The URL can be used to link to this page

B. Code Amendments CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952,227,1100 Fax: 952,227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952,227.1180 Fax: 952,227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952,227,1160 Fax: 952,227.1170 Finance Phone: 952,227,1140 Fax: 952,227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952,227,1120 Fax: 952,227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952,227,1400 Fax: 952,227,1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952,227,1130 Fax: 952,227,1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952,227,1300 Fax: 952,227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952,227,1125 Fax: 952,227,1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us B - MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Kate Aanenson AICP, Community Development Director DATE: ~> Code Amendments May 26, 2009 SUBJ: Periodically, staff proposes changes to City Code due to inconsistencies. The Planning Commission, in their work sessions, has reviewed the following: . Farm Animals . LED Lighting . Signage . Yard Regulations . Regional Commercial District Prior to holding a public hearing before the Planning Commission, staff is looking for input from the City Council on these issues. Attached are staff reports on each issue including background and proposed changes. g:\plan\city code\2009 code amendments\cc memo 5-26-09.doc Chanhassen is a Community for life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952,227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952,227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952,227,1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952,227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952,227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952,227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952,227,1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952,227,1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952,227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Sharmeen AI-Jaff, Senior Planner DA TE: May 26, 2009 SUBJ: Farm Animals in Non-Agricultural Zones BACKGROUND The Planning Commission directed staff to investigate how other communities deal with agricultural animals and if they allow them in non-agricultural districts. On April 7, 2009, staff presented the Planning Commission an issue paper addressing Farm Animals in Non-Agricultural Zones. The city has had chicken owners next to residential districts. On one occasion, a subdivision developed around an agriculturally zoned property that contained a chicken. Some of the new residents began feeding the chicken which caused the chicken to cross to the neighbors' yards. Shortly after, staff received complaints. Staff advised the neighbors to stop feeding the chicken which solved the issue. Shortly following this incident, the agricultural property was developed into a subdivision. As staff began investigating this issue, other animal-related issues came to light including definitions of farm animals, wild animals, birds of prey, and the provision of conditional use permits for the keeping of animals other than pets. There are three animal categories: 1. Household Pets: Permitted in all zoning districts. 2. Farm Animals: Permitted on Farm property. 3. Other animals: Permitted by Conditional Use Permit. Definitions: The current ordinance in the City of Chanhassen allows household pets in all zoning districts. . Pets are defined as a dog or cat, regardless of weight, or an animal not exceeding 40 pounds in weight that is usually and customarily considered a pet. Chickens are not considered household pets, but rather farm animals. A miniature pot-belly pig weighs 90 pounds. As such, it may not be considered a household pet. Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Todd Gerhardt Farm Animals May 26, 2009 Page 2 The city may wish to amend the definition of pets to read: House Pets means animals such as dogs, cats, birds (not including pigeons, chickens, geese, turkeys or other domestic fowl), gerbils, hamsters, rabbits (including those normally sheltered outside of the principal structure), and tropical fish, that can be contained within a principal structure throughout the entire year, provided that the containment can be accomplished without special modification to the structure that would require a building permit, excluding wild or domesticated wild animals. The City Code allows farm animals on farm property; however, the code does not define farm animals. Staff recommends adding the following definition: - Farm Animals means cattle, hogs, bees, sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, horses and other animals commonly accepted as farm animals in the state of Minnesota. The code allows other animals by conditional use permit; however, these other animals are not defined in the code. Staff recommends adding the following definitions: -Wild Animal means any animal that is wild? ferocious, or vicious by nature, habit, disposition, or character. Animals in this category include but are not limited to any ape, [including chimpanzee, giqbon,gorilla, orangutan, ()f.siamang], baboon, bear, bison, 'bobcat, cheetah, crocodile, coyote, deer, [inch.iding'all members of the deer family such as elk, antelope and moose], elephant, fox, hippopotamus, hyena, jaguar, leopard, lion, lynx, monkey, puma, also known as cougar, mountain lion or panther, rhinoceros, any snake which is poisonous or any constrictor snake, snow leopard, tiger, wolf, or hybrid mix of any of the wild animals such as wolf/dog mixes. - Birds of prey means birds that hunt for food primarily on the wing, using their keen senses, especially vision. Their talons and beaks tend to be relatively large, powerful and adapted for tearing and/or piercing flesh. Sec. 20-1001. (3) of the zoning ordinance states Farm animals are an allowed use on allfarm property. Farm animals may not be confined in a pen, feed lot or building within 100 feet of any residential dwelling not owned or leased by the farmer. However, the city code does not define farm property. (Suggested definition: F ann means a tract of land of more than ten (10) acres in size, usually with a house and barn plus other buildings on which crops and often livestock are raised for a principal source of livelihood.) Sec. 20-1001. (6) of the zoning ordinance states that Animals may not be kept if they cause a nuisance or endanger the health or safety of the community. Sec. 13-2. of the zoning ordinance deems the following to be nuisances affecting health, safety, comfort or repose: The keeping of horses, cattle, swine, sheep, goats, rabbits, dogs, or other animals or fowl so as to result in offense odors or disagreeable noises to the discomfort of adjacent property owners, and allowing any animal or fowl to run at large; Todd Gerhardt Farm Animals May 26, 2009 Page 3 Ordinances In Other Communities: The following is a summary of ordinances from other communities and how they compare to the City of Chanhassen: City Ordinance Requirements There are no agricultural districts within the city, therefore; no agricultural animals are permitted via code. Richfield A current rewrite of the animal ordinances is nearly completed and will deal with this issue in more detail, eliminating permits and defining "allowed" animals. Dayton does permit Farm Animals and Large Animals in residential districts depending on the size of the lot. Lot breakdown: Lot Size SAt A-I R-2 R-3 R-l (90,000 sq. ft.) ... (5 acres) (15,000 sq. ft.) 2-4.9 ac. CUP CUP CUP Not permitted Dayton 5+ ac. Permitted CUP Permitted Not permitted Dayton has a large number of nonconforming lots and chooses to base the decision on land size, except in urban residential neighborhoods. One acre per animal (Any person keeping, raising, feeding or caring for horses, Fridley cattle, goats, sheep or swine shall provide no less than one (1) acre of open, unused land for each animal.) Does not allow farm animals on a residential lot. Farm animals are only allowed Cambridge in the agricultural district or on lots of at least 10 acres. Except as regulated in FRD (rural/agricultural) district, farm animals (including Plymouth miniatures) are prohibited in Plymouth. Mounds View Does not allow farm animals in the city at all. Farm animals with the exception of chicken (hen) are not permitted outside the rural district. Within the non-agricultural district, there is a limit of four animals Brainerd on a parcel. (For example, the limitation is further clarified as follows: 4 dogs, or 4 cats, or 4 chickens, or 3 dogs and 1 cat, or 3 chickens and 1 dog, or 2 cats and 2 chickens, etc.) Todd Gerhardt Farm Animals May 26, 2009 Page 4 City Ordinance Requirements Farm animals are an allowed use on all farm property. Farm animals may not be Chanhassen confined in a pen, feed lot or building within 100 feet of any residential dwelling not owned or leased by the farmer. It is staff's opinion that the Chanhassen City Code addresses the subject of farm animals in a method that meets the demographics and nature of the city. It permits farm animals on parcels that have larger acreage and can maintain an adequate distance from other residential properties and adequately regulates them in denser areas. Also, Sec. 20-1001 of the City Code addresses the keeping of animals in the City. Subsection (2) addresses the zoning districts in which horses are allowed. One of the districts is A-I Agricultural Reserve. On May 24, 2004, the city repealed any reference to this zoning district since none of the properties within the city held that zoning designation. Staff believes that the reference to the A-I district in this section was unintentionally left in. Staff recommends that subsection (2) be rewritten to read "(2) Horses in the A-+; A-2, RR and RSF zoning districts in accordance with Chapter 5, Article III." PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS The following is a summary of issues raised by the Planning Commission with staff's finding. Issue: Finding: Issue: Finding: Issue: Finding: Issue: Finding: Should the city allow the keeping of bees in non-agricultural districts? Staff recommends bees be limited to the Agricultural District. We need to specifically address the exclusion of farm animals from non- agricultural areas. The code may be amended to provide specific standards for areas in which farm animals may be kept such as restrictions on the size of a parcel. Currently, the city code permits farm animals on farm property only. Should a limited number of "farm animals," e.g., chickens, ducks, rabbits, etc. be permissible? Staff believes that if this option was available, it may become problematic from an enforcement standpoint. Staff recommends limiting farm animals to farm property. It is beneficial to provide greater clarity through the definitions. However, the definitions, as presented, need to be worked on. Review farm acreage. The city needs to determine where farm animals may be kept. Staff suggests that they be limited to areas where agriculture use is permitted. The city may choose to specify minimum acreage or rely on the existing 100-foot separation requirement. Todd Gerhardt Farm Animals May 26, 2009 Page 5 Issue: Finding: It may be a good idea to specifically exclude wild animals from the City. Staff agrees that wild animals should not be permitted in the city. Issue: Finding: Currently, horses are permitted on minimum 1 Yz acres. Staff recommends maintaining the stable permit standards. This can be accomplished by amending section 20-1001 (3) as follows: Farm animals are an allowed use on all farm property except as otherwise specifically provided in the city code. Farm animals may not be confined in a pen, feed lot or building within 100 feet of any residential dwelling not owned or leased by the farmer. RECOMMENDA TION Staff recommends amending the city code to add the definitions listed in this issue paper and delete any reference to the A-I District in the city code. Staff is also requesting direction on whether to allow other animals in the city through a conditional use permit or prohibit them. g:\plan\issue paper\animals-cc.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site lfNIW.ci .chanhassen. mn. us MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Sharmeen AI-Jaff, Senior Planner DATE: May 26, 2009 SUBJ: Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Lights ISSUE Staff' was contacted by a developer requesting installation of Light-Emitting Diode (LED) lights. Staff explained that current city ordinances allow only High- Pressure Sodium (HPS) lights. Staff researched the difference between LED and HPS and presented the findings to the Planning Commission. The consensus was that the yellow hue from HPS is preferred over the white LED. BACKGROUND The City Code allows high-pressure sodium (HPS) light fixtures only (Sec. 20- 913). This requirement applies to public and private developments. The code also requires that if a development changes more than 50% of its existing non- conforming light fixtures, then the new fixtures must meet all standards specified in the code including the high-pressure sodium. Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Todd Gerhardt, City Manager LED Lights May 26, 2009 Page 2 of5 A large number of the city street lights are owned and maintained by Xcel Energy and Minnesota Valley Electric Company (MVEC). Currently Xcel Energy and MVEC offer HPS only. This discussion will focus on privately owned lights rather than street lights owned by Xcel Energy. EXISTING SITES WITH LED LIGHTS Staff recommends the City Council visit one or more of the following sites to be more acquainted with LED light fixtures: . Chan View in Chanhassen (south of the Chanhassen Fire Station) located at 7610 Laredo Drive, Chanhassen, MN 55317 . Eden Prairie City Hall parking lot located at 8080 Mitchell Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 . 1-35W Mississippi River Bridge, Minneapolis . Cub Foods - Phalen Neighborhood, 1177 Clarence Street, St. Paul, MN 55106 ANAL YSES One of the more promising and emerging technologies in lighting is LED. It consumes approximately 50% less energy than HPS making it more energy efficient. The lifetime of LED is between 10 to 15 years, while HPS lasts 3 to 5 years, requiring more frequent maintenance. , - Todd Gerhardt, City Manager LED Lights May 26, 2009 Page 3 of5 Municipalities are investigating the option of switching light fixtures from HPS to LED and they all want answers to the following questions: "Is this a good light? Is it as bright? Do we get the same coverage?" As with any such transition, there are advantages and disadvantages. '1000 The cost associated with retrofitting existing fixtures is still high; however, it is falling rapidly. - E Q) -n; ~ 0 10 then - .....0') UJ 0 O....J o 'Nhite LED Compact Fluorescent High Intensity Discharge 1 Fluorescent Incandescent 0- 2000 2005 2010 Year 2015 200 1 - ! 150 ~ ~ ~ , .. , I ""0,' " LED, I".t. Ir~ , I WIll , I I I I LED I I , I I ,I a- .i 100 .Y ai ! i 50 .3 locandlscont ~ HalOgen \y o 1920 1MO I 1- I 2000 2020 1960 1980 -~ Figure 2-1: Historical and Predicted Eflieacy of Light Sources Source: Lumilcds. Some of the LED products available today are marketed as "energy-efficient," but actually have lower light output (illumination) compared to typical light sources. The current efficacy of an LED light continues to grow. It is anticipated that it will surpass existing technologies. Todd Gerhardt, City Manager LED Lights May 26, 2009 Page 4 of5 As LED technology advances, costs decrease, and efficiency improves, LEDs will become more competitive in the market place. The following chart shows how the light output of LED has increased twentyfold each decade for the last 40 years, while the cost has decreased tenfold each decade over that same time period. The figure also shows predictions for price and light output over the next two decades. 10000 A Red SlLumen A White SlLumen . Red Flux . White Flux 1000 -Expon. (Red Flux) -Expon. (Red S/Lumen) (ij' +20x Increase/Decade.. c .. <Il 0 E 100 0 ::l ~ ...J -- <Il r c CI 10 3 <1l ~ CD U ::l <1l ~ 0.. (It ;:, r- ::l c. C - 3 ::l 0 CD - 0.1 2- - .21 ...J 0.01 -1 Ox Decrease/Decade 0.001 1005 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Year Figure 2-4: Haitz's Law: LED Light Output Increasing; Cost Decreasing Source: Roland Haitz and Lumilcds. :-:ote: Both lines arc on the same numerical scale (with difli:rent units) The one remaining issue deals with the placement of LED lights next to HPS light fixtures. The output of these lights is visually and esthetically different. LED provides a soft, even, and white light while HPS is a focused, golden light. PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the above-mentioned facts, staff believes that LED lighting should become the leading method of illumination. The City must consider how to facilitate the transition process from HPS to LED. The following are options to consider: 1. Do nothing: Eventually, the city will react to the changing technology. 2. Allow a mix of LED and HPS fixtures: It will provide the most flexibility; however, it will lead to a mix of lighting. Todd Gerhardt, City Manager LED Lights May 26, 2009 Page 5 of5 3. Allow developers the choice of either LED or HPS fixtures: Provides flexibility. Since the cost of HPS in the short term is less than LED, developers may opt to install HPS. 4. Require all new developments to provide LED lights: There is a higher short-term cost; however, the continuing maintenance and overhead cost will be less. 5. Replace existing light fixtures as HPS fixtures need replacing: will require a long-term commitment on the city's part. g:\plan\issue paper\led-cc.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952.227.1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227.1310 Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Angie Kairies, Planner I DATE: May 26, 2009 Work Session SUBJ: City Code Amendment Issue Paper Chapter 20, Zoning, Signs BACKGROUND On April 7, 2009, staff presented the Planning Commission with issues and concerns relating to electronic message center (EMC) signs including: scrolling, color, animation, display area, and administrative approval vs. conditional use permit approval. The Planning Commission was in favor of: . Allowing scrolling of text only as a function ofthe sign; . Allowing color; . Prohibiting animation and special effects, defining message delay time; . Approving electronic message center signs administratively and increase the sign permit fee accordingly. The Planning Commission further directed staff to: . Develop a step format for the maximum display area for electronic message center signs, rather than a blanket 25%; . Provide a location map of existing monument signs within the City that could be retrofitted to an electronic message center sign; . Based on current locations, staff will look at a separation requirement between such signs; . Prohibit sound for electronic message center signs Staff is requesting input and guidance with regard to the proposed amendments before we proceed with the public hearings. Based on that feedback and recommendation, the public hearing for the code amendments will be scheduled. Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow City Council Work Session May 26, 2009 Page 2 of4 DISCUSSION Color, Scrolling, Animation, and Special Effects: The Planning Commission unanimously agreed that scrolling text was not an issue and should be permitted, while animation and special effects including sound shall be prohibited. Single-color versus full-color display seemed to be an issue when it was combined with animation and/or special effects of the sign. Unless directed otherwise, staff is not limiting the number of colors that are permitted on an EMC sign. Staff will work with the Planning Commission to determine if there should be a mandatory message display time. Administrative Approval The Planning Commission was unanimously in favor of approving EMC signs administratively versus requiring a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The approval process would be less onerous on the applicant and the application would be approved in a timely manner (days vs. months). The review process will follow specific standards within the sign ordinance. Additionally, a CUP can cost the applicant in excess of$650 and the fee for a temporary sign (w/o an EMC) is $100. The review process for an EMC sign will be more extensive than a sign without an EMC. Staff proposes increasing the fee for signs with an EMC to $300. This fee would cover the additional review time required for EMC signs. Step Format Sign Display Area LED Percentage Walgreens 64 sq ft 29.44 sq ft 46% Chapel Hill 21 sq ft 8.45 sq ft 40% Arboretum 48 sq ft 12 sq ft 25% Shopping Center American Legion 22.96 sq ft 12.15 sq ft 53% Cinema 100.3 sq ft 30 sq ft 30% Following the Planning Commission work session meeting, staff reviewed the existing electronic message center (EMC) signs. The existing signs occupy a median percentage of 38.8%. Based on this information and the discussion with the Planning Commission, staff has developed a step increase for the allowed percentage of an EMC sign based on the total sign display area. City Council Work Session May 26, 2009 Page 3 of 4 The larger the sign, the smaller percentage an EMC may occupy. Below is an illustration of the proposed percentage stepping format for the area an EMC sign may occupy in relation to the overall sign display area. . 0-24 sq ft = 50% EMC . 25-64 sq ft = 35% EMC . 66-80 sq ft = 25% EMC Existing Signs (retrofitting) The Planning Commission directed staff to locate existing signs that could be retrofitted to include EMC signs. Based on this information, staff will be working with the Planning Commission to determine if there should be a minimum distance between EMC signs. See attached Aerial maps. DIRECTION Staff requests that the City Council provide feedback regarding electronic message center signs and provide comments and direction for the proposed code amendment. , --~ City Council Work Session May 26, 2009 Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENTS 1. Areal maps of existing monument and EMC signs. 2. EMC sign standards. g:\plan\city code\2009 code amendments\cc memo led signs issue paper 5-26-09.doc c tT) - - ~ o Q) a. :E (1) V) r+ r+ o :::J: _0 C7Q ::r ~ Q) < ~ o ~ ::I: ciQO :::r :E QJ < ~ o ~ :E (1) V') r-+ r-+ o s: QJ """ '" (1) r-+ tJ:' - < a. .._J s OJ "'" " tt) r+ OJ - < a.. ~ tt) C/) r+ r+ o "'C o == tt) "'" C/) OJ - < a.. Proposed EMC Sign Standards Add Sec. 20-1276 Electronic message center signs. Electronic message center signs, time and temperature signs and barber poles shall comply with the following standards: a) No electronic message center sign may be erected that, by reason of position, shape, movement or color interferes with the proper functioning of a traffic sign, signal or which otherwise constitutes a traffic hazard. b) Electronic and non-electronic message center space used on a sign shall not exceed the following display area: EMC Dis lay 50% 35% 25% c) Electronic message. center displays shall not exceed 5,000 Nits between the hours of civil sunrise and civil sunset and shall not exceed 500 Nits between the hours of civil sunset and civil sunrise. d) Electronic message center signs shall not cause direct glare nor become a distraction due to excessive brightness. e) The lamp wattage and luminance level in candelas per square meter (Nits) shall be provided at the time of permit applications. f) There shall be no electronic message center signs in the front setback area within 50 feet of a street intersection (as measured from intersecting right-of-way lines) except where lighting for such sign is indirect or diffused and in no way constitutes a traffic hazard. g) There shall be no electronic message center signs within 125 feet of a residential district. h) Flashing, special effects or animated scenes on electronic reader boards shall be prohibited. i) Electronic message center signs shall not be located in agricultural or residential zoning districts. j) Electronic message center sign LED display use for signs within 500 feet of single-family residential homes shall be limited to the hours between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. g:\plan\city code\2009 code amendments\proposed led sign changes.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952,227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952,227.1190 Engineering Phone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952,227,1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952,227,111 0 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952,227,1400 Fax: 952.227.1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952,227,1310 Senior Center Phone: 952,227,1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 Web Site www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Angie Kairies, Planner I DATE: May 26, 2009 SUBJ: City Code Amendment Issue Paper Chapter 20, Zoning, Yard Regulations BACKGROUND There are properties within the City that have large drainage and utility easements which do not contain utilities, located on the individual parcels that leave little room for outdoor living space. In such situations, the homeowner would like to place patios, pathways and other landscape features within a drainage and utility easement located on their property. The current City Code provides relief for fences with an encroachment agreement; however patios are strictly prohibited. Therefore, a variance is required to allow such structures within the easement. This can be onerous on the property owner if the improvement does not negatively affect the intended purpose of the drainage and utility easement. DISCUSSION -' :}! d~ 1:'1 1 r~ v I I I '" The current code strictly prohibits the encroachment of patios into a drainage and utility easement. Patios and pathways, etc. are currently reviewed and permitted through a Residential Zoning Permit to verify compliance with City Code including, but not limited to, setbacks, hard surface coverage, and maintaining existing drainage patterns. Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow Todd Gerhardt Yard Regulations May 26, 2009 Page 2 Sec. 20-908. Yard regulations. (5) The following shall not be considered to be obstructions (variances granted from a required setback are not entitled to the following additional encroachments): a. Into any required front yard, or required side yard adjoining a side street lot line, cornices, canopies, eaves, or other architectural features may project a distance not exceeding two feet, six inches; fire escapes may project a distance not exceeding four feet, six inches; an uncovered stair and necessary landings may project a distance not to exceed six feet, provided such stair and landing shall not extend above the entrance floor of the building; bay windows, balconies, open porches and chimneys may project a distance not exceeding three feet; unenclosed decks and_patios may project a distance not exceeding five feet and shall not be located in a drainage and utility easement. Other canopies may be permitted by conditional use permit. b. The above-named features may project into any required yard adjoining an interior lot line, subject to the limitations cited above. (6) The placement of any structure within easements is prohibited, except for those structures 'specified herein. .Fences, retaining walls, patios (that are not an integral part of the principal structure), non-structural fire pits, sidewalks, and pathways may be allowed within an easement with an encroachment agreement if they do not alter the intended use of the easement and at the discretion of the City Manager or his designee. A driveway or sidewalk from the street to the house crossing drainage and utility easements at the front of the property are exempt from this requirement. NOTE: For new construction, Section 20-905(6) requires a future 10' x 10' patio for all exiting doors which do not connect directly to a sidewalk or stoop be shown on the proposed survey. This future patio is an integral part of the principal structure and may not encroach into a drainage and utility easement. DIRECTION Planning staff is requesting the City Council provide feedback to the above City Code issue regarding structures within drainage and utility easements. g:\plan\city code\2009 code amendments\cc memo drainage and utility issue paper 5-26-09.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227,1100 Fax: 952,227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227,1180 Fax: 952,227,1190 Engineering Phone: 952,227,1160 Fax: 952,227.1170 Finance Phone: 952,227.1140 Fax: 952,227,1110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952,227.1120 Fax: 952,227,1110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952,227.1400 Fax: 952,227,1404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone: 952,227,1130 Fax: 952,227.1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone: 952,227.1300 Fax: 952,227,1310 Senior Center Phone: 952,227.1125 Fax: 952,227,1110 Web Site VNIW,ci ,chanhassen, m n, us MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner DATE: May 26, 2009 SUBJ: Regional/Lifestyle Center Commercial - Preferences BACKGROUND On November 10, 2008, the Chanhassen City Council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. One component of that plan was the creation of the regional/lifestyle center. A second component was the City has given a dual land use of the 160 acres at the southeast corner of Powers and Lyman Boulevards to accommodate this use. The 2030 Land Use Plan guides this area for commercial and/or office. The City must adopt an implementation ordinance as required by the land planning act. 2.7.4 RegionaVLifestyle Center Commercial This is defined as a mixed-commercial district with retail and entertainment uses of a scale and function that serves a regional market. The physical environment emphasizes an attractive, comfortable walking experience for shoppers and visitors and is designed to serve trail users and mass transit as well as automobile traffic. Centers of this type have at least two major retail anchors and are characterized by the diversity and mix of retail and service uses within their boundaries. Uses within this district should complement existing retail users in the other commercial districts. Development of these centers shall be planned as a group of organized uses and structures to accommodate a sensitive transition between commercial activities such as loading, parking of automobiles, lighting and trash collection and surrounding residential uses. Such centers shall be designed with one theme, with similar architectural style, similar exterior building materials, and a coordinated landscaping theme. Chanhassen is a Community for life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow -~ Todd Gerhardt Regional Commercial Preferences May 26, 2009 Page 2 Staff surveyed the Planning Commission on April 7, 2009, to get direction and input on the development of the Regional Commercial preferences. DISCUSSION SCALE The Planning Commission has a consensus that the development should be on a suburban to urban scale. This was also confirmed by the fact that there should be a maximum building height and number of stories. Staff infers that the range T -3 to T.5 is what should be incorporated in the district. ...4 .~!!- . ._~ . -lli._ General Character: Building Placement: Frontage Types: Typical Building Height: Type ot Civic Space: T-5 Urban Center Zone consists of higher density mixed use building that accommodate etail, offices, rowhouses and apartments. It has a tight network of streets, with wide sidewalks, steady street tree planting and buildings set close to the sidewalks. Shops mixed with Townhouses, larger Apartment houses, Offices, workplace, and Civic buildings; predominantly attached buildings; trees within the public right-ot-way; substantial pedestrian activit Shallow Setbacks or none; buildings oriented to street defining a street wall Stoops, Shoptronts, Galleries 3- to 5-Story with some variation Parks, Plazas and Squares, median landscaping Todd Gerhardt Regional Commercial Preferences May 26, 2009 Page 3 II BS....~ . '.. I _ Building Placement: Frontage Types: Building Height: Type of Civic Space: T-4 GENERAL URBAN General Character: Mix of Houses, Townhouses & small Apartment buildings, with scattered Commercial activity; balance between landscape and buildings; presence of pedestrians Shallow to medium front and side yard Setbacks Porches, fences, Dooryards 2- stories with 3-Stories allowed as a bonus Squares, Greens m Building Placement: Frontage Types: Typical Building Height: Type of Civic Space: ZONING T-3 SUB-URBAN General Character: Lawns, and landscaped yards surrounding detached single-family houses; pedestrians occasionally Large and variable front and side yard Setbacks Porches, fences, naturalistic tree planting 1- to 2-Story with some 3-Story Parks, Greenways The zoning district should incorporate all the standard requirements of existing zoning including intent, uses, setback, height, site coverage and parking. Additionally, streetscape standards should be included. Todd Gerhardt Regional Commercial Preferences May 26, 2009 Page 4 USES There appears to be a slight consensus that uses should be general, but that they should definitely include commercial- retail and commercial- services and office. Residential uses did not appear to be favored in the district and that if any residential was permitted it should be limited. There appears to be some support to develop permitted, accessory and conditional uses. There was unanimous opinion that a list of prohibited uses should be included. BUILDING HEIGHT AND SETBACK As stated previously, there should be a maximum height limitation in the district. However, there should not be a minimum building height. Additionally, height limitations and setback requirements should be included based on the use and location within the development. Locating buildings near the front setback does not appear to be desired nor are continuous building frontages on a street. PARKING There does not appear to be a consensus on the restriction of parking location, except to comply with existing ordinance. Parking ramps should be encouraged, but not required. However, the use of shared parking is favored and encouraged. STREETSCAPESTANDARDS There was positive support for the inclusion of streetscape standards. FURNISHINGS Some items had almost unanimous support and should be required: benches, bike racks and trash receptacles. PLANTINGS Planters and street trees with grates appeared to have near unanimous support. SIGNAGE Way-finding signs and pedestrian lights should be included. PAVING Accessible ramps are required. Paved (stamped concrete) crosswalks and comer pads were positively identified. Todd Gerhardt Regional Commercial Preferences May 26, 2009 Page 5 CIVIC ART Civic art had some positive leaning. However, fountains and sculptures had some negative indications. STREET DESIGN City street standards were generally preferred. Landscaped medians and street plantings should be incorporated in the design. RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that the City Council review the proposed preferences and provide comments, concurrence or direction on the development of the district regulations. ATTACHMENT 1. Preference Survey Results g:\plan\city code\2009 code amendments\cc memo survey results. doc Preference Survey Regional/Lifestyle Commercial District YES NO Required Possible Not Wanted SCALE Suburban 3 3 1 Urban 2 5 Urban Core 3 4 ZONING Should we require a PUD or rely on existing zoning? 4 2 Should residential be incorporated in the PUD? 1 4 2 Components of the RC district regulations? Intent 3 1 Uses 4 Setback 5 Height 4 1 Site Coverage 4 Parking 4 Streetscape Standards 4 Uses Should certain uses be required? 3 3 1 If required, what part/percent of the development? 70% Should there be permitted, conditional and accessory uses? 3 2 Or should standards for uses be included in the district? 2 2 1 Should uses be a function of the building form? 1 3 1 Should there be prohibited uses? 7 Should uses be limited, e.g., % of total sq. ft. or total area? 3 2 1 Should uses be general? 3 1 Commercial - Retail 5 1 Commercial - Services 5 1 Office 2 3 Should Uses be specific? 1 3 2 Residential Use 3 1 What density range? 1 - High Should it be a percentage or portion of project? 2 3 Should there be a triggering mechanism to include housing? 1 1 4 Should there be an overall limit on housing? 3 1 2 Building Height and Setbacks 1 G:\PLAN\City Code\2009 Code Amendments\RC survey.xlsx Preference Survey Regional/Lifestyle Commercial District YES NO Required Possible Not Wanted Should there be differences based on use? 5 1 1 Should there be differences based on location? 5 1 1 Should we encourage building at or near the property line? 2 2 3 Should continuous street walls be required? 3 3 Should there be a maximum height limit? 6 1 Should there be a minimum building height? 2 2 3 Should there be a minimum number of stories? 1 3 3 Should there be a maximum number of stories? 5 2 Parking Should Parking be restricted to the side and rear of a building? 2 2 2 Should existing location standards be used? 1 4 Should surface parking lots be discouraged? 2 1 3 Should parking ramps be encouraged? 3 2 1 Should parking ramps be required? 3 2 If required, what threshold? Should shared parking be encouraged? 2 4 Should shared parking be required? 1 3 2 Streetscape Standards What are the elements of a street? 2 2 How many element should be required? 1 3 How often should these elements be repeated? 1 3 Furnishings 1 Banners/Special Lighting 2 5 2 Benches 6 1 3 Bike Racks 6 1 4 Bollards 1 5 5 Bus Shelters 3 4 6 Cobra Sleeve "Wraps" 4 3 7 Kiosks 3 3 1 8 Newspaper Vending 2 3 1 9 Trash Receptacles 7 Plantings 2 G:\PLAN\City Code\2009 Code Amendments\RC survey.xlsx Preference Survey Regional/Lifestyle Commercial District YES NO Required Possible Not Wanted 11 Continuous Planting Pit/Paving Bands 4 2 1 12 Hanging Baskets 3 3 1 13 Planters 6 1 14 Planting Screens 2 5 15 Street Trees (With Grates) 6 1 Signage 16 Basic Way Finding Sign age 6 1 17 Pedestrian lights 6 1 Paving 18 Accessible Ramps 6 19 Paved "Bump-outs" 1 2 2 20 Paved Crosswalk 3 3 21 Corner Paving Pad 3 3 22 Ornamental Fencing 1 4 Civic Art 22 Civic Art 2 4 Fountains 3 3 1 Plazas 3 4 Pocket parks 2 5 Sculptures 1 4 2 STREET DESIGN City Standard? 3 2 1 Reduced widths? 2 4 1 Landscaped medians? 5 2 Street plantings? 4 3 3 G:\PLAN\City Code\2009 Code Amendments\RC survey.xlsx