Loading...
Agenda and Packet, Part 3 BOA DATE: June 13 , 1988 CITY OF C.C. :: 885 E: ktY CHANHASSEN CASE Variance Prepared by: Dacy/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Variance Request to Receive a 50 Foot Variance to the 200 Foot Wetland Setback for a Private Stable _ a V LOCATION: 3931 Aster Trail ( South # of Lot 8 , Schmid' s Acres ) {.1.. 1.r .t .y am APPLICANT: Dale H . Collins Q 3931 Aster Trail Excelsior, MN 55331 PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Single Family Residential ACREAGE: 5 . 65 acres DENSITY: N/A ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- RSF; single family residence & private sta )le S- RSF; wetland 4 E- RSF; single family residence W- RSF; vacant, single family residence, — Q Victoria W WATER AND SEWER: Water and sewer is available in the area. (n PHYSICAL CHARAC. : Site is dotted with occasional tree stands and contains fairly level topography. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential ..., ic • A erg,c , • St iirfit O O O • I $ � N f. O CT) CO d r d It K1 M M Sv�.+ M M M17)I 0 . iff w. 162ND 0 ST. //r W .24 ITI . Kh. i. • / I TrZ .11 till le till;r#,* iiiiiika•- , , .„*„. ,„,„,,,,::: El st. sit..÷,44,111, . .... _ _ .,,. A %alp Ilif- W- .4.,(--- / ,J� _ . 1.,›Algy= g gliP soey: ...--.-..-- p i P P/I 0 Nossilll VINIIIIIPPe „=0 iiiik, . , ..._ , . . __ 4 tc4): ,„,„.,, _4;4,.,.....i.e.,,,,,........ ( . 'T //14r- Irg7* AirirrIc irePriP.OVIA .. " r ai• A awe. 4 -I r--ri 0 a ,, . q - c. .•.ACIAMIR_Too /if u; • Wail ,j ' ' LAKE - ---1. 011111111' 0 _ 1. - M / N N E W AS HTA - RSF - ______ __ RD , PUD-R ii - 7- MMMilli% \ , — • c LAKE �_if i ft, ,; 4� . . x *PON• j ;Arliv, : .IP- Atillum . 1u. .:ti '-' RF MAPLE SHORE! _ �v —/ DRIVE _ C.3 Z� " air T M, si M3 ,„, , . • .. .: . 1 I ( �.�,: i _. ♦ ii. �-;� :. , . .g. :,.::,_,, . , a r:A.,. A _._1 . aG�.+o..::e... .-...1r �6.r�x kip — Collins Variance June 13 , 1988 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS — Section 20-260 requires that private stables be located a mini- mum of 200 feet from wetland areas . BACKGROUND The City Council approved the conditional use permit for a pri- vate stable on the subject property for five horses subject to eight conditions on May 23 , 1988 ( see attached minutes ) . During the conditional use permit process , it was noted that the building should be moved to accommodate the 200 foot setback from the edge of the wetland area. After the permit approval, the applicant was revising his site plan to accommodate the change and noted that shifting the building 50 feet to the north would locate the building in the middle of a drainageway that traverses his prop-erty. After evaluating other location options on the site, the applicant and staff determined that the only alter- native available was to seek a variance from the 200 foot setback requirement. David Headla, Horse Inspector, verbally reported to staff that the proposed location of the barn, in his opinion, is appropriate in order to maintain the existing drainageway traversing the property. ANALYSIS — The proposed structure is located approximately 150 feet from the edge of the wetland area. The wetland area extends approximately 75 feet from the creekbed in the south part of the property ( see Attachment #1 ) . The subject property contains a natural — drainageway which runs north-south and then westward off the site. Separating the barnand the wetland area is a rise in the topography and a tree stand. Drainage from the pasture and the stable area would be directed toward the middle of the property to the existing swale and then westward off the site. The appli- cant, as required by the horse ordinance, also needs to maintain at least 100 feet from the barn and pasture area to the existing single family house. Therefore, moving the building directly toward the north would interfer with the drainage right-of-way and would also locate the building closer to the house. Moving the building to the northwest would locate the building directly in front of the existing single family residence to the north of the subject site. The existing drainageway should be preserved as it accepts runoff from adjacent properties to the north . Given that the topography of the site to the south of the pro- posed building will prevent runoff from discharging directly into the wetland, it appears that the proposed location of the barn maximizes separation from adjacent residences as well as the wetland and still maintains the existing drainage pattern. Collins Variance June 13 , 1988 Page 3 A variance may be granted by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals only if it finds all of the following: A. That the literal enforcement of the Ordinance would cause undue hardship and practical difficulty. -' * Enforcing the 200 foot setback requirement would force the location of the building in the middle of an existing draina- geway and would locate the barn closer to the existing single family residence. B . That the hardship is caused by special conditions and cir- cumstances which are peculiar to the land and structure involved and which are not characteristic of or applicable to other lands of structures in the same district. * The property accepts runoff from the properties to the north. The drainageway runs north-south in the northern half of the — property and then westerly on the west side of the property. This is a unique circumstance which is peculiar to the subject property. Further, locating the building elsewhere on site _ would impose on existing residences and properties. C . That the granting of the variance is necessary for the preser- vation and enjoyment of substantial property rights . * The applicant does have reasonable use of the property with an existing single family residence. D . That the special conditions and circumstances are not a con- sequence of a self-created hardship. * The natural features of the site, the drainageway and topography, are unique to the subject property and are not self created by the applicant. — E . That the variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health , safety or welfare of the residents of the City of the neighborhood wherein the property is situated and will be in Keeping with the spirit and intent of the Ordinance. * Granting the variance will not adversely affect adjacent properties. In fact, the proposed location of the building respects existing features of the site and provides adequate separation between the stable and adjacent properties . — RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approve Variance Request #88-5 to grant a 50 foot variance to the 200 foot wetland setback as depicted on the site plan represented in Attachment #l . — — Collins Variance June 13 , 1988 Page 4 ATTACHMENTS 1 . Proposed site plan . 2 . Conditional use permit staff report dated May 4 , 1988 . 3 . City Council minutes dated May 23 , 1988 . \(� y��^� \/C���� � � � \ / ! | ' ` _~~^~ ' ! ' ................ | ./00i ^ | . � . ^� ` �-. `----'---' ' �)������� `_ + - � ~~ - ! - F | � ' ! .~ ^`--'-^ . ^ ^. ITY 0 F (7 •C. DATE: May 4 , 198t 411 C.C. : C::8 ' 1988 CHANIIASSZNCASE -5 Prepared by: Dacy/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conditional Use Permit for a Private Stable Z Q LOCATION: 3931 Aster Trail ( South i of Lot 8 , Schmid' s Acres ) — CL CL APPLICANT: Dale H. Collins Q 3931 Aster Trail Excelsior, MN 55331 , f%' PRESENT ZONING: RSF, Single Family Residential r7(7/.e ACREAGE: 5 . 65 acres DENSITY: N/A ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- RSF; single family residence & private stblE S- RSF; wetland — E- RSF; single family residence QW- RSF; vacant, single family residence, Victoria WATER AND SEWER: Water and sewer is available in the area . PHYSICAL CHARAC. : Site is dotted with occasional tree stands and contains fairly :level topography. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential Collins CUP May 4 , 1988 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-614 requires private stables to receive a conditional use permit in the RSF District. Further, the stable must comply with Chapter 5 , Article III ( Section 5-86 through 5-106 ) . — Section 20-260 requires that private stables be located a mini- mum of 200 feet from wetland areas . The City has a volunteer Horse Inspector ( Dave Headla) who is responsible for inspecting and making a recommendation on all private stables . A stable permit needs to be reviewed on an — annual basis . If the conditional use permit is granted by the city, the owner will have to comply with the stable permit requirements . Since Mr . Headla is on the Planning Commission, he — can also report to the Commission his recommendations about the site. ANALYSIS — The applicant proposes to construct an 1 , 800 square foot pole barn to act as a private stable for five horses . The applicant ' s — site plan indicates that the structure is to be located approxi- mately 174 feet southwest from the existing house and approxi- matley 252 feet from the existing creekbed in the southern portion of the applicant' s property. Attachment #1 is an aerial photograph of the subject property. A wetland area extends approximately 75 feet from the center line of the creekbed. Separating the proposed location of the barn from the wetland is a "L" shaped formation of existing trees and a slight hill blocking runoff from the north toward the wetland. — Although the applicant indicates that 252 feet can be maintained from the creekbed, a 200 foot setback must be maintained from the edge of the wetland. There is adequate room on the property to shift the building to the north to accommodate this setback. The size of the site ( 5 . 65 acres) also affords good separation from adjacent properties . Other stands of trees existing on iste serve as screens from the existing single family home on the — west . Another stable and pasture area is located directly north of the subject property. The acreage of the property meets the minimum lot area require- ments for five horses . The site is served by Aster Trail , which connects to West 62nd Street beyond the railroad right-of-way along the Victoria/Shorewood/Chanhassen boundary. Section 5-104 states that accumulations of manure shall be located at least 100 feet away from any well and that the stable — must be located at least 100 feet from any neighboring residen- tial structure. The proposed location of the stable can meet these requirements . — Collins CUP May 4 , 1988 Page 3 The proposed site of the building is 18 feet. The size of the building, 1,800 square feet or 36 ' x 50 ' , is in proportion to the lot area size. The scale and character of the proposed structure is not out of character for the existing lot sizes and land uses immediately adjacent to the property. — Pending the Horse Inspector' s comments, the construction of the proposed stable meets the requirements regarding installation of private stables and the criteria established for conditional uses in Section 20-232 . RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit #88-5 for the construction of a private stable for five horses subject to the following conditions : 1 . The private stable shall be located 200 feet from the edge of the wetland. 2 . The stable shall be located 100 feet from neighboring resi- dential structures . 3 . Land upon which horses are to be stabled and pastured must be surrounded by a sturdy fence which will keep horses confined. 4 . The private stable shall be constructed such that it will keep the horses comfortable and protected from the elements . 5 . Accumulations of manure shall be located at least 100 feet from any well. 6 . Accumulations of manure shall be removed at such periods that will ensure that no leaching or objectional odors exist, and the premises shall not be allowed to become unsightly. 7 . The applicant shall comply with the annual stable permit procedure. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the conditional use permit as recommended by staff with additional wordage on Condition #7 as follows : 7 . The applicant shall comply with the annual stable permit pro- cedure and other applicable laws concerning the stabling and care of horses . 1 Collins CUP May 4 , 1988 — Page 4 CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves Conditional Use Permit #88-5 for the — construction of a private stable for five horses subject to the following conditions : 1 . The private stable shall be located 200 feet from the edge of the wetland. 2 . The stable shall be located 100 feet from neighboring resi- dential structures . 3 . Land upon which horses are to be stabled and pastured must be surrounded by a sturdy fence which will keep horses confined. 4 . The private stable shall be constructed such that it will — keep the horses comfortable and protected from the elements . 5 . Accumulations of manure shall be located at least 100 feet from any well . 6 . Accumulations of manure shall be removed at such periods that will ensure that no leaching or objectional odors exist, and the premises shall not be allowed to become unsightly. 7 . The applicant shall comply with the annual stable permit pro- cedure and other applicable laws concerning the stabling and care of horses . ATTACHMENTS 1 . Aerial photograph. 2 . Detailed location map. — 3 . Proposed site plan. 4 . Cross section of building. 5 . Copy from Butler Building Publications regarding post frame buildings . 6 . Application . 7 . Section 5-86 through 5-106 . 8 . Planning Commission minutes dated May 4 , 1988 . — '` �< e -•r, ` ''j .. 'r.: a " i .. 'I ' i — ....- ...4 '...i 3 \k A• i• '. -- , , , - + f , :;* !`► Yam' ' . ...):,,_ • ••11 a . _:4Cr.a.,•'SI'''l ''..' :ill%-4111v__ ----%-y '43 „ : Itik \ ..• It' - -' ' 4 ' . - : % ••"'1,',' \ ,-4'. ;1- . • ,,,,,,,_ _ ' 6%.-,. ,. ......,;or...erlei, i• „ "'es. .. s,‘ 3::\ ?pr--. . nripe_. • . i ..4t,„ . . ..c,;.. ., ....0.., . . it 1. *..1,.. . • • - - ,-•:, ....i .?,--,L,;.'lt'".4t'1-.---.4.-1-' -: '..i. .4'14 :'''. .''' gifri't rm. , ,' - • .04..4674A-1.,. . ... :si. 't • -1- A411-11akitt • i c%. • :•-4-44-1-14-1 '•- *---‘I:\_4\ i94!•`•.- `yf Y" .._er 'y Q ., ' `F -e'•_l4t 4ti y 1'a - 1" .. ' l 7 v\ r` r • . J • • ! . *i+ } • jW r. is '' a K'i-r> f � _� 3. '� c+ MM • a ah;.if • 5: iF L r it ;^ `� Sr .0 ..•ice ,ti T 7 ' ."t• .� �"lc_C` ; . itf �. .t;yam r.tJ "-Sd L+,` :,., .r t �,. .a ♦: 1 �. t. 5) 0 1 !�;aver ` I Ej' •;a r la yr - R - 1r I +. - is �'i 1 ,V /r . Jr r• P 1 _4 ` - ' .1�t' ,,��,I , `yam i k '?��Y h �,,raaa .�t•, r+ �• pa .. - - ; .,yyi - • - 'a\\Y'• \•M r, 't-.5.� �_�')s [ "-7 `�14 _ ^a t.t� `r1 •. • • - .,•, ,,, ,-, _,- _117, ..,. .- - • * -44%- .N..i,.. %,:kt ;„-1'. .. ,-Ail,;... ieek -. •-lkt.,- -,-I I • t • r KeyLY �r � - n ,, yt., •t r i • 1 + .. a..- ( Ars,` �a a IA _ a . Ai -ti .• r 'f 14 71-34 n'—.,:5 ti Z s s. . ."- r.. y, `•t ;{:10.•r ,: ;vr . ,- ~ t,4-4Fez ,. t .r ,-ti` yriti a l ; J A • ti n s r� .4 yfr '.2 # ?• t - +:+• 1 •• � ,V "Ifs �a"� •J�t +1•k,... "A' • ram. `'" '>„ a a- ., , } .. _"Y� � - - + .� {.� •.. + T `` ,. 7Rn - a tom, ' : f�` 33 r sY'3 ,' -fr lie _ . .L. . .1. _ 51.. :"lr' ' 1' t,, .- . : , . -,i...r......,.., • r„ ,1/4.,,,,„r _- r ° i: t- a='' `'1 •• " '" V .• -• • l - - '% l {'- . F : s My;;r_ _: = • . . = am 47„,,,,. ;)' • ..4 ....,. ....,„,„„440 wp, - . - • - . :._ ,.• , ..- ,tri .... ., ..---ww. 71, ^ ,...-.-- .."....: - -"-c -:..-‘ ,.---1 -... ,,..t. . I•'' -it** --.t .-.‘A ":': . .1101t-r. .Y' - Hfit'Ir • w. .r:ti.::_ . . .•,:"i - '��\ - . . r` f 3 c i{f1'•k• 0. i. 4 E vL-A..•...i.*,;.4'" t,r-. */ (.. ...., i •_.....z e"s•-....,....:......,is..........a:_•:.4,.„_..... • _________J . _______ -Lck-koi.----=---cirA - -(- s.y.- -: 0 1 \11"1 .0.:\ --, cr cn \ \\.77. \ / \ . e)ZZI d `ES He r lav3Nlv0 'w s3wvr N /� ao, rat \-, 0a0°s z�z I M dtia , i 6- ,°' I Z d, A — a yd,>'s% • �, In Vig. i p O�� ti MW; Ili CV " ` LL Q d�do�a slay Q m LO 0 3 i� �o ya bl "' co a �iy\ yj•tiJ � � , w I U � r \� 7 y Z 3 Q; OJ,aJ o 1 1 CC • y. m LI- Tip p�� 'J is tf, I IAJ O �2)OJ Y7 I Cr) U cr yeti i J ` 01 I • I • I . _ _ ___ _ _ C A. C ft, 5o6/Th A. 4 cT - S'c_hiyiDs / ( Re T24 Ts - Sf- /- G/�(-'S l32 — 7 1/ 5.0 _ 30 0 / rire7te ,-/Y---- 1 17y PAaFeSe 0 / ----N 0< / ss�' 4.2 A_ i=-) in r /` _ 1 d _ ry ! u , , 1 4_,Le 111 v5.2. .._.______ ,N,__________----N......____________ , . _________ ___________ _______ --- tl....,..________+, 1 , ,, _ . /.. 2*-e ) _ sc/14 � I ( - 4 1 \ I _ • • • • • . • • • • • • I..:H 1 . i % -I ...1 oP. MI : 7 -_ sa ki'i I _ c q= b q {{yy yq N t� / / _ - tc*-}3'w}}-�-y•y i7it='F• O C y 3 O�p�.0 le W ;7 _ i s V .N., c V O oqo a q'ate C $ C' b T i , _ . f � Oi =?- E> ` q $aa bE $ '�} }� z 2 ' a -.:. W _ oenn„_o` ogcnZn El+ "! F q a Z V j ::. iipp44.: •= -2 - 4 2_ . o= p I `oa 4 '3a'2 a `oE r. z _• — a' , F ' bc .,* EF,4vgdE_ •(� • A C N Oi 4}V ugi u V... iC z a w V O ti V C `ll } w � b Z V n >'N N C q OA N 11'a C' ..C Y Q 4 . ' '� ° V O N {7 n 7 Efib' to 3 'oPE O S _r�` OO ... ..... ` 'u5wo.o +nS� Vocr $ s•4 -,. ' .1,., -,,;if. e- -- -a---. ,- • •4 't.1 . OOP V\ —ra"---__-;-:- a . 4 • • , , _ . _. . _ , ,...„.„„ . ,. .,. (.A 1, . • .... . , . ,,, - y 1\11 ,- ii, --, .1 4,13,` 1--:;../:•• , - ,,,,— 77.-, ---------- --Th • . 1 , 1--- ..1 It 4 .. F iii 1:i:r 7 _--,..iiiiN .ar ci '; t �� - f e • -a nT,n nE �+_ ., La •.111✓fz® .1 E . sg=4o w° �'o�Y`yVa '� g Ed r— a= f 1 • a s C V V ^fA C V V 8 OP. E Q Y y L - ��,- i. �i i ii; 'i ry!' x ao` Z:o53E 036 2 1.00`ogEa,°�= a° g i �l `r -al, _ f! ,. -/-` rS 'i , O w It n ac c' . x m flD q �u. y&l, _ :_I! ;-: Q L� oc 00 o °;gi \� if- kts, i (.� i 1 . Q `oeV3x $ ct sc p2En 4 'Ni -.�� r{r'�:- \ • .� tin c°°v°a ,p_� caaa'i'S`8 cpt 3wo i` . �•liA �7 .I '�.:- > ' w`R "' � w c ogt % Q a � cg. N M. 'f ; 1 t? , r '� O c f p� og O . E c2Y�t 2qb ,E Z.�u •Sa .N �C q3 7 Fla araiiir..4``. I • .N I I. I - g,„itT.„*.`- A.- _., ! ...4,.•,:-. , a m g N � 01 1 s\, k , V O r !lr a !f(ii ; i 4M as 1� s•1y it 1 r '1• �• mnk .H o C J' 1.� i HM"• x -gy t r — - 31+ a V c rEa '< 4 r . u� als 7ay" Ea g� \ �er t Mk ®{�ri•d•-ti • o d v '� ;it 4q a 6' i r J� •• cw i [ ir 7 mcy E 6.c E 2.1 q i '�r C i .Z N V u , q I l,,.. • I , 2.,... • n o V!i �.f W J >� a /?,b t E } N o . 0 .. 111 ,. ? ,- . .4 ca E / . . . Cie l'"I like .�,.a' i. O 2 6 O 1 9 G n c F W w .i� c n ` E u V W , �t � i Y 5 �� 9» . gm N �•� d� I 'S.3 ail i�� Y y cq$ �7 >di 12111 g m ' \" >1 B u s g i iti ems_ ray+.+ 1 o � s �e `� NRI 1I..a aaz g 2T go '. jig,Ez it m2 „ 8; wb8 I _ 1I �! N2E5a. �3 W n v a 0 W12 C Va N .•..,• . anV `V=n 7 2 o'i. gcv 2 i §S4 nN :: NW . i"�'f Nm�!'1 NsIcc3ac mi N S'�a ?'�» ` O� i y- C 7 V W • \f cSa C qa� a oY- } r KW �sb Eq± „ z� + .'•ly-+ HifltH ZC 2 ! g.e°1EE gEl O \ . Est stag �51i?S O,, • ',--- III+ : B« cv4it • L LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ' I T rLiC„r( CITY OF CHANHASSEN — 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 r' APPLICANT: F7P I t -Z / /150WNER: ADDRESS 7 -7/ / 5��`� M4, L. ADDRESS — r'L. dP �%'�/. �.53 3/ Zip Code Zip Code TELEPHONE (Daytime ) may- TELEPHONE REQUEST: Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision Land Use Plan Amendment Platting Metes and Bounds Conditional Use Permit Street/Easement Vacation Site Plan Review Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING — -I- USES PROPOSED � .5 `t /;', / k SIZE OF PROPERTY t ,LJ C �? (5 LOCATION REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) ANIMALS AND FOWL § 5-88 411) Sec. 5-74. Redemption. (a) Any dog or cat may be redeemed from impoundment by the owner, within the time stated in the notice of impounding,upon payment of the license fee,a late fee for the license in the amount established by resolution if unpaid, the impounding fees, and all other costs and charges incurred by the city for impounding and maintenance of said animal.The impounding fees shall be as established by resolution. (b) Upon the presentation of a correct license tag and a receipt for an animal license fee for the current year and for the required fees, the animal control officer shall release to any owner the animal claimed by him. (Ord. No. 24-C, §§ 7,8, 7-12-76; Ord. No. 24-D, § 2, 8-2-82; Ord. No. 24-E, § 1, 2-10-86) Sec. 5-75. Disposition of unclaimed animals. Any dog or cat which is not claimed as provided in section 5-74, within five(5)days after impounding, may be sold for not less than the amount provided in section 5-54 to anyone desiring to purchase the animal. Any animal which is not claimed by the owner or sold shall be painlessly disposed of and buried by the animal control officer. Whenever any licensed _. educational or scientific institution shall request, pursuant to state law, any impounded animal for research purposes, any such impounded animal remaining unclaimed for five (5) days after impounding shall be surrendered to such institution. •- (Ord. No. 24-C, § 10, 7-12-76) Secs. 5-76-5-85. Reserved. ARTICLE III. HORSES DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Sec. 5-86. Definitions. • In this article"horse" includes colts, ponies or mules. • (Ord. No. 56, § 2, 2-17-75) Sec. 5-87. Running at large. No horse shall be permitted to run at large within the city. (Ord. No. 56, § 9, 2-17-75) Sec. 5-88. Existing stables. (a) Persons maintaining or stabling horses as of April 24, 1975, shall comply with all provisions of this article except the requirements of sections 5-104, paragraph(a)(1),(aX3)and (aX4). The previous sentence notwithstanding, it shall be unlawful for such persons or their heirs and assigns to: (1) Enlarge, alter or increase the area of any horse housing enclosure not meeting the • standards set forth in section 5-104, paragraph(aX1); or 273 ( — § 5-88 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE 4111, (2) Increase the number of horses beyond the number of horses stabled on the subject premises as of April 25, 1975. Maintenance, necessary nonstructural repairs and incidental alterations of such housing enclosure shall nonetheless be permitted provided that such maintenance, repairs or alter- ations do not extend, enlarge or intensity the housing enclosure. (b) Any exemption under this section from the provisions of section 5-104, paragraphs - (aX1),(aX3)and(aX4)is void: (1) Upon the subdivision, platting or replatting of the subject parcel of land for which a stable permit is required; or — (2) In the event that the use of the parcel of land for the maintaining and stabling of horses is discontinued for a continuous period of more than one(1)year. (Ord. No. 56, § 10, 2-17-75) Secs. 5-89-5-100. Reserved. DIVISION 2. STABLE PERMITS Sec. 5-101. Required. No person shall maintain or stable horses in the city without a permit issued by the city. (Ord. No. 56, § 2, 2-17-75) • Sec. 5-102. Application. Application for the permit required by this division shall be made to the city upon a form furnished by the city.A nonrefundable application fee in the amount established by resolution shall be paid to the city when the application is filed. — (Ord. No. 56, §§ 2, 3, 2-17-75) Sec. 5-103. Horse committee. (a) The city council authorizes the establishment of a horse committee. (b) The horse committee shall inspect the premises of those seeking a stable permit and — recommend in writing approval or disapproval to the city council of all applications for permits under this division. (Ord. No. 56, § 4, 2-17-75) Cross reference—Boards and commissions generally, § 2-46 et seq. Sec. 5-104. Issuance. (a) After recommendations of the horse committee have been received, a stable permit shall be issued by the city clerk if the following conditions are met: — (1) Housing enclosures for horses shall be at least one hundred (100) feet from any 411 'neighboring residential structure used for human habitation; 274 ANIMALS AND FOWL § 5-106 (2) Land upon which horses are to be stabled and pastured(hereinafter referred to as the stabling area)must be surrounded by a sturdy fence which will keep horses confined. (3) No stable permit shall be issued for a lot of less than one(1)acre. (4) Minimum acreage for two(2)horses shall be one and one-half(11)acres and for three (3)horses shall be two(2)acres,and an additional one-third acre shall be required for each additional horse. (5) Housing or shelter must be provided which will keep horses comfortable and pro- tected from the elements,and the housing or shelter shall be so located as not to crate a nuisance. (6) Accumulations of manure shall be located at least one hundred (100) feet from any well; (7) All accumulations of manure shall be removed at such periods as will ensure that no leaching or objectionable odors exist,and the premises shall not be allowed to become unsightly. (b) The city council may approve applications for stable permits which do not meet all the requirements of this article where such exception would not be inconsistent with the intent of the article. • (Ord. No. 56, §§ 5, 11, 2-17-75) Sec. 5-105. Annual registration statement. (a) By June 1 of each year,the holder of a stable permit shall file,upon forms furnished by the city, an annual registration statement with the city setting forth the current status of the information required by section 5-102. The permit holder shall also give all information required on the form. Upon the filing of such annual registration statement, the holder shall pay to the city a nonrefundable inspection fee in the amount established by resolution. (b) Failure to file the annual registration statement as required will result in automatic cancellation of the stable permit. The holder of a canceled stable permit shall be required to make application for a new stable permit;the subject premises shall be inspected as provided by section 5-63; and in no event shall the city issue a new stable permit to said holder except upon city council approval as provided by section 5-104. (Ord. No. 56, § 6, 2-17-75) Sec. 5-106. Revocation. A permit issued pursuant to this division may be revoked by the city council if the • council finds, after investigation by the horse committee and after holding a hearing thereon, preceded by notice of the hearing to be given to the holder of the permit mailed to the address shown on the application or most recent annual registration statement at least ten(10)days prior to the hearing that: (1) The permit holder has not maintained the standards set forth in section 5-104; 275 C_ — § 5-106 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE (2) The winter accumulation of manure is not removed from the stabling area prior to May 1 of each year or as soon as is practicable thereafter; (3) The permit holder failed to make a reasonable effort to keep the horse, or horses, under control and contained within the applicant's stabling area; — (4) The horses have been treated cruelly or inhumanely; (5) The horses are kept,stabled,boarded or harbored in such a manner as to constitute a - public nuisance; or (6) The accumulation of manure present a hazard to public health. (Ord. No. 56, § 7, 2-17-75) [The next page is 327) 276 Planning Commission Meeting May 4 , 1988 - Page 32 )1r. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE STABLE ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND LOCATED AT 3931 ASTER TRAIL, DALE COLLINS , APPLICANT. _ Barbara Dacy presented the staff report . Dale Collins : I think I comply. Emmings moved , Ellson seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Erhart : What ' s Aster Trail? Dacy: It ' s a private drive that is both in Victoria and Chanhassen . Erhart: That ' s the access to the. . . Dacy: That ' s correct . Erhart : And all of the horse riding would be just on the property? Dale Collins : On the property and also on that Luce Line trail that runs adjacent to our property. Erhart : What is that , road? Batzli : No , it ' s an abandoned railroad . Erhart : Do we have any official , in our trail system, do we have any trails dedicated for horse riding or a trail plan or anything? Dacy: No. Not that I 'm aware of . Erhart : What ' s that trail you ' re referring to? Are there any restrictions on that? Dacy: As you can see , the Hennepin County has acquired that right-of-way for potential light rail . Erhart : So people just use it at this point . Dacy: Right . Batzli : They' ve gravled it . It ' s graded so that it ' s intended for use . Dacy: The railroad ties are gone. Erhart : Again , I just want to point out to the Commission here , we have a proposal for an 1, 800 square foot pole barn. It ' s just interesting to note in that we are discussing some restrictions on accessory buildings in the RSF district as well as other residential districts so you might want `' .. -•dine J.r`-s. .. _ .. y'('` = l Planning Commission Meeting May 4 , 1988 - Page 33 to keep that in mind for later discussion when that comes back to the Commission for further discussion, which I think it is isn' t it? There we ' re talking about 1, 200? 800? Dacy: Yes , and the Commission was also looking at a minimum lot size that you would apply that restriction to . Erhart : Yes , but this is RSF district right? Dacy: Right. Erhart : There we were basically talking . . . Dacy: Right, but you' re also talking about 5 acres and talking about a — threshold . Erhart : So here again is a situation where we' re getting a pretty _ permanent structure in the RSF district that doesn ' t necessarily fit into the increased density. It ' s okay now at 5 acres but what do we do with this building when someone wants to subdivide this 5 acres? Would they take it down? I think that ' s the only questions I had . — Emmings : On the corner of Church and TH 7 there we just looked at a plan to build a bunch of houses in there . Is that going to change the access into that? What did we wind up doing there? They took a little different plan I think to the City Council than we saw. Dacy: Right . They put together that site, Carlson ' s plat which is right — in here , and the plan that they came up with did not need any variances . They were able to shift lot lines and create an easement in there so they met all the 90 feet and 15, 000 square foot lot area . That did require an — easement for , if this property would develop and what would happen at that time if this would develop, and we probably would approve this street here and we 'd have a connection into the proposed street and Carlson ' s property. Emmings : Okay, I just wondered how that fit together . Dacy: If you drive in here on the cartway now, you can' t get to the applicant ' s house . Well , you can by foot but there is no driveway access in. You have to come in off of Aster . — Emmings : And the only thing on this property is going to be the barn? Dacy: Right. The existing home is out there and this would be located to — the southwest of it . Emmings : When we talk about private stables , I didn ' t look in the — ordinance , does it mean just that he can only have his own horses there? Dacy: That ' s correct . Emmings : And it ' s defined that way in the ordinance? C Planning Commission Meeting May 4 , 1988 - Page 34 Dacy: Right. Emmings : There' s no intention here to board horses? Dale Collins : No . Emmings : I don ' t have anything else . Ellson: Nothing to add here. Batzli : I want to know if the City Council has in fact authorized the establishment of a horse committee or are you the committee Dave? Dacy: He ' s the committee . Batzli : Has the committee looked at this application? Dacy: I hope so . Headla : I haven ' t seen it. Batzli : So there hasn ' t been an application . We ' re setting up the conditional use but he hasn ' t actually applied. . . Dacy: Well , number one , I found out tonight that Mr . Headla didn ' t receive his packet so I 'm operating at a loss in the first place. The intent was that the conditional use permit is typically process first because the City needs to decide whether or not that private stable is appropriate at that location . Since Mr . Headla was on the Commission anyway, I had hoped that he would have been able to have seen the site and offered his opinion . He does review the stable permits when they come up on an annual basis every June. Batzli : I guess I just had two questions . One was I think, actually I 'm killing two birds with one stone, I think we should insert an additional provision that they will in general comply with whatever city and state laws regarding maintenance of horses and animals in general . Whatever . For instance , no horse shall be permitted to run at large within the city. I personally had an experience, a run in with a loose horse and although you require that a fence keeps him in , I guess I 'd just prefer to see that the applicant will comply with applicable codes concerning horses . Wildermuth : I have nothing . Headla : If we approve this tonight , are we really approving a building permit also? Dacy: Yes . You ' re approving the ability of the applicant to have up to five horses on that property. He will still have to file a building permit for the construction of that pole barn but in essence , that barn is part of the stable use to house horses and so on. Planning Commission Meeting May 4 , 1988 - Page 35 — Headla : We ' re caught the same way with that one place north of TH 7 . At least myself , I don ' t know what the barn is going to be like. Are we consistent in our thinking on 5 acres , what that building should be like? Conrad : We don ' t have any regulations on the books right now to govern it. Headla : Right , so once we say yes to this , then it ' s . . . Conrad: It' s in. Since there are no regulations or restrictions . Headla : I ' ve got no problem with his having the five. I think that ' s appropriate for the space and there' s other people around there and in talking to Dale before hand right now it ' s their hoses . At the most it ' s — more but it ' s the dilemma with that building . Are we all consistent in our thinking on that? Conrad : Do we have any choices on that matter Barbara? Dacy: Number one, you want the building large enough. The applicant is intending eventually to have five horses so you want the building large — enough now so that it can safely and cleanly accomodate five horses during the winter . Number two , given the size of the property and where it' s located of the site, can not be seen from TH 7 , the site has good advantages of existing trees and so on. It ' s centrally located . I really can ' t see where there ' s going to be any negative impacts from this particular structure. Conrad : So as we look at our ordinance and we' re looking at secondary structures on property and we' re saying , I think City Council ' s directive was 800 feet . Wasn ' t it 800 feet? — Dacy: 1, 000 . But again , this is something that we have to discuss because this , in my view, perfectly appropriate for a private stable. Now _ if somebody on a 15, 000 square foot lot comes in with an 1, 800 square foot polebarn and puts it 5 feet away from the lot line, that ' s the kind of , you ' ve got talk about where you draw the line . Conrad : Is the 1, 000 square foot secondary structure coming back? Where is that? Did the Council approve that? Dacy: No , the Council hasn ' t seen that because it ' s been tabled at the Planning Commission . I ' ve been trying to exist on my own here for the last 3 or 4 weeks to keep up so it is on the schedule and Dave and Tim have made sure of that . Conrad : So when it comes back to us , we can review not only for , that was in an agricultural . — Dacy: You were looking at everything on accessory structures . Conrad : So we' ll have a chance to take a look at this. In the interim you feel comfortable that this is not out of sorts with the neighborhood Planning Commission Meeting May 4 , 1988 - Page 36 and whatever? Headla : Dale , do you realize no barbed wire? Dale Collins : I don ' t like barbed wire. Headla : I just wanted to make sure that that ' s one of the requirements now. Did you have something to say? Dale Collins : Yes , you were wondering about what kind of a building it was going to be. I 'm sure that the term polebarn doesn ' t do it justice really. It ' s one of the best buildings that Lester has put out . It' s a polebarn the interior structure but the inside is covered with metal and will be green which would comply with the surrounding terrain . With A white roof and we' re going to have skylights across the top on the ridge . It would have side windows , skylights the full length. It ' s a $13 , 000 . 00 structure so it ' s not a piece of junk. In fact it will be one of the nicest horse barns in the area . Headla : I 've got a Lester barn. Lester makes a good barn. Wildermuth moved , Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit #88-5 for the construction of a private stable for five horses subject to the following conditions : 1. The private stable shall be located 200 feet from the edge of the wetland . 2. The stable shall be located 100 feet from neighborhing residential structures . 3 . Land upon which horses are to be stabled and pastured must be surrounded by a sturdy fence which will keep horses confined . 4 . The private stable shall be constructed such that it will keep the horses comfortable and protected from the elements . 5. Accumulations of manure shall be located at least 100 feet from any well . 6 . Accumulations of manure shall be removed at such periods that will ensure that no leaching or objectional odors exist, and the premises shall not be allowed to become unsightly. 7. The applicant shall comply with the annual stable permit procedure and other applicable laws concerning the stabling and care of horses . All voted in favor and motion carried . anhassen City Council - May 23, 1988 CONSENT AGENDA: (B) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE STABLE, 3931 ASTER I TRAIL, DALE COLLINS. Councilman Boyt: What I would like to see happen here, according to the discussion of the Planning Commission, it appears to be a reasonable use of the — property being that it's 5 acres. My problem with it is that it sits on property zoned residential single family. I think if that parcel is split up, an 1,800 square foot pole barn would be inappropriate. I would like to ;cc us put a condition on this that should the property be subdivided, the pole barn would be removed. Mayor Hamilton: Wouldn't that be a hardship to a conditional use that we look at annually? Councilman Boyt: We can put this down as one of the conditions of approval. — Don Ashworth: When you buy property you have the authority to establish any conditions at that point in time. The removal of structure as a part of their filing would be a normal condition. Would you like to designate that at this time, that's fine. Councilman Johnson: You could have more.. .making that a condition if this is — already stated. . Councilman Boyt: It states an intention. I don't think it does damage to anyone. It provides a protection to us from that. .. Mayor Hamilton: Mr. Collins, do you understand what Bill is suggesting? Do you have any problems with that. — Dale Collins: No, I can live with that. Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve the Conditional Use Permit for a Private Stable at 3931 Aster Trail for Dale Collins as presented with the addition of a condition that upon the property being subdivided the pole barn will be removed. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: (H) APPROVAL OF CHURCH ROAD EASEMENT AGREEMENT. Gary Warren: Just today we received the cost estimate from Northfield, the contractor for the Church Road, the force main construction for the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and because they're going to be out working on Church Road basically starting even today, we need to get Council approval of change order amounts suggested by the contractor so he can go ahead and do the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements that you had earlier authorized. The handout that I gave you earlier here is their cost estimate. Basically for your — information, the northern part they estimated $13,608.00 is actually about $2,000.00 underneath our engineer's estimate and the southern half which wasLE: estimated at $22,957.00 to improve the watermain came out $2,000.00 over because of water connections that were missed in the plans. Basically, there are my 2 — CITY OF P.C. DATE: May 18 , 1988 CC.C. DATE: June 13 , 1988 CASE NO: 86-32 SUB Prepared by: Olsen/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary Plat for the Subdivision of 5 .6 Acres into Two Single Family Lots _ I- Z a - V LOCATION: Approximately Mile South of Co. Rd. 17 and f Mile _ ^ East of TH 101 Li. Q APPLICANT: Robert Buresh 5817 Hanson Road -. Edina, MN 55436 _--e/AS/EX. PRESENT ZONING: A-2; Agricultural Estate - - ACREAGE: 5 . 6 acres DENSITY: 2 . 8 units per acre ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- A-2; Halla Nursery/Halla Subdivision S- A-2; vacant/single family QE- A-2; single family Q • W- A-2; vacant W WATER AND SEWER: Not available to property. PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The northerly part of the site has a (/) slight slope and is open area. The southern portion of the lot has a steep slope and is heavily vegetated. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Agriculture ., e Q • D cr w 16: 1 B• `EVARD R. IB irA 1 ti ' . I. wr i SW RD , 1 . 7 , A2 \' PUD-R ...4%/ i , ._7.7--- git74 ^Wag' �-------) 6���,� L AK rat 4. ri. SF RILEY - avo ,iiip*".- - 4 c. . 1 ___ _ _ �►. i_ LT R f i 4 o la2 iri t" D POND •C": . ......__pil : • ? c....V 6 .1#1 hat 'FAIL (C.ft. 14/ 1 I r) 4-,----? /lir C---)61 2.) / 1 Ai 7 ...f). .z>, 04 A2 P. I wci-,j.a i ' / 1 bp vi...cfm-co 0 • a cc 0 :__ _ CREE(W000 _ Nee . f SSE FARM • Of a .1 .� pl -vp 'Lk?'4.a V 41064 r I I 69 9 ,1 I. 10.5' ` ORkVf' r - Buresh Subdivision May 18, 1988 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The application will be reviewed under the old ordinance regula- tions since the application was made by the January 15 , 1987, deadline. Therefore, the requirements for this subdivision is 2i acres per lot with 180 feet of street frontage. Each lot must provide two approved septic system sites . REFERRAL AGENCIES Asst. City Engineer See attached Building Inspector See attached Fire Inspector See attached BACKGROUND On March 12 , 1987, the City Council approved an extension of the rural subdivision deadline of July 1 , 1987 , preliminary plat approval for Robert Buresh until January 1 , 1988 (Attachment #1) . The Buresh property is located south of the Halla Nursery, east of Highway 101 . It was felt that the Buresh subdivision should wait until the Halla subdivision was completed and the street issues resolved. Since the Halla subdivision has been approved, Mr. Buresh received one more extension to the deadline until July 1 , 1988, for preliminary plat approval (Attachment #2) . The second deadline extension was approved to allow Mr. Buresh to have the soil borings completed and reviewed by Mr. Roger Machmeier and Mr. Jim Anderson. There is an existing 30 foot easement which services two e istiug residences anii rile ndIlci ivuise .y Lo the north. Tne 30 rout ease- .J \R r David _ J •i '� l 1lleLll. was created to provide 1'll • tlaV 1\.l Llalla with access to 111J home. ivaintenalicC ui the easemCat has caused several arguments between the two residents who use it. Any increase in the use of the 30 foot easement is opposed by one of the landowners. Staff had hoped to resolve several of these issues with the Halla sub- - division by having the easement improved to a public street and provide the lots adjacent to the easement with proper street frontage. The Halla subdivision proposed an internal street north of the easement which was approved uy the city. TnereLoie, the problems related to cite use of the 30 root easement still exist. - AL'ALYSIS The applicant is proposing to subdivide 5 .6 acres into two single family lots. Lot 1 is 2 . 7 acres and Lot 2 is 2 .9 acres. The proposed site is divided with a northerly lot and a southerly lot. Both of the lots have two approved soil treatment sites (Attachment #3) . - - Buresh Subdivision May 18 , 1988 Page 3 Street The 30 foot easement is adjacent to the proposed site on the north and easterly property lines which could service both proposed lots . The Subdivision Ordinance permits four single family lots to be serviced by a private drive ( Attachment #4 ) . There are currently five properties with land adjacent to the 30 foot ease- ment, Paul Graffunder , David Teich, the subject site, David Halla, and Halla Nursery (Attachment #5 ) . Paul Graffunder has an existing home being serviced by the 30 foot easement as does David Halla. David Teich' s property is approximately 19 acres and has an existing home on it which is serviced off of Hwy. 101 .The Teich property could not be subdivided under the one unit per ten acre density and the property adjacent to the roadway ease- ment could not be used as a single family lot. The Halla Nursery which is adjacent to the easement to the north has been sub- divided and will be serviced by internal streets from County Road 14 and Hwy. 101 . The remaining property is the subject site which is proposed for two single family lots which would result in four lots being serviced by a private drive. The remaining property adjacent to the easement would not use the easement since it cannot be subdivided. — There are two options for the city to pursue with this proposed subdivision . The first would be to permit the lots to be ser- viced by the existing easement as a private drive. The proposed subdivision of two lots would equal four single family lots on a private drive . Therefore, the lots would meet the city ordinance which permits four single family lots on a private drive. In — addition, the Fire Inspector has recommended a temporary tur- naround to be installed to ensure fire access . The temporary turnaround would have to be located where it would service both — of the proposed single family lots . The second option would be to require the easement to be improved to a public street. Don Halla, the owner of the property to the north, has submitted a letter objecting to increased use of the existing roadway ease- ment and has stated that he is in favor of the easement being improved to a city street ( Attachment #6 ) . The only way for the road to be improved to a city street would be for the Halla sub- division to be replatted to create a public street where the roadway easement now exists and to remove the proposed street directly north of the easement. Mr . Halla has not indicated — whether or not he would be opposed to replatting his subdivision and including the 30 foot easement as public street. MnDOT would not permit the roadway easement to be improved as a city street onto Hwy. 101 with another road directly to the north. — As recommended with the Halla subdivision, staff would prefer that the roadway easement be improved to a public street to — resolve all of the underlying issues resulting from the use of the easement. But given the past action of the city, a public street may not be feasible at this time. Therefore, the private — Buresh Subdivision May 18 , 1988 Page 4 drive may be the only option . Staff feels that the four lots would meet the city ordinance by being serviced by a private drive with the easement improved to private driveway standards . If the private drive is approved, the City Attorney recommended that the applicant provide verification that the subject property has the right to use the 30 foot roadway easement. Upon review of the easement document which grants the right of the easement to David Halla, it is not clear that the subject property also has the right to use the easement. Should it be proved that the property does not have the use of that easement, the property would be landlocked and could not be subdivided or developed. RECOMMENDATION From a planning perspective, the ideal plan would improve the 30 foot easement to a public street and be included in the Halla subdivision. Mr. Don Halla would have to consent to replatting his subdivision for the public street option to be feasible. In the event that Mr. Halla would not wish to replat, the Planning Commission and City Council can permit the four lots to be serviced by a private drive. Two additional lots using the easement will not pose safety hazards . Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the sub- division with the 30 foot easement being improved to a public street, staff recommends the following condition: 1 . Should the city approve the public street option , Mr . Don Halla must be willing to replat Great Plains Golf Estates subdivision to remove the internal street servicing the Halla subdivision from Hwy. 101 and improve the 30 foot easement to a public street. 2 . Type I erosion control shall be installed along the south and east sides of Lot 2 , Block 1 prior to the commencement of any grading. 3 . Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 :1 . 4 . The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site cleanup caused by construction or construction traffic from this site. Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the sub- ` division being serviced by a private drive, staff recommends the following conditions : 1 . The applicant shall provide documentation which verifies that the subject property has the right to use the 30 foot ease- ment. Buresh Subdivision May 18 , 1988 — Page 5 2 . The applicant shall provide a driveway access plan which shall address a turnaround as requested by the Fire Inspector . 3 . The approved septic sites must be staked and roped off prior to construction on the site. 4 . Type I erosion control shall be installed along the south and — east sides of Lot 2 , Block 1 prior to the commencement of any grading. 5 . Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 : 1 . 6 . The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site — cleanup caused by construction or construction traffic from this site. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the subdivision serviced by a private drive with the following con- ditions : 1 . The applicant shall provide documentation which verifies that — the subject property has the right to use the 30 foot ease- ment. 2 . The applicant shall provide a driveway access plan which shall address a turnaround as requested by the Fire Inspector. 3 . The approved septic sites must be staked and roped off prior to construction on the site. 4 . Type I erosion control shall be installed along the south and _ east sides of Lot 2 , Block 1 prior to the commencement of any grading. 5 . Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 :1 . 6 . The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site cleanup caused by construction or construction traffic from this site. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION — Should the City Council approve the subdivision with the 30 foot easement being improved to a public street , staff recommends the — following condition: 1 . Should the city approve the public street option, Mr. Don Halla must be willing to replat Great Plains Golf Estates Buresh Subdivision May 18 , 1988 Page 6 subdivision to remove the internal street servicing the Halla .� subdivision from Hwy. 101 and improve the 30 foot easement to a public street. 2 . Type I erosion control shall be installed along the south and east sides of Lot 2 , Block 1 prior to the commencement of any grading. 3 . Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 : 1 . 4 . The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site cleanup caused by construction or construction traffic from this site. Should the City Council approve the subdivision being serviced by a private drive, staff recommends the following conditions: 1 . The applicant shall provide documentation which verifies that the subject property has the right to use the 30 foot easement . 2 . The applicant shall provide a driveway access plan which shall address a turnaround as requested by the Fire Inspector . 3 . The approved septic sites must be staked and roped off prior to construction on the site. 4 . Type I erosion control shall be installed along the south and east sides of Lot 2 , Block 1 prior to the commencement of any grading. 5 . Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall oe used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 :1 . 6 . The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site cleanup caused by construction or construction traffic from this site. ATTACHMENTS 1 . City Council minutes dated February 9 , 1987 . 2 . City Council minutes dated January 11, 1988 . 3 . Report from Jim Anderson. 4 . Excerpt from Subdivision Ordinance. 5 . Plan showing existing homes and lots . 6 . Letter from Don Halla dated April 20 , 1988 . 7 . Planning Commission and City Council minutes from Halla sub- division . _ 8 . Memo from Asst . City Engineer dated May 12 , 1988 . 9 . Memo from Building Inspector dated May 11 , 1988 . 10 . Memo from Fire Inspector dated May 5 , 1988 . 11 . Application. 12 . Planning Commission minutes dated May 18 , 1988 . 13 . Preliminary plat dated December 7 , 1987 . 2 lir ...vuncil Meeting - February 9, 1987 . " , ry Warren: Ditch sections would be upgraded, right. '' Al Klingelhutz: That would give it a 30 foot roadway surface that you haven't _ice got now. I! Gary Warren: It actually would give you a 24 foot width rural travel surface and we're compromising on putting 3 foot on each side for the drainage ditches so that's where we came up with the 30 feet. • Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve #86-22 as shown on the preliminary Subdivision Request following plat dated December 17, 1986 with the conditions: 1. A11 lots must be serviced by Sunset Trail. 2. Dedication of a five (5) foot street drainage and utility easement along the easterly property line of the plat to expand the right-of- way width to 60 feet. 3. Approval of a final grading and drainage plan for Lot 2 at time of building permit application. 4. Locate the building and treatment systems on Lot 2 out of the drainage way. 5. Widening to 30 feet those portions of Sunset Trail which are less ! than 30 feet in width and improvement of the turnaround at the north end of Sunsetn Trail to the 60 foot radius. 6. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated and labeled as necessary along lot lines. '� 7. Specifically look at Lot 5 per Mr. Machmeier's comments regarding location of the mound system sites and the house site. All voted in favor and motion carried. _ CONSIDER EXTENDING APPROVAL DEADLINE FOR THE PETERSON/JEURISSEN/LAURENT. SUBDIVISION. • -- Mayor Hamilton stated that this item was looked at some time ago because of _ the problem with the designation of the TH 212 right-of-way and the problem with subdividing the property when they don't know where the road is going to go. Councilman Horn moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve, at the time the new Zoning Ordinance goes into effect, the approval deadline for the Peterson/Jeurissen/Laurent Subdivision to January 1, 1988. All voted in favor and motion carried. LT - i1 20 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to deny the request for the street name change by Bill Streepy and leave the street name as Sinnen Circle with the stipulation that city staff contact the Rottlund Company, make sure that city maps are changed accordingly and that public safety people are notified. All voted in favor and motion carried. CONSIDERATION OF PLAT APPROVAL EXTENSION FOR RURAL SUBDIVISION: A. SEVER PETERSON AND GILBERT LAURENT B. ROBERT BURESH C. LAKE RILEY WOODS SOUTH Councilman Horn moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to approve plat approval extension for rural subdivision for Sever Peterson and Gilbert Laurent, Robert Buresh and Lake Riley Woods South. All voted in favor and motion carried. ACCEPT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Councilman Geving moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to accept the Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Barr Engineering Company dated September, 1987 and that this plan be adopted as a guide to dealing with stormwater mangement within the study area. All voted in favor and motion carried. ACCEPT PLANNING COMMISSION RESIGNATIONS AND APPOINT NEW MEMBERS. Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to accept the resignations of Robert Siegel and Howard Noziska from the Planning Commission and to send them a Certificate of Appreciation. All voted in favor and motion carried. Councilman Boyt: I think it should be more than a Certificate of Appreciation. I think it should be some sort of a plaque or something. Councilman Geving: I don't know about that Bill. Not for Commission members. Councilman Boyt: They donate a lot of time. Mayor Hamilton: It's something that in the past we have always given letters of appreciation. It doesn't mean it has to stay that way. Councilman Boyt: It seems to me that a plaque is reasonably inexpensive. It's something a person might be more inclined to put on their wall. That's my thought. Mayor Hamilton: I think that's something that we need to have Todd r investigate possibly to look into something like that. A plaque and perhaps come back to us with some type of information written on it that we could look at and see if it would be a standard thing for all of our uomitissions. 19 L,a,( - ..�... ..a..s.r... ..sat •ldi� R RESOI RCE ENGINEERINGK E RoLecr E. Machmeier. P.F. Jame, L. Anderson. C.P.S.S. 29665 Neal Avenue 3541 Ensign Avenue. North Lindstrom, MN 55045 New Hope. MN 55427 (612) 257-2019 Apri 1 13, 1988 (612) 593-5338 — JoAnn Olsen, Assistant City Planner — City of Chanhassen P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Buresh Addition Dear JoAnn: — On Friday, April 11 , I made a field visit with Robert Buresh to the proposed Buresh Addition. I checked the proposed soil treatment — sites and corresponding soil boring data submitted December 10, 1987. I found that all of the soil treatment sites indicated by those data to be suitable for the installation of sewage treatment mounds. In addition, I checked the indicated mound site on Lot 1 . The area proposed for the house would also be a suitable area for the installation of a sewage treatment mound. By using this as one of —' the treatment sites, it provides more options for the potential owners. I found while field checking this subdivision that the soil borings and the proposed system locations corresponded with the field staking and data submitted in December. Both of the lots have at least two potential treatment system areas and Lot 1 has at least three. Sincerely, James L. Anderson, C.P.S.S. RESOURCE ENGINEERING JLA/jjm 1 t.- J 3 crY /43 SPECIALISTS IN ONSITE SEWAGE TREATMENT CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 84 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE The City Council of Chanhassen ordains : Section 1 . Section 7-16 (d) ( 5 ) is hereby amended as follows : ( 5 ) UBC Appendix, Chapter 35 , 38 , 55 , and 70; Section 2 . Section 7-18 (b) is amended as follows : ( b) Upon return of a building permit to the city by the holder thereof , with proof satisfactory to the Building Official that no construction was undertaken pursuant hereto, he shall refund to the holder the building permit fee paid by him except that twenty percent ( 20% ) of the fee paid or twenty-five dollars ( $25 . 00 ) , whichever is greater shall be retained by the city. A similar refund shall be made of any plan checking fee paid except that no refund shall be made if the city has caused the plans to be checked. Section 3 . Section 18-57 ( n) is amended as follows: Section 18-57 ( n) - Public streets to be constructed in sub- divisions located inside the Year 2000 Metropolitan Urban Service Area line as identified in the City' s Comprehensive Plan shall be constructed to urban standards as determined by the City Engineer ' s Office. Streets to be constructed in subdivisions located outside the Year 2000 Metropolitan Urban Service Area shall conform to the rural standard requirements as prepared by the City Engineer' s Office. The construction of private streets are prohibited. Private drives which provide access to four lots or less in the area outside of the Year 2000 Metropolitan Urban Service Area may be allowed subject to the following conditions: a . Reservation of a 60 foot easement; b . The private drive shall be constructed to applicable city standards when the drive provides access to 3 or 4 lots . Private drives in these situations may contain a gravel surface. Private drives to be shared by two lots do not have to meet the above referenced city standards if deemed appropriate by the city. c . Subdivisions in excess of four lots shall be required to construct a public street with a paved surface in compliance with applicable city standards . Direct access to a collector or arterial street shall not be permitted when an internal public street is provided. i _a o" o ay\2S 0G. I\4oS f i - oti - --- - c 4 IV .se, Z6 44,1, 44j '` SO°52'W _ ..-, i 426.59` '�1 • %9 •W ` fvg4..• a i 6 (� s u� 3°gj5 N \/ x rC- W N o u' a N 1`l-11 n a. I —o Pa u u W .7 0 ,. 400 kl9°17..49. A., E S68°44'39'E NI f 48.84 - or — s� /.. S5lo5703E (3�U� � I I10.61 ` NO°52'E 11 790.12 30 CO ` '' �, N84°2sXI 257.9 )/..,..,.. `,N89°0S'W Va 214.25 q ..0 .....) uo r o _ e--' o L S66°t8'49 E � oy p a rn 152.96 : O ni 71 �N58°08•W C -n • 100.65 (A -1 1 m X 856.9 �i } cUn� ° ' SO52W ^{ � �I��TUf�m--.461-•• 1Yy■ ! _ — S0°52'W 13 a - -_- -- ------ - - — -- --- - ---__• O 4�`wO4� �I 0 z 4 , 9 1 NSW f\ m ,9 ° ._... oct N N. Or_ al? NS 1. ' w O `fie o v- �.a 7 1}.4. tO 2 Z 9x 4 94.- e N 4, 0 o — V U � m\. I 111 17 _ 401.72 _ _ NO°53 ICE --•1290.91-- N 1024 32"E 1838 B9 A3A A 111, -)7zeode INC. z` "LANDSCAPE DESIGNERS, CONTRACTORS, GROWERS" mar. * ' *mew y MAILING ADDRESS 10006 Great Plains Blvd. Chaska, Minnesota 55318 100 Acre Growing Ronge - 3 Miles South of Chanhassen on HWY 101 (612) 445-6555 April 20, 1988 City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 ATTN: City Planning Dept/Barb Dacy Dear Barb; It has been brought to my attention that there is a preliminary subdivision, which has been approved for the lots, which are being subdivided by Mr. Robert Buresh (file #86-36). It is my understanding that no agreement has been made with Halla Nursery or Donald and David Halla regarding the use of said roadway. With any roadway use by additional parties, we would definitly request the road become a city road with the necessary upgrading, so as to handle 20 ton per axle trucks. At the same time we would request that the road be black topped and made and dedicated to the city for main- tenance purposes. We have received no notice of any hearings re- garding this propery before the planning commission or the council and wish to express our opposition to any additional sub-division or egress onto this road until the legal matter of the road is set- tled. Thanking you for your immediate attention and courtesies and the forwarding of this letter to the city council and planning commision. I remain sincerely yours, 46 �c Don E. Halla, President Halla Nursery, Inc. _ APR 2 2 1988 DEH/skj CITY OF CHANT- ASi'v "THE PLACE TO GO FOR PLANTS THAT GROW" YOUR "NATIONAL LANDSCAPE AWARD"WINNING NURSERY FOR DESIGNING & PLANTING SHADE TREES • EVERGREENS • FLOWERW4 RABS • FRUIT TREEMLOWER1NG SHR • s• a.;,. i i a.q_ LANDSCAPE CONSULTATION • 1NSECTIC • '; '►sr�, -, •f .4j- � i .y� i : •- _ ; kip '`�' J - City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 jr- with the recommendations that have been provided and move on. Councilman Johnson: Does the developer have a problem? Acting Mayor Geving: I'm not worried about the developer. Let's worry about the Council. Can we make a motion on the recommendations provided to us by — Staff with the agreement that we just made on the lot widths. Does anyone want to make that motion? Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approvePprove the final plat for Curry Farms, Phase 1 stamp ed "Received June 16, 1987" subject to the following conditions: 1. Execution of a development contract and submission of financial securities. 2. Execution of the required conservation easements. 3. Identification on the plat to show that side lot line easements five feet width. are — All voted in favor and motion carried. Acting Mayor Geving: The directive to the Staff is that we review, have Staff go back and take a look at the setback and bring it back to us and also bring back Block 4 on a potential Consent Agenda. We don't need to see it again other than on the Consent Agenda. REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 105 ACRES INTO 37 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF TH 101 AND CR 14, DON HALLA. Acting Mayor Geving: Let me say one thing to the Council and to the Staff — before we move into this area. Tonight we are discussing a lot of subdivisions. They are really crucial for what happens in these subdivisions are going to be the way the City looks for years to come. I'm most concerned about a very important issue and that is where our trails are going to be connecting all of these subdivisions and I want Staff to specifically understand my direction to you is in every subdivision make this provision for _the trail connection. I know this goes to the Park and Rec people but insist upon giving us a recommendation so that these will eventually all link and look like some kind of a system. Not just jagged and irregular pieces. Okay, do we all understand that? That's really a crucial point to me. Moving on then, let's go onto item 5, Mr. Halla's subdivision. Jo Ann Olsen: The property is located south of CR 14 and on the east and west _ side of TH 101. It's split into two parts. It's single family. They all have at least 2 1/2 acres and 90 feet of street frontage on the lots. The Planning Commission approved the subdivision. The first time it went in front of them it was tabled because of the street issue where they had private drives rather than public streets for each lot. They then came in with this — new ro p posal with a public street going to the center of the eastern half of 27 1- / City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 — the subdivision. It avoids the easement issue which is on the southerly portion of the property but it does still provide frontage for all the lots that is proposed in the subdivision and the highway department has approved the location. All the lots had the septic sites approved by the City's — consultants. With this new alignment of the road, they had to provide a new alternate site. The Planning Commission approved of the realignment of the road and the proposed subdivision with the condition that these new soil types — be accepted by the Soil Consultant. Also, the first plan had an outlot located approximatley in this location on Lot 13 which is now Lot 13. The purpose of the outlot was to allow for the straightening of TH 101 should that ever be proposed in the future. What Staff is now recommending is approval of — the subdivision that all lots shall have the area that was once outlot A to now be designated unbuildable area. Staff is recommending approval of the subdivision with the conditions set in the report. If you would like I could — read through those. Acting Mayor Geving: No, it's not necessary. We all have your report. Planning Commission action as is noted is fairly straight forward. I think at this time I think we'll hear from the developer. However, I think it would encumbant upon the developer or Mr. Halla, is there a representative here? Are you speaking for yourself? Don Halla: Yes. Acting Mayor Geving: Is there anything you would like to say? Tell us about your development. l___ Don Halla: The purpose of course of our development coming in at this point is really to preserve the value of our property. It is not my desire but I feel forced into doing a subdivision at this point in time. I have been very straight forward about it. My ideas and my concept is to drag my feet. Doing — the least that I can so I can remain in the nursery business but rather than having the value of my property reduced by there-fourths, I felt that it was pertinent that we did this at this time. Still I'm not looking to really come back in here and do a complete development like we just saw a few minutes before. I would like the opportunity to drag my feet and stay in the nursery business and keep it more rural which, as I understand, is really what the Coucnil and the Planning Commission wishes it to be. That's all. If you have — any questions, I would be happy to answer them. Councilman Horn: Really I only have one concern with this proposal. It looks — like a nice layout. My concern though is that's a very bad corner on TH 101. Is there any plans to straighten that out and while we precluded a plan to straighten it out, what's being proposed? It looks to me like this proposed road that comes just around the corner has a very short sight distance. Gary Warren: There aren't any plans from the State as far as TH 101 is concerned but I think it's all tied in to the TH 212 and TH 101 has become — obviously very important to us. We have reserved the corner there as part of our condition pursuant to the outlot now so that we could take steps if necessary to improve that corner. [7 28 / 9 C- •.( __ City Council Mooting - July 6, 1987 Councilman Horn: Is that enough? Gary Warren: I think short of having the feasibility done on it, I think this — will give us enough to give us a reasonable sight distance curve instead of the sharp angle that we have at this point. Councilman Horn: This proposed road just to the north of the sharp bend is not going to interfere with any change in that area? Barbara Dacy: Gary, I don't know if you've gotten the revised plat in your — packet. You've got the original one. Jo Ann Olsen: It should not impact that at all. It would still allow for _ that intersection to connect with TH 101. Councilman Horn: The lower cul-de-sac. Jo Ann Olsen: This would all become land that would have to be extended. Councilman Horn: That's my only concern. — Councilman Boyt: This is my both sides of TH 101 situation. Have you decided which side of TH 101 the trail is going to go down? Carol Watson: We already have some trail easement along the west side of TH 101. However, after you cross CR 14 and you start up around that curve, the west side of TH 101 is not a nice place for a trail unless you're a gopher or — something like that so then we had a consideration of having the trail then switch to the east side of TH 101. It is however not a particularly nice place to have people walking and biking and crossing TH 101 either. So it _ kind of got left like that because we didn't know what plans there were to change TH 101. I think we were leaning more towards leaving the entire trail on the west side and having to come up with some configuration where the trail could be done on the west side of TH 101. It may be steep in the base but — crossing TH 101 did not seem like a very viable possibility. People walking pets and bicycles and children and all these things. As these developments add quite a few people to these trails, and Eden Prairie has such an extensive — system not far from here at all. However, they're going to cross TH 101 to get to Eden Prairie section at the Pioneer Trail there you are going to cross. Councilman Boyt: You may have meant this in the recommendation but the way the recommendation reads, it says off-street trails along TH 101 and my only thing I would suggest with this development is that we have that clearly stating both sides of TH 101 until this gets resolved. At that point then we — would take one of those easements and release the other one. Carol Watson: I think we were kind of leaning towards the west side simply — because we already own a trail easment down TH 101 further on the west side of TH 101. We already have some easement. 1 Councilman Boyt: Mr. Halla, would - � y you be agreeable to giving us an easement L on both sides until we can clear this matter up? 29 ►. - .. V IMP ;////////4City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 Don Halla: I don't see that it should be any problem. Councilman Boyt: I would like to thank the Planning Commission representative, you guys did great work straightening out some of the issues here. Acting Mayor Geving: I tend to agree with your comments on the trail specifically at this time because we really don't know which is the best route. If the Hallas would agree to do that I think that would be a good move. Carol Watson: It's kind of a muddy issue because since you're going to cross TH 101 to connect to Eden Prairie because they come in on Pioneer Trail towards Chanhassen. We either cross at Pioneer Trail and TH 101 and have some kind of a controlled crossing or something like that where we can stay on the west side. Councilman Johnson: I've got one major issue and a couple quickies. Council recommendations item 5 and item 11 are no longer valid because they would be okay if we were using the June 1st addition of the blueprints but we're using the July 2nd. In one case the road has already been moved and in the other case there is no Lot 9 or 10 anymore because Lots 9 and 10 are now 4 and 5 and that condition has already been met basically. The other thing is on what is now called Lot 13 and it's part of condition 3 that the Outlot A shall on the June 1st preliminary plat shall be deemed unbuidable. This is part of both Lot 5 and Lot 13. As such, the remainder of Lot 13 is less than 2 1/2 acres and as such all of Lot 13 would be deemed unbuildable. I have a solution though. If we move the road just slightly north and curved it, you've got a problem with that? Don Halla: MnDot has a problem with that. It has to go where it is. That's the spot that MnDot wants it. They feel that's the least problems for accidents. Councilman Johnson: You mean coming 60-70 feet up the road, they got a problem with that. Don Halla: They got a problem with that because it drops too quickly on the vertical sight distance problem. David Halla: Let me explain that to you because I was out there with MnDot. They go out there with a ruler and set that ruler at 37 or 38 inches and at a certain speed limit that's on that road in that designated area you have to have so many feet of clear view and it's done very scientifically. If you've ever seen them do it you can't argue with it because it's so practical and logical it comes right out. If they say that's where it has to be, that's where it has to be because you have to have so many feet of clearance at that mile per hour. Councilman Johnson: I have no problem with that. What I'm trying to do is make sure that Lot 13 is buildable. [E: 30 I �� City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 Jr- Barbara Dacy: I think what you could recommend is that the westerly 160 feet of Lot 13, that's still leaves 625 feet for future resubdivision and adequate _ area for the two septic system sites. We'll go back and double check that but the westerly 160 feet ,of that was the original area that we looked at as part of Outlot A. Councilman Johnson: But that leaves it well under 2 1/2 acres in Lot 13. be an easement until a decision for TH 101 is made so 13 becomes buidable but they can't build out where they may realign TH 101. Acting Mayor Geving: Gary do you have a comment on that? I would like to have your comment on that, the recommendation. Gary Warren: If you just want to call it a roadway easement instead of a unbuildable outlot? Councilman Johnson: It wasn't designated as an outlot, then all of 13 would be unbuildable. Barbara Dacy: The westerly 160 feet. Gary Warren: The original intent was to put it as an outlot and reserve that portion of it. _ Councilman Johnson: These plans don't show it as an outlot. Barbara Dacy: But because of the realigned road arrangement, in order to get the 2.5 acres and so on, the Planning Commission's recommendation was to reserve the westerly portion of that as unbuildable. You can describe it by easement or a deed or some type of restriction as a part of the title for that — lot. We can work out the legal means. Gary Warren: As long as we restrict it I've got no problem. — Councilman Johnson: I don't want to take out a lot that's got 13 1/2 acres to it because at some time in the near distant galaxy or something we're going to _ actually change TH 101 there and put a bridge across that crevice. Don Halle: Originally there was a discussion that they were going to do that for a year so give them time to see that there was ever going to be a need or — anybody would ever agree to do that. That was the original. Councilman Johnson: We're trying to get the State to look at TH 101. They don't want it. — Acting Mayor Geving: Let's come to some conclusion. Councilman Johnson: The last issue was well sites, I had some concern on the well sites being downgrading it, not from downgrading it topographically but hydrologically downgrade the groundwater where the septic systems are going. Primarily on Lots 10 through 13. I don't know what the ground water is there. — My experience is it's probably heading down toward the creek and the river 31 i / (A NMI r City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 there so it's probably headed south unless they've got some really unusual �� drainage in there. Jo Ann Olsen: The soil consultant definitely looks at all the drainage patterns. Councilman Johnson: The drainage pattern on top of the earth does not match — the drainage pattern under the earth arxi a slight movement like this. All I want to say is let's be careful on those well sites there. I think there may be a chance that we'll have septic systems contaminating your own wells. It depends upon how deep you put the wells of course. Don Halla: I think a lot of the difference here is between the original plan and this one, the street moved to the north. I would think the houses would move to the north and satisfy your problem. Councilman Johnson: That's exactly right. You had those houses a long ways — back. A lot of driveway. I double anyone would actually go. Don Halla: That's because the roadway used to be on the south. Acting Mayor Geving: Any more problems, concerns? Councilman Johnson: No, I think we've made good progress. I agree with this. Councilman Horn moved, Acting Mayor Geving seconded to approve Subdivision Request #86-31 as shown on the preliminary plat dated July 2, 1987 subject to _ the following conditions: 1. The applicant receive access permits from MnDot and Carver County. 2. ' The final plat shall provide for a roadway easement dedication of 27 feet on either side of TH 101 and 17 feet on the south side of CR 14, east of TH 101. 3. What was shown as Outlot A on the June 1, 1987 preliminary plat shall be deemed as a roadway easement until the realignment of TH 101 is determined. 4. Provision of a 20 foot trail easment for off-street trails on both sides along TH 101 and CR 14. 5. All street improvements shall conform with City standards for rural construction. 6. Acquisition of a drainage easement through Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 2 coincident with the ravine and ponding area. 7. All slope areas in excess of 25% shall be restricted from any and all building and grading activities. 6 32 1 Iv cid 13 _ City Council Meeting - July 6, 1987 8. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated as necessary for placement of all utility improvements.9. Approval of the final Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan by the City, Watershed District and DNR and compliance with all conditions. — 10. Approval of the preliminary plat is conditioned upon two soil treatment sites per lot where any sites have been changed due to the realignment of the street and readjustment of lot lines. All voted in favor and motion carried. REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 8.5 ACRES INTO 15 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, LOCATED AT 6239 CHASKA ROAD, ROBERT SOMMER. _ — — Jo Ann Olsen: The applicant is proposing 15 single family lots. The site is located between Chaska Road and Murray Hill Road. It is zoned RSF, Single Family. All the lots have 90 feet of street frontage and at least 15,000 square feet of lot area. The Planning Commission approved the subdivision. They did table it once though for Staff to review with the applicant if a road could be developed off of Chaska Road rather than off of Murray Hill Road. The neighborhood objected to the Murray Hill Road access because of the hill going to the north. They felt that the sight distance was poor and that the increased traffic would be a hazard. The applicant did propose an alternate plan which I'll show in just a minute. It altered the site almost completed because of the steep slope. Staff and the Planning Commission both recommended that that not be approved. Another item that they had concern — about was with the outlots and the Planning Commission recommended approval that the outlots be offered to the neighbors to the north and the south and that if that isn't an option that they do become part of Lot 15 and 3 so the _ City would not be responsible for maintaining them. Another issue is the Park and Recreation Commission, they had not reviewed it at the time of the Planning Commission meeting. They have since then and they are requesting that a trail easement be provided along Chaska Road and also along the utility easem ent up to the cul-de-sac and then they are going to be working with the applicant and the property owners to the south to locate an area for an easement to go through to access the school site. Again another issue is the road access. The Engineer and Staff visited the site to see if it does have adequate sight distance. To the north it has approximatley 300 to 400 feet of sight distance. TO the south it has approximatley 200 to 300 feet. There is adequate sight distance and Staff felt that the street proposed would be adequate. We also felt that the additional lots onto Murray Hill Road would not be a negtive impact. The other issue was that the lots did not conform with the surrounding lots. The area, the lots in the surrounding neighborhood are larger from 30,000 on up. Staff had to stress the point that this subdivision is meeting the minimum requirements of the zoning ordinance and although they are not the approximate size as the existing lots, they are meeting the requirements of the ordinance and technically it can not be denied because of that. So those are the main issues that the Planning Commission had and were addressed and again the Planning Commission did recommend 33 — CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING rJUNE 24 , 1987 Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 p.m. . — MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steven Emmings , Ladd Conrad and David Headla MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Siegel , Howard Noziska and James Wildermuth STAFF PRESENT: Barbara Dacy, City Planner and Jo Ann Olsen, Asst. City Planner SUBDIVISION REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 105 ACRES INTO 37 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED A-2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE AND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND — SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF HWY 101 AND CO. RD. 14 , DONALD HALLA. Jo Ann Olsen presented the Staff Report on this subdivision request. Conrad: This is not a public hearing but I think we'll ask for some comments. Mr. Halla if you would like to talk or have a representative talk. Bob Bruno: I'm an attorney for Mr. Halla. I was here at the last meeting. We have a better picture of this northerly alignment. This is all Halla — Nursery property right now. This portion has quite a few growing trees on it. Quite a large number of large trees. Anywhere from 7 inches in N.Jiameter. The Halla Nursery buildings are located over in this area in Block 1, Lots 8, 9 and 10. After the last meeting when the Planning Commission requested that we provide some dedicated streets instead of private drives , we did meet with some of the land owners down to the south of Block 2 to see if there was some agreement that could be reached about — this easement. At the present time there is an easement which abuts the southerly line of Block 2. It's 30 feet wide. The road going on that easement. All of this property was deeded at one time or another to Roy and - Marlas Teich and they provided a number of easements to people. They provided an easement over that 30 feet to Halla Nursery. It was to David and Donald Halla which has been assigned and is now owned by Halla Nursery _ which provided access through that easement to each one of these landowners in this area so all of these people here had access to this road which is the next 30 feet south of the line there. What we propose to do, since these landowners to the south are not interested in paying for any — assessments. Were not interested in turning land whatsoever to the building of a road over that 30 feet and improving that 30 foot road which is now a road, is going to be a road forever. It's on the deeds. It's in perpetuity for roadway and drainage purposes. Instead of burden them, they didn't want to be burdened with paying for assessments, we decided to put the road entirely on the proposed subdivision and we did that by moving it 6 inches to the north. Now that would put two abutting roads together but I think we — have come up with a picture here now with the northerly route that I think is going to resolve all the issues. All of the lots have got access to a public street. There is a through situation. Something Staff wanted for and safety purposes to allow emergency vehicles access from either the _a lam.r• {.... ..:- :. ....a.4c:-� Planning Commission Meeting June 24 , 1987 - Page 2 (north or the west. I think this plan is very workable. The entrance onto TH 101 is staggered from here. We don't have a situation where you've got — two abutting streets. You can have 90 feet of roadway here or 90 foot double entrance onto TH 101 that really amounts to. MnDot has technically approved the outlet here next to another outlet and I frankly don't understand why they would do that. To me, as a driver coming down the road around this curve to be suddenly confronted with a double entrance onto TH 101, I just think would be pretty dangerous. There's a very poor sight situation here because of all the brush growing up in this ravine. That brush is not owned by the applicant so there isn't any control over who is going to cut that brush down to improve the sight lines there. Moving it up to the north I think we're going to solve the safety issue of having a — double outlet right here. Moving it to the north, all of the lots will be renumbered. Accordingly there will be a Block 4 and then Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. The lots up to the north here are Block 2 , Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 , 5 and 6 and we've simply revised the phasing schedule which renumbered these particular lots. I guess I have some problem with what Staff has suggested about this being done as a municipal improvement project and the reason they wanted to do that I think is so they could assess the owners the south. We — don't need to do that anymore when the applicant is going to be furnishing the road himself. We had a phasing plan, if you followed the phasing plan it called for the lots down in this area to be developed first and then — these lots, these lots. There was a pattern to it because the applicant did not want to disrupt his nursery business all that much. There are trees here. If this road is to be put in as a municipal improvement, it's going .:o be completely ruin all the phasing. It's going to immediately turn all of this property into residential. It's going to remove some very mature trees along this right-of-way and that would be a tremendous expense to the Halla's so this plan I think makes a lot of sense. It will be paved as the owner originally proposed to be done. I don't see any objection to the phasing in as we had proposed earlier. We would like to keep that phasing. It's pretty crucial to my client's business here to be able to remove these trees as time goes on so he can plant and put these roads in at his own expense and obviously assess them to each one of his own lots as he sees fit without the city or another contractor becoming involved in building this whole thing and then the problem of the assessment of all the owners I think is cumbersome. Putting a road abutting a 30 foot easement on here doesn't solve any of the problems. That easement has been existing in perpetuity and we might as well put the road fully on the applicant's — property and let him pay for the entire thing and let him phase in as he sees fit. That's just what this plan does. It allows for him to continue on with his nursery business and not put all of these lots into immediate residential status which they would be if the city needed to build this public street the way the Staff is proposing. He would be forced to sell these lots immediately. He doesn't want to do that. He wants to keep the nursery business. He wants to remove the trees in this area gradually and in a logical manner so I think we would recommend that this alternate be approved. I think it answers as many questions as anything. You're always going to have this easement problem to the south. It's not going to be — cured by abutting the street onto it because that road is going to be there. �d1 these landowners and Halla Nursery all have the right to use that 30 — Planning Commission Meeting June 24 , 1987 - Page 3 feet and that's going to be there. The only way that could be resolved is if the City or some other government condemmed it and took it because right now , all of these property owners have private rights to that road and even — the years isn't going to take that away so I think this is a very logical way. MnDot has approved this entrance over here on TH 101. It's quite a ways away from this very sharp, dangerous curve down here with a maximum of - sight distance. Much better sight distance than there would be at what the Staff is proposing. What used to be Outlot A is not Lot 1, Block 4 and we don't mind the restriction on what was Outlot A provided it's got a reasonable time put on it. To says it's going to be unbuildable forever I - think is unreasonable and we suggest one year for the City or MnDot or whoever is going to take TH 101 and straighten it out there. They make some decision about what they're going to do within a year. To say that it will never be built upon I think is unreasonable. Somebody has to be able to use it at some point in time. We would agree that Outlot A could be restricted for one year. Number 2 on the recommendations here require a dedication, of - course, we are talking about a right-of-way easement along here. We don't like it. We're giving an additional 27 and 17, an additional 44 feet there when there is no one who has any plan to approve highway 101. No one wants the road and to give 120 feet of right-of-way which is what this would - amount to is a bit unreasonable. Again, these are fairly narrow lots. No one would be building in that portion anyway. We would allow that portion of it if that's necessary. I don't think anyone would want to build that — close to TH 101 so I don't that's a concern as long as it's an easement and r not the street. Again, number 5, I guess here we have an alternative to ',....lumber 5 which is to have the applicant build the road and not have the City or County become involved in a municipal project. Any questions about this alternative? I know it's kind of a last minute situation but when Staff came up with moving this down to next to the this one , we felt that this would just serve us much better as a street. Conrad: I think we'll have questions later on. Are there any comments? It's not a public hearing but does anybody have any other relevant - information that they would like to share with us on this subject? Okay, quick question Jo Ann , how do you see the public improvement road , south of that , how do you see that land developing? - Olsen: We had an application in for one of the sites but it's presently on hold until this one has been resolved. Other than that, it's under that one unit per 10 rule. There are no intentions from what I've heard from the — property owners to develop it but there is one site that does want to develop 5 acres into two buildable lots. The only other large property owner is Teich and exactly how much he has I don't know. — Conrad: With the applicant's new plan which totally puts the burden on themselves and makes a lot of sense for phasing and for not forcing premature development of the property, why should we not consider that real — seriously? Olsen: We're not saying to not consider it seriously but Staff still )refers having the road, just to provide street frontage to those existing Planning Commission Meeting June 24 , 1987 - Page 4 (and any future homes there to the south. With the street being located on the southern property line or even if they wanted to do it half and half, -' that provides those properties with public street frontage so they will always be maintained to provide better emergency and safety access. Conrad : But they don ' t want it apparently. Paul Graffunder: That is incorrect what he said. All of the property owners that were at the meeting said they will give the 30 feet that is their property already as an easement towards the roadway. They said they would give that up with no problem whatsoever. I just wanted to make that clear . Bob Bruno: I guess I have to dispute that. I've been in contact with Dave Teich who owns the 10 acres in this area right here. He would not give any additional land unless he was guaranteed that he would not pay any assessments for it and that totally killed any idea without total cooperation. It would have to take total cooperation for this to be possible. I wrote him a letter requesting the same thing. I had an agreement drawn up even so far as to have an agreement drawn up which would hold him harmless from any assessments but he wouldn't sign that so we don't have 100% cooperation . Conrad : So the negative, if we follow the plan that's just been submitted, s ootentially we ' ll be creating another road sometime. Headla: Has Teich gone on record with the votes, he isn't here is he? Is he going to notice the village that he does not want to participate? So we really don't know from any other source what his position is? What bothers me is I tend to like the one discussed this afternoon because apparently from what we know, and I 'm not sure that what we know is accurate but from we think we know, he does not want to be involved with assessments. That's his decision. Have you had a chance to look at this plan that came in this afternoon? Olsen : Yes . Headla : Do they meet the minimum acreage on all lots? Olsen: I haven't gotten the calculations on it. It would have to to be acceptable . Headla: If that meets the minimum acreage requirements, is there any reason to consider it unacceptable? Olsen: No, again they are both acceptable it's just Staff had preference over the other. Headla: I guess I kind of like that plan that came in this afternoon because apparently not all parties want to pay for assessments. Why involve ()hem in something they have no control over? I guess all the other — Planning Commission Meeting June 24 , 1987 - page 5 recommendations were good . I don ' t have any further questions . Emmings: Would the driveway for Lot 9 be on the new road that you proposed — there rather than out to TH 101? Bob Bruno: Access would be along this area . It ' s now Lot 4 , Block 2. Emmings : I guess what I was wondering is if Lot 5, if you could get 5 onto that road as well to prevent another access onto TH 101 if we were to go with this plan. Bob Bruno: I think you might run into problems with Lot 3 here . — Headla: Is there a turning problem? Is that what you ' re saying? Bob Bruno: No, I don't think there's a turning problem. I think it's a - problem of taking acreage on these three lots here. Emmings : Let ' s go up one lot further . 6 will access where? — Don Halla: The County has approved that onto CR 14 and MnDot approved Lots 9 and 10 to be together on that. The old 9, I'm looking at the old numbers. 4 in the new numbers, 4 would be on the public road, not off of TH 101. The - only one would be 10 or 5 in the new numbering system that would have access , to TH 101. That access point is approved by MnDot. And 6 has an access %,)oint to the north which was approved by the County. There is a possibility that 5, except you're not going to meet your requirements for road frontage - is the problem. You could go to that Lot 5 and try to bring it in on that side street. — Emmings: I'm not sure about that because we approved another one here. We've gone around on this issue where you've got the road frontage on one side and bring the driveway out the other. Bob Bruno: Perhaps an easement could be over this small area . Emmings: I like this second plan that has come in because it gets the entrance of that road away from that corner. I guess I like that and I like the fact that we can bring another internal lot onto that roadway in the new 4. I guess all I would like to say is it seems to me it would be nice to — eliminate that other access onto TH 101 and bring Lot 5 down there as well or even consider, if you're not going to do that, consider putting the new 5 and 6 together on a neutral driveway. It would be nice to have the road down on the southern edge but if there is any one property owner that doesn't agree than it doesn't make any sense at all then I go for this plan. Otherwise, like they say, that road will be there forever and for the person who disagrees or who doesn't want to use it or anything else. Outlot A, if — that were to be buildable, how would it have access? Where would his driveway be? �lob Bruno : His would right at this point here onto the public road . Planning Commission Meeting June 24 , 1987 - Page 6 (Emmings : That ' s real small . Can they do that realistically? Don Halla: We tied Outlot A into Lot 1 and made a 3.7 acre lot so really it has been eliminated as an outlot. I think it becomes a moot point for the future. All you would do is restrict a person didn't build within x number — of feet of that corner or something and solve the problem simply. Emmings : So there is no more Outlot A? It now has become part of Lot 1? Don Halla : Correct . Emmings: So we probably don't need condition number 3 then with that — understanding. Then what we've got down as condition 11 isn't meaningful anymore either . I don ' t have anything else. Erhart: I generally agree that the last proposed plan for the streets probably makes sense considering the issues. Mostly I think it's pretty much up to the developer to propose streets and then try to get them approved. I'm getting a little concerned here that we made a last minute — change and we're not covering all the issues prior to the Planning Commission taking a vote on it. I guess I question this one whether we should have it come back and have it go through Staff to look at it again.One of the issues I think is Lots 9 and 10. With the new street layout it would seem to me that lot division where it's an east/west lot division now k.could be changed to the north/south. It might require a little bit of shuffling around of a couple of other lots but therefore you would have both — 9 and 10 accessed by your new east/west road. Bob Bruno : It ' s possible that we could put an easement to service this lot . — Erhart: I'm talking about changing your new lots 4 and 5 completely so they are split . Bob Bruno : I think that ' s a possibility. Erhart: That would solve the problem with easements and everything else . Don Halla: The square footage is there. You might get some odd lot lines in there as I see it looking at it from here you might end up with a real narrow point . — Erhart: We're looking at another subdivision, in fact Wally's, where the County wants 150 feet off of the boulevard for an easement. You have 120 on TH 101 which to me is 50 times the traffic on a state road and then 150 feet on County Road 14 . What ' s the sense of all that? Dacy: There's some background on that. The Galpin Blvd., the reason why they require such a large right-of-way section on Galpin Blvd. is that the County in their 2000 Transportation Plan has planned for the realignment of TH 41 down to the new TH 212 and potentially across the river. That's -eal ly not the year 2000. That's post the year 2000. Mr. Otto's — Planning Commission Meeting June 24 , 1987 - Page 7 --(subdivision is within that concept alignment. In that case there was no official map adopted. If I could make one more comment. The applicant mentioned that there are no plans to improve TH 101 , that may or may not be — the case. Everybody can sit there and argue when TH 101 is going to be improved but nonetheless it's going to function as a minor arterial. Given the growth of the southwest area and especially it's direct route to - Shakopee area and the major recreational facilities that are located down there. That's why both the State and the City feel it's necessary that we at least reserve additional area . - Erhart: Regarding going ahead and voting on this thing tonight, what's Staff's opinion? Are you satisfied that if we go ahead and vote on this that you can clean up the details and bring the thing up to Council? Olsen: We just want to make sure that some of that Outlot, which is now part of Lot 1, is reserved . Conrad : I like the plan that came in today and my question is just the same as Tim's. I don't want to vote on something that you have not reviewed thoroughly but if you're comfortable that you can administratively handle — the issues between now and when they get to City Council , I guess I 'm comfortable moving it out of here. The only thing I would like to do is have old Lots 9 and 10, I would really like to have those serviced on an — internal street and would like to see that in a plat that would get to City Council . Headla : Did they have to do any soil borings here? Did we change the - location where the drainage fields would be? Dacy: Good point . Olsen: If you readjust Lots 9 and 10, it looks like whatever lot would become to the east will not have two soil sites . Headla : Did you have any trouble in the area with borings? Olsen: No . Conrad: In terms of the realignment, I'm not sure that we're going to have a decision in a year like the applicant wanted on TH 101 but on the other — hand the terminology says until TH 101 alignment is determined which is sort of never, never time . Dacy: We just wanted to reserve the ability to conduct a feasibility study in that particular location. Not to resolve any issues but just to see if it could be realigned in that area . — Conrad: Which it probably should be if the cost is reasonable but the timing of something like that would be when? _`)1sen : As soon as the City initiates that . Planning Commission Meeting June 24 , 1987 - Page 8 (7Dacy: We could conduct it within a year . Conrad: So the statement of that third point in the motion, are we talking about feasibility study or are we talking about the actual determination of the realignment? _ Dacy: Just conducting the feasibility study. Other issues have to be resolved down the line like if it's designated as a trunk highway. Is the State going to turn that back to the County or the City? We're just looking from a pure engineering standpoint to see if we can build a road in that area . Conrad: So Barbara, is the third point on the motion, is that worded properly? Olsen : It should be changed to Lot 1 shall reserve. . . Emmings : I 've got a suggestion , maybe what we could do is say that what was previously designated as Outlot A shall be deemed unbuildable even though it — has now become part of Lot 1. Conrad : So you ' re not too concerned as to when? — Emmings: If we do it that way it doesn't matter. They can build on Lot 1. They can build on what is now Lot 1. Headla : They could put it right on the old property line of Outlot A. Emmings: Yes, they wouldn't have to worry about a setback but that area,they just can ' t build in that area what was previously Outlot A. Dacy: That ' s right. They couldn ' t anyway because it ' s only 1. 3 acres . Headla : Sometime in the future they' re going to come in with a proposal to put a house there. Emmings moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subdivision #86-31 as shown on the plat dated June 1, 1987 with the revised plat for Block 2 distributed June 24, 1987 subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant receive access permits from MnDot and Carver County. 2. The final plat shall provide for the dedication of an easement for roadway purposes of 27 feet on either side of TH 101 and 17 feet on — the south side of CR 14, east of TH 101. 3 . What was designated as Outlot A, which is now a part of Lot 1, shall — be deemed unbuildlabe until the TH 101 realignment is determined . — Planning Commission Meeting June 24 , 1987 - Page 9 4. Provision of a 20 foot trail easement for off-street trails along TH 101 and CR 14 . 5. The east/west roadway along the southern line of Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 2 and Outlot A should be moved to the north according to the alternate plans submitted by the applicant . 6. All street improvements shall conform with City standards for rural construction . 7. Acquisition of a drainage easement through Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 2 , coincident with the ravine and ponding area . 8. All slope areas in excess of 25% shall be restricted from any and all building and grading activities . 9 . Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated as necessary for placement of all utility improvements . 10 . Approval of final Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan by the City, Watershed District, and DNR and compliance with all conditions . 11. Lots 9 and 10, Block 2 shall share a common drive access off of an internal street. 12. Approval of plat is conditioned upon approval by our consultant of drainfield site and soil boring locations on any lots where the drainfield sites have been changed due to lot realignment . — All voted in favor and motion carried . Headla: Do you keep this June 1, 1987 plat on file? In two years when you two are promoted to better positions , we won't be here to look at the documentation , will there be any documentation available? — Olsen: We will revise the preliminary plat . Headla : So this particular one will be on file? Olsen: It will get on file. SUBDIVISION REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 8.5 ACRES INTO FIFTEEN SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND LOCATED AT 6239 CHASKA — ROAD, ROBERT SOMMER. Public Present: CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING APRIL 8 , 1987 L Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 p.m. . MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steven Emmings, Robert Siegel, Ladd Conrad, Howard Noziska and David Headla MEMBERS ABSENT: James Wildermuth STAFF PRESENT: Barbara Dacy, City Planner and Jo Ann Olsen, Asst. City Planner . PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary Plat Request to subdivide 105 acres into 37 Single Family Lots on property zoned R-1A, Agricultural Residential , Don and Dave Halla, Applicants . Public Present: Mr . and Mrs . Robert Buresh Greg Graffunder Alan Teich Jo Ann Olsen presented the Staff Report . )b Brunner: I'm the attorney for Don Halla, one of the applicants. We — nink we've provided a plan here which complies with all of the subdivision requirements of the City. We have looked at the Staff Report and it appears to me that the major problem that we have with this and the major problem that the Staff has with our proposal here is the issue of the private drives versus turning the existing easement into a public street and connecting to another public street. We've chosen the private drive approach in order to avoid some possible litigation with the landowners to the south and east over that easement that is to provide the land for a dedicated street. I don't see in the Staff Report any specific reasons why private drives should be disapproved as far as this particular property is concerned. It appears that the arguments that are put forward about private drives , as I read over it, I think a private drive can exist anywhere in the city. I don't see any reason why this particular area would be particularly unsuitable to having private drives. The Ordinance allows three lots to access onto a private drive and that's the way we've designed it. We understand now that there is consideration of increasing that to five lots on a private drive. We have three on each private drive. We think that complies. As far as the access — onto TH 101, there can be a frontage road put in to connect the private drive to the present access on TH 101. There is an access for Lots 15 and 16 of Block 2. That has been approved by the Department of Transportation. That access could also serve to be joined to the private drive put on Lot 17 through 20. Erhart : Would you explain to us again what his private drive is for Lots ( ' 7 , 18 , 19 and 20? .. __--..:. -+..a ,•..bar..i..ter.+..-..mT:Gi:1{:Qt Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 2 Bob Brunner : This area here . Erhart : So you ' re serving which lots? Bob Brunner : Lots 17 , 18 , 19 and 20. — Erhart: That ' s four lots . Don Halla: Actually it's serving 18, 19 and 20. Lot 17 already has access — off of TH 101. That is connected to the cul-de-sac and those four lots could go both directions. They could service all of those, 18, 19 and 20 from the cul-de-sac even if necessary. Dave Halla: The proposed private drive there, Staff's argument that that wouldn't be maintained is a moot point because Staff already requires in the planning that that be a blacktopped road so what's wrong with a blacktopped — road in there. If they put a blacktop road in there that's going to serve those lots . That ' s not going to become a problem. — Bob Brunner : I guess one of the other points that we really differ from the Staff Report is in relation to the park dedication being required to provide a 20 foot easement in addition to the park dedication fees. We think we ought to be credited with that easement for the dedication fee by some — formula that you could work out. We think it's pretty burdensome to have to both. A 20 foot easement along all of that roadway is a tremendous amount to dedicate. Robert Buresh: I'm in the process of purchasing 5 1/2 acres from Peter Link. The property that we're purchasing is 5 1/2 acres right in here. I'm — going to be at the end of this private easement. We started out purchasing the property with the understanding that it was going to be a private drive going in there and we share some kind of maintenance upkeep cost with the neighbors and we would still be content with that. However, if a public — street is anticipated at any time, I would just as soon, personally, see it go in now and have it out of the way so we would not duplicate some of our costs and it would just service my property that much easier and then I _ would proceed with dividing my 5 1/2 acres into two 2 1/2 acre pieces servicing both on a public street . Paul Graffunder: I own 5 acres directly here, southeast of TH 101 on the south side of the easement that is there now. My wife and I and I think I can speak for another property owner down the road, really don't have a problem with a public road going in there at this time. Jo Ann has made — reference to an Agreement between Halla's and the other landowners on where the property would come from if the road was ever to be expanded. That Agreement Hallas neglected to file and was not public record when I __ purchased by property I believe so it really doesn't have much to do with myself. If the property is converted into a public street, I believe in giving 30 feet of my own land. As far as improvement costs, I don't know --'hat would be fair to charge the southern landowners. We didn't ask for the Z.nprovements. Hallas are the ones who are going to benefit from it. I'll yc•. .y ___.:t'..T.4-.� .-Wlyl.i.1'V-..�f `malr-“�r`r.- Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 3 17 give up my 30 feet for a public road but I don't believe it would be fair that we share the cost half and half or even more than half which I think is what the Hallas want to do . David Teich: I own the land south of that easement road now. The Halla proposal to dedicate that easement and an additional 30 feet to make it the 60 feet that the City requires. I'm in favor of the private drive if we see that it's alright. One thing Halla is considering is limiting use of the _ road as it stands as it is now. I don't really have a problem with that being proposed as a road and leave that 30 feet on the south side private. Erhart: Would you explain this whole thing to me? I've read it but I still don ' t completely understand it. Olsen: The Easement Agreement? Erhart: Yes , go through this street again here. The 30 feet and 60 feet. Halla is asking for 60 feet off of somebody elses property for a public street or a private drive at this time or what? Olsen: The Agreement says that whenever that would be improved, whatever land is necessary for that improvement will be given by Party A. Party A is David Teich' s property. ( chart : 30 feet or 60 feet? Olsen: Whatever is necessary. It doesn ' t say. Erhart: What was the intention when this agreement was written? Was the intention that they provide all the land for the whole street? Dave, in your opinion , what was the intention of the Agreement when it was written? Dave Halla: I really don't know. I wasn't involved in the land at that time. It belonged to my father who the agreement was signed. It was an agreement signed for Halla's benefit in the event that we subdivide it, that they would have to provide the public road. There is no mention in the Agreement that if Al was to subdivide, which way the road was to go. Bob Brunner : That's not exactly right. I've got a copy of the Agreement. That Agreement provides that in the event a road is dedicated at that location that the additional property needed for that dedication would come from the land to the south . That is clearly what it says . _ Erhart : Why would you need an Agreement at all? Bob Brunner: That Agreement was made at the time so that an individual with a home on the corner of TH 101 that Graffunder 's now own , it was made so that building permit could be issued for building that house. It was a signed agreement to allow Mr. Teich to subdivide his properties so Mr. Cauly could build there. - Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 4 Erhart : I don ' t understand what that has to do with the Halla ' s? Dave Halla: Let me explain this thing a little bit here. I'll go back and g- ive everybody a little bit of history on this thing so they can understand it from the beginning. Number one, when Roy Teich's son-in-law, Vernon Pauly wanted to get a building permit, he came to the City Council here. At - that time Larson was the Attorney for the City. He made the determination that that road was Halla's exclusive easement. In order for Pauly to get egress and ingress onto TH 101, Halla's had to give him permission to use - that easement. Teich's Attorney drew up this Agreement. By doing so and having us sign it , Vernon Pauly was able to get building permit and build his home. When that Agreement was written, there were certain things put in that Agreement that if future expansion was done down the road, that Halla's -. built the road and maintained the road, that additional property required to meet the city's requirements, would come out of the property to the south. This was all signed up front. I might be getting into a point of law but - we're willing to litigate it. The decision has already been made by Judge Tom Snow that the Agreement is upheld. We were sued by Teich through Graffunder for parking cars along the easement so we abided by the Court's - decision and did not park anymore vehicles along the easement. We have maintained that road all of the time. I built that road to get down to my house which is down at the very end of that road and I have maintained that raod practically all by myself all this time. During that time they have - hauled one or two loads of gravel since 1972. Neither one of them want to Clare in the cost of maintaining that road. We feel that the easiest thing Lo get the thing resolved so there are no more arguments about it is to make -. it a public road. Then they don't have to worry about maintaining it. They already signed the Agreement. Mr. Graffunder's argument that he didn't see the Agreement is a moot point. It's just like I've got a lot for sale. If you don't check out my title, that's not my fault that your builder will not provide. The document was agreed. It was signed. It became a part of the building permit. Precedence had already been established. It has been ruled on. That maintenance agreement has been upheld. We haven't enforced -- it because we know about the personalities of the people involved in it and we would just as soon not get involved in another situation so we haven' t push that maintenance agreement. However , if push comes to shove, we're _ willing to take it because it's already been agreed upon by the Judge. The thing is already there. It's just a matter if everyone is going to agree in an amicable matter or if we have to litigate the thing for an agreement that has already been signed and that the principals agree. That's the whole -crux of the thing. Now everybody can say that they don't know about it and that it wasn't recorded. It doesn' t have to recorded to be a legal document because it was signed and witnessed by the people. Olsen: If I could clarify one thing. In speaking with our Attorney, this is a long issue but as far as the City is concerned, it's a private issue _between the parties and the City has to make the determination whether they want it as a public road. If the City wants a public road to go right through the middle of Halla's property, they can make that decision. If I-hey want it to go where it's proposed, they can also make that decision. .-lether that Agreement is proper or not is between the private parties . Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 5 — Don Halla: At this point in time, the way it sits with that private road, there are three accesses on it already. Halla Nursery has one. Graffunder has another and David Halla has one. So as it sits, that private road that's in existence will not allow for another building permit in there so that would prevent the other 5 1/2 acre tract from being used. Actually, if we wanted to go for a fourth one, Teich could access the property too. We really have four on there at this point. Mr. Teich has also subdivided, when I say Mr. Teich I mean Roy Teich, not Dave, did subdivide his property into two pieces already. He has a 5 1/2 acre tract that was discussed here already and also another tract on the other side. Dave Halla: I want to make one last comment about that road. That's already a 30 foot wide road along I would say one-third of the road and it's got a gravel base that I'm sure Dave Teich will back up and Graffunder also is aware of it , that that is an all weather road. I hauled somewhere around — 285,000 tons of rock on there for Class V that's required for a base road so you've got one-third of that road already built 30 foot wide and I know that the City or the Planning Commission is not going to require a 60 foot wide road. It might require a 60 foot easement and the way to keep everybody from getting their knickers in a twist and the landowners to the south is to leave the road as it exists right now and they can give the extra 30 feet or whatever is required for the easement but the City doesn' t need to make a 60 foot wide road in there. A 30 foot wide road is plenty adequate to drive two semitrucks back and forth by each other and still have room on the r ides. Mr. Graffunder's argument that it would come to close to this house tiis really not , if the City uses some common sense and says leave the thing where it is on the north side of the part right now and the part that has not been expanded, that's not going to bother anybody really because that's kind of in a field. Where Bob's piece is down on the south is kind in a low — area and the road needs to be expanded a little wider to the south there anyway so that's not really going to hurt anything and in one way it would be a benefit down there. The road as it is built right now, you've got one- third of it already built there close to the City' s specifications. Don Halla: The City has already set precedence. I'm doing exactly what is _ discussed right here, at the Golf Course just outside of our road. The road is actually sitting like this. The blacktopped area is sitting against our property line on the south. That blacktop was done by the City so whether it's one side or the other of an easement, in that case they decided to put it all on one side. Erhart : Which blacktop was that . — Dave Halla: That's on the south end on Creekwood on the very south end of all the way down . Don Halla : They expanded completely on the north side of that easement . Dave Halla: There is a section line there where most roads are constructed i 'lalf-way on each side of the section line. This deal there was a horse trade ` one way back in a coon dog's age that 3 rods and 4 feet out of the west Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 6 —C side of our property was given out of the property to the west to allow for that road on the south end there which was all on our property north of the — section line but the City decided rather than go to the expense to move the thing to the south, where it should be half-way on each side of the center line, they left the thing where it is and put the blacktop in there and that's the way it is. That's what we're talking about here is the same — thing. That wouldn't get Mr. Graffunder's feathers stirred up because that would stay exactly where it is right now. , Erhart: Maybe the reason is obvious but can I ask Don or Dave, the reason against providing 30 feet of your property for half the road? — Don Halla: The reason for not putting it 30-30 will be two things. There would be a problem with the width of lots meeting your criteria. If you look at these square footages, this was computer designed frankly to make it meet the City's requirements as it is. You could in fact take the 30 feet — out of the north end if the City would be amicable to having 2.4 acre lots along there and not have the length requirement that they have now because they wouldn't need it exactly according to specs. It wouldn't hurt because _ you can see how deep they are but you would end up with about 2.4 acres per lot. Maybe 2.46 even. It's very little. It would just be under that without giving up a whole 2 1/2 acres of land . — ' Erhart: If you provide a 30 foot road easement on the north end versus 7oviding a 30 foot road easement on the south end, why doesn't that affect "'the lot size the same? Olsen: Not the property. Don Halla : They take the square footage out of the lots . Olsen: That 30 feet will be on their property. — Erhart : You ' re talking about doing the same thing to theirs . Olsen: It will become public right-of-way down to the south. Erhart : And that ' s not added into the square footage. Olsen: You take that away from the lots . Erhart : Where , up here it wouldn ' t be? — Olsen: Easements don ' t reduce the area . Dave Teich: I'm not sure why we're discussing this road anyway. The _proposal is their own private drive. That road is not affecting all the lots private or otherwise. As the proposal stands, that provides Halla's access for all their own lots for their own benefit, the question of the Yoad is moot. David is talking about the Agreement was signed and has been Lpheld. That case dealt solely with the question of parking on that Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 7 — easement road. It had nothing to do with property agreement. It was a _ question of parking. Is there something that you want to talk about the road as being proposed . Conrad: We're talking about it because of whether it be a private or public — road. Dave Teich : Are you entertaining the thought of having that road public? — Conrad: We're going to have to make that decision tonight whether we believe it should be going that way or whether we believe it's adequate as a private road . Dave Teich: I guess I'm confused then because the original proposal as I saw it in here, it says it was a private drive. — Conrad: But they don't meet our standards. We have to decide whether we believe it's good road design. If we believe it's good for the future. We believe it's good for future subdivisions, we believe it's going to be good for any kind of future access. Those are the things we have to decide. Dave Teich : Are you entertaining making that road public? Conrad: As soon as we close the public hearing we ' ll probably. . . ir \bave Teich: And you'll go ahead without it being proposed or is it really proposed? Don Halla: It's being proposed as a private road here right now with three accesses and nobody else could have access . Dave Teich : It ' s already a private road with three accesses . — Don Halla: Right. Nobody else could build. This 5 acres to the south... Erhart: I think the answer, we can recommend that the developer go back and come in with a plat that shows is as a public road. If I can speak for you Ladd, I think that's what we can do and we may do that tonight. That's why the questions . — Bob Brunner : I guess as long as that's an alternative that's being proposed here, I want to speak against it. What we have proposed is a series of private roads and there is an existing private road and I guess I don't understand how the private road system doesn't meet your specifications. Your Ordinance provides for three accesses onto a private drive. That will _ be provided here. The flavor of the testimony that's been offered here, if the recommendation is to make that southerly private drive into a public street, you're going to have some litigation here deciding who's going to be providing that lot area. Who is going to be compensating who? I guess — +-hat's what we've been trying to avoid. We're trying to accommodate 'everyone here who's affected. If there are some specifications that you — Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 8 want to make to those private drives to make them more appealing to you, of specific objections that you have to those private drives that are being _ proposed. If there is some specific objection that you have to a private drive, we would like to know what it is. But to just say that because private drives are not acceptable, the Ordinance allows them. The Ordinance allows the private drives . Conrad: We'll get into any of our reasons. If we agree with your statements, the Planning Commission will tell you. Right now we're taking the input that you've got and we're going to kick that around ourselves and see overall if we like the design of what we're looking at. That's going to be a whole unit that we're looking at and we're trying to make decisions on good access and appropriate access off of TH 101. Are there any new comments? Noziska moved, Headla seconded to close public hearing. All voted in favor — and motion carried. Erhart: I guess what we're saying here is that this now proposed future _ road has nothing to do with the proposal on the table here. If we put in a private easement, how do Lots 5, 6 and 8 get access? Through that existing private road? That comes up through the top easement or the top cul-de-sac? - Olsen: It has several private drives in there. I guess they could come from CR 14 but the most logical one would be coming off the cul-de-sac or 'private easement from TH 101. Erhart: That already has more than three houses accessed and our Ordinance is limited to three correct? - Olsen: Yes . Erhart: So we're really looking at the one from the cul-de-sac from CR 14. — Explain to me this phasing thing. How does the City handle that? Is this something that' s done typically? Olsen: Typically it's done through the Development Contract and they have to do certain improvements within one year. The first 10 lots on Block 1 and then when they are done with that they will do the other one. The purpose of the phasing is to keep it moving. Make sure that the public improvements —'are provided in a timely manner. Erhart : Is there a time limit on these phases? Olsen: We don't have a time limit, no. But again, typically, the first phase will take two years. That's usually what it will take and then they will meet to start the other one. It's never happened where it has been one phase and then nothing for several years . 1rhart: What we're looking at here is a piece of property that we're attempting to handle it as a typical phase subdivision in the sewered area Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 9 — C which typically occurs over a period of 3 to 4 years maybe. I guess we're looking at doing this over 15 years. Olsen : That was a number that was mentioned that the applicant provided . Erhart: It could be 50 years? Olsen: It could be. If they do not want to develop it. If they want to _ maintain the nursery for several years . Erhart: What happens in a normal subdivision when it is platted in phases like this and the Ordinance changes say after Phase 1? Does that affect Phase 2 and Phase 3? Olsen: If it's been finalized and recorded with the County, the Ordinance — does not affect it . Erhart: So say Phase 2, in this case, that's recorded with the County. They don't pay the lot taxes though until improvements are in so what you're saying is they can grandfather this thing indefinitely under the old Ordinance just by getting this plat? Olsen : If the City approves it . r rhart : What obligation do we have to approve the phasing plan? Olsen: It ' s all set in the Development Contract. It ' s negotiable. Erhart : Can you say no? — Olsen: If the City agrees that they can not sit on it for a couple years, we can put that in the Development Contract and give them a deadline.Again ,. the issue hasn ' t come up before . It ' s all negotiable . Erhart: I guess if we don't like the layout our best resort is to not be so agreeable on this phasing plan right? Olsen: With the proposal as it is now, with the private drives, there are several variances because they do not have the public street frontage. If you don't like it and you're looking for a reason to deny it, you have a reason there. The Zoning Ordinance requires each street to have the required public street frontage and with the private drive, they are not — providing that. Erhart: So again, just repeat the issue here as we're looking at it, a phase development over 15 years and in order to attempt to grandfather this thing in under the old Ordinance. Olsen: I don ' t know if that was the intention. ';� rhart: The biggest thing that he's getting out of doing that is that he — Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 10 is allowed to put 2 1/2 acre lots over this entire piece of land from now until who knows when which is diametrically opposed to the current Ordinance _ which requires one unit in 10. I personally don't have any problem with that since I argued against that particular rule. On the other hand, for anybody after January 15th in the rural area that comes in with a subdivision, he's going to be required 1 and 10 and the City went really out — of it's way to allow people to come in in plenty of time with the old Ordinance. Therefore, it's my opinion and I think we ought to take every advantage to get this subdivision structured so it's agreeable to the City. -. To use this phasing method to make this thing come out right because we' re going to be living with this subdivision and in the process it looks like it may go on, if the developer wishes, for a number of years. With that I'll get into the issues of the proposed subdivision itself. Number one, if we allow Don Halla to grandfather the 2 1/2 acre lots in there, I guess I can agree with that but I am definitely opposed to allowing him to put any private driveways directly on CR 14 or TH 101. Under our new Ordinance, in — creating that Ordinance, we used all kinds of effort to try and prevent direct driveways or having private driveways onto the arterials. Before I would vote for this thing , I would like to see a street layout here where _ all the lots were served by interior streets for the subdivision. I personally don't think that's too much to ask because every subdivision that we've approved in the rural area that I can recall recently, they have had that. Are there any lots in the Gagne property that had direct access to TH ▪ 101 or CR 14? t ti,,lsen : The first plat that came through. Erhart: What was approved? Olsen : Is wasn ' t. Erhart : So there were no lots in the Gagne property with direct access on TH 101 and CR 14 and that ' s just north of this piece. Dave Halla : There is one on CR 14 . _Olsen: No, I think with the new plat that was changed . Erhart: Secondly, did the Gagne's get any credit for the park dedication fees resulting in the trail system that they provided which was along CR 14 and TH 101? Olsen: No . Erhart: So again, that's obviously an argument that you can make if you want but I think we've seen other developers come in and provide this 20 foot easement. Again, my opinion of 2 1/2 acre lots, a 20 foot easement along an arterial is not really taking land away from those lots. The other thing I would like to see us do is relieve the 100 foot setback on one side of the lot. Again, I personally think we voided it in the new Ordinance and Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 11 — I 've seen it result in some really weird layouts of the way people put houses . Olsen : When they come in for a building permit they would be under the 10 and 10. Erhart: That would allow them a little bit more flexibility in laying out the septic system sites. In summary, I, personally think I would like to see _ a street system as recommended by the City Engineer. Regarding Phase 2, running through from CR 14 to TH 101 and then perhaps with an interior cul- de-sac. That that street would serve all the lots in this subdivision on Phase 2 including Lots 14, 15 and 16 and that be an improved street. As far — as Block 1, I don't have any problem with that other than again, I do not believe we should allow a private access on Lot 3 as a temporary access. With that , that ' s enough. Emmings : What are the problems with private drives Jo Ann? Olsen: Number one, you're granting variances because they do not have street frontage. Emmings: Not even with regard to the Ordinance but just through practical — experience. What kind of problems have you seen with private drives? r lsen: We've seen that after several years that the property owners usually Lome to the City and they want the City to start maintaining it . Emmings : Some do and some don ' t . Olsen : And then they will also come and ask for their street to be improved to a public right-of-way. Then we have these little streets that are just out in the middle of nowhere and are not planned for future connections. — It ' s not good planning . Emmings: There have been a lot of maintenance problems with those roads. _ In fact, that's been typical of those roads hasn't it?. It appears to me with 17, is wrong but maybe it's irrelevant but with 18, 19 and 20 for sure, looking at where the house pad is located on the plat, it would appear to me that that was intended also to have it's access on the proposed future road — as it appears on this plat. I also note on the Staff proposal there is a question about the sewer and water since they are going to have individual treatment systems. It said the consultant recommended two soil treatment areas of 60 feet by 80 feet and the Staff is recommending that a new plat be submitted designating two 60 by 80 foot treatment sites. There are two treatment sites on each lot? How big are they? Olsen: They came out to about 3,000 square feet. We just need the larger ones. That's what the consultant suggested that they show the typical size treatment areas just to make sure that there is adequate room. — #.mmings : These are smaller? — Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 12 Olsen : These are very small . It ' s just a minor detail . Emmings: It may be minor but I think it ought to be done. I agree it's probably a small thing to do and I think they would have an opportunity to do that when they redo it for the roads. I also don't like the road system at all. I think it all ought to be served internally and I would agree with — the comments that have already been stated. The other thing, I remember when we did the Gagne property to the north , there was a great todo about matching up the entrances across CR 14. In fact, we wound up going over a — wetland, allowing Gagne to alter a wetland because it was so important to have those entrances across from one another. If you look down TH 101, they've got their's coming in all over the place and I think maybe when they redraw the roads . . . Olsen: We did go through MnDot with that and that's where MnDot preferred they to be rather than directly across. Don Halla: Line of sight is the right way for preventing accidents on TH 101. Olsen: Actually, they said the ideal, when I just talked with Evan Green, where Highway is and then there is a 933, they said ideally that would be, because that's right at the crest of the hill , that would be the ideal — connection from Block 2. But the existing connection is okay. They did not rant them to line up with each other . — Emmings: That cul-de-sac that's down there that serves Lots 12, 13 and 17 and so forth , if TH 101 were realigned . Olsen : It would have to be extended . Emmings: But is there a big ravine there? Can you do that? — Olsen: You can do it but it ' s difficult . Dave Halla: That road aint never going to be realigned in anybody's lifetime in this room. Emmings: I think what we're doing. You're trying to plat it for beyond our lifetimes so I think we have to look at those issues anyway. Dave Halla: If you know the history of that road, it was ox trail originally and the County gave it to the State and the State gave it back to —the County and the State's got it back now and nobody does anything about it. Chances of ramming that down their throat and making them straighten it out , that aint going to happen . Emmings : I don ' t have any other comments . Siegel : I agree with much of what has already been said. My only question do we have any idea about going that far south? Does the MnDot say Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 13 C anything about realigning? Olsen: They said if you can plan for it, yes, they will do it. The fact is that MnDot really isn ' t putting much money into TH 101 at all . Siegel : But can we legally put a condition like we've got on that for that lot to be unbuildable? Olsen: Yes . Siegel : Because that is terrible and with private roads coming in along that section, I can imagine that would be a real death trap for egress and ingress. It is right now if there were that many property owners living on it. Conrad: You can put that restriction on but I guess you go back to say, technically you've got to tell the property owner that you can't take his property away unless you're really convinced that somebody's going to do _ something with this at some time so that would be your decision. If you think they will fill it up and straighten out the road, if you think that might happen . Siegel: Aren't we going to be moving further north on realignment of TH 101 and have a decision made on whether TH 101 is turned over to Hennepin f'ounty, Carver County or the cities involved and wouldn ' t that effect . . . — Conrad: Nobody wants that road . Siegel : We are getting to the point where development north towards TH 5 is going to be decided. It was decided for the length of TH 101 instead of just a portion thereof. We're not talking about 50 years in the future. We're talking about the next couple years. And the intersection of TH 212 is going to affect the need for straightening out and the realignment of TH 101 so we're not talking about 50 years from now as Mr. Halla referred to. It could be that we will be realigning or someone will be realigning TH 101 within the next few years. It's not that we're going to upgrade it into a four lane highway but it might be straighten out to remove some of the ox cart wheel tracks . Noziska: At the risk of reiterating a lot of what's been said already, I agree with the Staff as far as the private drive versus the public street question. Without a doubt I think the lots needs to be realigned. I just — think we got stuck with a horse. There's a lot more that needs to be done with this plan before it's going to go and I think that probably part of it is administration on Staff's part. I think the park dedication fee question _ is moot. I think the precedence is already set there. Of course, when this comes seriously before the group I think it's quite realistic to expect a phasing plan . Those are my comments . £ Headla: I guess I don't understand why we all shouldn't pay an equal amount ` or park fees. It's going to be a benefit to all of us. Why do we look at — Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 14 individual particular parties? If the property comes in front of my place, I'm supposed to give 30 feet and the person behind me doesn't. I don't agree with that. I also don't agree with TH 101 being straighten out in the near future. I think that's tremendous to leave that curve in there. It stops speeders. I wish I had a curve like that in front of my house. I do agree with Tim to the extent, I think there should be an internal road — system. That it goes out on CR 14 or not , I don' t care but I think all the lots should be serviced internally. Jo Ann, did you have any comments on anybody' s statements during the public hearing? Olsen: Just about the private drives and where they felt it was meeting the Subdivision Ordinance . — Headla: Can you explain why the Staff feels the cul-de-sacs should be tied together? -. Olsen : It just always provides a secondary access . A through street . Headla: Where the houses are located now on the print, are they tied to that location? Olsen: No . -- Headla : How about for the drainage fields? clsen: No. Headla : All we ' re saying is this is a possibility? Olsen: Right. Headla: Do you know why they used 3,000 feet rather than 4,800 feet in the soil treatment sites? Olsen : No . — Don Halla : That was the original number we were given. We can go to the 4 , 800. All you have to do is draw a bigger square. Noziska : That ' s a moot point . Conrad : I don't really have anything to add. I think as you can hear the Planning Commission is more in favor of the Staff's position. In fact, — probaby to a person and as I look at it, it's not a real good roadway plan. From a pure ivory tower road system. It's certainly not the best and I think I would probably recommend that you take another look at it. In terms of what the Halla's would like to do, we have a couple options here. We can turn it down and that would get you to City Council or we could table it and that would send you back in drawing and you could back to us maybe with -'nother design. I'm just curious what your preference would be and that -iiesn't mean we're going to follow up on that but it may tell us. If you Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 15 would like to present it to the City Council this way and somebody who makes _ the motion may take that into consideration. Any preference on how we move tonight assuming that we' re negative at this time? Bob Brunner : I guess I would like to see some direction from you as to what you might be willing to approve. Conrad: I think what people have said tonight, there are some specific issues that they have talked about but I guess we said we really don't want access off of our main roads. TH 101 and CR 14, whatever. Individual lot access. We're talking about interior roads. That's what we've done in other large subdivisions like this. We're looking for interior roads and I — think to a planning commissioner, we feel that that's just good planning and again, we're looking at it from a very theoretical , ivory tower aspect. I think that's one thing and I see here in Block 2 real easy ways of making — those connections. They are obviously a lot more costly then what you've presented but from the standpoint of us concerned with good interior roads. Enough access for houses. Enough emergency vehicle access. Even looking at _ future subdivision which is going to be potential, this particular plan is not conducive to anything in my mind and I think what we're primarily saying is you get some interior roadworks and we're also or at least I'm saying that the intent of the private drive is a different intent than what I'm seeing you use it for here. I look at the intent of Ordinances more than I look at the letter of the Ordinance. This is abusing that. I think you can rnnd ways to get three lot service from a private drive but I don't see that e intent that that Ordinance had out there is being well served by this particular design. We are not designers of roads and I think the City can certainly come and help you on that but what I 've heard from the Planning Commissioners was pretty consistent in terms of road access. We would like — to put them interior. We would like to get those properties served and I see a lot of other problems with the property to the south but I 'm not even concerned with that right now. I'm really focusing on yours but as planners — we actually should be concerned with how those lots are served. And unfort- unately you don't have agreements between property owners and we can't force you to do that but given that fact, I guess I have to make you a self _ contained, well designed unit and I don't see that yet. My preference would be self contained and expandable to the south but that's not there right now. I guess I would like to see a better design . Bob Brunner: If it goes to City Council and they deny it, what's the possibility of you seeing it again? Conrad : What's the timing on that Jo Ann? Olsen : July 1st is the deadline . Conrad : But if they turn it down, how quickly can a developer come back with a new plan? Are there any restrictions? (iserl : That ' s a good question. I would have to confer with the Attorney. - Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 16 Conrad: I don't think there are any restrictions. I think all you have to do is come back. My feeling and I guess I can't speak for the Council is that they wouldn't want to see this to be very honest and I've been around for a couple years but it's your right. If we make that decision, it would be your right to take it there. You may hear their opinions but I think they would send you back but you can't count on my one person opinion on that. Dave Halla: I would like to ask one question. As I understand it from what Tim is saying there and the comments that are said or not said , everybody is more or less in agreement with Phase 1 on the west side of TH 101. You don't have a problem with that. It's the property on the east side of TH 101 that you ' re not real happy with . Conrad: Pretty much so. That's where most of our attention is. I think there were some comments however about interior access for Lots 14, 15 and - 16 on Block 1. Emmings : That ' s Block 2 isn ' t it? Dave Halla : The natural terrain of the land in there does not lend itself to access to that cul-de-sac on the south end because of the rise in the land so the road already existing, Creekwood, is the natural access for those three lots. Conrad : Tim did you make some comments on that? Erhart: The only comment I made on the side 1 was this request for a temporary access to Lot 3 directly from TH 101 . Don Halla: That ' s an existing access that is there right now. Erhart : There isn ' t a building there is there? Dave Halla: It serves the nursery property. It ' s a legal access . _ Olsen : You could make a condition that that would have to be closed . Conrad: Tim it was you who said it was Lot 14 and 15 that you wanted it served from a cul-de-sac . Erhart: It was Lots 14 , 15 and 16 on Block 2 . — Don Halla: Just to get everything out. I feel I'm being forced into a subdivision. You folks, the City Council and so on, came to certain agreements that they are going to change lot size and basically take away a good portion of the value of my property. I would like to stay in the nursery business. I really am being forced out of the nursery business and to go into a subdivision or at least preserve my value of my property by doing a subdivision. Otherwise, I'm losing 3/4th's of it. That's really why we're here tonight is for me to preserve the value of my property that Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 17 47 has been up there. It really is going to hamper by taking 10 acre lots _ instead of 2 1/2. That's really like taking 3/4th's of the value. I have no choice but to do this. I still want to be in the nursery business. 15 years from now I would like to be in the nursery business. I think it's easy neighbors. It doesn't create problems but I have to at least preserve — my right for future development so as to not lose the value of my land. That's really what we're trying to do. I'm going to do the minimum that I'm forced to do so I can still stay in the nursery business. That's really my — attitude towards these streets and so forth. I would be happy if they went in 25 years from now. According to what you're saying, you folks is what you want to do for the City. You would be happy if they went in 25 years from now. You don't want development. I don't want development exactly — either but I want to preserve my land value. That's really where I'm coming from in this situation. Conrad : But we have to assume you are going to develop. Don Halla: I understand that and I appreciate that. As far as the phased _ development I would like it longer than shorter just to handle that question as far as that goes. As far as working something out with a street on the south and so on, there can be some discussion with Jo Ann. We discussed that question. Will they give us an extension while we go through the Court — system? According to the documents and according to the lawyers we have discussed this with, if we take the time to go through the Court system , Zat will be handled but that is what it's going to take. We're trying to reet the deadlines that are imposed too. Dave Halla : I would like to add one last comment here. I have a little bit _ of an interest. Not as much. I settled out my interest in the corporation so I basically retired but this bottom piece down there that kind of juts out on the end where I have my house in, I've got that divided into lots. Lot 7, I already own. Number 6 and 8 will be proposed lots. I've got an — interest about maintaining the value of my property down on that end because of the situation that's going in now. If it's going to be one lot in 10 acres then I just have one lot in that whole area. Right now I could have two more lots in that same 10 acre piece . Conrad: Okay, Planning Commission I think we've said our thing. I don't know if we've helped them redesign this at all but I would certainly accept — a motion. I didn't hear any direction from anybody saying whether we should table it or return it. Bob Brunner : I would like to give you my preference on behalf of Don Halla, that you table it and come back with a redesign . Conrad : I think that ' s probably a wise decision. Noziska: From a planning standpoint that makes more sense and if it makes sense to them. — —" Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 18 Noziska moved, Headla seconded to table the application request for a preliminary plat to subdivide 105 acres into 37 single family lots until the — applicant provides an amended plat which eliminates the private drives and and provide internal public streets taking into consideration the general discussion of the Planning Commission. All voted in favor of tabling the item and motion carried. Noziska : How long ago did this thing come in? Olsen: It came in in early December , late November . Noziska: Has the applicant been aware that we were ruling against private drives? Olsen: They were trying to force the easement issue and as they stated, — they went to Court and their solution to that was a private drive. We let them know right from the start . ,_ Don Halla: Can I ask one question of the private drive? There was an agreement with both the City, the Highway Department and the County as far as the private drives and the entrances, that they be on certain lots and there was no question or problem there until we came up with these other -▪ private drives . risen: It was acceptable with MnDot and Carver County. If I can speak for — the Planning Commission, it sounds like they want everything off of internal drives . Conrad : That ' s Jo Ann speaking for the Planning Commission. Emmings: She certainly is speaking for me . —Conrad : I think she' s speaking for all of us . Noziska: It's quite feasible to eliminate the private drives. Dave Halla: You only have consideration of two entrances on TH 101. I'll point it out to you. Right down here with Lot 15 and 16, are the only lots that had egress and ingress onto TH 101. Emmings: What about Lot 14? —Dave Halla : Lot 14 had access off of CR 14 on a very extreme corner between Lot 13 and 14 line and the reason that is is because this is a high hill up on here and it would be hard because of the terrain to get it any other __place so they agreed, MnDot and Carver County, that that would be the best place to put it was over on that location there and it was far enough away from the corner with the line of sight not to impose a traffic hazard. That -as the only other one on CR 14 was that one on the corner and then Lot 15 'mid 16 would share a common entrance. I was out there personally with MnDot Planning Commission Meeting April 8 , 1987 - Page 19 and if you people ever have an opportunity to go with them , they really _ educate you. They get out there with their gauges and sight and have their line of views so many feet at so mant miles per hour so that you got clear view. That's where we put it because of what they suggested. Don Halla : They felt it was designed probably cutting down 4 or 5 lots to try and limit to those two . Dave Halla: If you go up and look in that area, the speed limit is greatly reduced because you're coming around that curve. It's a 15 mph speed limit in that area and because of that speed limit imposed on there, we thought it would cause no additional traffic problem in allowing that. Conrad : Okay, we ' ll see you back here. Site Plan Review for expansion of an office, manufacturing/warehouse building by 63,810 square feet for a total of 108,916 square feet on — property zoned IOP, Industrial Office Park and located at 18930 West 78th Street , Redmond Products , Inc. Jo Ann Olsen presented the Staff Report. — Paul Strother : I'm with Cluts, O'Brien, Strothers Architects and I can say r' iat I've reviewed the Staff Report and I don't have any problems with any — �f the conditions . Bob Cordell : I 'm with Redmond Products and it looks good to us . Conrad: Just to clarify, Jo Ann, you've read Art Kerber's note but feel comfortable with the previous recommendation? Olsen: Yes. It has enough water to supply the need for it now. Conrad : Who made the previous review? Olsen: Jim Castleberry. Headla: I see you supply hair products. Are you going to do any — repackaging? Transfer chemicals from one container to another? Bob Cordell : We do manufacture hair care products . — Headla: What kind of chemicals are involved? Bob Cordell : Water with fragrances . Headla: Do you have any leftover and disposal problem? "ob Cordell : Very small amounts . We wash out tubs or packings. CITYOF CHANHASSEN _ I 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Larry Brown , Staff Engineer 117 DATE: May 12 , 1988 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat for Buresh Subdivision Planning File No. 86-32 SUB, Robert Buresh This site is located mile east of State Aid Highway 101 approximately mile south of County Road 14 . The 5 . 6 acre site is composed of a rolling topography with a ravine located on the southeasterly property boundary. A 14 to 16-foot wide gravel field road serves as access to the site along the north side of the northerly property boundary. Vegetation ranges from young Sumac trees to a variety of mature trees scattered throughout the site. Sanitary Sewer This site is located outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) . Therefore , on-site waste treatment sites will be required. All proposed septic system sites should be staked and roped-off prior to the commencement of any grading. Water Service Municipal water service is not available to the site. Therefore, the applicant will be required to develop on-site sources for water. Roadway As mentioned previously , a 14 to 16-foot wide gravel roadway which exists outside the described property along the northerly property boundary , serves as the only access to the proposed site. At the time of this report it was not clear as to whether the applicant has easement rights to this access . Documentation regarding the easement rights for the applicant should be pro- - vided prior to final plat approval. f) Planning Commission — May 12 , 1988 Page 2 Article 3 , Section 18-57 (n) of the Chanhassen City Code states that "Private drives which provide access to not more than four — ( 4) lots may be allowed. " At present , there are four "buildable" lots, if developed, that would depend on this access . The proposed access could be constructed to the City ' s standard — for rural private drives ( refer to Attachment No. 1 ) , however , there are several other benefitting property owners . Staff has reviewed the existing 16-foot driveway and finds this acceptable. — Maintainence of the private drive is solely the responsibility of the owner . A 10-foot roadway easement shall be provided along the north and south property boundaries to facilitate future development. Grading and Drainage The plan proposes that grading be limited to the house pad only. We find that this is acceptable. Erosion Control Type I erosion control should be installed around the south and east sides of the lot . Recommended Conditions 1 . The applicant shall provide the City with the appropriate easement documents for the access to the site prior to the final plat approval. 2 . Type I erosion control shall be installed along the south and east sides of Lot 2 , Block 1 prior to the commencement of any grading . — 3 . Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 :1 . — 4. The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site cleanup caused by construction or construction traffic from this site. Attachments 1 . Standard for Rural Driveway Lulu cc - W J O a LIJO (75 _ w > 64 N O cc 0' •�� F- "t"� �i , ''la , Y r * i in Iti R r '' s e , , zIr0 0 0 lip; O 0 Q Q Cr :::. �"h•• J _ N v cc w 1 - 0 1- 3 • N in Z rJ 0 i a W CO r N 4:b 0 r w F- fr C.) (I) 11" Cr -�� � U 0 $,, W . r (UW) z r J LL Q _ 2 U CL (ate o �- I CITY OF \ ‘;‘,0 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 — MEMORANDUM TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Assistant City Planner FROM: Steve Kirchman, Building Inspector 4-1Cjk , DATE: May 11 , 1988 SUBJ: Planning Case 86-32 Subdivision, Buresh It should be emphasized to the developer that this department will not issue building permits or septic permits unless two ( 2 ) undisturbed septic treatment sites are available. Sites should be marked with steel stakes at approximately 16 ' on center. They should be roped off with 3/16 synthetic rope. Orange or red flags should be placed at approximately 8 ' on center . All contractors should be made aware of the importance of preserving the sites . A lot without two ( 2 ) available sites may be unusable for 7 to 8 years . CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Assistant City Planner FROM: Steve Madden, Fire Inspector) DATE: May 5 , 1988 SUBJ: Buresh, 86-32 Subdivision Upon review of the plans for Buresh, I request a temporary turn- - around be installed. This would insure fire access (Uniform Fire Code, Division 11 , Section 10 . 207[ a] ) . If you have any questions, please contact me . ��c LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF CHANHASSEN — 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen , MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 APPLICANT: ,)&74:77 /✓,g,e624/ y ADDRESS .5B/7 / .. , ADDRESS /09 3,3 /;77j,c '-C S — "' /.c1'�/ � jS T� j cam$ ►� �+�{ 53-9 3 l TELEPHONE (Daytime ) Zip Code Zip Cod 9ZZ-01%7 TELEPHONE V e"fs44.3©►5 REQUEST: Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan Zoning Variance Preliminary Plan Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision Land Use Plan Amendment —X__ Platting Conditional Use Permit Metes and Sounds Site Plan Review Street/Easement Vacation Wetlands Permit — PROJECT NAME ae-e_ 7177--7‘%<1 PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING --- USES PROPOSED / ������ / SIZE OF PROPERTY L� LOCATION REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) -- 1 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 18 , 1988 Chairman Emmings called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p.m. . MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Annette Ellson, Steven Emmings, Brian Batzli and Jim Wildermuth MEMBERS ABSENT: Ladd Conrad and David Headla STAFF PRESENT: Barbara Dacy, City Planner ; Jo Ann Olsen , Asst . City Planner and Larry Brown, Asst. City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: SUBIDIVISION OF 5. 5 ACRES INTO TWO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED A-2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATES AND LOCATED EAST OF TH 101 , 1/4 MILE SOUTH OF CR 14 AND ADJACENT TO HALLA NURSERY, ROBERT J. BURESH. Public Present: Name Address Robert Buresh Applicant _ David Halla 10000 Great Plains Blvd . Don Halla 10000 Great Plains Blvd . Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report . Robert Buresh: I 'd just like to put this issue to bed. I would like to get access to the property with a public street if possible and my second option would be to do it with a private drive . In talking with Don and Dave, I think there ' s a consensus that they want a street and a public street would be desirable. I was wondering if it would be possible to recommend a 30 foot public street with no parking on there so they wouldn' t have to go through the expense of replatting their existing plat . Emmings : You ' re aware though that there ' s a problem with MnDot in that there can ' t be another road coming off of TH 101 so close to the road that ' s platted in for their development . Robert Buresh : I don ' t have a solution for it other than if they put that street in , that has already been approved in their plat , possibly we could hook up to it someway and not go out to TH 101 but loop back around . Build a 30 foot street that would , when their plat finally develops and their streets are going in at that time, that we will do everything to cut off and come through that door . Emmings: Have you talked to them about that possibility? Robert Buresh : Briefly. I don ' t know that we specifically mentioned that but we talked about a 30 foot street on his . The issue of the two accesses onto TH 101 didn ' t come up in our conversations but I just threw that out now as a possible option. Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 2 Emmings : Okay, anything else? Robert Buresh: Nothing else . Dave Halla : Let me try to go through this real fast so we don ' t take up much of your time. Going back over the history to refresh your memories on this . Originally Roy Teich came into the City of Chanhassen wanting a building permit to give to his son-in-law as a gift for 5 acres . At that — time Russ Larson was your Attorney for the City of Chanhassen. He ruled that because of our deed, and it ' s still in that description today, that that road was ours exclusive in perpetuity, that easement . So Larson made — his legal ruling and said in order for Teich to get ingress and egress by using that easement Halla ' s had to give him permission , which we did in a document which you ' ve probably got in front of you now that Roy Teich ' s Attorney drew up. He spelled it out . We had a premonition that in the future that additional lots would be sold . Well , very shortly after that thing was done , Teich sold this piece that Bob Buresh is trying to get a building site on now, to Dipwick and then Dipwick sold it to Nikolai and then Dipwick got it back and then Lindquist got it and now Buresh is getting it from Lindquist. In all of that time, I put that road in there to service my house which is on the end . I hauled in there some 225 , 000 tons of rock. I paid for that myself. I haven ' t had one bit of cooperation from Teich . Hardly any cooperation from Graffunder on the maintenance of that road. I believe it was in 1981 or 1982, we were sued by Teich on Graffunder ' s behalf for parking cars along that road . He won — that lawsuit and Judge Thomas Howell , a District Court Judge rules that we could not park cars on that road . But he also ruled that that maintenance in that agreement was upheld and that they had to be responsible for the maintenance . Now we tried on a number of occasions , at least 6 or 8 occasions meeting with Lindquist , meeting with Teich, meeting with Graffunder , meeting with Pauly, who is Tacih ' s son-in-law where the whole thing got started, trying to get them to agree on maintenance. They absolutely refused to do anything . We ' ve given Graffunder a bill . At one time he said I ' ll pay half of the bill . It was $890. 00. He won ' t pay it . Snowplowing in the winter is a real pain . I have to plow that all the way — out. Graffunder is not the kind of the people that anybody would want for a neighbor . He won ' t plow that driveway until after I opened it up and then four days later . The snow can be 2 feet high in there so I have to plow i.t wide enough so I can get out . He won ' t do any maintenance . When we tried to maintain the road and we run a mower down there or something , his wife is out there just hollering and they got the Sheriff out there. Oh, you ' re getting a little gravel over on our grass or something. They cut their grass along the road , blow their clippings out on the road . That seeds down so the road gets all green . We go over there with some weed killer and spray the grass on the road , not on their lawn but on the road , she calls the Sheriff on us because we ' re spraying weeds in the road . It ' s been nothing gentlemen but a pain in the behind . You can ' t anybody to agree for maintenance and I have refused to do any maintenance. _ I have been doing it all these years since I ' ve lived there since 1970 and not one of those other people has even shared. We have talked with each one of them. Teich , Graffunder , Pauly and Lindquist and not one of them will share the expense. We ' re not going to take them to court and sue — them over it but we ' ve already got a commitment and I ' ve got the records Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 3 right here if anybody wants to see it from Judge Thomas Howell who ruled on it, that the agreement i.s upheld. Now also i.n that agreement and I 'd like to read this to you so that you ' re aware of it . We' ve got a copy here but let ' s go on the second page. And it says here, construction of home begins . It says vendees agree not to object the Village of Chanhassen granting the vendors or said Vernon Pauly and Judith Pauly a building permit . Vendors or their assigns agree to pay for maintenance along subdivided lots for a period of five years after said subdivision use after which time and i.n the event there is joint use of the said easement property, the parties hereto agree to share the maintenance costs over the easement property. Emmings : I wonder if I can cut this short. I want you to say whatever you ' ve got to say but if I can summarize this in a way that ' s fair to you . It seems to me that what you ' re saying is , . . .all the responsibility for the road even though other people use it . Number two , you' ve got a point that the road is really your ' s exclusively. You have the exclusive use of that easement? Dave Halla: Correct . Emmings : And I guess one of the conditions , are you aware the one of the conditions that the City has imposed on his being granted the right to subdivide is documentation that would verify that his property has a right to use that easement . In other words , putting the burden on him to show the City before this actually goes through, that ne has the right to use that easement? Now does that satisfy your concern? Dave Halla : Let me a couple of things in here and I think I can answer your question because it ' s spelled out in this agreement. Don Halla : One of the questions you ' re going to come up with is would I allow for a resubdivision. We ' ve already brought and paid for three separate redoings of subdivisions . I 'm not going to pay for anymore . I ' ve gotten it approved. I don ' t want to open a can of worms because there is a chance that if I go through with another subdivision , you folks might demand that I connect my subdivision to the subdivision to the east . That' s $100 , 000 . 00. I 'm not paying $100 , 000 . 00 in lots sale, putting i.n a road, redoing the plans, everything else . I 'm not going to pick up that tab so my answer is no to that one . We were disapproved on having the road to the south once. We didn ' t want to get into a lawsuit on it so we put it all on our property . We tried to play the game but I said if I 'm putting it on my property and not bringing it down and using that 30 foot easement because that ' s . . . That was disapproved so I guess I 'm saying no . Bottom line. Emmi.ngs : Same question to you . Assuming that we would approve the subdivision, if we would place a condition on his ability or condition the approval again , satisfying the City, if he has legal right to use that easement , placing that burden on him, does that satisfy your concern with respect to use and maintenance of the road? Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 4 Dave Halla : No . Because you ' ve still got the same situation . Even — though Teich signed it, Roy Teich, and it says in there that it ' s binding upon their heirs or assigns , he won ' t honor it . Graffunder has got the same thing and it ' s a recorded document. Graffunder won ' t honor it . Emmi.ngs : So what you ' re saying is there ' s an agreement there that you ' re having problems enforcing? Dave Halla : Right . Emmings : That ' s a problem between you and your neighbors . Dave Halla : Also , this subdivision has always been referred to by the City Planners and by their Attorneys as Tei.ch ' s illegal subdivision. He stuck that thing in there when he couldn ' t do it in the beginning and all — of these people have been stuck with it for years . Now, Buresh comes out there and he likes it and wants to build a house and all that on there, but you don ' t solve the problem like that . If you people go along and approve this, all you ' re doing is creating a bigger problem. Nobody will honor the maintenance agreement . The only way you can enforce it is to go into the court and end up with a big contest and nobody wins anything . It ' s a mess . It ' s not going to get any better and until it ' s resolved , I 'm not in favor of anybody else using that road because I 'm the guy who ' s the goat that paid for all of it and I ' ve enjoyed all that that I want to . Don Halla: Aren ' t you just complicating it? Shouldn ' t the horse come before the cart? The road thing should be approved first before you approve a subdivision of that lot and multiply the problem. If there is access and if there is a legal easement that serves this property, that should be determined first . Then secondary, go through a subdivision instead of creating two lots that have the same problem. Emmings: Jo Ann, has our Attorney looked at this and said whether or not he thinks the position of the Halla ' s , that they have the exclusive right to the use of that road is correct? What does he think? — • Olsen : Two fold . He addressed this issue with the Halla subdivision in a letter at all . It was just one lot , he was saying that yes , they do have the right to use that . Emmings : That Buresh does? Olsen : Yes . He had a copy of the easement but once it was subdivided it would be creating a new lot and the City is essentially a second buildable lot there . That ' s where he ' s started to say that we better have the guarantee that that would be serviced by that access . Emmings : What does the City Staff think about the ordinance. . . Should he have to do that as a part of the application process rather than having it _ as a condition on approval or don ' t you care? Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 5 Olsen : Typically yes we would have that . . . I don ' t see why it couldn ' t be done. That it could still just be a condition. Emmings : Is there anybody else from the public here that wants to speak on this one? Robert Buresh : First of all , if you do not give a public street and it does remain as a private easement , I go on record publicly as stating that I will be a good neighbor and honor my portion of any maintenance or upkeep agreement. I don't anticipate any problems in that area . The second thing , I ' ve been delayed because the Halla ' s were going to develop. I could have done this a long time ago and I ' ve been put off essentially over a year now waiting for this to happen and waiting to see what the Halla ' s are going to do. Now they did so now all of a sudden a new issue comes in . Where we already got an opinion from the City Attorney once that legally I can drive to that piece of property. Divide them into half acres now and you divide them into 10 little pieces or 2 big pieces or maintain 5 1/2. Legally I can still drive to that property. My Attorney has checked it out thoroughly. . .and we talked to the City Attorney today and we have to send some more documents over or maybe the same documents but I 'm beginning a little bit anxious . Now that I hear another issue after waiting over a year and waiting for the Halla ' s to do their plat and I agreed to that because I thought . . .mine should be a function of theirs rather than them being a function of mine or we end up with something that wouldn' t be in the best interest of the City. But I ' ve waited patiently for them to replat and now that they have, I would like to proceed as fast as possible and not be delayed by another issue that I think has already been settled. Dave Halla : I think you people have an opportunity here , right now and the City Council has the other opportunity in the next week is to say hey, if this is the way it is , you people live up to that agreement , part of the condition if we pass an approval is that everybody agrees to pay that maintenance . If you don' t do that , all you ' re going to do is have a bigger mess and we ' re going to end up in a lawsuit and the City. . . Emmings : There ' s nobody here that wouldn ' t agree with you that the people who are using the road , it makes sense that they share in the cost of maintenance . Dave Halla : He might be a good neighbor . He ' s saying he ' s got good intentions but the other people, I 'm telling you I wouldn ' t walk across the street and wave at them. Erhart moved , Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and motion carried. The public hearing was closed . Batzli : You can probably talk about the legal issues all night but I don ' t think the best thing to do would be to make this a public road I guess at this point in my mind . I believe that that person who owns the 5. 6 acres or whatever it is , probably does have the right to use that driveway but I don ' t know if he has the right to create a bigger burden on Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 6 that driveway and he probably doesn ' t have access from any place else . We — could probably talk about that legal issue until we ' re all blue in the face . I don ' t really like requiring the applicant to provide documenta- tion to the City. That he has the legal right to do that because I think _ the only thing he could do for the City would be to probably get some sort of declaratory judgment such as a lawsuit. You ' re basically asking him either to agree with the Halla ' s up front or basically sue them to get judgment. I don ' t know what other kind of documents . I don' t know what — kind of documents staff envisions that he ' s going to be able to get. Olsen: We ' re just going to have their Attorney speak together with our — Attorney and to confirm that he does include that in the subdivided lot . . . Brown: The intent of the conditions was that the applicant provide some existing documents . In the time frame we were not able to locate it but — we were under the assumption since that property or parcel in the past seemed to have access or appeared to have access to it , that there must be some document out there so the intent was just for the applicant to — provide an existing document . Not to come up with a new one. Batzli : You ' re basically asking him to perform a title search to determine if his deed restrictions to his property includes use of that access? Brown : Correct . — Batzli : Even if it doesn ' t . . . I don ' t think I like making that a public road much better . If it is true that that property already has legal — right to use that road , I think the addition of one more lot , basically by subdividing that lot in two would be a much better solution than. . . Wildermuth : I think we should look at the resolving the two parties . As far as the subdivision is concerned , it appears to meet all the subdivision requirements . The road issue apparently has got to be resolved between the two parties . The City is not a part of the — agreement . That agreement and the legal description of Mr . Buresh ' s property is probably. . . Ellson : It sounds like a complicated matter . I 'm trying to think of what we have the right to do and I can' t say anything more than saying yes , that ' s an okay plan . I can understand why MnDot says no public road and I feel like my hands are tied . I 'm thinking what I can do . I feel for this — guy with the no fun neighbors and I feel like Mr . Buresh will probably keep up his end of it but it isn ' t in our jurisdiction to say. . .we can ' t really write i.n a condition like that to my knowledge so I feel like all I — can say is I like the one recommendation where it ' s okay to come with the easement and unfortunately it ' s their problem. I 'm sure you ' ve got no love loss with those neighbors, I probably would take them to court even _ though more people lose . They might as well be one of the losers because . . .but that ' s about where I 'm at. Erhart : I don ' t have any questions or comments . Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 7 Emmings : I feel that pretty much the way Annette does in that I think we ' re here looking at a proposed subdivision and the subdivision seems to be alright . The problem is the access to it and there there ' s a long legal history that I don ' t think we really get involved in. It seems to me , the way to resolve this , the only people objecting right now to your proposal Mr . Buresh are the Halla ' s and if you can come to an agreement with them between the time this leaves here and by the time it gets to the City Council , it would seem to me then that there would be clear sailing . I know there are ways to write agreements such that if people don ' t live up to their agreement, you have an agreement in writing , laying out what the property owners will do. Agreements that will run with the land so it doesn ' t matter who owns them, where if they don' t live up to those they' ll be assessed and become liens on the property, they can be foreclosed upon. I ' ve written them myself and it ' s always a pain in the neck to enforce one because it means a court action but you ' ve got a real strong tool because you ' re basically telling the person if you don ' t live up to it we ' re going to foreclose on your property. If you guys can sit down and talk and come up with something and get your attorneys to draw up an agreement . . .maybe you guys can could get along . Maybe you could all go together and take on the other parties who don ' t seem to be as willing as you are to help. That ' s just an idea . Erhart moved , Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend to approve Subdivision of 5. 5 acres into two single family residential lots on property zoned A-2 , Agricultural Estates for Robert Buresh to be serviced by a private drive with the following conditions : 1. The applicant shall provide documentation which verifies that the subject property has the right to use the 30 foot easement. 2. The applicant shall provide a driveway access plan which shall address a turnaround as requested by the Fire Inspector . 3. The approved septic sites must be staked and roped off prior to construction on the site. 4 . Type I erosion control shall be installed along the south and east sides of Lot 2, Block 1 prior to the commencement of any grading . 5. Wood-fiber blankets or equivalent shall be used to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 : 1. 6. The developer shall be responsible for daily on and off-site cleanup caused by construction or construction traffic from this site . All voted in favor and motion carried . Emmings : I 'm sure you understand , that does include the condition that he has to satisfy the City that you ' ve got a right to use that road at this point i.n time. If you guys come to some agreement between now and the time it gets to the City Council , that won ' t be an issue anymore . CITY O F P.C. DATE: May 18 , 1988 flAUA17 C.C. ::E: 88 :n:1 : 1 1988 CASE Prepared by: Olsen/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Proposed Sign Variance to Permit an 80 Square Foot Pylon Sign in the A-2 District Z a - VLOCATION: 615 Flying Cloud Drive - SuperAmerica Station /_1 ilctie� CRY Ai'"?`i"►`bf3 — LL thecrste APPLICANT: Roman Mueller 1240 West 98th Street Bloomington, MN 55431 S7/,F/e? ///2/„ry PRESENT ZONING: A-2 , Agricultural Estates ACREAGE: DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- BF; cold storage facility (under const. ) S- A-2 ; flood plain and open space f E- A-2; vacant and motel QW- A-2 ; vacant drive-in W WATER AND SEWER: Not available. PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site is level on the north side. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Parks and Open Space a L: .1 .. ya.‘N .. • POND • PAN Ic 1! i 1� :RAIL (C. . l : CV . 14 i,,' __.) ir/ —_ c.b'es) 04 A2 1.c.D 1 / O / Q 1 o cc AEf - r-\ CREEXW000 - ? • fA M P0 1/4110P . r LA_ E . 1/ ocEC. MO - 9 V S•r-- _ 9 . , 4. .47t1 1t, hik ;Or4.Wt 4Z,ry tF - ' wii0so0 '‘Q.`ja- c' V.S• "6 pkwE R. .. _ 4 - , in \,1 1NG — 7-7>c,,, ...4t 6.-. _ „, . . ...,... ,. . :. :, , /R , c , _,_ , . . , ... , ..J .. , . 2opDSEA Sl cd pt2r ' ,``' LAKE — ,//// ) 1 . . •• - • (C% I( A2 • 0 CITY OF SH AKOPEE SuperAmerica Sign Variance May 18 , 1988 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-1260 Non-conforming uses under the Sign Ordinance states that when the principle use of land is legally non- conforming under this chapter , all existing or proposed signs in conjunction with that land, shall be considered conforming if they are in compliance with the sign provisions for the most restrictive zoning district in which the principal use is allowed ( Attachment #1) . Section 20-712 of the BH, Highway and Business Service District and BG, General Business District permits convenience stores with gas pumps as a permitted use (Attachment #2) . Section 20-1303 , BH, Highway and Business District and BG, General Business District signs permits one pylon business sign not exceeding 64 square feet in sign display area shall be per- mitted per lot. A pylon business sign greater than 64 square feet but equal to or less than 80 square feet may be permitted _ after securing a conditional use permit . Such signs shall be located at least 10 feet from the property line and shall not exceed 20 feet in height (Attachment #3 ) . ANALYSIS The applicant has an existing sign which is 78 square feet in area and 24 feet in height (Attachment #4 ) . The applicant is proposing to replace the existing sign with a new SuperAmerica sign to conform to the new standard company identification plan. The proposed sign is 80 square feet in sign area and 26 feet in height. The use of the subject site, convenience store with gas pumps , is a legal non-conforming use in the A-2 District. Any existing or proposed signs must be in compliance with the sign provisions for the most restrictive zoning district in which the principal use is permitted. The most restrictive zoning district which allows convenience stores with gas pumps as a permitted use is the BH, Highway and Business District. The Sign Ordinance permits a 64 square foot pylon sign in the BH District. An 80 square foot pylon sign is allowed as a conditional use. Staff interpreted the ordinance to require a 64 square foot sign . The applicant is therefore requesting a variance to the sign ordinance to permit an 80 square foot pylon sign (Attachment #5 ) . Applications such as these gives the city the opportunity to make non-conforming uses come into compliance with City Code. Since SuperAmerica applied for a new sign permit it allows the city to require installation of the sign in conformance with the Sign Ordinance. Staff is recommending that a 64 square foot sign be permitted with a maximum of 20 feet in height. SuperAmerica Sign Variance May 18 , 1988 — Page 3 RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends denial of Sign Variance Request #88-4 for an 80 square foot and 26 foot high pylon sign for the SuperAmerica Station . The Planning Commission recommends that the pylon sign be 64 square feet in size with a maximum of 20 feet in height. " PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION — Wildermuth moved, seconded by Erhart, to approve the sign variance for an 80 square foot sign with a maximum height of 20 feet. All voted in favor except Commissioner Ellson. The Planning Commission felt there was a minimum difference in the size of the proposed sign with the existing sign . Ellson felt a hardship did not exist for which to approve the variance. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Staff maintains its original recommendation; however , if the City Council chooses to approve the sign variance, the Planning Commission' s action is recommended. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Section 20-1216 of City Code.2 . Section 20-712 of City Code. 3 . Section 20-1303 of City Code. 4 . Approval of existing sign. — 5 . Proposed sign. 6 . Application . 7 . Planning Commission minutes dated May 18 , 1988 . § 20-1258 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE removal of any sign that is not maintained in accordance with the maintenance provisions of this article. (Ord.No. 80, Art. IX, § 11, 12-15-86) Sec. 20-1259. Prohibited signs. The following signs are prohibited: (1) Advertising signs. (2) Advertising or business signs on or attached to equipment such as semi-truck trailers where signing is a principal use of the equipment on either a temporary or perma- nent basis. (3) Motion signs and flashing signs,except time and temperature signs and barber poles. (4) Projecting signs. (5) Roof signs,except that a business sign may be placed on the roof,facia or marquee of a building provided it does not extend above the highest elevation of the building, excluding chimneys, and provided: a. Roof signs shall be thoroughly secured and anchored to the frames of the build- ing over which they are constructed and erected. 411111 b. No portion of roof signs shall extend beyond the periphery of the roof. (6) Business signs which advertise an activity, business, product or service no longer produced or conducted on the premises upon which the sign is located. Where the owner or lessor of the premises is seeking a new tenant, such signs may remain in place for not more than thirty(30)days from the date of vacancy. (7) Wall graphics. (8) Portable signs except as permitted in section 20-1272. (9) Signs which are tacked on trees,fences or utility poles. (10) Home occupation signs,except for one(1)identification sign.The sign may not exceed two(2)square feet in area. (Ord. No. 80,Art. IX, § 3(9-3-2), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-1260. Nonconforming uses. When the principal use of land is legally nonconforming under this chapter, all existing — or proposed signs in conjunction with that land, shall be considered conforming if they are in compliance with the sign provisions for the most restrictive zoning district in which the principal use is allowed. tOrd. No. 80, Art. IX, § 4, 12-15-86) 1264 ) ZONING § 20-752 Sec. 20-735. Lot requirements and setbacks. The following minimum requirements shall be observed in a "CBD" District subject to additional requirements. exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter: (1) The minimum lot area is ten thousand(10,000)square feet. (2) The minimum lot frontage is one hundred (100) feet, except lots fronting on a cul-de-sac shall have a minimum frontage of sixty(60)feet in all districts. (3) The minimum lot depth is one hundred(100)feet. (4) There is no maximum lot coverage. • (5) There are no minimum setback requirements for front, rear or side yard. (6) There are no maximum height requirements for principal or accessory structures. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 12(5-12-5), 12-15-86) Secs. 20-736-20-750. Reserved. ARTICLE XIX. "BG" GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT Sec. 20-751. Intent. The intent of the "BG" District is to provide for downtown fringe commercial develop- ment identified as the least restricted business district. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 13(5-13-1), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-752. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in a `BG" District: (1) Bowling center. _ (2) Day care center. C (3) Convenience stores with or without gas pumps. _ (4) Standard restaurants. (5) Entertainment. (6) Apparel sales. (7) Personal services. (8) Health and recreation clubs. (9) Specialty retail(including but not limited to jewelry,book,stationery,bible,camera, _ pets, arts and crafts, sporting goods). (10) Small appliance and similar repair shops. 1221 .. ._ ._...:.�.r3.� § 20-752 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE (11) Funeral homes. (12) Financial institutions, including drive-in service. (13) Newspaper and small printing offices. (14) Private clubs and lodges. (15) Miniature golf. (16) Veterinary clinic. (17) Animal hospital. (18) Offices. (19) Health care facilities. (20) Motels. (21) Supermarkets. (22) Home improvement trades building supply centers. (23) Garden centers. (24) Utility services. (25) Bars and taverns. (26) Fast food restaurants. (27) Automotive service stations. (28) Community center. (29) Senior citizen housing. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 13(5-13-2), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-753. Permitted accessory uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in a "BG" District: (1) Parking lots. (2) Signs. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 13(5-13-3), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-754. Conditional uses. The following are conditional uses in a "BG" District: (1) Outdoor display of merchandise for sale or rent. (2) Truck,automobile,farm implement,recreational vehicles and boat sales and service. (3) Equipment rental. (4) Screened outdoor storage. 1222 • ZONING — § 20-712 . • b. For rear yards, thirty(30)feet. — c. For side yards, fifteen(15)feet. (7) The maximum height is as follows: — a. For the principal structure, one (1)story. b. For accessory structures, one(1)story. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 10(5-10-5), 12-15-86) — Secs. 20-696-20-710. Reserved. — ARTICLE XVII. "BH" HIGHWAY AND BUSINESS SERVICES DISTRICT Sec. 20-711. Intent. The intent of the "BH" District is to provide for highway oriented commercial develop- ment restricted to a low building profile. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 11(5-11-1), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-712. Permitted uses. • The following uses are permitted in a "BH" District: — (1) Financial institutions. — (2) Fast food restaurant. (3) Automotive service stations. — (4) Standard restaurants. (5) Motels and hotels. (6) Offices. (7) Retail shops. (8) Miniature golf. — (9) State-licensed day care center. (10) Car wash. C (11) Convenience store with or without gas pumps. (12) Personal service establishment. (13) Liquor stores. (14) Health services. • (15) Utility services. (16) Shopping center. • 1217 § 20-712 CHANHASSEN CITY ts0 l)1.: (17) Private clubs and lodges. (18) Community center. (19) Funeral homes. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 11(5-11-2), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-713. Permitted accessory uses. The following are permitted accessory uses in a "$11" 1)i„I ,,.1: (1) Signs. (2) Parking lots. (Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 11(5-11-3), 12-15-86) Sec. 20-714. Conditional uses. The following are conditional uses in a "BH" District: (1) Outdoor display of merchandise for sale. (2) Supermarkets. (3) Small vehicle sales. (4) Screened outdoor storage. (Ord. No. 80,Art. V, § 11(5-11-4), 12-15-86) State law reference—Conditional uses, M.S. § 462.:t,o;, Sec. 20-715. Lot requirements and setbacks. The following minimum requirements shall be obser•v,.,l 111 41 , additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set I;„•t.I, Mr I i District subject to chapter: (1) The minimum district area is ten (10) acres. Tlri, I",r"I J"I may be waived by a condition use permit in the case of expansion ol';rrr ,•xr„lr„�, district. (2) The minimum lot area is twenty thousand(20,000):anima 1, „t (3) The minimum lot frontage is one hundred (100) lee. ,. lots cul-de-sac shall have a minimum frontage in all di:;l.r;,•�„,,tl,'txlly(60)feet fronting on a (4) The minimum lot depth is one hundred fifty(150) 1.4.4.1.. (5) The maximum lot coverage is sixty-five(65)percent. (6) Off-street parking areas shall comply with all except that no rear yard parking setback shall be r i.,l,rir 4�1 i "rnents ofre this section, railroad trackage; and, no side yard shall be requir4.11 Wl 1 lots directly abutting uses establish joint off-street parking facilities,as pr�,v;,l,.,t tit r4 adjoining commercial that no parking areas shall be permitted in anysection re20-1122,except Minimum rear yard shall be fifty (50) feet for lots dir,(c'Irl r,Il side street side yard. .Y "lartting any residential I218 umommir _ _ § 20-1301 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE collector street as designated as such in this chapter. Such sign shall be located so as not to conflict with traffic visibility or street maintenance operations, and shall be securely anchored to the ground. (Ord. No. 80,Art. IX, § 5, 12-15-86) Sec. 20-1302. Neighborhood business and institutional districts. The following signs shall be allowed by permit in any OI or B-1 District: (1) Ground low profile business signs. One (1) ground low profile business or institu- tional sign not exceeding twenty-four (24) square feet of sign display area shall be permitted per street frontage, with a maximum of two (2) such signs per lot. Such sign shall be located at least ten(10)feet from any property line and shall not exceed five(5)feet in height. _ (2) Wall business sign. One(1)wall business sign shall be permitted per street frontage for each business occupant within a building. The total of all wall mounted sign display area shall not exceed ten (10)percent of the total area of each building wall upon which the signs are mounted. but no individual business sign shall exceed twenty-four (24) square feet in sign display area. A wall business sign shall not be mounted upon the wall of any building which faces any adjoining residential district without an intervening public street. (Ord. No. 80, Art. IX, § 7, 12-15-86) Sec. 20-1303. Highway and general business districts. The following signs shall be allowed by permit in any BH, BG, or BF District: _ (1) Ground low profile business signs. One (1) ground low profile business sign shall be permitted per street frontage, with a maximum of two (2) such signs per lot. Such signs shall not exceed eighty(80)square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. Such signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from any property line. In no case shall any lot contain more than two(2)freestanding business signs, whether such signs are pylon or ground low profile signs. r-� (2) Pylon business sign. One(1)pylon business sign, not exceeding sixty-four(64)square feet in sign display area, shall be permitted per lot. A pylon business sign greater than sixty-four(64)square feet, but equal to or less than eighty(80)square feet, may be permitted after securing a conditional use permit. Such signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from any property line, and shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height. In no case shall any lot contain more than two(2)freestanding business signs, whether such signs are pylon or ground low profile signs. (3) Wall business signs. One(1)wall business sign shall be permitted per street frontage for each business occupant within a building. The total of all wall mounted sign display area shall not exceed fifteen(15)percent of the total area of the building wall _ upon which the signs are mounted. No individual business sign shall exceed eighty (80)square feet in sign display area. A wall business sign may be mounted upon any • wall of a principal building. 1268 ZONING § 20-1305 (4) Development identification signs. One (1) development identification sign, not ex- ceeding sixty-four (64) square feet of sign display area, shall be permitted for each major entrance into any commercial development of three(3)or more buildings. For the purposes of this paragraph, "major entrance"shall be defined as the intersection of any local or collector street serving the identified development with any arterial or collector street so designated as such in this chapter.Such signs shall be located so as not to conflict with traffic visibility or street maintenance operations, and shall be securely anchored to the ground. (Ord. No. 80,Art.IX, § 7, 12-15-86) Sec. 20-I304. Industrial office park signs. The following signs shall be allowed by permit in any IOP District: (1) Ground low profile business signs. One (1) ground low profile business sign shall be permitted per street frontage, with a maximum of two (2) such signs per lot. Such signs shall not exceed eighty(80)square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. Such signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet from any property line. (2) Wall business signs. One(1)wall business sign shall be permitted per street frontage for each business occupant within a building. The total of all wall mounted sign • • display area shall not exceed fifteen(15)percent of the total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. No individual business sign shall exceed eighty (80)square feet in sign display area. A wall business sign may be mounted upon any wall of a principal building. (3) Development identification signs. One (1) development identification sign, not ex- ceeding ninety(90)square feet of sign display area,shall be permitted for each major entrance into any Industrial Office Park of three(3)or more principal buildings. For the purposes of this paragraph, "major entrance"shall be defined as the intersection of local, collector or arterial street serving the identified development with any arterial or collector street so designated in this division. Such signs shall be located so as not to conflict with traffic visibility or street maintenance operations, and shall be securely anchored to the ground. (Ord. No. 80, Art. IX, § 8, 12-15-86) Sec. 20-1305. Central business district. The following signs shall be allowed by permit in the B-3 District: (1) Wall business sign. One(1)wall business sign shall be permitted per street frontage for each business occupant within a building. The total of all wall mounted sign display area shall not exceed fifteen(15)percent of the total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. No individual business sign shall exceed sixty- -0 four(64)square feet in sign display area.The design and location of all business signs in this district shall be in keeping with the purpose and intent of this article and the 1269 V I� 1-23-81 Sign Committee Meeting — Page 2 Knudson Insurance Agency Sian: Ms. Rust noted this sign permit request was heard on July 10 , 1980, and was denied due to the _ fact that it was not in conformance with existing ordinance standards. The applicant had now returned with a new proposal — to meet the suggestions given by the Committee in July. It was noted the sign could not exceed 15 percent of the total area of the wall space. Discussion occurred on the proposal — and its compliance with Committee suggestions. Mr. Johnson moved to approve the style of the proposed sign provided that when the sign was installed, it would be in compliance with — ordinance square footage standards and would not be in excess of 15 percent of the total wall area and that the sign was to be placed in the area on the wall between the window and the mansard area. Mrs. Swenson seconded the motion. All voted aye. — Motion passed. Z Overall Design for City Signs (Bob Waibel) : Mr. Bob Waibel, Land — ' Use Coordinator, explained the style of sign the city was proposing to use for government- and park-related areas. Mrs. Swenson moved to approve the proposed design on the condition it be scaled _ to size limitations within the existing ordinance and that the design be consistent on a city-wide basis. Mr. Johnson seconded. All voted aye. Motion passed. 7,y Superamerica Sign (Suburban Lighting) : The applicant was re- Q"5 questing permission to re-locate an existing sign to its former location. This sign was formerly approved for the proposed loca- — tion but was requested by the State to remove the sign tempor- arily due to construction of Highways 169 and 212. Super- america has now been informed that they may move the sign back to its original location by the State and they are requesting — peLluission of the Sign Committee to do so. The sign construction was within ordinance requirements with the exception of height. The Proposal is for a height of 24 feet and the ordinance allows — for 20 feet and the notational graphics plan allowed for 25 feet. Mrs. Swenson moved to approve the sign permit request because it — was a request to re-locate to a formerly-approved site and it would be a hardship to request the applicant to reduce the sign' s height by 4 feet. There was no record of a previous variance. _ She noted the sign did conform to the proposed sign ordinance. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion. All voted aye. Motion passed. Discussion, Ordinance No. 36 : The Committee discussed the — timetable for the completion of the proposed sign ordinance. Adjournment: Mr. Johnson moved to adjourn the 1-23-81 Sign Commit- _ tee meeting at 10 : 30 a.m. Motion was seconded by Mrs. Swenson and meeting was adjourned at 10 : 30 a.m. sf 14�:< . 3 -I n 4 i o D - - -D - o i ro D y < /G ' o " 3 � C > o (a jig I r ? CO _ cn - �r; 4N. CA) D mP . , . 440 . o - z , /o 0 " EL:ND ,. . . s 73 m Cl)mit 4 CD - ��_ �_ C 71 m � 'mill- CL. Q i cl m a 0L m Zo > C 0 m D ■ ■Cn m r o Cdpi PO CIO ttha. CA) .. (-)m to r i^ Z * 13 33 r V ZT - mO 3 17-4 n ° < Z — cO D 71 2 asimilinimilm -- LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF CHANHASSEN _ 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 APPLICANT: Roman Mueller OWNER: SuperAmerica Stations Inc . ADDRESS 1240 West 98th Street ADDRESS 1240 West 98th Street — Bloomington, MN 55431 Bloomington, MN 55431 Zip Code Zip Code TELEPHONE (Daytime)(612 ) 887-6171 TELEPHONE (612 ) 887-6100 REQUEST: Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal - Sketch Plan — Preliminary Plan x Sign- Variance Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision Land Use Plan Amendment Platting Metes and Bounds — Conditional Use Permit Street/Easement Vacation Site Plan Review Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING — USES PROPOSED SIZE OF PROPERTY LOCATION S .A . Station #4239 . 615 Flying Cloud Drive REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST Incorporate new Corporate Logo into existing location to conform to standard ID Company Identification Plan . LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) r City of Chanhassen Land Development Application Page 2 FILING INSTRUCTIONS : This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions . Before filing this application , you should confer with the City Planner to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application . • FILING CERTIFICATION: The undersigned representative of the applicant hereby certifies that he is familiar with the procedural requirements of all applicable City Ordinances . • Signed By Date • 2 I •o8 Applicant - The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been authorized to make this application for the property herein described . Signed By Date Fee owner Z. �8 R.tLCnrORJ4L �A-)GttiJ Date Application Received • Application Fee Paid City Receipt No. * This Application will be considered by the Planning Commission/ Board of Adjustments and Appeals at their meeting . Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 8 SIGN PERMIT VARIANCE TO SECTION 20-1260 TO CONSTRUCT AN 89 SQUARE FOOT — PYLON SIGN ON PROPERTY ZONED A-2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE AND LOCATED AT 615 FLYING CLOUD DRIVE, SUPERAMERICA STATION, ROMAN MUELLER AND SUPERAMERICA STATION, INC. Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report . Emmings : Is the 78 foot sign they have now, was that grandfathered in? Olsen : Right and that was approved by a sign committee so that was approved and has been grandfathered in . Roman Mueller : My name is Roman Mueller representing SuperAmerica , 1240 West 98th Street, Bloomington, Minnesota . I think she ' s presented our case here quite well . I think there' s one error and that ' s that our standard sign is 22 feet high, not 26. The sign company submitted this for us and marked that dimension in in error . We would like to maintain — 80 square feet. You can see our logo on the sign is 40 square feet at this point in time . The rest of the sign is informational . In this case with this particular location, the lower half where the drawing shows Instant Cash , would actually be a third product in there with pricing . We are required to have pricing on our signs . The question becomes whether or not we will show pricing on two or three products . Emmings : The sign that you ' re asking for now is how high? Roman Mueller : The one we ' re requesting? — Emmings : The one that you ' re asking for . Roman Mueller : Our standard pole with sign is actually 22 feet instead of 26 feet. It ' s shown on page 26. The 16 foot dimension was shown . Emmi.ngs: The present sign was 24 feet high so this one might even be not — as high. Roman Mueller : Correct . We ' ll be dropping it 2 feet from what the current sign is. In the area , looking at it, I 'm sure you ' re all familiar with it , it is along the highway so there are relatively good traffic speeds and we feel that something of larger size gives you the ability to view it while you ' re traveling through there in traffic and at that speed . — If you have any questions of us , please ask . Emmings : Alright . There is no one here from the public on this issue so — is there a motion to close the public hearing? Erhart moved , Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed . Erhart : Is this sign standard? Di.d you buy large quantities? Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 9 Roman Mueller : Yes it is . I already have the sign . They were in bulk quantity from our manufacturing in Cincinnati , Ohio. Erhart : So what we' re looking for is a variance. Okay, that ' s the only question I have. Roman Mueller : There would be a variation of about 12 . 8 square feet from where it is. Erhart : My position on this is that it ' s so close to the sign that ' s already existing. That it poses enough hardship that it makes it worthwhile. Let me summarize. The ordinance requires 64 square feet . Theirs is 80 that exists . Emmings : It ' s presently 78 and they want to make it 80. Erhart: I know but the ordinance is 64. It ' s so close that you visually couldn ' t tell the difference between 80 square feet so I 'm in favor of approving the variance. Ellson: I was wondering , what ' s the reason for replacing the one you have currently? Roman Mueller : The new logo package . SuperAmerica has changed their logo from the old SA that it was before. A red letter and a blue letter with a more script style to the current style that it has on here which we ' re putting up in about 500 locations in the midwest and eastern states . It would be the only one that didn 't have it if we didn ' t change it currently. I think the Metro area we ' re got about 10 left to do. This is the only one we' re requesting a variance . I think that everybody here would recognize the value of a corporation ' s identity which is their logo . If Northwest was still flying Republic it would look a little funny. Ellson: I can understand how you got grandfathered in and how you kind of lucked out because of that but I 'm probably in agreement with staff that if nobody else can have one that big than I can ' t see that they take special circumstances . Wildermuth : I 'm inclined to agree with Tim. The difference between an 8 by 8 sign and a 9 by 9 sign, roughly is pretty. . .but I do think the sign ought to meet the maximum height requirement and with that standard package you probably do accomodate that . Roman Mueller : We can cut the pole down for that . That ' s really not a problem. Batzli : Is there only one size sign from your corporation? Roman Mueller : There are two sizes. An 8 x 10 which is what this is and a 10 x 13 . If you 'd like us to put a 10 x 13 up , we 'd be more than happy to oblige. That ' s the standard sizes. The majority of cities has the size sign within those limits and that ' s how the sizes were based . X size for placement where we could get x and the other larger or smaller for the Planning Commission Meeting May 18 , 1988 - Page 10 other size . — Batzli : Are you suggesting that you haven ' t made other exceptions for special size signs? Roman Mueller : We have made exceptions . There ' s no question about that . We ' re dealing on one right now where it ' s not so much the size as the shape . They do not want us to change the shape of the current sign so we — are conforming to the previous sign size but with those size signs , we also have a separation section that has the pricing and products called bowtie. You notice the old sign there currently has the SA logo. Then below that , not counting what we' re dealing with now, is the product type and price so if you counted both we 'd actually probably be over what we have here . Batzli : I guess I understand the importance to get a standard logo and I 'm inclined to agree that having been grandfathered in at 78 feet, I don ' t think increasing it 2 feet i.s setting much of a bad precedence . I also like the fact that they' re actually lowering the height so I 'd be inclined to go for a variance . Emmings : I agree with Brian and Tim and Jim I guess . For the same reasons. It ' s such a minimal difference from what they have. In fact we ' re getting something back where they' re lowering it . That part won ' t apply and i.t ' s only 2 feet larger . That said, is there a motion? — Wildermuth moved , Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend — approval of Sign Variance Request #88-4 for an 89 square foot sign to measure no more than 20 feet maximum height from ground level for the SuperAmerica Station . All voted in favor except Ellson who opposed and motion carried . Ellson : It ' s setting a precedent that everybody else can have big signs later on . — Dacy: Was your motion maximum height of 20 feet? Wildermuth: Yes . — Emmings : That ' s what they had said they were willing to go with that. Roman Mueller : Measured from the ground where we install the sign because you referenced the station . There might be a slope in there . Emmings : Where do you measure from when you measure the height? Dacy: The ground . Erhart : I think there ' s a big difference in the one on the industrial site because they were asking for 12 feet and we asked for 4 and I don ' t see this setting the same type of precedence. — - . /L/ C I T'Y O F P.C. DATE: June 1 , 1988 -- �, C.C. DATE: June 13 , 1988 ClIANIIASSZN w \� � y CASE NO: 87-1 PUD Prepared by: Dacy/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Final Plan Amendment To Locate a 60 Unit Apartment Building at a Different Location than the Previously Approved PUD Plan — LOCATION: South of and adjacent to Chan View, opposite the Huron Avenue intersection, north of West 78th Street _ a U APPLICANT: Mr. Thomas Zumwalde Heritage Square Investors Butler No. Building , Suite 200 Limited Partnership 510 First Avenue 7101 York Avenue So. — Ct. Minneapolis , MN 55403 Edina, MN 55435 QCHADDA -;inert by Cr!, Arty :n st2 P.O. Box 100 Chanhassen, MN 55317 = - ✓ _ PRESENT ZONING: R-12, High Density Residential__ 6/ 2d_ -' CBD, Central Business District ACREAGE: 2 .6 acres _ 6i/ ski DENSITY: 23 units per acre ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- RSF & R-12; single and multiple family S- CBD; commercial uses E- R-12 & OI; dry cleaners/St. Hubert _ Q W- RSF; single family W WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site (I) PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site is level with poor soils along Chan View 2000 LAND USE PLAN: High Density Residential & Commercial S 1 ` w`,' \ I• UD—R vaml.1010\\ . ir Er, 400.1 „, .. _ 1, ____-7:00 . —1._ `'`. --44* ______./ I( 46* IP. ¶111 RSF — _ _ �11/ �. Zoo Nov LAKE �, I 1 I -,),i triajMIN nut :!.m�ss .iui .' delkliall' s\ fp�i , �. ��trt t!Tf�i..'�Jt�� `_ .00 • •• �-- �; �� 7400 R A • 011011 ,t, �•01..tII, •Togii 11 ? MN cia R 1 .! ..- :4 PMIPIJP-Pfifir win bilj a_.I i _ ,) !16111. wiii. ..L.,.Icrrelgit-.1.:Tr. ,,,„„..., i - 4. k/A \,, 1•;;:f: , '1 a'__ çj *Ei R 12 • /�;:s.1UII/,il !!'• 'I..111 2 : �;-;,.•- 1 • ..i...erg i 11111 UMW W. 7OTH ST ; _ Naomi. PgaS1112ri �;. : :111111_ ' • LP ! 7.NMI%.P 011 A.' -- Er— • C .l 'T 1 - fi a 4,0 41 1 TA1C1....:.....se iii....1.1rTi Ailiz- a ... . , 3 'or .. -, -,. ..0.0.: Vein �• 4; ‘k fir' �,i g oi abb..• Y a �` •r• • 1.,± _3 03 3 1 01 Vis 1111 OA lu II Tr" "*4 __ - 11014:401; Witi,•4 ( I 1 • . i1i 1 :=: :�tg p. 8200 1.►.., .141 erk• ,F RSF ____..--- NOW41. 111 INNEN f � 8300 - A CIRCLE 1;� N' - LAKE SUSAN }mgAi -J- a••,: � IF4111111 RICE MARSH LAKERD • -..:-______ ______,/ ii . . . /--- 86 TH ST. 11141 8600 .. ..=.a.... .t___w,.w a Heritage Square Apartments June 1, 1988 Page 2 REFERRAL AGENCIES Fire Department Attachment #1 BRW Attachment #2 Building Department Attachment #3 BACKGROUND This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at the May 27 , 1987 , meeting and by the City Council on June 15 , 1987 . The Planning Commission recommended approval subject to six con- ditions regarding submission of detailed utility, landscaping, lighting , facia and signage plans and provision of a pedestrian walkway ( see attached minutes) . The City Council approved the Planning Commission ' s recommendation and added a seventh con- - dition to require that all parking areas be lined with concrete curbing ( see attached minutes) . PROPOSAL Staff recommended that the applicant file this plan amendment application because the configuration of the building has changed as well as its location on the lot. Previously approved was a configuration which reflected a "U" with a long double bay parking area. This proposal shapes the building into a "L" with adjustments to the parking layout. Prior to application, city staff and the city' s downtown consultants , Fred Hoisington and BRW, reviewed the revised site plan with the applicant and advised him to maximize the distance from the adjacent single family lots and to increase the amount of screening along the south lot line. ANALYSIS The proposed plan locates the building 30 feet from the west lot line and 70 feet from the lot line for the existing apartment building. Although the building is ten feet closer to the west lot line than what was approved in 1987 , it is also fifty-five feet further to the south than the originally approved building location . The applicant has also proposed a band of evergreen and deciduous screening along the west and south lot lines . This will help to break up the expanse of the building. As now pro- - posed, the location of this building should not adversely affect adjacent residential properties . BRW has provided detailed comments regarding utility and grading issues as they relate to other projects currently planned in the downtown redevelopment process . The applicant will need to sub- mit a final stormsewer and utility plan to address the drainage and utility issues identified by BRW and the Fire Department. Heritage Park Apartments June 1 , 1988 _ Page 3 Landscaping Some of the comments in BRW' s letter regarding landscaping have been addressed by the applicant ( comment #5 , page 1; comment #1 , page 2 ) . As to the interior landscaping requirement, additional _ plantings should be provided between Chan View and the parking area. The Building and Fire Department note that the proposed building must now be sprinklered given the City' s adoption of Appendix E of the Building Code. The city now owns the existing residence in the southwest corner of the site. This will be removed with the demolition of other buildings some time in August. RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the — following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Final Plan — Amendment for the Heritage Park Apartments PUD #87-1 based on the plans stamped "Received May 12 , 1988" , and subject to the following conditions : 1 . A detailed utility plan showing water, sewer , and stormsewer connections as well as fire hydrant locations shall be sub- mitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to building — permit issuance. 2 . A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted indicating the — additional plantings to be located between Chan View and the parking area. 3 . A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in con- junction with the development plans for the retail projects to be developed to the south and east of the parcel . 4 . Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submitted for Planning Commission and City Council final review prior to building permit issuance. _ 5 . Removal of the existing single family residence shall be accomplished prior to building permit issuance. 6 . Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. 7 . All parking areas shall be lined with concrete curbing. 8 . Compliance with the comments as noted in the Building — Department memorandum dated May 25 , 1988 . Heritage Park Apartments June 1 , 1988 Page 4 9 . Compliance with the comments in the letter from BRW dated May 25 , 1988 , specifically, #6-#11 on pages 1 and 2 and #1 on page 3 . 10 . Compliance with comments as noted in the Fire Department memo dated May 27 , 1988 . PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request and added the following two conditions : 11 . Items referred to in BRW' s letter be specifically spelled out regarding storm sewer. 12 . City staff should research the traffic issue prior to City Council review. STAFF UPDATE The City Council is painfully aware of the requirements by MnDOT regarding traffic control on West 78th Street. The Planning Commission requested staff to research whether or not MnDOT could relax their requirements for no stop signs on West 78th Street. MnDOT has advised the City that as now planned, replacing the stop signs is not possible. The residents ' concern regarding traffic along West 78th Street reinforce the need to continue the City' s efforts to realign TH 101 as soon as possible, and possibly before the originally planned 1991-1992 timeframe . It should also be noted that the HRA is subsidizing this project . The HRA approved the subsidy based on representations regarding exterior design quality, among other items . Accordingly, this item will be placed on a future HRA agenda. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve PUD Amendment Request #87-1 subject to the plans stamped "Received May 12 , 1988" and the following conditions: 1 . A detailed utility plan showing water, sewer , and stormsewer connections as well as fire hydrant locations shall be sub- - mitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to building permit issuance. 2 . A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted indicating the additional plantings to be located between Chan View and the parking area. Heritage Park Apartments June 1 , 1988 Page 5 — 3 . A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in con- junction with the development plans for the retail projects to be developed to the south and east of the parcel . 4 . Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submitted for — Planning Commission and City Council final review prior to building permit issuance. 5 . Removal of the existing single family residence shall be accomplished prior to building permit issuance. 6 . Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. 7 . All parking areas shall be lined with concrete curbing. — 8 . Compliance with the comments as noted in the Building Department memorandum dated May 25 , 1988 . 9 . Compliance with the comments in the letter from BRW dated May 25 , 1988 , specifically, #6-#11 on pages 1 and 2 and #1 on page 3 . 10 . Compliance with comments as noted in the Fire Department memo dated May 27 , 1988 . — 11 . Items referred to in BRW' s letter be specifically spelled out regarding storm sewer. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Memo from Steve Madden dated May 27 , 1988 . 2 . Letter from Jim Lasher , BRW, dated May 25 , 1988 . 3 . Memo from Building Department dated May 25 , 1988 .4 . Application. 5 . Planning Commission minutes dated May 27 , 1987 . 6 . City Council minutes dated June 15 , 1987 . 7 . Reduction of previous building plan layout.8 . Planning Commission minutes dated June 1 , 1988 . 9 . Site plan stamped "Received May 12 , 1988" . C ITY TF L \ 1/4 J. CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Barbara Dacy, City Planner nn FROM: Steve Madden , Fire Inspector .F4� DATE: May 27, 1988 SUBJ: Heritage Park Apartments Upon completing the plan review for Heritage Park Apartments , I am requesting the following: 1 . A key box be installed on the front of the building. Uniform Fire Code, Division II , Section 10. 209 . 2. Water supply should be installed as marked on the site plan. 3 . Please install a fire alarm system throughout the building. The alarm system should be sent to a central dispatch (U. L. approved) . The central dispatch may be applied with flow alarm in the sprinkler system. Alarm system shall be installed according to NFPA standards . Uniform Fire Code , Division III , Section 10 . 307 and 10 . 308 . 4 . An automatic fire extinguishing system shall be installed throughout building . This system shall be installed to include the attic and loft areas. Chanhassen City Ordinance 82 ; Uniform Fire Code, Division III , Section 10 . 309 . .- 5 . A standpipe system shall be installed. The standpipe system shall have outlets on each floor, including the basement . Uniform Fire Code, Division III , Section 10. 312 , Table 10 . 312 . Also, the Uniform Fire Code has requirements for the building while under construction and we would request that this Fire Code be followed: 1 . Fire extinguishers are required in all areas . 2. Temporary standpipes should be installed with a basement outlet. If you have any questions , please see me. 1 ` " PLANNING TRANSPORTATION Ackti ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE BENNETT, RINGROSE. WOLSFELD. JARVIS, GARDNER INC. • THRESHER SQUARE • 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55415 • PHONE 612/370-0703 — May 25, 1988 Ms. Barbara Dacy City of Chanhassen — 690 Coutler Drive Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 — Dear Barbara, This letter is in response to your request for review and comments on the — Heritage Park Apartments project. (Review drawings stamped City of Chanhassen reviewed May 12, 1988.) PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN 1. All setbacks meet or exceed requirements for this project. The sideyard — setback on the west side of the building has been increased, as per our discussions, to approximately 30 feet. This provides an excellent area for planting which will help screen the building from the adjacent property owner. — 2. The west access road to the parking lot has been aligned with Huron which will make a safer intersection for traffic movement. — 3. Presently, there is no way of moving from this development to West 78th Street as a pedestrian. I was under the impression that some type of pedestrian link was planned for this area which would allow north-south movement. Is there any such intent? 4. The grading of the northerly most end of the building seems quite abrupt. 0$15T. The building is approximately 6' -0" above road grade in this area. The 44 grades should be blended to a more natural slope towards the street. O I eVCity ordinance calls for a 2' -0" berm between parking areas and adj.; -t 11.410(.2 . properties. This is not reflected in the plans on the east or - de of the lot. .ur 6. All attempts to gather storm water on site have been neglected. This plan should include a catchbasin/storm water system which would be piped to the storm pipe on Chanview. The parking lots should not drain into Chanview. — The entire residential area north of this development lacks an adequate number of storm sewer catchbasins resulting in significant problems in the Great Plains Boulevard low point (behind Kenny' s) . Direct runoff from this property adds to the problem. No new storm sewer is shown on the plans. DAVIDJ BENNETT DONALDW RINGROSE RICHARDPWOLSFELD PETERE JARVIS LAWRENCEJ GARDNER THOMAS F CARROLL CRAIGA AMUNDSEN DONALDE HUNT MARKG SWENSON JOHNB McNAMARA RICHARDD PILGRIM DALEN BECKMANN DENNISJ SUTLIFF MINNEAPOLIS DENVER PHOENIX Ms. Barbara Dacy May 25, 1988 — Page 2 Because some type of trench drain or catchbasin will be required to pick up runoff from the proposed garage entry ramp, thus requiring storm sewer, we recommend that all parking lot drainage be controlled "on site" and conducted via new storm sewer to the existing Chanview storm sewer line. — 7. There are presently some grading/drainage problems on the north side of the Colonial Center. Arvid Elness Architects should work closely with BRW to coordinate storm water management and grading in this area. In particular, — relief of storm water in the Heritage Park Apartments, Day Care, Colonial Center quadrant is critical , and needs to be addressed via storm sewer or overland relief. — 8. The driveway radius at Chanview should be City standard (i .e. , 10-foot radius) . — 9. As mentioned in our review of 5/27/87, the utilities, as shown on Chanview are not correct. They should reflect: A. 18" RCP Storm Sewer B. 8" VCP Sanitary Sewer C. 8" CIP Watermain 10. Proposed utility services, sizes and locations for the building should be identified. — 11. Fire Protection Requirements should be carefully reviewed and detailed to meet the requirements of the City of Chanhassen Fire Marshall (i .e. , No site fire hydrants are shown) . PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 1. Additional deciduous trees are needed around the parking lot to meet the — ordinance of 1 tree every 40 linear feet around a parking area. The evergreen screening on the south and west property lines will provide excellent screening from the adjacent property owners. 2. According to Article VIII - Landscape and Tree Removal Regulation, Section 3 - Interior landscaping for Vehicular Use Areas: This plan does not meet the requirements of 5 square feet of landscaping for every 100 square feet of vehicular use area. The total vehicular use area, excluding the underground access drive south of the westerly most parking is 16,686 square feet. This translates into a requirement of 834 square feet of — interior landscaping. Within this area there are only 3 parking bay islands for planting at a total of 432 square feet. As the parking required and parking provided numbers are equal and it looks to be a problem to expand the parking area, I suggest that additional landscaping directly adjacent to the parking lot be provided. This can be either in the form of larger sizes on proposed material or an increase in plant quan- tity. Ms. Barbara Dacy — May 25, 1988 Page 3 3. All plant material choices are consistent with City ordinances and required sizes. — PRELIMINARY ELEVATIONS 1. Material selections for horizontal lap siding - Type I or II , should be better identified in terms of product selection. Please contact me with any questions or comments concerning these issues. Sincerely, ; 111 ENNETT-'•'SE-WOLSFELD-JARVIS-GARDNER, INC. i-111 __ & *. Lasher :L/sk __ •c: Gary Ehret File: 62-8711 C ITY TF \ L CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Barbara Dacy, City Planner FROM: Steve Kirchman , Building Inspector k, DATE: May 25 , 1988 SUBJ: Planning Case 87-1 PUD, Heritage Park Apartments A 60-unit apartment building requires 3 handicap accessible units (SBC 1340 . 9100 ) . City ordinance requires 1 .5 parking spaces per unit ( Zoning 7-1-10 ) . This would work out to 5 handicap spaces in the tenant garage. These spaces should be located to the north of the elevators so that handicapped tenants will not have to cross the garage entrance to enter the building. One handicap space should also be provided in the outside parking lot . A building of this size is required to be sprinklered (SBC 1305. 6905 ) and will have to be Type V - 1-hour construction. The parking garage must be Type I construction and separated from the R-1 occupancy by a 3-hour occupancy separation . LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 APPLICANT: -{y )f-+ OWNER: I 4'1rRC-cct)-L- _LNWS 'S 6A4( ADDRESS P.0 . ( O0 ADDRESS '7 J0 1 L/ 17 / r iE Su7?-1 - -ki„1 K-1Ss / Mu- (�317 O/N.A , �'N. c5�3c Zip Code Zip Code 9 TELEPHONE (Daytime ) q 3y- - `is 3 2 TELEPHONE 2 I - '3�_? - REQUEST: ZoningDistrict Change Y Planned g P ed Unit Development Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan _ Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance ✓ Final Plan r Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision — Land Use Plan Amendment Platting Metes and Bounds Conditional Use Permit Street/Easement Vacation Site Plan Review Wetlands Permit — PROJECT NAME J. 1-1)A G� cast.4.,445.A('A ME, S r-- / PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION WV t,tcil et.E t-kl%-/it...--7 5eOFZ1\1)A-t- REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION S( 9�1 _ PRESENT ZONING CR REQUESTED ZONING {-AA i) - USES PROPOSED (0 (it NiT 4P.4?27/k•7&`17jk-4/ L(]l/q6: SIZE OF PROPERTY 2 • 4 -1 A-Ce_ ._s LOCATION �t�T1NNE5'1 copy or �-:-.A1 Pc triNS px_.k.,{) '� (-:(4.,.) \ifc.,,.,.) _ _ REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) , / �-` 7A-�,41`-i-D — MAY 1 1 1988 CITY OF CHANHASSEN City of Chanhasn Land Development Application Page 2 FILING INSTRUCTIONS : This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions . Before filing this application , you should confer with the City Planner to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application . FILING CERTIFICATION: The undersigned representative of the applicant hereby certifies that he is familiar with the procedural requirements of all applicable City Ordinances . //g/// Signed By ' Date F. Ap lic n The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been authorized to make this application for the property herein described . Signed By Date Fee Owner Date Application Received Application Fee Paid 5V -h/ City Receipt No. * This Application will be considered by the Planning Commission/ Board of Adjustments and Appeals at their meeting . Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 42 i7Conrad: We'll make sure that we're out there. That's a good idea Bill. We ' ll stop in. Bill Swearengin: Walk up the hill right across from my house, that's where the driveway is going to go. That's a high speed road by the way. It's posted at 35 but the traffic travels mostly at 45 to 50. To dump a road down a hill onto that is going to cause an infinite number of problems. You'll have more objections to dumping onto Chaska Road from the neighbors on Chaska Road than you will from Murray Hill . Nancy Swearengin: The Comprehensive Plan, that whole area from our land on the four acres and all that, we're still chopping away at it in pieces and — we're not blending. You're supposed to read the Comprehensive Plan on how you're going to build corners so everything blends. We're chopping away again . Conrad: How are we doing that again? I know the Comprehensive Plan very well . Bill Swearengin : You' re spot zoning . Conrad: No, we ' re not spot zoning . Bill Swearengin: You still have us guided for single family and yet we enjoy a traffic count of 30 some thousand cars on our immediate corner. There should be a buffer between his development and TH 7 and that should be — us. Conrad : But right now you ' re zoned single family right? Bill Swearengin: Right . Allen Putnam: I think one other thing to remember is that Murray Hill Road — is not exclusively in Chanhassen either. Before it gets to Chaska Road it's in Shorewood . PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO CONSTRUCT A 60 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON 2.5 ACRES. THE PARCEL IS ZONED R-12, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND CBD, CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CHAN VIEW OPPOSITE THE HURON INTERSECTION, CHANHASSEN DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION AND FIRST AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION. — Barbara Dacy presented the Staff Report on this PUD application. Tom Zumwalde : Given the late hour , I believe all of you received a full set of drawings and do you want me to go through the drawings again? As I go through it I'll try to explain some of the concerns from our side and the conditions that were put on here. One that was mentioned we felt that we Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 43 need a greener buffer around the site itself. I was a little bit uncomfortable creating too much of a barrier only because I think then we're starting to.-than to make them all work together but I guess the one - concern, the one area is here. The difference in density in building sites from one to the other. In terms of screening the residential building from the new development along here, it's our hope that the new building just south of the site will be not a frontal building but rather have a nice back side to it as well so we won't be looking at a service area but it will be a clean face. I guess what I 'm saying in essense is that we like to minimize screening that area around the site. What we're proposing is a three story on a concrete garage. The garage itself will be approximately 50% below grade and 50% above grade. As the grades are right now. What we would be doing is some berming around the building so a good portion of the garage will be hidden by that built up portion. The drive itself has a single entry/exit point at about the center. It's actually on the east side of the building. You enter and you would have parking on each wing of the building. The red area shown on here is stairs and elevator and mechanical storage. The three upper levels are kind of an inverted question mark configuration. There are approximatey 20 units on each floor. The first floor has a community space in the southeastern corner. There is a dashed line around it. The balance of the floor then are units. 13 two bedroom units and about 8 one bedroom units per floor. Each floor has a laundry room and then several storage areas for individual storage for each unit. - Let me speak just for a moment about the configuration of the building. gBarbara mentioned the soil problems on the site which restricted our use of the land in terms of buildable area. Everything along Chan View and basically the R-12 portion of the site, is a poor soil section that building requires pilings. In putting the building over in this area, first of all we' re pointing it a little bit away from the residential area and also this configuration has a very limited portion of the building that extends out to — Chan View. You go back to the site plan for just a minute and look at that portion of the building that faces Chan View. It's not so dissimilar to the 2 1/2 story building right next to it in terms of size. It would be a _ little higher and a little wider but it certainly a lot different than what you see on the model over there with the entire building spread out along Chan View. I think that will soften the transition from residential to commercial and if you look at the commercial side of it and go to another — drawing of that showing the proposed commercial development as well, the relationship as you come in the realigned West 78th Street , you end up with the proposed two story office and medical building. The three story - building and then some one story buildings over here so from a planning sense and just a spacial sense, you get a nice feel of the buildings kind of rising up one on the other. I feel in a larger sense as is shown on this plan that this building configuration fits very well with the commercial business as proposed right now. Now I'm going to skip back again to the building elevations. They are not intended to be this red. I don't know how it reads on your monitor but what we're looking at essentially are earth — tones that fit in with the rest of the community. First of all, the style of the building generally will be fairly traditional. You have gabled ends. Living units with balconies and steep roof slopes on the gabled ends so you would be 12/12 slopes which is a very traditional quality to it. The Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 44 L7building materials themselves, I'm looking at about 50% brick on the lower portion of the building. It reads dark on the monitor. Above the brick we — would have the lap siding right in this area and up into the gabled ends. Then for the roof itself, we're proposing asphalt shingles. There was some discussion with Barb this week concerning the type of asphalt shingles since _ most everything in Chanhassen now is cedar shakes. The scale of most of your buildings is a little smaller such that cedar shakes on a building of this size probaby would not be appropriate. It also would be prohibited from a cost standpoint. What we're proposing is a timberline type asphalt — shingle which has the appearance of a cedar shake type of roof. Generally, that ' s it . I don ' t want to spend any more time on it . Brad Johnson: I think you probaby know I would like to state why we're doing what we're doing. Basically, as a downtown redeveloper, our objective is to internally finance the acquisition of almost Two million dollars worth of property on the north side of the street. Tear it down and then build what we're trying to build. One of our problems is building something big enough to accomplish that so what happens is that as we were going through the process of getting final approval from the City to do Retail West, they -. wanted to know how the whole downtown was going to work and as you will start hearing here pretty soon our grocery store is moving over here someplace and different kinds of things so we've shoved a lot of what we _ perceived to be retail type of endeavors are going to be more to the west of the Dinner Theater now. It has to do with the people wanting highway visibility. At least with our current situation. Our objective was to be k_ under construction and have the north side of the street completed by the end of next year so we went about trying to figure out how we could build enough mass in order to generate enough tax increment so that we could then purchase the property, tear it down and build something new. So what we're _ dealing with in scale is a plan that has to meet the HRA and City Council's requirements as to the amount of building we'll build during a certain period of time so we can take care of what is considered to be the blight of the community which is the Hanus building. There is about a million dollars — worth of acquisition , I hate to call Bernie ' s building a blight but it is . Bernie Hanson: Careful . — Brad Johnson : But basically right here is my problem so when we make a proposal to the City and they have approved this. See, this is part of our development problem. We've got a contract with the City to build this. The City has a contract to tear down the Rettler House. These are all things that have been done as part of the HRA process. The City Council and HRA have basically approved this because they signed a contract to do this. We're generating most of the money, the excess increment from here. The way we have to go through our process on redevelopment is we go to the HRA. They approve it financially. We go to the City. They approve it — financially and then we come back to you to see what you think of it. As you know, we're kind of running through it. We're running through the process and I think last time when I was here with Retail West you said you' re going to see a lot more of us because now you get more involved in f the overall process. The bottom line is, in order to accomplish the whole Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 45 downtown area, we have to generate x amount of increments. Originally we were going to put the housing over here. We discovered that to acquire this one building was $250,000.00 and we could not afford to do it. Then we discovered we had $500,000.00 worth of excavation and pilings that would have to be dumped to build on that site. These were all surprises as we went through in trying to create a plan that we were working on. So we did some more surveys and found out there is a hill right here hidden in the ground that we could build this particular building. Our first design is not very nice but the new one is quite nice I think and with the new plan coming in, I think we end up with a pretty substantially good looking - building when we accomplish it. We have to increase the density by 20 units so we bought some more property which is the Rettler building and put the Bloomberg property which was originally supposed to be business and we then said , we think we can accomplish this so we signed a contract with the City saying we'll produce a $20,000.00 something over here and 2.5 million dollar something right here. That's the kind of process we have to go through and then as we were going through that , about 3 or 4 weeks ago we said now wait - a minute, what are we going to do with this now? So we've been running around and we found out that somebody was thinking about putting a clinic in town and as of Thursday we were the selected choice for the new medical arts - facility which will be built in the City if we can get it all put together through the HRA and through City Council. This is planned as a two story, 30,000 square foot medical arts building which will be half medical and half arts, retail type of space that wil be going into there. As a requirement of this, the clinic is requiring that this become a daycare center over here and that one be put in the community. That comes from the fact that there apparently has been a service for two years to try to find a site for a day care center in this community and they think this is good so we're under contract and you'll be seeing things on that one. We'll be able to put a tot lot back here and it will be close to St. Hubert's and that's kind of where we're at and why the plan is as it is. There is plenty of parking to meet all the requirements but there has been a fairly big change. It's hard to envision how this all would go together if you just saw the first page. All this new part will be presented to the HRA next Thursday as part of what we now perceive a doable and rentable which would be more important, plan for the downtown so that we can generate the dollars that are necessary. At the HRA level , it's very much oriented towards how can you, that's us, — generate enough tax dollars so we can change the downtown area. Wouldn't you say? Dacy: Just to clarify so the Commission understands, also in that contract the HRA fully recognizes the role that the Planning Commission plays. There is also a statement in there that they have to comply with any applicable zoning ordinance review, subdivision review, etc.. You guys are the — planners for the community. You don't have to deal with the finances. That ' s not your purvue. You ' re to be dealing with planning issues . Brad Johnson: So the process is HRA, City Council , back to the Planning Commission for our kinds of stuff. I think that's why things come to you after they've been through a big circle. By the way, we met with all the ' neighborhood people three times. That's why nobody is here. They are all Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 46 17 aware of what the plans and everything is . Noziska moved, Wildermuth seconded to close public hearing. All voted in favor and motion carried. Headla : This letter from Fred Hoisington, could you comment on that? Dacy: The intent for his third item is that he wanted to insure that everyone is aware that there is 170 feet left as opposed to 230. It does put more of a constriction as to what you can do for the site plan for the property to the south. Brad mentioned they are just culminating their planning process for what we commonly refer to as this being Retail Central — and Retail East. Mr. Hoisington when he wrote the letter did not have the benefit of this plan but he was just flagging an item that he wants everyone to be aware of at this point in time . Brad Johnson: What he's saying there is if we were to build retail, we would have to build it right here in front of this lot. We were aware of that and that's why this is now parking. There will be a lot of parking for — the medical center . Headla: How are you sure that area is being put to the best use for the — next 40-50 years? Dacy: You are questioning whether or not the apartments are appropriate use there? Headla : Yes . Dacy: That's really an item for discussion tonight. If the Commission feels that the proposal is proposing too much, then the option is to scale back the yard and the additional area is left for commercial area. This issue tonight that you ' re dealing with is just a proposal . Brad Johnson: As you see it there, the project for best use is how you define it. How we define it is how much tax dollars is generated for the — City. Headla : I guess I don't want to say best use. I'm thinking not only of today but in 10 to 20 years. Where are we going to be in 20 years. Is that going to be a hinderance in 20 years? Tom Zumwalde: This piece of property was already zoned R-12 which is the highest housing density you have. Traditionally what happens is that when you go from single family to commercial , you go to a higher density housing before you get to commercial in almost any community I can think of and — that's essential what's happened here. You've got single family residences up further north. You get down to the 2 1/2 story apartments here. You get a larger apartment and then you start hitting the commercial area and that's fairly typical in almost any community. At least any that I'm aware of in terms of overall planning and land use . Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 47 Wildermuth: What kind of precedence are we going to be setting if we consider this as a Planned Unit Development? In the recommendations you said that the Planning Commission has to decide if this location is - appropriate planning for development or what is the alternative? Dacy: The PUD process is really a rezoning process based on an individual site plan. The community has a lot more discretion because it is a rezoning application and you are evaluating a specific site plan for a specific site. The alternative to the PUD application was submitting a site plan review and a subdivision application. But because of the density of the proposal a - variance would be required. The other option that was suggested was you could literally create a zoning district to allow 24 units per acre. We did not recommend that however because of the past process we just went through the past three years that you could file a rezoning application for that anywhere else. One of the other reasons for the PUD, it was at this one specific location and had other existing apartments surrounding it to the north of similar density. Conrad : So based on that logic, we're setting a precedent for the tax increment district in terms of density. Dacy: The entire tax increment district, or I should say the downtown, is guide planned as commercial. As Mr. Zumwalde noted, this area along Chan View is guide planned as high density as well. We're talking about an F. additional acre of land that's being used for multiple family. If there was to be another proposal for multiple family in the downtown area, you would have to go through a guide plan change so to take back on the commercial land that we already have now, I 'm sure the Council would not . . . Wildermuth: The only extent for which it is precedent setting is that it -- happens to be in the tax increment district? How long does the tax increment district survive? Until the debt is retired? Dacy: That's correct and at this point I think we're proposing to retire it in 1994. Erhart : Is this the PUD ordinance we just passed? Dacy: That ' s right . Erhart : Doesn ' t that talk about minimum lot size of 12 , 000 feet? Dacy: That ' s regarding single family development . —' Erhart : That ' s the only thing we ' ve got . Dacy: No , it refers to other uses . Wildermuth: I don't have any further questions. I like the design and I like the elevation views . Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 48 Noziska: I guess the density is a bit high but in looking at the plan, I really don't have any objection to it. I think they've done a nice job of — taking a pretty big building and making it look as small as you can and it's a rather clever use of a good soil so I guess I don't have any objections. I don't think it would be out of context that bad with the neighborhood. I _ don't think I object to seeing that. I'm glad to hear that we're going to have some daycare available because those kind of apartments are going to need daycare. More so than we do even today so I think it's a good plan. The only one thing that I always come back to is I would assume that it's wood frame above the garage. Tom Zumwalde : That ' s correct . Noziska: And it always bothers me putting a building of that size together without more concern over fire. I just don't know how one would even put fire walls in the building that's configured that direction. I always thing — of Chanhassen as having rather limited capacity. We've got plenty of neighbors around here but still that ' s time . Tom Zumwalde: I talked with the Fire Inspector for the City about various potential problems he saw and had addressed those to his satisfaction. In terms of the building and the details of fire walls and so forth, they have — not been figured out yet. We're not at that stage of development. We will meet all the code requirements for fire and for the building inspector too. Noziska: I know we've got a motel that's an excellent example of a fire resistant structure and that makes me feel good in a community that has a volunteer fire department because I know when we start building, if we build too many huge barns like this , we're going to have to do something with our fire department so that's also money and taxes later on. I think the motel people provided for an excellent example of an affordable fire resistant structure. Those are the thoughts that are my mind and maybe with the soil considerations it's not possible to make a fire resistant structure. That I — don ' t know but other than that , I go along with Jim. Emmings: I think it's really an attractive building. I like it a lot. — Parking is the thing that I key in on. Maybe I'm becoming and Barbara predicted I would bring this issue up and I have thought about it because there are 60 units there are 2 parking spaces . — Dacy: It should have been 108. That was my fault . Emmings: Even so, it's not 2 per unit and maybe you don't need them but — again, like we had this other one that came up here and I think about where do visitors park and all that and maybe it's adequate. I simply have no way to know but it bothers me. Is the parking in the garage, it is reserved for — the people who live there I assume? Tom Zumwalde: I am assuming the same thing. That it will be just strictly _ residents. The way your ordinance is set up, it's one covered space per ! dwelling unit is required. There are 60 units so there are 60 spaces in the Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 49 garage and then 48 open spaces. The way your ordinance reads, it's 1 1/2 spaces per one bedroom unit and 2 spaces for the two bedroom or larger so we' ve got 108 spaces and that ' s exactly what the ordinance calls for . Emmings: I know it meets the ordinance because that's what our report says and maybe that's perfectly adequate. It just seems to me that people who have a two bedroom unit are very likely to have two cars and I don't know what happens if many people show up at once to visit , I don't know where they are going to park. - Noziska : Downtown . Emmings : I suppose they could park in the retail area and hike over there . Brad Johnson: If it gives you any comfort, we anticipate around 10 to 20 of those units will be occupied by single senior women. We would probably request to have a spot per center. We find that we were normally running a half a car per unit is even enough. Emmings: How do you take into account people who come? Not just people who live there but the people who come to visit? Brad Johnson: Just by the odds and the numbers. I think it's done that way Nam because that ' s what people have found over time is adequate. ( Conrad: The question is, is that the standard to accommodate guests and that's a real concern. If it's all taken up with residents, I don't think - we ' re wild about having people park on the street . Tom Zumwalde: For what it's worth, your ordinance is consistent with every — other ordinance that I've seen. It's based on a certain number of parking spaces per dwelling unit and I don't ever recall seeing an extra number of spaces set aside for visitor parking so it's my assumption that in their calculations, the spaces for the number of units, there is also some for guest parking. In this particular instance, we don't have a great deal more room on this site to add any parking. I guess I would question from an aesthetic standpoint first of all what it would do to the site if we were to — add more spaces. Are they in fact going to be necessary or are we going to take what could be green and turn it into bituminous? The other thing I look at would be the alternatives for parking. If in fact there was a day Wow when everyone had guests over or something, I would assume that there probably are some other alternatives around the area with the amount of commercial space . Emmings: Let me ask you this, I don't want to beat this to death because I think reasonably I think it's fine and the Staff says it's fine but if it would turn out that there was a shortage of parking , could you expand? It — looks like there might even be room to expand parking to add to . Tom Zumwalde : There is space back in here . r Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 50 Emmings: The other thing , I would expect that this is the kind of thing that is really known in exquisite detail by people who plan so I 'm going to — take my comfort in that but I 'm not going to find any comfort in the fact that our ordinance is consistent with other ordinances . Tom Zumwalde: The Edenvale apartments that are just down the street on TH 5 and TH 4 , we built that and that's a one to one. We've had to add 21 parking spots to that. Emmings : When you say one to one. Tom Zumwalde : One car per unit . Emmings: And were they all single bedroom? Tom Zumwalde : Yes . — Emmings : So one to one turned out to be adequate but here we have one to one and a half . — Tom Zumwalde : It ' s the first one we ' ve had to increase the parking on. Emmings: It looks there is room to do that here. Noziska: Steve, if it's not on a Sunday morning or early Saturday evening , they always have St. Hubert ' s parking lot . -' Erhart : PUD I see is real simple to apply if we are assuming that we' re getting something extra. Let me go back a second. How did we ever justify — these densities under the old ordinance? Dacy: They were were built some in the late 60's prior to the Comp Plan or Zoning Ordinance . Erhart : How did we ever come up with 12 units per acre in the most recent zoning ordinance? Did we make provisions for apartments complexes? — Dacy: Right, but only at the density of 12 units per acre . Erhart: I was just looking at what our history shows us that that's inadequate for an apartment building . Dacy: Through the Commission process and the Council it came back that 12. — Originally 15 was proposed. It went to Council and they said no, that's too high. If you came back and had it amended for 20, Met Council would jump up and down for Chanhassen to do that. They would love this plan. — Erhart: So let's assume we're all in agreement on that, what is density transfer again? Density transferring from one area to another? Dacy: Right and that really isn ' t applicable in this situation. Planning Commission Meeting May 27 , 1987 - Page 51 Erhart : That ' s what you ' re trying to comply with in a PUD. Dacy: Transfer isn't the right term. You're really allowing an increase in - density over what is typically required by the zoning ordinance . Erhart: And in exchange for that we give some various things and here we're saying what we' re getting is tax increment financing? Conrad: Based on this development, what have we taken the density up to? We taken from 60 units for this development , what does that work out to per - acre? Dacy: 23 . Conrad: So really what we're doing in my mind is we're saying 23 units per acre in the City of Chanhassen is acceptable. We're saying downtown right now but we'll be pressured for other high density, multiple dwelling areas to the City for us to explain why 23 there and why not 23 there and we' ll come back and say. . . Dacy: At Staff's suggestion that they file another application outside like in the Curry property. Conrad : What ' s on the north side? Tom Zumwalde: 2 1/2 story apartments . Conrad : The HRA has reviewed this plan or is it going to the HRA? Dacy: They have reviewed the financing package and the development — contract. They have seen an overall schematic but they have not seen this report. Conrad: My only concern is based on Fred Hoisington's comment on how that is dividing up that eastern portion of the downtown. I think the green area that's being interjected there. I think that looks good but I don't even want to get into the planning of that as long as somebody else is looking at — that and it makes sense from the downtown standpoint . Brad Johnson: This is the housing portion and not seeing what is planned for the rest. We held up this proposal until we had figured out what we're going to do with the rest of the downtown area to adjust to what we just did , no problem and we use the same firm for every development . — Conrad: If somehow we discover Brad that parking space is not enough because these people tend to have far more visitors than the average, what can be done? I really don't want parking spaces. I don't like it but I also don't think it's smart to put it out on the street either and force it. What are the chances of restricting? You're putting in more density than what we originally planned and what the area can hold, are there possibilities for restrictions for the apartment building people where you Planning Commission Meeting May 27, 1987 - Page 52 allocate so many spaces for visitors? Is that a possibility where visitors have certain spaces in that parking lot and the balance is for the residents? Brad Johnson: I guess the way we handle that question because it always comes up when a building is built, is that we try to show you how we — could add 12 more spaces or something to the site and then redo it if somebody on the Council or you guys say we have to do it. I've done that on a number of projects where we've just singled out here's an alternate sketch — of how we can do what's proposed. It's a fairly common question. Especially when you start going over 1 1/2. We can come back with an alternate sketch for City Council . — Conrad: Obviously you would approach the issue by finding more spaces rather than restricting residents in apartment buildings? I don't have any more comments . I like the way it looks . — Noziska moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend — approval of the Planned Unit Development Request #87-1 subject to the following conditions : 1. A detailed utility plan showing water , sewer and storm sewer connections, as well as fire hydrant locations shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance . 2. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted detailing additional screening along the south, west and east property lines prior to building permit issuance. — 3 . A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in conjunction with the development plans for the retail projects to be developed to the south and east of this parcel . — 4 . Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submited for Planning Commission and City Council final review prior to building permit — issuance. 5. Removal of the existing single family residence including the — proper demolition procedures . 6. Detailed lighting plans shall be submited prior to building permit issuance. — All voted in favor and motion carried . Chairman Conrad left the meeting at this point and Steven Emmings assumed the responsibilities of Chairman . 199 City Council Meeting - June 15, 1987 L.III 6. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City and provide necessary financial sureties for completion of the improvements. 7. Submittal of an acceptable final drainage plan including calculations for review by the City, Watershed District, and DNR and compliance with all applicable conditions. 8. A homeowners association shall be established to maintain the cul-de- r.. sac island. 9. A culvert shall be installed within the ravine to allow drainage and stabilization of the area. 10. The City Engineer must approve the design of the cul-de-sac island. All voted in favor except Councilman Johnson who opposed and motion carried. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO CONSTRUCT A 60 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON 2.5 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CHAN VIEW, CHADDA AND FIRST AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION. Barbara Dacy: The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request subject to six conditions as noted in the Staff update. Staff is requesting that an additional condition, a detail item that we overlooked, that all parking areas be lined with concrete curbing. Under the City Council section of the Staff Report, the proposed motion is left out and you just have the conditions there but that should read that should the Council wish to approve the subdivision that they approve it subject to the 7 conditions that are on �- page 7. Councilman Johnson: On number 7 should we say all outdoor parking areas since they have an indoor parking area and you don't need to put concrete curb in the basement? I like this. I like the looks of this and everything else. I wish all of our apartment complexes were as nice as this. Councilman Boyt: There was a comment raised at the Planning Commission about the fire protection and you indicated you are working with the Fire Marshall on that. Following what we just heard about the Eagan community, assure me that we're not going to go through that. Tom Zumwalde: I wish I could. I'm not sure what happened down at Eagan. It was a large complex and apparently something went ary out there. This building, our intent is not to install sprinklers and that is fairly typical in most apartment buildings. Typically the high rises are but not the 3 story. It is however, has fire walls, fire partitions, it has all the elements required to make it a very safe building. Again, I'm not sure what happened out in Eagan. I hope nothing like that happens here. What I've heard on the news someone was barbequing. 47 200 City Council Meeting - June 15, 1987 Mayor Hamilton: It was a barbeque that tipped over on a balcony on the third111 floor and our ordinance already prohibits barbeques on apartment balconies. Councilman Boyt: I don't know that we're real well prepared to fight a fire that's very high and I'm concerned. We're building this with a wood frame and — I watched one burn down when it was in construction and they go up real fast. Mayor Hamilton: Jim Chaffee who is our Fire Marshall could probably respond to your concern. Jim Chaffee: We have discussed this issue, or at least I've discussed this issue with the Fire Chief and Fire Inspector and we are considering and I don't know if we brought this up but requiring sand piping which would really help us out in any kind of fire. It would prevent any situation like happened in Eagan and probably would not allow barbeques and charcoal grills on the — balcony in this case. We are very concerned about that issue to make it as safe as possible. Councilman Boyt: My other question is the 60 foot space loss for retail. Brad, since you're involved with both ends of this, maybe you can tell me a little about the consideration of that lost retail space. Brad Johnson: You guys remember what the overall downtown plan was and we were going to extend the retail in a long line up and down the city. In the process we discovered one, that there may not be an immediate market for that type of space in that one location and in addition to that, we also needed to 1111 increase the amount of increments that we could generate. In other words, build bigger buildings. So we put the apartment building in. The apartment building was originally supposed to be 40 units so the site plan we're working on currently and brought to the HRA on Thursday is to change the plan and make use of now the beautiful clock you just approved will be located right here as an entrance into the whole town. The apartment itself looks like the clock. — So as you come into the community you'll have that and actually have a little courtyard located right in here. What they were concerned about is we would not be able to set this retail strip all the way down the street. We will not be doing that because that's not in the plan currently. Instead we're going to put a two story, what we'll call a medical arts building in there which we were contacted by Dr. McCullum who is at Chanhassen Clinic and they are going to move their facility there if we can get the whole transactions put together. Then we have a daycare center going in here that we will be showing before you here in the next two weeks that will go in this location and we're excited about all of this because it's a start doing the downtown and maybe hopefully getting out of that side of the street. That's the current plan. Councilman Boyt: What are we going to do with this variance problem? I know I talked to Barbara earlier today. I'm not sure that I got the answer down quite right as to the difficulty with rezoning this central business district but that's the third issue and I guess I would like to hear a quick synopsis Barb on how we're going to handle this. • Barbara Dacy: Your question is, whether or not the entire site can be rezoned to the central busines district up to Chan View. We did not recommend that to 48 201 City Council Meeting - June 15, 1987 the applicant because rezoning the property to central business district also includes other commercial uses. If, for some reason, the multiple family project were to fall through, you would have commercial uses located directly onto Chan View, directly across from the residential development. Other avenues that were discussed with the applicant were a zoning ordinance amendment to allow high density district around 23 units per acre and the final option was the PUD application allowing the Council a little more leverage in negotiating with the applicant as to establishing things like pedestrian connections, allowing the project with the tax increment district and requiring additional landscaping. That was why the rezoning issue was not.. . Councilman Geving: I'm ready to approve this but I have to put this in because the neighbors have called me in this area. I live within two blocks of this area and there has been some discussion and most of them have appeared here before the Planning Commission. I think the various comments were that it's just too much density for our area and they would have liked to have seen a 48 or 50 unit apartment building here. I want to throw that in as a plug for the people but I personally approve of it. I think we need the 1 and 2 bedroom units in the city and I'm all in favor. I do have to ask one question. Whether or not this unit was projected in our downtown redevelopment district for 60 units? Don Ashworth: Yes. —111 Mayor Hamilton: I just would say that I live in the apartments across the street from this on Chan View and those people there are anxious to see it built because they would like to move into it so I think it's a really nice project and I would like to see it move ahead. Councilman Horn moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve the PUD application for the 60 unit apartment complex located on the south side of Chan View with the following conditions: 1. A detailed utility plan showing water, sewer and storm sewer connections, as well as fire hydrant locations shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. 2. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted detailing additional screening along the south, west and east property lines prior to building permit issuance. 3. A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in conjunction with the development plans for the retail projects to be developed to the south and east of this parcel. 4. Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submitted for Planning Commission and City Council final review prior to building permit issuance. 111 5. Removal of existing single family residence including the proper demolition procedures. 49 202 City Council Meeting - June 15, 1987 — 6. Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. 7. All outside parking areas shall be lined with concrete curbing. All voted in favor except Mayor Hamilton who abstained and motion carried. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE STABLE, 3530 HIGHWAY 7, DAVID OBEE. Jo Ann Olsen: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for a private stable in the RSF district. It is going to be limited to two horses. — Staff is recommending approval. We feel that the site is screened from all surrounding properties. Is large enough for two horses and it is reviewed annually for the horse permit so any problems with it can be taken care of. — Staff is recommending approval with the conditions set forth. Councilman Horn: What's the size of the stable? Jo Ann Olsen: There are two proposed sizes but the applicant has stated that he decided he isn't going to build any building right now if it's going to be a problem. Councilman Geving: I read all the comments from the Planning Commission like the rest of you but I really wonder what the intent of Mr. Obee is. He's If' talking about a very large building then we find out he owns a lot of equipment and so forth. Whether or not the stabling of these two horses is really the issue. I don't mind him having two horses in that area. It's a stable permit request. I have seen the letters and comments from the — neighbors but I'm most concerned about what's going to go in that building that he's proposing. I wonder what his motive is and question that. Other than that, I don't know how we can issue a stable permit just to put horses — in. I don't know how that works with Mr. Headla. Jo Ann Olsen: There is an existing building that he would be using for the _ stable instead of constructing a new one. Councilman Geving: So in fact, if he had the horses he could move them in and use them if he had the permit? I have no other comments. Councilman Johnson: I went out and looked at the site and noticed there are existing stables to the west and pretty well treed area. For two horse and — limited use of the building in there for just horse stables and stuff associated with that, I don't have a problem with this. Bill Schmid: I own property directly west of Mr. Obee's proposed site. A few years ago a few of the present Council members were here at that time and there was a permit granted to a Mr. James Frizzell on the west side of me for two horses. Jim keeps the place very neat. Very clean. Very tidy. Regardless of all that, when it rains, it smells. You can't get around it. It's a pasture. Now there are horses on the east side and I'm very much opposed to it 100%. There are 73 lots and I believe you have a letter from 50 ..1 I . Itir, . 4.111111111.11 ._.. ... .I. c's• * I i. r • ,. • . .4‘ I • I I ' 1 .„;.-- 0110 I l t.-1 . ,. . . f -. .1„._ .- -.,,.„--.-• -. % . -: --m. •:.--'ti,.-„,.••;st.:- 5 . ..,j•-••- '..i. , .. - ;,-N'K' .1— N7'Ki-• .11ecr'--• —' 74.4 ••(.14- .s. — k,. -, ,.... .,... c.. : _ - •.- • -• ' .. ,• t.L_. .. /"---- ---'-'•-•........_. . —.......____ .....4111 )k. ' . N''s.' '.'*' 's\-.i,..;,4‘i.i..4•-.!.,:„„,,_:s.. -.,. ,... , -,z .... l'-', '- '-, --' 1,16.6,. '•'-'V 4, *4., 145- . ? . ,-kk 440 vi.,..-.... .,.., .,4.._ .,s;t• Act. , - -,.1....1, k--_, 1 .,, I/ :, - ...*,... . ,-• -....,.--..b s , • ,0! .•= ,. ' ,41,.%.,i'• : 8 k--,___. __Aft?. . .. ,.......74 .:, _b, --- --------_,... - ./ .._. .. . ,.., _. , : .. ..v.t...,,,,,, &•... . . .._ cp , -7---•-- - __ / I / .01.1..,.‘ti,...L. .n.L,.' '.... (1): ----_-...' %.-'. -*Ys.. ih, \Ii.7-;. . ., ,I, ,/ - 9,,----------______ .. 1 , , ...,—.,.... , _ . .. _ ._ „...v_mlrfir„ .. v. .4.....v..„....c...vit. __... lopi ' \itak Iv • 14 r i hisifti ,...1 . • r42.•••.'..... Ptift,„ -.-.?. , / ,,,A,.. : t•....‘,, ,..2 ..-.,.,.. 1,. -i t.' '----. N. R. . '''ktti-----k. 41:—..711,- .- 7 '',,..7 Ni,-;‘74::. \n,- .--... _ -.... . • \..-.1 ....„...-,,! i- . .,.. . , ....... -, - / ..,?.. -....b. .. r , .,. . -•-.4-..,,Notz.z .; .- .-.-. -. ,.,' .,.....6,rs.•,, .:4 -------- —.--,Jairmy--`- ;.-- 'e fa i ..- I ,..:▪ .-4,•. %\ 0.';ke:' .../ -• --; .....0 ;:•:. ,, ,,-... :,' "46%'..„.... "•40 7 ----------, As"A --,-' : - • / — " ' ▪. ,..• ?, .. ill( *I.A. kli 54 i - '0 ,- -1.'4 t ,, . \, •‘: --- if:4i')___:::•';-( o ii - — --.. " \ ,% i.. // I ..11110"&f, :if4V X ...... ,_ ja, %;'-• , ;1-;;UT-4& ._.; % I r-'717 . %.V i It.. „sit 4? , ;:•-,\,' 4 Ti A•t.!4•. i 1 • ii !.:,,.,:-:ifil ,--) /7 / .v.;. tr. - .4k....k-*:-.•-tn,..:\ 1 , e -it. ,.... .---.--:.--- -;-,- -'. 1. , i , '-• - . ..- pp, ....-;,. ' 4/11 Ir*.A.\:- \ -..!N.:--.... .-- - .--:.,-1>-; :.' ,' , , .•ip 1 Alrev,,A, ., i .':.--i't":''''''''k.:1..;;;.t.- .. .'7- .-•.-1.- .7V-...4. -!.,-,-.---, .... .-11,------, -tis... i... . . ‘..... .. ...c,.. ...... ..., „ . .14., , •••• ,,,,,.,,, / Nom t..:::,:: '''•1-4,* .k,::`.1fiV-k,::-..,-f‘tA-V•:.-.1..',.•..X* .‘k.—_ ---.-- •- ' ta —— :g A• 4:. *-'''.4 •T.h ". •,ae 3% '' % 1%,:- N. \ iv',.! • --- - - 4v,,,,--. ---,-;,..--::.- v.i, ..... . _ • \ — at ort.:-..-T:----- __ _ .! -•.. _ _-..- .4- : N.:,-.,,:..<7- 4:',1•'• •:;.% ,•' -.., A....‘„ ...%. . 4k-,...=4 .• 7.:..X4:".k. '•:,--;,___ •.4-.. " f-‘k."--,- Li. • •—• .4 :'-,•,.. ,.........I .:.-.#:7 / -,,y, tA* c.-: :i • . .,.. ' •-•::".• l'. ' --- ,..,"P / _,W • .k.,-...,_ `•$ €:.:A .'-.',1:1'- '---' -aMo-1•'. - l' ,.. . - ' ''ii.'1.*-‘ :.•4- ,.,,, . „...___ •,- `....1b.. r--lr- , \ .'N' / . - If L.•t / .7 lom ln 3) 15- gi/ -_,.,-, .iv / I am. '11 ---- ) .., 'DT.-.X / i'll. t•‘, .• .- sp..vt Et, , vt. /-• . 1 T.X.'':t.\ 'ts.4.1; -- kl ' #-4 i t.'6 • , 1 0 -,. , i , . . , „...„.. .. ,___ „ , _ ?...; , ..,__....t- , sy , _, .,...,.::.., ___— ,, , , _ /work- ,..... , ,:-.1,-•-• .-4, -,.- ,...._________/. •.....,-.,,,,,, Soar i • i 1; I I I 1 4,1' f I 1 I .---4-...,-1.4.1,%.- s ,.. ------__„ ......, . ..t . , ,i..,0er .T.-- kt, • ,•""——— gt. .,,;.401,- .. ,...,/ . s . . •II., :\VIVI , -- - :IV ,.. . .-,:-.C.Vi'Z'-. :Cf.'.'1'.•••• '' .. 44. 1 T . , • ,:.:., ,...:1. __ , . ..1.. I= i ... ... .. ... v .--.- i .....,....,,.... 4v..e4.1 .e........:.40,1/ r tr,.1 ' '*•----•-—-., .. ' .. ; . 0 .7 ... ....-__p:. . r ,, .• ••,11 1' , 1 / ---- ' . / •4, v.. ; ; . .... . CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION _ REGULAR MEETING JUNE 1, 1988 Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7: 35 p.m. . MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steven Emmings, Annette Ellson, Ladd Conrad , — Brian Batzli , James Wildermuth and David Headla STAFF PRESENT: Barbara Dacy, City Planner PUBLIC HEARING: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT FOR A 60 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CHAN VIEW, HERITAGE PARK APARTMENT PARTNERS. Public Present : Name Address Tom Zumwalde Applicant George Beniek 412 - 76th Street West Sue Welliver 7611 Huron Avenue Barbara Dacy presented the staff report . _ Conrad: I got a call from Brad Johnson saying he was on his way from St . Paul . He' d be delayed but he would be here . He ' s not trying to dodge it but we ' ll open it up for public comments , if there are any from the applicant . Any comments at all on the revision to this particular apartment building . — George Beniek : I live on 412 West 76th Street . I guess my only question is, was there, I imagine there was a public hearing on the initial which I — don' t recall ever receiving a copy of . What ' s the purpose of the change now? To who 's benefit is the change? Is it more units going to be in there? Dacy: No . There is no change in the amount of units that were previously approved by the Council in 1987. The only thing that ' s changed is how the building is sitting on the lot . Basically it ' s shifted more to the south - and has become an "L" fashion as you see there. The north/south and the east/west access as opposed to a "U" formation . As to who ' s benefit , I don ' t know. George Beniek : Why are they requesting the change? Is it our purpose to know that? Dacy: The architect is here. Tom Zumwalde : I can try and answer that . I am Tom Zumwalde, the _ architect on the project. I designed the original project and also the revision to it . The original project , we did not have a contractor Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 2 involved . We did not have a lot of marketing input . In the last year we got a contractor involved and we ' ve dome some marketing input and those are the prime reasons for the changes in the configuration . With the original building that was "U" shaped , we had a lot of units that were pie shaped with minimal exterior walls looking up to an inside court. From a marketing standpoint , the people we talked to felt they were less useable or less rentable. Less desirable units. From the construction end, all of those wedges in the building were very, very costly and what was happening was we were spending so much money on those that the rest of the building would have suffered for it . So what we feel , in the super configuration is that we ' re getting a much better , more efficient building . The units have increased an average of 24 square feet per unit . They' re much more liveable than the other ones were. Basically those are the reasons . George Beniek : The heights of it is going to be approximately how many stories? Tom Zumwalde : The same, it ' s 3 stories . The identical number of units . The same number of parking spaces. Basically just the configuration change. George Beniek : It will conform to allow the senior citizen access? Handicap? Tom Zumwalde : There are three handicap units in the building . Totally accessible. As far as rent levels and all of that, I wish the developer were here to answer that. I really don ' t have all that information. Sue Welliver : I live on Huron Avenue. I own a double bungalow there and I 'm concerned also about my tenants and myself , since I live there , is access . There' s going to be 60 units and you ' re going to have a lot of parking and that type of thing and a lot of cars . How are you going to -. get out onto 78th Street without any stop signs onto 78th Street? It ' s very difficult right now. If you ' re going to put that up and have the only access onto that road, how are you going to get back out? That ' s what I 'd like to know. Dacy: The access to the apartments will be from Chan View and there will be two access points. One opposite the Huron Avenue intersection . Here ' s Huron Avenue here . The entrance to the parking lot will be directly opposite of that and there will be another access further to the east on - Chan View. So cars entering and leaving the site will come from Chan View, iff they' re going to be headed to Great Plains Blvd. , they' ll go over to here and then go south to the Great Plains Blvd . and West 78th Street intersection which there ' s a stop sign at that point and West 78th Street is now a flow through on that . There ' s no four way stop. That was eliminated with the reconstruction of the south lane of Great Plains Blvd . . Additionally, there could be traffic that goes west on Chan View that would eventually hit Laredo . The City is just finishing up, we ' re reconstructing Laredo Drive as i.t intersects West 78th Street . There ' s a right turn lane now that will be on Laredo Drive going onto West 78th Street . Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 3 — Sue Welliver : Yes , but I mean when you try to get onto West 78th Street , _ that is the most difficult now that they eliminated the four way stop sign there. Also , on Laredo , eliminating that . You want to go east , anyway from there, it ' s very difficult . We have to wait 5 to 10 minutes and that ' s just normal time . You get into rush hour and it ' s terrible. Dacy: I agree. There' s a considerable amount of traffic on West 78th Street in both locations . In this location in front of Kenny' s , because that leg is part of TH 101, MnDot 's requirement was that we remove the stop signs along West 78th Street to promote the flow through on West 78th Street and to control the traffic coming from Great Plains Blvd. onto West 78th Street . There' s no question that during peak hours that main street is a busy street. I can' t dispute that. Sue Welliver : Are they going to do anything? Are they going to suggest to do anything for that for the residents in this apartment unit also? Like are they going to put a four way stop on Laredo and West 78th or do you know? Dacy: No , there are no plans to put a four way stop at either location. Again, MnDot is requiring us that we can ' t have stop signs on that leg of what is known as TH 101 . What ' s there now can control the traffic but yes , it ' s going to be busy during peak hours . I don ' t know how else to explain it . Sue Welliver : I have rental property right now and that ' s one issue that we have right now is because you can ' t get out . Now you build a 60 unit apartment building , those owners are also going to have the same problem _ there. I think they should look at that and I think the City should decide on putting in stop signs . There ' s a church there with children going across . I think there should be stop signs and I think this is just going to add to the congestion. — Conrad : It sure will add to the congestion by putting in 60 more units there. There ' s no doubt about that. I guess the question becomes , Barbara , you ' re telling us that the intersection at TH 101 or West 78th . Is that 78th? Dacy: Yes . — Conrad : That MnDot really does control that and what is our influence in terms of the traffic problems? — Dacy: As you recall also , the City has a long term plan , it ' s really not long term because we ' re trying to accomplish it along with the four lanes _ of TH 5, creating a new leg of TH 101 that would go through the Apple Valley-Redimix property, cross TH 5 and hook up into Lake Drive East . That would take a significant volume of the north/south traffic from TH 101 and take that out of going through the downtown area but there i.s — going to be this interim period in here where the north/south traffic on TH 101 is going to be going through the downtown area . George Beniek : How many parking places are there shown on their plan? Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 4 Dacy: 108 . Tom Zumwalde : The building has a 60 car garage below it . There ' s one garage space for each unit and then 48 open stalls out in the parking lot. The same as it was before. George Beniek: So there will be a basement in the building? Is that right? Tom Zumwalde : That would be the garage , correct . Conrad : The parking lot did look small didn ' t it? George Beniek : Yes . Emmings moved , Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed . Conrad : Tim, we ' ll start down at your end . What are your comments? Erhart : I really don' t have any. I think the building space is unusual space . It ' s built well and I think it ' s adequate . Emmings: I don ' t really have anything . I liked the other building better but so what . Conrad : Yes , the other building was prettier . Emmings : This one ' s efficient . Ellson : I don ' t have any comments either . I think it ' s just fine. Conrad: Nobody' s talking about traffic. Brian? Batzli : I was going to talk about landscaping but I ' ll talk about traffic a little bit . Kenny' s is going to stay where it is isn ' t it? Throughout this whole development so we ' re not going to lose any traffic . . . I guess I would recommend that, I ' ve seen the paster of that church has asked that stop signs be put in there , at least so people can get across the street to go to church. We ' re adding potentially 108 more cars a day or more . When you talk about back and forth trips , a lot more congestion at that intersection. I guess I would like to see whether we can convince -- MnDot of some other way before we get people getting inpatient and trying to pull out and creating havoc at that intersection because I think it ' s a problem. I personally waited there trying to get out of Kenny' s market for , it is several minutes. That ' s not really an exaggeration . I guess I ' d like to see something . I don ' t know what we can do in this particular instance but it sounds like MnDot is kind of calling the shots on it but I do think that ' s a concern . Not having been involved in the original building, I don ' t know if I like the original building or not. Your one condition that asks for the additional plantings , what are you going to , I didn ' t understand where that ' s going to be . Chan View and the parking area? You ' re just going to have more plantings in that one strip? Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 5 — Dacy: Yes , in this area . — Batzli : Do we require a certain plantings to be put in? Are we going to get like little pine trees that are going to take 15 years to grow to — shield this thing? Dacy: No . The ordinance requires for evergreens that they be a minimum of 6 feet at planting and I believe the landscaping plan , in some cases there were taller trees . Batzli : Because this is going to be a 3 story building and when you have — a 6 foot pine tree, it ' s going to take 20 years to mature and you have a single family homes in the area , I don ' t know. Obviously the people are going to have to look at the building for a couple of years no matter what — you do . That ' s all . Wildermuth : I guess I have a question about the storm water runoff . Jim _ Lasher , in his letter , spent quite a bit of time talking about an on-site retention. . . Dacy: Part of the problem in determing that, the ultimate storm sewer — plan is that the City needs to finalize it ' s plans for the drainage of the abutting properties . This site here is where a daycare center is proposed to be located and all of these properties here interrelate so what we ' re — trying to do is have BRW and the applicant on this project work together so there i.s on-site retention on this property and make sure that it ' s properly directed to whatever is finally determined on the daycare site also . It ' s hard at this point to give you a definitive answer of the catch basin over here or here. Wildermuth : There doesn ' t look like there ' s going to be room for a catch — basi.n on this property. Dacy: If you ' re talking about a retention pond . Is that what you mean? The City ' s intent was to create a storm sewer system and piping and so on so an actual pond wouldn ' t probably be used . There might be a very small depression in there but it was my understanding from BRW that we ' re looking at a storm sewer system. — Wildermuth : With an underground garage , I can see a lot of problems there. Like with the storm that we had last year . That ' s going to be — flooded because that whole area is low and it all drains . I think what we should do is strengthen the language for the storm water runoff. Put in provisions that that be made . . . I guess we ' re looking at the BRW letter . That 's all I had. Beadle : . . . Even if there ' s City' s storm sewer that will catch the runoff , then this apartment complex will pay for that? Dacy: Yes , the applicant is responsible for all necessary storm sewer improvements from the runoff from their property. — Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 6 Headla : Does that appear to be adequate to allow that storm sewer to take care of it? To me that seems that ' s the logical way to go but is there anything else we should be looking at? Dacy: The intent of condition 1 from staff was taken from BRW' s letter that we want final utility and storm sewer plans from them. That will be reviewed both by in-house engineering staff and BRW. Before they get a building permit, they' ll have to satisfy those issues . Headla: Did you get any input from the Fire Department today? Dacy: People from the Fire Department talked to me today but . . . Headla: I talked to Steve yesterday and I said I want to know if we recommend approval of this , is the Fire Department going to require any additional fire fighting equipment? His first comment was , well we ' re ordering the aerial ladder . We ' re ordering that so we ' re covered there . I said, is there anything else? He said I don ' t know, I ' ll have to talk to them. I said , well get back to Barb on Wednesday. Dacy: No , Steve did not talk to me. The primary fire protection equipment is the requirement for sprinkling so that ' s the number one best defense as far as . . . Headla : I 'm not talking about defense . I 'm talking about we got hooked into being required to have an aerial ladder in this City. Have we overlooked something else that we can ' t charge the apartment complex for or are the general taxpayers going to have to pay for it? Dacy: Not to my knowledge will there be any other need for any other type of equipment . The aerial ladder is a significant addition to Chanhassen ' s fire fighting capabilities . Between that and the requirement that the building be sprinklered is the best that we can do. Headla : Last time we beat around quite a bit on the soil borings . Have they done any of that work? Dacy: I know soil borings have been conducted on site . The area where the parking lot is is where most of the poor soils are located . Headla : They will have to take special precautions there so that doesn ' t break up in a short period of time? How do we cover that? Dacy: The applicant will be responsible for maintaining the parking lot in an acceptable condition and I believe they will be soil corrections . Tom Zumwalde : As required . There are a lot of borings that were done on the site and I 'm not certain exactly how bad it is down at that end but we' re putting in concrete curb around the entire lot . Putting in a bituminous parking lot. That ' s a rental property. We ' ll be forced to keep it up just to keep it marketable. Headla : Where do you have all your trash containers? Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 7 — Tom Zumwalde : The trash collection area will be in the basement of the building or the garage. Headla : Will they be coming in from Huron to go in there? Tom Zumwalde: That ' s correct . Headla : That tends to be off of where the real soft soil is? — Dacy: The poor soils, from my understanding , were over in this direction . Tom Zumwalde: It gets worse as you get into this direction . . . Headla : What do you do , you take soil borings and based on what you find that determines the type of base you put down? — Tom Zumwalde : That ' s correct . Headla : And the City Engineer has to approve that? Tom Zumwalde : The City Engineer will be approving all that . . . Headla: That ' s all I have . Conrad : I don ' t have any additional comments . I think those that I ' ve — heard are real valid comments and maybe whoever makes the motion might want to say something in there that the City Council decides what the traffic impact on West 78th Street might be. Maybe review whether we should pursue some kind of a stop sign on West 78th . Headla : I 'd like to talk about that again. When does it look like TH 101 will go through by that Redimix and that? — Dacy: Hopefully during the 1992-93 ti.meframe . Headla : Once it does that , then we would be able to put up a stop sign . . .? Dacy: Right . What would happen is that that portion of West 78th Street — would revert to local control . That would no longer be TH 101. Headla : What if it takes them two years to get that thing totally built , ' — then that would be two years when. . . Conrad : It ' s a problem right now. I know that and this will add a little bit to that and it may be an opportunity to look at the whole situation. I don ' t know what the flexibility of the State is but we may, somebody may want to ask the City Council to look into the matter. Is there a motion? Wildermuth : I move the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Final Plat Amendment for the Heritage Park Apartments PUD #87-1 based on the plans stamped "Received May 12, 1988" subject to the following _ conditions : 1 through 10 and I think the items in the BRW letter referred to in condition 9 should be specifically spelled out regarding storm water Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 8 handling . I would assume that it would have to make adequate provisions to handle. . . Does anybody have any suggestions on the traffic situation? I think the traffic situation in terms of what the City will be allowed to do after . . .and TH 101 gets rebuilt, in terms of the natural course of events I think if that situation becomes really bad . . .specifically read it into the motion . Wildermuth moved , Earnings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Final Plat Amendment for the Heritage Park Apartments PUD #87-1 based on the plans stamped "Received May 12, 1988" subject to the following conditions : 1. A detailed utility plan showing water , sewer and stormwater connections as well as fire hydrant locations shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to building permit issuance . 2. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted indicating the additional plantings to be located between Chan View and the parking area. 3. A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in conjunction with the development plans for the retail projects to be developed to the south and east of the parcel . 4 . Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submitted for Planning Commission and City Council final review prior to building permit issuance . 5. Removal of the existing single family residence shall be accomplished prior to building permit issuance. 6. Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. 7 . All parking areas shall be lined with concrete curbing . 8 . Compliance with the comments as noted in the Building Department memorandum dated May 25 , 1988 . 9. Compliance with the comments in the letter from BRW dated May 25 , 1988 , specifically #6-11 on pages 2 and 3 and #1 on page 3 . 10. Compliance with comments as noted in the Fire Department memo dated May 27 , 1988 . 11 . Compliance with the comments in the letter from BRW dated May 25 , 1988 , specifically spelled out regarding the storm sewer . 12. Direct City staff to research the traffic situation prior to City Council review. All voted in favor and the motion carried . — CITY OF —..,3 _ , sCL S' . - G I CHANHASSEN „ , .. . _\ - ,• 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 a 10! ty ,"? A,''r'Nf:416117P r-,. MEMORANDUM — TO: Don Ashworth , City Manager FROM: Todd Gerhardt, Administrative Assistant --17 ir.,_., --____ _______ __.. ..,_ _._. t, .:.„i;cii DATE: June 13 , 1988 - ----(---,7`3 _ 811 SUBJ: Public Hearing for Proposed Housing Plan and Program — On April 25 , 1988 , the City Council adopted a resolution — establishing June 13 , 1983 at the public hearing date for the proposed Housing Plan and Program. Attached for the Council' s review is the proposed Housing Plan and Program prepared by Ron _, Batty from the LeFevere Law Firm. Staff has reviewed each of the documents and feel that both plans meet the intent of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority action. — Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Housing Revenue Bond Program and Housing Plan for construction of the Chanhassen Heritage Square Apartment complex. — Attachments • 1 . Staff report dated April 21 , 1988 . — 2 . Council minutes dated April 25 , 1988 . 3 . Proposed Housing Plans and Programs . Aii64,000' '1 f A N E N c 2CITYOF _ A , _ [ s , % \ . [ , .., 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 tr*1 by City.",dmt,,istro'LR IMEMORANDUM __ ,,,--- — TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Todd Gerhardt, Administrative Assistant ,..,,: , tit,: 1 DATE: April 21, 1988 - - SUBJ: Resolution Establishing a Public Hearing Date for a _fih /�� Proposed Housing Plan and Program On March 24, 1988, the Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority came to agreement with the Chanhassen Downtown — Development Association regarding the construction of a sixty unit apartment complex in the downtown area. To make the housing project work, tax exempt bonds are required. These bonds are solely backed by the rents from the apartment complex and cannot become a liability of the City of Chanhassen. The sale of these bonds is similar to the old industrial revenue bonds . On June 15 , 1987 , the City Council gave preliminary plan approval for a 60 unit apartment building ( see attachment #1 ) . If any Council member would like to see the preliminary site plans for the porject, please call me prior to Monday night' s meeting. — For Heritage Square Investor Limited Partnership to sell the E bonds , the City must incorporate a housing plan and program. — Attached is the resolution establishing the date of June 13 , 1988 for the public hearing on the proposed Housing Plan and Program [ and necessity to issue revenue bonds. _ Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the resolution establishing -- June 13 , 1988 , as the public hearing date for the proposed Housing Plan and Program, and to give preliminary approval for the Lissuance of bonds to finance the 60 unit apartment complex.Additionally, staff should be directed to prepare a Housing Plan — and Program. 1._ - i - 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED HOUSING PLAN AND PROGRAM PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C; AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE THEREFOR, AND GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROPOSAL FOR A PROJECT TO BE FINANCED THEREUNDER WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act"), authorizes a city r to plan, administer and make or purchase a loan or loans to finance one or more multifamily housing developments or the rehabilitation of multifamily housing developments after adoption of a housing plan; and WHEREAS, the housing plan must be considered at a public hearing held after notice published at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of said hearing after which the housing plan may be adopted by resolution of the governing body of `{ the city with or without amendment; and WHEREAS, the Act requires that any such housing plan shall be submitted to t the metropolitan council for its review and comment; and WHEREAS, the program for the issuance of bonds to finance a multifamily housing development must be considered at a public hearing after notice published at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of said hearing after which the program may be adopted by resolution of the governing body of the city with or without amendment; and WHEREAS, the City of Chanhassen (the "City") has received a proposal from Heritage Square Investors Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (the "Developer") that the City adopt a program to issue its multifamily housing revenue bonds in an amount presently estimated not to exceed $3,000,000 (the "Bonds") to finance the acquisition of land and construction of an approximately 60 unit multifamily rental housing development (the "Project") to be located at the Southwest corner of the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and ChanView Street; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA, THAT: 1. The City Council of the City of Chanhassen (the "City") will conduct a public hearing on the proposed housing plan on June 13, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. 2. The City Manager of the City is hereby authorized to cause a public L notice, substantially in the form of the notice attached hereto as Exhibit A, to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least thirty (30) days prior to the date established for the public hearing by the preceding paragraph of this resolution. L L E . _ 3. The City Manager of the City is hereby authorized to pro ceed, in cooperation with the law firm of LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy, O'Brien do Drawz with the preparation of the housing plan and program relating to the Project, for — presentation to this City Council at the public hearing herein authorized. I 4. That the City Council of the City hereby preliminarily approves the — proposal of the Developer for the financing of the Project through the issuance of the Bonds, subject to the final approval of the terms of the Bonds and the related Idocuments among the City, the Developer and the initial purchaser of the Bonds, to the compliance with all requirements under the Act, and to the receipt by the City — of an allocation of authority to issue the Bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474A. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the preliminary approval granted I hereby shall not obligate or commit the City to issue the Bonds, and the City — reserves the right at its discretion to withdraw or refrain from participating in the financing of the Project at any time. 5. All fees and expenses incurred by the City in connection with the preparation of the housing plan and program for the issuance of the Bonds shall in any event be paid or reimbursed by the Developer. — ADOPTED: , 1988 ATTEST: — Mayor City Manager — 1 I - [ _ I_ _, _ I_ _ L - L - EXHIBIT A f- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON A HOUSING PLAN UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C, AS AMENDED, INCLUDING A PROGRAM TO FINANCE A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota (the "City") will meet on June 13, 1988, at 7:30 p.m. at the City offices in Chanhassen, Minnesota, for the purpose of conducting a public hearing on the adoption of a housing plan for the City prepared in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C. The plan includes a program to finance the cost of a multifamily rental housing development consisting of the construction of a 60-unit multifamily rental housing development. The Developer of the Project will be Heritage Square Investors Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership, or its successors or assigns, which will own and operate the Project. The proposed Project will consist of the construction of a building and the installation of equipment in connection therewith for use as a 60-unit multifamily rental housing development. The site of the proposed Project is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Chan View Street in the City of Chanhassen. The size of the bond issue proposed for the Project is presently estimated not to exceed $3,000,000. The bonds shall be limited obligations of the City and the bonds and interest thereon shall be payable solely from the revenues pledged to the payment thereof, except that such bonds may be secured by a mortgage and other encumbrance on the Project. No holder of any such bonds shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City of Chanhassen to pay the bonds, or the interest thereon, nor to enforce payment against any property of the City except the Project. All persons interested may appear and be heard at the time and place set forth above. May 5, 1988 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1 L L L L L _ . CERTIFICATION OF MINUTE S 1 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC — HEARING ON A PROPOSED HOUSING PLAN AND PROGRAM PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C, 1 AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE THEREFOR — IMunicipality: City of Chanhassen, Minnesota — Governing body: City Council I Meeting: A meeting of the City Council of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota held on the day of , 1988 at p.m. at 690 Coulter Drive, Chanhassen, IMinnesota. — Members present: — IMembers absent: Documents: A copy of a resolution adopted by the City Council of the City 1 of Chanhassen at said meeting. — I Certification: I, , City Manager of the City of Chanhassen, do hereby certify the following: IAttached hereto is a true and correct copy of a resolution on file and of — record in the offices of the City of Chanhassen, which resolution was adopted by the City Council at the meeting referred to above. Said meeting was a regular I meeting of the City Council, was open to the public, and was held at the time and — place at which meetings of the City Council are regularly held. Member moved the adoption of the attached resolution. The motion for adoption of the attached resolution was seconded by Member . A _ — vote being taken on the motion, the following voted in favor of the resolution: L — I - L and the following voted against the resolution: r f Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The attached resolution is in full force and effect and no action has been taken by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen which would in any way alter or amend the attached resolution. Witness my hand officially as the City Manager of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota, this day of , 1988. I I I- t L L L L L ' , y i ( i -\ LAND DEVELOP: nT APPLICATION CITY OF CHANHASSEN — 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 ( 612) 937-1900 - Chanhassen Downtown First American APPLICANT : Development Associates OWNER: Development Corporation IADDRESS P.O. Box 100 ADDRESS 5100 Eden Avenue S. , Suite 305 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Edina, MN 55436 TELEPHONE (Daytime ) 934-1505Zip Code TELEPHONE 929-2122 Zip Code — REQUEST : — I Zoning District Change2c, Planned Unit Development JZoning Appeal Sketch Plan — Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance Final Plan Zoning ,Text Amendment Subdivision Land Use Plan Amendment Platting — Conditional Use Permit Metes and Bounds Street/Easement Vacation Site Plan Review — Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME Town Square Apartments — PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION High Density Residential and Commercial I_ REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION Same PRESENT ZONING CBD, R12 [ REQUESTED ZONING Same [ USES PROPOSED 60 Unit Apartment Building — SIZE OF PROPERTY Approximately 2. 5 Acres tLOCATION See Attached Site Plan - REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST 1_ - 1_ . . LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) L ►.:._:�_. . _� - my06 �37 LCITY OF CHANHASSEN 1 City Council Meeting - June 15, 1987 1 6. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City and provide necessary financial sureties for completion of the improvements. r 7. Submittal of an acceptable final drainage plan including calculations for review by the City, Watershed District, and DNR and compliance with all applicable conditions. 8. A homeowners association shall be established to maintain the cul-de- sac island. — 9. A culvert shall be installed within the ravine to allow drainage and stabilization of the area. 10. The City Engineer must approve the design of the cul-de-sac island. All voted in favor except Councilman Johnson who opposed and motion carried. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO CONSTRUCT A 60 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON 2.5 I — ACRES, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CHAN VIEW, CHADDA AND FIRST AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION. Barbara Dacy: The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request subject to six conditions as noted in the Staff update. Staff is requesting that an additional condition, a detail item that we overlooked, that all parking areas be lined with concrete curbing. Under the City Council section — of the Staff Report, the proposed motion is left out and you just have the conditions there but that should read that should the Council wish to approve the subdivision that they approve it subject to the 7 conditions that are on _ page 7. Councilman Johnson: On number 7 should we say all outdoor parking areas since L they have an indoor parking area and you don't need to put concrete curb in the basement? I like this. I like the looks of this and everything else. I wish all of our apartment complexes were as nice as this. r — Councilman Boyt: There was a comment raised at the Planning Commission about the fire protection and you indicated you are working with the Fire Marshall on that. Following what we just heard about the Eagan community, assure me L that we're not going to go through that. Tom Zumwalde: I wish I could. I'm not sure what happened down at Eagan. It was a large complex and apparently something went ary out there. This _ — building, our intent is not to install sprinklers and that is fairly typical in most apartment buildings. Typically the high rises are but not the 3 story. It is however, has fire walls, fire partitions, it has all the L Mmi elements required to make it a very safe building. Again, I'm not sure what happened out in Eagan. I hope nothing like that happens here. What I've _ heard on the news someone was barbequing. 1._ L 47 L 200 ( - City Council Meeting - June 15, 1987 Mayor Hamilton: It was a barbeque that tipped over on a balcony on the third floor and our ordinance already prohibits barbeques on apartment balconies. Councilman Boyt: I don't know that we're real well prepared to fight a fire that's very high and I'm concerned. We're building this with a wood frame and — I watched one burn down when it was in construction and they go up real fast. Mayor Hamilton: Jim Chaffee who is our Fire Marshall could probably respond 1[ to your concern. — Jim Chaffee: We have discussed this issue, or at least I've discussed this IF issue with the Fire Chief and Fire Inspector and we are considering and I — don't know if we brought this up but requiring sand piping which would really help us out in any kind of fire. It would prevent any situation like happened in Eagan and probably would not allow barbeques and charcoal grills on the -- balcony in this case. We are very concerned about that issue to make it as safe as possible. Councilman Boyt: My other question is the 60 foot space loss for retail. Brad, since you're involved with both ends of this, maybe you can tell me a little about the consideration of that lost retail space. Brad Johnson: You guys remember what the overall downtown plan was and we were going to extend the retail in a long line up and down the city. In the process we discovered one, that there may not be an immediate market for that _ type of space in that one location and in addition to that, we also needed to increase the amount of increments that we could generate. In other words, build bigger buildings. So we put the apartment building in. The apartment building was originally supposed to be 40 units so the site plan we're working — on currently and brought to the HRA on Thursday is to change the plan and make use of now the beautiful clock you just approved will be located right here as an entrance into the whole town. The apartment itself looks like the clock. ILSo as you come into the community you'll have that and actually have a little — courtyard located right in here. What they were concerned about is we would not be able to set this retail strip all the way down the street. We will not _ L be doing that because that's not in the plan currently. Instead we're going to put a two story, what we'll call a medical arts building in there which we were contacted by Dr. McCullum who is at Chanhassen Clinic and they are going I_ to move their facility there if we can get the whole transactions put — together. Then we have a daycare center going in here that we will be showing before you here in the next two weeks that will go in this location and we're excited about all of this because it's a start doing the downtown and maybe 1_ hopefully getting out of that side of the street. That's the current plan. Councilman Boyt: What are we going to do with this variance problem? I know I talked to Barbara earlier today. I'm not sure that I got the answer down — quite right as to the difficulty with rezoning this central business district but that's the third issue and I guess I would like to hear a quick synopsis Barb on how we're going to handle this. _ LI Barbara Dacy: Your question is, whether or not the entire site can be rezoned to the central busines district up to Chan View. We did not recommend that to _ I- 48 City Council Meeting - June 15, 1987 the applicant because rezoningthe F property to central business district also includes other commercial uses. If, for some reason, the multiple family project were to fall through, you would have commercial uses located directly onto Chan View, directly across from the residential development. Other avenues that were discussed with the applicant were a zoning ordinance amendment to allow high density district around 23 units per acre and the final option was the PUD application allowing the Council a little more — leverage in negotiating with the applicant as to establishing things like pedestrian connections, allowing the project with the tax increment district and requiring additional landscaping. That was why the rezoning issue was • not.. . _ Councilman Geeing: I'm ready to approve this but I have to put this in because the neighbors have called me in this area. I live within two blocks of this area and there has boon some discussion and most of them have appeared here before the Planning Commission. I think the various comments were that it's just too much density for our area and they would have liked to have seen a 48 or 50 unit apartment building here. I want to throw that in as a plug for the people but I personally approve of it. I think we need the 1 and 2 bedroom units in the city and I'm all in favor. I do have to ask one — question. Whether or not this unit was projected in our downtown redevelopment district for 60 units? Don Ashworth: Yes. I — / Mayor Hamilton: I just would say that I live in the apartments across the street from this on Chan View and those people there are anxious to see it — built because they would like to move into it so I think it's a really nice project and I would like to see it move ahead. Councilman Horn moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve the PUD application for the 60 unit apartment complex located on the south side of Chan View with the following conditions: l_ 1. A detailed utility plan showing water, sewer and storm sewer connections, as well as fire hydrant locations shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. r: 2. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted detailing additional screening along the south, west and east property lines prior to 1.... building permit issuance.NNW 3. A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in conjunction with the development plans for the retail projects to be developed to — the south and east of this parcel. 4. Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submitted for Planning [ Commission and City Council final review prior to building permit issuance. L5. Removal of existing single family residence including the proper L — L P Pe demolition procedures. 49 L _ L 4.,“ d6`) City Council Meeting - June 15, 1987 _ r 6. Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. 7. All outside parking areas shall be lined with concrete curbing. All voted in favor except Mayor Hamilton who abstained and motion carried. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PRIVATE STABLE, 3530 HIGHWAY 7, DAVID OBEE. Jo Ann Olsen: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for a private stable in the RSF district. It is going to be limited to two horses. — Staff is recommending approval. We feel that the site is screened from all surrounding properties. Is large enough for two horses and it is reviewed annually for the horse permit so any problems with it can be taken care of. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions set forth. Councilman Horn: What's the size of the stable? Jo Ann Olsen: There are two proposed sizes but the applicant has stated that he decided he isn't going to build any building right now if it's going to be a problem. Councilman Geving: I read all the comments from the Planning Commission like the rest of you but I really wonder what the intent of Mr. Obee is. He's talking about a very large building then we find out he owns a lot of equipment and so forth. Whether or not the stabling of these two horses is really the issue. I don't mind him having two horses in that area. It's a stable permit request. I have seen the letters and comments from the neighbors but I'm most concerned about what's going to go in that building that he's proposing. I wonder what his motive is and question that. Other than that, I don't know how we can issue a stable permit just to put horses in. I don't know how that works with Mr. Headla. Jo Ann Olsen: There is an existing building that he would b: using for the stable instead of constructing a new one. Councilman Geving: So in fact, if he had the horses he could move them in and use than if he had the permit? I have no other comments. Councilman Johnson: I went out and looked at the site and noticed there are existing stables to the west and pretty well treed area. For two horse and limited use of the building in there for just horse stables and stuff associated with that, I don't have a problem with this. Bill Schmid: I own property directly west of Mr. Obee's proposed site. A — few years ago a few of the present Council members were here at that time and there was a permit granted to a Mr. James Frizzell on the west side of me for two horses. Jim keeps the place very neat. Very clean. Very tidy. Regardless of all that, when it rains, it smells. You can't get around it. It's a pasture. Now there are horses on the east side and I'm very much opposed to it 100%. There are 73 lots and I believe you have a letter from _ L 50 City Council Meeting - April 25, 1988 /gir /len1 ,,( Wing and couldn't get a hold of him, I didn't sense that there was an overwhelming need to get this filled quickly. I'm disappointed that we're not interviewing any of these candidates. I'm disappointed that we have not seen any of the objectives the Public Safety Commission had in filling these positions. I don't know if they took geography into account. All I've got, and I've said this every time, I think that we start people off the wrong way on commissions when the council does not interview them. I think that this was an opportunity in which we could have begun working out this system of having objectives that the Council and the Commissions agreed would be followed when people were sought and we didn't do it. It's not to say that these people aren't good people and worthy of being on the Commission. It's just, I don't see why we're doing it this way. That's all I've got. Mayor Hamilton: Just to comment, we had ten candidates and all excellent people. It was not an easy task to select them. We looked at everything we could think of into consideration. Councilman Boyt: Are we finally done with this way of appointing people? Mayor Hamilton: I don't know. We've talked to the staff about what we want to do and I guess it's up to them to come back and start changing things. — Councilman Horn: It was going to come back as an item and I haven't seen it yet. 1!/ RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR THE PROPOSED HOUSING PLAN. Resolution #88-39: Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Horn seconded to {1 approve the resolution establishing June 13, 1988 as the public hearing date for the proposed housing plan. All voted in favor and motion carried. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: TH 5 UPDATE, COUNCILMAN HORN. Councilman Horn: The bottom line is, by 1990 we're going to have a four lane highway up to Park Avenue in the Industrial Park which is a change and that's planned and scheduled by MnDot. Mayor Hamilton: We got a bill passed and we got some funds. COMPOSTING FACILITY IN CHASKA, COUNCILMAN JOHNSON AND COUNCILMAN GEVING. Councilman G ving: I think we ought to forget about this tonight Jay. Councilman Johnson: Yes, we're all very tired. Unless everybody has digested this huge thing. Basically there's an Environmental Assessment Worksheet that's out for the Chaska, proposed composting facility in Chaska. If we want — to comment on it, it has be to by next Wednesday. The necessity of commenting on it is we don't have to. We're not required to comment one way or the other. I've recommended that, in fact I've already sent my personal comments which I've attached here, have been sent in and I believe that the EAW provided is in many cases almost lip sevice to the environmental issues involved. There are 81 /71-/ArA•iep4 416- 3 CITY OF CHANHASSEN HOUSING REVENUE BOND PROGRAM CHANHASSEN HERITAGE SQUARE PROJECT HERITAGE SQUARE INVESTORS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP MAY 1988 • Prepared By: LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy O'Brien & Drawz, a Professional Association 2000 First Bank Place West — Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612)333-0543 CHANHASSEN HERITAGE SQUARE PROJECT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (Act) , the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota (City) has been authorized to develop, plan and adminis- ter programs for making construction and permanent financing loans for multi- family housing dev_lopments located within its boundaries, under the circum- stances and within the limitations set forth in the Act. Section 462C.05, Subdivision 2 of the Act provides that a multi-family housing project (Project) may consist of a development in which at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to persons and families with adjusted gross income not in excess of 80 percent of the median family income of the metropolitan area. In creating its multi-family housing finance program (Program) , the City has found and determined that the preservation and enhancement of the high quality of life in Chanhassen is dependent upon the maintenance and provision of adequate, decent, safe and sanitary housing stock; and that encouraging the provision of such housing is a public purpose and will benefit the citizens of Chanhassen; that a need exists within Chanhassen to provide in a timely fashion additional and affordable housing for persons residing and expected to reside in the City; that a need exists for mortgage credit to be made avail- - able for the new construction of additional multi-family housing. The proposed Project will be constructed by Heritage Square Investors Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (Developer) . The Project will consist of 60 residential units and will be constructed at the intersec- tion of Great Plains Boulevard and Chan View Street in Chanhassen. The units are expected to be available for occupancy in mid-1989. The City believes that the Project will assist it in addressing its housing needs by generally increasing the supply of rental housing available to low and moderate income persons. The City also believes, based on the representations of the Developer, that the Project is not economically feas- ible and would not have been constructed without housing revenue bond funds available for permanent financing. The Project will be funded through the issuance of City of Chanhassen housing revenue bonds, Chanhassen Heritage Square Project, Series 1988 (Bonds) . The Bonds will be secured by a mortgage on the Project. The City, in establishing the Program, has considered generally available information regarding conditions in the housing industry and the information contained in the City's Housing Plan, including particularly (i) the availa- bility and affordability of other government housing programs; (ii) the availability and affordability of private market financing for multifamily housing units; (iii) an analysis of the population; (iv) the recent housing trends and future housing needs of the City; and (v) an analysis of how the Program will meet the needs of elderly and physically handicapped persons residing and expected to reside in the City. The City, in adopting the Program, has further considered (i) the amount, timing and sale of the Bonds to finance the Program, fund the appropriate reserves and pay the cost of issuance; (ii) the method of monitoring and 1 implementation of the Program to ensure compliance with the City's Housing Plan and its objectives; (iii) the method of administering, servicing, and supervising the Program; (iv) the cost to the City, including future adminis- trative expenses; (v) the restrictions on the multifamily development to be financed under the Program; and (vi) certain other limitations. The C.'. .y, in adopting the Program, considered the potential financing impact of Bond issuance on affected public agencies. In addition, the City reviewed the method of marketing the Program. Such review examined the equal opportunity for participation by (i) minorities; (ii) households with incomes at the lower end of the range that can be served by the Program; (iii) house- holds displaced by public and private actions; and (iv) accessibility to the handicapped. The Project will be constructed pursuant to Section 462C.05, subd. 2 of the Act. Subsection A. Definitions. The following terms used in the Program have the following meanings, — respectively: 1) "Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as currently in effect and as the same may be amended from time to time. 2) "Agency" means the Minnesota housing finance agency, or any successor to its functions. 3) "Bonds" means the housing revenue bonds to be issued by the City to finance the Program and includes any and all other obligations payable as provided hereunder. 4) "City" means the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. 5) "Developer" means Heritage Square Investors Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership. 6) "Housing Plan" means the City of Chanhassen's housing plan prepared pursuant to Section 462C.03 of the Act. 7) "Housing Unit" means any one of the apartment units located in the Project, occupied by one person or family, and containing complete living facilities. 8) "Land" means the real property upon which the Project is situated. 9) "Program" means the program for the financing of the Project pursuant to the Act. 10) "Project" means the 60-unit multi-family development. 2 Subsection B. Program for Financing the Project. The City hereby establishes a Program to make a loan for the permanent mortgage financing for the Project. In establishing and carrying out the Program, the City may exercise, within its corporate limits, any of the powers the Agency is authorized to exercise under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462A. The City will hire no additional staff for the administration of the Program. The City will, however, incur certain costs for administration including an estimated $1,000 for preparation of reports. The City will select a trustee for the Program and the bondholders which is experienced in trust management and has a large corporate trust portfolio. The trustee will administer and maintain the Bonds sold to finance the Program. The city council hereby authorizes and directs the city manager to monitor all negotiations between the various parties taking part in the Program to ensure that the documents of the Program are consistent with the City's Housing Plan and the requirements of the City as set forth in this Program. Prior to the adoption of the resolution authorizing the sale of Bonds to finance the Program, the city manager shall report to the city council his findings as to the consistency of the documents regarding the Project with the Housing Plan and the policies of the City contained in this Program. It is contemplated that the Bonds shall bear interest at a variable rate per annum as set forth in the Program documents. The Bonds will not be ` general obligation bonds of the City, but are expected to be paid from reven- ues and properties pledged to the payment thereof, which includes a mortgage on the Project. Subsection C. Local Contributions to the Program. — It is not contemplated that any additional public financing or contribu- tions will be needed for the completion of the Project, or for the operation of the Program, other than the Bond issue described above, except that the City may use tax increment funds generated by the development to assist the Project. Subsection D. Standards and Requirements Relating to the Financing of the Project Pursuant to the Program. The following standards and requirements shall apply with respect to the operation of the Project by the Developer pursuant to this Program: 1) Substantially all of the proceeds of the sale of the issue of Bonds will be used to provide funds for the permanent financing of the Project, which will include a total of 60 residential units. The proceeds of the Bonds will be made available to the Developer pursuant to the terms of the Bond offering, which may include certain covenants to be entered into between the City and the Developer. 3 2) The Developer or owner or the Project will not arbitrarily reject an application from a proposed tenant because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, or status with regard to public assist- ance or disability. 3) Each Housing Unit within the Project must be used primarily for residential. purprses. 4) No Housing Unit may be in violation of applicable zoning ordinances or other land use regulations, including any urban renewal plan or development district plan, and including the state building code as set forth under Minnesota Statutes, Section 16.83, et seq. Subsection E. Evidence of Compliance. The City may require from the Developer or such other persons deemed necessary at or before the issuance of the Bonds, evidence satisfactory to the City of the ability and intention of the Developer to complete the Project, and evidence satisfactory to the City of compliance with the standards and — requirements for the making of the financing established by the City, as set forth herein; and in connection therewith, the City or its representatives may inspect the relevant books and records of the Developer in order to confirm such ability, intention and compliance. In addition, the City may periodic- ally require certification from either the Developer or such other persons deemed necessary concerning compliance with various aspects of the Program. Subsection F. Issuance of Bonds. To finance the Program authorized by this section, the City may, by resolution, authorize, issue and sell housing revenue Bonds, in an aggregate principal amount presently estimated not to exceed $3,000,000, pursuant to the Act. In issuing the Bonds, the City may exercise, within its corporate limits of the City, any of the powers the Agency is authorized to exercise under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462A, without limitation under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475. — Subsection G. Severability. The provisions of the Program are severable and if any provisions, sentences, clauses or paragraphs are held unconstitutional, contrary to statute, exceeding the authority of the City or otherwise illegal or -` inoperative by any court of competent jurisdiction, the decision of such court shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions of the Program. Subsection H. Amendment. The City shall not amend the Program to the detriment of the holders of the Bonds while such Bonds as are authorized herein are outstanding. C6:0511NH01.E40 — HOUSING PLAN FOR CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA May 1988 Prepared By: LeFevere, Lefler, Kennedy, O'Brien & Drawz a Professional Association 2000 First Bank Place West Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612)333-0543 Table of Contents Section I. INTRODUCTION AND INVENTORY 1 — 1.1. Housing Availability 1 A. Number and Type of Housing Units 1 B. Tenure I ` C. Cost of Housing I 1.2. Housing Quality 2 A. Overcrowding 2 B. Age of Housing 2 C. Housing Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities 3 _ Section II. ANALYSIS 3 2. 1. Housing Availability 3 2.2. Housing Quality 4 — Section III. POLICY PLAN 4 3. 1. Housing Availability 5 A. Housing for All Ages 5 B. Open Housing 6 C. Development Review Process 6 D. Land Use Regulations 6 _ E. Special Land Use and Zoning Provisions 7 F. Housing Types Offered 7 G. Tax Increment Financing and Housing Revenue Bonds 9 3.2 Using Quality 8 A. Compatible Development 8 B. Protection of Natural Resources 8 C. Providing Community Services 8 D. Pollution 9 E. Multiple Family and Attached Single Family Housing 9 Section IV. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM 10 — 4. 1. Housing Objectives 10 4.2. Affordable Housing 10 4.3. Land Use 11 List of Figures Figure 1 Housing Units by Housing Type 1 Figure 2 Market Value of Single Family Units 2 Figure 3 Average Cost of Single Family Housing 2 Figure 4 Age of Housing Units 3 Section 1. INTRODUCTION AND INVENTORY. This Housing Plan combines information from the 1988 amendments to the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan and the U.S. Census of the Population for 1980 and meets the requirements for a Housing Plan specified in Minnesota Statutes, — Section 462C.03. This Titan i-; prepared and s0-mi.tte4 fo- •eviPw by the appro- priate governmental bodies in fulfillment of the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C. The purpose of the housing inventory is to examine the status of housing in Chanhassen. In order to do this, it is necessary to focus on the various elements which affect housing for residents of the City. Some of the factors to be examined in the inventory include the kind, cost, age, and condition of the housing stock. 1. 1. HOUSING AVAILABILITY. A. Number and Type of Housing Units. — In Chanhassen there were 2944 housing units in 1986. Although the majority of these were single family detached houses, a number of other types _ of housing were also represented in the City's stock. Figure 1 — 1986 Housing Units by Type No. Single Family Detached 2168 74.0 Farms 69 2.0 Duplexes 144 5.0 Townhouses 188 6.0 — Multi-family 375 13.0 Total 2944 100.00 B. Tenure. Owner-occupied housing prevails in Chanhassen. Of all housing units, 75% were owner-occupied in 1980. C. Cost of Housing. The cost of housing in Chanhassen represents a significant proportion of the income of persons residing in the City. This is particularly true for households occupying rental housing. 1 _ Figure 2 Estimated Market Value of Single Family Housing Units, 1980 Housing Unit Value Percentage Less than $39,999 2.9 $40,000 - 49,999 4. 1 $50,000 - 59,999 36.8 $60,000 - 99,999 25.9 $100,000 - 149,999 20.9 More than $150,000 9.4 The cost of housing in Chanhassen may also be illustrated by the cost of new construction. The following figures are the average cost of a single-family detached house within the City for a recent six-year period: Figure 3 Average Cost of Single-Family Detached Housing Year Cost 1981 $107,591 1982 100,789 1983 86,391 1984 85,052 1985 78,614 -• 1986 92,491 1.2. HOUSING QUALITY. A. Overcrowding. A housing unit is considered to be overcrowded if there is more than one person per room. Out of 2075 occupied housing units in Chanhassen in 1980, only 41 or two percent were considered to be overcrowded. B. Age of Housing. Chanhassen's housing stock spans a large age range, with a considerable -- concentration among units constructed since 1960. This is significant since the age of housing is generally related to the upkeep needed to maintain the unit in good condition. 2 Figure 4 Age of Housing Units Year Built No. — 1939 or before 299 11.0 1940 - 1959 533 19.0 _ 1960 - 1969 609 22.0 1970 - 1979 854 31.0 1980 - 1985 446 16.0 Total 2741 100.00 C. Housing Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities. Chanhassen has very few housing units which lack complete and exclusive plumbing facilities. Of all units in Chanhassen, only 1.0% lack such facili- — ties. Section II. ANALYSIS. The purpose of this portion of the Housing Plan is to examine present and future issues which face the City in attempting to provide adequate housing opportunities for its present and future residents. In order to do this, it is necessary to focus on the primary factors which affect the availability and quality of housing. 2.1. Housing Availability. — In Chanhassen, as well as elsewhere in the metropolitan area and through- out the state, it is has become difficult to ensure the availability of hous- ing. Those who are most severely affected by high housing costs are those with low or moderate incomes. Families and individuals in these groups often live in substandard housing or spend a disproportionate percentage of their income on housing. Although some persons in these groups receive public — assistance, many are simply employed in areas of the economy in which wage scales are relatively low. Because Chanhassen has only a limited influence on the supply and cost of housing, it needs to make its efforts to meet housing needs more effective. There are many factors beyond the control of the City which have a great effect on the supply and cost of housing. Market forces, including mortgage interest rates and the availability of mortgage loans, generally have far more influence on who can purchase housing than do actions of the City. Also, the cost of land, labor and materials has increased over time and the effect of — local public policy designed to provide low and moderate or lower-middle income housing has been lessened. 3 — However, some actions of the City can have an effect on housing costs. Development regulations which are designed to provide orderly municipal growth can increase housing costs, although they represent only a small portion of the total monthly cost to the homeowner. Nonetheless, the City should contin- - ue to be conscious of the impact its actions have on the cost of housing and attempt to implement policies which minimize the cost without abandoning the legitimate role the City needs to play in r^_gulating development. Land use regulations which allow prompt review of proposed developments and which do not require the submission of unnecessary data or applications should be encouraged. The City should continue to avail itself of the resources of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. The City should also plan to use tax increment financing to assist in the construction of multifamily rental housing for low and moderate income families. 2.2. Housing Quality. The physical condition of housing in Chanhassen is generally good. A 1979 survey of Chanhassen indicated that 95 percent of the residential struc- tures were in sound structural condition. Visual observation suggests that there has been no widespread deterioration in the quality of housing in Chanhassen. Maintenance of housing quality in Chanhassen will undoubtedly require greater attention over the long run. With a high percentage of its housing having been constructed within the past 25 years, Chanhassen does not yet face the task of maintaining a large stock of aging housing. In the future Chanhassen's housing stock will begin to show signs of aging. As housing ages, more emphasis must be placed on maintenance to prevent deterioration. In order to ensure housing quality in the City, older housing units must be kept in compliance with housing standards. Unfortunately, the enforcement of these standards through the use of building codes and ordinances is not an easy task. In many instances, those who live in housing units which do not meet existing housing codes and ordinances have modest incomes. Individuals with modest incomes are generally unable to afford costly household repairs and housing deterioration is sometimes difficult to avoid. Continued attention will also need to be given to prevention and mitigation of the negative effects which commercial and industrial development can have on the residential environment. The increased traffic congestion, noise and pollution which often accompany more diverse and concentrated development will need to be carefully monitored. Section III. POLICY PLAN. The purpose of the Housing Policy Plan is to describe the course of action Chanhassen will take to ensure the availability of quality housing to those who reside and those who seek to reside in the City. The Policy Plan 4 approaches housing in a comprehensive manner. Provisions within the Plan will include ones for existing housing development and the conservation of existing neighborhoods. The Policy Plan will also encourage construction of modest — cost housing along with market rate housing. In addition, the Plan will discuss provisions for protecting the natural environment from poorly designed housing developments. The Policy Plan is designed to implement the housing — goals articulated by the Metropolitan Council for all communities within the seven-county metropolitan area. 3.1. HOUSING AVAILABILITY. GOAL: To expand housing opportunities for all persons who are or wish to be part of the community, including the promotion of lower cost housing and the encouragement and development of housing for low and moderate income families and senior citizens. A. Housing for All Ages. Housing in Chanhassen is most readily available to middle-aged house- holds. Since persons between the ages of 35 and 64 generally have higher incomes than those who are younger or older, they are the portion of the — population which is most likely to find housing to be affordable. Younger and older persons with lower incomes have fewer opportunities for housing in the City. One way to provide housing for all age groups is to encourage construc- tion of housing types which suit particular needs. This is especially true with regard to senior citizens. Senior citizens often cannot continue to — maintain their homes because of decreased physical abilities. A type of housing which would lessen maintenance burdens, such as apartments, condo- miniums, townhouses or patio homes, would be more suited to the needs and abilities of this age group. Inclusion of services such as congregate dining, transportation and shopping in such housing can further address the needs of older senior citizens. Many persons over the age of 50 are "empty-nesters" whose children have grown up and moved out of the house. A house that was large enough to raise a family is often too big for the remaining couple or individual. By encourag- ing older couples and individuals to move into housing that is more suited to their needs, existing single family homes become available for purchase by younger families with children who require more space. Existing homes also tend to be less costly than comparably-sized newly built houses and are more easily afforded by younger families. An additional benefit of such housing turnover may be better maintenance of the stock of older housing. Unusually long tenure in a home may lead to deferred maintenance since occupants are most likely to make improvements to their dwelling during the first few years of occupancy. The provisions of adequate support services for older citizens, such as transportation, health and social services, is an important additional contri- bution the City can make to the living environment of this age group. 5 — POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will promote housing options to meet the particular housing needs of all age groups and more efficiently use the City's housing stock. B. Open Housing. Discrimination on the basis of color or national origin can defeat the City's efforts to provide housing for all persons. The City of Chanhassen does not condone discriminatory housing practices and believes that housing must be open to families and individuals without regard to race, religion, sex, economic status, or cultural or ethnic background. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen supports a policy of non-discrimination in the sale or rental of housing. C. Development Review Process. _ In order to ensure the development of quality housing in Chanhassen, it is necessary to subject development proposals to City review. While an attempt is made to complete this process is quickly as possible, a small amount of delay is inevitable. Under some circumstances the delay can be considerable, especially when other public agencies also must also review a proposal. Short delays in the review process will not substantially affect the cost of housing. However, when long delays take place, the developer can incur increased carrying costs which are ultimately passed on to the homeowner. To ensure quality housing while at the same time not causing long delays, the City must endeavor to ensure that its review process is efficient. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will discourage unnecessary delays in reviewing housing development proposals by streamlining the process to make development review more efficient. D. Land Use Regulations. Land use regulations are among the most important tools available to the City in guiding housing development. Adequate land use controls are necessary for providing orderly municipal growth, protecting the natural environment, insulating communities from adverse developments and providing for the health and safety of the residents. If land use regulations go beyond these pur- poses, the type and cost of housing in Chanhassen can be affected. One of the most important effects of land use regulations on the cost and availability of housing is in regard to the design standards required by the City' s ordinances. Large minimum lot size and generous setbacks tend to push up the cost of housing. While lowering these factors does not always result in lowering the cost of housing, it has a general tendency to do so. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen supports development and implementation of land use regulations which allow the private sector to provide housing which is affordable to a broad spectrum of persons in the community. 6 E. Special Land Use and Zoning Provisions. To encourage the development of moderately priced housing in Chanhassen,the City should utilize flexible land use and zoning standards. Innovative planning approaches, such as the planned unit development and zero lot line techniques, can reduce housing costs while at the same time provide for better — use of land, increased protection of natural resources, and a higher level of supporting community services. The City should not restrict itself to traditional land use and zoning — approaches for the remaining parcels of undeveloped land in the City. When possible, land use and zoning regulations should be designed to fit character- istics of land and surrounding development, while at the same time meeting the — needs of individual developments. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will encourage innovative zoning and land use approaches to encourage the development of modest cost housing. F. Housing Types Offered. It is not surprising that a majority of families and individuals in Chanhassen prefer single family detached housing. However, the preference for this type of housing varies among age groups. Younger and older persons — generally have less desire to reside in single family homes than do middle aged families. In addition, many families and individuals are unable to afford the type of housing in which they would prefer to live. The demand for multi-family and attached single housing is likely to grow because such housing types offer the potential for savings in construction costs, utility costs and energy usage. The City should encourage the development of multiple family and attached single family housing units in a variety of cost ranges to meet the housing — needs of all groups. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will support the construction of multiple — family and attached single family housing units and not restrict development to detached single family housing. G. Tax Increment Financing and Housing Revenue Bonds. With the decline in federal housing subsidies, local governments have had to become more involved in providing housing which is affordable to low and moderate income people. Two tools which have proven useful to cities are tax increment financing and housing revenue bonds. Although in some instances federal tax law changes enacted in 1986 have lessened the attractiveness of — these tools, they are still of great importance. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will consider participation in the issuance of tax increment bonds and housing revenue bonds in appropriate cases in order to increase the supply of affordable housing. 7 — 3.2. HOUSING QUALITY. GOAL: To maintain through careful planning, the character and condition of existing neighborhoods and the important housing resources they contain. A. Compatible Development. Commercial and industrial structures located in or close to residential areas can detract from the aesthetics of residential neighborhoods because their scale and design often are inconsistent with housing. In addition, public facilities, transportation utilization and environmental quality standards differ significantly in industrial and commercial developments. In instances where topography, building forms and landscaping permit, commercial and industrial development can exist near residential areas. However, it is necessary to protect the character of existing neighborhoods from the negative effects of incompatible developments. In instances where the impact of these developments is harmful to adjacent residential areas, it is necessary to separate and buffer neighborhoods from these developments. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will ensure that industrial and commer- cial development is located and designed so as to be compatible with housing in existing and planned residential areas. B. Protection of Natural Resources. Chanhassen is fortunate to enjoy the benefit of numerous natural ameni- ties. In some instances, however, development has encroached upon these resources in a manner that threatens them. This process results in diminish- ing the aesthetic value of these resources to the City as a whole and also inhibits the natural drainage, water retention, and recreational functions of these areas. Housing development in the City can and should exist in harmony with the natural environment rather than work against it. Provisions should be made to ensure protection of these natural tracts of land from encroachment. -- POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will restrict housing development on wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes and other natural areas which perform important environmental functions or provide aesthetic resources. C. Providing Community Services. Historically, housing development in Chanhassen has occurred on a parcel- by-parcel basis. The construction of housing has sometimes not been timed to coincide with the installation of adequate public facilities. When housing is developed in this matter, residents are inconvenienced and are forced to pay higher prices for public facilities when they are eventually installed. This problem is especially prevalent in communities such as Chanhassen in which the supply of available land is relatively large. The City's Comprehen- 8 sive Plan allocates 1578 acres to residential growth during the period 1985-2000. There is a strong temptation for development to "leap-frog" beyond the limits of current development to outlying parcels. Such land may be marginally less expensive but the long run costs, both public and private, are usually greater than where development occurs in an orderly and compact fashion. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will encourage residential development to coincide with the development of urban facilities and services. D. Pollution. The quality of the residential environment in Chanhassen can be adversely affected by pollution. Air and noise pollution from traffic along arterials diminish the quality of life for those who live near these roadways. As Chanhassen attracts more diverse development, increases in all types of pollution may occur in residential areas abutting commercial and industrial development. In these residential areas it will become necessary to provide adequate buffering and pollution abatement measures to protect residents from more intensive development. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will encourage steps to protect residen- _ tial areas from adverse environmental impacts of air, noise, dust and odor pollution. E. Multiple Family and Attached Single Family Housing. Single family attached and multiple family housing developments are sometimes located on the fringes of commercial and industrial areas. High _ density housing built in these areas can be a desirable place to live. If located in close proximity to shopping, employment and transportation facili- ties, residents will be provided with a high level of urban services. However, there are problems associated with locating housing in these areas. In some instances, higher density housing is used exclusively to buffer more intensive land uses from single family housing. Also, industrial and commercial centers often produce nuisances such as congested roadways, noise and air pollution. Some land near commercial and industrial uses is simply not suitable for residential development. _ It should be remembered that housing of all types should be in areas amenable to residential living. Apartments and townhouses should be discour- aged in areas not suitable for residential development and encouraged in areas — where they will not be subject to adverse conditions. POLICY: The City of Chanhassen will discourage higher density housing in areas not suitable for residential development due to such factors as lack of shopping, employment and transportation, or exposure to adverse conditions such as air or noise pollution. 9 _ Section IV. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM. The purpose of the Housing Implementation Program is to identify steps the City will take to implement the Housing Policy Plan. To be effective, the Housing Implementation Program will include a wide range of integrated func- tions and activities in which the City will be involved. These functions will include developing housing programs, designing development regulations, imple- menting administrative procedures, and establishing adequate monitoring systems to evaluate the success or failure of housing programs. The Housing Implementation Program will emphasize maintaining present housing conditions and expanding housing to those in all income groups. 4. 1. Housing Objectives. Housing activities outlined in the Policy Plan are designed to ensure the availability of quality housing to all those who live in or seek to live in Chanhassen. Although the Policy Plan enumerates the course of action the City will take to achieve housing goals, the City must determine the anticipated or desired result these actions will produce. As Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan makes clear, the City can expect to experience an increase in both persons and households through the year 2000 and beyond. The number of households is related to the number of housing units which will be needed while the number of persons per household gives a rough indication of the type and mix of housing which will be demanded. There is no way to determine future population with certainty, but the City's Comprehensive Plan projects that there will be 3285 new households in Chanhassen by the year 2000 compared to the number in 1985. The Metropolitan Council uses the more modest estimate of 1625 new households in the City during that period. Whatever assumptions are made, it is evident that there will be a contin- uing demand for housing in Chanhassen. It should also be remembered that the above figures do not include the number of units which must be replaced because of loss to dilapidation, redevelopment, or natural disasters. While the private market will provide a majority of these units, City participation will be required to ensure that units needed by persons on the lower end of the economic spectrum are also constructed. 4.2. Affordable Housing. The City's opportunities to encourage the development of housing afford- able to those of low and moderate income have been severely limited by reduc- tions in federal funding. The City will continue to investigate federal programs and apply them when feasible and appropriate. At present, the major tools available to the City to promote affordable housing are tax increment financing and housing revenue bonds. The City will make use of these financing mechanisms to assist the construction of housing for persons of low and moderate income. 10 Chanhassen should also continue to explore opportunities to make avail- able to its residents the benefits of programs offered by the federal govern- ment through HUD and by the state of Minnesota through MHFA. These include a _ variety of grant, loan and assistance programs which could be useful in achieving the City's goal of providing affordable housing for all. 4.3. Land Use. Land use and zoning regulations are among the primary tools Chanhassen can use to guide housing development. These regulations must be designed to protect the health, safety and welfare of existing residents without excluding any group because of age or income. To encourage an adequate supply and diversity of housing in Chanhassen, the City's land use regulations, especially its zoning ordinance and subdivi- sion controls, should be reviewed and updated to ensure flexibility in regul- ating development. Provision should be made in Chanhassen's zoning ordinance to encourage innovative housing types. C5:051IHPO1.E40 11 4 C I �T v O I�C P.C. DATE: June 1 , 1988 T C.C. :: L:: ' 1988 CASE 3 , ZOA 88-7, Rezone 88-3 Prepared by: Dacy/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: 1) Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Permit Garden Centers as a Conditional Use in the BH District (Section 20-7_4) 2 ) Land Use Plan Amendment to Redesignate 1. 7 Acres of — I--• Industrial to Commercial z 3 ) Rezoning to Rezone 1 . 7 Acres of IOP, Industrial Office — Q Park to BH, Business Highway U LOCATION: North of and adjacent to West 78th Street, just east of ^ the Dakota Avenue/TH 5 intersection :-: -, -.,;, i;tr;tof Q APPLICANT: Jay Kronick ------ 1609 Marshall Avenue Rockville, Maryland 20851 - - -- — PRESENT ZONING: BH, Business Highway and IOP, Industrial Office Park District ACREAGE: 3 .7 acres DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- R-12; multiple family & Eden Prairie S- BH; vacant commercial 41 , E- IOP; Redmond Products W- BH; Chanhassen Office Building W '.._. WATER AND SEWER: Available to site PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site is flat and contains a wetland. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial and Industrial ...AW' Q___,, . 4_••woo, 1.____-71 0 0 litiatill fa 1' r7. si..te.iErr firrf,.k.. k N RS - , r ., 11� 7200)4qtrio , '�.. .-� r=- \ / • 0 U( . 730C- _ 'fig• ■ MO & - . H 2 _ . , : iii �/'��...„,,, - 7400 g :,. ._ is • li I 41.4 -1 _ ..oo = 7500 -li 4., • ... -- - _ , -.1 ons.:11:1111P OW IF ImiN -: : N.,\O *1- :. ' , MIN z' Trroo (nE illgil IT. 2N *IF Fli f'.- _./ • IN17l IN�so hp _sIIlI'11 '_'•IVilnIM-1 inv,i nrri : --- . iiiie--..44,- 2 _ 9* 7700 Ah.34I•i111111111111 - ` _ r �I��h x:III 111.�/ il im 1q w. TH sT 3 ..,, 5M 7800 I -1:2 ta_-r- R ,� ' w � 3tulikl - ....will/ �� :i=/ 11Prll" � / ��11ii ► OP 7900 - M i 0did R =� V `` 8000 (WAY - _`` t. - ;. , : .r wI�1�p•'�_ • Tirar70.1 ta leits% I - 0 co 0 to lTeis.;� . ��v4: Y��i • ;� — CrCAK0 AN ��� RSF 4 di c f'l c?)3 mi, t vim 1144t1111v,....* INNEN =� � 8300 t CIRCLE -.44r4 R/CE A/ 'SH LAKE �' — 3T. Ili ./.. .� — 8600 - Mr. Jay Kronick June 1 , 1988 Page 2 BACKGROUND The applicant petitioned the city in September , 1987 , to amend the Rural Residential District to allow garden centers as a con- - ditional use. The City Council denied the application; however, the Council encouraged the applicant to locate elsewhere in Chanhassen. During the zoning ordinance amendment review pro- cess , the Planning Commission and City Council determined that a garden center would be better located in an urban commercial district rather than a rural district. ANALYSIS ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT It is proposed that Section 20-714, Conditional Uses in the BH District be amended to allow garden centers as a conditional use. In reviewing zoning ordinance amendments, the proposed use should be reviewed as to its compatibility with the intent of the district as well as other uses permitted in the district. The intent of the BH district is to provide for highway oriented commercial development restricted to a low building profile. A garden center is consistent with this intent in that it provides a specialized retail service for the traveling public. Although a predominant portion of this use entails outdoor activities, it is similar to those already permitted as conditional uses such as outdoor display of merchandise for sale and screened outdoor storage . A garden center is compatible with these uses as well as other permitted uses . In fact, other than its outdoor activi- ties , a garden center can be less intense than other permitted — uses in the district. A garden center should be controlled as a conditional use, however, to evaluate the impacts of the out- door storage areas and sale areas (garden centers are a permitted use in the BG, Business General District) . Given this analysis, staff finds that a garden center should be included as a conditional use in the BH district. RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: _ "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Request 88-7 to amend Section 20-714 , Conditional Uses in the BH District as follows : ( 5 ) Garden Centers . " PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the request as recommended by staff . Mr . Jay Kronick June 1 , 1988 Page 3 — CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION - Zoning Ordinance Amendment It is recommended that the City Council approve Zoning Ordinance Amendment Request #88-7 as recommended by the Planning Commission . LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT The subject property is split by the Carver County and Hennepin — County border. This site was also the subject of a zoning ordi- nance amendment review for automotive service centers . (The applicants on that project have decided not to pursue construc- tion of the automotive service center. ) The site is also split as to land use and zoning. The Carver County portion is zoned BH, Business Highway and is designated on the Land Use Plan as Commercial . The Hennepin County or the eastern portion of the — site is zoned IOP, Industrial Office Park and is designated as Industrial on the Land Use Plan. The applicant intends to use the site for a garden center. The applicant is also considering subdividing in the future to create another parcel for another commercial use. (This is different _ than the automotive service center application which proposed a combination of both industrial and commercial uses. ) Because of the small acreage involved, redesignation of 1 . 7 acres from Industrial to Commercial will not have a significant impact on the availability of industrial land. A majority of the site is zoned and designated as commercial . Redesignation and rezoning of this site to one zoning district and land use is appropriate — in order to enforce consistent setback and other zoning regula- tions . RECOMMENDATION — Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: — "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Land Use Plan Amendment #88-3 to redesignate 1 . 7 acres of industrial to commer- cial subject to the approval of the Metropolitan Council . " PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission recommended approval of the land use plan amendment request; however, two of the Commissioners voted against the proposal . Commissioners Erhart and Batzli felt that this action should not take place until a specific request is filed and second, a detailed analysis on the change from industrial to commercial should be better researched. Mr . Jay Kronick — June 1 , 1988 Page 4 — STAFF UPDATE The Planning commission discussed at length two issues regarding this item: traffic generation and the change of permitted land uses from industrial to commercial . The Planning Commission was concerned about the traffic impacts on the adjacent road systems . Despite the zoning district, com- mercial or industrial, significant amounts of truck, employee or retail traffic can be generated depending on the use. Several — traffic improvement plans affect this area. Along with widening TH 5 , the Dell Road/West 184th Street intersection will become a full movement intersection. This will relieve truck traffic con- — gestion at Dakota. Secondly, this area will continue to be served by West 78th Street which will connect into the realigned TH 101 project. Therefore, the change in land use or designation has little effect on traffic generation. — The Planning Commission also wanted the Council to evaluate what types of uses should be encouraged in the subject area between — Redmond Products and the Chanhassen Office Plaza. As it now exists , the west part of the site can be occupied by a use permitted in the BH District. The east part of the site could be used by a small industrial office warehouse building. The appli- - cant has requested to redesignate the entire site commercial to permit greater flexibility in the proposed use and to simplify building and site regulations . As now exists , the parcel exists _ with two land use designation and zoning districts . One zoning district should apply to the parcel. The Council needs to decide whether the parcel should be used as industrial or commercial . — Some members of the Planning Commission felt that a specific request should be entertained prior to final decision. Staff maintains its original recommendation. — CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION - Land Use Plan Amendment It is recommended that the City Council approve Land Use Plan — Amendment Request #88-3 to redesignate 1 . 7 acres of industrial to commercial subject to the approval of the Metropolitan Council . — REZONING Given the above analysis, the application to rezone the site to BH, Business Highway is appropriate. — RECOMMENDATION — Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Rezoning Request #88-3 to rezone 1 .7 acres of property from IOP, Industrial Office Mr . Jay Kronick June 1 , 1988 Page 5 — Park to BH, Business Highway District, subject to approval of the Land Use Plan Amendment by the City Council and the Metropolitan — Council . " PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION — The Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning request on a 4 to 3 vote. Commissioners Erhart, Batzli and Conrad approved it based on reasons discussed in the report — above. STAFF UPDATE — Rezoning actions like zoning ordinance amendments require a 4/5ths vote of the Council . CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve Rezoning Request — #88-3 to rezone 1 . 7 acres of property from IOP, Industrial Office Park to BH, Business Highway District, subject to approval of the Land Use Plan Amendment by the City Council and the Metropolitan Council . " — NOTES FOR FUTURE APPLICATIONS If approved, the applicant will have to file a conditional use permit and potentially a subdivision application if a portion of the lot is to be used for another commercial use . The Planning — Commission and Council should be aware that the City has already worked with the property owner to create a city maintained storm- water retention pond near the railroad tracks in the rear of the lot. This is consistent with the recommendations from the Barr — Engineering Stormwater Management Plan report. Also, because the site is a designated wetland, the applicant will need to file for a wetland alteration permit. Jim Leach from the Fish and — Wildlife Service has already in spected the site and has con- curred with the city' s intention to create a stormwater pond in the rear of the property while preserving some of the wetland _ areas also. The applicant is also aware that an Army Corps of Engineer permit is necessary. This lot is a parcel of record and has been zoned commercial and industrial since 1972 . ATTACHMENTS 1 . Application . — 2 . Letter from applicant. 3 . Land Use Plan. 4 . City Council minutes dated October 5 , 1987 . — 5 . Planning Commission minutes dated September 9 , 1987 . 6 . Planning Commission minutes dated June 1 , 1988 . 47 _ LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 Coulter Drive _ Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 APPLICANT:Jay K! ram. r r OWNER: I(" U ADDRESS d ' ik_4ck+t Avg ADDRESS Oci ((P � 20I Zip Code Zip Code TELEPHONE (Daytime).30/-'7c-gC'g17 TELEPHONE REQUEST: 2-02"SSY- `70 )<, Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision :>‹: Land Use Plan Amendment Platting Metes and Bounds Conditional Use Permit Street/Easement Vacation Site Plan Review Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME � ., r' i_ PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION —i>`r )' ,. ! _J� I �� REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION ( ^6-)-r` -C-i PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING l USES PROPOSED 'r- �)"ram �i (7')("\ L^ SIZE OF PROPERTY r: . REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary) City of Chanhassen Land Development Application Page 2 FILING INSTRUCTIONS : This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions . Before filing this application , you should confer with the City Planner to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application . FILING CERTIFICATION: The undersigned representative of the applicant hereby certifies that he is familiar with the procedural requirements of all applicable City Ordinances . Signed By ` " �l lC ni /r Date ( - (• if Applicant The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been authorized to make this application for the property herein described . Signed By Date Fee Owner (4.1)4kT m — f12es 360 Date Application Received frt" (M201& Application Fee Paid ^ ‹tri 9 , • City Receipt No. 4-.2j * This Application will be considered by the Planning Commission/ Board of Adjustments and Appeals at their meeting. _ LA 1\ D A°1)0cAT to eronic( �ASoN s forz 77)a lc 112cNINJG ibis ieJcT CNANGc - l suLjec'+ ?rojer ?re5-e,-) )-Na S iwo z_on);t3 0(153-rkL ikStstr�R�-) 5 , Ip p o�D — ' J ore- s rk- -Cor- re4-ok i I use is uesk + 4L _ Z o� ,TOP�P ck � u-l.ed io 81-I _ 2 , r� Trx-r AK eNo(n v r - A r2iat ckrot.¢.n � � cEi*r is ? pad - o r s Z-- is u + 41-\o4 4L.� z3YI l c\1 )4 `?e410'1 -7 l c/ Gt Mervij a 1 ow a a-1 5cks,cte (-1 ce rnk r ov5 co n0 l+- " I )r-, 4 13f1 d\-6+-r'‘c4. - 3) LAMD Us& LAID Ai 1c OineNT - stA G4 proper-Li },o,s +vvo Usz k st -,a_±► To�, 66E60 r fy a 5 s1+-e. --r-&- ust ;.6 ("90,e4e___0( 4•V-vd-- -14 ,ZrAvs-}-r1Q1 Po t or s ono -,e. ors Cawl,i.e r-c(cal cN-, 4),\,e lane, c,se .7 - LE - cg l P/1 o N OF 7)"JE P20(3&"2�7'y --rtzajr G ant 4- oQ D /y, €rife r( o-P + SpAerly ma(- er5) P ne 0P ( rac C s4-e \e) lArd _ 5 , to 5 34- is-}rr\• r T,-1-1 e s.Cpvn4 0 ( v� - 0.150 +, kie_s4 199 OP - o� c -4 oQ �� � �v,.e Quay--�- l G Fi o p -ems o n7� 03r-11-4arle. 2-2_ c4e54- gP Sal. prfrgpof /Yler(dccn ly rL l �� Ch sav�l�.erl OP `�� �'1'1,�wa��ee and r �D 1 n� f`,fay) e( \s2,0 i ym Ca,,y-1 , i a- sses ., \�..: RP.a -6400 r■Ea,a, 1 :. i't :' ► , ssoo amll• M Salt ' •; .. . .. . \ •' - 6,00 1 L KE LUCY ; \.. `�' . ... ..4...." .0 jiL e9oo ........,.., .... -- . ', .••;•‘.....,7-77 , ' If. ttly,.:.:.:„..:.--.,. . ..1g.i ,.„..,-.. .-_, _ _____.__ "�.:.:,-..--(p ` _roo pa LAKE ANN f 1 . ''''.• , 1 IMEI .,-1r,r\,\ iI.f . . . . . .„). ,... ..„.. ,_,i,.., _ ..:..:4,. .—,,,:::.„:„.:,.:„..„.:,„;,,:i,..„.:,.:,.,.. ..:,:.„„-., • ____„cm - .••••••••••••. _-_-_--_-: :,t.:,!:: :14.:.:::...,Aiii,:,.::. :,:.:,:im.„.2r . , .....,...\ ir_ ----\--.. -"I-r-s. _..:'t L 11 11 1•' ••,..:_.:;.:.'.., ••• ♦'4 • ■ • • • • • rs.'t.::'.1:•:- _„,•. '1,-6-,'-Y,' 1c: ..'„.‘•_" Ni 7••.:.-Pe.-.7... .•.-.1'..4,4•I. ', •' rl m.re•••;- • •JN ••- : -•ye.a;-._4 1.'.--._1"..,;-..-,-;.1..i:ii•"?,:w.• 'i 1- . .N• •9'\• —,soo :s.'...,1.',.• ' \+ :.wry •i..iiDO••i;r4*•�i�•' .•. _: , __..%.-M-1. r. -,..-.--0..--...•M,...-..--....::.:...-*-S .I6t,g:al- r 1 j y '-.- h fffff����`• . ..� .l `mil'• I -.sx e.c , ■ ■ ■ . LAKE SUSAN3 +� a' — ...otr) f/ • •■ •■ •• )i RICE M •H LAKE NA II -,H / a . ... . • .. , i•i 2 3all11 VIYM. 4 1 • won I y� 1.1 J I• . • • � ./ • Y 1lh1 • ais Aic£Y li • 'Ji \ JL I ii i . 7 City Council Mecting - October 5, 1987 Councilman Horn: Just to expand on what Mark is saying. If we carry that to _ the extreme then, what we need to do is leave this as agriculture. Agricultural and the protection is green acres. The problem we have is there is pressure on the people who own this property in terms of taxes and so forth. - That's what we're dealing with. If we use his example to keep this open to what we can do later, we have to zone it all as agricultural to give it green acres protection and then when the time comes move it over. What he's telling us is an interim step won't work because you're locked in and then you're stuck. At least that's what I'm hearing. Mayor Hamilton: Not necessarily. I don't think you're locked in. Councilman Horn: We're going to create valuable pieces of property by opening the door to these interin uses. Mayor Hamilton: But when they come in if they know only at maximum, a 12 year use for that piece of land, how can you be locked in any more than that? Maybe that's not legal. I would like to ask Roger that but if somebody came in here and said I want to use that piece of land on TH 41 and TH 5 and we said fine, we'll give you a conditional use to use that for whatever they might be asking and then in 12 years you have to know that use may go away. Roger Knutson: State Statutes provide that once you issue a conditional use, it sticks. You can't put a time limit on it so once you issue a conditional use permit they have the right to stay there as long as they comply with the conditions and standards and what not. Not duration. Councilman Johnson: One thing, when we do look at this, there will be people, I think when we look at any individual development going in here, we have to look at it as that might be the ultimate use of that land too because I wouldn't mind seeing that area for a very long time as a nursery. Like Mark says, that's a very good use but while the intent may be that it's a temporary use, I do believe that we have to look at it being a long term use and if it does, if commercial or some plant wants to come in and they've got the money to buy him out, then that's up to them. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND ARTICLE V, SECTION 4(4) TO ALLOW GARDEN CENTERS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, JAY KRONICK, FIRST READING. Mayor Hamilton: This is the first reading. Jay has been before us previously and is back here this evening. As you all know Jay owns a business in Washington D.C. and would locate a business here in Chanhassen. That being a retail garden center so Barbara did you want to add some? Barbara Dacy: The Planning Commission action was to recommend denial of the request based on the findings in the staff report with a note to the Council that if you are to amend the zoning ordinance for the first reading requires a four-fifths vote of the entire Council. Mayor Hamilton: Jay, do you want to present anything to the Council? 19 City Council Meeting - October 5, 1987 Jay Kronick: Yes, thank you. I think you touched upon a lot of the issues here and I:m really not going to make the decision for you. I also have given L many of you in the past of the ideas of the type of development I'm proposing out there. That's what I would just maybe reiterate and amplify a little bit in conjunction with some of the points you touched on here tonight. As far as the waste from the site, it's a five acre site with a house on i:. A garden center, I really can't -cc a problem with the impact there. It depends on where you put that gallons per day limit. The traffic issue, I agree there. I've had a tough time. I've sat there for the Natural Green property _ trying to left back into town on TH 5. There's a lot of cars and sometimes you've got to wait. Something has got to be done about that, I would agree. I'm not a traffic ngineer but I would be willing to work on that to the extent possible. I've looked at some data on traffic generated by retail garden centers. They base it on factors like size of the property, square feet, number of employees, parking spots, take all these parameters and I come up with estimates of between 75 and 100 trips per day. That's one trip in and one trip out. Two trips per person. I look at that and compare it to the number of vehicles on that road at present traveling back and forth each day and the impact seems pretty minimal to me. Nonetheless, every car that comes either in or out has to cross the highway. There's something to think about there. I have a question that was raised in your discussion about talking about putting a limit on the number of trips per day. How is the estimate made initially and what happens when the business grows? I think that's — something that that is, do I have to shut my business down at 1:00 in the afternoon because I had my 100 trips a day and that's it. That growth is going to happen. As the City grows, my business is going to grow hopefully t, regardless of where it's located so I just had a question about that. Some points raised in staff report that I wasn't clear. Looking at some other jurisdictions and how they've handled this sort of thing. Staff mentioned that Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, and St. Louis Park don't allow retail garden centers in rural residential districts. Whether this district remains as such or not in Chanhassen, I don't know but I look at Eden Prairie and the one garden center of similar scale that I see is just relocated out of the shopping center out to Eden Prairie Center. It's on a busy road but it's a similar type of thing. Probably not the same traffic philosophy. Minnetonka has one right smack in the middle of a residential district off of Woodland _ Road. It's the only business around. It's surrounded by residents in 1/4 acre of 1/2 acre parcels. St. Louis Park is another jurisdiction that was mentioned. I don't believe a garden center exists in St. Louis Park because of a combination of high commercial values as opposed to availability of suitably sized parcels for a garden center. I guess that's really it. I would be happy to respond to any questions. Councilman Johnson: I just have mostly general comments on item 1(d). I don't have a specific question for anybody. As you can probably tell from my earlier comments, I'm in favor of this particular use at this particular spot _ but as I read through the Planning Commission and I believe Commissioner Emmings was the one that probably swayed me the most of anybody there. Several things he said I have to agree with. I really don't like to see it in the RR district. I don't really think the area should be RR but that's what we discussed a minute ago. I think for what he's selling and what he's doing is best suited in this area. Some people were talking about moving it 20 City Council Mooting - October 5, 1987 downtown. I personally, with the price of property and the profit on margin probably wouldn't be affordable in downtown. I think it would be a very good addition to Chanhassen. I think we would draw people in here at various times of the year and help our other businesses out considerably with this use. The Planning Commission, they did say they do not have to be practical because they are a body considering the broad view. I think the Council has to be practical but at the same time we have to avoid what Commissioner Emmings referred to as the tyranny of small decisions. I loved that one. That's a good one because that's what we look at all the time. I like the way he put that in. Exactly what Barb was saying a little while ago. We let this in, the next one, the next one, the next one continuing until we say we are no longer wide open. There is no restriction. I do plan on voting against this unless somebody can convince-me that we have adequate safeguards added to the conditions of use. That we won't find garden centers all over our RR area.. Councilman Geving: I thought about this a long time because I've been involved with the David Luse situation for about 7 or 8 years. I really would like to have Jay come to our community and build a facility here and build a business in Chanhassen and I think that the business that's there now is certainly good use for that land at this time. As long as it remains a nursery, it certainly could stay there as a wholesale activity. That property is changing hands obviously and with that comes a new owner and some new thoughts. My feeling is that we're infringing on the residential area and I believe that the rural residential area should be kept clean of retail activity. Retail activity should be focused in the downtown area. If Jay wanted to grow his plants, his potted plans, his trees and bring them onto the site out there and grow them on the 5 acres that he has, I see nothing wrong with that as a good interim use and then transport those to a downtown location for retail sales I think would work but as far as the traffic on TH 5, it's not going to get any better. There is absolutely no signs that we're going to get TH 5 to four lanes certainly within the next 3 years. The traffic is going to be compounding and that is one issue. The primary issue I think here is that we would be opening ourselves up to developing a lot of other areas in Chanhassen with potential for retail in the rural residential areas. I'm just afraid that once that avalanche started, it would be a snowball that we wouldn't be able to stop. It would really start to roll and once we make the first decision, the second ones become easier because you've set the precedent. I'm very much in favor of what you're trying to do Jay and I wish that that facility was in the MUSA line. You could develop it and the highway wasn't as congested as it is but I just can't see putting another 35 cars, 100 trips per day, whatever the estimate might be, turning in and out of that facility. We probably have it now more than likely with David Luse's operation we have at least as much as what you're proposing. There's no question about it but I look at this way. Now we have an opportunity to reduce the congestion by moving Luse out of there on his own volition and maybe that will reduce some of the traffic that we have. I guess at this time I would have to vote to keep the amendment we're passing and I would vote against your proposal to put retail in the rural residential area. Councilman Horn: I understand the issue of changing the complexion of rural residential and I'm sympathetic to that issue but that's not the overriding — , factor for me in this case. The overriding factor for me is traffic. I would 21 • City Council Meeting - October 5, 1987 be much more open to this type of thing, even if it weren't in a downtown commercial area, if it were not on TH 5. If it was on one of the off highways. I think there we would have an opportunity to have a real tough decision but as long as it is on TH 5, I think the traffic is just totally unreasonable. Even if we don't make it worse than what it is now with the Luse operation there, I drive past his operation every morning and watch him try to merge his trucks into the traffic and it's scary to watch let me tell you. And it's one thing I think if you have a wholesale operation where you're subjecting your employees to that. What we'd be doing in retail is say, this is okay for the general public and I have a real problem with that. Councilman Boyt: It sounds as though it's a forgone conclusion how this is going to go since it takes a four-fifths vote. I think that one question I have and I think I may have gathered the answer out of the Minutes but I want to clarify, is there anyplace in Chanhassen currently as it is zoned where a retail garden center can be located? _ Barbara Dacy: The BG, Business General district does allow garden centers as a permitted use. I believe the applicant is also looking at a site along TH 5 that would require a zoning ordinance amendment to the Business Highway District... The only lands that are zoned BG are the Burdick property and the James property. Councilman Boyt: Alright. I don't know how your development fits as far as consistency with what Mr. James or Mr. Burdick has planned for their property. I would suggest that a garden center can stand the toll of paying a rather substantial amount of money since we see them surviving in Minnetonka on TH 7 which is certainly a very valuable piece of property. I think there clearly is a need in Chanhassen. I heard the other council members saying that. _ We're approving new developments very quickly. They all want to plant something and right now that money is leaving town so I think you have a good • possibility. I would support what I saw Mayor Hamilton suggesting as a possibility when he was speaking to the Planning Commission. I think a number — of us were saying, please grow your trees there if you like. That seems to fit very nicely with what we'd like to see happening on that piece of property but I don't think we're going to support running a retail business out of that particular location. I'm impressed by your desire to be here and your willingness to fly in to talk to us. Mayor Hamilton: I think I've made many comments to the Planning Commission mostly because Jay was unable to be here and I've worked with Jay a little bit trying to get him into town and I guess I'm not convinced yet that we shouldn't have a retail operation on TH 5. I just don't think that the traffic to be generated would be of sufficient amount to cause a real hazard there. Like Clark says, there's an awful lot of traffic there right now with Natural Green and I don't think Jay's operation would generate a whole lot more but in talking to Jay I think it's been suggested that his retail operation would probably be more profitable in the short term and hopefully in the long term if he located downtown in the central business district. It's certainly one of the things we want to have you accomplish, if you come here, is to be successful. That's the number one thing. That you want to be here and stay here a long time. We'd like you to stay here a long time. I know 22 City Council Mccting - October 5, 1987 — 7 it's disappointing to not, because you had your heart set on living and growing and selling all in the same area but it looks like that's not going to be the case. Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to deny the Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend Article V, Section 4(4) to allow Garden Centers as a retail business as a conditional use in the RR, Rural Residential District. All voted in favor excpet Mayor Hamilton who opposed the motion and the motion carried. Mayor Hamilton: I just wanted to clarify that so that Jay would know and I think we've all said that we would allow you to live and grow on this site if I'm hearing all the rest of the council members correctly. That would be an allowable use but have your retail someplace else. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO INSTALL A 33 FOOT AMATEUR RADIO TOWER AND A 26 FOOT VERTICAL ANTENNA, 7071 SHAWNEE LANE, ROY S. BARKE. Mayor Hamilton: We have no control over this so I don't know why it's even on the agenda. Is there anybody from the neighborhood who wanted to speak on this item? No. — , Councilman Boyt: As I understand the FCC regulation it says that a person has a right to put an antenna up. Mr. Barke has an antenna up so I think from there, in terms of the number of antennas an individual has the right to put up, I don't see that the FCC addresses that. Now maybe Mr. Barke can enlighten me about that. Roy Barke: I don't know if there are any restrictions based on the number. I do think there is a desire on their part to conform monitor to conform with the community while at the same time topography so I guess I can't disagree with that at all. ...before the Planning Commission is that a lot of times you can't do everything to the point where... It does take a little bit of variety to do one thing or another. Like the people who buy boats. They may buy a speed boat and fishing boat. Councilman Boyt: Mr. Barke as I understood your comments in the Planning Commission, they were along the lines that this is primarily a means of convenience. Your new tower could be adjusted to handle what your existing towers are doing. Is that correct? Roy Barke: No. My existing tower is.-I really can't add this same device to — it. Councilman Boyt: You indicated in the Planning Commission that you would be willing to provide a, I think it was a $3.00 filter to your neighbors who had problems with interference. Roy Barke: I have no problem with that. Just like I stated in the meeting, it's sometimes very difficult to be sitting outside and working with my neighbors if you have a problem, work out that thing. That type of 23 Planning Commission Meeting September 9 , 1987 - Page 15 close and as Bob said there's some massaging that has to be done. I would like to see some creative thinking on TH 5 when we get to it. Classically — it can be the strip type stuff that we see in all the other communities and I guess I would like to see if there's anything creative we can do along that roadway but I don't even know what that means. It just means we have an opportunity of several years to think about it and maybe there is something that we can do that's creative along the highway. With that, why don't we bounce back to the public hearing and talk about the zoning ordinance amendment to amend Article 5, Section 4 allowing garden centers as — a conditional use in the rural residential district. PUBLIC HEARING: — ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND ARTICLE V, SECTION 4 (4) TO ALLOW GARDEN CENTERS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, JAY KRONICK. Public Present: Name — Tom Hamilton Barbara Dacy presented the staff report on the zoning ordinance amendment. C — Tom Hamilton: Let me change hats here and I'll represent Jay Kronick. I wasn't asked to represent him and I don't officially represent him in any official capacity but as a licensed realtor I have talked with Jay on — several occasions about the project that he is attempting to accomplish here and you are reviewing this evening. The current Natural Green is going to be moving to Chaska I believe. He needs more space so he, Dave Luse was the owner of that property, was contacted by Jay Kronick and Jay who currently lives in Baltimore, Maryland and owns a restaurant in Washington D.C. and that's why he wasn't able to be here this evening. His background is in forestry and agriculture. He would like to open a garden center. His wife is from Minnesota and that's the whole background thing why he's looking in Chanhassen. Somehow he came across Dave Luse and the two of them got together and discussed Dave's leaving and Jay wanting to open a garden — center here so the two of them together, without anyone's interference apparently reached some kind of an agreement on purchasing the property. It's all contingent on the Metropolitan Waste Commission paying off Luse for the right-of-way I guess for the easement across his property for the Lake Ann Interceptor. So Jay would like very much to have a garden center in Chanhassen and he felt that would be a great opportunity for him to purchase that property. It would be about 5 acres is about what he needs. He would — grow his material on the property and he would also live on the property. There is the old home there that has been used as an office for several years and he would like to convert that to a home and have his family live there. He does however have some alternatives. This isn't a do or die situation for him. He can live someplace else. If he can't have that as a Planning Commission Meeting September 9 , 1987 - Page 16 — retail center , he may still purchase it and do his growing there if that's something that the Planning Commission and Council would approve and then have his retail outlet someplace else in the community. He may also just attempt to do his growing there or wherever he can find a place to do it and live someplace else so he has several alternatives available to him. I just wanted to present that to you and tell you why Jay couldn't be here this evening . I think he would appreciate your consideration on those points . Wildermuth moved, Siegel seconded to close public hearing. All voted in favor and motion carried . Headla: I wonder what the alternatives are if Natural Green moves. What's really going to happen to that place? I don' t know. What can go in there? Wildermuth: Nothing can happen to it unless we change. . . Dacy: The uses that are listed in the RR District, single family, agricultural and the conditional uses potentially so basically that limits it to residential or agricultural use unless we would have a request for a conditional use permit. Conrad : You've got to answer in your mind if you want retail in some form in that area. So far we've kept retail, other than small scale sales, out of that zone so I think that's your question. The zone is there. The use Ar as it is right now follows it can be used as a wholesale nursery or going back to the primary zone. I think you've got to answer whether you want to start modifying. Headla: Personally I would like to see it go in but I'm having a hard time putting retail in the area with what' s going on. Wildermuth: Without the urban services, is that right? No urban services. I guess I would be inclined to make an exception because of the fact that, as you said Barbara, the intensity or the use intensity is not very great. It's not going to make a very big demand on the septic system for example. The fact that there isn't a sewer out there is not going to present a real problem right? Dacy: No and there could be very little demand as far as septic systems on the sewer . Wildermuth: High well water demand no doubt . Dacy: The problem is we're referring to a specific use. He's proposing a very small facility. Staff's concern is that unless you really identify in 10 conditions, the extent to limit how much a garden center could operate, we're concerned that we could get a large intensity retail outfit in the — rural district area which could pose conflicts . . . Wildermuth: Even if that development were a Frank's style operation, . I 4, don' t see where that would be a problem would it? Planning Commission Meeting September 9 , 1987 - Page 17 Dacy: Staff's analysis is based on the proposed use in relation to the district uses. If you feel that a Frank's nursery can co-exist with single — family development then that's fine. We're just having problems from the standpoint that those are completely two different types of uses. Retail versus single family development. Another potential with the zoning — ordinance amendment, you're sending out conflicting messages of what a RR district should be. Does that answer your question? Conrad: Just remember Jim when you get into retail sales, that's a — different animal than wholesale. You're talking about night time hours. You're talking about weekend traffic. You're talking traffic issues. You're also talking what's the difference in this retail versus that retail. — There's no difference between selling a potted plant and selling a skirt. There's no difference. Wildermuth: It's the way that I look at this. I would see that area probably either as high density or a commercial piece anyway ultimately. Here we go violating what we've just said. It would be a hard and fast rule about urban services. — Conrad: I think if you can identify a scope, retail sales under $10,000.00. Traffic under 4 cars a day or 100 cars a day, whatever it might be because _ my problem is, there is no difference between that retail and another retail so whatever you do here will sort of set us up for other retail in this district which is okay if we want other retail in that district. — Siegel: It's too bad we haven't proceeded with the previous subject to the point where we know what we're going to do along TH 5. I hesitate to see a wig shop with 5 acre minimum lot size. Everything in perspective. We have — done other exceptions in other areas where we've made conditional use permits available and I think we can make it restrictive enough. It's too bad we can't get this downtown. If we could force them out of that location and put them into one of those nice spots downtown that is still vacant It would probably be a better draw for him and a better draw for Chanhassen downtown although that isn't that far away from downtown and I see that there is a possibility that that is going to end up being commercial in a short time. I don't have any problem with this garden center concept as long as we put the appropriate conditions on it and I don't think I'm being contradictory. _ Conrad : Does that mean you don ' t mind retail in this district? Siegel: That's what I said before when we talked about zoning and then the possibility that we're going to have to look at doing that. As long as it's planned properly and the appropriate requirements are put on the applicants, I don't have any problem with it. For one thing I don't judge retail — establishments like you do that they're all one and the same. There's a wide variety of retail establishments. If you call a car dealership a retail establishment, it's not a barber shop. It's not the same. There are _ categories of retail that I look at being different. Planning Commission Meeting September 9 , 1987 - Page 18 - Conrad: Garden center is one? Siegel : I don't have a big problem with this from it's use or aesthetic, being in this area and especially with what ' s happening all around that. Emmings: I'm going to take the position here that we ought to keep retail - completely out of the RR. Again, we're the Planning Commission. We have no obligation to be practical. We don't have to, we could ignore the fact that there are 40 million trees growing out there right now and it looks like a retail nursery. Just like last week and I think that's what we should do. I think we should look at that piece of ground like, we should ignore the present use of it because when you look at the present use of it, it's just a tiny step. It seems so reasonable. I think I told the guy when he was here that it seemed like such an easy, natural thing to do but I think that's very dangerous for us at least. If the City Council wants to make an exception here, maybe that's fine but I think if we don't stick to our guns on the new zoning ordinance. There's a process called the tyranny of small decisions where you make these natural, easy steps and one day you're over here and by god the next day you're way the hell over here and you don't know how you got there and I think we ought to hold the line. The retail , when you read the RR, you look at the intent statement, it's single family residential subdivisions intended for large lot development. That's the intent of the RR. That certainly does not contemplate commercial uses and when you read down the permitted uses, the accessory uses and the 4 conditional uses, none of them are commercial like this would be. We also just got done talking about what the development on TH 5 is going to be and said we shouldn't have urban scale development out there until we've got those services and I think we ought to stay true to that principal too. I don't think we ought to violate that because it is commercial and although it's less intensive than a lot of other commercial or retail thinks might be, you're going to have a hard time making that distinction I think to a developer who comes in once we've opened the door. That's going to be a very difficult distinction to draw. There are going to arguments on each — side are going to be of equal weight and we're going to lose ground that way. If they can make an argument that's as good as the one we can make, we're going to lose so I guess I'm really persuaded by what staff has come up with here. The language and the intent under the RR doesn't allow this. As a footnote though, we're talking about putting a frontage road all along TH 5 down to TH 41 and if that was there, I would have no trouble with this there at all but I think that's a long ways off and for now, as a growth — policy, I think we should not have commercial in the RR. Conrad: I agree with Steve and I agree with Staff. I think my biggest concern is opening up the door to retail in a residential area and I don't know how to control it if we did do this one. I think philosophically I agree with the intent of the agree as it is right now and I agree that retail should have the urban services so unless there are other things, - questions . Tom Hamilton: I'm not going to speak on Jay's behalf because I don't think it's fair for me to be trying to speak for him when he hasn't even asked me Planning Commission Meeting September 9 , 1987 - Page 19 to but I think there are some things that I do know about the business that having been in conversations with him and Brad Johnson was talking to him — about his business I want to share with you. Jay said that not only was he going to have a plant store where his major business would be April , May, June and then your lesser business during the rest of the summer when you're ,— doing some shurbery work in your yard and perhaps some other plantings. He would probably also consider having Christmas trees for instance for a month or whatever length of time that you sell Christmas trees for so there would be those actually two periods of time when that would probably be a busy area. It wouldn't be like a Frank's, at least his comment to myself was he's not interested in crafts and he doesn't intend to get into that type of thing so you've got a couple of periods where traffic would be heavy and a — good share of the year there would virtually be no traffic there. I think in order to compare traffic flows you need to look at the traffic flows out there now and even though that's a wholesale use, there's awfully heavy _ traffic going in and out of that piece of property. Both trucks and employees. There are a lot of employees there and there are a lot of trucks bringing materials in and also taking materials out so you may not even see an increase in traffic at that spot should it be retail. Bob made a good comment that it would be nice to have him downtown and I know that Brad Johnson, working with CHADDA, has been trying hard to convince Jay that he should be downtown and that would be in Jay's best interest to be in — downtown. One of the things that I think all of us need to consider when a new business comes to town is we want that business to be successful. We 0 want that person to come to town, to have a business to last and the best way for him to be successful in a lot of people's opinions, is to have his business within the CBD so there are other choices to him and I think might have hit on those and they are very valid points. I guess I'm kind of torn on this because I feel both ways. I would like to see him the ability and I — think he could, to grow out there. Could he not do his growing there and then not have the retail facility there at all but do his growing and perhaps even live on the property? That' s something he may be able to do. — Conrad : Yes . That ' s logical . Tom Hamilton : I think for the success of his business he would be better — off if he were in the central business district and I think he probably realizes that but his heart is really out there and he can see where he could live and grow and work, walk out his backdoor and he could be dealing — with the customer . That looks pretty attractive. Headla : He could grow all the stuff out there? Conrad : He can use the land as it is currently. Siegel : Barb, does the Lake Ann Interceptor go through his property? Dacy: Yes . Siegel : When you have an interceptor sewer line going right through your property. Planning Commission Meeting September 9, 1987 - Page 20 4rDacy: You can' t use it. Siegel : You can' t use it? Dacy: Right and that's the basis of the Lake Ann agreement is Metro Waste gave us permission to install an interceptor. However, Chanhassen can not use that until the year 2000 or until the entire urban service areas are developed. Wildermuth : Why is that? • Dacy: The major issue was the growth control issue and Met Council felt if they would allow hook-up into the Lake Ann Interceptor going outside of their MUSA line would be contrary to the Metropolitan Development. And really, to get the Lake Ann Interceptor was a major victory for the City and Council. It's just a major accomplishment that we are able to have that. Even though we can't hook up into it now, that is addressing some capacity issues for not only Chanhassen but the entire sewer service area . Emmings: I notice I had this marked and I forgot to mention it in my comments but another thing that was of interest to me in the staff' s report was that they pointed out that Eden Prairie and St. Louis Park, Brooklyn Park and Minnetonka, garden centers are not permitted in the rural or residential area. They are permitted only in the commercial districts. The ir worse part about being so rigid about these classifications is we start sounding like the Metropolitan Council . Conrad : There are so many charming things about having what he wants to do. There are some neat things that I would like to see but when you get back into being practical and in terms of how you manage that type of development and that' s when things become a little bit tougher . Emmings moved, Headla seconded that the Planning Commission recommend to deny the request for the Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend Article V, Section 4 (4) to allow garden centers as a conditional use in the RR, Rural Residential. All voted in favor except Siegel who opposed and motion carried . Siegel : I would just go with a garden center with the given restrictions that it should be a permitted use in this area given the proximity of the area and the surrounding useage of the area and the potential development in that corridor. Emmings : You said permitted use , did you mean that or conditional use? Siegel: Well, the permitted uses in the area. For instance the industrial on the other side of the highway. Tom Hamilton: I guess it would be good too, Jay would probably appreciate it if you would have some comments to make about encouraging him to even come to town. If you would like to see him out there growing . Planning Commission Meeting September 9 , 1987 - Page 21 Emmings : We need a garden center here very badly. We told him that when he was here. Now a couple of us said we're always driving way into Minneapolis — for garden materials and stuff like that and we would love to have one here so I think he knows that and if he doesn't, I'm saying so now. I think it would be nice if he could have that as his growing range and have a shop in town in the commercial downtown area. That would be great. CONSIDER MODIFICATION TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PLAN AND TAX '— INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN (DISTRICT NO. 2) . Barbara Dacy presented the staff report on this item. Conrad: I just had trouble following what we're talking about. Not in terms of the concept but in terms of what land is now being added. I couldn ' t track it. — Dacy: The land within the downtown area is in our redevelopment district. The land that's in that little cut-out into Eden Prairie and Hennepin — County, that's an Economic Development District. Both districts have tax increment districts within them that the City is receiving property taxes from those lands. At this point in time we can use those for public improvement projects so now basically what we're going to do is overlap the districts. Bring them together so that we can spend the money that's being 4. generated in economic development district in the downtown area. Because of the amount of redevelopment and the amount commitments that we have in the — downtown area, in essence we're running out of funds so we can avoid a major bond issue. Where the economic development district is very healthy with the Press and CPT and development that is occuring and the development that — will occur now that Mr. Beddor has subdivided all his land at the Press so we can use those monies for projects . Emmings: My brain died when I tried to read this. It was paralyzing to me but it sounds like a good idea the way Barbara explains it so I'm certainly all for it. We don't want to give our money to Hennepin County or anybody else. Might as well spend it here so that ' s the bottom line I guess . — Siegel : I guess I 'm not really clear of why the Planning Commission is being asked to adopt a resolution. There must have been some reason for us — to do this . Dacy: State Statute requires that the local Planning Commission and planning agency review any redevelopment plans for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and other documents. To be honest, a resolution adopted by the Commission was a new item brought to be my attention. However , it is one of those things that should be done . — Siegel: I'm just wondering why we're acting on this after the City Council has already acted . Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 9 PUBLIC HEARING: JAY KRONICK, PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO TO WEST 78TH STREET, 1000 FEET EAST OF DAKOTA AVENUE/TH 5 INTERSECTION: A. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTION 20-714 TO PERMIT RETAIL GARDEN CENTERS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE BH, BUSINESS HIGHWAY DISTRICT. B. LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE YEAR 2000 TO REDESIGNATE 1. 7 ACRES OF INDUSTRIAL TO COMMERCIAL. C. REZONE 1. 7 ACRES FROM IOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK DISTRICT TO BH, BUSINESS HIGHWAY DISTRICT. Barbara Dacy presented the staff report . Chairman Conrad opened up the public hearing . Dacy: Unfortunately the applicant ' s in Maryland . Conrad : Did we send out notice for the public hearing? Dacy: Everybody within 500 feet . Conrad : And to the owners of the Chanhassen Office building have not called you nor Redman Products? Dacy: No . Batzli moved , Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed . Conrad : I guess we ' ll take them one at a time in terms of our comments . We ' ll start Dave, down at your end and talk about garden centers that is a conditional use in the BH district . Headla : Really the only comment I have is I like the idea of a garden center , the whole bit. I 've got a fear of the unknown. If we say yes to — this , for a garden center , I don ' t see how we can control other garden centers. Unless we . . . Conrad : It is a conditional use . The point in this district is to make it a conditional use which means we see it. It gives it the opportunity to occur . It doesn ' t give it the total right . It does have to come in here and we can apply whatever standards we want to it. Do we have — standards in here that would help us review later? A center would meet certain conditions? Dacy: For garden centers specifically, no we don ' t . Conrad : So typically I like to see conditions. If it is a conditional use , what are we looking for to guide us in granting it as a conditional Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 10 — use? Staff hasn ' t prepared that. Maybe what we can have input on but it ' s only, how many BH districts do we have, two? Dacy: The BH district is located primarily along TH 5. It stretches from the Hennepin County border then west to the end of West 79th Street . — Conrad : So I think Dave, what we ' re saying , that ' s the district and we ' re saying it now can , it ' s not permitted , it ' s now possible to have garden _ centers but it ' s not automatic . They have to come in and talk to us . We don ' t have any standards to evaluate whether it ' s good or bad but it ' s a question right now. The concept in my mind about highway business district was quick in and quick out, low intensity. The concept was we had limited traffic . We had limited road use in those areas and we wanted to help the highway traffic through gas stations or restaurants get in but the idea was not that that pattern was to go through the rest of the — Chanhassen. It was to help cars going on TH 5 find services that they needed . Maybe Chanhassen residents could out there too but it was really key that we didn ' t have real great traffic handling roads at that time so _ we weren ' t looking for real intensive uses . We were really saying this is a district that services cars that are going out onto TH 5 for whatever the basic needs are . Whether a retail . We ' ve got retail down there obviously so that ' s not a problem. It ' s just whether you believe. In my — mind , to tell you where I 'm at right now, it ' s whether we believe that this is a traffic generator , that it ' s going to go . Is it like the Gardeneer? Is it like a Frank ' s? Is it going to generate traffic that we — can ' t handle in that area and in my mind , that ' s the question that is still open . Dacy: In comparison to what is already permitted , fast food restaurants , financial institutions , automotive service centers , retail shops , liquor stores , motels and hotels , I think garden center , even a Frank ' s Nursery, because it ' s so specialized , I 'm positive that the trip generation reports — for a garden center are lower than those types of uses that are already permitted . Batzli : Except on Saturday morning . Wildermuth : That ' s part of the advantage of having a garden center . The pressure will be on weekends rather than during the week. That ' s not a good intersection there . Conrad : These are all independent actions that we' re taking . We can make — it a conditional use . This particular application may not be appropriate but if we feel that it ' s appropriate in that area , then we can make it a conditional use for business highway and that ' s the only district we ' ve got . That ' s the only business highway district going along TH 5 that we ' ve got in Chanhassen . Headla : I feel comfortable right now but I 'd like to hear what the other — inputs . Wildermuth : I would like to see that parcel stay business office . I 'd — rather see another office building there. . . but I guess I can' t come up with a good reason why. . .a nursery or garden center . _1. 7 acres is -- Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 11 certainly adequate size . I don ' t know how big Frank ' s is . . . Batzli : I guess two questions came to my mind . Why are we rezoning and doing this thing , wouldn' t that normally be part of the process of a conditional use permit? When we see what the guy has put together rather than rezoning it to suit a conditional use permit application that we may not even approve? Dacy: Two reasons . Number one , the applicant has a purchase agreement on the property and wanted to pursue this application to see if the City would even consider rezoning the entire thing to business highway. Number two, yes you do have a specific request that you can pretty well bank on a conditional use permit application for a garden center at this location but tonight you ' re basically being asked, are you comfortable with rezoning this particular parcel , in total , to business highway? Are you comfortable with all of the uses in that district to remove the split zoning on the property to entirely business highway? If you just wanted to act on the Zoning Ordinance Amendment and would prefer to postpone the other two applications , that ' s certainly within your power . Batzli : I guess from my own point of view, I don ' t know that a garden center is any more intense than these permitted uses . In fact , if it ' s going to be a conditional use, I think we are going to take a look at it to make sure it' s appropriate . As far as rezoning , I don ' t know that I 'm comfortable rezoning this not knowing why I 'm rezoning it . Dacy: Again , the applicant doesn ' t want to have the parcel split by both zoning districts. He wants one consistent zoning for the entire parcel . That ' s the reason for the rezoning . Batzli : But he doesn ' t own the land at this point does he? The applicant? Dacy: No , he has a purchase agreement . Ellson: He ' ll buy it contingent on all this happening? Dacy: Right . Batzli : I guess I 'd prefer seeing either the landowner and the applicant . I understand but that 's just what I would prefer . Dacy: The landowner di.d consent to the application and Jay had to make the decision of which meeting he had to come up to. Either the City Council meeting or the Planning Commission for flight schedules and so on so he opted for the City Council . Ellson : I don ' t see any problem with a garden center . I think we 'd be in trouble if we tried to say no in the business highway. Especially when you' re saying outdoor display of merchandise , screened outdoor storage. . . Whether I want it or not isn' t really what I get to chose. It doesn ' t look like it would fit in here and according to some of these other things , I don' t see how we can no to a garden center . I 'm kind of on the side of Brian . We' re zoning this just because some individual wants it Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 12 — zoned that way and I guess I don ' t see a whole good reasoning on that . In the staff ' s report you ' re basically saying . . . will not have a significant impact on the availability of industrial . I guess I can go along if you feel that but I just don' t feel strongly that there are some really good reasons. Some guy would like all of these things , so okay then we' ll — rezone it just for one individual . Emmings : Do you only want us to comment now on the . . . _ Conrad : All three. We started with one but that. . . Emmings : I don ' t have any problem with rezoning . . . I 'm curious about TH — 101. Does any configuration of TH 101 potentially involve this land at all? Dacy: It' s too far to the east . Batzli : They' re not planning on putting a stop sign at that interchange _ though are they? At that service road there for TH 101? Do you know where I 'm talking about? When they realign , the last time I saw the realignment, was there a stop sign there or did they move that service road back? Dacy: TH 101 will be realigned . There will be a median in Dakota and West 78th Street will "T" into that and continue on. So where' s the stop — sign? Batzli : Will there be one where the access is currently? Dacy: Here? Batzli : Yes . _ Dacy: Yes . Erhart : What has happened? We ' re now looking at TH 101 being realigned at TH 5. The last time we talked about it we were. . .of the industrial . Did that go through? Dacy: No . Erhart : The last I heard it was kind of a dead issue . Apparently it ' s — still alive? Dacy: Yes , the City is still going to try and pursue it because it ' s a vital part of the transportation system. So one means of doing that was the tax increment district but there are other financial means available. Erhart: So 1992 that will include. . . — Dacy: We' re going to try as hard as we can to achieve that date . Erhart: On the other place where we allow garden centers now is in the BG district? Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 13 Dacy: That ' s correct . Erhart: Then that ' s essentially the downtown? Dacy: That ' s west of the downtown area . On the Burdick property and the James property. Erhart : What do you see as the difference between the intent of the general business district and the business highway? Is it something to do with TH 5? Dacy: Yes . The general business district permits much greater and more '- intense variety of uses . The Chairman ' s description earlier of the intent of the business highway district was accurate . The listed uses in the zone are specifically oriented to the traffic flow. Erhart : Even when you go downtown you almost have to get into your car to go across the street. Where the bakery was . Dacy: Right . There are some similarities and there are some differences . Some of these in the BG district would need a much larger land area whereas a business highway district primarily consists of smaller , 2 to 3 to 4 acre parcels so there are some differences between the two . Erhart : On that access road , say you come out of this nursery and you go east , your route back to TH 5 is what? Can you get back onto TH 5 going east? Dacy: At the present time , no . When TH 5 is four lane , there will be a full movement intersection at Dell Road and TH 5. Erhart : So someone coming from the direction as Dell Road , they come down 78th Street and . . . Dacy: Right . Erhart : Most likely the traffic going into that area would take the TH 101 exit . . . Dacy: That ' s another point as far as the garden center is concerned . It ' s the type of use as opposed to a fast food restaurant because from a marketing standpoint , a garden center you really don ' t need that immediate -. direct access as where this property could be a prime site for a fast food restaurant because of it ' s location . Erhart : Fast food restaurants are allowed? That ' s a permitted use in the area? Dacy : Right . Erhart : The problem is , it ' s more of a problem up there with street layout. Given, I guess I 'd agree with other commissioners , given the other uses that are already allowed as a conditional use in this area , it Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 14 _ would almost be senseless to. . .garden centers in this area . . . I 'd be in favor of adding that as a conditional use. As far as the zoning is concerned , I guess my history of being on the Planning Commission is you can try to accomodate people who own the land if it doesn' t otherwise cause an intrusion on who abuts , I guess I 'm in favor of it. . . — Conrad: I don' t have a problem with the zoning ordinance amendment to make it a conditional use . Philosophically though, I like the garden — center. Therefore, the other two things I don ' t mind. In this particular case I really would like the industrial use . I would prefer to see a plan to persuade me that this garden center will add to the area and until I see that plan , even though it ' s more concrete than , I 'd like to see — something concrete before I rezone the property. I have to be persuaded. I 'm not at this point in time. I 'm concerned with traffic. I don ' t have a problem with graden centers in the BH districts . — Headla : Are you . . .or against this? There ' s a lot of Council members talking about beachlots. . . .where a contractor . Conrad : It may actually work in that area but I just don' t know enough right now to rezone it just because somebody' s asking to rezone it. I think we can get him the philosopic feeling that yes , it could work in the — zoning district. Headla : Let ' s talk a little bit about that . Because it doesn ' t, how many — possibilities can it be? If we rezone it, do you prefer to see it more industrial? Conrad : Yes , I think so . I see an office building on one side and I see Redman on the other . That ' s kind of the way I thought that area would develop. There ' s some good rationale for putting a garden center in here mind you because the intensity would be on a Saturday-Sunday and therefore — somebody could persuade me that just because of traffic patterns and things like that , that it could be a benefit in terms of overall Chanhassen. I don' t know that right now. I don' t know what they' re _ planning . I don ' t know what they' re thinking about how to develop that land. So philosophically I wouldn ' t do it but if somebody gave me, in this one case , if somebody gave me a concrete example of what they ' re thinking of, I might be tempted to change the zoning for them. — Headla : What if somebody came in and wanted to use that for fast food? Conrad: I wouldn ' t do that. I think that ' s just a traffic generator that would be bad all the time. Emmings: But they could do that . Ellson : It ' s legal . Headla : They can have that and maybe we should go for the garden center because it could be a whole lot worse. Conrad : You' re right . Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 15 Wildermuth : The best of all worlds would be an office or distribution center . . . Ellson: That ' s not saying it never can be by having a garden center . Conrad : I think we did put the auto service center in there didn' t we? What ' s the differnce between an auto service center and a garden center? Headla: How is that garden center working out over in Eden Prairie? Have they had any problems there do you know? Dacy: I don ' t know. Headla : If you don' t know, it probably isn ' t a problem. Dacy: I wouldn' t know. Tim Erhart asked a question that couldn ' t be heard on the tape . Dacy: The best that I can say that, typically when the zoning district lines are drawn . . .boundaries . This parcel was overlooked unfortunately it goes right through the middle of this parcel . The parcel is operating as a split as two zoning districts . Erhart: So it makes sense to zone the whole thing? Dacy: One way or the other . Erhart: Most of this land . . . Dacy: With the office use you are going to get more peak hour traffic , morning and afternoon and that ' s going to exasperate the traffic situation . With a manufacturing facility, the same thing . Conrad : It could by chance be quite complimentary to the area . Then on the other hand it' s a little bit out of sync with what ' s there . Is ther a motion on the zoning ordinance amendment to permit garden centers as a conditional use? Emmings moved , Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Request #88-7 to amend Section 20-714 , Conditional Uses in the BH District as follows : - (5) Garden Centers . All voted in favor and the motion carried . Emmings moved, Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Land Use Plan Amendment #88-3 to redesignate 1. 7 acres of industrial to commercial subject to the approval of the Metropolitan Council . All voted in favor except Batzli and Erhart who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 2 . Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 16 _ Erhart : Why do we need approval from Metropolitan Council on this? Dacy: Because we' re changing our Land Use in the Comp Plan. It would be a minor amendment through their office. Ellson: How did it get split like this in the first place? Normally we would never have done this sort of thing? This was always a one person , — one owner land? You' re saying this was just part of an oversight? Dacy: Right . Batzli : By voting for this , what we' re going to do is move the BH line over . Erhart : Or you could go the other way. Conrad: Your reason Brian? (for voting in opposition) Batzli : I 'd like to see something in writing , more concrete as to what they' re proposing to do with this property prior to changing the land use . — Erhart : I want to add my vote to opposing also. The reason I would like to have just a little better analysis . . . — Emmings moved , Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Rezoning Request #88-3 to rezone 1. 7 acres of property from IOP, Industrial Office Park to BH, Business Highway District subject to approval of the Land Use Plan Amendment by the City Council and the Metropolitan County. Emmings , Ellson , Headla and Wildermuth voted in — favor of the motion. Batzli , Conrad and Erhart voted in opposition of the motion. The motion carried with a vote of 4 to 3 . Conrad: Brian, your reason? Batzli : Pretty much the same reason as well as the fact that I 'm not convinced that it shouldn ' t be rezoned entirely to IOP. — Conrad : Tim you voted . Erhart: Same reasons I stated before. Conrad : My reasons , I would like to see a concrete proposal in front of us . I 'm extremely concerned about the traffic problem that may be generated with the new realignment of TH 101 . Emmings : . . . I think you told me that we can ' t proceed that way. We can' t consider rezoning , we can ' t demand they have a plan taken into account in the anlysis of whether or not we ' re willing to rezone. Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 17 Dacy: I 'm still conferring with my previous opinion. What you ' re deciding on the rezoning issue is if you ' re totally satisfied with all of the uses in that district being applied to that parcel , yes , you may have a specific site plan that ' s coming in at the same time but you 've got to be aware that that specific site plan , that he developer could call it a picture, the property is sold and you could be looking at another use for that district . You just can ' t based your approval on the rezoning solely on that site plan. Batzli : I would like to state that I don ' t think there was any real analysis of what that property could be zoned. Should it be zoned IOP? What should it be there? We were presented this as if it ' s going to be a garden center. There was no anlysis of what the use of that particular site should be . Emmings : Except half the site is already exactly the zoning we gave the whole thing so I suppose to the extent that the . . . Batzli : I know but it ' s arbitrary on which way you want to make the whole lot. I think we' ve should just look at that. Emmings : I guess the answer to that would be , either one didn ' t have. . . Dacy: We can certainly do that analysis for the Council . Conrad : That ' s would be appropriate . I think they would appreciate that . Steve, you ' re absolutely right. This is philosophy here. This is ivory tower non-specific but nobody' s persuaded me that we should change it. I can go either way and the only way I can go either way is to see the real stuff and the real stuff is not here . In the absence of a real thorough staff investigation of what ' s the best and in the absence of the applicant being here , I don ' t want to change the zoning . Emmings : My thinking on that issue, this particular item that we ' re mulling over tonight is , you could spend four years deciding whether it would better to be BH or IOP and we wouldn' t be any further along than we are now. Conrad : Right . But if we saw the applicant and they had a plan , we might be able to make some real good positions but the applicant doesn' t want to sit here tonight . PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTIONS 20-695 , 20-715 , 20-774 , 20-795, AND 20-815 TO PROVIDE FOR MINIMUM BUILDING AND PARKING SETBACKS FOR LOTS ADJACENT TO RAILROADS AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS , CITY OF CHANHASSEN. Public Present : Name Address Darrell Fortier Architect and Land Planner for Frank Beddor C - CITYOF -- Itt# CHANHASSEN' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 ;men by fir ^'1!stratcr MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager _6l ti __ FROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planner DATE: June 9 , 1988 /13/fa/ SUBJ: Lake Riley Woods South, Final Plat Approval , ( SUB #87-2) BACKGROUND The City Council approved the preliminary plat for Lake Riley Woods South at the April 11 , 1988 , meeting subject to the following conditions : — 1 . Soil borings are submitted to the city soil consultants and the consultants approve two acceptable sites per lot prior to final plat approval . 2 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of these public improvements . 3 . The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit. 4 . A revised plan showing the changes in the horizontal roadway alignment, as discussed previously in this report, shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer as part of the final planning review process . 5 . An 18-inch minimum diameter culvert shall be installed under- neath the proposed access onto Pioneer Trail , CSAH 14 . 6 . The proposed road file shall include a 0 . 5% grade for a mini- - mum distance of 50 feet prior to the access onto Pioneer Trail . 7 . Wood fiber blanket or equivalent shall be utilized on all disturbed slopes greater than 3 : 1 . 8 . The typical rural roadway section shall be revised to a 3-inch bituminous wear course as per the City standards for rural construction. Mr . Don Ashworth June 9 , 1988 _ Page 2 9 . Trail and park dedication fees shall be accepted in lieu of — trail and parkland and if the road or an emergency access is connected to Great Plains Golf Estates , the Park and Recreation shall review the for the trail along the proposed _ road. 10 . Submittal of stormwater calculations to determine predevelop- ment rates . 11 . Carver County shall review final construction plans prior to final plat approval . 12 . A road connection easement should be retained so that a road connection could be sought to the Halla subdivision and — which would do the least amount of damage to the Lake Riley Wood development and the Halla development. 13 . The applicant shall provide a 20 foot trail easement along — the proposed street into the subdivision. Three issues needed to be addressed prior to final plat approval .The applicant has submitted soil boring reports for the lots . Roger Machmeier and Jim Anderson have reviewed the soil borings and have advised staff that the reports are satisfactory. The — applicant has submitted all information required in Machmeier' s letter dated May 16 , 1988 . Carver County was also to review the construction plans prior to final plat approval . The construc- tion plans are now undergoing review by both the City and County. — The Council can withhold signatures of the mylars until Carver County approves of the plans . Finally, the Park and Recreation Coordinator has indicated that the 20 foot trail easement should — be provided on the south side of the proposed street . ROAD CONNECTION — Remaining to be decided; however, is the clarification as to whether or not a road connection was required by the City Council at their meeting of April 11 , 1988 . The applicant is requesting — that the Council clarify its action on April llth, and, if so deemed , to reconsider its original action to require a road through Lot 3 of Lake Riley Woods South. - — It was staff' s interpretation that the City Council required retention of an easement through Lot 3 for a potential road con- nection into Halla' s subdivision . The Planning Commission origi- nally recommended that either an emergency access or an easement be reserved for connection into the Halla property. The City Council chose to require an easement . Upon City Council action, staff investigated whether or not such a road connection could be built via a public improvement process if Halla were to develop Mr . Don Ashworth June 9 , 1988 Page 3 within the next year . The City Attorney advised that such a pro- cess is achievable, although the city would have to acquire right-of-way from Halla to achieve the connection . If Halla does not develop the property, the easement could either be vacated or remain on the plat until a future connection would be made at a future point in time . Given the applicant' s request, the Council needs to consider the _ following: 1 . If the Council chooses to affirm their original decision then the items addressed in the following paragraphs need to be reviewed. If the Council reconsiders their decision from April llth and clarifies that a road connection was not to be made but some type of an emergency access would be made, then other steps need to be undertaken to design such an access . Finally, the Council could reconsider their action on April 11, 1988 and not require reservation of the ease- ment. 2 . If the Council clarifies that a road connection should be made between the Lake Riley Woods South plat and the Halla subdivision, assuming Halla develops within the next year , the following is recommended: a . The developer , as shown in Attachment #2 , should dedicate a portion of the land area of Lot 3 as an outlot to the city for future road purposes . As shown in the diagram, enough acreage remains to exceed the 21 acre lot area minimum. The development contract would also require that the developer waive any rights to object to a future assessment for Lot 3 in order to construct the road . The development contract would also stipulate that if the Halla property were not to be subdivided the city would deed the outlot to the owner of Lot 3 . RECOMMENDATION 1 . It is recommended that the Council clarify their action on April 11 , 1988 . Depending on Council direction, city staff will prepare the development contract accordingly. Again, if the Council meant to create the easement for a future road connection between the Halla property and the Lake Riley Woods South property, the final plat should be amended to dedicate the road easement and the remnant parcel of Lot 3 as shown in Attachment #2 to the city as an outlot. The development contract would also require the developer to waive the right to object to a future assessment on Lot 3 . If the road is not to be built, the city would deed the outlot to the owner of Lot 3 . Mr. Don Ashworth June 9 , 1988 Page 4 — 2 . Staff recommends approval of the final plat stamped "Received May 19 , 1988" and subject to the following conditions : 1 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial sureties to _ guarantee the proper installation of these public improvements . 2 . The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit. 3 . A revised plan showing the changes in the horizontal roadway alignment, as discussed previously in this report, shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer as part of the final planning review process . 4 . An 18-inch minimum diameter culvert shall be installed under- neath the proposed access onto Pioneer Trail, CSAH 14 . 5 . The proposed road file shall include a 0 . 5% grade for a mini- mum distance of 50 feet prior to the access onto Pioneer Trail . 6 . Wood fiber blanket or equivalent shall be utilized on all disturbed slopes greater than 3 : 1 . 7 . The typical rural roadway section shall be revised to a — 3-inch bituminous wear course as per the City standards for rural construction . 8 . Trail and park dedication fees shall be accepted in lieu of trail and parkland and if the road or an emergency access is connected to Great Plains Golf Estates , the Park and Recreation shall review the for the trail along the proposed — road. 9 . Submittal of stormwater calculations to determine predevelop- — ment rates . 10 . The City will not sign the plat mylars until Carver County _ has approved the construction drawings . 11 . The applicant shall provide a 20 foot trail easement along the proposed street into the subdivision. 12 . Council clarification regarding the road easement dedication. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Detail map of Lot 3 with proposed road easement.2 . City Council minutes dated April 11 , 1988 . 3 . Staff report dated March 16 , 1988 . 4 . Letter from Roger Machmeier dated May 16 , 1988 . "3:Vb(C7icia 15rM OtCrW I \ • • LOT- 3 - z, 5 5 GR e:5) 21'51 / 171 Zv MAf 1988 on 4.01e- ( J — C CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING — APRIL 11, 1988 ' IT Mayor Hamilton called the meeting to order. The meeting was opened with the — Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Councilman Geving, Councilman Boyt and Councilman _ Johnson COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Horn STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Barbara Dacy, Larry Brown, Lori. Sietsema and Roger Knutson APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Geving moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to approve the agenda as presented with the addition by Councilman Boyt of a citywide trash pick-up under Council Presentation. All voted in favor and — motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Conditional Use Permit Approval for Food Processing Facilities and Site Plan Review for McGlynn Bakeries. c. First Reading of Rezoning, Subdivision and Wetland Alteration Permit Approval for Minnewashta Meadows, Gary Carlson. 1. Resolution #88-28: Minnewashta Meadows Subdivision Petition for Public Improvement File No. 88-2. e. Resolution #88-29: Cable Television, Request to Transfer Ownership. — f. Resolution #88-30: City Hall Expansion: 1) Approval of Plans and Specifications 2) Authorize Bids 3) Approve Architectural Agreement — g. Accounts Payable dated April 11, 1988 i. City Council Minutes dated March 28, 1988 — Planning Commission Minutes dated March 16, 1988 All voted in favor and motion carried. -- CONSENT AGENDA: (B) SUBDIVISION AND WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT APPROVAL, LAKE .? — RILEY WOODS SOUTH, GEORGE NELSON ASSOCIATES. L.- Barbara Dacy: It's obvious from the staff update that we wanted to follow up on the street connection issue regarding this subdivision with the adjacent — subdivision to the west. That being Great Plains Golf Estates. Larry Brown 1 City'Council Meeting - Apl 11, 1988 would like to present the staff follow-up on this item. Larry Brown: As noted in the staff report, this site is located south of CR 14 approximately 1/2 mile east of TH 101 and directly south of Lake Riley Woods. Municipal sanitary sewer service is not available to the site and therefore on-site septic systems will be required. Similarly, municipal water service will also have to be provided by on-site sources. The issue of the proposed right-of-way, the street grades are in accordance with the city standards of 7.0% with the minimum being 5.0% which is consistent with the city standards. There are some minor changes noted in the staff report which the applicant is more than willing to work with staff with to address those issues. The main issue from the Planning Commission stems fran combining alternate accesses. The proposed cul-de-sac is approximately 2,000 feet in length. The Planning Commission approved the subdivision contingent upon the applicant obtainng alternative sources of through traffic out to CR 14. We pursued the County in this matter and the County said that they would not support such an emergency access or a regular access. Due to the existing constraints of the ravines around the site and the bluff topography, the only other alternative was to extend this cul-de-sac over to the west to Great Plains Golf Estates, which as you're aware of, received plat extension on March 28, 1988. Obviously extension of the cul-de-sac would cause the loss of one lot from both of these proposed plats. The 2,000 foot cul-de-sac, although public safety felt that the single entrance did not provide a problem, from an engineering standpoint, being traffic flow, maintenance and emergency accesses are better facilitated with the alternative access. That's all I have. Councilman Boyt: Larry, given the topography, where's the best spot for the secondary access if we considered putting it out to where the proposed Great Plains Golf Estates is now? What's the best way to get there?Larry Brown: Right where this line is drawn, (c) and (d) , I had the applicant investigate that alignment and there's a diagram in your packet. Just to give you some sort of feel as to what the topography looks like through there. It's fairly flat. Due to the ravine that surround the site, this is actually the only feasible site where you could possibly put a road through. Councilman Boyt: How long is the cul-de-sac if we put it through where you're proposing for the secondary entrance? Larry Brown: The cul-de-sac would be approximately 1,500 feet. Councilman Boyt: No, if we put through the secondary access you're proposing. Larry Brown: I'm sorry, approximately 500 feet. Councilman Boyt: I thought you said something about the original cul-de-sac was 2,000 feet. Larry Brown: This cul-de-sac that's being proposed on the plan is 2,000 feet. Councilman Boyt: So we're knocking 1,500 feet off of it with the secondary? Larry Brown: Well, I was referencing the 500 feet for this distance here. In actuality, you have a cul-de-sac situation through here that would be 2 City Council Meeting - April 11, 1988 P estaimated at roughly 1,000 feet each way. Councilman Boyt: You'd have a loop? The other question I have is, I'm — interested in a trail on this. I don't mean to propose to put a trail on but these are lots that are 2 1/2 acres apiece. I think it would be a fairly minor request to ask to have a trail easement on one side or the other of this. — Probably on the inside of what I would propose to be the loop. So looking at it initially, I think that anytime we have a chance to avoid a 2,000 foot cul- de-sac, we should take it. I think there have been a few times in the past when we've said that it's unlikely that we'll have a hook-up and then it's cost — up when the opportunity has become available and we hadn't provided for that option. I would suggest that we follow the Planning Commission and what I think is Larry's recommendation and ask the developer to make arrangements to — run a secondary, at least give us the easement, for a secondary access across what is now Lot 3. I would also request that we put a trail easement on what would then become the inside of that loop. Councilman Geving: Have you had a chance to talk to Mr. Halla about the potential linking of this subdivision plat with his? Larry Brown: I believe Mr. Halla is here, the developer, and we'll give them a chance to speak if you'd like. The developer of this plat had contacted him and Mr. Halla had stated that he wasn't in favor the idea. Is Mt. Halla here? — David Halla: Yes. I think I'd prefer to let the developer speak on his part first and then get involved afterwards. — Councilman Geving: That's fine. From my own perspective we've seen a lot of developments like this and I don't think we have very many that are 2,000 feet although they have extended considerably over our original 500 feet maximum. — We have an opportunity to get a secondary access through the eventual Halla plat. I think we ought to take that opportunity. We have to deal with issue as it comes up and we're dealing now with this particular proposed plat and I _ too would go along with Bill's suggestion that we take the opportunity to get the easement so in the future can link up these two. I think we're missing an opportunity if you don't do this so my recommendation is the same as Bill's. As far as the trail's concerned, that's another issue but I'm more concerned — about the road at this time. I guess that's the end of where the Planning Commission left it with us to make the decision and I think we can make the decision. _ Councilman Johnson: I'm in agreement with both Bill and Dale on this but I don't believe that what we have to do is cut right along the alignment section called CD here. If we cut in at 90 degrees on the east property line where it says 245 feet there, then take a turn and run along the Ward property line, we won't be cutting off much of his lot there. It's a four acre lot. Probably drop that one lot considerably. We may be able to make some of that up and — still get the same number of lots out of this subdivision. We take that as an easment at this time. It will help both subdivisions for the safety purposes. This other, Great Plains had a fairly long cul-de-sac on it I believe also. I don't remember for sure whether he had multiple entrances there.or not. You see what I mean. Instead of cutting straight through Lot 3, go around the edge of Lot 3. 3 — City Council Meeting - Apr- 11, 1988 ( Councilman Boyt: What's the topography look like there? Councilman Johnson: It's flat there also according to the topo map. Larry Brown: If I may clarify something, the diagram that I had sketched out which was included in your packet was only for reference to the "T" intersection which I desired. I have talked to the applicant's engineer and he says, if the Council decides they would like to see alternative access go through there, are willing to work with the staff in nailing down a final diagram for that. The one that I included wasn't necessarily intended to pinpoint the exact location. Councilman Johnson: I don't think you'll lose a lot from doing it. You've got several six acres and this particular lot in this case if 4.0 acres. It's more important in the far future when this gets further subdivided, when sewer is in there, to have with the number of lots in this subdivision, it's not as important right now but when these all get resubdivided 20-30 years down the road, having that easement in there, even if there isn't a road in there at this time, having the ability to get a road in there in the future for future subdivision will be very important for our grandchildren or whatever. Mayor Hamilton: Is there a representative here from Nelson and Associates? Did you have anything you wanted to say about the comments that were made. _ Brian Olson: We drew the plat several times and because of the topography of the site, we found no practical way to give the second access. We also felt that since Mr. Halla's plat already had preliminary approval, that the actually link-up or connection would never happen. It's an question the Attorney can answer as to how easy it's going to be to get that. Also, we plan to start construction as soon as possible and we would like to proceed to finish our project. I'm not so sure that that's the intention next door. I'm wondering, if you desire to have us create something in here again, that may never happen. I understand the concern. Ideally we would prefer an easier piece of ground to work with in a double access situation but for this site, it isn't real practical or possible. If the Council so desires or mandates that that happens, we're more than willing to work with staff to accomplish that. Yet we would like to proceed with our plans here though if possible and not table this for perspective planning. The season's here as far as we're concerned. We'd like to proceed. We also don't see a great deal of potential here for future sewer and water development with the size lots and the type of clientele that we've already attracted and are talking to. We have one gentleman that's made _ a commitment for almost a million dollars on one of the sites. I don't think he's going to be further subdividing his lots. We're looking for consideration. It's not an effort to dodge or duck. We looked at some of these suggestions that staff had. Some of this is happening before I became involved with the developer and I don't know the complete history but there are instances where, because of the situation and the topography of the land that you perhaps permitted a less than ideal road situation and that's basically what we've got here. David Halla: We have redrawn our plat three or four times to satisfy the Planning Commission and Council for their requirements. WO did give two accesses and changed the cul-de-sacs that we had originally in order to take care of our plat. I feel that it would be unfair to us at this point to say 4 • (- City Council Meeting -( _aril 11, 1988 — that we make changes and give up an additional lot to run this one through. To give an easement across where it's already been approved and okayed in our situation. There's a possibility of doing different situations on the existing _ site to the east of us that you're talking about tonight where another road can be put in rather than connecting through our property. Mayor Hamilton: I'm not so opposed to putting it through as long as it can be accomplished without taking lots away from either one of the developers. I guess I'm concerned that we seen to be fairly preoccupied with the length of cul-de-sacs and as I drive around other communities and see plats and plans occurring in other cities, they've got cul-de-sacs that run for miles with no alternative access and I'm kind of curious if we're the only one that gets so concerned about the length of our cul-de-sacs. Having never had an instance _ occur in this town, that I know of, where an alternative access is necessary, I'm not so sure that it's something we need to waste our time at. There's no question that it could occur sometime or we may need an alternative access but when 2 1/2 acre lots or better, to tie the two neighborhoods — together, I'm not sure it can be a requirement, although it'd be nice someday if they both continued to subdivide, as some of the people have said, it probably would be a good idea to have the easement at least so it could be put — through if so desired. As far as the trail in there, again, it's the same problem I've had with a lot of other areas where trails have been suggested. It begins nowhere and it ends nowhere. It doesn't go to anyplace and maybe that would tie into something at someday too but to request and require that a — trail be built that doesn't accomplish anything, doesn't do a whole lot for me. Did you have anything to add? Councilman Geving: I'd like to hear from our Attorney on the question that Mr. Halla raised or someone raised about the status of Mr. Halla's plan. Whether or not at this point, if we decided to make that linkage, we can go back and change that. Roger Knutson: Change Mr. Halla's plat? What is the status of Mr. Halla's plat? — Barbara Dacy: It was approved for preliminary plat last summer. It was granted an extension of the preliminary plat approval just recently. _ Roger Knutson: When does that extension run out? Barbara Dacy: July 1, 1989. — Roger Knutson: The preliminary you're giving an extra year and a half? Councilman Johnson: The final was given an extra year and a half. Roger Knutson: To bring in a the final? Barbara Dacy: Right. Roger Knutson: At this point it's really tough to go back and open that up. Once you get through the preliminary plat approval and he complied with the conditions of that plat approval. 5 City Council Meeting - Apr— 11, 1988 Councilman Boyt: I've got a couple things to add. First, the trails haven't picked up much discussion here. I think anytime we're looking at lots that we would have so little impact on asking for a trail easement, it's a good idea to ask for it. I'm not saying that we're going to build the trail tomorrow. I'm simply saying that we don't have to go back and purchase land in the future that is available to us now simply for asking so I'd like to see us ask for a trail easement along what is going to be for a long time a long cul-de-sac. Mainly because I think it's always good to give people an opportunity to consider walking someplace else besides in the street and someday we might like to build a trail. On the possibility of going back and asking for this road easement for secondary access, I think the point that Roger has made that it's certainly going to be difficult to go back and ask Mr. Halla to adjust his plan now in some ways begs to question because I'm skeptical that we're going to see a final plat in here in July because as soon as we see a final plat, as I understand it, then that changes the value of that land. Is that correct? Barbara Dacy: The value is determined by the Assessor's Office. I know that Scott has told me that once a plat is filed there's a three year grace period that will continue to assess a base on the use of the land as is even though it's platted for single family detached use. That was hi.s most recent interpretation. Councilman Boyt: That puts a wrinkle i.n it. I personally think that we're making a mistake. Anytime we approve a cul-de-sac that's this long when we have some sort of potential release. I think Jay's proposal of laying it along the property line is probably the least impact to everyone involved and I hope we have a motion that indicates we will do that. Councilman Geving: This is for the road now you're thinking? Councilman Boyt: Yes. Councilman Geving: I do want to comment to the developer that the Council has an insight, in my opinion, a historical perspective that I don't believe you understand or can appreciate. We have seen a lot of large developments that were picked up years and years ago that had no intention of ever developing but now they've been passed on several times to different members of the family and now, due to economic conditions throughout our community, we're seeing a lot of development that people never intended ever to develop 20 years ago. Because of that, especially in our northern area, we're finding that the lots are being broken into smaller chunks especially for economics. The economics of today's world, people can't pay the taxes or don't want to continue to pay the taxes. People are getting older and they'd just as soon move on to a condo. We're seeing a lot of that so just for your perspective, when you see these big lots 20 years from now, they will be broken once we get sewer and water in there. I guarantee you. That's all I have to say and I just want to reiterate what you said Bill, I do believe we should take every opportunity to gather as many trail easements as we can as we approve these plats because you never have another opportunity. Once that passes, it's gone. Just like we heard from our Attorney, once we miss a plat, we have lost the opportunity to make a change on it and I don't want to lose that tonight so I'm in favor of securing that trail easement. I don't want to lose a lot for the developer but I do believe that it would be proper for us to get the easement however, for a potential link-up i77 at some future time. 6 City Council Meeting - April 11, 1988 Councilman Johnson: The trail does not start nowhere and go nowhere because we're also planning a trail along CR 14 out there so the trail will link to the — trail system. It should fit in quite nicely and again, we're only asking for an easement at this time. Someplace in the future if the people in the area petition us for trails in the area, we already have the easement and we can put _ the trails in. Without that easement, if we get petitioned or some future Council gets petitioned to a trail i.n, there's no way they can because they'll have to obtain those access from 16 people. I would like to see that trail access and I think personally, it should go on the north side of the road. — That would be the least number of households affected. It appears that there's a slice of area between the roadway and the neighboring properties there between Lots 2 and 3. I'd rather have one side or the other, I'd just like to — put a condition that a trail easement will be shown on the final plat. After looking at the contours I hate to say it, but my little idea of running along the east property line is down on the side a hill that's at about 15% grade and i.t may not work too well. I would like the motion to say, if at all possible, engineeringly feasible, that we obtain a road easement for possible future connection to the west. Saying that we have not had the situation as of yet is the same thing as saying I haven't had a traffic wreck that killed me yet. It — only takes once and who knows. In fact, in this case, I'd even be willing for a lot area variance on Lot 3 for that easement to allow that. If we had to push down the lot a little bit to get that easement. I don't think we need an area variance at this time because it's only an easement, it's still a part of the property. The variance would come in at the time the street was built and the City took i.t over as right-of-way. Am I correct there Barb? Barbara Dacy: Right. The easement, as an easement, the area is still calculated as a part of the lot area. I guess I'm kind of concerned. I don't mean to throw water on the fire here but if you're looking at an easement in — the alignment of C and D, it's almost better in that case to require the connection because an easement would just chop the lot in half. They wouldn't be able to build within that easement. Otherwise, an easement would have to be reserved along the northerly lot line of Lot 3. Is that what you're suggesting? Councilman Councilman Johnson: Yes, the northerly lot line I suggest as the east/west — part of it and then run up to it. Instead of starting at the corner of Lot 3, closer to where the alignment of C intersects, that C-D site section intersects the road. Further up where I had originally said, is quite steep and would be — engineering wise quite difficult to get in there without owning the property next door. Barbara Dacy: And the full 60 feet of width. — Councilman Johnson: Yes, theoretically we could go along the property line with half the width or something and go for future, whenever the other ones are — subdivided along there that we get the other half of the road. It seems to line up with the lot lines on Great Plains Golf Estates better to keep it all on his property. I'm definitely for the trail. — a t- A motion was made at this point with the following discussion. 7 City Council Meeting - Apr. 11, 1988 Councilman Johnson: Are you saying easement or road connection? Councilman Boyt: I'm saying an easement for both of those things. (7 Councilman Geving: What's the width of your proposed trail easement? Councilman Boyt: Whatever a standard easement width is. Know that we're- going to put an 8 foot trail in there or whatever but we're not going to use 20 feet. The 20 foot easement is to give us a little room to flex around the geography. Councilman Geving: The motion has 13 items to our conditions, is that correct? Mayor Hamilton: 9 changes. We can just change 9 so it would say, instead of park dedication fees, it would be say trail easement or 20 foot easement shall be acquired and that park dedication fees shall be accepted in lieu of parkland. Councilman Boyt: We're still taking the fees. They're not building the trails. Councilman Geving: We would do both. We'd still get the trail and park dedication fees and now we're asking for the easement. I'm asking, we have apparently added 12 for the trails and 13 for the road? Councilman Boyt: Right and what I'm basically trying to do here is give them the green light to go ahead and do your development stating that this be worked out with staff as to the best location. My intent being that we're not going to take a lot away from you and we're going to work with Mr. Halla so we minimize the impact on that side of the development as well. Councilman Johnson: Are you including the Wetland Alteration Permit in your motion also? Mayor Hamilton: His motion was 1(b) which includes the Wetland Alteration Permit unless you didn't intend it to be? Councilman Boyt: I didn't see any problem with the wetland alteration. Councilman Johnson: Either did I so if you motion included that, my second includes that. Mayor Hamilton: I would just say it seems kind of foolish to try to pass a motion that our Attorney we've hired to give us legal advice is telling us it isn't going to work. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. This Council seems to not like to listen to what the experts tell us I guess. Councilman Boyt moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to approve the Wetland Alternation Permit for Lake Riley Woods South for George Nelson Associates and Subdivision #87-2 as shown on the plat stamped "Received January 25, 1988" with iE7 the following conditions: 8 City Council Mooting - April 11, 1988 171 1. Soil borings are submitted to the city soil consultants and the consultants approve two acceptable sites per lot prior to the final plat approval. 2. The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of these public improvements. _ 3. The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit. 4. A revised plan showing the changes in the horizontal roadway alignment, as discussed previously in this report, shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer as part of the final planning review process. 5. An 18-inch minimum diameter culvert shall be installed underneath the proposed access onto Pioneer Trial, CSAH 14. 6. The proposed road file shall include a 0.5% grade for a minimum distance of 50 feet prior to the access onto Pioneer Trail. 7. Wood fiber blanket or equivalent shall be utilized on all disturbed slopes greater than 3:1. 8. The typical rural roadway section shall be revised to a 3-inch bituminous wear course as per the City standards for rural construction. i 9. Trail and park dedication fccs shall be accepted in lieu of trail -- construction and parkland. Also, a 20 foot trail easement shall be granted where the developer and staff feels it is appropriate. 10. Submittal of stormwater calculations to determine predevelopnent rates. 11. Carver County shall review final construction plans prior to final plat approval. 12. The applicant shall provide plans for a secondary access for emergency purposes with Carver County and City Engineer approval. — 13. A road connection easement shall be sought and worked out with staff that would do the least damage to Lake Riley Woods South and Great Plains Golf — Es to tes. All voted in favor and motion carried. Larry Brown: Bill, your motion, does that mean you're telling the developer to go ahead and construct the cul-de-sac as proposed with just the easement there? — Councilman Boyt: Yes. VISITORS PRESENTATION: There were no visitor presentations at this meeting. 9 I T Y OF ClIA IH�ASS��t C.C. DATE: March 16 , 1988 \\, . C.C. DATE: April 11, 1988 1,41, y CASE NO: 87-2 SUB 88-4 WAP Prepared by: Olsen/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: . Preliminary Plat for 16 Family Single Lots on 77 Acres . Wetland Alteration Permit for Development Within 200 Feet of a Class B Wetland V LOCATION: South of County Road 14, approximately mile east of Hwy. 101, directly south of Lake Riley Woods North - TS - Cl_ APPLICANT: George Nelson Associates 1660 South Hwy. 100 , Suite 428 _ Minneapolis, MN 55416 -- 3ii4 /se PRESENT ZONING: A-2, Agricultural Estates ACREAGE: 77 acres ( gross ) and 73 acres (net) DENSITY: 4 . 6 acres per unit ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- A-2; Lake Riley Woods Estates S- A-2; Railroad track and vacant E- A-2; Great Plains Golf Estates sub. QW- A-2; single family residence W WATER AND SEWER: Not available to the site . (f) PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The northerly portion of the site is cultivated and the southerly portion of the site is a steep ravine . 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Agriculture 1 t ,A.KJIIIE *Fityi -. KE 4‘94 rivApikll,ft • Fcs F RILEY :. �_ � z - AYD ' r 1.1 \V/ --..________ 1,.:.: ! �• THi TR .E T IF •..t.,. -__.-._______9( ________ Ae POND9sc c. . Hcf 'FAIL (C1 !�7) cz-L--)a 5,..) : a' .. o. ''''' 1-0645:pai NOV NV i ------ 1( _,, T pow . A 2_ L_________7 4.7-(,:: I A eiL-13 i 0 4. 3c CC. 71e-T-.. --. -- I litCR EEKW 00D I 400 } *---..,,, trin I 1°I.Ir rA q , 500— ilk kocf( :pig v S 2‘2 9 ra - G 600 - � ••vijitrat `� ,LOVE 1 V� ' • _� - I. - 700 R / C E • ' 800 LAKE — G / s ( NE- ---- _______„_: ; 900 1_ - 1000 C Lake Riley Woods South March 16 , 1988 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The application will be reviewed under the old ordinance regula- tions since it the application was made by the January 15, 1987 , deadline. The applicant has received two extensions from the City Council to the July, 1987 , deadline for preliminary plat approval . The most recent deadline for the applicant is July, 1988 . Therefore, the requirements for this subdivisionta. 2i acres per lot with 180 feet of street frontage. Each lot must provide two approved septic system sites and have at least one acre of buildable area, meaning 25% of less slope. Section 6 . 05 ( 5 ) (a) of the previous Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum lot area of 2 . 5 acres in the R-la District. The Shoreland Ordinance requires unsewered lots to have a minimum of 40 , 000 square feet, a lot width of 150 feet, a building set- back of 100 feet and a sanitary sewer setback of 75 feet. The Wetland Ordinance requires a 75 foot setback from the ordi- nary high water mark for a structure and a 150 foot setback for sewage treatment systems . REFERRAL AGENCIES Carver County Attachment #1 Building Department Attachment #2 Fire Inspector Attachment #3 Engineering Attachment #5 BACKGROUND The application for the Lake Riley Woods South subdivision was submitted by the required deadline of January 15 , 1987 , so that it would be regulated under the old rural requirements . The City Council extended the deadline of July, 1987 , for preliminary plat approval until July, 1988 ( Attachment #6 ) . ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing 16 single family lots on 77 acres of property zoned A-2 , Agricultural Estates . The property is located south of County Road 14 . The northerly portion of the site is currently cultivated and the southerly portion contains a steep heavily vegetated ravine. There is a small Class B wetland located in the westerly portion of Lot 2 , Block 1 . f ! - Lake Riley Woods South March 16, 1988 Page 3 — Lot Layout — The 16 lots are located along an internal cul-de-sac from County Road 14 . Two of the lots are double frontage lots between County — Road 14 and the internal street ( Lots 1 and 2 ) . The majority of the lots are located adjacent to the steep ravine to the south. The applicant has provided on the preliminary plat the total acreage for each lot ( the acreage of the lot removing the — unbuildable acreage [ 25% slope or less] ) . All the lots contain at least one acre of buildable area for the house, septic systems and well. — The tree line of the site is shown on the preliminary plat and the lots are situated so that none of the vegetation will have to be removed as a result of the construction of the street. Certain house pads may remove a small amount of the existing vegetation. Since a large amount of trees will not be removed as part of the improvements to the site, staff is not recommending a tree removal plan be provided. Septic Systems — Typically, staff does not permit review of the preliminary plat until the city soil consultants have reviewed the soil borings and have approved all of the lots as having two septic sites .The applicant wished to pursue the application at this time rather than having to wait until the spring thaw for the soil borings to be taken. Once the soil borings were approved in the — spring, they could move ahead with the project . The applicant contacted Jim Anderson, city soil consultants , to — determine whether or not preliminary plat review be initiated with approval conditioned upon final approval of the soil borings and two septic sites per lot. Drs . Machmeier and Anderson have visited the site with the applicant during the last year and — determined that there was adequate area for the two septic sites . Dr . Anderson was confident that from their experience with the soils in that area, site visits and with the large amount of — buildable acreage on each lot, that it would not be difficult to locate two septic sites per lot. With this guarantee, staff has agreed to initiate the preliminary plat approval . — The applicant has shown the approximate location of two septic sites for each lot. The applicant has located the sites such that there is adequate area for construction traffic to pass by the septic sites to the proposed house pad. Staff will be con- ditioning the approval of the preliminary plat upon submittal of the soil borings and acceptance of two septic sites per lot by the city' s soil consultants . 44, Lake Riley Woods South March 16, 1988 Page 4 Streets and Grading and Drainage In the attached memo, the City Engineer addresses street construction, grading and drainage in detail and also addresses future street connections from the subject site. RECOMMENDATION The proposed preliminary plat meets the requirements of the pre- vious Zoning Ordinance with each lot have at least 24 acres and 180 feet of street frontage, contingent upon each site having two acceptable septic sites . Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion : "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision #87-2 as shown on the plat stamped "Received January 25, 1988" , subject to the following conditions : 1 . Soil borings are submitted to the city soil consultants and the consultants approve two acceptable sites per lot prior to final plat approval . 2 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of these public improvements. 3 . The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit. 4 . A revised plan showing the changes in the horizontal roadway alignment, as discussed previously in this report, shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer as part of the final planning review process . 5 . An 18-inch minimum diameter culvert shall be installed under- neath the proposed access onto Pioneer Trail, CSAH 14 . 6 . The proposed road file shall include a 0 . 5% grade for a mini- mum distance of 50 feet prior to the access onto Pioneer Trail . 7 . Wood fiber blanket or equivalent shall be utilized on all disturbed slopes greater than 3 : 1 . 8 . The typical rural roadway section shall be revised to a 3-inch bituminous wear course as per the City standards for rural construction . " Lake Riley Woods South March 16 , 1988 Page 5 — PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission unanimously approved the preliminary plat for Lake Riley Woods South with staff ' s recommended eight con- ditions and added the following four conditions : 9 . Trail and park dedication fees shall be accepted in lieu of trail and parkland and if the road or an emergency access is connected to Great Plains Golf Estates , the Park and — Recreation shall review the for the trail along the proposed road. 10 . Submittal of stormwater calculations to determine predevelop- ment rates . 11 . Carver County shall review final construction plans prior to final plat approval . 12 . The applicant shall provide plans for a secondary access for — emergency purposes with Carver County and City Engineer approval . The Planning Commission felt that some sort of future connection should be provided from the site, whether a full street 60 foot roadway easement or a smaller emergency access ( such as a 20 ' gravel drive) . It was also felt that a secondary access could be — provided through the property to the north to CR 14 or to Great Plains Golf Estates . STAFF UPDATE The major point of concern by the Planning Commission was regarding whether or not a secondary access can be achieved to — the subject site. An emergency access to CR 14 is not acceptable to Carver County — ( similar reasons were conveyed on the Lake Susan Hills West issue) . The Engineer' s Office has evaluated options to make a connection to the street proposed in Halla' s subdivision . In order to accomplish the connection, a dedicated right-of-way would have to _ be created as part of the final plat process for Halla' s sub- division as well as reconfiguring this application . Connecting the two subdivisions offers advantages such as provides free flow of neighborhood traffic and providing easier patterns for street and plowing maintenance. Although not a public safety concern, given the existence of the subdivisions directly adjacent to one another , a street connection is recommended. It is unfortunate that staff was unable to anticipate the connec- tion during Halla' s review. A connection in the proposed loca- tion was not evaluated because of the lack of plans and — Lake Riley Woods South March 16 , 1988 Page 6 topographical information supplied by the Nelson apaplication. Mr . Halla has expressed objections to the street connection option. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Should the Council feel that the street connection is warranted, the plat should be revised and referred back to the Planning Commission. Should the Council approve the subdivision without the street connection, the following motion is recommended: "The City Council approves Subdivision Request #87-2 based on the plans stamped "Received April 8 , 1988" and subject to the following conditions : 1 . Soil borings are submitted to the city soil consultants and the consultants approve two acceptable sites per lot prior to final plat approval . 2 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of these public improvements . 3 . The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit. 4 . A revised plan showing the changes in the horizontal roadway alignment, as discussed previously in this report, shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer as part of the final planning review process . 5 . An 18-inch minimum diameter culvert shall be installed under- neath the proposed access onto Pioneer Trail , CSAH 14 . 6 . The proposed road file shall include a 0 . 5% grade for a mini- mum distance of 50 feet prior to the access onto Pioneer Trail . 7 . Wood fiber blanket or equivalent shall be utilized on all disturbed slopes greater than 3 : 1 . 8 . The typical rural roadway section shall be revised to a 3-inch bituminous wear course as per the City standards for rural construction. 9 . Trail and park dedication fees shall be accepted in lieu of trail and parkland and if the road or an emergency access is connected to Great Plains Golf Estates , the Park and Recreation shall review the for the trail along the proposed road. Lake Riley Woods South March 16, 1988 Page 7 10 . Submittal of stormwater calculations to determine predevelop- ment rates . — 11 . Carver County shall review final construction plans prior to final plat approval . _ WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT The Class B wetland is located in the western half of Lot 2 , Block 1 . It is not designated as a Class B wetland on the City' s Wetland Map but upon site visitation it was discovered that it was a low area of the site with predominately canary grass vegetation . The wetland will not be negatively impacted by development within 200 feet. The area of Lot 2 provides enough — area for the house and septic systems to meet the 150 and 75 foot setbacks from the wetland and the applicant is providing erosion control to the south of the wetland to protect it during construction of the street. RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland Alteration Permit #88-4 for development within 200 feet of a Class B wetland subject to the following conditions : 1 . No construction traffic will be permitted beyond the erosion control fence to the south of the wetland. 2 . The structure on Lot 2 , Block 1 , must maintain a 75 foot set- back from the edge of the wetland and the septic system must maintain a 150 foot setback from the edge of the wetland. " PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the — Wetland Alteration permit with staff' s recommended conditions . CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION — Straff recommends the City Council approve Wetland Alteration Permit #88-4 for development within 200 feet of a Class B wetland subject to the following conditions : 1 . No construction traffic will be permitted beyond the erosion control fence to the south of the wetland. — 2 . The structure on Lot 2 , Block 1 , must maintain a 75 foot set- back from the edge of the wetland and the septic system must maintain a 150 foot setback from the edge of the wetland. " Lake Riley Woods South March 16 , 1988 Page 8 ATTACHMENTS 1 . Letter from Carver County dated March 1 , 1988 . 2 . Memo from Building Department dated March 2 , 1988 . -- 3 . Memo from Fire Inspector dated March 1 , 1988 . 4 . Memo from Park and Recreation Coordinator dated March 10 , 1988 . 5 . Memo from City Engineer dated March 10, 1988 . 6 . City Council minutes dated January 11 , 1988 . 7 . Application. 8 . Memo from City Engineer dated April 8 , 1988 . 9 . Memo from from Scott Harr dated April 6 , 1988 . 10 . Neighborhood Road alignment maps . 11 . Sight section maps . 12 . Planning Commission minutes dated March 16 , 1988 . 13 . Preliminary plat dated January 25 , 1988 . CO[l �Tir: :r: CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE 4``tl 600 EAST 4TH STREET PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT \ / CHASKA,MINNESOTA 55318 (612) 448-3435 !`VNESO� COUNTY OF CAI VEQ Marcn 1 , 1988 Ms. JoAnn Olsen City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive _ P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Planning Case 87-2 Subdivision Lake Riley Woods South Dear Ms. Olsen: — We have reviewed the information regarding this subdivision and submit the following comments: Carver County has had previous discussions with Mr . George Nelson concerning this proposal . We have discussed the access location which is acceptable. We would request the opportunity to review the final construction plans before approval . — Thank-you for the opportunity to submit our comments . Sincerely , e# William J . Weckman P. E. Assistant County Engineer WJW/cjr • MAR 3 1988 VI l Y OF CiHANriik stiv 1 Affirmahue Action/Equal Opportunity Employer CITYOF - G CHANHASSEN ,,,„. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Asst. City Planner FROM: Building Department DATE: March 2 , 1988 SUBJ: Lake Riley Woods South, #87-2 Subdivision The proposal for this subdivision was reviewed as requested. It should be noted that Lots 6 and 14 are at or near the maximum slope allowed for sewage treatment mounds . If mounds are necessary in this subdivision, these lots should be closely scru- tinized to determine if they are buildable . 2 C CITYOF - G CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 — (612) 937-1900 MEMO TO : JoAnn Olsen , Csst . City Planner FROM : Steve Madden , Fire Inspector — DATE : March 1 , 1988 Subject : Lake Riley Woods (87-2 Sub-division ) Upon review of the site plan for Lake Riley , I have them to be in complaince with the fire code . — c. c . Scott Harr Jim Chaffee CITYOF N# CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: JoAnn Olsen, Assistant City Planner FROM: Lori Sietsema, Park and Recreation Coordinator • DATE: March 10 , 19884(c, RE: : Park and Recreation Commission Action on Lake Riley Woods South The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the site plan for Lake Riley Woods South at their last meeting . This area was also reviewed last year by the Commission for potential parkland and it was determined that it was not centrally located enough to serve as a community park. The trail plan identifies trail alignment along Pioneer Trail, which will be located on the north side of the road due to dif- ficulties within the Riley Lake Meadows development. Therefore, it does not affect this development. The Commission was concerned with the length of the cul-de-sac and discussed the possibility of it becoming a through street. If such would happen, it would have an affect on their trail recommendation, as they would not recommend a trail along a cul- de-sac but would on a through street. It is the recommendation of the Park and Recreation Commission to accept park and trail dedication fees in lieu of parkland and trail construction. They have requested to review this proposal again if changes are made in the road design. 4 4- CITYOF _ \ , 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission _ FROM: Larry Brown, Asst. City Engineer DATE: March 9 , 1988 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for Lake Riley Woods South Planning File No. 87-22 Sub. — George Nelson Associates , Inc. Attached are the plans for Lake Riley Woods South dated "Received — January 25 , 1988" . This 16 lot subdivision is located on the south side of Pioneer Trail, County State Aid Highway 14, approximately one-half of a mile east of Trunk Highway 101. The site is composed of a rolling cultivated farm field with a ravine along the southern and westerly property boundaries . Sanitary Sewer This 16 lot subdivision is outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) . Therefore, on-site septic treatment systems — will be used. All proposed septic system sites should be staked and roped off prior to the commencement of any construction. Water Service Municipal water service is not available to the site. Each lot _ will have to develop on-site sources for water . Roadway The applicant has provided a 60-foot right-of-way which is in accordance to the City standards for rural construction. The maximum proposed street grade is approximately 5 . 0% as compared — to the City' s recommended standard of 7 . 0% . It is recommended that the proposed roadway alignment adjacent to lots 12 , 13 and 14 be revised to show a straight horizontal — alignment and the not the reverse curve as shown . Reverse curves do not provide sufficient time between two curves for a driver to perceive and anticipate a reversal in horizontal alignment and — therefore should be avoided where practical . The applicant' s Planning Commission March 9 , 1988 Page 2 engineer has been advised of this recommendation and has agreed to revise the roadway alignment prior to final platting review processes . The typical section for rural roadways as shown on the plans shall be revised to a 3i-inch bituminous wear course and a 10-inch Class V base in accordance witht the City standards for rural roadways . Additional access to the west was examined to try to eliminate the proposed long cul-de-sac. Due to the ravine along the west and south sides of the site, only one alternative proposed right-of- - way was practical (refer to Attachment #2 ) . The preliminary plat to the west, Great Plains Golf Estates , was approved by the City Council on July 6 , 1987 . The extension of the proposed roadway to the west would create a skewed intersection with the current cul-de-sac alignment. The alternative access through Great Plains Golf Estates would eliminate one lot . Due to the density _ and hazards of a skewed intersection, it is recommended that the right-of-way remain as shown on the planset dated January 7 , 1988 . If, however , the Planning Commission wishes to pursue this alter- native access , the proposed plat should be revised to form a "T" intersection with the alternate access . Grading The majority of the proposed grading is limited to the proposed right-of-way with the roadway side slopes being constructed just outside of the roadway. Drainage and Erosion Control A culvert with a minimum diameter of 18 inches shall be installed under the access onto CSAH 14 . The erosion control along the south side of Lot 2 , Block 1 , shall be Type II erosion control ( staked hay bales and snow fence ) . The plan shall be revised to include the City' s standard detail for Type II erosion control . Recommended Conditions 1 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of these public improvements . 2 . The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit. k Planning Commission March 9 , 1988 Page 3 — 3 . A revised plan showing the changes in the horizontal roadway — alignment, as discussed previously in this report, shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer as part of the final planning review process . 4 . An 18-inch minimum diameter culvert shall be installed under- neath the proposed access onto Pioneer Trail, CSAH 14 . 5 . The proposed road file shall include a 0 . 5% grade for a mini- mum distance of 50 feet prior to the access onto Pioneer Trail . 6 . Wood fiber blanket or equivalent shall be utilized on all disturbed slopes greater than 3 : 1. 7 . The typical rural roadway section shall be revised to a — 3-inch bituminous wear course as per the City standards for rural construction. Attachments : 1 . Location Map 2 . Letter from Carver County — .1FRCO04, T ►4 :: CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE 600 EAST 4TH STREET PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT \ CHASKA,MINNESOTA 55318 (612) 448-3435 CNNES0 COUNTY OF CA VEQ March 1 , 1988 Ms. JoAnn Olsen City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen , MN 55317 RE: Planning Case 87-2 Subdivision Lake Riley Woods South Dear Ms . Olsen: We have reviewed the information regarding this subdivision and submit the following comments: Carver County has had previous discussions with Mr . George Nelson concerning this proposal . We have discussed the access location which is acceptable . — We would request the opportunity to review the final construction plans before approval . Thank-you for the opportunity to submit our comments. Sincerely , William J . Weckman P . E . Assistant County Engineer WJW/cj r MAR 3 1988 +r;l Y OF CHANtiAs t1V • 1 Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer City Council Meeting - January 11, 1988 Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Horn seconded to deny the request for the street name change by Bill Streepy and leave the street name as Sinnen Circle — with the stipulation that city staff contact the Rottlund Company, make sure that city maps are changed accordingly and that public safety people are notified. All voted in favor and motion carried. CONSIDERATION OF PLAT APPROVAL EXTENSION FOR RURAL SUBDIVISION: A. SEVER PETERSON AND GILBERT LAURENT B. ROBERT BURESH C. LAKE RILEY WOODS SOUTH Councilman Horn moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to approve plat approval extension for rural subdivision for Sever Peterson and Gilbert Laurent, Robert _ Buresh and Lake Riley Woods South. All voted in favor and motion carried. ACCEPT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN — Councilman Geving moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to accept the Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Barr Engineering Company dated September, 1987 and that this plan be adopted as a guide to dealing with stormwater mangement within the study area. All voted in favor and motion carried. ACCEPT PLANNING COMMISSION RESIGNATIONS AND APPOINT NEW MEMBERS. Councilman Geving moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to accept the — resignations of Robert Siegel and Howard Noziska from the Planning Commission and to send them a Certificate of Appreciation. All voted in favor and motion carried. Councilman Boyt: I think it should be more than a Certificate of Appreciation. I think it should be some sort of a plaque or something. Councilman Geving: I don't know about that Bill. Not for Commission members. Councilman Boyt: They donate a lot of time. -- Mayor Hamilton: It's something that in the past we have always given letters of appreciation. It doesn't mean it has to stay that way. Councilman Boyt: It seems to me that a plaque is reasonably inexpensive. It's something a person might be more inclined to put on their wall. That's my thought. — Mayor Hamilton: I think that's something that we need to have Todd investigate possibly to look into something like that. A plaque and perhaps _ (-- come back to us with some type of information written on it that we could look at and see if it would be a standard thing for all of our commissions. 19 4 (.0 LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 APPLICANT: George Nelson Associates, Ina,—E R: Verne Gagne ADDRESS 1660 So. Hwy 100 - Suite 428 ADDRESS 10001 Wayzata Blvd. _ Minneapolis, MN 55416 Wayzata, MN 55343 Zip Code TELEPHONE (Daytime) 542-8474 TELEPHONE 545-2822 Zip Code REQUEST: Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment. X Subdivision Land Use Plan Amendment x Platting X Conditional Use Permit Metes and Bounds Street/Easement Vacation Site Plan Review X Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME Lake Riley Woods PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION Agricultural • REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION - same PRESENT ZONING Rl A Agricultural REQUESTED ZONING same USES PROPOSED sinc'l e f mil v vyyres SIZE OF PROPERTY 77 acres LOCATION Highway 101 and Pioneer Trail REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) 11( City of Chanhassen Land Development Application Page 2 FILING INSTRUCTIONS : This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or _ clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance filing this application Provisions . Before City to determine the specific ordinanceandd confer proceduralwitherequiremen applicable to .your application.• requirements FILING CERTIFICATION: • The undP.rszgnAd . reprs� that he is gne `ntative oZ th-e app).;cant :.er:b applicable familra with the prodedural requirements of y all — CitY rdinances . Signed By — Applicant Date 1/12/87 The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been authorized to make this application for the property herein described . • Signed By / v ,2i ,,_. � � Lt!. 1/12/87 Fee pwr}er Date uate Application Received Application Fee Paid• City Receipt No. * This Application will be considered Board of Adjustments and Appeals at h the Planning Commission/ t meeting . their C CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Larry Brown, Staff Engineer DATE: April 7 , 1988 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for Lake Riley Woods South Update to March 9 , 1988 Memorandum Planning File No. 87-22 SUB, George Nelson Associates On March 16 , 1988 , the Planning Commission approved the prelimi- - nary plat for Lake Riley Woods South dated "Received January 25 , 1988" subject to 13 conditions from staff . In summary, since the proposed cul-de-sac is approximately 2000 feet in length, con- dition 4 of approval from the Planning Commission ( refer to Attachment #1) directed the applicant to pursue an alternative emergency access to the site. The surrounding topographic constraints of the site and proximity of existing roadways dictate three options : That the applicant pursue the construction of an emergency access which would extend from the westerly end of the proposed cul-de- sac to CSAH 14 . The Office of the Carver County Engineer has stated that they would not support additional or emergency accesses onto CSAH 14 ( refer to Attachment #2 ) due to its collec- tor status . In addition, a 20-foot wide gravel road used for emergency access would only create a maintenance problem for snowplowing (making sure that is is cleared by the homeowners during winter months ) and a traffic enforcement problem. In light of this , we support the County' s position with regard to the construction of an emergency access onto CSAH 14 . The second option is to revise the plat to show the east/west portion of the proposed cul-de-sac be extended across Lots 3 and 4 , Block 1 ( refer to Attachment #3 ) to the Great Plains Golf Estates plat. The extension of the roadway through Great Plains would also eliminate Lot 4 , Block 3 of Great Plains Golf Estates . The City Council approved an extension of Great Plains Golf Estates on March 28 , 1988 . Don Ashworth April 7 , 1988 Page 2 The applicant has provided a section through the existing topography ( labled C-D on the plan set ( refer to Attachment #4 ) . This topography would easily facilitate the road extension. The _ revised intersection should form a "T" intersection as shown in Attachment #4 ) . The final option is to accept the plat as originally proposed with the revisions as requested in my previous memo and as shown on the plans dated January 21 , 1988 , received February 22 , 1988 . Although Public Safety has indicated that a 2000-foot cul-de-sac will not create an access problem, the extension of the proposed right-of-way as discussed in this report would better facilitate winter maintenance and traffic flow. Should the Council approve the plat as submitted, the plat should be approved with the conditions stated in my previous memo dated March 9 , 1988 subject to the 13 conditions as approved by the Planning Commission. Attachments: 1 . March 9 , 1988 Memorandum 2 . Letter from Carver County Engineer dated March 28 , 1988 3 . Right-of-Way Extension 4 . Site Sections CITYOF CHANHAS SEX - � G 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Larry Brown, Asst. City Engineer I DATE: March 9 , 1988 SUBJ: Preliminary Plat Review for Lake Riley Woods South Planning File No. 87-22 Sub. George Nelson Associates , Inc. Attached are the plans for Lake Riley Woods South dated "Received _ January 25 , 1988" . This 16 lot subdivision is located on the south side of Pioneer Trail, County State Aid Highway 14 , approximately one-half of a mile east of Trunk Highway 101 . The site is composed of a rolling cultivated farm field with a ravine along the southern and westerly property boundaries . Sanitary Sewer This 16 lot subdivision is outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) . Therefore, on-site septic treatment systems will be used. All proposed septic system sites should be staked and roped off prior to the commencement of any construction. Water Service Municipal water service is not available to the site. Each lot will have to develop on-site sources for water . Roadway The applicant has provided a 60-foot right-of-way which is in p accordance to the City standards for rural construction. The maximum proposed street grade is approximately 5 . 0% as compared to the City' s recommended standard of 7 . 0% . It is recommended that the proposed roadway alignment adjacent to lots 12 , 13 and 14 be revised to show a straight horizontal alignment and the not the reverse curve as shown. Reverse curves do not provide sufficient time between two curves for a driver to perceive and anticipate a reversal in horizontal alignment and therefore should be avoided where practical . The applicant' s ' II/ N/ Planning Commission March 9 , 1988 _ Page 2 engineer has been advised of this recommendation and has agreed — to revise the roadway alignment prior to final platting review processes . The typical section for rural roadways as shown on the plans shall be revised to a 34-inch bituminous wear course and a 10-inch Class V base in accordance witht the City standards for rural roadways . -' Additional access to the west was examined to try to eliminate the proposed long cul-de-sac. Due to the ravine along the west and — south sides of the site , only one alternative proposed right-of- way was practical ( refer to Attachment #2 ) . The preliminary plat to the west, Great Plains Golf Estates , was approved by the City — Council on July 6 , 1987 . The extension of the proposed roadway to the west would create a skewed intersection with the current cul-de-sac alignment. The alternative access through Great Plains Golf Estates would eliminate one lot. Due to the density — and hazards of a skewed intersection, it is recommended that the right-of-way remain as shown on the planset dated January 7, 1988. — If, however, the Planning Commission wishes to pursue this alter- native access , the proposed plat should be revised to form a "T" _ intersection with the alternate access . Grading The majority of the proposed grading is limited to the proposed right-of-way with the roadway side slopes being constructed just outside of the roadway. — Drainage and Erosion Control A culvert with a minimum diameter of 18 inches shall be installed — under the access onto CSAH 14 . The erosion control along the south side of Lot 2 , Block 1 , shall be Type II erosion control ( staked hay bales and snow fence) . The plan shall be revised to — include the City' s standard detail for Type II erosion control. Recommended Conditions 1 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of these public — improvements . 2 . The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit. C Planning Commission March 9 , 1988 Page 3 3 . A revised plan showing the changes in the horizontal roadway alignment, as discussed previously in this report, shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer as part of the final planning review process. 4 . An 18-inch minimum diameter culvert shall be installed under- neath the proposed access onto Pioneer Trail, CSAH 14 . 5 . The proposed road file shall include a 0 .5% grade for a mini- _ mum distance of 50 feet prior to the access onto Pioneer Trail. 6 . Wood fiber blanket or equivalent shall be utilized on all disturbed slopes greater than 3 :1. 7 . The typical rural roadway section shall be revised to a 3-inch bituminous wear course as per the City standards for rural construction. Attachments: 1 . Location Map 2 . Letter from Carver County IMO C . • • -',;('''-.)\ oiox ./stv-,k,„:c:.,„ - - , \OP. ...._._..-e,-- • • „......,-,• • \. \,0,____6 11\ ,.,,,, . ... ..._....„.- ___.........1.t....? • N4Y- ›:- ---__._ • -Ns _ \ . .....-. • ,th.,\.q ss- a'• ,\ s. 1.,.......-t , tini ' ..... .....„„ 4‘ ... . _____ ....... ...,...... ......, ..... • • • • 4 / s-.---- -.:••;.-1,, .x x , --",-- \\,\ ••,. ci- '`.. • ii ii[A, �. ' �.�9= = 1 I //7 ......... 1 c-, _..-...i z., ,\\xvx.,,. -\_.„/ , / LJ / ,/ __,r t � + \ I_ ,• _ ,r �%: v/ . l i i .( I1lfI i 1 ~•�`• I �-� -• ._•ter '.° - 4 - ' I i. � II\!\ 1 11 � �, leo% .O i•. :: ll -I ) - 7 IT /lid► 'IS, �-' • \ •/ !' ,,, .. .� .way •'' -�I� .. •' �1 . \ r' :- pi1.s, /'���% �111„i( slat . ;111�� .��\{ a .\rj w`i t';• r• in 1 :ti /.' V •L ,1111' '• .I ,r1 i jai:.•% . ( • = ., zi.?,... 1 .. - ./,- -,.... ;e; ;??,.k.;4.5.w....)0.,..::- t�1 1► • I i i _ : - • - •. - t -. ., _ '' ( -- ': i ice+:-fr.. mil( .I.. . • --ref . .� 1- _. — ��.R CO14 1 :: ;: CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE . PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT \ CHASKA,MINNESOTA 55318 (612i 448-3435 �' 600 EAST 4TH STREET !N N E S°� March 28, 1988 T COUNTY Of CAI \,, FE Mr. Larry Brown Assistant City Engineer City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Emergency Accesses onto County Roads Dear Mr. Brown: This letter is in response to our telephone conversation on March 23, 1988 concern- ing the position of the County allowing "emergency" only accesses onto County Roads. The Carver County roads located in Chanhassen are presently functioning as arterial and collector type roadways. In order to maintain that functional classification, some restrictions on access are necessary. The feeling of the County is that the internal road system should address the local access needs. Based on our conversation, it sounds like the planning commission is considering the installation of accesses designated as emergency use only. The planned use of the access would be very occasional, if used at all. The problem that exists would be the design of an access that would adequately serve an emergency vehicle, would not be an obstruction in the recovery area of the main route, and would be designed to discourage use as a service road. Our experience with occasional use accesses is that the use becomes less occasional and eventually turns into a normal use access. For this reason we do not allow ac- cess for woodpiles, storage sheds, and other homeowner utility uses. The construction of an emergency use only access is something the County could only consider on a case by case basis. The city would have to propose a design that ad- dresses the concerns as previously discussed. The request would also have to ad- dress the "enforcement of use" proposal of the City. If you have further questions or concerns about this matter feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, William J. Weckman P.E. - Assistant County Engineer MAR 31 1988 WJW/c j r CITY OF CHANFhASSEN 1 Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer ` - C . . . . ' 6 Fil r 0 . . . - li m iM FT ilv .1 _ 7-1 11 ii t T \11.Q > z00 t Z. mD)9 - N 1 ___.! M t-5 l -Co , o, 1 _ , _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a �D: : : f itr )1 P. 0 11 rn � N gl ---I (II N .11 E 8 z - z.' Km N.r\ I Q ). ?2) 1 q rnD oCI\ OD m 0 CITY O F GCHANHASSEN \ , , 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 TO: JO ANN OLSEN FROM: SCOTT HARR DATE: 4/6/88 RE: LAKE RILEY WOODS SOUTH Jo Ann, Per your request, we have reviewed the attached plan, and see no specific _ need for a second access road. Thank you for seeking our input. COTT \ ( \\ \ \ N i• • \ 8 c \ \ 3' r z \ \ Ni W _ _ Z \ \ ' d ii!4-1 C--1 CL- \ CD1-1,i i° C!) re CC U Q \\ UDJ \ \ �i, 0 7 q o ` 0 �Q. ,A._ 1 I R 0 3 - } / 0- 0. — ill„,---/ CC - / ------ / / 1 7( i i — 7 S ._L'gJ 5- o---D 5NI-vrj ._ 7 aa sod o,r+d N m ct- Fn - • , 0,,, 4. ,c% Wes \ — J o ' z h 2 kis � ��in Y 3y — i-4 • 1 7 al ‘? 0 _ .. ., / .p, LI CI .111 8 / 1 (,);--- W 1: i I Y —1- To aao�xo� l' s'_ p 45 \ / v_ \ _ h. / � n / . /. .• , t.,. \ , k- F- 14111 -- W • � 17 - .,. . oboyk� ----- - -- J H NJ / 1.1 ... / 100 = 1 fi 1 1 j � 3 Planning Commission Meeting March 16 , 1988 - Page 41 Emmings : To the south and to the east? Yes , I think so. Conrad: We might need a motion to do that or can that just be a simple request? Dacy: That can be a request . Conrad : It takes the City Council to fund the request so formally how. . . Dacy: I think what we would do is take that comment along with these items to the Council on April llth and see if the Council would allow extension of Mark' s contract to include this study. PUBLIC HEARING: GEORGE NELSON ASSOCIATES , LAKE RILEY WOODS SOUTH, PROPERTY ZONED A-2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATES AND LOCATED SOUTH OR AND ADJACENT TO CO. RD. 14 (PIONEER TRAIL) , 1/2 MILE EAST OF TH 101 : A. SUBDIVISION OF 77 .44 ACRES INTO 16 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS (MINIMUM LOT SIZE 2. 5 ACRES) . B. WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF A CLASS B WETLAND. Public Present : Name Address Brian Olson Ron Krueger & Associates , Applicant Jim Peterson Ron Krueger & Associates , Applicant Boyd Peterson 325 Pioneer Trail Jo Ann Olsen and Larry Brown presented the staff report on this item. Brian Olson: I 'm with Ron Krueger and Associates and I 'm here representing George Nelson & Associates and this is Jim Peterson who is also here. I have a color up rendering of the drawing that may be a little bit easier to read than that one but basically we have no objections or any additional things to add to the staff' s comments . We are here for any questions . Boyd Peterson, 325 Pioneer Trail : My property line adjoins . I had a question on the road . It ' s going to be going from their road over to Great Plains Golf Estates . Is that a road or a trail? Olsen: We were just looking at options of providing future connection and actually the only possible location would be along this line but that is not definite that that road will go through yet . Brown: If I may clarify that , I don ' t mean to confuse you . I don ' t think it ' s a future street connection. I think if the plat were to be approved , that would be a requirement if the Commission would so desire r Planning Commission Meeting March 16 , 1988 - Page 42 C to look at that option . It ' s not related to future road connection . That 's dependant upon the approval of the plat . — Headla moved , Emmings seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and motion carried. The public hearing was closed . — Conrad : Before I open it up for the commissioners to talk, the property to the west has been subdivided and there are no easements to make the connection . If we wanted to make the connection , what would it take to change the plat that has been approved? Is that really an option? Olsen : It is an option . They just have preliminary plat approval . They — haven' t received final plat approval . Conrad : Did staff or the Planning Commission look at that? Olsen: We did and we hit the ravine and we didn ' t know where the development was going to go so it was really hard to determine so at that time we did not pursue it . Emmings : We ' ve never liked long cul-de-sacs . We' ve always been for connecting them up to neighboring properties and I certainly think we ought to reserve an easement across there to do that. Sometimes the City Council has gone along with us . Sometimes they haven ' t but I would certainly want to encourage the City Council to make that a condition of this plat and tryand — get a connection across there . The only other thing I ' ve got is that if you look at Lot 6, Jo Ann, and really this would apply to a lot of these. All of them. 9 , 10. They 've got all of the septic sites between the house and the street and we ' re bringing — driveways back and I assume that they will be absolutely forbidden to put a driveway across . Olsen : Oh yes . They' ll all have to be staked . Emmings : Okay, and they can ' t drive across those areas in the construction phase either to compact them. They' ve got to stay off of them. Olsen : And they should be preserved even after the house is constructed. — Emmings : In fact there is a provision that says that isn ' t there? They can ' t ever . And that ' s not going to create any problems with driveways? _ — Olsen: What usually happens is that whoever buys that lot also has the option of finding another suitable site . If they want to line them up right along the lot line to provide them more room, they can do that . — Emmings : I guess what I 'm thinking , if you just look at 12 and 13 for example. The driveway on 12 is going to have to be right hand side as we ' re looking at this and the driveway on 13 is going to have to be off to the left . The way it is , do we worry about driveway separations coming out on those streets or not? Planning Commission Meeting — March 16 , 1988 - Page 43 Olsen: No. Ellson : Just to echo the thing about the street . I 'm not sure I like — the idea that one person has , even if it ' s a plat approval or whatever , this whole thing is contingent that that one goes through. First of all , the Great Plains Golf Estates has to go through. Everything has to be — built just the way it plans before this can even get off the ground . That' s kind of a lot of tying in to make your project go. Emmings : I don ' t think we' re saying that . Ellson: Well , he' s got to have that thing to connect it with otherwise, if Golf Estates or whatever falls through than this would fall through because there isn ' t anything to go across there. Isn ' t that right? Emmings : We only want to reserve an easement so it ' s possible to do it in the future if we want to. That' s all I 'm saying . Conrad : It ' s a question . We have these standards that we keep screwing around with on cul-de-sacs. It ' s kind of tiring . Ellson : We' re not being consistent , yes . f Conrad: The idea that we' re party to is that it 's unsafe to have a long cul-de-sac and we continually, almost every week, have long cul-de-sacs . I don' t know Jo Ann. Obviously, it ' s tough to plan in advance and make connections in some of these areas , especially in larger areas like this but we do have a standard out there and that standard says it ' s unsafe. Yet we ' re saying , it' s unsafe but we ' ll let this happen because we' ve already granted preliminary plat approval to something else and I don ' t know, we still have a chance to connect and if we really buy that standard that it ' s unsafe to live on a cul-de-sac that ' s longer than 500 — feet and that ' s going to injure somebody, we'd better to stick to that or else we should change our standard. We kind of are believing the staff' s perspective that it is unsafe . We hear all these emergency folks tell us that it is unsafe. Here we go, we' re allowing an unsafe development to go based on opinion. Olsen : The recommendation should be to preserve that . Conrad: It ' s not only to reserve it , it ' s to make the connection. I don ' t know, given what the standards are . If there ' s no way for _ emergency vehicles to get in there, we' re creating a dangerous situation. I don ' t know how I can resolve that in my mind . Headla: That bothers me. I think there is an alternative and I 'm sorry we didn ' t bring it up at our last meeting . Remember the church over by McDonalds . We said all you needed was like a hard gravel road. If we ask staff to try and develop something here but give them an alternative. Try to come through here and you probably have to acquire some land but come through here somewhere with that type of road and he can put a chain across it. The fire trucks can get the chain down. It would stop cars from using it but if he would have a firm surface from here through here , Planning Commission Meeting March 16 , 1988 - Page 44 20 foot right-of-way or whatever the Fire Department would need , wouldn' t — that satisfy our safety requirements? Conrad : It would satisfy the standards that we' ve been trying to follow. _ Headla : And like Lake Susan, if we would have just asked the fellow to put in that type of thing , at least temporary, I think it would have been alright. _ Ellson : Just like a fire escape road that ' s just used in case. Headla : Yes . Olsen : We did look at that option . . . Emmings : And would they have problems with getting another entrance on that road from the County? Olsen: Exactly. We looked at that too . Headla : As an emergency road? r Ellson : Maybe if we just told them it ' s limited use like that . Brown : No, they would still object . Olsen : The best direction would be going to Great Plains Golf Estates . It ' s level there. It almost lines up with another future road. That really could work out the best . The problem is with Great Plains Golf Estates, I don ' t know if you can follow this , this is showing the existing connections , but Don Halla is proposing to extend their deadline _ for final plat approval . They just do want to even_ developit for a long time . The easement would be there for a long time. I don ' t think we do have a set length of 500 feet . I think that ' s what one of the problems is , is that is real ambiguous . The definition of what length of a permitted cul-de-sac is . Emmings : But this one is long enough to be in the category. It ' s over in the red zone. I know we' ve talked about 1, 500 as being too long before. I can remember that . Headla : We gave up on that too easy. You can come up CR 14 , part of the proposed driveway. Then you don ' t have to worry about the access . It isn ' t something we ' re going to be using all the time . It looks like I think it was right at the curve. I think there ' s something there that we — could develop. Brown : In comment to that . I agree with you that we would like some alternative access . The problem being , one of the problems that I will mention is Carver County reviewed this access point onto CSAH 14 with regards to sight distance. It ' s very tight . Very tight . They did come back with a recommendation that the access onto Pioneer Trail would be acceptable and would meet MnDot ' s guidelines . I would doubt, speaking i Planning Commission Meeting r March 16 , 1988 - Page 45 off the top of my head , I would doubt an alternative accessing that general vicinity would meet those sight line requirements . Again, that would have to meet MnDot ' s approval . Headla : But if you ' re coming off an existing road already, a driveway. Brown: Where is the road that you were. . . Olsen : Where this cul-de-sac will be? That ' s where they' re realigningCR14 and they are proposing to put in a cul-de-sac. When the County realigns CR 14 , they are proposing to also develop this cul-de-sac to service ail the lots that are loosing their frontage. It doesn ' t show up here but that' s where it would go, right through this guy' s property. Batzli : I had a question for Jo Ann . Is this letter from Carver County regarding the access point or is that what this is solely in regards to? Brown : Correct . Batzli : Have they reviewed the final construction plans before approval? Brown: They' ve reviewed this . Batzli : What are they actually requesting here is I guess my question . They would like another opportunity to look at something . Olsen : That ' s one of their new conditions that is in all the letters now. They just want to see what was finally approved by the City but they always have to give the access permit so they always have to see the final entryway plan. Batzli : Is that something we should be including as a condition? Brown: Being that they are covered by the access permit , it ' s solely up to the feeling of the Commission. Olsen: It' s a reminder to us . Brown: I think their main intent there , a lot of times when plat approval , their feeling is a lot of time in plat approval there may be items missed such as side slope grading at the culvert entrance , etc . . Minor details that they want to make sure they have their handle on . Batzli : I guess I would suggest maybe as a reminder to us , that we do include that as a condition. Another question I had , is your condition to straighten out the reverse curve, number 4? Okay, so that' s already been included . Brown: Yes . Batzli : I also agree , not to overharp on it because I think I did enough last agenda item on the subject but I guess I 'd like to see at least to C Planning Commission Meeting March 16 , 1988 - Page 46 C preservation of right-of-way. I 'd like to be consistent . — Headla : I think we' ve got to have another access at the north end of the cul-de-sac . If we can give them two options or more , all the better but _ I think he should be obligated to come up with something . Ellson : Explain to me what the difference of saying reserve a right-of-way versus . . . — Emmings : We' re reserving an easement for a road . Conrad: So just in case. Ellson : But it doesn ' t tell him to make a road? Conrad: No. So I think we can either have language in our recommendation to reserve it and say that sort of gets us off the hook with our standards but it doesn ' t force anything to happen. Or we can make it an absolute . We think a second access should be found . Emmings : But if we do it along the route that we ' re talking about , of _ course it will go to the edge of their property and it will stop and it will be a road to noplace until that other development is done. What you ' re saying , as far as what I hear is if we reserve the easement , at least we ' ve got the potential for connecting it up later on. But if we — demand that they have a second access point , that ' s going to have to come off CR 14 . And it' s not going to happen because of the County if I hear what Larry is saying . So there we ' ve got an impossibility. — Conrad : I guess I don' t know that . I 'm sure Larry' s feeling is, I don ' t know that Larry has ever gone or said this is an emergency entrance only _ that is chained and will only be used by the Fire or Police . Emmings : But they don ' t even own that property up there . We ' re asking them to put a road through property they don ' t own . Conrad : I honestly don ' t know where it would go . I hear what you ' re saying . Brown: If I may clarify the position before you may make a motion . My condition so states , at least in the body of the report , that if the _ Planning Commission wishes to pursue the alternative access , then the plat should be revised to form a "T" intersection with that cul-de-sac , the end of the bubble . My concern is if in fact the applicant were to pursue putting a road through to Great Plains Estates , and any other — conditions , the intersection created there would create an askewed intersection and ultimately a hazard . Conrad : Larry, we ' re talking about an emergency entrance. We' re not talking about an ongoing road . Ellson : It ' s not even the same material . Usually just gravel . Planning Commission Meeting March 16 , 1988 - Page 47 Brown: If it ' s an emergency access only, then there would not be a problem with it . If the Council ' s wishes were to pursue a 50 foot roadway easement , then I would ask that it be conditioned upon that statement. Headla : What happened at the Council? Did they look at Lake Susan Hills? Olsen : That hasn ' t gone in front of them yet . Headla : Okay, so we don ' t know how much the Council is going to back us up on emergency fire lanes . Batzli : Based on my experience, they would . Headla : However , a few meetings before you came on. Batzli : This was way prior to when I came on. It was through my neighborhood . Headla : I still remember over on the southeast side of Minnewashta . Conrad : Would we want language in here that would basically say that we reserve some right-of-way for a second access for emergency use only? Is that the intent of what we 'd like to do? Headla : If they just reserve it , he doesn ' t have to improve it . Maybe there' s a little swamp or something so a fire truck couldn ' t get through there . Instead of reserve , provide? Batzli : But it can ' t be provided until what , when and where we' re going to require it to be provided. It may not be able to be provided right now other than to CR 14 . Conrad: Well , we can' t even get there. Headla : I think we' ve got to take the position here because other builders are going to look in and if we let this one go through , just like this in a day, we might as well forget about the whole thing . Do we mean it or not? Emmings : We can vote it down on that basis . Make a motion to vote it p down and explain that the reason is simply because of the long cul-de-sac or maybe do the same thing a little more positively, although I don ' t think it' s any different. Maybe make a motion that it pass contingent upon the developer finding a second access acceptable to the City planning staff and City Council by the time it goes to City Council . Conrad : I think that' s a good way to do it . Olsen : When you say access , are you talking about a roadway easement or? (- Planning Commission Meeting March 16 , 1988 - Page 48 C Emmings : A solution to the problem that ' s okay with city staff and City — Council . Brian Olson : I guess I 'd like to maybe get a clear understanding about _ the sort of things we' re talking about. I guess it seems like the main concern here is the connection of this long cul-de-sac somewhere else outside this property. Emmings : No . The concern, just to maybe speed this up, the concern is the length of that road and with emergency vehicles getting to property owners who are at the end . If there are vehicles blocking that road or _ snow blocking that road or whatever. We always like to have a second way in . That ' s the issue . Brian Olson : Is the concerns for the safety, like if this was in a normal say smaller lot subdivision, it would have numerous more lots along the length of this cul-de-sac . If you would take a normal 500 foot long cul-de-sac with their 90 foot wide lots along there, I believe you 'd — end up with 11 or 12 lots . This has 16 lots so we' re talking 6 additional single family houses that would be on this long cul-de-sac as compared to the normal city standards of 500 feet which would be the smaller lengths . Conrad : Emergency wise , you still have to get to that . It ' s a distance V issue. The thing that we are struggling with is we' ve always had some — kind of a standard saying cul-de-sacs should not be longer than this simply because we can ' t get emergency help to the people there and that ' s what we ' re dealing with . Here I don ' t know how long your cul-de-sac is — but it ' s a long one. We set precedent. Everytime these come in and we say you don ' t need it , then I guess if you don ' t need it and we' re not worried about somebody at the end and reaching them in a tornado or _ whatever , I don ' t know if the City is doing it ' s job of making sure that everybody is going to be provided their emergency service adequately. That ' s what we ' re struggling with . No matter how many houses , I think your point is there are fewer houses in this area but we still have to — get help to them. Brian Olson : May I ask Jo Ann or Larry maybe can help me out on this . This plat has received plat approval and the Council did ask for a change for revision in their preliminary plat . Does that constitute a major change or a minor change? To provide an access or does that get into the condemnation of a lot? Olsen: It ' s a major change . Conrad : I don ' t think those on the Planning Commission are saying you have to have a fully improved road. We just want to know that there' s a flat piece of land that this fire truck or vehicle can get over and when that part is blocked, we want to be able to get that vehicle there. Therefore, we' re not , I don ' t think on either your property or , I don ' t know that it ' s condemning or taking a piece of land. I think it ' s putting a right-of-way there and it ' s going to make sure that it ' s a Planning Commission Meeting March 16 , 1988 - Page 49 passable right-of-way but I don ' t know that we' re taking property that ' s useable. Headla : From the proposed Great Plains Golf Estates , would it be possible to put like a 20 foot right-of-way? They really don' t need property as such . If we come through on a dividing line , take 20 feet off of each side just so they can drive a vehicle on? Brown: Right now the possible access through Great Plains Golf Estates is limited by the topography. The ravine cuts up into the lot . Headla : That really is not a practical way to go Larry? Olsen: There is a flat area . There also is an existing road on Great Plains Estates but it ' s being used by the nursery. So if you ' re just talking a small gravel access . . . Headla : That ' s on the very south side isn ' t it? Olsen: There is an existing drive here. Brown : There ' s no doubt that the applicant ' s provided a section through here, that this is fairly flat . Again , my only concern was we obviously would be affecting this building pad and this building pad is limited due to the ravine which cuts in through here . From what I ' ve seen , it ' s not going to be easily remedied by that . Whether it ' s possible . . . Conrad : I guess we can ' t get into designing right now. We' re pretty lousy at that but maybe we put in some terms where we ask the City Engineer and the developer to provide a plan for providing emergency access for the short and long term. Then you can do it and then the City is making their decision as to what kind of emergency service the people at the end of the cul-de-sac should have . Headla moved , Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subdivision #87-2 as shown on the plat stamped "Received January 25 , 1988" subject to the following conditions : 1. Soil borings are submitted to the city soil consultants and the consultants approve two acceptable sites per lot prior to the final plat approval . 2. The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of these public improvements . 3 . The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit . 4 . A revised plan showing the changes in the horizontal roadway alignment, as discussed previously in this report , shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer as part of the final planning review process . C Planning Commission Meeting March 16 , 1988 - Page 50 5. An 18-inch minimum diameter culvert shall be installed underneath the proposed access onto Pioneer Trail , CSAH 14 . 6. The proposed road file shall include a 0. 5% grade for a minimum distance of 50 feet prior to the access onto Pioneer Trail . 7 . Wood fiber blanket or equivalent shall be utilized on all disturbed slopes greater than 3: 1 . 8. The typical rural roadway section shall be revised to a 3-inch — bituminous wear course as per the City standards for rural construction . 9. The applicant shall pay park and trail dedication fees in lieu of parkland and trail construction. 10. If a road connection goes through to Great Plains Golf Estates , the Park and Recreation Commission shall review the plan for possible trail connections . 11 . The applicant and City Engineer shall work together to develop an emergency vehicle right-of-way. 12 . The applicant must provide calculations verifying the pre-development run-off rate. 13 . Carver County shall be given a chance to review the final — construction plans . All voted in favor and motion carried . Headla : The function of our Class B wetland is really just to delay water from flowing down so even if it ' s a lawn , it ' s going to serve the purpose isn ' t it? Olsen : The vegatation will be preserved and they won ' t be able to fill it in and mow it. Headla : That ' s not going to happen . Why is it such a poor Class B wetland now? — Olsen : It ' s just a low area in the ground that just happens to have wetland vegetation . — Headla : Low area and they ' ve plowed into part of it . My point is , the owner has gone into it already and if it becomes a lawn . Olsen : It won ' t become lawn. It ' s being preserved . Headla : Go out there in 5 years and it ' s going to be a lawn but that ' s not necessarily bad is it? RESOURCE ENGINE ING ERover E. Machmeier. P.F.. James L. Anderson. C.P.S.S. 29665 Neal Avenue 3541 Ensign Avenue, North Lindstrom. MN 55045 New Hope. MN 55427 (612) 257-2019 (612) 593-5338 May 16 , 1988 _ JoAnn Olsen, Assistant Planner City of Chanhassen P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen , MN 55317 Re: Lake Riley Woods South Dear JoAnn: On Thursday, May 12 , 1988 we met Jim Peterson and Larry Van DeViere on the proposed subdivision and evaluated the lot arrangement and the location of the proposed sites for the sewage treatment systems . It was helpful to have both of them present and we did modify some of the sites with respect to realigning them with existing natural contours . Also , we relocated two of the proposed sites , one of which was in a low area and the other in a drainageway. The relocated sites should be presented on a new plat map of the proposed subdivision and a copy sent to us for review prior to acceptance of this report and any action on the preliminary plat. It was our understanding that Jim Peterson was going to have the locations remapped, and I wanted to point out to you that this was to be done. We believe that our report on the proposed subdivision is complete , but if you have any questions , please do not — hesitate to contact us . Sincerely, grae/Li fvnAV,V--. Roger E. Machmeier , P. E. -- RESOURCE ENGINEERING REM/jjm is 988 ,A l f OF CHAP\{ iAJJ" iN SPECIALISTS IN ONSITE SEWAGE TREATMENT -447 R RESOURCE ENGINEEEING • Roger E. Machmeier, P.E. James L. Anderson. C.P.S.S. 29665 Neal Avenue 3541 Ensign Avenue. North Lindstrom. MN 55045 New Hope. MN 55427 (612) 257-2019 (612) 593-5338 REVIEW OF LAKE RILEY WOODS SOUTH SUITABILITY OF SOILS FOR ONSITE SEWAGE SYSTEMS for the _ CITY OF CHANHASSEN by Roger E. Machmeier , P. E. James L. Anderson, C.P.S.S . May, 1988 SPECIALISTS IN ONSITE SEWAGE TREATMENT t REVIEW OF LAKE RILEY WOODS SOUTH SUITABILITY OF SOILS FOR ONSITE SEWAGE SYSTEMS This proposed subdivision in the City of Chanhassen has been reviewed with respect to soil suitability, topography, drainage, slope limitations , and area available on each lot for the installation of two onsite sewage treatment systems. The information used for this review included the map of the proposed subdivision submitted by the developer , soil boring data submitted by the developer , and the Carver County Soil Survey. The soils and site information upon which the evaluation of the lots in the proposed subdivision is based is that which has been collected and presented to the City of Chanhassen by — the developer. It is assumed that the data has been collected from the soil in its natural condition as it existed on the site at the time that the soil boring was made and at the time the field evaluation of the subdivision was made. It is also assumed that the topographic map which presents contour and slope information is accurate and indicates the actual contours which will exist when the plat receives final approval . When the site and soils data on each lot are evaluated and it is determined that the submitted data will allow the location of two sites for onsite sewage treatment systems, those sites absolutely must remain in the condition that they were when the soils data were collected and the field evaluation of the subdivision was made. Any manipulation or movement of the soil from its natural condition as evaluated for the preliminary plat will require additional detailed soils information and a re-evaluation of the subdivision prior to final approval . Also , any changes in the surface drainage patterns on any lot as the result of road or street construction will require a re-evaluation of those lots. For example, when roads and streets are constructed after obtaining preliminary approval of the subdivision, no soil can be excavated or moved from any of the sites on the lots in the proposed subdivision which have been proposed and approved as suitable locations for the sewage treatment systems , nor can any soil fill be placed on any of those sites. Further , there shall be no vehicular traffic or movement of any construction — equipment over those sites which have been investigated and approved as potential sites for the location of soil treatment systems . If the soil is removed from the top part of the soil profile on one lot to fill in a relatively low area on another lot, then it is likely that neither location will be suitable for the installation of a soil absorption unit even though one or both sites were initially approved for the preliminary plat on the basis of the originally submitted data. Also, there must absolutely be no movement of soil so as to change the Lake Riley Woods South Page 2 of 8 natural land slope. Since there is a limit of 12 percent on the natural land slope which is suitable for the installation of a sewage treatment mound, there may be the inclination to — decrease steeper slopes by the technique of cutting and filling. Modification or alteration of natural slopes on the clay loam soils that are common in the proposed subdivision will make such sites unsuitable for the installation of any type of onsite soil absorption system. Design Considerations — Each lot was evaluated with respect to having an area available for two soil absorption systems . It was assumed that the homes which will be built will be Type I , 4-bedroom which according to Minnesota Rules 7080, have an estimated average sewage flow of 600 gallons per day. Since mottled — soils at various depths of predominate in the area , each lot was evaluated to determine if two sites were available for the installation of sewage treatment mounds . The rock layer in a mound which would treat 600 gallons of sewage per day would be 10 feet wide and 50 feet long . The area required for the mound would have dimensions of 60 feet by 80 feet. The long dimension of the mound must be located parallel to the existing ground contour lines . The mound must be located on natural soils and on slopes not exceeding 12 — percent. Absolutely no grading to modify the natural slope can be done prior to mound construction. A mound can be located on a soil having as little as 1 foot of unsaturated soil . This soil would require, however , a 2-foot depth of '— clean sand as opposed to the normal 1-foot depth of sand. This review has considered that the location of the two — sites for the sewage treatment systems on each lot to be of top priority. Thus , some of the sites on a lot which were judged to be suitable for an onsite soil treatment unit might _ conflict with the desires of a potential purchaser as the prime building site. This situation will need to be reconciled at the time of lot purchase and certainly no later than the issuance of a building permit . A point to note here is that no permits should be issued for any construction on any lot until a scale map of the lot has been submitted showing the two sites for the sewage treatment system, the : proposed site for the house and other improvements , and the site for the water supply well . No consideration was given to the relative location of the onsite sewage system soil treatment unit with respect to the location of the house or source of sewage . Since a pump is required with a sewage treatment mound and since pumps can — easily deliver effluent to drainfield trenches , and since C Lake Riley Woods South Page 3 of 8 sewage pumps are now designed to be extremely dependable, assuming the use of a pump provides complete flexibility in the development of a lot. Many of the two proposed sites for the sewage treatment systems are located side-by-side along the long axis of the areas . While this arrangement meets the alternate site requirement , it creates a difficulty in the construction of the sewage treatment system. That is , the construction of one sewage treatment system must not make the other designated site unsuitable because of construction activity. The construction process will need to be carefully watched during the lot development. This caution exists on lots 6 , and 8 through 16 . It would be advisable to have at least a 20-foot separation distance between the two sites since the construction of one mound will require construction traffic that would tend to compact the adjacent soil . Also if the top mound is constructed first and the secondary site is used later on, it will be virtually impossible to construct the secondary site because of the proximity of the first mound . There appears to be sufficient room on most of the lots to separate the two proposed soil treatment unit sites . This separation requirement should be followed in the process of granting permits on the individual lots . The proposed soil treatment areas were staked in each corner with a half-inch reinforcing rod to which a blaze pink flagging ribbon was attached . This made it convenient to locate the areas and to evaluate their orientation. These proposed areas must remain undisturbed during the construction of streets and any other grading on the proposed subdivision. The areas which are staked off are approximately 50 feet wide by 100 feet long. Also, even though the evaluation of the preliminary plat of the subdivision has assumed the use of sewage treatment mounds , a more detailed site investigation which is necessary for the design of the sewage treatment on each lot at the time of development may locate some soils which are suitable for the installation of drainfield trenches . In most cases , however, it is likely that mounds will be the required sewage treatment system because of seasonal soil saturation. The area required for 30-inch wide drainfield trenches spaced 10 feet on centers in a soil having a percolation rate of 46 to 60 mpi (minutes per inch) is approximately 5000 square feet. The long axis of this area should be parallel to the contour lines . For example, if an area 50 feet wide by 100 feet long is the site for the soil absorption trench unit, (- Lake Riley Woods South Page 4 of 8 then the 100-foot dimension should be parallel to the contour lines . In order for trenches to be constructed, there must be _ at least 3 feet of unsaturated soil naturally occurring below the bottom of the trench. This means at the very minimum there must be at least 4 feet of undisturbed soil above any indication of a seasonal high water table in the soil as evidenced by mottling . The trenches could then be excavated 12 inches deep, leaving 3 feet of undisturbed soil suitable for treatment. The area in which the trenches would be _ installed need to be backfilled with soil hauled into the area . There should be at least 12 inches of soil covering the rock in the drainfield trenches . To evaluate a soil for the _ installation of such trenches, the percolation tests must be performed at a depth of 12 inches , in other words, 36 inches above the saturated level in the soil . Following is a lot-by-lot analysis of the lots in the proposed subdivision. Site 1 in the evaluation refers to the site which contains borings 1 and 2 , and site 2 contains borings 3 and 4 . Lot 1 Both of the proposed sites appear to be suitable. They are laid out end to end on a north-south axis and there should be sufficient room on the lot to locate additional sites if necessary. Lot 2 Site 1 has been moved in the field to the south to avoid being located in a drainageway and will need to be relocated on a copy of the proposed plat. Site 2 as proposed appears to be suitable for the installation of a sewage treatment mound . Lot 3 The proposed site 1 is suitable but site 2 proposed for a sewage treatment system was located in the center of a drainageway, even though this does not show clearly on the topographic map. This site, which had borings 3 and 4 located in it, was eliminated in cooperation with Jim Peterson and a new site to the north of site 1 was selected . This site was located on a copy of the plat map in pencil and will need to be located on a copy of the map presented to the City of Chanhassen. A soil probe was made of the center of this area . Soil texture is a silt loam and there has been some deposition in the area since it is at the bottom of the slope. The soil is suitable for the installation of a sewage treatment mound . 4 C Lake Riley Woods South Page 5 of 8 — Lot 4 The sites as proposed on this lot appear to be suitable in orientation. There is additional area on the lot which would be available for additional sites should the property owner desire. Lot 5 The two proposed sites on this lot appear to be laid out — properly even though they do not correspond with the contour lines as shown on the map. In the field these sites are laid out approximately parallel to the natural contour lines. — Again , it is essential that site 1 not be disturbed any way by construction activity from the street construction. Lot 6 The edge of this lot is near a very steep gully located in the woods to the south. This gully is presently — progressing and enlarging in a northeast direction with tree roots freshly exposed at the head of the gully. It will be necessary that a grade stablization structure be designed and installed to prevent any further encroachment of this gully upon the lot. It should be noted that the intensity of runoff will likely increase as paved streets, driveways, roofs , patios , etc. , appear in the development. The gully should be inspected by a structural engineer to determine if there is any future threat to structures located on lot 6. The two sites selected for the sewage treatment systems are in the northeast corner of the lot and side by side along their long axis . The slope is approximately 12 percent. The _ slope of the soil in the remainder of the lot is somewhat steeper than 12 percent. Site 1 could be moved to the west if necessary. There must be absolutely no cutting or filling or any type of construction activity that will infringe upon the proposed sites for the sewage treatment systems . The plat map shows a symbol for an "erosion control device" located over a portion of one of the proposed sewage treatment system sites . — The site should be moved or the erosion control device location should be moved so that there is absolutely no cutting, filling, erosion, or sedimentation in the area designated for the sewage treatment system. Lot 7 Two sites are proposed for sewage treatment systems on this lot and have the proper aspect and orientation with respect to contour lines . The sites appear to be suitable. fr- Lake Riley Woods South Page 6 of 8 Lot 8 Two proposed sites are staked along the lot line near the cul-de-sac. There will need to be extreme care taken during road construction so that there is absolutely no cutting or filling of any soil on this lot. There is a slight depression or drainageway in the middle of the area proposed but this should not appreciably interfere with the operation of a sewage treatment mound. While the depth to mottling was — reported to be greater than 4 feet , a soil probe approximately midway between borings 3 and 4 encountered mottled soil at a depth of approximately 36 inches. In a probe made near soil — boring 4 , heavily mottled soil was encountered at a depth of approximately 36 inches even though the mottling depth was reported as 5 ' 6" . Lot 9 The two sites as proposed for the sewage treatment mounds are adjacent but appear to be suitably located as far as topography is concerned. There is some difference in elevation along the long axis of the mound but the area in — which the rock area will be placed should not have more than 1 foot difference in elevation which is suitable. Lot 10: — The two proposed sites are side by side but are on the crest of a knoll and should be suitable for the location of — sewage treatment mounds . The rock layers will need to be properly oriented with the natural contour lines at the time of installation . Lot 11 : The two areas proposed for sewage treatment sites on Lot 11 were re-staked to more closely conform with the existing natural contour lines . The stakes were relocated in the field and will need to be relocated on a future drawing of the proposed plat. Lot 12 : — The proposed site 1 for the sewage system on this mound is on the crest of a slope or knob but appears to be suitable. — Proposed site 2 has a considerable portion in a low wet area and was unsuitable as proposed. The proposed site 2 in which soil borings 3 and 4 were located has been deleted and a new area parallel to the west C Lake Riley Woods South Page 7 of 8 lot line and near the northwest lot corner has been located. The soils in this area appear to be suitable for the installation of a sewage treatment mound . The soil appears to have had some deposition from higher areas and evidence of seasonal soil saturation was encountered at a depth of 42 inches . This site will need to be identified on a revised copy of the plat map. Lot 13 : The two sites proposed and field staked for the mounds appear to be properly oriented with the contour lines . Site 2 borders the low area and in the event of increased runoff there may be increased ponding in this area . The proposed plan had no indication of the surface drainage plan but water should not be allowed to pond in the lower area which would infringe upon the proposed site 2. Lot 14 : Borings 1 and 2 delineate site 1 for the mound which is properly located along the contour lines . Site 2 is immediately adjacent to site 1 and would likely encounter construction problems at a later date. In addition , site 2 is located in a slightly concave area which is presently collecting surface water and would also collect subsurface _ flow from a mound located on site 1 . With the proposed house location it would be extremely difficult to separate these sites and retain sufficient clearance for a driveway access which presumably will follow along the boundary or lot line with Lot 13 . A probe located by boring 4 on Lot 14 showed distinct mottling at a depth of 24 inches. From the contour lines there appears to be some area of suitable slope to the south of the proposed house location which may be suitable for a sewage treatment system. There have been no soil borings located in this area however , and if this area were to be _ used , it would need to be coordinated with the well location and proposed house location on the permit application. Lot 15 : The proposed site 2 for the sewage treatment system had an elevation difference of 2 . 2 feet along the long axis . On the same mound along the lower edge of the long axis there was a 1 . 2 foot difference in elevation . This site can easily be rotated slightly so that the long axis of the rock layer in the mound would be parallel to the natural ground contours. The two proposed sites for the mounds have a common line. At the lower line of the second site, the elevation is approximately the same along the long axis . These two sites Cd Lake Riley Woods South Page 8 of 8 — appear to be suitable for the installation of a sewage treatment mound. — Lot 16 : A soil probe near boring 1 on Lot 16 indicated mottling at a depth of approximately 36 inches even though the presented soils report indicated 5 ' 0" to mottling. A level _ rod and a hand level were used to measure the difference in elevation between the corners of the long axis of site 2 which was found to vary about 2 feet in elevation while a maximum difference in elevation would be 1 foot. There is sufficient area available on Lot 16 for the axis to be shifted so that the long axis of the mound is approximately parallel to the contour lines . The long axis of the other mound was measured — and found to have an elevation difference of 3 . 5 feet . Again, this proposed site for the mound could be rotated so that the long axis would be parallel with the contour lines . The two areas which were initially proposed as sites for the sewage — treatment system were unsuitable because of improper orientation with natural contour lines. The two sites were restaked on May 12 , 1988 by Jim Peterson and Larry Van DeVeire under our observation so that the long axis of the sites is now parallel to the contours of — the natural soil . The sites as now staked are suitable for the installation of sewage treatment mounds . The relocated sites should be presented on a revised map of the proposed subdivision. — Summary Each of the lots appear to have sufficient usable area of suitable soil for the location of two sewage treatment systems . The caution of the abutting areas proposed for the _ sewage treatment systems was addressed in the introduction and should be regarded in the permit granting process for the individual lots . On several of the lots the areas were relocated or shifted in location by Jim Peterson while we were — present . These changes should be presented on a revised version of the plat map and verified as proper before preliminary approval of the plat. 17 CITY o f\ CHANHASSEN -- le i sk 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager DATE: June 13 , 1988 SUBJ: Merle Volk Annexation Request Attached please find information received from the City of Chaska regarding the Chaska City Council' s approval of providing fire protection service for Gedney Pickle Processing Facility during the next six months . If you will recall, this issue had been included, rightly or wrongly, in discussions regarding the Volk annexation issue. [Note: City staff has met with the Sheriff' s Department and Fire Department to insure that agreements reached by the Cities of Chanhassen/Chaska are properly administered by the Sheriff/Fire Departments . ] Following receipt of Chaska' s correspondence, I met with their Administrator, Dave Pokorney. He stated that he would again discuss the issue with their City Council so as to decide whether additional negotiations were necessary or not. The Chaska City Council has discussed the issue and would ask to meet with members of our City Council (an informal, daytime meeting of one/two members of each group is being suggested) . I anticipate that meeting being one of attempting to preserve the good rela- - tionship which has existed between Chanhassen/Chaska, but that they need to move forward with their overall development plan for the Jonathan Industrial Park. Recommendation _ Should the Council wish to discuss this item with the Chaska City Council, they stand ready to do such. One or two members of our Council should be designated. I will have the City Attorney con- tact the representative( s) prior to that meeting and will have his office additionally prepare a confidential memorandum to all Council members regarding the issue at hand. The meeting would be one in which the two attorneys would present the position of their cities with Council members being able to ask questions . No decisions would be made, and, in light of such meeting being to avert litigation, it would be a closed meeting. Alt?i, Chaska = .,, _ -,, , ,- May 4, 1988 _ 1 Mr. Don Ashworth 1 City Manager City of Chanhassen P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 L Dear Don: The Chaska City Council at its May 2, 1988 meeting l considered Chanhassen' s request that the Chaska Fire Department be a joint first responder for the Gedney Pickle Processing Facility. The Chaska City Council L approved this request with the understanding that Chaska would provide these services at no formal charge for a period of six months in order to allow for the final negotiation for a long term agreement between the two cities. It was understood that such an agreement may or may not be incorporated into the ongoing discussions regarding the potential annexation/ detachments. I am 'assuming that you will contact the Sheriff's Department notifying them of our agreement. Based on the Council 's action, I have sent the attached letter to Bob Vadness of Gedney pickle. If you have any 1. questions regarding the Council 's action, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, , L e -f/e -Iie- tz") 1_ Dave Pokorney City Admi ni strator DP:jai r�Ar cc: Jim Worm, Fire Chief 0 5 1988 L CITY OF CHANF,ASStN City Of Chaska Minnesota 205 East Fourth Street 55318-2094 Phone 612/448-2851 L Chaska ismOssoinaarfta May 4, 1988 Mr. Robert Vadness M. A. Gedney Company 2100 Stoughton Avenue Chaska, MN 55318 Dear Mr. Vadness: The Chaska City Council at its May 2nd meeting took action authorizing the Chaska Fire Department to re- spond as a joint first responder with the Chanhassen Fi re Department to any fire or emergency calls at the Gedney pickle processing facility. Based on this action the City Fire Department will be a first responder and dispatched directly by the Carver County Sheriff' s Department. If you have any questions regardi ng the City Counci l 's action, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Dave Pokorney City Admi ni strator DP:jai cc: Don Ashworth / MAY 9 1988 Cil Y OF CHANT- ASSEN City Of Minnesota 205 E-,: �3� ,,, c ,), . i,).` M.A. Gedney Company CHASKA, MINNESOTA 55318 / (612) 448-2612 May 16, 1988 — Mr. Don Ashworth City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Don: Thank you for your assistance in getting the first response agreement with the City of Chaska. Hopefully we can enter into a long term agreement in the near future. — Again, thanks for your help. Sincerel i L ,yam- i Robert F. Fadness Exec. Vice President Operations M. A. Gedney Company mb MAY I ,f 1988 • Vi i Y OF CHANhASSEN PICKLES __y PEPPERS :f RELISH _'f CONDIMENTS -._ f VINEGAR 4 SAUERKRAUT .A.and��G�z�v 4f:Ced- 100 BARRISTERS TRUST BUILDING 247 THIRD AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55415 612/338-8623 May 4 , 1988 Don Ashworth, City Manager City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re : SW 1/4 of SE 1/4 , East half of SE 1/4 , Section 16 , Township 116 , Range 23 Dear Mr. Ashworth: I have been reviewing with Mr. and Mrs . Merle D. Volk the appropriate provisions of Minnesota Statutes relating to the detachment of the above-described property from the City of Chanhassen and its annexation to the City of Chaska. More than a year has elapsed since the request was made with only the City of Chaska indicating its full support. In order to avoid any confrontation on a proceedings before the Municipal Commission, I am respectfully requesting a determination by the City of Chanhassen to further explore the feasibility of a joint resolution with the City of Chaska to permit the development of this property within the City of Chaska industrial park. It is my intention to initiate the detachment proceeding within the next 60 days. I do hope this matter can be resolved on an amiable basis with both communities adopting the appropriate resolutions setting forth the boundaries and the area of land to be detached. Sincerely _yours , r TX-1 4/ A. H. Michals lm cc: Mr. and Mrs. Merle D. Volk 135 Mound Avenue - - Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Mrd 0 5 1988 C,I1 Y uF CHANhASSEN . _ / 9 - CITYOF i CHANHASSEN ti 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth , City Manager FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer DATE: June 9 , 1988 SUBJ: Review Final Configuration for TH 101/West 78th Street Intersection File No. 86-11A-General As you are aware , much consideration has been given to the inter- section configuration for West 78th Street and TH 101 . There has been considerable discussion not only with local interested par- - ties but also several reviews with MnDOT. The attached June 7 , 1988 memo from BRW effectively summarizes the key design criteria which had been considered for this intersection. Since this item has received several reviews by the Council , I do not anticipate a lengthy discussion. However , I did want to appraise the Council of the final design configuration which we have arrived at as shown on the attached document and which we believe strikes the best compromise for dealing with this complex intersection. We intend to construct this final configuration in the next few weeks , and therefore felt it best to appraise the Council beforehand. Attachments 1. June 7 , 1988 letter from BRW. _, .: ✓ r 2 . Revised Intersection Schematic. 6/i3/Fd; PLANNING I%) TRANSPORTATION 3 A, iENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE BENNETT RINGROSE. WOLSFELD. JAFNIS. GARDNER. INC • THRESHER SQUARE • 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55415 • PHONE 612/370-0700 — June 7, 1988 City of Chanhassen CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 , � 1C) — Attn: Mr. Gary Warren, PE JUN 08 1988 City Engineer — RE: West 78th Street/TH 101 Intersection ENGINEERING DEPT. Modifications Dear Mr. Warren: As you are aware, a significant amount of concern was expressed last winter — regarding the above-referenced intersection. We have reviewed numerous layouts, some previously considered and rejected, some new ideas. We have reviewed this intersection with staff, the City Council , the HRA and the Public Safety — Committee. Some time ago we submitted five (5) alternative designs to MnDOT for their review and selection of a preferred design. The design criteria used included: #1 Minimize changes to the intersection to minimize added cost. #2 Increased visibility and traffic separation particularly in the winter. #3 Lane width and radii of sufficient dimension to accommodate full fire truck and semi-truck movements. — #4 Increased definition of the intersection to assist traffic in clear, concise traffic movement. — As you may recall , we reviewed each of the five (5) designs with you prior to the submittal to MnDOT. Clearly, Illustration No. Five (5) was the design pre- ferred by staff. MnDOT has reviewed each of the designs and responded with their approved alter- native. They have indicated Alternative No. Five (5) as the preferred alter- — native and added additional comments. The downtown project is approaching completion shortly and implementation of the — revised intersection design is becoming critical . Therefore, I am transmitting to you the final design layout for this intersection. Prior to construction, which should occur sometime the week of the 13th of June, I suggest we once _ again inform the City Council of our final design for this intersection. DAVIDJ BENNETT DONALDW RINGROSE RICHARDPWOLSFELD PETERE JARVIS LAWRENCEJ GARDNER THOMASFCARROLL CRAIGA AMUNDSEN DONALDE HUNT MARKG SWENSON JOHN B McNAMARA RICHARDD PILGRIM DALE N.BECKMANN DENNISJ SUTLIFF MINNEAPOLIS DENVER PHOENIX Mr. Gary Warren June 7, 1988 Page 2 I am transmitting herewith copies of the review comments from MnDOT and the final design layout. This information may be passed along to the City Council as appropriate. We will be present at the June 13th Council meeting if so desired to discuss this with the City Council . Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, BE T-RINGROSE-WOL -aARVIS-GARDNER, INC. ry A hret, PE Project Engineer GAE/sk cc: Mr. Greg Roy I . I = ' ' O goi M • 14' _ --\ \IK) ( pip‘ \o ,\/ � .• P`�,5 , \t%:‘\\ca\-------7 \ O'''C C.V ck +IkaPc .)13N G _ I>:_ / NN // / o U z 0 — w z I- o z - Zw = - xQ C - - oz iCO - F° co w o c' CA T - 5 W A D - -r— . I . L i ; . . • IN= '' • . ' . ‘, . . '.. :. 7: '1 ,•,. , . . • '• ' • . • ' f - i 1 . bow . . .- . .._.. . . ...... ......... C.4... . 0 • .... . , . • • .. \ . . •. . - . • • /11,..' 11. . . . . , • . . ' • 1 . /. O. . .... • • .11 ' -.-.....). ' . . ' : •1 1 . i Imo . I' •.. :\N......... / - 2b, _ • . • , (.... ,g,'I ... . . ... . ... "/ , - v ,....... ...........\ : 1111\jr'l\fli '' •,,-. • - . ... ..... • .." ; ; . •-• ••• t t„.....••.c.. . •' , / . :' ! 1 . ) . • 1.. .. . •.) IFir.,:. : \..t 11. C• f.•v., ...-/ ..i‘ .., mr,Abt1/4\....),„ '-- ..-- ..„,' ; ; \ • . • A,' '• • ,:,,'• mi. -- . "i, . . i•ii, .,,, , . -c.,,,, , • ,10 - •2\ . \Ve:: ti tZt . ...x\y\I/ 4 !,,,tt` • ' .4,71‘1%. qq1. .;..fre,f, . . \ 1, •,r a .._ N• .... . „ _ / 11 • 41-;1;',. :.,'Iv.T ‘14 *-\\C):" 67-- ''i I &I • ' ' '- - . 6 - '-Th .,x•T .s:.:ki di, 0-4 il,62:;),c,a;.i. A' ‘ \: yr; ! , i i ;-' • • a -1- • -i.:,,,c4:01.3c.,41:.;%5', :t :# !.:., - -1 . '• - . .., 0 _.:•r‘ ° -.-R-4,i447.4.!'!Nidk , , .! . — . . / . -\.i.0.1174i,k olii 'I, •.; ..,.. . , .• - P/ / r. a t•, ""...• 4 i N:i , - '.,.., t .11 . Ili co \ '..-: . :,.-- . . •.. „ , • • . _ - .. . . ,....... .r. . -- .... ---m • l'1 ' ..• V —--- r, — 7— -mg, , ——:-._ss.-- .... • i . .8 .. 0 - ,/ z \‘‘. ,.• a _,:_ 7.4 = __. V -:-\- - ------- --- : •, " -:-. • • -I, ,. • • -• - . v.. x ,.....,..-3-: ...,..M.st. _ :'.,..17.7., 7:..7.1._• ,:,,,........, :.....,,,..„-;•::.:--••--..f-:“..t.--" •iFr•-' •t 4:::-.-_:-!_z.:.:?.i .--.7.:.:.N,--=-7=--7;-::."'.::„:172L•il:22'4—i 7:.`7•:"7.1.7 ... --k.-, ::.•cS,:14 1 -.24.-.-, q • • • • ("\ ' , .4- P• ..-, ••_..• •-_-• .—‘ -, ‘7I N ):;. , .. in. Z th ,, . k-, p _ ..i ,,. \\\>... - -,— ;41r q 0 z P, D 2 • g, .. .." (1) , A- S 1- ..,' G.- `‹P V , cr_ ; 3 . . 71 - P a Titr' ‘1. • P 0 r., -4 811 07:, --8 •• i r ‘4. r uN Z- --I C.1 . ,...8 •••••.- 1,1 8imn cr& ?z-b X - 0 v v', :.-• )=. ';' c7— 0 •-- •-i n. vi ;,:-: s . . .._ .. . _ ___....... . . . . . q : W. L_ i..1 Vs I i77 • I . 0 I am C I TY OF CHANHASSEN `\ I 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 =ct•er „1-v ,!' ^,r MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager • FROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planner _f°%o /IVl DATE: June 9 , 1988 __- SUBJ: Reuter Composting Complex (General File #39 ) 4� //S(SS The Chaska Planning Commission considered the above referenced project on June 8 , 1988 . Attached is the staff report for this item, correspondence from the Gustafsons (Galpin Boulevard residents) and Arbor Park Coalition members ( local industries opposed to the facility) , and copies of the proposed site, grading, and landscaping plans. Also attached is the EAW adden- dum which was reviewed and approved by the Metropolitan Council . The Chaska Planning Commission recommended approval of the pro- posed project and recommended approval of the following: 1 . Amending the Arbor Park Industrial Concept Plan to rede- signate 8 industrial lots into one lot and to realign the proposed road along the west lot line of the subject property. 2 . The preliminary plat for the parcel . 3 . The building/site plan review subject to several conditions as noted in the staff report and regarding compliance with the state and county standards for odor emissions, covering of transfer vehicles, restrictions on outdoor storage and keeping the grounds and area in and around the buildings free from debris . This item will go to the Chaska City Council on June 20 , 1988. If the Council wishes to make any comments regarding the propo- sal, the Council should direct staff to draft a letter to submit to Chaska. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Chaska Staff Report. 2 . Letter from Jerry and Lois Gustafson dated May 17 , 1988 . 3 . Reduced copies of site, grading and landscaping plans . 4 . Lessons in solid waste management from Europe. 5 . EAW addendum. CITY OF PC. DATE: JUNE 8, 1988 - C.C. DATE: Chaska CASE : 88- AGENDANO ITEM N21O: 14 PREPARED BY: K. CROUCH STAFF REPORT - J. 1 APPLICANT: REUTER, INC. Z 1 a U PROPOSAL: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - 1) CONCEPT PLAN AMENDMENT 2) PRELIMINARY PLAT 1 O. 3) BUILDING/SITE PLAN REVIEW a LOCATION: ARBOR PARK 3rd ADDITION, NORTH OF C.R. 18, EAST OF T.H. 41 1 1 1 PRESENT ZONING: PID-2 PROPOSED ZONING: PID-2 J ACREAGE: 43 ACRES + a DENSITY: NA J a ADJACENT ZONING INDUSTRIAL, PID-2 WEST, VACANT UNDEVELOPED (CITY OF CHANHASSEN)I AND LAND USE: NORTH, EAST AND SOUTH JJ w MUNICIPAL SERVICES: AVAILABLE BY EXTENSION PHYSICAL CHARAC.: ROLLING, SEMI-WOODED 1990 LAND USE PLAN: INDUSTRIAL 1 iI i .r Background A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission in May for an amendment to the Concept Plan and for a Preliminary Plat. The hearing was continued to provide time for: 1. meeting with Merle Volk to obtain his reaction and input. 2. revision of the Preliminary Plat to show relocation of the north/south street to the west edge of the property. 3. preparation of preliminary site and building plans. 4. surrounding industrial representatives to tour Reuter ' s Eden Prairie facility. Reuter was also requested to identify what other sites were con- sidered and why they were rejected. Volk Meeting City staff and Reuter representatives met with Merle Volk and described the proposal. Merle definitely wants to develop his 40 acres for industrial use and sees no problem with the Reuter proposal. He is continuing to pursue annexation to Chaska. The relocated street will not affect his development plans. If necessary, he will provide an easement for extending utilities to the Reuter site prior to platting and development of his property. City staff remains optimistic that the Minnesota Municipal _ Commission will approve the annexation which will allow complete development of the 160 acre Arbor Park concept. Preliminary Plat The Preliminary Plat has been revised to show a relocated public street along the west edge of the property. The proposed alignment creates two nearly 90 degree turns which is not desirable for an industrial street. It allows the most efficient use of the site but does not provide smooth movement for truck traffic to and from T. H. 41 from the Volk property. In my opinion, the align- ment of the proposed street should be revised to soften the right angle curves. The Plat still shows sewer and water service from Peavey Road. This should be revised to provide service from C. R. 18 through the Volk property. -1- Preliminary Site Plan — A preliminary site plan, grading plan and landscape plan have been prepared and submitted. The site plan shows internal vehi- cular circulation and parking areas in addition to building locations. Truck movements are focused upon gaining access via T. H. 41 , but a future connection to C. R. 18 is provided in the event the Volk property is developed as a part of Arbor Park.The grading plan shows extensive berming around the south and west sides of the building complex, to screen the facility from — visual exposure to public streets and from adjacent properties. Existing wooded knolls are retained in the northwest and east areas for similar screening purposes. Landscape Plan The northeast one-third of the site is relatively heavily wooded with hardwood trees , mostly oak but also basswood and some maples. The balance of the site is rolling, open, agricultural land. Development of the site for Reuter ' s purposes will result in the loss of about 45 trees but will also retain significant numbers of trees around the edges of the site. This is consistent with other industrial buildings which have been installed within the wooded areas of Arbor Park. In my opinion, the Reuter proposal preserves more trees than would be saved if the area were developed for eight industrial lots. The City ' s proposed landscape standards call for 212 trees to be planted based upon the total building floor area proposed. The — landscape plan shows 165 new trees including 11 different varieties of understory and overstory shade trees and evergreens. The "shortfall " in new trees is proposed to be offset by retention of existing trees. About 600 shrub plantings will also be installed within the site. The proposed planting together with earth berming should provide — a good visual screening of the Reuter operation from surrounding streets and properties. In addition to screening, the landscaping will give the site a more attractive appearance. — Building Plans The proposed composting facility consists of two primary struc- tures. The front "process" building contains a "tip floor" for unloading incoming trucks from the Eden Prairie plant, a final screening area and a truck loading area for finished compost and for rejected material. This irregular shaped building is 26 ,500 square feet in size and also contains a 2, 500 square foot office area. The compost "hanger" is a 158, 875 square foot rectangular _ building. -2- The two structures total 185 , 400 square feet or about 4. 3 acres. This represents a 10 percent building coverage which is quite low compared to the allowable coverage of 40 percent. It should be noted, however , that the southeast corner may be used in future for another light manufacturing facility unrelated to the compost operation, on the order of 50 ,000 to 100 , 000 square feet. The buildings will be of masonry construction. The front process building will be double T precast concrete panels and the rear curring/storage building will be raked precast concrete panels. Both materials have been commonly used within Chaska ' s industrial areas. They are proposed to be left in a natural concrete color, unpainted; however, I feel that the front building should be painted or should have color added to the panels at the plant. This has commonly been done with the double T panels within Chaska and Chanhassen' s industrial areas. Unpainted surfaces may be appropriate for the rear building because of its more active use. Front end loaders will operate around the sides of the building for removal of finished compost and conveyance back to the process building for outloading. Environmental Impacts An Environmental Assessment Worksheet has been prepared, a hearing has been held, and the Metro Council (responsible Governmental Agency ) found on May 26th that 1) the proposed pro- ject does not have the potential to create significant environ- mental effects, 2) the effects from the facility will be subject to ongoing public regulatory authority and can be controlled or mitigated through enforcement of permits, and 3) preparation of a full-blown environmental impact statement is not necessary. In this case, the regulatory agencies issuing operational per- mits for the facility are Carver County and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The City of Chaska does not issue environmental permits, but does approve zoning, platting and bulding permits. There has been some concern about the generation of 20-25 semi- truck trips per day at ultimate development. In fact, the development of eight light manufacturng plants, as originally _ proposed for Arbor Park, would probably generate more truck traffic (assuming about 5 per day per plant) and would certainly generate more employee auto trips since the compost facility will have only 10 employees. Tax Base Reuter ' s proposed bulding and equipment is valued at about $8 million for tax purposes. This means that Reuter will pay about $400 , 000 per year in property taxes. -3- The company has requested City financial assistance through its Tax Incrument Financing Program. _ Creation of tax base was one of the primay reasons for develop- ment of the Arbor Park industrial area; hence, Reuter appears to satisfy that objective. Evaluation In my opinion, the proposed revision to the Arbor Park Concept Plan to accommodate Reuter is generally consistent with the development concept for the area. Again, the amendment involves development of one large site as opposed to eight smaller sites; and relocation of the north-south street from a central location to the west edge. My main concern with the street is that it will provide for continuous, interconnected movement between T. H. 41 and C. R. 18 and among the various sites within Arbor Park. The Preliminary Plat shows a continuous public street but one _ which contains two right angle turns. I feel that these curves should be softened to provide for smoother , more convenient traffic flow. Concern about environmental impacts will probably continue until the facility is in place and actual observance and monitoring can be conducted. While actual environmental impacts appear to be non-existent or minimal, concern about the psychological impact of a garbage _ compost facility within Arbor Park continues to be an issue. Since this process is relatively uncommon, negative public reaction is not surprising. As recycling and composting becomes more common in the United States in future years, the psychological impact will be reduced as long as actual negative impacts do not occur. Action Requested 1. Recommend approval of an amendment to the Arbor Park Concept _ Plan (PID-2) consisting of a proposal for one large lot on 43 acres as opposed to eight smaller lots , and relocation of the proposed north/south street from a central alignment to a location along the west edge of the site as depicted on the Preliminary Site Plan dated 5-25-88. A condition of approval shall be that the two right angle corners in the proposed street be softened to provide smoother , more con- venient traffic flow. 2. Recommend approval of a Preliminary Plat for Arbor Park 3rd — Addition dated 5-25-88 subject to the following conditions: a. The street alignment be revised as stated above. - -4- _ b. Sewer and water service shall be obtained from CR 18 rather than Peavey Road. c. Park dedication requirements shall be satisfied by cash payment. 3. Recommend approval of preliminary building and site plans as depicted on the following exhibits: - Preliminary Site Plan (5-25-88 ) - Preliminary Grading Plan (5-25-88 ) - Preliminary Landscape Plan (5-25-88 ) - Floor Plan, Hanger ( 5-26-88 ) Section/Elevations, Hanger (5-26-88 ) - Floor Plan, Process Plant ( 5-26-88 ) - Elevations, Process Plant (5-26-88 ) A condition of approval shall be that the street alignment shall be revised as stated above. -5- May 17 , 1988 8341 Galpin Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 City of Chaska Planning Commission — 205 - 4th Street East Chaska, MN 55318 Dear Commission Members: We live on Galpin Boulevard, just a short distance from the proposed site of the Reuter "composting project" . I think it would not be good planning to allow this facility to locate there and following are a few of my concerns . 1 . This type of industry is not compatible with the type of industry in Arbor Park. 2 . Has the possibility of locating this site on Highway 169 or 212 been explored as it would be closer to the Eden Prairie facility where the garbage comes from? This would lessen their trans- portation costs. 3 . This is called a "solid waste composting facility" in the Fact Sheet. No matter what you call it, it is an immense structure — to bring in garbage and Arbor Park will be known and associated as an area where garbage is trucked in. Most people will refer to it as an inside garbage dump. 4. Are there periods of time during normal operations when sides — of the building are left open for periods of time in order to accomplish the the drying out process? I understand this is a — normal procedure in this process . The alternative is to install air purification equipment to handle the odor and even this is — not 100% effective. Please contact the Buhler-Miag Company, manufacturer of the equipment to be used in the proposed operation. They will confirm that it is impossible, no matter what equipment is installed, to completely eliminate odors emminating from this type of business. Page 2 . City of Chaska Planning Commission 5. My main concern is the potential for offensive odors that would make it unacceptable to live where we are and the value of my property would be greatly decreased. There is no getting around it, there will be odors that connot be contained within the building. 6 . The Reuter Company is providing a valuable service in minimizing, by 25%, the need for land fill space. I know that this facility has to occupy space somewhere but a business of this kind is usually located in an area far from any existing structures. I understand that sites for this operation had been selected by Reuter in Dahlgren Township and also in Waconia and that each municipality rejected their proposal. I am speculating that these sites were located further from any farms than the Arbor Park site is to the existing neighbors. The City of Chaska has done an admirable job in attracting businesses that have obviously gone to great expense to make this area a real _ industrial show-place. By allowing a facility of this type that Reuter proposes in, or next to, Arbor Park will destroy the good planning that has thus far taken place. Sincerely, 4-15.;-1 g/IL.44-1-7C Gerald M. & Lois H. Gustafson ..r..I/�► I r.a/ ►A► N idNY Aeration Industries; Inc. 4100 Peavey Road•Chaska,Minnesota 55318•USA L-19 — AIRE•I1• May 2 , 1988 United Telephone of MN — 105 S. Peavey Road Chaska, MN 55318 Attention: Manager Dear Sir: I am taking the liberty of informing you, that if you are not already aware, of the effort to sell 40 acres of property in the Arbor Industrial Park and construct the Reuter Compost Facility. We need your support in blocking the sale of this — land and the construction of the compost facility. A compost facility proposes a great deal of environmental effect to our Industrial Park and surrounding community. The one most — noticeable is the release of pungent odors that can become airborne, and depending on which way the wind blows that day, we will all know of its presence. — Last week I attended the Metropolitan Council public meeting regarding the Reuter compost facility project. I was asked if there were other people opposed to the facility construction, and if there were, that we should form a name for our group. We have elected to call ourselves the Arbor Park Coalition. We would like very much to have your support — in joining this Arbor Park Coalition. If you could have your employees sign a petition much like the one attached, it will have a greater impact on the City Fathers, the Metropolitan Council , and the newspaper. We already have close to 100 names. I would appreciate a phone call from you advising me to add your name to the membership list. Your earliest reply would be most appreciated. Telephone:1(612)448-6789•Telex:9105780838•Facsimile 1(612)448-7293 Page 2 I am enclosing for your review, our concerns which were submitted to the Metropolitan Council. I am also sending you the Environmental Assessment Worksheet that goes into greater detail. You may want to go through this, and it will begin to give you some idea of the problems that the Reuter Compost proposal will present. Particularly see pages 14, 15 and 16. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Regards, AERATION INDUSTRIES INTERNATIONAL, INC. Daniel Durda President DD:ct Enclosure TO: PEOPLE OF CHASKA FROM: ARBOR PARK COALITION RE: REUTER COMPOST FACILITY TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: We the residents and all other people concerned with the ultimate construction of the Reuter composting plant, do hereby officially register our protest against allowing this facility to be built in our industrial park. Our concerns are as follows: 1 ) That the physical appearance will invariably deteriorate over time, and thereby will require an unusually high degree of maintenance. As this is a prototype facility, its efficiency is unknown. 2 ) Composting processes generate odors that can be airborne, and thereby affect the entire park and surrounding community. 3 ) Air pollution will be increased from trucks hauling the material to and from the site. Pollution can also occur from excess diesel emissions. With the increasing loads over time, debris can escape from the truck beds causing additional pollution. 4) Leachate from the facility can cause soil and ground water pollution. 5) Exothermic reaction produces heat which could ignite the material , resulting in a hazardous condition. 6) By its very presence, the composting facility lends a negative image to the industrial park as well as the city of Chaska, and could be viewed as a garbage dump. 7) Prior to the construction of the current facilities located in the park, we were led to believe that this would be a standard industrial park accommodating non- controversial manufacturing, assembly, and warehouse buildings and others most commonly associated with industrial parks . 8) We are concerned that the construction of such a facility would have a negative effect on the value of the current land and buildings already in the park. 9 ) Due to the experimental nature of this prototype facility, we are concerned over many other unknowns not herein addressed. AMNIA & ASSOCIATES, INC ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, SITE PLANNERS 8401 73rd Avenue North • Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 Telephone:(612) 533-7595 REUTER, INC. LANDSCAPE PLANT LIST SYMBOL COMMON NAME II OF PLANTS _ AL AMERICAN LINDEN 9 B WHITE BIRCH 15 CS COLORADO SPRUCE 4 FC FLOWERING CRAB 22 LI LILAC 47 LP LOMBARDY POPLAR 17 MO MOCK ORANGE 12 NS NORWAY SPRUCE 27 PJ PFITZER JUNIPER 101 RM RED MAPLE 2 RO RUSSIAN OLIVE 23 RT FLOWERING DOGWOOD 16 SM SUGAR MAPLE 15 W WEEPING WILLOW 26 WA MARSHALL ASH 5 CREEPING JUNIPER 250 SUMAC 150 EXISTING TREES (OAK, MAPLE, BASSWOOD & ELM) 69 .. • i 1 .! ��. ��.. .•_.. — _�"s,:.._,_—...,_ _-_p si• ' _. I i I I ;, . , I I I K: I'', I • t I .•.i I _`\Ili • ( - //+ I ',. — i i _0;10.0;;ie.'.0 i 04.,s.,- „ -1/ _ �'?% �a f _ rf ; �ifl_ -•i 0= \ \ \P`lei �r i�_�`,I' I /�`/ Ai \ ` / �t r Il\ i /^ , • `C' . •tc' /4Ti/ /.r am - 1,•'-_p.:, 5 / ,• U --f•• ,. a,<'•' ` fir° � S\\ '�1•,..;;i. nl''%, `,` ---. \'0\__ ice' tr_;'i40 4 5 d - "^2%AJ1•�s' \ - ',` _ `` , ' ,l ' _,'=�° _ ii ��� i oDail; ,1 \ R I �� c yr ter\ \ �. y' s `�R ;� j l///'` i�1. \ _ 1 ! G/%iir ''r4 1I \\ % -tr )0 11) i fro4\ - 'q'-'- &i ! /;,tom-ice - . •-.., ' ''zi ..qzp.,:-- --.' \4--\c--•-4.5.•;•7!--LiTh ( ' //,‘ -{--- M • F i.; R K s r/i tr :j 'r�w.l \\\ r- ////// r i \�-+ro�_�•�rs - I^C F, f a`•'�' .nca_ i li - 1 m T 71 Z' 1i ,E , r r' n , 1: ; g .1 c D --\— t Z "{ o m i --r s v m • g 3 • t? it• -< - 0 ti -. • r. ._ E• ` j > — • U) HI !TT-i -1 m rn t ;H - > i li —Z— _ -_ ial i- -- . ,y,—_ , r, I -•-�•-�-'-,-.�•. girl I I ,. I (1.„ '1 I N{ - I I - -r L -; - -: 1 " 1 ..' Ip . Li I��\ il << I _-_ �\ 1 ,�O.+,+ " I '�r' I I ''-2 r�N`\\�1�\�/f' ‹T /� ► \\\ - -yd =ti`-_ ice. - \ ILI / / c— i .. \ l ` I i n��07#4i- \ \ wr .r`-.vrt,.w,l,,,Ik. 11- ;` — / \ , / —� --- //'///// / \\ \\ . t it • ,'y9 ' IJi1\ \ `_.-- • •==-_---,--\\ \II\—.%////,▪ 1l%,;-1_-- \*-•-i)4'----\ :.,.- =/ll 0p '� •t+/ I \\ \-ii/i \._11\\l` i%-.+`<<= �r�r T• — _%37` %0- /} - - /i--•�—�\� \ I S \\ ",ems.• / — i !„--Ise I 1 ii-- —.h \.;, RI I \`� 1 -. ems' ' 2 J.v r �,\ �� �\ 1 % "yam. / ♦R II ��1-✓—\ \ I� / I i I i / / I • K III I (�/�—� 11 / —- k I ` ka s�,.��\,\\\ \\, 111 /I I r w —,1 , , - z�\\',\\ , % k n�J?�-1/\\\`��I '. I \�--1 �:-- \ \ }-`\�1111I 1�. "• I k A 111 Jill it ��\` 1 �\��// // / \�—��\ \ �� .---- /}ta\ \ 0 .N i"--—. 4-, _ 1 7 i / ./ / / ram$ \� "" - /?f�\4 es 1U K x k l.rK1 w+�k�wv.1,.\\ \ ,_' ///// w I \ --..o\ �. m ,„[iii ‘ k _ 1 * z 1�� -• k % 77.1 P !...- iiii *4 i --1.41 •i - ...,,, . 0 ....z . 0 x c _< ! , .. .. ..1, 1 r., , CT 04 I 3 . e` ,,v &ail 4 3 ; , 1 1 I 1 v d .MI y . \\\... CD 0 am i;:' ;Sl. ?Qv 3____ _. 0 .41 _i ? . I ,_ Z C 0 • =gI —- > t m i .Z . a 13 XI s S, — is s - r cZ ' ji it tc._._..'._r +[d_�_ .tom-'-,'.-e- ' -,,,, l� '" I I } I :y: I I '.`.' I 'I I I 1 k. ,,,- -- I / '.i'l ‘ ,rim�_ _\` I \\ \\ ` • �.- �- 1111///// / / I�� 12 1` I 1 / ��"\s , 1„1)Ill l/ Z\N''- -) III k,i,e'';ii r.)-7--'-)\\ --<.`.1\J....1?-21C: .,,,,..1 I t. r'._ //11///11111;'fi if".--1:•.• fIII f -�\�,�' _.. \ c Is. I / /-i- /j/ / * I I II /,..-.�� _� \ i �%.' / F I . // _� i / C I ' '* / l1I ////% / /�)!1lV I/ c— / //////l 4 ` ' =it :t R t/I / - - f / / // 1/ //�_�F ` --" /0 1/4---•--./f/// /// .... ....E Z.4 ........._:__.....„ _ ___., „....,.\\„ . ...‘„..„ ....... I, P lit....144, 1"4 // ii/\`_i/ // 1 \�i7 Y X \\ \ 11111I \1 X/'///=_� //// fo / \ /i / - �� - 11111i 1 \\ // Y/l �\ /// 1 //// \ \ \ \\ i ,.z 0//l/'` / .� `=-'- 1 1 //i/1 / •i\\ l\ \ \ - \) I")t s1I�( �I \ z \\ \1 4// // \ \ I I / 'i\\�\ .�Ji/i"�J�ri1�,1•x•\�./%// ///// \ \�� � ��- _ i �4 pi -11 i 1[ i i 1 E k \ .....,fr____-•-...„/ ‘ T. i — i :II itTi 13 m -1 71 1 Pi '..\41- a ii r 4kw!s� � 0 � `I ;• o II -Di (n .� i fl z0 : r M m I li D It 1a • n I 1 _' ' - — aa • it • . : _ . ,,,,__:�-J / - .,% \ -�4.\,;�'�__ -�0��„ •• - /$--\�2 / —v i ^ql ','\fftle. 410...--__:-3.- ------..:.!----t.S...y-.4:7/I/ , - _ . ' I- \---7_-_,--, -)I , ,-, ',',11114br ..,.-----=-''''-'---- '-..A.***--c, . •---- ' 1. -.---,\I '-. -----'.. ---Ill )'1 d `'' I r......\,,c,_% \� _ ,,,, �/i///a d s ride-A _ r • I. lif ;it, . \ 1z:eh:Ivo.,§k i\-,...i \,,,.), ,-----_,.,,, . 7 ''' ' / / ,,, ?i, ,, i , r- �-� ter•, - ��\ ///� ! ! , \ „ • .... , cs. •, 1.... ...,... 440.... -„,,...). . _ \ \ ,‘„ ,,,,,,\....„.:,...,,,,, , 1, ill'.:,‘ )01, \\ r \ .:— .... *4 s, ......\\ • • VIII , I i/Y%/ %/ram.\ /..i, to, \ ,,,i/yI// \\.�ti..\ , I11„ �,� .4 \,....,,....„.. ........... 0/-/ , -,\\,1..) --i/ k.„, , ii, //jiff ,,,,,,, . _ \ \. ,p \ 4,041(.6. .,,,,,,,......,„,.. 0, . „, ..... ......____ _z „,, . , , „:„.,„ ....,1 •.... WI/ / '. .'--'---k-- 1.‘ I j//1/ k 1 1,'•\ \ \. \ ;10 ,,o5r: 'j I I) MIIi III/��� '_. \1\ �, ;'/// ii-, -�����- .N.-= -. ; �a;;� y�• i --+rr--- 1 : - / / / / l �.�; - `_ -l /'N,f�+� \\}'am i/ . ~ 1 l ��i / /'/ l' \ _ \ / Y.. \�tili-,, ii--- ` I Ilk._..%ice //' 1 ... .- •'.\\C-J., .4/ I y%l I -\ a --� -1 -- - \ �__ • .l // � ,�`s �/` .. . \ \. - , I ---,Pc.-�`�'rs yit 4 t : tk /�� p \\ Y Cn l\ i !0•gi cam� :i 11 rn C) ., P \ m D K - �- �� :::.; � rn o rn i z -:;; I — if' - O ri ;' Z n \ 0 fo CTI..ir , - :, .::..__ ,. r— z = i . ,... I x _ 'r 1 r it- I- pi.--- : I'- II 'I-k--- S • 1 On W> j - m II - _ 14I'1:f7.7:. 4 ice= 0 .... _ t _ y li- __ 1 Ir 7 , I`. II f IL _ II f I I I _ ELEVATION= _ yr•..��•��_ '�N it i Piff r ,... jICCj - PROCESS PL -r , '�"`" ` madder, Tire. • It - s e. • .. I. PI x I . .L.4 : :_I l I : I I j l s. _ - 1`I. __a }-�—c I- I I ' TpyT1T10..1 - I � 1 FwarMR • � a. , L . • . o I — \m .14...__, — I / ii ^, 1D .R ,/� I s .. 1 1 t /a 70 A / ir f• N j / / mom , /\ .. ?-1' :Ito _ .py \\<17/ f f it to ti i FLQdR. ?LAsN ��_— ��ar��_� ..�. `.�.� ci{� 01 PFtOGE3S PLANT = .--".... Rude ?we. I r , I�-no- _ t \ I .+. r �• • i 1--- I I tr ] i _=a *---i. mg I1 (Na _ a,, Y-4 . / _. ... § II I j `" j . ,-.. . =U.. , .°_. .)?, i i _ 10 — a' -1 aEJI' Z4411 lat .-p — s n ---� 1 ,i i ] , \\,..).< z 1.4 . ..., if =III F I3 . ow-a'. 4, Ica- 1 -1 It -We` I n ?m • I' II M {{ I1 • -{ IO 11 I •,�0 0 Iq -1 I — L j ' j �- II I j III, d In I II _= II ' 1: , a_ _ In II 11 i - -', 2 II i D li .jl' _— T 1 - 11 II 7 1 4 I; 1 _ '' Ali I — 1� _ .I I . It 1 1, In .. II ifI ^ 1. II II 1 II .Fm II ::{ l II P itI..1- 0I ",c Y. 1;.. I, o - V.._ - I or-=. - I, ;i 0I I 56GTION/ELEv"-noN5 ��=..,-._ -�` r IA - ct. n — , •:�/ FERMENTATION HANGAFZ .�� ��'�"- /KG • - I — I I I- 1I ; I ii• III _ I ' I I I I ' ' i I • . a I I i I i I 7 i I I I t I • ' I I I - Or. • x I I I I I ,I ' 1 I I I I i 1 1 1 I 1 l 1 I I • ' ; I I - i ! i I •I I I I { — I I ' I i l 1 - I 1 I I ! 1 i I i I I t I ~ I I I i I u ! I ! I I I I I t 1 i I I I 1 , 1 I I — Fi ! 'i I i I I ' I ► ; I i , l I i I ! I I i I I I I ! I 1 I I I I i I 1 11 I I I I 'I ! I I I I I a I I 1 i I I I I I ! I — s_ I { 1 I , I 11 I I I I • ' I l I l i 1 •I l i 1 1 a' I I I 1• I I , ! I 1 •I • 1 I 1 I 1 i ' ! 1 !1 I I 1 I ai I I I I i t ir 1 1 1 I I I I I ' I i I I ! ' ' 1 i I I ; 1 I I I I . i i I I 1 I Ai i I i I I I 1 I I I I i t 1 I 1 I I o I I I I i I I I I 1 I I ; I14 I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I faD k ; 11 11 I 1 1 ' i 1 I I I , `3 ° I j l , I I I 1 I I I { 1 1 I 1 I 1 — • I I I 1 1 i I I I I I 1 • i I I 1 1 1 ! 1 1 I I 1 1 1 i I 1 , ' 1 I 11 1 I I I I I ( 1 <1) I 1 I ' I 1 1 ! I 1 I I 1 I • 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I I ; I 1 i 1 1 I 1 i , 11 1 1 I I I I I I I , • ,I I ! I 1 1 1 I 1 • 1 ' I I I I I i ', I ; I I I ' I i 1 I ' I 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I i I I I i I I 1 I I 1 I ' I I I I I I I I I I 1 I ' I 11 I . 1 I I I I 1 I I i ! 1 I I 1 , 1 � 1 I i� , I ' ! I I 1 " I 1 I 1 ! 1 ! I , i ! " I I i I I I 1 — I 1 I I 1 I • i 1 ! I I I I I I i 1 i ' I I I ► - I , - ( I l l ,4 I, J iI I - - •._., • 1,'._ 1 1•- I I I ! I I 1 '' i 1 i I I ,I 1 I ; , I I i I I i l l I I1 I . i ', x ,I I I I 1 j ) j ► I I I , I I I / . i 1 1 q` 1 I 1 ? i ■ a II -.1. ■ a 0m' \Ir. 1 -1 . . I I-- ft �, o Of.", • IfI w I I ^_' FL ~YL AN - W?5T HALF --- ^._•—•_� ^`^���. ..mow kr Q — 1r-o` FERMENTATION M-IAhJGAR � _ a rniv o .-. a'r�I''"„ .1! _ _- �eutacr 7Kc. t coati c 11111 C.) — Vt/ NI/ CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE /k 600 EAST 4TH STREET ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES l CHASKA.MINNESOTA 55318-2186 (612) 448-3435 ,A, viv E SOS COUNTY Of CAQVEQ - LESSONS IN SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FROM EUROPE Solid waste management issues and proposals been a major concern — of Carver County staff and Commissioners in the last several years . These issues have also begun to directly effect county residents as proposals for processing facilities are considered.As the County' s staff person most heavily involved in solid waste issues, I recently had the opportunity to participate in a tour that visited and examined solid waste processing facilities in — Europe . I would like to briefly comment on the sites I saw and some of the things I believe were learned from this trip . First of all , why a trip to Europe? There are two basic answers — to this question . One , Europe has not had the luxury of cheap landfills like we in the United States had until recently . While the U . S . was developing landfills , Europeans were developing — machinery and methods to reuse solid waste rather than burying it. This experience in waste processing leads to answer number two to the question above. When Carver County recently asked for _ proposals from companies to process it' s waste, the three com- panies responding all proposed utilizing equipment and machinery from European manufacturers . None of these equipment manufac- turers had a fully operational facility in North America, despite — having been in the waste processing business for many years . Waste processing is expensive . These companies can not compete with cheap landfills . — I visited five countries in Europe and saw solid waste being recycled , composted , burned , and even landfilled - often all at the same facility . In the process of being processed , I saw solid — waste being shredded , mashed , screened , picked , sorted , analyzed , extruded , and even "optically scanned" by a machine that sorted clear glass fragments from stones and other colors of glass. I — saw what was once garbage being used to produce electricity , steam heat, methane gas , and compost . In short, I saw a lot of garbage , and I saw facilities which had been in business for — years at making something useful from it. It was readily apparent that solid waste processing is not an experimental technology in Europe . Having dealt with over ten waste management facility siting proposals while I have been with Carver County , I was very inter- ested in seeing how Europeans dealt with some of the concerns that commissioners, residents , and myself have had about proposed waste facility sites . Things like location and odors. Some quick observations on these based on my European trip ; — 1 Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer Location - About half of the facilities we visited were located in the countryside with familiar looking black and white cows and farmers for neighbors. These facilities usually served several small towns and were located somewhere in between. The rest of the facilities were generally located within city limits in areas of mixed industrial and residential development. Typical neigh- - bors were factories , apartment houses , and some single family homes. Special notes: In Gent, Belgium we stayed in a new Holiday Inn built right across the street from a composting facility built and in operation since 1964 . In Heidelberg , Germany we toured a incinerator and composting facility that has been in operation for over ten years across the street from a large area of summer homes and gardens . These facilities seemed to be ac- - cepted as neighbors. Odors - Garbage can stink and so can solid waste processing facilities. What I think we discovered was that you don ' t have to have odors . Two French facilities we visited smelled bad - but they made no special efforts to control the odors and probably weren ' t concerned about them given their location . The operators apparently believed that if garbage smells , but nobody is around to smell it , then garbage odors aren ' t a problem . And in all fairness to the operators, much of the odor was probably coming from the nearby landfill . The other facilities we visited made special attempts to control odors and were very successful at it. Is European garbage the same as ours? Many people ask me this question . In rural France we saw much less packaging and plastics and more vegetable waste than you would expect here . In the cities we visited we saw garbage that looked American - plastic bags, packaging , magazines , and discarded household items. What struck me as the biggest observation or lesson? As we traveled Europe, I think the whole group was struck by the diver- sity of management methods . As mentioned above , we saw garbage subjected to many different high technology processes. However , we also saw containers for recycling glass and papers located on city street corners all over Europe. And we saw yard and garden waste being collected and composted separately such as we have done in Carver County for several years. The lesson to be learned? Solid waste can be managed - but don ' t put your garbage all in one can or technology . Support your local _ recycling and composting programs - they will be in operation for the forseeable future. Learn about the issues and provide input on the selection of a processing facility for the bulk of Carver County ' s solid waste. But don ' t expect to find one easy or magi- - cal method that will manage our waste in the near future . 2 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 300 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 291-6359 REPORT OF THE METROPOLITAN WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE DATE: May 11 , 1988 TO: Environmental Resources Committee SUBJECT: Determination of the Need for an EIS on the Reuter, Inc. Composting Facility, City of Chaska BACKGROUND At its meeting on May 10, 1988, the Metropolitan Waste Management Advisory Committee considered the above mentioned report. ISSUES AND CONCERNS Council staff informed the committee that Council member Nunn had expressed concern that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) comment regarding storage of finished compost did not have a response. The staff informed the committee that the MPCA comment indicated that the compost would need to be stored unless the compost was mature and the commissioner of the MPCA approved the proposer selling the compost for use without six months of storage. These provisions are related to permitting the facility and did not appear to pose a significant environmental effect. The committee noted that a letter had been received from the administrator of Fillmore County. The committee asked if the odors generated at Filmore would be comparable to the potential odors generated by the proposed Reuter, Inc. facility. Staff informed the committee that after the initial formation of the compost, a period of 21 days, the Fillmore compost was removed from the building and allowed to cure outside in windrows. Further, the Fillmore County facility does not have odor control equipment as is proposed for the Reuter, Inc. facility. The committee asked if the MPCA had an opinion concerning the staff recommendation that an EIS was not needed for the proposed Reuter, Inc. composting facility. Staff informed the committee that staff from the MPCA was present, but it was staff's understanding they were not prepared to comment at that time. Staff further informed the committee that the MPCA may address comments to the Environmental Resources Committee. 011 N ; J988 CI1 Y ut. CHAIVt;HSSEN The committee asked if the proposer had made provisions for reducing the amount( of toxic materials that may be delivered to the facility in the compostable material. Staff indicated that the separation of toxics was conducted to a — limited degree in the Eden Prairie facility that would be producing the compostable material and the majority of the separation would need to be performed by generators. Staff explained the issue will be addressed in the — Special Wastes paper to bediscussed at the June meeting. The committee asked what the consequences would be if the compost did not meet _ class I standards. Staff responded that if the compost did not meet the proposed class I standards, it would be managed as class II compost. Class II compost may be land applied so that heavy metals concentrations do not exceed defined limits in the soil. — The committee approved the recommendation. RECOMMENDATION That the Metropolitan Council: 1 . Adopt the findings of fact and the conclusions contained in the staff report to the Metropolitan Waste Management Advisory Committee dated May 8, 1988. - 2. Find the Reuter, Inc. composting facility does not have the potential to create significant environmental effects. _ 3. Issue a negative declaration g stating that an environmental impact statement is not necessary for the proposed Reuter, Inc. composting facility in the City of Chaska. — Respectfully submitted, Richard Beens, Chair — METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 300 Metro Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612-291-6359 DATE: May 8, 1988 TO: Metropolitan Waste Management Advisory Committee FROM: Solid Waste Division (John Rafferty 291-6459) SUBJECT: Determination of the Need for an EIS on the Reuter, Inc. Composting Facility, City of Chaska BACKGROUND Reuter, Inc. had proposed two potential sites for a composting facility to accept up to 300 tons per day of residuals from the company's densified refuse derived fuel (dRDF) facility. The company has requested that the Dahlgren Township site be removed from further consideration. The comments received concerning the Dahlgren site should be disregarded. The determination of the need for the completion of an environmental impact statement will be made for the City of Chaska EAW only. (r6, The company has submitted additional information not present in the original EAW. The new information concerns some operation aspects of the facility relayeu in the response to comments and the EAW addendum prepared for consideration for the need for an EIS. The record of the public meeting and the response to comments is attached along with the EAW addendum. The decision on the need for an EIS should be based on the information in the EAW and the information that has been developed in response to the EAW process. COUNCIL REVIEW AUTHORITY Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules require an environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) on resource recovery facilities that increase processing capacity by more than 100 tons per day of solid waste (Minn. Stat. 4410.21300) . The EAW and comments from government agencies and the public are used to determine whether or not an EIS should be prepared on the project. The Council prepared an EAW and held a public meeting on April 19, 1988. The Council must now determine whether an EIS is required. The EQB rules (Minn. Stat. 4410.1700 Subp. 7) state that an EIS is required for projects which have the potential for significant environmental effects. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the Council should consider: 1 . The type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects. 2. The cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects. 3. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority. 4. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or of EISs previously prepared on similar projects. — SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED IMPACTS AIR QUALITY The proposed project will produce compost from the waste currently disposed after processing waste at the Eden Prairie facility. The compostable material — consists of two fractions, the heavy fraction from the primary separator and the fines fraction from the air classifier. The facility is not equipped to accept unprocessed wastes. The composting operation employs microorganisms to — aerobically decompose the waste received at the facility. The processing building separates the compostable fraction from screen rejects and adds water to the waste. The processing of the waste to form windrows does not involve the use of process air. The processing building will have an air management —' system that will vent to the outside. Concern has been expressed about the potential for odor generation from the processing area. The practice of rapid processing of waste (less than three days) and daily cleaning of the — tipping floor has been successful in mitigating odor generation at transfer stations and is expected to be effective for this facility. The aeration system planned for the compost building forces air up through the relatively mature compost in the outer windrows and draws the air into the inner windrows. The air drawn through the windrows is to be sent through an earthern filter to reduce the odors emanating from the facility. Specific operation data on the earthern filter is not available from the proposer at this time. The Council staff did not receive information from existing facilities that indicates odor generation problems in facilities that do not have the same degree of control proposed for the Reuter, Inc. facility. The compost is screened for large particles which are rejected and disposed. The remaining fraction is to be subjected to a ballistic separater. The air from the ballistic separator will be laden with fine particles. The proposer intends to use a cyclone separator to remove the fines. The resulting air will release approximately seven pounds of dust per hour. This is equal to 30 tons of particulate emissions per year. This is below the threshold for a stationary source of air pollution. The proposer has indicated that additional control for dust emissions may be employed on the cyclone separator. The proposer has submitted data on the concentrations of volatile organics in the compostable materials to be received at the facility. The data, in the addendum attachment, shows that the levels of volatile organics in the — materials to be delivered to the facility are below the detection level. Emissions of volatile organics from the facility should not be a concern. — ( LAND USE The proposed facility has been sited in an area zoned industrial in the City of Chaska. The land north, east, and south of the site is in rural land use in the City of Chanhassen. The EAW addendum shows a revised site plan, provided by the proposer, that reduces the impact of the facility on adjacent land use. SOILS, NOISE, TRANSPORTATION AND WATER QUALITY The Minnesota Department of Transportation forwarded comments that the proposed project would not have an adverse impact on the transportation system serving the proposed facility. They did, however, note that the primary site access proposed into the industrial park is currently undergoing agency review. The proposer has indicated that approximately 20 trucks per day would arrive at the site. The hours in which the trucks would arrive is proposed to be from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. , Monday through Friday and one half a day Saturday. Concern was expressed for the potential impact of truck noise. The access to the site will be next to a Consolidated Freightways terminal and the truck traffic will be on the western side on the site, away from residential structures. The major sources of noise will be in an enclosed building, however, fan noise will be generated on the roof tops of the proposed buildings. The external noise sources are typical for an industrial area. The proposer has indicated that storm water will be directed away from impervious surfaces by city storm sewer, which will reduce the potential for sediment disturbing the DNR protected wetland north of the site. During construction, the proposer has indicated that measures will be taken to reduce the potential erosion at iie site. Concern has been expressed that the wildlife will dislocate. The modification of the site plan minimizes the potential for these impacts by siting the facility in existing crop land rather than in a wooded area. Areas of small on site peaty areas have been avoided in the revised site plan to reduce the potential impacts on these areas. The DNR did not note any protected wetlands or wildlife species on the site and the Minnesota State Historical Society indicated that there were no known sites of archeological significance on the site. SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE The MPCA expressed concern that the heavy metal concentrations of the materials sold as compost may exceed the proposed class I compost standards. In an _ analysis of the compostable materials, assuming all of the heavy metals will concentrate in the finished compost, the compost would pass the class I standard. The proposer has indicated that a routine testing program will be required and that any compost not meeting class I standards will be managed as -' a class II compost or landfilled under the industrial co-disposal program. The MPCA also expressed concern that the material landfill from the facility may be hazardous. The EAW addendum contains a table showing the total concentration of heavy metals that would be present in the waste landfilled if all of the heavy metals are concentrated in the waste landfilled. The actual character of the waste and total metals concentrations will require testing. The proposer has indicated that the materials to be landfilled will be managed according to the industrial waste co-disposal program. 3 FINDINGS OF FACT 1 . The project is the processing of the compostable fraction of waste generated by the Reuter, Inc. Eden Prairie refuse derived fuel processing facility to produce a compost product. 2. The commentors' concerns have been addressed in the response to comments and the additional materials contained in the addendum to the EAW. 3. The commentors and EAW did not demonstrate that the proposed facility has the potential for significant environmental effects. 4. The effects from the proposed facility will be subject to ongoing public — regulatory authority and can be controlled or mitigated through enforcement of permits. CONCLUSIONS 1 . The proposed project by Reuter, Inc. to build and operate a solid waste composting facility in the City of Chaska does not have the potential to create significant environmental effects. 2. The effects from the proposed facility will be subject to ongoing public regulatory authority and can be controlled or mitigated through enforcement of permits. _ RECOMMENDATIONS 1 . That the Metropolitan Council adopt the findings of fact and the — conclusions contained in the staff report to the Metropolitan Waste • Management Advisory Committee dated May 8, 1988. 2. That the Metropolitan Council find the Reuter, Inc. composting facility does not have the potential to create significant environmental effects. 3. That the Metropolitan Council issue a negative declaration stating that an environmental impact statement is not necessary for the proposed Reuter, Inc. composting facility in the City of Chaska. JR 142D 4 - EAW Addendum Reuter, Inc. Proposed Composting Facility City of Chaska Addendum to Item 5 The proposer has submitted data on the chemical composition of the materials to be composted at the proposed composting facility (Attachment Al ) . The highest concentration observed for each constituent from fines samples has been provided in Table Al . Table A2 provides the revised mass balance for the proposed composting facility. The volatile organics tested in the material to be composted were all below detectable levels. The composting process may concentrate the heavy metals in the finished compost product. Table A3 shows the estimated heavy metals concentrations for the finished compost assuming all of the heavy metals present concentrate in the finished compost. The results show that if all heavy metal are concentrated in the finished compost, which is very conservative, the finished compost would pass proposed Class I compost standards. A revised site plan is provided as Figure Al . 1 TABLE Al Chemical Composition as Compostable Fractions* 4:- Constituent Levels (mg/kg) Constituent MPCA Class I ACHF Fines Standards (Heavy Fraction) (Highest Constituent -- Concentrate Sampled) Zn (Zinc) 1000 >8 95 Cu (Copper) 500 14 23 Cd (Cadmium) 10 <3 <3 Cr (Chromium) 1000 9.5 31 — Pb (Lead) 1000 43 68 Hg (Mercury) 5 0.24 3.3+ — Ni (Nichel) 100 6.7 13 PCBs <1 <1 * Note: Samples were collected by the proposer and analyzed by an independent laboratory. The results shown are the highest values determined for each constituent. The raw data from the laboratory is in Attachment — Al . + The second highest mercury level in the fine fraction equaled 0. 1 mg/kg — 0 TABLE A2 —17 Revised Mass Balance for the Proposed Composting Facility — Mass Mass Dry Matter H2O H2O Percent TPD TPD TPD Percent — Refuse Input - Fines 59 176 114 62 35 — - ACHF 41 120 96 24 20 — Input to ZST mixing drum 100 296 210 66 29 — - Water addition 24 70 0 70 100 - Screen rejects 32 96 82 14 15 Raw Compost 91 270 128 142 53 — - Water added (. during fermentation 26 76 0 76 100 - Fermentation losses 72 212 34 178 168 — Mature Compost Before Fine Treatment 45 134 94 40 30 - Sieve reject greater — than 10 mm 20 60 44 16 25 - Glass/Stones 2 6 6 0 0 Fine Compost less than 10 mm 23 68 44 24 35 Note: 1 . Above values are approximate only. — 2. Amounts stated are in U.S. (short) tons per day. Source: Buhler-Miag, Inc. Sales Contract, 1987 — --(.._ MEI TABLE A3 (:- Estimate Metals Concentrations Finished Composts Average Conc. in Estimate Conc. Constituent MPCA Standard Compostable Materials in Finished Compost Zn 1000 72 223 Cu 500 16 49 Cd 10 <3 NA Cr 1000 14 43 Pb 1000 42 130 _ Hg 5 0.75 2.3 Ni 100 7.6+ 24 * Assuming all metals present concentrate in finished compost and 44 dry tons of compost are produced for every 210 dry tons of compostable material reserved. + Using the detection limit as a data point. Mft • Addendum to Item 13 Figure A2 shows the locations of residences adjacent to the site. ( Addendum to Item 14 Approximately how many acres of the site are in each of the following categories? (Acreages should add up to total project area before and after — construction.) Before After Before After — Forest/Wooded 7.2 6.0 Wetland (types 3-8) 0.8 0.8 Cropland 24 21 .2 Impervious Surface 0 6.0 Brush/grassland 8.0 5.2 Other (specify) 0.8 0.8* * planted areas .- Addendum to Item 20 Will the project affect groundwater levels in any wells (on or off the site)? — If yes, explain: No X Yes ( Addendum to Item 24 Table A4 shows the concentration of heavy metal that could be present in the — materials landfilled from the proposed composting operation if all of the heavy metals are concentrated in the waste landfilled. .m' (ft.- ( Figure A2. LAND OWNERSHIP AND RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES NEAR PROPOSED REUTER COMPOSTING SITE — fll fM/THfifitipiapr ive, N/NNEY• ,,j - - II ® m BAY �� _ , r� �. /R • /A / r _ r En Y u • / fatii �! / ...-- i. Nee t M I M Ie . L. Brcndefl N Carper'. ti kta /a.d/ s� / INNEWASHT is rn f 2i4o9 arigroa RR/ / 90.m ParCt.� / RED 7/.1S I �/'CUM. - ' El ` CEDAR i 2 w.+b�! PT ....'CUrt, J ✓. � RAC counc� slf — • Q :-: Can, Duarr , /,ter vS ,\ — I. 8 Ntt!• r/J _ (Tahnsdl7',eri7,t • 4- 1111b u .. cAl__ ��w.,..;...ea. ,,Nss�s' il,I Z ` C ft' yrohn O ` r `� b 0,� lt, Chan.7.11 i a A aspit-r-3, 01.114 ..... k eo 02 . I " -Nina II - c . OS 75 '',1 ' • pr",'.': rst 0. ki r7• i rJly J3offfl A//a Iona/ r\• T M We 1rr lV� a r 10. 41 �r •- Minna. . a Bonk of k I RicharQ 6 • Q h kg ,:,iryc l I., eheui I l5/.Pau/ ,8 I ,// h Hartung,. 1 .40.4.... (/ fl+rheW ura efa!�_ ` ho ti y�1 (r a �, ` L 4 Ili ! �,R , ; °c• • A r/� 1.4.zi, f� Su twi La Nr/b \ 'Sf "-"im'14ag V d I ® Vo/k , ,,e.c. 1,rtr WWII i • g f j ,ar7 �'- 1111 ad n R yW Schn ,dU +, _ • Na,K 11,, T .0#4 I 'f1/Shia, F, Jt Na( ./ I. a / /JBt/ nlge/h i t 1n • k of Lt. / J � 4 +tames.01 Curr /U 7,7• am C�Chaska 9 /asn2 /411/P1‘401P• aiLl �.i` ` i_ __� b a 7. _— aMJon iiiit / �� r •Kr {Loa �Q/Jr. �iac a Fcr 4+ �+�re V L• s a Hri-NE cz tt' • 4o . as/�1f+ah, . t` k7e, \VAR . .. . ew,• Frank i' •Au'tJ*'' J� aJtn EI!iabe Far I.crqme is /.7J re i I Firaf Na/ionnlfC ,p,Etfi1 .Hajd/rne ' Er bn•lhar Bonk o 1 ♦ Nation/r7 n• 40 ' • Ao V,h,•r. 51.AOul - • Frederick F + /asC/- m .odcrf Mo/ a ^� r7 He"ar r,E- 1 / . ♦ �.^ !G tars on Si I 90RAC.... • . .gi Fi- � 'ter + r .A,1 (Tear,s. B/uff Creek ft DAu ik : 4' 0/ ,bey,, �ki .1 aM/, HO • LRSS:c on, ` + 22d 30 rst r+.hl,. Mr , 4 fNa/`• / (-Bankoj,S,W/ FirJF `f^ e b- ,,.., No Nona/ Ie-sc f a f St �) f n aorence D Jo ►cram Bank o Elate 0 1 2 N ' 1 Mlles ., ■ Residential Structures as of 4/15/87 Map Source: Land Atlas Plat Book, Carver County Farm Bureau 6Aft TABLE A4 Estimate Metals Concentrations Waste Disposed Average Conc. in Estimate Conc. in Constituent Compostable Materials Waste Disposed* (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Zn 72 131 Cu 16 29 Cd <3 NA Cr 14 26 Pb 42 77 Hg .75 1.4 Ni 7.6+ 14 * Assuming all metals present concentrate in waste disposed and 162 tons of waste are produced for every 296 tons of compostable materials received. + Using the delection limit as a data point. 7 EAW Addendum Attachment Al 1:- 1 . Braun Environmental Laboratories Data 2. Revised Compost Facility Site Plan ttfl 3 - • ' 1 Ouailry Services Since 19 57 ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES POU S CounTs Rd 18. P 0. 6c x 35108. Mr!;_ MN 55435-010R — C41-5600 May 5 , 1988 �- . E: ,.r,.st ;•^ • :�o.,a.. ,.. fig 6 Afr �- Reuter Resource Recovery, Inc. Attn: Roger Davis 11000 West 78th Street 4250 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Project 4 E88-192/3i55 Preliminary Report Mr. Davis : Braun Environmental rabor?tories , Inc. is p eased to provide our report for the analysis you requested . Data for the following samol.e( s ) are e.cicsea Your I .D. Number Work RecLes-e Baled EDF, Heavies . Fines PCB; Petals , Volati.:,.=s 4: All samples were analy ei according to EFT or other standard methods . Any anomalies which were encountered in this analysis are referenced on the laboratory retort. Metho d' ' 'red references and quality control information are available on request . ... If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this report or otner Braun Environmental Laboratories services Dlease contact us . very truly yours, BRAUf ErNVIIROyV E 4L' LABORATORIES, INC. / Cy 'th'la H. Wetie`r Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor Anne L. Ochs Laboratory Manager CNW/ALO:gec/E:E88-192-2A Attachments cc: David Kuechenmeister Joseph Jameson 9 4nvironmrr+al 7 naq jr ,x Consu!ting Services .11.,• r •i • ..,.Ih.r^. ,h.i, .or t i.•.rrl It.,,• i..• .u.I'.I ...I i.l lit:r. •t h lkiu I NO 4 14^1.41•,. .I!i./rm,p Al!n•i,. i. May 5, 196i Page 1 c_` i LABORATORY REPCRT .1O: 5155 r Reuter Resource Recovery, Inc. 1,ROJECT NUMBER :1Lt:.: Roger Davis T E8°- :92 , , COLLECTED: 4-26-88 by Client 11„00 West 76th Street #250 RECEIVED: Eden Prairie, MN 55344 � 4-li — SAMPLE MATRIX: Solidd8A BP.AUN I. D. : 5155-1 5155-2 5155-3 5155-4 Baled RDF Baled RDF Heavy E. P . Plant Client I .D. : 6 Mo . Old Fresh Frac. Fines Oversize -- Parameter Units Cadmium mg/kg <3 . 0 <3 . 0 <3 . 0 <3 . 0 Chromium mg/kg 12 8 . 8 9 . 5 Copper mg/kg 27 14 7 . 0 1 ^ Mercury mg/kg 1 .8 0.0 4 2 Nickel mg/kg 24 <6 . 0 Lead mg/kg 120 6 . 7 <6 . 0 Zinc mc/kg22 4 28 — PCBs 1�6.'� 92 78 28 mg/ kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 <1 . 0 <1 . 0 ( -' ' - " - 1] _ . .... : ,, ,t,� ,: :: , c < = Less than: compound not detected at or above indicated detection limit All quality control checks were within acceptance limits . Revewed by: H:E88-192-4A 4 OR/IOni 10 Page 2 of 4 LABORATORY REPORT NO: 5155 BRAUN I .D. : 51'35-5 Baled F D Client I .D. : 3 Months Parameter Units Cadmium Chromium mg/kg 33 n Copper m /kmg/kg 23 3 Mercury mg/kgg 1. 1 Nickel mg/kg <6 . 0 Lead Zinc mg/kg 26 mPCBs mg/kgg 190 <1 . 0 r"b:). ) • 1:. IA1411 7)17 Reviewed by: H:E88-192-5A -c �� DM1101 Page 3 of 4 LABORATORY REPORT NO: 5155 volatile Organic Compounds , (A) ( BRAUN I .D. : 5155-3 51E5-4 Heavy E.P . - Client I .D. : rrac. Plan`: r,�Qs Oversized - . ? irameter Units Acetone Benzene mg/kg <5 . 0 '5 • 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 e1 . 0 Cumene mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Ethyl Benzene mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Ethyl Ether mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 _ Methyl Et'ayl Ketone mg/kg <5 . 0 <5 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone 0 mg/kg <5 . 0 <5 . 0 Xylenes ; total ) mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Tetrahvdrcfuran mg/kg <5 . 0 <5 . 0 Toluene mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Allylchloride ( 3-Chloropropene) mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Bromodichloromethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Bromoform mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Bromomethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 ( - Carbon Tetrachloride mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Chlorobenzene mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Chlorodibromomethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Chloroethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 2-Chloroethyl Vinyl Ether mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Chiorcfcrm mg/kg <5 . 0 <5 . 0 Chlorc: ethane mg/kg <5 . 0 <5 . 0 Dibromo:nethane mg/kg <5 . 0 <5 1 , 2-Dihrcmoethane 0 kg Dichloroace.toritrile mg/kg mgkg <1 . 0. 0 <1 . 0 1 , 1-Dichloro-l-propene mg/kg <5'1 . C <1 . 0 1 . 0 NOTE: Some unidentified peaks detected with 1-he photcio:izat ior.detector. Reviewed by : 1 . . Iii 4/ H:E88-192-6a jAli � � �' � m' t- 12 HR/IOn1 Page 4 0:- 4 LABORATORY REPORT NO: 5155 ow ( , Volatile Organic Compounds, ( B ) BRAUN I .D. : 5155-3 5155-4 ,1 Heavy ` E. P. Client I .D. : Frac. Plant Fees 4 Oversized Parameter Units 1 ,2-Dichlorobenzere mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 3-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-DichlorobenzenP mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 1-Dichloroethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 2-Dichloroethane mg/kg <1 . 0 1 , 1-Dichlcroethylene <1 . 0 g 1 , 2-Dichioroethylene (cis & trans ) mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1, 2-Dichlorcpropane g g <1 . 0 <1 . 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 3-Dich_-cropropane • 1 , 3-Dichloro-l-propene (cis ) mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 3-Dichlorc-l-propene (trans ) 1: 2, 3-Dich?oro-l-propene ) mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Methylene chloride m mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Pentachloroethane 1 , 1 , 1 , 2-Tetrachloroethare mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 1 , 2 , 2-Tetrachiorcethane mg/kg <1 . 0 < Tetrachioroethylene . 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 0. 1 , 1 , 1-Trichloroethane <1 . 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 1 , 2-Trichloroethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 1 , 2- richlorcethylene mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Trichlorofluoromethare mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 2, 3-Trichloropropare mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 • 1 ,1 , 2-Trichloro-trifluoroethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Vinyl Chloride mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Reviewed by: H:Eo8-192-7A if ":1 . ' :L ' Ai. • Li ' .4._ .... Brun 13 ; if OnQuality Services Since 195: If:I)S County 3C 18. P O. Box 35108. Mpls. MN 55435.0108 -612/ 941- 5C0 ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORIES z F , C...nt].... O, ti "ca P:eideq' May 5 198844 M,na�.., Reuter Resource Recovery, Inc. Attn: • Roger Davis •J. r . 11000 West 78th Street #250 j Eden Prairie, MN 55344 ,; . Project # E88-192/5179 Preliminary Report Mr. Davis: - Braun Environmental Laboratories, Inc. is pleased to provide our _ report for the analysis you requested . Data for the following sample(s) are enclosed: Your I .D. Number Work Requested Fines Mass Bal #1 and #2 PCB, Metals , Volatiles All samples were analyzed according to EPA or other standard methods . Any anomalies which were encountered in this analysis are referenced on the laboratory report . Method references and quality control information are available on request . If you nave any cuestions cr need additional regarc_ng this rry ort or other information P Brau.. Environmental La .^:a�ories servi.:Q ; please cor_tact Ls . — very truly yours , PRA;;d ENVI RON 4EN;JL itABORATORI S , INC. • Cyrn 'hia H. Weber Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor Anne L. Ochs Laboratory Manager — CHW/ALO:gec/E:E88- 192-1A Attachment cc: David Kuechendeister Joseph Jameson 14 Er•.•,r_•nnlent.11 ier3ttnu andIr • c:-ns I Irn Scrvlces ..Ie !u1,.i.t•Kn elh..:a: ;;t Go r ,'•r•''r .I:•A SI r•I A •,r,.A v tiv'r••I.N' e,N V.t.er PIO A aIIM .qs er'llu:rrtur Il':A I May 5 , 1988 Page 1 of 3 LABORATORY REPORT NO: 5179 ... ( Reuter Resource Recovery , Inc . PROJECT NUMBER Attn: Roger Davis COLLECTED: COLLECTED: 4-28-88 by Client 11000 West 78th Street #250 RECEIVED: Eden Prairie, MN 55344 4-2i SAMPLE MATRIX: Solid '3RAUN I .D. : 5179-1 5179-2 Fines Fines Client I .D. . Mass Mass Rai 42 Sal #1 Parameter +T,, ; t, Cadmium mg/kg 6. Chromium mg g 31<3 0 <3 . 0 Ccpper mg/kg10 '�rercury � 18 10 mg/kg 0, 10 3.3 Nickel r:::7/kg , 3 Lead mg/kg <6 . o Zinc 68 37 ns mg' kg 95 80 mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1: , I. < = Less than: compound not detected at or above indicated detection limit All quality control checks were within acceptance limits . Reviewed bv: • h:E88-192-1A i..0 r , ,... LLUR/IHO r 15 Page 2 of 3 LABORATORY REPORT NO: 5179 /" Volatile Organic Compounds , (A) BRAUN I .D. : 5179-1 5179-2 Fines Fines Client I .D. : Mass Mass - • Bal #2 Bal #1 Parameter Units - Acetone Benzene mg/kg <5 . 0 <5 . 0 Buneee mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 - mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Ethyl Benzene mg/kg <1 .0 <1 . 0 Ethyl Ether mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Methyl Ethyl Ketone 'gig/kg <5 . 0 <5 . 0 Methyl Isobutyl Ketoneg <5 . 0 Xylenes ( total ) ma/kg Tetrahydrofuran aka <5 . 0 ma. �g <5 . 0 Toluene r /ka <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Allylchioride ( 3-Chlo;:ocropene) mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Bromodichloror;et-ane i:•cgi ; -.1 . C <1 . 0 Bromoform ;- .4• , G < BromomethanP " . -. ..,1 ':i . 0 <1 . (1 ( Carbon Tetrachloride Chlorobenzene . �.^ <1 . 0 Chlorodibr-omon,ezhane ri�yik <1 . 0 - . G C. loroethare r {7 <1 . 0 y 2-Chloroethyl VinylEther < .. o Etr_. M� �"g <1 . 0 y . p Chloroform mg/ kg <5 . 0 <_ . ChloromethanP Dibromomethane mg/kg <5 . 0 <5 . 0 1 , 2-Dibromoethane mg/kg <5 . 0 <5 . 0 - Dichloroacetonitrile mg/kg <1 . 05 <1 . 0 mg/kg <a . 0 <5 . 0 1 ,1-Dichloro-l-propene mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 - NOTE: Some unidentified peaks detected with the photoionization detector. - Reviewed by: "'1 • -,." .1, 1 -1 7 -! .11 i 11 ,7 H: E88-192-2A 16 Lwuion1 v • Page 3 of 3 LABORATORY REPORT NO: 5179 ... ( Volatile Organic Compounds, (B) BRA(JN I. D. : 5179-1 5179- Fes Fires - =n Client I .D. . Mass Mass Bal #2 Bal 42 Parameter Units 1, 2-Dichlorobenzene 1 , 3-Dichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 4-Dichlorobenzene mg/kg <1 . O <1 . 0 Dichlorodifluoromethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0mg/kg ar 1 ,1-Dichloroethane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 2-Dichloroethane 1 ,1-Dichloroethylene mg/kc <1 . 0 <1 . 0 m1 , 2-Dichloroethylene (cis & trans <1 . 0 gg <1 . 0 1 , 2-Dichloropropane mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 3-Dichloropropane 1 , 3-Dichloro-l-propene (cis) mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 3-Dichloro-l-propene (trans ) mg/kg <1 . 0 2 , 3-Dichloro-l-propene <1 . 0 1: Methylene chloride mg/kgmg/k <1 . 0 <1 . 0 <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Pentachloroethane i , 1 , 1 , 2-Tetrachloroethane mg/kg <1 .0 <1 . 0 mg/kg <1 . 1 , 1 , 2 , 2-Tetrac!�loroethane mg/ 0 <_ . 0 Tetrachloroethvlene kg <'1 . '_ , G Trichlorceth ane mg/kg mg kg < . 0 <1 . 0 b.. 1 , 1 , 1- • 0 <1 . 0 1 . 1 , 2-Tr ichloroet hGne /k i , 1 . 2-Tri c}ii��r�et';ylene Tn7 g <.:. . 3 <1 2 1'richiorni!�:cromethane my/kg < . . 0 <1 . 0 1 , 2 - 3 r'_ch_oropropane mg/kg <1 . 0 <? 0 'M goro-trifluoroethane m /k <1 . 0 <1 . 0 5 <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Vinyl Chloride mg/kg <1 . 0 <1 . 0 Reviewed by : H:E88-192-3A '-.7) 777) .:-31 a .. 1 -M A VP: N 4.) ; ..., .11 i .:. . 1 imelf 4,1 i‘ , . ., 1 . ... , 1 • , , 1 , . •: i '_: _7 . . . . , -(I.- - OMuirl 17 NNW May 3, 1988 Dave Kuechenmeister Resource Consultants Inc. 5275 Edina Industrial Blvd. Edina, Minnesota 55435 Dear Dave, As per our telephone conversation today, I would like to reiterate that Fillmore County has been composting MSW since last September. Our facility is located on the edge of town _ and next to a campground. During this time we have taken MSW, ground it into 4" minus particles, added water to it, and put it in windrows for decomposition. We have experienced no problems with either leachate or odor. — If you wish to visit our facility to learn first hand about our project, we have set a side Thursdays for tours. ( — Please call in and set up an appointment. Respectfully, Norman L. Craig Administrator FILLMORE COUNTY Zoning Office Qr`S%o ';��:. Preston, Minnesota 55965 1 !�I MAY-t .t'88 i �l is • I 1 -- U ti'r B wftlR 611:705 18 Dave Keuchenmeister Resource Consultants Inc. — 5275 Edina Industrial Blvd. . . I . I r711 1 _ , . rA — ---• . • -...--__ 1 .."---.^ Co \ a. 4 , t I A----• t f• < ---:; ...i — . .. 2 5. . ...._. .4 i ,!. - ic . z ' 1 • • 1 r..• 0 I. . - I ; 4 i... _. 1 . s.,4, . 0 '1 Ne, .,: 8 .1• -:Wm C 'i ,...../ .7.n' :z.• -1 ,--4-.i.,___ -.----= ‘.I ,•1 ,., -t 1 I. •r i - L,,,t !•• 4.' .... • --i:•.• • .-..• :-.. ',..1..; _ - i : .- . wm, q., :°..11 .. ,.... 4, .. .._ , 'it'. 1 . . N. 1 4 ' • I a; • , ,„...--,, a• e;i •- ...-- ./ \1 a -1.- a- \ I 11. ° ...... - / - re...-..-,•‘...-• - .----__-':...\,. • . --._ ........,..•--- . - , ,.. • . - • • .•n i ..- r,_._ --..---•—--7..7.: ._• -, .. • . -.---- • • . ---....--• - . . . . . . . .•- . _ • ./ - • 1 „.,- ...___ •0,1r-.. / 1, a • -• --'--- - / ._.: . __---•.---_ , ,.r.,... • -.. . r• '• - __ 4 ; • ._ / - ... /• .• . - -- -• .\ • ./ --.- ..0: - kt . • :".' -- "I,. ,,,, , . • ‘... ------ ::. ' -a . 4 / Y. , e• No, .......„ • , . . . I,, A, \ / ' ..._. - I '!.9%. . \•''.. . ' ..:: , 1 . , ' • .. .. dir. \. . . • . ... ..,.. . ...............,...-....-,,.. . _ _-••,:____ _,-_ ____,. e i . „--r , I . • - —4. • s. i_ ., / ., • ..,-"C. „... , ..0., .......--4.—.... ..\ . -44. - ---•'''' . ..• ,•••• ,....„ -..., ...-. ,-. . - sN. _ . - - .,-. 4." - •' `... ... -,-ex.7-,..-.. ---. im. • -...------ - _ ..."--- - - ..,-- ...-- , • -...-IAil--, ..._ _.: • __ ,A.53, .. • - - I ,, --..., ‘ , •-•..._-,‘-:...-_,.-----..4.:. , ...._ , . ..,:_..- ---...-,....- ,...„,...• ''',.. 1. „ ; .., N....,"/ ,,,' t .. -- • - / /...1 ', "II//."..:....7.:::--=.-. .1--, x.. •-.- ...., . ,. ........- ....-; . --„, / /.'-- . :,- • . • •- ..- / . ....--- Um , . • \ . - - - \ -..- . -.. • ' • , . • • • .. •• . . _ . ......, • .:;• ( . . . • ../ —--- •,/,—-....---. 1 - . im. , -- - .....„....--_____ _ I _ ...1 _ ... • .: ..._.-----_- , -...--_:.__ _..... _. -, - •--. ....- . . .. - ---' / ,_, ;...„-;,,-rz-.- z..-. --;•• ---. - - ,t -..." c; --- . , • _._ • i ,,"— -- :;•.-::-:.---. .." • tik ' ' - ------ •-••• • '/ •• •.;-..., :S.-. ." . • • •:"^. 0,,,,,,...."- ......0. .. --., --_.-_—_7-_,..-: \ . . .i ,0 - ) ,?...; .• i ( . ,..- ,:...:: •so,. . --..\ _ _..---,•,_ ::4.,\\ . ,,/, . _••••• • 7 ''-•-i':,i,iii,11; s- 1 -.. -, C---tr-----------4-:---4..„.. --2--- .. .._ -. ,...'..;,--- --, st,..v ! -, :•• ---_ -... -- 1/4. --. -... .... .„---- ----••• •,- `..„->- . ii,e1-• ,_L__,_,------ ____.."...,_ , -...........—,•<.. , _... ,..‘•,_ 1, , -.e.--, ) ,/41/4410ar.-....,ot/./_.../t,.......c..,/........./'.:.....e.„:•<^l"--.. --1.44-7,./...,.1.6..00...s...W.C.,__ 1\ "1 Al'....'...... -,....._ -,.......... • ...... •••••,,,-..-_7:7---:.---.> . I , --"...,..' ..,.."// I ,..:17'-:- -•-•.. ..<- :,....,...'. \‘ , ;• -", 4'. ---Are .,_ , ........;......7.5,;................-,.:..,.____......„?....... , ,0.,e.f,„„—-......„1....,2,.....,...,,,,, , ril. . ,;.'.-N.''-ref'. 'i, ""..-"-.... -., .,.....---..7.• ,...,1%...1—-:......--=-7...--------11",..t.`•````\ \ 5 . !, -- ,' - ... •:---•- „./, --_-_--- -4, -----.••••;,:,- •... V.A.. . ; s•-__....., i . -5- ----_,,;.--••-• Ns. -;,... "--- t ' --e-- - -- s-,.'•••••,,,f4. / -k---- -- -- . • ....e • r,_ ...-4.4 \ --.......--;;;-44 ... .. — •,__..;--aar ( , ,.., -. ." J-7....." ..• ._ '- _- ._ __ ,. . . •. ._ •. .. . • ! ':....t . . . • . .- • •___________ z:=.!..,•'="-2:2-...—.-.--7-77;-...:----- -f...11:77-7... - _ __---.'__.—r--.........)- ---------. 1:4 —10------L-i—.-----"" '',,S.-1.•-••.•t.. 4 .. •• _ .. , ....a,r oar-I i Ji . i -'.- 5. Ns.- /... 19 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES REUTER INC. COMPOSTING FACILITY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET C CPUBLIC MEETING RESPONSES w C METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Suite 300 Metro Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612-291-6359 DATE: April 19, 1988 SUBJECT: Public Meeting Comments - Reuter Composting Facility, City of Chaska The meeting opened at 7:10 p.m. and was chaired by Council Member Wartiz. Presentations were made by representatives of Reuter followed by a brief presentation by Council staff. The comments received are followed by staff response. Dan Durta, Aeration Industries Asked if the facility was a proto type facility. Commented that odor control may be a problem. Response: The odor from the facility will be treated by an earthen filter. The functioning of the filter must be assessed by the (rh. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to determine the effectiveness of the equipment. The representative from Reuter Inc. explained that, although this is the first composting facility it the United States constructed by Buhler-Miag, over 80 composting facilities of this type are in operation in the world. Linda Carlson, resident, City of Chanhassen Asked the hours in which trucks would arrive and how much noise would be generated at the facility. Response: Representatives from Reuter Inc. explained that the trucks would arrive between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. five days a week and one half a day on Saturday. The proposer further explained that the processing equipment would be inside an enclosed building and the noise impact should be minimal. Dave Dalby, resident, City of Chanhassen Asked how much moisture would be released from the earthen filter and the concentration of toxic materials in the materials composted. Response: The proposer responded that visable moisture may be released from the facility in cold weather. The EAW addendum has data on toxic materials concentrations for the materials to be composted. 1 Dale Gibben, resident, City of Chaska Asked if truck would travel Hwy d � to Minn Hwy 5 the Hwy 41 and how leachate from the facility would be managed. Response: The proposer that the route described would be the primary route however, Hwy 18 in Eden Prairie may be an alternate route. The proposer further explained that the compostable materials would not have free moisture to generate leachate. Condensate could be produced and would be reused in maintaining the moisture content of the compost. Jay E. Johnson, P.E. C.I.H. , council member, City of Chanhassen — Read a list of concerns that were submitted in writing and addressed in the response to written comments. Roger Davis, Reuter Inc. addressed the industrial nature of the facility site. The meeting adjourned 7:50 p.m. WRITTEN COMMENTS Gomm flua Mom OMB Nom 7O07 ,n d d•O O -*I:, K....and r r?b•< 7. 3 d 0 0.±..0 0"Z a b H V O w 7 7 •D 7^ NO R 3 _ ,C.0 '7O -J .. r•03 . b R O D .D n .D �D D C c n - D .0 R,-B in 0 G 3 a a r•0 a ^ a K0 r-T .OLD- a 3 ^ R^ .n.. .Jr-..p < ^ 7 r -.O R QQ O••-.D n c A•O h O R '^S'O 7 .D n 0 .D iD N K"O `' `BN7 O. 7 n0 bn va n 3^ nmh - R< V. i E V 00 R B B O.r-K 3 .i n K Op •• •(ql d i 6 O r 3 r£O •N b N b I 7 R O 7a.villr N 1 tD d C O b 7 3 n C. 7 _ 7 7 7.87 h 71 ,10m C • C r ,•7 0.0- T'<.0 dr•d0•< C (.� N C h N O rTd1TT T R C 0 3 O P3 .D i.r. n •O N 3'--- .-.3 0m ,0 .D •i A r R 71 11-:.a- ?.D N N n N N NY d o R 4 R h n .i i 9 N r' n 0 - b - V.y y KnO r O ^ r -7 O 'R+ 3 - '-.bh `0•OKO,7BST T •� 7T - . C.•--x 3 O n 7 'h Tm 7 O 7 7 ^I 7 N T 3 • R O 7 -a•U - .O C n -S n n•7.a h 3 0.R n n .D D.n c 7 -. y S 0.d 3 U 7 fl E n -O >['�O - o B B Y n N 1D d-CDR 7 7 n 7 o n ID 3 m N 0 n K N G_7 C 3 b n •.D -d E .0 n n 7 N C ( m K?77 K KO R E £3 n .+A £N O O •-C m 7 K ` 'O 7.D n R O.b 0 0 .D 7 0 MO. 0 3 r M y 3 •• '. O N Sn ?7 TO 3 n 0 m R .". RRr.r-J.n n N 3 •0 n C D3_. O C - b 7•a.•• D. BK0rr-f.3NK TiRO '7i 0 r' •O 7 �D • T3bn e•`J n b • O 7 `C NA -< b O N O .r.,pC K r•703,40 n r-3 n 7 3 3 Cl 3 r.' �D b d_ p N ^.C 33 0 .D T 00 r 7 n R m b b T n• .< O K Fr- n x•r-VI n 5 0 d R R m c••0 j^7 r.n r r 7 O O 7 K O O m O.7 �. ynj n .D 7 A N rn•'b.n-•n O..D O :J 7 3 !*r•3 KK O. ,- • `Gan•^ nK(�fJTbh O 3 7 ^ChN r+C .O o 3 •-< Z .D 6 .•-b 7N KN 3 3 < d1.E :7 n d N3KRN 7 .0 (3 0 //�� Os 0 ,0 ( b K• N 41 ba • 3 .. ,MO. .D < O R R K o C V m e O O N K✓0 r N O R N(•1 •D T.•- .D n p 01 r N acm d .y TN ..0 .•.•p yKO ,iia• 7 Y..O O a 7..m .! a rC a O _=7 main.TC KBr mn , .K. - jr 700 •Onc -clog. n T r 0 7 m n N 0 K ?S r•�b ^ 0 3` E N E O b 2 C•O £_.D 3 b 0 3 O C.'7 N (1 1 7 r•N O b 0 Q m-0 0 m b 0 R•0 3 -5.0 O 7 R 0 .o R 3 7 O.r n r f0 7 N d j v N 7 ...0303 •D d r_ 71'S••C RfD .D N K R e (n n n µ K pp n N 00.3770043 b m N m n (D _ O �D n 7O.N KKO n. T ....0 ,.O-N •7 Oa o O np 3 K 7 ,MC , T !,r-R N 7 K n N O C 3 n- (5 7 n 6 .7 N R•l d n JD. KO 7 n 70 A T'aN 7 , 0 < Dl N b N b•� K O O N R 7 .D r N .D 3 n 0.T T(1(3 a•.K n 3 m- 5 oa.n rn 7w 7 Ann ^7 3b3T.•-3,0,O 0 '0 C 3 0- T Rm •Op b w .D O 7 N 4. •r'<an 3 m£ Q ; N .E+.r 0 n 0 0 0.b N�'0 Y n.0..-b.D DI r N r N K Q O I�D3 .OO y K -. •Ot 0 3 C T K r•r ngS 0 n m 7 n l0 (D .-I.n B N 0 7 b O.- 7a'.O O• m 0 SOS n m b do N tn�u. N 7 N T N .Oa.0 3 n O K O.b 777 r D 0 C••0 r D. .K+. tl1 K• •O O ....333 .D 7'D m n b ;o on-noTKn .Dn Od070K no4.7-0. NK 7 ^� b 3 N3r7 n hny.3-R r m a m 0x77000.0O0- K J.w b•0 - n r•a 7 O. O 7 C K 3. K •w 'R 3••-7 3 vN n RKOOrcn .DKC £ d 10 nnR3K inn v O n n- S3 T.+-n O. K N N Op E.1(() PI b q'p KR O..Dnmmr • < 7 3 „ 0773µR_RC n 77 n .0 r S•O N yq K n 0 A N N -�' gNg 2 K£ 0y.Nrbw •O C73OR 301 .3NO 7 O a 3 B m<< K N 0 m r b 0 r9 N•D O d O,'O b ••pp rN -< .D K('�N n b ri o• N m 7 n b r•O p�••p n O C O N rCc Or.n t •70 r. O KK•O np 3'm.••OME6 .- M7 r-S 3 �om .1N ,o• myy3yy K.D7 D O K 7 r a n N n .D 3 0.n (0 m o.<N K O N 7 0.207 b n .D.7 N O T _ 7 0 n n O row n N n .� A C R n b O 7_'p3 C 3•n ni 3 KO V !� r-- O07 b0 O. D IT n N K C. T,, n S n..N O I..-.7 9 co .. T C m R ^ R 70O0K K7r- l) ° 3 mod 'DB.:•o.z Nn ,, oK N• 37'"0.EN T( N < K n O N C. O O O '. p• <L • ✓ot.a b 0. • K mow IC. 1.1 33 R t- C 0 "r 1 O 0... O 9 00 Z. 0 , M.0 O = n cm3 Ca •u- 7 R n 3 r+]R S O m (113.in a, f Ea 7I n a-to 0. b n07, ✓do3 m 0 7 v0n 'n r,G u CCa 3 7 0O 7 CO3.0 3 0.... A 3 O 0 , R 33 , 3 1 O R R 7 O 7 9O 0 x GO R 9 3 7 0 r•3 R O n O O.O R • b 6 U 3 7 1.. 0 m n 7 O m ✓ :a n ,. .' r m m b n .r 340 a•< 3 0 a•r N r.3 R 0 72.3 D 3 O' U m O 3 R 34 O 3 a n•7 n O. J.�3+3 ✓N 7 7 00 i. R O. N 33 3 3 O. N am ram..Q 04 r 3 O 3 N 0 a0 9 -1 O v0•<V aJ N 1 .23 u 0 O 1 R 04 CI S 7 3. C Om. b ' 7 a v O• 0. n ..... O 3 3 d< J 0 3 33 aa R £4 b °c 3 3 • o r.^3 I O MP 7 CI _C CI 3. 3 33 L R b a e o u .. .0 to LQ J LO L I.... L. a ✓ O n w n MU L. a0i C. II. R E R Ci OLC X C .M.. O C L .O C./a C .., ', n X L V a, L 0 0 9 ' c t. o. co CC I. IC h C./ ` 0...I L J 10 C C L 0 N a .0 = ti •n a L N • v cal In V Ca 0.n.�O.L L L JH O.F Oa t. a 7 c a •Vn n n are ~ y O O .44 7 7 v c n O d n w C u d .v 4 C a i t v v v v 0....0 7 .en N v . 9 . A m y.u E a A T. 0 3 c ..... .. 0 W 00 C C.0C 7 C... 0 0 0.. L C V - V V � d V O 01 C d V 0 0 H F -) ..1 L L a .cec �.. ..4 3 I- 1-•c. F r m • • ) -- V A C L V V J a .0 .- .. -07 V n .0 "U C 3 V.. V U 10 u .. C C 7 L 4•O.-.- H N b• F ciL .-. 01 7 N 7 A w .-1 •L a�i�+ 0 300 wC AuE OL 00- C 0 01.1-100.003 a ✓ 0 a'O O a -., -.., n d a a ••. 4,....... L E 0 T. n 'p•p 7 n N d N 7 in i t'j L. r 0 0. d .+ '0 C C O O d > d T > C A 7 O0.•'p 0 .. C U N 1 C-.. C•.O. .5+' 777a .+ ra w.. > p OALLNN77 U aa N ..0 ✓ n 0 w n. O 3Fu O n 7 �e •+ E3 00 awu w O_O .'0 •.. VV U'O ✓ U V L v C n 0 F C O, n n C en.0 U .. .. V 0▪ 0C C u'O Cn C 00 .. O,L✓ C 0.,a.) 10 pp,, V u,-. 7 0 • V u V u.+ A T 0 3 A T 01 V O. y a Y, O yp. O 3 n .. 0 3 3 I•L A ' U d 41 E >. �6,'0 w C N L r • 0, •' d N y a✓ 0 >. 3 0 C A.. .$w n C O A pp,, r--L >. C 0 0•-. 3 O d v . a A V C.+, A V V N p�, ✓ a T 0 D-.. 01.0� L.C 7 X 41 y U O d n V) d • . 0 Cl U C 0 L n<^ O .+ .0., .. n O'C T. =,a. .CT.0 d yp �. yp UC U pa a cX n CC, UCi C..-+ N O. •0 R > C u a O C > ✓.0 O N .0 13-C p4y,... A U > N O E C D. ID. .0 u✓'0 ULL4 .0•.0� V > nu 0.'O.O-,n U CIv C U •3 1.0 ..u • ✓ .NO L. n L F 0N,3 .a•. O C.. c 0,I-ud. 0✓ q >.L C OCi .d.G O d 'O O 3 C a•p O 7 y a. 7 a. .,N u L] O d✓.1 a C A 00.wn • .,.✓,D 3 .di °C n c'0 a,w w 4,.- E 3 y to'0 '0.d+ 0 L 3 CN, 0 E C l A 0 07 d V w 0 a n 0.R d +• a ✓ 0.� N U a 3 7✓ E y T • C C U 3 T3 G'D A U n t, In L-. O n.. c 0.O✓w 0,0Y a UU✓.n MOO-. CE ••pp .Ny G. d V.•,f O .0 C n N 0 n C N•.. >.-w or• G+-.. O N O 010 Epp1,A ddf..0 .LnU LOaLO 0 'C O.-JU V La I- U0 Cl..-.0 n..V., 3 0 0 0 3,C 10 E y 3 y ✓.....n - =. U.. 0 C d d 'rt.'. .^ • �� 4 w d ✓ ., 1.1 n d a 00 0. C y'UO C'•O+ T _U n C...0 C `17 `✓1,2 y D•L L C C ^ 7 U C -+C'O V..• 0 0 C T. u E-.. 7 9 L C C• 0 C. 0 d . 00 .d, O U 0U ,.a,' .. T.u N.. d C 0.� C A a. 'p✓ 0 .r 0,.-. L. V ✓ 0 C L-^ w a n N 3.••. ..:,a - �^ N a d C • CO C0 coN C C r L • Os, .ar G-..N_ Cl. 0 15 C A V y F d C0 10 0, O e. >..7. ... 3 7., L is w 0 E 3 s ✓N •_•C.y A.-. C.0 C 4 ^ •C 33 '0 - 3 OL > '0. Ec. > C 17 U 0 O 4..0 F' O n N • a"7...t.-. 0.C F- -.O•. 1.7 T2 yy 5 d... 0p,. 'Oa O. .,., C;, •Di. N nOC. LNcdo iv-.V > V L�.u 0.+ u Inn E. 3 >. A In Ty, 0, 3 C -• 0 C.... 0 0 0 C d ., >. y �R y 7 M u _la 4 L n A.0 L 1 3 N 0 n0...-y L 3 0u C 03'O . �O 0. d .0 .0 ' -' C 0 N 'O Y a U d ,cc 4= Cl~ L 4 w 0 d••. L✓ 7 a E N ww.. 'O n a ✓ 0 C d 0 C.0. C N C o 4 w y 0 o'p .n ^ O C - c n 0 •' 0 A o R o U L d U ; C.--. O E J 2 .-. �.. a N 0, V = G U.A.- 3 G- 0 ••. V 3 y N A C 3 N 6 'O u n d G.u•p ••1] 4 A C..0 0.00 00, ....✓. 7 O >.C J O R.6 C 1l U✓ U aUa .1 0'00.W r_.. A Q E-7. .�i w u dw I. n L4 n 3 ✓, r �•..0. a:�L O.r ... VI"L.. C Of y Cl ✓ C 0• .•. u 0 O R V 0 N y 4 S.. i - O �.V • N G N N C •7 G.1 d = E M. G.> E L N E 0 0 O u O L 410 .n N _ • GV" d u 4 O n r cC. V.- E 0, M...✓ I u Cr E M l ✓ r•f.0 0 U. 0 ., - 0 . ap,c ^ .L.. _ C ..a ...-. d i.. ". 0 G. .. 0 ?.t. .-.. C :. c J., N ✓ .: I L U L L `N y ✓ c U n N N m •_J 'A n N 7C"•' - C n '0 n 3 N'n-n E N n ...03 n s '. 3 .7 - n n(9 C 0r N >V1 •• '7-. 7 0 1 D - 3.r - 0 _. 0 X r-7•< 3'0 'D >-•O n .- 0 0 7 3 7 0 - n 3 77, 90.0n1.- O i 7 0 - 3'S U n 0 A 3.3 ' 0 7 3 n 00 3 '0 O U. O n 0.'0 .O • 7n••-0n'0 Ann - on On3 '0 3 ' in� .-'e .CN-•�yny y 3 0• ,-• •+inn C AR- 7 0 C, 0 m, 0, 0 N 3 -0 0 0 C 0, ' '0 3 3 n O m'O 9 N - m 3. a 3 n .0 R n m .• ° In 7 ''.n n 3 .-n-0 3•.0 n r.0 -'0 d m •t R•-•7 "".N 0 0 '0 •••C n N n.0.0 0.3 • n 0 ,✓ n 3 n N 9 0 1 7 n'0 •3 '0 w m 7 3 17 - _ � ? C'N•' 0 N'] 0w0U O N 7_YO• 300 < •n. On O • ••Ny0 n 3•7 n n n 3 £.-.3 o n n 7 '0 . 30750. Owe- L n, n n J O 0 -4 N O N `. O O A O 7 n '0 373 •0'< 0 C. 3- "G'1 n r 3 m'•C O • 3 1 7• • 3 O 0 n 0 0 0. 7 r r n a- • o x :,•- 'C r w r ... .1 0,r' 0 O 0. n 00 '0 0 n n 3 - - 333n(35 _ Co C '0 -0 m In 3•0 d .0 .- - 0. 0 n n 0.133- 73000 0.3 .0 0 C 'n •S-.Dn 0.7 - m O5 mnn Or (D 7N 0- 39 'D •< d'0 ar0 <00. m A • tt 0 , •0 N.nn n 707 '0 an •*7-• 0. 0 N 7 .+.n •n an n y n III 0 •• •.< n 0 3 3 "- .'- 0 n 0..< 0 (O 0 Or O3 n.rr.w 0 .n = •7 „n 0 • 3 n n Cl' " n -• C -- O C < 1 3 7 n n nn 3 3 .-N n N 0 •0 -- 0 E 0 0 .n '0 a 3 t7..- N .O n C fn 3 n 9 goo d 7 .0 N n 0r 3' N 7 3 L 'O 0 N n', 7 r n N O n (n.- 0 '0 3.u 0 0.0•G 3 5 N 0 0 '0 • n Mn. n r N d 0. n '0 7 0 n 1 -0 0 n 00 0 ^ 'p0 0 O n n R.-- 3 --0 .•: 2-K 7 O 3 3 in n O. 3 0 m'9 .<0- a N l en 3 r 0 .n-• n 0 •••n.9 N •'0 O.- ••0.0 0 n.D 0 70- 0 187100 p • 0 3 0'< 0 n 7 U 0, 7 K ^7.w N -.n C n • C O C O O 'n9 m ;n 0 re ,,QQ O n O m N 3 N iD 1-^7 n •••0 7'< 7 3 C 74 5 0 •--3. � 7 <C C '�*R n 7 77 n V1 - 'D 0 N 0 '0 3 n 0 r� n 0 '0 m _.• T n.0 -m 1 N a.D £ N .n 7.0 7 n 0 C 3'7 an '0 --'-• 9 a 3 -.-•'D m m a.0 Co 0 +. '0 0 - r 3 0 7 an -•rnr< 7 M7r0 n: •+n -'< 0 Cl' '00.Cn •.0X0 rN O 7rn7n•< n .•--.Dn"fdn 0p30 n 7 0, m m 7 n 7 n< o00 n .•0 aR - .- 'D n'7 C •C '0 0. n µ0.'• -•n9' m0 •7-.• 7n - 0 Damn,, -n .1+. •q 7n n OC nC 01 O. n n'OO 3R re 7.n n 0 '0 .0 .-•'O- inn '0 '0 I1 n 7 CO~E m N -• C n N o•n N n J.•n .D O n n 7 a 0 R'D W nR-•-• I N O ono 7 N co 04 7'0 '0 n .r n m 7 L 3'a '0 O n'- O n n rl n 3 C 7 m 0 A O < n '-C•n t_ N 0 ~'0 d 7 n 0 0 3 £ 1 .•0.M^ 3 6�'' ley A a 0.7 C N 'n 0 n 01 0 r n n 3 N 7 .7 0 3 N NK n'< _0 3 0 9 I YI'O ••• O.- O m n'•-••-3. 7 '0 3._ n 3p N '0 N .O•.7-•n 0 , 341n R 0 n 7 C O O < .-•N 7'0 -• O'�DD 0 3 m 7C 0NC 9 r..- O.333C n•D- 3 n O.O3 - .0 n 3 < 00,30 .n 3 C•••7 7n4 n -.. - n-n 0 CC 0 at n0 `< 3 N n a'--'-n 0 0 n N .• ^.0 n O 3 r 0 O n 7 N 3 CO.... 30 0."- 0 n'O 7.0 a 7 7'O MCP 7 R n 'D N 'D n 3 iy m ...3 n n 0 E 01 3 n 0 9 n.O 6 m 0 N m n r N 0 33 '0 NC O N-C m .wn< 0 N n7 - • m7n '+. O 6 ` n.D n3 O EN n0n-m0 - '0 p • 00 •+. 0RR- R7'7 m 0 0 nN 7.0n 0•< no.an9r 70 0 •a .0 O •O ✓7 n1 IT a,.o -'0 n m '.•0..-'••0 0 7 'O 7 O N 0 C 3 N (0 m •N n n-•' n 0 •3301 n 7.n X'7 7 �o n n 7 n n 7 r 0 7 0 7 C 2.0 d .0'< 0p '0 J 0 '•- d N a Or co 0- o.0 n O r• Cl'- ' 'O r7 'n 03 n7 re 0. 3 1 0- (0 3 -•< n 3 o r0 n I-3 3 O O n OL 7 n 2W.(70 O.-•.• .n 'O.0 0 9 •'0 :D 7 E 3 7 3 R 7 O 71 N .• to m 0 r. 0 -'O O C 7,-.0 n R m Co .0 0 0 ••0 n C 3 • n R 7 0 n. 07 7n 010 .+0 r3 7703 N .'-'y3 n N F n N7 O. r00 n 0 rnrn 0 0 r n O.n 01 co n m 7 R n 0 0 0 '0 - -•0 C.0 7 n 0 Co .0 n O.nn 0 7n n NI700n 'g0' .•0 D w 00. 0O•p m '0 •0 7In -n0 .n C nn N-n n3- 77 .n7 m a",3 n < n 3070 n 3300 3 n NU-•E• •< ,(1'0N .0 d• n - 10 n -•< '••rn 73 C. < 0 0 con .--, 37n 77 0 n 30 'O 0.mn n no µ'0'< 3 C••n< a n • ' n £• n '7 n-n -0 n o n Co n n 7 •• •-'< 0 E••'N L m '0 7^ 7 7'-nn O a0 0 ✓ 9 n.< 3 .•^7 9 N n -'.•'• n m• 'C '•-R. d I 0 n 7 0'D -.I -' 3 '0 ....re 70 n'•• '0 "1 n'-. Or 3 3 C • 0 X n £ n 0 U 0 n•< .••0 7 n r 7•0 n n I+1 et'0 'C '0 n CA 00. PIS" '0 m '< 71 0 0 0 0.0 3 • '�' m n .L� N 0 0 mr� n < dN00 OEN n�'1nU C .* r 7 -• G n 7 < 77ff S 0 '0 .• C 0 C 7 U O n n n 7 nO (3 aN n n r• 7 K '<n a n 01 '9 n 0 • CO n 7 3' 0'< 0 m n 7 3 m n 7 0 £ O C D1 n Cl' ( R. m 0 in 111 C-. m 03 '7 3rC..3 07 C. R COn. .- .0 '0 -. m '0 7 0.0 O 7 m 0 3 0 r'n m G•f 0 n3 3 OD : I--. n 0 0 n O. n '0 R Co 7 >'ern C A C W 0 0 0. 0 r 's•4 I-9 7 - V 3Ct. '- 0 0 7 Do re O.0 in 0 0 3 COCo3 co 1 '0 0 3 0 R 0 Of 7 34120 re M 2• n 7 7 U m 3 0I 7 ID0 '-m C 0 O R.• 7 R'•'•C re woo. CI m 4 11 3 0 I. 7 3 Co r n n 3 0 410 von 0 7 0 0 X 0 0 7 7 0'O C 9 3 ry 1 •••i 3 m o (I •1 3 o m '- d R n 7 7 03 .•O 3 C 0 3 7 r'l 6 -' 9 0 0 0'0 n n 7 N n 001 n° n O' 7 0 0.0 .•m n 3 3 a 3 3 1 DI DI 7 7 0 3 fa o C 0 1m nR O X I� 7 S 0 (0 3 re G 3 30 'f a 00 i3 -Ia' 0 j n 2,o 7 0 m n n • 1 1 0 C 0 7 7 n 3 6 1 n 0 ?1 r 0. G O. r 1 O C rs 0 0 O 0.0 n 0 5 9 n v La a C ~ CO n t. n a _ y to n co , E d ° d O ammo O C n r. y a n... O U n E a O O n . CO T c CO ro d • y 7 a C. C .a,4 U _� v a d E y a O O+, V ep C C w 9 CC O .Co C) L. a d n 9 O d O.eo • 0 a S. C CI.a . . E d .0 d E• .0 ) -_ --- 0.0 C d C 11. G.• a a w 00 a+.•. n o. I C O•.. CV y L 0 L u C•.U• - C to) c .a. .V.,y C , C aO y y r. -V ] s. V°i E 1+7 `C•— C$ C w d E 2 C a a °0 C > n.T d U U r — y n L., 0 a Cu T L M C C .-I C ., L.. d y L U O .-.y Cl.� C 3Ny a•.. 0 a S. v I. a pno w T C0 - -I- n Q d 4_ 7 d I. I. y- 0 U n d u 3 E. 0 7'O E.S' .,nu CC n E >, aV °' as ,C 21 O C. a 17 cal C E,�.y CdN 0 N GI w. OdC a U °Y ....10 C L h 0 t d _ C.EN nh • C.y > w 7 .G Y. 3 C 0�I 0 0,o -y. C C >''L ° 0 E G O nCw.0 -M i C 3 O. ..p L N C n N IS oc G-. d0 44]] 'a."' o O C n ° c d N ]n y � y✓ G E F• �y 7.r 3.n •U •C• C I4[ d C a d Q'.O .. C a. u €a C EE r d 7 V . T. a y a 0 0 "• n d Si ° QED T U Si 3 a CC 7 7 U L a i J C O.c a m d P E Co Cc O,d o n V a 0 6 n a C '> >V 0 U 7 m d W 0 E. V 0 n'C u 0 V. °C.O.-. 0 7 C. C y C C.L.+� Y 0 a u T. U O a .. O._ ° d 3 c o F meta, C 7_' C > n�— d G. y t ., Q O a ✓47."' 0. C • d U n C .N C , G U n 0 V ` N ., `� E. 8 4. 'C C"U d n-.'p nV :+ n a E E y} 0` 0 y.: . C q 7 0 y a; L` CUB E w y .d .4i •C Ca 7•a/ "' ' 0 T T•E S.d. n.� E C u ` c c u 6 V y 'V_ 7 -.. W. [d C y w y.[ . Yi \� Z .C- 3 u _ V C T O� r LaCV = In C 0 a—i y O ., w C,` a\. • p' �YGV. a r C.0 0 C. \ t [- V� O C E. 0,...., — . .. O 7 C.E 1D c.c 0 0 ..>' F.,\� >,_,'S -CCU T..., C N y, V a C >.0 l O ° ` 'p 7n'^,a.. d C-_• ' o •C n w O Z C Y d y S. ♦ ". U U EMIll li IJ 7 n C-y E a C U •\'w d u 1•3 0 F.. v. �J .0.4S—O L. u • ✓ C r_ 0 C'CI'n -.ro-3 M O Z> a S R y 32 rip moat R � D7n7oc^v c ° � r�.or7+ 3 CD O.9 .:n9 f0D C•O r'. 'O 2c:1 n �7 n r >a.-o m c.y 7 rp n .. ro 7 O 3 C rAJ N ry.. .•; 'O•7 .~--.•• 7 D 01 0.•R 3 < 00.N Q. •.f r rC*.• Cr-, 0 r R 7 0 .. n D r O n O R r .0 r 00� 0 ..O•i. .1>7 OOr.7 O ^R 7 n ^ 0 3Uf 7 r rD 3 0, N - m J R 7 i1 Cr m 7 O - 3 Z.0 C.7 lir N'O O q e+ O u^ R •�� Y 3 7 O M.D c O m Nr0R RLO ..na •< n 3n r v.n 70 m rr r. C. r N < rl 0 7 0 .n C. •t. - 0 • C- 0 .0 0 0 r S R-.ry .•0 1O O r r r C 7 0 7 r 9.; 0 0 O.C. n rr r 0 > or Cl:. ..n �+ CO 0 c.N r-.IT 4 aO C C O.�(D 7 .�.Sr .•-N rrD r Ain R N r';r -j< an aR '< Imp 0 flt r :r 01 >fD 7.•. r. C. N r•R nrrr0 0 1'r sR v N 7 9 0£t 9 7''< 7-Jm = n • DLR ron W 0~1 7 O 0 2. S ~r 7 .1 r 3 R 7 D .0 c. • N 0 CD -j a n 7 O 3 CD rr S T O f>! n n c nw3 � mro� .p,. D 00 mN3 2'l. 7 N (D '11 .••. r7r O '� 01 01 N 7 0 ti CO 0.0 r• 3 R .D R p W O rr 7 1-•N p W 'C 0 7 0 0 m(D 7 •-7 .-n .pR M n 0 co � • R. 0 <.0 0 7 Sn ea to 7r. 7 0 • ID G!'1.0 7 S Co rr f0 3 ro um. 3 R Dr r.•.- 7 Co DI CD rr 0 Z 7. CO C.r+ a 7 7 7 ro Cr rr 'C 3 .7 f0 rr 0. 7 F--•RI Oil-. to.-. Co.- -. M D. r •C 71 rD y 7 . o 0r < x00 0.3 N 3'0 7N1'°•0 r �� (] 3 .•• CDC ID 0 £ 7 of 01 $< �• .,o ✓ 0. 7 r•< 7•DI •- D, .•• 0 SO 0' 0 n of x n N M r N(D r I-I 7 S7 ..1 3It 7 rD loom • 0 DC nrn 0•E N rt 00 nq Co '7 in. R n n O 7 CD• n 0 7 C'0 CD .0 0 C 0 3 R 0 0 7 _ M.O 7 O C 3 0 a n_> Dr (0 M n o r rR 7 O O•o r • R7 7 '0 a R N 0 R N Cr(D < 0 n N 0 r 7• ro N r(D • 77 rD Nr n. Rrr ...tm wN 0C 0 rr R I .•-3 rr 7 N 0 fr.. c S .0 r 3 .n to 0 um 7' 7 R imp n rn c.. nc n 7 VI 7-Dr If 3\\ R,�a 1 4w 7 OrNL1-� 7 7 (Dp coa r AA N .0 CArO m p 7R7CDI. (D ID•< 0 . 7 C n. LI RRn ro n� 0 r C) N • 0 n 03 . De • M.•.r. 7 O R r Cl.. 0 m n • 7 0 •• !) 7 0 N c o. 7 n .n• R - r r Dm O 7 • M 3 n 0 3 itim (D 7 Col" Wm N 7 8 - • Y s. t d �, 0 c u v 7 D C C 0• O a .. C u o n r U -3' .✓�, . 0 v d n ✓ .E. u g d L .0 " .a yd L d L. ' - E .0 . I. 4 d ✓ c 0 a, L. L. V u C L 6 n V .0 'a .y. al 0 •' n 0 0 7 L L .. .>•`a E0 0 G A ~ti v w .▪ d.• 0 C 2 a) G 0' > - • V. L C .0 V .0 O'', 'a .a a. E L- • .. n • ✓ . C cL. ID I- CO 0..d 00a) m 0 a e000 D▪ u E -+ a a` V 0 .o. L v = y d m n C 0 n 0f L .a v..C_ 0 C V 0 0 0 2 0. -. O a d C 0 v 0. ▪ d G.0 [aa d .0...a ..CO 7 .CE✓ C 0 O.C-.L 41 a) ✓ E O'a O .. E✓ L a1. O L L v .Cy C. 0 0 L O n i 00 c 0• >• E > .d. U 00 01 C 0..' d C- 0 D 1 '• R O U L C 0 i. C. C as E 0 K a) o y a, O d y N 0 C.. L •+ tV V F4 1• C E u e- -• ) _ . _ . _ - C 0) L. U d J al 01 I C'a I d .Ul 0i 0C1 c c 0) O •W-• E 0)•y C 0 0 0 L C 4 0f ✓ d a) ✓ .0 O a) c 0 0 0 4) U 4 0,CO 7 E C✓•7 p Vc CO N .� E L 0 1. +a 0 00 01c.. c C) ✓ C 0 EF .04 ^ 01 C d w '7 4 d 0) N 0 7 0 E '0 0: O .. C ✓ 0+O .0 0.0 C fj O .0 E N O'7 .. 0 3 -•• O T �•. r .� 07-C E = O N L c 4 O 00) ✓ E > • Om01 Ur 0 N C .. d•• 40 07•• O) d L•C 0) •" w 47 0 R O U 0;0•-ya E~ U -..w..4✓ 4) C N.F0'0C a.) EU L. .. 0 +.L . .vO 3 C L 0)•. d C 0 E N c 07 U C✓'7 d ••+ C•p F. 0)3 0 03 C O. ✓ L 0.T C-al 0.0 0)✓ A Z ✓L U O d D•C L.7 7 E. 0 U C.0 U O O d 0 q S N✓ CTm d ✓ - N 0.. as 0 47ti 0• Q '7 L E C✓ t 0 0 -- 0 E E V 0 0 • 4 C N Y y y d as,� a as 0.040 00) .. CTNDO x N • E✓ O'7 O.U m d - 47NK = 0 TO O.07 aa0a UC •.Ci 0j L 0f 3Ud c✓^7 CC0 • U 01 > d ✓ O.L hl..✓ N 07 C L 0 d 0 d 0: 01 L R xO0 O) � o � C d4C: ✓ E F.S 3 • N 4 C.0 0•.. m • L. N d ✓ 07 N h q d L N -• Z O E. 7 01 0 0) 01 w L y 0-y 4 C 0'O 'C U 0 U.0• d 0 0 Ud LL-.. ✓ 0) Cd7 C) d U•00 NdO ✓as O CJZ •m 0) C S. ..a✓ 00 C'u) 01 O d 3 1. 7 C 0 L L C L C q F Fva fa Z E... 0•••.OL 4..... U • 0.� 7.. CD.0 ✓ O 0 0 0 ✓ 0W O 0... 4 ..S-•V) a 0•N u 0 4 14 47 A U 0.0✓ y L,'--) .a m.0 r. U TUC 0)..•O O N d W L 7 d L. N✓ N 0 " U r m ti L✓ > L. ua S m E 0.0.. ✓ 0 0 o'd 4.0 L. • 0) C C 0 d O.0 > O. fsN C. 0000- O✓ N1a G71. d46U E 0U .0 CC �-.• Lb' ..a... y •p. OCS O Li.7..! 3h 0 U Ls..7 4✓L 0)C 0 U .0.0 ✓..... ✓aa O U L >. O U•-• m A 7 d C C•. a s c ✓ O.N N'O Ld. 0 Cd1.'O y 0.O.L.-. m U L.C 3 C 0 3 h 0 > d ua'y✓~.. •W 40 0 O< .0 4 -. d 4 C 7 O N 0 0.W✓'C s 4-I 0 0 'd O E E O L. L>L n1 OC N.. 07 .]V)1- ']S 0✓ d N en 0 U N✓,T. v C1 0 C 0 01 7 0 4 N U 0 Le 0) 0 4 u C.-••• 07 O Ca •. •47 O.v.. 4 y✓ 0)C'a C 0+ ✓ 0 •C U✓ U O.'C CC N •0 d✓✓ E-2 Z co0 E 0.C) U 0. 0) C 0O R`'0 L E Ca >.....7 ✓✓ c✓ C c U N-.. 5) L 0 iv N C C .•.✓ E c 0: 00 d ^ al 0 0: .d. A..^ > O d C. 4 on ✓ 7✓ • d w as... • E C O 3 U 0 N✓ _ - L. d 0:✓L M A 3 .. U.p 0 _ U ' 0 O. 0 C ✓ 0 X C. 0 0 ... > L. LL Z '7 O'O C C L c~ L . C•0 L N C •L ' U 0-. 4) O x C. y p R C L. 0 F.w Ly U 0; ✓-. C)- y C • 0W 0 E U c Y E C. 0 0 4 n.. q 0 • C. Crar •� C 0 • r. E C .. C. O d 4 C. d L. d-•N -. L. U 4 ..✓ 0 r• 0 U C 7 L W 0 O 0 O d [^ ✓ 0 . 04, . 0 IN .E'a 0 •c UC c✓-.. 0 0✓a 0.•0 d✓.. I ..) 3 _ •) E d c.✓ :. Cu 0 0 x-.L L.3. N L. co'7 4 0. L.•. E O 2 O'O a-, 7 ✓ N d .0 N •0 ¢.0 0 'D L O N in7!� C. N N•. >0.> 0 0 0 0.0.4 7 C U 0 L ....-. 0 0. - f , =. .J L. L. . 47 O+JJ W k] 0 d 4 7 C O d d 4 "• E 7 L m d E d _.. O)•a •O. 'a 01 01 0 47 U✓ 4 d ✓. C✓.0 > U a U. .7 O U 0.N 7 L. 0. 3 3. EL.•O 3 y m 3 3 E 0. F d 40 U•0.•O.ars U' d' • N! 10 .0 U •0 40 w O• .0 i !✓ O. N N n•O I11 '0 0'O rr 7 !(n 7.0 7 rr 0 7 n a rj I'll w n••= IV 'O 3 r•...•0 W a -' (0 a- u- O 0 fD O rn n O ,(0 0 di C 7.0 7 W n 7 i0 0 s 7 .7 C Cu w 7 n n n rr (D 0 n 7 O'O w ;0 nn •••a'0 •• •-•aD (D 10 C .--(D n sn 0.00 (D n rr n rr a n'd 0 .-- in 7 n r ID F n a ,n R w n r r 7 •u- W a n ONO li - r• 70.On• < 0.0.a Cwa _ S n 0.O O n fD R 'O s o a r c n'0 c-^± r01 .y ,D 0 0 O w w - CO :O r O n 7 7 1 7 E'(D 10 n < 7 7 7 7 r 7 n n S 0 7 n V OM < :7 7 0,0 R Co a rr 7 D, 1� 0-.it < 7 • 0C R R(D 7'rt.Dl !I7 W a 0 a CD a ID O n (D 3 "• r• ( w 0•< �•w 7 (D v r•a I ar n flin 7 7N 3 LD I. r 0 < r- r n r n Ir '0 r 0 C a C n n Im ,D C n ID n '0 n rn r W r D. w • a 0 a•c D• .n 7 7 E 0 70 n n i• E 0 0 •., C w r_ 7 w I w a n (D (D 3 7 r • s•pn r- ; (S fDJr Asa • rrr c0n^n I aal wn ar-(D 3wrn rw ID O ID a n ii .O7=w r rr rr ra7ZC n n N O 77 aw aw a or •C'-< n a s O n O 7 .3 r-aw O0 C n a 0 a 0 a'0 ? = 7 10 1'` a n 0 O C r•• •- •0 n^9 tD C 0 0 0 • n C n r0 Co E w 3 n C 7 a 0 n ja S w 0 r 0 -n C r 7 CI7 n CO r n �D a .-•n - R w n r•( a ID .-• a r....7 ID C •2 7 7 ry .0 0 a 0 O.•• a s co a 7 a•0 w r n o n W O. rn CO ,0 W 7703r7 arr rr <V 7 0 n r • -3 0, 0 a7 07 rr.• w R ID n a ,n 7 a n m< C 0 S O 0 N O N < 0.0 S a Cr 0 7 r R r-0 W S 3 O r•C ,n a r• w a s o N o w n S I- W ID n ry n rp C a n r.7 0 7 COa 3 7 2 0 1r• < C I r 0(0 01 <00 I .<C 0 0 a C r•a 7 7 7 w 0 U( Dr L7 10 'O •C ID • C ID w n < n ID•t I. O C '1 IO 0. w a n E a a (D 'O am 0 w 7 R R f/y 110 r a n ID • C r a r-.7 7 ID r•R'O C n ID W n Mira r•n n O R n (D 1 O r0 7 R.O r a O W C n 7 0 r S 3 n 0 @ w 0 a Co W 7 7 di -7 raC 3 In < a 0 .. J.• < n •<• a O arD 0Ru- n a0r-a a ala0. n fD I.R n n Cu 17 ....• a 0 a (D (D 0 r• r• 7 7 rD R (D 0.00 .D O rn W r•rD r•R 7'O (o (0 .0 n -n r r R 0 0 7 7 7 n O n O n a Nn 7 Dr a o r•a 0 w. n 370 Cr 10 tD n w n CoCo.O'O n C rn0•< W n r l 0 'O 0 0 rr r I Ca a 3.-3 C rD ID'O I-. 3 n my n n £ n C 3 n rD ivw pa Co 0' r n ' 7 7 0 7 n '0 7 (0 r• 7 n E -r a a (0 n Ew W a n r 3 (0 a ! R I COS. w .•• n r•7 ID 7 a w n'O 0 fD 0 a r Co (0 n a (0 7 r•w ID A--n rD w NM 5-ID a s 3 "7 pi" O to C a n ? (D CO in rr w w 7 < (D • W r•0 n Co•< 7 n r• a n7 0r Conn r wa0aDD 0 C r IA fD Ca w•O .3 r.0 n77rD r• 7 0'OO 77n.o r 377n in.0 r7 DI wa 07rc O .7'r an'Orrrn Cr IN di E X a 0• 000 .c 001 . n (D W R n 7 n n (0 n 7 rD E n ID rr C R•< n 7 r. rn'O Ni 0 R rn n (0 X a n 7 a 0 E (D r•-n O Al 7 no' 0 < 7 r rD 1.•S R a r-7 ID n co E rD R 'p wR 7 an ID rr S•< a 0 r•(D (0R aS 7 0 n IV •w 0.n 0 a 7'O0RS 7 C7C'a'I0• 7 S 0 7 as m 7 O ,p fDa nr•r .7 a n r (D V n r (D s n(D r•r• ID in ID 7 0 < (D R m ID r n w 3 rr r•n'0 'O or7 w ,J r W a r O n n W n C S 0 '0 a 0 C Or rr dirr 7 0 n n O n 'O . a 7 0 CO n 0 CO C -3 .-r r• a 0 n . n 3 C n O w 1-.7 R.0 x re 0 n C 0 n 7 a a ..- n 3 R n a:: 7 w n rn 0 7 10 C a n R 0 r 7 r- a • 0 0 w a w n • a r-(D w :D rD n n to S < A f3 C 7 a n (0 w a (7 0 a C w n R ID -nwa < a, . RI CD r..9 ca.nw (0w 70 '0 a nn (D • rr a 0 - r- to 7 0 • C 7 S a 7' r•(0 Co (D a 0 0 a 0 (0 R a O n X fD • O 7 R• n r w • 0 W fD r•w 7 0.rn.•• w 7 Co 0 7 n ••• • 7 0 7 n 0 r- 0 a to C 4:1 C 7 r C a r- 3 43'O 0 0 74,00 a 0'0 I-I0 nr 0 • arras a r a '0 '17a07 w ID 7 R r - w C n^7 3 rn 0 R 3 n 7 S n C r 7 n 3 r 0 n 7 n a rD n • 77 Zr1D 77 0 fD ar0 n C aw 0 0 war-(0 n W E ID O C n O ORO . a E rr 0 W a a rn 7 7 r•r•n 7 Z 0 0 ..• C w 7••jw R7rn R 7C • a -t r• a nn w ra ID O R r(D (0 CO r• ID (0 C• S r 0 rr 0 w r r-n r.r••. r-w `< W n S as •• R0 w r W 0 ID 7 n ID rn rr0 w 0 (D Co R 3 R r• ID rn(D a was at n £a r n(D 7 r r0 R n C•7 7.0 n rr C. O rr r7 co ..-n 337 co r• a n > 7 ,0 . 1D n 7 -W r 7 7 7 n 0 0,0 m' r ID ID R < 0 R it (D n l ID ID n a 0 rD 03 r rn'O W W 7 7 S ID I 7 a r• n n 0 0 r R R 0.ID 0 7 7 (0 .0 r 7 7 .T. n 0,0 ID a - - - - - ` '1 3 C S m `-7 .i r .j S 0.K 'nF 7 N C m G R c b .l r C CD a 0 CD0 n co 6 R w O a : a . o a 0 0 0 Co o 1 CO CO0 a I. A r w 7 a•e a n a u •C O 1• a G 05 a •e 0 7 3 < o e •• v 0 n 9 Z q ON'0 n n O 7•u :7 0 ` a r0 0 o. 7 CO0 S Nir a 7 o c n a ti c o n • Cr 7 ear a CO n co R 7 7 r 1 l .a-.o. 7 7' C Co O 7 ...... L 3 0. ' a r• Din m o4 D Co 6 rr 7 a .... r = re iD 7 O. 7 < G ' C 3 7(0 N 6 9 r.n o 0 o Was n CO 10 n rr _ no - •D a 3 D70 Q. a J A r a pp 10 G= r. 7 a... a _ m n A C a s a• 4.4 3 -1 n n ? O. w O.0 9 •-•• r C Mr co 7 0 Di ( r ,< 0n y • - ' CA �, a „o, t 7 'a 7 r. 0 I 7 a.m. 3 n 'a n 9 S • d in Ot a - e - E n... a 0 e d 0 a) a E y y •.O+ C E 0 0 C. V CKi .O. CO n .0 0 .1 O L. --I C Cl O ^ n 0 C 7 v -d VO v yu s E e7 C- V0 n - • .0.0 o CI eae K a. >.., 7 IC C ausc. E .� pa c dC .-. d a .0 .r v v CC ., C -. d d 2 c,1) L C O.•a C. 7 a) a) ..C O. n 7 C v 0. d d a, L.~•I I. m e Q m L y C. p p C L.4 al C. .1.y a 0 r. •.. O d y A V C) .... n 2 0 'V V C v 0.. ... >•-. ., OC 0 L.•-1 e G .-di co O a n d o d. e > C ., 0 0)C. > O V V .3 L d.. n 7 .0 .0a L. V a, n w - 2 .> a V C. C C a, C C . C O C IC 3 3 0 C ^ to.0 a O O E S. O O ...• IC T •.•. F V.0 v•7 C I. •d C) •I. y - d • dE ., (p 0 L r DL v n al, L O.C L. V 3 v C .V'..0 E E y Cd. L d d•.0. c C V C V y C 0 a.a, J..) >. J C II••c0. .0 al.. N C O C d 2 0 CC a, a) Y d al ..-•y .y > L..1 0 ... 0 IC M ...ICU y > C V .,O 0 4 v 0 y C L. q 0 r. C V. � C. 7 v 0 0 I. ani a O 1C -. O - U .L,0 m ti ^ y ,V d U L ., C' C L. c. a n a o 2 : c. 2 7 C I. C .Tr • 1) L u d EC C m 0 0 y d ., .+ C 0 ea L h0 L. L 2 3 a w n 3 C L. C .ni.L, d a - C L > a L i ... d E. h I. n C C. 2 E. L �,. h ) _ _ -_ - I mu, O n n n -....) >•1 'O ., .,•-1 ..1 w C „ a 0 •a •• ea.0 O O n 'O.O O 0., 7 'O.. E. 0 0'O • 0 'O ... .c C 0 c x ., c c > OE 0'CS 7 0c '0 .10a, - a 0 -'1 0 0 C E 0 7.-4-1 a C 4 Vl n • n-I.-1-. n.. 0 7 U.I 0 a u,4 a C. L 4 0 • ., n 7.0 4 0 C a 0•.4 0 0 7 C).7 1., 0 0 0 0 O. d O 4 >.(J 0 .0•.I.0 L. 0 L. U 0.0 C) u1 0 w n 0 .0 0 0.•. V) 4 n 17 3 a M L. ,.I, ..I •.1 4•.. VI 0 ., L. >.-1-.. Q. -.4 '0 .0 n .:. Y.. 0 n 4.-1 .-I 0 O 7 a no •... 7•0 4.-I .U 0 4 C•.. 0 7 C U O'.0 1..'p•0-1 Di ., 0 7'0 Cl) U 4 a 4 C 0 41 a C., 0 0 n•..-- ..., 0 0•'4 c 0 4 O'O '•• 0 to 0 4 0 0 a.0 • CT a='O'O 0 ., 0 C O G 0 n'C-C 0 4 .0.0 .1 37 .. -3 n••. 7 X a.0 ., C 0 C)4 0 0., 0 4 Cl >.-1 Cl• C Y ., 4- >. 1• ., O L C L ., 17,0 W C 0., G 0 r. 0 0 U ut n a in L 0 0 0 4 L W V) C 0 0 > N O 4 a, n 4 7 a 0 C 4 0 -.. ., 4.I N 0 0 7-4 > d O -•.a O.C C .0 L. ••O U- O .-1 4uc Un Ea. .0 a, 330 CO ., tc 0 O Cu. C 3 V) .-1 0., U 0 n n'7 U 0 .1 O X 0 .0 0 •c a 4-1 0 3.1 C-.I n Cl 'S 0 7•-I-4 O. 0 4'0 4 L ., .0 a.,L n.0 U d 7 C U) L U 0.- .0 0. 0 7. y 0 n., a CO 0 V1.O 0•.. ., n 0 O a O. ., 0 V) 3 w .0.4 a C 4 n > 0 • •-. 01a., 0 >. 0 0 ., a 0 4 .0.•I w a SD RI'O 0 .0..1.0 a C 4 >. 0 4 0-7 a, -"� .0 0 0 U 0.0..0.0 0 00 ' CC 0 .0 L L 4 0 C., 0 3 4 0 C u ., C .I 01 0 L E .I 0 >.., C 0 n 4 .0 0 0•r1 0 a >.C 0 a 0-.0 a, C a 'O .0 0 c 4 V7.,.-I C 0.c.c•4 a C) ••. 4 en.0 en 0 3 Cl C 4 4 7 a 0 I n d .. 4 E•,) O E E ., 0 7.. ., 4 ., •.. a 0 C O. r1 '0., 0 a Co. 7 U C a .0 0•.. a a 0 0 0 O. I C a.••- .0 0 CT -0 •4 0 L. U 0 > 4 V! C n= a, • .. C 0 in L'p ••.I C O.0 '0 171 • 7 > C 11., 0 0 .,,, C'O .0 ••'... n 0.0 ••. C'0 a O C E SD 0 0 C .. 0 U -4 O 0 ...I y v d >. C V1.,., C•.I 4 ea.0 0 4 0 .1.4 0 0 • a., O C CT..-1 0 0 7 n 4., 0 •, •-I E.•- 3 O.0 0 CT •-• W J'0 E a 'O 3•-. 4.0 O.0 a 7 0.0 C ., 0 U >.,4 0 7 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 0 4 U.c 0,.I • C 0 -.• n 0 :. a, 0•-4 E'O 0 0 • 0 ., 0 C.,f.• .0 • „ Cl - C C a 3 O O.0 .0.I U 0 a O.0 C) 0 ., >.n - •0 C7• 7 0 41 U n u 7 7 •.. > 3.3 C n 4 C .0.0.0 CD 7 C 03.1 'C C C 4 0 0' .•. 0 a 0L r•. 4 d 'O W n.. 0. •.. 0.,.,E.ore .1 3.. In0 0 C r C, 4 -a n -.. a.0 e1.0 0...- IN X L L: C •.. n •-• C U r.> •O 17 a 0 1 T n 4 E. 0 0 .•I n V y-4 L a.,7 a 4 U 0 • 3 7 0 0 X O N C .4 10 L y .n N 7) ., el, 0 0 0 - ' a).0.> a s 11 0••• U .y C en • J- 3 y 0 a n 0 .0 0' • 0 En C. ..01. C 3 4 C 0 I:'7 - 0••. .0 U 4.,--1., C .0 y v 4 u a• C. Cl .,C 0.'O O...0 • 0 • --. V) L. 3 0'O • •.I'p • 7 O L: a a 0 • n f- Cl 0.0 „ 0.1 •.. 1!1 c C Z ., .rl •.. nl .-I U .. I: Ci•--1 � r1I J 'I L. Ip CC 7 "1 4 n M .•I1 ., O a .-.1 y Cl C a-•71.. NI 1 N a L^., ., 4 J L el7 0 ..4 „ '•,'0 N C' n N C n a, 4 I n 0-•+.-. -• - U I •...I U.O n n., 0 .+mote C; ~'O 0 c ....... 0. .. V) O. CI •.. 10 y 4 11 C 0 CI 4 n U 0 IC C n.. CI .- C C., C: 7 V) C O U C a .l1 X a '0 0' X 0 4 0 • O.0 0 n 01 .I C n 7 4 3 0 --X O 0•O 0 O U- O n 0 01 n 0 .0 O 0 0 0 7 •4I 0 y V 3'O/. > --1I n... 7 E 7 'C C p... --. U C,.+ 7 LP 0 0 ., n a, 7.0 0 La 1I1•- y•� .4 7 y .--.-. r U ., -1,•p ., U 4 d Cl-.1 0 U' 0 0 0., 0 3 U •- U •p ., VI 3 0-- U r u U 14 0 1) C 0 L 1. n U n .0.0.0 4 01 -C 0.c..0 C.L 0 0 .0 0 C...... 0 0- U - ... C.1 •-L 0 4 C 4•.. 0 O 0 Or •0 0 )F., 3 0, MI F.,+,a, Cr,a,S N E. V) I•-, 3 0.0 E., a 3: n to C n O E• G.7 V'0 U1 CI d Oil .G n O IY n •C ^ r. m as .-I .. 0 .. .4 a _ _ _ _ NJ A.) 1-- 0 •14 CO J a• u- a'O T ()) E n c (n 3 0 R'O m - IA rn•O > N n R 7 (n'O R(. IIn nl I(0 7 3 m -,- N S m O ' ID 7-.ID ID ID J O.S O 7 0 0 r•O IT -'0 0 S O •-•a (� m D IN O n £ n m.r n 9 r m In n -*0 ID n a E n r II - n n n O m m 0 n 7 n r0'r 7 O• a c In IA n 7 y ` a 7 r S. r.R m n IT ) n n - R R R:) R (D R R E m r n Ir* IR •c C 7 R R m 41 R li 77 r• 777 n ID O E ID m 07 S r-r• m - 7 m a r.�m O .-R R o Om 7 . 0 --ID a70 0 n7n 0 r) • 76m i0 0 0 a--am RC7 0 777 777 I7 0.7417 7 m 3 n v m - 7 In - 7 m .0 --In 17 I7 Om R n n 0 7 ID c O 77-m I O N r-•0 R'C r*7 -- E (Dn n DD 1 .0 /D6IDr.IAC n -n a m 1N n 0 m NJm C N ID-.O N C 1 -I Co ID ID IN N CD . C ID m n N n rr > rr,m I 7 n 0 l.. --m r-+m E ') r'r {W 7 s 7 R m le, m R 7 r•0 W a.--ID m I m ID • n -J ID a • 7 •a 7n .• I. 7 n - . r ) 6 0 • r 1• m 1' R 7 3 ID I• •• 0 n R'O 0 m 0 a O in .... ;C so a S. r 7 la 7 IO ID (D 0'v'O n E In a 7 m ID Sm 7 • n 7 67 .- • I••- 7 • ---m 7 7 0 r < 7 1. c.J Om fD n R E n 7 ID S R R m 13 0 7 7 CM m I. 0 I• m 6 K ID ID R n a r I m 7•< In n m N ID 7 R 0' C O m n r K Ir n a 7C m r N '0 R 7 r, 0 0 1-.6 •- 7 E 0 (D - I-. m O n 7007 0 •-• a 1- am. a .c I- • N m (D ID - r n m J • 7 7 7 /D `) • S C I: r,R n'O rn • • - (D R--I-- R • 3 c 3 n X 0 ID R 1 .. WO 0 •-R m J - N r rn 6 m n O ID m 0 7 • 'a rD ID n 7 RID :.r ID n a n C a l rnO0wW113 ID On m n 0 'O 7 n ID 3 r-7 3 ID )C r O O r 0 a K 7 - -•n 7 c m RID C O (D R O 0911 m ID ID J RSn'O a6 0 m arm ID m 77700. n m n a n '0 n 7 7 R•D r n e - 0 0 N ID .7 - m m O ID m'0 (D R ID ge ID 0 n n (D R O.S 7 n(D D. 6 • 0 n in el) 7 sO < r, ID 7 mom , 0 -.-.. nn OID 0O.7 30 m - 0 4 R ID a Enn n -• 70 .-n n OM 'pu.m'0 n ID -.-I) 7 • mRRm -•R 3 • RIDCIDm < 00 ID I m O n 7 n ) N a R m 3 m n DJ • S S n m 7 R m S m n'O R'D E •• n m a m m n K m no /D m D R r r- 00 (1,00 R ID R R R--n CO rR 1 R"- (D 7 0 'D- 'O n r•7 m C n (D m 0`< ID m A n 1.41 0 Cl.ID ID R .-O ID Om R a •O'O 1713'0 -' a 7 co 0 0'7 x 2 1 7'0 0 0.X r- < o n Cr 7 m O ti n n O n n 7 (D --'0 r- R ID O E DI. 003 n O 7n 0 --ID 0 aaC 00m00a m maIDl n 7 7 r*Dln O BmID a Onrn • n 'O.O 'O'O c 7 MID " RC a0 r IDOID nmCm • na01D m r OORIDOI a 6 mr0n mOr a.-7 R m C 3 < R (4 n IA m 7 n CO R • 0 R 0 -•F • 7 (+ RID R r- 6 O 'DID 7 I.r ID(D /D RID ' 0.. 17.1.-• m m m 6 MOM 77 7 r•nm rI) 0170 as --ar r n Om RID n nm ...--< n m c m n (D m m ID R 7 7 r 6 n O R m Of ID R 7'0 ID n R R m 17 rD Co ro r n m 7• CD O ID CC 3 71D r7 7 -s-•n a:, 777 I-•m m m C •ID 0 O m W m m m RID n 3 ID c n • - r,r) -• •0.(I :A, m 0. m m 0 RID I N 7 n m -• 1D n 3 n n m 7 O -•a 7-•1-• m m'O .3 a S V .0. N MM ID R r n R m .-7 r ID .D r R ID 7 n 7,.--•ID 0 O nm IODID 0 ,7 mm R--7 wa 0. 000mO n 70 a0.< -J n R n O ."1c•O n KK O R n'O R m • ID'O 0 0 m c mO K (D r•(D rn n r m m K (D n•< m 0 (DID R 6n r-C 0.0 -- C(D R r 77 3 WO R • m 7 7 r--• (D r. r m 3 . 74 n 7 r 7 R (D 0 -•m 'O m 7 ID R R 7 7 rw 7 r ID -•- ..m.< r-(D 33 77ROmm Mr .O 0(O ` r-E R r m 7 r n m n .--0 0 m 7 -3 n n R•J re 7 m m 0 7'° R O •` err 3 c ID 0 S m ID ID 7 to J] (nr ola (D ID 747 3 m7 r r Cr n re,. I--• MID v R 0 a m n'C ID 1-ID N Cl.7 0 0 m R n-• Z J ID ID 7 --R-n 3 a R R ID 11 ,O ID m a -. •• R a a 7 7 Mal - -- Cr CO /D n n ID R 0 m D m 0 'O 6 I 0 1) R m ID ID 0 R-•7 7 0 R m V r0 - m m C 00 ,0 mR 7 n 0R r, (Dn m3m co C -•ID C m 77 0. 0 r• m 00 O R 0 (D R CO 70 1 ID 1 < X' n 3 < ID •< 3 ID ID R I m m 7 -• rr - 7 a 7 I m 0 0. ( E -7 p J C.= 00 7,0- ~ 7 .--o T m 7 u 0 0•< 3 7 0 .J m 7 ID 0 CD 1D R m S •, , m O N ._ .. a .74.0 I C O 7 7 r .. n <• 7 0 ) GQ- Ca 7 a J 4.D m W O 7 r° O O (D R o a .o 7 7 c 1 777 ;� O '7 :! .< ._- Y•S- - a a O m Z R n • ' C ° .- = a- 7 O.7 R R y 3 -I. I) 7 a 0 r, Di 9 D0 77. ° 0 r, �D 7 7 '-!7 '� .� a m 17 �D O. O I+ R ID -C of IA - 7 R r r) O m n -. O C)m 90 7 7 7 7 O Ie C 0 3 0 a 73 S. ID c DG O a n 7 -. 7 7 r .0 o 7 r C1 - O C 7 ID CO Ca O a- a r' 0. m a m 3 O a R a O In 3 7 ° 3 R 7° a 0 Ot m9 a ' 1 . .-' R C 1- m 070 a m m mC Rm 7 < 7 C7 7 . O aao O O Ca 0 Ir R M ma 7 C R° - m C A .o J re 6 7 3 a y u •dO S. r 7 nI3 •r) R_ ID.< 1 m < 7 ' R R 7 R C re 7 O 0 7 n R 01 .7 K S m ID - R -1 Z 7 0 'I: 0 0 0 7 1 A 0 3 an Cnarb O 7 !J .7 O 6 l ► _ 707 w u 3 3 m c 0 R -c-� d < 7 n 7.O m n 3 .,-33 A rm- •C DD 7 m - . a m o R 7 7 ._- 7 O 7 • 7 In CO O O 3 3 ,0 C ; C 7 7 n r:0 m m 0 C .+0 IS 7 O ,1 I- . 3 3 n r..< ,< n n 0 -O 7 0 _o 0 O R a 0.) R •a r ' 3 3 nn A 3 7 R, OS m 3 9 .. 0 a m .R.. •) V (m) R 7 1 S C. a 07 3 Y. O II•••(... 00 S Cr.• .1 13 7 0 A O O CD ■ 't O O 00 n WI I=•• 7 7 O 0. C•1 3 0 R O va O A 7• 7 y °° 7 (D 7 1 J C I 3 ._.• V .•mi RIA m l ' R ) R R R r g a tam _ 7 7 r m 0 D 0. . D S a 7 03 ID O ' 0 7 it a • 4. 47 '' i C � c a.SI C 0. C 7 0 A H V V C . C 7 •. C = C c -0 C•-. A A O. . L V J ••. > c • O-. 7 .0 n V C 0 C C L C 4 .y U 4!L 0 E V C Y 0 O.L. A A - V O 114 0 ' V i 0 a L Y... v T N ai J C q V 4 L.0 .•1 U V •L. 0 Y GC 0 C 2 0 V C y G 0 0-• 0 .0 VI) C) 2 +� L p V a! J O.C4...0 4) V L 0 Q4.. C., •y h E L 41 c O •Ua-. E 0 L. L. .. c. 0 .41'D O L L .6.1 as S > C V 0 •-• E Q..0 O = 0 c y A C V..O v m A O EL 0..ni 0 0 as L VC U V A a C V h-7 N U y ) \ _ , --- a ty . 0 0••. Y '0 a 40 7 Y w U- N ea 0 0.•. I W J C 0 W 4.., N A C w�a)Y Y.0 .-1 3 0 W ..•.+ a:W C Y 4 0..0 U 0 U .0 0 H 4 U N L A O A 0••1 L a.a A 0 W 0 •.. U O ...E N 0 U.y 3 E.,a c aX .•.1 0 0) C .. U N C .. O > d70a, .a > Aa N•rH 00.•. w 02 N0 0 W Q O A 4,Y A 4 C A 45 N W W Y w C • 0 y 2 W G..0 y 0 O 'a1 YY OW U...41 UC 1• Y. U-. AN .0 ^ C JN +^Y C•.. Y E 0 Y Od-4 0 d 7 Y.-i Y Y W a E. 0 m a. .00 4).0 y.0 4 C 0 O.0 0 N 7-W C Y .••. w 47 0 4 0 •.. 4 A •.1 0 O C d .0 Y C H 0 01 0 7 C 0 0 Y 0 O > ".0 .0 0 J J 0 y 0 A a 11 A 0 • O U •0 C•. 7 Y N O N .W. .U.,... .0 0 D 0.-• a. 3 U C•.1 c C W E. L U A .L d-.. 16 A N Y a >.01 00) 'O a a a01•... • -i.0 • .+.0 O. d b CO 4 .0 L.�.0) 0^. A4 a0 • 0NU a.L-.i3 AYa 4.,A 0 w C W U -. w.0 4 A N 3 N ^ 0 .00 4 U al ea 41 .00O Nw--. 7.0 OE• Aa ' y4 0_.0 UWC. •.4 C••. • >,N C O O.0 u "• 0 0 al0 4: O. 0 H 0/••.a a • N•O 3 UC 1- 7 > 4 0U 0r03 .-, (I) 0 7 ^.3 W E E,.1 C L. L. A O GIGO• A C O L i.t at .0•C 0 04 0....4 W.--1 -.0..Uii O N 4 0•.. CO a y O.Y d V JO1 -C Y O'C. Y) C0 W 0•-. WOC C A C a C L Al'0 4 W 4 W 0 W C. Y S' C A C 4 y 0 4 A .0 0 r C 0 4 E U > 0 14 0 4 C O-. M W O L•. W L O.4 Y.0 O'7 U A y' 01a O' a d0 ••+ 0 C UYL y Y Y • 0 N 0•.. J 0 L. W J C L. E • Y H aA Y C w N•Cw W C t A C O d r -. C O >.0 p. 3.C.....O A 3 .1 C En O c N y O of N O H W O dO � O ..4.....J a.... 0 0.-. 0 .0 U C a Y'r r > r Y N .•a C u d G > L C. 4 J d Y C N.. y E N +. w,O 4 a al C C:.0 0 A U O.•1 a ) W 0 0 U a) A O 0 0 W •'-. O'4' 0 0 7 N 0 U U C' N J Y 0 Y J.. 0 C War ^' ' .•y G C'C.r O O N C 0 0 3 te)0 r_ a C + .. y A Y 7 U .+ r 0 a Y C 0 01 N-••. '�a O' 0 .• 0) W Y'C N••. L•'• A .0 L 7 C U1'O • N A 0 4 0 . A Y A•� U 0 4 W U u 0 0 A 0.-+3 W 7 0 W A C L a O Y O Y 7 •0 0 C. y .r C J ••• > O > 7 4 >..• C 7 7 t ••0•a,a 0 ti O d.0 .- W a ••* A O'0 2 N C 0 Ca) O� • to Y O A A N^1 Y A-. Y O a a O N E.a••.L a. � C V. -. a-. 4 C H W a)0 N A A U 01 J 0) C N CD .. O a' w a 0 W 4 E.., L L a Y d U C J G G 1C C Y N C 14 0 J It. w 0 L.L G Y.'. C1 Y 7 L A r N 0 Y U 0 O >"•• y U a 0•.+ 0 w 4 .• 0 1 • Y N C 0 0 W•..... C • 0 C L J .. a I. U^. N O. D•r U W H .O a+.•.... .pi U r J ; 0'.� 0 h .•r-i V E C ..7 O. A v 7 N 40 •r d • .0 0 N y c N 10 s .0 N 4 U.-, O m N U >-.-. E y C A Via E r.0 ' m^7 Y a 0 3 .+-.. A y N (4^. 0-7 0 G^. 44 4 �QC O >. COI ••y 0 C C O-� C C a r-'..C. U :. E H E 0 0 N >.y 4 r r Q.W . d '•" C.•. s C 7 .00. C'0 c-.. 0u 10 0 r_ 3 >. = y y i.. a� 43 .~-.. C R A .0 N 7 C 1. J a ^ O W -. C. .4 a, 0 0••.J 2 0•.. V 0 U O E CO L -. N 4 W E ..L L . UI W U U U U >•O c U > U UI 3 c•0•...•. c. W• y�� 0 7 .0 N S J Y A.. WI F UO+.c rn C r C 0 4 C a. W 4 E wig C U C 0 0 M G F N CO IX.0-.. U 44.••a H ...O. r. 3 CEi COI f-'.7• C. F c-•Ni F . U F > 0 0 [.. d N en N N N N N • 0 d] n < '< a < 0 Cr Cr Y-•D O N n 7 D um. Ir. • �+ n n V N 7 0.3 iD O .O rn m Y.'C O 7 C O >r r n 7 Y-n $Y•�D N Cu nS Om 0 (D a O.7 tD 7 (D ra- O '.. • ,-. 7 Y- n •0 n N Y-n1 r m Cn 7.0 7 M 7 CD c n C < xmOY- r Y-O n n n N 3 0 r •• O C 7 7 In 0 r r m ▪ 3 n •7 • f0 * 02, 3 ▪ 7 o n 7 r o r n o a 5 V r n ✓a 3 7 70 O 0.0V 01 • I 3Y•r a27r 0 7 • 0.n a O. O•O r n r•rt. Cr 0 3 0 r 0 7 to N 0.O (0 (0 r O 0 7 n 0 ate, a c Cr 7 r a•7 MZO PO 3Orw G.r r r 7 w0-C n r r•(D O.O n. • O r< c r 7 Y 7 7 m< c W O. rn 7 sm• r-CD 0.rr n 7 a r r(0 a O 7 J r r MWWV Cr Cr ..r ✓ T 7 3 a a ID ✓ M 'o law a 1D n m n I 0 > r I E lam 111 Moe lam C • 13 vI — v D L ci .• a. C) to C O 0. m d L. z )'.: L 0 • v d U 0 y o A y, t. C1 0 V US 0.. O I....I G. 111 C,•.. 0 i, C. CP .0-1_ C 0X. N L +�•L O ••+ FCC C . U ; ..--• s a •a . Cn r.11 7 .-1 C.I y 0... _ 0 • w-. • IC IC 0 y �/ a 0.^.. O L.J.,C 0 0 1 --..-. O O ‘E. 0 0o 0O it) 0, 0.. t. 0. E 0 C ,7. CO C% --n 1. 0 0 E 0 Z1,CG -y..-- O q1, F... _ E O. . 7):.Z.n 0. U1 0 0 U...U U: C. L •-i a en(n .7-.. 0 Q:� 0V d a•. .: L N t..L I.1 C v'O__I 07 1, I ` C a '. IA11 a O ..C. C O T U 0 G i O 1 ,' ... t.. + t. C C O C.. .•. U G)D 7 O Y .0.0 10 >. Q = •--1 CO 3 11 u'0... .. O C: 0 C .ai it'-4 0 00004, 0 n Co 0 0 L-. u1F N .00 U .O C 40.4•.I.0 .. ... O .. > 7-.. O > - .0 L CI 11 0 O 0. .. I 41 to a. .y.. EL. 0, I.. t......D. 0O Ct-•O•U 0rs. V .) C 0 CI.-. 0 y O V/ 0 U) " o a u y 1J M C! L.LJ 0 'oo.,a -.coa�o ., 0 J Z00 0 1, ;1,.0 U .0 90 C G ny1 .>. '-.. . 0 q C•y U - 00 O=: 0.t. L .. M >,E G a > O 0 '7 .. y U •.1 to t. •-0 In C.� .. ON 7 .0 • 0C U.. 0.G -a. L, -., 07 >.- L ~ a C. O z C Oo= - 7Q 0w OG .0'0 U.- CO U..-. � 00•U W U .. ..1-t U .0 y G 0 .. L. C= '.. N r y J>.C O 0 , • >a U C C •. T CJ / 1+. o C!U .0 0 C, ..C, .. ., 0 G O•.. > - C, y U 0 C I, C .L•) C .0 C s co '... • .� .4`. .... C- L..- Y b.' 0 r �: _• - .e•. .... C O i,... C. 7 : U _ Y c r� q r v.. 1) •. .n U ...' = 0 0 0 _ D =.i.. = C, C9-U, G:.o .` Co .,C n• > - /. y N y • Y G UI '� Co... U ....+ 17. ~0 0 L �•'�_Y N 0 0.0 .0 Z 0.ti U Z. h(i L C ... . -y Cr O VI U 'C L. .. '7 O i.L •. O - -� y L: .0 E G•n L:... //II .1.. 4 env, o a' Fai,p.4 Fir. = O c., - , a p Co ... ..... .....• II I ee_ _ tJ C n n O n -..- K 0 a VI 0 0 N V. n0 ^ -p n a - CI CA N CO 3 VI 3. S 0 .... • S •a 7 7-0 0 v O 3 - O ••0 n O.. 0 O O '0 n - O O N >• ee n00, 07 0 a 3 b N O.-•O et C 0 n C 7 7 n 7- C-E e> 3 3 N O Cu • < O n-• l 0 n I -7 n 0 N n -7 -a 7 2 -•-N -•b 0.0 7 ]• O N 3 0 N -. JA=e'1 x' l e0 7 a G n ^ n _•l n 7 -.1 n O n C O N 3 , 7 7 3 0 O.v ... 1 ^V(/r` - -N N 1 6 n n-7 -. =0 -•a< O. A N - 7 N - 3 a n M'J 0 C '. 1•< O -7 C n N n- 7 7 C A 0 -.0 e.n 3 C 1 0 7' 0 E_ N ! 0 O 7 at n N n O a `< - •`-n N N 3 N C E N 7 O 7 '• -a 7 T f 4-DC 070 497 . 0 C. 0 C -(D O V 7 0 - a O -••N - r. �� _� e n Cu N 7 E -. l 7 1 _.N -.7 0 7 a ID 7 7 -n N A 7 n.••9 0 r•• n b -.1 0• 3 0- 3 n M 0 7 7 e•N -7 C b 0 a 3 n'II b eD b - N 0 o ID Q N O n N C G O a 1 7 N A n 3 n 7 •-. z J . •O 1 1 -• 0a C -E 07 N n b < n ^ 7 0 a A •.C o n 3 K —an70, n'] -.• n00 -•0A0 ( ( A 1 7 .,00,-.N m O O b 0. 1 0 C• n --1 - V 1 l b , , 7 7 •n•0 1 •0' O < C S 1 v Cua C 7 0 7 C 7 -0 N ,0 a s -.a N m 7 v.O -7 -et C eo D n n C ( 77Ca o n -- -C. 77 > 7- Sc 07 7N•'c 9 0 -i ' n 3 N N O.e<D 0 ••0., n N n N ......... \I 0 et.0 -. .. n CO n O. ,'0 - ..-- C I i -• ^ x 0 - a eV n 0 C n 0 ••7 n^ N--7 to - v n 0 a -- a O-7 O O 1 < - n ..0 - - C b m O - -= n Z 30 7 7 b a 0 K•0 7 7 (J -•1 7 -7 1 IG 1 n 0 1 0 0., 1 7 E N 0.to -Z a -N eD n o • n �-. -3 to ••a 7 0 n a _-n .• -• 0 3 m >'' elf 3 K C a a K 7 a•0 7 _ • N 0 1 a O 7 a 0 J a 7 E n(0 • n n C n T -~ l a 7 7. 7 - 1 J •••.O N n K0 -, < a (3Dn ,- .•' N x6 nN70N -.> 0 r^ _ K • 1 N c ei -.7 C•< 3• n 7'o n-•n eD L o E o> G VI T �•A - N- 7'Cu n 0 a n a 0. 7 N 7•0 �- 5 n ••n O , n CC < 7^3 3 a a 1 3-A - •O 1 7 V = 0 O —•-.0 0 n C a •• < a -•< N n o -o 1 • 7•n- D �I 1 0 ••3 7 O 7 -• C 0.0`•et 1 N N N 7 a O. 3 -.."n ri n 7 n 7 a 3 ^ 3 -l 1 n 0 1 - O v R C 'e C0 a n a 7 a N -0 - a 3 N 0 < b o o n n 1• - i '' r,v11 ' n r3a v -.-a n•l N N 1 a m a Al v \\f Y~I N N 0 1 a b i.. 0 r7.et 00•G (a.C-A O C •0n n ra A 0 .1 ? ..) : ' '•;:Z 7 `n-.7 0 7 7 o n -.7 S 0 - 0 , 00 ID N v n P:'',1,., C',., (A D N 0 0 1-.- n 0 C 7'N -n a • N C 7 n 0 _ ' "e'Via• ti Z eD • a S 7 .0.- n -•- 0 0- N ei n n A _ A �- 0 n 1 O n(0 < 1 .. O.r n O,l 3, 7 1 0 m Oe a .. ! '=,y M. 0 N n Cl a 1 0 a +. 0+a 3 fD a a •wGN �/'I z ' Z g a a 7 - n N .•• n 7 7 a m7. f.��.i„IS".--. v 7-N .r o S C -. O 1 c N a 7 (D 3 n J n A 1 Z < 1 +0 N ••E eD O - v N K C -c a T a a r n 7'A A K 0 7 N 7 0 -•S 1 r Q n N ^e0 7 0 b C < C . - 0 0 al -•n+• V. A o N b C 0.(D O 1. 7 a 7 3 N n- -I C 7 •N r 0 -.< r• N-. a J ,a < a M 0 0 7 31D a 1 E 9 9 CD 7'7 n N N, 7 n O,n n a --.07 = l 7 n m I elm - a 1 -• S SD 7rem N O N n n 7 0 n -C. < (D 7 n (D 3 e7•.• 0.�-•>n S 7 ' • K eD N 0-• a 3 C r A a 0 b a n n 0 E^ n .........03n17390 S r C = 7 0 n n N (D C O a n N 0• 9 C 7 n 1 n 0 a 1 n -.C M.a n 7 H 7 n a 1 n 30 - 0 raCr. no.. 1.,, 7 -a 77 C K -0 -7 et N l L.:. 0 7 n a •. .D v x a a 7 n N e7 7 C n Cl- N N J. C 7 < 7 Z G <(0 K T+N _ N 3 n o J C. l ID a< mC 7 -. Cr 7 -.n• •1 '--.3 Cr -. 0 - N N 0 0 n a < 7 -S. n e.e et b -n n- t- 0 (3 1 n c 7.7 -.•n n N -ID 7 n -CO E n 7 GO 0 n N(D ell 7 K n -.O.C n 0 O < a C 0 E n ell D -. a .✓ a 01 fD 0 0 0 N 7 N ...a n 0 0 n N= 0 -K ••• -•en 0 7 7 n eD C < n N n R.•• N 0 n 8 7 E a a 1 3 n ,et O to,A a N n- a N a s n. -•O -. O A 1 Q O 1 n N 0 . O K 7 -In••N 7 - O ''•N N 7 OI n O.C i o N n••_ ID a n n - -n-.0 e' F.N. '0 -et 7 7 V - -SD O N S,,et O'7 O -•E 3 -N Co.-- 0 A n a (0- 0 K A 0 J 05 r;0 .7 v N )7 o SD a 7 6-. E n V. a O O n 3 r C V. O. o n ID 0 n 7. •.0 -. 3 10 r 0 Si nSK M N 0 a n n F O• C mOr 1 1 ID K n I u I o< m n m o r 3 .4 _ .- C C 0 v .. J O 7 e✓ 7 CO 3 1 R O 7 y. 7 0 n n S n n o p _a m _ ▪ c .0' C 3 -7 e. c a 1 1 • o ..v v v n 1 n n 3 ^1 o -s 10 < 3 1 3 71 O 1 p S A 3 l 7 1 3 0 • O 7 3 a o- I 1 C e* 0 7 — H v 7 S l . 9 7 15 9I • ) WW1 MN MEM rmai I. = O . C L C J' V < L 0 0 O U L EvE z u E ,C.} mo N= 1. K •• T CO CO CO <C. r�J�.IS 0, T CZ v. G G1 ..+ 2 m �' r O = •E C E N art0 C t n g i ^ L C G U A, L x S<4 t ,O yC COy - = 4 C O. << I, • 8 ° 3 _ C n . � _ 7S o I� c ^P: v ^1 v2.` 4 3 s .n x ac1_ 7 aQ _ 3 `�v .^ .r. n • n gp c ZN J N 3 3 c o r a °-CI +c = w o a- - o.,. •• c n 7 3 .. $y �g ',I S^0 ° ' o N �> n7 _ a2 ? =4 7c y?3. -a3• co 72.a =vd • 7 7. 3 � ,=E., o . n :: . N = fa.o n w a`e C^ v S a 7 (. a S. u 3 ° , O n 00 G Oa ^ O O w n p- n _ n w 7n -nn 3n nu3 ^ �w .. 3o wroao c. 7" _' ^ nc= c O 1v n n a a -:c a Q, 0*c. ,. v ,^, a u _1.4 ° -, n S= " o g F ^° v w n D. ? rn n • ... el w 17:.7 7 a-n. ^ a- ° w.C o -.n . 3 --. c n c c r -- o O' S. n rc- O n w N Oo 0 n a _ 7 f^ § 3 e 7 n "{ a < •.y g. n_ 3`e ti • 7, 7a`•e .. 7'.e n'� -. 7 n o 3 2 a O 3 w a H °im A ? c w 7 C e n n 3 w o ri n t. ° w 3 3.� ^ a ^ w o 7 v x 7 7 c ._ H a ncl aoq c .7^..c ? ^ 3.(1'3 w•n n• O a 7.o '.0- H' 7S. S.' n �- a ^G- 4...ev 0 �w 2 wv e w r• ae w o^ a. ?, w o �w 3 r " -.^ "' y fl 7 3'° ; ^ 3 S N--°yy o a.ao 0.2 H � fu c n o z .. a r a a n 7 c 7 - ^ p 7^.P. n eci •-• `A w O n a 7 w 7 N a a 0 '9 a .. 3 a p 6 c O. a s�c 3 p ri �.n ^ 7 a O. p n U w n . Ii - a,4o.0 HIliPU III x '3 C n U Gn - 7 rn • pq .0 xi 0 c O 7 r. a n 0.8 p n n ^ u 0 w p 3•� �' m 3 ° •e 3 H Fa n m • e m'� o c O 3 " - ^ > 3.nE °cis05ni o ° oc3 n 0a .1a .• ... 5. r- °�- . ^o ..... Qa° '3 a E. c 3 0 '0 3, -'n a =2 w w w a 3' oa w- nn o aS n Z w3 °cam on ^.n �' n P. c Q 3'. c N o r v° s is r w•yy£ 1 ;^ r ^ 7 .w c N G 7 7 ^ d. O d w O. ^.w A 7 o n 12 D� ^ H•N n.an,� .2 n 0 -$n .wj N-. O N 7.Ow0 ', '� w Y �_ 0 ri (719 v n E. w N j ^. S 0•a O r 7.7 7 7. �. a y 7 0 ^ n n �.w °� 7 N n7n -. O ^ nH wn p n O. n n . c O 0.w . 3 C _ n C O. c.5 w O < • C w e 7 » 7 0. L • n'v . - 3 .. n 0 a s D.0 ^ a o n c g o.o - y c.a a c. c•a rn aei . cgao° rl',.% o ^ -Rd E vG -1 o °�- �. 3 .. -. ve _ a� ^ 3 c o • w 3 w w w -.N - n a i.o2 t...' eao W o0 ; 26° = a as w77a g • Mau:� ;: � t--. ._ l� ( - -- • e LL S ¢ 4 4 4 004 4 to 4 G 94.614 9 r tt + =3x --- 3 B 114 , - s s4 -4s 4 49 o n 9. s _ _=ce -t a iiti- i.tt.; i• 9. n;. # ti o lno. ig MtIllllflhjflflll3.g o B a CO 03R - pg_� ii fi 11 c0$ o o n g4� f 'f z i' 1c M7C i m• .•- rc. y a t Zg s >q1sngP'" R .. , [ii rg Eais �8a? ; . c.a Li ' V:i.`' 2.. .3ac n i 1 1; n 0"="gamier x7 �Go; r -L' r G > n 5-F,AEs=�F C. n o e 12] *-9. 5 o f 'C �1 0 ! r .w� aaa� j� C 3 : 3.0 3r 5e?M 0 'x) rn 5 .aa,� rg^ rri " x G. a Z W o2 , . �� aaa a a [it is 0,1a3$Srse2 z, w 2 r �i,o a•5 A2%1 a ; MO 0 4a444 P 4 C > R..3 c`E.-..�R fz.zx_z > �' a v3 `e 6 o d < ..-.c_ - • Cc_ o = > a v' 3.i�!p-o r 5 !Mill! r ^g �}e rQ igggggar _ p ^I O. • M 2tc 3= g�6^-S •. - G ii ii e..„..c^- • i1i§ 01 i io r n o O a C a e a o ji�•t'r s Vj i 3. : 3 �9 m'tng � � �� i l z IHilhitli a �� rr'��3 ; V1 a o�� i9�9E x gA$a �5-c.7 8 _ �3 leg f f J A 3 a. 3 SyMo1.-AEaXa a '' -g " -` 17 - - - w- • 81 0 L ea C. 3 _ n E a O q J I. P. I. J tO u • ., p J J • t C. J o c a... I. 1 C ✓ C e O n C., c V ••1 L V .0s c . 11 C • 4 C U J O • O > Y• s .0 L 7 4 C O._ .q1 J • p /0 L.J O 4 C 4r O .. O C v O O E.• 9 C J L 4 .ai C L. I- C C G L. E O • 1 J J C C n L E • • mma ) . ___ _. _ ___. .46131 •0 • Y ✓ V V y J ✓ .0 I. q .mm C u ✓ C T Iu J 1. • CC 10 C Y 3 N I wo ° s ° =' m •r W L V.. 4 u o q 1;. ✓ Y 1 u V V °i L. 4 u Y I q 9 . V< O .-�i V Y L T. 4 0 V L m • O t O V L P O i. L V C C q • 6'0 O_ V C O v • O. as 1., C L U V • ., VI 01 q a, u•O Y C. Y ) o W • C o7 sm Vq °.... Ce Y I. O a c • > V m mT -• M — I- V V •• C C CC O L Y J q CEY Y U > O V O.. QW Z I .•. y�• V • i Y: u a• G 0 Cg Z 0 10 Y V Y O Y 0.../ C Iae .c i a_0 q C V C C W Q L •L. IY O u • • • F. 1 CO Y •••.• GI ., q • V .....E G. • C C.V Z Ea O E • C V pi. , q ., CC re V U. • U O Y 0 .V..0.. Y V y^ O O. ft . 0 u CO d E Y 6. C �.Y > Y L C'C O JV. • 4 4 Y O�• Y Y yEL 6- O -1. 0 w V 1 L 9 f0 y y ` F y u u. Y C Or.Y V t0 y W W w • Y 4 •• C 4 _ L. LL OC 0 • a+au .. • 0 '9 i. •C C G V I 1CO 3.6 O OO «•• V.< 0 W ~ C V 0 C Y V C 0 3.. P • Cr ./� ~ U C- •.-• .. Z p • 4 V 0 4 C. " ..0. L. v V V. .V•i •w t'JIJ c• 5 i.C V 0 V 0 u O 3 C u y 4.u C L V L a 0 N CO L t Q YO1 Y O �••.+ CC Y N 1. C C O. V • O • €t C q N Y).w•.O. V U ! N .-• Y J C G. •� Y 4 L C.C P f. u C C H 7/] d • 0• c E y C 0 V F 0 E t C O. Y .- ° v V V 3 Y c [�"7 W a ° 0 0.= I. 0 C V .1 C E - Y V ' f• 4 C C Y OG O= O E C V u C- V 4 0 I - C 0 V CO C u 4 Y C V U.• C C.-.q 1 V 3•••.0 L.C C� X y u Y y Y y T •.. .. •-•..7 .� m O - O 4 C Y L L .- 0 - C O G>•• Y C I L. C 7 y L u 1:imp 0 - C•-• • ea L .. 0 L. < L. 4... L. I'J.1 0 43 C C C I- • C V1 q 0 4 O 0 = 11 0I 4. CI CI E C O-- V.0 Y C•u Y Le.-I iO C Y O I. 7 V O `- E V • E L C q G 1- Y C u i Y l .0 0 - 4 w .3 '.O' .3 C cc ; -- T r V. C F 9 O.C G c C E V. u >.v V2 V C O n . 1 i q z` C +'• [707 V w to nr. N I. n 0 a 0 z to W 33 > 7 3 M . t0-•y ra • 0 7 A A rr< < n 3 lJ 0 n On ) y .. • OO rr. .1 ,3'MlaYy30 r•..M. 3 a 1 n 'I ,S. n n 2.7 a 0)n rO z 0 0 n 2 n Ca -C a n13 > nn r•nH 7 �..3. 'O a.0 O ..+ 0 -Zi 7 7 r• A A a n 7 G O n 7 -y 7 7 0 7 n ) 7 3 r 3 0 3 c rrr o 7 N C33y l .... ran r70'7 \n0 A •• b y ® ,�, OWN 7 7 0 K • .a•D n'O .. d...a r•n. L 0 < C C ..•n0 ...7 . C o.O A 0 0 r. r. r+o_'O 0 0 A n n A 9 rr o 9�• f. J"' n n C . n n w •G n Co n µ r.6 CO 9 rt n 0 y Co 0 n r.A rr 0 :. n. .l 0 n 0 7 .)_n .3...n 7 ra �AT4Tt0� r•r••00 yS •O•1 n O.m ••`G Ru. nA .n n3 7 c rn O CA n L :. n rr A n • 9 •7 A 3 A A rt.r 7 m y b A 0 0 0 h 7 ra r...D 7 n n ) n lA 7 7 0 .0000 I n n .9 C n a. < K •ji O. 9 O n 7 O. "J•j •C Co 0 7•C C -r•n� •• .• , nO. Jrr n0..73 nn.. 7 n0 On nr AC.n- 0 7 o 7 rrr µ 7 n 7 - .O 0 0 < n 00 oa On ;•1 .0 3'0 ,. 7000 v..--r -4 -. G.0 0 n 0 7 < A.0 0 1 7 0 0 r r to,. y n 0• 0 A O H 0 n 7 )r A 0.. 7 j' 1. '0 7 A n 0 r• 0 A = I c o n * 0 n C. 0 O.Or 0 7 .a 7 3 rr r 3 0 0 r r•3 c n n fl nY nnL 3 'C nr. 7 00 0' 3 £S ~� O N arm Z .... rr v n 7 R y rA O. • 0 r R x 7 rn) n 7 A Cr y y O 0 - Ora 3 7A 77.-30 7H yrrrrn C m 4 7 .-3 0 Cr G r• n A 0 C n n •C 'o B n n'7 r.3 `C C 7.0 A 0 00£ A A 3 O -C G 7 S O A n C 20 9 n 7 G y n N 3 C 7 .-.n O O m n 0 0 0 7 21'D 40 A.3 3 C _ 4 rr 3 .•• n (1 3 0. n 0 Y. o >o n a'0'0 1 3 4�3 r0. e0 10 Car 3700 m 3 a r•" 0 �..3 0 c 31900 rr,rt Z 'OG Ho --•Ca rr0 >3 n • n 6n Hrr 3. n O' •< n r 0 O7 3 0 0 'o0 0 0 no .•+n . A O.nn• 0. O.0 L 3 3 3 NJ.•- 0 O .....n 7 7 .-+,• A N A.0 -'0 CO• =•• 0 r•9 0 0 C7 7 7 • -1 aa� 7 3 7 N 7'0 '0 7 0 ..0 n 3 ....£ I m m C 1`.... •0 0 A A 7 A n 0 7 7 3 A o Wra a n n L 0•L � 9 -(n c m 71O I n' 3 3'0`C2. a 07 70. K O A- 1-3 3.br -•n •< n 0 m 0 Z .7..01 ...II 0 0 rr Om n•2 A .p Or 9, .-•r+'o 0 0 M �� S. o n n n 0. v O.co r 0 .7 7 0 A - 3 3 ` 3 I.0 A 7 coA n b 9 !)r-b n d A 3 cn 7 n NJ aln • 0...•O NJ0 0 v r0rA 0 Cr 7 > n 0.3 r.. 0 n o g 30 =7� 17y 000 c 3 C 0 A G 0 rr Cr CO... 3 a n 3 3 - R 3 n 3 .+ < 7 a••• n O. r•02 A .O A r 0 CO o A n ,Cl a O n .1) co Cr .3O. I r N N r. z .1 7 _ ... ro 0 N ., CO 0 0 3 1 r• 0 m n . 0 3 Cr 0 a r n 0 0 0 0 a a 0 C 7. tam o 3. 0. 0 A 0 3 0 ar n Z A .0 C i A .... a lb 0 .0 0 3 7 A 19 CITYOF k CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Barbara Dacy, City Planner �^ _ DATE: June 9 , 1988 _ _--_61/37d d'' SUBJ: Southwest Coalition of Communities - Comments Regarding the Draft Transportation Policy Plan Attached are the draft proposed comments for the Transportation Policy Plan which is currently under review by the Metropolitan Council. There is to be a public hearing on the draft on Thursday, June 23 , 1988 , at the Met Council Chambers in St. Paul . The City Council was sent a notice last week regarding an elected officials meeting on June 16 , 1988, from 5 : 00-6 : 30 p.m. at Chanhassen City Hall to review proposed comments to be made at the hearing. This item is being submitted to the Council this evening to determine whether or not the Council would like to raise any other issues exclusive to Chanhassen at the public hearing on June 23 , 1988 . It is anticipated that the same type of format that was used for the public hearing for the Metropolitan Development Investment Framework Plan will be utilized in this instance as well . John Boland, the communities consultant, has suggested that com- munities such as Chanhassen, Eden Prairie, and Chaska remind the Metropolitan Council that their growth continues to exceed projections for this area and that we are concerned about the decision making process for transportation improvements for growing areas . Also attached for the Council' s review is the draft Transportation Policy Plan. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Proposed comments . 2 . Agenda for June 16 , 1988 elected officials meeting. 3 . Transportation Policy Plan dated February, 1988 . Boland & Associates 2443 E. Larpenteur Ave., Suite 110 Maplewood, MN 55109 (612) 777-3388 DRAFT Comments of the Southwest Coalition of Communities on the Draft Transportation Development Guide of the Metropolitan Council. The Southwest Coalition of Communities supports the general philosophy and concepts of the Draft Transportation Guide. We commend the staff and the Council for its willingness to work with the — concerned interes the metropolitan area to reach a consensus on what we all agre; . • e of the major issues facing the metropolitan area in the future. We support the four basic philosophic principles as stated on page seven (7) of the document. We point out once again, however, that _ growth in the southwest quadrant of the metropolitan area continues to take place more rapidly than the Council or local • •vernments have been able to forecast. This poses a mutual problem CO' e Council and _ local governments. Decisions based on "forecasted •evelopment" must take into consideration the fact that in the southwest part o Pre metropolitan area growth has dramatically exceeded foreca- s int he past few years.We also call your attention to the problem of the building, maintenance, and funding of the minor arterial system. More — attention must be given to the funding of these roads by agencies other than local governmental units. The costs of such highways would be prohibitive for most local governments. Thus they would not be built or maintained, and the burden would fall back on the metropolitan highway system. We believe these minor arterials are fundamental to the whole system and that more attention should be paid to their — funding needs. We also support the T.A.B.'s position that the Metropolitan Council - _ should support a recommendation to MN/DOT that all roads on the Metropolitan System be placed on the Federal Aid Primary System or the Interstate System for the purposes of receiving federal assistance. And, that those metropolitan highways currently on the Federal Aid Urban System should be placed on the Federal Aid Primary System. more Southwest Coalition of Communities Memo Re: Draft Transportation Development Guide of Metropolitan Council — -Page Two- - We also support the concept of ranking specific projects by category and not by specific number within that category. — We support the proposal of leaving the TH 41 bridge over the Minnesota River at Chaska on the Metropolitan System until the E.I.S. for TH 212 and the Major River Crossing Study are completed. The Southwest Coalition of Communities pledges its continued support for adequate highway funding from state and federal sources for the highways in the metropolitan area. We thank you for your cooperation and that of your staff in this effort and for the opportunity to appear this evening. • AGENDA SOUTHWEST COALITION OF COMMUNITIES THURSDAY, JUNE 16 , 1988 _ 5 : 00 P.M. - 6 : 30 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL I . Welcome - Tom Hamilton, Chanhassen Mayor II . John Boland — A. Review proposed comments on draft Transportation Development Guide _ B . Review procedures for public hearing on June 23 , 1988 III . Discussion — IV. Adjourn • c2O CI TY o f - •" CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 - (612) 937-1900 400C s`mtnf MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager • FROM: Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Director DATE: June 8 , 1988 SUBJ: Sprinkling Ban 6-/a/64 The purpose of this memo is to update you on the status of the watering ban. The total ban was put into place over the weekend per the deci- sion of the Fire Chief, Dale Gregory and City Manager, Don Ashworth. This response was made because of the dangerously low level of water in our City. On Monday morning, I met with you, Dale Gregory, and Gary Warren, and we agreed that a total watering ban should continue until this water crisis passed. While the total ban was to include the watering of lawns , gardens , and the washing of personal vehicles at residences , it was decided that Chief Gregory and I would issue temporary permits for special circumstances . The temporary permits have been issued to the people that have recently sodded or seeded their lawns, or have particular problems with gardens dying. Frankly, we have sought to cooperate as much as possible with citizens regarding these permits . In addition to requiring that watering be done with a hand held hose (no continuous sprinklers) , the permits have also been issued to people with their own wells . This was done more as a con- venience for them if questioned by a neighbor or a city employee. Together with the deputies and the Sheriff' s Safety Patrol volun- teers , the Chanhassen Public Safety Department spent much of the first part of this week informing people of the ban. Members of the Chanhassen Fire Department played a vital role in advising the community of the ban. In addition, the radio and TV stations were advised, as well as the newspapers and the Chanhassen Bank (who agreed to put it on their marquee) . Mayor and Council June 8 , 1988 — Page 2 Utility Superintendent Jerry Boucher has advised us that the voluntary compliance by our community has shown a dramatic improvement . While a number of citizens were either advised of the ban or actually warned, to date no citations have needed to — be issued. An enforcement problem that did arise is the way that the — Chanhassen City Code, Section 19-28 , SPRINKLING RESTRICTED, is organized in conjunction with Code Section 1-9 , GENERAL PENALTY; CONTINUING VIOLATIONS , which read: Section 1-9 . General Penalty; Continuing Violations: Whenever in this Code any act is prohibited or is made or — ).^'^ declared to be unlawful or an offense, or whenever in fir- this Code the doing of any act is required or the failure ito do any act is declared to be unlawful or an offense, — spl where no specific penalty is provided therefor, the �� ��' violation of any such provision of this Code shall be a �' ' misdemeanor punishable to the maximum extent authorized YPJ1 in Minnesota Statutes Section 412 . 231 . Each day any — violation continues is a separate offense. r r b . The city may bring an action to restrain, enjoin or abate — violations of this Code. (-i,} )- v t )�, Section j3J3.. Sprinkling Restricted: — s 9f Whenev the City Council shall determine that a shortage of wate supply threatens the city, it may by resolution, limit the imesI andhours during which water may be used from the — city water supply system ,for -lawn and—garden spr- -k±i-ng, irrigation, car washing, or other uses specified therein. A.ny water customer who shall cause or permi -to be used — in vio1-a-t-ian__Qf _the provisions esolution shall be charged $50 . 00 for each- =ol Guch violation , which charge shall be -added to their next water bill:— wont-i-nu-ed violation _ shall be cause for discontinuance of water service. Please notice that the problem is that because Section 19-7 ( Sprinkling Restricted) states that a violator would be charged — $50 .00 for each day of such violation, Section 1-9 ( Penalty) precludes enforcing Section 19-28 as a criminal violation . As such, law enforcement officers could not issue citations. City — Attorney Roger Knutson concurs with this interpretation. Mr . Knutson recommends that the City Council amend Section 19-28 by deleting the final two sentences (Any water customer who — shall cause or permit water to be used in violation of the provi- sions of the resolution shall be charged $50 . 00 for each day of such violation, which charge shall oe added to their next bill. — Mayor and Council June 8 , 1988 — Page 3 Continued violation shall be cause for discontinuance of water service. ) As an interim measure, we have used the Uniform Fire Code — ( adopted by City Code) , Article 2 , Division 1 , Section 2 .102 , which allows the Fire Chief and City Manager to make necessary regulations on an "as needed" basis . Because of the drastic improvements in water conservation resulting from the sprinkling ban, we decided to limit the ban to residential lawn and garden sprinkling and washing cars at home. — I also understand that there has been some discussion about ini- tiating a "step system" by which a schedule of city responses would be implemented in such periods of water shortage. For — instance , we would first go to an odd/even schedule, followed by restrictive hours, etc . , etc. In fact, this is just what staff did, always seeking to require the least restrictive alternative. It worked extremely well . I believe the entire City of Chanhassen is to be commended for their spectacular voluntary response to an unusual situation. It — is another example of why Chanhassen is a special place to live and work. Recommendation I recommend that the City Council initiate an ordinance amendment deleting the last two sentences from Section 19-28 of City Code that deals with the $50 . 00 penalty for non-compliance of the sprinkling ban . Total sprinkling ban until further notice. This includes lawn sprinkling and car washing . — REASON: Water levels are dangerously low and need to be reserved for fire emergencies . The City anticipates voluntary compliance, but will be — aggressively enforcing the ban. Violators could be issued a cri- minal misdemeanor citation punishable by up to a $700 fine and/or 90 days in jail . — KMSP ( Channel 9 ) 925-4636 — KSTP (Channel 5 ) 642-4412 KARE ( Channel 11) 546-1111 WCCO (Channel 4 ) 330-2500 — Bank Sign (Jean) 937-2265 WCCO Radio 370-0611 KS95 Radio 642-4141 _ Herald 448-2650 KSTP AM Radio 481-9333 Sailor News 474-0285 ( Chris Burns ) South Shore News 473-0890 — Star & Tribune °- �� CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT ( SENF.R.: i +1-- '•F `, P.O. BOX 97 7610 LAREDO DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 — f Q� O� BUS. PHONE 934-9191 MINNEWASHTA STATION NO. 2 PHONE 474-7094 .S .3 - L f`t..l� @FF7 V. ,mac_ NOTICE By the authority of Chanhassen Fire Chief , Dale Gregory, and the Uniform Fire Code , (adopted by city code section 9-43 ) Article 2 , Division 1 , Section 2 .102 , a complete sprinkling ban is issued effective 1200 hours (noon) on 6-4- 88 . This total sprinkling ban is made necessary by the extreme dry weather conditions and lack of water capacity to — assist fire suppression efforts. This total sprinkling ban will be in effect until further notice and/or cancellation by the Fire Chief. This ban prohibits lawn and garden sprinkling, and car washing. Citizens with special circumstances (to be determined by the fire department or water department) may contact city hall for a sprinkling permit . Violation of this order is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine up to $700 .00 or imprisonment in a city or county jail for a — period of 90 days , or both. Chanhassen r f-) 9 AJ, .,i75-ay / , r Fi a ef City Manager Subscribed and sworn to before me this t day o f :4_44.l) , 1988 . /1 .--, -.14(./t,,,-141-",,r (--tA-4(2-it-e.)-e-,-61----. Notary Pub is -j .1 KAP.EN J EPJGELHAROT L.f c (-'=/ County,, Mn . _+ NOTARY PUBLIC - F1S1;'•'C30TA ' CARVER COJ ;;Y '_ ,' My common empires ,o-,Gs1 i My commission expires v /0 - /L ;%1 ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION Letter from American Heart Association dated May 23 , 1988 . Letter from Rudy Perpich dated May 20 , 1988. Memo from Gary Ehret dated May 23 , 1988 . Letter to Gene Borg dated May 25 , 1988 . Letter to Rudolph Remus dated May 25 , 1988 . Letter to Sheriff' s Office dated May 25 , 1988 . Letter to Chanhassen American Legion dated June 2 , 1988 . Letter from Roger Knutson dated May 31, 1988. Letter to Dan Sershen dated June 2 , 1988. Memo from Gary Warren dated June 3 , 1988. Memo from Mark Koegler dated May 2 , 1988: Police Pass On dated May 26 , 1988 . Letter from Land of Lakes GTOs dated May 26, 1988. Letter to Carl Hoffstedt dated June 3 , 1988 . Letter to Family of Christ Lutheran Church dated June 3 , 1988. Police Pass on dated June 3, 1988. Park and Recreation Commission agenda for June 14, 1988. Memo from Scott Harr dated June 1, 1988 . Letter to Charitable Gambling Board dated June 7, 1988. Letter to Roger Gustafson dated June 3 , 1988. _ Memo from Jim Chaffee dated June 2 , 1988 . Correspondence to and from Jack Melby. Letter to Family of Christ Lutheran Church dated June 6 , 1988 . Phone Message on the Water Reservoir Color dated June 8 , 1988 . HRA Accounts Payable. Letter from Mary Ellen Anderson, Minnesota Won't Forget POW/MIA dated June 7 , 1988. Memo from Jo Ann Olsen dated June 10, 1988. Report on Water Quality of Ten Metro Area Lakes . 4701 West 77th Street,Minneapolis,Minnesota 55435 (612)835-3300 dr// /sa American Heart a 3' /1. Association Minnesota Affiliate, Inc. May 23, 1988 Tom Hamilton, Mayor Chanhassen City Hall P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Tom: A big round of applause is due to you and your committee for Chairman of the Board a successful celebrity waiter event at the Chanhassen Barbara Jean D'Aquila Wednesday evening. President _ Erik L Altman,M.D.,Ph.D. You went full speed in not only selling tickets but President-Elect James H.Zavoral,M.D. recruiting celebrities. First Vice-Chairman of the Board The event went smooth, (at least from where I was sitting) Louise Carlson and the guests seemed to be enjoying themselves. Second Vice-Chairman of the Board Larry Dunham For a first year, first time ever event, this was #1! Secretary Russell Luepker,M.D. Next year's will prove to be even stronger. Treasurer DaveTwa Sincerely, Chairman of the Development Committee Robert L.Russell C. dy ;leis I/ it or of Special Events /ka cc Dennis Kelly • MAY 2 /1 1988 WERE FIGHTING FOR CITY OF CHANhASSEN YOUR LIFE 14.4 1 ° i o ✓ ` STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( // /O g ST. PAUL 55155 RUDY PERPICH GOVERNOR May 20, 1988 Dear Transportation Supporter: On April 23 I signed a major transportation funding bill that will provide $390 million for Minnesota's transportation needs over the next three years. In the first year alone, the bill is expected to create over 5,000 private sector . jobs for the working men and women of this state. The transportation funding bill is a significant step in our ongoing effort to improve what is already one of the best transportation systems in the country. According to the most-recent statistics, Minnesota has the lowest fatality rate in the nation per vehicle miles traveled. Despite our inclement weather, our roads are the safest in the country. This bill will continue our aggressive emphasis on highway safety. It will increase road rehabilitation and surface improvements and create a Study Board to examine our surface transportation needs into the 21st Century. Another highlight of the bill is the attention it pays to our transit systems , particularly in Greater Minnesota. During the 1988-89 biennium, $18 million will go toward expanding and/or upgrading Minnesota' s public transit systems, including 43 outstate Minnesota systems which collectively handle nearly 9 million passenger — trips each year. The $390 million in funding will be shared by the state, counties, and cities to meet their own specific needs. The 5,000 jobs that will be directly created in the coming year only counts direct job development. Because transportation plays such a vital role in our economic growth, this bill will also indirectly stimulate the creation of hundreds of other jobs in Minnesota. This historic transportation bill took literally years to put together. Legislators (particularly those who served on the Transportation Finance Study Commission) , individual citizens, and members of the transportation industry should all be proud of their work on behalf of this important piece of legislation. As Governor of Minnesota, I want to thank you for your efforts and hope that we can continue to work cooperatively to meet our transportation needs in the future. Sincerely, CITY OF CHANHRSSEtJ ERMINE 2i ? MAY ti i 1988 RUDY ERPICH ENGINEERING DEPT. Governor AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER s• ►•75 etc, tA ^ w\i a Fa< l LI719r-1.1 PLANNING ]1]Ellir TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE BENNETT. RINGR(1SF. WOLSFELD, JARVIS. GARDNER. INC. - THRESHER SQUARE • 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55415 • PHONE 612370-0700 • MEMORANDUM 1 DATE: May 23, 1988 TO: Mr. Gary Warren FROM: Gary Ehret RE: Soo Line Crossings Downtown I talked to Loren Sultze today regarding the above. He says that everything is set to go. The crossing work (for both) is ordered 1 (internally at Soo Line. ) It is scheduled for July 15, 1988+, he wasn' t sure. The final scheduling must be verified through Tom Parsons, Regional Engineer. I put in a call to Tom, but he is out until Friday, May 27 , 1988. I will follow up with him. GAE/ss • CITY OF CHANHASSEt! RjRNIRM MAY 24 1988 ENGINEERING DEPT. MINNEAPOLIS DENVER PHOENIX c//?/Z CITYOF CHANHASSEN - � G 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • May 25 , 1988 Mr . Gene Borg 6897 Chaparral Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Gene: I want to thank you for your kind contribution toward the purchase of a mobile telephone for the Chanhassen squad car . Your donation made it possible to purchase this mobile phone which was recently installed and is now operational . Already it has proved to be an invaluable communications tool in the field of law enforcement. Deputy Mike Douglas did an outstanding job in coordinating the efforts to purchase and install this needed piece of communications equipment. Again, thank you for the contribution and if you have questions , please feel free to call me. Sincerely, im Chaff e Public Safety Director JC:k cc: Mike Douglas , Deputy Don Ashworth, City Manager Al Wallin, Sheriff CITY O F c//2 Ap,R CHANHASSEN — � G �'. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 May 25 , 1988 Mr . Rudolph Remus 9245 Lake Riley Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Remus : The Chanhassen Public Safety Department, which the Chanhassen deputies are a part of , sincerely appreciate your kind contribu- tion of $100 . 00 toward the mobile telephone. We used the money to help purchase a Motorola mobile telephone which was recently installed in the Chanhassen squad car. It is now operational and proving to be a valuable communications tool for our law enforce- - ment services . Deputy Mike Douglas did an outstanding job coor- dinating the efforts to purchase and install this needed piece of equipment. Again, thank you for your contribution and please feel free to call me if you have any questions or you would like to see a demonstration of the phone in use. Sincerely, Jim Chaff e Public Safety Director JC:k cc: Mike Douglas , Deputy Don Ashworth, City Manager Al Wallin , Sheriff 4.(,„ C I TY of ,c-) HANHAssEN - � G 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 May 25 , 1988 Captain Bud Newmann Carver County Sheriff' s Department 600 East Fourth Street Chaska, MN 55318 Dear Bud: — The Cities of Chaska and Chanhassen recently concluded a mutual aid agreement whereby the Chaska Fire Department will be the first responding units to be notified of any and all fire calls occurring at the M.A. Gedney Pickle factory at 2100 Stoughton Avenue, Chaska. Please insure that your dispatchers are aware of this and should a fire alarm or fire call occur at the Gedney facility, the Chaska Fire Department is notified first. I have attached copies of supporting documentation for this decision. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, im Chaffee Public Safety Director JC:k cc: Dale Gregory, Chanhassen Fire Chief Don Ashworth, City Manager Jim Worm, Chaska Fire Chief f `1_ • t f' 7 • :h Chaska May 4, 1988 • Mr. Don Ashworth City Manager City of Chanhassen P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Don: The Chaska City Council at its May 2, 1988 meeting consi dered Chanhassen ' s request that the Chaska Fire Department be a joint first responder for the Gedney Pickle Processing Facility. The Chaska City Council approved this request with the understandi ng that Chaska would provide these services at no formal charge for a period of six months in order to allow for the final negotiation for a long term agreement between the two cities. It was understood that such an agreement may or may not be incorporated into the ongoi ng discussions regardi ng the potential annexation/ detachments. I art) assuming that you will contact the Sheriff' s Department notifying them of our agreement. Based on the Council ' s action, I have sent the attached letter to Bob Vadness of Gedney pickle. If you have any questions regardi ng the Counci l 's action, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, Dave Pokorney City Admi ni s trator CITY OF CHANT-A DP:jai cc: Jim Worm, Fire Chief MAY 0 5 1988 City Of Chaska Minnesota 205 East Fourth Street 55318-2094 Phone 612/448-2851 aska May 4, 1988 Mr. Robert Vadness M. A. Gedney Company 2100 Stoughton Avenue Chaska, MN 55318 Dear Mr. Vadness: The Chaska City Council at its May 2nd meeting took acti on authorizing the Chaska Fi re Department to re- spond as a joint first responder with the Chanhassen Fire Department to any fire or emergency calls at the '-� Gedney pickle processing facility. Based on this action the City Fire Department will be a first responder and dispatched di rectly by the Carver County Sheriff' s Department. If you have any questions regardi ng the City Counci l 's action, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Dave Pokorney City Admi ni strator DP:jai cc: Don Ashworth V I ' MAY 9 5 1988 Cll Y OF CHAN,ASSEIN City Of Ch kMinnesota 205 East Fourtn street 553 18 2094 Phone 312 443.73=1 j'., Yt � ' }� M.A. GedneyCompany ) .� . CHASKA. MINNESOTA 55318 / (612) 448-2612 May 16, 1988 Mr. Don Ashworth • City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P. 0. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Don: Thank you for your assistance in getting the first response agreement with the City of Chaska. Hopefully we can enter into a long term agreement in the near future. Again, thanks for your help. Sincerel , — Robert F. Fadness Exec. Vice President Operations M. A. Gedney Company mb MAY 17 1988 �.� Y or CHANHASSEN PICKLES A/ PEPPERS N!! RELISH `lt! CONDIMENTS \*1 VINEGAR "t i SAUERKRAUT sr4 CITY4 of \i % CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1aM June 2 , 1988 Commander Ozzie Chadderdon American Legion Post #580 7995 Great Plains Blvd Chanhassen, Mn. 55317 Dear Commander Chadderdon; As the Public Safety Director for the city of Chanhassen I enjoy a very unique and challenging job. I am responsible for coordinating the activities of the Fire Department, Police Department (Carver County Deputies) , and the Building Inspection Division. You are probably aware that we contract for police services with the Carver County Sheriffs Department . Through the contract, the Sheriff provides to the city of Chanhassen some of the finest law enforcement officers in the metropolitan area . Overworked and underpaid, these deputies often times risk their own personal safety to provide to the citizens of Chanhassen a professional level of security. One of the biggest obstacles standing in the way of these fine officers is the lack of funds for equipment and training . When Carver County cannot provide the equipment needed to help these Chanhassen deputies do their job, we (the city of Chanhassen) try to help. Unfortunately though, even the City sometimes does not have the funds needed to purchase the desired equipment. My reason for writing to you is to seek funds for a very special request from the deputies serving Chanhassen . They have asked for a replacement radar unit with upgraded technology and expanded capabilities. While the City would like to purchase the unit for the Chanhassen squad car , the funds are just not available. Would your post consider donating the $2000 .00 needed to purchase a new radar unit? I am including an informational brochure on the type of radar unit that the deputies have researched . With this units expanded capabilities the deputies serving Chanhassen will be better equipped to handle the numerous radar requests that are received weekly in my office . Some of the more recent radar requests from citizens are for Kerber Blvd, Kings Rd, Pleasantview Rd, W. 78th St . , and Lake Riley Blvd . I look forward to hearing from you and should you have any questions please do not hesitate to call . Sincerely, im Chaffe Public Safety Director cc/Don Ashworth , City Manager _ j!V ;:t PE i7 ATO S - PUT- �S l,�� 1 IN YOUR PATROL 46" °//kcd-A 5r.1 gar , � , r5 - ,ssHMTHA ; .15.0r, from M . P . H . THE SMALLEST RADAR - IN SIZE BUT THE BIGGEST IN - PERFORMANCE The NEW M.P.H . BEE Model 36 Moving Traffic Radar is a fit. • � � �'" :,id ` t S_ W i S'9}4 7 ? 4 -yt'why �y �� I 3l ME '-• ,---: IP 4'_..:,ai s.F.se,•2 <eX%.'..ter. ,�.'i tiSr Lam+. _ '� _ 4._ 1 Readout, Antenna, Remote Control Off-Dash Readout Mounting • C ... i l�. ,: "-al'?" 10111111 .01r.• } F K Line-of-Sight Readout Mounting , . - . ap 0iii 1 yy t", f '? 4�/, ,4'�1q " ` �I.� 'y / / ` Rear-Window Dual Antenna The M .P.H . BEE Model 36 MovingTraffic c Radar brings a N EW concept to Police Radar, but with proven ideas and engineering practices from the Eectronics Industry. Here's A Of Reasons To Buy A BEE * We know that the size of Police vehicles is getting smaller inside. The B.E.E. offers the smallest readout available in the industry. Mount it anywhere. Perfect for Ford Mustang type cars and motorcycle mounting. * The BEE is designed for performance and built with HQ components to guarantee you the on-the-street performance you expect and deserve from a Top-Of-The-Line Quality Traffic Radar. * Engineered upon the component system, much the same as your expensive Hi-Fi systems. All functions seperated into individual models, thus increasing the operating efficiency and longevity of the entire system. * The simple, modular concept allows you to place all the critical electronics safely out of sight and away from abuse, but leaves the controls close to the operator. * All important controls are located in the operator's hand in our remote control module. Easier to use and more convenient than all others. * Triple readout protection — with the outstanding performance and long range of the BEE you can lock-in the violator's peak speed on the "Target Lock" window and then monitor the tracking history on the "Target" window as the radar continues to track the vehicle right down to you, plus continually displaying your patrol speed for verification. * Front and rear dual antenna systems available. Allows you to monitor targets going away from you in the moving mode and easy instant two-way monitoring in stationary. * Exclusive Town/Country switch for slow speed and high speed cruising operation. Great for slow patrolling on 4-lanes. * Standby Switch — Lightning quick response allows for total defeat of all radar detectors. * Manufactured and backed by M.P.H. Industries, Inc. A world leader with over 10 years of proven ability. * DIRECT FACTORY REPRESENTATIVE FOR ON-SITE DEMONSTRATIONS * FACTORY TRAINING * TWO TO FIVE YEAR WARRANTY * EXTENDED WARRANTY PROGRAMS * STRATEGIC FACTORY AUTHORIZED SERVICE CENTERS * LEGAL SUPPORT AND EXPERT WITNESS AVAILABLE Model BEE 36 Moving Traffic Radar Specifications GENERAL The unit is designed for convenient use by law enforcement agencies to measure the speed of motor vehicles when operated from a moving or stationary patrol car.The BEE Model #36 utilizes the well known and legally accepted"Doppler Principal"and has been type accepted by the Federal Communications Commission. SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS: Specifications apply to both X-Band and K-Band Model BEE #36 Doppler Radar unless otherwise specified. Nonimal Power Supply Voltage: COMPUTER MODULE: 13.6V DC The Computer Module consists of the critical electronics in a dust- Low Voltage Condition Level: proof metal housing that can be placed out of harms way.All cabling 10.8V DC-16.5V DC comes from this module and consists of a Power Cable with Cigar Plug or phone-jack plug, Remote control cable, Readout Module Low Voltage Condition Alert: with 24-Pin locking connector,antenna connectors for either single When supply voltage decreases to 10.8V, DC,and LED located on or dual antenna capability. the front panel of the readout module is illuminated to warn officer Physical Size: of the low voltage condition. Length: 101/2" Nominal Current Requirements: Width: 81/2" Lamp Test-On/Lock-On/Transmitter- X Band K Band Height: 13/4" On(Max) 0.9A 1.OA ANTENNA MODULE: Display-Off/Transmitter-Off(Min-Standby) 0.2A 0.2A Circularly Polarized Antenna in an enclosed seamless cylinder Display-On/Transmitter-Off 0.5A 0.5A metal housing with lens covering. Display-Off/Transmitter-On 0.3A 0.4A Operating Frequency: Operating Speed X-Band— 10.525 Ghz+0.2% Patrol Speed Range 15 MPH to 69 MPH (Units may be special K-Band—24.150 Ghz+0.2% ordered to read patrol speeds above 69 MPH and/or below 15 MPH) Microwave Source Target Speed Range-Will display speeds from a minimum of 15 Solid State Gunn effect diode MPH up to a maximum closing speed of 209 MPH.StationaryModel Operating Speed is 15 MPH to 129 MPH. Output Power: X-Band—Nominal 13-30mW Maximum 50 mW Operating Temperature Range: K-Band—Nominal 12-5mW Maximum 95mW -30°C(-22F°)to+60°C(+ 140°F) Radiated Power Density: Operating Humidity Stability: Less then 1 mW/cmz at 5 cm in accordance with microwave oven Operated normally up to at least 90% relative humidity @ 99'F standards (37°C). Type: The Complete System consists of the following modules: Circularly polarized conical horn READOUT MODULE: Beam Width' Lexan Scratch Resistant Front Panel with Three Window LED Speed X-Band Does not exceed 18° Display Indicating Target Speed, Target Lock Speed, and Patrol K-Band Does not exceed 15' Speed LED Indicators for: Beam Width Variance: Stationary Mode—Low Voltage Radio Frequency Interference ±1°at maximum manufacturer's tolerance Normal/Light Test Switch Side Lobe: Physical Size: 24db down from main beam Length. 41/e" Received Microwave Beam: Width: 6" Utilizes transmitting antenna. Isolation accomplished by a Height: 21/2" "turnstile" phase shifter. REMOTE CONTROL MODULE: Transmitter Incorporated the following features in a hand-held device: Complies with FCC Part 90 Scratch Resistant Lexan Control Panel Front/Rear-Standby Control Switch FCC Type Acceptance: Lock/Release Switch X-Band-C1 Y8AEXF54 LED"Run" Indicator K-Band-C1Y8AEKF54 Audio Speaker and Volume Control Mixer Diode: On/Off Control Switch Schottky Barrier type rated for 100 mW burnout Stationary/Moving Switch Town/Highway Mode Switch Range: Squelch Override/ICT Mode Check Switch 2500'typical for average size vehicle Physcial Dimensions: Physical Size: Length: 6" K-Band: Length 5" Width: 2Y2" Diameter 334" Height: 1" X-Band: Length 61%" Diameter 43/4" FOR A OF A DEAL CALL TOLL FREE, Arrange fora Demonstration, or Place Your Order. 1 -800-835-0690 (KS Residents Call Collect 1 -316-431 -2830) M . P. H . Industries, Inc. 15 S. Hinhlancl ' riNo. c aa-p-In LAW OFFICES H ! j /, GRANNIS, GRANNIS, FARRELL & KNUTSON 1e L C C- DAVID L. GRANNIS- 1874-1961 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION 1 ELECOPIER. DAVID L. GRANNIS,JR. - 1910-1980 POST OFFICE Box 57 (612)455-2359 VANCE B. GRANNIS 403 NORWEST BANK BUILDING DAVID L. HARMEYER VANCE B. GRANNIS,JR. 161 NORTH CONCORD EXCHANGE ELLIOTT B. KNETSCH PATRICK A. FARRELL MICHAEL J. MAYER DAVID L. GRANNIS, III SOUTH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55075 TIMOTHY J. BERG ROGER N. KNUTSON TELEPHONE(612)455-1661 May 31 , 1988 Mr. Don Ashworth, City Manager Chanhassen City Hall 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 RE: City of Chanhassen v. Pauly, et al Dear Don: Enclosed for your file please find copy of Findings and Order in the above-entitled matter, which was entered on May 26, 1988. Very truly you s, GRAN IS, G NIS, FARRE L , .A __— BY. r N. Knuts RNK:srn Enclosure • \ Jvia , 19 • r . ? . .' ''C T'' OF CHANT,AS�t88 ,) • i„ I •r A. Pauly • . At i:r,riu:y I.1w • • •II4.i.1 lip:: c •nror • rli ;in 9 .A ls, MN 55402 • • Luke Mrlchert . Ccur't's Notice of Filing, • • Attorney at Law Entry ,or Docketing 112 Second Street West PO Box 67 t Lundsten • lh PO Box 2 9.4 � a:,kd,• MN 55318 • Excelsior, MN 55331 • • Patrick Farrell Keith Traxl'er %+ Attorney at Law Carver County Realty 403 Norwest Bank Bldg. 413 Chestnut St. 161 North Concord Exchange • Chaska, MN 55318 South St. Paul, MN 55075 . - Eugene Rosenwinkel • 212 Broadway North In Re: City of Chanhassen vs. Pauly et al File No. Carver, MN 55315 87-22584 . . For the above entitled matter, you are notified that cn May ?6, 1988 , a (n) • X Fir-Zings and Order . • Order JtsT-ent • Si • • Other rtv , • t''as duly - _ Filed x Enterer • Docketed in the a-cuntof . • Dated: Mav 2t6, 1989 • Copies attached • Joyce A. V4nL.�r! Court Deputy • Court k_�r.inistrac'_c:- Carver County Courchouse • 55318 • • (6 i ) 4- -3435 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF CARVER FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT City of Chanhassen , a Minnesota municipal corporation , File No . 87-22584 Petitioner , vs . F I Np INcs;Anr,o'RDER- --, Henry A . Pauly , Gloria I . Pauly - - a/k/a Gloria O . Pauly , Kallestad Enterprises , Inc . , et al , MAY 2 6 1988 , Respondents . C I f 1 I i13. J l y 1 The above-entitled matter came on for hearing on Respondents ' Motion to Permit Testimony , before the undersigned , Judge of District Court , at the Carver County Courthouse , Chaska , T Minnesota , on the 15th day of March , 1988 . Roger Pauly , Esq . , appeared on behalf of Respondents Gloria and Henry Pauly . Luke Melchert , Esq . , appeared on behalf of Respondent Kallestad Enterprises , Inc . Patrick Farrell , Esq . , appeared on behalf of the City of Chanhassen . Based upon testimony , affidavits , all files and records herein , the Court makes the following : FINDINGS - 1 . Respondents have shown that their going-concern value of their businesses may in fact be destroyed as a direct result of condemnation , and also , that their businesses cannot be relocated as a practical matter , or that relocation would result in irreparable harm to their interests . 1 2 . Evidence authorities action had worked a "taking" on a tr-T^ter-.ry basis, requiring that issue be addressed by the Commissioners . 3 . The attached mer::cra:-:Ius, is incorporated by reference herein . Based on the foregoing , the Court makes the following : ORDER 1 . That the Condemnation Commissioners shall hear and consider testimony on the loss of going-concern value of the Pauly and Kallestad 1:r. c7erzies . 2 . That if the Commissioners find a lo ss of gc i ng-cor.cer n value , they shall include the loss in the award of damages as a separate itemized element of damages . 3 . That the Ccns_-:n - _ _.. Ccm:;_s,,ic•:=r_ shall hear �- and consider testimony �� �--rea=rd i .�u damages resulting from the claimed temporary total takinc of the remainder of Respondents ' property . 4 . That if the __...miss- - re=s _ -•• t :':n . 7.e.F:L:oni'entshave suffered a loss due the claimed tem7orar7 total remainder of Respond=.. __ -rt the r.. ; '- _. ! • - _ _"".*': =_ .or:=ram shall include the loss in . -, _ _ -__ _ _: __.. ____ as a _-_orate itemized element of damages . 5 . That the amount and t; -7 - of damages awarded _ to the Respondents ( if any) by the __.-.m_c_i_.-_- _ is not to be a binding determination for e,!iden7 _ _- • _ __ _ _ _ ir _. _ s_-iuent hearing or trial of the issues in then- matters . DATED : May S, 1988 . BY THE COURT Robert J . Go gins , Judge First Judicial District MEMORANDUM Minnesota courts allow compensation for loss of going concern value when the holder of an interest lost by condemnation can show : ( 1 ) that his going-concern value will in fact be destroyed as a direct result of condemnation , and (2) that his business cannot be relocated as a practical matter , or that relocation would result in irreparable harm to the interest . City of Minneapolis v . Schutt , 256 N .W .2d 260 , 265 (Minn. 1977) ; Housing and Redevelopment Authority v . Naeaele Outdoor Advertising Co . , 282 N.W.2d 537 , 540 (Minn. 1979) . It is the opinion of the Court that factual issues have been raised which must be addressed in the trial of this matter . It appears as though there are certain foundational requirements before the factfinder may consider the award of any damages for going-concern value . — Accordingly , the Order of the Court specifically is not binding with regard to evidentiary questions on any trial court , but does require the Commissioners to separately identify the areas of damage that were in issue in these motions . In State v . Saugen , 169 N .W .2d 37 (Minn. 1969) , the • 3 Minnesota Supreme Court held that a going-concern value under a liquor license was property . The Court held that the owner of the liquor lounge in question had lost the going-concern value of his business because , as the parties had stipulated , the owner had attempted to move his business three times, but he could not transfer his liquor license to those locations because of Minneapolis Ordinances . The parties stipulated that but for the actions of the city in condemning, the owner could have continued to operate his lounge . In Saugen , the owner had gone completely out of business , and his liquor license had expired because of the condemnation proceedings . In deciding Schutt and H .R .A . , the Court indicated that Saugen was a case limited to its facts based on the stipulations of the parties . In Schutt , the Court noted that "many acts of eminent domain operate to the detriment of private parties in furtherance of valid public purpose , but such detriment does not become a constitutional taking unless it can be shown that the loss , . . . , was egregious and irreparable ." Schutt , 256 N .W .2d at 265 . In H .R .A . , the City of St . Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority instituted proceedings to condemn an on-sale liquor store . The owner appealed the condemnation commissioners ' award of damages . The District Court allowed evidence of going-concern value and allowed such damages as a separate item of damages . The Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case with orders that the condemnee present evidence on the test factors from Schutt to - - 4 e:,tabl i f;h if the loss of doing-concern value met the test . The Paulys and Kallestad rely on the case of First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v . County of Los Angeles , 482 U .S. — 96 L.Ed . 2d 250 , 107. S .Ct . ( 1987) , to support their claim for damages for a temporary taking of their property during construction . In First English , a flood destroyed all the buildings at a camp facility owned by the church . The county passed an interim ordinance barring the construction or reconstruction of any structures in a designated flood protection area . The Supreme Court held that where the government 's — activities have already worked a taking of all use of property , no subsequent action by the government can relieve it of the duty to provide compensation for the- period during which the taking was effective . 96 L .Ed . 2d at 268 . Therefore , the county could not just vote to rescind the ordinance without also being required to pay the church compensation for the time that the county had taken total use of the church 's property . The Court limited its holding to the facts of the case . The majority of state courts hold that where a public improvement or repair is not performed negligently or unlawfully , or is not unreasonably prolonged , temporary conditions suffered by nearby landowners incident to the public improvement are not compensable . 23 ALR4th 674 , 684 ( 1981 ) . The courts look for unduly lengthy interference with use of the property or business on the property ; physical damage to the property or permanent — depreciation of the property . 23 ALR4*;, 637-8 . 5 A minority of the state courts have allowed recovery for damages resulting from temporary conditions incident to public improvements . 23 ALR4th 683 . In Filler v . Minot , 281 N.W .2d 237 (N.D. 1979) , the Court stated that even temporary interference with access to a landowners property during construction of a public improvement is a taking compensable in eminent domain where access to the property is totally cut off , though temporarily. RJG _ z /K /.6 _ 1:4-1 Y / • 6 -(„. S� C I TY O F /4 /.? 3 \ k cHANBAssEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 June 2 , 1988 Mr. Dan Sershen 6951 Redwing Lane Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Dan: Thank you for you recent phone call concerning speeders on Kerber Boulevard. As I indicated to you on the phone, it is extremely difficult to handle all of the traffic complaints received in this office due to our limited resources . However , I have asked that the deputy on duty during his spare time run radar on Kerber Boulevard in an effort to slow down the problem traffic . Please continue to call when you have a complaint and we will do everything in our power to address it. incerely, /Lw' im Chaffee � ic � `1,-,, / el Public Safety Director JC:v CC: Don Ashworth / L Scott Harr ^.� ✓e- d P.P, �� v 4,(1 1 C 1 TY F 1 S NEASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (M 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Dale Gregory, Fire Chief Jerry Boucher , Utility Superintendent FROM: Gary Warren, Director of Public Works 44 DATE: June 3 , 1988 SUBJ: Ground Storage Reservoir Disinfection/Filling File No. 86-3 This memo is to inform you that the ground storage reservoir painting has been completed as of Friday , June 3 , 1988 . Allowing for proper curing time indicates that we will plan on disin- - fecting the tank on Monday, June 13 , 1988 . The contractor has accepted the Fire Department ' s proposal for reimbursement of $500 for the equipment and $12. 50 per hour per man. You should plan on a minimum of four to six hours and possibly the entire day for the disinfection. Likewise, the equipment should be such that you can reach to an 80-foot height with the water spray. Immediately after disinfection , we will proceed with the filling of the ground storage reservoir . This will be carefully coor- dinated with the system usage and the elevation of the water in the 100 ,000 gallon elevated tank downtown. Depending on the system usage and weather conditions , I would anticipate that it will take us from three to five days to fill the new reservoir . It goes without saying that we will not take the 100 ,000 gallon tank out of service until later in the month when we are satisfied that the new reservoir is properly on-line to meet system demand. Please notify the respective personnel in your department of the above schedule and prepare accordingly for these events . cc: Don Ashworth , City Manager Jerry Schlenk , Street Superintendent City Council Administrative Packet dated 6/13/88 r _ 1 °tf ; ; }.� i. c .�1 'tea- �1 t7.. i i '_43itslii $ ix, _c_d- , .,..,....... .:,,.,.:„.„...,..,„. — i�`Ltp �. 'rr� .yxr l� SY... /�// /r gl'` ."4—.1' . ® . a: Stalli" n / ry 1(.{ _,!. try / O` ;�n `' Am20* 10,0r line n:n, /t le- /' !(J,z < 2 d -c.� y _I c S 3030 Harbor Lane North bib G..1.44 or/ A c .---.'/ J- . /�+ i Bldg.II,Suite 104 1. /t Z Q I.-Q ,. , Minneapolis, MN 55447-2175 /%.ii ,.S , 61...r,..� l-/y ,[l1"�� 6 1 215 53-1 9 5 0 ,�, c-- c..�,-..,f.�}'c —.-i-k- `� " ilt MEMORANDUM A TO : Lori Sietsema cwrc�,-f f...,...C.` A,rQ_f. FROM: Mark Koegler f� — DATE : May 2 , 1988 C/1 /eg SUBJECT: South Lotus Lake Park As a follow up to our meeting on April 29 , 1988 , I have summarized the maintenance items at South Lotus Lake Park that we — discussed . The attached plan graphically identifies each of the items . Upper Area 1 . Add topsoil , rake and seed parking lot islands . — 2 . Deep ruts in the pond area were caused by NSP during transformer installation . Previous conversations with Gary Warren indicated that NSP was going to repair the damage . The City might want to consider contacting NSP to see if a cash payment in lieu of repair is possible since City crews will be working in the same general area . — 3 . Remove silt from the upper pond area near the drainage structure . Create a rip rap pond area in the vicinity of the outlet structure . A porous plastic weed barrier could be used — under the rock to reduce ongoing maintenance . 4 . Along South Shore Drive , the Bloomberg Companies recently constructed a berm . The shape of the berm may need to be modified to allow easier mowing . 5 . Consider placement of the park sign along the right side of — the upper parking lot entrance off of South Shore Drive . If budget allows , plantings are recommended around the base of the sign . Lower Area 1 . Top soil and seed should be added along the west side . 2 . A number of people have driven over the large island area next to the lift station . In order to discourage this from occurring in the future , it is recommended that this area be sodded and that two or three trees ( possibly green ash ) be brought in from the tree farm. If people see an established turf area with trees , they are less likely to drive over the area . If this problem persists , bollards may be necessary to provide a permanent barrier . 3 . Silt should be removed from the small island on the north side and rip rap should be installed . Sod could be placed along the south side adjacent to the elderly/handicapped parking space . 4 . Weeds around the pond area need to be cut . 5 . Damaged signs should be repaired or replaced . 6 . Along the east side of the access turn around next to the pond , grade a "bench " area and add rip rap to the edge of the pavement . 7 . After completion of the above items , the parking and driving areas should be swept and re- striped . General Comments In the early planning stages of South Lotus Lake Park , the landscaping budget was reduced resulting in smaller and fewer plants . If nursery stock is available at the tree farm , trees should be planted along both sides of the boat access entrance road . Additional plantings in the upper portion of the park should also be added if material is available . As soon as Dale gets additional summer help and they begin work , I would be glad to drop by the site and review these suggestions . Sf — CITY OF 67,, 1 c.c. p�_�� cEA1HAssEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 POLICE PASS ON ' S May 26 , 1988 Lake Ann Park and South Lotus Lake Park : Once again this summer the responsibility for the gate openings and closings will fall on Public Safety. The gates to both Lake Ann and South Lotus Lake Parks will be manned by _ students at different hours all through the week during the summer beginning immediately. It will fall upon us to make sure that the gates are opened at 0600 hours and closed at 2200 hours. There will be times when the gate attendant will have already opened the gates but we must check daily to ensure that they are being opened at the proper time . This is a daily activity that must be logged. There will be occasions at Lake Ann Park when a ballgame may go over 2200 hours , but the Park and Recreation Department tells me that everyone should be out of the park by 2230 hours . Please use your discretion during these times. OPEN CLOSE South Lotus Lake Park: 0600 2200 Lake Ann Park: 0600 2200 IMPORTANT NOTE: Please keep in mind that the Lake Ann gate attendant will be collecting park fees at the gate and on busy days a substantial amount of money could be collected. The attendant is to deposit the bank bag with the days receipts in the depository at city hall . It would be nice if the on duty deputy could drop by periodically to see if the attendant needs any help. Greenwood Shores Park: Please check and log frequently throughout the summer especially during evening and nighttime hours. Park Reservation Forms : The Park and Recreation division of the City of Chanhassen has implemented a park reservation form of which we will be receiving a copy. I am placing these forms on a clip board which will be left in the deputy' s office. These forms indicate a contact person and the organization that is reserving the park. If there are any problems associated with the park involving these organizations , this information will be readily available for — the deputy' s use. These forms were prompted in part by a problem we had last year at Lake Susan involving a large party and damage done to the park. Police Pass On ' s May 26 , 1988 p. 2 Sprinkling restrictions: The sprinkling restrictions that were established by the city council last year are still in effect and should be enforced. I have attached a flyer with the code for citations if one needs to be issued. Hopefully a warning will suffice . Speed/traffic problems on W. 78th St . : Please run radar frequently on W. 78th St . especially near St . Huberts Church . Enforce all traffic regulations and note these activities on your log sheets. NOTE: Please log these areas of special attention. When a citizen calls it is always nice to be able to inform them that we have been keeping an "eye" on these problems and to tell them the frequency of the checks, be it radar , residential patrol , or park checks to name a few. Thank-you for your cooperation and continued fine work. Sincerely, im Chaffe Public Safety Director • CITY OF CHANHASSEN - � G\, . 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY MEMORANDUM TO: Gate Attendants fe °- FROM: Todd Hoffman , Recreation Supervisor DATE: June 1 , 1988 SUBJ: Lake Ann Gate Procedures Effective today , June 1 , 1988 , you are not required to transport your money bag from Lake Ann Park to City Hall at closing time. Instead, you are to call the Carver County Sheriff ' s Department at 448-2111 and they will pick up your money bag . You should call approximately 10 minutes prior to your anticipated closing time. When calling , identify yourself by name, explain that you work at Lake Ann Park and are ready for the money bag to be picked up. Make sure that you have your shift report complete before calling for pick up. New locking money bags are now being used. When you pick up your money bag at City Hall to begin your shift the bag will be locked. The keys for the bags will be secured to the inside of the gate house. There are three keys , one of them will fit your money bag. You then can open your bag to start your shift ( the key cannot be removed when the bag is open ) . After your shift , seal all money ( except the $20 . 00 change) and your shift report in a labeled envelope, enclose it, the $20 . 00 change and all remaining park stickers in the money bag and lock it. You are then ready to call the Sheriff ' s Department. If there is ever a situation when a deputy is not available to pick up the money bag , you are then responsible for depositing it at City Hall. 4�04e4. , ,? OF LAKESGTOs A CHAPTER OF THE G i O CSOCIA i/ON 7/3/r(C e Barbara Dacy City of Chanhassen P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen,Mn. 55317 May 26 , 1988 Dear Mrs . Dacy Thank you for the opportunity of holding our 1987 Classic Auto show in Chanhassen. Both Hooked On Classics and our Land of Lakes GTO club felt that the show was a great success . We att- racted approximately 1 , 500 people to the area during the day, and heard many positive comments from Chanhassen businesses . Our 1988 show is scheduled for Sunday August 14 , 1988 in the Hooked On Classics parking lot,and the lot in front of the adjoining mall . The show will be scheduled from 8 :00 AM.- 5 :00 PM. We expect aroud 150 to 200 show cars,and approximately 1 , 500 to 2,000 spectators . We organized a set-up and clean-up procedure last year that worked well , and will be instituted again this year.Traffic leaving the show will be monitoried by our club also. Thanks again for sharing your area with us,and we urge you to join us at our 2n annual show.Please contact me at 475-2770 if I may supply you with additional information. Respectfully Yours , cI Kevin P. DeWitte Land Of Lakes GTOs MAY 2 7 1988 CITY OF CHANhASSFN 6 -/3-Ye C ITY OF CHANHASSEN' - � G 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 June 3 , 1988 Mr. Carl Hoffstedt MnDOT District 5 _ 2055 No. Lilac Drive Golden Valley, MN 55422 Dear Mr . Hoffstedt: This is to follow up on your memorandum dated April 29 , 1988 , regarding the TH 212 Technical Committee. Please place my name and Gary Warren, City Engineer , as Chanhassen' s representative to the Technical Committee for TH 212 . Should you need further information please feel free to contact me . S ' cere , e. arbara Dacy City Planner BD:v • CITY of ( . CHANHASSEN - � G 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 June 3, 1988 Pastor Nate Castens Family of Christ Lutheran Church P.O. Box 388 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Nate: I just wanted to let you know that I have received your note on the continuing problems with traffic and safety concerns at your corner. I have also received a copy of the letter from MnDOT in response to your concerns. As it would appear, the powers at MnDOT are not in favor of our concerns. At the present time, I have taken no action to replace the no parking sign in front of your church, although I believe it is just a matter of time before it will have to be replaced. Addressing your particular concerns on the speed in the area, we will attempt to do everything in our power to control it. Unfortunately we only have one deputy serving the City of Chanhassen and that deputy's time is taken up by a lot of reactive responses. Running radar in your location, or for that matter any location in the City, is a proactive stance. As you may or may not be aware, we did attempt to run radar during rush hour times on West 78th Street, both in the morning and in the afternoons. Your particular request of consistent patrolling from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. is a nice idea and hopefully we will be able to pro- vide some level of patrol in that area during those times. Please continue to keep me posted on the problems regarding traffic in your area. I will do everything within my power and the resources of this office to help alleviate the unfavorable traffic conditions in your area. Sincerely, im Chaffee lic Safety Director JC:k Attachment: Memo from Gary Warren dated June 1, 1988 cc: 1Don:Ashw►orth, City Manager CITYOF CHANHASSEN \sk, 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director FROM: Gary Warren , City Engineer DATE: June 1 , 1988 SUBJ: No Parking Sign , Great Plains Blvd. and West 78th Street File No. 86-11A-5 Attached is correspondence received from Mr. Chuck Weichselbaum, District State Aid Engineer, concerning the Minnesota Department of Transportation ' s request that the City reestablish the missing no-parking sign in front of old St. Hubert ' s Church. The State ' s rationale for the necessity of the no-parking sign is well- founded, as documented in their April 20 , and May 18 , 1988 correspondence (attached) . I have therefore directed public works staff to reinstall the no-parking sign and I would look to your department to enforce this no-parking restriction consistent with City policies. As you I believe are aware , we will be painting a designated crosswalk at the west and north side of this intersection to assist with pedestrian crossing and will also be installing _ pedestrian crossing signs on West 78th Street to assist with delineation of this area. I believe that these measures will sufficiently address the concerns for this location. Attachments: 1 . April 20 , 1988 correspondence from MnDOT 2 . May 18 , 1988 correspondence from MnDOT cc: Don Ashworth, City Manager Jerry Schlenk, Street Superintendent C. E. Weichselbaum, MnDOT Larry McKenzie, MnDOT /1":ktANESO _ go- Minnesota la Department of Transportation a District 5 �, 2055 No. Lilac Drive ofO Golden Valley. Minnesota 55422 — (612)593- 8408 April 20 , 1988 Nate Castens, Pastor Family of Christ Lutheran Church P. 0. Box 388 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: C.S. 1010 (T.H. 101 ) At Great Plains Boulevard Dear Pastor Castens : This letter is in response to the concerns you stated in your April 5th letter. You requested the all-way stop condition at T.H. 101 and Great Plains Boulevard be reinstalled and parking be permitted in front of the church. Let me address the stop condition first. The old intersection at this location prior to construction carried two main streets through the community. Heavy vehicle and pedestrian traffic volumes justified an all-way stop. As you are aware, this condition no longer exists. Great Plains Boulevard across from the church is now the only part of the intersection that remains and it is a local street with a fairly low volume of traffic. When a request like yours is made, Mn/DOT must try to look at the intersection using uniform criteria employed at all other intersections on trunk highways throughout the state. We have standards that are reviewed and requirements that must be met . Mn/DOT must also abide by federal rules and regulations when considering an installation of an all-way stop. The inconvenience of the major street must be considered as well as the needs for the minor street. Our guidelines come from the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways which is authorized by the Federal Highway Administration. Some of the conditions we must meet to justify an all-way stop are: " . . .total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any eight hours of an average day and the combined vehicles and pedestrian volume from the minor street or highway must average at least 200 units per hour for the same eight hours, with an average delay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour. . . 11 An Equal Opportunity Employer f Nate Castens, Pastor April 21 , 1988 Page 2 • The manual also states all-way stop installations "should ordinarily be used only where the- volume of traffic on the intersecting roads is approximately equal . " An unjustified stop sign tends to breed disrespect for all stop controls. We also find a much higher violation rate for unwarranted stop signs . Because of the above noted conditions and requirements, we feel very strongly that an all-way stop condition at this location is not warranted. A review of the location on April 13th revealed that a No Parking Sign appears to be missing approximately 75 ' east of the center line of Great Plains Boulevard. My understanding is this is where the zone should end on eastbound T.H. 101 . The reason this location was picked was to allow eastbound • traffic to bypass other eastbound traffic turning left onto Great Plains Boulevard. This restriction ends approximately 100 ' east of Pauly ' s . If the restriction were removed, it would add four or five vehicles to the parking on the south • side of the street, and it would have the potential of disrupting eastbound traffic every time a vehicle was parked in this area . We feel this restriction should be a 24-hour-a-day, 7 days-a-week restriction. You stated there will be a painted crosswalk at this location. I assume that the City must be planning to do this work. Pedestrian crossing signs would certainly be appropriate at this location as well as possibly restricting parking in the northeast corner of this intersection. We will pursue these matters with the City. What we are not able to do is justify the installation of flashing lights at the location. Our budgets are limited and must be prioritized to stretch them as far as possible. If the City feels the flashing lights would be appropriate and has the funds, or if the church has the money available for this project, Mn/DOT is willing to work with you in developing a plan and processing the required permits for the installation. Sincerely, C CALlotr:4416:444 C. E. Weichselbaum, P.E. District State Aid Engineer 0. 0$HESO4 Minnesota t Department of Transportation r District 5 2055 No. Lilac Drive OF MPa Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 (612)593-8408 May 18, 1988 Gary Warren, City Engineer City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: C. S . 1010 (T.H. 101 ) at Great Plains Boulevard Dear Mr. Warren: _ Attached is a letter I received from Pastor Castens of the Family of Christ Lutheran Church and my response to him. In my letter, I commented on a missing NO PARKING sign in front of the church and why it is important to Mn/DOT that it be maintained at this location. I am requesting that the city reestablish this restriction. I understand that you have discussed this matter and other items of my April 20 , 1988 letter with Larry McKenzie of our traffic office and that the city will look into these other items as well . Please let me know what action the city decides to take , if any. Sincerely, C. E . Weichselbaum, P . E . District State Aid Engineer CITY OF CHANHASSEN .11NO7LD MAY 19 1988 ENGINEERING DEPT. An Equal Opportunity Employer 44_ s..„}- TY OF Celliriliraglii1:11:1/ 1:: _ 1 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 POLICE PASS ON ' S June 3 , 1988 SPEEDING COMPLAINTS: The following roadways have had numerous complaints regarding speeding vehicles: Lake Riley Blvd Pleasantview Rd W. 78th St. Kings Rd Kerber Blvd Please patrol frequently taking enforcement action when necessary. NO PARKING SIGNS ON W. 78th ST : The "no parking" sign has been replaced along W. 78th ST , across from St. Huberts. Please take enforcement action for compliance with the signs along W. 78th St , near the church and Pauly' s. SOUTH LOTUS LAKE ACCESS: There is to be no boat trailer parking on South Shore Dr , South Shore Court, and Hill Street , near the Boat Access. Please issue citations (not warnings ) to all violators. Since the trailer is actually the vehicle in violation, issue the ticket to the trailer but please make note on the ticket, the towing vehicle plate number . Please continue to issue tickets to all vehicle violations in the parking area itself , especially for vehicles parked on the grass. 7404 FRONTIER TR : On Sunday, June 5 , there will be approximately 50 cars parked near 7404 Frontier Tr . The residents at that address have been given permission to park guests on one side of the street only from 1400 hours to 2200 hours (approx) . If there are problems please contact Kathleen or Patrick Bauer , 934-9618 . Sincerely, Jim Chaf Public S fety Director cc/Capt Bob Pagelkopf , CCSO Don Ashworth, City Manager AGENDA PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION TUESDAY, JUNE 14 , 1988 , 7 : 30 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE Please Call Lori at 937-1900 if You Will be Absent or if You Will be Late 1 . Call to order . 2 . Approval of Minutes . Old Business 3 . Revised Parking Plan for Greenwood Shores . 4 . Review Revised 5-Year CIP. 5 . Review Request to Seed Hockey Rinks . 6 . Review Carver Beach Park. New Business 7 . Request to Remove Seaweed and Water Lilies at Carver Beach. 8 . Review Park Maintenance Staff Needs , Dale Gregory. 9 . Site Plan Reviews : a . Ches Mar Farms b . Hidden Valley Commission Presentations 10 . a. Park Naming Contest b. Weekly Feature Park. Administrative Presentations 11 . Memo from Jim Chaffee. 12 . Establish Commission Schedule to City Council Meetings . t/r' /�� CITY OF ,, , 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director FROM: Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Director DATE: June 1 , 1988 SUBJ: Employment Law Institute On May 25 and 26 , 1988 , I attended the 5th Annual Upper Midwest Employment Law Institute. This was an excellent opportunity for — me to acquire current information on a variety of employment law issues , including: - The new Minnesota Drug and Alcohol Testing Statute - A "Mini Trial" - the examination and cross examination of a personnel director - Handling defamation and privacy claims — - Termination decisions and procedures - A review of recent settlements and jury awards - The latest developments regarding Aids in the workplace - Retention, destruction and dissemination of personnel file information and other employee data - Negligent hiring, retaliatory firing and other new employment claims - EEOC and Minnesota Department of Human Rights update - When and how to use separation agreements - New developments in the expanding area of sexual harassment liability Considering the rapid growth that our city is experiencing, our new CSO' s starting, etc. , this was a most timely and beneficial workshop. �(f v v ,S,/4 CITYOF CHANHASSEN - G 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 r y ay A:.f• Pi June 7 , 1988 _ • Charitable Gambling Board Room N-475 Griggs-Midway Building 1821 University Ave r , 6/f3/ss. St . Paul , Mn. 55104-3383 cc- ti41 . To Whom it May Concern: The Chanhassen American Legion , Post 580 , has applied for a charitable gambling license and have so notified this municipality. Although they will not have met the 30 day waiting requirement as allowed by law, they have met all other local requirements. It is our intent to waive the 30 day waiting requirement . Please call me if you have any questions regarding this application . Sincerely, im Chaffe ublic Safety Director _ fay C-' �.l-C �^ t9111rL,,, >- Charitable GamblingControl Board "`°L^ � FOR BOARD USE ONLY Room N-475 Griggs-Midway Building License Number A _ 1821 University Avenue Paul,St. Minnesota55104-3383 %-•)1 (612) 642-0555 PAID CHECK# DATE GAMBLING LICENSE APPLICATION _ INSTRUCTIONS: A. Type or print in ink. B. Take completed application to local governing body,obtain signature and date on all copies, and leave 1 copy. Applicant keeps 1 copy and sends original to the above address with a check. C. Incomplete applications will be returned. Type of Application: (Class A - Fee $100.00(Bingo, Raffles, Paddlewheels,Tipboards,Pull-tabs) t�,Class B - Fee S 50.00(Raffles, Paddlewheels,Tipboards, Pull-tabs) Make checks payable to: - ❑Class C - Fee S 50.00(Bingo only) Minnesota Charitable Gambing Control Board ❑Class D - Fee S 25.00(Raffles only) 41Yes❑No 1. Is this application fora renewal? If yes,give complete license number .^' - � 774`^- EYes(1No 2. If this is not an application for a renewal, has organization been licensed by the Board before? If yes,give base license number(middle five digits) ')Yes: :No 3. Have Internal Controls been submitted previously?If no, please attach copy. '4. Applicant(Official, legal name of organization) 5. Business Address of Organization 6. City, State,Zip �_ 7. County 8. Business Phone Number L . - 9. Type of organization: ❑Fraternal 2Veterans OReligious ❑Other nonprofit* 'If organization is an"other nonprofit"organization,answer questions 10 through 13.If not,go to question 14. "Other nonprofit"organizations must document its tax-exempt status. EYes L,No 10. Is organization incorporated as a nonprofit organization?If yes,give number assigned to Articles or page and book number: Attach copy of certificate. EYes I No 11. Are articles filed with the Secretary of State? EYes_:No 12. Are articles filed with the County? EYes ]No 13. Is organization exempt from Minnesota or Federal income tax?If yes,please attach letter from IRS or Department of Revenue declaring exemption or copy of 990 or 990T. DYes'No 14. Has license ever been denied,suspended or revoked?If yes,check all that apply: CDenied . ❑Suspended ERevoked Give date: -15. Number of active members 16. Number of years in existence Note: If less than four years,attach evidence of three years • ._ existence. / 17. Name of Chief Executive Officer 18. Name of treasurer or person who accounts for other revenues �/.• of the organization. .4:e" Title Title Business Phone Number Business Phone Number - -1 - - 19. Name of establishment where gambling will be 20. Street address (not P.O. Box Number) ,,conducted / 21. City,State,Zip 22. County(where gambling premises is located) ' /1 . ./f CG-0001-02(8/86) White Copy-Board Canary-Applicant Pink-Local Governing Body - Gambling License Application Page 2 Type of Application: El Class A Class B ❑Class C CI Class D Yes El]No 23. Is gambling premises located within city limits? - Yes[iNo 24. Are all gambling activities conducted at the premises listed in #19 of this application? If not, complete a separate application for each premises (except raffles)as a separate license is required for each premises. ElYes❑No 25. Does organization own the gambling premises?If no,attach copy of the lease with terms of at least one year. ❑Yes❑No 26. Does the organization lease the entire premises?If no,attach a sketch of 27. Amount of Monthly Rent the premises indicating what portion is being leased.A lease and sketch $ is not required for Class D applications. ❑Yes❑No 28. Do you plan on conducting bingo with this license? If yes,give days and times of bingo occasions: Days Times - 7Yes❑No 29. Has the $10,000 fidelity bond required by Minnesota Statutes 349.20 been obtained?Attach copy of bond. 30. Insurance Company Name _ 31. Bond Number 32. Lessor Name /f 33. Address 34. City, State,Zip 35. Gambling Manager Name 36. Address 37. City,State,Zip - 38. Gambling Manager Business Phone 39. Date gambling manager became ( I _ member of organization: r • _ — GAMBLING SITE AUTHORIZATION By my signature below, local law enforcement officers or agents of the Board are hereby authorized to enter upon the site, at any time, gambling is being conducted, to observe the gambling and to enforce the law for any unauthorized game or practice. BANK RECORDS AUTHORIZATION By my signature below,the Board is hereby authorized to inspect the bank records of the General Gambling Bank Account whenever necessary to fulfill requirements of current gambling rules and law. OATH - I hereby declare that: 1. I have read this application and all information submitted to the Board; 2. All information submitted is true, accurate and complete; 3. All other required information has been fully disclosed - 4. I am the chief executive officer of the organization; 5. I assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful operation of all activities to be conducted; 6. I will familiarize myself with the laws of the State of Minnesota respecting gambling and rules of the Board and agree, if licensed,to abide by those laws and rules, including amendments thereto. - 40. Official, Legal Name of Organization 41. Signature (must be signed by Chief Executive Officer) X Title of Signer • Date s, • , ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE BY LOCAL GOVERNING BODY I hereby acknowledge receipt of a copy of this application. By acknowledging receipt, I admit having been served with notice that this application will be reviewed by the Charitable Gambling Control Board and if approved by the board, will become effective 30 days from the date of receipt (noted below), unless a resolution of the local governing body is passed which specifically disallows such activity and a copy of that resolution is received by the Charitable Gambling Control Board within 30 days of the below noted date. - 42. Name of City or County(Local Governing Body) If site is located within a township,item 43 must be completed, in addition to the county signature. Signature of person receiving application 43. Name of Township X Title Date received (30 day period Signature of person receiving application - begins from this date) — • _ X 44. Name of Person delivering application to Local Governing Body Title i , .. - CG-0001-02 (8/86) White Copy-Board Canary-Applicant Pink-Local Governing Body CI TY QF c, f i( CHANHASSEN - � G 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 June 3 , 1988 Carver County Public Works Attn : Mr . Roger Gustafson County Engineer Carver County Courthouse 600 East 4th Street Chaska, MN 55318 Re: County Road 14 ( Pioneer Trail) Construction File No. PW137 Dear Roger : As you are aware , the City Council approved the County' s construction plans for County State Aid Highway 14 from Trunk Highway 101 to Hennepin County Line at its May 9 , 1988 City Council meeting . Enclosed are Resolution No. 88-41 and 88-42 which deal with the approval of plans and specifications and the no parking restrictions , respectively. The installation and costs associated with the signage for the no parking zones we presume will be the County' s obligation. In addition , we would request that the number of signs needed for identifying the no parking zones would be kept to a minimum so as to reduce the "eye pollution" on this roadway. Given the Mounds View Williams Pipeline disaster , it is my understanding that any pipelines which are moved by Williams Pipeline will be accomplished through usage of "new pipe" for that section requiring the move. Williams Pipeline also has stated that they will hydrostatically test the existing pipe when it is taken down for repairs . Since the actual plan for reloca- tion of Williams Pipeline was not a part of your construction documents , I request that prior to the initiation of construction that Williams Pipeline provide the County and the City of Chanhassen with their proposal for movement of this line so that we can be assured that proper precautions and techniques are uti- lized. I look forward to hearing further from you on this issue. Roger Gustafson June 3 , 1988 Page 2 Sincerely , CITY OF CHANHASSEN — 1 . 444 4 G B arren , P.E. Ci • ineer GGW:ktm Attachments : Resolution No. 88-41 and 88-42 — cc: Don Ashworth , City Managers' Al Klingelhutz , County Commissioner Roger Knutson , City Attorney — Larry Brown , Staff Engineer - F CITYOF 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director DATE: June 2 , 1988 SUBJ: Authorization to Take Quotes for Inspection Vehicle and CSO Vehicle As you are aware, the 1988 budget included funding for the purchase of 2 inspection vehicles. The first vehicle was purchased earlier in the year and is being utilitized by the Engineering Department. The second vehicle, which we hope to purchase shortly, will be used for the recent employment of the two new CSO' s . In addition, on March 28 , 1988 , the City Council approved the purchase of a support vehicle for the new Plumbing and Heating Inspector. Per our discussions , we are prepared to move ahead with the taking of bids for the support vehicles . The attached specifica- tions for the four wheel drive vehicle were taken exactly from the 4 x 4 Engineering vehicle that was purchased earlier in the year. This vehicle would be utilized by the Building Inspection Department consistent with their needs to access off roadway construction areas . My intent at this time is to purchase a CSO sedan that will be marked similar to the CSO truck. The sedan, as a marked unit, will serve as a double duty vehicle - first and primarily as CSO vehicle, but secondarily as an enforcement vehicle for Scott Harr or myself to use when we will be in uniform supplementing the County contract. In the interest of time and consistency, we have listed for specification a vehicle similar to the presnet Public Safety Director' s vehicle. r1c4 ;t Gy �ndars — CITY OF CHANHASSEN June, 1988 SPECIFICATIONS PUBLIC SAFETY CSO SEDAN 1 . Wheel Base 110 maximum 2 . Engine V-6 fuel injected 3 . Steering Power 4 . Brakes Heavy Duty Power Disc 5 . Transmission 5 speed automatic 6 . Tires 4 P195/75R14 All season 7 . Air Conditioning Standard 8 . Lighting Standard 9 . Heater Standard 10 . Seat Belts Standard 11 . Glass Tinted 12 . Windshield wiper Intermittent 13 . Paint color Light blue 14 . Defroster Standard plus rear window 15 . Door locks Standard 16 . Radio AM/FM Stereo 17 . Spare tire Limited service 18 . Seats Cloth split bench 19 . Trunk Auto Release CITY OF CHANHASSEN SPECIFICATIONS PUBLIC SAFETY 4 x 4 VEHICLE 1 . Wheel Base 100 . 5 maximum 2 . Engine 2 . 9L EFI V-6 maximum with block heater 3 . Steering Power 4 . Brakes Power - Disc/Drum 5 . Transmission 5 speed automatic 6 . Transfer case 2 speed Transfer case-option Touch drive electric 7 . Tires 4 P195/7515 All season 8 . Front axle capacity 2 ,750# maximum 9 . Rear axle capacity 2 , 700# maximum -- 10 . Ground Clearance 6 .3 inch minimum 11 . Air conditioning Standard 12 . Lighting Standard 13 . Heater Standard 14. Seat Belts Standard 15 . Tools Standard tools and jack 16 . Glass Tinted 17 . Windshield wiper Intermittent/rear wiper washer 18 . Paint color Light blue 19 . Defroster Standard plus rear window 20 . Door locks Power 21. Radio Standard 22 . Tailgate Flip open rear window 23 . Spare tire Limited service Zvi (y- . fl CITY OF r--- CHANHASSEN - � G 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 June 7 , 1988 Mr. Jack Melby 40 Hill Street Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Melby: Attached please find a punch list of work items to be undertaken by the Park Department in concert with Public Works/Public Safety. I believe the list includes all items noted in your letter of June 1 , 1988 as well as those being recommended by staff members . Thank you again. Sincerely, - Cif/ Cam, Don Ashworth City Manager DA:k cc: Mayor and City Council Lotus Lake Homeowners Association June 1 , 1988 Tom Hamilton - Mayor Dale Geving - Councilman Clark Horn - Councilman Bill Boyt - Councilman Jay Johnson - Councilman Barbara Dacy - City Planner Lori Sietsema - Park and Recreation Jim Chaffee - Safety Commissioner Don Ashworth - City Manager Lotus Lake Home Owners Assoc . I am again writing to you to inform you of the problems associated with the South Lotus Lake boat access and Park. Please address the following: . The Park is over grown with weeds and needs clean up. . The holding pond is unsightly and needs clean up. . The Bloomberg property is over grown with weeds and dead brush is unsightly and needs to be cleaned up. . Park rules are not being followed or enforced. (Alcohol , pets etc . ) . The dock needs to be moved inside the park to give the Melby' s some relief from the noise and increase their privacy. . The promised night light has not been installed. . The Carver Beach access is still open and used heavily. It must be closed. . Toilet should be moved inside the park or enclosed, like the one on Christmas Lake . Ja k Melby %/° ii S , ' c1998 CITY OF CHAwr.,,J,,• .• c4,/, C I TY O F LCHANHASSEN' „,,,, 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Lori Sietsema, Park and Recreation Coordinator / — DATE: June 2 , 1988 SUBJ: Concerns Regarding South Lotus Lake Boat Access Recently we have received a number of calls and letters regarding South Lotus Lake Boat access ( see attached memo from Jim Chaffee and letter from Jack Melby) . I wanted to bring you up to date as to what staff is doing about the residents concerns and bringing the site up to Chanhassen' s park standards . Dale Gregory and I met with Mark Koegler to prepare a punch list of what needs to be done to get the park to a groomed state. Attached please find that punch list. Many of the items included pertain to the residents concerns . Although we would have liked to have all of these things done immediately, it just is not possible until the summer workers are in place ( after June 9th) . Some of the work; however, has been completed: - Topsoil has been placed where needed and new seed planted on both upper and lower levels . - The deep ruts in the upper pond area have been removed. - The shape of the berm along South Shore Drive has been modified to accommodate mowing. - Damaged signs have been removed and new ones ordered. Below I have addressed the concerns noted by residents: - Grass seed has been replanted. - The lower holding pond to the east of the access is likely to have water standing in it most of the time. Wetland vegetation has already begun to grow in that area, which will make the pond more attractive and aids filtering. Mr . Don Ashworth June 2 , 1988 Page 2 - The Satellite can be moved back from the edge of the road, but not so that it is hidden where it would be susceptible to vandalism. Also, to ensure that it is used instead of the wooded area, it should remain in the lower portion of the park. - "No Boat Trailer" signs have been placed along the streets. - Officers are patrolling on a regular basis and a park attendant is on duty to inform park and access users of the park and lake rules . - Park attendants or Carver County Deputies will be opening the gate at 6 : 00 a.m. and closing it at 10 : 00 p.m. daily to enforce park hours . - The holding ponds have been repaired after last years big storm and will filter the runoff before it enters the lake. - The City has requested NSP to install a night light. - The fence was installed to meet the normal water level. The water level is low at this point, so the fence appears short. - Bloomberg Companies owns the land adjacent to the gate area. Fred Oeschlager indicated that they would be interested in putting something in that area to prevent people from driving around the gate when closed. - The existing park signs currently state that no pets are allowed in the park. Park attendants will report viola- tors to the Carver County Sheriff' s Department. - The lake was dredged last fall as part of the disaster clean up as a result of the July storms . - Buoys have been ordered and will soon be installed in the narrow part of the lake . I believe this covers most of the concerns mentioned to date. I will be working with Dale and Mark to get these items completed as soon as possible. + sa May 2 , 1988 Tom Hamilton - Mayor Dale Geving - Councilman Clark Horn - Councilman Bill Boyt - Councilman Jay Johnson - Councilman Barbara Dacy - City Planner Lori Sietsema - Park and Recreation Don Ashworth ? - City Manager Lotus Lake Home Owners Assoc. The purpose of this letter is to inform you of several important issues that council needs to address relative to the South Lotus Lake Park and Public access and the major drainage ditches that enter into Lotus Lake. In it 's current state, the park and access are incomplete and in need of repair. - The grass seed planted last year has not taken leaving the park unsightly and open to severe erosion and a threat to Lotus Lake. - The holding pond is over grown with weeds and is unsightly. It contains stagnant water and will be a breeding site for mosquitoes . - The portable bathroom is unsighlty and when the wind is right changes the quality of the air in a dramatic fashion. That facility should be set back further into the park (South) where it can be hidden by trees and the odor contained. Much to my disappointment the DNR has changed its mind in mid stream and left the City and the Park neighbors holding the "Bag" relative to control , use and safety issues for boat access and the lake. At this stage all I can offer is what was discussed at the Council Meeting on 4/25/88 . - Put "No Parking" signs along residential streets - Have Public Safety officers patrol both the park and the lake to enforce . Park hours . Park rules . Parking rules . Prevent Park, boat access and lake abuse and danger to neighbors and users. So far this year we have not had heavy rains and the strength and quality of the South end drainage facilities have not been tested. My experience has been that during heavy rains large amounts of DEBRIS are entering into Lotus Lake from all drainage areas and large amounts of silt are entering from: - the Public access ditch - The Eden Prairie Hwy. 101 ditch C Page 2 After rains of moderate to heavy volume, silt and debris have made my beach unusable for swimming. The water takes on an oily film and the silt settles to the bottom about 15 ' out from the shore and forms a sticky layer of goo about 3" deep . A more effective method of cleansing of filtering the water run off is needed. The park and access are now being used year round . During the winter months there is constant activity from ice fishermen, snowmobiles , A. T.V. users , skaters , skiers , sliders etc. During the summer months its pleasure boaters and fisherman. On weekends pleasure boaters arrive Friday and some will stay most of the night ( 2 : 00-3 : OOAM) . When they leave fisherman begin arriving about 4 : 00AM. There is constant traffic and noise. Obviously weekends and Holidays are the worst but the activity goes on every day. You must remember that the park is an urban one. So far there seems to be no relief for the neighbors of the park other than policing and enforcing park rules . We are kept awake late at night and awakened early in the morning all the days of the week. Trespassing by people and their animals has started, is increasing and is now a real concern. An all night light is needed at the access to discourage partiers , improve safety for late night park users and hopefully discourage trespassers and potential vandals . In summary, please address the following : - The physical appearance of the Park . Plant grass or sod . Move the satellite into the park . Please move the public dock to the Southwest of the access to reduce noise and increase privacy for the Melby family - Install no parking signs where appropriate and enforce by ticketing violators - Patrol the park and the lake on weekends and other peak periods and ticket violators - Improve the purifying capabilities of all drainage entrances to Lotus Lake to remove oil , silt and other pollutants - Install a night light at the access - Increase the length of the chain link fence on the North side (Melby) of the park to go into the water to prevent trespass by park users and their animals . Thank you for attending to these matters . 4i a Mb Y 40 Hill S . , Chanhassen CITYOF , CHANHASSEN' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Lori Sietsema, Park and Recreation Coordinator Gary Warren, City Engineer FROM: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director DATE: May 24 , 1988 SUBJ: South Lotus Lake Boat Access In her capacity as the President of the Lotus Lake Homeowners Association, I received a call from Cindy Gilman today, who stated that there were still some problems at the boat access and nearby park area that needed to be resolved. The following is her list of concerns: 1 . The satellite needs to be moved back up the hill into the park area itself near the parking lots . It had apparently been tipped over recently. Their concerns are that the spillage will leak into the lake. — 2 . They are requesting all night security lights be installed. 3 . They would like to see barriers installed to prevent cars from going around the gate. 4 . They would like to see signs indicating no pets allowed. 5 . The seeding apparently did not work. They would like to see the area sodded. 6 . The silt in the lake by the access has yet to be dredged. 7 . The Homeowners Association is requesting the placement of buoys in the narrow part of the lake. The placement of the buoys would be in such a manner to make boats choose one side or the other. 8 . Some sort of erosion control needs to be established to prevent the silt from getting into the lake by the access . Ms . Lori Sietsema Mr. Gary Warren May 24 , 1988 Page 2 9 . The holding pond allegedly needs cleaning. It is apparently dumping into the lake right now. These are the nine points that Cindy Gilman talked about over the telephone. I would suggest that representatives from both the Engineering Department and the Park and Recreation Department meet with us at 8 : 30 a.m. on Monday, June 6th to discuss these issues . Please look them over and come prepared to discuss them on June 6th and I will in turn get back to Cindy Gilman and let — her know what we are doing regarding these concerns . — cc : Don Ashworth, City Manager Scott Harr, Assistant Public Safety Director .• ? ! - 1 " f • f plaza Stal Inns - 3030 Harbor Lane North Bldg.II,Suite 104 Minneapolis,MN 55447-2175 612/553-1950 MEMORANDUM TO : Lori Sietsema FROM: Mark Koegler DATE : May 2 , 1988 SUBJECT: South Lotus Lake Park As a follow up to our meeting on April 29 , 1988 , I have summarized the maintenance items at South Lotus Lake Park that we — discussed . The attached plan graphically identifies each of the items . Upper Area 1 . Add topsoil , rake and seed parking lot islands . 2 . Deep ruts in the pond area were caused by NSP during transformer installation . Previous conversations with Gary Warren indicated that NSP was going to repair the damage . The City might want to consider contacting NSP to see if a cash payment in lieu of repair is possible since City crews will be working in the same general area . — 3 . Remove silt from the upper pond area near the drainage structure . Create a rip rap pond area in the vicinity of the outlet structure . A porous plastic weed barrier could be used under the rock to reduce ongoing maintenance . 4 . Along South Shore Drive , the Bloomberg Companies recently constructed a berm . The shape of the berm may need to be — modified to allow easier mowing . 5 . Consider placement of the park sign along the right side of the upper parking lot entrance off of South Shore Drive . If budget allows , plantings are recommended around the base of the sign . r Lower Area 1 . Top soil and seed should be added along the west side . 2 . A number of people have driven over the large island area next to the lift station . In order to discourage this from occurring in the future , it is recommended that this area be sodded and that two or three trees ( possibly green ash ) be brought in from the tree farm. If people see an established turf area with trees , they are less likely to drive over the area . If this problem persists , bollards may be necessary to provide a permanent barrier . 3 . Silt should be removed from the small island on the north side and rip rap should be installed . Sod could be placed along the south side adjacent to the elderly/handicapped parking space . 4 . Weeds around the pond area need to be cut . 5 . Damaged signs should be repaired or replaced . 6 . Along the east side of the access turn around next to the pond , grade a " bench " area and add rip rap to the edge of the pavement . 7 . After completion of the above items , the parking and driving areas should be swept and re- striped . General Comments In the early planning stages of South Lotus Lake Park , the landscaping budget was reduced resulting in smaller and fewer plants . If nursery stock is available at the tree farm , trees should be planted along both sides of the boat access entrance road . Additional plantings in the upper portion of the park should also be added if material is available . As soon as Dale gets additional summer help and they begin work , I would be glad to drop by the site and review these suggestions . ad,r),t,1?-e,Z ;ry 6-/. _I y CITY of c_ev›,ceie__or— CHANHASSEN \ k _ 1 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (m 937-1900 June 6 , 1988 Family of Christ Lutheran Church Attn: Pastor Nate Castens P .O. Box 388 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Nate: Thank you for your letter of May 26 , 1988 as well as the attached note. I am forwarding copies of both to the City Council. Engineering and the Treasurer ' s Office will review the question regarding street address - such being a good point . I know that I can speak for the Mayor and City Council in wishing you the very best at your new site. We also appreciated having you as a tenant and were extremely pleased with the courteous and business-like approach taken during the up and down periods that often leave an owner/tenant in perpetual dislike for the other . I honestly do not know of one issue that we were not able to sit down and listen to the concern of the other and come to a solu- - tion. Again, I have deeply appreciated this latter point and ask that you pass along the City' s gratitude to members of the building/lease committee that I have had an opportunity to work with during the past several years . As departure time comes closer, I am sure numerous miscellaneous items will require attention. Please feel free to contact either Todd Gerhardt or myself so that we can resolve these as quickly as possible . Thank you again. Sincerely, Don Ashworth City Manager DA: k FAMILY OF CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH Post Office Box 388 Church Phone Nate Castens,Pastor _ Chanhassen,Minnesota 55317 (612)934-5659 At Home 934.7870 Don -- on another, unrelated item, which (again) you can pass along to the appropriate person in the city administration: It occurs to me that with the change in street arrangements, the church actually no longer sits at 7801 Great Plains Boulevard. Since we do not receive mail at this location, mail service is not a problem. But delivery service may be in the future if, for example, a new UPS driver comes to town. It may be wiser to re-number old St. Hubert's church along West 78th Street. Thankssi MAY 2 7 1988 OF CHANhASSEN FAMILY OF CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH • YOUR GOOD CHRISTIAN NEIGHBOR Post Office Box 388 Church Phone Nate Castens, Pastor Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 (612)934-5659 At Home 934-7870 I Thursday, May 26, 1988 Don Ashworth, City Manager City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear Don: I 'm writing to inform you regarding our intentions in the use of old St. Hubert's church. Please forward this information to the appropriate person(s) in city administration. We are only days away from beginning construction on our new church facility. We anticipate completion sometime in the fall of 1988 -- barring unforeseen delays. _ We have scheduled an official dedication of the building for Sunday, November 20 -- an indication of the time we fully ex- pect to have vacated old St. Hubert's and no longer be res- ponsible for its upkeep, insurance, and lease payments. We can be more precise as to the date of vacancy only as con- struction proceeds. If you are satisfied with this prior notice and our informing you the closer we are sure of the date of moving, then we are. Otherwise I hope you' ll call me and we can make other arrangements. We have appreciated the cooperative arrangements we've had with the City of Chanhassen over the years. We have appre- ciated old St. Hubert' s. or i MAY 2 7 1988 Nath astens, pastor CITY OF CHANr,A6- Copy: Mike Weiberg, parish president J 'c ADM IN. SLFc--fio� /1i3 Y _ ,. . • PHONE CALL / )A.M. FOR et LA DATE //f TIME l .� P.M. . M eieg " �' /�j�, v- �rL TELEPHONED DF____/ r _ RETURNED PHONE Z,Z1( ��' YOUR CALL - _ AREA CODE NUm t3ER ExTEN :+ON PLEASE CALL _ MESSAGE / / /�j�J R n WILL CALL AGAIN `�''G f�CSC / CAME TO SEE YOU WANTS TyySEE YOU / SIE •..' - TOPS 4,O J FORM 0003 -' r • .,. .F. yam_, -i 3 b.tia,.`a`'r.:S_d,-". ,-,tip: � I ..„ _ ram• • er _ti �_ S� e.- ,'-` ',_ - _ - TT - _ ..'t_ • '..�. .5 1 - • p .1 - 1 - 1 1 • 0 1 1 1 1 1 a •- • '--4 U) 0 F Z z „ w £ in W 7• " 6 a z R) P. H .M- F Z W w z 4-, w co w 6 U A c0 U) £ IZ 'M Z I U] E. 6 r') 0 VI Cr. .-+ w + W r3 I P. co Cl) z co U) a I-I o a 6 W F — > U) Z P a 6 w r-/ w P. Co w co P. U) F G. P. a PI r 6 A 0 w z >. Z I--i z x 6 Z W U1 Lc) w x -. z o P. U) a w - F. m - m F CO 6 w F U) Z X F a P. I--i co z A w a - t F 6 6 G W Z 3 co 6 co Z £ U < a CQ U) a w a x — P I-. W w 12 = U O r. W x w O < > X ›. A w U) U o a E- A W a 1-+ 0 w 3 6 0 U 0 F a U) FO 6 E. to G U) E. .-. (3) L7 - - x '-I CD N G CO U Z - • cr w if) co l') co [') x • G co co CD Lc) - 0 .-c - CO) • 0 - - CD ' 6 N •-. • £ CD • 6 X Is+ — O Z c w a a cn aC V un LC) u"3 H 6 U cr c' c C v X w ti .- F — Z X CO c7 r'') • 6 U O O G G X U 1 1 a 1 a > > a a ) 1 1 > > 1 1 > ) ) > 44- ? 7' June 88 G Mayor and Council 690 Coulter Dr.. PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Attn: Todd .3arhardt Dear Mayor and Council, . I am requesting your -attention .to an issue that has touched my heart , . and that is the POW/MIA' s in Vietnam. . Our .government has information on actual live sitings of over 240 men still in Vietnam. These are men who fought for our country. The government also gave a woman in :1.N information regarding her husband being sited 3 times in the oast 7 months , in a pri_on in Vietnam. He has been missing .20 years: Enclosed is a petition of names of other concerned citizens , as well as my name, . requesting that a P0','P,/MIA Flag be flown below the City Hall' s American: flag. We feel these men should be remembered. The original flag -is donated free. Dale and Karen Hanley of *11N Won't Forger. P0W/MIA' will grsent the f lag to you on. a date convenient' to you. . We also will contact the local press to be there- as :Hell. Dale Hanley also needs the size of the flag_you would like.. It must be smaller-than; . or equal to the size of your American F1wg: .The sizes- available are as follows: 2X3, 3X5, , 4X6, & 5X8. . Thank you very much. Sincerely, Mary Ellen Anderson: 474-3767 JUN G 8 1988 CITY OF CHAIVFI Stty • ._wr•. a•, - We request` that the ; of L nha.�ujfly: a POW/MIA — flag beneath the United States of America flag:. AME ADRESS / r lzrsc:a l �.� G LSD `0vw cYi.s' - HA�v ( b�� -t�s�o/ of kil.h.A.)) 92' C11190(L CAt&C, i a0c71 e ti eve la'elfS; - 3 fit- ' �" C 90 i-vx , 4 /4 c44s1 4-7't- fDa I " 54 w c/ .r/ 4iPANav,,, g.,, CA/A ) 93‘,/- 8'/L _ 5. /3.i& P.�.&..4 roils 4--i"P. ksse ', ,0" 937-Q3)1 6 av„,.1 _,L_,P,„,_,._, `i'cc3i °±4-- ----k',_ ,,,, _' e -- mut 934-5s-g al?..41 i 4'3414v/s3 S $moo ZO9Js:� 1c/IL 1: - 31 ra 6E5 a Your. n - 55_3/7 e — 9 �� 93 1(/o - 41”- .. urk- F. @1Add ) Ct a� �33/7,, // 7.6S Z p -, � j.q35�~ 17 r _a_a_ZA .4a(z/X. ,77-2 )7a 0:S' /3 7a.4'� . .azvav � 93 / 9sc - !`t az 1, ), , , r < 13 -,Rss-. ._ 1 S b a?:;, ,,,_el •t`';.•:.,,,e 6 /,%-a (/ /Gr' /. E."r ' (f )r f 01 �.1 f (V 11474-37 I , .cam--�.,�4�,� �L L - ���o ��. ' +C.G..rU, �(lCY..'Y-, 5.�.. e.,( _ /7 ate, . an y✓ 6g 7 'Ai - 72- -Cil&h. _ (•(-7c--3 76 7 _ i /5 L.- • ,)-3 c7 G2S ay --- -- 30 _ KURTIS & MARY ELLEN ANDERSON ,. •—1870 LOTUS TRAIL . I - ;0.4 .: -s.. .. - ,;.�;�CNANHASSEN Md 55317 CITY OF G CHANHASSEN' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Jo Ann Olsen, Asst. City Planner () DATE: June 10 , 1988 SUBJ: Recycling Drop-Off Center On June 11, 1988 , the City will be initiating a recycling drop off center. The center will be located at the Public Works Building in Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. The site will be opened the second and fourth Saturdays of each month from 9: 00 -- a.m. to 4 : 00 p.m. and will accept newspaper , glass, cans and yard waste. We are looking at accepting plastic also in the near future. The center will be attended by the following volunteers: 1 . Chanhassen Jr . Olympic Fast Pitch Girls Softball 2 . Chanhassen Chiefs 3 . Boy Scout Troop 346 4 . Chanhassen Girl Scout Service — 5 . Family of Christ Lutheran Church Group 6 . Chanhassen Boy Scouts _ The attached sheet was sent to all Chanhassen residents and printed in the Chanhassen Villager. The center will be funded completely by Carver County. It is planned to keep the center open through December, 1988 . In the meantime, staff will be working on initiating curbside pickup for 1989 . NHASs G FA , — recycle F C L Y C ANNOUNCING: Chanhassen Recycling Drop-off Center will open on Saturday, June 11, 1988 WHEN: Second and fourth Saturday of each month ( see calendar on back) 9 :00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. WHERE: Chanhassen Public Works Garage 1591 Park Road (see map on back) WHAT: Newspaper - May be brown bagged, bundled or loose (Not Boxed) - Anything in Sunday and daily papers is acceptable - No phonebooics , magazines or catalogues Glass - Beverage containers only, no windows , etc. - Clear containers only - Containers must be clean and unbroken - All foil and plastic labels and metal bands must be removed. Paper labels are acceptable. Aluminum/Bi-Metal - Beverage containers only - Whole or crushed containers are acceptable Yard Waste - Grass clippings - Brush QUESTIONS - CALL JO ANN OLSEN AT 937-1900 Chanhassen is participating with Carver County to provide Chanhassen — residents with recycling opportunities . The drop-off center is being added to the existing spring and fall leaf pick-up service to help Chanhassen and Carver County meet their goal of recycling 13% of — solid waste generated by Carver County by 1990 . The drop-off center will be attended by local community groups . Please support the effort to reduce the need for landfills by using the drop-off center as an alternative means of solid waste disposal . !.I LAKE ANN I 1t :A VP•M• Pi .` '�"'\ , LAKE ck ILA r rIA,4 40041411,44j 1:.,Al o. : 3 - a < 1 clrr i _ W HALL O� BOUl.E V4R i 2M " ' n.aa�i'�111 AISLEY �sT 1. 1sr y —' ' IP PARK tM •°'p* ." p Ai 0 IT 9oRp *Eøj1 . • ie 9A6.• s7n7 . n1clwA+ •m `O Al 9 I Ill`'.tf tl l: a ,,----- 1 0 /i . . , 4 '- 1, LAKE SUSAN �r •T — DROP - OFF LOCATION JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH • S Y T WIT St t M T WI r t t M T w T r S 1 1 1 2 3 A 3 6 12 3 a 5 3 A 5 6 7 1 9 71 9 10 1 1 12 13 4 7 t 9 10 11 12 .... 10 11 12 13 II 15 16 1A IS 16 17 It 19 70 13 IA IS 16 17 It 19 17 11 10 20 21 27 23 71 22 23 24 23 26 77 20 21 27 23 29 23 76 1, 25 26 77 21 79 30 11 29 27 21 29 30 31 APRIL MAY DUNE — 1 r T w T r t S M T WI F t s OPT w T it , I 2 1 2 3 •- 5 6 7 I 2 3 3 A 3 6 7 1 9 1 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 1 0 10 ill , 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 - 15 16 17 11 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 11 17 It 19 20 21.22 23 22 23 2A 25 26 27 21 10 20 21 22 2] 26 75 74 23 76 77 71 29 70 29 30 31 26 27 71 29 20 91 •n JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER I r T w 7 PS t SI 7 w T r 1 3 Pi w 7 9 1 _ I t 7 ] A 3 I 2 3 6 5 6 7 t o 7 1 9 10 11 12 �I] 5 9 7 9 a 10 II 17 13 IA 13 16 16 15 16 17 11 19 20 II 17 13 14 15 16 17 — 17 11 19 70 21 27 23 21 22 2) 24 25 76 ;'2 16 19 20 21 77 73 7• 1, 23 26 27 01 29 30 2! 29 30 21 75 76 77 21 29 30 OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER t Y 1 w T r 1 S r r 1 r 3 1 M T w 1 r / ..' I I 2 ] 4 5 1 7 (3D 7 3 A 3 6 7 O 0 7 t 0 10 I I (, • 5 ♦ 7 1 9 I 9 10 I 17 17 I• 13 IA IS 16 17 It 19 11 12 13 IA 15 16 117 16 17 I 19 20 11 27 20 71 22 13 24 25 ®0 II I9 70 71 22 23 24 1, 23 26 27 21 29 27 21 29 30 25 26 77 2/ 20 30 31 1 1988 DROP -OFF DATES