Loading...
2001 11 26 AGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2001 CHANHASSEN MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD 5:30 P.M. - CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION, COURTYARD CONFERENCE ROOM Al 2002 Budget Work Session: 1. 5:30 p.m.- Administration 2. 5:45 p.m. - MIS Department 3. 6:00 p.m. - Capital Improvement Program B. 6:30 p.m. - TIF Update 7:00 P.M.- REGULAR MEETING, CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER (Pledge of Alleeiance) Flag Ceremony Presented by Cub Scout Troop. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS CONSENT AGENDA All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered'to be routine by the city council and · will be considered as one motion. Them will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item_ Refer to the council packet for each staff report. Approve Electronic Proprietary Database (EPDB) License Agreement with Hennepin County. b. Approve Water Service Connection to 23040 Summit Avenue, Ted Rix. c. Approve Adjustment to No Parking Zone on Brenden Court. ck Adopt Assessment Roll for BC7 & BC8 Tmak.Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project 00-01. e. Adopt Assessment Roll for Trunk Highway 5 Improvement Project 9745. f. Receive Feasibility Smd}r, Call Public Heating for Pedestrian Trail Adjacent to Highway 101, Project 97-12-3. g. Approval of Prosecution Contract with Carver County. h. Approval of Bills. Approval of Minutes: - City Council Work Session Minutes dated November 13, 2001 - City Council Minutes dated November 13, 2001 Receive Commission Minutes: - Planning Commission Minutes dated November 6, 2001 - Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated October 23, 2001 Approving Resolutions Decertifying: 1. Hennepin County Tax Increment Financing District 2. National Weather Service Tax Increment Financing District yISITOR PRESE~ATIONS Presentation of Citizenship Pins to Scout Troop. LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE , a, Sgt. Dave Pot-ts, Carver County Sheriff's Department John Wolff, Fire Chief PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. Assessment Heating for Dogwood Road Sanitary. Sewer Improvements, Project 00-01-1. 4. Public Hearing for Kings Road Street & Utility Improvements, Project 99-20. UNFINISHED BUSINESS , , Update on Roundhouse Renovation Project. Update on Rental Property Licensing Task Plan. NEW BUSINESS . . Request to Amend the Land Use from Residential Large Lot to Residential Low Density; Rezone Property from Agricultural Estate (A-2) to Single Family Residential (RSF); Preliminary Plat Request to Subdivide into Six Single Family Lots; and a Variance to Approve a Private Street; 8800 Powers Boulevard; Powers Circle; Arild Rossavik. Request for an Amendment to the Planned Unit Development to the Villages on the Ponds to Permit Four Story Buildings with a Maximum Height of 50 ft. and Three Stories with a Maximum Height of 40 ft; and an Amendment to Determine a Formula for Conversion of Commercial and Office Space to Residential Units and Vice Versa; Villages on the Ponds I, 1J12; Lotus Realty Services. Request for Site Plan Approval for Two Apartment Buildings Consisting of a 4-Story Building with 90 Independent Living Units, and a 3-Story Building with 73 Assisted Living Units for a Total Building Area of 254,100 sq. ft. with Underground Parking and Approximately 9,000 sq. ft. of Commercial Area; Located at the Southwest Comer of Lake Drive and Main Street; Villages on the Ponds Senior Living Campus; Senior Housing Partners. 10. Council Appointment to Southwest Metro Transit Commission. COUNCIL PRF~ENTATIONS 11. Council/Commission Liaison Update AI)MINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS 12. Carver County Community Demographic Partnership, Community Development Director. CORRESPO~~~ DISCUSSION A copy of the staff rePort and supporting .documentation being sent to the city'council will be available after 2:00 p.m. on Thursday. Please contact city hall at 937-1900 to verify that. 'your item has not- been deleted from the agenda any time af~ 2:00 p.m. on Thursday; 'GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting. In thc interest of open comrn~ications, the'Chanhassrn City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address thc City Council. That opportunity is provided at every regular City Council raeefing during lfuitor Presenlmions. Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor ~ons will be acknowledged by the Mayor. When called upon to speak, s~ your name, address, and topic. All remaric~ shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole, not to any specific member(s) or to any person who is not a member of the City Council. 2. If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please desigtmm a spoon that can summarize the issue. 3. Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional ~ may be granted at the discretion of'tbe Mayor. If you have writton comments, provide a copy to the Councql. e During Visitor Pre~n~ons, tbe Council and staff list~ to commextts and will not engage in discussion- Council meanbem or tim City Manager may ask qu~dons of you in ontex to gain a thorough ~ of your concern, suggestion or request. e Please be aware that disrespecu~ comments or co~ of a personal natu~ directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City islative inistration al perty nt .City Hall · · '~1 ice inistration CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET Commentary General Government-Legislative Mlsalon and Current Services The city council, comprised of the mayor and four at-large council representatives, 18 the legislative body of city government. Chanhassen Is a statutory Plan B city with a council/manager form of government. The Council is responsible for formulating city policy, enacting legislation, and oversight of city administration. The City Council also has authority over the financial affairs of the city, Including appropriating money through the annual adoption of the city budget and property tax levy. City Council members constitute the Board of Equalization, which reviews local property value assessments as prepared by the Carver County Assessor. The City Council appoints members to various boards and commissions such as the Economic Development Authority, Planning Commission, Park Board and other advisory groups. Budget Highllghta The 2002 budget reflects an Increase of about 23.8% primarily due to reallocation of general liability insurance. Future Trends The council continues to pursue excellence in building community and enhancing citizen participation through neighborhood meetings, public forums, and other methods. 4300 - City Hall space allocation assessment/strategic planning process 4340 - Most of the costs in this account are the printing and publishing the City newsletter (Chanhassen Connection). 4360 - Memberships Include: Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce Association of Metro Municipalities National League of Cities $4,800 $1,400 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET t01 1110 General Fund Legislative ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 2000 2001 2002 BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 2001 TO 2002 % INC/(DEC) 4020 4O3O 4050 Salaries & Wages-Temp Contributions-Retirement Workers Compensation TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 2,000 ~':~~.. 2,000 100 ..*_'~,;- .'.=~ u~,: 100 27,300 27,300 27,300 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4110 4210 Supplies-Office Books & Periodicals TOTAL MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 1.050 270 .270 0.0% 0.0% 4300 4310 4330 4340 4360 4370 4375 4483 Fees, Services Telephone Postage Printing & Publishing Subscriptions & Memberships Travel & Training Promotional Expense Insurance-General Liability TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES ,:.-'-.-':. 'i~';®~..--'.: ;,~-!:;;::-~/:. ':..~-~o.' -..-,.'.:.: ..-.; ...'..4_,;~ J._O ~':: '..!';'-:.-":'i'~,'60~'i-' :.!'.--"-:~!:i::~';.~i! :'-.-'".':.:..;:i~$~.! .... -,',--_,- ~ ~--,,i,,A~,,~..4 ..... -,-.~:;.':_.¢.-:.-.?,x.~.~.'m,~¢ .--:.-:-:?,';---'.'...~7~"~ ':' i?.':-~;,'¥.'~ ............. -. -..., :-~ ..-,:.._.:.-....~_~..~ :.--..~ :.'!.!¢';¢'~'1~;~ ?:'?-*.'-'~,-~-"-'-.'.-.'..--:-,;:.'::.'~_~ · ':!';.'::'c:':!'::'.~-i~! :"-':!:;;?"'~;i,;;'"*--;'"~o''''''-:I .:..::-.--, :.--.',-"...,;~ ..'-'."'.;;-.'~.~;~!-* -?::i'i::';:..-"/2~'~' .-" '-'-.i-:-;...~s~?¢ 119,860 111,760 144,900 0.0% - 11.1% (18.2%) (1.o%) 23.5% (40.0%) 33.3% 161.9% 29.7% ** TOTAL LEGISLATIVE 148,210 139,330 172,470 23.8% CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET Commentary General Government-Administration Mission and Current Services The city manager Is the chief administrative officer of the city and directs the administration of city affairs. It is the city manager's rasponslblllty to enforce the city code and resolutions of the city. The city manager's office provides general administrative services for the city to ensure that council policies and dlrectivas are carried out. Duties also Include keeping the council fully advised of the financial condition and the needs of the city, preparing and submitting the annual budget to the council, and recommending measures to the council deemed necessary and/or desirable for the welfare of the community and the efficient administration of the city's affairs. The city manager's office also provides liaison between the council, advisory boards and commissions, staff, other levels of government, the media, and the public. The Administration Department oversees progress toward meeting city goals In the areas of responsive government, safe community, lifelong learning, housing, business, and community connections in collaboration with the school districts, chamber of commerce, and other community organizations. Administration also prepares the council agenda packets and quarterly newsletter. Budget Highlights The 2002 budget reflects an increase in expenditures of about 14%. Future Trends Administration supervises the implementation of the city's strategic plan and monitors progress toward their goals. 4330 - (Postage) - Postage for general .rnaillng for all City Hall. 4360 - (Membership/Subscription) - ICMA Memberships (2) Metro Area Management Association MN City County Management Assoc. Misc. (Villager, MN Public Employer Labor Relations) $1,200 $10o $10o $ 2O0 4410- (Equipment Rental) - Copier Maintenance Agreement $18,000 Mail Machine Maintenance Agreement $1,000 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET 101 1120 GenemlFund Administration ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 2000 2001 2002 BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 2001 TO 2002 % INC/(DEC) 4010 4020 4030 4040 4050 Salaries & Wages-Reg Salaries & Wages-Temp Contributions-Retirement Contributions-Insurance Workers Compensation TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 13,100 ~?~ 300 ~-~ 209,700 324,900 391,100 30.0% (24.1%) (14.8%) 25.0% 20.4% 4110 4120 4130 4170 4210 Supplies-Office Supplies-Equipment Supplies-Program Motor Fuels & Lubricants Books & Periodicals TOTAL MATERIALS & SUPPLIES L:',~' , ':, '~ .... ' '..:::.'-' :: :'.';i00;:. · . - - , 9'00',. .... . _ -.:,... .... :._.-'.~ 06i'.~ 25,300 · ., .,'. -...~:--~-7-,~ ['-~,,~.,~ .~ ..... .~ .... ~~-~ ' = :. ,.,:', :'.'i: .." "- .. '.. iI. -.. i ,'1-~..' '~. · :. '~'~. ~.'~ -; ,':-~-~;;~i"~Y~ : _:... ,.~ ,-.~..-~,~i~g,~r,,,O~.... 4,5O 1,500 0.0% 0.0% "33.3% 233.3% 43OO 4310 4330 4340 4360 4370 4380 4410 ~.~.~.0 4530 Fees, Services Telephone . Postage Printing & Publishing Subscriptions & Memberships Travel & Training Mileage Rental-Equipment License & Registration Repair & Maintenance-Equip TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES ~:?..-:i'. i:::i'~'~ .~-,_...:., :...-'~..':'":.'.i.;.'¢: .i:::.(i~ ': :' ?':' :':::'~-" ' -, ' · .' ' ? ".J2 i~".: ":'): -' - . " :-,.:. ..... ..- ,: ... · .-.' . ..-..... -.:.: '.-.' :."6,.0..001"; · ..":::' '-'..: ~.:... . "?~O0;,i...._ ~- ¢_~.~ '-'." "1::'.-;2' 'iff,] . ,- -.." i" ':'...':/-~.-., ... -.. ..... :- -~-, -.,; .......... 'a":..-' .-~?~, . ~ _ .' ..~ ,.~-. · ... ..:.~..... .... :.:.-..~:..~.~.:~.~.~.'.~:~ ' ' ... :-":: '. ~800'"' '-': '-' ........... " . .. -: ~-.~. ~-'.l".-"-I'~.~t'a~__~'~ 60,150 62,350 !! "~ ~, - ;~:: ~ -..~, ,.,,i, 'F 49,500 0.0% (20.0%) (16.7%) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (13.5%) (34.1%) (37.5%) (20.6%) 4703 Office Equipment TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,000 1,000 1,000 0.0% 0.0% ** TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 296,150 388,700 443,100 14.0% CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET Commentary General Government-Legal Mission and Current Services This department pays for attorney services to advise the city on questions of law; review all ordinances, resolutions, contracts, and other legal documents of the city; and represent the city In court actions including the prosecution of cases In District Court. The city has contracted with Campbell Knutson Associates to handle civil and criminal matters. The ctty also periodically uses separate law firms for various specialized legal matters (e.g. personnel/labor, bond counsel, EDA). The city uses consultative attorney services with general service costs paid on a fixed fee basis. Budget Hlghllghta The 2002 budget reflects only a 7.5% Inorease in costs. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET 101 t140 General Fund Legal 2001 TO IACCOUNT 2000 2001 2002 2002 DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET % INC/(DEC) 4302 TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 90,000 93,000 100,000 7.5% 7.5% ** TOTAL LEGAL 90,000 93,000 100,000 7.5% CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET Commentary General Government-Property Assessment Mission and Current Services The Assessing Department pays for the valuation of residential and commercial real estate parcels and personal property by the Assessors from both Carver County and Hennepln County. The taxable value estimates are used by the city, school districts, counties, and special taxing jurisdictions for the purpose of equitably distributing the property tax against all taxable properties. Budget Hlghllghta The 2002 budget reflects only increase In the number of dwellings In the community. Carver CounN Assessment Contract 2001 - $7.50 per valuation x no. of units 2002 - $7.50 per valuation x no. of units $54,615 $54,885 est. Hennepln (,~o~Jnty A~$essment (~Qntraqt 2001 - $1,515 2002 - $1,600 est. Truth In Taxation Notice $7,000 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET 101 t160 General Fund Property Assessment ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 2000 2001 2002 BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 2001 TO 2002 % INC~(DEC) 4300 4340 Fees, Services Pdnting & Publishing TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES · ... ,..~,, .~ ~ ~"-'~'rl-'l'~":~'-r'~--'---~' ,- ,=-.:-.~ .-~..-,.: ~ - ,: .~.--.-, 70,000 70,300 70,100 0.0% (66.7%) (0.3%) ** TOTAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT 70,000 70A00 70,100 (0~%) CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET Commentary General Government-City Hall Mission and Current Services The City Hall Department exists to fund Improvements to city owned buildings and structures other than parks & recreation facllitlas and enterprise fund facllitias. It also serves as a collector department for costs that are not easily attributable to any specific department. Improvement projects are very diverse and range from replacement of elements that have reached the end of their service life expectancy (i.e. roofs, HVAC equipment) to Improvements made to meet current building codes. Budget Hlghllghta The 2002 budget shows a decrease of 1.5%. The full amount Is attributable to the Inclusion of the office supplies for all city departments for the year. 4110 - Office Supplies for all City Hall 4300- Full Service Phone Support (Eshelon.Telecom, Inc.) Elevator Inspection Smoke/Fire Alarm Inspection 4310 - Telephones KMC/MCl Local and long distance $ $5,300' $500 $500 $24,OOO *This expense will be deleted as a part of our new phone contracts CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET 101 1170 General Fund City Hall ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 2000 BUDGET 2001 BUDGET 2002 BUDGET 2001 TO 2OO2 % INC/(DEC) 4010 4011 4030 4040 4050 4110 4120 4140 4150 4170 4260 Salades & Wages-Reg Overtime-Reg Contributions-Retirement Contributions-Insurance Workers Compensation TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES Supplies-Office Supplies-Equipment Supplies-Vehicles Maintenance Materials Motor Fuels & Lubricants Small Tools & Equipment TOTAL MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 40,000 . 5,100 2,900 1,000 14,350 42,000 1,000 5,400 3,850 1~400 53,650 '54,450 44,000 1,000 5,800 4,400 2,100 57,300 46,450 4.8% 7.4% 14.3% 50.0% 6.8% (15.6%) 0.0% 0.0% ; (17.5%) 0.0% 0.0% (14.7%)' 4300 4310 4320 4350 4370 4375 ~.~.~.0 4483 4510 4520 4530 4531 Fees, Services Telephone Utilities Cleaning & Waste Removal Travel & Training Promotional Expense License & Registration Insurance-General Liability Repair & Maintenance-Building Repair & Maintenance-Vehicles Repair & Maintenance-Equip Repair & Maintenance-Radios TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 191,800 -'"'i" ~..- .r.-~ .... 189,200 189,100 8.3% · 4.2% 0.0% ' (6.5%) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (20.0%) (o.1%) 47O5 Other Equipment TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 500 500 500 0.0% 0.0% ** TOTAL CITY HALL 255,660 297,800 293,350 (1.5%) CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET Commentary General Government-Elections Mission and Current Services The city manager's office Is rasponslble for the administration of the city's elections and official records. The office is responsible for voter registration, redistricting and conducting local, state, and national elections. Many of the functions performed by the election staff are required by state and federal laws governing elections and data practlcas.. Our mission Is to provide these mandated services efficiently and accurately and to act as an effective communications link between government and citizens by providing public access to government Information, records and processes. We feel that excellent customer sen/Ice Is key to citizen satisfaction with government and can Increase positive Interaction and positive connections within our community. Budget Highlights This budget Increased dramatically due to the fact that 2002 is a general election year. Future Trends The city's election process is largely directed by the State of Minnesota and Can/er County. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002 BUDGET 101 1180 GeneralFund Elections ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 2000 2001 2002 BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 200t TO 2OO2 INC/(DEC) 4020 4030 405O 'lb Salaries & Wages-Temp Contributions-Retirement Workers Compensation TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 2,000 400 1,700 100 100 250 27,100 5,500 23,950 340.0% 325.0% 150.0% 335.5% 4110 4300 4330 4340 4370 4380 4560 Supplies-Office TOTAL MATERIALS & SUPPLIES Fees, Services Postage Printing & Publishing Travel & Training Mileage Repair & Maintenance-Signs TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,000 - 1,500 ·: . . -. _ ... .:-..::.: ~.: ~.~'... ,~. - -, - . ,T-' ~,~.~1.~_.-; ~_-T. ,.- .,~.~:'~ · :'.-...'. .../...-~ ........... ~ 6;:~.?/~]~g~~ ~~~~-'-'~,~+-. ...... n~' ~ .... · -.'u -: --"~-~-.' ~ .~-* ?~. ~.. ~ ~,.~A~ '-' ":--:-300:: -':-~:¥~.~~ ' . .--- .--:" - ~,'--- ~ - .'. :.~ ~.::: ~ :::_r' ~.~ . '. ' '.-,' '~.~. . , .... .;.::._. ~ :.:..S~=;;~l~:~ : ....- ' ':...'~A ,' ::-.-~'J".~.~'~ ~_.. ~ .......h=: ... :.':~¥.'.'."-',-:-:zw..~ ::.~'~..~~ ~~ -16,000 2,3~ 1~,~0- 450.0% - 0.0% . 0.0% 0.0% 400.0% TOTAL ELECTIONS 45,100 7,800 36r950 373.7% CITY OF CHANHASSEN 2002BUDGET Commentary Public Safety- Police Administration Mission and Current Services The function of this department has changed in recent yearn to being primarily a funding mechanism for the contract with the Carver County Sheriff's Department/or law enforcement services. The amount included In Personal Services are for the Public Safety Communications Specialist, who continues to Involve neighborhoods and businesses In crime reduction acttvlfles. Budget Highlights The total expenditures.have Increased by $43,000 (5.2%). The Increase In contract costs represents four additional hours each day, now 48 hours - up from 44 hours. We have a Carver County sergeant serving as a liaison between the Sheriff's Department and Chanhassen city administration. Them is no longer a Chief Law Enforcement Officer employed by the city. Contract for 2001 (17,432 total hrs. x $45.29 per hr.) $789,495.28 Plus Sgt. Potts 74.308.00 Grand Total $863,803.28 contract for 2002 (17,520 total hrs. x $48.83 per hr.) Plus Sgt. Potts Other Expenses (car lease, cell phone, etc.) Grand Total 82,757.00 7,000.00 $945,258.6o * Note: We are $63,803.28 over budget for 2001. We need a budget amendment for 2001. **Note: We am $15,258.60 over my original proposed budget in August for 2002. TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Richard Rice, Information Services Coordinator DATE: November 18th, 2001 Information Services Budget Discussion The MIS budget is scheduled for a City Council discussion on November 26t~, 2001. A short Power Point presentation will be used to fm'ther outline the budget details. Mission and Current Services The MIS Department provides and maintains both computer and network resources to all City computer users. In addition, the department coordinates all vendor support for the City's telecommunication needs. The department is also responsible for managing the training needs for all other departments. Ottmnfly the department consists of one individual. If approved, a second staff member- will b.e hired in 2002 to serve in a desktop.support .role, and will also function as the backup network manager. Budget Hl~.hli~hts The MIS department budget shows a 3% decrease over the previous year. The decrease is due largely to fewer computer and printer purchases. Nearly all of the users now have equipment suitable to their job funcfiom and a standard replacement schedule can now be pursued. An additional staff position is included in this year's budget. The 2001 MIS budget funded an additional staff position but a decision was made early in the year not to fill the position. Capitol expenditures will be focused on the addition of a centralized database, and the continued upgrades to the network inf-rastmeture. The department will assume a larger role in developing online resource~ for City residents. Future Trends The MIS Coordinator will be focusing on efforts to further develop individual departmental databases, and the integration with a single central database, linked to the City's mapping products. The database will provide much of the content for online resoume~. Other projects will include improvements in remote access, intmnet / extranet development and the conversion of paper documents to electronic formats. Network Security will take on an even higher priority as the number of cyber attacks continue to increase. C: ~ TEMPtMIS_Budget_Report_ }'1.1. doc -1- EXPENDITURES 4150 Maintenance Materials Bulk network wiring, cabling supplies. Also includes cleaning media for tape backup 4210 .Books and Periodicals Technical documentation, with the major item being Microsoi~ TechNet subscription on CD's. Also includes various monthly PC magazines. 4220 Software Licenses and Registrations Purchases of new and upgrade sotb,vare licenses, for both server and client software, for all departments. 4260 Small Tools and Equipment Small hand tools and various test equipment. 4300 Fees for Service Sol.are and Hardware maintenance contracts for software used in multiple departments, not associated with a specific department project. Also includes additional network consulting services to supplement current staff as needed. - 4310 Telephone Cell phone and pager expenses for I. S. staff only. 4320 'Utilities Circuit charges for data, voice and intemet services for. Does'not include services dedicated to utility services. 4370 Travel and Traininl~ Computer related training for both I.S. and all other City staff. Training is made up of offsite courses and seminars, and web based - online training. Specific GIS training for all departments is also funded in this account. 4530 Repair and Maintenance Items purchased to the repair of equipment. Includes parts needed to upgrade components. 4703 Office Equipment All purchases of computers, printers, and network components City wide. C.' l TEMPIMIS_Budget_Report_ I,'l. l.doc -2- Iud ~ 78,981 95,000 95,000 ~,0~3 1.10,000 110,000 · 10,614 12,S00 12,500 9,235 14,500 14,500 4,014 13,40Q 13,400 4,635 ].3,000 2.2,000 75 200 200 234 300 300 ~,046 O 0 0 95,730 121,100 :].21,100 16,g27 136,800 136,800 5,100 O 0 66 0 1,000 1,000 536 1,160 1,160 130 710 710 365 610 610 0 27,800 27,800 13,684 26,1'40 26,130 S05 ?50 750 4,47 420 420 5,735 30,260 30,260 15,098 20,320 28,320 31,439 71,945 71,945 20,5?9 60,785 60,785 4,918 600 600 2,087 1,500 1,500 3,342 0 0 3,129 1S,600 15,600 41 0 ~ 9 . 23,100 30,150 30,150 8,754 20,925 20,925 9 849 0 0 0 5,619 5,000 5,000 7,725 -5,000 5,000 ............................................................................. ' ................................... 78,308 107,695 107,695 42,283 103,810 103,810 53,145 78,100 78,100 65,028 -- 59,900 59,~00 Clipit. L1. Ou'c.lJy 53,145 78,100 78,100 65,028 59,900 59,900 lla~m~meot ln~ogmitton B~at---. 232,918 337,155 337,1S5 209,336 328,830 328,830 Capital Improvement Pr .o. .gra .... November 26, 2001 Source Bond Proceeds Cap?al Replacement Fund General Fund MSA Park Dedication Fund Sewer & Water Assessmenls Sewer & Water Expansion Fund Sewer & Water Utility Fund Street Assessments Surface Water Utility Fund ' Televtslon (Cable) Fund Youth Sports Ass'n ContrrouUon Total CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN SOURCES OF REVENUE SUMMARY 2002 thru 2006 2002 2003 2004 2005 565,700 625,000 370,000 951,000 31g,900 335,700 352,200 345,600 378,000 170,000 4,025,000 1,395,500 1,065,000 225,000 175,000 1,245,000 515,000 850,000 625,000 3,655.000 862,000 3,990,000 380,000 150,000 265,000 145,000 560.000 415.000 450,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 0 11,519,100 8,941,700 7,409,200 8,178,600 Page I of I 2006 Total 1,584.000 4,096~700 36O,0O0 1,713,4~ 4,573,000 2,860,500 3,170,000 1,175,000 10,307,000 697,000 1,637,000 1,425,000 10,000 ' 50,000 0 3,826,000 35,872,800 · ruezday, Nm~mber 20, 2001 Source Bond Proceeds CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhass~n, MN PROJECTS BY FUNDING SOURCE 2002 thru 2006 Projeetg Priority 2002 M8-001 0 6,000,000 PK&T~ 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Pag~ l of 5 Tuesday, Nm,ember 20, 2001 Source Capital Replacement Fund 100fL Aerial Ladder Refurb]shlng Boat/Tmlter/Uotor Replacement FITs Dept: 800 MHz Redlo System Fire Dept.: Thermal Rescue Device Fb"e Dept.: 1 3/4 Inch Hose Fire Dept.: LBptop CompulB= Fire Dept.: PPE (Turnout/Halmets) ]=Ire Dept.: ~ucade System AJr Bottle Refill Ta]ecommunlcaUon Purdumes~pgmde8 Community Dev.: Light Duty Trucks Dump/Plea Truck ReplBcement~AddlUon8 V1bmlx~ Roll Packe~ Equipment Trailers Tar Keltic Ford 555C Bad,hoe Crock Sealer ].ine Sldper Copier Replacemenls Groundsmaster 580 Mower Replacement Pub]lc Works: Light Duty Trucks Bobcat Snow Blower Tracks for Bob(at Grounds Mower Replacement Tractor Tractor Boom Troller Grounds Uower Replacement (10') Ul:q;Irade 217 Grass Rig Pump,~tor/WBta' Tank D~ Team Equipment Training Room Furniture and Equipment Bokx:at Trencher Attachment CBrver County Community Demographic PBrtnershlp Web-Enabled SoflwBre Computerta)d Records Retention System Pub]lc Works FBcaty Expansion Sanlor Center Expanslofl Enclosed Salt & Sand Storage Fadllty File Station 1 and 2 Refurbishing Capital R~placement Fund Total Project~ EQ-O01 EQ-O02 EQ-O03 EQ-O05 EQ-O07 EQ-OOg EC~010 EC-011 EC-014 EC-015 EC-016 EC-017 EC-019 EC-021 EC-022 EQ-023 EQ-024 EQ-025 EQ-027 EQ-028 EQ-029 ECH)30 EQ-031 EQ..033 EQ-034 EC-035 EC-036 EC-037 EC-038 EC-039 EC-042 EQ-043 EQ-045 EQ-047 EQ-048 EQ-O4g M8-002 MB-OO4 MB-O08 Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35,000 35,000 10,000 10,000 100,000 50,000 150,000 20,000 20,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 50,000 50,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 60,000 9,200 9,200 0 10,000 0 0 10,000 22,000 24,000 25,000 26,000 97,000 252,000 140,000 133,000 525,000 140,000 140,000 21,0~0 21,000 8,000 8,000 IO0,O(X) 15,000 115,000 115,000 113,000 115,000 34'4,000 5,000 5,000 0 0 20,000 27,000 47,000 . 30,000 45,000 75,000 6,000 6,000 7,000 -7,000 41,000 41,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 18,000 12,000 12,000 24,000 8,500 8,500 10,000 10,000 100,000 100,000 75,000 75,000 0 0 200,000 1,200,000 1300,000 100,000 100,000 31,000 31,000 565,700 626,000 370,000 951,000 1,584,000 4,096,700 Page 2 of 5 Tt~sday, November 20. 2001 Source Project~ Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl General Fund Gomlx~ Pu~asm/Uporados Gar~ Gou~ G~mmuntt~ D~m~ras~lc Parm~tp Annual Slmot Inkoromm~ Program MSA Llomn I~i ONest City Umila to TH 101) Bllumlnom Overlay:. ~d~ ~ ~ ~ ~u~n Rd. ~ ~ w~ 7~ ~ MSA Total EQ-013 EQ-048 EQ-047 ST-012 0 59,900 65,700 72,200 65,600 70,000 333,400 3 5,000 5,000 0 5,0(}0 5,000 5,000 5,000 20,000 0 255,000 265,000 275,000 275,000 285,iXl0 1,355,000 319,900 335,700 352,200 345,600 364),000 1,713,400 95,000 18,000 140,000 110,000 15,000 3,900,000 3,900,000 SS,000 18,000 140,000 110,IX)0 15,000 170,000 170,000 125,000 125,000 Park Dedication Fund ~ Bandinmm Community Park Playground Equlpmenl: Cum/F~ns Park lmlXOmmsn~ Meaclo~ Green Park Play Arm: Po~r I-Iii Park Trai: Banclitmre Park to Chanhamen Ha. Trat. ~ 101 (S. ~ Dr. to Townine Dr.) Road & Trail F~:matnx:l~: Lake Ann Park Maj.1 Glen Trai Conneclor Tme~ Tmsh Recel~mlm Pemlanent Park BendleS and Table~ Tn~ Conning. H~Sat Riey Cre~ TrM~ Hwy 5 at Blutf Creek PK&T-001 PK&T-O03 PK&T-004 PK&T-005 PK&T~ PK&T-O~ PK&T-009 PK&T-011 PK&T-012 PK&T-013 PK&T-014 PI~T-015 PK&T-018 PK&T-021 PK&T-022 PK&T~ PK&T-024 PK&T-025 PK&T-026 PK&T-027 PK&T-028 275,000 . lb0,000 375,000 . 10,000 " 10,000. -. 0 0' · . 0 0 15,000 15,000 175,000 175,000 15,000 15,000 7,.500 7,500 10,000 IO,(XX) · -. . 100.000 100.000 75,000 Pag~ 3 of 5 Tu~kry, No.tuber 20, 2001 Source Project~ Priority ! Sewer & Water Assessments Sanitary Sewe:. LC-1 SS-002 0 Sanitary Sewer. BC-8 SS-003 0 Sanitary Sewec. BC-9 SS4X)4 0 Sanltm7 Sewen BC-2 (Portion) SS-005 0 Lake Rley Trunk II W-005 0 Water Improvemen~ TH 41 W-(X)6 0 Wa'mr Improvemenls: Manchester Dr. W-007 0 Water Improvement~ Mlrmewashta Loop W-008 0 Water Improvements: BC-1 (TC&W - Lyrnan) W-009 0 Water Improvemen~ Lymen, Audubon, Powers W-010 0 Sewer & Water Assessments Total Sewer & Water Expansion Fund Public Works Faclay Expansbn MB-003 0 SCADA System Repair & Maintenance SS-010 0 Well ~9 W-001 0 Well #10 W-002 0 We~ #11 W-003 0 Water Tower (2MG): Lymen Blvd. W-004 0 Water Treatment Plant 1 W-011 0 Repalnting: West 761h St Wa~ Tower W-015 0 Sewer & Water Expansion Fund Total Sewer & Water Utility Fund Sump Pump Inspections SS-006 General Repalm (Emergency/Unplanned) SS-007 Televtse Sewer Lines SS-008 Repair Manholes, Infiltration/Inflow (I/i) SS-009 General Water System Repairs W-013 SCADA System Upgrades/Maintenance W-014 Utl,~/Rate Study W-017 Well #12 W-018 Water Treatment Plant II W-019 Sewer & Water Utility Fuud Total Street Assessments Centuly Blvd. ST-002 Street Assessmeuts Total 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 200,000 200,000 315,000 315,000 80,000 350,000 430,000 110,000 110,000 130,000 130,000 270,000 270,000 370,000 210,000 580,000 1,245,000 515,000 850,000 560,000 3,170,000 500,000 500,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 340,000 70,000 630,000 700,000 72,000 530,000 602,000 75,000 675,000 750,000 75,000 3,300,000 3,375,(XX) 40,000 40,000 625,000 3,655,000 862,000 3,g90,000 1,175,000 10,307,000 . · . 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 60,000 60,000 220,000 15,000 15,000 30,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 360,000 45,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 195,000 100,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 130,000 25,000 25,000 77,000 77,000 380,000 150,000 265,000 145,000 607,000 1,637,000 0 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Page 4 of 5 Tttesday, November 20, 2001 Proje~t~ Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl 200,000 210,000 175,000 175,000 200,000 210,000 215.000 215,000 275,000 275,000 50,000 50,000 560.000 4ff~)O0 450,000 1,42~00 Television (Cable) Fund ~ Equipment Tolovision (Cablo) Fund Total EQ-02~ 10,000 lO,O(X) 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,(X)O 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 50,000 Youth Sports Ass'n Contribution Imprmmlle~ Bafldkl'mm Co~m~n~ Park Youth Sports Ass~ Contribution Total I:)K&T-O01 0 0 0 0 0 GRAND TOTAL' -11,519,100 · . . · ..- _ . . . . · . . Psge 5 of 5 T~sday, November 20, 2001 City of Chanhaeeen: Property Taxes on Homestead Residential Tax Less % MV Assessor's Capacity MV State Increase MV Taxes Taxes Credits Total Taxes Tax Reduction % Change Additional Reduction with $100,000 Lower City Levy 80,000 Pay 01 1,276 179 -328 1,127 8.5% 86,800 Pay 02 1,039 159 -294 904 100,000 Pay 01 1,763 223 -390 1,596 8.5% 108,500 Pay 02 1,299 199 -275 1,224 125,000 Pay 01 2,372 279 -390 2,261 8.5% 135,625 Pay 02 1,624 249 -250 1,623 150,000 Pay 01 2,981 335 -390 2,926 8.5% 162,750 Pay 02 1,949 299 -226 2,022 200,000 Pay 01 4,198 447 -390 4,255 8.5% 217,000 Pay 02 2,598 399 -177 2,820 250,000 Pay 01 5,416 558 -390 5,584 8.5% 271,250 Pay 02 3,248 498 -128 3,618 300,000 Pay 01 6,633 670 -390 6,913 8.5% 325,500 Pay 02 3,898 598 -79 4,416 222 373 638 904 1,435 1,966 2,497 -20% -23% -28% -31% -35% -36% 5.14 6.42 8.03 9.83 12.84 16.05 19.26 Tax Capacity Proposed Pay 02 w/ Tax Rates Pay 01 Pay 02 $100k Less County 43.105% 54.465%I - I City 26.508% 40.756%I- 40.114% I School#II2 60.805% 29.826%I Other 5.603% 4.871%I mota 136,021% I 129.276%1 Market Value Proposed Tax Rates Pay 01 Pay 02 JCounty 0.00000% 0.00000%I City 0.00000% 0.05133%I School #112 0.22330% 0.13235%I Other O.OOOO0% O.QOOOO%I Total 0.22330% 0.18368%J Prepared by Ehlers Associates - Draft Numbers Only 11/20/01 CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN DEPAK~ SUMMAKY 2002 thru 2006 Department 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total MunUpal Sui~ngs 6,031,000 100,000 400,000 1,700,000 8,231,000 Pink & Tral Impmverne~ 1,395,500 1,065,000 225,000 175,000 2,860,500 ~ ,~ I~ ~95,ooo 6~0,000 370,000 s20,000 12o,ooo Surface Water Management 560,000 415,000 4,50,000 1,425,¢XX) Wa~ Syst~ Impto~ments 1,555,000 3,630,000 · 1,607,000 4,175,000 1,252,000 12,219,000 Total 11,517,100 6,941,700 7,:409,200 6,176,600 3,852,000 35,896,600 Pag~ 1 of I Tuesda3; November 20, 2001 CAPITAL PLAN City of Chauhass~n, MN PROJECTS BY DEPARTMENT 2002 thru 2006 Department Major Equipment lO0tt. Aerial Ladder Refurbishing Boa'dTmller/Mo~ Replacement Fire Dept.: 800 MHz Redlo System Fire Dept.: Therrr~ Rescue Device Flre Dept.: 1 3/4 Inch Hose Fire Dept.: PPE O'urnout/Helmebi) Fire Dept.: ~e System Air Bottle Refill Computer Purchases/Upgrades Telecommunlmlim'l PurchasesAJpgrades Community Dev.: Light Duty Tructm Dump/Plow Trud( Replacements/Additions Vibratory Roll Packer Equipment Tmilem Tar KetBe Ford 555C Bad(hoe Crock Sealer Audio/Visual Equipment Copier Reptacemenls Grmmdsmaster 580 Mower Replacement Public Works: Ught Duty Trud(s Bobcat Snow Blower Grounds Mower Replacement Tmctm' Tractor Boom Trailer Grounds Mower Replacement (10') Upgrade 217 Grass Rig Pump/Motor/Water Tank Dive Team Equipment Training Room Fumlture and Equipment Bobcat Treacher Atlachrrmflt Project// Priority 2002 EQ-001 EQ-002 EQ-003 EQ-005 EQ-007 EQ-009 EQ-010 EQ.011 EQ-013 EQ-014 EQ-015 EQ-016 EQ-017 EQ-0-19 EQ-02t EQ-022 EQ-023 EQ-024 EQ-025 EC~026 EQ-027 EQ-028 EQ-029 EQ-030 EQ-033 EQ-034 EQ-035 EC-036 EC-037 EC-038 EC-O~ EC-042 EC-043 EQ-045 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 15,000 9,200 59,900 0 22,000 10,000 100,000 113,000 6,000 12,000 8,500 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 100,000 65,700 10,000 252,000 6,000 12,000 1,000 72,200 0 24,000 140,000 10,000 15,000 113,000 35,000 15,000 8,000 10,000 116,000 41,000 60,000 70,000 52,000 140,000. 35,000 10,000 150,000 20,000 5,000 50,000 60,000 9,200 333300 10,000 123,000 525,000 140,000 21,000 8,000 115,000 342,000 5,000 47,000 75,000 6,000 7,000 41,000 18,000 24,000 8,500 Pas¢ 1 of 4 T~.~o),, Nove~nber 20, 2001 Department ~ R~ Rm~c~ ~ Municipal Buildings pu~ woos Fa~ Expan~ ~~1~2~~ M~~ B~ T~ Park & Trail Improvements ~~ nand~e Co~.on~ P~k ~ Eq~ ~W F~ ~ ~ ~ ~d P~ T~ ~~ ~ ~ C~~ T~ ~ ~ 01 (S. ~ Dr. ~ T~lm Dr.) ~&T~l~:~n~ ~ G~ Tm~ ~~ T~ ~ p~ ~ ~ ~n~ ~ T~ ~ T~~ ~Sm~C~ T~~ T~ ~n~ ~~ H~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ & T~ T~~ T~ Projeet~ Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl E0-046 3 5,000 5.000 EQ-047 0 10,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 EQ-048 0 100,000 100,000 EQ-049 0 75,000 75,000 I~B-001 0 6,000,000 6,000,000 kE-(X)3 0 2(X),000 1,700,000 1,900,000 lVB-004 0 100,000 100,000 ~ 0 200,000 200,000 ~ 0 31,000 31 PK&T-001 0 25,0iX) 40,000 65,000 PK&T-003 0 275,000 100,000 375,0(X) PK&T-004 0 40,000 40,000 PK&T4X)5 0 10,0(O 10,0~0 PK&T-O06 0 50,000 50,00~) ' PK&T-009 0 ~0,000 30,000. PK&T;12 0 250,000.. _' .250,000 PK&T-013 0 8~. ,000 ' - : 85(J,000 - PK&T-014 0 485,0(}0 _ 485,000 PK&T-015 0 68,000 68,000' PK&T-018 0 15,000 15,000. PK&T~I 2 175,000 175,000 PK&T-022 3 15,000 15,000 PK&T-023 1 7,.50O 7,5OO PK&T-024 1 20,000 20,000 40,000 PK&T-025 2 10,000 10,000 PK&T-026 1 100,0(Xl 100,000 PK&T-027 1 75,000 75,000 1,395,500 1,D55,1XiO 225,000 17,~00 Pa~ 2 of 4 T. eada~, Nm,emir lO, 2001 Department Sanitary Sewer Improvements Sani~ry Sewec LC-1 SS-002 Sanltmy Sewer:, BC-9 SS-004 San~ry Sew~. BC-2 (Por~on) SS4305 Sump Pump Inspectloas SS-O06 Geaa'al Repairs (Emergency/Unplanned) SS-007 Televise Sewer IJnes SS-008 Repair Manholes, lnflltralion/Infiow (I/0 SS-009 SCADA b"yst~ Repair & Maintenance SS-010 Sm3J,t31zy Sewer Tmprovements Total Street Improvements Century B~d. ST-002 Lyman ~ (West C~y L~n~s to TH 101) ST-004 Bltumlnou~ Overlay:. Lake Lucy Rd. ST-005 Bituminous Ovary: Saddlebrook Curve ST..006 Bltumlnou~ Overlay: Lake Drive/Lake Drive East ST-007 Bl~n~ Overlay:. Audubon Rd. ST-008 Bituminous Overlay:. Coulter Blvd. ST-009 Blturr~ Overlay:. West 78th St. ST-010 B'~uminous Ovatay: IVlJnnewashte Pankway ST-011 Annual Street Improvement Program -ST-012 Street ~m~ov~ts Tots].. Surface Water Management Lake Su-.an Watered Lake Wlnnewashte Watershed Bluff Creelc Alter Existing POads Bluff Creek: Altar Existlng Ponds Bluff Creek: Create Sta'n~ Ponds B~ff Cme~ Create Stormwater Ponds S~e Water lV[a3ageme~t Total Project~ SWMP-003 SWMP-O04 SWMP-005 SWMP-O06 SWMP-008 SWMP-O09 SWMP-010 SWMP-011 Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 200,000 200,000 400,000 400,000 315,000 315,000 80,0(X) 350,000 430,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 60,000 60,000 220,000 15,000 15,000 30,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 360,000 695,000 690,000 370,000 520,000 120,000 2,395,000 0 40,000 40,000 0 3,900,000 3,900,000 0 95,000 95,000 0 18,000 18,000 0 140,000 140,000 0 110,000 110,000 0 15,000 15,000 0 170,000 170,000 0 125,000 1'25,000 0 255,000 265,000 275,000 275,000 285,~000 '-1,355,000 673,000 435,000 4,300,000 275,000 285,000 5,96'81000 200,000 210,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 175,000 175,000 200,000 210,000 215,000 215,000 275,000 275,000 560,000 415,000 450,000 1,425,000 Page 3 of 4 Ttesda3.,, ;Vovember 20, 2001 Department Water System Improvements WeiCO Well ~1 WalBr Tower (2MG): Lyman Blvd. Lalm Riey Trunk II W~~TH41 water ImFoveam(~ lViandm~ Dr. Water lttN3mvaTmfl~ Mmewahm Loop Water Itaixoven8~ aC-1 (TC&W - Lyman) WabN' ImlNovalmf~ Lyman, AudLrtx~, Powers WalBr Tmabm~ Plant 1 Repal~ng: West 76'Itt St WalB(' Tower WatEIr TmabTN~lt I:~nt II Projectg w-001 w4302 w-003 w-(x)4 w4)05 w-006 w-0o7 w.tx)8 w-goO w.010 w-011 w-013 w-014 w-015 w-017 W-018 W-019 Priority 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl 110,000 335,000 130,000 270,000 70,000 75,000 530,000 75,CXX) 3,30C),000 675,000 750.000 3,375,000 110,000 335,000 130,000 270,000 400,000 4.000.000 195.000 130,000 400,000 3"/0,000 210,000 3,500,000 5C),000 5O,OOO 50,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 1 ,-__~5,000 3,830,000 1,607,000 4,1 ?5,0IX) 1,252,000 12219 .,000 11,517,100 _-6,941,700 7,409,200 '~,176,(~00 3,852,(~ 35~96~ ..... .; - .. ... . . · l~4of 4 Tue~iay, November 20, 2001 CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN PROJECTS BY YEAR 2002 thru 2006 Project Name 2002 Boat/Trailer/Motor Replacen~nt F~ i~pt: ~l R~_,e ~ F~ ~= 1 ~4 I~ H~ F~ Dept: PPE (TumoutYHel~) Fire Dept.: C~cade System Air Bottle Refll Computer Purchases/Upgrades Telecommunk:a~n Pu~ases/Upgrades Community Dev.: Light Duty Trucks Audio/Visual Equipment Copier Rep[acemenls Pubic Works: Light Duty Trucks · Dive Team Equipment Trahlng Room Furniture and Equipment Bobcat Trencher Attachment Recmalion Center Carpet Replacement Carver County Co~m~unlty Demographic Partne~lp Web-Enabled Software Computerized Records Retenl~ System Ubrary Expansion Fire Sta~)n 1 aJ~ 2 Refurbishing Trail: Bandimem Park !~ Chanhassen Hms Ti'ail: ~ 101 (S. Shore Dr. to Townllne Dr.) Marsh Glen Trail Connector Tree Pfl~lr~ Skat~ Park Ramp Trah R~ Peemne~t Park Benche~ and Tables Sanitary Sewec BC-8 Sump Pump Inspections General Repairs (Eme~e~cy/Unplanned) Televise Sewer Lines Repair Manholes, Inflltra~n/lnflow (I/I) SCADA System Repair & Maintenance Bituminous Overlay: Lake Lucy Rd. Bltumi, ous Dverlay:. Saddlebrook Curve Department Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Municipal Buildings Municipal Buildings Park & Trail Im =rovements Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im :~rovements orovementa 3rovementa 3rovoments :~rovements xovements Sanitary Sewer mm 3rovements Sanitary Sewer Im Sanitary Sewer mm Sanitary Sewer mm Sanitary Sewer Im Sanitary Sewer Im 3mvomen~ 3rovomon~ 3mvomenta Street Improvements Street Improvements Street Improvements Project # EQ-002 EQ-005 EQ-007 EQ-010 EQ-011 EQ-013 EQ-014 EQ-015 EQ-.026 EQ-027 · EQ--029 ' EG033 EQ-042 EQ-.043 EQ-045 EQ-046 EQ-047 EQ--048 EQ-049 MB-001 MB-008 PK&T-012 PK&T-013 PK&T-015 PK&T-018 PK&T-023 PK&T-024 PK&T-025 SS-003 SS-006 SS-007 SS-008 SS-009 SS-010 ST-002 ST-005 ST-006 Priorit~ Project Value 10,000 20,000 2,000 15,000 9,200 59,900 0 22,000 10,000 100,000 113,000 30,000 6,000 12,000 8,500 5,000 '10,000 100,O00 75,000 6,000,000 31,000 250,000 850,000 68,000 15,000 7,500 20,000 10,000 400,000 25,000 50,000 15,000 120,000 85,000 40,000 95,000 18,000 Page I of 6 D~e.~dm,., November 20. 2001 Project Name Bl~.~o~ ~ ~ D~ D~ ~ ~ ~ ~ B~. ~ ~ I~ P~ ~~W~ ~~T~ w~ I~ ~ 41 W~ I~ ~~ ~. W~T~~I ~W~~~ ~: W~ ~ W~T~ Department Street Improvements Street Improvements Street Improvements Street Improvements Surface Water Management Surface Water Management Surface Water Management Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Project # ST-012 W-(X)5 W-O06 W-O07 W-O08 W-011 W-013 W-014 W-015 W-017 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project g'alue ~o,oo0 15,ooo 210,000 110,000 130,000 100,000 Total for 2002 11,342,100 -.o .. Pag= 2 of 6 Tuea~, November 20, 2001 Project Name 2003 Fire DepL: 1 3/4 Inch Hose Fire Dept.: PPE frumout/Helrnets) Cornput~ Pu~pgrades Telecommunication Purd~asea/upgrades Duml~low Truck R~ola~rnanl~Adclition~ Ford 555C Backhoe Audio/Visual Equlprnant Bobcat Snow Blower Tracks for Bobcat Grounds Mower Replacement Tractor Trailer Dive Team Equipment Training Room Fumltura and Equipment Carver County Community Demographic Partnership Senior Conter Expansion Improvemenls: Sandlrnera Community Park Development: City Canter Park Slgnage: Karl)er Pond Park Improvamnls: Meadow Green Park Road & Trail Reconstmclk)n: Lake Ann Park Trash Receptedes Sanitary Sewer, LC-1 Sanitary Sewer. BC-9 Sump Pump Inspections ' Genarai R~palrs (Emergency/Unplannad) Televise Sewer Unea SC, ADA System Repair & Maintenance Bituminous Overlay: West 78th St. Annual Street Improvement Program Lake RIk~y Watemhed Bluff Creek: Create Stermwater Ponds Lake Lucy (Lake Project) Well ~9 Water Treatment Plant 1 General Water System Repairs SCADA System Upgrades/Maintenance Department Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Munic{pal Bulldlnga Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im Park & Trail Im Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer Improvements Street Improvements Street Improvements Surface Water Management Surface Water Management Surface Water Management Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements 3rovements 3rovements 3rovements 3rovements 3rovements 3rovements Improvements Improvements Improvements Improvements Improvements Project # EQ-O03 EQ-007 EQ-010 EQ-013 EQ-014 EQ-016 EQ-023 EQ-026 EQ-.030 EQ-031 EQ-034 EQ-035 EQ-037 EQ-.042 EQ-043 EQ-047 MB-004 PI<&T-001 PK&T-O03 PK&T-005 PK&T-O06 PK&T-014 PK&T-024 SS-002 SS-004 SS-007 SS-010 ST-010 ST-012 SWMP-004 SWMP-009 SWMP-011 W-001 W-011 W-013 W-014 Priority Project Value 100,000 1,000 15,000 65,700 10,000 252,000 68,000 10,000 5,000 0 20,000 30,000 7,000 5,000 12,000 5,000 100,000 25,000 275,000 10,000 50,000 485,000 20,000 200,O00 315,000 25,000 50,000 15,000 85,000 170,000 265,000 150,000 215,000 50,000 70,000 3,500,000 50,000 10,000 Total for 2003 8,741,700 Page 3 of 6 D~sd~. , November 20, 2001 Project Name 2004 Fire DeFL: 13/4 Inch Hose Fire De~: PPE (Tumcx~teimm) A.d~ Trac~Boom Dive Team Equipment Impmvemm~ I~ncimsm Comn~nl~ Park Trai: Whi~ RUge Ct. to I~ Lucy Ln. ~ u~o~, ~n~n~o~n~r (e) Wat~ To~r (2~G~. Lyman B~. Wmr ~n~=~nt~ BC4 ffC~W - Ly~n) Wa~ I~ L~m~an, Audulx~, Department Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Park & Trail Improvements Park & Trail Improvement,~ Park & Trail Improvements Park & Trail Improvements Park & Trail Improvements Park & Trail Improvements Park & Trail Improvements Sanitary Sewer Improvements Sanitary Sewer Improvements Sanltsry Sewer Improvements Sanitary 8ewer Improvements Sanitary 8ewer Improvements Street Improvements Street Imp .rovemen~ Street Improvements Surface Water Management Surface Water Management Water Syatem Improvements Water b"y~em Improvemer~ Water Syatem Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water Syatem Improvements Water Syatem Improvements Project # Pr or EQ-O03 0 EQ.O07 0 EQ.010 0 EQ-013 0 EQ..014 0 EQ-015 0 EQ-016 0 EQ-026 0 EQ-027 0 EQ-029 0 EQ-036 0 EQ-042 0 EQ-047 0 PK&T-O01 0 PK&'I'-O03 0 PK&T-O04 0 PK&T-O08 0 PK&T~ 0 PK&T-011 0 PK&T-022 3 SS-O05 0 SS-O06 ' 0 SS-O07: 0 S,.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'~ ' SS-OlO o -. ST-004. 0 . . ST-011 0 ST-012 0 SWt~-005 0 SWMP-010 0 W-001 0 W-002 0 W-004 0 W-009 0 W-010 0 W-013 0 W-014 0 50,000 1,000 15,000 72,200 0 24,000 140,000 10,000 15,000 113,000 6,000 6,000 5,000 100,000 0 0 -120,0~0 125,000 '275,000 175,000 275,000 75,000 370,000 10,000 Pag~ 4 of 6 ~, November 20, 2001 Project Name 2005 IOOE Aerial Ladder Refurbishing Flra Dept.: 1 3/4 Inch Hose Fire Dept.: PPE ('rumout/Hslmsts) Cornputar Purchase~pgrades Telecommunication Purchases/Upgrades Community Dev.: Light Duty Trucks Dump/Plow Truck Rep~c~ments/Addltlon~ Vlbrat~/Roll P~:~er Une S~per Audb/Vbu~ Equipment Publk: Works: Light Duty Truc~ Grounds Mower Replacement Tracer Groun~ Mower Replacement (10') Upgrade 217 Gras~ Rig Pump/Mo~a~ T~k Carver County Community Demographic Partne~lp PubUc Works Fadlity Expansion Endowed Salt & Sand Storage Fadlity Park Shellec. Bandlmere Community Pad~ Sanitary Sewec. BC-2 (Portk~) Sump Pump I~ General Repairs (Emegency/Unplanned) SCADA System Repair & Maintenance Annual Street Improvement Program W~ #10 Well #11 Wal~r Tower (2MG): Lyman Blvd. Wster Improvements: Lyman, Audubon, Power~ General Water System Repairs SCADA S~rn UpgradegMalntenance Department Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Major Equipment Municipal Buildings Municipal Buildings Park & Trail Improvements Sanitary Sewer Improvements Sanitary Sewer Improvements Sanitary Sewer Improvements Sanitary Sewer Improvements Street Improvements Water System Improvements . Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Projecl # EQ-O01 EQ-O07 EQ-010 EQ-013 EQ-014 EQ-015 EQ-016 EQ-019 EQ-025 EQ-026 EQ-029 EQ-034 EQ-035 EQ-038 EQ-039 EQ-047 MB-O03 PK&T-021 SS-010 ST-012 W-O02 - .- W-O03 W-os4 W-010 W-013 W-014 Priority 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total for 2006 Project Value 35,000 1,000 15,000 65,600 0 25,000 133,000 45,000 8,000 10,000 116,000 27,0O0 45,000 41,000 60,000 5,000 200,000 200,000 175,000 350,000 25,000 60,000 .85,000 275,000 530J300 75,000' 3,300,000 210,000 50,000 10,000 6,176,600 Page 5 of 6 Tuesday, November 20, 2001 Project Name 2006 Fire Bept: ~ Coatputms Major Co~ Purchasea/U pgrades Major ~ Bev.: light Duty Trtx:~ Major Street ~ Major Equipment Tmlle~ Major Tar ~ Major Crad< Sealar Major Audk)N'atml Equipment Major Gmundsmast~ 580 Mower ~ Major Can~ Counl~ C, omrnunlty Demographic Parlner~lp Major Pubic W~xta Facilty Expansion Annual Street Improvement Program Wa~I1 Weil~12 Water Treatment Plant II Departnwnt Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Equipment Municipal Buildings Munidpal Buildings Sanitary Sewer Improvements Street Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Water System Improvements Project # EQ-O09 EQ--013 EQ-015 EQ-017 EQ-021 EQ-022 EQ-024 EQ-026 EQ-028 EQ-047 MB-(X)2 ST-012 W-O03 W-018 W-019 Total for 2006 Project Va/ue 50,000 70,000 52,000 140,000 22,000 21,000 40,000 10,000 85,000 5,000 0 1,700,000 120,000 285,000 675,000 3,852,000 GRAND TOTAL 36,62.1,600 Page 6 of 6 Tuesday, Now. tuber 20. 2001 CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN 2002 t~u 2006 ~'role~t# EQ-001 Project Name 100ft. Aerial Ladder Refurbishing Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipment Useful Life Category Fire Equipment Priority n/a Description iThis project, scheduled for halfway through the expected life of the vehicle, includes repainting the truck and ladder, adding new step grips on each ladder step. iupgrading the pump to handle 2000 gallons per minute and class ^ foam, replacing tires, axels and suspension systems, adding a second master stream and adding iSCBA to the Offic,,er's seal I :(1989 Simon LTl) ~This vehicle is expected to last 30 years. The recommended refurbishment will keep the ladder viable, functional and safe on the road a~ well as in the air. The .project is consistent with the City Vehicle replacement schedule and advice from fleet maintenance. · :Leave ~ is - no changes for 2002. · Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 35,000 35,000 Total 35,000 35,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . Total Capital Replacement Fund 35,000 35.000 Total 35,0o0 3~,oo0 Operational Impac~Other Negligible additional operating costs are anticipated. ; CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 Contlct City of Chanhasscn, MN __ . - i' r~ojm # EQ-002 I Type Equipment I i Useful Life i Project Name Boat/Trailer/Motor Replacement ', i , Category Fire Equipment .............. Priority n/a Involves adding a dive/rescue boat, trailer and motor. This watercraft is thc primary response unit for div~related emergencies in thc lakes and thc Minnesota Riv~. It is used to transport rescuers and r~tove vi~ims in near-drowning and drowning inciclmt~, for fast wat~ r~a:ues in li~ Minnesota Kirk, recovery acthritics, dive team suppcwt, acc~ to flloodcd areas during high water emergencies, crc. I ;The dive tenm needs a boat for their operntions. ~:NOTE: Fire Depamnent recommends moving up sch~ulc from 2003 nt $10,000.00 to 2002. Justification - in wntn'-rel~ted f~nlities in y~ar ~dlng 2000 and 2001, :the Fire Department has initiated nggressive restructuring, training and certifying new divers. By year~ end the Fire Department will have 15 certified divers. Part ~fthe equipment for a safe dive operation is adding a zodiak boat, new motor and trailer. The estimated cost is $10,000.00 Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Malntenanc~ Equipment 10~}00 10.000 'Total 10~00 10~o0 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 - 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund 10.000 10,000 Total 10~00 10~0o 'Negligible additional operating costs are anticipated. ,. : , I CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN Project# EQ-003 Project Name Fire Dept.: 800 MHz Radio System 2002 2006 Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipment Useful Life Category Fire Equipment Priority n/a ~ Description : :Involves changin~ t~-c Fire Department radios to 800 mHz when Carver County m 'akcs its county-wide conversion. Thc existing system will begin to be phased out ~,in 2002, continuing through 2004. Susfifi~afion · !The new system should improve radio coverage and provide additional channels for operations. It allows the Fire Department to continue to use the Catve~ County Communications Center. Carver County is migrating to a new radio/communication platform. This will improve inter-agency communication, radio performance :and functionality. This one time expense is projected at :1;150,000.00 to convea't the existing radio system to 800 mHz. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 100,000 50,000 .150,000 Total 100,000 ,50,000 150,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund 100,000 50,000 150,000 Total 1 oo,ooo ~,ooo 1 ~o,ooo :Operational Impact/Other - 'No additional operating costs are anticipated. :, · ; CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN , ~j~t # EQ-005 · i end~t ~,m,Fire Dept.: Thermal Re~cue Device Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipment Useful Life Priority n/a ilnvolvcs purchasin~ one thermal imaging rescue device over a 3-y~u' period (2000-2002). devices nrc ttscd by fircfightcrs while scnrching for victims insid~ of thc bu~din~ during a stmctnl~ fire. Thc device ennbles the fu~figh~ to see clenrly while ~vignting a dark smoke--filled structure using infrared technology. Without this tcchnolo~, flrcfightcrs arc subject to dmlEm~us a:ro-visibility conditions. This it~hnology will sp~d up firefighting operations significantly. iAccount 0400-4102-470:5 ] is project will enhance firefighter safety significantly, improve firefighting operations nnd allow for fnst and snf~ victim searches. This is comis~nt with the ',City's risk w.~ngeng-nt policy. I Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total ] 40,000 [ Maintenance Equipment 20,000 20,000 Total Total 20~oo 9nd)o0 -.. Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 ' ' 2004 2005 ' 2006- Totnl 40,000 ] Cnpitel Replacement Fund 20,000 20,000 Total Total 2o~o0 2o~o ,This project may lower payroll expenses for paid on-call staff'as a result of improved and more c:fficimt ~ fighting operations. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN ........... · · Project # EQ-007 · Project Name Fire Dept.: 1 3/4 Inch Hose Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipment Useful Life Category Fire Equipment Priority n/n Description ilnvolvcs replacing thc existing 1 1/2" hose with a I 3/4" hose. This hose is connected to thc fire trucks and is used by thc firefighters to ~tinguish fire. There am 2 [lxucks remaining that need this conversion - one truck will be converted in 2000. , Account #400.4104-4705 'Justification ' · Thc existing hose is over 15 years old. Thc larger hose allows for significant improvement in water flow, which in mm, enhances fircfighting capabilities. , .NOTE: $2000.00 to replace hose damaged duc to fircfighting, . : Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 5,500 ] Maintenance Equipment 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 Total Total 2,000 1,000, 1,000 1,000 5,000 . Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 5,500] Capital Replacement Fund 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 Total Total 2.ooo 1,000 1,000 1,000 5,000 Operational Impact/Other No additional operating costs are anticipated. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN ~ ~olect # EQ-009 rro~ct ~amcFire Dept.: Laptop Computers Contact Type Equipment Useful Life Priority n/a IInvolv~s installing laptops in all front-line vehicles to enable responding imsonnel to sacess building pm-plans, hs,srdous matm'ials a~. hydrant ~nd o~r utility I i ! :The project will enhance Fire Department operations, allowing for increased saf~ as a result of easy access to important ~. It will also make it easi~' to i I · Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total Off'me Equipment 50,(X)0 50,000 Total so,ooo 50dxXl .. . Funding Sources 2002 - 2003 -. 2004 Capital Replacement Fund 50,000 50,000 . . · TotM - Total .~,~o ~0,000. No additional op~mtin$ costs am anticipated. , ! L.. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru City of Chanhassen, MN rrolec, # EQ-010 · Project Name Fire Dept.: PPE (Turnout/Helmets) 2OO6 Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipment Useful Life Category Fire Equipment Priority n/a 'Description ,Replacement of 3-5 sets per year as a result of damage received fi'om firefighting activities. The City will also provide new members with new gear after they · complete their probationary period. ;Account//40041054705 Juatitication :Turnout gear lasts approximately 5-7 years on average. iNOTE: Turnover/retirement have made it necessary to add more firefighters. Instead of adding five to six we are nmv adding eight to nine additional per year. iAdditional new turnout gear needs to be ordered to replace damaged or worn out equipmenL Cost of equipping one new firefightea' is approximately :$1500.00. Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 20,000 ] Maintenance Equipment 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 60,000 Total Total 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 60,000 Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 ·2004 2005 2006 . Total ~ Capital Replacement Fund 15,000 15,000 1.5,000 15,000 60,000 Total Total 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 60,000 Operational Impact/Other No additional operating costs are anticipated. : · CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN ~~,~, MnjorEquipment r ........................................ Type Equipm~ ' m-o.l~ # EQ-O 11 ', ~ ~ IJ~rul I..,i fe I~ eroi~ Name Fire Dept.: Cascade System Air Bottle Refill , : Catego~ Fire F. quipm~t ......................... Thc Cascade System is used to refill thc SCBA (air packs) used by ~efight~s. The systg~ is used frequently and it is an'dcipa~i that it will need to be rcfurb~ in 2002. I I 1 }1) $6,000.00 needed for OSHA required blast containment system for filling air bottles (both firefighting and SCUBA tnn~). ~2) Aerial truck breathing air tanks and piping need to increase flora our old 2S00 psi b~athing air system to om' oun~nt 4500 psi. This would involve installing new ihigh pressured air lines and tanks - $1200.00. ~) Add additional breathing masks for new fuefighters - $2000.00. I , i Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 9,2(X) 'Total 9,200 9~,2oo Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 ' 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund 9~X) Total 9,2oo 9,2o0 iNo additional opening costs are n~[icipatcd. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN Department Major Equipment !;'(~.(~ l't Type Equipment ~ Project# Useful Life Project Name · [Jomputer t-urcnases/upgraoes = Category Office Equipment ! ......................................... Priority n/n ;Description :Funds the purchase of replacement PCs, local area network equipment, network and local printers, peripheral hardware and all network and common-user soRwnm. ;ri'he replacement schedule was reviewed by the I.T. Task Force and is subject to modification by the City Manager and IX-partment He, ads. · A~ount #101-1160-4703 . ' lusfificafion ~The replacement schedule for this equipment is based on the following useful life expectancies: 13=5 years - PCs, network servers ~4-5 yea~ - network printers :Budgeting and purchasing PCs through this project allows the City greater flexibility to direct equipment to where it is needed most, rather than using individual 'budl~'ts. Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 16405001 Office Equipment 59,900 65,700 72,200 65,600 70,000 333,400 Total Total 59,900 65,700 72,200 65,600 70,000 333,400 Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 78,100 ] General Fund 59,900 65,700 · 72,200 65,600 70,000 333,400 Total . Total 59,900 65,700 72,200 65,600 70,000 333,400 ',Operational Impact/Other . . :No additional operating costs are anticipated. · : CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 co.t.,_-t City of Chanhassen. MN O~p..m~, ~~p.= ...................... Type Equipmmt i rroim # EQ-014 u~f~ Ufe I ' { ~olm N, me T.e!_eeOm_m..u_nication Purcha_?es/Upgrades ] c,t~r~ om~ Equ~pmat Priority n/a This project fxmds expansion of thc City Hall telephone system to thc new Library. Justifictaion 'There will bca nccd to provide telephones to thc ncw Library building. This will fund thc equipment and connections ncccssm'y to allow phonc service ming thc m:cntly installcd phone switch in City Hall. i Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl 0 10,000 0 0 10,000 [ 233,000 ] Office Equipment Total Total 0 10~0 0 0 10~0 ' 2004 2005 '2006 Total Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 ' . - [ 233,0001 Capital Replacement Fund 0 10,000 -- 0 ' 0 10,000 Total Total o 10,ooo o 0 10,oo0 CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t,~u 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN O,~,'~ent MsjorEquipm~t :Project# EQ-015 ~ Type Equipment i Useful Life ~ proie=t N, me CommuniW Dev.: Light Du~ Tru¢l~ ............................... ~ C~tego~ PrioriB, ; Desoripfion i · Provides for scheduled replacemen-t~ starti 'n~-~-~-~l. These purchases are consistent with the Vehicle Replacement Schedule. Replacement units are generally :~purchased early in the year to accommodate the time frames established by Hennepin County and th~ State of Minesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. :Account//400-4107-4704 Justification , These vehicles ar~ used to provide building inspection services throughout the community. The awrage replacem~t age is 10 years. Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Future 21,000[ Maintenance Equipment 22,000 24,000 25,000 52,000 123,000 [ 55,0001 Total Total 22~)00 24,000 25,000 ~.,000 123,000 Total Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 '2006 · Total I 2'1,000 1 Capital Replacement Fund 22,000 24,000 25,000 26,000 97,000 Total Total 22,000 24,000 25,000 26,000 97,000 · Operational Impact/Other : These purchases will include a limited warranty and will reduce the annual maintenance and r~-pair costs as compared to the vehicles r~placed. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhass a, MN ~ eroj~t # EQ-016 i Project Name Dump/Pl0w Truck Replacements/Additions Contact Department Major Equipmmt Useful Life Category Strut Equipmmt Priority n/a ~ pun:haa~ anticipate $ sch~lul~! r~la~m~nt~ and 2 Mdifi~ d~p ~ ~ ~ C~s ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h~c ~ ~ ~n~ ~ p~ ~d s~d~. Tm~ ~ ~ ~ hi~ d~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~fi~ ~g ~ ~ s~ 2~. ~ ~ · ~ p~ ~i~ ci~ ~ H~n~in ~ or S~ of~ ~~ bid ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~ p~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~in M~ of~i~. !Account 0,00-4108-4704 ~ vehicles ar~ ~ to provid~ a variety of maintmanc~ servic~ throughout lt~ ~mmunity including winjta- ~m'lg:nc~ n:spon~ for plowing and hauling :~snow. Thc av~ra~ r~plgn:mmt ag~ is 16.5 y~ar~. Wintm' ~m~n~ s~rvic~ necessitttlrz tl~se vchi~m l~ reliable mid dq~ndablc. Growth in tl~ ~mmmnity .~cat~ an additional plow rout~ approximately ~ 3 y~a~. Thc track sc, h~d~d for r~p~ in 2000 is a 1984 mode~ (57,000 milm). Du~ to this tm~s *ma'nmt valu~ of $5,000, it will I~ kept in tl~ fl~:t aa a backup. Thcs~ vehicle pumhas~ a~ ~maistmt with ~ Vehlcl¢ R~~t Sch~lulc. Prior Expenditurea 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total [ 233,000 ] Vehicie9 252,000 140,000 13.%000 525,000 Total Total 252,000 14o,00o 133.000 · . . · . . . . . : -. · . . · . - Prior' Funding Sourc~ 2002 - 2003 2004 " 1.2(~05 " 2006' ' Total [ 233,000 ! Capital Replacement Fund 252,000 140,000 ' 133~00 525,000 Total Total i These purr, ha.scs will include a limited warranty and will reduce thc annual maintm'mncc and repair costa as compar~ to thc vehicles mplamd. · CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN · Project # EQ-017 Project Name Street Sweeper Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Major Equipment Equipment 8 Years Street Equipment n/a Description 'This project replaces the 1992 Athey Ss~per which is used to clean streets each spring and fail. ' Jtmfifieafion ~ .This unit is subject to heavy dust and dirt infiltration and needs regular maintenance to continue in running condition. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Vehicles 140,000 140,000 Total 14o,ooo 14c),ooo Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . Total Capital Replacement Fund 140,000 140,000 Total 140,000 140,000 · Operational Impact/Other CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhass~n, MN !, rrojm # EQ-019 i Project Name Vibratory Roll Packer 2002 t~n~ 2006 ~ontuct Useful Life Priority n/a iPurehnse is scheduled to r~plnce thc 1987 Rosco Vibrntory Roll Pnc. k~. The purchase is consistent with the Vehicle Replncem~nt Schedule (lst Qua'tn' of 2002). ~This mnchine is used extensively in thc patching nnd overlaying of City s'n'eets. The existing unit will be 15 ymrs old. 1 Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Vehicles 45,000 45,000 Total Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 '2005 ' 2006 - Total Capital Replacement Fund 45,000 45,000 Total . iThis purchase will include a limited warranty nnd will reduce the anntud maint~nnnce and repair cos~ ns compared to thc machine replaced. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN ProJect # EQ-021 ProJect ~ame Equipment Trailers 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Major Equipment Equipment Street Equipment n/a Description , 'Provides for replacement of an existing and and addition of a 20,000 lb (10 ton) capacity tandem axle trailer. 'Fund t~400-0000-4705 Jtmtificafion ,These trailers are used extensively in thc paving operation to transport the paver machine, roll packer and bobcat to each job site. The existing trailer is 20 years old i and cannot haul all of the equipment together. This is consistent with thc Vehicle Replacement Schedule. I ' I Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 22,000 22,000 Total- 22,000 22,000 Total Pribr Funding'Sources . 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund 22,000 22,000 Total 22,000 22,000 Total Operational Impact/Other :Both purchnses include a limited warranty. i ! CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN I i rrol~ # EQ-022 I Project Name Tar Kettle 2002 t/~n, 2006 Contact Department Major F_.quipmeat. Type Equipment Usefnl Life Category Street Equipment Priority n/a Provides fro' replsc~nem of the existing mr kettle. Justification LThe existing tar kettle is used extensively in the pavement maintm~mcc opera, om. Due m the nnm~ of its use, the life expecUmcy is apprm-imamly 5-6 ymrs. This consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Mnlr~nance Equipment 21,000 21,000 Total , 2'1~00 ~1,000 -.. Funding Sources 2002 2003 ' ' 2004 2005 ' 2006' Total Capital Replacement Fund -- 21,000 21,000 Total zn,O0o ~n,O00 iThis purchase will include a limited wammty and will eliminate an oq~nsiv~ overhaul on the gxi~ting unit CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN · Project # EQ-023 · Project Name 2002 thru 2006 Ford 555C Backhoe Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipment Useful Life Category Priority :Description 'Provides for the replacement of an existing 1989 Tractor Backhoe. ~The tractor backhoe is used extensively in maintenance operations. The existing machine currently has 2,300 hours ofusnge and will be nearly 15 years old at the : :.time of scheduled replacement. This is consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 68,000 68,000 Total 68,ooo 68,ooo Funding Sources 2002 . . 2003 2004 2005 2006 ' Total Capital Replacement Fund 68,000 68,000 Total 68,000 68,000 :-Operational Impact/Other' This purchase will include a limited warrnnty nnd will reduce the nnnual maintennnce nnd repair costs ns compared to the machine replaced. · CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhass~n, MN · ~oj~# EQ-024 i Project Name Crack Sealer i 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Useful Life Priority Msjor Equipm~t Equipmmt n/a :Provides for ~ rcplac~mtt of an ~xisting c. rack ~e, aling machine,. i ,~Fhc crack seater is used extensively in thc pavcmmt maintenance opcmtion~ Duc to thc nature of its usc, the life cxpcctcncy is appmxima~y 6-8 years. This is :comist~ with thc Equipm~t R~l~m~nt S~lul~. ! · 1 ! Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Mnlntanance Equipment 40,000 40,000 Total ~1oo ~oo Funding Sources 2002 - 2003 2004 '2005 2006 To~al Capital Replacement Fund -' 40,000 40,000 · . o Total 40~oo 40~oo -o !This purchase will include a limited warranty and will reduce thc annual maintenance and repair costs as compmcd to thc existing tmit. · i CAPITAL PLAN City of Charthassen, MN · Project # EQ-025 Project r~'ame Line Striper 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipm~t Useful Life Category Priority tVa - Dosca'ipfion Provides for thc replacement of an existing line-striping machine. Justification :This machine is used to paint pavement markings and stripe lanes on roads. This purchase will ensure timely and reliable pavement marking operations. It is consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 8,000 8,000 Total 8,o0o 8,oo0 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . Total Capital Replacement Fund 8,000 8,000 Total 8,000 8,0OO , · Operational lmpa~dOther : I, · This purchase will include a limit~ warranty. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN D..na.~. ! 1,,-olin # EQ-026 ,: TYl~ I~i~ ~"~ Audio/Visual Eqnipment ,, um~ uf~ .............. Priority Equipmmt !Provide~ for thc systematic maintenance and upgrading of audio/visual equipment Replacemmt will occur in the l~t Quarter of 2003. -;Account 8210-0000-4705 ! ,'I'h~ original A/V equipment was purchased in 1989, with the remainder purchased in 1994. This project calls for tim systmnali¢ maintenance and upgrading of tim iA/V equipment and additional equipment as new technology develops. Potenti~ projects i~..ludc: rcplacemen! ofequi_ .p~.. including but not limit~l to, replacing the spotlight system in the Council Chambers and smffmicrophonm. Them rcplacenmm will ~LSUre tim qualay ofofficml City meetings and video productions. I Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total [ 20,000] Maintenance Equipment 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,04X) 50,000 Total Tbtal lo~oo lo~x~o lo~oo 1o~oo lo,sm 5o~oo Prior Funding Sources ~ 2002 2003 2004 2005 · 2006 Total .o [ 20,000] Television (Cable) Fund 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,0O0 50,000 Total Total 10~00 10.000 lO,mO 10.000 10~00 ~0~00 ~hJs purchase will include a limited warranty. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN Department Major Equipment Project# EO-027 : Type Equipment Useful Life Project Name Copier Replacements : .................................... Category Priority n/a 'Description , ;Provides for the purchase of replaCement copiers for all City depnrlrnents. The copiers will be evaluated each year and replaced ns necessary. The manufacturers ;have stopped making replacement parts for some copiers in our inventory, so they will need to be replaced if parts availability becomes problematic. ! ,Account #4004109-4703 1 i Justification iThe project will replace copiers ns they become obsolete or maintenance costs escalate to unacceptable level_~. The manufacturers have stopped making replacement '.parts for some copiers in our inventory, so they will need to be replaced if parts availability becomes problematic. Copiers are genearlly replaced on a 7 year :?hedule. The 2000 budget will replace one of the five copiers located in various City depamnents. · ; , Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total [ 12,0001 Maintenance Equipment 100,000 15,000 115,000 Total Total 100,000 15,000 t15,000 Prior Funding Sou~'ees 2002' ' 2003 2004 2005 20'06 Total I 12,0001 Capital Replacement Fund 100,000 15,000 115,000 Total Total 100,000 15,000 115,000 Operational Impact/Other ~-~. :These purchases will decrease annual maintenance costs because equipment is generally more reliable than earlier models. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t/~-u City of Chanhass~n, MN ~i~t# EQ-028 Pro]reName Groundsmaster 580 Mower Replacement 2006 Conm~t Department Major Equiim~nt Type F_.q ulpm~t U~eful Life Priority Provides fix I addition to and 1 replacemeat of an ~xisting Tom 580, 15 ~ high volume grounds mower. Account ~R)0-0000-4705 i?be City currmtly has 3 high-production grounds rnowets that cut a 15' pass. ? .m~.. ina is ~ daily. ~ the.~ season and takes the place of 2 1/2 smaller machines used by the City. Due to additional park dew. lopment, an additmnal hlgh-~pfl~Ry ~ l~ ngeogo, ln~ oldest mnchim is scheduled to be ~plnced in 2002. This is consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule. ,: ! i Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total I 72,0421 Maln'mnance Equipment Total Total Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 .. 2004 2005 ' 2006- Total I 72,o421 capm Rep,acement Fund ~,000 SS,O00 Total Total iThis putclmse will include a limited warranty and ngluce malntemmc~ and repair expenses as compared to the unit replaced. Also, each oftbese machines talms tbe I place of 2 i/2 smaller machines and makes the mowing operation 150% mom efficienL CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN · Project # EQ-029 , : Project Name Public Works: Light Duty Trucks ' Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipment Useful Life Category Priority n/a -Description ,Provides for 16 scheduled replacement Public Works light duty trucks, some with plows. Replacement units are generally purchased early in thc year in order to -accommodate thc time frames established by Hcnncpin County and thc State of MN Cooperative Purchasing Program. ;Justification iThese vehicles are used to provide a variety of services throughout thc community. Thc average replacement ngc is 14 years. Thc additional trucks are required to [ !meet growth needs in the maintenance operations. These purchases are consistent with the Vehicle Replacement Program. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 113,000 113,000 116,000 342,000 Total 113,000 113,000 116,000 342,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003. 2004 2005 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund 115,000 113,000 116,000 344,000 Total 115,000 113,000 116,000 344,000 Operational Impact/Other These purchases will include a limited warranty nnd will reduce annual maintenance and repair costs ns compared to thc vehicles replncecL CAPITAL PLAN City of Chnnhassen, MN I i r~oj~ # EQ-030 . i rroj~ N. me Bobcat Snow Blower 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Ufe Priority iProvidm for replacement of an existing Bobcalt Snow Blower. I ! ! i ! iThe existing unit will be ! 5 year~ old and is at the end of its useful life. Rebuilding is not cost ~ This purchase is eomistmt wi~ tt~ Equipmem ! .. , Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 5,000 . . 5,000 Total ~ooo ~ Funding Sources 2002 - 2003 2004 "-260~ 2006 To~al Capital Replacement Fund' 5,000 5,000 Total .~ooo ~ ,'This purchase will include a limited warrnnty nnd will reduce the nnnual maintnumc~ nnd mpnir costs ns compared !o the e:xislin& mill . · CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN Project// EQ-031 Project Name Tracks for Bobcat Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipment Useful Life Category Priority n/a 'Description iProvides for the replacement of robber tracks for the existing Bobcat. I I , · Justification ,The current wear on tracks indicate they will last only 2-3 more years. This project is consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule. I I._ ....... Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 0 0 Total o o Funding Sources ' 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . Total Capital Replacement Fund Total Operational Impact/Other This purchase will not increase maintenance or repair expenses. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN .......... [ va,lin # EQ-033 ' Project Name Bobcat I .............. 2002 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Priori~ Major Equipment Equipment n/a IProvicl~s for replacement ofnn existing 1994 model Park Maintenance Dept. bob~t. I ! I .Tbe existing Ix~cat will be 8 yems old in 2002, with an cs'drrmtcd 2,750 horns of usagg and a major ov~aa~ is nced~l. Impmvemmts m tbe d~sign meaa that if is ~ operationally to purchase a new mae. him rather than overhauling the old. I I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 30,000 30,000 Total ~o~00 Funding Sources ' 2002 .- 2003 2004 2005 - 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund 30,000 30,000 Total 3o~oo 3o~o . ,This pttrchnse will include a warranty and will reduce the annual maintenance and ~-pair costs ns compat~i to th~ existing trail Operating Budget Impact 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance 2,000 2,000 Total 2,~oo ~} CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN ProJect # EQ-034 ~ Project Name Grounds Mower Replacement ...... 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Major Equipment Equipment n/a =Description =Provides for replacement of 4 existing lawn mowers over five years. Justification · :'With the amount ofparklnnd growing each yem', there is increased wear and tear on the City's lawn mowers. They m'e 12-16 yeas old and am not dependable. Rebuilding is not cost effective. This is consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule. Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 18,4521 Maintenance Equipment 20,000 27,000 47,000 Total Total 20,000 27,000 47,000 Prior Funding Sources 2002' 2003 ' 2004 2005 2006 Total I 20,0001 Capital Replacement Fund 20,000 27,000 47,000 Total Total 20,000 27,000 47,000 Operational Impact/Other This purchase will includc a limited ~r~-~d will reduce the annual maintenance and repair costs as compared to the existing uniL ..... ; CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen MN I r,-ojm # EQ-035 i Project Name Tractor ...... 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Priority Major Equipmmt Equymeat n/a iProvidcs for rcplncgment of 3 cx~ing tracto~ over a five year period. I I ! 12000: Unit is 27 years old with an estimated 4,500 hours of usngc. It is ~ for a vnriety ofPm-k Maintcnnnce nctivities, including fertilizing, spraying, grading. Icrc. The new unit will be used for sweeping sknting rini~. TI-tIS WiLL BE DELAYED UNTIL 2001 FOR A S[GN[FXCANTLY REDESIGNED MODEL. ~,002: Unit is 52 years old. It is smnllm', used for seeding parks, raking beaches, grnding nnd ballfieJd maintennnce. !2003: Unit is 16 ymus old and is not depcndnbl¢. Rebuilding is not cost effective. It is used for sweeping rinks nad trails, grnding/lcveling pm'ks, fcttili~g nnd iThis projec~ is consistent with_th__e Eoui_p_ment l~eplaccrnmt Schedule. Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 43,900 ] Maintenance Equipment 30,000 45,000 75,000 Total Total 30JX~0 4,5~00 75,0oo Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 . . 2004 2005 ' 2006- Total [ 43,900 ] Capital Replacement Fund 30,000 45,000 75,000 Total Total 3o,ooe 4.r~oo 75,000 ~his purchase will include a limited warranty and will mduc~ thc aunu~! rn~nt~n~ and r~pnir cosl~ ns compare] to the existing unit · i CAPITAL PLAN City of Chaahassen, MN Project # EQ-036 Project Name Tractor Boom 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Major Equipment Equipment n/a .. · Description iPmvides for replacement of a Tractor Broom and hea~l for the Ford tractor. i Justification i !The sweeper broom for the wacmr is used extensively in the strect sweeping operation and typically has a useful life of 7-8 years. This is consistent with the IEquipment Replacement Schedule. i I I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 6,000 6,000 Total 6,000 6,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 '2006 ' Total Capital Replacement Fund 6,000 6,000 Total 6,000 6,000 ~ Operational Impact/Other This purchase will not increase maintenance and repair expenses. · : CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN ' r~ol~ # EQ-037 i Project Name Trailer 2002 ttm, 2006 Contact Useful Life PHoHty n/a ;Pmvicl~ for addition ora trailer to the existing Park inventory. I ~railcr is needed to translx~t medium-sized mowe:s to neighbodmod parks. This is consistent with the Equipment Rep~ Sded~e~ : : Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 7,1:100 7,000 . Total ?~0 ' ' ' ?~oo · . . .. . · . . · · . . . .- . . .. Funding Sources 2002 - 2003 2004 -2(~05 ..... 2006 - Capital Replacement Fund 7,000 Toi~ -.. - . Total 7,000 7,o00 iThe purchase will include a limited warranty. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~u 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN ProJect # EQ-038 ProJect S, me Grounds Mower Replacement Contact Department Major Equipment Type Equipment Useful Life Category Priority n/a 'Description ' Provides for addition of a 10' high-volume grounds mower. 'Justification :The increase of parkland has warranted the use of a mid-sized mower that can be transported to parks that are too far for the large mowers to drive. This is '.consistent with the Equipment Replacement Schedule. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 41,000 41,000 Total 41,000 41,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . Total Capital Replacement Fund 41,000 41,000 Total 41,000 41,000 i-bp~i~:mal Trap ~e.J'Other This machine would replace thc transporting of 2 smaller mowers to smaller neighborhood parks and reduce mowing time. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~ 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN l~lmrtm~nt M~orEquipm~It : r~olect # EQ-039 i u~ful Life i P~°lm~''c Upgrade 21'/Grass Rig Pump/Motor/Water T~mk ~ ........... ........... Priority n/a :,G-ra~ rig/msm~ mack//217 is n 1977 Ford pickup. This truck hms as a backup rescue, gram fire rig. hose haul=, and utility track and runs wr. JL For ils limited us~ lit serves its purpose, but it will be 28 yeah old upon replacement L~umount g4(g)-4 ! 12-4705 ..Upgrading the grass tim fighting capabili~ with a new tank, pump, and pump motor to foam capabilities will ~dmnc~ fu~ ~n~uishn~at The new pump ::assembly will be built as a 'slide in' unit, so it could be utilitzed in a future truck. With these enhancements, a replacement may be Imsbed out for fi~ ~ Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 8.500 ] Maintenance Equipment 60,000 60,000 Total Total ~o,ooo ~o,o00 Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' 2~}05 - 2006, [ 8,500 J Capital Replacement Fund 60.000 Total Totnl Total CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~u 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN Department Major Equipment .. Project # EQ-042 . Type Improvement , : Useful Life =, Project Name Dive Team Equipment Category Priority n/a : Descxiption iThe. Chan/mssen Fire Department Dive Team is continuing its improvement of equipment on the dive team. In order to fully outfit the dive team additional ieqmpmcnt needs to bc purchased. Thc equipment would bc drysuits, Aga full-fac,~ piece with communications, communication rope and control box. and safety iback-up air bottle. ; Justification ',This equipment will keep the dive team in compliance with National fire Protection Association (lqFPA) and Occupational Safety ande Health Administration i)C)SFIA) standards. This equipment will allow the dive tealrn to safely respond to ice-related/winter water hazards. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 6,000 6,000 6,000 18,000 Total 6,000 6,00C~ 6,000 18,000 Funding Sources 2002 ' 2003 ' 2004 2005 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund 6,000 6,000 6,000 18,000 Total 6,000 6~)0 6,000 18,000 Operational Impact/o~ho~- ......... CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thr~ 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN __ i P~o~ # EQ-043 ] rrolm NameTraining Room Furniture and Equipment Conm~t Department Major Equipment Type ~ Useful l. Jfe Priorl~ I IThe oarrent furniture needs replacement and is not good for Uaining. The room is highly used by the fire depmtmenC The currmt furniture is over 30 yem~ old. , i i i Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 12,000 1ZOO0 2.4,000 Total 12,000 12,0~0 24~00~ Funding Sources . 2002 2003 .2004 2005 ' 2006- Total Capital Replacement Fund 12,000 12,000 24,000 Total 12,000 t2J)00 24,K)0 CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN i Project # EQ-045 i Project Name Bobcat Trencher Attachment 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful l.lfe Category Priority Major Equipment Equipment Equipm~t 4 Less Important Description ~ This is a new tool that'~ll at'ch to the new Bobcat to allow city crews to perform trenching. i Jl.lstifioation ,:The current process is to rent a trencher to replace drain tile and help with utility work when necessary. This purchase will eliminate the time lag and staff effort inecessary to locate and pick up n trencher. i Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 8,500 8,500 Total 8A)o 8,500 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund 8,500 8,500 Total 8,5oo 8,5o0 · Operational Impn~Other CAPITAL PLAN 2002 City of Chanhassen, MN ,~ rrol.t # EQ-046 :~ lh'oJect Name Recreation Center Carpet Replacement t~"u 2006 Contact n,.partment Type Useful Ufe Priority 5-10 yearn Buildings iThis project provides new carpet in the reception ~ meeting moms 2 nnd 3 and the common,ce room. I I ?l'his carpet is six years old, stained, and ratty. ! I .m Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total ConstTuctlon/Malntenance 5,000 5,000 Total Funding Sources 2002' · 2003 - - 2004 General Fund 5,000 5,000 Total ~ ~ 2006 -' Total' CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t/,r. 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN Department Major Equipment · , Type Improvement · Project # EQ-047 ~ Uneful Life · ProJect Name Carver County Community Demographic Partner , i ....................................................... ' Category Priority n/a :Description, iDcmographic information for planning community programs and services, managing rcsourses and infraslxucturc would be available to thc city through a database !that is created county-wide. The databaso includes school districts, the county, census information, health care information along with State of Minnesota and city , I , ~Jusfific~fion ! :Because the database includes all entities in the city, the applicaton will be the best source for studying life-cycle housing, needs assessments for transportation, :senior services, park & rec programs, trends in home ownership, and resident turn-over. : I I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Planning/Design 10,000 10,000 Construction/Maintenance 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 20,000 Total 10,000 · 5,000' 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 - Total Capital Replacement Fund 10,000 10,000 ' ' General Fund 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 20,000 Total lO,OOO 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 30,000 Operational Impact/Other CAPITAL PLAN City of Chauhassen, MN ,: Prell# EQ-048 ~ erolm s~-,~ Web-Enabled Software 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Useful Life Category Priority 5-7 yents n/n project will fund ~ software for Finance, Park & Recreation, and Building Inspection. ~qew software will allow w~b access to pay utility bills, process recreation n:gistrafi~ and apply for building permits. The cummt so/tware is adequate for cummt lusts but is not w~b-e~tblcd. Ther~ ar~ nagging functional issues that continue to crop up and will probably not Ix: freed by thc v~ndom in a tin~iy manner. I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Office Equipment 100,000 100,000 Total t00~00 100~0 Funding Sources 2002 ' 20~3 2004' ' 2005 - 2006 Total. Capital Replacement Fund 100,000 100,000 Total 100,000 100,1100 CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~u 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN ~ep..~., Major Equipment Type Impmvunent P~oieet # EQ-049 Useful Life ProJect Name Computerized Records Retention System Category Priority tva ' Desm'iption ~ :This project will fund a system that will scan and store records on CD's, rather than relying only on paper copies. .._ Justification .q'his type of system will allow records to be reu'ieved much faster than the current method. The possibility of lost or misfiled records will be reduced. Most of these '~systern~ also have readers that allow the records to be viewed over the intemet, which ~il allow easier access to city records for the general public. : Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Office Equipment 75,000 75,000 Total 75,o0o 75,000 Funding Sources 2002 ' 2003 · 2004 2005 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund 75,000 75,000 Total 75,000 75,000 CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t/m, 2006 Contnct City of Chanhassen, MN ~p. rtm=t !, rrojm # MB-001 i Project Name Library Expansion I U,ef~ Ufe ........................... [ C~t~ory Priority iThis project provides for the expansion of the current library. ~tly, the librnry [uts 5,800 SCl. ft. Se, heduli~ to be d~n~tined ns pnrt of Needs Analysis. :,The city has hired a Library consultant to review thc needs analysis for the Library expansion. This w~'k is consistent with the policy of providing timely and efficient ptz'vmtnt~ maintmmncc of the City's buildings. ,, Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 6,000,000 6,000,000 Total Funding Sources 2002 - 2003 ' 2004 2005 . 2006- Total Bond Proceeds 6JX)0J)00 6,000,000 Total 6,0o0,0o0 6.ooo,oeo These projects generally improve building efficiencies. However, with thc expansion, there will be a pcrccnlagc increase based on ee expanded footprint oftbe , ! : CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN Project # MB-002 · Project NameFire Station #2 Expansion 2002 t~u 2006 Contact Department Municipal Buildings Type Improvement Useful Life Category Buildings Priority fda ! Description :Upgrading of Fire Station #2. This project calls for a new roof, lawn sprinkler system and interior remodeling. Justification , 'Station #2 was built in 1980 and has seen no major remodeling or updating since its original construction. This work is consistent with the policy of providing ~mely and efficient preventative maintenance of the City's buildings. , Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 0 0 Total 0 0 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 · Total Capital Replacement Fund 0 0 Total 0 0 Operational Impact/Other This project wi]] have no effect on operating costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru City of Chanhasscn, MN , r,ojeet # MB-003 ! P,'oJe,:t Sam Public Works Facility Expan.qion 2006 ~ontact Department Municipal Buildings Useful 'Life Category Bui]dins3 Priority tVa iThis project provides for the upgrade of the Operations and Maint~m~ce Dcpnrtment facilities locat~ a~ 1591 Park Road. Thc building layou~ will be rcconfigumt :for incressed efficiency and centralized support. Plan dcvelofnnent will begin in 2001, with construction stinting in curly 2002. i iAccount #459 & #710 I i iCurrently, the Operations and Maintenance Department needs additional space for to-pairs, accessible tnccting ureas, file and plan storn8~ supervisory offices and i iT'nc project provides for increased facility efficiency by cenmilizing activities. This concept wns suppmt~ by the City Council in 1998. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Pl~nnlnfl/[~ign · .- Constructlon~qVlalntenance 1,700,000 1,700,000 .- . Total 2~0 1,i'0~00 · ~00,o00': .... ' · . . . - . . . - . . . . .- ..~ .-- . .- ': -. · . . .... . . . . : . . . . Funding Sources 2002 - .2003 2004. '-2605 2006' - , Total ' Capital Replacement Fund 21)0,000 -1~:)0,000 1,400,000 Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 5(}0,000 - Total ~0,000 1,700,000 1,900,000 :This project would increase operational costs based on the percenm~ oftbe footprint eapansion. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN : Project # MB-004 ProJect Name Senior Center Expansion 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Municipal Buildings Type Impmv~nent Useful Life Category Priority efta i D~c~'iption ~ project provides for additional space to our current Sex~ior C~ntex bas~l on increased usag~ of thc facility. It will be d~elopexi in 2002, and conslruction will be comple~d in 2003. Justification :Based on increased usage of the current Senior Center. This project is consistent with thc Comprehensive Plan. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 100.000 100,000 Total lOO,OOO lOO,OOO 'Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . Total Capttal Replacement Fund 100,000 100,000 Total 100,000 t00,000 ,This project would increase operational costs based on the percentage of the footprint expansion. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 City of Chanhasscn, MN P~ol~# MB-005 rroJm,n=ne Enclosed Salt & Sand Storage Facility thru 2OO6 Contact Department Type UsefUl Life Priority Municip~ Bu~din~ [Provides for the construction of a building to house thc wint~ salt/sand mix. ]Accoum ~459 I lit is nnticipnted that furore EPA regulntions mny require enclosures for salt/snnd storugc. Thc project provides for nn ea-wito~nm'mlly friendly fncility nmi meet EPA I Expend itu res 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 200,000 200,000 Total 20~o0 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' ' '2005 - 2006 Total Capital Replacement Fund :200,000 :200,000 Total 2oo,o0o :This pm. jcct will have no effect on opcrnting costs. ,. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~u 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN Department Municipal Buildings I Project # MB-008 : Type Improvement : Useful Life i ProJect Name Fire Station I and 2 Refurbishing - ............... Category Prtorlty n/n ~ Description ilnvolves refurbishing b'oth~stations I and 2 in 2002. We will replace carpeting and repaint walls as needed. We will refurbish bay area floors and improve :landscaping by adding irrigation to Station 2. Station 2 also needs new lounge area furniture and improved counters in the dispatch area. I Justification The hi~oriml fiv~ y~ plan had projected I;105,000 to maintain ~xi.qting fire -qmtiom. The revised capi~ plan will -~ave approxin~t~ly $74,000. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 31,000 31,000 Total 31,000 31,000 Funding Sources 2002 ' ' 2003 ' ' '2004 2005 20'06 Total Capital Replacement Fund '31,000 Total 31,000 31,000 ~ Operational Impact/Other , . ! · . CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN i~l~# PK&T-O01 i~ ~amt Improvements: Bandimere Community Park ......... Contact Dep~rtmtnt Type PHority Park dc Trail Improvemmts Improvement n/a n~dhm~r is a a 30-nc~ Community Pnrk (9405 Grant Plains Blvd. - TH 101). The following improvements nm mcommende& [2003 - Sno ~ - $25,0oo ~410-0000=4705 ]~his Inject involves the implementation of m:ommendn~ set forth by the Park & Recrgnfion Commission. It is comistmt with the ~ ~ m maintain .~m~al resources and the public's investment in community pnrks. i Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 25,000 25,000 Maintenance Equipment 40,000 40,000 Total ~,o00 4o~oo , ~. . · . . · . Funding Sou.rcez 2002 2003 2004 . ~00~ .2006- . Total Park Dedication Fund 25,000 40,000 ' 65,000 Youth Sports Ass'n Contflbutlo 0 0 Total ~ 4(~o z,~oo ese projec~ will increase annual operating costs by an estimated $2,000. I I CAPITAL PLAN City of Chauhassen, MN : ProJect # PK&T-003 ' Project Naae Development: City Center Park 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Park & Trail Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/n ~-~scripfion ~ City Center Park/s a 10-acre Community Park - a collaborative effort between School Di~-~ct 112 and the City to provide an active park for elementary school .children and Chanhassen residents. The M_aster Plan developed by the Park 8: Recreation Commission includes the addition cfa Park Shdter/Warming House i(2003) and Senior Garden (2004). The Senior Gardens is an amenity requested by many of the seniors residing in Centennial Hills. Major improvements include planting beds, decorative arbors and hard surface paths. The garden will be located in the NW comer of the park adjacent to Kerber Blvd. Account//410-00004701 and//410-0000-4705 Justification i 'city center Park/s bomc to thc iar§est outdoor skating venue in thc City. Thc Shelter will replace a rental satellite building. Thc improvements arc consistent with ithc master plan. Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total ] 60.000 ] Construction/Maintenance 275,000 100,000 375,000 Total Total 275,000 100,000 375,000 Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 .- 2005 2006 Total I ~0,000 ] Park Dedication Fund 275,000 100.000 375,000 Total Total 275,000 100,000 375,000 'Operational Tm.~&i~---- · These projects will increase annual operating costs by a~ e'stin~&-~i'/3-~_b6. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 City of Chanhass~n, MN Proj~# PK&T-004 r~oj~:t~am~Playground Equipment:. Curry Farms Park 2006 Contlet Department Useful IJfe Category Priority Park & Trail Impro~men~ r~u~nmt ~~t~ for Curry Fanta Park ~ part ofa fiv~-y~ar plan to provid~ playground ~uipmmt r~p~ in 2004 (sun~n~). I iOriginnl wood equipment was instnlled in 1989 and is expectd to haw a 15-ycnr lift: span. Comprehensive Phms cnll for nn nctivc recrcnfion sil~ within 1/2 mil~ of Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 40,1)00 40,1)00 Total F~nding Sources 2002 . 2003 2004" ~2(~05 200~ . . 'Tot~! "' . . Park Dedication Fund 40JX}0 40,000 Total ~o~0 4o~1 'No additional operating costs are anticipated. 1 · CAPITAL PLAN 2002 City of Chanhassen, MN Project# PK&T-005 Project Name Signage: Kerber Pond Park thru 2006 Conlact Department Park & Trail Improvements Type Equipment Useful Life Categol~' Priority n/a 'Description lin.stall signage for an existing interpretive trail around Kerber Pond Park (summer). ,. ~ote: Four or five locations will be selected for interpretiv~ signa~ and other appropriate site arr~nitics Coench/tabl¢). Thc sign material will most likely be metal .with an appropriate frame and mounting standards. The project would only be completed if thc signs can compliment their surroundings. Justification Local history and its interpretation is an area in which thc Park & Recreation Commission would like to expand. This will improve the overall experience at this location. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 10,000 10,000 Total lO,OOO 10,ooo Funding Sources 2002' 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Park Dedication Fund 10,000 10,000 Total 10,o00 10,000 Operational Impact/Other :Effect on annual operations are estimated to be S400. · i CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN i n-oj~t# PK&T-006 i Project Name Improvements: Meadow Green Park Contlct Dcptrtment Parle & Trail ln~Mv~n~n Useful Ufe Category Priority n/a ?rovi~ for r~ln~xr~st of the existing Novo playground structure et thc park. I I ........ · !The existing playground was installed in 1984 and is nearing the end of its useful lifi~. ! I Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total [ 6,000J Maintenance Equipment 50,000 50,000 Total Total 50,ooo , 5od~oo Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' 200S . 2006 Total [ 6,000 ] Park Dedication Fund 50,0(}0 50,000 Total Total ~o,ooo 50,000 :Negligible additional operating costs are anticipated. i CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~u 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN Department Park & Trail Improvements · Type Improvement Project// PK&T-008 , : U~eful Life Project Same Play Area: Power Hill Park ........................ Category Priority n/a Description :Involves the construction of a Phase II play area at Power Hill Park (Flamingo Drive). !DELETED BY PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION i ' Justification ._ iThe Power Hill Service Area is large and contains a high population of children. The playground was designed to accept a Phase II cxpansion. Thc projcct is :consistent with plans for all ncighborhood parks. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 0 0 Total · · Funding Sources 2002 ' 2003 - 2004 2005 20'06 Total Park Dedication Fund 0 0 Total 0 0 Operational Impact/Other Eff~t on annual operations arc esti~l't~"l~e-$~0. - CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~v-u City of Chanhassen, ~ I r~°J~# PK&T-009 i rrojea Name Roundhouse Renovation: Roundhouse Park 2006 Contact Department Useful Life Priority Park & Trail Improvements n/a I ~olv~s building a neighbodmod plnyground ns phnse 11 of the renovation. l I I I Roundhouse is a local historic Inndmm'k nnd thc nnmesnke for the pm4c Functions include use ns a pnrk sheltn', wntming house nnd focal point. :.Ala:ount i~410-OOO04702 Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Conatruc~on/Malntenance 30,000 30,000 Total ~Jm ~.~e Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006- Total Bond Proceeds 0 ' 0 Park Dedication Fund 30,000 30,000 Total These projects will increase nnnunl openaing costs by mt estimnted $2,200. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN Project# PK&T-011 Project Name Trail: Whitetail Ridge Ct. to Lake Lucy Ln. Description Contact Department Park & Trail Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/a Involves the construction of a trail segment from Whitetail Ridge Court to Lake Lucy Lane. 'DELETED BY PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION Ju~ifi~afion iThe Galpin Blvd. Neighborhoods need a more direct link to Pheasant Hill Park. With the trail, the 1/2 mile service area radius of Pheasant Hill Park would be 'greatly enlarged. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 0 0 Total 0 0 Funding Sources '2002 2003 2004 2005 2006' -... Total Park Dedication Fund 0 0 Total 0 0 . Operational Impact/Other Effect on annual operations are estimated to be $400. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 City of Chanhassen, MN Prolm# PK&T-012 i Projett NameTrail: Bandimere Park to Chanhassen ]:[ills 2006 Contact Department Useful Life Priority Paflt &Trail Improvements tmpmvmznt n/a iInvolves dm, el~t of a trail syst~n from Bnndime~ Park to Chanlmssm Hills. I ,. wail ia th~ missing link in the South Highway 101 Trail System. It i~ identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 2.30,000 250,000 Total ~ · .. · -. . . Funding Sources 2002 - 2003 2004 " 20'05 - "'2006" - Park Dedication Fund 250,000 250,000 Total 250,000 '2~0,000 Total · :'I'he~ projects will increase annual operating costs by an estimated $1,000. : CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN Department Park & Trail Improvements , Project # PK&T-013 Type Improvement U~eful Life · ProJect Name Trail: Hwy 101 (S. Shore Dr. to Townline Dr.) .......................................... Category Priority n/a 'Description ' :Involves construction of a pedestrian trail concurrent with the reconstruction of North Leg of TH 101. Planning meetings are being conducted. It is the Cits/s desire }to compleie this segment as soon as possible. It has been delayed due to the reconstruction of TH 101. : Justification -The trail segment ranks # 1 in the Comprehensive Plan. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 850,000 850,000 Total 8~),ooo 8~,ooo Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Park Dedication Fund 850,000 850,000 Total 850,000 8.~C),000 Operational Impact/Other ' The~ projects will increase annual operating costs by an estimated $3,000. .. --- CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN r~oject# PK&T-014 Project Name Road & Trail Reconstruction: Lake .Ann Park Contact Department Type U~eful Life Priorl~ Description ~,kwolvm the recemmgfioo of~ce Ann Park streets, parking lots and trail (original half oflt~¢ park). I !Accoum ~.10-0000-470 ! : Justification The majority of these asphalt s~tions are over 25 years old and display multiple signs of failure. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl Constru~on/Maintenance 485,000 _48~,000 Total 4~00 ~ Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 ' 2006 Total Park Dedication Fund 485.0(X) 485,000 Total .~_~ooo 4~)oo :Maintmumce costs would decrease. I I CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN Project # PK&T-015 Project Name Marsh Glen Trail Connector Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Prtorlty Park & Trnil Improvements Improvement n/a Description ~o~nstmction o~'an eight foot wide pedestrian trail connecting Mission Hills Lane to the Lake Susan/Rice Marsh Lake trail. Identified in the city's comprehensive trail plan. Nces to be constructed with the development of Marsh Glen (approved July 24, 2000). Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 68,000 68,000. Total 68,000 68,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Park Dedication Fund 68,000 68,000 Total 68,000 68,000 'Operational Impaet/Ott~ ..... CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN i- ......................................................... . iPr°ject # PK&T-018 i Project Name Tree Phmfin~ ! Conl~ct Department Type Useful Life Category Priority !This project funds tr~ plantings in various community and mighbodmod parks. Playground and pi~i¢ ar~s nmeiv~ i~iority. i ! ;Th~ best tim~ m plant trc~ wm 20 ye.a~ ago - the second best time is today. i Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total I 5,0001 Construction/Maintenance 15,000 Total Total 15,000 Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 .2005 1~000 2006' Total I 5,oool ..<DedlcatlonFund 15,000 Total Total 15~oo CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN Department Park & Trail Improvements Project # PK&T-021 ~ Type Improvement · Useful Life 50 Years Project Name Park Shelter: Bandimere Community Park Category Buildings Priority 2 Very Important Description The construction of a multi-purpose community park shelter. Locsting centrally between the balifield and socc~ fields, the sheit~ will offer shad~, seating and .concessions. Control ~tems for the park's irrigation will be housed hcrc and storage areas will be included in the design. · : Justification 'Bandimere Park is the second busiest park in town and hosts thousands of users each year. Provision of the services that a shelter can offer will greatly increase the level of satisfaction of park users. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total ConstructlondVlaintenance 175,000 175,000 Total 175,000 175,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Park Dedication Fund 175,000' 175,000 Total 175,000 175,000 Op~'~tional Impac0~aor CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~-u 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN · : Projm# PK&T-022 -] I ~ i~rojmSaa~ Haft Court Basketball: Bandimere Heights Park t Contact Department Perk & Trail lmpmvcmcnts Usefnl Life 25 ymxs Priority 3 Important ',Construction of a half court asphalt bmkemball court with basketball msembly. i ilntroduction of a hard court play surface in this neighborhood park will complirr~nt l~e existing nn~nRies. I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Constructlon~alntenance 15,000 15,000 Total 1.~X~ , Funding Sources 2002 - 2003 2004 :- ' .200S - ' 2006 ' . 'Totnl' Park Dedication Fund 15,000 15,000 Total 15,000 15,000 CAPITAL PLAN City of Chauhassen, MN · Project # PK&T-023 · i Project Name Skate Park Ramp 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Park & Trail Improvement~ Type Equipment Useful Life 7-10 years Category Equipment Priority I Urgent ' Descriptio~ i iThis project provides an additional ramp at thc Skate Park. I !Justification i 'Thc skate park is thc busiest park and recreation amenity in the city. This ramp will provide added interest to thc course and reduce ~ongestion. i Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 7,500 7,500 Total 7~oo 7,5o0 Funding Sources 2002' '2003 '2004 2005' .2006 . Total Park Dedication Fund 7,500 7,500 Tota] 7,500 7,5O0 Operational Impact/Other CAPITAL PLAN City of Chaahasse~ MN l~l~# PK&T-024 I [Project Name Trash Receptacles -- . - . 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type U~eful Life Category Priority Trail Implxn'em~n~ F_xluipmmt Ul'gmt project funds the purchase of 75 ~ contain~s with conoete bases. -- ._ i .lustification -' [ ~'The department is in the second year of a tht~ year program to rcpLa~ our ~isting unsightly blu~ ph~stic trash containers. I I I I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Maintenance Equipment 20,000 20,000 40,0(}0 Total ~o~o lo,ooo 40,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 ' 2006 Total Park Dedication Fund 20,000 20,000 40,000 Total 20,000 2o,ooo 40,0011 CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN ProJect # PK&T-025 l'rolect Name Permanent Park Benches and Tables Contact Department Park & Trail Improvements Type Equipment Useful Life 10-15 years Category Equipment Priority 2 Very Important Description ~This project funds the installation ofpermnnent park benches nnd picnic tnbles. ~The availability of.seating areas in city parks is one oft. he improvements most often requested by residents. i Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 10,000. 10,000 Total lO,OOO lo,ooo .. Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' 2005 2006 Total Park Dedication Fund 10,000 10,000 Total 10,000 10,000 Op~afional Impac~./Oth~r CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~-~ 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN : Proj~# PK&T-026 I l,,-oj,~ ~ame Trail Connector: Hwy 5 at Riley Creek Contact Dep~rtment Park & Trail Improvements Type Equipment Useful Life 50 Years Priority 1 Urgmt IThe Highway S/West 78th Street consUuction project includes undmpnsses to allow for pedcstr~n crossing at this location. This connector will nm from isouthern Highwny $ R.O.W. to the city's existing trnil systems. ! I I ~'This connection is necessary to complete the tmderpa, project and put these trails "on line". I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Cc)nstmctiorOdalntenanca 100,000 100,000 Total ' 100,000 100,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006' Total Park Dedication Fund 100,000 100,000 Total qoo~oo too,ooo CAPITAL PLAN 2002 City of Chanhassen, MN Project # PK&T-027 ProJect,Xame Trail Connector: Hwy 5 at Bluff Creek tl, ru 2006 Contact Department Park & Trnil Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life 30 Years Category Park Equipment Priority 1 Urgent Description .The Highway 5/West 78th street construction project includes underpasses to allow for pedestrian crossing nt this location. This connector will run from the ,southern Highway 5 R.O.W. to the recreation center trail which currently terminat~ nt the east end of the bnllfieids. Justification This connection is necessary to complete the underpass project and put these trails "on line". Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 75,000 75,000 Total 75,000 75,000 Funding Sources ,. 2002 2003 2004 2005 :~006 Total Park Dedication Fund 75,000 75,000 Total 75,000 75,000 · Operational Impact/Oth~ ---- CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chaahassen, MN '. ProJm# PK&T-028 · i Prolm ~me Trail Connector: Chanhassen Hilla to Bandimere i Contact Department Park & Trail/mpmvoncnts Useful Life 30 Years Priority 1 Urgent iAn 8-foot wid~ bituminous trail to be located in n rural stmc highway section (Hwy 101 S) and a county road section (Lyman BIvd) ~ Chanhessm Hills to '.Bl~lim~ Parle 1 1 ~This trail represents the missing link between the city's soutbem and norl~em trail systems. This improvement can be justified as a safety impmvemm~ n !recn:ational amenity and a non-vehicular commular roue:. I : Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total C, onstmctlon/Malntanance 200,000 200,000 Total 200,0oo 2004 ' 2005 . - - . Total Funding Sources 2002 - 2003 2006 Park Dedication Fund 200,000 200,000 Total 200,000 '310,OO~ CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thr,, 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN Project # SS-002 Project Name Sanitary Sewer: LC-1 Contnct Department Sanitary Sewer Improvementa Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/n . Description ,LC-I Sub-district extension. i Justification Needed to provide sen'ice to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 200,000 200,000 Total ~oo,ooo ~oo,o0o Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . Total Sewer & Water Assessments 200,000 200,000 Total :200,000 ~00,000 · Operational Imp~-'tJOther ~ iThis project will increase maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN [ i rroj~ # S8-003 [Project Name Sanitary Sewer: BC-8 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department U~eful Life Priority ffrunk emension from Poim BC 3.1 to BC 4.2. ~tition received from de~lopex desiring scrvic~ in 2000. However, TH 5/West 78th Steer t~ojcct and BC-7 project must b~ comple~zxl ~ i I ~__ee~d__ to provide service to developing areas, ldcntificd in thc 1998 Comprchcnsivc Sewer Policy Plan. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total Construc~lon/Malntonan~ 400,000 400,000 Total 400,0oo Funding Sources 2002 ~00~ 2004- 2005 - 2006 'Total Sewer & Water Assessments 400,000 Total 400,000 400J)00 :This project will incr~as~ maintenance costs. : , 1 CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN Project # SS-004 Project Name Sanitary Sewer: BC-9 2002 t~ru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Sanitary Sewer Improvements Improvement n/a Description .Trunk ~tension from Point BC 4.1 to Point BC $. I. -D~v~lopm~nt may r~quim concurrent with BC-8 project. : · iN~d~ to provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Sewer Poli~y Plan. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction~aintonance 315,000 315,000 Total 315,000 315,000 Funding Sources 2'002 ' 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Sewer & Water Assessments 315,000 315,000 Total 315,000 315,000 · Operational Impact/Other This project will increase maintenance costs. · · .__ CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN e,-olm# SS-005 rro~ut SameSanitary Sewer: BC-2 (Portion) 2002 thru 2006 Contlct Department S~nitary Sewe~ ~ts Type hnprovcrnent Useful Life Prtority n/a Tnmk extn~sion from Point BC 1.1 to BC 1.2. ,N___~:c~__ to provide service to developing nrc. as. Identified in fl~e 1998 Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plnn. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 80,000 350,000 430,000 Total n0/~ '3~0;000. 43o,ooo Funding Sources 2002 '2003 2004. .2005 ' 2006- Total Sewer & Water Assessments 80,000 ' 350,000 430,000 Total I This project will increase maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN · Project# SS-006 Project Name Sump Pump Inspections ' Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Sanitary S~vcr Improw-rnents Improvement n/a 'Description ilnspections required to minimize sump pump discharge to sanitary sewer system. iAeeount #700-77014300 r Justification .MCES Loan/Grant Agreement requires ongoinE re-inspections to insure sump pump connections removed with 199/5 project are not reconnected. Identified in the '.1998 Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan. · Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 50,0001 Conatruction/Malntenance 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000 Total Total 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000 Prior Funding Sources . - 2002 2003 2004' 2005 2006 T~tal . 50,000 ] Sewer & Water Utility Fund 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000- 100,000 Total Total 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 lO0,O00 ' Operational Impact/Other Will minimize sanitary sesver treatment costs for sump pump (clean) water. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN D,partment SanitarySeg~r~ ~ole~ # SS-007 ~ me~a Ufe r~lm ~.me ............... General Repairs OgmergeneyFtJnplanned) '1 Category Priority iProvides for eanergen~ and unplanned ~q~irs to thc sanitary sewer system. #700-T102455 ! , 1 L r jusfifi~ion ~ , 1 [Sewex synton failures such as pil~ bmakl, pump stm~, molm~ and eJ~fficad ~ontrol problems am ~table~ but inevitable~ ~ failu~ a~ most oftzn ~.emergga~es in nature and require immediate ~ a~tion. This prosn~n is necessary to expedite repairs and maintain a hish level of service. [ · Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 90,000] ~onstructton/Maintenance 50,1)00 50,000 60,000 60.,000 220,000 Total Total- '~0 ~o ~o~1o Ito;00o.. r~o_ Prior Funding Sources 2002 . .- Toiai · gO,fflO ] Sewer & Water Utility Fund Total Total 5o,ooo 5o,ooo 6o,0oo 6o,ooo .q'his project will not increase maintenance costs. :, CAPITAL PLAN 2002 City of Chanhassen, MN ,. Project # SS-008 · i Project Name Televise Sewer Lines thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Sanitmy Sewer Improvements Improvement n/a Description Provides for annual televising of sanitary sewer lines suspected of having leakages, rainfall inflow and/or ground water infiltration. ::Account 4/700-0000-4300 [Justification ' '.This program is important to verify the integrity of the sanitary sewer piping system. Leaking pipes can pose a health risk. Clear water inflow and infiltrations also iincrease the City's cost for treatment of sewer flow. The program is required to maintain a reliable and safe sanitary sewer piping system. i ; ; Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total L10,000 ] Planning/Design 15,000 15,000 30,000 Total Total 15,ooo 15,ooo 30,000 Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005' 2006 Total [ 10,000] Sower & Water Utility Fund 15,000 15,000 30,000 Total Total 15,ooo 15,ooo 30,000 !Operational hnpa-c~Other : - ~.~ .~ 'This program will not increase operational costs. It could lmver costs by reducing the volume of sewer flow needing treatment. , CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN i ,: rrol~t # S8-009 1P~olm ~,,,, ___Repair Man_hOles, Infdtration/Inflow (I/I) Contact Department U~eful Life Priority iProvides for planned repairs and maintenance to thc sanitany s~wer piping system. I tt #700=T/02=455 ! I _..-.--.-..~ - .--. -_-~__ i.lusgfie~on ?,~ ~ It i~ r~luir~d to maintain a ~i~l~ and raL~ ~ 1 Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 120,000 120,000 120,000 380,000 Total 12~,000 120,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' 2005 ' 2006 Total Sewer & Water Utility Fund 120,000 .120,000 120,000 360,000 Total 1~,000 120,000 12~,IXIO 360,000 CAPITAL PLAN 2002 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN : Project # SS-010 Project Name SCADA System Repair & Maintenance Contact Department Sanitary Sewer Improvements Type Equipment Useful Life Category Priority n/a Description "Provides for the updating of the SCA.DA system control panels for the Ci~s 29 sanitary sewer pumpinE stations. The panels will be replaced over a $ year period. ~Acc, ount 0700-7702-4705 i ,, ' Justification iThe sewer liR station control panels have a defined, reliable or useful life span. It is becoming more difficult each year to get parts for older panels that are no longer · made and/or the manufacturer is out of business. This replacement program will be a proactive approach to ensure reliable sewer service. : , ... Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total ] 80,000 [ Maintenance Equipment 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 340,000 Total Total 85,000 BS,O00 BS,000 85,000 340,000 Prior Funding Sources 2002 ' 2003 2004 2005 2006 To{al I 80,0001 Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 340,000 Total Total 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 340,000 · Operational Impact/Other -- :This program will likely decrease annual repair and maintenanc~ costs due to reduced problems and failures v~fith the equipment. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN ! rro]~ # ST-002 i Project Name Century Blvd. 2002 thru 2006 Contact Useful Life Priority n/a l ~n-iption !Provides for constru~on of Cenlury Boulevanl including water (1039) and sewer (BC 2.3) imptovemmts flu., its cunent north terminus to ~ 200 f~et h of Trunk Hishw~J $. I Project i~ neec~ to to developing area~ It fi:zs~ility report for th~ ~ Business Park Public Improv~nmts - Project No. prmd~-~-vice is identified in 97-1. The co~mection of Century Boulevard to TH 5 is included in the THSAVest 78th Steer Projec~ This project will complet~ the oventll work scope identified in the fmsibility study for Project No. 97-1. Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl I 825,0001 Construction/Maintenance 40,000 40,000 Total Total Prior Funding Sources .2002 '2003 2004 2005 -- 2006. . . Totnl - 825,0001 Street Assessments 40,000 Total Total project will increase maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN : ProJect # ST-004 · · ProJectNamt Lyman Blvd (West City Limits to TH 101) Contact Department Street Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/a Description · Provides for reconstruction of Lyman Boulevard from West City limit to TH 101. It was identified as a joint City/County project in a 1994 Master Agrecment to be :constructed in 1996. A joint powers agreement was drafted, hmvever, not executed due to lack of funding. ,As with any county road project, there will be certain responsibilities borne by the City (e.g., stormwater, trail, lighting sewer & water, em.). Any MSA funds :utilized for conslmction of a County State Aid Highway distracts from the City's ability to construct and maintain its Municipal Stag Aid Street System. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 3,900,000 3,900,000 Total 3,900,000 3,900,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total MSA 3,900,000 . 3.900,000 Total 3,900,000 3,gO0,O00 This project will increase maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru City of Chanhassen, MN ~ Prol~ # ST-005 !Project, Name Bituminous Overlay: Lake Lucy Rd. 2006 Contact Type Impmvmgnt Useful Life Priorfly n/a iPmvides for a bitumin~s overlay on Lake Lucy Rond between Gnlpin Boulevard nnd Powers Boulcv~-d. This project is consistent with the 19~ Pnv~nent i~ s~,~y- iAccount 0415-0000-4540 I I ~tppmprinte routine maintenance technique based on 1991 Pnvement lvlanagcmcnt Study. I i ; i · Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl Construction/Maintenance 95,000 Total -. -. . · -- .. . · _ . -. .. · ..-. Funding Sources 2002 . 2003 ' ' 2004 '.." 2005 ' ' -' 2006' . Total' Total ~5~o0 ~000 This project may decrease maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 ti~ru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN !, Project # ST-006 : : Project Name Bituminous Overlay: Saddlebrook Curve .................................................. ! 'Description Contact Department Street Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/a !Provides for a bituminous overlay of Saddlebrook Curve. Plans and specs will be prepared by Engineering l~partment for Spring 2002 bid opening. Account #415-0000-4540 Justification ~S~ppropriate routine maintenance technique based on 1991 Pavement Management Study. It is consistent with the 1999 Pavement Management Study. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 18,000 18,000 Total 18,ooo 18,ooo Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total MSA 18,000 18,000 Total 18,ooo 18,000 Operational Imp~,JOther .This project may d~cm~s~ maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhasse~ MN v,p,~,., s~t~ irr°l~# ST-007 ,i ~ype ~ U~eful Life i oJm name Bituminous Overlay: Lake Drive/Lake Drive East Priority '.Providm for a bituminous or. ay of I. akc Driv~ and I. aka Drive East. Harm and apcca will I~ pr=pined by Fn~nc='ing ~t fro' Spring 2002 bid ol~ning ~3~:mnt 0415-0000-4540 I · I I i Smtification !Appmpri~ routi~ m~int~nan~ t~hniqu~ ~ on 1991 P~n~nt ~ Study. It i~ mmist~t with the 1999 lhw~nt ~ Study. I ,: I ! Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 140,000 140,000 Total 14o~o 14o~o0 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' 2005. 2006 'Total MSA 140,000 140,000 Total 140,000 140,(XX) ?I'his project may decrease maintenance costs. · I CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN ~ Project # ST-008 · Project Name Bituminous Overlay: Audubon Rd. Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Street Improvements Improvement ! Doscripfion , ,Provides for a bituminous overlay of Audubon Road bet~en TH 5 and Lyman Boulevard. Justification '.Appropriate routine maintenance technique based on 1991 Pavement Management Study. It is consistent with the 1999 Pavement Management Study. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 110,000 110,000 Total 110,000 110,000 Funding Sources 2002 · 2003 20'04 2005 2006 Total MSA 110,000 110,000 Total 110,000 110,000 . Operational ImpactYOth~r , This project may decrease maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thr~ 2006 City of Chanhasscn, MN · "~J~# ST-009 ! ! i P~olm s.,,,. Bituminous Overlay: Coulter Blvd. Contact Delmrtment U~eful Life Prlorfly 'Provides f~r a bimmino~ overlay of Coulter Boulevard between Audubon Road and Pillsbury. I · ! routine maintnmnce technique based on 1991 Pnvernent Mnnngemeat Study. It is consist~ with the 1999 Pavcma~nt ~ Study. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Constm~on~aintenance 15,000 15,000 Total 15,000 15,000 Funding Sources 2002 '2003 2004 2005 2006. Total - . MSA 15~000 15,000 Total 15,000 15,000 ..=This project may dec, rea~ maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN Project# ST-010 Project Name Bituminous Overlay: West 78th St. 2002 thru 2006 Contnct Department Street Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/a Description Provides for a bituminous overlay of West 78th Street between Powers Boulevard and TH 101. Justification · Appropriate routine maintenance technique based on 1991 Pavement Management Study. It is consistent with the 1999 Pavement Management Study. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 170,000 170,000 Total 170,000 170,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total MSA 170,000 170,000 Total 170,000 170,000 · Operational Impact/Other This project may decrease maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, ~ ·: e,-o~# ST-Oll ! ~ eroJea ~,~ Bituminous Overlay: Minnewashta Parkway Contact Del~r~ent U~eful Ufe ~t~ ~o~ ;Provides far a bituminous overlay of Minncwashtn Pm'kway betwam TH 5 and TH 7. I ; I ro~tin~ maintmnnce t~chnique based on 1991 P~'~mat ~t Study. It is ~msimmt wi& the 1999 Pm,-eamm ~ Study. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 125,000 125,000 Total · . · . .. - .'. -. · . - Funding Sources 2002 . 2003 ' ' 2004 . 2005 .... -' 2006' . Tpin'! MSA 125,000 125,000 Total 125,000 ;'This project may decrea.~ mainmmnce com. · CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thr~ 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN : Project# ST-012 i Project Name Annual Street Improvement Program ' Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Street Improvements Improvement n/a Description I: Provides for routine sealcoating, maintenance, and improvement of streets ns recommended by the Pavement Management System. r . i Justification , .~ppropriam routin~ maintenance based on the Pavement Manag~ncnt System. Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total I 470,0001 Construction/Maintenance 255,000 265,000 275.000 275,000 285,000 1,355,000 Total Total 255,000 265.000 275.000 275,000 285,000 1,355,000 Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 470,000l General Fund 255,000 265,000 275.000 275,000 285,000 ' 1,355,000 Total Total 255,000 265~000 275,000 275,000 285,000 1,355,000 Operational Impact/Other .This project may decrease maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN i r~o~m # SWMP-O03 i Project Name Lake Susan Watershed ..................... 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Usefnl Life Priority Surfa~ Water ~t n/a ~WMP Projects 3.34, 3.Z wi~ for modifications to an ~xisting stormwam' pond. F~asibility Study in 2002. IThcsg projects nrc identified, dctmlcd and pnonuzcd in thc City's Surface Writer ~ Plnn to meet water quality goals for Lake Sttsmt W'tl] ae. hicvc better ~ and ~din~nt r~nmnd. I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 150,000 150,000 Total 150,000 150,1100 Funding Sources · 2002 2003 2004- 2005 . 2006 'Total .o Surface Water Utility Fund 150,000 150,000 Total 15oj)oo 150,ooo ;'rhcsg projects will bc finnnccd with thc nnntml opcnaing budget ofthe Surfncg Wntm' Mmmggntcra Plan, funded by thc Storm Wstcr Utility. , ! i CAPITAL PLAN 2002 tlwu 2006 City of Chanhasscn, MN rrolect# SWMP-004 :Project Name Lake Riley Watershed ; Contact Department Type Uieful Life Category Priority Surfa~ Wat~' Manag~nent Improvement n/a ~SWMP Projects 4.1.4.6. ::Provides for the ca'cation ofstormwater ponds at these locations. Feasibility Study in 2003. I I : : Juffificafion projects am identified, detailed and prioritized in the City's Surface Water Management Plan to meet water quality goals for Lake Riley. Will reduce the '~diment and nutrient loads into Lake Riley. I ; Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 150,000 150,000 Total 15o,o00 15o,000 Funding Sources 2002 · 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Surface Water Utility Fund 150,000 . 150,000 Total 150,000 150,000 ', Oporafional Impact/Other .These projects will be financed with the annual o~erating budget of the Surface Water Management Plan. funded by the Storm Water Utility. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN i hol~ # SWMP-005 holm s.-, Lake Winnewasht~ Watemhed 2002 thru 2006 Contact U~qfl Life C.~tegory l)r.lorit~ :SWMP Projec~ 3.16, 1.9. iPrmq~ fro' fl~ ~a~tion of ~'mw~ pond~ ~t th~ Ioo~iom. F~ibility Study in 2004. I I I : ! :These projects arc identified, derailed and prioritized in the City's Surface Water Manasement Plan to meet wuIer quality goals for Luke Winnewushl]. Will reduce ~tbe r~lin~ ~md nudist Io~ into ~ Winncw~ ! Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 175,000 175,000 Total 175,000 175,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 .2006. Total Surface Water Utility Fund 175,000 ' 175,000 Total 175,ooo 175,ooo :These projec~ will be financed with the annual operating bud&et oftbe Surface Water Management Plan, funded by the Storm Warn' Utility. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN rrolect # SVVMP-006 Project Name Bluff Creek: Alter Existing Ponds Contact Department Surface Water Management Type Improvement Useful Life Category Prtorlty n/n 'Description · SWMP Projects 4.7, 5.19 'Projects would alter existing ponds by excavation and outlet control. This project is scheduled fur consideration in 2000. However, the actual project will be :managed by the watershed district once their Feasibility Study is complete. :Account 0720-0000-4769 i'Justification :Projects would increase pond storage capacity and water treamaent capabilities. These projects are identified in the City of Chanhassen's Basic Water Management 'Project petition to the Riley, Purgatory, BluffCrcek Watershed District This project is consistent with both the Surface Water Management Plan and the Bluff 'Creek Natural Resources Management Plan. I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 200,000 200,000 Total 200,000 ~00,000 Funding Sources .. 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Surface Water Utility Fund 200,000 200,000 Total 200,000 200~00 Thc Watershed District will provide 100% funding for water resource-related projects, 50% for recreational trails and educational facilities and 25% of the costs for land acquisition. Thc City's contribution to these projects will be funded through thc Surface Water Management Program. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN ........... i ~ol~ Nme Bluff Creek: Alter Existing Ponds 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Stn~ Water Mana~t U~fill Life PHoHtI n/a ~SWMP Projects 2.13, 4.12. Pm. je~ would alter existing ponds by excavnfion mai outlet control. This project is scheduled for comiden,fion in2002. Howcv~, the nctmd project will be ~ by thc watershed district once their Feasibility Study is complete.. I ! .[Pmj~t petition to tbe Riley, Purgatory, BluffCreek Watershed Du~tn~ This proJeCt a constant vnt~ both Walzr ~Plan and tbe Bluff '~Cavi Nstual Rtsources Manag~mnt Plan. I I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Constructlon/lVlalntenance 210,000 210,000 Total 210,000 210,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 . . 2005 ' ' 2006- : .... Surface Water Utility Fund 210,000 210,000 Total 21o~)oo .o o . ~ Wstershed District will provide 100% funding for wat~ ~ouzce-rclnted projects, 50% for ~onnl trails nmi educationnl facilities nnd 25% oftbe costs iland acquisition. Thc City's contribution to these projects will be funded thrmagh thc Stn'face Water Management Program. , CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru2006 Contact City of----Chanhassen, MN Department Surface Warn' Manag~nent i ProJect # SWMP-009 Type Improvement Useful Life i ProJect Xam. Bluff Creek: Create Stormwater Ponds · .................................................. Category Priority n/a [ i Des~iption iSWMP Projeas $.1 l, 7.9.  oJtJt~tS would create stormwater pon& at ~e l~iom. ~is pmj~t is sch~uled for ~nsi~ion in 2~3. H~v~, ~e ~ pmj~t will ~ dis~ict on~ ~eir F~ibili~ Study is ~mple~. I . ~ Justification : Projects would reduce the sediment and nutrient loads into Lake Minnewashm. These projects are identified in the City of Chanhassen's Basic Water Management Project petition to the Riley, Purgatory, BluffCreek Watershed District. This project is consistent with both the Surface Water Management Plan and the Bluff 'Creek Natural Resources Management Plan. : Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Ma Intenance 215,000 215,000 Total 215,000 215,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Surface Water Utility Fund 215,000 215,000 Total 215,000 215,000 ; Ope~ional Impa~6ffter iThe Watershed District will provide 100% fun'cling for water resource-related projects, 50% for recreational lyails and educational facilities and 25% of thc costs for ; iland acquisition. The City's contribution to these projects will be funded through the Surface Water Management Program. i : : CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~-u 2006 Contact City of Chanhassen, MN Department Surf~ Warn ~ ................ ~' Type Improvement i ~ojm # SWMP-010 ~ i U~eful Life i l'ro]eet Name Bluff Creek: Create Stonnwnter Ponds I I ................ cstenory Priority Projects 2_3, 3. !. !Pmject~ would m:m stormw~ta' ponds ,,t the~ locations. This project is scheduled f~r consi~ in 2004. H~, the actual project will be ~ by the :,watastmd district once their Feasibility Study is complete. iProjecls would reduce the sediment and nutrient Ionds into Lake Minnewmhtn These. proje~., mr i..d~ifi** ed in the City of Chanhnssen~ Basic Writer Management iPmject petition to the Riley, Purgatory, BluffCmek Watershed District. This project ~s conststmt ruth both tbe Surface Watm' ManN,meat Plan and the Bluff iC~k N~ml R~o~ M~n~-ment Plan. I Expenditures 2002 1003 2004 200~ 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 275.000 275,000 Total 2'/S,~, 275000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' 2005 . 2006 Total Surface Water Utility Fund -275,000 275,000 Total 'rim Watenlmt District will pr~i~100% funding for water msource-relatecl projects, 50% for nmmational trails nd education~ facilities and 25% of thc cosls for !land acquisition. The City's conlxibution to these projects will be funded through the Sm'fi~ Water Mmmgement Program. , CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN i Project # SWMP-011 i Project Name ~ Lake Lucy (Lake Project) Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Surface Water Management Irnpwvement n/a r Description for alum treatment to I.~ke Lucy. r Justification 'These projects are identified, detailed and prioritized in the Ci~s Surface Water Management Plan to meet water quality goals for Lake Lucy. Will reduce the current phosphorus content in the lake and create a blanket which would prevent further loading of phosphorus from bottom sediments. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total ConstructionJMalntenance 50,000 50,000 Total 50,000 5o,ooo Funding Sources 2'002 2003 2004- 2005' 2006 Total Surface Water UtiJity Fund 50,000 50,000 Total 50,000 5o,ooo , Operational Impact/Other ;These projects will be financed with the annual operating budget of the Surface Water Management Plan, funded by the Storm Water Utility. i ; I CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN ii'''°le~t # W-001 ' I iPr°jcct Name Well 09 ] Contlct Department U~ul Life Priority ,Provide municipal water supply w~ll. Well siting and mgin~xing will be. gin in 2003, with ~mstxuction in 2004. I I {Needed to provide sendcc to developing areas. Identified in thc 1998 Comprehctmivc Water Supply and Distribution Plan. : i : Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 200~ 2006 Total Planning/Design 70,000 70,000 Conatruction/Malntenance 630~)0 630,000 'Total ?o,Ooo Sa0,000 7oo,0o0 ¥ Funding Sources 2004 ....... 2006- Total Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 70,000 630,000 - 700,000 Total · This project will increase nmintennnce com. ; , · CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN · Project # W-O02 Project Name Well #10 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Prlori~ Water System Improvements Improvement n/a , Description .Provide municipal water supply sell. Well siting and ~ngin~ring will begin in 2004. with construction in 2005. Justification ,Needed to provide service to developing areas. Idmtified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan. I ; · i Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Planning/Design 72,000 72,000 Construction/Maintenance 530,000 530,000 Total '/2,000 530,000 602,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 To~l Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 72,000 530,000 602,000 Total 72,000 530,000 802,000 · Operational Impact/Other This project will increase maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN · r,-olm # W-O03 ,. ; Project Name Well #11 ! 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Wa~r Syst~ lmprovetmm~ Type lmprowm~ Useful Life Category Priority n/a iPmvide municipal wat~ supply w~ll. Well siting and engineering will begin in 2005, with construction in 2006. , I i Ju~ifw. afion iNceded to provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Comprehemive Wnter Supply nmi Distribution Plnn. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Planning/Design 75,000 75,000 Construcfion/ldalntena nce 675,000 675,000 Total .. '?5,oeo 'Os,ooo ?~o~0o --- · . · . _ .. · . . -. ..... . . , .-' - ": ' -' = 2- - .' . "..~ ' ' ' '- '~ . . · Funding Sources 2002 . 2003 ' ' 2004 200~ ' " 2006' . - Total Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 75,000 .6'/5;000 · 750,000 ' Total 75,000 675,000 -750J)00 ,This project will increase maintenance costs. :, i CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thru 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN Project # W-004 ' :'Project NameWater Tower (2MG): Lyman Blvd. Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priorl~ Water System Improv~nents Improvement rea :Description ; . iConslruct 2.0 MG elevated water storage reservoir. Tower siting and engineering will begin in 2004, with construction in 2005. I I ~ Justifi~fion : i INeeded to provide service to developin8 areas. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Planning/Design 75,000 75,000 Construction/Maintenance 3,300,000 3,300,000 Total 75,000 3,300,000 3,3'/5,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 75,000 3,300,1100 ' 3,375,000 Total 75,000 3,300,000 3,375,000 , Operational Impact/Other : 'This project will increase maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chauhassen, MN i t~oj~# W-005 i ! ilh'°'~'t Nnn~ Lnke Ril~ Trnnk II 2002 thr~ 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority ~Nodc 641 tO PRV-10 to Node 60Z 1 I I 1 ~eeded to provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Compre. hensiw Wnter Supply and Distribution Plan. · I I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Totnl Construction/Maintenance 110.000 110,000 Total 110~X)0 110~00 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' 2005 - 2006 Totnl Sewer & Water Assessments 110,000 110,000 Total 110,000 110,000 .o .. · This project will increase maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chard~ss~n, MN Project# W-006 : Project Name Water Improvements: TH 41 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Water System Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/n Description ,Node 1021 -Node 1022 'Node 1021 - PRV-g iPRV-8 - Node 1023 Node 1023 - Node 501 Node 501 - Node 1024 Node 1024 - Node 639 'Justification · Needed to provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan. -.. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 335,000 335,000 Total 335,000 335,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 -2004 2005 2006 Total Sewer & Water Assessments 335,000 335,000 Total 335,000 335,000 Operational Impact/Other ~This project will increase maintenance costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2o02 City of Chsnh~scn, MN --. i r,-oj~# W-0O7 . , r~ojm ~me Water Improvements: Manchester Dr. thru 2006 Contact Department U~l'ul Life Improvemm~ n/a !Node 10.31 to Node 636. · ,~[eeded to provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Comp~iv~ Water Supply and Distribution Plan. I I I Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Oonstru~on/Maintenance 130,000 130,C)(X) Total 130,000 130,OO0 Funding Sources 2002' 2003 2004. 2005 . 2006- Total' Sewer & Water As.~ee~mrlts 130,000 130,C)(}0 Total 13o,om) 13o,I)oo ~'his project will incrense maintmnnce costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t/,,-,, 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN ' Project # W-008 ' ProJect Name Water Improvements: Minnewashta Loop Contact Department Water System Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/a Description ' Node 1022 to Node 3. ; · ,. - : I ; · Justification -Needed to provide .service to developing areas. Will also provide loop for x~t service area. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution iPlan. : Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 270,000 270,000 Total 270,0O0 270,000 · . · Funding Sources 2002 2003 '2004 2005 2006 Total Sewer & Water Assessments 270,0O0 270,000 Total 270,000 270,000 · Operational Impact)Other This project will increase maintenance costs. ; · CAPITAL PLAN 2002 thn, 2006 C~ty of Chanhasson, MN ! P,-oj~ # W-009 ! ProlecfName Water Improvements: BC-1 (TC&W - Lyman) Contact Department W~ Systn~ ~ Type lmpmvcm~-m Useful Lffe Category Priority n/a 510 to Node 612. ::Ncgdcd Io provide so.icc to developing moas. Idcflfificd in thc 1998 Comprehensive Walrr Supply and Distribufi~l Plan. , ; I ; I , Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 400,000 400,000 Total ~J}00 .. 400~oo .o . . _ . .. .. .... ~'....-..::.--::. ..-... :. --.-.- .. · .. - -.. .- . . · - : · · .. · Funding Sources 2002 . :~00~ 2004 2005 2006 To~al Sewer & Water Assessments 400,000 · 400,000 Total 4oo~oo , -4o9, ,ooo :This pmjc~ will increase maintenance costs. I ; I CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~u 2006 City of Chaahassen, MN Project # W-O 10 i ~olect Name Water Improvement~: Lyman, Audubon, Power~ Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Wagr Systcrn Improvements Improvement n/a · I Deser/pfion ; Node 510 to Node 1012 /ode 1012 to Node 1013. ~ Justification 'Needed to provide service to developing areas. Identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan. , : i -- Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 370,000 210,000 580,0(}0 Total 370,000 210,000 580,000 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 ' 2005 2006 Total .. Sewer & Water Assessments 370,000 210,000 580,000 Total 370,000 210,000 580,000 ~ Operati~ Impact/Other This project will increase maintcnance costs. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN iPr°J~# W-Oll I i Project Name Water Treatment Plant 1 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Useful Life Priority Omstmct Wnm' Treatment Plant with siting and design in 2002, and construction in 2003. , I I i ~ublic demand nnd high maintenance costs may require water t~tmcnt to address high iron and manganese lcvcls. Potmtial ncccl and sites nrc identified in thc ~;1998 ~~iv~ W~' Supply and Distribution Plan. i i I : Expenditu res 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Planning/Design 500.000 500,000 Construction/Maintenance 3,500,000 . 3,5(X),000 Total 5OU00 3,500~oo . 4d~00d~00 Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' ' 2005 - - 2006 'Total Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 500,000 3~500,000 4,000,000 Total This project will increase maintenance com. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN :Project# W-013 ProJect Name General Water System Repairs 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Category Priority Water System Improvements Improvement n/a Description · Provides for emergency and unplanned repairs to the water system. This program is funded on an annual basis. i :Account #700-7702-4550 Justification iWnter system failures such as pipe breaks, valve./hydrant/pump/clectrical control problems are unpredictable, but inevitable. These failures are most oiL~-n iemergencies in nnture and require immediate repair action. This progrnm is necessary to expedite repairs and maintain n high level of service. Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 90,000 [ Construction/Maintenance 45,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 195,000 Total Total 45,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 195,000 Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total I ~0,0001 Sewer & Water Utility Fund -45,000 50,000 . 50,000 150,000 195,000 Total Total 45,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 195,000 · Operational Tmpaot/Othor This program does not increase operational costs. CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t/~-u 2006 City of Chanh~s~ MN 'eh,lin# W-014 ~ Wolfram, $CADA System Upgrades/Maintenance · . Conflct Useful Ufe PHority n/a iPmvid~ for the updming of the SCADA System control panels for n portion oftlg warn' system infnstrucltm: (Walls 3,4,5,6,7 nnd towers 1 & 2). The program will Account #700-77024705 !Existing ecmtml panels vn~ in age. Avail~le pans for the older units are dwindling. Communication is based on a phone line system; replnc=nent upgrades would ~chanl~ to radio eommunientions. This upgrade program will be n proactive npproach to enstu~ relinble warn' s~vice. I ; Prior Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total i 200,0001 Construc~on/Malntenance 100,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 130,000 Total Total loo~oo lo~oo .. Prior Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006. Total 200,0001 Sewer & Wal~r LRility Fund 100,000 10,000 10,000 - 10;000 130,000 Totnl Total :l'his program will des:tense annunl repair and maintenance costs due to problems nssocinmd with equipmem a~c. · i CAPITAL PLAN 2002 t~u 2006 City of Chanhassen, MN . ProJect # W-015 · Project Name Repainting: West 76th St. Water Tower Contact Department Water System Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/n f 'Description I .Provid~ for the r~o~ting of the int~ior ~nd exterior ~urfa~ of the W. ?6th St. Wat~' Tow~. : I :Account #710 Justification 'This type of infrastructure requires recoating approximately every 10 years to protect the life of the metal structure and maintain healthy potable water. This project iwill extend the service life of this water storege facility. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Construction/Maintenance 40,000 40,000 Total 40,ooo 4o,ooo Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Sewer & Water Expansion Fun 40,000 40,000 Tota] 40,000 40,000 t Operational lm~actyother This project does not incrcasc opcrational costs. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN rrolut # W-017 i [ rroJec~ Name U~iH~j' Rate Study 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Usehll Life Category Priority iProvid~ for bbc t,,wiew of current costs to provide sewer nnd water services nnd needed re-visions to the utility !Account #700-770 !..4300 iR is important to ensure th~t utility rnt~s represent the City~ cost to provide utility services. The Study ensures ttmt I~ Utility Enlr~dse Fund is opernt~ in a Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Planning/Design 25,000 25,000 Total 25~o , ... ~0}oo .. . Funding Sources 2002 . 2003 2004 2005 2006 .." Total .- ' ' Sewer & Water Utility Fund 25,000 25,000 Total '...This project does not increase operational costs. CAPITAL PLAN City of Chanhassen, MN Project # W-01 8 Project Name Well #12 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Water System Improvements Type Improvement Useful Life Category Priority n/a I Description i ,Provide municipal water supply well. Well siting & design in 2006 with construction in 2007. Justification .Need to provide service to developing ar~as identified in the 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply & Dislxibution Plan. : Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Future Planning/Design Total 77,000 77,0oo Total · . Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 200'6 Sewer & Water Utility Fund 77,000 Total Fulure T ,000 I ' ,0001 Total 77,000 77,o0o Total ' Opea'ational Impact/Other CAPITAL PLAN City of Chnnhas n, MN i~°j~t# W-019 i Proleet Name Water Treatment Plant H 2002 thru 2006 Contact Department Type Useful Life Priority ,~7.onstmct Wa~' Treatment Plant with siting and design in 2006 and construction in 2007. i I I I i l iPublic Demant & High rrmintnmncc cost~ Potential aced and sites identified in 1998 Comprehensive Water Supply & Distribution Plan. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Future Planning/Design Tol~l 5oo~oo ~oo~0o Total .o Funding Sources 2002 2003 2004' 2005 . ' 2006 Sewer & Water Utility Fund 500,000 Total Future - '- Total ~o0~o ~oo~o Total '.Project will inc~a~ maintenance costs. I i CITYOF CHAN] SEN 690 Ci~ Ce,,ur D,'i~e P0 t~147 Mi~e~ta 55317 Pique 952.937.1900 95Z957.5~9 952.937.9152 952.9342524 TO: Mayor City Council FROM: DATE: Bruce M. DeJong, Finance November 21, 2001 Enclosed are several projections from our consultants that show what could possibly happen if to our Downtown TIF Distri~ assuming that we will not be able to retain the tax increment. This scemafio is one that our consultants feel is the more conservative given that ambiguous wording of TIF laws and the history of the state in reviewing districts for statutory compliance. This presentation shows a deficit at the end of the districts life of $2,742,380 even with using all of the fund balance fi'om the Historic Preaea-vafion tim& That ' means we need to fund some of our debt.sm-vice through additional tax levies through thei life of the bonds and pm. bably fund the deficit With other available' fund balances if we take thi~ approach to resolving the TIF districts deficit. . . We will not be taking any action at this point in time. Our advisors will be on hand to discuss the options available to us and their effects on other funds. Cit~ ff Cbanbtmm. A ero~n~ comntuni~ ufftb dean NOV. 20. 2001 5'59PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO, 3086 , mLL EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC MEMORANDUM i _ i .... mi Todd Oedm~ City of~ FROM: Mark Ruff- Ehlers & Associates DATE: November 20, 2001 Projection~ for Tax Leviea Attached are four documents related to calculations for the 2002 and future property tax levies necessary to support debt. Thc fist document ate estimates for homestead property taxes from 200l to 2002, given property tax reform. The second document relates to the amount of excess TIF which will b~ produced in 2001 through 2003. The City and County's share of thc excess TIF ate pledged to two bond issues, the 1996B and 1996D G.O. Improvement Bonds. The attar&ed projections ~how th~ tho proceeds of.the agreqme~t should amount to $:5,800,000, depending upon future tax rates and values. This amount should be sufficient to pay for the- deficiu in h~ese two bond funds ~ the 2002 levy. l%r taxes payable in 2004, the TIF district will .be decertified and available for general tax base use. Thc third document demonstrates the property tax levies for non-TIF bonds. We have also included thc two bonds which were ~ by referendum (the park bonds of 1998 and'the library bonds to be issued in 2002). We have al~o canceled the levies for the 1988 and 1989 bonds which lowers the proposed levy by $170,000 for 2002. As you can see, thc amount of levy and the impact on a homestead property stay stable for :3 years and drop beginning in 2005. We have assumed no inflation on tax base for this analysis. Under Almmative I atlached, the City will be able to increase the levy for thc library bonds by over $420,000 in 2002 and in increase of over n $120.000 fi~om 2002 to 2003 with no impact on taxpayers, even though the taxpayers voted for an increa~ in tho referendum. We ~hould note tha~ the City will have other pwjects in the next few years which will likely increase taxe~ Under the fourth docmeat a~taohed, Alternative 11, the City levy is left at payable 2002 truth in taxation levels through 2009 to pay for deficits in ~e tax increment debt servi~e funds..Tl~e levy would raise over $4,200,000 and would primarily pay for debt service for the 1998F G.O. TIF Bonds, which could be refinanced and payments stremhed over the next seven years. Ruff Executive Vice Pmidem/Director Ebler: & A~svciates, Inc. 30~0 Centre .Poin~ Drive Ro~villa, MN 55113 NOV. 20. 2001 5'59PM EHLERS & ASSOCIATES NO. 3086 P. 3 C/~ of Chanl~eeen: Properly T~ume o~ Homeetead ReeldenUal Tax % MV Assesso~l Capadty MV Incma~ MV Taxe~ Taxes Credlla 80,000 Pay 0t 1,124 179 -289 1,014 8.5% 86,800 Pey 02 1,128 159 -294 g93 100,000 Pay 01 1,572 223 -390 8.5% 108,5D0 Pay 02 1,410 lgt;I -2.75 1~oe 125,000 Pay 01 2,133 279 -390 8.5% 136,625 Pay 02 1,762 249 -250 150,000 Pay 0t 2,695 335 .390 8.5% 162,760 Pay 02 2,114 299 -226 2,640 2,187 200,000 Pay 01 3,817 447 -390 3,873 8.5% 217,000 Pay 02 2,819 399 -177 3,04t 250,000 Pay 01 4,939 558 -390 5,107 8.5% 271250 Pay 02 3,524 498 -128 3,894 300,000 Pay 01 6,061 870 -390 8.~% 325,500 Pay O2 4,229 ~8 -7~ $,341 4,747 milx 21 833 1,213 ReduGtion with % $10Q,000 Lower cr~anlp c~/L,v,/ -2% -5% -13% -21% 6.57 8.97 8.71 17.42 20.90 Tax Ratee I~ 01 Pay 02 l County 43.106% 64,46~% CS~ 28.SO6% 40.756% 9112 60.805% 29.826% 5.60~% 4_R71% ITo~ . 138.021% 129.918% $100k Less 40.114% 129.276% Market Value T~x R~tes lCounty C~S~ #112 Other Total 0,0OOOO% 0.00000% 0.O0O0O% 0.05133% 0.22330% 0.13235% 0.2233O% 0. t8388~ Prepared by Ehlem A~a,3eiates - Draft Numbers Only 11/20/01 llililiitl, I!~': i ..... ~tl IjJ'i CITY OF CHANHASSKN, MINNF, SOTA TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NO. 1 STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDS, AND CHANOES IN FUND BALANCE Far the Years Ending December 3 I. 2001 to 2(X}4 20OO 2001 Tax increment $ 5.376,875 Excess over qualified debt/~ I~linqucut tax i~ $1x~l as,~sm~ra.' Coun~ 4,037 HRA ! $9.~74 ~uv~un~ i n~om~ 3 ! ,490 Toud ,'uvcnu~ $,s,~,~476 s.47o,ooo $ 3,~61,rr/ $ (4,505,646) (1,632,539) 6212,393) 177.062 158.607 40.421 37.813 1,772~060 2~187t245 1,658,617 37~813 Qvalified debt - Non-qualified debt 2,403.753 Defeased debt 4,660,041 Adrnini~aative eoq~ensem 146,350 Capital outlay 32,648 Developer paymen~ 143,020 Intn'fund int~ 346,198 Rev~tm over (undo) ~xp~ditur~ (2,958,816) 557,980 1,808v931 1,516,775 345.274 ! 58.607 40.421 37.813 61.100 61.100 61,000 807,706 158~607 40r421 37~813 Debt mrvic~ Transfers to pay debt service: Refunding Bonds of 1994A (333) Refimdin8 Bonds of 1994B (334) Improvement Bonds of 1996D (344) Total transfers lncre~e (decrease) in fund balance Fund balance (deficit) st start of year Fund batnnce (deficit) at end ofyem' (2,958.816') 807.706 158.607 40.421 - 0.596.212) (6,ss5,028) (5.747,3~) (5,s88.71~ {~,6,555,028) ~5r7471322) ~,~.$88,715) ~515481294) {~5,548,294) l'~Mble fnnds available: Non:l'IF l?~-venue: 1999 TIF Grant 2000 TIF Grant 2001TIF Grant =estimn~ Historic Pmsetvalioa Fund Excess TIF nmmm Distric~ #3 Cmh balance - Fund 333 Less debt servim on non qunlified debt (842.5'30) Annual to~ 4,193~/1 ~)61110 Cumulnfive ~ 41l~ff/! !.147.751 625,.368 1,748,640 2,420,852 0 0 0 0 0 705,000 (117,667) (117.667) ~763.833) $871333 ~1171667~ (2,763.833) 5,687,414. _ 5r569~747 218051914 Defklt upon dete~lfkntlon (2.742.380) A.~umptloa~ i) Expm~ only qualified debt from ~O! andbeyond (Le. future lax incremmt e~n't fund pastdefuzitm) :2) 3) 32246.1 11/21/01 12:54PM CITYOF C. hanhautn, Minnesota 55317 952.93Z1900 C, enmd Fax 952937.5739 952.93Z9152 952.934.2524 wu, mci.~~.mn.u~ MEMORA~UM TO: FROM: DATE: Todd ~t, City Manage~ Teresa J. Burgess, Public Works Director/City November 20, 2001 SUBJ: Approve Electronic Proprietary Database (EPDB) Licem¢ Agreement with H~nnepin County- PW388B m O mST O ACT O Council is requested to approve the attached agreem~ DISCUSSION The attached agreement is a licensing agreement simil~ to the one curnmfly in place with Carver County to allow ac, ce, ss to the County GIS data. The City .uses the Carver County data extensively and staffbelieves access to the Hennepin County data will be an asset as well. Attachment: 1. Agreement c: Joleen Devons, Chaubassen GIS Coordinator Agreement No. HENN~IN COUNTY ' CONDITIONAL USE LICENSE AGKEEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, Taxpayer Services Department, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "County", and the City of Chanhassen herein~er referred to as the "Entity". For purposes of this Agreement, the address of the County is A703 Government' Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0073 and the address of Entity is 690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the County has developed electronic forms of certain data bases and an electronic proprietary geographical digitized data base hereinafter referred to as "EPDB"; and WI-IE~AS, the Entity desires to use the County's EPDB in the course Of conducting the Entity's business; and WHEKEAS, in acknowledgment of the Entity's above-stated purpose, the County is agreeable to provide to the Entity the EPDB, and WHEREAS, the parties agree that the execution of this Agreement is necessary in order to adequately protect sa/d EPDB; and WHF_22AS, the County exclusively owns the EDPB which is the subject of this Agreement and has the authority and legal Hght to grant Entity a license to have and use the EPDB as provided in this Agreement; and WH~KEAS, the EPDB is trade secret or confidential information under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and is governed by Minnesota Statutes sections 375.86 and 13.03 as well as other applicable state and federal law. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, as well as the obligations herein made and undertaken, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows: Form 1 (09/00) Section 1 SCOPE OF AGREEMENT 1.1 This License Agreement shall apply to the EPDB, which HennePin County will provide to Entity, after a specific request has been made to County. Section 2 GRANT OF LIMITED LICENSE 2.1 The County hereby grants the Entity a non-exclusive, nontransf~le and nonassignable limited use license to use thc EPDB which includes self developed computer software under Minn. Stat. § 375.86. Said license shall commence on the date of approval of this Agreement by the County and shall extend throughout the term of the Agreement unless terminated sooner, in accordance with the provisions hereof. Section 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PROPRIF~TARY INFORMATION RESERVATION OF TITLE 3.1 The Entity acknowledges and agrees, that the EPDB is the exclusive property of the County, including, but not limited to, any and all indexes, and includes commercially valuable information which reflect the efforts of skilled development experts and required the investment of considerable amounts of time and money, and that the County has treated the EPDB as Wade secret and confidential information, which County entnJsts to the Entity in confidence to use in the conduct of the Entity's business. The Entity further acknowledges and agrees the EPDB is a creative selection, coordination, anangement and method of arrangement of data which is identified as being subject to copyright protection; is self-developed computer soi~ra~ under Minn. Stat. § 375.8(~ and is an entire or substantial and discrete portion of a pattern, compilation, method, technique, process, data base or system developed with significant expenditure of funds by County under Minn. Stat. § 13.03. The Entity agrees that the County owns and reserves all rig_hts, protection and benefits afforded under federal copyright law in all EPDB furnished to the Entity as unpublished works, as well as all rights, protection and benefits afforded under any other law relating to confidential and/or Wade secret information respecting said EPDB, and that the Entity will abide by all relevant laws, rules, regulations and decisions which afford protection to the County for its confidential and trade secret information and said copyright. This Agreement does not effect any transfer of rifle in or to any EPDB of the County. The Entity acknowledges that it is granted only a limited right of use of such EPDB, which right is not coupled with an interest, and the F. ntity shall not assert nor cause or cooperate with others to assert any right, title, or interest in any EPDB of the County. 4.1 4.2 4.3 Section 4 PROTECTION OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION Obligations of Confidentiality, Limitations of Use. The Entity shall neither disclose, furnish, sell, resell, transfer, duplicate, reproduce nor disseminate, in whole or in part, the EPDB of the County and its unique design, arrangement or method of arrangement in its electronic form furnished to the Entity to (1) any other person, firm, entity, organization, or subsidiary, except as expressly authorized hereunder; or (2) any employee of the Entity who does not need to obtain access thereto in connection with the Entity's exercise of its fights under this Agreement. The Entity may have and use the El'DB on a corporate-wide basis and shall have the rights to use the EPDB on a limited number of sites, provided the equipment on which the EPDB is maintained supports only equipment operated by the Entity and the EPDB is used only for the conduct of the Entity's own internal business by Entity employees. All employees having access to the EPDB shall be informed of the requirements contained in Section 4 herein. The Entity shall not otherwise copy or reproduce any EPDB of the County. Under no circumstances may the entity disclose or disseminate any EPDB to. any other public or private entity. The obligations of the Entity to protect confidentiality which are established by this Agreement apply to the EPDB itself and not to any graphic representation or products produced by the Entity while using the EPDB. Any authorized consultants, contractors or agents of Entity must properly execute and file a separate EPDB Conditional Use License Agreement with Hennepin County. The Entity expressly agrees to use the County's EPDB in the ordinary course of its business and all such use shall bear a notice.of copyright by Hennepin County. Secure Handling. The Entity shall require that all EPDB be kept in a secure location at 690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 and maintained in a manner so as to reasonably preclude unauthorized persons fi.om having access thereto. The Entity shall devote its reasonable efforts to ensure that all persons afforded access to EPDB protect same against unauthorized use, dissemination or disclosure. Entity agrees it will not knowingly or negligently allow its employees, agents or independent contractors to copy, sell, disclose or otherwise make the EPDB available to others. Entity agrees to immediately notify the County by telephone and in writing if Entity becomes aware of any unauthorized duplication, sale or other disclosure. Entity further agrees to prevent unauthorized disclosure by taking appropriate security measures including, but not limited to, providing physical security for copies of the EPDB and taking all steps Entity takes to protect information, data or other tangible and intangible property of its own 'that Entity regards as proprietary, confidential or nonpublic. Except for off-site backup, the Entity shall not remove or cause or allow to be removed from the Entity's place of business any EPDB or any copy thereof without the prior written consent of the County, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Assistance of the Entity. At the request of the County and expense of the Entity, the Entity shall use good faith and reasonable efforts to assist the County in identifbdng any 4.4 use, copying, or disclosure of any EPDB by any current or former Entity personnel - or anyone else who may have come in possession of said EPDB while the same was in the Entity's possession - in any manner that is contrary to the provisions of this Agreement so long as the County shall have provided the Entity with information reasonably justifying the conclusion of the County that such conum'y use may have occurred. Survival of Confidentiality Obligations. The Enfity's obligations .respecting confidentiality of the EPDB shall survive termination of this Agreement for any reason and shall remain in effect for as long as the Entity continues to possess or control any EPDB furnished by the County. In addition, the County shall remain entitled to enforce its copyright and propriety interests in all EPDB. 5.1 5.1.1 5.1.2 Section 5 TERM, TERMINATION The Entity and the COI. YNTY agree that this Agreement is in effect during the period commencing October 25, 2001 and terminating December 31, 2002, unless terminated sooner. This Agreement shall commence from the date hereof, unless sooner terminated by either party with cause upon .three (3) calendar days' written notice to the other..The expiration or termination of this Agreement shall automatically and without further action by the County terminate and extinguish the license. In the event'of any such expiration or termirmfion, the County shall have the right to take immediate possession of said EPDB, and all copies thereof wherever located, and without demand or notice. Within five (5) days after expiration or termination of this Agreement, the Entity shall return the EPDB and all copies thereof to the County, or upon request by the County, the Entity shall destroy all of the same and all copies thereof and cea'fify in writing to the County that the same has been destroyed. It is agreed that any fight or remedy provided for herein shall not be considered as the exclusive fight or remedy but shall be considered to be in addition to any other right or remedy hereunder or allowed by law, equity or statute. The County's failure to insist upon strict peffommnce Of any covenant, agreement or stipulation of the Agreement, or to exercise any right herdn contained shall not be a waiver or relinquishment of such covenant, agreement, stipulation or right, unless the County stipulates thereto in writing. 6.1 Section 6 INJUNCTIVE RELIEF The Entity acknowledges and agrees that unauthorized disclosure or use of the EPDB or any part thereof could cause irreparable harm and significant injury to the County, which may be difficult to measure with certainty or to compensate through damages. Accordingly, the Entity agrees that the County may seek and obtain against the Entity and/or any other person or entity injunctive relief against the breach or threatened breach of the foregoing undertak/ngs, in addition to any other equitable or legal remedies which may be available. 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5. 7.6 Section 7 OTI-IER TERMS AND CONDITIONS No Agency. The parties hereto are independent contractors, and nothing herein shall be construed to create an agency, joint venture, partnership or other form of business association between the parties hereto. No Waiver. No delay or omission by either party hereto to exercise any right or power occun'ing upon any noncompliance or default by the other party with respect to any of the terms of this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof unless the same is consented to in writing. A waiver by either of the parties hereto of any of the covenants, conditions, or agreements to be observed by the other shall not be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach thereof or of any covenant, condition, or agreement herein contained. All remedies provided for in this Agreement shall be cumulative and in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other remedies available to either party at law, in equity, or otherwise. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. Entire Agreement. This License Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties, and there are no understandings or agreements relative hereto other than those that are expressed herein. No change, waiver, or discharge hereof shall be valid unless in writing and executed by the party against whom such change, waiver, or discharge is sought to be enforced. No Assignment. Neither party shall assign, sublet or transfer this Agreement, either in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the other party, and any attempt to do so shall be void and of no force and effect. THE ENTITY AGREES THAT THE COUNTY IS FURNISHING THE EPDB ON AN "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT WHATSOEVER, AND WITHOUT REPRESENTATION OR ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT IN ANY MANNER LIMITED TO, FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY OR ~ ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS OF ~ EPDB. THE COUNTY'S SOLE LIABILITY AND ~ ENTITY'S EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR ANY SUBSTANTIAL DEFECT WHICH IMPAIRS TH'F~ USE OF THE EPDB FOR THF. PURPOSE STATED I:IF.~IN SHALL BE ~ RIGHT TO TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT. TH'F. COUNTY DOES NOT WARRANT THAT TH'F. EPDB ARE ERROR FREE. THE EPDB WERE DEVELOPED FOR ~ COUNTY'S OWN INTERNAL BUSINESS PURPOSES AND ~ COUNTY DOES NOT REPRESENT THAT THE EPDB CAN BE USED FOR NAVIGATIONAL, TRACKING OR ANY OTFIF. R PURPOSE REQUIRING EXACTING MEASUREMENT OF DISTANCE OR DIRECTION OR PRECISION IN ~ DEPICTION OF GEOGRAPHIC FEATURES. THE COUNTY DISCLAIMS ANY OTI:IF.R WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, RESPECTING THIS LICENSE AGREElVIENT OR ~ EPDB. 7.7 In no event shall the County be liable for actual, direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential damages (even if the.County has been advised of the posdbility.of such. damage) or loss of profit, loss of business or any other financial loss or any other damage arising out of performance or faJl~ of performance of this Agreement by the County. The County and the Entity agree, each will be responsible for thdr own .acts and omissions under this Agreement and the results thereof to the extent author/zed by law' and shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of the other party under the Agreement and the results thereof. The parties' respective liabilities shall be governed by the provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466, and other applicable law. This paragraph shall not be construed to bar legal remedies one party may have for the other party's failure to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement. 7.8 7.9 7.10 7.11 Notice. Any notice or demand shall be in writing and shall be sent registered or certified mail to the other party address as follows: To the Entity: City of Chanhassen 690 City Centre Drive PO Box 147 Chanlmssen, MN 55317 To Hennepin County: Hennepin County Administrator A-2300 Government Center (233) Minneapolis, MN 55487-0233 Copy to: Robert L. Hanson Hennepin County Chief Information Officer A-1900 Government Center (190) Minneapolis, MN 55487-0190 Copy to: Patrick H. O'Connor Director, Taxpayer Services Department A-600 Government Center (060) M{r,r, eapolis, MN 55487-0060 Whereas Clauses. The matters set forth in the "Whereas" clauses on page one of this Agreement are incorporated into and made a part hereof by this reference. Survival of Provisions. It is expressly understood and agreed that the obligations and warranties of the Entity under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.6, and 7.7 hereof and the obligations and warranties of the Entity and the County which by their sense and context are intended to survive the performance thereof by the Entity and the County, shall so survive the completion of performance and termination or cancellation of this Agreement. Authority. The person or persons executing this License Agreement on behalf of Entity represent that they are duly authorized to execute this License Agreement on behalf of Entity and represent and warrant that this License Agreement is a legal, valid and binding obligation and is enforceable in accordance with its terms. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL ENTITY, having signed this agreement, and the County having duly approved this ~ent on the ~ day of ,20 , and pursuant to such approval, the proper Counly officials having signed this contract, the parties h~-eto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Approved as to form and execution COUNTY OF I-I]~NNEPIN STATE OF MINNF. SOTA Assistant County Attorney Date: By:. Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator CTrY OF CHANHASSEN Date: Form 1 (09/00) 8 MFAVIORANDUM C YOF 69o c, ty C. en~ Drive P0 t~147 ~ bfum~ta 55317 FROM: DATE: Teresa $. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Rn~ne~r November 19, 2001 Approve Wmm- Service Connection to 23040 Summ/t Avenue Mr. Ted Rix, Resi~ File No. PW-397 952.93Z1900 9.52.93Z57~9 952.937.9152 ~52.~M.252~ Mr. Ted Rix, a Shorc~ood reai~ who resid~ at 23040 Summit Avcmue, is requcs~g water a~-Tvice from th~ City of Chanh.~o~t. Mr. Rix's prop~t'ty bordgra th~ city limits ~ Shor~ood and Cl~nlmsz~ This par~l is unable to be aa'vic~ with utilities from S~ and as su~ th~ owner is ~n,o th~ City's l~mni~on to tap into the City's watermahl on Hummingbird Road. The City's warm'main cun'gnfly dead-ends at the city limits on Hummingbird Road. As noted on the attached letter from the Shorewood City Pn~ne~r, the City of Shomwood has no objection to Chanha~gn providing wat~ sea'vice to mia parcel.. Thr typical watrr connection charges and hoolmp-fc~s will be Collcct~ from'this .parcel prior to connection to the City's water systm~L .. -. -. It is therefore recommended that thc'City. Council approve the-wamr'~on to 23040 '" Summit Avenue with the folio.wing conditions: .- .. - ] Agmemmt. .... 2. The resident shall pay the City of C'hanhz~-,n a typical wa~ connection charge and hookup fee in conjunction with _permit fees to connect to the City's wamrma~ 3. Any expense for connecting the sexvi~ m ~ Ci~s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ prop~y owne~. , The pwperty owner will not be e~itled to any rcba~ of connection charges from the City of Chanhtssm ahould the C/ty of Shomwood eve~mally e~te~ water service.to 5. Work wiflfin the public right-of-way and the connection to th~ C/ty's watermain ahall be completed by a contractor approved by the City of Chanhass~ 1. Location Map. 2. Water Connection Agree~e~ 3. Letlrr from City of Simrewood dated Nove~b~ 7, 2001. C: Lm'y Brown, City of Shomwood Rn~neer Mr. Ted Rix, 23040 Sunm~ Aven~ Sharewood Kelley Janes, City of ~ Utility Sut~erintmde~ . ~ o~Chashau~ A ~ui~ com~n~ ~it~ ~ l~ mMi. ~'b~k a ehan,ff~ daumu, o,,. d,~,i,,, inninm~ and bnesaifd ~ .4 ~ da~. t,, Ii,,,. c ~ ANHASSE -! PRO WATER CONNF, C~ON AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMRNT, made this ~ day of ,200__, by and between the CITY OF SHOREWOOD, a municipal corporation, the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a municipal corporation, and TED RIX of 23040 Summit Avenue, Shorewood, Minnesota (the "Owner"). WI~REAS, Owner is the owner of certain real property (the "Owner Prop~') located in the City of Shorewood, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, described as Lot 8 of Murray Hill; and WI-iEREAS, the City of Shorewood owns a municipal water system which does not presently serve the Owner Pwperty, and WHEREAS, the Owner desires to intar, onnect with the Chanhassen Municipal Water System and pay to the City of Chanhassen a connection and hookup charge therefore; and WHF. REAS, the City of Shorewood is willing to permit Owner to connect to the Chanhassen Municipal Water System provided that Owner agrees to the provisions contained herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual contained-covenants herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Owner shall have the right to interconnect with the Chanhassen Municipal Water System and pay to the City of Chanhassen a connection and hookup charge therefore. 2. All work involved in such interconnection will be done according to City of Chanhassen specifications and under City of Chanhassen supervision and all expenses and costs connected therewith will be paid by Owner. Owner further agrees to convey all necessary easements prior to completion of the project. 3. In the event that the City of Shorewood extends their municipal water system to serve the Owner Pwperty at some time in the future, Owner agrees. to pay any assessment in connection therewith on the same bads as all other properties assessed at that time, alld Owner herewith specifically agrees to waive any claims or defenses to said assessment based upon a theory of no benefit because of the water connection allowed herein. 4. It is further agreed by and between the parties that this Agreement shall mn with the land and shall benefit and be binding upon their respective legal repre e tatiws, successors and assigns. 5. The City of Chanhassen shall bill the Owner for said water service. In the event of a late water bill, the charges for said water service shall include a penalty for late payment equal to at least 5% of the billing. The City of Shorewood, pursuant to Minn. Stat. ~.a.~..075, subd. 3, agrees to promptly certify the delinquent water bills against the property for collection with real estate taxes if requested to do so by the City of Chanhassen. Upon collection by the City of Shorewood, the City shall remit amounts collected, less 5%, to the City of Chanhassen. 6. The City of Chanhassen will inform the Owner in writing of any water emergencies declared by the City of Chanhassen and the restrictions imposed as a result thereof. The Owner agrees to implement and enforce appropriate restrictions on the Owner property within the City of Shorewood served by water from the City of Chanhassen. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed of the day and year first above written. OWNER By. Ted Rix Date CITY-OF SHOREWOOD By. Woody Love, Mayor And By, Craig Dawson, City Administrator Date CITY OF CHANHASSEN By. Linda C. Jansen, Mayor And By Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Date STATE OF MINNF. S~A ) COUNTY OF CARVEK ) ( 88. The foregoing instalment was acknowledged before me this 200__, by Ted Rix. day of NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPI~ The foregoing instmmont was acknowledged before me this day of , 200__~ by Woody Love, Mayor, and by Craig Dawson, City A~r, of the City of Shorewood, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation .and pummut to the .. authority granted by its City Council. -. .NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF M]NNF_,SOTA ) COUNTY OF CARVEK ) SS. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of , 2001, by Linda C. Jansen, Mayor, and by Todd ~ City Manager, of the City of ~ a Minnesota municipal corporation, on b~ of tho corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Dmfl~ by: City of Chanhasscn 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 ir~n~m~-~zt~f n~ort~hor~wood am~-m~ntdoc NOTARY PUBLIC ~ov O? 01 06:00p Cit~ Shore$ood 952~?~0128 p. I · November 7, 2001 CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 · www, cl.shorewood,mn,us · cltyhall Ocl.shorewood.mn.us Mr. Matt Saam, Project Engineer City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive Chanhasse~ 1VEq 55317 RE: 23040 Summit Avenue Mr. Thodore Rix Water Connection Request De~r Mr. Saam: Mr. Theodore Rix has requested that the City of Shorewood allow connection' of his primary residence to the City of Chanhassen's municipal water system. This is due to the fact that the City of Shorewood ' doe~ not have municipal'water service available to the subject area. Staff has reviewed the request and finds it to be in order. Therefore, according to the cooperative agreement betwe~ the Cities of Shorewood and Chanhassen, the City of Shorewood is to petition the Chanlmssen City Council to allow the connection to Chanhassen's water system. Please consider this letter to be the required form of petition. Mr. Rix has indicated that the well that is currently in operation is showing eminent signs of failure. Therefore, he has requested that both cities act as quieldy as possible to allow his contractor to make this connection to Chanhassen's water system. If you have any questions or need additional information, I can be reached at 952-474-3236. Sincerely Larry Brown, PE City Engineer & Director of Public Works Cc Mayor and City Council Craig Dawson, City Administrator Bonnie Burton, Finance Director Cathy Elke, Senior ~untant CiPRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CT 0F PO lhr147 , t~tsota 55317 Pb~ 952.93Z1900 952.937.5739 952.93Z9152 952.934.2524 o TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: DATE: Teresa $. Burgess, Public Works Dir~. r/City Engin~ November 20, 2001 SUBJ: Approve Adjustm .ent to No Parking Zone on B~ Court PW056-K REQUESTED ACTION It is rex, ommended that the City Council approve the attached resolution revising the no parking zone on Bmnden Court. .- DISCUSSION The City has received a petition requesting a revision- to the-no, p.ark4ng zone on Bmnden Court. - - · . The revised no pm-king zone Will ~ '.at 6672/6673 Brenden Court ami run to the The Council had previously approved the no pafldng resolution for Brenden Court on October 22, 2001. The neighborhood revised the request following staking of the proposed signs. No si~s have been installed pending this revision. Attachments: 1. Resolution ¢.' Property Owners Mike Wcgler, Street Sup~dcm CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA DA TE : MOTION BY: RESOLUTION NO: SECONDED BY: A Resolution Establishing A No On. Street Parking Zone On Brenden Court from 6672 Around the Cul-de-Sac to 6673 WHEREAS, the City desires to provide safe and effective transportation access to all areas in the city of Chanhassen. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chanhassen City Council that no on-street parking be allowed on Brenden Court from 6672 Brenden Court around the Cul-de-Sac to 6673 Brenden Court between the hours of 7:00 am and 5:30 pm on weekdays during the months of September- May. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this~ day of ,200'1 ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Linda Jansen, Mayor YES NO ABSENT g:~dmin~-e.~olkbrenclen court no pm~dnff~doc ~ORANDUM CTFYOF Todd Cnxhardt, City Manag~ FROM: Tm J. Burgess, Public Works DirectodCity Engin~ November 20, 2001 DATE: SUBS: Approval of Azzes~ment Roll for BC 7 & BC 8 Trunk Sanitary Sewer I .mpro~ Project 00-01 952.93Z1900 Gentrd ~ 952.93Z5739 95293Z.91~ 952934.2524 Requested Action Thc Council is rcqucstcd to approve thc attached resolution approving the assessment roll for BC 7 & BC 8 Trunk Sanitary Sewer 1 .mpmvcmcnt Project 00-01. Discussion On November 13, 2001 the City Council held the assessmmt hearing for the above- referenced project. Three objections to the assessments were received. Staffhas reviewed the objections. The objections and the Staff recommendations are summarized below: Lundgren Bros. .Outlot K PID 25.4530490 Susan McAllistcr PID 25.0090310 Mid American Baptist Social Services Corp. PID 25.0091611 Thc Mn/IX)T Right-of-Way taking for Highway 5 and West 78th Street rcdaccd Lundgrcn Bros. parcel 'size. They have requested a reduction in the assessable am~q~e based an thi~ ROW taking. Staffrecommands reduction in the assessable area to 39.48 acres as requested by Lundgren Bros. In documeatation that the maximum &msity an the site is61 units. Lundgreaha~ requested that the REU's be changed to match the maximum dansity. This is a net increase for thia project. Property owner has requesmt a reduction.to 1REU based an the histm'ical nature of the property. Staff signature of a canservation easement .by the property owns.. open the option to cona~ the ~ssesament amount. No revision is ~ *REU is residential equivalency unit (equal to cae single family home) Attachments: 1. Revised assessment roll dated November 20, 2001. 2. Resolt~om c: Chris Ttu'bodeau-Feist, Finance Depst~a~nt C~ oF C. hanham, n. A ~'oudm, communi~ udt$ d~,an lalr,, aualit~ ~k a charmi~ dram,num, dn'hd~ ~'i~m,~ and t~ut~! CITY OF ~EN CARVER AND I:rENNEPIN COU'NTI]~, MINNESOTA Date Motion By Resol~on Seconded By RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS FOR TRUNK HIGHWAY 5/W. 78Ts STREET WATERMAIN CITY PROJECT NO. 97-6 WItEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly givem as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for extension ofwatermain as part of the Trunk Highway 5/W. 78~ Street Improvement done by MnDOT, City Project 97-6. NOW, TREREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota: 1 w Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assesnment against the lands named the~efin and each tract of land therein included is h~by found to be benefited by tho pr~_posed .improvement in the amount of the assessment levied ~ it. .- Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments e0ctex~ling over a period of 8 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2002, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.5% per annum from the date of adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of thin resolution until December 31, 2002. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. Except those assessments noted as def~uxl on the attached assesnment roll for Green Acres. Those assessments shall be deferred until a change in status; however, interest shall continue to accrue at 6.5% during the time of deferment e The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Finance Director, pay the whole-of the assessment on such property with interest ac, creed to the date of payment to the City Finance Director, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution and the owner may at any 6mo thereaflzr pay the City Finance Director the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such paymeat is made. Such payment must be made before November 30 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. 97151.01 KNK:I 0/3 lgl001 The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County Auditor and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. 5. Thc Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to thc County Recorder for thc deferred assessments. 6. The total cost of the improvement assessed by this resolution is $1,276,795.25. ADOPTED this day of City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. , by the City Council of the ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/Mamger Linda C. Jansen, Mayor g:~nl~ublic~97-6h-esol ~lopting ass~srnents.doc 97151.01 2 RNK: 10/31/2001 CTrYOF CHtNHgSE t~ &x147 bFmnesots 55517 352937.1900 C, enersl F~x 35~3~7.5733 MEMORANDUM Todd G~r~ City Mmmger FROM: Teresa $. Burge~ Public Works Director/City November 20, 2001 DATE: SUBJ: Adopt Assessment Roll for Trunk Highway 5 Improvement Project 97-6 Requested Action The Council is reque.qed to approve the atlached resolution approving the assessment roll for Trunk Highway 5 I .mprovement Project 97-6. Discussion On November 13, 2001 the City Council held the as~sm~at hearing for the abov~- referoncaxl project. Three objections to the assessmmts were received. Staffhas reviewed the objections. 95293Z9152 952334.2~4 The objections and the Staffrecomm~datio~s m'e summm'ized below:. Lundgren Bros. Outlot K PID 25.4530490 Michael Gorra PID 25-0100900 Mid American Baptist Social Services Corp. PID 25.0091611 Larry and Betty Vandeveier PID 25.0101400 The Mn/DOT Right of Way taking for Highway 5 and West 78th Street re~,~.Lundgren Bros. parcel size. They ~ve ~ a ~on in the assessable acreage based on ~is ROW taking. Staffrecommm~ds ~on iri the assessable area to 39.48 as requestrd by Ixmdgren Bros. In'addition, maximum density on the siteis 61 units, hmdgren has requested that the REU's be changed to match the maximum demdty. The 61 units will match the BC 7 & 8 as~essmmt roll Acre status is to address ~is situation and is not a concern of the City. The ~ obi~dus bonefit buildable ares and current zouing. ' No revision is recommended. *REU is residential equivalency unit (equal to one single fm~y home) Attachments: 1. Revised assessment mH dated November 20, 2001. 2. Rrsolution. c: Chris Thibodeau-Feist, Finance g:~-ng~publi~-~/~ ~ ~ 11=26-01.d~ CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA Date Motion By Resolution Seconded By RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS FOR BC 7 & 8 TRUNK UTILITIES EXTENSION CITY PROJECT NO. 00-01 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for extension of trunk utilities in the BC 7 & 8 utility district, Project No. 00-01 .- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota: 1, Such proposed assessment, a.copy of which is attach.ed hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is .hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the-assessment levied against it. 1 Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a pedod of 8 years except as otherwise noted on the attached assessment roll, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2002, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.5% per annum from the date of adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2002. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. . The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Finance Director, pay the whole of the assessment on such property with interest accrued to the date of payment to the City Finance Director, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution and the owner may at any time thereafter pay the City Finance Director the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 30 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. 4, , The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. · i .,'. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Recorder for the deferred assessments. The total construction cost of the improvement assessed by this resolution is $1,265,673. ADOPTED this day of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. , by the City Council of ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/Manager Linda C. Jansen, Mayor CT 0F MFJVlORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBS: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Teresa $. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engine~ November 20, 2001 Receive Feasibility StudT, Call Public Hearing for Pedestrian Trail Adjacent to Highway 101, Project 97-12-3 m gtmST n AC rIO It is recommemded that the City Council receive the feaaibility report and call a public hearing for the above-referenc~ project on January 14, 2002. DISCUSSION This project is in response to a need to provide safe pedestrian/bicycle access along the Hwy 101 Corridor north of Highway 5. A $500,000 grant from the Mn/DNR was received due to the environmental sea~i..'tivi.'.ty 0f the potential The feasibility study is on file in the City Engin~ Depai~emt. A Public Informational Meeting will be held prior to the Public Hearing. The Public' Hearing is scheduled in January to avoid the holiday season and allow time for review of the report by the Chanl~t~m Park and Recreation Board. ¢: l_mtrie A. Johnaon, I-l_ans~ Thorp Pellinen Olson 8:~tS~publick97-12-3~aff report - 11-26-01 XiOC CTFYOF PO Box147 ~, Minnmua 55317 Phone 952.93Z1900 Geueral ~ 952.93Z5739 952.937.9152 952.934.2524 Web Site umm~d, dmn~.mn.~ TO: Mayor City Council FROM: Todd G-tn'hardt, City Manager DATE: November 20, 2001 SUB J: 2002 Prosecution Contract Please find attached a copy of a contract from the Carver County Attorney seeking ratification for the provision of prosecution service~ during calendar year 2002.. .. I have discussed the contract with our City Attorney and he finds it to be in order. I have also attached a memo from Mr. Fahey, Carver County Attorney, outlining the number of cases handled by his office as of November 2001. I have asked for his sucx,~s rote inprosecuting these cases. I will have this information for you at Monday night's .meeting. Staff is nc, om.mending approval of 2002 Prosecution Contract with Carver County Attorney's office. G:~lmin~fio~ MICHAEL A. FAHEY CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY Government Center, Justice Center ~ 600 East Fourth Street ~ Chaska, Minnesota 55318-2188 CARVER (952) 361-1400 COUNTY (952) 361-1413 Fax Chief Deputy County Attorney Karl L.S. Myrold Criminal Division Peter Ivy, Head Tara E. Keehr Martha E. Mattheis Michael D. Wentzell Mark Debban, Paralegal Victim Witness Coordinator Nancy E. Yates Law Office Coordinator Christopher Weldon Civil Division Robert G. I-Iendricks, Head Thomas W. Haines Carol L. Mayer Patricia May, Paralegal Juvenile Division Janet L. Barke Cain, Head Kevin G. Cedergren TO: CITY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES (CARVER, CHANHASSEN, CHASKA, COLOGNE, HAMBURG, MAYER, NEW GERMANY, VICTORIA, WACONIA, WATERTOWN AND NORWOOD YOUNG AMERICA) FROM: MICHAEL A. FAHEY, CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY DATE: OCTOBER 9, 2001 SUBJECT: 2002 PROSECUTION CONTRACTS Enclosed for your review is a proposed contract for municipal prosecution services. The Carver County Board and County Attomey's Office are again offering to provide this service to the municipalities in Carver County. If we are to prosecute the traffic ordinance violations, it is imperative that we have a record of current city ordinances. In addition, any changes made during the year should be forwarded to the County Attorney's Office. If we do not receive these documents, we will be unable to provide the prosecution services. If you wish to renew the contract as proposed, please sign the original and return it to my office at your earliest convenience. ~ the contract is fully executed, the original will be filed Jn the Accounting office and a fully executed copy will be sent to you for your records. The only change in the prosecution contract is that we have raised our hourly rate for non-traffic and non-parking municipal violations from $50.00 to $69.00 per hour. We prosecute these offenses only upon the request of the city. If you have any questions or need fimher information, please feel free to contact me. I look forward to participating in this cooperative effort. tt: \UI~RIIS\I~S\I~PDOC~\¢IVILLIT\ 1 -PROSK Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on 30ok Post-Co,sumer Recycled Paper JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT PROSECUTION CONTRACT THIS JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT is msde and entered into by and between the County of Carver, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, and the City of Chanhassen, a muni~pal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, to provide for prosecution of statutory gross misdemeanor, mi~emeanor and petty mis~lem~ violations, other than liquor !aw violations directly involving establishments, organizations or individuals with liquor licenses or permits issued by the City of Ctmnhass~ and also to provide for prosecution of mtmicipal traffic and parking ordinance violations. WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. §471.59, as amended, authorizes the Board of Counly Commissioners of any county in the State of Minnesota to enter into agreements by resolution with any other governmental unit to perform on behalf of that unit any se~'wice or function which that unit would be authorized to provide for itself; and WHEREAS, in 1983, the Minnesota State Legislatttre amended Minn. StaL ~487.25, StdxL 10, to provide that statutory gross mi~lemeanor, mi~lern~or and petty mir~lem~or violations and municipal ordinance violations in the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, scott arid Washington shall be prosecuted by the attorney of the muni~p~ty where the violation is alleged to have occurred; and WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. §487.25, Subd. 10, further provides that municipalities may enter into a three party agreement with the County Board and County Attorney to provide for prosecution sea'vices for any criminal offense; and WHEREAS, each of the parties hereto desires to enter into this J'oint Powers Agreement and has, through the actions of its respective governing bodies, been duly authorized to enter into this Joint Powers Agreement for the purposes hereinafter stated; NOW, TRF~REFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, it is hereby agreed by and between the County of Carver, through the Board of Commissioners, the Carver County Attorney, and the City of Chanhasse~ through its Council, that: 1) The Carver County Attorney's Office shall prosecute statutory gross misdemeanor, misdemeanor and petty misdemeanor violations other than liquor law violations directly involving establishments, organizations or individuals with liquor licenses or permits issued by the City of Chanhassen allegedly occurring in Carver County and within the jurisdiction of the City of Chanhassen (those liquor violations dealing with ordinances not duplicated by state law, such as nuisances, license revocations and suspensions). The Carver County Attorney shall also prosecute all municipal traffic and parking ordinance violations allegedly occurring within the jurisdiction of the municipality and within Carver County. Specifically excluded will be abandoned vehicle violations under municipal ordinance. The Carver County Attorney's Office may prosecute any other ordinance violation at a rate of $69.00 per hour for prosecutor time plus expenses incurred if the municipality so requests and the Carver County Attorney agrees. This would be in addition to any fine or penalty paid or any surcharge pursuant to paragraph 3 below. 2) Prosecution services shall be rendered by the Carver County Attorney's Office commencing January 1, 2002, and extending through December 31, 2002. 3) In consideration for said prosecution services being rendered, the County of Carver shall collect an additional one-third (1/3) of all fines or penalties pursuant to Minn. Stat. {}487.33, Subd. 5, as amended. 4) The City shall forward current traffic ordinances to the County Attorney's Office and mediately inform the County Attorney of any changes made during the contract period. 5) Carver County indemnifies and holds harmless the City of Chanhassen for all acts and/or omissions of Carver County employees consistent with the provisions of Minn. Stat. Chapter 466. The City of Chanhassen indemnifies and holds harmless Carver County for all acts and/or omissions of its employees consistent with the provisions of Minn. Stat. Chap. 466. 6) This Agreement shall terminate of its own accord without further action taken or notice given by either party at midnight, December 31, 2002. IN WITNESS Wi~.REOF, each of the parties has caused this Agreement to be executed by its appropriate offi~ and with the consent and approval of its appropriate governing bodies. CITY OF ~SEN BY: Mawr IN PRESEN~ OF: City Admini~ Date: Date: COUNTY OF CARVER IN PRESENCE OF: BY: Ch~D~BOn Board of Commissioners County Administm~r Date: Date: - -' - . APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael A. Fahey #28071 Carver County Attorney CARVER COUNTY MICHAEL A. FAHEY CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY Government Center, Justice Center 600 East Fourth Street Chaska, Minnesota 55318-2188 (952) 361-1400 (952) 361-1413 Fax :; '! ',~ · ,~. To: Todd Gerhardt, Chanhassen City Administrator From: Mike Fahey, Carver County Attorney Re: Chanhassen Prosecution Contract Chief Deputy County Attorney Karl L.S. Mymld Criminal Division Peter Ivy, Head Tara E. Keehr Martha E. Mattheis Michael D. Wentzell Mark Debban, Paraiegal Victim Witness Coordinator Nancy E. Yates Law Office Coordinator Christopher Weldon Civil Division Robert G. Hendricks, Head Thomas W. Haines Carol L. Mayer Patricia May, Paraiegai Juvenile Division Janet L. Barke Cain, Head Kevin G. Cedergren Date: November 16, 2001 Todd, per your request, I am sending you the information for the Chanhassen prosecution contract with our office. The fine revenue paid to our office per the contract through September of this year was $13,937.83. As of November 16, 2001 we have lmndled 294 misdemeanor and 42 gross misdemeanor cases occurring in Chanhassen. If you have any additional questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. We look forward very much to continuing this relationslfip ~vith Chanhassen. If there is anytlfing you or any of the council members can think of for us to improve this service, please bring it to ~W attention. Happy Tbanksgivingl I I ! I Equal OpportuniO' Employer Printed on 30% Post-Consumer Recycled Paper CHANHA~SEN PROSECUTION INFO Fine figures are through September, 2001 CHAN DATE CITY PROSECUTION SHARE SHARE Jan-01 $1,369.28 $1,369.46 Feb--01 $1,113.47 $1,113.73 Mar-01 $1,692.87 $1,693.19 Apr-01 $1,209.92 $1,210.10 May-01 $1,162.74 $1,163.06 Jun-01 $1,844.13 $1,844.70 Jul-01 $1,835.41 $1,836.16 Aug-01 $2,145.75' $2,146.60 Sep-01 $1,560.02 $1,560.83 Oct-01 Nov-01 Dec-01 TOTAL $13,933.59 $13,937.83 According to figures received' from Court Administration the fine revenue is as above. As of November 16, 2001 we have handled 294 misdemeanor cases and 42 gross misdemeanor PO Bar147 Mimmm 55317 952,9~Z1900 95~937,5739 952,93Z9152 952,934,2524 TO: Mayor City Council FROM: DATE: Bruce M. DeJong' Finance Director Novc~nb~ 8, 2001 Approval of Bills The following claims are submitted for approval on November 26, 2001: Check Numbers Ainount 107312-107456 $948,529.83 1 Total Claims .- - - $948,529.83 I nw. ommend approval of all claims as submitted.. - ZNvo'rc~ ~ T.'rBT BY ~ 11/26/01 D~t-e [ 11/20/01 'l':l.m~, 11,40,,-, a~x~t ~ vm~o~ ~ ~ T~ote~ D~e~t~tioo ~ D~tm ~ 101-0000-2005 FI~x Plan ~BRAYIJ(]]~ 107376 ~-H~q~B Z.1.1601 21/16/200 201-0000-2005 PI~ ~1~ ~2~ 8~ 107380 ~-~ 111601 11/16/~00 ~.00 101-0000-2005 ~1~ ~l~ ~ ~ 207~0 ~-~ 111601 11/16/200 101-0000-2005 Yl~ ~ ~ 107400 ~~ ~~ 101~520 11/11/200 270.66 201-0000-20~ ~ ~ ~ 20~400 ~ ~ ~~ ~01~3510 11/11/200 101-0000-2022 ~~ ~~ 107118 ~2001 ~~ ~001 11/15/200 101-0000-2022 ~ ~y ~ ~I~ 107~91 ~ ~ ~ 0102727 11/14/200 101-0000-2023 ~~ ~~ 107427 ~ - ~~ 0101019 11/08/200 101-0000-2022 ~~Y ~~~ 10~J~ ~ ~-4150 ~~ 0102547 11/19/200 6.50 201-0000-20~ B~ ~ ~Z~~ ~ 107131 ~ ~-~624 ~ ~ P 010268~ 11/29/200 ~.00 102-0000-3~01 ~t~ ~~I~ ~074~7 ~ - ~ ~ ~ 020~019 11/08/200 124.75 1~-0000-3~02 ~1~ ~~ ~ 107~1 ~ ~-4150 ~~ R 0202547 11/19/~00 22~.25 101-00~-]~01 ~11~ ~ ~ ~ 10~331 ~ ~-3624 ~ ~ ~ 0202688 11/19/200 97.25 101-0000-~]0~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~07392 ~~ ~ 0102727 11/14/200 139.25 A01-0000-~816 ~ ~t5 ~~ ~, ~ ~ 107~16 ~ 200~-~ ~ ~001 11/~5/~00 -69.00 101-0000-~816 ~~ ~~~ ~07402 ~~~ 729800 11/07/200 0.00 101-0000-3818 8~ ~t ~ ~~~ ~07318 ~ 200~ ~ ~ ~001 1~/~5/200 -74.12 ~0~-0000-4901 ~ ~~C ~ ~ 107315 ~~A~ 082901 08/29/~00 158.~1 10~-0000-4901 ~ ~ ~LG 107~0 ~ ~~ 78074 11/07/200 235.80 101-1110-4300 COOB~Llt:LT~ 101-1110-4340 101-1110-4340 101-1110~340 101-1~0~375 De~C ~ J~mt~Lmt~tio~ 101-1120-4040 /nau~a~c~ M~DXOt 101-1120-4110 Of~£tco Sup ~ 101-3_120-4370 Tr~v/Tre/n LEA&~IB OF HINWEBO~ ~A~ D~G~: ~trm~.e 101-1130-4040 101-1130-4300 101-1130-4300 Dei~ L~jal 101-1140-4302 Logal Fees D~t: lvL'Opt~cy 201-1150-4300 H~B ~ RID~A~H ~ B~,,ERS & AB~OCIATE~ ~NC 101-1160-4040 101-1160-4150 101-1160-42~0 101-1160-4~00 101-1160-4300 101-1160-4300 101-1160-4300 101-1170-4040 101-1170-4110 101-1170-4110 O~ft~ 8up 101-1170-4110 O~ft~ 101-1170-4110 101-1170-4110 O~ft~e 101-1170-4110 O~1c~ Sup 101-1/70-4110 O~£1ce ]]up 101-1170-4110 O~l~o Sup 101-1170-4110 O£~lgo 8up 101-1170-4110 O~£tco 9up 101-3,170-4110 O~£~ Sup 101-1170-43-10 O~£tce 101-1170-4110 101-1170-4110 0~tg~ 8up 101-1170-4110 101-1170-4110 O~£1c0 101-1170-4320 l~ctlttl~o 101-1170-4350 101-1170-4410 101-1170-4510 101-1170-4531 Dep~: POltC~/~a_v'w~Co COoY._vlgC 101-1210-4040 InS~lnOO 101-1210-4370 T~v//~i/n l:~eim: Y/~m ~zeve~tto~ 101-1220-4040 Total s, 971.86 107359 7~LI~JH(I~ ~ 107413 W/MTBR ~AlfH~BSBN COHI(BC'I'/0M 107358 ~FJ~I'I~R(]~d~I]kSBIMCOHIIECTZOM 107435 ~ ~, D~Y~ 10731~ ~ ~/~ ~ ~illatl~ 107400 ~~ ~ 107441 YZ~ ~~ 107390 mI~-~ 1115011 11/15/200 11,095.00 17623 11/07/200 6,839.43 OI01-06 11/11/200 471.75 10/31/200 198.25 102501 10/25/200 46.74 18,651.17 10133510 11/11/200 1,650.11 762354 10/31/200 6.75 00008466 11/01/200 60.00 To~A1 ,~qm4-4ml~'at:Lo~ 107400 107373 PtQII'~gXONAL 107363 10734~ 107343 107400 107347 ~ C~B~B 107364 ARC,AD WZTH C~4~A0 107415 107328 107328 ~ELOO~TBJ~BAT 107351 107400 107395 107447 107434 107434 107440 107439 107414 107414 107414 107355 107355 107355 107355 107355 107355 107414 107456 107450 107356 10743] 1,716.86 10133510 11/11/200 724.32 144447 10/31/200 8,680.10 18884 10/12/200 968.75 10,373.17 10/31/200 5,913.95 5,913.95 11/08/20013.75 ................. 13.75 10133510 11/11/200 273.33 · 556126 11/01/200 58.99 70005341 11/01/200 1,059.68 02007847 11/01/200 S24.85 2064 11/07/200 1,387.27 2055 11/07/200 423.12 2587 10/3X/200 3,202.83 To~al 14an~3emm~ Infor~at/on 8¥et~ae 6,030.08 Di~:~iERII~AL~ /MBQRA~CI 10133510 11/11/200 273.33 ~/P~X~ 1652 10/10/200 43.11 ~ ~X~/~ P~ 01~987 10/31/300 117.50 M ~-~ 24354 :x/09/200 43.95 ~~-~ 24297 x0/31/200 50.75 ~x~ 8~x~ 11/08/300 85.33 ~ 51225 11/06/300 103.19 ~ 8~X~ 102~85 10/12/200 133.07 ~~ 9~8~60 09/17/200 9.58 ~~ ~ 7osssx oo/12/2oo s.8s ~ ~7~1832 ~o/3~/2oo ~~ 27354269- ~0/22/200 -~.o4 ~ ~ 2735772o 11/o8/2oo -77.61 2002 ~~xs~ 27331531 11/os/2oo 265.ox ~ 27503371 ~/o0/2oo P~IP8, ~ 27397983 21/07/200 33.38 n~,~ ~ 202s~57 00/~4/200 2~.20 ~~~ ~1140~ ~/~4/200 z,345.36 ~~/~~ 1593 11/01/200 0.00 ~P~~ 71~51537 ~/o4/2oo ~,ooo.~ ~ ~ Y~ ~P~ 59818 11/06/300 65.44 ~XO~~ 11264 10/29/~00 31.53 ................. ~1 ~ty~11 ~~ ],895.~9 107400 I)EC~4BERIIZALTH /MBDRANCB 10133510 11/11/200 273.33 107336 8~(/]Ot~ PARKZIf~, ~ 10/29/200 29.65 ................. ~1 ~lt~/~r ~tr~t 302.98 107400 ~~ ~~ 10133510 11/11/200 913.10 D~I:e: 11/20/01 r~: C~6o Bn~oz'c~nan~' ~-1250-4040 L-1~50-4520 11-1250-4530 11-1250-4531 11-1260-4040 11-1260-4140 ll-/260-4300 01-1260 -4531 01-1310 -4040 01-1310-4531 .01-1320-4040 .0'1-1320-4120 L01-1320-4120 L01-1320-4120 L01-13~0-4120 L01-1320 -4150 L01-1320-4150 L01-1320-4170 L01-1320-4170 L01-1320-4520 L01-13~0-4531 q~ 8Cz'eot Llcd~/~J & 819n~le L01-1350-4320 L01-1350-4320 L01-1350-4320 sp~: C:tcy 101-1370-4040 101-1370-4/.20 L01-1370-4120 L01-1370-4260 LO1-1370-&260 L01-1370 =4260 101-1370-4260 L01-1370-4260 L01-1370-4260 L01-2370-4320 L01-1370-43S0 LO1-1370-&350 L01-/370-4531 101-1420-4040 101-1420-4140 107429 107407 107426 107416 107430 107341 107324 107456 107450 1073~ 1074~ 10739~ 1073~ 107414 107335 1073~ 1073~ 107416 107436 107367 107429 107379 107332 In~ MKDTC~ Veh I~J.uf: I~'1~ Z~C Rodlo Mo:Ln ~ T~3~TC~L C~ER Veh 8upp M];NGYO(~I' 'CC~' ~ ' R~dlo I~in MJO~ 'r~:~iM/~:~kT~ C~TI'BR Equ:tp Supp ~ _ ~ p~tT'uT'~ Equ:l.p Bupp ~ AHD METER Ssa~v.LCSH ~IC Equ/p Supp ~ AHD Hr~R Sm~vJ.f"tq ~C 8mall 7~)ol ~ TOOL CCSIgM~ Sm~ll Tool DILBG~RD TOOL CGN~JJ~ ~cllt~tmm XCeL ~ ~ ~ Iq~DXC~L Veh 8uJ~) #X~l' C~m(E~ '~ 8']]kTZ(:B' uu~v,.rl~ 10/25/200 157.75 F'J:3~TITT~ BU99~T~S 80067423 ~/05/200 182.73 ~~~ ~27751 11/~/200 37.50 ~00 ~ ~ 8060 ~/0S/200 ~4.42 · ~ ~~~ ~068 ~0/~5/200 247.50 m/~ 99268 ~/01/200 ~6.45 ~ ~vJ~-ff ~/01/200 972.75 ~~~w~ 20/3~/200 23.3~ ~~ ~ ~0202 ~/0~/200 28.7~ ~ ~ ~0101 11/01/200 7.68 ~~~ 110602 11/06/200 206.92 ~~ ~. ~402 11/~4/200 488.42 ~~m 1593 ~/01/200 0.00 ~~/~ 100601 10/06/~00 ~.85 ~ ~~ 5~4 20/~/200 292.23 ~T~-~ ~ 4~ ~/07/200 ~65.00 ~~ · ~63~02 2o/29/2oo 3.62 ~~ 16681 ~o/29/2oo 450.00 ~~/~ 2oo6o~ 2o/o6/2oo 199.27 ~~/~ 2o252oo2 2o/25/2oo 2~.7o ~~/~ 2o252oo2 2o/25/2oo 433.23 ~ ~ ~,~~ 12o~ lO/15/2oo 1,285.oo ~ ~ m~ 26~ 2o/24/2oo 1,148.93 ~~~ 2~ 2o/24/2oo 3.17 ~m~ 2o/26/2oo ~.~ ~2~ 16259 o9/26/2oo 1,989.70 ~XO~ ~ 20/29/200 ~08.60 9,811.32 107400 DBC~4B~RB~.,'I~ ,--~ 10133510 11/11/200 4,341.69 107406 XL~ ~ ~ID J606 101143.28 11/14/200 89.95 . 107353 ~ ~~ 17561 11/08/200~6~49 107332 ~0~ ~ 10/29/20056.06 ................. ~ ~ ~~ 5,0~.19 107400 ~~ ~~ ~01336~0 11/11/200 -. 273.3~ .-- ~0746~ .~ -' '' ' ~000~. ~/0~/200 280.~4 - - . . 107~8 ~ ~v~ ' 100~1' 10/~1/2~0 975.79 - . . · 072~2 ~0~,~-~ - · ~ ~0/29/200 '42.06~. . -- ..... %.__~ ...... . . 107400 107332 107400 107369 107425 107397 10~350 10740~ 107408 10~83 10~83 107406 107332 . . . 10133510 11~11'/200 2,203'.52 11.264 10/29/200 14.01 2,217.53 10:133510 11/11/200 - 3,231.50 51560 11/08/200 782.78 11/06/200 161.83 2020069 11113/200 47.92 227617 11/141200 45.22 221485 11/12/200 4,043.60 221484 11/12/200 4,060.62 /24781 111131200 42.11 /24779 111131200 1,137.42 10/.14093 11/13/200 89.95 3~264 10/29/200 119.12 ~ 81:_--~etNm/nl:snmlc:m 13,751.97 107325 BLIC~ ~ 3_10601 11/06/30014,268.83 107456 EI,BCT'~TCI"FY ~u~ 111401 11/14/200 1,489.43 107456 ~a~"'I~ZC/~I~ ~ 111501 11/15/200 /.l.70 ................. TC)I:Lt 8tz~tlcl~f~u9 G 8:LgnL/f ~q,769.96 107400 D~:BMRER ~ ~ 10133510 11/11/2~0 1,48~.15 107401 RABI~T 196 11/09/200 3.~'.23 - 107422 O ~ 3]5554 11/15/200 37.38 107422 O ~.T]K~J 185553 11/15/200 148.72 107360 AIV/L 240370 10/29/200 58.26 107360 HMIDTO~L8 240328 10/29/200 45.?8 107360 A.T~IOOLA'I'C~ 240356 10/29/200 23.28 107360 Ri.I'T(3~:! 242629 13./05/200 60.98 107360 97~ 242839 11/05/200 9.90 107360 VT_BE (~3:l~J, irr.T~q 244239 11/08/200 27.05 107456 IL~C~I/[-,~ (:3~ki368 111401 11/14/200 409.72 107450 ~'"YCL/~IG~ ~ 1593 11/01/200 0.00 107357 prrm'.TCNC~I~B (:~,Ei]i]31~ 11/11/200 1,292.50 107332 RADZOMi./~'F~B]~ 11264 10/29/200 14.01 107400 107454 10133510 11/11/200 1,263.09 1000162 11/01/200137.17 ................. 1,400.26 11/26/01 Dal:~ ~ 11/20/01 r~lL--y' o£ C~],B~L~BIII~, ~m 11140a]1 ....................................................................... ~:J' ~ 3 De,atilt GL Number Check Xuvoi~e Du~ ACCOUnt Ab~rev Vendor Name NUmber ~nvoice Description N~m~me~ Date Amount ............................................................................................................. ~un~: G~NEP~J~ P~ND ................................................ De'pCz B~1O~ faclllty 101-1430-4040 Znmu.~z~-'~ M~DZC~ De~c: ~az-~ ~mion 101-1510-4340 Prtn~Lr~ Dap'c: Park A~mtnlmtra~lrm 101-1520-4040 Xnsur~nge 101-1520-4300 Con~ult/ng 101-1520-4390 Tr&v/Train DepC, ~.r~tton Center 101-1530-4150 M~tntMabl 101-1530-4310 Telephone 101-1534-4130 101-1534-4130 M~DTC~ J~RRY ~ 8U8411' NAR.E~ MCI IICXtLDO:~ ~ 8~%rlc~ DISC: L~keAnn Perk 101-1540-4300 Con~ulti~ PROT~"TZCI~0B~ 101-1540-4310 T~le~ne ~ 101-1540-4320 ~c111tiea ~ ~ ~NC De,c: PagkM~tnten~n~e 101-1550-4040 Insurance 101-1550-4120 101-1550-4120 ~quip 101-1550-4150 Matnt Marl 101-1550-4150 14L~C 101-1550-4150 Matnt Marl 101-1550-4151 Irrlg Bui;~ 101-1550-4151 101-1550-4240 ~ntforme 101-1550-4240 101-1550-4300 Co~ult/~g 101-1550-4300 Con~ultt~ 101-1550-4350 Cleant~] 101-1550-4370 Trav/Train 101-1550-4400 ~nd/Bl~ 101-1550-4520 VehMaint 101-1550-4520 Veh Ma~nt 101-1550-4531 R~/oMain 101-1550-4540 8tr 101-1551-4151 Zrr/g 101-1551-4320 U~tlitiea 101-1551-4350 Cleaniug D~C, 8en~or C~tizl~l Center 101-1560-4130 101-1560-4130 Prog 101-1560-4130 proggt~pp 101-1560-4300 Cou~ultt~ 101-1560-4300 Consultin~ 101-1560-4300 XC~., ~ MAST~~-TCWEST ~ #'r C~N~J~ VOX~'8 B~ C~PA~Z~8 AN~/E' 8 CA~RZN~ De~t, ~llot~i P~rty 101-1614-4130 P~Sup~ 101-1614-4300 COneultix~ Dept, gmlf-Su~g~ctugPrograms 101-1700-4040 Inmur~c~ ~t: ~relCbOOl 101-1710-3636 81£8u~Pro~ 101-1910-3636 81fSu~Prog D~: Youth Ac~tvlttel 101-1731-3636 glfSu~Pro~ M~DXC~ PET~H PF~ ANN 8ICHA/ LIND& 107400 D~C]DIB~HEALT~ INSU~~NC~ 10133510 11/11/200 68.33 ................. To~al Sen/or ~acilt~y ~mli~ 68.33 107435 ~~, DXS~Y~ Z0/3~/200 203.ZZ ~1 ~ ~mml~ 203.11 107400 ~~ ~ 10133510 11/11/~00 1,006.~0 107431 ~1~~ ?03~11 11/0~/200 24.05 107377 ~~ ~/DI~ 11162001 11/16/200 277.39 ................. ~Ci1 ~ ~IC~Ct~ 1,307.64 107440 ~ ~Z~ 11/13/200 14.~7 107~99 ~~ ~ 110101 11/01/200 0.82 ................. ~1 ~tt~ ~er 15.19 107386 ~ 00034718 10/04/200 14.38 10~386 ~7I~ ~I~ 00034811 10/15/200 12.6~ ................. ~1 ~e 27.05 107421 ~ ~~~~ 12723631 11/04/200 86.27 109424 TE~PHC~E CHaRgE8 107325 EL~CTHZCITY ~ 111301 11/13/200 126.60 110601 11/06/200 490.69 ................. Total haka Azm P~rk 703.56 107400 D~C~MB~H HEALTH INBU~ANC~ 10133510 11/11/200 3,189.94 109395 BP~C~ T0~8 B~IDL~8 103001 10/30/200 54.28 107340 MUTG, ~ AND BIR~ 394330 11/02/200 916.03 107396 I,~4BER 347473 11/05/200 48.77 107396 ~ 348291 11/08/200 38.41 107350 TAMPS. 227144 11/08/200 26.41 107410 X~I(~ATI0~ BUPPL/R8 11290000 11/12/200 1,369.01 107410 ~ CO~P~E8810~i CPZ~3 113132 11/15/200 -35.43 107452 WOHKPANTB 46328889 10/12/200 315.79 107349 8H0~8 11/13/200 34.97 107388 lENS 17922 10~29/200 153.00 107388 NIRB ~C3~8 ZNPA~KBH~D 17916 10/24/200 1,967~04 107450 ~YCLIN~/~.J~h~F ~ 1593 11/01/200 2,307.99 107409 C01~FB~ENC~ RB~IST~ATI0~ 111401 11/14/200 325.00 107381 ~EC~IV~ FOHD00~8-LKANN 110701 11/07/200 158.70 107327 WIHD~RI_gld) R~PI~ 3224 11/05/200 250.00 107406 A~IGN FRUIT END 10114156 11/15/200 89.95 107332 ~ADIOMAIRT~/~C~ 11264 10/29/200 73.57 107419 OVBRZAY TRA/LB/P~PAIR PA~_K LOT 10513 10/18/200 33,788.25 To~al Park Ma~_n~m~nne 45,069.68 109410 XRR/GATI~ BUPPLXE8 11313300 11/13/200 14.41 107456 ~I~ ~ 111401 11/14/200 291.63 107450 ~~/~~ 1593 11/01/200 0.00 ................. ~1 ~t~ ~int~e 306.04 107382 ~I~-8R ~ 8~ZE8 11090Z ~Z/07/200 48.05 107382 ~B-~T. ~ S~ ~Z~30Z ~Z/Z3/200 36.31 109329 ~YI~ ~ 11/13/200 17.92 107449 8~Z~ ~~ATZ~ 10518 11/08/200 383.14 107382 ~E-SR ~ S~ 11132001 11/13/200 150.00 107334 ~~D1~ 11/10/200 242.29 ................. ~1 8~or ~tts~ ~ter 877.71 107400 ~~ ~~ 10133510 11/11/200 437.33 107354 ~, ~ 11/08/200 15.75 107378 ~B M~ ~090~ ~1/~S/200 292.S0 · 07325~C~ ~ =~060~ ~/06/200 86.30 107456 ~C~ ~ ~40~ ~/~4/200 50.02 107456 ~IC~ ~ 11~501 ~1/~5/200 72.~8 ................. ~ ~t~ ~ 954.58 107441 FI~~9~ 680237 ~0/20/200 28.72 107354 ~, ~ 11/o8/2oo 27.43 ................. ~tal hl~ ~rty 56.15 107400 ~~ ~ 10133510 11/11/200 109.33 ................. ~1 Belf-~r~t~ ~ 109.33 107418 ~~B-~ 57840 11/07/200 35.00 107333 ~ - B-~ 57857 11/08/200 35.00 ................. ~1 ~m~l ~l 70.00 107393 ~~ ~IC 5788~ 11/09/200 40.00 ......................................................................................................................................................... L-1731-4130 2:'og Bu~i) C~l[%rgR O)CMTY ~ ~ 107345 13iH/'Bi'T'I']]IQ CL.I~XC ~ 4~6 10/30/200 241.50 ~-X731~300 ~~ ~ ~ 107387 ~ ~~ ~C ~0801 ~/08/200 2~.00 ................. ~ Y~ ~t~ 4~. 50 ................. ~ ~ ~7,~. 06 lC: .0-0000-4040 107400 I:]~(::~(I~RH~]LL~ J. JUbt~f.A~BZ0133510 11/11/200 679.19 TO4:,B.]. 679.19 Fund. T O4:o/ 679.19 L1-0000-4340 1.1-2310-4040 l,=~.nc:L~ -2360-4040 Xnmzz'lnce -2360-4130 Pz'og f~ J-4130 Pz'og Supp 130 i'z'og Supp -2360-4130 ~ Supp 0-4300 O:xmulc:Lng .-2360-4370 107435 L,B3i~HCTFZr'Bq, ~XuvracL' Total 107400 I:S(~4BERI~E]kT.,TH ZIIHORA~:~ 1074OO 107412 107~ ~-~~ 1074~ 107395 ~~/~~ 107380 ~~-~ 10/31/200 208.40 208.40 10/.33510 11/11/200 319.88 319.88 10133510 11/11/200 251.55 2009734 11/08/200 85.20 2009728 11/08/200 85.20 2009727 11/08/200 102.24 2009733 11/08/200 102.24 1664 11/:!.2/200 1,022.40 111901 11/19/200 7.00 1,655.83 ................. ~.z~d..TO'CA1 ' 2,184.11 0-0000-1155 DeY //mp 0,0000-1155 DIv lZllp 00-0000-1155 Dev'T,..l:llp 00-0000-4300 CC:]GI~J.12CJ 00-0000-4300 O::msultJJ:lg 00-0000-4300 COnSulting 107445 ABIIL.THQ I(IEI~0MB ~ ~ 107370 ~H~,Z(m'l'8 IrRoJ'B~RV 107370 m GL~Ig~OF mv 107368 OTZ/f/TY~ 107403 ~ ~,ZC LTM J~8 OCT 1-51 107403 CHMrI~qIBr-TB-]:rl'j~-TC]B,8 0220725 10/27/200 9,462.88' 7461 11/12/200 1,481.25 7465 11/13/200 39.50 1100191 10/31/200 434.00 20010210 10/31/200 22,792.~1 20010215 10/31/200 277.50 34,488.07 FundTo'ca/ 34,488.07 ~ JU::qOTfJl'T/~l & Z~S'VELOIINIi~ ,10-0000-4300 C~xmxnlt tJ~3 ~.T. ~ BCOI'I' m F[X338 107341 ?Or..Ll 10/31/20010.00 ................. 10.00 Fund.'l'ot:J/ 10.00 t23-0000'-4r483 Lt~b Tn. 107330 m]]l~]R~ TO4:l.l 2214 10/31/200201.00 ................. 201.00 ~und.'l'Ot,.al 201.00 C~un Bow1 ;-0000-4320 D1:tltttoa 107456 ET,.,~"'I'R/CZT~ ~ TOOl1 /11501 11/15/200 349.10 349.10 ................. Fl.lZldTOb.ml 349.10 'flLT/]ICR1 - DOimT01MI025 )-0000-,18G& · J'J:l'Tl~ & TALZ~ 14X]iX~4~IT .Z]C 1074,43 2]IDHILF 2001 'i'~'FI1~-253150010 To4=al 1//401 11/19/200 25,907.69 25,907.69 ................. /~12dTo'cl/25,907.69 CM[VI! ~ RTGmfX.Y ir~lD~]lQ 1-0000-4751 107346 OtAH17 IIlO:HIJTB~C~C~ 10/18/200 4r'f,,351.32 44,351.32 Fund.'/'ol:~l 44,351.32 ZNVOZCg ~PP]~V'A~ r. ZBT BY VT~D 11/26/01 Date~ ~/~0/0~ .......................................................................... ~: ~ ~ 3 - ~ ~ ................................................................................... 490-0000-4300 ]~1:~., ~ ~ 4- ~fX'~"~ZX~l~?X' 1028 491-0000-4300 C~m~u/ttu9 491-0000 -4340 Pr~nt~n9 491-0000-4350 C1~ Yund, ~ ZNCR 2-2 I~TL, ~ 8V !027 Dept, 492-0000-4804 ~pec ~ l~m~: T~ ~ 7 - ~ ~ #23 D~t: 497-0000-4300 497-0000-4300 Fund: BP~CZA~ ~gGIWgM~qT ~ ~, CreltVi. C_trcle 600-6001-4340 Pr/J~tlnG De;~: Ca, fury 21vd ~tnxctton 600-6002-4340 ~inting. J~pt : Qutnn Rd 600-6003-4340 Printing 2002 M~Btreet /zRp~tl 600-6004-4300 Con~ultlr~ 600-6004-4300 cc~m~t/~3 X;%u~2: ,~mC~'~l~'i~S ~I'*rT.i'TZ.E8 DE.C. 659-0000-4752 107370 HX(~AY 101 TRAZL 97-12-3 7438 11/12/200 7,335.75 ................. Total 7,335.75 ................. Fund Totml 7,335.75 C~I,G)BBX~ ~QEO'X'GC)bl 8CO'X'X' G ~ 8oxTr'gg~'T 81~01U~N ~q3Bx,'rgR"r_J~ 107341 0CT0~X~G~ 8~WZC~ 107435 L~QA~NOTXC~8, DZSPXAYADVERT 107450 ~gCYC/,XRG/ROhLOI~ ~ TOtmX 10/31/200 933.70 10/31/200 64.07 1593 11/01/200 0.00 997.77 ~md~tal 997.77 107423 2RD ~ TAX~ 2001-251630010 ~tal 1630010 11/19/2006,199.66 ................. 6,199.66 ................. Fund To~al 6,199.66 107344 Gmus~ALABSTRACT~ 107344 Q~ABSTRACT DOCX~ENT8 336 10/23/200 S3.00 11 10/23/20039.00 ................. 92.00 ................. Fund To~al 92.00 107435 Xd~ALNOTXCP~,- DZBPLAYADVERT 10/31/200 116.06 ................. Total Crutvte~ C/~Ze 116.06 107435 LEGAL NOTICES, DISPLAY ADVgRT ' 10/31/200 116.06 ................. To~al Century Blvd R~onltruction 116.06 107435 ~L%LNOTZCHG, DZSPLA¥~ 10/31/200116.06 ................. To~aI Oulnn Rd 116.06 107431 D~LIV~RYC~M~]E~ 703811 11/08/200 35.45 107370 2002 MBA STREET ZMPROV~4ENT9 7500 11/15/200 757.00 ................. Total 2002 MBA Btreet Imprc~emen~B 792.45 ................. Fund Total 1,140.63 107370 BHY 5 & ~78/~ B~ IMP~ 7466 11/13/200 59.25 ................. 59.25 ................. Ym~JTotml 59.25 FmC: 8B'ff~. G ~UTILZTY ~ 700-0000-2023 Q~C Payabl 700-0000-4040 Xz~urm~-~ 700-0000-4140 VmhSug~ 700-0000-4140 Veh 8uI~ ~00-0000-4140 V~h ~ 700-0000-4150 Katnt Marl 700-0000-4150 M~tnk K~Cl 700-0000-4160 Cl~mlm 700-0000-4160 Chem/Call 700-0000-4160 C~all 700-0000-4240 Untforml 700-0000-4240 Un/£orm~ 700-0000-4240 Unl~ 700-0000-4310 ToZe~hcu~e 700-0000-4320 Utilttie~ 700-0000-4320 ;rcilitimm 700-0000-4130 U~tlttlem 700-0000-4340 ~J~t/~ 700-0000-4370 Trav/T'raJ..u 700-0000-4370 Tray/Train 700-0000-4509 ~m~t 700-0000-4509 Rem/t 700-0000-4520 Veh M~tn~ 700-0000-4520 Vehl4~l. nt 700-0000-4520 Veh 14~'[n~ 700-0000-4531 Rad/o Main 700-0000-4550 ~cr Byl M;TROIK~ITANC0(R~C/L, ~NVBVC8 107316 M~DIC~ 107400 BQBUR~I~(~I~%qU~X~T 107437 B~ ~ 107437 F~Y~p~ ~ 107365 ~~ ~ 107350 ~ F~ 107340 ~ ~ 107371 ~ ~X~ 107371 ~ ~ 107~71 ~ 107453 ~ 107452 ~~ 107384 ~ 107321 X~ ~ ~ 107325 ~~ ~ 107456 ~ ~ ~ 107456 ~z~T B~~zB~ 107435 ~ ~ ~~ATZ~ 107405 ~~ 107375 ~~ ~L 107402 ~OP ~ 107404 ~~'8 ~ ~ 107453 ~ TX~ ~ 107406 ~ TI~ I~ 107406 ~~~ ~ 107332 ~~ ~ 107455 0CTOB~R 2001-SAC(]~RGg OC72001 11/15/200 6,900.00 D~C~4BBRHEALTB ZNBURANC~ 10133510 11/11/200 3,237.40 HI~.~O3W 199353 11/08/200 143.62 TR~RN06TAT 199335 11/08/200 9.12 BATI~R/~8 11311054 11/06/200 134.92 W/R~, EX~Clq~C~L TAB~, ~982~8 227536 11/13/200 9.54 MrU'/~/BOX,'I~-R.~AZR. GA'I~V'&LVE~ 395242 11/07/200 514.88 FLOQR/D~ H~(~ENT 391537 10/29/200 52.97 HFS AC~D/O~LOg.TN~ CYLIMD~3W 391442 10/25/200 1,497.67 OONTAINHHD~J~Q~ 65905 10/31/200 35.00 ~ 46467864 10/27/300 84.94 JACucw£ 4623422 10/23/200 94.94 H0~KJEAR8 111501 11/15/200 49.96 T~L~tq/Ob~ ~ 110101 11/01/200 52.00 EI~CT~_TCXTY O~Rfl~8 110601 11/06/200 3,569.09 K~TR~CXTYC~AR~8 111401 11/14/200 5,112.90 ~E. TCITYC~MU~ 111501 11/15/200 690.79 X~GAL HCr~iC~8, DIGPTaAYAD~RT 10/31/200 232.12 ~ATER SYSTBM 8~4IN3R 111401 11/14/200 150.00 HII~F~X~ F01tTRAI~XNG 110801 11/08/200 100.10 10.8'I'~,IA"I'~RG~tV(~ 729800 11/07/200 102,424.00 ~T~R 8~RVXC~ COWI'~ZGI~ 110601 11/06/200 8,028.00 SEAT R~PA/~ 935379 11/14/200 161.81 ALI~ F3t0~T END 10106751 11/13/200 89.95 ALX~4~T 114157 11/15/200 89.95 RADXO)EtT]TI~N~JECE 11264 10/29/200 56.05 a~u~K~TAT 73397450 11/13/200 22.80 I~VOI~B ~ LlflT HY l~mD 111261O1 mr~ ~/20/01 T~um~ 11~4(Mm 0-0000-4550 leer Sys ~W ~ I~ 107455 ~ 526523S4 11/13/200 585.13 .0-0000-4550 ~ S~B IP/RHT ~ ~ ~07366 ~ ~ ~ ~60~ ~/~6/200 360.00 t0-0000-4705 ~tp F~ ~ ~ 207366 P~ ~ ~282020 ~/00/200 4,620.00 ,0-0~0~?0S ~h~p ~I~~~ 107366 ~ ~~ 2 ~781~ 11/16/200 (,626.00 ................. ~ 143,735.65 ................. ~~ 143~735.65 L: SBl~R & ~ KXPMIHICll ~ L0-0000-4300 O::lllull~ tJ31CJ L0-7001-4751 ~ CD L0-7001-4752 0~ BngJ~e L0-?001-4752 OuC 10-0000-3660 10-0000-3660 20-0000-3660 30-0000-3660 20-0000-4~0 20-0000~30 20-0000~300 20-00004300 d: 1)~VELQI~R B~:2DM I~BID 13.5-8201-2024 I~ICL'OW ~ 115-8201-2024 ~ ~¥ 107432 II~T.T~UD VRGI~C~ZCBI ~ 81309 11/12/200 1,585.80 '1'orr. L1 1,585.80 107389 BC7 &BCe Tm~n'__~ 2 11/01/200 456,620.99 107370 ~ 78~H GL'BErt' 01-14 7327 11/09/200 4,693..75 107370 BC7 &B C8 ~E~X~L~:~TY~B8 7499 11/3.5/200 32,405.75 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ 4g~,7~.49 ~~ 49s,3~.29 q~: B~K~JX(]I cXBrl~CL 115-8202-2024 ~ Pe¥ J4~4 115-8202-2024 Zlc:cov ~ GUPlR/OR HC]MIS 107374 107438 107428 107362 107400 1073~ 107338 107338 1073~ 3738000 11/16/200 4.33 1831200 /1/16/200 53.05 3496002 11/16/200 80.06 3303700 11/19/200 6.04 10133510 11/11/200 426.44 113.501 :]~/19/200 8.62 82312 10/19/200 1,602.00 82357 10/19/200 280.00 I~1701 11/3.9/200 28.48 ~3~S01 11/19/200 18S.25 2,674.27 Fundff'otal 2,~74.27 107319 Z, JmZXJ4:~LPZ~~ 107313 X, IBX2eCM;~ISC3Z~Iq]ID 107317 BBf:MJXCII II~ B~lfUMD 107322 ~Z~~ ~ 107392 ~Z~ ~~ '416~nLL ~1/~/200 S00~00 4150~ /1/14/200 750.00 1,250.00 4150~ED 11/14/200 500.00 672b'1731~ /1/14/200 250.00 237533R3~ /1/16/200 500.00 Z,250.00 ................. Fund'l'O~ 2,500.00  0-O000-300S F18x PLm2 0-0000-2005 FX~ ~2O-O0O0-200S l~_ex Plan 830-0000-2005 /l~r Plan 820-0000-2005 Ir/gm Pl.~n 820-0000-2005 FXgm Pl.~n 820-0000-2005 Flgm 9Lan 820-0000-2005 FXgm Pl.~n 820-0000-2005 Flex P~mn 820-0000-2005 Flgm Plan 820-0000-2005 Flex 820-0000-2005 lfXe:E 820-0000-2009 Def~ ~ &20-0000-3009 Def~ Omi) 820-0000-2009 lMf~ C:h~up 120-0000=203..2 H~nXth XC34~ RITXRB, I~FX' AHD ~ Ii~XC~ 107337 FL~X-~YC~WZ 111601 11/i6/200 302.43 107339 IPT_,EX-DIkYC~ZAIDIlZLT~J~ 111601 11/16/200 5,014.12 107342 IP[~X-H~iLTH 111601 11/16/200 167.18 107352 ltTjEZ-~ 111601 11/16/200 114.58 107357 lI~BX-H~RL33I 111601 11/16/200 603.68 107361 IIT, BX-It~kT,~I 111601 11/16/200 69.16 107382 IlT, EZ-I:~ 111601 1//16/200 1,280.00 107385 ll/~Z-1]LYC3LRE 111601 11/16/200 52.08 107417 IPI~X-DI~YOG~ 111601 11/16/200 217.39 107442 IFLEX-I]tlq::BLRB 1/1601 /1/16/200 208.33 107444 il/~X-I]L.TC~3EI 111601 11/16/200 58.33 107448 m-~ 1/1601 11/16/200 326.68 107320 ilOV~Ii~RI~FCCB~ 11'J601 11/14/200 165.00 10.7323 D(P DEIP CCIG)-2HI) PAY TM ! I Or 111601 11/14/200 5,611.42 107314 B(I) I~Y CC:IG*-2]ID P]LY TI lIC~r 111601 11/16/200 1,345.00 107400 DBC:~4RERHE]kT,~t ~ 10133510 11/1//200 7,771.64 23,307.02 23,207.02 948,529.63 CHECK REGISTER REPORT BANK: CHANHASSEN BANK Date: 11/20/01 11/26/01 Time: 11:41am Ctty of Chanhassen Page: 1 Check Check Vendor Nmi)er Date Status Number Vendor N~e Check Deacrtption' Amount 107312 11/15/2001 Printed FESFO0 FESTIVAL FOODS MISC FOOD/SUPPLIES 975.7~ 107313 11/15/2001 Printed HERITA HERITAGE LANDSCAPE ESCROW REFUND 750.00 107314 107315 107316 107317 107'518 107319 107320 107321 107522 107323 107324 107325 107326 107327 107328 107329 107330 107331 107332 107333 1073~ 107335 107336 107337 107338 107339 107340 107341 1073~2 107343 10~44 1 10~6 10~7 10~48 10~9 10~50 10~51 10~52 10~5~ 10~54 10~55 10~56 10~57 10~58 10~5~ 10~0 10~ 10~ 10~ 1 10~ 10~67 10~ 10~70 10~71 10~ 10~ 10~74 10~ I0~76 10~ 10~ 10~ 10~80 10~81 10~2 10~ 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001 Printed 11/15/2001Prtnted 00/00/0000 Void 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prihted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001 Printed 11/26/2001Prtnted 11/26/2001 Printed ICMA ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST EMP DEF COMP-2ND PAY IN NOV 1,345.00 JTELE JT ELECTRIC SERVICE INC REFUND C~ERPAYMENT 158.61 METCO METROPOLITAN COUNCIL, ENV SVCS OCTOBER 2001'SAC CHARGE 6,831.00 MGM MGM EROSION ESCROW REFUND 500.00 NNTREA NN STATE TREASURER OCTOBER 2001 BUILD SURCHARGE 3,632.08 NATBO! NATALIE BOISVERT LANDSCAPE ESCROW REFUND 500.00 NAS NAT]ONW]DE FAMILY OF FUNDS NOVEMBER DEF COMP 165.00 QWEST QWEST TELEPHONE CHARGES 52.00 SUPHOM SUPER!OR HOMES EROSION ESCROW REFUND 250.00 USCM LISCM DEFERRED COMP EMP DEF COMP-2ND PAY IN NOV 5,611.42 VERIZO VERIZON WIRELESS CELLULAR PHONE CHARGES 28.74 XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC ELECTRICITY CHARGES 18,521.42 0.00 ABRAUT ABRA AUTOBODY & GLASS WINDSHIELD REPLACEMENT 250.00 ACCCOM ACCESS COMMUN!CATIONS RELOCATE JACKS AT PUBL WORKS 1,810.40 ADESKL ADEY SKLUZACEK PLAYING CARDS 17.92 AMEAGE AMERICAN AGENCY INC WAFTA INSURANCE 201.00 AMEBU! AMERICAN BUILOING CONTRACTORS PERMIT REFUND-3624 REO CEOAR P 329.00 ANCTEC ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER RADIO MAINTENANCE 515.00' ANNS]C ANN SICHAK REFUNO- B-BALL 35.00 ANNCAT ANNIE'S CATERING THANKSGIVING DINNERS 242.29 ANOHEN ANOICA'HENNEPIN TECH COLLEGE RIT TEA~ TRAINING 450.00 HOISET BETH HOISETH SEMINAR PARKING, MILEAGE 29.65 BILBEM BILL BEMENT FLEX'DAYCARE 202.43 BONROS BONESTRO0 ROSENE ANDERLIK LK MINNEWASHTA OUTLET DESIGN 1,882.00 BRUDEJ BRUCE DEJONG FLEX'DAYCARE AND HEALTH 5,014.12 BUIFAS BUILDING FASTENERS NUTS/BOLTS'REPAIR GATE VALVES 1,430.91 CAMKNU CAMPBELL KNUTSON SCOTT & FUCHS OCTOBER LEGAL SERVICES 6,880.96 CARDUN CAROL DUNSMORE FLEX-HEALTH 167.18 CARAUO CARVER COUNTY AUDITOR OW'NERSHIP NAME CHANGES 13.75 CARREC CARVER COUNTY RECORDER GENERAL ABSTRACT DOCUMENTS 92.00 CARRED CARVER COUNTY RED CROSS BABYSITTING CLINIC SUPPLIES 241.50 CARTRE CARVER COUNTY TREASURER CSAH 17 RECONSTRUCTION 44,351.32 CDWGOV CDW GOVERNMENT INC PATCH CABLE 58.~ CHAVET CHANHASSEN VETER!HARY OCTOBER SERVICES 975.79 CHAEIL CHARLES EILER SHOES 34.97 CHABUI CHASHA BUILDING CENTER COVERS/BITS/GFI 81.17 COMMAN CMS HOLDINGS, INC SOFTWARE MAINT AGREEMENT 3,102.83 COLMAR COLLEEN MARTINO FLEX-DAYCARE 114.58 COPIMA COPY IMAGES INC BUILDING COPY MACHINE 546.49 CORHOE COREY HORN MTG, FUEL 43.18 COREXP CORPORATE EXPRESS PAPER CLIPS, CALENDARS 559.41 DANKA DANKA OFFICE IHAGING COMPANY EQUIP MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 1,009.11 DEASCH DEAN SCHMIEG PUBLIC WORKS CLEANING 1,896.18 DEBKIN DEBRA KIND WINTER CHANHASSEN CONNECTION 471.75 DECRES DECISION RESOURCES, LTD TELEPHONE SURVEY 11,095.00 DELTO0 DELEGARD TOOL COt4PANY VISE GRIPS, PLIERS 225.33 DONASH DON ASHWORTH FLEX-HEALTH 69.16 OONHUL OONALO HULES OVERPAYMENT UTILITY BILL 6.04 EHLERS EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ESRI ESRI INC ARCPAD WITH COMPAQ 1,059.68 FACMOT FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY BATTERIES 134.92 FIRSYS FIRST SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY TEST LHX BOARD 9,606.00 FOCONE FOCUS ONE HOUR PHOTO PHOTO DEVELOPING 3.17 GOPSTA GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC UTILITY LOCATES 434.00 H&LHES H & L MESABI CARBIDE PLOW BLADES 782.78 HANTHO HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON BC7 & BC8 TRUNK UTILITIES 46,770.25 HAWCHE HAWKINS CHEMICAL CONTAINER DEMURRAGE 1,585.b4 HENTEC HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE TUITION-EMT REFRESHER 165.00 HLBTAU HLB TAUTGES REOPATH LTD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8,680.10 JEFSEL JEFF SELANDER REFUND OVERPAYMENT 4.33 JERJOH JERRY JOHNSON MILEAGE FOR TRAINING 100.10 JERHOH JERRY MOHN FLEX-HEALTH 127.83 JERRUE JERRY RUEGEMER REIMBURSE HOTEL/DINNER 277.39 JERRUE JERRY RUEGEMER REIMBURSE MILEAGE 292.50 JERTRA JERRY'S TRANSMISSION SER. REPAIR 211 1,989.70 JILSIN JILL SINCLAIR PARKING FEE'CONFERENCE 40.00 JIMTHE JIM THEIS RECEIVERS FOR DOORS-LK ANN 158.70 ICARWIC ICARA WICKENHAUSER FLEX-DAYCARE 1,514.36 KATFUE KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE GEAR OIL 1,179.53 :y of Chanhassen 107384 107385 I0738~ 107387 107388 10738~ 107390 107391 107393 10739~ 107395 107396 107397 107396 107399 107400 107401 107402 107403 107405 107406 107407 107408 107409 107410 .107411 '107412 107413 107414 107415 107416 107417 107418 107419 107420 107~.1 107/,27. 1074?.3 10'/424 107425 107427 10742.8 107429 107/,50 107431 107432 10743~ 107435 107436 107437 107438 107/,]9 107/,40 107/~1 1074~2 107443 107/J,4 107~5 10744~ -107~47 107448 107~9 107450 107451 10?45 2 107453 107454 107455 CHECK REGISTER REPORT BANK: CHANHASSEN BANK -Date: 11/20/01 11/?.6/01 Time: 11:41em Page: 1 Check Date Status Vendor Nc~ber Vendor Name Check Description Amm~t 11/26/2001 Printed KELJAN KELLEY JANES k~)RK: JEANS 49.96 11/26/2001 Printed KII~EU KIN #ELNISSEN FLEX-DAYCARE 52.08 11/26/2001 Printed KIWI(OS KIWI(OS STATIONARY DESIGN 27.05 11/26/2001 Printed I(RISCH I(RISTA SCHNIDT FALL BABYSITTING CLINIC 213.00 11/26/2001 Printed LARELE LARRY"S ELECTRIC INC WIRE FIJRNACES IN PARK SHED 2,120.04 11/26/2001 Printed LATCON LATOUR CONSTRUCTION INC BC7 & BC8 TRUNK UTILITIES 456,620.99 11/26/2001 Printed LF. ANIN LEAGUE OF NINNESOTA CITIES REGISTRATION-GERHARDT 60.00 11/26/2001 Printed LENCON LE#ASTER CONSTRUCTION REFUND VOIDED PERNIT 142.75 11/26/2001 Printed LEOHOF LEO HOFFHAN EROSION ESCROU REFUND 500.00 11/26/2001 Printed LINI(RA LINDA KRANER BABYSITTING CLINIC ' 40.00 11/26/2001 Printed LORHAA LORI HAN( #ILEAGE REI#B/EXPENSES 222.35 11/26/2001 Printed LOTLAW LOTUS I.AWN AND GARDEN CLEANUP DEBRIS/SPREAD COHPOST 1,119.79 11/26/2001 Printed LYNLLI4 LYMAN LUNBER LUI~ER 87.18 11/26/2001 Printed NACE~U HACOUEEN EQUIPflENT WINDOM LATCH 47.92 11/26/2001 Printed HANLIT HARK LITTFIN FIRE BOARD #EETING 14.55 11/26/2001 Printed #CIUOR #Cl t~RLDCON COWl SERVICE TELEPHONE CHARGES 8.50 11/26/2001 Printed HEDICA HEDICA DECENBER HEALTH INSURANCE 35,403.57 11/26/2001 Printed #ENARD NENARDS - EDEN PRAIRIE BASKET 12.23 11/26/2001Prtnted #ETCO2 HETROPOLITAN COUNCIL WASTEUATER SERVCIES 102,424.00 11/26/2001 Printed #EYSCH #EYER SCHERER & ROCI(CASTLE LTD CHAN PUS LIB-INTERIORS 23,070.44 11/26/2001Prtnted HNHEAL HN DEPT OF HEALTH MATER SERVICE CONNECTIONS 8,028.00 11/26/2001 Printed HRMA HN RURAL MATER ASSOCIATION MATER SYSTEN SE)IINAR 150.00 11/26/2001 Printed NODTIR HOOERN TIRE ]NC ALIGNI4ENT ~9.75 11/26/2001 Printed NOONED 140ORE #EDICAL FIRST AID SUPPLIES 182.73 11/2~/2001 Printed 14ORSAL NORTON SALT SALT FOR ROADS 8,094.12 11/26/2001 Printed HTGF #TGF CONFERENCE CONFERENCE REGISTRATION 325.00 11/26/2001 Printed #TIDIS NTI DISTRIBUTING INC -RETURN COMPRESSION CPLG 1,347.99 11/26/2001 Printed NORCOS NORCOSTCO ROSCO FOG FLUID 192.23 11/26/2001 Printed NRGPRO NRG PROCESSING SOLUTIONS, LLC CONPOST-COl~UNITY GARDENS 374.88 11/26/2001 Printed NYSPUS NYSTROH PUBLISHING CONPANY INC WINTER CHANHASSEN CONNECTION 6,839.43 11/26/2001 Printed OFFMAX OFFICE NAX BINDERS,WRIST PAD 173.29 11/26/2001 Printed ONVOY . ONVOY ' INTERNET CHARGES-.' '- _- 524.85 :-;.. 11/26/2001 Printed OUTGRA' .OUTHOUSE GRAPHICS FIRE ED SHIRTS/UNIFOR.q.S -. 1/532.50 . 11/26/2001 Printed PAUEKH PAUL EIOIOL# FLEX-DAYCARE. - - .217.39-. 11/26/2001 Printed PE~PFA PETER PFANI(UCH REFUND PRESCHO0~ B-BALL :' 35.00 '- 11/26/2001 Printed PLEBLA PLEHAL BLACKTOPPING INC OVERLAY TRAILS/REPAIR PARK' LO? 33,788~25 11/26/2001 Printed PLYPLU PLY14OUTH PLUNBING .REFUND'OVERPAYI4ENT - '235.80 11/26/2001 Printed PROONE PROTECTION ONE LKANN COliC BLDG ALARM HON~TOR 86.27 11/26/2001 Printed PUGET PUI~ AND #ETER SERVICES INC 0 RINGS 18~.10 11/26/2001Prtnted QUACON QLIANTUN CONTROLS INC 2ND HALF TAXES 2001-251630010 6,199.~ 11/26/2001 Printed 17JEST ~JEST TELEPHONE CHARGES 126.60 11/26/2001 Printed REBHOS REBECKAH ROSCATELLI PLANTS FOR DRAINAGE MAY 161.8] 11/26/2001 Printed RENNER RENNERTIS 100 MATT SPEAKER 124.42 11/26/2001 Printed RERN4E RERDOF ANERICA REFUND - NOT DOING l&~J( 128.25 11/26/2001 Printed RICWIL RICHARD WILSON REFUND - MATER BILL 80.06 11/26/2001 Printed RICWIN RICHARD WING STATION SUPPLIES 252.47 11/26/2001 Printed RIDBUS RIDGEVIL%I BUSINESS HEALTH HEALTH SUNVEILLANCE-FF 972.75 11/26/2001 Printed ROANUN ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION ]NC DELIVERY CHARGES 59.50 11/26/2001 Printed SEH SEH UELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN 1,585.80 11/26/2001 Printed SICELE SICKNANN ELEC HOTOR REPAZR ROOF TOP FAN REPAIRED 65.44 11/26/2001 Printed SIGNSO SIGNSOIJRCE NNIEPLATE-S~EIDAN 9].70 11/26/2001 Printed SOUSUS SOUTHWEST SURURBAN PUBLZSHING LEGAL NOTICES, DISPLAY ADVERT 1,254.13 11/26/2001 Printed STEPUB STEPHENS PUBLISHING COHPANY FIRE ED GZVE AMAY NATERIAL 11/26/2001 Printed SUBCHE SUBURBAN CHEVROLET THE]U~OSTAT 152.74 11/26/2001 Printed SUEOVE SUE OVERVOLD OVERPAYFIENT UTILITY BILL 53.05 11/26/2001 Printed SUNPRZ SUNSET PRINTZNG & ADV SPEC CO LABELS .. 102.19 11/26/2001 Printed SUSNAR SUSAN NARE]( - FLEX-DAYQ~RE '' ]49.70 11/26/2001 Printed TARGET TARGET FILH DEVELOPING 35.47 11/26/2001 Printed TERBUR TERESA BURGESS FLEX-DAYCARE 208.33 11/26/2001 Printed THITAL THIES & TALLE HANAGE)IENT INC 2ND HALF 2001 TAXES-253150010 25,907.~9 11/26/2001 Printed TOOGER TOOD GERHARDT FLEX-DAYCANE 58.33 11/26/2001 Printed ULTENG ULTEIG ENGINEERS INC ASHLING #EADOWS ENG SERV 9,/~2.88 11/26/2001 Printed UNIUNL UNIFORHS UNLI#ITED PANTS/SHOES 136.45 11/26/2001 Printed USOFF US OFFICE PRODUCTS STORAGE FILES/INK PADS 117.50 11/26/2001 Printed VICBOE VICK! BOE FLEX-DAYCARE 326.68 11/26/2001 Printed VOIBUS VOIGT'S BUS COHPANIES SENIOR TRANSPORTATION 383.14 11/26/2001 Printed MASHA2 MASTE HANAGE)IENT-TC WEST RECYCLING/ROLLOFF BOXES 2,307.99 11/26/2001Prtnted ~IATCON MATEROUS COKoANY SHAFT VALVE ACTUATOR 37.50 11/26/2001 Printed WEARGU WEARGUARD JACKET 495.67 11/26/2001 Printed WICLTD WICHTERI4AN~S LTD INC SEAT REPAIRS 161.81 11/26/2001 Printed GOOSRA WINGFOOT COW4ERCIAL TIRE TIRES 417.31 11/26/2001 Printed I~IGRA I.'d GRAINGER INC HEATER/BRACKET 607.9] CHECK REGISTER REPORT BANK: CHANHASSEN BANK Date: 11/20/01 11/26/01 Time: 11:41am City of Chanhassen Page: 2 Check Check Vendor N~nber Date Status Number Vendor Name Check Description Amount 197456 11/26/2001 Printed XCEL XCEL ENERGY [NC ELECTRICITY CHARGES 10,311.75 Total Checks: 145 Bank Total: 948,529.1Lt Total Checks: 145 Grand Total: 948,529.83 CHANItASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION NOVEMBER 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. CQUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jansen, Coundlman Boyle, Councilman Ayotte, Councilman Peterson, and Councilman Labatt STAFF PRF,,~ENT: Todd Gedmrdt, Bruce DeJong, Jerry Ruegemer, Teresa Burgess, Mark Littfin, John Wolff, and Tom Scott 2002 BUDGET DISCUSSION: Bruce De~ong made a power point presentation to the City Council on the Finance Department's budget proposal. Councilman Ayotte asked if the public works department's tiered billing system would i .mpact the finance department. He stated it would not. FIRE DEPARTMENT. John Wolff presented an overview of the Fire Department's budget proposal, ~ating it Was similar to past budget requests. He talked about the fire department's fleet of vehicles be~nning to age and that maintenance and repair were becoming a factor so that was something to think about in the future. He stated the fire depamnent would like to start tracking the dive team and I-Iazmat e~ on a line item basis. Mayor Jansen asked if the amount budgeted for training and travel was adequate for next year when the f~e department has already spent more than that to date this year. John Wolff stated a lot of thc expense for this year was due to start up training associated with the dive team. The fire d~arUnent received a $50,000 grant from the County for training and equipment for the I-Iazmat team for next year. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Todd Gerhardt and Bruce DeJong passed out and discussed the handout regarding the proposal for capital improvements. Councilman Ayotte asked about disposal of current radio equipment, if there was a market for resale. Councilman Labatt asked if the amount req~ for Fh-e Deportment turnout/helmets was adequate. John Wolff stated that over time it would be ade~uate. Councilman Ayotte asked if anything could be pushed off to future years to save money in 2002. Councilman ~n asked about computer equipment rep .lacermmL Todd Gerhardt said he would e-mail the council members with the scheduled that Rick Rice has prepared on ~ equipment replacement Councilman Peterson then asked about leasing versus buying a new copier. Bruce DeJong stated that a cost analysis they had done showed buying to be the better option. Jerry Ruegemer talked about the Bandimere Park trail connector, and it being dependent on what happe~ .to the money allocated to the trail along north Highway 101. Bruce DeJong stated the council needed to decide what to do with the money allocated for 101 and that the park dedication money gomin~ in did not cover what was proposed. Todd Gerhardt suggested that the Park and Recreation Commission prioritize their projects. City Council Work Session - November 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen adjourned the work session meeting at 7:00 p~n. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen called the meeting to order at 7:0S p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jansen, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Ayotte, Councilman Peterson, and Councilman Boyle STAFF PRESENT: Todd C, erhard~ Tom Scou, Teresa Burgess, Sharmin Al-Jaff, Bruce De~ong, and Jerry Ruegemer PUBLIC PRF~ENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Rich Slagle Ann & Ron Kleve Jerry & Saner Paulsen Debbie Lloyd 7411 Fawn W_tll ~ 7307 Laredo Drive 7305 Laredo Drive 7302 Lamdo Drive PUBLI(~ ANNOUNCEMEN'I~: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Jansen: Are there any me~ of the council with.items that.you would'like to have removed from the consent agenda for separate discussion?' Is there any09e in the audience that has items on.the consent agenda that you would like to see removed from the consent agenda for a separate discussion. Teresa Burgess: Madam Mayor, I do not have one to be removed but if you'H notice the handouls that were at your location when you came in, there's an adjustment to the resolution that is being adopted for Quinn Road and a resolution for Crestview Road adjusting the assessment interest rate, and also it adds some language that the attorney's office asked us to add onto that so when you adopt this, if you could adopt the revised resolutions instead of the ones in your packets. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. Council, if you'd like to take a moment to read those two revisions. If we're comfortable leaving that on the consent agenda at this point we can do that. So Teresa, do you need us to then revise this, the motion? Teresa Burgess: I believe you need to. Mayor Jansen: As ame~? T~ Burgess: As amended. Mayor Jansen: So Fm seeing item l(d) would be as amended. Teresa Burgess: l(d) and l(c). City Council Meeting- November 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen: And l(c). We were also handed by the Finance Director an axnendment to the call outstanding bonds so whoever does make thc motion, if all three of those could be as amended please. With that, if I could have a motion to approve the consent agenda please. Councilman Ayotte: I'd like to, based on astute information I just want to double cheek on a point on the resolution. I'd better pull it for discussion. Mayor Jansen: If you'd like to just clarify with staff, that'd be fine. ffyou've got a question fight now. Councilman Ayotte: Well the period of pedormance for both assessments. For the one on Quinn and the one on Crestview. Do they remain to be at an 8 year period? Teresa Burgess: They remain at 8 years. However, there is one parcel on Crestview that has been extended an additional time period for their payment. They've been given 20 years. That is the home that is an affordable issue, and so to keep that home in the affordable housing market we have extended 20 years. Two parcels on Crestview have been deferred. One for disability and one until development or 8 years, whichever comes first. Mayor Jansen: That was in the original proposal, correct? Teresa Burgess: That was in the original proposal. No, I take that back. The deferments are new. They have been added. Quinn Road, we have deferred the assessment on the ouflot until the time of plat or 8 years, whichever is the sooner. Councilman Ayotte: I'd like to pull them for discussion. Mayor Jansen: If you would like to make, what? You're wanting to pull item (c) and (d)? Councilman Ayotte: l(c) and l(d). Mayor Jansen: Okay. I need a motion for the consent agenda please. Councilman Ayotte: I'd like to make a motion to pull 1(c) and l(d) for discussion. Pull from the consent agenda. Mayor Jansen: And would you like to make a motion to approve the remainder please. Councilman Ayotte: And a motion to approve the balance. Mayor Jansen: Okay. With (e) as amended? With (e) as amended correct? Councilman Ayotte: Correct. Mayor Jansen: Okay. If I could have a second please. Councilman Peterson: Second. Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 R. Resolution g2~1-71: Approve Construction Hans & Specifications for Arboretum Business Park 4m Addition, Project No. 00-11. b. Resolution g2001-72: Call for Assessment Hearing for Dogwood Road Sanitary Sewer Improvements, Project 00-01-1. e.. Resolution ~,001-73: Call Outstanding Bonds, as amended. Approval of Minutes: - City Council Work Session Minutes dated October 22, 2001 - City Council Minutes dated October 22, 2001 Receive Commission Minute: - Park & Recreation Commission Minutes dated October 23, 2001 j. Resolution g2001-74: Receive Feasibility Study and Call for Public Hearing for Kings Road Extension. k. Approve Addendum to Telephone/Voicemail System Bid. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to O. Mayor Jansen: Why don't we move the consent agenda items then tc~the end of the agenda, which is our typical. Councilman Labatt: Let's just do. it right now. Teresa Burgess: Madam Mayor, I do have to leave part way through the meeting so if we could do them sooner. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Councilman Ayotte, if you'd like to discuss those two items please. Councilman Ayotte: Okay, and just, Teresa please feel comfortable in coming in on me in case I have a piece of misinformation but as I've read the packet, and I'll start with the Quinn Road situation, that the period of performance or the payment plan right now is for an 8 year period. Going from an 8% down to 6.5% interest rate, correct? And as I've learned today, and earlier that the typical cost for a linear foot, although I know we're not going on a linear foot cost, ranges between $50 and $60 and this project came in around $69. Teresa Burgess: Typical assessment is $50 to $60. Typical cost would be $100 to $120, .l:ecause you're dividing it by 2. Councilman Ayotte: Assessment. So, and then there will be to some measure, when water's inlroduced, in some measure there probably would be disruption to the neighborhood again. Understanding that when water's brought in, we're probably going to re-do a road. But we probably have some measure of disruption to the neighborhood. City Council Meeting- November 13, 2001 Teresa Burgess: Yes. Substantially less than we had at this time. This trench was 20 to 30 feet deep. Water will be 7 to 8 feet deep, and so we will be able to maintain traffic. Councilman Ayotte: I understand. Now I know there's an argument back and forth for economy of scale. That this is a short mn, 200 feet, something like that and that it is, it was a small project. And there's probably some amount of some cost impact with respect to another start-up cost for when we bring in water. Teresa Burgess: There is that potential for cost. Typically mobilization is pretty directly related to the size of the project. The larger the project the more mobilization cost. Bringing in new equipment for the watermain, they probably would have trenched twice anyway. So probably not that much of a difference. A minor amount. Councilman Ayotte: But it's arguable. Teresa Burgess: It's arguable, yes. Certainly, there's that argument that could be made. Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. See the concern I have is that with this particular project and with Crestview, even though we've come down in interest, and thank you Bruce. I think that's great, but I would like to see the payment plan, how much adverse affect is there to the city by having it longer than 8 years? And what is doable? What are the rules with having it longer than an 8 year period? Teresa Burgess: Do you want to answer that Bruce? Well, can I answer the first question first. You brought up the economy of scale, so if I can answer that one'first. That will give me time to think about the 8 years. The economy of scale, we actually tried to put this onto a larger project originally. We tried to add it onto Century Boulevard as a change order. It was more expensive for us to put it on that larger project than for us to do this as a small project on it's own. So economy of scale, I understand that that comment' was made by a contractor's personnel. The city does not have anything to do with What that' contractor said and I don't know where he got his information. But the city did try to put this with a larger project. In fact we tried twice. We tried to put it with Century and it was more expensive. We tried to put it with BC-7 and 8 and they didn't have the proper equipment and couldn't do the project. Now as far as the 8 year, the problem we.run into with the 8 year is this is being funded out of actual cash balance. This is not being bonded. And so what happens to the city then is we draw down our cash balance. We don't have the ability to do these small projects anymore because we don't bond those. We may sit in a position eventually of saying, sorry can't do it. Or having to bond these tiny projects and not getting as good a payback as we should on those bonded projects. That would be probably the worst impact of extending it. The other thing, and Bob you and I had talked about it earlier, if you give a longer period to Crestview and Quinn, you need to seriously consider a longer period for the other projects, and the other projects are substantially larger and then you're talking about substantial dollars. And that's not a requirement that's legal, but it is something the council needs to seriously consider for consistency throughout the city. Councilman Ayotte: I understand that with the consistency. However, the concern I have is that with us going with the smaller projects, and I think from now on we ought to take a look at a different way of handling the smaller projects so we don't come into this particular situation. The brunt of the cost associated with these smaller projects is still with our residents and to me I have a problem with it and I would like to know, even though, since we have the cash up front, is there anyway that we can extend the period of performance further than 8 years? City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen: At this point you are talking about a policy decision that currently is in place, as far as the 8 years. We have had some conversation around the issue of how we go about changing that. Now it's noted within our packets that the fees associated with these projects are consistent with what would be anticipated for these types of improvements. And then the subsequent increase in valuation of the property due to then~ As far as establishing a precedent here on these two projects, without looking at the big picture, I don't know that council would be doing their diligence to do that. And again I'm going back to prior conversations around that policy, and the amount of financial burden that the city would then be impacted with were we to go in that direction. Councilman Ayotte: Can we table the vote until we have the oppommity to revisit the policy so we do not penalize the residents for possibly us considering a different circumstance? Mayor Jansen: I guess what I would want to remind council of is that we did visit that policy discussion, and we are not going in the direction of revising that currently. Now as far as delaying these projects, you're now bearing the burden of the cost of the projects by the city, instead of proceeding under our typical policy. I don't know if Todd you'd like to comment, or staff. Todd Gerhardt: We were trying to get this certified down to the County. Teresa Burgess: We have to have it certified down to the County by the end of November. And so we only have one council meeting left. We can certainly try to turn it back around. I'm not sure what type of information you're going to need to feel comfortable to move forward with it. If you're looking for us just to analyze these two projects or to analyze all of them for a longer time period. Councilman Ayotte: What I'm saying is, 'these two projects because they were small jobs, the resi~nts are taking the brunt of the situation. Certainly'the city's not at faulf and we're certainly within' our legally we're fine to go ahead and approve and 6 ½% s sure as hell better than 8%. But nonetheless there's a burden on the residents, in my opinion, and whether or not the policy.is discussed at this point or not, the fact still remains and I believe that the residents are bearing the brunt. My question is, what is the adversity of pushing it out, the period of performance longer for these two projects? If we can't answer that question, and we can't defer it until past November, what are our choices? Todd Gerhardt: Well I don't believe staff is going to deviate from the 8 year policy. This has been the policy that the council's reviewed. That staff has implemented for the past 10 years. In changing the policy you're going to be treating these individuals different than the individuals that you've treated before. And that's what's bad about this because you're going to be treating other people differently than what you'll be treating these individuals. That's why we're sticking in recommending the 8 year, 6 1/2%. Changing the interest rate is in line with where the rates are today and we can research it but it's going to come back at 8 years is going to be our stance. Mayor 1ansen: And I would actually like to compliment staff on having worked with these residents to try to answer their questions and reply to the concerns that came to us. You've provided us the information from the consultant responding to the cost questions. Responding to whether or not there's a fairness involved in the cost of the assessment that they're bearing. And also looking at the individual situations because your original proposal was that there be no deferments. And now you've taken the position that there are parcels that do deserve to have at least some things taken into consideration as we're reviewing that. So I will of course recognize Mr. Ayotte's comments, Councilman Ayotte's comments and I can appreciate the points that you've brought up here. Staff has done an excellent job of documenting the response to those concerns. City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 Councilman Ayotte: Is it reasonable to request, certainly not for these two in particular, but that we revisit how we source select and deal with these smaller projects and what we can do to avoid this sort of situation in the future? Teresa Burgess: My recommendation is that that be done as part of the feasibility study as these small projects come in and we look at if they're economically feasible. That they be looked at at that time. What are those assessments going to be, and that was done with both of these projects. They were still approved. They were determined to be feasible. But that we take a close look at those assessment amounts and revise our feasibility study process for these smaller projects that do have higher assessment valuers. Todd Gerhardt: And as a part of that, we will have them sign waivers to the assessment hearing so that we don't get into this issue where somebody comes in and petitions the city to make a public improvement, and then after the fact says we can't afford it. So we shouldn't be going down this road. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. With that if I could have a motion please. I'll make the motion to approve item l(c) and l(d) per the staff recommendation. If we could have a second please. Councilman Labatt: Second. Mayor Jansen moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the following consent agenda items per the City manager's recommendations: C~ Resolution g2001-75: Approval of Assessment Roll for Crestview Circle Utility & Street Improvement Project 00-05. d. Resolution g2001-76: Approval of Assessment Roll for Quinn Road Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project 01-02. AH voted in favor, except Councilman Ayotte who abstained, and the motion carried with a vote of 4to0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: Teresa Burgess: Madam Mayor, I have been asked to make a visitor presentation on behalf of a neighborhood. You'll see in the packet that was at your table when you came up, there's a petition from Brenden Court. They had come through with a petition for no parking. They are now coming through with a revision to that petition and they requested that I submit that petition to you this evening. It will be on the council agenda for the 26~ of November. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. So noted. Anyone else that would like to approach the podium. State your name and address for the record please. Terese Berquist: Hi. My name is Terese Berquist and I am President of the Sunrise Hills Civic Association. I'm here this evening representing 51 families. I'm here about the driveway issue that is in your work for this evening, Section 120-1122. I must state that I don't feel very well prepared to speak this evening because I just found out yesterday that this was on the agenda. Possibly for passing this evening. Just a little bit of background. I'll try to be as brief as possible. City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen: If we could keep comn~nts to 5 minutes, that would be appreciated as the standard. Terese Berquist: Okay. Okay, we have a beachlot as part of our homeowners association and there has been a proposal to, proposal by the city to put an access road across our beachlot. We have been working with the city and the city I believe has been working with us, but there is some langa~a~ in the driveway proposal that's possibly going to be passed this evening that concerns us. My first reading of Section (j) says, separate driveways serving utility facilities are permitted. And then this evening when I get here under Unfinished Business it says, permit one driveway access per lot. And that's, to me that's very unclear. Does that mean the city can come in and has the right to put an access across our beachlot to access the utilities? Is there anybody here that can tell me if that's what that means? Mayor Jansen: If you would go ahead with the rest of your questions, and then possibly we can, I don't know if staff can manage to address your issues here this evening or when we get to that item on the agenda. Thank you. Terese Berquist: Okay. We believe that we've been working with the city and working back and forth and hope to resolve this issue of access to the utilities. I think there are a lot of issues that need. to be addressed, including the possibility of some pipes needing to be replaced that may even outdate our lift station so I will hope that the city would not be making any improvements on the city's behalf to the lot that would not he improvements to our, from our point of view. Going to letter (i). This concerns a driveway turnaround and I would just like to say that I think maybe that letter (i) is in there for ~s to Sunrise Hills lift station, maybe as well as a few other areas. I have seen the Vac truck back up the Sunrise Hills driveway, and not turn around so I know that's a possibility, and I just want to, I'm hoping that the city engineer who you know was addressed in that part of letter (i), will keep in mind the expenses of future turnaroun'ds and not recommen~i disturbing any more green space than neces~. Regarding letter (j). Because what I read seemed very vague and not explained what. I'm asking, but maybe that could be eliminated. 'If it's not el' .unjnat~ I'd like to know the intent behind that and I would also like to know if down the road there are additional plans to make additions to that, to give that statement more guts. And then regarding letter (c). It refers to driveway surfaces within the MUSA. I'd like clarification on whether or not the grass paved surface material would be considered "other hard surface materials". If it's not considered hard surface material, could it be added? Could grass paved surface be added to letter (c)? The reason I'm asking that is it's my Understanding that the city was looking to use grass pave applications if a test area proved workable within the city. Appreciate your listening. Thank you very much. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. When we get to that item on the agenda, I know that Teresa was taking notes and we will certainly address those issues as they come up. Terese Berquist: Thanks. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. If there's anyone else who would like to address the council under visitor presentations. Mike Gorra: My name is Mike Gorra. I live at 1680 Arboretum. Mayor Jansen: Good evening. Mike Gorra: And I would like to address a little bit on your assessment hearing. City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen: We in fact have that under public hearings and when I call that agenda item, that will be the perfect time to come up and address that issue. Thank you Mr. Gorra. With that, I will close the visitor presentation portion of the meeting and why don't we move onto the public hearings. PUBLIC HEARING: VACATION OF A LANDSCAPE EASEMENT AND DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT~ LOT 3~ BLOCK 1~ PARK ONE 4TM ADDITION. Sharmin Al-laff: Thank you Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. There' s a minor change on this item. It's vacation of landscape easement only. The drainage and utility easement will remain intact. With that, on October 22, 2001 the City Council approved Site Plan g2001-12 for a. Mayor Jansen: Sharmin, I'm sorry. If you can pull your microphone a little closer. It's just not working well. It is turned on isn't it? Okay. Thank you. Sharmin A1-Jaff: On October 22~a the City Council approved Site Plan Review ~r2001-12 for 20,785 square foot office building. Dell Professional Building. One of the conditions of approval stated that site plan approval shall be contingent upon the City Council approving vacation of landscape easement. The city has a landscape easement over the south, east and southeast comer of the site. The applicant has requested the city vacate their interest in this easement. Staff reviewed surrounding properties to see ff landscape easements existed on similar projects. CSM, located at the opposite comer of Highway 5, did not provide a landscape easement. The applicant will provide adequate landscaping that meets ordinance requirements. This can be achieved without a landscape easement. Staff is recommending approval of the vacation of the landscape easement. Thank you. I'll answer any questions. .- .. Mayor Jansen: Before we open this for the public hearing, are there any questions .for staff at this time council? My only question involved the Highway. 5 corridor study and this comer as well as the CSM comer were noted as entryway focus positions for th~ city. In fact it's called the community gateway element. Sharmin AI-Jaff: Correct. Mayor Jansen: As far as any plans for that currently, and just from memory sake, CSM has really just put up a building designation or a property designation, correct? It doesn't say anything about Chanhassen or an entryway? Sharmin AI-Jaff.' No, but during conversations with them they' ve always stated that they will work with the city should we decide to put a gateway entry monument sign out there. They will not oppose it. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Looking to this flip side of the highway then, to Highway 5, will there be the same amount of room or positioning then for a similar situation were the community to decide to put some sort of a monument on that side of the road? Sharmin A1-Jaff.' Yes there will be. Mayor Jansen: So it will be comparable space? Sharmin AI-Jaff.' Correct. City Council Meeting- November 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Okay. With that, we will open this up for public hearing. If there's anyone present who would like to address the council on this item, please step forward and state your name and address for the record. Seeing no one, we will close the public hearing. Council, any discussion of the item7 Then if I could have a motion please. Councilman Boyle: I'll make the motion the City Council approve the vacation of the drainage, or excuse me. Utility easement with the stated conditions. Mayor Jansen: Excuse me. Yep, we're just making it the landscape easement. Councilman Boyle: You're right. Mayor Jansen: Vacation of the landscape easement. Councilman Boyle: Revise my motion to say landscape easement. Mayor Jansen: Vacation of the landscape easement. Councilman Boyle: Right. Mayor Jansen: And do I have a second please. Councilman Labatt: Second. . . Resolution g2001-77: Coundlman Boyle moved, Coundlman Labatt seconded to approve the vacation of the landscape easement shown on the existing conditions survey and as described in Attachment #1 for Lot 3, Block !, and the northerly 75 feet of Lot 2, Block 1, Park One 4ta Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanlmon~ly 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: ASSESSMlZ~NT F~ARING FOR TRUNK HIGHWAY 5 IMPROVEME1VI~ PRO,[ECT 97-6. Public Present: Name Address___ Mike Corm Scott Craig Mike Burton 1680 Arboretum Boulevard Excelsior Lundgren Bros Construction Texesa Burgess: Madam Mayor. The assessment hearing for tonight is the Trunk Highway 5 improvements, known as Project g97-6. MnDot did this project and in conjunction with the Highway 5 improvements, they built West 78th Street. Those projects were paid for with a combination of state, federal and city funds. However in addition to that, the city also requested MnDot to install watermain and bike path. The bike path was paid for with federal funds, but the watermain is an assessment project And that's what we're here to discuss this evening. We have received in addition to the one assessment objection that you have in your packet, we have received additional ones to date so my recommendation has been changed from, in your packet it says I'm requesting that you adopt a resolution. My reconunendation this evening is you hold the public hearing. Close the public hearing and table the City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 discussion of the actual assessment hearing and we will do as we did with Crestview and Quinn, respond to those individuals that submitted objections. Make the appropriate adjustments or responses and place it on the consent agenda for November 26t~. This project did have an assessment roll that was prepared as a preliminary assessment roll. There have been significant changes...that it tried to assess twice. And what I'm referring to is that it would have, in the assessment roll it had collection for trunk and lateral, and that is something that had been done in the past but legal counsel reviewed it and stated we cannot do that and then come back and collect lateral and tnmk connection fees, or trunk and hook-up fees. And that is something that the city has done in the past. So we have revised this assessment roll in keeping with the legal counsel's recommendation, and so these will be, these parcels will never be charged for lateral connection fees at the time of connection unless they exceed the number of units that are shown on the parcel, the city does have the legal right to charge connection fees at the time of connection for any parcel in excess of what was included in the assessment roll as long as there is a city share of the project. This project does have a city share and we will track that as additional parcels come in. With that I'll answer any questions. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Any questions for staff at this time? Seeing none, we will open this up for the public hearing. If there' s anyone present this evening that would like to address the council on this item, please step forward and state your name and address for the record. Mike Gorra: Okay, I guess it's my turn now. Mayor Jansen: Yes, thank you. Mike Gorra: Mike Gorra, 1680 Arboretum Boulevard. Mayor Jansen: Welcome. 'Mike Gotra: I've kind of got two parts to my little speech here tonight. First one is, the first ~earing that you, that the City Council held last summer, and I think it was July 24th, I didn't attend that. I did get a packet in the mail but the packet didn't mention the watermain assessment. All it gave was just the information on the new construction. And I think the person I talked to up at city hall was Dave, was it Dave Hempel at the time, gave me all the information I needed and I didn't think that it was even necessary to attend that because I knew you were going to build a road there. I thought now was the time to put the water and sewer in and I shouldn't have any argument with that fact. I didn't know about the watermain. But I can't remember whether it was a week later or 2 weeks or 2 months later, another packet came in the mail. That was addressing the properties to the west of me on the same assessment rolls. And in this packet there was a statement in there of preliminary costs for the lateral and the watermain cost. And the watermain for my property was, I think it was $452,000 and that's the first I knew of that, so I did attend that meeting and I was told then, at that time that I should have attended the first meeting and the only thing I could now was come to this meeting you people axe having this fall so that's why I'm here. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Mike Gorra: The second reason I'm here is the way the costs were, have been attributed to the property. ...use, it's based on a number of acres. I think in my case 60 acres, and multiply times the zoning times the units allowed per acre, and that's how the $452,000 is arrived at but I'm kind of objecting to the fact that I should pay for this in advance. Who knows what we're going to put on that property. Who knows how many units are going to go there. Who knows if there's even going to be multiple dwellings built 10 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 there. I don't think it's proper to assess somebody a year, 2 years, maybe 10 years in advance before we actually submit a plot plan what we're going to do there. In fact I've been up before the council several times the past few years on what I am actually thinking of doing for that piece of property was 134 acres before the taking for the road. Now it's 126, and I had planned to put in a, my first choice was to use the ~y for, even though I am a developer of multiple dwellings, a possible golf course. And I've had 2 golf architects look at it. One a few years ago, and he, everybody's seen this one. Fmnot going to bore you with this. It's 18 holes and on Highway 5 is a multiple dwelling for assisted living for the elderly. But that's kind. Mayor Jansen: We actually have quite a few new council people ffyou'd like to go ahead and show that. For their benefit. I don't know that everyone's familiar. Mike Gorra: Just pass it around or. Mayor Jansen: Sure. Or you can just put it under the, is the color rendering the same as the black and white? Mike Gorra: Well you can't really see that much. The lines are the length of the holes. Anyway, there's 18 holes. This is the multiple dwelling for assisted living for the elderly. That would be the club house. Anyway, the guy that laid out 1 8 holes. It fit but it was, it wasn't perfect. At any rate, time moved by. The city came and took 8 acres for the frontage road. And I had another golf architect draw this plan. This was last year when we knew what was going to be taken and here he also has 1 8 holes. It's a little easier to see. This has got it colored. This here would be the club house. And he utilizes the whole piece of property. There is no room for multiple dwellings this time because the ~ge was smaller. The only problem with this plan is, it's still a little too tight. You can get 18 holes on 126 acres but it's not, I'm not comfortable with this. It's a little too tighL The greens, the fairway's a little clos~ together.- It's a little close to my house here. It's a little close to the frontage road, and there's a couple here, at least one that you have to back track to get to the next tee box. So I don't want t6 do something that I'm not comfortable. I've been up here trying to get the city to leaae me some property to the east there but I guess that's not an option so I forget that. Mayor Jansen: That's our l_ake Ann Park, correct? Mike Gorra: The woods at Lake Ann Parle Mayor Jansen: To the east, okay. Mike Gorra: Anyway...he's in the process of developing a 9 hole course which I really never really in favor of. I'd much rather, I know a golfer would much rather have an 18 hole but I would think it would be better to have a nice spacious 9 hole and a nice driving range rather than a tight 18 hole and tight driving range so that's what we're looking at now. And so...thinic~ that we're going to need maybe 90 to 100 acres at least for the 9 holes and standard driving range. So that cuts me down to 26 acres when this assessment's talking 60 acres. And until we're through with this, we don't know ififfs going to take the whole thing, or maybe less than 100 acres. So what I'm trying to say here is that Fm not contesting the price per unit or the total cost completely, but I am contesting trying to get me to pay for it in advance when I don't really have a set project decided for this property yec And in fact I'm almost certain that this property is not going to be built in multiple dwellings like the assessment plan is projecting. The other question I had is, where did that cost come from for the watermain for $452,298? Based on a construction cost, that's almost 3 miles of watermain. I only live a mile and a half from Chanhassen. I 11 City Council Meeting- November 13, 2001 mean where's this watermain coming from? Why should I pay for 3 miles of watermain? It just doesn't seem to fit. Mayor Jansen: We can have staff answer that question for you. Mike Gorra: That's it. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Mike Gorra: Thank you. Mayor Jansen: Well thank you. Appreciate your coming in this evening. Is there anyone else here this evening that would like to address the council on this agenda item? If so, please come forward and approach the podium. Okay. Seeing no one, we will close the public hearing on this agenda item. Teresa, would you like to go with your recommendation that we table this so that you can get back to the property owners with their answers? Teresa Burgess: I would Your Honor. I have several that I need to respond to and they do take some research. I didn't receive many of the applications for contention until today. I can answer real quickly a couple of the issues Mr. Gorra brought up. First of all with the issue of not assessing. That is a council policy that would need to be changed. We have traditionally assessed properties that are adjacent and receive benefit. In fact it's not possible to develop until you have these utilities. We have only assessed the southerly 60 acres. The reason for that is we believe only the southerly 60 acres receives benefit directly from this project. The remainder of the property does not receive benefit and so that was not assessed. The number of units that were used, zoning actually allows for 4 units per acre in this area. We've only used 2 units per acre to allow for things like green space, larger spacing. Some of our developers like to use large lots. Streets. Utility easements. Allowing for all of those things. We felt that there could be substantial decrease in land available for development so we've gone with 2 units per acre. I will certainly respond to all of Mr. Gorra' s comments in the staff report for the 26~, but if the council's comfortable with it I'll respond to all of the issues and put it on the consent agenda for the 26th for adoption at that time. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Council, any questions or comments for staff at this time? Councilman Ayotte: That interest rate carries, the lower interest rate would carry across the board. Teresa Burgess: Those would also be at 6.5 and I believe Mr. Gorra's property is actually green acres. That is something that needs to be recorded down at the County. If he's filled out that paperwork, that would mean that his assessment is deferred until the time that he pulls it out of green acre status, but that is something the County does. Not the that the City does. Mayor Jansen: That would include the 60 acres? Teresa Burgess: That would include all of it I believe. But that is a County issue. That's not a City issue. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Okay, if I could have a motion please. Councilman Peterson: Motion to table. 12 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen: A second? Councilman Boyle: Second. Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Boyle seconded to table the a~e~nent hearing for Trunk Highway 5 Improvements, Project 97-6. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0. Teresa Burgess: Madam Mayor, if I could clarify for anyone that's listening at home or in the audience. Just as with Crestview and Quilm, the public hearing has officially been closed on this. Any contentions received after this evening would not allow them to go to District Court, but they are allowed to make any comments that will be taken into consideration. PUBLIC HEARING: ASSF~SMENT I4'E~G FOR BC7 & BC8 TRUNK SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEME1VI~ PROJECT 00-01. Public Present: Name Address Susan McAllister Jay Rubash Mike Burton Brace Geske .. 7461 Hazeltine Boulevard HTPO Inc. Lundgren Bros Construction 7325 Hazeltine Boulevard'- Teresa Burgess: In a parallel project with th~ Trunk Highway 5 and West 78~ Street to bring out water, the City also pursued a sanitary sewer improvement project. This is not-on the same alignment.as West. 78th so it had to be done on a different project and was done strictly by .the City. The assessments for this project were originally calculated the same way as the Trunk Highway 5 and West 78~ Street ones. They have been revised in keeping with legal counsel advice. I've also received a number of objections to this assessment, and so my recommendation this evening is that the council hold the public heating, but table adoption of the actual assessment roll until I've had a chance to respond to those objections. With that I'll answer any questions. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff at this time? Seeing none, I'll open this up for the public hearing. If there's anyone present that would like to address the council on this item, if you would approach the podium State your name and .address for the record. Susan McAllister: My nan~ is Susan McAllister. I live at 7461 Hazelt~e Boulevard.. Mayor Jansen: Good evening. Welcome. Susan McAllister: Good evening. I have some handouts that might simplify the reason why Fm up here actually, and it's a little more self explanatory and it would be good if you, it was a historical assessment done on my farmstead. Miss Rosie's Farm and I would recommend kind of holding onto this assessment because I know I'm going to be back here again for other issues so. The reason I'm obviously here is because I am objecting to the proposed assessments for my pro~. The reason being is that my farm has been designated as a historic property. I plan on operating it as a historic property, and I believe that 13 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 this, you know I'm not going to plan on subdividing it at all. So I guess the reason why I'm here is because of the fact that it talks about the farmstead and I might have to get technical assistance on this so bear with me. I do, I have had to rely on the SI-IPO, State Historic Preservation Office quite a bit lately. Since this report became known. But it talks about how my farm is eligible under the farmstead and I think I'd highlighted some different areas for you to refer to but the definition of a farmstead, out of the Random House Webster's College Dictionary, copyright 2000 2n~ and revised updated edition, farmstead. A farm with it's buildings. And then the definition of a farm is a tract of land usually with a house, barn, silo, etc on which crops and other livestock are raised for livelihood. Then there's another definition from the Webster' s 3~ New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged copyright 1986. Farmstead. The buildings and adjacent service areas of a farm broadly a farm with it's buildings. And then there' s another definition of farm. A plot of land devoted to the raising of domestic or other animals. Or to devote land to agriculture. So you know keeping that in mind, they're talking about the farmstead I believe as the land and the buildings so I plan on running it as a historic farm, so I don't plan on subdividing it whatsoever. And if there's any questions I might be able to answer some but I probably would need technical assistance from the State Historic Preservation Office on this one. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. I think more your issues has to do with whether you're 1 residential unit or the proposed 6 in the assessment, correct? If I'm hearing you. Susan McAllister: Right. Yeah. Mayor Jansen: Great, thanks Susan. If there' s anyone else here who would like to address the council on this item. Seeing no one, I will close this to the, for the public hearing portion of the meeting. Council, do you have any questions for staff at this time? Otherwise staW s request was that we table this for a response back to all of the applicants. If I could have a motion please. I closed the public hearing, correct. Yeah. Councilman Boyle: Motion to tabie. Mayor Jansen: And I need a second please. Councilman Peterson: Second. Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to table the Assessment Hearing for BC 7 & BC 8 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Improvements, Project No. 00-01. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER L ~550 & 570 WEST 79TM STREET).~. Public Present: Name Address Scott Schmitt Brian McCarty Kraus Anderson Realty Welman Sperdes Architects Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council members. Before you is a purchase agreement to buy the land located directly east of Applebee's. It's 1.8 acres of commercial property. The proposed purchase 14 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 agreement is $8.80 per square foot, which would be as a total purchase price of $705,000. We have earnest money of $10,000. Scheduled closing is June 15"' of 2002 and the purchaser is Kraus-Anderson. Has until March 1't of 2002 to get a signed lease agreement with Northwestern Book Store or some other retail tenant. If they do not have a signed lease agreement, they can either move ahead on the closing by June 15~, or terminate the purchase agreement. Scott Schmitt from Kraus Anderson is here tonight to give you an overview of the proposed project and I have attached the economic status of what we purchased the property for and a couple different assumptions based on taxes, building permits and a land only. If you'd like I can go through that. Mayor Jansen: If council would like staff to nm through the costs on the projects, otherwise we can just move forward with the consultant comments or Kraus-Anderson comments. Todd Gerhardt: Okay, at this time I'd like to introduce Scott Schmitt from Krans-Anderson and his architect. Mayor Jansen: Good evening, welcome. Scott Schmitt: Thank you. Madam Mayor, members of the council. Thanks for hearing us. The project before you really was, if you recall, some of you are on the Board of the EDC. We started out on that project with Northwestern Book Store and because of some layout issues they re-directed us and asked us if we would, if we'd possibly be able to pursue the site that you see here, and I believe you've got a copy of it in your packet. And so really that's what's.driving this is a transaction with Northwestern Bool~ Stores. And what is going to happen is this area over behind the, this would be the west side of the property would be the area the Northwestern Book Store would occupy .and because there's more land available, we've accounted for the eastern half to be some smaller multi-tenant retail buildings. It's really pretty straight forward. Really a pretty straight forward project. You can see the orientation of the building as it lays out to the Applebee's and the Tires Plus. The front of the building would be facing the north, and then you would just landscape around the back and side, earlier as to what the overall project would look like. As to the timing of the purchase agreement, we're simply tying that to Northwestern Book Store's needing to get through the Christmas season. Get through the Christmas audit and then they can make a decision as to whether or not they can sign a lease. My intention isn't to tie up a piece of property to see ifI can "pull it off". I really am just interested in the Northwestern Book Store transaction and if that becomes a reality, we'd like to move forward and we've moved forward on a speculative basis on the rest of the property. And in the meantime we would be marketing it in the open market to find other tenants, and should Northwestern Book Store go away and we have other tenants that it becomes viable, then at that point we would also like the option to move forward. It would suit us all so, that's really all I have to present. If you have any questions about the uses of the plan, I can answer them. Otherwise Brian McCarty from Welman Sperdes is here to answer any architectural or layout issues that were technical to the site so. Mayor Jansen: Okay, appreciate that. Actually you answered my one question with your last comment about still looking and marketing for other tenants for the building, in case something were to potentially fall through with the Northwestern Book Store. Scott Schmitt: Right. This site combined with the potential of moving forward on the Chanhassen bowling alley site, marketing them in conjunction with the demand that's in Chanhassen and the desirability from a lot of tenants, there's a lot of confidence that this has got a good likelihood of moving forward regardless of whether or not Northwestern Book Store goes. The depth of the bays, or of this 15 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 section here, may change or there may be some configuration changes if Northwestern Book isn't the tenant because we're really catering to them so, but you're fight. Mayor Jansen: Thank you for that comment. Obviously this evening we're not doing a site plan review, though it's always appreciated to see what in fact visually might occur on this property. Does council have any questions for Mr. Schmitt at this point? Any other questions or comments for staff7 Councilman Labatt: Just one from me. So June 15m of next year is the closing date. If they don't have agreement by June 15th they can terminate the purchase agreement, correct? Todd Gerhardt: If we don't close by June 15th, we would terminate the purchase agreement, and I would think Kraus-Anderson would do the same. Councilman Labatt: What it says here though, March 1at and you...with Northwestern Book, fight. If they don't get a signed lease or, they can either move ahead on the closing on June 15~ or terminate the purchase agreement on what date? On March 1st can they terminate? Scott Schmitt: Maybe I could help on that. Mayor Jansen: Certainly. Scott Schmitt: Yeah. The intent behind it is that the March 1at or 15th, I don't recall .which one it is. Councilman Labatt: March 1't. Scott Schmitt: March I~t is for the, is when we have to remove that. leasing contingency. Amd then. at this point it's a matter, of process to get back in front of Planning Commission for technical review, City Council approval and by, and to get all those government approvals in line for the intended uses; that's why the June 15~ date is there. It's not for additional time, anything other than getting through that, the public process and the technical review because we'd have to go back to Planning Commission. Like you said, this isn't a site plan review at this point so we'd do it at that time. Mayor Jansen: So after March Iat you would be coming before, well working with staff and coming before the Planning Commission with an alternative plan is what you're saying and that potentially could take fil June then. Scott Schmitt: Correct, yeah. Well no. I mean I'm hoping it's this plan. Mayor Jansen: Sure, sure. Understood. Scott Schmitt: So yeah, but if the tenants change it could be, it could change again. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Does that answer your question? Councilman Labatt: Yeah, it does. But my question is. Mayor Jansen: Does the city also then have the fight to terminate the purchase agreement? And I would think there would be some provision that if they' ve come into the public process to work through a new site plan, that we certainly wouldn't be terminating the purchase agreement with that underway. 16 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 Scott Schmitt: Yeah. I think that if again, going back to the intent, I'm not the attorney on this and I just know how I need to have things work to make them work smoothly. I think the intent is that if we waive that contingency then we're going to be working toward that closing and I don't think it would be really in anybody's best interest to try to terminate anything. Although if we didn't remove it, then we would probably be terminating it anyways so it would go away. How the technicalities of the contract work, I guess that's a question for the city attorney but that's sort of the intent behind what we're trying to articulate. Mayor Jansen: Okay, thank you. We'll give them a minute to go through the language to see. Tom Scott: Fm sure I'll do that in a minute. Someone else in our office drafted this document so I'm... Mayor Jansen: Okay. We don't have our usual attorney sitting with us this evening. It's falling on Mr. Kelly without his prior review of the document. Tom Scott: I can take a minute and do that and get back to that. Scott Schmitt: Should I just keep talking? Mayor Jansen: We can move onto the next agenda item and then come back to this if you would like. Tom Scott: That would be fine. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. If you want to take citizen input at this time. We have' not done that, and. Mayor Jansen: Okay, that would give you a minute. Okay. Why don't I go ahead and I'll open this up for the public hearing. If there is anyone present that would like to comment on this agenda item, please step forward to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. I was going to say, you know Vemelle, Gerhardt's trying to get some time here. Councilman Peterson: Not that much. Mayor Jansen: Not that much time. Sorry. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing on this agenda item and why don't we give you an opportunity to take a look at the contract. We Will just, let's suspend discussion of this agenda item and come back to this after we've covered agenda item number 6. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 8. PRESBYTERIAN HOMES IN THE VILLAGES ON THE PONDS. Mayor Jansen: Of course we're pulling Mr. Gerhardt away from his one review. Staff report please. Councilman Labatt: That Steve knows how to ask tough questions doesn't he? Under State Statute the City Council must hold a public hearing when approving a tax increment financing district. I have Mark Ruff from Ehlers Associates here tonight to go through the tax increment financing plan and budget for Presbyterian Homes. This project is 161 rental units of senior housing and we are creating this TIF 17 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 district to allow for 33 of those units to be affordable for seniors. And at this time I'd like to introduce Mark Ruff to through the project budget. Mark Ruff: Good evening Madam Mayor, members of the council. Mark Ruff with Ehlers and Associates. As background, the city's action this evening is consider creation of a tax increment financing district. For those people not familiar with tax increment financing, it's a methodology by which cities and counties can capture the increased property taxes from a new development to use to help pay for certain site costs, land acquisition costs, housing affordability costs, as the city manager mentioned. There are various types of tax increment districts which have different restrictions, depending both on when the year they were created as well as what the use of the property is. This particular piece of property is being proposed for senior housing. The type of tax increment district would be a housing district, meaning that the city can create a tax increment district as long as certain affordability requirements are met. In this particular case the developer and the city have tentatively agreed to 20% of the units being affordable for those at 50% or less of median income. The housing district has a legal maximum of 25 years. The tentative arrangement with the developers of this property being the non-profits, both locally and together with Presbyterian Homes, which is a regional developer of senior housing, is that there would be up to 7 years of tax increment financing assistance on a pay as you go basis. And by that I mean that the city would not issue bonds in this case. That the development entity would issue their own or have their own financing, primarily probably through the issuance of tax exempt bonds. That the city would have no responsibility for paying any of the obligations should taxes not be paid or a default, or any other way took place. The term of the assistance is based upon a review by our firm and staff of this developer's proforma that says that in order to get their financing they need to have a certain debt service coverage level, and after 7 years their debt service coverage will be sufficient to pay for both the affordability and the increased taxes at that time. The estimated amount of tax increment on an annual basis is approximately $185,000 per year. The budget for tax increment in the plan includes total costs, assuming that this tax increment district runs for 25 years. The City Council does have the option at the end of that 7 years to shut down the district. Have the taxes go back to the regular taxing jurisdiction, or it has the option of utilizing the tax increments from this district on other affordable housing developments within the city. This plan merely gives you authority to do that. It doesn't bind you to run the district for a certain length of time. Nor tonight is there any action being taken to finalize the specific agreement with the development. That agreement will come before the City Council and the EDA at a later date. So I think the purpose again is to just review the tax increment plan. As a part of putting the plan together, we did send the tax increment documents to the county and the school district as well as the local county commissioner. The Planning Commission has reviewed the plan and finds the development to be in general conformance with the city's comprehensive plan. So with that I would be happy to answer any further questions or to highlight any of the findings required in the resolution. There are 4 findings which we did briefly go over at the EDA meeting and the City Council previous meeting as well but I would be happy to review that if the City Council is interested. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Does council have any questions or comments for Mr. Ruff? Seeing none, thank you. Appreciate your presentation. At this time I will open this item up for public comment. If there's anyone present who would like to address the council on this issue, if you could come forward to the podium and state your name and address for the record please. Seeing no one, I'll close this to public hearing. Council, any comments? Discussion. Otherwise, if I could have a motion please. Councilman Ayotte: I'I1 make a motion that we recommend as staff has outlined a resolution, Attachment #5 to adopt the modifications of the redevelopment plan and establishing tax increment district No. 8. 18 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Thank you. And a second please. Councilman Boyle: Second. Resolution g2001-78: Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Boyle seconded that the City Council approve the resolution (Attachment gS) adopting the modificalions to the Redevelopment Plan and Establinhinoo Tax Increment District No. 8. AH voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0. Mayor Jansen: Are we ready to come back to item number 5? Tom Scott: Yes we are Mayor. Mayor Jansen: Thank you Mr. Kelly. Tom Scott: I believe the question was what would be the impact if on March 1 there was not a lease in place? Mayor Jansen: I think if you could please, maybe bring your microphone closer. Tom Scott: There we go. Now I'm in business. I believe the question was, if on March 1 if there was not a lease in place with Northwestern Book Store, what would be the status of the purchase agreement? The way it's structured right now would be is that the purchaser would have the option of either t .exrninating the purchase agreement at .that time or else notifying us that they would like another 60 days, which would take it til May 1~t ~o attempt to get the lease in place or terminate the purchase agreement at that time. It would not give us the option of te.rmihating it at th~ time but it would 'be the option of the purchaser to either do it at that time or indicated they wanted another 60 days which would take it June 1. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Todd, any comments? Todd Gerhardt: No. That's basically what we've done is allowed Kraus-Anderson to market this property in the next 6 months in trying to develop this property. Staff's been doing this for the past 8 years and it gets difficult when you deal with retail, multi-tenant spaces like this to try to market a piece of property if you don't have control of it. And what we're doing is giving Kraus-Anderson a 6 month option to try to find tenants to fill this multi-tenant space. Mayor Jansen: Okay, very good. So not dissimilar to what we're moving forward with with the bowling alley site as, we've obviously identified a need for retail and entertainment in the downtown core. This would be providing us yet another site to expand our current retail and entertainment. Todd Gerhardt: Correct. And I just want to make one clarffic~on that everybody understands that the earnest money is not, it is refundable. If for some reason we do not close on the property, they get the earnest money back. However staff was able to negotiate if they do soil borings or survey work or a Phase I environmental, that we will have access to those if they should decide not to close on the property. So that's what we were able to negotiate as a part of not having the earnest money. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Council, any more questions for staff?. Okay. And I guess I would like to compliment Mr. Gerhardt on his efforts on this property. As he mentioned, staff has had the property for what, 8 years that you've been looking at proposals and being selective about what we acttmlly bring into 19 City Council Meeting- November 13, 2001 our downtown and our core and this proposal is certainly one that I think our community would be able to embrace and I certainly hope that everything will come to fruition as you've projected or that at least one of your options will come through. You've certainly done some nice things in the community. The lake Susan Apartments being Kraus-Anderson and we certainly appreciate your coming into Chanhassen and proposing another project. With that if I could have a motion please. Councilman Boyle: I'd like to make a motion that we approve the purchase agreement with Kraus- Anderson for the sale of Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3"~ Addition. Mayor Jansen: And a second? Councilman Peterson: Second. Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to approve the purchase agreement with Kraus-Anderson for the sale of Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0. UPDATE ON ROUNDHOUSE RENOVATION PROJECT. Public Present: Name Address Janet Carlson Ed Kling 4141 Kings Road 4169 Red Oak Lane Mayor Jansen: Staff report please~ and then I'm sure we have Deanna Bunkelman with us here this evening, correct? Or no. Ed Kling: She actually couldn't make it tonight... Mayor Jansen: Okay. Thank you. Todd Gerhardt: Council members, I received Deana's renovation working plan today and I want to compliment Deana on her efforts here the past month. It's a very detailed project. I am a little curious on how the bids came in from the 2 different contractors. I think you were going to get some quotes on the lumber and some of the other materials on the project. What I would ask the City Council to do is to direct staff to sit down with Deana and Todd Hoffman when he comes back to go through the work plan and delineate out what's staffrole in this project would be. What Deana's role would be in there. And put together kind of a joint powers agreement. This is an unusual project where you have a group of residents that are actively out soliciting money for a capital improvement project and then taking the lead on this. My concerns are our liability from the city's standpoint and also that we have somebody coordinating the project from a city level too. And so from that staff would like direction from the council to work with Deana and the city attorney in drafting a joint powers agreement. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions for staff at this point? Councilman Peterson: How much time do you think you'll need? 20 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 Todd Gerhardt: I would hope that Deana or the group is available, that we should be able to get thig back on our next council meeting. Councilman Peterson: Do you still want to demolish if you don't. If you don't end that meeting with a confidence level that it can be executed, do we still want to demolish this year? Todd Gerhardt: Well again I think the big thing in that is how some of these costs come in and the group's effort to raise money. It was my belief that the neighborhood was the fund raising group for this project. That they would go out and solicit funds and have a say in how the building was going to be designed and used, and that the city would then ultirru~t¢ly maintain it My only concerns in that is a liability that we have a group of residents working on a city project and they're kind of taking the lead on it so I want to make sure that it's clear and that we have the liability side of this project covered. Mayor Jansen: Okay, so in that joint powers agreement it would be more sitting down with the residents and making sure that everyone's roles are well defined and we know exactly how the project would proceed if it does proceed under their ability to finance and fund raise to finance the project. C. orrect? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, I wanted to make it just clear that, you know what everybody's roles are as a part of this project and that the city's general liability insurance would cover the construction if anybody got injured or hurt out on the project. Even the fund raising effort of this. Who takes the responsibility for that and if there's money short or missing or whatever there, might be, I mean there could be a lot of- issues involved in this so. This is a unique project. I don't think the city's ever been involved in one where a neighborhood has come in and built us a building before. The closest project I can come in with is when the Lion's I think came in and built the pavilion out at Lake .Ann. I believe it was the Lion's, correct Jerry? That built the pavilion. Jerry Ruegemer: Who built it or paid for it? ' Todd Gerhardt: Built it. Jerry Ruegemer'. I think that was. Councilman Boyle: American Legion. Todd Gerhardt: Legion? Okay. Jerry Ruegemer: That was quite a while ago. Before my time. Todd Gerhardt: Okay. Mayor Jansen: So it's just hammering out the specifics at this point so that all parties are clear as to where we're going, because actually and again to piggy back what Mr. Gerhardt said, I was very impressed with the document that Deana pulled together for us. Raised numerous issues as far as some assumptions, as well as just some questions in general as to what the scope of the project would actually be, and so then allowing staff and the residents to sit down and maybe really be able to discuss all of these issues and questions and make sure that the project is moving forward with everyone on the same page I think is an excellent opportunity to make sure we've got everything coordinated properly. Any other questions for Mr. Gerhardt? 21 City Council Meeting- November 13, 2001 Councilman Ayotte: Yeah Todd, if you could also, one of the concerns I have, and she brought it up. Deana brought it up under questions and issues but maybe it should be an assumption. The laterals, water and sewer and all that business. Now if we go ahead and do a good job and the residents take, do a good job of taking care of the round house, and then we incur a significant expense because of utility that, that's an known at this point and that really has to be addressed. The other places too with respect to tax deduction. That's a pretty big assumption there. Can you shed any light on that particular point? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, that one's, that's the easiest one out of all this. I've talked with Deana twice about it. She can either establish her 5013C and that's the IRS regulation for. Councilman Ayotte: The residents would be involved with the establishment of the. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah, they would establish'their own 5013C for tax deductions, and that's an administrative responsibility that would fall back on the neighborhood. Or the other option is Bruce has agreed to establish a round house fund here at the city, and it would be a tax deduction if somebody wanted to donate money towards the project to the city of Chanhassen and they would get that benefit of the write-off. So, and I've talked with Deana. Have not heard back from her on which of those two options she was going to go through. I think she told me that she had an accountant that lived in the neighborhood that might be able to put the paperwork together and so those are some of the things that I think we need to tie up and get a better handle on and who's just coordinating what. Mayor Jansen: Okay, great. I think we do have a couple of the coordinators here this evening and I want. to afford you the opportunity to make any comment that you would like to. Though you may be. hearing what you needed to hear this evening as far as our moving this to staff and asking you to come in and work with them on really hammering out the specifics at this point.. But if there are any comments you'd like to share with us, certainly step forward and approach the podium. . . Ed Kling: Good evening. My name is Ed Kling. I live at 4169 Red Oak Lane. Mayor Jansen: Welcome. Ed Kling: Thank you. Some of the, obviously Deana has done quite a bit of work on this and I've been trying to keep up with her on this. She's been moving pretty quickly. Really what we wanted to do tonight was to come to you with a plan that we feel is a workable plan with the amount of time we' ye spent on it. We' ye seen quite a bit of response from our community. People who are willing to donate time and money. We do have individuals who have already suggested avenues to gaining access to funds through individuals that live in the community if they can see a workable plan and I think we have that here. What we really want to do today is show you that we've got a workable plan and move this project forward. We did have a couple of questions that we did want to have answered. One is, at some point we'd like to find out is the electricity still connected to the building? And is the sewer still connected? Those would be two things that if they are, then that would be items that we would not have to fund. 'But our main goal is, in this project is to secure the asbestos paint on the outside. Do that as soon as possible. We are getting, in the process right now of getting bids back. One was due today. As well as Mr. Gerhardt's awareness of the lumber bids and window bids. Those are items that are on our way right now. We're expecting those either yesterday or today. So the first thing we want to do is secure the building of any hazardous materials, and then to correct the outward appearance of the building and that seems to be the biggest thom in anybody's side as far as the neighborhood goes. I don't think anybody's really too disappointed in the fact that if the building looked good, I think we wouldn't have any 22 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 complaints right now and if it was a functional building I think people would be, you know we have to look into the future a little bit to see what this building can be. So what we really want to do is secure the outside of the building and then we can have time to work on the inside. We feel we have a workable plan. Our goal we feel is measurable, attainable and, measurable, achievable and realistic and that's the 3 elements of a working goal. So at this point if we can get an opportunity to meet again and really hammer out some of those details I think we'll have some progress. I know we'll have some progress as far as getting this project off the ground but the idea of liability is one that we need to discuss. And then coordinating at a city level, that's what we also want to discuss as well. So at this point we'd just like to request to move the project forward and have another opportunity to take the project forward. I guess at this point, is there anybody who is, is there any reason that we can't go forward with the project? Mayor Jansen: Well at this point I guess what staff is suggesting is that now that we have all of this detail in hand, and there are numerous questions and issues that we need to resolve and make sure that everyone's on the same page with the, as you mentioned, the liability and the legal issues so I'm hearing that we will probably move this to staff and your group to meet and really hammer out those issues so that we can be sure that we do have a project that is going to move forward and everyone's coordinated in that effort and knows exactly what needs to be done and achieved and a joint powers agreement certainly would make sure that we've got a clear definition of everyone's roles and the liabilities and expectations. So certainly appreciate all of your efforts on this. I know you mentioned that I)ea~ has certainly been out on a lead on this but I think you've attended every meeting here at the council and we certainly appreciate that. Knowing that there is a co-coordinator working on this. It's a big project. Ed Kling: Well I have a feeling that seeing the work that she's done so far, I have a feeling I'm going to have a little bit more involvement in the, she's more the brains. I'm more of the brawn. I might be able to come I'm sure. Mayor Jansen: This will take some brown. Ed Kling: I've been involved in different projects and I've worked on projects like this doing renovating. I worked with a friend who's a remodeler and so I've been involved in a lot of, get your fingers in the dirt and do the job. I've done work on my own and remodeled my home. Built a deck on the back so it's the type of thing that, it doesn't scare me so I don't see this being a very, a project that we can't handle. I've been involved with a friend of mine who' s a painter for about 20 years so I've been involved in a lot of these projects so I'm very confident we can do this. Mayor Jansen: Very good. Excellent. Any questions or comments for Mr. Kling council. Okay. Thank you again for coming this evening. Ed Kling: Thank you. Councilman Ayotte: Thanks a lot. Mayor Jansen: Mr. Gerhardt, do you need a motion to have this directed back to you or just a consensus? Todd Gerhardt: No. Mayor Jansen: Everyone comfortable having staff meet with the residents at this point to hammer out the specifics? Okay. Great. Thank you. If you'll coordinate that with Deana and her group for as soon as you can possibly arrange to get that accomplished. 23 City Council Meeting- November 13, 2001 Todd Gerhardt: And we'll get you a tentative budget too on this with their numbers that come in. Mayor Jansen: Excellent, thank you. Thanks for being here this evening. CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE TO PERMIT ONE DRIVEWAY ACCESS PER Public Present: Name Address Therese Berquist 7107 Frontier Trail Sharmin A1-Jaff.' Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. On October 22~ the City Council tabled item on this action and directed staff to prepare language dealing with the location of the driveway on the property as it relates to side property lines. The main change in this ordinance in summary is, the first 20 feet of the driveway will have to maintain a 5 foot setback unless the property owner enters into an encroachment agreement. The rest of the ordinance remains the same as before. Earlier there were some questions raised regarding the driveways, and at this point I would like to turn it over to Teresa to answer those questions. Mayor Jansen: Alright, thank you. Thank you for staying Teresa. Teresa Burgess: The issues, and I tried to take notes. I apologize if I missed them but the issues that were raised were specific to the beachlot in Sunrise Hills. Just to give.the council a little bit of background. In the spring of this year we had an incident on that beachlot where we needed access to a lift station that was malfunctioning. Our equipment is relatively large. We made very deep ruts and so following that, and since NSP had done it the previous year, we thought that it would be reasonable to acquire easement and try to do something to avoid that continuous maintenance cost of repairing 3 foot deep ruts. Our proposal to that neighborhood was to go in and do what's called grass pave, and you heard Therese Berquist mention that product. That's a very expensive product but we felt it was reasonable if we could get the easement donated. We are still in negotiations with that neighborhood. We have not made any progress so we have gone back to a standard easement acquisition. We had tried to do it a little bit out of the norm. We are going to a standard easement acquisition. We have had a surveyor draft up the easement that we would like to acquire. We will make an offer. However, we're still open to the idea of grass pave if we can work with the neighborhood and I know that Councilmember Boyle had called earlier today. He's been getting some information from the neighborhood as well, so if the council members have more interest in that, I'd certainly be happy to share it with you, but we are just trying to acquire an easement for access to a lift station so that we don't have this continuous maintenance cost of repairing the ruts in the beachlot itself. As for the issues that were raised on the actual amendments, this amendment was not intended to be directed towards the beachlot. The separate driveways serving utility facilities, the intent of that section is to eliminate or reduce any hardships to the property owners. We do not want to end up with a situation where a property owner cannot have an addition, cannot have a driveway because we already have a utility easement access, or that we have to use their driveway and so we're driving up close to their home when they prefer us to be further away on a large lot. It's really intended for the property owners. We acquire those easements. We can't be in an area without that easement, and so we need to have the flexibility if the driveway doesn't work, we need to be able to move to where we can get into a utility access without telling the property owner you have 24 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 to move your driveway to where our utility access is. In addition, the city is not able to place an access on a property, just like you can't build on your neighbor's property without an ca.merit. The city cannot build on anybody's property without the proper easements in place. The only difference is that the city does have the authority and ability to go through condemnation, but we still need to go through that entire process and acquire the easement and that requires us to work out a negotiated settlement or to go through that condemnation proceedings. We are still wjiug to negotiate on the beachlot It is our intent to try and settle that. but if necessary that is an option that would have to be decided by the council. Elimination of (j) in my opinion would lead to hardship for property owners because we would have locations where we would require property owners to relocate their driveway to match our easement That is something that sometimes we can't go where they want to have their driveway, due to grades. Due to issues of location, and that means they would be stuck with our location. In some eases we can use their driveway. We always try to use their driveway if it's possible, but it would cause hardship in those few cases and at a minimum a variance for each of those cases coming through. The intention was to avoid that when it was reasonable. The turnaround issue that was brought up. The city, it is standard practice to put a turnaround at all the utility stations. It makes it much easier for us to get in and out It means that we're there less time. It also means we can park 2 pieces of equipment down there instead of just 1 if we need to have more than 1 vehicle down there. Quite often when we're serving a lift station or a well, not only is the city there, NSP is there. I guess they're Xcel Energy now. They need to be down there because a lot of times it's an electrical related issue, so we need to be able to get multiple pieces of equipment in. The turnaround allows us to do that, as well as turning around the equipment. In the case of the beachlot, if we can work out to using the grass pave, it would be in grass pave. If not, we would look at is it appropriate to have one, but the intention in this issue is not, that turnaround doesn't apply to the beachlot. The beachlot is an 'access easement. That's a separate negotiation. In this an~en~nt the inte~/tion of the turnaround is for driveways that come out onto streets tha~ are busy. An example would be Highway 101. As you drive '101 you see all those driveways'. Those people back outonto 101. It's a very dangerous situation..They're going the opposite direction, of traffic. The intention is if they could turn around and be coming out forward, first of all they had better visibility. Second of all, they're going the same direction as traffic as they come out of their driveway. So that is the intent...section of the amendment. Section (e). The question was raised if grass pave counts as a hard surface. No it does not. Grass pave is not qualified as a hard surface and adding it as a hard surface, I would recommend against that Allowing that as a hard surface would allow anyone that wants to to use that product. It's not appropriate for all uses as driveways and while it's very expensive and most people probably wouldn't use it, we would end up with it in places that are totally inappropriate. Instead what will happen is if it is used on the beachlot, it will require a variance. This is appropriate since it's a one time situation. The city would like to use it in other places but again in those locations they are either not driveways, which means they do not fall underneath this amendment, or the city will apply for a variance just like any other property owner. Any developer that wants to use grass pave and can show a good reason for it can again apply for a variance, and if appropriate it would go through. But the locations where this is appropriate are very minimal and should not be allowed just across the board. Mayor Jansen: Great. You addressed all of the issues that I had written down that were raised as questions. Council, any questions for staff at this _time? Councilman Ayotte: How would you enforce a 5 foot setback, a 10 foot setback irrespective of that distance? We've got so many people already with existing structure, how would you go about it? Teresa Burgess: The existing one, I believe all of the existing ones are grandfathered. They are allowed. It then becomes an issue of catching therm Construction generally brings the attention of the city. We get calls from neighbors. We rely very heavily on that. We also hear from our inspectors who City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 are out in the field. Our building inspectors are out continuously moving around the city looking at new homes. Our street and utility department are both out continuously. Our parks department are out continuously. When they see activity that doesn't look appropriate they call the engineering department or the planning department, whichever is appropriate, and report that and it's checked up on by one of our technicians. And so we would continue to use that same methodology. We right now catch a lot of these in the act of being installed. However there's nothing to stop them from doing it. We stop. We talk with the property owner. We remind them that there's a utility easement and if possible we negotiate an encroachment agreement. This will give us the teeth to require an encroachment agreement. Councilman Ayotte: I see the encroachment agreement. I also see however that with folks who already have an existing condition, and folks that want to introduce what they want to do and not have to adhere to constraints that other owners have not had to deal with is going to cause us a burden and a workload. Is that true or false? Todd Gerhardt: Well there's definitely going to be some argument amongst people. And it's not a perfect world. It's not a perfect situation. I mean the encroachment agreement allows us the oppommity to view these driveways. To make sure that we still have drainage through this area, is the intent behind the encroachment agreement. I'm assuming that the driveways that are out there today, we do have proper drainage and that either most of them are within 5 feet or fairly close to that setback. So those will be the arguments that we have that we'll try to state to these people. Mayor Jansen: Well and after our lengthy discussion at the last meeting over this ordinance I appreciated staff coming up with the recommendation that we do put that encroachment agreement in place so that at least our engineering department does have the opportunity to review the drainage. So this has come back to us as we had directed after the last meeting. Councilman Ayotte: I agree with the encroachment agreement portion. I'm just wondering with the setback issue, people are more likely going to understand that if a structure that they introduce is going to have an adverse affect to drainage, that it's arguably something that they have to address. People who have a setback of 4 feet, vis a vis 5 feet, that will be the issue. Todd Gerhardt: Well they can always come through the variance process. It's something we don't like to do and I think how we came to the 5 foot was kind of a compromise. I think was at 0. Other people had suggested l0 so I think we came to a compromise of 5. And so. Mayor Jansen: And the 5 being to enforce the issue of the drainage which was what was being expressed as being the concern of what would happen with these driveways right on property lines. But as far as the setback, the way that it's worded in here is affecting the parking pads, if in fact there's going to be a parking pad up by the house. The setback is stating where that will begin so that we don't have a driveway coming all the way out to the curb. Otherwise it's the encroachment agreement to protect the drainage. Todd Gerhardt: But from Bob's comment, I think where he's going with this is that not all properties drain between properties or between garages or between houses. But we need to establish some type of rules out there so we can enforce it and so that's how we came to the 5 foot. Councilman Ayotte: And your point about a variance is a very valid point. That gives people an opportunity to work through an issue. 26 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 Todd Gerhardt: Well and the difficult part in that is that somebody's got to show a hardship and the need for a third car garage. Because you have 4 teenagers, I don't know what planners look at these days. If that's a hardship or not. Councilman Ayotte: Trust me, it's a hardship. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. I is a hardship but it's, I don't know how they would view that. Councilman Boyle: Todd, refresh my memory a little bit please. We ctm'ently have a 10 foot setback in code right? Mayor Jansen: No. No, we do not. Councilman Boyle: We do not? Oh, I thought it was. Teresa Burgess: We have no setback at thi~ time. Mayor Jansen: There is none. Councilman Boyle: Zero setbaclc Mayor Jansen: And engineering has no review on these encroachment agreements. So we're adding'the ability for staff to be able to review these. Councilman Boyle: Okay, thank you.' Mayor Jansen: Sure. Any other questions or clarifications? Councilman Peterson: Todd you may want to just talk about the 10 feet versus 5 and what the impact of that is. Todd Gerhardt: Sure. In town we have a lot of homes that sit around in that 15 to 18,000 square foot area so that limits your side yard for you. And if you go with the 10 foot side yard setback in a lot of our newer developments, you've basically eliminated that option of that individual having a driveway in a side yard. We believe that the 5 feet, you could still accomm~ for that driveway in the side yard, but if you go with the I0 foot, I think you've opened up the case for some variances to come in and the planners have told you that the variances are not a way to manage these things. If you're processing a lot of variances, it's a method of having you look at your ordinan~ and seeing what you need to do to eliminate the paperwork and the red tape. So that's what we tried to do with the 5 foot to come to a compromise to still allow those driveways in the side yards, and still keep a distance from the neighbors yard as a part of that. And again, the reason we are allowing for the side yard parking is that we don't allow for the parking in the streets and when you have teenagers and you've got 3 cars, 4 cars and you park it behind your 2 car garage, it's very frustrating that somebody's always got to get out and move that car. So I've got 3 in my neighborhood that have side yards driveways and they're paved, and it works. So I guess that's my theory beside the 10 foot side yard is that you would e 'hminate it in a lot of neighborhoods. Mayor Jansen: And though this has become a primary focus of the conversation I believe as this came forward and a great deal of the discussion was around the fact that this will limit the number of City Council Meeting- November 13, 2001 driveways per lot. At this point there can be multiple and what we're accomplishing here is getting it' down to I driveway per lot and I do think that that is very conducive to maintaining the integrity of our established neighborhoods. Though we have control over our new developments as they come in, we certainly don't have anything in place currently on our established neighborhoods to ensure that. Council, anything else at this point or are we ready to move forward with a motion? Councilman Ayotte: I guess that means yes. Councilman Boyle: But just one more question Todd. If between the 5 and-the 10 foot setback, do you really anticipate there would be that many more variances? Todd Gerhardt: I guess I'd have to send that over to Sharmin. At our last meeting we had a couple that would have to come through that were just approved. Sharmin AI-Jaff: You will have 3 variances that will come in, and this is just by going over a couple of areas in Chanhassen. We did not go over every single subdivision or vacant parcel of land that's in the city. And I know you looked at these at your last meeting. This is in Big Woods. We have a storm pond and a very narrow path to allow for a driveway to get through. This will force a variance situation. There is about 10 feet to build a driveway. Councilman Boyle: But would that not force a variance either way? Sharmin Al-Jaff: No. Councilman Boyle: No. If you did a 5 foot, it would not force a variance is that correct? Sharmin A1-Jaff: Then we would work'with the applicant. Through an encroachment agreement they would be' able to put in the driveway.' It would be specific circumstances when situations like this would not have to come in through a variance. Councilman Boyle: What I'm trying to get to, do we anticipate a lot of situations like this? I mean. Sharmin A1-Jaff.' There are only, there are 2 here that we expect to come through. Councilman Boyle: 2? Sharmin Al4aff'. 2. Mayor Jansen: And the city manager's opinion offered at the last meeting is that it then also puts a large number of the current properties in non-compliance and we now take them out of conformity with code and ordinance and that's why we moved in the direction of what staff would like is the ability to be able to review that placement whereas right now we don't require an encroachment agreement. Councilman Boyle: That portion I agree with. Teresa Burgess: If I may. The difference between the 2 of going with the, part of the reason for the encroachment agreement is our easement is 5 foot as well. Going to 10 foot we cannot say encroachment agreement is what's required. That will mean if you go to 10 foot that all variances will be a variance approved by the council. The ordinance amendment builds in the ability to do these with an 28 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 encroachment agreement instead of a formal variance, making it so if it is a reasonable application for them to come through and do this, this is what they need to do. That we're able to assist the property owner without a lot of red tape. We're trying to do it in a manner where the city can still protect itself and it's citizens and do the right thing without making life a headache for the property owners. Trying to assist them to do what's appropriate. We don't want to have boats parked in the street. We don't want to have them parked out in front of people's houses, and that's where the majority of these come in. Is things like boats. Trailers. And to fit something on the side lot, that 5 foot does make a different. That's really, you only need about 8 foot to have a parking stall, and so if you go from a 5 foot to a 10 foot you really have put them in a situation where they may not be able to fit that boat versus if you were to give them the extra 5 foot and maybe they've got another 3 or 4 next to their garage, it will fit. Councilman Boyle: Thank you. Councilman Peterson: To highlight what you just said. Essentially council does not need to see an encroaclunent agreement, but does need to see the variance. Teresa Burgess: Correct. Council approves encroachment agreements, but they would be negotiated at staff level and be put on the council agenda as a consent item instead of going through the entire planning commission process for a variance. It just comes to the council as an encroachment agreement for approval. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. I just'wanted one point of clarification. -Sharmin you highlighted on one of those plans where it would go right up against the property line and anything' within 5 feet would have to come in for a variance then, correct? Teresa Burgess: No. It would be covered by the encroachment agreement.' Todd Gerhardt: Okay. Teresa Burgess: Which, if I could add. If I could say again so everybody hears me. Encroachment agreements are negotiated by staff but approved by council so they would still come to council for approval. You'd still have the ability to say no, we don't want to do that. But it takes the load off of the variance process. These property owners don't have to go through the whole process. Todd Gerhardt: So that gets back to Bob's point for the flexibility, as long as it doesn't i ~mpede the Mayor Jansen: Okay. With that I'm going to make a motion that the City Council approve the staff recommendation for the amendments to Chapter 20. Councilman Ayotte: Second. Mayor Jansen: And I have a second. Mayor Jansen moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to approve the following amendments to Chapter 20 of the Cllanhassen City Code: 29 City Council Meeting - November 13,2001 Section 1. Section 20-1122 of the Chanhassen City Code is hereby mended as follows: Sec. 20-1122. Access and Driveways. The purpose of this subsection is to provide minimum design criteria, setback and slope standards for vehicular use. The intent is to reduce interference with drainage and utility easements by providing setback standards; reduce erosion by requiring a hard surface for all driveways; to limit the number of driveway access points to public streets and to direct drainage toward the street via establishment of minimum driveway slope standards. Parking and loading spaces shall have proper access from a public right-of-way. The number and width of access drives shall be located to minimize traffic congestion and abnormal traffic hazard. All driveways shall meet the following criteria: Driveways shall be setback at least 5 feet from the side property lines, beginning at 20 feet from the front yard setback unless an encroachment agreement is received from the city. b. Driveway grades shall be a minimum of 0.5% and a maximum grade of 10% at any point in the driveway. In areas located within the Metropolitan Urban Services Area (MUSA) as identified on the Comprehensive Plan, driveways shall be surfaced with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as approved by the City Engineer. In areas outside the MUSA, driveways shall be surfaced from the intersection of the road through the right-of-way portion of the driveway with bituminous, concrete or other hard surface material, as approved by the City Engineer. d. On comer lots, the minimum comer clearance from the roadway right-of-way line shall be at least 30 feet to the edge of the driveway. For A-2, RSF, and R-4 residential uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed 24 feet at the right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved except that portion used for the driveway. Inside the property line of the site, the maximum driveway width shall not exceed 36 feet. The minimum driveway width shall not be less than 10 feet. For all other uses, the width of the driveway access shall not exceed 36 feet in width measured at the roadway right-of-way line. No portion of the right-of-way may be paved except that portion used for the driveway. g. Driveway setbacks may be reduced subject to the following criteria: , , The driveway shall not interfere with any existing easement; and Shall require an easement encroachment agreement from the Engineering Department; and The location of the driveway must be approved by the City Engineer to ensure that it will not cause runoff onto adjacent properties. h. One driveway access is allowed from a single residential lot to the street. A turnaround is required on a driveway entering onto a state highway, county road, or collector roadway as designated in the Comprehensive Plan, and onto city streets where this is deemed necessary by the City Engineer based on traffic counts, sight distances, street grades, or other 30 City Council Meeting - November 13, 2001 relevant factors. If the engineer requires a turnaround, this requirement will be stated on the building permit. j. Separate driveways serving utility facilities are permitted. Ail voted in favor, except Councilman Boyle who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 tol. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: COUNCHdCOMEffIS$ION LIAIS. ON UPDATE~_ Mayor Jansen: I unfortunately had the flu for the last Planning Commission meeting so I was not in attendance so I do not have an update from that meeting. I don't know ff anyone else has anything else that you would care to share from the commissions. Councilman Labatt: Did you watch it on TV? Mayor Jansen: No I didn't. I was in bed. Councilman Labatt: You could have watched it on TV and still reported back. Mayor Jansen: And called in, right. Councilman Boyle: It's a good thing to watch when you're in bed with the flu. Mayor Jansen: Oh yeah. Anything under administrative presentations. Mr. Gerhardt. .. ADM]NISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Gerhardt: Just wanted to make sure that everybody knows the November 199, I had sent out an e- mail a couple weeks ago regarding a tentative meeting on the 199. We will not be meeting on the 199. That didn't work with everybody's schedule so we'll try to fit it within our current schedules. Mayor Jansen: Yeah, just trying to get through all of the budget presentations at this point. Councilman Peterson: We've got one left don't we? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. Councilman Labatt: The 269. Councilman Peterson: No, one budget presentation left. Isn't just admin left? Who's left? Todd Gerhardt: Admin and finishing the capital plan. And then. Mayor Jansen: And MiS is part of your's, correct? Todd Gerhardt: Yeah. And I don't know how quickly we can get through the capital plan. We are planning on a December 3r~ public hearing on the tentative budget, and then considering approval of the budget in our first meeting in December. 31 City Council Meeting - November 13,2001 Mayor Jansen: And the December 3~ is not a regular council meeting night so please make sure you've got it on your calendars. Todd Gerhardt: That was part of my e-mail. Mayor Jansen: For the public heating for the budget. If you'll make sure that you have your December 3~a marked for the public hearing on the budget. That's not a typical Monday night council meeting. Todd Gerhardt: Was it 6:007 We wanted to stay with the same time that we used last year as a part of the notice so that was the same date we used last year. Councilman Peterson: So on the 6t~. Councilman Labatt: No, December 3~ at 6:00. Councilman Boyle: The 3~ at 6:00. Mayor Jansen: Got it? Councilman Labatt: It's not the 6th at 3:00. Councilman Peterson: Who's on first7 Mayor Jansen: It is a Monday night, right? Todd Gerhardt: Yep. It is a Monday night. Mayor Jansen: Okay. First Monday night in December. CORRESPO~ENCE DISCUSSION. None. Councilman Boyle moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to adjourn the City Council meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 pan. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 32 CHANHA~EN PLANNING COMMI~SION REG~ MR~TING NOVEMBER 6, 2001 Chairwoman Blackowiak called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Alison Blackowi~k, Rich Slagle, LuAnn Sidney, Uli Sacchet, and Deb Kind MEMBE~ ABSEI~: Craig Claybaugh and Bruce Feik STAFF PRF~ENT:. Kate Aanenson, Co~ Development Dimctoc, Bob Generous, Senior Plannen Sulie Grove, Planner I; Matt ~ Pr6ject. F_,fi~ne~; and Todd ~' City Mana~ ' . .. . . PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Debbie Lloyd Janet Paulsen 7302 l_aredo Drive 7305 Laredo Drive Chairwoman Blackowiak made a brief statement on how the meeting would proceed for the evening. DISCI~ THE ADOPTION OF A PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 8 AND A PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT. Public Present: Name Address ' Vemelle Clayton 422 Santa Fe Circle Todd Gerhardt presented the staff report on this item. Blackowiak: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? Deb. Kind: Yes Madam Chair. In the Villages design standa~ it calls for a goal of 35%'of rental to be affordable and to this current TIF plan calls for 24%. Could you speak to that? Gerhardt: Yeah. We have been working with Met Council and they will be a little more flexible in allowing us to spread outside the Village on the Ponds to accomplish the affordab'dity factor for that site. Kate, has the City Council taken action on the flexibil!.ty of that also? .The' modification'of th~? . · . Aanenson: Con'ect. As we lookedl at the/~i'vable Community Act and the goals, that's one ~f the points that we made is that it's diffiCult in flint circ .umstance, the rental and we have met with the Met Council to discuss that and again that's going, to be our goals to try to work in some other areas. And we won't probably be able to achieve all of the rental component. .Affordability. Kind: But our role here is to determine whether this complies with our Comp Plan and our design standards for Village on the Ponds and fight now the 35% is a goal? Is that how we should be thinking about that as opposed to that's a hard, fast number because this does not meet that with the 24%. Gerhardt: I thought the City Council modified that. Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanensom No. In reviewing with the Met Council, that would be our interpretation of that. It would be a goal we're trying to achieve in good faith effort and that's what their expectation that we're making good faith effort to achieve what we can within the city's financial interest. That it would be a goal. Kind: Okay. Thank yQu. .. : Gerhardt: So what Met Council has agreed to that we would have to make up that difference of affordability. Not on th6 Village on the Ponds hut that we would get credit for the Pulte development. If we should happen to do more-affordable units.~ifiywhere in the community. Some of- the developments that Julie Frick has done through Carv& Coflnty, we would get some credits, for that. Any other-projects that might meet the definition of affordable we' would g.et credit for. - Kind: Thank you. Blackowialc Thanks. Anything else? Kind: No. Blackowialc Uli? Sacchet: What we are looking at as the Planning Cormnission is just the correspondence to the comprehensive plan and PUD. We are not looking at any of the financial implications of this. Gerhardt: That's correct. Even the City Council on Tuesday night will not be looking at the true financials for the development. How that's handled is through a private re-development agreement, which we've hired Mark Ruff to work with Presbyterian Hornes to do what is called a but for analysis. And they have to prove that they have the need for city assistance and but for that assistance we could not create those 36 units of affordable. 33, I'm sorry. Sacchet: Thank you. Blackowiak: Questions? Sidney: My question has been asked. Blackowiak: Okay: Rich? . Slagle: I'm going to hold on for fight now.'- .. Blackowialc Okay. Actually I do have a couple questions here. First of all, is this TIF district tied to a specific project? So in other' words, if the project does not go forward., is this TIF district ended or what's the status of that? Gerhardt: Yes. We would not create theTIF district. If you remember, I was back here with the Lake Susan Apartments and we approved, had you approve a resolution for that project for TIF assistance and the financials did not work out at the last minute on that district so we did not certify it. So we did not create the distfiec If that holds true with this project, we would not create the district. And this is a parcel specific. If you look at the map. All we have taken into account for this district is the entire Presbyterian Homes site. We're not including any other property as a part of that. So all the increment collected from this site would be created from the Presbyterian project itself. Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Blackowiak: Okay. 1 guess it was my question I guess was parcel specific versus project specific. So if this project does not go forward, nothing happens. No harm, no foul. · . . .. · . . Gerhardt: That's correct. · Blackowiak: Okay. Second question has to do with, and I'm sure that this might be a silly question but propert)' taxes on a non-profit, do .they still, do .non-profits still pay property.taxes at the same rate I mean as everyone else? .',:'..::-'-" · ' ~' . .... · ... Gerhardt: This project isn't a non-profit I don't believe: It's a market rat~ project Blackowiak: Well it's owned by a non-profit so I guess that's kind of my question is, is how doe~ that affect the underlying the taxes, underlying this whole thing. Gerhardt: No. They will be paying taxes. This is, the Presbyterian Homes is, help me out here Vemelle but I believe they're just going to be the manager of the project Vemelle Clayton: Well they're currently going to be owing but they'll probably... Gerhardt: Okay. It will be a market rate project. So under that conditiofl i believe they have to pay full...-- property axes. Blackowialr: Okay. I guess that was ray question. And that would be something I'd like to know. You know do non-profits pay full property rexes ? · . . . Gerhardt: Most true non-profit apartments do not. They will sometimes make a payment in lieu of taxes. Or they will qualify for a low income so it'.s, what is it? A-I apartments which will pay like 1% versus a market rate project will pay 2% of it's market value in property taxes so they have a lower tax rate. In this case it is going to be fully taxed because that's how they get their increment. If they don't pay property taxes, they don't get any increment. Blackowiak: Well that's I guess, that was my question. I mean if they don't pay full; that means: something is decreazed somewhere along the line so I just want to make sure that I understand where-we are with that. So you're saying full taxes, full increments. · . . . Gerhardt: Yeah, and it's not money up front, It's a:pay as you go so a~ they pay property taxes, those new generated property taxes would go back to makethose 33 units affordable. Blackowiak: Okay. That's my questions. Rich. · . Slagle: Just a couple. Todd, if I may. The TIF, the creation of the T1F if you will, is there a dollar figure that you have in mind that that will end up resulting in? Gerhardt: Well fight now we're anticipating to be somewhere in the range of a million to a million 2 would be our guess. And that's about 6 to 7 years worth of increment. That's something we're negotiating with right now. And through this year, the legislators changed the tax structure in how property taxes will be calculated and one of the groups out there that benefited were apartments. They will see a substantially lower tax rote. If this project was brought to you a year ago, we'd probably be here asking for anywhere from 11 to 13 years worth of increment. And because of that ram change we ?lam;lng Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 are now in the 6 to 7 year window. If you read through the plan, ttus is called a housing tax increment district and they run for 25 years. And it's our belief that after the 7 years you have 2 choices. You can decertify the district and put it back on the tax rolls or you could take the increment from this project and make other projects in town affordable to help assist other projects. So we have that flexibility. So you can either decertify, put it back on the tax rolls or take that increment of, I think it's roughly about $180,000 a year and-~'reate other affordable units in town. Slagle: Having, if I may'continue.. Having not.~,been.part of the TIF situation before, I'm going to rely on your input, and can I say you're comfq.r~b., le. Wlth this'ob.viously? · · . Gerhardt: Oh yes. Slagle: Okay. Last question. Do you see any additional TIF, whatever you want to call them, district fundings in this development coming forward. What I'll call Village on the Ponds. Gerhardt: I believe there is one more site for multi-housing on here and, but we' ve had no discussions on that. I'm sure Met Council would like us to try to get some affordability in there so if there is the possibility, it might be another one of those apartment complexes. Kate, do you know what site that is? . Or Bob? Aanenson: There:s two on the west side. East side. East side of the church. Gerhardt: Could you point on the map, just so everybody. Aanenson: This area. Gerhardt: Okay~ thanks. Sacchet: If I may ask another question of clarification. So is the timeframe like, you say in the document talks about the 25 year timeframe. Now you're talking that it may be a 6 to 7 year timeframe would actually be sufficient. Is that part of the negotiation that will go on when the financials get ironed out? Gerhardt: Yes. It's called a Private Redevelopment Agreement and in that agreement you'll have a promissory note that says we will promise to re-pay you $1,120,000 if you create $1,120,000 in increment over the next 6 years. So it's called a pay as you go. If they cream it, we will reimburse them. And we can keep up to 10% for administrative fees out of that so the operation of the TIF district, we have to do an annual audit on it and there's.some repons that need to.go over to the Department of Revenue and the State Auditor. ' - ' ' .. Sacchet: You actually touched on the other question I still had. The context that Alison brought up with there being a non-profit Organization behind it. Obviously this only works if they pay taxes. So if they for some reason would put the non-profit framework in place to reduce the taxes, it would automatically reduce the TIF framework, correct? Gerhardt: That's correct. Sacchet: It's an automatic contingency. It's not something that we woald need to formalized because it's built in. Gerhardt: It's built in, that's correct. Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Sacchet: Okay. That's answers it, thank you. Gerhardt: Sure. Blackowiak: Deb. '" Kind: Yes Madam CbaiL I just want to clarify...our role, I mean this discussion's interesting but our role is really to decide whether this conforms to thd-~omp plan mad our zoning dWn-icts, plain and simple. : . . . . . · . Gerhardt: That's correct. Kind: Okay. We don't get to decide whether this a good idea or not to do a TIF district. The EDA has already decided that it's a good idea. Gerhardt: That's correct. Kind: Okay. Just want to clarify so I make sure I'm t~nking of this the right way. Gerhardt: The EDA has taken formal action on it. The City Council is really the body that will ultimately decide if the district is going to be created or not and they will be doing that next Tuesday. ' .' And that's a public hearing. .- · . Kind: hi the staff report you recommend that we approve the attached resolution and there's several resolutions in here but I think I found the one that you think we should approve. : Gerhardt: It's the very back on. If you were to turn it right over. Kind: Oh, the very back one? Gerhardt: Yep. Kind: Okay. Now to me that resolution is saying that this body approves the tax increment district. Really we are approving, basically declaring that it's consistent with the.comp plan and zoning. We don't really, this resolution isn't appropriate for this body, is tha' t, am I understanding our role right? Gerhardt: No. If you read kind of the. . . · · . . · Kind: It's just the very tail end o~: it'kind of a deal? Gerlmrdt: Yeah. Kind: Okay. Gerhardt: I mean you have to, you're approving the plan and the plan outlines the overall development of the project and so you have to approve the TIF plan, the document inside here and that you're · approving that the development of this apmrnnent complex is consistent with fl~e overall development of the community and it meets the comprehensive plan. That it meets the zoning. That we will be creating employment opportunities. Enhancing our tax base into the future and so that's what this resolution that was drafted by legal counsel is saying. Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Kind: That makes sense. Thank you. Gerhardt: You're welcome. Blackowiak: Any othar questions? Sidney: I have.one question. Looking at your 0.~bjectives, on number 6. Affordable rental housing would not reasonably be expected to occur wi~tl~.'.n Development District-#8 and it goes on. 'Could you elaborate on that for the reasons? I guess what i'm trying to do is have you explain more about the basis that you- believe that there might not be affordable Gerhardt: Well a good example would be the Lake Susan Apartments. We toured those about a ~nonth ago and I think the rents in that area were in the range of $800 to $1200 and we're looking for affordability in $650 to $750 range. So what we're doing with this increment from this project is writing down the difference between that $800 and $1200. And in making those affordable based on state and federal guidelines for the affordability rents for certain incomes of family. And so without this increment, this would not be an affordable project as defined by state statute and the federal government for those rents in the $650 to $750 range. So that's what that statement is saying. Sacchet: So the tax break is just on the affordable units or on the whole thing? Gerhardt: Yep. That's what the 33 of the 16l units. When you create a TIF district, only 20% of the · units can be used-for affordable. So that's what we're doing. 20% of the 16l !s 33 of the units so under this type of TIF district we are writing down solely the rents for. th'ose units and I don't know if 1 included · their rent schedule' for this, but they're i.n that $850 to $1200 range. And then in some of the dementia units they have a healthy deposit in the 5 figure area for the individuals to stay in those. So these units. would not require a deposit to be in there. So they would be for seniors. Blackowiak: Okay. Thank you. Alrighty. This item is not open for a public hearing this evening so at this point we need to have any discussion we may want to have and then make a motion. So I' 11 start with Deb. Any comment~? Kind:. I just think that our role is to decide whether this conforms with the comp plan and zoning and I feel that it does, with the caveat that 24% is working towards the goal of 35, but it is stated asa goal. Not as a requirement so I think that it complies. - . .. Blackootlak: Okay, Uli, Comments. · .. Sacchet: I'm fine with it. Appreciate you're clarifying some of the aspects that are actually not directly related to what we're looking at but it helps to' understand it better. Gerhardt: Not a problem. Sidney: I agree with the recorm~endation. Slagle: As well. Blackowiak: Okay. With that I'd like a motion please. · Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Kind: Madam Chair, I move the Planning Commission approves the attached resolution declaring the program and plan for TIF District No. 8 is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the plans for development of Chanhassen as a whole, and that's Attac.hment #3. Blackowiak: Okay, there's been a motion. Is ~ere a second? · Sidney: Second. Resolution 02001-0i: Kind moved, SMney.~nded that the Pianning'C~mmission approve the . attached resolution (Attachment O3)"d~ng the program .mid plan for TIF.District No. 8 is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the plans'for'development of Chanlmssen as a whole. All voted in favor and the motion carried ~ously 5 to.0. Blackowiak: And this is going to be heard before City Council on the 13"', is that correct? Gerhardt: That's correct. Blackowiak: A week from tonight. Gerhardt: It will be a public heating. Blackowiak: At that time. O_kay, thank you so much. . o PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE AT TtIE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR THE ·' CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE LOCATED ON PROPERTY ZONED A2~ AGRICULTURAL ESTATE AND LOCATED AT 425 LAKOTA LANF TIMOTHY WISE. Julie Grove presented the staff report on this item. : Blackowiak: Commissioners, any questions? Rich. Slagle: Julie, just one. Can you tell roe. in May of '92, was that approval that was denied for the garage addition, was that by the Planning Commission or was that by staff?. Grove: For the building? ' Slagle: The garage addition. It looks like.the fiouse addition was approved but the garage addition was not. Grove: staff at t~t t"_.ne said a variance would be needed and they dropped the issue. It did not go before Planning Commission Slagle: Okay. Kate, there's someone in the back who might have an answer. Blackowiak: Yeah, we'll wait for ',he applicant to co.me up. Okay. Slagle: That's it for right now. At that time I don't know if it was the.applicant who decided riot to build the garage addition or . Pl.anni~,g Co~mnission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Blackowiak: Okay. Questions? Sidney: Couple points of clarification. Sorry I didn't have a chance to call you this afternoon but on page 3, second paragraph. This development was platted paler to the adoption of our o.n.-linance. Could' you clarify which ordi .nance you're talking about. · Grove: The bluff ordinance. Sidney: Okay, bluff. So not setback. ~.'s..fronti~tard setback ~.n this case. . . · Grove: When the lot was platted it was'before' any city ordinance I believe. Aanenson: For the bluff ordinance which required the 30 foot setback from the top of the bhfff, that · ' ordinance wasn't in place at the time. , Grove: At the time the house was built. Sidney: Okay. And then, let's see another one. You included in their packet, well in the report the ' minimum driveway separation is as follows. Can v~u speak to the importance of that in this application? Glx>ve: At which point? " Sidney: Thi.; is zoning, page 1207. And it was ~mrked the minimurn driveway separation or ,~'as th~.t: just. · . . GroYe: TIu~ was just starred from something else pri. o.r to '~in~g copied. That was .just sh:~wing that the .. setbacks me. there. .. -- Sidney: Okay. ' Blackowiak: Okay, is that it? Si&qey: Ye~.. for now. Sacchet: One quick question. In terms of you make a staternent that this variance would not be applicable to. euflots on Lakota Lane. When I' m out tl'~ere I actually looked how many of these buildings-. have 3 car garages already and it seems like most of them indeed do. Them was only one other building,· ! think it was house number 535 that has a 2 car garage, but I believe that house is quite a bit fiLrther set back. On your list, do you actually see how far. that one is set back, just for our reference. Grove: 5? " S.'tcchet: 535 I fifink was the other one. Grove.: It's set back. 100 feet. Saccb, et: So that's plenly setback so we wouldn't c~ate a c, recedent. Okay. ·That answers my question, thank you. Blackowi:.:k: Thanks. Deb, any questions? Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Kind: No. Blackowiak: No questions, okay. Would the applicant or their'designee like to'c~>me up and'n~xke a' -'-"' presentation'? Please come up to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. .~. . · Tim Wise: I'm Tim Wise. I'm at 425 Lakota Lane and I don't really have any changes except to the dimensions of the structure.. The plans acmally,,,$how a 12 by 22 plan., and the analysis shgws it as 12 by 20. So I'd like to have that corrected. ~Ogh.. e~ I'don't .have. any change to the findings or the '-- recommendations. '. - - . Blackowiak: Okay, 12 by 20. Can I ask you a .question then? How does that affect, is it set back farther from the front of the garage? Does it still mn parallel to the back? .' Tim Wise: No. The setback will be 42 feet. And it doesn't change that at all. Blackowiak: Doesn't change that at all? : Tim Wise: No. Blackowiak: Okay. Tim Wise: i think it's just a type. '- '-. -. Blackowiak: Okt~y, thank you. -. --.. :.-' -- · ! ! Tim Wise: And then the issue with why the garage vOasn't put on in "92, that was m,v decision not to out. - it on. My understandiflg was they allowed me, to put the addition on'in '92 and becanse it wa-qn't Coming · any closer to the street and neither was the garage and I just decided not to put the garage'on at that time.. ' · Blackowiak: Okay. Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions for the applicant? Deb, I'll start with you. .' - - Kind: My only question is, staff the 20 foot, is that overhang eaves? · Grove: It Was a typo. On the plans it does show that it's 22, · . .- Kind: It show.~ 22 on the plans. ' - · . Grove: Right. Kind: And actually if you're counting the overhang it would be a bigger nthmber. Biackowiak: Maybe, they're counting the overhang with 22. Kind: Maybe. Okay. Blackowiak: Okay. Uli, questions for the applicant? Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Sac:bet: Yeah, quick question if I may. The trees, you have very nice oak tree on the site there. That probably would not be impacted. TimWise: No, we'd just trim it. Sacchet: Okay, youfi'e just going to trim it. You think you'll kind of curve around it? Tim Wise: Yeah, I intend to leave, those. ..,: · · Sacchet: Yeah. Just for my own curiosity. ' '. Tim Wise: Yeah, I wasn't planning on changing that.. Sacchet: Okay, thank you. _. Blackowiak: Okay. LuAnn, do you have any questions for the applicant? No. Rich? .o Slagle: Just one. More to staffifI may. So in Tim's letter to Bob he states it was approved in '92. He just chose not to follow up on the garage addition but in the staff report it says it was, if I read it right, was not approved. Do we not know for sure? -. Grove: We to not know for sure. I was not hem at the time. From staff who had been here' prior, their fecol!e,:tion was that it was not approved. It was just the addition that was approved. We don't knov~ for sure. Slagle: Okay. But nonethele~ss it would work, [ mean it's not falling outside in any of our limits as to what he can do, is that correct? Other than us granting the variance. Grove: Correct. ' Slagle: Okay. Tim Wise: Actually if you look at the garage addition, it actually sits farther back from the' addition that was approved in '92. .. Slagle: Okay. Thank you. · . Blackowiak: Thank you. Okay, this item'i~' open fer a public hearing so if anybody would like to make comments on this item, plea.se come'up to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. Okay, seeing no one I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, if you have any comments? Uli, you want to start? Sacchet: I think it's a pretty clear request. [ have J~o problem with it. The finding (c) that staff says, the proposed addition may increase the value of the property. 1 would make that more affirmative. I would say the proposed addition will increase the value of the property, but that's not the main purpose. I support approving this request. B!ackowialc Okay. Comments? 10 Planmng Cmmnission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Sidney: Yes I guess I agree with staff's-analysis and I d.o believe there is a hardship due to lhe- topography of the lot as stated in the staff report. '- Blackowiak: Okay; Rich. No? Deb, any comments? Kind: I agree. .'". Blackowiak: Alright. And I don't, really have: .~nything to ..add. I do agree with the findings as they're set out in the staff report so With that -I'd '.l~te. a niiSii0n. : ' - .. ' ' .- · . . · . Sacchet: Yeah Madam Chair, I make a move thai the Planning Commission approves the request for an 8 ' fool variance from the 50 foot front yard setback for the con~tmction of a 12 by 20 foot. - · Kind: 22. .' SaccF. et: Should we say 12 by 22 foot garage addition based upon the findings presented in the staff r~port and subject to the following conditions 1 through 4. Kiad: .t second that motion. S~cclxel moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commimion approve the l~quest for an 8 foot- ' ' variance from the 50 foot front yard setback for the construction of a 12 x 22 foot garage addition . based upon the finding~ presented in the staff report and subject to the following conditions:, ...:.. 1. The applicant shall submit existing and proposed elevations for the garage addition. -'. ! The applicant shall show driveway access to the garage addition. " ' -' . . 3. The driveway may not be widened beyond the property l~ne. 4. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan shall be submitted. All voted in favor and the motion carried unnnimously 5 to 0. Blackowiak: Kate, Julie, there's no. Aanenson: it wouldn't go tbrward unless it, s appealed. · ; · Bl~ckowiak: Okay, m this is really Board of Adjustments7 Aanenson: Correct. So unless there's an appeal, any person aggrieved of'the decision has a right to appeai it within 4 days... Blackowiak: Okay. And I guess [ ,vas going to ask that because :'here a eeuple bere, the next two are also the .mme. AalaellSOll: CorP.2Ct. Blackowiak: Okay. They just didn't really say Board of Appeals specifically. Okay. Tlmnk you very, mt~ch. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 REOUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE LAKESHO~ SETBACK FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK LOCATED ON PROPERTY ZONED R~.GLE FAMILY ' AN~D LOCA YED AT 7000 UTICA__LA___NF_a.HEIDI CARISCH/VERNON HALL. Public Present: '". Name Address Bill Issnbrex:ht Heidi Carisch & Vernon Hall · 6990 Utica Lane 7000 Utica Lane Julie Grove presented the staff report on this item~ Bb~:kowi~: Okay commissioners, any questions? Deb. Kind: Yes. I just, these two pages in the staff report. One has the survey on it and the other has that list of the setbacks. On the survey, the neighboring homes are set back 60 feet to their existing deck and the'. other side J..~ 68 feet, is that ,,5.'.ght? -: -. .Grove.:. Correct.. ~KJnd: Okay. On the sheet you just round~ up to 70 feet, is that what Ihe deal is? Grove:- Yep. 'Yep, it was approximate..· Kind: It should actually be 68 f~t, okay. l just wanted t0 make-sure we had apples to apples going here,:. And then the applicant is actually 62 feet from their existing porch. Grove: Correct. Kind: And they currently have no dex:k. Grove: Correct. '. Kind: And the majority of the neighbors do have decks. . .. Ca'ox,e: CmTeCl. . .. - Kind: Got it. Thank you. Biackowiak: Okay, Uli. Sacchet: Yes. b, I have a que. stion. What.kind of precedence are there? l..mean we ~ave obvieusly ~oo~_~ng just at the drawing actually put irt ti~e. slatff report, the house to the immediam north ha.-.' a setback that is the same or even slightly less, and i~ does have the deck the whole width of the house. And that tmubied me a little bit. I rne~n it looks like. there's an element of precede~:r invoiv-'~d. Could you touch on that please? ! 12 Piamfi ng Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Grove: Well the deck to the north was given a variance, that was the one property in this area that has been given a variance. The variance was, they had a.deck and they were adding onto it. S!agle: Which way? Grove: Which way .¢)ere they adding on? They were adding north, not towards the lake. Adding. north. It was the same setback. S~cchet: They maintained the same ~etback 6t~'th. ey ma~'it-he whole width, okay. 'I think We ni~xt to be very specific. Also that deck, is it a r~:ond level deck or first level deck?.-Not that it ultimately'makes any difference but. C~ove: It looks to be a second and, there's a picture fight here. Sacchet: Both, okay. And that was, a variance for that was approved in '97. That's pretty recent, okay. T-hat answers my question, thank you. .. . · Blackowiak: Okay. LuAnn. Sidney: No questions. Blackowiak: No. Rich, any questions? : . Slagle: Yeah, I have a question. The current homeovnaers, how long have they resided in that house? .. Grove: I do not know. I believe they are here. · . Slagle: okay. §o I'll ask that question. The i'eason t.'m asking that. is, my next question is', when was the porch put onto the house? It appears as when, in 1960 when the house was built, it was within, .maybe not at that time but current zoning laws, right? Setbacks. Grove: Yep. Slagle: Okay. The porch obviously is not within the approved setbacks so at some point a decision was made, and I'm not sure if it was before or after an ordinance went into place. Do we know? -. -. Grove: We don't know. · · . . Slagle: Okay. Aanenson: We're not sure there was a buildi6g permit. Grove: We didn't find a building pemdt. Aanenmn: There's no record of the building pemfit'for the deck. Back in 1900 there was no planning staff and so we don't. Slagle: We don't even have a history of when that porch was put on. Grove: Correct. 13 Planning Cor. amission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Slagle: Okay. That's it for now. Biackowiak: Okay, thank you. Well it sounds like you have a couple questions fo: the applicant so - would the agplicant or l. heir designee like to corr~ up attd make your presentation. Please step to the microphone and stat~'y0ur name and address' for the record. Vernon Hall: My name ls Vernon .Hall. I'm at. J000 Utica Lane, Chanhassen. And I don't know, do you want to answer a couple questions first....: .I. lm0w'you had questions. · . · . Slagle: I think I can already tell that you probably weren't there in 1960. . Blackowiak: Not making decking decisions at. that point, right. Vernon Hall: We've owned the house for 7 years is how long we've been there. So I've seen some of the pictures and I wanted to show the neighbors to the. This is the neighbor's house directly to the south. Again just showing the decking that's there because it's, you were looking on also the site plan that it shows that it's not totally within compliance also. And I just wanted to show also a more update plan of our decking and make some comments on that. This is an updated owe of the existing with the whole site plan of it showing that the existing porch there and the deck wrap around has changed a little-bit, and then - endit:g in the zorner, again it's changing. We're lessening the deck area a little bit on the north'end also, And with that also there's the hard cover, I mean just to make note- also that you saw the note in there front the DNR as far as the runoff and concern of that. Right now existing to the south of the screened in por-;h ~t's basically solid concrete for at l&ast the size of the porch, if not larger and that would be · eliminatect.. That would become green area, green space there on that. And then thfs is a bigger plan; just so you get a good view of what we' n/ talking as far as the decking space. And'then again it doesn't show it clearly on this because it doesn't have the existing but the existing deck that we're asking for would' ' · actually come back a few feet from what' s there now. And from the roof line actually it comes back ' about 4 f&t '~here the surveyor' s measured it. The existing from where the building is so the roof line' hangs out about another 3 or 4 feet there. Saccheu May I ask a question for clarification.9 Blackowiak: Sure. Sacchm: Are you actually eliminating the lower porch underneath? · . Vernon Itall: No. It would be under the existing, underneath. .. . Sacchet: Okay just to clarify, thank you. Vernon Hall: This would be the screened in porch area there. That would be still there, and again as you can see we'd be eliminating the hard area over there that's all existing now as hard cover. And also then to t~ north side of the house which is just a slope hill down now that we're planning on to tier that and again to central some of the runoff to the lake there. So and also in the recommendations I katow if it was al;proved as far as vegetative screening in place, I mean we're totally willing or even have some plans to' do atom of that. Slagle: If I can ask as well. In your request for a variance you mentioned 61 feet. The report says now 62 feet. If l'm tracking right. Do you have any issue with just keeping the porch at 62? 14 .- Plan.ing Cormnission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Vernon Hail: No. I mean again we're going to be regressing back. · Slag!e: [lndeBtand. Unders[and the porch is a'llule further out trna'you're talkifig butjus.t wondered;,62' ' feet is fine as well7 · Vernon Hail: Yes. Yes, and again we're back about 4 feet I think from where it;s existing..the mol overhang is now. This if an elevation view, jU,t..again to kind of show what.we're proposing as far as a deck on the west side. of the lake.. Any. questio~s?i" '--" ' ' ' .-. - .-- . '.'-... -. . Blackowiak: Okay. Commissioners, any questions for the applicant? No? Anybody? You have any other questions? Kind: No. Blackowiak: No, I don't have any at this time: Vernon Hall: Thank you. Blackowiak' Alright, this item is open for a public h .earing so'anybody waJlting to come u~ and .: comment on ,'hi~ item, please step to the microphone and state your name and address. Okay, seei~.g hr,.'.. one I will close the public bearing. Commissioners, any comments?- Deb. '- Kind: Yes Madam C .hair. Our ordinance states that a reasonable use can be defined as a uge made by:'~he ' majority ol' comparable property within 500 feet. I get stuck on this er. cry. time we go over a v~ari.'.ance'. ' -'- :. .. · And I think I'w. starting to get it now. The majority of the property~wners within 500 feet have do:ks;., .~. and so the ~vxtuest is reasonable. And since several of the.adjacent lake.shore property or, acrs have- reduced setbacks, there -[sa pre-existing neighborhood setback and granting this va_dance would not .. - , depart downward frem those standards. And if we do grant it I would add a condition that the patio be removed as a condition in addition to staff' s recommendations. .- ...' · Slagle: You mean the .porch? Kind: Patio. Blackowiak: I think the concrete. The ~ious. Okay, Uli..3my comments? " · . Sazche!' Yeah. This was an rote.resting ad(,enture. When I first looked at this, for one thin.' g when we . get these variances the idea is not that we approve them all. - Kind: True. Sacchet: I h'm. an the wi~ole peh~t, the approval of a variance should be. the exception becata~e why have-," rules otherwise? ...rules it' ~verybody comes and asks fcr an exception and we give them a variance. And then 0eing2 the enviromr, entally fcxuse~t person, the~e buildings are awfully close to the lake and. '- '. from that .angle I was ~aliy uncomfortable with the idea to allow further, not necessarily further .. encmacl:,ment from the distance but increasing the amoant ef encroachment into the natural buffer. '- However, considering the precedent in the neighborhood I have to agree that in order to be- fairl it- has to ~ considered a reasonable request, reasonable use and based on the precedent I don't think it would be fair t~, deny it. t5 . Plannit~g Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 '. Blackowiak: Okay, LuAnn. Sidney: Well, :his was difficutt for me Ioo Uii, to analyze and 1 think I would .tike to disa '.~ with thb two commissioners who h~-ve spoken, and I'll state my reasons. I do believe that staff has outlined reasons that there is.ta~3t a hardship. There is reasonable use of the property, and I do have a problem with increasing the non-conformity in it and further e~croaching into the 75 toot setback and I think that' is such an important setback and we've always:..talked about that in Planning Commission as being a very important setback which we should rng~intain.". And I think, by doing that, increasing.the non-conformity, we are setting a precedence and I really don't want to cross that line so I would feel more comtbrtable denying this request based on that. B lackowiak: Okay, thank you. Rich. Slagle: I have a thought and a question to staff. In 1997 when the variance rexluest to the neighbor's to the nm~.h I believe was granted,.do we have any information? And if I have received it I apologize having just flown in but I guess what I'm trying to think, what I'm trying to find is what was the reasoning in '97 that they granted a variance approval? .. Grove: We don't have much information. There wa,n't much from the minutes of that meetiug. Basicall'~. !t seems that. Aa.henson: 'rhJ. s xvas Board of Adjustments that made the decision. Grove: They were looking at it as replacing an existing'structure. More looking at ii as a repair to what ,;vas ah 'eady existing. " Slagle: And fair. to ask,. without probably having the answer ,~as. how did the deck get put.there in the ' first place? We see a lot of ~ese don't v,e? .' Grove: Yes we do. It happens. Slagle: Well. let me throw one thought then is we'v,-~ had discussions here regarding this setback. And for all who are here who are interested, there's been lots of debate in the last 6' months about setbacks from water. And to the point of where I think we came pretty clear that we wanted one defined number. and that would apply throughout the city. We were getting away from all the different averages and who your nei~ibors, how far they're back and what:not. 'So in a lot of ways, I mean this is the number. I mean plain and simple and just trying to think out as to how 1 will go-forward with votes because the more variances we find that have been approved, it really limits us to saying yes because we have to obviously be fair to you.. If your neighbor was approved, and yet you have the dilemma of you just'keep creating new precedence because I think if your neighbor had not been approved, I will throw out I think I would vote against it and ! don't Want to be unfair bttt I think just to try and set fairness throughout the city. Because we get some doozies of requests That's a good word. My 5 year old at~d 3 year old would pt~..bably get into those but, so I think my thoughts to the rest of the commissioners is, I think I will vote · for the approval but I do so pretty reluctantly. That's all. That:s my thoughts. B!ackowiak: Yeah, I struggled with ti~Js one as well. I,ooking at it in terms of what is the number'? What"s the right thing to do and looking at the property, 1 certainly can see why they would like to have'a deck and take advantage of that entire, that's just a beautiful setting back there. So looking at that I certainly ar~derstand their reasons for wanting to do that. Yeah, we do have numbers. We do have 16 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001' certain rules. However I think one of the reasons that I look at, look favorably on this would be that the fact that the neighbors did get approved and again whether or. not it was a rebuilding or acnmlly a new ,. deck, I don't know they want it classified. I feel that when you go ahead and do something like that and grant something like that, it's hard to say no to the next person just because the number isn't mere. So I' guess tbJ;se are my thoughts. It was a hard one but I'll need a motion for this. ..,-. Kind: Madam Chair, I move the Planning Commission apprm;es a 13 foot variance from the 75 foot shoreland setback for, th6 construction of a 39 ....fgot. Actually I don't want to say the size. For the construction of a deck based on the fa~t .tJmt:~.~-e is a pre-existing neighborhood standard and gran~g this variance would not depart downwaid from that standard. And that it's a reasonable use because the.- majority of the property owners within 500 feet have decks. And I would like to make it contingent on 4.- conditions. The first 3 are stated in the staff report and I wotfld like to add a fourth that says, the existing patio shall be, removed to reduce the hard surface coverage. Az~nenson: Point of clarification. Can we use the word concrete. Kind:. Thank you. Existing concrete patio shall be removed to reduce the hard surface coverage. Sacchet: ! second that. ~: Slagle: Can L point of clarification'? If I can ask staff. Or actually ask c'~Ommissioner Kind. Is lhere a" . concern o[ what's underneath the deck as far as rocks? I mean obviously yoa wouldn't w~t patio bricks '. . · so I mean do you want· anything? '. - · ' '-: .. : ,. Aanenson: .Well part of fltis concrete patio is offto the.~ide: .)utditional, it's not underneath. It's. " additional to. .-Siagle:' No, I understand that completely. What rm saying. · i . Kind: Do 1 want to make a condition what can be underneath that deck? Slagle: Yeah, or what can't be. : - " . Kind: I think the deck is in itself considered hard surface coverage so really what's underneath of it probably is not a factor. '- - ' Slagle: Okay. That"s all. -.- . Blackowiak: Okay, there's been a motion and a second. We need to vote on this. . . . Kind moved, Sacchet seconded that the Planning Commi.~ion approves the request for a 13 foot' variance from the 75 foot shoreland setback for the construction of a deck based upon the findings pre~.nted ia the staff, report and the revised plans' submitted on November 6, 2001, contingent 'opou the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall' submit a landscape plan that provides vegetative screen from the lake. 2. Th~ applicant should demonstrate that no additional stormwater should be directed to the lake, 3. The deck may not be enclosed. 17 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 4. The existing concrete patio shall be removed to decrease the amount of hard surface · coverage. All voted in favor, except Lu~..nn Sidoey who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.' Blackowiak: I would like to make one point though. I guess a point of clarification. I feel we should have a maximum width for the deck. I understapd you may not want to have a width and length, based on changes in the plans but I'm'thinking .mayb~ we need to talk about. · · · . · Slagle: Do we need to then re-vote? Because it's already been approved. Kind: Right now it has, I put itt the motion a 13 foot variance so that means it needs to maintain a 62 foot setback so that really does limit the width I guess. Blackowiak: Okay. That's fine. I just wanted to make sure because you didn't list a specific deck size but as long as we're okay with not going any closer to the lake because that's my point. Kind: .~.d that's what that 13 foot prohibits. Going any closer to the lake than where they currently are. Sacchet: I'd also like to point out that the revised plan that was Shovm actually pulled back. Kind: Palled it Rack quite a bit. yeah. Sacchet: -So I feel comfortable with that being in there. Aanenson: Note of clarification again. I guess staff's finding of that would be that your acceptance wag . based on revised plans dated today. We'd ask for a copy of that for the record. Sacchet: Correct. Blackowiak: Okay, that sounds fair. Okay, so'this item was the Board of Adjustment and Appeals item' ' so any aggrieved person may appeal the decision of this board within 4 days to the city planning office. · .. PUBLIC HEARING: REQL~_,ST FOR A VARIANCE FOR TEMPORARY USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING AS A TWO FAMILY DWELLING ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF~ RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND LOCATED AT .6791 BRIARWOOD COURT~ SAWHORSE DESIGNERS/ BUILDERS. Public Present: Name Address No~ene Zi 11 Mark Piatkowski David A. Senner Jim Hurt Trey & I.ynne Eggers 6817 Manchester Drive 6833 Manchester Drive 6829 Briarwood Court 6791 Briarwood Court 6791 Briarwood Court 18 · Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 JuUe G~x~ve presented the staff repo~ on ~ item. : Blackowiak: Commissioners, any questions of staff?. Rich9. I' m sorry., you're still reading but.' · - Slagle: No, I have no questions. Blackowiak: LuAnn? Sidney: No comn~nts at this time. ;.' .. . Blackowiak: Uli? Sacchet: Yes, definitely have questions. So one you already addressed. In o~der to have a second, third, fourth kitchen in a house doesn't really require any particular permit except a building permit, eot'feet?. Grove: Correct. Sacchet: To have an extra bathroorm same thing. . Extra whatever, finish your basement, same thing.. Family. Family is parents and kids. f really don't ge: it. We have parents moving in with ~heir k~ds; sarne family, i think this doesn't fly. i' guess that wasn't a queslion. Biackow:,'ak: And your question is'? · . Sacchet: Why the hock do, zorry' the English, why do t. bey need a variance for their parents' t c: live with tbair kids? It's one family. They can get a building permit, build a kitchen. They can build ~/..bathroo~ They can build whatever they want. They cm~ get a building permit but not a vari~mce It's not a multi- f&trtily house. · - Grove: According to the zoning, the definition of a single family, well of a dwelling unit in the zoning ordinance is that it has one of all of the amenities, and this would have two in one specific area. Sacchet:. But that doesn't make it a multi-family house.. We don't have more than one family in there. I mean there are lots of houses that have more than one kitchen. Certainly tons of bathrooms is pretty' popular these days. I'm sorry to pounce on that but I don't get the point. I think we're off track with this OliO. Blackowiak: This might be an issue for fumre-woJk session. Changes in ordinance. I me~'that might be something we need to look at, but. ' ' · Slagle: lfI can ask. So from-staff's perspective it truly is in essence a contradiction perhaps, there's some confusion around an ordinance that you i,211y have to bring this up to us like you have. ' Aanensen: It's the state law and we've .adopted it, corr~L And they've come in and asked for it mid complied with ail the requirements. Slagle: And it basically says and I apologize if it was in there to read but if two kitchens are in a house' I1~.: becomes then a multi-family dwelhng, is that verbiage? .. Aanenson: Yes. 19 Plaaning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Grove: ?otentially. Slagle: Okay. Because what I'm... Aanenson: You can have other tenants there too, correct. It",; when you have other people tiring them,. You can Pave up to 57I 'agree with Uli. It's a fine line and it' we're moving into a rental housing I ~hink this provides also clarity. Protection for them too. It's a City Council has directed to move towards a rental housing. · .. : . Single: I guess what I'm getting at to the' Commissioners ihough is, here we.perhaps have a situation where, at least initially, at least from two of us there's this wow, this might not even be needed to be talked about like in this forum and we could find ourselves actually going against the State State law, is-.- that what you said it is7 Which is just opposite of what .we kind of talked about recently where if it's State law we really have to try and stick with it or. even go beyond it. Here now we're sorrof questioning a State law. So I guess and sort of with Lqi's way. Aanenson: Well I guess the other point of clarification is, is it coming the correct way is that what we .' don't want is someone altering the exterior appearance which'is critical that you don't have a door that you completely separat.-~. Now it's two actual separate dwel.l:ing unks. The intent is that it can easily be'. - converted back to the one dwelling. When yoi~.provide additional parking spaces for the tenants; where ' . yov' v~ get a sci.,state entrance, separate meters, some of those firings where you could call .and we ntay .'. not know. This is the control way ~,e go through. We knew ~d the neighbors know what's going on' next dc,o,: because we do get complaints on that situation. Where people me renting out and they any. provide a separate, entrance. Changiug/he character of locking as a single family hotne. - · '- . · Sac£het: Now we just heard that ~he ct:amcter of the dwelling doesn't cht~tge.' The utility me.ters don~t ch:m.~e, which would :;upport ray case that ifs really not a multi-family sltuafioe. '..: . . . . . (.fi'ore: We would concur. .. : . Slagle: I guess what I'm wondering if, and this might be easy, is could it just have been decided at staff?..- · . · Aanensom No. ' ' ' Slagl~ Dr..s it have to come to us? Aanenson'. Con~x:t. It's a variance. Requires a public hearing. . . Grove: According tc the ordinande.' . Sacchet: Now here's the real question. Is it within our reach to say this doesn't need a variance? A~.rll~llSen: No. Blockowiak: It's Sta~e Jaw is wltat you're telling us and we ne-,xi, ekay. '. · . Aanenson: It's in the zoning ordinance. You have lc, look at die 4 findings and attach reasonable- ,xmd!fions. -' 20 P~ming Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Blackowi,,k: O 'kay. So maybe there's not a lot of room for discussion. I mean we really don't need to discuss a lot and we'll just move forward. Okay. Sacchet: It's a non issue. ' '. Blackowiak: Deb, d0-~ou have any questions at this point? o. . Kind: Yeah, for staff fight? Is tha.t where we'd:at? . ..:--i:".5 . . _ . Blackowiak: We're asking staff'fight fio~V, yes...' · Kind: This new condition that you handed out.to change, condition number 3, to include tiffs temp0raxy aspect seems to address kind of the n~n issue with that might have neighborhood concern which is this could be rented out in the future. So that's the point of that. ;. Grove: Correct. : . · I<'Jnd:-Okay. That's all. ~ · -. '~ Blackowi_ak: Ti',at's it? Okay. Would the applicant'or their designee, like.to come up and make a presentation? ~!ease state your name and address and step to the microphone.. Troy Eggers: Troy Eggers, 6791 Briarwood Courl and I'd just like t'o ~ay thol the flooi-plafi'that'w.a,.5 · . presented today is the existing floorplan. We.haven't made any changes to that so that's basically what- we're looking at doing. That's all I had. -- .. - . . . · .. ., Biackowiak: Okay, thanks. ': ~ '- Troy Eggers: Do you have any questions for me? Blackowiak: Commissioners, any questions -for the applicant? No. · Troy Eggers: Thank you. ... Blackowiak: This item is open for a public heating so if anybody would like to make comments on this, please s[ep to the microphone. State your name and address. ". :' ..- . . David Senner: My name is David Senner.- 'I live at 6829 Briarwood Court and I .certainly think that a couple should be able to improve ilieir property for their parents without a lot of variance problems. I think a couple of the questions that I had were addressed by Mr. Sacchet and one was the te~ nature Of the'variance and I Understand that it,-if the property is sold that.the variance terminates. "- Because people were wondering about the rental, like you had mentioned. And the other thing was what the definition of single family dwelling was and I'm in agreement with you. I think that in our country I thir~k wc've gotten away front parents living with farailies and I think it's a bad precedent fo set that we have to get ~ variance to allow that to happen comfortably so. And the ocher ~ing is.that, what kind. ~1~ precedent would be set in the rest of the neighborhood if somebody had a variance for their family and parents to come live with them. And if this is granted, does that set a'precedent that other homes in that area could get a variance more easily so, I kind of think it' s opening a can of worms myseff. Blackow~ak: Okay Kate, would you like to address that? 21 Planning Conuuission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanenson: Sure. In the State of Minnesota this is the one use variance. Typically you cannot get a variance to a t~se. You can get a variance to the bulk, which would be the height, the setback, the width, but you can't get a variance to a use. This is the one exception in the State. of Minnesota. We've had this. ordinance on our books, the State's had it for, our city attorney said forever which is facetious but it's been on there a longtlme. In the 10 years I've been here this is the first request we've had. Anybody can have their grandma live with them. You can have related people living with you. Anybody. We've got that all over town. If yoti want a separate facility such as this, there is a mechanism that provides for ' protection. That they go through the c~e .rtain c'ri~eria that this board reviews to see-if it's being met... That's the process that this group is goihgthrough. Whether there will be a.rash of flaese or not, this has been I in 10 years. I don't know. Based on economic c.ircurnstances, but people can have a member live with therm It's just the separate kitchen facilities and separate living quarters, that's the standards that are in place. David Senner: But what is defined as a separate facility? Because I know people in other neighborhoods itt other states that have had kitchens and things put in and haven't had to have a variance though. Blackowiak: Kate, can you answer definition of a separate facility? Aanenson: They're living independently. They're ~ot in a b~room'on the main floor sharing, the same kitchen and bathroom. They've got their own liv~.ng quarters. A separate living quarters within the saxne dwelling. That's how this is being define~i. Blackowiak: Okay. David Sennex: I would, I me. an a lot of houses have separate living quarters. BiackowJalc Right. That's what I was going to say. I know a lot of people that have microwaves and fridges and so on and so forth in their basements but not necessarily anybody living there. Aanenson: Right, and they're living there and that's their permanent address at that and they've got a separate living space. David Senner: Well we' ve got possibility for a living quarters in our first floor and our second floor. Why not the basement? Aanenson: Again, the intent is that it's completely independent living2 The two can function separately except for the same driveway. That:s the intent and th~it's the way our ordinance describes .independent dwelling unit. So they're not sharing a common kitchen, refrigerator, that sort of thing. David Senner. And what is the definition of single family residence? Aanenson: What I was reading from was the definition of dwelling unit. David Senner: Yeah. this was a second question. Aanenson: We just have a definition of family. We used to have up to 5 people but that's agai~tst State law so definition of a family or dwelling unit is as many people as you want. There's no limit on if 3/ou had yom' cousins and brothers living together, there's no limit on that. That's unconstitutional. And just for point of clarification, if anybody wanted to rent their house for a year, they got a job transfer to 22 Planning Co:imqission Meeting - November 6, 2001 .' Europe for a ~ear or they did a mission trip, people/ent their houses all the time for a yea.- or two. That's also another type of arrangement people make. Single family dwelling means, a detached building containing one dwelling unit. And again the definition of dwelling ,mit would be that you'.ye got " independent living .so again be. zau~ this has 2 indepel;dent living. Blac 'kowiak: Okay,..q'6 2 bedroom areas, kitchen areas. Aanenson: Right, and the primary-purpose is tq;live there. A lot of people have kitchens in their · basement for parties, entertaining,, that~sort' Of:ihing but' the primary purpose of this, What they've been totally upfront about is to have somebody living there. It's not for entertaining. It's to have another fanfily members live there. Blackowiak: Okay. Alright. David Senner: Well we still don't know if their unit is not a single family, right? Blackowiak: It's still a single family, correct? Aanenson: Yes. The ordinance allows for this variance to become two independent living units within that ~ingle t~mily home. -' · Blackowiak: Right. So it remains a single fatally home. Nothing change~, but as }',ate was saying, State: law allows one variance. Only one excemion to the defiuition of a family living in a house. -}lelp me out here. Kate. ' ' Aancnson: That's ~.hat the variance is for. %'0 allow more than one independent living. ;. - .. --v.' Blackowiak: More than one independent living area.: So nothing has.changed Mth the zoning.- It's, still a · · single fanfily home. Nbthing's changed with that. .. David Senner: Well I guess on the proposal that I got, it says variance for temporary use as a two family dwelling. Aanenson: That's correct. David Sennen And my question is. B!ackowiak: Two separate living areas. David Senner: Is this a two family. Sacchet: Would it be a two unit dwelling? I mean it's like I'm hung t,p on this family thing. Aanenson: There's two families i~_ there., if we waat to call it that, correct. That's what the; variance is' for. Blackowiak: Right, but it's still a single, a residential single family. It's zoned. Aanenson: The zoning has not changed to allow two families them. It only goes with this specific, the applicant and request. And it goes away if their situation changers. 23 Phmning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 David Senner:. Thank you. Blackowiak: Okay, thanks. Mark Piatkowski: Mark Piatkowski, 6833 Manchester Drive, Chanhassen. i'm the President of the Woodridge Heights Homeowners Association. Speaking for several people in the neighborhood; and I do commend you for having your parents and your~jn-.Iaws moving in. It's an excellent opportunity to bond, especially with the grandchildren,, alth..o, ugh! 'db' have questions about the iemporary use of it. Is it' something that goes away at the end Of, when they move away or when their parents move out? · Obviously our concern as a neighborhood is more vehicles in the neighborhood, more parking for cars for the grandparents, as well as property values of the neighborhood itself. So there are some eonhsion in regards to what's written in the document so they're obviously looking for some clarification to that. On the recommendation, on item number 5 it talks about by definition a 2 family dwelling is classified as an R-3 occupancy, therefore I'm not sure what this next thing means. A one, hour separation. Kind: Fire. BMckowiak: Fire wall. Grove- Building zode. ' ' · Mark Piatkowski: Okay. And there was some confusion in regaxds to the letter that was sfibmi£ted by · . Sawhorse. It talks about, there was, they do not intend to have a separate, entrance ,~o the '.:ower levei..: And c-n another letter that sent in to the C_hanhassen, City of Chanhassen, line item 4 says, i~'s ~.ot, I doi~'t. -know if it's '~vritten correctly or not. It said utilities. Do .they intend to h~ve separate utilifi,s installed?' It sounds like it's almost asking a question as compared to stating no, they do not intend to baYe a'. separate address. Obdousl~ we're concerned about a' separate,' address thin.V3ng two different homes. Obviously it goes into a different type category for the neighborhocxl... · ' Blackowiak: Okay. Kate let's see if we can go through his.questions here. No separate utilities. No separate address. Aanenson: Correct. Blackowiak: Th~ variance runs with the parents or to the sale of file house. answering7 Got them all? Oka),. .. - · . : Kh.~d: Oh pm'king was one of them." Any other questiotts I'm not Blackowiak: Parking. Kind: I-low many cars are allowed in a driveway and pm'Hng on the sue, et and that sort of stuff. Blackowialc As with a single fan-dly home. I mean you can't really restrict, I mean as long as k's ar', operable car. you can't really restrict. '. Mm'k Pialkowski: Right. There are covenm~ts in the neighborhood which will direct that otherwise and we'll address that if necessary. 24 Plmmii~g Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Blackowiak: Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, if there.'s anyone else who would like to come up, come on up to the microphone. If not I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, comments please. Rich, why don't I start with you. Slagle: The only thingl would ask is, aud I don't believe it will make a change but what the heck. Should we put cann0t'versus will not in the request for utilitieg'? Aaneuson: Sure. .-:-- Slagle: Okay. That's all. "' '- " -- Blackowiak: Okay. LuAnn, anything? Sidney: Yeah I'm in favor of granting a variance and I see this as a wonderful oppommity to encourage families to make use of, well an opportunity, to have "mother-in-law.apartments" in their homes. I think it' s going to be an important aspect of future living for all of us. And I think the one thing that I do ' recommend that we add to conditions is that, I'm still worded about whether or not the lower living level could be rented and I guess I'd encourage us to think about adding a condition that would state the living level, lewer living level will not be rented separately. It sounds like they're able to rent the whole- properD' but I wouldn't want to encourage pex~ple to think of you know finishing off the .basement, adding a sink and renting it out. Of course they do that for college students all the time but maybe-not in ... Chanhassen. I want to .make sure that the rental'question is addressed so agree with the stows coeditir~ns'- and the overall intent of granting the v~iance and would to recommend to do so. Blaqkowiak:. Okay,'thank you. Ult. .. '-: .... ". , · .: Sacchet: Well I made plenty of comments already. It's one of these, things where you'd almost rather not- ~..qk and just get your building permit it .seems. I still have an issue, I see the State !aw aspect in thig and ' if we call it a two unit dwelling instead of a two famiiy dwelling, I think that clears it up a little bit' because it's obviously one family. But I molly wouldn't want to set the precedent. Everybody that wants .a parent to move into their house has to come get a variance, I mean that just doesn't fly. And even if they want to build them a kitchen or a balhroom or so on, an extra bedroom and a deck or what have you,: it's still one family. Crying out loud. But by all means I don't want to complicate this issue further and please let's pass this quickly. -' .Blackowiak: Okay, Deb. '- . . .. Kind: I agree with my fellow commission'ets; and I would have a question for LuAnn. Do you feel that the condition that staff just handed 6ut this evening covers the temporary nature of this and would' preclude rental as an option.4.. Sidney: I guess I'd like to state specifically. Kind: Specifically. Aanenson: i guess that was our intent, and just to take what LuAnn was saying was that if the Eggers are living there, and so that it doesn't become, that they're kind of the main tenant. They have to be the tenant in the house. If they were to. move and the grandparents still stayed i'a the basement, that the two go together. If that makes sense? That was our intent with that language and if you wanted to tweak that, if that's what I'm hearing you're saying, similar thing. Plan~ing Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Sidney: Yeah. Just state no rental of the separate unit. Blackowiak: Uli, another cormnent? Sacchet: Yeah, the c~ndition number 5. Kind: Is not a condition.' .'... Sacchet: It's not. It doesn't work. I tl~nk the first sentence should come out. We can say. Kind: I think the whole thing should come out. Saechet:. Well, I think there is some purpose in there. We say it's proposed to be members of the.same family and therefore can be classified as a one family dwelling. I think that's significant. And it actually covers the concern of LuAnn's in term,q that it's not intended for rental. I think that would actually be implied in that. Blackowiak: Well maybe we can add some verbiage into that to address both the rental issite.and the proposal· that members of the same family occupy the dwelling refits, and'kind of weave those two together in some way to make 5 a little more clear. Okay, that's possible, Well my only comments are, I certainly agree .with this idea. We're talking tonight about affordable housing and about these other issues and this is certainly a good solution to a lot of people I think wanting to have parents move into them. I'm glad you came forwatfl and kind of got Us talking about this issue, even though it might seem silly to get a variance. I think there is an element of protection and the neighbors that talked about this 1 think brought that forward. Is the reason the city does that is to ensure that people are not going to finish off alad rent out basements to just anyone, ann this is the reason we have so,ne of these see. nxingly trivial ~I shouldn't say trivial but kind of questionable variance requests. Sacchet: Interesting. Blackowiak: Interesting. There we go. Interesting requests but there is a reason for them and I think it's for ewn3tone's protection and I think certainly in this case it certainly works well and sort Of carries -- forward the intent of this' statute so, with that I would like someone to make a motion please. Slagle: If I can throw out something just quickly, and I'm going to make alt assumption I believe is 100% conect, but I do want to just ask it. I assume this is 'o 'kay with the parents. · . Jim Hurt: You want it in writing.4 Slagle: No, no, Just a nod of the head will be' fine. Blackowiak: Okay. Kind: lVladam Chair, I can make a motion. Blackowiak: Okay. Kind: I move the Planning Commission approves the request tbr a temporary use of a single family d~'elling as a two unit dwelling located at 6791 Briarwood Court, subject to the following conditions 1 26 Plan:~ing Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 · · through < witi-, a couple changes. Number 3 be changed to wlmt was handed out this evening. Did' anyone read tiffs out loud so that the people in this room have heard this temporary part2 Shall I-read it. · out loud? .. . . . . Biacko~-iak: Go right ahead. .,- Kind: ! will do that. Number 3 now says, the variance will be recorded with Carver Coun~ specifically stating that the dwelling is temporarily permitt~, as a two unit dwelling for. such period of time as the Eggers family and their parents reside :.at..the. i6i:61~. 'y. ~r until the. home is.sold, whichever comes 'fi~st. So that's number 3. And then number 5. I'm go'.mg to make an attempt here'al this condition. 'It should sa5', since it's proposed that members of the same family occupy the dwelling .units, it can be classified as a one famil?/dwelling as defined by the building code. Therefore the second unit may not be rented · -- .. separately. Oh, and number 2. This is Rich's change. Separate utility services may not be established.'- Saechet: Can not. '- · Kind: 'Can not. Can not, may not. Single: Whatever is. .~nd: Actually which is correct? l'll let you decide that. That's my motion, · · Blackowiak: Okay, there's I:een a motion. Is there a te/zond? Sacchet: Can not, sei:ond. . Kind moved, Sacchet seconded that the Planning Commis~on approves the request roi' a · '.. --- .. ':" temporary use of a single family dwdllng as a two unit dwelling located at 6791 Briarwood Caurt, subject to the following conditions: .- . .:. The dwelling has an appearance of a single family dwelling including the maintenance of one- . dri'~eway and main entry. o . . Separate utility services can not be established. · ... The variance will be. recorded ~ith Carver Co'tmty specifically, stating that the dwelling is-. '- temporarily pc~nitted as a two unit dwelling for such period of time as the Eggers family and their parents t~side at th~ property, or until the home is sold, whichever comes first. . Permits for alterations must be obtained from'the Inspections Division before beginning any. work. . Since it's proposed that members of the same r$rnily occupy the dwelling milts, it can be . classified as a one fmaily dwelling as defined by the building eode~ Therefore the second unit may not be rented separately. . . All voted in favor and th'e motion carried unanimously 5 to O. Blackowiak: This is a Board of Adjustment and Appeals issue so anybody who is aggrieved by this .- decision nmy make an appeal in writing to the cit3' planning staff within 4 days. Thank you. I think al 27 Planning Commission Meeting -November 6, 2001 this time, I .-,aid.we'd take a break at around 9:00 but )/think it's going to be right now. I'm ahead of . schedule, and there are two reasons for this. One, I would like to take just.a quick break, but number two. We were just given a fairly substantial letter from the applicant, 4 full pages and I would like to maybe ~ake l0 minutes so the commissioners can have lime to fully look at rh[s I:eft~re we start ~r :liscussh.m o~ this itzm.becattse I think it's probably going rD be very impo:~amt to what's being said. So with that, let's take'a'"10 minute break. Quick break, read and then we'll reconvene. .:..,[ PUBLIC HEARING: , · -'." .. REQUF~T TO AMEND THE LANi~ USE-FROM RESIDENTIAL LARGE LOT TO RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY REZONE PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTAIE A_._2~TO'SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RSF PRELIMINARY PLAT PROPERTY INTO SIX SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND A VARIANCE TO APPROVE A PRIVATE ~;TREET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8800 POWERS BOULEVARD POWERS CIRCLE ARILD .. ROSSAVIK. " Public Present: .' Name Address . ' Virginia & Donald Coban 8821 Jim Kozlowski 8730 Greg Ka~ier 8742 lay~re: D. & Carol R. Lee !'380 Tanya Parks 8750 Brend:-: Hill 1360 .lackie, Molly & George Bizek 8750 Arild Rossavik-.. 8800 Rick Echteinacht 8746 Steve BuRn 8740 Cheryl Dory 8736 Sunset Trail ' Flamingo Drive ~lamingo Drive Oakside Circle Flamingo Drive Oakside Circle .Powers Boulevard . Powers Boule,axd Flamingo Drive Flamingo Drive Flamingo Drive Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. · Blackowiak: Okay, Deb. Any questions for staff right now? Kind: Not right now. Blackowialc LuAnn. Sidney: No. Blackowmk: Rich, do y'ou have any que.stions for st~ No.. Before l.go to Uli, m~d anybody who kr~o:vs Uli will thank me for this. How are we going to proceed on this? Shoukl we ask all of oar questions in ret,ns of land use. subdivision, everythJng'~ £.~ene. rous: Yes. Blackowiak: Just go right down the line.. 28 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Generous: Because you'll just be making a recommendation: goes on so we need to create that record. Whether you approve it or deny it-and it'- Blackowiak: Okay well, Uli. Go to it. Sacchet: Yeah, I do. have a couple questions, as you obviously guessed. Two key questions, l'he land use, when you said it's domino affect. The land uso is the first step7 --'3; Generons: Correct. .. . . ... . . Sacchet: And so if we would want to do anything, the land use would have to be in place first? CJenemus: Correct. - ' ~acchet: Now my question is the reverse. C~d we put the land use ~n place and deny the rezoning and subdMsion or would it be preferable to keep it all in one package? You understand my question? Generous: Yes. -' · . · · .. . S~tcch~t: Because the land use. at least by my reading' ~e l~md use- request is the most cooked while the rezoning and ,;ubdivision is a little more questi0iutbie. , · · Atmenson: But !egally stranding the most discretion you have is.at the changing, of the lm~d u~. r¢cenm~e o datio'a, and that's where yom' standing should take p .lace. If you concur that it should'be,.lhen ·. you would go through the rest of those. - Sac, chex: So we should do it as one? -' Aanenson: Correct, but having said that, you should also lo6k to the subdivision because you are going - to make a recommendation to the City Council, while they will make a decision. Whether or not they. concur with you, we don't know but you should review that as a part of'it. Sacchet: So to be really clear about this Kate: we do not wancto split this thing apart? We want to deal with this as one thing? Generous: Yes. - · . Sacchet: That' s what my first one.- The second major question I have, the s~aff report refers' to this proposal or something similar to this proposal having been denied in 1998. Generous: Correct. S~.cchet: it doesn't give much tm>re information than that and my question is, what is diffcret:t in this pre. posa! here from the propos:d that was .denied in 19987 Generous: We reviewed the subdivision. There's nothing different. Sacchet: There's nothing different? Generous: Correct. 29 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 ' Sacchet: So okay. Well that probably Will be a question for the applicant why it should go through now when it didn't go through in '98. Okay. I had about a dozen more specific que~stions but I'll hold off. Blackowiak: Okay. At this poin! woulO the applicant or their desig-nee like to make a presentation? If so, please step to the'tlaicrophone and state y~ut name and address for the record. Arild Rossavik: Yeah, my name is Arild Rossavik at 8800 Powers Boulevard. True enough the 'd' · .application was submitted be. fore and I.ill. get' into what has changed here since the last time and it's basically not that much of a change on my side.- '. Blackowiak: Okay, excuse me sir. -Could I just get you to pull the microphone down a little bit. [ think we ceuld hear. Thank you. Arild Rossavik: I will go back and point to that we didn't do that good presentation last time, and I'm a litde bit more'prepared this time. I want to go back to, I don't need...Talking about so much about the planning here and zoning and stuff like that. Here a copy that you have... City of Chanhassen sends this letter to me in '95 and they said that they...property taxes and they sent also on page 2 here, basically. they have spent about $4,400,000 basically on the project bringing down Powers Boulevard. And in addition to this,.they brought down water and sewer, There's' a lift station sitting down figh't there now for $225.000. Nobody's using it. And this is, this water ani. l sewer is stubbed into ~e property for 7 lots down there on previous...and for pm-use. Nobody's .using it. They also sent me this assessment pages, and you will see my lot here, actually it's Lot, number 2 is projected future units as 6 on it. This'is · project[on.done back in '93. So what l'm trying to da here to get the.city to use it's resoucces., we have a huge investment them. I see the city as.a huge investment there in infrasm~cture that's not being used. And we have another problem b. ere on the property, and we have pictures up because we have a lot.of traffic going down on Powers Boulevard now. The city projects in with these last years 10.000 cars a day. This is not the quiet area anymore. And also we have the traffic on 41 being shut down. All that traffic has now to date moved over to Powers Boulevard. We got all'the traffic from 41 and even when 41's going to be-opening up, we have no guarantee that this tr'~c will move back to 41. M6st likely it won't because like the shortcut going down to Powers Boulevard, across 17 and coming down to Chaska. So the zoning of the area definitely changed and I didn't do that. Because of the layout of the property, we have pictures here to see that delivery tracks coming down to the neighbor on the north here, he:s backing up on Powers Boulevard. And it's 45 miles an hour. That's not a good condition to be in. And these pictures here, he is backing in from the Powers Boulevard. The delivery van. And this is not a good condition. And to top it off here, I got this letter from, we have a copy from BFI. They refuse now to do delivery of waste from my property. And what is next thing to come UP here, UPS? Federal Express? You can't do. delivery tO your property because of they don't want to back out on-Powers Boulevard. It's 45 miles and there's'heavy traffic. To top it off, we have this picture here. This is the ~sult of development the city did the last time...because they took the culvert away from my driveway and they didn't lift it enough so I have a flooding problem here. And in the winter here, this is what we're looking is pure ice. And even the city acknowledges they have a responsibility for...down there if fl~ere's being reconstruction here being done they will, they suggest that we fix that problem at the same tine. I feel that rezoning will not change the 'character of the area. I got townhouses next to me. High density mwnhouses are 3 hours down the street. So to put, like you said the PUD to the north and the west, they define the character of the area. And we go back a little bit in the staff report you' 11 find out this was actually supposed to be low density as a part of the Lake Susan project back in 1980 actually. - And you can see that from, that's also in'the staff repert also. And so the appropriate zoning for this area is RSF, residential zoning. We have just what we call this spot zoning down there. Why...the 2.5 acre minimu:n size actually when the city is in shortage of lots actually? It doesn't make any sense to me. In 30 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 addi6c~: o4' tiffs zoning here, for lots, 5 more Io~s affordable lots. Actually affordable housing, single family housing. The intention is to develop the, se lots and sell them out for people to build houses -. ' themselves on them for reasonable cost. So we definitely .meet the comprehensive plan of affordable hot,sing here in Cbanhassen. And we'll als6 increase the tax ban for the city. :.smdso finedly we c~ get paid back from this huge investment fl~ey have on the water and sewer charges. The staff acknowledged that the use is compatible to the me, a, so it would not..'.and can aucommcdate without existing services. Meaning the infrastructure's in place and would not generate sigtiificant traffic. I mean extra traffic · compared to what it is now. If you looked up 0p a little bit..fixrther up .there where we. have townhouses, there with rather high density. The deyelop.me~t now ired eul-de;sac, they would provide, that.wbuld ' eliminate the traffic safety and we won"t have this problem because truck and my cars and UPS can ' come. in and turn in around on the cul-de-sac. And if we look back here On this picture here; you can the cul-de-sac will actually be, would be where the sign is actually and'you see the ~rty line, so I'm giving up all my land basically for the cul-de-sac. ,Smd my neighbor to the north there, he would have the · most benefit from this cul-de-sac because as you can see, he cannot drive into his lower end of hi~ warehouse there. He can't turn around. He has to back out again because the property is where.the line." is: The person...up there, he has to drive back again. So he' is, as far as I'm concerned, he's th8 best benefactor from the cul-de-sac and this development in the firs.t place. There are no...natural resources ' or physical features that cannot become... We can fit this into the cul-de'-sac or the property, asking: ·: developed. The tree in the front and two in the 'l~ack and I don't see any big issue that they 'cannot be : accommodawxl in the back Lhere. And the rea.~on we're not, unable tx.,...~sidential, industrial ~se of'his property. It's not an issue here acm'ally. He can ge, up .mid as long as/he city approves his business them. thot will just go on. Proposed subdivision, findings nuntber l'.. 2 and 5 and 7 need to t-e adju,;? '. aecerdit:gly, as in the proposed additions, No changes need to be made to private, the findings, It:s 'the city's findings actuall:t. And i3, the rezonJng findings need to be adjusted to reflect that propert3~-can be develeped within the performance standards of the z~ning ordinance and will not depreciate On.cl..cravat .. further ~,dentify with the rezonJl~g is not inconsistent a4th official city.plan..In conclusicn Lask the city tO. adopt the.findings factor and recommendations attached at the.end of staff' mm, but make 61-a. nges tcr' ' .: paragraph (a) and (c) thereof to :.ndicare the proposed ~t consistent with comprehen'sive plan-and can be .-' developed in conformance with the'performance standards. Iask for the cie)' then allow me to work:wilh the staff to addxess the various planning issues identified. Questions?- .' " Blaekowiak: Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions of the applicant? Deb7 .- ' ,. ' ' Kind: No, I guess not at this time. Blackowiak: Okay. No? Rich, you hiding or do you have any'/ . . . Slagle: .No: 1 don't have a q-cation right ~0W. Blackowiak: No. Okay Uli · Sacchet: Yeah, i'tn going to ask a couple questions. Actually quite a lot of que,stions. See how far we get. So Ibc question I brot, ght up with :-:taft before aa how is this different to what was brought befoce the city. was it 3-2 years ago. You basically state it's not all that different, l$'s pretty rauch the sera, so you agree with sraWs as.~sment of that. Now you tneafioe, ed some things that are benefits. Makingflfis development go through. It's making use of the resources, the sewer. It solves the problem with the acce~s. Ob~,'iously you'd have garbage pick-up again. 1 mean those are important things. And there are benefits, definitely. And are those the type of things that happened since this came to the cit) before? 31 " Planniog Commission Meeting - November 6, 200 l Arild Ro.~sax, ik: .Well that's happened since the traffic has i~.creased and also s~nce we did the preseritation last time, I must say we didn't bring in several issues. At that point in time I didn't think - ' . about it actually. -So I didn't bring about the water and the sewer problem at that point in time actually.. That was in r~iace. Sacchet: So are thera'any other lhings you can think of that ~ different in terms of, what 'I'm trying to understand is this came in pretty much the way it is apparently. A couple years ago it was turned down: Now you bring it back. Pretty much the same ~ing as it was then. Why should there be the decision this . · . . time? . Afild Rossavik: Well I just think that the situation has changM a little bit. The city is looking for reasonable housing. And definitel)' that's definitely changed. Sacchet: Got more developed. ,a, riId Rossa¥ik: More development and use existing infrastructure.. · · . Sacchet:. You got more traffic. Arild R.ossavi?c And more traffic m~d the city doem't, Well the fact is whether you even i~crease.the tax. base. · -' Saccbet. Okay. Airight, I think that's :'eason able a,~s'.ver. But backing ao, kind Of at .~he end:of this' -'." question. I mean if this catne in tike ~hat, those couple years back, ! would aasum~. thai some of the similar recommendations and ISSUES were raised ,.hat are being., raised.now. · ' " .. .- Afild Rossavik: Yes. but they weren't addresse~l dt that point in time a,.:tually. We didn't add*.egs the issue. We just carn~ l just came to ',.he heaa'-ieg.last time kind-of withou,, me making. .- -. Sacchet: It didn't go to this level. · Arild'Rossa,,ik: No, We didn't go to this level actually. Sacchet: Okay, that's what I want to know because. Arild Rossavil~: It didn't go to this level. .. · ' · . Sacchet: On that baals I would like. to asl~'y'our patience in going thr. ough questions because I'd like to get a sense of where you are at with 'some of ti,ese aspects that staff raises in the context of this proposal.. So if you don't mind I'm going-to go through a lot of questions. Hopefully you're quick· One of the issues that staff is raising thai the lots abutting Powers are too small. What's your feeling about that? .. Arild Rossavik: Well I don't feel they are too small because they are, ltne. an the lownhouses going a l~ale bit aotth of the 3 houaes, they have much smaller lots [acing the same thing actually. '¢,~hat the staff had a pr¢:b!en': with before .0uas Ihat somebody-, wou~d, put townhouses on those lots because technically they could go townhouses. You know we're not going to put, we just...because the variance I think is for · 8,0~0 s,qtmre foot for townhouses. But I'm not interested in putting townbouses in. We'd put in n:~idential-?,euses. Single family houses so that was the. that has never been an issue with staff before that abutting Powers Boulevard because they were basically, they will be facing Powers Boulevard but 32 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 they wot,'t ~ driving in from Powers Boulevaxd. The'-'d be'u~dng the cul-de..sac and coming in fa'om the back side. Sacchet: Grading significantly intpacts the chai'gcter of the site. You already said you didn:t'fully-~gree "' w~.~.h that. but yeu would be willing to try to nfinimiz~ that. .'l. Arild Rossavik: Yeah, of course. Of course. That's just technicality actually. -. -.:.~; .. Sacghet: Bei:ause on the west side the~..wa,y:ifienfi0n :that the. t0Pography.len .ds' itself to tuck under 'hype of l-,ouses. ' '. --' - · : Arild Rc~ssavik: Yeah, that's not a problem with me 'actually that was. .. - '... Sacchet: Impact of Lot 4 with the ravines. Arild Rossav~: Well, the technical thing I got 3 ravines on my propert5 and there's a little flat' tiling where actually the house will be. Or actually it will be before that. So the ravines will be back, won't ' affect the. house there but the ravines will be actually not touch the door. And the last time the city was a.qking an easement on my ravines in conjunction with the park and such, and it doesn't make av, y differeuce because they will not be touched. Ai~ easement can be.in ~lae, e... - ' - . S~cchet: So are you saying you'd be willing to move that building site forw./ad ea,,:.t to some- extent? · . o · . Ar?id Rossavik: '.Yes. And they probabl~' can..show icbetter than I.caa. . . . . · . Succhet: And that's the one on the southwest., isn't it? · · ., Arild Rossavik: Yeah, tiffs is the one on the south, fight. · ' Sacchet: So you'd be willing to move that forward. Now you mentioned the idea of easemems. No/v staff was on this report such as the conservation easement over the westerly part of the property, as well as a drainage and utility easement of the ravines so what's your feelings about that? Afild Rossavik: Okay. The drainage, right now goes on the side here actually and there's no, whatever.'. they need to have in that, I don't have any problem with actually: It's just a technical issue more than. anything. ' ' - ...... - - · . Sa¢chet: I4~.,,ing a conservation .ease. mentiike the way they're proposing, i guess that's the blue color~ · ! Adld Rossavik: .Yeah, I'll give the land up. No issue. Sacchet: Okay, that's wlmt I want to hear. Lot 6 could also, you'd also want to move tbat other easement anc~ tlhat wouldn't be that big an issue? ,qa'ild Rosse, v'ik: Yes, it should be worked out actually fine actually so I don't see th.qt... Sacchet: So fl~e~: seems to be not that much of an issue on the west side. It's more an issue on.the east' side where there's certain...accommodations on landscaping buffer av, d berming. Are you refen'ing to · the townhouses and what it is up north which is a very well taken point. On the other hand.we're looking at the cot,ditioning to the large lot to the south so. 33 Planning'Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Arild Rossavik: Well even the large lot to the south would be minimized impact because we don't' have a commou driveway. My neighbor and myself we have a common driveway. The neighbors to the south- they have their owh driveway cul-de-sac down there so they'd be min;.mized impacted. And hours .' would not be so tar after the first houses down there. Sacchet: The well and septic system, I assume vou're fine with that. Atilt Rossavik: Yeah, whatever..I'm ...fine with. 'that...going. to be hooked up to water and sewer.' · . · Sacchet: I don't know whether we will be able tO tiear from the owner to the north because he's def'mitely...in th~s. Are you working together to some extent? ' Arild Rossavik: Well I have tried to get his attention on this matter and he is here today so he probably, . you can a~k him yourself about that actually. I have been trying to send a letter to the effect that he. would benefit from this being here. I think he's more concerned about his business actually. HOW it will affect his .warehouse down the road. ' Sacchet: ...how he benefits. The tree situation. There's a-fair amount or' txees in the staff report t,hat is suggested would need to be planted to establish'the minim.am canopy coverage as well as a significant ' amount o£ plm~fings as a buffer yard. What's your sense? .. . . Arild Rossavik: [ have no problem. Whatever it takes. There will be ininin:um impact on existing trees on/hi.'; development. · Sacchet: Okay. What they talk e. bout additional 3 trees. Arild Rossavik: Yes: so I will provide whatever additional trees they neexl to have. Sacchet: And they really have probably the most intense poiht'then what it comes down to ia that-the . requirement of the cul-de-sac like staff showed that it would have to come back, and really, I mean realistically, looking at this either way it is right now I kind of wonder how well accommodated that.Lot number 1, that pad is now with the cul-de-sac going back pretty much with...flag lots. Realistically speaking I think that's not a far fetched assumption. How do you feel about that? Arild Rossavik: Well, it that's what they think. But let meljust show you something here. Where's an additional plat zoning there anct if we go back to the picture, if we looked at the now picture there, and. yo~ see !'m giving up most of the land and'maybe I can talk to the neighbor into giving up 3 feet-of his land. Then we can move the cul-de-sac, then the cul-de-sac will accommodate him at a better level and all the way up there. That's'a technical issue. Sacchet: Actually that touches on my last question then. Hopefully it's the last one. There is this retaining wall along the cul-de-sac towards the north and when l looked at the property, it does actually look..to that garage from your house...and the retaining wall will pretty much cut the access . from...n6rth. Arild Rossavik: I addressed that issue before with the people who designed this because mis is a 2 dimensional drawing. It's not the 3 dimensional drawing, so as a matter of fact his boulder will not be affected by the cul-de-sac at all. 34 · . Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Sacche~: So it would keep his driveway .. Adld Rossavik: Yeah, be would keep his driveway on this cul-de-sac. Sacchet: Well bttt that's not what staffput in as if this would .wove forward. You would be reqLdred'to actually access the cul-de-sac the way I understand the staff report. So I wonder to what extent that is ' possible w:.th the differences of the elevations. " x :~ . Arild Rossavik: Well .it'S thy understa:u~ ..ding,"~king to'the' ~ngineer when we did-the...would not affect this cul .de-sac at all. With the original' plan,-the revised one it was moved down a little bit actually which was on the first plan. Because that would 'becam~ a very sensitive issue. They .could go out there and point out exactly where the cul-de-sac.got but as you can see. on-the picture here, the cut.de-sac, I '. have enough space on my land to put the whole cul-de-sac on my land. So the only thing, if he gives.up-.a couple of feet on his side, then we don't, we can more adjoin the cul-de-sac actually. · ' . . Sacchet: So you would expect that he would do some grading to actually... Arild Rossavik: Yeah, whatever. I think so. Sacchet: I tl:.ink that's enough questions fight now. Thank you for your patience. Blackowiak: Alfight, con:missioners. Doe~s anybody else have questions of the. applicant? : -'- -. -. Kind: I have one quick question. wa:er and sewer. Arild Rossavik: Y~. You commented that you stubbed ht for 6 or 7 homes on your aite for . .- -. Kind: And I'm looking at this chart with the assessment mil, and it looks to me as though you and ydur neighbors all pay the same, amount, whether you had 4 units, 5 units or 6 units. You didn't pay extra for. 6, as I understand it. " A.,q. ld Rossavik: Just look at present assessment. This assessed pre.sent assessment on it. .. Kind: Present total assessment? '"" · P~ri!d Roseavik: It's supposed to rake, yes...Present'total assessment 'tz'cause I can't, they can't-assess.me more.. They came out because [ just had t' 10t at that point in time. i~' you look at- that potential future units, they didn't say it was 6 units there. They said potential future mait$ and my neighbor has 4 .-. potential future units. Then 'present total assessment is just for 1 unit. So if you times that by 6 actually, when you get $12,000 or actually $14,000 taxes coming into city just from my property. Saanc Comnfissioner Kind, if I could add something. Just point of clarification. There's 1 sewer stub. 1 waxe'r stub iutc..the property to serve both, yes. To ser~e both the northerly parcel and Mr. Rossavik's. The assessment sheet that he shows is proposed future units that -ate used to propose his assessments. We' looked at this property and said possibly 6 units in there. You have to do that when you're' proposing assessments, and like he said, the property to the north was looked at for 4 units so he could possibly be asse~s'tml for 4 units. And just to add, neither he, bix. Rossavik or the property owner to the north have bee.-, assessed yet, and I think I mentioned that in the staff report. 35 ....... · Planning Colmnissien Meeting - November 6, 2001 Arild Rossavik: If l just make a little comment on that because his letter here when we would assess' those, we pulled it back again because'for legal reasons they couldn't assess us so. · i~i~ckcw:,ak: Okay, rely other quesfiot~s of th-_, applicant? No? I don't have at;y questions e!the~'. Thank you. · Arild Rossavik: Thank you. · Blackm,Aak: Okay, this. item is open for a pubi[c hearing.so if anyone would like.to come up before the. ' commission,, please step to the nficropf/o~ie and-state your name and addres~ please. C~o:ge Bizek: My name. is George Bizek and my address is 8750 Po,vets Boulevard. 'We have.the adjoining driveway at the bottom of the hill. At this time 1 do not wish to deYelop this property: I'bought this property to have some space. It was obvious that it was laid out to begin with for large lots for a reason. Because of runoff. Because of, you look at a topographical map of the area, it's steep.. That's - why I k, ought the property. I don't want it to change and I don't want it to be stuff~ down my throat that - I have to c!maage. As far as him referencing my property as a warehouse, a business. He has ealled you people over3 times to go through my property to .see if there was anything in non-compliance with my. '. property and t~,.dy wit~ the city did nol have an? problem with it The t~ucks backing ou*. of the .-. " driveway, you migh~ okay the red G&K truck, if that's a o.,.oblem 'a,i~ ~he backi~g out of my ds'iveway. i'11 q-fi: getting dry c!eaning you kmaw. The referenr, e to tmc'xs nc.~ deliver;.ng t:) us, I don't [:ave a . t:rc, blen, witi~ th, az. The o~.ly thit~g the ;,~arba~_:e zomp'-anS., and [ talked to Cory o':er at tko. gad:age'" ...'. compar, y. Over at BFI tw~cat.,se riley want t~_em :arbslde. Th..~t's the only :'efem'.~cc ~n~.y said. Thgy:~. stil-! '~c~in.:r tt'. oick:up our garbage but they want it curU~side. He's making.at~ issue out of lhis .~:~ try ~.o ..... . s~vay, te get him to develop this propert)._ The city mnst hove any records if t~ere's ever be~n an5'., ac~:idents '..here. We have no median crossing the~. Everyone who leave:i uur house goes down and nxakes m~ ~.llegal U-tm'n on the firsl curb cat [or ti~e next cul-de-sac, including Mr. Rossavik. [ don't · .'" know, it's pretty obvious that this really wash'/~.~eant to be chopped up that small because of the topogniphi, c layout of th, ptope~y. I think it should remain that way and ! think ][ have a bunch of .. neighbors l~em with the same lots that feel the same way. . · .'.. Blackowiak: Thank you. Sacchet: Could I ask son.thing7 Black0wiak: Sure, quick question. Sacchet: Since you're So much incline ~ iffi this, if I could jt~st ask a few quick questions. You already express veo' clearly that you don;t like the idea of being forced to develop. I had some other question,,.' here. There's some benefits' in thisthat there is better access to cul-de-sac. Having access to water and sewer, would you consider that an adva.ntage? · George Bizek: Well water and sewer's there alre, a:l7. It's stubbed our on Ihe p~ operty. Sate. her.: Yc, u're no~ usk~g cit) water and ~,,v::~'. You ~av'e v well and seutic system, is that con'ect?' George giz~.k: 'Right. 36 · -. P!amfing Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Saect:et: So it's not really a benefit for vou then in that sense. I metal if tiffs goes through and .~ou would have to access your property, your horn~ from that cul~-sac, do you think that would be doable? I mean considering... . . . George Bize. k: If this goes through I'm hiring an attorney and I'm suing the city becaus~ this is.. '. .,. Sacchet: You don't want it? George Bi~k: I do not want it. Saechet-- You don't see any benefit? Geo~e Bizek: Yes. Saechet: Okay. That's my questions. · · .. George Bizek: And the water and ice he shows at the bottom of the driveway in the picture thai; he' put up ' hiro. seifjust shows you what kind ofrtmoff we've got. It's a large piece of property. It's all sloped.-. The ' roacl does x:et take the water. Our lots take the water. It takes it dowa. There's a walk path that th%,'put . in. After-a heavy rain, across the ravines on thd back .of:his property, you can ~ water that flJ0se walk. , - ,:, , ..paths are ,,,.,.et for a we~k from the. water coming aut of thom ravines. ;I fac, an that's the amount of water. · . It nc, t ouly. gets it from our property, it gets it fix~m the development behind us. I'm fine with it: I don2t.. , whn~ m~)'. cha~;ge.. " · -. , '- , ..- .- · . " Sacchet:. You made yourseJf plenty clear, thank,you. · : ... ·-'. '. · . Siagl~: Let rr~, if I may. " : ~ ._- Black0wiak: Mr. Bizek, could we ha ve.'l gueAs.Rich has go~ a question' for you. '" Slagle: Just one more question. I hear you. I guess what I'm tryingto decide is, is the reason you don't want your neighbor to develop, is it because you are going to be asked in essence, or .reqMred to chmlge yeur driveway into a cul-de-sac? Becaus~ that s~ms to me the .only thing from. my, use of your cun~nt property that will change. George Bizek: I think it will be a detriment to the value of... '; . . Single: Okay, that's what l',-n tD,'!ng to get'to. So J.~_'s,the use of his land in Such a way that-you believe it's detrimental to your's? .. George Bizek: Absolutely. Slagie: Okay. Okay. Blackowiak: Thank you. Steve Buan. Hello. I'm Steve Buan at 8'740 Flamingo Drive. B~n here one Other time doing this since the host lime.. If I could have some of those, one of those maps. The large plat map that showed the area. Generous: The grading or? 37 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Steve Buan: No, the larger scope. To put some of this in a little more context to make some-of the ' commissioners members that haven't been around. I was an original buyer in the Lake Susan Hills West development, right adjacent to Mr. Rossavik's property. You'll notice the las'ge park area back here was originally guided to be, developed. That's when we bought our home, there were potential plans for that. The city backed out-6~-those and decided to not intensively develop this part of the park. They justput a gazebo in there, lVlade a flat area and left the rest of it natural. Large prairie area that' s, it's a reverted prairie. Planted to convert it from agricultural?e. Probably grazing. At the time with a lot of large trees in the bluff area .right along this area h¢i:e~'whicb'.then also the one large ravine' cuts right across. these back lot lines here. Another large ravine immes onto my property and down here. In 1993, summer of '93 with all the rains there was a significant rain storm in June of that year. This ravine on this side sounded like Niagara Falls. The water was just pouring out of all these back lots, across this park and coming down into there. They had to come back and put large rip rap boulders in there to protect the ravine from cutting back into the properties back there. I think the parks commission made.some correct decisions in not developing this. They decided to leave this a natural park area. It fits in well with the upland park being in this area. And the transition area down to the lowlands of large lots, not density development still allows a connection to the ldwland park over here. To go in and densely develop all these lots across here, you're cutting off natural corridor of transition of wildlife and also views and other natural amenities that go with this park. Ybu therefore are then changing amenities for the entire area, city of Chanhassen. Not.just people that live adjacenl to that. That's one issue. Just trying to address some of the things that have been brought lap here. The deliv6ry issues I believe they can be addressed through.other means. In fact I can't understand why there hasn't been tumaroun, ds mandated.for those preperties on their property, much like in other cities. You go out to Crystal, New Hope, anywhere up them, anybody who's got a front a Winnetka Avenue or a major front, they have a T-shaped driveway where they're mandated to have a. turnaround sa they don't back down. There is a turnaround at the' bottom so I don't see that to be a problem. And one major problem I have, even with the dev'elopment, if it ever got that far, is those houses being so close to Powers Boulevard, right along here, that I feel it's a deuiment to the community. There's no precedence for houses being fronted up into residential single family homes with their back lots being butted up to there. Yes, the,no houses are along Powers Boulevard but they front on the side street and therefore it just degrades the quality of the residential single family and adjoining areas. It just doesn':t work. Doesn't work at all. Let roe.just conclude my remarks with, and I don' t know if this got included in the current pacliage or not but I submitted with'3 of my neighbors a letter to the Planning Commission in "98 and I'm just.going to read it here. In response to notice of public hearing regarding request for rezoning and subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks, we as interested parties submit the following written comments per this notice. The ravine and bluff topography on the western side of this property and adjoining areas of several other properties is part of an integrated, interdependent, natural-system. This ecosystem contains a complex biodiversity of plants and animals. Numerous species of trees, shrubs, and perennial plants of varying age i:lasses from sapling to dead and decaying are present. Tree and shrub species include white pine, red pine, spruce, oaks, maples, cottonwood, ironwood, cedar, sumac and many more. This plant life system supports a wide variety of animal life, including ground nesting birds, earth and tree cavity nesting birds; numerous song birds, bald eagles, owls, pheasants, wild turkeys, deer, squirrels, chipmunks, rabbits and many tnore. The city parkland immediately adjacent to the southwest is directed to be a natural landscape park. The ravine mid bluff system is a vital and important pan of this park. Several species of animals and birds utilize lite prairie grassland area for food and the ravines and bluffs for shelter. To encroach and damage the ravine and bluff complex would diminish the value of the park to the residents of Chanhassen. The character of this portion of Chanhassen is defined by the dramatic rise in elevation and stand of large, ma~cre trees. The vertical rise from Powers Boulevard to the crest on Flamingo Drive is approximately l(J0 l~et and is unmatched throughout Chanhassen except the bluff area of the Minnesota Riger valley. Unique features encompassed within the approximately 3 acres of ravine and bluff structure are a 38 · Plann!ng Coum'dssion Meeting - November 6, 200i si gnature of this area of Chanhassen and should not be obscmv_xl m encroached upon by further . development. Therefore we strongly oppose the proposed rezon:.ng and subdivision of this property. Subraitted'by Steve and Christie Buan, David and Cheryi Doty, Greg and Shireen Kahler, and Jim and Sue Kozlc, x:,ski. And are ti, ere' any queslions afi,~'body-might have of me.' -' -" - B]ackowia?.: Thank'you. Commissioners, any questions? No. I would ask, I did not get a copy of tlmt ia the current packet. -' Steve Buam'No. it w~.s in the last one~., .. -' · . . . . . . Blackowiak: Yeah, if you would just get a copy ~o Kate so that could be included in the packet that goes lo council. Just written comments. It's nice to have copies of everything so that cotincil knows what ' ' we're seeing. Okay, thank you. .' Iavme D. Lee: My name is Jayme D. Lee. I live at 1380 Oakside Circle. I'm the neighbor tO the'south at:d I want to state m~ opposition. We have a large lex and it butts against other large lot& which. maximize the appeal of rite large lot. Privacy, seclusion, unobstructed views. It would be an ungraceful. intrusion to stick 6 houses in there, into the'lot in the middle and would severely degrade the~ appeal of all. ct' the i:crdering lots. The, degraded append of my lot would in turn [ believe de~omute the, value of my .lot. And wb~t recourse would I ha ye to collect fair cempensafion for my lots. Other concerps, the:re are .. definitely tm,"fic concern. CYaxenfly there are 2 residents that ~ ri~:t turn 0nly. 'lite 2, and:I do from ..' tim:-: to tiwe se,~ them doing a U-mm at the opening in firmt'o[ our O .akside Circle and I'm concerned .tha~ if we i~ave mc:m residents them without, with only right turn, right' mm, that we're going to-have' more - people tun~Jng U-tums there and it could present a dangerous s~tuation :~bere people are st0pp. Jng.in'ti!e left lane to mm. to take a U-tt,m there. Also I'd be concemed, abou't children, the shape of o'~'r properv~t, .'- -. it has a pointed comer which goes up into that very excellent wild land that was justs talked )xbouL'.Afld.~' woeld be concerned of children going up them to play as they. would want to. Pexhaps it would pi'~mnt a. liability to me if they would hurt themselves on my prol:~rty. Would that mean I would have to put up .... fences on my property? I'd have concerns about that. Any questions? -' Blackowiak: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? No. Thank you very much. Brenda Hill: Brenda Hill and l'in at 1360 Oakside. Circle, so I'm 2 lots down to the south. And Iwant to state my opposition also. The reason that we bought the place, our homestead that we bought is because of the lax-ge lot. Because of the scenery out in back and there's a lot of wildlife and stuff like that.- l-think . it would be'deu'imenta! to o~ property as well. Loo ;ldn'g ~ut my back wind,)w, seeing all those.hoixse~,. that's ~,et what it was ~t for. ~ was mean. t-for a'large lot and that:.~ why we bought it. I oppose. - · · · Blackowiak: Thank you. Rick Echteinacht: Rick Echteinacht, 8746 Flamingo Drive.' I purchased my home 2 years ago. It was after the last decision was made that this area would not be developed. I'm up behind the lot being. :. considered tot change and just like the previous individual stated, the view that we have, the wildlife' that gces :brough our back yard and down through th~-t asea ,;s something flint we looked at when we were. pumhasing this home. And it was kind of our understanding when we purchased the home that this decision had been made previously and I don't see any change basically from what was decided in 1998 a~d I would eppo~ th~s change. A.'~y questions? Black,-,wiak: I don't think so, thank you. 39 .. Pi.an:flag Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Don,lid Coban: My name is Donald Coban. 1 live at 882l Sunse~ Trail. [ live over the top of thehill-: I ;vas. or we were one of the first houses in the whole neighborhood. There was a neighbor to us when we built back in '75. We have 2 ~h acres and the reason we picked that spot was the large lot.. Just big. '. · enough for what we wanted to do. And as things grow up al'ound the .~rea we bec~me large lots and that was rosily gte:tt bec,tuBe we could see anytFdng we wanted to ,1o. As ',,ou can see, we' ye got a pretty good sp~:t up ti/ere. 'We've got the park area.adjoining us and it looks p,'etty gocx!, so I agree with. some of the th;.ngs that the other people have said here. We're going to kind of suffer with the animals.an'd ' things that go through our property and we can.see out in the park. I just, I don't want the project to go tl,~ough for the same reasons we discussed bael~ in years before..Another little comment Foe got to make is that tlaev comanented about 10,000 c~S' a day: That means you're going to see a car through them every 6 seconds. I don't believe that. That's 24 hours a day. It just doesn't come out right. Any questions? " Blackowiak: I don't think so. Thank you vex')' much. Arild Rossavik: I'd like to make a comment on.'. Blackowiak: You know, let's let everyone have a chm~ce'then if you'd like to come up agairh you know as a publi.,2--he~i~g, that's alright. '- . . 'Virginia Cobtm: My name is Virginia C'obm'~ ai:d Don' didn't ask one question ti~at I ~.'ould lille t6 ask. '.. Mr. Rossavik keeps saying, that this is lc.;' low cos~ housing ahd I ~'¢ou!d like to ask him what Itc'intends t6 charge f:)c ti:ese lots, and if it does fit into the affon, lable' hou:.,ing guidelines.- '. ' ' ' Ble, ckow~uk: Okay.- i' think we'll have him ~sx~er that when he comes back up. · Virginia Cobam Okay, thank you. : '. Blacko;~.iak: Okay, is there any of the ether neighbors who'd like to get up mtd add anything else?'.If' not, Mr. Rossavik, why don't you come up. Oh, excuse me. Carol Lee: Hi. My natne is Carol Lee. My husband spoke a couple minutes ago. There were.a couple' cf things in the rnatenals that were passed out that in looking over th~m earlier this evening I feel are in error. There i~ a letter in the materials that is a 1996 letter from an engineer who states that there is not a wetlands-issue in the area. In 1996 late, and 19.o.7 there'were significant changes .made in the road. way on Power.q Boulevard.- ..And Mr. Bizek told you that there is a runoff issue in the spring, during the rain . stomks. In om area ore, elves we find that the front 'ama by the road i~'so soggy in the springtime that it's diff. cult ~,o mow. So I would submit that that letter dated 1996 is at this point in time inaccurate, parry .. bec. aus~ of continuing runoff area and because there was the road workexl on after that which that,letter does not reflect, in addition'on page 5 of the materials that was passed out, there is a recommendation that states that in order to control some of the drainage, that berm should be placed on some of the facing properties on Powers Road i'm assuming that that would include our place which is south of the prc-f:er[y and to ~lace a berm on that material would further be detrimen.~al to the drainage of tb~.t vicinity . axed ~vc:~Id also be.. detrimental to our property ua!ue. Thank you. Blackowiak: okaY, thank you. Aanet~on: Would you like us to respond to that? Blacko vtak. Yeah Kate, if you have anything to add right now. 40 Pi~,nnmg Commission Meeting .- November 6, 2001 Aanenson: Loft's the person that does wetlands. It's her opinion there are no wetlands. We would concur the~v, are drainage issue& We pointed that out. Two separate issue. The drainage issue. The- buffering is required along a collector street. It's part of the landsc, aping ordinance, and that was one of the issues raised with those lots is that the lots were deep enough to' accommodate that. They wouldn't access onto Powers..'That's not allowed but that they have enough screening in the back yard through the berming. We wouldn't berm on somebody else's property, but that they provide a noise barrier, lights,' that sort of thing, along Powers Boulevard.. Blackowiak: Okay. '- .-- -. Sa~trc Kate, just to add something to flutt. Miss Lee's concern was'that we would make her pm~rty bent, also. No, we obviously won't do that. Bl~kowiak: Okay, thank you. And Kate, now you're differentiating between wetlands and gullies, which I think this letter did to a certain extent. Aanenson: Con,ct. And as by state law, as a wetland as classified by state law. Wetland Conservation Act and the drainage issue which would lmve to be. worked through if a subdivision was to-go forw'atd.,' Blackc. wiJk: Okay. which is not to say .tl3a.. t there aren~-t drainage issues but it's technically not defined as' a wetland:is wlmt we're saying. .' · ...... ' .... ' Aa}~et,son: Correct. '' ..-- . . o Blackowiak: Okay, gmat. Is there anyone else. before I give Mr. Rossavik a chance to respond? 'I guess to a couple things. Why don't you step.up to the mic. Oops, sorry. ', .George l~i?ek: I'd just like. to address the issue of the c. ost of the lots.' .Wh_ en he approached me to give me to develop the lots, he was giving me. different figures of what these lots would sell for than the oues that he's applying to the city. Blackowiak: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Rossavik, why don't you jus~ come up fight now.and'if someone else wants to add something, they're just going to have to'come after you. .. Arild Ressavik: Just to 'address the issue of why did the city bring down Powers Boulevard in the first place. It was nothing like if nothing chang.es..But the 'fact is, we have'all 212 coming out now stopping at 4 right now. The next develop.ment there'is Powers Boulevant. It's going to be an access road. It's going to be, these figures I have from the city for 10,000 cars a day. They don't come from me. And they can be as early as 5-6 years down the line. So either my neighbors like it or not, it's going to be .' heavy traffic on that road the~. And also tiffs' turning around they're talking about, well most traffi~ will go dowry'and hit 212 and go towards Minneapolis so by turning it won't be a serious issue actually at that lX>:.nt in time. I understand they don't like change. 'Talking about the pricing on the'property.. What I have in place is actually w~tb the horneownets. They're the people who's helping out people. They put a cotxple o.r thousand dollars down or' tt',eir own pocket money, and they could call their own contract could help from therm They set up a plan for that so we have about, becoming somebody goes in and appraise the preperty. }low much it's worth and then they'll give it, they come up with a couple thousand dollars so ~hey can build a house there, and they have about 20% in equity the day they move in. That's the goal of my planning there actually. That's the reason they don't need big mortgage payment. Pay-no mortgage insurances. So this is actually the best way I don't have any pricing on this thing because you 41 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 know pricing changes.' It is an approach that I will not be involved with. I will provide, if it's being improved, I will, these lots will be available for sale. Not to develop for but for single persons to purchase these lots actually, and would go up and see what the price is going to be basically based on the b~t development cost them and whatever actually the market value and point is they wili have 20% :' equity... Blackowiak: Okay. And Mrs. Coban had a question, I'm sorry. What was that question again Mrs. Coban, did you have a question about? · .. Virginia Coban: ...how much he was-~harging.... Blackowiak: Oh, what he was charging so we, okay. Arild Rossavik: Like I said, we have to work...that would determine the price of the lot. Virginia Coban: My question was whether it fit in with the guidelines of affordable housing. Arild Rossavik: I don't know what affordable is. This is going to be'single family housing. Blackowiak: Alri. ght Kate. what's affordable housing? I mean it's very unlikely. . , Aanen~.vn: 134. .-' Blackowiak: 134. -. .-' · Ari~d Ress~}vik: 134 in Chanhassen? Blackowiak: Well that's the Met Council guideline for affordable, for a single family house. Whether. '- Arild Ro~savik: It's going to be very tough to get in I can tell you that but I mean it will definitely be.. low, what normal pricing would be in Chanhassen. Blackowihk: Right. That's what l'm saying. Yotr'm not going to be subsidizing anybody er anything? Arild Rossavik: No. Blackowiak: No, okay. . . Slagle: Madam Chair, may I ask One question of the applicant? Is this plan that you've proposed the only plan that you would be'Willing to accept? Arild Rossavik: bio. I'tn flexible you know. Slagle: Let me be mom spec~.fic, in number of sites. Arild Rossavik: Oh, .lots on the property? Slagle: Yes. 42 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 . Afild Rossavik: '[hat's flexible. I mean it's the city loss more than mine because they lose the tax revenue basically and it would just bring the cost up to get a lot actually. Because the development cost is going to be the same, It's about $150.000 to bring in the cul-de-.sac. That's money I have to come up with And also, a~er I have coroe up with all the money, 1 have to give it tO the city ~ a public street. ~ Slkgle: Okay. -"'- ' Blackowiak: That's it, thank you.-Okay, seeing;no one else I am going to close the public hearing. Kate, before I go any further, I know I said I'~d .do .s0fi~ething at 9:00. What are your feelin'gs on issues i5 and-7? Aanenson: The applicants are, ready. They're'hem so.. Blackowiak: I know. Aanenson: It's up to you. The by-laws say 10:30 1 believe. Blackowiak: By-laws say 10:30 and I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page on that. Alright, well that being said let's yeah, let's move forward with this. Commissioners, we need to make our comnr.~nts on this. Deb, why don't you start. ':: '. Kind: I' I1 keep rny conm~euts brief. I think long and hard before I ri'aXe comp plan, land use changes and ti,is is ciea~ly guided as res';dential large lot for the future. I really don't see a compelling reason~ borrow Craig Peterson's, my mentor's te~,-nJnoiogy to change that designafiou. .' Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. U,q. Comments? "..- ' Sacchet: Yeah, couple quick comments. Obviousl~ this is a bit of contentious situation we have he~. l' -. do want ¢o commend staff for being sensitive to the natural aspects To topography~ the trees, the slopeff and all ih, at. I appreciate that. It's difficult to untangle certainly the two lots, the one to the north and this : one. i do believe it would be, in terms of our terminology, s~ot zoning.',.those lots and it would'nbt blend in. I do feel that the subdivision is not really feasible. I don't personally have a problem with the variance request for a private slxeet or the access part. The rezoning sounds fairly okay. Actually rezoningdoes not sound alright, It's the land use. that Sounds relatively okay. I do see that there are some problems. In one of the letters that came from the applicant, actually both from his lawyer I .' believe, it was pointed out that these large lots are an anomaly within an area of a lot of single familyand m the north even multi-family situation. I do believe thoagh that it's become very clear tonight with all the different neighbors that ~pokc up, that it is a c01iesive area withinthat p.arkland and the large, lots so. that we have to be sensitive to that.. I don~t think I can support passing this at this point.. - .. Bleckowiak: Okay, thani~you. LuAnn. Sidney: Yeah I look at the request for a land use map amendment and I do have problems with that, s.s prec~xling ccrmnissioners have stared. There's no compelling reason that I can see that we should change the land us,~ for this particular ama. It would change in my opinion the character of the neighborhood. I can see in the fmure'if the number of lots might be. reduced, that might not be such a problew~ [ do think that the encroachment into the drainageway, which we're talking about, and I guess I'd encourage staff" for council to maybe do a short drainage 101 course ,an this particular site be2~use that seems to be an ' issne. I believe staff has characterized it as a significant drainageway which should not'be encroached ul×,n. And as Uli stated, this does provide a connection point between parklands, large lot does serve a 43 Pla.rating Con-mission Meeting - November 6, 2001 pu~ose here and for us to spot rezone I thitJk would be u real problern so I would not support .this. I ' believe this development would be premature. Bla,:kowiak: Okay, Rich. S}agle: I have some.~oughts as well as a couple of questions for staff if I n~.y. The development to the- no~h, the townhomes. What was that zoned prior to being moved into? .. - . . Aanenson: Lake Susan? Probably all A.-2..or"agricultural.-A-l; A-2. ' ' . . Slagle: Okay. So just a hypothetical here. If the' applicant here today was not this gentleman but the other gentlemma on the north lot, my question is what would we be thinking? You know. Because we · have tMked as a group, now l'm addressing the commission. We have talked as a group about the fact that in the future there will be changes. You know as reality sets in, as we're going to hear from another applicant on some other changes. Go with the times. And as I sit here and think of Powers 'Boulevard, ' it's going.to be. a busy road. And the development of tl:e city- is going to start going south..'So we will have a pocket it' you will, of large lots that will be at some pcint in the future surrounded by neighborhoods that many of you live in. It's 0bvious}y to the large lot owners that doesn't apply:but to a' lot ct' the neighbors who spoke. So I'm againjust Irymg to think of that in a long term approach to I'm- not going to stick with, and I respect the thoughts of we don't wmt to get intn changing the zoning,' Or at least encouraging that. But I do think that 'we Itave to be open to that. The question that l threw out:to the a.~plica~l of a development that was not quite as packexl in. '.[' m jus: letting the group 'knew that if:it ' ,,,;as a dif,%rent application I would have at least .mine more openness to it. ~;o with all that said, !.can't: approve it now but I'm also just t,hrowing out for rite ~esictencs here today, at'least this person; commissioner believes that as time goes oh that wigl.be developext at some point. And prematme prot~bly the best word that I can think of righi now. but I'd just encourage everybod? to be t~lking · - because.that .will hap'pen at some point. 'So with that said, that's enough. .. · . Blackowiak: .Okay, thmik you. I agree with my fellow commissionem that at this point I think it'is premature. I do believe that there is a real relationship, I mean the only way that I would even consider it would be that the two, 8750 and 8800 came in together. And then at that point in time we could look at. how to best.preserve some of those natural features because by 'going ahead with 8800 before 8750, in' - other words before the lot io the north, I think' you're Iosing some opportunities and losing some of. the possible connectivity between the parkland on the west behind the lots, and then the parkland to the east'- of Powers Boulevard. So ! think that you know if and when these lots do come in, it needs to be together. We need to look at overall how it cau work and how we can kind of k~p some kind of a trail, or some kind o! an open space going through that. But.yes, it is premature. I believe ifs premature. So I. woald not support a land use amendment at this point in time. 'With that I would like to-have a motion. In fact I need 3 motions. So jump in.' Sacchet: The Planning Commission, well let'~ make it all in one. The Planning Commission recommends. _4~anense;:: ~' ou c~.n do ir all ;.n one. Blackowiak: Can we take? We don't need to do them separately? No. Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Sacchel: I move' that the Planning Commission recomn~nds denial of the I. and Use Map Amendment. from Residential-Large Lot to Residential Low.Density for Lot 2, Block 1, I-rfllside Oaks as well as the Pla.~ni. og Commission recommends denial for rezoning from A2, Agricultural Estate District tO. RSF,- Single Family Residential for Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks, due to in.consistency'with the comprehe'nsiv~': plan, and t~he Planning.Commission recmmnends denial of the preliminar~ plat of Subdivision 9742' · creating six lots for the Powers Circle Addition subject to not complying with the land use designation and zoning requirements. And I would like to comn~nt, to emphasize Commissioner Slagle's comment that inevitably it will be developed at some po.'..mt., and I hope that at that point our discussion here with this will allow you to bring a proposal~n...tl~at't--going to .be'.,.. -.-. . . - -" '-- .. . . Blackowiak: Okay. There's been a motion. IS ttiere.a vv~cond? - : Kind: F!! second that. Sacchet moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commi~ion recommends denial of the Land.Use Map Amendment from Residential-Large Lot to Residential Low Density for Lot 2, Block 1, · Hillside Oaks as well as the Planning Comnit~sion recommends denial for rezoning from AZ, Agricultural Estate District to RSF, Single Family Residential for-Lot 2, Block 1, HlllMde Oaks, due to inconsistency with the comprehensive plan, ami the Planning Commission recommends. denial of the preliminary, plat of Subdivision 97-12-creating ~ix lots,for the Powers Circle Addition subject to not complying with the land use designation and zoning requi.rements. All voted i~i favor and the ;notion carried unanimously 5 ~ 0. ' '"" · . : · ' ~.. ~ ... · · Blackowiak:. This item goes to City Council on. November 26"~. Thank you al| for coming. . . " · - . ~. . . Kjv, d: M0dam Chair, can I clarify zhat Mth staff?. ' ' ' '-.' "' ':.- ~ . Blackcwiak Sure. .- : Kind: I just want to clarify that that little caveat that Uli added.at the end was not part of the motion.: Sacchet:' Ttiat was a comment. : . ! Kind: That was a conm~nt that was made before'it was seconded. -- . . · · Aanenson: Let the record show that. · . . · PUBLIC IIEARING:. ~ ' ' ' REOUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO VILLAGES ON THE PONDS TO PERMIT FOUR (4) Srly.)RY BUILDINGS WITH A · MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 50 FEET 'AND THREE (3) STORIES WITH A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 40 FEET AND AN AMENDMENT TO DETERbHNE A FQRMULA FOR CONVERSION OF COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE SPACE TO RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND VICE VERSA ' VILLAGES ON THE ~1 LLC LOTUS REALTY SERVICES. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item, Biackowiak: Okay commissioners, any que~stions? Rich? Slagle: I'!1 start. 45 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Blackowiak: He raised his hand. Slagle: I raised my hmld on this. Bear with me Bob. I wan~ to understand this in laylnan'S terms and' just bear with me. The original plan, let's call it the concept of Village on the Ponds, I'm reading here in 1996 it called for 322'dwelling units. Are we on track for that or is this request that we're seeing today allow, and I'll ask the applicant as well, allowing for a lower goal or is that still on target? .~., Generous: Well actually wd would be.ab!e, p'6~ntially be able to get more dwelling'units ~ithin'the project because the senior housing counts for less'dwelling units. But we're right on, we're at 161 units in this project. There is 162 across the street.so we're fight on. target. .. Slagle: Okay. The question I had on the center, what I think you determined or showed as one. Generaus: Sector I, yes. Slagle: Sector I. Explain that description of how you ~see that center? You said pedestrian, was that right? Generous: Right. Shgle: Okay. And we're still proceeding alpng that line? Generous: Right. We have, as part of the design standards there's aciually a build to requirement. .We. want to create a public realm so wide sidewalks, 14 to 18 feet with street furniture and places for people to gather. Nice landscaping. Decorative lighting and so we want to try to create a sense of place in lhat '. core, at that intersection. And we anticipate that all four comers will have very similar design elements in therrc We have, well on this southwest comer we have the bus shelter and then there will be like the little courtyard area adjacent to the building. And then a connection through to the parking b6hind. Slagle: Okay. And prefacing this, and my commissioners know this...not having been part.of this .when it first came, I wasn't able to hear a lot of these things. Last question before I continue with the applicant at some point, in our schedule we have a request to amend the PUD for 4 story, building. Number 7 on our agenda is to approve a plan for a 4 story building. Are those synonymous? Meaning if 6-doesn't'get approved, is 7 going to happen? Generom: They would have to either get a.variance or reduce the building height. . Slagle: So 7 is made on the assumption, as'on our agenda item, that 6 is approved? Generous: Correct. Aanenson: You're just going to make a recormnendation. Blackowiak: Yeah I' was going to say. Not necessarily because it gozs to council. Aa~',enson: You just need to make your recommendations independent and send them onto the council, but you're fight. There is implications. 46 -Planning Cormnission Meeting - November 6. 2001 Slag!e- 6 needs to happen from cur group. A rec. ormnendafion for 7 to then be ~vx:omn~nded, we wouldn't. Blackowiak: We wouldn't say no to 6 and yes to 7. Slagle: Gotch ya. OF, ay. lust trying to see... Blackowiaic It wouldn'~ make sense I guess. It'.,sgetting late. We could, whaknows. LuAnn, · Sidney: Nothing. ." -. Blackowialc Uli, questions7 Sacchet: Yeah, real quick. Your pulling your trip generation numbers front this Trip Generation 6~ . · Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers. Is that a generally used accepted authority in the industry? Generous: Yes. · Sacche;.: .lust wanted to confirm that .aspect. The answer is yes to that? One thing I don't understamt is, '~ we increased the capacity oS' them buildings by t floor, but we don't seem to increa.,~ the numl:er-of trips: versus before and after that chra~ge. How's that work? ' ' : " Generous: Dtfferen~. trip ge~.~eration rates. . . ~me~.son: Seniors.' Sacchec The senior nature of... Generous: Yeah. Becau~ of this dementia units have .32 trips per unit. Sacchet: Hopefully they don't drive, fight? Generous: Yeah. But they do have people that will visit and also the employees that come in, and so ' those are accommodated in our trip rates. Sacchet: '~ hey might fmget where they're driving. . · . Generous: That's why the bus is there. ' ' Sacchet: And a similar question. When you have your total square footage, in.the previous table-before the change it was 391,000 and now we are at 372,000. Similar question. Why are weless when we have more floors? Generous: Because we convertexl squa,e [ootages to residential dwellit~.g units. As .cart of the origiua!: PUD they were, shat'was a [ootnote to this table and we just got rid of ~he fc'o~note l:ecaase we u~,x~d, it.. We put residential in Sector IV and no office in. Additional.office in Sector L but it reduced the total sqoare foe, sages. ~cchet: Alright. And also you checked your math in the table against. 47 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aar)enson: Somebody did. Sacchet: Somebody did. That's my question. Blackowiak: I.~'b, yes: Kind: I fixed a chart. Let's just say that. Sidney: Oh Madam Chair. I do have a q. uestion~J' Blackowiak: No, go ahead. Kind: W~nt me to keep going as long as I'm speaking? Okay. I've got to chew my little hot'tart here.' Okay, sorry. The old standards allowed-50 feet in Sector I. The new standards allow 50 feet-in Sector I. So it's.really the definition of story that is being changed. Just'want to .make sure I'm tracking'here. Also. in our c.ld standards it stated that retail and office buildings, let's see.-Oh it didn't state., it doesn't' say anything about office on the first floor. In our old ordinance. That's a new thing? I'm sorry, I'm .- confusing myself and I' m probably confusing everybody else. Thiq is on page 4 of the design standards where it talks about building ileight. ~ .. t Generous: ')res it was. '- Kind: And I thought the language about first floor, ret. ail re'tic,.: buildir, gs wttt,o,.tt resider, ces abo.,e, . " shonl;i be limited to '2 stories but that's the o~lly mention of re.t:til and offic~ on the first .~ioor. The new -:. one ral~ ibout, in Sector I we want to have residentJa! with street level commercial o:' offico in Sector f' ii we're going to allow th~s 4 story thing.-So ..'hat's new. Goll, I didn't even notice that until just-now.-' · . SOfTy about fi~z.t guys. : Aanenson: 'II~at'a to make sure we get the commercial on the first' ,qoor which was the intent. Kind: And when I read that I take that to mean that the entire first floor should be retail, or commercial - office. Blackowiak: Should be. Kind: ~hould l:/e? Could be`?. Portion of'it? Aanenson: Substantial. · Kind: Yeah. What's staff's'feeling on that? What was your intent by this language? Generous: Well, nor that We require the ent;.r.=. first floor to be. The Presbyterian Homes is an example. 'We negotiate that on each one. ! don't know. we could cotne up with the criteria. -' : Aaneu.,,e.n: ~ '..hini.'. we sl~ould pul something in there. K_ir:d: [ do too_ Should it be a percentage or'? Aanenson: As soon as we put a number, we're not going to hit it so I don't know. 48 Plaaning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Kiad: Okay. Aanenson: ...something we can get from the attorveys to put something'in. Kind: I think that's it for staff. Yes, that's. Oh! Would you speak to how, if we shift commercial to'. residential, or residential 'to commercial, how does that affect our tax base? Generous: Well that's a'big assumption. I dou~ you'd go fi'om conanercial to residential. · :. . . Slagle: Wait, that's not what you asked, right?' .-- . . Kind: I said either way. · · Slagle: Yeah, what's it do? -' Kind: What does it do to om' taxes'? Generous:. Well apartment units pay mom. ,,or. they're based on the co~ial rate. They pay 2% I believe. Kind: So it's a wash? Generous: Pretty much. You do have a Iow higher valuation'for cbmmetc;.al but then you have'lower -story buildings, so. · . .. Aanenson: You can. get mom density so. '- Kind: hitere,sting. Okay. That's it for my questions. Blackowiak: Okay, LuAnn. Sidney: Well I had a question about what's driving this whole discussion about the trip generation i'ates - and .square footage. And then talking about the total square footage for Sector L And it .seems to me. that being able to not, well that' s not a good way to state it but, to not have to do another EAW is a driving force for this. Aanenson: Well I think there was also a commitment that we would s/ay within certain parameters. Certain design parameters for tha.t,'.kind of Our guiding principles and certainly there was a commitment level on the traffic. We've heauxt time and time again from the residents so we certainly don't want to exceed the traffic level. That's not our intent. What 6ur intent is to go back and examine as the uses have filled in and we have more known's...certain other things that are driving that but we want to be able to provide as we move along some of that flexibility as these Come in. So we don't want it to exceed the ultimate approved trip generations. That's not what we're trying to do. Sidney: Anti then based on the numbers lhat you have h:re, you're able to meet that? Aanenson: Correct. Sidney. Right. -' 49 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanenson: That's the bottom line. Sidney: Right. Slagle: Ill can ask. Is, them a, on staWs part, is there a desire or an expectation that can be stated that it will not exceed those'?.'. Aancnsom Yep, that's fine. I think what you'~ saying is maybe there'd be an intent statement through this intended through this PUD amend.,.me.nt. .that'the inte. nt. is, and-just as I stated before, put something in - like that? Is that what' you're looking'fbr? - - . . Slagle: I need to think how do ! say this? Again, in my short term here, this.project has had more changes and updates than any project I've seen. Now albeit that'.s a very shmx window, so what I'guess I'm asking is, is there some ultimate goal that we have for this development that is in essence, I don't want to say concrete but I mean it is sort of there. And everybody now understands what the playing field is as times change. I keep hearing as times change. We have this ultimate traffic trip generation goal. Am I going to hear 6 months from now that that now needs to change because of XYZ? And I'm not saying it's good or bad. I'm just trying to get an idea of what's happening here. Aanenson: We certainly don't want that to happen. This has been a long term project. It's pretty'cutting edge when we put this. Not a lot of people doing this at the time. So based on the knowledge we had at the time, and the expectations, we put together design standards. As this has evolved, and we' ye recognizexl seme things that we needed more strength on. and just for example-the ambiguity of saying . you can go 50 feet but you can only be 4 stories. 3 stories. We're recognizing some of that. I can't predict what, you know we know some of the other things that are coming in. I think you'll all be .' . please~2 with that. There's going to be use that we hadn't anticipated but we're'not trying to do that. Slagle: Sure, and that I appreciate. I'll just throw one thought out for just toss around. We'have a ' limited space. We have some. interesting roadways. We' ye heard descriptions of what traffic does and doesn't do, okay. I mean I'm just thinking as just plain Rich Slagle from Chanhassen, that area can only handle so much traffic. I don't know what that number is. I'm assuming it's this trip generation figure that-we've come up with, so I guess I'm just asking staff, that, is there one area that we're sort of going to put that cap on and make, I don't, make's the wrong word. Encourage the developer and others to work within that, leaving that alone. Am~enson: Correct. Since this was approved, we're still at that number. That number has not changed.. · But what we've done'is say within that mix, as'long as you don't exceed that nmnber, we're allowing certain mixes to occur..If you have more assisted living, then maybe you can bump it up here but we don't want to exceed that overall. Slagle: Okay. Cool. Thanl~. BlackowiM:: Okay. Kate I just, maybe it's Bob. Can yc, u walk me through a little bit on these allocation, the reallocation conversions? How are you getting these numbers? I metro assuming the new ones are correct, and you know l don't even care. You're getting these based on traffic? Generous: Yes. I tried to equate everything to trip gengration rates, and then there's ratios that you can develop between different uses~ And so if you divide the trip generations for apartments by retail you get a factor. And so that's what we used to, and then you have to bring it to a common denominator. If )'ou're going from residential to commercial, then you have to go from unit to square footage. And so I 50 ' Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 did all tile math on a spread sheet to come up with tbose numbers and then we rounded it to the nearest - 10 t-v make it easier for everybody. . .. · . Aanen:;on: },nd that goes direclly to ~e healrt 6fRJch's question. They wante6 ~o change and we ~aid - ~-e're not goi.qg to change if we know we're going to increa.se traffic so we had to come up'with a · methodology to back:fill om' position that does this support that, and tha~.'s.exacfly what this chart doe,5... 'Haat's why we support that. .- . -.. .- A,a ~ only say this in jest.but i~s ..that.' tile;same ~ource.as the O~iver's numl:n~? ' . . . · Aanenson: That was supplied by, they supplied that number. Single: There wm~ confusion on those numbers. · Aanenson: They aupplied those numlz~. Tiffs was our methodology based on standard applied trip generation. To give you some ~afionale basis to mak, the decision mswap within. · . Blackowiak: Okay. So then. I mean just for example 1 residential apartment unit equals 2 elderly indepe:~dent units. That came from a book? .. -. - .. · . Generous.' No. :' Blackowi.'.tk: Where'd that come fiotn'? . Generous- They show a trip generation, t'~t ap.artme, nt unit has ~o many trips that it generates, F~2flerl~'. - housing has so many trips. ' ' ':-. ' .- Blacko,aiak: Hail as many basically. Generous: Yes, per unit. Biackow,_'ak: Okay. Generous: And so I did all those ratios for all the uses to come up with this conversion chart. ' · Single: Cx)ngmtulations first of all. I me. an good'job of putting.this together. · . · Generous: And again it wa,,; back. to, we wanted a rational basi~ to do flint. Kind: And I checked his math. Aanenson: We were audited. Black,:wiak: Sorrebody had to do it, right? Kind: It workecl. It worked, he was right. Blackowia.[: Well my second question, is dwelling units. I wrote down 322. I'm seeing that a couple different places, and then I thought I saw another place. Where did I write down 433? Where did'tha~ number come from? Was that in this one or was that in the next? It could have been in the next. 51' Planning Cammission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanenson: Original PUD. Blackowiak: No. it wasn'~ origin31. It sentra like we're getfinl;; mo~e dwelling units and I'm wondering. inhere the..y're coming from. .,. Generous: Well there ia a potential if they converted because the residential they're proposing doesn't. - - use all their allocations. 'There's like an addifiopal 90 units or 80. I don't remember the number right . · · · Blackowiak: ()kay, maybe that's where it's c.0mi'ng from. Explain that to me. Help me out with that. Generou:.: ©kay. We sim'ted with 322 dwelling units for the project. Blackowiak: Ri~,ht. Genereus: Because they're converting some of those apartment units to elderly housing and assistexl ._ housing, they're not using as many. ' -o Blackowiak: Okay, so ycn'm talking. Again yc,u';e L. asing fi;al er, tr"p gene~ a.'.ion. So it hb.s-norhil~g'to -. -- do ~,, ith :;a'.'ts per se'? ..... Blackowi,"k: So you can't say you've got mm~ units. You have ,eew,r trip units or raon kt,.o:v ho-.,,": ~ · you ~, ;va~t t_,:, 3 u,: that. But it has to do with driving. Generous: Yes. Bkxckowialc The 'whole thing, it's traffic. Generous: Traffic is there. Blackowiak: It starts specific units. Okay. So then I guess my question is, if you're talking about,, tell me about this 90 ~mits. What are you talking about this extra 90? Where am I getting this number? Generous: Well that, if you do the math ju.s.t on the'residential, they're proyiding, what is it? 71. No, 20 dementia units wh':ch are 3 t,:, .t ratios so th~/t's 7 units instead of 21 so you pickeA up 14. ' Blackowiak: P~cked up'! Generous: Well you haven't used 14 units for trip generations. No, it's more trips. Slag!e: We nee:l a cay accountant here. Blackowiak: ',"his is just, sorry. I'm sorry but I just, I had a real problem xvith this whole. Geaerods: Thece is total number of milts. Yes, you cm get more but the senior housing would count.less against those units. If that explains it. So you're still at the, trips that you generate with 322 units, if you add the total units developed, they'd be the same. Theoretically. - 52 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Siagle: Vernelle, do you have more answers? Blackowiak: Don't even go there Vernelle. Vemelle Clayton: l:ll.wait. Blackowiak: Okay so, I"m just wondering if w.~re going to. get mom units or if it's, how many units are we going to have? :: .. -. .. . . . Aanenson: You possibly could get more units. Blackowiak: Do we want more units? ' · -..' Aanenson: Yes, that's a. question you have to. Blackowiak: Yeah, that's what I mean., Okay.' Well I'm not going to go there right now. Does anybody have any more questions for staff7 We'd better move on here. Alright if not, would the applicant or the designee like to ,-make a presen.talion? Name and address'please. Vemelle. .-:" Veme!ie Clayton: Vernelle Clayton at 422 Santa Fe Cimle. I would rather, Fm comfmtable with'~is.:' : We're conffortable with everything that's been suggested to be approved. We don't have may questions,'. · and I would rather just answer your questions rather than speak to this. Because I'd like to ha~'e a chance for these guys to get on. So ifyot;'ve got any questior, s .i'll hang around. I'll sit down if yon-don'c, . --. - . .- · . .Black::wiak: Okay commissioners, questions'i'or. Lqi. .. -, . Sacchex: I have one question Vemelle. In what' s being proposed here for us to recommend approval for,' it says in S~tor L 4 stories residential with street level commemial and actually before it was 50 feeL,. Retail office buildings without re, sidences above shall be limited to 3 stories, 40 feet. ttowever what you're actually planning to do, according to the next thing which we hopefully still get to talk about; you. have 4 stories that is all residential, and you have 3 story where the first floor is partially commercial, is that conect? Genem~s: Yes. -'- " .Sacchet: Is them a reason why, are you aski.'ng-'for more flexibility the~/or .why this discrepancy between. what you're actually doing and what? ' ' .~ .. Vemelle Clayton: We actuai, ly were more specific in our request initially to focus just on this project..I think staff thought it would be better to have a' more general standard. Aanenson: Can we answer that question? Sacchet: }:lease. Aane~.~son: Them wasn't street frontage. Om h~tent was street frontage. That building fl~at's forward doesn't bare street frontage. Generous: The internal street. 53 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanenson: Internal street frontage. Generous: Ithas 101. .~,enson: The part'that we're talking about is frontage here. These buildings...that frontage. Kind: On 101 it does. .-... .. Aanenson: Right, but that's not the ad'ess to Me ~treet. Where we're trying to get the retail part. Where. you' ye got the pedestrian. Generous: Where you're parking right in front. Vemelle Clayton: Our main concern is this comer. Aanenson: Maybe it needs to be clarified in the.amendment specifically. The streets. Lake Drive. Sacchet: I think it's...when we go to get specifics of the proposal, l just wondered whether there was · something I'm overlooking and you m~swered it.. thanlc~. B!a,:kowiak: This item is open ,for a public hearing.-So if anybody would llke to speak to the Pla*.ming Coinmission, come to the podimn. State your name and address for the record. Seeing no c~e i'll. close iha public hearing. Commissioners, comments on this. -' Slagle: I'll start, l'mjust son of confused. I mean truly, mid l guess what I'm, and 1'11 own some of this that I just ne~l to get more in depth the history of this development. And we'll have coffee so~.etime... Because I' m still not cl~'2r on exactly what is ~ntended other'than I understand the stories has changed. You know stories as in buildings. So I understand that but truly, I mean mid based upon some of the questions I' m hearing, and I'm just asking this out loud. Do we as a commission have a pretty good understanding of what' s happening with this deyelopment? And if the answer is yes, then I have a lot of work to do. But I guess I'm just wondering, it just seems that we're raising questions and they're legitimate questions, and I almost. Here's my fear and this is where I'll end'this. Is I have a fear that. we're now being asked to approve this, in what I think a rather short order, and then coming along in: possibly 10 minutes is to approve what I'll call a fairly major development in this city. And I think I'm getting by the pace of what' s happened in the last half hour, they want this approved tonight. And I' m just throwing out as a concern to my fellow, commissioners,' is everybody okay with what's happening here and the pace? And if the answer is y~s', then we'll proceed but just throwing that out. Okay. 'You don't have any answer it now. I'm just throwing it out for consideration. Sacchet: Sliould we make comment to this? ' Slagle: You don't have to. Blackowiak: This is conunent time. Sacchet: I would like to make a comment to this because .I think it will be overstatement for me to say that I understand the whole framework of this, but what I do understand that there's some flex~ility needed and from the memo that was passed out tonight, I also understand that the City Council suppor~ that flexibility to be put into this framework. I do think. 54 Pl~-nning Comrmssion Meeting - November 6, 2001 Slagle: If I can interject. Sacchetz Yes. Single: I ~lieve 2 of'fi~e council members were no.t present. Sacchet: Correct... I do'believe that, I pers0 ...~ .am comfortable with this framework. I don't think it needs much deliberation. 'Ir'certainly d. oes. n~tii~.~in that I.expect ev .e~_ybody to'feel the same. ': - ... Blackowiak: LuAnn, what about, do you have'any'your comments? Sidney: Yeah ! think, you know we're faced with the situation where this area is developing slowly" I ' think Kate has stated that already. And we are going to see changes. We're going to have'applications come in that are very attractive and in this case we have one that's going to be presented to us hopefully tonight for development and it seems reasonable, a reasonable uso for the land. And stepping back and looking at the intent of the PUD, I believe it still fits the 'standards and we've.had to make a few c. hanges her A lot of math that we generated to make sure that we're still within the limitations of the trip .' generation. Then we're talking about adding anotI, er story, which I dm~'t think is a significant, O,.ese ar/; i:~significant changes so die spirit and the intent of the PUD is still them and we're saying that we have a very attractive devel0Pmei:t that's being proposed. That we'd like to make sure that we !ncorpo_ rate so l.. don't have any problem. .-- · : · Blackoxviv_k: Okay, Deb. Kind: I agree with LuAnn. or 4 story, it really doesn't make any dil'fi~rence to me. 1 would like to see some language put'in- regarding what we expect for street level connme~x:ialloffice. Whether we keep it flexible and sar) a 'portiofi of the first level needs to be retail office er do we want to put 25% of thai needs to be at least' -25%? We allowed 50 feet before..This is still 50 feet. Whether we Cai! ii'3 st.o~' Blackowmk Or a majority'~ 5t%. I meam. Kind: Whatever. ' Sacchet'. Then on the issue, considering that it's going to be. specified.in the plans we get to see. · . Kind: The pimps that we are going .to see e~flxenfly have about 25% as retail/office on the street level · fronta,~. 29%7 Okay. Vemelle Clayton: I would appreciate it if you could leave it up to the, you're going to see the plan tonight, which at this point is anticipated to have the least amount of retail on the street. I really don't want to open the door to having less than ~vhat we really what for ;he rest so if you accept 25% hca'e, - which really kind of wor 'ks for a number of reasons, including the drop off, I don't want to have ~o fight t,~.e hattie with every'applicant that comes in for another building to s~ if they have a standmd where they only have to be 25% on the street. . · Kind: We could for instance say a majority needs to be a retail office and then make it an exception for the one that we're about to see because of the memory care units need to be on the first floor or whatever die teasm~ is. 55 Planning Cc, remission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanenson: 1 think that'd be f'me. Just one other point. We did talk to some of the neighbors. This is one that is...it could be the 4 stories. They are concerned about views. They'd like to see the top of.the steegle. I think w:: need...ao if we're going to be a little more specific, I thi;~k il'd be. nice 'it' w.e left ~hat. one. The ~,.eigbt li.,rfitation on that building that is just fight next to ~he re.,.idenc, es. I know Vemelle · stated that .;he doesn°l.-want it but I think it's k, etter.if we put. in the aar~'.ndment, as long as we're amending it, that that be limited. · :..,.- Vemelle Clayton: ! don't havea problem with'your limRing'the height here. ! just didn't want to have". everybody come.., and say on these btifidings they only have to have 25%.. . Aart~nson: Correct. I raised fi, at too. ! agree. ." - Kind: Right, right. But we want to put something in them about it. · . Aanenson: Well one approach we talked about is it had dimc~ frontage onto, name-the .specific sta'eet. That would alleviate this particular. King: Oh, wkh pedestrian sidewalk fro::tage. Aanenson: Correct. Those would fit, yeah in:emal sttee.'ts. Kit. d: Has what pen:ent a majority of commerciab'retail on zhe fir:;t floor9. Or co~metcial/ofti/:e, i~m - sorry. Slagle: I',e: me throw something out fiaere.. And Verneil,':, I k,zow exactly w!',at you're asking fo-t fl4at: . · flex;.bility bul my question is, is let's just say 'this paix;~cular applicant that wt~'ll see next has a ve~' le.gi:imate ~asen not to have much, flint' ,gould make sense for whatever ,.':ca:ten. At some point as the..' .. development continues,' those requirements ;tm going to.have to be in place because, or otherwise vow 11 ' end up witi~ the la:'~ 2 applicants being told that their development has to be 100% just to make that,- whatever figure it is. " -. Venaelle Clayton: That's my point. We don't want you to.'.. Slagle: Oh just this one? Ve;.~elle Clayton: Right. A;menson: Right. Slagle: Okay. Kind: S~,ggestions. Sacchet: Yeah. here':, a suggestion. Couic~ we make this aspect of this comtnercia! req~fite...fl~.at they have specific area rather than the whole Sector 17 Would that work? ]31ackowiak: Yeah I was ;vondering if we cc, aid just do, is it Outlot F? Is that what it's call~:d.? Genereus: Yes, or Lot I, Block 1, 7t~ Addition. 56 · . i. Planning Conm~ission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Vemelle Clayton: This one is currently Outlot F. To be replatted. -. . Sacchet: So if we make this part applicable just'tO refer to O,4. riot F, wo~d lhat ac'commodate you~ -- concern? " Aanenson: 29.%. The remaining shall be, and then whatever number you put in there. .- :f~'; - . Blackowiak: A majority.- ~.~ .. "" - -. -' : . . . Kind: A majority. .. Blackowiak: Which can be from 51 to 100 percent.' I mean and that allows some. flexibility.: . Kind: Okay, was I still commenting? I think we should also add in an intent statement to, I'm callingit th, fc~mete but it's really the paragraph below the sector totaIs under number 5 where it talks about the building square footages may be reallocated between sectors inbetween uses subject to approval by the Planning Director, and we probably should put some intent in there. With the intent to not increase truistic in the development so that our Planning Director knows what the intent is. Something-like that. That'.~ it. Black,>wiak: My comrt~nts. This is just a very ccnfush,g thing. [tmde. rst~and the height thing.. 50 feet i~ 50 feet. '3 ;:.r 4 gtories, [ don't have a problem with that. l. understand the idea of keepi, ng n:affic to a : cretin level. '['he extra num~rs really kind of threw xne for a while. Sign. age, [ do not feel, that we- .. . should change any signage requirements. 20 feet i.s plenty ~nd I think that that needs to just stc. y .a.,r.~.s. -. And ! fl~ink that we ne~.~cl to also consider, I don-" t know if we ~ant to' do tiffs on specifically 'ca thiS' outlot or say, could we consider this as height changes on this ouflot only? Or do we say *.hat heigh'ccha~geg are ok,ny in:Sector I excepl on, how do we achieve'that?. ' ' ': · Aanenson: Except for that one lot? . .. Blackowiak: Except for that one lot. ls it just that one lot or are there other lots? Aanenson: I would just, if we could say except for... Adjacent to Great Plains, lot. Generous: At Pond Promenade. · . Am~ensov.: Yeah, we should call that out.' The neighborhood... Blackowiak: Yeah, I guess flutt's what I was trying to say. We need to either say you know, it can only be on Outlot F or it can be ex;erywhere except-for this Other ouflot and I don't, or the separate lot.and I'm · not sure wha~ that is. Bottom line is it's, overall I understand the height thing. The numbers, I could ~ave a week and probably not get these all figurexl out but. ' ' Slagle: [~t m ask, are we in danger. I shouldn't say danger,, but is there any concern that if We appreve this for the height and we just get some more clarification time to allow whether it's through meetiags-or yeu guys providing more info_rmation. There's no concern. Is that okay to do? i mean there's no danger in that path, right? Okay. Biackowiak: Okay. Well let's just move on here. I think are we ready for a motion? Are we close? . 57 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Sacchet: I'm reMy for a motion. Kind: Go Uli. Sacchet: Okay. I'd-like to make a motion that the Planning Commission reconunends approval of the amendment to Planned Unit Development Standards for Villages on the Ponds amending section d. as. . follows, and I through 5 that is. With let's see:~ere's a couple fixes. The height, actually'it's the number of stories aspect. The height ~rq, al!y d0h't change.but the number of stories for the building on the northeast :omer. Staying with the old'fl'ameworl~ meaning the 3 and 2 sto~. And with statement-on the nmnbe:' 5 identifying that the intent is not to increase the total traffic loads. Deb, can you help me splice in that percemage of commercial please? " Kind: Yeah. I'll second that and I'll make a friendly amendment that the parens of number 3. You're suggesting that number 3 be as stated in the staff report right now? Sacchet: Yeah, with the addition of excepting the multiple stories of the northeast lot. Or building... Blackow. iak: On Promenade and Great Ptains. Sacchet: Right. That that would stay with the 3 and 2 rather than go to the 4 and 3 stories. ! Kind: Okay. So we could, I'm trying to figure out where [ wo'al~ add this sentence. Here;s my .suggestion first for a condition. And maybe it's even totally a separate condition, I don't know. Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must hage commercial/office on the majority of the street.- frontage. Sacchet: Let's make that a separate. Blackow:,alc Cemmercial, office or retail? Kind: What did I put? Blackowiak: Contmercial/office. Kind: Com:netx:ial/office. Isn't retail commercial? . .. S,-cchet: Yes it is. ' Blackowiak: I thought we had. Okay we have commercial/retail or office/service. I guess maybe.. Kind: Maybe commercial/office or retail. On the majority of the street frontage. And just have that be a .~ep~a'ate cx, ndition? ' · Sacchet: Yeol't, I would recommend that. Kin& Maybe that makes life easier. Sacchet: So that would be number 6. Unless you want to splice it into. That's clear. 58 Pianning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Kind: Yeah. Put it in there wherever it ~nakes .sense. Aanenson: And did you want an intent, statement in your motion. Kind: And tl~e intent, Uli did add the intent staten~nt. That was in his.motion. Okay. .,. · . Blackowiak: Uli, do you accept that amendment7 -:~; : Sacchet: Yes, I do accept it; ~, ... -'"' ~'''' ' :-. - - Sacchet moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commigsion recommends approval of the. ameudme,,~, to the Planned Unit Development Standards for Villages on the Ponds amending. -', .'-: section (d) as follows: · .; Development Site Coverage and Building Height'. ' '~" 1. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development Individual-lots · may exceed this threshold, but in no case shall the average exceed 70 percent. - · More than one (i) principal strucrare may be placed on one (t) platted ioi ..... o The maximum building height shall b~ Sector 1 - ~our stor}es (residential with street level ' · - 'commercial or office) 50 feet (retail t~nd office buildings'without residences above shall be limited to three stories) ,10 feet. except for the lot o~ the northeast corner of Promenade Pond ' '- ,.mi Great Plains Boulevard shall be limited to three stories and two storiesresp~ctivel.~r' ' ,,~" : [ S~ctor Il - fl~ree storie~q/40 feet; Sector Ill -. three storiesb'Rl feet; and Sector IV- four atofie.&lS0. feet. Buiiding height limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers, ~d other architectural and :. roof accents. 4~ The nmximmn building fooqnint for any one building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet '-. ' - without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g. pedestrian passageways, except for the church and residential only buildings. : ." ' 5. The following table shall govern the mount ef building area for the different uses: Commercial/. Office/Service Institiitional Dwelling Total Square Retail (sq. _ft.)(sa_. ft.) - .' ' (sa_. ft.) Units Feet Sector I 114,500 83,500' 0 160 198,000 Sector Il 60,000* 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector iii 0 0 100,000 0 100,000. - . Sector IV 0 0 0 162 ' 0 TOTA [. 174,500 97,500 100,000 322 372,000 . *lnch:d~.s 47,2.01',) squa~: toot. 106. unit motel. Building ~uare i:0otages may be re. allocated between sectors and between uses subject to approval by the ' P!~mh~g Dh e.c~or, with the intent not to increase the total traffic loads. The following factors shall be usrxl in calculating the reallocation of building squme footages between uses. ! Residential apartment unit = 0.32 congregate care (assisted living or deraentia) unit. 59 · Planning Comm/ssion Meeting -November 6, 2001 I Residential apartment unil = 0.52 elderly (independent) unit. 1 Resident/al apartment unit - 360 square feet of officelselwice. 1 Residential apartment unit = 90 square feet of retail. 1 R~sidenfial apartment unit = 440 sqna: e feet of institutional. 600 sqitare feet cf office/service = t residential aparm~.'nl unit. 4,1.10 square feet ofaffice/service = 1,000 square feet of.retail. 950 square feet of office/service -- 1,000 square feet of institutional. 160 square feet of retail = I residential apartme,n..t unit. 300 square feet of retail = 1,000 square...f..e, et .of'office/servic& 290 square re,'_,.~ of retail = 1,000 square'feet of institutional. In i;o instm~ce shall more than 27.000 square feet of additional institutional building square footage be. reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. Buildlngq adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority bf. the street frontage. All voted in favor and the motion carried unammously 5 to 0, · B!ackowiak: This goes to C~ty Council Nove:n~r 26'~. · Ge~:e:'ous: N:~vember 26~1''.. yes. Bleckowiak: O~ay. Do we need agree, n:te. nt to go beyo,ad 10:..0; ! · Aanenscn: S,,¢, if you. want Biackowiak: I mean I don't lmow. l'mju:t as",4'ng. I'm not sure. 'Y~:u decide if you w,'mt.' Should we stay fil 11:007 Do you want to set a time limit or til we fall asleep? Okay, I,,t s just move on-then.. ! PUBLIC .HEARING: ' R._EOUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR TWO APARTMENT BUILDINGS :'· CONSISTING OF A FO UR-STORY~ 90 INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS AND A THREE STORY~ 73 ASSISTED LIVING UNITS~ A-,TOT3J~ BUILDING AREA OF 254~100 SQUARE FEET INCLUDING UNDERGROUND PARKING AND APPROXIMATELY 9~000 SQUARE- FEET OF COMMERCIAL AREA ON A 5.11 ACRE PARCEL ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT~ LOCATED AT TIlE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LAKE DRIVE AND MAIN STREET, VILI~AGES ON THE PONDS SEN-IOR LIVING CAMPUS Sa.~.~ENIOR HOUSING FARTNERS. -. · Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Blackowiak: Commisstoners, any questions o[ staff? Rich, why don't you star~_ Sl.:~gle: Bob, just :a couple. As .r. look at the plat if you will of this .-.leveiopment, and seeb~g where they are going and seeing that it calls for commercial space, albeit not as much as originally intended. Where. would the parking be for these c,:mmercial users? Could you neip n~ t3nt? Right srratck ir, the middle of it? 60 · - Planning (2ow_mission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Generot~s'. And out in front. We have short term. ?here is, probably for the tenant owners they:re going to have underground parking that they'd'be able to access so they leave the smf..ace parking available for c:Lstomers that come in. Slagle: So if I can ask,.and ! apologize if [should kaiow this but inside, xvhat I'll call the interior of these - two buildings, how man)' parking spots are in there'? Generous: OR, I'd have io count them It's on the site plan. ' .' 4 ~'-': :' : . -' . $1agle: Just rough. ' .-- Vernelle Clayton: 83. Slagle: 837 Okay. And then the commercial would be basically, if I'm looking at this, so like the. . -. southeastern and the eastern and northeastern part of it. -'. Generous: It'd be the entire frontage. Single: Okay. And then how many parking spots flo you ,;ne to ;he southeast and i guess east? I m6an i_s there a nmnber? -' ..... (~',aerous: Southeast?' Slagle: Well, I'm trying to fig~.'rc if 10t, so this second buil.ding sort of facing St. l-Iobert's.. On the . street.. 15-20.25, something to that effect? '. "..- Genero'z.s: Yeah, around that. On one, side...so about 30 ou b,;~ sides. · .-., Single: In a sense, fai~ parking. Vemelle Clayton: Not an excessive amount. Single: But fair. OkaY. Blackowiak: Okay. is t.hat it? LuAnn? ' Sidney: Yeah Bob, excuse me. I guess one.thing I was 'noticing and it'was nor lfighlighted at all, or di:.~:ussed that I could tell is the undexgroun'd parking:numbers. Did you, do'you have that, is it in he~? Generous: They do provide it, I calculated the numbers. They actually exceed what our parking . requirements would be. The'breakdown. " Sidney: I guess that that could be. Ge. neaous: They have a total of 207. 83 are on grade. 72 are imdcrg,-otmd in Building I and 52 itt Building 11. -' Sidney: Yeah, that might be useful to have that in the staff report. 61 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Sacchet: i have 2 questions. I actually had 3 but I was able to count, there were certain vinyl colors even though 3 pretty much look the same, or 4. Now the thing with the windows, the window types. That seems a littie open ended...little bit more. Generous: Well we were looking at planter boxes in it. Some shutters. Maybe some round tops or half rounds on top. .'". Sacchet: Accent type things? .. Generous: Yeah. A lot of window acd6nts.' .We wanted io really give them. flexibility. Sacchet: It's just a suggestion and they can. Generous: Yeah, they work with us. Sacchet: Not really specific. And then my second question, it says here there are 2 urban wetlands. I can only see I really there...said in the report there was 2. Generous:' There's 1 wetland up in the northwest comer of the-site. ~knd then another one in the aouff~west corner. Saccnec Ua, :bat's a wetland too? 'Geaerous:' l/[ight. That's a wetland on the end. Sacchet: And so that was my actual question is by m:)ving that pond from the, what's fl',at'northwest next :o the wetland, we actually move to this smaller wetland which'is acamily, nice. -. -. Generous: Yeah, it opens up the southern exposure into St. Hubert's so it will improve that. % Sacchet: ...okay. That's my questions. Thanks. Blaekowiak: Deb. Kind: The roof type, this might be an 'applicant question but maybe you know. The roof shingle type, is that at', architectural shingle or is it flat? Can you tell which I prefer? · . . . · . . Generous: Yeah, that's an applic.ant. Kind: I'll ask the applicant that. As to what it looks like. -The vine recommendation for the garage level is basically to break up the Wall, because it's still going to be brick. It's basically just to kind of break it up, because it could be a pretty tall wall. Generous: They created on the south end of the building too. There's a patio area above so that will help. Kind: That looks really cool. Generous' Yeah, to soften that edge. 62 Piamfing Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 · ' Kind: My concern is that we're not going to be having this rock face block on tb_e base, like we do in the apann~nts across the street. Generous: Right. And we're working on those.. Kind: You:re already Working on thal, good to hear.' TI'Lc palette that was passed around, 1 agree. I -: would lika to see more boldness in the colors. I'm getting into commenting here but does staff.feel it would be okay to achieve that boldness if nece-ssary with EFIS or stucco kind of material? Because this is kind of in the accent area of the building....:-.-.?;- - -- -.- . -. . . Gen~,rous: Well I think that's an acceptable alteraative.' Actuall~ when We looked at the elevation initially we thought it was a stucco finish because. Kind: I thought it was too by the drawing, the renderings looked like stucco. Okay, I was just curidus if ' we thought it would be an acceptable way to achieve that. O .kay. Plantings. 'Oh, meters and utility boxes are not shown on these plans, as far as I can see. Did you talk about that at all? " Generous: No. The applicant, their architect could probably. Kind' Mostly what I'm interested ip is how the)' wo~dd'be screened. Tl'e~ sidewalk that yoti:re. .. saggesting in the conditions, yoa'm suggesting, co~d you point that out where you'r~ suggesti.ng that · ' ' ~at goes again. "· Generous: initially, one of Ihem wouid be- connac'O,;m from b, ere out to I.ake I~ive. And the othe[on6 would connect actually both buildings out to main strut. ,: .'.' '.-" · . · . · . . Kiud: So there is a sidew~,lk the~ ahead), though? ... : Generous: Ye~): but you don't have this connection to get people'across. So we'd have 1~9 have head ramps hate and here, and one thece and there. And so someon~ could actually do a loop within there, if- ' they wanted to. Kind: O}aiy. Yeah, that mala~.s sense. Slagle: So you could, if I can aslc are you continuing fl~at sidewalk on the first building down to the., .south? (.}enetoua: Yes. that would come here and theft come across at the top of the.ramp down into the parking Kind: The Building Il, how do you propose to get people, out to that roundabout? Generous: They would have a connection fight here. Plus there's this pass through right in-the comer to' get people out to that intersection. Kind: O.~ay. Biackowiak: Actually I think most of my questions were answered, except getting back to the whol. ' sidewalk thing. Is there currently a sidewalk on the south side of Lake Drive? 63 Planning Conmfission Meeting - November 6, 2001 G,met'nus; I don'.t believe se, no. Blackowiak: Okay, because I didn't, I don't really see. one. Is that, on this side right here.- I'm talking about. Kind: What's this? ...' Blackowiak: Yeah, I don't know if that's a sidewalk or what that is. Kind: What's the checkery line? .'What'~ that chec~r pattern along? Generous.: That would be. a sidewalk that is do~e as part of the subdivision for this. Blackowiak: Okay, and that will happen when this. Gene:'ous: As part o1~ the development approval ~.ey're required to do that. Blackowiak: Yeah I was too, but then I'm like, I'm curious as to when it comes around, if you look at ~e, let's say I don't even .tm. ow. Nortl~west or vcrthem most [:oint ol' the building, lmok at the comer. Go u[: at li,'tle bit more of Building I. There. Now is there going to ~ any way to get around back?, ls there goh~g to 'l~ a sidewalk or where7 · I meat: 1' see the same widff~ oi' line. Generous: Tlc_ere' a a sidewalk here. · Blackowiak: Well what is the stone width o~-line? Do.yeu'have a~y ideas on tha~? Kind: Is that ,t tnfil? bio'? " Blacko.wiak: I don't .know. Generous: Well that's, yeah. I believe that's intended for a trail or sidewalk to this patio area on the back side. Blacl~owiak: Well no actually, on the fourth page of the plans on the landscape plan it looks as'if something is continued around about the' same width 'as the trail or the sidewalks. Kind: AJong [01. .. · . · Blackowiak: Along 101 and I'm just wondering what flint is. Generous: When 101's realigned there will be another trail.. Biackowiok: So thai. will be eventually a trail :'ight there'? G'enefou?,: Yas. Blackowiak'. Okay. Well that's good. Alright, well that was my b/g, my major. Okay, so any other qaeslions of staff?. No? Alright, would the applictmt or their designee, like to make, a presentation? Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. And thank you for staying ap so late. 64 ?ima~fing Cormnission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Alan Black: Thank you. I'm Alan Black, Senior Housing Partner to Presbyterian Homes..We're at 3220 Lake Joham,.a Boulgvard in Arden Hills..Thank you for the.oppommity to come forward and .respe~.'ng ' your time. Fve got maybe, just a very bricf-backgromid of who the applicant is. Presbyterian HOmes.has been in the n.,etrolmiit .an area since the early 1900's. About !930 providing care to about 3,000 reside, ms in the metro area. And we provide exclusive care to older adults and we have a continuum of care responsibility in our mission and that is to provide care to people of all levels of need. The hi.story has started with nursing homes.. More.pmgressivel, y.:.o..ver the last 10 years we've been developing assisted living, independent living...commun, ifi~ throU'~h0ut the me..tm area, and this project, represents a continuation of the strategic plan to seht~ throe, residents 'in the s0uthweste'm metro area. We' . continuously find ourselves in conversations With people who Want to expand those services and as we · look at tl',is ama here, we felt there was a strong need. That need is predominant when you begin to look at how nursing horne-s have evolved, we have...misplacement of nursing homes throughout our metro . . area. When they were developed, which was during the early 1960's, a distribution of older adults:were not in Chanhassen. This whole southwestern quadrant. As a result many of the care related options.are. not available in the community arid our focus is on providing and creating greater continuums. This ' project represents an opportunity to do just that with both the assisted living and the independent.living. Even the assisted living further defined in providing some memory care so our goal is to try to use ' residential options rather than institutional options to cream serv_~ce options for people. Places foraging' in pla,ge. This' will relate to some other c, ampasvx~ we-have that will provide you the skill care piece. We · b. ave campuses'in Minnetenka, Spring Park, Bloomington, and so this will be a continuation of the spoke~ of what we're doing so we're glad for the'opportunity to provide housing and services. With flutt'I think-. you' 'ce sun our project. I heard some interesting dialogue about trips mid I'd like to reaffirm and maybe add some additional comfort m that about the average age of the people that we serve, even Jn our .. · independent living is about age 82, and !saw that thbre Was'no distinguishing made between the various types of ~nio:' housiug. Our's being kind of a senSce driven model. We probably have even fewer -' ': drivers, fewer trips than may be most typical non service relate~ senior housing so we get some comfort there. We dc.n't have a lot of residents out of memory care driv./ng. However we might surprise Some .:-' people with that in that we do have couples who continue to provide care to a spouse, who may be - ." occupants of an assisted living facility and I think that is one of the opportunities that we're glad to have is to keep.families together. So we might have some unusual situations to speak of but I think they'll be reasonable. We knew that you wanted to address specific questions and we thought rather than going · - through the 53 recomn~ndations, maybe we'd point out a couple that we thought were maybe worthy of some additional discussion, and not necessarily resolution here tonight. But just an oppornmity to express our interest in continuing some dialogue to make sure that our project can comply. Meet with. your approval. And under the recommendations, we wanted to go through the ,5nes that we talked about. We thought those were probably precipitated..by concern about making sure that this building .has an aesthetic appeal that doesn't reflec, t those baildings that maybe has not hit the mark for you in the past. We wot:Id concur. We'want to lmve-.this building attractive. It's a focal point away from'the church and' some of those areas. We'd like to explore continuously with staff those items that could make that, for example we're using extensive amount of brick in that area rather than rock face block as an example. If we're going to cover it up with vines, we might want to come back and say you know, is it really a good' idea to use brick in those areas. Or maybe there's some other ways to approach ic. but we would just.like the opportun!ty to continue to work with staff and come back to you with some alternative ideas. We have some other folks here with roe tonight who will be available prior to the City Council meeting who I think may have some interesting ideas and if some of those ideas has merit we'd like to have some - · flexibility be~ides the use of vine as the sole method. Number- 7. Additional fire hydrants. We're a little concerned about how those are going to impact us in terms of parking. We want to make sure that we have certainly adequate amount of fire suppression capacity on the site, but 5 additional hydrants has · both impact to us in terms of both site and cost to the project. We'd like to explore that to make sure that 65 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 that in fact is the right number and maybe as we look at some of our building type constructive, s, then that number may want to change. So we'd like to keep that item just open for discussion. Item number 24. We jumped way back. We certainly appreciate the level of detail. We're not sure that we've been througt', this before in a project so we're stretching ourselves here to try to anticipate which ones are the ones that are really important 24 and 25 I'd like to put together in our wetland buffers, and the concern we have today is weT.re not sure exactly where the definition of wetland buffers are, but the 40 foot setback in number 25, from the edge of a wetland buffer, we're somewhat concerned and if I could just point to the area fight in here, we're not exactly certain where the wetland might be, and if this current' building actually meets that. And.I don't know-]f staff has looked at that. If we think we're in complias~ce. · . - -. Blackowiak: Excuse me, Kate or Bob, do you have any comment on that one specifically? Generous: No. I' ye had discussions with Lori. I thought that was a utilized wetland, and I' I1 have to clarify that with her. Alan Black: So' if it'd be reasonable we'd like to just continue to leave that one kind of open-and see if , we're okay under that area. This wetland has been kind of a hard one. We do have some decking and so forth and we have some trails through there and we wanted to respect and not create a requirement that we can'.t currently meet. Number 35. We concur. We'd like'to continue,, it somtded like front Planning Corn. mission, you:re wanting us to work .with staff towards those things that can add architectural detail. And since number 35 is not well defined, we want to understand that ourselves because there's a need for us to tP? to design a building that works and also'prices in so we'd li'ke to continue to work. with staff but -. right now we're not certain which level of responsibility'we would have and stafl would have and frankly reach a conclusion them. And then lastly number 44, public drainage and utility easements be requited over the public's storm sewer line. Minirhum easements shall be 25 feet, and we just haven't-had a c.hancc here to look at that and sex~. if we're in accord with the current site plan to do that. I'd be our intent to do that but we just want te make sure that our current project meets that. I think we condensed our's down to 6 or 7 items out of the 53 so we didn't react negatively to any of the recommendations. We want tO continue to fine tune and work with staff-on these ite~ns if we may. And with that I would pause and try to take questions and we have our architect here, co-developer and contractor Mark Eckloh and housing construction and see what we can do to answer your questions to get the project. We're glad to have an opportunity, to get to this level of detail tonight. Blackowiak-' Alright. Okay, commissioners. Questions of the applicant. Deb, start out. Kind: Two questions. The shingle style, is .that an architectural style or. Alan Black: I believe ti, ose axe fi'a/shingles and I think the nature of it typically because the elevation heights we're at, it's our perception that ~nay be a very, very expensive item and we're not sure on a 4 story building at this location that there'd be any opportunity to see those. If we were down into a lower scale building, I think that would have a lot of merit but we're just not sure that that would be the best place to spend the dollars on this project today. Kind: What sort of precautions can you take to make sure that there's not that ripple effect in the summer and is there a certain kind of felt that can be used to limit that or'? Alan Black: Okay thank you. Maybe I could pass that question to this is Mark Eckloh. 66 'P~a~ming Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 ~Hrk Eckloh: My name is Mark Eckloh: I'm with Senior Housing Cxmstmction. Co-developer on the project. And I live in Chaska. To answer your question specifically, v, qth the height of these buildings; typically what we have is fairly iow roof styles on the main body of the roof. 'Probably in the range of a 5:12 ,~'pically. Because'of the height of the building'we're usually fi~fing the foot restriction of the. 5(5- foot height to begin with. The second hhing is ::'hen you look at the elevation Of the building, we dr~ not' want to draw attention to that big mass of asphalt so typically by trying to lower that and make .fi. at less o1' an appearance is our goal. To answer your question specifically about the rippling effect, this is an. XP25 fiberglass shingle Which is completely di, fferent than what's on residential and beca~ of the thickness of it and because of the fire .requireni~'nts, the fire:cod*.require.meats to this shingle, you don't get that rippling effect that you are referring to that you see in re~.. idential Co. nstmction. Kind: There's a few apartment buildings around too that get it tOO. Mark Eckloh: Okay. K~d:' So that's my concern is I want to make sure it's a qmflity looking building, because, it reklly is.-. And I sure would hate to have the shingles detract from that. ~..' M,~rk Eckloh: We do have so_me feature areas tho. ug.h. on the entrance to these, areas and thtk~e lower roof areas that are proposed to be a different type. There w~s some discussion about, and correct, me if l'm . xia'ong Ward, that there was some diszusslon about a standing seam metal roof on some of these exea.s and so :~ome of ,~he lower areas that you ~e on the-model, them would be. where we would spend the. morfe9·" and n~ke. a i'oc::l point of the roof ~s opposed to the broader flat area up on top.. .' .. Kind: O~. And then meters and utility boxes, that'sort of ~hing. How do you prolX~Se.. ... ; Mark Eckioh: One per building. Kind: One. per building. Mark Eckloh: One here, one there. All the utilities are paid for by Presbyterian Homes. It's incruded in t.he residents rent. Kind: And are they outside? Will they be screened from public view, or are they located inside9.- M'.~a'k .Eckloh: I don' t 'know how Chanhassen haadles their meters per se but ¢'pically With 6ne"on'each building, they're usually ~ome ldnd of fashion on the outside but the. y'te not objectionable. It's not like they ~ave a whole bunch of them. I don't ltnow how they do their water meters..Usually .that's some. type of remoCe so there's just a counter on the exterior of the building so it's prett3', not a big item. But" we only have one per building. Kind: Okay. That's all. Blaekowiak: 'rhacs enough? Okay. Uli. Sacchet: Ye. ah, real quick. Making the colors a little bit more of a.contrast. Do you have an issue 'Mth t.hat? Mark Ecklob: We have no issue with that but I think in reality in trying to be totally honest with both . .staff aad with council I think there will be a difficulty in finding a lot of colom As you look around our 67 Planning CoJ..ranission Meeting - November 6, 2001 neighborhoods, unfortunately or fortunately, however you ,,iow it, most p,mple seem to pick beige .' colored sidings so if you go to a vinyl manufacturer, which we can bring in 4 or 5 different manufactm.~rs. that make vinyl, you will find no dark colors. ! don't want to lie to you and say that there's a dark green out there. They rlon't make it. Tl.~ere's t~o demand for it. You don't see it in at~y of your neighborhoods: Sacchet:' I don't think it has to be said to be dark. JuSt a little more contrast I guess that's what. · -- Mark Eckloh: We're certainly not.opposed to that, provided it's one of the normal siding. 'We dbn't .. want t.o Nave to special order a product., We w~t to be able to use the normal vendors but there.really ' · isn't much oi :, selection and as you lobk' at most of our n~w i~eighborhoods unfortunately, there doesn't,. . . seem to be a broad selection of color in the vinyl's. " . . Kind: Sorry to interrupt you Uli. You hit on ~e point I forgot ~bout. Would you consider'using a .. different material? .-' Mark Eckl6h: Well stucco is a tremendous cost difference to us obviously than vinyl. We focus when we designed this building originally, we focused and were given direction both by some of the'people at city, staff and also with the architecture group to focus on brick, and we have put an extensive amount of. brick av.d .~;'e.. do have a lot of areas anti obvi. o.~sly this is in c:.'-ference to the project across ~e s'~'eet, '. Whet~ there ~s .~ lot of cut face block that's exposed. We l',a','e none. We've cove~ed, we have a.lot:of · garage area tl~at shows en this because of the. elevations of these buildings and we've...brick. And the' ocher thing about for us is t;ut the siding .~spect, and this may seem small but for senior housing the sic!lng aspect is ~':ritical because we're trying ~o ma.~e it.!ook residential and feel residential.-'We warn t~,ese older Feople to feel like they're in a residential home. ,'lot some type of institutional Imnae. '.And · even ihcugb you see stucco homes, brick and stucco tends to look more instituti'onai than siding'so :ye tpt .: to keep a skling as.peet to the hom~ just because v,e like the :tspect o[' trying to make it f.*.el mc~re "· residential. S~: ! guess to be honest with you we would like to avoid going to stucco if at all p6ssible. · We don't see that as a benefit to th. is project and we wot:Id rather do other trea~.ments in terms of awnings' or windows or tho~ kind of things than stucco. · ' Kind: Okay, thank- you. Blackowiak: l..rli. Sacchet: Yeah. Ail these units are going to be rental units, correct? Alan Black: All the units are in a rental unit mad the program here provides that residents arco' t signing -' long term !e~ses.. They're a 30 day lease requirement so. .' .. Sacchet: 'I hen just to really'briefly touch on this, and the Milo .aa'chitecture Group letter there was recotnmendation to give it a little more of a~modern twist. Make it a little more contemporary. 'Probably · some of those would be accomplished by having a little mere contrasting colors and the window accent elements introduced. Is that correct? ,Man Black: I think through the staff recommendatimts ~r, have here.~ there's some :,does to modernize it through the.use of windows, awnings, some coloration and so I think we' 11 accomplish Milcr' s...1 think so anyway. Sacchet: That's all my questions. 68 Planning Coramission Meeting- November 6, 2001 · · ! Blackowiak'. Okay. LuAnn. Si. dney: i guess a question about your lighting plan. -Could you explain that? You know light fixtttms.., exterior lighting. ' '.. ' '.. -: Mark Ecidoh: You go./us. In terms of interior lighting, we were told that them.was a nell for shoebox, you know the standard box lighting that just goes down in terms of the parlcing lot. In terms of tl~ decorative lighting on the exterior Of main street, and Lake Drive,,,I assume that we would be.matching wtmever is going, on throughout the ba~ance.of~ pmject,.but apart from that W~ don't have ~ythin.' .g.- specific, if it worked with council, or. Plimn!ngC0mmission I'msorry, we would prefer the dec6rative' lighting interior as well. Most of our projects,'we like the old fashion lightih.' g and we like that but I know there'-~ objections to communities not to having. We think when you talk about all these buildings ' and trying-to put features in, to put those ugly shoebox-lights is a problem but we realize that we have to respect other p~ple's space as well in terms of that but we prefer the decorative lighting in terms of the interior space as well· If we could do that. · · · Genemm.-: Go for it. It's permitted under the design standards:.' . · Sidney: .Yeah: I think that would really enhance the project.- · . -. Blackowiala Rich. " '-: .~,--,~,e: Jus~ one question regarding the air conditioning, trying to think of the, the air'conditioning.a~.d. farnoce but there's no exterior units or m~ything like that? There is? Well then I'm trying:to-see. ' ... · . o . Aloft Black: Ti~e plan for'the independent lixSng bhilding is.a p~oduct Blue. you nmy refer to.ii a'd a magi~ · pack or 5ky pack and there is some exterior grills and:venting that Comes out. However by ~e. way : they've designed it~ that occurs, and I don't know if this plan ~-,uld even shew it. It a~udly occ~ OUt on :he balcon.~ a~eas. Would you like to try to show, do we have that on our plo. ns, on an elevation bore?- Mark Eckloh: Al's one plan behind.' It's a 4 pipe system which means that it has all centralized heating and cooling so that there is a massive chiller unit, but it's built into a rooftop scenario so there, is nota' chiller unit sitting on the ground. There might be a scenario where there might be one or two.small air conditioning units, and that heat that central core area, but that would be no bigger in terms than what the air conditioning unit you have sitting at your current home, but the chiller is designed to go on the'roof area over on Building Il there. - ' .. · · · · . . · Sidney: Not screened? -'. Mark Eckloh: -It's all screen.ed, yes. You wouldn't see it. That's correct. There's a mansard rbof, and then it creates a flat spot inside so visually you can't see the chiller unit. Blackowiak: I guess I don'. t have any questions right now. Do you have anybody else that's interested in' presenting? : Alan Black: Just one quick thought in terms of all your concerns about height. The 4 story building is actually 8 feet lower in elevation than the 3 story building. The way the topography works out, the 3 st:~pj building is 8 feet higher so even though we have a 4 story building, if you lo0k closely.hem, and this is an actual scale model, the roofs are basically the same height~ So because of the way the tep%.q-aphy of the site works, the 4 story building won't appear to anyone looking across from the area 69 Planning Coinmission Meeting - November 6, 2001 over to the. notxheast, or coming in, the building won't appear any higher from the interior of the project than the 3 story building just because this building sits 8 feet lower on the site to begin with. So I think it helps alleviate those fears about the height scenario. Blackowiak: 1 have a question that just made me think of something, and I don't know if it's'for you or for staff. St. Hubert;s building. How high is that and how w:~ll this compare with St. Hubert, s? · Generous: I think they're 40. It depends which level you look at. It was 2 stories. Blackowiak: I'm just wondering i.f yo~u, let's say you stood fromthe north and looked and St. Hubert's would be down to your left and then th6se buildings would be to your right.. I'm just kind of curious how they would compare. " Vernelle Clayton: ...tonight for that same reason. Idrove over there spe~-ifically to try to figure that out. It's so far down...It's really hard to know. Aanenson' We could puli the plans and find that out. Blackowiak: Yeah, that'd just be interesting to find out how it's going to, you know how it's.going to .kind o[ set up in the entire. Aanenson: To so~ what St. Hu'~ert's did, look at this. rhey were concereed about that... Vernelle C!:tyton: 'Yeah. they were requested to acconunodate it. Aanensc.n: "['o make sure that they're not blocked completely. B!ackowiak: Okay, so they're comfortable?' ,Manenson: Right. ! Mark Fx:kloh: In reference to 2 again, if you look at the model. What we've done, and this is the.end that's closest to St. Hubert's and also the endthat's acrosg from Bookoo Bikes. What we've tried to do is we've actually lowered the end of the building there so it's not 4 stories on the end of the building, This is actually 3 stories, and we've got the same scenario on the Bookoo end of the building. That we're dropping the building, down so that visually it gives the effect of being closer and not so imposing in .- terms of the buildings that axe in proximity to it. So that we'have tried to accommodate that by lowering the end of the building and giving a feel of being a floor down. I don't know where we are in relation to the actual pitch of the church roof.. I think we're fairly close but I know we're substantially.under the ' · steeple to the point of the roof. We aren't even close to that. Blackowiak: Okay. Alan Black: Kate had mentioned also at one time. in the project's planning we actually had this portion of the assiszed living building a~s a 4 story atructure and one of the comments we got back fi:om the - ' church was they were concerned about the elevation of that and so at the request, we cut that down-to a 3 story structure so I think they're comfortable with that part of the elevation of that. Blackowiak: (.)kay. Alrighty. Well this item is open for a public hearing. St> if anyone would' like to come and comment on this, please do so. Seeing no one, I will close the public heating. Commissioners, time for comments. Deb, would you like to start us out? 70 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Kind: Sure. I like the building. 1 think it's really attractive. I agree with staff though. I'd like to see it a'-' little bolder, more closely to this rendering. This is always a danger with me to show me a rendering, and- I like thcai ti:e wa)' they are so. I don't know. I'd L;ke to see you get closer to that and. l think EFIS w0ifld be an acceptable tnateria~ i~':ause il is really an accenl area. it's not a foot traffic area where itmt seems to be, a problem materiid. A Couple other points thai were brought up. Let me double check here.' I agree re'th tie staff's recommendations for conditions. I'm not quite sure what to do with some of the reque,~ of the applicant. The vines on the brick, I'm fine with the landscaping being used to screen s6 maybe. change that language to landscaping pi ,ants sha~. ' ";l:ie p!anted.:' That's-kind of red .un.dant. How about'". landscaping sh~l be planted in the areas 'where the. garage elevation of the' building is, I think we can give' .. . . them seine flexibility. Blackowiak: Work with staff. , ,- Kind: Work with staff. The standard work with staff. The fire hydrant thing I think we could say' : additional fire hydrant5 may be required, and the applicant shall work with the.Fire Marshal to determine where they' re located. I'd be fine with softening that a little bic The 40 foot setback from the wefland : buffer, direct staff to check on that. I guess leave that condition there. Leave it the way it is and just-get - answera ,~> that before ii g~s to council. And th~n numbzr 35, that's the condition, about window, types a.ndhalfi.-.oy~vindows. I don't really know how we can make ~hat more clear t~night. Ithinkwes~ould ' do our s:andam work with staff condifien there, because I do hke the ~dea of getting; especially on,the'. Pha~; I buikting of incorporating a little bit more interest i~ the- windows on that building e;peciatty I ' :..' [hink weuM be nice. I love the Building II, the Europe. an flavor there..It's very nice. An~t ~en I'd like --'. · to add ~¢c, ndition about screening utility. ~xes: air conditioning, any ~:f that kind of stuff on ground..- leve~ defi:uteiy needs to be. screened. Nice project. ' Blackowiak: Airight. Uii. Saechet: Ditlo. '-- -' Blackowiak: No way. Okay, LuAnn. Sidney: Really an oul~standing project by an outstanding company. This is; you Imow I think what the- intent was for. Villages on the Pond, we're seeing a good example of that and as a former commissioner would say, gc~xl four walls and it really flows threughout the whole buildings. So I really commend . everyone fi~r working on this. I agree with Deb's comments about, you know maybe a little bit more'- bolchless in the colors may help give the Eur0. pean vernacular feeling to the buildings i~ what: I wrote down. But reaily great. I made my commeht3 and so I'll pass it along to Rich. Slagle: 1 think it's great. I raean I understand the comments of my fellow commissioners. Em.not as. sold on the diversity of the difference of coloring. I think it looks great. Blackowiak: And I agree. I certainly like the projecl. 1 think I'm gJad we stayed to see it t'h/s evening. It's iate but i~ certainly was worth the wait tonight. I like it a lot. Recon'anendations. The conditions ·. · that were. of co~,cem, to you, 1 mc, an basically work wi. th staff. I know that they can be. worked outand I have no worries about that. We have two nmnber 52's and a number 53 we have to renumber at the end'.- . A little housekeeping thing. .:' Kind: Oh yeah, there's a couple typos too. 71 Planning Commission Meeting -November 6, 2001 Blackowiak: Yeah. but it's late and we're not going to worry about that so. All and all what'.s important is I think it's a great project. 1 think everybody agrees here so with that I'd like to have a motion please.- Seccbet'. "i rah Madam Chair, I'd like to tn~ke a moti6n that the Pla:ming CormrdsSion recommends appro~,al of Sire'Plan #2001-13, plans prepme, d by Ko~supsky, Krank, Efickson Architect.~ dateO Septembe~ t4, 2001,.stibject to ate tbllowing cOnditions 1 through 54 with the following fixes in 4, sub- number 6. Applic~t Shall work with staff to consider landscaping or vine-type plants to be planted in .. areas and. so forth. Number 7. Additional fire hydrants may be required. Number 25. Work with staff to determine the required 'setback. Wetland setback for structures. Number 33 should say furniture, enough furnitme. Number 35. Applicant'shall.'Work .with. staff to' incorporate additional windows and so forth.. Number 44, i'm going to leave. And then you recall that Deb, well you can'do your own 55. That's my motion. Blackowiak: Okay. There's been a motion. Is there a second? Kit:d: i'll second and I have a couple friendly amendments. Uli, I'm sho~'ke.d. Nmnber.28. You 'neeat'to ' add a sentence that says silt fences shall be removed upon project completion. -'. Sacchet: Ol:. thanks so much. Kind: You're, welcome. Number 34, 1 would like to add a sentence that says, since the siding areas are ~'or v..cceat euly, FJ:[S or stucco w,~uld be an accept~ble alternative in t3rder to.achi.~ve border colors. Do. yc, u v;an! to accept them our by one? .... -. Sacchet: Yep, no, no, no. I accept them all. .. .. Kip. d: Okay. And then number 50 needs your slit fence sentence as well. Silt fence shall be rern6ved .. from project upon completion. Aod then the re-numbering that .Mison talk~J about...&nd then nu:ff~r 55. I'd tike to add a cond~.tiou. 'Or wait, what am we up to°. Yeah, 55. Ground air conditi6ni~l~ units, utility boxes, and meters shall be screened with landscaping and/or with the same. building materials'used' on the main structures. Sacchet: Yes. Accepted. Blackowiak' Okay, a motion and second. Saechet moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of'Site'Plan #2001-.t3, plans prepared by Korsunsky,'Krank, Erickson Architect.q, dated September 14, 200.~, subject to ~he following conditions: " . The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary r, ecurity to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. Site 91an approval is co:tti,gent on final platting of Outlot F, Villages nv the iPonds, to a block ·" anti lot dcs~.gnation. . Pedestrian cc, nnecfions shall be provided from the interior Farking lo;' to both Lake Drive and Main Street. 4. The applicant shall make the following corrections to the landscape plan: 72 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 . . . . 10. 11. 12. t3. 15. . . a. Add 9 grey dogwood. b. Plant 13 Redtwig dogwood instead of 6. ' c. Substitute 2 Green Mountain sugar maples for 2 Emerald Queen. Noia,~ay maplel d. Plant 7 Black Hill spruce instead of 6. " e. All .c .h~nges pertain to the landscaping proposed along Highway 101. f. Applicant shall work with staff to consider landscaping or vine type plants to be planted in areas where the garage elevation of the building is exposed, including the southern end of B'uildip, g I .ag. d.43/e southern end .of Building I!,.on the west end of Building IL anti adjacent'to the.retainingwali. Shredded bark mulch shall be placed under the line of Japanese tree lilacs proposed along the . terrace facing Lake Drive. A strip of sod shall be laid along the sidewalk. -.- A revised landscape plan shall be submitted to the city for approval. · Additional fire hydrants may be required on the inner l~arking portion of the project. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of fire hydrants. .. A 10-flint clearance space must be maintain'ed a,.-ouhd fu'e hy .drear& i.e. street lamps, Cre~,--. · ~h. rabs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, table TV, and trai~sformm- boxes. This is to ensure that fire. h;.'drant.~ can be qtfickly l¢~:ated .and safely operated by firefighters. Ptrrsuant to Chanhasscn-City Op:iinance gg- 1. - · Fire lanes and yellow curbing will be re. quired. Contact Chanhassen Fi~ Marshal for e:oct curbs to be.. painted and exact location of fire land signs. Pttrsuant tO Chanhasseu Fii'e Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy//6-1991 'and Section'904-1; 1997 Minnesota Uniform F~re Code: .... A p.~r (Post Indicator Valve} is required. ContactC.hm~tssen Fire Marshal for exact location~ · - Pnrstmat.to 1999 NFPA 13 Section 5-14.1.1.8. · - : Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division regarding premise-' identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevemion Division Policy g29- 1992. Comply with water service installation policy for commercial and industrial buildings. Pursuant. to h~spei:tion Division Water Service. hstallation Policy #34-1993. Copy enclosed. · · . . . Comply with the ChanhaS~en Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division policy concerning - maximum allowed size of domestic water on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line. Pursuant to Chanlu~sen Fire Department/Fire'Prevention Division Policy #36-1994. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Depa~tment/Fhe Prevention Division Policy regatrling notes to b~ included on all site plans. Pursuam to Chanhassen Fire .De, pamnent/Fire Prevention Division Pc. licy g4-1991. Submi[ design specifications regarding ve.hicle access over the underground link connecting the two buildings. This ttmnel design should support the imposed loads of Chanhassen~s largest-fire apparatus. 73 Planning Cormmission Meeting - November 6, 2001 16. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Submit radius turn dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval. The inner courtyard area should be designed for fire apparatus access drive-through. The buildings must be protected with automatic fire sprinkler systems. The building.plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. The proposed ;building areas are over/lie allowable, area.permitted for Type. V One-Hour construction, area separation v?alls wjll.be required to bring the building areas in ·compliance. ' vhth the code. Building #1 is not permitted to be four stories high ii' constructed of Type V One- -Hour construction. The proposed 13R fire sprinkler system cannot be used for area and/or number of story increases. An accessible rout~ must be provided to both buildings, parking facilities, public transportation- stops and all common use facilities. All parking areas, including parking garages, must be provided with accessible parking spaces. ,.iispe,.~:ed among the various building enrcances. Accessible dwelling units must }~ provided in adcordance with Minnesota State Building Code 'Chapter 1341. ". A t'~" (Post It:dicator Valve) must be installed on the domestic/fire suppression water ser','ic6. -, · The building owner and/or their representatives should meet with the Inspections Di.v. ision 'to' · discuss ·plan review and permit procedures. In particular, lype of construction and allowable' area issu ~s need to ~ addressed as soon as possible. , · . A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained. or established around all wetland basins. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the city's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge Signs under the direction of city staff and shall pay the city $20 per sign. The applicant shah work with staff to determine lhe required wetland buffer setback for structures. The rate of discharge from the prot~os0:l development shall not exceed pre-development runoff- rates. The applicant shall provide storm water calculations to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. Existing drainage and utility easements should be. vacatexl and new drainage and utility easements should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas and storm water ponds. Type IH silt fence should be provided adjacent to all areas to be preserved as buffer or, if no buffer is to be preserved, at the delineated wetland edge. The slit fence shall be removed upon completion of the project. Erosion control blankets should be installed on all areas with slopes 3:1 or greater. 74 Plannir?.g Con-anission Meeting - November 6, 2001 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. Lighting shall comply xvith the Villages on the Ponds design standards. ' Signage shall comply with the Villages: on the Ponds design standar-.ls. A separate sign ~rmit.is ~qdi:~'d for ea.ch sign. .' -' .~. · · The monument sign located in the northwest comer of the site at the comer of Lake Drive and Market Bouleva/'d must, at a minimum,..~identify the Villages on the Ponds development. · . .. . - . :'~ ~:. . . .. .-. ' . . ~. - - . The applicant/developer shall'htstall site furniture throughout the-project inclnding benches,. planter boxes, tables, chairs, etc. . · The applicant/developer shall work with staff to prepare a final color pallet with greater . . . differentiation in siding colors. The number of vinyl siding colors is limited to four colors. 81nee · the siding areas are for accent only, EFIS or stucco would be an acceptable altertmflve tn. ' order to achieve bolder colors. . ~: Applicant shall work with staff to incorporate additiot~al window types such as bay, half-... ' ,' lound, round, and ltalianate as well as window accents sm-h as plant boxes, s~,utters, balconies, decks, grates, canopies, a',~mings, trellises, reces~e,s, embrasures, arches, lunettes. '- SuE mi: storm sewer design calcuhtions for a 10 year,. 24 hour stom~ event. · . ! S~.ff. nnt stormwater pond design: calculations for the I0 and 10G year storm event. - Ad:l the following City o.~ Chanhazsen De~,xil ?la~e NOS: 220.2, 3 iS2, 3107, 3 l'08, 310~,' ~30ff, '.' ' 5301. 5302, and 5313. - - " The minimum drive aisle width is 26 feet. Revise the plans to comply. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regularity agency permits. Retaining walls must be designed by a reg~tered engin~r and r~quire on approved fence at the top of the wall. Ail plan sheets xm~st bz sighted by a registered engineer.. '-' . The two propo .sed rock constmctiofi entrances are required to be a minimum of 75 feet in length. Public drainage and Utility easements will be required over the public storm sewer line. The.. minimum easement Width shall be 25 feet. " Add a stc~xn sewer ~hedule to the plans. On the utiiity plan revise CB 5, 6, 7, 8 and 14 to CBMH 5.6, 7, 8, an6 14. }'lan and profile views are required for all of the public ston'n sewer. To guarantee the installation of the public improvements, the applicant must supply the City with a financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow. 75 Plam.~ing C(>nunission Meeting - November 6, 2001 50. A public drainage and utility easement is required over the proposed pond. This easement shall cover the pond up to the 100 year high watec elevation. The easement over the existing pond.will hax-e to be vacated ak a condition of site p~ac appro~;al. '-' 51. 52. Type II1. heav~ duty silt fence shall be used adjacent to all ponds and wetlands. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected from construction-related sediment through the use Of filter barriers (see Ci.ty Detail Plate No. 5302). All slit fences shall be removed upon completion of.. the project. .. .. . . Cormection to the public utility lines will incur hook-ap charges against the lot. The 200 l :. sanitary sewer hook-up charge is $1,322 per unit. The 2001 water hook-up charge is $1,723 per.. unit. The 2001 SAC charge is $1,225 per unit. These charges will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. 53, Temporary easements are required for any off-site, grading. .54: Add a legend to t.he plans. 55.. (.}n the ~"-- et. ,. '.- .i.,, plan, shew the dimens'_,ons of the.parking ..ali.,. a :cess aisles and '!riveway widths. . 56, Grouted air condifioving uni-~,s, utility bo,/e~, and meters shall he screened with landseapi, ng...: am/dm- with the same building materials used on the main slc.c',ures. · .d vo,.ed i~: t'avor and the motion carried unanimoasty ~ to O. -. .. . .. . Blackowi'-'~k: G(~ to City Council on Novem~.er 26t~. Thank you ao much again for ,vailing.' · APFROYAL OF MINUTES: UIJ Sacchet noted the Minutes of the Planning Comnfission m~efing. : :..-: dated October '2, 2001 as presented. ... ONGOING ITEMS: · ', Aanenson: We do have a meeting on the 20th. We have a subdivision and a coaple of code amendments ~o we wil! have a meeting. Blackowi~k' Subdivision and what? . Aanenson: Two c~)de am:ndmenis. 'So we will have a meeting. Chairwoman Blackowiak adjourned the Planning -Commission meeting at 11:25 p.m.' Submitted by Kate Aanen:,on G~mmm,it)' I.)¢veiopment Director Prepared by Nann ()pheim 76 CHANI-IASSEN PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION REG~ MEETING OCTOBER 23, 2001 Chairwonmn Lash called the meeting to order at 7'.30 p.m. · MEMBERS PRF_~ENT: Jan lash, Rod Franks, ]Wflm Howe, Dave Moes, Tom Kelly and Frank Spizale MEMBERS ABSENT: Say Karlovich STAFF PRI~-qENT: Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Direotor and lerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent VI$ITQR PRESENTATIONS: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTF~: Howe moved, Moes seconded to approve the Park and Recreati~ Commission Minutes dated September 25, 2001 as presente& Ali voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ROUNDHOUSE RENOVATION UPDATE. Hoffman: Thank you Chair Lash, members of the commission. I've handed out, there should be some correspondence from ~anna Bunkel~n and it's pretty 'm-depth. If you. had a chance to page through, there's some 14 odd questions there. I've restxmded and Ms. Bunkelman and I have not spoken since that time. It will be back to the City Council on the 12~ of November, which is a Tuesday evening to present her report to the City Council. And they will hand down a decision at that time w~ or not lt~ey will approve an extension of thc project into next season. She's got some good questions and I think she did a fine job in her presentation. ! ~.~h: Michael, you were at this, were you not? Howe: I was. Iamh: Anything you want to share? Howe: Yeah. We all talked at the meeting about how, well how the one of us. We talked about how a . little disappointed we might have been and I think she did have some, for a better word, issues over the stmuner but she came in spitting fire and I was glad that those pictures, they had some renditions of what this thing might look like and very nicely done. That showed me that they had put some thought into thi~ and I think the council was impressed with that. And I thought it went pretty well and I'm i .repressed to see this laundry list here of questions so I think they're gearing up and they've got all winter to do the planning and I think she's up to the task and should be making some contacts so I have a pretty good feeling about it. I can't say what the council might do in 3 weeks but I think this is going to be a pretty decent looking report, I would guess. So that's all I had but maybe we should plan to be here on the 12m. I didn't speak at the meeting publicly so those are my i .repressions, thank you. lash: Okay, thanks Mike. Todd, so you'll be responding to all of her questions here? Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 Hoffman: Back page. I.,ash: Oh! I haven't got that far. Okay. Did you, oh Janet Carlson. That was the woman I was, because she's the one that lived there, correct? Hoffman: No. As a child. Lash: Yeah. Okay. Do people want time to keep looking through this or can we look at it later? Alright. So we don't really need to do anything with this a~ this time, do we Todd? Hoffman: No. Lash: Okay, thanks. Howe: Do you know who's up for the 12~?. The rep from the Park Commission. Hoffman: That person will be so notified. Through the mail. It's auwmatic. Lash: I'm fairly confident if David is the appointed one, that he would represent the view of the commission. Moes: Absolutely. Lash: I have total confidence. But I may try to be there just to make sure. Howe: I'.ll put it on my calendar. Lash: What's the date on that again? Hoffman: Tuesday the 12~. Pranks: Tuesday, November 13m. Hoffman: Yeah, that's it. Lash: Is what? Pranks: The 12~' is Monday. Hoffman: Because the Monday is a holiday. That's Veteran's Day. Lash: Oh, so it is Tuesday. So it's Tuesday the 13~. Hoffman: Excuse m~. Lash: Okay. PROGRAM REPORTS: Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 2001 TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY. Ruegemer. The tree lighting ceremony is coming up Saturday, Dece~ 1't. It's going to be right out front again. We'll have to find out kind of next year what's going to ha~ with the library. Where that will be held but this year it's going to be right down here. Corey's working on that again with Nancy Lipinski with the Chanhassen Chhmber of Commerce and doing kind of a joint effort on that again so the Chamber helps with certain components of that and Corey coordinates'a lot of the event as well so it's a fun event and it's traditionally been kind of a fun weekend with a lot of activities going on down at Market Square. We have the tree lighting ceremony here, and also that's the weekend of Breakfast with Santa out at the Rec Center so. Real fun evening. ~Iust an FYI for you. Howe: Do we have that same Santa guy coming? Ruegemer: Was it Brian Beniek? For the tree lighting? Yes. Anyone have any questions? Lash: Okay, thanks Jerry. IL 2002/2002 ICE SKATING SEASON. Ruegerner. Much is the same as last year as far as the number of hours. Kind of time' flame when the finks will he flooded. Same type of operations again this year with portable satellite trailers at certain locations. A noted change is that we are not going to be doing a warming house at Chanhassen I-rills this year. Low numbers. We had kind of talked about that last kind of late winter, early spring. We will be doing a pleasure rink at that location so there still will be a skating option there but it just didn't pay to have a, pay a warming house attendant at that location. So we will be having 4 sites. The Rec Center, City Center Park, North Lotus and Roundhouse this year. Attached is a warming house kind of locations on the map and also the addresses and kind of featured amenities at the rest of the sites at the rec center. Does anybody have any questions on that at all or any c .hanges that the commission would like to see? Franks: The only thing is I know in years past when we've had the site map of the ice rinks we've had the service areas for those parks circled. And it just helps to give a little bit better idea of the coverage. That's just a little thing. Ruegerner: Would you like to see one? Franks: Well not this year but just for the future. It just I think is more helpful. Pa~gerner:. Okay. Hoffman: When was Pheasant Hill cut Jerry, last year? Ruegemer: I think there is one at Pheasant I-FilL I didn't know that it was on this. I think it was in the newsletter. Is it not on this? Hoffman: So there's one missing here for Pheasant Hill, so you're aware. Franks: There is a Pheasant Hill one as well? Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 Hoffman: Yeah, so that's a big void up. Franks: Yea~ that's one reason that made we think of the circle thing. That is a pretty big void. Ruegemer: I think that was a typo on here but it is advertised in the newsletter. Lash: Okay. Anybody have anything else about ice? Hoffman: No indoor ice yet. Just outdoor. Certain bankers still ask for it on a weekly basis in town. Lash: Okay, well speaking of ice we'll move onto the February Festival. ~ ~FEBRUARYFES~VAL. Ruegemen This year's event again is more of an FYI for the commission to put on their calendars. It's coming up again. It' s always the first Saturday in February so February 2~ this year. Corey's already working on the event. We already did get approval from the Chamber of Commerce to kind of sponsor the fishing contest again so he's in the process of getting the appropriate permits for the Minnesota Gambling Board and getting that information kind of put together so he's working very hard on trying to get dog sled rides again. So if anybody knows contacts. I know that's the weekend now of Beargrease and some other events in the state. It's kind of been hard to find dog sled people to do rides and such but we are still trying very hard to find those so if anybody's got contacts, send them our way. Spizale: You know Mound had that big winter festival with dog sleds, which they don't have now but do you know anybody from Mound that you could contact to get a hold of. Ruegemer. I know some people over at Community Ed over there. Spizale: Yeah I mem~ they had a ton of people with the races and everything so that might be a good spot to get a hold of some people. Kelly: Just curious, whatever happened to the ice golf?. I know that was an event a couple years. Was it just lack of a turnout or? Ruegemer: A little bit of both. The Jaycees are the ones that coordinated that event. They have since disbanded for lack of interest and that's kind of where that is. That was. I think we did it for like a year or two. Kelly: I remember that being tim because it was different. Ruegemer: Yeah. I think their thought was it was going to be the next Chilly Open but it never got to that point. Kelly: Are there any other events you're thinking about? Any non-fishing related, like maybe I don't know...hockey puck shooting contest or something. Something non-fishermen people can do besides playing bingo or whatever else. Besides the past events, something more active out there. I don't know, just a thought. I don't fish. I know I'm in a huge minority but I'm just trying to be. Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 Ruegemer. Well if you have some ideas let us know. We'd be happy to, we do have the skating. The sliding. Down there. The medallion hunt was there last year. Franks: Is the library going to be involved this year? Moes: How about the bonfire and s'mores too. Cub Scouts. Ruegemer: So beyond that please let us know. Kelly: How about the, what happened to the scuba people? Was that just not a very popular family event? Watching someone go. Ruegemer: The diving team? Kelly: Yeah. Ruegemer: Well kind of through 3 or 4 years ago Carver County was having some issues with their dive team and with budget cuts, that sort of thing, that was disbanded and it kind of was put back on the local entities. And to this, I don't know that they have formed another dive team. Kelly: I was just trying to think of events that I've seen in the past. Ruegemer. Yeah. · . Hoffman: Tom's got the history in this event. Ruegemer: That goes to Lake Susan. Lash: Back in the day when there was no fish. Franks: Yeah, didn't they have like cross country skiing and snowshoeing and stuff going on at I. ake Susan too? Ruegem. er.. That was out at the Arboretum. Franks: Arboretum, right. Lash: We have talked about having a ski through Lake Ann though, didn't we? Back in the trail. Is that a possibility or don't you think, did it die for lack of interest? Ruegemer:. For that particular event? It'd be in coordination with finding the grooming. Hoffman: It had good support, the event at the Arboretum at the time and so they put all they could into it for probably 4 years and it never made a go of it so. They had their own committee chair and their own committee and the Arboretum backing it and what happened was the weather would never cooperate. They were skiing through slush a couple times. Howe: I believe, isn't February 2"a Ground Hog's Day? Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 Lash: Yes it is. Ruegemer. Is it? Lash: It is every year. Howe: I know, I mean yeah... :"' Ruegemer:. Have Mikey come out of his hole, see if he sees his shadow. Hoffman: We'll have to get the ground hog in there. Howe: Just a thought you know. Someone dress up like a ground hog. Get that Goldie Gopher out here to walk around. Lash: Get animal control to get their live traps out there. Find something. It could be a raccoon. Hoffman: We can put the Hoffman kids in that. They'll... Lash: Are you interested in recruiting a guest announcer? Hoffman: You know somebody? Lash: Well I might know someone who might be interested. Ruegemer: Big beard. Franks: Looks like Santa. Lash: Yeah, a burly fellow with a very warm hat. Ruegemer. We would welcome that. Lash: Well could somebody send a nice invitation. Besides me. Somebody besides me. Thanks. Ruegemer:. Can do. Lash: Okay. Anything else on February Fest? SELF SUPPORTING PROGRAMSA A. 2001 ADULT SOFTBALL EVALUATION. Ruegemer: Does anybody have any specific questions on softball? We did gain a couple teams this year which was good, and most notable was probably the Thursday night league again. We were up to really Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 capacity and Friday night we added some teams too. That was from the Excelsior League that folded. A lot of people gravitated down this way, which was nice. Very nice. Adding some teams. A couple years ago we had 4. This year we had 9 so. Lash: FII ask this question since Jay's not here, because I figure this would be Jay's question. Where does the money that, if we do ggnerate revenues on some~, and I know that's not very common that we actually ever come out monei/ahead on anything, but where does that money go? Ruegemer. That goes to help pay, that goes back to the self supporting programs and that pays, well a portion of my salary and it should, if there is any money left over from that, it will go into pay all the rest of the expenditures in self supporting. And it's. Lash: So like the rec programs and things like that that we host that we end up not making money at? Ruegemer: Yeah, there's a little leeway within that budget. Hoffman: If there's any left over it goes right to the g~neral fund. Lash: That's kind of what I was thinking but I knew Jay would want to know. Well once you take your salary out of that $7,000, there probably isn't a whole lot left. Ruegemer. We're in the hole. Hoffman: 20%. Lash: Okay. Anybody have anything for Jerry on that? 2001 ADULT FALL SOFYBALL EVALUATION. Lash: Oh, there's another $1200. Ruegemer:. Getting close to my salary. 20%. Lash: Anybody have anything for Jerry on that one? Hoffra : That's a big money maker. Ruegemer:. Minimal ~ffort. Big money. lash: You ought to have about a hundred of those. Ruegemer:. We're always working on it. ADMINISTRATIVE: A. 001 C, OQSE m M0VAL A rt AL Hoffman: The goose report is interesting. The goose numbers are down across the metropolitan area, which means when numbers are down, our cost per goose removed goes up. So in 2001 the City of Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 Chanhassen paid $5450 to get rid of a single goose in Chan. 60 of thel~ They removed from 3 sites. Lake Minnewashta, Lotus Lake and up on Near Mountain Boulevard. A couple of factors. The goose removal program itself is holding down numbers. The metro goose season, which was extended from 5 days when it started about 10 years ago to 3 weeks now, so people shoot geese in the metro for 3 weeks in September. And then the fact that we had a wet and cold spring. Geese nested first time around and then waters rose and drown out .many of those nests. And then young geese that they found out their first nest typically don't mm-nest. The'bid geese will mm-nest so they're holding numbers down. Very few complaints this year. And t think if you noticed, just fewer geese around town in general. Lash: I remember back in the day when we were taking large, large quantities. Hoffman: 180-200. Lash: Yeah, quantities of these geese and from other sites too. What do you think would happen if we skipped a year7 Hoffman: We skipped a year in the past. Lash: We have? Hoffrnan: Yes. I don't think it'd be a bad recommendation. Lash: Just see what happens. Franks: I couldn't remember if we were in a term contract or whether it was year by year. Hoffman: Year by year. We just let them know after the first of the year if we want to participate. They may see a number of communities drop out actually. I' 11 call him and talk to him about that and I'll report back to you next meeting. See if you need... I.ash: Yeah, if we should have some kind of radical shift next year or the population doubles or triples or something, then. Hoffman: I just want to make sure he doesn't have a waiting list so once you're out, you're out. Lash: Yeah, that's probably a good idea. Hoffman: So I'll call him and then report back next meeting. Franks: And the decision would need to be made, then our recommendation to the City Council before the first. Hoffman: Yeah. There's time even after that. I_ash: Okay. Anybody else have anything on the geese? B. CITY DIRECTORY UPDATE. Lash: Anybody need to make corrections to your. Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 Kelly:. Just on my e-mail address. It's f. It's fairisaa~ not sairisaac. Hoffman: Not an s. An f. Thank you. Moes: Yeah for mine Todd, and ! maY have communicated this. Just take the work and fax numbers off. And then it's a different e-mail. :'Which is ~ Hoffmam Thank you. Lash: Anybody else? Okay. COMMISSION MEMBER CO~E REPORTS. None. COMMISSION MEMBER PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PACKET. Hoffrnan: The item in here on tobacco free recreation, there was a cover letter that was not included from a resident and she's requesting that the city consider tobacco free at youth athletic arenas or fields. Events. Those type of things. I think the 2 cities that are noted in here, Rochester and Bloomington. Bloomington made all city parks and ballfields in Bloomington. That's Rochester and Bloomington did youth athletic facilities tobacco free. One thing I'll be recommending that once the skate park is fenced and we have the skate park formed, we should chat about here before we leave tonight, that that entire area be smoke-free. Tobacco free. So that's our first location and then we would go from there and outdoor spaces. Lash: I have a quick question for you Todd on the Lake Susan Revegetation, whatever you call that thing. Is that just to, if you're facing the lake, is that just to the right of the boat launch of the right of where the little beach area was kind of made? Hoffman: To the left of the boat launch. Lash: To the left of the boat launch, okay. Franks: Between the dock and the boat launch? Hoffman: All the way around it's side. Where the trail is. You'll see some pretty aggressive erosion going on there. Lash: Okay, I'm really mined around then. Hoffn'um: Is the map goofy? Lash: Yeah. Because if you look at where Lake Drive is, you come in from Lake Drive going south, right? Isn't that big area the park? And then the black thing would be to the right of the launch, wouldn't it? Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 Hoffman: Yeah, the proposed location shows from about the beach, and all the way around to past the fishing pier. Lash: Where's the access? Is this it? Hoffman: Access is just near the arrow. Lash: Okay, never mind. Okay, I get it. Thanks. I'm assuming we'll get an update on. Hoffman: Whether or not we're successful. Lash: Okay. And then under the doggy park, I thought that was very interesting. Hoffman: That's a good news letter in that. Lash: Yeah, it had a lot of good ideas. And of course I got my wheels spinning and I'm. trying to figure where in the world we could put one of these, and I think we talk about it almost every meeting now and we can never come up with any good spot. How about, and I'm just throwing this out and I know it's probably a goofy idea but I'm desperate. What about the Fox property? Is there some area there that we could, because isn't there a pond there and could we do something right off of 1017 Does it go out to 1017 No, it doesn't go out to 1017 Hoffman: In the future when access is there, there could be a location. Lash: I mean it's not very centrally located in the city by a long shot but it's not by.a residential area. It's big. It's open.' It's got water. It's got some of those things we're looking for. It's not exactly what people envisioned for there but maybe we could do something in a way that wouldn't be too disruptive to the sit~ Hoffrnan: Yeah. It's probably, well there won't be access for 10 years. And I think the reasoning behind the acquisition was for open space and wildlife preservation and putting a dog park in the middle of it is probably not going to be that well received. The horse people are also going to be lobbying the park commission when the time comes to develop a management plan. There is a group of residents down there have that horses and currently they have ridden on trails within the Fox property for the last 20 years and are continuing to do so today. And so they will talk to the commission about that continued use. So that's something to think about. Marry Walsh is also out at the regional park is going through the master plan redevelopment process for the regional park and he' 11 be addressing the dog park as a part of that. And a golf course. And all sorts of other potential amenities out at the regional park so. That' s a tough one to find a spot for. It really makes you think, there's a couple of things. Dog park. Frisbee golf. A couple of the things that have come up over the years and we don't have a location to put them in. BMX track and all those type of things. Spizale: How much space do you need for a dog park? Hoffman: 3 acres. Spizale: 3. Hoffrmm: Yeah. Someplace accessible with parking. 10 Park and Rex: Commission - October 23, 2001 Franks: So when the city combines with the DNR to purchase the Seminary Fen property, some of that upland grass area around the old seminary building itself, would that be? Hoffman: Sure. When you buy something like that you'd have plenty of locations to look at. Long term. It's also a tough place to get to traffic wise. Meadow Green Park would be a great location. Just take out the ballfields. Put the fence up. :" Lash: How about Pheasant ITfll. That's got water. Hoffman: Trying to put one of these in a neighborhood park would be. Lash: A political nightmare. Franks: If you had a situation like that triangle of land on the, to the east of Chart ITflls Park. Inbetween 101 and Lyman there, that's probably about 2 acres. And what you'd have is the neighborhood park would be the buffer between the neighborhood and, if you ever get your hands on a piece of property like that. Lash: How about when 212 comes through? There's going to be a bunch of odd little parcels here and there aren't there? Again, it's not going to be very centrally located but. Hoffm : There's a lot of questions surrounding 212 acquisition. They're currently talking to a landowner who has considered giving the city 22 acres of excess land or lVlnDot wants it so they're considering the tax benefits for giving it to the city and MnDot is offering them a cash offer so those things are underway. We're making it as attractive as possible. We offered to pay for the appraisal so the appraisal will be getting back to the property owner and if it works out with their...give it back to the Lash: Well I think this is one of those issues that's kind of right up in everybody's mind, so when something happens, people will jump right on it and try and make it happen. I think it's something people have been asking for. Quite a few people. Hoffman: Pretty popular. The other thing I didn't mention was Tuesday, yesterday. Monday, a group of athletic, private athletic club investors came in to meet with the city and talk about a Crosstown or what's the one in Eden Prairie, Flagship type of a club on the Highway 5 frontage road. On the south side near the recreation center. So they're considering 130,000 square foot facility, about $20 million and so watch for that in the upcoming news. Lash: Whatever happened to the YMCA? Hoffrnan: Still out there. Lash: Has anybody heard anything new? Franks: Do they have a new contact person? 11 Pa~k and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 Hoffman: Yeah. I know most of them We met with $ohn Foss, Foss Swim School. He would like to build an athletic pool, a competition pool in town. We haven't heard from Lifetime in quite some time. ...but I think the type of club they're talking about is going to appeal to only a certain market. Howe: That's not cheap, Flagship. Hoffman: Yeah, so there's still ~0ing to be a large percentage of the Chanhassen, especially family market that is not satisfied by that facility so they're still going to be asking in the future for a community center type of a facility. This group would not like a Y. There's long standing battles across the country between private clubs and YMCA's and so if you get one, you're pretty much setting yourself up for...battles in the future to construct another one. Lash: Okay. Anybody have anything else in the packet? Just, I'm going to double check on the skate park forum. Is that supposed to be right before our meeting, is that your plan? Hoffman: Right before our meeting. Howe: I can't make that meeting. I won't be here that night. Hoffman: For the whole thing? Howe: Whole thing. Hoffrnan: This comes about as, the city manager's office. Staff continues to manage a variety of issues basically litter and conduct and those type of things that people walk in our front door and say, this is inappropriate. Cities should not be involved in sponsoring an environment such as that environment. Or certain portions of that environment. And so to allow those folks who have a chance to discuss with the community, we want to host this and talk about the successes and the challenges there and use that feedback to talk about future management. I think the one way, or the one management change that would be looked at is hiring a CSO type of individual and then charging to pay for that person' s salary we would have to charge at the gate. Have operating hours. Have closed hours. And then that person would be responsible for monitoring the conduct at the skate park. That brings a whole other set of issues along with it. You certainly aren't going to pay for that person's salary with just charging and it changes the whole environment there so is that a good thing or a bad thing? Those are some of the issues we want to talk about that evening. We' 11 post this at the skate park so we have some of the users present and parents. I'll also, I'll finish the flyer off with letting people know that they can send written comts or e-mail comments so if they choose not to attend, they can still get that feedback. Lash: Okay. Anybody have anything else? No? Ruegemen If I can bring up the Halloween party real quick. That's this coming Saturday out at the Recreation Center. Jan, Mike and David, I know you have confirmed with Corey that you're going to be out there that evening. If you could be out there at 5:00, that'd be wonderful. And then I have to put the screws to, I know Jack's out of town. Franks: I will be out of town too now. Ruegemer:. Rod. 12 Park and Rec Commission - October 23, 2001 Kelly:. We have our neighborhood Halloween party that afternoon. Ruegemer:. Okay. Okey dokey. Lash: Do you have anything Todd? Okay. Should I wrap it up? Okay, is there a motion to adjourn? Spizale moved, Franks seconded to adjourn the Park and Recreation Commission meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned. Submitted by Todd Hoffman Park and Recreation Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 13 CFFYOF PO liooc147 ~ M'mse~ota ~5317 t~e 952.937.1900 ~1~ 952~Z5~9 ~937.9152 9~9M.2524 W~ g~ TO: Mayor City Council FROM: Bruce M. DeJong, Finance DATE: November 21, 2001 SUBJECT: Dcccrfification of Hcnnepin County and National Weather Service TIF DistriCts Thc two re, solutions presented should be approved in order to deccrtify thc respective TIF districts for next year. This will increase thc mount of property value thai thc 2002 tax levy will be applied against and d~as~ ~vm3, taxpayer's bill proportionately. This decertifi~on will take place at the end of the year. We will calculate ' interest earned for December, apply it to the fund, and then return any excess to Carver and Hennepin Countys for redistribution ~o thc city, county, and . · appropriate school distri~ . 'in me C, l~uluuseu. A ~o~,oinf community ~th dean CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNF_~OTA DATE: November 26~ 2001 RF3OLUTION NO: 2001- MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: RESOLUTION APPROVING DECERTIFICATION OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TIF DISTRICT A. WHEREAS, on ~ 19.~q'the City of Chanhassen (the "City") created its Tax In~t Financing District No.~ 3, Hennepin County TIF District (the "District") within its Development District No. 3 (the "Project"); and; WHRKEAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 to 469.179 authorizes the City Council to &certify a tax increment financing district on any date after all bonds and other obligations have been satisfied; and B. WHEREAS, as of the date hereof all obligations to which tax increments from the District have been pledged have been paid or reserved in full; and Ci WHEREAS, the City desires by this resolution to &certify the District effective December 31, 2001, by which all taxing jurisdictions will benefit from an increased tax base effective for taxes payable in 2002; and - D. WHEREAS, the mining tax increment in the account for the District will be returned after the books are closed in January, 2002 to the County Auditor for redistribution to the regular taxing jurisdictions; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhasscn, Minnesota, as follows: That the Carver County Auditor is authorized and requested to decertify the District as a tax increment district and to no longer remit tax increment from the District to the City as of December 31,2001. Adopted this 26th day of November, 2001. Attest: Mayor City Manager CITY OF CHAN-I~SEN CARVER AND me. NNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: November 26~ 2001 RESOLUTION NO: 2001- MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: A. RESOLUTION APPROVING DECERTIFICATION OF THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TIF DISTRICT WHEREAS, on ~)~/t' ,19_~tbe City of Chanhassen (the "City") created its Tax Increment Financing District No. 2-2, (the "District") within its Development District No. 2 (the "Project"); and; B. WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 to 469.179 requires that the Tax Increment Financing District be terminated in the tax year aI~ 10 yearn at~ approval of the district or 8 years from the receipt of the first increment; C, D. E, WHEREAS, the City desires by this resolution to acknowledge the decx~ification of the District, due to its expiration, af~ which all property taxes generated by property within the Districts have been and will continue to be distributed in the same manner as all other property taxes beginning with taxes payable in 2002, and; WI-IEREAS, as of the date hereof all bonds to which tax increment from the District have been pledged have been paid in full; and; . . WHEREAS, the remaining tax increment in tbe account for the District will be retrained after the books are closed in January, 2002 to the County Auditor for redistribution to the r~gular taxing jurisdictions; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanlmssen, Minnesota, as follows: That the Carver County Auditor is authorized and r~xtuested to decerti~ the District as a tax inerement district and to no longer remit tax increment from the District to the City as of December 31, 2001. Adopted this 26th day of November, 2001. Atteat: City Manager Memo From: Mayor City Council Sgt. Dave Potts 11-19-01 Re: Items for November Council Meeting . . . . . · Sheriff's Office Area Report- October. Attached . Sheriff's Office Area Citation Listing - October. Not available Community Service Officer Highlights - October. Attached Cdme Prevention Specialist Highlights- September/October. Attached Miscellaneous Items: I will have brief information on recent activi'des of possible interest to the Council. · 11-2, juvenile traffic violator dies in car crash · Patrol shift assignments completed for 2002 · Robbery Seminar scheduled for 12-4, 10:00am CARVER COUNTY Office of Count)' Sheriff Carver Count.,.' Government Ccnter Justice Center . 600 East Fourth 'Street Chaska. Minnesota 55318-2190 Bud Olson, Sheriff Emergency: 911 SheriffAdmin: (952'~ 361-1212 Admin. Fax: (952) 361-1229 Dispatch: (952) 361-1231 (Non-Emergency) Listed below is a description of each of the different classification of calls for service which the Carver County Sheriff's Office received and processed for your area. Criminal . Assault Burglary Drug Violation Homicide TraffidAlcohol 'Misc. Criminal Property Damage Robber Sex Crime Theft Vehicle Theft Non-Criminal Disturb Peace/Privacy Misc. Non Criminal Lock out Alarm Domestic Missing Persons/Runaway Animal Medical Housa/Business Check . Azalst other Agency Fire Call Prowler ' Civil Process Transport Wan'ant Service Boat and W~ter Snowmobile Gun Permit/Acquire Gun Permit/Carry. Lock Post Office Suspicious Activity Open door Auto Accd-Prop Damage Auto Accd-lnjury Auto Accd-Fatal Trnffic Special Traffic Altercation between parties where actual physical harm occurred Breaking into a residence or business All drug violations, possession of, sale of, manufacture of or under the influence of. Taking of a persons life · Traffic stops or accidents involving a driver under the influence Minor offenses which include order of protection violations, warrant service, threats and harassment, tobacco violations. -~ All damage to property includh)g vandalism' and trespassing on properW Taking of property in the presence of another with use of force Rape, sexual abuse, indecent exposure and pornography Taking of progerty Credit card fraud, issuance of bad cheeks, counterfeiting, theft by swindle " Theft of a motor vehicle -. Noise, harassing phone calls, Citizen assists, lost and found property, general law enforcement questions, civil matters, delivery of council packets, juvenile disciplinary problems etc. Unlock doors of automobiles, residences or businesses for owners Checking on an alarm at a private residence or business. Verbal argument between parties Juvenile runaways or missing persons Animal bites, stray animals Assist persons with medical issues, natural cause deaths Check 6n houses or businesses when owners are away from property Assist other law enforcement offices; state patrol or govemmerit departments Fires and assist fu'e departments Person on property who does not belong Suicides, 72 hr holds for mental health issues. Service of civil papers, assist with civil stand by situations Transport persons for various reasons Service a warrant for Carver County and other counties All incidents involving boats or lakes All incidents involving snowmobile Issuance of a permit to purchase a handgun Issuance ora permit to carry a handgun Deputies lock post office buildings Suspicious persons, acts or vehicles Locating an open door to a business Auto accident when only property damage occurred Auto accident when injury and property damage occurred Auto accident in which a fatality occurred All traffic stops and calls, stalled vehicles, debris on the roadway Radar wagon, special tra~c details Affirmative Action/Equal .Opportunity Employer CARVER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE AREA REPORT FOR CITY OF CHANHASSEN CALLS FOR SERVICE FOR MONTH OF OCTOBER 2001 2001 2000 2000 MONTHLY Y'I'D MONTHLY YTD CRIMINAL Assault 2 40 2 48 ! Burglary 0 36 6 32 Drug Violation I 25 2 22 Homcide 0 0 0 0 Traffic/Alcohol 14 137 18 132 Misc. Criminal 22 217 29 277 Property Damage 21 287 55 391 Robbery 1 5 1 2 Sex Crime 2 12 2 22 Theft 49 376 38 367 Theft/Related 3 25 1 18 Vehicle Theft 2 22 2 16 TOTAL CRIMINAL 117 1182 156 1327 NON-CRIMINAL Disturb Peace/Privacy 43 424 33 367 Misc/Non criminal 55 647 64 587 Lock out 58 526 59 468. Alarm 80 781 77 743 Domestic 11 122 4 90 Missing Person/Runaways 8 66 5 94 Child Abuse/Neglect 0 ' 45 4 ' 50 Motorist Assist 20 287 14 195 Animal 41 346 40 354 Medical 37 387. -. "39 374 House/Business Check 2 25 3 36 Assist other Agency 3 63 7 83 Fire Call 26 224 26 225 Prowler 2 10 7 33 Mental Health I 35 3 32 Civil Process 0 2 0 2 Transport 0 5 1 24 Warrant Service 5 41 4 19 Boat & Water 0 51 0 36 Snowmobile 0 20 0 0 Gun Permit/Acquire 19 102 6 72 Gun Permit/Carry 1 4 0 5 Lock Post Office 0 0 0 0 Suspicious Activity 110 744 58 538 Open Door 1 21 3 13 Auto ._Accd-__ Prop Dam 28 424 42 393 Auto Accd - Injury 6 64 11 83 Fatal Auto Ar~.~ 0 1 0 0 Traffic 179 2209 168 1266 'Special Traffic 8 51 0 0 TOTAL NON-CRIM 744 7747 678 6182 75O9 z 0 z October 2001. CSO Highlights 60 comp~a/nb/ca~Is responded to An/ma/ComplaJnb;: 18 Animal Impounds: Vehicle Lock Outs: 15 Traffic Assistance: 6 (Crashes, motorist assists, etc) Code Enforcement: 6 miscellaneous 2 Park Calls Sheriff's Office Assists Other: 3 Medicals I Chaska Assist 1 Suspicious person assist · City Council Packet delivery · 2 fire calls Crime Prevention/Safety Education September/October 2001-PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS Crime Alert Distribution: · During a 6 week period, 16 Neighborhood Watch groups received alerts regarding theft from vehicle: Foxford Rd, Hidden Ct, Conestoga, Sierra, Bridle Creek. Trotters, Saddlebrook, M]nMons Hills, Boulder, Stone Creek, Erie Ave, Carver Court Apartments. · To Chanhassen convenience stores regarding strong-arm robbery at the Amoco Station. Neighborhood Watch Group(s) Formed or Meeting(s) Held: · Heron Drive & Bluebill Trail Business Contacts: · Visited Brown's Amoco regarding robbery. Discussed safety issues and provided information on crime prevention services. · Provided Tn,tant Web with security and crime prevention information. · Provided security recommendations for 2"d Wind. · Westwood Church, burglary victim. · Contacts with manager and business owners at Town Square regarding loitering and other juvenile problems. Residential Contacts/Project LeadFoot: . - Traffic and parking concerns on Brendan'Court. · Melody Hill Road - burglary victim. · Lake Lucy Road - P.L. · Oxbow Bend- P.I~ · Pawnee- P.L. · Del Rio- P.L. · Long Acres- P.L. Crime Free Multi-Housine: · Monthly/weekly contacts with management of Lakeview Hills, Lake Susan, Carver Courts, and Chanhassen Hill apartments. · Conduct on premise research. Presentations: · Sixteen (16) safety presentations for elementary children at the Chanhassen Fire Station during Fire Prevention Week. · Bicycle safety presentation for the group Magnifying Abilities. · Crime prevention presentation for the group Magnifying Abilities. Education: · Attended the State Crime Prevention Conference in St. Cloud. 3 CT 0F PO Box147 M'maavta 55317 952.93Z1900 952.93Z5739 952.93Z9152 Buil~ Depn~t Fax 952.9342524 Ireb Site FROM: DATE: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Teresa $. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engine~ November 19, 2001 SUBS: Assessment Hearing for Dogwood Road Sanitary Sewer Improvements, Project No. 00-01-1 Requested Action The City Council is requested to hold the assessment hearing for the Dogwood Road Sanitary Sewer Improvements, Project No. 00-0 1-1. Discussion The City has prepared thc final assessment roll for thc above-referenced improvement project. The assessments were reduced from thc pre~ assessment roll in the feasibility study by $7,000. This reduction is a direct result of reduced project costs. The cost reduction was a result of reduced ~ree'loss by using directional boring rather than traditional trenching methods. -. To date, no written Objections' 1/ave been'received/o-'the afoiemen~on&l assessment . . . · No assessments are proposed for deferral at this time. Deferred. assessments continue to accrue interest dudug the period of defenal. Recommended Action At thc close of the assessment hem'ing, if there are no further relevant questions or issues which would require further investigation,' it would be staff's recommendation that thc final assessment roll dated November 19, 2001 for the Dogwood S~nitm~ Sewer Improvements Project No. 00-01-1 be adopted at a tenn of 8 years and an interest rate of 6.5%. 1. Assessment roll dated November 19, 2001. 2. Assessment notices to residents with affidavit of mailing, 3. Resolution. . c: Chris Thibodeau-Feist, Finance Deparlment CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, I~ren ~'. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on November 13, 2001, the duly quaffed and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chantmssen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Assessment Hearing for Dogwood Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project No. 00-0i'~o the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing - as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and sworo to before me this ~. day of .~,,/O~/t'r~l ~le r'", 2001. · JANET M QUIST ETAL 7331 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 RICHARD C LUNDELL 7341 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 L MARTIN & DONNA R JONES 7321 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CITYOF CHANi~EN L MARTIN & DONNA R JONES 7321 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 ~ Mi~M~ 5~17 .o CffYOF CHANI~EN JANET M QUIST ETAL 7331 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CITYOF CHANilA~SEN RICHARD C LUNDELL 7341 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR MN 55,t31 Z ~n,' Ow CITY OF CHANHASS~, MINNESOTA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE BC 7 & 8 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTILrrY EXTENSION DOGWOOD ROAD SAN1T~Y SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 00-01 The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement Project No. 00-01 on Monday, November 26, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at 690 City Center Drive, Chauhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those properties along the new alignment of West 78u' S~reet and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41 to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $1,056,983.45. Your assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City Councirs policy as follows: Property Owner: Address: Parcel No.: L MARTIN & DONNA K JONES 7321 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR ~ 55331 25-8350030 The proposed assessment agahast your property is as described below: Lateral Sanitary Sewer: '" · . Tnmk Sanitary Sewer~ - Total Assessment:' $39,2o35.'15 '$1,3oo.o0- $40~535.15 Total Project Cost: $1,322,656.37 City Share of Project: $265,672.92 .Msessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317, Attention: Trehsurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the as. sessment hearing date. If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes be~nning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Cleric Written and oral objections to the proposed assessment by any property own= will be considered. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written ob~ signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. All wdtten objections to the assessment not recdVed prior to or at the a,~sment lmrint in tl~ above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the asses~ent heating is due to a mason,able canse. CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE BC 7 & 8 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER UTILITY EXTENSION DOGWOOD ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENT PROIECT NO. 00-01 The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement Project No. 00-01 on Monday, November 26, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at 690 City Center Drive, Chauhassen, Minnesota. The area to be assessed includes those properties along the new alignment of West 78th Street and Tanadoona Drive from Highway 41 to Dog~vood Road. The total amount of the proposed assessment is 51,056,983.45. Your assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows: Property Owner: Address: Parcel No.: JANET M QUIST ETAL 7331 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR ~ 55331 25-8350040 The proposed assessment against your property is as described below: Lateral Sanitary-Sewer: . Trunk Sanitary Sewer: Total Assessment: $39,235.15 $1,300.00 $40,535~15 Total Project Cost: $1,322,656.37 City Share of Project: $265,672.92 Assessment may be paid in full without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to Chanhassen City. Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, ,Minnesota, 55317, Attention: Treasurer. Please indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of the assessment is permitted during the 30 days after the assessment hearing date. If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days after the hearing date, the assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes beginning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance. The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a written objection[ signed by the affected property owner is filed with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the heating. All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment heating in the above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a reasonable cause. CITY OF CHANI-IASSEN, MINNESOTA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT NOTICE BC 7 & 8 SANIT~Y SEWER AND WATER UTILITY E~SION DOGWOOD ROAD SAN1TA.RY SEWER EXTENSION IMPKO~ PKOJECT NO. 00-01 The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider proposed assessments for Improvement Project No. 00-01 on Monday, November 26, 2001 at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers at 690 City Center Drive, Chanhassen, 1Vfinnesota. The area to be assessed includes those properties along the new alignment of West 78m Street and Tanadoona Drive fi'om Highway 41 to Dogwood Road. The total amount of the proposed a~essment ks $1,056,983.45. Your assessment has been calculated in accordance with the City Council's policy as follows: Property Owner: Address: Parcel No.: RICHARD C LUNDELL 7341 DOGWOOD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 25-8350050 The proposed assessment against your property is as described below: Lateral Sanitary Sewer: Tnmk Sanitary Sewer: Total Assessment: Total Project Cost: City Share of Project: $39,235.15 $1,300.00 $40,535.15 . $1,322,656.37 $265,672.92 Assessment may be paid in fiJl/without interest or other charges within thirty (30) days after the assessment hearing date. These payments may be made in person or may be mailed to Chanhassen City Hall, 690 City Center Drive, P.O. Box 147, ~sen, Minnesota, 55317, Attention: Treksurer. P~ease indicate the parcel number on your check. Partial prepayment of the assessment is permitted during the 30 days at~er the assessment hearing date. If you elect not to pay the full amount within thirty (30) days ~ the hearing date, the assessment will be spread over 8 years with the installments appearing on your real estate taxes be~nning next year. Interest will be included at the rate of 8 percent of the unpaid balance. The proposed assessment mil is on file with the City Clerk. Written and oral objections to the proposed assessment by any property owner will be considered. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment adopted unless a ~ signed by the affected property owner is fled with the City Clerk prior to the assessment hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hca.ring. All written objections to the assessment not received prior to or at the assessment hearing in the above manner are waived, unless failure to object prior to or at the assessment hearing is due to a reasonable cause. CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA Date Motion By Resolution Seconded By RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS FOR DOGWOOD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION CITY PROJECT NO. 00-01-1 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for extension of sanitary sewer utilities to three properties on Dogwood Road, Project No. 00- 01-1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota: . Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made-a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. . Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a pedod of 8 years except as otherwise noted on the attached assessment roll, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2002, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.5% per annum from the date of adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2002. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. . The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Finance Director, pay the whole of the assessment on such property with interest accrued to the date of payment to the City Finance Director, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution and the owner may at any time thereafter pay the City Finance Director the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 30 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. a The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Si The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Recorder for the deferred assessments. g The total construction cost of the improvement assessed by this resolution is $55,214, ADOPTED this day of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. ~, by the City Council of A'i-I'EST: Todd Gerhardt, Clerk/Manager Linda C. Jansen, Mayor G.'~NG%~JBU~I~Dogwood Im[xovenmats~[ESOLADOPTING ASSESSMENTS.doc C 0F PO B~ I47 . M'~ 55317 952,93Z1900 952.93Z5739 952.93Z9152 952.934.2524 TO: FROM: DATE: Teresa Burgess, Public Works Directo~ F_,n~neer Mahmoud Sweidan, Engineer ~ Novombm' 19, 2001 Public Hearing - Approve Feasibility Study for ~ Road Improvement Project 99-20 ~ Staff recommends approval of the feasibility study for installation of sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, curb and gutter and street improvements and ordering preparation of plans and specifications for sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer and bituminous paving. An information meeting with the affected property owners will be held on Tuesday, November 20, 2001. Any consid~ation from thi~q meeting will be passed to the City Council at their meeting on November 26, 2001'. - .. - Item -' Total Com'- - ,4 Poo" Watemain $43,500 Servi~ . . $t0,100 Storm Sewer & Street $209,300*- TOTAL $304~800 *l.,undgren Bros. Share of $104,650 to be izmhuted in agreen:e~ Failure to accept the Feasibffity Study and Order Preparation of Plans and Specifications will delay the project. Attachment: Feasibility Report c: Phil Gravel, Bonestroo 8:~nlg~ublicLOg-213smffrepo~. 11-26-01 Revision No. Ap~'.oveG by Oity Engineer Dais nl'~'to't ~ AO~-~oved by C~ Council Date _ CITY OF C SEN Feasibility Report for CITY OF CHAHHASSF-.N I~C'.-'~'-."I~ NOV: ~ 5 ZOO1 ENGINEF-RING DEPT, Kings Road City Project 99-20 Street and Utility Improvements Chanhassen, Minnesota October 2001 File No. 393-01-121 I Table of Contents Transmit~ Letter ................................................................................................................ 1 Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ 2 Introduction/Summary ................................................................................................. 3 Figure 1 - Location Plan ..................................................................................... 3A Proposed Improvements ............................................................................................. 4-5 Cost Analysis / Financing ........................................................................ '..i..~ .............. 6 Table 1 - Estimated Project Cost S .ummary ................... ' ........................ ~: ............ 6 .. T~ble 2 - Proposed Assessment Rates.~ ..... .,..J ........ LLJ ........... :.-...- ........... -",:.':...:..-::7 '" .. · Table3-RevenueSummaxy ' ', ' ' -' ' '- '- "..: ...... '.'i ....... 7 ' IV. Project Schedule ..................................................................... : ..................................... 8. '- V. Easements and Permits ................................................................................................ 9 VI. Summary and Recommendations ............................................................................... 10 Appendix A- Preliminary Cost Estimate Appendix B - Preliminary Assessment Roll Figure 2 - Sanitar~ Sewer and Water Main Figure 3 - Street and Storm Sewer Figure 4 - Typical Residential Street Section Figure 5 -Ar~a to be Assessed Feasibility Report for Project 99-20, Kings Road Page 2 I. Introduction/Summary This report presents information concerning the extension of Kings Road from Country Oaks Road to the west city limits. The project has been requested by Lundgren Bros. Construction who is developing property to the west in Victoria. Municipal improvements proposed herein include the construction of a sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer, street, and trail. The proposed street alignment will generally follow the existing gravel road. Additional right-of-way will be required for the south side of the road. The additional right-of-way should be acquired as part of this project. The west end of the road alignment will curve to match the proposed development in Victoria. The costs of the proposed improvements are detailed in Appendix A. Cost allocati~)n and a cost sunuum'y are presented in the Cost Analysis section. Financing for the project will come from property assessments, and a cost Sham agreement with Lundgren Bros. A preliminary assessment roll is included as' Appendix B. This report is the result of a petition from Lundgren Bros. The City Council authorized preparation of a report on August 13,2001. The report examines the feasibility of completing municipal improvements in the project area. Assessments proposed in this report are consistent with previous city assessments, City policy, and the Comprehensive Sewer and Water Plans. The proposed project assessment area consists of the property adjacent to Kings Road and is shown on Figure 5. The proposed assessments are based on the preliminary cost estimates and may be revised at the time of the final assessment hearing based on actual costs, and the development agreement with Lundgren Bros. Feasibility Report for Project 99-20, Kings Road Page -- PROJECT LOCATION LOCATION PLAN CITY OF CHANHASSEN - PROJ. 99-20 KINGS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ,39301117WO4..dwg 1 O- 10-01 COMM. FIGURE Bonesboo Rosene Anderlik & Associates II. Proposed Improvements Sanitar~ Sewer Sanitary sewer service for the area is provided by a lift station installed in 1995 (Lift Station g'28) in conjunction with the Oaks of Minnewashta project. Lift Station g'28 was installed deep enough to serve the property on the south side of Kings Road. The proposed sanitary sewer is shown on Figure 2. The sewer consists of an 8-inch diameter lateral sewer in Kings Road to service the property adjacent to the mad. The sewer also includes an 8-inch stub from Lift Station #28 to the south to serve the area south of Kings Road. No sanitary sewer service will be provided outside the Chanhassen municipal limits. Water Main Water main improvements proposed herein are shown on Figure 2. An 8-inch diameter main will be constructed along Kings Road. This main will connect to an existing main in Kings' Road' on the east, and will be stubbed for possible future connections on the west end. .- Water main stubs will be provided to the adjacent developments where necessary. Fire hydrants will be included with the adjacent developments to provide adequate fire coverage. Fire Hydrants will be installed in accordance with requirements from the City Fire Marshall. No water service will be provided outside the Chanhassen municipal limits. Storm Sewer The storm sewer to serve Kings Road will include installing an 18-inch sewer from the west end of Kings Road. Catch basins will be installed on Kings Road to collect street drainage. Discharge from this storm sewer will flow into a ponding area on the west end of the road that will be provided by the developer (Lundgren Bros.). The proposed ponding will be subject to approval from Lundgren Bros. and the City of Victoria. Sidewalk A 5-foot wide concrete walk is proposed on the north side of the road. Feasibility Report for Project 99-20, Kings Road Page 4 Street Street improvements include connecting to the existing 31-foot wide Kings Road at the intersection with Country Oaks Road. The street section will consist of the typical City of Chanhassen street section as shown on Figure 4. Street lighting is not proposed as part of this project. Final design details will have to be worked out as part of the plan and specification preparation process. Issues to be verified during design include the extent of any necessary removals, grading, and the location of access points for adjacent properties. Feasibility Report for Project 99-20, Kings Road Page 5' IH. Cost Analysis / Financing Cost Estimate The estimated project cost to complete the street and utility improvements proposed herein are presented below in Table 1. These costs include legal, administrative, engineering, bonding, and interest costs estimated to be 30% of the construction costs. The indirect costs are based on previous similar projects and includes the following: engineering (18%), geoteehnieal testing (1.3%), bonding (1.3%), legal (0.8%), permits (0.5%), and City administration (8.1%). This estimate does not include easement acquisition costs. TABLE 1 Project 99-20 Estimated Project Cost Summary (See Appendix A for Detailed Cost Estimate) Item Total Cost Sanitary Sewer $ 41,900 Water Main 43,500 Services 10,100 Street and Storm Sewer 209,300 Total $304,800 Assessments Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited properties as shown on Figure 5. A Preliminary assessment Roll is presented in Appendix B. The proposed assessments herein are consistent with City policies and past practice. Assessments need to be checked to see if area charges are properly assessed. Feasibility Report for Project 99-20, Kings Road Page 6 A summary of the proposed Assessment Rates is presented in Table 2 below. TABLE 2 Item Sanitary Sewer Water System Sanitary Sewer (Trunk Hookup Charge) Water Main (Trunk Hookup Charge) Services Street Projm99.2o Proposed Assessment Rates $27.88/front foot $28.50/front foot Due @ Hook-up Due @ Hook-up $1,450 each $68.60/front foot Assessment Revenue Table 3 below summarizes the estimated revenue from assessments. '100% Of the project costs. are proposed to be recovered .through assessments and the agreement with Lundgren Bros... .. · . . - .. . .. · . . Project 99-20 Revenue Summary Item Estimated Cost Assessments Sanitary Sewer $ 41,900 $ 41,900 Water Main 43,500 43,500 Services 10,100 10,100 Street 209,300 209,300' Total $304,800 $304,800 * Lundgren Bros. share of $104,650 to be included in agreement_ Area to be Included The area to be assessed for this project is shown on F~gure 5 and listed in Appendix B in the Preliminary Assessment Roll. Feasibility Report for Project 99-20, Kings Road Page 7 IV. Project Schedule The improvements described in this report should be constructed as one project. The schedule shown below is very preliminary and is subject to revisions based on the Public Hearing and the proposed development. The schedule is based on completing construction in the summer of 2002. The project schedule can be modified and/or delayed if the City or adjacent developments request it. Council Authorize Feasibility Report Staff Review Draft Feasibility Report Council Receive Report & Call for Hearing Neighborhood Meeting Public Hearing -. Order Preparation of Plans and Specifications Approve Plans & Specs,-Authorize Bids Open Bids Award Contract Begin Construction Substantial Completion Assessment Hearing First Assessment Payments Due August 13, 2001 September 28, 2001 November 13, 2001 November 20, 2001 November 26, 2001 December 10, 2001 March 2002 April 2002 April 2002 May 2002 September 2002 October 2002 May 2003 Feasibility Report for Project 99-20, Kings Road Page 8 V. Easements and Permits Easements for proposed constn~on will be required from the property to the south (Carlson) and adjacent developer (Lundgren Bros.). The necessary easement (right-of-way) should be acquired as part of this project and the plat approval process for the Lundgren Bros. project in Victoria. The easement required from the Carlson property is at the far west end of the mad where the road will make a slight curve to the south. The approximate area of the easement on the Carlson property is 1,600 square feet. Permits and approvals will be required from the following: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Metropolitan Council. Environmental-Services Minnesota Department of Health Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Department of Transportation Board of Water and Soil Resources Watershed District City of Chanhas~ Wetland Alteration Permit Preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Public Improvements is not required. The developers may be required to complete an EAW for the development project. If the developer prepares an EAW, the proposed .improvements contained herein should 'be included as part of the EAW prepared by the developer. Feasibility Report for Project 99-20, Kings Road Page 9 VI. Summary and Recommendations The total estimated cost for this project is $304,800 including both construction and indirect cOStS. Figure 2 of this report shows the proposed sanitary sewer and water main construction. Figure 3 shows the proposed street and storm sewer improvements. Figure 5 shows the area to be assessed. The proposed work is necessary, cost effective, and feasible from an engineering standpoint. The following recommendations are presented for the Charthassen City Council: The City should adopt the report as the criteria for'installation of the improvements contained herein. No further action regarding this project should occur until a cooperative agreemem is executed with the City of Victoria. 2. The City should review and adopt the proposed assessmem and financing methods contained herein. , A formal public hearing should be held to discuss the proposed improvements and assessments. All properties that are proposed to be assessed and all properties within 500 feet of the project area will be notified of the public hearing. Feasibility Report for Project 99-20, Kings Road Page 10 APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE. KINGS ROAD, PROJECT 99-20 OCTOBER 10, 2001 No. Item Un~ Part I - Sanitary Sewer Connect to existing s~w~r 8" PVC sanitary sewer 8-13 feet deep 8" PVC sanitary sewer 13-18 feet deep 8' PVC sanita~ sew~ 18-23 feet deep Improved Pipe Bedding 8' x 6' PVC wy~s Tek'vise sanitary sewer 4' diameter sanitary manholes 4" di~ MH depth great than 8 feet Total Constn~on Plus 30% - Leg~, Administration & Engineering Part 2 - Water Main 10 Connect to existing water main 11 8" wal~ main 12 6" wal~ main 13 8" gat~ valve and box 14 6" gale valve and box 15 Hydrant w/marker sign in place 16 Water main fittings Total Construction Plus 30% - Legal, Administration & Engineering Total Part 2 - Water Main 17 Ill 19 20 Part 3 - Services 1" corp nmi curb box 1" copper 6" sewer service Restoration Total Construction Plus 30% - Legal, Administration & Engineering Total Part 3 - Service~ EA 1 LF 250 LF 310 LF 230 LF 790 EA 7 LF 650 EA 5 LF 32 Unit Priee Total Price $1,320.00 $1,320.00 $18.00 $4,500.00 $23.00 $7,130.00 S25.00 $5,750.00 $3.00 $2,370.00 $50.00 $350.00 $1.00 $650.00 $1,450.00 $7,250.00 s~o.oo s~,880.00 $32,200.00 $9,7OO.OO $41,900.00 '.. · . 1 " $440~00 $440.00' 880 $20.00 $17,600..00. 30 ' $18.00. $540.00 3 .$800.00 $2,400.00 2 $700.00 Sl,400.00 4 $1,600.00 $6,400.00 2330 $2.00 $4,66o._~.._._~oooo $33,440.00 $43,500.00 7 $150.00 $1,050.00 280 $10.00 $2,800.00 · 280 ' $12.00' $3~60.00 1 $590.00 $590.00 $7,8OO.00 $10,100.00 I of 2 393-01-121KingsRoad No. Item Units Qty Unit Price Total Price Part 4 - Street 21 Mobilization 22 Traffic control 23 Landscaping 24 Excavation and grading 25 Test rolling 26 Subgrade preparation 27 Select Granular Borrow (CV) 28 Aggregate base, Class 5 (12") 29 Bituminous Wear Course, Type 41 (2") 30 Bituminous Base Course, Type 31 (2") 31 Prep of bit. surface for wear paving in 2003 32 Bituminous material for tack coat 33 4" Polyethylene drain tile 34 12" RCP storm sewer 35 15" RCP storm sewer 36 18" RCP storm sewer 37 18" RCP apron 38 4' diameter storm CBMH (Plate 3102) 39 2' x 3' CB (Plate 3101) 40 4" concrete walk 41 Concrete curb and gutter 42 Pedestrian curb ramp 43 Sign panels., Type C 44 1-1/4" rock for entrance mat 45 Protection of catch basin in strut 46 Seeding w/mulch & fertilizer and 6" salv. topsoil 47 Sodding, lawn type 48 Silt fence, regular 49 Wood fiber blanket Total Construction Plus 30% - Legal, Administration & Engiheering Plus Easements Total Part 4 - Street Total Part I - Sanitary Sewer Total Part 2 - Water Main Total Part 3 - Services Total Part 4 - Strut LS LS LS LS LF LF CY TN TN TN LS GAL LF LF LF LF EA EA EA SF LF EA SF TN EA AC SY LF SY I 1 1 I 800 800 2000 2150 300 300 1 200 1500 60 240 160 1 2 3 4100 1640 1 90 · 1130 4 1 loo 1600 $8,700.00 $2,OO0.00 $3.5OO.OO $12,000.00 $1.OO $13.00 $9.OO $33.OO $31.00 $3,0OO.00 $1.50 $8.00 $23.OO $25.00 $27.00 $75O.OO $1.SOO.OO $1,2OO.OO $7_~0 $30o.oo $30.OO $12.OO $50.OO $1,2OO.OO $2.50 $2.5O $2.OO $8,7OO.OO $2,000.0O $3~5OO.OO $12,000.00 $800.00 $1,600.00 $26,OO0.OO $19,350.00 $9,900.00 $9,3OO.OO $3,0OO.00 $300.00 $12,0OO.OO $1,380.00 $6,000.00 $4,320.OO $750.00 $3,000.00 $3,6OO.OO $82OO.OO ... $12,300.00 $3OO.OO $2,7OO.OO $12.OO.OO $2OO.OO $13.OO.00 $250.00 $3,200.00 $158.550.00 $47.550.OO $3,2OO.00 $41,900.00 $43,5OO.OO $10,1OO.00 $304,8OO.00 2 of 2 393-01-121 Kings Road APPEND~ B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL KINGS ROAD, PROJECT 99-20 REVISED NOVEMBER 13, 2001 Parcel -~ Assessment 25 -56?04?0 Outlot B, Oaks of Minnewashta Owner:. Williams Development (711 assessable feet) Sanitary Sewer Water Main Services Street Total $19,822.68 20,263.50 8,700.00 $97,560.78 25.0070600 Owner:. Lowell Carlson (660 assessable feet) ' · Sanitary Sewer Services .. Total -. · $18,400.80 '" ls,810.oo .. · - 1,450.00.. $83,936:80 25.0070700 Owner:. David & Marga~t BonSs (132 assessable fee0 Saaitary Sewer Water Main Services Street Total $3,680.16 3,762.00 0.00 9 055.20 $16,497.36 25.0070500 Owner(s): Scott & Morgan (24 assessable feet) Sanitary Sewer Water Main Services Street Toml $0.00 684.00 0.00 $2,330.40 393-01-121 Kings Road -. C~LS~ 25.0070600 PROPOS~ 8' 'SANITARY SEW~:R 25.0070400 SANITARY SEWER AND WATER MAIN CITY OF CHANHASSEN - PROJ. 99-20 FIGURE 2 KINGS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS KINGS ROAD 25.0070500 CITYOF CHANHAS ~:~ Bonestroo Rosene Andertik & Associates Engineers & Archttecte ..~ WHITE OAK LANE P~ ~.~70~0 KINGS ROAD CITYOF CHgIgSSgl STREET AND STORM SEWER CITY OF CHANHASSEN - PROd. KINGS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 99-20 FIGURE 3 Bonestroo Rosene ~-m Andertik & ~lAssociates 39301121W(3,3.dwn 113-113-01 ~.t3uu. I I I __ PL CL PL ',_ 5o' ~1._. 30' -- [- ~ 15.5' to Back ri- 15.5' to Back I { I ,Wear Course to be 1/2" , ! [ / Above Edge of Outter \ .~ c~..~5 4" Topsoil, Seed ~ ~ I I L 1 y2"-Plant Mixed Bituminous Wea'rin~ Cou ~ Mulch or Sod. ~ I I T~e ~41WEA50055B Surmountable ~ ! ~' · Tack Coot - 2557 Concrete Curb ~ 2"-Plent Mixed Bituminous Bose Course , ~ T~e ~31BBBS0000B , 12"-Class 5 Aggregate Bose, 100~ Crushe 24" MNDOT 3149.2B Select Granular Borrow (See Note 7) NOTES 1. Right-of-Way Required - 60'. 2. Maximum street grade 7.0%. 5. Minimum street grade 0.75%. 4. 4.0" Topsoil placed in disturbed areas. 5. 2 Roils sod behind curb. 6. The bituminous wearing surface shall be placed the next construction season following placement of the bituminous base. 7. A test roll of the prepared subgrode shall be performed by the owner in the presence of o city inspector. The city has the authority to require additional subgrode correction or to reduce the requirement of 24" MNDOT Select Granular Borrow to 12" based on the test roll. I I I I I I I I CITY OF T CHAI HA EI STR£E IREVISED: DATE: P~TE NO.: APRIL 2001 5200 I ,FIC~ ~[: 3~30~ ~ ~ 7W05 ~ ~ I I I YPICAL IDENTIAL T SECTIO FIGURE NOLO: A.f~ZSSABI.E FRONT FOOTAG~ SHOIM. I I I RED OAK LANE 25.0070400 AREA TO BE ASSESSED CITY OF CHANHASSEN - PROd. KINGS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 99-20 FIGURE 5 . in fe~t PAR~ KING8 ROAD C1TYOF CltANHASSEN Bonesboo Rosene Anderiik & Associates .5- CT 0F 690 City Ce. ur idve PO Box147 C.~ Minnesota 5~17 9g~ZI~ 9~.~Z5739 95z~zgI52 Bui~h~ ~~t ~ 952.9~.2524 TO: FROM: DATE: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation November 20, 2001 SUB& Update on Roundhouse Renovation Project Per your direction, I am working on the establishment of a Joint Powers Agreement between the Roundhouse Renovation Committee and the City. Tom Scott from the City Attorney's office, Deanna Bunkelman, and I will be meeting on Friday, November 30th to discuss the creation of this document. The intent is to give both parties a clear understanding of each other's roles and responsibilities in the project. Following this meeting, Ms. Bunkelman will be preparing a final budget: estinmt~ for the project. CITYOF CHANHg EN PO t~x147 . Mime~ 55317 95Z93zIgO0 952.93Z5739 95Z937.9152 952.9M.2524 W~Siu TO: FROM: Beth Hoiseth, Crime Prevention Specialist DATE: November 19, 2001 SUB J: Conduct on Premise Update Research has been conducted with metropolitan area communities in regard to their Conduct on Premise ordinances. Cities involved in this study were Eagan, Woodbu~, Plymouth, New Brighten, St. Paul, Columbia Heights, Minneapolis, and Blaine. Conduct on Premine Objectives The communities sunteyed adopted the Conduct on Premise ordinance for the purpose of improving and/or maintaining the "quality of life" by minimizing criminal activity, while reducing the burden on police resources of having to respond to chronic nuisance complaints... Conduct on Premise Description Although each community has develot~ a program unique tO its neeXls, the following similarities have been found: A licensed ~ is subject to a fee or revocation of license when the police department has responded to the same property three (3) or more times in regard to criminal acts or nuisance ordinance violations within a 365-day time period. Disorderly behavior that is 6onsidered a violation of Conduct on Premise may include liquor offenses, drug offenses, noisy assemblies, disorderly conduct, assaults, domestic incidents, and other miscellaneous criminal offenses. · .. Written notification through certifi~ mail is sent to both the pmt~rty owner and oeasupant after each violation has been verified. The second violation within a 365-day time period requires that the licensee respond in writing to the city within five (5) business days to advise how the problem will be resolved. If a third violation occurs within a 365-day time period, a certified letter is sent to the licensee advising that the license to that unit CJtt, mC g'l~md~r, en. A ~rn#dnm rnmm#n;t~ u,b~ rl,,~. I~ n.,d;t~ ~!~ ~ ,4~om;,w ,./m,n, tm, m dh4,,;,,,, l,,,d,,~,,.r ,md t,,mnqf,,I ,'.,,nb,. ,4 ~,',1,,,., tn I;,., ,,.mi, ,..d al,,... Mr. Todd Gerhardt November 21, 2001 Page 2 may be revoked, suspended, placed on probation, or not renewed. This action is often initiated by the city council at the request of the program designee. The recipient has the fight to a hearing with city council, and must make the request in writing usually within five (5) business days after receiving his notice. Examples of Program Distinctions · Eagan's ordinance includes all properties, not just rental, and enforces through a service fee rather than license revocation. · Woodbury mandates that rental properties must participate in its crime prevention program. Properties existing prior to the 'adoption of conduct on premise are grandfathered in, but are encouraged to participate in the crime prevention program. Participants of the crime prevention program receive a reduced licensing fee, based on their level of involvement. · Blaine enforces a code of conduct for all properties through its "disorderly housing" ordinance. One violation shall constitute a misdemeanor fine. Summary Conduct on Premise empowers municipalities with an effective problem-solving too1. The ordinance provides the leverage needed to achieve compliance, and by making the city the enforcer, assists the landlords with tenant disputes. Several program coordinators have concluded that voluntary compliance through crime free multi-housing strategies has had limited success. However, when communities combined Conduct on Premise with crime free strategies, they experienced a notable reduction in criminal activity and chronic nuisance complaints. Program coordinators speak favorably regarding the impact that conduct on premise has made with regard to rental property issues. Next Step Formulate a research guidebook and establish a task force made up of landlords, citizens, city and county staff. The purpose of the task force is to design a workable plan for all participants. December 31, 2001, is the projected timeframe for developing the guidebook and forming the task force. CITY OF PC DATE: 11/6/01 CC DATE: 1 lf26/01 CASE ~. 97-12 SUB By:. RG, MS, ST, ML:v '7. STAFF REPORT LOCATION: Request for a land use plan mclm~t from Re~dential ~ Lot to Residential Low Densi~r, requ~ for rezoning of Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks, from Agricultural Estate District, A-2, to Single Family Residential District, RSF; Md subdivision with'a variance for a.private street of Lot 2, Block 1, I-r_dlside Oaks, into 6 lots, Powers Circle 8800 Powers Boulevard, Lot 2, Block 1, Hill~de Oaks Arild Rossavik 8800 Powers Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 448-4844. Agricultural Estat~ District, A2 ACREAGE: 3.72 acres 1.82 net, 1.61 gross ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - A2, existing house S - A2, existing house E - PUD, open space as part of thc Lake Susan I-rdls development W - PUD, single family homes of thc Lake Susan Hills development WATER AND SEWER: Available to thc sim. PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site has significant topographic changes from a h~gh of 960 elevation ' in the northwest to a low point of 898 elevation in the southeast corner of the parcel. Drainage ravines are - located on the west and southwest corner of the property. Wooded areas are 1~ in the southwest comer of thc site. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Iarge Lot Blvd (C.R. 1~) Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 2 PROPOSAL/S~RY The applicant is requesting a land use plan amendment from Residential Zarge Lot to Residential Low Density and rezoning of Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks, from Agricultural Estate, A-2, to Single Family Residential, RSF, to permit the subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks, with a variance to permit a private street into 6 lots for a development to be known as Powers Circle. As part of the 1980 Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan, this parcel as well as the rest of ITdlside Oaks subdivision was guided for Residential Low Density. After tt'xllside Oaks final plat was approved and in exchange for MUSA expansion elsewhere, this ~ was reguided for estate type development. However, as part of the original plat, it was envisioned that when urban services became available, this property would redevelop, but with larger lots. This property and the lot to the north are sepamm from the balance of the I-r_fllside Oaks development and are served via a shared driveway off Powers Boulevard. LOw Density Residential Development in the Lake Susan Hills PUD surrounds these properties on three sides. As part of the upgrade of Powers Boulevard, sewer and watatata~ services were extended down to Lyman Boulevard to 'serve abutting parcels. Redevelopment of the properties would assist in paying for these public improvements. Redevelopment of these parcels would use existing public facilities, rather than requiting the extension of additional tnmk sewer and water lines. Powers Boulevard is a collector roadway and will continue to carry high volumes of traffic. The proposed development proposes only one lot. for redevelopment, Lot 2. Of the two lots, this lot represents 59.9% of the land area of the lots. However, this lot represents only 50 percent of the property ownership. If this development is approved, then Lot 1 would be surrounded on four sides by urban density development and inevitably be forced to redevelop. The proposed subdivision minimally meets ordinance requirements and is, at best, a marginal development proposal. The three lots abutting Powers Boulevard are much too small considering that Powers Boulevard is a collector roadway and will carry high traffic volumes in the furore. The site grading significantly impacts that natural character of the site, and even if approved, would require significant cl~tnges. The two lots on the west side of the development would be conducive to tuck-under type units, ones that are not well received in the existing real estate market. Drainage ravines are located on the west and southwest comer of the ~ and could significantly impact proposed Lot 4. The comprehensive plan policies state: Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 3 Encourage low density residential development in appropriate areas of the community that' reinforces the character and integrity of existing single family neighborhoods while promoting the establishment of new neighborhoods of similar quality. By changing only one lot, .the proposed development would Change the character of the large lot development. New residential development shall be discouraged from encroaching upon vital natural resoume, s or physical features that perform essential protection functions in their natural state. The proposed development would encroach into a significant drainage way that covers the southwest comer of the development. Thc City of Chanhassen is committed to providing a variety of housing styles with housing available for people of all income levels. The City of Chanhassen supports a balanced housing supply including the provision of estate type homes. Staff is recommending denial of the l_and Use Map Amendment, rezoning and preliminary plat due to inconsistency with the comprehensive plan. BACKGROUND · . . Febmary 1972. The property was zoned R-iA,Agricultural Residence District as part of the original city zoning. July 1980. The property was granted preliminary approval for a Planned Residential development as part of the preliminary development plan for Lake Susan West P.R.D. Since a final plat was never filed on the project, the approved rezoning was never filed or published. May 7, 1984. Final plat approved for Hillside Oaks Subdivision (84-2 Subdivision). September 7, 1984. The City approves a land use map amendment from Residential Low Density to Agricultural and d~letes the property from the MUSA in exchange for 22 acres of industrial land (McGlynns) and 7.3 acres of residential land northeast of Lake Minnewashta. February 1987. Property rezoned to A-2, Agricultural Estate District as part of comprehensive rezoning of the city. February 1991. Property brought back into the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and guided for Residential Large Lot. Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 4 Summer, 1997. Property ownors for'Lots 1 and 2 brought in preliminary plat for Lots 1 and.2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks including a land use map amendment and rezoning to single family residential. The property owner for Lot 1 de.~ded not to go forward with the project and the application was withdrawn. On February 23, 1998, the City Council: · denied a request for a I_and Use Map Amendment from Residential - Large LOt to Residential Low Density for LOt 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks. denied a request for rezoning from A-2, Agricultural Estate District, to RSF, Single Family Residential, for LOt 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks, due to inconsistency with the comprehensive plan. · denied a preliminary plat of Subdivision 97-12 creating six lots for the Powers Circle Addition subject to not complying with the land use designation and zomg requirements. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 18, Subdivisions Sections 20-41 through 2045, Amendments Section 20-571 through 20-576 Agricultural Estate district regulations Section 20-611 through 20-616, RSF district regulations' Section 20-1400 through 20-1407, Bluff Protection SUBDMSION REVIEW GRADING Approximately two-thirds of the site is proposed to be graded for the house ps~ and street layout. The existing topography contains a very steep, partially wooded slope along the westerly portion of the site..The westerly portion of the site contains a variety'of trees, shrubs and conifers. To preserve this sensitive area, staff is proposing that a conservation easement be dedicated over the westerly portion of the plat. In addition, two drainage ..ravines also intersect ' the parcel on this west slope. While previous upstream development has decreased the amount of runoff that flows through the ravines, they still act as a conduit to neighborhood drainage and needs to be preserved. As such, staff is recommending that public drainage and utility easements be dedicated over those parts of the ravines in Lots 4 and 5. Additionally, staff is recommending that the house pad for Lot 4 be moved closer to the front of the lot. This will minimize the amount of grading and tree removal on Lot 4. Likewise, Lot 6 would benefit from the house pad being moved closer to the street. This lot is proposed to be "custom graded". The pmpo~xt Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 5 grading limits shown on the grading plan would permit grading from lot line to lot line and essentially alter the entire slope. Due to the steep slope, Lot 6 is conducive to a tuck-under type home style, which would minimize the lot grading. A detailed grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plan will be required at the time of building permit application for staff review and approval in an effort to. minimize tree loss and reduce grading impacts to the lot. The front and rear house pad elevations for Lot 6 should be shown on the grading plan as well. It appears that fill material will nell to be imported to construct the lots and streets. The applicant and/or contractor must supply the City Engineer with a haul route for review and approval prior to grading activities commencing. This development is adjacent to Powers Boulevard (County Road 17), which is listed as a collector street in the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan. According to City Code, the development will require screening of the adjacent lots from Powers Boulevard. Given the drainage characteristics and topographic features of the site, landscaping and separated berms are recommended along Powers Boulevard. The separated berms will provide openings for the runoff to drain out to Powers Boulevard as it does today. A retaining wall is proposed along the north side of Powers Circle to reduce the grading limits. The retaining wall is shown within the proposed'right-of-way. Normally, retaining walls are not permitted within the City's right-of-way. To that extent, staff is recommending that the applicant revise the proposed street grades in order to minimize the use and height of the retaining wall. An encroachment agreement will be necessary for the construction of said retaining wall. An existing driveway that serves the parcel to the north may be impacted by this retaining wall as well and should be furthered addressed prior to final plat consideration. The City has planted a number of boulevard trees along Powers Boulevard that are not shown on the plans. In addition, there are a number of conifer trees on the site that are not shown on the plans as well. These trees need to be shown on the plans to determine what, if any, impact the trees will sustain. DRAINAGE The site drains from west to east onto Powers Boulevard where a storm drainage system collects stormwater runoff and carries it to a stormwater quality pond for pretreatment prior to discharging into a downstream wetland. The storm sewer improvements were constructed under the City/County Powers Boulevard Project. The parcel was not assessed for any storm drainage improvements and therefore will be responsible for surface water management fees. The plans propose two catch basins to convey stormwater runoff from Powers Circle into the existing drainage system in Powers Boulevard. Detailed storm sewer plans and specifications in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications & Detail Plates will be Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 6 required for review and approval at time of final plat consideration. In addition, storm drainage calculations for a 1 O-year and 100-year, 24-hour storm event shalI be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval along with a drainage area map.. EROSION CONTROL Erosion control measures and site restoration shall be developed in acco~ce with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPI-I). Silt fence is shown along the south and east property lines where stormwater and sediment can nm off the site. A rock construction entrance must be shown at the proposed street access off of Powers Boulevard. In addition, tree preservation fencing needs to be added around any and all trees to be saved. There is an existing home on the site which utilizes a well and septic system. The plans propose to abandon the existing well. However, there was no notation with regard to the septic system. .. Staff assumes that the septic system site will be abandoned as well once-City sewer'and water becomes available. In the meantime, the existing septic site will need to be protected during the construction phase. The site has not been previously assessed for utilities. As such, the site will be subject to one sanitary sewer and water connection charge for the installation of the existing stubs 'to the site. The 2001 connection charges for both sanitary sewer and water are $4,144. The property is also subject to sanitary sewer and water hook-up charges for all six lots. The 2001 trunk utility hook- up charges are $1,322 per unit for sanitary sewer and $1,723 per unit for water. The 2001 SAC charge is $1,225 per unit. These charges are collected prior to each building permit issuance. In conjunction with the Powers Boulevard project municipal sewer and water service was extended to serve this parcel and the one to the north. An 8-inch sewer line has been extended out along the northerly lot line of the site from Powers Boulevard. The plans propose on extending the sanitary line into the site and then going south to serve the lots. A 6-inch watermain is also proposed to be extended into the site along Powers Circle and then along the private street and terininating. Staff is recommending that both a sanitary sewer and water line be stubbed-off of the cul-de-sac to serve the property to the north. Due to the low floor elevation of the proposed lots, in-home pressure reducing valves will be required on all lots with a lowest floor elevation of 930 or less. Utilities along the private street will also need to have a drainage and utility easement dedicated over them. The minimum width will be 30 feet depending on the utility depth. Upon installation of these utilities, the house to the north will be within 150 feet of the sanitary sewer. As per City Code Section 1941 (a), this house will then be required to connect to the sanitary sewer system within twelve months of the sewer becoming available. Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 7 Detailed utility construction plans and specifications in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates will be required for review and approval by the City Council at time of final plat consideration. Since the utilities and part of the street improvements will become owned and maintained by the City, the applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee construction of the public improvements. STREETS Access to the site is proposed by both a public street (Powers Circle) and a private street to serve up to four of the lots (2, 3, 4 and 5). Based on the surrounding parcels, there appears to be no need to extend a public street to the south. The adjacent parcel has access from Oakside Circle immediately south of the development. The parcel to the north will have access from Powers Circle. Since this parcel is zoned A-2, the cul-de-sac must be shifted to the east to maintain a 50 foot setback to the garage. The public street width and right-of-way for Powers Circle per City ordinance shall be 31 feet back-to-back within a 60-foot wide right-of-way. The plans propose a 34-foot wide face-to-face street within a 60-foot wide right-of-way. Therefore, the street width should be reduced to 31 feet back-to-back. The private street must be paved to a minimum width of 20-feet and built to a 7-ton design. A turnaround area, acceptable to the City's Fire Marshal, must be provided at the southerly end of the private street. The private street must be located within a 30-foot wide private easement and dedicated to the benefiting property owners. Access to the site from Powers Boulevard does have a right turn lane provided. Therefore, no additional turn lanes will be necessary. The existing driveway access from Powers Boulevard currently serves two homesteads (Rossavik) and the parcel to the north. In conjunction with the proposed street improvements, the driveway for the parcel to the north will need to be modified to adapt to the new street grade. As a result of this project, both homes will be required to change addresses to correspond to the new street name. In addition, a fire hydrant and street light pole will need to be relocated. The developer will be responsible for the relocation of these utility improvements. LANDSCAPING/TREE PRESERVATION Tree canopy coverage and preservation calculations for the Creekwood development are as follows: Total upland area (including ouflots) Total canopy area (excluding wetlands) Baseline canopy coverage Minimum canopy coverage allowed 3.7 ac or 162,205 SF .65 ac or 28,314 SF 18% 25 % or .93 ac. Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 8 Developer does not meet minimum canopy coverage allowed, therefore the difference is multiplied by 1.2 to calculate the required replacement plantings. Difference in canopy coverage Multiplier Total replacement Total number of trees to be planted 21,780 SF 26,136 SF Buffer yard plantings are required along Powers Boulevard as follows: East property line - 6 overstory 0 overstory bufferyard B 13 understory 0 understory 18 shrubs 0 shrubs A landscape plan must be submitted to the city for approval. Included in the plan shall be location, species and size of replacement and buffer yard plantings. All plants must meet minimum size requirements. WETLANDS There are no wetlands on this site. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different laud uses based on an average city-wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acqui~tion, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Single family residential developments have a connection charge of $1,980 per developable acre. The total net area of the property is 2.9 acres of SRF minus the existing lot. The water quantity connection charge is. $1,980 per acre or $ 5,742 for 2.9 acres. These SWMP fees will be due payable to the City at time of final plat recording. Water Quality Fee The SWMP has established a water quality connection charge for each new subdivision based on land use. Dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond comtmction shall be based upon a schedule in acc~ce with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of $2.50 per cubic Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 9 yard for excavation of the pond. The propo.~ed SWMP water qua!ity charge' for single family residential developments is $800 per acre. SWMP fees for this proposed development are based on a total developable land area of 2.9 acres. This area does not include the existing house located on Lot 5. Under SWMP rules, existing homes are not to be assessed SWMP connection fees. Therefore, the applicant is required to pay $2,320 in water quality fees. INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM Onsite utilities. The existing well may continue to be used on future Lot 5 after City utilities are provided to the lot. A licensed well abandonment contractor must abandon the well if its use is discontinued. The existing ISTS (individual sewage treatment system) must remain undisturbed until the existing home is connected to City sewer. The system should be located and protected before site grading begins. The septic tank for the ISTS must be properly abandoned by a licensed ISTS pumper. Abandonment includes pumping, removing or destroying 'the tank and filling the excavation or the destroyed tank. Proof of abandonment must be furnished to the Inspections Division before issuance of any building permits in the subdivision. Soils Report. Before building permits can be issued a soils report showing details and locations of house pads and verifying suitability of natural and fill soil is required. The soils report should include lot-by -lot tabulations for land development with controlled earthwork prepared according to HUD Data Sheet 79G. This information is required in order to be able to review building plans. Addressing. The house directly to the north of the proposed subdivision will be accessed from Powers Circle. This new driveway location will require an address'change for that home. The existing home within the proposed subdivision will also require an address change. PARK AND RECREATION The developer is not 'donating any park or trail land and there is no need in this area. Payment of full park and trail fees is required per city ordinance for the new lots being created (the existing home is exempt from park and trail fees). Park fees for 2001 are $1,500.00 per lot. Trail fees are $500.00 per lot. One-third of the total park and trail fees are payable at the time of final plat recording. The balance of the park and trail fees are paid with the building permit. Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 10 COMPLIANCE TABI.E Area (sq. ft.) Frontage (ft.) Depth (ft.) Setbacks (ft.): front, rear, sides Code 15,000 90, 100 if 125 30, 30, 10 acccs~ via a private sffeet Lot 1 15,766 157 97.5 (NC) 30, 30, 10 Lot 2 lS,024 9~ (NC) 1~2 30, 30, ~0 Lot 3 15,412 100 162 30, 30, 10 Lot 4 41,745 150 270.5 30, 30, 10 @ Lot $ 35,634 132 260 30, 30, 10 @ Lot 6 19,789 ROW 18,835 Total 162,205 NC = nonconforming @ = conservation easement prOposed over portion of property. Due to the requirement to move the cul-de-sac to the east and the nonconforming status of Lot 2, staff believes that the applicant will need to eliminate one lot reducing the plat to five lots. (Note. that lots must have a minimum of 125 feet of depth for each street frontage.) REZONING/COMPREI:W~NSIVE PLAN The existing land use designation of the ~ is for Residential Large Lot. This area has.beon developed with single homes on larger lots. The parcel abuts a collector roadway. Chanhassen is a high amenity community. One of the amenities is that we have a range of residential land uses from large lot to high density. Maintaining this mixture is one of the city's goals. In addition, the community highly regards its natural environment including trees, slopes, vistas, and uncluttered open spaces. The development, as proposed, significantly impacts these features. Hillside Oaks was developed as a Large Lot development and has maintained that character. While staff believed that the conversion of both Lots I and 2 might not have significantly impacted the character of the area, conversion of only Lot 2 definitely impacts the character of LOt 1'. Staff has consistently supported the idea that only if a majority of property owners in an existing area came in requesting land use amendments, rezoning, or intensification of uses, we would more positively support the conversion of those uses. This alone would not be the sole reason to deny the rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment. The propen'y owners of Lots 1 and 2 bought into a large lot type development. Lots 1 and 2 are intertwined, due to shared access to Powers Boulevard, and either both should be redeveloped or neither be redevel~. Staff believes that conversion of one lot without the other would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Powers Circle November 6, 200! Page 11 SUBDIVISION FINDINGS. 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; Finding: The proposed subdivision does not meet all minimum ordinance requirements for RSF zoned properties and is, at best, a marginal development proposal. The three lots abutting Powers Boulevard are too small considering that Powers Boulevard is a collector roadway and will carry high traffic volumes in the future. Due to site topography, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to adequately buffer these lots from noises and lights along the collector roadway. The site grading significantly impacts that natural character of the site, and even if approved, would require significant changes. The two lots on the west side of the development intrude into a bluff area with the preliminary grading plan. The proposed development does not meet the requirements of the A2 district. . The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed development is inconsistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan and unduly impacts an existing land use as well as natural features. It has been the policy of the city that if a majority of property owners in an existing area came in requesting land use amendments, rezoning, or - intensification of uses, the city would consider the'request in a more positive light. . The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to significant revisions to the development plan specified in this report. Due to topography, the proposed development would need to be revised to preserve additional natural rearm'es. . The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; Finding: The proposed subdivision would be served by adequate urban infrastructure. 5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 12 Finding: The proposed subdivision Will cause environmental damage to site ' topography through grading and removal of vegetation. Significant revisions to the plan would be required to mitigate the damage. In addition, restrictions on the housing types would be necessary to reduce the developments impacts on nannal features and abutting property. - 6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of recorcL Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: Lack of adequate storm water drainage.. Lack of adequate roads. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or Support systems.' Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate ~ infras~. However, as stated previously, it has been the policy of the city that if a msOority of property owners in an existing, area came in requesting land use amendments, rezoning, or intensification of uses, the city would consider the request in a more positive light. From that stanctpoint, this project may be premature. VARIANCE FINDINGS WITHIN SUBDIVISONS The city may grant a variance from the regulations of the subdivision ordinance as part of the plat approval process following a finding that all of the following conditions exist; 1. The hardship is not a mere inconvenience. The ~ private street preserves significant site f~. 2. The hardship is caused by the particular physical Surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the land. 3. The conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to other property due to the site feamre~. Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 13 . The granting of a variance will not be substantially detrimental to the public welfare and is in accord with the purpose and intent of this chapter, the zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan. PRIVATE STREET FINDINGS. (1) The prevailing development pattern makes it unfeasible or inappropriate to construct a public street. In making this determination, the city may consider the location of existing property lines and homes, local or geographic conditions and the existence of wetlands. (2) After reviewing the surrounding area, it is concluded that an extension of the public street system is not required to serve other parcels in the area, improve access, or to provide a street system consistent with the comprehensive plan. (3) The use of the private street will permit enhanced protection of the city's natural resources in this instance site topography and forested areas. REZONING FINDINGS The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: 1. The proposed action has been considered in relation to' the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be inconsistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed use is compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. 3. The proposed use does not conform to all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. 4. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. 5. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. 6. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 14 ,PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 6, 2001 to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted unanimously for a motion recommending denial of the Land Use Map Amendment from Residential - Large Lot to Residential Low Density;, the rezoning from A2, Agricultural Estate District to RSF, Single Family Residential; and the preliminary plat of Subdivision 97-12 creating six lots for the Powers Circle Addition all based on the findings contained in the staff report. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motions: "The City Council denies the Land Use Map Amendment from Residential - Large Lot to Residential Low Density for Lot 2, Block 1, Nilldde Oaks." "The City Council denies the rezoning from AZ,'Agriculmral Estate District to RSF, Single Family Residential for Lot 2, Block 1, ltili~ide Oaks, due to inconsistency with the comprehensive plan." 'q~he City Council denies the preliminary plat of.Subdivision 97-12 creating six lots for the Powers Circle Addition subject to not complying with the land use designation and zoning If the City Council decides to approve the Land Use Map .Amendment and rezoning, then staff would recommend the following conditions be imposed on the preliminary plat: 1. The developer shall pay the City applicable GIS and reco .rding fees. 2. A preservation easement shall be recorded over the westerly portion of the site to preserve topography and trees. This easement shall include land west of a line beginning at a point on the south line of Lot 4, 80 feet east of the westerly property line, to a point on the north property line of Lot 4, 180 ft. east of the westerly property line; and west of a line beginning at a point on the south line of Lot 5, 180 feet east of the westerly property line, to a point on the north property line of LOt 5, 50 feet east of the westerly property line; and west of a line beginning at a point on the south line of LOt 6, 50 feet east of the westerly property line, to a point on the north property line of Lot 6, 50 feet east of the westerly property line, there terminating. Powers Circle November' 6, 2001 Page 15 3. An additional fire hydrant will be required at the intersection of Powers Circle and Powers Place. 1 A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters (Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance//9-1). 1 There will be no parking allowed along one side of the new proposed road. Fire lane signs will be installed by the developer per requirements set forth by Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #6-1991 and Section 904-1 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. 6. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and brush must either be removed from site or chipped. g The proposed new driveway extending south from the cul-de-sac is in excess of 150 feet. ' Per 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code Section 902.2.2.4, dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for turning around of fire apparatus. Exception: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system the provisions .of the turn around may be modified by the Fire Department. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for more information regarding the exception. Si Lot 6 shall be designated as a "custom graded" lot. A detailed grading, drainage, tree removal and erosion control plan shall be submitted to the City at time of building permit application for review and approval. Lots 4 and 6 shall be designated as tuck under (TU) housing types. 9. The applicant and/or contractor shall supply the City Engineer with a detailed haul route for review and approval prior to site grading. 10. A combination of landscaping, berming, and/or fencing shall be installed adjacent to Powers Boulevard (County Road 17) to provide screening in accordance with City Code. 11. The cul-de-sac must be shifted to the east to maintain a 50-foot setback from the right- of-way to the garage on the property to the north. The plat will need to be reconfigured to bring all.lots into compliance with the RSF district regulations. Potentially, one lot may be eliminated. Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 16 12. The plan shall be revised as follows: Locate all existing trees on the site including the City's boulevard trees along Powers Boulevard..Also, show the existing streetlights on Powers Boulevard. b. Relocate the proposed house pads on Lots 4 and 6 further down the slope. c. Add a benchmark and legend to the plan. d. Change thc type of curb on thc cul-de-sac from B-612 to surmountable curb. e. Change the type of watermain pipe from DIP to PVC C-900. f. Show all existing and proposed easements on the plan, including the off-site easement along the property to the' north. g. Change the plan name to Preliminary Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control & Utility Plan. . . h. Number all proposed stmcmt~ such as MH 1, CB 2, CBMH 3, etc. 13. The developer shall be responsible for the applicable surface water management fees. The applicant is required to pay the full storm water quantity ($5,742.00) and quality ($2,320.00) fees prior to reco~ng the final plat. 14. The developer shall supply the City Engineer with storm drainage calculations fro; a 10-year and 100-year, 24-hour storm event for review and approval along With a drainage area map. 15. Existing well and septic site shall be protected during construction and properly abandoned in accordance with City Code and the Minnesota Department of He~th once the sewer ~d water lines become operational and are accepted by the City. 16. Detailed utility and street construction plans and specifications shall be prepared and submitted in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates for City Council approval at time of final plat consideration. 17. The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide financial security in the form of a letter of credit or a cash escrow to guarantee Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 17 construction of the public improvements and compliance with the Conditions of Approval. 18. The street width on Powers Circle shall be reduced to 31 feet back-to-back within the 60-foot wide right-of-way, Direct lot access shall be restricted to the interior streets and not to Powers Boulevard. 19. The existing driveway to the parcel to the north shall be modified to adapt to the new street (Powers Circle). The developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with the modifications, including the relocation of the fire hydrant and sue, et light pole at the entrance to the site. 20. The existing home on Lot 5 and the home on the parcel to the north of the site shall be assigned a new address through the Public Safety Department. 21. All disturbed areas as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc mulch or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 22. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and comply with their conditions of approval. 23. The developer shall include a drain tile system behind the curb to convey sump pump discharge from the units not adjacent to ponds and/or wetlands. This includes the private street. 24. Public drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated over the ravines in Lots 4 and 5. 25. A rock construction entrance must be shown at the proposed street access off of Powers Boulevard. 26. The site has not been previously assessed for utilities. As such, the site will be subject to one sanitary sewer and water connection charge for the installation of the existing stubs to the site. The 2001 connection charges for both sanitary sewer and water are $4,144. The property is also subject to sanitary sewer and water hook-up charges for all six lots. The 2001 trunk utility hook-up charges are $1,322 per unit for sanitary sewer and $1,723 per unit for water. The 2001 SAC charge is $1,225 per unit. These charges are collected prior to each building permit issuance. Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 18 27. Both a sanitary sewer and water line shall be stubbed off of the cul-de-sac to serve the property to the north. 28. Due to the low floor elevation of the proposed lots, in-home pressure reducing valves will be required on all lots with a lowest floor elevation of 930 or less. 29. Utilities along the private street will need to have a drainage and utility easement dedicated over them. The minimum width will be 30 feet depending on the utility depth. 30. As per City Code Section 1941 (a), the house to the north will be required to connect to the sanitary sewer within twelve months of the sewer becoming available. 31. The private street must be paved to a minimum width of 20-feet and built to a 7-ton design. A turnaround area, acceptable to the City's Fire Marshal, must be provided at the southerly end of the private street. The private street must be located within a 30-foot wide private easement and dedicated to the benefiting property owners. 32. The applicant shall revise the proposed street grades in. order to minimize the use and height of the retaining wall. 3 3. Applicant shall submit a landscaping plan showing 24 trees as replacement plantings. Buffer yard plantings are also required along Powers Boulevard. A minimum of 6 overstory and 13 understory trees, and 18 shrubs shall be planted as part of the buffer yard. The landscape plan shall specify size, species, and locations Of all proposed landscaping. 34. All areas outside of grading limits shall be protected by tree preservation-fencing. Fencing shall be installed prior to grading and excavation for homes on each lot. A minimum of four overstory, decidous trees shall be planted on each lot. 35. Provide a copy of a final soils report for all building pad~. The report should include 79(3 lot-by-lot tabulations. ATrACHMENTS: 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Development Review Application 3. Letter from Mark W. Kelly to Planning Commission and City Council dated 9/7/01 4. Letter from Jay Riggs to Arild Rossavik dated May 1, 1996 5. Memo from Mark IAtmn to Robert Generous dated Octo~ 3, 2001 Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 19 '6. Memo from Corey Metcalf, B.F.I. to Pa-ild Rossavik dated 10/10/01 7. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List 8. Memo from Bill Weckman, Carver County, to Robert CJenemus dated 10-22-01 9. Area Map Land Uses 10. Planning Commission Minutes of November 6, 2001 11. Photos of "Backing Out on Powers Blvd" 12. Photos of "Delivery to garage upper level" CITY OF CHANHASS~ CARVER AND HF~NI~IN COUNTI~, MINN~OTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION Application of Arild Rossavik for rezoning. On November 6, 2001, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly schedule meeting to consider the application of Arild Rossavik for rezoning property from Agricultural Estate District, A-2, to Single Family Residential District, RSF. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed rezoning preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT le 2. 3. 4. The property is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District, A-2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential Large Lot. The legal description of the property is: Lot 2, Block 1, I-Yfllside Oaks. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: The I?roposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be inconsistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b) The proposed use is compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. Powers Circle November 6, 2001 Page 2 c) The proposed use does not conform to all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. d) The proposed use Will not tend to or actually, depreciate the area in which it is proposed. e) The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. , The planning report #2001-3 Rezone dated November 6, 2001, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. · . . RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the city Council deny the .rezoning. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 6th day of October, 2001. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: BY: Its Chairman Sez~tary g:~lan~,~levelopment revievApowers circle.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN 69O COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (el;) z7.1;oo DE~ELOPME~ REVIEW APPUCATION · L,,"' C~m~or~ensive Plan Amendment OWNER: ADDRESS: · .. · . '~ . TELEPHONE: Temporary Sales Permit - . Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Use Permit .Nan-conforming Use Permit P~u~ed Unit Development* Sign Permits Varlanoe Wetland Alteration Permit' Zo..nlng Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Si~n PJan Review ~/' Notification Sign !~0 Site Plan Review* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost** ($50 CU P/SPR/VAC/VAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) V" ~- /~'q O TOTAL FEE $ A ilst of all properly ownem within '500 f~t of the boundaries of the property must be Included with the ~ ~! samples must be submitted with site plan revlew~ *'Twenty-slx full slze fold~cl copies of the plans must be submitted, Including an IFA" X 11" reduced copy of ~cy for each plan sheet. .; :Escrow wl]! be required for other applications through the development contract en ~ applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. .1_I~=RL :Z)ESCRIPT1ON TDTAL AP,,,REAC, IE "~'E33.RNDS i~ESi~IT ! ~RES:ENT ~D USE DESIGNATION. 3::~:QL3E,ST]ED LAND USE DESIGNATION YES ~/ NO ' FOR THIS REQUEST -Thls applica~on must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all Information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning .D~arm~m to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements appll.cable to your application. A detewnirra~ion of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written .not]ce of alqplic, ation deficiencies shall be malled to the applicant within ten business days of application. -J'h~'isl~ cefflfyffiat 1 am malting application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying With all City requirements with regard to this requesL This applicat, ion should be processed In my name and I am the party whom -the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this applicetlon. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of. Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make ~,~ and/he fee owner has also signed this application. 1 ~ lmep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further ~'nderstand 'that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and Information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of "The ~ ~ ~3tlfies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing -requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city Is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day -extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review are approved by the applicant. Fee Paid Date Date -Jl~eappTlcant sl~ould contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. .if.not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. KELLY LAW OFFICES Established 1948 MARK W. KELLY WILLIAM R KELLY (1922-1995) September 7, 2001 351 SECOND STREET EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 (952) 474-5977 ~:AX 474-{)675 Chanhassen Planning Commission Chanhassen City Council City of Chanhassen (590 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Rezoning Application Applicant Arlld Rossavik Address: 8800 Powers Boulevard, Chanhassen Proposal Change Zoning from Residential-Large Lot to Residential- Low Density Dear Planning Commission and City Council Members: I represent Arild Rossavik. The application of Mr. Rossavik to rezone his' property at 8800 Powers Boulevard is enclosed. Presently, this neighborhood in the northwest quadrant of Powers Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard (CR18) is zoned for ~residential-large lot (2.5 acres minimum)'. An inspection of the City Zoning Map will show that this small area of seven lots is the only land zoned in such a manner between downtown Chanhassen and Bluff Creek Golf Course. In fact, it is surrounded by planned unit development townhouses to the north and "residential-low density (1.2 - 4 units per acre)' zones on the west, south, and east; and these properties will soon be immediate to the TH212 improvements. Moreover, this property fronts Powers Boulevard which will be host to 10,000 cars per day in the near future. Mr. Rossavik's property and that of his neighbors appear under-uHliT~d. The surrounding land is open with few trees. The sites are not secluded, rather they are exposed. They do not have the amenities typically attributed to sites zoned large lot - residential i.e., attractive topography, wooded character, and relative privacy. The designation of these seven lots as "residential-large lot" in a sea of higher density zoning is an anomaly. Therefore, Mr. Rossavik is requesting that the City acknowledge this anomaly and allow his property to be developed in conformance with the zoning of surrounding properties - residential-low density (1.2 - 4 units per acre) properties. KELLY LAW OFFICES -2- If developed, Mr. Rossavik's property could be host to a total of six homes including his existing home. A sample proposed plat is included herewith for your inspection. 'Sewer and water infrastructure anticipating' such an improvement was built years ago and is presently under utilized. The SAC and WAC charges the City can expect, (if the area is re-zoned), will help amortize this significant prior investment. Please observe that ,_he property to the north - 8750 Powers Boulevard, (the office and warehouse of AC & Heating by George), is also subject to a f~. ture division and might be host to an additional two-three properties {see alternate proposed plat). The residential driveway servicing 8750 has insufficient room for the large trucks delivering commercial goods to turn around on-site, rather they must back in, or {worse?), back out on to the Boulevard. The development of a cul-de-sac in conjunction with the anticipated platting of these properties would alleviate this safety problem. It should be kept in mind that this re-zoning will not immediately result in the re-development of all property in this area. While Mr. Rossavik hopes to develop his property, it should be noted that the Rossavik property abuts the PUD to the north and, if developed, will not immediately impact those properties off of Oakside Circle. The present character of those properties may be maintained indefinitely. This rezoning does not conflict with your Comprehensive Plan, in fact, it will provide an opportunity for 'affordable housing" by making an efficient use of land best employed for more economically priced housing. Because of the character of the land, the neighboring higher density developments, and proximity to high traffic arterial boulevards and TH212, the market value of Mr. Rossavik's land will be lower than most home sites in the city. Making available economical home sites good municipal planning. My client stands ready to answer any questions that you might have and looks forward to working with you hereon. Respectfully submitted, Mark W. Kelly Attorney for Arild Rossavik MWK/tas Enclosure Ill i · i !. .'j :..\ # ~"*'~1/~'~ I · I V/r"--. ;I ~ . t :~,., · k../ .,-,.. - ~.,~.,.?~., , - · · . ; , .~ ! ! _ _..-~,: · , · ,. "; ~ " F'" "::'; 'i' %' . ,... :~. .", .. ,, ,, ~.. ~{.." ':: [ .:,: .......!.-...:~ .....:-.. t .. , '" '" '::..5 C"- ...... "'-- '.<'::.. ' ' ~ '"-f; .,.. I. i '-. ~- ~,. ..;': ; '-'"'- .... ~-"!c'~':' ':" '"'"" "'~" !,~,, ~,., '.~-.' ,, , W~mwood Professional Services, Inc. May 1, 1996 W 14180 Trunk Hwy. 5 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 612-937-5150 Mr. Arild Rossavik 8800 Powers Boulevard Chanhasscn, MN 55317 FAX 612.937-5822 Re.: Wetland determination for the parcel located in the East Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 23, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, Chanhassen, Minnesota. Dear Arild: Per vour request. I reviewed thc site at 8750 and 8800 Provers Boulevard to determine the absence or presence of jurisdictional wetlands. Based on the methodologies described below, there are no wetlands on the parcel Wetland Determination Methodology · Thc site gas reviewed in thc field on April 30, 1996 using thc Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Enviromnental Laboratory, 1987). This manual is currently followed to delineate wetlands regulated under both the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 (as mnendcd) and Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. · .- . Background Data -.: - . .... .. '...:l ~. - ' " .. Background data used to identify potential wetland areas before conducting th~ field regieW'ii~clude' National Wetlands Inventory (NWl) mapping and thc Sbil Survey of Carver County.' No wetlands or hydric soils were identified on either of these sources. Thc Soil Survey shows four gullies trans~ the . '" · · . site from east to ~vest. " i'. :v: ..~,: ..... ..... · .. ;.',:.,~:'/-,.; ... Field Review Findings .. :~ '.' '.~"?:. . ...~...... ' ' '~.'? %,'-.*t;'-:...!~,,,'.-.: .... -. · ..~,~ .,'.' ~ :.-, -.. -~,, . .., . . l-! '! ::" . '~ ~' - ,,...:-'. -.. Site topography slopes steeply from the west to east, and the eastern edge of the site abuts Po.we,~:-'~.".,. '.',...': · '- · , ' - .. ., :',,'~' , ;.,'! ','; - . Boulevard (Coun .ty Road 17). The four gullies shown on the Soft Survey are readily observable m the. ~ :-::.-,."'. field, but, as noted below, none of them have wetland hydrology. No other drainage paRc.ms, '.dcprc~siOa~fl" areas, or other landsc4pc features indicate potential wetland areas. ' ' . ..) .., · .~.;.:., .~,, . In summary: '"'"':"'. ' - ~' .-':" ::" , .'.; :-,.-.~...: ~ . . 1. No direct or indirect evidence of hydrology ,vas observed. Vegetation, topography, and upslope' ' ' drainage modifications provide adequate evidence to indicate the site lacks wetland hydrology. The gullies on the site were likely eroded by drainage tile outlets that served thc cropland that was located on top of the hill. These tiles have been removed (or cut) and have not functioned for a number of years. All of thc land above the gullies has been converted to single-family residential uses, and the uppermost portions of the gullies are filled. 2. The outlets of thc gullies are dominated by plants that seldom or rarely grow in wetlands, including smooth bromc (B~'omus lnermis; UPL), staghorn sumac (Rhus typhlna, prickly ash (Zanlhoxylem americanum; FACU-), Kentucky bluegrass (Pea pratensis: FAC-), mid Canada goldenrod Mr. Adld Rossavik May 1, 1996 Page 2 (Solldago carmdensts; FACL0. The northernmost gully exhibits some wetland vegetation including black willow (Sallx ragm; OBL) and red-osier dogwood (Comus stolonifera; FACW), however these plants are r~wnn_nt from whan th~ tile or ~ outlet that created this gully was Tim Soil Survey, ~redominance of upland vegetation, and si~i~icant modifications to tho drainage area that historically served the gullies provide adequate data to dete~¢ no hydric soils exist on the site. For these reasons, we submit that no W~tlands exits on the site. Conclusions The site does not appear to contain any jurisdictional wetlands. If you have any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please give me a call at 937-5150. WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC. Jay Riggs Environmemal Scientist · · .. :. 690 Cio, Center Drive PO Box I47 Cbanlszm, n, Minnesota 55317 952.93Z1900 General Fax 952.93Z5739 Engineering Department Fax 952.93Z9152 Btdldh~g Deparonent Fax 952.934.2524 l~b Site wu'w. ci. chanlmssen, mn. us MEMORANDUM TO: Robe~l Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: October 3, 2001 SUBJECT: Request to amend the land use from residential large lot to residential low density, rezone property from agricultural estate, A2, to single family residential, RSF, preliminary plat property into six single family lots and a variance to approve a private street for property located at 8800 Powers Boulevard, Powers Circle, Arild Rossavik. Planning Case: 200 I-4 LUP, 2001-3 rezone, 97-12 SUB(File 2-2001). I have reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan is based on the available information submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. I. An additional fire hydrant xx ill be required at the intersection of Powers Circle and Powers Place. 1 A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen Cit- Ordinance #9-1. . There will be no parking alloxved along one side of the new proposed road. Fire lane signs will be installed by the developer per requirements set forth by Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention DMsion Policy #6-1991 and Section 904-1 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. 4. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and brush must either · be removed from site or chipped. The proposed .new driveway extending south from the cul-de-sac is in excess of 150 feet. Per 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code Section 902.2.2.4. dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for turning around of fire apparatus. Exception: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system the provisions of the turn arot~nd may be modified by the Fire Department. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for more information regarding the exception. g:~safety',pl rev2 O01-4 C1TYOF CHAN S ' Co~ Ddve, PO i~147 ~ M'uumga 55317 Pilo~ 612.93 z I gO0 ~ Fa~ 612.~$Z5739 Dginetrb~g Fax 612.93zg152 l~blic Safey Fax 612.9M.2524 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE NO PARKING FIRE LANE (NOT TO SCALE) ~7'0" GRADE 1. Signs to be a minimum of 12' x 18'. 2. Red on white is preferred. . 3M or equal engineer's grade reflective sheeting on aluminum is preferred. 4. Wording shall be: NO PARKING FIRE LANE . . . . Signs shall be p. osted at each end of the fire lane and at least at 7:5 foot intervals along the · fire lane. All signs shall be double sided facing the direction of travel. Post shall be set back a minimum of 12" but not more than 36" from the curb. A fire lane shall be required in front of fire dept. connections extending 5 feet on each side and along all areas designated by the Fire Chief. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING, WITH A SITE PLAN, FOR APPROVAL B.Y THE FIRE CHIEF. IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONTINUITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDING THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF FIRE LANES. Al~froved- Building Official Ap~{-ove~-~ ~~arshal Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #06-1991 Date: 01/1:5/91 Revised: 04/12/00 Page 1 of 1 To: Arild Rossavik From: Corey Metcalf, B.F.I. Waste Systems Due to increase traffic flow on 8800, 8750 Powers Blvd. At this time BFI is unable to safely service these accounts. We currently back out of 8800 Powers Blvd into traffic. We no longer can accommodate this special service due to increased traffic fl0w and a 45 M.P.H. speed limit. Son3' for the inconvenience. Sincerely, Corey 9813 Flying Cloud Dr. · Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55347 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2001 AT 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 690 CITY CENTER DRIVE PROPOSAI~ Land Use Amendment, Rezoning, Subdivision and Variance APPLICANT: Arild Rossavik LOCATION: 8800 Powem Blvd. NOTICE: You are Invited to attend a public heal'lng about a proposal In your area. The applicant, Arild Rossavik, is requesting to amend the land use from Residential Large Lot to Residential Low Density, rezone property from Agricultural Estate, A2, to Single Family Residential, RSF, preliminary plat property Into six single family lots and a variance to approve a private street for property located at 8800 Powers Blvd., Powers Circle. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain Input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments am received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to telk to someone about this project, please contact Bob 937-1900 ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission.. Notice of this public hearing has bccn published in the Chanhassan Villager on October 25, 2001. .yman Blvd (C.R.. 1I) Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5!60® ROSEANNE M BOYUM 8805 SUNSET TRL CHANHASSF~ MN55317 STEVEN J & NANCY S FAY 640 LAKE SUSAN I-re' J.q DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SAME. S R/R & SUSAN L 8730 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DONALD C & VIRGINIA D COBAN TRUSTEES OF TRUST 8821 SUNSET TRL CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O SCOTT BOTCHER ~ 690 CITY CE~R'~ PO BOX 147 CH~__,..A~ MN55317 MICHAg~. J & CYNTHIA A LEEMAN 8726 FLAMINC~ DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 GEORGE A & SACQUELYN BI~.K 8750 POWERS BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RODNEY & BONNIE M NELSON 8764 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL $ KRYCH & CAROLYN $ TICHEY-KRYCH 8720 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ARU.D ROSSAVIK 8800 POWERS BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHRISTOPHER J SONES & JUDITH A MARTINEZ- 8756 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 WILLIAM J & NANCY E PREMO 8712 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JAYME D & CAROL R LEE 1380 OAKSIDE CIR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TANYA C PARKS & JEAN C SCI-1WAI.RN 8750 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN55317 RAYMOND J GARVER JR & JULIE ANN GARVER 8704 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN E & BRENDA L I-lllJ. 1360 OAKSIDE CIR CHANIqASSEN MN 55317 RICHARD & CONNIE M ECHTERNACH7 8746 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BRUCE R BARKE 1371 THRUSH CT CHANHASSEN MN55317 KEITH M & MARY PAT BUESG~S 1300 OAKSIDE CIR CHAN'HASSEN MN 55317 COREY J & RUTH L WEIKLE 8744 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 STEVEN R & CF. CELIA M SMITH 1361 THRUSH CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BRENT R & KATI-H'.g.g.N A MILT.RR 1200 LYMAN BLVD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 GREGORY D & SH1RF. EN S KAHI.,ER 8742 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN55317 GARY D & JF_,NNIFER L HICKS 1351 THRUSH CT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHARI. D & JOAN M FLYNN 660 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 STEVEN D & KRISTI A BUAN 8740 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RONALD J & DEBRA R MICHELS 8751 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TODD N & SHIRLEY M REID 650 LAKE SUSAN HILLS DR CHAN-14ASSEN MN 55317 CHERYL LEE DOTY 8736 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN55317 BYRON J & LINDA J BOTZ 8743 FLAMINGO DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® A & WENDY $ PEKAREK FLAMINGO DR MN55317 CRAIG A OI-ILSON 1584 LAKE SUSAN HUJ-s DR CHANHASSEN MN55317 D & M~-ANIE J WEGNER FLAMINGO DR MN55317 SREANG & SOPHORN SONG BANG 1590 LAKE SUSAN I-mJ.S DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ANNE JOHNSON ~ OF TRUST P1..AMINGO DR MN55317 JOSEPH GIBNEY' JR & KAREN grEIN 1594 LAKE SUSAN I-lit J.S DR CI-IA.WrIASSEN MN55317 A & MARY G KRAFt FLAMINGO DR MN55317 KOUNTHONE SOUVANNAKANE & OULADETH SOUVANNAKANE 1600 LAKE SUSAN I-m'J.S DR CHANHASSEN MN55317 M & LAN T NGUYEN FLAMINGO DR MN55317 CITY OF CHANttASSEN C/O SCO'Fr BOTCHER ,....~..~ 690 CITY ~~1~'~ PO BOX 147 ~ MN55317 TU T, LONG D NGIJYEN & B & HAIB NGUYEN 81 LAKE SUSAN I-UI J-q DR MN55317 ~ E & RONDA S PIERRE 91 LAKE SUSAN I4'n J _q DR MN55317 W & ANGm-A A MEYER SUSAN ~ J-S DR MN55317 & CATHERINE S SCOTT 78 LAKE SUSAN Hff J.S DR ',SEN MN55317 A PHTS~ & L PRII:~E 80 LAKE SUSAN I-m l_s DR IVlN 55317 CARVER COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Carver County Government Center Administration Building 600 East Fourth Street Chaska, Minnesota 55318-2192 Phone (952) 361-1010 Fax (952) 361-1025 Administration Parks F, ngln~ring Highway Maintenance Surveying & Mapping October 22, 2001' To: From: Subject: Robert Generous, Senior Planner, City of Cha. n_ha~sen Bill Weckman, Assistant County Engineer Request to Amend Land Use Property located at 8800 Powers Blvd., Powers Circle 2001-4, LUP, 2001-3 Rezone, 97-12 SUB Carver County has the following comments regarding the request to amend the land use at 8800 Powers Blvd. as transmitted to Carver County by your memorandum dated September 25, 2001. These comments and questions are based on the information submitted. Further comments and concerns may develop as this proposal advances. Powers Boulevard (CSAH 17) was just recently reconstructed in 1996 and 1997. As part of the development of the construction plan, access for this property was reviewed and addressed. The Chanhassen City Engineer was involved in those discussions and decisions. The existing private access is a right in / right out only access. There is no opening in the center island on Powers Boulevard to accommodate a full access. It is the position of Carver County that if Powers Circle were approved, it would be approved as a right in/right out only access to Powers Blvd. An access permit from the County Engineer's Office will be required if this driveway is changed from a private access to a City street. The previous Chanhassen City Engineer had indicated that there was a nuisance type drainage problem that occurs at this entrance due to the trail construction. Snowmelt from the trail apparently crosses the driveway and freezes on the pavement. This causes a slippery, icing problem on the entrance. The City should consider resolution of this problem if the access is reconstructed. Thank you for the .opportunity to comment on this request. If there are further questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 952-361-1010. Cc: Roger Gustafson, County Engineer Wd~&B~Enginneering Staff~ill~Chanhassen Plat Review - 2 AJ~rmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on 30% Post-Consumer Recycled Paper Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 this time~ I said we'd take a break at around 9:00 but I think it's going to be right now. I'm ahead of schedule, and there are two reasons for this. One, 1 would like to take just a quick break, but number two. We were just given a fairly substantial letter from the applicant, 4 full pages and I would like to maybe take 10 minutes so the commissioners can have time to fully look at this before we start a discussion on this item because I think it's probably going to be very important to what's being said. So with that, let's take a l0 minute break. Quick break, read and then we'll reconvene. PUBLIC HEARING: REOUF~T TO AMEND THE LAND USE FROM RESIDENTIAL LARGE LOT TO RF$IDENTIAL LOW DENSITY~ REZONE PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE~ A2TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND A VARIANCE TO APPROVE A PRIVATE STREET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8800 POWERS BOULEVARD POWERS CIRCLE ARILD ROSSAVIIL Public Present: Name Address Virginia & Donald Coban 8821 Jim Kozlowski 8730 Greg Kahler 8742 Jayme D. & Carol R. Lee 1380 Tanva Parks 8750 Brenda Hill 1360 Jackie, Molly & George Bizek 8750 Arild Rossavik 8800 Rick Echteinacht 8746 Steve Buan 8740 Cheryl Doty 8736 Sunset Trail Flamingo Drive Flamingo Drive Oakside Circle Flamingo Drive Oakside Circle Powers Boulevard Powers Boulevard Flamingo Drive Flamingo Drive Flamingo Drive Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Blackowiak: Okay, Deb. Any questions for staff right now? Kind: Not right now. Blackowialc LuAnn. ' Sidney: No. Blackowiak: Rich, do you have any questions for staff7 No. Before I go to Uli, and anybody who knows Uli will thank me for this. How are we going to proceed on this.9 Should we ask all of our questions in terms of land use, subdivision, everything? Generous: Yes. Blackowiak: Just go right down the line. 28 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Generous: Because you'll just be making a recommendation. Whether you approve it or deny it and it goes on so we need to create that record. -Blackowiak: Okay well, Uli. Go to it. - . . Sacchet: Yeah, I do have a couple questions, as you obviously guessed: Two key questions. The land use, when you said it's domino affect. The land use is the first step? Generous: Correct. Sacchet: And so if'we would want to do anything, the land use would have to be in place first? Generous: Correct. Sacchet: Now my question is the reverse. Could we put the land use in place and deny the rezoning and subdivision or would it be preferable to keep it all in one package? You understand my question? Generous: Yes. Sacchet: Because the land use, at least by my reading the land use request is the most cooked while the rezoning and subdivision is a little more questionable. Aaneuson: But legally standing the most discretion you have is at the changing Of the land use recommendation, and that's where your standing should take place.' If you concur that it should be, then you would go through the rest of those. Sacchet: So we should do it as one? -- .. Aanenson: Correct, but having said that, you should also look to the subdivision because you are going to make a recommendation to the City Council, while they will make a decision. Whether or not they concur with you, we don't know but you should review that as a part of it. Sacchet: So to be really clear' about this Kate,.we do not want to split this thing apart? We want to deal with this as one thing? Generous: Yes. Sacchet: That's what my first one. The second major question I have, the staff report refers to this proposal or somethinl~ similar to this proposal having been denied in 1998. Generous: Correct. " Sacchet: It doesn't give much more information than that and my question is, what is different in this proposal here from the proposal that was denied in 19987 Geuerous: We reviewed the subdivision. There's nothing different. Sacchet: There's nothing different? Generous: Correct. 29 Planning Commission M .eeting- November 6, 2001 Sacchet: So okay. Well that probably will be a question for the applicant why it should go through now when it didn't go through in '98. Okay. I had about a dozen more specific questions but I'll hold off. Blackowiak: Okay. At this point would the applicant or'their designee like to make a presentation? If so, please step to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. Arild Rossavik: Yeah, my name is Arild Rossavik at 8800 Powers Boulevard. True enough the application was submitted before andI'll get into what has changed here since the last time and it's basically not that much of a change on my side. Blackowiak: Okay, excuse me sir. Could I just get you to pull the microphone down a little bit. I think we could hear. Thank you. Arild Rossavik: I will go back and point to that we didn't do that good presentation last time, and I'm a little bit more prepared this time. I want to go back to, I don't need...Talking about so much about the planning here and zoning and stuff like that. Here a copy that you have...City of Chanhassen sends this letter to me in '95 and they said that they...property taxes and they sent also on page 2 here, basically they have spent about $4,400,000 basically on the project bringing down Powers Boulevard. And in addition to this, they brought down water and sewer. There's a lift station sitting down right there now for $225,000. Nobody's using it. And this is, this water and sewer is stubbed, into the property for 7 lots down there on previous...and for pre-use. Nobody's using it. They also sent me this assessment pages, and you will see my lot here, actually it's Lot number 2 is projected future units as 6 on it. This is projection done back in '93. So what I'm trying to do here to get the city to use it's resources. We have a huge investment there. I see the city as a huge investment' there in infrastructure that's not being used. And we have another problem here on the property, and we have pictures up because we have a lot of traffic going down on Powers Boulevard now. The city projects in with these last years 10,00(! cars a day. This is not the quiet area'anymore. And also we have the traffic on 41 being shut down. All tha~ - traffic has now to date moved over to Powers Boulevard. We got all the traffic from 41 and even when 4 l's going to be opening up, we have no guarantee that this traffic will move back to 41. Most likely it won't because like the shortcut going down to Powers Boulevard, across 17 and coming down to Chaska. So the zoning of the area definitely changed and I didn't do that. Because of the layout of the property, we have pictures here to see that delivery trucks coming down to the neighbor on the north here, he's backing up on Powers Boulevard. And it's 45 miles an hour. That's not a good condition to be in. And these pictures here, he is backing in from the Powers Boulevard. The delivery van. And this is not a good condition. And to top it off here, I got this letter from, we have a copy from BFi. They refuse now to do delivery of waste from my property. And what is next thing to come up here, UPS? Federal Express? You can't do delivery to your property because of they don't want to back out on Powers Boulevard. It's 45 miles and there's heavy traffic. To top it off, we have this picture here. This is the result of development the city did the last time...because they took the culvert away from my driveway and they didn't lift it enough so I have a flooding problem here. And in the winter here, this is what we're looking is pure ice. And even the city acknowledges they have a responsibility for...down there if there's being reconstruction here being done they will, they suggest that we fix that problem at the same time. I feel that rezoning will not change the character of the area. I got townhouses next to me. High density townhouses are 3 houses down the street. So to put, like you said the PUD to the north and the west, they define the character of the area. And we go back a little bit in the staff report you'll find out this was actually supposed to be low density as a part of the Lake Susan project back in 1980 actually. And you can see that from, that's also in the staff report also. And so the appropriate zoning for this area is RSF, residential zoning. We have just what we call this spot zoning down there. Why...the 2.5 acre minimum size actually when the city is in shortage of lots actually? It doesn't make any sense to me. In 30 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 addition of this zoning here, for lots, 5 more lots affordable lots. Actually affordable homing, single family housing. The intention is to develop these lots and sell them out for people to build houses themselves on them for reasonable cost. So we definitely meet the comprehensive plan of affordable housing here in Chanhassen. And we'll also increase the tax base for the. city. -And so finally we can get paid back from this huge investment they have on the water and sewer charges. The staff acknowledged' that the use is compatible to the area, so it would not...and can accommodate without existing servia. Meaning the infra,5, macture's in place and would not generate significant traffic. I mean extra traffic compared to what it is now. If you looked up on a little bit timber up there where we have townhouses, there with rather high density. The development now and cul-de-sac, they would provide, that would eliminate the traffic safety and we won't have this problem because trucks and my cars and LIPS can come in and turn in around on the cul-de-sac. And if we look back here on this picture here, you can see the cul-de-sac will actually be, would be where the sign is actually and you see the property line, so I'm giving up all my land basically for the cul-de-sac. And my neighbor to the north there, he would have the- most benefit from this cul-de-sac because as you can see, he cannot drive into his lower end of his warehouse there. He can't turn around. He has to back out again because the property is where the line is. The person...up there, he has to drive back again. So he is, a~ far as I'm concerned, he's the best benefactor from the cul-de-sac and this development in the first place. There are no...natural resources. or physical features that cannot become... We can fit this into the cul-de-sac or the property asking developed. The tree in the front and two in the back and I don't see any big issue that they cannot he accommodated in the back there. And the reason we're not, unable to...residential, industrial use Of his property. It's not an issue here actually. He can go up and as long as the city approves his business there, that will just go on. Proposed subdivision, findings number 1, 2 and 5 and 7 need to be adjust accordingly, as in the proposed additions. No changes need to be made to private, the findings. It's the - city's findings actually. And 13, the rezoningTtndings need to be adjusted to reflect that property can be developed within the performance standards of the zoning ordinance and will not depreciate and must further identify with the rezoning is not inconsistent with official city plan. In conclusion I ask the. city to adopt the findings factor and recommendations attached at the end of staff memo, but rrmke changes, to paragraph (a) and (c) thereof to indicate the proposed list consistent with comprehensive plan and can be developed in conformance with the performance standards. I ask for the city then allow me to work with the staff to address the various planning issues identified. Questions? Blackowiak: Thank you. Commissioners, do you have any questions of the applicant? Deb? Kind: No, I guess not at this time. Blackowiak: Okay. No? Rich, you hiding or do you have any? Slagle: No, I don't have a question right now. Blackowiak: No. Okay Uli. Sacchet: Yeah, I'm going to ask a couple questions. Actually quite a lot of questions. See how far we get. So the question I brought up with staff before as how is this different to what was brought before the city, was it 34 years ago. You basically state it's not all that different. It's pretty much the same so you agree with staff' s assessment of that. Now you mentioned some things that are benefits. Making this development go through. It's making use of the resources, the sewer. It solves the problem with the access. Obviously you'd have garbage pick-up again. I mean those are important things. And there are benefits, definitely. And are those the type of things that happened since this came to the city before? 31 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Afild Rossavik: Well that's happened since the traffic has increased and also mnce we did the presentation last time, I must say we didn't bring in several issues. At that point in time I didn't think about it actually. So I didn't bring about the water and the sewer problem at that point in time actually. That was in place. Sacchet: So are there any other things you can think of that are different in terms of, what I'm trying to understand is this came in pretty much the way it is apparently. A couple years ago it was turned down. Now you bring it back. Pretty much the same thing as it was then. Why should there be the decision this time7 Arild Rossavik: Well I just think that the situation has changed a little bit. The city is looking for reasonable housing. And definitely that's definitely changed. Sacchet: Got more developed. Arild Rossavik: More development and use existing infrastructure. Sacchet: You got more traffic. Arild Rossavik: And more traffic and the city doesn't, well the fact is whether you even increase the tax base. Saccbet: Okay. Alright, I think that's reasonable answer. But backing up, kind of at the end of this question. I mean if this came in like ttmt, those couple years back, I would assume that some of the similar recommendations and issues were raised that are being raised now. Arild Rossavik: Yes, but they weren't addressed at that point in time actually. We didn't address the issue. We just came, l just came to the hearing, last time kind of without me making. Sacchet: It didn't go to this level. Arild Rossavik: No, we didn't go to this level actually. Sacchet: Okay, that's what I want to know because. Arild Rossavik: It didn't go to this level. Sacchet: On that basis I would like to ask your patience in going through questions because I'd like to get a sense of where ybu are at with some of these aspects that staff raises in the context of this proposal So if you don't mind I'm going to go through a lot of questions. Hopefully you're quick. One of the issues that staff-is raising that the lots abutting Powers are too small. What's your feeling about that? Arild Rossavik: Well I don't feel they are too small because they are, I mean the townhouses going a little bit north of the 3 houses, they have much smaller lots facing the same thing actually. What the staff had a problem with before was that somebody would put townhouses on those lots because technically they could go townhouses. You know we're not going to put, we just...because the variance I think is for 8,000 square foot for townhouses. But I'm not interested in putting townhouses in. We'd put in residential houses. Single family houses so that was the, that has never been an issue with staff before that abutting Powers Boulevard because they were basically, they will be facing Powers Boulevard but 32 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 they won't be driving in from Powers Boulevard. 'll~ey'd be using the cul-de-sac and coming in from the back side. Sacchet: Grading significantly impacts the character of the site. You .ahv, ady said you didn't fully agree with that, but you would be willing to txy to minimize that. A_dld Rossavilc yeah, of course. Of course. That's just technicality actually. Sacchet: Because on the west side there was mention that the wpography lends itserf to tuck under type of houses. Arild Rossavik: Yeah, that's not a problem with me actually that was. Sacchet: Impact of Lot 4 with the ravines. Arild Rossavik: Well, the technical thing I got 3 ravines on my property and there's a little flat thing where actually the house will be. Or actually it will be before that. So the ravines will be back, won't affect the house there but the ravines will be actually not touch the door. And the last time the city was asking an easement on my ravines in conjunction with the park and such, and it doesn't make any difference because they will not be touched. An easement can be in place... Sacchet: So are you saying you'd be willing to move that building site forward east to some extent? -. Arild Rossavik: Yes. And they probably can-show it better than I can.: Sacchet: And that's the one on the southwest, isn't it? · · A.rild Rossavik: Yeah, this is the one on the south, right. Sacchet:. So you'd be willing to move that forward. Now you mentioned the idea of easements. Now staff was on this report such as the conservation easement over the westerly par of the property, as well as a drainage and utility easement of the ravines so what's your feelings about that? Arild Rossavik: Okay. The drainage, right now goes on the side here actually and there's no, whatever they need to have in that, I don't have any problem with actually. It's just a technical issue more than anything. · Sacchet: Having a conservation easement like the way they're proposing. I guess that's the blue color... · A_dld Rossavilc Yeah, I'll give the land up. No issue. Sacchet: Okay, that's what I want to hear. Lot 6 could also, you'd also want to move that other easement and that wouldn't be that big an issue? Arild Rossavik: Yes, it should be worked out actually fine actually so I don't see that... Sacchet: So there seems to be not that much of an issue on the west side. It' s more an issue on the east side where there's certain...accommodations on landscaping buffer and berming. Are you referring to the townhouses and what it is up north which is a very well taken point. On the other hand we're looking at the conditioning to the large lot to the south so. 33 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Arild Rossavik: Well even the large lot to the south would be minimized impact because we don't' have a common driveway. My neighbor and myself we have a common driveway. The neighbors to the south they have their own driveway cul-de-sac down there so they'd be minimized impacted. And houses would not be so far after the first houses down there. Sacchet: The well and septic system, I assume you're fine with that. Arild Rossavik: Yeah, whatever. I'm fine with that...going to be hooked up to water and sewer. Sacchet: I don't know whether we will be able to hear from the owner to the north because he's de£mitely...in this. Are you working together to some extent? Arild Rossavik: Well I have tried to get his attention on this matter and he is here today so he probably, you can ask him yourself about that actually. I have been trying to send a letter to the effect that he would benefit from this being here. I think he's more concerned about his business actually. How it will affect his warehouse down the road. Sacchet: ...how he benefits. The tree situation. There's a fair amount of trees in the staff report that is suggested would need to be planted to establish the minimum canopy coverage as well as a significant amount of plantings as a buffer yard. What's your sense? Arild Rossavik: I have no problem. Whatever it takes. There will be minimum impact on existing trees on this development. Sacchet: Okay. What they talk about additional 3 trees. Arild Rossavik: Yes, so I will provide whatever addi~i0nal trees they need to have. Sacchet: And they really have probably the most intense point then what it comes down to is that the requirement of the cul-de-sac like staff showed that it would have to come back, and really, I mean realistically, looking at this either way it is right now I kind of wonder how well accommodated that Lot number 1, that pad is now with the cul-de-sac going back pretty much with...flag lots. Realistically speaking I think that's not a far fetched assumption. How do you feel about that.* Arild Rossavik: Well, if that's what they think. But let me just show you something here. Where's an additional plat zoning there and if we go back to the picture, if we looked at the now picture there, and you see I'm giving up most of the land and maybe I can talk to the neighbor into giving up 3 feet of his land. Then we can move the cul-de-sac, then the cul-de-sac will accommodate him at a better level and all the way up there. That's a technical issue. Sacchet: Actually that touches on my last question then. Hopefully it's the last one. There is this retaining wall along the cul-de-sac towards the north and when I looked at the property, it does actually look...to that garage from your house...and the retaining wall will pretty much cut the access from...north. Afild Rossavik: I addressed that issue before with the people who designed this because this is a 2 dimensional drawing. It's not the 3 dimensional drawing, so as a matter of fact his boulder will not be affected by the cul-de-sac at all. 34 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Sacchee So it would keep his driveway... Arild Rossavik: Yeah, he would keep his driveway on this cul-de-sac.. Sacchet: Well but that's not what staff put in as if this would move forward. You would be required to actually access the cul-de-sac the way I understand the staff report. So I wonder to what extent that is possible with the differences of the elevations. Arild Rossavilc Well it's my understanding, talking to the en~neer when we did the...would not affect this cul-de-sac at all. With the original plan, the revised one it was moved down a little bit actually which was on the first plan. Because that would became a very sensitive issue. They could go out there and point out exactly where the cul-de-sac got but as you can see on the picture here, the cul-de-sac, I have enough space on my land to put the whole cul-de-sac on my land. So the only thing, if he gives up a- couple of feet on his side, then we don't, we can more adjoin the cul-de-sac actually. Sacchet: So you would expect that he would do some grading to actually... Arild Rossavik: Yeah, whatever. I think so. Sacc.het: ! think that's enough questions right now. Thank you for-your patience. Blackowiak: Alright, commissioners. Does anybody else have questions of the applicant? Kind: I have one quick question. You commented fi,at you stubbed in-for 6 or 7 homes on your site for water ~d sewer. :' - Arild Rossavilc Yes. Kind: And I'm looking at this chart with the assessment roll, and it'lool~ to me as thougfi you and your. neighbors all pay the same amount, whether you had 4 units, 5 units or 6 units. You didn't pay extra for 6, as I understand it. Arild Rossavik: Just look at present assessment. This assessed present asSeSSment on it. Kind: Present total assessment? Arild Rossavik: It's supposed to take, yes. Present total assessment because I can't, they can't assess me more. They came out because I just had 1 lot at that point in time. If you look at that potential future units, they didn't say it was 6 units there. They said potential future units and my neighbor has 4 potential future units. Then present total assessment is just for 1 unit. So if you times that by 6 actually, when you get $12,000 or actually $14,000 taxes coming into city just from my property. Saam: Commissioner Kind, if I could add something. Just point of clarification. There' s l sewer stub, 1 wat~r stub into the property to serve both, yes. To serve both the northerly parcel and Mr. Rossavik's. The assessment sheet that he shows is proposed future units that we used to propose his assessments. We looked at this property and said possibly 6 units in there. You have to do that when you're proposing assessments, and like he said, the property to the north was looked at for 4 units so he could possibly be assessed for 4 units. And just to add, neither he, Mr. Rossavik or the property owner to the north have been assessed yet, and I think I mentioned that in the staff report. 35 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Arild Rossavik: If ljus! make a little comment on that because bis letter here when we would assess those, we pulled it back again because for legal masons they couldn't assess us so. Blackowiak: Okay, any other questions of the applicant? No? I don't liave any questions either. Thank .. you. Arild Rossavik: Thank you. Blackowiak: Okay, this item is open for a public hearing so if anyone would like to come up before the commission, please step to the microphone and state your name and address please. George Bizek: My name is George Bizek and my address is 8750 Powers Boulevard. We have the. adjoining dri',eway at the bottom of the hill. At this time I do not wish to develop this property. I bought this property to have some space. It was obvious that it was laid out to begin with for large lots for a reason. Because of runoff. Because of, you look at a topographical map of the area, it's steep. That's why I bought the property. I don't want it to change and I don't want it to be stuffed down my throat that I have to change. As far as him referencing my property as a warehouse, a business. He has called you. people over 3 times to go through my property to see if there was anything in non-compliance with my property and Cindy with the city did not have any problem with it. The trucks backing out of the .' driveway, you might, okay the red G&K track, if that's a problem with the backing out of my dr~.veway, I'll quit getting dry cleaning you know. The reference to trucks not delivering to us, I don't have a problem with that. The only thing the garbage company, and I talked to Cory over at the garbage company. Over at BFI because they want them curbside. That's the only reference they said. They're · still going to pick up our garbage but they want it curbside. He's' makiflg an issue out of this to try to sway, to get hirn to develop this property. The city must hage any records if there' s ever been any accidents there.. We have no median crossing there. Everyone who leaves our house goes down and makes an illegal U-tuna on the first curb cut for the next cul-de-sac, including Mr. Rossavik. [ don't. know, it's prett, y obv~,ous that this really wasn't meant to be chopped up that snail because of the topographic layout cfi the property. I think it' should remain that way and 1 think I have a bunch of neighbors here with the same lots that feel the same way. Blackowiak: Thank you. . Sacchet: Could 1 ask something? Blackowiak: Sure, quick question. Sacchet: Since you're so much incline with this, if I could just ask a few quick questions. You already express very clearly that you don't like the idea of being forced to develop. I had some other questions here. There's some benefits in this that there is better access to cul-de-sac. Having access to water and sewer, would you consider that an advantage? George Bizek: Well water and sewer's there already. It's stubbed out on the property. Sacchet: You're not using city water and sewer. You have a well and septic system, is that correct? George Bizek: Right. 36 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Sacchet: So it's not really a benefit for you then in that sense. I mean if this goes through and you would have to access your property, your home from that cul4e-sac, do you think that would be doable? I mean considering... George Bizek: If this goes through I'm hiring an attorney and I'm suing the city because this is. Sacchet: You don't want it? George Bizek: I do not want it. " Sacchet: You don't see any benefit? George Bizek: Yes. Saccbet: Okay. That's my questions. George Bizek: And the water and ice he shows at the bottom of the driveway in the picture that he put up. himself just shows you what kind of runoffwe've got. It's a large piece of property. It's all sloped. The road does not take the water. Our lots take the water. It takes it down. There's a walk path that they pm in. After a heavy rain, across the ravines on the back of his property, you can see water that those Walk · paths are wet for a week from the water coming out of those ravines. I mean that's the amount of water. It not only gets it from our property, it gets it from the development behind us. I'm fine with it. Idon't want any ctw. nge: .. · . Sacchet: You made yourself plenty clear, thank you. Slagle: Let me, if I may. Blackowiak: Mr. Bizek, could we have, I guess Rich has got a question for you. Slagle: ~Iust one more question. I hear you. I guess what I'm trying to decide is, is the reason you don't- want your neighbor to develop, is it because you are going to be asked in essence, or required to change your driveway into a cul-de-sac? Because that seems to me the only thing-from my, use of your current property that will change. George Bizek: I think it will be a deffiment to the value of... Slagle: Okay, that' s what I'm trying to get to. So it's the use of his land in such a way that you believe it's detrimental to youJ"s? George Bizek: Absolutely. Slagle: Okay. Okay. Blackowiak: Thank you. Steve Buan: Hello. I'm Steve Buan at 8740 Flamingo Drive. Been here one other time doing this since the last time. If I could have some of those, one of those maps. The large plat map that showed the area. Generous: The grading or? 37 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Steve Buan: No, the larger scope. To put some of this in a little more context to make some of the commissioners members that haven't been around. I was an original buyer in the Lake Susan Hills West development, right adjacent to Mr. Rossavik's property. You'll notice the large park area back here was originally guided to be developed. That's when we bought our home, there were potential plans for that. The city backed out of those and decided to not intensively develop this part of the park. They just put a gazebo ~.n there. Made a flat area and left the rest of it natural. Large prairie area that's, it's a reverted prairie. Planted to convert it from agricultural use. Probably grazing. At the time with a lot of large trees in the bluff area fight along this 'area here, which then also the one large ravine cuts right across them back lot lines here. Another large ravine comes onto my property and down here. In 1993, summer of '93 with all the rains there was a significant rain storm in June of that year. This ravine 6n this side sounded like Niagara Falls. The water was just pouting out of all these back lots, across this park mid coming down into there. They had to come back and put large rip rap boulders in there to protect the ravine from cutting back into the properties back there. I think the parks commission made some correct decisions in not developing this. They decided to leave this a natural park area. It fits in well with the upland park being in this area. And the transition area down to the lowlands of large lots, not density development still allows a connection to the lowland park over here. To go in and densely develop all these lots across here, you're cutting off natural corridor of transition of wildlife and also views and other natural amenities that go with this park. You therefore are then changing amenities for the~ entire area, city of Chanhassen. Not just people that live adjacent to that. That's one issue. Just trying to address some of the things that have been brought up here. The delivery issu6s I believe they can be addres'sed . · through other means. In fact I can't understand why there hasn't been turnarounds mandat~l for those' properties on their property, much like in other cities. You go out to Crystal, New Hope, anywhere up there, anylxxly who's got a front a Winnetka Avenue or a major front, they have a T-shaped driveway where they're mandated to have a t'urnaround-so they don't back down. There is a turnaround at the botto~n so I don't see that to be a problem. And one major problem I have, even with the development, if it ever got that far, is those houses being so close to Powers Boulevard, right along here, that I feel it's a detriment to the community. There's no. precedence' for houses being fronted up into residential single family homes with their back lots being butted up to there. Yes. these houses are along Powers Boulevard but they front on the side street and therefore it just degrades the quality of the residential single family and adjoining areas. It just doesn't work. Doesn't work at all. Let me just conclude my remarks with, and I don't know if this got included in the current package or not. but I submitted with 3 of my neighbors a letter to the Planning Commission in '98 and I'm just going to read it here. In response to notice of public hearing regarding request for rezoning and subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks, we as interested parties submit the following written comments per this notice. The'ravine and bluff topography on the western side of this property and adjoining areas of several other properties is part of an integrated, interdependent, natural system. This ecosystem contains a complex biodiversity of plants and animals. Numerous species of trees, shrubs, and perennial plants of varying age classes from sapling to dead and d6caying are present. Tree and shrub species include white pine, red pine, spruce, oaks, maples, cottonwood, ironwood, cedar, sumac and many more. This plant life system supports a wide variety of animal life, including ground nesting birds, earth and tree cavity nesting birds, numerous song birds, bald eagles, owls, pheasants, wild turkeys, deer, squirrels, chipmunks, rabbits and many more. The city parkland immediately adjacent to the southwest is directed to be a natural landscape park. The ravine and bluff system is a vital and important part of this park. Several species of animals and binls utilize the prairie grassland area for food and the ravines and bluffs for shelter. To encroach and damage the ravine and bluff complex would diminish the value of the park to the residents of Chanhassen. The character of this portion of Chanhassen is defined by the dramatic rise in elevation and stand of large, mature trees. The vertical rise from Powers Boulevard to the crest on Flamingo Drive is approximately 100 feet and is unmatched throughout Chanhassen except the bluff area of the Minnesota River valley. Unique features encompassed within the approximately 3 acres of ravine and bluff structure are a 38 .Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 signature, of this area of Chanhassen and should not be obscured or encroach~ upon by further development. Therefore we strongly oppose the proposed rezoning and subdivision of this property. Submitted by Steve and Christie Buan, David and Cheryl Dory, Gteg and Shireen Kahler~ and Jim and- · Sue Kozlc~wski. And are there ~ny questions anybody might have of me. Blackowiak: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? No. I would ask. I did not get a copy of that in the current packeL Steve Buan: No, it was in the last one. Blackowiak: Yeah, if you would just get a copy to Kate so that torrid be included in the packet that goes to council. Just written comn~nts. It's nice to have copies of everything so that council knows what ; . we're .seeing. Okay, thank you. Jayme D. [~: My name is/Iayme D. Lee. I live at 1380 Oal~ide Cimle. rm the neighbor to the sotith and I want to state my oppo.4fion. We have a large ltn and it butts against other large lots, which maximize the appeal of the large lot. Privacy, seclusion, unobstructed views. It would be an ungraceful intrusion to stick 6 houses in there, into the lot in the middle and would severely degrade the appeal of. all of the bordering lots. T~e degraded appeal of xny lo:. we,Id in mm I believe degrade the value of my lot. And what recourse would ! have to collect'fair compensation for my lots. Other concerns, there are definitely t.raffic concern. Cta'rently there are. 2 residents that are right mm only. The 2, and I do from time to time see them doing a U-turn at the opening in front of our Oakside Circle and I'm-concerned that if we have more residents there without, with only .fight turn, . fight .un'a, that we're going to have more people turning U-turns there and it could present a dangerous sinmfion where people are stopping in the left lane to turn, to take a U-turn there. Also I'd be concerned about children, the shape of our property, · it has a pointed corner which goes up into that very excellent wild land that was just talked abe. ut. And.i would be concerned of children going up them to play as the)' would want to. Perhaps it would pre. sent ~ liability to me if they woulo hurt themselves on my property.- Would that mean I would have m put .up. fences on my property? I'd have concerns about that. Any questions? Blackowiak: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? No. Thank you very much. Brenda Hill: Brenda Hill and l'm at 1360 Oakside Circle, ao I'm 2 l~)ts down to the south. And I waiit to state my opposition also. The reason that we bought the place, our homestead that we bought-is because of the large lot. Because of the scenery out in back and there's a lot of wildlife and stuff like that. I think it would be detrinmntal to our preperty as well. Looking out my back window, seeing all those houses,' that:s not wi'mt it was meant for. It was meant for a large lot and that's why we bought it. I oppose. Blackowiak: Thank you. Rick Echteinacht: Rick Echteinacht, 8746 Flmningo Drive. I purchased my home 2 years ago. It was. after the last decision was made that this area would not be developed. I'm up behind the lot beixag considered for change 'and just like the l:revious individual stated, the view that we have, the wildlife that goes through our back yard and down through that area is something that we looked at when we were purchasing this home. And it was kind of om' understanding when we purchased the home that this decision had been made previously and I don't see any change basically from what was decided in 1998 and I would oppose this change. Any questions? Blackowiak: I don't think so, thank you. 39 Phmfing Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Donald Coban: My name is Donald Coban; I live at 8821 Sunset Trail. I live over the top of the hill.' I was, or we were one of the first houses ~n the whole neighborhood. There was a neighbor to us when we built back .in '75. We have 2 ½ acres and the reasc~a we. picked that spot wos the large lot, Jugt big enough for what we wanted to do. And as things grew up 'around the area we became large lots and that- v, as really great because we could see anything we wanted to do. As you can see, we've got a pretty .. good spot up there. We've got the park area adjoining us and it looks pretty good, so I agree With some of the things that the other people have said here. We're going to kind of suffer with the animals and things that go through out' property and we can see out in the park. I just, I don't want the project to go through for the same reasons we discussed back in years before. Another little comment I've got to make is that they commented about 10,000 cars a day. That means you're going to see a car through there every 6 seconds. I don't believe that. That's 24 hours a day. It just doesn't come out right. Any . .. ques~ons? Blackowiak: I don't think so. Thank you very much. Arild Rossavik: I'd like to make a comment on... Biackowiak: .You know, let's let everyone have a chance then if you'd like to come up again, you know as ~ public hearing,.that's alright. Virginia Coban: tvIy name is Virginia Coban and Don didn"t ask one question that I would like to ask. Mr. Rossavik keeps saying that this is for low cost housing a~,d I would like to ask him what he.intends to charge Ibr tl;e.~e, lots, :tnd if it does fit into the affordable housing guidelines. -. .. Blackciwiak: Okay. I think we'll have him answer that when he come, back up. Virgln;,a Coban: Okay. thank you. · Blackewiak: Okay, is there any of the other neighbot.~ wbo'd like to get up and add anything els~? If not, Mr. Rossavik, why don't you come up. Oh, excuse me. Carol I_e,e: Hi. My name is Carol Lee. My husband spoke a couple minutes ago. Them were a couple of things in the materials that were passed out that in looking over. them earlier this evening I feel are'in · error.' Them is a letter in the materials that is a 1996 Ietter from an engineer who states that there is not a wetlands issue in the area. In t996 late, and 1997'there were significant changes made in the roadway on Powers Boulevard. And Mr. Bizek told you tt~at there is a ranoff issue in the spring, during the rain .- stom~s. In our area ourselves we find that the front area by the road is so soggy in the springtime that it's. difficult to mow. So I would submit that that letter dated 1996 is at this point in time inaccurate, partly bzcai~se of continuing'runoff area and because them was the road worked on after that which that letter does not reflect. In addition on page 5 of the materials that was passed out, there is a recommendation that states that in order to control some of the drainage, that berm should be placed on some of the facing properties on Powers Road. I'm assuming that that would include our place which is south of the property and to place a berm on that material would further be detrimental to the drainage of that vicinity and would a!sa be detrimental to our property' value. Thank you. Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. Aar, enson: Would you like us to respond to that'? Blackowiak: Yeah Kate, if you have anything to add right now. 40 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanenson: Loft's the person that does wetlands. It's her opinion there are no wetlands. We would · concur there are drainage issues. We pointed that out. Two soparam issue. The drainage issue. The ' buffering is required along a collector stxeet. It's part of the lands, caping ordinance, and that wa~.0ne of the iasue, s nfised with those lots is that the lots were deep enough to accomn-a:~lam that. They wouldn't access onto Powers: That's not allowed but that they have enough screening in the back yard through the berming. We wouldn't berm on somebody else's property, but that they pro.vide a noise barrier, lights, that sort of thing, along Powers Boulevard. Blackowiak: Okay. Saarm Kate, just to add something to thai. Miss Lee's concern was that we would make her property- berm also. No, we obviously won't do that. Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. And Kate, now you're differentiating between wetlands and gullies, which I think this letter did' to a certain extent: Aanenson: Correct. And as by state law, as a wetland as classified by state law. Wetland Conservation - Act and lhe drainage issue which would have to be worked through ifa subdivision was to. go forward. Blackow;~ak: Okay, which is nor to say that there aren't fli~ainage is.~ues but it's technically .not defined as . a wetland is what we're saying. . · Aanenson: Correct. · . Blackow:~ak: Okay, g~eat, ls there anyone else before I give Mr. Rossavik a chance to respond? £ gue,~s to a coupl~ things. Why don't you step up to the mic. Oops, sorry. : -. George Bizek: I'd just like to address the issue of the cost of the lots. When he approached me tolgive me to develop the lots, he was ~ving me different figures of what these lots would sell for than the ones - that he's applying to the city. · Blacko~viak: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Rossavik, why don"t y6u just come up right now and if someone else wants to add something, they're just going to have t6 come after you. Arild Rossavil:: Just to address the issue of why cud the city bring down Powers Boalevard in the first place, it was nothing like if nothing changes. But the fact is, we have ail 212 coming out now stopping at 4 rigl. ~t now. The next development there is Powers Boulevard. It's going to be an access road. It's going to be, these figures I have from the city for 10,000 cars a day. They don't come from me; And the5' can be as early as 5-6 years down the line. So either my neighbors like it or not, it's going to be heavy traffic on that road there. And also this turning around they're talking ab6ut, well most traffic will go down and hit 212 and go towards Minneapolis so by turning it won't be a serious issue actually at that pcfint in time. I understand they don't like change. Talking about the pricing on the property. What I have in place ;.s actually with the homeowners. They're the people who's helping out people. They put a coup!e of thougand dollars down of their own pocket money, and they could call their own contract could help from them. They set up a plan for that so we have about, becoming somelxxty goes in and appraise the propexty. How much it's worth and then they'll give it, they come up with a couple thousand dollars so they can, build a house there, and they have about 20% in equity the day they move in. That's the goal of my planning there actually. That's the reason they don't need big mortgage payment. Pay no mo~gag, e insurances. So this is actually the best way I don't have any pricing on this thing because you 41 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 know pricing changes. It is an approach that I will not be involved with. I will provide, if it's being improved, I will, these lots will be available for sale. Not to develop for but for single persons to purchase these lots actually, and would go up and see what the price is going to be basically based'on the best de'velopment cost them and whatever actually the market value and point is they will have 20% equity... Blackowiak: Okay. And Mrs. Coban had a question, I'm sorry. What was that question again Mrs. Coban, did you have a question about? Virginia Coban: ...how much he was charging. Blackowiak: Oh, what he was charging so we, okay. Arild Rossavik: Like I said, we have to work...that would determine the price of the lot. Virginia Cot~an: My question was whether it fit in with the guidelines of affordable housing. Arild Rossavik: I don't know what affordable is. This is going to be single family housing. Blackowiak: Alright Kate, what's affordable housing? ! tnean it's very unlikely. .. Aanenson: 134. Biackowiak: 134. Arild Rossavik: i34 in Chanhassen? Blackowizk: Well tl-.at's the l~let Council guideline for affordable, for a single family house. Whethei'. :- Arild Rossavik: It's going to be very tough to get in 1 can tell you that but I mean it will definitely be low, what normal pricing would be in Chanhassen. .. Blackowiak: Right. That's what I'm saying. 'You're not going to be subsidizing anybody er anything'? Arild Rossavik: No. Blackowiak: No, okay. Slagle: Madam Chair', may I ask one question of the applicant? Is this plan that you've proposed the only plan that you would be willing to accept? /Mild Ross~.vik: No. I'm flexible you know. Slagle: Let r;te be more specitic, in number of sites. Arild Rossavik: Oh, lots on the property? Slagle: Yes. 42 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 .. Arild Rossavilc That's flexible. I mean it's the city loss more than mine because they lose'the tax.. revenue basically and it would just bring the cost up to get a lot actually. Because the development cost is going to be the same. It's about $150,000 to bring in the cul-de-sac. That's money I have to come up with, And also, after 1 have come up xvith all the raoney, I have to givz it to.the cit)- as a public street. · . Slagle: 0 'l~y. Blackowiak: Tha~' s it, thank you. Okay, seeing no one else I am going to close the public hearing. 'Kate, before I go any further, I know I said i'd do something at 9:00. What are your feelings on issues 6 and 7? Aanenson: The applicants are ready. They're here so. Blackowiak: I know. Aanenson: It's up to you. The by-laws say 10:30 1 believe. Blackowiak: By-laws say 10:30 and I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page on that. .Mright, well that being said let's yeah, let's move forward with this. Commissioners, we need to mak~ our comments on this. Deb, why don't you start ..... Kind: I'll ke'..p my comments brief. I think long and hard before I lnake comp'plan, land rise changes.,- . and ~his is clearly guided as residential large lot for the future. I really don't see a compelliug tea.son,'to - borrow Craig Petcrson's, my mentor's texminology to change that designation. -- Biackowiak: Okay, thank you. Uli. Comments? Sacchet: 'Yeah. couple quick comll~llt~. Obviously this is a bit of contentious situation w~ have-hem.. I do wm~t to corn. mend staff for being sensitive'to the mitural aspects. -To topography, the trees, the slopes · and all that. ! appreciate that. It's difficult to untangle certainly the two lots, *.he one to the north and this one. I do believe it would be, in terms of our terminolggy, spot zoning...tho~ lots and it would not blend in. I do feel that the subdivision is not really feasible. I don't personally have a problem with the variance request for a private street or the access part. The rezoning sounds fairly okay. Actually re. zoning does not sound alright. It's the land use that sounds relatively okay. I do see that there'are. '- some problems. In one of the letters that came from the applicant, actually both from his lawyer I believe, it was pointed out that these large lots are an anomaly within an area of a lot of single family and to the north even mulfi-fanfily situation. I do believe though that it's become very clear tonight with all -- the different neighbors that spoke up, that it is a cohesive area within that parkland and the large lots so that we have to be sensitive to that. I don't think I can support passing this at this point. · Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. LuAnn. Sidney: Yeah I look at the request for a land use map amendment and I do have problems with thaL as preceding cc, mmissioners lave stated. There's no compel~ng reason that I can see that we should ctuutge · ,he land use for this particular area. It would change in my opinion the character of the neighborhood. I can aec in Ne future if the number of lots might be reduced, that might not be such a problem. I do think that the encroachment into the drainageway, which we're talking about, and I guess I'd encourage staff for council to maybe do a short drainage 101 course on this particular site because that seems to be an issue. I belie,,e staff has characterized it as a significant drainageway which should not be encroached · upon. And as Uli'stated, this does provide a connection point between parklands, large lot does serve a 43 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 purpose here and for us to spot rezone I think would be a real prob}em so I wauld not support this. 1 believe this development would be prerrrature. Blackowiak: Okay, Rich. Slagle.' I have some thoughts as well as a couple of questions for staff it'I may. I'he development to the north, the townhomes. What was that zoned prior to being moved into? ' ' Am'~enson: lake Susan? Probably all A-2. Or agricultural. A-l, A-2. Slagle: Okay. So just a hypothetical here. If the applicant here today was not tiffs gentleman but the other gentleman ou the north lot, m) question is what would we be thinking? You know. Because we' have talked as a group, now I'm addressing the commission. We have talked as a group about the fact that in the future there will be changes. You know as reality sets in, as we're going to hear from another applicant on some other changes. Go with the times,. Antl'as I sit here and think of Powers Boulevard, it's going to be a busy road. And the development of the city is going to start going south. So we will -. have a pocket if you will, of large lots that will be at some point in the future surrounded by . neighborhoods .that many of you live in. It's obviously to the large lot owners that doesn't apply but to a lot of the neighbors who spoke. So I'm again'just trying to think of that irt a Iong term approach so I'm. not going to stick with, and I respect the thoughts of we don't want to ge: into changing the z~ning. Or.at least eucouraging fi:at. But 1 do think that w~ have to be operi to that. The question 'that I thr~w-out to *.he applicant of a development that was not quite as packed in. I'm just letting the group know that if it was a diffe~nt applicatioh I would Imve at least some more'ooenness m it. So with all that said. I can't approve it now but I'm also just throwing out for the residents hem today, a~ le.~.t this person, ,'.his com~ni.ssioner believes that as time goes On that will be develeped at some. point. And prenmatre is' probably the best word that I can .'.hink of right now, but I'd just enzourage eve, rybody to -be talking- because that will happen at some point. So with rliat said, that's enough. ; -. Blackow/ak: Okay, thank you. I agree With ~hy fellow commissioners that at this point I think it is -' premature. I do believe ~hat there is a real relafionship, I mean the only way that I would even consider it. would be that the two, 8750 and 8800 came in together. And then at that point in time we could look at how to best preserve some of those natural features because by going ahead with 8800 before 8750. in other words before the lot to the north, I think-you're losing some opportunities and losing some of the possible connectivity between the parkland on the west behind the lots, and then the parklatad to the east . of Powers Boulevard. So I think that you know if and when these lots do come in, it needs to be together. We need to look at overall how it can work and how we can kind of keep some kind of a trail or some .kind of an open space going through that. But yes, it is premature. I believe it's premature. So I would not support a land use amendment at this point in time. With that I would tike to have a motion. In fact I need 3 mo~ions. Sojthnp in. Sacchet: The Planning Commission, well let's make it all in one. The Planning Commission recomanends. ,-Mmanson: You can do it all in one. Blackowiak. Can we take? We don't need to do them separately? z~anenson: No. Planning Commission Meeting -November 6, 2001 Sacchet: [ move. that the Planning Commission recommends denial of the I. amd Use Map Amendment from Residential-Large Lot to ResidenU.'.al Low Density for Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks as well as the Planning Commission recommends denial for rezoning from A2, Agricultural Estate District to RSF, Single Family Residential for Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks, due to inconsistency with the comprehensive plan, and the Planning Cormnission recomngnds denial of the preliminary plat of Subdivision 97-12 creating six lots for the Powers Circle Addition subj~t to not complying with the land use designation and zoning requirements. And I would like to comment, tO emphasize Commissioner Slagle's comment . that inevitably it will be developed at some point and I hope that at that point our discussion here with this will allow you to bring a proposal in that' s going to be ..... Blackowial6 Okay. There's been a motion. Is there a second? Kind: I'll second that. Sacchet moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commi _~slon recommends denial of the Land Use' Map Amendment from Residential-Large .Lot to Residential Low Density for Lot 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks as well as the pla~nin~ Comminsion recommends denial for rezontnop fr~m A2, Agricultural Estate District to RSF, Single Family Residential for Lot 2, Block 1, Flill~ide Oaks, due to inconsistency with the comprehensive plan,.snd the Planning Comminsion recommends denial of the preliminary plat of Subdivision 97-12 icreating six lots for the Powers Circle Addition subject tc. not complying with the land use designation and zoning requirements..all Voted in Yavor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0. .. B!a,;kowiak: This item goes to City Council on November 26°'. Thank you all for coming. Kind: Madaxn Chair, can I clarify that with staff?. Blackowiak: Sure. . Kind: I just want to clarify that that little caveat that Uli added ht the end was not part of the motion. Sacchet: That was a comment. Kind: That Was a comment that was made before it was seconded. Aanenson: Let the record show that. PUBLIC HEARIN'(3: REQUF_~T FOR AN'AMENI)MENvr TO ~ PLANNED IJNIT DEVELOPMENT TO VILLAGE,5 ON THE PQNDS TO PERMIT FQUR (4) ~TQRY BUILDING~ WITH A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 50 FEET AND THREE (3) STORHe$ WITH A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 40 FEET AND AN AIV~ND~~ TQ DETERMINE A FORMULA FOR CONVERSION QF (~OMMERCIAL AND OFFICE ~;PACE TQ RF$IDENT1AL UNH~3 AND VICE VER~A~ VILLAGES ON THR PQNDS I, LL.C., LOTU~ REALTY SERVICES. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Blackowiak: Okay commissioners, any questions? Rich? Slagle: I'll start. 45 CITYOF Minnaota 55317 952937.1900 C~eral Fax 952.93Z5739 952.93Z9152 B~ilding De~mnent Fax ~52.934.2524 We~ Sit~ TO: Todd Gerhard~ City- .Manage. . . FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner DATE: November 6, 2001 SUB J: Request for an Amendment to the Villages on the Ponds Planned Unit Development PROPOSAL/S~Y The applicant, Lotus Realty Services, is requesting an amendment to the Planned Unit Development, PUD, development standards to permit in sector I building heights of up to 50 feet for four story buildings and 40 feet for three story buildings. In conjunction with the building height amendment, the applicant is proposing that signage height require, ments be revised is sector I. ' 'Additionally, staff is revising the use rubles and .developinga conversion method when changing approved square footages and units from one type of use to another. -' .. = .. .,. .. BACKGROUND " -- On August 13, 2001, th.e City Council approved an amendment to PUD 95-2, Villages on the Ponds, to _permit a drive through window on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2"a Addition, as a conditional use.- On September 23, 1996, the City Council approved PUD 95-2, Villages on the Ponds, including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Den.si.'ty, Residential' · . Low Density to Mixed Use-Commemial, High-Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to" 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial]office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of in~tutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; ~g from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (final re,_ding); and final plat dated ;'Received September 19, 1996" for two lots and ten ouflots and public fight-of-way. .. On August 12, 1996, the City Council granted preliminary approval of PUD t~t92-1 including a Comprehensive l.and Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use-Cornmeal, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (first reading); Prelimirmry plat for 13 I I I te Lake Susan Villages on the Ponds PUD Amendment, Building Height November 6, 2001 Page 2 lots and 3 outlots and public right-of-wa~, Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and excavate wetlands on site; Vacation of right-of-way and easements; Environmental assessment Worksheet (EAW) findings of Negative Declaration of the need for additional environmental investigation; and Indirect Source Permit Review for the Villages. on the Ponds project. ANALYSIS The proposed amendment is in response to a proposal for a Senior Housing development. In developing the design standards for the Villages on the Ponds Planned Unit Development, the city and developer spent a significant amount of time reviewing the potential uses within the development. The typical village commercial or village center district permits a mixture of residential, commercial and civic uses. Commercial uses, however, are restricted to those that seem to fit the size, scale, and intensity of the village setting. These mix of uses were to provide a synenergy to the development, creating a sense of place. However, changing market conditions and demographics require that flexibility be built into the development. In order to accomplish this flexibility, we need to use a common factor, in this case trip generation rates. As part of the overall development, trip generation was modeled and analyzed to determine the projects impacts on the transportation system using the projected mix of uses. By equating each use based on the trip generation rates (from Trip ~Qn 6th Edition. Insti_njt¢ of Tmnsim~fion_Engineers, 1997), we are able to maintain the overall trip generation of the development within equilibrium. The first part of the table below contains the average trip generation rates for uses on weekdays and at the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. The bottom part of the table provides a ratio of the trip generation for uses by dividing the rate for the use to be converted to by the rate of the use being converted from. Avetnge Trip GenerntiQn US~ Weekd_~¥ Apn_rlment (220) 6.63 0.56 0.67 Congregate Care (252) (Assisted) 2.15 0.15 0.21 Elderly Housing (253) (Independen0 3.48 0.06 0.11 Office Cmneral (710) 11.01 1.56 1.49 Specialty Retail (814) 40.67 6.41 4.93 Church (560) 9.11 1.28 1.41 A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Unit of measm'ement per dwelling unit per occupied unit per oecup~ unit per 1,000 sq. ft. per 1,000 sq. ft. C. onversiQn Factors Avg. Aparmmnt to Congregate 0.32 0.27 0.31 0.30 Apartment to Elderly 0.52 0.11 0.16 0.27 Apartment to Office 1.66 2.79 2.22 2.22 Apamaem to Retail 6.13 11.45 7.36 8.31 Apartment to church 1.37 2.28 2.1 Office to Apartmem' 602 359 450 470 Office to Retail 3694 4109 3309 3704 Office to Church 827 821 946 865 R~tail to Apartment 163 87 136 129 Retail to Office 271 243 302 272 Retail to Church 224 200 286 237 Con. on nmasm-es units for each unit units for e~h unit unita for each 1,000 sq. ~ units for each 1,000 sq. ft. units for each 1,000 sq. ft. square feet for each unit square feet for each 1,000 sq. fc square feet for each 1,000 sq. ft square feet for each unit square feet for each 1,000 sq. ft. Villages on the Ponds PUD Amendment, Building Height November 6, 2001 Page $ Using the conversion factors in the comparisons of trip generation rates, we are able to analyze the ratio of trip generation rates when converting from one use to another. Staff is proposing that we use the worst-case scenario in each conversion case. This would permi't the city to account for the greatest potential traffic impact of any use. Alternately, one could incorporate the average ratio in convening between these uses, but then the peak impacts would not be accounted for. In the conversion of an apartment unit to a congregate care unit, we could convert one standard apartment into three memory care units. This is done by dividing the trip generation rate for the use being convened to by the trip generation rate for the use being converted from. For example, a congregate care unit (assisted and memory care) generates approximately 1/3~a the trips (2.15/6.63---0.32) as a standard apartment unit on a weekday. When convening from a residential unit to an office or retail space, we must convert the units of measurement from dwelling units to square feet. In the case of an apartment to office conversion, the ratio is 2.79 units per 1,000 square feet of office space, or one apartment unit for each 358 square feet of office (1,000/2.79 = 358). When convening from office or retail space to apartment units, we must change from square footages to units. In the case of conversion from retail to apartments, each 163 square feet of retail space is equal to one apartment unit. As part of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, EAW, for Villages on the Ponds, the developer incorporated assumptions for the number of residential Units as well as square footages for commercial and office service uses. Based on this data, it is staff's opinion that the proposed conversion factors recommended by staff would maintain the overall traffic volumes.within the development at the EAW trip threshold. The second part of the design standard amendments has to do with permitted building height within the development. The applicant is requesting that we amend the standards to permit four stories and 50 feet height on the parcel in the southwest comer of sector I. The current standards are The maximum building height shall be Sector I - three stories (with residential loft)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to two stories/30 feet), Sector 11 - three stories/40 ft., Sector 111- three stories/40 ft., exclusive of steeples and bell towers, and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet Staff supports the idea of providing incentives for the provision of housing within Villages on the Ponds. The design standards permit, in Sector IV, housing at four stories and 50 feet. Within the Village core, we should also permit housing at this height with the requirement that street level retail and office be provided within the building. Staff, further, believes that we should amend the standards to permit other buildings to be three stories and 40 feet, within the Village core, similar to what is permitted within the Highway 5 corridor district. In conjunction with the height revision, the applicant is proposing that the signage restriction in sector I, which limits the height of signage to 20 feet, be revised to permit signage similar to sector 11, which does permits the height of the sign to be increased "based on the criteria V'dlages on the Ponds PUD Amendm~n~ Building Height November 6, 2001 Page ~ that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building architecture and design." Staff believes that the current signage requirements are appropriate since the intent of sector I, as the village core, was to create a pedestrian friendly environment. If signage is permitted 30, 40, or even 50 feet in the air, its orientation is off site, rather than directed to individuals on the street. Sector H was given this a_dditional height flexibility since it was assumed that part of it orientation was to Highway 5. Signage limited to.20 feet i~ height will adequately permit businesses to "identify" themselves. Staff is recommending that the language remain as it is currently written: Wall Signs The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the tops of which shall not extend greater than 20 feet above the ground. In Sector H, sign height may be increase based on the criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building architecture and design. The letters and logos shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall be con~ of wood, metal, or translucent facing. If an individual development comes in and wishes to request a variance from the design standards, the city can look at the proposal on a case by case basis. . The following is the recommended amendment to the Villages on the Ponds Development Design Standards for building height (section d. 3.) and use conversion (we are rounding figures to the nearest 10 to make the calculations easier) and updating the use table to show exchanges that have already been made (the office/service increased by 13,000 square feet in Sector I, if the 32,000 square foot office building is deleted in Sector IV and replaced with 56 additional dwelling units of which six units have been reallocated to Sector I) (section d. 5.): d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height 1. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall .de. velopmen~ Individual lots may exceed this'threshold, but in.no'case shall the average exceed 70 percent. 2. More than one (1) principal slxuctum may be placed on one (1) platted lot. ,, The maximum building height shall be Sector I - four.~ stories (residential with street level commercial or office Izff)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to three stories/40 ft. ~;~':z ~..,,..,~~*'~*an.,,, ~.~,~.,~.~, Sector II towe~, and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet. Building height limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers, and other archi~ and roof accents. Villages on the Ponds PUD Amendment, Building Height November 6, 2001 Page 5 e The maximum building footprint for any one building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g., pedestrian passageways, except for the church and residential only buildings. 5. The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: Commercial/ Office/Service Institutional Dwelling TOTAL sq. ft. Retail (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) Units Sector I 114,500 83,500 0 160 198,000 Sector II 60,000 * !4,000 0 0 74,000 Sector I~ 0 0 100,000 0 ! 00,000 Sector IV 0 0 0 162 0 TOTAL 174,500 97,500 100,000 322 372,000 * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 unit motel. Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors and between uses subject to approval by the Planning Director. The following factors shall be used In calculating the reallocation of building square footages between uses 1 Residential apartment unit = 1 Residential apartment unit = 1 Residential apartment unit = 1 Residential apartment unit- = 3 congregate' care (assisted living or dementia) unit. 2 elderly (independent) unit 360 square feet of office/service. 90 square feet of retail. 1 Residential apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional. 950 square f~t of officWse~ = 1,000 sq~ f~t of i~fimfion~. 2~ sq~Fe f~t oF ~e~l = ~,~ squ~e F~t of ins~m~on~. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of addition institutional building square footage be rea!located without an amendment to the PUD. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 6, 2001 to review the proposed amendment. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the amendment subject to the following revision: The maximum building height shall be Sector I - four stories (residential with a street level commercial or office)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to three stories/40 ft.) except for the lot on the comer of Promenade Pond and Great Plains Boulevard shall be limited to V'dlages on the Ponds PUD Amendment, Building Height November 6, 2001 Page 6 two stories and 30 feet, Sector H - three stories/40 ft., Sector llI- three stories/40 ft., and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet. Building height limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers, and other architectural and roof accents. ... · . And, .... Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors and between uses subject to approval by the Planning '.Director, with the intent not to increase the total traffic load. The following factom shall be used in calculating the reallocation of building square footages between uses. And, 6. Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority of the slxeet frontage. Additionally, the Planning Commission pointed out that the conversion table was confusing. Upon further review, staff concurred that the factors were overly confusion since for some' conversions, i.e., apartments to office/service, office/~ce to retail, find apartments to retail, there were two separate formulas. It was pointed out to staff that there should only be one number that would work in either direction Of the'conversion. Therefore, again:' ' :. following the standard that we would use the-most restrictive conversion, we recommend the deletion of 600 square feet of office/service = I residential apartment unit, 4;110 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of retail, and 160 square feet of retail = 1 residential. apartment unit, which was struck through above and deleted in the recommendation below. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motions: "the City Council approves the amendment to the Planned Unit Development Stan...dm'ds for Villages on the Ponds amending section d. as follows: .- d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height le The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots may exceed this threshold, but in no case shall.the'average exceed- 70 percent. 2. More than one (1) principle structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. The maximum building height shall be Sector I- four stories (residential with street level commercial or office)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to three stories/40 ft.) except for the lot on the comer of Promenade Pond and Great Plains Boulevard shall be limited to two stories and Villages on the Ponds PUD Amendment, Building Height November 6, 2001 Page 7 30 feet, Sector 1~ - three stories/40 ft., Sector tn - three stories/40 ft., and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet. Building height limitations are exclusive.of steeples, towers, and other architectural and roof accents. m The maximum building footprint for any one building shall be lim]te~ to 20,000 square feet without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g., pedestrian passageways, except for the church and residential only buildings. 5. The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: Commercial/ Office/Service Institutional Dwelling TOTAL Retail (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) Units sq. ft. Sector I 114,500 83,500 0 160 198,000 Sector II 60,000 * 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector Ill 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 Sector IV 0 0 0 162 0 TOTAL 174,500 97,500 100,000 322 372,000 * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106-unit motel. Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors and between uses subject to approval by the Planning Director, with the intent not to increase the total traffic loadl The following factors shall be used in calculating the reallocation of building square footages between uses: 1 Residential apartment unit = 3 congregate care (assisted living or dementia) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 2 elderly (independent) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 360 square feet of office/service. 1 Residential apartment unit = 90 square feet of retail. 1 Residential apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional. 950 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of institutional. 300 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of office/service. 290 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of addition institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD." m Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority of the street frontage. ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Location Map 3. Development Review Application V'dlages on the Ponds PUD Amendment, Building Height November 6, 2001 Page 8 4. Memo from Vernelle Clayton to Bob Generous d__~_texi 9/7/01 5. Memo from Vernelle Clayton to Bob Generous dated 9/18/01 6. Addendum to Attachment to Application dated 8/22/01 . 7. Villages on the Ponds Development Design Standards 8. Villages on the Ponds Development Schematic 9. Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated 9/7/01 10. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List 11. Planning Commission Minutes of 11/6/01 12. Second Amendment to the Villages on the Ponds Development Con~~~ Agreement ~:XphnXbgWil~e~d buikiing heiSt, doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, 1VHNNP_~OTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION Application of VOP I, 1112 for Amendment On November 6, 2001, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly schedule meeting to consider the application of VOP I, 1J12 for an amendment to the Planned Unit Development to increase building heights and create a use conversion formula. The Planning Commission conducted a public heating on the proposed amendment preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT . 2. 3. 4. b) c) d) The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development, PUD. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Mixed Use. The legal description of the property is: Villages on the Ponds The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is or will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. The proposed use conforms to all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. e) 5~ The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streem serving the property. The planning report # 95-2 PUD dated November 6, 2001, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION amendment. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 6th day of November, CHANI-IASSEN PLANNING COMIVIISSION BY: Its Chairman ATTEST: CITY OF CHANHASgEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (6 2) e37.. eoo DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION RECEIVED AUG 2 2 2001 CITY OF CHANHASSEN APPLICANT~,4Ctr~. ADDRESS: OWNER'~ TELEPHONE (Day time)~'~ TELEPHONE: 1...__._ Comprehensive Plan Amendment , Conditional Use Permit e Grading/Excavation Permit 4. Interim Use Permit 5.._,_._ Notification Signs 6. ~ Planned Unit Development 7.~ Rezoning 8.~ Sign Permits 9.~ Sign Plan Review 10.~.._ Site Plan Review I 11. Subdivision 12. Vacation of ROW/Easements ' 13. Vadance 14.._.__ Wetland Alteration Permit 15.~ Zoning Appeal 16. __._. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 18,m Filing Fees/Attorney Cost - (Collected after approval of item) Consultant Fees TOTAL FEE $ ~ A list of all property owners within 500 feet of th~. tmundarlea of the property must Included with the application. Twenty-slx full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 8~" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. * NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME .- LOCATION ._~tt-~ ~ //zz~ ~ Bm~'~t~' ~a, '~l/*~ ~ ~i~ /¢~/"' LEGAL DESCRIPTION' ~"'Z_/~y ~.. /~/,z.~.,~,¢.¢".~' ~ ~'#,~' ~oAJB~ ' - · PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accomparlled by all information ' and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer 'with the' Planning Department to determine the specifio ordinance and procedural requirements-applicable to. your application.- This is to certify that I am making application for the dascrlbed action by the City and that Iarn responsible forc0mplying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This appacatlon should be processed In my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of TI'de or purchase .agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and'the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and Information I have submitted are true-and correct to the best of my knowledge. · . . . I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall, be Invalid unless they am recorded against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records. (lOP/, ./..x <= Signature of Fee Owner Date '. Appi'~..atlon Received on ~;~" ~l'l~t . Fee Paid ~'tP0 Receipt No. ~L) /~?~ * The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy o! the report will be mailed to the applicant'8 address. vlot~l Attac~t to Application ofVOP I re Villages on the Ponds Page 1 of 2 The applicant is requesting two changes in the PUD Agreemeat of record regarding the Villages on the Ponds project. The'requested changes and the reasons therefor are as follows: 1. A change at Subparagraph d, 3, of the Development Design Standards regarding the ~ height of buildings for the purpose of accommndating the Site P]axl being proposed by Pres~¢~ Homes. The Presbyterian Homes project will be located on Outlot F which is within Sector I of the Villages on the Ponds Project. The current lan~mm_ge states with respect to Sector I that the maximum b~ding height shall be "three stories (with re~lemial loft)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limlted to two stories/30 feet)". We are requesting that the following language be added: "except that within Outlot F of Sector I, the maximum number of stories shall be 4 and the maximum height of bttildings shall be 46 feet if3 stories and 55 feet if4 stories." The Presbyterian Homes plan indicates a 4-story senior independem living building and a 3-story assisted living building. The assisted living building will be L shaped and will fi, om along Lake Drive and Main Street. The first story along l. ake Drive will have public-oriented retail type. uses and the second and third floors will be homing, but the third floor will not be the typical loft re. fereneed in the currem language. The independem living building will be located along the western side of the site. A massing plan shows the relationship of the heights of the two buildings to each other and the ~ of the downward slope of the topography in the area of the proposed 4-story building. The requested heights reflect a meas~nt of 54' 9" from entry level to the roof ridge line for the 4-story building and 45' 5" fi'om the elevation ofthe entrance to the roof ridge line for the 3-story building. It should be noted, so that there is no misunderstanding, that the proposed plans anticipate compliance with the requirement elsewhere in the PUD Agreement that all residential uses have underground parking. The elevation drawings will therefore articulate a 10' exposure for the garage drive-in areas at one end cap of each building, with some sloping to that level. Due to the terrain on wMch the 4-story building will be located, its height will not appear to be much greater than a 3-story building along Lake Drive. For that reason and for the reason that the 4-story building will be located outside of what we call the Core Re~ Area, the applicant does not feel that the height will have any negative impact on the scale of the project. For those reasons and because the activity which the Presbytefi~ Homes project will bring will be beneficial to the project, we support the change. In addition, beca~ the use and service to be provided by Presbyterian Homes will be a benefit to the City as well, we urge approval of this requested change. Page 2 of 2 2. A change at Subl~ragt~h d, 5, of the Development Design ~ for the propose.of chrifying the conversion factor used to determine the ~ of uses. The bede f~rrrmh vlot~ September 7, 2001 TO: Bob Generous FROM: Vemelle Clayton Use/Capacity- Villages on the Ponds After your cornmem that the extended stay would now probably be considered commercial, I thought I had better check to see how that fits with the earlier discussiom between you and Kate and Mika and me and with the-plans we made based on the concept that the extended stay would be considered as a use of the residential category. As a practical matter, it doesn't matter as long as everyone is in sync on the conversion factor,- which has been assumed to be just under 340 square feet of commercial to 1 residential unit. (This is now made more complex, of course, by the fact that we now have assisted residential units for which the actor is something less.) In any event, the revised Site Plan (copy I gave you) and marketing materials which MCka prepared assume the 340/1 formul, which means that the site plan should work whether or not the extended stay units are residential, according to my calculations. There is some inherent danger of confusing the Commi~ioners and the Council members, however, since I believe your traffic generation study considered these units to be residential and, on the other than, for parking requirements, the established criteria for extended stay is All this leads to a conclusion that you and I should review the allocation tables, update them and project them. That is what the attached pages attem~ to do. These tables were prepared as a cheek on the marketing materials but before we knew for sure what the use for the R. Tues. site would be. The sheets I'm enclosing eau now be updated to reflect Culvers, but in the meantime perhaps you and I should meet and compare notes. I , Update of Use Table Section d.5 of PUD/Deve!opment Contract, Exhibit C '- Development Design Standards Exhisting Section d.5 is as follows: The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: Commercial/ A. Retail Off'~./Service Institutional Dwelling Total (sq. fL) (scl. fL) (sci. ff.) Units (SCl. ft.) Sector I 114500 70500 0 154 185000 Sector II 60000 14000 0 0 74000 Sector III 0 0 100000 0 100000 Sector IV 0 32000 0 112 32000 TOTAL 174500 116500 100000 266 391000 As an alternative, the off'me/service could be increased by 13,000 square feet in Sector I if the 32,000 square foot office buidling is deleted in Sector iV and replaced with 56 additional dwelling units." (A footnote indicated that 47,200 square foot of the Commercial/Retail in Sector II was allocated to the 106 unit motel.) Subsequently, because Sector I¥ was improved with 162 dwelling units and no office building. Therefore, the altemative schedule is as follows: ('l'lie 6 unused dwelling units previously allocated to Sector IV are added to Sector I.) Commercial/ B. Reta~ Off'me/Service Institutional Dwelling Total (sq. fl.) (sq. ft.) . (sq. ft.) Units . (sq. fL) Sector I 114500 83500 0 160 - 198000 Sector I! 60000 14000 0 0 74000 Sector II! 0 0 100000 0 100000 Sector IV 0 0 0 -162 0 TOTAL 174500 97500 100000 322 372000 Lotus Realty Services V123KW.WK4 Development through Year 2000 has used the following allocations: (Includes 30,000 office approved for Outlot K but does not include R.Tues) Commercial/ C. Retail Ofr~e/Se~ce Institutional Dwelling (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) Units Sector ! 6000 40800 Sector II 73094 1573 Sector III Sector IV TOTAL 96288 Total (sq. f~) 46800 See Footnotes 1 and 2 74667 See Footnotes 3 and 4 96288 162 79094 42373 96288 162 217755 , Footnote 1:6,000 Retail is Vigil Footnote 2:30,000 #17, 1,000 Vigil, 9,800 Foss = 40,800 Footnote 3:~,~,,013 Amlnn built, 6,870 Amlnn future, 7,362 Houlihan's, 14,849 Silo I = 73,094 Footnote 4:81 Houlihan's, 1492 Americlnn = 1,573 Development through Year 2000 results in the remaining allocation: Commercial/ D. Retail Office/Service Institutional Dwelling Total (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) un~s (sq. ft.) Sector I 108500 42700 0 160 151360 Sector II -13094 12427 0 0 -667 Sector III 0 0 3712 0 3712 Sector IV 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 95406 55127 3712 160 15'!.~.05 The proposed uses reflected in the revised Site Plan and Northcott and Sr. Housing proposals are as follows: Commercial/ E. Retail Off'~.,e/Service Institutional Dwelling Total (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) Units (sq. ft.) Sector I 95406 34717 0 271 130123 Sector II Luke's Lot or Luke's Lo 0 0 0 Sector III 0 0 0 0 0 Sector IV 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 95406 34717 0 271 130123 Lotus Realty Services V123KW. WK, Assuming the proposed uses as set forth in the revised Site Plan, Including the Northcott, Sr. Housing and projected plans for the balance of the Northeast and Southeast quadrants are completed, the as-built table will be as follows: Commercial/ F. ~ Offlce/Sel'~4~ I~ Dwellin~ .Total (~q. re) (~q. n.) (~q. ~) ~ (~. ~) Se~r I 1014~ 75517 0 271 176923 Se~or II 73~4 1~3 0 0 74~7 Se~r Iii 0 0 ~288. 0 ~288 ~r N 0 0 0 162 0 TOTAL 174500 77~0 9~88 433 ~7878 ~pm~d 174~0 97~ 10~ ~ 372~0 D~emn~ 0 -2~10 ~712 111 -24122 Note: Above schedule does not include use of Lot 1, Block 1, 2nd Add'n. See also discussion below re total no. ras. units. Proposed new uses Included in above totals: Sector ! Sr. Housing 9000 0 161 SE Quadrar 6000 0 40 Northcott 1st Fl. 17000 2nd FI* 21000. 3rd FI NE Quadrant At Main 33406 13717 Freestand 30000 Totals 95406 34717 '.30 E.xt. Stay 40 271 *Adjustment should be made. 21000 not available on 2nd Floor and - decision was made not to have office on 3rd floor. Sector II (Totals not included in above schedule.) 5300 Restaurant or 4410 Bank or 10O0O 2-SL O.B. Note: The above new uses were used for the Traffic Genralion Analysis. To be consistent with Planning Staff's assumptions in preparing the Traffic Generation Study, the 8000 s.f. of conference rooms is not listed separately and is considered to be a part of the 30 units . of All Suites, for which conference rooms and other amenities are assumed and for which the traffic generation far exceeds office use, according to the instruction manual. Analysis of Res. Units: As proposed: Assumption at 160 units was 1.5 per unit =. 101 Sr. Housing at 1/unit = 101 30 Ail Suites at 1/unit = 30 60 Assisted at .51unit = 30 80 Market at 1.5/unit = 120 Totals 271 Total Difference At 1.4 cars per unit at Market = SAY: At 340 s.f. commercial per unit = Note that we have an excess of 27.33 28 9520 s.f. 240 cars 281 -41 20410 s.f. to be used L1 ,B1 + these units Lotus Realty Services V123KW.WK4 LOTUS REALTY SERVICES September 18, 2001 TO: Bob Generous FROM: Vemelle Clayton Village on the Ponds PUD Amendment Enclosed is a revised attachment to the recent application for amendment to the PUD.' As we have .discussed, this attachment does not list all of the anticipated changes that may be nece&qary for future development; rather it is confined to those which will assist the Presbyterian Homes proposal and a housekeeping change. I have not added any request regarding towers, etc., inasmuch as it appears that Section 12. Roof Accents, exempts towers, turrets, spires etc. firom the building height limitation. We should discuss the formula I set forth. I tried to anticipate all of the possible reallocations, however, I have a couple of questions including whether or not we should have an allocation for the hotel rooms and whether or not the language is really appropriate regarding 27,000 s.f- of reallocation for St. Huberts. I believe they have some.remaining capacity, but it would not be a reallocation_ Please call and I'll come over. 551 WEST 78TH STREET · P,O. BOX 235 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 · (952) 9:34-4538 · FAX (952) 934-5472 ~o~ ~ to Application ofVOP I re Vilhges on the Ponds The applh:znt is requesting clmnges to the PUD Agreement of record regarding the Villages on the Ponds project as follows: maximum number of stories for the purpose of accommod~tin~ the Site Phn being proposed by Presbytedan Homes~ This project will be located on the site presently ~ as Outlot F which is w~t_' hln Sector I of the Villages on the Ponds Project. The ctmem l,m~_m~oc states w~ respect to Sector I that the maximum building height slmll be ~tbree stories (with residential bit)/so o...... We are requesting that the following language be added:; "cxcc~ ttmt w~l~n ~t F of Sector I, the ma~dmum numl~ of stories shall be 4/50 iL" We are making no request to change the number of f~et inasmuch as we have been assured that when determining ~ a b~ is ~ tl~ maximum ~ only 1/2 ofany pitched mol the reason that the Z-story building w~ be loca/ed outside of what we call the Core Rem~ Area, the applicant does not f~el that the height ~ have any negative ' .nnp. act on the scale of the project. For those reasons and because the activity which the Presbyterian Homes project W~l 2. A change at Subparagraph d,5, of the Deveb~ Design Standards for the purpose of clarifying tl~ conversion factor used to detexm~ the ~ uses. The basic fi~rmula was irr~. lied in the nmnbers set lbrth at this subsection, but vas not actually set forth. The requested ~ would delete the existing language contained in the last paragraph of this subsection and insert in lieu thereof the following: "B~ square lbotages may be reallo~t~ between sectors and betweeu uses subject to approval by the Planning Director. Reallocation slmll be based on the f~llowing 1 ~A.p~tme~tm~ = 340sq. fl. off~Jservice 1 Ass/st~ Livin~ Unit = 114 sq. fi. office/sa'v/~ 1 Dementia Unit = 57 sq. fi. o/~/service = 289 sq. R. reta~ = 97 sq. R. retalq = 48 sq. R. retail In no instance shall more titan 27,000 square feet of additio~ institutional building square footage be reaH~ w/thom an amendment to the PUD." ADDENDUM TO ATTACHMENT TO APPLICATION FOR PUD AMENDMENT Dated August 22, 2001 3. At Section d.3, we request that all of the language wi_thin parentheses be deleted. The effect of this deletions would be to permit the 3 story buildings within Sector 1, whether or not the third floor consists of apartments or condos. 4. Inasmuch as current plans for the improvements to Outlot E include a building which has signage integrated within its comer tower, we are requesting a deletion of the words "In Sector II" or the addition of rom "I" at both paragraphs. 1 and 4 of the section on Wall Signs. This would have the effect of permitting an increase in sign height "based on the criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building architecture and design" and that "architecturally building-integrated panel tenant/logo si~tms may be permitted based on criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building design and architecture': within Sector I as well as Sector H, since Sectors IH and IV have already been i .reproved. EXHTBIT C Adopted September 23, 1996 Amended August 13, 2001 VILLAGES ON THE PoNDs CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a mixed use PUD consisting of commercial, institutional, office, and residential uses. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall p .rof. eed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone should be limited tO uses as defined below or similar'uses to those as listed in the Standard Industrial Classification. If there is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director shall make that interpretation. No single retail user shall exceed 20,000 square feet on a single level of a building. A maximum of thirty- three (33) percent of the square footage of the retail users within the development may be of a "big box" category. The intent of this requirement is to provide a variety of users, including small retail shops, service providers, coffee shops, cabarets, etc., for residents of the Villages as well as the community as a whole, rather than typical suburban type large, individual users dominating the development and detracting from the "village" character. Retail users should be those that support and compliment the residential development located within the development, providing goods and services which enhance residents of the village and'the community. " Office. Professional and business office, non-retail activity except for showroom type. display area for products stored or manufactured on-site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. bank/credit union finance, insurance and real estate health services - except nursing homes and hospitals engineering, accounting, research management and related services legal services Personal Services. Establishments primarily engaged in providing services involving the care of a person or his or her personal goods or apparel. dry cleaning beauty or barbershop shoe repair photographic studio tax return preparation laundromat health club optical goods computer services day care center copying mail stores Institutional. Establishments that are public/semi-public in nature. church library education services day care art gallery dance studio cultural facility commercial/Retail. Establishments engaged in commercial operations including retail sales and services and hospitality industries. Apparel and Accessory Stores shoe stores electronic and music store and musical instruments restaurant- no drive through, except on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2na Addition through a conditional use permit and compliance with the following standards - the drive through shall provide sufficient stacking to assure that traffic is not backed into the parking lot drive aisles; loud speakers used for ordering shall be shielded so that noise is not heard off-site, and the drive through shall be screened from off-site views. (amended 8/13/01) restaurant -fast food only if integrated into a building no freestanding fast food and no drive through drag store/pharmacy book/stationary jewelry store hobby/toy game gift novelty and souvenir sewing, neeAlework and piece good florist camera and photographic supply art and art supplies, gallery. sporting goods video rental food stores including bakery and confectionery hardware store computer store hotel/motel entertainment liquor store pets and pet supplies home furnishings Residential. Residential units shall be provided as upper level units above the commercial/office uses within the village core and as stand alone units. A minimum of 50 percent of the residential units shall be rental units.. Of the rental units, the city has adoptexl a goal of 35 percent of the units meeting the Metropolitan Council's affordable criteria. For the ownership housing, the city has adopted the goal of 50 pement of the units meeting the Metropolitan Council's affordable criteria. .:. · . Prohibited Uses: auto related including auto sales, auto repair, gas stations c. Setbacks In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply:. Great Plains Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback Market Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback Hwy. 5: Buffer yard & Setback Interior Side Lot Line: Buffer yard & setback East Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to residential): Buffer yard & setback West Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to industrial): Buffer yard & setback . . · Building ' Parking (2,0' C, 50' B, 50' NA, O' D, 50' B, 50 Of 0' O! 50' 2O Buffer yards are as specified in the City of Chanhassen Landscaping and Tree Removal Ordinance, Article XXV. No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height lm The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots may exceed this threshold, but in no case shall the average exceed 70 percent.. 2~ More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. The maximum building height shall be Sector I - three stories (with residential loft)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to two stories/30 feet), Sector II- three stories/40 ft., Sector rtl- three stories/40 ft., exclusive of steeples and bell towers, and.Sector IV - four stories/50 feet o The maximum building footprint'for any one building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g., pedestrian passageways, except for the church and residential only buildings. 5. The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: Commercial/ Office/ServiceInstitutionalDwelling TOTAL sq. ft. . Retail~ ~ ~ Units Sector I 114,500 70,500 @ 0 154 185,000 Sector Il' 60,000 * 14,000 0 .0 74,000 Sector III 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 Sector IV 0 32,000 @ 0 112 @ 32,000 TOTAL 174,500 116,500 100,000 266 391,000 · . @ As an alternative, the office/service could be increase by 13,000 square feet in Sector I if the 32,000 square foot office building is deleted in Sector IV and replaced with 56 additional dwelling units. * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 unit motel. Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors subject to approval by the Planning Director. Building square footages may be reallocated between uses subject to approval of the Planning Director. However, the reallocation of building square footages between uses shall only be permitted to a less intensive use, i.e. from commercial to office or institutional, or from office to institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet Of addition institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. e. Building Materials and Design The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. The intent is to create a pedestrian friendly, "traditional" village character consistent with the European heritage of the upper midwest and the atmosphere within this development, yet with the amenities and technological tools of modem times. The village elevations shown on the PUD drawings are to be used only as a general guideline and the reflection of the overall village image including the north- midwestem architectural vocabulary, village like human scale and flavor, and variety in design and facade treatment. . All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Major exterior surfaces of all walls shall be face brick, stone, glass, stucco, arehi~y treated concrete, cast in place panels,' decorative block, cedar siding, vinyl siding in residential with support materials, or approved equivalent as determined by the city. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block or brick. Bright, long, continuous bands are prohibited. Bright or brilliant colors and sharply contrasting colors may be used only for accent purposes and shall not exceed 10 percent of a wall area. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. Exposed cement ("cinder") blocks shall be prohibited. ge 5~ Metal siding, gray concrete, ctmain walls and similar materials will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials, or as trim or as HVAC scree~ and may not exceed more than 25 percent.of a wall area. .. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary sm~mre. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior tn'ocess mac~e~, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building. . The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall tmmlieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other si~ificant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will 8. e 10. 11. 12. incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal or accessory structures. There shall not be underdeveloped backsides of buildings. All elevations shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. The materials and colors used for each building shall be selected in context with the adjacent building and provide for a harmonious integration with them. Extreme variations between buildings on the same street in terms of overall appearance, bulk and height, setbacks and colors shall be prohibited. Slope roof elements shall be incorporated in all structures: Sector I - minimum 70 percent of roof area shall be sloped, Sector II - minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, Sector 111 - minimum of 30 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, and Sector IV - minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped. An exception to this requirement are roof areas designed for human use such as decks, garden areas, patios, etc., which will not be counted towards flat i:oof area. The following design elements should be incorporated into individual structures: Building Accents Towers, silos, arches, columns, bosses, tiling, cloisters, colonnades, buttresses, loggias, marquees, minarets, portals, reveals, quoins, clerestories, pilasters. Roof Types. Barrow, dome, gable, hip, flat. . - Roof Accents Cupolas, cornices, belfries, turrets, pinnacles, look-outs, gargoyles, parapets, lanterns. Accent elements such as towers, turrets, spires, etc., shall be excluded from the sector building height limitation. Window Types Bay, single parted, multi-paned, angular, square, rectangular, half-round, round, italianate. Window Accents Plant boxes, shutmm, balconies, decks, grates, canopies, awnings, recesses, embrastue, s, arches, lunettes. 13. Street level windows shall be provided for a minimum of 50 percent of the ground level wall ama L Site Landscaping and Screening le All buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I shall be installed when the grading of the phase is completed. This may well result in landscaping being required ahead of individual site plan approvals, but we believe the buffer yard and boulevard plantings, in particular, need to be established immediately. In addition, to adhere to the higher quality of development as spelled out in the PUD zone, all loading areas shall be screened. Each lot for development shall submit a sepa .fa. te landscaping plan as a part of the site plan review process. 2. All open spaces and non-parking lot surfaces, except for plaza areas, shall be landscaped, rockscaped, or covered with plantings and/or lawn material. Tree wells shall be included in pedestrian areas and plazas. 3. Storage of material outdoors is prohibitexL . Undulating or angular berms 3' to 5' in height, south of Highway 5 and along Market Boulevard shall be sodded or seeded at the conclusion of grading and utility consmmfiom The required buffer landscaping may be installed Where it is deemed necessary to screen any proposed development. All required boulevard landscaifing shall be sodded. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. e Native species shall be incorporated into sim landscaping, whenever possible. $ nage . One project identification sign shall be per!nj. 'tied for the development at each end Of Iadce Drive and at the south end of Main Street. Project identification sign(s) may also be located at the entrances to the development(s) in Sector IV. Project identification signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display area nor be greater than five feet in height. One project identification sign, with a maximum height of 20 feet, which may be increased in height subject to city approval based on the design and scale of the sign, designed as a gateway to the project shall be located at the north end of Main Street. Indiv/dual lots are not permitted low profile ground business sign. Within Sector l]I, one sign for the church and one sign for the school may be placed on streetscape walls. The top of the signs shall not extend more than eight feet above the ground and the total sign area for the signs shall not exceed 64 square feet. Pylon signs are prohibited. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should refle, ct the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. 2. All signs require a separate sign permit. m Wall business signs shall comply with the city's sign ordinance for the central business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on the "street" front and primary'parking lot front of each building. 4. Projecting signs are pe.rmitted along Main Street and Lake Drive and along pedestrian passageways subject to the conditions below. Signage Plan and Restrictions Wall Si~__~ lm The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the tops of which shall not extend'greater than 20 feet above the ground. In Sector IIi sign height may be increase based on the criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building architecture and design. The letters and logos shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall be constructed of wood; metal', or translucent facing. m If illuminated, individual dimensional letters and logos comprising each sign may be any of the following: a. Exposed neon/fiber optic, b. Open channel with exposed neon, c. Channel Letters with acrylic facing, d. Reverse channel letters (halo_lighted), or e. Externally illuminated by separate lighting source. o Tenant signage shall'consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do not occupy more than 15% of the sign area unless the logo is the sign. 4~ Within Sector lI, architecturally, building-integrated panel tenant/logo sign may be permitted based on criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building design and architecture. 5. Back lit awnings are prohibited. Pm]ectinff Signs le 2. The letters and logos shall be restricted to the apl~'OVed building sign area. · . All wooden signs shall be sandblasted and letters shall'be an integral part of the. building's architecture. Signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is re~. tricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered and such minimal messages such as date of establishment of business. Corporate logos, emblem~ and similar ide~~g devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band or within the projecting sign and do not occupy more than fifteen (15) percent of the sign display area. e Projecting signs shall be stationary, may not be serf-illuminated but may be lighted by surface mounted fixtures located on the sign or the adjacent facade. 5. Projecting signs shall be limited to one per tenant on s~et frontage and pedestrian passageway and my not exceed six square feet. Letters shall have a maximum height of 12 inches. e Projecting signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk and shall not project more than six feet from the b~lding facade. . . . -. Plastic, plexi-glass, clear plex, or similar material projecting signs are Prohibi .ted unless. used in conjunction with other decorative materials. ge Projecting signs may be painted, prefinished, or u 'ttlize exposed metal. Any exposed metal shall be anodized aluminum, stainless steel, titanium, bronze, or other similar non- corrosive or ono-oxidizing materials. Window Signs . - - Window signs shall not cover more than 25 percent of the window area in which they are located. ' ' .. 2. Window signs shall not use bright, garish, or neon paint, tape, chalk, or paper. Menu Sign~ .. .. lm Shall be located at eye level adjacent to tenant entries and shall not exceed 4 feet in height. 2. Shall be used only to convey daily specials, menus and offerings and shall be wood framed chalkboard and/or electronic board with temporary handwrittem lettering. No paper construction or messages will be permitted. 3. Menu signs shall be limited to one per tenant and may not exceed 8 square feet. Festive Flags/Banners 1. Flags and banners shall be permitted on approved standards attached to the building facade and on standards attachedto pedestrian area lighting. 2. Plastic flags and banners are prohibited. 3. Flags and banners shall be constructed of fabric. 4. Banners shall not contain advertising for individual users, businesses, services, or products. 5. Flags and banners shall project from buildings a maximum of two feet. 6. Flags and banners shall have a maximum area of 10 square feet. 7. Flags and banners which are tom or excessively worn shall be removed at the request of the city. Building Director~ 1. in multi-tenant buildings, one building directory sign may be permitted. The directory sign shall not exceed eight square feet. Pole Directo Sry._~ 1. Pole directory signs consisting of single poles with individual nameplate type directional arrows may be located within the development. 2. Pole directory sign shall not exceed 15 feet in height. .- 3. Directory signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk. 4. A maximum of eight directory signs may be provided per pole. 5. The max/mum size of an individual sign shall be 18 inches long by four inches wide. 6. Poles shall be a minimum of 10 feet behind the curb. la,Lighting lO Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consist~t throughout the development. The plans do not provide for street lighting. As with previous developments, the City has required the devel~ to install street lights throughout the street system. A shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with decorative natural Colored pole shall be used throughout the development parking lot area for lighting. Decorative, pedestrian scale lighting shall be used in plaza and sidewalk areas and may be used in parking lot areas. Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. il All light fixmr~ shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the project perimeter property line. This does not apply to street lighting. $. Light.poles shall be limited to a height of 20 feet. Lighting for parking areas shall minimize the use of lights on pole standards in the parking area. Rather, emphasis should be placed on building fights and poles located in close proximity to buildings. L Parking . Parking shall be provided based on the shared use of surface parking areas whenever possible. Cross access easements and the joint use of parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. A minimum of 75 percent of a building' s parking shall be located to the "rea/' of the structure and in underground garages. The development, shall be treated as a integrated shopping center and provide a minimum of one space per 200 square feet of commercial/retail alv,,a.' The office/personal service cbmponent shall be treated as an integrated office building and provide 4.5 space per 1,000 square feet for the first 49,999 square feet, four per thousand square feet for the second 50,000 square feet, and 3.5 per thousand square feet thereafter. Residential uses shall provide 1.5 spaces per unit as underground parking with visitor spaces provided as part of the commercial/office uses. Within sector IV, .visitor parking shall be' provided at a rate of 0.5 stalls per unit. Hotel/motels shall comply with city ordinance. Churches/schools shall comply with city ordinance, however, a minimum of 50 percent of the parking shall be shared. 11 I I J m m uI i. , . . OC, O O HIGHWAY 5 Oo O O CITYOF CHANHg E I 690 Ci7 Center Drit~ PO Box147 Cha,lumen. Minnesota 55317 Phone 952.93Z1900 Gtneral Fax 952.93Z5739 Engineering Department Fax 952.93Z9152 Building Dqanmem Fax 952.934.2524 Web Site www.'ci, dm,hasse,.m,.,s MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: September 7, 2001 SUBJECT: Consider a request for an amendment to the planned unit development to Villages on the Ponds to permit four-story buildings (4) with the maximum height of 55 feet for residential for three (3) stones with a maximum height of 46 feet for retail/office and an amendment to determine a formula for conversion of commercial and office space to residential units and vice-a-versa, Villages on the Ponds I, LLC, Lotus Realty Services. Planning case: 95-2 PUD I have reviewed the request for an mnendment for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy .requirements. The request for an amendment review is based on the available information submitted at this time. When additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. In reviewing the plans for three and four story buildings the fire department has no issues or concerns at this time. Buildings will be built in compliance with building and fire code which will allow structures of this height. The fire department does have equipment to deal with structures over four stories high. g:ksafety~l~mendmentvillagesontheponds The City of Chanlutuen. ,4 orou.i,~ c,,,,w,in' ,.ith de, m lak,'c a,,afin' ~dmah. a civ, n,zi,, d,,,,,,m,.,,, tl,,'i,.i,v h,,6,,~,~, a,d hea,,tit;,I ,a~ ,4 tm. at nlm', tn B,~. ,,,,d,. a,,d NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2001 ,AT 7:00 P.M. CiTY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 690 CITY CENTER DRIVE · · . . ' · APPLICANT.'- Lotus Realty services ... PROPOSAL: PUD Amendment ' - ..... LOCATION: Villages on the Ponds · · NOTICE: You am Invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant, Lotus Realty iServices, is requestlng an amendment to the Planned Unit Development to Villages on the Ponds to permit four (4) Story buildings with a maximum height of 50 feet and three (3) stories with a maximum height of 40 feet and an =amendment to determine a formula for convemion of commercial and office space to residential units and vice versa, Villages on the Ponds I. LLC. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to Inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments am received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the pmjecL Questions and Comments:. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during .- office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project'," contact Bob 937-1900 ext. 141. If you choose to submit wrttten . comments, it is helpful to have one ... :opy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. .. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager On October 25, 2001. Lake Susan Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® AMERICAN LEGION~ POST 580 7995 GREAT PLAINS BLVD CHANHAS~ MN 55317 APPLE AMERICAN LP (APPLEBEE'S) C/O AVTAX INC 1025 WEST EVERE/~ RD LAKE FOREST IL 60045 WII.I.IAM R & DEBRA E PRIGOE 390 HIDDEN LN C~SEN MN 55317 AMOCO AMERICAN OIL CO C/O ERNST & YO~ 06529 CHICAGO IL 60606 ROBERT DrrrRICH PO BOX 755 826 BROADWAY N NEW ULM MN 56073 BRIAN E SEMKE & DEBORAH C DEUTSCH 331 HIDDEN LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SI'EVEN $ KOKESH 8201 GRANDVIEW RD ~SEN lv[N 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O SCOTT BOTtOm'S7 690 CITY ~DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RANDY G &KIMBRA$C, REEN 8103MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ALBERT & lEAN SINNEN 8150 GRANDVIEW RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RI CHARDA &LINDA G ANDERSON 8210 GRANDVIEWRD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DEAN V SKAI.,I.,MAN & JOYCE L BISH 8155 GRANDVIEW RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 GREC~RY D & MARY A LARSEN 8151 GRANDVIEW RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 690 CITY CEN'I~-DR CHANHA/~BN" MN 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN .,~ C/O SCOTT BOTCH]RILBO~[ 147 690 CITY CENTER DI~ CHANHASSEN' MN 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O SCOTT BOTC~ BOX147 690 CITY CENTER DR CHANH~$EI~" MN 55317 79TH STREET CENTER PARTNERSHIP 684 EXCELSIOR BLVD EXCELSIOR MN 55331 MICHAmJ M & PRUDENCE L B1 8113 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 HAROLD A & BEVERLY 8123 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 553'17 ROBERT J & LOIS A SAVARD ' 8080 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TODD R & KELLY G WALKER 8090 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ROSEMOUNT INC ATTN: CONTROIJ 12001 TECHNOLOGY DR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 ROSEMOUNT INC ATTN: CONTROl JaR 12001 TECHNOIX)GY DR'"' 55344 CITY OF CHANI-IASSEN -.----- c,o scorr o c oX f4? 690 CITY C~R MN 55317 CITY OF CHANHASSEN C/O SCOTT BOTCH]IlO BOX-I47 690 CITY CENTER DR'"" C~ MN 55317 MICHAEL R SCHNABEL & SANDRA J STAI 370 HIDDEN LN CHANHASSEN MAI 55317 BISRAT & DENISE AI.RMAYEHU 380 HIDDEN LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MARTIN J & TIMAREE FAJDETICH 8100 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHRISTOPH J I,F_,SER & COT J.RRN A CANNON 8110 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DAVID E & KARLI D WANDLING 8120 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Smooth Feed SheetsTM AUL F & RITA A IO.a%UDA 130 ~ DR ~-IANI-IAS,~I MN 55317 ANCE T & MARGARET MAZUR CI-IAN~ 140 MARSH DR ~tANHASSEN MN 55317 ROBERT V LAN~ & LAURIE B SOPER 8134 DAKOTA LN Cfi)PAL & NIRALI SHAH 8136 DAKOTA LaN CHANI-IASSEN MN 55317 55317 Use template for 5160® AU~MAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC C/O LOTUS REAL~ BOX 235 CI-/ANHA~ MN 55317 VIGIL COMPANIES LLC 11191 BURR RID(~ LN EDEN PRAIRH~ ' MN 55347 IRUCE D & CYN'rHIA J MARENGO 150 MARSH DR IHANHASSEN MN 55317 ~"rEVENP & ~ K ~~ ~160 MARSH DR MN 55317 STEPHEN T RIPPLE 8138 DAKOTA LN CHANHASSEN MN ROGER S YOUNG & LF.~T .m C I-La n .~ 8140 DAKOTA LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317 55317 AUSMAR DEVEI.~PMENT CO LI~ ao l.m~s ~~~x 235 MN 55317 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC ~o LOTUS~F, ALT~'O,,..Mg]39X-'Z35 ...-- 55317 P & DEBRA A DISCH 170 MARSH DR [SEN MN 55317 JASON W WI-ti'rE 8139 DAKOTA LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317 NORTHCOTr COMPANY 250 EAST LAK~ DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 D JOttNSON & C SURBROOK ~20 SINNEN CIR MN 55317 C/O SCOT'r BOTCHt[~ BOX,147 690 crrY ct~,m~,~''-''~' CHANHASI~q'~' MN 55317 SILO I IZC 200 HWY 13W BURNSVNI-R MN 55337 I & 1'~.1- M MEYER ~30 SINNEN CIR MN 55317 E HAMBLIN IR & - A HAMBLIN SINNEN CIR ;SEN MN 55317 BLUE CIRCLE INVESTMENT CO STE 301 1304 MEDICINE LAKE DR PLYMOUTH MN 55441 1100 INTERNATION~ 900 2ND AVE S MINNEAPOHS ~ 55402 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC CHANHAS~5C/O LOTUS REAL~ 55317 -WHEATSTONE KESTA~ GROUP 250 EAST LAKE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 & IAN~ i ~. R PETRUSA SINNEN CIR MN 55317 LAKE SUSANAPARTMENTHOMESLI~ I1455VIKINGDR EDENPRAmIE MN 55344 NORTHCO'I'r COMPANY 250 EAST LAKE D~ MN 55317 & ROBIN E POINTER 31 SINNEN CIR MN 55317 WARM WATER POOLS LLC #104 6121 BAKER RD MINNETONKA MN 55345 CHURCH OF ST HUBERT 8201 MAIN ST CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Sa¢chet: I move that the Planning Commission recommends denial of the Land Use Map Amendment' from Residential-Large Lot to Residential Low Density for Lot 2, Block l, Hillside Oaks as well as the Planning Commission recommends denial for rezoning from A2, Agricultural Estate District to RSF, Single Family Residential for Lot 2, Block I. Hillside Oaks, due to inconsistency with the comprehensive plan, and the Planning Commission recommends denial of the preliminary plat' of Subdivision 97-12 creating six lots for the Powers Circle Addition subject to not complying with the land use designation and zoning requirements. And I would like to comment, to emphasize Commissioner Slagle's comment that inevitably it will be developed at some point and I hope that at that point our discussion here with . tiffs will allow you to bring a proposal in that's going to be... Blackowiak: Okay. There's been a motion. Is there a second? Kind: 1'11 second that. Sacchet moved, .Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of the Land Use Map Amendment from Residential-Large "Lot to Residential Low Density for Lot 2, Block 1, Hiilsid~ Oaks as well as the Planning Commission recommends denial for rezoning from A2, Agricultural Estate District to RSF, Single Family Residential for LOt 2, Block 1, Hillside Oaks, due to inconsistency with the comprehensive plan, and the Planning Commission recommends denial of the' preliminary plat of Subdivision 97-12 creating six lots for the Powers Circle Addition subject to not complying with the land use designation and zoning requirements. All voted in favor and the motion-carried unanimously $ to 0. - Biackowiak: This item goes to City Council on November 26u'. Thank you all for confing.. Kind: Madam Chair, can I clarify that with staff?. Blackowiak: Sure. Kind: I just want to clarify that that little caveat that Uli added 'at the end was not part of the. lnotion. Sacehet: That was a comment. Kind: That was a comment that was made before it was seconded. :~nenson: Let the record show that. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TQ VILLAGES ON THE PONDS TO PERMIT FOUR (4) STORY BUILDINGS WITH A MAXIMIJM HEIGHT OF 50 FEET AND THREE (3)-STORIES WITH A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 40 FEET AND AN AMENDMENT TO DETERMINE A FORMULA FOR CONVERSION OF COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE SPACE TO RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND VICE VER~A~ VILLAGES ON THE PONDS I~ LLC~ LOTUS REALTY SERVICES. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Blackowiak: Okay conmaissioners, any questions? Rich? S!agle: I'll start. 45 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Bla~kowiak: He raised his hand. Slagle: i raised my lmnd on this. Bear with me Bob. I want to understand this in layman's terms and" just bear with me. The original plan, let's call it the' concept of ViUage on the Ponds, F m reading'here in' 1996 it called for 322 dwelling units. Are we on track for that or is this request that we're seeing today allow, and I'll ask the applicant as well, allowing for a lower goal or is that still on target? Generous: Well actually we Would be able, potentially be able to get more dwelling units within the project because the senio~ housing counts for less dwelling units. But we're right on, we're at 161 units h~ this project. There is 162 across the ~rreet so we're right on target. Slagle: Ogas. The question I had on the center, what I thank you determined or showed as one. · Generous: Sector L Yes. Sl.~tgie: Sector I. Explaiv that des~ption of how you see that center? You said pedestrian,.was that -. . . Gbnero.s: Right: '-.- Slagle: O~y. And we're still p_~eeding along that line? Generous: Right..We have, as part of the design standards there's actually a build to requirerne, nt.. W~ want to create a public realm so wide sidewalks. 14 to 18 feet with street fumi'ture and places for pec~le ..: to l[,mher. Nice. landscaping. Decorative lighting and~o we want to try to create a sense of place in that .- core., at lh'-.tl intersection. And we anticipate that all four comers will have very similar design eleme, ntx. .- in them. We have, well on this southwest comer we have the bus shelter and then there will be like the ' -- little cou,.'tyard area adjacent to the building. And then a connection through to the p~king behind.- ,. Slagle: Okay. And prefacing this, and my commissioners know this...not having been part of this when it first came, I wasn't able to hear a lot of these things. Last question before 1 continue with the applicant -: at some point, in our schedule we have a request to amend the PUD for 4 story building. 'Number 7 on our agenda is to approve a plan for a 4 story building.. Are those synonymous? Meaning if 6 doesn't get ..' approved, is 7 going to happen? .. Gen~'ous: '£',hcv would have to either get a variance or reduce the building height. Slagle: So 7 is made on the assumption, as on our agenda item, that 6 is approved? Generous: Correct A,-menscn: You're jusl going to make a ~ecommendafiom Blackowia~: Yeah I was going to say. Not necessarily because it goes to council. Aanenson: You just need to rnak~ your recommendations independent aod send them outo the council, but you're right. There is implications. Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Slagle: 6 nee, ds to happen from our group. A recommendation/:.'or 7 to then be. recommended,.we wouldn't. Blaekowiak: We wouldn't say no to 6 and yes to 7. ' . Slagle: Gctch ya. Okay. Just trying to see... Blackowiak: It wouldn't make sense I guess. It's getting late. We could, who knows. LuAnn. Sidney: Nothing. Blackowiak: Uli, questions? Sacchet: Yeah, real quick. Your pulling your trip generation numbers from this Trip Generation 6th Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers. Is that a generally used accepted authority Jn the industry? Generous: Yea. Sacchet: Just wanted to confirm that aspect. The answer is yes to that? One thing I don't understantl is, we incre~ased the capacity of these buildings by 1 floor, but we don't seem to increase the number of trips' · versus before and after that change. How's that work'! Generous: Different triu generation rates. .. Aanenson: Seniors. Sacchet: The 5enim navare of... Generous: .Yeah. Because of this dementia units have .32 trips per unit. Sacchet: Hopefully they don't drive, right? : Generous: Y~.~h. But they do have people that will 'visit and also the employees that come in, ~nd so those are accommodated in our triprates. Sacchet: They wright forget where, they're d6viug. Generous: That's why the bus is there. Sacchet: And a similar question. When you have your total square footage, in the previou~ robie before- the change it was 391,000 and now we are at 372,000. Similar question. Why are we less when we have more floors? -' Generous: Because we converted square footages to residential dwelling units. As past of the original.. PUD tl',ey were, that ;vas a foomote t¢ this table and we just got rid of the footnote because-we used it. We put residential in Sector IV and no office in. Additional office in Sector I, but it reduced the total . square foomges. Sacchet: Alfight. And also you che~:ked your math in the table against. 47 ' Planning Commission Meeting - Nove~ 6, 2001 Aanen.~m: Somebody did. Sacchet: So~nebody did. That's my question. B!ackowiak: Deb, yes. Kind: I foxed a char~. Let's just say that Sidnesg Oh Madam Chair, I do have a question. Blackowiala No, go ahead. Kind: Want me to keep going as long as Fm speaking? Okay. I've got to chew'my little hot tart here. · Okay, sorry. The old standards allowed 50 feet in Sector L The new standards allow 50 feet in Sector L So it's really the definition of story that is being changed: Just want to make sure I'm tracking here. Also, in our old standards it stated that retail and office buildings, let's see. Oh it didn't state, it doesn't say anything about office on the first floor. In our old ordinance. That's a new thing?. I'm sorry, I'.m confusing myself and I'm probably confusing everybody else. This is on page 4 of the design standards- Where it talks about building height. : . . .o Generous: Yes it was. Kind: And i thought the language about first.floor, retail office buildings .without residences a..b0ve- should be. limited tO 2 stories, but that's the olfly mention 0f re, tail and office on the tirst floor. Tim. new. one talks about, in Sector I we want to have residential with street level commercial, oy.0ffice in Sector I ' ii'we're going to allow this 4 story thing. S0 that's new. Goll, I didn't even notice that until-just now.. Sorry about that guys. Aanenson: That's to make sure we get the commercial on the first floor which was the intent. Kind: And when I read that I take that to mean that the entire first floor should be retail, or commercial- office. Blackowiak: Should be. Kind: Should ben.. Could be? Portion of it? . Aane:mon: Substantial. Kind: Yeah. What's staWs fbeling on that? What was your intent by this language? Generous: Well, not that we require, the entire first floor to be. The Presbyterian Homes is an example. We negotiate that on each one. I don't know, we could come up with the criteria. Aanenson: I think we should put something in there. Kind: I do too. Should it be a percentage or?. Aanenson: As soon as we put a number, we're not going to hit it so ! don't know. 48 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Kind: Okay. Aanenson: ...something we can get from the attorneys to put something in. Kind: I th~.nk tbar's it for staff. Yes, that's. Oh! Would you speak to how, if we shift commercial'to residential, or residential to commercial, how does that affect our tax base? Generous: Well that's a big assumption. I doubt you'd go from commercial to residential. Slagle: Wait, that's not what you asked, right? Kind: I said either way. Slagle: Yeah, what's it do? Kind: What does it do to our taxers? Generous: Well apartment units pay more, or they're based on the commercial rate..They pay 2% I believe. Kind: So it's a wash? Generous: Pretty much. You do have a low higher valuation for cotnmercial but then ~ou have lower story buildings, so. .' . . Aanens0n: You can get more densit~ so. Kind: Interesting. Okay. That's it for my questions. Blackowiak: Okay, LuAnn. Sidney: Well I had a question about what's driving this whole discussion about the trip generation rates and square f¢otage. And then talking about the total square footage for Sector I. And it seems to me that being able to not, well that's not a good way to state it but, to not have to do another EAW is a driving force for this. Aanenson: Well I think there was also a commitment that we would stay within certain parameters. Certain design parameters for that, kind of our guiding principles and certainly there was a commitment level on the traffic. We've heard time and time again from the residents so we certainly don't want to exceed the traffic level. That's not our intent. What our intent is to go back and examine as the uses have filled in and we have more known's...certain other things that are driving that but we want to be able to provide as we move along some of that flexibility as these come in. So we don't want it to exceed the ultimate approved trip generations. That's not what we're trying to do. Sidney: And then based on the nurnbers that you have here, you're able to meet that? Aanenson: Correct. Sidney: Right. 49 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanenson: That' s the bottom line. Sidney~ Right. S~.agle: If I can ask. Is there a, on sufff's part, is them a desir~ or an expec~tion that can be-stated that it will not exceed those? Aanenson: Yep, that's fine. I think what you're saying is maybe there'd be an intent statement through this intended through this PLq) amendment that the intent is, and just as I stated before, put something in like that? Is that what you're looking for? Slagle: I need to think how do I say this'? Again, in my short term here, this project has had more changes and .updates than any project I've seen. Now albeit that's a very short window, so what I guess I'm asking is, is there some ultimate goal that we hav~ for this development that is in essence, I don:t want to say concrete but I mean it is sort of there.. And everybody now understands what the playing field is as times change. I keep hearing as times change. We have this ultimate traffic trip generation goal. Am I going to hear 6 months from now that that now needs to change because of XYZ? And I'm not. saving it's good or bad. I'm just trying to get an idea of what's happening here. Avnenso. n: We certainly don't want that to happen. This has been a long term project. It's pretty cutting edge when we put this. Not a lot of people doing this at the time. So based on the knowledge we had at · the time, and the expectations, we put together design standards. As this has evolved, and we' ve ' recognized some things that we needed more strength on, and.just for'example the ambiguity of saying. you can go 50 fee, t but you can only be'4 stories. 3 stories, we're recognizing some of that, I can't' ' ' predict wi'~at, you know we know scme of the other things that are coming in. I think you'll all be · · pleased w~.th that. There's going to be use that we hadn't anticipated but we're not trying to do that.- · Slagle: Sate, aud that I appreciate. I'll just throw one-thought out for just toss around. We have a. ' -. limited space. We have some interesting roadways. We've heard descriptions of what traffic does and doesn't do, okay. I mean I'm just thinking as just plain Rich Slagle from Chanhassen, that area can only handle so much traffic. I don't know what that number is. I'm assuming it's thi.~ trip generation figure that we:ye come up with. so I guess I'm just asking staff that, is there one area that we're sort of g0ing to put that cap on and make, I don't, make's the wrong word. Encourage the developer and others to work within that, leaving that alone. Aanenson- Correct. Since this was approved: we're still at tint number. That number has not changed.- But what we've done is say within that mix, as long as you don't exceed that number~ we're allowing certain mixes to occur. If you have more assisted living, then maybe you can bump it up here but we don't want to exceed that overall. Slaglc: Okay. Cool. Thanks. Blackowiak: Okay..Kate I just, maybe it's Bob. Can you walk me through a little bit on these allocation, the reallocation conveasions? How are you getting these numbers? I mean assuming the new ones are correct, and you know I don't even cate. You're getting these based on traffic'? Generous: Yes. I tried to equate everything to trip generation rates, and then there's ratios that you. can develop between different uses. And so if you divide the trip generations for apartmen~ by mtaff you get a factor. And so that's what we used to, and then you have to bring it to a common denominator. If you're going from residential to commercial, then you have to go from unit to square footage. Arid so I 50 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 did all the math on a spread sheet to come. up with those numbers and then we rounded it to the nearest · 10 to make it easier for everybody. Aanenson: .and that goes directly to the heart of Rich's question. They wanted to change and we said we're nor going to change if we know we're going to increase traffic so we had to come up with a methodology to back fill our position that does this support that, and that's exactly what this chart does. That's ~vhy we support that. Slagle: And I only say this in jest but is that the same source as the Culver's numbers? A,~menson: That was supplied by, they supplied that number. : Slagle: There was confusion on those numbers. .. Aanenson: They supplied those numbers. This was our methodology basecl on standard applied trip generation. To give you some rationale basis to make the decision to swap within. Blackowiak: Okay. So then. I mean just for example 1 residential apartment unit equals 2 elderly indepehdent units. That came from a book? Generous: No. Blackow[ak: Where'd that come from° '. Generous: They .~how a trip generation. An apartment unit has so many trips that ir generates. Elderly'. - - housing has so many trips. , ..... . Blackowiak: Half as many basically. Generous: Yes, per unit. " Blackowiak: Okay.. Generous: And so I did all those ratios for all the uses to come up with this conversion chart. Slztg!e: Congratulations first of all. I mean good job of putting this together. Generous: And again it was back to, we wanted a rational b~is to do ~at. Kind: And ! checked his math. Aanenson: We were audited. Blackowiak: Somebody had to do it, right? Kind: It worked. It worked, he was right. B!ackowiak: Well my second question is dwelling units. I wrote dow~ 322. I'm seeing that a couple different places, and then I thought I saw another place. Where did I write down 433? Where did that number come from? Was that in this one or was that in the next? It could have been in the next. 51 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanenson: Original PUD. Blackowiak: 'No, it wasn't original. It seems like we're getting more dwelling units and I'm wondering' . . where they're coming from. Generous: Well there is a potential if they converted because the residential they're proposing doesn't use all their allocations. There's like an additional 90 units or 80. I don't remember the number fight nOW. Blackowiak: Okay, maybe that's where it's coming from. Explain that to me. Help me out with that. Generoag: Okay. We started with 322 dwelling units for the project. Blackowiak: Riglxt. Generous: Because they're converting some of those apartment units to elderly housing and assisted ' housing, they're not using as many. Blackowiak: Okay, so you're talking. Again you're, basing that on trip generation. 'So it has. nothing to do ~,;i~ traits per se? ' '-' ' Generous: No. Blackowiak: So you can'[ say you've got more units.: You_ have fe~er.trip onlts or I don't la,ow how. you'd want to put that. But it has to do with driving. Generous' Yes. Blackowiak: The whole thing, it's traffic. Generous: Traffic is there. Btackowiak: It starts specific units. Okay. So then Iguess my question is, if you're talking about, tell ' me about this 90 units. What are you talking about this extra 90? Where am I-getting this number? Generous: Well that, if you do the math just on the residential, they're providing, what is it? 71. No, 20 dementia units which are 3 to' 1 ratios so that's 7 units instead of;21 so you picked up 14. Biackowiak: Picked up? Generous: Well you haven't used 14 units for trip generations. No, it's more trips. $iagle: We need a city accountant here. Blackowiak: This is just, sorry. I'm sorry but I just, I had a real problem with this whole. Generous: There is total number of units. Yes, you can get more but the senior housing would count l~ss against those units. If that explains it. So you're still at the, trips that you generate with 322 units, if you ad:l the total units developed, they'd be the same, Theoretically. 52 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Slagle: Vemelle, do you have more answers? Blackowiak: Don't even go there Vemelle. Yemelle Clayton: I'll wait. Blackowiak: Okay so, I'm just wondering if we're going to get more units or if it's, how many units are we going to have? Aanenson: You possibly could get more units. Blackowialc Do we want more units? Aanenson: 'Yes, that's a question you have to. Blackowiak: Yeah, that's what I mean. Okay. Well I'm not going to go there right now. Does anybody'. have any more questions for staff? We'll better move on here. Alright if not, would the applicant or the designee like ~.o make a presentation? Name and address please. Vemelle. Vemelle Clayton: Vemelle Clayton at 422 Santa' Fe Circle. 1 would rather, I' rn condonable with this. We're comfortable with everything that's been suggested to be approved. We don't have any questions, and I would rather just answer your questions rather than speak to this. Because I'd like to have a chance for these guys to get on. So if you've got any questions I'1l hang around. I'll sit down if you don't. Blackowiak: Okay cormnissioners, questions for. 'Uli. Sacchet: I have one question Vemelle. In what's being proposed here, for us to recommend approval for,' it says in Sector I, 4 stories residential with street level commercial and actually before it was 50 feet. Retail office buildings without residences above shall be limited to 3 stories, 40 feet. However what you're actually planning to do, according to the next thing which we hopefully still get to talk about, you have 4 stories that is all residential, and you have 3 story where the first floor is partially commercial, is tlmt correct? Generous: Yes. Sacchet: Is there a reason why, are you asking'for more flexibili¢ there or why this discrepancy between what you're actually doing and wlmt? Yemelle Clayton: We actually were more specific in our request initially to focus just on this project. I think staff thought it would be better to have a more general standard. Aanenson: Can we answer that question? Sacchet: Please. Aanenson: There wasn't street frontage. Our intent was street frontage. That building that's forward doesn't have street frontage. Generous: The internal street. 53 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Aanenson: Internal street frontage. Geuerous: It has 101. Aanenson: The part. that we're talking about is .fi'6ntage here. These buildings...that frontagel Kin& On 101 it does. Aanenson: Right. but that's not the access to the street. Where we're trying to get the retail part. Where you've got the pedestrian. Generous: Where you're parking right in front. Vernelle Clayton: Our main concern is this comer. Aanenson: Maybe it needs to be clarified in the amendment specifically. The su~ets. Iatke Drive. Sacchet:. i think it's...when we go to get specifics of the propo~al, l just wondered whether them was son~thiag I'm overlooking and you answered it, thanks. Blackowiak: This item is open for a public heating. So if anybody would like t0 speal~ to the Planning Commission, come to the podium. State your. name and address for the record. Seeing no one..['.ll close the public hearing. Commissioners, commen .t,5 on this. Slagle: FII start. I'm just sort of confused. I rrean truly, add I guess what F'm, and 1'11 owh scm6 of this' . that I just need to get more in depth the history of this development.' And we'll have coffee' sometime,.. ' . ' ' Because I'm still not clear on exactly what is intended other'than I understand the stories has.changed.' You know stories as in buildings. So I understand that but truly, I mean and based upon some of th~ questions Ym hearing, and I'm just asking this out loud. Do we as a commission have a pretty good. understanding of what's happening with this development? And if the answer is yes, then I have a lot of.. work to do. But I guess Pm just wondering, it j .ust seems that we're raising questions and they're legitimate questions, and I almost. Here's my fear and this is where I'll end this. Is I have a fear that we're now being asked to approve this, in what I think a rather short order,' and then coming along in · possibly 10 minutes is to approve what I'll call a fairly major development in this city. And I th~mk I'm .. .getting by the pace of what's happened in the last half hour, they'want this approved, tonigh.t. 'And I'm just throv,,ing out as a concern to my fellow commissioners, is everybody okay with what's happening here and the pace? And if the answer is yes, then we'll proceed but just throwing that out. Okay. You don't have any answer it now. I'm just throwing it out for consideration. Sacchet: Should we make comment to this? Slaglec You don't have to. Blackowiat:: This is comment time. Sacche~.: I would like. to make. a comment to this because I think, it will be overstatement for me to say that ! understand the whole framework of this, but what I do understand that there's some flexibility needed and from the memo that was passed out tonight, I also understand that the City Council supports that flexibility to be put into this framework. I do think. Plannir,g Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Slagle: ff I'can interject. S,s:chet: Yes. Slagle: 1 believe 2 of the co,,ncii rnembers were not present. Sacchet: Correct... I do believe that, I personally am comfortable with this framework. I don't think it needs much deliberation. It certainly doesn't mean that I expect every, body to feel the same. Blackow~.ak: LuAnn, what about, do you have any your connnents? Sidney: Yeah I think,'you know we're faced with the situation where this area is developing slowly'. I think Kate has stated that already. And we are going to see changes. We're going to have applications. come in that are ve~ attractive and in this case we have one that's going to be presented to us hopefully tonight for development and it seems reasonable, a reasonable use for the land. And stepping back and looking at tl,e intent of the PUD, I believe it still fits the standards and we've had to make a few changes here...~ lot of math that we generated to make sure that we're still within the limitations of the trip generatiou. Then we're, talking about adding another story, which I don't think is a signi, fica'nt, these are insignifican~ changes so the spirit and the intent of the PUD is still the:~ and we're sayi.-.g that we have a vet-,.,, attractive development that's being proposed. That we'd like to make sure that we incorporam so 1 do, fi have any problerm .~ · . . Blackowhk: Okay, Deb. Kip.d: I agree with LuAnn. We allowed 50 feet before. This i's still 50 feet. ~thether we call. it 3 sto~. or 4 story, ;.t really doesn't make any difference to me. I would like to see'some lanffaage put in -. .,~-wgarding what we expect for street level commercial/office. Whethfr we keep it flexible and say a 'ponion of the first level needs to be retail office or do we want to put 25% of that needs to be at.least 25%'? '- Blackowiak: Or a majority? 51%. I mean. Kind: Whatever. Sacchet: Then on the issue, considering that it's going to be specified in the plans we get to see: Kind: The plans that we are going to see currently have about 25% as retail/office on the street level frontage. 29%? Okay. Vemelle Clayton: I would appreciate it if you could leave it up to the, you're going to see the plan tonight, which at this point is anticipated to have the least amount of retail on the street. I really don't want to open the door to having less than what we really what for the rest so if you accept '25% here, which re. ally kind of works for a number of reasons, including the drop off, 1 don't want to have to fight the battle wi.th every applicant that comes in for another building to see if the5' have a standard where they only have to be 25% on the street. Kind: We could for instance say a nutjority needs to be a retail office and then nmke it an exception for the one that we're about to see because of the memory care units need to be on the first floor or whatever the reason is. 55 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Aanenson: I think that'd be fine~ Just one other point. We did talk to some of the neighbors. This is one that is...it could be the 4 stories. They are concerned about views. They'd like to see the top of the steeple. I think we need...so if we're going to be a lit0e more specific, I think, it'd be nice if we left that one. The height !imitatic.n on thai building that is .just right next to the .residences. ! know Vernelle staled that she doesn't want it but I tbini~ it's better if we put in the amendment, as long as.we're amending it, that that be limited. Vemelle Clayton: I don't bavea problem with your limiting the height here. I just didn't want to have everybody cong...and say on these buildings they only have to have 25%. Aanenson: Correct. I raised that too. I agree. Kind: Right. right. But we want to put something in there about it. Am~ensoo: Well one approach we talked about is k had direct frontage onto, name th~ specific street. That would alleviate this particular. Kind:. Oh, with pedestrian sidewalk ,%outage. Aan,mson: Correct. Those would tit, yeah internal streets. Kind: IL'ts what percent a majority of commercial/re, tail on the first floor? Ch: comme~ial/office, I'-m scr~y -' Slag!e: Let me throw something out there. And Vemelle, I know exactly what you're asking for that fl~xibility but my question is, is let's just say this particular applicanfthat we'll see next has a very legitimate reason not to have much, that would make sense for whatever reason. At some point as the development continues, those requirements are going to have to be in.place because, or otherw-~se you'll end up with the last 2 applicants being reid that their development has to be 100% just to make that, whatever figure it is. Vernelle Clayton: That's my point.. W'e don't want you to... Slagle: Oh just this one? Vernelle Cla)~on: Right. Aanenson: Right Slagle: Okay. Kind: Suggestions. Sacchet. Yeah, here's a suggestion. Could we. make this aspect of this commercial require...that they have specific area rather than the whole Sector I? Would that work? Blackowialc Yeah I was wondering if we could just do, is it Outlot F?. Is that what it's called? Generous: Yes, or Lot 1, Block 1, 7* Addition. 56 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Vernelle Clayton: This one is currently Outlot F. To be replatted. Sacchet: So if we nmke this part applicable just to refer to Outlot F, would that accormnodate, your concern? Aanenson: 29%. The remaining shall be, and then whatever number you put in there. BlackoMak: A majority. Kind: A majority. Blackowiak: Which can be from 51 to 100 percent. I mean and that allows some flexibility. Kind: Okay, was I still commenting? I think we should also add in an intent statement to, I'm calling it the footnote but it's really the paragraph below the sector.totals under number 5 where it talks about the building square footages may be reallocated between sectors inbetween uses subject to approval by the Planning Director, and we probably should put some intent in there. With the intent to not increase traffic in the development so that our Planning Director knows what the intent is. Something like that. That's it. Blackowiak: My co~nments. This is just a very confltsing thing. 1 understand the height thing. 50 feet is 50 feet. 3 or 4 stories, [ don't have a problem with that. I understand the idea of keeping traffic to fi .. certain level. The extra numbers really kind of threw me for a while. Signage, I do not feel.that we should change any signage requirements. 20 feet is plenty and I think that that needs to just stay as is. And [ think that we need to als0 consider, I don't know if we wanf to do this on specifically-ori this outlot or say, could we consider this as height changes on this outlot only? Or do we say that height changes are, okay in Sector I except on, how do we achieve that7 Aanenson' Except for that one lot? Blackowiak: Except for that one lot. Is it just that one lot or are there other lots? Aanenson: I would just, if we could say except for... Adjacent to Great Plains, lot. Generous: At Pond Promenade. Aanenson: Yeah, we should call that out. The neighborhood... Blackowiak: Yeah, I guess that's what I was trying to say. We need to either say you know, it can only be on Outlot F or it can be everywhere except for this other outlot and I don't, or the separate lot and I'm not sure what that is. Bottom line is it's, overall I understand the height thing. The numbers, I could have a week and probably not get these all figured out but. Slagle: .Let me ask, are we in danger. I shouldn't say danger, but is there any concern that if we approve this for the height and we just get some more clarification time to allow whether it's through meetings or you guys providing more information. There's no concern. Is that okay to do? I mean there's no danger in that path, right? Okay. Blackowiak: Okay. Well let's just move on here. I think are we ready for a motion? Are we close? 57 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Sacchet: I'm .ready for a motion. - . K~nd: Go IJii - Sacchet: Okay. I'd like to make a motion that. the Phmning Commission recommends approval of the amendment to Planned Unit Development Standards for Villages on the Ponds amending section d. as follows, and I through 5 that is. With let's see there's a couple fixes. The height, actually it's the number of stories aspect. The height really don't change but the number of stories for the building on the' . · norlhe~st comer. Staying with the old fiamework, meaning the 3 and 2 story. And with statement on the: number 5 identifying that the intent is not to increase the total traffic loads. Deb,'can you help me splice in that pexcen/age of commercial please? · - .. Kind: Yeah. I'll second that and I'll make a friendly amendment that the patens of number. 3..You're · suggesting that number 3 be as stated in the staff report right now? -' Sac'ct'.et: Yeah, with the addition of excepting the multiple stories of the northeast lot. Or building. Blackowiak: On Prornenode and Oreat Plains. -' Sacche.'-' Right. That that would .stay with the 3 and 2 rather than go to the 4 and 3 stories.- . .. " Kind: Okay. So we could. I'm trying to figure out where I ~,ould add this se, tence. I-Iere'~ my '-. - ." suggestion fis~at for a condition. And maybe it's even totally'a separate conditioJt, I don't .~ow. Buildings adjace, p.t to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority of. the streo. ~r: -frontage. " Sacche~ Lel's make that a separate.. ' · ' Blackov. iok: Corrane~cial, office or retail? " .. Kind: What did I put? -: Blackowiak: Commercial/office. " Kind: Com~rs~rcJal/off~ce. Isn't retail comn~rcial? : Sacchet: Yes it is -' -. Blackowiak: I thought we had. Okay we have commercial/retail or office/service. I guess mayb,~. Kind: Maybe. commercial/office or retail. On the majority of the street frontage. And just'have that be a separ~e condition7 Sacch.¢:: Ycah, I would re. zoning, nd that. · Kind: IvIaybc tlmt makes life easier. Sacchet: So that would be number 6. Unless you want to splice it into. That's clear. 58 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 °' . I Residential apartment unit = 0.52 elderly (independent) unit. i Residential apartment unit = 360 square feet of office/service. l Residential apartment unit = 90 square feet of retail. I Residential apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional. 600 square feet of office/service = 1 residential apartment milt. 4.. 110 square fee. t of office/service = 1;000 square feet of retail. 950 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of institutional. 160 square feet of retail = I residential apartment unit. 300 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of office/service. 290 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of additional institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. ¢ Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority of the street frontage. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0. Blackowiak: This goes to City Council November 26~. Generous: November 26th, yes. B!ackowiak: Oka'y. Do we neext'agreemel~t to go beyond 10:307 -. .. Aauenson:. Sure, if you want to. · [ Blackowiak: I mean I don't know. I'm just asking. I'm not sure. Yo~ decide if you want. Should we stay til 11:007 Do you want to set a time limit or til we fall asleep? Okay, let's just move on then. PUBLIC HEARING: REOUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR Two APARTMENT BUILDINGS CONSISTING QF A FOUR-STORY~ 90 INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS AND A THREE STORY~ 73 ASSISTED LIVING' IJNITS~ A TOTAL BUILDING AREA OF 254,100 SQUARE FEET INCLUDING UNDERGROUND PARKING AND APPROXIMATELY 9~000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL AREA ON A 5.11 ACRE PARCEL ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST (~QRNER QF LAKE DRIVE AND MAIN STREET~ VILLAGES ON THE PONDS SENIOR LIVING (~AMPUS~ SENIOR HOUSING PARTNERS. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Blackowiak: Commissioners, any questions of staff? Rich, why don't you start. Slagle: Bob, just a couple. As I look at the plat if you will of this development, and seeing where they are going and seeing that it calls for commercial space, albeit not as much as originally intended. Where would the parking be for these commercial users? Could you help m.e out? Right smack in the middle of it? 60 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Kind: Yeah. Put it in there wherever it makes sense. Aanenson: And did you want an intent s~atement in your motion. Kind: And the intent, Uli did add the intent statement. That was in his motion. Okay. · . · Blackowiak: Uli. do you accept that amendment? Sacchee Yes. I do accept it. Sacchet moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commi~ion recommends approval of. the ammldment to the Planned Unit Developmen~ Standards for Villages on the Ponds amending section (d) as follows: ; d. I~velopmeot Site Coverage and Building Height. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots may ezceed this threshold, but in no case shall the average exceed 70 percent. -.. . 1 More than one (1) priucipal stnicmre may be placed on one (1) platted lot . .. - The maximum building height shall be. Sector I.- four s~ories (residential with street level' ' cerm~rc, ial or office) 50 feet (retail and office buildings without .resl.dence~ above shall be '. , lin'~ to lhree stories) a0 feet, excePt for the lot on the northeast corner of Promefiade Pond and Great Plains Boulevard shall be limited to three stories and two stories resimctively; ' ' Seztor ~i - ~zee stories/,lO feet; Sector III - three stories/40 feet; and Sector D;- four. stories/SO': fee. t. Building he~gl,.t limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers, and other ~rchitectural and' ronf accents. '~ e The maximum building footprint for any One building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g. pedestrian passageways, except for dm church and residential only buildings. 1 Sector I Sech)r II Sector III TOTAL The following table shall govern .the amount of building area for the different uses:.- -.. Cowxnerc'ial; Office/Service Institutional Dwelling -Total Square' .. -. -. . Retail (sq. ft.) (sa_. fl.) (sa_. ft.) Unit~ Fee__t ! 14,500 83,500 0 160 198,000 ' 60,G00* 14,000 0 0 74,0130 '. 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 0 0 0 .162 0 - 174,.600 97,500 100,000 31111 372,000 .- *Includes 47~00 square foot, 106 unit motel. Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors and between uses subject to approval by the Planning Director, with the Intent not to increase the total traffic loads. The following factors shall · be used in calculating the reallocation of building square footages between uses. I R~ident!al apartment unit = 0.32 congregate care. (assisted living or dementia) unit. 59 ! . Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 1 Residential apartment unit = 0.52 elderly (independent) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 360 square feet of office/service. 1 Residential apartment unit = 90 square feet of retail. 1 Residential apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional. 600 square feet of office/service = I residential apartment unit. 4,1 l0 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of retail. 950 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of institutional. 160 square feet of retail = I residential apartment unit. 300 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of office/service. 290 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of additional institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. 6, Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority of the street frontage. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to 0. Blackowiak: This goes to City Council November 26~. Generous: November 26a, yes. Blackowiak: Okay. Do we need agreement to go beyond 10:307 Aanenson: Sure, if you want to. Blackowiak: I mean I don't know. I'm just asking. I'm not sure. You decide if you want. Should we stay til 11:007 Do you want to set a time limit or til we fall asleep? Okay, let's just move on then. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUF~T FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FQR TWQ APARTMENT B~ILDING~ CONSISTING OF A FOUR-$TORY~ 90 INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS AND A THREE STQRY~ 73 ASSISTED LIVING UNIT$~ A TQTAL BUILDING AREA OF 254.100 SOUARE FEET INCLUDING UNDERGROUND PARKING AND APPROXIMATELY 9~000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL AREA ON A 5.11 ACRE PARCEL ZONED PLANNED IjNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) L0(~ATED AT THE SQUTHWEST (~QRNER QF LAKE DRIVE AND MAIN STREET~ VILLAGES ON TI-IF, PQNDS SENIOR LIVING CAMPUS~ SENIOR HQUSING PART m . Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Blackowiak: Commissioners, any questions of staff?. Rich, why don't you start. Slagle: Bob, just a couple. As I look at the plat if you will of this development, and seeing where they are going and seeing that it calls for commercial space, albeit not as much as originally intended. Where would the parking be for these commercial users? Could you help me out? Right smack in the middle of it? 60 SECOND AMI~NDMI~NT TO VILLAGES ON ~ PONDS DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT/PUD AGREEMENT AGREEMENT dated November 26, 2001, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"), and AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company (the '~Developer'~. 1. BACKGROUND. The City of Chanhassen has previously entered into a Development Contract/PUD Agreement for Villages on the Ponds dated September 23, 1996. The Development Contract/PUD Agreement was recorded at 3:30 p.m_ on December 31, 1996 as Carver county Abstract Document No. 205417. The Development Contract/PUD Agreement was mended by Addendum "A" dated September 22, 1997. Addendum A was reeordext on June 11, 1999 at 10:30 a.m. as Carver County Abstract Document-No. 251282. The Development Contract/PUD Agreement was mended by Addendum "B' dated May 11, 1998. Addendum B was recorded on August 13, 1998 at 4:00 p.m_ as Carver County Abstract Document No. 233012. The Development Contract/PUD Agreement was mended by Adden~ "C" dated June 14, 1999. Addendum C was reco~ on August 11, 1999 as Carver County Abstract Document No. 255115. The Development Contract/PUD Agreement was mended by Addendum '~D" dated June 14, 1999. Addendum D was recorded on October 15, 1999 at 11:00 a.m. as Carver County Abstract Document No. 258780. The Development Contract/PUD Agreement was amended by the First Amendment to the Development Contract/PUD Agreement dated Au'gust 20, 2001. The developer is now amending the development design standards for the Development Contract/PUD Agreement to amend building height and incorporate a use conversion methodology. 2. EXTENSION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT. The Development Contract/PUD Agreement, Addendums A, B, C and D and the First Amendment shall remain in full force and effect with the modification as listed in the amendment below. 3. AMENDMENT. In addition to the terms and conditions outlined in the Development Contract/PUD Agreement, the following shall apply: Exhibit C of the development Contract shall be modified as follows: Development Site Coverage and Building Height le The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots may exceed this threshold, but in no case shall the average exceed 70 percent. . e o More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. -. The maximum building height shall be Sector I - four stories (residential with street level commercial or office)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to three stories/40 ft.) except for the lot on the comer of Promenade Pond and Great Plains Boulevard shall be limited to two stories and 30 feet, Sector II - three stories/40 ft., Sector 111 - three stories/40 ft., and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet. Building height limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers, and other architectural and roof accents. The maximum building footprint for any one building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g., pedestrian passageways, except for the church and residential only buildings. 1 The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses'- Commercial/ .Office/Service Institutional Dwelling TOTAL sq. fL Re~l (sq. ft.) (sq. fL) (sq. fL) Units Sector I 114,500 83,500 0 .160 198,000 Sector II 60,000 * 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector III 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 Sector 1V 0 0 0 162 0 TOTAL 174,500 97,500 1001000 322 372,000 * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 unit motel. Building square footages may be reall~ between sectors and between uses subject to approval by the Planning Director. The following factors shall be used in calculating the reallocation of building square footages between uses 1 Residential apartment unit = 3 congregate care (assisted living or dementia) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 2 elderly (independent) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 360 square feet of offieedservice. 1 Residential apartment unit = 90 square feet of retail. 1 Residential apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional.. " 950 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of institutional. 300 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of offieedservice. 290 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of addition institutional building square footage be reallocmeA without an amendment to the PUD. m Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority of the street frontage. CITY OF CHANHASSEN (SEAL) BY: Linda C. Jansen, Mayor Todd Gefllardt, City Manager DEVELOPER: AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, !.112 BY: John H. Ward, Chief Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF CARVER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ., 2001, by Linda C. Jansen and by Todd Gerhardt, respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Chanhassen, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of 200 I, by John H. Ward, the Chief Manager of AUSMAR Development Company, IJ 12. Drafted by:. City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P. O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 Notary Public MORTGAGE HOLDER CONSENT TO VILLAGES ON THE PONDS DEVELOPMENT CONT~CT/P~ AGREEMENT- , which holds a mortgage on all or part of the subject ~, the development of which is governed by the foregoing Villages on the Ponds Development ConUact/PUD Agreement, agrees that the Development Contract/PUD Agreement shall remain in full force and effect even if it forecloses on its mortgage. Dated this~ day of ,2001. By STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF The foregoing immanent was. acknowledged before me this ,2001, by day of~ , its NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFI'ED BY: City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 CITY OF · STAFF REPORT PC DATE: Nov. 6, 2001 · CC DATE: Nov. 26, 2001 REVIEW-DEADLINE: 11/20/01 Extended to 1/29/02 CASE #: 2001-13 SPR By:. RG, LH, MI.,, ST, JS, MS LOCATION: APPLICANT: Request for site plan approval for Presbyterian Homes. The site plan approval is for two apartment buildings consisting of a four-story, 90 unit indet~dent living apamnent and a three-~, 73 unit assisted living aparlxnent, a total building .. area of 255,300 square feet incl .ruling underground pinking and approximately 9,000 square feet of commercial 8pace. Ouflot F, Villages on the Ponds. Bounded by Market Blvd., Lake Dr. and Main St. PHM- Chanhassen 3220 Lake Johanna Blvd. Arden Hills, MN 55112 -7997 (651) 631-6133 Senior Housing Corm. triton, Inc~ 5100 F_Aen Avenue, Suite 106 Edina, MN 55436 (952) 929-8377 . . 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Planned Unit Development, PUD Mixed Use ACREAGE: 5.11 Acres DENSITY: 1.14 F.A.R. SUMMARY OF REQUF~T: The devel~ is requesting approval for a two building Villages on the Ponds Senior Living Campus, Presb~an Homes. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all pmtxn~ owners within 500 feel I.EVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: . The City's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with Zoning Ordinance req~ts. If it meets those standards, the City must then approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. L_ (1) Lake Susan Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY, The development is located within the Villages on the Ponds mixed use development. The site was rough graded as part of the overall development. The proposed senior housing campus will consist of two buildings, a four-story, 90 unit independent living apartment building and a three-story, 73 unit assisted living apartment with street level retail on Iaflce Drive. The commemial component will be multi-tenant lease space available for public use. Approximately, 9000 square feet of building will be available for commercial users. Parking for the project is located underground and in the interior of the lot. Some on street parking is also available. The proposed development is being reviewed in conjunction with an amendment to the PUD design standards which would permit four story buildings in sector I of the Villages on the Ponds. The current standards permit three stories and a loft for residential development in sector I. The development proposes relocating a storm water pond from the west central portion of the site to the southern portion of the site. As part of the relocation, existing drainage and utility easements will need to be vacated, requiting a separate public hearing, and new easements will need to be dedicated, as part of the final platting of the property. Utility service is available within Villages on the Ponds. Access to the site will be via Main Street and Lake Drive, wMch are private streets. The intent of the Villages on the Ponds inixed use deve.10Pment was to create a pedes.. 'tri.an..frien.dly environment. The proposed site does not pro.vide convenient pedes. ~ .acA. es. s from the parking lot- . .area to the street. Staff is recommending as a condition of'approval-that pedestrian connections in the. form of sidewalks be provided from the interior parking lot to both Lake Drive and Main. Street: · . The proposed development is highly articulated and will create a welcome addition to the Villages on the Ponds mixed use development as well as the community. Staff is concerned with the proposed ' vinyl siding colors being too similar in appearance. We recommend that the developer incorporate bolder colors than currently being proposed and that they work with staff to develop a final material color pallet for the buildings prior to issuing the building permit. Additionally, we would recommend that additional window types and accents be used to help create more interesting detail. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan subject to the conditions of the staff mpom BACKGROUND On August 13, 2001, the City Council approved an amendment to the Villages on the Ponds Development Design Standards permitting a drive through window as a conditional use on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2~ Addition. Additionally, drive through windows were prohibited in the rest of the Villages on the Ponds. On September 23, 1996, the City Council approved PUD 95-2, Villages on the Ponds, including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/in--al, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use-Commemial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 3 to PUD, Planned Unit Development (final reading); and final plat dated "Received September 19, 1996" for two lots and ten ouflots and public right-of-way. On August 12, 1996, the City Council granted preliminary approval of PUD ~)2-1 including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use-Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (first reading); Preliminary plat for 13 lots and 3 outlots and public right-of-way; Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and excavate wetlands on site; Vacation of right-of-way and easements; Environmental Assessment Worksheet (F..A~ findings of Negative Declaration of the need for additional environmental investigation; and Indirect Source Permit Review for the Villages on the Ponds project. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-1, Definitions, Outlot Section 20-106 through 20-122, Site Plan Review Villages on the Ponds Development Design Standards GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The proposed development consists of two buildings on a 5.1 acre site. Building 1 is the westerly building on the site, fronting on Market Boulevard, and is proposed as a 90 unit, independent living, senior apartment building. Building 1 is four stories tall with an underground parking level. The building height is 49 feet (note: building height includes ~A the gable height and excludes the garage elevation). Total building square footage is 143,100 square feet. Building 2 is three stories tall with an underground parking level. Building height is 40 feet. The total building area is 112,200 square feet. The building elevations are highly articulated. The building materials consist of up to four types of face brick. Brick is located on the garage level and on every level from first through third floors. The balance of the building elevation is composed of vinyl siding and metal trim and fascia. The roof is made of asphalt shingles. Proposed Material Pallet Shingles (colors based on Certainteed): B - Black (optional) BR - Oakwood (optional) (has brownish tint) GR- Nickel Gray Vinyl Siding (colors based on Heartland): A - Sand (optional) B - Antique White C- Cream (yellowish white) D - Sienna Green (light green) E- Sandalwood (Optional) Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 4 F - Champagne G - White Brick (colors based on Sioux City Brick & Tile): I - Black Hills (Velour) (dark brown) 2 - Coppertone (Velour) (orangish brown) 3 - Desert Blend (sand) 4 - Bronze. stone (optional) (brownish red) Canopies: W - Purple X- Medium Tan Y- Red Z - Green Window, Fascia, Soffit and Trim: White Terrantone (optional aluminum storefront) (dark gray) -. (The applicant has provided colored renderings of 'the building elevation. In copying the original, the copying process has darkened the siding colors from.those actually being proposed.) . .-. Staff is recommending that 'the black shingle be eliminated as an'optional roof color.. While.the nickel gray shingle is preferred, the oakwood is an acceptable alternative. While inadvertent, staff believes that the darker colors that show up on the colored elevation should be incorporated in the' final building materials. For example, the sienna green shows up as almost forest green. The champagne appears almost mauve. The color pallet being proposed for the building is not sufficiently differentiated. Therefore, staff recommends that the applicant work with staff to prepare a final color pallet with greater differentiation in siding colors. Additionally, the number of vinyl siding colors should be limited to four. Staff also recommends that the developer incorporate additional window types such as bay, half- round, round, and Italianate as well as window accents such as plant boxes, shutters, balconies, decks, grates, canopies, awnings, trellises, recesses, embrasures, arches, lunettes. While some different window types and accents are provided, they are very limited in scope and quantities. The following setbacks shall apply: IMarket Blvd. Interior Side Lot Line Villages Proposed 50' 53' 0' N 10', E 10', S 264' Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 5 LANDSCAPING The quantity of plant materials exceeds those presented in the Villages on the Ponds master landscape plan that was approved by the City Council. It is expected that property owners in the Villages development incorporate the species and numbers of plants specified in the overall landscape plan into their specific landscape plans. On this site, landscaping required by the master plan occurs entirely along Highway 101. Several modifications to the plan have been made by Presbyterian Homes. Changes include: 1. Substituting 3 Thunderchild crabapples for 3 Toba hawthorn 2. Omitting 9 Grey dogwood. 3. Specifying 6 Redtwig dogwood instead of 13 4. Substituting 2 Emerald Queen Norway maple for 2 Green Mountain sugar maples 5. Planting 6 Black Hills spruce instead of 7 Staff recommends that changes 2-5 be corrected and a revised landscape plan be submitwxt to the city. Staff also recommends that shredded bark mulch be placed under the line of Japanese ta~e lilacs proposed along the terrace facing Lake Drive. A strip of sod should still be laid along the sidewalk. Staff recommends that vine type plants be planted in areas where the garage elevation of the buildir~g is exposed, including the southern end of building 1, the southern end of building 2, the west end of building 2, and adjacent to the retaining wall.. GRADING~ DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL' Storm Water Management As part of the project, the applicant is proposing to fill an existing storm water pond and construct a storm water pond in a different location. The rate of discharge from the proposed development may not exceed predevelopment runoff rates. Storm water calculations have not been submitted for the proposed development. The applicant must provide storm water calculations to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. The current plan is proposing two senior housing buildings with underground parking. The project will involve grading the site to prepare the building pads, parking lots, and storm ponding area. There is an existing stormwater pond on the site that is proposed to be filled for construction of the western building. The existing pond will be replaced by the construction of a new stormwater pond at the south end of the site. The parking lot and building drainage will be collected by a system of catch basins within the parking lot. There is an existing storm sewer line that enters the site from the north. A portion of this existing line will be removed and the new system within the parking lot will mute the stormwater to the proposed pond in the south end of the site. The new mainline storm sewer through the site will be considered public since it conveys drainage from multiple lots. As such, public drainage and utility easements will be required over the storm sewer line. The minimum easement width shall be 25 feet. Plan and profile views are required for the entire public storm sewer. To guarantee the installation of the public improvements, the applicant must supply the City with a financial security in the form of a letter or credit or cash escrow. Also, a public drainage and utility easement is required over the proposed pond. This easement shall cover the pond up to the 100-year Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 6 high water elevation. The easement over the existing pond will have to be vacated as a condition of site plan approval. The applicant is required to submit pond sizing calculations for a 10 and 100-year, 24-hour storm event. The pond must be built to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). Also, storm sewer sizing calculations for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event are required. Easem~nt~ Existing drainage and utility easements should be vacated and new drainage and utility easements should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas and storm water ponds. Erosion Control Proposed erosion control consists of silt fence around the perimeter grading limits of the site. Staff is recommending that Type 3, heavy-duty silt fence, be used adjacent to all ponds and wetlands. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected from construction-related sediment through the use of filter barriers (see City Detail Plate No. 5302). Two rock constrtm, tion entrances are proposed at each of the two existing entrance drives. These rock entrances are required to be a minimum of 75 feet in length. Type m silt fence should be provided adjacent to all areas to. be preserved as buffer or, if no buffer is to be preserved, at the delineated wetland edge. Erosion control blankets should be installed on all areas with slopes 3:1 or greater. Any disturbed wetland areas should be reseeded with MnDOT seed" mix 25 A, or a similar seed mix that is approved for wetland soil conditions. All upland areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restowxt with seed and disc-mulched, covered with a wood-fiber blanket or sodded within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Other Agencies The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, e.g. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, ~tn~m Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Department of Transportation and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. WETLANDS Existing Wetlands Two ag/urban wetlands are present on-site. One was identified and delineated as a part of the overall Villages on the Ponds development. The other was constructed as wetland mitigation for the wetland impact that occurred as a part of the Villages on the Ponds development. No wetland impact is proposed for either basin. However, grading is proposed within required wetland buffer areas. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a mil~imum average of 10 feet) must be maintained or established around all wetland basins. Wetland buffer areas should be surveyed Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 7 and staked in acco~c~ with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant will install wetland buffer edge signs under the direction of City staff and will pay the City $20 per sign. All structures must. maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. UTILITIES Currently, the site has access to public sanitary sewer and water from Lake Drive and Main Street. The plans propose on connecting to the existing utility stubs and extending one additional sewer service from Main Street. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. Connection to the public utility lines will incur hook-up charges against the lot. The 2001 sanitary sewer hook-up charge is $1,322 per unit. The 2001 water hook-up charge is $1,723 per unit. The 2001 SAC charge is $1,225 per unit. These charges will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. STREETS The plans propose on utilizing the two existing accesses off of Lake Drive and Main Street. No public streets are proposed. The drive aisles are required to be a minimum of 26 feet wide as per_City- Code. LIGHTING/SIGNA GE The applicant is p~posing a sign band above the first story~ The design standards permit signage that shall not extend greater than 20 feet above the ground. The letters and logos shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall be constructed of wood, metal, or translucent facing. Wall business signs shall comply with the city's sign ordinance for the central business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on the "street" front and primary parking lot front of each building. All signs require a separate sign permit. One project identification sign shall be permitted for the development at each end of Lake Drive and at the south end of Main Street. Project identification signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display area nor be greater than five feet in height. Individual lots are not permitted low profile ground business sign. The monument sign located in the northwest comer of the site at the comer of Lake Drive and Market Boulevard must, at a minimum, identify the Villages on the Ponds development. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. A shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with decorative natural colored pole shall be used throughout the development parking lot area for lighting. Decorative, pedestrian scale lighting shall be used in plaza and sidewalk areas and may be used in parking lot areas. The maximum height of light fixtures in the parking lot is 30 feet. All fixtures must be shielded with a total cutoff angle of 90 degrees or less. Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 8 MISCELLANIOUS The site is currently platted as Outlot F, Villages on the Ponds. Ouflots, by definition, are not developable or are reserved for future replatting before development. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the property must be replatted into a block and lot designation. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's' compliance with the following: (1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including, the comprehensive plan, official mad mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Consistency with this division; (3) (4) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minirrd, zing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes 'to be in keeping with the general' appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; .. . Creation of a harmonious r~l.ati~nship o~ buikiing and' open spat4. With~natuml. site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; ' ' '. (5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site feaun~, with special attention to the following: ae An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community, b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; Cl Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and de Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 9 Finding: Subject to the revisions contained in the staff report, the proposed site plan is consistent with all plans and specifications and development design standards for the Villages on the Ponds Planned Unit Development. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 6, 2001 to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the site plan subject to the conditions of the staff report with modifications to condition 4 (Applicant shall work with staff to consider landscaping or); 7 (may); 26 (The applicant shall work with staff to determine the required wetland buffer setback for structures.); 29 (The silt fence shall be removed upon completion of the project.); 35 (Since the siding areas are for accent only, EFIS or stucco would be an acceptable alternative in order to achieve bolder colors.); 36 (Applicant shall work with staff to); and 51 (All silt fences shall be removed upon completion of the project.); with the addition of condition 56 (Ground air conditioning units, utility boxes, and meters shall be screened with landscaping and/or with the same building materials used on the main structures). These conditions are shown in bold in the recommendation. In addition, staff proposes a condition be added requiring the uses located on the first floor of building 2, along Lake Drive, be commercial-type uses, open to the public, and not directly related to the Presbyterian Homes operation. The inclusion of commercial uses is required to both fulfill the requirement of the Villages on the Ponds Planned Unit Development as well as achieve the goal of the tax increment financing district. Finally, condition 29 (Type I11 silt fence should be provided adjacent to all areas to be preserved as buffer or, if no buffer is to be preserved, at the delineated wetland edge) is essentially a duplicate of condition 51. Condition 29 should be deleted to remove redundancy. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning recommends approval of Site Plan g2001-13, plans prepared by Korsunsky Krank Erickson Architects, dated September 14, 200 I, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. Site plan approval is contingent on final platting of Outlot F, Villages on the Ponds, to a block and lot designation. 3. Pedestrian connections shall be provided from the interior parking lot to both Lake Drive and Main Street. Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 10 4. The applicant shall make the following corrections to the landscape plan: a. Add 9 Grey dogwood. b. Plant 13 Redtwig dogwood instead of 6. c. Substituting 2 Crmen Mountain sugar maples for 2 Emerald Queen Norway maple d. Plant 7 Black Hills spruce instead of 6 e. All changes pertain to the landscaping proposed along Highway 101 f. Applicant shall work with staff to consider lands,aping or vine type plants shall be planted in areas where the garage elevation of the building is exposed, including the southern end of building 1 and the southern end of building 2, on the west end of building 2, and adjacent to the retaining wall. 5. Shredded bark mulch shall be placed under the line of Japanese tree lilacs proposed along the terrace facing Lake Drive. A strip of sod shall be laid along the sidewalk. 6. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted to the city for approval. 7. Additional fire hydrants may will be required on 'the inner parking portion of the project. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of fire hydrants. . A 10-foot clearance space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street, lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire. hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefigh.ters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance g9-1. 9. Fire lanes and yellow curbing will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact curbs to be painted and exact location of fire lane signs. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy g6-1991 and Section 904-1 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. 10. A PIV (Post Indicator Valve) is required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. Pursuant to 1999 NFPA 13 Section 5-14.1.1.8. 11. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy g'29- 1992. 12. Comply with water service installation policy for commercial and industrial buildings. ~rsuant to Inspection Division Water Service Installation Policy #34-1993. Copy enclosed. 13. Comply with the Chanhassen fire Department/Fire Prevention division policy concerning maximum allowed size of domestic water on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #36-1994. 14. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy regarding notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy g4-1991. Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 11 15. Submit design specifications regarding vehicle access over the underground link connecting the two buildings. This tunnel design should support the imposed loads of Chanhassen's largest fire apparatus. 16. Submit radius turn.dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval. The inner courtyard area should be designed for fire apparatus access drive-through. 17. The buildings must be protected with automatic fire sprinkler systems. 18. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 19. The proposed building areas are over the allowable area permitted for Type V One-Hour construction, area separation walls will be required to bring the building areas in compliance with the code. Building # 1 is not permitted to be four stories high if constructed of Type V One-Hour construction. The proposed 13R fire sprinkler system cannot be used for area and or number of- story increases. 20. An accessible route must be provided to both buildings, parking facilities, public transportation stops and all common use facilities. 21. All parking areas, including parking garages, must be provided with accessible parking spaces dispersed among the various building entrances. 22. Accessible dwelling units must be provided in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. 23. A PIV (Post Indicator Valve) must be installed on the domestic/tire suppression water service. 24. The building owner and or their representatives should meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan review and permit procedures. In particular, type of construction and allowable area issues need to be addressed as soon as possible. 25. A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 feet) shall be maintained or established around all wetland basins. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs under the direction of City staff and shall pay the City $20 per sign. 26. The applicant shall work with staff to determine the required wetland buffer setback for Al! ~" *"'" d b fie 27. The rate of discharge from the proposed development shall not exceed predevelopment runoff rates. The applicant shall provide storm water calculations to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 12 28. Existing drainage and utility easements should be vacated and new drainage and utility easements should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas and storm water ponds. 30. Erosion control blankets should be installed on all areas with slopes 3:1 or greater. 31. Lighting shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. 32. Signage shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. A separate sign permit is required for each sign. 33. The monument sign located in the northwest comer of the site at the comer of lake Drive and Market Boulevard must, at a minimum, identify the Villages on the Ponds development. 34. The applicant/developer shall install site furniture throughout the project including benches, planter boxes, tables, chairs, etc. 35. The applicant/developer shall work with staff to prepare a final color pallet with greater differentiation in siding colors. The number of vinyl siding colors is limited-to four colors. Since the siding areas are for accent only EFIS or stucco would be an acceptable alternative in order to achieve bolder colors. 36. The applicant/developer shall work with staff to incorporate additional window types such as bay, half-round, round, and Italianate as well as window accents such as plant boxes, shutters,. balconies, decks, grates, canopies, awnings, trellises, recesses, embrasures, arches, lunettes. 37. Submit storm sewer design calculations for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event. 38. Submit stormwater pond design calculations for the 10 and 100-year storm event. 39. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos.: 2202, 3102, 3107, 3108, 3109, 5300, 5301, 5302 and 5313. 40. The minimum drive aisle width is 26 feet. Revise the plans to comply. 41. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regularity agency permits. 42. Retaining walls must be designed by a registered engineer and require an approved fence at the top of the wall. 43. All plan sheets must be signed by a registered engineer. Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 13 44. The two proposed rock construction entrances are required to be a minimum of 75 feet in length. 45. Public drainage and utility easements will be required over the public storm sewer line. The minimum easement width shall be 25 feet. 46. Add a storm sewer.schedule to the plans. 47. On the utility plan revise CB 5, 6, 7, 8 and 14 to CBMH 5, 6, 7, 8 and 14. 48. Plan and profile views are required for all of the public storm sewer. 49. To guarantee the installation of the public improvements, the applicant must supply the City with a financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow. 50. A public drainage and utility easement is required over the proposed pond. This easement shall cover the pond up to the 100-year high water elevation. The easement over the existing pond will have to be vacated as a condition of site plan approval. 51. Type 3, heavy-duty silt fence shall be used adjacent to all ponds and wetlands. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected from construction-related sediment through the use of filter barriers (see City Detail Plate No. 53.02). All silt fences shall be removed upon :completion of the project. 52. Connection to the public utility lines will incur hook-up charges against the lot. The 2001 sanitary sewer hook-up charge is $1,322 per unit. The 2001 water hook-up charge is $1,723 per unit. The 2001 SAC charge is $1,225 per unit. These charges will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. 53. Temporary easements are required for any off-site grading. 54. Add a legend to the plans. 55. On the site plan, show the dimensions of the parking stalls, access aisles and driveway widths. 56. Ground air conditioning units, utility boxes, and meters shall be screened with landscaping and/or with the same building materials used on the main structure. 57. The uses located on the first floor of building 2,' along Lake Drive, shall be commercial type uses, open to the public and not directly related to the Presbyterian Homes operation." ATrACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation 2. Development Review Application 3. Letter from Bill Weckman to Robert Generous dated 10/9/01 4. Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated 10/3/01 5. Memo from Mika Milo to Vemelle Clayton dated 10/29/01 Presbyterian Homes November 6, 2001 Page 14 6. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List 7. Letter from Sharon Anderson (MNDOT) to Katte Aanenson dated 10/30/01 8. Planning Commission Minutes of 11/6/01 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUN/IES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION Application of PHM - Minnesota for Site Plan Review On November 6, 2001, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly schedule meeting to consider the application of Presbyterian Homes for a site plan review for the property located at Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 7th Addition (a.k.a., Outlot F, Villages on the Ponds). The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed site plan was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT The property is currently Zoned Planned Unit Developmeni, PUD. 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Mixed Use. . The legal description of the property is: Outlot F, Villages on the Ponds. After replatting, the property will be known as Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 7th Addition. 4. Section 20-110: Is consistent with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Is consistent with this division; (3) (4) (5) (6) Preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; Creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; Creates a functional and harmonious design for strucm and site features, with special attention to the following: al An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; Cl Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and d, Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. Protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not 'adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Sm The planning report ~2001-13 Site Plan Review dated November 6, 2001, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve, the site plan review subject to the conditions of the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 6th day of November 2001. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY: Its Chairman ATTEST: RuC 31 CITY OF CHANNASSEN 690 COUL~ DRIVE CHANi-I.~ lin 55317 DEVELOPMENT REYIEW APPUCATION · -PHr - C.HANHASSEN ~ 3220 T~lce ,.T..ohan~, Blvd.. Arden H~'] is, MN 55112-7997 'TEI.EPI-tGNE (D~y time) 651-631-6133 ... _ Coml~'ei~msive Plan Amendment Condifim~l Use Permit Interim I,~e Permit Use Perm# -..-- Planned Un~ oevelolxnen~ ._.__. Sign Pennia ADD~5_I_ O0 ~ Ave., SU.~L~ 106 l~Q.tna~ MN 55436 .'rE~t~, 952-929-8377 · V~u:~tbn o~ ROW/E~rments Yadanee · WoUnd AJtsrallon Permit · · ___.~Nodfi~saon S~gn j ~'o ~m:zaw will be requirud tor other .ppucefl~ through th. cfovel~ contFact mull]plo, applloa~l~ ~ procsHHod, tho ~prinm lee shall be cr~ged rot each appllaglon. p,3 LOP. ATiON · · i _ II . _ I I i n i i Il TO'J'AL ~GF.. ...... ~ETI.AN~S PRF_SENT _ YE~ NO Tt~_~ ZONING , P~ LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION __ RE.R~C~ FOR THIS REQUEST ...... · · _ i il n i This appru::atlon rnus~ be completed In full and be typewritten or dearly ~nted and must be accompanied by all Information and plans mqutred by applicable City Ordinate provisions. Before. filing this application, you srtould conte~' with the Planrdng .Depa.'tmam to ,:leterm~m the apoclrm ordlnan~ and procedural requirements appi/cal:~e ~o your application. A dal~rm'~ of completeness, ol' the aPp~ion shall be made within ten busirimis days of appl.icatlon subm~ttaJ. A wfltlen J'to/~ of al:~J~_.az~mi deEcienc'fl'eg shall be mailed to the al:~li'eant vdthin ten bueineaa dayS of application. Th~ is to eetl~ that I am making appl~fion for the' deacrlbecl action by the City and that i am responsible ['or complying with" all Clty requirements with regard to this mcluest. ThL< a~lica.tbn Ihouid be p. toeem~ecl In my name and I am the party whom . 'the City ahould contact regaralng any matter pedainJng to this appl]caUon. I have a~ached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy o/Owner's Duplicate Co,ftc. ate of. TrUe. Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make =bLs application and the fee owner has aJao signed this applicatlort. I w~ keep mysee informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I fu~er understand that additional feea may be charged [or consulting fees, feaaibility studi~es, el:c. with an estimate pr[or to any authatlza~n to proceed wtm ~e study. The documents and Information I have submitted are tree m'~ct correct to the best ca' 'The att7 ttomt~ nattflea the applicant that development review cannot 1oe completed within 60 clays due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is noti~ng the applk~ant that the city requires an automatic 60 clay extension for development review. Development revfew shall be completed wllhin 120 clays un~ess additional review extensions am approved by the appl~t. AOpllMdiOn Recebec~ on _ . Fee Pa~cl Date Dam" "The appllcant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which Will be available on l=rlclay prior to the meeting. ;if,tot cordacted, a co.ay of the report wiU be marled to the applicant's addrmla. CARVER COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Carver County Government Center A~tration Building 600 East Fourth Street Chaska, lVlinnesota 55318-2192 Phone (952) 361-1010 Fax (952) 361-1025 ~wny 'Mnin~ sm'v~yins & ~ October 9, 2001 To: From: Subject: Robert Generous, Senior Planner, City of Chznhassen Bill Weckman, Assistant County Engineer Site Plan - Villages on the Pond Senior Living Campus Senior Housing Partners Planning Case: 2001-13 Site Plan We have reviewed the information transmitted to Carver County by your memorandum da!ed September 25, 2001 regarding the site plan for the Villages on th'e Pond Senior Living Campus. ; - ----... - ..' . - DeveloPment on this property is along existing TH 101 and does' not dire.ctly impact a Carver County roadway. 'Transportation plans for the County indicate that TH 101 may _ Someday be turned back to the County. The site plan indicates the'width of the corridor that will be preserved for a futura reconstructed TH 101. The width shown on the site plan appears to show a width that will accommodate the future roadway needs. No further comments will be sent from the Carver County Public Works Department regarding this development at this time. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed rezoning request. any questions regarding these comments, please call me at 952-361-1010. If you have RECEIVED OCT ~ 2 2001 Crl'Y OF CHANHASSEN Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on 30q6 Post-Consumer Recycled Paper C 0F 690 City Center Drive PO Box I 47 Chan~, Minnesota 55317 P~.e 952.937.1900 General £ax 952.93Z5739 Engineering Depam~m~t Fax 952.93Z9152 Building Depamnent Fax 952.934.2524 Web Site wu~v. cl. chanhau~, m,. us MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: October 3, 2001 SUBJECT: Request for a site plan approval of two apartment buildings consisting of a 4-story 90 independent living units and a B-story 73 assisted-living units for a total building area of254,100 square feet including underground parking and approximotely 9,000 square feet of commercial area on a 5.11 acre parcel zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) located at the southwest comer of Lake Drive and Main Street. Villages on the Ponds Senior Living Campus, Senior Housing Partners Planning Case: 2001 - 13 Site Plan. I have reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire DepartmenffFii'e Prevention DMsion, I have the following fire code or city ordinancedpolicy requirements. The site plan is based on the available information submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. 1. Additional fire hydrants will be required on the inner parking portion of the project. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of fire hydrants. 2~ A 1 O-foot clearance space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. . Fire lanes and yellow curbing will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact curbs to be painted and exact location of fire lane signs. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #6-1991 and Section 904-1 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. 4. A PIV (Post Indicator Valve) is required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. Pursuant to 1999 NFPA 13 Section 5-14. I. 1.8. . Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-i 092. Mr. Robert Generous October 3,2001 Page 2 . . . , 10. Comply with water service installation policy for commercial and industrial buildings. Pursuant to Inspection Division Water Service Installation Policy #34-1993. Copy enclosed. Comply with the Chanhassen fire Department/Fire Prevention division policy concerning maximum allowed size of domestic water on a combination domestic/tim sprinkler supply line. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #36- ! 994. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy regarding notes to be included on ali site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy fi4-1991. Submit design specifications regarding vehicle aeex,ss over the underground link connecting the two buildings. This tunnel design should support the imposed loads of Chanhassen's largest fire apparatus. Submit radius turn dimensions to City Engineer. and Fire Marshal for review and approval. The inner courtyard area should be designed for fire apparatus access drive- through. g:~afety~mlkpl rev200 ! - 13 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIZE OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE ON A COMBINATION DOMESTIC/FIRE SPRINKLER SUPPLY LINE 1. Domestic water line shall not be greater than ¼ pipe size of the combination service water supply line. 2. 1 ½" domestic off 6" line. 3. 2" domestic off 8" line. 4. 2 ½ domestic off 10" line. Option 1' Option Domestic sizes may be increased if it can'be calculated hydraulically that the demand by all domestic -..fixtures will not drop the fire sp ' .rinkler water belowits minimum gallonage required. "'." :' · ".":. · .· ..' . .. - . · :' . -.. '. ... ... . '. . . · Combination domestic and fire line service sh~' have an electric. solenoid valve installed on the domestic side of the service. This: !.": "' valve shall be normally powered open and close on 10ss of electric.' -" ';';.i' :' power Or signal from the system water flow indicator.. ' "' - '. '. ".-. · :- . : .-. : .- Must be approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen ' "': ~ ' Mechanical Inspector. Apprs'~ed- Bm~lding Official -...' . . . . ... . .. . . . . . .. . · . . . .- __ ' "..' '"---'.:.. :.',. :::..' '--., ....-.-.-i' .": :': '.": '..Page i of .1' pp~'o~~.,i~ Marslml --: '-;': "' 'i. i'"':" :.:i[',-: ..;.?." ... · . -: Chanhassen Fire Department.. 'Water Line Si~irtg ': .... ;.." . · . Policy//36-1994 ~-' Date: 06/10/94 Revised: 1-1/24/9~.': .... " ";"-'5'.-'-,.. -' .' · '. .... . .. - . .... - . . gNOF , Center Drim PO lhx147 ~ Jl&~n~t~ 55317 Phone 612.95Z 1900 Geatral Fgr. 612.937.5739 Ftc 612.93Z9152 , Far. 612.934.2524 WATER SERVICE INSTALL&TION POLICY FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUffI'RIA.L BUILDINGS 1) The In~cgtion~ Division shall be responsible for issuance of permits No permit shall be ismuxi until approval of plans have been obtainccl ~om the following: 2) -d) a) Engineering D~partme~t b) Fire Marshal c) Minnesota Department of Health d) Plumbing Inspector . ,.. :.55 .:, ...... .- ..-.: "~:. ~ .- ; - ... :" :.-..--.5. ::..'.~ :. Mechanical.~rs wifl do all installS. 'on ~om and wime, ss th~ hydrostatic and eond .u~. '~i."ty..te, sts. C~.":937-1900 ~. ~.!."~,' ~exlul¢ an :-' · '::- "-. ,:-. '-:: ::~:: .::::.:.-"';:i-- -:':..i~ :._::~:-.::..' :.::-:'::' '::'::-:-:~:: a) All pipes shall b~ inspect~l bego~ being coY..m~xL:':Ph'0n~ 937.'.7!..9-.,0'.~?:::- ~xt ~ 1, ~o set~ul~ ~ons: A 24 hgur notie~ is. rexl~: . . . . -':ii7-":-.:~'-'" minimtml.~ 350 amp ~ for a period of not l~s than 5 min.~.:. :5::':i :.:":.- ¢) Hydro~ati¢l~,,~r~l~ Allpil~slialll~subj~e,~toa '-:.:5.:. · - ' :? .~.-T:::-' hydro~tati~ Fre, ssum of 150 PSI for 2 hours. Allowable drop slmll not exceed 1 PSI. . . :':"~"'"'"' ~i~ ~ ~ot ~ ~ ~ ~~- Nlq,^ ~_4, s-:. ~'::--' !. '-.' - .._%:.. :~.:'" .. · , , . -, ~ ...-:5' , ::" " " """ ":~0 ,. :: ~. :... , . :: :..: :.::-:. m Division . -. - .~ ' . .... . _ ''>- .' :"-".'' ~ :. : -~ "'.i ' · , ". ':.:: -'-' < : :-. :, ,-' :':" W~l~r Sm"vie~ ~on .- < :.. ~ · ' .:L:'::: .-': ;.::. ',) ~-'..;.: " ..... Polioy #34-1' ': ": ':"~ "':':' ":: :':' ' :' '" ·-":-'-".: :'~:': -.:'-':'.'.:: 5:::':..-': "~ : 993." . ~..:.~:~-.~. ....... . ' :-' ': :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~0~/~: ':~:-" '~ .':'::'.::::'::-;~,:.~:5.':L-':.'-.~ri:.5::~.-'..'Ca · --, :- ~'~ .-'J= ! -"~ :--:-:?:.: :.:.:: :..:.-: i:-5:::':..':'5 ~'.e::!: ::::"'::'3.:'.::.:~.-::::~-.~.-'-: 5~ .: .-:..::' .- .. ~i...a.~..~:.t. '.,..--,'.,-',.."-,..":..~:...'~.> 3) Upon approval of the hydro test, the plumbing in~ector sh~ submit a copy of the inspection report to the utility superintendent. The inspection report shall note whether the system is ready for main flush and drawing of water sample for the bug test. 4) Water main flushing shall be wimessed by the utility superintendent. 5) a) Watermain flushing may be scheduled by e0ntacting the utili'ty superintendent at 474-2086. A 24 hour notice is required. b) The utility superintendent shall obtain a water sample for a bacteria test after the main flush and deliver to a testing company. The contractor shall be responsible for testing costs. Allow two weeks for testing results to be returned to the City. c) Upon receiving approval of the water sample test, the utility superintendent shall submit a copy to each plumbing inspector and turn water on to the tested and approved sections of the piping. An additional supervised flush and flow test will be required and wimessed by the Fire Marshal for services supplying fire suppression systems. The flush and flow test shall be performed, in accordance with 1991 edition of NFPA 13, See. 8-2.1. Contact the Chanh~sen Fire Marshal at 937-1900 ext. 132. 6) Watermaln installations shall comply with: 7) a) Minnesota Plumbing Code, Chapter 4715 b) Chanhassen Engineering Department, Watemaain Specifications c) National Fire Protection Association, Chapter 24 Only authorized city employees are pemfitted to operate city water control valves. For water mm on or off contact the utility superintendent by phone 474-2086. A 24 hour notice is required. App~ov~ Marshal Inspections Division Water Service Installation Policy #34-1993 Date: 04/15/93 Revised: 04/17/96 Page 2 of 2 .. CITYOF L'HAI IHASSEN ~, Minnesota 55317 Phone 612.937.1900 ~ Fa~ 612.93Z5739 .F_.n~ineering Fax 612.937.9152 PubBt ..~ Fax 612.934.2524 'Web u~,w. dd~auhauen, mn. us CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE NO PARKING FIRE LANE (NOT TO SCALE) '7" GRADE 1..Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18". 2. Red on white is preferred. 3. 3M or equal engineer's grade reflective sheeting on aluminum is preferred. 4. Wording shall be: NO PARKING FIRE LANE . Signs shall be posted at each end of the fire . lane and at least at 75 foot intervals along the- fire lane. 6. · All signs shall be double Sided facing the--,' direction of tragel. -- · . 7. ' Post shall be set backa minimum of 12" but not more than 36" from the curb. ' 8. A fire lane shall be required in front of fire dept. connections extending 5 feet on each side and along all areas designated by the Fire Chief. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING, WITH A SITE PLAN, FOR APPROVAL By THE FIRE CHIEF. IT IS THE INTEN'HON OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONTINUITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY 'PROVIDING THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF FIRE LANES. Al~roved- Building Official Ap~ov~-~~l arshal Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #06-1991 Date: 01115/91 Revised: 04/12/00 Page 1 of 1 . = ~en, Minnaota 55317 ,P~nt 612 93Z 1900 Gt~eral Fax 61293Z5739 End, ring Fax 612.93Z9152 .Public Sa~{y tax 612.934.2524 C. HANI-IAS~qEN FIRE DEPART1VI'F~NT POT,TC~V PRE~sF~q ~ENTI~CA~ON N~~ or M~s~ s~l be pl~ on ~1 new ~d e~s~g b~l~ ~ such a position ~ to be pl~y ~sible ~d le~ble ~m ~e s~t or mM ~n~g ~e pmpe~. S~d n~be~ ~1 ~n~t ~ ~e~ hackled. Si~ ~d lo~fion of n~b~ ~1 ~ appmv~ by one of ~e follo~ng - Fi~ M~, F~ ~pee~r, B~l~g OfficiO, B~lding ~pecmr. Req~ments ~ for new ~~efion ~d exis~g b~ldings whe~ no ~~s n~be~ ~ po~ted. Other Re~ul~men~ - Gene~l l. Numbe~ shall be ~ contesting color ~m ~he bac~round. 2. Numbe~ shall not be In ~rlpL ... 3. If a structu~ Is not x4slble from the street, additional numbe~ are ~qulred at the driv~'ay enwanc~ Si~ and location must be approX.. 4. Numben on mall box at drive'ay entrance may be a minimum of 4". However, requi~ment 03 must still ~ me~ 5. Admlnlst~flve autho~' may ~qulre additional numbe~ If deemed nec~. ~ldenflnl ~ulremfp~ (2 nr I~ dwellln~ .nl~ 1. Minimum height shall be 5 In~ 2. Building perml~ will not ~ flnaled unlm num~ are p~t~ and appro~ by the Building Depa~ment. ~nmme~lnl Re?d~me~ I. Minimum height ,haU be 12". 2. Multi-Tenant Buildln~ a. Building addrm ~nge, minimum height of 12 Inehu. b. Add~ human requl~ on all tenant doo~ Minimum height of 6 inch~ 3. ~add~ numbe~ a~ l~a~ on n dl~ ent~ sign, additional numbe~ will ~ ~ui~d on the bulldln~ ~ln ent~n~ 4. Slgnnge on overhea~ dell~ doo~ will also be requl~. App~b%ed- Buildinl~ Official- ' App~ Marshal Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #29-1992 Date: 06/15/92 Revised: 4/12/00. Page 1 of 1 CITYOF ~.r~ ~119375739 ' F~x g12J$7.9152 , ,r~ 612.9M2524 e e e e e CHANHAS, SEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLIC-~ C-~~ASSEN~ DEPARTMENT NOTF~ TO BE IN(~UDED ON ALL $1TE PI.~ Fire Mamhal must witness the flushing of underground sprinkler sec'vice line, per NFPA 13-8-2.1. A final impection by .the Fire Marshal before a C, erfificate of Occupancy is issued. Fir~. Department access roads shall be provided on site during all phases of construction- Thc co--on of these temporary roads will conform with the Chanhassen Fire Department reqmmments for temporary ~c, ess roads at construction sites. 'Details are available. : . :' - :.. - ...:..~. · ' ;: .... ' "! "::'" "'-i~;z': :~ . o~t~ f~ h~d~ts-,~k~U b~ p~ov~a~a ~ ~n .o.~~ ~onaiaon -:,.' ' .:' -".. !.:7- :':.'?.:.i '"'.: ::: : i :';.' '.ii/.':. '.:.:. ':(': !'::- The use of iiqucfied 'petroleum gas shall be in' ~nfo~ce with NFPA Standard 58 and thc Minnesota Uniform Fire CO.dc: A list of- these requir~cnts is available. (S~ policy #33-1993) ' :-".--:-?..','~ · . . .... -... .-..~.~- -.?. -..:. c.- · . ,'.. . f :' . ' ,... :' .... , . ., .2'...:-.~ ;'::..-~:: . ,... J-~. .. . ..,...~ -. ._-.'~ - .. - · ' . .-. . -..-:*..': -.-.-,.-... ~., .- ~..-' All fire deteCtion'and rite suppression SyStem.~ .shall. be momtored., by an" approved UL central station with a UL 72 Certific~.". issued, on'-. these systems before ~'occupancY ~ issued.''':~:I.'-.:'~I/.::~: ":":": :':':: '~ i ::'.'~. !' ..'~ / ~" ::~:~'.'.': :""'"-' '.' :-"-.'. ':. :' :i:..'/"":~/:':'-::' .'"-:'~;i.,?::'. An ~ ~" x'i4"'~ B,2t s~l i~ ptovi'd~it0 ~ F~ D~enC ~ As-Built shall be reproducible and acceptable to the Fire Marshal.'/" (Scepolicy~07-1991),; ' '.-';//"':-..' '/.'. -..'.;.." "'. ':' '''~:~ · ...........:- :.....-..: ...'..::, ~.-:., :.~..--f..'..:.-:// '...~::.:.::.-.: ~.. :'.:./!;:/?:.;':.'.;..~..~:..-:':.':'?-(:.:.... . ..' 'i-'i-..-i.,'".i:".-'.i..' ~..?:;:2 :'.?./"/ :,. ' .. Chanhasse, nF~D~ .artment -.-' '~-':::' ' ' "-'-~'-~'-"-"-- .:: ..... '-'-'::' ...... ~-.' '.[/-"-'Fire Prevcnti~-~:..-'-::-" .... '.. :':..:'~.:.:---.;':-!.::.-~--,-:..-:. -"~ .- --..Date: 11/22/91 -' .. '... ": .; (.."-.;....:/.!:i...:', ;:')':~J "'/::'i. .,':-.:.i: --:. ":--.-'":.Revised:' 05105198 '..--,.-.: .-.-:- :- . :~... ... ":i"!/.:--. :.:'-~-'?:::_'::'-.'."!'i';i- :' ..'2':" Pagc, l'of2: ".~ii~..-:.'.' :"' ".'-'~i:://':/:i~:.';'?:;'.':?i."!'""~.':'.'."i/.:f ?`:' :/?.' '/'"": ':'''''! :'''''~' ' . ' "':/':.'i-:.-'-,~- ":/".: '"-~"-' :. ':.'.: . ' .:i ~"..!:f ,:?~: '.:',- ." .' ::.. '. :': ~.:.' i ': i..': ...... . ....... ' ~ '-':";~: i~:~'::'-?-'~'~":.!-:i i':..:!':;-."i~ ' · . .' ..:;:'"? .':.'/'."":i.'..'. "... ,~ : .'.... .... -.", ~: /~..~, ':/~: j ::::, :' ,.: .... :: .....,.'..?.-...: ~,?:.,~:.:~' - . ) .'j .: ;. . ,- a~ :*- 8~ e 10. 11. An approved lock bQX shall be provided on the 'building for fire department use. The lock box should be located by the Fire Department connection or as loca .ted by the Fire Marshal. High-piled cornbustil~le stora_~e shall compl_v with the req~ts . o._f Article #81 of the Minnesot~ Uniform Fire. Code. High-piled combustible storage is combustible materials on closely packed piles more than 15' in height or combustible materials on pallets or in racks more than 12' in height. For certain .special-hazard commodities such as rubber tires, plastics, some flammable liquids, i.dle pallets, etc. the critical pile height may be as low as 6 feet. Fire lane si~mag_e shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshal. (See policy #06-1991). Maximum allowed size of domestic .water service on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line policy must be followed. (See policy #36-1994). Appro'~ed- Public Safety Director Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: .06/05/98 Page 2 of 2 0¢~., CON~.JL~G MEMORANDUM DATE: I0/29/01 RE: 1.) 2.) 3.) MateFial I~ubmitled MARC Evnhmtion based on tho City SubmJ~al Set dated 10/19/01 jn_~.=b~_b~ ~ eolor~ elovst~oM And colorAmteflal board fur extu-io~. The above ~ am sufTw:~nt and m~mbJe to ARC for pu~Mses of the evaluation. Approved P.U.D. for this nrn =nvishmed re~! uses atthe first ~ along upper po~on of the Main Strut and Lake Drive, with two add~tioMI levels of apm'unet~ w~h kd~ on top ofthe rmm't, and n SnrsS~ undenumh of each buildins. !~0p(sed uses s~anfially comply with P.U.D.'~ that no retail Is fo senior Jmmbg snd ns/sad ilvin~ unlls ~ asmcb~ed functiam. in view ofpuding difficulties alo~ Main Sitter. and requiremmls of the assisted livin~ fmlcsJam mi the tim floor, A.R.C. finds ~is deviation oFP.U.D, intent acceptnbk. HowL, mr. this is the reason mom thc propo~d St~e Pla. neinn The building disposition on ~he ~e 8~erally conlbrms to P.U.D. with buJld~s lined-up alo~ "buildlus ~ on the su'eets, and along East side of Hwy 101, It is,~r ~ ~1~ I~ldi~ ~ ~~ Plan" could not be plawned on thnt Iocntion as envisioned in P.U.D. due m e~unenln] ~ (hb~tnt and NURP ~ nnd irndins difficultlet Yet. by shlftin~ the buiMb~m the Noflh, along ~ 101, the. "ceremonial" axial view corridor (open. kndsca~ sren with a pond in front ~it) towards the ~ Hubert Church flx~ Hwy 101, has been lost. Fomma~iy. anewopenlandsc~ amllxmd m'ee~us bccn ~ Somhwest of the Chu~ thus pmvidin~ a Urong prum~ and visual exposur~ of the Chur~ ~vsrds the Hwy. We findthstas on ncceptablo trade off. Asa~~,~eoffic~ building #17, Southoft~ Chinch Plnza has also gained in exposure and prom~ mwnrds the Hwy as well. 250 Prnirie Cent' Drivc Suite 20% Eden Prab~ heq 35344 PIMa¢: ~'J2- 944-6Rd2 Fnx: 9~J- 944.4)106 E*mnil: nul~mm FROH :Nt:IG FI:IX HO. :EI58-565-~2~5 Oct,. 29 21~1 05:56P~ P3 4.) Architecture · ! , A~ fog the overall building rm~,, bulk and densip/, ~hc ~ d~l~t ~ P.U,D. i~nt, Ho~, ~il~n~ hc~t ~4 stofi~ n~m ~ ~ a~~ ~ ~ ~~nt to P.U.D. chmc~ of ~e Vi~ge. Tile tower al)ore the pedesbi,n p~ssa~e at thc Vilhl~¢ Squ~ ~opria~ely highlighl~ the significance ofttu: public spoce, &e "head" ofth¢ VI'UT. TI~ re~il sm~f.m~ ~d d~e sign.b~x] facing Lakc Drive mc-ct our expirations for the ehL, gcter of the Village re~il f-uactio~. While the f~ade forum sre varied and reflect neo-~ldttiotml chracler of thc Village archite~tL~re ruther 'well, we would suSlze to the design ~'un to try m give some "modem twisf' iD detailing, f, hap, os and rraterlAl.. thus lending more of contcmpomry, v~'bmnt contm~ and ~ on the f~cedes (plmtse refer to V.O.P. Dmitri Character Guidelines). Conclusion and Recomnundttion -- The proposed development is a higlfly desirable irut welcome new addition M the V.O.P. Due m iCA magnitude, architecture and u~s proposed, it will give mn hnpetus to ~.celerMed completion of {he Village to become a vibrant, ped~tri~n ozicnted commurti~ of ~ssen. Subject to 6.~hcr code/rcsularion ~mpllance review~ by the City, we highly tecormnend appmvil to tl~ development 010411 VOP-AIRC 3914 Murphy Canyon Rd. Ste. AI44 Ssn Dieso, CA92123 Phome: 858-$65-8485 Fnx: 858..'i65-$203 F.-mMI: rrms~n~m'ch.com EXHmlT C Adopted September 23, 1996 Amended August 13, 2001 VILLAGES ON THE PONDS CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a mixed use PUD consisting of commercial, institutional, office, and residential uses. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below. .. b. Permitted Uses . . . . The permitted uses in this zone should be limited.to uses as defin~cl bel0w'or similaruses to those as listed in the Standard Industrial Classification. If there is a question..as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director shall-make-that interpretation. No single. retail user shall exceed 20,000 square feet on a single level of a building. A maximum of thirty- three (33) percent of the square footage of the retail users within the development may be of a "big box" category. The intent of this requirement is to provide a variety of users, including small retail shops, service providers, coffee shops, cabarets, etc., for residents of the Villages as well as the community as a whole, rather than typical suburban type large, individual users dominating the development and detracting from the "village" character. Retail users should be those that support and compliment the residential development located within the development, providing goods and services which enhance residents of the village and the community. Office. Professional and business office, non-retail activity except for showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on-site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. bank/credit union finance, insurance and real estate health services - except nursing homes and hospitals engineering, accounting, research management and related services legal services Personal Services. Establishments primarily engaged in providing services involving the care of a person or his or her personal goods or apparel. dry cleaning beauty or barbershop shoe repair photographic studio tax return preparation laundromat health club optical goods computer services day care center copying mail stores Institutional. Establishments that are public/semi-public in nature. church library education services day care art gallery dance studio cultural facility Commercial/Retail. Establishments engaged in commercial operations including retail sales and services and hospitality industries. Apparel and Accessory Stores shoe stores electronic and music store and musical instruments restaurant- no drive through, except on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2na Addition through a conditional use permit and compliance with the following standards - the drive through shall provide sufficient stacking to assure that traffic is not backed into the parking lot drive aisles; loud speakers used for ordering shall be shielded so that noise is not heard off-site, and the drive through shall be screened from off-site views. (amended 8/13/01) restaurant - fast food only if integrated into a building no freestanding fast food and no drive through drug store/pharmacy book/stationary jewelry store hobby/toy game gift novelty and souvenir sewing, needlework and piece good florist camera and photographic supply art and art supplies, gallery sporting goods video rental' food stores including bakery and confectionery hardware store computer store hotel/motel entertainment liquor store pets and pet supplies home furnishings Residential. Residential units shall be provided as u~ level units above the commercial/office uses within the village core and as stand alone units. A minimum of 50 percent of the residential units shall be rental units. Of the rental units, the city'has adopted' a goal of 35 percent of the units meeting the Metropolitan. Council's affordable criteria. For the ownership housing, the city has adopted the goal of 50 percent of the units meeting th~ Metropolitan Council's affordable criteria. Prohibited Uses: auto related including auto sales, auto repair, gas stations c. Setbacks In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffeting in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply: Great Plains Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback C, 0' 0' Market Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback C, 50' 20' Hwy. 5: Buffer yard & Setback B, 50' 20' Interior Side Lot Line: Buffer yard & setback NA, 0' 0' East Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to D, 50' 50' residential): Buffer yard & setback B, 50 20 West Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to industrial): Buffer yard & setback Buildin~ Parkin~ Buffer yards are as specified in the City of Chanhassen Landscaping and Tree Removal Ordinance, Article XXV. No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height le The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots may exceed this threshold, but in no case shall the average exceed 70 percent.. 2. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. e The maximum building height shall be Sector I - three stories (with residential loft)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to two stories/30 feet),-Sector II- three stories/40 ft., Sector 111, three 'stories/40 ft., exclusive of steeples and bell towers, and Sector IV - four storierdS0 feet 4~ The maximum, building footprint for any one building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g., pedestrian passageways, except for the church and residential only buildings. 5. The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: Commercial/ Office/Service Institutional Dwelling TOTAL sq. ft. Retai~ ~ (sa_. ft.) Units Sector I 114,500 70,500 @ 0 154 185,000 Sector II 60,000 * 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector III 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 Sector IV 0 32,000 @ 0 112 @ 32,000 TOTAL 174,500 116,500 100,000 266 391,000 t~ As an alternative, the office/service could be increase by 13,000 square feet in Sector I if the 32,000 square foot office building is deleted in Sector IV and replaced with 56 additional dwelling units. * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 unit motel. .. Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors subject to approval by the Planning Director. Building square footages may be rea~ocated between uses subject to approval of the Planning Director. However, the reallocation of building square footages between uses shall only be permitted to a less intensive use, i.e. from commercial to office or institutional, or from office to institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of addition institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. e. Building Materials and Design The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. The intent is to create a pedestrian friendly, "traditional" village character consistent with the European heritage of the upper midwest and the atmosphere within this development, yet with the amenities and technological tools of modem times. The village elevations shown on the PUD drawings are to be used only as a general guideline and the reflection of the overall village image including the north- midwestem architectural vocabulary, village like human scale and flavor, and variety in design and facade treatment. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Major exterior surfaces of all walls shall be face brick, stone, glass, stucco, architecturally treated concrete, cast in place panels, decorative block, cedar siding, vinyl siding in residential with support m~_,~rials, or approved equivalent as determined by the city:_ Color shall be introduc~l, through colored block or panels and not painted block or brick. Bright, long, continuous bands are prohibited. Bright or brilliant colors and sharply contrasting colors may be used only for accent purposes and shall not exceed 10 percent of a wall area. m Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. Exposed cement ("cinder") blocks shall be prohibited. Metal siding, gray concrete, curtain walls and similar materials will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials, or as trim or as HVAC screen, and may not exceed more than 25 percent of a wall area. 5. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary smmmm. e All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials. Ail mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building. 1 The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wail unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. m Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal or accessory stmctm'es. There shall not'be underdeveloped backsides of buildings. All elevations shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualifies. 10. The materials and colors used for each building shall be selected in context with the adjacent building and provide for a harmonious integration with them. Extreme variations between buildings on the same street in terms of overall appearance, bulk and height, setbacks and colors shall be prohibited. 11. Slope roof elements shall be incorporated in all structures: Sector I - minimum 70 percent of roof area shall be sloped, Sector 11 - minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, Sector 1II - minimum of 30 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, and Sector IV - minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped. An exception to this requirement are roof areas designed for human use such as decks, garden areas, patios, etc., which will not be counted towards flat roof area. 12. The following, design elements should be incorporated into individual structures: Building Accents Towers, silos, arches, columns, bosses, tiling, cloisters, colonnades, buttresses, loggias, marquees, minarets, portals, reveals, quoins, clerestories, pilasters. Roof TX p__~ Barrow, dome, gable, hip, flat. Roof Accents Cupolas, cornices, belfries, turrets, pinnacles, look-outs, gargoyles, parapets, lanterns. Accent elements such as towers, turrets, spires, etc., shall be excluded from the sector building height limitation. Window T. y p_~ Bay, single paned, multi-pane, d, angular, square, rectangular, half-round, round, italianate. Window Accents 13. £ Site le . . e . le Plant boxes, shutters, balconies, decks, grates, canopies, awnings, recesses, embrasures, arches, lunettes. Street level windows shall be provided for a minimum of 50 percent of the ground level wall area. Landscaping and Screening All buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I shall be installed when the grading of the phase is completed. This may well result in landscaping being required ahead of individual site plan approvals, but we believe the buffer yard and boulevard plantings, in particular, need to be established immediately. In addition, to adhere to the higher quality of development as spelled out in the PUD zone, all loading areas shall be screened. Each lot for development shall submit a separate landscaping plan as a part of the site plan review process. All open spaces and non-parking lot surfaces, except for plaza areas, shall be landscaped, mckscaped, or covered with plantings and/or lawn material. Tree wells shall be included in pedestrian areas and plazas. -. . . Storage of material outdoors is p.rohibiteyl_. _ -- -. .... . . - . - . · Undulating'or angular berms'3' to 5' in height; south of Highway 5 and along Markex · Boulevard shall be sodded or seeded at the conclusion ofgrading and utility .construction. The required buffer landscaping may be installed where it is deemed, necessary to screen any proposed development. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. Native species shall be incorporated into site landscaping, whenever possible. Signage One project identification sign shall be pergfi. 'tted for the development at each end of Lake Drive and at the south end of Main Street. Project identification sign(s) may also be located at the entrances to the development(s) in Sector IV. Project identification si~s shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display area nor be greater than five feet in height. One project identification sign, with a maximum height of 20 feet, which may be increased in height subject to city approval based on the design and scale of the sign, designed as a gateway to the project shall be located at the north end of Main Street. Individual lots are not permitted low profile ground business sign. Within Sector IlL one sign for the church and one sign for the school may-be placed on streetscape walls. The top of the signs shall not extend more than eight feet above the ground and the total sign area for the signs shall not exceed 64 square feet. Pylon signs are prohibited. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. 2. All signs require a separate sign permit. e Wall business signs shall comply with the city's sign ordinance for the central business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on the "street" front and primary parking lot front of each building. Projecting signs are permitted along Main Street and Lake Drive and along pedestrian passageways subject to the conditions below. Signage Plan and Restrictions Wall Si~_~ 1. 1 . Sm The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the tops of which shall not extend greater than 20 feet above the ground. In Sector I1, sign height may be increase based on the criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to.the building architecture and design. The letters and logos'shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height.- All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall be constructed of wood, metal, or translucent facing. If illuminated, individual dimensional letters and logos comprising each sign may be any of the following: a. Exposed neon/fiber optic, b. Open channel with exposed neon, c. Channel Letters with acrylic facing, d. Reverse channel letters (halo lighted), or e. Externally illuminated by separate lighting source. Tenant signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do not occupy more than 15% of the sign area unless the logo is the sign. Within Sector 11, architecturally, building-integrated panel tenant/logo sign may be permitted based on criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building design and architecture. Back lit awnings are prohibited. Proiecting Signs _ _ _ 1. The letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign area. . All wooden signs shall be sandblasted and letters shall be an integral part of the building's architecture. e Signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered and such ~ messages such as date of establishment of business. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identif3dng devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band or within the projecting sign and do not occupy more than fifteen (15) percent of the sign display area. e Projecting signs shall be stationary, may not be serf-illuminated but may be lighted by surface mounted fixtures located on the sign or the adjacent facade. 1 Projecting signs shall be limited to one per tenant on street frontage and pedestrian passageway and my not exceed six square feet. Letters shall have a maximum height of 12 inches. 1 Projecting signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk and shall not project more than six feet from the building facade. 1 Plastic, plexi.-glass, clear plex, or similar material projecting signs are prohibited unless used in conjunction with other decorative materials. Projecting signs may be painted, prefinished, or utilize exposed metal. Any exposed metal shall be anodized aluminum, stainless steel, titanium, bronze, or other similar non- corrosive or ono-oxidizing materials. Window Signs Window signs shall not cover more than 25 percent of the window area in which they are located. 2. Window signs shall not use bright, garish, or neon paint, tape, chalk, or paper. Menu Signs Xm Shall be located at eye level adjacent to tenant entries and shall not exceed 4 feet in height. . Shall be used only to convey daily specials, menus and offerings and shall be wood framed chalkboard and/or electronic board with temporary handwritten lettering. No paper construction or messages will be permitted. 3. Menu signs shall be limited to one per tenant and may not exceed 8 square feet. Festive Flags/Banners le Flags and banners shall be permitted on approved standards attached to the building facade and on standards attached to pedestrian area lighting. 2. Plastic flags and banners are prohibited. 3. Flags and banners shall be constructed of fabric. 1 Banners shall not contain advertising for individual users, businesses, services, or products. 5. Flags and banners shall project from buildings a maximum of two feet. e 7~ Flags and banners shall have a maximum area of 10 square feet. Flags and banners which are tom or excessively worn shall be removed at the request of the city. Building Directory_ 1. In multi-tenant buildings, one building directory sign may be permitted. The directory sign shall not exceed eight square feet. Pole Directory Sign le Pole directory signs consisting of single poles with individual nameplate type directional arrows may be located within the development. e Pole directory sign shall not exceed 15 feet in height. Directory signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk. 4~ o A maximum of eight directory signs may be provided per pole. The maximum size of an individual sign shall be 18 inches long by four inches wide. Poles shall be a minimum of 10 feet behind the curb. h. Lighting lO le 1 Se 1 Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. The plans do not provide for street lighting. As with previous developments, the City has required the developer to install street lights throughout the street system. A shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with decorative natural colored pole shall be used throughout the development parking lot area for lighting. Decorative, pedestrian scale lighting shall be used in plaza and sidewalk areas and may be used in parking lot areas. Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street fight-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the project perimeter property line. This does not apply to street lighting. Light poles shall be limited to a height of 20 feet. Lighting for parking areas shall minimize the use of lights on pole stan~ in the parking area. Rather, emphasis should be placed on building lights and poles located in close proximity to buildings. i. Parking Il 1 o Parking shall be provided based on the shared use of surface parking areas whenever possible. Cross access easements and the joint use of parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. A minimum of 75 percent of a building' s parking shall be located to the "rear" of the structure and in underground garages. The development shall be treated as a integrated shopping center and provide a minimum of one space per 200 square feet of commercial/retail are,~ The officedpemonal service component shall be treated as an integrated office building and provide 4.5 space per 1,000 square feet for the first 49,999 square feet, four per thousand square feet for the second 50,000 square feet, and 3.5 per thousand square feet thereafter. Residential uses shall provide 1.5 spaces per unit as underground parking with visitor spaces provided as part of the commercial/office uses. Within 'sector IV, visitor parking shall be provided at a rate of 0.5 stalls per unit. Hotel/motels shall comply with city ordinance. Churches/schools shall comply with city ordinance, however, a mirfimum of 50 percent of the parking shall be shared. 11 I io NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2001 AT 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 690 CITY CENTER DRIVE PROPOSAi~ Site Plan Review for Senior Living Campus APPLICANT: Senior Housing Partners LOCATION' .Villages on the Ponds NOTICE: You are Invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal In your area. The appllcent, Senior Housing 'Partners, is requesting site plan approval for two apartment buildings consisting of a four-story, 90 Independent living units and a three-story, 73 assisted living units, a total building area of 255,300 sq. ft. Including underground perldng and approximately 9,000 sq. ft. of commercial area on a 5.11 acre parcel zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) :located at the southwest comer of Lake Drive and Main Street, Villages on the Ponds Senior Uving Campus. What Happens at the Meatlng: The purpose of this public heating Is to Inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain Input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead .the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. " 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the 'pmjecL Questions and Comments: If you want tO see the'plans before fl~e meeting, please stop by.city Hall du.ri~, g · office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob 937-1900 ex[ 141.. If you choose to submit written comments, it Is.helpful to have one copy to the department In advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission~ - Notice of this public hearing has been published In the Chanhassen Villager on October 25, 2001. ROSEMOUNT 1NC ATTN: CONTROLLER 12001 TECHNOLOGY DR F. DEN PRAIRIB MN 55344 CHURCH OF ST HUBERT 8201 MAIN ST CHANHASSEN MN 55317 LAK~ SUSAN APARTMENT HOMES LI 11455 VIKING DR EDEN PRAIRIE .MN 55344 WARM WATER POOLS LLC 6121 BAKER RI~104 ~ONKA MN 55345 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY PO BOX 235 CHANI-IASSF, N MN 55317 VIGIL COMPANIES LLC 11191 BURR RIDGE LN EDEN PKAmIE MN 55347 ^us m D .Vm,O? m v C/O LOTUS~~~~ O~ ~ SEN MN 55317 A'USMAR DEVELOPMENT CO I.LC C/O LOTUS REALTY C/O LOTUS REALTY .: PO BOX' 235 CHANHASSEN-''''~- MN 55317 . WHEATSTONE RESTA~ GROUP 250 EAST LAKE DR CHANHASS~ MN 55317 C~ MN 55317 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY PO BOX 235 CHANHASSEN ,. ..... -~MN 55317 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY PO o.r 35' CHANHAS~ 55317 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY PO BOX-235 .r CHANHASSEN .- MN 55317 .- .. .,.o' AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT. CO LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY C~'" MN 55317 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT.CO LLC C/O LOTUS KE~ ....----PO Box 235 C~SEN MN 55317 NORTHCOTT COMPANY 250 EAST LAKE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 October 30, 2001 City of .Chl!nhassen Attn: Kate Aanen~n 690 City Center Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Villages on the Ponds Minnesota Department of Transportation Review #S01-065 SE Quad of TH101 & Lake Dr C.S. 1009 The Minnesota Department of Transportation has reviewed the Villages on the Ponds site plan. Please address the following issues prior to further development: . Right turn lanes will be required, for both northbound TH101 access points at Lake. Dr. and Main St.. A southbound left turn lane will also need to be constmct~ at Main SL. As these turn lanes are necessitated by the proposed development, the financial responsibility will be with the City, developer, or both. If you have any questions regarding these truffle issues please contact - Lars Impola in our Traffic section at (651) 634-2379. A Mn/DOT drainage permit may be required. The proposed development will need to maintain existing drainage rates (i.e., the rate at which storm water is discharged from the site must not increase). The City or project developer will need to submit before~a/t~ hydraulic computations for both l0 and 100 year rainfall events verifying that all existing drainage pa~ and systems affecting Mn/DOT right of way will be perpetuated. Please direct questions concerning these issues to Benjamin Timerson (651-634-2399) of Mn/DOT's Water Resources section. · An access permit will also be required. Please direct questions regarding all permit applications to Keith Van Wagner in our Permits section at 651-582-1443. The apparent existing alignment/topography of Marlegt Blvd., (TH 101), shown on sheet C-O01 doesn't coincide with the 'Mn/DOT right of way shown. There is a second ali~menf for Mark~ on the same sheet, which matches the right of way but not the existing topography. This sheet should have some note or label of explanation reganting the two ali~onments and the status of the right of way shown. If you have any questions regarding these design concerns please contact Ken Ljung in our Design section at (65 l) 634.2113. An equal opportunity employer City of Chanhassen October 30, 2001 Page 2 Mn/DOT's policy is. to assist local governments in promoting compatibility between land use and highways. Residential uses located adjacent to highways often result in complaints about traffic noise. Traffic noise from this highway could exceed noise standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Minnesota Rule 7030.0030 states that municipalities are responsible for taking all reasonable measures to prevent land use activities listed in the MPCA's Noise Area Classification (NAC) where the establishment of the land use would result in violations of established noise standards. Mn/DOT policy regarding development adjacent to existing highways prohibits the expenditure of highway funds for noise mitigation measures in such areas. The project proposer should assess the noise situation and take the action deemed necessary to minimize the impact of any highway noise. If you have any questions regarding Mn/DOT's noise policy please contact Jim Hansen in our Transportation Planning section at (651) 582-1392. If you have any additional questions regarding this review please call me at (651) 582-1468. Sincerely, Sharon Anderson Transportation Planner Roger Gustafson / Carver County Engineer Sunde Engineering, Inc. KKE Architects Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 1 Residential apartment unit = 0.52 elderly (independent) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 360 square feet of office/service. 1 Residential apartment unit = 90 square feet of retail. 1 Residential apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional. 600 square feet of office/service = 1 residential apartment unit. 4,110 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of retail. 950 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of institutional. 160 square feet of retail = 1 residential apartment unit. 300 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of office/service. 290 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of additional institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial]office on the majority of the street frontage. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 5 to O. Blackowiak: This goes to City Council November 26~. Generous: November 26m, yes. Blackowiak: Okay. Do we need agreement to go beyond 10:307. Aanenson: Sure, if you want to. Blackowiak: I mean I don't know. I'm just asking. I'mnot sure. You decide if you want. Should we stay til 11:007 Do you want to set a time limit or til we fall asleep? Okay, let's just move on then. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUF-qT FOR SITE PI,AN APPROVAL FOR TWO APARTMENT BUH~INGS CONSISTING QF A FouR-STORY, 90 INDEPENDENT LIVING UNIT~ AND A THREE STQRY, 73 ASSISTED LIVING UNI'I~, A TQTAL BUILDING AREA OF 254,100 SOUARE FEET IN(~LUDIN(~ UNDERGROUND PARKING AND APPROXIMATELY 9~000 SOUARE FEET QF CQMMER(~IAL AREA QN A 5.11 ACRE PAR(~-~EL ZONED PLANNI~ ~ DEVELQPMENT (PUD} LOCATED AT THE $O~T CORNER OF LAKlg. DRIVE AND MAIN STREET, VII.I.AGES QN ~ POND~ SENIOR LIVING CAMPUS, ~;ENIQR HousiNG PARTNERS. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this iten~ Blackowiak: Commissioners, any questions of staff?. Rich, why don't you start. Slagle: Bob, just a couple. As I look at the plat if you will of this development, and seeing where they are going and seeing that it calls for commercial space, albeit not as much as originally intended. Where would the parking be for these commercial users? Could you help me out? Right smack in the middle of it? Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Generous: And out in front. We have short term. There is, probably for the tenant owners they're going to have underground parking that they'd be able to access so they leave the surface parking available for customers that come in. Slagle: So if I can ask, and I apologize if I should know this but inside, what I'll call the interior of these two buildings, how many parking spots axe in there? Generous: Oh, I'd have to count them. It's on the site plan. Slagle: Just rough. V.~melle Clayton: 83. Slagle: 837 Okay. And then the commercial would be basically, if I'm looking at this, so like the southeastern and the eastern and northeastern part of it. Generous: It'd be the entire frontage. Slagle: Okay. And then how many parking spots do you see to the southeast and I guess east? I mean is there a number? Generous: Southeast? Slagle: Well, I'm trying to figure if 101, so this ~;econd building sort 6f facing St.. Huberf s. On the street. 15-20, 25, something to that effect? Generous: Yeah, around that. On one side...so about 30 on both sides. Slagle: In a sense, fair parldng. Vemelle Clayton: Not an excessive amount. Slagle: But fair. Okay. Blackowiak: Okay, is that it? LuAnn? Sidney: Yeah Bob, excuse me. I guess one thing I was noticing and it was not highlighted at all, or discussed that I could tell is the underground parking numbers. Did you, do you have that, is it in here? Generous: They do provide it, I calculated the numbers. They actually exceed what our parking requirements would be. The breakdown. Siduey: I guess that that could be. Generous: They have a total of 207. 83 are on grade. 72 are underground in Building I and 52 in Building II. Sidney: Yeah, that might be useful to have that in the staff report. 61 Planning Commission Meeting- November 6, 2001 Sacchet: I have 2 questions. I actually had 3 but I was able to count, there were certain vinyl colors even though 3 pretty much look the same, or 4. Now the thing with the windows, the window types. That seems a little open ended...little bit more. Generous: Well we were looking at planter boxes in it. Some shutters. Maybe some round tops or half rounds on top. Sacchet: Accent type things? Generous: Yeah. A lot of window accents. We wanted to really give them flexibility. Sacchet: It's just a suggestion and they can. Generous: Yeah, they work with us. Sacchet: Not really specific. And then my second question, it says here there are 2 urban wetlands. I can only see 1 really there...said in the report there was 2. Generous: There's 1 wetland up in the northwest corner of the site. And then another one in the southwest comer. . . .. Sacchet: Oh, that's a wetland too? Geferous': Right. That's a wetland-on' the'en_d. .. .'.: · -. .- . Sacchet: And so that was my actual question is by moving that pond from the, what's that northwest next to the wetland, we actually move to this smaller wetland which is actually nice. Generous: Yeah, it opens up the southern exposure into St. Hubert's so it will i ,reprove that~ ~ Sacchet: ...okay. That's my questions. Thanks. Blackowiak: Deb. Kind: The roof type, this might be an applicant question but maybe you know. The roof shingle type, is that an architectural shingle or is it flat? Can you tell ~vhich 1 prefer? Generous: Yeah, that's an applicant. Kind: I'll ask the applicant that. As to what it looks, like. The vine recommendation for the garage level is basically to break up the wall, because it's still going to be brick. It's basically just to kind of break it up, because it could be a pretty tall wall. Generous: They created on the south end of the building too. There's.a patio area above so that will help. Kind: That looks really cool. Generous: Yeah, to soften that edge. 62 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Kind: My concern is that we're not going to be having this rock face block on the base, like we do in the apartments across the street. Generous: Right. And we're working on'those. Kind: You're already working on that, good to hear. The palette that was passed around, I agree, l would like to see more boldness in the colors. I'm getting into commenting here but does staff feel it would be okay to achieve that boldness if necessary with EFIS or stucco kind of material? Because this is kind of in the accent area of the building. Generous: Well I think that's an acceptable alternative. Actually when we looked at the elevation initially we thought it was a stucco finish because. Kind: I thought it was too by the drawing, the renderings looked like stucco. Okay, I was just curious if we thought it would be an acceptable way to achieve that. Okay. Plantings. Oh, meters and utility boxes are not shown on these plans, as far as I can see. Did you talk about that at all7 Generous: No. The applicant, their architect could probably. .. Kind: Mostly what I'm interested in is how they would be screened. The sidewalk that. you're. suggesting in the conditions, you're suggesting, could you point that out where you're suggesting that ttuat goes again. Generous: Initially, one of them would be connecting from here out to Lake Drive. And the other one' would connect actually both buildings out to main street. Kind: So there is a sidewalk there already-though? Generous: Yeah, but you don't have this connection to get people across. So we'd have to have head romps here and here, and one there and there. And so someone could actually do a loop within there if they wanted to. Kind: Okay. Yeah, that makes sense. Slagle:. So you could, if I can ask, are you continuing that sidewalk on the first building down to the south? Generous: Yes, that would come here and then COll!g across at the top of the ramp down into the parking -. Kind: The Building II, how do you propose to get people out to that roundabout? Generous: They would have a connection right here. Plus there's this pass through right in the comer to get people out to that intersection. Kind: Okay. Blackowiak: Actually I think most of my questions were answered, except getting back to the whole sidewalk thing. Is there currently a sidewalk on the south side of Lake Drive? 63 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Generous: I don't believe so, no. Blackowiak: Okay, because I didn't, I don't really see one. Is that, on this side right here. I'm talking about. Kind: What's this? Blackowiak: Yeah, I don't know if that's a sidewalk or what that is. Kind: What's the checkery line? What's that checker pattern along? Generous: That would be a sidewalk that is done as part of the subdivision for this. Blackowiak: Okay, and that will happen when this. Generous: As part of the development approval they're required to do that. Blackowiak: Yeah I was too, but then I'm like, I'm curious as to when it comes around, if you look at the, let's say I don't even know. Northwest or northern most point of the building. Look at the comer. Go up a little bit more of Building I. There. Now is there going to be any way to get around back? Is' there going to be a sidewalk or where? I mean I-see the sanae width of line. Generous: There's a sidewalk here. Blackowiak: Well what is the same width of line? DO you have any ideas on that? Kind: Is that a trail? Blackowiak: I don't know. Generous: Well that's, yeah. I believe that's intended for a trail or sidewalk to this patio area on the back side. Blackowiak: Well no actually, on the fourth page of the plans on the landscape plan it looks as if something is continued around about the same width as the trail or the sidewalks. Kind: Along I01. Blackowiak: Along I01 and I'm just wondering what that is. Generous: When 101's realigned there will be another trail. BlackGwiak: So that will be eventually a trail right 'there? Generous: Yes. Blackowiak: Okay. Well that's good. Alright, well that was my big, my major. Okay, so any other ' questions of staff7. No? Alright, would the applicant or their designee like to make a presentation? Please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. And thank you for staying up so late. Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Alan Black: Thank you. I'm Alan Black, Senior Housing Partner to Presbyterian Homes. We're at 3220 Lake Johanna Boulevard in Arden Hills. Thank you for the opportunity to come forward and respecting your time, I' ye got maybe just .a very brief background of who the applicant is. Presbyte. dan Homes has been in the metropolitan area since the early 1900's. About 1930 providing care to about 3,000 residents in the metro area. And we provide exclusive care to older adults and we have a continuum of care responsibility in our mission and that is to provide care to people of all level~ of need. The .history has. started with nursing homes. More progressively over the last 10 years we've been developing assisted living, independent living...communities throughout the metro area, and this project represents a continuation of the strategic plan to serve those residents in the southwestern metro area. We continuously find ourselves in conversations with people who want to expand those services and as we look at this area here, we felt there was a strong neeat. That need is predominant when you begin to look at how nursing homes have evolved, we have...misplacement of nursing homes throughout-our metro area. When they were developed, which was during the early 1960's, a distribution of older adults were not in Chanhassen. This whole southwestern quadrant. As a result many of the care related options are not available in the community and our focus is on providing and creating greater continuums. This project represents an opportunity to do just that with both the assisted living and the independent living. Even the assisted living further defined in providing some memory care so our goal is to try to use residential options rather than institutional options to cream service options for people. Places for aging in place. This will relate to some other campuses we have lhat will provide you the skill care piece. We have campuses in Minnet0nka, Spring Park, Bloomington, and so this will be a continuation of the spoke of what we're doing so we're glad for the opportunity to provide housing and se.,wices. With that I think you've seen our project. I heard some interesting dialogue about trips and I'd like to reaffirm and maybe add some additional corrd'ort' in that about the average age of the people that we serve, even in our independent living is about age 82, and I saw that there was no. distinguishing made. between the ,,atious types of senior housing. Our's being kind of a service driven model. We probably have even fewer drivers, fewer trips than may be most typical non service'related senior housing so we get some comfort there. We don't have a lot of residents out of memory care driving. However we might surprise some · - people with that in that we do have couples who continue to provide care to a spouse, who may be occupants of an assisted living facility and I think that is one of the opportunities that we're glad to haxie is to keep families together. So we might have some unusual situations to speak of but I think they'll be reasonable. We knew that you wanted to address specific questions and we thought rather than going through the 53 recommendations, maybe we'd point out a couple that we thought were maybe-worthy of some. additional discussion, and not necessarily resolution here tonight. But just an opportunity to express our interest in continuing some dialogue to make sure that our project can comply. Meet with your approval. And under the recormnendations, we wanted to go through the vines that we talked about. We thought those were probably precipitated by concern about making sure that this building has an. aesthetic appeal that doesn't xeflect those buildings that maybe has not hit the mark for you in the past. We would concur. W'e want to have this'building attractive. It's a focal point away from the church and some of those areas. We'd like to explore continuously with staff those items that could make that, for example we're using extensive amount of brick in that area rather than rock face block as an example. If we're going to cover it up with vines, we might want to come back and say you know, is it really a good idea to use brick in those areas. Or maybe there's so, ne other ways to approach it, but we would just like the opportunity to continue to work with staff and come back' to you with some alternative ideas. We ha~'e some other folks here with me tonight who will be available prior to the City Council ~ne~ting who'l think may have some interesting ideas and if some of those ideas has merit we'd like to have some flexibility besldes the use of vine as the sole method. Number 7. Additional fire hydrants. We're a little concerned about how those are going to impact us in terms of parking. We want to make sure that we have certainly adequate amount of fire suppression capacity on the site, but 5 additional hydrants has both impact to us in terms of both site and cost to the project. We'd like to explore that to make sure that 65 . _l Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 that in fact is the right number and maybe as we look at some of our building type constructives, then that nu~ may want to change. So we'd like to keep that item just open for discussion. Item number 24~ . We jamped way. baclc We certainly appreciate the level of detail. We're not sure that we've been · . through, this before in a project so we're stretching ourselves here to try to anticipate which ones are the ones lhat are ~ally important. 24 and 25 I'd like to put together m our wetland buffers, and the concern. we have to(lay is we're not sure exactly where the definition of wetland buffers are. but the 40 foot ~tback in number 25, from the edge of a wetland buffer, we're somewhat concerned and ff I could just point to the area right in here, we're not exactly certain where-the wetland might be, and if this current building actually meets that. And I don't know if staff has.looked at that. If we think we're in compliance. Blackowiak: Excuse me, Kate or Bob, do you have any. comment on that one specifically? Generous: No. I've had discussions with Loft. I thought that was a utilized wetland, and Fll have to': clari'~ that with her. Alan Black: So if it'd be reasonable we'd like to just continue to leave that one kind of open and see-if we're okay under that area. This wetland has been kind of a hard one. We do have some decking and so: forth and we have some trails through there and we wanted to respect and not create a requirement that . we can't :urrently meet. Number 35. We concur. We'd like to continue, it. sounded like from planning: Corvanission, you're wanting us to work. with staff towards those things that can add architectural' detail. ~nd sine6 number 35 is not well defined, we want to understand that ore, elves because there's a need for. us to try to desi~ a building that works and also prices in so we'd like. to continue to work with.staff but right now we're not certain which level of responsibility _we .would have and staff would have and frankly ~,~ach a conclusion there. And then lastly number 44, public drainage and utility easements be required - over the public's storm sewer line. Minimum. easements shall be 25 f~t,'and we just haven't had a' chance here to look at that a_qd see if we're in accoxd with the current site plan to do tfiat. I'd be our intent to do that but we just want to make sure that our current project meets ~hat. I think we condensed our's down to 6 or 7 items out. of the 53 so we'didn't react negatively to any of the recommendations. We want :o continue to fine tune and work with staff on these items if we may. And with that I would pause and try to take questions and we have our architect here, co-developer and contractor Mark Eckloh and housing construction and see what we can do to answer your questions to. get the proje~ Wa're glad to have an opportunity to get to this level of detail tonight. ~ Blackowiak: Alright. Okay, commissioners. Questions of the applicant. Deb, sta_n om. Kind: Two questions. The shingle style, is that an architectural style or. Alan Black: [ believe those are flat shingles and I think the nature of it typically because the elevation heights we're at, it's our perception that may be a very, very expensive item and we're not sure on a 4 story building at this location that there'd be any oppoxmnity to see those. -If we were down into a lower scale building, I think that would have a lot o~merit but we're just not st're that that would be the best- place to spend the dollars on this project today. Kind: Wh0t sort of precautions can you take to nutke sure that there's not that ripple effect in the summer and is there a certain kind of felt that can be used to limit that or? Alan Black: Okay thank you. Maybe I could pass that question to this is ,Mark Eckloh. Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Mark Eckloh: My name is Mark Eckloh. I'm with Senior Housing Construction. Co-developer on the project. And I live in Chaska. To answer your question specifically, with the height of these buildings, typically what we have is fairly low roof styles on the main body of the roof. Probably in the range of a 5:12 typically. Because of the height of the building we.'re usually fighting the foot restriction of the 50 foot height to begin with. The second thing is when you look at the elevation of the building, we do not want to draw attention to that big mass of asphalt so typically by trying to lower that and make that less of an appearance is our goal. To answer your question specifically about the rippling effect, this is an XP25 fiberglass shingle which is completely different than what's on residential and because of the thickness of it and because of the fire requirements, the fire code requirements to this shingle, you don't get that rippling effect that you are referring to that you see in residential construction. Kind: There's a few apartment buildings around too that get it too. Mark Eckloh: Okay. Kind: So that's my concern is I want to make sure it's a quality looking building, because it really is.. And I.sure would hate to have the shingles detract from that. Mark Ec'..floh: We do have some feature areas though, on the entrance to these areas and these lower roof' areas that are propo.sed to be a different type. There was some discussion about, and correct ..me if Fm wrong Watt, that there, was some discussion about a s.tanding seam metal roof on some of these areas and so some of the lower areas that you see on the model, there would be where we would spend the money and make a focal point of the roof as opposed to the broader flat area up on tog. Kind: Okay. And then meters and utility boxes, that-sort of. thing. How do you propose. · Mark E~,kloh: One per building. . Kind: One per building. Mark Eckloh: One here, one there. All the utilities are paid.for by Presbyterian Homes. It's included in the residents rent. Kind: And are they outside? Will they be screened from public view, or are they located inside.* Mark F.,ckloh: I don't know how C'~anhassen handles their meters per se but typically with one on each. building, they're usually some kind of fashion on the outside but they're not objectionable. It's not like they have a whole bunch of them. I don't know how they do their water meters. Usually that's some *..,,,ge of remote so there's just a counter on the exterior of the building so it's pretty, not a big item. But we only have one per building. Kind: Okay. That's all. Blazkowiak: That's enough? Okay, Uli. Sacchet: Yeah, real quick. Making the colors a little bit more of a contrast. Do you have an issue with that? Mark Ecklah: We have no issue with that but I think in reality in trying to be totally honest with both staff and with council I think there will be a difficulty in finding a lot of colors. As you look around our 67 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 neighborhoods, unfortunately or fortunately, however you view it, most people seem to pick beige colored sidings so if you go to a vinyl manufacturer, which we can bring in 4 or 5 different manufacntmrs that make vinyl, you will find no dark colors. I don't want to lie to you and say that there's a dark green. out them. They don't make it. There's no demand for it. You don't see it in any of your neighborhoods. Sacchet: I don't think it has to be said to be dark. Just a little more contrast I guess that's What. Mark Eckloh: We're certainly not opposed to that, provided it's one of the normal siding. We don'-t want to have to special order a product. We want to be able to use the normal vendors but there really isn't much of a selection and as you look at most of our new neighborhoods unformna~ly, there doesn't seem to be a broad selection of color in the vinyl's. Kind: Sorry to interrupt you Uli. You hit on the point I forgot about. Would you consider using a different material? Mark Eckloh: Well stucco is a tremendous cost difference to us obviously than vinyl. We focus when we designed this building originally, we focused and were given direction both by some of the people at city staff and also with the architecture group to focus on brick, and we have put an-extensive amount of brick and we do hav. e it lot of areas and obviously this is in reference to the project across .the street, where there is a lot of cut face block that's exposed. We have none. We've covered, we have a lot of garage area that shows on this because of the'elevations of these buildings and we've...brick. And the other thing about for us is that the siding aspect, and this may seetfi small but for senica' housing the siding aspect is critical because we're trying to make it look residential and feel residential.- We want · these older people to feel like they're in a msidentia!' home,' not some type of '.msfimtiomd ho.me.-. And' - - even though you see stucco homes, brick and' stucco tends to look mom institutional than siding so we try.' to 'keep a siding aspect to the ilome just because we like the aspect of trying to make-it feel more- residential. So I guess'to be honest With you we would like to. avoid going to stucco if at all possible. We don't see that as a benefit to this project and we would rather do other trealxnents in reims of awxdngs or w~.ndows or those kind of things than stucco. ' Kind: Okay, thank you. Blackowiak: Uli. Sacchet: Yeah. All the~e units are going to be reatal units, correct? Alan Black: All the units are in a rental unit and the program here provides that residents aren't signing long te.nn leases. They're a 30 day lease requirement so. Sacchet: Then just to really briefly touch on this, and the Milo Architecture Group letter there was recommendation to give it a little more of a modem twist. Make it a little more contemporary. Probably some of those would be accomplished by having a little more contrasting colors and the window accent elements introduced. Is that correct? Alan Black: I think through the staff recommendations we have here, there's some ideas to modernize it through the use of windows, awnings, some coloration and so I think we'll accomplish Milo's...I think so anyway. Sacchet: That's all my questions. 68 Planning Commission Meeting -November 6, 2001 Blaekowiak: Okay. LuAnn. Sidney: I guess a question about your lighting plan. Could you explain that? You know light fixtures, extedor lighting. Mark Eckloh: You got us. In terms of interior lighting, we we)e told that there was a need for shoebox, you know the standard box lighting that just goes down in terms of the parking lot. In terms of the decorative lighting on the exterior of main street and Lake Drive, I assume that we would be matching-. whatever is going on throughout the balance of the project, but apart from that we don't have anything specific. If it worked with council, or Planning Corm)dssion I'm sorry, we would prefer the decorative lighting interior as well. Most of our projects, we like the old fashion lighting and we like that but 'I "' know there's objections to communities not to having. We think when you talk about all these buildings,' and to'ing to put features in, to put those ugly shoebox lights is a problem but we realize that. we have to · ' respect other people's space as well in terms of that but we prefer the decorative lighting in ~terms of the interior space as well. If we could do that. Generous: Go for it. It's permitted under the design standards. Sidney:' Yeah, I think that would really enhance the project. Blackowiak:. Rich. Slagle: Just-one question regarding the air conditioning, trying to think of the, the air conditioning'and .' · filrnace bu.'. there's no exterior units or anything like thai'? Them is? Well then I'm trying to see. Alan Black: The plan for the independent living building is a product type, you may refer to it as a magic'- pack ,;r sky peck and there is some exterior grills and venting that comes out. Howeve~ by the way ... they've desi~¢ed it, that occurs,.and I don't know if this plm~ would even show it. It actually occurs out' on the balcof~y areas. Would you like to try to show. do we have that on our glans, on an elevation here? Mark Eckloh: Al's one plan behind. It's a 4 pipe system which means that it has all centralized heating and cooling so that them is a massive chiller unit, but it's built into a roof top scenario so there is nora chiller unit sitting on the ground. There might be a scenario where there might be one or two small air conditioning units, and that heat that central core area, but that would be no bigger in terms than what.the air conditioning unit you have sitting at your current home, but the chiller is designed to go on the roof .' ama over on Building il' them. · - Sidney: Not screened'? Mark Ecklob: It's all screened, yes. You wouldn't see it. That's correct. There's a mansard roof, and. then it creates a flat spot inside so visually you can't see the chiller unit. Blackow~ak: I guess I don't have any questions right now. Do you have anybody else that's interested presenting? Alan Black: Just one quick thought in terms of all your concerns about height. The 4 story building is ~cmally 8 fee~ 13wer in elevation than the 3 story building. The way the topography works out, the 3 story budding is 8 feet higher so even though we have a 4 story building, if you look closely hem, ~d fl:is is m: actual scale model, the roofs am basically the same height. So because of the way.the topography of the site works, the 4 story building won't appear to anyone looking across from the area 69 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 over to the northeast, or coming in, the building won't appear any higher from the interior of the ~. ject than the 3 story building just because this building sits 8 feet lower on the s:.te to begin with. So I'think it. helps alleviate those' fears about the height scenario. Blackowiak: '! have a question that justmade me thifik of'something, and I don't know if it's for you or - ~ for staff. St. Hubert's building. How high is.that and how will this compare with St. Hubert's? Generous: I think they're 40. It depends which'level you look at. It was 2 stories. Blackowiak: l'mjusl wondering if you, let's say you stood from the north and looked and St. Hubert's would be do,~n: to your left and then these building.s would be to your right. Fmjust kind of curious how they would compare. Vemel!e (.~ayton: ...tonight for that same reason. I drove over there specifiea~y to try to figure thai Out. It's so far down...It's really hard to know. · - Aenenson' We could pull the plans and find that out. · Blackowiak: Yeah, that'd just be interesting to find out how it's going to, you know how it's going to kinfi of set ut: ir, the entire. - .... -" Aanengon: To see what St. Hubert's did, look at this. They were concerned about that... - .Vem. ell¢ Clayton: Yeah, thev were requested to accommodate it. Aanenson. Zo make sure that they're.not blocked con~pletely.. Blackowiak: Okay,'so they're comfortable? ' .. Aanen.~n: Right. · Mark Eckloh: In reference to 2 again, if you look at the model. What we' ye done, and this is the end that's closest tt~ St. Hubert's and also the end that's across fromBookoo Bikes. What we've tried to do is. we've actua]iy lowered the end of the building there-so it's not 4 stories on the end of the building. This is actually 3 stories, and we've got the same scenario on the Bookoo end of the building. That we' .r9 dropping the building down so that visually it gives the effect of. being closer and not so imposing in '. teems of the buildings that are in proximity to it. So that we have tried to accomngxlate that by.lowering the end of the building and giving a feel of being a floor down. I don't know where we are in relation to the actual t~itch of the church roof. I think we're fairly close but I know we're substan~ly under the. - steeple to *,he point of the roof. We aren't even close to that. · · . Blackowiak: Okay. ,;,lan Black: Kate had mentioned also at one time in the project's planning we actuality had this portion of the a.~sistexl INing building as a 4 story structure and one of the comments we got back from the. church was they were concerned about the elevation of that and so at the reqtmst, we cut that down to a 3 story structure so I think they're comfortable with that part of the elevation of that. Blackowiak: Okay. Alrighty. Well this item is open for a public hearing. So if anyone would like to come and comment on this, please do so. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, time for c(3mments. Deb, would you like to start us out? 70 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Kind: Sure. I like the building. I think it's really attractive. I agree with staff though. I'd like to see it a little bolder, more closely to this rendering. This is always a danger with me to show me a rendering, and I like them the way they are so, 1 don't know. I'd like. to see you get closer to that and I think EFIS would be ma acceptable material because it is really an accent area. It's not a foot traffic area where that seems to be a problem material. A couple other points that were brought up. Let me double check here. I agree with the staff's recommendations for conditions. I'm not quite sure what to do with some of the requests of tl~ applicant. The vines on the brick, I'm fine with the landscaping being used to screen so maybe change that language to landscaping plants shall be planted. That's kind of redundant. How about landscaping shall be planted in the areas where the garage elevation of the building is, I think we.can give them some flexibility. Blackowiak: Work with staff. Kind: Work with staff. The standard work with staff. The fire hydrant thing I think we could say additional fire hydrants may be required, and the applicant shall work with the Fire Marshal to determine where they're located. I'd be fine with softening that a little bit. The 40 foot setback from the wetland buffer, direct staff to check on that. I guess leave that condition there. Leave it the way it is and just get answers to that before it goes to council. And then number 35, that's the condition about window types and half bay windows. I don't really know how we can make that more clear tonight. I think we should do our standard work with staff condition there, because [ do like the idea of getting, especially on the 'Phase I building of incorporating a little bit more interest in the windows on that building especially I think would be nice. I love the Building 'ri, the European flavor there, it's very nice. And then I"d like - to add a condJ, tion about screening utility boxes, air conditioning, any of that kind of stuff on ground level definitely needs tO be screened. Nice project.. '-- Biackowiak: Alright. Uli.' Sacchet: Ditto. Blackowiak: No way. Okay, LuAnn. Sidney: Really an outstanding project by an outstanding company. This is, you know I think what the intent was for Villages on the Pond, we're seeing a good example of that and as a former commissioner would say, good four walls and it really flows throughout the whole buildings. So [ really commend everyone for working on this. ! agree with Deb's comments about, you know maybe a little bit more boldness in the colors may help give the European vernacular feeling to the buildings is what I wrote dowr,. But really great. I made my comments and so I'I] pass it along to Rich. Slagle: I think it's great. I mean I understand the conunents of my fellow commissioners. I'm not as sold on the diversity of the difference of coloring. I think it looks great. Blackowiak: And I agree. I certainly like the project. I think I'm glad we stayed to see it this evening. It's late but it certainly was worth the wait tonight. I like it a lot. Recommendations. The conditions t_hat were, of concern to you, I mean basically work with staff. I know that they can be worked out and I have no worries about that. We have two number 52's and a number 53 we have to renumber at the end. A little housekeeping thing. Kind: Oh yeah, there's a couple typos too. 71 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 Blackowiak: Yeah, but it's late and we're not going to worry, about that so. All and all what's important is I think it's a great project. I think everybody agrees here so with that I'd like to have a motion please.. Sacchet: Yeah Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan g2001-13, plans prepared by Korsunsky, Krank, Erickson Architects dated September 14, 2001, subject to the following conditions 1 through 54 with the following fixes in 4, sub- number 6. Applicant .shall work with staff to consider landscaping or vine type plants to be planted in areas and so forth. Number 7. Additional fire hydrants may be required. Number 25. Work with staff to determine the required setback~ Wetland setback for stmctar~. Number 33 should say furniture, enough furniture. Number 35. Applicant shall work with staff to incorporate additional windows and so forth. Ntunber 44, I'm going to leave. And then you recall that Deb, well you can do your own 55.. That's my -, motion. Blackowiak: Okay. There's been a motion. Is there a second? Kind: I'll second and I have a couple friendly amendments. Uli, I'm shocked. Number 28. You ~ieed to add a sentence that says silt fences shall be removed upon project completion. Sacchet: Oh thanks so much. Kind: You're welcome. Number 34, I would like to add a sentence that says, since the siding areas are for accent only, EFIS or stucco would be an acceptable alternative in order to achieve bolder colors. Do you want to aecept them one by one? Sacchet: Yep, no, no, no. I accept them all. ' Kimi: Okay. And then number 50 needs your silt fence.sentence as well. Silt fence shall be removed from project upon completion. And then the re-numbering that Alison talked about. And then nnmher 55, I'd like to add a condition. Or wait, what are we up to? Yeah, 55. Ground air conditioning units, utility boxes, and meters shall be screened with landscaping and/or with the same building materials used on the main structures. Sacchet: Yes. Accepted. Blackowiak: Okay, a motion and second. Sacchet moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commi~:~ion recommends approval of Site Plan ' 02001-13, plans prepared by Korsunsky, Krank, Erickson Architects, dated September 14, 2001, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the CiOj and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. . Site plan approval is contingent on final platting of Outlot F, Villages on the Ponds, to a block and lot designation. . Pedestrian connections shall be provided from the interior parking lot to both Lake Drive and Main Street. 4. The applicant shall make the following corrections to the landscape plan: 72 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 . . . 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Add 9 grey dogwood. Plant 13 Redtwig dogwood instead of 6. Substitute 2 Green Mountain sugar rnap!es for 2 Emerald Qaeen Norway maple. Plant 7 Black Hill spruce instead of 6. All changes pertain to the landscaping'proposed along Highway 101. Applicant shall work with staff to eonsidea; landscaping or vine type plants to be planted in areas where the garage elevation of the building is exposed, including the southern end of Building I and the southern end of Building II, on the west end of Building II, and adjacent to the retaining wall. Shredded bark mulch .shall be placed under the line of Japanese tree lilacs proposed along the. terrace facing Lake Drive. A strip of sod shall be laid along the sidewalk. A revised landscape plan shalI be submitted to the city for approval. Additional fire hydrants may be required on the inner parking portion of the project. Contact- · Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of fire hydrants. .. A 10-foot clearance space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV, and tr-ansformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire ' hydranm can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance g9-1. Fi~ lanes and yellow cmbing will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Mamhal for eiact curbs to be pa'[nted and exact location of fire land signs. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fi.re Department[Fire-. Prevention Division Policy #6-1991 and Section 904-i, 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. A PIV (Post Indicator Valve) is required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. Barsuant to 1999 N~*PA 13 Section 5-14.1.[.8. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy/129- 1992. Comply with water service installation policy for commercial and industrial buildings. Pursuant to Ir, sr~ction Di'vis.~oJ.~ Water Service Installation Policy #34-1993. Copy enclosed. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Departrnent/Fire Prevention Division policy concerning maximum allowed size of domestic water on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #36-1994. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire DepartmenffFire Prevention Division Policy regarding notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy g4-1991. Sub,nit design specifications regarding vehicle access over the underground link connecting the two buildings. This tunnel design should support the imposed loads of Chanhassen's largest fire apparatus. 73 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 16. 17. i8. 19. 21. 22. 23. 6. 27. 28. 29. 30. Submit radius turn dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval. The inner courtyard area should be designed for fire apparatus access drive-through. The buildings must be protected with'automatic fire sprinkler systems. 'l~e building plans must be prepared and signed by design .professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. The proposed ;building areas are over the allowable area permitted for Type V One-Hour construction, area separation walls will be required to bring the building areas in compliance . with the code. Building #1 is not permitted to be four stories high if constructed of Type V One- Hour construction. The proposed 13R fire sprinkler system cannot be used for area and lot number of story increases. An accessible route must be provided to both buildings, parking facilities, public transportation · stops and all common ose facilities. All parking areas, including parking garages, must be provided with accessible parking spaces dispersed among the various building entrances. Accessible dwelling uuits must be pro.vialed in accordance ~th Minnesota State Building-Co~. .. Chapter 1341. '' i A PD/(Post Indicator Valve) must be installed'On rile dorae, sfic/fire suppression water service'i' ..... - .. · The building owner and/or their representatives should meet with the Ins3x~.ons Division to discuss plan review and perrrfit procedures, h~ particular,.type of. construction and allowable area issues need to be addressed as soon as possible. . ,- A wetland buffer 0 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 10 fee0 shall be maintained or established around all wetland basins. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the city's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs under the direction of city staff and shall pay the city $20 per sign. The applicant shall work with staff to determine the required wetland buffer setback for - structures. · .' Th,~ rate of discharge from the proposed development shall not exceed pre-development runoff r~tes. The applicant shall provide storm water calculations to ensure runoff rates will not increase as a result of the proposed development. Existing drainage and utility easements should be vacated and new drainage and utility easements should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas and storm water ponds. Type III silt fence should be provided adjacent to all areas to be preserved as buffer or, if no buffer is to be preserved, at the delineated wetlanci edge. The silt fence shall be removed upon completion of the project. Erosion control blankets should be installed on all areas with slopes 3:1 or greater. 74 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 3g. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 45. 47. 48. 49. Lighting shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. Signage shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. A separate sign permit is required for each sign. The monument sign located in the northwest comer of the site at the comer of Lake Drive and Market Boulevard must, at a minimum, identify the Villages on the Ponds development. The applicant/developer shall install site furniture throughout the project including benches. planter boxes, tables, chairs, etc. The applicant/developer shall work with staff to prepare a final color pallet with greater differentiation in siding colors. The number of vinyl siding colors is limited to four colors. Since the siding areas are for accent only, EFIS or stucco would be an acceptable alternative in order to achieve bolder colors. Applicant shall work with staff to incorporate additional window types such as bay, half- round, round, and Italianate as well as window accents such as plant boxes, shutters, balconies, dec!cs.~ grates, canopies, awnings, trellises; recesses, embrasures, arches, lunettes. .- Submit storm sewer design calculations for a 10 year, 24 hour storm event. Sabm/t stormwater pond design calculations for the 10 and 100 year storm event. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos:. 2202, 3 t02, 3107, 3108, 3109, 5300, · .' ' 530t, 5302, and 5313. The minimum drive aisle width is 26 feet. Revise the plans to comply. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regularity agency permits. Retaining walls must be designed by a registered engineer and r~luire an approved feuce at the ' top of the wall. All plan sheets must be signed by a registe -red engineer. The two proposed rock construction entrances are required to be a minimum of 75 feet in length. Public drainage and utility easements will be required over the public storm sewer line. The minimum easement width shall be 25 feet. Add a storm sewer schedule to the plans. On the utility plan revise CB 5, 6, 7, 8 and 1;t to CBMH 5.6, 7, 8, and 14. Plan and profile views are required for all of the public st6nn sewer. T~ guarantee the installation of the public improvements, the applicant must supply the City with a financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow. 75 Planning Commission Meeting - November 6, 2001 50. A public drainage and utility easement is required over the proposed pond. This easbment shall cover the pond up to the 100 year high water elevation. The easement over the existing pond will have to be vacated as a condition of site plan approval. ' ' 51. Type Ill, heavy duty silt fence shall be used adjacent to all ponds and wetlands. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected from construction-related sediment through the use of filter barriers (see City Detail Plate No. 5302). Ali silt fences sludl be removed upon completion of the project. 52. Connection to the public utility lines will incur hook-up charges against the lot. The 2001 sanitary sewer hook-up charge is $l,322 per unit. The 2001 water hook-up charge is $1,723 pet unit· The 2001 SAC charge is $1,225 per unit. These charges will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. 53. Temporary easements are required for any off-site grading. 54. Add a legend to the plans. 55. On the site plan, show the dimensions of the parking stalls, access aisles and driveway widths. G round air conditioning units, utility boxes, and meters shall be screened with landscaping and/or with the same building materials used on the main structnres. . . .. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried nnanlmously 5 to 0. · Blackowiak: Goes to City'Council on November 26e". Thank you so much again for waiting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Uli Sacchet noted the Minutes of the Planning Commissiori meeting dated October 2, 2001 as presented. ONGOING ITEMS: Aanenson: We do have a meeting on the 20e". We have a subdivision and a couple of code amendments so we will have a meeting. Blackowiak: Subdivision and what? Aanenson: Two code amendments. So we will have.a meeting. Chairwoman Blackowiak adjourned the Planning Comminsion meeting at 11:25 p.m, Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 76 SOuTUWuT Mn'BO TBANsFr DS00 TKhslfly Jflw Gin Puifie. htesor~ 553~ hONE: 9~US (27.87) FAX: 9~..97/,.7997 Wmrr[: ~ November 13, 2001 Todd Oedmrdt City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive Chanhasseax, MN 55317 RE: Appointment to the Southwest Metro Transit Commission Dear Todd, The City Council of Chanhassen will need to appoint one member to the Southwest Metro Transit Commission. The term of Ma~or Jansen expires on December 31, 2001. The new ~year te~m will start Janua~ 1, 2002 and will end on December 31, 2004. The position must be filled by the mayor or If you have any questions, please give me a call at 974-3104. Sincerely, SO~T METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION Executive Director NOV 1 3 CiTY OF CHA?~FASSEN CITYOF 690 C/0' C~ Dr/vt PO llox I47 ~~, iinne~ta 55317 952.95ZI900 C,~eral Fax 952.93Z5739 Engineering Depam.ent Fax 952.95Z9152 Buildiug Department Fax 952.934.2524 Web Site wu,m ci. d~ag~asse...~n. ~. MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt City Manager FROM: Kate Aanenson, community Development Director DATE: November 19, 2001 SUB J: Caver County Community Demographic Partnership Background At the last city council meeting, the Carver County Community Demographic Partnership was discussed as a part of the capital improvement program. The Carver County Health Partnership is the primary lead agency in this study, which is an outgrowth of the Carver County Quality of Life Study. Caver County is contributing $25,000 of the initial $75,000 cost for data creation.. All jurisdictions in the county will be using this database. While most jufisdictons in the county track their own pertinent statistics, this database will allow for the sharing of individual databases. This data is valuable for the following types of studies: · Predicting the number of school age children by housing type · Rental housing · Home values and rates of change · Income and housing types · Crime rote. by type of housing units or by neighborhoods · Numbers of children by neighborhood for park programming · Location of seniors for Meals on Wheels or transit needs · Age of dwelling units and length of residency · Types of dwellings · Business and employment concentrations · Transit needs Both School Districts 112 and 276 will be Sharing data. District 112 is very enthusiastic regarding the ability of the housing data and demographics to plan for future building needs. The Planning Department views the partnership as an invaluable tool to provide better information for analysis and predict furore needs for the city. Attached is the proposal from Excensus. ~o~m~m~ Carver County Community Demographic Partner D~:mogmphic information for planning conununity proF~,,,s and services, managing resourses and infrastructure would be 8vailabk~ to the city through a dam.base Ihat i~ cnmb:d core. de. Th~ dazabase inolude~ school distric:U,, the county, census inibmmfion, health car~ information ~loog with Stato of~ and oily park & rec program~, trends in home ownership, and resident turn..ove~. Expenditures 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total. ' Planning/Design 10,000 10,000 Construction/Maintenance 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 2DJXX) Total 10J~oo . . Fnndlng Sources 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Capital l~plncerrmnt Fund 10,000 10~X} General Fund 5JX)0 5J)iX} 5,000 5,0{X) 20J~ Total 1o,ooo ~o 5,._~_ Moo Moo ~oJ)oo , EXCENSUS DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES F. xcen~s is a Twin Cities consulting firm serving state and local gove~ment, school distrias, colleges and universities, not-for-profit foundations, neighborhood organizations, and private sector firms and research organizafion.~ that also serve public There are two basic parts to Excensus' services. First, we build and ~ am'em demographic profiles of a commun/ty's resident and business base. Second, we provide a unique data ~ that ties resident and business data directly to other data set~ for housing jobs, school enrollment, land use and transport__~fi'on relat~ planning, forecasting and analysis. This service is unique. A ~ is pending on the da~ ~ and Excensus' Demonrnohic Dat~b~ze The Excensus database details the current characteristics of residential households and businesses. Included in these profiles are:. · Population and household counts and profiles for any geographic area defined by the U~l' · Resident ages (numbers of people in each of 20 age groups) · A~es of heads-of-household · Households by size and composition (adults, families with children, seniors, etc.) · School-age and pre-school children · Types of dwellin~ (condo, townhouse, apartment, single hmily, duplex, etc.) · Property values by range · Owner or renter occupancy status · Home sales in past 5 years, including price of most recent sale · ~ of time residents have lived at aurem addresses · Age of housing stock (owner-occupied) · Dwelling chara~edstics · Housing owned by elderly persons · Business and employment concentrations .. · School enrollment data · Other data derived from other data sets developed for thi.~ project To our knowledge, no other comparable ~ exists and certainly does not exist in an integrated form permitting almost any data field to be cross-tabbed with any other and then mapped on a parcel basemap. T41dd I LTI~ 3 ~ 0 ~ 1~0-14# ]84 ~.'Pli 8 8.8tA 18~-'11~ ~ 8.1'1o 3 ].Jlro · 1' I~O 87 ].,11L 0 O.01L M'dd~ HiramMat Nqmdmd 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~0~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ This information is built by Excensus from a number of overlapping state and loc, al adminismlfive data sets. These core databases include: · County GIS parc, e. 1 data files · County Assessor's properly tax and ownership data' · State drivers license and vehicle registration dsm · The US Postal Seflrice Resident file · School census data · City water utility billing and connect data, · Depamnent of Economic Seon'i~ business dam sets, and · Other shared data sets unique to each county and community. These daLubases have been shared with Excensus under provisions of the l~innesota Data Practices Act. Confidentiality a~l non-disclosure contract agreemem~ between the respective agency and Excensus apply to all confidential and limited-access da~ sets. All are provided with the understanding that the data will be used only for commuflity planning and research purposes and that individual names and other protected data fidds will not be divulged by Excensus to its parme~ or end-users. Uniaue ProDertv-lhsed Linksig~ Key to the quality and utility of Excensus' household and business data files is the direct link made between each household or business and a prope~ parcel. This link makes it possible for any of the demographic data files to be mapped and co ,mpared with any outside data maintained at a parcel ID level. The link to property data gives Excensus an important grosscheck on its household counts, resulting in unparalleled accuracy and a mechanimn for matching demographic da~ to housing, land use and transpo~on related dam It also permits the Exceasus demographic profiles to be mapped with precision on top of detailed property or site maps using GIS technology and county level digital parcoi data. ~BlockTM l)e~i~rn While Excensus demographic profiles are developed at a household or business establishment level, profile reports summmiz~ this information for specific groups of households and businesses. No names or data specific to individual households or businesses are ever released and the munmary data cannot be tied back to a particular household or business. A hallmark of this demographic product is the flexibili~ provided for viewing and analyzing data. Unlike traditional census ties, Excensus data can be easily and accumely matched to any specified area. Excen,ms' da~ mucU~ is unique, a~p~atin8 information for small geographic clusters called iBlocXsTM that can be liner assembled into larger groups based on any neighborhood, school enrollment area, housing renewal area, transit corridor, parks and trail boundary area, etc. Excensus Residential iBlocksTM contain three to five households in single-Family neighborhoods. For multi-family housing, an iBlock~Uwill include all the units locat~ on a single parcel of land. Business iBlocksTM contain three or more adjacent businesses. Each iBlockTM will contain summary demographic profiles-of the households or businesses in that are~ IBlockTM Structure - Residemial Clusters · . - ' ..'.-.- ;'-.--.'=--'.-:.~...:4.~4~.~;~:.- '-'-. ..... 12, 2001 /B/oc.~TM Texture M~ps COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLDS IN 1~9 ............. . . . .... ~ . ~-~, -- ~.. ~,... · ... . . ..... ~.~~ ', Stnlte~c Applications The following am (~xapl~ ofthr~ major application are~: . . . TransoortmJon Demouraohics - ~ - Excensus provides a unique database for use in a wide variety oftransportmion planning and modeling activities. The database is unique in its capac~ to incorporate both demographic and land use attributes in a state-of-the-art (itS mapping environment. Because ofExcensus' proprielm7/BlockTM technology, data is both current and fine-grained permitting unparalleled quality and accuracy in demand modeling and forecasting activities. This information is also of siEnificant June IZ 2001 value in promoting hiffl~ quality corridor planning, as well as addressin~ environmental equity issues. TJZ 8ub-.4rea Mode//n~ Characteri~tics Within 1/4 Mile of 8top Children Under Age 18 __ LT 0.4 pemom/acm -- .5 to .9 pemons~cm 1.0to 1.9 2,0 to 2.4 2.5 to 2.9 3.0 to 4~9 5.0 to ~.9 ~ 7.0 or mom pemons/acre I-Iou~mho~ 83 417 430 Popula~Xl 224 743 686 A~g. Age (yin.) 40.3 44.5 47.g Age 2O-24 15 23 21 Age 25-29 21 21 26 ° Age 30-34 13 34 53 Tolal 98 390 384 Pera/t-I-I 2.70 1.78 1.62 . School Enrollment planning and Forecasting_ Aoo. ar~ school enrollment forecasts are ofcritic~ concern to all school districts. Poor forecasting can cause serious anmml budgeting and financing problems, major inefficiencies in use of both facilifi~ and facul~, and erific~ community relations problems. Excensus is working in tandem with school districts to both improve the quality of student and pre-school demographic data and the timeliness of this information. Working with school superint~lem~ and census adminisumors, Excensus has developed a s. fite of services and products that help focus school census efforts in the district and support the development and use a rolling forecast model. One district has calculated that by tighteain8 up a forecast by as few as 50 students district-wide, the district saves $325,000 a year. J~ 12, 2001 4 Commune_ Trend Map_ pin~ Developing strategic responses to the ~ patterns of residential and commercial demographics is quickly becoming a defining issue for all counties and communities in this country. A wide range of issues are involved. ~ these include: · Access to affordable housing for workers and residents. · Quickly rising home and remal prices in the face of apparent shortages. · Availability of move-up housing for growing households and families. · Transit options that reflect resident and employee needs. · Aging and turnover paltems that can contribute to community instability, as reflected in tax base losses, a shrinking labor force, and school enrollment downtums. Exeensus is working collaboratively with dries, counties and non-profit foundations to track the nature and causes of structural demographic changes in our communities. The fine-grain nature of the Excensus iBlockTM demographic products permits planners and policy makers to develop neighborhood level ~es and services in response to the observed changes. Exc, ensus' services include anmml demographic updates, the mapping of structural changes, forecasting of twenty-year impacts associated with om'ent trends, and providing planning tools for assess~ the demographic and economic impacts associated with new development or- redevelopment proposals. For more #~rmation, please visit the Excensus Web Site at ww~v. excens~ts, com CARVER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEMOGRAPI~IIC PARTNERSi~TP .4 Funding Proposal- Confidential Draft- September 28, 2001 This document outlines a proposal that would establish a new community-wide demographic services capability in Carver County, Minnesota. This is a publi~vate development program with wide community support and a distributed funding base. The following sections provide an overview of the program, describe the deliverables and outline thc steps that will be taken to ensure its successful implementation. Proposal Outline: · · Page Pmgram Description ........................................... 1 Why This Service Is Needed ..................................... 4 High-Impact Applications ....................................... 5 The Community Partners ........................................ 6 Costs and Delivery Timetable .................................... 7 Additional Program Considerations ................................ 9 Appendices: o Database development overview ............................ 10 o Framework for cooperative data sharing ...................... 12 o Agreements, contracts, and licensing ......................... 14 o Sample outputs .......................................... 15 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The Carver County Community Demographic Partnership (CDP) project will bring to Carver County government, communities and institutions access to critical demographic information for planning community programs and services, mmmging resources and infrastructure, and developing strategic growth policies. At the core of this initiative is a commitment to making the data acce~ible and useful to all organizations and individuals in the county. What makes CDP unique is its scale (data specific to very small areas of geography), the currency of the data, a structure that permits very different kinds of data to be integrated, the capability to display the data in highly detailed "community maps", and the ability to show small incremental changes in local demographics at a scale and frequency that is of significant value in all manner of program planning, policy making, and evaluation. The primary audiences for CDP are organizations and individuals in Carver County '- facing difficult decisions regarding program needs (e.g., Where should a new day care center, senior center, or recreation center be located to meet current and future need~?), infrastructure development (e.g., what roads will need to be expanded to meet growing traffic demands?), school enrollment planning (e.g., Which schools will see growing student counts and which will not?), transportation capacrity planning (e.g., where will growth patterns require highway or transit upgrades), or making decisions regarding the allocation of public funds (e.g., How should scarce housing rehab dollars be deployed across communities and neighborhoods to reflect existing and future needs?). This base of information will also prove invaluable to community development specialists, housing developers, strategic growth planners, grant writers, and community organizers that need to be able to measure and track changes in neighborhoods, communities and study areas across Carver County. CDP is being sponsored and financially supported by a key group of county, municipal, school districts, health care, community service providers, and state sponsors. All of these organizations anticipate making signiticant use of the information provided. The information, available through CDP, will be developed by ExcensusIxc, a Twin Cities-based firm with unique capabilities to create current, high quality demographic data. In fact, Exeensus has a patent pending on the technology and processes it uses in producing these demographic data sets. Excensus has established strong relationships and credibility with a number of cities, school districts, counties, as well as regional and state agencies. This proposal anticipates that future year development and enhancements to the CDP service will be aided and facilitated by other comparable development efforts going on elsewhere in the Twin Cities Metro Area.. CDP Components There are three functional parts to CDP: a database compatible with Geographic Information System (GIS) sof~vare and technology in use throu~out the county, a pn'nted community atlas containing maps, tables and charts for all users even those without direct access to GIS, and aprogram of outreach and training that will help users make effective use of the data and resoumes provided through CDP. Database content - Excensus will be producing demographic profiles describing the current base of 24,350 households that live in Caxver County. Rather than being limited to standard geographic areas (e.g., city, zip code area, county totals, etc.), this information will be constructed to fit any community-defined geography, from neighborhood and school enrollment areas to transit corridors, development planning areas, police patrol areas, city boundaries, county totals, and almost any other geographic area. For confidentiality and data privacy reasons, the household information that is used to build these profiles is not published or released by Excensus. No names, addresses or means to link these demographic profiles to specific resideats is ever released by Excensus to the partnering organizations in this project. What is released is summary data compiled for small-geographic clusters (generally 3 to 5 households) called iBlocksTM that, in turn, become the building blocks for the larger neighborhood, planning area, or community profiles. (A more detailed description of the demographic data file is provided in Appendix 1.) These summary profiles tell us a great deal about the charaeter~cs of residents living in the County. Three categories of data will be provided: Resident and household attributes (again, no individual or household data will be directly released) o Population and household counts o Residents' ages (numbers of people in each of 20 age groups) o Ages of heads-of-household (generally the property owner or the eldest adult in the household- in each of 7 age groups) o Type of households grouped by size and composition o Length of time living at current address (two-year segments) o Licensed drivers and vehicle ownership o Other items subject to availability of source data (e.g., health care data, public assistance data, mortgage size and type, etc.) e Summary housing and land use attributes- as available from county sources. All are reported at a summmT level and can be cross=tabbed against the full set of resident and household attributes. o Property_ tax values by range o Owner and renter occupancy o Home sales in past 5 years, including average price of sales in past year o Age of housing stock o Type of dwelling (i.e., townhome, duplex, single family, garden apartment, em.) 1990 and 2000 Census data - for standard census, geographies (a Subset will be attributed to the Excensus iBlockTM geographies) o Current 2000 Census block data releases (August, 2001) a. Population and household attn]autes b. Race and ethnicity c. Marital status and additional household composition variables d. Housing units and vacancy rates Available in 2002 a. Housing detail data b. Socioeconomic data- income, occupation, edue~ation, poverty rates, etc. Access and Delivery - The iBlockTM profiles developed for the CDP are designed for use with the County's GIS mapping technology. These small summary cluster areas fit directly on top of the County's digital parcel and property base map, permi~g the demographic information to be mapped in a highly recognizable way showing the demographic relationships between neighborhoods as well as pro~mity to parks, lakes, schools, businesses, highways, etc. This demographic information will serve a wide range of potential users, from county or city planners and GIS technical staff to community, school or non-profit organization users. Some of these users will be technically inclined while others will not. Stakeholders will be given the choice of acq~g the raw database directly for use by in-house GIS technical staff or other planners/researchers with data manipulation skills, or by accessing the data in prepared report or map form. These reports and maps will be available in hardeopy form or as digital flies accesdble to the community at large. Finally, users that wish to tie their own data to the CDP profiles can do so through a separate fee-based consulting arrangement with Exceusus. For example, schools may wish to link student achievement data with the demogr~hic and housing profiles to assess the relationship between in-school performance and associated household characteristics. With this information, schools could determine the need for various types of community intervention or remedial services. Access to data developed in these custom projects would be kept confidential unless directed otherwise by the user organization. Outreach and Training - Much of the outreach and training requirements for CDP will be served through existing resources within the county. Principal among these is the Carver County GIS Users Group which includes members from the county, cities and schools in the Carver County. With support and assistance from Excensus and the Carver CDP Pwject Team, the GIS Users Group will be asked'to provide periodic forums and training session for current or prospective CDP users. Reso~ have been budgeted for both outreach and ~g. .. WHY THIS SERVICE IS NEEDED - This demographic resource will have signiflcanl, lasting impacts on planning and policymaking in Carver County and the region. The needs being addresses are critical. Here are some of the anticipated outcomes. Current Data Appropriate for Real World Apphcations - Planning will be based on a current picture of what actually exists in a neighborhood, highway corridor, planning district, or development impact area. Planners and decision makers can focus on any geographic area that uses streets boundaries and expect accurate and cturent data. Consistent Data Covering All Geographies - Data at all levels (neighborhood, community, sub-regional and regional) will be derived from a consistent base of demographic information along with consistent use of Geographic Information System (GIS) technology. Meaningful Trend Data based on Frequent Updates - For the first time, communities can track annual changes in housing and service delivery needs by type of household (e.g., adults with school aged children) on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis. · Capability to Seamlessly Integrate 2000 Census Data- The Carver County demographic data can enhance the value of the 2000 Census by increasing its availability and providing a means to validate and update data published in the Census. Capabili _ty to Cross-tabulate Demographic Data with Critical Planning Data - Data will be structured so that meaningfi~ infommfion about current residents can be linked to existing data about land use (e.g., zoning), economic development (e.g., impact analysis areas), urban design (e.g., housing density), and infrastructure planning (e.g., utility capacity). Unique Data Offering New Ways to Measure Change - New sets of demographic indicators and trend reports can be developed to monitor community and neighborhood pwgress against major public initiatives. Thig assessment can be performed and compared at all levels of geography from neighborhoods to the county a whole. Consistent Countywide Data Framework That Facilitates Data Sharing and Collaborative Planning - New planning overlays and templates will be developed permitting the planning applications developed in one community to be shared with others. HIGH-IMPACT APPLICATIONS Small-area demographic data that is geographically precise, incorporating current sununary data on households and .residents, is unlike anything available to planners and policy-makers in our region. Here are a few examples of public uses and benefits. Note that many of these applications serve both local and regional needs. Community-Based Planning- Visualize and quantify the changing ehamct~stics of neighborhoods and communities. Make more informed decisions about future land uses, capital improvements, transportation improvements, housing and recreation needs, s~or programs, childcare services, economic development, the environment, and many other planning issues. 1. Lifecycle Housing Analysis - Compare the changing characteristics of residents with the characteristics of their homes (location, type, size, age, condition, affordability, etc.). Prepare for long-term housing needs of current residents and local employees. Watch for early signs of neighborhood decline or rapid turnover. Design more effective home maintenance and reinvestment programs. . Neighborhood Needs Assessment- Use socioeconomic profiles to assess the concentration of different household types. Allocate resources based on current and future needs. Document the neighborhood need for programs such as home maintenance, senior services, transit, parks and recreation programs, community education, and public assistance. Pro,ram Eva/~'on - Track the impact of community programs. For example, for a program aimed at stabilizing a neighborhood, tr~k trends in home ownership, resident turnover, housing reinvestment, cmplo~ent rates, and retention of young families. Use outcome information to improve programs and prioritize funding. Transportation Planning - Understand travel patterns with much greater clarity and precision. Design or redesign roadways to match neighborhood characteristics and long term trends. Highway Design and Redesign - Study the neighborhoods along a current or planned roadway. Anticipate the timing and impact of resident turnover. Extend the life and value of street and highway projects! 2~ Transit Planning- Pinpoint the geographic areas with the greatest need for transit services (seniors, households without vehicles, low-to-moderate incomes). Predict transit demand based on resident demographics and neighborhood trends. Select optimum routes and transit stops. County Human Services- Use mall-area data to assess the need for services in any given area. Compare the characteristics of neighborhood residents with the known characteristics of current service recipients (such as people receiving public assistance, chemical dependency services, child protection, or housing services). Use demographic trend data to forecast future changes in service needs. Community Corrections - Compare neighborhood crime data with neighborhood trends occurring over the same period of time. Use neighborhood characteristics to select the most promising strategies for prevention and enfomement. Over time, uso neighborhood trends to identify neighborhoods at risk for increased crime and develop strategies for countering these trends. School District Planning - Current, "quick response" data can be used to predict enrollment trends and plans for facilities, staffing, and enrollment boundary changes. Further, school districts will be able to match up enrollment for state formula funding purposes. THE COMMUNITY PARTNERS In recognition of the application and benefits that are expected to accrue from CDP, a strong community cross-section of organizations has stepped forward to endorse and support this program. The current base of community partners includes the following: Carver County Departments ('Public Health, Planning and Zoning, Social S~v'ices, Public Works, Sheriff's Department, HRA, Information Servia, and Minnesota Extension Services) · Carver County Cities (Cbanha.~.~en, Chaska, W~ Watertown, and Norwood/Young America) · Carver County School Districts (Chaska/Cbanhassen, Waconia, Watertown, and Norwood/Young America) · Ridgeview Regional Medical Center · Southwest Metro Transit · Carver/Scott Coop · Minnesota Department of Transportation (MN/DOT) · M~'oGIS · Others... As Community Partners, these organizafion~ have communicated their intent to support this project through direct funding and/or by providing data to support the profile building efforts of Exeensus. Letters of Intent are being drafted by each partner at the present time. In return for these commitments, each of these organizations will have full access to the digital database products, published reports, and access to training and custom support services. COSTS, FUNDING FORMULAS AND DELIVERY TIMETABLE COMMUNITY DATA PARTNERSHIP BUDGET ~fimtyear f,~ain~ __ _ $ 2,0O0 $ 957 $ 1,0o0 $ 478 $ 5,000 $ 2,391 Medical Center $ 10,000 $ 4,783 _ . . $ 2,000 $ 957 $ 1,000 $ 478 $ 2,000 $ 957 $ 2,000 $.. 957 ~t fi,ndin~ .... y~ __ $ 9,700 $ 4,639 $ 8,550 $ 4,089 Ameri~ $ 1,650 $ 789 ....... $ 3,600 $ 1,722 $ 1,500 $ 717 .......... STAKEHOLDER FUNDING Carver.Cou~.~__($25,00o Information Services Planning.& Zonin~ ........ yap.. !ic. Public Works ............................. Sheriffs Depm'm~t ......... MN Extension Service ........ .C..ry.__.t_.cT_.~.._(_~3_.5: _o0_o. ....... ......... Citx_o__r. ~ ..... .......... C~ .o.f. ~ ............ ......... O_ty .of.~o.....r~o..od_ y..._o~_. .......... CSty o.f.w, a~ ............. ....... C~ty..o.f.W.a _ .ty~.._ _~ ......... School Districts .($_5 :.000~, first year ~~?_~_v_n. ............ $ 3,500 $ 1,674 ......... ..N_~_yo..m~. America $ ..... S00_ $ 239 Wm:onia $ ~00 $ 239 ......... Watertg. ~.~ $ 500 $ 239 .......... .S .o.u__~_w. ~ .t_M_.e_.t~... Tranait $ 1 ~250 $ 598 ...... _Ca~_e~ _S_~..C._oOp_ __ $ 1,250 S 598 ~ Depa~...r/a2~._n_~..o_f_T__ranapo_r~atlon (MN/DOT) $ 20,000_ $_ . - TOTAL $ 77~500 $ 27~500 EXPENSES ! ................. ....... _C.C_._C~._.p__D_..a. ta_._.I~..e!.o, pment and Mahtenan~ Creation of iBlockTM database ~ $ 50,000 $ - ....................................... .......... ~._u .Na..~s....,~_ .. ~s.,~~ ...... s - $ 12,soo ....... ~,_b.~_h. _ea_~..m,...~____~ ?able~ $ 10,000 $ S,000 ...... ..P~..j..~.._Co ..-?,-~.cau.'_o_~_._a~. Outr~ch $ S,000 $ 2,_S00 _ ......... U_ser_T.. _v,j.-.~_-._.-_._an~.. ._As.__sis~ ....... S TOTAL $ 77,500 $ 27~500 ADDITIONAL PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS · Regional Cost Sharing · Program Sustainability APPENDIX I: DATABASE DEVELOPMENT Excensus' approach to demographic data is unique and effective. The process involves the acquisition, mer~ng and synthesis of information contained in many different administrative data files maintained by the state, Carver County, local cities and school. districts. This methodology is consistent with the State Data Practices Act (Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13 and administrative rules) and its provisions governing preparation of "summary data." Excensus designed, tested and refined this process over the past three years working with Metro Area cities, counties, school districts and other related units of government. A patent is pending on the technology and processes developed and used by Excensus in producing its demographic data products. Process Description- Building Current-Y~ Demographic Profiles 1. Administrative Data Acquisition and Storage- Through a series of information sharing, confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements Excensus expects to acquire and process a number of state, county and local administrative data sets. Included are school census files, utility billing files, county tax and dwelling data, building permit data, driver's license and vehicle registration files, librm3t cardholder files, birth and death records, and public assistance participant data. These core data sets are the best and most reliable information sources about individuals and households in the Twin Cities.' Non-disclosure and limited use agreements are routinely signed with all data sharing organizations. Confidentiality of the 'source data is also protected by use of a dedicated data warehouse, a clear separation of household-specific data and summary profiles, and security/licensing provisions providing controlled access to the data.. ,1 HousehoM .Profiling- The technical team merges the source data sets based on the recorded names of individuals, their birth dates, addresses and property IDs. Processing routines sort out current from past residents, assign a head-of- household, and construct profiles for each resulting household. Accuracy and reliability in the final profiles are critical to CDP's success. Care is taken so that names and addresses are standardized and checks are made to ensure that the master address list is complete and that it matches to all known residential m iBlockTM Summary Area Development - The household profiles are aggregated and summarized to a block segment (called. an iBlocka~v') and all identifying names and addresses are removed. Thi~ split with the original source data means that there is no risk of confidential data getting beyond this point. For low-density residential areas, an iBlockTM is roughly equivalent to three to five adjacent housing units. Where a single block segment has fewer than three resident households, adjacent block segments are pulled together until at least three households are contained in the group. For high-density,, residential areas (apartments, townhouses or mobile homes) the iBlocksTM will normally consist of all multi-unit buildings on a single tax parcel. Approximately 5,000 iBlocksTM will be produced for the Carver County area. iBlocksTM are designed so that, wherever possible, they do not cross any city, school enrollment area, census boundary, subdivision, or TAZ boundary. This ensures that thc remflting profile units can bc further aggregated to ac, curatcly fit any planning area that uses slreets as a boundary. e Filling Data Gaps - Based on completed projects in other areas of the Twin Cities, the technical team knows that detailed profile~ can be expected for 90 to 95 percent of the households in Carver County without the need for any additional modeling. In addition, for these profiled households, names and dates-of-birth will be available for more than 95 percent of the individuals living in these households. This leaves only a small portion of the total base to be modeled and ensures a very high level of accuracy. Where data fields are missing or incomplete, household profiles are modeled using profiles from other similar households living in comparable housing and in the same micro-geographic arem - 5. Quality and Reliability Crosschecks- The.data development process inco~~ numerous consistency checks thmu~out the projecL Data aggregations are also checked for consistency a .gainst data and estimates from the 2000 Census and other data provided by the Metropolitan Council's Research Department. Alignment to County Parcel Data and GIS Base Maps The bridging of demographic data across to the County-maintained parcel property file is important in developing reliable demographic data and ~g a flexible product with nearly unlimited at~plication- ii Building a Master Address File - Key to the quality and utility of Excensus' demographic data files is a master address-to-parcel table that ensures a directly link is made between each household address and each residential property parcel in the County. This correspondence table is produced by the technic1 team by matching and merging address data from the source administrative data files to the digital GIS parcel boundary file developed and maintained by the Carver County Public Works Department. Quality checks are initiated in those eases where there are addresses on the source data files that don't match to a specific - ' residential tax parcel or where a tax parcel exists but not address in found. By reconciling these differences, the technical team is assured of having a complete residential housing base upon which to build the household and population profiles. 10 1 Incorporating Carver Coun~ Property and Housing Attribute Data - With thi~ bridge established between data maintained on an address basis and property information maintained on a parcel ID basis, a unique capability is achieved permitting the demographic profile data to be directly matched to housing, land use, tax and transportation rehted data. The result is an unparalleled capacity to view demographic data in the context of ho.using and land use. For example, users will be able to analyze, with precision, the relationship between the type, size and value of an area's housing stock and the demographic make-up of the people who live in these units. This is of significant value as the County and cities assess the adequacy and affordability of the current housing stock, plan housing rehab programs, or consider alternative new housing development proposals. m Enhanced "Real World" Mapping- As described earlier, the demographic data is summarized using small geographic clusters called iBlocksTM. By virtue of the address-to-parcel correspondence file, the J.Block clusters are given physical form by matching them to the boundaries of the parcels in the County GIS parcel file. This means that all of the demographic data can now be mapped with precision on top of the Carver County GIS parcel file. It also means that maps can be produced that are intuitively clear and extremely valuable from a p!anning and analysis perspective. Users can see the composition of households living in a' clearly defined neighborhood and then consider the implications with respect to an adjoining park, school, day care facility, highway, or new development parcel. Patterns of community aging, turllover and growth can also be considered with respect to adequacy of existing or planned community SerViCes or utilities. Data Updating and Maintenance Our communities are always changin~ New homes are built and, in some cases, existing homes are removed. Some residents will remain in their homes while other will move on either to another home in the community to a home in a new community. Even where households remain in place, their demographic profiles will be changing as household members age, new members are added and existing members move out. . Annual County Data Updates - The capacity to fi'equenfly update the Excensus demographic file is considered essential to maintaining the value of this resource. Furthermore, the ability to track and report changes as they occur is of critical value in all types of program planning and forecasting. As contemplated, the Carver County file will be updated on an annual basis, permi~ users to see and map the patterns of demographic change in the County.- The updating process requires fewer resources than the original data development effort. Rather than rebuilding the entire data base, updates to the household profiles require only the processing of records that have changed since the previous update. Since the original base files contain date-of-b~ most household profiles will be automatically aged ahead based on a calendar birth 11 date. Examples of"chauge records" would be changes in property ownership records, new utility connects or disconnects, new birth or death records, addition or deletions to properties in the County Assessor's tax records, additions to addresses in thc Postal Resident file, or other similar changes. As change records are brought in for updating by Exccnsus, routines arc nm that update thc household profile fields and new iBlock cluster profiles are generated. As source data agreem~ts are established initially with data sharing parmers, specific data update schedules will bo identified and agreed upon. 12 APPENDIX H: FRAMEWORK FOR COOPERATIVE DATA SHARING Cooperative data sharing is critical to the lasting success for this proposed progratm Quality results are dependent on the availability of several key admini~ve data sets as well as the cooperative involvement of those agencies and organizations that are responsible for maintaining this information_ To ensure that ail confidentiai and non- public data is protected, a structure of formal data sharing agreements will be established between Exconsus and each data sharing organization_ In addition, each of those organizations will be given the opportunity to participate directly in the program as a member of the Data Sharing Advisory Group. Anticipated Sources of Shared Data The following agencies and organizations will be administrative data in support of this program: asked to provide current le Carver County o Information Services - GIS parcel boundary files. o Assessor '~ and duditor'~ Departments - Property ownership, tax and dwelling o Community Social Serv/ces- Birth and death records as well as program participant data (.administrative listings only- no program detail needed). o County Library System - Caxdholder file. 2. Carver County Municipalities o Public Works Departments - Water utility billing data o Planning Departments - Newly approved residentiai addresses o Inspections and Licensing- Building Permit data and pet licenses 3. Carver County Area School Districts o Student Information Offices - School census and enrollment data 4. Minnesota State Agencies o Department of Public Safety- Drivers license and vehicle registration files. o Secretary of State's Office - Voter registration data Public Utilities (if available) o Xcel Energy- Electricity billing data o Qwest- Telephone billing data Data Sharing Agreements -. A sample Confidentiality, Non-Disclosure and Limited Use Agreement is found in Appendix III. The form of this agreement was dmfkxl initially by the Governor's Council on Geographic Data and has been approved for use by avariety of local gov~nment agencies. 13 Separate signed agreements will be executed between Excensus and each of the agencies or organizations that will be asked to share data for this program. These agreements establish the rights of the agency or organization, the limited uses of the data, and data privacy and protection responsibilities of the parties involved. Some variation in the agreement can be expected based on each agency's contract policies. Data Sharing Advisory Group Data sharing partners and other intex~c~l parties will be offered the opportunity to serve on an advisory panel that will develop guidelines for processing, summarizing and managing the demographic profile data developed by Excensus. This group will also help shape long-range plans for enhanced source data development and policies for data access and support. 14 F~ue Calls for Week of November 12-18, 2001. Letter from Larry McKenzie, MnDOT dated November 15, 200 ~. Let~r from Michael Beer, MnDOT dated November 6, 2001. . Fi~ Calls for Week of October 29-November 4, 2001. Letter from Nancy Tyra-Luken, Southwest Metro Transit Commission dated November 9, 2001. Carver County Sheri~ s Office Area Report - ~ for Service for Month of October. Fire/Rescue Calls for Week of November 5-11, 2001. Chamber of Commerce 2002 Business Plan and Program of Work. CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE/RESCUE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 12-NOVEMBER 18, 2001 Thurs Thurs Fri Sat Sat Sat Sat Sat Nov 13 9:40AM Nov 14 1:02 PM Nov 15 4:58 PM Nov 15 9:32 PM Nov 16 9:34 AM Nov 17 1:59 AM Nov 17 1:59 AM Nov 17 2:16 PM Nov 17 7:24 PM Nov 17 11:59 PM Redwing Lane Coulter Boulevard Preakness Lane Horseshoe Curve Sandpiper Trail Troendle Circle Frontier Trail Highway 41 & Highway 7 Lodgepole Point Highway 5 & Powers Blvd Fire alarm- false alarm, no fire Medical- possible seizures, cancelled Medical - trouble breathing Medical - trouble breathing Medical - trouble breathing Medical - person collapsed Medical - person fainted Grass fire - unfounded Smell of smoke .... Car accident with injuries ~ Fax:651-6~-2085 Nov 15 '01 15:50 P. 02 ~,~~,.~ Minneeota Department of Tmn.portatlon Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Rosevllle, MN 55113 Novembe~ ! 5, 2001 Teresa Bm'gess Public Works Director City of Chanha~n 690 City C~nter Drivo ~sc~ NIH 55317 Dear Iris. Burgess: This letter is in response to your November/ia leUgr to Leon Lilly, he has ask~xl me to respond. We have made several reviews of the intersection over the past month8. A fatal accidertt occurred at this location in late September. Charles Hudrlik and I made a review of the inmr~cti~ to see ff add.ifio~ traffic control was needed. Thc traffic control was ad~uate, however, we did make recommendations to Leon for some sign additions which he subsequently/nsta]l~ Our primary concern was for thc eastbound traffic, which has a higher opelating speed. Wc added a double set of SIGNAL ~ 1/3 MILB (left and right side of the road), a second sign indicating ROAD WORK AI-~ and a second SIGNAL AHEAD tm the le/t aide of the road across fi-om inplace signs, and some reflectorized drams on thc fight side of the mad near the intersection. Westbound has good junction signing, double SIGNAL AHEAD s~ and double -' ROAD WORK AHEAD signs. Both northbound and southbou~l traffic was and still is in a shlgle lane ai the intersection and seems to be stopping at the proper location without a problem. I reviewed the intersection again after r~cei~ your letter on Friday, Nove~lber 9~; the intersection is ncafin8 completion. The north side of thc intersection should bc paved within the next few day~, if it isn't a~y completed. Lanes line up appropriately in all four directions now with the recent opening of thc final alignment on thc south side of TH7. Thc temporary signals that ar~ inplace now will stay until next spring when the final signal system will be installed. Signal head plac=nent looks good with heads placed over both thru lanes in each d~on on TH 7 and over the thru lanm of the northbound and southbound wads. I felt the signing and striping looked good lind do not plan any addifi~ chanses. We will continue to monitor this location until the project is completed. next year. If you have any sugge,,stio~ or would like ro discuss this issue in more detail please feel fr~ to oonta~ mc at 651 634-2388. Lat_..M. cKer~e - Work Zon~ Supervisor An equal opportunity employer CC: Leon Lilly Charles Hudrlik Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Construction Resident Office 7333 Bryant Lake Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: Fa.c: (952) 826-6778 (952) 941-5481 November 06, 2001 Ms. Teresa J. Burgess, P.E., City Engineer City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive PO Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 S.P. 1002-61 T.H. 5 [~ter No. 0-13 Subject: TH 5AVest 78~' Street Bypass Review Dear Ms. Burgess: This letter is in response to your letter dated October 23,2001 requesting a review of the TH 5/West 78t~ Street Bypass. I reviewed this project last week with our Traffic Unit. We have'determined that the frontage road bypass is adequately signed to inform motorists of the speed requirements and advanced curve warnings. I plan to add Chevron signs for the WB TH 5 traffic' bypass located at approximate station 958+00 to provide additional indication of the bypass curve at that location. Also, this bypass will be modified this fall to carry the TH 5 EB traffic across to the new TH 5 EB concrete pavement. This modification will increase the radius of the WB bypass curve coming off the TH 5 WB concrete pavement. Mn/DOT will be responsible for snow removal only on the portion of West 78~' that is currently being used to carry TH 5 bypassed traffic. Feel free to contact me at (952) 826-6778 if you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter. Sincerely, Michael G. Beer, P.E. Project Engineer ce: File M. Pauek M. Mondeel Larry MeKenzie (Tra~c, W.E.) An equal opportunity employer Cl'rY OF CHAt. iHAS$~['! NOV 0,3 ZOO1 ENGINEERItlG DEPT, Men Men Men Tues Tues Tues Weds Fri Fri Fri Sat Sat Sat Sat Sat Sat Sat Sat Sun Oct 29 Oct 29 Oct29 Oct 30 Oct 30 Oct30 Oct 30 Oct31 Nov 2 Nov 2 Nov 2 Nov 3 Nov 3 Nov 3 Nov 3 Nov 3 Nov 3 Nov 3 Nov 3 Nov 4 1:53 AM 2:12 AM 5:23 AM 9:27 AM 9:54 AM 12:35 PM 3:48 PM 2:12 PM 5:24 AM 9:54 PM 11:19 PM 11:59 AM 12:02 AM 6:37 AM 10:53 AM 12:09 PM 2:04 PM 4:20 PM 4:48 PM CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRF_JRESCUE WEEK OF OCTOBER 29, = NOVEMBER 4, 2001 Hunter Drive Hunter Drive Mission Hills Drive Nez Peree Drive Redman Lane Coulter Boulevard Hwy 7 & Minnewashta Pkwy Wood Duck Lane West Village Road Fox Path Hwy 5 & Hwy 41 West 78th Street Park Road Autumn Ridge Way Laredo Drive Flamingo Drive Briarwood Court Clover Court Flying Cloud Drive Fox Path Medical - cancelled enroute Medical- assist paramedics on scene Medical - chest pains, cancelled by medics Medical - person f~ling shaky, oanc~lle~l by Medical - s~izums Medical - unresponsive person Medic. ad- cancelled ~xtroute~ no problem El~ztrie~ fire Medical- difficulty ~g, e. anoelled Car ae. cident with injuries Car accident- eame~lled, no injuries Water flow alarm - false alam~ no fire Cax~n Monoxide alarm Fire alarm - false alarm, no fire Medical - person fell off bike Electri~ short in stove Medical - trouble breathing Medical - person down, unknown problem Fire alarm- false alarm, no fire SOUTIIWr-sT HETnO TRANSIT 1:3500 Tfc]ltolo(Jy DriYe [den Pairie, Hitmoa 55]~/, P,ONE: 95Z.9~9.~.aUS r^x: 95Z.97~.7997 W[BSIT[: www. swlrmitor, November 9, 2001 Todd Gerhardt City Administrator, City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 NOV 1 1~ 2001 CFI'F OF cHA,¥HA$.~£t~ Dear Mr. Gerhardt, As you are aware, the Office of the State Auditor has issued a report concerning the Southwest Metro Transit Commission. The report centered around two main issues: 1) The Auditor alleged that SMTC did not have the proper controls and policies in place to always ensure compliance with state laws, and 2) the Auditor alleged that certain expenditures made did not serve a public purpose. With respect to the first point, action has been taken regarding controls and procedures to ensure compliance with state law. As to the second point, SMTC provided detailed documentation to the Auditor's office, which supports the public purpose for these expenditures. Furth~ore, the Board approved the expenditures and was aware of their purpose. SMTC is concerned that the Auditor's report casts doubt on the integrity and professionalism of the Commission and its Staff. We believe the report fails to recognize the legitimate business and public purpose set forth by SMTC in documentation submitted to the Auditor's Office. Success in a suburban market requires innovation, image, and, most important, constant care and concern over every detail of tnmsit service. Our drive to ensure system quality has been rewarded as express ridership has increased 60% in three years. We have cut costs by privatizing many areas of our operation saving at least $500,000 annually, generated new sources of revenue and secured over $18 million in regional and federal grants. Further we have constructed new facilities, purchased state-of-the-art equipment, and are currently developing the Southwest Station site as a transit oriented community which will generate over $4.5 million in new revenut~. In 1999, SMTC was awarded the Minnesota Transit System of the Year, and in 2000, the agency received the first-ever Management Innovation Award given by the Minnesota Public Transit Association. Throughout the inquiry by the State Auditor, SMTC fully cooperated and provided all materials requested. While the State Auditor's final report contains a number ofinacarmcies, we agree that improvement was necessary in our internal accounting and administrative control procedures. SMTC hired a new finance director, who, even before the State Auditor's Office began its inquiry, began an internal audit and suggested ways to improve our systems and policies in order to ensure that SMTC is in compliance with' state laws. The new finance director has extensive experience and knowledge in the area of public finance, something the agency was lacking during the time pe~od covered by the audit. All of us associated with SMTC are committed to continually improving and avoiding even the slightest appearance of impropriety. The report reminds us that we can all strive to do a better job as we operate our transit system to serve our customers, our communities and our employees. We are hopeful that your confidence and support for Southwest Metro Transit will not waiver. The Board believes that our transit system is effectively and efficiently managed, and has voiced our support for the Executive Director and the administrative Please feel free to contact me, or any of the other board members, if you have questions, concerns or comments about the State Auditor's report' - ' · . · Sincerely, Chair, Southwest Metro Transit Commi~,~ion Cc: Members of the Southwest Metro Transit Commission · -' -'-;;'001 CI/'1' OF ~H~NHA.~EH O, C CITY OF CHANHASSEN CITY REPORTS Office of County Sheriff Carver County Government Ccnrer ~ Justice Cente~ . :ARVER 600 Fourth'Street OUNTY Chaska, Minnesota 55318-2190 Bud Oison, Sheriff Emergency: 911 · Sheriff Admin: (952') 361-1212 Admin. Fax: (952) 361-1229 Dispatch: (952) 361-1231 (Non-Emergency) Listed below is a description of each of the different classification of calls for s~rvice which the Carver County Sheriff's Office received and processed for your a.ma. Criminal. Assault Drug Violatioa -Homicide Traffic/Alcohol Misc. Criminal Property Damage Sex Crim~ Theft Related Vehicle Theft Non-Criminal Disturb Peace/Privacy Misc. Non Criminal Lock out Missing Persons/Runaway Anknal Medical House/Business Check Assist other Agency Fire Call - Mental Health Civil Process Transport Warrant Service Boat and Water Snowmobile Gun Permit/Acquire Gun Permit/Carry Lock Post Office Suspicious Activity Open door Auto Aecd-Prop Damage Auto Aced-Injury Auto Aced-Fatal Traffic Special Traffic Altercation between parties where actual physical harm occurred Breaking into a residence or business All drug violations, possession of, sale of, manufacture of or under the influence of. Taking of a persona life Tra~c stops or ac~iden~ involving a &Der under the influence Minor offenses which include order of protection violatioas, warrant service, threats and harassment, tobacco violations. " All damage to property includhi.'g vandalism'and ~ing on property Taking of property in the pre.ncc of another with use of force Rape. sexual abuse, indecent exposm~ and pornography Taking of property Credit card fraud, issuance of bad checks, counterfeiting, theft by swindle Theft of. a motor vehicle Noise, harassing phone calls, Citizen ass~ lost and found propex~, gen~ law enforcm~ent questions, civil matters, delivery of council packets, juvenile disciplinary problems etc. Unlock doors of automobiles, residences or businesses for owners Checking on an alarm at a private residence or business. Verbal argument between parties Juvenile runaways or missing persons Animal bites, stray animals Assist persons with mediead issues, natural cause deaths Check 6n houses or businesses when owners are away from property Assist other law enforcement offices; state patrol or govemmerit departments Fires and assist fLre departments Person on property who does not b~long Suicides, 72 hr holds for mental health issues. Service of civil papers, assist with civil stand by situations Transport persons for various r~asons Service a warrant for Carver County and other counties All incidents involving boats or lakes All incidents involving snowmobile Issuance of a permit to purchase a handgun Issuance of a permit to carry a handgun Deputies lock po~ office buildings Suspicious persons, acts or vehicles Locating an open door to a business Auto accident when only property damage occurred Auto accident when injury and property damage occurred Auto accident in which a fatality occurred All traffic stops and calls, stalled vehicles, debris on the roadway Radar wagon, special traffic details Affirmative action/~_.qual.Opportunity F. mployer l~v.;~,.~,.I ~.. lt'IOL D..o )'"' ......... m ....~. · vn .... CARVER COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE AREA REPORT FOR crrY OF CHANHASSEN CALLS FOR SERVICE FOR MONTH OF OCTOBER CRIMINAL Burglary Drug Violation Homclde Traffic/Alcohol Misc. Criminal 2001 2001 MONTHLY YTD 14 22 2000 MONTHLY 4O 36 25 137 18 217 29 Property Damage 21 287 55 Robbery 1 5 1 Sex Crime 2 12 2 Theft 49 376 38 Theft/Related 3 25 1 2 117 22 1182 Vehicle Theft TOTAL CRIMINAL 2 156 NON-CRIMINAL 2000 YTD 48 32 22 ' 132 277 391 2 22 367 18 16 1327 Disturb Peace/Privacy Misc/Non criminal Lock out Alarm Domestic Missing Person/Runaways ~ Abuse/Neglect 43 Gun Permit/Carry 55 58 80 11 424 647 526 781 122 66 33 64 59 77 367 587 468 743 9O 94 45 4 50 Motorist Assist 20 287 14 195 Animal 41 346 40 354 Medical 37 387 _. 39 374 House/Business Check 2 25 3 36 Assist other Agency 3 63 7 83 Fire Call 26 224 26 225 Prowler 2 10 7 33 Mental Health 1 35 3 32 Civil Process 0 2 0 2 Transport 0 5 1 24 Warrant Service 5 41 4 19 Boat & Water 0 51 0 36 Snowmobile 0 20 0 0 Gun Permit/Acquire 19 102 6 72 1 Lock Post Office 1 0 0 0 Suspicious Activity 110 744 58 538 Open Door 1 21 3 13 Auto Accd- Prop Dam 28 424 42 393 Auto Accd - Injury 6 84 11 83 0 0 0 22O9 Fatal Auto Acc.,d 179 8 Special Traffic TOTAL NON..CRIM 168 0 678 51 7747 1266 0 6182 Mon Mon Mon Mon Tues Weds Ffi Nov 5 Nov 5 Nov 5 Nov 5 Nov 6 Nov 7 Nov 8 Nov 9 2:40 AM 8:31 AM II:19AM 10:36 PM 5:42 PM 7:56 AM 11:40 AM 6:19 PM CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPAR~ FIRE/RF_~CUE - WEEK OF NovEMBER 5 - NOVF.~BER 11,2001 South Shore Drive Lake Drive West Hesse Farm Road Osprey Lane Century Boulevard Lake Drive West Arboretum Boulevard Highway 7 & Highway 41 Caren Monoxide Alarm Medical - seizures Garden Uaemr on fire Medical- unknown problem Medical- possible heart attack Medical - diabetic reaction Fire alarm- false alar~ no fire Smell of natural gas, unfounded Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce 391 West 78th St., Chanhassen, MN 55317 Our Mission "To provide a healthy atmosphere where business can prosper and add to the economic and social health of the co.mmunity.' 2ooa Business Plan And Program of Work 391 West 78th St., Chanhassen, MN 55317 952-934-39o3 E-maih Linda@chanhassenchamber.org Fax 952-934-21~9 www. chanhassenchamber.org Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce 391 West 78th St., Ch_anha.~qen, MN 55317 :~002 Priorities The Board of Directors, at its annual'planning conference, established the following priorities for 2002. Within this report, are the goals set forth for each priority. ~.Membership Development 2.Committee Development 3.Generate Non Dues Income Chanhassen Chamber of Commerce 2002 BUSINESS PLAN Adopted by the Board of Directors 11/30/01 1. Membership We will expand the resources and efficiency of the Chamber by increasing the membership base. A goal of net 25 new members by year end will be realized. 2. Committee Development We will develop and maintain strong committees with the chair- person and members actively participating in achieving committee goals. Committees and their sponsored programs will be made visible to the membership and the community through increased marketing. 3. Generate Non Dues Income We will develop specific task forces, to develop special events or promotions with the goal of each being to generate income over and above membership dues./~ In order to accomplish the mission of the Chamber and to realize the business plan for 2002, the Board and Staff of the Chamber will work with committees and task forces. Ail Chamber members are encouraged to become involved by serving as a member of one or more of the following committees or on a specific task forc~ Ambassadors:, Chair: Board Liaison: Mission: To serve as the public relations arm of the Chamber by welcoming new business to the Chanhassen community, providing liaison services to Chamber guests and new members and recogvizing Chamber volunteers. · Make a minimum of 20 personal visits to new businesses annually · Coordinate ribbon cutting ceremonies for new and/or remodeled businesses · Sponsor volunteer recognition program I time annually during national volunteer week. · Serve as "greeters" at membership luncheons. Business Industry. & Education Chair:. Susan Conrad, MTM Advertising Board Liaison: Susan Conrad Mission: To connect business people, schools and learners-of all ages, to inspire with a lead- ership role and to educate students, the community arid businesses. - "' · Connect with people through the monthly newsletter, e-mail and web site · Sponsorship of 4 annual scholarships · Develop an "adoption" program · Promote job shadow and mentor programs within the Chamber membership and the local Government Affairs Chair: Board Liaison: Mission; To identify and monitor key legislative, regulatory and governmental issues affec~ Chamber businesses, to keep the membership informed of such issues and encourage active participation by members in a manner which is favorable to Chamber busi- ne, ss. · Work closely with the Minnesota Chamber on state issues. · Host candidate forums during election years. · Provide input to elected officials on issues that affect Chanhassen business or the com- munity · Keep membership informed on governmental issues that affect business. Membershil~ Chak: Board Liaison: Mission: To plan and implement ongoing new member recruitment programs and member retention. · Develop a new member kit. · Create new Chamber marketing tools/informational literature. · Make a minimum of 20 personal visits with nonmember businesses annual to discuss membership. · Sponsor annual membership drive during a specific time period. · Contact Chamber members through surveys twice annually for input on Chamber issues. Down Town Council Chair: Cindy Ballard, d'facto Art Studio Board Liaison: Cindy Bailard Mission: To promote Down Town Chanhassen through marketing and event coordination to the local and surrounding community. · Develop promotion/marketing for Chanhassen businesses during the PGA tournament 8/02. · Sponsor two advertising campaigns for the down town area annually. · Coordinate a Holiday promotional event for the Down Town business district. · Explore possibility of a Chanlmssen Farmers Market. Tourism Chair: Nichole Kuerschner, AmericInn Board Liaison: Nichole Kuerschner Mission: To create new marketing tools to increase the economic impact of tourism trade. · Implement a community assessment. · Research matching grant programs for marketing tool development. · Submit marketing information to regional publications. Board Liaison: Mission: To provide non dues revenue through social and networking events and/or Cham- ber promotions. · July 4th Trade Fair · Holiday Gala · Miscellaneous Fundraising including Holiday Ornament Program Chamber Membership: Access ~s Power Chambers of Commerce benefit the communities they serve. on a small scale, by providing, events' and sermceS,' "andin'the. ' larger-sense]: :._.. by promoting the growth of the local economy... The foundation of every community CNA#lEI ~tE~lr. tSHIP ACCESS IS. POWER