5. City Code Amendment-Gusiness Fringe Additional Permitted and Conditional Uses, First Readingr I q
im
CITY OF S
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
Action by City AdminlstratoT
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
Endorse v — L-. R
Modifie
Rejecte
Det
Date Submitted to Commissiotl
FROM: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner Il
Date Submitted to council
DATE: August 2, 1994 _ 9" L �4
SUBJ: City Code Amendment to the BF, Fringe Business District by adding additional
Permitted, Conditional and Interim Uses
' BACKGROUND
The BF District was created in December 1986, for existing nonconforming businesses in that
location. On many occasions, staff has been requested to re- examine the status of the BF
District. Both the Planning Commission and the City Council have expressed concern over
the type of uses that have been located in the district.
1
Staff is proposing to begin the review of the 1995 stun
evaluating future land use and zoning, the BF District
of this amendment is to add permitted uses or require
uses that are temporary in nature. When sewer and w
would convert to a higher or improved use.
ANALYSIS
°a next year. As a part of
also be re- evaluated. The purpose
itional or interim use permits for
ervices are available, the area
The BF District is located in two -separate areas,along Highway 212, (Attachment #1).
Highway 212 is classified as minor arterial. The Comprehensive an guides ?he BF District
for commercial uses only. This district has no access to sewer and water and we do not
foresee it extended within the near' future
limited to those that do not require urban
limited commercial uses without urban st
id conditional uses in this district are
stated purpose is to "accommodate
Current uses in the BF District include the following:
• Sorenson cold storage warehouse -Has a Conditional Use permit
• Vacant/Discontinued Riverside Auto used car sales lot -Has an expired Conditional Use
Permit
MEMORANDUM
Don Ashworth, City Manager
August 2, 1994
Page 2
• Several Single family homes
' Vacant land
• Progress Valley mini- storage -Has a Conditional Use Permit
• Brookside Motel -Has an approved Site Plan
' Discontinued Super America -Has an expired Conditional Use Permit
• Vacant site of a drive -in restaurant (formerly Tri-Y)
• Admiral Waste Site - Currently applying for an Interim Use Permit/Outdoor storage of
dumpsters
Other uses outside the BF District but within the surrounding area are:
' Statewide Auto Salvage Junk Yard-Nonconforming Use
g g
• Moon Valley Gravel Quarry -Has an Interim Use Permit
• Assumption Seminary-Has Conceptual PUD approval
• Garden Center - Permitted Use
' Radio transmission tower -Has a Conditional Use Permit
• MnDOT Park and Ride Lot
• Western Motel -Has a Site Plan
' Gedney Pickle Plant (zoned IOP)
One of the goals that was identified at the point Planning Commission -City Council meeting,
' was expanding uses within the BF district. The following is a list of suggested permitted and
conditional uses recommended by staff and the City Attorney:
ARTICLE XX. "BF" FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT
Sec. 20 -771. Intent.
The intent of the "BF" District is to accommodate limited commercial uses temporary in nature
without urban services, while maintaining the integrity, minimizing impact, and protecting
' the natural environment. When urban services are available, land use may change to a
higher and improved use of the property.
' Sec. 20 -771.1 Permitted Uses.
1. Whole sale Nursery /Green House/No Retail (Pursuant to Sec.20 -257).
2. Private Park/Public Park.
3. Single Family Dwelling (One unit per 10 acres).
4. Agriculture.
1
Don Ashworth, City Manager
August 2, 1994
Page 3 i
Sec. 20 -773 Conditional Uses '
The following are conditional uses in a BF District:
1. Motor fuel stations without car washes. '
2. Truck/trailer /auto /sporting goods and boat sales /rental
3. Utility services
4. Cold storage and warehousing i
5. Miniature Golf Course (Pursuant to Sec. 20 -265).
The proposed amendment will allow reasonable use of properties within the BF District. Staff t
is recommending approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
On July 20, 1994, the Planning Commission reviewed this ordinance amendment. They agreed ,
that a change is needed in the southern portion of Chanhassen. Many area residents attended the
meeting and voiced their concern over some of the uses along Highway 212 and the impact it
has had on the area. One resident requested higher standards, similar to those regulating the rest '
of Chanhassen.
The Planning Commission questioned the reason behind this ordinance amendment and the '
impact it will have in the long run, after the MUSA line has been extended to the BF District.
Staff explained that the proposal will permit additional uses that are compatible with the
surrounding area.
Originally, staff listed Miniature Golf Course (Pursuant to Sec. 20 -265) as a permitted use. The
Planning Commission requested that it be moved to the Conditional Use section. ,
The ordinance was passed with a vote of 6 to 1.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION '
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion:
"The City Council approves amendments to Article XX. "BF" FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT
to read as follows:
Don Ashworth, City Manager
August 2, 1994
Page 4
ARTICLE XX. "BF" FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT
Sec. 20 -771. Intent.
The intent of the "BF" District is to accommodate limited commercial uses temporary in nature
without urban services, while maintaining the integrity, minimizing impact, and protecting
the natural environment. When urban services are available, land (Ise may change to a
higher and improved use of the property.
Sec. 20 -771.1 Permitted Uses.
1. Whole sale Nursery/Green House/No Retail (Pursuant to Sec.20 -257).
2. Private Park/Public Park.
3. Single Family Dwelling (One unit per 10 acres).
4. Agriculture.
Sec. 20 -773 Conditional Uses
The following are conditional uses in a BF District:
1. Motor fuel stations without car washes.
2. Truck/trailer /auto /sporting goods and boat sales /rental
3. Utility services
4. Cold storage and warehousing
5. Miniature Golf Course (Pursuant to Sec. 20 -265)
ATTACHMENT
1. Map showing the area along Highway 212.
2. Planning Commission minutes dated July 20, 1994.
M 0
9700---
9800—
;020.)—
10300-- - - -._ _..
10400-
10500–
'070o-
I, X41",
10900-
11000
11100
11:
113181
114(1 - --
AA
4,
* •• n ., - � -. �Or _ 700
AIL 9000
—9900
A21 _10000
f l�
<
BLUFF
CfirEK B rookside Motel
PO I - T Home —10200
Admiral Waste moon Valley
\y - ; t, �� <, S�b��°° w SS FA M 0
Vacant Riverside Auto
----10300
Seminary
R R U MORI State Wide Auto Salvage
O
n
S4�rep
-.0600
L A 9 E
Progress Valley
Oft Western Motel
Vacant Super America,.,.
F ------ A2 Vacant Drive-in
11T� �V 1"A".AVIF.
mT Ur 3nM%urCL
MnDOT Park and Ride
Radio T ower
-11300
s.
S COTT
0
0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0
T
0
Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
Al -Jaff: On weekdays and then.
Mancino: 9:00 to 5:00 on Saturdays.
Conrad: 9:00 to 5:00 on Saturday I think is right.
Al -Jaff: Alright.
Scott: Anything else?
Conrad moved, Mancino seconded to table interim use permit to allow screened outdoor
storage in the BF for Admiral Waste Management. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING:
AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TO THE BF, FRINGE BUSINESS TO AMEND
BY ADDING ADDITIONAL PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES.
' Public Present:
I Name Address
Verne Severson 675 Lakota Lane
Tim Wise 425 Lakota Lane
Leon & Delores Mesenbrink 250 Flying Cloud Drive
Nancy Lee Admiral Waste Management
Patrick Blood Admiral Waste Management
Jim Sulerud 730 Vogelsberg Trail
' Richard Vogel 105 Pioneer Trail
Willard Halver 470 Flying Cloud Drive
' Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item.
Scott: Any questions or comments? I just have one. When you're talking about some of
that property being zoned or rezoned to a higher use level, is that something that would come
about due to, first of all the MUSA line being available? And then, we would basically see
what sort of development plans would come in and if it happens to be a PUD, it would be a
' PUD. If it happens to be, is it depending upon.
7
Planning ommission Meeting - Jul 20 1994 '
g g Y
Aanenson: Well when urban services become available we would certainly look at a comp ,
plan amendment and revisit that whole area.
Scott: So the BF could conceivably be a study area if we figured the MUSA line would be,
okay.
Aanenson: ...with urban services available and there were existing uses down there, we'd try
to accommodate them ... So certainly we would revisit that whole area.
Scott: So this would be something, for example like what happens to an A2 when services ,
are available, it becomes a PUD or RSF or something like that? Okay.
Mancino: Or it could be zoned for an existing use, or whatever. I have a question about
permitted uses and mini golf course. Mini golf course is different than a miniature golf
course?
Scott: Well get your code book out.
Mancino: I was thinking wouldn't a golf course be nice there and then I say, oh but it does
say mini golf course.
Aanenson: That's the definition we have. It's the same thing, yeah.
Mancino: So it's a miniature golf course.
Aanenson: Yes.
Mancino: But what if somebody did want to come in and put a mini 9 hole golf course in? '
Could they do that?
Aanenson: I'm not sure there's enough land in that BF district to do that. '
Harberts: Is that park and ride lot inside Chanhassen? ,
Aanenson: Yes.
Harberts: What's it zoned then?
Al -Jaff: No, I'm sorry it's zoned A2. Agricultural Estates. I
8 1
I Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
Scott: Any other questions or comments? This is an item with a public hearing and may I
' have a motion to open the public hearing please?
Conrad moved, Harberts seconded to open the public hearing. All voted in favor and
the motion carried. The public hearing was open.
Scott: If anyone would like to step forward and make comments or ask questions regarding
this particular item, please do so. State your name and your address and have at it. Is there
anyone here, sir please.
' Willard Halver: I'm Willard Halver. I live at 470 Flying Cloud Drive. In other words,
Highway 169/212. I've been living there for 35 years and it seems as though we're in a
situation in that area, and that area is important ... to preserve and we've got a situation now
' where if you want to use that as a conditional uses to the city ordinance and this conditional
uses, in addition to the ordinance, city ordinance would open up a can of worms that I don't
think we're getting into and who would be responsible or control these conditional uses?
' There could be a million different things, in fact we got a number of things right in this, in
the area that I am in next door to me that are conditional uses that have been going on for 3-
4 years. And also what is kind of a thing that came to my attention, you use this initials BE
' Is that a connection with Browning Ferris in regard to his Admiral Waste Management?
Scott: No. BF just signifies Business Fringe zoning. So it doesn't have anything to do with
any commercial enterprise.
1 Willard Halver: I do know that there is an individual that's just waiting for this conditional
use thing to go into effect and he is within oh 2 -3 block area that has been controlled by the
City Council and done a good job by keeping under control. But he's just waiting to explode
and come ... further sand mining and that would come under this conditional use addition to the
ordinance. I thank you.
Scott: I don't have an answer or comment. Perhaps you might. Sir are you stating that the
people who are operating Moon Valley are planning on purchasing other property to expand
their mining operation? Is that what you're saying?
�I
Willard Halver: Yes. I know it indirectly and almost directly speaking. And this has been
an eyesore in the area for quite a while and it's also a traffic hazard with those big belly
dumps going in and out of there every morning because I'm retired and I sit there and watch
the traffic tied up when they're trying to go in and out of that pit. But the owner I know
from a matter of fact, I got in a round about way, wants to buy all additional property that's
available and some of it is right in my front door. And that's why I am taking the stand I'm
W
Planning Commission - '
ann g Co scion Meeting July 20, 1994
taking because we like it where we live and we've lived there for 35 years and I don't think '
somebody can come in and again, they're conditional uses.
Scott: Well let's maybe have our staff talk about that. I
Aanenson: First of all Moon Valley is not located in this business fringe. And if they were
looking at buying property within the district, this wouldn't be a ... use. And you are aware of
the fact that we have been in litigation with Moon Valley. 1
Scott: Yes, for quite some time. 1
Aanenson: If you look on the map, maybe Sharmin can show you where Moon Valley is and
where the district is that we're talking about. They're over there quite a ways from the ,
district. We're just talking about that little narrow piece on 169.
Willard Halver: Yeah, I know. It's about a third of a block from where I live. There's been '
15 to 50 dumpsters up until now. And also, what type of screening, is that going to be tree
screening or what type of screening is that going to be? I can see it from where I live and I
know, this thing has been going on for 2 -3 years. This haphazardly.
Aanenson: I think we're talking about the Admiral Waste.
Scott: Yeah, we're talking about two things.
Aanenson: Yeah, the Planning Commission tabled that earlier for further information. I
Willard Halver: ...it's been tabled but it's still a thorn in my side.
Scott: Yeah the reason it's been tabled is that we don't feel that the screenin g as proposed is '
P ro P
adequate for the location and amount of dumpsters that are proposed to be on that spot and
that will be coming back probably what, first meeting in August. '
Al -Jaff: When they submit a revised plan. '
Scott: Okay. And then on the Admiral Waste, the notice area would include this gentleman
for that particular item?
Aanenson: If he wants to be noticed.
Scott: If you would like that, we could send you a notice when the Admiral Waste item
10 1
t
F
Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
comes up again.
Willard Halver: I'd appreciate it. I may be out of town, I mean I don't know. If I am,
that's my hard luck.
Scott: Well you can work that out with our staff and they'll make sure that you get notice so
you can know when that's coming on the agenda.
Willard Halver: The other thing I'm concerned about is, part of my property fronts on this
property that this miner wants to buy and there are some other people in the audience that are
closer than I am to that mining pit and I know that it's temporarily stopped but that doesn't,
this conditional use thing.
Aanenson: But this is separate from that.
Scott: Yeah this is.
Willard Halver: It's a can of worms.
Scott: Good, thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak about the item at
hand, which is additional conditional uses for and permitted uses for business fringe?
Leon Mesenbrink: My name is Leon Mesenbrink. I live at 250 Flying Cloud Drive which is
right across from the development area. And what really amazes me is you people up here
sitting in Chanhassen, beautiful town. You want it all like Edina and everything else but us
people at the very end of Chanhassen, it's almost like we're in a different ballgame. Entirely
different from you people. You let people, this Moon Valley do what they want to do.
Basically. I mean you can't stop it. They run trucks in and out. I bought there in 1959.
How many of you people have been here since 1959? Any of you people?
Harberts: I haven't been alive that long.
Leon Mesenbrink: Okay, well that's fine. I bought out there when it wasn't even a gravel
pit. It was a ski tow. I bought out there and paid a lot of money, which we thought at that
time, we'd be out in the woods. All of a sudden now we're into a commercial nightmare.
And now you want to go by 169 or 212 and put another Shakopee and look at a bunch of
garbage containers. Do you want them sitting around? Do you have a home in Chanhassen
here? I come home every day from work up that road. I should look out at 50 or 100
garbage dumpsters? Would you want to do it? Any of you people? Think about some of
these things. I'm just saying you people here, we're at the far fringe of Chanhassen but
11
Planning ommission Meeting - Jul 20 1994 '
g g Y
we've been here a long time too and think about us. Thank you.
,
Scott: Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak about the business fringe conditional
uses and permitted uses? Yes sir.
'
Jim Sulerud: I'm Jim Sulerud and I live at 730 Vogelsberg Trail. I'm not immediately
adjacent to business fringe but in the same neighborhood. What my experience has been in
the almost 20 years that I've lived there, is that within the city here, is that the city's very
cautious about the taking of property rights of people so they, the city has by lawsuit in some
cases, to give into property owners for exercising their property rights for development or
what they want to. I think the present experience in that particular portion of the business
'
fringe that's at the, near the Y, is that if you have multiple failing businesses. Businesses that
tried something. Didn't work out in that setting and it's my view that the city is not under
obligation to further enhance their property values or enhance their ability to do additional
,
things in order to make that suitable for something they were unable to make suitable in the
past. So to expand the uses for people, property owners to try something else because what
they thought might work in the past doesn't work, seems to be going against all the
discussion that I've heard in the Planning Commission and City Council about the wonderful
natural area and how it will be nice to preserve that and perpetuate the natural nature of that
,
area. Now when there's opportunity, I think you can recognize that when places have failed,
maybe that's going in the right direction and not seek ways of enhancing further commercial
development. I think it would be, it would have been great if this were left A2 or whatever.
'
The places where we do see some things growing a little bit, and Admiral is an example, or
the Moon Valley, is where people have gone beyond the permitted uses. And now they're
trying to say, well we'll grandfather them in or we'll provide conditional use permits to
accommodate that and I think you can take advantage of the economics right now that have
turned that area down and the uses are probably at a low point. If you approve additional
uses, you're going to have new proposals before you that do new and wonderful things that I
'
think are contrary to what this body is looking for and the City Council is looking for.
Thanks.
'
Scott: Good, th y y g none, can I have a motion to close
thank you. An other comments? Hearin
the public hearing please?
'
Mancino moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and
the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Scott: Comments. Matt.
Ledvina: Well I don't know what the driving force was to initiate this effort in terms of
12 1
I Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
rezoning this area. As I understand this currently is A2, is that right?
I Aanenson: No. It's currently business fringe.
Ledvina: It is currently business fringe? Okay. So essentially the lines on the map are
essentially the same, they're exactly the same. We're not changing the lines. Okay. But
what we are doing then is adding permitted uses? Okay. That's the only thing we're adding.
Mancino: Well conditions.
' Ledvina: And, go ahead.
Al -Jaff: The only thing we're adding under conditional is the sporting goods. But there
' could be 5 conditional uses or 5 permitted uses.
Ledvina: Okay. Has there been any specific request for any of these items? I mean what
drives the mini golf course for example? I mean I can see.
Aanenson: What we looked at in this zoning, we tried to look at some reasonable use of the
' property where maybe it could be a turnover when you go back and look at the study—look at
the MUSA line expansion. Maybe there's a better use for the property or higher use ... at one
time, before it was a part of the city, you know served as a collector and there were services
down there. There's some grandfathered uses as the people that spoke tonight indicated.
There are some non - conforming uses down there that have grandfathered rights. What we're
talking about are other uses that people that have properties there, for people that have
property down there to make use of their property until such time services do become
available.
Ledvina: Okay, well I look at the permitted uses and I see 1 thru 4 wholesale nursery,
greenhouse, that seems to make sense. There's not retail activity. Private /public park, great.
' Single family dwelling, 1 per acre. Agricultural. All those things are reasonable land uses
but then I see mini golf course and now you've got parking. You've got retail. You've got
traffic.
' Aanenson: Yeah. We've addressed that in Section 20 -265 which is in the conditional use.
We referenced that standard and ... show that there are conditional use standards so that's why
we've shown that reference. And that does say, if you are going to use this use, you have to
develop using this criteria. There are criteria ... you get the hours of operation and some other
criteria that was to go in this area you'd have to maintain the use of standards. But we tried
t to give some ... meet those standards.
1 13
Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
Ledvina: I'm just thinking about you know, land uses that are somewhat similar and
compatible and I see numbers 1 thru 4 as being low intensive and reasonable but I don't
know about number 5 for permitted uses. And then, so I don't know exactly where that's
going to go but those are my thoughts on the addition of the permitted uses. And then a
question on the conditional uses. Truck trailer and then we've added sporting goods, boat
sales and rental. Again, why would we go ahead and do that? I mean is there something
that's driving that or?
Al -Jaff: No, but we've always had the auto sale or rental. There is a U -Haul rental place.
Ledvina: But that was only grandfathered, right?
Al -Jaff: No. It's a conditional use.
Aanenson: They had to go through the screening, which they've done so we felt that's been
an appropriate use and if someone came under that same criteria, and screened it
appropriately and landscaped it and fencing.
Ledvina: So that's a conditional use. Why isn't that identified on page 3 on the top?
You're saying auto.
Aanenson: ...conditions in the BF district.
Ledvina: Motor fuel stations.
Al -Jaff: What you see in bold is just what we're adding.
Ledvina: Right, I understand that. But the, previously there was a used car sales.
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Ledvina: Okay. And you're saying used car sales are allowed within the business fringe
district?
Al -Jaff: Correct.
Ledvina: They are, okay.
Al -Jaff: They don't require the use of urban services.
14
I Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
Ledvina: Oh I see, current uses. That's the extent of my comments at this time.
Scott: Okay, Ladd.
Conrad: Why are we doing this right now given we're going to study the area?
Aanenson: The area that's outside the MUSA doesn't go quite as far south as we... When we
talked about the ... and looking at this on a cursory level, again we've had requests from people
to use their property... Again, Matt had a question about the golf course and we'll just give
you two of the things and—you can't be within 500 feet from single family residence. They
' have to provide adequate parking. They also have to provide—Again, that's the reason we
felt we could make it compatible with the residential.
Conrad: Okay. Just real quickly, I think all the permitted uses are better uses than what we
currently will allow under conditional uses so if you follow that logic, I think I'd buy what
staff is saying. It is, they're more environmental. They're more natural, which is, the theory
is really they're going to be developed for commercial or it should be put into a natural
setting and so no governmental body is buying it up for a natural setting. I think we do have
to give the land owners an adequate use for their property here and I feel comfortable in the
' permitted uses. I think that's certainly acceptable to me. I would like to make some changes
in the intent statement however in terms of, because it is, a lot of it is natural and a lot of it
is sensitive, I would like to get some wording in that talks about development without
impacting the natural conditions or the sensitive to the environment and the river valley that's
there. I just think in the past we've tried to minimize, we tried to give land owners an
acceptable use, a low level acceptable use of their property in that area without major impact
and I'm not sure if we've been successful in that or not. But I continue to think that we want
to really preserve the natural part of that until we have urban services there or until we have a
plan to turn it into a more natural setting.
Mancino: I have a question on your's, to piggy back on that. If it is a permitted use and the
MUSA line comes down and includes this area at that time, much like Swings on Galpin and
Highway 5, and now we're looking at that study area and saying, you know it may be single
family or multi family. Does the permitted use that is there now, once the MUSA line
' changes and encompasses that land, can that, let's say it's a mini golf course, stay there even
though we have rezoned it forever? Until, okay.
Aanenson: Yeah. That's why we were comfortable with these uses even if it were to
change. We felt like that—these would be compatible. It has to be done, these are the other
conditional uses that we'd be looking at...
1 15
Planning ommission Meeting - Jul 20 1994
g g Y
Mancino: And you feel that way with the wholesale nursery. I mean they have trucks, big
trucking operations because they have to get things out and deliveries in the spring and they '
have big greenhouses, etc and you still feel that.
Conrad: We have that at Lake Ann. Down on TH 101. '
Mancino: Well I know ... too so I just wanted to bring that up. '
Scott: Ladd, are you finished with your comments?
Conrad: Finished. '
Scott: Nancy, do you want to continue, if you have others? Since you're on a roll. Diane. 1
Harberts: I don't really have a lot of extras to add. I guess when you take into consideration
that we try to bring a balance to growth and development to the needs of the residents and '
the needs of the business community, I think we do that by, when you take into perspective
all of our codes or guidelines that we put out there. I mean the architectural integrity. We
ask for building and landscaping. I think we've seen that with our first one. The first, on the
interim use permit for screening. I think we're here to bring that balance but I think because
of standards we've kind of set, it's probably our best we can do to protect the interest of each
resident in their own way. So I guess I support what's here. It certainly isn't an easy job. ,
Not everyone's going to be happy but when you look at everything that's in place, I think it's
good for the community and we just have to remind ourselves. As things come in that we
keep that integrity there with each project.
Scott: Ron.
Nutting: I guess I don't have any big P problem with the permitted uses. From some of this I
discussion and the exchange Kate with regard to future and the MUSA line. Was there
discussion about making the mini golf course a conditional as opposed to a permitted? ,
Aanenson: Again, I think based on the standards that's in the code, I think we feel ,
comfortable as far as that being under permitted use...
Nutting: Okay. I don't have a lot to add. I think that there's not a significant change here I
and so it looks good for a motion.
Scott: Okay, Jeff. 1
16 1
H
I Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
Farmakes: I'll follow up a little bit on Ladd's comment. What worries me about this, the
' long term and what the plan is going to be in that area. We're kind of blanketly saying that
when the MUSA gets there we'll worry about it but it seems that most of these uses will
revolve around things like dumpsters and trucks and mining and I question in the
comprehensive plan, long term, if those are the uses that we see in Chanhassen. Is that the
intent of the community. Many of these uses have been sort of acquired through default.
Businesses that went under. They were able under past ordinances to use this and nobody
seemed to care. It was under county at the time before the township expanded. What I
would like to see is a study for us to look at long term use. What our intent is for that
property area all along the bluff area because I see a convergence of opposing interests and it
seems that all those uses, or all those uses that are unpalatable, seem to be concentrated along
that bluff area over there. And it kind of makes you wonder what we're going to wind up
with in 20 years. But I understand in the interim that property owners want to continue their
' use as permitted uses for the businesses. But long term I don't see those there. I'm not
going to be on the commission then but certainly.
' Mancino: But they could be there long term because once it's a permitted use.
' Farmakes: That's what I'm saying. That gets to my next point. You're familiar with how
we deal with some of these large scale developments, say Timberwood for instance. They
become the nucleus for development around them because people will come in and they will
' complain that they don't want industrial or they don't want business use or whatever next to
their development. So what happens is you get a sort of a nucleus for development going on
there that may not be the best interest for the city. Just because dumpsters happen to ... been
put there, does that mean that that use should be expanded and therefore—developer may not
want to put a housing project there. And that's what I'm getting at. I'd like to see us look at
the long term development of that bluff area just because in general scope like we do the
' comprehensive plan. We've seen to have left that area down below there as work to be done
later. It seems that we get an awful lot of that stuff here, in that particular area. It seems to
be coming back here a lot.
' Scott: What would you think about, instead of allowing these additional permitted uses,
allow them as conditional uses?
Farmakes: I would, if we put a time limit on them...
' Scott: I was thinking for the interim point in time, let those continue but yet to be able to
have some sort of a sunset on there that the trigger is the MUSA line.
Farmakes: A sunset that makes sense, yeah. It allows the city staff to long term look at what
17
Planning ommission Meeting - Jul 20 1994 ,
g g Y
would be in the best interest for Chanhassen for development of that property. Because I
look at these uses and they're quite haphazard, as you look at them. They're even as '
grouping of businesses there. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. That's it.
Conrad: Okay, just for discussion.
Scott: We're doing that. '
Conrad: You've got two choices down there. It's on a major highway.
Harberts: Soon to be ex major highway. '
Conrad: It's still serving 15,000. ,
Mancino: Soon to be?
Scott: 10 to 20 years. '
Farmakes: A lot of closed businesses on that highway. I
Conrad: 15,000 cars a day.
Scott: How many Super America's go out of business? That was a surprise. But anyway, '
continue.
Conrad: Why would they do that, I don't understand. But you've got a major highway and
what's the difference between a major highway there and a major highway on Highway 5?
You know what are you going to put? On the other hand you have a very natural area. But ,
somebody's got to come up with money to buy it, meaning a government body, and I haven't
seen that in our plans at all.
Farmakes: There's a highway or maJ j hi that along the St. Croix. I don't see development '
g Y goes g
there either but there happens to be a major highway.
Conrad: But it's park property right.
Farmakes: No. Not all of it's park property. '
Mancino: Well you could do some architectural guidelines and everything else that's been I
done to Highway 5 in that area also.
18 1
fl
I Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
Conrad: But are there other alternatives?
I Mancino: As to what can go?
Conrad: Let's talk, you've got a highway business community. You've got a natural
community. Natural environmental area.
Mancino: You're talking about a city referendum. A land referendum like Eden Prairie does
to buy the land.
Farmakes: But are you saying the business that are along that highway have any, make any
sense as a grouping or are they here by default?
' Conrad: They're there because the land.
Farmakes: What does mining have to do with dumpster storage? Or park and ride.
Conrad: I'm just saying, this study that we're looking for. You know you can say well
we're not going to do anything until a study happens but the reality of what a study might
' show us, I think we can be wise enough to know what a couple uses are down there and I'm
not sure that we're going to say ah ha. Well there's a good use for that. And I question
' whether it's going to be public money is going to be put into the area so even so, let's say
that's 10 -15 years down the line something might happen. You still have to give the property
owners a fair use of their property. So right now they can use it for motor fuel stations,
trucks. They can use it for a lot of these things and yeah.
Farmakes: You supply intent. I think what I was looking for was a time period for renewal
' to allow a reasonable amount of time in the interim to look at what the city's going to do
with that property, What I'm looking for is to try to take away some of these haphazard
businesses driving the development that goes around it. I'd like to see some planning
involved there.
Conrad: Yeah, I hear what you're saying Jeff. I just don't see any commitment on. There's
' no urban service. When's urban service going to get there? A long, long time and until that
happens, nothing really is going to happen down there.
' Farmakes: Again, if they have unlimited usage of those uses, they're going to be what drives
them. They're going to be what drives that
Conrad: Jeff, I hear you, so we have some uses there. They're kind of grandfathered in or
19
Planning ommission Meeting - 1 20 1994 ,
g eets g July ,
they're there. They're conditional and we haven't found better ones other than maybe what ,
staff is saying, these might be better. So what you're doing is encouraging. So here's your
choice. And you can, and I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying in terms of
having some time lines and what have you. But on the other hand, what staff's proposed
here is to encourage certain things that probably are more in setting, more in nature of the
property. So you could do something today and encourage it.
Farmakes: Well, I would make the statement for the public hearing, for the people who have '
property have adjacent to this area who have a difference of opinion of that.
Conrad: Well I'm sure. If I were a residential owner, I wouldn't want any of this stuff, '
absolutely. Yeah. I agree.
Farmakes: So and what the government is doing with that area, it just seems like it's in r
conflict or will be in conflict. Maybe not now. 10 years from now.
Ledvina: Does it make sense to make the permitted uses conditional uses?
Scott: Also the sunset because that's what. I
Aanenson: ...right now. We're trying to get away from the amount of conditional uses.
Scott: I mean I can see where you might be coming from here to say, well if you're willing ,
to, landowner if you're willing to invest in items number 1 thru 5, you'll get a permitted use
and you can continue that use on into the future as far as you care to carry that So I mean I '
kind of took a look at that and said, that's what it is. I mean there's conditional uses that
perhaps we're not interested in seeing, i.e. motor fuel stations, etc, etc. If someone who
happens to own that property wants to single family dwellings, etc, etc, they're in essence '
guaranteed the use of that land for that purpose for an extended period of tune. But then
again, one of the points that Jeff raised is do we want that stuff down there forever. So what
I'm hearing. '
Mancino: Not only that but it will drive the .surrounding. '
Scott: Right, exactly because if this is going to be here forever, then you're going to see
something else. So perhaps what we need to do, I mean we already had one item this ,
evening about business fringe with a sunset on it. Perhaps where we want to go with this is
not add permitted uses to business fringe district but perhaps add some conditional uses and
sunset them. Would that be acceptable? I
20 1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
Aanenson: We can't put a sunset on conditional uses.
Scott: Or perhaps make these uses conditional but not permitted.
Nutting: Kate, are they already conditional uses, number 1 thru 5?
Aanenson: No.
Nutting: Okay.
Conrad: But what Jeff wants to do is do some planning and nothing we've said right here
really does do that.
Farmakes: I would like to leave the opportunity for planning to have some effect with those
uses.
Conrad: So you want to, your preference would be to table this thing and have staff come
back and tell you when they can get to the planning issue.
Farmakes: No, not necessarily.
Aanenson: But even if we did that, we said we see this being x, okay. And when urban
services come in, what if it's 20 years. And we said, well this is what it's going to be. Then
we still have 20 years of relative use of.
Conrad: But what Jeff's saying hey, do the plan in the next 6 months so we know.
Farmakes: No, that's not what I'm saying.
Conrad: Oh, I'm sorry. Okay.
Farmakes: I said leave the door open to review the use rather than grant it forever. That's
what I'm saying. Leave it open for the opportunity when the time comes to do the planning.
The city has the option of what it wants to do rather than to have those businesses drive that
development.
Mancino: But the landowner, if I'm going to build a house on 10 acres and then all of a
sudden there's this sunset that the city wants to review whether that's appropriate in 10 years.
Farmakes: Those uses happen quite often. Say for instance you have a permitted use, let's
say you're storing something on a piece of property ... in 5 years it's renewed. You may get
21
Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
that again. It may develop. Houses come in and you get enough people to come in and they
object to that use. It's incompatible with their use and you have to move. We've had several
businesses in here that have done this...
Nutting: So what I hear Jeff, are you in agreement with what Joe is saying? You're saying
make the permitted uses conditional uses?
Scott: And then set some sort of review time frame.
Farmakes: I think that would work and give them a reasonable, about 10 years or whatever
you think is.
Nutting: But your comment, or what I was thinking is, who's going to do a single family
dwelling under a conditional use?
Scott: In this area? In the BF?
Aanenson: ...you can't put conditions for time limits on conditional use. You can only do it
on interim use. So you have to change that to interim use, and then you could put time
limits.
Scott: So that's really the only vehicle that would us the planning opportunity.
Conrad: Kate, why isn't this part of the 1995 study area? I always thought it was.
Scott: Is it too far out? As far as the MUSA access.
Aanenson: Well we indicated that we would look at this as part of that. Really we may start
working on that plan late this fall. ...big project and it's not going to be done in 6 months.
No way.
Scott: Your thoughts for development pressure being along Highway 5 and not on 212 in this
BF area.
Aanenson: ...fine there as far as time frame. When they did the comp plan it said 1995. But
you know, we said we would look at this and include this in the area of the project. But
again if people come up with, you know what we're trying to do here is in the short run
allow what we feel is a compatible use of properties that are down there.. just as Ladd has
indicated. To allow use of the property...
Scott: So are we talking about interim uses now? Would that do what we want?
22
f
1
�I
I
I Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
Mancino: ...come back and ask for an interim use until the MUSA line.
Scott: That's probably the vehicle that will allow for planning yet, and interim use permits
we can set time tables.
' Harberts: What ordinance...is there some reason?
' Aanenson: Well we felt that in this district there should be some uses that are permitted.
Right now the district...
' Scott: Does somebody want to take a stab at a motion?
Nutting: But you know, even with interim use versus conditional use for some, 1 thru 5, who
' is going to pursue those under an interim use?
Scott: Well I think if the time table's long enough, they will.
Nutting: But there's uncertainty with an interim use for the time table so anytime you throw
that uncertainty in there.
Harberts: Well in fact similar to the sig n ordinance. If the desire is to go with an interim
permit use with a time line, what's the time line?
Well I would think y ou know, if I were sitting on a piece of property Scott: y g P P P Y that used to be a
' drive in, a failed drive in and I saw the opportunity to turn it into a mini golf course that I
could operate subject to certain criteria for a period of 5 years, I'd get my calculator out and
figure out if it would work.
Harberts: But how do you know 5 years or 2 years or 1 year?
Scott: I think that would be something that we'd need to put in with the interim, if we're
going to be. For example, if you're going to say that the permitted uses would become
interim uses, which would be x years. 5 years. That would allow someone to say, well
here's the criteria. Here's the time horizon and then that would allow a business person to
make a determination if they want to invest any money in it. I think that'd be pretty straight
forward. Because then there's concrete rules for interim uses and there's a concrete length of
time and a business decision could be made based upon that.
Harberts: Well I don't know if this group is ready to move it forward.
1 23
Planning ommission Meeting - Jul 20 1994
g g Y
Scott: Okay. Is there a motion? I guess I think we need to give staff some direction on this
one. Does it appear that interim use would allow us the opportunity to plan yet act as a
carrot to have some of the property put to a better use? I don't know if there's another
option for us that would give us the flexibility.
Nutting: Are you talking about changing the conditional use s that already exist to interim
uses also? Or are you just going to leave those as conditional? I just sense we're really ,
mucking this thing up here. It's really getting cloudy.
Conrad: Yeah. Unless you know where you're going, we don't know. '
Nutting: You're trying to micro manage something before we even know what we're
managing. I agree with the issue of with what Jeff is saying.
Mancino: ...big picture plan.
Nutting: Big picture and long term but what, do we have a reasonable vehicle to do that?
And what I sense is happening, and staff is saying, we don't know but we're going to set it
up so that these permitted uses seem to be driving it in a direction which makes more sense
long term. But we're not going to know for sure. You know the question is.
Mancino: Well and secondly, some of these conditional uses, I would hate to see new
conditional uses of motor fuel stations and cold storage and warehousing, etc, expanding in
this area. And right now they are a conditional use.
Nutting: So would you like then to delete some of the conditional uses? Is that what you're?
Mancino: I. would not like to see the ones that are here expand more. If I were looking at '
this area as a whole, planning it from the very beginning, I would not have those uses in
there.
Nutting: Okay. But right now today they're there so we have to do something with them if '
g Y � Y Y g
we don't want to have them expand. ,
Mancino: Plus there could be more coming in according to this. Because there are
conditional uses right now in the BF district. I
Harberts: It seems that, what I'm reading here, it seems that, is that so much what the
expansion items are. It's just the duration because it's kind of an unclear area of what should '
happen down in that area. What we'd like to see ... in that area long term. That's what it is. I
24 1
I . ..
Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
don't know if we're having real problems with the items right now here in time but it's
because it's a longer duration possible and does it tie our hands.
Scott: Well permanent uses would tie our hands relative to planning for that area. There's
no question about that. And so will conditional uses.
Farmakes: Look at the Red -E -Mix that was on TH 5. Just an incompatible use with TH 5.
' It wasn't that many years ago that it probably didn't seem that bad of a use at the time. If it
is a major highway Ladd, and if it's outside the study area, shouldn't we have the opportunity
to plan for it when the time comes without having that planning already done with the
' expansion of these uses?
Conrad: I never disagree with planning. Yet motor fuel stations can be done down there
' right now. Truck trailer can be done. Cold storage can be done. And as I see it, rather than
allowing those to come in, I'd like to encourage some things that I think are more in sync
with the area now. So I'll make a motion. The Planning Commission recommends approval
of Article XX, BF Fringe Business District to read per the staff report except for moving the
mini golf course under a permitted use into a conditional use and to have staff reword the
intent statement to emphasize the impact on the natural conditions of the area.
' Scott: Is there a second?
' Nutting: I second that
' Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we recommend to City Council the motion as
stated by Commissioner Conrad. Is there any discussion?
' Mancino: Yeah, my discussion is, can we ask that it be included in the 1995 study area?
Aanenson: We've already indicated that we'll do that.
' Mancino: Oh, okay.
' Scott: Okay. So that should be in the intent statement then. Okay, is there any other
discussion?
' Conrad: No, I don't want it in the intent statement.
Scott: Well I know it's in the background section here.
1 25
Planning ommission Meeting - Jul 20, 1994
g g Y
Conrad: I would like to make it of record that this area will be part of the 1995 study area
but Kate when you said that, what is telling me that it is? What guides you to include this?
Just us? Okay, I believe you. We'll make sure that is. We'll make sure it is. I guess I
don't need that as part. I think it's part of the record but I guess I don't really need to.
' about the BF district. That includes the Progress Valle
Scott: And we're also talking abo �' Y Mini
Storage as well? '
Aanenson: Okay.
Scott: Any other discussion? '
Mancino: I just have one question. Okay, it gets into the 1995 study. That means we can '
look at the whole area. Rezone it. Take out the conditional uses.
Aanenson: We don't know. We've got to go back and do a whole study of the whole 212 '
corridor. Where should commercial be. Where should residential be. It's the same process
we went through with the comp plan ... it's a lot of work.
Conrad: You're just stuck with what's there. You can change the future but you're stuck ,
with what's there.
Farmakes: But we're expanding what's there. '
Conrad: My motion is to change what's there. To guide it a little bit differently. I
Scott: By having the uses that you consider to be more compatible with the area become
permitted uses and then the mini golf course, which is more of a commercial use per se, '
become conditional.
Conrad: Yeah. '
Scott: Which makes, that's a surgical way of kind of doing I think what we want.
n at ,
Mancino: And you want to add sporting goods and boat sales / rental?
Conrad: I'm comfortable with that. I'd rather have a boat there than a car because there's a ,
river across the, I don't know. I'm comfortable with that.
Conrad moved, Nutting seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval '
26 1
u�
Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994
1
of Article XX, BF Fringe Business District to read per the staff report except for moving
the mini golf course from under permitted use into a conditional use and to have staff
reword the intent statement to emphasize the impact on the natural conditions of the
area. All voted in favor, except Commissioner Farmakes who opposed, and the motion
carried with a vote of 6 to 1.
Scott: And your reasons?
r Farmakes: I think we're putting the cart before the horse.
1
1
r
1
1
r
1
1
r
r
1
27
r