The URL can be used to link to this page

5. Interim Use Permit to Allow Screened Outdoor Storage, 10500 Great Plains Blvdi MEMORANDUM CITY OF - CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 0 FAX (612) 937 -5739 ' TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner H ' DATE: September 7, 1994 R W Epft wd-2LD! K Mod"rfie ., -- - Re) D ecte .....� o t WP , .r.w. " r Dote Submitted to CommWft + Dale Submitted to Cot*4 SUBJ: Interim Use Permit (94 -1 IUP) to provide Outdoor Storage for Commercial Dumpsters located North and adjacent to Highway 212 and east and adjacent to Highway 101. Address: 10500 Great Plains Boulevard ' On August 22, 1994, the City Council tabled action on an Interim Use Permit application to g Y store commercial dumpsters on property zoned�BF, Business District, located north and adjacent to Highway 212 and east and adjacent to Hihway 101. The City Council wanted the conditions of approval restated clearly to prevent any future misunderstandings. The following constitutes our proposed changes: 1. A final landscaping plan shall,be approved by staft This plan shall include a site diagram showing the maximum number and locati�tt of dumpsters and made part of the conditions of approval. The fence shall be 6 fee) in height, not to exceed 8 feet with 42 trees of varying F 9 B from 1 Ufa feet to 6 feet.. Minimum of 10% of the trees shall be,6 feet height at the time of planting. 'I'lie landscaping shall be planted prior to Oct 22 "1994v r The applican ,was directed to provide 42 trees of varying heigAt NMI - feet to 6 feet. The purpose ' af-,these-trees is to soften the look of the fence a not to provide .., - screening. Staff is recom»i "ending:: =tl!%,of have ht" "mum height of 6 feet. 2. Hours of operation shall be from 7 00'.rn -to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and r :r 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturday. Wyk on Sundays and helidays is not permitted. The applicant requested that they be permitted to work on Sundays and holidays. The ordinance does not prohibit work on holidays and Sundays; however, we believe that as a courtesy to the neighbors and to minimize noise, the applicant should be J it F11 i� 1 LI 1 Don Ashworth, City Manager September 7, 1994 Page 2 prohibited from working on Sundays. We found it difficult to define holidays, consequently, it was deleted. 3. There shall be no outdoor speaker system. No change. 4. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. No change. 5. The number of dumpsters shall be limited to a number that can be adequately screened, not to exceed 140 dumpsters. The screen shall be designed to provide effective visual barrier during all seasons. Only empty dumpsters may be stored on the site. This interim use permit shall apply specifically to the storage of empty dumpsters owned by Admiral Waste. No expansion of the site, unspecified uses, or ancillary uses shall be allowed unless a separate interim use permit is granted by the City Council. The City Council directed staff to provide language that clearly points out only empty dumpsters owned by Admiral Waste are permitted on the site. 1 6. There shall be a yearly review of this site to ensure compliance. ' No change. 7. The length of the term shall not exceed 10 years. The use shall be terminated within ' one year of inclusion of the site within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area or if conditions of approval have been violated, whichever comes first. The applicant may request an extension for the interim use permit prior to it's expiration. ' The City Council was concerned over the length of the term and felt that 10 years was too long. The condition clearly points out that any violation of the terms of the Interim Use Permit will result in revoking their permit. There are adequate conditions to safeguard the neighborhood. If the MUSA line was expanded to include this site, the permit will be terminated within one year. 8. The applicant shall replace an of the new trees that die within two e� ear." PP P Y Y The City Council wanted the landscaping to be guaranteed for two growing seasons and the condition was amended accordingly. 11 t Don Ashworth, City Manager � September 7, 1994 Page 3 Staff is recommending approval of this application with conditions outlined in the staff report. ' STAFF RECOMMENDATION , Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves the request for Intenm Use Permit #94 -1 as shown on the plans dated August 3, 1994 and subject to the following conditions: , 1. A final landscaping plan shall be approved by staff. This plan shall include a site diagram showing the maximum number and location of dumpsters and made part of , the conditions of approval. The fence shall be 6 feet in height, not to exceed 8 feet with 42 trees of varying height from 1 feet to 6 feet. Minimum of 10% of the trees shall be 6 feet height at the time of planting. The landscaping shall be planted prior , to October 22, 1994. 2. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and ' 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturday. Work on Sundays and heliday& is not permitted. 3. There shall be no outdoor speaker system. 4. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. 5. The number of dumpsters shall be limited to a number that can be adequately screened, not to exceed 140 dumpsters. The screen shall be designed to provide , effective visual barrier during all seasons. Only empty dumpsters may be stored on the site. This interim use permit shall apply specifically to the storage of empty dumpsters owned by Admiral Waste. No expansion of the site, unspecified uses, or ancillary uses shall be allowed unless a separate interim use permit is granted by the City Council. ' 6. There shall be a earl review of this site to ensure compliance. a y early P 7. The length of the term shall not exceed 10 years. The use shall be terminated within ' one year of inclusion of the site within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area or if conditions of approval have been violated, whichever comes first. The applicant may request an extension for the interim use permit prior to it's expiration. 8. The applicant shall replace any of the new trees that die within two year." I Don Ashworth, City Manager September 7, 1994 Page 4 ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff report and City Council minutes dated August 22, 1994. J CITY OF CHANHASSEN P.C. DATE: 6 -15 -94 C.C. DATE: 8 -22 -94 CASE: 94 -1IUP _ BY: Al -Jaff S J STAFF REPORT I PROPOSAL: Interim Use Permit to provide Outdoor Storage for Commercial Dumpsters Z LOCATION: North and adjacent to Highway 212 and east and adjacent to Highway Q 101. Address: 10500 Great Plains Boulevard V APPLICANT: Admiral Waste Management, Inc. J Mr. Patrick Blood and Ms. Nancy Lee 714 West 3rd Avenue Q. Shakopee, MN, MN 55379 Q PRESENT ZONING: BF, Fringe Business District ACREAGE: 13.27 acres ADJACENT ZONING a W I AND LAND USE: N - S- E - W- SEWER AND WATER: Sery E: Commercial A -2; large lot single family residential and abandoned Railroad Right -of -Way A -2; Minnesota River Valley BF; Vacant commercial (previously sold used cars) BF; existing Brooks Motel ices are not available to the site. SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is undeveloped and contains the footings of a demolished farm house. Vegetation is concentrated along the parameters of the site. The center of the site is void of vegetation. There is a Natural Wetland located along the south edge of the site. There is an intermittent stream located to the southeast of the site which drains into the Minnesota River Valley (Wildlife Refuge). 1 -- ►owo — I S N � RD ANA H PARK N��S �/ J- PUD -A ^� U Qep./ BANOAMERE - NE /GN75 - I BANG /ME ' � ' LAKE coMMuNirr — ` \ .,J AaNR •� SF R ILEY 2 4 1, 1 " I r , �•�% • r I �--^- _ _ .._.. � - C —'_ : °i N E •� AIL i ( i . i J.. —. Q r�oxi,E ' A2 Q - i. - - - -• r d I / �' "!, • ° A� BLUFF IF- � CREEK — _ PARK _ nte'w000 _ i \ MONO r ��- >n.., f e YGCF<ff! t� i ti c J5 — i (. RICE s � r— 0 0 F / - -T A2 P %t.. o R 0 O 0 O 0 O O O 0 0 SCOTT n v 0 r. a N o - c o o 0 0 00 j G U O r0 M N 0 O 1 Admiral Waste Management August 22, 1994 Page 2 PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is requesting an Interim Use Permit to store commercial dumpsters on property ' zoned BF; Fringe Business District. The site is located north and adjacent to Highway 212 and east and adjacent to Highway 101. Access to the site is gained off of Hwy 101. There are no proposed structures on the site with the exception of a 150 foot lon g wood fence proposed along the south edge of the site to provide screening for the dumpsters. City ordinances also require that landscaping be used in conjunction with fencing. There is ' existing vegetation on the site; and the applicant is proposing to plant an additional 42 spruce trees, 1 feet in height, along the north and south edge of the site. Trees along the north will provide a buffer for the neighbors in future years, and trees to the south will soften the ' overall look of the 150 foot long wood fence and provide additional screening from views off of Hwy 212. Staff is recommending approval of this application with conditions outlined in the staff report. BACKGROUND r On February 8, 1988, the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit for a Contractors Yard on this site. Conditional Use Permits expire within one year unless substantial ' work/construction has taken place on the site. The applicants had delayed their construction of the improvements due to anticipated changes in their operation specifically for recycling. On February 27, 1989, the same application appeared before the City Council for an extension. The City Council moved to deny the extension. On November 30, 1993, staff responded to a complaint regarding outdoor storage of dumpsters on the applicant's property. Staff counted approximately 50 dumpsters. Staff sent the applicant a letter informing them that the outdoor storage taking place on their property located at 10500 Great Plains Boulevard is illegal. We also stated that all fifty dumpsters must be removed from the site by December 17, 1993. Staff, the applicant's attorney, and the city attorney began meeting to resolve this issue in December of 1993. An agreement was finally reached as shown in attachment #3. As a result of this agreement and to fulfill its conditions, the applicant is making this application. On May 5, 1994, staff visited the site again. We noticed 58 dumpsters, which we viewed as an increase to the original count. The applicant sent a letter stating that they have not added any new dumpsters. .1 Admiral Waste Management August 22, 1994 Page 3 On May 19, 1994, staff visited the site and documented the serial numbers of all dumpsters on site. There was a total of 58 dumpsters. INTERIM USE PERMIT I The applicant is requesting an interim use permit for the outdoor storage of commercial dumpsters. The purpose and intent of an IUP, as defined in Sec. 20 -381 of the zoning ordinance, is to allow a use for a brief period of time until a permanent location is obtained ' or while the permanent location is under construction, and to allow a use that is presently acceptable but that with anticipated development will not be acceptable in the future. ' Sec. 20 -383. of the Zoning Ordinance lists the following criteria for issuance standards: A. Meets the standards of a conditional use permit as outlined in section 20 -232 of the ' City Code. The following constitutes our review of this proposal against conditional use permit standards. GENERAL ISSUANCE STANDARDS 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or city. FINDING The site is zoned BF. The proposed use will not create any significant ' or unexpected impacts from this use if screened properly; no dumping of compost or miscellaneous material will occur. 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. FINDING - The proposed use would be consistent with the City Zoning Ordinance. We will be making recommendations to address the screening of ' dumpsters to ensure they are not visible from Hwy 212. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in ' appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. FINDING - The site is located adjacent to a major highway and a collector road. It is in the Fringe Business district. The site does not have access to sewer and water, thus there are limited types of commercial uses ' permitted within this zone. An outdoor storage facility is fully consistent with this site as long as it is appropriately screened. 11 Admiral Waste Management , August 22, 1994 Page 4 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. FINDING - There will be no measurable impacts to the existing or planned , neighboring uses. This use will be screened from the surrounding area with the exception of the property located to the north of the site and on top of a bluff. It is impossible to screen the dumpsters from the northerly view, short of constructing a storage building and storing the dumpsters inside it. , 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. , FINDING - The site will not require sewer and water. Access to the site is gained via Hwy 101. It is capable of handling the access needs of this proposal. The applicant should obtain an access permit from MnDOT , and comply with their conditions. 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will , not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. , FINDING - There are no projected needs for public facilities and services that staff is aware of. 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. FINDING - This site will not create adverse impacts to persons, property or the general welfare of the area as long as there is compliance with the , conditions of approval. Hours of operation and orientation of the storage area will be regulated under the conditions of approval. , 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. FINDING - The site is visible from a major highway and is accessible from Hwy 101. The number of trips to the site will depend on demand for , dumpsters. There will be no direct traffic impacts to any area Admiral Waste Management August 22, 1994 Page 5 residential neighborhood. The applicant must obtain an access permit from MnDOT and comply with their conditions. ' 9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. ' FINDING - The development of this site will not result in the loss of any features once screening of the site is implemented properly. ' 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. ' FINDING - The applicant must provide adequate landscaping and buffering from adjoining properties to make the site compatible. ' 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. FINDING- Fencing and additional landscaping of the site will be required as a ' condition of approval. This added element will improve the appearance of the area. It will not depreciate surrounding property values. ' 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. I FINDING - The following is our review of conditions of approval and appropriate findings: a. All outdoor storage must be completely screened with one - hundred percent opaque fence or landscaped screen. I FINDING - As a condition of approval, the applicant submitted a landscaping/ screening plan. B. Conforms to the zoning regulations, is the second issuance standard for an IUP. FINDING - Outdoor storage is permitted under the BF district as an Interim Use Permit. This allows the Planning Commission and City Council to attach conditions to the proposal. Sec. 20 -1180 of the Zoning Ordinance addresses screening for visual impacts. Outdoor storage is required to be screened from all public views by a combination of fences, walls, earth berms, hedges or other landscaping materials. The applicant has submitted a screening plan. The plan consist of a wood ' fence and 42 spruce trees. The height of the trees is life feet. �7- Admiral Waste Management August 22, 1994 Page 6 C. The use is allowed as an interim use in the zonin g district. ' FINDING - The use is listed as an interim use in the BF district. ' D. The date of event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty. in the use be ears. We are also permitted for ten FINDING - Staff is proposing that p y recommending that the use be terminated after one year of inclusion of the site within the Municipal Urban Service Area or if conditions of ' approval have been violated, whichever comes first. E. The use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future. FINDING - The proposed use will not impose any additional costs on the public. , F. The user agrees to any conditions that the city council deems appropriate for I permission of the use. FINDING - The City Council can attach any conditions they deem appropriate. ' Based upon the foregoing findings, staff is recommending that the interim use permit be approved with appropriate conditions. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE ' On July 20, 1994, the Planning Commission tabled action on the Interim Use Permit application JUP #94 -1) for the second time, due to lack of detailed landscaping screening , plans. On August 3, 1994, the Planning Commission reviewed the application for the third time and ' unanimously recommended approval of the application with conditions. The applicant proposed 42 spruce trees at B6 feet in height along the north and south portions i of the site as shown in the attached landscaping plans. The Planning Commission recommended that the applicant provide varying heights from 1'6 to 6 feet. They also recommended the fence be built at a height of 8 feet. ' The Planning Commission discussed the length of the Interim Use Permit term. They felt , that 10 years was a long term and wanted to see it limited to 5 years. J 1 �II L.! � I Admiral Waste Management August 22, 1994 Page 7 A third issue was the total number of dumpsters to be stored on site. The Planning Commission recommended the total number of dumpsters on site not exceed 58 dumpsters. The applicant requested the number be increased to 140. Staff made a recommendation that the number of dumpsters be limited to a number that can be adequately screened, not to exceed 140 dumpsters. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves the request for Interim Use Permit #94 -1 as shown on the plans dated August 3, 1994 and subject to the following conditions: 1. A final landscaping plan shall be approved by staff. The fence shall be 8 feet in height with 42 trees of varying height from 1% feet to b feet constructed and the landscaping shall be planted prior to October 22, 1994. 2. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturday. Work on Sundays and holidays is not permitted. 3. There shall be no outdoor speaker system. 4. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. 5. The number of dumpsters shall be limited to a number that can be adequately screened, not to exceed 140 dumpsters. Only empty dumpsters may be stored on the site. 6. There shall be a yearly review of this site to ensure compliance. 7. The length of the term shall not exceed 10 years. The use shall be terminated within one year of inclusion of the site within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area or if conditions of approval have been violated, whichever comes first. The applicant may request an extension for the interim use permit prior to it's expiration. 8. The applicant shall replace any of the new trees that die within one year." t Admiral Waste Management August 22, 1994 Page 8 ATTACHMENTS 1. Site Plans dated August 3, 1994. 2. Letter from William C. Griffith, Jr. dated August 10, 1994 and July 26, 1994. 3. Letter from Nancy Lee dated July 5, 1994. 4. Planning Commission Minutes dated June 15, 1994, July 20, 1994 and August 3, t 1994. 1 C Fi r r� rr rr �r rr r rr rr rr �r rr rr r r r rr it rir CITY OF CHANHASSEN r- REr�.1 v r-" _ 1 ►a'x5 ,� , �„ 3' A CoN�t�fER.,. A U G ' 0 � l sp r�cE CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. Cl�NTRtNE� � T � I - 7 ao JCo t? - of cx u mE a a -,-p - --150 = - t3$ to 5 cs PROPOSED FENCE Warranty Aaalnst I Rot & Decay ::-Dog Eared Treated Panel *.We' really did . n't . c corners to bring you this Dog Eared panel. Thick 6. x 5-3/4"I.boards nailed to three 2"-x 3" - 8' backrails. Pressure ( treated and built to last. 6' high x 8' long panels. Green in color. 3-1365 F,r� 17 Ouanilly Materials Total Dog Eared Panels - 4 x 4". to' Permawood Posts Total Also available in western red cedar. a X i � !�: !'i I' �li i �II � � CITY OF CHANHASSEN L EC — IV-ED i AUG 0 - IRM CHIAMASSEN PLANNING Dt I - I ' M - CITY OF CHANHASSEN L EC — IV-ED i AUG 0 - IRM CHIAMASSEN PLANNING Dt I Rpc r lr� PARC T. 116, ?. 23 J L� n I yw III I 11. w �, � a� 1 _ _ *0 S I- 9n 34(o Y N� 4NwA H 16 ) y 7 - . 4 0 / 1¢ CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVE® AUK 0 „ 1494 CHIMHASM PLANNING DEPT. F J L� n I yw III I 11. w �, � a� 1 _ _ *0 S I- 9n 34(o Y N� 4NwA H 16 ) y 7 - . 4 0 / 1¢ CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVE® AUK 0 „ 1494 CHIMHASM PLANNING DEPT. JAMES P. LARKIN L Alti.laN, HOOF Y N, DALY & UNDIGRV, LTD. DANIEL L. 80W129 ROURT L, K090MAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW TIMOTH TIMOTHY J. &WS `s JACK A. DALr ALAN M. D. KENNrTH jJ ND OREN DONNA L R OSAC GELD H, FRIEDELL FA H MICHAEL . SCHL SY ALLAN E. MULLIGAN A 7 USA Y. GU JAMES G. ERICCSON ZDV /AAO J. DP=I5 1$W NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER GRAY A, RFDINELE GHRIiTOIHYR J. EigpHt+6'fHAL GEN2 N. FULLER JOHN D FYLLMER 7900 XERXES AV9NUE SOUTH MICHAEL A. go L BRUCE J. D04IGA8 ROBERT E. IOYLI BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA SV431 -1184 wILL1AM c, SM 0011H, Jot. PRANK I. HARVEY JOIN J. CHARLES S. MODELL TELEPHONE (672) 836 -3800 . V FFl;NHAGFN O es CHRISTOPHIR J. OIE`riEN JOHN R, H ILL JOHN P.,EArne FAX (6121896-3333 prrdR R.coy" LINDA H FISHER MICHAEL J. SM'.TH THOMAS P. STOOMAN VILIS R. WOE MICHAEL G. 40-WAM DWIGHT N. HOLMSO JOHN E. P"L ANDREW F. Khkv4 JON S. SW IGRzowt Ki ANN M. MEYER THOMAS J. ALYNN NAUSEA III ' JAMES F OUINN MARY , V MART e. vo F0 DO I. FREEMAN LARRY D. MAA71N Firm G. peak - JANE E. BREIiMFA JEROME H. KAHNKE RENEE L. TOENGES GIAALD L. BECK MARCY R. LRS4iMAN JOHN B. LUNDQUIST MARI E. P+ILOLA OAYLB NOLAN' DAMON E. SCHRAMM THOMAS 8. HUMPHREY, JR. STEPHEN J. [AIAlNSKI JOHN A. COTTER- BEATAICE A, ROTHwII614 OF COUNSEL PAVL R. PWPJVr T WENDELL R. ANDERSON ALAN L KILDOW JOSEPH G+TIS KA'rHUW M NEWMAN MARK A, RUHIK MICHAEL 8. LEBARON GREGORY I. KORSTAD •ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN GARY A. VAN CLEVE- August 10, 1994 , Mayor of the City of Chanhassen VIA P City Council for the City of Chanhassen 937 -5739 , 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 ' RE: interim Use Permit to provide Outdoor Storage for Commercial Dumpsters by Admiral Waste Management, Inc. adjacent to ' Highway 212 and Highway 101 Our File No. 18,737 - 02 Dear Mayor and City Council; We represent Admiral Waste Management, Inc. the applicant for Interim Use Permit on the above- referenced property. We have worked for several months with City Planner, Sharmin Al -Jaff and City Attorney Elliott Knetsch to provide documentation of proposed screening to screen the dumpsters from the view of passing motorist. Following a recent visit to the site, we reached agreement on appropriate conditions of approval to allow the property owner reasonable use of the property while protecting City interests and the views of surrounding properties. However, at the ' recent Planning Commission Meeting of August 3, 1994, the Commission disregarded the understanding we reached with staff regarding the conditions of approval and adopted conditions which were substantially more restrictive. Therefore, I have the following comments with regard to ' the conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission: 1. Regarding the hours of operation, the applicant would like to be permitted to operate on holidays since it is not unusual for waste: hauling businesses to collect waste on holidays, especially when holidays fall on week days. 2. With regard to the number of dumpsters allowed on the site, we would ask that the permit specify 140 dumpsters. Through the site visit; and `, ;(, •J '��_. `�`r.�F, 11 i� : %� Ll V tO V V0 �11�� 1 ��r.a 111111? V^ fll i,�i 4� L ARmN, ll o umAN, DALY & LNDam, LTD. Mayor of the City of Chanhassen City Council. for the City of Chanhassen August 10, 1994 ' Page 2 materials submitted to staff, we have demonstrated that approximately 140 dumpsters can fit comfortably behind the proposed screening. Since the objective is to screen the dumpsters, not necessarily to arbitrarily limit the reasonable use of the property, we feel that the numbers should be 140. At the Planning Commission, we stated that we could accept 58 dumpeters as a limit and apply for an amendment to the Interim Use Permit. However, the process is somewhat cumbersome, and if all parties agree that 140 dumpsters can be accommodated on site, it seems that this would be the appropriate limitation to be ' established with a permit. 3. With regard to the length of the term of the Permit, we would ask that ' it be 10 years, rather than 5 years as recommended by the Planning Commission. When we began our discussion with City Staff, we initially agreed to a 15 year term, or when the property is included in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area, whichever came later. We ' agreed to delete the reference to the urban service area because it is difficult for anyone to know exactly when that extension may occur. Therefore, with staff we agreed to a 10 -year term. We would ask the ' City to recognize the substantial costs to the property owner in providing a 150 foot fence with evergreen plantings. Also, the past history of the site is significant since the applicant had obtained ' approval of a conditional use permit which was denied when they sought a one -year extension of the permit. Finally, through all of this period, there has not been any use which has been permitted as a matter of right. Therefore, in fairness to the applicant, the term of the Permit should be at least 10 years. With these changes, I believe we would be in agreement with the conditions of approval for the permit. We will plan to attend the City Council Meeting of Monday, August 15, 1994 and present our position to the City Council and to answer the City Council's questions regarding this matter. Thank you for your Careful consideration of our request. Sincerely, r William C. Griffith, Jr., for LARKIN, ROF'F'MAN, DALY & LINDGREN Ltd. Enclosure cc: Ms. Nancy Lee (via facsimile) Ms. Sharmin Al -Jaf'f (via facsimile) Mr. Elliott n. Knetsch (via facsimile) ' WCG:PZ7s ' t ? _v_v,__ La Z! IS/ L. 1'Z1 V�aV'� �U�Q�lYi1 Iti5'Yu vH i }' - .cvC. JAMES P. LARKIN ROBERT L. HOFFMAN JACK F. DALY D. KENNETH LINDGREN GERALD H. FRIEDELL ALLAN E. MULLIGAN JAMES C. ERICKSON EDWARD J. DRISCOLL GENE N. FULLER JOHN D. FULLMER ROBERT E. BOYLE FRANK L HARVEY CHARLES S. MODE" CHRISTOPHER J. DIETZEN JOHN R. BEATTIE LINDA H. FISHER THOMAS P. STOLTMAN MICHAEL C. JACKMAN JOHN E. DIEHL JON S. SWIERZEWSKI THOMAS J. FLYNN JAMES P. QUINN TODD 1. FREEMAN PETER K. BECK JEROME H. KAHNKE GERALD L. BECK JOHN B. LUNDQUIST DAYLE NOLAN' THOMAS B. HUMPHREY, JR. JOHN A. COTTER' BEATRICE A. ROTHW EILER PAUL B. PLUNKETT ALAN L. KILDOW KATHLEEN M. NEWMAN MICHAEL B. LEBARON GREGORY E. KORSTAD GARY A. VAN CLEVE' LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, L TD. DANIEL L. BOWLES ATTORNEYS AT LAW TIMOT i HY .J .KEAANEE ALAN M. ANDERSON DONNA L. ROBACK MICHAEL W. SCHLEY LISA A. GRAY 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER GARY A. E CHRISTOPPHER HER J. HARRISTHAL 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH MICHAEL A. ROBERTSON B DO UGLAS BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431-1194 WILLIAM WAM C. GRIFFI RIFFITH, JR. HAGEN TELEPHONE (612) 835 -3800 DANIEL W VOSSS FAX (612) 896-3333 J PETER J. COYLE MICHAEL J. SMITH VILIS R. INDE DWIGHTN. HOLMBO ANDREW W. PERRIN ANN M. MEYER FREDERICK K. HAUSER III MARY E. VOS LARRY D. MARTIN JANE E. BREMER RENEE L. TOENGES MARCY R. KREISMAN MARIEL E. PIILOLA DAMON E. SCHRAMM STEPHEN J. KAMINSKI July 26, 1994 OF COUNSEL W ENDELL R. ANDERSON JOSEPH GITIS MARK A. RURIK 'ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN Elliott B. Knetsch, Esq. Campbell, Knutson, Scott & Fuchs, P.A. 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, MN 55121 RE: Interim Use Permit for Outdoor Storage 10500 Great Plains Blvd., Admiral Waste Management; Our File No. 18,737 -02 Dear Elliott: This letter is a follow -up to our conversation of July 25, 1994, regarding the above - referenced application. As you know, our client, Nancy Lee, was disappointed that she was not given the opportunity to address the Planning Commission as she had requested both by her letter, dated July 5, 1994 and my letter, dated Ju1y___19, 1994. We understood that the Planning Commission_ meeting was a continuance of the public hearing on Admiral Waste's application opened in this matter on June 15, 1994. Therefore, the action of the Planning Commission chair in tabling this matter without allowing my client an opportunity to speak violated her right to due process and contributed to unnecessary delay and additional costs to the applicant. I will attend the Planning Commission at its meeting of Wednesday, August 3, 1994 to make a presentation on behalf of my client. In addition, we request that the Planning Commission make a final recommendation to the City Council at its next meeting so that we have a timely decision with regard to my client's application. To resolve the matters regarding the required level of landscaping and /or screening, we have scheduled a site visit with you and I, and AI F1 F� 0 I � i� I I LmuaN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Elliott B. Knetsch, Esq. July 26, 1994 ' Page 2 the applicant and City Planner, for Friday, July 29, 1994, at 3:00 p.m. We will provide additional detail regarding plans for landscaping to screen the dumpsters on the property and will review the cleared location of compost. We appreciate your time in meeting on site. It should resolve the remaining issues with regard to required landscaping. Sincerely, Wi C. Griffith, for LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd. ' WCG:PW7s cc: Nancy Lee, Admiral Waste Sharmin Al -Jaff NANCY LEEE PA BLOOID [• MANAGEMENT, INC. PJD�, BOX :377 MN. 55379 � I �! '. . 4 C r% A 5' 1 7 Ti f c"r P i <3 re d oil E JU 1. Y "'? 0 19 9 4 P 1 a il, n n g C c.) fri M t h E, W c' C; L t'lla t --e d" I F1 1 _'Ale t iJ Ls He sai I a b U t g e o T e i i ed t he 1UP t( store oui u m p s s s need e U c or,.,co i.1" i It. i1 t r -ie screening requirements. Based upon e a n _le fz�levation of the property, 140 '117. t ef �7; Ca- n ' -torecd on, the property without c t n C-� a J. : - mj -quested infoi a t ion on MUSA and the time, m f lon of the MUSA to include our pl-operty se . p'je c extens e, o r Cfi -! t." o n o 1S y e r cat t he t i m e the property is w h i cr e v er s la, er . RECEIVIE.101 Y ' 4 . Sc - e en, i 1 /Land s capirlg: E used is a detailed plan showing the land as it appear; on the .`::.Jr'veys. Also listed On this plan are ')t vJ ic:re. C'Ontainers wi l l. be p " ac tin(` ( 71 a shows a side view. with grades and location Of n _�_ a- copy of the first plan det_ ailing the t)�-es to be planted, with the circle showing what:. ' t he iT" f l.!� W31 L)e,. W e. pla to plant them every 1 5 feet., Tirt c), ee 1eC is On the south side of the property ' r _ of c being !H'ghway 212, The Only containers that Can be ,.- o }:) >rt.y on Hwy. 212 are the containers that were ; r =. r l ,.L1. The c0 T-, a, ne, tha r F: d t. Were placed 'VeT V.�si.• - ij -�,::ause O'F the y elu��Ja.tiOn O�" ; �tc? I1 i 1 - u ..,L Of assor tamed t , e.e.s, bushes, , and ^.t.„ .. ai e (nat1_re wit�'1 approximately 25 f00' OT' is, one, area of 100' that is not fully y t t r e s . howeveT it is fully screened with ` r t' v YaI feet. tal l 's t ;iu aTe th =t we a 100' chair: link fence if neI W<s :ary- { e r'; e c;dy bulshes and . .' ants as covera� ge there but we � ._ T' cg\'_ T a 1. N p T - uce iI this area a Wel cf Y'E' h <;.: `:�;> t.O C}� e T "eel , a.n C{ C;T -ow q.. C. of 35' and width, of 20'. We already / have JGiti.ng to plant these 1 1/2' and 2' t t ? COI1I(iieti0 0 thi i ' 'y prOCE:u C` t0 i, h >c,c c1f t ".r' property On the i l: ?fi "t_h sId t _ne1 U - 1 "ilt�T c sets of tree lines before you T "ecc the W f r ,, Ear' y The West side of the prope, t.y is Completely The East side of the property is cE,r.r' y a L O l! r c O 1"1 t a i l - 1 e r s is al re a d y ver UJ e l l - ' t . i T" ?1 t; r.C.)W E i w n �J a V1c;!c r.:) 'y a.t the Planning Commission hearing. , j. ., "C;; ,pfti� n t s0 that We may review this Vile - with _. rl•� _ .. _ , c ch, City Attorney f � �� ■rig � r �r� ii �■� � � � � �� ' t : z y r a .., :avxcs:?.>•c. i..e::.. ,r}� ,.. af�� :: ,x.v :: :, }:.... : i ..... ;: :, ., -. ,..; �a',.1 ::. :•:� r .r.. .. :..t �- �i ,., ". ..�,a , m�,�.a.. _.... c .�w[}'_:y :: rs Rx'�t�: .?. x j, iia -. ..,:... ,, ..,_..;. :„),, ...... n .• -f,:,; .`�. _.. '.,.i .3. ." x �' w .,_: .i ,. r -� ? .t A ...� ". a l� �f "�4^ 7"k. ,}5::`e J^ �*� e t i, i •i a '..n ,:,. .. �, -:.: Y . . :.. ,::. .., .. :. :t .,... d r...w „r r -. ,, ,_.. .� .... :i � : a. 4 : w 1 t .F.-.•,ac *aaty W �a i.�a�ixse +P� ,. ,9iR. n'r i •. .; t'',kt �s* ;.y: " ... . at" ., k ..:� .., .. , : f.:,, , t y �r 5 - r,Y• to - �* + a. � ' - .. ... .. :, � .. ,.:.... ;. ,. ;.,.. �.:.. „r. i' <'t q••s"�» air•. - � `} `J + ;:.' r. `'', „� a'y .�:- ...... ,. >. .. ,.. ;,:� ,: ., ...4" .,;# _.. -.: n •- ..:i•> � ' „y .,.,;.: .: t:, y.... ,•¢, - .S .,ili: �y \�, +> k, �,<9f sy,. +nk�. .. *�,t'rs:: , .# n �.x,:.., ib. •.e.5. ^i °� . t',..J .... xY "r, -. ,...;Y,a, 4 :. r .. r� Y. ',A' �:f 'f �+� d }h�' K q � ,..: .. : a, ..+ .' -- .., (t ..::..' _. -... . '..:. '« •,. .. �:, ..:.: r :'a+ +z. k.,++.` � ..,.1'� �„•JLTri..➢Y] V�.i �' -..S�t li:, iii _ :,» >�.•�.a -:.s 3�.ke -e zv.,, s-'!< �'f',.�..�.. v A .•�., F 5a ,. F u t ;� .i A .u' 1.. w.k .A,".t'i 3E Yt � Y . . Y `'� r . z tr' . +t y{Yp , t .. r ,wa:: ._, F, j' ., .:. '�'. ..,. � '.,.x .: � .' ..- .. .- - :.' k r •Y "fi :,lZt� x`45 *5CW �`, 'y c �. . �- ,.:vk ,;• -. -�� ... � ...r..r u- �..+.+. -:. ..7.�,, -. �,... ... r..... ; .. -..,r i !^ Y JR '",it: ::t K SDK � 'h r - ' : T: L' ;4.r., "� o- . :' '.,, ..: : :'.:,... . _.: ..,' -A - } :. �•:� 4. t �;:,. ..rai pF' .4 ';�c. sR t afi �: i �k.ar ; .., n: .: .. ... , "v.:� 1' Y t.. ., d .:. , Y H:•,.,. W } �*f� �',� S 1 .: 'fir,. __..0 ., :..:... -,. .. ., _.. ,: -�.... t �:..... -::. �:.:..., , ..•i.; ,. - - . ..,.. y _ .1� .:J Y rt.wi N• i t .. ..., Sf ,. .. >... .. .,G •.. .:.. ...A ,. . -.,. � .;.. .. A: -. a r � �.tiY r .A��•33v :F: �'V rb�' -.: �Y p,l�� ,y✓'� W S.- J .,• 4.v.A r. .,: ... :Y :.41 .. wt, w r C ,: , ,,. ,ter. ,. e t �G -b tt `¢[ �+t'e 5 s. }a, •� }} a't Xx:s, ,>E ,.:.;... ,. ;!•�. ., .r':. u , : <. ,,. _. ,�,..,..,�.,. ,. r ,4�„ ;>, Y ��,y .:n"• ,rve '1 .: ,v..m... y.. ��. ' »�A.- a�Nr...NM.....u._.:' ...b:: u�:,..r�._. _- '�....xW.....- >�..•,:' ,.«,_. ..:.e < .�...:! .:.. ... -w�.. � w 1. , 1i. — ..{' .'! 5Y:1. .x�:•.- +�X'+w�.+?,^ 5 :.! ? . !K W} :..:,X'Y't� a- :..., ., ., .. .. Ps•, .,... .....: i�. .. ,.,. �'.. '"w ,. K. +r.. .1 F r-y + :."f;- h Ti�:`t � . -:5., ;.Y ��: �� T,. t ..... .,, N r ... .. M.,. :: ,.... .•> . , A.W M � 5 .. ... J r.. :. .. ... _ e.'!i �1tixY S!. 5... ,+h ,. ..:,.. yyqq .. ,. .: t r. .;r,n... �,.::. ,,... r,.. .d. � z�,a v'i'•' +, '"S, :fir r�,a�:ir I•.r • ..,,; .:- " , :. .... .... . . . ., .. J ) .. ,: .. ... \,b ... xa.,> ,l J Y� .. Y:.. - .., Y 7t �'... 'F: �'.. ,:i"' -'Y2. �.�t..,. NA �... .,.:sC.:._',..r .Ar:,>.>i�,.: �.., ..:....��, ,:. ,, ..Y ,...r.73_.,, -.. „. ,,..a: -,� rA .. .. ., 1: _ ..�., -..i. .,r-0�, � -r.. '�- tx3. :�i�ia..:x {t.�k - •', �`�anw::flr.w �ri ]rid., �` .'�^X�:i: �: .;'�.- ...'! 3 �A,'. .'�� ` %:.3:�'i., v; " '�' , S C r. - �'si.' . «'L,.,J q.:,,::.F.a,.,. .,+: : �', . :., .} r} „.. 5 ,. F. �.:. ,:.::, 5 x.+5. "��_ i;. •v - :p { L; -y � ;�. ,z� v i4 ,w-�. ,< rs � M, f .t' , 1 s•r .;..: m . _ .�.. ..,,'''. S�^.`,�??a�:. r r; L^r`�'k” �; 4 . x . '�s rr� � i"�• "� ,. .. "�",�.:� Y: ;'�' ,},, a �t Y f;' to 'S, •r��. .s rr =a � "tA �, 3 '� k� � - :s. :� ,. #M�+-i. ,,'�` 't?t� {�' .t� ..� �?+., +; "�` ,`, r � x' � s : � ,•',.� �N� f'^ Y, '�1,�YY `+ s. )f, 's .- ;�r r }, � :'«�, k 3 '.(. ,i ,� _ a , r � F q . .. _ .k n •;�:,.. .:�, 1"'�a �'ri"<f� A t 3 ; , �L�+�� .�:. 'h ,"�'.F y , , , t '� g 4 r r 7t:'�•'k�t� & E i 1 &:, n ! . {. y ,• t ...�.: ', 4 t x.,"� �.. 5..: ,.y ,[,{. - F.t• a ,.a. ,, fa,Y^ )b"a2r f,Ex >. Y. :. r�.F., A� ,d. ) t :•.:t:•r A,{ : °1 )... a. '�:� "'} t { +:;?7 a1' a� i k � ',z s } a ,.,..: e.{ ;.;• � f , "', f :,+ S`? � �! �' A t '�'f �k t :r' ,.'f C,, d:v'• r x 1,t` S "� ye. -7:.:r r„qa ,;. a;'. •. a •., .. +�.K •V»•. .a..,.,...3 ,.4.+ ..i ,h• .„,..t. a:. 'f .,1 : r, ® p ). - .e: .:�•' � j - . � i. . °�a .d} y t '. .�; :.� �::sg° '��: Sa v 7 tt... tj k Y ,y - : �". .� t 'S ti %'fX § Rat• q 4 :,."_ f .air S•.. a;p, �" , z , �s1 . ,r .,� �, >y.. ,�r�i'Cr. ,;.;, f)j :.i' '.. ::, `t..$' .';•..' .� ., ... „� r,i ,'Y - ! >I r.. ka'r i {� .y. 4; {Y ,' Sn ....}.4r,� - .7::Sjx"k �,. -a -:�N "7 ' - �A�ti . � , ;Y �' '� s'i r•,'�''aa • +_'�:r '� a. k ,}�� i �4;�y �•' �• .::. °{ 0i. ': , ;i.. v'; .s `.::' .: :! i')$ )."� .' y..'{ ' .�5 ,V;:F� A'» ) t' 'M `s }i a ..,.a.ci,. :, :Y." ... :. � . .,. '.t', ��i: .,. i . ..: .:. .. .... .: .,:7 :.. ::. a,..: . :L.. 4, .a 7 �: ,.JJ k x 1 W.: '�S ♦ '� '?!l: .d}.:�,'.4a{ I. �'Y 1 1 �f. 4.. .ea, •7,., M•i _•++ ,{ r4 t_ � t ,.; rt - t"`, ): .b '� -: tr"a ;.:�5,'g ' "'w' ; r �i r• .:';� E,.`s- : '.::• �' S1'. ,} , .. ��.,.' 1 �'':.`. �:.� :,, - ' ;'q"`r �' -�):�' s -. t.'1 .' $ • $ X a3 ° ' •+' �z � 'Y �';.`?tr „ :., :,�::,.'` z , "',1; :,.. a: :. � ,i .. �: ;.. ,,_Mt• :l, -:'� •`t �M rt` :•* ;A �i'�: i k �,'�:,;� �;' i ,t. -�: { t , ,' 1 ;��:'dy q • f' . .'fw%f# .a ^. v. t �l '£ 2 - ✓' ry �r , � �'�`.�;� i 4 .�. c �^ :,, 2, + „� t_ a , -� > , x , v.'� r ed a 7'E``,:RT�kct �"FL, M^�'h f t 'f r L� &'sti "C � .'t �� '� � a � i v. ! . -i' - s 3a s,.� , .,3� s •. Cr f .;Rf �) ' K �; , F } h"�.;Y::r ee ,.s -.. ...,: ,.a..: ,. 5y .5,.. }. r ,..: , u a 4;r. � .. <....� 4. :±)ti;.... r€ 'S „.,,. .;�: .i , y e �,. , x v:l:�k.^ y +j': , M �..� �, *Aa• r3 $!!Cao p )`Ft+f'R.' }} ^'fqk ;. r � j FF -'` x �a ' *i1';• 3•::, t . 3.” � -. �x' 'f. ” t •>�,'i� y - �+ •�, . r 4 � 3 % �j t r'p -, i t fi >C✓ y .y , � w. w� � n. -, 1v 3� -; •F ,':r ". ?:�':).' s ; :�.'sa. zyll' 5 e r'd'., A t ., .,,�,. .yam �:(.?. C.'n:� - i .T . ,.�'• ) Uf:'r .�._. ,. ' - 5 : .f v1.1.• 3: - i. :k y, t ;,, " .'44x5 l' i . :r� rt t'i• ♦ y � tY�x '„qd, A, E ° p � i y"' 1 ar � S f , � U.� .§f - : S �, "v 1:.z. ;.. *: c� fiw '�' t i ,� " p er • �� - .,..q ,;.�'*. "+ �k ?•.,lfu� a �'��i 5 !;'ayfaipCi+�a�:Y �� y3,_.''. 4 r� r � � r }� � y r ��) ,' � � • G�a"F�a�[F'» C y i trsil Q v► �T �:.... r L. .:::a w _ ,�. S':!d4 ..$.- . '• - d - , -.:r w.. x. J,ydC .:.... :1 A ,•�a�,. , -s 2.. 'ti? `a�'�� v''. d,;s,.a i. r�R, G -a . x Y;!.k 1t' i,... M .'f' �YA^. YPi � ��4�. 's, Y i Me•�n, �z E,�� t ..« �`, a r,•s»a i+ ^.., •� ' d, < 4 , ., yl- ...w:,:Eeka...`: ,.at. ,v+{. .; .>.. : .,. ) ,.: Et ". I +;:E• . -F n;' >.r.�n,. a -" _�, i*.,,.� 'f,�},"�`{� r�.�'7 4 �.r Yrk - - v, ? �a �L k�f!K. z.r1 h 'j� �C $. -.ar„ �.,, «.b [':'. .:x '._ -•, 7 l'. 'ia' ,riE }..:,;;, � .. ,,t Y e r �r g°'h: �d =, ,,,� as � ;r> �,�' '?'' d,�. :7� �•. .t <. a:;:tx .e .,.. !•.1w ..R ..1 ,. .,:.. .,.::• 3•!!7 M. .1 ,,.7 A 1,�� y, i. qt k 'l. ). fks wa�, , C' ='� F' -'•' ^' �';5.,.'� - t �.i',.: '� .fSf:.,�� 3' (� r s .,'''. '';;� r,r..) '!.', 1„ ., i .'.� a ..� I _'W" !-I_,v ' Ir. I �� .I .:� lx� .' -r► '. `_..w -'�/. .� ..✓• - i -_ Ir - Imo• �. ' « .! Co p p . PA" !! W 1 Z� » .fit h. _ :t ":" .._.+'''- r._ a��~ -.� : ►. -.J.°Z •�'r+;' .y ,.. � .. - ., .z •.. rs2 &. an& _. �. _ � .. .. Ih '''�"rN'j""_.�ri"��. : y,y q ..�..,.�ye. .... .: 'II Vi. .._�• S ..'.. -'» , = '�..�.�__..._w"r � .� ' . -. n `r 9{rM7� �� '�t�Wl'�/!�}�"!_MS^."y~ r'fR;� .emu' _•�. :.: te r..-.► - '- �� .. ` J..:.M. 5 - 0 1 Y M�+I9IYIP /•re .t1n,.t �k "E�•'"'� «M�" '�"...�._+. ..,yS ^'-.� .rte +. = � i � .. ..... .. - dl"f.3'T . AYE Of T.yE WEST 4 90./� .o-. ARC A ■r■ , - _ - m- - � m -= w r e�i e?'m,. [; ...'o- ... :.... ». .: .. ._ � f :,_�..::� . _. "a X , .. # 4� p �• a r ^g' t x a� t 4 � i - t t tt , � # t t ,: '! � � cp' � ,� # a.: .A + . i ': :; y .. q • ". � � r �' r} r � a� k �.� a u��t,� .t c i � i � ' ._.t. s f a 3a a 1 . "" Y a +4 t � "; , ;« M ,.... _ .� " _ _ . ..._..,.... .... __.. -- ' -` ^ ^ n ",� v .«j',�,^„" n - 'S{rs�L: � �."rtr' ,. M ,.., .�:,1 .� t ,, r e y _ i . • q o- �+ {i+r '#^^ � ,�. F , , . ;. :; 9 � ; -::# ' r ♦ � . . � a .F � � *, '94' : � #� Vic.: ax �:? rd : t,. 7 w ¢ , '�," ' ea - - f f , � y , " : , u.. «•,�';s3.r�a;f�e� aM'i «"- r..: �"". � �... a rnz 3: � � ,r.a;� aw. 1 F • N: ry ,. k . i:. , ... . ,., , .:. ,.., f , ., k >.:� , , ....,:3 , k . �" 'wt.. ^_2.�Sy r •", J . ;, � mx� ;.�.n . 3:.� � ,.'.',4, ... ., ... ... v .... .,:. ..... ...; .... v. .. r ..: .. :,.. a.., ;;.^N �-.r ,., ...:�..r. ••t•+* M,, '.. 3.. ::9iN ^Eiyip +'5�� 9•� ��4 .�/}. '4a 'rN)._ iF,Yf ,'.Rt Yk .:A .... ,.,. ti: cx�_ w gr*,mX •vr,..r a .g, � hr.# r a.,z ,. r � n_,:S �,,Y a> � •.� '!f. .- ,;:Y -� ' "s • ;G.;�„Yt^. .. .iyr -. , ;. .�. ''� rt.,.rs�.,p.i, 1 .��i , , �t. a .'�•, r+'. >'Y , Y - XM' ''^..+ A' YtwQ+ A c �, W. •�* h . ,` ,�" ". F", '*fie ,�e, ;� ,. _. .� ^� -. A'�. :'�, ^I. _.. .2 .. _`8 ^#.. �._ F.., _. _.9:._. 2�_.:,:::.:.. S _..._.:_. ...«_ _ .�."�_. .i�" _,. ::.i.i. ... ..s ... f i _... , xx .;. ..,x, A .,.nar, ,,.�..:. n .� M t��eiK -,..e rruia�,•u4 .rf_ .. _ .Nr .:.':kGr.�cdb�J:e"+.:9. 7.�9 ., +.a..a ;,. ,, k F`.t. M a+ V`k=,t vr.4M as;oi.+ s, A �•.r .w . _ x'r k „ r..: k . e ri , F «i r .,t . � 9 r. ,1. .47 A Y" 1 4 $ f. ! k F 1, t i i +� s4 �� d ,�:, ` „g �, `t ;;? ” 7 :::' ;. :: ... � "7: .. � � j` . .. �..: -$.�. „'q •' &.:ij., ,;,#.: . 1: - M�.,.x..•+nww,»,� — - - :•.— .w::... ;y7n .. .�J7V„a .�- Y ..: 7 »� � r ;-... r q .� •� }?�-�' •._ � � .. .� 4 ^� •-tea 1. to I = - I t:;� �-� kez \04- :77- nSFi 7 -. MA r"��s e ia - r .,.. . .. _. .. _ — • _ b ;� e m - .•w•; � {'ars«a. � Jv r+ #x=••": : ^j r. 14. 7.r A. 4; , �rp L4Wl - q 14 4k; L4A -.i, u Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 Aanenson: It goes to City Council on July 11th. Conrad: It's real important that you stay there. Scott: Don't be on vacation. Good. Conrad: Go to the City Council meeting. Scott: Yeah, July 11th. And check the agenda to make sure it's actually on too. Good. Thank you all for coming. PUBLIC HEARING: AN INTERIM USE PERMIT TO ALLOW SCREENED OUTDOOR STORAGE IN THE BF, BUSINESS FRINGE DISTRICT LOCATED AT 10500 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD, ADMIRAL WASTE MANAGEMENT. Public Present: Name Address Laverne Wheeler Nancy Lee Patrick Blood 445 Lakota Lane Admiral Waste Admiral Waste Verne Severson 675 Lakota Lane M. Happy 495 Lakota Lane L.M. Campbell 415 Lakota Lane Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Scott: In your opinion, how responsive has the applicant been to, I mean I read the staff report and it seems like there's, the city of Chanhassen is kind of chasing these people and spending a lot of time trying to get them to conform existing agreements. Have they been somewhat uncooperative? Very uncooperative? I'm trying to get a sense' for what the relationship is because, the reason why I'm asking the question is I recall last year we had a contractor's yard situation where it was pretty much a mess and there was a lot of legal time spent on both sides. The intent that I perceived on behalf of the applicant was that they had no intention of conforming to anything and I'm trying to separate these two issues. Hoping that we're not running into the same thing again. Al -Jaff: Yes. We spent some time working on this. I think that the applicants had some 35 C 0 u 0 1 I Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 ' personal, I think a member of their family was taken ill and they had to leave town for a while so a lot of the meetings were postponed that were scheduled and some of the reasons ' were legitimate. It took us a while to reach an agreement but we did reach an agreement. Scott: Okay, enough said. Questions. Comments from commissioners for staff? None? ' Okay. Would the applicant or their representative like to speak? Is there anyone here? Nancy Lee: My name is Nancy Lee. I'm the applicant. I don't know where to start and I ' don't want to get long winded. We are, and always have been in the past, 100% cooperative. I think for anybody...I don't know if any of you received the letter that I had sent as a back - up to ... If you looked at the ... We did not build anything on the property ... It was brought to our ' attention—and if you notice the dates ... We want to be as cooperative as we can. We thought we were alright in having our containers on the property. In the letters ... We want to do a lot more with the land. We did have conditions... was denied, even though at the ... wrote a nasty letter and told we had to get them off right away. We contacted the city to see what could be done. We are, we worked with the city right away. The first meeting was with their ' attorney... Those pictures, I'm not aware what you're looking at. I know I had taken pictures earlier... Conrad: Is there ever any refuse in the containers when they're on site? Nancy Lee: No. They're construction containers that we take to the sites but we don't fill them with garbage. Conrad: And is the 58 number that staff has proposed acceptable? Nancy Lee: No it's not... Conrad: I guess I'm not sure why, when did you start storing these there and under what? Nancy Lee: They've been there since we had the conditional use permit. Conrad: And the conditional use allowed this? Nancy Lee: Yes it did. We have a letter from. ' Conrad: Allowed dumpsters? It said that we allow dumpsters? Nancy Lee: I have a letter from Barb Dacy, the previous city planner, and she had a limit on ' what... 36 Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 1 Conrad: You're aware of what our, this business district is all about? Do you know what , we're trying to do down there and what we're not trying to do? Have you talked to staff about the intent of the. ' Nancy Lee: ...I know we haven't had a lot of direct answers. Conrad: Well it's in rint. It's in print so you can always o and ask staff to say, what are , P P Y Y g Y they trying to do in that fringe business district. You should do that just so you know how we react when we look at an application. Thank you for your comments. ' Nancy Lee: Well actually on that, I don't know if you'll remember or not, we have been ' trying to find out from you... Conrad: You know and I'll fill in and maybe because you may not get to the report but that area is a pretty area. And the intent typically has been down there that we don't want to intensify. Yet there were businesses there and we didn't want to harm their right because they had that business. And so under that, we have a very natural looking area. We have an area that's not serviced with Chanhassen services. In terms of water, sewer. We're trying to maintain that area in terms of it's natural appearance but give business an opportunity to survive. But really not to grow because it's not serviced and we have these other conflicts. ' So I think if you had looked at the intent, and the intent has been there for quite a while. Since I've been around, for that particular district, I think that would tell you what you can and can't do and maybe might tell you why staff might react to some of the things you do the way they do. But again, thanks for your comments. Mancino: I have a question for Ladd I guess. In Barbara Dacy's conditional use permit that was given, there was a limit of 50 dumpsters when the conditional use permit was granted. Is that correct? Al -Jaff: With that conditional use permit, they were going to have a building actually. There was supposed to be a garage and an office. Mancino: Oh, and the PP were dum sters supposed to be in the building. P Al -Jaff: They were going to have vehicles stored in that area and it was ... I mean it was , indoor, enclosed storage and. Mancino: It was just never done? Al -Jaff: Nancy, do you want to elaborate? ' 37 t rj 1] Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 Nancy Lee: Yeah. It was going to be ... It was a garage ... and outdoor storage. It was ... That's not true ... We would like to build on it. A building would be wonderful but there... Scott: Are there any services to that site? Electricity, water, sewer. Al -Jaff: Definitely not sewer and water. No. It's outside the MUSA area. Scott: But electricity though. They could get electricity. Nancy Lee made a statement that was not picked up on the tape. Scott: Okay. So this was originally a conditional use permit. It was a lot like the contractors yard where 12 months you have to have substantial construction, etc, etc. Okay. Nancy Lee: We were originally told that garbage companies don't fit anywhere ... we were told that we would be under a contractors yard and we also applied for ... so we did that and that's how they granted... Then when we had that change so that we would fit in that category, according to what they wanted us to do, then ... So we don't fit anywhere in an area with contractors yards and everything else. Mancino: Sharmin, tell me about the operation hours and days. I see 7:00 in the morning until 6:00 at night. Al -Jaff: On weekdays. Assuming that ... or to take a dumpster. Mancino: But I see that's Monday thru Saturday. Aren't there homes in that area? Al -Jaff: There is one part of the site. There are two... Mancino: Do we usually in the business fringe allow the Saturday, the 7:00 in the morning until 6:00 p.m.? And is there a need? Nancy Lee: There's quite a distance... property but I think people would have to come to the very edge of their property to even see on our land. We're down by 212. And they're up over the railroad tracks and they have to go ... There's not a lot of activity... Mancino: Would you support keeping those hours as the area gets developed? Around it. And is there a way to change those if you get more development around? Aanenson: Sharmin has indicated that there are, the neighbor ... has complained but the 38 Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 ! recommendation... Mancino: Well I would certainly, I don't care whether it's one house or 10 houses. Saturday at 7:00 in the morning would not, I would change those hours on Saturday to 9:00 to 5:00 as reasonable for people living in that area. No other questions at this time. Scott: Any other questions or comments for the applicant. No. Do you have any other comments you'd like to make? Nancy Lee: No. Scott: Okay, thanks. Would anyone else like to speak at the public hearing? Yes sir. Please r identify yourself and give us your address. Verne Severson: I'm Verne Severson and I'm the property owner who's directly north of the lot in question. So I have a few thoughts that I guess I'd like you to think about and then I have a list of problems... First, I guess living in the south end, and having to pay what we feel are very high property taxes and we don't get the same benefit or advantages that other residents of Chanhassen have, we don't have the, like in city parks, we don't get playgrounds. We're forced to use a Chaska address and we're living in Chanhassen. And it's always been a safety issue. We don't have sewer and water. We have difficulty getting our local street paved or properly maintained and we get no help in our request for, to make Highway 101 safer for walking and biking and jogging. And then our desire to work on taking advantage of the abandoned rail corridor, which was met with great disinterest by the city. So overall we feel that we're somewhat ignored by the city and so when something like this comes up, it peaks our interest. The problems we have, these are I think quite simple. One is we have , high expectations of our quality of life in Chanhassen. It's a prestigious city and we want to be part of that but we feel that the noise and smells and the views of dumpsters aren't really consistent with that. I don't know, I guess it's been commented that the site is presentable but I tend to disagree with that. I think it is quite ugly really. We can't see it from our house but people who walk on the trail along there can see it ... And number two I think, and those are selfish reasons of course. Number two, I think Chanhassen should be concerned... This is the southern entrance to Chanhassen. State Highway 101, people come up there. I know that that area's been called ugly town and it has been quite ugly and is still quite ugly but I think that you as city planners should be trying to be considering that. Trying to at ' least improve that ... and do it quickly and rapidly but maybe you should just be concerned with Chanhassen and start working on that... Like I mentioned, it is the southern entrance to Chanhassen and also there's the biking and hiking trail to be developed along there so you'll have more people to have a view of that area. It's a very pretty area and I guess I'd like to see it kept for... And third, we're being asked to make some sacrifices. Especially the , 39 I Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 concern of the preservation of the bluff area. There's some restrictions being put on us because of that. And I guess I feel our neighbors should also help preserve the area and keep it looking nice. The report, the staff report says they didn't feel the property value would be decreased by that. Well, I guess I'd dispute that. A dumpster is a dumpster and a dumpster really is a garbage, it's associated with garbage and that's not good for your property value. And I guess my last point is that, approving this area for storage of dumpsters is one thing and maybe something can be worked out where that can be allowed but what happens is that leads to something else. And we're afraid that if that's allowed, that something else is going ' to be ... and uglier and it will be difficult to stop so it comes back to my first point I guess. I guess I feel that you should be paying a little more attention to the area at the south end of ' Chanhassen and try to pay as much attention to us I guess as you do to the Kings Road area. Thanks. ' Scott: Good, thank you sir. Anyone else like to speak at the public hearing? Yes sir. Laverne Wheeler: My name's Laverne Wheeler. I live at 445 Lakota Lane. Just down the block to the east. I just second what Verne had said and I just had a couple questions that people might answer for me. A commercial dumpster. I have an image of what it is but, and what it might contain but maybe if I was informed a little more on the type of materials that these things contain and if there are any refuse left in them at the point when they're stored at all. ' Conrad: They said no. Laverne Wheeler: They're ... and cleaned out. Scott: Has the applicant seen those pictures? I don't think she has. Laverne Wheeler: I would just, in talking about making that area more presentable, I think this abandoned railway and improvements that are happening there is just an outstanding thing to improve that area for both the residents of Chanhassen and people who might enter and leave through that gateway. And if the storage site can be screened from those people adequately, with something that's attractive. The dumpsters are clean and neat dumpsters. ,I mean something that we ... other things, I don't object to dumpsters. I've got one in my driveway right now because I've been improving but I think if we can find a way to either collect them in an area where they could be screened entirely from view of the people who ' are around there. If they don't provide an odor or don't support animals or anything like that, I wouldn't have a problem. But I would encourage some dramatic screening so that the items themselves can't be viewed. 40 Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 1 Scott: Good, thank ou. Would anyone else like to speak? Seeing none, I'd like to have a ' Y Y P g motion to close the public hearing please. Conrad moved, Mancino seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Farmakes: I'd agree with the residents. For Chan's future, I think that those type of uses along that area have got to go. For some reason along that road just seems to be a magnet to that type of use. I guess I wasn't back here in the 50's and 40's and. Conrad: No, I haven't been on here that long. ' Farmakes: I think it's pretty obvious. I don't know if waiting until the MUSA expands there I is necessarily criteria that we should use for that. Mancino: Well then what would be it based on? I Farmakes: Well for instance, we have some developments, large lot developments that squeezed into those areas before we get MUSA and it increases the population. I think the criteria being that there's going to be enough people to object to that type of usage. Kind of does the trees fall until you hear it. We're talking about an area that not only us but the federal government are looking at trying to enhance and I'm not against approving this permit but I'm wondering if we should entertain a time limit for review or if we're just going to leave it open ended criteria for it. I'm not sure how you do that with an existing use that is incompatible, or you think is incompatible long term with the goals of the area. How is the position that we take to nudge that out and allow the person a reasonable amount of time to make arrangements elsewhere. ' Conrad: See we don't have a master plan for this area. If Tim Erhart was here, he'd love this conversation because he's always been real concerned with that corridor. And we don't have a plan and the only thing that's going to force the plan is city services down there and then you can start doing something but nobody's really said let's turn it into a preserve because you'd have to buy it. There's no money to do a natural thing down there so therefore we've always taken the easy. Well I don't know if it's the easy way out but nobody's had a vision Jeff to really do something that might be quite different. So therefore status quo has been. I Farmakes: And I'm not talking about initiating this now. I'm just talking about in the future. Whether that 10 years from now. It seems to me that a master plan will be done for that area ' 41 i fl 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 prior to sewer and water going there. And I'm just, they're talking about fringe businesses and some of the other ones that we see along that road. Either mining operations or the type of thing that you would not expect out here. The reason that they haven't been objectionable is it is an isolated area. But long term, and in particular. Not just ... federal government is becoming more involved in that area. We may be thinking about what we should do long term planning with that area and again allow some reasonable time for the business owners of that area to. Conrad: You're thinking right but we don't know so it's hard to tell. We shouldn't really make up something out of the clear blue. Aanenson: Can I just make a comment? When we went through the goals with the City Council, we promised them that we'd start working on the, we had the 1995 study area south of Lyman and as you know we put together what we're doing in the agenda ... but we've committed to the Council that we were going to try to wrap in the BF district in the 1995 study area and start working on that this fall. So in short ... we also have to start looking at the BF district...so we have committed to the Council that we'll do the 1995 study area ... It is a priority. Mancino: So are you saying you would feel comfortable with a recommendation that not only, you whichever is less then, the use shall be terminated after one year of inclusion of the site within the Municipal Service or conditions of the permit have been violated, whichever comes first. Or the Highway 1995 study is concluded and passed or? Aanenson: That might be a good way to wrap it into. To do an evaluation of that as we review the study area... Conrad: Can't we put terms on conditional uses though? Can't we put. Aanenson: You can bring it back every year if you want. Conrad: But your trade off is, the applicant is only willing to put in so much money into the site given the fact they may lose. Mancino: Every year they may lose it. Conrad: Right. So you've got to say, what do you want them to do right now and to prorate that over a life of, if it's only one year. If we give them one year, they don't want to do it and that's one way to defeat their proposal. But there's a lot of stuff I think coming in down t here. I guess you just have to weigh. 42 Id Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 1 Aanen on: That's why we're going to be looking at these issues—and we'll also be looking , s y eg g g g at a Bluff Creek study area which we talked about earlier tonight working with the watershed district and ... that was part of this charette we had recently. Trying to get some additional funding for Bluff Creek and is ... enhance Bluff Creek and the surrounding watershed area. So there are a couple things happening with that study that will... Mancino: I guess I want to ask Ladd. Do you have a vision for that area. Conrad: Long term, that whole area? It's a tough one. It should be natural. Absolutely. It r should be, but the fact of the matter is, nobody's going to. There's not going to be a government body that comes forth with a lot of money to buy it. But it is, it's beautiful territory. Should be connected to Eden Prairie is I think a preserve or I don't know what it's called to the northeast of it so we should be connected there. It's pretty stuff. But remember we've got a dump down there and auto graveyard and it's, there's a lot of poor uses that are , ecologically just horrendous. Just horrendous so, a vision for the area, I don't know what it's going to be. It's also on a highway. It's a great highway. If I were a business person in the highway business area, I'd just love to have a gas station down there if it has the right road access and what have you. It's just, it's 15,000 cars or big numbers. Big enough to really develop a commercial deal but the right use is natural park or passive. In terms of tonight, and I'm going to ask staff but I really think we should be tabling this tonight because the real ' issue. Well, the real issue, I guess there are other deeper issues but the only way you can look at this is if it's screened. That's the only way. They're coming in for a conditional use and they've got something that's less intensive than what they were planning before with ' building something and fencing something and putting trucks in there and so really I don't mind the use if you can handle it. If you can screen. So screening is the major issue and if you can't screen it, I don't want to take a look at it. Mancino: So you want to see the landscape plan and see what they can do. Conrad: Absolutely. Point number one, we'd recommend that it's approved, that the. Well ' Y PP if the applicant can't furnish us a landscape plan that we think is acceptable to us, then in my mind this doesn't fly at all. So I think it should be tabled. If staff feels that's the right thing to do. Because I think there's been some communications back and forth and I don't know, some of the, all the background to why this is here tonight. Farmakes: You're making my comments shorter. Mancino: I'd support tabling it. Ledvina: Likewise. 43 i 1 71 u Planning Commission Meeting - June 15, 1994 Scott: Can I have a motion please? Conrad: I move that we, hold on. I move that we table Planning Case #94 -1, IUP. Scott: Is there a second? Mancino: Second. Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we table case #94 -1 IU`P. Is there any discussion? Conrad moved, Mancino seconded that the Planning Commission table action on the Interim Use Permit #94 -1 for Admiral Waste Management. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: PUD AND PRELIMINARY PLAT TO CREATE 34 BLOCKS AND 3 OUTLOTS FOR A 166 UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF 34 BUILDINGS OF EITHER 2, 3, 4, 6 OR 8 UNITS IN EACH. THE UNITS ARE TWO STORY, SLAB ON GRADE CONSTRUCTION WITH ATTACHED ONE OR TWO CAR GARAGES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 5 AND GALPIN BOULEVARD, AUTUMN RIDGE, GOOD VALUE HOMES, INC. (BETTY O'SHAUGHNESSY PROPERTY). Public Present: Name Address Jim & Sue Avis 8190 Galpin Blvd. Chuck Gabrielson 2600 Arboretum Blvd. Howard Dahlgren 1786 Irving Avenue So, Mpls. Derrick Passe 9445 E. River Road, Mpls. Suite 201 John Peterson 9445 E. River Road, Mpls. Suite 201 Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Bob, can you please show me where the 4 or 5 single family homes are. I've never seen them on any of their drawings. On Galpin east of the development? And how many are there? Can you draw that in? Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994 they've done some good massing on that west side so I feel real comfortable. That's all my questions. Scott: Good, any other discussion? If there's no more discussion, I'd like to have a vote on the question. Harberts moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission approve the architectural detailing incorporated in the detached commercial/office building being developed as part of the West Village Center. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. AN INTERIM USE PERMIT TO ALLOW SCREENED OUTDOOR STORAGE IN THE BF, FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED AT 10500 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD, ADMIRAL WASTE MANAGEMENT. Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Scott: Any questions or comments for staff? Okay, any discussion? Conrad: Well yeah. We went from a request of 40 some dumpsters up to 100. We went from 58 dumpsters up to whatever. Mancino: 140. Conrad: And staff agrees. Because why? Al -Jaff: Originally it wasn't specified how many they wanted on the site so basically what we did was we went out and we counted how many dumpsters were there and we said... A letter came from the applicant requesting 140 so staff discussed this issue and we made the recommendation that as long as there is screening of those. As long as the screening works, then it would be. Conrad: Okay. Shielding 58 is different than shielding 140 or whatever that number is so. Well, I still haven't seen a plan that shows me how it's done so I guess I'm, I think we could pass it along. But on the other hand our duty is to see it first and then pass our recommendations of the plan to the City Council and I still don't see a plan that's acceptable. So I guess I would have to recommend that we table this item until we see a plan that works. Mancino: What do you want to see in the plan Ladd? 3 n I� V Ll r] 1 1 L I n Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994 Conrad: I don't know, just something that staff feels comfortable with. It'd be really easy for us to pass it along and just say hey, yeah it looks like a good plan but I think we just owe it, or we're owed a good plan that staff makes a positive recommendation on. Mancino: Yeah, I'd actually like to see in the plan where the 140 are. You know layout where they would be on the plan. Conrad: Yeah. It's not that this is a bad use. You know if it's screened, this could be a good use for the parcel. I don't have a problem with the use as long as there's some wording in the recommendation that I think has to be changed a little bit to make sure that we really don't have storage in the dumpsters. The applicant said there's no refuse or whatever but I really would want to make sure that that was specified in our language. But again, it's probably an acceptable, as long as the traffic and noise is handled, it's probably an acceptable use for that. But again, we need a plan that we can see that staff has shown us works. Scott: Okay, any other questions or comments? Okay. Can I have a motion please? Conrad: I would move that we table this particular item, the interim use permit to provide outdoor storage for commercial dumpsters per the staff report. I would have it tabled until the applicant and staff can present a screening plan that meets staff's requirements. Scott: Okay. Is there a second? Mancino: Second. Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we table the item. Is there any discussion? Ledvina: Yes. I also think that we should know specifically where the dumpsters are going to be stored on site. It's a rather large site so we, I need to know what space 150 dumpsters occupies and then that those dumpsters are going to be screened. So I think just to, I think you said that but just to also know where those dumpsters are being stored. Mancino: Yeah. I have a question on that. We're asking for screening right now and I , mean one of the only ways we'll get it is to get either a perspective drawing or something perspectively that we're on TH 212 and either they're going to berm or not and then how, if we're going to see 42 trees there, how tall are the trees. And if the trees are 6 feet tall, the span of a 6 foot tall spruce is going to be 4 feet. So if you only have 42 trees, I mean how much screening is that going to be if it's 6 feet tall? So we need to know the height and if we're talking about screening all year, or complete screening, we're going to have to know how tall the trees are and what the span is. 4 Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994 1 Scott: And then bearing in mind that there's a 20 foot change in elevation over the area where they could be potentially stored so. Ledvina: The criteria though for screening is from the highway 212. That's what we're , talking about. Okay. Scott: Yeah. , Mancino: And there may even need to be a little bit of berming to help in that height , because the trees will start out at 6 feet and it really won't do it. And it takes them about a couple years to really start growing. So and then they'll start after 2 years growing about a foot a year. But the most screening you'll get from a coniferous tree is about 15 feet wide. I , mean it grows 15 to 20 is the widest and that's after 25 years. So I mean there needs to be some calculations and looking at it. Scott: Any other comments or questions. Al -Jaff: Mr. Chairman? , Scott: Yes. I Al -Jaff: Do you have any comments regarding... Ledvina: The time line. The term of the permit. Are we talking about 15 years? Or MUSA ' line extension, whichever comes later. What? Al -Jaff: We're recommending that it be 10 years or until the MUSA. Ledvina: Whichever comes first. Al -Jaff: Correct. The applicant is requesting that that be changed to whichever comes later. We're also recommending that the applicant be permitted to request an extension for interim ' use permit prior to it's expiration. , Conrad: Are there a lot of costs in developing this property to the point where it can take the , dumpsters? Are we imposing a lot of financial hardship? Are we imposing a lot of financial tasks that appear unreasonable? Have we asked for paving? Al -Jaff: Paving f the property? g 5 Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994 ' Conrad: Again, when you do a 10 year permit, that's a long time. I would do that if I thought we were imposing some real financial hardships. I think that it's important to get some security. But I don't know right now that we are. I think we're asking for screening. Anything else? Mancino: Well one time the building was. Scott: Well that was the original. ' Conrad: You know ou put a building there, you need the return. You need time to et a Y P g Y g return on that building. Really they need a time period to get a return, right now, on the screening, which are trees. Which could be 42 trees. Probably more. And I'm not sure that the 10 years is, if I were them I'd want the 10 years. I'd want to know that there was a ' chance for re : issuing the permit and I think we can probably, if they run a good operation, which I'm sure they would, I think we would renew that. But I'm not sure that the 10 years is necessary right now. It could be 5. ' Ledvina: Yeah, I think we talked about 5 last time. Conrad: But again, it's all based on finances. If they have to put a lot of money in, then I'd say 10. I don't see it so I think 5 looks pretty good. I think the other thing the applicant will probably care about is the hours of operation. You know 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 was struck and now it's 9:00 to 5:00 and 9:00 to 5:00 is not really a commercial type operation so. I would think that they'd be very nervous about that. Those hours. Scott: Any other comments? Mancino: On recommendation number 6. The second sentence. I would just add, only 1 empty dumpsters may be stored on the site. And I agree with Ladd on the 5 years and hours of operation. I didn't know that they worked on holidays. Picked up waste on holidays. It's interesting. ' Al -Jaffa I believe this was an item of discussion at the last meeting. It's on page 38 of the Minutes. And the request was to, page 39. I'm sorry. Top of the page. That the hours be changed Saturday to. Conrad: See those are Saturday hours. That may be but not Monday thru Friday. Monday ' thru Friday, that's just not reasonable. I think we should leave them with the typical 7:00 to 6:00. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - July 20, 1994 1 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. have one. When you're talking about some of Scott: Any questions or comments. I dust a e y g 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 , t L F n 0 INTERIM USE PERMIT TO ALLOW SCREENED OUTDOOR STORAGE IN THE BF, FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED AT 10500 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD, ADMIRAL WASTE MANAGEMENT. Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Scott: If you were to rate the intensity of use over the, let's say the last 12 months, what's your best guesstimate as to the intensity of that use with regards to the number of containers that are stored there on the average? Do you have a feel for that? Al -Jaff: The maximum I have been able to count on there has been 58. It has never gone beyond that. Scott: Why the extra 100? Al -Jaff: I think the applicant should answer that question at this point. Scott: Well since we're not having a public hearing, this will be a good time to do it so. Bill Griffith: Mr. Chair, Planning Commissioners, my name is Bill Griffith. I'm an attorney representing Admiral Waste. What we've discussed on site was essentially what is required to screen the containers, whether it be 58 or 140 or 200. The topography provides essentially a buffer to the north. The existing vegetation provides screening year round because of it's density and intensity around the area. And so what is being provided now is a 150 foot fence at 6 to 8 feet in height and the addition of the spruce trees provides a break in the look of that linear screening method. What we discussed is whether the applicant could come back at a future time and say, based on experience, we've got 140 out there now. There are still 2 or 3 rows left, in which we could provide dumpsters based upon that. Showing pictures or whatever type of documentation would be acceptable. Could we obtain essentially an s Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 1 amendment of the deferment. That's what we desire. I think in fact the city code allows the ' applicant to come in, amend a permit and where it complies with the standards for approval, obtain an amendment for that permit. That's all that we're discussing. It really is a statement ' of what's allowed by code. We wanted to see a clear statement as there is in the, I think the last condition. For instance it states, the applicant may request an extension of the interim use permit prior to it's expiration. Similar to that kind of statement which is a statement of , essentially the obvious that we can't request an extension. No guaranteed implied. We wanted to say that the applicant can request additional dumpsters if they demonstrate those dumpsters can be screened and that's what this full exercise is about. Demonstrating that we can screen the dumpsters which are now located on the property and those that are capped at 140 today and maybe at some number in the future. That's essentially what we discussed. Scott: Any questions for the applicant? Ledvina: Did you look at how many dumpsters can actually, physically fit in that area? In , terms of putting the dumpsters there. Maneuvering them. Having access to a large type of truck vehicle and things like that. ' Bill Griffith: The plan which has been submitted to the staff would provide the ability to locate the 140 dumpsters. Today there are 4 rows, or there have been 4 rows. Again, they , reduced the number of dumpsters down 20 to 58. We certainly know that 58 could be allowed. Ledvina: What's the size of the dumpster? The dimension of the dumpster. ' Bill Griffith: I don't have that. I Nancy Lee: They're about... Ledvina: 1 1/2 to 10? ' Nancy Lee: They go anywhere from 1 1/2 foot deep to 10 to 12 foot deep, depending on the ... diagram in that demonstrates when I put in these dumpsters, utilizing 12 foot dumpsters. Ledvina: I'm sorry, could you say that again? i Nancy Lee: Sharmin has the ... the southwest corner. Ledvina: Right, I see that but. 2 , I Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 Nancy Lee: ...is a 5 x 4 foot... Ledvina: Right, I see that. But I guess what I'm thinking about is they all, you know they all pack in there nice but that's not, it doesn't seem to me the logistics of getting the things in and out. Are you literally packing them in there tight and how do you get equipment in that area to. Nancy Lee: ...dumpsters you use the back of the truck. You back up so you can hook it up to the back of the truck. Obviously we park the dumpsters in line so all we have to do is back up to it and take it away. Obviously we can't get the dumpsters at the very back end. We utilize those in the front first. Bill Griffith: Maybe I can get to the point of your question. The experience has been that 58 dumpsters in loosely aligned rows, because these were aligned before this issue arose. 58 dumpsters in 4 rows at 100 feet fits comfortably on the property and allows for a truck to come down and move it around. Based upon the discussions with city staff, we've increased the width of the area to 150 feet. That's the width of the, or the length of the fence. And the number of rows, because of the concerns about screening, are more closely spaced and the rows are now, 12 are shown on the plan but if you have 10 let's say at 150 feet, you could comfortably get in the 140 dumpsters and we would maybe at that point come back a year or two from now and say, can we increase the number. But it's been demonstrated that they can fit within the area shown on the plan. Mancino: Yeah, it hasn't been demonstrated to me yet. Don't we require a site plan as we do on any subdivision, any building site where we can see that the trucks can get in off Highway 101? I mean I went there and I was very concerned about big trucks getting into and onto that site. And I haven't seen a site plan that shows that the trucks can get in and out. And I haven't seen a site plan that shows us exactly where the 140 dumpsters will go and if the and if the land is graded. I haven't seen any grading plan or anything. Do we require that? There hasn't been any physical, visual thing for us to look at, at all. For the last, boy this started, we requested an actual landscaping plan, let's see. We met in June about this. We met in July about it and now we're meeting in August about it and we haven't seen anything. Scott: It's also unfair to have us react to something that's not in our packet. So it's very difficult for us. I mean fortunately you've had a chance to meet with the applicant and stuff but as a Planning Commission, I mean we don't have the benefit of those conversations. Nor do we have the benefit or did we have the benefit of what you have and it's very difficult for us to make a decision in a span of 10, 15, 20 minutes on something like this, so. I don't know how you want to respond to that. 3 I Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 1 Al -Jaff: I believe there are conditions in the staff report, and we have amended some of ' those conditions as well. We haven't had a chance to go through them yet but with the conditions in the staff report, we believe that we will achieve the desirable results. ' Scott: What about the, 1 noticed that there's some, a number of trees to be planted along the railroad right -of -way. Will that impart any screening benefit to the residents or from what I ' know of the area, that's fairly steep. There may be 40, 50 feet above the property. Al -Jaff: It won't, we won't get any benefits in the near future, no. Scott: What, and the reason for planting the trees along the railroad grade is for future eventual screening for the people on the bluff? I Al -Jaff: Correct. , Scott: Okay. Mancino: Dave, how do you feel about big trucks entering TH 101 and coming off TH 101 ' in that area? I mean it's one, hard to find. The entrance. I went there two different times looking for it and yet there was, when you're coming down that hill, it's right on the top of the hill going down to 212. And you don't see anything coming out of the east side there... Do you have any thoughts? Hempel: Yes, TH 101 is a curvy road in that area. There probably are some sight considerations to be concerned with. It's my understanding ... it has been accessed in the past. Mancino: But we're intensifying the use. We're going to have more traffic there because we're going to have more dumpsters. Hempel: The other consideration I guess is TH 101 is a State highway and MnDot would have jurisdiction of the access. There probably could be the most concerns from a liability standpoint... necessary site improvements. There's traffic control signs to be placed and truck ' hauling signs and similar to that that could be posted on TH 101 ... the potential is there. , Mancino: Because those trucks, I would think move pretty slow as they're getting ready to , turn and somebody coming down that hill. The other thing is, as I remember it's gravel into there. The roadway off TH 101 is gravel. Don't we require, I know that we do in a residential areas, where you need driveways to be asphalt, 7 ton and MnDot requirements, etc. ' Is there? 4 I� Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 Hempel: We do for two reasons. One is for emergency access. All weather, in the winter time conditions, spring thaw conditions. The other is from an erosion standpoint. Hilly terrain. There's not adequate site drainage to the site... potential to have erosion problems there but I think that site's been there for some time. I'm not aware of any kind of erosion problem. I haven't been made aware of anything yet to date. If I'm not mistaken, we did have a site plan at one time for this that did show either existing or proposed conditions. And we did have some remarks with regards to that site plan. At this time I don't think... Al -Jaff: Another thing we like to have... emergency access. There really isn't anyone living on this site. So that's something... There is some very minor, minor erosion. It's not even erosion. It's more of a pothole in the entrance as you go into the site. Mancino: So you would not recommend paving it as we do residential driveways? I Al -Jaff: Yes. Scott: Any other questions or comments for staff or the applicant? Mancino: Okay. Al -Jaff: Could we, if I may, go through some conditions that need to be amended. I Scott: Sure. 1- Al -Jaff: On condition number 1. It should read, the applicant shall demonstrate. No, we take out the applicant shall demonstrate that the submitted landscaping screening plans will provide adequate screening year round. But it will read, all final plans shall be approved by staff. The fence and landscaping shall be constructed and planted prior to October 22, 1994. We originally chose the September 15th because that's the DOT deadline for landscaping. However, you can plant trees beyond that date and that's what the applicant requested and we can work with that. And condition number 5. This condition has been satisfied. When we went to the site we noticed that the compost materials had been removed. We also would like to add a condition to read that, the applicant shall replace any dead trees within one year. Or anything that dies within one year shall be replaced. Any new planted trees. Mancino: Anything on the property that dies. Scott: Also there should be a condition here that storage of compost materials, tires or plants, it says furniture or other refuse, shall not be stored on this site. And I don't know, I'm looking at the July 11th version. 5 0 Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 1 Al -Jaff: Okay. We made a change to condition number 6 to read only empty dumpsters may be stored on the site. Scott: Okay, thank you. ' Mancino: Did you want to say anything about MnDot? Oh, you have got that. Al -Jaff: We do have that condition. Mancino: Yes on 4. And how do ou feel about the length of the term shall not exceed 10 ' Y g years? Weren't we also talking about Sharmin last time, not only should it be terminated within one year of inclusion of the site within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area, but according to the study, 1995 plan. How that's guided. Didn't we say something about that last time? Ledvina: Are you saying that we should tie that into that? Mancino: Yes. Scott: Tie the use. Mancino: Tie the use into that. Oh, but then we were concerned with. Ledvina: That's open ended. Mancino: Well, so are all of these. ' Al -Jaff: I believe that was the amendment of the BF district. The zoning ordinance amendment would apply then rather than this specific application. ' Scott: Any other comments or questions? Matt. _ Ledvina: Well, I don't know. I don't care to be surprised when it comes to these meetings as it relates to what we have. You know I specifically, I asked last time that we have the applicant demonstrate on paper that x amount of dumpsters can be fit in the screened area and that they shall screen from all sides. I don't know, I don't have a very good level of comfort that I see enough information to tell me that. I hate to say come back again and show us your plan. Let's see that plan in a little more detail. The contours on all sides because ' essentially, I mean you've said that yes. There's plantings there. There's trees but I'm not necessarily convinced of that because I haven't seen a detailed plan of that. I guess I'm still 6 i 71 u � Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 not comfortable with moving this along at this point. I think the applicant is on the right track certainly in terms of finalizing this thing but I'd like to know what I'm voting on and I don't have that level of comfort yet. Al -Jaff: Do you feel that condition number 6 addresses that concern? Or shall be limited to the number that can be adequately screened. Ledvina: Well, I'd like to know that going in up front. I think we can turn everything over to the staff but then at that point you know, what's our role. I think we need to, it's my understanding of the role that we want to make sure that the conditions of these types of permits are adequate. That the site plans are adequate and I don't have that level of comfort. Scott: Okay, Nancy. Mancino: Gosh, I guess I kind of feel the same way as Matt. I think that the applicant is in the right direction and I'm glad that staff and the applicant met to go over a landscape plan. Something that we've been requesting but I agree with Matt. We did ask to see a layout of the dumpsters and egress and ingress points and how that all works and I would feel much more comfortable waiting to see that. Scott: Okay, Jeff. Farmakes: I won't argue with that. Obviously a time limit in there and... In general I'm not wildly enthusiastic about expansion of those uses. I go back to the mining issue that we had here many times. That's a pretty big percentage of expansion. Currently under the rules and regulations that we have, that's allowed but I go back again to the planning issue. I think it's enough property probably to live with that amount of dumpsters. But I think it might be a bad precedent for what we're doing. Or something at least to look at. And if they're going to study this for long term, next year or in the next season, I think that that's a good thing. I think we should do that. I think we should come to a conclusion as to what they're going to do with those businesses. We're going to permit that type of expansion... Mancino: I had a question for Sharmin. When we conditional use with Barbara Dacy. think when she was Planning Director. When the conditional use was first given to the applicant. How many dumpsters? Wasn't it 50 at that time? Was there a limit? Al -Jaff: It was going to be enclosed within a building. There was supposed to be a building on this site. It was completely enclosed. Mancino: So that the dumpsters were going to be inside the building. Was that it? Or was 7 Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 1 the building for some other maintenance reasons? Or was the thinking at the time that the ' dumpsters were all fitting inside the out building or the big? Al -Jaff: There was supposed to be vehicles in the building as well. Nancy, were there ' supposed to be vehicles as well as dumpsters? Nancy ee: Dum sters were not going to be stored in the building. , Y P g g . g Bill Griffith: Let me see if I can address the question please. I think the letter you're , referring to from, is it Barb Dacy? That's the planner at the time. Allowed for the temporary storage of 50 dumpsters on the property pending the development of the site. As you may recall from earlier discussions, the City Council denied the request for an extension of the conditional use permit. As you may also recall, our concerns is there are very limited uses in the BF district and the applicant has been using this property in the interim for the storage of dumpsters. Essentially all they can use the property for because of limitations. That is why we're in here for an interim use permit. And that is probably why you have some discomfort level with the amount of materials submitted or the level of detail. This is not ... a conditional use permit for a permanent use. This is not a commercial building. Something that you're maybe more familiar seeing at this Planning Commission level. This is an interim use permit essentially to install a fence to screen dumpsters on the property. Maybe if we established that the existing number, 58 would be the cap for this round and install the improvements and demonstrate to staff in the next season that we can store more on the property, maybe that would get us off of dead center. But as far as the level of detail, ' we do not intend to hire a professional landscape planner to provide detail on a fence. It just isn't going to be done for this level of use. This is an interim use permit. It's to store dumpsters on the property and we believe through site visits and through documentation that we've satisfied the city code and demonstrated that to city staff. I apologize and I'm sorry that hasn't been for 3 meeting brought your comfort level up but that's really where we're at. So maybe to get off dead center, if we propose the 58 that have been allowed to this point and demonstrate in the next season that we can store more. Once the improvements are there, maybe we can get this thing moved onto City Council. We have a season for construction and we have a season for installation of plantings and any further delays may put us beyond , that season by the time we get out of City Council so that would be my proposal to move this thing along. ou guys think about that? Scott: What do Y Y g Mancino: I would be glad with not intensifying a use and keeping it 58 and also the term of ' the length being 5 years. Not 10 years as it says. For a interim use permit. i Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 I Farmakes: I find that acceptable. Scott: 5 years? Mancino: And not intensifying the use and keeping the dumpster count at 58. Farmakes: Sure. Ledvina: Well, I think if we reduce the numbers and kept the, allow some plantings the same that would bring about certainly 3 times the chance of that area being screened so that seems reasonable to me in terms of that approach. Mancino: And it doesn't intensify the traffic on TH 101 and it allows. Scott: How many, in your report, how many conditions do you have? You're working off the July 11th? I just want to make sure what I'm putting in. Al -Jaff: July 28th. Scott: May I have a motion by the way. Mancino: Yeah, I move that the Planning Commission approve the Interim Use Permit #94 -1 ' for outdoor storage of dumpsters as shown on plans received July 7, 1994 with the following conditions. Sharmin, could you please read the revised number 1? 1 Al -Jaffa Okay. A final landscaping plan shall be approved by staff. The fence shall be constructed and the landscaping shall be planted prior to October 22, 1994. Mancino: And could you just add in that the 46 trees so we have a count as to what the landscaping is made up of. Al -Jaff: 46 spruce trees. Mancino: And how tall? 6 feet? Al -Jaffa The applicant has purchased the trees at 1 1/2 feet tall. They have been planted. Bill Griffith: The number is 42. They have been planted and they are, the trees are not providing the screening. CE t Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 1 Al -Jaffa At the site, Nancy mentioned that they have been planted on her site. Nancy Lee: No. They're not planted. Al -Jaff: I misunderstood. They are 1 1/2 feet high and they are. , Mancino: And they are, I mean the reason why we, they're planting 46 trees is to break the horizontal line, right? I mean isn't that what we were told. And the fence is going to be 8 feet tall, because it can screen more dumpsters being 8 feet tall. And now we're going to have 1 1/2 feet trees. I'm going to stop and can we go back to the discussion on that? What's our ordinance say as far as landscaping and? Don't we have a minimum coniferous size? Al -Jaff: 6 feet. I Mancino: 6 feet, okay. So if we are asking for landscaping and we do have a minimum city size, thank you. I Elliott Knetsch: If I may be allowed. You've seen my face at the last couple meetings. I'm Elliott Knetsch from the City Attorney's office and I guess I just wanted to say to you that in staff's opinion we've been looking at this for a long time. Obviously the level of submittals is not on a par with what you might see for Goodyear's conditional use permit to put an auto store on Highway 5. But the level of submittal is commensurate with the nature of the use ' and this is a temporary use. It's an interim use. It will only last under this permit as proposed for 10 years. It's basically a use that's existed out there since I think 1988 or '89. And we have to ask ourselves, what can we ask them to do. What kind of investment can we ' ask them to make in return for a 10 year use of the property. And they've been somewhat struggling with this property. Their plans,. it was proposed back in '89 or so for a conditional use didn't come off and now we are left with a zoning district that provides zero permitted , uses as it stands right now for that property. There's not one thing they could come in and get a site plan and do out there. Mancino: We just passed. Elliott Knetsch: Again that's, you recommended at the last meeting that we increase those permitted uses but that's not on the books yet. That still has to go to the City Council. I would suggest trying to make a decision tonight. If you feel that you just can't approve it, ' then I think you should make that recommendation. But if you can, if you do think the use can work out there with the conditions as outlined by staff, I think that's what should happen tonight. The applicants are here as far as some of your specific questions about trucks getting 10 n I Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 in and out. I think they have provided a great deal more detail. We know where the storage area is going to be. It's outlined on their site plan so dumpsters won't be stored willy nilly all across the property. She's got a boxed in storage area there behind the fence. That's the only place a dumpster could go. The tree issue. They are not for screening. They are to break up the fence. They're 1 1/2 to 2 foot high spruce which if any of you have them know, they grow fast. You know within just a couple years. They will be very noticeable against that fence. If they aren't originally. Again, the site has a lot of vegetation on it. There's a bluff coming up from Highway 212 which provides some natural screening and a natural barrier in addition to the fence and so forth. So I guess what I really wanted to tell you is, it's apparent from these last three meetings that you're somewhat frustrated by the level of submittals and the information and then today you get something that's not in the report and that's certainly understandable but I guess our request, and the applicant's request is that you make a decision tonight one way or the other and state your reasons for that. Thank you for letting me speak. Scott: Thank you. Motion? Mancino: I'll try this one again. I move that we approve the Interim Use Permit #94 -1 for outdoor storage of dumpsters as shown on plans received July 7, 1994 with the following conditions. And Sharmin if you could state that again, and I would like to add, in specifics there if you could, that the fence be 8 feet in height and there are 46 trees be in varying height from 1 1/2 feet to 6 feet. Scott: Is there a second? ' Mancino: Oh, and the other one. Then number 2 stands as is. The hours of operations. Number 3, there shall be no outdoor speaker system stands as is. Number 4 stands as is. Number 5 we can delete? Al -Jaff: Correct. Mancino: Number 6. The number of dumpsters shall be limited to a number that can be adequately screened, not to exceed 58 dumpsters. And retain only empty dumpsters may be stored on the site. Number 7 remains as is. Number 8, the length of the term shall not exceed 5 years. And the rest remains as is. And number 9, Sharmin could you please. About the applicant shall replace any new trees that die within one year. Al -Jaff: Correct. Ledvina: I'd second that. 11 u Planning Commission Meeting - August 3, 1994 1 Scott: Its been moved and seconded. Unless there's any discussion. Mancino moved, Ledvina seconded that the Planning Commission recommend to approve Interim Use Permit #94 -1 for the outdoor storage of dumpsters as shown on plans received July 7, 1994, with the following conditions: , 1. A final landscaping plan shall be approved by staff. The fence shall be 8 feet in height with 46 trees of varying height from 1 1/2 feet to 6 feet constructed and the landscaping shall be planted prior to October 22, 1994. 2. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturday. Work on Sundays and holidays is not permitted. 3. There shall be no outdoor speaker system. ' 4. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. 5. The number of dumpsters shall be limited to a number that can be adequately screened, not to exceed 58 dumpsters. Only empty dumpsters may be stored on the site. ' 6. There shall be a yearly review of this site to ensure compliance. 7. The length of the term shall not exceed 5 years. The use shall be terminated within one year of inclusion of the site within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area or if conditions of approval have been violated, whichever comes first. The applicant may request an extension for the interim use permit prior to it's expiration. 8. The applicant shall replace any of the new trees that die within one year. i All voted in favor and the motion carried. , n 12 1 f' City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 INTERIM USE PERMIT TO ALLOW SCREENED OUTDOOR STORAGE IN THE BF, BUSINESS FRINGE DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 10500 GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD, ADMIRAL WASTE MANAGEMENT. Sharmin Al -Jaffa This site is located north of Highway 212 and south of the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority trail. Highway 101 and is in ... off of Highway 101. The applicant is requesting an interim use permit to store commercial dumpsters on property zoned fringe business. There aren't any structures proposed on this site with the exception of the fence. The fence is proposed to be 100 feet in length. 6 to 8 feet in height and would screen the dumpsters from views from the highway. The applicant is also proposing to plant 42 spruce trees at a foot and a half in height. The fence is proposed to be of a dog ear treated panel design. Staff is recommending approval of this application with conditions outlined in the staff report. However, if you ... some minor corrections. As far as the height of the fence, currently the condition reads, condition number 1. Reads this fence shall be 8 feet in height. It should read, the fence shall be 6 feet in height, not to exceed 8 feet. Another issue that we would just like to bring to your attention. Staff is requesting that work on Sundays and holidays not be permitted. Now this is not required by ordinance. We put that condition in there out of consideration to the neighbors in the area If the City Council wishes to add any conditions for this application, we need to find out that there should be a balance between the conditions of approval and the length of the term that you put on this application. You should allow the applicant to meet those ... of the site. Again, staff is recommending approval of this application with conditions outlined in the staff report. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Sharmin. Is the applicant here this evening? Bill Griffith: Mr. Mayor, Council members. My name is Bill Griffith, 1500 Norwest Financial Center, Bloomington representing the applicant. The permit requested is essentially a permit to build a 150 foot fence to screen existing construction containers on the site. It would seem a simple matter but I do believe that it needs to be put into context so if you'll indulge me for a few minutes. This will not take as long as the snowmobile discussion. Although I was happy to see that the trail did overlook our site, as it looks at the juncture of Highway 101 and 212 and as it overlooks the top of the site and down to the bottom, I saw no dumpsters visible from that location. So the issue is really screening the construction containers from the roadway. And if you drive by the site at this time, you'll notice that there's quite a bit of foliage on the site. It's fairly dense and the topography lends itself to screening from the north and from the other directions. What we are proposing would screen the dumpsters more than sufficiently during the winter months when foliage is not as dense. The reason for this application is related to another matter on your agenda this evening, and that is the amendment to the BF district uses. To add permitted uses and make additional conditional uses. I don't think there is any coincidence that these matters are on the same agenda. The applicant has very limited uses today. You're probably aware that there are 4 conditional uses and I think 3 interim uses of the property in the BF district. In 1988 the applicant did have a conditional use permit for a contractors yard and had planned to locate a facility for storing these types of dumpsters both inside and outside the building and putting... center. They looked at the site and I think because the recycling was just taking off at that time and as they ... looked at their recycling market, the year lapsed and they came back to the Council for an extension and was denied. So they were not able to go forward with that contractors use. However, they did have permission from the city to store dumpsters, I think albeit 6 at the time. They continued to use the property in that manner from that time until this for the last 6 or so or 7 or so years. And up until last year in December, I think it was late November that Sharmin visited the site, there were no complaints with regard to this property. Of which we are aware anyway. The point is that there are very limited uses of this property and for those 6 or 7 years, they've been able to store these containers without problem. We provided an opinion letter to the City Attorney's office that we believe that what they 29 E City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1 were doing is legal based upon both the conditional use permits and the lack of reasonable use under the zoning ordinance. The City Attorney did not necessarily agree with us, although I entered into discussion... what we didn't want and that... So over the last several months, since probably February we've met with staff on 3 or 4 occasions. Supplied information regarding what we proposed to do, or the applicant proposed to do with the property in terms of screening the use. In addition we met out on site and I thank the staff for doing that. It was a very hot and humid day and I, myself was a little late. Caught in traffic and we toured the entire site and therefore the balance of the site that would be used for this use. And I think really kind of hammered out an understanding of what would work and what wouldn't work. Really essential to that understanding is the , concept that the applicant is required to screen the containers and if a container shows or is visible, then it's not screened and it cannot be allowed on the property. There was quite a bit of discussion at the Planning Commission level about this application. In fact there were 3 hearings at which this application was heard and I think that centered on two things. Mainly the fact that what you see there are hand drawn plans. They are to scale and they are drawn by the applicant. In Chanhassen you've got a lot of commercial development. You're used to seeing professional landscape plans. This however is an interim use for dumpsters. Essentially to build a fence and it was not cost effective for the applicant to hire a lot of consultants. I'm I think the only consultant on this team. To get this application completed. However she did, both Pat and Nancy provided a lot of information and a great amount of detail we believe to the satisfaction of staff. After this long process. So with that the staff informed us that we met the standards for the city code submission package. However, I think the ' Planning Commission was somewhat uncomfortable again with the type of materials, given what they're used to seeing with all the recent commercial and residential development in town. I think the other thing is the, there was a request to limit the dumpsters to the 58 on site and we have made a request that the dumpsters be given a cap of 140. All this 140 would have to be adequately screened so if 58 dumpsters are adequately screened behind the wall, then that's what will be allowed. If 59 or 60, 61. Whatever is adequately screened should be the number because that is the objective of the city. Not to arbitrarily pass a number at something less than 140 or 58. So we requested, although at the Planning Commission level we said we could accept 58, that was essentially because we wanted to move this forward. We would like you to reconsider the staff recommendation of 140 as a cap and if 130 fits or 120 fits, that's the number of dumpsters which will be on the site because that is the limit that is placed on this permit. I think a couple other comments on the staff conditions. The height of the trees at 1 1/2 feet. The applicant is essentially building a 150 foot wall. Board on board wall to screen the use. That would be built in what is fairly dense ground cover. In addition, to break up the look of the fence, they purchased 42 spruce trees at 1 1/2 feet high. They were able to get a good price on these spruce trees but , they are 1 1/2 feet high. They will grow rapidly. They will be 6 feet in a year or two. Or probably a couple years actually. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Can I some of those? get Councilman Mason: Yeah, what kind of... Bill Griffith: ... they are rapidly growing. It won't be more than a year or two... My point is that they are there not to screen the containers. They are there to break up the look of the fence. And I want you to keep that in mind when you think about that because already this applicant has gone through a very long process to get to ' this point and they now have the 42 trees and staff is recommending that they go out and buy some more trees and at some point this becomes really not very cost effective. Finally, we have asked and we have understood from the start that, well actually from the point that we were on site we discussed the concept that we did not want this to be limited to or referenced to the MUSA extension because as you well know, as Council members, it's anybody's guess when that might occur and if and when the MUSA is extended to cover this property, obviously the property will go up in the value and there will be significantly expanded uses of the property. But 30 Ll i City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 that takes some time and the day from the time that happens to the day the property is ready to marketed and your zoning ordinances change, it may be several years. So if you tie this to when the MUSA is extended, leave a gap because if the permit goes away but we aren't ready, or the city may not be ready to turn the use over to ' something new. So we would ask that it be a straight 10 year tern. And we talked with City Attorney Elliott Knetsch and he believes that's reasonable. Now, the condition continues to read with the MUSA extension so we would ask you to delete that and that was generally our understanding when we met with staff on site. I ' guess those are my comments. Again, I'd like you to please remember the context of this application. I think this is a solution that your city staff have worked very hard to come to and the applicant has worked hard to avoid confrontation and to get on with some reasonable use of the property after these several years of being ' fairly restricted. So we would ask you to consider that as you look at this matter. And then we would ask you to approve it tonight because it has been a long process and we need to get out there and plant trees of 1 1/2 feet and build a fence and hopefully what you saw on the tape this evening, no dumpsters, hopefully that's what you'll continue to see on the property here in the winter months. I thank you very much for your time and stand for questions. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I just had a quick question as you're looking at 140 dumpsters. How many dumpsters do you presently own now? Nancy Lee: I don't have an exact figure. I believe 140. 1 Mayor Chmiel: And where do you store those existing dumpsters presently? Nancy Lee's comments were not picked up by the microphone. Mayor Chmiel: Does Council have any questions in regard to this? Well let me ask, is there anyone wishing to address this at this time as well? Gary Anderson: My name is Gary Anderson. I live at 725 Creekwood in Chanhassen here. I guess I've never heard about the fact that there'd be a garbage, expanded garbage area in the back of my yard and I was wondering when this was brought up and how close this is being to passed. I've never heard about it and I ' don't know if all the other neighbors here have heard about it either. I know there have been a few dumpsters in the area but 1 don't know. Mayor Chmiel: Sharmin, would you like to address that? Sharmin Al -Jaffa Sure. We've notified people within 500 feet of the site. Those are empty containers that will be stored out there... Gary Anderson: And how did this, the Park Commission, have they been involved with this? As far as would they be involved with this? ' Mayor Chmiel: No. ' Gary Anderson: Should they be involved with this? Mayor Chmiel: No. 31 t City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 1 Gary Anderson: Wouldn't that be considered part of... i Mayor Chmiel: Well basically this goes through the Planning Commission rather than the Park Commission and it has gone through that particular commission. ' Gary Anderson: Okay. How many years has that been? Mayor Chmiel: How long has this been going? , Councilman Senn: 1986 wasn't it? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Councilman Senn: I thought that's what I read. Mayor Chmiel: '88. Councilman Senn: I thought it was in '86 the original approval for them to build a building on the site. Sharmin Al -Jaffa Correct. However, they let it expire. '86, Councilman Senn: But I'm just saying, if they would have built their building in this would be a non -issue and wouldn't even be here, correct? '86. '88. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. It's immaterial. Close. Yes. Boyd Peterson: Yeah, Boyd Peterson and my question was, did these 140 dumpsters, are they all owned by Admiral saying Admiral on them or are 30 of them Admirals, 50 of them that. Are we creating a business of storing them or are they all indeed Admiral dumpsters? Bill Griffith: To answer a couple questions. First of all I would like to confum that these containers are ' typically used in construction settings. They don't haul garbage or refuse. They haul demolition materials so they do not create odors and smells and they are empty. Second, to answer the question. All of them belong to Admiral. These are the dumpsters that would have been stored on site with the contractors yard. These are the ' dumpsters that have been stored on site. Since that time they've numbered about 58. And they're all owned by Admiral. They're not leasing space to other people or businesses. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else? Yes sir. Verne Severson: Verne Severson at 675 Lakota Lane. We own the property just north of the site and this has been going on for quite a while and I'm one of those property owners that has been kept informed and I thank , the city for that. And like I say, it's been going on for a few years and we've been struggling over this. I'm a small businessman and I like to support small business and it does seem like a good use for this piece of property. But the word dumpster and the word garbage, as a property owner I have a lot of trouble with that , and I think the city should have some concern with that too. This is the south end of Chanhassen. It is part of the main entrance to the south part of Chanhassen. And some of us in that area feel we've been neglected by the city. It's often called ugly town and I think that's wrong and we resent some of that. And again back to the 32 i C L 1 I F IF � City Council Meeting - August 22, 1994 word garbage and you have dumpsters around and it's just ugly. There's no way around it. I guess that's my main concern. Maybe there needs to be a better selling job on this or maybe the city should do a little more work because I think, I think like I said, it could be possibly a good use for the property but all the language we've heard so far and what the lawyer was talking about, he said the dumpsters are empty. The dumpsters are used for this but I don't hear anything about the future. What's to say that after one year they start storing dumpsters full of material in there. Or what's to say they don't start cleaning the dumpsters on the property and there's toxic waste and it runs into the soil or whatever. I don't see that in the language of the staff report and I haven't heard anything about that mentioned so I think more emphasize needs to be placed on enforcement and maybe inspection of the site. And I understand it's a 10 year permit ... and that seems awfully long to me. I believe there should be some way we can review that every year. I understand the investment they've put into it and I want to make sure they get their money back from that. Personally I think a lot of the camouflaging is not really money well spent on the fence if you think about it. You know the foot and a half trees and the wood fence, that's almost ugly by some nature. I guess I'd maybe rather see a smaller time period unless there's a trade off that we could work something out. I think that's about all of the comments that I have. I would like to see more emphasize placed on enforcement and the future use of the property and I've been to the Planning Commission several times. Well, it seems like several times. I've always commented to them how I feel the south part of Chanhassen is being ignored and like I said to Mr. Mayor and Councilmembers, pay a little more attention to the southern part of the city. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Verne. Anyone else? Jim Sulemd: Jim Sulerud again, 730 Vogelsburg Trail. This is the item that I did come for ... hike and jog and bike along there plus we just live up the road a little bit on TH 101. And I think the trail as you've heard the snowmobile people talk about, it's a major resource in the community. (There was a tape change at this point in the discussion. The Interim Use Permit for Admiral Waste Management was tabled by the City Council.) PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 46.5 ACRES INTO 36 RURAL SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND ONE OUTLOT, HALLA'S GREAT PLAINS GOLF ESTATES, LOCATED SOUTH OF PIONEER TRAIL AND WEST AND EAST OF HIGHWAY 101, DON HALLA. (Taping of the meeting began again at this point.) Mayor Chmiel: Are there any questions? Richard. Councilman Wing: Did you write all those down? I mean I sort of got lost in the pros and cons and yeahs and nays. Of their request versus these recommendations. Kate Aanenson: Yes. Sharmin and Dave have met with them and were aware of the issues that they had. Councilman Wing: Is there anything to be said? I mean are we going to move ahead and try to put this thing together? Kate Aanenson: The storm water issue obviously ... the lot size and we may have to look at that... outside the MUSA... 33 I