Loading...
Agenda and PacketAGENDA CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, MARCH 11, 2019 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD A.4:30 P.M. ­ WORK SESSION Note:  Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the work session items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regular agenda. 1.Commission Interviews 2.Discuss Commission Appointments ­ 6:00 P.M. B.7:00 P.M. ­ CALL TO ORDER C.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS D.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.  There 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. 1.Approve City Council Minutes dated February 25, 2019 2.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated February 19, 2019 3.Approve Purchase Agreement for Acquisition of Property Located at 770 Pioneer Trail for Flood Hazard Mitigation Grant 4.Resolution 2019­XX: Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Ad for Bid and Resolution 2019­XX: Designate No Parking on Dakota Avenue 5.Ordinance XXX: Amendments to Chanhassen City Code 6.Approve Chanhassen Farmers' Market Agreement E.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Visitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete and submit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda) F.NEW BUSINESS AGENDACHANHASSEN CITY COUNCILMONDAY, MARCH 11, 2019CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 7700 MARKET BOULEVARDA.4:30 P.M. ­ WORK SESSIONNote:  Work sessions are open to the public.If the City Council does not complete the worksession items in the time allotted, the remaining items will be considered after the regularagenda.1.Commission Interviews2.Discuss Commission Appointments ­ 6:00 P.M.B.7:00 P.M. ­ CALL TO ORDERC.PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTSD.CONSENT AGENDAAll items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the city council andwill be considered as one motion.  There will be no separate discussion of these items.  Ifdiscussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and consideredseparately.  City council action is based on the staff recommendation for each item.  Refer to thecouncil packet for each staff report.1.Approve City Council Minutes dated February 25, 20192.Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated February 19, 20193.Approve Purchase Agreement for Acquisition of Property Located at 770 Pioneer Trailfor Flood Hazard Mitigation Grant4.Resolution 2019­XX: Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project Approve Plans andSpecifications and Authorize Ad for Bid and Resolution 2019­XX: Designate NoParking on Dakota Avenue5.Ordinance XXX: Amendments to Chanhassen City Code6.Approve Chanhassen Farmers' Market AgreementE.VISITOR PRESENTATIONSVisitor Presentations requesting a response or action from the City Council must complete andsubmit the Citizen Action Request Form (see VISITOR GUIDELINES at the end of this agenda) F.NEW BUSINESS 1.Galpin Site Preliminary Plat & Rezone PUD 2.Commission Appointments G.COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS H.ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS I.CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION 1.Review of Claims Paid 03­11­2019 2.February 2019 Website Analytics Overview 3.Building Permit Data as of 03­05­2019 J.ADJOURNMENT K.GUIDELINES GUIDELINES FOR VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Welcome to the Chanhassen City Council Meeting.  In the interest of open communications, the Chanhassen City Council wishes to provide an opportunity for the public to address the City Council.  That opportunity is provided at every regular City Council meeting during Visitor Presentations. Anyone seeking a response or action from the City Council following their presentation is required to complete and submit a Citizen Action Request Form. An online form is available at https://www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/action or paper forms are available in the city council chambers prior to the meeting. Anyone indicating a desire to speak during Visitor Presentations will be acknowledged by the Mayor. When called upon to speak, state your name, address, and topic. All remarks 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. If there are a number of individuals present to speak on the same topic, please designate a spokesperson that can summarize the issue.  Limit your comments to five minutes. Additional time may be granted at the discretion of the Mayor. If you have written comments, provide a copy to the Council. During Visitor Presentations, the Council and staff listen to comments and will not engage in discussion. Council members or the City Manager may ask questions of you in order to gain a thorough understanding of your concern, suggestion or request. Please be aware that disrespectful comments or comments of a personal nature, directed at an individual either by name or inference, will not be allowed. Personnel concerns should be directed to the City Manager. Members of the City Council and some staff members may gather at Houlihan's, 530 Pond Promenade in Chanhassen immediately after the meeting for a purely social event.  All members of the public are welcome. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Commission Interviews Section 4:30 P.M. ­ WORK SESSION Item No: A.1. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: ADM 146G SUMMARY Commission interviews are scheduled every 15 minutes as follows: 4:30  Doug Reeder (PC & PRC) 4:45  John Kunitz (PC) 5:00  Bill Chappell (EC Incumbent) 5:15  Mike Schachterle (SC) 5:30  Ross Reeves (EC & PRC) 5:45  Matt Kutz (PRC) Paper copies of the applications and interview questionnaires will be provided to the city council for their convenience. DISCUSSION PLANNING COMMISSION Three 3­year positions The terms of Commissioners Andrew Aller, Steven Weick, and Nancy Madsen are expiring. Andrew Aller and Steven Weick have reapplied. Ten (10) new applications have been received. PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION Two 3­year positions and One 1­year position The terms of Commissioners Cole Kelly and Rick Echternacht are expiring. Both incumbents have reapplied. Commissioner Steve Scharfenburg is resigning his position as he is moving out of the city, leaving one year remaining in his term. Eight (8) new applications were received, four (4) of which selected the Park and Recreation Commission as their second choice. One or two 1­year youth positions Grant Schaeferle's term has expired and he is no longer eligible to reapply. No new applications were received. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Two 3­year positions The terms of Commissioners Bill Chappell and Wayne Benbow are expiring. Bill Chappell has reapplied. Four (4) new applications have been received. SENIOR COMMISSION Two or three 3­year positions The terms of Commissioners Jackie Engel and Cheryl Ayotte are expiring and are currently vacant due to resignations. Six (6) new applications have been received, one (1) of which selected the Senior Commission as CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectCommission InterviewsSection4:30 P.M. ­ WORK SESSION Item No: A.1.Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: ADM 146GSUMMARYCommission interviews are scheduled every 15 minutes as follows:4:30  Doug Reeder (PC & PRC)4:45  John Kunitz (PC)5:00  Bill Chappell (EC Incumbent)5:15  Mike Schachterle (SC)5:30  Ross Reeves (EC & PRC)5:45  Matt Kutz (PRC)Paper copies of the applications and interview questionnaires will be provided to the city council for their convenience.DISCUSSIONPLANNING COMMISSIONThree 3­year positions The terms of Commissioners Andrew Aller, Steven Weick, and Nancy Madsen are expiring.Andrew Aller and Steven Weick have reapplied.Ten (10) new applications have been received.PARK & RECREATION COMMISSIONTwo 3­year positions andOne 1­year position The terms of Commissioners Cole Kelly and Rick Echternacht are expiring. Both incumbents havereapplied. Commissioner Steve Scharfenburg is resigning his position as he is moving out of the city,leaving one year remaining in his term.Eight (8) new applications were received, four (4) of which selected the Park and RecreationCommission as their second choice.One or two 1­year youth positions Grant Schaeferle's term has expired and he is no longer eligible to reapply.No new applications were received.ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONTwo 3­year positions The terms of Commissioners Bill Chappell and Wayne Benbow are expiring. Bill Chappell hasreapplied.Four (4) new applications have been received.SENIOR COMMISSION Two or three 3­year positions The terms of Commissioners Jackie Engel and Cheryl Ayotte are expiring and are currently vacant due to resignations. Six (6) new applications have been received, one (1) of which selected the Senior Commission as their second choice. NOTE: The Senior Commission bylaws allow for the appointment of 7 or 8 commissioners. ATTACHMENTS: 2019 Commissions Interview Schedule City Code, Section 2­46. ­ Appointment to city committees and commissions Commission Interview Scoring Sheet 2019 Commissions Interview Schedule FIRST MEETINGS IN APRIL: Planning Commission - April 2, 2018 Environmental Commission - April 10, 2019 Senior Commission - April 18, 2019 Park & Rec Commission - April 23, 2019 City Council Interviews Environmental Commission Interviews - February 13 February 25 (Monday):6:00 Brian Smith (PRC 2nd Choice) 8:00 Bhakti Modi (SC)6:15 Ross Reeves (PRC 2nd Choice) 8:15 Alice "Lisa" Lyon (SC)6:30 8:30 6:45 Andrew Allen-NO SHOW 8:45 Gerald Cook (PC)7:00 Jeff Harken 9:00 Laura Skistad (PC & PRC) 9:15 Planning Commission Interviews - February 19 9:30 Andrew Aller (PC incumbent-coming from airport may be earlier)1st Antonio J. Fricano (SC 2nd Choice) 2nd Bala Chintaginjala-NO SHOW WITHDRAWN February 26 (Tuesday): 3rd Douglas Reeder (PRC 2nd Choice) 5:00 Sandy Sweetser (PRC)4th Gerald Cook 5:15 Bill Hickey (PRC)5th Lynn Pelto WITHDRAWN 5:30 Natalia Sander (PC-NO SHOW AT PC INTERVIEW) WITHDRAWN 6th Annette Stock-Lind 5:45 Laurie Susla (PC)7th Natalia Sander-NO SHOW 6:00 Jeff Harken (EC)8th John Kunitz 6:15 Lynn Pelto (PC) WITHDRAW 9th Laurie Susla 6:30 Steve Weick (PC incumbent)10th Laura Skistad (PRC 2nd Choice) 6:45 Annette Stock Lind (PC) 7:00 BREAK Senior Commission Interviews - February 21 7:15 Rick Echternacht (PRC incumbent)4:10 Ruth Lunde 7:30 Cole Kelly (PRC incumbent)4:30 Jim Camarata 7:45 Haley Pemrick (PRC)4:50 Alice "Lisa" Lyon 8:00 Drew Allen (EC-NO SHOW AT EC INTERVIEW)5:10 Bhakti Modi 8:15 Brian Smith (EC & PRC)5:30 Mike Schachterle 8:30 Antonio Fricano (PC & SC)5:50 Antonio Fricano (PC 1st Choice) 8:45 Ruth Lunde (SC) 9:00 Jim Camarata (SC)Park & Rec Commission Interviews - February 26 5:45 Bill Hickey March 11 6:00 Laura Skistad 4:30 Doug Reeder (PC & PRC)6:15 Sandy Sweetser 4:45 John Kunitz (PC)6:30 Doug Reeder 5:00 Bill Chappell (EC incumbent)6:45 Ross Reeves 5:15 Mike Schachterle (SC)7:00 Brian Smith 5:30 Ross Reeves (EC & PRC)7:15 Haley Pemrick 5:45 Matt Kutz (PRC-OUT OF COUNTRY FOR PRC INTERVIEW) 6:00 Discuss Commission Appointments Incumbents All commission appointments will take place at the March 11, 2019 City Council Meeting Page 1 ARTICLE IV. - BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS[4] Footnotes: --- (4) --- Cross reference— Park and recreation commission, § 14-16 et seq.; planning commission, § 15-16 et seq. State Law reference— Authority to establish advisory boards and commissions, M.S. § 412.621(2). DIVISION 1. - GENERALLY Sec. 2-46. - Appointment to city committees and commissions. All vacancies on committees, commissions, and boards shall be advertised to seek applicants. The city council may interview applicants before making appointment. With the exception of the housing and redevelopment authority, all appointments shall be by majority vote of the city council. Once appointed, an applicant shall serve until removed, with or without cause, by a four-fifths vote of the city council, until the expiration of the term of appointment and following appointment of the applicant's successor. Vacancies during a term shall be filled for the unexpired portion of the term. Sec. 2-46.01. - Same—Generally. The council determines the duties and exercises the powers of administrative boards or commissions. However, the council may establish boards or commissions as set forth in this article to investigate subjects or to perform quasi-judicial functions. Additional administrative boards or commissions shall be established as required by law or for the administration of a municipal function jointly shared with another political subdivision. (Ord. No. 363, § 4, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.03. - Planning commission. (a) Commission established. The planning commission is established pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Planning Act, and has the powers and duties assigned to it by that Act, by this Code, and state law. The planning commission is hereby designated the planning agency of the city pursuant to the Municipal Planning Act. (b) Membership. The planning commission consists of seven members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years, expiring on March 31 of each year. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the planning commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable, or as required by law or this Code. Page 2 (d) Powers and duties. The planning commission shall have the powers and duties allowed under state law, including: (1) To prepare a comprehensive plan for the future development of the city that is submitted to the council for implementation and to recommend amendments of the plan to the council from time to time as may be necessary or desirable. (2) To initiate, direct, and review, from time to time, a study of the provisions of the zoning code and the subdivision regulations and to report to the council its advice and recommendations with respect thereto. (3) To study applications and proposals for amendments to the zoning code and applications for special permits and to advise the council of its recommendations thereon. (4) To study preliminary plats and to advise the council of its recommendations thereof. (5) To act in an advisory capacity to the council in all matters wherein powers are assigned to the council by state law concerning comprehensive planning, zoning, platting, changes in streets, and other matters of a general planning nature. (e) Reports. The commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than March 31 of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 5, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.05. - Park and recreation commission. (a) Creation. There is established a park and recreation commission for the city. (b) Membership. The park and recreation commission consists of seven members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years expiring on March 31 of each year. Additionally, the commission may also have one or two youth representatives who shall also be voting members. Youth representatives shall be appointed for one-year terms. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the park and recreation commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable or as required by law or this Code. (d) Powers and duties. The park and recreation commission shall have the following powers and duties: (1) To hold meetings of its members, to consider such matters pertaining to parks and public recreation programs in the city as shall be referred to the commission by the council, or as the members of the commission themselves deem proper. (2) To prepare a comprehensive plan for the future development of the city park and recreation system, to be submitted to the city council for implementation, and to maintain said plan, and recommend amendments of the plan to the city council, as may become necessary or desirable. (3) To act in an advisory capacity to the council in all matters relating to park and recreation in the city. (e) Reports. The commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than March 31 of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 6, 1-12-04; Ord. No. 582, § 1, 4-22-13) Page 3 Sec. 2-46.07. - Board of adjustments and appeals. Pursuant to M.S. § 462.354, a board of adjustments and appeals is hereby established. The planning commission shall serve as the board of adjustments and appeals. (Ord. No. 363, § 7, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.09. - Environmental commission. (a) Commission established. The environmental commission is established to provide the residents of Chanhassen with opportunities to improve the quality of their environment, address issues that affect the city's natural resources, provide environmental education to the public, bring a comprehensive perspective to environmental issues, and advocate the benefits and necessity of Chanhassen's natural resources. (b) Membership. The environmental commission consists of seven members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years expiring on March 31 of each year. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the environmental commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable or as required by law or this Code. (d) Powers and duties. The environmental commission has the following powers and duties: (1) The environmental commission shall serve as an advisory body to the city council and planning commission in addressing the needs of the environment as directed by the city council. All final decisions are to be made by the city council. (2) The environmental commission will consider and make recommendations at the direction of the city council regarding environmental issues. (3) The environmental commission will make recommendations at the direction of the city council regarding funding for environmental projects. (4) The environmental commission may propose studies to the city council and make recommendations according to the results. (5) The environmental commission will coordinate services with other governmental and private agencies for related issues. (e) Reports. The environmental commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than March 31 of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 8, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.11. - Senior commission. (a) Commission established. The senior commission serves as an advisory body to the city council in addressing the special needs of people over age 55 living in Chanhassen. They consider and make recommendations to the city council regarding the special needs of seniors in the areas of transportation, information and assistance, independent living in the home, social and recreational Page 4 programs, senior center and senior housing, but are not limited to these issues. All final decisions are made by the city council. (b) Membership. The senior commission consists of seven or eight members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years, expiring on March 31 of each year. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the senior commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable or as required by law or this Code. (d) Powers and duties. The senior commission shall have the following powers and duties: (1) They make recommendations to the city council regarding funding for special services to be provided for citizens over age 55. (2) They may propose needs studies for this age group where necessary and make recommendations to the city council based on the results. (3) They coordinate services with other governments and private agencies for this age group. (e) Reports. The commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than the last day of March of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 9, 1-12-04; Ord. No. 581, § 1, 4-8-13) Sec. 2-46.15. - Resignations and removal from commissions. Commissioners may resign voluntarily or may be removed from office by a majority vote of the city council. Vacancies on any advisory board or commission shall be filled by appointment with a majority vote of the city council. Vacancies shall be announced in the city's official newspaper and posted within city hall. Applications shall be available at the city clerk's office and shall be forwarded to the city council within the time prescribed. (Ord. No. 363, § 10, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.17. - Compensation. Commissioners shall serve without compensation. (Ord. No. 363, § 11, 1-12-04) Secs. 2-47—2-55. - Reserved. DIVISION 2. - HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY[5] Footnotes: --- (5) --- Page 5 State Law reference— Creation of city housing and redevelopment authority, M.S. § 469.003. Sec. 2-56. - Authority to adopt housing plan, issue bonds, etc. The city economic development authority is authorized to exercise on behalf of the city all of the powers conferred by M.S. §§ 462C.01 to 462C.08, including without limitation, the power to adopt a housing plan and program and to issue and sell mortgage revenue bonds for single family housing. (Ord. No. 75, 11-7-83; Ord. No. 363, § 12, 1-12-04) Secs. 2-57—2-65. - Reserved. DIVISION 3. - RESERVED[6] Footnotes: --- (6) --- Editor's note—Ord. No. 363, § 13, adopted Jan. 12, 2004, repealed Div. 3, which pertained to the public safety commissions and derived from Ord. No. 70-B, §§ 1.01, 3.02, 4.02, 5.01, and 6.01, adopted Oct. 1, 1984; Ord. No. 166, §§ 1 and 2, adopted Apr. 27, 1992; Ord. No. 268, § 1, adopted May 12, 1997; and Ord. No. 298, § 2, adopted Feb. 14, 2000. Secs. 2-66—2-71. - Reserved. INTERVIEW SCORING SHEET 5=High/1=Low Name Years Lived in Chanhassen Knowledge of Community Commitment to Position Knowledge of Major Issues Involvement in Community Total Points Doug Reeder (PC & PRC) John Kunitz (PC) Bill Chappell (EC incumbent) Mike Schachterle (SC) Ross Reeves (EC & PRC) Matt Kutz (PRC) CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Discuss Commission Appointments ­ 6:00 P.M. Section 4:30 P.M. ­ WORK SESSION Item No: A.2. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: ADM 146G PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council appoints the following commissioners: Planning Commission _____________, ______________, and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022." Park & Recreation Commission _____________ and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022, and _____________ for a one­year term ending March 30, 2020. Environmental Commission _____________ and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022. Senior Commission _____________, ______________, and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. DISCUSSION Planning Commission There are 3 three­year positions available for appointment to the Planning Commission.The terms of Commissioners Andrew Aller, Steven Weick, and Nancy Madsen are expiring.Andrew Aller and Steven Weick have reapplied. Eleven additional applications were received, of which seven are still active. NOTE: Applicant Lynn Pelto was interviewed and recommended for appointment by the Planning Commission but has since withdrawn her application. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectDiscuss Commission Appointments ­ 6:00 P.M.Section 4:30 P.M. ­ WORK SESSION Item No: A.2.Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: ADM 146GPROPOSED MOTION"The City Council appoints the following commissioners:Planning Commission_____________, ______________, and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022."Park & Recreation Commission_____________ and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022, and _____________ for aone­year term ending March 30, 2020.Environmental Commission_____________ and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022.Senior Commission_____________, ______________, and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022."Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.DISCUSSIONPlanning CommissionThere are 3 three­year positions available for appointment to the Planning Commission.The terms of CommissionersAndrew Aller, Steven Weick, and Nancy Madsen are expiring.Andrew Aller and Steven Weick have reapplied.Eleven additional applications were received, of which seven are still active. NOTE: Applicant Lynn Pelto wasinterviewed and recommended for appointment by the Planning Commission but has since withdrawn her application. The Planning Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Kate Aanenson.Also attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates. Park & Recreation Commission There are 2 three­year positions and 1 one­year position available for appointment to the Park & Recreation Commission.The terms of Commissioners Cole Kelly and Rick Echternacht are expiring.  Both incumbents have reapplied. Commissioner Steve Scharfenburg is resigning his position as he is moving out of the city, leaving one year remaining in his term. Nine additional applications were received, of which eight are still active. The term of Youth Commissioner Grant Schaeferle is expiring.  Grant is no longer eligible to reapply and no new youth applications were received. The Park & Recreation Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Park & Recreation Director Todd Hoffman.Also attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates. Environmental Commission There are 2 three­year positions available for appointment to the Environmental Commission.The terms of Bill Chappell and Wayne Benbow are expiring.Bill Chappell has reapplied. Five additional applications were received, of which four are still active. The Environmental Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Environmental Resources Coordinator Jill Sinclair.Also attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates. Senior Commission There are 2 or 3 three­year positions available for appointment to the Senior Commission. The terms of Commissioners Jackie Engel and Cheryl Ayotte are expiring and are both currently vacant due to their resignations. Six new applications have been received. The Senior Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Sharmeen Al­Jaff. Attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates. Since the Senior Commission has the option of appointing seven or eight members, Council may choose to appoint 2 or 3 three­year positions. ATTACHMENTS: City Code, Section 2­46. ­ Appointment to city committees and commissions Interview Schedule Planning Commission Attendance Log Park & Recreation Commission Attendance Log Environmental Commission Attendance Log Senior Commission Attendance Log Page 1 ARTICLE IV. - BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS[4] Footnotes: --- (4) --- Cross reference— Park and recreation commission, § 14-16 et seq.; planning commission, § 15-16 et seq. State Law reference— Authority to establish advisory boards and commissions, M.S. § 412.621(2). DIVISION 1. - GENERALLY Sec. 2-46. - Appointment to city committees and commissions. All vacancies on committees, commissions, and boards shall be advertised to seek applicants. The city council may interview applicants before making appointment. With the exception of the housing and redevelopment authority, all appointments shall be by majority vote of the city council. Once appointed, an applicant shall serve until removed, with or without cause, by a four-fifths vote of the city council, until the expiration of the term of appointment and following appointment of the applicant's successor. Vacancies during a term shall be filled for the unexpired portion of the term. Sec. 2-46.01. - Same—Generally. The council determines the duties and exercises the powers of administrative boards or commissions. However, the council may establish boards or commissions as set forth in this article to investigate subjects or to perform quasi-judicial functions. Additional administrative boards or commissions shall be established as required by law or for the administration of a municipal function jointly shared with another political subdivision. (Ord. No. 363, § 4, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.03. - Planning commission. (a) Commission established. The planning commission is established pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Planning Act, and has the powers and duties assigned to it by that Act, by this Code, and state law. The planning commission is hereby designated the planning agency of the city pursuant to the Municipal Planning Act. (b) Membership. The planning commission consists of seven members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years, expiring on March 31 of each year. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the planning commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable, or as required by law or this Code. Page 2 (d) Powers and duties. The planning commission shall have the powers and duties allowed under state law, including: (1) To prepare a comprehensive plan for the future development of the city that is submitted to the council for implementation and to recommend amendments of the plan to the council from time to time as may be necessary or desirable. (2) To initiate, direct, and review, from time to time, a study of the provisions of the zoning code and the subdivision regulations and to report to the council its advice and recommendations with respect thereto. (3) To study applications and proposals for amendments to the zoning code and applications for special permits and to advise the council of its recommendations thereon. (4) To study preliminary plats and to advise the council of its recommendations thereof. (5) To act in an advisory capacity to the council in all matters wherein powers are assigned to the council by state law concerning comprehensive planning, zoning, platting, changes in streets, and other matters of a general planning nature. (e) Reports. The commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than March 31 of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 5, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.05. - Park and recreation commission. (a) Creation. There is established a park and recreation commission for the city. (b) Membership. The park and recreation commission consists of seven members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years expiring on March 31 of each year. Additionally, the commission may also have one or two youth representatives who shall also be voting members. Youth representatives shall be appointed for one-year terms. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the park and recreation commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable or as required by law or this Code. (d) Powers and duties. The park and recreation commission shall have the following powers and duties: (1) To hold meetings of its members, to consider such matters pertaining to parks and public recreation programs in the city as shall be referred to the commission by the council, or as the members of the commission themselves deem proper. (2) To prepare a comprehensive plan for the future development of the city park and recreation system, to be submitted to the city council for implementation, and to maintain said plan, and recommend amendments of the plan to the city council, as may become necessary or desirable. (3) To act in an advisory capacity to the council in all matters relating to park and recreation in the city. (e) Reports. The commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than March 31 of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 6, 1-12-04; Ord. No. 582, § 1, 4-22-13) Page 3 Sec. 2-46.07. - Board of adjustments and appeals. Pursuant to M.S. § 462.354, a board of adjustments and appeals is hereby established. The planning commission shall serve as the board of adjustments and appeals. (Ord. No. 363, § 7, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.09. - Environmental commission. (a) Commission established. The environmental commission is established to provide the residents of Chanhassen with opportunities to improve the quality of their environment, address issues that affect the city's natural resources, provide environmental education to the public, bring a comprehensive perspective to environmental issues, and advocate the benefits and necessity of Chanhassen's natural resources. (b) Membership. The environmental commission consists of seven members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years expiring on March 31 of each year. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the environmental commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable or as required by law or this Code. (d) Powers and duties. The environmental commission has the following powers and duties: (1) The environmental commission shall serve as an advisory body to the city council and planning commission in addressing the needs of the environment as directed by the city council. All final decisions are to be made by the city council. (2) The environmental commission will consider and make recommendations at the direction of the city council regarding environmental issues. (3) The environmental commission will make recommendations at the direction of the city council regarding funding for environmental projects. (4) The environmental commission may propose studies to the city council and make recommendations according to the results. (5) The environmental commission will coordinate services with other governmental and private agencies for related issues. (e) Reports. The environmental commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than March 31 of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 8, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.11. - Senior commission. (a) Commission established. The senior commission serves as an advisory body to the city council in addressing the special needs of people over age 55 living in Chanhassen. They consider and make recommendations to the city council regarding the special needs of seniors in the areas of transportation, information and assistance, independent living in the home, social and recreational Page 4 programs, senior center and senior housing, but are not limited to these issues. All final decisions are made by the city council. (b) Membership. The senior commission consists of seven or eight members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years, expiring on March 31 of each year. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the senior commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable or as required by law or this Code. (d) Powers and duties. The senior commission shall have the following powers and duties: (1) They make recommendations to the city council regarding funding for special services to be provided for citizens over age 55. (2) They may propose needs studies for this age group where necessary and make recommendations to the city council based on the results. (3) They coordinate services with other governments and private agencies for this age group. (e) Reports. The commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than the last day of March of each calendar year, containing the comm ission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 9, 1-12-04; Ord. No. 581, § 1, 4-8-13) Sec. 2-46.15. - Resignations and removal from commissions. Commissioners may resign voluntarily or may be removed from office by a majority vote of the city council. Vacancies on any advisory board or commission shall be filled by appointment with a majority vote of the city council. Vacancies shall be announced in the city's official newspaper and posted within city hall. Applications shall be available at the city clerk's office and shall be forwarded to the city council within the time prescribed. (Ord. No. 363, § 10, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.17. - Compensation. Commissioners shall serve without compensation. (Ord. No. 363, § 11, 1-12-04) Secs. 2-47—2-55. - Reserved. DIVISION 2. - HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY[5] Footnotes: --- (5) --- Page 5 State Law reference— Creation of city housing and redevelopment authority, M.S. § 469.003. Sec. 2-56. - Authority to adopt housing plan, issue bonds, etc. The city economic development authority is authorized to exercise on behalf of the city all of the powers conferred by M.S. §§ 462C.01 to 462C.08, including without limitation, the power to adopt a housing plan and program and to issue and sell mortgage revenue bonds for single family housing. (Ord. No. 75, 11-7-83; Ord. No. 363, § 12, 1-12-04) Secs. 2-57—2-65. - Reserved. DIVISION 3. - RESERVED[6] Footnotes: --- (6) --- Editor's note—Ord. No. 363, § 13, adopted Jan. 12, 2004, repealed Div. 3, which pertained to the public safety commissions and derived from Ord. No. 70-B, §§ 1.01, 3.02, 4.02, 5.01, and 6.01, adopted Oct. 1, 1984; Ord. No. 166, §§ 1 and 2, adopted Apr. 27, 1992; Ord. No. 268, § 1, adopted May 12, 1997; and Ord. No. 298, § 2, adopted Feb. 14, 2000. Secs. 2-66—2-71. - Reserved. 2019 Commissions Interview Schedule FIRST MEETINGS IN APRIL: Planning Commission - April 2, 2018 Environmental Commission - April 10, 2019 Senior Commission - April 18, 2019 Park & Rec Commission - April 23, 2019 City Council Interviews Environmental Commission Interviews - February 13 February 25 (Monday):6:00 Brian Smith (PRC 2nd Choice) 8:00 Bhakti Modi (SC)6:15 Ross Reeves (PRC 2nd Choice) 8:15 Alice "Lisa" Lyon (SC)6:30 8:30 6:45 Andrew Allen-NO SHOW 8:45 Gerald Cook (PC)7:00 Jeff Harken 9:00 Laura Skistad (PC & PRC) 9:15 Planning Commission Interviews - February 19 9:30 Andrew Aller (PC incumbent-coming from airport may be earlier)1st Antonio J. Fricano (SC 2nd Choice) 2nd Bala Chintaginjala-NO SHOW WITHDRAWN February 26 (Tuesday): 3rd Douglas Reeder (PRC 2nd Choice) 5:00 Sandy Sweetser (PRC)4th Gerald Cook 5:15 Bill Hickey (PRC)5th Lynn Pelto WITHDRAWN 5:30 Natalia Sander (PC-NO SHOW AT PC INTERVIEW) WITHDRAWN 6th Annette Stock-Lind 5:45 Laurie Susla (PC)7th Natalia Sander-NO SHOW 6:00 Jeff Harken (EC)8th John Kunitz 6:15 Lynn Pelto (PC) WITHDRAW 9th Laurie Susla 6:30 Steve Weick (PC incumbent)10th Laura Skistad (PRC 2nd Choice) 6:45 Annette Stock Lind (PC) 7:00 BREAK Senior Commission Interviews - February 21 7:15 Rick Echternacht (PRC incumbent)4:10 Ruth Lunde 7:30 Cole Kelly (PRC incumbent)4:30 Jim Camarata 7:45 Haley Pemrick (PRC)4:50 Alice "Lisa" Lyon 8:00 Drew Allen (EC-NO SHOW AT EC INTERVIEW)5:10 Bhakti Modi 8:15 Brian Smith (EC & PRC)5:30 Mike Schachterle 8:30 Antonio Fricano (PC & SC)5:50 Antonio Fricano (PC 1st Choice) 8:45 Ruth Lunde (SC) 9:00 Jim Camarata (SC)Park & Rec Commission Interviews - February 26 5:45 Bill Hickey March 11 6:00 Laura Skistad 4:30 Doug Reeder (PC & PRC)6:15 Sandy Sweetser 4:45 John Kunitz (PC)6:30 Doug Reeder 5:00 Bill Chappell (EC incumbent)6:45 Ross Reeves 5:15 Mike Schachterle (SC)7:00 Brian Smith 5:30 Ross Reeves (EC & PRC)7:15 Haley Pemrick 5:45 Matt Kutz (PRC-OUT OF COUNTRY FOR PRC INTERVIEW) 6:00 Discuss Commission Appointments Incumbents All commission appointments will take place at the March 11, 2019 City Council Meeting 2018 Planning Commission Attendance Record January 2January 16February 6February 20March 6March 20April 3April 17May 1May 15June 5June 19July 3July 17August 7August 21September 4September 18Otober 2October 16November 6November 20December 4Percentage of Attendance Andrew Aller 4/10 - 4/19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 93% Mark Undestad 4/5 - 4/20 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 47% Steven Weick 4/13 - 4/19 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 67% John Tietz 4/15 - 4/20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 80% Mark Randall 6/16 - 4/21 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 80% Michael McGonagill 4/18 - 4/21 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 47% Nancy Madsen 4/15 - 4/19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 93% Total Attended 5 4 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 7 6 5 0 6 6 0 6 5 5 6 0 6 0 Number of meetings to date:15 red means no meeting 2018 PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD Commissioner Jan 23 Feb 27 Mar 27 Apr 24 May 22 June 26 July 24 Aug 28 Sept 25 Oct 23 Nov 27 Dec 11 Percent of Meetings Attended Karl Tsuchiya (4/17 – 4/20) A X X X X X X A X X X 82% Steve Scharfenberg, Chair (4/04 – 4/20) X X X X A X X X X X X 91% Cole Kelly (4/10 – 4/19) X X A X X X X X A X X 82% Jim Boettcher (4/12 – 4/18) X X X X X A X X X X X 91% Rick Echternacht (4/13 – 4/19) X X A X X X X X X X X 91% Meredith Petouvis (4/17 – 4/20) X X X X X X X X X X X 100% Jennifer Hougham (4/15 – 4/18) X X X 100% Joe Scanlon (4/18 – 4/21) X X X A X X X X 88% Lauren Dale Youth Representative (4/15 – 4/18) X X A N/A Grant Schaeferle Youth Representative (4/17 – 4/18) A X A A X A X A X X X N/A The city council requests a 75% attendance record (does not apply to Youth Representatives). g:\park\th\commission\attendance\prc attendance 2018.docx G/PLAN/JS/EC/Administration/Environmental Commission Attendance 18 19 Environmental Commission Attendance April 2018 – March 2019 Name April May June July Aug (Joint Tour*) Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March Percent attended Don Vasatka X X X X X X X X A X 90% Keith Butcher X X X X X X X X X X 100% Wayne Benbow X X A A A X X X X X 70% Bill Chappell X X X X X X X X X X 100% Rachel Popken X X X A X X X X X A 80% Kristin Fulkerson X X X X X X A X X X 90% Greg Hawks X X X X X X X X A X 90% X = meeting attended *= attendance not required g:\plan\js\ec\administration\environmental commission attendance 18 19.doc 2018-2019 SENIOR COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD Commissioner Apr 20 May 18 June 15 July 20 Aug 16 Sept 20 Oct 19 Nov 15 Dec 21 Jan 18 Feb 21 Mar 15 Percent of Meetings Attended Dorina A. Tipton X X X NO MEETING X X NO MEETING X NO MEETING X NO MEETING 100% Cheryl Ayotte X X X A X X A 71% Carol Buesgens X X X X X X A 85% Barbara Nevin X X X X X X X 100% Mack Titus X X X A X X X 85% Jackie Engel X X X X X X X 100% Jerry Cerchia X X X X X X X 100% \\cfs5\cfs5\shared_data\plan\sj\sc\attendance\2018.docx CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Approve City Council Minutes dated February 25, 2019 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.1. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No:  PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the minutes dated February 25, 2019.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: City Council Summary Minutes dated February 25, 2019 City Council Verbatim Minutes dated February 25, 2019 City Council Work Session Minutes dated February 25, 20129 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES FEBRUARY 25, 2019 Mayor Ryan called the City Council meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman McDonald, Councilman Campion, and Councilwoman Coleman STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, Andrew Brotzler, Todd Hoffman and Roger Knutson PUBLIC PRESENT: Roger & Shannon Burks 2401 Highway 7 Carrie Barclay 6545 Gray Fox Curve Laurie Susla 7008 Dakota Avenue Rodney Colson 6440 Pipewood Curve Jerry Cone 6320 Minnewashta Woods Drive CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Coleman seconded that the City Council approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: 1. Approve City Council Minutes dated February 11, 2019 2. Receive Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated January 22, 2019 3. Resolution #2019-11: Approval of a Two Lot Subdivision with a Variance for Reducing Lot Frontage at 3800 Red Cedar Point Road 4. Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Carver County for Arboretum Area (Highway 5) Transportation Plan 5. Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Carver County and City of Chaska for Lyman Boulevard Improvements (TH 41 to Galpin) and Adopt Resolution #2019-12: for Advancement of State Aid Funds 6. Resolution #2019-13: Approve Bid for Water Tower No. 3 Rehabilitation Project All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. None. FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE. Assistant Fire Chief John Murphy provided updates on Fire Department staffing, calls for service, training, assisting with City Council Summary – February 25, 2019 2 Feb Fest and Fire Marshal activities. Lt. Eric Kittelson reviewed monthly activity numbers before announcing that he will be moving to the Chaska Sheriff’s Office to be the Lieutenant of Investigations and Professional Responsibility. He introduced Lieutenant Lance Pearce who will take over as the liaison to the City of Chanhassen. Lieutenant Pearce provided background information on the work he’s performed with the Carver County Sheriff’s Office. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVE ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR NORTH COOP, LLC DBA NORTH COOP. Todd Gerhardt presented the staff report on this item. Mayor Ryan opened the public hearing. Shannon and Roger Burks, the applicants, described what type of restaurant they will be opening at this location. Mayor Ryan closed the public hearing. Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Coleman seconded that the City Council approves an on-sale intoxicating liquor license including Sunday sales for North Coop, LLC doing business as North Coop located at 2401 Highway 7. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Gerhardt reminded residents that the City Council will be holding a special meeting on Tuesday, February 26th for commission interviews. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. Mayor Ryan noted the response to Brent Carron’s visitor presentation from February 11, 2019. Councilwoman Coleman moved, Councilman Campion seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 25, 2019 Mayor Ryan called the City Council meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman McDonald, Councilman Campion, and Councilwoman Coleman STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, Andrew Brotzler, Todd Hoffman and Roger Knutson PUBLIC PRESENT: Roger & Shannon Burks 2401 Highway 7 Carrie Barclay 6545 Gray Fox Curve Laurie Susla 7008 Dakota Avenue Rodney Colson 6440 Pipewood Curve Jerry Cone 6320 Minnewashta Woods Drive Mayor Ryan: Thank you and welcome to this evening’s meeting. To those of you that are watching at home, either on Mediacom’s city cable channel or those who are livestreaming from Chanhassen website, we’re glad you can join us. For the record we have all of our members present tonight so our first action is our agenda approval. Council members are there any modifications to the agenda as printed? If not we will proceed with the published agenda. With no public announcements tonight we have consent agenda items 1 through 6. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Coleman seconded that the City Council approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager’s recommendations: 1. Approve City Council Minutes dated February 11, 2019 2. Receive Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated January 22, 2019 3. Resolution #2019-11: Approval of a Two Lot Subdivision with a Variance for Reducing Lot Frontage at 3800 Red Cedar Point Road 4. Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Carver County for Arboretum Area (Highway 5) Transportation Plan 5. Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Carver County and City of Chaska for Lyman Boulevard Improvements (TH 41 to Galpin) and Adopt Resolution #2019-12: for Advancement of State Aid Funds Chanhassen City Council – February 25, 2019 2 6. Resolution #2019-13: Approve Bid for Water Tower No. 3 Rehabilitation Project All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS. Mayor Ryan: As many of you know as we’ve done in the last few meetings this year we have implemented a new way to go about managing requests as they come before council during this portion of the meeting. If you come forward and your request includes an action item from staff or City Council we would like you to complete a Citizen Action Request Form. There are hard copies here in the chambers or there is, if you do it in advance there is a link online. To clarify you are simply making a comment, or let me clarify. If you’re making a comment or a presentation where there is no action required a form does not need to be completed. You have 5 minutes to present the action item you are requesting so please be respectful of that time when you come forward and then we will follow up, staff will follow up with you following the meeting so I just wanted to clarify the visitor presentation. With that do we have any visitor presentations this evening? Okay moving on. FIRE DEPARTMENT/LAW ENFORCEMENT UPDATE. Mayor Ryan: Next we have the Fire Department and Law Enforcement update. Assistant Fire Chief John Murphy: Mayor, council. So fire department staffing currently we’re at 42 of 45 paid on call firefighters. We have one firefighter currently on leave and conditional offers were extended to 6 candidates for the 2019 rookie group. To date 2 candidates decided to decline and one additional candidate was not able to successfully complete the steps required to begin employment. Three candidates will begin their service on February 25th, tonight and their academy for the Southwest Academy starts on March 7th where they will begin their emergency medical technician certification training. Fire response, the fire department responded in 94 calls for service in the month of January. Significant calls for December included the following. We had 54 rescue EMS calls with 11 motor vehicle accidents mostly related to poor weather conditions. We had 2 fire related responses. The mutual aid response to Eden Prairie and our major loss structure fire which is just the garage on Stone Creek Drive. Monthly training, training that occurred since the last update. We’re doing fire ground tactics for apartment building fires, basic fire skill stations and tonight we’re doing our employee assistance presentation. Other activities that we did, we assisted with Feb Fest and with the weather we had several standby crews created during our many nights of the bad weather we’ve had recently. For our Fire Marshal update, traditionally fire inspections taper off for the colder months of the year but this year we’ve been quite busy. Some of the notable fire inspections for new construction in the month of January are Mission Hills townhomes took occupancy of 10 more units. The Venue Apartments, they met with the contractor on site to approve locations of fire department connections and standpipes for our fire department operations. And Riley Crossing, formerly Mission Hills, met with contractors on the site to approve attic system. The New Chanhassen City Council – February 25, 2019 3 Tobacco Shop on 79th Street occupancy inspection were given. New Café Thyme Restaurant in Market Square, occupancy inspection was done. Ameriprise Financial occupancy. The New Mattress Value Store. That occupancy inspection was completed. Then for fire prevention notable activities have been, we presented a basic fire investigation class for all of our Chanhassen Fire Officers. Met with new business owner for Agnatron Building to discuss fore code and safety issues and we’ve conducted a safety meeting for residents of Powers Ridge Senior Living to talk about fire safety, fire alarm response and other safety items related to the building. And we’re working on setting up CPR and fire extinguisher training for the same group next month. Annual fire inspections at existing buildings and businesses, Olive Branch Assisted Living. Beehive Assisted Living. Gas stations, Holiday and Kwik Trip. And Powers Ridge Senior Living. For fire investigations, the large structure fire at 8080 Stone Creek Drive, the garage was a total loss. The fire door from the garage to the house, along with an aggressive fire department tactical response saved the main structure of the home from further damage. Cause of the fire was determined to be unattended cooking in the garage and classified as accidental. Any questions for me? Mayor Ryan: Council any questions? Thank you. I know you guys have been, you all have been very busy with this weather so appreciate your hard work. Assistant Fire Chief John Murphy: Yeah, yep thank you very much. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Thanks for the report. Lieutenant Kittelson. Lt. Eric Kittelson: Good evening Madam Mayor, council members. I have the monthly law enforcement update for you this evening. Monthly calls for service, January sorry. We had 36 Group A crimes, 9 Group B crimes, 395 miscellaneous and non-criminal calls for service, 405 total traffic incidents and 26 administrative issues so we had a total of 871 calls for service in the month of January. Arrests, citations and verbal warning summary. We had 28 individuals were arrested and charged with 51 crimes in 24 separate incidents. Some of the highest offenses were DUI and liquor law. We had 6 and drug violations we had 10. We had 63 traffic citations with 16 of those being for speed, 8 for no proof of insurance and 6 for inattentive driving and some of the more, some of the higher numbers and then for warnings deputies issued 229 verbal warnings and 207 of those were on traffic stops. Training update. All staff attended use of force training in January and went through various scenario based decision making simulations as well as intermediate weapons that would involve our Asp or expandable baton, our AIP, aerosol air tip projector, our Taser and handcuffing. Community relations. Deputies and the sheriff’s office reserves assisted with February Fest on February 2nd. I understand it was one of the, Mr. Hoffman it was one of the better attended events I believe in recent memory so that went very well. And Sergeant Bruenig and I met with Summerwood of Chanhassen with their administrative team on February 13th to review security procedures and go over some different response issues with them to ensure that we’re continue to collaborate. And for staffing update we remain at full staff. That concludes my report. I’ll stand for questions. Chanhassen City Council – February 25, 2019 4 Mayor Ryan: Did you want to make an introduction as well? Lt. Eric Kittelson: I thought, I was going to do that. Mayor Ryan: Oh okay, alright. Lt. Eric Kittelson: Or I can do it now. Mayor Ryan: Well first okay, any questions from council? Pardon me? Lt. Eric Kittelson: I said let’s give him the questions. He can go right away. Mayor Ryan: We’ll put him under a test right away, perfect. Any questions council? No? Lt. Eric Kittelson: Okay and with that I would like to announce that on Monday, March 4th I will be moving to our Chaska Sheriff’s Office to be the Lieutenant of Investigations and Professional Responsibility and so with that I’d like to introduce your new liaison to the City of Chanhassen Lieutenant Lance Pearce. So Lieutenant Pearce began his career in law enforcement in 1991 as a reserve deputy for Carver County. He moved on to become a part time and full time deputy in 1993 and 1995. He worked a variety of shifts while working as a deputy sheriff until promotion to Sergeant in 2006. During his time as deputy sheriff he experienced many aspects of law enforcement including many years on the SWAT team, field training officer, weights and scales enforcement, water patrol, snowmobile patrol, and a short time as a crime scene technician. As a Sergeant Lieutenant Pearce worked both day and night shifts as a supervisor and most recently as a support services sergeant where he was in charge of training, civil process, recreation services and off duty contracts. He also has experience supervising the field training program, SWAT team and the reserve unit. Lieutenant Pearce has an Associate Degree from Normandale Community College and a Bachelor of Science Degree from Metropolitan State University. He resides in western Carver County with his wife and teenage son and when he is not working he’s an avid outdoorsman enjoying all of the hunting seasons and Muskie fishing. And a little bit off script I’ve spent the majority of my patrol deputy years, Lance and I worked together as patrol deputies on the night shift and we were on SWAT for a majority of both of our careers. About 8 to 10 years on SWAT together so I know first hand from being involved in numerous critical incidents with Lance and then just spending down time at night that he is going to be an excellent replacement and you’re in good hands with Lance as your new liaison so with that I’ll let him say a few words if he’d like. Lt. Lance Pearce: Well just a few words. I’m happy to be here. I look forward to working and meeting every one of these guys. I worked obviously my entire career has been with Carver County so this is where I’m going to be so I look forward to working for the city. I know I have big shoes to fill and Eric’s done a wonderful job since he’s been up here so. Chanhassen City Council – February 25, 2019 5 Mayor Ryan: Well welcome Lieutenant and we look forward to having a successful relationship going forward and Lieutenant Kittelson I want to thank you for your, I think you said earlier today your 14 years of service with Chanhassen and you’ll be missed. We really appreciate your community outreach and advocacy. Your attention to detail in the reports that you provide and just a great relationship that I know you have with not only city staff and council but with the community at large in Chanhassen. You’ve been a real asset and great to work with so best of luck in your next endeavor. I know you’ll be of great success and I look forward to continue to work with you as we move forward so again thank you for your service and we’re excited to be working with you Lieutenant Pearce. Lt. Lance Pearce: Thank you very much. Mayor Ryan: Great, thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVE ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR NORTH COOP, LLC DBA NORTH COOP. Mayor Ryan: We have the approval of on-sale intoxicating liquor license for North Coop LLC doing business as North Coop. Ms. Aanenson is this you or Todd? Todd. Todd Gerhardt: I’ll take this one. Mayor, City Council members as the Mayor has stated North Coop is asking for an intoxicating liquor license including Sunday sales at the 7 and 41 Center up at State Highway 7 and 41. It’s kind of a real catchy name for that strip mall up there. Included, I’m not going to take any thunder from the owners who are here this evening about the flair that they’re going to be providing the residents in Chanhassen but we did do a background check and criminal history check and both the owners, managers have come back with a clean record and no negative comments were found in those investigations. At this time staff would ask that you open up the public hearing and then close the public hearing and then ask the owners if they would come up and give you a little background on their restaurant. Mayor Ryan: Perfect. Before I open council any questions at this time? Okay I hereby open the public hearing. Please step forward and state your name and address for the record. Shannon Burks: Hi, how are you? Mayor Ryan: Great, how are you? Welcome. Shannon Burks: Thank you. My name’s Shannon Burkes. Address is 6115 Club Valley Road, Excelsior, 55331. Roger Burks: I’m Roger Burkes at the same address if that’s enough. Mayor Ryan: That works. Welcome. Chanhassen City Council – February 25, 2019 6 Shannon Burks: Thank you. Roger Burks: Well thank you, we’re excited to be here. Mayor Ryan: Well we’d love to hear about what you’re doing. Roger Burks: We’ll give you a little bit. Mayor Ryan: Alright. Roger Burks: Yeah it’s a, you know a lot of my roots were back in Kentucky. My family’s from Kentucky and so southern cooking was always part of what we’re doing and so there’ll be a lot of southern influence in the restaurant. We created and opened Lago Tacos in Excelsior and then we opened another one in Uptown and then we put together a Charlie’s on Prior on Prior Lake and we have sold those out to our other partners and now this is just us doing this and we’re really excited about it because we live in the community. Less than a mile from the restaurant. We have been in Chanhassen for a long, long time. Now we’re in Shorewood or Excelsior so apologize. Mayor Ryan: You’re doing business in Chanhassen so that’s okay. Roger Burks: Yeah we’ve been working on this project for almost 2 years with Pasture Realty about trying to get the space the right size and trying to bring life to that site. The Center which is kind of, it needs it. It needs a little CPR over there so we put this together. This restaurant that seats about 108 inside and another 36 outside on the east side of the building. We’ll be knocking out windows and adding a patio which includes expanding the parking lot out so cars can get through so it’s just going to be a very light space. We moved Grizzly’s Pizza over a space so now it’s the right size for us. We’ve got a chef and a sous chef and I don’t know if they’ve all given their notices so I’m not going to tell you who they are yet. We’re working on some key staff members right now. Real southern influence to the menu. You know with fried chicken and some southern cooking but it will be well rounded so it’s kind of a southern fare with a northern flair. We’ll have much more things on the menu. We’ll have a smoker and pulled fried chicken and a whole bunch of other items so full service bar and some unique cocktails and very family oriented. We’re very proud about that. We did a very nice job of that with Lago Tacos. It’s a little small and some people have to wait a long time to get in there but yeah we’re very, very excited about opening this space so. Mayor Ryan: Well we’re excited. Roger Burks: I’ll field any questions you have so she can answer them. Mayor Ryan: What are your hours and your timing? Chanhassen City Council – February 25, 2019 7 Roger Burks: Hours will be Monday through Thursday from 11:00 to 11:00. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Roger Burks: Friday will be from 11:00 to midnight and Saturday and Sunday we’ll open at 9:00. We’ll do brunch on those two days. We’re really looking forward to that because it’s something that’s really needed in that area and we’ll close at midnight on Saturday and we’ll probably close at 10:00 on Sunday. Things kind of shut down in the area so we’re happy with that. Mayor Ryan: Well great and your projected opening is May or? Roger Burks: We are really trying hard to open the day after Mother’s Day which is the Monday after Mother’s Day. Mayor Ryan: Okay. Roger Burks: We’ll take over the space somewhere in April 24th or 25th and we have a couple weeks of training with mock services and parties and things like that so that’s kind of when we’ll slide the doors open sometime, hopefully right during that week and yeah. Mayor Ryan: Great. Roger Burks: Yeah there’s a lot of work to do outside so we’re really hoping these huge snow piles will go away. We have, you know there’s just to dig out on that patios and all that kind of stuff so it’s all heading that… Mayor Ryan: So is the hill on the east side, will you cut into that? I know that’s more of a staff question but. Kate Aanenson: No actually that’s, that has a permit for another restaurant so it cuts out. Mayor Ryan: Oh okay. Kate Aanenson: It cuts out. I think that was one of the struggles was trying to find an outdoor space that we could work with you but they do have a building permit so they are under construction right now. Mayor Ryan: Oh great, okay. Roger Burks: Yeah the parking lot that is on the east side actually is, it will just be moved back I think 6 feet. Chanhassen City Council – February 25, 2019 8 Mayor Ryan: Oh great. Roger Burks: We have a short little wall that we need to put in because it does slope up and so just then enough room to back cars out and. Kate Aanenson: We had to keep the driveway for the access to some of the services in the back so that was one of the things that we worked on. Mayor Ryan: Oh great. Great. Roger Burks: Yeah we’re real happy with it. Mayor Ryan: Well there’s already a lot of buzz on next door and social media so people are very excited about having you in Chanhassen so we’re excited as well and wanted to, want to welcome you so. Roger Burks: We’re excited to have parking. I mean Excelsior, this is exciting so. Mayor Ryan: Well great. Well thank you for choosing Chanhassen. Roger Burks: We’re very excited so thank you. Shannon Burks: Thanks for having us. Appreciate it. Mayor Ryan: Thank you. Anybody else in the chambers would like to come forward? If not I will close the public hearing. Public hearing is now closed and I will bring it back to council for questions, comments or action. Any questions, comments or action by anybody? Todd Gerhardt: Mayor and council we’re just excited to have North Coop here and it’s another family run restaurant in the community. That’s something our residents have been asking for and having a brother and a sister-in-law that run a restaurant bar, there’s a lot of time and effort and personal energy that they put in there than most of the, some of the franchises and they can, they make it fun and can do a lot of specials and things like that so it’s going to be fun to have the North Coop up in the 7 and 41 area. Mayor Ryan: Councilman Campion. Councilman Campion: I would like to make a motion. Mayor Ryan: Yes. Chanhassen City Council – February 25, 2019 9 Councilman Campion: I propose that the City Council approves an on-sale intoxicating liquor license including Sunday sales for North Coop, LLC doing business as North Coop located at 2401 Highway 7. Mayor Ryan: We have a valid motion. Is there a second? Councilwoman Coleman: I’ll second that. Mayor Ryan: With a valid motion and a second. Councilman Campion moved, Councilwoman Coleman seconded that the City Council approves an on-sale intoxicating liquor license including Sunday sales for North Coop, LLC doing business as North Coop located at 2401 Highway 7. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Mayor Ryan: That motion carries 5-0. Congratulations. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Gerhardt: Just a reminder, more for the public. Tomorrow night the council is going to meet as a whole to do interviews so something new. We’re interviewing all our commission members tomorrow night and typically we take almost a month and a half to do interviews and we’re going to start tonight. We’ve got I think 5 interviews for tonight and then several for tomorrow night and get them knocked out in 2 days so thank you for being flexible council and giving me your 2 additional meetings. Mayor Ryan: Great, look forward to 29 applications. Applicants which is great. Which is fantastic. CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. Mayor Ryan: Next is the correspondence discussion. I would like to make a comment just on number 3 about the response to a gentleman who was here at our last meeting that filled out a Citizen Action Request form and did his presentation and staff has followed up and that is closed and so just so you know once the form is filled out and staff and council work through it we will put the final, the final response in the packet so the community can review it so thank you for handling that so quickly. Todd Gerhardt: Yeah just probably another follow up. We’re still working with the no wake boat individual. We’re finding out some details on DNR rules and regulations and thanks to Chanhassen City Council – February 25, 2019 10 Todd Hoffman for making a few calls and you’ll see some closure on that before our next meeting. Mayor Ryan: Perfect, thank you. With that I would look for a motion to adjourn. Councilwoman Coleman moved, Councilman Campion seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The City Council meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION FEBRUARY 25, 2019 Mayor Ryan called the work session to order at 5:00 p.m. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ryan, Councilwoman Tjornhom, Councilman Campion, and Councilwoman Coleman. Councilman McDonald arrived during the fire department presentation. STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Kate Aanenson, Andrew Brotzler, Todd Hoffman, Greg Sticha, Chief Don Johnson, and Lt. Eric Kittelson PUBLIC PRESENT: Steve Smith Fire Department Don Amorosi Wayzata Kara Amorosi Chanhassen KEY FINANCIAL STRATEGY: CONSIDER INCREASE TO STAFFED FIRE DEPARTMENT HOURS (DUTY CREW PROGRAM). Chief Don Johnson introduced Captain Troon Dowds prior to reviewing highlights of a power point presentation regarding 2002-2014 duty crew calls for service and response times, 2018- 2019 calls for service using duty crew and non-duty crews, and reviewed a graphic showing trends in total calls for service from 2004 through 2018. Mayor Ryan asked what caused the large increase in calls in 2018. Chief Don Johnson continued with review of impacts on call loads for staffing non-duty crew hours, duty crew versus general alarm calls response times, positive impacts on duty crew expansion, and recommendations and expansion costs for additional duty crew shifts in 2019 and 2020. He reviewed estimated capital costs associated with increasing the duty crews shifts. Mayor Ryan asked for clarification on the legal rules associated with the capital costs. Councilwoman Coleman asked how this request would affect good standing service requirements. Councilman McDonald asked about the status of capital costs for Station 2 and the possible addition of a third station. Mayor Ryan asked for clarification on the schedule for implementing additional duty crews, does this request change the number of firefighters needed in the future, comparisons to surrounding communities and the schedule for next steps. Councilmembers were in agreement to expand recommended duty crew shifts for 2019. CHANHASSEN/CARVER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE YEAR END REPORT. Lt. Eric Kittelson discussed his future endeavors in investigations for Carver County before reviewing the 5 year data for 2014-2018 highlighting crime numbers, medical/mental health City Council Work Session – February 25, 2019 2 numbers and training requirements for mental health response. Mayor Ryan asked for clarification on how mental health calls are determined. Todd Gerhardt asked how Chanhassen numbers compare to state numbers. Lt. Eric Kittelson continued with data showing burglary/robberies. Councilwoman Tjornhom asked about the difference between a burglary and robbery. Lt. Eric Kittelson continued with theft/vehicle theft numbers, assault/sex crimes, DUI/drug violations, arrests/citations, misdemeanor investigator FTE closed/cleared, total activity/calls for service, 2018 KFS police operating budget comparisons, and changes from using the summary based reporting (SRS) to incident based reporting (NIBRS). Elliott Knetsch with the City Attorney’s office introduced himself as the lead prosecutor for Chanhassen. Todd Gerhardt explained how the City changed from using Carver County Prosecutors to Campbell Knutson and cost comparisons. Mayor Ryan asked about the mental health initiatives being pursued by the Carver County sheriff’s office. INITIAL REVIEW OF 2020 BUDGET ESTIMATE. Todd Gerhardt reviewed issues associated with starting the 2020 budget estimates. Greg Sticha discussed issues identified by staff regarding their analysis of estimated changes for the 2020 general fund budget which results in a deficit of approximately $421,700 and options available to council as either cutting services or looking for additional revenue streams. He explained his belief that it is not a good idea to use reserves as a funding source and that 2020 will be one of the more difficult budget years. Mayor Ryan asked if Todd Gerhardt has provided this information to department heads on how to address these deficit numbers. Todd Gerhardt explained that staff will look at the debt service funds. Councilwoman Coleman asked about other options other than reducing personnel which will reduce service. Councilman Campion asked about reducing consulting fees as a possible area of cost savings. Mayor Ryan recessed the work session at 7:00 p.m. It was reconvened at 7:35 p.m. The City Council held interviews for vacant commission positions. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Receive Planning Commission Minutes dated February 19, 2019 Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.2. Prepared By Nann Opheim, City Recorder File No:  PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council receives the Planning Commission minutes dated February 19, 2019.” Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Summary Minutes dated February 19, 2019 Planning Commissin Verbatim Minutes dated February 19, 2019 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISION REGULAR MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2019 Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, and Michael McGonagill MEMBERS ABSENT: John Tietz and Mark Randall STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; MacKenzie Walters, Associate Planner; and Erick Henricksen, Project Engineer PUBLIC PRESENT: John Kunitz 6441 Bretton Way Jerry Cone 6320 Minnewashta Woods Drive Tony Fricano 980 Lake Lucy Road Lynn Pelto 6581 Foxtail Court Annette Stock-Lind 8104 Dakota Lane Rodney Colson 6440 Pipewood Colleen Johnson 5015 St. Albans Bay Laurie Susla 7008 Dakota Avenue PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION WITH A VARIANCE FOR REDUCED LOT FRONTAGE AT 3800 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD. MacKenzie Walters presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner McGonagill asked about the status of the gravel driveway. The applicant Rod Colson with Colson Custom Homes, 6440 Pipewood Curve discussed storm water drainage on the property. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Weick moved, McGonagill seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the preliminary plat for a two-lot subdivision and approves a lot frontage variance for Lot 1, Block 1, Comer Addition, as shown in plans dated December 5, 2018, subject to the conditions of approval, adopts the findings of fact and recommendation: Building: Planning Commission Summary – February 19, 2019 2 1. Demolition permits required for the removal of any existing structures. 2. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. Engineering: 1. Lot 1 shall have a 10-foot drainage and utility easement along its front lot line (northernmost lot line) prior to recording of final plat. 2. An accurate soils report indicating soil conditions, permeability, slope, and groundwater elevations shall be provided upon the submittal of grading permits. 3. The contact information for the responsible person(s) for erosion and sediment control best management practices shall be updated on the plans prior to issuance of grading permits. 4. Review and approval of the use of silt fence and bio rolls for perimeter control shall be conducted by the city prior to the issuance of grading permits. 5. Add city detail 5302B – Erosion Control for Individual Lots, to the detail sheet. 6. If the 1974 sanitary and water services stubbed off Red Cedar Point Road that will service Lot 2 are inadequate for use, they shall be abandoned in accordance with city standards and re-installed. 7. The developer of Lot 2 will be required to pay all required city WAC and SAC fees associated with service connections for the rate in force at the time of building permit application. Environmental Resources: 1. Any trees removed in excess of what is shown on the grading plan dated 12/5/18 will be required to be replaced at a ratio of 2:1 diameter inches. Additionally, a birch and maple on Lot 1 are not shown on the tree inventory, but are larger than the 10” dbh minimum for the inventory. They will be preserved on Lot 1. 2. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed around existing trees to be saved prior to any construction activities and remain installed until completion. Fire Department: 1. The home on Lot 1, Block 1 must be addressed off of Hickory Road. Parks: Planning Commission Summary – February 19, 2019 3 1. Park dedication fees shall be paid for one lot at the rate in force at the time of final plat approval. Planning: 1. An escrow of 110 percent (110%) of the estimated removal cost for the concrete pad on the interior lot line between Lot 1 and Lot 2 must be received, and the concrete pad removed within four months of the approval of the final plat. Water Resources: 1. All permits and approvals must be received from other regulatory agencies prior to issuing permits. 2. The applicant shall pay the SWMP fee for 1.06 acres at the rate in force at the time of final plat approval. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE PERMITTING CHICKENS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. MacKenzie Walters presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Aller asked about different types of chicken coops, enforcement, and notification of neighbors. Commissioner Weick asked about the overall use for chickens in other cities, and if there has been found to be an increase in predators around chicken coops. Commissioner McGonagill asked about homeowner association regulations. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Weick moved, Undestad seconded that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapters 4, 5 and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning chickens with the following modifications. The lot size requirement will start at one acre with 8 chickens being the maximum. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE REVISITING THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT SECTION’S FORMATTING. MacKenzie Walters presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner McGonagill asked for clarification of this item. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Summary – February 19, 2019 4 Undestad moved, Madsen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning community commercial district formatting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE TO ALLOW CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT FACILITIES IN HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. MacKenzie Walters presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Undestad moved, Weick seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning continuing care retirement facilities. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE TO UPDATE SIGN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS REFERNCE (BUILDING CODE). MacKenzie Walters presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. McGonagill moved, Madsen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning sign design and construction standards. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE CLARIFYING TRASH STORAGE ENCLOSURE EXEMPTION. MacKenzie Walters presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Aller opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. Undestad moved, McGonagill seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning trash enclosures. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Madsen noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated January 15, 2019 as presented. Planning Commission Summary – February 19, 2019 5 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE. Kate Aanenson provided an update on the Galpin property matter which is scheduled to come back before the Planning Commission at their March 5th meeting for public comment and redevelopment of the Applebee’s site. YEAR END REVIEW/2019 WORK PROJECTS ANNUAL REPORT. Kate Aanenson reviewed planning numbers for 2018 and what staff is projecting to see in 2019. Commissioner Undestad moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISION REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 19, 2019 Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, and Michael McGonagill MEMBERS ABSENT: John Tietz and Mark Randall STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; MacKenzie Walters, Associate Planner; and Erick Henricksen, Project Engineer PUBLIC PRESENT: John Kunitz 6441 Bretton Way Jerry Cone 6320 Minnewashta Woods Drive Tony Fricano 980 Lake Lucy Road Lynn Pelto 6581 Foxtail Court Annette Stock-Lind 8104 Dakota Lane Rodney Colson 6440 Pipewood Colleen Johnson 5015 St. Albans Bay Laurie Susla 7008 Dakota Avenue PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION WITH A VARIANCE FOR REDUCED LOT FRONTAGE AT 3800 RED CEDAR POINT ROAD. Taping of the meeting started at this point in the staff report. Walters: …sewer access currently so from the north up here and the proposed Lot 2 on the south had utilities stubbed in in 1974 off of Red Cedar Point to the south. Sorry I’m having a little trouble changing slides for whatever reason. With regards to right-of-way streets and easements, no right-of-way dedication is being requested. The plan is for Lot 1 to be accessed via the existing driveway easement up through the vacated Kirkham Road onto Hickory. Lot 2 will have driveway access to Red Cedar Point and the applicant is going to dedicate a 5 foot side yard drainage and utility easements and then 10 foot easements along the front yard and they will be dedicating, asking for the designation of the northern lot line here as the front lot for Lot 1, Block 1. This is really slow. Sorry, bear with me a minute. Regarding the proposed variance request they are, they gave us a couple options to show the feasibility of doing the subdivision without a variance. That’s shown as Concept A or Concept B. They’re proposing again having zero feet actually on a strip public street because the front lot line would be where there is not a street. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 2 The reason for this is the Kirkham Road is not improved. In order to do it without requiring a variance they could install a private street which would involve several thousand feet of impervious surface within the area. They could also dedicate land to the city right-of-way and conduct, construct a public street. They could also use a flag lot configuration which would involve having a 30 foot neck that would service this rear parcel off of Red Cedar Point. All of these would result in an increase in impervious surface within the subdivision and given that the lots exceed the minimum dimensions required and lot area required staff’s preference would be to minimize the amount of impervious surface installed within the shoreland district. Staff has been contacted by several individuals in the neighborhood. Comments have fallen into two categories. One was concern that the subdivision not exceed two lots. Staff’s reassured folks that what’s being proposed is a two lot subdivision and there is no contemplation or potential for more than two lots to come from this. There has also been concern expressed over the subdivision’s potential impact on the area’s stormwater. Mainly staff’s been informed that Hickory is a low point and there’s concern that increased impervious would cause more runoff to be diverted into that area. Staff clarified that under the subdivision ordinance two lot properties are not required to install their own stormwater infrastructure or improvements and that the development would need to meet city and watershed requirements when they pull a building permit. So looking over the proposed subdivision it could go forward without a variance through the use of either a private street or a public street or through a flag lot which would require a variance from the subdivision ordinance but it would likely meet all of those criteria. All of the above mechanisms would require additional impervious surface. Staff as I mentioned believes it’s important to minimize the amount of impervious surface within the shoreland district. Both of the proposed lots are significantly larger than the residential single family district’s minimum lot width, depth and lot area requirements. Lot 1 will have access provided to a public road from the existing driveway easement which is a continuation of the current situation in the neighborhood and the subdivision meets all the requirements of the city code so for all of these reasons staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat with the variance. I’d be happy to address any questions you have at this time. Aller: Any questions of staff at this point? Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: One question I had is mostly my own education on Lot 2 I notice they have a rock driveway going in. Walters: That is conceptual for the construction so they, you know they can put the rock entrance so that they can get the construction vehicles there when building. So they showed that in the grading plan I believe on the plat. McGonagill: Right, I was just wondering were they doing that to avoid an impervious surface or are they thinking about they’ll pave it down the road? Walters: It would be paved after construction. That would only be for like some of the grading activities as part of the construction. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 3 McGonagill: Okay, thank you sir. Walters: Yep. Aller: Additional questions. Hearing none if the applicant would like to come forward and make a presentation that would be great. If you could state your name and address for the record sir. Rod Colson: Sure Rod Colson with Colson Custom Homes, 6440 Pipewood Curve. Aller: Welcome. Rod Colson: Thank you. Aller: Tell us about your project. Rod Colson: Well it’s a pretty straight forward two lot subdivision. There’s nothing special about it. Aller: There had been some concerns stated about the amount of water runoff and whether or not there’s a storm drainage problem based on the fact that this property would be built or subdivided. Can you address those issues a little bit? Rod Colson: Well I don’t think that it’s going to be creating more of a problem or making any problems that are there worst than already the, Hickory Road is the low point anyway so a lot of the water comes across and then it comes up from the lake when we have high water. Aller: Will the property when you build the property it’s going to have it’s own drainage area or no drainage area? Is it going to have, what’s it going to use to wick water away from your construction? Rod Colson: We’ll be well under the hard cover so it will, the soil’s pervious will absorb the water. There’ll be some runoff but that’s normal. There’s already runoff coming through from the lot to the west up high so. Aller: Additional questions? Okay thank you. Rod Colson: Thank you. Aller: We’ll open the public hearing portion of this item so this is again an opportunity for an individual that’s present to come up and speak either for or against the item. Make a comment. The public hearing is now open. Seeing no one come forward I’ll close the public hearing. And Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 4 entertain comments, concerns, questions, additional questions of staff or a motion. Commissioner Madsen. Madsen: Yeah it looks like a, as presented would be better than the flag lot or some of the other alternatives in trying to reduce the impervious surface and that would be with the recommendation that staff is proposing. Aller: I see a lot of sense. Commissioner Weick. McGonagill: And this will include the new address right? Walters: That is one of the conditions of approval. Weick: I was going to propose a motion. Aller: Please do. Weick: I don’t want to rush anybody but the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the preliminary plat for a two lot subdivision and approve a lot frontage variance for Lot 1, Block 1, Comer Addition as shown in the plans dated December 5, 2018 subject to the conditions of approval and adopting the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? McGonagill: Second. Aller: Having a valid motion and a second, any further comments or concerns? I just want to say that I think under our guides we are looking for what will be least impactful and a reasonable use of the property and when we look at the situation here we have an opportunity to create a situation where there’s better stormwater management and reduction of the impervious surface so I think it’s a good plan as well. Any additional comments? Weick moved, McGonagill seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the preliminary plat for a two-lot subdivision and approves a lot frontage variance for Lot 1, Block 1, Comer Addition, as shown in plans dated December 5, 2018, subject to the conditions of approval, adopts the findings of fact and recommendation: Building: 1. Demolition permits required for the removal of any existing structures. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 5 2. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. Engineering: 1. Lot 1 shall have a 10-foot drainage and utility easement along its front lot line (northernmost lot line) prior to recording of final plat. 2. An accurate soils report indicating soil conditions, permeability, slope, and groundwater elevations shall be provided upon the submittal of grading permits. 3. The contact information for the responsible person(s) for erosion and sediment control best management practices shall be updated on the plans prior to issuance of grading permits. 4. Review and approval of the use of silt fence and bio rolls for perimeter control shall be conducted by the city prior to the issuance of grading permits. 5. Add city detail 5302B – Erosion Control for Individual Lots, to the detail sheet. 6. If the 1974 sanitary and water services stubbed off Red Cedar Point Road that will service Lot 2 are inadequate for use, they shall be abandoned in accordance with city standards and re-installed. 7. The developer of Lot 2 will be required to pay all required city WAC and SAC fees associated with service connections for the rate in force at the time of building permit application. Environmental Resources: 1. Any trees removed in excess of what is shown on the grading plan dated 12/5/18 will be required to be replaced at a ratio of 2:1 diameter inches. Additionally, a birch and maple on Lot 1 are not shown on the tree inventory, but are larger than the 10” dbh minimum for the inventory. They will be preserved on Lot 1. 2. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed around existing trees to be saved prior to any construction activities and remain installed until completion. Fire Department: 1. The home on Lot 1, Block 1 must be addressed off of Hickory Road. Parks: Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 6 1. Park dedication fees shall be paid for one lot at the rate in force at the time of final plat approval. Planning: 1. An escrow of 110 percent (110%) of the estimated removal cost for the concrete pad on the interior lot line between Lot 1 and Lot 2 must be received, and the concrete pad removed within four months of the approval of the final plat. Water Resources: 1. All permits and approvals must be received from other regulatory agencies prior to issuing permits. 2. The applicant shall pay the SWMP fee for 1.06 acres at the rate in force at the time of final plat approval. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE PERMITTING CHICKENS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. Aller: Moving onto the amendments to the Chanhassen City Codes which have been put forward. Do you want to hit these one on one or would you like to take them as a group? Aanenson: Yeah… Aller: Okay so we’ll hit item 2 which is an amendment to Chanhassen City Code requesting a permitting of chickens in residential districts. Walters: Alright, so the first code before you is, and I do apologize. This is not working, there we go. Is again the question of allowing chickens. I’ll maybe give it a minute until folks can. Alright the question is re-examining the City’s policy on back yard chickens. Currently the City considers chickens to be farm animals. This is kind of reminiscent of if you’ll remember the bee discussion we had last year. They’re restricted to parcels, agricultural or 10 acres or larger. We’ve had a lot of people contact us express interest in having chickens on their properties. Staff looked at, I think we surveyed 62 different cities, 44 of which now allow back yard chickens. Looked at some literature and staff’s belief is that they can likely be accommodated in residential districts so long as there are numbers of chickens. Limits on the number of chickens and then also some performance standards. So some stuff that we looked at, and I apologize, I put a lot of charts on this one slide but the different type of regulations that cities had. So I mentioned we looked at 62 cities. 44 of these permitted chickens to be kept in the back yard. Of those the most common limit was a limit on the number of birds. 40 of the 44 did that. About Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 7 half required that additional setbacks beyond the base zoning codes be applied to like the chicken coop or the chicken run. About half required licenses. The majority prohibited roosters. We saw that was pretty common. We looked at the maximum number of chickens. Four was the kind of the favorite number but there were a lot of different sliding scales and different systems used. What staff is proposing for the city of Chanhassen would be allowing them on any parcel. Parcels less than one acre, limiting them to 4 chickens. From the 1 to 2.5 acre range allowing up to 8 chickens. From 2.5 to 10, up to 16 chickens. If you have over 10 acres you can have a chicken farm so we didn’t really see a reason to limit it at that point. Beyond that we’d like to go with a 25 foot setback from any adjacent residence not owned by the owner just to kind of minimize a chance for noise or odor impact. Standard 10 foot lot lines. Requiring that coops and runs be enclosed. That’s mostly to prevent predators from eating the chickens and rodent proof food storage. Weekly waste removal again to deal with potential odor issues. Prohibiting roosters and crowing hens to prevent noise issues and no discernable odor at lot line were the performance standards and then probably requiring a permit similar to what was done with bees. $25 lifetime permit as long as there’s no violation no need to reapply every year. With that I’d be happy to take any questions. I know I through that quick and I can go into a lot more depth if you’d like. Aller: Did we look at the, I know we use articulation in our buildings. Did we look at the type of coops? Are there differences in an open coop versus a closed coop for purposes of noise, odor and view? Walters: Yeah we’d need, we’d require a fully enclosed coops because it allows better protection from the chickens from both predators and the elements but one of the things that folks would have to take into account as they designed them would be proper ventilation to prevent odor issues or you know disease for the chickens and also to make sure it’s comfortable. But we didn’t go into like super detail you know designing their coops for them. We did put a minimum of 4 square feet per chicken just to ensure the animals had room to be chickens in. That seemed to be a pretty common provision from some of the other cities we looked at. Aller: And a coop would be considered an accessory structure. Walters: Yes it would. Aller: So for purposes of the code enforcement and that would limit an individual’s use of their property is they decide to put in a coop for instance. That would be their accessory structure. They couldn’t have another one on the other side of the property. Without acreage. Walters: Yeah I mean they would still be, it would contribute to the 1,000 square foot accessory structure limit so if somebody already had 1,000 square foot garage they’d have to potentially choose between how to use it but that’s similar to the choices they have to make for a lot of other features. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 8 Aller: And we’re talking about specifically keeping chickens outdoors versus indoors? Walters: We did put a prohibition against having them indoors. The rationale behind that is there is some evidence that there’s a lot of, there can be increased risk of transmission of illnesses from chicken to people when chickens and people live in very close confines. So just as a safety disease control we didn’t necessarily think they’d be good household pets. That being said you know if someone wanted to convert a portion of their garage or something to a chicken coop, especially if it’s like a detached garage I don’t personally see an issue with that and we didn’t address that in the code. Aller: And then we’re not looking at butchering or anything else on a property correct? Walters: So the language that staff is proposing would say no outdoor butchering. What we, our approach was within the city of Chanhassen during a certain time of the year you can see deer hanging from trees. There’s no prohibition about butchering a deer or any game animal that you may hunt. We felt the intent of like butchery bans was to avoid potentially offending the neighbors if in your garage you want to eat one of your chickens, we felt that was a choice chicken owners could make. Aller: Alright. Walters: Again any of these provisions could be obviously amended if the commission has different feelings on it. Aller: Did we look at enforcement? Walters: Enforcement would be similar to how we’re planning on enforcing bees and other potential nuisances. If we receive a complaint we’ll go out there. If we find that the chickens are being kept in violation of the permit it’d be grounds for revoking the permit which would prevent them from being issued a new chicken permit but yeah it’s similar to any other part of the code. You know we would not be doing annual or surprise inspections. It would all be complaint response based. Aller: And we were also looking at notification of neighbors with bees. Is that the same with chickens? Walters: Yes it is. We actually adopted the exact same language on that again just to make sure everyone knows that there’s going to be a change and has some forewarning. Aller: Any additional questions? Commissioner Weick. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 9 Weick: Did you, when you looked at the 62 other cities was there any information on the people that have chickens, what they’re doing with them? Do they have them for eggs? Do they have them for pets? Do they have them because they’re cute? Walters: It honestly seems to be primarily eggs with a touch of good companion animals and cute. A lot of people think it’s fun to watch them run around. They do also serve some ecological benefits. Their waste produces a really good compost so you know gardeners like that They also eat a lot of garden pests so some people strategically place their coops and runs next to their garden so they eat insects before they even get to the gardens so a lot of kind of your green ecologically friendly motivations but I think egg production tends to be like the over riding factor. Weick: And then a second question is it just, has there been any evidence of increased predator activity around chicken coops? Walters: A lot of stuff eats chickens and if the chicken coops are not well designed and not properly enclosed your, everything from your neighbor’s dog to an eagle is going to get a meal and that’s one of the reasons why we adopted the provision that both the coops and the runs needed to be fully enclosed and well constructed and the hope there is if you don’t have vulnerable chickens out where predators can get them hopefully they will not be attracting predators. Weick: That’s all I have. Aller: Great. Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: Question on the structures. I’m assuming the way this would work that, okay we would have a code that would approve it but they would still have to get their homeowner’s association to approve it. Like for example you know patios have to be approved you know or you’re painting a house sometimes has to be approved by a homeowner’s association so they would have to submit, I’m assuming they’d have to submit their plan to their local homeowner’s association board for approval. Walters: If their homeowner’s association had policies those policies would govern. From the city’s perspective you know just with the examples you mentioned I do not ever, if someone applies for a patio and they meet the city code I issue a patio permit. McGonagill: Right. Walters: If their homeowner’s association does not allow that that’s for the homeowner’s association to address and enforce. McGonagill: Okay. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 10 Walters: And you know most folks obviously are very good about doing their research and one of the things that the notification is hopefully it would make sure the homeowner’s association knew chickens were in the plans. McGonagill: Thank you. Thanks MacKenzie. Aller: Additional questions or comments? Hearing none I will open up the public hearing portion of this item. So any individual wishing to come up and speak either for or against the item can do so. Seeing no one come forward I’ll close the public hearing. Open it for discussion, comment or action. Weick: I’m concerned about attracting predators. I don’t know that, although we haven’t heard from residents or anything I, it’s just a, I mean we have issues now I think with you know putting bait in people’s back yards potentially. That’s my concern. I mean I don’t have anything against chickens certainly and I think people will do it responsibly but that’d be my concern. Aller: Additional comments, questions. Madsen: I share that concern. I do like the fact that neighbors need to be notified. I do like the fact that there’s a permit and so if there is an issue there’s a real you know process where people can talk about it. Maybe find a solution so if there were predators, I mean I don’t know what that solution would be except to remove the chickens if it was really bad but at least, and I like the requirement that it be all enclosed to keep the chickens as safe as possible so. Aller: Well I’m not, I’m kind of on the chicken fence. I mean I’m just, I don’t want to stop somebody from using their property reasonably. We do allow bees. We do allow for other pets but I agree with Commissioner Weick that we have to trust our citizens to act responsibly. I do think that as in the bees when we were looking to do a permit process that that’s absolutely necessary. That there’s notification to the neighbors. That there’s a permit taken out so the neighbors have someone to turn to rather than creating a confrontation. You know as much as we love to have neighbors be able to talk to themselves that doesn’t necessarily always happen and so this would give an opportunity for people to turn to their neighbors. I guess I have an additional question of staff. Is there any indication that this has been going on without being permitted? Walters: I did receive a complaint about chickens in June of 2018 I believe was the date I listed. An individual was staying with their mother. Had brought their chickens. Had a kind of sub- standard fencing. Chickens got out you know. As always we find out about stuff when someone comes to us. You know if we did a proactive patrol it probably wouldn’t surprise me if we found a few other properties with chickens but no I don’t think there’s like a huge number in the city. If that is… Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 11 Aller: Well I mean it cuts both ways. It’s also telling that if we would suspect that it’s out there and neighbors aren’t complaining then it’s kind of leads to the opinion that the neighbors don’t have a problem with it so that may be an unwritten will. Walters: In the one complaint we received the verbatim comment was I didn’t care until they got in my garden which is understandable. Aller: Based on those questions any additional comments? Questions. Concerns. Weick: I’ll probably oppose it, unless we considered maybe increasing the lot size so that it, because as I understand it there is no lot requirement so I would say if you mandated it on some lot size smaller than agricultural but you know with bigger than I don’t know. Aller: So could you put up the slide again with the different, there we go. If that will help your thought process at all. Weick: Yeah because I’m just leaning if lot sizes are bigger there’s just more space. There’s more opportunity to you know create a coop or something that’s, you know you’re not going to have neighbors necessarily on top of you at that point. You know jut thinking about the nuisance factor. Potentially smell and other stuff so if it was, I guess I’m most concerned about the you know chickens on less than an acre. I’m not sure. You know I’m just trying picturing my neighborhood right and if my neighbors had chickens I don’t know if it’d really like that. I don’t know. McGonagill: I’m looking at your page 3 following up on your comment. It says that there’s 7 cities that had minimum lot sizes. Do you remember what those were MacKenzie? Walters: Not off hand. Most of them that had the minimum lot sizes did it by zoning district and I didn’t necessarily cross check you know what those thresholds were. McGonagill: Okay. Walters: That’s definitely something we could get back to you on if you wished. Aller: My understanding is Rosemount allows for hens and no roosters and you have to get written permission from all your neighbors if that helps or perhaps taking the less than one acre and excising it and going 4 and 8 instead of 8 and 16 so something that’s workable. I mean it’s not that I’m pushing it at all but if you’ve got an idea that you want to put forward that’s fine. Weick: Yeah and you know this can certainly pass without me so you know I don’t want to, I would just throw if several, I’m just trying to be open about it. If several of us are on the fence I would propose starting at one acre and then stepping it up from there. But if the consensus was Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 12 that you know to vote in favor of it I have no, you know that’s perfectly fine as well. I just wanted to express my concern there that’s all. Aller: Your point’s well taken. I mean people are discussing things for a reason because we have. Weick: Right, right. Aller: We don’t want to disrupt our neighbors and our neighborhood and at the same time we want to make sure that our neighbors have an opportunity to have appropriate pets and to use their property accordingly so. Any comments or? Undestad: I’ve got one more on the setbacks. So we’re doing 25 feet on the sides for each residential. 10 feet from the lot line. Walters: Yep. So the coop or run would not be able to be located within 25 feet of any of the neighbor’s housing but could be 10 feet from any lot line and that was to try to guarantee that like on very close lots or lots where there wasn’t a lot of space you know you couldn’t put a coop right outside your neighbor’s window. Undestad: So I guess but you know looking at that too I guess I kind of agree with Commissioner Weick. Aller: Go in the back yard. Undestad: Yeah if you’re just 10 feet, if you’re in those smaller lots on there and you have you know if you don’t like chickens and you’ve got them 10 feet away from your back yard and you’ve got only a 30 foot deep back yard, oh there’s your chickens so. Maybe I guess that less than an acre might be a little tight for many. Aller: So I’m hearing acreage as being the sticking point so to speak and what about any of the other conditions are concerning of anyone? Undestad: Well I just would like on an acre or more you’ve got room to do this stuff with the coops and the runs and all that so. Aller: So if that’s the case would someone like to propose a motion regarding that or do you feel as though it’s not worth it at this time and you want to send it back. Weick: I’ll propose it that way. I would say I’d still keep it at 8. Starting at 8. Undestad: On one acre. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 13 Weick: I think you put good research into that. That seems to be a good number. I mean I don’t think we have to reduce the number of chickens people can have but I mean I can certainly give it a shot. I’ll propose a motion. Aanenson: Just so you can read the motion… Weick: Okay the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapters 4, 5 and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning chickens with the following modifications. The lot size requirement will start at one acre with 8 chickens being the maximum and scale up from there. So we would be removing less than one acre as a possibility. Walters: Understood. Aller: So we have a motion. Do we have a second? Undestad: Second. Aller: Having a motion and a valid second any further discussion? Weick moved, Undestad seconded that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapters 4, 5 and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning chickens with the following modifications. The lot size requirement will start at one acre with 8 chickens being the maximum. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Aller: Moving onto item 3. Item 2 having carried. Will that also be on February 25th? Walters: No it will not. That would be March 11th. Aller: So March 11th. Aanenson: Can I just go back to that one because we didn’t have a quorum last time we agreed to fast track the previous application because that was on last, 2 weeks ago. Aller: So if all those that are watching at home and present would like to follow that item for final action that will be on March 11th before the City Council. Moving onto item 3. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE REVISITING THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT SECTION’S FORMATTING. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 14 Walters: Yep so for reasons unknown to staff the community commercial district is not formatted within the city code with the same break out of subsections as the other zoning districts. It just makes it a little challenging to read and find stuff in that. It also would hinder any future amendment to that section because instead of being able to call out a specific subsection for amendment you could have to wholesale amend the entire zoning district so staff you know we’re just going through and we identified some ways we could improve the readability and usability of our code. This has been one that I wanted to change for a while and I would, staff’s recommending that we just make it match to format of the others. And just so you know this is the location of the, oh no. It lost. I apologize. My graphic seems to have lost the little circle I drew around the commercial district which is unfortunate. But it is this section I believe. Aanenson: I don’t know if you recall we added this to the downtown when we did the Comprehensive Plan. We don’t have anything that’s in there but we proposed it for redevelopment to kind of continue the, to allow for some larger footprint commercial buildings in the downtown core. I think the only one that came under this one was the Walmart one which was denied. It needed variances which were not approved and so we want to make sure those standards in that zoning district are codified similar to the other ones so, again it would take a redevelopment project for somebody to go in there. There isn’t any vacant lots in there right now but we’ve had other interests over the years to do redevelopment. Nothing at this current time Aller: Alright questions of staff. Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: A question, you know this is mostly again mechanics. You all spend a lot of time and work doing exactly what you said, the commercial district. You did a lot of mission work. What should be down here. Realize this is code but how does that get rolled into this? I mean you talk about what’s permitted but you all did a lot of work on the intent of what you wanted downtown to look like and where it wanted to go so how does that drive what people are allowed to do? You understand my, where I’m going with the question. It’s almost like the Comprehensive Plan itself. Aanenson: Yeah. McGonagill: How does that plan get included in the direction you would give to someone? Aanenson: So the Comprehensive Plan describes land uses. When it says commercial. Then you go to the zoning ordinance. Within the zoning ordinance there’s a subset of types of commercial like you have the central business district. You have highway business. You have as MacKenzie talked about the regional commercial zoning district. This is what we added a number of years ago. The central, or community commercial. McGonagill: Right. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 15 Aanenson: Which allowed for larger footprint of buildings. So if you look at like Target or a grocery store, we didn’t have an opportunity for some additional, adjacent to the core of downtown so it would kind of extend that so it has permitted uses within that district. McGonagill: But you all did write a document. I know around that kind of stuff if I recall what you wanted in the commercial district. Aanenson: Absolutely. In this community commercial district. McGonagill: Right. So can the code point to that and said you know reference this, use this, you know it’s like. Aanenson: Yes it’s currently in the code right now. Walters: Yeah if you, sorry if I may jump in. If you check the staff report we actually pulled the code for community commercial and you’ll notice the first section is intent and I think that gets to what you’re getting at. Where we looked at the Comprehensive Plan and then within the zoning code we said this is what this zone is designed to do. To clarify the channel… McGonagill: Let’s see it’s 20-741. Walters: The changes here are purely cosmetic and for readability. They don’t change any of the intent or. McGonagill: So that’s how you’re rolling in the direction you want to take it. Aanenson: Correct. Yep. So again the intent of this wasn’t to you know to do a lot of smaller type businesses but to provide the opportunity for some larger accessory offices or something like that. Yes. McGonagill: So based on the code, this is, I know I’m off base here if you’re talking just formatting. Aanenson: Correct. McGonagill: I’m trying to educate myself a little bit. If someone came in with a smaller footprint, as a real small deal you could deny it because it doesn’t meet this? Aanenson: Well once this is the total building on any single level could be no more than 65,000 square feet and then you could have one at 15,000 square feet. At a time there was a lot of fast foods that wanted to come in and that wasn’t what we wanted to see in this district so we tried to Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 16 say there had to be a minimum of tenant space of 15,000 or up to 65,000 which would prevent a larger warehouse type thing. McGonagill: Alright got it. Okay that answers my question, thank you. Aller: Additional questions? Alright. I’ll open up the public hearing portion of this item. Having heard the request and the comments so far anybody will come forward and speak either for or against the item and make a comment? Seeing no one come forward I’ll close the public hearing. I think the discussion that was just had shows the need for the clarification and the fact that the ease of readability and the assistance that it will give an individual looking at the code and pointing those things out is beneficial so thank you for requesting the modification. With that any other comments so I’ll entertain a motion. Undestad: I’ll propose a motion. The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning community commercial district formatting. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Madsen: Second. Aller: Thank you Commissioner Madsen. Undestad moved, Madsen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning community commercial district formatting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Aller: Motion carries. Again that will be heard on March 11th. So anyone wishing to follow that item before the City Council for final action will be March 11th. Moving onto item 4. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE TO ALLOW CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT FACILITIES IN HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. Walters: So one of the things staff does is we periodically review the code for internal consistency and one of the things we noticed in our last round of reviews was that the continuing care retirement facility performance standards set a maximum bed limit of 6 beds per acre and specifically mentioned that they were allowed in high density districts so the R-12 and R-16 districts. Districts guided for up to 16 units an acre. However when we cross checked those districts it’s not listed as a permitted use within any of the high density districts so I did a little research. Looked at the initial proposal. How it ended up being passed and it looks like what happened was when the original code went through it was paired with the Beehive development Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 17 that was in a medium residential district and essentially in one of the revisions the R-12 and R-16 was omitted and it was passed just narrowly targeted to that one development instead of with the bigger all over arching intent of the initial draft. So staff is proposing to bring it in line with the listed performance standards and add continuing care retirement facilities as permitted uses in high density residential districts in line with the original intent of the drafted ordinance before it was you know combined with a specific project, if that makes sense. Aller: Questions of staff? I think it’s pretty straight forward the way you presented it. You’re to be commended on the report. Any individual, I’m going to open up the public hearing portion of this item. Any individual again wishing to speak either for or against this item or make a comment can come forward and do so at this time. Seeing no one come forward I’ll close the public hearing portion of this item and open it up for discussion or action. Undestad: I’ll propose a motion. Aller: Commissioner Undestad. Undestad: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning continuing care retirement facilities. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Weick: Second. Aller: Commissioner Weick. Having a motion and a second any further comment or discussion? Okay I, I’m glad to see this before us. I think that our city has taken strides in the last couple of years to make sure that we’ve been taking care of our elderly and making sure that our housing program fulfills the mission of Chanhassen becoming a life long community so an individual can literally have their starter home here and then move into a facility like this and be present in Chanhassen for the remaining days so I think it’s incumbent upon municipalities like the City of Chanhassen to step up and make sure that these things are taken care of in code and I think that we’re doing so, so I would at this point in time request a vote. Undestad moved, Weick seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning continuing care retirement facilities. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Aller: Motion carries and again that will be on March 11th so any individual wishing to follow the item for final action it will be heard on March 11th before the City Council. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 18 Aanenson: Chair I’d just like to add a couple things. I think sometimes we’re moving through this, just for clarification for everybody so we added this definition. If you remember we had that kind of that remnant piece along Highway 41 that we were trying to find a use for so we thought that would be a good use so we added this as a new definition as MacKenzie talked about. The Beehive because they’re living in a group home. They don’t really have individual kitchens and everything so there’s a new definition added so we’ve got this one and then shortly after that we had the one that came down off of Lyman Boulevard. The Olive, so that’s our second one so this is a little bit different where we, there was new introducing to the city and as a need and so what we’re seeing now is to codify that with some of the other senior housing that we looked at that there may be some other uses coming down the road and so it’s just codifying all that but up until Beehive came in we didn’t accommodate that type of use. Aller: Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE TO UPDATE SIGN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS REFERNCE (BUILDING CODE). Walters: This is another example of checking for internal consistency. We were contacted with a request to provide the 1997 Uniform Sign Code and we do not have a copy of it and so we spoke with the building inspectors and the people who actually inspect commercial signage and they recommended that we adopt Appendix H of the International Building Code. It’s a much more common document. Much more easily attainable. It’s one that we feel sign contractors and our inspectors are both more familiar with and so staff is proposing that the section of the code that requires all commercial signage to meet the 1997 Uniform Sign Code standards be replaced with requiring them to meet Appendix H of the International Building Code which also has construction design standards and is on file with the City. Aller: Great. Any questions of staff? McGonagill: One question. Aller: Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: We adopt Appendix H, do you know of any violations of Appendix H that already are out there that we would have to deal with? Walters: Not to my knowledge. McGonagill: Okay thank you. Aller: Any additional questions? Commissioner Madsen. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 19 Madsen: So is Appendix H similar to what you remember that the 1997 edition was? Walters: I must confess I have never read the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code. Could not comment on that. We did look, we did read Appendix H. I did go over it with Eric Tessman who is the City Building Official. It from our perspective seemed to be comprehensive. Seemed to discuss wind load. You know proper securing. All the things we’d want to protect the safety and welfare of our citizens. It is somewhat difficult for me to imagine that there were meaningful standards that were different between the International Building Code and construction standards in another sign code manual but again I have not personally read it. Aanenson: Just to be clear all building permits for signs go through the building department so they are inspected and reviewed for compliance. This just documents that, what we’re using for that compliance. Aller: Which is going to just a follow up question if I might and that is in your discussions were there any concerns that this subdivision would leave out something that they would want to have in? Walters: No. This is what the inspectors asked me to propose. Aller: Okay. Additional questions, comments? Hearing none open the public hearing portion of the item. Again having heard the request any individual wishing to come forward and speak either for or against the item or just give a comment can do so at this time. Seeing no one come forward we’ll close the public hearing portion of the item. Open it up for discussion, comment or action. Have you done one yet today? McGonagill: I’m getting ready to. Aller: Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: I was getting ready to read it. May I? Aller: Absolutely. Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: Thank you. I’d like to propose a motion that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning sign design and construction standards. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? No race this time. Madsen: Second. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 20 Aller: Commissioner Madsen, thank you. Having a motion and a second, any additional comments, questions or concerns? McGonagill moved, Madsen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning sign design and construction standards. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Aller: That motion carries and again that item will be forwarded to City Council on March 11th. PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO CHANHASSEN CITY CODE CLARIFYING TRASH STORAGE ENCLOSURE EXEMPTION. Walters: So this is another housekeeping internal consistency and making sure the code reads like we want it to. I was reviewing the trash enclosure section of the code and I noticed that the way it was structured we have a section that requires all trash containers to be stored within basically a self contained building and then we have an exemption from that that says single family properties don’t have to do this. So the goal was this, the enclosure provision was designed to regulate industrial and commercial properties. We wanted to make sure it didn’t also regulate single family properties so they exempted them from it. However the first sentence of that section also is a section that prohibits the exterior incineration of trash so by exempting single family residences from the enclosure provision it also exempted them from the provision preventing them from exterior incineration of trash. Now I don’t believe anyone but myself and now yourselves noticed this so no one has yet made the case that they’re allowed to burn in an enclosed trash container in their yard but we thought it would be wise to separate this out and fix the problem before it occurred. So staff is proposing to break that into 3 subsections. One subsection prohibiting the exterior incineration of trash. The other exempting single family residences from the enclosure provision. Does that make sense? Aller: Yeah. Walters: Yeah, okay. Aller: Questions? McGonagill: Another educational question. Aller: Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: What is the code on burning leaves? I wanted to ask that because I really don’t know. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 21 Walters: I would, I wish the Fire Marshal was here. I’d defer to that but I believe you are not supposed to burn yard waste. Nope. McGonagill: Okay. Aanenson: You can get a burning permit but it’s highly regulated so you’re not supposed to burn. Aller: I was going to say when in doubt call the fire department and ask to speak with them and see what you need to do to get a permit. McGonagill: Thank you very much. Aller: Commissioner Madsen. Madsen: Now if you happen to be in an association that requires that it be inside a garage or have some sort of covering in front of it, would that pre-empt this? Walters: Yes. So as always association rules can be more stringent than the City but not less stringent. So the City also just for full discussion we have another provision in our general code that says trash containers must be kept out of public view except on day of pick up. And so obviously if your association also had an additional provision defining what out of public view meant like in garage, behind wall, whatever it may be that would not be affected by this change. All this would do is guarantee no one can ever make the argument it’s okay I lit my trash container on fire because of X. Madsen: Okay thank you. Walters: Yeah. Aller: Additional questions, comments? Hearing none I’ll open up the public hearing portion of the item. Again it’s the last opportunity of the evening. Any individual wishing to come forward speak for or against the item. Seeing no one come forward we’ll close the item. We’ll bring it up for discussion, comment or action. Anyone? Madsen: No. Undestad: Then I’ll make the motion. Aller: Commissioner Undestad. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 22 Undestad: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning trash enclosures. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? McGonagill: Second. Weick: Second. Aller: Commissioner McGonagill got it. Weick: You got it. McGonagill: I sure did. Aller: Thank you. Having a valid motion and a second, any further discussion or comment? Undestad moved, McGonagill seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code concerning trash enclosures. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Aller: Motion passes. That concludes our public hearings for today’s meeting and we’ll open up request for approval of the Minutes. McGonagill: A lot of good work MacKenzie by the way on going through all this stuff. Walters: Thank you. I have a whole other 40. McGonagill: Okay. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Madsen noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated January 15, 2019 as presented. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE. Aanenson: Thank you Chairman, members of the Planning Commission. So on January 28th the City Council took under advisement during the work session the Galpin site. They also discussed it again on February 11th and you will be seeing it on your March 5th meeting. It’s not a public hearing because you held a public hearing on it. There were specific directions given to you and I’ll be working with the City Attorney’s office on that formatting how that meeting is Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 23 going to go. Wanted to see you know what the reception is for the redesign and the other is reception or thoughts about preservation of the open space so I’ll be structuring that. McGonagill: So you said we will get instructions on how that will go. Aanenson: Absolutely, yep. We’re working on the staff report now, yep. McGonagill: So it will come in… Aanenson: What you’re doing is, it’s remanded back to give some additional information back to the City Council. McGonagill: Okay. Aanenson: Not formalizing correct. McGonagill: So very, very specific. Aanenson: Correct because to have the public hearing would be different notification and then in addition to that would be all the engineering plans that you approved so those would just be revised as it moves forward to City Council. The City Council will be making a recommendation also at their March 11th meeting so it’s going to be a quick turn around from that with all their engineering so there’ll be specific instructions regarding that and it is being noticed, a flyer attached in the Villager and there’s information out on the City’s website too for anybody that wants to come comment on the project. So that was one of the issues to make sure we had additional. Weick: But they can’t comment though right? Aanenson: Pardon me? Weick: There was no public hearing I thought. Aanenson: Well it’s public comment. Aller: It’s not technically a public hearing. Aanenson: What they want is input but it’s not a public hearing. The legal form when you do notice to everybody within 500 feet. Aller: So there won’t be Findings in there and there don’t have to be notices. Weick: So you will open it for public comment? Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 24 Aanenson: That’s the whole purpose correct. McGonagill: So will we or will we not be voting on it? I just want to be sure. Aanenson: Well that’s what I’m trying to formalize yet. How that works. McGonagill: Okay. Aller: We left them with a 3-3 the last time. McGonagill: Yeah. Aanenson: Yep so or summarizing what the majority of the comments were and that sort of thing so that’s what we’re working on yeah so. McGonagill: Okay. Aller: So they want. Aanenson: More to come. Aller: They want more. They said go back to work. Aanenson: So right now at the, that’s the only item on for that meeting. We were going to try to put some additional code amendments. As you know with the Comprehensive Plan there’s some other code amendments that will be coming too. Mostly regarding stormwater management. A big chunk of them but so right now we’ll just put that item on because I don’t know how many people are going to be here and that want to be heard on that so we’re just kind of leaving that open just for that item as long as we had nothing external. It would just be internal things that we’d be bringing forward to have more flexibility. So with that also at that, the 11th meeting you know there’s discussion of the Applebee’s site so there was a desire for redevelopment on the site. The council encouraged the developer to find a different type of business for that site so they’re ongoing with that one too. Again there’s been a lot of work trying to find restaurants and they’ve struggled to try to find a restaurant to go in there and it is permitted for some other type of commercial uses would be permitted in there too so we’ll see what happens with that. So that’s all I had for council updates. YEAR END REVIEW/2019 WORK PROJECTS ANNUAL REPORT. Aller: Great. So then we would move onto our year end review. Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 25 Aanenson: Yes. So for everybody’s edification, not just the Planning Commission but we at the end of every year do an annual report and this is also the City Council. This is in the By-laws of, and the duties and powers of the Planning Commission to get an annual report. So this is this year’s annual report and the first thing we’ll talk about is a population projection. As of April 1st will be 26,355 so we are continuing to grow. Having problems with our power point here. I’m just going to kind of go through the, maybe MacKenzie can just kind of scroll along. Go through kind of what the 2018 year in review and kind of what we see anticipating or what we anticipate for 2019. So for 2018 the conditional use permits, 3 of those. Four planned unit developments, PUD’s. One rezoning. Three site plan reviews. Again site plan review is either an office, commercial or industrial. Four subdivisions so those can be a one lot subdivision, two lot and then 9 variances so that added up to 20 cases. And also in 2018 we had a record number of 373 dwelling units which is typically about double what we usually do and again those were driven by two, the senior housing project down it’s now called Riley Crossings Senior Housing which formerly was called the Mission Hills down at 101 and Lyman. If you’ve driven by and seen that. And also the Venue downtown. So we see about a 2 percent increase in the housing stock. Again we’re predominantly and will always be predominantly single family residential as our largest portion of the housing stock. We also permitted, the average is 132 single family and 69 attached so attached can be a townhouse or a tri-plex or the like. So again there’s a slight deficiency of approved lots available for development with lot inventory of 103 platted lots. We keep that report in there too. That’s one of the things Bob’s done a great job of tracking all that so we track all the permits that come through so we’re always looking at our land inventory. That affects prices and fluctuation and when developers want to increase their stock so the one that we went through pretty quickly because there was some pent up demand for that price point was the townhouses down at 101 and Lyman, just north of the Kwik Trip there. Those went through pretty quickly and then scattered 61 single family lots. So you can see there the projects that went through. The Arbors 2nd Addition and then Red Cedar Point, just a two lot subdivision. The Arbors a 3 lot so those were some of the smaller ones. The ones on 101 and Lyman, kind of the cottage type homes those are still working their way through the permitting. Again market based. So what we do anticipate in 2019, some of the big projects coming through is Avienda. They were going to go to the Planning Commission, go to that one slide right here. So that’s the lot information right there. That’s hard for you to read but we keep that internally and we keep track of how many vacant lots are per subdivision. We get that request from developers when they’re out doing some of their market studies so we know on the top half of that is actually the single family and the bottom half is the multi-family so it kind of, when a subdivision comes in not always get final platted as you know. They bring in so many lots. Put the infrastructure in and then they’ll do phases on those so that helps us kind of keep track of that. That also happened on the townhouse projects so this is typical in multi-family too. Typically it’s not on an apartment. They pull a permit and that’s what kind of skews your numbers so an apartment like senior, the senior hill, the senior housing and the Venue downtown, those permits for you know 130 approximately in each of those units get pulled all at once. Typically that doesn’t happen in other types of multi-family or single family so those are the things that we keep track of on an annual basis and helps us understand what’s happening in the marketplace. What’s moving. So going back to what we see happening next year, you approved as did the City Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 26 Council the Avienda project and that project, the lifestyle center has made some changes to it. They got their grading permit at the end of last year. They came in for final plat and now they’re going to make some changes to that. They are working in getting their grading permit tied to the preliminary plat. That’s not uncommon that we do that. They would still provide security for that project. They still have to dedicate the 23 acres of the wooded knoll. They had that all staked and there’s some other requirements that were tied to the wetland permit. Wetland banking. Also some additional money for acquisition on Lyman Boulevard so those things will happen before they get the grading permit. I’m working on that with Project Engineer Erick Henricksen on that and they’re hoping to start grading on that sometime in April. Meanwhile they’re going to make some changes to the project itself. Some of the internal things. You know there’s a hotel. Some senior housing also in that project. Some smaller lot housing in there. Some office and as I mentioned retail so some of those are going to move around a little bit so, because they’re amending that PUD that does require a public hearing back before the Planning Commission so you’ll see that. But before it comes back to you it will start at the top at the City Council. They’ll present to the City Council what they’re thinking about those plans before you see that but we do anticipate that sometime this spring again. Kind of all the same time they’ll be coming forward with the grading permit so that will probably be a pretty large discussion on that meeting too kind of going through all the idiosyncrasies so when we do a big PUD like that, that also has design standards so we put together the architectural package which I think they might be making some tweaks. As you recall that had a unique attributes to their sign package so that’s a pretty large development so we’ll be going through all that again with you so have an opportunity for input on that. Aller: So this will be a reverse concept process. It’s going to go by City Council first for comment and then come back to us. Aanenson: Correct yep, yep. Yep, yep so they’ll get a chance to see it. I think they were anticipating that they might be on this coming up council meeting but I think they wanted to refine a few things before they come back before the council. I know we’ve got a lot of requests from neighbors that think that that project went away. It’s not. I think some of the changes are really for the better. Making not only architecturally but some of the uses and the location of some of those uses so anticipating bringing that forward to you. Again looking at our growth rate, about a 2 percent growth rate. We talked about the city code with the changes with the Comprehensive Plan. We did get some feedback on the Comprehensive Plan. It seems like every city got some minor tweaks that we’ve had a little angst over. We have a nuance wording that we’re working through right now on getting those changes. Some of it also involves some watershed district comments so we’ve got our consulting engineers working on that so we’re anticipating that going back up to the Met Council for a final review and then once we get that in place then the clock’s ticking for us to do some more code amendments so you’ll be seeing that. Although the watershed or the wetland actually goes first because we have a shorter window when those changes need to be made. So I think we’ll spend some time with you on that. Education. We talked about that before we spent a lot of time last year on that. The four different watersheds. How we make our rules align so our residents aren’t bumped around Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 19, 2019 27 between all the different rules and we’re taking back the permitting on that so there will be a little bit more education on that moving forward so we’ll spend some time on that. Comprehensive Plan we talked about that. What else am I looking up there? Joint commission tours. So we’ll plan that again. And then also we have our typically our meeting in April is a work meeting because we have our new commissioners that would be involved in that so we’re looking through, kind of thinking of some ideas that we might want to spend some time doing a deep dive on some educational things and if you have suggestions we’d love to hear about that too. So and then also for our tour but those are really the big things we’ve got going. I don’t know what I missed on the slides there that Bob had put together but again it’s in a formalized report. We’ll make sure this gets out online. It tells you kind of where we are in the permits. We also have good numbers in here. What’s our valuation. Our housing valuations compared to other cities and that sort of thing. What our building permit valuation is and that’s total number of inspections. We have a lot more detail on there too so that will be out on the website too so again we just want to share that with you. Be happy to answer any questions that you might have about it. Aller: Any questions or comments at this point? Other than you know thank you again for providing us with a really deep dive report on the status of planning in Chanhassen. Keeping up with it is a bear just on a bi-weekly basis for us but you keep track of everything so we appreciate it and the fact that it will be put on the website. It gives the public an opportunity to deep dive on their own and take a look at ask questions and be prepared to come in and give their ideas on where they want Chanhassen to head in their planning. So thank you. And is that it for our agenda? Any correspondence? None. Okay so I’ll entertain a request for adjournment immediately following the meeting or after a short break I believe there’ll be a work session for interviewing commission applicants so we look forward to doing that. Aanenson: Yep. Aller: And what that I’ll entertain a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Undestad moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Approve Purchase Agreement for Acquisition of Property Located at 770 Pioneer Trail for Flood Hazard Mitigation Grant Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.3. Prepared By Andrew Brotzler, Interim Public Works Director/City Engineer File No: SWMP 19­88­02 PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council approves the Purchase Agreement for Acquisition of Property located at 770 Pioneer Trail in conjunction with the State of Minnesota General Obligation Bond Grant Contract for Acquisition of Flood Prone Property, contingent on satisfactory title review by the City Attorney." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND On March 12, 2018, the City Council approved a DNR Flood Damage Reduction Grant Assistance Program Application for properties along Pioneer Trail, located at 730, 750 and 770 Pioneer Trail. The homes were constructed in the 1960s and 1970s and have historically been susceptible to flooding. Rain events over 2.5 inches in a 24­hour period flood the yards and events of 3.5 inches can potentially flood the structures on the properties. The properties are in an 11.4­acre subwatershed that extends east to Foxford Road in the Lake Riley Woods Development. Most of the acreage on these parcels are in a wetland so flood mitigation opportunities are limited per wetland rules. Flooding on these properties has been reported as far back as the 1970s before significant development in the area began. The DNR has awarded grant funds to help the city purchase one of the homes, 770 Pioneer Trail, at this time. On August 27, 2018, the City Council approved a DNR Flood Mitigation Grant Agreement for Acquisition of Flood Prone Property at 770 Pioneer Trail. On October 25, 2018, Kelly Lindstrom prepared an appraisal report for the property. The opinion of fee simple market value was $330,000. On March 5, 2019, Robert and Elizabeth Haak accepted the purchase price of $330,000.00 and signed the purchase agreement. DISCUSSION The Minnesota DNR Flood Damage Reduction Grant Assistance Program (FDR) application was approved to CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectApprove Purchase Agreement for Acquisition of Property Located at 770 Pioneer Trail for FloodHazard Mitigation GrantSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.3.Prepared By Andrew Brotzler, Interim Public WorksDirector/City Engineer File No: SWMP 19­88­02PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council approves the Purchase Agreement for Acquisition of Property located at 770 Pioneer Trail inconjunction with the State of Minnesota General Obligation Bond Grant Contract for Acquisition of Flood ProneProperty, contingent on satisfactory title review by the City Attorney."Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.BACKGROUNDOn March 12, 2018, the City Council approved a DNR Flood Damage Reduction Grant Assistance ProgramApplication for properties along Pioneer Trail, located at 730, 750 and 770 Pioneer Trail. The homes wereconstructed in the 1960s and 1970s and have historically been susceptible to flooding. Rain events over 2.5 inches in a24­hour period flood the yards and events of 3.5 inches can potentially flood the structures on the properties. Theproperties are in an 11.4­acre subwatershed that extends east to Foxford Road in the Lake Riley WoodsDevelopment. Most of the acreage on these parcels are in a wetland so flood mitigation opportunities are limited perwetland rules. Flooding on these properties has been reported as far back as the 1970s before significant developmentin the area began.The DNR has awarded grant funds to help the city purchase one of the homes, 770 Pioneer Trail, at this time.On August 27, 2018, the City Council approved a DNR Flood Mitigation Grant Agreement for Acquisition of FloodProne Property at 770 Pioneer Trail.On October 25, 2018, Kelly Lindstrom prepared an appraisal report for the property. The opinion of fee simplemarket value was $330,000.On March 5, 2019, Robert and Elizabeth Haak accepted the purchase price of $330,000.00 and signed the purchaseagreement.DISCUSSION The Minnesota DNR Flood Damage Reduction Grant Assistance Program (FDR) application was approved to purchase the property at 770 Pioneer Trail. The city will be reimbursed 50% for eligible project expenses, not to exceed $180.000.00. The city must provide a match equal to the state’s contribution. The proposed project would be to purchase the home, remove the structures, cap the well and remove the septic system.  Staff has discussed purchasing the parcel and re­establishing wetlands on the parcel with the Riley­Purgatory­Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) staff and board. RPBCWD has stated they are interested in the project and are willing to undertake a future wetland restoration project. In addition, the RPBCWD has accepted being the LGU for the second and third parcel acquisitions (730 and 750 Pioneer Trail).  The project was identified during the Avienda WCA permit process. If the Avienda project moves forward, the developer is required to contribute funds to the city for a wetland or stormwater project. These funds could be used to help with the acquisitions and a future wetland improvement project. To date, these funds have not been received. Funding Because the Avienda funds have not been received, funding for the purchase will be advanced from the Surface Water Utility Fund. If the funds are received from Avienda for the wetland requirements prior to closing, these funds will be used instead. Once the property has been acquired, well has been sealed, and structures and septic system have been removed, the city will submit for reimbursement from the DNR per the grant agreement. Once the city has received the grant fund for the property at 770 Pioneer Trail, the land will be transferrred in fee title to RPBCWD. Additionally, any remaining funds from the Avienda wetland funding will be transferred to RPBCWD for the remaining acquisitions. The city will not contribute to the wetland restoration project. Schedule Closing shall take place on or before August 30, 2019.  Structure removal, capping the well, and septic system removal will take place in fall of 2019. ATTACHMENTS: Purchase Agreement Location Map DNR Agreement PURCHASE AGREEMENT THIS PURCHASE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made on rhe day of , 2019, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota munic ipal corporation ("Purchaser and wife ("Setlcrs"). "), and ROBERT A. HAAK AND ELIZABETH K. HAAK, husband f. OFFER/ACCEPTANCE. In consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and agreements hereinafter contained, Sellers agree to sell and convey to Purchaser, and Purchaser a€rees to buy the real property, legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto from Sellers, upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, together with the buildings constructed thereof (the "Buildings"), the improvements located within the Buildings (the "Improvements") and all and singular rights and appurtenances pertaining to the real property including, but not iimited to all right, tille and interest of Sellers in and to adjacent streets, rights of way, easements, utility agreem€nts, parking and other shared use agreements and all hereditaments and appurtenances pe(aining thereto, if any (hereinafter refened to as the "Property"). subject to compliance with the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement, Purchaser offers io purchase and Sellers agree to sell to Purchaser the Property. Applicable laws, regulations, zoning regulations and ordinances, whether federal, state or local; and Encumbrances to title which constitute encumbrances, restrictions, or easements which have been disclosed to Purchaser and accepted by Purchaser in writing; (hereinafter "Permitted Encumbrances"). 4. RELOCATION BENE,FITS. Sellers are aware of Sellers' rights and payments that Sellers may be eligible to receive pusuant to the Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (the "Act"). Sellers acknowledge that Sellers have been given the opportunity to seek and receive the advice of legal counsel with respect to relocation, moving, reestablishment and other costs, if any, that may be available under the Act. Sellers hereby acknowledge that the payment of the Purchase Price does not include a payment for Relocation Benefits. At Closing, and as a condition precedent to Closing, Sellers will waive any right to receive any relocation payments pursuant to the Act (or other federal or state law provisions) with resp€ct to the Property. Sellers acknowledge that Sellers will make such a waiver I C D ?: PRICE AI\D TERMS. The price for the Property included under this Agreement is Three Hundred rhirty Thousand and No/I00 Dollars ($330,000.00) ("purchase price;), which shall be payable by Purchaser to Sellers in cash or certified funds in full on the Date of Closing 3. DEEDA{ARKETABLE TITLE. Upon performance by Purchaser, sellers shall execute and deliver a Warranty Deed, conveying good and marketable title ofrecord, subject to: A. Reservations of minerals or mineral rights by the State of Minnesota, if any; B. Building and zoning laws, ordinances, state and lederal regulations; and of Sellers' own volition and with full knowledge of the specific relocation benefits to which Sellers may be entitled, Sellers and Purchaser agree that this is a voluntary sale by Sellers. Purchaser represents that Purchaser would not acquire the Property in the event that negotiations between Setlers and Purchaser had failed to result in an amicable agreement. If the transaction set forth by this Agreement is not completed, Purchaser has no present intent to acquire the property by eminent domain and has not considered the use of eminent domain. If this Agreement is terminated for any reason, Sellers are free to retain ownership ofthe Property or to sell the property on the private market. As Purchaser and Sellers agree that this is a voluntary sale, state and federal law permit the Pwchaser to request a waiver of relocation benefits from Sellcr, as provided under Minnesota Statute Section 117.521. Prior to and as a condition of Closing, Sellers will be required to sign a relocation waiver, the form of which is substantially the same as shown on Exhibit..g,,and the final form will be subject to the approval of Purchaser ("Relocation Waiver"), If Sellers do not waive relocation benefits, this Agreement will be terminated and Sellers wili be free to retain ownership of the Property or sell on the private market. 5. REALESTATETAXES ANI)SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. a.P flor Y Delinouent Real Estate Taxes and rnqulJnt Soecial A ssmcnts. Delinquent delinquent real estate taxes payable in years prior to the year of Closing and installments of special assessments certified for collection with real estate taxes payable in years prior to the year of Closing, together with penalty, interest and costs, shall be paid by Sellers not later than the Closing Date. b Real Estate Taxes Pavable in the Year of Closins. Real estate taxes payable in the year of Closing shall be prorated between Sellers and Purchaser on a calendar year basis to the Closing Date. Purchaser shall assume installments not paid at Ctosing. Sellers shall pay penalty, interest and costs on any delinquent installment oftaxes and special assessments payable by Sellers in the year ofClosing. c. Certified Sneci al Assessments.All installmcnts of special assessments owing prior to the Closing Date and certified for payment with the real estate taxes payable on the Property in the year of Closing shall be paid by Sellers. 6. SELLERS'BOUNDARY LINE. ACCESS. RE STRICTIONS AND LIEN WARRAN'I'I8S. Sellers warrant that buil dings on adjoining real property are entirely outside of the boundary lines of the Property. Sellers warrant that there has been no labor or material fumished to the Property for which payment has not been made. Sellers warrant that there are no present violations ofany restrictions relating to the use or improvement of the Prope(y. 2 7. REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS ANn ACCESS TO PROPERTY. Within ten (10) business days ol the execution of this Agreement, Sellers agree to provide Purchaser with all of the following documentation: True and correct copies of all existing environmental assessment reports, soil reports and results of all soil tests and environmental assessments in Sellers' possession; (b)Suweys, permits, licenses, leases, complete copies of all contracts currently affecting the Propcrty which are in Sellers' possession ("Other Agreements"), and notices received within the last 90 days from the city, state or other governmental authorities pertaining to uncured violations ofany law, ordinance or regulation. Sellers' obligation to provide the foregoing documentation shall continue for any such documentation that Sellers receive following execution of this Agreement and prior to Closing. Sellers acknowledge that Purchaser and Purchaser's agents shall have access to the Prope(y without charge and at reasonable times for the purpose of Purchaser's survey, investigation and testing of the Property, which may include, but is not limited to a Phase ll Environmental Study and appropriate soil borings ("Investigation"). Purchaser shall pay all costs and expenses of Investigation and Purchaser shalI hold harmless and indemnify the Property and Sellers, their heirs, successors and assigns, from and against any and all claims, suits, losses, liabilities, andexpenses (including attomey's fees, expert's fees, and other expenses of litigation) on account of injury to or death of any persons (including Purchaser's) or damage to property or contamination of or adverse effects on the environment or liens against Sellers or the Property, caused by Purchaser's entry onto the Property. Purchaser's obligations under this Paragraph 7 shall survive the termination ofthis Agreement or the Closing. Purchaser shall repair and restore any damage to the Property caused by or occurring during Purchaser's Investigation and retum the Property to substantially the same condition as existed prior to any Investigation. Purchaser shall have the right in its sole discretion to contact various public officials and administrators to verify information regarding the status ofthe Property and to determine that the Property is suitable for Purchaser's intended use- 8. POSSESSION/PERSONAL PROPERTY AND FIXTURES.Sellers shall deliver possession ofthe Property to Purchaser as oftlre Dale ofClosing. Prior to Closing Sellers stnll have the right o rernove the house and garagg as well as any otlrcr outbuildings, from tlre Propcrty, at Sellers' own mst and expense. Sellers may also remove fxhles located on the Property at Sellen' sole c6t ard expense. Sellers shall have removed all personal property from the Property by the Date of Closing. Any possessions or property remaining on the Property after Closing may be considered by the Purchaser to have been abandoned. Purchaser may dispose of the possessions and personal property in the manner that Purchaser deems appropriate. Purchaser shall not be liable to Sellers, their representatives, heirs or assigns for disposing ofthe possessions or property. 9. EVIDENCE OF TITLE. Purchaser shall obtain a commitment for an ALTA Owner's Form title insurance policy (the "Commitment') issued by a title company (the "Title Company"), pursuant to which the Title Company agrees to issue to the Purchaser upon the recording of the documents of conveyance referred to herein an Owner's title insurance policy insuring the Property in an amount equal to the Purchase Price. The Commitment shall include (a) 3 (D Insures that Purchaser has marketable title of record to the Property, free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, leases, claims and charges, all material easements, rights-of-way, covenants, conditions and restrictions and any other matters affecting title, except for Permitted Encumbrances. (iD Waives or agrees to insure over the following standard exceptions (A) Rights and claims ofparties in possession; and (B) Mechanic's, contractor's and material liens and lien claims. Purchaser shall have fifteen (15) days after receipt ofthe Commitment to deliver to Sellers written objections to title based on marketability of the Property ("Objections"). 10. TITLE CORRECTIONS AND REMEDIES. Sellers shall have sixty (60) days from receipt ofPurchaser's written title objections to make title marketable. Upon receipt ofPurchaser's title objections, Sellers shall, within ten (10) business days, notify Purchaser of Sellers' intention to make title marketable within the sixty (60) day period. Liens or encumbrances for liquidated amounts which can be released by payment from proceeds ofclosing shall not delay the closing. Cure ofthe defects by Sellers shall be reasonablc, diligcnt, and prompt. Pending correction oftitlc, all payments required herein and the closing shall be postponed. ll. AS-IS, Purchaser shall accept possession ofthe Real Property on the Closing datestrictly on an "AS IS, WHERE IS, WITH ALL FAULTS" basis, and that such sale shall be without represcntation or waranty of any kind, express or implied, except as otherwise provided herein. Purchaser acknowledges and agrees that Sellers shall be under no duty to make any changes, alterations or repairs to the Real Property. Any alterations or repairs required by the Purchaser shall be the sole responsibility and expense of the Purchaser. Purchaser understands the AS-IS provision is a material inducement to Sellers' willingness to enter into this Agreement. The provisions of this Pamgraph l1 shall survive closing or termination of this Agreement. Purchaser hereby waives the written disclosures required under Minn. Stat. 0$ 513.52 - 513.60. 12. NOTICES. All notices shall be in writi ng and considered to have been duly given if sent by first class certified mail or delivered to the address as set forth below by reputable ovemight delivery service or local messenger, or to such other address as such party may hereafter designate by written notice to the other party. Notices to Sellers shall also be sent by email if a duplicate copy ofsuch email is also given or scrved by an altemative method described above. Notices given by certified mail shall be effective two (2) business days after their postrnark; notices delivered by ovemight delivery seryice or local messenger shall be effective upon receipt or refusal of receipt; and notices by email shall be effective upon delivery, provided that ifan email notice is delivered after 5:00 PM or on a non-business day, then such email notice shall be effective on the next business day. Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other party, in any manner ahve specified, ten (10) days prior to the effective date of such change. Notice by or to a party shall be effective if delivered by or to such party's attomey. 4 proper searches covering ba*ruptcies, state and federal judgments and liens and levied and pending special assessments, which Commitrncnt: To Sellers Robert and Elizabeth Haak 770 Pioneer Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 Email: haakfamil liv co To Purchaser: City of Chanhassen, Minnesota Chanhassen City Hall 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn: City Manager Copy to:Campbell Knutson, P.A. Grand Oak Office Center I 860 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 290 Eagan, Minnesola 55121 Attn: Andrea McDowell Poehler 13. MINNESOTA LAW. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. 14. LIEN FOR MEDICAL ASSISTANCE. Sellers indicate that the P roperty IS NO'l' subject to a lien for Medical Assistance or other public assistance. 15. LEAD PAINT DISCLOSURE. Sellers represents that the dwellings WERE constructed on the real prope(y before 1978. (lf such housing is located on the real property, attached and made a part of this Purchase Agreement is "LEAD PAINT ADDENDUM FOR HOUSING CONSTRUCTED BEFORE I978".) 16. SELLERS' REPRESENTATIOI\$. Sellers, as part of the consideration therefore, represent that: to Sellers' knowledge, without investigation, no entity or person has, at any time: i. "released" or actively or passively consented to the "release" or "threatened release" ofany Hazardous Substance (as defined below) from any "facility" or "vessel" located on or used in connection with the Property or adjacent tracts in violation of applicable laws; or ii. taken any action in "response" to a "release" in connection with the Property or adjacent tracts; or iii. otherwise engaged in any activity or omitted to take any action which could subject Sellers or Purchaser to claims for intentional or negligent torts, strict or absolute liability, cither pursuant to statute or common law, in connection with Hazardous Substances (as defined below) located in or on the Property or adjacent tracts, including the generating, transporting, treating, storage, or manufacture of any Hazardous Substance (as defined below) in violation of applicable law. "Hazardous Substance" means any substance, whether waste, liquid, gaseous or solid matter that is or is deemed to be hazardous, a 5 hazardouswaste,toxic,pollutant,adelcterioussubstance,acontaminantor u.o*""ofpollutionorcontaminationunderanyapplicableenvironmental law. Selleri disclose, however, that in the late 1970s, when they re-sided the residence on the Property, they buried the painted paper siding- and ptywooa in the yard area of the Property, which materials have not been diiturbed since they were buried approximately 40 years ago' b. Sellers have the present full authority and power to execute this Agreement and to close the sale ofthe ProPertY. c. Sellers represent to the best of Sellers' knowledge that the property.does not have -y aroericun Indian burial grounds, other human burial grounds, ceremonial "*ttlrorkr, historical materiali, and/or other archeological sites that are protected by federal or state law. Purchaser's obligation to close is contingent upon Purchaser determining to Purchaser's satisfaction that the property does -not have any American -lndian burial grotmds, other humm burial grounds, ceremonial earthworks, historical mateiials, and/or other archeological sites that are protected by federal or state law. d. Sellers ceftify that [check one of the following]: _ that Sellers do not know ofany individual on-sitc sewage Eeatrnent systems on the ProPertY. X individual on-site sewage treatment systems on the Property are disclosed by Sellers on the attachcd Disclosure Form. e. Sellers certify that [check one of the following]: - that Sellers do not know ofany wells on the Property. X wells on the Property are disclosed by Sellers on the attached Well Disclosure Form. f. Sellers ropresent that methamphetamine production has not occurred on the Property. g. Other than Sellers, there are no olher tenants or occupants of the Property. h. On the Date of Closing there will be no (i) outstanding leases or occupancy agreements, or (ii) outstanding contracts made by Sellers for any improvements to the Property which have not been fully paid for or for which Sellers shall not have made arrangements to pay off at Closing, or that will affect the Property or be binding upon Purchaser or upon the Property subsequent to Closing without Purchaser's written consent; and Sellers shall cause to be discharged all mechanic's or materialmen's liens arising from any labor or materials furnished to the Property that were made at the request of Sellers, their agents, or contractors, prior to the Date of Closing and any mortgages ot other such similar encumbrances. 6 Allofsellers'covenants,feplesentationsandwarrantiesinthisAgreementshallbe true as ofthc date hereofand ofthe closing Date, and shall be a condition precedent to the performance ofPurchaser's obligations hereunder. IfPurchaser discovers that any s,r"h cou"n*t, representation, or iarranty is not true, Purchaser may elect prior to Closing, in aaiition to any of its other rights and remedies' to -cancel this Agreemerit, or Purchaser may postpone-the Closing Date up t9 nllet{ (90).days to aliow time for correction. If iurchaser elects to proceed with the Closing following such discovery, iurchaser shall be deemed to have waived its rights to assert a claim against Selleri-arising from the inaccuracy or trntruthfulness ofany such covenant, rePresentation, or warranty. The representations under this Paragraph shall survive closing for a period of two (2) years. 11. CLOSING. The closing (the "closing") tall take.place at the offices of a title company a"rig*iidTfF-*"t aser (the "iiile Company'1. The Closing shall take place on orbefore er*'rri lO, jOfS (.,Closing Date"), or ui rurh oth", time as agreed upon by thc parties. Unless ffiilFug.."a Uy ttre paiies in writing, in the eventthat any. ofthe contingercies provided for in itir Agrlri"rt # not iatisfied prior to'-the Closing Date, this Agreement-shall be null and void and oino further force and effect. At closing, Sellers and Purchaser shall disclose their Social i""*iiNr.t"rs or Federal Tax Identificatioir Numbers for the purposes of completing state and federal tax forms. 18. CLOSIN G DOCUMENTS. a.At the closing, Sellers shall execute and/or deliver to Purchaser the following (collectively the "Closing Documents"): i. Warrantv Deed and WelUseptic Disclosures. A Warranty Deed in *"*d"bt" f"t *d reasonably satisfactory to Purchaser, together with properly executed Well and on-site Septic Disclosure forms' ii. &Ue63flidefil. A standard form affidavit by Sellers indicating that on the Ct"stng D"te tt ere are no outstanding, unsatisfied judgments-, tax- liens or bankrultcies against or involving Sellers or the Property; that there has been no skill, labor oi material fumished to the Property for which payment has not been made or for which mechanic's liens could be filed; and that there are no other unrecorded intercsts in the Property, iii. @hg. A certification in form and content ratisfa"tory to the parties hereto and their counsel, properly executed by Selters, containing such information as shall be required by the lnternal Revenue Code, and the regulations issued there under, in order to establish that Sellers are not a "foreign person" as defined in $ l4a5(Q(3) ofsuch Code and such regulations. iv. $etllenglstetCnCnL A Closing settlement statement prepared by the Title Company reflecting the financial provisions of this Agreement. v. Ed[g-DgEI-CcItiIlCelg. The Bring Down Certificate required under the 7 19. terms of this Agreement. vi. BClqggtigll[Ciyit. The Relocation Waiver required under Paragraph 4' vii. Qlhcr-Dggg1g9il!. All other documents rtasonably determined by either prrty - th" tttt. t*urance company to be necessary to transfq andprovide title insurance for the ProPertY. b. At the Closing, Purchaser shall execute and deliver to Sellers the following: i. Purchase Price. Payment of the Purchase Price. ii. St8legSalSlalenCnL A Closing settlement statement prepared by the Title Company reflecting the financial provisions of this Agreement' iii. QBIL A Certificate of Real Estate Value in form acccptable to the Title Company and Sellers. iv. OlhSLDgCgES4t& All documents reasonably determined by either party or th" titl" insurunce company to be necessary to provide title insurance for the Property. Purchaser shall provide copies ofall closing documents to Sellers for review within a reasonable period of time prior to Closing. CLOSIN G COSTS. The costs relating to the closing of this transaction shall be paid as a. Purchaser shall pay: i. Recording fee for the Warranty Deed; ii. The closing fee charged by the Title Company; iii. All coss of obtaining a title insurance commitment and the premium for owner's title insurance, including survey coverage; iv. Pro-rated taxes; v. State Deed Tax and Conservation Fee attributable to the Warranty Deed; and vi. Costs related to Purchaser's inspection or survey ofthe Property. b. Sellers shall pay: i. Pro-rated taxes. follows: 8 c. Sellers and Purchaser shall each pay their own attomeys' fees in connection with the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and the Closing' 20. PURCHASER'S CONTINGENCIES. Pur,chase-r'sobligations under-this Agreementare co"ti"g@h of thc following ('Purchaser's contingencies"): a. The representations of sellers contained in this Agleem€nt must be.true now and as ofthe blosing Date, as if made on the Closing Date and Sellen shall.have delivered to puchaser on the blosing Date, a certificate, sigrred by sellers, certifyingthat such representations are true as of the closing Date (the "Bring-down_ certificate"), except to the extent that the representations are no longer true and acceptable to Purchaser. b. purchaser determining on or before the Closing Date, that it is satisfied, in its solc discretion, with the reiults of matters disclosed by a Phase I Environmental Audit or by any additional environmental/engineering investigation or testing ofthe Property plrlormed by pruchaser or Purchaser 's agent. By executing this Agrtement, Sellers irereby authorize Puchaser to enter upon the Property at reasonable times to conduct the investigations and/or tests described hercin. Purchaser shall be solely responsible for all environmental tests. c. Purchaser determining that it is satisfied with the title to the Property. d. Sellen, as owners of the Property, signing at Closing the voluntary waiver of all relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits as set forth in Minnesota Statute Section I 17.521 , as required under Paragraph 4. If the Purchaser's Contingencies have not been satisfied on or 60 days after the date of this Agreement, then Purchaseimay, al Purchaser's option, extend the Closing Date in order to satis$ thE Purchaser's Contingencies for an additional 30 days or terminate this Agreement by givingnotice to Sellers on or before the Closing Date. The contingencies set forth in this Paragraph are for the sole and exclusive benefit ofPurchaser, and Purchaser shall have the right to waive the contingencies by giving notice to Sellers. perform all obligations required by this Agreement and Purchaser shall fail or refuse this Agreement within the time and in the manner provided, then Sellers' sole remedy 21. DEFAULT; REI4EDIES. If Sellers have performed or are ready, willing and able to to perform shall be the right to terminate this Agreement by giving a 30-day written notice to Purchaser pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section 559.21, as it may be amended for time to time. If Purchaser fails to cure such default within thirty (30) days of the date of such notice, this Agreement will terminate. Upon termination, parlies shall have no further rights and obligations hereunder other than those rights and/or obligations which are expressly stated to survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. IfPurchaser has performed or is ready, willing and able to perform all obligations required by this Agreement and Sellers shall fail or refuse to perform this Agreement within the time and in the manner provided, then Purchaser, at its option may terminate this Agreement by giving wriften notice thereof to Sellers, in which case the parties shall have no further rights and 9 23. NO AGENCY. None of the provisions herein shall be construed to establish an agency, pu.t ,"trhip o..loinw*ture relationship between sellcrs and Purchaser for any purpose. u. ATTORNEYS'S FEES. If any party hereto fails to perform any of its obligations under thir Ag.""-;;i; if urt;i$ute arisls bet*een the parties hereto conceming the meaning or interpritation of any provision of this Agreemen! then the defaulting party or the party not pr"ruiling in such dispute, as the case .uy b", .haU pay any and all costs and expenses incuned by the other party, including reasonable attomey's fees. obligations hereunder other than those rights an&or obligations which are expressly stated to survive expiration or termination of this Agreement. 22.TIMEI S OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence lor all provisions of this Agreement' 25.ASSIGNMEN T , This Agreement shall not be assigned without approval of the non- assigning party. 27. TIME PERI ODS. ln the event the time for 26. SEVERABILITY. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall bs held to be inualid,li66GI'iE67in conflict with the law of the jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue to be valid, enforceable and not be affected by such holding. performance of any obligation hereunder expires on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday in the State extended to the next succeeding day which is not a of Minnesota, the time for performance shall be Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday in the State of Minnesota 28, SURVIVALOF REPRESENTATIO NS AN D WARRANTIES. The representations and warranties set forth in this Agreement shail survive the Closing for a period of eighteen (18) calendar months following the Closing Date, and none of such representations and warranties shall merge into any instrument of assignmcnt, endorsemen t, contract, deed or other instrument executed or delivered at the Closing in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby. The descriptive headings of the paragraphs of this29.DESCRIPTIVE HE,ADINGS. Agteement are for convenience only and shall not control or affect the m eaning or construction of any provision hereof. 30. NOIryAIYEB. The waiver by one party of the performance of any covenant or condition hereunder shall not invalidate this Agreement, nor shalt it be considered to be a waiver by such party of any other covenant or condition hereunder. The waiver by any or all of the parties of the time for performing any action shall not constitute a waiver of the time for performing any other act or identical act required to be performed at a later time. The exercise ofany remedy provided by law and the provisions ofthis Agreement of any remedy shall not exclude other remedies unless they are expressly excluded. 31. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the transaction hereinabove set forth and may not be amended or modified in whole or in part except with the consent of both of the parties hereto in writing. l0 32. 33. MINNESOTA LAW. This contract is govemed by the laws of the State of Miruresota. This Agreement maY be executed in counterparts. Signatures may be transmitted via or in "PDF' format via e- mail. [The remainder of this page intentionally left blonk signature pages and Exhibits follow.J 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOtr', the parties hereto have entered into this Agteement as of the day and year written above. PURCHASER: City of Chanhassen, Minnesota By: Elise Ryan, Mayor By: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager 12 I9EH'ezllg )t"?H 'V Ueq :sug'I1gs €l THE SOUTH HALF, AS MENTIONED ALONG THE EAST AND WEST LINES T}IEREOF' oFTHEWEST155.0FEET'ASMEASUREDALoNGTHENoRTHANDSoUTHLINES THEREoF,oFTHEEASTI0ACRESoFTHES0UTHHALFoFTI{ENoRTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 1 16, RANGE 23' CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA. E}GIIBIT A Legal Description of ProPertY 14 E,XHIBIT B Asreemcnt Rcsardins Release. Pavment and Assisnment of Relocation Ilencfits THIS AGREEMENT REGARDING WAIVER AND ASSIGNMENT OF RELOCATION BENEFITS (this "Agreement")is made as of 2019, by and between the CITY OF CHANHASSEN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (sPurchaser") and ROBERT A. HAAK AND ELIZABETH K' HAAK, husband and wife ("Sellers")' RECITALS: Sellers and Purchaser entered into a purchase agleement (the "Purchase Ageemenf) dated as oi---, 2019, related to property located in the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. Sellers have been advised of their rights and payments that Sellers may be eligible to receive pursuant to the uniform Relocation Assistance Act (the "Act"), including payments for Minimum Compensation under Minn. Stat. 117.87' Sellers acknowledges they has sought and received the advice of legal counsel and have been specifically advised as to relocation, moving, reestablishment, and other costs that may be available to the Sellers under the Act. Sellers and Purchaser desire to enter into this Agreement to confirm their understanding of the Sellers' release, sale and assignment of any claim for any relocation benefits and/or other relocation costs due or payable to Sellers, whether pursuant to the Act or otherwise. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and suffrciency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: 1. Effective as of the date hereoi Sellers hereby acknowledge that the sale of the Property is a voluntary sale and not under threat ofcondemnation and the payment ofthe Purchase PriCe does not include payment for Relocation Benefits and Minimum Compensation Benefits and hereby release Purchaser ftom any liability for payment ofadditional relocation payments pursuant to the Act (or other federal or state law provisions) with respect to the Property' 2 Effective as ofthe date hereof, Sellers hereby sell, transfer and assign to Purchaser any benefits, payments, claims, or other rights due or payable to Sellers pursuant to the Act (or other federal or state law provisions) with respect to the Prope(y. 3. Sellers acknowledge that they have freely waived such rights oftheir own volition. 4 Sellers acknowledge that they have waived such rights with full knowledge of the specific relocation benefits to which she would otherwise be entitled. l5 5. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original, but all ofwhich together shall constitute one instrument. 6 This Agreement shall be null and void if the Purchase Agreement shall terminate or if Closing under the Purchase Agreement shall fail to occur for any reason. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Waiver of Relocation Benefits Agteement has been executed by the parties hereto as ofthe day and year first above written. SELLERS: Robert A. Haak K. Haak PURCHASER: City of Chanhassen, Minnesota Elise Ryan, Mayor By: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager By l6 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Property THE SOUTH HALF, AS MENTIONED ALONG THE EAST AND WEST LINES THEREOF, OF THE WEST 155.0 FEET, AS MEASIJRED ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH LINES THEREOF, OF THE EAST IO ACRES OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 116, RANGE 23, CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA, 17 Lake Ann Park Rice Marsh Lake Preserve North LotusLake ParkLake Minnew ashta Regional Park (County Park)SunsetRidgeParkMeadowGreenPark K erb erP o n d P a rk Lake Susan PreserveBluff C reek Preserve ChanhassenRecreationCenter Hesse Farm Preserve Pheasant HillPark CurryFarmsPark CityCenterParkStoneCreekPark RoundhousePark HermanFieldPark CarverBeachPlayground Park PrairieKnollParkPowerHillPark Ch an hassenHillsPark Bandi mereHeightsPark Greenwood Shores Park CarverBeachPark Bluff Creek Golf Course RaguetWildlifeManagement Area (WMA) MN Valley NationalWildlife Refuge Minnesota Landscape Arboretum S ugar bushPark ChanhassenNaturePreserve M innesota Land sc ape Ar bor etum Pleasant ViewPreserveFoxwoodsPreserve Minnewashta Heights Park S LotusLake Park B andim erePark Chanhassen Estates Park Lake Susan Park Seminary FenScientific andNatural Area (SNA) Park RileyRidge Park PioneerPass Park Raguet WildlifeManagement Area (WMA) Bluff CreekPreserve Rice MarshLake Park OHW 877.0 OHW 699.2 OHW 896.3 OHW 865.3 OHW 944.5 OHW 956.1 OHW 881.8 OHW 955.5 OHW 993.6 O HW945.2 OHW 932.77 OHW 929.8 Lotus Lake Lake Riley Lak e M innew ashta Lake Lucy Rice Lake Lake Susa n Lake Ann Lake Virginia Lake Harrison Rice Marsh Lake C lasen Lake La ke St J o e Christmas Lake Ca stle Rid g e C a s c a d e P a s s Town Line Road Pleasant View Road C a s c a de Pass Trapp e r s P a s s Timber H ill Road Sta gHornLane Trap Lin e Circle TrapLineLane O x b owBendOxbow Bend Oxbo w B e n d Shasta Cir E C a s c a de Circle M ountainV iewCo urtP i e d m o n tCourt TrappersPassOxbowBendOx b o wBe n d FoxHollow Dri ve Pleasant View Road FoxH o ll ow DriveHuntersCourt BluffRidgeCourtF o x H ollow Drive G r a yFoxCur veFoxta il C o urtQuailCrossi ngGrayFoxCurv GreyFoxCurve Gray F o xCurveGrayFoxCurveBruleCircleChocta w Circle S a n d y HookRoad Hwy101GreatPlainsBlvdFox Path F o x C o u rtLake P oint Lotus TrailNava jo D rCa r v e r Bea c h Ro ad Ponderosa Drive Broken Arr o w D r L o t u s T r a i l Lotus Trail R ojinaLanePle a s a n t V i e w R o a d Pleasa n tV iew RoadHorseshoeC u rv e Pleasant Vie w R oa d F o x P a thFox Pat h Vineland Court H o lly L a n e Holly Lane W illo w C reekP ow e r s B l v d (C .R . 1 7 )PleasantViewC o v e Pleasant View Road Peaceful LanePleasant View R o a d Nez Perce DrivePowers Blvd (C.R. 17)DevonshireDrWelsleyCourtArlingtonCrt.DevonshireD riv eStrattonCourtBrett o n Wa y Teton L a n e Bretton Way Ashton Court Teton LaneIthilienTroendle CircleCharingBendShadowLaneYosemite AveYosemite AveLakew a y Lane PointeLakeLucyKerber Blvd Kerber BlvdPowers Blvd (C.R. 17)P im licoLaneK e r b e r B l v d P ontia c L a n e Buckingw oodC tTrotter sCi r cl ePon t i a cCircleP o n tia c C o u rtButte Co u rtPont i acCir c l e Pontiac Lane Redman LaneDeclarationDrShawnee LaneU ti c a L a n e Powers B lvd (C .R . 17 ) C actusCurve Canyon C urve Powers Blvd (C.R. 17)Santa Vera DriveTargetLaneW 78th S t Hwy 101 Great Plains BlvdHwy 101 Great Plains BlvdHwy101GreatPlainsBlvdWest Village Road S a n d y Hook Road Sand y Hook C irCheyenneDakotaDakota C ir cl e Dakota Cheyenne Basswood CirKurversPointRoad W illow ViewCove Twin M aple Lan e S o u th S h oreCourtChan View Erie AvenueErieAvenueSouthShoreDriveSouth Shore Dr i veHill StreetW 77th St Canterbury Circle DerbyDriveBelmo nt L n Kerber BlvdK e r b e r B l v d Laredo Drive(W 78th St) C hanView StoneCr ee k Dr AudubonRoadCommerce Drive AudubonRoadP a rk R o a d P a rk R o a d Park Court Pa rk Place Park DrivePark Road PowersBlvd(C.R.17)V alley Vie w Crt ValleyRidgeCrtValleyRidge Trail North Coulter Boulevard T im b e rw oodD rP i n e w o o d C i r Oakwoo d R i d g eTimberwoodDr Ti mberwoodDrBluffView Crt StoneCreekD r CreekviewCrt StoneCreekDrRenaissance Crt Lyman Blvd (CSAH 18)BoulderR o a d StoneCreek D r Bethesda CirWashi ngtonBlvdWashingtonBlvdCommonwealthBlvdLincoln Ln W a shingtonCirFranklin L nJefferson DrMadison DrTWIN CITI E S & W E S T E R N R AI L R O A D Lake R il eyTrlHighover LaneJe rs e y Way L a k e A n n P a rkDrIroquois AveHuronKiowaGreatPlainsBlvdW 78th St W 76th St Frontier TrailW 78th S t re e t S t a t e Hw y No .5 Hill Str e et Chippewa Cir Chippewa TrailS a n ta Ve r a Drive SaratogaDriveSaratoga DriveSaratogaCir Laredo L a n e Laredo LaneIr oqu o is Santa Fe TrailDelRioDrive Del Rio Drive Cimarro n Circ leLaredoDrive FrontierTrailFrontier Court F r o n t i e r T r a i l Kurver s Point Road Frontier Trail Highland DriveLaredoDriveLongview CircleSierra Court Sierra T ra ilConestogaCourtConestoga TrailBighor n DriveF r o ntier Trail KiowaFrontier TrailHighland Drive S h a d owm e r e Bighorn D r ive State Hwy 5 Arboretum Boulevard Shasta Cir W Olympic Cir Castle Ri d g e Ca s t l e R i d g e C o u r t Ca s c a d e C o u r t NearMountainBlvdN ear M o u n t a i nBl vdNe ar MountainBlvdMountain Way S u mm i t C i r c l e Pleasant View Road Indian Hill RdPleasantParkDrGrayFoxLaneMarketBl vdM arket B lv d S t a t e H w y 5 A r b o r e tu m B o u le v a rd StateHwy5ArboretumBoulevardKerberBlvdPicha Chan View V ioletRoadCarverB e a c h RoadCree DriveYuma Dr ive Ri n g o D r i v e Yuma D r iveDeerwoodDrN e z P e r c e D r i v e Imperial Dr Ponderosa DriveNezPerceDrive NezPerceCtHeatherCourt H o p i R d Carver Beach Road Penamint Court P e n a m intLaneRedw ing LaneChaparral LaneChaparral CtRedman LaneUtica CircleTecumsehLan e Preakness Lane R e d w i n g L a n e R e d wing Lane Pi maLaneUtica LanePreakness Lane Carver Beach Road RooseveltDrLake Lucy Road Western Drive Hiawatha Dr Cree Drive Woodhill Dr Redwi ng Crt C h a p a rr al LaneUtica La n eUticaTer r a c eLakewayDriveLake Lucy Road Lake Lucy Road West 63rd StAudubon CirCreekRu nTr a ilCardinalBlue Jay CirWest 63rd St Koehnen Circle East Koehnen Circle West Ringneck D rive P hea santCirRingneck D r ive WoodDu c k L anePartridge Cir WhiteDo ve Drive PheasantDrive S te ll e r Cir WoodD uckCirWood D u c k L aneTe a l C i r PintailCir WhiteDoveCirWood Duck LaneL a k e L u cy Road Lak e L u c y L a n eMurray Hill RoadGal pi nBl vd.(C.R.117)ChaskaRoadMelody Hill Lake Lucy RoadHummingbird RoadMolineCirMelody HillCirGalpinBlvd.(C.R.117)Melody H ill West 65th St reetMurrayHillRoad W h it e T a ilR id g e C t Crestv i e w C i r GalpinBlvd.(C.R.117)Crestview Dr Steller C o u r t Galpin Blvd. (C.R. 117)Highgate Cir Briarwood Ct.ManchesterDriveLakeLucyRoadLakeLucyRoadBrenden C r t Lake L u c y R oad HighoverDriveHighoverWay HighoverCrtSHa r ri s onHillTrailHa rriso n H illCrtHazeltineBlvd(Hwy41)Galpin Blvd. (C.R. 117)NorthwoodCrtLonga c r e s D r iv e FawnHillRoadRed F o x C i r LodgepolePointLongacresD riv e Hunte r Drive Hunter Drive GalpinBlvd.(C.R.117)H unter DriveFawnHillRoad FawnHillRoadFawnHill C r t L o n g a c r e s D riveS o u th e r n C rtGunflintCrt GunflintTrailH ills d ale C ourt M occasinTrl BentBowTrail M o cc a sinTrlBentBowTrailL o n g a cr esDrive HazeltineBlvd(Hwy41)Tanadoona Drive Ma j e s t i c W ay Windmill DriveBrinker StreetTulip CrtCrocusCrtWalnut Curve Praire Flower Blvd Galpin Blvd. (C.R. 117)St at e Hw y 5 Arboretum Boulevard S t a t e H w y 5 A r boretum Boulevard Cactus Cu rveS addlebrookC u r v e SaddlebrookPass Cany o n C u r v e State Hwy 5 A rbo re tum Boulevard A rboretumDrCri m sonBayRoadDogwood RdDogwood RdTanadoona Drive Chaska RoadHazeltineBlvd(Hwy41)Sommer Gate Hazeltine Blvd (Hwy 41)North M a n o r R o a d TanagersPointPiper R id g e L a n eTanagers LaneS a n d p ip e rTrailMinnew as hta WoodsDriveO r c h a r d Lane ForestCirForestAve Foxford RoadEastwood Court Foxford RoadP io n e e rT ra il(C S A H 14)Pioneer CirD e e rb ro o kD riveMea d o wl arkLaneHwy101 GreatPl a i nsBlvdW 94th S TSummerfieldDriveSummerfieldDr iveG reenview Dr i v eStone Creek CtLake Drive East Lake Drive East Ess e xRdSuffolkDrBurlwood DrR ose w o o dD rRo s e w o o d D r Po wers PlacePowers PlacePowersPlaceLake Riley BlvdLake R i l e y B l v d W 78th Street 6 4thStreetState Hwy 7 O r c h a r d L a n e Oriole AveState Hwy 7W.62nd St.S t a t e H w y 7 FirtreeAveDogwoodAveState Hwy 7 B a rbe rr yCircleCy pr es s Dri v eEl mtreeAveMaplew o od Cir Gr eenbri ar AveShore Drive ShoreDrive S ta te H w y7Church Road M eadow Crt MeadowL a n eCartway LaneW. 62nd St. S tateH w y 7 LandingsCourtL a n dingsDriveL a n d ingsDriveMinnewashtaParkwayK irk w ood C ir L in d e n Circle J o s h u a Cir LindenCircle PipewoodCurveP a d dock L ane StateHwy7Leslee CurveGlendaleDrive LesleeCurveCrestvie w D r Crestview Dr Maple DriveMaple Cir Glendale Drive Glendale Drive MinnewashtaParkwayCountryOaksRoadWhite Oak Lane Red Oak Lane CountryOaksRoadKings Road MinnewashtaParkwayJuniper AvenueRed Cedar Point Road South Cedar Driv e Red C e d a r P o i n t R o a d Maple S h or es D r i v e Hawthorne Cir Lakeridge R d MinnewashtaCrt MinnewashtaParkwayLak e ridgeRd Laker i d g e R d F o rrestRidgeCir77th St 77th St LoneCedarLa n e StateHwy5 W82ndStW 8 2 n d S t Highway 41W 82nd St CenturyBlvdGalpin Blvd (C.R. 15)BridleCre e kCir Stone Cre ek L n W Lukew ood Dr BenwoodCi rS t o n e C reek L nEStoneCreekRdGal pi nBl vd(C.R.19)Stone Cr ee k D rS to n e C r e e k D r LymanBlvd ( C S A H 1 8 )Ly manBl v d(CSAH18)ValleyViewPlaceValley Ridge Place ValleyRidge Trail South Sunrid g e C ourtAudubon RoadAudubon RoadAudubon RoadLake Drive West Lyman Blvd (CSAH 18) LymanBlvd(CSAH 18)Alisa LaneAlisaCourtOsprey Lan e Osprey Lane O s p r eyLaneBluebill Trai lSpoonbillCirB luebill TrailHeron Dr HeronD rBitternC o urt SwanCourtHeron Dr M allardCrt I bi s CourtSunsetTrailFlamingoDr Her o n D rLakeS us a n H i l l s D rive EgretCourtPelican Crt M erganserC rtTern Crt L ake S usa n H ill s Driv e PowersBlvd(C.R.17)Lake Drive W estLake Driv e W e s tMal lory CrtUpland C i rc le Lake Dri v e WestLa k e Court LakeSusanHillsD riv e West Lake DrLake S u sanHillsDriveDove Court Lake Sus a n H illsD riveWest Lak e D r DrakeCourtL a k e Su s a n H ills DriveLake Susan Drive Mary J aneCirLake Su s a n Dri v eChanhassenHillsDrNorthBarbara Crt LymanCourt L a k e SusanDriveLyman Blvd (CSAH 18)PowersBlvd(C.R.17)OaksideCirLakeSusanHill s D rive FlamingoDrThrush Crt Kingfisher Crt FlamingoDrLyman Blvd (CSAH 18)AudubonRoad(CSAH15)Audubon Road (CSAH 15)Pione e r T r a il(C S A H 1 4) Bl u f f C r e e k D r i v e Bluff Creek Drive WestFarmRoad We st F a r mRoadHeidi Lane West F a r m R o a d Bluff CircleWest Far m Road He sse FarmRd He s s e F a r m C i r c l e Bl u f f C r e e k D r i v e Hesse Farm Rd CS A H 6 1 / F l y i n g C l o u d D r i v e Stoughton Ave (C.R. NO. 10)StoughtonAve(C .R .N O .1 0 )CSAH 6 1/ Fl yi n g Cl o u d Dr CSAH 61/Fl yi n g Cl o u d D r CSAH 61/Flying Cloud Dr Hwy101GreatP la in s B lvdS tate H ig h w a y 1 0 1 C S A H 6 1 /F ly in g C lo u d D rCo Rd 61/ Fl yi n g Cl o u d Dr Vogelsb e r g T r l Hwy1 0 1 G r e atPlainsBlvdLakota Lan eMandanCreekwood Drive Hwy101 G r e at Pl ai nsBl vdBramble Driv eDelphinum LaneRaspberryHillHwy101GreatPlainsBlvdPioneer Trail (CSAH 14) Homestead LaneHomesteadLane FlintlockTrailH o me s t ea dLaneW. 96th Street Hwy101GreatPlainsBlvdPioneer Trail (CSAH 14) Pineview Court FoxfordRoadOverlookCrtSpringfieldDrive SpringfieldDriveS un n y v a l e D r iv e Sunnyvale D riv e S h o r e v ie wCrt Par klandWa y GreenleafCrtDeerfoot Trail DeerfootTrail Lyman Blvd (CSAH 18)Kiowa TrailLyman Blvd (CSAH 18)Quinn RoadL y m a n Blvd Lak e v i e w R o a d E N o rth B ayDr W 8 6 t h S t T i g u a L a n e Mission H illsCrt MissionHillsLaneHwy101GreatPlainsBlvdHwy101 Gr e at P lai n s B lv d Lake Drive Main StreetHidd e n CourtH iddenLane H id denLaneHiddenCourtSinne n C irMar s hDriveD a k o t a LaneLake Drive E ast Hi d d e n C i r DakotaLaneErie CirDakotaLaneErie SpurErie AveErie AveC h e yenneAveDakota A v e Cheyenne Av eDakota AveErie Av e Lake Drive East LakeDriveEastDell RoadDell RoadW 78th St. W 7 9 t h S t DakotaAveDakotaCir C h e ySp u r MarshDrive Grandview RdDakotaLnSantaFeCirES a d d l e b rook Trail Saddl eb r o o k Tr ailHighoverDriveChes Mar DrLilac Lane Lilac Lane Ridge RoadInd i a n H i l l R d Quiver D r Napa Dr Fox Hill Dr A u tu m n R id g e C tA utumnRidge W a yAutumn Ridge LNHarvest Way AutumnRidgeAveHarvestLaneAndrew Court McGlynn Drive 77th St.77th St.W 187th Ave.Q uattroDrDell RoadDell RoadDell RoadBlue Sage LN E S napdragonDrL a d ySlipperLN B lu e B o n n e t B lv d BlueBonnetBlvdPoppy Dr C o n e f l o w e rCrvSBanebe r r y W ay E BaneberryWayE But t ercupCr tConeflower CrvNPrimrose PlChicory WayCentury BlvdTrails E n d RdT ra ilsE n d R dTrailsEndRdArboretumVillageCt.Highwood Dr Market St Crestview Dr ManchesterDriveChest nutL N EdgewoodCt Expl o r e r T r .TrailsEndRdBridleCreekTr ai l BridleCreekTra i l TWIN CI TI E S & W E S T E R N R AI L R O A D TWIN CI TI E S & W E ST E R N R AI L R O A D TWIN CITIES & W E S T E R N R A I L R O A D W 86th St Marshland Trl M o n k C r t R ic e CrtMissionWayHillW Mission W ayHillEHeartlandCrtBlac k birdCrt M a y f ieldCrtLake Susan DriveLake Riley DrMissionH ills Dr. Mission Hills Dr.Frisc oCrtCoulter Blvd. Coulter Bl v d . Acorn L a n e Maple wood Ter Mission HillsLane MissionHillsCircleMerry Pl a c e Lone Eagle Dr M e l o d y H i l l Melody LaneCypressDriveTop a z Dri veSapphireLaneDia mo n dCrt RubyLaneRuby L a n e BaneberryWay W Clov e r Cou rt Clover Co u r t B l u e S a g e L N W WaterleafLane EWaterleafLaneW Century Cir W78th Stre e t Arbo r e tu mVillageCir(pvt. rd)Pleasant View WayRedCedarCoveRed CedarCove Ches M a r F a r m R d Big Wood s Blvd KimberlyL n Kimberly LN Kelly Ct N ic k o lasWaySantaFeCirWMulberryCir cl e WMulb e rry Circl eEC h anhassenHillsDrSouthL ake Sus a nC ourtHallgren L a n e Country Oaks Drive Stratford LnStratfordBlvdStratfordRidge HorseshoeCrvState Hwy 5 Arboretum Boulevard W 78THStreet W 7 8 T H Street Chan h assen Hills Dr North T.H.212T.H.212 T.H.212T.H.212T.H.212Century Tr a ilArboretum VillageCirLucyRidge C ourtLucyRidgeLan eCoulter Boul e v a r dCentury BlvdCorporate Place Village Lane Village Crt Powers BlvdWestwood DrVillage Cir Village PlVi l lage S t CoachCtC o a c h Dr Arboretum V i l la g e T rCoachLnCoach PlArboretum Vill. Ln.Century CtCentury PlArboretum Village Crv ArboretumVillagePl.W78TH Street Murray Hill Crt L ake Drive P o n d P rom e n a d ePipewoodCurvePipewood LanePipewood Curve Leslee C u r v e Emerald L a n e RubyLaneTopaz Drive Ridgevie w P oi n t Water Tower Place VassermanTr RidgeviewWayRi d g e v i e w W a y Mohawk DrPawnee DriveArbor LaneWashtaBay Ct D a r t m o u t h Drive Ridgehill RdTristin Knol l TristinDrive Was h t aBayRoad KNOB HILL LA N E Vasse r manTrailVassermanPlace Hickory Rd Hick ory R o a d Shenandoah GoldenCourtTreetop RoadMill Creek LnKings Road Kings RoadPipew ood Crt Pipewood Cir W79th S t Great Plains BlvdGreat Plains BlvdS te llers CtPinehurstDrA m berwo o d L a n e Al d e r W a y F o x DrLakeHarriso n C ircle L a k e H arrisonRoad Highov e r T r a ilGal pin CourtL ongacre s D riv eArrowheadLnGunflintTrailHighcrestCirHighoverDrHighoverCrtNPipewood Lane StonefieldLaneB lu ffCreekBlvdColonial Ln Plymouth Ln Freedom LnIndependence CirI ndependenceCirHorseshoe LnBlaze TrlB lu ffCreekBlvdEllendale LnPembrokePass Degler Circle RiverRockDriveN78thStW BeaconCrtW atersEdgeDrWaters Edge DrFoxHollowCtCrossroadsBlvd Co lu mb ia Ln Co m m o n w ealth Blvd Bluff Creek BlvdHwy 101 Great Plains BlvdWestw o o d D r Westwood DrSouthwest Village Dr Southwest Village DrApple Tree LaneBluffCreekDriveM a y a p p lePassH e m lo c k W a y Mills Drive Mills Drive Lake Riley DrHallgren Ct 6829RockyI sl a ndLN RileyRidge Arrow- head Ct ReflectionsRdChesterfieldLn Motorplex Ct C o u l t e r Boulevard Reflections RdBellevueCtL a k e viewRoadEDegler Circl e Hemlock Way H e mlo c k Way Cottongr a s s Ct M a r ig o ld C o u r tWy n s o n g L N Jeurissen LnRiverR oc k Dr SRiver Rock Dr NRive r RockDriveS C a md en RidgeDrHenryCo urtSouthWestVillage LoopStra w b e r r y L a n eStrawbe r r y Lane F a wnHi l l Road Pres e r v e CtDegler LNRiver Rock Dr N StateHWY101EagleRidgeR dHawkcrestCir HawkcrestCtEagle CtEagleRidgeRdCrossroad Ct AnthemPlace Potential Property Acquisition Taxparcel µ 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,0001,000 FeetDelphinum LaneRaspberryHillPioneer Trail (CSAH 14)FlintlockTrailH o me s t ea dLanePioneer Trail (CSAH 14) Pictometry 2017 0 500 1,000250 Feet Potential Property Acquisition K:\NickLH\Projects\PW\Engineering\For Paul\2018\January\PropertyAcquis\Property Acquistion_V2.mxd 145835 I 3000138988 STATE OF MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND GRANT CONTRACT WITH THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN FOR ACQUISITION OF FLOOD PRONE PROPERTY This grant contract is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Natural Resources, ("State") and the City of Chanhassen, 7700 Market Boulevard, PO Box 14 7, Chanhassen, Minnesota, 55317 ("Grantee"). Recitals 1. Under Minnesota. Statutes, Section 103F. l 6 l, Subdivision 1, the State is empowered to enter into this grant agreement. 2. The State agrees that removal of structures from flood prone areas is in the interest of the State. 3. The Grantee represents that it is duly qualified and agrees to perform all services described in this grant contract to the satisfaction of the State. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § l 6B.98 Subdivision 1, the Grantee agrees to minimize administrative costs as a condition of this grant contract. 4. The Grantee attests it has the financial capacity to provide any required local match for the project or phase funded under the terms of this grant contract, and agrees to complete the project or phase ifthe cost of the project or phase exceeds the amount of state funding and required local match. 5. The monies allocated to fund the grant to the Grantee are proceeds of state general obligation (G.O.) bonds authorized to be issued under Article XI,§ 5(a) of the Minnesota Constitution; and 6. The Grantee's receipt and use of the G.O. Grant to acquire an ownership interest in and/or improve real property (the "Real Property") and, if applicable, structures situated thereon (the "Facility") will cause the Public Entity's ownership interest in all of such real property and structures to become "state bond financed property", as such term is used in Minn. Stat. § l 6A.695 (the "G.O. Compliance Legislation") and in that certain "Fourth Order Amending Order of the Commissioner of Finance Relating to Use and Sale of State Bond Financed Property" executed by the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget and dated July 30, 2012, as amended (the "Commissioner's Order"), even though such funds may only be a portion of the funds being used to acquire such ownership interest and/or improve such real property and structures and that such funds may be used to only acquire such ownership interest and/or improve a part of such real property and structures. Grant Contract 1 Term of Grant Contract 1.1 Effective date: August 15, 2018, or the date the State obtains all required signatures under Minnesota Statutes §16C.05, subdivision 2, whichever is later. 1.2 Expiratio.n date: December 31, 2019 or until all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first. 1.3 Survival of Terms. The following clauses survive the expiration or cancellation of this grant contract: 8. Liability; 9. State Audits; 10. Government Data Practices and Intellectual Property; 13. Publicity and Endorsement; 14. Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue; and 16. Data Disclosure. 2 Grantee's Duties The Grantee, who is not a state employee, will be responsible for: Acquisition of as many flood prone properties identified in the Grantee's March 13, 2018 application for Flood Damage Reduction Grant Assistance as funding allows. The Grantee shall acquire title to property, remove all structures, disconnect utilities, and restore topsoil and landscaping. All demolition material is to be disposed of in compliance with Federal, State, and local standards. Property acquired by the Grantee shall remain in permanent public ownership. The Grantee agrees that the land shall be used only for purposes compatible with open space, recreational, or wetlands management practices per adopted State and local floodplain and shoreland management ordinances. Gran! (Rev . 08/2018) 145835/3000138988 All project expenses not identified as being related to work outlined above, or as subsequently amended in this agreement, must be approved by the State in writing prior to the Grantee incuJTing said expense. 3 Time The Grantee must comply with all the time requirements described in this grant contract. In the perfonnance of this grant contract, time is of the essence. 4 Consideration and Payment 4. l Consideration. The State will reimburse for all eligible services performed by the Grantee under this grant contract as follows: (a) Compensation. The Grantee will be reimbursed 50% for eligible project expenses, not to exceed $180.000.00. Grantee must provide a match equal to the State's contribution. (b) Travel Expenses. Reimbursement for eligible project-related travel and subsistence expenses actually and necessarily incurred by the Grantee as a result of this grant contract will be reimbursed in the same manner and in no greater amount than provided in the current "Commissioner's Plan" promulgated by the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB). The Grantee will not be reimbursed for travel and subsistence expenses incurred outside Minnesota unless it has received the State's prior written approval for out of state travel. Minnesota will be considered the home state for determining whether travel is out of state. (c) Eligible Expenses. Eligible expenses are those costs directly incurred by the Grantee that are solely related to and necessary for producing the work products described in Provision 2 of this Agreement. Eligible costs may include the following: advertising costs for bids and proposals; capital expenditures for facilities, equipment and other capital assets as expressly approved by the State; materials and supplies; architectural and engineering services; construction management and inspection services; surveys and soil borings; attorney fees solely related and necessary to accomplish the Project, as determined by the State and actual construction of the Project. Certain other types of costs may be eligible provided that they are (1) directly incurred by the Grantee; (2) are solely related to, and necessary for, producing the work products described in Provision 2; and (3) have prior written approval of the State. Any cost not defined as an eligible cost or not included in the Project Plan shall not be paid from State funds committed to the Project. (d) Ineligible Expenses. Non-eligible costs for reimbursement means all costs not defined as eligible costs, including but not limited to the following: Any costs incurred before the effective date of this Grant; fund raising; taxes, except sales tax on goods and services; insurance, except title insurance; attorney fees not necessary to accomplish the project; loans, grants, or subsidies to persons or entities for development; financing; bad debts or contingency funds; interest; operation and maintenance costs; options for acquisition of real estate; lobbyists; and political contributions. 4.2. Payment Invoices. To obtain reimbursement for eligible costs under this Grant, the Grantee shall provide the State with invoices and evidence that the portion of the Project for which payment is requested has been satisfactorily completed. All invoices shall be sent to the person designated in Section 6. Grantee shall submit invoices and evidence that the required contribution toward any required local match are being met. Invoices will be submitted for the amount and should differentiate, when applicable, between the Federal and Non-Federal Project costs, as well as the State and local share of the Project costs. Invoices must be received by the State within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Project or the expiration of this Grant as set forth in Section 1.2, whichever occurs first. lnvoices received after that date may not be 2 145835 / 3000138988 eligible for reimbursement, at the State's discretion . The State's authorized agent has final authority for acceptance of Grantee's services, determination as to whether the expenditures are eligible for reimbursement under this Grant, and verification of the total amount requested. The Grantee shall not receive payment for work found by the State to be unsatisfactory, or perfonned in violation offederal, state or local law, ordinance, rule or regulation. At its discretion, the State may retain 10% of the total grant award until the State has determined that the Grantee has satisfactorily fulfilled all of the terms of this Grant. If requested by the State, the Grantee shall arrange for a tour of the Project area prior to release of the final ten (10) percent of the funds. Invoices must be submitted timely and according to the following schedule: It is required that invoices be submitted, at a minimum, at the close of each state fiscal year which is July 1 -June 30. If expenses are extensive, reimbursement requests may be submitted monthly or quarterly. Please itemize the eligible expenses by the month of occurrence, not liquidation. If invoices are not received in this format, it could delay receipt of payment. 5 Conditions of Payment All services provided by the Grantee under this grant contract must be performed to the State's satisfaction, as determined at the sole discretion of the State's Authorized Representative and in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations. The Grantee will not receive payment for work found by the State to be unsatisfactory or performed in violation of federal , state, or local law. 6 Authorized Representative The State's Authorized Representative is Patrick Lynch, Floodplain Hydrologist, Department ofNatural Resources, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, Minnesota, 55155, 651-259-5691, pat.lynch@state.mn.us,or his/her successor, and has the responsibility to monitor the Grantee's performance and the authority to accept or reject the services provided under this grant contract. If the services are satisfactory, the State's Authorized Representative will certify acceptance on each invoice submitted for payment. The Grantee's Authorized Representative is Paul Oehme, Public Works Director/City Engineer, City of Chanhassen, 7700 Market Blvd., PO Box 17, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317, 952-227-1169, poehme@ci.chanhassen.mn.us . If the Grantee's Authorized Representative changes at any time during this grant contract, the Grantee must immediately notify the State. 7 Assignment, Amendments, Waiver, and Grant Contract Complete 7. J Assignment. The Grantee shall neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this grant contract without the prior written consent of the State, approved by the same parties who executed and approved this grant contract, or their successors in office. 7.2 Amendments. Any amendments to this grant contract must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original grant contract, or their successors in office . 7.3 Waiver. If the State fails to enforce any provision of this grant contract, that failure does not waive the provision or the State's right to enforce it. 7.4 Grant Contract Complete. This grant contract contains all negotiations and agreements between the State and the Grantee. No other understanding regarding this grant contract, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party . 8 Liability The Grantee must indemnify, save, and hold the State, its agents, and employees hannless from any claims or causes ofaction, including attorney's fees incurred by the State, arising from the performance of this grant contract by the Grantee or the Grantee's agents or employees. This clause will not be construed to bar any legal remedies 3 145835/3000138988 the Grantee may have for the State's failure to fulfill its obligations under this grant contract. 9 State Audits Under Minn. Stat. § l 6B.98, Subd.8, the Grantee's books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the Grantee or other party relevant to this grant agreement or transaction are subject to examination by the State and/or the State Auditor or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this grant agreement, receipt and approval of all final reports, or the required period of time to satisfy all state and program retention requirements, whichever is later. 10 Government Data Practices The Grantee and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, as it applies to all data provided by the State under this grant contract, and as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Grantee under this grant contract. The civil remedies of Minn. Stat. § 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either the Grantee or the State. If the Grantee receives a request to release the data referred to in this Clause, the Grantee must immediately notify the State. The State will give the Grantee instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released . The Grantee's response to the request shall comply with applicable law. 11 Prevailing Wages Grantee agrees to comply with all of the applicable provisions contained in Chapter 177 of the Minnesota Statutes, and specifically those provisions contained in Minn. Stat. §§ 177.41 through 177.435, as they may be amended, modified or replaced from time to time with respect to the Project. 12 Workers' Compensation The Grantee certifies that it is in compliance with Minn. Stat. § 176.181, subd. 2, pertaining to workers' compensation insurance coverage. The Grantee's employees and agents will not be considered State employees. Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act on behalf of these employees and any claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of these employees are in no way the State's obligation or responsibility. 13 Publicity and Endorsement 13 .1 Acknowledgments. The Grantee agrees to acknowledge the State's financial support for the Project. Any statement, press release, bid, solicitation, or other document issued describing the Project shall provide information reflecting that State funds were used to support the Project and will contain the following language: This Project is made possible in part by a grant provided by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, through an appropriation by the Minnesota State Legislature. Any site developed or improved by the Project shall display a sign, in a form approved by the State, stating the same information. 13 .2 Endorsement. The Grantee must not claim that the State endorses its products or services . 14 Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Venue Minnesota law, without regard to its choice-of-law provisions, governs this grant contract. Venue for all legal proceedings out of this grant contract, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 4 145835/3000138988 15 Termination 15. I Termination by the State. The State may immediately terminate this grant contract with or without cause, upon 30 days' written notice to the Grantee. Upon te1mination, the Grantee will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed. 15 .2 Termination for Cause. The State may immediately te1minate this grant contract if the State finds that there has been a failure to comply with the provisions of this grant contract, that reasonable progress has not been made or that the purposes for which the funds were granted have not been or will not be fulfilled. The State may take action to protect the interests of the State of Minnesota, including the refusal to disburse additional funds and requiring the return of all or part of the funds already disbursed. 16 Data Disclosure Under Minn. Stat. § 270C.65, Subd. 3, and other applicable law, the Grantee consents to disclosure of its social security number, federal employer tax identification number, and/or Minnesota tax identification number, already provided to the State, to federal and state tax agencies and state personnel involved in the payment of state obligations. These identification numbers may be used in the enforcement of federal and state tax Jaws which could result in action requiring the Grantee to file state tax returns and pay delinquent state tax liabilities, if any. 17 Preservation of Tax Exempt Status In order to preserve the tax-exempt status of the G.O. Bonds, the Grantee agrees as follows: A. It will not use the Real Property or, if applicable, Facility, or use or invest the G.O. Grant or any other sums treated as "bond proceeds" un~er Section 148 of the Code including "investment proceeds," "invested sinking funds," and "replacement proceeds," in such a manner as to cause the G.O. Bonds to be classified as "arbitrage bonds" under Section 148 of the Code. B. It will, upon written request, provide the Commissioner ofMMB all information required to satisfy the informational requirements set forth in the Code including, but not limited to, Sections 103 and 148 thereof, with respect to the G.O . Bonds. C. It will, upon the occurrence of any act or omission by the Grantee or any Counterparty that could cause the interest on the G.O. Bonds to no longer be tax exempt and upon direction from the Commissioner of MMB, take such actions and furnish such documents as the Commissioner ofMMB determines to be necessary to ensure that the interest to be paid on the G.O. Bonds is exempt from federal taxation, which such action may include either: (i) compliance with proceedings intended to classify the G.O. Bonds as a "qualified bond" within the meaning of Section 141(e) of the Code, (ii) changing the nature or terms of the Use Contract so that it complies with Revenue Procedure 97-13, 1997-1 CB 632, or (iii) changing the nature of the use of the Real Property or, if applicable, Facility so that none of the net proceeds of the G.O. Bonds will be used, directly or indirectly, in an "unrelated trade or business" or for any "private business use" (within the meaning of Sections 14l(b) and !45(a) of the Code), or (iv) compliance with other Code provisions, regulations, or revenue procedures which amend or supersede the foregoing . D. lt will not otherwise use any of the G.O. Grant, including earnings thereon, ifany, or take or pennit to or cause to be taken any action that would adversely affect the exemption from federal income taxation of the interest on the G.O. Bonds, nor omit to take any action necessary to maintain such tax exempt status, and if it should take, permit, omit to take, or cause to be taken, as appropriate, any such action, it shall take all lawful actions necessary to rescind or correct such actions or omissions promptly upon having knowledge thereof. 18 Use of State Bond-Financed Prnperty, Deed Restrictions, and Real Estate Declarations "State bond-financed property" means property acquired or bettered in whole or in part with the proceeds of state 5 145835/3000138988 general obligation bonds authorized to be issued under article Xl, section 5, clause (a), of the Minnesota Constitution. Use of State bond-financed property must be operated in compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes chapter l 6A.695, all state and federal laws, and in a manner that will not cause the interest on the state general obligation bonds to be or become subject to federal income taxation for any reason. Upon acquisition or betterment of any land and or structures using these grant funds, Grantee shall record permanent deed restrictions requiring any new or future public structures on the parcels to be in strict conformance with adopted floodplain and shoreland standards. Grantee shall record a declaration for real estate rights acquired or property bettered under this Agreement. The declaration must acknowledge the property rights or betterments were acquired in whole or in part with State general obligation bond funds and subject to the encumbrance created and requirements imposed by Minnesota Stat. Sec. l 6A. Grantee shall submit a copy of the recorded real estate declaration for real estate acquired or bettered under this Grant to the State's Authorized Agent using the form in Attachment A of this Grant or on an alternative form pre-approved by the State. Proof of recordation of the deed restrictions and declaration for each property acquired or bettered under the terms of this Agreement must be submitted to the State's authorized agent within 60 days of acquisition or betterment, and before final payment is made by the State to the Grantee. 19 Invasive Species The DNR requires active steps to prevent or limit the introduction, establishment, and spread of invasive species during contracted work. The contractor shall take measures to prevent invasive species from entering into or spreadil1g within a project site by cleaning equipment prior to arriving at the project site. If the equipment, vehicles, gear, or clothing arrives at the project site with soil, aggregate material, mulch, vegetation (including seeds) or animals, it shall be cleaned by contractor furnished tool or equipment (brush/broom, compressed air or pressure washer) at the staging area. The contractor shall dispose of material cleaned from equipment and clothing at a lo.cation determined by the DNR Contract Administrator. If the material cannot be disposed of onsite, secure material prior to transport (sealed container, covered truck, or wrap with tarp) and legally dispose of offsite. 20 Jobs Reporting Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes l 6A.633, subd. 4, the Grantee shall collect, maintain and, upon completion of the project, provide the information to the State on forms provided by the State. The information must include the number and types of jobs created by the project, whether the jobs are new or retained, where the jobs are located, and pay ranges of the jobs. 21 Construction Contract Language on Jobs Reporting The Contractor is hereby advised that this Project is funded all or in part by state bond funds and subject to the reporting requirements of Minnesota Statute 16A.633, Subdivision 4 (MN Laws of2012 Chapter 293, Section 28). 22 Permits, Approvals and Environmental Review This grant does not constitute State approval of the project or phase funded under this agreement, and neither negates nor precludes any mandatory environmental review or permitting requirements that may apply to the project or phase. Grantee may not commence construction until all necessary permits and approvals have been obtained and the requirements of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410 have been satisfied. 1. STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION JndlvklNol certtflu thtJtfuJttb ~ b.,, --~ tU r«Jl'tru/ by Minn. Sftlt. §§16A.l 5 and 16C.OS. Signed: ;1.dA1.4 ~ Dal£: Bn/2 SVJIFJ' Contract/PO No(1). 145835/3000138988 2. GRANTEE n.m,_~~:7 .,, ij'~ 3 .-1.V4 T~odd Gerhardt. City Mana ger Date: August 28, 2018 7 145835 I 3000138988 3. STATE AGENCY By: /'11dhlld!1al certifies the applicable provisions of Minn. Stat. §I 6C. 08, ;t11 bdiv/.Tion.s ~ and 3 are reaffirmed H, 'tB::/aazn.« (w hdeiated authority) Date: Distribution: Agency Grantee State's Authorized Representative -Photo Copy State of Minnesota General Obligation Bond Financed Property DECLARATION TO BE RECORDED WITH DEED TO PROPERTY The undersigned has the following interest in the real property located in the County of ________ . State of Minnesota that is legally described in Exhibit A attached and all facilities situated thereon (collectively, the "Restricted Property"): (Check the appropriate box) D a fee simple title, or D an easement, and as owner of such a fee title or easement, does hereby declare that such interest in the Restricted Property is made subject to the following restrictions and encumbrances: A. The Restricted Property is bond financed property within the meaning of Minn. Stat. Sec. 16A.695, is subject to the encumbrance created and requirements imposed by such statute, and cannot be sold, mortgaged, encumbered or otherwise disposed of without the approval of the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget, which approval must be evidenced by a written statement signed by said commissioner and attached to the deed, mortgage, encumbrance or instrument used to sell or otherwise dispose of the Restricted Property; and B. The Restricted Property is subject to all of the terms, conditions, provisions, and limitations contained in that certain {Insert title and# of the grant agreement[ between the State of Minnesota and dated ----------~ The Restricted Property shall remain subject to this State of Minnesota General Obligation Bond Financed Declaration for 125% of the useful life of the Restricted Property or until the Restricted Property is sold with the written approval of the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget, at which time it shall be released therefrom by way of a written release in recordable form signed by both the Commissioner of Natural Resources and the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget, and such written release is recorded in the real estate records relating to the Restricted Property. This Declaration may not be terminated, amended, or in any way modified without the specific written consent of the Commissioner of Minnesota Management and Budget. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF -------) ______________ ___,,a _____________ [Insert name and description of the entity receiving the grant or appropriation] Dated : 20 --------~ -- By : _____________ _ Title: -------------- Dated: _________ .,20 __ The forgoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of ________ _, 20 , by ___________ , the ______ [insert name and title of first signatory] and , the _____________ [insert name of second signatory], respectively, of the _____________ , a [insert name and description of the entity receiving the grant or appropriation]. Notary Public This instrument was draft by (name and address) GO Bond Declaration, April 2014 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Resolution 2019­XX: Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Ad for Bid and Resolution 2019­XX: Designate No Parking on Dakota Avenue Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4. Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 2018­02 PROPOSED MOTION “The City Council adopts a resolution approving the plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for the Lake Drive East Improvement Project No. 18­02.” “The City Council adopts a resolution designating no parking on Dakota Avenue between Lake Drive East and Trunk Highway 5.” Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council. SUMMARY On May 8, 2017, the City Council approved a consultant contract for the Lake Drive East Street Rehabilitation Project No. 18­02. On November 8, 2018, an open house neighborhood meeting was held to discuss the proposed project. On November 26, 2018, the City Council received the feasibility report and ordered the Public Hearing.  Council also requested cost breakouts for three project scenarios, including (1) intersection improvements in addition to mill and overlay of Dakota Avenue and a small portion of Lake Drive East relative to the intersection improvements; (2) just utility improvements; and (3) mill and overlay of just Lake Drive East. On December 10, 2018, the City Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications for the entire project with a bid alternate for the sidewalk improvement to the south of the Dakota Avenue/Lake Drive intersection. BACKGROUND Every year the city considers streets that are in poor condition to be rehabilitated or reconstructed. The Capital Improvement Program planned for the rehabilitation of Lake Drive East in the summer of 2019. Staff utilized the city’s Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine the project extents, as illustrated in Figure 1. The project includes approximately 0.76 miles of urbanized streets. Lake Drive East is a Municipal State Aid Route that was constructed in 1991, overlaid in 2002, and sealcoated in 1995 and 2005. The 2018 surveyed pavement conditions were 59 and 58 on the west and east sides of Dakota Avenue, respectively, as shown in Figure 1. A PCI of 100 represents a new street. Figure 1: Proposed Project Area and 2018 Pavement Condition Scores CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectResolution 2019­XX: Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Ad for Bid andResolution 2019­XX: Designate No Parking on Dakota AvenueSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 2018­02PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution approving the plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for the Lake Drive East ImprovementProject No. 18­02.”“The City Council adopts a resolution designating no parking on Dakota Avenue between Lake Drive East and Trunk Highway 5.”Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council.SUMMARYOn May 8, 2017, the City Council approved a consultant contract for the Lake Drive East Street Rehabilitation Project No. 18­02.On November 8, 2018, an open house neighborhood meeting was held to discuss the proposed project.On November 26, 2018, the City Council received the feasibility report and ordered the Public Hearing.  Council also requested cost breakouts for threeproject scenarios, including (1) intersection improvements in addition to mill and overlay of Dakota Avenue and a small portion of Lake Drive East relativeto the intersection improvements; (2) just utility improvements; and (3) mill and overlay of just Lake Drive East.On December 10, 2018, the City Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications for the entire project with a bid alternate for the sidewalkimprovement to the south of the Dakota Avenue/Lake Drive intersection.BACKGROUNDEvery year the city considers streets that are in poor condition to be rehabilitated or reconstructed. The Capital Improvement Program planned for therehabilitation of Lake Drive East in the summer of 2019. Staff utilized the city’s Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine theproject extents, as illustrated in Figure 1. The project includes approximately 0.76 miles of urbanized streets.Lake Drive East is a Municipal State Aid Route that was constructed in 1991, overlaid in 2002, and sealcoated in 1995 and 2005. The 2018 surveyedpavement conditions were 59 and 58 on the west and east sides of Dakota Avenue, respectively, as shown in Figure 1. A PCI of 100 represents a newstreet. Figure 1: Proposed Project Area and 2018 Pavement Condition Scores Dakota Avenue is also a Municipal State Aid Route constructed in 1986 and sealcoated in 2005. As shown in Figure 1, the 2018 surveyed pavement condition was 73, which is higher than expected due to the extensive patching along the street corridor. A 190­foot long, raised concrete median separates northbound and southbound Dakota Avenue. The northbound portion consists of two through lanes, one left turn lane, and one right turn lane. The southbound portion consists of two lanes that transition to a right turn and a through/left turn lane at the Lake Drive East intersection. Traffic counts were performed in August 2017. Analysis focused on weekday AM and PM peak hours because weekend traffic was determined to be 30% to 50% lower than weekday traffic. The counted vehicles were 8,000 vehicles per day (VPD) between the intersection with TH 5 and the intersection at Lake Drive East. The counted vehicles were 4,100 VPD east of the Dakota Avenue intersection and 3,650 VPD west of the intersection. The southern leg of the Dakota Avenue intersection tallied 950 VPD. Street Improvements Staff recommends the pavement rehabilitation be accomplished as a mill and overlay project. Based on the pavement condition, traffic, and geotechnical report, a three­inch mill and overlay is recommended.  Based on field visual inspection, approximately 20% of the concrete curb and gutter and sidewalk within the project area is deficient and is recommended for replacement.  In addition to the sidewalk spot repairs, new ADA compliant pedestrian curb ramps are proposed to be installed at all crosswalk locations within the project area. Proposed Intersection Improvements Over the years, the city has received resident feedback related to this intersection. The intersection currently has a two­way stop condition for both directions of the Lake Drive East traffic. Residents in the Chanhassen Estates neighborhood to the south are concerned with eastbound Lake Drive East traffic failing to yield to traffic on Dakota Avenue. The intersection averages about one crash per year. There is also concern for pedestrian and bicyclist safety at this intersection. The feasibility study analyzed six alternatives for the intersection design including leaving the existing two­way stop condition or modifying it to a three­way stop or an all­way stop with and without turn lanes. The study also analyzed installing a traffic signal and a mini roundabout. The feasibility study and staff recommend a three­way stop condition be considered as the primary alternative (Figure 2). The secondary alternative (Figure 3) would be the installation of a mini roundabout. Both alternatives would include pedestrian crossing improvements. Both alternatives addressed traffic concerns but the three­way stop is much more cost effective and does not require right­of­way to be acquired. The recommended pedestrian improvement includes signed and marked crossings on the north and west sides of the intersection. In conjunction with the three­way stop alternative, the median north of the intersection would be extended to the south and incorporate a pedestrian refuge. In addition, a sidewalk along the west side of the block to the south of the intersection will also be considered to improve pedestrian safety to the neighborhood. One of the biggest neighborhood concerns with traffic at the Dakota Avenue and Lake Drive intersection is the eastbound  and westbound Lake Drive East traffic failing to stop for traffic on Dakota Avenue.  Currently, there are orange flags on the stop signs to draw drivers' attention to the stop condition.  Some drivers still roll through the intersection without completely stopping.  An enhancement to the stop sign which would draw drivers' attention to the stop condition would be replacement of the stop sign with stop signs that have embedded LED flashing perimeter lights.  National studies have shown these signs help improve driver stop compliance.  However, the signs have demonstrated they lose their effectiveness over time, as the traveling public becomes accustomed to the signs.  Two embedded LED solar­powered stop signs on Lake Drive East are estimated to cost $4,500 installed.  Battery life expectancy of these units are three years, with a replacement cost of $200 each.     CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectResolution 2019­XX: Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Ad for Bid andResolution 2019­XX: Designate No Parking on Dakota AvenueSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 2018­02PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution approving the plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for the Lake Drive East ImprovementProject No. 18­02.”“The City Council adopts a resolution designating no parking on Dakota Avenue between Lake Drive East and Trunk Highway 5.”Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council.SUMMARYOn May 8, 2017, the City Council approved a consultant contract for the Lake Drive East Street Rehabilitation Project No. 18­02.On November 8, 2018, an open house neighborhood meeting was held to discuss the proposed project.On November 26, 2018, the City Council received the feasibility report and ordered the Public Hearing.  Council also requested cost breakouts for threeproject scenarios, including (1) intersection improvements in addition to mill and overlay of Dakota Avenue and a small portion of Lake Drive East relativeto the intersection improvements; (2) just utility improvements; and (3) mill and overlay of just Lake Drive East.On December 10, 2018, the City Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications for the entire project with a bid alternate for the sidewalkimprovement to the south of the Dakota Avenue/Lake Drive intersection.BACKGROUNDEvery year the city considers streets that are in poor condition to be rehabilitated or reconstructed. The Capital Improvement Program planned for therehabilitation of Lake Drive East in the summer of 2019. Staff utilized the city’s Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine theproject extents, as illustrated in Figure 1. The project includes approximately 0.76 miles of urbanized streets.Lake Drive East is a Municipal State Aid Route that was constructed in 1991, overlaid in 2002, and sealcoated in 1995 and 2005. The 2018 surveyedpavement conditions were 59 and 58 on the west and east sides of Dakota Avenue, respectively, as shown in Figure 1. A PCI of 100 represents a newstreet.Figure 1: Proposed Project Area and 2018 Pavement Condition ScoresDakota Avenue is also a Municipal State Aid Route constructed in 1986 and sealcoated in 2005. As shown in Figure 1, the 2018 surveyed pavementcondition was 73, which is higher than expected due to the extensive patching along the street corridor. A 190­foot long, raised concrete median separatesnorthbound and southbound Dakota Avenue. The northbound portion consists of two through lanes, one left turn lane, and one right turn lane. Thesouthbound portion consists of two lanes that transition to a right turn and a through/left turn lane at the Lake Drive East intersection.Traffic counts were performed in August 2017. Analysis focused on weekday AM and PM peak hours because weekend traffic was determined to be 30%to 50% lower than weekday traffic. The counted vehicles were 8,000 vehicles per day (VPD) between the intersection with TH 5 and the intersection atLake Drive East. The counted vehicles were 4,100 VPD east of the Dakota Avenue intersection and 3,650 VPD west of the intersection. The southern legof the Dakota Avenue intersection tallied 950 VPD.Street ImprovementsStaff recommends the pavement rehabilitation be accomplished as a mill and overlay project. Based on the pavement condition, traffic, and geotechnicalreport, a three­inch mill and overlay is recommended.  Based on field visual inspection, approximately 20% of the concrete curb and gutter and sidewalkwithin the project area is deficient and is recommended for replacement.  In addition to the sidewalk spot repairs, new ADA compliant pedestrian curbramps are proposed to be installed at all crosswalk locations within the project area.Proposed Intersection ImprovementsOver the years, the city has received resident feedback related to this intersection. The intersection currently has a two­way stop condition for bothdirections of the Lake Drive East traffic. Residents in the Chanhassen Estates neighborhood to the south are concerned with eastbound Lake Drive Easttraffic failing to yield to traffic on Dakota Avenue. The intersection averages about one crash per year. There is also concern for pedestrian and bicyclistsafety at this intersection. The feasibility study analyzed six alternatives for the intersection design including leaving the existing two­way stop condition ormodifying it to a three­way stop or an all­way stop with and without turn lanes. The study also analyzed installing a traffic signal and a mini roundabout. Thefeasibility study and staff recommend a three­way stop condition be considered as the primary alternative (Figure 2). The secondary alternative (Figure 3)would be the installation of a mini roundabout. Both alternatives would include pedestrian crossing improvements. Both alternatives addressed trafficconcerns but the three­way stop is much more cost effective and does not require right­of­way to be acquired.The recommended pedestrian improvement includes signed and marked crossings on the north and west sides of the intersection. In conjunction with thethree­way stop alternative, the median north of the intersection would be extended to the south and incorporate a pedestrian refuge. In addition, a sidewalkalong the west side of the block to the south of the intersection will also be considered to improve pedestrian safety to the neighborhood.One of the biggest neighborhood concerns with traffic at the Dakota Avenue and Lake Drive intersection is the eastbound  and westbound Lake Drive Easttraffic failing to stop for traffic on Dakota Avenue.  Currently, there are orange flags on the stop signs to draw drivers' attention to the stop condition.  Somedrivers still roll through the intersection without completely stopping.  An enhancement to the stop sign which would draw drivers' attention to the stopcondition would be replacement of the stop sign with stop signs that have embedded LED flashing perimeter lights.  National studies have shown these signshelp improve driver stop compliance.  However, the signs have demonstrated they lose their effectiveness over time, as the traveling public becomes accustomed to the signs.  Two embedded LED solar­powered stop signs on Lake Drive East are estimated to cost $4,500 installed.  Battery life expectancy of these units are three years, with a replacement cost of $200 each.     Figure 2: Three­Way Stop with Pedestrian Improvements Alternative Water Main Improvements Twelve­inch ductile iron water main is within Lake Drive East and eight­inch cast iron water main is within Dakota Avenue as shown in Figure 4. There are no documented water main breaks within the project area. Some of the existing valves and hydrants are anticipated to be repaired/replaced with this project. Figure 3: Existing Water Main It has been the city’s practice to replace cast iron water main in conjunction with street projects in order to reduce the potential for disruptive and costly water main breaks. In addition, the 8­inch cast iron water main under Dakota Avenue extends to the north under Highway 5. The pipe was not installed within a casing and access to it underneath Highway 5 is limited due to traffic volumes. A water main break under Highway 5 would be a poor location for it to occur due to the impact to a high volume of traffic and the repair expense. An engineering report was prepared specific to this section of pipe to consider if it would be necessary to rehabilitate the existing pipe via a cured­in­place structural lining process due to pressure or flow concerns. This section of pipe CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectResolution 2019­XX: Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Ad for Bid andResolution 2019­XX: Designate No Parking on Dakota AvenueSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 2018­02PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution approving the plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for the Lake Drive East ImprovementProject No. 18­02.”“The City Council adopts a resolution designating no parking on Dakota Avenue between Lake Drive East and Trunk Highway 5.”Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council.SUMMARYOn May 8, 2017, the City Council approved a consultant contract for the Lake Drive East Street Rehabilitation Project No. 18­02.On November 8, 2018, an open house neighborhood meeting was held to discuss the proposed project.On November 26, 2018, the City Council received the feasibility report and ordered the Public Hearing.  Council also requested cost breakouts for threeproject scenarios, including (1) intersection improvements in addition to mill and overlay of Dakota Avenue and a small portion of Lake Drive East relativeto the intersection improvements; (2) just utility improvements; and (3) mill and overlay of just Lake Drive East.On December 10, 2018, the City Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications for the entire project with a bid alternate for the sidewalkimprovement to the south of the Dakota Avenue/Lake Drive intersection.BACKGROUNDEvery year the city considers streets that are in poor condition to be rehabilitated or reconstructed. The Capital Improvement Program planned for therehabilitation of Lake Drive East in the summer of 2019. Staff utilized the city’s Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine theproject extents, as illustrated in Figure 1. The project includes approximately 0.76 miles of urbanized streets.Lake Drive East is a Municipal State Aid Route that was constructed in 1991, overlaid in 2002, and sealcoated in 1995 and 2005. The 2018 surveyedpavement conditions were 59 and 58 on the west and east sides of Dakota Avenue, respectively, as shown in Figure 1. A PCI of 100 represents a newstreet.Figure 1: Proposed Project Area and 2018 Pavement Condition ScoresDakota Avenue is also a Municipal State Aid Route constructed in 1986 and sealcoated in 2005. As shown in Figure 1, the 2018 surveyed pavementcondition was 73, which is higher than expected due to the extensive patching along the street corridor. A 190­foot long, raised concrete median separatesnorthbound and southbound Dakota Avenue. The northbound portion consists of two through lanes, one left turn lane, and one right turn lane. Thesouthbound portion consists of two lanes that transition to a right turn and a through/left turn lane at the Lake Drive East intersection.Traffic counts were performed in August 2017. Analysis focused on weekday AM and PM peak hours because weekend traffic was determined to be 30%to 50% lower than weekday traffic. The counted vehicles were 8,000 vehicles per day (VPD) between the intersection with TH 5 and the intersection atLake Drive East. The counted vehicles were 4,100 VPD east of the Dakota Avenue intersection and 3,650 VPD west of the intersection. The southern legof the Dakota Avenue intersection tallied 950 VPD.Street ImprovementsStaff recommends the pavement rehabilitation be accomplished as a mill and overlay project. Based on the pavement condition, traffic, and geotechnicalreport, a three­inch mill and overlay is recommended.  Based on field visual inspection, approximately 20% of the concrete curb and gutter and sidewalkwithin the project area is deficient and is recommended for replacement.  In addition to the sidewalk spot repairs, new ADA compliant pedestrian curbramps are proposed to be installed at all crosswalk locations within the project area.Proposed Intersection ImprovementsOver the years, the city has received resident feedback related to this intersection. The intersection currently has a two­way stop condition for bothdirections of the Lake Drive East traffic. Residents in the Chanhassen Estates neighborhood to the south are concerned with eastbound Lake Drive Easttraffic failing to yield to traffic on Dakota Avenue. The intersection averages about one crash per year. There is also concern for pedestrian and bicyclistsafety at this intersection. The feasibility study analyzed six alternatives for the intersection design including leaving the existing two­way stop condition ormodifying it to a three­way stop or an all­way stop with and without turn lanes. The study also analyzed installing a traffic signal and a mini roundabout. Thefeasibility study and staff recommend a three­way stop condition be considered as the primary alternative (Figure 2). The secondary alternative (Figure 3)would be the installation of a mini roundabout. Both alternatives would include pedestrian crossing improvements. Both alternatives addressed trafficconcerns but the three­way stop is much more cost effective and does not require right­of­way to be acquired.The recommended pedestrian improvement includes signed and marked crossings on the north and west sides of the intersection. In conjunction with thethree­way stop alternative, the median north of the intersection would be extended to the south and incorporate a pedestrian refuge. In addition, a sidewalkalong the west side of the block to the south of the intersection will also be considered to improve pedestrian safety to the neighborhood.One of the biggest neighborhood concerns with traffic at the Dakota Avenue and Lake Drive intersection is the eastbound  and westbound Lake Drive Easttraffic failing to stop for traffic on Dakota Avenue.  Currently, there are orange flags on the stop signs to draw drivers' attention to the stop condition.  Somedrivers still roll through the intersection without completely stopping.  An enhancement to the stop sign which would draw drivers' attention to the stopcondition would be replacement of the stop sign with stop signs that have embedded LED flashing perimeter lights.  National studies have shown these signshelp improve driver stop compliance.  However, the signs have demonstrated they lose their effectiveness over time, as the traveling public becomesaccustomed to the signs.  Two embedded LED solar­powered stop signs on Lake Drive East are estimated to cost $4,500 installed.  Battery lifeexpectancy of these units are three years, with a replacement cost of $200 each.    Figure 2: Three­Way Stop with Pedestrian Improvements AlternativeWater Main ImprovementsTwelve­inch ductile iron water main is within Lake Drive East and eight­inch cast iron water main is within Dakota Avenue as shown in Figure 4. There areno documented water main breaks within the project area. Some of the existing valves and hydrants are anticipated to be repaired/replaced with thisproject.Figure 3: Existing Water MainIt has been the city’s practice to replace cast iron water main in conjunction with street projects in order to reduce the potential for disruptive and costlywater main breaks. In addition, the 8­inch cast iron water main under Dakota Avenue extends to the north under Highway 5. The pipe was not installed within a casing and access to it underneath Highway 5 is limited due to traffic volumes. A water main break under Highway 5 would be a poor location for it to occur due to the impact to a high volume of traffic and the repair expense. An engineering report was prepared specific to this section of pipe to consider if it would be necessary to rehabilitate the existing pipe via a cured­in­place structural lining process due to pressure or flow concerns. This section of pipe was modeled and analyzed for ancillary effects related to pressure and flow if it was eliminated. The report found the 8­inch water main could be eliminated with little effect on the water system in the area within and around the project. The cast iron water main under Dakota Avenue is proposed to be replaced with PVC pipe to the service connection to the businesses on the west side of the street and abandon the cast iron pipe that is under Highway 5. Sanitary Sewer Improvements Municipal sanitary sewer within the project area is 8­inch PVC pipe and 12­inch RCP as shown in Figure 5. The city had the sewer lines cleaned and televised to determine the scope of work. Some minor repairs are recommended to the sanitary sewer system including removal of mineral deposits at joints within the existing mains. Other inflow and infiltration reduction items recommended include replacement of concrete adjusting rings, installation of chimney seals, and replacement of casting lids that do not conform to city standards. Staff inspections indicated there is not a need for manhole repair or replacement. Figure 4: Existing Sanitary Sewer Storm Sewer Improvements The existing storm system is shown in Figure 6.  City staff inspected the storm sewer system and identified necessary repairs.  Improvements to the system will include replacement of structures that are failing including concrete adjusting rings and invert repairs.  Additionally, the project will include the installation of drain tile behind the back of the curb at known problem areas to alleviate groundwater from weeping onto the street.  In addition, drain tile will be placed at sump pump discharge locations to collect this water before discharging on the street. Figure 5: Existing Storm Sewer Feasibility Report The feasibility report was prepared by WSB and Associates.  A copy of the feasibility report is available in the Engineering Department.  An open house was held on Thursday, November 8, 2018 to discuss the proposed project and to answer questions; approximately 30 people attended.  All of the residents' questions were answered at the meeting and/or with a follow­up after the meeting. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectResolution 2019­XX: Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Ad for Bid andResolution 2019­XX: Designate No Parking on Dakota AvenueSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 2018­02PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution approving the plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for the Lake Drive East ImprovementProject No. 18­02.”“The City Council adopts a resolution designating no parking on Dakota Avenue between Lake Drive East and Trunk Highway 5.”Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council.SUMMARYOn May 8, 2017, the City Council approved a consultant contract for the Lake Drive East Street Rehabilitation Project No. 18­02.On November 8, 2018, an open house neighborhood meeting was held to discuss the proposed project.On November 26, 2018, the City Council received the feasibility report and ordered the Public Hearing.  Council also requested cost breakouts for threeproject scenarios, including (1) intersection improvements in addition to mill and overlay of Dakota Avenue and a small portion of Lake Drive East relativeto the intersection improvements; (2) just utility improvements; and (3) mill and overlay of just Lake Drive East.On December 10, 2018, the City Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications for the entire project with a bid alternate for the sidewalkimprovement to the south of the Dakota Avenue/Lake Drive intersection.BACKGROUNDEvery year the city considers streets that are in poor condition to be rehabilitated or reconstructed. The Capital Improvement Program planned for therehabilitation of Lake Drive East in the summer of 2019. Staff utilized the city’s Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine theproject extents, as illustrated in Figure 1. The project includes approximately 0.76 miles of urbanized streets.Lake Drive East is a Municipal State Aid Route that was constructed in 1991, overlaid in 2002, and sealcoated in 1995 and 2005. The 2018 surveyedpavement conditions were 59 and 58 on the west and east sides of Dakota Avenue, respectively, as shown in Figure 1. A PCI of 100 represents a newstreet.Figure 1: Proposed Project Area and 2018 Pavement Condition ScoresDakota Avenue is also a Municipal State Aid Route constructed in 1986 and sealcoated in 2005. As shown in Figure 1, the 2018 surveyed pavementcondition was 73, which is higher than expected due to the extensive patching along the street corridor. A 190­foot long, raised concrete median separatesnorthbound and southbound Dakota Avenue. The northbound portion consists of two through lanes, one left turn lane, and one right turn lane. Thesouthbound portion consists of two lanes that transition to a right turn and a through/left turn lane at the Lake Drive East intersection.Traffic counts were performed in August 2017. Analysis focused on weekday AM and PM peak hours because weekend traffic was determined to be 30%to 50% lower than weekday traffic. The counted vehicles were 8,000 vehicles per day (VPD) between the intersection with TH 5 and the intersection atLake Drive East. The counted vehicles were 4,100 VPD east of the Dakota Avenue intersection and 3,650 VPD west of the intersection. The southern legof the Dakota Avenue intersection tallied 950 VPD.Street ImprovementsStaff recommends the pavement rehabilitation be accomplished as a mill and overlay project. Based on the pavement condition, traffic, and geotechnicalreport, a three­inch mill and overlay is recommended.  Based on field visual inspection, approximately 20% of the concrete curb and gutter and sidewalkwithin the project area is deficient and is recommended for replacement.  In addition to the sidewalk spot repairs, new ADA compliant pedestrian curbramps are proposed to be installed at all crosswalk locations within the project area.Proposed Intersection ImprovementsOver the years, the city has received resident feedback related to this intersection. The intersection currently has a two­way stop condition for bothdirections of the Lake Drive East traffic. Residents in the Chanhassen Estates neighborhood to the south are concerned with eastbound Lake Drive Easttraffic failing to yield to traffic on Dakota Avenue. The intersection averages about one crash per year. There is also concern for pedestrian and bicyclistsafety at this intersection. The feasibility study analyzed six alternatives for the intersection design including leaving the existing two­way stop condition ormodifying it to a three­way stop or an all­way stop with and without turn lanes. The study also analyzed installing a traffic signal and a mini roundabout. Thefeasibility study and staff recommend a three­way stop condition be considered as the primary alternative (Figure 2). The secondary alternative (Figure 3)would be the installation of a mini roundabout. Both alternatives would include pedestrian crossing improvements. Both alternatives addressed trafficconcerns but the three­way stop is much more cost effective and does not require right­of­way to be acquired.The recommended pedestrian improvement includes signed and marked crossings on the north and west sides of the intersection. In conjunction with thethree­way stop alternative, the median north of the intersection would be extended to the south and incorporate a pedestrian refuge. In addition, a sidewalkalong the west side of the block to the south of the intersection will also be considered to improve pedestrian safety to the neighborhood.One of the biggest neighborhood concerns with traffic at the Dakota Avenue and Lake Drive intersection is the eastbound  and westbound Lake Drive Easttraffic failing to stop for traffic on Dakota Avenue.  Currently, there are orange flags on the stop signs to draw drivers' attention to the stop condition.  Somedrivers still roll through the intersection without completely stopping.  An enhancement to the stop sign which would draw drivers' attention to the stopcondition would be replacement of the stop sign with stop signs that have embedded LED flashing perimeter lights.  National studies have shown these signshelp improve driver stop compliance.  However, the signs have demonstrated they lose their effectiveness over time, as the traveling public becomesaccustomed to the signs.  Two embedded LED solar­powered stop signs on Lake Drive East are estimated to cost $4,500 installed.  Battery lifeexpectancy of these units are three years, with a replacement cost of $200 each.    Figure 2: Three­Way Stop with Pedestrian Improvements AlternativeWater Main ImprovementsTwelve­inch ductile iron water main is within Lake Drive East and eight­inch cast iron water main is within Dakota Avenue as shown in Figure 4. There areno documented water main breaks within the project area. Some of the existing valves and hydrants are anticipated to be repaired/replaced with thisproject.Figure 3: Existing Water MainIt has been the city’s practice to replace cast iron water main in conjunction with street projects in order to reduce the potential for disruptive and costlywater main breaks. In addition, the 8­inch cast iron water main under Dakota Avenue extends to the north under Highway 5. The pipe was not installedwithin a casing and access to it underneath Highway 5 is limited due to traffic volumes. A water main break under Highway 5 would be a poor location for itto occur due to the impact to a high volume of traffic and the repair expense. An engineering report was prepared specific to this section of pipe to considerif it would be necessary to rehabilitate the existing pipe via a cured­in­place structural lining process due to pressure or flow concerns. This section of pipewas modeled and analyzed for ancillary effects related to pressure and flow if it was eliminated. The report found the 8­inch water main could be eliminatedwith little effect on the water system in the area within and around the project.The cast iron water main under Dakota Avenue is proposed to be replaced with PVC pipe to the service connection to the businesses on the west side ofthe street and abandon the cast iron pipe that is under Highway 5.Sanitary Sewer ImprovementsMunicipal sanitary sewer within the project area is 8­inch PVC pipe and 12­inch RCP as shown in Figure 5. The city had the sewer lines cleaned andtelevised to determine the scope of work. Some minor repairs are recommended to the sanitary sewer system including removal of mineral deposits at jointswithin the existing mains. Other inflow and infiltration reduction items recommended include replacement of concrete adjusting rings, installation of chimneyseals, and replacement of casting lids that do not conform to city standards. Staff inspections indicated there is not a need for manhole repair or replacement.Figure 4: Existing Sanitary SewerStorm Sewer ImprovementsThe existing storm system is shown in Figure 6.  City staff inspected the storm sewer system and identified necessary repairs.  Improvements to the systemwill include replacement of structures that are failing including concrete adjusting rings and invert repairs.  Additionally, the project will include the installationof drain tile behind the back of the curb at known problem areas to alleviate groundwater from weeping onto the street.  In addition, drain tile will be placedat sump pump discharge locations to collect this water before discharging on the street.Figure 5: Existing Storm SewerFeasibility ReportThe feasibility report was prepared by WSB and Associates.  A copy of the feasibility report is available in the Engineering Department.  An open house was held on Thursday, November 8, 2018 to discuss the proposed project and to answer questions; approximately 30 people attended.  All of the residents' questions were answered at the meeting and/or with a follow­up after the meeting. At their meeting on November 26, 2018, City Council requested the project be broken out into three projects, including (1) Intersection improvements, in addition to mill and overlay of Dakota Avenue and a small portion of Lake Drive East, relative to the intersection improvements.  The work on Lake Drive would be from the proposed western project limit to the McDonald's entrance; (2) Utility and intersection improvements only; and (3) Overlay Lake Drive, east of the McDonald's entrance. Staff has also included the feasibility costs in the background.  At their meeting on December 10, 2018, City Council elected to proceed with the project as described in the Feasibility Study, with a bid alternate to consider a sidewalk along the west side of Dakota Avenue. Design Considerations An established goal of this project has been to make safety improvements for the Dakota Avenue­Lake Drive East intersection, which includes vehicles moving through the intersection and pedestrian crossings.This goal was based upon feedback received from residents through the public engagement process and neighborhood meetings.The feasibility report defined this goal and identified likely design strategies to facilitate meeting the goal. A change in the control of the intersection has been made in the plans.The current two­way stop control for east­ and westbound traffic is being changed to a three­way stop condition by adding a stop sign for northbound traffic.The stop signs for the east­ and westbound traffic are being changed to a flashing LED model to increase their recognition by perceived distracted drivers. In order to create the desired pedestrian safety improvements, a refuge has been incorporated in the middle of the crosswalk across Dakota Avenue on the north side of the intersection.The feasibility study proposed extending the median between Highway 5 and Lake Drive East further to the south to encompass the crosswalk.A nosing and signage would be added just to the south of the crosswalk in order to begin the divided section for northbound traffic. During the design process, the consultant reviewed the turning movements for a full­sized 53­foot tractor­trailer truck (WB­62) through the intersection. This is the design vehicle for the intersection but the size of the intersection is constrained.For certain turning movements, this sized vehicle will likely need to drive over some the curb associated with the median. Additional street width can also be considered in two areas to improve the turning movements where the design vehicle is expected to need to drive­over curb.Widening the street a few feet in these areas should facilitate the design vehicle being able to make the turn if the driver fully utilizes the width available.Sufficient right­of­way exists in these two locations to facilitate the widening. Another consideration regarding pedestrian improvements is the work designed as part of Bid Alternate No. 1 as requested by the City Council.This alternate creates a north­south pedestrian crossing on the west side of the intersection and a sidewalk along the block immediately south of the intersection. This will allow pedestrians to safely move into and out of the neighborhood at all times of the year.Currently, pedestrians are forced to walk on grass or along the edge of the roadway.During a challenging winter such as is being experienced this year; pedestrians are forced to walk in traffic if they want to walk to the nearby businesses.A picture recently taken facing southbound from the north side of the intersection is shown below to help communicate this concern. Figure 6: Dakota Avenue/Lake Drive East Intersection The design considered an attached sidewalk to the back of the curb and including a typical 4­foot boulevard section between the back of the curb and the sidewalk. An attached sidewalk is not as safe for pedestrians and the boulevard provides a storage area for plowed snow during the winter. Creation of a 4­ foot boulevard is recommended but it will require the relocation of a couple street lights and the removal of a few trees. The trees would be proposed to be replaced to the west of the sidewalk. There is sufficient right­of­way existing in order to make the improvements. Parking Restrictions The City of Chanhassen will be expending Municipal State Aid funds on Lake Drive East and Dakota Avenue.  Approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street project requires certain parking restrictions when the improvements do not provide adequate width for parking on both sides of the street, as is the case for Lake Drive East and Dakota Avenue.  Resolution Number 2002­39 was adopted on May 13, 2002 which designated either CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectResolution 2019­XX: Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project Approve Plans and Specifications and Authorize Ad for Bid andResolution 2019­XX: Designate No Parking on Dakota AvenueSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.4.Prepared By George Bender, Assistant City Engineer File No: Project No. 2018­02PROPOSED MOTION“The City Council adopts a resolution approving the plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for the Lake Drive East ImprovementProject No. 18­02.”“The City Council adopts a resolution designating no parking on Dakota Avenue between Lake Drive East and Trunk Highway 5.”Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council.SUMMARYOn May 8, 2017, the City Council approved a consultant contract for the Lake Drive East Street Rehabilitation Project No. 18­02.On November 8, 2018, an open house neighborhood meeting was held to discuss the proposed project.On November 26, 2018, the City Council received the feasibility report and ordered the Public Hearing.  Council also requested cost breakouts for threeproject scenarios, including (1) intersection improvements in addition to mill and overlay of Dakota Avenue and a small portion of Lake Drive East relativeto the intersection improvements; (2) just utility improvements; and (3) mill and overlay of just Lake Drive East.On December 10, 2018, the City Council authorized preparation of plans and specifications for the entire project with a bid alternate for the sidewalkimprovement to the south of the Dakota Avenue/Lake Drive intersection.BACKGROUNDEvery year the city considers streets that are in poor condition to be rehabilitated or reconstructed. The Capital Improvement Program planned for therehabilitation of Lake Drive East in the summer of 2019. Staff utilized the city’s Pavement Management Program and site investigations to determine theproject extents, as illustrated in Figure 1. The project includes approximately 0.76 miles of urbanized streets.Lake Drive East is a Municipal State Aid Route that was constructed in 1991, overlaid in 2002, and sealcoated in 1995 and 2005. The 2018 surveyedpavement conditions were 59 and 58 on the west and east sides of Dakota Avenue, respectively, as shown in Figure 1. A PCI of 100 represents a newstreet.Figure 1: Proposed Project Area and 2018 Pavement Condition ScoresDakota Avenue is also a Municipal State Aid Route constructed in 1986 and sealcoated in 2005. As shown in Figure 1, the 2018 surveyed pavementcondition was 73, which is higher than expected due to the extensive patching along the street corridor. A 190­foot long, raised concrete median separatesnorthbound and southbound Dakota Avenue. The northbound portion consists of two through lanes, one left turn lane, and one right turn lane. Thesouthbound portion consists of two lanes that transition to a right turn and a through/left turn lane at the Lake Drive East intersection.Traffic counts were performed in August 2017. Analysis focused on weekday AM and PM peak hours because weekend traffic was determined to be 30%to 50% lower than weekday traffic. The counted vehicles were 8,000 vehicles per day (VPD) between the intersection with TH 5 and the intersection atLake Drive East. The counted vehicles were 4,100 VPD east of the Dakota Avenue intersection and 3,650 VPD west of the intersection. The southern legof the Dakota Avenue intersection tallied 950 VPD.Street ImprovementsStaff recommends the pavement rehabilitation be accomplished as a mill and overlay project. Based on the pavement condition, traffic, and geotechnicalreport, a three­inch mill and overlay is recommended.  Based on field visual inspection, approximately 20% of the concrete curb and gutter and sidewalkwithin the project area is deficient and is recommended for replacement.  In addition to the sidewalk spot repairs, new ADA compliant pedestrian curbramps are proposed to be installed at all crosswalk locations within the project area.Proposed Intersection ImprovementsOver the years, the city has received resident feedback related to this intersection. The intersection currently has a two­way stop condition for bothdirections of the Lake Drive East traffic. Residents in the Chanhassen Estates neighborhood to the south are concerned with eastbound Lake Drive Easttraffic failing to yield to traffic on Dakota Avenue. The intersection averages about one crash per year. There is also concern for pedestrian and bicyclistsafety at this intersection. The feasibility study analyzed six alternatives for the intersection design including leaving the existing two­way stop condition ormodifying it to a three­way stop or an all­way stop with and without turn lanes. The study also analyzed installing a traffic signal and a mini roundabout. Thefeasibility study and staff recommend a three­way stop condition be considered as the primary alternative (Figure 2). The secondary alternative (Figure 3)would be the installation of a mini roundabout. Both alternatives would include pedestrian crossing improvements. Both alternatives addressed trafficconcerns but the three­way stop is much more cost effective and does not require right­of­way to be acquired.The recommended pedestrian improvement includes signed and marked crossings on the north and west sides of the intersection. In conjunction with thethree­way stop alternative, the median north of the intersection would be extended to the south and incorporate a pedestrian refuge. In addition, a sidewalkalong the west side of the block to the south of the intersection will also be considered to improve pedestrian safety to the neighborhood.One of the biggest neighborhood concerns with traffic at the Dakota Avenue and Lake Drive intersection is the eastbound  and westbound Lake Drive Easttraffic failing to stop for traffic on Dakota Avenue.  Currently, there are orange flags on the stop signs to draw drivers' attention to the stop condition.  Somedrivers still roll through the intersection without completely stopping.  An enhancement to the stop sign which would draw drivers' attention to the stopcondition would be replacement of the stop sign with stop signs that have embedded LED flashing perimeter lights.  National studies have shown these signshelp improve driver stop compliance.  However, the signs have demonstrated they lose their effectiveness over time, as the traveling public becomesaccustomed to the signs.  Two embedded LED solar­powered stop signs on Lake Drive East are estimated to cost $4,500 installed.  Battery lifeexpectancy of these units are three years, with a replacement cost of $200 each.    Figure 2: Three­Way Stop with Pedestrian Improvements AlternativeWater Main ImprovementsTwelve­inch ductile iron water main is within Lake Drive East and eight­inch cast iron water main is within Dakota Avenue as shown in Figure 4. There areno documented water main breaks within the project area. Some of the existing valves and hydrants are anticipated to be repaired/replaced with thisproject.Figure 3: Existing Water MainIt has been the city’s practice to replace cast iron water main in conjunction with street projects in order to reduce the potential for disruptive and costlywater main breaks. In addition, the 8­inch cast iron water main under Dakota Avenue extends to the north under Highway 5. The pipe was not installedwithin a casing and access to it underneath Highway 5 is limited due to traffic volumes. A water main break under Highway 5 would be a poor location for itto occur due to the impact to a high volume of traffic and the repair expense. An engineering report was prepared specific to this section of pipe to considerif it would be necessary to rehabilitate the existing pipe via a cured­in­place structural lining process due to pressure or flow concerns. This section of pipewas modeled and analyzed for ancillary effects related to pressure and flow if it was eliminated. The report found the 8­inch water main could be eliminatedwith little effect on the water system in the area within and around the project.The cast iron water main under Dakota Avenue is proposed to be replaced with PVC pipe to the service connection to the businesses on the west side ofthe street and abandon the cast iron pipe that is under Highway 5.Sanitary Sewer ImprovementsMunicipal sanitary sewer within the project area is 8­inch PVC pipe and 12­inch RCP as shown in Figure 5. The city had the sewer lines cleaned andtelevised to determine the scope of work. Some minor repairs are recommended to the sanitary sewer system including removal of mineral deposits at jointswithin the existing mains. Other inflow and infiltration reduction items recommended include replacement of concrete adjusting rings, installation of chimneyseals, and replacement of casting lids that do not conform to city standards. Staff inspections indicated there is not a need for manhole repair or replacement.Figure 4: Existing Sanitary SewerStorm Sewer ImprovementsThe existing storm system is shown in Figure 6.  City staff inspected the storm sewer system and identified necessary repairs.  Improvements to the systemwill include replacement of structures that are failing including concrete adjusting rings and invert repairs.  Additionally, the project will include the installationof drain tile behind the back of the curb at known problem areas to alleviate groundwater from weeping onto the street.  In addition, drain tile will be placedat sump pump discharge locations to collect this water before discharging on the street.Figure 5: Existing Storm SewerFeasibility ReportThe feasibility report was prepared by WSB and Associates.  A copy of the feasibility report is available in the Engineering Department. An open house was held on Thursday, November 8, 2018 to discuss the proposed project and to answer questions; approximately 30 people attended.  Allof the residents' questions were answered at the meeting and/or with a follow­up after the meeting.At their meeting on November 26, 2018, City Council requested the project be broken out into three projects, including (1) Intersection improvements, inaddition to mill and overlay of Dakota Avenue and a small portion of Lake Drive East, relative to the intersection improvements.  The work on Lake Drivewould be from the proposed western project limit to the McDonald's entrance; (2) Utility and intersection improvements only; and (3) Overlay Lake Drive,east of the McDonald's entrance. Staff has also included the feasibility costs in the background. At their meeting on December 10, 2018, City Council elected to proceed with the project as described in the Feasibility Study, with a bid alternate toconsider a sidewalk along the west side of Dakota Avenue.Design ConsiderationsAn established goal of this project has been to make safety improvements for the Dakota Avenue­Lake Drive East intersection, which includes vehiclesmoving through the intersection and pedestrian crossings.This goal was based upon feedback received from residents through the public engagementprocess and neighborhood meetings.The feasibility report defined this goal and identified likely design strategies to facilitate meeting the goal.A change in the control of the intersection has been made in the plans.The current two­way stop control for east­ and westbound traffic is being changed toa three­way stop condition by adding a stop sign for northbound traffic.The stop signs for the east­ and westbound traffic are being changed to a flashingLED model to increase their recognition by perceived distracted drivers.In order to create the desired pedestrian safety improvements, a refuge has been incorporated in the middle of the crosswalk across Dakota Avenue on thenorth side of the intersection.The feasibility study proposed extending the median between Highway 5 and Lake Drive East further to the south toencompass the crosswalk.A nosing and signage would be added just to the south of the crosswalk in order to begin the divided section for northboundtraffic.During the design process, the consultant reviewed the turning movements for a full­sized 53­foot tractor­trailer truck (WB­62) through the intersection.This is the design vehicle for the intersection but the size of the intersection is constrained.For certain turning movements, this sized vehicle will likely needto drive over some the curb associated with the median.Additional street width can also be considered in two areas to improve the turning movements where the design vehicle is expected to need to drive­overcurb.Widening the street a few feet in these areas should facilitate the design vehicle being able to make the turn if the driver fully utilizes the widthavailable.Sufficient right­of­way exists in these two locations to facilitate the widening.Another consideration regarding pedestrian improvements is the work designed as part of Bid Alternate No. 1 as requested by the City Council.Thisalternate creates a north­south pedestrian crossing on the west side of the intersection and a sidewalk along the block immediately south of the intersection.This will allow pedestrians to safely move into and out of the neighborhood at all times of the year.Currently, pedestrians are forced to walk on grass oralong the edge of the roadway.During a challenging winter such as is being experienced this year; pedestrians are forced to walk in traffic if they want towalk to the nearby businesses.A picture recently taken facing southbound from the north side of the intersection is shown below to help communicate thisconcern.Figure 6: Dakota Avenue/Lake Drive East IntersectionThe design considered an attached sidewalk to the back of the curb and including a typical 4­foot boulevard section between the back of the curb and thesidewalk. An attached sidewalk is not as safe for pedestrians and the boulevard provides a storage area for plowed snow during the winter. Creation of a 4­foot boulevard is recommended but it will require the relocation of a couple street lights and the removal of a few trees. The trees would be proposed to bereplaced to the west of the sidewalk. There is sufficient right­of­way existing in order to make the improvements.Parking Restrictions The City of Chanhassen will be expending Municipal State Aid funds on Lake Drive East and Dakota Avenue.  Approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street project requires certain parking restrictions when the improvements do not provide adequate width for parking on both sides of the street, as is the case for Lake Drive East and Dakota Avenue.  Resolution Number 2002­39 was adopted on May 13, 2002 which designated either side of Lake Drive East from Great Plains Boulevard to Dell Road as no parking allowed.  No previous resolution has been adopted for Dakota Avenue. As such, the City of Chanhassen must now adopt a resolution to ban parking on Dakota Avenue from Lake Drive East to Trunk Highway No. 5 in order to obtain State Aid Approval. Project Funding The project is proposed to be assessed to 18 adjacent benefiting properties. Assessments will be based on the city’s assessment practice of assessing 40% of the street improvement cost to the benefiting properties on a per lot basis. The remaining 60% of the street improvement costs will be funded through state aid funds and city funds. The utility improvements are proposed to be 100% funded through city funds.  Estimated Cost Summary Street Improvements (MSA)$405,467.59 Revolving Assessment Fund $175,234.53 Water Main Improvements $  75,389.79 Sanitary Sewer Improvements $  17,325.00 Storm Sewer Improvements $  77,272.67 Intersection Improvements $  13,744.50 Total Project Cost $764,434.08 The estimated project cost includes a 5% contingency and 10% indirect costs for legal, engineering, administrative and financing items. Estimated Assessments Total Estimated Assessable Street Costs:  $438,086.32 40% of Assessable Cost:                            $175,234.53 Assessable Area (acres):                              71.01 acres Per Unit of Area Assessment:                  $2,467.65/acre The assessments would be proposed for an 8­year term at an interest rate of prime rate plus 2% at the time the contract is awarded. Schedule Approve Plans and Specifications; Authorize Advertisement for Bids March 11, 2019 Open Bids April 12, 2019 Public Information Meeting May 1, 2019 Assessment Hearing; Accept Bids and Award Contract May 13, 2019 Start Construction July, 2019 Construction Substantially Complete September, 2019 Final Completion October 18, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Resolution to Approve Plans & Specs CIP Sheets Resolution to Designate No Parking CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: March 11, 2019 RESOLUTION NO: 2019-XX MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING AD FOR BIDS FOR THE LAKE DRIVE EAST STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 18-02 WHEREAS, pursuant to the resolution passed by the Council on December 10, 2018, the City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chanhassen City Council: 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which can be reviewed at the office of the City Engineer, are hereby approved. 2. The city clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official city newspaper and QuestCDN.com, an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The ad shall be published at least three times, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be opened and that the responsibility of the bidders will be considered by the Council at 7:00 PM on Monday, May 13, 2019, for the Lake Drive East Street Improvement Project No. 18-02, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall. Any bidder whose responsibility is questioned during consideration of the bid will be given an opportunity to address the Council on the issue of responsibility. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the clerk and accompanied by a bid security payable to the clerk for 5% of the amount of such bid. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 11th day of March, 2019. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA DATE: March 11, 2019 RESOLUTION NO: 2019- MOTION BY: SECONDED BY: RESOLUTION TO RESTRICT PARKING ON DAKOTA AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen, has planned the improvement of Dakota Avenue, State Aid Route No. 194-128-010 from Lake Drive East to Trunk Highway No. 5, Lake Drive East, State Aid Route No. 194-110-030 from Dakota Avenue to .16 miles East of Dakota Avenue, and Lake Drive East, State Aid Route No. 194-110-040 from .16 miles East of Dakota to Dell Road in the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen will be expending Municipal Street Aid Funds on the improvements of these Streets; and WHEREAS, these improvements do not provide adequate width for parking on both sides of the street; and approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street project must therefore be conditioned upon certain parking restrictions; and WHEREAS, resolutions have previously been adopted to impose parking restrictions for Lake Drive East, State Aid Route No. 194-110-030 from Dakota Avenue to .16 miles East of Dakota Avenue, and Lake Drive East, State Aid Route No. 194-110-040 from .16 miles East of Dakota to Dell Road in the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, as follows: The City of Chanhassen bans the parking of motor vehicles on Dakota Avenue from Lake Drive East to Trunk Highway No. 5 at all times. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 11th day of March, 2019. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor YES NO ABSENT CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Ordinance XXX: Amendments to Chanhassen City Code Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5. Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, Associate Planner File No:  PROPOSED MOTION “The Chanhassen City Council approves Ordinance XXX amending Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, and approves Summary Ordinance XXX for Publication Purposes.” City Council approval of the proposed amendments requires a simple majority vote of the City Council and approval of the summary ordinance requires a four­fifths vote of the entire council. Approval requires a 4/5 Vote. SUMMARY On February 19, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to take public input on the proposed changes to Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. No member of the public spoke on the following proposed amendments: Permitting backyard chickens in residential districts. Revising the Community Commercial District Section’s formatting. Allowing Continuing Care Retirement Facilities in High­Density Residential Districts. Update Sign Design and Construction Standards Reference (Building Code). Clarifying Trash Storage Enclosure Exemption.  The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt these ordinances amending Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. A brief summary of each item discussed and a synopsis of the Planning Commission’s discussion is provided below. The full staff report for each item is provided as an attachment. DISCUSSION Permitting backyard chickens in residential districts: Report Summary: The city defines chickens as farm animals and restricts them to parcels in the rural residential and agricultural estate CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectOrdinance XXX: Amendments to Chanhassen City CodeSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: PROPOSED MOTION“The Chanhassen City Council approves Ordinance XXX amending Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen CityCode, and approves Summary Ordinance XXX for Publication Purposes.”City Council approval of the proposed amendments requires a simple majority vote of the City Council and approvalof the summary ordinance requires a four­fifths vote of the entire council.Approval requires a 4/5 Vote.SUMMARYOn February 19, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to take public input on the proposed changesto Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. No member of the public spoke on the following proposedamendments:Permitting backyard chickens in residential districts.Revising the Community Commercial District Section’s formatting.Allowing Continuing Care Retirement Facilities in High­Density Residential Districts.Update Sign Design and Construction Standards Reference (Building Code).Clarifying Trash Storage Enclosure Exemption. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt these ordinances amendingChapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code.A brief summary of each item discussed and a synopsis of the Planning Commission’s discussion is provided below.The full staff report for each item is provided as an attachment.DISCUSSIONPermitting backyard chickens in residential districts: Report Summary: The city defines chickens as farm animals and restricts them to parcels in the rural residential and agricultural estate districts with a minimum lot size of 10 acres. The recent interest in backyard chickens is due to increasing interest in locally­sourced foods. Staff conducted a review of how other cities in the area regulate chickens and 44 of the 62 cities surveyed allowed chickens in non­agricultural districts. About half of those required permits and placed restrictions on types of and numbers of chickens as well as on things like butchering and chickens running at large. Staff believes that setbacks, permitting requirements, and basic performance standards can mitigate the potential noise and odor nuisance concerns associated with backyard chickens. Ordinance in Brief: Defines relevant terms (chicken or domesticated chicken, coop, hen, rooster, run). States goal is to allow chickens while mitigating potential nuisances. Requires permit and establishes standards for receiving a permit. Establishes maximum number of chickens based on lot size and setbacks for coops and runs. Establishes standards of practice for the keeping of chickens. Authorizes staff to revoke a permit if the standards of practice are violated. Public Hearing: No comments from the public. Planning Commission expressed concern over the potential for chickens on lots of less than one acre to attract predators and unduly disturb neighbors via the noise and odor generated by flocks of chickens. The Planning Commission amended the proposed ordinance to only permit chickens on lots over one acre in size and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the ordinance as amended. Changes from Staff Report: Planning Commission amended the proposed ordinance to only permit chickens on properties one acre or larger. Revising the Community Commercial District Section’s formatting: Report Summary: When the city established the “CC” Community Commercial District in 2009, the ordinance was passed without its sections being broken into subsections. In the interests of improving the code’s readability, staff proposes adding subsections to this section of the City Code. This change would bring this section of the code in line with how the city’s other zoning districts are structured. Ordinance in Brief: The CC District’s formatting and headings will be revised to align with the structure of the other zoning districts. Public Hearing: No comments from the public. No concerns from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval. Allow Continuing Care Retirement Facilities in High­Density Residential Districts: Report Summary: Between its initial draft on June 5, 2012 and its adopted form on October 22, 2012, the proposed ordinance was altered in three significant ways: 1. Continuing care retirement facilities were changed from a conditional to a permitted use; 2. Density limits were changed from 10 dwelling units an acre to a maximum gross density of 16 beds per acre; and, 3. It was only listed as allowed in the R­8 district, rather than the initial R­8, R­12, R­16, and OI districts. Staff believes that the first two changes were deliberate refinements of the initially proposed ordinance, but that the failure to list continuing care retirement facilities as a permitted use within the R­12 and R­16 districts was an unintentional oversight. Staff proposed adding these facilities to the list of permitted uses for the R­12 and R­16 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectOrdinance XXX: Amendments to Chanhassen City CodeSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: PROPOSED MOTION“The Chanhassen City Council approves Ordinance XXX amending Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen CityCode, and approves Summary Ordinance XXX for Publication Purposes.”City Council approval of the proposed amendments requires a simple majority vote of the City Council and approvalof the summary ordinance requires a four­fifths vote of the entire council.Approval requires a 4/5 Vote.SUMMARYOn February 19, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to take public input on the proposed changesto Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. No member of the public spoke on the following proposedamendments:Permitting backyard chickens in residential districts.Revising the Community Commercial District Section’s formatting.Allowing Continuing Care Retirement Facilities in High­Density Residential Districts.Update Sign Design and Construction Standards Reference (Building Code).Clarifying Trash Storage Enclosure Exemption. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt these ordinances amendingChapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code.A brief summary of each item discussed and a synopsis of the Planning Commission’s discussion is provided below.The full staff report for each item is provided as an attachment.DISCUSSIONPermitting backyard chickens in residential districts:Report Summary:The city defines chickens as farm animals and restricts them to parcels in the rural residential and agricultural estatedistricts with a minimum lot size of 10 acres. The recent interest in backyard chickens is due to increasing interest inlocally­sourced foods.Staff conducted a review of how other cities in the area regulate chickens and 44 of the 62 cities surveyed allowedchickens in non­agricultural districts. About half of those required permits and placed restrictions on types of andnumbers of chickens as well as on things like butchering and chickens running at large. Staff believes that setbacks,permitting requirements, and basic performance standards can mitigate the potential noise and odor nuisance concernsassociated with backyard chickens.Ordinance in Brief:Defines relevant terms (chicken or domesticated chicken, coop, hen, rooster, run). States goal is to allow chickens whilemitigating potential nuisances. Requires permit and establishes standards for receiving a permit. Establishes maximumnumber of chickens based on lot size and setbacks for coops and runs. Establishes standards of practice for the keepingof chickens. Authorizes staff to revoke a permit if the standards of practice are violated.Public Hearing:No comments from the public. Planning Commission expressed concern over the potential for chickens on lots of less thanone acre to attract predators and unduly disturb neighbors via the noise and odor generated by flocks of chickens. ThePlanning Commission amended the proposed ordinance to only permit chickens on lots over one acre in size and votedunanimously to recommend approval of the ordinance as amended.Changes from Staff Report:Planning Commission amended the proposed ordinance to only permit chickens on properties one acre or larger.Revising the Community Commercial District Section’s formatting:Report Summary:When the city established the “CC” Community Commercial District in 2009, the ordinance was passed without itssections being broken into subsections. In the interests of improving the code’s readability, staff proposes addingsubsections to this section of the City Code. This change would bring this section of the code in line with how the city’sother zoning districts are structured.Ordinance in Brief:The CC District’s formatting and headings will be revised to align with the structure of the other zoning districts.Public Hearing:No comments from the public. No concerns from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission votedunanimously to recommend approval.Allow Continuing Care Retirement Facilities in High­Density Residential Districts:Report Summary:Between its initial draft on June 5, 2012 and its adopted form on October 22, 2012, the proposed ordinance wasaltered in three significant ways:1. Continuing care retirement facilities were changed from a conditional to a permitted use;2. Density limits were changed from 10 dwelling units an acre to a maximum gross density of 16 beds per acre;and,3. It was only listed as allowed in the R­8 district, rather than the initial R­8, R­12, R­16, and OI districts.Staff believes that the first two changes were deliberate refinements of the initially proposed ordinance, but that the failure to list continuing care retirement facilities as a permitted use within the R­12 and R­16 districts was an unintentional oversight. Staff proposed adding these facilities to the list of permitted uses for the R­12 and R­16 districts to correct this omission. Ordinance in Brief: Add continuing care retirement facilities to the list of permitted uses for R­12 and R­16 districts. Public Hearing: No comments from the public. No concerns from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval. Update Sign Design and Construction Standards Reference (Building Code): Report Summary: The currently referenced sign design and construction standards are derived from a 22­year­old manual that the city does not have on file. It is unlikely that most sign designers and contractors have access to this book, and in practice, the city’s building officials use the Minnesota State Building Code when reviewing sign permits. Staff recommends that the sign code be amended to reference Appendix H of the International Building Code instead of the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code. Ordinance in Brief: Replace the text referencing the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code with text referencing Appendix H of the International Building Code. The Planning Commission requested clarification on if there were signs that would be rendered non­compliant by this change and if the proposed reference book differed significantly from the currently referenced book. Staff stated that the building inspectors evaluated each sign permit and that to the best of their knowledge this amendment would not create any non­conformity. Staff also noted that they were not familiar with the currently referenced work, but were recommending the change in standards at the request of the building inspectors. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval. Clarifying Trash Storage Enclosure Exemption: Report Summary: The City Code has two provisions that stipulate where garbage containers may be stored; one is designed to govern commercial, industrial, and multi­family users, and the other is a universal provision. In order to avoid applying the section of the code that governs other uses to single­family districts, a clause was added exempting single­family districts from those standards; however, the storage portion of the ordinance also contains the provision prohibiting the exterior incineration of trash. The result is that both the storage portion of the ordinance and the prohibition on exterior incineration do not apply to single­family districts. Staff proposes amending this section of the code to apply the prohibition on the exterior incineration of trash to single­family districts. Ordinance in Brief: Separate the provision on exterior storage and exterior incineration into two separate sections and amend the exemption to only apply to the exterior storage section. Public Hearing: No comments from the public. No concerns from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommended approval. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt proposed Ordinance XXX amending Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the City Code, and approve Summary Ordinance XXX for publication purposes. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectOrdinance XXX: Amendments to Chanhassen City CodeSectionCONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.5.Prepared By MacKenzie Young­Walters, AssociatePlanner File No: PROPOSED MOTION“The Chanhassen City Council approves Ordinance XXX amending Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen CityCode, and approves Summary Ordinance XXX for Publication Purposes.”City Council approval of the proposed amendments requires a simple majority vote of the City Council and approvalof the summary ordinance requires a four­fifths vote of the entire council.Approval requires a 4/5 Vote.SUMMARYOn February 19, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to take public input on the proposed changesto Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. No member of the public spoke on the following proposedamendments:Permitting backyard chickens in residential districts.Revising the Community Commercial District Section’s formatting.Allowing Continuing Care Retirement Facilities in High­Density Residential Districts.Update Sign Design and Construction Standards Reference (Building Code).Clarifying Trash Storage Enclosure Exemption. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council adopt these ordinances amendingChapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen City Code.A brief summary of each item discussed and a synopsis of the Planning Commission’s discussion is provided below.The full staff report for each item is provided as an attachment.DISCUSSIONPermitting backyard chickens in residential districts:Report Summary:The city defines chickens as farm animals and restricts them to parcels in the rural residential and agricultural estatedistricts with a minimum lot size of 10 acres. The recent interest in backyard chickens is due to increasing interest inlocally­sourced foods.Staff conducted a review of how other cities in the area regulate chickens and 44 of the 62 cities surveyed allowedchickens in non­agricultural districts. About half of those required permits and placed restrictions on types of andnumbers of chickens as well as on things like butchering and chickens running at large. Staff believes that setbacks,permitting requirements, and basic performance standards can mitigate the potential noise and odor nuisance concernsassociated with backyard chickens.Ordinance in Brief:Defines relevant terms (chicken or domesticated chicken, coop, hen, rooster, run). States goal is to allow chickens whilemitigating potential nuisances. Requires permit and establishes standards for receiving a permit. Establishes maximumnumber of chickens based on lot size and setbacks for coops and runs. Establishes standards of practice for the keepingof chickens. Authorizes staff to revoke a permit if the standards of practice are violated.Public Hearing:No comments from the public. Planning Commission expressed concern over the potential for chickens on lots of less thanone acre to attract predators and unduly disturb neighbors via the noise and odor generated by flocks of chickens. ThePlanning Commission amended the proposed ordinance to only permit chickens on lots over one acre in size and votedunanimously to recommend approval of the ordinance as amended.Changes from Staff Report:Planning Commission amended the proposed ordinance to only permit chickens on properties one acre or larger.Revising the Community Commercial District Section’s formatting:Report Summary:When the city established the “CC” Community Commercial District in 2009, the ordinance was passed without itssections being broken into subsections. In the interests of improving the code’s readability, staff proposes addingsubsections to this section of the City Code. This change would bring this section of the code in line with how the city’sother zoning districts are structured.Ordinance in Brief:The CC District’s formatting and headings will be revised to align with the structure of the other zoning districts.Public Hearing:No comments from the public. No concerns from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission votedunanimously to recommend approval.Allow Continuing Care Retirement Facilities in High­Density Residential Districts:Report Summary:Between its initial draft on June 5, 2012 and its adopted form on October 22, 2012, the proposed ordinance wasaltered in three significant ways:1. Continuing care retirement facilities were changed from a conditional to a permitted use;2. Density limits were changed from 10 dwelling units an acre to a maximum gross density of 16 beds per acre;and,3. It was only listed as allowed in the R­8 district, rather than the initial R­8, R­12, R­16, and OI districts.Staff believes that the first two changes were deliberate refinements of the initially proposed ordinance, but that thefailure to list continuing care retirement facilities as a permitted use within the R­12 and R­16 districts was anunintentional oversight. Staff proposed adding these facilities to the list of permitted uses for the R­12 and R­16districts to correct this omission.Ordinance in Brief:Add continuing care retirement facilities to the list of permitted uses for R­12 and R­16 districts.Public Hearing:No comments from the public. No concerns from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission votedunanimously to recommend approval.Update Sign Design and Construction Standards Reference (Building Code):Report Summary:The currently referenced sign design and construction standards are derived from a 22­year­old manual that the citydoes not have on file. It is unlikely that most sign designers and contractors have access to this book, and in practice,the city’s building officials use the Minnesota State Building Code when reviewing sign permits. Staff recommends thatthe sign code be amended to reference Appendix H of the International Building Code instead of the 1997 edition ofthe Uniform Sign Code.Ordinance in Brief:Replace the text referencing the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code with text referencing Appendix H of theInternational Building Code.The Planning Commission requested clarification on if there were signs that would be rendered non­compliant by thischange and if the proposed reference book differed significantly from the currently referenced book. Staff stated thatthe building inspectors evaluated each sign permit and that to the best of their knowledge this amendment would notcreate any non­conformity. Staff also noted that they were not familiar with the currently referenced work, but wererecommending the change in standards at the request of the building inspectors. The Planning Commission votedunanimously to recommend approval.Clarifying Trash Storage Enclosure Exemption:Report Summary:The City Code has two provisions that stipulate where garbage containers may be stored; one is designed to governcommercial, industrial, and multi­family users, and the other is a universal provision. In order to avoid applying thesection of the code that governs other uses to single­family districts, a clause was added exempting single­familydistricts from those standards; however, the storage portion of the ordinance also contains the provision prohibiting theexterior incineration of trash. The result is that both the storage portion of the ordinance and the prohibition on exteriorincineration do not apply to single­family districts. Staff proposes amending this section of the code to apply theprohibition on the exterior incineration of trash to single­family districts.Ordinance in Brief:Separate the provision on exterior storage and exterior incineration into two separate sections and amend theexemption to only apply to the exterior storage section.Public Hearing:No comments from the public. No concerns from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission votedunanimously to recommended approval.RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt proposed Ordinance XXX amending Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the City Code, and approve Summary Ordinance XXX for publication purposes. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Backyard Chickens Survey of MN Cities Chicken Essay Chickens Email Staff Report Community Commercial Community Commercial Area Staff Report Continuing Care Retirement Staff Report Sign Code Reference Appendix H, Signs Staff Report Trash Storage Enclosures Omnibus Ordinance Summary Ordinance OITTOT OHANIIASSTN Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Planning Commission MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner February 19,2019 Backyard Chickens MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapters 4,5, and 20 of the City Code." ISSUE City staff has received numerous requests from residents asking that the city re-examine its policy of classifying chickens as farm animals and limiting them to parcels of at least 10 acres in size. SUMMARY The city defines chickens as farm animals and restricts them to parcels in the rural residential and agricultural estate districts with a minimum lot size of 10 acres. The recent interest in backyard chickens is due to increasing interest in locally sourced foods. Staff conducted a review of how other cities in the area regulate chickens and 44 of the 62 cities surveyed allowed chickens in non-agricultural districts. About half of those required permits and placed restrictions on types of and numbers of chickens as well as on things like butchering and chickens running at large. Staffbelieves that setbacks, permitting requirements, and basic performance standards can mitigate the potential noise and odor nuisance concerns associated with backyard chickens. RELEVANT CITY CODE Sec. 1-2 - Rules of construction and definitions: Includes chickens under the definition of "Farm animals". Sec. 20-1001 - Keeping: States that farm animals are allowed on farm property zoned A-2 or RR with a minimum area of 10 acres. PH 952.227.1 I 00 . www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us . FX 952.227. I I I 0 77OO MARKET BOULEVARD .PO BOX I4T.CHANHASSEN .MINNESOTA 55317 Backyard Chickens February 19,2079 Page2 BACKGROUND The City Council last investigate the possibility of allowing backyard chickens in May of 2009. At that time, fewer cities had experience with allowing chickens in non-agricultural districts, and there had been a history of issues caused by chickens wandering from an agricultural property to an adjacent subdivision. For these reasons, the City Council elected to maintain its existing prohibition on farm animals in non-agricultural districts and passed Ordinance 480 on June 22, 2009, which further defined a farm as a tract of land more than then 10 acres in size to avoid ambiguity. On December 14,2015, the City Council passed Ordinance 612, which amended Sec. 20-1001 to clarify that farm animals were only allowed on A-2 or RR parcels with a minimum parcel area of 10 acres. ANALYSIS Issue 1: BeneJits of Chickens The recent rise in the popularity of backyard chickens is linked in part to the growing local food movement. As people have become more aware of the impact of agriculture on the environment and concerns have increased over the uses of pesticides and genetically modified organisms, GMOs, individuals have become more interested in knowing where their food comes from and producing their own produce. Many cities have responded to this trend by establishing community gardens, allowing beekeeping, and permitting residents to own chickens. Chickens are one of the few agricultural animals that can thrive in the space provided by residential lots, and they can provide their owners with a source of eggs and meat. While egg production varies by breed, many hens can lay around five eggs per-week during their egg laying cycle. Though many people choose only to raise chickens for eggs, they can also provide a source of fresh poultry. In addition to being a source of food, chickens can provide other ecologically friendly services. They can provide a natural means of pest control for gardeners as they eat many different types of insects and larvae. Homeowners can utilize mobile pens to allow chickens to forage in gardens between plantings or place chickens adjacent to gardens where they can eat insects before they can reach the garden. Chickens can also be fed leftover vegetables and unseasoned meat scraps, which helps to reduce the amount of food waste a household generates. Finally, chicken droppings are rich in plant nutrients and can be used for composting as part of a strategy to minimize the use of fertilizers. Beyond their ecological benefits, chickens can also provide a mechanism to teach children about nature, animal care, and food systems. Many owners also feel that chickens make good pets, and derive a sense of companionship from them. Issue 2: Concerns with Chickens Backyard Chickens February 19,2019 Page 3 Chickens have been confined to agricultural districts in many cities due to concems over noise and odor nuisances, chickens running atlarge, and their potential to attract pests and predators. Historically, the City of Chanhassen has received complaints when chickens have escaped from their coops and wandered onto neighboring properties. The most recent chicken-related complaint the city received was in June of 2018 when several chickens being kept on a property in violation of City Ordinance escaped from their pen and got into the neighbor's yard. In addition to the complaints that can be generated when chickens get loose, they have the potential to violate municipal noise ordinances. This is especially the case when roosters are present since they crow loudly multiple times a day. Hens can also make noise, especially when laying an eggor if frightened, but they are significantly quieter than roosters and their clucks typically do not carry far. Some breeds of chickens are nosier than others are, and could potentially disturb nearby neighbors. Chicken coops and waste can also be a source of noxious odors. Moist and poorly ventilated chicken coops can produce ammonia and an unpleasant smell. If owners do not regularly remove waste from coops and runs strong smells can be produced, and inadequately cleaned chicken runs may produce offensive odors after rainstorms when waste is moist. Finally, keeping chickens can attract rodents and predators. Rodents can be attracted to chicken feed when it is not stored in properly sealed containers, and many animals including cats, dogs, coyotes, raccoons, skunks, snakes, and raptors prey on chicks, chickens, andlor eggs. The presence of backyard chickens can attract these animals to residential neighborhoods, especially if the chicken coop and run are not property secured. Issue 3: Survey of Minnesota Cities Staff found a spreadsheet compiled by ba< advocates that noted if various Minnesota allow chickens. Using this list as base, stt summarized the ordinances governing chi Minnesota cities. The tables to the right st of staffls research. Staff found that 44 of the 62 cities allowed chickens in residential areas with an additional 16 cities only permitting chickens in agricultural areas. Two cities prohibited chickens in all districts. Of the 44 cities that allowed chickens in residential districts, 26 required ry backyard chicken esota cities did or did not se, staff researched and Lg chickens in 62 ght summari ze the results Summary Allowed 44 Ag Only 1,6 Prohibited 2 Total 62 Requirements for cities that allow chickens outside of Ag. Minimum lot size 7 Limit to specific residential districts 3 Require permit/license 26 Require additional setbacks 25 Limit number of birds 40 Total number of cities 44 permits and l0 limited chickens to certain residential districts or established minimum lot sizes. Other common provisions were requiring additional setbacks for chicken coops and runs, 25 cities, and limiting the maximum number of chickens,40 cities. Backyard Chickens February 19,2019 Page 4 Issue 4 : Typical Conditions/Limitations Most cities that allow chickens in residential areas havt it necessary to establish provisions regulating the keepi chickens in order to mitigate the concerns highlighted t in this report. By far the most cofilmon restriction is a I the number of birds that may be kept, with 40 of 44 surveyed cities establishing a maximum number of birds. Staff could not identify a universal standard for the number of birds allowed, although 16 cities have limited properties to a maximum of four chickens. The rationale behind limiting the number of chickens is to minimizethe potential for the flock to generate offensive odors and excessive amounts of noise. City staff is proposing that Chanhassen limit the number of chickens based on a parcel's lot area, in recognition of the fact that the city has some large parcels that could accommodate larger numbers of chickens without negatively affecting surrounding properties. The proposed limits are listed in the table to the right. ve found ping of I earlier r limit on urveyed could a ting the Maximum number of Chickens Limit # of cities 2 1. 3 4 4 L6 5 4 6 5 8+4 Based on lot size 6 Total 40 Proposed limits on number of Chickens Lot size Number of chickens less than 1 acre 4 1to 2.5 acres 8 2.5 to 10 acres 16 10 acres +no limit In order to limit the potential for backyard flocks to create noise nuisances, most cities, 33 of 44, prohibit roosters, and of those that allow roosters, two require a special rooster permit. Several other cities also took the precaution of banning crowing hens. Staff is proposing that Chanhassen prohibit both roosters and crowing hens. Other common provisions that staff identified were prohibitions on chickens running atlarge, breeding chickens, keeping chickens in the house or garage, and butchering chickens. Staff believes that since roosters are already prohibited and only a modest number of birds are permitted outside of agricultural areas a further prohibition on breeding chickens would be redundant. Similarly, staff is proposing that chickens be kept in enclosed coops and runs or a fenced area at all times which should address the issue of chickens running at large. The prohibition on butchering chickens likely comes from concems that the activities associated with killing and cleaning a chicken could offend or disturb neighbors. Staff proposes to address this concern by prohibiting the outdoor butchering of chickens. Finally, staff does not believe it is necessary to adopt the prohibition on keeping chickens in garages. If an owner wished to convert a portion of their garage to serve as a chicken coop, assuming it could meet the required setbacks, staff does not believe it would create an issue. Due to the potential for chickens to spread disease or create unsanitary conditions, staff does believe it is appropriate to prohibit them being kept as household pets. As was noted earlier, many cities require permits for the keeping of chickens and some require that neighbors within a certain radius be notified. Several cities that require public notification also require that a certain percentage ofthe neighbor's consent to the presence ofchickens. Staff Backyard Chickens February 79,2019 Page 5 believes that requiring a permit is necessary to ensure that owners interested in keeping chickens are aware of and comply with the any enacted provisions governing backyard chickens, and that asking applicants to notiff their neighbors of their intent to own chickens can forestall potential future issues between neighbors. Finally, many cities, 25 of 44, also require chicken coops and runs to meet setbacks beyond what are typically required within their zoning districts. Generally, cities require these structures to be located in rear yards, be setback a minimum distance for neighboring residential structures, and be setback a minimum distance from the property line. The largest setback staff found was I l0 feet from residential structures not occupied by the owner, with 50 and 25-foot setbacks being more cornmon. Staff is proposing that a 25-foot setback from adjacent residential structures be used, as it should create a reasonable buffer while also allowing smaller lots to accommodate chicken coops. Additional proposed setbacks are limiting the coop and run to rear yards and requiring them to be setback 10 feet from the lot line. These standards are consistent with how the City Code regulates other accessory structures. Staff is also proposing that standards be enacted requiring chickens be provided with a minimum of four square feet within the coop/run, the coop/run be enclosed and soundly constructed, coop/run be well ventilated, feed be kept in rodent-proof containers, and that waste be disposed of on a weekly basis. Staff believes that these standards will help provide for the welfare of the chickens and minimizethe potential for the creation of nuisances. ALTERNATIVES Do nothing. This would limit chickens to agricultural properties over 10 acres. Allow chickens in areas zoned RR and 42. Allow chickens on parcels one acre or larger, and adopt general performance standards and permit requirements. 4) Allow chickens on all lots with single-family residential as the principal use, and adopt general performance standards and permit requirements. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Alternative 4. Staff believes any residential property that can meet basic setbacks can accommodate hens without creating a nuisance for surrounding properties, and that adopting general performance standards will provide a mechanism staff can use to address chickens that do become nuisances. The text of the proposed ordinance is provided below. Sec. a-30(bX23) Chicken Permit. . ...$25.00 Sec.5-126 -129. - Reserved ARTICLE V. - Chickens l) 2) 3) Backyard Chickens February 19,2019 Page 6 Sec. 5-130. - Definitions. In this article, the following terms have the stated meanings: "Chicken or domesticated chicken" means a subspecies of the species Gallus domesticus. "Coopo' means the structure for the keeping or housing of chickens. "Hen" means a female chicken. ttRooster" means a male chicken. 66Run" means an enclosed and covered area attached to the coop where the chickens can roam unsupervised. Sec.5-L31. - Purpose of Ordinance. The purpose of this ordinance is to provide minimum standards for the keeping of domesticated chickens. This article enables residents to keep chickens on a non-commercial basis as an accessory use to a residence, while limiting the adverse effects of the activity on surrounding properties. Such adverse effects can include noise, odors, unsanitary conditions, attraction of predators, chickens running at large, unsightly conditions, and similar adverse conditions. Sec.5-132. - Permit required 1) No person shall maintain or keep domesticated chickens without a permit issued by the city. Properties exceeding 10 acres where agriculture is a permitted use are exempt from the permit requirements of this article. 2) Application for a permit required by article shall be made to the city upon a form furnished by the city. A nonrefundable fee in the amount established by resolution shall be paid to the city when the application if filed. 3) In order to be issued a permit the applicant must: a. Have as the principal use of the property a single-family residential structure. b. Submit a notarized statement to the city stating that they have informed all adjoining neighbors that they intend to keep chickens. c. Not have had a prior chicken permit revoked by the City of Chanhassen. d. Meet the density and setback requirements listed in Sec.5-133. Sec. 5-133. - Density and Setbacks 1) No person is permitted to keep more than the following numbers of chickens on any lot within the city, based upon the size of the parcel: a. Lots smaller than one acre: 4 chickens b. Lots one acre or larger but smaller than two and one-half acres: 8 chickens Backyard Chickens February 19,2019 PageT c. Lots two and one-half acres or larger but smaller than ten acres: 16 chickens d. Lots larger than ten acres: No limit 2) The coop and affached run must be located in the rear yard and must be setback a minimum of 25 feet from all adjacent residences that are not occupied by the applicant and be setback a minimum of 10 feet from any lot line. a. On corner lots, coops and runs may not be located in any yard with street frontage. b. On double frontage lots, coops and runs may not be located in any required front yard. Sec. 5-134. - Standards of Practice The following standards of practice apply to all properties governed by this article: I) No roosters or crowing hens are allowed. 2') No outdoor butchering of chickens is allowed. 3) Chickens must be kept in a coop or run whenever they are unsupervisedl however when supervised they are allowed in a fenced area. 4) The coop must: a. Be maintained in good condition. b. Be enclosed and constructed of durable materials to prevent entry by predators or the escape ofchickens. c. Be built to protect the chickens from extreme heat or cold. d. Provide at least 4 square feet per chicken. 5) The run must: a. Be maintained in good condition. b. Be affached to the coop. c. Be enclosed and constructed of durable materials to prevent entry by predators or the escape of chickens. d. Provide at least 4 square feet per chicken. 6) The chicken's living area must be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition. 7) Odor shall not be perceptible at the lot line. 8) All stored manure shall be placed within a fully enclosed container. All manure not used for composting or fertilizing shall be removed weekly. The coop and run must be kept free from trash and accumulated manure. 9) Feed must be stored in a rodent proof container inside of a structure. 10) No person may keep any chickens inside a house. Sec. 5-135. - Revocation of Permit A chicken permit issued under this article may be revoked by the Community Development Director if it is determined after an inspection by city staff that the permit holder has not maintained the standards set forth in Sec. 5-124 or that chickens are being kept in such a manner as to constitute a public nuisance. Backyard Chickens February 19,2019 Page 8 Sec. 5-136 - 145. - Reserved Sec. 20-1001. - Keeping. The following animals may be kept in the city: (1) Household pets are an allowed use in all zoning districts. (2) Horses in the A-2, RR and RSF zoning districts in accordance with chapter 5, article III. (3) Honey bees in accordance with Chapter 5, article IV. (4) Chickens in accordance with Chapter 5, article V. (5) Farm animals are an allowed use on all farm property zoned A2 or RR, which permit agricultural use, with a minimum parcel area of l0 acres, except as otherwise specifically provided in the City Code. Farm animals may not be confined in a pen, feed lot or building within 100 feet of any residential dwelling not owned or leased by the farmer. (6) Wild animals may not be kept in the city. (7) Animals may only be kept for commercial purposes if authorized in the zoning district where the animals are located. (8) Animals may not be kept if they cause a nuisance or endanger the health or safety of the community. ATTACHMENTS 1) Survey of MN Cities 2) Chicken Essay G:\PLAN\City CodeV019V0l 9-01 Various\Chickens\Staff Reports Chickens.docx City Allowed Permit Required Min lot size Afton Yes Yes None Andover Rural Possible CUP None Anoka Yes No None Apple Valley Ag only No None Arden Hills Ag only No None Blaine Ag only No None Bloomington Yes No None Brooklyn Park Ag only No 5 acres Bursnville Yes Yes None Centerville Yes Yes 10,000 sq. ft. Champlin Ag only No None Chanhassen Ag only No 10 acres Chaska Ag only No None Columbia Heights Silent NA NA Coon Rapids Yes Yes None Cottage Grove Yes Yes 3 acres Dayton Ag only CUP 90,000 sq. ft. Eagan Yes Yes None Edina Yes No None Elk River Yes No 2.5 acres Falcon Heights Yes Yes None Fridely Yes Yes None Ham Lake Ag only No 5 acres Inver Gover Heights Yes Yes None Lake Elmo Yes Yes .5 acres Lexington Yes Yes 10,000 sq. ft. Lino Lakes Ag only No None Little Canada No NA NA Mahtomedi Yes Yes NA Maple Grove Yes No 1 acre Maplewood Yes Yes Not R-1s Mendota Heights Yes Yes No Minneapolis Yes Yes No Minnetonka Yes No No Montrose Ag only No None Mounds View Yes Yes No New Brighton Yes No No New Hope Yes No No Newport Yes Yes No North Oaks Silent NA NA North Saint Paul No NA NA Oakdale Yes Yes No Otsego Yes Yes No Plymouth Ag only No None Prior Lake Ag only No None Ramsey Yes No .75 acres Richfield Yes No No Robbinsdale Yes No No Rosemount Yes No No Roseville Yes No No Saint Anthony Ag only No None Saint Paul Park Yes Yes No Savage Yes Yes No Shakopee Yes No No Shoreview Yes Yes R1, RE district Shorewood Yes No None St. Michael Ag only No None St. Paul Yes Yes No Stillwater Yes Yes RA, RB district Vadnais Heights Yes Yes No West St. Paul Yes No No White Bear Lake Yes Yes No Setbacks Bird Limit 25' from res structures 5 per .5 acres 100' from non-owner res None accessory building 4 None None None None None None 50' from non-owner res 4 None None No front/side yard 4 25' form non-owner res, 15' lot line 4 None 1 per acre 100' from non-owner res NA None Sliding NA NA 30' from non-owner res, rear only, 10' lot line 4 110' from non-owner res, rear yard, 50' property line 4 None None 25' from res structures, 10' rear, 5' side 5 None 4 25' from res structures, rear yard, 10' lot line 12 20' form res structures 4 30' from lot lines 6 None None 25' from res, 10 from lot lines 3 20' from non-owner res, rear, gen setbacks 4-22 (sliding) 25' from res, rear, 15' from lot lines 4 None Sliding NA NA 20' from res, rear, 5' from lot lines 6 None 6 per .5 acre rear/side, 5' from lot lines 10 rear/side, 10' from lot lines 4 20' from non-owner res, rear 6 not front 1 per .1 acre None None 20' from res, 20' from lot lines 8 25' from res, 5' from lot lines 6 None 3 50' from res, 10' from lot lines 4 NA NA NA NA No None Double setback of principal building 1 per .1 acre None None None Sliding 30' from res, 10' from lot lines 16 +4 per .25 None 3 None 2 None 3 Standard None 500' from platted land None 50' from res, rear, 4 50' from res, 10' lot lines 4 50' from res, 10' lot lines 5 30' from res 4 Buildable area 6 None Sliding Standard 15 Standard 5 50' from res, 20' lot lines, rear 5 100' from non-owner res 4 50' from res, 5' lot lines, rear 4 Other Provisions No roosters, no commercial No sewer or water No rooster, not a large, right to terminate Note: From March 2018 community News letter No roosters, no killing, not at large, no dwelling/garage No roosters, not at large, kill only in R1-a No roosters No roosters, no killing, not at large, no dwelling/garage Written consent of neighbors, no roosters, not at large No roosters, no killing, not at large, no dwelling/garage No roosters, no killing, not at large, no dwelling/garage No roosters, no killing, not at large, no dwelling/garage, leg band id No roosters, no killing, not at large, may impound No roosters, no killing, no dwelling/garage no breeding, 350' public notice, No roosters, no at large, no dwelling/garage, 150' public notice No roosters, no outdoor killing, no at large, no dwelling/garage, 150' public notice (70% consent) No roosters, no breeding, need training no roosters, no killing, 100% neighbor consent, leg bands no roosters, no killing, roosters need special permit, more than 6 need special permit, no killing, no at large no roosters, need fence no roosters, no killing, not at large, 350' public notice w/ council approval no roosters, no killing, not at large, inform city no roosters, can get council permit for more no roosters, no breeding, consent of 75% of neighbors within 150' consent of 75% of neighbors within 150' no roosters not at large need City Council permit for more than 2 or roosters not at large, may impound and kill Silent so allow, treat coup as shed. Council can grant special permit. no roosters, no breeding, no killing, not at large, no dwelling/garage no roosters, not at large, may impound and kill no roosters, not at large, may impound and kill no roosters, no killing, not at large no roosters, not at large no roosters, two tiers of permits, for tier 2 need consent of 75% of neighbors within 150' no roosters, no killing, not at large, not in house no roosters, no killing, no dwelling/garage no roosters no roosters, no breeding, not at large, Hello Mr. Walters! Thanks so much for filling me in on the phone yesterday on the City Council's plans to vote on backyard chickens at its meeting in March. Our family is thrilled at the possibility, and are sorry to have missed the public hearing on this. Please let council members know that we sincerely hope the measure passes and encourage all to vote in favor. Fresh eggs at home and the experience for the kids (and us adults alike) will be wonderful! We have well over one acre and will be diligent in following all guidelines and permit requirements. Thanks again for your help, and please pass this along to council members. Sincerely, Jon and Kalley Yanta and family 365 Pleasant View Rd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 OITY OF OHA['I[IASSI[{ Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Planning Commission MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner February 19,2019 Community Commercial District Formatting PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapters 20 of the City Code." ISSUE The "CC" Community Commercial District is formatted differently than every other zoning district within the city. SUMMARY When the city established the "CC" Community Commercial District in2009, the ordinance was passed without its sections being broken into subsections. In the interests of improving the Code's readability, staff proposes adding subsections to this section of the City Code. This change would bring this section of the code in line with how the city's other zoning districts are structured. RELEVANT CITY CODE Chapter 20, Article XVIII-A. - "CC" Community Commercial District. This article stipulates the intent, permitted uses, pe(mitted accessory uses, conditional uses, and lot requirements and setbacks of the Community Commercial District. ANALYSIS Uniform formatting helps make the City Code more navigable. The more reference points that are present within the Code, the easier it is for staff to direct people to specific passages. Additionally, listing subsections makes it easier to amend the City Code as ordinance amendments can target specific subsections for revisions, rather than needing to work at the section level. PH 952.227.l I 00 . www.ci.cha nhassen.mn.us . FX 952.227.1 I I 0 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: 77OO MARKET BOULEVARD .PO BOX I4T.CHANHASSEN'MINNESOTA 553I7 Community Commercial District Formatting February 19,2019 Page2 ALTERNATIVES 1) Do nothing. The difference in formatting does not impact the functionality of the City Code. 2\ Amend the city's Community Commercial District to bring its formatting in line with the other zoning district's RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Altern ative 2. The proposed ordinance would be as follows: ARTICLE XVIII-A. - ''CC'' COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Sec.20-741. - Intent. (a) The intent of the Community Commercial District is to provide for moderate to large- sized commercial development. These large-scale commercial and office users need high visibility along arterial roads. While smaller scale ancillary commercial uses may be permitted integral to the principal use, the primary use of a building shall be medium to large-type users with a minimum tenant space of 15,000 square feet. The intent of the district is to accommodate larger uses. The creation of multi-tenant, small user, strip centers is prohibited. (b) Location criteria for Community Commercial uses are: Access to arterial and collector streets, preferably at intersections with collector and arterial streets; moderate to large- sized sites; public water and sewer service; environmental features such as soils and topography suitable for compact development; and adequate buffering by physical features or adjacent uses to protect nearby residential development. (c) The total building area on a single level or floor for an individual use shall be no more than 65,000 square feet. Sec.20-742. - Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in a $CC)' District: (1) Arts and crafts suPPlY store. (2) Automotive parts and accessories. (3) Bookstore. (4) Building supply center. (5) Consumer electronics and appliance store. (6) Drugstore. Community Commercial District Formatting February 19,2019 Page 3 (7) Furniture and home furnishings. (8) Garden center. (9) Grocery store. (10) Health and dental clinics. (11) Hobby, toy and game stores. (12) Office. (13) Office equipment and supply. (14) Personal services. (15) Sewing and fabric store. (16) Sporting goods. Sec.20-743. - Permitted accessory uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in a"CC" District: (1) Antennas. (2) Automatic teller machines (ATMs). (3) Parking lots and ramps. (a) Signs. (5) Temporary outdoor sales and events (subject to the requirements of Section20-964). (6) Utility services. Sec.20-744. - Conditional use. hefollowingareconditionalusesina.(CC,'District: (1) Drive-through facilities. (2) Gun range, indoor (only in conjunction with and accessory to a sporting goods store). (3) Screened outdoor storage. Sec.20-745. - Lot requirements and setbacks. The following minimum requirements shall be observed in a "CC" District subject to additionat requirements, exceptions and modification set forth in this chapter: aJ Community Commercial District Formatting February 19,2019 Page 4 (1) Minimum lot area: One acre. (2) Minimum lot depth: 100 feet. (3) Minimum lot frontage: 100 feet. (4) Maximum lot coverage: 70 percent. (5) Maximum building height: Four stories; 50 feet. (6) Setbacks: Building/parking: a. Front: 25 feet. b. Side: 10 feet. c. Rear: 10 feet. d. Parking setback exemptions: i. There is no minimum setback when it abuts, without being separated by a street, another off-street parking area. ii. Parking setbacks may be reduced to 10 feet along public streets if the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the city that 100 percent (100%) screening is provided at least five feet above the adjacent parking lot. Secs. 20-74 6-20-7 50. - Reserved. ATTACIIMENT Community Commercial Area Map g:\plan\city codeVOl9U0l9-0 I various\cc formating\staff report cc formating.docx 4 Community Commercial District OITI OT OHAI{IIASSIN Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomonow Planning Commission MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner February 19,2019 Continuing Care Retirement Facilities MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the City Code." ISSUE The performance standards for continuing care retirement facilities mention medium and high- density districts, but they are only listed as permitted uses in R-8 - Mixed Medium Density Districts. This discrepancy should be reconciled. SUMMARY Between its initial draft on June 5, 2012 and its adopted form on October 22,2012, the proposed ordinance was altered in three significant ways: l) continuing care retirement facilities were changed from a conditional to a permitted use; 2) density limits were changed from 10 dwelling units an acre to a maximum gross density of 16 beds per acre; and, 3) it was only listed as allowed in the R-8 district, rather than the initial R-8, R-12, R-16, and OI districts. Staff believes that the first two changes were deliberate refinements of the initially proposed ordinance, but that the failure to list continuing care retirement facilities as a permitted use within the R-12 and R-16 districts was an unintentional oversite. Staffproposed adding these facilities to the list of permitted uses for the R-12 and R-l6 districts to correct this omission. RELEVANT CITY CODE Sec. 1-2. Defines the term "continuing care retirement facilities". Sec.20-652. Lists continuing care retirement facility as a permitted use in the R-8 district. PH 952.227.1 I 00 . www.ci.chan hassen.mn.us . FX 952.227. I I I 0 77OO MARKET BOULEVARD .PO BOX I47 .CHANHASSEN .MINNESOTA 55317 Continuing Care Retirement Facilities February 19,2079 Page2 Sec. 20-965. Establishes performance standards for continuing care retirement facilities, and states that they should be located in medium or high-density residential districts with a gross density net exceeding l6 beds per acre. BACKGROUND On June 5,2012, staff presented an issue paper on continuing care retirement facilities to the Planning Commission. This report proposed definitions and suggested making them conditional uses within the R-8, R-12, R-16, and OI districts with a maximum density of 10 dwelling units per acre. On June 6,2072, staff submitted an issue paper on continuing care retirement facilities to the Senior Commission and requested comments. On June 11,2072, staff presented an issue paper on continuing care retirement facilities to the City Council. The City Council requested staff conduct additional research on how these facilities were treated by surrounding cities. On October 2,2072, a proposed ordinance amendment to the Planning Commission, which established definitions related to continuing care retirement facilities, listed them as permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district, and established performance standards for these facilities was tabled.* On October 16,2012, a proposed ordinance amendment to the Planning Commission, which established definitions related to continuing care retirement facilities, listed them as permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district, and established performance standards for these facilities was presented to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission recorlmended approval.* Ordinance No. 574 was passed by the City Council on October 22,2012, establishing definitions related to continuing care retirement facilities, listed them as permitted uses in the R-8 zoning district, and established performance standards for these facilities.* *This code amendment was linked to and processed in conjunction with Planning Case2012-15: Beehive Home's Assisted Living Facility. ANALYSIS The City has numerous senior-oriented apartments located within its residential districts, and as the population ages, there is a growing demand for facilities that can provide a continuum of care from independent to assisted living. Many of these types of facilities meet the city's definition of continuing care retirement facilities. Currently, any continuing care retirement facility would need to either be located in an R-8 "Mixed Medium Density District" or within a Planned Unit Development, like the recently approved Riley Crossing (formerly Mission Hills) project. There is no reason not to allow continuing care retirement facilities within the R-l2 and R-16 "High Continuing Care Retirement Facilities February 19,2019 Page 3 Density Residential Districts" and staff believes the ordinance's failure to list these facilities in those districts was an elror of omission. Staff believes that the ordinance's failure to list continuing care retirement facilities as a permitted use within the R-12 and R-l6 districts is the result of the fact that the ordinance proceeded concurrently with the Beehive Home's Assisted Living Facility, a continuing care retirement facility that was requesting to locate within an R-8 district. Sometimes when a code amendment is drafted in response to a request to allow a specific use, the included provisions are very narrowly constructed to meet the needs of the specific request. It is likely that when the ordinance was revised between its hypothetical iteration in June 2012 and its final form responding to a direct request to allow these facilities in the R-8 district, its broader intent was overlooked. As adopted, the ordinance that governs continuing care retirement facilities lists a maximum density of 16 beds per acre, a number that is consistent with the upper threshold of density permitted in areas guided for Residential High Density, which permits densities of 8 to l6 units per acre. Additionally, the adopted performance standards for continuing care retirement facilities specifically states, "The facility shall be located in a medium or high-density district..." This means that the only change that would be needed to permit continuing care retirement facilities within the R-12 and R-16 districts is adding these facilities to the list of permitted uses since the rest of the regulatory framework already contains provisions that accommodate the placement of these facilities within high-density residential districts. ALTERNATIVES l) Do nothing. PUDs can accommodate this use in higher density districts. 2) Amend the City Code to list continuing care retirement facilities as permitted uses in the R-12 and R-16 districts. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Alternative2 as it is in line with the original intent of Ordinance 574 and there is no compelling reason not to permit continuing care retirement facilities within high-density residential districts. The proposed ordinance would read as follows: Sec.20-652. - Permitted uses. The following are permitted uses in an R-8 district: (1) Townhouses, two-family, multifamilydwellings. (2) Public and private parks and open spaces. (3) Utility services. (4) Temporary real estate office and model home. (5) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter. J Continuing Care Retirement Facilities February 19,2019 Page 4 (6) Continuing care retirement facility, subject to the requirements of section 20-965. (7) Adult daycare, subject to the requirements of section20-966. Sec.20-672. - Permitted uses. The following are permitted uses in an "R-12" district: (1) Townhouses, two-family dwellings and multifamily dwellings. (2) Public and private parks and open space. (3) Utility services. (4) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter. (5) Adult daycare, subject to the requirements of section20-966. (6) Continuing care retirement facitity, subject to the requirements of section 20-965. Sec. 20-681. - Permitted uses. The following are permitted uses in an "R-16" district: (1) Multifamilydwellings. (2) Public and private parks and open space. (3) Utility services. (4) Antennas as regulated by article XXX of this chapter. (5) Adult day carc, subject to the requirements of section 20-966. (6) Continuing care retirement facility, subject to the requirements of section 20-965. g:\plan\city codeVO19\20l9-01 various\cont. care ret. facility\staffreport continuing care retirement facility.docx 4 OITY OT OIIAI{HASSII'I Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Planning Commission MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner February 19,2019 Referenced Sign Code MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the City Code." ISSUE Sec.20-1270 of the City Code requires that all signs meet the design and construction standards set forth in Chapter 4 of the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code. The city does not have a copy of this book. SUMMARY The currently referenced sign design and construction standards are derived from a 22-year-old manual that the city does not have on file. It is unlikely that most sign designers and contractors have access to this book, and in practice, the city's building ofEcials use the Minnesota State Building Code when reviewing sign permits. Staff recommends that the sign code be amended to reference the Appendix H of the lnternational Building Code instead of the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code. RELEVAI\T CITY CODE Sec.20-1270. - Uniform Sign Code. Requires signs to meet the design and construction standards of the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code. BACKGROUND The city attomey's office contacted the city to ask if we had a copy of the reference book available. Staff was unable to find a copy of the book within City Hall. PH 952.227.1 I 00 . www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us . FX 952.227. I I I 0 77OO I'4ARKET BOULEVARD .PO BOX I4T.CHANHASSEN .MINNESOTA 55317 Referenced Sign Code February 19,2019 Page2 ANALYSIS While the 1997 Uniform Sign Code does have detailed sign construction standards, Appendix H of the International Building Code also has provisions that ensure signs will not pose a risk to life, health, property, and public welfare. The city currently has numerous copies of the Intemational Building Code on file and both the city's building inspectors and sign contractors are familiar with its requirements. Adopting a separate manual to govern sign construction and installation needlessly complicates sign permit review. ALTERNATIVES l) Do nothing and purchase a copy of the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code. 2) Amend the city's sign ordinance to adopt Appendix H of the International Building Code rather than the 1997 edition of the Uniform Sign Code. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Alternative 2.The proposed ordinance would read as follows: Sec.20-1270._@CompliancewithMinnesotaStateBuildingCode The design and construction standards as set forth in Appendix H of the International Building Cod as may be amended, are adoPted. ATTACHMENT l) Appendix H of the International Building Code g:\plan\city code\20 19\20 I 94 I various\sign design standards\sign code reference staff report.docx 2 OITY O[ OIIAI{IIASSTI'I Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Planning Commission MacKenzie Young-Walters, Associate Planner February 19,2019 Trash Container Storage MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJ: PROPOSED MOTION: "The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the City Code." ISSUE Section 20-912@) exempts covered garbage cans in agricultural and single-family districts from the prohibition on exterior incineration of trash or garbage. SUMMARY The City Code has two provisions that stipulate where garbage containers may be stored; one is designed to govern commercial, industrial, and multi-family users, and the other is a universal provision. In order to avoid applyng the section of the code that governs other uses to single- family districts, a clause was added exernpting single-family districts from those standards; however, the storage portion of the ordinance also contains the provision prohibiting the exterior incineration of trash. The result is that both the storage portion of the ordinance and the prohibition on exterior incarnation do not apply to single-family districts. Staff proposes amending this section of the code to apply the prohibition on the exterior incineration of trash to single-family districts. RELEVANT CITY CODE Sec. 16-21. - Container storage. Requires garbage and refuse containers to be located out of public view except on day ofpick up. Sec.20-912. - Storage of garbage and trash. Does not permit incineration of trash or garbage and prohibits exterior storage of trash or garbage unless screened. Also exernpts detached single- family residential districts from these provisions. PH 952.227.1 I 00 . www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us . FX 952.227. I I I 0 77OO MARKET BOULEVARD .PO BOX I4T.CHANHASSEN .MINNESOTA 55317 Trash Container Storage Code Amendment February 19,2019 Page2 ANALYSIS Section 20-912(a) of the City Code requires that trash or garbage be stored either in an enclosed accessory building or in closed containers within a total screened area. It also prohibits the exterior incineration of trash or garbage. Section 20-912(b) states that Section 20-912(a) does not apply to covered garbage cans in agricultural and single-family districts. Staff believes the intent of Siction z}-gl2(b) was to exempt single-family homes and agricultural properties from the potentially onerous storage requirements of Section20-912(a), instead leaving their trash storage iegulated by Section 16-21 which simply requires that garbage and refuses containers be located oul of public view except on day of pick up. However, since the provision prohibiting incineration is located within Section 20-912(a), Section 20-912(b) also exempts single-family and agricultural districts from the that prohibition. Staff recommends that Section 20-912(a)'s two provisions be separated out and that single- family and agricultural districts only be exempted from the storage portion of the ordinance. ALTERNATIVES l) Do nothing. To date, no one has made the case that they are allowed to burn covered garbage cans. 2) A-"na Sec.20-912 to only exempt covered garbage containers from the enclosed storage provisions. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Altern ative 2. The proposed ordinance would read as follows: Sec. 20-912. - Storage of garbage and trash. (a) No exterior incineration of trash or garbage is (b) No exterior storage of trash or garbage is permissible except in an accessory building enclosed by walls and roof, or in closed containers within a totally screened areas. (c) Subsection (a b) does not apply to covered garbage cans in agricultural and single- family districts. g:\plan\city codepo19\2019{l various\trash storage\trash storage staffreport 021919.docx 2 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. XXX AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4, LICENSE, PERMIT AND ADMINISTRAIVE FEES; CHAPTER 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL; AND CHAPTER 20, ZONING OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: Section 1. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 4-30(b)(23) to read as follows: 23. Chicken Permit….. $25.00 Section 2. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 5-126 to Section 5- 145 to read as follows: Sec. 5-126 – 129. – Reserved. ARTICLE V. – Chickens Sec. 5-130. – Definitions. In this article, the following terms have the stated meanings: “Chicken or domesticated chicken” means a subspecies of the species Gallus domesticus. “Coop” means the structure for the keeping or housing of chickens. “Hen” means a female chicken. “Rooster” means a male chicken. “Run” means an enclosed and covered area attached to the coop where the chickens can roam unsupervised. Sec. 5-131. - Purpose of Ordinance. The purpose of this ordinance is to provide minimum standards for the keeping of domesticated chickens. This article enables residents to keep chickens on a non-commercial basis as an accessory use to a residence, while limiting the adverse effects of the activity on surrounding properties. Such adverse effects can include noise, odors, unsanitary conditions, attraction of predators, chickens running at large, unsightly conditions, and similar adverse conditions. 2 Sec. 5-132. - Permit required. 1) No person shall maintain or keep domesticated chickens without a permit issued by the city. Properties exceeding 10 acres where agriculture is a permitted use are exempt from the permit requirements of this article. 2) Application for a permit required by article shall be made to the city upon a form furnished by the city. A nonrefundable fee in the amount established by ordinance shall be paid to the city when the application if filed. 3) In order to be issued a permit the applicant must: a. Have a lot one acre or larger. b. Have as the principal use of the property a single-family residential structure. c. Submit a notarized statement to the city stating that they have informed all adjoining neighbors that they intend to keep chickens. d. Not have had a prior chicken permit revoked by the City of Chanhassen. e. Meet the density and setback requirements listed in Sec. 5-133. Sec. 5-133. - Density and Setbacks. 1) No person is permitted to keep more than the following numbers of chickens on any lot within the city, based upon the size of the parcel: a. Lots one acre or larger but smaller than two and one-half acres: 8 chickens b. Lots two and one-half acres or larger but smaller than ten acres: 16 chickens c. Lots larger than ten acres: No limit 2) The coop and attached run must be located in the rear yard and must be set back a minimum of 25 feet from all adjacent residences that are not occupied by the applicant, and be set back a minimum of 10 feet from any lot line. a. On corner lots, coops and runs may not be located in any yard with street frontage. b. On double frontage lots, coops and runs may not be located in any required front yard. Sec. 5-134. - Standards of Practice. The following standards of practice apply to all properties governed by this article: 1) No roosters or crowing hens are allowed. 2) No outdoor butchering of chickens is allowed. 3) Chickens must be kept in a coop or run whenever they are unsupervised; however when supervised they are allowed in a fenced area. 4) The coop must: a. Be maintained in good condition. b. Be enclosed and constructed of durable materials to prevent entry by predators or the escape of chickens. c. Be built to protect the chickens from extreme heat or cold. d. Provide at least 4 square feet per chicken. 5) The run must: a. Be maintained in good condition. b. Be attached to the coop. c. Be enclosed and constructed of durable materials to prevent entry by predators or the escape of chickens. 3 d. Provide at least 4 square feet per chicken. 6) The chicken’s living area must be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition. 7) Odor shall not be perceptible at the lot line. 8) All stored manure shall be placed within a fully enclosed container. All manure not used for composting or fertilizing shall be removed weekly. The coop and run must be kept free from trash and accumulated manure. 9) Feed must be stored in a rodent-proof container inside of a structure. 10) No person may keep any chickens inside a house. Sec. 5-135. - Revocation of Permit. A chicken permit issued under this article may be revoked by the Community Development Director if it is determined after an inspection by city staff that the permit holder has not maintained the standards set forth in Sec. 5-134 or that chickens are being kept in such a manner as to constitute a public nuisance. Sec. 5-136 - 145. – Reserved. Section 3. Section 20-652(6) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows: (6) Continuing care retirement facility, subject to the requirements of Section 20-965. Section 4. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 20-672(6) to read as follows: (6) Continuing care retirement facility, subject to the requirements of Section 20-965. Section 5. The Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding Section 20-681(6) to read as follows: (6) Continuing care retirement facility, subject to the requirements of Section 20-965. Section 6. Section 20-741 to Section 20-750 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows: ARTICLE XVIII-A. - "CC" COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Sec. 20-741. - Intent. (a) The intent of the Community Commercial District is to provide for moderate to large- sized commercial development. These large-scale commercial and office users need high visibility along arterial roads. While smaller scale ancillary commercial uses may be permitted integral to the principal use, the primary use of a building shall be medium to large-type users with a minimum tenant space of 15,000 square feet. The intent of the district is to accommodate larger uses. The creation of multi-tenant, small user, strip centers is prohibited. 4 (b) Location criteria for Community Commercial uses are: Access to arterial and collector streets, preferably at intersections with collector and arterial streets; moderate to large- sized sites; public water and sewer service; environmental features such as soils and topography suitable for compact development; and adequate buffering by physical features or adjacent uses to protect nearby residential development. (c) The total building area on a single level or floor for an individual use shall be no more than 65,000 square feet. Sec. 20-742. - Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in a “CC” District: (1) Arts and crafts supply store. (2) Automotive parts and accessories. (3) Bookstore. (4) Building supply center. (5) Consumer electronics and appliance store. (6) Drugstore. (7) Furniture and home furnishings. (8) Garden center. (9) Grocery store. (10) Health and dental clinics. (11) Hobby, toy and game stores. (12) Office. (13) Office equipment and supply. (14) Personal services. (15) Sewing and fabric store. (16) Sporting goods. Sec. 20-743. - Permitted accessory uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in a “CC” District: (1) Antennas. (2) Automatic teller machines (ATMs). (3) Parking lots and ramps. 5 (4) Signs. (5) Temporary outdoor sales and events (subject to the requirements of Section 20-964). (6) Utility services. Sec. 20-744. - Conditional use. The following are conditional uses in a “CC” District: (1) Drive-through facilities. (2) Gun range, indoor (only in conjunction with and accessory to a sporting goods store). (3) Screened outdoor storage. Sec. 20-745. - Lot requirements and setbacks. The following minimum requirements shall be observed in a “CC” District subject to additional requirements, exceptions and modification set forth in this chapter: (1) Minimum lot area: One acre. (2) Minimum lot depth: 100 feet. (3) Minimum lot frontage: 100 feet. (4) Maximum lot coverage: 70 percent. (5) Maximum building height: Four stories; 50 feet. (6) Setbacks: Building/parking: a. Front: 25 feet. b. Side: 10 feet. c. Rear: 10 feet. d. Parking setback exemptions: i. There is no minimum setback when it abuts, without being separated by a street, another off-street parking area. ii. Parking setbacks may be reduced to 10 feet along public streets if the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the city that 100 percent (100%) screening is provided at least five feet above the adjacent parking lot. Secs. 20-746—20-750. - Reserved. Section 7. Section 20-912 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 20-912. - Storage of garbage and trash. 6 (a) No exterior incineration of trash or garbage is permissible. (b) No exterior storage of trash or garbage is permissible except in an accessory building enclosed by walls and roof, or in closed containers within a totally screened area. (c) Subsection (b) does not apply to covered garbage cans in agricultural and single- family districts. Section 8. Section 20-1001 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 20-1001. - Keeping. The following animals may be kept in the city: (1) Household pets are an allowed use in all zoning districts. (2) Horses in the A-2, RR and RSF zoning districts in accordance with Chapter 5, Article III. (3) Honey bees in accordance with Chapter 5, Article IV. (4) Chickens in accordance with Chapter 5, Article V. (5) Farm animals are an allowed use on all farm property zoned A2 or RR, which permit agricultural use, with a minimum parcel area of 10 acres, except as otherwise specifically provided in the City Code. Farm animals may not be confined in a pen, feed lot or building within 100 feet of any residential dwelling not owned or leased by the farmer. (6) Wild animals may not be kept in the city. (7) Animals may only be kept for commercial purposes if authorized in the zoning district where the animals are located. (8) Animals may not be kept if they cause a nuisance or endanger the health or safety of the community. Section 9. Section 20-1270 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read as follows: Sec. 20-1270. – Compliance with Minnesota State Building Code The design and construction standards as set forth in Appendix H of the International Building Code, as may be amended, are adopted. Section 10. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of March, 2019 by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor (Summary Ordinance XXX published in the Chanhassen Villager on [insert date]) 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. XXX AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1, GENERAL PROVISIONS; CHAPTER 4, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 4, LICENSE, PERMIT AND ADMINISTRAIVE FEES; CHAPTER 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL; AND CHAPTER 20, ZONING OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE The purpose of these code amendments are as follows: Amend Section 4-30(b)(23) to establish a $25.00 chicken permit fee; and Amend Section 5-126 to Section 5-129 to reserve space for future amendments; and Amend Section 5-130 to define the terms chicken or domesticated chicken, coop, hen, rooster, and run within Article V.-Chickens; and Amend Section 5-131 to state that the purpose of the chicken ordinance is to establish requirements for keeping chickens within the city and mitigate the potential adverse effects of keeping chickens; and Amend Section 5-132 to require a permit for keeping chickens and establish that to receive a permit, an applicant must submit a fee and form, have a lot one acre or larger, have a principal use of the property a single-family residential structure, notify neighbors, not have a prior permit revoked by the city, and meet the city’s density and setback requirements; and Amend Section 5-133 to limit the number of chickens allowed based on property size and establish setbacks for coops and runs; and Amend Section 5-134 to establish standards of practice for keeping chickens; and Amend Section 5-135 to state that a chicken permit may be revoked if the permit holder violates the standards of practice for keeping chickens or if the chickens are found to constitute a nuisance; and Add Section 20-136 to Section 20-145 to reserve space for future amendments; and Amend Section 20-652(6) to reference the requirements of section 20-965; and Amend Section 20-672(6) to permit continuing care retirement facilities, subject the requirements of section 20-965; and 2 Amend Section 20-681(6) to permit continuing care retirement facilities, subject the requirements of section 20-965; and Amend Section 20-741 to Section 20-750 to organize and format the city’s Community Commercial District in a manner similar to the city’s’ other zoning districts; and Amend Section 20-912 to address a clause that exempted agricultural and single-family districts from the city’s prohibition on the exterior incineration of trash or garbage; and Amend Section 20-1001 to allow for the keeping of chickens in accordance with Chapter 5, Article V; and Amend Section 20-1270 to require commercial signs to conform to the design and construction standards set forth in Appendix H of the International Building Code. A printed copy of Ordinance No. XXX is available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Manager/Clerk. PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION this 11th day of March, 2019, by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen. (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on [insert date]) CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Approve Chanhassen Farmers' Market Agreement Section CONSENT AGENDA Item No: D.6. Prepared By Jerry Ruegemer, Recreation Superintendent File No: RA­648 PROPOSED MOTION "The Chanhassen City Council approves the 2019 agreement with the Chanhassen Farmers' Market to coordinate a farmers' market every Saturday from 9am­1pm at City Center Park from June 1 through October 12, 2019." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. BACKGROUND The Chanhassen Farmers' Market has been coordinated and managed by community volunteers since 2004 and has been a popular Saturday morning destination for residents to pick up fresh produce, flowers, and other items. Staff has had conversations with Laurie Lorenz who coordinated the 2018 farmers' market and has agreed to coordinate again in 2019.  The agreement between the City of Chanhassen and the Chanhassen Farmers' Market has been updated and Ms. Lorenz has also updated rules, regulations, and vendor applications, which are also available on the Farmers' Market website and Facebook page. The attached map shows the designated area in City Center Park where vendors can set up to the sell their products, which has helped the farmers' market operate more efficiently.  RECOMMENDATION The Chanhassen City Council approves the 2019 agreement with the Chanhassen Farmers' Market to coordinate a farmers' market every Saturday from 9am­1pm at City Center Park from June 1 through October 12, 2019. ATTACHMENTS: Farmers' Market Agreement Farmers' Market Map Vendor Application Food Vendor Truck Application Charitable Organization Application 1 in ch = 30 feet CHANHASSEN FARMERS' MARKET CITY CENTER PARK APPROVED AREA ¯ 2019 Chanhassen Farmer’s Market Rules, Regulations and Application www.chanhassenfarmersmarket.org Please complete application to be reviewed for approval as a vendor. Completed applications should be e- mailed to chanhassenfarmersmarket@gmail.com. ALL VENDORS (NEW OR RETURNING) MUST HAVE THE APPLICATION FILLED OUT AND SUBMITTED TO US NO LATER THAN APRIL 30th, 2019. We will review applications beginning May 1st, 2019. We always give preference to returning seasonal vendors, but will also be reviewing new vendor applications as well. Keep in mind: our farmer’s market is a smaller market and we try not to have too many of one type of vendor, so there will be limits on vendors with the same or similar products. This way, each vendor has a better chance of selling their goods. We will let ALL applicants know by May 5th, 2019, whether or not they have been selected to be a vendor for the 2019 season. FEES: All fees must be paid in advance before stall spaces will be assigned. Stall fees are listed below under the “STALL FEES” section. Stall fee payments must be made by May 25th, 2019. We accept a variety of payment types: Paypal, Check, Money Order or Cash. Checks should be made out to “Chanhassen Farmer’s Market”. If you wish to pay via Paypal, let us know and we can send you an invoice. Payments can be sent to: Laurie Lorenz RE: Chanhassen Farmer’s Market 6395 132nd St. N White Bear Lake, MN 55110 TIME AND PLACE: Saturdays, June 1st through October 12th, 2019; 9:00 am – 1:00 pm at City Center Park, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The first parking lot north of 78th street will be reserved for the market. QUESTIONS? Ask the Market Managers. The Market Managers are Laurie Lorenz and Tessa Lorenz and both can be reached by calling (651) 271-4584 or E-mailing: chanhassenfarmersmarket@gmail.com . Applicant Contact Information Date: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Business Name: _____________________________________________________________________________ Primary Contact Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Cell Phone: ________________________________________________________________________________ Email Address: _____________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Business and Product Information Selling Privileges: Only members of the Chanhassen Farmer’s Market are extended selling privileges. Membership is included in the stall fee. What Can Be Sold: 1) Produce 2) Plants and flowers 3) Processed or Prepared Food 4) Handmade goods 5) Local business products approved by market representatives Products (Please list all products, products not listed cannot be sold): _________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ Address where products are grown/made: _______________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________ Minnesota Sales Tax ID Number (if applicable): ___________________________________________________ REQUIRED FORMS: ST-19 Minnesota Revenue Operator Certificate of Compliance Form Certificate of Liability Insurance with ‘Chanhassen Farmers’ Market, City Center Park, Chanhassen, MN 55317’ named as Certificate Holder Please Check the appropriate box for your vendor type and provide all additional information requested: Produce Fruits and Vegetables grown by Farmers on land within 50 miles of Chanhassen, Minnesota. Plants and Flowers Plants and cut flowers grown on land within 50 miles of Chanhassen, Minnesota. Plant sellers must grow bedding plants and potted plants from seed, plug, cutting, bulbs or bare root. No resale of prefinished plants is allowed. Transplanted plants must be grown to the point where the roots fill the pot (roots hold the soil when the pot is removed). Processed Food Those who sell processed food, which they have prepared. Processors are person or entities offering fresh food products (such as meats, seafood, ciders, baked goods, jams, etc.) that have added value to their product through some sort of “hands-on” processing (e.g., smoked or butcher meats, handmade candies, etc.). All processors’ permits and licenses shall be displayed whenever a processor is selling at the Chanhassen Farmers’ Market. Processors must produce their products in Minnesota or be Minnesota based. Processed food products should use ingredients from Minnesota farms as much as possible. The Chanhassen Farmers’ Market shall give stall preference to processors using ingredients from Minnesota farms or waters. These include raw agricultural products that have been processed by the vendor, or any product, the sale of which a government agency regulates. Examples are milk, cheese, oils, vinegars, meats, poultry, eggs, honey, soap, and herbal preparations. Agricultural products licensed, inspected or otherwise regulated by the federal government, the State of Minnesota, Carver County, or the City of Chanhassen may be sold only upon the Farmer’s Market’s receipt and acceptance of required documentation of compliance with all regulations. Vendors must abide by all applicable federal, state, and local health regulations. In addition, they must adhere to federal guidelines on all labels. If you are selling any canned, processed, or baked food items: Are these items made in a licensed and inspected commercial kitchen? (please circle) Yes No If yes, provide the name and address of the commercial kitchen: _____________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ If yes, you must provide a copy of your MN Dept. of Agriculture Retail Mobile Food Handler and/or applicable license with this application. Are these items prepared in your home? (please circle) Yes No If yes, you must provide a copy of your Cottage Food Producer Registration from the MN Dept. of Agriculture with this application. If you are selling any meat products: Are they USDA-inspected and approved? (please circle) Yes No If yes, you must provide a copy of applicable licenses. Prepared Food (Concessionaires) Prepared food vendors offer freshly made foods, available for sale and immediate consumption on-site at the Chanhassen Farmers’ Market. Prepared food vendors shall process and maintain all required state, county, and local permits. Prepared food vendors should use ingredients produced in Minnesota as much as possible. When selecting prepared food vendors, the Chanhassen Farmer’s Market will encourage vendors to provide a good variety of healthy goods, and will give preferences to vendors using ingredients produced in Minnesota. Certain vendors may be restricted due to contractual obligations of the farmers’ market. You must provide a copy of all applicable licenses. Handmade Goods Non-profit Organizations: Tax ID #: ________________________________ Community Booth: 501c’s can sign up for a booth at no charge once per season. Priority will be given to those organizations that reside in Chanhassen and/or support Chanhassen. Non-profit organizations may not sell anything. Organization will need to provide booth supplies: tent, table, chairs, etc. Stall Fees Full-season or Weekly vendor? (please circle below) Full-season fee per stall: $150 Weekly fee per stall: $25 Fees and Space Assignment: Stalls are approximately 10 x 10 feet in size. Limited stalls with access to electricity or room for vehicles are available. Returning vendors must return application and pay full fee by April, 30th, 2019 to reserve a stall as well as product exclusivity. Stall spaces for full-season vendors will be reserved for the full season. Weekly vendors must pay at least one week in advance to reserve a stall space. The Market Manager will assign stall spaces for all vendors. Number of stalls required: __________________ Stall space preference: _______________________________________________________________________ Do you need a space for a vehicle in your stall? (please circle) Yes No Do you need electricity? (please circle) Yes No Approximate arrival time each Saturday: ________________________________ Farmer’s Market Day Arrival/Departure Procedure: The market hours are from 9:00 am – 1:00 pm, each Saturday. Arrival and setup time will be 7:00 am to 8:45 am. All vendors must be ready for business by 9:00 am. For safety reasons the designated parking lot area for the market will be closed to ALL traffic starting at 9:00 am through 1:00 pm. Early take-down and departure before closing time will not be allowed. Exceptions may be made in case of emergency – please see the Market Manager. No sales should be made prior to 9:00 am. Please check the Saturdays you will be in attendance (full-time vendors must complete also): June 1 June 8 June 15 June 22 June 29 July 6 July 13 July 20 July 27 August 3 August 10 August 17 August 24 August 31 September 7 September 14 September 21 September 28 October 5 October 12 IMPORTANT: If you cannot attend a market you were originally scheduled to be at, you must notify the market manager one week in advance. Vendor Publicity Both the market and the vendor can benefit from promotion. We are regularly updating our website, planning social media efforts, and considering new forms of promotion. Please check the pieces of information that we may share with the public. We will not share any information that is not checked below: Website: ______________________________________________________________________ Facebook: _____________________________________________________________________ Twitter: ______________________________________________________________________ Instagram: ____________________________________________________________________ Other: ________________________________________________________________________ Adopt-a-Sign Program All full-season vendors will be required to participate in the Chanhassen Farmers’ Market Adopt-a-Sign Program. Each vendor will be given a sign promoting the Farmer’s Market that they will be responsible for the season. The vendor will also be provided with a location with-in the city where they will need to drop off the sign at on their way to the market and pick-up the same sign as they leave the market every Saturday. If a vendor forgets to pick-up their sign on their way home, they must notify the Market Manager immediately so that alternate arrangements can be made to retrieve the sign. Rules and Regulations Miscellaneous/Appearance and Conduct: 1. Vendors will be neat, suitably dressed (shirt and shoes), and deal with the public and fellow vendors in a courteous and appropriate manner at all times. 2. All vendors will display their products neatly and attractively, with consideration for the other vendors and public. Vendors must remain at their stall for the duration of each market. 3. Vendors are responsible for their own stalls, will supply all necessary trash containers, and will leave their site clean and in a condition suitable to the Market Manager and the City of Chanhassen. Each member will remove containers, waste, and trimmings before leaving the market. 4. Vendors will in no way cause detriment to other vendors. 5. No rummage sale, second hand, or flea market type items may be sold. 6. Space dimensions must be respected. Do not block the view of other vendors, the flow of traffic, or encroach on areas assigned to other vendors. 7. Alcoholic beverages may not be sold, consumed, or advertised at the market. 8. Vendors are required to post an identification sign in a prominent place stating the vendor name, product, and area they are from. 9. All vendors are expected to clean up in and around their stall after usage. This includes the parking lot. 11. All vendors are responsible for providing, setting up, and taking down their own display/stall materials. Vendors must provide tent weights for any tent structure. 12. No smoking will be allowed with-in the area designated for the market. Membership • Membership fee is included in stall fees. By becoming a member, the vendor agrees to the terms of the Rules and Regulations and the Bylaws of the Chanhassen Farmers’ Market. • All vendors need to provide their own insurance. • As condition of membership, the member agrees to release and hold the Chanhassen Farmers’ Market, its directors, officers, agents, and employees harmless from all claims related to or arising from such membership. Chanhassen Farmers’ Market reserves the right to prohibit anyone from selling at the Farmers’ Market. • Members are expected to comply with any government regulation that may be in effect for activities that take place at the Farmers’ Market. These include certification of scales, health rules applicable to samples and food display, statements about being organically grown, eggs, etc. • Food vendors are responsible for providing proper “product liability” insurance. Product liability insurance is necessary because customers may have allergic reactions or may experience illness due to some chemical residue, product acidity, food spoilage, or other food-safety relate issues. • Compliance with all Health, Fire, and Police Department codes and regulations as well as state Health and Revenue Departments, and the Center for Disease Control codes and regulations is required. These agencies have the final say in any dispute in the operation of the Farmers’ Market. These codes and regulations will also apply to the preparation of food on-site including food samples. • Vendors found to be in violation of one or more rules may be suspended from selling at the Farmers’ Market. • Anyone who fails to comply with the Rules and Regulations or the Bylaws may have their membership terminated with no refund of dues or fees. Market Rules Please initial each statement: _____ I understand that I must be actively involved in the planting, growing, harvesting, processing and/or making of products I sell at the market. Reselling is prohibited unless I receive express permission from the market management. _____ I agree that the City of Chanhassen and its respective officers, employees, agents, and consultants are not liable for any injury, theft, or damage to either the buyer or seller, or their property, arising out of or pertaining to preparation for or participation in the 2019 Chanhassen Farmers’ Market; whether such injury, theft or damage occurred prior, during, or after the 2019 Chanhassen Farmers’ Market. Applicant further agrees to indemnity, defend and hold harmless the City of Chanhassen and its respective officers, employees, agents, and consultants for and against any claims for injury, theft or damage resulting from my fault. _____ I have read and agree to abide by all City of Chanhassen 2019 Farmers’ Market rules. ______________________________________________ ______________________________ (Signature of applicant) (Date) 2019 Chanhassen Farmer’s Market Food Truck Application www.chanhassenfarmersmarket.org Please complete application to be reviewed for approval as a Food Truck vendor. Completed applications should be e-mailed to chanhassenfarmersmarket@gmail.com. There will be limits on vendors with the same or similar products. TIME AND PLACE: Saturdays, June 1st through October 12th, 2019; 9:00 am – 1:00 pm at City Center Park, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The first parking lot north of 78th street will be reserved for the market. FEES: All fees must be paid in advance before stall spaces will be assigned. Stall fees are listed below under the “STALL FEES” section. Stall fee payments must be made by May 25th, 2019. We accept a variety of payment types: Paypal, Check, Money Order or Cash. Checks should be made out to “Chanhassen Farmer’s Market”. If you wish to pay via Paypal, let us know and we can send you an invoice. Payments can be sent to: Laurie Lorenz RE: Chanhassen Farmer’s Market 6395 132nd St. N White Bear Lake, MN 55110 QUESTIONS? Ask the Market Managers. The Market Managers are Laurie Lorenz and Tessa Lorenz and both can be reached by calling (651) 271-4584 or E-mailing: chanhassenfarmersmarket@gmail.com . Applicant Contact Information Date: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Business Name: _____________________________________________________________________________ Primary Contact Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Cell Phone: ________________________________________________________________________________ Email Address: _____________________________________________________________________________ Vendor Business and Product Information Products (Please list all products, products not listed cannot be sold): _________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ Minnesota Sales Tax ID Number (if applicable): ___________________________________________________ Required Forms: ST-19 Minnesota Revenue Operator Certificate of Compliance Form Certificate of Liability Insurance with ‘Chanhassen Farmers’ Market, City Center Park, Chanhassen, MN 55317’ named as Certificate Holder Prepared Food (Concessionaires) Prepared food vendors offer freshly made foods, available for sale and immediate consumption on-site at the Chanhassen Farmers’ Market. Prepared food vendors shall process and maintain all required state, county, and local permits. Prepared food vendors should use ingredients produced in Minnesota as much as possible. When selecting prepared food vendors, the Chanhassen Farmer’s Market will encourage vendors to provide a good variety of healthy goods, and will give preferences to vendors using ingredients produced in Minnesota. Certain vendors may be restricted due to contractual obligations of the farmers’ market. You must provide a copy of all applicable licenses. Stall Information Weekly fee per stall for Food Trucks: $20.00 (See beginning of application for fee payment options) Space Assignment: The Market Manager will assign stall spaces for all vendors. Size of Space Needed: _______________________________________________________________________ Do you need electricity? (please circle) Yes No Approximate arrival time: ________________________________________________________ Farmer’s Market Day Arrival/Departure Procedure: The market hours are from 9:00 am – 1:00 pm, each Saturday. Depending on the type of food offered, Food Trucks can attend the market from 9:00 am – 1:00 pm or just for lunch, from 11:00 am – 1:00 pm. For safety reasons the designated parking lot area for the market will be closed to ALL traffic starting at 9:00 am through 1:00 pm. For Food Trucks attending from 11:00 am – 1:00 pm, the market should be entered from the 2nd parking lot north on Market St and use the entrance on the west side of the lot to pull in/back in to the designated stall. Early take-down and departure before closing time will not be allowed. Exceptions may be made in case of emergency – please see the Market Manager. No sales should be made prior to 9:00 am. Please check the Saturdays you wish to attend: June 1 June 8 June 15 June 22 June 29 July 6 July 13 July 20 July 27 August 3 August 10 August 17 August 24 August 31 September 7 September 14 September 21 September 28 October5 October 12 IMPORTANT: If you cannot attend a market you were originally scheduled to be at, you must notify the market manager one week in advance. Vendor Publicity Both the market and the vendor can benefit from promotion. We are regularly updating our website, planning social media efforts, and considering new forms of promotion. Please check the pieces of information that we may share with the public. We will not share any information that is not checked below: Website: _____________________________________________________________________________ Facebook: _____________________________________________________________________ Twitter: _______________________________________________________________________ Instagram:_____________________________________________________________________ Other:_________________________________________________________________________ Rules and Regulations Miscellaneous/Appearance and Conduct: 1. Vendors will be neat, suitably dressed (shirt and shoes), and deal with the public and fellow vendors in a courteous and appropriate manner at all times. 2. All vendors will display their products neatly and attractively, with consideration for the other vendors and public. Vendors must remain at their stall for the duration of each market. 3. Vendors are responsible for their own stalls, will supply all necessary trash containers, and will leave their site clean and in a condition suitable to the Market Manager and the City of Chanhassen. Each member will remove containers, waste, and trimmings before leaving the market. 4. Vendors will in no way cause detriment to other vendors. 5. No rummage sale, second hand, or flea market type items may be sold. 6. Space dimensions must be respected. Do not block the view of other vendors, the flow of traffic, or encroach on areas assigned to other vendors. 7. Alcoholic beverages may not be sold, consumed, or advertised at the market. 8. Vendors are required to post an identification sign in a prominent place stating the vendor name, product, and area they are from. 9. All vendors are expected to clean up in and around their stall after usage. This includes the parking lot. 11. All vendors are responsible for providing, setting up, and taking down there own display/stall materials. Vendors must provide tent weights for any tent structure. 12. No smoking will be allowed with-in the area designated for the market. • All vendors need to provide their own insurance. • As condition of membership, the member agrees to release and hold the Chanhassen Farmers’ Market, its directors, officers, agents, and employees harmless from all claims related to or arising from such membership. Chanhassen Farmers’ Market reserves the right to prohibit anyone from selling at the Farmers’ Market. • Members are expected to comply with any government regulation that may be in effect for activities that take place at the Farmers’ Market. These include certification of scales, health rules applicable to samples and food display, statements about being organically grown, eggs, etc. • Food vendors are responsible for providing proper “product liability” insurance. Product liability insurance is necessary because customers may have allergic reactions or illness due to some chemical residue, product-acidity, food spoilage, or other food-safety relate issue. • Compliance with all Health, Fire, and Police Department codes and regulations as well as state Health and Revenue Departments, and the Center for Disease Control codes and regulations is required. These agencies have the final say in any dispute in the operation of the Farmers’ Market. These codes and regulations will also apply to the preparation of food on-site including food samples. • Vendors found to be in violation of one or more rules may be suspended from selling at the Farmers’ Market. • Anyone who fails to comply with the Rules and Regulations or the Bylaws may have their membership terminated with no refund of dues or fees. Market Rules Please initial each statement: _____ I understand that I must be actively involved in the planting, growing, harvesting, processing and/or making of products I sell at the market. Reselling is prohibited unless I receive express permission from the market management. _____ I agree that the City of Chanhassen and its respective officers, employees, agents, and consultants are not liable for any injury, theft, or damage to either the buyer or seller, or their property, arising out of or pertaining to preparation for or participation in the 2019 Chanhassen Farmers’ Market; whether such injury, theft or damage occurred prior, during, or after the 2019 Chanhassen Farmers’ Market. Applicant further agrees to indemnity, defend and hold harmless the City of Chanhassen and its respective officers, employees, agents, and consultants for and against any claims for injury, theft or damage resulting from my fault. _____ I have read and agree to abide by all City of Chanhassen 2019 Farmers’ Market rules. ______________________________________________ ______________________________ (Signature of applicant) (Date) 2019 Chanhassen Farmer’s Market Community Booth Application www.chanhassenfarmersmarket.org Please complete this application to be reviewed for a Community/Non-Profit Booth. Completed applications should be e-mailed to chanhassenfarmersmarket@gmail.com. ALL APPLICATIONS MUST BE FILLED OUT AND SUBMITTED TO US NO LATER THAN APRIL 30th, 2019. We will review applications beginning May 1st, 2019. We will let ALL applicants know by May 5th, 2019, whether or not they have been selected to be a vendor for the 2019 season. TIME AND PLACE: Saturdays, June 1st through October 12th, 2019; 9:00 am – 1:00 pm at City Center Park, Chanhassen, Minnesota. The first parking lot north of 78th street will be reserved for the market. QUESTIONS? Ask the Market Managers. The Market Managers are Laurie Lorenz and Tessa Lorenz and both can be reached by calling (651) 271-4584 or E-mailing: chanhassenfarmersmarket@gmail.com . Applicant Contact Information Date: _________________________________________ Business Name: ____________________________________________________________________________ Primary Contact Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Cell Phone: _______________________________________ Email Address: _____________________________________________________________________________ Organization Description: ___________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ Address: __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ Required Forms: Certificate of Liability Insurance with ‘Chanhassen Farmers’ Market, City Center Park, Chanhassen, MN 55317’ named as Certificate Holder Non-profit Organizations: Tax ID #: ________________________________________ Community Booth: 501c’s can sign up for a booth at no charge once per season. Priority will be given to those organizations that reside in Chanhassen and/or support Chanhassen. IMPORTANT: Non-profit organizations may not sell anything. Organization will need to provide booth supplies: tent, table, chairs, etc. Fees and Space Assignment: Stalls are approximately 10 x 10 feet in size. The Market Manager will assign stall spaces for all vendors. Farmer’s Market Day Arrival/Departure Procedure: The market hours are from 9:00 am – 1:00 pm, each Saturday. Arrival and setup time will be 7:00 am to 8:45 am. All vendors must be ready for business by 9:00 am. For safety reasons the designated parking lot area for the market will be closed to ALL traffic starting at 9:00 am through 1:00 pm. Early take-down and departure before closing time will not be allowed. Exceptions may be made in case of emergency – please see the Market Manager. Please check the Saturdays you are available and indicate your 1st, 2nd and 3rd preference next to each date: June 1 June 8 June 15 June 22 June 29 July 6 July 13 July 20 July 27 August 3 August 10 August 17 August 24 August 31 September 7 September 14 September 21 September 28 October 5 October 12 Publicity Both the market and the vendor can benefit from promotion. We are regularly updating our website, planning social media efforts, and considering new forms of promotion. Please check the pieces of information that we may share with the public. We will not share any information that is not checked below: Website: _____________________________________________________________________________ Facebook: _____________________________________________________________________ Twitter: _______________________________________________________________________ Instagram: _____________________________________________________________________ Other: ________________________________________________________________________ Rules and Regulations Miscellaneous/Appearance and Conduct: 1. Vendors will be neat, suitably dressed (shirt and shoes), and deal with the public and fellow vendors in a courteous and appropriate manner at all times. 2. All vendors will provide a neat and attractive display, with consideration for the other vendors and public. Vendors must remain at their stall for the duration of each market. 3. Vendors are responsible for their own stalls, will supply all necessary trash containers, and will leave their site clean and in a condition suitable to the Market Manager and the City of Chanhassen. Each member will remove containers, waste, and trimmings before leaving the market. 4. Vendors will in no way cause detriment to other vendors. 5. No rummage sale, second hand, or flea market type items may be sold. 6. Space dimensions must be respected. Do not block the view of other vendors, the flow of traffic, or encroach on areas assigned to other vendors. 7. Alcoholic beverages may not be sold, consumed, or advertised at the market. 8. Vendors are required to post an identification sign in a prominent place stating the vendor name, product, and area they are from. 9. All vendors are expected to clean up in and around their stall after usage. This includes the parking lot. 11. All vendors are responsible for providing, setting up, and taking down their own display/stall materials. Vendors must provide tent weights for any tent structure. 12. No smoking will be allowed with-in the area designated for the market. • All vendors need to provide their own insurance. • All vendors agree to release and hold the Chanhassen Farmers’ Market, its directors, officers, agents, and employees harmless from all claims related to or arising from such membership. Chanhassen Farmers’ Market reserves the right to prohibit anyone from selling at the Farmers’ Market. • Members are expected to comply with any government regulation that may be in effect for activities that take place at the Farmers’ Market. • Compliance with all Health, Fire, and Police Department codes and regulations as well as state Health and Revenue Departments, and the Center for Disease Control codes and regulations is required. These agencies have the final say in any dispute in the operation of the Farmers’ Market. These codes and regulations will also apply to the preparation of food on-site including food samples. • Vendors found to be in violation of one or more rules may be suspended from selling at the Farmers’ Market. Market Rules Please initial each statement: _____ I agree that the City of Chanhassen and its respective officers, employees, agents, and consultants are not liable for any injury, theft, or damage to either the buyer or seller, or their property, arising out of or pertaining to preparation for or participation in the 2019 Chanhassen Farmers’ Market; whether such injury, theft or damage occurred prior, during, or after the 2019 Chanhassen Farmers’ Market. Applicant further agrees to indemnity, defend and hold harmless the City of Chanhassen and its respective officers, employees, agents, and consultants for and against any claims for injury, theft or damage resulting from my fault. _____ I have read and agree to abide by all City of Chanhassen 2019 Farmers’ Market rules. ______________________________________________ ______________________________ (Signature of applicant) (Date) CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Galpin Site Preliminary Plat & Rezone PUD Section NEW BUSINESS Item No: F.1. Prepared By Kate Aanenson, AICP, Community Development Director File No: PC 2019­01 PROPOSED MOTION Denial “The City Council denies the Rezoning of 191 acres from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned Unit Development ­ Residential, PUD­R; including the PUD ordinance 'Galpin Design Standards'; “The City Council denies the Wetland Alteration Permit of 1.28 acres of wetland impacts subject to conditions in the staff report; The City Council denies the Subdivision Preliminary Plat creating 167 lots, three outlots and dedication of public right­of­way as shown in plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated February 28, 2019; And The City Council adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision for Denial." Approval “The City Council approves the Rezoning of 191 acres from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned Unit Development ­ Residential, PUD­R; including the PUD ordinance 'Galpin Design Standards'; The City Council approves the Wetland Alteration Permit of 1.28 acres of wetland impacts subject to conditions in the staff report; The City Council approves the Subdivision Preliminary Plat creating 167 lots, three outlots and dedication of public right­of­way as shown in plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated February 28, 2019, to be modified to match the site plan dated March 11, 2019, subject to conditions stated in the staff report; And The City Council adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision of Approval." Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectGalpin Site Preliminary Plat & Rezone PUDSectionNEW BUSINESS Item No: F.1.Prepared By Kate Aanenson, AICP, CommunityDevelopment Director File No: PC 2019­01PROPOSED MOTIONDenial“The City Council denies the Rezoning of 191 acres from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned UnitDevelopment ­ Residential, PUD­R; including the PUD ordinance 'Galpin Design Standards';“The City Council denies the Wetland Alteration Permit of 1.28 acres of wetland impacts subject to conditions inthe staff report;The City Council denies the Subdivision Preliminary Plat creating 167 lots, three outlots and dedication of publicright­of­way as shown in plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated February 28, 2019;AndThe City Council adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision for Denial."Approval“The City Council approves the Rezoning of 191 acres from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned UnitDevelopment ­ Residential, PUD­R; including the PUD ordinance 'Galpin Design Standards';The City Council approves the Wetland Alteration Permit of 1.28 acres of wetland impacts subject to conditionsin the staff report;The City Council approves the Subdivision Preliminary Plat creating 167 lots, three outlots and dedication ofpublic right­of­way as shown in plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated February 28, 2019, to be modified tomatch the site plan dated March 11, 2019, subject to conditions stated in the staff report;AndThe City Council adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision of Approval." Approval requires a Majority Vote of the entire council. BACKGROUND On March 5, 2019, the Planning Commission held a meeting to review changes that have been made to the project since the public hearing was held on January 15, 2019. Minutes for this meeting will be made available by the end of day Friday, March 8, 2019.  DISCUSSION There have been a number of meetings on the development. Following is a list of these meetings: Where Meeting type Date City Council, Planning Commission and Park & Recreation Tour of the Site June 4, 2018 City Council Work Session June 11, 2018 Park Commission Concept PUD June 26, 2018 Planning Commission ­ Public Hearing Concept PUD July 17, 2018 City Council Concept PUD August 13, 2018 City Council Work Session December 3, 2108 Planning Commission ­ Public Hearing Preliminary Plat January 15, 2019 Park Commission Preliminary Plat January 22, 2019 City Council Work Session January 28, 2019 City Council Work Session February 11, 2019 Planning Commission Public Comment March 5, 2019 (minutes not yet available) City Council Preliminary Plat Scheduled for March 11, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report PUD Ordinance Findings of Fact and Decision Approval Findings of Fact and Decision Denial Development Review Application Project Narrative Affidavit of Mailing Compliance Table March 5, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Exhibit A ­ Home Styles Galpin Site Plan Sheets 1­31 Galpin Site Plan Sheets 32­51 Fire Marshall Letter Carver County Development / Access Review Comments Letter MCES Notes Army Corp of Engineers Letters Email Comments Received Emails received March 10 and 11, 2019 CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: January 15, 2019 CC DATE: March 11, 2019 REVIEW DEADLINE: February 12 April 5, 2019 CASE # 2019-01 BY: KA, EH, JS, TH PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Subdivision approval, rezoning to PUD-R and a wetland alteration permit. LOCATION: 7141 Galpin Boulevard APPLICANT: U.S. Home Corporation, d/b/a Lennar PRESENT ZONING: RR Rural Residential 2030 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential 1.2 – 4 units per acre ACREAGE: Approximately 191 acres gross GROSS DENSITY: 1 unit per acre net 129 123 acres net NET DENSITY: 1.33 units per acre net LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION MAKING: The city’s discretion in approving or denying a Preliminary Plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the city must approve the preliminary plat. This is a quasi-judicial decision. The city has a relatively high level of discretion in approving Rezoning’s and Planned Unit Developments (PUD) because the city is acting in its legislative or policy-making capacity. A rezoning or PUD must be consistent with the city’s Comprehensive Plan. Notice was sent to adjacent properties within 500 feet. PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is requesting Preliminary Subdivision approval, rezoning to PUD-R and a wetland alternation permit. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 2 of 45 Map of Property Parcel and Site Information Parcel ID Taxpayer GIS Acreage Land Use Current Zoning 256900030 PRN 10 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential 256900020 PRN 156.07 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential 250100100 Paisley Park Enterprises Inc. 3.75 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential 256900010 PRN 19.74 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential 250100200 PRN 6.49 Low Density 1.2-4 units/acre Rural Residential Total 191/188 Deeded acres vs. GIS City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 3 of 45 The surrounding land uses are included in the following table: Subdivision Zoning Land Use Notes South Royal Oaks RSF Low Density 13 acres-33 lots West Woods at Long Acres PUD Low Density 97 acres-115 lots Wynsong - Shoreland District PUD Low Density 9.4 acres 4 units North Ashling Meadows RSF Low Density 40 acres-51 units Lake Lucy Ridge RSF Low Density 9 acres-17 units East Lake Ann Recreational not applicable not applicable Undeveloped Adjacent Land South Gorra Property Zoning Land Use Notes Rural Residential Low Density 38 (25 net) acres- 50 units Rural Residential Low/Medium 34 acres – 204 units Rural Residential Medium Density 46 acres - 276 units Rural Residential High Density 28 acres -336 units An existing home that is on 2.62 acres at 7011 Galpin Boulevard is not included in the subdivision. BACKGROUND The following meetings were held discussing the PUD/Subdivision: Where Meeting type Date City Council, Planning Commission and Park & Recreation Tour of the Site June 4, 2018 City Council Work Session June 11, 2018 Park Commission Concept PUD June 26, 2018 Planning Commission - Public Hearing Concept PUD July 17, 2018 City Council Concept PUD August 13, 2018 City Council Work Session December 3, 2108 Planning Commission - Public Hearing Preliminary Plat January 15, 2019 Park Commission Preliminary Plat January 22, 2019 City Council Work Session January 28, 2019 City Council Work Session February 11, 2019 Planning Commission Public Comment March 5, 2019 (minutes not yet available) City Council Preliminary Plat Scheduled for March 11, 2019 City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 4 of 45 A public meeting was held on a concept PUD before the Planning Commission on July 17, 2018 and with the City Council on August 13, 2018. Included in the concept review were two layouts. One demonstrated a traditional subdivision using the RSF zoning district and the second layout applied the PUD zoning with a cluster development. The RSF zoning district showed a plan with 202 lots and the PUD showed a plan with 199 lots. The City Council held an additional work session on December 3, 2018 to discuss proposed changes for the preliminary review based on neighborhood meetings held in November. A summary of the comments from the Concept review include: • The elimination of the through street the on the north end. • Reduction of eight lots. • Larger lots and deeper lots were created on the southern end (Majestic Oaks) to accommodate stormwater and tree preservation. • Four lot sizes were introduced. The most significant changes from the Concept PUD and the Preliminary PUD application are: Plan modifications since initial concept review Overall • 50+ acres designated for city park. • Lot count has been reduced to 191 181 homesites down 17 lots since the concept (1.37 1.33 DU/Acre). • Stormwater ponding has been incorporated to accommodate Galpin Boulevard upgrades and has shifted to minimize visual impact to the Longacres neighborhood and allows an opportunity to preserve the existing guardhouse as a symbol of neighborhood identity (condition and ability to preserve guardhouse to be further evaluated for safety). • Perimeter buffering has been evaluated. • Monumentation and landscape detail created. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 5 of 45 North end • Through-street from Galpin Boulevard to Lucy Ridge Lane has been eliminated. • Buffering through preservation has been identified. • Fourteen (14) lots have been eliminated to minimize environmental impacts. South end • Twelve (12) lots have been eliminated from the southern 1/3 of the property to reduce density. • Lots along the southern property line have been enlarged from 55’ to 75’ wide to 75 90’ wide to meet the RSF standard to accommodate standard homes rather than a Villa. • Storm sewer and emergency overflows have been identified to alleviate water issues in adjacent neighborhood. • Back yard areas along the southern property line have been expanded allowing for the preservation of existing trees. • Landscape buffering has been integrated into the plan. ZONING DISTRICT Low-density zoning options for 1.2-4 units an acre. Within the low-density land use, there are a number of zoning applications including RSF, RLM, R-4 and PUD. The applicant’s proposal is requesting the Low Density Residential PUD Zoning. Residential Single Family (RSF) requires 15,000 square foot lots. This zoning district would cause the most environmental impacts to the site. In order to achieve the desire for a larger preservation area next to the lakes, the most appropriate zoning would be either a PUD or residential-low and medium density (RLM). Both of these districts require preservation of environmental features. It will be the city’s goal to ensure that the request for either zoning meets the intent. ARTICLE VIII. – PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DIVISION 1. – GENERALLY Sec. 20-501. – Intent. Planned Unit Developments (PUD) offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfers of density, construction phasing, and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the city has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the use of other, more standard zoning districts. It will be the applicant’s responsibility to demonstrate that the city’s expectation is to be realized as evaluated against the following criteria. The applicant is pursuing the PUD zoning. In their narrative, they have stated, “The use of the PUD zoning also allows for greater specificity in the types, location and sizes of uses. The city has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would be the case with the other, more standard zoning districts. It is the City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 6 of 45 applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the city's expectations are to be realized as evaluated by the city’s goals.” Justification for Rezoning to PUD Sec. 20-501. – Intent. Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD in this instance is to preserve a significant open space (100 +/- acres) next to Lake Ann Park as identified in the city’s Comprehensive Plan. The transfer of density preserves land by dedication rather than acquisition by the city. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the city has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. The proposed subdivision provides a compatible development with the surrounding development and subject to the recommended modifications to the plan. The proposed PUD rezoning assists in the furtherance of the following land use goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: • Enhanced preservation of Lake Ann and Lake Lucy by limited development within the shore land district. • Reduction in total impervious surface through the cluster development. • Preservation of native vegetation and habitat within the shoreland district. • Preservation of over 90% of the wetlands on the site. • Reduction of city long-term maintenance costs. • Provide connectivity (trials) to existing parks and trails. • Dedication of right-of-way along Galpin Boulevard. The proposed amendment and rezoning assists in the furtherance of the following housing goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: • A variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life-cycle. • Development will be encouraged within the MUSA line. • The plan should seek to establish sufficient land to provide a full range of housing opportunities. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 18, Subdivisions Chapter 20: Article VI. - Wetland Protection Article VII. - Shoreland Management District Article VII. - Planned Unit Development District City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 7 of 45 EXISTING CONDITIONS • A bluff area to the northern off of Lake Lucy Ridge. • A portion of the site is within the Shoreland District of Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. All lots within 1000 feet of the shoreland must have a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. This standard has been meet with the lots on the end of Street “Z” and the end of Lake Lucy Lane. • There are several wetlands on the site, the largest of which is approximately 42 acres. The wetlands have been delineated and a Notice of Decision has been made. SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT The applicant is requesting subdivision of 191 acres into three outlots and 191 181 residential lots. Access to the site is from Galpin Boulevard except for the connection to the north that connects Topaz Drive and Lucy Ridge Lane. Street “Z” off of Galpin Boulevard is now a cul- de-sac. While a variance is not required for the cul-de-sac length, staff has reviewed the criteria necessary to permit longer cul-de-sacs. The maximum length of a street terminating in a cul-de- sac shall be 800 feet. The city manager or their designee may approve a cul-de-sac exceeding 800 feet if they determine that the following necessitates a length in excess of 800 feet. Topography would require substantial grading and the loss of significant trees that would alter the physical character of the property and surrounding parcels. Additionally, the 16 lots proposed for housing accessed via this cul-de-sac are on larger lots, rather than the 26-30 homes that would be permitted by City Code. Site Analysis Total Gross Area 191.0456 +/- Acres Total Development Area 51.9451 51.21 Acres Number of Lots 191 181 Number of Outlots 3 Total Outlot Area 122.3114 123.28 Acres Total Right-of-Way Area 16.79 16.47 Acres Gross Density .9474 Lots/Acre Net Density (Excludes Wetlands & Co. Rd. 117) 1.5 1.33+/- Acres City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 8 of 45 DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Staff is proposing that the following development standards govern the development of the property. Wetland Standards - Manage 1 • Buffer: 30 feet • Building Setback for Buffer: 25 feet • Accessory Building setback from the Buffer: 15 feet Proposed Lot Standards 90-Foot Lots - Shoreline Overlay Non-Riparian Lots Width: 90 feet Area: 15,000 sq. ft. OHW: 75-foot setback Bluff: 30-foot setback Local street ROW setback: 20 feet (25 feet with sidewalk) Corner Lot Right-of-way: 20 feet Lot Coverage: 25% Total Lots: 31 42 City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 9 of 45 75-foot lots Width: 75 feet Area: 11,000 sq. ft. Front setback: 20 feet Rear setback: 25 feet Side setback: 7.5 feet Corner at ROW: 20 feet County Road 117: 50 feet Lot Coverage: 35% Total Lots: 10 65-Foot Lots Width: 65 feet Area: 8,450 sq. ft. Front setback: 20 or 25 feet Rear setback: 25 feet Side setback: 7.5 feet Lot Coverage: 35% Total Lots: 116 139 55-foot lots Width: 55 feet Area: 6,000 sq. ft. Garage setback: 25 feet; Living space: 20 feet Rear setback: 25 feet Side setback: 7.5 feet Lot Coverage: 35% Total Lots: 34 *Lots within each category may exceed the pervious surface because they are averaged with the overall preservation area within the development. The PUD ordinance requires setbacks from roadways and exterior property lines. The following table displays these setbacks: GALPIN PROPERTY COMPLIANCE TABLE Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 90 foot frontage 15,000 90 125 5,500 90 foot frontage ** 11,250 90 125 5,500 65 ft Lots 8,450 65 125 4,400 City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 10 of 45 Front Setback Rear Setback Side Yard Setback Corner Setback CR 117 Setback 20 ft * 25 ft 7.5 ft 20 ft 50 ft 25 ft 25 ft 7.5 ft 20 ft 50 ft Wetland Buffer Setback 20 ft. *25 ft. with Sidewalk **Lots 101-111 90-Foot Frontage Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 501 18,092 100 177 5,500 502 17,455 90 167 5,500 503 15,030 90 167 5,500 504 22,829 90 249 5,500 505 24,572 90 249 5,500 506 16,733 90 175 5,500 507 18,427 90 201 5,500 508 17,037 90 142 5,500 509 23,848 90 159 5,500 510 20,017 90 137 5,500 511 18,801 90 156 5,500 512 17,844 90 167 5,500 513 15,032 90 167 5,500 514 15,030 90 167 5,500 515 16,667 100 167 5,500 516 15,574 90 175 5,500 517 15,514 90 175 5,500 518 15,482 90 174 5,500 519 15,576 90 174 5,500 520 15,300 90 170 5,500 521 15,300 90 170 5,500 522 15,300 90 170 5,500 523 15,440 90 172 5,500 524 15,882 90 168 5,500 525 16,629 90 136 5,500 526 22,359 90 140 5,500 527 27,426 90 143 5,500 528 16,764 90 160 5,500 529 15,371 90 165 5,500 530 44,983 90 165 5,500 531 47,788 90 125 5,500 City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 11 of 45 90-Foot Frontage Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 101 19,897 135 143 5,500 102 13,371 90 148 5,500 103 13,297 90 148 5,500 104 13,297 90 148 5,500 105 13,297 90 148 5,500 106 13,297 90 148 5,500 107 13,297 90 148 5,500 108 13,297 90 148 5,500 109 14,599 90 148 5,500 110 14,840 90 148 5,500 111 25,529 90 148 5,500 Avg. 18,479 65-Foot Frontage Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 301 9,993 78 125 4,400 302 8,450 65 125 4,400 303 8,450 65 125 4,400 304 8,450 65 125 4,400 305 8,450 65 125 4,400 306 8,450 65 125 4,400 307 11,132 65 125 4,400 308 13,748 78 131 4,400 309 8,925 65 129 4,400 310 12,282 65 126 4,400 311 8,607 65 125 4,400 312 8,126 65 125 4,400 313 8,257 65 125 4,400 314 8,795 65 130 4,400 315 9,683 65 142 4,400 316 12,836 78 125 4,400 317 12,591 78 150 4,400 318 10,414 65 145 4,400 319 10,228 65 145 4,400 320 11,448 65 145 4,400 321 13,180 65 147 4,400 322 12,052 65 145 4,400 323 11,853 65 142 4,400 324 10,767 65 142 4,400 325 9,524 65 139 4,400 City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 12 of 45 326 9,135 65 132 4,400 327 8,609 65 132 4,400 328 8,609 65 132 4,400 329 10,232 65 132 4,400 330 9,750 65 125 4,400 331 9,478 65 125 4,400 332 10,900 65 125 4,400 333 16,107 78 125 4,400 334 11,215 78 136 4,400 335 10,404 65 153 4,400 336 11,607 65 167 4,400 337 10,622 65 142 4,400 338 11,545 65 133 4,400 339 14,532 65 125 4,400 340 12,761 65 125 4,400 341 13,019 65 125 4,400 342 10,858 65 125 4,400 343 10,887 65 163 4,400 344 10,502 65 152 4,400 345 9,306 65 134 4,400 346 10,263 78 125 4,400 347 10,020 78 125 4,400 348 9,385 65 135 4,400 349 10,984 65 154 4,400 350 10,228 65 126 4,400 351 8,474 65 126 4,400 352 8,474 65 125 4,400 353 8,776 65 125 4,400 354 8,864 65 125 4,400 355 13,586 65 131 4,400 356 14,313 65 130 4,400 357 12,790 65 132 4,400 358 12,963 65 125 4,400 359 14,449 65 145 4,400 360 11,360 65 126 4,400 361 11,011 78 125 4,400 362 10,508 65 142 4,400 363 11,458 65 145 4,400 364 13,033 65 130 4,400 365 12,790 65 130 4,400 366 12,940 65 132 4,400 367 12,790 65 130 4,400 368 9,728 65 131 4,400 369 10,036 65 140 4,400 370 10,303 78 125 4,400 City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 13 of 45 371 8,933 65 130 4,400 372 9,242 65 130 4,400 373 9,242 65 130 4,400 374 9,242 65 130 4,400 375 9,236 65 130 4,400 376 8,450 65 130 4,400 377 8,450 65 130 4,400 378 8,450 65 130 4,400 379 8,450 65 130 4,400 380 8,450 65 130 4,400 381 8,801 65 130 4,400 382 15,319 95 130 4,400 383 11,772 78 145 4,400 384 9,453 65 145 4,400 385 9,780 65 145 4,400 386 9,898 65 134 4,400 387 9,263 65 130 4,400 388 8,450 65 130 4,400 389 8,450 65 130 4,400 390 8,450 65 130 4,400 391 8,450 65 130 4,400 392 8,450 65 130 4,400 393 8,749 65 130 4,400 394 9,189 65 130 4,400 395 9,390 65 130 4,400 396 9,313 65 130 4,400 397 8,922 65 134 4,400 398 12,754 78 130 4,400 399 8,474 65 130 4,400 400 8,450 65 130 4,400 401 8,450 65 130 4,400 402 8,450 65 130 4,400 403 8,450 65 130 4,400 404 8,450 65 130 4,400 405 10,504 65 130 4,400 406 11,092 65 130 4,400 407 8,819 65 130 4,400 408 8,450 65 130 4,400 409 8,729 65 130 4,400 410 12,658 78 131 4,400 411 10,192 78 127 4,400 412 9,559 65 127 4,400 413 9,104 65 145 4,400 414 9,702 65 137 4,400 415 14,151 65 135 4,400 City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 14 of 45 416 9,676 65 135 4,400 417 8,779 65 130 4,400 418 8,570 65 130 4,400 419 9,103 65 136 4,400 420 9,344 65 143 4,400 421 9,170 65 143 4,400 422 10,929 78 132 4,400 423 12,265 78 142 4,400 424 9,984 65 130 4,400 425 10,465 65 130 4,400 426 11,434 65 159 4,400 427 12,108 65 170 4,400 428 12,591 65 178 4,400 429 12,589 65 178 4,400 430 12,101 65 170 4,400 431 10,764 65 130 4,400 432 9,554 65 130 4,400 433 11,046 78 128 4,400 434 12,618 65 141 4,400 435 14,656 65 212 4,400 436 14,357 65 248 4,400 437 14,285 65 248 4,400 438 13,661 65 200 4,400 439 12,931 65 134 4,400 Avg. 10,475 Design Standards 1. The permitted uses in this zoning district shall be single-family detached houses and their accessory uses. House styles include the Lennar Lifestyle, Luxury, Landmark, Classic and Villa home plans; similar or equivalent as approved by the Community Development Director. 2. The 31 northern lots that are adjacent to Lake Lucy Ridge and Ashling meadows maybe developed by another entity. These lots are a part of these governing documents; the home styles may differ but must be similar in architectural scale and quality (Exhibit A). EASEMENTS & RIGHT-OF-WAY There is an existing 20’ wide Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) sewer and utility easement located on the property as illustrated on the submitted preliminary plat. Generally, the easement traverses from the northwest corner of the property to the southeast corner of the property, bisecting the site diagonally. The applicant is proposing to impact the easement at two locations. The first location is within the northwest corner of the site where grading and construction of Street “Z” and Basin 200 are proposed. The second location is to the east of Street “G” where grading is proposed behind Lots 143-144. The MCES has been City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 15 of 45 supplied with the applicant’s site plans. The applicant shall address all comments and conditions set forth by the MCES. An agreement to construct any of the proposed improvements over the MCES’s easement must be executed and supplied to the city for review prior to the issuance of grading permits. Furthermore, the applicant shall supply callouts identifying the width of the MCES easement on the plat prior to recording. The applicant is proposing standard drainage and utility easements (D&U’s) around the majority of the lots on the provided preliminary plat. Additional 20’ wide D&U’s have been provided within Lots 116-130 abutting Street “Z”, Lots 108-111 abutting Street “A”, and Lots 102-105 abutting Topaz Drive. These 20’ wide D&U’s are provided for stormwater collection and conveyance systems located in backyards that fall outside the standard D&U’s. Furthermore, 30’ wide D&U’s between Lots 133-134 abutting Street “H” and Lots 116-117 abutting Street “D” have been proposed. These additional 30’ wide D&U’s are provided for access to proposed utilities and the north side of Basin 300. However, 30’ wide D&U’s between additional lots throughout the development shall be provided in areas requiring access to utilities and stormwater basins. This shall include the location of a water main connection off Street “Z” to a stub off Ruby Lane, discussed under the “Water” section of this staff report, and between lots abutting stormwater Basins 100, 300, and 600. Right-of-way dedication will be required along the east side of Galpin Boulevard per Carver County’s review and comments (see attached “Carver County Development / Access Review Comments” letter), the Highway 117 Corridor Study, and the typical roadway sections identified in the county’s Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Corridor Study identifies specific right-of- way needs and the plat will be required to follow and be consistent with the preferred roadway alternative. The right-of-way shall tie into the existing highway right-of-way north and south of the proposed development. The preliminary and final plat proposals shall be reviewed and approved as to form and content by the county surveyor and city. Specific right-of-way dedications and recommended cross-section submittals are referenced in the county’s comments under Item 5. Currently, there exists overhead utilities within the right-of-way abutting the development on the east side of Galpin Boulevard. The applicant will be required to underground all overhead utilities from W. 78th Street to the northern property line. Underground utilities reduce the risk of accidents, such as vehicles colliding with poles and service impacts such as storms knocking down limbs on lines. It also improves the overall esthetics of roadway corridors and neighborhoods, which improves and promotes livability. The undergrounding of utilities from W. 78th Street to the southern property line is required to maintain continuity, discourage associated impacts with piecemealed undergrounding activities, and promote constructability. EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY The provided existing conditions survey does not call out any existing septic systems or water wells. However, Engineering and Public Works are aware of a potential septic system near the “guard house” on the development. The applicant shall determine, to the satisfaction of the City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 16 of 45 Engineering and Public Works departments, that there are in fact, no existing septic systems and/or wells located on the property. If found, the abandonment of all existing wells shall be in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Health’s review and regulations, and the abandonment of all existing septic systems shall be in accordance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s review and regulations. All required permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies shall be obtained prior to the commencement of any abandonment(s). There is an existing MCES sanitary and utility easement on parcels 250100400 and 257580040 that is not delineated on the existing conditions survey. The applicant shall identify the document numbers and illustrate the extents of the easement on these parcels and resubmit the existing conditions survey. GRADING The applicant is proposing to construct five stormwater basins (Basins 100, 200, 300, 400, 600) within and around the development. Through the preliminary grading plan and grading details, drainage from individual lots will be routed away from buildings into a series of catch basins and reinforced concrete pipe located within drainage and utility easements in backyards. Drainage from proposed public streets will be collected through catch basins located next to curbs and routed to stormwater basins within and around the site. The applicant has not provided in the narrative or on the preliminary plans details regarding whether the site will be mass graded or if the site will be graded under a phased approach. The applicant shall supply a mass grading plan or a phased grading plan (whichever is applicable) for review and approval by the city prior to the issuance of grading plans. There are proposed driveways that approach the maximum 10% grade (e.g. Lot 130 abutting Street “Z” is at 9.9% grade) and one street that reaches the maximum 7% grade (Street “A” near station 24+50) allowed by city ordinance. Staff recommends limiting maximum grades in order to achieve a higher level of constructability. Any constructed street or driveway that exceeds maximum allowable grades upon final inspection will be required to be removed and replaced. The applicant has not supplied top of curb elevations or spot elevations at the center of proposed driveways at curb line on the submitted grading plans. Updated grading plans shall be submitted illustrating these elevations for review by the city to ensure constructability and any potential conflicts. The proposed grading to the north of Street “Z” between stations 6+50 and 11+00 is called out as a 2:1 slope. The slope shall be reduced to 2.5:1, at a minimum, upon submittal of construction drawings and prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Certain locations that call out the emergency overflow route (EOF) are missing the associated drainage arrows. All locations of the EOF shall be illustrated with accompanying drainage arrows upon resubmittal of grading plans. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 17 of 45 There are two bluffs within the site. One bluff is located west of Lots 111-115 abutting Lucy Ridge Lane and a second bluff is located south of Lots 125-126 abutting Street “Z”. The grading plans do not indicate the locations or extent of the bluffs and their appropriate buffers and setbacks. The extent and location of all bluffs shall be provided on the grading plans upon submittal of construction drawings, and the grading and/or building of any structures adjacent to bluffs shall be subject to review and approval prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Proposed grading for Basin 400 encroaches into the southern section of the city’s well house #3 and water station site off Galpin Boulevard. The applicant will be required to perform site improvements associated with the well house site as discussed under the “Water” section of this staff report, including the relocation of the access driveway off Galpin Boulevard. Additionally, there is a significant oak tree that shall be protected during grading operations. The grading plans shall show the relocated access driveway location and grades, the location and footprint of the well house, and call out the protection of the oak tree upon resubmittal of grading plans. There is a low point indicated on the preliminary grading plans at the intersection of Street “E” and Street “H” that does not align with the proposed storm catch basin. The applicant shall adjust the grading plans so that the low point is adjacent to the catch basin for optimal drainage and to reduce ponding or “bird bathing”. The preliminary grading plans indicate drainage of backyards from Lots 164-174 abutting Street “A” to runoff directly onto the proposed public trail, north of Wetland 11. The applicant shall submit revised grading plans and stormwater plans so that no stormwater runoff flows directly onto the public trail. Furthermore, no untreated stormwater shall be routed to wetlands prior to treatment. Immediately east of Lot 110 abutting Street “A”, the applicant is proposing a stormwater conveyance pipe with catch basins. The preliminary grading plans indicate a grade of approximately 30% running perpendicular to the stormwater system. The applicant shall adjust the grading plans to create a grade of not more than 10% over the utility for maintenance and accessibility purposes. Furthermore, staff has concerns regarding slope stability immediately east of Lot 110. The applicant shall submit an updated geotechnical report, including soil types, groundwater elevations, and slope stability calculations for this area based on the proposed structure to be constructed on the lot. The public trail adjacent to the back lot lines of Lots 112-115 has a proposed continuous grade of 8% extending over 150’. While the proposed public trail system meets the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) for maximum running slope of trail segments (no more than 30% of the total trail length to exceed a 1:12 slope), staff recommends the installation of a level resting pad over this continuous grade. This recommendation is based on the intent of ADAAG which is to provide access to the greatest extent possible. The plat’s final grading plans, ponds, and right-of-way along Galpin Boulevard shall be reviewed and approved by the county and the city to show how they conform to the potential City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 18 of 45 future Galpin Boulevard reconstruction. A cross reference of grading plans, profiles, and respective cross sections should be provided at key locations such as intersections, ponds, or other special features for review by the county and city prior to acceptance. RETAINING WALLS There are three proposed retaining walls on the site. All retaining walls exceeding 4’ in height shall be constructed in accordance with plans prepared by a registered engineer or landscape architect and shall be constructed of a durable material (smooth face concrete/poured in place, masonry/mortared, railroad ties and timber are prohibited). No such plans or details were submitted with the plan sheets and must be provided prior to issuance of grading permits. The retaining wall on the south side of the development behind Lots 108-111 abutting Street “A” is approximately 420’ long and ranges from 4’-10’ tall. The retaining wall is currently proposed to be offset approximately 10’ from a proposed stormwater conveyance line. The retaining wall shall be adjusted to accommodate a 1.5:1 buffer from the bottom of the proposed stormwater line to the bottom of the proposed retaining wall foundation. The 1.5:1 buffer is required for maintenance and repair purposes and to maintain structural stability of the wall during such activities. The retaining wall on the west side of the development behind Lots 161-163 abutting Street “A” is approximately 170’ long. Top of wall and bottom of wall spot elevations were not provided. The updated grading plans shall include the top of wall and bottom of wall elevations. The retaining wall on the north side of the development behind Lots 123-125 abutting Street “Z” is approximately 200’ long and ranges from 6’-8’ tall. The construction of this wall appears to be within a bluff setback. Pending updated grading plans that illustrate the bluff, addressed previously under the “Grading” section of this staff report, the retaining wall may have to be adjusted outside the bluff protection area. STREETS The applicant is proposing the construction of nine new streets (Streets “A”-“H” and Street “Z”) and the extension of two existing streets (Topaz Drive and Lucy Ridge Lane) that shall be owned and maintained by the city after acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council. All newly constructed street sections shall be designed to meet the current standard specifications and detail plates for residential streets. These new streets and extensions will result in six cul-de- sacs with five of the six proposed cul-de-sacs meeting current City Code and standard specifications. Street “Z”, a newly constructed street and cul-de-sac in the northern section of the development, exceeds the maximum length for a cul-de-sac per city ordinance. City ordinance section 18.57.k limits the length of any cul-de-sac to 800’. Street “Z” is proposed as a cul-de-sac with a length of 1376’ measured from the centerline of Galpin Boulevard to the center point of the turnaround radius. However, Engineering recommends approval of the cul-de-sac as City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 19 of 45 the topography would require substantial grading and the loss of significant trees that would alter the physical character of the property and surrounding parcels (Ordinance 18.57.k.2). Furthermore, public outreach efforts and public hearings were conducted by the city regarding the option for a local through street connecting Galpin Boulevard to Lucy Ridge Lane (i.e. Street “Z”). The responses received from residences in the Ashling Meadows neighborhood noted that they opposed the connection. The concerns were regarding perceived increased cut-through traffic, safety associated with an increase in traffic through residential neighborhoods, and loss of the natural barrier between neighborhoods. The alternative to connect Galpin Boulevard with Lucy Ridge Lane was conceptually proposed back in June of 2018 by the applicant (see exhibit below). Exhibit 1: Pioneer Engineering’s Concept Plan 07 from 6-1-2018 As the applicant has proposed not to extend or connect the development of the north section through the existing stub off Ruby Lane, the developer shall remove the existing hard surface and construct half-street improvements (extending curb & gutter) to maintain the continuity of Topaz Drive. The city will reach out to the property owners abutting the removed stub to discuss vacating the right-of-way, while maintaining utility easements over existing utilities. Access to Street “Z” is from Galpin Boulevard, a collector road. There is an existing driveway 30 feet south of Street “Z” providing access to parcel 250100400. This spacing does not meet MnDOT Access Management Guidelines or Carver County’s requirements for access points off collector roads. The parcel’s access from Galpin Boulevard shall be abandoned and realigned to City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 20 of 45 tie into Street “Z”. Additionally, a water stub for future connection shall be installed to serve the property. The city has had discussions with the resident of this property and has obtained verbal agreeance of such a realignment and future water service connection. The applicant has supplied a geotechnical evaluation report that was completed by Braun Intertec Corporation on June 29, 2018. The report discussed and explored design and construction recommendations for roadway sections, amongst other topics. The report utilized eight boring locations for the entire site. Due to the size of the development, the city will require additional borings. In-situ soil strata and subsoil conditions over a large area, such as this development (approximately 52 acres), requires a more comprehensive understanding of subsoil constraints that additional borings can provide. The city will require additional borings where roadways are to be constructed and at all cul-de-sac locations. The city will require the applicant to submit an updated geotechnical evaluation report based on the additional borings. Sidewalks and pedestrian access points have been proposed on a majority of the streets throughout the development. However, Streets “D”, “G”, and “Z” will require extensions of sidewalk to provide access within the cul-de-sacs. Sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with city standard specifications and detail plates. Furthermore, there are considerable stretches of sidewalk that do not provide access points or curb ramps to the newly constructed sidewalks. The applicant shall provide curb ramp/access points for every 500 feet of sidewalk. This will result in three additional curb ramps/access points from the provided preliminary site plan. All curb ramps shall be constructed to meet ADA standards and the city’s detail plates. The sidewalk located at the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and Street “E” terminates with no proposed intersection improvements to access the existing trail system on the west side. The developer will be required to extend connectivity by providing access from the newly constructed east side to the existing west side of Galpin Boulevard by utilizing approved MUTCD practices for pedestrian crosswalk and intersection improvements. Street lights have been proposed throughout the development. No street light construction detail or specifications were provided with the subdivision submittals. A detail of the street lights shall be submitted and reviewed prior to the issuance of building permits. An enumerated list of all street lights and their locations shall be submitted prior to the recording of the final plat. Street lights will be required at all intersections and at the end of each cul-de-sac. The developer will need to work with Xcel Energy for the installation of city-approved street lights. A $300 fee shall be collected with the development contract for each street light for the purpose of electricity costs for the first year of operation. WATER MAIN & SANITARY SEWER Water The applicant is proposing to construct 8” PVC C900 water main throughout the development that shall be owned and maintained by the city after acceptance of the public improvements by City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 21 of 45 the City Council. The development is located between two pressure zones in the city; a high pressure zone and a low pressure zone. To the west in the Longacres neighborhood is a high- pressure zone. To the north and south in the Ashling Meadows and Royal Oak Estates neighborhoods, respectively, are low-pressure zones. The city has modeled the impact of the development based on the proposed usage. It was found that in order to provide adequate pressures and fire flows, water mains shall be tied into the high-pressure zone located on Galpin Boulevard. This will result in some areas of the development experiencing pressures above 90 PSI. Therefore, a portion of the homes will likely require individual pressure reducing valves. The developer will need to work with the Building Department and Public Works Utility Department to determine which homes will require pressure-reducing valves. In the northwest area of the development where Topaz Drive and Lucy Ridge Lane will be extended, the developer is proposing to tie into the low-pressure water system via the existing 8” PVC water mains. Engineering does not anticipate any extraordinary impacts to the water system’s pressure or fire flow for the proposed 15 connections. Street “Z” will be tied into the high zone water system via the existing 14” HDPE SDR 11 water main off Galpin Boulevard. Street “Z” is currently proposed as a cul-de-sac and the applicant is proposing the creation of a dead end system. Public Works will require the applicant to resubmit plans to tie into the proposed water main on Street “Z” to the existing water main stub located off Ruby Lane, to the north. Because Street “Z” will be within the high-pressure zone and the north tie-in location on Ruby Lane (Ashling Meadows neighborhood) is within the low-pressure zone, updated construction plans shall call out a gate valve to be installed where the system ties in. This gate valve will remain closed in order to separate the two zones and will be opened by city forces during any maintenance or repair work in order to “back feed” the system, as necessary. The majority of the water main to be installed is within the central and southern portion of the development (Streets “A”-“H”). The applicant is proposing to create a looped water system which meets city best management practices for water utilities. Looped systems improve reliability by feeding water from two directions rather than one, which subsequently allows service to continue during an event that may otherwise cause disruption to water service. Water main connections will be tied into the high zone water system off Galpin Boulevard via a 14” HDPE SDR 11 pipe. The applicant shall verify the location of the connections on the construction plans. All water main taps, connections, and required water main testing shall be witnessed by the city. A pre-construction meeting prior to the commencement of any work shall be scheduled by the developer’s contractor with the city. Additionally, all underground utilities on the east side of Galpin Boulevard have not been located. For example, the city’s raw water main that feeds the west treatment plant. This area on the east side of Galpin Boulevard is where water and sanitary sewer will cross before entering the development. Thus, prior to the issuance of building permits, all underground utilities in this area shall be surveyed and illustrated in the profile sheets in order to identify any conflicts. The applicant is proposing a “land swap” to build Lot 163 abutting Street “A” within the city’s well house #3 property off Galpin Boulevard. This exchange of land will require the execution City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 22 of 45 of an agreement to be reviewed and approved by the city prior to acceptance and recording of the final plat. The agreement will set forth conditions for improvements to the well house #3 site in exchange for the land required for Lot 163. The improvements will include: the relocation of the ingress/egress driveway to well house #3 due to vertical curve and sight distance hazards, relocation of the SCADA antenna due to the impact of Lot 163, improvements to the hard surface area surrounding the well house which shall include a turning movements analysis to ensure proper widths for design vehicles are adequate, and potential landscaping improvements. Furthermore, the applicant must maintain a 50-foot setback of all structures from well house #3 in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Health requirements. From the proposed preliminary water plans, there are multiple areas where water main and sanitary sewer mains will cross. All crossings of water and sewer utility mains are required to have 18” of vertical separation and 10’ of horizontal separation, measured from the edge of pipe. Additionally, where water mains cross sanitary sewer mains, the sanitary sewer shall be constructed of C900 water main material and the sanitary sewer pipe length shall be centered over the water main crossing. The preliminary plans delineate areas where water main will run closely adjacent to, or under, stormwater catch basins. This may cause a potential for freezing of the water main at these locations due to inadequate ground cover from catch basin bottoms (sumps) to the water main. Water mains shall be constructed at 7.5’ below grade, or insulated, and constructed in conformance with the city’s standard specifications and detail plates. Plan and profile sheets provided with the construction drawings of the water main shall include the location and depth of catch basins and their sumps for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The location of gate valves at some locations are up to 40’ away from tees. The applicant shall cluster all valves at tees to obtain a minimum of 5’ spacing from the tee to the valves, where feasible. Review of valve locations and other water main appurtenances shall be conducted by Public Works and Engineering prior to the issuance of building permits. The applicant shall ensure all fire hydrant spacing meets fire codes and are subject to the review and approval of the Fire Department. Sanitary Sewer The applicant is proposing to construct 8” PVC sanitary sewer main throughout the development that shall be owned and maintained by the city after acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council. The entire sanitary sewer system will operate as a gravity system and connects to existing sanitary sewer mains at five locations (Lucy Ridge Lane, Topaz Drive, the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and Hunter Drive, a direct connection to the MCES sanitary sewer trunk line on Street “Z”, and at the Majestic Way extension off Street “D” through a utility easement). City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 23 of 45 As proposed, the connection to the MCES sanitary sewer trunk line from Street “Z” and its subsequent manhole are not within the roadway, down steep grades, and abutting Basin 200. The applicant shall resubmit construction drawings to provide the access manhole and tie-in on and within Street “Z”. All conditions set forth by the MCES shall be addressed by the applicant for the required access manhole and direct connection to their trunk line, and all permits required shall be obtained prior to the commencement of construction. The sanitary sewer line to the south, adjacent to Lots 101-109 abutting Street “A”, are proposed to be constructed at the minimum slope for gravity systems based on 10 States Standards (0.4% for 8” PVC pipe). It is the recommendation of the Engineering department to increase the slope to a minimum of 2% for a more effective cleaning velocity. This approach is feasible as the proposed manhole depths are 12-22 feet (e.g. MH-92) from top of lid to invert-outs. Also, the tie-in of this sewer line is to a manhole at the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and Hunter Drive. From the proposed preliminary plans, the applicant is proposing a new manhole, while city records show an existing manhole directly adjacent to the proposed new manhole. The applicant shall field verify this connection and its configuration prior to the submittal of construction plans. The preliminary plans submitted utilize a nomenclature for identifying proposed manholes that differs from the city’s. Prior to the submittal of construction drawings, the applicant shall ensure the city’s manhole naming conventions are incorporated within the plans. The city will provide a list of appropriate manhole identifiers. This will ensure an efficient transition of the newly constructed public improvements into the city’s asset management system for sanitary sewer appurtenances. Profile sheets for all public utilities, including sanitary sewer, shall be required for review and approval by the city prior to issuance of building permits. Based on the provided plan sheets, the applicant is proposing sanitary sewer that reaches a maximum depth of 26.47’ (see MH-26 in front of Lot 172 abutting Street “A”). PVC sanitary sewer pipes that have a burial depth of 0-16 feet are required to be class SDR 35, burial depths of 16-26 feet requires class SDR 26, and burial depths of greater than 26 feet requires class C900. The applicant shall update construction drawings indicating sanitary sewer pipes that fall within these burial depths to have the appropriate class of PVC. Furthermore, all inverts that have a 20-inch or greater differential shall be supplied inside drops per city standards and be constructed per the city’s detail plate for inside drops. The preliminary plans show one manhole (MH-99 in front of Lot 118 abutting Street “C”) having sewer flows in opposing directions, i.e. the east “invert out” flows to the east, and the west “invert-out” flows to the west. The applicant shall submit construction drawings that isolate flow directions via separate manholes and independent pipe systems. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 24 of 45 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Please note that due to the need to review additional stormwater information, additional comments will likely be provided on any resubmitted plans. General The applicant has delineated all wetlands on the property and agencies have approved the boundaries and type. 1. Wetland permitting is required due to the proximity and proposed impacts to wetlands on site. A wetland permit application has not yet been received by the City from the applicant. Grading permits will not be issued until approved wetland permits have been received. See “Wetland Alteration” of this staff report for more information. 2. Wetland review will include ensuring hydrology is maintained to all wetlands to be preserved as well as review of proposed stormwater impacts. 3. Storm sewer sizing calculations should be provided to confirm storm sewer is sized to convey the 10-year storm event. 4. A NPDES permit and accompanying Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required prior to the start of construction. 5. An operations and maintenance plan for the proposed stormwater management system will be required prior to approval. 6. Provide infiltration test results per MPCA Requirements in the location of each proposed infiltration area. 7. All comments and conditions set forth by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District shall be addressed by the applicant. Preliminary Plans 1. Show all existing storm sewer and other water resource related features in plans. 2. Adjust and show all easements over the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services’ sanitary sewer on the preliminary and final plat. 3. Clearly indicate what storm sewer will be private and what will be public. All public storm sewer will be required to be shown in profile view. Applicant should confirm there are no conflicts with the water main or sanitary sewer throughout the site. 4. The following comments pertain to all proposed ponds that include an infiltration bench (Basins 100, 200 and 300): a. Infiltration test results will be required in the location of all proposed infiltration benches and infiltration basins. Infiltration test results have not been submitted in the location of proposed Basin 100. If filtration is to be used, the applicant will need to provide a specification for amended soils. b. The exfiltration above the piped outlet elevation should be included in the HydroCAD model and the exfiltration rate should correspond to what is presented in the infiltration test results. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 25 of 45 c. The proposed infiltration benches will be required to meet the 48-hour drawdown requirement. d. Outlets from the pond should be moved out of the permanent pond area and should be moved away from the inlet to minimize the risk of short circuiting. 5. The proposed piped outlet being modeled for Basin 400 is not shown in the plans. 6. Access routes for all proposed stormwater basins are required for maintenance purposes. Applicant should callout access locations for all proposed stormwater basins. 7. A defined riprap EOF spillway will be required for all stormwater basins per details provided on Sheet 33. Applicant should include location and elevation of all EOF spillways on the storm sewer plans. HydroCAD Model 1. The soil borings provided show that there are clay soils throughout the site. Modeling should be updated to reflect the D soils present. 2. Proposed and existing HydroCAD models should be modeling the same area. There is roughly 120 acres included in the existing conditions model that is not included in the proposed conditions model. All offsite drainage should be included in the models. 3. Existing and proposed conditions drainage area maps should be updated to show the location and boundaries of all subcatchments included in the models. 4. Time of concentrations should be calculated in HydroCAD and not directly entered to confirm accuracy. Provide supporting calculations for all directly entered times of concentrations. 5. From the drainage area maps, it appears that P-LU 2-6 (P.E. Edit) in the existing model corresponds to Pond 500P in the proposed conditions model. The modeled storage for the wetland differs between the existing and proposed conditions models but no wetland impacts are shown on Sheet 37 for this wetland. Applicant should update the models so that they have the same storage modeled for the wetland. a. There is a proposed piped outlet from this wetland that is over 4 feet lower than the current natural spillway outlet. The applicant will be required to show that this does not change the hydrology of the existing wetland as part of the wetland permit requirements. 6. There are numerous inconsistencies between what is shown in the plans on Sheet 35 for the outlets of the stormwater basins and what is being modeled in HydroCAD and P8. Applicant will need to update the models so that they are representative of what is being shown in the plans. P8 Model 1. The same total area should be modeled in P8 as in HydroCAD. 2. The model should be run for at least 50 years and should include the most recent precipitation data included in the precipitation file to get accurate removal efficiencies. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 26 of 45 3. The modeling of the proposed stormwater ponds with filtration benches is incorrect and is overestimating the removal efficiencies of the basins. The applicant should update the model for the stormwater basins in the following way: a. The design infiltration rate should be added to the flood pool section of the stormwater pond devices where applicable. This will model infiltration above the outlet elevation. The design infiltration rate should match what is being modeled in HydroCAD. b. The infiltration basins should be removed from the model (except for Device 600i). c. Applicant should confirm total phosphorus and total suspended solids removal requirements are still being met after the model has been updated. 4. Watersheds 201 and 600 are only modeling the impervious area. The pervious area in these watersheds should be added to the model. 5. Watershed 300 in the P8 model has 25% impervious while the corresponding HydroCAD subwatershed has 45% impervious modeled. Applicant should update the models to be consistent with one another and representative of the plans. Stormwater Management Plan 1. The total areas listed in the table in Section III.A of the Stormwater Management Plan are inconsistent with the total area called out in the plans and the total area being modeled. Applicant should include the entire site in the areas shown in the table. WETLAND ALTERATION Wetland Protection The plan set shows intent to impact several wetlands on site. A Wetland Replacement Plan application needs to be submitted to the city and reviewed per the WCA. Many requirements of Article VI have not been addressed. Some of the important requirements include: 1. Any projects seeking a wetland alteration permit subject to this article will also be required to submit the following incomplete requirements: Existing and proposed drainage areas to wetlands; Buffer strip plan meeting the criteria of subsections 20-411(c) and (d). 2. Sec. 20-416. Mitigation. Wetland mitigation shall be undertaken on-site. If this is not feasible, then mitigation may occur locally within the subwatershed. If this is not possible, then mitigation may occur outside the subwatershed, elsewhere in the city. If mitigation cannot be accomplished on-site or if the city deems it necessary to perform mitigation off-site, then the applicant shall be responsible for providing off-site mitigation within the major subwatershed as designated by the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, or purchasing wetland credits from the state wetland bank. 3. Stormwater runoff shall not be discharged into wetlands without water quality pretreatment as prescribed by this Code. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 27 of 45 4. If a wetland alteration permit is issued allowing wetland alteration, the following standards shall be followed: (1) The alteration will not have a net adverse effect on the ecological and hydrological characteristics of remaining wetland, (2) It shall be located as to minimize the impact on vegetation, (3) It shall not adversely change water flow, (4) The size of the altered area shall be limited to the minimum required for the proposed action, (5) The disposal of any excess material is prohibited within remaining wetland areas, (6) The disposal of any excess material shall include proper erosion control and nutrient retention measures, (7) Alterations to any wetland area are prohibited during waterfowl breeding season or fish spawning season, unless it is determined by the city that the wetland is not used for waterfowl breeding or fish spawning, (8) Alterations to wetland areas shall be mitigated in accordance with the requirements of this article if the activity results in a loss of wetland area and/or function and value of the wetland. 5. The alteration shall not alter the hydrological patterns in the remainder of the wetland, if a portion of the wetland remains, unless exempted under Sec. 20-417. Please show how hydrologic patterns will not be altered for the remaining wetlands. 6. Sec. 20-405. Wetland delineation. An electronic copy of the delineated wetland boundaries must be submitted in a format compatible with the city's GIS database. 7. Sec. 20-406. Wetland classification. All wetlands delineated under Sec. 20-405 of this article that have not been previously classified shall be classified using the results from the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method for Evaluating Wetland Functions (MnRAM Version 3.0), or future versions. A MnRAM shall be completed by the property owner or applicant for each previously unclassified wetland. An electronic version of the MnRAM evaluation must be submitted to and approved by the city to establish the classification of each wetland prior to any alteration or impact to the wetland. 8. Staff review will be conditional upon an approved Wetland Replacement Plan. 9. A grading permit cannot be issued until the applicant has completed the WCA process. 10. Wetland Buffers. Wetland buffers and buffer monumentation will be required adjacent to the wetlands on site. Please indicate wetland buffers widths and locations where signage will be placed on a plan sheet. Please find additional information on signage placement in the guidance document attached. The WMO provides signs and sign posts for the cost of materials. Alternative signs (by the city or applicant) are also acceptable provided they contain similar information. 11. Sec. 19-146. Wetland elements. a. Water level fluctuations (peak elevation and duration) for wetlands shall be limited to two feet and duration not to exceed 48 hours so as to prevent the destruction of wildlife habitat and wetland vegetation. b. Sedimentation basins or sediment removal devices shall be provided prior to discharge into wetlands. c. Variable bottom contours should be considered to provide deeper holes and flat shallow benches. This feature will provide habitat for diversity of plants and wetland inhabitants for wetland mitigation sites and stormwater basins. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 28 of 45 Wetland Acres Status 1 41.9 preserved 2 0.18 preserved 3 0.16 filled 4 0.2 filled 5 0.05 filled 6 0.06 preserved 7 0.62 preserved 8 0.17 preserved 9 0.38 preserved 10 0.13 preserved 11 2.79 preserved 12 0.6 filled 12A 0.04 filled 13 0.03 preserved 14 0.23 filled Percent Total 47.54 100% Filled 1.28 3% Preserved 46.26 97% City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 29 of 45 EROSION PREVENTION & SEDIMENT CONTROL The proposed development will exceed one (1) acre of disturbance and will, therefore, be subject to the General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity Under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination/State Disposal System (NPDES Construction Permit). The applicant has prepared and submitted a Surface Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the city for review. The SWPPP is a required submittal element for preliminary plat review. No earth disturbing activities may occur until an approved SWPPP is developed. This SWPPP shall be a standalone document consistent with the NPDES Construction Permit and shall contain all required elements as listed in Parts III and IV of the permit. The SWPPP will need to be updated as the plans are finalized, when the contractor and their sub-contractors are identified and as other conditions change. Financial Assurance. To guarantee compliance with the plan and related remedial work, a cash escrow or letter of credit, satisfactory to the city, shall be furnished to the city before a building permit is issued. The escrow amount shall be $7,500.00 per acre. The city may use the escrow or draw upon the letter of credit to reimburse the city for any labor or material costs it incurs in securing compliance with the plan or in implementing the plan. If the city draws on the escrowed funds, no additional building permits shall be issued until the pre-draw escrow balance has been restored. The city shall endeavor to give notice to the owner or developer before proceeding, but such notice shall not be required in an emergency as determined by the city. The assurance shall be maintained until final stabilization and removal of erosion and sediment controls. STORMWATER UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGES Section 4-30 of City Code sets out the fees associated with surface water management. Water quality and water quantity fees are collected with a subdivision. These fees are based on land use type and are intended to reflect the fact that the more intense the development type, the greater the degradation of surface water. This fee will be applied to the new lot of record being created. It is calculated as shown in the table below: The SWMP Fee is $432,183.23 pending any plan revisions. PER ACRE FEE ACRES FEE $8,320 191.0465 1,589,506.88$ $8,320 16.79 (139,692.80)$ $8,320 122.3114 (1,017,630.85)$ 51.9451 432,183.23$ AREA GROSS AREA ROW OUTLOTS NET AREA SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT FEE City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 30 of 45 ASSESSMENTS Water and sewer partial hookups are due at the time of final plat. The partial hookup fees will be assessed at the rate in effect at that time. The remaining partial hookups fees are due with the building permit. FEES Based on the proposal, the following fees would be collected with the development contract: • Administration Fee: If the improvement costs are between $500,000 and $1,000,000, 2% of the improvement costs. If the improvement costs exceed $1,000,000, 2.5% of the first $1,000,000 plus 1.5% of the remainder. • Surface Water Management fee: $432,183.23 • A portion of the water hook-up charge: $2,311/unit • A portion of the sanitary sewer hook-up charge: $691/unit • GIS fees: $25 for the plat plus $10 per parcel • Street light operating fee for one year: $300 per light. LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 31 of 45 The applicant for the Galpin Property development submitted tree canopy coverage and preservation calculations. However, the minimum parkland dedication of 9.1 acres was not included in the calculations; it has been incorporated into staff’s calculations. Total upland area (excl wetlands, bluff and parkland) 130.2 acres Baseline canopy coverage 69% or 89.8 acres Minimum canopy coverage required 46% or 59.8 acres Proposed tree preservation 36% or 47.5 acres The developer does not meet minimum canopy coverage for the site; therefore, the applicant must bring the canopy coverage on site up to the 46% minimum. The difference between the required coverage and the remaining coverage is multiplied by 1.2 for total area to be replaced. One tree is valued at 1,089 SF. Minimum required 59.8 acres Less canopy preserved 47.5 acres Minimum canopy coverage to be replaced 12.3 acres Multiplied by 1.2 14.76 acres Divided by 1089 = Total number of trees to be planted 590 trees The applicant has submitted a landscape plan showing a total of 397 trees to be planted in the development. The applicant shall increase tree planting in the development to meet minimum requirements. While it may seem that tree removal on the site is significant, the intensity of it is regulated to the proposed development of the west side of the property. Out of a total of 89.8 acres, which does not include wooded wetlands, forested bluffs or parkland dedication, 42.3 acres will be removed for homes, but a majority of 47.5 (52% of existing woods) acres will be preserved. This is a positive outcome for the preservation of natural resources on the site. The development is required to install a buffer yard along Galpin Boulevard. Landscaping Item Required Proposed Bufferyard B – Galpin Boulevard., 1200’ 12 Overstory trees 24 Understory trees 24 Shrubs 12 Overstory trees 66 Evergreen trees 0 Shrubs The applicant is also proposing bufferyard planting along the south property line. According to ordinance, a low-density development abutting a low-density development is not required to have a bufferyard. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 32 of 45 Landscaping Item Required Proposed Bufferyard B – South property line, 1050’ 0 Overstory trees 0 Understory trees 0 Shrubs 6 Overstory trees 61 Evergreen trees 0 Shrubs The city well house on Galpin Boulevard abuts the development. Staff recommends that buffer plantings be added to the east of the building. There are also three oaks on city property to the south of the building that appear to be within the grading limits for a proposed pond. Staff recommends that these trees remain and the grading limits be adjusted to provide for preservation by avoiding any grading within the critical root zone areas of the trees. The plant schedule submitted with the landscape plan lists overstory and evergreen tree selections. Applying the city ordinance dealing with species diversity, each type (species) of tree should be in quantities of 40 or less (10% of the total) and each group (Genus) of trees (maples, oaks, etc.) should have no more than 80 specified. Using those designations, staff recommends that Autumn Blaze maples be eliminated from the plant schedule since maples comprise 23% of the total trees and these types of maples are overplanted and have an undesirable structure as they mature. The applicant shall choose a different genus of tree to replace the Autumn Blaze. Other trees which are noted in excess of the maximum quantities allowed include Northern Pin Oak, Black Hills Spruce and White Pine. These quantities must be reduced to a maximum of 10% of the total trees and new varieties of trees added to increase diversity of plantings. Additionally, Northern Pin Oak shall be replaced with white, bur, red or bicolor oak species. The alkaline soils of Chanhassen make the Northern Pin Oak selection undesirable for long-term survivability. Additional selections of tree species should expand the breadth of tree types and take into consideration soil conditions and future hardiness zone changes. Staff has reviewed the tree clearing limits for the development on the plans and on site. There are a number of trees at the edge of the grading limits that staff would like to consider for preservation. Staff requests that the developer conduct a walk-through of the grading limits on site prior to removals with city staff to inspect for opportunities for additional tree preservation. Grading and tree removal is not allowed within the bluff impact zone. The grading plan does not show the impact zone on the plans and proposed grading and tree removal to the top of the bluffs. The applicant shall revise the plans to show the bluff impact zone on both bluffs and eliminate grading within these areas. Additionally, private lot boundaries should not encompass surveyed bluff areas. Property lines could meet the edge of the bluff, but not encroach into it. Staff recommends that lots with significant tree cover contain conservation easements to protect the wooded areas. Lots 101, 104, 105, 130 and 131 should have protective easements over parts of the lot containing existing forest. Specifically, the rear 40’ of Lot 101, the rear 100’ of Lots 104 and 105, the westerly 200’ of Lot 130 and the easterly 250’-300’ of Lot 131. Staff fully supports the clustering of development/density transfer to preserve the significant open space to the east. The existing woods on the east side of the property contain significant City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 33 of 45 oaks, maples, and other native species. Many of these trees are over a hundred years old and provide a wooded legacy within the community. Traditional subdivision development would not preserve as many trees and would compromise the health of Lake Ann by removing woods and vegetation along the lakeshore. As stated earlier, the applicant is preserving a majority of the existing woods on site thereby allowing the Chanhassen community, and more directly the residents of this neighborhood, an experience not found in every community whereby significant open space is reachable and accessible from someone’s front door. That experience is a rare gem and would offer this neighborhood, and the others adjacent to it, an enhanced quality of life. PARKS & RECREATION Summary Lennar is proposing to develop 191 acres of property located midway between W. 78th Street and Lake Lucy Road and east of Galpin Boulevard. The existing zoning is rural residential and the existing guide plan designation is residential low density (1.2- 4 units per acre). Two concept plans were originally submitted by Lennar for consideration. One plan titled Concept Plan 04 depicted an invariable plat of uniform sized residential single-family lots covering all quadrants of the property. A second plan titled Concept Plan 07 depicted a variable plat of mixed lot sizes clustered to the west-central and north-central quadrants of the property, 3.6 units per acre, and preserving 100+/acres of public park area utilizing a density transfer and park dedication in the eastern quadrant of the property. The Park and Recreation Commission supported the density transfer and park dedication proposal at a concept review on June 28, 2018. Background This site has been held as an estate property in the community for an extended period of time and is now being proposed for development as a single-family home community. The property includes a large quadrant of land identified in the city's Comprehensive Plan as conceptual park expansion area and in the city's Parks and Recreation System Plan as a priority park expansion area. This eastern quadrant proposed for preservation is 100+/acres in size consisting of wetlands and wooded uplands and featuring extensive shoreline on both Lake Lucy and Lake Ann. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 34 of 45 Discussion Upon completing conceptual plan review with city Commissions and Council this past summer, Lennar also held a neighborhood meeting in November and met with individual residents to receive feedback on the proposed development. The preliminary plat that has developed as a result of the input gained from these reviews, is an excellent model of the use of a PUD. City Code states "The use of a planned unit development for residential purposes should result in a reasonable and verifiable exchange between the city and developer. The developer gains the potential for offering reduced lot sizes and the flexibility in development standards that result in a combination of reduced development costs and improved marketing flexibility. At the same time, the city should be offered enhanced environmental sensitivity beyond normal ordnance requirements". The city's PUD ordinance addresses the desire for the creation of parks and open space consistent with the city's planning documents. The proposed PUD, with the noted conditions, provides public benefit and helps the city meet stated goals with respect to parks, trails, and open space by: • Preserving for the public 100+/acres of unique natural open space with very high recreational and environmental value. This includes 50+/acres of upland around Lake Ann and Lake Lucy that might otherwise be privatized. • Providing land and connections for trails to eliminate trail gaps and better connect the community and natural areas. • Allowing for the expansion of Lake Ann Park and enhancing its role as Chanhassen's premier community park. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 35 of 45 This proposed PUD benefits all parties and ultimately fulfills the desires and intent of the city’s Comprehensive Plan and Park and Recreation System Plan. On December 28, 2018, the city received letters from Lennar and Comerica requesting additional compensation for the proposed 50+/acre dedication of upland for park purposes above and beyond the granting of full park dedication fee credit ($1,107,800) and application of a density transfer moving housing density from the eastern half of the property to the western half of the property. In that this is a PUD application, staff is not recommending that compensation be granted beyond the density transfer and full park dedication fee credit. RECOMMENDATION Denial “The City Council denies the Rezoning of 191 acres from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned Unit Development - Residential, PUD-R, including the PUD ordinance “Galpin Design Standards” “The City Council denies the Wetland Alteration Permit of 1.28 acres of wetland impacts subject to conditions in the staff report; “The City Council denies the Subdivision Preliminary Plat creating 181 lots, three outlots and dedication of public right-of-way, as shown in plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated February 28, 2019. And The City Council a adopts the attached findings of fact and decision for denial. Approval “The City Council approves the Rezoning of 191 acres from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned Unit Development - Residential, PUD-R, including the PUD ordinance “Galpin Design Standards” “The City Council approves the Wetland Alteration Permit of 1.28 acres of wetland impacts subject to conditions in the staff report; “The City Council approves the Subdivision Preliminary Plat creating 181 lots, three outlots and dedication of public right-of-way, as shown in plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated February 28, 2019, subject to conditions in the staff report subject to the following conditions: City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 36 of 45 Parks & Recreation 1. Dedication of 100+/- acres of wooded open spaces and wetlands in the eastern half of the property to the City of Chanhassen for parkland in exchange for a housing density transfer and fulfillment of a nine +/- acre parkland dedication requirement. 2. Acknowledgement that the dedicated land may be developed at the city's discretion as parkland for public use and may include, but is not limited to trails, boardwalks, bridges, structures, and signage. 3. The planning, engineering and construction of a 10-foot wide bituminous east/west trail connection between Galpin Boulevard and a location east of Street “D” and a 10-foot wide bituminous trail adjacent to Galpin Boulevard between Street “E” and Street “A”. 4. All trails shall meet all city standards for trail construction. 5. The east/west trail shall maintain a minimum 10-foot setback from outside edges of trail to private property and be designed to minimize encroachment of wetland buffers. 6. The east/west trail crossing of Street “A” shall be relocated from a midblock crossing as shown to the intersection of Street “A” and Street “D”. 7. The east/west trail be designed and constructed so as not to require retaining walls. 8. The entirety of the east/west trail and associated buffers shall be constructed within the dedicated public outlots. 9. The entirety of the Galpin Boulevard trail between Street “E” and Street “A” shall be constructed in dedicated public right-of-way. 10. The planning, engineering and construction of 10-foot wide bituminous trails connecting both Street “Z” and Topaz Drive Ridge Lane to the planned trail at the western edge of Lake Lucy including trail easements. Planning 1. All 191 acres must be included in the PUD. 2. All lots and homes must be developed consistent with the standards in the Compliance Table. 3. Approve the length of the cul-de-sac on Street “Z”. Engineering 1. Any requirements set by the MCES to work within the MCES’s sewer and utility easement shall be addressed by the applicant. 2. An executed agreement between the developer and the MCES allowing work within the MCES’s easement shall be provided to the city prior to the issuance of grading permits. 3. The width of the MCES sewer and utility easement shall be called out on the final plat prior to acceptance and recording. 4. The width of the public right-of-ways shall be called out on the final plat prior to acceptance and recording, this includes radii cul-de-sacs bulbs. 5. Thirty foot (30’) wide drainage and utility easements, for the purpose of accessing utilities and basins, shall be provided between but not limited to Lots 109 and 110 abutting the cul- de-sac of Lucy Ridge Lane and Topaz Drive, Lots 152 and 153 abutting Street “E”, Lots 119 and 120 abutting Street “D”, in the area of Lots 128 and 130 abutting Street “Z” where the City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 37 of 45 water main loop is to be installed, and Lots 120 and 121 abutting Street “Z” prior to acceptance and recording. 6. Right-of-way dedication in conformance with the attached Carver County Development/Access Review Comments, subject to review and approval by the county and city prior to acceptance and recording of the final plat. 7. On-going coordination with the county and city regarding future improvements to Galpin Boulevard. Also see Condition 25. 8. The developer shall underground all overhead utilities from W. 78th Street to the northern properly line of the development. 9. The developer shall locate on the existing condition survey all existing wells and septic fields. 10. The developer shall abandon all existing wells and septic fields in accordance with all federal, state and local regulatory agency standards, and obtain all necessary permits for said abandonments. Prior to commencement of abandonment activities, a copy of all required permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies shall be provided to the city. 11. Provide an updated existing condition survey that illustrates the MCES sanitary and utility easements on parcels 250100400 and 257580040. 12. The applicant shall submit a mass grading plan or a phased grading plan (as applicable) for review and approval by the city prior to issuance of grading permits. 13. Proposed spot elevations shall be shown on the grading plans at the center of the proposed driveway at the curbline for review prior to issuance of grading permits. 14. Proposed spot elevations shall be shown on the grading plans at top of curb for review prior to issuance of grading permits. 15. Slopes north of Street “Z” called out as 2:1 between stations 6+50 and 11+00 shall be adjusted to achieve a minimum slope of 2.5:1. 16. Drainage arrows for all EOF routes shall be included on the grading plans prior to issuance of grading permits. 17. Grading plans shall be updated to include bluff extents and setbacks. Grading within bluff setbacks is subject to review and approval by the city prior to issuance of grading permits. 18. All existing buildings and structures within the city’s well house #3 property abutting Galpin Boulevard shall be included on the grading plans. 19. Grading plans shall be updated to include the location and grade of the improved and relocated access driveway to well house #3 off Galpin Boulevard. 20. Grading plans shall be updated to include the location and protection methodology of the significant oak tree on the well house #3 site. 21. The low point south of the catch basin (CBMH-306) near the intersection of Street “E” and Street “H” shall be adjusted to be adjacent to the catch basin. 22. The applicant shall submit revised grading plans and stormwater plans so that no stormwater runoff flows directly onto the public trail south of Lots 164-174 abutting Street “A”. 23. Slopes shall not exceed 10% immediately to the east of Lot 110 abutting Street “A” where stormwater conveyance systems are proposed. 24. An updated geotechnical report assessing slope stability immediately east of Lot 110 abutting Street “A” shall be submitted for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 38 of 45 25. Final grading plans, including pond locations, sizing and analysis, along with right-of-way dedications off Galpin Boulevard, shall conform to the future Galpin Boulevard reconstruction project. Cross reference of grading plans, profiles, and respective cross sections are to be provided at key locations such as intersections, ponds, or other special features required by the county and city for review prior to acceptance and recording of the final plat. 26. All retaining walls exceeding 4’ in height shall have plans and details prepared by a registered engineer or landscape architect prior to issuance of building permits. 27. The retaining wall south of Lots 108-111 abutting Street “A” shall be adjusted to accommodate a 1.5:1 buffer from the bottom of the proposed stormwater line to the bottom of the proposed retaining wall foundation. 28. Spot elevations of top of wall and bottom of wall for the retaining wall behind Lots 161-163 abutting Street “A” shall be included on the grading plans. 29. Grading and construction within bluff setbacks are subject to review and approval by the city prior to issuance of grading permits. This includes, but is not limited to, the retaining wall located south of Lots 123-125 abutting Street “Z”. 30. All newly constructed streets and the extension of any existing streets shall be public streets, owned and maintained by the city, after acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council. 31. All newly constructed public streets shall be designed to meet the current standard specifications and detail plate for residential streets (Detail Plate #5200), unless otherwise directed by the City Engineer. 32. Any and all conditions associated with the alignment and configuration of Street “Z” set by the Planning Commission or City Council shall be addressed by the applicant prior to acceptance and recording of the final plat. 33. The applicant shall remove all impervious surface from the existing Ruby Lane stub-out, construct half street improvements (extending curb and gutter) on Topaz Drive, and restore the area to the surrounding conditions. 34. The existing driveway off Galpin Boulevard located on parcel 250100400 shall be abandoned and tied into Street “Z”. 35. A water service lateral shall be stubbed off Street “Z”’s watermain for the future connection to parcel 250100400. 36. An updated geotechnical report with additional soil borings shall be provided for review and approval prior to the commencement of construction. 37. Sidewalks shall be extended along the cul-de-sacs located off Streets “D”, “G”, and “Z” and shall be constructed in accordance with the city’s standard specifications and detail plates for concrete sidewalks. 38. The applicant shall install curb ramps for pedestrian access to stretches of sidewalk greater than 500’ between intersections and/or proposed curb ramps. 39. All curb ramps shall be constructed to meet ADA standards and the city’s Detail Plates #5215-5215D. 40. Intersection improvements to provide pedestrian access at the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and Street “E” shall be constructed in accordance with MUTCD best management practices. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 39 of 45 41. A detail of the proposed street lights shall be provided prior to the issuance of building permits. 42. An enumerated list of all street lights and their proposed locations shall be provided for review and approval prior to the recording of the final plat. 43. Street lights shall be installed at all intersections and at the end of each cul-de-sac subject to review and approval of the city prior to issuance of building permits. 44. The site plan shall be updated to provide proposed street grades (centerline gradients). 45. All newly constructed water mains shall be public water mains, owned and maintained by the city, after acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council. 46. Water mains located on Streets “A”-“H” and Street “Z” shall be tied into the high-pressure zone located on Galpin Boulevard. Water main extensions on Topaz Drive and Lucy Ridge Lane shall be tied into the existing water main stubs (low-pressure zone). 47. The water main located on Street “Z” shall be tied into the existing stub off Ruby Lane and a gate valve near the connection point shall be installed. The gate valve shall be closed to separate the pressure zones. 48. The developer shall field verify the location of all water main taps prior to the issuance of building permits and update the plans accordingly. 49. The developer’s contractor shall schedule a preconstruction meeting with Engineering and Public Works Utilities prior to the commencement of any work to the water main installation and tapping. 50. Updated plans indicating the location of all underground utilities on the east side of Galpin Boulevard, along with plans and profiles of any utility crossings on the east side of Galpin Boulevard, shall be submitted for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 51. An agreement that lists the conditions and required improvements for the land swap between the developer and the city regarding Lot 163 and a portion of the well house #3 site, shall be executed and recorded prior to the acceptance and recording of the final plat. 52. All utility crossings of potable water and sanitary and/or storm mains will require 18” of vertical separation and 10’ of horizontal separation. The developer shall submit construction plans with profiles and plan views of the utilities for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 53. All utility crossings of potable water and sanitary sewer will require that the sanitary sewer main at that crossing be constructed of PVC C900 water main material. The developer shall submit construction plans indicating material type at these locations for review and approval of the city prior to issuance of building permits. 54. The developer shall submit construction plans indicating that pipe lengths of sanitary sewer mains are centered over potable water crossings. 55. Water mains shall be constructed at 7.5’ below grade, or insulated, and constructed in conformance with the city’s standard specifications and detail plates. 56. Cluster valves located around water main tees shall be installed at a minimum of 5’ from the tees to the valves, where feasible. All valve locations and any other water main appurtenances shall be reviewed and approved by Engineering and Public Works prior to the issuance of building permits. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 40 of 45 57. All comments and conditions regarding fire appurtenances, spacing, and location set forth by the Fire Department shall be addressed by the applicant. 58. All newly constructed sewer mains shall be public sewer mains, owned and maintained by the city after acceptance of the public improvements by the City Council. 59. A 30’ utility easement shall be recorded over the existing public sewer line, within Outlot A located near the south-central area of the preliminary plat, prior to acceptance of final plat. 60. All conditions set forth by the MCES for the direct connection and installation of an access manhole to their trunk line shall be addressed by the applicant, and all permits required for the connection and installation of the manhole shall be obtained prior to the commencement of construction. 61. The applicant shall field verify the proposed sanitary sewer connection and existing sewer system configuration at the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and Hunter Drive prior to the submittal of construction plans. 62. The applicant shall ensure the city’s sanitary sewer nomenclature is incorporated in the construction plans. 63. Profile sheets for all public utilities, including sanitary sewer, shall be required for review and approval by the city prior to issuance of building permits. 64. PVC sanitary sewer pipes that will be constructed at a burial depth of 0-16 feet shall be constructed of pipe class SDR 35, burial depths of 16-26 feet shall be of pipe class SDR 26, and burial depths of greater than 26 feet shall be of pipe class C900. 65. Inverts that have a 20 inch or greater differential shall be supplied inside drops per city standards and be constructed per the city’s Detail Plate No. 2104. 66. The applicant shall submit construction drawings that isolate flow directions via separate manholes and independent pipe systems. Stormwater Conditions & Wetlands The SWMP Fee is $432,183.23, pending any plan revisions. This fee will be applied to the new lot of record being created. It is calculated as shown in the table below: Assessments Water and sewer partial hookups are due at the time of final plat. The partial hookup fees will be assessed at the rate in effect at that time. The remaining partial hookups fees are due with the building permit. Fees Based on the proposal, the following fees would be collected with the development contract: PER ACRE FEE ACRES FEE $8,320 191.0465 1,589,506.88$ $8,320 16.79 (139,692.80)$ $8,320 122.3114 (1,017,630.85)$ 51.9451 432,183.23$ AREA GROSS AREA ROW OUTLOTS NET AREA SURFACE WATER DEVELOPMENT FEE City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 41 of 45 • Administration Fee: If the improvement costs are between $500,000 and $1,000,000, 2% of the improvement costs. If the improvement costs exceed $1,000,000, 2.5% of the first $1,000,000 plus 1.5% of the remainder. • Surface Water Management Fee: $432,183.23 • A portion of the water hook-up charge: $2,311/unit • A portion of the sanitary sewer hook-up charge: $691/unit • GIS fees: $25 for the plat plus $10 per parcel • Street light operating fee for one year: $300 per light 1. Wetland permitting is required due to the proximity and proposed impacts to wetlands on site. A wetland permit application has not yet been received by the city from the applicant. Grading permits will not be issued until approved wetland permits have been received. 2. Wetland review will include ensuring hydrology is maintained to all wetlands to be preserved as well as review of proposed stormwater impacts. 3. Storm sewer sizing calculations should be provided to confirm storm sewer is sized to convey the 10-year storm event. 4. An NPDES permit and accompanying Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required prior to the start of construction. 5. An operations and maintenance plan for the proposed stormwater management system will be required prior to approval. 6. Provide infiltration test results per MPCA Requirements in the location of each proposed infiltration area. 7. All comments and conditions set forth by the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District shall be addressed by the applicant. 8. Show all existing storm sewer and other water resource related features in plans. 9. Adjust and show all easements over the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services’ sanitary sewer on the preliminary and final plat. 10. Clearly indicate what storm sewer will be private and what will be public. All public storm sewer will be required to be shown in profile view. Applicant should confirm there are no conflicts with the watermain or sanitary sewer throughout the site. 11. The following comments pertain to all proposed ponds that include an infiltration bench (Basins 100, 200 and 300): a. Infiltration test results will be required in the location of all proposed infiltration benches and infiltration basins. Infiltration test results have not been submitted in the location of proposed Basin 100. If filtration is to be used, the applicant will need to provide a specification for amended soils. b. The exfiltration above the piped outlet elevation should be included in the HydroCAD model and the exfiltration rate should correspond to what is presented in the infiltration test results. c. The proposed infiltration benches will be required to meet the 48-hour drawdown requirement. d. Outlets from the pond should be moved out of the permanent pond area and should be moved away from the inlet to minimize the risk of short circuiting. 12. The proposed piped outlet being modeled for Basin 400 is not shown in the plans. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 42 of 45 13. Access routes for all proposed stormwater basins are required for maintenance purposes. Applicant should callout access locations for all proposed stormwater basins. 14. A defined riprap EOF spillway will be required for all stormwater basins per details provided on Sheet 33. Applicant should include location and elevation of all EOF spillways on the storm sewer plans. 15. The soil borings provided show that there are clay soils throughout the site. Modeling should be updated to reflect the D soils present. 16. Proposed and existing HydroCAD models should be modeling the same area. There is roughly 120 acres included in the existing conditions model that is not included in the proposed conditions model. All offsite drainage should be included in the models. 17. Existing and proposed conditions drainage area maps should be updated to show the location and boundaries of all subcatchments included in the models. 18. Time of concentrations should be calculated in HydroCAD and not directly entered to confirm accuracy. Provide supporting calculations for all directly entered times of concentrations. 19. From the drainage area maps, it appears that P-LU 2-6 (P.E. Edit) in the existing model corresponds to Pond 500P in the proposed conditions model. The modeled storage for the wetland differs between the existing and proposed conditions models but no wetland impacts are shown on Sheet 37 for this wetland. Applicant should update the models so that they have the same storage modeled for the wetland. a. There is a proposed piped outlet from this wetland that is over four feet lower than the current natural spillway outlet. The applicant will be required to show that this does not change the hydrology of the existing wetland as part of the wetland permit requirements. 20. There are numerous inconsistencies between what is shown in the plans on Sheet 35 for the outlets of the stormwater basins and what is being modeled in HydroCAD and P8. Applicant will need to update the models so that they are representative of what is being shown in the plans. 21. The same total area should be modeled in P8 as in HydroCAD. 22. The model should be run for at least 50 years and should include the most recent precipitation data included in the precipitation file to get accurate removal efficiencies. 23. The modeling of the proposed stormwater ponds with filtration benches is incorrect and is overestimating the removal efficiencies of the basins. The applicant should update the model for the stormwater basins in the following way: a. The design infiltration rate should be added to the flood pool section of the stormwater pond devices where applicable. This will model infiltration above the outlet elevation. The design infiltration rate should match what is being modeled in HydroCAD. b. The infiltration basins should be removed from the model (except for Device 600i). c. Applicant should confirm total phosphorus and total suspended solids removal requirements are still being met after the model has been updated. 24. Watersheds 201 and 600 are only modeling the impervious area. The pervious area in these watersheds should be added to the model. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 43 of 45 25. Watershed 300 in the P8 model has 25% impervious while the corresponding HydroCAD subwatershed has 45% impervious modeled. Applicant should update the models to be consistent with one another and representative of the plans. 26. The total areas listed in the table in Section III.A of the Stormwater Management Plan are inconsistent with the total area called out in the plans and the total area being modeled. Applicant should include the entire site in the areas shown in the table. 27. Any projects seeking a wetland alteration permit subject to this article will also be required to submit the following incomplete requirements: Existing and proposed drainage areas to wetlands; Buffer strip plan meeting the criteria of subsections 20-411(c) and (d). 28. Sec. 20-416. Mitigation. Wetland mitigation shall be undertaken on-site. If this is not feasible, then mitigation may occur locally within the subwatershed. If this is not possible, then mitigation may occur outside the subwatershed, elsewhere in the city. If mitigation cannot be accomplished on site, or if the city deems it necessary to perform mitigation off site, then the applicant shall be responsible for providing off-site mitigation within the major subwatershed, as designated by the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, or purchasing wetland credits from the state wetland bank. 29. Stormwater runoff shall not be discharged into wetlands without water quality pretreatment as prescribed by this Code. 30. If a Wetland Alteration Permit is issued allowing wetland alteration, the following standards shall be followed: (1) The alteration will not have a net adverse effect on the ecological and hydrological characteristics of remaining wetland, (2) It shall be located as to minimize the impact on vegetation, (3) It shall not adversely change water flow, (4) The size of the altered area shall be limited to the minimum required for the proposed action, (5) The disposal of any excess material is prohibited within remaining wetland areas, (6) The disposal of any excess material shall include proper erosion control and nutrient retention measures, (7) Alterations to any wetland area are prohibited during waterfowl breeding season or fish spawning season, unless it is determined by the city that the wetland is not used for waterfowl breeding or fish spawning, and (8) Alterations to wetland areas shall be mitigated in accordance with the requirements of this article if the activity results in a loss of wetland area and/or function and value of the wetland. 31. The alteration shall not alter the hydrological patterns in the remainder of the wetland, if a portion of the wetland remains, unless exempted under Sec. 20-417. Show how hydrologic patterns will not be altered for the remaining wetlands. 32. Sec. 20-405. Wetland delineation. An electronic copy of the delineated wetland boundaries must be submitted in a format compatible with the city's GIS database. 33. Sec. 20-406. Wetland classification. All wetlands delineated under Sec. 20-405 of this article that have not been previously classified shall be classified using the results from the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method for Evaluating Wetland Functions (MnRAM Version 3.0), or future versions. A MnRAM shall be completed by the property owner or applicant for each previously unclassified wetland. An electronic version of the MnRAM evaluation must be submitted to and approved by the city to establish the classification of each wetland prior to any alteration or impact to the wetland. 34. Staff review will be conditional upon the approved Wetland Replacement Plan. 35. A grading permit cannot be issued until the applicant has completed the WCA process. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 44 of 45 36. Wetland Buffers. Wetland buffers and buffer monumentation will be required adjacent to the wetlands on site. Please indicate wetland buffers widths and locations where signage will be placed on a plan sheet. Please find additional information on signage placement in the guidance document attached. The WMO provides signs and sign posts for the cost of materials. Alternative signs (by the city or applicant) are also acceptable provided they contain similar information. 37. Sec. 19-146. Wetland elements. a. Water level fluctuations (peak elevation and duration) for wetlands shall be limited to two feet and duration not to exceed 48 hours so as to prevent the destruction of wildlife habitat and wetland vegetation. b. Sedimentation basins or sediment removal devices shall be provided prior to discharge into wetlands. c. Variable bottom contours should be considered to provide deeper holes and flat shallow benches. This feature will provide habitat for diversity of plants and wetland inhabitants for wetland mitigation sites and stormwater basins. Landscaping and Tree Preservation 1. The developer shall conduct a walk-through of the grading limits on site prior to removals with city staff to inspect for opportunities for additional tree preservation. 2. Tree preservation fencing shall be installed around existing trees to be saved prior to any construction activities and remain installed until completion. 3. All trees shall be planted outside of the street right-of-way. 4. The applicant shall increase tree planting in the development to meet minimum requirements of 590 trees. 5. Buffer plantings shall be added to the east of the city well building. 6. The three oaks on city property (not inventoried) to the south of the city well building shall remain and the grading limits be adjusted to provide for preservation by avoiding any grading within the critical root zone areas of the trees. 7. Autumn Blaze maples shall be eliminated from the plant schedule. 8. Northern Pin Oak shall be replaced with white, bur, red or bicolor oak species in the plant schedule. 9. Additional selections of tree species shall expand the breadth of tree types and take into consideration soil conditions and future hardiness zone changes. 10. No tree Genus shall comprise of more than 20% of the total number of trees and no tree species shall comprise of more than 10% of the total number of trees. 11. The applicant shall revise the plans to show the bluff impact zone on both bluffs and eliminate grading within these areas. 12. Private lot boundaries shall not encroach into bluff areas. 13. Lots with significant tree cover contain conservation easements to protect the wooded areas. Lots 501, 504, 505, 530 and 531 should have protective easements over parts of the lot containing existing forest. Specifically, the rear 40’ of Lot 501, the rear 100’ of Lots 504 and 505, the westerly 200’ of Lot 530 and the easterly 250’-300’ of Lot 531. City Council Galpin Property Preliminary Subdivision Planned Unit Development – Planning Case 2019-01 January 15, 2019 and Updated March 11, 2019 Page 45 of 45 And The City Council a adopts the attached findings of fact and decision of approval. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Report 2. PUD Ordinance 3. Findings of Fact and Decision - approval 4. Finding of Fact and Decision - denial 5. Development Review Application 6. Project Narrative 7. Affidavit of Mailing 8. Compliance Table 9. March 5, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes 10. Exhibit A – Home Styles 11. Pioneer Engineering Plan set dated February 28, 2019 12. Fire Marshall Letter 13. Carver County Development / Access Review Comments Letter 14. MCES Comments 15. Army Corp of Engineers dated 1-8-2019 16. Emailed Comments g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-01 galpin site preliminary plat and rezoning pud\pc prelim staff report - 1-15-19.docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. XXX AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the city's zoning ordinance, is hereby amended by rezoning all property described within Exhibit A from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned Unit Development Residential, PUD-R. Section 2. The rezoning of this property incorporates the following development design standards: The Galpin Site Zoning Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for single-family detached housing. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. The development will preserve 50 acres of woods adjacent to Lake Ann. There are a number of housing collections with a variety of housing styles and exterior materials with in each collection serving different life stages. Except as modified by this PUD ordinance, the development shall comply with the requirements of the Residential Low and Medium Density District, RLM. The property shall be developed in accordance with the following plans. 1. Preliminary Plat 2 2. Landscaping Plan 3. Tree Preservation Plan 4. House Plans (Exhibit A) b. Permitted Uses 1. The permitted uses in this zoning district shall be single-family detached houses and their accessory uses. House plans include the Lennar Lifestyle, Luxury, Landmark, Classic and Villa home plans or similar or equivalent plans. c. Design Standards 1. Development - Amenities Design • Integrate pathways with the local street system to maximize access and flexibility of use. 3 2. House designs • There shall be a mix and a variety of housing materials. • Linear repetitive streetscape appearance and building facades shall be avoided by providing variation between the front elevations. No two identical facades shall be located next to each other. • The same front or rear elevations shall not be located directly across from one another. • No similar material/colors shall be located adjacent to each other. • There shall be articulation of wall planes, a variety of roof forms, variation in roof heights or other architectural treatments. • If side loaded garages are incorporated into the development, the front facing wall must be architecturally integrated with the design of the home (no blank wall). d. Lot Requirements and Setbacks The PUD ordinance requires setbacks from roadways and exterior property lines. The following table displays those setbacks: GALPIN PROPERTY COMPLIANCE TABLE Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 90 foot frontage 15,000 90 125 5,500 90 foot frontage ** 11,250 90 125 5,500 65 ft Lots 8,450 65 125 4,400 Front Setback Rear Setback Side Yard Setback Corner Setback CR 117 Setback 20 ft * 25 ft 7.5 ft 20 ft 50 ft 25 ft 25 ft 7.5 ft 20 ft 50 ft Wetland Buffer Setback 20 ft. *25 ft. with Sidewalk **Lots 101-111 90 foot frontage Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 501 18,092 100 177 5,500 502 17,455 90 167 5,500 503 15,030 90 167 5,500 504 22,829 90 249 5,500 505 24,572 90 249 5,500 506 16,733 90 175 5,500 507 18,427 90 201 5,500 508 17,037 90 142 5,500 509 23,848 90 159 5,500 510 20,017 90 137 5,500 511 18,801 90 156 5,500 4 512 17,844 90 167 5,500 513 15,032 90 167 5,500 514 15,030 90 167 5,500 515 16,667 100 167 5,500 516 15,574 90 175 5,500 517 15,514 90 175 5,500 518 15,482 90 174 5,500 519 15,576 90 174 5,500 520 15,300 90 170 5,500 521 15,300 90 170 5,500 522 15,300 90 170 5,500 523 15,440 90 172 5,500 524 15,882 90 168 5,500 525 16,629 90 136 5,500 526 22,359 90 140 5,500 527 27,426 90 143 5,500 528 16,764 90 160 5,500 529 15,371 90 165 5,500 530 44,983 90 165 5,500 531 47,788 90 125 5,500 90 foot frontage Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 101 19,897 135 143 5,500 102 13,371 90 148 5,500 103 13,297 90 148 5,500 104 13,297 90 148 5,500 105 13,297 90 148 5,500 106 13,297 90 148 5,500 107 13,297 90 148 5,500 108 13,297 90 148 5,500 109 14,599 90 148 5,500 110 14,840 90 148 5,500 111 25,529 90 148 5,500 Avg. 18,479 65 foot frontage Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 301 9,993 78 125 4,400 302 8,450 65 125 4,400 303 8,450 65 125 4,400 304 8,450 65 125 4,400 305 8,450 65 125 4,400 306 8,450 65 125 4,400 307 11,132 65 125 4,400 308 13,748 78 131 4,400 309 8,925 65 129 4,400 310 12,282 65 126 4,400 5 311 8,607 65 125 4,400 312 8,126 65 125 4,400 313 8,257 65 125 4,400 314 8,795 65 130 4,400 315 9,683 65 142 4,400 316 12,836 78 125 4,400 317 12,591 78 150 4,400 318 10,414 65 145 4,400 319 10,228 65 145 4,400 320 11,448 65 145 4,400 321 13,180 65 147 4,400 322 12,052 65 145 4,400 323 11,853 65 142 4,400 324 10,767 65 142 4,400 325 9,524 65 139 4,400 326 9,135 65 132 4,400 327 8,609 65 132 4,400 328 8,609 65 132 4,400 329 10,232 65 132 4,400 330 9,750 65 125 4,400 331 9,478 65 125 4,400 332 10,900 65 125 4,400 333 16,107 78 125 4,400 334 11,215 78 136 4,400 335 10,404 65 153 4,400 336 11,607 65 167 4,400 337 10,622 65 142 4,400 338 11,545 65 133 4,400 339 14,532 65 125 4,400 340 12,761 65 125 4,400 341 13,019 65 125 4,400 342 10,858 65 125 4,400 343 10,887 65 163 4,400 344 10,502 65 152 4,400 345 9,306 65 134 4,400 346 10,263 78 125 4,400 347 10,020 78 125 4,400 348 9,385 65 135 4,400 349 10,984 65 154 4,400 350 10,228 65 126 4,400 351 8,474 65 126 4,400 352 8,474 65 125 4,400 353 8,776 65 125 4,400 354 8,864 65 125 4,400 355 13,586 65 131 4,400 356 14,313 65 130 4,400 357 12,790 65 132 4,400 358 12,963 65 125 4,400 359 14,449 65 145 4,400 360 11,360 65 126 4,400 361 11,011 78 125 4,400 6 362 10,508 65 142 4,400 363 11,458 65 145 4,400 364 13,033 65 130 4,400 365 12,790 65 130 4,400 366 12,940 65 132 4,400 367 12,790 65 130 4,400 368 9,728 65 131 4,400 369 10,036 65 140 4,400 370 10,303 78 125 4,400 371 8,933 65 130 4,400 372 9,242 65 130 4,400 373 9,242 65 130 4,400 374 9,242 65 130 4,400 375 9,236 65 130 4,400 376 8,450 65 130 4,400 377 8,450 65 130 4,400 378 8,450 65 130 4,400 379 8,450 65 130 4,400 380 8,450 65 130 4,400 381 8,801 65 130 4,400 382 15,319 95 130 4,400 383 11,772 78 145 4,400 384 9,453 65 145 4,400 385 9,780 65 145 4,400 386 9,898 65 134 4,400 387 9,263 65 130 4,400 388 8,450 65 130 4,400 389 8,450 65 130 4,400 390 8,450 65 130 4,400 391 8,450 65 130 4,400 392 8,450 65 130 4,400 393 8,749 65 130 4,400 394 9,189 65 130 4,400 395 9,390 65 130 4,400 396 9,313 65 130 4,400 397 8,922 65 134 4,400 398 12,754 78 130 4,400 399 8,474 65 130 4,400 400 8,450 65 130 4,400 401 8,450 65 130 4,400 402 8,450 65 130 4,400 403 8,450 65 130 4,400 404 8,450 65 130 4,400 405 10,504 65 130 4,400 406 11,092 65 130 4,400 407 8,819 65 130 4,400 408 8,450 65 130 4,400 409 8,729 65 130 4,400 410 12,658 78 131 4,400 411 10,192 78 127 4,400 412 9,559 65 127 4,400 7 413 9,104 65 145 4,400 414 9,702 65 137 4,400 415 14,151 65 135 4,400 416 9,676 65 135 4,400 417 8,779 65 130 4,400 418 8,570 65 130 4,400 419 9,103 65 136 4,400 420 9,344 65 143 4,400 421 9,170 65 143 4,400 422 10,929 78 132 4,400 423 12,265 78 142 4,400 424 9,984 65 130 4,400 425 10,465 65 130 4,400 426 11,434 65 159 4,400 427 12,108 65 170 4,400 428 12,591 65 178 4,400 429 12,589 65 178 4,400 430 12,101 65 170 4,400 431 10,764 65 130 4,400 432 9,554 65 130 4,400 433 11,046 78 128 4,400 434 12,618 65 141 4,400 435 14,656 65 212 4,400 436 14,357 65 248 4,400 437 14,285 65 248 4,400 438 13,661 65 200 4,400 439 12,931 65 134 4,400 Avg. 10,475 Section 3. The zoning map of the City of Chanhassen shall not be republished to show the aforesaid zoning, but the Clerk shall appropriately mark the zoning map on file in the Clerk's Office for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided for in this ordinance, and all of the notations, references, and other information shown thereon are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this ordinance. Section 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of _____, 2019 by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on ______________________________) 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION IN RE: Application of U. S. Home Corporation, DBA Lennar, and Comerica Bank and Trust, NA, for the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson and Paisley Park Enterprise, Inc. for Rezoning, Preliminary Plat with a Wetland Alteration Permit. On January 15, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of U. S. Home Corporation, DBA Lennar, and Comerica Bank and Trust, NA, for the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson and Paisley Park Enterprise, Inc. for a Rezoning from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned Unit Development – Residential, PUD-R; Preliminary Plat approval creating 191 lots and three outlots with and approval of a Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands on site. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed rezoning, subdivision and wetland alteration permit preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and at the conclusion of the public hearing and discussion by the Planning Commission, McGonagill moved, Tietz seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of the rezoning for 191 acres from Rural Residential District (RR) to Planned Unit Development Residential (PUD-R) including PUD ordinance for Galpin Design Standards; the wetland alteration permit and the subdivision preliminary plat creating 191 lots, three outlots and dedication of the right-of-way as shown in plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated December 5, 2018. Commissioners McGonagill, Tietz and Randall voted in favor of the motion for denial. Commissioners Madsen, Weick and Aller voted against the motion for denial. The motion tied with a vote of 3 to 3, and, therefore failed. On March 5, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public comment meeting. No formal action was taken. On March 11, 2019, City Council met and reviewed the proposed development. They reviewed the testimony from the Planning Commission. The City Council makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District (RR). 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential Low Density (net density 1.2-4.0 units per acre) use. The net density of the PUD is 1.3 units an acre. 3. The city’s Comprehensive Plan has identified the eastern portion of this site (49 acres) as future park expansion. This development will dedicate these 49 acres as open space. 2 4. The legal description of the property is: (See Exhibit A) 5. The Zoning Ordinance directs the city to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. 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 since the zoning is consistent with the land use designation of the property, preserves significant areas of natural habitat, trees and vegetation, protects shore land area, utilizes available infrastructure and provides a variety of housing opportunities; b. The proposed use is and will be compatible with the present and future land uses of the area, which are residential uses to the west, north and south, an arterial roadway to the west and is buffered from existing single-family homes by distance and landscaping. The subdivision buffers existing development/homes on the north and south by matching or exceeding lots sizes and creating a landscape buffer; c. The proposed use conforms to all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance, subject to the conditions of approval for the subdivision and wetland alteration; d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed since the use is similar to surrounding uses as well as providing a significant area of permanent open space to be enjoyed by the community, which adds value to all the homes; e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity since adequate infrastructure is available to the site; and f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. This subdivision will dedicate the necessary right of way for the upgrade of Galpin Boulevard. 6. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the city to consider seven (7) possible adverse effects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed subdivision complies with the zoning ordinance; b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's Comprehensive Plan; c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and stormwater drainage are suitable for the proposed development; d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by the subdivision ordinance; e. The proposed subdivision will not cause significant environmental damage; f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record, but will provide additional required easements; and g. The proposed subdivision is not premature since it is providing all required infrastructure improvements necessary for residential housing as well as improving 3 existing stormwater issues for adjacent properties. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: 1) Lack of adequate stormwater drainage. 2) Lack of adequate roads. 3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. 7. When approving a Wetland Alteration Permit, the city must determine the capability of a proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The general issuance standards of the conditional use Sec. 20-232, include the following 12 items: a. The proposed development will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. While the development impacts several wetlands, the majority of the wetlands (97 percent) are being preserved and protected. The developer shall mitigate any wetland impacts as well as preserve significant areas of permanent open space for enjoyment by the community. b. The proposed development will be consistent with the objectives of the city's Comprehensive Plan and the subdivision and zoning ordinances. The developer shall meet all water quality standards required of it. c. The proposed residential development will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing and intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. The project proposes the development of single-family homes, which currently exist to the south, west and north of this parcel. d. The proposed development will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. The project proposes single-family homes and a significant public open space. e. The proposed development will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools and will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. The developer shall preserve the easterly outlot as permanent open space. f. The proposed development will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, but will increase the value of the community through the provision of additional housing as well as a significant public open space. g. The proposed development will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash since the use is similar to adjacent uses. h. The proposed development will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. Primary access is provided via full intersections off of a collector street. 4 i. The proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. Wetland impacts will be mitigated. A significant amount of the site will be preserved as permanent open space. j. The proposed development will be aesthetically compatible with the area. The project proposes the development of single-family homes similar to those in the developments to the north, south and west. k. The proposed development will not depreciate surrounding property values. The project proposes the development of residential uses similar to those in the developments to the north, south and west and will increase the value of the community through the provision of additional housing as well as a significant public open space. l. The proposed development will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in Chapter 20, Articles VI, VII, VIII, XIV - Division 1, XXIII and XXIV of the Chanhassen City Code. 8. The Planning Report #2019-01 dated January 15, 2019, and updated March 11, 2019, and prepared by Kate Aanenson, et al, is incorporated herein. MOTION The City Council approves the rezoning of the property from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned Unit Development - Residential, PUD-R; Preliminary Plat approval creating 181 lots and three outlots; and a Wetland Alteration Permit; and an ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the City Code, subject to the conditions of the staff report. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 11th day of March, 2019. BY: BY: Todd, Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor 5 EXHIBIT A Legal Description: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 89, files of Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota. Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 89, files of Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota. Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 89, files of Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota. That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the North Quarter corner of said Section 10; thence South along the North- South Quarter line of said Section 10 as distance of 409.69 feet; thence West along a line parallel with the South line of the North Half of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 435.76 feet to the centerline of the Excelsior-Shakopee Road; thence Northeasterly along said centerline a distance of 419.39 feet to the North line of side Section 10; thence East along the North line of said Section 10 to the point of beginning, all according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof. That part of the South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116, Range 23 Carver County, Minnesota lying easterly of the centerline of County Road No. 117, also known as Galpin Boulevard, and lying North of the South 186.00 feet of said South half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter thereof. Together with: That part westerly 183.00 feet of each of the following two tracts: (1) That part of the South 186.00 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying Easterly of the centerline of County Road No. 117 (also known as Galpin Lake Road and formerly known as Chaska and Excelsior Road and as Excelsior and Shakopee Road). (2) That part of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying Easterly of the centerline of County Road No. 117 (also known as Galpin Lake Road and formerly known as Chaska and Excelsior Road and as Excelsior and Shakopee Road). Which lies northerly of lines described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said South Half of the Northwest Quarter; thence on an assumed bearing of North 89 degrees 49 minutes 08 seconds West, along the North line of 6 said South half of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 588.71 feet, to the beginning of the lines to be described; thence South 65 degrees 37 minutes 15 seconds West a distance of 98.69 feet; thence Northwesterly a distance of 141.37 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 45 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds, the chord of said curve is 137.77 feet in length and bears North 46 degrees 52 minutes 45 seconds West; thence North 69 degrees 22 minutes 45 seconds West, tangent to said curve a distance of 40.00 feet and said line there terminating. g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-01 galpin site preliminary plat and rezoning pud\city council 3-11-19\findings of fact and recommendation cc approval.docx 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION IN RE: Application of U.S. Home Corporation, DBA Lennar, and Comerica Bank and Trust, NA, for the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson and Paisley Park Enterprise, Inc. for Rezoning, Preliminary Plat with a Wetland Alteration Permit. On January 15, 2019, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of U.S. Home Corporation, DBA Lennar, and Comerica Bank and Trust, NA, for the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson and Paisley Park Enterprise, Inc. for a Rezoning from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned Unit Development – Residential, PUD-R; Preliminary Plat approval creating 191 lots and three outlots with and approval of a Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands on site. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed rezoning, subdivision and wetland alteration permit preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and at the conclusion of the public hearing and discussion by the Planning Commission, McGonagill moved, Tietz seconded that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the rezoning for 191 acres from Rural Residential District (RR) to Planned Unit Development Residential (PUD-R) including the PUD ordinance for Galpin Design Standards; the wetland alteration permit and the subdivision preliminary plat creating 191 lots, three outlots and dedication of the right-of-way as shown in plans prepared by Pioneer Engineering dated December 5, 2018. Commissioners McGonagill, Tietz and Randall voted in favor of the motion for denial. Commissioners Madsen, Weick and Aller voted against the motion for denial. The motion tied with a vote of 3 to 3 and, therefore, failed. On March 5, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public comment meeting. No formal action was taken. On March 11, 2019, the City Council met and reviewed the proposed development. They reviewed the testimony from the Planning Commission. The City Council makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District (RR). 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Residential Low Density (net density 1.2-4.0 units per acre) use. 3. The legal description of the property is: (See Exhibit A) 2 4. The Zoning Ordinance directs the city to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. 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 since the zoning and resultant cluster development does not create a homogeneous development with the single-family zoning to the north and south of the project; b. The proposed use is not compatible with the present and future land uses of the area since it consists of cluster housing development, rather than the single-family residential uses to the west, north and south on 15,000 square foot or larger lots; c. The proposed use does not conform to all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance for any existing residential zoning categories; d. The proposed use may not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed since the use is similar, but not the same as surrounding uses; e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity since adequate infrastructure is available to the site; and f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 5. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the city to consider seven (7) possible adverse effects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed subdivision does not comply with the zoning ordinance; b. The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with all applicable city plans including but not limited to the city's Comprehensive Plan since it does not create a homogeneous development with the single-family zoning to the north and south of the project; c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and stormwater drainage are suitable for the proposed development; d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by the subdivision ordinance; e. The proposed subdivision will not cause significant environmental damage; f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record, but will provide additional required easements; and g. The proposed subdivision is not premature since it is providing all required infrastructure improvements necessary for residential housing as well as improving existing stormwater issues for adjacent properties. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: 1) Lack of adequate stormwater drainage. 2) Lack of adequate roads. 3) Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4) Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. 3 6. Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfers of density, construction phasing and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the city has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the use of other, more standard zoning districts. The applicant has not demonstrated that the city's expectation is to be realized as evaluated against the following criteria. Planned unit developments are to encourage the following: a. Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, mature trees, creeks, wetlands, lakes and scenic views. b. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels. c. High quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned. Site planning, landscaping and building architecture should reflect higher quality design than is found elsewhere in the community. d. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city. e. Development that is consistent with the comprehensive plan. f. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city. Such park and open space shall be consistent with the comprehensive park plan and overall trail plan. g. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate within the PUD. h. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sightings and the clustering of buildings and land uses. i. Use of traffic management and design techniques including the provision of transit and pedestrian linkages to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate. Where appropriate, the use of transportation demand management strategies may be required within a project. 7. When approving a Wetland Alteration Permit, the city must determine the capability of a proposed development with existing and proposed uses. The general issuance standards of the conditional use Sec. 20-232, include the following 12 items: a. The proposed development will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. While the development impacts several wetlands, the majority of the wetlands (97 percent) are being preserved and protected. The developer shall mitigate any wetland impacts as well as preserve significant areas of permanent open space for enjoyment by the community. b. The proposed development is inconsistent with the objectives of the city's Comprehensive Plan and the subdivision and zoning ordinances. The developer shall meet all water quality standards required of it. c. The proposed residential development is not designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing and intended character of 4 the general vicinity and will change the essential character of that area. The project proposes the development of single-family homes that are on smaller lots than currently exist to the south, west and north of this parcel. d. The proposed development will not be hazardous, but are disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. The project proposes single-family homes on smaller lots than surrounding development. e. The proposed development will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools and will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. f. The proposed development will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community but will increase the value of the community through the provision of additional housing as well as a significant public open space. g. The proposed development will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash since the use is similar to adjacent uses. h. The proposed development will have vehicular approaches to the property that do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. Primary access is provided via full intersections off of a collector street. i. The proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. Wetland impacts will be mitigated. j. The proposed development will not be aesthetically compatible with the area since it consists of lots smaller than adjacent development. The project proposes the development of single-family homes on smaller lots than to those in the developments to the north, south and west. k. The proposed development will not depreciate surrounding property values. The project proposes the development of residential uses. l. The proposed development will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in Chapter 20, Articles VI, VII, VIII, XIV - Division 1, XXIII and XXIV of the Chanhassen City Code. 8. The Planning Report #2019-01 dated January 15, 2019, and updated March 11, 2019, prepared by Kate Aanenson, et al, is incorporated herein. 5 MOTION The City Council denies the rezoning of the property from Rural Residential District, RR, to Planned Unit Development - Residential, PUD-R; Preliminary Plat approval creating 181 lots and three outlots; and a Wetland Alteration Permit; and an ordinance amending Chapter 20 of the City Code. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 11th day of March, 2019. BY: BY: Todd, Gerhardt, City Manager Elise Ryan, Mayor 6 EXHIBIT A Legal Description: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 89, files of Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota. Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 89, files of Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota. Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 89, files of Registrar of Titles, Carver County, Minnesota. That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116, Range 23, Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the North Quarter corner of said Section 10; thence South along the North- South Quarter line of said Section 10 as distance of 409.69 feet; thence West along a line parallel with the South line of the North Half of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 435.76 feet to the centerline of the Excelsior-Shakopee Road; thence Northeasterly along said centerline a distance of 419.39 feet to the North line of side Section 10; thence East along the North line of said Section 10 to the point of beginning, all according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof. That part of the South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116, Range 23 Carver County, Minnesota lying easterly of the centerline of County Road No. 117, also known as Galpin Boulevard, and lying North of the South 186.00 feet of said South half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter thereof. Together with: That part westerly 183.00 feet of each of the following two tracts: (1) That part of the South 186.00 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying Easterly of the centerline of County Road No. 117 (also known as Galpin Lake Road and formerly known as Chaska and Excelsior Road and as Excelsior and Shakopee Road). (2) That part of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying Easterly of the centerline of County Road No. 117 (also known as Galpin Lake Road and formerly known as Chaska and Excelsior Road and as Excelsior and Shakopee Road). Which lies northerly of lines described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said South Half of the Northwest Quarter; thence on an assumed bearing of North 89 degrees 49 minutes 08 seconds West, along the North line of 7 said South half of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 588.71 feet, to the beginning of the lines to be described; thence South 65 degrees 37 minutes 15 seconds West a distance of 98.69 feet; thence Northwesterly a distance of 141.37 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 180.00 feet and a central angle of 45 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds, the chord of said curve is 137.77 feet in length and bears North 46 degrees 52 minutes 45 seconds West; thence North 69 degrees 22 minutes 45 seconds West, tangent to said curve a distance of 40.00 feet and said line there terminating. g:\plan\2019 planning cases\19-01 galpin site preliminary plat and rezoning pud\city council 3-11-19\findings of fact and recommendation cc denial.docx QC lcrrq-o t )2-A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Planning Division -7700 Market Boulevard Mailing Address - P.O, Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317 Phone: (952)227-1300 / Fax: (952)227-11'10 *crTYorcttAtlttAs$rtl APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW submittato",",ldlrtt ( f<i ecoate:l lr 6 I rq ccDater }-t ,t \tq 6GDayReviewDate:U tu[ rq tr Comprehensive Plan Amendment ... $600 E Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers ..... $100 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) I Single-Family Residence ................................ $325 D Allothers......... .......$425 lnterim Use Permit (lUP) fl ln conjunction with Single-Family Residence.. $325 D m Others.......... ..... $425 a Subdivision (SUB) D Create 3lots or 1ess............. ,......$300 E Create over 3 lots.......................$600 + $15 per lot( 191 66; D n4etes & Bounds (2lots)........, .....$300 E Consolidate 1ots......, ...................$150 I Uot Line Adjustment.........,..... .....$150 ! rinatP1at.............. ....$700 (lncludes $450 escrow for attomey costs)' 'Additional esdorv may be required for other applicatiorE through the development contracl. Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC )........ $300 (Additional recording fees may apply) Variance (VAR).......... ... .... ............ $200 tr tr tr tr n I Sign Plan Review E Site Plan Review (SPR) $1s0 \E wettand Alteration Permit (wAP) E Aoministrative........... ......... ......... $100 Ei Cilil'"i.urnor.t'i"i o;i;;;. : : :. :................ ssoo Ptus $10 per 1 ,000 square feet of building area: (- thousand square feet) 'lndude number of erisfit o emdq€os: 'lndude numb€r ol new emPloYees: fl ResictentialDistricts... ... .. ..... ...$500 Plus $5 per ctwelling unit ( units) Notification SBn lcity to installand remove) ..{*t*.t.y.f-d... . ! Single-Family Residence... ........ $150 E ru CIhers......... ......$275 D Zoning Appea1......... ..... $100 I Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA)................. $500 p!!: When multlple appllcatlons ate proco3sed concurrently, the approprl.to fac chall bc charged for each .ppllcstlon. $200 D tr Property Owners' List within 500' (city to generate after prtapplication meeting) SJei -'-.1...-4 $3 per address(_ addresses) Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that apply).......... ! ConditionalUse Permit D tnterim Use Permit E Vacation ! Variance I Uetes & Bounds Subdivision (3 doas.) ! Easements (- easements) $50 per document E Site Plan Agreement fl WetlanO Alteration Permit fl oeecs TOTAL FEE: Property Address or Location:7141 Galpin Rd, Chanhassen parcet *,)S 69Ooot O- Lesat Description,' RLS 81 Total Acreage:188.00 Wettands Present? Z Ves E ruo Present Zoning: Rural Residential District (RR)Requested Zoning:Planned Unit Development (PUD) Present Land Use Designation: ResidentialLow Density Requested Land Use Designation: Existing Use of Property: Vacant (Refer to 1116 epprorytate A!{i,lcalt)n Checklist fot requhed submiftal inloonafion lhat must ffilimpany this apdication) Description of Proposal: Pretiminary plat application and rezoning to PUD for residential development ECfrecf box if separate nanative is attached. Residential Low Density Section 1:allthat APPLTCANT OTHER THAN PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as applicant, represent to have obtained authorization from the property owner to file this application. I agree to be bound by condiiions of approval, subject only to the right to object at the hearings on the application or during the appeal period. lf this application has not been signed by the property owner, I have attached separate documentation of full legal capacity to lile the application. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom ihe Gity should contact regarding any mafter pertaining to this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additionalfees may be charged for consutting fees, feasibility studies, etc. \rvith an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. lcertifythat the information and exhibits submitted are true and corect. US Home Corporation, DBA Lennar Joe Jablonski Address:16305 36th Street NE, Suite 600 (952) 249-3014 City/State/Zip:Plymouth, Mn 55446 Cell: Fax: (612)49G.6076 Email: Joe Jablonski 12113118Signature:13 1a:56:@ 46'.00',Dats: Contact: Phone: PROPERTY OWNER: ln signing this application, l, as property owner, have full legal capacity to, and hereby do, authorize the filing of this application. I understand that conditions of approval are binding and agree lo be bound by those conditions, subject only to the right to object at the hearings or during the appeal periods. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand thal additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studiss, etc. with an estimats prior to any authorization to proceed wilh the studv. I certifv that the information and exhibits submitted are true and correct.' Andrea' Bruce. VP for Comerica Bank & Trusl, N,A. as Personal Represeniative Name. for the Estaie of Prince Rogers Nelson AND Peisley Park Enterprise, INC Contact. Gerard Snover, VP 355lHamlin Road Addr€ss:Phone. 212-590-9992 City/State/Zip:Aubum Hills, Ml 48326 cefi. 2154224'.126 Signature:Date:1i,17 t2018 This application must be completed in full and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Bafore filing this application, refer to the appropriate Application Checklist and confer with the Planning Department to determine lhe specific ordinance and applicable procedural requirements and fees. A determination of completeness ofthe application shall be made within l5 business days of application submittal. written notice of application deticiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. PROJECT ENGINEER (if applicable) Pioneer Engineering Contact:Paul Cheme Address:2422 Enteryrise Drive (651) 2s1-0630 City/State/Zip: Email: Mendota Heights pcheme@pioneereng.com Cell: Fax: DZZtr Who should receiys coples of stafi reporE?'Other Contact lnfomation : Property Owner Applicant Engineer Oulef Name: Address: City/State/Zip: Email: INSTRUCTTONS TO APPLICANT: Complete all necessary form fields, then select SAVE FORM to save a copy to your de\4ce. TR|NTTORm and deliver to city along with required documents and paytnent. SUBMIT FORM to send a digital copy to the city for processing. Via: E Email E Mailed Paper copy Via: E Email E Mailed Paper copy via: E Email ! Maited Paper Copy Via: D Email E Mailed Paper copy Section 3:Owner and lnformation Section 4:lnformation 1 Galpin Property City of Chanhassen Introduction U.S. Home Corporation, d/b/a Lennar is proposing to develop Galpin Property (actual name TBD) in a manner that is sensitive to the environment and surrounding area. With this Preliminary Plat we are submitting a plan that has taken into account input from public leaders, staff, and neighbors. Our plan has 191 homes demonstrating how the property can be developed through the use of a PUD that will offer diverse housing opportunities and price points accompanied by the preservation of open space. Background/History In November 2017 the property was listed for sale by Comerica Bank; Trust NA, as personal representatives of the Estate of Prince Rogers Nelson and Paisley Park Enterprises. On several occasions the seller’s agents and members of Lennar have met with City staff to begin reviewing the zoning standards and the best use for the property. In May of 2018 U.S. Home Corporation entered into an Option Agreement to purchase the property. Property Description The site consists of approximately 188 acres made up of several tax parcels (PID 25.6900010, 25.6900020, 25.6900030, 25.0100100, and 25.0100200) located in the Notheast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 10, Township 116, Range 23. All buildings have been removed and the property has been vacant for some time. The site suffers from frequent trespassers that use the property for walking trails. City Standards • Land Use designation The property is designated for Low Density residential: RSF 1.2-4 units per acre. Pre-plat – 1.37 DU/Acre • Zoning Classification The site is currently zoned as Rural Residential with underlying zoning of RSF; low density residential 1.2-4 units per acre. Our plan requires a zoning change to PUD to allow flexibility and the relaxation of strict application of the zoning ordinance in exchange for greater environmental sensitivity and preservation of open space for public use. At 1.37 units per acre our plan also fits into the low range of the RSF density classification. 2 • Surrounding Land Uses Residential developments of varying densities surround the site to the North, South, and West. To the West, across Galpin is Long Acres which was developed as a PUD to allow flexibility in design standards. Our primary street connections appropriately line up with Hunter Drive and Long Acres Drive. Boarding the property to the North and South are existing neighborhoods zoned RSF. The existing neighborhoods to the North (Ashling Meadows and Lucy Ridge) provide road stubs to the subject property. There are no road connections to the South. Lake Lucy, and Lake Ann and their surrounding wetlands are located to the East. Plan modifications since initial concept review Overall • 50+ acres designated for City Park • Lot count has been reduced to 191 homesites (1.37 DU/Acre) • Stormwater ponding has been incorporated to accommodate Galpin Rd upgrades • Perimeter buffering has been evaluated North end • Through street from Galpin to Lucy Ridge has been eliminated • Buffering through preservation has been identified • 14 Lots have been eliminated to minimize environmental impacts South end • Density in Southern 1/3 of the property has decreased • Lots along Southern property line have been enlarged from 55’ wide to 75’ wide to accommodate standard homes rather than Villa. • Storm sewer and Emergency Overflows have been identified to alleviate water issues in adjacent neighborhood • Back yard areas along South property line have been expanded allowing for the preservation of existing trees • Landscape buffering has been integrated into the plan Open Space Preservation The City of Chanhassen’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies significant trail improvements along the Eastern boundary of the property that would enhance the Lake Ann Park and trail system by completing important connections between Lake Ann, Lake Lucy and Galpin Road. Our plan for the Galpin property focuses housing development closer to Galpin and preserves approximately 50 acres of land adjacent to Lake Lucy and Lake Ann that could be used for park dedication to the City. By mixing lot sizes our plan strategically places the 191 homes on 88 acres of land giving the opportunity to preserve significantly more open space for use by the residents of Chanhassen then would be available if strict RSF 3 zoning standards were followed. Preserving the open space in this manner not only minimizes environmental impacts but also significantly reduces the length of public infrastructure (sewer, water, roads) required for long term maintenance by the City. Building Plans/Product Information Extensive research on housing availability and market conditions within the City of Chanhassen has guided us in putting together a plan that is matched by a product portfolio that includes architecturally interesting variety of homes, and price points, that meet multiple buyer niches. Landmark Series - Designed with efficiency in mind, the Landmark series meets the demands of today’s challenging housing market by offering a fantastic value planned specially for 65’& 75’ wide homesites. Lennar has successfully built the Landmark series in Reflections at Lake Riley, Boulder Cove, and Camden Ridge. Typical footprints are 50’ wide allowing the ability to maintain setbacks designated by zoning standards. A variety of houseplans and elevations make up this series offering square footages ranging from 2,200 sq ft to 3,200 sq ft plus the ability to finish the basement to add footage to the home. With families in mind, the homes typically include four bedrooms, a large open living space on the main level, a master suite, mud room, and three car garage. Sixty-five foot wide lots allow the ability to preserve open space without compromising the integrity of the neighborhood. Typical side yard setbacks will be maintained. An interesting streetscape will be maintained through the incorporation of a variety of elevations, materials, and color packages. Lots are arranged in a manner that will include an assortment of walk-outs, look-outs, and flats. The 75’ wide lots will provide additional spacing and allow the opportunity to expand certain elevations to include a four-car garage. Included in this series are Lennar’s NextGen plans. This revolutionary series is a multi-generational home plan designed specifically to accommodate generations living under one roof with privacy and convenience. This truly unique home highlights the ‘NextGen suite’ that provides a separate first floor living space with its own entrance, living area, kitchenette, attached garage and laundry all under one roof with access to the rest of the home. The result is a 5-bedroom, 5 bathroom home that creatively satisfies a variety of unique housing needs while fitting into the architectural styling of the neighborhood. Luxury Villa – The 34 Luxury Villa are designed for the 55’ wide homesites just North of the Southern entrance. The Luxury Villa provides minimal maintenance housing for an underserved market in Chanhassen; and the Twin Cities in general, the ‘empty nester’. Designed for single level living, the Villa homes offer a spacious first floor that includes a master suite, fireplace, open living room, gourmet kitchen, and study. A deck or three season porch is included with the home to allow the opportunity to enjoy the natural features of Galpin Property . Multiple elevations and color packages will be incorporated to reduce monotony. 4 Traditional - The 31 Traditional homesites on the North end of the property are currently being marketed for sale to custom homebuilders. We are requesting a lot split that would allow that portion of the site to be developed in the future, perhaps by another entity. It is recognized the lot split will not release the North portion of the site from the responsibilities of the overall PUD request. Lennar ultimately reserves the ability to participate in development and construction of homes in that area but does not have the intention to do so at this time. Environmental Impacts • Wetlands - A wetland delineation was completed on the site in September 2017 and was followed by a Wetland classification analysis. Wetland impacts have been minimized by careful planning and the preservation of open space. Following RSF standards for the entire property would require more impact to existing wetlands for the extension of public infrastructure (sewer, water, streets) to serve the upland adjacent to Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. • Tree Preservation – Preservation of open space for public use will allow the opportunity to preserve large wooded areas that may otherwise be disturbed with development. Tree replacement as required by code has been factored into the landscape plan. Following the RSF zoning guidelines would have a much greater impact on the large stands of trees located in the upland areas fronting Lake Ann and Lake Lucy that are contemplated by Public Park with this plan. • Water Quality – Water quality will be managed through the incorporation of on- site ponding and other appropriate erosion control measures. We are evaluating the potential for water re-use on site to supplement irrigation systems. Lennar is committed to following stormwater policies enacted by the City of Chanhassen and the Minnesota Pollution Control Association (MPCA). Plans have been submitted to the Riley Purgatory Watershed to allow for the simultaneous review of stormwater management designs. • Impervious Surface – Lennar recognizes the importance of managing the runoff of hard surface areas. To help regulate standards we have created the following table to set average thresholds for each sized homesite. Note: A more detailed table specific to each homesite has been provided with the other submission materials. To help inform customers of these standards Lennar intends to provide each customer with a copy of their lot certificate that includes the current impervious 5 area, the maximum impervious area allowed, and the remaining impervious area left for future improvements such as patios, 4-season porches, and pools. Flexibility through the use of PUD Our plan requires a zoning change to PUD to allow flexibility and the relaxation of strict application of the zoning ordinance in exchange for greater environmental sensitivity and preservation of open space for public use. The items we are requesting flexibility include; lot width and area, cul de sac length, and relaxation of front setbacks along the North and South boarders. All three items are requested for consideration to allow for the preservation of open space and trees. Homeowners Association(s) A Master Homeowners Association will be established to maintain private common areas and community monuments. A Sub-Association will be created to take care of the common elements within the Villa area. The Villa will be ‘full maintenance’ in nature to include; professional management, mowing, plowing, and exterior upkeep of the homes. Owners of single family homes will be responsible for their own upkeep and maintenance subject to City Ordinance and Architectural Controls established within the Master Association. Summary Lennar has a long history of building successful Communities in the City of Chanhassen under the names Lennar, Ryland, Lundgren Bros. Construction, and Orrin Thompson Homes. We are very excited for the opportunity that lends itself through the careful development of this fantastic property and ask for your support. (US Home/Lennar) Galpin Property – 191 Gross Acres Total Homesites – 191 Approximate Developed Area – 89 acres Open Space – 50 acres Preserved wetlands – 49 acres Traditional homesites – 31 Average Lot – 90’ wide Landmark Homesites – 126 Average Lot – 65’ wide -115 75’ wide -11 Villa Homesites – 34 Average Lot – 55’ wide 6 Project Team Developer: U.S. Home Corporation, D/B/A Lennar Builder: Lennar Corporation Primary Contact: Joe Jablonski Planner/Engineer/Surveyor: Pioneer Engineering Geotechnical Engineer: Braun Intertec Wetland Specialist: Midwest Natural Resources, Inc. Landscape Architect: Pioneer Engineering Legal Council: Vantage Law Group Association Manager: TBD CITY OF CHAI\HASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Kim T. Meuwissen, being first duly swom, on oath deposes that she is and was on January 3,2019, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing to consider rezoning parcel from Rural Residential (RR) to Planned Unit Development/Residential District (PUDR), Wetland Alteration Permit, and Subdivision of 191 acres including the preservation of approximately 100 acres and the creation of 191 lots, Planning Case File No. 2019-01 to 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. Notary Public Subscribed and trrifr'J day to before me This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic lnformation System (GlS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 5466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought bt User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the useds access or use of data provided. (TAX_NAME) (TAX-ADD-L1) (TAX-ADD-L2>, <<TAX-ADD-L3) << Next Record ><<TAX-NAM ED (TAX-ADD-L1ll (TAX-AD D-L2>, (TAX-ADD-L3)) This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be us-ed for reference purposes only. The City does not wanant that the Geographic lnformation System (GlS) Data used to prepare this map are enorfree, and the City does not represeni that the Gls Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the Oepiction of geographic features. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 5466.03, Subd. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the use/s access or use of data provided. ,l t"l Disclaimer Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Notice of Public Hearing Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time:Tuesday, January 15,2019 at 7:00 p.m. This hearing may not start until later in the eveninq, dependinq on the order ofthe agenda. Location:Citv Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Boulevard Proposal: Consider rezoning parcel from Rural Residential (RR) to Planned Unit DevelopmenUResidential District (PUDR); Wetland Alteration Permit; Subdivision of 191 acres including the preservation of approximately 100 acres and the creation of 191 lots. Applicant:US Home Corporation, D/B/A Lennar Property Location: 7141 Galpin Boulevard A location map is on the reverse side of this notice. 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 are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the proiect. Questions & Comments: lf you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the city's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/2019-01. lf you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Kate Aanenson by emailat kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by phone at 952-227-1139. lf 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. The staff report for this item will be available online on the project website Iisted above the Thursday prior to the Planninq Commission meetinq. Sign up to receive email and/or text notifications when meeting agendas, packets, minutes and videos are uploaded to the city's website. Go to www. ci. chan hassen. m n. us/notifyme to sig n u p ! City Review Procedure; . Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and lnterim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within at least 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the applietion in writing. Any interested party is invited to attend the meeting. . Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industrial. . Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their @mplexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. . A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is en@uraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the project with any interested person(s). . Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. lf you wish to have something to be included in the reoort. olease contact the Plannino staff person named on the notification. Date & Time:Tuesday, January 15,2019 at 7:00 p.m. This hearing may not start until later in the eveninq. deoendino on the order ofthe aqenda. Location:City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Boulevard Proposal: Consider rezoning parcelfrom Rural Residential (RR) to Planned Unit DevelopmenVResidential District (PUDR); Wetland Alteration Permit; Subdivision of 191 acres including the preservation of approximately 100 acres and the creation of 191 lots. Applicant:US Home Corporation, D/B/A Lennar Property Location: 7141 Galpin Boulevard A location map is on the reverse side of this notice. 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 are received from the public.4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the oroiect. Questions & Comments: lf you want to see the plans before the meeting, please visit the city's projects web page at: www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/2019-01. lf you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Kate Aanenson by email at kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us or by phone at 952-227-1139. lf 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. The staff report for this item will be available online on the project website listed above the Thursday prior to the Planninq Commission meetinq. Sign up to receive email and/or text notifications when meeting agendas, packets, minutes and videos are uploaded to the clty's website. Go to www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us/notifyme to siqn upl Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and lnterim Uses, Wetland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within at least 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the appli€tion in writing. Any interested party is anvited to attend the meeting. Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overyiew of the report and a recommendation. The item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/industrial. Minnesota State Statute 51 9.99 requires all applications to be proessed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some appliGtions due to their mmplexity may take several months to mmplete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the pro@ss should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff is also available to review the pOect with any interested person(s). Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any mrrespondence regarding the application will be included in the report to the City Council. lf you wish to have something to be included in the report, please contact the Planning staff person named on the notification. TAX-NAME ALLAN R & MARYJ OLSON ANDREW WERNER ANGELOJ&CARALGALIOTO ASHLING MEADOWS HOMEOWNERS ASHLING MEADOWS HOMEOWNERS BARRYG & JENNIFER J FRIENDS BLAKE M &TAMI C GOTTSCHALK BRADLEY G & ALISA L LACOMY BRIAN J & BARBARA A KNUDSON BRIAN L LAROCHE BRIAN M LARAMY CARVER COUNW CHARLES E LOEFFLER II CHARLES PETERSON CHERREE R THEISEN DAGMAR DIETHELM REV INTER TRUST DAKE N & DEIRDRA CHATFIELD DARYOUSH GOLBAN DAVID A EICKMEYER REV TRUST DAVID D KOESTER DAVIDG&MAUREENNELSON DAVID K WEIBY DAVID KOELLN DAVID SENIOR DOUGLAS J AHRENS ECKANKAR ELIZABETH BARNES ERICS&LISAMHAMBORG GERARD W MAHER GREGORY BTAUFUSS GREGORY R STEWART HSIN.HUNG HUANG HUGH REVOCABLE TRUST TAX_ADD-11 7461 WINDMILL DR 2241 HUNTER DR 1805 EMERALD LN 16305 36TH AVE N SUITE 600 16305 36TH AVE N SUITE 600 PO BOX 396 2197 MAJESTIC WAY 7301 FAWN HILL RD 7312 FAWN HILL RD 1880 TOPAZ DR 747LrUUP Cr 602 4TH ST E 7327 FAWN HILI RD 7496 CROCUS CT 2072 MAJESTIC WAY 2085 MAJESTIC WAY 22OO MAJESTIC WAY 2232 HUNTER DR 7339 FAWN HILL RD 7290 FAWN HILL RD 6885 SAPPHIRE LN 2149 MAJ ESTIC WAY 2133 MAJ ESTIC WAY 7431 WINDMILL DR 4011 E VALLEY RD PO BOX 2000 2179 RED FOX CrR 1861 TOPAZ DR 7101 UTICA tN 7116 UTICA LN 1893 TOPAZ DR 2045 MAJESTIC WAY 7441 WINDMILL DR TAX_ADD_12 CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN PLYMOUTH PLYMOUTH EXCELSIOR CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHASKA CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN WAYZATA CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN TAX_ADD_13 MN 55317-9366 MN 55317 MN 55317-7595 MN 55446-4270 MN 55446-4270 MN 55331-0396 MN 55317-93ss MN 55317 MN 55317 MN 55317-7662 MN 55317-9330 MN 55318-2102 MN 55317 MN 55317-9351 MN 55317-9352 MN 55317-9356 MN 55317-9354 MN 55317 MN 55317 MN 55317 MN 55317-7591 MN 55317-9355 MN 55317-9355 MN 55317-9366 MN 55391-3667 MN 55317-2000 MN 55317 MN 55317-7662 MN 55317-9528 MN 55317-9528 MN 55317- MN 55317-9356 MN 55317-9366 JAMES A & LESAW BOETTCHER JAMES A FREEBERSYSER JAMES W & CYNTHIA A ROSENDAHL JAY R & ANN MARIE GERCZAK JEFFREY J & STACEY J MORKEN JEFFREYS & CRISTIN L MASCHKA JEROLD R CLAIR JOAN E WEIS JOCELYN J O'BRIEN JODI LV LANNOM INTERVIVOS REV TRUST JOELW & SUSAN M REIMERS JOHN C & CARRIE M TIE'I-Z LIV TRUSTS JOHN D & CAROLA P PI\Z JOHN E ELVECROG JON & MARY BETH HEBEISEN JT REV TRST JOSE L MARRUJO JOSHUA KIMBER KARLD&DIANNEMDEAN KENNETH LEER KEVIN J SUNDEM LAKE LUCY RDG HOMEOWNERS A55N LARRYJ &YOKO N STUEVE LE THU CA LEOTA M HALES LONGACRES HOMEOWNERS ASSN INC LONGACRES HOMEOWNERS ASSN INC MARK E & JULI A GEMPLER MARKR&TANYALERICKSON MARK S & GERI SRADKE MARK SEEFELDT MARTIN ZIELINSKI REV TRUST MATTHEW & MICHELLE N MYERS MATTHEW RAU MAURICIO FERREIRA DE GOES 7476 CROCUS CT 6935 RUBY LN 7O9O TECUMSEH LN 1941 TOPAZ DR 6945 RUBY tN 2086 MAJESTIC WAY 7460 WINDMILL DR 2101 MAI ESTIC WAY 2198 BRINKER ST 6920 RUBY LN 7495 CROCUS CT 7011 GALPIN BLVD 2117 MAJESTIC WAY 7411 FAWN HILL RD 2150 MAIESTIC WAY 1973 TOPAZ DR 2060 MAJESTIC WAY 2251 HUNTER DR 2181 MAJESTIC WAY 1845 TOPAZ DR 8315 PLEASANT VIEW DR 7324 FAWN H ILL RD 7319 FAWN HILL RD 7451 WINDMILL DR PO BOX 542 PO BOX 542 1877 TOPAZ DR 2216 HUNTER DR 1989 TOPAZ DR 7470 TULIP CT 2211 HUNTER DR 7421 WINDMILL DR 6925 RUBY LN 6930 RUBY LN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN EXCELSIOR CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN MOUNDS VIEW CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9351 MN 55317-7595 MN 55317-8330 MN 553L7-7593 MN 55317-7595 MN 55317-9352 MN 55317-9362 MN 55317-9355 MN 55317-9359 MN 5531.7-7595 MN 55317-9351 MN 55331-8026 MN 55317-9355 MN 55317-8430 MN 5s31.7-9353 MN 55317-7593 MN 55317-9352 MN 55317 MN 55317-9355 MN 5531.7-7662 MN 551r.2-6139 MN 55317 MN 55317 MN 55317-9366 MN 55317 MN 55317 MN 55317-7662 MN 55317 MN 55317-7593 MN 55317-9330 MN 55317 MN 55317-9366 MN 55317-7595 MN 55317-7595 MEHDI AYOUCHE MICHAEL D & JANE E FELMLEE MICHAEL J GORRA MICHAEL L & KRESSIN B KRAUSE TRUSTS MICHAEL WESCHE NATHAN DEKAM PAISLEY PARK ENTERPRISES INC PATRICK DOUGLAS SIMMONS PAULA&AMYC HOLLIS PAUL A SJOGREN PAUL D JOHNSON PAULJ & LYNNETTEAOLSON PAUL M ENGEBRETSON PETERJ & LYNN M POLINGO PRINCE R NELSON RICHARD A SIT ROBERT J RAJALINGAM ROBERT LESTER SHEEHAN ROGERJ&SALLYAHAMM ROSE-MARIE J ANDERSON SCOTTE&TAMARAGSATHER SENGTAVANH B & MARIO S MEAS SHANE D WASKEY SHAWN YOU STEPHEN M & RENEE L PAWLYSHYN STEPHEN M BARNES STEVEN P WALLACE STUART REID SUSAN M LOMBARDO REV TRUST THOMASF&NANCYLHAUSER THOMAS P & ANGELA D VUKOVICH TIMOTHY C STEWART TIMOTHY NORDBERG TODDM&KARENTBIMBERG 2102 MAJESTIC WAY 7336 FAWN HILL RD PO BOX 9798 7O5O UTICA LN 7475 CROCUS CT 2231 HUNTER DR PO BOX 826s 7055 NORTHWOOD CT 2221 HUNTER DR 7490 TULIP CT 2174 MA]ESTIC WAY 2189 RED FOX CIR 7O5O TECUMSEH LN 198], TOPAZ DR PO BOX 8265 1957 TOPAZ DR 1909 TOPAZ DR 21.99 RED FOX CtR 2180 BRINKER ST 7210 GALPIN BLVD 7O9O UTICA LN 7440 WINDMILL DR 1925 TOPAZ DR 7263 FAWN HILL RD 7266 FAWN HILL RD 71OO UTICA LN 6900 LUCY RIDGE LN 7423 FAWN HILL RD 7278 FAWN HILL RD 1920 TOPAZ DR 1965 TOPAZ DR 7287 FAWN HILL RD 2126 MAJESTIC WAY 7275 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN FARGO CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN WICHITA FALLS CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN WICHITA FALLS CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN EXCELSIOR CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN MN 55317-9353 MN 55317 ND 58106- MN 5s317-9214 MN 55317-9351 MN 55317 TX 76307-8265 MN 55317 MN 55317 MN 55317-9330 MN 55317-9353 MN 55317 MN 55317-8330 MN ss317-7593 TX 76307-8265 MN 55317-7593 MN 55317-7593 MN 55317 MN 55317-9359 MN 55331- MN 55317-9214 MN 55317-9362 MN 55317-7593 MN 55317 MN 55317 MN 55317-9528 MN 55317-7599 MN 55317-8430 MN 55317 MN 55317-7593 MN 55317-7593 MN 55317 MN 55317-9353 MN 55317 TODD M SIMNING TODD N & ANNE BJUTTING TRENT J MAHR TREVOR A ST JOHN TYLER N TREAT WILLIAM H THOMPSON WILTIAM K & KRISTINE GUGGEMOS 2145 WYNSONG tN 7311 FAWN HILL RD 2065 MAJESTIC WAY 19OO TOPAZ DR 2148 WYNSONG LN 7491 TULIP CT 2165 MAjESTIC WAY CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN MN 55317-4841 MN 55317 MN 55317-9356 MN 55317-7593 MN 55317-4841 MN 55317-9330 MN 55317-935s Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 90 ft Lots PUD 15,000 90 125 5,500 90 ft Lots PUD** 11,250 90 125 5,500 65 ft Lots PUD 8,450 65 125 4,400 Front Setback Rear Setback Side Yard Setback Corner Setback CR 117 Setback 90 ft Lots 20 ft * 25 ft 7.5 ft 20 ft 50 ft 65 ft Lots 25 ft 25 ft 7.5 ft 20 ft 50 ft Wetland Buffer Setback 20 ft. * 25 ft with Sidewalk **Lots 101-111 90 ft Lots Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 501 18,092 100 177 5,500 502 17,455 90 167 5,500 503 15,030 90 167 5,500 504 22,829 90 249 5,500 505 24,572 90 249 5,500 506 16,733 90 175 5,500 507 18,427 90 201 5,500 508 17,037 90 142 5,500 509 23,848 90 159 5,500 510 20,017 90 137 5,500 511 18,801 90 156 5,500 512 17,844 90 167 5,500 513 15,032 90 167 5,500 514 15,030 90 167 5,500 515 16,667 100 167 5,500 516 15,574 90 175 5,500 517 15,514 90 175 5,500 518 15,482 90 174 5,500 519 15,576 90 174 5,500 520 15,300 90 170 5,500 521 15,300 90 170 5,500 522 15,300 90 170 5,500 523 15,440 90 172 5,500 524 15,882 90 168 5,500 525 16,629 90 136 5,500 526 22,359 90 140 5,500 527 27,426 90 143 5,500 528 16,764 90 160 5,500 529 15,371 90 165 5,500 530 44,983 90 165 5,500 531 47,788 90 125 5,500 GALPIN PROPERTY COMPLIANCE TABLE 90 ft Lots Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 101 19,897 135 143 5,500 102 13,371 90 148 5,500 103 13,297 90 148 5,500 104 13,297 90 148 5,500 105 13,297 90 148 5,500 106 13,297 90 148 5,500 107 13,297 90 148 5,500 108 13,297 90 148 5,500 109 14,599 90 148 5,500 110 14,840 90 148 5,500 111 25,529 90 148 5,500 65 ft Lots Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 301 9,993 78 125 4,400 302 8,450 65 125 4,400 303 8,450 65 125 4,400 304 8,450 65 125 4,400 305 8,450 65 125 4,400 306 8,450 65 125 4,400 307 11,132 65 125 4,400 308 13,748 78 131 4,400 309 8,925 65 129 4,400 310 12,282 65 126 4,400 311 8,607 65 125 4,400 312 8,126 65 125 4,400 313 8,257 65 125 4,400 314 8,795 65 130 4,400 315 9,683 65 142 4,400 316 12,836 78 125 4,400 317 12,591 78 150 4,400 318 10,414 65 145 4,400 319 10,228 65 145 4,400 320 11,448 65 145 4,400 321 13,180 65 147 4,400 322 12,052 65 145 4,400 323 11,853 65 142 4,400 324 10,767 65 142 4,400 325 9,524 65 139 4,400 326 9,135 65 132 4,400 327 8,609 65 132 4,400 328 8,609 65 132 4,400 329 10,232 65 132 4,400 330 9,750 65 125 4,400 331 9,478 65 125 4,400 332 10,900 65 125 4,400 333 16,107 78 125 4,400 334 11,215 78 136 4,400 335 10,404 65 153 4,400 336 11,607 65 167 4,400 337 10,622 65 142 4,400 338 11,545 65 133 4,400 339 14,532 65 125 4,400 340 12,761 65 125 4,400 341 13,019 65 125 4,400 342 10,858 65 125 4,400 343 10,887 65 163 4,400 344 10,502 65 152 4,400 345 9,306 65 134 4,400 346 10,263 78 125 4,400 347 10,020 78 125 4,400 348 9,385 65 135 4,400 349 10,984 65 154 4,400 350 10,228 65 126 4,400 351 8,474 65 126 4,400 352 8,474 65 125 4,400 353 8,776 65 125 4,400 354 8,864 65 125 4,400 355 13,586 65 131 4,400 356 14,313 65 130 4,400 357 12,790 65 132 4,400 358 12,963 65 125 4,400 359 14,449 65 145 4,400 360 11,360 65 126 4,400 361 11,011 78 125 4,400 362 10,508 65 142 4,400 363 11,458 65 145 4,400 364 13,033 65 130 4,400 365 12,790 65 130 4,400 366 12,940 65 132 4,400 367 12,790 65 130 4,400 368 9,728 65 131 4,400 369 10,036 65 140 4,400 370 10,303 78 125 4,400 371 8,933 65 130 4,400 372 9,242 65 130 4,400 373 9,242 65 130 4,400 374 9,242 65 130 4,400 375 9,236 65 130 4,400 376 8,450 65 130 4,400 377 8,450 65 130 4,400 378 8,450 65 130 4,400 379 8,450 65 130 4,400 380 8,450 65 130 4,400 381 8,801 65 130 4,400 382 15,319 95 130 4,400 383 11,772 78 145 4,400 384 9,453 65 145 4,400 385 9,780 65 145 4,400 386 9,898 65 134 4,400 387 9,263 65 130 4,400 388 8,450 65 130 4,400 389 8,450 65 130 4,400 390 8,450 65 130 4,400 391 8,450 65 130 4,400 392 8,450 65 130 4,400 393 8,749 65 130 4,400 394 9,189 65 130 4,400 395 9,390 65 130 4,400 396 9,313 65 130 4,400 397 8,922 65 134 4,400 398 12,754 78 130 4,400 399 8,474 65 130 4,400 400 8,450 65 130 4,400 401 8,450 65 130 4,400 402 8,450 65 130 4,400 403 8,450 65 130 4,400 404 8,450 65 130 4,400 405 10,504 65 130 4,400 406 11,092 65 130 4,400 407 8,819 65 130 4,400 408 8,450 65 130 4,400 409 8,729 65 130 4,400 410 12,658 78 131 4,400 411 10,192 78 127 4,400 412 9,559 65 127 4,400 413 9,104 65 145 4,400 414 9,702 65 137 4,400 415 14,151 65 135 4,400 416 9,676 65 135 4,400 417 8,779 65 130 4,400 418 8,570 65 130 4,400 419 9,103 65 136 4,400 420 9,344 65 143 4,400 421 9,170 65 143 4,400 422 10,929 78 132 4,400 423 12,265 78 142 4,400 424 9,984 65 130 4,400 425 10,465 65 130 4,400 426 11,434 65 159 4,400 427 12,108 65 170 4,400 428 12,591 65 178 4,400 429 12,589 65 178 4,400 430 12,101 65 170 4,400 431 10,764 65 130 4,400 432 9,554 65 130 4,400 433 11,046 78 128 4,400 434 12,618 65 141 4,400 435 14,656 65 212 4,400 436 14,357 65 248 4,400 437 14,285 65 248 4,400 438 13,661 65 200 4,400 439 12,931 65 134 4,400 55 ft Lots Lot Lot Area (SF) Lot Width (Feet) Lot Depth (Feet) Impervious Area (SF) 201 11,262 55 115 3,400 202 8,851 55 148 3,400 203 8,645 55 146 3,400 204 8,659 55 146 3,400 205 8,894 55 149 3,400 206 9,079 55 156 3,400 207 9,043 55 165 3,400 208 8,470 55 132 3,400 209 13,623 55 115 3,400 210 10,635 55 137 3,400 211 11,580 55 139 3,400 212 10,688 55 132 3,600 213 13,820 55 124 3,600 214 9,059 55 164 3,400 215 7,285 55 132 3,400 216 7,285 55 132 3,400 217 7,488 55 133 3,400 218 9,065 55 131 3,400 219 8,605 55 124 3,400 220 6,824 55 122 3,400 221 7,222 55 140 3,400 222 8,456 55 168 3,400 223 11,920 55 176 3,400 224 10,548 55 128 3,400 225 7,164 55 131 3,400 226 9,284 55 127 3,600 227 8,832 55 126 3,600 228 6,875 55 125 3,400 229 6,875 55 125 3,400 230 6,875 55 125 3,400 231 6,875 55 125 3,400 232 6,875 55 125 3,400 233 7,651 55 126 3,400 234 10,745 55 142 3,400 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MARCH 5, 2019 Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, Mark Randall, and Michael McGonagill COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Undestad and John Tietz STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Erick Henricksen, Project Engineer; Todd Hoffman, Park and Rec Director; and Andrew Brotzler, Interim Public Works Director PUBLIC MEETING TO REVIEW CHANGES TO THE GALPIN PROPERTY SUBDIVISION. Aller: Today’s meeting is a public meeting to review changes to the Galpin property subdivision. The proposed Galpin subdivision has been before us on two prior occasions at which formal notice public hearings were conducted. The first time it was before the Planning Commission public hearing was on the concept PUD and that was in July on July 17, 2019. The benefits of that type of hearing were that the Planning Commission continues to gather public comments without requiring any formal Findings of Fact. The developer’s not required to prepare costly or detailed plans for consideration and the City is not necessarily obligated to grant approval at that point in time. There’s no legal binding obligation on either party without the Findings of Fact so it makes it easier for the parties to continue to talk and discuss and to take your comments and turn it into action. The developer receives input without direction or with our direction and then it goes before the City Council to do the same. The second time it was before the Planning Commission there was a public hearing on a preliminary plat. That was on January 15, 2019. We were discussing whether the proposed plat met the standards outlined for a PUD. At a recent meeting the item has been remanded to the Planning Commission for public comment to review the most recent changes to the proposed Galpin subdivision. The Planning Commission may or may not ask questions and may or may not comment on the project after public comments have been received. The Planning Commission will not be making any formal decision tonight or taking a vote or making a formal recommendation to the City Council. This hearing is not about us the Planning Commission making a decision. It’s about you as the residents of the city of Chanhassen providing your thoughts, opinions and feedback to the council for it’s consideration and their decision on March 11th. The City of Chanhassen values communications to it’s residents and in an effort to provide exceptional service we have a website available for your use. All the documents, all the minutes, all the proceedings that we’ve had in this matter before the City Council or the Planning Commission are found on that website. It’s a one stop location and the address is ci.chanhassen.mn.us. We will be proceeding tonight as Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 2 follows. The staff will open with a presentation of the project item. The applicant will address the status of the proposed project. And then the public comment will be taken. That’s an opportunity for the public to come forward and speak either for or against the item before us. At that time we ask that you please state your name, your address and representational capacity if any. If there are a number of individuals present who are here to speak on the same topic it’s always great if you can elect one person to speak on your behalf. It saves some time and it gives some clarity to the discussion. We ask that you limit your comments to no more than 5 minutes. Additional time might be granted but is unlikely due to the large number of individuals before us. When the public comment is open there are individuals at the senior center now that can hear us and watch us on the televisions. You are certainly welcomed to come around and voice your opinion so please feel free to come by when that happens. If you have written comments please provide them to us and they will be prepared and put in the package to the City Council and again those prepared items and statements will be available on the website between now and the meeting before the City Council on the 11th. Our commission by-laws indicate that we conduct business until 10:30 p.m. If we continue to 10:30 p.m. we may have to cut off our hearing so again that’s the importance of keeping our comments to a point and between 3 and 5 minutes. Finally for those of you who are maybe out of town and not familiar with the City of Chanhassen and it’s residents we have a nice attitude here. We have a nice attitude here. We have meaningful conversations and dialogue at these Planning Commission meetings and we request that all individuals act with respect and courtesy while another individual is speaking. There will be no major applause. We want to make sure that we hear what is being said and if there’s interference or something, somebody wants to disrupt we’ll have to take action at that point in time. With that we’ll begin this public hearing for comment with the staff presentation. Aanenson: Thank you Chairman, members of the Planning Commission. Just because we have a large group I think it’d be important that we introduce the staff that’s here. I’m Kate Aanenson. I’m the Community Development Director. Hoffman: Hello I’m Todd Hoffman. I’m the Director of Parks and Recreation. Henricksen: I’m Erick Henricksen, the Project Engineer. Brotzler: Andy Brotzler, Interim Public Works Director. Aanenson: So we’re also available if there’s technical questions that the Planning Commission has. Again the Planning Commission’s goal tonight is to be an opportunity for public comments and those comments will be gathered and forwarded up to the City Council for their meeting on Monday. As you mentioned Chairman there is a packet available of the staff report. We put in that report, and I’m not going to go through all those meeting dates because we are going to have just a brief presentation from the developer of what you saw at your meeting in January and how that’s evolved. There’s been a number of work sessions at the City Council and they wanted the Planning Commission and the public to have an opportunity to comment on those changes. So I’ll let the developer go through a number of those meetings but again there will be a staff report Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 3 that should go out, hopefully tomorrow for the Monday meeting and that will include everything except for the Minutes for tonight. I’m not sure we can turn that around that quickly but there has been a number of emails. Those will be part of the record. They are, have been stitched to this packet so if you went online right now you could download the comments that have already been submitted to the city as a part of this record and we’ll continue to add to that record too so again the goal tonight is to listen to the comments from the residents and forward that information onto the Planning Commission. As you stated Chairman you’re welcome, the commission’s welcomed to ask questions. You’re not going to make a formal motion but if you want to add additional comments that’s up to you and I think if we’re going to try to end by 10:30 and you want time for comments you may want to end at a little bit beforehand so I’ll leave that up to you Chairman. But with that what I would be suggesting is that you give the developer a chance to kind of go through the changes since you’ve seen it last and then go ahead and open it up for public comment. And again as you stated we’re not having a sign up. We’re going to let as many people to go through as we can and then just state their name for the record so with that I’ll turn it over to the developer. Joe Jablonski: Good evening Mr. Chair, members of the Planning Commission. I want to start, well first Joe Jablonski representing U.S. Home Corporation or Lennar as the applicant developer. I want to start by giving a brief introduction of kind of where we’ve gone and some of the things that we’ve gone through. I’m going to run through kind of where we started with the concept plan that was mentioned and then how that’s evolved or changed and some of the things that we’ve addressed. Some of the things that we’ve listened to and I want to make sure some of the questions that still seem to be hanging out there that I’m trying to address now and without getting. McGonagill: Just a second. Joe Jablonski: Yes sir. McGonagill: That stuff’s not up on our screens. Can you get it up there please? Okay thank you. Joe Jablonski: You want me to keep going? Weick: Yeah. Joe Jablonski: So we started off and you mentioned that we started with a concept plan, even prior to the introduction of the concept plan going back as far as the first part of June in 2018 we invited Planning Commission members, staff, park commission and City Council members out to the site to kind of introduce what we’ve thought was the vision that we wanted to proceed with and had a chance to kind of walk around. Take a look at the site and from there we started building immediately the following week. We went right into a council work shop where we got a little bit more feedback and jumped right into the Planning Commission concept plan review Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 4 that was on July 17th, that was mentioned. Planning Commission recommended some changes. We went through and I’ll talk about those. Leading up to that in November we also held a invitation neighborhood meeting that I think went out to the same people that received the public notices were invited to that meeting. It was well attended. We had an opportunity to meet some of the neighbors one on one and we also have held one on one meetings. We’ve been in constant communication with a number of residents by email and phone and have done several, as I mentioned, one on one meetings as well. So that kind of leads us up meeting wise where we are tonight. I wanted to start back at our original concept plan. The original concept plan had 198 homes on it. This is the version that had the density transfer and what you can see is in the middle of that plan there was a large pond. I know you can’t see it up on your, is there a pointer here? Oh yeah cool. I don’t know if you can see it up there. Okay. But there is a pond centrally located in the middle and some of the things that, out of the concept plan that we really took to heart was that the density transfer was preferred. We went through both the Planning Commission, Park and City Council and I think the general acknowledgement was we’d like to see the park preserved and we’d like to see you go forward with some form of density transfer. That was the direction that we felt we were given so that’s the route that we took. One of the other items that was very important, especially to the north neighborhood was that we did something with the connection to Lucy Ridge. As you can see on this plan the street coming in off of Galpin went all the way up into the Lucy Ridge neighborhood. That was something that Lucy Ridge and Ashling Meadows were both fairly vocal about concerns over. Other things we were asked to take advantage of some of the exiting topography on the site. It is a rolling site from the street at Galpin down to the wetlands. There’s quite a bit of grade change. We were asked to preserve trees and then we were also asked to preserve similar lot types against the surrounding perimeters. On the bottom of this plan we had 55 foot wide villa style lots directly adjacent to the neighborhood on the south. Majestic Oaks. So that was in your concept plan. Then as we were proceeding into the preliminary plat, which goes through additional steps of engineering, starts to work out hydrology and starts to gather a little bit more information to get into where we are today so that led into a submission packet that had 191 homes so we at that point we’ve already reduced that number by 7. We eliminated that connection to Lucy Ridge and were able to do so by preserving quite a bit of landscape buffer around the perimeter of that northern cul-de-sac. We also worked to, on the south we addressed the similar neighborhood type by introducing 75 foot wide lots all the way on the south end there to match similar house or similar product type on the south end. We went through and started addressing drainage concerns were brought up during the preliminary plat. I’ll talk about that a little bit. And then you also one of the other things to address some of the topography questions or challenges is that central pond that we had that was kind of in the middle of the hillside. We moved it adjacent to the wetland which was after the engineering was done on it seemed to be a more appropriate place for that to allow the opportunity to take advantage of some of that rolling topography out there. Which really brings us to and some of these questions or these items were things that we pulled out of the preliminary plat stage. Some of the things that we felt we were asked by the Planning Commission or through the workshop sessions with the council. To bring us to the plan that you have before you now which is why I wanted to come up and talk about kind of where we went from that pre-plat submission to where we are today. So now we’re at a plan that Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 5 has 181 homes. We reduced it by another 10. 17 from the original plan. And since then we’ve gone through and we’ve changed all the homes on the south side buffering the Majestic Oaks way have been changed to 90 foot wide lots. That was a change from 75 before so now they match the R-1 zoning standards or are very similar in lot size. By doing that we also reconfigured the, that central area that had, and I do have some more information on this leading up to but we expanded the size of the other lots that were 55 feet wide in that south central area to 65 feet. As part of our current plan we also relocated the Galpin pond. A couple things that we’re doing out here is we’re having to take stormwater ponding for the future expansion of Galpin Road. The locations of that are the preferred locations were provided to us by the County originally and we took those into consideration but actually moved one of the pond locations from what’s know today as where the guard house is a little bit to the south and in doing that there’s a couple different things that we were able to do. One of it was move the pond but it allowed us to save more trees and we also went through and enhanced some of the buffering around the perimeters. I can go, I’ll go into that in a little more detail and address some of the drainage concerns a little bit more closely so they go into those changes in more detail here. Up on the north end now the plan obviously we’ve cut off the connection. We’re starting to show the trail connections that were important to the park commission. We’ve included buffering right at the north property line that is adjacent to the Lucy Ridge neighborhood. We’ve also been contacted by the Ashling Meadows neighborhood and had requested that we consider some additional buffering along the edge of Topaz Road which is something that we would certainly look at. Either with preserving some existing trees along that property line or replanting and buffering that’s not shown on here but it’s something that we would consider. On the south end you can start to see the changes that have been made. We are doing more tree preservation down on that southeast corner. Along the south and the central coming right off of Galpin we were able to save about a 20 foot wide, 20 to 25 foot wide buffer of existing trees along that property line. Now the lot sizes match. They’re 90 foot wide lots on the south. Going into the next ones here. So as we talked about meeting into the topography it’s difficult to explain how that’s going to look from a two dimensional plan in a 3D world so what I attempted to do, and it’s kind of hard to read on this sheet obviously but at the north entrance, if I go back one. At that northern entrance just south, not the far north but the one that lines up with Longacres Drive. The elevation of the road coming in off of there is a 121.7 and down at the south end, or not south but the eastern side of that it goes down to a 987.5 and that’s the road grade following the existing topography. So I point that out because I think it’s important to understand that we’re not flattening the site. From the road connection off Galpin and Hunter down to where those first double cul-de-sacs are there’s about a 34 foot grade change and that’s in the road and that’s kind of pushing the max of what the City design guidelines will allow for those road changes. They’re in the some portions are about 5 to 6 percent. The City does allow up to 7 but it’s really not preferred to go that steep and it makes it difficult from a grading perspective from house to house but I think it is important to show that we are attempting to match the existing topography from Galpin down to the wetlands and then on the south entrance there, from the south to the southern cul-de-sac there’s about a 19 foot grade change and it’s not quite as steep there because Galpin actually comes down in elevation quite a bit there from the other intersections so we’re maintaining a level above the wetlands that’s required but what we’re doing is trying to match Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 6 the locked location or elevation that we’re stuck with off of Galpin down to the wetlands and rolling that street through there at the maximum grades that are allowed for street construction throughout so I know it’s difficult to see that and how that looks but I wanted to make sure that I explain that a little bit because we have gotten quite a few questions. You know are you just going to flatten it and it really isn’t going to be just flat. It is going to have and maintain some of that natural topography throughout. So the changes down in the south end by moving the pond we eliminated, while we both changed from 65 to, or from 55 to 65 wide lots and we changed, we eliminated this little bump out cul-de-sac and put the pond down in that location. What that allows for is a little bit less intrusive view from Longacres. Rather than looking at a small cul- de-sac of houses and roof tops, they’ll be looking across at some ponding and some of the revegetation that we’re going to do. By removing or changing that pond location we were also able to, where the existing guard house is preserve another area of trees. There’s a number of large standing oaks in that area. 14 to 20 inch that are in pretty good shape that we were able to maintain and that pond really wasn’t taking much of our water. It was taking a lot of the stormwater from Galpin so moving it we had to get some leeway from the County but I think they understand the importance of putting that in a location and it still is in a low point for them so it allows the opportunity to preserve some more trees and potentially the guard house as a neighborhood identification marker at the trail head. So if I go forward here, another one of the things that may be a little bit confused in this is the perception that we’re going to be flooding the neighbors. One of the things in our design guidelines and the City’s rules and the watershed is you can’t change the volume of water leaving the site. In fact you have to reduce it. So what we’ve actually done here and what this highlights is the house in the corner here, I highlighted it or I can’t tell. Can you see that up there or not? Yeah it disappears in the screen. So right by where you had the cursor there, that 1002 elevation that you see is one of the existing homes there and the houses that we’re proposing immediately adjacent to it are actually 10 feet below so, and we’ve put in a series of catch basins and a series of storm sewer running through that rear line there so our homes will actually be sitting 10 feet below. Oh yeah. So the elevation of this home in Majestic Oaks is 1002. Our home here is actually at a 992 so it sits 10 feet below the adjacent property and this property actually takes water from the neighbors so what we are doing here is allowing an out for some of the design and some of the, there is no storm, rear yard storm sewer in the existing neighborhood. By putting the number of catch basins and enhancing the storm sewer system that isn’t there today, it allows us the opportunity to collect some of the water from the neighbors. I also talked to one of the neighbors that we would allow or with the City’s permission there may be an opportunity to allow rear yard sump pumps to connect into that storm sewer as well. We could put leads. We’ve done that in other communities in Chanhassen where we put sump pump leads up to the property line to allow the opportunity to connect their sump pumps into that storm sewer. It’s something that we’ll have to review with staff if the neighbors are interested in but it certainly could help that situation. We do have a retaining wall along here and the purpose of that retaining wall, because our lots are sitting down it actually it holding up the hillside and there’s vegetation and trees that we’re preserving on top of it and then in the areas that we aren’t able to preserve trees through here our landscape plan proposes putting them back in on top of the wall so I think there was some misunderstanding that the wall was actually going to be above the existing properties but it’s actually below Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 7 because our houses will sit below. So I wanted to make sure that that was spelled out and understood a little bit better. That’s been something that has been a concern that we wanted to make sure was understood and addressed. Continuing through one of the other things we were asked to do was continue working on the creativity of the plan and what this shows is locations that we’re starting to show some enhancing of landscape. Monumentation at the south entrance, both entrance sides. The north and the south of that road will get an entrance monument with landscaping. At the guard house we are proposing somewhat in and in some respects to the existing or the former owner, some landscaping that would be enhanced by purple flowers of aster, chives and petunias. We thought that that may be a subtle way to show some recognition of the previous owner without going too far over the top and they are kind of a wild species that don’t require a ton of maintenance so it should be something that would be appropriate and take fairly well in a location like that. Down into, I know you can’t see but detail 5 is right in this area. As I click into the next screen we’re also doing some upgrading of landscaping there. Again trying to do more of a wildflower type of situation that’s highlighted by some of the purple colors. Purples and yellows. So lastly I want to make sure that I talk briefly about this because this has been something that from the start has also been kind of part of this conversation is do we want to see a density transfer or do we want to go straight zoning and I’m sure that the Planning Commission understands that with following straight zoning guidelines there are rules in place. There are rights in place that allow property owners and people to develop their property provided they’re following those guidelines. For this area the minimums are 90 foot wide lots with 15,000 square foot requirements. There are some shoreland overlay district rules that apply as well but this plan is a pretty good visual of how that looks. If you follow exactly to the T what those zoning guidelines are and this plan you can see some things that are happening here. The road goes back through because that could happen if the plan is followed to the T. There are the opportunity for lots that meet those 90 foot requirements and 15,000 square foot minimums to go in that location. There is obviously the park area, this plan shows the minimum park required per the ordinance and development of more homes in the area that’s shown on our PUD plan as preserved for park. The overall lot count on this plan is 195 versus 181 on our plan. I think that there is maybe some misunderstanding that this plan creates less traffic. It creates less, you know less pressure on schools. Whatever the case is but in fact there is more houses on it so it’s important to understand that it’s more than a straight trade off of park. There is the opportunity that there’s going to be more pressure on the infrastructure and the roads with a plan like this. There’s obviously more tree removal as well. This whole park as everybody knows is wooded and that’s why we’ve elected to try to preserve it. So the other question that has come up that I want to make sure I address is that area in the park. Can you actually develop that? We’ve taken a little bit more time. We’ve gotten some opinions from wetland consultants about that and we feel that it can. In fact this is a plan, it looks a little different but this is a community that we are building in Victoria. It’s Laketown. Lake Wasserman is actually up on the north part. This is a large wetland complex that goes through here. We actually built a road very similar fashion right through the middle of it. Is it challenging? Is there permits? Yes there is but we were able to not only accomplish this but in this project, this is Minnehaha Creek Watershed. We actually got an innovation award for the work that we did here so can it be done? I do think it can and our wetland consultants think it Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 8 can and I think it’s important to, that people understand that if the decision is made that the PUD plan is not supported that something like this can certainly occur. Whether it ends up being Lennar. It ends up being somebody else but it is possible I believe and I think it’s important for people to know and understand that. That basically concludes the last slide that I have and I know this table is hard to read but what I want to point out here is compatibility with the existing neighborhoods. Our plan by definition is, has a 1.3 density units per acre and by definition I mean net acres which is gross acres or the total land mass minus wetlands. Minus county right- of-way. That’s where that 1.3 units per acre comes from. The area around it averages 1.33 so by definition we fall right in line with that but just for the sake of the math, if you take out the park, which is roughly 50 acres and the 89 acres of upland we come in at 2.03 units per acre and that’s 181 homes at 89 acres. So I think the misconception that it doesn’t fit in with the existing neighborhoods is maybe a little misleading. The neighborhood to the south is actually 2.5. Lucy Ridge is 1.89. Ashling Meadows is 1.28. Parts of Longacres, Longacres is a little bit different. It’s 1.19 but the way that that is, those lots are counted was also different. They were platted into wetlands and platted into ponds and lot sizes are a little misleading on that one. So I wanted to make sure also that that was pointed out because there’s been some maybe misleading or misunderstandings that we’re coming in with a plan that doesn’t match the neighborhoods and it’s significantly more dense but the numbers here really don’t indicate that. So I would be happy to answer any questions that you have. I’d be, certainly will stick around and be happy to answer any at the end or however you feel I’ll be close by. Aller: Great thank you. Joe Jablonski: Thanks. Aller: Commissioner McGonagill, you have questions? McGonagill: Just a couple Mr. Jablonski. A question when you look at this, on your concept plan 7 which is different, a little bit different than what we saw on January 15th. How did the grading plan, how much percentage wise did the grading plan change as far as you know you talked I think if I recall a couple hundred thousand yards of dirt was going to be moved around and now you’ve reduced lot size. You’ve done that. How much has the grading plan come down? Joe Jablonski: The grading plan didn’t change too much. The location of the ponds changed and some of the, we did a little bit more work in that back yard area but the volume of dirt moving doesn’t necessarily change and with that the other plan that follows the zoning, I think it’s important to understand that that requires or ends up with a very similar type of grading situation and probably even more because of the grading that occurs into the park area. So does that? McGonagill: Yeah that answers that question. One more. Quite a few of the citizens have talked about traffic concerns and the interconnections between, and I’ll have to use Longacres and Hunter because I don’t remember the name of the streets across but the streets exiting the Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 9 Galpin development will be single line roads? Are they going to be divided? And then on, you’d have to ask probably Kate, this is probably directed to you. The Galpin project will there will be turn lanes? What’s going to be on Galpin to allow egress from those two neighborhoods now that will be abutting each other with traffic. Aanenson: I’m going to turn that over to the engineering department. Someone that can answer that question regarding the plans that they’ve got on Galpin. McGonagill: Okay. So why don’t we start with you as far as in and out’s. Were those single roads? You know you had a chart of where the monuments were. Joe Jablonski: I have the best plan here. Well here’s one for the south. It is single lane each direction. We weren’t splitting the entrances. We were electing to put monuments on the sides so it would be one lane in, one lane out. McGonagill: So it wasn’t like a monument in the middle of a cul-de-sac? Joe Jablonski: No. McGonagill: Where you’d go around it. It was. Joe Jablonski: No. That’s not the way that we were proposing it. We were proposing it on the outside edges. McGonagill: Okay. Joe Jablonski: And that’s the same in all three connecting points. McGonagill: Okay. And so I guess I’ll turn it to, okay. What about on the Galpin itself? Aanenson: Erick? Or Andrew. Brotzler: Mr. Chair, commissioners we were just going through the Galpin Boulevard design study that was completed in 2018 and the proposed project that’s currently planned for 2022, to reconstruct Galpin Boulevard does include the addition of dedicated turn lanes. McGonagill: It does include? Brotzler: Yes. McGonagill: Okay. At both. Brotzler: That is a part of the proposed plan. Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 10 McGonagill: At both roads? Brotzler: Yes. McGonagill: Turn lanes going just one turn lane or will there be two? I mean I’m getting into the details I know. Brotzler: It’d be a right turn lanes and then a left turn lanes in the opposing direction. McGonagill: Okay thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Aller: And just to add, tack onto that as a result of the PUD plan that you’re proposing there will be enough easement granted for those turn lanes to be created? Joe Jablonski: Correct. Aller: Okay. Joe Jablonski: Yes. Aller: Any additional questions from commissioners at this time? Commissioner Weick. Weick: One question. I know we don’t have a plan yet but have you given any thought to the phasing of the buildout and what that might look like? Joe Jablonski: We have. Let’s see if I can, well this is probably the best way to look at it. The sewer comes through here, the Interceptor Line down, that runs kind of like this. So we would be electing to start our first phase in this area so that we have immediate connection or the easiest connection to the sewer. Grading would probably occur up to somewhere in here that first development season. And then we’d continue to the north and then the further north can really, both of these can kind of work independently. That really will depend on market and depend on the timing of interest for those neighborhoods but as far as the grading and the infrastructure works it can kind of be broken into thirds with us planning to start on the south third. Work our way to the north knowing that those, that those two areas on the far north could kind of happen simultaneously or at any time. Does that answer? Weick: Yep thank you. That’s all Chairman. Aller: Commissioner Madsen. Madsen: In this most recent proposal you mentioned that there was additional tree preservation. Could you just clarify exactly what areas that is and some sort of quantity of tree preservation? Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 11 Joe Jablonski: On the south end we were able to preserve down at the far southeast corner a little bit more and then about a 20 foot, 20 to 25 foot wide existing tree buffer here. And then these circle trees, kind of the more blob style is what we’re preserving where my cursor is and then these circle ones are trees that we’re planning to replant. So that would be the south end. In the center area, which I don’t know I have a real good. Well let’s go up to the north. The north from the start between the time of our concept plan and the preliminary plat is where we probably spent the most time concentrating on what we can and can’t preserve up in the north section so all of this vegetation you see here would be preserved. We are preserving this area. One thing that we did change based on staff recommendations or that we support is putting these trees that would be within private lots into conservation easements. We’d be happy to work with staff to, on language for that to occur. There was some concern from neighbors about you know it’s great you’re saving the trees but how do we know they’re going to stay in the long run so I think conservation easements in those situations is a good opportunity for that. And then in the central area the biggest change or the place that we were saving the most was near the guard house. This is at Galpin, just south of the water station. So there were a number of existing oak trees there that are in pretty good shape that we were able to preserve and save by moving that pond. The exact quantity here it’s easy to determine but the other places, I don’t have a number for you sorry. Madsen: Okay thank you. Aller: Any additional questions at this point in time? Okay, thank you sir. So now is the time we’re going to open up the public hearing for comment by the public. Again that’s an opportunity for those present to come forward, speak either for or against the item. Those individuals in the other rooms if you want to feel free to come by and come around to the front and get in line when you feel like speaking please feel free to do so. You’re certainly welcome. To all those present I usually try to welcome you when you get here. Instead of saying that a hundred times tonight I just welcome everybody so we can move it along and I can hear the individuals. Again just a short reminder. 3 to 5 minutes. Please state your name, your address for the record. This is all going to go to the City Council to read and review and to digest and it will also give us a good record of who’s present before us tonight so with that welcome sir. Alan Nikolai: My name is Alan Nikolai, 6570 Galpin Boulevard which is about three-quarter mile north of this property. I go back a ways. I’ve been here in Chanhassen for 60 years. My family used to be about a couple one percent of the population back in early 60’s. For some of those people in those units north and south of this property, I used to hunt that. So you want to talk about not in my backyard. I get it. Bottom line is I’m looking a little bit on the wildlife aspect of it. That was one of the things when this first came up. What are we going to do to preserve natural areas for wildlife? That’s one of the intrinsic values of when people are seeing deer, owls, fox, whatever. When the little kids are seeing the fawn first time in June. Look at the little fawn. How do you put a dollar value on that? You can’t. We’re going have is basically a refuge here. It’s been that way for a while already. We’ve got another big refuge out Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 12 to the west. Lake Minnewashta Park. And there’s a wildlife corridor, if you ever talk to the DNR. How do you connect the two? That little creek on the north side that’s the connection. That’s the corridor that goes through there. With the PUD there’s more buffer space for wildlife to transverse east to west. They go way up that creek, I watch it all the time. I’ve been driving that road for 45 years. I understand what goes on with the wildlife. Frankly the PUD, all the work that’s been done with all the Lennar and all the city officials, well done. Very well done. We have a much bigger natural area for wildlife that people will enjoy for years to come. Frankly this, that area in the, those that have it. This red area, that’s the feather in the hat for the city of Chanhassen for the next couple generations. When they look back, what did we do well? Is to preserve that naturally. Now mowed. Natural. Let he dog gone turkeys and deer and fox, whatever have some room. So I strongly recommend that the City Council and, approve the proposed PUD. It’s dramatically increased. I have a background in construction. Civil engineering. Soils engineering. Architecture. I know what it takes to come together to do this. That’s a monumental step forward compared to the first proposal. Fully in support of this, the new version that you’ve come up with. Representative from Lennar thank you for working with the city but this is what we’re supposed to do. All come together. What’s going to be best so I know I heard through the grapevine you wanted to hear from some people that weren’t right next to it. Well I’m three-quarter miles away and this is the PUD is really a remarkable thing that can happen for the city. Thank you. Marnie Wells: Good evening. My name is Marnie Wells and I’m actually a Minneapolis resident. However I am the CEO of Camp Fire Minnesota. We own and operate Tanadoona which is just not even 4 ½ miles from here so thank you for including me tonight. Thank you Chairman and commissioners and staff. And I bet many of you have been to Tanadoona so again we’re jut down the road and I’ve been leading the organization for nearly 14 years. Tanadoona is 103 acres with 2,000 feet of shoreline on Lake Minnewashta. We are home of birds, bugs, critters. Lots of critters. Five unique eco regions including wetlands, prairie and a big woods. And we’ve been serving our kids of this community since 1924. And we believe that nature is the catalyst for change and we believe children have a right and we believe all kids deserve access to nature and that’s why I’m here tonight. Many of you may know this but I’ll just remind you. Kids spend 90 percent of their time indoors. Kids spend 50 hours a week in front of a screen. That is a full time job in front of a screen. That’s about 7 ½ hours a day. And we all know, we all know this and the research shows that when kids are unplugged and in nature it makes them happier, healthier, and better in school. So it seems really clear that being exposed to more nature, and that’s not just the Boundary Waters, or even Tanadoona for that matter, any nature and even perhaps this park in your back yard will have an enormous benefit on their lives and their future success and that is why I support the density transfer plan. This area has the potential to be 100 acre park for the community. That’s another Tanadoona in your back yard. And you know the property’s going to be developed. There’s no bones about it. And you all have an opportunity to create a legacy that will outlive all of us and benefit young people for many, many generations. I believe supporting the density transfer plan is the smartest and most thoughtful way to develop this gem. This absolute gem of an area. Now is my dreams were to come true we would do nothing other than leave it alone and let the turkeys do what they’re Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 13 doing out there but we know it will be developed so the reality, knowing it will be developed, supporting the density transfer plan is my stance. Of course I encourage you all to think carefully and clearly. You all have. I am very impressed with the work that’s been done. The positive impact that nature has on us, especially our children is immeasurable. And we are very well positioned to create and ensure a legacy that will benefit generations to come. And as someone who’s been working with children in a nature network and community I encourage you to support this plan, the density transfer plan. Thanks so much. Aller: Thank you. Craig Mertz: My name’s Craig Mertz. I’m a resident of town here. I’ve lived here for 40 plus years. I’m speaking on behalf and in support of Lennar’s plan for the density transfer. I came here because I wanted to explain a little bit of institutional memory here of historical context to what is happening here. This is the 50th anniversary, the half century anniversary of the establishment of Lake Ann Park. 1969 the then mayor Al Klingelhutz and his wife Mary Jane Klingelhutz and some other community leaders in town here came up with the idea of buying the Welter Farm that became Lake Ann Park. People here probably don’t know that there was opposition in 1969 to taking that big step of buying the parkland. The objections were didn’t need a park or this park was too big or the City shouldn’t be in the business of buying raw land for park purposes or the City shouldn’t buy any more land unless it has money in the bank already to do the internal developments in the park. If the City village council back in that year had gone along with the naysayers we wouldn’t have Lake Ann Park here. Now I know there’s going to be some limited objections to what’s going on. The effect on the surrounding community but just as the village council did in 1969 we need to be looking forward to what’s going to happen 10 years, 20 years, 30 years from now where this park, this doubling of the size of the park is going to be another, we’re doubling the size of the jewel of the city park system and I would ask that the City and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Lennar plan and we do a density transfer and accept the gift of the additional parkland so thank you. Jennie Skancke: Hi, my name is Jennie Skancke. I’m the area hydrologist for this area from the Minnesota DNR. My role as the area hydrologist is to review and approve preliminary plats when they come from cities. I cover 3 different counties so I review a lot of plats for developments across Dakota, Scott and Carver County. I did see this plan in a very preliminary idea at the very beginning and sent Kate my support for this density transfer idea. I want to essentially just echo what that first man said. I honestly cannot overstate the importance of setting aside this land, not only for the community of Chanhassen but creating resiliency to deal with the amount of flooding that we might have in the future due to climate change. I want to especially commend the staff here for coming up and working with Lennar on this kind of a design. This is truly a unique and commendable design. I rarely see anything this wonderful that sets aside this much space. I think Lennar is really to be commended for not only working with the City but for hearing the concerns of the neighbors for preserving these spaces that they’re willing to set aside an easement. You know they can get extra money for an individual parcel if they don’t set aside those trees in the conservation easement. If they have a larger Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 14 acreage for that each individual parcel but they are hearing what this community wants and honestly it’s very, very rare that a developer is so willing to work with the community so you know just from I haven’t reviewed the details so this is not intended to be a formal support of the plan but generally I think it looks really great and I would strongly support this density transfer concept. Thank you. Conrad Fiskness: Good evening. My name is Conrad Fiskness. I live at 2385 Bridle Creek Circle which borders right up to Galpin. I’m about, between a half a mile and three quarter miles south of Highway 5. Been a resident of Chanhassen since 1966. In 1969 I was appointed to the Park and Recreation Commission and very early on, actually our chairman at the time came to the meeting all excited. He had discovered this piece of property that would make a wonderful park and within a few days as a group went to look at it and it was remarkable. Anybody driving down 5 thought it was just a field of cabbages. Where the ballfields are now and I had no idea that there was a lake behind that hill. We actually commission, park and rec commission, there were 7 of us decided that we did want to go ahead with the park. The council supported us. We put together a plan. Council let us go ahead and promote a bond issue. We bought 60 acres out of 120 that was available. We proposed to buy that and it went, the cost was $3,000 an acre. The comment was made earlier about opposition. I went to 3 different organizations to present the plan. I was told that we were the dumbest people on the face of the earth to consider paying $3,000 an acre for land. Unheard of. And probably if you were looking at it in terms of growing corn, soybeans or cabbage probably that was true but we did proceed. We passed the bond issue. We constructed the park during, I guess it would be 1970 and ’71 and it’s something that I feel very good about having been a part of. I think the fact that Chanhassen has been the number 10, number 4 and number 2 best city under 50,000 in which to live in the country that Lake Ann would have something to do with that. January of 1972 I was appointed to represent this area on the Riley-Purgatory, Bluff wasn’t a part of it yet. At the Riley-Purgatory Watershed District. At the time I came on I, excuse me let me back up. While I was on the Park and Recreation Commission there was a developer that either owned or had option to this land and was proposing building right up to the lake. The park and rec commission, supported by the council promoted the idea and it was accepted that Lake Ann would be the one lake in Chanhassen around which there would be no houses built. In other words there would be a public area all the way around the lake. And so we, that position was accepted by the council and has been to the best of my knowledge supported by park and recreation commissions and councils ever since so we have virtually half a century of support for Lake Ann, the park and the way it has been managed. While on the watershed district board of managers, when I came on Lake Ann was the second best quality lake, well it was the best in Chanhassen. The second best in the district. The only other lake that was better was Round Lake in Eden Prairie. However in Eden Prairie substantial development took place to the west and to the north of the area and the water quality deteriorated rather significantly. Excuse me. To the extent that we spent a lot of effort, time and resources trying to improve the quality of Round Lake. The watershed has supported Chanhassen during the, and I was on the park and rec, I mean on the watershed district for 34 ½ years and during that time we did what we could to maintain and enhance the quality of Lake Ann and that’s where we are today. I checked yesterday and Lake Ann is still the best lake in Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 15 Chanhassen and so it would be a shame in my opinion to do anything that would be possible and deterioration of that quality. And the 50 some acre wetland that is proposed for the density transfer is a very high quality wetland. It’s not something that should be given up without great consideration. And to the extent that, and I don’t know from this plan where the stormwater discharges will go but certainly the straight zoning plan brings houses awfully close down to that west shore of Lake Ann. So I guess in conclusion I would say that I have a lot of years of being involved, either directly or indirectly with Lake Ann and the park and it’s something that I look back on with satisfaction that I was a part of it and maybe even a little bit of pride. And I would be sorely disappointed if a decision was made to negate all that half a century of work that poses a greater jeopardy then might be necessary so thank you. Aller: Thank you. Brenda Darkow: Hello, my name is Brenda Darkow. I live at 2198 Red Fox Circle which puts me pretty much directly across from the gate house so for the last really for 15 years I have had my family have had a great view. We’ve enjoyed all the trees. We’ve seen plenty of turkeys and deer and everything. Even when as they cross that corridor. I teach my teenagers to, when there’s one deer there’s always more to follow so, but we’ve enjoyed that. We love living in Minnesota for what Minnesota gives us. Not just the city of Chanhassen but the state of Minnesota. We have parks. We have trails. We have woods. We have wildlife. We have so many things that not everyone gets to have and appreciates and I’m happy that my kids have been able to grow up in a place that they’re not so confined. That they have room and that maybe 10 percent of the time that they’re not looking at a screen for whatever reason but my kids have gone to Tanadoona. They’ve played at Lake Ann. You know they’ve been everywhere. It’s great so, which leads us to our Mr. Rogers. Ideally he would have left us a will and Marnie says that it’d be great if we could do nothing but that is not realistic and it’s not reasonable. Anyone who thinks, in my opinion that just nothing can happen that’s not going to happen so on the premise that something will happen we need to make the best of it. I do commend Lennar for listening to residents. I know that I, I think have talked to you as well as other people and one of the things that I’ve emphasized is nature so I appreciate in hearing that we’re taking more steps, as many steps as possible. It just tears me apart to see new development and the first thing they do is rip out all the trees. They grade everything out and it’s frustrating for me to look at all of that and it just goes away and the fact that you plant 60 more trees to replace just doesn’t replace a 30-50 year old tree when you have a 5 year old tree. So I appreciate those efforts that have been made to make that. So I guess as you’re probably getting there I have been thinking a lot about it and looking at the main conceptual. Thinking for the map. I do support the PUD because I think it gives, it’s a compromise. It’s a compromise that you know Lake Ann gets more park and that it feeds into things that we as Chanhassen residents love and residents in the state of Minnesota love. We have woods. We have more trees and landscaping and everything like that so we’re trying to follow the grade and do all those things because I love my view. I know my view is going to change and so this is the compromise I think with getting, preserving as much nature and trees as possible. Adding to the parks and just sort of minimizing that and as Mr. Aller knows he’s an attorney, compromise is not, you know if everyone walks away a little Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 16 unhappy it’s been a good day because it’s what you can live with because not everybody’s going to get what they want. I know that I won’t get what I want which is nothing to happen so in this case I’m trying to, you know as a resident and as a resident that’s more directly affected than some and I’m sure as many others that are more directly affected as well this is the compromise that I think will hopefully work. Have more nature. Less houses and hopefully will not have such a long term effect onto the neighborhoods that surrounds and Longacres and Ashling Meadows and everyone as we have brand new houses that are being built and we all have 20 year old houses that are being built and sometimes that causes a conflict so I’m hoping that the proposed PUD is a compromise for everyone. Thank you. Josh Kimber: Hello, good evening. I’m Josh Kimber. 2060 Majestic Way. I’ve kind of been the opposition mascot for this development but I want to start by saying I want this to be a conversation. If you guys have additional questions I know this is public comment I also want to just open it up to questions if you have any for me so I’d be open, willing to do that. When Joe was talking earlier about Majestic and he was pointing out the elevation of this one house. This is actually my house. I had a really good meeting with Joe. I agree that Lennar has done a really good listening to, well at least in my opinion, listening people on the southern end. This, the water in our area is a major concern. It has been a major concern. Even he spoke when the two entry lots, I mean if you picture the land it slopes down towards us and specifically if you look at my lot, I really don’t have a lot of topography in my back yard and this was intended to have the water leak out the back and what as happened is water doesn’t leak out the back and it basically sits in our two yards and makes it way down to my basement and that’s why I’ve been flooded a couple times. So as you know I’ve been to every meeting since January about this listening and I had a really good meeting with Joe and he went over in detail the plan that he went over. I won’t go over it again but I will say that I do feel a lot better about it because of the location. I mean the development is doing basically what we would ask of it. The property from where it is will go down and will slant towards the new houses and not towards my house. It was really good to understand this hill and how the water is supposed to go and how they plan on doing that so I mean Joe did a really good job and I thank him for taking the time for him doing that. So then you may be saying well Josh it really sounds like you’re in agreement with this plan. What are you doing up here? Well the reality is we on Majestic don’t have an option. These are 90 foot lots on both plans. Both plans are the exact same. So regardless we’re going to be losing a significant amount of tree loss. They’re going to be moving a significant amount of dirt. I believe this will probably be one of the most destructive developments in the city of Chanhassen that will lose 80 percent of the tree cover. It will lose 90 percent if you do both plans and I agree that there… I’ve been to every meeting. I don’t think this is an either or situation. I think there are other options out there and I believe with the Mayor that we should be pushing developers to come up with a different plan that just treats the land differently. I completely agree with the Tanadoona comments that nature is of utmost importance and we should use it but I don’t this plan, either plan does that. The topography, the character that’s in the land. It just, we shouldn’t touch it or we should do something different with it. Whether we put 180 homes there or you spread the 180 homes over a great piece it’s both poor use of land in my opinion. That was some of the comments you guys had in July. This is a poor use of land. Commissioner Tietz said Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 17 there’s a complete disregard for natural resources on both plans and that’s why I don’t have a vote. I’m not going to pick one over the other but I did bring up a couple of additional points. A lot of people are talking about the park. The park would be fantastic. When we moved into that house, we’ve been there almost 10 years this year, we did our homework. We looked and we say hey this is going to be zoned low density. Man look there’s going to be a park there. Man that’s going to be great. What we didn’t ask is how is the City going to get that land so in the past the City has gone through a bond and actually did purchase park space. Even he said they were ridiculed or you know commented about how that was a poor decision to do at the time. Why doesn’t the City do that again here? Put together a bond. Let’s buy the land. Then you don’t have to have a trade off. We don’t have to have a density transfer. We can buy the land outright. Sorry, we can buy the land outright. Use it as we’d like and to me that’s what we should do. That’s what we’ve done in the past and we should look at doing it again. In terms of this park space I’d like to remind people that the park space is really in the middle of nowhere. There’s going to be three walking paths. One would involve over a one mile walk around the lake. The other two would be requiring you to park in city neighborhoods to get to that land so yes it’s a great park but there isn’t a way to get to it. Either the guard shack, I question if there are going to be cross walks for people to cross Galpin there safely. There’s not a walkway that goes from Longacres down to the guard shack so the trail head really connects nothing and you wonder if kids are going to cross in the middle of nowhere there. It’s of concern. Learning more about the Galpin…element I think would really appease residents. I know the turn lanes are there but we’re talking about two blinds intersections that both come up hills and I would recommend regardless of what the plan is, even though we haven’t seen anything that the City looks at reducing the speed limit on Galpin. It’s a dangerous cross way. You’ve got to play Frogger just to get across the street and some intersections it’s unsafe. The last comment I have would be about the density units. I know you got creative with numbers but if you look at what the lot sizes are in general and you look at what these property owners are going to have it isn’t in comparison to anything in the area. I believe the math that’s being used would be something along the lines of me buying 2 acres from the Gorra property and then selling my house at 2 ½ acres. Well it doesn’t work like that. The lots that are going in this space are significantly smaller than the south, on the north and the west and that’s really what we oppose in this development is there’s a density transfer and this fits with nothing that’s in the community and that’s why I believe we should be pushing all developers, including Lennar and maybe coming up with a different plan. Everyone has asked for a different plan to come forward back in, even when we were in the concept phase. I think there were 2 people that said we should be looking at a concept 3. City Council members said we should, 3 City Council members at the time said we should be looking at 3 different options here. That didn’t happen so I know that there is great turnout here tonight and I know that there is a lot of people who are passionate about this but I don’t think this went down the right path. I think we should have been looking at alternative plans to use the land better. There’s better use for this land than either plan and that’s really where I stand so any questions for me? No. Aller: No, thank you. Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 18 Josh Kimber: Awesome. Now I’m going to leave but I have to go get my daughter and I’ll be back so, I’m not leaving because I’m upset or anything so thank you. Tijuana Burton: Hello, my name is Tijuana Burton. I don’t live in Chanhassen but I served a lot of time here being a fan, supporter and volunteering at Paisley Park. Probably half of you haven’t listen to his music, current music or been to his late night parties. Morning parties. He has expressed, Prince the former owner. His name is Prince Roger Nelson. He stated in his music that the most important thing is not the building but the land that the building is on and the reason why after he tore his house down after his second divorce he didn’t want to build anything on it because everybody was like what are you going to build next? What you going to build next? And he said nothing and everybody was like why? He was like for what? I’m cool living in Paisley Park. I don’t need a big house. I’ll just let the land be the land. I enjoy it how it is and the neighbors said thanks. We appreciate you not building anything. We enjoy you know not having anything on the land. We enjoy the wildlife and you know the habitation and the way it is. He left it the way it was so if he wanted something on there he would have built something on there. Okay I knew eventually after we wished him heaven that somebody was going to end up buying it and when I heard the news this morning that somebody bought it and was going to put some houses on it I’m like oh Lord, and when you all said your meeting was at 7:00, I put it on Facebook. I’m coming. I was going to chew you out because I thought you was going to be you know the regular contractor. Tear all the trees out and concrete everything, whatever but as I listened to you and some of the neighbors I’m like huh maybe he ain’t half bad. But when I found out you all had meetings before this and everybody was trying to come with a, that things falls a hundred times a day child. Thank you. That you all were trying to work together and at least leave some type of you know natural habitat or whatever like the woman was saying, you know teaching her kids about nature because that’s the problem. Why do people think bears are in their back yard? They don’t have nowhere to go. All of this development, everybody get a little piece of land and they want to put something more on it but when bears and deer come knocking on their door they’re like why is there deer in my back yard? Because they don’t have nowhere to go. But if you leave some at least they won’t be at your back door not as often so I don’t know the right answer because I don’t live here but I came to support the residents because I know that street. I’ve been up that street. I’ve been up that driveway. I know that shack and if, that street needs to be widen. If you’re going to build, because you’re going to do whatever you want to do anyway, so if you, when you do build your houses there that poor little street is going to get so worn out. You’re going to have to repave that street. You’re going to have to widen that street. The turning lanes. That would be fine going this way but if somebody want to make a left turn to go up in that property that traffic going to get backed up. The school buses is going to get jammed up. It’s going to be a problem and you’re going to be back here and all these people are going to be back here and I’m going to be back here. So I don’t know what to tell you but you all continue to converse and you all going to have to come up with agreement but I’m here to say I know and I know what he wanted and he would appreciate this and you all coming together and he liked wildlife you know. I know you bought it and you had buildings in mind and homes and what not. It’s too late like the gentleman just left here saying. If we could have left it alone but it is what it is but you all continue to come to a Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 19 compromise and communicate. It sounds like you know you’re taking huge consideration on you know how to do the natural plumbing and what not and everything but please continue to respect the residents. Please keep Prince in thought and mind even though he’s the former resident. He’s not the Artist Formerly Known as Prince. His name still is Prince so please continue to take their thoughts in consideration because they live here. I mean the guy that’s been here since ’66. I was born in ’67. I wasn’t even here yet. So they know okay. Alright thank you guys. Aller: Thank you. Just a quick reminder to all present. I know people like to turn their back to me so that I can’t tell them their time is up but if you speak into the microphone the City Council is going to get a better hear of what you actually present and say so if you can speak into the microphone, again let us know your name, address, representational capacity if any. Matthew Myers: Matthew Myers, 7421 Windmill Drive. I’m on the south edge of the property representing myself. I don’t think it’s an either or. I think when these gentlemen talk about they’ve been here for 60 years and I’m only 20 years so I’m new compared to them but the City took a chance and bought Lake Ann. They bought it. Why didn’t they buy the whole thing? Take the deal. Put in a stage there. Have music concerts instead of here in the city. Let’s really honor Prince. Let’s really buy this. Let’s step up like the City Council did in 1969. They’re saying they stepped up and they bought that part of Lake Ann and now this is the best compromise. Why do we have to compromise? Chanhassen is never going to see the piece of property like this again. There’s plenty of open farmland that they can build 200 houses on sometime in the future but the rolling hill and the wetlands and the Lake Ann access, it’s never going to be available again. What we’re going to run out of is open land like this. Beautiful piece of property… I see pheasants every day coming out of there. The turkeys, the deer, all the wildlife. It’s a wildlife preserve. Let’s keep it for the generations. I’m old….it’s for 20, 30, 40 years like they said. Let’s say in 40 years when people come back and say hey in 2019 they stepped up and they bought that piece of property. Referendum. Work with the County. Work with the State. Get the whole piece and do it right. Be bold like they were in ’69. Not the ’69 they did a great job and now you want to compromise to add to that? No let’s be bold and do the whole thing and leave it all green. It’s not an either or and nothing against Joe. Joe’s done a great job of listening but we don’t have to cow cow to a billion dollar corporation and to heirs that never lived here and the millionaires, the money they’ve made off of Prince. No work of their own. Why does Chanhassen residents need to work with them? We can say no to it all. Be creative. Find a way to work with other agencies, other foundations and preserve this land for the next generation of Chanhassen so when I come up and say I’ve been here 60 years and say hey I was part of stopping the development of 200 homes and doing it right, preserving this land for everyone. Steve Scharfenberg: Steve Scharfenberg, 1470 Lake Susan Hills Drive. Chairman Aller, members of the commission, I’m here tonight as Chairman of the Park and Recreation Commission and I’m speaking in favor of the revisions to the proposed Galpin property. At the most recent City Council work session the developer presented their updated proposal. Mr. Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 20 Jablonski has gone through some of that tonight. They’ve revised the plan to reduce the number of houses to 181. They’ve changed and modified the lot sizes. They’ve made revisions to both the north, south and the Galpin property. I believe that those revisions were made after listening to the public. Following the January session of this commission the revised plan is now back to you tonight to review and I understand that you will not be voting on it per se but recommendations will be made to the council. As a Park and Recreation Commission we refer back to the recently completed 20 year Park Recreation System Plan. We received feedback during the completion of that plan to expand Lake Ann’s open space. In addition citizens expressed the desire to continue the existing trails around the lakes. The Park and Recreation Commission shares the community’s desire to preserve as much open space as possible. The proposed density transfer to the west will preserve 50 acres of forested public area with the remaining 44 acres as a wetland. I don’t believe that anyone here wants to see that 50 acres developed along Lake Ann or along Lake Lucy. It would be a shame if that were to happen. However that may happen as indicated by Mr. Jablonski and the council does not, if the council not take the necessary steps and action this evening and later on on March 11th. There are additional goals that should be considered in reviewing the plan and those include the following. Helping to protect the water quality of both Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. Preserving undeveloped shoreline. Allowing the City to complete the trail system around Lake Ann. Allowing additional trails to be constructed connecting the surrounding neighborhoods to the area. Those connections will be made. The people both in Longacres and to the south will have and to the north will have those connections to that large 50 acre development and that trail will now almost go all the way completely around Lake Ann. This development plan has been a work in progress to say the least. Changes have been made and I believe the public has had the opportunity to bring forth their concerns. Tonight we have one last chance to comment on this proposal. I know that our two commissions look at different aspects of this proposed development. However I believe as a community our goal is to preserve as much beautiful open space that we can. The Park and Recreation Commission would encourage the council to adopt this revised development plan. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. John Garry: Excuse me, my name is John Garry. I’m at 1460 Knob Hill Lane. Live about a mile away from this. Wasn’t planning on saying anything tonight but sat here listened and appreciate what everybody has to say. I appreciate the work staff has done. Lennar as well especially probably in this situation. I’ve gotten a little selfish. I got 3 boys that live a mile from here so 50 acres of woodland is probably in favor for me personally and my kids. But I do have a history for 10 years owning probably one of the biggest ecological restoration companies in the Midwest and it’s pretty rare working with developers and with cities to see a piece of property like this that’s available to the city. Not necessarily for purchase but for free and as a citizen I would say it wouldn’t be very financially responsible I don’t think for the City Council to try and buy this when they’re getting the prime ecological aspects of the property for nothing. I think it sounds crazy to me. I’m under the belief that this area will be developed, whether it’s now or unless you know one of us wins the lottery and wants to buy the whole thing and leave it. It’s a Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 21 lot of money and I think it’s a lot of money for the whole of Chanhassen to eat if we think that we’re just going to purchase it. But what kind of drove me to say something is I’ve seen a lot of these plat maps and I agree with the first gentleman who spoke about the wildlife corridor and you know it’s extremely rare to find 50 acres of upland woodland on the edge of these lakes that you can preserve. And I’m really impressed with what you guys have done by closing off the roads. By changing this so everybody kind of gets the advantage of the best parts of this property. I you know I put a hockey rink in my back yard every year and my neighbor looks at it like you going to flood my basement in the spring so I don’t disagree with the neighbors but I’ll also say as a guy who worked around erosion and these developments that Lennar knows damn well they can’t flood anybody out and they’ve you know, Lennar has lots bigger pockets to go after than I do from my neighbor so I understand that and I think the neighbors should too. But I think it’s a great plan and I would be in full support of it and I just, you know the gentleman who said it’s going to be tough to get back to those woods and you’ve got to walk a mile and there’s only a couple trails, perfect. That’s exactly what it should be so thanks. Todd Simning: Todd Simning, 2145 Wynsong Lane. I probably come with a little bit of a different perspective and really ask the City to, I’ll say honest to goodness you guys have done a really good job of revamping your plan but I want to throw it back at the City to say truly do you need 50 acres over here? Okay so across the street on Wynsong Lane we did the same thing and didn’t destroy the environment. Didn’t destroy the wetlands around. We really preserved a lot of the area. I developed that property. I live there myself and we, we’re very sensitive to what the area was and I don’t see how or why you can’t develop some of the 50 acres there. There’s o reason why you can’t have the trail system connect. I mean whether you go to Eden Prairie or whether you go to Chanhassen I mean you guys are all connecting your trail systems and what not. I mean it’s really a phenomenal system that we all have to really enjoy. Whether you’re in Minneapolis. Whether you’re in Plymouth or whatever, cities are really doing a great job of connecting their trail systems and that. This right here, you’re not going to destroy an entire 50 acres. You might take some of it out of there, okay. You may take some density transfer from the area where you’re completely taking out almost every tree and moving it over to the east side. You know when you look at the emails and what not that have been sent to the City there’s so many, what do you call it? Residents that from Utica and everything else on the east side that were very pro I don’t want anything to happen on the west side. Well why? I mean I don’t want to look at houses. They’re afraid that every tree is going to be taken out but if you guys do a good job of helping the developer, helping the builder develop a good plan you will have a great project. You don’t have to throw density over to one area all the time. You can have a balance. And it’s disappointing to see the City on so many different levels and I think that we did a good job and maybe Kate, Todd and whoever, Erick wasn’t here at the time, maybe they didn’t think that we did a good job balancing out what we did over on Wynsong Lane but we took a 10 acre parcel over there and only subdivided it into 4 lots and granted I make my living building and developing so I’m so cognizant of you’ve got to make money because that’s why we’re in business but you can also be cognizant about what you’re doing with the land to make it beneficial and just to say that we need to transfer everything over to the west side and we need to take out pretty much every tree and God bless us we’re saving this wetland which you’re not Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 22 going to destroy anyway and with all the ecologically sound practices, business practices that we have as developers today you can’t just destroy everything anyway. So to say that they’re doing something better than somebody else is not truly what’s happening. It’s the City has some choices to make and if you say that gosh darn we want to save 50 acres just because we want to save 50 acres, well so be it. You can do that. But on the other hand if you say that we want to take 50 acres, we want to balance everything out and we want trees over here. We want to protect this land. We want to have our corridor system coming through so the trails line up, I mean goodness. My kids will run through there. I mean I’m just on the other side of the road. We’re always outside. My kids are out on the ponds all the time. I mean we have what, 3 natural ponds with Lake Harrison just behind us. You can do a good job making a good project. It doesn’t necessarily have to be just density transfer. It can be a balance. I don’t have anything other than that to say but truly if you guys can just take that into consideration. You’re acting like it’s one of the other and it really isn’t one or the other. It can be a good balance working with the developer because he needs to make money. We want him to make money. We want him to build houses because we want houses to be in Chanhassen. We want the tax revenue and everything else. We want Lennar to make money. I don’t care if you’re a billion dollar business or 10 billion dollar business. You need to make money just like me. Just like you guys when you go to your jobs. Every one of us has to make money. But you can make a good decision about what you really want to balance out with the project and it doesn’t necessarily all have to be over on one side. That’s all I have to say, thank you. Aller: Thank you. John Yanta: Hi my name’s John Yanta. I’m a Chanhassen resident. 365 Pleasant View Road. I think you did a great job with your plan and I have seen my taxes increase every year since I’ve lived in Chanhassen. I enjoy Chanhassen but I’ve seen taxes increase. Therefore I recommend the City to not buy this piece of ground. If people want to come up and step up as private citizens God bless them but this is not a way to buy this site and I think they did a nice job with this new plan. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Scott Dewing: I’ll be quick. Scott Dewing, 6735 Mulberry Circle. I live just on the other side of Lake Lucy. 20 year resident. Born in 1966. I’m excited about this plan. I’ve been following this pretty closely. I believe that Lennar’s done a great job of allowing us to enjoy that area. I drive, walk, run, bike around that area almost daily. I’m very much in favor of this new plan. Thank you. Cheree Theisen: Hi everybody once again. Cheree Theisen. I live at 2072 Majestic Way and I’m in the Royal Oaks development which is the immediate south side of the property. I was the second house in there 25 years ago. I’ve been there all this time. Now I’m looking at our entire back yards being totally demolished. You talk about this wonderful walkway around this lake. Well no one realizes that there’s a big piece of private property still that you’re not going to be Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 23 putting a walkway through so that’s going to be like maybe three quarter walkway to get there as Josh said is going to be a mile walk to get around to your new property. For me on Majestic Way there if I want to go and get on the walkway system I have to walk down Majestic Way, get on Galpin. Go north hopefully down to maybe they’ll put a crosswalk in where the guide track is or I’ll have to go even further but I have go down there, cross again okay. If I had children I’d be very concerned about that. To get down into the nice little walkways that are going to be down to get me and my family down to the lake. That’s a lot. And then the biggest thing I want to say is I wish somebody would put out for these people of Chanhassen, it’s easy for you to come in here and say we need the park. We need the park. Okay but it’s not at a cost to the City of Chanhassen. It’s a cost to us who have been there for 25 years. 30 years or even longer because we’re losing. We’re losing a lot and I don’t think that that’s fair. I would like to see somebody put out a graph so everyone in Chanhassen can see, this is what it’s going to look like and then another one that shows this is what it looks like with every single tree that’s there and then you could realize the impact of what you’re doing to that property by ripping out those trees and putting 5 foot little spruce trees in and I look out my yard I’ll see the top of a fence and I’ll see the roof tops of houses. That’s what we’re going to see there in a beautiful development that we created. Just saying. I think it sucks. Aller: Thank you. Barb Klick: Barb Klick, 7196 Utica Lane. I’m a resident of Chanhassen for 32 years. First of all I want to say I’m glad that this session is being taped. We could send it to the federal government and tell them how the government in the community and the private sector can actually work together to get a good outcome. Number one. Second of all Prince has been a great neighbor for 32 years for all of us. What a great person who let us use that land. He never posted it and we’re all grieving the loss. I mean I don’t want it to change. None of us want it to change but it’s going to change so we’ve got to make the best of it and we’ve seen what the outcome is and how we’ve pulled together and we do need to preserve the 54 acres and they need to be preserved intact, not split up. I’m a big nature lover. I’ve taken gray horn owls to the Rapture Center. I’ve seen deer die from getting hit by cars in my front lawn. We need some land for the nature and I’m telling you as a nurse we do need to walk so people we do need to park our cars and walk down and see the nature. I’m telling you we need to move. We do. It’s part of it so I’m a huge supporter of this high density transfer. It’s our brutal reality that things are changing but accolades to everyone for coming together. It’s the best of the worst situation and if this slips out of our fingers and all these other developers will come in and do exactly what they want shame on all of us. Laurie Susla: Hi my name is Laurie Susla. I live at 7008 Dakota Avenue in Chanhassen. I think that I very much appreciate the Planning Commission listening to the public again tonight. I think this is a very important topic for the whole town but certainly everyone here and over in the senior center. It’s packed over there so a lot of people are very, very passionate about this. My concern I think there are a lot of people who are in favor of the density transfer. My concern is that the number of homes that are being transferred from the east to the west at 54 homes. That Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 24 seems to have been a matter of negotiation. I as of yet haven’t seen any actual engineering plat that says this could work this way. There was a landscape architect plan that was given to you all but no real hard facts that 54 is the number that we should be dealing with and when you take those 54 homes what ends up happening as you well know is the hard cover in the 181 homes gets very, very high. We have two thirds of those lots are at 40 percent hard cover or higher. Over a quarter are at 50 percent hard cover or higher and that’s not including the streets so when you take a look at all the stormwater that’s going to be coming off all of this new hard cover and where is that going? That’s going into Wetland 1. It is a Preserve wetland. It’s going into Lake Ann. It’s going into Lake Lucy. It’s going into everything that we all want to preserve so my comment is to re-examine that 54. Is 54 the right number? Is that what we really should be talking about transferring to the west? Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Shane Waskey: Hi Shane Waskey, 1925 Topaz which is on the north end of the development there and I’m just, I live otherwise tonight I kind of have a unique perspective because I’ve been going back on that land for quite a few years and if it’s okay I’ll grab the mouse. I just feel like this picture really doesn’t represent reality at all. So this swamp or wetland or whatever you want to call it, I think everyone knows pretty well or is well documented, what it doesn’t show is the water flows out here into Lake Lucy and then you cross over here and it goes north out on this peninsula here. You know in the summer we’ll hike back here but we’ll put up a, you know a lot of people lay down logs and things like that but it’s flowing water so, and then all along this area it appears to be trees. This is all, I mean it’s so low that I can’t imagine that, I mean unless they’re allowed to excavate and bring in a lot of dirt, you could not have a home with a basement through here. It’s very low. As you come through here I would agree that there would be some nice property, you know houses that you could probably align but I would say 5-6 or something. When you come in here it gets very tall and steep like it’s like Split Rock Lighthouse sort of thing. Put a tower up here and very steep down the edges. No way you could build so I just, I think that these concessions and these nice things that the builder has offered, especially you know starting off at 55 foot lots and oh we’re going to be nice now and go bigger is a bit of smoke and mirrors so I just wanted to mention that. That I feel like a lot of us are negotiating from a place of weakness when really this property I really question the ability to do anything with it. Furthermore if there was houses put out here, correct me if I’m wrong but I think there’s already well documented plans that there would continue to be a trail through here so if we lost some of this area we still have the trail. There’s already a park on the other side of the lake. I mean how many lakes do you have a continuous park all around. I don’t know that it makes a lot of sense so in turn you know all these houses are getting blitzed over on this property as a result of just some weird you know messaging in my mind. Thank you. Greg Stewart: Hi my name is Greg Stewart. My wife Gerry and son Ian live at 1893 Topaz Drive and I guess I’ll be one of the naysayers as my property abuts the northern edge of the forest of the Prince property. Just so it’s clear that the impact this development will have on the neighbors that adjoin this property. The construction project will take 2 to 4 years which means Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 25 for 2 to 4 years everybody that has property along this area will suffer from noise pollution, air pollution, traffic and noise. Our property values will be greatly depressed and will remain depressed first because nobody will want to buy a house seeing what’s being built behind it. Nobody will want to buy a house perhaps afterwards when all the homes are in and our property values are devalued because of the new home sales and the prices that they may bring so I’m really concerned you know. There really are tangible impacts to the neighbors that adjoin this property. I must say that I was dumb founded at the comments of Jerry McDonald in the paper that residents apparently aren’t supposed to have a voice in City Council so I’m very pleased that tonight we’re demonstrating our ability to speak out and speak our mind. However if this plat is going to go through I guess one observation is everywhere you see a house crammed to the left of that wetland is now forest or other wetland and so you’re destroying half of the forest to save the other half. I’m not sure that that’s a reasonable trade off but again unfortunately because Prince didn’t leave a will we’re in the situation we’re in so I guess the one thing I would ask the council to definitely consider is that there are provisions put in place to ensure that there truly is a conservation of trees, as Mr. Jablonski mentioned earlier, and that there is additional buffer line built into the north. And so I just want to make sure that if the PUD is approved that these provisions are also firmly put in place and that we bring together some kind of standing committee between Lennar and the City and the neighbors so that we can hash out some of these details in a more open venue than these types of meetings that obviously are not a good setting for doing that. Anyways those are my thoughts, thank you. Aller: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward at this time? Anyone from the senior center that would like to work their way around? Jeri Sorensen: I’m Jeri Sorensen. I live at 8121 Maplewood Terrace. I’ve lived in Chan for 28 years. Love Lake Ann Park. We spend a lot of time there. Doing every form of recreation that you can enjoy and it’s been a gift to our family and I thank the founders of Chanhassen for setting aside. I love the idea of the north side of the lake being preserved because it’s a beauty. Can’t think of anything more that I enjoy in the town but kind of thinking compromise. What can we do that you know there is, as I’m looking at that similarly dense areas. What about the City purchasing some small areas in some of those dense things on the west for neighborhood parks. Leave the big park. The compromise would be…smaller parks in the neighborhoods. And maybe a small tree buffer between the adjacent neighborhood to the south…just a little area of compromise. Just a thought. I would not want to give up the Lake Ann Park area but I sent a letter in earlier saying what about you know not putting the path in right away to have some money to put in some additional park space. And don’t build anything more in Lake Ann Park until that property is paid for. And then like thinking 50 years from now. Not just about our families or our kids or what’s in it for me. I think there’s way too much of that kind of thing going on. But what if after it’s paid for then you make a memorial path through Lake Ann and it’s built by you know, where are we going to put people when they die? What about using that money like I would like my name along that path or think of parkland as a memorial for the people who love the city and love the lake so put in a couple more small parks. I wouldn’t want Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 26 to ditch the whole deal. I want to keep Lake Ann but if there’s an area of compromise that’s where I see it. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Greg Andrews: Hi, Greg Andrews. I’m at 6895 Ruby Lane. Ashling Meadows. Prince…from what I’ve kind of written here is Prince may have loved this land but he didn’t will the property to the city and he’s got some heirs and they want to monetize this and they’re going to monetize it to the highest bidder and that’s going to force any developer, and I do believe this will be developed, to need to build more houses to make money because they’re not charity organizations. I don’t believe the City’s going to buy this land. They’re not going to get that through. When I originally heard about this project last summer I contacted the Sierra Club. We’re going to fight for the trees. They really don’t care. It really surprised me. That’s a small project. They really don’t care. They’ve got bigger things to fight. I contacted the watershed district. They’re like look, if the builder follows the rules, City’s on board, this is going to go through. Not going to happen. News to me. I thought there has to be some preservation laws to protect this. Watershed district’s going to do their job and follow the rules, so will the builder, et cetera. There’s not enough million dollar donors in our community willing to pony up a lot of money and buy this. It’s reality and I tend to try to live in reason. My original concern was building next to this lake because Lake Ann is a gem. It’s crystal clear. But if you build near a lake you’re going to get phosphorus leakage from the soil that comes up from developing land and guess what, I know the builders on Lake Lucy Road didn’t intent that to happen but it happened. All the drainage over the last 3 years of building up there has come down the storm drains and for those people on Lake Lucy Ridge who built a dock a couple of years ago on north Lake Lucy, their beautiful lake right there is green muck and weeds and they can’t use their dock anymore because they put, the builders up in Lake Lucy Ridge, who probably didn’t intend it to happen, polluted the lake. I do believe that if that goes in there and building is still next to the lake, Lennar’s not going to try to do that. You know there’s no builder would want to pollute a lake but it could happen. Maybe, I don’t know. I’m not a landscape engineer etcetera but it happened on the north end of Lake Lucy so I saw it here. So I think this development’s going to happen. You know I was like originally I don’t want it to happen but I think it’s going to happen so my question to all of you is what if we run Joe and Lennar out of town and say nope, you can’t do it? My question is since Prince’s heirs want their money, what’s next and so that’s my question to you. Maybe it’s been said. Maybe people know. Does it go back to them and say okay open up for bidding? Next builder please give us your highest bid and we start all over again? So I don’t know the answer to that question. That was my question. Do you have an answer for that? Aller: I can’t answer that. Greg Andrews: Anybody? Anybody got a good guess? Aller: Only the heirs with title can. Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 27 Greg Andrews: Okay, what do you think’s going to happen Joe? Joe Jablonski: I think it will get approved. Greg Andrews: No, no but if, but if we run you out of town? You know who’s going to say what’s going to happen here, next bidder right? Joe Jablonski: Correct. Greg Andrews: Because they’re yeah, that’s why I think it’s, and Lennar’s listened to a lot of people. They’ve made a lot of changes here and I do believe that creating an area that’s unencumbered by houses, not houses weaving in it is better for nature and the animals and everything, etcetera and if you want to traipse through there yeah it’s, that’s you have to walk into it. You just don’t go next to your house etcetera. So I guess you know there’s been a lot of conversations and they’ve done, my biggest concern was safety. Running roads right through Ashling Meadows so if that ever changes call me. Because that I mean that could be, that’s a bee line and that was my concern as a father that cars were coming right down Ruby Lane or going right through Lucy Ridge etcetera so with that said this is not going to be perfect. Guys on Majestic Lane I feel for you. Like you said it kind of sucks. It really does but I don’t know. I guess we just don’t know what we’re going to get if we kick this to the curb. Does the next builder come in and follow the rules and get to build whatever they want within the guidelines next to Lake Ann? I just don’t know so right now I’m tending towards this. It’s not perfect but that’s kind of what we’ve got. Aller: Thank you. Joe Myss: Hi I’m Joe Myss. I live at 2419 Hunter Drive. I’m representing my kids and my family. So first off thank you to the City Council. Thank you to Lennar for you know taking, you know listening to everyone here. Taking the matter seriously and clearly putting forth a good effort because clearly the development of some form is going to happen. I do want to make sure that it’s noted I am actually pro development. I am just anti development in it’s current state. Right now I live in Longacres as some of the others that are here also do. Specifically on Hunter Drive. The issue’s been brought up numerous times. I personally have nearly been run over by a car speeding through my neighborhood. I felt it appropriate to follow up the last speaker here and thank you sir when he brought up safety. And as we put in much larger densities of population it’s critical in order to manage that traffic. As we brought it to the City Council’s attention before you know we need something whether it be a different methods to manage the traffic. Speed bumps would be great. I do understand there are challenges with that but when we put the safety of our children of our residents at risk and we have issues where we’re now adding additional housing, specifically dropping the entrances to a new development that is you know a fairly significant size that goes right into Longacres and as well as some of the other neighboring communities, I kind of feel it’s very irresponsible and I would hold you guys Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 28 really personally accountable when, because it’s not a matter of if. It’s a matter of when a child or an adult gets hit by a car just because we have so much traffic going through specifically on Hunter because it doesn’t have even a sidewalk. So that’s really the big message that I wanted to communicate through because I am confident that that will happen. Otherwise one other item I did just want to note, and I appreciate that it’s been somewhat discussed in the last couple of speakers is that, that piece of land there that they have given us isn’t developable. It’s pretty clear. You know while I understand that there are people who may look at it and say it can be developed for a cost, Lennar is not choosing to cut from 195 single family homes. Giving away property and land to the City in order to cut it down to one, whatever it is. 81 or I heard 17 off of whatever they were at, whatever. But that would technically be a loss of revenue and I’m sorry but I don’t buy it that Lennar’s in that business so that’s all I got. I appreciate your time and thank you for your consideration. Kurt Oddsen: My name is Kurt Oddsen. I live at 7325 Moccasin Trail in Longacres. What I’m concerned about is I think this will be developed. I truly believe that. Don’t want to see it but I believe it will happen but I’d like to see the project and property managed in a way that is respectful of the land and the density. I think we kind of need to get a one time shot at this in Chanhassen. I don’t want to see that land murdered for the profit of a developer. I understand the cost factors. I understand return on investment. I would ask people to go up on Highway 19 to a little par 3 golf course that used to be there called Red Oak. It had nice beautiful oak trees. It had some ponds and it had topography. It was bought by Lennar who developed it and in my opinion if you go in there now they murdered the land to accommodate the housing. They’re nice houses. It’s a nice neighborhood but I’m not sure that I want to have that happen to this project across the street on Galpin. I think the density is a little too high. From what I’m seeing we have two access points onto Galpin Boulevard. Longacres goes by my house. Not directly but down a block away, a house away from it. I think that Longacres will get to be a cut through street and I think if you have 181 units, if you only take one car per unit coming out in two directions on Galpin I think there’s going to be a lot of traffic. And I believe that people coming from the north on 41 or coming south on 41 can cut through Lake Lucy Road. I think people coming up from 41 to the north can cut through Longacres. I don’t know whether people will take 5 to Galpin and go up there. I have not done a traffic study obviously. Maybe somebody has but I just think that’s a lot of traffic coming out of two points of a development. And I’m just afraid looking at this density that they’re going to be right on top of one another and I like the idea of having the wetlands to the east of the development preserved but I’m, this land density and transfer it does appear to be smoke and mirrors because I don’t know whether that can be developed or not but I do know that it does increase the density on the west side of that property and I’m very concerned about what that’s going to look like when it’s done. And when it’s done we can’t say wait, maybe we should have looked at it a little differently. I don’t have the answer. I just don’t want the density to be there to affect the neighborhoods around it. Wherever they are. I just think that it’s a lot of houses and a limited access in and out of there and that’s my concern. It will be developed. I think the City of Chanhassen needs to really look at it and say is this what we want it to look like when it’s done? Somebody said can we see a mock up of what it’s going to look like when it’s done. That’d be great. I don’t think it’s going Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 29 to happen and therein lies another concern is when it happens we won’t get to say, we won’t get a do over. I’m not sure what I, I don’t have an alternative for this but I think we ought to really consider it. I think Lennar is been cognizant of what some of our concerns are but they are in it to make money and they have to have a density and I’m concerned that we as the city are going to suffer for that. Thank you. Mark: Mark…Hill Street. I have zero vested interest in this. I live like 4 miles that way and so I don’t have a strong opinion. I was just kind of watching and I thought there’d be more fireworks but everyone’s been pretty cool. But and I was starting to take tallies. So it looked like for the PUD was kind of weighing in and then anti PUD came up and it’s about a tie ballgame now so, but I think we have to be cognizant. Everyone of us has agendas. That’s human nature. We have agendas so I don’t think we can discount the people who are on that property. Now I live right off 101. When you guys start to come at my 101 and want to tear down my house I’m going to bitch big time but I’m not but I respect the people on that, on the side. I don’t think we can discount it and I don’t think, I’m tired of hearing the word gift and there’s no gift here. And Joe not to pick on ya, you’ve been on the hot seat but we’ve been asking for a third option for about 6 months and that was asked by the mayor and by other people. We’ve been asking for a third option. That’s the one thing I got out of this meeting is that we need an alternative and…buying it out is probably not feasible but we need a third option. We are not, we’re at 50/50 right now. We are not agreeing so we need another option and I know that’s the last thing you want to do. I wouldn’t want to tell your graphic artist to build a new one but it’s got to be done so, anyway just when you think about, because I guess it’s pretty easy to say if I’m 4 miles away it’s pretty easy for me to say yeah let’s have another park in town. But put yourself in their shoes and it’s going to happen in your back yard and just be cognizant. That’s all I have. Dan O’Connor: Hi Dan O’Connor, 7124 Northwood Court in Chanhassen. I do live on the other side in Longacres so that road does go by my house. I do have concern about the traffic that’s going to flow right through that the gentleman back there mentioned. It will be a direct corridor to 41. It definitely will be. It will be the quickest access from that development to 41 and it will go right by my house and cars already come over there going too fast. I’ve seen a lot of kids almost get hit. It’s very dangerous. The other thing I’d like to point out is the last election was very much a referendum on the development in Chanhassen and with the new mayor and a couple new council members because of it. And they won pretty overwhelmingly and I think if you look at some of the development that’s gone on over the last several years I’ve heard a lot of meetings like this. There’s a lot of voicing opinions against some development and it still just seemed to kind of go through. This land is a gem as a lot of people have said. I can’t imagine there’s a better chunk of land in the metro than this. That’s this close to the metro. To Minneapolis. I just don’t understand the rush. I understand Lennar’s rush. I know they’ve got to participate in a timeline they’ve got to hit. They knew that risk when they put this bid out and put the work into this. I respect that but I do not understand why Chanhassen has to rush in the notion that some Joe’s going to come next and another guy and just develop this. I’m sure somebody will at some point in time. I’ve got to think there’s an awful lot of people who would love at some point in time in the future to develop this in a very, very good way that really does Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 30 honor the land and does honor the citizens of Chanhassen. And someone pointed out the article in the Villager a week or so ago and the council member kind of wondered why the citizens of Chanhassen kind of had a voice in some of these developments stuff the other way. This is our city. I mean this is, this is our city and it’s really critical that we understand these voices and if there’s this much debate and there’s this much voicing I think of concern we don’t have to say we got to pick one of the two. We have to do that today. We don’t. We can pause. We can hit the pause button and take another look down the road when the next developer comes around with the next proposal and do what is best for this city in the eyes of the residents of the city. And again I’d like to point out I do believe that that last election was very, very much a referendum on the development that has gone on in this city and the changes that have taken place in Chanhassen the residents of Chanhassen isn’t really a big of so thank you. Peter Polingo: Peter Polingo, 1981 Topaz Drive representing Ashling Meadows and it’s like answering the teachers question. You’re the 29th person up. There’s so many good things that have been said. So many things about the safety and the congestion in the, kind of the plan that Lennar put together and their strategy towards starting with a Plan A and then making a Plan B when realistically you know they never thought Plan A would work anyway so the Plan C idea that the gentleman had has been what we have been pushing for for quite a while. The opportunity for them to have routes out of these developments without creating a safety hazard is ridiculous. There are so many opportunities right now with Galpin for our security issues when going up and down there from a traffic point of view so it is real to parents. It scares us and we also have a, in the proposal a pass through Ashling Meadows down Topaz Drive which is already like a little raceway so to add more homes and to add more people coming from up above it scares us because we have a private park that we have our kids play at so our biggest challenge is again to have you listen to what we’re trying to achieve and thank everyone for all the comments on support of doing the right thing for Chan. Thank you. Aller: Anyone else wishing to come forward? We’re not getting married here but speak now or forever hold your peace. Anybody from the senior center wishing to come forward? Jessica Landon: My name is Jessica Landon and I live at Fox Hill Drive so I’m actually also pretty far away but my main concern just looking at this is how many homes are there. I think it’s too many. Too much population especially living of the border Carver County and Minnetonka schools. I worry about the number of incoming families and how many kids would be attending you know whichever schools and things like that. Even pollution just around the lakes. A lot of things that have already been covered but the traffic that like many people have already said is already there but it’d be nice to see because unfortunately as everyone is saying it’s like it’s gonna get developed. I prefer to just see it as it is but seeing how it is and what is eventually going to be it’d be nice to just see it with less homes. Kind of how it is on the east side where people can actually enjoy their back yards versus living on top of one another. Thanks. Aller: Thank you. Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 31 Alan Nickolai: Alan Nickolai again. One point that hasn’t been brought up and that is with the Galpin being, proposed to be redone here in a few years. Let’s be careful about wasting taxpayers dollars and redoing things twice. They’re going to have you know exit lanes. Let’s put them in that section, so we’re not redoing it 3-4 years from now. Wasting the taxpayer’s dollars. I think that’s critical. Little bit just…3-4 years. Do it once, not twice on those turn lanes. Whatever needs to be done so it’s done safely because I’ve got to believe some of the people safety is a issue but I’ve seen it with other developments. They did it at two stages and frankly it was, they wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars. That’s our money. Not your money. It’s our taxpayer’s money so just spend the money wisely when the turn lanes etcetera off of Galpin. By the way I remember when Galpin was a gravel road and our biggest concern was not to hit the horses because there used to be 20 to 30 horse back riders there every Saturday morning so I’ve been around a little bit so anyways, do it safely. Spending money wisely on the turns. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. And I don’t want it to turn into point counter point but if somebody hasn’t had a chance please come up and speak. If somebody wants a second chance now is the time to get in line. Judy Bolstad: Hi I’m Judy Bolstad. I live over on 1101 Lake Lucy Road but I grew up on Lake Lucy. My parents still live there so I’ve been familiar with this area since I was 8 so 1972 so I have concerns about the Lake Lucy getting polluted and where the drainage is going to go and what that’s going to do to that lake. I like a lot of the ideas of, I obviously want that land preserved. I’ve been walking that land since I was a kid and I love it and I you know I think that’s a good idea but I think that even the traffic that people are talking about, I’m over on you know Powers and Lake Lucy and we have trouble getting out now and so adding another 150 homes or whatever it is is going to, it’s not going to just affect the people in that area. Those neighborhoods. It’s going to affect everybody in Chanhassen and like I said I don’t know what you, if you have plans to change how some of the roads work or what the speed limits are but right now I can’t get out of my neighborhood as it is so if people start to use you know Lake Lucy to get out to Powers to be able to go to 5 I’m just wondering what the plan is I guess for traffic so thank you. Aller: Thank you. Jean Burke: Good evening. My name is Jean Burke. I live at 225 West 77th Street. That’s on old Chanhassen. Tom Klingelhutz’ house. Tom is the brother to Al Klingelhutz. The old homes. Should I be excited about a new park for the citizens of Chanhassen? Absolutely not. In my opinion when I look at this, this is a park for the new development. It will be like Greenwood Shores Park with signs saying do not park here and a bar across the road. There’s a gazebo, lake access, picnic area but only the people in Greenwood Shores can use it. How am I living in old town Chanhassen going to benefit from this park? As I look at the drawing it appears that the people that are going to buy the houses and build the beautiful homes, their Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 32 children will be able to take a trail and access Lake Ann. For myself and for other residents of Chanhassen I know the City paper said it’s close to downtown Chanhassen. No Tom it isn’t. It isn’t close to those of us that live in the area other than the Lennar development. Even this woman who talked about living across the road, she’s got to cross the road. Go down and around and navigate to get on the trail and get out to the lake. Obviously the density of one side just blows me away that they would crowd that many houses in an area that has been so pristine and undeveloped. It’s going to have to have water runoff, pollution. And speaking of pollution of Lake Ann we do fireworks over our clear lake every year which pollutes Lake Ann terribly with sulphur so if we citizens want to give up a few things and buy some property over here, let’s not do fireworks for a couple years. Sacrifice for our future and leave the trees and say to Lennar hey sell us part of your development so we can leave it. And maybe the citizens can come and park a car and actually access the trail from the other end of Lake Ann. Otherwise I…thank Lennar for the gift of a park that is really like somebody said, it’s in the middle of nowhere for those of us that like Lake Ann Park the way it is so that’s my opinion. It’s not beneficial for those of us that want to see parks built for Chanhassen and what to see developments that make our city proud. Aller: Thank you. Art Roberts: Art Roberts, I’m in the…association at Vasserman. Property at Galpin and 5. I’ve got one thought. People are saying we need a third alternative and the following has occurred. We need to ask the expert from Lennar, what if you took the lots in the middle that are 65 feet wide and got out your slide rule or drawings instruments here and made those 80 foot lots or 75 foot lots. What would happen of course is that the larger lots would go for a higher dollar value. And we’ve have a few fewer homes but you’d have maybe a lot more space. A lot more trees you could leave so if I was looking for a third alternative to ask him to look I’d say spend a day. Do a what if and then run the numbers. How much more expensive could you sell 80 foot wide lots versus 65 so I think this is basically the right plan but I would just say hey, could you enlarge those lots a bit to make it a little bit more liberal? A little bit more roomy and leave a few more trees. That’s what I would do at this point is say I think there is a third alternative but it’s not redesigning the whole shebang. It’s just widening the 65 foot lots and saying what if. Please try that in real numbers and tell me, Lennar who, would that work. Sharon McCotter: Hi my name is Sharon McCotter. I live at 7000 Utica Lane and in the last 10 years as I’ve been preparing to retire this summer I’ve been getting involved with the watershed and learning more about how it operates and as they try to do their plan and you know they had a lot of opposition to some of the rules and I think it was really great to have public hearings to get input from both sides. Listening to everybody tonight you know I can sympathize and empathize with all of the parties that are speaking. I think what I’ve learned in these last 10 years working with the watershed is there’s no perfect plan. Some people will be, most people will be inconvenienced and I think one of the first people talked about a good day is when nobody feels like they left totally mutilated. Somebody, you got something out of it so I feel like at the last City Council meeting the mayor quoted out of the City’s 2040 plan I think it was or 2020 plan Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 33 and she quoted about how the City is charged to preserve green spaces and preserve the trees and things like that and be very environmentally conscience and she put that back to Lennar to say you know what can you do to keep helping us to meet the goals of our city plan and seeing that they’ve done some things I think it’s great but I also can empathize with the people that are living there. But I would ask that we step back and say sometimes you have to look at the bigger good. So not what’s good for any one neighborhood or any one district but what’s good for Chanhassen and I do believe that this transfer density plan does have the best interest of Chanhassen as a whole in preserving the most trees and the most, we heard that this plan would preserve the most trees and be the most environmentally friendly so I would just say you know if we have to choose I think we’ve got a good option and like people have said, this is a concentrated dense space that you won’t get back so it’s not like we have another opportunity to do a do over so I just, I know some people will not like it. I live on the other side of Lake Lucy and we now look across at a big gated steel thing that went in a dock that people said they can’t use because it’s all socked in over there so we all have to make compromises because the world’s moving forward but I do think this plan of preserving this larger space is really in line with the 2040 city plan. Thank you. Aller: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward to speak either for or against the item tonight? Paul Theis: Good evening, I’m Paul Theis. I live at 6520 White Dove Circle. Been a resident of Chan for about 27 years. My wife is here. She was going to speak because she’s usually not known for being too quiet but anyhow I certainly agree with the lady that last spoke and I support the density transfer. You know a lot of the earlier speakers talked about the other option developing lots and I don’t know if the topography’s right. The soil compaction is correct not to have the density transfer. The other plan that would build close to a shoreline but I certainly don’t want to see that. I certainly want to see this bigger strip of land saved. I want to thank the earlier speakers that talked about some of the earlier citizens here that went into the planning. The watershed people. Planning and zoning. City vision over the years. Retain that area around the lake. We live a little bit north of, northwest of Lake Lucy and you know we look forward to being able to walk from our place along Lake Lucy and around the lake but other residents of the city would like to see if possible to have Lennar put some parking in. You know maybe to give up a lot or something here or there so people that aren’t immediately adjacent can use it. Also I do have some sympathy for the drainage issues but I would hope between Lennar’s engineering, I know they’ve made some attempts to fix the problem for the folks in the south end and maybe there can be some access put into the plat to also help those people gain quicker access to the park area I’ll call it. So I say a little bit additional minor tweaking and I think it’s a terrific plan and I would support what’s been presented in terms of the density transfer. Thank you. Aller: Any additional speakers? Are you sure? I’ve been pretty good every time I say that somebody comes up. Alright seeing no one come forward I will close the public comment section of this meeting. Before I move to any additional actions or comment I just first and foremost would like to thank you one and all for sharing your thoughts with us and with the Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 34 council and with each other. I said before and I continue to say that I believe that we as a commission and a city are at our finest when everybody shows up and participates and whether they’re on one side of the issue or the other they voice their opinion and make themselves heard and participate in the process. Regardless of the outcome I think that the final action, which will be taken again on March 11th by the City Council, is better with rather than without your input. I would like to thank the City Council for providing our residents with the additional opportunity tonight to voice those opinions. I’d like to again thank staff for being present and for working diligently with Lennar and with the public and covering the many different items that were put together in the plans and keeping them up and available for everyone to again see on the website and so all those items are available for your viewing. And then I would, I’d like to thank Lennar Homes and their representatives for recognizing what we already know. Chanhassen is a wonderful place to live and for both their past efforts and continuing commitment to listen to the citizens input and offering what they believe are economically viable win/win developments for the City Council’s consideration. So with that I’ll open it up for any additional comments at this time from the commissioners. We’re not here to make any formal recommendations but if you have a comment or would like to say anything now is the time. McGonagill: Go ahead Steve. I’m following you. Weick: You sure? McGonagill: No I’m fine. Weick: I’d be happy to speak. And gosh this one, this doesn’t get any easier. The more we talk about it that is for sure. There’s big issues at hand and I think one thing that I struggle with personally is, I don’t, and this is just me. Yeah I don’t see a pause button out there because it is land that’s for sale with a buyer with regardless of how many homes you can put on that 50 acres could come in and build a really significant amount of homes. On that property and can take out a very significant amount of trees with or without our input. And I, you know that’s one thing that’s on the table. I would love to be able to not do that. I don’t believe that’s an option because you have, we have a seller and we have a buyer and we have codes that could be followed to build single family homes on that property in a well over 150 homes I think. In my opinion which is a lot. So in light of that, and I’ve been fairly consistent in my opinion that a density transfer to protect that wetland and make it a park would be better than just you know filling the space with homes on as much buildable property as you can because I do think that there is a difference between building a path through a neighborhood and having truly you know 100 plus acres to be able to use and this land is accessible from Powers. I mean if you imagine all those folks that live on Powers and on that side can access it through the neighborhoods there off of Powers. You can access it from 5. You know people park in Lake Ann Park to go to Prince’s museum. Can you imagine the ability to be able to go to the museum and then walk several miles on his land and that’s possible as well. One of the things that is a positive to me that’s been mentioned as a negative is the fact that it is miles of paths and land and I think that’s a positive. Where else can you go and do that in a wooded area so I think that’s a gem of an Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 35 opportunity for the city and again based on, unless somebody can explain it to me differently but based on the really limited options that are out there based on having a seller and a buyer and code that allows homes to be built, with or without our opinion, I still believe and I have believed and I still believe that a density transfer is the best option for the city of Chanhassen. Aller: Comments? McGonagill: Yeah. Aller: Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: First off I again as Chairman mentioned we appreciate everybody coming and I would also encourage you to, as you feel led to write a thank you note to the mayor and the council for allowing this meeting to occur. They heard the feedback and they came back and had this session which is different. It’s unusual and so it’s very, very positive for that and I think it was as a referendum from the election and they’re trying to listen to everyone so I really think that is important. Just some facts for folks that may be listening or online. Again I always talk about this. You need to read the Comprehensive Plan and if you did what you would see is the amount of growth that’s going to, projected to occur in Chanhassen over the next 20 years. Basically we will see about a 37 percent increase in population here. By 2040 the city will be built out. I mean it basically will with the amount of land that’s available so our objective, our charge that, the trust you’ve put on us and on the council is to do that buildout in a pragmatic and wise fashion. What we’ve heard over and over, and we have in our Comprehensive Plan the thing that people want to maintain and it’s in the plan, again if you refer to it, is to maintain the small town appeal of Chanhassen. That’s what people want. It does have parks. It does have lakes but it’s the small town feel. So when you put that together with the amount of increase in population we’re talking you know basically if my numbers are right, Kate will correct me, about 2,000 homes that have to go in here somehow over the next 20 years. We’re talking about only a tenth of that so we’ll be talking about these issues over and over again so I think it’s important to understand that and set a precedent of how we want developments like this to occur. And so with that what should they look like to be done to maintain the feel. What I appreciated about the mayor’s question and the council to come back here really there’s two questions that we’re talking about tonight really is one is do you have a PUD or not. That’s the first question. And the second one does this PUD work? I’ve separated those in my mind and so we’re not voting on it tonight. I’m glad we’re not in some ways but at least we can express our opinions on that. On the first question as far as having a PUD or not. I am not crazy about density transfers. I never have been. You know we’ve talked about this. I like the feel. Small town feel. It has larger lots. If the density was coming in more like 1.7, 1.8 as opposed to 2 I can be there but with a density of being north of 2 I’m not in favor of that. But that being said it is, and because of that there’s a lot of transition issues around with the neighborhoods in the area. Longacres, north Lake Lucy, Ashling Meadows, those numbers are more like 1.2 to 1.9 so that’s where I come from on density. This is a 48 percent increase in density over the average for those and that does give me some pause. You know also too if I look in the Comprehensive Plan again the Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 36 ownership values map it, you can look at it. It’s 3-31. I look at that and go is this consistent with that and it is inconsistent and with the land use map so again I’d kind of, that’s where I kind of come down on the side that I would rather see the density less but that may or may not be possible. I still believe we can do better on that density transfer as it occurs and I’d like to see that. So let’s go with the next question about the PUD itself. Is this PUD acceptable that we see? I’m still of the, I’m first off grateful and glad that we did not approve that or vote in January because I think Lennar came back with a better deal. It looks, it has better opportunities. There’s more trees. There’s more of that. We made the right decision there. So a couple of these, I’ve got really 3 major issues that I would challenge Lennar to work with the City Council on. The first is both concepts, both whether you have a PUD or not are inadequate for park access. One of the individuals tonight talked about that. There is really no way to get to that park. You’ll be parking on the street. That is, there has to, we need to come up with a solution to that as this development’s getting done, particularly as you’re starting in the south and you work north there needs to be some area like Sugarbush Park or somewhere where people can park. If they’re not they’re going to park on the street and you’re going to have conflicts between citizens. That’s not what we should do. There needs to be an area where people can park. Access the trails and go through there. And we all walk. We’ll get those miles in anyway but the ability to go there and take your car, park your car and take your bikes off, do what you need to do, there needs to be an area like that and I would encourage the City Council to work if the PUD is pursued to work very aggressively with Lennar to get that so there is some sort of access so that we can live in harmony with our neighbors. The second thing I would look to Lennar on the designs. One of the concerns that I have if the density transfer goes forward is actually the design or the construction itself of Lennar. Particularly on the higher density deal. You showed us the proposals. I would encourage you to continue to vary those designs such as varying setbacks. Varying 1 and 2 stories. Varying, you know everything you can to do this to make this the neighborhood as I think Commissioner Tietz talked about, the place to live in Chanhassen. I think you can build a lot of culture and character into it with some thought. Side loaded garages. Front loaded garages. You know doing all that you can, working with the Planning Commission and staff to really make this, if this is where we go, to make it look really nice. What I don’t, this is a jewel of a piece of property. I’ve said that before. It’s a jewel of a piece of property. I don’t want it to turn out like costume jewelry. I want it to be a jewel. You know so when I come back here 20 years from now when I’m 85 I can see that. I want that. That would be my, as a citizen I would say. The last point, one of the speakers talked about tonight and I totally agree with is to be very careful about impervious surfaces. As this density goes up the impervious surface issue becomes more and more and we’ll have more and more variances come to the Planning Commission to be dealt with. What I don’t want to have is a development where someone builds a home and suddenly he has to get a variance to build a patio. Or a deck. Or another parking area. We have too much of that even now and so I really don’t want that box to be built. That is why when I again I go back to this whole question about density. Particularly in the 65 footers that you have in there. How are those people, they won’t, they will want to live there. They’ll want to grow. They’ll want to have their deck. How’s that going to happen under the current guidelines and so again that’s where my concerns come from the density and I would like to see that addressed. In other words don’t build a box that you have Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 37 a hard time getting out of. I do still believe there’s room here to get better on that and I would challenge the council and the Lennar to come up with that. I do appreciate what you guys have done. I do like the monuments. I do like what you’ve done on some of the other stuff but that’s, those two issues are the issues where I land on Chairman. Thank you for allowing me to comment. Aller: Additional comments? Commissioner Madsen. Madsen: I just wanted to thank everyone for their input this evening and also for the input that they provided last January and then the previous summer as well. I think with all that input the City Council and the Planning Commissioners if I can speak with them really listened to your concerns and I think changes were made to address that. I also want to thank the people who gave the input into the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and people gave input to that plan through open houses and through public meetings and gave input to the Planning Commission and one of the items that they told and it came through in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan was that the Galpin property was identified as a priority expansion area and so, and a goal of the parks is the elimination of the trail gaps and creating trails within the preserves so that people can have better access. I’m not sure about the parking and all the access points but I just wanted to thank everyone through all these various processes for their input and for the City Council to give that opportunity for it and I think because of that we hope to come up with a better plan that will work out best for all the citizens of Chanhassen and that’s it. Aller: Great, thank you. Commissioner Randall. Randall: Again I second that on the, everyone’s input was great tonight. I have 4 pages of notes that I took down. Lot of new ideas. People brought up new concepts. Things on the fly and there weren’t any fighting, or what was the quote from, I think I got it here. When he came over and said that it wasn’t getting too heated over here. That was good and I was glad to hear, or glad that everything went well tonight. I got a lot out of it tonight and I appreciated everyone’s input. Aller: The Comprehensive Plan is designed to be a flexible tool that we look at and we take a look at all the projects that come before us and we look at what the citizens and what the Planning Commission, who’s spent along with the City Council the better part of a year in creating and getting public input on all the different sections and how that applies. In this case when we apply the project and we look at what kind of trade off’s we need to make based on the plan and based on the Comprehensive Plan simplistically stated it’s park versus density and that’s really what I think the City Council was digging into to hear from the citizens tonight and I think they got a really good indication that yes we’re going to be split on that but I think because of the hearing itself they are going to be better informed. They’ll be more strategic and more deliberate about that decision that the make come Monday. We’ve seen during tonight’s presentation that the proposal has changed over the past year based upon the back and forth between Lennar and the community and the City and it’s staff and as a resident I want it all. I Chanhassen Planning Commission – March 5, 2019 38 want to have the park and I want to have zero zip density. I love the lakes. I live on Lotus Lake. I don’t want to have anything impact Lake Ann. At the same time I have to live in the real world and so on a reality based decision I know that developers are going to come in and they’re going to need to be developing and make a decent profit from what they have and what they deliver to us. And when I look at that desire I look back at the proposed PUD and what it does with regard to the plan and I look at the land use goals and I think that one of the goals was to enhance preservation of Lake Ann and Lake Lucy by limited development and I think that the transfer creates development on one side but it does limit it and create a buffer for the lake. There’s a reduction in total impervious surface throughout the clustered environment because you don’t have roads going through that additional parkland but yes the density location is going to have more hard cover. What happens later after a decision is made I trust that the watershed, that the City is going to come in and enforce the rules and regulations. That they’re going to make sure that based upon the impervious surface that’s there, the runoff and the storm drainage that we’re going to comply with the rule and that there will be a zero impact and of course with every plan it’s imperfect. I hope that that’s the case. With regard to the trails and open space. Preserving the public, for the public over 100 acres of unique natural open space, 50 acres of upland around Lake Ann and Lake Lucy that could otherwise be built on I think fulfills that need. Providing land and connections for the trails to eliminate trail gaps and the better connection to the community and it’s areas. I think it fills that goal. Allowing for the expansion of the Lake Ann Park and enhancing it’s role with Chanhassen’s premiere community park and in fact I think it will be a destination park for Carver County and the State. In looking at it it’s not a perfect plan. Again I would love to have zero density. What plan is especially when we all bring biases. You know people that live right next to it are going to have a different view point than me who lives on a different lake. But at the same time I think that the community has come together. Has expressed it’s opinions in these hearings and I think it’s important that they do so and as someone came up and stated that there’s value and we should respect the desires and the thoughts and the intent of the individuals who both are homeowners next to the development as well as the rest of the community and I think that’s what the City Council did when it pushed this back to us to have more input so they could look at it again thoughtfully and strategically. Tonight wasn’t about listening with the intent to respond. I too took a thousand notes but I think the intent of the City Council was just to hear what your voices said and I think they have the ability now to look at the record. To look at the tape. To listen to your voices and over the next week consider your opinions. And I think that we’ve created that record and I hope that, and I know that they’re going to consider that record thoughtfully. Additional comments, questions. I’ll entertain a motion to adjourn. Commissioner McGonagill moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 2 Stories l4 Bedrooms l4 Bathrooms l3 CarGarage 3,328 Sq. Ft. VERYTHING'S INCLUDED' TheWashburn Landmark Collection 95?-?49-3000 GREAT ROOM 18-0'X 15-0" DINETTE 12'-0',X t5'-0' STUDY 11'-0" X r0'4' 3 CARGARAGE 3o'-0' x 20'4' Upper Level 3,328 Sq. Ft. . 2 Stories . 4 Bedrooms . 4 Bathrooms . 3 Car Garage fi TWrN CtTtES #l ,!,i nomrBulLDER Elevatrons ol a home may vary and we reserve lhe r0ht to substitute and /or rnodify desion and mabrhls, in our sole opinion and witrriut notice. Pleas€ see your New Home C0nsultanl and home purchas€ agreement l0r actual leatures designated as an Everylhing's lncluded featire, additional information, discloGures, and dischimers relating to your home and its features. Phns are artist's renderings and may c!0tain options which are not sanrhrd on all models. Lennar reserves lhe right h make changes to phns and elevations wi$out orior notice. Stated dimensions and square lmtrge are approxinEte and should ndt be used as representation of the home's o.ecise or actual size. Any statement, verbal br writlen. reoardino 'under air" or "finished area" or hnf orrei desc{iption or nndifier o{ the square fmtage size of any home is a shorfiand description of the manner in which the square fmtage was estimated and should not be c0nstrued to indicate certainty. Garaoe sizes mav vary from home to home and hav not accilmmddate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.tbm or see a Lennar New Home Consultant lor further details and im@rtant leoal disclaimers. This s nol an otfer in states wiere orior reoistration is reouired,Void where orohibited by hw. tsource -' BATC, 201 5 Top 25 Builders List, Copyright O 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar. the Lennar logo, EveMhing's lncluded and the Everything-s lncluded logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corooration d/b/a Lennar r"ilii".,S' il',i3"ci+oi'dii. ffi ;; .S Sales CorD, - Broker, MN Bldr. Lc l=l+ gcooiars,(rotg1\ tha17 lffi 1530535thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNArT TheWaShbUfn Landmark Collection Main Level BEDROOM 2 13',\ fi', BE,DROON,{ 4 1l's 16' BEDROOM3 I2',X l{ 952-?49-3000LENNAFR.COIVI The Sinclair Landmark Collection EVERYTHII{G'S INCLUDED' H 95"-?49-3000 Main Level Upper Level ?,468 Sq. Ft. . Z Stories . 4 Bedrooms . 3 Bathrooms . 3 Car Garage fl TWrN CtTtES #l ,L[ nomrBulLDER El€vations ol a home may vary and we reserve the right to substfiute and /0r rnodify desion and rnaterials, in our sole opinion and witdut notice. Please see your Nelv tlome Coosultant and home purchase agreement lor actual leatures designated as an Everytling's lncluded feature, additional informati0n, disclosures, and dischimers relating t0 your home and its features. Phns are artist's rendsrings and may contain options lvhich are notstan&rd 0n all models. Lennar reserws the rioht t0 make changes t0 plans and elevations witlrout prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are appr0ximale and should not be used as representation ot the home's orecise or actual size. Any statement, verbal br written, regarding 'under air'or "finished area'or anv other desfiiDtion or rnodifier ol he souaie fmtage size ol any home is a shorhand description ot the manner in which the square fmtage was estimated and should not be construed t0 indi{xte certainty. Garaoe sizes rnay vary from home t0 home and mav not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.iom or see a Lennar New Home consultant for further details and important leoal dischimers. This is not an ofler in states wiere orior reoistration is reouired,Void where prohibited by -law. tsource - MTC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright @ 20'17 Lennar Corooration. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar lo0o, Everything's lncluded and the Everythingrs lncluded logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Horile Corporatbn d/b/a Lennar - License N0.20464871. Lennar sates coro. - Broker. MN Bldr. I=l Lic # Bodrol413.(10186) 4/3/17 ffi 1530536thAve.N. Suite 5OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 The Sinclair $6 DINING ROO\{ 11'x15' tr----l Yi KIl (.1ll.:\ lU'\ li' BEDROONI 2 12'x1l' llt,])R(x)NI 3 11'\ l1' BEDROOM 4 11' x l2' LENNAFT"The Lindbergh Landmark Collection 1 Story | 2 Bedrooms | 2 Bathrooms | 3 CarGarage L,9O?Sq. Ft. EVERYTHING'S INCLUDED' **r*1r 95?-249-3000 Main Level NL\STER BEDROON{ 77',X14', DINING ROOM 73',y.14',GRE,\T ROOI,I 18',X 17', z = 3 CARGAfu\GE 30'x21' T-- - -- --- - -- -- --- ------l BEDROOI,I2 1l',X12', L,9OZ Sq. Ft, o l Story . 2 Bedrooms . Z Bathrooms . 3 Car Carage 1'TWIN CITIES #1 'lIK HOMEBUILDER Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or npdify desion and materhls, in our sole opinkm and with6ut notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and homs purciase agreement for actual leatures designated as an Everything's lncluded feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating t0 your home and its features. Phns are artist's renderinos and may contain options wtrich are not standlard on all ftodels. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without orior notice. Stated dimensions and souare fmtage are approximate and should not be used as representation ol fE home's orecise or actual size. Anv statement, verbal br written, regarding 'under ail' or 'finished area" or any other description 0r fiiodifier of the square lootage size 0l any home is a shorthand description of he manner in which the square f0otage was estimated and should not be mnstrued to indicate certainty. Garaqe sizes may vary from home to home and mav not accommodate all vehicles, Visit Lennar.tbm or see a Lennar New Home Consultant lor turther details and important leoal disclaimers. This is not an otfer in states w[ere orbr reoistration is reouired.Void where orohibited Dy iaw, tsource - BATC, 20'16 Top 25 Builders Lisl. Copyright O 2018 Lennar C0rporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar lo0o. EveMhino's lncluded and the Everythingrs lncludad hio are U.S. registered service marks or service marks 0l Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar - License No. 20464871. Lenn., fS, f 33#{lia',ili[dti]ilffi H 1630535thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 The Lindbergh LENNAFI The Taylor 2,680 Sq. Ft. o 2 Stories . 4 Bedrooms . 3 Bathrooms . 3 Car Garage II TWIN CITIES #I ,i,[ HoUTBUILDER Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify desion and materials, in our sole opini0n and with6ut notice. Please see your New tlome Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everylhing's lncluded feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating t0 your home and its features. Plans are artist's renderinos and mav contain ootions whlch are not sund'ard on all models. Lennar reserves the rioht to make changes to plans and elevations wilhout prior notice, Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation ol $e home's orecise or actual size. Any statement, verbal br written. reoardinq 'undeI air" or 'finished area" or ani othei descriDtion or rnodilier ot tre souaie footage size of any home is a shorthand descriplion of me manner in which the square lmtage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate ctrtainty. Garaoe sizes mav vary kom home t0 home and ftav not accbmmbdate all vehhles. Visit Lennar,6om or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for furlher details and important leoal disclaimers. This is nol an offer in states w[ere 0rior reoistration is reouired.Void where pronibiieo by hw. tsource -' BATC, 201 5 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright O 2017 Lennar Corooration. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar hqo, Everything's lncluded and the Everythrng's lncluded logo are u.S. registered service marks or servce marks 0t Lennar Corporation and/or ils subsidhries. U.S Horire Corporatbn d/Ua Lennar - License ilo. 20464871. Leonar Sales CorP. - Broker. MN BHr. Lic # 8C001413.{10187], 4ru17 1630535thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAII!' TheTaylOf Landmark Collection Main Level : EF*MF$:ffiflEBE#+IGREAr o,xrxc FffiROOAT RC}O\itni15' r1\r5' BE,DROON,I 4 10'x 13' BEDROOM 2 12',X 13', BEDROO]\{ 3 l1',>( 12', Upper Level LENNAFT.COIVI 95?-?49-3000 2 Stories | 4 Bedrooms I 3 Bathrooms | 3 CarGarage ?,gOG Sq. Ft. EVERYTHING'S lNCLUDED' The St. Croix ll 95?-?19-3000 Main Level OWNER'S SUITE 14'-0" x l4-0" Upper Level 2,806 Sq. Ft, r 2 Stories . 4 Bedrooms . 3 Bathrooms . 3 Car Carage 1'TWIN CITIES #I 'ift HOMEBUILDER Elevations ol a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or rnodify desion and materials, in our sole opinion and with6ut notice, Please see your New Home Consultant and home purdEse agreemenl l0r actual features designated as an Everytling's lncluded feature. additbnal information, disclosures, and dischimers relating to your home and its lealures. Plans are artist's renderings and may contain optiofls which are notstandard on all rmdels, Lennar reserves lhe rioht t0 make changes t0 plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square lbotage are approximale and should not be used as representation of the home's orecise 0r actual size. Any statement, verbal br written, regarding 'under air'or 'finished area" or anv other description or rnodifier ol the souaie tootage size ol any home is a shorthand descri,tion ol the manner in which the square lmtage was estimated and should not be mnslrued to indklate certainty. Garaoe sizes mav vary lrom home to home and irav not accbmmirdate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.iom or see a Lennar New Home Consuliant tor further details and lmportrnt leoal disclaimers. This 6 not an otfer in states wiere Drior reoistration is reouired.Void where orohiDited by hw. tSource - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright @ 2018 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar looo, Everything's lncluded and the Everythinds lncluded logo are U.S. registered seruice marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries, U.S. Home CorDoration d/b/a Lennar -liirn$'u"0.")6ns+'aii. ffi ;;; af- LILEIDE NU. eVaU+U' r. Lsil[or Sales Gorp. - Broker. MN Bldr Lic* gcoojarg.(rotaa) ovttng 1630535thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENN,\O Landmark Collection LENNAFI.COTVI 95?-?49-3000 The Snelling LENNAFT.COIVI 95?-249-3000 Main Level BEDROOI\I2 11'x l3'BEDROOM 3 11'x 13' Upper Level 3,?70 Sq. Ft. . Z Stories o 4 Bedrooms o 4 Bathrooms o 3 Car Carage fl TWIN CITIES #l 'i,1, HOMEBUILDER Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the r(lht to substiute and /or rnodily deshn and materhh, in our sole opinion and rvitbut notbe. Please see your New l'lome C0nsultant and home purdlase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything's lncluded feature, additional information, disclosures, and dischimers relating t0 your home and its leatjres. Phns are artist's renderings and may contain options which are nol standardon all rnodels. Lennar reserves the rioht to make changes to phns and elevations witimut orbr notict. stated dimensions and square fbtage are approxirnate and slpuld not oe used as representation of he home's orecise tr actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, reqarding 'under aif or 'tinished area' or anf ohea descriotion or rnodilier ol tre squaie lmtage size ol any home is a shorhand descriptbn of the manner in which the square rootage was estimaud and should not be @nstrued to indi{2te certainty, Garaoe sizes mav vary from home to home and irav not acc6mmirdate alt vehhles. Visit Lennar.rbm oI see a Lennar New Home Consultant lor furher details and imporhnt leoal dischimers. This is not an ofter in states wiere 0rior reoistration is reouired.Void where Drohibited by 6w. tsource '' BATC, 201 5 Top 25 Builders List. Gopyright @ 2017 Lennar CorDoration. All rights reserved, Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything's lncluded and the EveMhingJs lncluded logo are U,S. registered service marlG or servhe marks ol Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S, Horire Cormratbn d/b/a Lennarlit.,.#il'd iti+oieii ffi; fS Sales Coro, - Broker. MN Bldr. L= lic + scobtlte.(10192) 4/Y17 ffi 1630536thAve.N. Suite 5OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAFI' Landmark Collection F-_llr---t-_l i .----,--l Kl 1r\r lt\ BEDROOM4 12'r 15' LENNAFT.COIVI 95?-?49-3000 Main: 2 Stories t 4 Bedrooms I 4 Bathrooms | 2 Car Garage I 2,637 Sq._Ft.- private Suite: l Bedroom t i Bathroom ! Piivate Living Area I Kitchenette I Laundry 1553 Sq. Ft. l. NEXTCEN- THE HOi.IE WITHIN A IIOXEs I= LENNAFT The lndependence Collection I Main Home 2,637 Sq, Ft, . 2 Stories . 4 Bedrooms . 4 Bathrooms . ?Car Garage Private Suite 553 Sq. Ft. . L Bedroom . L Bathroom . Private Entrance . Kitchenette .laundry . Living Area . L Car Garage II TWIN CITIES #I ,Lll nOmTBUILDER Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right t0 substitute and /or modify desion and rnaterhls, in our sole opinion and wihbut notice. Please see your New Home Cmsultant and home purchase agreement l0r actual leatures designated as an Everyfiing's lncluded leature. additional information, disclosures, and dischimers relating to your home and its fealures. Plans are artist's renderinos and mav contrin ootions u,hich are not san&rdon altrircdels. Lennar reserves the rhht b make changes to plans and elevations wirout prior notice. stated dimensions and square fmtage are approximate and should not be used as representation 0f the home's orecise 0r actual size. Any statemenl, verbal or wriflen. reoardino 'under air or 'finished area' or anf otrei description 0r rnodilier of the sQuare lmtrge size of any home is a shonhand descriotion 0f the manner in whictl the square footage was estimated and should not be construed t0 indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehtcles. Visit Lennar. com 0r see a Lennar New tlome Consultant tor further detaih and important legal dlschimers. This is not an ofler in states where prior reqistration is required. Void lvhere prohibiled bv hw tSource - MTC.20'l6To0 25 Builders Li$.Copiright @ 2017 Lennar Corporalion. All riohts reserved. Lennar. the Lennar 1090, The Forn€ Wifiin a Home, The ihme Wthil a tlome lo0o and the Everytiling's lncluded and he Everything's lncluded l0go are U.S, reoistered servrce marl$ or servhe marks of Leirnar Comorathn and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. tlome Comoration d/b/a Lennarr-i-&#'l'6 iii46ft?i. Ienil; al Sales Corp. - Broker. MN Bldr. Lic L=# 8C001413 (1050n 01/0448 #l!ilf, 1530536thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 Main Level Upper Leve! NEXTC I=N N /A R{{r \1 L}T4FE I fIr LENNAFI"The lndependence Landmark Collection cREAr DTNING [ ]RooM AREA l. i i170"X15',-0" 12',-0"X15',0' : ! 2.CAR GARAGE r94" X 22'4" i------ ---------- -'---- LENNAJiI'The Cenesis.4-Car Main: 2 Stories I 4 Bedrooms ! 4 Bathrooms I 3 Car Garage a?,637 Sq. Ft. Private Suite: l Bedroom l l Bathroom I Private Living Area I Kitchenette I Laundry 1563 Sq. Ft. W ' g!." r*'+w:' ,,',,',t,='*,t a- )'t' Classic Collection LENNAFT-COIVI 95?-?49-3000 Main Home 2,637 Sq. Ft. . 2 Stories . 4 Bedrooms . 4 Bathrooms . 3 Car Garage Private Suite 563 Sq. Ft. .l" Bedroom . l Bathroom . Private Entrance . Kitchenette .laundry . Living Area . L Car Garage II TWIN CITIES #I ,i,ll nomrBulLDER Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /0r rodity desion and rEteriah, in our sole opinbn and witrrout notbe. Please see your New }lome Consultant and home purdEse agreement for actual leatures designated as an Everyfiing's lncluded feature, additbnal information, disclosures, and dischimers relating to your home and its features. Phns are artist's renderinos and may contain options which are notshn&rd 0n all i[dels. Lennar reserves the rhht b make changes to phns and ehvations ilithout orior notice. Slated dimensions and souare lirotaoe are a0oroxirnale and sfnuld nrit oe used ls reoresdntation of rE home's Drecise or actual iize. Any statemeflt, verbal br written, regarding 'un(h air' oI 'finished area" or anf otrei dessiotion 0r rnodifier of the souare tmtaqe size ol any home is a shorthand descriDtion ol the manner in which the souare footaoe was estinEted and shouE not brj mnstruad-to indilate c€rtainty. Garage sizes mav vary from home b honE and may not accohmodate all vehicles. ViSt Lennar' com or see a Lennat i,lew ibme Consultant for lurther details and im@rtant legal dischimers. This is not an offer in slal6 where prior reobtraton is reouired. Vord whele p{dibited bihw. tsource - BATC,2016Top 25 Buiklers List.Copyright O 2017 Lennar Corporatbn. All riohta reserved. Lennar, the Leflnar 1090, The Fome Within a Horne, The tlome Whin a Home lo00 and the Et/eryhing's lncluded afld fie Evarylhing3 lncluded dgo are U.S. reoistered service-nErks or servae rnarks of Le"nnar Corporatim and/or its $jbsilJiaries. U.S. Home Comoratbn d/t/a Lennar -"i-ten#'ru6. iriqoaslj. ffi* ar' Sales Coro. - Broker. MN Bldr. Lic l:l# Bcooi413.(1o5og) 01/04/18 ffi 1630535thAve.N- Suite 6OO, Plymouth, I.lN 55445 GItI]:\T R(X)\r l7-(f \ l5'rr' f#t6IB,rl0x ld-o' FO\ Main Level KI!(III;\ ll I=N N 7a\rlrlr FE rIr I The Genesis c 4-Car trh IT,[}J,f.E*} i owNER's ii SUIIE I I ra'o" x ts'o' i BEDROOM4 13'-0'X 12'-0' BEDROOM2 BEDROOM 3 15'-0" X 10'-0' Upper Level 2 Stories l4 Bedrooms l4 Bathrooms ! 3 CarGarage 3,344 Sq. Ft. EVERYTHING'S INCLUDED' The Blakely Classic Collection LENNAFR.COTVI 95?-?,49-3000 Main Level Upper Level 3,344 Sq. Ft. . 2 Stories . 4 Bedrooms . 4 Bathrooms . 3 Car Garage II TWIN CITIES #I ,i,[ HomTBUILDER Elevatbns ol a home may vary and we reserve he rbht to substitute and /0r modity desion and materhh, ln our sole opinim and rvffiiut notice. Please see your NetY }lome Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Ewyfiing's lncluded feature, additional information, disclosures, and dischimers relating t0 your home and its feafures. Phns are artisfs renderings and may contain options v'?hich are not stan(kd on all rnodels. Lennar reserves the right h make changes to phns and el€vations witrout prior notice. Stated dimensioN and square fmtage are approxirlEte and srnuH not be used as represenhtion of $e home's orecise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, reoarding 'under air" oI 'finished area' u anf omer description or nndifier of he squde lmtage size 0f any honE is a shortrrand description of fie manner in whi*l the square fuotage wils estimated and sIEUld not be consrued h indbate ctrtainty. Garaqe sizes rEy vary lr0m home h home and mav not mmmodate all vehicles. visil Lennar.rfom oI see a Lennar I'lflv Home cmsultant fo{ furher details and importanl leoal dischimec.Ihis b rnt an otter in sEtes wiae prbr registatinr 6 required.Wfi wtEre orotribited by iaw. tSo.trce - BATC, 201 5 Top 25 Buil&rs Us1. Cogmdtt O m17 Leflnar Comoratbn. All righb ressrved. LenrEI, $e Lennar @, Erery$tng's lncluded and he Everylhingb lnctuded @ are U.S. regbtered servi{E rnarlG or seflice marks 0l Lennar CorpoBlbn ad/o( its $,bsuhrie$. U.S. tkrire Cormrabirn dua Lennar:U.#'ffi:io4d8;i. ffi^a, fS Sales Com. - Broker. MN Bldr. L= Lic fl 8C001413. (10156) 4/317 ffi 1530536thAve.N. Suite 5OO, Plymouth, MN 55445 The Blakely \( x-)1.. r=,,rtt iiN u_r i K|l;(:lJr:\ BEDROOM4 BEDROOM 3 r! tl!BEDROOM 2 ?,498 Sq. Ft. o l Story . 2 Bedrooms o 3 Bathrooms . 3 Car Garage II TWIN CITIES #I '1,!' HOMEBUILDER Elevations ol a home may vary and we reserve tre right to substitute and /or nEdify desion and nEterhls, in our soE opinlon and with6ut notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purdase agreement lor actual features designated as an Everyhing's lncluded feature, additional intormation, disclosures, and disclaimers relating b your home and its feaures. Phns are artist's renderings and may clntain options whlch are not standard on all nndels. Lennar resenes the rioht to make chanoes t0 ohns and elevations witrrout orior notic-e. Staied dimensions and s0uare lootaoe are aooroximate and should nrit be used ls representation of he home's Drecise or acfual size. Any statement, verbal br written, regarding 'under aif or 'linished area' or anf otrei description or rnodilier 0l the squaie lmtage size 0t any home is a shorfiand description of the rnanrEr in whbh the square footage wEs estimabd and should not be mnstrued t0 indicate certainly. Garaoe sizes may vary from home o home and fuav not accommodate all vehlcles. Msit Lennar.6om or see a Lennar New tlome Consultant lor further details and important leoal disclaimers. This is not an otfer in shtes wiere orior reqistration is required.Void where Drohibited by hw tsource - MTC, 201 5 Top 25 Builders List. C0pyright @ 2017 Lennar Corooration. All righb reserved. Lennar, the Lennar loqo, Everything's lncluded and the Everylhingrs lncluded logo are U.S. rqistered service rnarks or service rnarks ot Lennar Corporation and/or its subsllhrils. U.S. Home Comoratbn d/ty'a Lennar-tt'r# [',i iri+oisii. ie.* f-1 Sales Coro. - Broker. MN Bldr. Lr l=lI scooiats. (1olso 7nzl7 ffiF 1630536thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, tlN 55446 Main Level I I I I CffiI\IER'S i i-'----------- 'ii orNrNc ii noorrr i i 13'{" X 10'-0* i BEDROOM2 11'-0'X 12'4', STUDY 10'-0u x 14-0u I0RCH ii 2 Stories I 4 Bedrooms I 4 Bathrooms I 3 CarGarage 3,395 Sq. Ft. EVERYTHING'S INCLUDED' I=rIlNN 7a\ RI{r WN4ISE t LENNAliR The Springdale Classic Collection 3,396 Sq. Ft. . 2 Stories . 4 Bedrooms . 4 Bathrooms . 3 Car Carage II TWIN CITIES #I '!,!, nOmfBUILDER Elevatbns of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or nndity desion and materhls, in our sob opinion and withiut notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual leatures designated as an Everything's lncluded feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating t0 your h0me and its leatures. Phns are artist's renderinos and mav contain ootions v'/hich are not stan&rd on all irodels. Lennar reserves the rioht to make changes to phns and elevations w'ihout orior notice. Stated dimensions and souare foolaoe are approxirnate and should not be used as representaton ol the home's Drecise or actual size. Any slatement, verbal br written. regarding 'undeI aif or 'tinished area' or anf othei description or rnodifier of he square fmtage size 0l any home is a sh0rthand descriplion of the manner in which the square lootage was estimated and should not be mnstrued t0 indi€te certainty. Garaoe sizes may vary lrom home t0 home and mav not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.6om or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and imDortant leoal disclaimers. This is not an ofler in states wiere orior registration is required.Void where Drohibited by hw. tSource - BATC, 201 5 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright @ 2017 Lennar Cor@ration. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything's lncluded and the Everyihing-s lncluded logo are U.S. registered service marks or serviE marks of Lennar Coeoration and/or its subsidhries, U.S. Home Corporation d/Ua Lennar - Lbense llo.20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. - Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC00'1413. (10154) 11/08n7 1630535thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55445 Main Level The Springdale LENNAFT.COIVI 95?-?49-3000 \( )( )K Rlr\lr\IL\till KI I1]I I]I\ BEDROOM4 11'4',X 14-o', Upper Level 1 Story ! 3 Bedrooms I 3 Bathrooms | 3 Car Garage 2,983 Sq. Ft. @ EVERYTHIl{G'S INCLUDED' LENNAFT The Riviera LENNAFI.C(]IVI 9s?-373-0485 LENNAFI'The Riviera 2,983 Sq. Ft. . L Story . 3 Bedrooms . 3 Bathrooms . 3 Car Garage Elsvatjons of a home may mry and we reserve the rioht to substitute and /or modity design and materials, in our soh @inicm and wittput notice. Please see your I'lew Home Coflstlltant and home purchase agreement l0r aclual features de$gnated as an Everylhirqb hduded featrre eddilional infomatM. disdosures. and C0r0. - Broker LicerEe *.40021205. iir_,,[{,".d!;fi,,ffififf g 1630536thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55445 MAIN LEVEL 9s"-373-0485LENNAFR.COIVI 2 Stories I 4 Bedrooms t 5 Bathrooms I 3 CarGarage 3,974 Sq. Ft. @ EYERYTHIilG,S INCLUDED' LENNAliR'TheSalisbury LENNAFT.COM 95?-249-3000 MAIN LEVEL I- OEM rlr]\rn UPPER LEVEL 3,974 5q. Ft. . 2 Stories . 4 Bedrooms . 5 Bathrooms . 3 Car Garage 1'TWIN CITIES #1 TiK HOMEBUILDER Elevations of a home may vary and w€ reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our s0le oprnion and without n0tice. Please see vour New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement tor aclua' leatures designated as an Everythings lnduded feature. additional information, disdosures. and disclaimers relating to your home and ihfeatures. Plans are artisl's renderings and may contain oDtions which are not Sandard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes t0 ohns and elevations without prior notice. Stated iimensons and souare lootaqe are approximate and should not be used as representation ol fie home's precise or actual size. Arry slatement, verbal or written, reqarding 'under air'or'finished area" or any o$er des{ription 0r modilier ol the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square tootaoe was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. visit Lennar.com s see a Lennar New Home Consultant lor further details and imp0rtant l€gal disclaimers. Ihis is not an olfer in states where prior regisEation is reouired. Void where prohibited by law. tsource' MTC. 2017 Top 25 Buil@rs List Copynght @ 2018 Lennar Corporation. All nghts ressved. Lennar. the Lennar logo, Evel&ing's lnduded and fie Everything's lnclud€d logo are U.S. reoister€d seruce marl6 or seMce rnarlc ol Le-nnar Corporation and/ol its $Ndiatus. U.S. Llome Corporation d y'a Lennar^--Lennar Sal€s corp. - giolGr Licer6e #40@1205. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413. CalAtlantic Group, lnc.; BC numbet is - 8C736565. Q48731 W17t18 1530535thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAJiI"TheSalisbury 95?-?49-3000LENNAFT,C(fIVI 2 Stories l4 Bedrooms l4 Bathrooms | 3 CarGarage 3,874 Sq. Ft. @ EVERYTHII{G'S INCLUDED' LENNATiT The Muifield LENNAFT.C(]IVI 952-373-0485 nff.li K]TCHEN 13'X lr', FAMILY ROOM 17 Xfr', 3-CAR GARAGE 3/ XA', -1- MAIN LEVEL '-I OWNER'S SUITE 14'X 16vwr(ffi BEDROOM2 13':{12. BEDROOM4 14](1t UPPER LEVEL 3,874 Sq. Ft, o 2 Stories o 4 Bedrooms . 4 Bathrooms o 3 Car Garage 1'TWIN CITIES #I Tih HoMEBUILDER Elsvations of a home may vary and we reserve the rigm to substitute and /or modity design and materials, in our sole opinion and withod notice. Please see your NelY Home Consultant and home ourchase agreemenl tor aclual features designated as an Everything's lncluded feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its featur$. Plans are artis:tb renderings and may contain ootions which are not $andard on all models. Lbnna reserves the right to make changes h Dhns and elevations withod prior notice. Stated dimen$ons and square lootage are approximate and sir0uld not be used as reoresentation of he home's precise or aclual size. Arry shtement, verbal 0r written, regarding 'under air'or'finished area" or any other desc{iption 0r modili€r of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand d€scriptlon ol the manner in which the square lootage was eslimated and should not be consfued h indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary tlom home to home and may nol accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com 0I see a Lennar Nav Home Consuttant lor turther details and important legal disclaimers. Ihis is not an ofler in $ates where prior Iegistralion is required. Void where prohibited by law. tsource - MTC, 2017 Top 25 Builders List. Copynght @ 2018 LenMr Corporatjon, AII rights reserved. Lenna( the Lennar logo, Eveq/thing's hcluded and tlE Eveqniing's lncluded logo are U.S. reoislered seflice marks or seMce marks of Le-nnar Corporation and/or its subsidianes. U.S. Hom€ Corporation d y'a Lennar - Lennar Sales corp. - &okel Licer6€ #40021205. MN Btdr Lic # BCml413. CalAdantc &o|,p, lnc.; BC number is - 8C736565. (24816) W17/18 16305 35th Aue. N. Suate 5OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAIiI"The Muifield 95?-373-0485LENNAFI.COIVT 1Story ll Bedrooms lZ Bathrooms l2 CarGarage 1,96.2Sq. Ft. EVERYTHING'S INCLUDED' LENNAIiT The Madrid Lifestyle Collection LENNAFR.COTVI 95?-?49-3000 OPI. PORCH IOC.\TION DINING ROOM 12'xL5' MASTER BEDROOM 13' x 15' I\IASTER BATH 2 CAR GARAGE 27'x25' PORCH Main Level L,962Sq. Ft. . l Story . L Bedroom o Z Bathrooms o Z Car Carage TheTwinCities #1 homebuilder for the last 10 years! Plans and elevatbns are artist's renderings and may contain options whhh are not standard on all nndels. Lennar reserves the riqht to make changes t0 trEse floor plans, sd,ecitications, dimensbns and elevations witrrout orior notice. Stated dimensbns and square footage are approxirnate and should not be used as representatron ol he home's orecise or actual size. Any strtement, vefual ilr written. reoardino 'under air or 'tinished area" s ani othei description 0r modifier of the square footage size ol any home is a shorthand description of tile manner in which the square fmtage was estimated and should not be construed to indbate certainty. Garaoe sizes mav varv from home t0 home and ilnv not accbmmirate all vehbles. U.S, Home Corporation d/t/a Lennar - Lftnse No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. - Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # 8C001413. Copyrighl O 2016 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved Lenna( he Lennar logo and he Every$iru's lncluded hgo are registered servile marks or service fiiarks of Lennar corDorati0n and/or its subsidhries. !ftl002004/15/16 F 1530536thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 The Madrid 1 Story | 1 Bedroof l?Plthrooms I 2 Car Garage Z,OOB 5q. Ft. I EVERYTHING'S INCLUDED' LTI,ZFEI|IINI=N N 7a\ RiI.r I The Monaco Main Level 2,008 Sq, Ft, o l- Story . 1 Bedroom . 2 Bathrooms . ? Car Garage TheTwinCities #7 homebuilder for the last 10 years! Plans and elevations are artist's renderinos and mav contain ootions lvhich are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to these floor plans. s6ecilications. dimensions and ele{iations wihout Drior notice. stated dimensions and souare footaoe are aDproximate and should not be used ls representation of the home's orecise or actual size. Any statement, verbal br written, regarding "under air" or "linished area" cr anf otrei description or rnodilier ol tre souaie lmtage size of any home is a shorhand description ol the manner in whch the square footage was estimated and should not be mnstrued to indicate certainty. Garaoe sizes rEv vary from home to home and inav not actirmmirdate all vehicles. U,S Home Crrporation d/b/a Lennar - License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. - Broker' MN Bldr Lic # 8C001413, Copyright @ 2016 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, he Lennar logo and the Everything's lncluded boo are reoistered servbe fi;,:l'T;,il ;i,"il!i ft'ffi ra. Crrooration and/or its subsidiaries. E-(10204)4/15/16 ffi 1630535thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 The Monaco LENNAFT.COIVI 952-?49-3000 1 Story I 2 Bedrooms | 2 Bathrooms | 2 CarGarage 2,068 Sq. Ft. EVERYTHII{G'S INCLUDED' LENNAFT The Birkdale LENNAFT.COIVI 95?-373-0485 OI$(/NBR'S SUITE 13'X 14 TRAY CEILING MAIN LEVEL 2,068 Sq. Ft. o l Story . 2 Bedrooms o 2 Bathrooms . ? Car Garage 1'TWIN CITIES #1 'iiK HOMTBUILDER Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the riont to substitute and /0r modify design and niateriats, in our sole opinion and without notice. Pleas€ see vour Ne{v Home Consultant and home Durchase agreemenl lor aclual features desionated as an Everything's lncluded leature. additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating h your home and ils features. Plans are artisl! renderings and may cofltain ootions which are not standard on all models. Lbnnar reserves the righl t0 make changes io Dlans and elevations without prior notice. Stated irimen$ons and sQuare footage are approximate and should not be used as reples€ntation of tre home's precise or actJal size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding 'under air'or'finished area'or any other desc{iption 0r modilier of the souare footage size ol any home is a shorthand description ot the manner in which the souare lootage v{as estimated and shoulo not be consfued h indicate certainty. Garage sizes may \rary lrom home l0 home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Vlsit Lennar.com 0r see a Lennar New Home Consjlhnt lor funher details and importanl bgal disdaimers. This is not an ofter in states where prior registration is reouired. Void where Orohibited by lali. tsource - gAfC, ZOtz Top 25 Builde6 List. Copynght @ 2018 Lennar Corporati0n. All righls res€rved. Lennar, he Lennar 1090, Everything's lncluded and the Everything's lncluded logo are LJ.S r€oislered griict marks or seM@ marks of Le'nnar CorDoration and/or its subsidranes. U.S. Home Corporation dhla Lennar - Lennar Sales Corp. - Bioker License #40021205. MN 8ldr. Lic # BC001413. CalAtlantic Group, lnc.; 8C number is - 8C736565. {25561) 0t17n8 1630535thAve.N. Suite 6OO, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAFI'The Birkdale 95?-373-0485LENNAFI.COM 1 Story | 2 Bedrooms I 3 Bathrooms I 2 CarGarage Z,lg7 Sq. Ft. @ EVERYTHING'S INCLUDED' LENN TheOlympia 95?-373-0485 "*R oPr. lrINDOV O\TNER'S SUITE 13'X 15' TRAYCEILING oPr. VINDOW MAIN LEVEL 2,L87 Sq, Ft. o L Story . 2 Bedrooms . 3 Bathrooms . 2 Car Garage 1'TWIN CITIES #I ,iik HotrnrBulLDER Elevations oI a home may vary and we reserve the rioht to sub$itute and /0r modify design and ni'aterials, in our sole opinion and wilhoul notice. Please s€e vour New Home Consultant and home ourcha& agreement loI aclual features desionated as an EveMhing's lncluded t$ture, additional information, disclosures. and disclaimers relating to your home and itsleatures. Plans are arti$'s renderings and may contain ootions which are not slandard on all models. Lennar reserves the riohl to make changes t0 olans and elevations without prior notice. Stated bimensions and squale lootage are approximate and should not be us€d as reDresentation of the home's precise or aclual size. Any statement, verbal 0r written, regarding 'under air" or'finished area" or any ofier description 0l modilier of the souare footage size ol any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the souare lootaoe was estrmated and should not bri construeci'to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not ac@mmodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com 0r see a Lennar New Home Consulhnt for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an otfer in states where prior registration is reauired. Void where prohibited by law. tsource - BATC, 2017 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright @ 2018 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything's lncluded and the EveMhing's -lncluded logo are u.s. reoistered seriice harks or service marks ol Le-nnar Comoration and/or its subsidiaries. U.S Home Cor0oration d/b/a Lennar - Lennar Sales Coro. - Broker License #40021205. H,-',,i,-.;ny;#-,fq'Jfi',t H 1530535thAve.N. Suite 5OO, PIymouth, MN 55446 LENNAFI'The0lympia 95"-373-O48sLENNAFR.COIVI LENNAR®The Valencia LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 A C B D VILLA COLLECTION LENNAR® 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 The Valencia Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16743) 4/6/17 Main Level VILLA COLLECTION 1,536 Sq. Ft. • 2 Bedrooms • 2 Baths • 2-Car Garage Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16743) 4/6/17 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR®The Valencia LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 VILLA COLLECTION Options Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16743) 4/6/17 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR®The Valencia VILLA COLLECTION Optional Finished Basement LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 LENNAR®The Oxford LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 A C B D VILLA COLLECTION LENNAR®The Oxford 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 Main Level VILLA COLLECTION 1,541 Sq. Ft. • 2 Bedrooms • 2 Baths • 2-Car Garage Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16747) 4/6/17 Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16747) 4/6/17 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR®The Oxford LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 VILLA COLLECTION Options Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16747) 4/6/17 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 LENNAR®The Oxford VILLA COLLECTION Optional Basement LENNAR®The Buckingham 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16746) 4/6/17 Main Level VILLA COLLECTION 1,930 Sq. Ft. • 3 Bedrooms • 2 Baths • 2-Car Garage LENNAR®The Buckingham LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 A C B D VILLA COLLECTION LENNAR®The Buckingham VILLA COLLECTION Options Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16746) 4/6/17 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16746) 4/6/17 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR®The Buckingham LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 VILLA COLLECTION Optional Basement LENNAR®The Barcelona 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16744) 4/617 VILLA COLLECTION Main Level 1,631 Sq. Ft. • 2 Bedrooms • 2 Baths • 2-Car Garage LENNAR®The Barcelona LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 A C B D VILLA COLLECTION LENNAR®The Barcelona VILLA COLLECTION Options Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16744) 4/617 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16744) 4/617 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR®The Barcelona LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 VILLA COLLECTION Optional Finished Basement LENNAR®The Brighton 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16745) 4/6/17 VILLA COLLECTION Main Level 1,649 Sq. Ft. • 2 Bedrooms • 2 Baths • 2-Car Garage LENNAR®The Brighton LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 A C B D VILLA COLLECTION Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16745) 4/6/17 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR®The Brighton VILLA COLLECTION Options LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 Elevations of a home may vary and we reserve the right to substitute and /or modify design and materials, in our sole opinion and without notice. Please see your New Home Consultant and home purchase agreement for actual features designated as an Everything’s Included feature, additional information, disclosures, and disclaimers relating to your home and its features. Plans are artist’s renderings and may contain options which are not standard on all models. Lennar reserves the right to make changes to plans and elevations without prior notice. Stated dimensions and square footage are approximate and should not be used as representation of the home’s precise or actual size. Any statement, verbal or written, regarding “under air” or “finished area” or any other description or modifier of the square footage size of any home is a shorthand description of the manner in which the square footage was estimated and should not be construed to indicate certainty. Garage sizes may vary from home to home and may not accommodate all vehicles. Visit Lennar.com or see a Lennar New Home Consultant for further details and important legal disclaimers. This is not an offer in states where prior registration is required. Void where prohibited by law. †Source - BATC, 2015 Top 25 Builders List. Copyright © 2017 Lennar Corporation. All rights reserved. Lennar, the Lennar logo, Everything’s Included and the Everything’s Included logo are U.S. registered service marks or service marks of Lennar Corporation and/or its subsidiaries. U.S. Home Corporation d/b/a Lennar – License No. 20464871. Lennar Sales Corp. – Broker. MN Bldr. Lic # BC001413.(16745) 4/6/17 16305 36th Ave. N. Suite 600, Plymouth, MN 55446 LENNAR®The Brighton VILLA COLLECTION Optional Basement LENNAR.COM 952-249-3000 BASIN 300 BASIN 200 BASIN 100 WETLAND 2 WETLAND 6 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 11 WETLAND 10 WETLAND 7 WETLAND 7 WETLAND 8 WETLAND 8 BASIN 600 WETLAND 13 LAKE ANN LAKE LUCY OUTLOT A OUTLOT C OUTLOT C OUTLOT A OUTLOT A OUTLOT A OUTLOT B BASIN 400 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-COVR 1COVER LOCATION MAP SITE PLANPRELIMINARY PLATEXISTING CONDITIONSLEGEND SHEETCOVER SHEETSHEET INDEX1.2.3-6.7-9.10-11. GALPIN SITE PRELIMINARY PLAT & PUD CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA R EROSION CONTROL PLAN SANITARY SEWER & WATER PLAN12-13.14-19. 28-29. GRADING & EROSION CONTROL DETAILSSEEDING PLAN30-31.32-35. STORM SEWER PLAN LANDSCAPE PLANL1-L5.TREE PRESERVATION PLANT1-T7. I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND IMPACT & BUFFER PLAN36-37.IMPERVIOUS AREA PLAN38-39. 20-27.GRADING PLAN 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-LGND 2LEGEND I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 EX-SURV-118100-SHEET-EX CON 3EXISTING CONDITIONS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 554464229912-7-2018 Pete Hawkinson EX-SURV-118100-SHEET-EX CON 4EXISTING CONDITIONS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 554464229912-7-2018 Pete Hawkinson EX-SURV-118100-SHEET-EX CON 5EXISTING CONDITIONS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 554464229912-7-2018 Pete Hawkinson EX-SURV-118100-SHEET-EX CON 6EXISTING CONDITIONS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 554464229912-7-2018 Pete Hawkinson 00-SURV-118100-SHEET-PLAT 7PRELIMINARY PLAT c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota Peter J. Hawkinson 12-05-201842299 00-SURV-118100-SHEET-PLAT 8PRELIMINARY PLAT c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota Peter J. Hawkinson 12-05-201842299 00-SURV-118100-SHEET-PLAT 9PRELIMINARY PLAT c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota Peter J. Hawkinson 12-05-201842299 BASIN 200 BASIN 100 WETLAND 2 WETLAND 6 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 8 WETLAND 8 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 BASIN 600 OUTLOT A OUTLOT B OUTLOT A NORTH - 90' LOTS (501-531) WIDTH 90' AREA 15,000 SF OHW SETBACK 75' BLUFF SETBACK 30' LOCAL ROW SETBACK 20' (25' WITH SIDEWALK) CORNER AT ROW 20' TOTAL LOTS 31 SOUTH - 90' LOTS (101-111) WIDTH 90' AREA 11,250 SF FRONT SETBACK 75' REAR SETBACK 30' SIDE SETBACK 20' (25' WITH SIDEWALK) CORNER AT ROW 20' C.R. NO. 117 50' TOTAL LOTS 11 65' LOTS WIDTH 65' AREA 8,450 SF FRONT SETBACK 25' or 20' (SEE PLAN) REAR SETBACK 25' SIDE SETBACK 7.5' CORNER AT C.R. NO. 117 50' TOTAL LOTS 139 TOTAL LOTS PROPOSED 181 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-SITE 10PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 BASIN 300 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 11 WETLAND 10 WETLAND 7WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT C WETLAND 13 OUTLOT C OUTLOT A OUTLOT A BASIN 400 NORTH - 90' LOTS (501-531) WIDTH 90' AREA 15,000 SF OHW SETBACK 75' BLUFF SETBACK 30' LOCAL ROW SETBACK 20' (25' WITH SIDEWALK) CORNER AT ROW 20' TOTAL LOTS 31 SOUTH - 90' LOTS (101-111) WIDTH 90' AREA 11,250 SF FRONT SETBACK 75' REAR SETBACK 30' SIDE SETBACK 20' (25' WITH SIDEWALK) CORNER AT ROW 20' C.R. NO. 117 50' TOTAL LOTS 11 65' LOTS WIDTH 65' AREA 8,450 SF FRONT SETBACK 25' or 20' (SEE PLAN) REAR SETBACK 25' SIDE SETBACK 7.5' CORNER AT C.R. NO. 117 50' TOTAL LOTS 139 TOTAL LOTS PROPOSED 181 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-SITE 11PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 BASIN 200 BASIN 100 WETLAND 2 WETLAND 6 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 8 WETLAND 8 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 BASIN 600 OUTLOT B OUTLOT A OUTLOT A 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-SSWR 12PRELIMINARY SANITARY & WATERMAIN PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 BASIN 300 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 11 WETLAND 10 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT C WETLAND 13 OUTLOT C OUTLOT A OUTLOT A BASIN 400 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-SSWR 13PRELIMINARY SANITARY & WATERMAIN PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT A 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-STRM 14PRELIMINARY STORM SEWER PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 2 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT B 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-STRM 15PRELIMINARY STORM SEWER PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 6 OUTLOT C OUTLOT A 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-STRM 16PRELIMINARY STORM SEWER PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT C OUTLOT A 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-STRM 17PRELIMINARY STORM SEWER PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT A 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-STRM 18PRELIMINARY STORM SEWER PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 13 OUTLOT A OUTLOT C 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-STRM 19PRELIMINARY STORM SEWER PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT A 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-GRAD 20PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 2 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT B 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-GRAD 21PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 6 OUTLOT A OUTLOT C 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-GRAD 22PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 6 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT A 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-GRAD 23PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 OUTLOT C OUTLOT C 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-GRAD 24PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT A OUTLOT C 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-GRAD 25PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 13 OUTLOT A 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-GRAD 26PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT A 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-GRAD 27PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 BASIN 200 BASIN 100 WETLAND 2 WETLAND 6 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 8 WETLAND 8 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 BASIN 600 OUTLOT A OUTLOT B OUTLOT A LEGEND 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-EROS 28PRELIMINARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 BASIN 300 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 11 WETLAND 10 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT C WETLAND 13 OUTLOT C OUTLOT A OUTLOT A BASIN 400 LEGEND 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-EROS 29PRELIMINARY EROSION CONTROL PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 BASIN 200 BASIN 100 WETLAND 2 WETLAND 6 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 8 WETLAND 8 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 BASIN 600 OUTLOT A OUTLOT AOUTLOT B · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-SEED 30PRELIMINARY SEEDING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 BASIN 300 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 11 WETLAND 10 WETLAND 1 WETLAND 1 OUTLOT C OUTLOT C OUTLOT A OUTLOT A BASIN 400 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-SEED 31PRELIMINARY SEEDING PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 · · · · · · 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-DTLS-GR 32GRADING DETAILS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 · · 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-DTLS-GR 33GRADING DETAILS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-DTLS-GR 34GRADING DETAILS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-DTLS-GR 35GRADING DETAILS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 5 IMPACT AREA=2,288 SF (0.053 AC) WETLAND 4 IMPACT AREA=8,749 SF (0.201 AC) WETLAND 3 IMPACT AREA=7,036 SF (0.162 AC) WETLAND 2 WETLAND 1 (PRESERVED) BUFFER=40' MIN. & 80' AVG WETLAND 8 WETLAND 8 AVERAGE REQUIRED BUFFER REQUIRED MINIMUM BUFFER AVERAGE REQUIRED BUFFER REQUIRED MINIMUM BUFFER PROPOSED BUFFER PROPOSED BUFFER EXISTING BLUFF LINE EXISTING BLUFF LINE WETLAND 6 (MANAGED 2) BUFFER=20' MIN. & 40' AVG BASIN 200 BASIN 100 SURFACE WATER IMPACT AREA = 1,406 SF (0.032 AC) SURFACE WATER IMPACT AREA = 2,323 SF (0.053 AC) BUFFER NAME REQ'D. AREA (SF)PROP. CREDIT AREA (SF)PROP. TOTAL AREA (SF) WETLAND 1 487,766 533,919 534,584 WETLAND 6 15,830 16,477 16,477 WETLAND 11 60,834 61,844 61,844 WETLAND 13 6,064 6,140 7,265 WETLAND NAME IMPACT AREA (SF) WETLAND 3 7,036 WETLAND 4 8,749 WETLAND 5 2,288 WETLAND 12 26,149 WETLAND 12A 1,798 WETLAND 14 9,861 SURFACE WATER 3,729 TOTAL 60,551 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-WETL 36WETLAND IMPACT & BUFFER PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 WETLAND 12 IMPACT AREA=26,149 SF (0.600 AC) WETLAND 13 (MANAGED 2) BUFFER=20' MIN. & 40' AVG WETLAND 14 IMPACT AREA=9,861 SF (0.226 AC) WETLAND 12A IMPACT AREA=1,798 SF (0.041 AC) WETLAND 5 IMPACT AREA=2,288 SF (0.053 AC) WETLAND 4 IMPACT AREA=8,749 SF (0.201 AC) WETLAND 1 (PRESERVED) BUFFER=40' MIN. & 80' AVG WETLAND 11 (MANAGED 2) BUFFER=20' MIN. & 40' AVG WETLAND 10 AVERAGE REQUIRED BUFFER REQUIRED MINIMUM BUFFER AVERAGE REQUIRED BUFFER REQUIRED MINIMUM BUFFER PROPOSED BUFFER PROPOSED BUFFERAVERAGE REQUIRED BUFFER REQUIRED MINIMUM BUFFER PROPOSED BUFFER BASIN 400 BASIN 300 BUFFER NAME REQ'D. AREA (SF)PROP. CREDIT AREA (SF)PROP. TOTAL AREA (SF) WETLAND 1 487,766 533,919 534,584 WETLAND 6 15,830 16,477 16,477 WETLAND 11 60,834 61,844 61,844 WETLAND 13 6,064 6,140 7,265 WETLAND NAME IMPACT AREA (SF) WETLAND 3 7,036 WETLAND 4 8,749 WETLAND 5 2,288 WETLAND 12 26,149 WETLAND 12A 1,798 WETLAND 14 9,861 SURFACE WATER 3,729 TOTAL 60,551 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-WETL 37WETLAND IMPACT & BUFFER PLAN I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-IMP 38IMPERVIOUS AREAS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 00-ENG-118100-SHEET-IMP 39IMPERVIOUS AREAS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota c 39OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTH 12-05-18 PJC/BNM BNM/NCR Name Reg. No.Date Revisions 1. 2-28-2019 City Comments Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 12-05-2018 Paul J. Cherne PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 5544619860 c 5OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-7-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 2-28-19 I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson L1LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 LANDSCAPE PLAN2-28-19 city comments c 5OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-7-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson L2LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 LANDSCAPE PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 city comments c 5OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-7-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson L3LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 LANDSCAPE PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 city comments c 5OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-7-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson L4LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 LANDSCAPE PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 city comments c 5OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-7-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson L5LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 LANDSCAPE PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 city comments c 7OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS 2-28-19 I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson T1LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN2-28-19 updated tree calculations for site plan revisions c 7OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson T2LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 updated tree calculations for site plan revisions c 7OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson T3LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 updated tree calculations for site plan revisions c 7OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson T4LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 updated tree calculations for site plan revisions c 7OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2018 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson T5LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 updated tree calculations for site plan revisions c 7OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson T6LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 updated tree calculations for site plan revisions c 7OFGALPIN SITE CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 12-5-18 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson T7LENNAR 16305 36TH AVENUE NORTHPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55446 TREE PRESERVATION PLAN 2-28-19 2-28-19 updated tree calculations for site plan revisions Carver County Public Works 11360 Highway 212, Suite 1 Cologne, MN 55322 Office (952) 466-5200 | Fax (952) 466-5223 | www.co.carver.mn.us CARVER COUNTY December 28, 2018 City of Chanhassen, c/o Paul Oehme, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer 952-227-1169 poehme@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Re: Development / Access Review Comments: Nelson Property Preliminary Plat on CR 117/Galpin Blvd. Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject development in the City of Chanhassen. Consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and County Codes, the following are comments and recommended conditions of approval and as potential requirements for any necessary permits to be issued for the project: 1. The subject plat and development has been reviewed against several other major planning and infrastructure projects, with the result that several changes and/or cross-checks of the subject plat will be required. CR 117/Galpin Blvd. is planned as turn back project and studied as part of a Highway 117 Corridor Study. Galpin Blvd is also identified in the County’s Comprehensive Plan as an Urban/Urbanizing Collector, with a guided access spacing of 1/4- mile full access and 1/8-mile secondary access. In addition, a draft master stormwater and pond management was developed, based on planned development and road design elements. 2. In terms of access management, the proposed accesses across from Hunter Dr. and Longacres Dr. meet the guideline for full access. These two access points are also identified in the Highway 117 Corridor Study for full access. 3. In terms of access management, the access across from Wynsong Ln. meets the 1/8 spacing guideline for a secondary access. Note that this access could be restricted to a right-in/right- out access in the future. As such, it is recommended the City and developer consider a local through road connection instead of the proposed cul-de-sac. As a condition of the secondary access across from Wynsong Ln, the driveway from parcel no. 250100400 will need to be removed from CR 117/Galpin Blvd. and connect to the proposed new local road. 4. Exclusive left turn and right turn lanes should be required at all full access points across from Hunter Dr. and Longacres Dr., and if full access allowed at Wynsong Ln. Left turn lanes are preferred over right turn lanes if space is a premium. These are shown conceptually in the preferred alternative from the Highway 117 Corridor Study. The Hunter Drive location looks like it will need additional right of way and / or special design transitions to the south to fit the recommended turn lane lengths and transition tapers. 2 | P a g e 5. Right of way dedication will be required along the east side of CR 117/Galpin Blvd. per the above considerations, the Highway 117 Corridor Study, and the typical roadway sections identified in the County’s Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Corridor Study identifies specific right of way needs and the plat will need to follow and be consistent with the preferred roadway alternative. The right of way will need to tie into the existing highway right of way north and south of the proposed development. The preliminary and final proposal will need to be reviewed and approved as to form and content by the County Surveyor. Specifically, given that most all of the existing corridor is platted at approximately 100-ft total now, this new plat’s right of way could also be a total of 100 ft total or 50-ft on center. The typical roadway section for a 2-lane urban undivided with continuous left turn lane (intersection) should be followed and revised to fit in the 100-ft right of way planned, with an exact cross-section to be reviewed and approved by the County and City. The recommended cross-section could run as follows from west to east: 1’-offset; 8’-trail-5’- blvd; 2’-gutter; 4’-bike lane; 12’-right turn lane; 12’-thru lane; 12’-left turn lane; 12’-thru lane; 12’-right turn lane; 4’-bike lane; 2’-gutter; 5’-blvd; 8’-trail; 1’-offset (with variations in offset and/or blvd). Potentially, the right turn lanes could be shared Thru/Right Turn Lanes as exclusive left turn lanes are preferred over right turn lanes if space is a premium. It could be that the left turn lane or center left turn lane could be left out of the section where Pond “C” Wetland is existing to keep the road narrower in this section. From the Corridor Study centerline stationing reference numbers, it looks like the typical left turn lane is about 600-800-feet long, such that the LT lane at Hunter Drive falls at Sta 32+00 to Sta 40+00; and the LT lane at Longacres Dr falls at Sta 40+00 to Sta 48+00; and so on to the north. More exact design layouts can verify some of these details. 6. The technical details of the plat, its boundaries and form(s) will need to be reviewed and approved by the County Surveyor. 7. The plat’s final grading plans, ponds, and right of way along CR 117/Galpin Blvd. will need to be reviewed and approved to show how this is set up for the potential future CR 117/Galpin Blvd. reconstruction. A cross reference of grading plans, profiles, and respective cross sections should be provided at key locations such as intersections, ponds, or other special features. 8. A new a draft master stormwater and pond management will need to be developed for this plat and area, based on planned development, road design elements, and the draft ponds planned from the Corridor Study Storm Drainage Plan. Ponds “D”, “C”, and potentially “B” will need to be verified accordingly. 9. Prior to any work affecting or on County highways or in County right of way, the applicant shall coordinate plans with the County Engineer and obtain a Utility or Excavating/Filling/Grading Permit(s) from Carver County Public Works: (http://www.co.carver.mn.us/how-do-i/apply-for/a-permit). Final details of locations, grades, and profiles affecting County roads as well as any utility connections will need to be reviewed and approved prior to any permits. 3 | P a g e 10. Any damages, modifications, or changes incurred on County highways from current or approved conditions will need to remedied or updated at development expense, including costs incurred by the County. These are comments at this time. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at dmccormick@co.carver.mn.us or by phone at (952) 466-5208. Sincerely, Dan McCormick, P.E. PTOE Transportation Manager Carver County Public Works REPIY TO ATTENTIOT{ OF REGULATORY BRA CH DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 180 FIFTH STREET EAST, SUITE 7OO sT.PAUL,t N 55101-1678 January 08, 2019 Regulatory File No. 2017-03447-MMJ City of Chanhassen Community Development Department Planning Division c/o Kate Aanenson, AICP 7700 Market Boulevard , P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Ms. Aanenson: This letter is in response to correspondence we received from the City of Chanhassen regarding the proposed rezoning of an approximately 188.S-acre property located east of Galpin Boulevard and west of Lake Ann and Lake Lucy. This letter contains our initial comments on this project for your consideration. The purpose of this letter is to inform you that based on the Galpin Site Preliminary Plat and PUD for the project referenced above, a Department of the Army (DA) permit may be required for the proposed activity. We concurred with the delineation of aquatic resources that was completed on the Galpin property, and completed an Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) for numerous waters located within this project site, as indicated in the enclosed letter dated March 26, 2018. We determined that Wetlands 3-13 on this property are not jurisdictional waters of the U.S.; the discharge of dredged or fill material into these wetlands would not require Corps authorization. However, the Galpin site project may require a Corps permit if it would involve the discharge of dredged or fill material into any wetlands or waters on the property not included in the enclosed AJD, as they could potentially be walers of the U.S. Please consider the following information concerning our regulatory program that may apply to the proposed project. lf the proposal involves the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, it may be subject to the Corps of Engineers' jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA Section 404). Waters of the United States include navigable waters, their tributaries, and adjacent wetlands (33 CFR S 328.3). CWA Section 301(a) prohibits discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, unless the work has been authorized by a Department of the Army permit under Section 404. lnformation about the Corps permitting process can be obtained online at htto://www. mvo. usace.armv. mi l/reoulatorv. The Corps evaluation of a Section 404 permit application involves multiple analyses, including (1) evaluating the proposal's impacts in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (33 CFR part 325), (2) determining whether the proposal is contrary to the public interest (33 CFR S 320.4), and (3) determining whether the proposal complies with the Section 404(b)(1 ) Guidelines (Guidelines) (40 CFR part 230). lf the proposal requires a Section 404 permit application, the Guidelines specifically require that "no discharge of dredged or fill material shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so long as the alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental Regulatory Branch (File No. 2017-03447-MMJ) consequences" (40 CFRS 230.10(a)). Timeand money spent on the proposal priorto applying for a Section 404 permit cinnot be factored into the Corps' decision whether there is a less damaging practicable alternative to the proposal. lf an application for a corps permit has not yet been submitted, the project proposer may request a pie-application consultation meeting with the Corps to obtain information regarding the data, studies or other information that will be necessary for the permit evaluation process A pre-application consultation meeting is slrongly recommended if the proposal has substantial impacts to waters of the United States, or if lt is a large or controversial project. lf you have any questions, please contact me in our St. Paul office at (651) 290-5363 or Melisia.m jenny@usace.army.mil. ln any correspondence or inquiries, please refer to the Regulatory file number shown above. Enclosure Cc: Joe Jablonski, US Home Corporation Vanessa Strong, City of Chanhassen Ben Carlson, BWSR Sincerely, rtu{)6 Melissa Jenny Project Manager Page 2 of 2 Depenrueur oF THE Anuv ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 180 FIFTH STREET EAST, SUITE 7OO sT. PAUL, MN 55101-1678 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF REGULATORY BRANCH March 26,2018 Regulatory File No. 2017 -03447 -MMJ Comerica Bank c/o Gerard Snover 230 Park Avenue, Suite 634 New York, New York 10169 Dear Mr. Snover: This letter is in response to your request for Corps of Engineers (Corps) concurrence with the delineation of aquatic resources completed on an approximately 188.5-acre property on Galpin Boulevard, in the City of Chanhassen. You also requested an approved jurisdictional determination (AJD)for numerous wetlands located on the property. The project site is located in Sections 3, 10, & 11, Township 116 North, Range 23 West, Carver County, Minnesota, as identified on the enclosed Figures 1-2. We have reviewed the delineation report completed for this property, dated September 27, 2017 , and determined that the limits of the aquatic resources have been accurately identified in accordance with current agency guidance inqluding the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual(1987 Manual) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region. This concurrence is only valid for the review area shown on the enclosed figures labeled MVP-2017-03447-MMJ, Figures 1-2.fhe boundaries shown on the enclosed figures accurately reflect the limits of the aquatic resources in the review area. We have also completed an ,\JD for the wetlands labeled as Wetlands 3, 4, 5, 6,7 ,8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 12a & 13 (3-13) on the enclosed Figure 2. We have determined that these wetlands are isolated, and are not jurisdictional waters of the U.S. Therefore, you are not required to obtain Department of the Army authorization to discharge dredged or fill material within these wetlands. The rationale for this determination is provided in the enclosed Approved Jurisdictional Determination form. This determination is only valid for Wetlands 3-13, as shown on the enclosed Figure 2. lf you object to this AJD, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. lf you request to appeal this determination, you must submit a completed RFA form to the Mississippi Valley Division Office at the address shown on the form. ln order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the enclosed NAP. lt is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the division office if you do not object to the determination in this letter This delineation concurrence and AJD may be relied upon for five years from the date of this letter. However, the Corps reserves the right to review and revise the boundary in response to changing site conditions, information that was not considered during our initial review, or off-site activities that could indirectly alter the extent of wetlands and other resources on-site. This determination may be renewed at the end of the five year period provided you submit a written Regulatory Branch (File No. 2017-03447-MMJ) request and our slaff are able to verify that the limits established during the original determination are still accurate. We did not complete a jurisdictional determination for the remaining wetlands or walerbodies on this property. While not required, you may request a jurisdictional determination for these wetlands from the Corps contact indicated below. Please note that the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the united states without a Departmenl of the Army permit could subject you to an enforcement action. Receipt of a permit from a state or local agency does not obviate the requirement for obtaining a Department of the Army permit. lf you have any queslions, please contact me in our St. Paul office at (651) 290-5363 or Melissa.m jenny@usace.army.mil. ln any correspondence or inquiries, please refer to the Regulatory file number shown above. Sincerely, NC/,6' Melissa Jenny Project Manager Enclosures Cc: Vanessa Strong, City of Chanhassen Andrew Krinke, KES Ben Carlson, BWSR Page 2 of 2 2017 -A3447-MMJ, Figure 1 Figurel-SiteLocation N M), A ? ''1?0"* !!fl$ \Jotluuc EN'r R oN M Er{rA r. s r. Rv'r c F.s c ovpAr\y rA.Ai/ Sounc; ESRI StreB Brsemrp Galpin Property (KES 2017-ll0) Chanhassen, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. 2017 -03447-MMJ, Figure 2 Figure 2 - Existing Conditions Io600 K1 otluvc ENvrRo NMENT^L sE*vr cEs coMpANy Sdrcc: Mlnndotr DNR (2013) - - > Drainageway - - > Ravine - Transect - omamental Feature - Lake Edge Vlbtand Boundary i- ] ] nssessmentArea Galpin Property (KES 2017-110) Chanhassen, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are aPProximate and do not constitute an official surveY Product. APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV ofthe JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): 03126120t8 B. ST PAUL, MN DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBEn: MVP-2017-03447-MMJ; Comerica Bank/Galpin Boulevard C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFOR]VIATION: StAtE:MN County/parish./borough:Carver City:Chanhassen Center coordinates of site (latllong in degree decimal format): tat.44.873952'N. tong. -93.568829. *V. Universal Transverse Mercator: X:455069.3 9l I I 4, Y:4969 I 05.6303 Name of nearest waterbody: Bluff Creek Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit code (HUC): 0702001211 [! Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.[-l Checkifothersites(e.g.,offsitemitigationsites,disposal sites,etc...)areassociatedwiththisactionandarerecordedona different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ffit Omce (Desk) Determination. Date: February 6,2018 E fleta Determination. Date(s): SECTTON II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There are no"waters of the U.5." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. l. Waters of the U.S.: N/A 2. Mn-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):1 [$ Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: There are multiple wetlands in the review area; however, this determination is only for the wetlands labeled as Wetlands 3,4,5,6,7,8,9, 10, 11, 12,l2a & 13 (3-13) on the enclosed map labeled MVP-2017-03447-MMJ, AJD Figure 2. Wetlands 3-13 are depressional wetland basins that do not have a surface or shallow subsurface hydrologic connection to any navigable waters or their tributaries, as confirmed in the Galpin Boulevard delineation report dated September 27,2017, and revised on October 24,2017. The wetland delineation boundaries on this property were confirmed in the field by State of Minnesota and City of Chanhassen government staff on October 11,2017. The wetlands are surrounded by upland, and do not have any swales, pipes or other means to connect them to waters of the U.S. (WOUS). Wetlands 3,7,8,9, 11, & 12 are mapped as isolated basins on the updated National Wetland Inventory (NWI). Wetlands 4,5,6,10 & 13 are not mapped on the NWI. Wetlands 7, 8, 9 & l0 are shallow forested depressions located on topographically prominent upland features on the property, and are surface water driven features that contain ephermeral hydrology. Wetlands 12 and 13 continue offthe project site, but are not connected, via swales, pipes or other means, to any downstream waters. We have determined that Wetlands 3-13 are isolated depressions and are not WOUS. Wetlands 3-13 do not support a link to interstate or foreign commerce because they are not known to be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreation or other purposes; they do not produce fish or shelllish that could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; and they are not known to be used for industriat purposes by industries in interstate or foreign commerce. These wetlands do not have a significant ecological connection to other waters within the review area. Wetlands 3-13 were determined to not be jurisdictional under the CWA. SECTION III: CWA A]TIALYSISA. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs: N/A I Supporting documentation is presented in Section Ill.F. c. D. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY): N/A SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION: N/A DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CIIECK ALL THAT APPLY): N/A ISOLATED IINTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATEI WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS' THE USE' DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): N/A NON.JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): tr iidili *.tt*a. *.r. urr..r.i within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements' I Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. - - prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SIIANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solelv on the "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR). ! Waters dJ not meet the "significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: I Other lexplain, ifnot covered above): provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis ofjurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., pi...n.. ofmigratory birAs, presence ofendangered species, use ofwater for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that aPPIY): f] Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (f0. I Lakes/ponds: acres. I Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type ofaquatic resource: fr wetlands: Wetland 3: 0.16 acre, Wetland 4: O.2O acre, Wetland 5= 0.05 acre, Wetland 6:0.02 acre, WetlandT:0.62 acre,Wetland 8: 0.17 acre, Wetland 9:0.38 acre, Wetland 10: 0.13 acre, Wetland ll:2.79 acres, Wetland l2&l2a:0.61 acre, Wetland 13: 0.03 acres. provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required forjurisdiction (check all that apply): E Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft)' fl Lakes/ponds: acres. E Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type ofaquatic resource: I Wetlands: acres. SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. sUppORTINc DATA.EI;eviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): ffi Uaps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicanVconsultant KES [t Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. X Omce concurs with data sheets/delineation report. n Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Data sheets prepared bY the CorPs: Corps navigable waters' studY: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: X uscs NHD data. E uscs 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: MN-Shakopee USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Carver County Soil Survey National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS NWI & MnDNR NWI State/Local wetland inventory map(s): FEMA/FIRM maps: 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic vertical Datum of 1929) Photographs: [t eerial (Name & oate;:FSA 199l-2016 or E other (Name & Date): Google Earth 2016-2018 Previous determination(s). File no. and date ofresponse letter: Applicable/supporting case law: Applicable/supporting scientifi c literature: Other information (please specifo): E. F. trtrtr trx trntrtr tr antrtr 2 B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS To SUPPORT JD: Based on the wetland delineation report, Wetlands 3-13 are isolated wetlands and are therefore not jurisdictional and not regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. NOTIFIC/'TION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND REOUESTFORAPPEAL - Applicant: Comerica Bank Attached is:See Section below II.IITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT tSt"naa.a pe.-it o.l-ett A PROFFERED PERMIT (Stunda@ B PERMIT DENIALffi DETERMINATION C Dx PREIIVTN ERY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E nd options regarding un u@decision. Additional infnmotinn mav hc f.r,nd i-t httn://usace.armv.miUineVfunctions/cw/ceqwQh9g or Corps regulations al 33 CfR Part 331. ffi-lftel pnOpfeRED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. r ACCEpT: If you received a Standard permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. lf you received a Letter of Permission (LoP), you may accept the LoP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard permit or acceptance of the LoP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights tJappeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit' o oBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LoP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. you must complete Section II of this form and retum the form to the district engineer. your objections must be received by the district .rgir.". within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt ofyour letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) -ojifv the peimit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modifo the permit having determined that tire permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below' pnOnfgnEp PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit ACCEpT: If you received a Standard permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized' Your signature on the dtandard permit or acceptance of the LoP mlans that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights tJappeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit' AppEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LoP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps oiEngineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this ror'n ura sending the form to the division engineer. ttts rorm must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date ofthis notice. B: C: pERMtT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps ot bnglneers Aomlnlsratlve Appear rroucss completing Section II ofthis to.m and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. v eppnOVgO JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approveo JU or provrqe new rnrorrlatrufl' ACCEpT: you do not need to notifu the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date ofthis notice, means that you accept the app.or.d JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD' AppEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal process by coripleting Section II of this fo.rn und r"rrding the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days ofthe date ofthis notice' D: tneedtorespondtotheCorpsregardingthepreliminary JD. The preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Alsoyou may irovide-newinformation for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD. From: Sent: To: Subject: Steve Albrecht <salbrecht8791 @gmail.com> Tuesday, February 26, 2019 12:20 PM Aanenson, Kate Prince's land development proposal We are in favor of the PUD plan with 54 acres set aside for lake Ann park expansion We live at 6951 Tecumseh Lane in Chanhassen Thanks 1 Flom: Sent: To: Subject: timleberle@gmail.com Tuesday, February 26, 2019 12.47 PM Aanenson, Kate Prince land development Please support the PUD plan to give the city as much parkland as possible. Thanks Sent from my iPhone :) 1 From: Sent: To: Subject: Nick Lawson <nicklawson3l 1 @gmail.com> Tuesday, February 26,2019 2:21 PM Aanenson, Kate Prince land/Development oPinion Hello Kate, I just wanted to extended my opinion on the proposal of the Prince land by my house. Of the options that have been brought to my attention I would vote for the "Proposed PUD" option that maintains as much of the beautiful woods as possible. My family moved to Chanhassen in 2015 into the Greenwood shores neighborhood and my 3 kids, wife and myself as well as most of our neighborhood use and enjoy those woods every summer. It would be a shame to let them be developed if there is a viable option to save them that is on the table' part of what makes Chanhassen so great is its parks and natural woods. Its something you cant get back once its given up. Fl"ur. do all that you can to save that area for future generations to use and enjoy and not just reminisce about how great it was when we were young.. Thanks for your time. Ill see you on the 5th. --*t"U ru*ron - 612.232.3464 7071 Redman Ln, Chanhassen, MN 55317 ] From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jim Rosendahl <jimr@systium.com> Tuesday, February 26, 2019 3:48 PM Aanenson, Kate City Council Galpin Boulevard Property As a resident of Chanhassen and the Greenwood Shores neighborhood for 24 years I am in favor of the Proposed PUD. lt would be a big plus for Lake Ann Park! Jim Rosendahl 7090 Tecumseh Lane Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Sent: To: Subject: Kate, Stephen Barnes <s.m.barnes@gmail.com> Tuesday, February 26,2019 3:49 PM Aanenson, Kate Prince Property Development I just wanted to make known my support for the PUD plan (not the original plan). I hope this helps guide the negotiations and approvals by the council. Thanks! -Steve Barnes 7100 Utica Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 612.237.0660 5 From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Wednesday, February 27,2019 9:11 AM Steckling, Jean Fwd: Prince's Land proposal. Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message : From: Mike Boehm <mikeboehml I1474@y Date: February 27,2019 at 9:01:50 AM CST To: "kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <kaanenson@ci.chanhas , "council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <council(Eci.chanhassen. mn.us) Subject: Prince's Land ProPosal. Reply-To: "mikeboehml I 1474@yahoo.com" <mikeboehml 1 1474@y Hello, Just sending an email in case I can not make it to the March 5th meeting. I am heavily in favor of the proposed PUD. I can not support the concept plan. Thank you Mike Boehm G From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Wednesday, February 27,2019 2:20 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Lake Ann/Susan Development From: Chad Johnson <chadmtka@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 27 ,2019 11:47 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Lake Ann/Susan Development Good morning Kate, I wanted to reach out to you via email since I will not be able to attended the City councils meeting on the Lake Ann/ Susan development project. I have been a resident in the greenwood shores neighborhood for over 17 years. My family and I have enjoyeO the natural beauty of this area and would like to keep it that way for others. Everything from the paved path that reaches the length of the east side of Ann up to the park, to the foot paths that split between Susan into dense woodlands has kept this i one of a kind area available for everyone to enjoy. With the minimal disturbance of the southside with the exception of a park and additional trails, ln my opinion, the PUD plan would be the best way to accomplish this. Sincerely, The Johnson Family '7 ? Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Wednesday, February 27 ,2019 2:22 PM Steckling, Jean FW: 16 residents support Proposed PUD of Galpin property From: Barry Da llavalle <barry.dallavalle@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 27 ,2019 1:55 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.cha nhassen.mn.us> Cc: City Council <Council@ci.cha nhassen.mn.us> Subject: 15 residents support Proposed PUD of Galpin property To Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council, The following residents unanimously support the Proposed PUD plan for the Galpin property. We wish to thank Lennar and our city planners while working with the community to achieve this well-conceived proposal. We urge its recommendation. Our reasons are stated at the bottom of this letter. Scott and Tamara Sather 7090 Utica Ln Mike and Kressin Krause 7050 Utica Ln Tim and Sharon McCotter 7000 Utica Ln Bill and Joanne Lambrecht 6990 Utica Ln Barry and Laura Dallaval-le 6960 Utica Ln Daryl and Kim Weispfennlg 6930 Utica Ln Dal-e and Gloria Carlson 6900 Utica Ln Pat Mohr and Maureen Lord Mohr 6890 Utica Terrace Ron and Mary Knudten 5850 Utica Terrace Rob Long and Louise Ou-Yang 6830 Utica Terrace Chris and Nicole Liwienski 612L Point Lake Lucy Bryan and Bonnie McCoskey 6'720 Point Lake Lucy Matt and Suzanne Woods 61 45 Lakeway Drive Betsy RandaII 1571 Lake LucY Rd John and Anne Wicka 1501 Lake Lucy Rd Al and Mary Weingart 1685 Steller Ct Reasons supporting our recommendation: l. More green space to mitigate runoff damage to Lakes Lucy and Ann and the Riley Creek watershed. Many of the co-signers here have willingly contributed significant time and money to control the invasive plant growth in Lake Lucy each year. 2. More green space for the surrounding community to enjoy the natural beauty and numerous wildlife of both lakes and their environs. 3. Preserve the long-envisioned legacy of Lake Ann Park. Respectfully submitted, Barry Dallavalle 6960 Utica Ln 952-737-8433 6 { From: Sent: To: Subject: Pat Harding <PSJCAHarding@msn.com> Wednesday, Fefiuary 27,2019 8:39 PM Aanenson, Kate Support for PUD Dear Ms. Aanenson, We would like to voice our support for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) plan for the land surrounding Lake Ann. We believe that dedicating the land as park space would the best option for the City of Chanhassen and for Carver County. Than k you for taking into consideration the input of the residents in making this decision. Sincerely, Patrick Harding 1 /o From: Sent: To: Subject: Anna Harding <hardil 80@umn.edu> Wednesday, February 27,2019 8:41 PM Aanenson, Kate Support for PUD Dear Ms. Aanenson, We would like to voice our support for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) plan for the land surrounding Lake Ann. We believe that dedicating the land as park space would the best option for the City of Chanhassen and for Carver County. Thank you for taking into consideration the input ofthe residents in making this decision. Sincerely, Anna Harding Stecklino. Jean 1 From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Ms. Aanenson, Suzanne Harding <psjcaharding@gmail.com> Thursday, February 28, 2019 4:25 AM Aanenson, Kate Support for PUD We would like to voice our support for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) plan for the land surrounding Lake Ann. We believe that dedicating the land as park space would the best option for the City of Chanhassen and for Carver County. Thank you for taking into consideration the input of the residents in making this decision. Sincerely, Suzanne Harding 1 /I From: Sent: To: Subject: Alyson Duneman <alysond23@gmail.com> Thursday, February 28,2019 6:31 AM Aanenson, Kate Galpin Boulevard PropertY PUD Dear Planning Commission Director, I would just like to send a quick word in my support of the PUD plan. In an effort to preserve the invaluable beauty our lake shore and our highly sought after and well cared for Lake Ann Park, I am strongly requesting that the city does approve the concept plan. Kind Regards, Alyson Duneman 612-272-6297 i3 Stecklinq, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28,2019 9:17 AM Steckling, Jean FW: Lake Ann/Susan Development From: Chad Johnson <chadmtka@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 27,2019 11:47 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Lake Ann/Susan Development Good morning Kate, I wanted to reach out to you via email since I will not be able to attended the City councils meeting on the Lake Ann/ Susan development project. I have been a resident in the greenwood shores neighborhood for over 17 years. My family and I have enjoyed the natural beauty of this area and would like to keep it that way for others. Everything from the paved path that reaches the length of the east side of Ann up to the park, to the foot paths that split between Susan into dense woodlands has kept this a one of a kind area available for everyone to enjoy. With the minimal disturbance of the southside with the exception of a park and additional trails, ln my opinion, the PUD plan would be the best way to accomplish this. Sincerely, The Johnson Family Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Include in the packet Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28, 2019 10:17 AM Steckling, Jean FW: Comments on Prince's Galpin Property From: Hoffman, Todd <thoffman @ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 10:16 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd <TGerhardt@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Fwd: Comments on Prince's Galpin Property Sent fl'om ury Verizon, Samsung Galaxy surartphone Original message From: Marcia Mclean <dmclean602@email. > Date:2128119 1002 AM (GMT-06:00) To: "Ryan, Elise" <ERyan@ci.chanhass >, aaller@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, "Hoffinan, Todd" <thoffinan@ci.chanhas > Cc: Dianne <dmclean602@gmail. > Subject: Comments on Prince's Galpin Property Please share my thoughts at all meetings related to Prince's Galpin property. Thank you. It has been legally accepted that Prince Rogers Nelson left no will. He did, however, leave his thoughts, his views, and his philosophy. One only has to look at his discography and approach the lyrics on literal and figurative levels. One only has to consider his many philanthropic endeavors. One only has to see the devastation he felt upon the loss of his child. Thus, I petition all parties involved to rethink the "Galpin project" in light of what Prince would have wanted. I propose that the property be given to the city of Chanhassen to become an extension of Lake Ann with an Arts Center and a playground for children with disabilities within its boundaries. Would this be easy to do at this point? No. Consider Prince's famous work ethic and it can be done, however. He loved Chanhassen and it is time for Chanhassen to show its love for him. To obtain the property and create this adjunct Paisley Park, inclusive, accepting and a place where people can play, refresh, and just be, funding would be necessary. Create a 50lc(3)? Endless resources are "out there". There is no doubt that the "Purple Family" all over the world would respond, as well as the PRN Alumni Foundation, the People of Paisley Park, the Timberwolves, the Lyn*, Tavis Smiley, Spike Lee, Oprah Winfrey, Sheila E., his photographers, and COUNTLESS others. They could give monitarily and/or in creative and imaginative ways. Further, would his heirs donate a record from the Vault to raise money? A "Go Fund Me" Account could be created? Prince always went to "The Max". He sang "When I go, I go, I go to the Max". Let's all continue affirming his legacy by doing exactly that "4 him". / Ll Marcia Mclean 110 Stratton Ct Columbia SC29210 2 'll From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Friday, March 01,2019 11:46 AM Steckling, Jean FW: Addendum to Email Marcia Mclean sent 2-28-19 From: Andrew Aller <aaller@mchsi.com> Sent: Friday, March L,2OL911:33 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen'mn.us> Subject: Fwd: Addendum to Email Marcia McLean sent 2-28-19 Addendum to yesterday email Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Marcia Mclean <dmclean602@gnail.com> Date: March 1,2019 at9:40:34 AM CST To : eryan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, thoffrnan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, aaller@mchsi.com Cc : Dianne <dmclean602@ernail. co Subject: Addendum to Email Marcia Mclean sent 2-28-19 Please consider these additional thoughts. Yesterday a friend asked me why I was writing to you. I replied it was because I felt a connection to Chanhassen. From the first time I came up there, I loved it. Perhaps, it is because I grew up in and lived in a town with a seemingly similar character and "rhythm of life". In my opinion, unfortunately, my hometown has not evolved positively. Farmland and woods have been consumed by developers and the town is filled with so many housing developments and endless cars. While I realize progress and change is inevitable and typically necessary, the officials in my city did not appear to be very thoughtful in their decision-making. Thus, I respectfully encourage you, members of government, in Chanhassen to consider the environmentai effects of the decisions you make about the Prince Galpin Property. Land is a limited commodity and environmentally sensitive. There are many places housing can be constructed. Further, I continue to encourage all involved to think about using it in a manner that would have been Prince-approved and benefit ALL of the people of Chanhassen and be in keeping with the uniqueness and specialness of the city. I do not want what happened to my hometown to happen to Chanhassen. Sincerely, Marcia Mclean /5 From: Sent: TO: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28, 2019 1:44 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Planned Unit Development From: Ray Gaylord <rgaylord@qualitymold-inc.com> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 li42 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: City Council <Council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subiect: Planned Unit Development We would like to voice our opinion on the Planned Unit Development (PUD) plan for land surrounding Lake Ann. believe that dedicating the land as park space isthe best optio n for the City of Cha n hassen and Carver County. Thank you for your consideration, Pat and Sue Ha rding Q Virus-free. www.avast.com lc From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28,2019 3:53 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Galpin Boulevard Property PUD From: Alyson Duneman <alysond23@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 28,2079 6:31 AM To: Aa nenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.m n. us> Subject: Galpin Boulevard Property PUD Dear Planning Commission Director, I would just like to send a quick word in my support of the PUD plan. In an effort to preserve the invaluable beauty our lake shore and our highly sought after and well cared for Lake Ann Park, I am strongly requesting that the city does approve the concept plan. Kind Regards, Alyson Duneman 612-272-6297 t? From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28,2019 3:54 PM Steckling, Jean FW 7141 Galpin Boulevard Comments & Pictures DS-City Development - Aug 2018.pptx From: david senior <davidtsenior@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 8,2OL87:57 PM To: Aa nenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.m n.us> Cc: Trish Ann Wisell <trish.wisell@yahoo.com> Subject: 7141Galpin Boulevard Comments & Pictures Hi Kate - my wife & I bought the property located at7431 Windmill Drive, Chanhassen just 12 months ago. We love the neighborhood, neighbors and City. The Prince property development as proposed I have concerns about how close the Concept plan comes to the back of all neighbors property lines without any significant tree buffer, and considering the existing wetlands which do not seem to have been correctly considered. Our property gives a unique insight into why this area is so wet as we have a city storm drain in our back yardi I have attached 2 slides that show the back yard & the view of the Prince property from our backyard showing the wetlands & outlet from the storm drain. I understand the desire of the City to expand the parkland, but have to agree with the 2 Planning Commission Council members & many neighbors that had serious reservations on the plan as submitted in the July meeting. I just want to add our voices to that concern as we were on vacation during the last meeting time. I recognize you may not have time to come visit, but we do extend that offer given the gravity of what is being proposed. Best Regards, David & Trish Senior oIIe=az.antx fiHFE; 7t ;IE =5EIE=;lr;F=lAfr= g=firH r==r;--r-uZt ntfiHjE=><llJr-=uJuJE : aot IJJJfo mz I o-J o FtT'N t,oll a UJ :)aLz J o- F o- IIJozoo Ft ITJ(Lto)tOo E =oO:<Jo H#>zoo z to =toFa ua>o 9eurJ ilH : aot, IIJJfo mz I o-J o !Ft!FN Eo lJ.aul :)aIz J o- F o- IJJozoo ?. at! r9 From: Sent: To: Subiect: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28, 20'19 3:54 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Proposed Development on GalPin --.-Original Message--- From: Chrissy Boberg <cnboberg@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, July 28,2OL812:15 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> subject: Proposed Development on Galpin I am writing in in support of the proposed development of the land off of Galpin. My family and I have lived in Chanhassen for over 10 years and currently live at 1321 Heather Court. We live close to Lake Ann and have enjoyed that and other parks in the area. After looking at the planes it looks like the developer is offering up to the city around 100 of the 188 acres. Ofthe 1OO acres given to the city it appears the plan has the Lake Ann Park expanded to the west side of the lake. We have often visited that park and it would be wonderful to be able to walk almost entirely around the lake with this expansion. lt seems very generous and responsible of the developer to offer such a large part of the property to the city to preserve green space for all to use and enjoy. we strongly hope that the city supports this plan at the upcoming meetings. Thank you, Mlke Boberg and Family 1 rq Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28,2019 3:54 PM Steckling, Jean FW: draft for consideration From: Gord ie Ham pson <gord ie. ha m pson @cushwa ke.com> Sent: Thursday, July 26,2078 2:01 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: FW: draft for consideration Dear City Council, Planning Commission and Staff: Attention: Kate Aanenson: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us My family and I have lived in Ghanhassen for 26 yearsi at 7003 Sandy Hook Circle. We understand that the 188 acres on Galpin Road is being considered for development. I have reviewed both plans that the developer has submitted to the city. We very strongly support the plan which shows the majority of the units on the west side of the property. Not sure how the developer was pensuaded up to this point, however, it seems pretty amazing that they are offering to deed approximately 100 acres to the City of Chanhassen. This would really open up the two lakes which have been non-accessible until now! This seems like a huge win for everyone in the community! We understand that the developer could legally develop adjacent to the lake as presented in the first plan. We hope the city supports the second plan proposed by the developer at the Planning Commission meeting July 17th. On behalf of our family, we would enthusiastically express our support for the second plan of the proposed project. Thank you, Gordie Hampson and Family. Gordie Hampson Senior Director Brokerage Services Direct: +1952 465 3310 Mobile: +1612 366 6139 gordie. hampson@cushwake. com 3500 American Blvd W, Suite 200 Bloomington, MN 55431 | USA cushmanwakefield.com The information contained in this email (including any attachments) is confidential, may be subject to legal or other professional 1 privilege and contain copyright material, and is intended for use by the named recipient(s) only. Access to or use of this email or its attachments by anyone else is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. lf you are not the intended recipient(s), you may not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or its attachments (or any part thereof), nor take or omit to take any action in reliance on it. lf you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email and delete it, and all copies thereof, including all attachments, from your system. Any confidentiality or privilege is not waived or lost because this email has been sent to you by mistake. Although we have taken reasonable precautions to reduce the risk of transmitting software viruses, we accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by this email or its attachments due to viruses, interference, interception, corruption or unapproved access. 2 )<> Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28,2019 3:55 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Proposed Galpin Plan From: Dewing Scott <dewscott@Email.com> Sent: Monday, July 23,20L810:24 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaa nenson@ci.chanhassen.m n.us> Subject: Proposed Galpin Plan Attention Kate Aanenson; My famity and I have lived in Chanhassen for 20 yeans, currently at 6735 Mulberry Circle. We understand the 188 acres on Galpin Road is being considered for development. ! have had a chance review both plans the developer has submitted to the city. We strongly support the plan, which shows the majority of the units on the east side of the property. It is a great position to have the Developer to agree to offer approximately 100 acres to the city of Ghanhassen. Everybody in the community and area will benefit from this layout with the ability to walk it and enjoy the added space. We spend a lot of time outdoors and look fonrvard to seeing this preserved for all. Please express my famities' support for the project. We understand the developer could legally develop adiacent to the lake. We hope the city supports the second plan proposed by the developer at upcoming Planning Commission meetings. Thank you, - Scott Dewing and Family )l Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28,2019 3:55 PM Steckling, Jean FW 7 141 Galpin PUD Concept From: Tim Nordberg <nord0296@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July L9,2O!8 3:11 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.m n.us> Subject:7141 Galpin PUD Concept Re: 7l4l Galpin PUD Concept Hi Kate, I attended the 7l4l Galpin PUD Concept Review session on Tuesday to learn more about the Galpin Concept and really appreciated the opportunity to learn more about the process, the city and developer's ideas and public's opinions on the matter. I know the session's public commentary has passed, but I wanted to take the time to send over some of my own thoughts, many came up in retrospect of attending the meeting and hearing what was said. Hopefully you can share this with anyone involved in the back-and- forth with the Concept Development. One takeaway I had from the meeting I had was few proposed solutions or additional ideas to consider. Nearly all in the public seemed clearly worried about environmental impact and preservation or trees / nature, while clearly the developer cares most about economics, i.e. profit. The two notions aren't necessarily polar opposites (developer profit vs environmental impacts), but they definitely trade offeach other. I wonder if on the South side of the development the path connection into Lake Ann's park system could be considered along the north edge of, within, or near the current tree cover. It would help with several of the concerns I heard in the meeting: o Poorly or under marked wetland area within the Southern trees - it is really wet there, with often standing water for 4 months of the year. Development would impact the environment due to filling in the space, but also potentially push water back on other existing properties that back up to the land. . Buffer between current homes and new development - especially important if realistically considering 55' lots in this area with high percentage lot coverage. A proper buffer should add value and desire to the lots abutting it new development making it a positive for current residents and developers alike. o Preservation of Trees - during the meeting I heard this was a priority within the city overall within long term plans (i.e. 2040 review). It may be true that "replacing" if removed trees is technically allowed, but can you consider planting hundreds of new, young trees the same as replacing 30-50+ year old woods equivalent and adequate "replacement"? Hopefully it can be considered, the idea came to mind while I was enjoying a run along the Bluff Creek trail, portions nicely tucked into and around the trees are one ofthe things I really enjoy since moving to Chanhassen a few years ago. I have come to appreciate the City's commitment to excellence in Parks, Trails and outdoor activities (Walking, Bicycling, Running). I would love for this commitment to hold true in new developments rather than see "Trail Connections" run along a sidewalk or within a dense neighborhood. Further items I had thought of, and wanted to reiterate with my communication: l. The Galpin Road project really needs to be closely tied to this planning. The proposed development seems to be roughly the size of Longacres, but it is effectively forced to put all traffic on Galpin while Longacres has Hwy 41 on the West Side. Galpin is already difficult to manage (as a pedestrian or in a car) near Majestic due to traffic flow including numerous cars rolling through or completely missing the stop signs at Sugar Bush Park (Galpin and Brinker). Trafhc from nearly 200 additional homes would have a significant impact here that may be difficult to properly estimate with a simple traffic study. Galpin to the North (into Shorewood / Hennepin Cty) and Lake Lucy Rd do not seem suitable for significant increases either. 2. Housing density and lot coverage may be within rules (perhaps pushing the limits), but when I look at similar new developments I always worry about places for small children to play without ending up on the road. Cul-de-sacs help (because they somewhat create a safe place _in the road_ to play, but in the concept plan the cul-de-sacs were all targeting the "Empty Nester" home styles (likely' without small children). Often in these new developments I see the streets lined with signs and flags (i.e. "Drive like your children live here", "Caution kids at play"), highlighting the safety risks of such layouts, density and lot coverage. 3. I don't fully understand the need to line up the road connections to Hunter and Longacres, especially the alignment with Hunter seems to have an immediate challenge with the large holding pond / wetland space adjacent to the road. Relaxing this need may help offer more favorable layouts within the usable land on the properfy. On the positive side, I really appreciate the concept that expands Lake Ann's paths and the City's long term plans for further trails and connections. The more options we have, the better for the enjoyment and health of those in the community. I really believe these concepts are primary drivers that attract people to moving to the City of Chanhassen in the first place -- it was for my wife and I. Thinking of large developments like this reminds me of the praise early Minneapolis planners now receive in setting up the groundwork for their interconnected trail system (Lake and River trails, Parkway system, etc...). This is a key chance to ensure we develop an exceptional shared natural resources (Lakes and Trails) for everyone in our community to enjoy for many years to come. Ultimately I agree with the Planning Committee's final points, especially that neither of the concepts proposed thus far seem to respect the land, but with enough effort an acceptable compromise between the Environment, the City, current residents and the developers could be made. Best Regards, Tim Nordberg 2126 Majestic Way, Chanhassen 2 From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28,2019 3:55 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Galpin Property - PUD From: Meredith McGuirk <meremcguirk@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 77,2018 5:L5 PM To: Aa nenson, Kate <kaanenson @ci.cha nhassen.mn'us> Subject: Fwd: Galpin Property - PUD July 17,2018 Planning Commission City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O.Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Planning Commission Members. We recently learned of the Planned Unit Development for the Galpin Property, formerly owned by Prince. We write today to formerly register our opposition to the plan. We are residents of Chanhassen in the Lucy fudge neighborhood, adjacent to the PUD land. lnterestingly, the concept review offered by Lennar on page 2 states that the "existing neighborhood to the North (Ashling Meadows) provides two existing road stubs to the subject property." This is inaccurate. Ashling Meadows provides one existing road stub, while our neighborhood, a I 6 unit custom home development contains the other. The current plan proposes direct access through the Lucy fudge neighborhood. We oppose the PUD in its cunent form for the following reasons: o Safety. We are a 16 home development currently attached to a 45 home development, commonly called Ashling Meadows. The one street leaving our community is already heavily flooded with traffic from Ashling Meadows. With one access road out of neighborhood residents cutting through often travel well beyond the speed limit and igrrore stop signs, causing significant hazards to the small children living in our neighborhood. The same road proposed as a pass through to the PUD property contains a bus stop for dozens of elementary children aged k-5. I cannot imagine the additional safety hazard caused by the increased flow oftraffic from another adjoining neighborhood twice the size. Simply stated, the current plan is only acceptable ifthe Commission disregards public safety to the children in our neighborhood. o Environmental. I think it is reasonable that even with the VERY BEST construction and water management techniques, given the proximity of proposed development to Lakes Lucy and Ann, it is, as a practical matter, impossible to prevent harmful phosphorous runoff(especially at the outset), and to furthermore expect the preservation ofLake Ann's pristine quality and clarity in concert with the proposed development would be naive and reckless. o Please also refer to Donna and Brian Strauss' letter, dated July 4, 2018. We concur with all statements raised in their letter to the Commission and City Council. It is my sincere hope that the Planning Commission and City Council will consider altemative road access points. Alternatively I urge the Commission to consider the development of a smaller community ending in a cul de sac connecting to our community that will be less hazardous and disruptive to current community members. While I understand the desire to have several access points, I also find it alarming that the Commission would not consider the disruptive and significant impact this will have on neighborhoods developed almost l5 years ago. Sincerely, Meredith and Greg McGuirk 1770Ltcy fudge Court clJ- From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28, 2019 3:55 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Galpin Development - Staff Report From: j bra nda ll@aol.com <jbrandall@aol.com> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2018 8:49 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Re: Galpin Development - Staff Report Kate, After reading the Staff Report I have a few questions: Page 6 last paragraph: I assume this paragraph is referring to the North lots which are the only ones listed as 15,000 sf if so the number of lots may not be correct. Would you please explain why/how the development plan is not consistent with the Park Comp Plan Looking at scenario 2 and reading the small print, it looks as though they will be requesting variances' for lot area size on both the central and south lots. Betsy ---Original Message---- From: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> To: jbrandall <jblalde!!(Da.Ql@!0> Sent: Tue, Jul 10,201810:26 am Subject: RE: Galpin Development Betsy, The developer is requesting the PUD, which preserves the large area adj acent to Lake Ann. The staff report should be available by the end ofthe day Thursday. You can address any concems to me and I will forward then to the Planning Commission and the City Council Kate Kathryn Aanenson, AICP Community Development Direclor CITY OF CHANHASSEN PA. 952.227 .1139 FX. 952.227.11'tO www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us From: iEa!dal!@iq!.es!0 <.i!ra-!.d.a.!l@.q-q]-!o.!0> sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 10:19 AM To:Aanenson, Kate<@> Subject: Galpin Development Kate, When might the staff reporUrecommendations be posted for the development? Do you know which concept plan the city might be recommending? Pleases let me know if I should be directing my questions to someone else' Regards, Betsy Randall 1571 Lake Lucy Road Av Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28, 2019 3:56 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Galpin Blvd Proposed Development -:-Original Message--- From: Julie Witt <juliewitt20@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, July L4,20L811:01 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Re: Galpin Blvd Proposed Development Thanks Kate. I appreciate the information. l'm not sure I will be able to join future meetings so I will take you up on the offer to leave my feedback with you. Comments are below. My vote if I had to choose between the 2 would be for concept #2. This concept builds 199 homes on 88 acres. Why this plan is better: 1. Less impact to wetlands. One of the things I love about Chanhassen is how much natural land there is. I am concerned how many trees the first concept will take down and the disruption to nature it will create. I would love to see Chanhassen utilize the undeveloped acres for trails instead. lt is a beautiful piece of land and I would appreciate the ability for the public to use part of it. 2. Variety of price ranges. 55' and 90' lots will probably still be above average home prices especially with the opportunity for families to add upgrades (having priced Lennar homes before). One question, would the city consider adding trails for biking and/or hiking to the undeveloped land? Thanks for you consideration as you assess the available plans. Julie Witt > On Jun 27 ,2018, at 8:01 AM, Aa nenson, Kate <kaanenson @ci.chanhassen.mn.us> wrote: > J ulie, >Therewill be a num ber of opportunities for you to give input into the proposed development. Thereisaconcept review going to the Planning Commission on July 17th. You can review the staff report online on the city's website and should be available on July 12th. You can attend that meeting or submit your comments in writing to me and I will share with the Planning Commission and City Council. The staff report outlines the review process, after the concept review they will come go through preliminary plat with another public hearing at the Planning Commission. The developer has expressed they would have a neighborhood meeting. > Kate > Kathryn Aanenson, AICP > Community Development Director > CITY OF CHANHASSEN > PH. 952.227 .t139 1 > FX. 952.227 .t7t0 > www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us > ---Original Message--- > From: Julie Witt <juliewitt20@gma il.com> > Sent: Tuesday, June 26,2018 7:00 PM > To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn. us> > Subject: Galpin Blvd Proposed Development will ou > Hi Kate, > Will the public be able to give input to the decision for this development? > Thanks, > Julie 2 J9 From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28,2019 3:56 PM Steckling, Jean FW: 18-12 Galpin Development From: Barry Da llavalle <barry.dallavalle@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 9,2O!82:46 PM To: Aa nenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.cha nhassen.m n. us> Subject: 18-12 Galpin Development Hi Ms. Aanenson, My name is Barry Dallavalle and am current President of the Lake Lucy Homeowners Association. As you might expect, our association membership is interested in how this development moves forward. Currently, there appears to be two alternatives, a "density trade" and a "yield plan". Has the planning group settled on either? Or would the selection be the subject of the planning commission meeting on the lTth? Would you or another on your staff be interested in receiving our comments prior to or at the meeting? Thank you, Barry Dallavalle 6960 Utica Ln 952-737-8433 1 .1( Stecklinq, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, February 28, 2019 3:57 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Prince's land off Galpin ---Original Message--- From: Holly Nelson <hollysn9@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 20,2018 9:12 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn us> Subject: Prince's land off Galpin ljust read through the development plans from Lennar for Prince's land. Those 55'and 55' lots make me sad. I was hoping this would be an elite development in Chan and instead it's sadly dense. I read their justification that if they spread it out they'd fit that many lots but are condensing it for the parkland. lt would be so much nicer to have the 90' lots through the whole development and have the park land too. This is valuable land. Please don't let them waste it. Holly Nelson 1 3t-1 From: Sent: To: Subiect: Aanenson, Kate r[liiioiv,'rebruary 28, 2o1e 5:oe PM PffiI[?fiJ"3:rpin Propertv comment From: Marcia Mclean <dmclean602@gmail'com> Date: February 28,2019 at12:59:46 PM CST To: aaller@mchsi.com Subject: Prince Galpin Property Comment Please share my thoughts at Galpin Property meetings' It has been legally accepted that Prince Rogers Nelson left no will' He did, however, leave his ihorrghtr, his views, and his philosophy' One only has to look at his discography and approach the lyrics on literal and figurative levels' One only has to-consiier his many philanthropic endeavors. One only has to see the devastation he felt upon the loss of his child' =- ih;;, I petition uil purti.r involved to rethink the "Galpin projectu in light^of what Prince would have wanted. I propose the property be given to the city of Chanhassen to become an extension of the Lake Ann Park, with an Arts Center and a playground for children with disabilities to be developed within its boundaries. would this be easy to do at this point? No. consider Prince's famous work ethic and it can be done. He loved Chanhassen. It is time for Chanhassen to show its love for him. To obtain the property and create this adjunct Paisley Park, inclusive, accepting, and where people can play refresh and just be, funding will be requiredlCreate a SOf ct:) perhaps? There is no doubt that people from the ,,Purple Family,, around the world, the PRN Alumni Foundation, the People of PaisleyPark,thefimUerwotves,theLyn*'TravisSmiley'SpikeLee'Oprah Winfrey, Sheila e., t,i, pt,otographers,-and countless others will respond either monetarily o, ir.r"uiiri u"aI*^uginative ways to gather resources' Maybe his heirs will donate a song from the Vaull prince always *"r,io ,,The Max". He sang "whenJ gg,I go,I go to the Max"' Let,s ali continue and affirm his legacy by doing exactly that "4 him"' Thank You. Marcia Mclean 110 Stratton Ct' Columbia SC29210 lr From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Friday, March 01,2019 8:06 AM Steckling, Jean FW: Development plan From: Ron Robey <trapshooterl 100@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 28,2019 6:38 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Development Pla n I'm in favor of the proposed pud plan to have more green space and protect the lakes Thanks Ron Robey J? From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Friday, March 01,2019 12:27 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Lennar Galpin subdivision From: Andrew Dunema n <a nd rew@bulkreefsupply.com> Sent: Friday, March 'J.,2019 12:23 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Lennar Galpin subdivision Kate - I wanted to drop you a quick note supporting the Proposed PUD version of the Galpin Subdivision project. l'm a resident of Greenwood Shores (7050 Redman Lane)just on the other side of Lake Ann. My family and I along with our neighbors love hiking through the woods around Lake Ann year round. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to create a space that all residents of Chanhassen and the surrounding area can enjoy for generations to come. l, along with my neighbors, strongly oppose the Concept Plan which will eliminate this valuable recreational area for good. I attached a few pictures of our kids hiking here this last August. I look forward to attending the meeting on March 5th to express my support for protecting this priceless area. Andrew Duneman lntegrotor Direct:763.231.9061 Cell:612.242.9838 Andrewt@bulkreefsuoolv.com BUI.K REEF SUPPLY 3o From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Friday, March 01 , 2019 12:26 PM Steckling, Jean FW: l'm in favor of the proposed PUD Plan From: Mike Harding (mharding) <mharding@cisco.com> Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 L1:58 AM To: City council <council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen mn.us> Sublect: I'm in favor of the proposed PUD Plan Kate and Council members - l'm urging you to back the PUD plan. Please help us maintain some community green space and keep our city an outstanding place to live. Mike Harding Mobile: 612-860-5584 mhardinq@cisco.con-l 1 3r From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Friday, March 01,2019 2:12PM Steckling, Jean FW: PUD - Lake Ann park space From: Tim Harding <t.h@visi.com> Sent: Friday, March L,2OL91:59 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci'chanhassen'mn'us> Subject: PUD - Lake Ann Park sPace Dear Ms Aanenson, I would like to voice my support for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) plan for the land surrounding Lake Ann. I believe that dedicating the land as park space would the best option for the residents of the City of Chanhassen and Carver County. Thank you for your careful consideration in making this important decision. Sincerely, Tim Harding {- From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Monday, March 04, 2019 8:1 1 AM Steckling, Jean FW: Suppo( for PUD plan From: RICHARD MARIETTA MCLEOD <rmktm@msn.com> Sent: Sunday, March 3, 2019 11:04 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson @ci.cha nhassen.mn.us> Subiect: Support for PUD Plan Dear Ms. Aanenson, We are writin8 to voice our support for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) plan for the land surrounding Lake Ann. We believe that this would be the best long-term option for the City of chanhassen and carver county. we have friends who live near Lake Ann, and have enjoyed spending time with them in this natural setting. Thank you for your consideration, Marietta and Rick Mcleod 13306 Kipling Ave So Sava8e MN 55378 952-895-8676 rm ktm @ msn.com 3_3 February 27,2019 Mayor Ryan and Council Members: Thank you for seeking public comment regarding the Galpin Boulevard property development. I understand the two proposals and support the change from the Concept Plan to the Proposed PUD with a density transfer. lunderstand the density transfer results in approximately4l lots to be transferred to smaller parcels which will allow approximately 45 acres of land to be available for parkland. The density transfer would benefit the wetlands by creating more green space for water runoff, natural filtration and a buffer for the Lake Ann and Lake Lucy's water health. ln addition, a community with a strong park system is a more desirable community, a more interactive community and a healthy community. The hard work of Council, Planning Commission, City Staff and Lennar to create this option with a life time benefit is much appreciated. please approve the density transfer Proposed PUD in order to capture the land for public use and the benefit of Chanhassen's residents.s Sincerely, Solvei and Todd Wilmot 7101 Shawnee Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 952-470-2360 cc: Chanhassen Planning commission 3t From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Tuesday, March 05, 2019 2:09 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Once in a life time opportunity! 100 acres on Ann & Lucy From: Jon Rausch/USA <Jon.Rausch@cushwake.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 2:08 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: FW: Once in a life time opportunityl 100 acres on Ann & Lucy Dear Mayor and City Council Members, I understand that as a result of the work session last night l2/l/191, the council has requested that the Developer re-present its latest plan to the Planning Commission. Additionally, the City is asking the residents their opinion on the park, for example, residents are being asked " How important is the new park to the residents"? As I understand the project, the Developer is proposing to transfer density from the East side to the West side of the property in order to preserve a laree oark alons the lake. This is INCREDIBLE! For the sake of the land and our future generations enjoyment of this incredible green space, I would strongly urge you to consider the density transfer, which would result in a 100 acre oark. At Camo Tanadoona, we have an internal wetland comDlex that we eniov (ducks. qeese, deer. turkev CllgL lt's amazing to see such a diverse wildlife on our property. Outdoor experts believe that contact with nature leads to improved mental health, lower stress levels, and enhanced cognitive skills! Please feel free to contact me anytime. Again, to be clear - | support the transfer of density to the West side of the site and the preservation of the 100 acres on Lake Ann and Lucy, especially given the alternative of the Developer/Owner pursuing a development plan that would impact the land adjacent to the lake. Which I understand they could do by code. Thank you. All my best, Marnie Marnie K, Wells ch ief Executive Off icer camp Fire Minnesota Direct (612) 284-6816 t'lain (612 ) 235 7284 www. ca mpfiremn.oro Find us on Facebook & Twitter Light the fire within The information contained in this email (including any attachments) is confidential, may be subject to legal or other professional privilege and contain copyright material, and is intended for use by the named recipient(s) only. Access to or use of this email or its attachments by anyone else is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. lf you are not the intended recipient(s), you may not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or its attachments (or any part thereof), nor take or omit to take any action in reliance on it. lf you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email and delete it, and all copies thereot including all attachments, from your system. Any confidentiality or privilege is not waived or lost because this email has been sent to you by mistake. Although we have taken reasonable precautions to reduce the risk of transmitting software viruses, we accept no liability for any loss or damage caused by this email or its attachments due to viruses, interference, interception, corruption or unapproved access. Z7 Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Tuesday, March 05, 2019 3:24 PM Steckling, Jean FW: Lennar Galpin Boulevard Property Planned Unit Development From: Julie Sorensen <Julie@TeamSorensen.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 3:23 PM To: Ryan, Elise <ERyan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Sinclair, Jill <jsinclair@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; McDonald, Jerry <J McDonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Tjornhom, Bethany <BTjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Coleman, Julia <JColeman@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Campion, Dan <DCam pion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson @ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; AlJaff, Sharmeen <SAlJaff@ci.cha nhassen.mn.us>; Generous, Bob <bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Walters, MacKenzie <MWalters@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subiect: Lennar Galpin Boulevard Property Planned Unit Development Thankful for Lake Ann Park!!l My husband and I moved to Chanhassen 28 years ago. We actually bought our lot 29 years ago and could not afford to build Initially. We were attracted by the natural beauty. We are so thankful the founding fathers of Chanhassen put aside such a wonderful park - Lake Ann. We have picnicked, swam, fished and walked the paths as much as possible over the past 28 years. lt has been a gift of tra nquility; sun rises, sunsets and quiet moments. So many of Chanhassen's ' current residents were attracted by the beauty and green space of Chanhassen. lt is a great place to enjoy life and raise a family. We are grateful for the comprehensive plan to make the north shore of Like Ann a park. We feel the City of Chanhassen should not lose this opportunity to preserve this beauty of nature with little to no investment by the citizens of Chanhassen. What Lennar has proposed to have 41 acres added to the park at no cost to the city in exchange for increased density is incredibly generous on their part. Money doesn't grow on trees. The concept that the city purchase the acreage instead of allowing increased density is fiscally irresponsible. That is clearly only for the benefit ofadjacent nelghbors. lf thecity were to pursue such a financial transaction, are the neighbors willing to pay for this through a special property tax assessment against their property? lam guessing not. They want to entire city to unnecessarily pay money it doesn't have. lf the city does have it, it should be used for other purposes or reduced property taxes in the future. When lookinB at the density they are complaining about, the complaining neighborhoods aren't any different than the PUD's proposed density. The proposed density is in keeping with the adjoining neighborhoods and property. The parkland version also leaves more trees in place, especially on the north side where those neighbors are complaining about loss of natural buffer. This park version is a gift by Lennar on multiple levels. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. Even the city purchase instead of density transfer would be fewer trees excluding the park land when comparing the two versions. The park plan minimizes cost to the city and maximizes trees retainage. The City's logo is a tree leaf. Kind of implies that we value maintaining as much green space as possible especially with mature trees. With the natural buffer at the north side and the 90 foot lots on the south side, the plan completely complements adjacent neighborhoods for consistency. Even the wetland segment benefits from increased tree borders in the park based plan. Again this wouldn't be the case if the city purchased the density where the park is planned. The park plan basically is setup to make lt appear the wetland is a part of the pa rk given the tree separation on the west and north perimeters of the wetland. Lennar clearly bent over backwards to maximize parkland and natural areas with their new plan. lf city/cltizens get to greedy and Lennar walks away, the next developer will not likely be as generous. The other financial downside of the city purchasing the park acreage is reduce property tax basis. So any cost of an estimated 57 to S10 million is a clear misstatement of actual costs to the city. Losing the property tax revenue from those lots in perpetuity is a staggering amount of revenue to the city. With what looks to be roughly 54 lots being taken offthe property tax rolls, that is easily at least S2oo,OOO/year and likely much more based on size/quality of homes built on the lots. Let's not think only of ourselves or our families, but what we can leave behind. Make Chanhassen a place people want to stay, especially in a fiscally responsible way! Greg and Julie Sorensen 2 3g Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Wednesday, March 06, 2019 8:18 AM Steckling, Jean FW: Proposed Galpin PUD From: Kathy O'Connor <kjoconnorl3@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 5,2O!9 11:08 PM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Fwd: Proposed Galpin PUD Kate- First of all, thank you all so much for sitting through the Public comment meeting tonight. It was wonderful to witness a collaborative environment. Chanhassen residents are the best :) 1. NEED PLAN C! I will say, I was surprised at the number of comments from residents who thought the proposed plan was an EITHER/OR situation. Who wouldn't chose the "gift" of park land ?!?!?! I have sat through all the meetings in person or via streaming and it was clear to me that a plan C had been requested a few times. The council had challenged Lennar to come back with something creative, unique, something Chanhassen could be proud of. I truly believe this gem of a property deserves something very special. They need to get creative! While Lennar listened to some neighborhood concerns and appeased Lake Lucy Ridge residents with no thru street and the south side residents by addressing water run off, elevation, etc., they did nothing to addressing a unique neighborhood - plan C. They also fluffed up the design by including entrance monuments, flowers, etc......I'm soffy, those are a given. Not a concession! The last thing we need is another Longacres, Ashling Meadows or Vasserman neighborhood. While I love living in Longacres, I do NOT want another cookie cutter Lennar development, especially on this arnazing property. 2. Need to address parking for any park land - I agree with Michael McGonigill that they also need to address parking for any park land within the neighborhood development. There will be conflict between residents who are parking on their neighborhood streets and trying to utilize the park. That is a given. 3. PLEASE Don't Settle - Please don't settle for just another Reflections on Lake Riley, Vasserman, Camden Ridge, Ashling Meadows, Longacres - type neighborhood. This extraordinary piece of land deserves extraordinary home in an extraordinary neighborhood with an extraordinary feel! An executive neighborhood that draws people to Chanhassen. Don't allow this builder to come in and nueter this land! Any builder can come in and do what they have propsed. Make them work for this pizel And if they won't, let's find someone who will. I have also sent this email to the City Council. Kathy O'Connor Resident Longacres 7124 Northwood Ct, Chanhassen, MN 55317. 612.309.1712 2 Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Wednesday, March 06, 2019 8:17 AM Steckling, Jean FW: Proposed Galpin PUD Development Proposed by Lennar Homes From: Jim Aiken <jaiken299@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 8:25 PM To: Aa nenson, Kate <kaanenson @ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Re: Proposed Galpin PUD Development Proposed by Lennar Homes Dear Ms. Aanenson and Esteemed Commissioners: I am a Chanhassen resident living at 751 Carver Beach Road. I am a professional geologist and have 25 years of experience in reviewing development plans and performing environmental review on large development projects. I am in no way connected with the proposer associated with the development. Based on review of the proposal packet and staff recommendations, I find that the planned unit development (PUD) proposal that is currently proposed (with the density transfer plan including a large 54 acre woodland buffer area along the northwest side of Lake Ann) is thoughtful and represents an excellent opportunity for increasing and protecting public access and water quality in Lake Ann. ltherefore strongly support the proposed development proposed by Lennar on the former Prince Rogers Nelson estate. My opinion is based on the following observations: o The land is guided for residential development. lt will be developed and we will have new neighbors on this land sooner or later. o lf this plan is rejected there will be another, perhaps less accommodating plan eventually. The proposal could be far worse including more homes and removing much of the woodland areas northwest of Lake Ann. This would be disastrous and should never be supported it in any way. o The development plan provides for significant buffer between the residential areas and lake shore with stormwater runoff control and pre-treatment. The county and watershed requirements for runoff control are substantial and proven to protect water quality. o The provisions for tree preservation are substantial and In my experience, exceptional benefit of this proposal . I routinely bike along Galpin. Contrary to recent public comments, the existing traffic on Galpin is relatively sparse and has adequate controls for safe and efficient egress and access. This road has been long planned for expa nsion. o The development will provide additional recreational and wildlife viewing opportunities for city residents. Lake Ann is a favorite snowshoeing and fishing lake for our famlly and increased trail connections will enhance these opportunities. o Much of the opposition to these developments is fear of the unknown and uncertainty on how the existing neighbors will adapt to the changes from the development. History shows that new developments in our area work out fairly well. . Unless you are descendent of one of the original settlers in the area (a nd I know a few), at one time, we were ALL a new neighbors in Chanhassen. We are all part of change. The reality is we have no right to seek the close the door on those who wish to join us in future. . Recreational connection to lakes greatly enhances the value and quality of life in any city. Connection to water is paramount. Looking at what the trails and lakes do for the City of Minneapolis, it appears likely that this project will similarly result in benefits to all residents. o I live near Lotus Lake and one problem is that when it was developed there were no modern stormwater controls and no public imperative to improve access to lakefront via trails. The result is that water quality has struggled and very few hiking and riding opportunities along the shores ofthis otherwise beautiful lake. This project represents an opportunity. The Commission and the Council have rare chance to create a legacy for future generations ofChanhassen residents. Please approvethe plan with the additional parkland for Lake Ann. Thank you ! Jim Aiken, PG 2 4c Steckling, Jean From: Sent: To: Subject: Aanenson, Kate Thursday, March 07, 20191 1 :04 AM Steckling, Jean FW: How to Ensure the Top Notch "Prince" Property Has Top Notch Homes Built On lt From: Art Roberts <artroberts3 @gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 7,2019 10:57 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Hoffman, Todd <thoffman@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Henricksen, Erik <EHenricksen@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Brotzler, Andy <ABrotzler@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: How to Ensure the Top Notch "Prince" Property Has Top Notch Homes Built On lt Kathryn: I am told you are the one who forwards this to the Planning Commission. Thanks. A well known standard for ranking real estate is "Location/Location/Location". The "Prince" property is truly a Top Notch, impressive property based on 3 Locations: Location #1: Chanhassen itself is a highly rated, respected, sought after city. Location #2: Homeowners will have easy access to an adjacent 50 acre park. Location #3: Homeowners will have easy access to Lake Ann plus Lake Ann Park. We should strive to have Top Notch homes filling up this Top Notch, impressive property. Then, to allow for Top Notch homes to be built, we need to have larger properties/lots! At the March 5th public meeting there was nearly unanimous consensus that the "Proposed PUD", with no homes East of the wetland, provided the best street layout, by far. But the current proposal, with its 121 65-foot lots, accommodates only smaller homes. Lennar builds houses from small up to quite large. In the current Parade of Homes they are showing homes from $300,000 all the way up to $2 million. Having larger properties/lots will provide Lennar the space it needs to build homes that are a bit larger -- more Top Notch. Thus, could the Planning Commission request that Lennar flesh out a "third alternative" (which should take very little time)? In place of the 121 65-foot lots in the current "Proposed PUD", and probably using the same street layout, Lennar should redraw it using wider lots -- maybe SO-foot wide, for example. Sure, there willbe fewer lots than the current 121 65-foot ones, yet, as offsets: a) Each of the larger lots will be worth more dollars, plus b) These larger lots will accommodate larger more expensive homes for Lennar to build. Lennar should then "rerun the numbers" to check that the larger lots will: a) Generate equivalent total dollars, thanks to both more expensive lots and homes. b) Set a Top Notch home standard more in line with the "Prince" Top Notch property. Let's develop this site with a level of home excellence matching this siters excellence. Thank you for this opportunity to propose elevating this site to a true Top Notch development. ArtRoberts artroberts3@8mail.com (952)484-0233 Homeowner's Association President Vasserman Ridge Promenade [38 twinhomes] (Northwest of Galpin Boulevard and Highway 5) From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Galpin Property - In Opposition to the PUD Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:07:59 AM     From: Danlye Jones <danlye@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2019 9:29 PM To: City Council <Council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Galpin Property - In Opposition to the PUD   Dear Council Members & My Fellow Chanhassen Citizens,    Thank you for your efforts to gather public opinion regarding the proposed development of the Galpin property.    I would like the city to preserve the Galpin property and I oppose the PUD. My husband and I have called Chanhassen home for 11 years. We are raising our little girl here. I grew up swimming and fishing at Lake Ann during summers while visiting my grandmother long before this was my home. This land needs to stay pristine to preserve our city's treasure, Lake Ann, for my child, your children, and future generations.    Prince was a fan of Joni Mitchell. When I think about the land being developed, I think of her song lyrics "Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you got 'til it's gone". Let's not pave paradise. We can do the right thing and preserve this land for us and for generations to come.    Thank you,   Danlye Jones 7026 Pima Ln  Chanhassen, MN 55317     From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Galpin Property PUD - Oppose Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:31:18 AM     From: Becca Brandt <becca.brandt@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 8:25 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Fwd: Galpin Property PUD - Oppose       ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Becca Brandt <becca.brandt@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 8:23 AM Subject: Galpin Property PUD - Oppose To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us <council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>, kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.is <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.is>   Hello -    Me and my family recently moved to Chanhassen (7601 Walnut Curve) from Minneapolis. The appeal of the area and the community was and is the trees, open land, park space, and nature that surrounds us.    Please reject the PUD plan. The high density in this community would instantaneously and permanently eliminate the appeal that brought us here.    Becca Swanson      -- Becca Brandt -- Becca Brandt From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Galpin Site Preliminary Plat & Rezone PUD Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:08:33 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png     From: matthew.myers@mchsi.com <matthew.myers@mchsi.com> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2019 9:04 PM To: Ryan, Elise <ERyan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Coleman, Julia <JColeman@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Campion, Dan <DCampion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; McDonald, Jerry <JMcDonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Tjornhom, Bethany <BTjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Galpin Site Preliminary Plat & Rezone PUD Dear Mayor Ryan and the Chanhassen City Council,   I urge the council to reject the current PUD and density transfer. The PRN Galpin property is unique piece of land. It is the only remaining virtually untouched land of hills and wetlands left in the City of Chanhassen. There are many more acres of farmland that could be developed into housing subdivisions. The topography has been changed and the trees stripped from the farm land The PRN Galpin property was never farmed because of its topography and wetlands. These features also make the land less than ideal for a housing sub division on the scale of the current proposal.   I am not opposed to the development because of the proximity to my house. I oppose it on behalf of the future citizens of Chanhassen. I want people in 2069 to look back and praise the foresight of the City of Chanhassen for saving the entire piece of land and thus keeping Lake Ann clear. I worry about the wildlife that survive in the wetlands and woods. While the PUD saves the wetlands down by the lake, it destroys the wetlands and the trees on the south hill. The Lennar plan clearly shows streets laid right on top of a wetland. The property has been a de facto nature preserve for more than a decade. There is an abundance of wildlife on the site that would be displaced or wiped out. There are deer, coyotes, turkeys, opossums, and at least 5 different types of woodpeckers There is a pair of pheasants that have nested on the south hill for at least the last 3 years.       The decision before you on Monday will affect Chanhassen for decades. I know the PRN Estate and Lennar have timelines, however, that does not mean the citizens and elected officials of Chanhassen have to meet those deadlines. I urge the council to reexamine the Comprehensive Plan and find a better use of the land. Be creative and innovative. Reach out to other governmental bodies and create a partnership for the purchase and long- term preservation of the land. Please put a referendum to the vote of the citizens of Chanhassen, the people you were elected to serve. No future City council will be able to make a decision like this one. This type of land will not exist any more in Chanhassen for the City to step in and save for future generations.   I respectfully ask you to do your duty to serve and preserve Chanhassen.   Sincerely,   Matthew Myers 7421 Windmill Drive Chanhassen MN         From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Galpin Site PUD Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:08:51 AM Attachments:8581.910000182688     From: Daly Myers <daly.myers@mchsi.com> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2019 8:44 PM To: Ryan, Elise <ERyan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Coleman, Julia <JColeman@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Campion, Dan <DCampion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; McDonald, Jerry <JMcDonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Tjornhom, Bethany <BTjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Galpin Site PUD     My favorite book is "The Lorax" by Dr Seuss. I wanted my mother to read it to me every night.   The final message of the book is:  "Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not."   I urge each city council member to read this book prior to voting on the destruction of the tress and land on Galpin Blvd.   Daly S. Myers Chanhassen MN From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Galpin/Lennar development Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:32:59 AM     From: Hoffman, Todd <thoffman@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 8:32 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Steckling, Jean <jsteckling@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: FW: Galpin/Lennar development   From: Lynne PILGRIM <lpilg@msn.com> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2019 8:26 PM To: Hoffman, Todd <thoffman@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Fwd: Galpin/Lennar development     Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Lynne PILGRIM <lpilg@msn.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 8:32:16 PM EDT Subject: Fwd: Galpin/Lennar development   Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: LPILG@msn.com Date: March 10, 2019 at 8:15:57 PM EDT To: eryan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: dcampion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, jcoleman@cichanhassen.mn.us, jmcdonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, btjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Galpin/Lennar development Good evening Mayor Ryan and Chanhassen City council members, Tomorrow night is a major council meeting for many Chanhassen residents.  It is always difficult to face the reality that the area you moved your family to and now call home will greatly change in the near future.  Those of us who moved here years ago bought our homes that were surrounded by farms, woods, lakes and other scenic views.  Our children played in these areas.  We loved the silence and the peace these areas offered us. We walked the paths through the woods and around the water.  We appreciated the beauty of the land.  However, we were always aware that those areas could and would be developed some day.  That was the future for Chanhassen. Our one hope was that we could help to choose the best type of development.  As you are aware, Chanhassen Estates fought the first ideas on the land to the west. We did not want a Mobil home park or slab homes.  What was finally approved was a neighborhood of single family homes.  Likewise our neighborhood joined with Eden Prairie to fight the Hennepin County idea for a garbage dump on what is now the Wynfield neighborhood, just off Dell Road.  That area instead became a lovely area of family homes.  Our voices were heard but we always accepted the fact that our voices could only express dislike to a point and that development would happen.  We just wanted the best for our area and for Chanhassen in general. The Chanhassen city council has a purchase agreement with an opportunity to gain a great addition of 54 acres to our park land.  The builder can do as its chooses without the city picking a plan that helps all residents of the city.  It is very narrow minded of a neighborhood to think it can choose what is best for everyone in our town.  We are a great community with people from all areas and economic backgrounds.  We need to look for what is best for everyone, not just one special area.  The city is not buying the land. A private party is not buying the land. The neighborhood is not buying the land. A developer has a purchase agreement on the land.  Let’s work with the developer and accept what is best for everyone In Chanhassen.  Let’s support the plan that includes 54 lovely areas for everyone to share and enjoy.   Lynne and Ron Pilgrim 8026 Dakota Ave 612-202-1632 Sent from my iPad From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Please reject the PUD and density transfer Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:08:12 AM     From: Christine Butterfield <cmcbutterfield@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2019 9:06 PM To: City Council <Council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Please reject the PUD and density transfer   Mayor Ryan and Chanhassen City Council,   We are urging you to reject the current PUD you are scheduled to vote on tomorrow.  This is not what the residents of Chanhassen want.  There are so many more options beside the few that Lennar is providing.  We realize they are trying to negotiate with gifting a portion of the land to the City.  The exchange is dense housing, clearing beautiful big woods, rolling hills, and displacing more wildlife.  In the short 6 years we have lived in Chanhassen, we have watched this same thing happen in our back yard with the development on Lakeway Dr and Anthem in the Park on the north side of Lake Lucy.   We moved here from Eden Prairie and while we loved coming to this community, we feel it lacks walking trails that don't run along a road and housing developments.  We lived near Starring Lake and the trails around that lake are amazing and highly used.  We are now facing a once in a lifetime opportunity to potentially capture a similar setting as Starring Lake.  I believe many citizens would agree.     Has there been discussions about the City potentially buying a portion of this land around the lakes?  Has the City talked to a spokesperson from Prince's estate regarding a discount on the land in exchange for an added memorial for Prince on the property?  Another place the Prince fans from all over the world can go and enjoy while they also visit Paisley Park?  They not only see the inside of his home, but also can see the beauty of the landscaping where Prince called his home?  What are the options on voting for a referendum, or applying for a loan?   This would allow for a developer to pay less for their portion of land and could comply with the 2040 Comprehensive plan.  Please don't allow Lennar to turn our beautiful land into another cookie-cutter dense housing subdivision.  The City just approved a large apartment building in the middle of downtown.  We don't need more dense housing, we need less.   We appreciate all the work you do and know it's not an easy job.  We urge you to please work a little harder to make this development great.   Thank you,   Christine and Jason Butterfield 6626 Pointe Lake Lucy From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Prince"s property on Galpin Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:06:35 AM     From: K B <kabl1@msn.com> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2019 8:38 PM To: City Council <Council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Prince's property on Galpin   Hi, I live in Chanhassen and have lived in Chanhassen for 23 yrs. I am concerned about the developement of Prince's property on Galpin Blvd. I reviewed both proposed options, PUD and Concept plan. The Propsed PUD is better than the concept plan but neither is acceptable. We need to leave areas such as this for wildlife. All pieces of land do not need to be developed. I moved to Chanhassen originally because of more open spaces and now that is becoming less and less. Prince owned this land for many years possibly to keep it as is, not to be developed. Think of what he would have liked. Develop a park for everyone to enjoy as a wild area. Please make the right decision in this and hear what the community is saying. Do not develop this land because someone wants their profit. Think of what is right. Think about/research what developing this land will do to the lakes, such as runoff from fertilizer, chemicals, etc. We need green areas, trees, especially old growth forests for future generations to come and enjoy. I seen to much of this destroyed over the years, beautiful areas, old oak trees, replaced with a housing community, one example housing development on Lyman Blvd years ago to the current development around the lake off Lyman and 101, and many more. Thank You, Karen Blenker   From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: PRN Galpin Property Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:07:37 AM -----Original Message----- From: Dake Chatfield <dake.chatfield@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 7:34 AM To: City Council <Council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: PRN Galpin Property Dear Mayor Ryan and City Council members, My name is Dake Chatfield and I live at 2200 Majestic Way in Chanhassen. I border the south side of the proposed development property in the Royal Oaks neighborhood. My family and I have lived there for 18 years. I am located at ground zero between this property development and the Galpin boulevard reconstruction. I have attended every city planning and council meeting on this topic. I recognize the difficulty and importance of this decision. I have thought long and hard about this and tried to determine what I would do if this were my decision. I’ve always wondered what would become of this land when he was gone. I’ve imagined many things from a golf course, a park land, some sort of memorial space with an amphitheater, or something like Matt Myers has been envisioning in his comments. The worst possible scenario I can imagine is clear cutting all of that old growth forest, leveling those rolling hill acres, and putting in a high density housing subdivision. Therefore, I would ask that you vote No to this PUD proposal and reject these development plans. I respect and appreciate the amount of work that has gone into this plan by the developer, Kate, and city staff. I think the concept of preserving a park land west of Lake Ann is enticing. I am an avid outdoorsman, and nobody would benefit more from that space more then me and my family. But it is not worth the cost of building a high density development on the remaining space. My comments and feedback so far on this development have been to minimize the impact on the environment, minimize the loss of old growth forest, and to preserve a buffer between the existing neighborhoods and the development. None of that has been addressed with this proposal. Nobody has reached out to me to seek my opinion in this manner, short of the city council meetings. My recommendation is that we try to preserve the property as-is as much as possible. And if we cannot do that, only develop the open land with low density and do not cut down all the trees and grade the land. The last thought I will leave you with is to ask that you think about what he would have wanted for this property. Surely his importance to the community and the impact he’s had across the world should have some weight on his legacy. I have to think that there is no way a high density housing development would have been his choice. Let’s find another option for this property and pay him respect. Dake Chatfield From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Statement opposing the Galpin Project Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:07:48 AM -----Original Message----- From: Kristen <kjkelroy@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2019 10:32 PM To: City Council <Council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Statement opposing the Galpin Project Dear City Council, I’m writing to let you know that I oppose the proposed PUD for the Galpin project. I by no means have a “not in my backyard” mentality...because growth and development is bound to happen. However I do believe that the builder/buyer of the land can and should do better to preserve the beauty of Chanhassen. I would like to see minimal tree removal and something that better addresses the increased traffic that is bound to come from dropping in a new development. I feel as though Mayor Elise Ryan has been thoughtful in hearing people out and am confident she has the best interest for keeping Chanhassen unique and beautiful. I encourage you press for better as well and do not pass the PUD. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Kristen Nordberg 2126 Majestic Way Chanhassen, MN 55317 Sent from my iPhone From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Citizen Letter - PUD Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 6:31:03 PM Attachments:Citizen Letter_PUD_Christian Myers.docx ATT00001.htm Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Christian Myers" <christian.myers@mchsi.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 6:22:46 PM CDT To: <'eryan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'>, <'dcampion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'>, <'jcoleman@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'>, <btjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'>, <'jmcdonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'> Cc: <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Citizen Letter - PUD Please see the attached letter for my concerns about the recently proposed development. Thank you for your time and attention. Thank you, Christian Myers 612.964.9061 From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Developing Prince’s property Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 4:53:57 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda W <lindawilkes@live.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 4:52:00 PM CDT To: "kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Fwd: Developing Prince’s property Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Linda Wilkes <lindawilkes@live.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 4:49:50 PM CDT To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Developing Prince’s property To our Mayor and City Council, This is such a bad idea! It will destroy the lakes and park. We do not need more housing especially in that beautiful little oasis in the middle of Chanhassen. Why can’t it just stay a park that all can enjoy instead of polluting the whole area. The city should buy it and I for one think that our exorbitantly high taxes be used for what residents want. Especially when it comes to preserving our dwindling natural areas. Please find an alternative option to this disastrous plan. We the people want a say in this endeavor. Start a go fund me with residents and see what happens. Linda Wilkes Sent from my iPad From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Email RE: Galpin Development Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 8:11:52 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Richard Sit <richardsit32@gmail.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 8:10:29 PM CDT To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, eryan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, Andrea Sit <andrea.i.h.sit@gmail.com> Subject: Email RE: Galpin Development March 10, 2019 Dear Mayor Ryan and the Chanhassen City Council, We urge the Chanhassen City Council to reject the current PUD and density transfer development plans proposed by Lennar. The Galpin Development property is a unique piece of land and offers a rare opportunity to preserve and enhance the Lake Ann area and nearby Chanhassen neighborhoods for current and future generations. The Galpin Development property is the only remaining virtually untouched land of hills and wetlands left in the City of Chanhassen. There are other less unique pieces of land that could be developed into housing subdivisions. For example, there are many more acres of farmland already stripped of trees and of which the topography has already been changed. The Galpin Development property was never farmed and retains its original topography, wetlands, and Big Woods. These features also make the land less than ideal for a housing subdivision on the scale of the current proposal. We oppose this development on behalf of the current and future citizens of Chanhassen. This plan is contrary to Chanhassen’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan which calls for the protection of significant wooded areas. We and our children cherish the wildlife, wetlands, and trees that make up this land, and we strongly urge you to preserve this pristine area of land and wetlands for current and future generations. This plan strongly resembles the destruction of a beautiful forest and wildlife habitat in the movie, The Lorax. It is beyond heartbreaking to imagine this beautiful land torn up, filled in, and bulldozed. Also, Lennar’s plans for preserving existing trees and wetlands and the proposed tree buffers along the North and South borders of the Galpin Development property are grossly inadequate to meet the goals of Chanhassen’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan and to maintain the existing character of the nearby neighborhoods. We moved here in 2016 from Shorewood because of the open spaces, woods, and natural beauty, and if this plan goes through, we will be forced to move again to remove ourselves from the heartbreak of seeing this land desecrated. We are also concerned about the ever-increasing traffic volume on Galpin Boulevard between Highways 5 and 7. In addition, it is already hazardous to turn right (Eastward) onto Highway 7 with cars crossing two lanes of traffic to get to Excelsior and holding up the line of traffic waiting behind them to get onto Highway 7. People take chances pulling onto Highway 7 when there are cars lined up behind them. We have both witnessed near- accidents occurring here. Thank you for hearing our concerns. We hope that you make the correct decision. Sincerely, Andrea and Richard Sit 1957 Topaz Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 andreaihsit@gmail.com richardsit32@gmail.com From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Galpin Property Development Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 4:16:59 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Jennifer Smolka <jenlynnsmolka@gmail.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 4:09:17 PM CDT To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Galpin Property Development To whom it may concern, I am a resident of Chanhassen who is writing to you today to oppose the new housing development around Lake Lucy and Lake Ann, as this area is vital for wetlands and wildlife, and once it is developed, it cannot be restored. Wetlands and the lands surrounding them work together to provide ecological benefits for our community - benefits that are undermined when land is razed for development, obliterating wildlife corridors and interrupting habitats and food chains necessary to preserve the ecosystem as a whole. Wetlands provide flood and erosion protection, water quality improvement, and climate stability. Wetlands are also the breeding ground for dragonflies, which provide us with a natural form of mosquito control. I work with and am a board member of the Frankfurt Zoological Society, an international NGO based in Germany and Washington DC with over 30 conservation projects in 18 countries around the world, whose mission is to preserve critical ecosystems and biodiversity. But conservation must begin in our own backyards. Because if we allow ourselves to destroy our resources - one area at a time - eventually the benefits provided to us by these irreplaceable natural habitats will be gone. Minnesota leads the nation in conservation stewardship. It is my hope that the City of Chanhassen will safeguard the future of our community's environment by choosing be a leader in conservation now. Sincerely, Jennifer Smolka 500 Trap Line Lane Chanhassen From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Galpin property PUD Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 3:21:57 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Vanessa Martin <Vanessa_Martin@jjtaylor.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 3:11:26 PM CDT To: "council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: "kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Galpin property PUD Hello, my name is vanessa martin. We live at 2325 hunter drive Chanhassen mn. I strongly oppose the PUD, please take into consideration those who have purchased for the beauty and quality of life that is in jeopardy. Vanessa Get Outlook for Android Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more Click Here. From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Galpin Property Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 5:56:22 PM Attachments:image001.png Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: <michelle.myers@mchsi.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 5:54:59 PM CDT To: "'Councilman Jerry McDonald'" <'jmcdonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'>, "'Councilwoman Bethany Tjornhom'" <'btjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'>, "'Councilwoman Julia Coleman'" <'jcoleman@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'>, "'Councilman Dan Campion'" <'dcampion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'>, "'Mayor Elise Ryan'" <'eryan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us'> Cc: <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Galpin Property   The beauty of nature’s bounty….     And we are about to lose it all. That’s is unless, you as our Chanhassen City Council preserve it for future generations.   So many people think this is an either/or with the Lennar plans. They don’t seem to understand we can choose not to succumb to big builders and we can choose to ask for more. The quality of life in Chanhassen will change for the worse if we have to contend with 181 more homes confined to such a small space. The lakes and habitats will be adversely affected by the destruction of the land. Water quality will diminish and wildlife will be permanently displaced.   There must be other options to leave hope for the future. Require more of builders looking to build in Chanhassen. Innovation and compassion are not mutually exclusive. Please consider rejecting Lennar’s proposals as they are now.   Thank you, Michelle Myers 7421 Windmill Drive Chanhassen, MN From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: I oppose the Galpin PUD Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 5:55:14 PM Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Tami Gottschalk <tamig66@gmail.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 5:24:54 PM CDT To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: I oppose the Galpin PUD Dear Chanhassen City Council, I respectfully urge the council to reject the current PUD and density transfer. The PRN Galpin property is unique piece of land. My husband and I built our home facing the property 20 years ago. We truly enjoy the beauty of the minimally touched property. It is the virtually the only untouched land of hills and wetlands left in the City of Chanhassen. There are many more acres of farmland that could be developed into housing subdivisions if the housing need is so great. I worry about the wildlife that live in those wetlands and woods within this property. While the PUD saves the wetlands down by the lake, it destroys the wetlands and the trees on the south hill. The property has been a de facto nature preserve for more than a decade. There is an abundance of wildlife on the site that would only be displaced or wiped out. There are deer, coyotes, turkeys, ducks and opossums. The scale of the current proposal scares me. Along with the apartments going in downtown, I am concerned about the strain on the schools. I also worry about the increased traffic this proposed development will bring; understanding the new and improved roadway. Still too much traffic going at unreasonable speeds. I know the PRN Estate and Lennar have timelines but that does not mean the citizens and elected officials of Chanhassen have to meet those deadlines. Please consider what is before you on behalf of me, my family and my neighbors. No future City council will be able to make a decision like this one. This type of land will not exist any more in Chanhassen. Please put a referendum to the vote of the citizens of Chanhassen, the people you were elected to serve. Thank you, Tami Gottschalk 2197 Majestic Way Chanhassen MN From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: I oppose the PUD on Galpin Rd Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:52:55 AM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Jacqueline Tyson <jactyson03@me.com> Date: March 11, 2019 at 8:41:08 AM CDT To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: Chanhassen City Planner <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: I oppose the PUD on Galpin Rd As a long time resident of the Longacres community in Chanhassen, I just want to share with you that I oppose the current PUD for the former property owned by Prince. As it is proposed, in the very least, this PUD will increase traffic through my neighborhood and along Galpin Road. However I feel it will have a larger negative impact on the city of Chanhassen at large. I’m not convinced the city has explored all the ways this PUD will impact our community. Please take the time to evaluate, and let developers know we demand more from them - access to Lake Ann, less density and perhaps most importantly less destruction of our beautiful landscape - we don’t want all the trees removed & land flattened for more homes!!! Concerned residents, Jacqueline & George Tyson 7414 Moccasin Trail Chanhassen Sent from my iPhone From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Oppose the PUD! Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 3:08:37 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: C Jerdee <cjerdee@gmail.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 2:49:14 PM CDT To: "council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>, "kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>, "mayor@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <mayor@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Oppose the PUD! Craig Jerdee, 6621 Chestnut Ln 55317 here I oppose the PUD and urge you to do the same. Make Lennar or whomever stands to develop and profit from the development work harder to come up with a better plan. I’d love to see a non-development option, and sell bonds to fund the city the purchasing the land for all to enjoy. We’ll never have another opportunity to do this! Now is the time! If you vote for the PUD, we, the voters, will make sure to remember that come election time. From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Oppose Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 3:08:20 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Natalia Sander <nataliasander@me.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 2:54:28 PM CDT To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Oppose The proposed PUD is NOT the right thing for the residents of Chanhassen Please vote No Natalia Sander 6671 Amberwood Lane Thank you. Natalia N. Sander- Realtor Edina Realty- Minnetonka (612) 850-7737 Http://nataliasanderhomes.com Your referral is the best compliment I can earn! From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Prince / Lennar Proposed Development Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 3:07:55 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Mark Seefeldt <maseefeldt@gmail.com> Date: March 9, 2019 at 1:06:40 PM CST To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Prince / Lennar Proposed Development Dear Chanhassen Council, Will the plans impact me? A little with increased traffic and infrastructure usage, but my yard doesn’t touch the proposed development property. I live a block south of the proposed development. I have a line of tall spruce trees in my backyard separating my backyard from the neighbors. That was one of the reasons we bought our house. If those trees were not there, we would not have purchased. Am I strongly against either plan? No. Will we all get over it? Yes. Time heals all wounds. Which plan is the right choice? Neither in my opinion. This shouldn’t be a quid pro quo. If Lennar wants to only develop the western half of the property, then the density should fall in line with the master plan and zoning requirements that the city has set. If Lennar is a good developer and wants to keep developing in Chanhassen, then they’ll recognize the voice of the community and not develop the eastern half close to Lake Ann. There is better plans and options out there that haven’t been brought to the table yet. I urge you to vote no to Lennar’s density transfer plan. Put the decision about developing the full property (while meeting density requirements) back on to them. They’ll find a better solution or someone else will. Thank you, Mark & Jennifer Seefeldt 7470 Tulip Court 952-297-2645 From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Prince Property - Vote NO on Lennar Development Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 3:08:10 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Rebecca Nay <nay.rebecca@gmail.com> Date: March 9, 2019 at 1:37:29 PM CST To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Prince Property - Vote NO on Lennar Development I am one of the area residents who have enjoyed the beautiful Prince property around Lake Ann and Lake Lucy for many years, I am thankful to Prince who allowed the public to enjoy his land. I beg the city to say no to the Lennar development and allow the area residents to continue to enjoy one of the last remaining nature areas in the city. It would take away trees, pollute the lakes, increase noise and traffic congestion, and overall will ruin a once peaceful and beautiful oasis. -Rebecca Nay From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Prince Property proposal Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:52:42 AM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Abby Ellis <abby.ellis11@gmail.com> Date: March 11, 2019 at 8:33:29 AM CDT To: btjornhom@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, "council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>, dcampion@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, eryan@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, jcoleman@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, jmcdonald@ci.chanhassen.mn.us, "kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us" <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Neil Ellis <neil.ellis4@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Prince Property proposal Hello all! I am not opposed to A development, but AM opposed to Lennars scare tactics to get the city to do what they want. I am IN FAVOR of the city exploring more responsible and thorough propsals that have full transparency into the end result. There are way too many unknowns in this proposal that Lennar has simply ignored, despite many requests by council to research and provide details. The city owes it to the current residents of Chanhassen and the Comprehensive Plan to uphold the higher standards Mayor Ryan mentions and require detailed information of ANY development proposed here. I hope you do the right thing and insist on this by voting ‘NO’ tonight. Thank you! Abby and Neil Ellis 7284 Bent Bow Trail On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:42 PM Abby Ellis <abby.ellis11@gmail.com> wrote: Good evening, I was one of many Chanhassen residents who attended the city planning session tonight. It is great to see so many people engaged in this process and voice their opinions respectfully. I was excited to hear an update on the inevitable development. Boy did Lennar disappoint! Still 181 homes, still only the Concept Plan and the same PUD Plan that was proposed last time, only very slight variations were made. If I were Mayor and Council, I would be extremely frustrated with the amount of time and resources spent by city and staff without the results that were asked for on several occasions. Many of the residents who spoke tonight were in support of the proposed PUD. The vast majority of them did so with the position of 'but what would the alternative be' and 'we don't want to risk losing the opportunity to have the area west of Lake Ann'. The many nature-lovers stated that the current proposal would preserve the land around the lake for the wildlife that inhabits the area currently. I am concerned that the wildlife would be forced out during the 2+ years construction of the area, excavating the land, altering the entire topography of the landscape, tree removal, noise and air pollution, etc. Perhaps wildlife would return once all is settled, but that is a lot of disruption to a thriving ecosystem. I am unclear on how the density transfer works. If it is literally the transferring of existing trees from the area to be developed to the western edge of the lake and buffer areas, how viable is that? Will the mature trees really survive when transplanted? Our soil is not the greatest here and I have trouble believing that 20'-30' trees that have rooted where they are will sustain if migrated around the property. How about an expert opinion from a horticulturist or an unbiased authority to weigh in on that? Regarding the increase to traffic and the plan for Galpin Blvd...how could this NOT be incorporated in this project? Many residents voiced their concerns about the traffic increase and safety issues that currently exist, let alone with approximately 362 drivers (2 per household) added to the mix. There are already concerns about traffic congestion and visibility. Of the 3 entrances proposed off Galpin, 2 of them feed directly to/from Longacres neighborhood. There will absolutely be an increase of traffic running through our neighborhood for access to 41. What does the city's plan include to address those concerns of our neighborhood's safety? Here's a big unknown...is the land that Lennar is "gifting" to Chanhassen even able to be developed? Do we even have to worry about that if Lennar's proposal is not accepted? There were varying opinions on that tonight, but none of them official. Why don't we have an unbiased analysis on that aspect of this plan? That would answer a lot of questions that residents have. Some of the residents brought up good points about the area that would be a continuation of the park around Lake Ann, that it would mainly serve as a draw to the new development. Unless there is public parking spaces and areas for people to gather, similar to the existing Lake Ann park, it's simply a bonus to the people who purchase homes in the development and not a realistic benefit to the other residents of Chanhassen. So their newly constructed homes reduce the value of homes for currently established residents AND they get the benefit of 54+ acres in their backyard that we have generously persevered for their enjoyment and their property values? That doesn't live up to the commitment to the current residents of Chanhassen that I would hope to be considered. Several speakers provided historical perspectives and are clearly proud Chan residents. I appreciate their wise decisions made decades ago in purchasing and preserving the land in this community that we are so passionate about. Many comments have been made about this shouldn't be an 'either/or' proposition and it isn't! Decisions of this magnitude should not be made under pressure from a company that has their own best interest, AND PROFIT, as the highest priority. The city of Chanhassen doesn't owe Lennar an agreement to one of their two proposals. Lennar owes it to the city of Chanhassen and it's residents to present a responsible, sustainable proposal that supports this community's values. Mayor Ryan - I really appreciated your public letter in response to other council members public appeal for this proposal. I am proud that we have elected officials in place now who are listening to residents and fulfilling the comprehensive plan. Please keep up the commitment and the good work. The right proposal is out there for Chanhassen, but it has not been presented yet or this would be a done deal already. There are too many unanswered questions to make a well-planned decision. See you on March 11th! Abby Ellis On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 7:16 AM Abby Ellis <abby.ellis11@gmail.com> wrote: Good morning! I appreciate the time council and the planning commission has invested in this proposal. I joined the Facebook group regarding this and provided my comments from the meeting last night. I’d like to share them with you: Mayor Ryan mentioned that, of the feedback she received, the vast majority of residents recognized that the land would be developed (vs left alone), but would like to see a plan that is more “responsible”. I have the impression that she is not pleased that Lennar is coming back with minimum changes in the several revisions to date. It appears that Lennar is getting irritated and was nearly threatening the council regarding the land around Lake Ann. Personally, I think it feels like blackmail. What I don’t understand is why the city is in this position to HAVE to accept a proposal from Lennar or lose the Lake Ann land. Doesn’t the city have final say with permits and zoning to allow/not the land to be developed? How is it that Lennar is coming from an ‘upper hand’ position? Perhaps this is just the way these deals are when developers obtain an agreement to purchase as they have. Excuse my lack of familiarity with the process. But I keep scratching my head like, ‘how did we get here’? I appreciate that Mayor Ryan is clearly listening to residents surrounding the perimeter of the land and voicing their concerns as well as referring to the Comprehensive Plan and keeping that commitment in the forefront. There are more details that need to be addressed: Traffic along Galpin - it was stated that the city has a plan in place already to upgrade Galpin. How does this coincide with plans/changes to the proposals from Lennar? How does the city plan to address the through traffic that will occur on Longacres Drive b/w Galpin and 41? It will become busy like Lake Lucy Rd. vs the quieter neighborhood street it is currently. How do the current residents, who have invested in Chanhassen’s economy and property tax base, deal with the loss in home values when compared to these new homes at the same price point as homes that are 20 years old? Where is the commitment to the existing home owners who have invested in their homes and this community for decades? Soliciting feedback from other residents is great and the right thing to do. However, the residents who are not directly impacted by the process of construction, the drastic change of the quality of life and decrease in home values, may focus on preserving the Lake Ann land without considering how this development will negatively impact those of us who live surrounding the area. I continue to believe that there is still an opportunity for better compromise. The city should not have to be forced to make a decision on Lennar’s timeline with their contract to purchase. If Lennar wants to move ahead, they should have made the adjustments requested by staff and the council previously vs the minimum effort. I’d like to see the city taking a stronger approach to ensure a responsible decision, taking as much time as that requires, in order to uphold Chanhassen’s commitment to the Comp Plan and the current residents. I look forward to the city planning meeting that is on March 5 and the city council meeting on March 11. Thanks!!! Abby Ellis On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:47 AM Abby Ellis <abby.ellis11@gmail.com> wrote: We are current residents of Longacres and I have been a Chanhassen resident for over 15 years. What we appreciate about our city are the green spaces, the sense of community and the commitment our city council has to maintain the integrity of our special place to live. I have involved myself in community events and previous proposals in front of city council, most actively when Wallmart had a proposal in front of our council. I was a member of the Chanhassen First volunteer group who helped organize the residents who were opposed to the proposal. I am proud that my contribution encouraged the city council to make the right decision on this proposal. Our concern about this Lennar proposal is that it does not follow the commitment the city council has made to the residents of Chanhassen. We attended the city planning commission meeting on Jan 15 and were disappointed in the result. It appears that Lennar is attempting to bribe the city to meet their proposal in exchange for the 50 acres around the northwest area of Lake Ann. The developer representing Lennar could not speak to the sustainability efforts that would be made, and that is very concerning for our environment. The extensive loss of a variety of mature trees, wildlife that depends on the ecosystem and the aesthetics of the topography of the land would be catastrophic. We are also very concerned about the increase in traffic through our neighborhood and the decrease in our home values. We are not opposed to development of our area, recognizing that we have a jewel of a city and this is attractive land for development. We ask the city council to stay committed to the current residents who have contributed to the economy and quality of this community. There must be other options to explore that will enable the long-term plan, so carefully developed by our city leaders, to continue to support our values. Thank you, Abby and Neil Ellis 7284 Bent Bow Trail From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Prince Property: proposed development Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 8:11:24 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Stephanie Rutledge <p-s.rutledge@mchsi.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 8:09:06 PM CDT To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Prince Property: proposed development Dear Chanhassen City Council: Is the proposed PUD the right thing for the residents of Chanhassen? We vote NO! Thank you. Sent from Patrick and Stephanie Rutledge 7568 Walnut Curv From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Prince PUD Date:Sunday, March 10, 2019 4:53:34 PM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Tom’s New Gmail <7381tbell@gmail.com> Date: March 10, 2019 at 4:41:49 PM CDT To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Prince PUD Dear Council, As I have emailed most of you about different dimensions of the PUD request by Lennar, I’d like to one more time reiterate that I’m against the proposal. Among my concerns is that though the request has been made several times, Lennar has never definitively shown that the parkland they want to give to the city is, in fact, buildable for 50 single family homes. The density transfer is predicated on that fact. If the PUD is granted, there should be more protections provided for those who are most affected. If the PUD is denied, the city should figure out a way to purchase some of the land as parkland. Tom Bell 7381 Fawn Hill Rd Longacres Sent from my iPhone From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:Fwd: Proposed Development of Galpin property Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 8:53:31 AM Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: mary beth johnson <mbsilbs@me.com> Date: March 11, 2019 at 8:45:35 AM CDT To: kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Proposed Development of Galpin property To whom it may concern, my family and I believe the currently proposed Galpin PUD is NOT the thing for the residents of Chanhassen. We are strongly opposed to this plan for Princes property based on the density of proposed new homes and it’s negative impact on our open/green spaces, traffic, school systems and the financial impact it will have on the bordering neighborhoods of similarly priced homes. Thank you for your consideration of our concerns. Mary Beth Silbernagel 7492 Bent Bow Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 612-245-9759 From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Galpin Property Development Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 10:05:46 AM     From: Ryan Erickson <ryanaerickson@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 9:55 AM To: City Council <Council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Galpin Property Development   To whom it may concern,   I am a resident of Chanhassen who is writing to you today to oppose the new housing development around Lake Lucy and Lake Ann. As a recent addition to the Chan community (I moved here 2 years ago), I moved here specifically because of the wetlands and wildlife. Wetlands and the lands surrounding them work together to provide ecological benefits for our community - benefits that are undermined when land is razed for development, obliterating wildlife corridors and interrupting habitats and food chains necessary to preserve the ecosystem as a whole. Wetlands provide flood and erosion protection, water quality improvement, and climate stability. Wetlands are also the breeding ground  for dragonflies, which provide us with a natural form of mosquito control. In addition to the science behind the need to protect our wetlands and woodlands, they provide a beauty to the area that prompted me to choose to become a member of Chanhassen instead of so many other spots in the Minneapolis/St Paul area. I would hate to see Chan lose what makes it so great.   Sincerely,   Ryan Erickson 500 Trap Line Lane Chanhassen From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Galpin Property Letter Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 11:44:39 AM     From: Mars Chatfield <mars.chatfield@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 11:42 AM To: City Council <Council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>; Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Galpin Property Letter   Dear Mayor Ryan and City Council members,   My name is Marsden Chatfield and I live at 2200 Majestic Way in Chanhassen. I border the south side of the proposed development property in the Royal Oaks neighborhood. I have lived at this location for the past 18 years. I am located at ground zero between this property development and the Galpin boulevard reconstruction. I moved into this house when I was one year old and have been living here my entire life. While I may not yet be an experienced member of society with decades of residency under my belt, I feel as though my 19-year-old opinion should still be considered, if not taken with more weight than others’; I am the fruit that Chanhassen has produced. I love this town with all of my heart, and will continue to love it whether or not you develop this property into a neighborhood. So rather than boring you with an emotional memoir telling the experience that this property has allowed me, I write this letter to you in the name of logic and common sense- I hope that you will find this more relevant to your decision. While I am not an economist or city planner, not (yet) a financial analyst or environmentalist, I am still able to recognize the foolishness of your proposal- simply as an observer. It is true that I live at ground zero and that this place means a lot to me, but even if it were not this way I could still see the golden opportunity that is being overlooked; how could I miss it? Chanhassen, MN: a small, developing suburb just outside of Minneapolis is graced by one of the largest icons in all of music history, who personally advocates and shares his love of the town, an ideal situation for a newer suburb who possesses no deep roots in culture, little to no historic value, and lots of open space. After the passing of this beloved star, the town of Chanhassen is swamped by tourists from all across the country who hope to see the place where their idol spent most of his time- tourism which brings in thousands of dollars for local businesses, further promoting Chanhassen’s booming economy. Now, here’s the part that doesn’t make any sense to me. The city of Chanhassen receives the beautiful, sprawling property that Prince himself had purchased and built his private residence on. While the home is now destroyed, the acres of rolling hills and beautiful wildlife still persist, untouched by any industrial development or manmade infractions. Chanhassen is essentially given a ‘Graceland’; an opportunity to dig its feet into national history for decades to come. What boggles my mind is that, rather than milking Prince for as many cultural sites and memorials as possible while simultaneously pleasing the citizens of their town, my city council would rather flatten that gorgeous plot of nature and cover it in concrete; stimulating the local economy briefly and destroying both a natural gem and a potential heritage site forever. This proposed development makes sense, don’t get me wrong- it just makes sense right now. In a growing suburb, you will increase the overall property value, bring in more citizens which in turn inflate the local economy; businesses make more money, you all earn more taxes-- our city will become better, I understand that. I just wish that you could recognize the potential gold mine you have here, if things were handled the right way. Chanhassen could become nationally realized as ‘Prince’s town’; the Motown of Minnesota, the Graceland of the Great Lakes- yet my city is focused on short term gains and development rather than establishing Chanhassen as a city to withstand the test of time, a city to be taught about in schools around the country for years to come. Thirty years from now, what do you expect of this neighborhood? The houses will remain full, the foundations sound, the streets paved- I expect you will do a good job on construction. However after thirty years, the neighborhood will lose its glimmer. Take a look at neighborhoods built in the 1980’s and 1990’s- these neighborhoods are no longer the apple of the homebuyer’s eye, instead they are typically considered options which are safer for buyers’ checkbooks; temporary homes to be lived in until income increases. In the year 2050 a neighborhood on this land will be approaching its demise, whereas a city park will likely only have increased in beauty and value; an oasis of natural delicacy in a city which will presumably be much larger than it is today. All in all, my point is this: in pursuit of economic prosperity, environmental conservation, cultural enhancement, residential happiness, and respect for the deceased and his family, the city of Chanhassen ought not develop a neighborhood on the property adjacent to Galpin Boulevard, nor on any of the properties previously owned by Prince and company. The city should, however, recognize the potential value of these properties and improve them to serve not only as amenities to the townspeople and tourists, but also to honor a great neighbor who we miss dearly. I hope that this letter does not fall on deaf ears, and that my council will act in favor of the city it represents rather than the expansion of its treasury.   Marsden Chatfield   From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Lennar Development (Prince Property) Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 10:43:13 AM     From: Susan Mcallister <smcallister7510@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 10:37 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Lennar Development (Prince Property)   Dear Madam Mayor, City Council,   I have lived in Chanhassen for 58 years, since 1959, and when we arrived it was just a "hick town" as my mother would refer to it. I have seen almost all the rural areas disappear to development over time.   I watched the video for public comment at the Planning Commission Meeting when it popped up on my phone. Because I now reside in Waconia I unfortunately didn't know about it until it was too late which was the day after.   I just want to comment on the numerous residents who don't want it abutting their homes. The reality is, they don't "own" their view so if they don't want to look at it, then unfortunately they have to buy their view, because development is inevitable and obviously clustering is the only way to preserve the beautiful greenspace we find in this property and all others going forward.    I hope you adopt the plan as shown because it is very sensitive to the site. I think the developer, along with the planning department has done an absolutely wonderful job putting this together.    Please make sure though, that every tree in the 54 acres is protected and that it is not to be accessed by car, that the only way to access the 54 acres is by foot.   Also, if there is ANY possibility to protect a few of the old growth trees in the clustered section of the plan that would be wonderful. I realize this might not be possible due to the regrading that will happen.    Lastly, I would ask the developer to name it Purple Meadows.    Sincerely,  Susan McAllister  100 West 3rd Street #302 Waconia,  MN 55387 952.228.4511     From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Prince Property Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 1:05:36 PM     From: Juli Gempler <juliannagem@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 1:04 PM To: City Council <Council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Prince Property   We oppose the PUD development. We are at 1877 Topaz Drive. We have lived here for 14 years and feel there needs to be other options for the property that preserves and protects the natural beauty and resouces it provides.  Please take into considerstion the people, the residents that call this area home. This is a unique opportunity to do the right thing, step out of the box and vote no.    Thank you for all of your efforts and considerstion,   Juli and Mark Gempler Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android From:Aanenson, Kate To:Meuwissen, Kim Subject:FW: Proposed Development Galpin Blvd. Date:Monday, March 11, 2019 10:28:21 AM     From: Connie Moore <CMoore@mclindengrp.com> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 10:14 AM To: Aanenson, Kate <kaanenson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Subject: Fwd: Proposed Development Galpin Blvd.     Begin forwarded message:   From: CONNIE MOORE <cmoore@mclindengrp.com> Subject: Proposed Development Galpin Blvd. Date: March 11, 2019 at 9:53:01 AM CDT To: <council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us> Cc: <kaanerson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us>   Dear Council Members and City Planner, First and foremost, thank you for your service. We have been residents of Chanhassen for 24 years and have experienced tremendous growth and prosperity. We have felt that the leadership of Chanhassen has had it’s residents best interest at heart. We are opposed to the current development under discussion due to the density and the impact it will have on the community.  In making your decision, please consider the affect it will have on green space, traffic, schools and community as a whole.  Thank you for your consideration. Dave and Connie Moore 7330 Moccasin Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317   CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Commission Appointments Section NEW BUSINESS Item No: F.2. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: ADM 146G PROPOSED MOTION "The City Council appoints the following commissioners: Planning Commission _____________, ______________, and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022." Park & Recreation Commission _____________ and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022, and _____________ for a one­year term ending March 30, 2020. Environmental Commission _____________ and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022. Senior Commission _____________, ______________, and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022." Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present. DISCUSSION Planning Commission There are 3 three­year positions available for appointment to the Planning Commission.The terms of Commissioners Andrew Aller, Steven Weick, and Nancy Madsen are expiring.Andrew Aller and Steven Weick have reapplied. Eleven additional applications were received, of which seven are still active. NOTE: Applicant Lynn Pelto was interviewed and recommended for appointment by the Planning Commission but has since withdrawn her application. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectCommission AppointmentsSectionNEW BUSINESS Item No: F.2.Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: ADM 146GPROPOSED MOTION"The City Council appoints the following commissioners:Planning Commission_____________, ______________, and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022."Park & Recreation Commission_____________ and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022, and _____________ for aone­year term ending March 30, 2020.Environmental Commission_____________ and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022.Senior Commission_____________, ______________, and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022."Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.DISCUSSIONPlanning CommissionThere are 3 three­year positions available for appointment to the Planning Commission.The terms of CommissionersAndrew Aller, Steven Weick, and Nancy Madsen are expiring.Andrew Aller and Steven Weick have reapplied.Eleven additional applications were received, of which seven are still active. NOTE: Applicant Lynn Pelto wasinterviewed and recommended for appointment by the Planning Commission but has since withdrawn her application. The Planning Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Kate Aanenson.Also attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates. Park & Recreation Commission There are 2 three­year positions and 1 one­year position available for appointment to the Park & Recreation Commission.The terms of Commissioners Cole Kelly and Rick Echternacht are expiring.  Both incumbents have reapplied. Commissioner Steve Scharfenburg is resigning his position as he is moving out of the city, leaving one year remaining in his term. Nine additional applications were received, of which eight are still active. The term of Youth Commissioner Grant Schaeferle is expiring.  Grant is no longer eligible to reapply and no new youth applications were received. The Park & Recreation Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Park & Recreation Director Todd Hoffman.Also attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates. Environmental Commission There are 2 three­year positions available for appointment to the Environmental Commission.The terms of Bill Chappell and Wayne Benbow are expiring.Bill Chappell has reapplied. Five additional applications were received, of which four are still active. The Environmental Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Environmental Resources Coordinator Jill Sinclair.Also attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates. Senior Commission There are 2 or 3 three­year positions available for appointment to the Senior Commission. The terms of Commissioners Jackie Engel and Cheryl Ayotte are expiring and are both currently vacant due to their resignations. Six new applications have been received. The Senior Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Sharmeen Al­Jaff. Attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates. Since the Senior Commission has the option of appointing seven or eight members, Council may choose to appoint 2 or 3 three­year positions. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORTMonday, March 11, 2019SubjectCommission AppointmentsSectionNEW BUSINESS Item No: F.2.Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No: ADM 146GPROPOSED MOTION"The City Council appoints the following commissioners:Planning Commission_____________, ______________, and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022."Park & Recreation Commission_____________ and ______________ for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022, and _____________ for aone­year term ending March 30, 2020.Environmental Commission_____________ and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022.Senior Commission_____________, ______________, and ______________for three­year terms ending March 30, 2022."Approval requires a Simple Majority Vote of members present.DISCUSSIONPlanning CommissionThere are 3 three­year positions available for appointment to the Planning Commission.The terms of CommissionersAndrew Aller, Steven Weick, and Nancy Madsen are expiring.Andrew Aller and Steven Weick have reapplied.Eleven additional applications were received, of which seven are still active. NOTE: Applicant Lynn Pelto wasinterviewed and recommended for appointment by the Planning Commission but has since withdrawn herapplication.The Planning Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Kate Aanenson.Also attachedis an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates.Park & Recreation CommissionThere are 2 three­year positions and 1 one­year position available for appointment to the Park & RecreationCommission.The terms of Commissioners Cole Kelly and Rick Echternacht are expiring.  Both incumbents havereapplied. Commissioner Steve Scharfenburg is resigning his position as he is moving out of the city, leaving one yearremaining in his term.Nine additional applications were received, of which eight are still active.The term of Youth Commissioner Grant Schaeferle is expiring.  Grant is no longer eligible to reapply and no new youthapplications were received.The Park & Recreation Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Park & RecreationDirector Todd Hoffman.Also attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates.Environmental CommissionThere are 2 three­year positions available for appointment to the Environmental Commission.The terms of BillChappell and Wayne Benbow are expiring.Bill Chappell has reapplied.Five additional applications were received, of which four are still active.The Environmental Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Environmental ResourcesCoordinator Jill Sinclair.Also attached is an applications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates.Senior CommissionThere are 2 or 3 three­year positions available for appointment to the Senior Commission. The terms ofCommissioners Jackie Engel and Cheryl Ayotte are expiring and are both currently vacant due to their resignations. Sixnew applications have been received.The Senior Commission ranked the candidates as shown in the attached memo from Sharmeen Al­Jaff. Attached is anapplications summary to assist the City Council in ranking the candidates. Since the Senior Commission has the option of appointing seven or eight members, Council may choose to appoint 2 or 3 three­year positions. ATTACHMENTS: City Code, Section 2­46. ­ Appointment to city committees and commissions Interview Schedule Planning Commission Recommendation Memo Planning Commission Application Summary Planning Commission Attendance Log Park & Recreation Commission Recommendation Memo Park & Recreation Commission Application Summary Park & Recreation Commission Attendance Log Environmental Commission Recommendation Memo Environmental Commission Application Summary Environmental Commission Attendance Log Senior Commission Recommendation Memo Senior Commission Application Summary Senior Commission Attendance Log Page 1 ARTICLE IV. - BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS[4] Footnotes: --- (4) --- Cross reference— Park and recreation commission, § 14-16 et seq.; planning commission, § 15-16 et seq. State Law reference— Authority to establish advisory boards and commissions, M.S. § 412.621(2). DIVISION 1. - GENERALLY Sec. 2-46. - Appointment to city committees and commissions. All vacancies on committees, commissions, and boards shall be advertised to seek applicants. The city council may interview applicants before making appointment. With the exception of the housing and redevelopment authority, all appointments shall be by majority vote of the city council. Once appointed, an applicant shall serve until removed, with or without cause, by a four-fifths vote of the city council, until the expiration of the term of appointment and following appointment of the applicant's successor. Vacancies during a term shall be filled for the unexpired portion of the term. Sec. 2-46.01. - Same—Generally. The council determines the duties and exercises the powers of administrative boards or commissions. However, the council may establish boards or commissions as set forth in this article to investigate subjects or to perform quasi-judicial functions. Additional administrative boards or commissions shall be established as required by law or for the administration of a municipal function jointly shared with another political subdivision. (Ord. No. 363, § 4, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.03. - Planning commission. (a) Commission established. The planning commission is established pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Planning Act, and has the powers and duties assigned to it by that Act, by this Code, and state law. The planning commission is hereby designated the planning agency of the city pursuant to the Municipal Planning Act. (b) Membership. The planning commission consists of seven members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years, expiring on March 31 of each year. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the planning commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable, or as required by law or this Code. Page 2 (d) Powers and duties. The planning commission shall have the powers and duties allowed under state law, including: (1) To prepare a comprehensive plan for the future development of the city that is submitted to the council for implementation and to recommend amendments of the plan to the council from time to time as may be necessary or desirable. (2) To initiate, direct, and review, from time to time, a study of the provisions of the zoning code and the subdivision regulations and to report to the council its advice and recommendations with respect thereto. (3) To study applications and proposals for amendments to the zoning code and applications for special permits and to advise the council of its recommendations thereon. (4) To study preliminary plats and to advise the council of its recommendations thereof. (5) To act in an advisory capacity to the council in all matters wherein powers are assigned to the council by state law concerning comprehensive planning, zoning, platting, changes in streets, and other matters of a general planning nature. (e) Reports. The commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than March 31 of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 5, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.05. - Park and recreation commission. (a) Creation. There is established a park and recreation commission for the city. (b) Membership. The park and recreation commission consists of seven members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years expiring on March 31 of each year. Additionally, the commission may also have one or two youth representatives who shall also be voting members. Youth representatives shall be appointed for one-year terms. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the park and recreation commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable or as required by law or this Code. (d) Powers and duties. The park and recreation commission shall have the following powers and duties: (1) To hold meetings of its members, to consider such matters pertaining to parks and public recreation programs in the city as shall be referred to the commission by the council, or as the members of the commission themselves deem proper. (2) To prepare a comprehensive plan for the future development of the city park and recreation system, to be submitted to the city council for implementation, and to maintain said plan, and recommend amendments of the plan to the city council, as may become necessary or desirable. (3) To act in an advisory capacity to the council in all matters relating to park and recreation in the city. (e) Reports. The commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than March 31 of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 6, 1-12-04; Ord. No. 582, § 1, 4-22-13) Page 3 Sec. 2-46.07. - Board of adjustments and appeals. Pursuant to M.S. § 462.354, a board of adjustments and appeals is hereby established. The planning commission shall serve as the board of adjustments and appeals. (Ord. No. 363, § 7, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.09. - Environmental commission. (a) Commission established. The environmental commission is established to provide the residents of Chanhassen with opportunities to improve the quality of their environment, address issues that affect the city's natural resources, provide environmental education to the public, bring a comprehensive perspective to environmental issues, and advocate the benefits and necessity of Chanhassen's natural resources. (b) Membership. The environmental commission consists of seven members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years expiring on March 31 of each year. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the environmental commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable or as required by law or this Code. (d) Powers and duties. The environmental commission has the following powers and duties: (1) The environmental commission shall serve as an advisory body to the city council and planning commission in addressing the needs of the environment as directed by the city council. All final decisions are to be made by the city council. (2) The environmental commission will consider and make recommendations at the direction of the city council regarding environmental issues. (3) The environmental commission will make recommendations at the direction of the city council regarding funding for environmental projects. (4) The environmental commission may propose studies to the city council and make recommendations according to the results. (5) The environmental commission will coordinate services with other governmental and private agencies for related issues. (e) Reports. The environmental commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than March 31 of each calendar year, containing the commission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 8, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.11. - Senior commission. (a) Commission established. The senior commission serves as an advisory body to the city council in addressing the special needs of people over age 55 living in Chanhassen. They consider and make recommendations to the city council regarding the special needs of seniors in the areas of transportation, information and assistance, independent living in the home, social and recreational Page 4 programs, senior center and senior housing, but are not limited to these issues. All final decisions are made by the city council. (b) Membership. The senior commission consists of seven or eight members appointed in the manner set forth in this subsection. Members of the commission are appointed by the council for staggered terms of three years, expiring on March 31 of each year. (c) Officers; meetings. The chairperson and vice chairperson of the senior commission are appointed by the commission from among its membership for the term of one year. The commission shall adopt its own bylaws with the approval of the city council. All members of the commission may vote on all questions before the commission. No member of the commission may vote on any question in which the member has fiduciary interest, either directly or indirectly. The commission shall determine in its bylaws the date and time of its meetings and shall set such public hearings as are necessary and desirable or as required by law or this Code. (d) Powers and duties. The senior commission shall have the following powers and duties: (1) They make recommendations to the city council regarding funding for special services to be provided for citizens over age 55. (2) They may propose needs studies for this age group where necessary and make recommendations to the city council based on the results. (3) They coordinate services with other governments and private agencies for this age group. (e) Reports. The commission shall make an annual written report to the council, not later than the last day of March of each calendar year, containing the comm ission's recommendations for the ensuing year. (Ord. No. 363, § 9, 1-12-04; Ord. No. 581, § 1, 4-8-13) Sec. 2-46.15. - Resignations and removal from commissions. Commissioners may resign voluntarily or may be removed from office by a majority vote of the city council. Vacancies on any advisory board or commission shall be filled by appointment with a majority vote of the city council. Vacancies shall be announced in the city's official newspaper and posted within city hall. Applications shall be available at the city clerk's office and shall be forwarded to the city council within the time prescribed. (Ord. No. 363, § 10, 1-12-04) Sec. 2-46.17. - Compensation. Commissioners shall serve without compensation. (Ord. No. 363, § 11, 1-12-04) Secs. 2-47—2-55. - Reserved. DIVISION 2. - HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY[5] Footnotes: --- (5) --- Page 5 State Law reference— Creation of city housing and redevelopment authority, M.S. § 469.003. Sec. 2-56. - Authority to adopt housing plan, issue bonds, etc. The city economic development authority is authorized to exercise on behalf of the city all of the powers conferred by M.S. §§ 462C.01 to 462C.08, including without limitation, the power to adopt a housing plan and program and to issue and sell mortgage revenue bonds for single family housing. (Ord. No. 75, 11-7-83; Ord. No. 363, § 12, 1-12-04) Secs. 2-57—2-65. - Reserved. DIVISION 3. - RESERVED[6] Footnotes: --- (6) --- Editor's note—Ord. No. 363, § 13, adopted Jan. 12, 2004, repealed Div. 3, which pertained to the public safety commissions and derived from Ord. No. 70-B, §§ 1.01, 3.02, 4.02, 5.01, and 6.01, adopted Oct. 1, 1984; Ord. No. 166, §§ 1 and 2, adopted Apr. 27, 1992; Ord. No. 268, § 1, adopted May 12, 1997; and Ord. No. 298, § 2, adopted Feb. 14, 2000. Secs. 2-66—2-71. - Reserved. 2019 Commissions Interview Schedule FIRST MEETINGS IN APRIL: Planning Commission - April 2, 2018 Environmental Commission - April 10, 2019 Senior Commission - April 18, 2019 Park & Rec Commission - April 23, 2019 City Council Interviews Environmental Commission Interviews - February 13 February 25 (Monday):6:00 Brian Smith (PRC 2nd Choice) 8:00 Bhakti Modi (SC)6:15 Ross Reeves (PRC 2nd Choice) 8:15 Alice "Lisa" Lyon (SC)6:30 8:30 6:45 Andrew Allen-NO SHOW 8:45 Gerald Cook (PC)7:00 Jeff Harken 9:00 Laura Skistad (PC & PRC) 9:15 Planning Commission Interviews - February 19 9:30 Andrew Aller (PC incumbent-coming from airport may be earlier)1st Antonio J. Fricano (SC 2nd Choice) 2nd Bala Chintaginjala-NO SHOW WITHDRAWN February 26 (Tuesday): 3rd Douglas Reeder (PRC 2nd Choice) 5:00 Sandy Sweetser (PRC)4th Gerald Cook 5:15 Bill Hickey (PRC)5th Lynn Pelto WITHDRAWN 5:30 Natalia Sander (PC-NO SHOW AT PC INTERVIEW) WITHDRAWN 6th Annette Stock-Lind 5:45 Laurie Susla (PC)7th Natalia Sander-NO SHOW 6:00 Jeff Harken (EC)8th John Kunitz 6:15 Lynn Pelto (PC) WITHDRAW 9th Laurie Susla 6:30 Steve Weick (PC incumbent)10th Laura Skistad (PRC 2nd Choice) 6:45 Annette Stock Lind (PC) 7:00 BREAK Senior Commission Interviews - February 21 7:15 Rick Echternacht (PRC incumbent)4:10 Ruth Lunde 7:30 Cole Kelly (PRC incumbent)4:30 Jim Camarata 7:45 Haley Pemrick (PRC)4:50 Alice "Lisa" Lyon 8:00 Drew Allen (EC-NO SHOW AT EC INTERVIEW)5:10 Bhakti Modi 8:15 Brian Smith (EC & PRC)5:30 Mike Schachterle 8:30 Antonio Fricano (PC & SC)5:50 Antonio Fricano (PC 1st Choice) 8:45 Ruth Lunde (SC) 9:00 Jim Camarata (SC)Park & Rec Commission Interviews - February 26 5:45 Bill Hickey March 11 6:00 Laura Skistad 4:30 Doug Reeder (PC & PRC)6:15 Sandy Sweetser 4:45 John Kunitz (PC)6:30 Doug Reeder 5:00 Bill Chappell (EC incumbent)6:45 Ross Reeves 5:15 Mike Schachterle (SC)7:00 Brian Smith 5:30 Ross Reeves (EC & PRC)7:15 Haley Pemrick 5:45 Matt Kutz (PRC-OUT OF COUNTRY FOR PRC INTERVIEW) 6:00 Discuss Commission Appointments Incumbents All commission appointments will take place at the March 11, 2019 City Council Meeting PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATIONS SUMMARY c:\program files (x86)\neevia.com\docconverterpro\temp\nvdc\c8bbf81f-b6e2-4448-a563-20833e915579\chanhassen.2493.1.planning_commission_matrix.docx PLANNING COMMISSION – 2019 Terms Expiring: • Andrew Aller (Reapplied) • Steven Weick (Reapplied) • Nancy Madsen COMMISSION RANK COUNCIL RANK Applicants Andrew Aller, 6661 Horseshoe Curve (incumbent) 1 Steven Weick, 6401 Teton Lane (incumbent) 2 Lynn Pelto, 6581 Foxtail Court - WITHDRAWN 3 Laurie Susla, 7008 Dakota Avenue 4 Douglas Reeder, 590 Broken Arrow Road 5 Laura Skistad, 2284 Stone Creek Lane West 6 Gerald Cook, 9920 Delphinium Lane 7 Antonio Fricano, 980 Lake Lucy Road 8 Annette Stock-Lind, 8104 Dakota Lane 9 John Kunitz, 6441 Bretton Way 10 Alternate Applicants None (All applicants selected the Planning Commission as their first choice) -- -- First Meeting in April April 2 Ranked by: Planning Commissioners Mark Undestad and Michael McGonagill. Commissioners John Tietz, Mark Randall, and Nancy Madsen were absent. Vacancies Three 3-Year Terms 3-Year Terms (2) 1. 2. 3. 2018 Planning Commission Attendance Record January 2January 16February 6February 20March 6March 20April 3April 17May 1May 15June 5June 19July 3July 17August 7August 21September 4September 18Otober 2October 16November 6November 20December 4Percentage of Attendance Andrew Aller 4/10 - 4/19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 93% Mark Undestad 4/5 - 4/20 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 47% Steven Weick 4/13 - 4/19 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 67% John Tietz 4/15 - 4/20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 80% Mark Randall 6/16 - 4/21 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 80% Michael McGonagill 4/18 - 4/21 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 47% Nancy Madsen 4/15 - 4/19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 93% Total Attended 5 4 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 7 6 5 0 6 6 0 6 5 5 6 0 6 0 Number of meetings to date:15 red means no meeting g:\commission\2019\park & recreation commission matrix.docx PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION APPLICATIONS SUMMARY PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION – 2019 Terms Expiring: • Cole Kelly (Reapplied) • Rick Echternacht (Reapplied) • Steve Scharfenburg (Resigning with one year left in his term) • Grant Schaeferle (Youth Representative-no longer eligible) COMMISSION RANK COUNCIL RANK Applicants Cole Kelly, 1556 Bluebill Trail 1 Rick Echternacht, 8746 Flamingo Drive 2 Sandy Sweetser, 9132 Springfield Drive 3 Haley Pemrick,7608 Erie Avenue 4 Bill Hickey, 6301 Elm Tree Avenue --- Matt Kutz, 1080 Lyman Court --- Alternate Applicants Brian Smith, 7610 Great Plains Blvd. Apt. 201 (EC 1st choice) 5 Ross Reeves, 8471 Swan Court (EC 1st choice) --- Douglas Reeder, 590 Broken Arrow Road (PC 1st choice) --- Laura Skistad, 2284 Stone Creek Lane West (PC 1st choice) --- Natalia Sander, 6671 Amberwood Lane (WITHDRAWN) --- Youth Applicants None --- First Meeting in April April 23 Ranked by: Steve Scharfenberg, Meredith Petouvis, and Karl Tsuchiya, Vacancies Two 3-Year Terms/ One 1-Year Terms 3-Year Terms (2) 1. 2. 1-Year Term (1) 1. 2018 PARK & RECREATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD Commissioner Jan 23 Feb 27 Mar 27 Apr 24 May 22 June 26 July 24 Aug 28 Sept 25 Oct 23 Nov 27 Dec 11 Percent of Meetings Attended Karl Tsuchiya (4/17 – 4/20) A X X X X X X A X X X 82% Steve Scharfenberg, Chair (4/04 – 4/20) X X X X A X X X X X X 91% Cole Kelly (4/10 – 4/19) X X A X X X X X A X X 82% Jim Boettcher (4/12 – 4/18) X X X X X A X X X X X 91% Rick Echternacht (4/13 – 4/19) X X A X X X X X X X X 91% Meredith Petouvis (4/17 – 4/20) X X X X X X X X X X X 100% Jennifer Hougham (4/15 – 4/18) X X X 100% Joe Scanlon (4/18 – 4/21) X X X A X X X X 88% Lauren Dale Youth Representative (4/15 – 4/18) X X A N/A Grant Schaeferle Youth Representative (4/17 – 4/18) A X A A X A X A X X X N/A The city council requests a 75% attendance record (does not apply to Youth Representatives). g:\park\th\commission\attendance\prc attendance 2018.docx g:\commission\2019\environmental commission matrix.docx ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION APPLICATIONS SUMMARY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION – 2019 Terms Expiring: • Bill Chappell (Reapplied) • Wayne Benbow COMMISSION RANK COUNCIL RANK Applicants Bill Chappell, 8736 Stonefield Lane (Incumbent) 1 Jeff Harken, 7020 Derby Drive 2 Brian Smith 3 Ross Reeves 4 Drew Allen 5 Alternate Applicants None --- First Meeting in April April 10 Ranked by: Environmental Commissioners Keith Butcher, Don Vasatka, Greg Hawks, Wayne Benbow, and Kristin Fulkerson. Rachel Popken was absent. Vacancies Two 3-Year Terms 3-Year Terms (2) 1. 2. G/PLAN/JS/EC/Administration/Environmental Commission Attendance 18 19 Environmental Commission Attendance April 2018 – March 2019 Name April May June July Aug (Joint Tour*) Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March Percent attended Don Vasatka X X X X X X X X A X 90% Keith Butcher X X X X X X X X X X 100% Wayne Benbow X X A A A X X X X X 70% Bill Chappell X X X X X X X X X X 100% Rachel Popken X X X A X X X X X A 80% Kristin Fulkerson X X X X X X A X X X 90% Greg Hawks X X X X X X X X A X 90% X = meeting attended *= attendance not required g:\plan\js\ec\administration\environmental commission attendance 18 19.doc SENIOR COMMISSION APPLICATIONS SUMMARY SENIOR COMMISSION – 2019 Terms Expiring: • Jackie Engel • Cheryl Ayotte COMMISSION RANK COUNCIL RANK Applicants Jim Camarata, 6340 Oxbow Bend 1 Ruth Lunde, 6721 Hopi Road 3 Alice “Lisa” Lyon, 889 Kimberly Lane 4 Bhakti Modi, 8663 Flamingo Drive 5 Mike Schachterle, 2852 Century Trail 6 Alternate Applicants Antonio Fricano, 980 Lake Lucy Road (PC 1st choice) 2 First Meeting in April April 18 Ranked by: Senior Commissioners Barbara Nevin, Jerry Cerchia, and Mack Titus. Commissioners Dorina Tipton and Carol Buesgens were absent. Vacancies Three 3-Year Terms 3-Year Terms (3) 1. 2. 3. NOTE: The Senior Commission has the option to appoint a total of 7 or 8 commissioners per Section 2.46-11 (b) of the City Code. g:\commission\2019\senior commission matrix.docx 2018-2019 SENIOR COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD Commissioner Apr 20 May 18 June 15 July 20 Aug 16 Sept 20 Oct 19 Nov 15 Dec 21 Jan 18 Feb 21 Mar 15 Percent of Meetings Attended Dorina A. Tipton X X X NO MEETING X X NO MEETING X NO MEETING X NO MEETING 100% Cheryl Ayotte X X X A X X A 71% Carol Buesgens X X X X X X A 85% Barbara Nevin X X X X X X X 100% Mack Titus X X X A X X X 85% Jackie Engel X X X X X X X 100% Jerry Cerchia X X X X X X X 100% \\cfs5\cfs5\shared_data\plan\sj\sc\attendance\2018.docx CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Review of Claims Paid 03­11­2019 Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: I.1. Prepared By Greg Sticha, Finance Director File No:  SUMMARY The following claims are submitted for review on March 11, 2019: Check Numbers Amounts 170435 – 170488 $155,583.09 ACH Payments $150,883.26 Total All Claims $306,466.35 ATTACHMENTS: Check Summary Check Summary ACH Check Detail Check Detail ACH Accounts Payable User: Printed: dwashburn 3/1/2019 9:05 AM Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount ALPAUR Alphagraphics Aurora #492 02/21/2019 0.00 13.04170435 CouVet Countryside Veterinary Clinic PLLC 02/21/2019 0.00 64.00170436 PeterChe Chelsea Petersen 02/21/2019 0.00 581.41170437 BCATRA BCA 02/21/2019 0.00 15.00170438 BCATRA BCA 02/21/2019 0.00 33.25170439 BoldLynn Lynnette Boldt 02/21/2019 0.00 71.00170440 CENENE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 02/21/2019 0.00 1,685.94170441 CouVet Countryside Veterinary Clinic PLLC 02/21/2019 0.00 637.46170442 EHLERS EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 02/21/2019 0.00 1,562.50170443 GOGYMN Go Gymnastics 02/21/2019 0.00 1,312.50170444 INDLIG INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC 02/21/2019 0.00 380.15170445 JOHMAR MaryAnn Johnson 02/21/2019 0.00 13.00170446 KENGRA KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 02/21/2019 VOID 1,356.00 0.00170447 LEAMIN LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 02/21/2019 0.00 994.00170448 MADGAL MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 02/21/2019 0.00 98.85170449 MCKMED McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc 02/21/2019 0.00 142.87170450 MIDCOU MID COUNTY COOP 02/21/2019 0.00 15,414.68170451 MinuPre Minuteman Press 02/21/2019 0.00 389.00170452 MORSAL MORTON SALT 02/21/2019 0.00 1,742.31170453 MTIDIS MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 02/21/2019 0.00 64,216.71170454 RAITRE RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 02/21/2019 0.00 12,891.53170455 RASMMICH Michon Rasmussen 02/21/2019 0.00 408.00170456 SIGNSO SIGNSOURCE 02/21/2019 0.00 516.50170457 SINNDON Don Sinniger 02/21/2019 0.00 25.00170458 SOUSUB Southwest Suburban Publishing 02/21/2019 0.00 2,750.00170459 SULLPATR Patricia Sullivan 02/21/2019 0.00 13.00170460 triedeea DeeAnn Triethart 02/21/2019 0.00 20.96170461 POST POSTMASTER 02/27/2019 0.00 668.76170462 ACHEA AC & HEATING BY GEORGE 02/28/2019 0.00 1,005.00170463 THERME Thermech 02/28/2019 0.00 7,300.00170464 AARP AARP 02/28/2019 0.00 400.00170465 AMETIR AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 02/28/2019 0.00 266.80170466 ASPEQU Aspen Equipment 02/28/2019 0.00 377.71170467 BCATRA BCA 02/28/2019 0.00 15.00170468 BERCOF BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 02/28/2019 0.00 659.69170469 BollAnd Bollig & Sons, Inc.02/28/2019 0.00 500.00170470 CASEJACO JACOB CASEBEER 02/28/2019 0.00 10.00170471 CORMAI CORE & MAIN LP 02/28/2019 0.00 115.96170472 FACMOT FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 02/28/2019 0.00 83.36170473 FLEPRI FleetPride, Inc.02/28/2019 0.00 679.08170474 GREWAT Great Waters Financial 02/28/2019 0.00 160.00170475 HARTLIFE Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company02/28/2019 0.00 1,025.77170476 HENCOU HENNEPIN COUNTY 02/28/2019 0.00 88.03170477 ICMART ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 02/28/2019 0.00 1,466.67170478 Loc49 IUOE Local #49 02/28/2019 0.00 735.00170479 MIDCOU MID COUNTY COOP 02/28/2019 0.00 17,171.83170480 MinuPre Minuteman Press 02/28/2019 0.00 16.00170481 Page 1AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (3/1/2019 9:05 AM) Check No Check DateVendor NameVendor No Void Checks Check Amount MNHEAL MN DEPT OF HEALTH 02/28/2019 0.00 13,252.00170482 NCPERS MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 02/28/2019 0.00 64.00170483 SIGNSO SIGNSOURCE 02/28/2019 0.00 56.50170484 STAMIN STATE OF MINNESOTA 02/28/2019 0.00 100.00170485 SUBRAT SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY 02/28/2019 0.00 1,356.00170486 ULINE ULINE INC 02/28/2019 0.00 76.27170487 WILSCO Williams Scotsman Inc 02/28/2019 0.00 1,941.00170488 Report Total (54 checks): 155,583.09 1,356.00 Page 2AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (3/1/2019 9:05 AM) Accounts Payable Checks by Date - Summary by Check User: dwashburn Printed: 3/1/2019 9:22 AM Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH Z-ACMTOO Acme Tools 02/15/2019 0.00 319.99 ACH Z-AIRMEC Air Mechanical 02/15/2019 0.00 373.00 ACH Z-AMAZON Amazon 02/15/2019 0.00 8,643.17 ACH Z-AMELEG American Legion 02/15/2019 0.00 67.84 ACH Z-AMEPLA American Planning Association 02/15/2019 0.00 735.00 ACH Z-CARHAR Carhartt 02/15/2019 0.00 194.94 ACH Z-CARCOF Caribou Coffee 02/15/2019 0.00 6.00 ACH Z-CDWG CDW Government 02/15/2019 0.00 219.34 ACH Z-CHANDI Chanhassen Dinner Theatre 02/15/2019 0.00 3,280.90 ACH Z-COBORN Coborn's Delivers 02/15/2019 0.00 159.46 ACH Z-CUBFOO Cub Foods 02/15/2019 0.00 176.47 ACH Z-CUSINK CustomInk.com 02/15/2019 0.00 169.72 ACH Z-DOMINO Domino's Pizza 02/15/2019 0.00 37.74 ACH Z-DUNGAR Dungarees 02/15/2019 0.00 344.95 ACH Z-EPISPO Epic Sports 02/15/2019 0.00 42.63 ACH Z-FACBOO Facebook 02/15/2019 0.00 25.29 ACH Z-FIBOPT FiberOptic.com 02/15/2019 0.00 315.00 ACH Z-FREWAT Freshwater 02/15/2019 0.00 290.00 ACH Z-GFOA Government Finance Officers Association 02/15/2019 0.00 420.00 ACH Z-HACCOM Hach Company 02/15/2019 0.00 436.27 ACH Z-HEAKIN HealthyKin.com 02/15/2019 0.00 184.75 ACH Z-HOMDEP Home Depot 02/15/2019 0.00 1,061.67 ACH Z-HOULIH Houlihan's 02/15/2019 0.00 78.00 ACH Z-HYDWOR Hydraulic World 02/15/2019 0.00 340.44 ACH Z-HYDSOF HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 02/15/2019 0.00 45.00 ACH Z-IKEA IKEA 02/15/2019 0.00 251.10 ACH Z-INTCOD International Code Council 02/15/2019 0.00 1,430.00 ACH Z-JCPENN JCPenney 02/15/2019 0.00 109.98 ACH Z-JOHHEN John Henry Foster 02/15/2019 0.00 75.49 ACH Z-LUNBYE Lunds & Byerly's 02/15/2019 0.00 36.24 ACH Z-MACYS Macy's 02/15/2019 0.00 182.74 ACH Z-MENARD Menards 02/15/2019 0.00 21.63 ACH Z-MILFLE Mills Fleet Farm 02/15/2019 0.00 58.36 ACH Z-MNNUR Minnesota Nursery and Landscape 02/15/2019 0.00 327.00 ACH Z-MNRUR Minnesota Rural Water Association 02/15/2019 0.00 240.00 ACH Z-MNTROP Minnesota Trophies & Gifts 02/15/2019 0.00 41.29 ACH Z-MNAGRI MN Dept of Agriculture 02/15/2019 0.00 10.22 ACH Z-NORTOO Northern Tool+Equipment 02/15/2019 0.00 1,203.18 ACH Z-OFFMAX Office Max/Office Depot 02/15/2019 0.00 111.60 ACH Z-PANBRE Panera Bread 02/15/2019 0.00 190.19 ACH Z-PARPEO Parts People 02/15/2019 0.00 199.95 ACH Z-PETBRO Peterson Brothers Funeral Home 02/15/2019 0.00 82.13 ACH Z-POUBAR Pounder's Bar & Grill 02/15/2019 0.00 18.00 ACH Z-POWSYS Power Systems 02/15/2019 0.00 87.02 ACH Z-PRESAF Premier Safety 02/15/2019 0.00 73.65 ACH Z-PRODYN ProFlow Dynamics 02/15/2019 0.00 33.00 ACH Z-PUBSUR Public Surplus 02/15/2019 0.00 110.99 Page 1 of 2 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount ACH Z-REDWIN Red Wing Store 02/15/2019 0.00 314.98 ACH Z-RIVPRI Riverfront Printing 02/15/2019 0.00 144.00 ACH Z-ROTCLU Rotary Club 02/15/2019 0.00 106.00 ACH Z-SAMCLU Sam's Club 02/15/2019 0.00 31.48 ACH Z-SENLAN Sensible Land Use Coalition 02/15/2019 0.00 48.00 ACH Z-SOYSUS Soya Sushi & Grill 02/15/2019 0.00 76.13 ACH Z-STATRI Star Tribune 02/15/2019 0.00 410.28 ACH Z-TARGET Target 02/15/2019 0.00 132.07 ACH Z-URBLAN Urban Land Institute 02/15/2019 0.00 560.00 ACH Z-USABLU USABlueBook 02/15/2019 0.00 42.66 ACH Z-WEISSM WEISSMAN 02/15/2019 0.00 336.01 ACH Z-ZORO Zoro 02/15/2019 0.00 34.80 ACH carcou Carver County 02/21/2019 0.00 890.00 ACH DelDen Delta Dental 02/21/2019 0.00 2,220.80 ACH EnvSer EnviroTech Services Inc. 02/21/2019 0.00 1,024.08 ACH HOIKOE HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 02/21/2019 0.00 7,350.00 ACH InnOff Innovative Office Solutions LLC 02/21/2019 0.00 167.20 ACH MUNCOD MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION 02/21/2019 0.00 900.00 ACH PioEng Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 02/21/2019 0.00 350.00 ACH ProTec Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 02/21/2019 0.00 431.00 ACH STAPRO Stavros Properties 02/21/2019 0.00 303.42 ACH STRGUA STRATOGUARD LLC 02/21/2019 0.00 163.20 ACH MINCON SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 0.00 2,116.00 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 02/21/2019 0.00 5,519.08 ACH 3RDLAI 3RD LAIR SKATEPARK 02/28/2019 0.00 500.00 ACH AFLAC American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 02/28/2019 0.00 39.78 ACH ANCTEC ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 02/28/2019 0.00 11,724.50 ACH BOYTRU Boyer Truck Parts 02/28/2019 0.00 710.50 ACH carcou Carver County 02/28/2019 0.00 5,855.04 ACH ColLif Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 02/28/2019 0.00 134.58 ACH EMERES Emergency Response Solutions 02/28/2019 0.00 38.88 ACH AVESIS Fidelity Security Life 02/28/2019 0.00 176.43 ACH FORAME FORCE AMERICA INC 02/28/2019 0.00 738.05 ACH AlHiJuli Juli Al-Hilwani 02/28/2019 0.00 285.00 ACH METFOR METROPOLITAN FORD 02/28/2019 0.00 11.40 ACH MVEC MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 02/28/2019 0.00 302.26 ACH NAPA NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 02/28/2019 0.00 6.58 ACH POTMN Potentia MN Solar 02/28/2019 0.00 3,067.83 ACH MINCON SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/28/2019 0.00 390.00 ACH SUNLIF Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 0.00 2,988.24 ACH TCIInc TCIC, Inc. 02/28/2019 0.00 274.50 ACH TOUPOI TouchPoint Logic LLC 02/28/2019 0.00 60,074.00 ACH ULTCON ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 02/28/2019 0.00 3,611.00 ACH UNIWAY UNITED WAY 02/28/2019 0.00 29.40 ACH VESSCO VESSCO INC 02/28/2019 0.00 186.00 ACH XCEL XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 0.00 13,206.77 Report Total: 0.00 150,883.26 Page 2 of 2 Accounts Payable Check Detail-Checks User: dwashburn Printed: 03/01/2019 - 9:20 AM Name Check D Account Description Amount AARP 02/28/2019 101-1560-4300 Driver Safety - 4 hr refresher course 400.00 AARP 400.00 AC & HEATING BY GEORGE 02/28/2019 700-0000-4530 Inducer Blower, Curcuit Board 1,005.00 AC & HEATING BY GEORGE 1,005.00 Alphagraphics Aurora #492 02/21/2019 101-1320-4340 shipping costs for leave requests 13.04 Alphagraphics Aurora #492 13.04 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 02/28/2019 101-1550-4120 117/112L HER POWER ST2 ST TRAILER 266.80 AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS INC 266.80 Aspen Equipment 02/28/2019 101-1320-4120 Seal Kit 377.71 Aspen Equipment 377.71 BCA 02/21/2019 101-1120-4300 Background Investigation 15.00 BCA 02/21/2019 101-1220-4300 Background Investigation 33.25 BCA 02/28/2019 101-1120-4300 Background Investigation 15.00 BCA 63.25 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 02/28/2019 101-1170-4110 Coffee 659.69 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 659.69 Boldt Lynnette 02/21/2019 101-1560-3637 Refund - Classic Nashville Roadshow #6191.108 71.00 Boldt Lynnette 71.00 Bollig & Sons, Inc.02/28/2019 815-8202-2024 Erosion Escrow - 3738 Hickory Road 500.00 Bollig & Sons, Inc. 500.00 CASEBEER JACOB 02/28/2019 700-0000-4370 MN Water Qualtiy Training Lunch 10.00 CASEBEER JACOB 10.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 02/21/2019 101-1220-4320 gas charges 1,116.10 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 02/21/2019 101-1530-4320 gas charges 468.96 CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 02/21/2019 101-1120-4320 gas charges 100.88 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (03/01/2019 - 9:20 AM)Page 1 of 5 Name Check D Account Description Amount CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO 1,685.94 CORE & MAIN LP 02/28/2019 700-0000-4550 O-Rings 115.96 CORE & MAIN LP 115.96 Countryside Veterinary Clinic PLLC 02/21/2019 101-1260-4300 Boarding, Exams, Shots 442.60 Countryside Veterinary Clinic PLLC 02/21/2019 101-1260-4300 Impound Intake, Boarding-Impound 64.00 Countryside Veterinary Clinic PLLC 02/21/2019 101-1260-4300 Impound, Exam, Shots 194.86 Countryside Veterinary Clinic PLLC 701.46 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 02/21/2019 700-0000-4300 Utility Rate Study 520.83 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 02/21/2019 701-0000-4300 Utility Rate Study 520.83 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 02/21/2019 720-0000-4300 Utility Rate Study 520.84 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 1,562.50 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 02/28/2019 101-1250-4140 DEL 86PS part 83.36 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 83.36 FleetPride, Inc.02/28/2019 101-1370-4170 Fluid Diesel Exhaust 55 gallon 135.66 FleetPride, Inc.02/28/2019 101-1370-4170 Fluid Diesel Exhaust 55 gallon 138.37 FleetPride, Inc.02/28/2019 101-1320-4140 Delco Alter 12V 160A Hinge Mnt 154.99 FleetPride, Inc.02/28/2019 101-1320-4140 Rim Clamp, In-bound freight 250.06 FleetPride, Inc. 679.08 Go Gymnastics 02/21/2019 101-1537-4300 gymnastics class 1/19-2/16 945.00 Go Gymnastics 02/21/2019 101-1538-4300 gymnastics class 1/19-2/16 367.50 Go Gymnastics 1,312.50 Great Waters Financial 02/28/2019 101-0000-2021 Refund Room Rental 10.99 Great Waters Financial 02/28/2019 101-1531-3631 Refund Room Rental 149.01 Great Waters Financial 160.00 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1160-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 26.39 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1250-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 105.51 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1310-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 71.84 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1320-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 112.76 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1550-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 95.48 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1420-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 80.50 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1430-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 4.81 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1370-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 45.59 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1520-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 35.96 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1530-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 14.61 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1560-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 11.99 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1600-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 25.34 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1700-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 2.82 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1120-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 72.10 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1130-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 49.27 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 210-0000-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 18.60 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (03/01/2019 - 9:20 AM)Page 2 of 5 Name Check D Account Description Amount Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 720-7201-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 5.68 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 720-7202-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 5.68 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1170-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 12.61 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 101-1220-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 43.14 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 701-0000-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 68.70 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 700-0000-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 94.56 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 02/28/2019 720-0000-4040 Mar 2019 insurance premium 21.83 Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company 1,025.77 HENNEPIN COUNTY 02/28/2019 101-0000-3010 2018 final settlement 73.60 HENNEPIN COUNTY 02/28/2019 420-0000-3010 2018 final settlement 0.61 HENNEPIN COUNTY 02/28/2019 369-0000-3010 2018 final settlement 3.01 HENNEPIN COUNTY 02/28/2019 601-0000-3010 2018 final settlement 2.51 HENNEPIN COUNTY 02/28/2019 400-0000-3010 2018 final settlement 5.23 HENNEPIN COUNTY 02/28/2019 370-0000-3010 2018 final settlement 3.07 HENNEPIN COUNTY 88.03 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 02/28/2019 101-0000-2009 3/1/19 ID #304303 1,135.42 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 02/28/2019 210-0000-2009 3/1/19 ID #304303 25.00 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 02/28/2019 700-0000-2009 3/1/19 ID #304303 152.50 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 02/28/2019 701-0000-2009 3/1/19 ID #304303 152.50 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 02/28/2019 720-0000-2009 3/1/19 ID #304303 1.25 ICMA RETIREMENT AND TRUST-457 1,466.67 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC 02/21/2019 101-1370-4510 Lampholder, Ballasts 380.15 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC 380.15 IUOE Local #49 02/28/2019 101-0000-2004 PR Batch 00401.03.2019 Local 49 dues 511.59 IUOE Local #49 02/28/2019 700-0000-2004 PR Batch 00401.03.2019 Local 49 dues 161.32 IUOE Local #49 02/28/2019 701-0000-2004 PR Batch 00401.03.2019 Local 49 dues 62.09 IUOE Local #49 735.00 Johnson MaryAnn 02/21/2019 101-1560-3637 Refund - An Affair of the Heart-Valentine's Day Party #6191.107 13.00 Johnson MaryAnn 13.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 02/21/2019 720-0000-4360 MN Cities Stormwater Coalition Contributions 994.00 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 994.00 MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 02/21/2019 101-1140-4302 Labor Relations Services svc through 1/31/2019 98.85 MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP 98.85 McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc 02/21/2019 101-1220-4130 Gloves 142.87 McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc 142.87 MID COUNTY COOP 02/21/2019 101-1370-4170 Winter Diesel Dyed 7,183.20 MID COUNTY COOP 02/21/2019 101-1370-4170 No Lead Gasoline 8,231.48 MID COUNTY COOP 02/28/2019 101-1370-4170 No Lead Gasoline, Winter Diesel Fuel 17,171.83 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (03/01/2019 - 9:20 AM)Page 3 of 5 Name Check D Account Description Amount MID COUNTY COOP 32,586.51 Minuteman Press 02/21/2019 101-1170-4110 business cards - S Flagstad 16.00 Minuteman Press 02/21/2019 101-1170-4110 Door Hangers - ER Water Shutdown, Notice Uniform Code 373.00 Minuteman Press 02/28/2019 101-1170-4110 Business Cards - Don Nutter 16.00 Minuteman Press 405.00 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 02/28/2019 700-0000-4509 Water Supply Service Connection Fee 1/1/19-3/31/19 13,252.00 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 13,252.00 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 02/28/2019 101-0000-2011 PR Batch 00401.03.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 44.01 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 02/28/2019 700-0000-2011 PR Batch 00401.03.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.60 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 02/28/2019 701-0000-2011 PR Batch 00401.03.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 9.60 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 02/28/2019 720-0000-2011 PR Batch 00401.03.2019 NCPERS-Life Insurance 0.79 MN NCPERS LIFE INSURANCE 64.00 MORTON SALT 02/21/2019 101-1320-4150 Safe-T-Salt 1,742.31 MORTON SALT 1,742.31 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 02/21/2019 400-0000-4705 Groundmaster 4000-D 64,216.71 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 64,216.71 Petersen Chelsea 02/21/2019 101-1120-4380 Mileage 400.62 Petersen Chelsea 02/21/2019 101-1120-4380 Mileage 160.79 Petersen Chelsea 02/21/2019 101-1120-4370 APMP Conference - registration 20.00 Petersen Chelsea 581.41 POSTMASTER 02/27/2019 700-0000-4330 February Utility Statements 334.38 POSTMASTER 02/27/2019 701-0000-4330 February Utility Statements 334.38 POSTMASTER 668.76 RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 02/21/2019 720-7202-4300 Winter Parks Pruning - Curry Farms 1,166.01 RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 02/21/2019 720-7202-4300 Winter Parks Pruning - Sugarbush 1,488.00 RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 02/21/2019 720-7202-4300 Winter Parks Pruning - Powerhill 1,722.80 RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 02/21/2019 720-7202-4300 Winter Parks Pruning - Minnewashta Heights 3,515.97 RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 02/21/2019 720-7202-4300 Winter Parks Pruning - Meadow Green 4,998.75 RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 12,891.53 Rasmussen Michon 02/21/2019 101-1539-4300 Chair Yoga 4191.112 408.00 Rasmussen Michon 408.00 SIGNSOURCE 02/21/2019 101-1220-4120 FF Helmet Graphics 516.50 SIGNSOURCE 02/28/2019 101-1560-4130 Replacement name plate - M Blazanin 56.50 SIGNSOURCE 573.00 Sinniger Don 02/21/2019 101-1320-4150 Mailbox Post Mount Combo - replace damage 25.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (03/01/2019 - 9:20 AM)Page 4 of 5 Name Check D Account Description Amount Sinniger Don 25.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing 02/21/2019 101-1110-4340 printing/advertising 1,679.20 Southwest Suburban Publishing 02/21/2019 101-1310-4340 printing/advertising 64.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing 02/21/2019 101-1410-4340 printing/advertising 54.40 Southwest Suburban Publishing 02/21/2019 101-1611-4340 printing/advertising 722.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing 02/21/2019 601-6038-4340 printing/advertising 51.20 Southwest Suburban Publishing 02/21/2019 700-7050-4340 printing/advertising - W-061 179.20 Southwest Suburban Publishing 2,750.00 STATE OF MINNESOTA 02/28/2019 700-7019-4550 MN Hazardous Materials Act Fee, Chemical Inventory Fee 100.00 STATE OF MINNESOTA 100.00 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY 02/28/2019 101-1310-4300 2019 Membership - 1st half 1,356.00 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY 1,356.00 Sullivan Patricia 02/21/2019 101-1560-3637 Refund - An Affair of the Heart: Valentine's Day Party 13.00 Sullivan Patricia 13.00 Thermech 02/28/2019 400-0000-4510 Insulation complete - LMC Claim 7,300.00 Thermech 7,300.00 Triethart DeeAnn 02/21/2019 101-1250-4120 First Aid supplies 20.96 Triethart DeeAnn 20.96 ULINE INC 02/28/2019 101-1600-4130 White Grocery Bags 76.27 ULINE INC 76.27 Williams Scotsman Inc 02/28/2019 101-1617-4410 42x12 Mobile Office - 1/12/19 to 2/11/19 647.00 Williams Scotsman Inc 02/28/2019 101-1617-4410 42x12 Mobile Office - 1/12/19 to 2/11/19 647.00 Williams Scotsman Inc 02/28/2019 101-1617-4410 42x12 Mobile Office - 1/12/19 to 2/11/19 647.00 Williams Scotsman Inc 1,941.00 155,583.09 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-Checks (03/01/2019 - 9:20 AM)Page 5 of 5 Accounts Payable Check Detail-ACH User: dwashburn Printed: 03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM Name Check D Account Description Amount 3RD LAIR SKATEPARK 02/28/2019 101-1613-4300 Summer Skateboard Contest @ Chan SkatePark on 7/3/19 500.00 3RD LAIR SKATEPARK 500.00 Acme Tools 02/15/2019 101-1320-4260 Impact Wrench w/Friction 319.99 Acme Tools 02/15/2019 101-1320-4260 Wacker Neuson Internal Vibrator 787.99 Acme Tools 02/15/2019 101-1320-4260 Wacker Neuson Internal Vibrator -787.99 Acme Tools 319.99 Air Mechanical 02/15/2019 101-1550-4300 Hot Surface Ignitor 263.00 Air Mechanical 02/15/2019 101-1550-4300 OEM Ignitor 110.00 Air Mechanical 373.00 Al-Hilwani Juli 02/28/2019 101-1533-4300 Personal Training 285.00 Al-Hilwani Juli 285.00 Amazon 02/15/2019 101-1170-4110 Acylic Ballot Box 61.99 Amazon 02/15/2019 101-1170-4110 Open End Catalog Envelopes 12.99 Amazon 02/15/2019 101-1220-4290 Tamper seals/Zip ties, Shoe and Boot Covers 26.61 Amazon 02/15/2019 101-1530-4120 Scale 90.23 Amazon 02/15/2019 700-7043-4510 Window Tint Film 69.79 Amazon 02/15/2019 700-7043-4150 Cartridge 27.60 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Surface book charger 99.95 Amazon 02/15/2019 101-1160-4530 Paddle Antenna, Webcam 61.98 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Mitel IP Phones, Cordless Headsets 1,956.84 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Aruba Switch 1,027.61 Amazon 02/15/2019 101-1160-4150 Cable Ties, Brother Tapes 95.16 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Canon Microphone 399.00 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Cable Punch Down Stand 6.99 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Aruba Access Points 1,459.50 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Keystone Jack, Modular Plug Breakout Adapter 117.78 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Dell Latitude 14 Rugged 5414/14 I5 1,887.99 Amazon 02/15/2019 101-1160-4150 3 pack of mouse pads 10.99 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 MK710 Wireless keyboard mouse combo 174.06 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 24 inch monitors 839.96 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 cables, ipad dock 50.48 Amazon 02/15/2019 101-1310-4120 daily planner, crayons 32.61 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Adapter, port cable 33.14 Amazon 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Dell speaker bars 99.92 Amazon 8,643.17 American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus02/28/2019 101-0000-2008 February 2019 premium 39.78 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 1 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus 39.78 American Legion 02/15/2019 101-1220-4290 Chief lunch meeting 32.84 American Legion 02/15/2019 101-1120-4370 Breakfast meeting with Workman & Callister 35.00 American Legion 67.84 American Planning Association 02/15/2019 101-1420-4370 2019 National Planning Conference 735.00 American Planning Association 735.00 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 02/28/2019 101-1220-4531 Replacement USB Port Cov 54.50 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 02/28/2019 400-4127-4705 G5 Dual Band VHF Pagers and Desktop Chargers 11,670.00 ANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 11,724.50 Boyer Truck Parts 02/28/2019 101-1320-4140 Pipe-Exhaust, Brace, Oil Seal, Dust Shield 546.78 Boyer Truck Parts 02/28/2019 101-1320-4140 Pipe-Exhaust 163.72 Boyer Truck Parts 710.50 Carhartt 02/15/2019 700-0000-4240 LS t-shirts, jeans, sweatshirt 194.94 Carhartt 194.94 Caribou Coffee 02/15/2019 101-1120-4370 Recruitment meeting - coffee 6.00 Caribou Coffee 6.00 Carver County 02/21/2019 101-1160-4320 CarverLink Internet/Fiber - Feb 2019 540.00 Carver County 02/21/2019 700-7043-4320 Dark Fiber WWTP - Feb 2019 350.00 Carver County 02/28/2019 101-1550-4150 Treated Salt 5,855.04 Carver County 6,745.04 CDW Government 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Camera dome mounting kit 101.26 CDW Government 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Camera mounting bracket 86.25 CDW Government 02/15/2019 101-1160-4260 Serial Null Modern adapter 10.14 CDW Government 02/15/2019 101-1160-4260 Black Box DB9 serial adapters 21.69 CDW Government 219.34 Chanhassen Dinner Theatre 02/15/2019 101-1560-4300 Holiday Inn tickets 1,500.00 Chanhassen Dinner Theatre 02/15/2019 101-1560-4300 Holiday Inn tickets 1,464.15 Chanhassen Dinner Theatre 02/15/2019 101-1560-4300 Holiday Inn tickets 316.75 Chanhassen Dinner Theatre 3,280.90 Coborn's Delivers 02/15/2019 101-1110-4370 City Council - Water 89.70 Coborn's Delivers 02/15/2019 101-1170-4110 Soap, Creamers, Air Freshners, Tissues 69.76 Coborn's Delivers 159.46 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 02/28/2019 701-0000-2008 February 2019 premium 36.93 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 02/28/2019 101-0000-2008 February 2019 premium 60.72 Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 02/28/2019 700-0000-2008 February 2019 premium 36.93 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 2 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co 134.58 Cub Foods 02/15/2019 101-1220-4290 Cookies - Rookie Orientation night 20.48 Cub Foods 02/15/2019 101-1560-4300 Fruit, Muffins, Cake 28.44 Cub Foods 02/15/2019 101-1560-4130 Gift Cards 70.00 Cub Foods 02/15/2019 101-1560-4130 Lunch event - pasta, beans, turkey, produce 47.58 Cub Foods 02/15/2019 101-1560-4300 Fruit, Cake 9.97 Cub Foods 176.47 CustomInk.com 02/15/2019 101-1530-4375 LS T-shirts - Silver Sneakers Promo 169.72 CustomInk.com 169.72 Delta Dental 02/21/2019 101-0000-2013 March insurance premium 1,643.45 Delta Dental 02/21/2019 101-0000-2013 March insurance premium - cobra 60.40 Delta Dental 02/21/2019 700-0000-2013 March insurance premium 220.35 Delta Dental 02/21/2019 701-0000-2013 March insurance premium 190.16 Delta Dental 02/21/2019 720-0000-2013 March insurance premium 106.44 Delta Dental 2,220.80 Domino's Pizza 02/15/2019 700-0000-4150 watermain break - frontier trail 37.74 Domino's Pizza 37.74 Dungarees 02/15/2019 700-0000-4240 Pants, Jeans, Boots 172.48 Dungarees 02/15/2019 701-0000-4240 Pants, Jeans, Boots 172.47 Dungarees 344.95 Emergency Response Solutions 02/28/2019 101-1220-4120 O-Ring 38.88 Emergency Response Solutions 38.88 EnviroTech Services Inc.02/21/2019 101-1320-4150 Calcium Chloride 1,024.08 EnviroTech Services Inc. 1,024.08 Epic Sports 02/15/2019 101-1530-4120 Foam Bowling Pins 42.63 Epic Sports 42.63 Facebook 02/15/2019 101-1530-4375 Holiday Ad Boutique 25.29 Facebook 25.29 FiberOptic.com 02/15/2019 400-4126-4703 Fiber Optic Meter 315.00 FiberOptic.com 315.00 Fidelity Security Life 02/28/2019 101-0000-2007 Vision insurance - March 2019 162.95 Fidelity Security Life 02/28/2019 700-0000-2007 Vision insurance - March 2019 10.18 Fidelity Security Life 02/28/2019 701-0000-2007 Vision insurance - March 2019 4.03 Fidelity Security Life 02/28/2019 720-0000-2007 Vision insurance - March 2019 -0.73 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 3 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Fidelity Security Life 176.43 FORCE AMERICA INC 02/28/2019 101-1550-4120 24.0cid-2 Bolt A-1-1/4" keyed - #10 staggered ports 738.05 FORCE AMERICA INC 738.05 Freshwater 02/15/2019 101-1310-4370 2019 Road Salt Symp Registration - C Burke 145.00 Freshwater 02/15/2019 101-1310-4370 2019 Road Salt Symp Registration - R Pinkalla 145.00 Freshwater 290.00 Government Finance Officers Association 02/15/2019 101-1130-4370 Annual GFOA Conference 420.00 Government Finance Officers Association 420.00 Hach Company 02/15/2019 700-7043-4550 Chlorine Reagent, Chemkey Regents 436.27 Hach Company 436.27 HealthyKin.com 02/15/2019 700-7019-4150 Paper towels, toilet paper 184.75 HealthyKin.com 184.75 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 02/21/2019 410-0000-4300 Proj 018-072 Lake Ann Park Expansion - svc from Jan 2019 7,350.00 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP 7,350.00 Home Depot 02/15/2019 700-7019-4510 Door Closer, Foam Sealant 199.63 Home Depot 02/15/2019 101-1550-4120 Plywood, Paint, Glue, Chain, Saw, Drill/Impact Kit 428.64 Home Depot 02/15/2019 700-0000-4260 Torch Head, Cylinder, Tool Bag 52.42 Home Depot 02/15/2019 700-7019-4150 Cable Ties, Wire Rope 14.01 Home Depot 02/15/2019 701-0000-4551 PVC Bushing, Coupling 8.32 Home Depot 02/15/2019 101-1320-4260 Hammer Drill/Impact Driver Combo 267.36 Home Depot 02/15/2019 700-7043-4150 Detergent, Grease gun, Rust Remover 91.29 Home Depot 1,061.67 Houlihan's 02/15/2019 101-1110-4370 Year end wrap up with c.c dept heads 78.00 Houlihan's 78.00 Hydraulic World 02/15/2019 101-1320-4120 misc parts/supplies 340.44 Hydraulic World 340.44 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 02/15/2019 101-1310-4360 License 45.00 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 45.00 IKEA 02/15/2019 101-1530-4120 Rec Center Frames 251.10 IKEA 251.10 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 02/21/2019 101-1170-4110 Calculator roll paper 7.12 Innovative Office Solutions LLC 02/21/2019 101-1170-4110 Files, Paper, Push pins, Markers 160.08 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 4 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Innovative Office Solutions LLC 167.20 International Code Council 02/15/2019 101-1250-4370 2019 ICC Upper Great Plains Region Registration - J Keogh 290.00 International Code Council 02/15/2019 101-1250-4370 2019 ICC Upper Great Plains Region Registration - P Ekholm 290.00 International Code Council 02/15/2019 101-1250-4370 2019 ICC Upper Great Plains Region Registration - E Tessman 290.00 International Code Council 02/15/2019 101-1250-4370 2019 ICC Upper Great Plains Region Registration - B Sullivan 290.00 International Code Council 02/15/2019 101-1250-4370 2019 ICC Upper Great Plains Region Registration - J Heidelberger 145.00 International Code Council 02/15/2019 101-1250-4360 Cerificate renewals for the next 3 years 125.00 International Code Council 1,430.00 JCPenney 02/15/2019 700-0000-4240 Jeans 79.98 JCPenney 02/15/2019 700-0000-4240 Work Shirt 30.00 JCPenney 109.98 John Henry Foster 02/15/2019 700-7019-4120 Zeks Drain Float 75.49 John Henry Foster 75.49 Lunds & Byerly's 02/15/2019 101-1110-4370 goal session - Egg Bake 36.24 Lunds & Byerly's 36.24 Macy's 02/15/2019 700-0000-4240 Jeans, Pants, shirts 91.37 Macy's 02/15/2019 701-0000-4240 Jeans, Pants, shirts 91.37 Macy's 182.74 Menards 02/15/2019 101-1220-4290 Folding Knife 21.63 Menards 21.63 METROPOLITAN FORD 02/28/2019 701-0000-4140 1113 Kit - Jet 11.40 METROPOLITAN FORD 11.40 Mills Fleet Farm 02/15/2019 701-0000-4240 T-shirts, Jeans, Crew 29.18 Mills Fleet Farm 02/15/2019 700-0000-4240 T-shirts, Jeans, Crew 29.18 Mills Fleet Farm 58.36 Minnesota Nursery and Landscape 02/15/2019 700-0000-4370 Northern Green 2019 327.00 Minnesota Nursery and Landscape 327.00 Minnesota Rural Water Association 02/15/2019 700-0000-4370 Class - March 5-7, 2019 290.00 Minnesota Rural Water Association 02/15/2019 700-0000-4370 Refund for class - member -50.00 Minnesota Rural Water Association 240.00 Minnesota Trophies & Gifts 02/15/2019 101-1611-4130 Cracked Ice trophies 41.29 Minnesota Trophies & Gifts 41.29 MN Dept of Agriculture 02/15/2019 101-1550-4370 MDA Renewal - D Koskela 10.22 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 5 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount MN Dept of Agriculture 10.22 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 02/28/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 137.76 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 02/28/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 43.05 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 02/28/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 121.45 MN VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP 302.26 MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION 02/21/2019 101-1160-4300 Annual hosting fee - city code 900.00 MUNICIPAL CODE CORPORATION 900.00 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 02/28/2019 101-1320-4120 misc parts/supplies 6.58 NAPA AUTO & TRUCK PARTS 6.58 Northern Tool+Equipment 02/15/2019 700-0000-4530 Hand truck, Generator 1,203.18 Northern Tool+Equipment 1,203.18 Office Max/Office Depot 02/15/2019 101-1550-4120 Post-its, Markers, Pencils, Cork Board, Towelettes 71.01 Office Max/Office Depot 02/15/2019 101-1220-4290 Binders 40.59 Office Max/Office Depot 111.60 Panera Bread 02/15/2019 101-1110-4370 City Council Dinner 190.19 Panera Bread 190.19 Parts People 02/15/2019 101-1160-4530 Dell Latitude replacement screen 199.95 Parts People 199.95 Peterson Brothers Funeral Home 02/15/2019 101-1110-4370 Funeral Flowers for Todd Hoffman's father 82.13 Peterson Brothers Funeral Home 82.13 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.02/21/2019 601-6042-4300 118132 Lake Susan Trail Rehab - svc through 1/31/19 350.00 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. 350.00 Potentia MN Solar 02/28/2019 101-1190-4320 December 2018 1,351.17 Potentia MN Solar 02/28/2019 700-0000-4320 December 2018 657.42 Potentia MN Solar 02/28/2019 101-1170-4320 December 2018 1,059.24 Potentia MN Solar 3,067.83 Pounder's Bar & Grill 02/15/2019 101-1120-4370 Carver County City Mgr meeting 18.00 Pounder's Bar & Grill 18.00 Power Systems 02/15/2019 101-1530-4120 Pump Set-Bar Only, Single Grip Handle w/rotating handle 87.01 Power Systems 02/15/2019 101-1530-4120 Pump Set-Bar Only, Single Grip Handle w/rotating handle 0.01 Power Systems 87.02 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 6 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Premier Safety 02/15/2019 700-0000-4240 Hooded Waterproof Reflective parka 73.65 Premier Safety 73.65 ProFlow Dynamics 02/15/2019 700-7019-4150 Coupler, Adapter 33.00 ProFlow Dynamics 33.00 Pro-Tec Design, Inc.02/21/2019 400-4148-4703 Keyfob, Proxkey III 431.00 Pro-Tec Design, Inc. 431.00 Public Surplus 02/15/2019 101-0000-2033 Online Auctions 110.99 Public Surplus 110.99 Red Wing Store 02/15/2019 101-1220-4240 00834E2100 Black boots - D Johnson 157.49 Red Wing Store 02/15/2019 101-1220-4240 00834E2100 Black boots - D Nutter 157.49 Red Wing Store 314.98 Riverfront Printing 02/15/2019 101-1611-4300 2019 Fishing contest tickets 144.00 Riverfront Printing 144.00 Rotary Club 02/15/2019 101-1520-4360 monthly dues - T Hoffman 53.00 Rotary Club 02/15/2019 101-1120-4360 monthly dues - T Gerhardt 53.00 Rotary Club 106.00 Sam's Club 02/15/2019 101-1560-4300 Fruit, Dessert, Spinach, Onions 31.48 Sam's Club 31.48 Sensible Land Use Coalition 02/15/2019 101-1420-4370 Market Recap and 2019 Forecast Breakfast/Program - K Aanenson 48.00 Sensible Land Use Coalition 48.00 Soya Sushi & Grill 02/15/2019 101-1220-4290 Dinner for NYE crew 76.13 Soya Sushi & Grill 76.13 Star Tribune 02/15/2019 101-1530-4360 2019 Newspaper Subscription 410.28 Star Tribune 410.28 Stavros Properties 02/21/2019 101-1550-4300 Q4 2018 Easement fees for property adjacent to 7805 Great Plains 303.42 Stavros Properties 303.42 STRATOGUARD LLC 02/21/2019 101-1160-4300 Proofpoint Email Filtering service - Mar 2019 163.20 STRATOGUARD LLC 163.20 SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 101-1550-4300 Annual Fire Extinguisher Maintenance - Lake Ann Park 312.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 101-1190-4300 Annual Fire Extinguisher Maintenance - Library 75.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 101-1170-4300 Annual Fire Extinguisher Maintenance - City Hall 130.00 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 7 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 101-1220-4300 Annual Fire Extinguisher Maintenance - Fire Dept & Trucks 499.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 101-1220-4300 Annual Fire Extinguisher Maintenance - Fire Dept 235.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 101-1370-4300 Annual Sprinkler Inspection of 2 wet systems - Public Works Bldg 245.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 101-1220-4300 Annual Sprinkler Inspection of 1 wet system - Fire Dept & Trucks 195.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 101-1190-4300 Annual Sprinkler Inspection of 1 wet system - Library 195.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/21/2019 101-1170-4300 Annual Sprinkler Inspection of 1 wet system/1 Hood - City Hall 230.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 02/28/2019 700-7019-4530 Annual Sprinkler Inspection of 1 wet/1 dry system - WTP 390.00 SUMMIT COMPANIES 2,506.00 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1250-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 45.00 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1310-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 39.09 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1250-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 32.31 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-0000-2011 Life Insurance-March 2019 - Cobra 50.11 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1310-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 39.88 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1320-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 47.62 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1370-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 18.86 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1520-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 13.50 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1530-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 6.21 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1560-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 5.13 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1600-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 10.85 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1700-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 1.21 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1550-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 40.24 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1420-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 34.58 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1120-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 33.30 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1320-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 47.91 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1130-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 21.30 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1160-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 11.21 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1120-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 32.56 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1430-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 2.05 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 210-0000-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 7.90 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 720-7201-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 2.43 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 720-7202-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 2.43 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1370-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 19.11 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1170-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 3.51 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1220-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 18.72 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1160-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 11.88 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 701-0000-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 30.18 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 700-0000-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 39.14 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 720-0000-4040 Life Insurance-March 2019 9.97 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-0000-2011 Life Insurance-March 2019 760.36 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 210-0000-2011 Life Insurance-March 2019 6.29 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 700-0000-2011 Life Insurance-March 2019 109.52 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 701-0000-2011 Life Insurance-March 2019 109.52 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 720-0000-2011 Life Insurance-March 2019 9.00 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1130-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 22.01 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-0000-2011 Life Insurance-February 2019 62.36 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1520-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 11.66 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1530-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 6.39 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1560-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 5.31 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1600-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 3.82 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1700-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 -0.58 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1550-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 40.58 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1420-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 35.96 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1430-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 2.12 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 8 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 210-0000-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 8.15 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 720-7201-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 2.52 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 720-7202-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 2.52 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1170-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 3.57 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-1220-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 18.99 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 701-0000-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 30.56 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 700-0000-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 39.52 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 720-0000-4040 Life Insurance-February 2019 4.21 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 101-0000-2011 Life Insurance-February 2019 774.88 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 210-0000-2011 Life Insurance-February 2019 6.58 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 700-0000-2011 Life Insurance-February 2019 114.69 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 701-0000-2011 Life Insurance-February 2019 114.69 Sun Life Financial 02/28/2019 720-0000-2011 Life Insurance-February 2019 4.85 Sun Life Financial 2,988.24 Target 02/15/2019 701-0000-4240 Jeans 53.97 Target 02/15/2019 101-1170-4120 Tray and Brush to clean carpet 19.31 Target 02/15/2019 101-1530-4130 Tissues 4.82 Target 02/15/2019 700-0000-4240 Jeans 53.97 Target 132.07 TCIC, Inc.02/28/2019 700-0000-4530 10-A-MFT-10 274.50 TCIC, Inc. 274.50 TouchPoint Logic LLC 02/28/2019 210-0000-4705 Council Chamber Digital Media AV Upgrade 60,074.00 TouchPoint Logic LLC 60,074.00 ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 02/28/2019 700-7019-4550 Chanhassen EWTP Air Discharge Pressure Transmitter 2,956.00 ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 02/28/2019 701-0000-4530 Chanhassen Lift Station #26 Switch Wiring 655.00 ULTIMATE CONTROLS ELECTRIC LLC 3,611.00 UNITED WAY 02/28/2019 101-0000-2006 PR Batch 00401.03.2019 United Way 29.40 UNITED WAY 29.40 Urban Land Institute 02/15/2019 101-1420-4370 Public Agency Membership 560.00 Urban Land Institute 560.00 USABlueBook 02/15/2019 700-7043-4550 Sampling valve 42.66 USABlueBook 42.66 VESSCO INC 02/28/2019 700-7019-4530 EV50V rebuild kit 186.00 VESSCO INC 186.00 WEISSMAN 02/15/2019 101-1535-4130 Costumes 336.01 WEISSMAN 336.01 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 32.10 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 9 of 10 Name Check D Account Description Amount XCEL ENERGY INC 02/21/2019 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 5,519.08 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 1,483.38 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 701-0000-4320 electricity charges 5,738.24 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 2,446.56 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 11.32 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 11.32 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 101-1600-4320 electricity charges 12.16 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 101-1600-4320 electricity charges 10.15 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 700-0000-4320 electricity charges 61.08 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 101-1350-4320 electricity charges 30.19 XCEL ENERGY INC 02/28/2019 700-7043-4320 electricity charges 3,370.27 XCEL ENERGY INC 18,725.85 Zoro 02/15/2019 700-7019-4120 Repair Kit 34.80 Zoro 34.80 150,883.26 Accounts Payable - Check Detail-ACH (03/01/2019 - 9:26 AM)Page 10 of 10 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject February 2019 Website Analytics Overview Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: I.2. Prepared By Kim Meuwissen, Office Manager File No:  SUMMARY Attached is the monthly report for February. The information in the bottom left corner has been changed to eliminate repetitive content. Additions include what cities people are from, as well as average time on page, average page load time, and age demographics. ATTACHMENTS: February Website Analytics Overview Analytics City of Chanhassen All Web Site Data Go to report  Top Channels Users Conversions Acquisition Behavior Set up a goal. To see outcome metrics, defineone or more goals. GET STARTED Conversions Acquisition Overview Feb 1, 2019 -Feb 28, 2019 Primary Dimension:Conversion: Edit Channel Grouping To see all 5 Channels click here. Top Channels All Goals Organic Search Direct Social Referral (Other)31.8% 60.5%  Users  Goal Conversion Rate Feb 4 Feb 11 Feb 18 Feb 25 500500500 1,0001,0001,000 Feb 4 Feb 11 Feb 18 Feb 25 0.00%0.00%0.00% 100.00%100.00%100.00% 1 Organic Search 2 Direct 3 Social 4 Referral 5 (Other) Users 11,608 New Users 9,395 Sessions 15,923 7,080 3,723 582 315 11 Bounce Rate 57.94% Pages /Session 2.43 Avg.SessionDuration 00:02:14 55.68% 63.38% 61.25% 45.32% 100.00% © 2019 Google All Users 100.00% Users Analytics City of Chanhassen All Web Site Data Go to report  Page Rows 1 - 10 of 2524 Pages Feb 1, 2019 -Feb 28, 2019 Explorer Pageviews Unique Pageviews Avg. Time on Page Entrances Bounce Rate % Exit Page Value 38,702 % of Total:100.00%(38,702) 30,327 % of Total:100.00%(30,327) 00:01:34 Avg for View:00:01:34(0.00%) 15,923 % of Total:100.00%(15,923) 57.94% Avg for View:57.94%(0.00%) 41.14% Avg for View:41.14%(0.00%) $0.00 % of Total:0.00%($0.00) 1.5,411 (13.98%) 3,375 (11.13%)00:02:30 3,124 (19.62%)36.36%30.23%$0.00 (0.00%) 2.1,352 (3.49%) 951 (3.14%)00:00:51 755 (4.74%)29.67%30.47%$0.00 (0.00%) 3.1,298 (3.35%) 1,091 (3.60%)00:00:47 963 (6.05%)28.76%30.51%$0.00 (0.00%) 4.1,287 (3.33%) 998 (3.29%)00:04:13 538 (3.38%)79.37%63.48%$0.00 (0.00%) 5.1,073 (2.77%) 820 (2.70%)00:02:17 732 (4.60%)68.03%62.35%$0.00 (0.00%) 6.995 (2.57%) 915 (3.02%)00:02:40 567 (3.56%)90.12%80.70%$0.00 (0.00%) 7.702 (1.81%) 575 (1.90%)00:01:09 246 (1.54%)49.19%34.62%$0.00 (0.00%) 8.670 (1.73%) 455 (1.50%)00:00:27 164 (1.03%)17.68%10.30%$0.00 (0.00%) 9.588 (1.52%) 446 (1.47%)00:02:34 179 (1.12%)72.07%55.27%$0.00 (0.00%) 10.492 (1.27%) 411 (1.36%)00:00:50 3 (0.02%)0.00%12.80%$0.00 (0.00%)  Pageviews …Feb 3 Feb 5 Feb 7 Feb 9 Feb 11 Feb 13 Feb 15 Feb 17 Feb 19 Feb 21 Feb 23 Feb 25 Feb 27 1,0001,0001,000 2,0002,0002,000 3,0003,0003,000 / /https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/chanhassenmn /296/Recreation-Center /240/Agendas-Minutes-Videos /270/February-Festival /301/Gym-Schedule /31/Parks-Recreation /194/Proposed-Developments /1467/Galpin-Site---Preliminary-Plat-Rezoning- /vr/modal © 2019 Google All Users 100.00% Pageviews Analytics City of Chanhassen All Web Site Data Go to report  Search Term Rows 1 - 10 of 842 Search Terms Feb 1, 2019 -Feb 28, 2019 Explorer Site Usage Total Unique Searches Results Pageviews / Search % Search Exits % Search Refinements Time after Search Avg. Search Depth 1,046 % of Total:100.00%(1,046) 1.19 Avg for View:1.19(0.00%) 32.60% Avg for View:32.60%(0.00%) 18.41% Avg for View:18.41%(0.00%) 00:02:32 Avg for View:00:02:32(0.00%) 1.53 Avg for View:1.53(0.00%) 1.Pickleball 15 (1.43%)1.13 33.33%17.65%00:02:21 1.13 2.Ithilien Pond Maintenance Project 7 (0.67%)1.00 0.00%28.57%00:05:17 2.57 3.pickleball 6 (0.57%)1.17 50.00%14.29%00:01:14 1.33 4.Snow Removal 6 (0.57%)1.33 16.67%37.50%00:04:22 2.00 5.map 5 (0.48%)1.00 40.00%0.00%00:00:06 0.60 6.Rink Attendant Job Description 5 (0.48%)1.00 100.00%0.00%00:00:00 0.00 7.volunteer 5 (0.48%)1.40 60.00%14.29%00:01:28 1.80 8.zoning map 5 (0.48%)1.60 80.00%12.50%00:04:58 0.60 9.Babysitting 101 4 (0.38%)1.25 0.00%0.00%00:00:50 1.50 10.Basketball 4 (0.38%)1.25 0.00%20.00%00:01:06 2.25  Total Unique Searches …Feb 3 Feb 5 Feb 7 Feb 9 Feb 11 Feb 13 Feb 15 Feb 17 Feb 19 Feb 21 Feb 23 Feb 25 Feb 27 202020 404040 606060 © 2019 Google All Users 100.00% Total Unique Searches FEBRUARY 2019 WEBSITE ANALYTICS OVERVIEW Analytics City of ChanhassenAll Web Site Data Go to report  Language Users % Users 1.en-us 11,283 98.12% 2.en-gb 50 0.43% 3.c 37 0.32% 4.en-ca 16 0.14% 5.es-es 12 0.10% 6.zh-cn 12 0.10% 7.en 10 0.09% 8.ru-ru 9 0.08% 9.de-de 8 0.07% 10.ko 8 0.07% Audience Overview Feb 1, 2019 -Feb 28, 2019 Overview  Sessions  Pageviews …Feb 3 Feb 5 Feb 7 Feb 9 Feb 11 Feb 13 Feb 15 Feb 17 Feb 19 Feb 21 Feb 23 Feb 25 Feb 27 500500500 1,0001,0001,000 1,0001,0001,000 2,0002,0002,000 3,0003,0003,000 Users 11,608 New Users 9,395 Sessions 15,923 Number of Sessions per User 1.37 Pageviews 38,702 Pages / Session 2.43 Avg. Session Duration 00:02:14 Bounce Rate 57.94% New Visitor Returning Visitor 25.7% 74.3% © 2019 Google All Users100.00% Users SESSIONS VS. PAGEVIEWS 15,932 Sessions vs. 38,702 Pageviews Session: The period of time a user is actively engaged with our website, app, etc. Pageview: Total # of pages viewed. Repeated views of a single page are counted. HOW ARE THEY FINDING US? 7,080 Organic Search 3,723 Direct 582 Social 315 Referral WHERE ARE THEY? HOW OLD ARE THEY? WHAT ARE THEY SEARCHING FOR?WHAT PAGES ARE THEY VISITING? NEW VS. RETURNING VISITOR 9,523 New Visitors 3,291 Returning Visitors AVG TIME ON PAGE 1 minute 34 seconds AVG PAGE LOAD TIME 3.59 seconds WHAT CAN WE LEARN? Chanhassen’s website gains attention from neighboring communities as well as some from around the country. Visitors spend very little time on each page, which hopefully means information is easy to find. Analytics City of Chanhassen All Web Site Data Go to report  City Rows 1 - 10 of 877 Location ALL »COUNTRY: United States Feb 1, 2019 -Feb 28, 2019 Map Overlay Summary Acquisition Behavior Conversions Users New Users Sessions Bounce Rate Pages / Session Avg. Session Duration Goal Conversion Rate Goal Completions Goal Value 11,108 % of Total:95.69%(11,608) 9,047 % of Total:96.30%(9,395) 15,533 % of Total:97.55%(15,923) 57.54% Avg for View:57.94%(-0.70%) 2.44 Avg for View:2.43(0.57%) 00:02:16 Avg for View:00:02:14(1.42%) 0.00% Avg for View:0.00%(0.00%) 0 % of Total:0.00%(0) $0.00 % of Total:0.00%($0.00) 1.Minneapolis 1,855 (15.72%) 1,366 (15.10%) 2,362 (15.21%)59.74%2.11 00:01:33 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 2.Chanhassen 1,468 (12.44%) 947 (10.47%) 2,869 (18.47%)45.24%3.28 00:05:13 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 3.Chicago 1,212 (10.27%) 1,049 (11.60%) 1,312 (8.45%)82.62%1.50 00:00:34 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 4.Chaska 613 (5.20%) 481 (5.32%) 764 (4.92%)51.96%2.73 00:01:47 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 5.Eden Prairie 557 (4.72%) 438 (4.84%) 714 (4.60%)51.96%2.53 00:01:48 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 6.Saint Paul 433 (3.67%) 302 (3.34%) 508 (3.27%)58.27%2.30 00:01:55 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 7.Minnetonka 312 (2.64%) 233 (2.58%) 428 (2.76%)60.51%2.14 00:01:36 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 8.Waconia 236 (2.00%) 146 (1.61%) 337 (2.17%)56.97%2.40 00:02:20 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 9.Seattle 224 (1.90%) 222 (2.45%) 224 (1.44%)98.66%1.04 00:00:03 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 10.Bloomington 193 (1.64%) 144 (1.59%) 242 (1.56%)52.48%2.50 00:02:29 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 111 1,8551,8551,855 © 2019 Google All Users 95.69% Users Analytics City of Chanhassen All Web Site Data Go to report  Age Rows 1 - 6 of 6 Demographics: Age Feb 1, 2019 -Feb 28, 2019 Explorer Summary Acquisition Behavior Conversions Users New Users Sessions Bounce Rate Pages / Session Avg. Session Duration Goal Conversion Rate Goal Completions Goal Value 4,204 % of Total:36.22%(11,608) 3,378 % of Total:35.96%(9,395) 5,972 % of Total:37.51%(15,923) 51.76% Avg for View:57.94%(-10.67%) 2.77 Avg for View:2.43(13.80%) 00:02:41 Avg for View:00:02:14(20.11%) 0.00% Avg for View:0.00%(0.00%) 0 % of Total:0.00%(0) $0.00 % of Total:0.00%($0.00) 1.35-44 1,210 (28.70%) 967 (28.63%) 1,652 (27.66%)54.54%2.48 00:02:09 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 2.25-34 985 (23.36%) 774 (22.91%) 1,417 (23.73%)55.05%2.44 00:02:05 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 3.45-54 918 (21.77%) 734 (21.73%) 1,345 (22.52%)50.11%2.89 00:02:49 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 4.55-64 583 (13.83%) 458 (13.56%) 862 (14.43%)45.82%3.27 00:04:15 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 5.65+314 (7.45%) 261 (7.73%) 429 (7.18%)46.15%3.14 00:03:16 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%) 6.18-24 206 (4.89%) 184 (5.45%) 267 (4.47%)53.56%3.43 00:02:25 0.00%0 (0.00%) $0.00 (0.00%)  Users  35-44  25-34  45-54  55-64  65+ 18-24 …Feb 3 Feb 5 Feb 7 Feb 9 Feb 11 Feb 13 Feb 15 Feb 17 Feb 19 Feb 21 Feb 23 Feb 25 Feb 27 200200200 400400400 © 2019 Google All Users 100.00% Users CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Monday, March 11, 2019 Subject Building Permit Data as of 03­05­2019 Section CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION Item No: I.3. Prepared By Robert Generous, Senior Planner File No:  ATTACHMENTS: Building Permit Data 03­05­2019