Loading...
2 Chanhassen Short CourseCITYOF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Bou!evard PO Box 147 Ohanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Pr'c, ne 9522271100 Fax: 9522271110 Building Inspections Phone: 952227 1!80 Fax: 952227 1190 Engineering Pho¢;e 952227 1160 Fax: 952227!170 Finance Phone; 9522271140 Fax; 9522271110 Park & Recreation Phone: 952.2271120 Fax: 9522271110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 9522271400 Fax 952 2271404 Planning & Natural Resources Pix:ne 952 2271130 Fax~ 952 227 1110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone %2 2271300 Fax' 952 227 1310 Senior Center Phoebe 9522271125 Fax; 95222711 ! 0 Web Site wwwel er'ar?asser~ mr~ us MEMORANDUM To: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager From: Date: Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner September 4, 2003 Re: Chanhassen Short Course Executive Summary The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a golf course to be located on property zoned A-2, and a site plan for the construction of a club house. Planning Commission Update This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission on August 19, 2003. The Commission tabled action on this item and recommended changes. On September 2, 2003, the Commission reviewed and approved this application unanimously. Due to the number of changes, staff wrote a new report. There were concerns from the commission and neighbors regarding the impact to neighboring wells. Engineering staff added a condition regarding this issue. 1. A hydrogeologic study shall be completed on the golf course site to show that there will be no impact to the surrounding wells. PLANNING COMMMISSION SUMMARY Sacchet: Summary for council, We find that the most sticky issue that is far bigger than this application is the water issue, and we would like to, engineering to further study how the water situation can be mitigated should the unfortunate circumstance arise that some wells get negatively affected. In order to find out how, what affects it. How does it come and can any responsibilities be assigned for that, how does that get dealt with. We would like to instruct staff to have a clear understanding how the State agencies deal with these type of issues so that we are ahead of the curve and not reactive should ever anything happen in this context. That's the water issue. The issue with. Claybaugh: Can that information be forwarded to anyone that was here at the meeting? The City of Chanhassen. ~ grov,,'~r~g COITdTIuflity with clean lakes qual ty schools a ?harming dowr~town, h viu g bus nesses w d ~ g -al c. ar d ~,eats,t ~ul parks A ,,", ',p,~4" ,,,~ iive ~,cf'~: mrJ F, iai' Todd Gerhardt September 4, 2003 Page 2 Sacchet: And we request that we would see maybe that as well, is that something that you could include for information to the Planning Commission? Slagle: I think also residents. Claybaugh: Residents yes. Sacchet: And residents that. Claybaugh: Certainly the affected residents that receive mailings as part of this application that showed up at the meeting. Sacchet: Do we want to just use the residents that signed in or would we want to? You know how to do it? Okay. You know how to do it, that's good enough for me. Any other water aspects? Lillehaug: I have a couple other comments. Sacchet: Let's do water. The private drive to the south, we figured based on the neighbors, what seemed quite unanimous statements that they're not interested in this line up and we had some reservations impacting the Halla property, which at this point does not benefit from that driveway at all. That we feel that a better solution for this drive can be found once further development occurs in that area, either on the Halla property or to the south. And however that we would like to see some tree trimming where that drive comes out on 101 at this point, to maximize sight distance without having to do an actual realignment. Anything else on the driveway? Alright, other things Steve? Lillehaug: For staff to work with the applicant to insure that the sight line is adequate with the tree layout. Feik: He just said that. Lillehaug: Did you? Sacchet: Yeah, I just touched on that. Lillehaug: I thought he said tree trimming. Sacchet: Same idea. Anything else you want to add for summary to council? Saam: Nets on 101. Sacchet: Nets on 101, yes. To the south. Todd Gerhardt September 4, 2003 Page 3 Saam: To the driveway. Sacchet: The private road. The private road. I do want to mention in summary to council that the applicant has shown really good effort addressing the issues that we brought up the first time we looked at this application and asked to be looked at. I mean that's important because I really appreciate that. Lillehaug: I have one more. Sacchet: Yes Steve. Lillehaug: It didn't get put in as a condition but I'd like staff to work with the applicant and the current owner of the land to get that roadway removed. Going to the bluff. Sacchet: The gravel drive to the bluff, that should be eliminated with clean-up of the bluff. Stopping of the dumping. There's no road needed any more. Might as well get rid of that road. Good point. Is that it? Alright. Wow, do we need two minutes of a bio break? I think we need, we'll get back, let's shoot for 10:15. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit and site plan. The motion and conditions start on page 14 of the staff report. CITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: August 19, 2003 And September 2, 2003 CC DATE: September 8, 2003 REVIEW DEADLINE: September 16, 2003 CASE #: 2003-7 SPR & 2003-4 CUP BY: A1-Jaff STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conditional Use and Site Plan Request for a Golf Course. LOCATION: Southeast Comer of the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Pioneer Trail. APPLICANT: Applicant Ron Saatzer/SMG, Inc. 9450 Fox Ford Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 994-7794 Property Owners Don Halla 6601 Mohawk Trail Edina, MN 55439 (952) 941-2924 PRESENT ZONING: A-2, Agricultural Estate District 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential-Large Lot (2.5 Acre Minimum) 1/10 Acre Outside of MUSA ACREAGE: 45.99 acres DENSITY: N.A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: A conditional use permit to allow a golf course to be located on property zoned A-2, and a site plan for the construction of a club house. Notice of the public hearing has been sent to property owners within 500 feet. Staff is recommending approval of the application with conditions. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets these standards, the City must then approve the site plan amendment. This is a quasi judicial decision. The City has limited discretion in approving or denying conditional use permits, based on whether or not the proposal meets the conditional use permit standards outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. If the City finds that all the applicable conditional use permit standards are met, the permit must be approved. This is a quasi judicial decision. / ..... · q/ ......... ~__~ ' Nix ..... ..... ~_ ....... ~ ............. ~____ ~:;' . .......... xf.l Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 2 This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission on August 19, 2003. The Commission tabled action on this item and recommended changes. On September 2, 2003, the Commission reviewed and approved this application unanimously. Due to the number of changes, staff wrote a new report. BACKGROUND On June 21, 1995, the City Council approved the final plat for the subdivision of 102.73 acres into 33 lots and one outlot, Halla Great Plains Addition. Halla Nursery was platted with an area of 11.45 acres as part of the subdivision. HALLA GREAT PLAINS ADDITION On July 8, 2000, Carver County District Court approved the vacation of a portion of the plat (the area east of Highway 101 and south of Halla Nursery), at the request of the owners of the property. VACATED PORTIONS OF HALLA GREAT PLAINS ADDITION Page 3 Over tile lasi yea~, si~if bas had several meetinBs witN Mn Saatzer to discuss rite possibility ora golf coul'se on tile area located oas{ (i Great Plains BoulevaM and south ()i~ Pbileer Trail.. ///j LO65iTYON OF I>~OPOS~I} GOLF COURSE ~!~ROPOSAL[S UMMARY The applicant is requestiilg a co~.lditional use permit fi)r the co:astruction of a golf course on prol'~t;rty z(>lled Ad,, The sit:e has an area of 45~99 acres and ctin~enity gains acc~ ss og of Pbtlcet" Trail and Gr<at Plaii~s B(mlevard~ TNt applicant is als() requesting a site pIail review k> locate a 40' × 60' pre-manuii~ctured sti"ucture club ho~_lse t{> the slt~'!jec~ site,, Tile nlahl exterior n~a{e;ial is cedar- siding, which is pennined by oKiinance~ The N'o~)acd building is n'lanufacim~cd by I.estel~ Buildi~gs A porct~ is pv)p.>sed at tNe t~ent ~>rti()n of l. he b/,~ilding and a pa{io is prop_)sed south of tnt buiMing ~%e above bui~(i~g is ~a example ef ~he cedar sMi'.g bui[di~g proposed kS' ~'he applicant, Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 4 As an accessory use to this establishment, the applicant is requesting a 30' x 60' maintenance building. The main exterior material is proposed to be cedar siding to match the club house. Parking is proposed along the north portion of the building. The parking lot will be screened from views by a combination of berms and landscaping. Trash enclosure is located west of the Maintenance Building. The enclosure is proposed to be built of cedar siding, which is the same material as that used on the building. A sign plan has not been submitted. The applicant submitted a narrative that stated they intend to have an identification sign. The ordinance allows monument signs not to exceed 24 square feet in area and 5 feet in height. Detailed sign plans shall be submitted for staff's review and approval. The applicant has expressed a desire to serve basket food in the club house. This type of use is incidental to a golf course. The proposed septic system design does not allow for any cooking grease to be disposed through the system which will cause the system to fail. Therefore, staff is recommending no commercial kitchen be permitted in the club house. Also, there shall be no cooking equipment permitted on the premises with the exception of a microwave oven, pizza/toaster oven, etc. Staff is recommending the club house operations maintain the same timetable as the golf course. A liquor license is required to serve beer on the premises. The applicant must submit a request to the city. A public hearing will be scheduled before the City Council when the application for the liquor license is received. Staff regards the project as a reasonable use of the land. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending approval of the site plan and conditional use permit, with conditions outlined in the staff report. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Golf courses are permitted as a conditional use permit in the Agricultural Estate District. The following constitutes our findings: GENERAL ISSUANCE STANDARDS Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or city. Finding: The proposed use will not create any significant or unexpected impacts with the incorporation of staff's conditions. The use will provide a convenient location for residents in the area to practice an outdoor activity. 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 5 Finding: The proposed use is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. o 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 surrounded by highly traveled roads. The proposed use is permitted within the district as a conditional use. It will be compatible with the area. The applicant is proposing a landscape buffer around the site to minimize impacts on the residential neighborhoods to the south, west and east. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. Finding: The use will provide a convenience for existing or planned neighboring uses. 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: Public utilities and infrastructure are not available to the site. The site will be served by a well and an Individual Septic Treatment System (ISTS). Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Finding: Staff is not aware of any excessive requirements for public facilities. 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. The proposed use will comply with city ordinances. 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 accessible from Pioneer Trail and lines up with Foxford Road. Both MnDOT and Carver County Public Works have submitted guidelines and recommendations to facilitate the access to the property. As a condition of approval of this application, the applicant will be required to obtain permits from these agencies and comply with their requirements. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 6 Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. Finding: The site contains existing nursery stock. Over the past few weeks, the applicant has moved a large number of the existing mature trees. They can be seen along the borders of the property. The ordinance does not prohibit moving of trees. 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. Finding: The proposed use will be compatible with the area. l 1. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. Finding: The use will not depreciate surrounding property values. 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. NA Based upon the foregoing findings, staff is recommending that the conditional use permit be approved with appropriate conditions. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The proposed buildings will be utilized as a club house and maintenance building. The club house will have a total area of 2,400 square feet (60' x 40'). The building is proposed to utilize cedar siding. An open porch is proposed along the north side of the building and a patio along the south. The applicant provided staff with a picture of an existing building and plans that have been customized to reflect architectural detail (windows, doors, columns, etc.) The club house is proposed to house a pro shop, office and a cafeteria. The applicant intends to sell hotdogs and other basket food. Staff is recommending a commercial kitchen not be permitted on the site. Also, the proposed septic system design does not allow for any cooking grease to be disposed through the system which will cause the system to fail. Therefore, staff is recommending no commercial kitchen be permitted in the club house. Also, there shall be no cooking equipment permitted on the premises with the exception of a microwave oven, pizzdtoaster oven, etc. The maintenance building is proposed to utilize the same materials, have similar design, with an area of 1,800 square feet (30' x 60'). The site plan is reasonably well developed. Parking for vehicles is located north of the club house. The majority of the parking lot will be screened either by landscaping or berming. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 7 The total hard surface coverage permitted by ordinance is 20%. The applicant is proposing a total hard surface coverage of 2.4%. ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE Size Portion Placement Entries The building has an open porch that greets visitors and directs them to the front of the building. Articulation The building incorporates adequate detail and has been designed tastefully to fit the setting. The architectural style is unique to the building but will fit in with the surrounding area. The building will provide a variation in style through the use of the cedar siding, windows porch and patio. The building is utilizing exterior materials that are permitted by ordinance. Lighting Staff is recommending that outdoor lighting be limited to a residential type lights attached to the building. Staff is also recommending that the golf course hours of operation be limited to sunrise to sunset. These hours will eliminate the need for golf course and parking light fixtures. An exterior building light plan is required. The plan should incorporate the light style and height. Signs A detailed sign plan is required. The sign shall meet ordinance requirements (area not to exceed 24 square feet and height not to exceed 5 feet). Material and detail High quality materials - accent material may occupy up to 15 percent of the buildings fagade. The building will utilize wood as the main material. Color The colors chosen for this building are earth tones. The selection is unique to the building but blends in with the surrounding buildings. This is an area agricultural in nature and staff believes that the overall chosen materials and color will fit in with the surrounding area. Height and Roof Design The building is proposed at a height of 12 feet with one story. The porch along the north portion of the building meets the design criteria dealing with pitched elements. Facade transparency All facades viewed by the public contain more than 50 percent windows. All other areas will be landscaped. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 8 Site Furnishing The applicant has provided an outdoor seating area; however, the furniture has not been shown on the plans. The plans must be modified to show the chairs and tables. Loading areas/refuse area, etc. The trash enclosure is shown on the plans. building' s exterior materi al. The exterior material will match the proposed Landscaping The site is fairly level. The landscaping plan will provide a variety of plant materials that are massed where possible. The berms and landscaping materials will be continuous along the perimeter of the site. The plant materials are repetitious in some locations and variable in others. Proposed plant materials are indigenous to Minnesota. Lot Frontage and Parking location The site is located at the southeast intersection of Pioneer Trail and Great Plains Boulevard. The parking is fully screened and meets ordinance requirements. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance with the following: Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Consistency with this division; (3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing areas; (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: no An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 9 Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and do Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance, the design standards, and the site plan review requirements. The site design is compatible with the surrounding developments. It is functional and harmonious with the approved development for this area. Staff regards the project as a reasonable use of the land. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending approval of the site plan, with conditions outlined in the staff report. MISCELLANEOUS Soil tests should be performed at least once a year. Results of all soil testing should be submitted to the City of Chanhassen. In addition, annual reports detailing all applications of fertilizer (including nutrient content for nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium; application rate in pounds per acre; date of application; and total quantity of fertilizer applied) should be submitted to the City of Chanhassen. No fertilizer containing phosphorus should be applied unless the soil test results demonstrate a deficiency in phosphorus. Also, on-site grading should not increase the rate or volume of runoff downstream from the site or onto adjacent properties. SIGNAGE Section 20-1301 of the sign ordinance allows non-residential use in Agricultural Estate Districts to have only one (1) monument sign on the site. The total sign area shall not exceed twenty-four (24) square feet of sign display area, nor be more than five (5) feet in height. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 10 PARKING The ordinance requires 20 parking spaces plus l space for each 500 square feet of floor area in the principal structure. The total parking spaces required are 25 spaces. The applicant is proposing 80 parking spaces. BLUFF No grading, disturbance or dumping is permitted in areas designated as bluff or in bluff' impact zones. Runoff from cart paths, fairways, greens or tee boxes on Hole 3 should not be directed into bluff impact zones or bluff areas. WETLANDS No wetlands exist on site. LANDSCAPING The applicant has submitted a landscape plan for the golf course. Landscaping requirements include parking lot landscaping and buffer yards along all property lines. Requirements are as follows: Landscape item Parking lot landscape Required 3,142 ft.2 landscape area 13 overstory trees 6 islands/peninsulas Proposed > 3,142 ft.2 ldscp area 13 overstory trees 6 islands/peninsulas The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for parking lot landscaping. Landscape item Required Proposed Pioneer Tr. 10 overstory trees 10 overstory trees Buffer yard B - 30' 21 understory trees 21 understory trees width 31 shrubs 31 shrubs East Property Line 7 overstory trees 7 overstory trees Buffer yard B - 30' 15 understory trees 15 understory trees width 22 shrubs 22 shrubs South Property line 28 overstory trees 40 overstory trees Buffer yard B - 30' 55 understory trees 35 understory trees width 83 shrubs 250 shrubs Highway 101 11 overstory trees 11 overstory trees Buffer yard B - 30' 23 understory trees 23 understory trees width 34 shrubs 34 shrubs Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 11 The applicant does not meet minimum requirements along the south property line, but is proposing to plant a solid hedge consisting of lilac, black chokeberry and dogwood. In addition, they have increased the number of overstory trees. They hope to create a buffer that meets the needs of the neighbors better than what is required by ordinance. Staff supported this argument and recommended the number of under story trees be increased by 10. The landscape plan has been revised accordingly. PARK AND TRAIL The Parks and Recreation Director reviewed the request of the Chanhassen Short Course proposed at the southeast comer of the intersection of Pioneer Trail and Great Plains Boulevard. He noted one deficiency which is the lack of a pedestrian/bikeway connection to the City's trail system at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Pioneer Trail. The proposed course would be a destination for area youth seeking to access the property utilizing non-vehicular forms of transportation. The applicant is required to provide this connection. COMPLIAN(~E TABLE - A2 DISTRICT Ordinance Short Course Total Lot Area 10 Acres 45.99 Acres Lot Frontage 200' 1215' Lot Depth 200' 1170' Lot Coverage 20 % 2.4 % Total Parking 25 80 Stalls Building Height I story 1 story Building Setback N - 50' S - 10' N - 110' S - 500' E-50' W-10' E-260' W-270' PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE On August 19, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed and tabled action on this item. Staff was directed to provide additional information on the following items: 1. Existing and proDosed access: The Planning Commission requested additional information on the need to relocate the existing driveway. It is staff's opinion that this development is a triggering event requiring the improvement of the driveway to meet existing practices, policies, and ordinances. Visibility The existing driveway has an approximate sight distance to the south of 100 feet. Based on Traffic Studies done in the area in 2002, average vehicle speed in this area is 41 mph. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 12 This gives the entering traffic less than 2 seconds of clear sight distance on which to judge the safety of entering the roadway. The proposed driveway has an approximate sight distance to the south of 400 feet. Based on a 41 mph speed the driver has over 6 seconds of clear view. While still not the level the City would desire to see in this area, this is a significant improvement. Both driveway locations have adequate visibility to the north. Realignment It is City practice to align private drives across from existing driveways whenever possible. This practice reduces the number of conflict points on the through street, which is an accepted method of crash reduction. This practice is in accordance with existing MnDOT standards as well. The Planning Commission questioned if tree trimming would be an acceptable alternative to the realignment to address the visibility issues discussed above. The curve in the roadway would require significant tree trimming to provide the same level of visibility. To obtain the same improvement of 300 additional feet of sight distance, trees would need to be trimmed approximately 80 feet outside the existing right of way or nearly a distance of 100 feet from the edge of the existing pavement. The City does not have the legal ability to trim this area, as it is private property. For the purposes of this review, it was assumed that the existing trees in the right of way would be trimmed, allowing the 100 feet of sight distance from the existing driveway. The City does not have jurisdiction to perform the trimming in the TH 101 right of way without a permit from MnDOT. Width and Cross Section City Ordinance Section 18-57 requires that private streets, private drives serving more than one property, must be built to 20 feet of width to a 7-ton cross section. Staff believes that the development is a triggering event to require the upgrade to meet the City Ordinance. 2. Well Interference During the Planning Commission meeting, several property owners expressed concern about the potential of impacts from the commercial well on surrounding wells. The applicant has submitted a letter from the well company stating that interference should not be an issue. However, staff recommends a condition of approval be added that should the commercial well cause interference with the surrounding wells, the applicant shall be required to make alterations to the commercial well to correct the problem or provide alternate water supply to the affected property owners at no cost to the property owners or the City of Chanhassen. Alternate water supplies may include but are not limited to redevelopment of the existing wells to a deeper aquifer or installation of public water to serve the area. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 13 3. Site drainage: The public questioned if any additional drainage would affect the south property owners. The applicant proposed to utilize the existing contours to minimize grading changes. The proposed grading will accommodate the surface drainage within the golf course area toward four proposed storm ponds. Staff is fine with the proposed grading which will minimize the surface drainage affect to the south. 4. Landscaping: The applicant modified the landscape plan as recommended by staff. The revised plans are in compliance with ordinance. 5. Bluff Restoration: Staff has been working with Chip Hentges, Conservation Technician with Carver Soil and Water Conservation District, and the owner of the property, Mr. Don Halla, to remedy the situation. On September 2, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved the application unanimously. Issues of discussion included the following: 1) Well Interference During the Planning Commission Meeting, several property owners expressed concern about the potential of impacts from the commercial well on surrounding wells. The applicant has submitted a letter from the well company stating that interference should not be an issue. Following the PC meeting, staff checked with the Department of Health, the state permitting agency for private wells, to see what mitigation effort(s) could be installed to decrease the chance of the golf course's well affecting the neighboring properties wells. The Dept. of Health recommended that a hydrogeologic study be completed on the golf course site to show that there will be no impact to the surrounding wells. As such, staff is recommending that this hydrogeologic study be completed by the applicant as a condition of the CLIP approval. 2) Summary of Mn/DOT comments The Mn/DOT review letter dated 8/26/03 pointed out the following concerns: · A drainage permit will be required for the drainage that flows off the golf course site and into the TH 101 drainage ditch. · The applicant should be aware that a signal improvement project will be going in at the comer of 101/Pioneer Trail in 2005. Mn/DOT will need to acquire additional right-of-way in that area for the project. The applicant should take that into consideration for the design of the golf course and landscaping. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 14 It should be noted that, with the deletion of the proposed access onto TH 101, only one (1) Mn/DOT permit should be needed for this development in its current form. This is contrary to what the 8/26 Mn/DOT letter stated. 3) Summary of Carver County comments The Carver County review letter dated 8/29/03 pointed out the following concerns: · An access permit will be required for the proposed access to the golf course site from Pioneer Trail. · The applicant should be aware that a signal improvement project will be going in at the corner of 101/Pioneer Trail in 2005. The County may need to acquire additional fight-of- way in that area if trails, berming, landscaping, etc. are needed along Pioneer Trail. The applicant should take that into consideration for the design of the golf course and landscaping. · Permits are required for the installation of any public utility lines within Pioneer Trail fight- of-way. In addition, any grading, landscaping, or trees within the fight-of-way will be subject to the review and approval of the County. · Noise abatement, due to increased traffic along Pioneer Trail, will be the responsibility of the applicant. · The County is recommending that the applicant be responsible for the final condition of the County road fight-of-way. The fight-of-way needs to be left in "as good or better condition." · A fight-turn lane is required to be delineated at the entrance to the site off of Pioneer Trail. A left turn lane may also be required to Foxford Road. Staff will verify this with the County. · The County also expressed concern that the approval of the golf course could greatly restrict and increase costs for the future realignment options for 101. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt the following motion: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT "The City Council approves Conditional Use Permit 2003-4 CUP for the construction of a golf course with a club house as shown in plans dated August 25, 2003, with the following conditions: 1. Hours of operation shall be seasonal and limited to sunrise to sunset. 2. No outdoor speaker system shall be permitted (individual pager systems are permissible). No commercial kitchen shall be permitted in the club house. There shall be no cooking equipment permitted on the premises with the exception of a microwave oven, pizza/toaster oven, etc. The intent of this condition is to put the golf course operator on notice. The proposed septic system design does not allow for any cooking grease to be disposed through the system which will cause the system to fail. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 15 4. Approval of the Conditional Use Permit is contingent upon approval of Site Plan Review 2003-7 SPR. Soil tests must be performed at least once a year. Results of all soil testing must be submitted to the City of Chanhassen. In addition, annual reports detailing all applications of fertilizer (including nutrient content for nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium; application rate in pounds per acre; date of application; and total quantity of fertilizer applied) must be submitted to the City of Chanhassen. No fertilizer containing phosphorus may be applied unless the soil test results demonstrate a deficiency in phosphorus. No grading, disturbance or dumping shall be permitted in areas designated as bluff or in bluff impact zones. Runoff from cart paths, fairways, greens or tee boxes on Hole 3 shall not be directed into bluff impact zones or bluff areas. 7. On-site grading may not increase the rate or volume of runoff downstream from the site or onto adjacent properties. 8. The applicant shall enter into a conditional use permit with the city. 9. No exterior lighting shall be permitted with the exception of safety light." SITE PLAN REVIEW "The City Council approve Site Plan Review 2003-7 SPR for the construction of a Club House and a Maintenance Building for a golf course as shown in plans dated August 25, 2003, with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the Site Plan Review application is contingent upon approval of Conditional Use Permit 2003-4 CUP. 2. All trees to be preserved must be protected by tree protection fencing. Fencing must be installed prior to grading. 3. No vegetation may be removed within the bluff impact zone. 4. The applicant shall provide a pedestrian/bikeway connection to the City's trail system at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Pioneer Trail. Fire Department Conditions: a. Please contact the Building Official and Fire Marshal to discuss the sprinklering requirements for the clubhouse and storage/maintenance building. b. If a Fire Hydrant is available, a 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Qwest, Excel Energy, cable TV and Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 16 transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. c. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and yellow curbing will be required. Please contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbs to be painted yellow. d. The builder must comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division regarding maximum allowable size of domestic water on a combination water/sprinkler supply line. This is only if a sprinkler is required. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #36-1994. e. The builder must comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention division Policy #29-1992. f. A post indicator valve will be required on any building that will have a sprinkler system. g. Submit radius tums and dimensions to City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. Building Official Conditions: a. Submit a detailed floor plan of the clubhouse so the occupancy classification and fire suppression requirements can be determined. b. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. c. An accessible route must be provided to all facilities on the site. d. Submit a design of the on-site sewage treatment system for review and approval. Two sites must be provided and these sites must be protected from damage prior to beginning any construction activity on the site. The system must comply with the requirements of Minnesota Rules 7080.0600. e. Detailed occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed until complete plans are submitted. f. The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review, permit procedures and fire suppression options. 10. Engineering Department Conditions: a. Staff recommends that Type I silt fence be used along the northwesterly and southerly property lines. The applicant should be aware that any off-site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. All disturbed areas are required to be restored with seed and mulch within two weeks of grading completion. b. Add the following City of Chanhassen Latest Detail Plates Numbers: 5201, 5203, 5207, 5300, and 3001 c. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regulators agency permits. d. On the grading plan add a bench mark. 11. The applicant must submit detailed architectural plans for the club house and maintenance building that meet the design ordinance requirement. 12. The applicant shall enter into a Site Plan Agreement and provide financial guarantees to insure compliance with the project. Chanhassen Short Course September 8, 2003 Page 17 13. Only one (1) monument sign may be pe~Tnitted on the site. The total sign area shall not exceed twenty-four (24) square feet of sign display area, nor be more than five (5) feet in height. 14. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with a MnDOT and Carver County permit for the new access. 15. Per MnDOT's review memo, dated September 2, 2003, the need for a net along TH 101 will be evaluated upon completion of the golf course. If it is determined that a net is needed, then the applicant will be required to install it. 16. A hydrogeologic study shall be completed on the golf course site to show that there will be no impact to the surrounding wells. 17. Comply with all conditions of the Carver County review letter dated 8/29/03. 18. Comply with all conditions of the Mn/DOT review letter dated 8/26/03." and revised narrative dated August 19, 2003. Memo from Steve Torell, Building Official, dated August 6, 2003. Memo from Mak Sweidan, Engineering, dated August 6, 2003. Memo from Mak Sweidan, Engineering, dated August 26, 2003. Memo from Todd Hoffman, Director of Parks and Recreation, dated August 4, 2003. from Greg Hayes, Fire Inspector/Training Coordinator, dated July 29, 2003. from Herfort Norby Architects dated August 25, 2003. from Bergerson Caswell regarding well construction dated August 20, 2003. Letter from MnDOT dated August 26, 2003. Revised Letter from MnDOT dated September 2, 2003. Memo from Carver County Public Works, dated August 29 and August 26, 2003. Public Hearing notice and property owners list within 500 feet. Planning Commission minutes dated August 19, 2003, see Agenda Item #1-e. Planning Commission minutes dated September 2, 2003. Plans dated August 26, 2003. ATTACHMENTS 1. Application 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Memo 7. Letter 8. Letter 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: ADDRESS: c7 ~y j'~O TELEPHONE (Day time) OWNER: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: __ Comprehensive Plan Amendment ~X Conditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit __ Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Variance Non-conforming Use Permit Wetland Alteration Permit Planned Unit Development* Zoning Appeal __ Rezoning __ Zoning Ordinance Amendment __ Sign Permits __ Sign Plan Review "~ Site Plan Review* Subdivision* __ Notification Sign X __ Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CU P/SPR/VAC/VAR/WAP/MeIes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) TOTAL FEE $ A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. .Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. *Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8Y=" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet. ** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME LOCATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION TOTAL ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING YES PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION REASON FOR THIS REQUEST ~ ~ NO This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to cedify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and ! arn the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are ap~prove~ by the applicant. Sign~,tur~ o~pplicant t, !~'~ Date . Signature of Fee Owner .--Date *Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2`' X 11" reduced copy for each nl~n ¢=hp~t ..... ~- ..... The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. CHANHASSEN SHORT COURSE-SITE PLAN August 19, 2003 (revised) The Chanhassen Short Course site plan submittal consists of a request to construct a nine-hole public golf course with practice facilities. The site is located south of Highway 5 in Chanhassen at the southeast comer of Highway 101 and Pioneer Trail. This 45 acre site was formerly the site of the Halla Nursery tree growing range and is currently zoned Agricultural (A2). The site is owned by Don Halla of Chanhassen, Minnesota and is currently under long-term lease by Ron Saatzer of Chanhassen for the purpose of constructing and operating a golf course. The surrounding properties on all sides are zoned Large lot/Low Density residential. Our proposal would include approximately 44 acres of golf course facilities, a small clubhouse building, a small maintenance and storage building and a parking lot capable of accommodating 80 cars. Total hard coverage is approximately 44,000 square feet or 2.2% of the site. At this time, we are requesting Site Plan approval by the City of Chanhassen as well as approval of a Conditional Use permit to operate a golf course. It is our belief that the project will not require rezoning or variances. The Golf Course. The par 29 golf course has been designed to appeal to golfers of all ages and abilities. Particular emphasis, however, will be placed on attracting kids and golfers of average ability. It is anticipated that there will be weekly league programs, youth programs, lessons and a limited number of small tournaments or corporate events. The course consists of seven par three holes and two par four holes. The driving range will be 300 yards long and will have approximately 35 hitting stations with both artificial and real turf teeing areas. The putting greens, tees and fairway areas as well as the driving range and clubhouse area shall be irrigated with a fully automatic sprinkler system. Some portions of the rough will be irrigated as well. A pond will be excavated between holes No. 6 and 8 for use as an irrigation pond. A new well, to be located near the south end of the pond, will be used to fill the irrigation pond during the daylight hours. A small 14'x18' slab on grade building will be located near the north end of the pond and will house the irrigation wet well and pumping system which will distribute water throughout the golf course. A permit application shall be submitted to the State of Minnesota prior to installation of the irrigation well. The Clubhouse. The clubhouse building will be a pole barn-type structure similar to that manufac Lester Building Systems. for use by golf course facilities. The Clubhouse will measure {~0'x60 and will include a pro shop area, restrooms and small office space. Complete plans wili'be submitted to the City upon application of a building permit. It is anticipated that the clubhouse will accommodate up to 50 people during peak use. This will include a large outdoor concrete patio which will accommodate tables and chairs for outdoor seating. The Clu~bhouse will be heated and air conditioned. Roofing will be ~phai~'shin)gles. Siding wil~ ~. The north face of the building facing Pioneer trail and th~_a'king lot shall meet the C~'s 50°,4 transparency requirement with doors and windows. Maintenance Buiidine. The maintenance building will be a pole barn-type structure similar to that/flan~factured by Lester Building Systems. The building will measure approximately ,'30'x60Yand will be used to provide storage and work shop facilities for servicing the golf course ~maint/eenance equipment. The building will include a smglt ,Office space, bathroomfacilities~for 3 to 4 employees and work shop space. Siding wil) be wood: Roofing will be asphalt shingles. Complete plans will be submitted to the City up&!_application of a building ~rmit, The north side of the building along Pioneer Trail and the west side of the building which faces the parking lot shall meet the City's 50% transparency requirement with doors and windows. Sewer and Water. Since the site does not have access to the municipal sewer or water supply, two septic sites (primary and secondary) have been identified on the site plan. Septic site size was calculated based on use of the facilities by 250 people per day. Septic sites have been protected with orange construction fencing and shall be maintained during the construction of the project. Potable drinking water for the clubhouse and maintenance facility shall be provided by drilling a new well in the vicinity of the clubhouse. Buffervard and Landscai~ina. The golf course is being developed in a manner which is intended to minimize site grading and tree loss. Existing nursery trees which are small enough to transplant and are in good health shall be transplanted to a holding area within the proposed driving range or shall be relocated immediately to a permanent location at the perimeter of the site. Upon completion of the site grading, trees being held in the driving range will be relocated to a permanent location elsewhere on the site. Our consultants have prepared a bufferyard and landscape plan in accordance with the City's Bufferyard Ordinance. On the north and west side of the site there are significant stands of existing trees as well as earth berms which were previously created by the landowner. These berms and trees will be retained and additional over-story trees, conifers (under-story trees) and shrubs wilI be transplanted. On the south and east sides of the property there are a lesser number of existing nursery trees. On the south side, we have proposed to transplant a greater number of over-story trees and shrubs and plant fewer under-story trees than is required by the bufferyard ordinance. In doing so, we intend to provide a continuous lilac hedge buffer along the south property line between neighboring residents and the golf course and to then use over-story to provide additional separation. On the east side, it is our intent to preserve much of the existing vegetation and the existing earth berm and to transplant additional over-story trees, conifers (under-story trees) and shrubs. Gradine. In general, grading will be limited to the construction of golf course features and ponds. Soil generated from the excavation of two ponds, including the irrigation pond, will be used to elevate and construct the greens and tees. In addition, some grading will occur to provide visual site lines from the proposed teeing area to the greens and to provide separation between adjacent golf holes. Upon completion of the grading operations, all areas shall be either seeded or sodded. Putting greens shall be seeded with Bentgrass. Tees and fairways shall be seeded with a blend of Kentucky Bluegrass and Perennial Ryegrass. Rough areas shall be seeded with a blend of Kentucky Bluegrass and Fescue grass. The seeded areas immediately surrounding the putting greens, tees and sand traps shall be covered with Futerra erosion control blanket in order to minimize erosion and enhance the establishment of the fescue grass. Drainage swales and areas of concentrated drainage will be either sodded or seeded and covered with erosion blanket. Drainage. In general, existing drainage exits the site at in four locations. The majority of the site drains towards the southeast where its rate of discharge is controlled by the existing storm water pond near hole No. 3. The area including holes No. 1 and 2 drains to the northeast and exits the site through an existing culvert under Pioneer Trail. A small pond is being constructed near hole No. 1 green to control rate of discharge and act as a visual amenity for the golf course. The area including holes No. 8 and 9 as well as the parking lot drains to the northwest and exits the site through an existing culvert under Pioneer Trail. A storm water treatment pond is being proposed at the west end of the parking lot to control rate of discharge and water quality. A curb-cut with rip-rap in the northwest comer of the parking lot will provide drainage between the parking lot and the proposed storm water pond. The Bluff. The south east comer of the property includes an area designated as bluff. This area has been delineated by City Staffand is shown on the site plan application. It is our intent to respect the 20 foot bluff grading setback, however, we would ask the City's approval to allow a path to be constructed between the bluff and the existing storm water pond in order to allow golfers to get from No. 3 tee to No. 3 green. At the recommendation of City staff, the tees on this hole were relocated to the west to allow the preservation of existing trees near the edge of the bluffzone. Si~,na~e. It is our intent to install a permanent sign at the parking lot entrance on the north side of the site which will identify the facility as a public golf course. The sign will be constructed in compliance with the City of Chanhassen's sign ordinance and landscaped to provide seasonal color and interest. Driveway Realit, nment. The City planning staff has requested that we cooperate in addressing an existing safety problem on the adjacent property at the southwest comer of the site. City staff believes that the existing driveway for the four existing homeowners south of the site is unsafe. It is our hope to not become involved in this issue as we feel that this is an issue between the City of Chanhassen and the existing neighboring landowners. However, if the City- can come to terms with the landowners we would be willing to participate in discussions with the City regarding the construction ora new entrance driveway for the adjacent residences. Our site plan includes a representation of one possible location for a new 14 foot wide driveway to be relocated approximately 300 feet to the north of the existing driveway entrance. Schedule. It is anticipated that the transplanting of trees and the construction of the driving range and ponds shall begin in the fall of 2003. The remaining site grading, irrigation installation and grassing shall be completed during the spring and summer of 2004. It is anticipated that the course will open for play in May of 2005. Conclusion. We believe that the construction ora golf course on this site will provide a important recreational amenity for residents of Chanhassen and the surrounding communities. In addition, we hope that the City will agree that construction of a golf course provides a good opportunity to maintain the overall natural character of the site though preservation of habitat and open space. Submitted by, Ron Saatzer Chanhassen, Minnesota MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUB J: Sharmin Al-Jarl; Senior Planner Steven Tor¢ll. Building Official / August 6, 2003 Review ora request for a conditional use permit and site plan review for a Golf Course located at the southeast comer of Pioneer Trail and Great Plains Boulevard, SMG Inc. Planning Case: 2003-7 Site Plan and 2003-4 CUP I have reviewed the plans for the above project. Following are my comments, which should be included as conditions of approval. 1. Submit a detailed floor plan of the clubhouse so the occupancy classification and fire suppression requirements can be determined. 2. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 3. Four accessible parking spaces are required. 4. An accessible route must be provided to all facilities on the site. 5. Submit a design of the on-site sewage treatment system for review and approval. Two sites must be provided and these sites must be protected from damage prior to beginning any construction activity on the site. The system must comply with the requirements of Minnesota Rules 7080.0600. 6. Detailed occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed until complete plans are submitted. 7. The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review, permit procedures and fire suppression options. G/safcty/st/memos/plan/Gol f Course-SMG MEMORANDUM Page 1 of 1 AI-Jaff, Sharmeen From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: site plan review.doc Golf Course MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUB J: Sweidan, Mahmoud Wednesday, August 06, 2003 4:36 PM AI-Jaff, Sharmeen Burgess, Teresa; Saam, Matt Sharmeen A1-Jaff, Senior Planner Mak Sweidan, Engineer Aug.6, 2003 Site Plan Review for a Golf Course Land Use Review File No. 03-14 Upon review of the grading and site plans dated July 18, 2003, prepared by Sathre-Bergquist, Inc., I recommend the following conditions of approval: 1. Staff recommends that Type I silt fence be used along the northwesterly and southerly property lines. The applicant should be aware that any off-site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. All disturbed areas are required to be restored with seed and mulch within two weeks of grading completion. Add the following City of Chanhassen Latest Detail Plates Numbers: 5201, 5203, 5207, 5300, and 3001 Add a legend to the plans. The rock entrance must be a minimum of 75 feet in length. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regulators agency permits. Submit 60 scale drawing for the grading plan. On the grading plan add a bench mark. Line up Clubhouse access with Foxford Road or meet minimum spacing off set of 300 feet. Show names of streets (101 & Pioneer Trail.) 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. C: Teresa J. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engineer Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer g:\eng\projects\Golf Course\site plant review.doc 8/11/2003 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmeen AI-Jaff, Senior Planner FROM: Mak Sweidan, Engineer DATE: Aug.26, 2003 SUB J: Planning Commission Update on Site Plan Review for Golf Course Land Use Review File No. 03-15 At the Aug. 19, 2003 Planning Commission (PC) meeting, there were three main issues raised by the Commissioners and the public: 1) Existin~o and proposed access: The Planning Commission requested additional information on the need to relocate the existing driveway. It is Staff's opinion that this development is a triggering event requiring the improvement of the driveway to meet existing practices, policies, and ordinances. Visibility The existing driveway has an approximate sight distance to the south of i00 feet. Based on Traffic Studies done in the area in 2002, average vehicle speed in this area is 41 mph. This gives the entering traffic less than 2 seconds of clear sight distance on which to judge the safety of entering the roadway. The proposed driveway has an approximate sight distance to the south of 400 feet. Based on a 41 mph speed the driver has over 6 seconds of clear view. While still not the level the City would desire to see in this area, this is a significant improvement. - Both driveway locations have adequate visibility to the north. Re-Alignment It is City practice to align private drives across from existing driveways whenever possible. This practice reduces the number of conflict points on the through street, which is an accepted method of crash reduction. This practice is in accordance with existing MnDOT standards as well. The Planning Commission questioned if tree trimming would be an acceptable alternative to the re-alignment to address the visibility issues discussed above. The curve in the roadway would require Width and significant tree trimming to provide the same level of visibility. To obtain the same improvement of 300 additional feet of sight distance, trees would need to be trimmed approximately 80 feet outside the existing right of way or nearly a distance of 100 feet from the edge of the existing pavement. The City does not have the legal ability to trim this area, as it is private property. For the purposes of this review, it was assumed that the existing trees in the right of way would be trimmed, allowing the I00 feet of sight distance from the existing driveway. The City does not have jurisdiction to perform the trimming in the TH 101 right of way without a permit from MnDOT. Cross Section City Ordinance Section 18-57 requires that private streets, private drives serving more than one property, must be built to 20 feet of width to a 7-ton cross section. Staff believes that the PUD is a triggering event to require the upgrade to meet the City Ordinance. 2) Well Interference During the Planning Commission Meeting, several property owners expressed concern about the potential of impacts from the commercial well on surrounding wells. The applicant has submitted a letter from the well company stating that interference should not be an issue. However, Staff recommends a condition of approval be added that should the commercial well cause interference with the surrounding wells, the applicant shall be required to make alterations to the commercial well to correct the problem or provide alternate water supply to the affected property owners at no cost to the property owners or the City of Chanhassen. Alternate water supplies may include but are not limited to redevelopment of the existing wells to a deeper aquifer or installation of public water to serve the area. 3) Site drainage: The public questioned if any additional drainage would affect the south property owners. The applicant proposed to utilize the existing contours to minimize grading changes. The proposed grading will accommodate the surface drainage within the Golf Course area toward four proposed storm pond. Staff is fine with the proposed grading which will minimize the surface drainage affect to the south. C: Teresa J. Burgess, Public Works Director/City Engineer Matt Saam, Assistant City Engineer g:Xeng\projects\golfcouurseupdate site plan review.doc CITYOF CHANHASSEN Administration ~'!' n ,i~Z22'~1! Building Inspections ¢ ,r~ ~, :,,711~, Engineering r:~, i ;'Z 71 ?: Finance Park & Recreation F ~, h~ !!, Planning & Natural Resources Pi ,, ~(~?,, ~;i q J'i'I} Public Works P! '!( j ii)(j Senior Center Web Site MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner Todd Hoffman, Director of Parks and Recreation August 4, 2003 SUB J: Proposed Chanhassen Short Course I have reviewed the submittal for the Chanhassen Short Course proposed at the southeast comer of the intersection of Pioneer Trail and Great Plains Boulevard. One deficiency that I see with the plan is the lack of a pedestrian/bikeway connection to the City's trail system at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Pioneer Trail. The proposed course would be a destination for area youth seeking to access the property utilizing non-vehicular forms of transportation. Please require such a connection to the property as a condition of approval for the project. c: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director CITYOF CHANHASSEN Administration :,u, , ;!1:,, Building Inspections Engineering Park & Recreation Planning & Natural Resources Pi~u a52 ;: Public Works ),/?7 Senior Center !:'J'c,r~s 952 2,"? 11 Web Site MEMORANDIIM TO: Sham'fin Al-,lafl: ,";cnior t)lanner FROM: (ircg l tares. Fire Inspector/Training ('oordinator DATE: Jul)'.'~9. 2003 SIIILI: Conditional [ !se and Site Plan request ~ilh V~.lrialqces lbr a gel f course on propcrt> zoned A-2 and located al thc s()ttlhcasl corner of Pioneer frail and (il'Cai Plains IMulcvard, NM( i. Inc. Plarming Case: _00_>7 Site Plan and ~()(l'%4 ('l rp I have reviewed the site plan lbr the above prqiect. In order to comply x~ith thc Chanhasscn Fire I)cpartmcnt/Firc l>rcvcntion Division, I have tine lbllm~ing lire code or city ordinance/polic5 requirements. 1'he sile plan is based on the available intbrmation submitted at this time. lfaddilional plans or changes arc submiUcd, thc appropriate code or city ordinance/policy requirements will be addressed. 1. Please contact the Building ()fficial and t:irc Marshal to discuss thc sprinklcring requirements tbr the clubhouse and storage/mainlcnancc building. 2. A 10-thor clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Qwest, Excel Energy. cable TV and transtbrmer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance riO-1. "No Parking Fire l.ane" signs and yellow curbing w, ill be required. Please contact Chal~hassen Fire Marshal tbr exact location of signs and curbs to bc painted yellow. The builder must comply with Chanhassen Fire Dclgartmcnt/Fire Prevenliol~ l)ivision regarding maximum allowable size of domestic water on a combination water/sprinkler supply linc. This is only ifa sprinkler is required. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy ~36- 1904. The City of Chanhassen Sharmin Al-Jail' .luly 20. '~ Page 2 o The builder must comply with the Cha|~hassen Fire l)cpartmcnt/Firc Prcvention Division regarding premise identilication. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention division Policy #29-1992. 6. A post indicator valve will be required on any building thai x~,ill have a sprinkler svstem. 7. Submit radius turns and dimensions to City Engineer and Chanhasscn l:ire Marshal for review and approval. If you have any questions, you may reach me at 952-227-1152. HERFORT ° NORBY Golf Course Architects August 25, 2003 Sharmeen Aljaff City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Re: Chanhassen Short Course Sharmeen, In response to the Planning Commission comments and the staff report dated August 19, 2003 we have made the following revisions to our previous submittal and plans dated July 18, 2003. Our revised plans are dated August 25, 2003. We have modified the bufferyard plan to reflect 13 overstory trees and 6 landscape islands in the parking lot. Total parking spaces equals eighty (80) including four accessible spaces. We have modified the bufferyard plan to reflect 35 understory trees on the south side of the property. 3. Since the City has indicated a desire to provide pedestrian access to the site, the applicant would agree to construct an 8 lbot wide bituminous path on private property at the west side of the parking lot. The City would be responsible for the construction of the public pedestrian trail within the right-of-way along Pioneer Trail including application tbr permits and design. It should be noted that the County Engineer cautioned that the location of such a trail may be affected by the final design and installation of the turn signal proposed for the intersection of Pioneer Trail and 101. 4. Two additional accessible parking spaces were added (4 spaces total). 5. Septic design data has been provided by Gary Bohn of Bohn Well Drilling. The site plan has been revised to reflect two 50'x87' septic sites. 6. A legend has been added to the grading plan. 7. The rock entrance has been increased to 75 in length. 8. The proposed grading plan has been submitted at a scale of 1" =60'-0". 9. The parking lot entrance has been reconfigured to align with Foxford Road to the north. In a phone conversation on August 22 and alter reviewing a portion of the proposed site plan, Carver County Engineer Roger Gustafson indicated that their office would support alignment of the entrance with Foxford Road but cautioned that MNDOT, Carver County and the City of Chanhassen are still in the process of finalizing plans for the installation of a stop light at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Pioneer Trail. Depending on the final design solution, some adjustment may be required to allow for grading of shoulders, turn lanes, etc.. 10. Names of streets have been added to the plan. 6452 City West Parkway, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 / (952) 942-0266 11. Plans have been revised to indicate a 40'x60' clubhouse. 12. Plans have been revised to indicate a 30'x60' maintenance building. 13. Plans have been revised to indicate a 5' tall wood-fenced trash enclosure. 14. The existing gravel driveway at the south side of the site has been indicated on the plans. 15. The plans have been revised to indicate additional silt fence in areas where drainage could exit the site. Specifically this includes the northwest corner, the south side and the north side of the site. 16. The plans have been revised so as to no longer indicate the relocation of the existing driveway which services the four homes south of the site. At the August 19th Planning Commission meeting, three of the landowners who use this driveway indicated that the existing entrance location was not of concern to them. Since this property is not under the control o£the applicant, we believe that this is an issue unrelated to this request for site plan review and should not be tied to its approval. 17. The tee for hole No. 8 has been moved to the west to assist in directing golfer's tee shot away from Great Plains Boulevard. In addition, the turning point for hole No. 8 was also moved to the east. 18. The location of the tee and green on hole No. 7 have been adjusted so as to allow for the preservation of existing trees along the south property line. If you have any/questions please feel free to call me at (952)942-0266. thank you. Sincerely, Kevin Norby, President Herfort Norby Golf Course Architects, LLC. AUG-20-2003 17:42 FROM: 765-479-2185 T0:952 402 9663 P.001/001 August 20, 2003 BERGERSON - CASWELL INC. Comtnerctal · Municipal * Residentkd Geothermal · Irrigation Submersible & Turbine Pumps Environmental Driller* Well Drilling, Abandonment & Repair Since 1948 CHANItASSAN SHORT COURSE Mr. Ron Saatzer 9450 Fox Ford Road Chaska, MN. 55318 RE: Information on Water Well Construction ~ CHANHASSEN SHORT COURSE Dear Mr. Saatzer; This letter is to confirm my verbal explanation on how water well's interact with each other. Most water is glacial deposited and rain-water that saturates thc ground. With the proposed irrigation well at your golf course,, it will have a greater demand than a house well or thc common well stated above. Your proposed well will bc considered high capacity water well, and to with draw the proposed 300 gpm from a water well we .have to drill into thc bedrock so we do not effect other water wells in the area and were assured the requested 300 gpm. From your message I was lead to believe the Cities planning commission was not aware of the current laws regulating minerals in the State of Minnesota. The State Department of Natural Resources regulate water usage. This means to pump your well at rates exceeding 10,000 gallons/day or 1,000,000 gallons / year requires approval and permitting from the DNR annually. The construction and monitoring of water wells and the associated rules, is performed and regulated by the Minnesota Department of Health, along with a few delegated programs that have been authorized by the Commissioner of Health. This information can be obtained by reviewing the Minnesota Rules Handbook for wells and borings by the MDH. This is part of the Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4725. If the well you install effects the well operation of other existing water wells akeady in use, you will be responsible and will have to correct thc problem. If you have any other questions relating to this welt construction project, or if you would like assistance at other meetings, please do not hesitate to give me a call at (763) 479-3121 Sincerely, 5115 Indlzrtr~l St., Mtlpl~ ?laltL ,~l 55359 ff65) 479-312t Fax ~$) 479-2183 CARVER COUN~[y August 29, 2003 Sharmeen AI-Jaff Planning Department, City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Subject: Chanhassen Shod Course SE Quad of TH 101 and Pioneer Trail 2003-7 Site Plan and 2003-4 CUP Carver County has reviewed the site plan for the proposed golf course located southeast of the CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail) /TH 101 (Great Plains Boulevard) intersection transmitted to Carver County by your memorandum dated July 24, 2003. These comments are not all inclusive and may need review and revision as this proposal changes and progresses. 1. Carver County has reviewed the comments submitted by Mn/DOT in their August 26, 2003 transmittal and concurs with comments presented by Mn/DOT. The entrance as proposed on CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail) will require an access permit from Carver County. It is the County's understanding that the entrance location has been changed so that the entrance will be located directly south of the Foxford Road entrance on the north side of CSAH 14. The construction of this entrance will require, as a minimum, delineation of a right-turn lane on CSAH 14. Presently a by-pass lane is striped in this area. Traffic markings will need to be changed to reflect a right turn lane. Any changes in traffic markings on CSAH 14 need to be reviewed and approved by Carver County. As stated in Mn/DOT's review, an intersection improvement is proposed for the TH 101 / CSAH 14 intersection. -l-he project letting is scheduled for October 2004. This will likely mean a 2005 construction period at the intersection. Carver County has seen preliminary plans for this intersection improvement. The preliminary design shows a need to add/reconfigure lanes at the intersection. Due to the closeness of this proposed access to the intersection, access modifications may be needed to reflect the lane configuration needs on CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail). The existing right-of-way of CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail) extends approximately 50 feet south from the existing centerline of CSAH 14. The roadway lane and shoulder needs in this area consume most of the right of way. If sidewalks, trails, berms, landscaping and other urban amenities are needed along Pioneer Trail, additional right-of-way will need to be secured from this development. -1- 4. Any public utility lines that are to be installed within the CSAH 14 right-of-way are subject to the utility permit requirements of Carver County. 5. Any proposed grading and installation of drainage structures within the right-of-way of CSAH 14 is subject to review and approval of the county highway department. Development activities (including the installation of both public and private utilities needed to serve the development site) that result in any disturbance of the county highway right-of-way (including tree removal, trench settlements, erosion, and sediment deposits) need to be completed in a manner that leaves the right-of-way in "as good or better condition" than what existed prior to construction. It is requested that the city include a provision in the developer's agreement that requires the developer to be ultimately responsible for the final condition of the county highway right-of-way. A clear understanding of this responsibility will result in fewer project oversight problems for both the county and the city. Any trees or landscaping completed within the right-of-way must be approved by the County. When locating shrubs and trees, consideration should be given to maintaining an acceptable sight distance at the CSAH 14 intersections. Any trees or shrubs overhanging into the right-of-way could be subject to trimming for safety or overhead utility consideration. 8. As this area develops, traffic volumes will increase. Carver County considers any potential noise abatement improvements to be the responsibility of the developer. The Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Plan for this area of Chanhassen indicate a need for an improved TH 101 roadway. Present plans include a high potential for TH 101 to be turned back to Carver County and maintained as a county state aid highway. Previous development concept plans for this area that were developed in the late 1980's and 1990's indicated a plan for preservation of a corridor to facilitate a realigned TH 101 roadway through this parcel of land. Approval of this golf course plan as proposed will greatly restrict realignment options and greatly increase the cost of any potential Great Plains Boulevard improvements. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this site plan. If there are any questions regarding these comments, please call me at 952-466-5200. Sincerely, ~'~ ' / -I /..~._ William J. Weckman, P.E. Assistant County Engineer CC: Roger Gustafson, County Engineer -2- Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 August 26, 2003 Sharmeen A1-Jaff Planning Department, City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 SUBJECT: Clnanhassen Short Course, Mn/DOT Review #S03-039 SE Quad of TH 101 and Pioneer Trail Chanhassen, Carver Co. Control Section 1009 The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has rcvicxved the above referenced site plan. Please address the following issues before any further development: As you may be aware, Mn/DOT has an intersection improvement project at TH 101 and Pioneer Trail scheduled lbr October 2004. This project will be acquiring right of~vay fi'om the southeast quadrant of the intersection, which will affect the proposed golf course. In addition a temporary easement xvill also be needed from appmxinnatcly 650 feet east and south of the TH 101 and Pioneer Trail intersection. In addition, sheet 3 of the plan scl tbr the goll' course shows proposed landscaping m areas where Mn/DOT will need construction easement. These planting should not be installed until after the intersection reconstruction or they should be moved outside of the area Mn/DOT will need for construction easement. Please contact Geoffrey Prelgo Mn/DOT Design Engineer, at (651) 634-2355 xvith questions regarding this issue. · For liability reasons, the city or developer should install netting along TIt 101 at the 8th lnole to prevent golf balls fi-om entering the highway. A Mn/DOT Drainage permit is required. Drainage computations for the pond in the nortlneast corner of the golf course near hole nine must bc submitted to determine the o['l:site drainage entering the cons~uction project. Please contact Martin Korthank, Water Resources ~6~, i 6_,~-2v,, --:,1~ tHIS ..... g~,~C~, at ,. .... questions regardiag "-'~ issue. · A Mn/DOT Access permit ~vill be required tbr tine new access onto T}t 10l. Mn/DOT xvould also recommend that the golf course have an cast-bound right turn-lane off of Pioneer Trail. Any use of or work within Mn/DOT right of way requires a permit. Two Mn/DOT permits will be required for this development. Please direct questions regarding permit applications to Keith VanWagner (651-582-1443) of Mn/DOT's Permits section. Please send a copy of the final plat for Mn/DOT review to tine lbllowing address: David Torfin Mn/DOT- Metro West Surveys 2055 N. Lilac Drive Golden Valley, MN 55422 Phone: (763) 797-3113 An equal opportunity employer As a reminder, Pioneer Trail is County State Aid Route 14. Any work on a CSAH route must meet State Aid rules and policies. Also, the County must review any changes to its County State Aid system so that they stay within its system limitations. Please note that CSAH 14 is Carver County's jurisdiction and the County must have the opportunity to review and comment on the development as well. You may obtain additional infbrmation regarding State Aid rules and policies in any of the following ways: ht~p://w~'w.d~_J..:.~.[~2.~.:..!.~!.!~.:.[!..,.s.'~!5.!.~.[~.!_i..~:!.~! shows or has links to the applicable tbrms and the Mn/DOT State Aid Manual. Refer to the Mn/DOT State Aid Manual, Chapter 5-892.200 for information regarding standards and policies. ~ Please go to http://wx~w,!~evjso!~:leg, smtc.m!~,!!s/arulc/88~{!/tbr inlbrmation regarding State Aid Operations Rules Chapter 8820. ~ For driveway standards, the designer is directed to refer to the Mn/DOT Road Design Manual (English) Table 5-3.04A and Figure 5-3.04A for guidance and policies. Driveway widths, other than those recommended, up to 50 feet will be permitted only by special permission of the Commissioner of Transportation or designee. Please contact Jim Deeny in our State Aid section at (651) 582-1389 with any additional questions. As a reminder, please address all initial future correspondence for development activity such as plats and site plans to: Paul Czech Mn/DOT - Metro Division Waters Edge 1500 West County Road B-2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 Mn/DOT document submittal guidelines require three (3) complete copies of plats and two (2) copies of other review documents including site plans. Failure to provide three (3) copies of a plat and/or txvo (2) copies of other review documents will make a submittal incomplete and delay Mn/DOT's review and response to development proposals. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in providing the necessary number of copies, as this xvill prevent us fi'om having to delay and/or return incomplete submittals. If you have any questions concerning this review please feel free to contact me at (651) 582- 1378. Sincerely, Brigid Gombolc~ Senior Transportation Planner Copy: Roger Gustafson / Carver County Engineer John Freemyer / Carver County Surveyor Ron Saatzer / Owner Herfort Norhy Golf Course Architects Sathre-Berquist, Inc. Sep - 02 - 03 _1_0_ _.' _35_A_ _N_ORBY/KA~ .W, .E..1- ,L,.~ 9529420197 P. 01 M.tmpolitan Dlvlalon Wsuers Edge 1500 West County Roe<l ~ Rosevtlle, MN 55113 September 2, 2003 Kevin Norby Herfort Notby Golf Course Architects 6452 City West Pm-k-way Eden Prairie, M~N 5534~ SUBYECT: Chaahasscn Short Come, Mn/DOT Rex, iow #S03-039 Follow up SE Quad of TH 101 and Pionem Trail Chaahassen, Carver Co. Control S~ction 1009 Mn/DOT's initial review of this development indicated thai a net should be installed for liability reasons, as stated in our August 26, 2003 letter. Mn/DOT was not requiring this as a stipulation ofdevelopmem but instead more a recommendation. After further discussion with the developer Mn/DOT would like to review the site upon completion and make a determination at that point whether a net would be warranted or not. If you have any questions please feel free to contact mc at (651) 582-1378. S~'dor Transportation Plauner SEP-02-2003 08:35 CARUER COUNTY PUBLIC WKS. 9524665223 P.02×03 CARVER COUNTY iPUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 11360 Highway 212 West PO Box 300 Cologne, MN 553224)300 Phone (952) 466~520{) Fax (952) 460~5223 August 29, 2003 Sharmeen AI-Jaff Planning Department, City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 Subject: Chanhassen Short Course SE Quad of TH 101 and Pioneer Trail 2003-7 Site Plan and 2003-4 CUP Carver County has reviewed the site plan for the proposed golf course located southeast of the CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail) /TH 101 (Great Plains Boulevard)intersection transmitted to Carver County by your memorandum dated July 24, 2003. These comments are not all inclusive and may need review and revision as this proposal changes and progresses. 1. Carver County has reviewed the comments submitted by Mn/DOT in their August 26, 2003 transmittal and concurs with comments presented by Mn/DOT. The entrance as proposed on CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail) will require an access permit from Carver County. It is the County's understanding that the entrance location has been changed so that the entrance will be located directly south of the Foxford Road entrance on the north side of CSAH 14. The construction of this entrance will require, as a minimum, delineation of a right-turn lane on CSAH 14. Presently a by-pass lane is striped in this area. Traffic markings will need to be changed to reflect a right turn Jane. Any changes in traffic markings on CSAH 14 need to be reviewed and approved by Carver County. As stated in Mn/DOT's review, an intersection improvement is proposed for the TH 101 / CSAH 14 intersection. The project letting is scheduled for October 2004. This will likely mean a 2005 construction period at the intersection. Carver County has seen preliminary plans for this intersection improvement. The preliminary design shows a need to add/reconfigure lanes at the intersection. Due to the closeness of this proposed access to the intersection, access modifications may be needed to reflect the lane configuration needs on CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail). The existing right-of-way of CSAH 14 (Pioneer Trail) extends approximately 50 feet south from the existing centerline of CSAH 14. The roadway lane and shoulder needs in this area consume most of the right of way. If sidewalks, trails, berms, landscaping and other urban amenities are needed along Pioneer Trail, additional right-of-way will need to be secured from this development. -1- SEP-82-2803 88:33 CARUER COUNTY PUBLIC WKS. 9524665223 P,OS,x85 4. Any public utility lines that are to be installed within the CSAH 14 right-of-way are subject to the utility permit requirements of Carver County. 5. Any proposed grading and installation of drainage structures within the right-of-way of CSAH 14 is subject to review and approval of the county highway department. Development activities (including the installation of both public and private utilities needed to serve the development site) that result in any disturbance of the county highway right-of-way (including tree removal, trench settlements, erosion, and sediment deposits) need to be completed in a manner that leaves the right-of-way in "as good or better condition" than what existed prior to construction. It is requested that the city include a provision in the developer's agreement that requires the developer to be ultimately responsible for the final condition of the county highway right-of-way. A clear understanding of this responsibility will result in fewer project oversight problems for both the county and the city. Any trees or landscaping completed within the right-of-way must be approved by the County. When locating shrubs and trees, consideration should be given to maintaining an acceptable sight distance at the CSAH 14 intersections. Any trees or shrubs overhanging into the right-of-way could be subject to trimming for safety or overhead utility consideration. 8. As this area develops, traffic volumes will increase. Carver County considers any potential noise abatement improvements to be the responsibility of the developer. The Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Plan for this area of Chanhassen indicate a need for an improved TH 101 roadway. Present plans include a high potential for TH 101 to be turned back to Carver County and maintained as a county state aid highway. Previous development concept plans for this area that were developed in the late 1980's and 1990's indicated a plan for preservation of a corridor to facilitate a realigned TH 101 roadway through this parcel of land. Approval of this golf course plan as proposed will greatly restrict realignment options and greatly increase the cost of any potential Great Plains Boulevard improvements. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this site plan. If there are any questions regarding these comments, please call me at 952-466o5200. Sincerely, William J. Weckman, P.E. Assistant County Engineer CC: Roger Gustafson, County Engineer -2- TOTRL F'.83 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 19, 2003 AT 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7700 MARKET BLVD. PROPOSAL: Golf Course APPLICANT: LOCATION: SMG, Inc. SE Intersection of Pioneer Trail and Great Plains Boulevard NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicants, SMG, Inc., is requesting a conditional use permit and site plan request with variances for a Golf Course on property zoned A-2 located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Pioneer Trail and Great Plains Boulevard. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Sharmeen at 227-1134 or e-mail sajaff@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on August 7, 2003. iii Z u.~,-r o~z -,o<_5 r~Z ~uW~ n Z <o O0 LI.I 0'~T >-0~ nZ ~:r tOo>rD w S r,." LO Z <,:r~ LU Z -r Z 0 7O7 LIJU_(D ~"r' o~:~ 7~ w~< -r ZO >-7'T <~ Z >->- 7z mm >> z ~ C~ wZ ,~,*n0_ NO~ LI.I u I ~w~ ~o~Z w<~ z o ,4.. z O~l,U n..' U.J vD Z~ ~o< <~ '~E 0 ~... ~W,o >. n~ ,~ "r~- -,,,,__ ~w< > z~6 <© N I-- iii mt.u~: "r- uJ n" uj ~-ZW PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 2, 2003 CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF SMG, INC. REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN REQUEST WITH VARIANCES FOR A GOLF COURSE ON PROPERTY ZONED A2, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF PIONEER TRAIL AND GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD. Public Present: Name Address Sharon Gatto Jeff Sorum John Lonstein Gary A. Koch Mike Conroy 9631 Foxford Road 9900 Deerbrook Drive 9861 Deerbrook Drive 9901 Deerbrook Drive 9921 Deerbrook Drive Sharmeen AI-Jaff and Matt Saam presented the staff report on this item. Sacchet: Questions from the engineer? Feik: I had one. With the possible realignment of the gravel driveway northward to the Halla entrance, help me out a little bit. Show me on the map exactly where the property line is of the subject parcel. Is it at that sort of 45 degree angle there in the southwest comer? Would we be taking. Saam: Yeah, this is the property comer right there where my pen is. Feik: So there would be a taking of a portion of this parcel to accommodate that roadway? Saam: Let me clarify. This would be a private street. way. There's no taking by the City of right-of-way. benefit of these existing properties. There wouldn't be any public right-of- An easement would be required in the Feik: And the road would go in at who's expense? The people who benefit from the driveway or the developer in this case? Saam: The developer who's proposing this golf course. Feik: Okay. Saam: As with other developments, when they come in we see, from the city's standpoint that's our chance to get improvements made and that's our standard practice. Sacchet: If I may jump in here. Is that part of the, that's being caused partially by the vacating of the plat that was originally on that lot that is now proposed to be a golf course because there were probably some roads planned in there? Can you give a little brief... Saam: Yeah, in the original plat and Sharmeen jump in because I think you worked on it but in that plat that was vacated I believe the road was lined up with Halla Nursery Drive, and yes that had right-of-way and that's been vacated which basically means you know the City doesn't have right-of-way in there anymore. It reverts back to the property owner. But I don't see how that ties in with the existing gravel drive. Sacchet: Go ahead Rich. Slagle: You touched on that Matt, and maybe you know the answer, maybe you don't but if you take a look at page 2 of our program where it shows the old scenario before the golf course, was proposed. You are correct that it's next across from Halla Nursery Drive. My question is this. If those parcels to the south were to develop, how would you see the roadway? And what I'm getting at, maybe this will help you, is I'm not sure for 5 or 6 parcels it makes sense to ask the developer to incur costs to improve a driveway, if you will. But if someone came and said hey we're going to be putting in 60 homes, or something to that effect, then ! think that kind of driveway or that kind of road would be certainly insufficient and would need to be upgraded and be safer and so forth. Not saying it shouldn't be safe for those families but you know where I'm getting at? So my question, I mean you would probably I guess have roads coming off 101 further south, right? Into those parcels. Saam: Possibly. Another point I should mention is with the golf course, it's obviously going to be more traffic coming to this area. More traffic going by this existing driveway, which I think everyone agrees isn't the safest intersection. The safest place to pull out. So with more traffic there, I guess we wrestle with the question are we doing a good job in saying well you know that's off their site, that's fine. Let's just not deal with that but sure, we'll approve this and add all the traffic but not correct this bad situation. I guess that's what we wrestle with. Slagle: Be careful about traffic. Given what's gone on in the last 2 hours. Okay, a couple more. Sacchet: Go ahead Rich. We're going to go back to Sharmeen. We're not necessarily exhausting our staff questions. This is engineering questions. Slagle: Alright, well I'll leave it for Sharmeen then. Sacchet: Well we want to make sure we save something for her. Do you have an engineering question? Alright. Lillehaug: ! just blew through the County comments here. Thanks for getting that from them. They said there currently on Pioneer exists a by-pass lane which would indicate to me that there's a left turn lane on Pioneer going into Foxford Road. So if we're just going to re-stripe a right turn lane, that means we're getting rid of the left turn lane and, am ! following that correctly? Saam: I believe it's a, and I think the applicant, since he lives up there, Ron Saatzer can speak to this but I believe it's a straight through left now. So that would be the same condition as I think what you're getting to but I'll let you finish. Lillehaug: Okay, with a by-pass lane, if there's a by-pass lane that means a car can sit in that through left turn lane to make a left turn. Saam: Right, but if there's not a car there, cars are just going straight, so it's not a dedicated left. Lillehaug: So with the by-pass lane, that typically indicates a left turn lane is warranted and by re- striping it for a right turn lane you're getting rid of a left turn lane. Claybaugh: You're losing the by-pass. Saam: Yep. Lillehaug: In my opinion isn't a left turn lane typically more warranted than a right turn lane? Saam: I guess you could argue that, sure. Again I would leave that, I mean that's a County road. It is their jurisdiction. We can certainly recommend that and put in a condition that the County look at this and keep it in mind. But that's ultimately their jurisdiction and I believe with the upgrade of 101 and Pioneer Trail they are going to be looking at adding dedicated left turn lanes, right turn lanes, that sort of thing with the signal going in there. Lillehaug: Then on comment number 3 from the County they hit on, it seemed like pretty extensive right-of-way impacts to the short course property here. Does the short course take into account these right-of-way impacts? Or are they simply, you know not mitigate them for them at this point because it really appears that with the reconstruction of that intersection that they're going to take a swath out of that southwest corner of right-of-way. Saam: Yeah. I don't believe that they have taken into account all of the right-of-way that MnDot and the County say they're going to require. Slagle: Point of clarification. Northwest comer or southwest? Saam: Southeast corner...but again that's the point of these County comments. To put both the City, the applicant, everybody on notice. Say hey, this is coming. You know if you don't plan for it, it's kind of the developer's own fault if they don't plan for it. They've been put on notice now by the County. Lillehaug: We can say that now but you know as soon as it's done, I mean it's the applicant's property. I mean I think right now is the time to be ensuring that we're taking it into account and I'm not sure if it's taken into account right now. Saam: Well one thing that's tricky, I mean with this they're not platting so, and we can't require right-of-way. So that gets into a gray area when the County and MnDot are both saying well hey, we need this right-of-way. ! believe it's incumbent upon them to approach the residents and offer a price you know for that land. Lillehaug: A couple more questions here. MnDot responded in one letter to the net issue, and then they, what generated another response about the net? I mean it appears that it's pretty clear in the first letter that they require a net, then all of a sudden they take another look at it. Saam: I believe and jump in if you want, but I believe the applicant or the applicant's architect contacted them. Is that true Sharmeen? AI-Jaff: That's correct. Saam: Yeah, so it's applicant... Lillehaug: And then I want to hit on this driveway again here. You know this is adjacent property. It's not part of the applicant's property, ls there some sort of tie between the properties that we can require the applicant to make an improvement and dedicate basically an easement here? I mean how can we require the applicant to do that? Saam: Sure. I guess as I've said, this development's going to be generating additional traffic. We already know we don't have that safe of a driveway there, and in order to realign this driveway, make it safe, it would require going through the applicant's property to align it with that street right there. So I guess that's our tie in. We did, just so you know, get the opinion of the city attorney. See if that was a reasonable condition to attach. In his opinion yes it was. So we did check with him because we had your same concern. Can we do this? Lillehaug: But the properties aren't tied together by ownership in any way, is that correct? Saam: I don't believe so. No. Lillehaug: Alright. That's it. Sacchet: Alright. That's engineering. Thanks Matt. Appreciate it. Back to you Sharmeen. AI-Jaff: The handout that I gave you, I just wanted to go through one condition and that's condition number 3 under the conditional use permit. Initially we said no commercial kitchen permitted in the club house. The applicant submitted some septic system calculations and our plumbing inspector received the results late afternoon today. We went through the calculations and basically what he determined is there isn't a filter for a treatment system for grease. Cooking grease if you will, and he requested that we add a condition that no cooking equipment be permitted on the premises, unless it's a microwave oven or a toaster oven, and again the intent is to put the golf course on notice that the septic system design does not allow for any cooking grease to be disposed through the system and if there was grease it will cause it to fail. So I just wanted to point that one out. We are recommending approval with conditions and will be happy to answer any of your questions. Sacchet: Rich, questions from Sharmeen. Slagle: She's looking at me. I just had two, and they deal with the questions that I asked which I think for the most part were addressed in the conditions so thank you for doing that. The one is getting back to the water. I just want this for the record that with the city growing like it is, taking into account the last two hours of discussion, if a user, and it doesn't matter if it's Ron property or someone else's, uses 150-200,000 gallons of water a day, all you've got to do is pick up the newspaper the last month in different areas of this state that are having the problems they're having. I'm just wanting to know, and I don't need to know tonight but asking staff to really be diligent on this for any applicant using lots of water, is that what is the plan because I think the plan, the conditions, the steps that you address here are more vague and any attorney or what not faced with this, there's a lot of loopholes and I'm not saying it should be iron tight or anything like that but just, you know you can look at that a little bit more. The last thing is regarding phosphorus. In the paper again just recently the seven metro area, all residents, if I'm not mistaken next year, no phosphorus at all. In 2004. I live next to a gentleman who's 95 year old father goes to a special store somewhere and he gets Tee Time I think it's called, and they have the greenest grass in the world. Obviously not good for the environment. My question is, how will Ron's property and I know I keep referring to Ron but Ron's a good man. Ron's property and others, you know what is the plan going forward for commercial operations? And again I don't need the answer now but if that particular property is the equivalent of x number of households, that needs to be addressed. Other than that I think it's great. Sacchet: Thanks. Bethany. Tjornhom: Yeah, I have, I'm confused I guess. There's a section in here that is specifically related or dedicated to driveway realignment and at the last time we were here there were applicants that were concerned about the safety of their property and driving in and out and the whole, they had horses I believe and there was a whole, it was a concern to them. And then I read in here, and is this from the golf course? This reading or submitting this or is this the City that's saying that you know, this really isn't their problem. It should be dealt more with the City and the homeowners. Do you know what I'm referring to? I wish there was a page. Slagle: What page are you on? Tjornhom: I wish I could tell you. There's no page number. Slagle: It's toward the back of our original. Sacchet: It's the letter. A1-Jaff: That was sent in and it's a narrative that was submitted by. Sacchet: The applicant. Tjornhom: By the applicant. But I guess I question that logic that it really isn't their problem. It's more the City's problem. I don't think the neighbors or these four existing homeowners would have a problem, or they didn't have a problem until the golf course was being proposed. It's under the driveway realignment. Al-Jaff: Okay, and it's signed by Ron Saatzer. Tjornhom: Okay, yes it is. Al-Jaff: Okay. That is the applicant's perspective. Tjornhom: Okay, and what is the City's perspective then on that? AI-Jaff: That the realignment does take place. Tjornhom: And that it is the golf course's responsibility. AI-Jaff: Responsibility. Tjornhom: And not the City's? A1-Jaff: No. Tjornhom: Okay. Alright, I was just confused about that. That issue. And were there parts of the bluff or the Bluff Creek area, were they delineated? Or I mean from the map that was shown earlier. A1-Jaff: Yes. Tjornhom: And they're on the map now or? Al-Jaff: Yes. Tjornhom: Okay. Okay, that was my only I guess I didn't understand part of that. Thank you, That's it. Sacchet: Thanks Bethany. Kurt. Papke: Two short ones. Last time there was some discussion about the, on Hole 3 by the bluff line there, there was some discussion about the path construction there and grading and so on of that area. The plans, the latest plans we have still show that golf cart path going right along the bluff line there. Are there any, does that maintain the 20 foot bluff grading restriction? Are there any issues or concerns with that that you have Sharmeen? Al-Jarl: I discussed this issue with Lori Haak and. Sacchet: Lori Haak being. A1-Jaff: Being the Water Resource Coordinator. Sacchet: Thank you. Al-Jaff: Thank you. And she had gone out to the site. She has looked at it and she says that the path is in keeping with the requirements of the ordinance so she is. Papke: So we're allowing some grading in that area? Al-Jaff: No grading. Papke: No grading, just the construction of the path? A1-Jaff: The construction of the path. Papke: Okay. With that path, it looks like it comes pretty close to about a 50 foot decline here in there. Do you have any concerns with safety along that with golf carts? Is there any issue or concern with that there? Am I reading the map wrong or is them? If you look at the path it comes within about 10 or 20 feet of the edge of a 50 foot bluff, and I'm just wondering if there's any safety concerns there. Al-Jaff: When we walked the site, and it really is extremely difficult to get close to the bluff just because of the existing vegetation that's around the bluff area. It's not, the vegetation is fairly tall and it's not simple. Papke: So no need for a guardrail or anything like that there? Okay. Last question I had, and maybe I should have asked it when Matt was still up there but the MnDot letter mentions the potential future realignment of 101 and they raise some concerns with this golf course going into place, that that would make that future alignment more expensive. Saam: Yes, for them it would. Papke: For them. Saam: Well, yeah them as government. We're all taxpayers, yes. Papke: So do we have any idea on time frames and how that plays into this? Saam: For the upgrade of 101, no. Not at this time, other than the signal going in at 101 and Pioneer Trail. But again let me reiterate their comments, that's the point of their comments so the applicant can mitigate, can plan for it. You know move, if they've got to move trees back where there's going to be a road, you know they can do so. So it's kind of like MnDot's putting them on notice that hey, at some point we're going to be doing this so you might want to plan for it. Papke: Okay, so they raised the red flags but there's no recommendation for us to really need to take that into consideration at all? Saam: If you feel we can certainly attach conditions. Papke: I'm not recommending that. I'm just trying to get your level of concern with that. Is this going to be, is this a non-issue or is this? Saam: I guess yes, from our perspective it is. Papke: Okay, that's all. Sacchet: Thanks Kurt. Steve. Lillehaug: I have a couple questions. Number one, the trash enclosure. We have an applicant coming in later tonight. Holiday Inn Express where they have a trash enclosure that's built out of brick, but I think it has a roof on it and this applicant has a 5 foot fence surrounding the trash enclosure. Is there a double standard here? I mean do you think the applicant's proposal is adequate? Al-Jaff: Well with this application what they're attempting to do is use the same material as the building, which is the cedar siding. Lillehaug: As a fence. AI-Jaff: Correct. And maintain that rural look if you will. Lillehaug: So staff's position is it's, we're treating them equal to other site plans? A1-Jaff: If this was in downtown it would be a little different. You're looking at a site that is in a rural residential district, or agricultural estate district, I'm sorry. Lillehaug: I'm looking at a site in Chanhassen I guess. A1-Jaff: Okay, that's fair too. The way the ordinance reads, it says enclosure around the dumpster basically, and this does meet the requirement. Lillehaug: Okay. The trail in the, I think within MnDot right-of-way there. Would the City typically pay for a trail in a similar development there, or do we require the developer to either pay or put in the trail? Under their site plan. AI-Jaff: Under site plans, in this case our park and recreation director felt that currently there is a trail to the north of Pioneer Trail. In this case traffic, bike traffic basically and teens coming to the site will probably need an additional pathway to get to this site. And it is his recommendation that the applicant pay for the construction of. Lillehaug: Is that how your report reads? That the applicant pay for that? Al-Jaff: Yes. It is the applicant's responsibility. Lillehaug: Okay, the applicant's. Okay. I must have put words in or read it wrong then. And then in our last meeting I requested the applicant include the roadway on the, paralleling the south property line right to the north of their property that leads to the bluff. Just looks like a driveway or a road that goes directly to the bluff for no purpose other than dumping back in the bluff. Does staff have, is there any other reasons to maintain that road back there? A1-Jaff: Well for restoration of the 20 foot bluff impact zone will basically put a stop to that. With the dumping. Lillehaug: Okay, so what's the reason for the road there then I'm saying? You know as part of the site plan, that road has no reason for use. Why are we even leaving it there? A1-Jaff: We can make it a condition that it be eliminated. Lillehaug: So is it your opinion that it's not needed there for any reason? And I can ask the applicant. Al-Jaff: Today? Lillehaug: I'll ask the applicant. AI-Jaff: Up to date the use of that driveway has been for dumping purposes. Lillehaug: Okay, thanks. Sacchet: Thanks Steve. Bruce. Feik: I'll be quick. The change regarding the no cooking equipment, that was discussed with the applicant and he's okay with it? AI-Jaff: Yes. Feik: Thank you. And I'm going to beat something to death here a little bit I think. The water. I feel for the neighbors. So before I go further on this I'd like to hear, if I were living out there or I owned for that matter Bluff Creek Nursery, or Bluff Creek Golf Course or Halla Nursery, what are the requirements, if I'm not going through a permitting process for something like this, for me to sink a well? Saam: I'm not an expert but they would have to get at a minimum a permit through our building department for the well. Also through the Department of Health, they would need a permit. If I can reference this case. I believe the Department of Health will require test well, you know to get pumping rates to ensure that there's going to be sufficient water to provide for this site, and also take into account that it's not going to affect, at least from their perspective, surrounding neighbors... Feik: So that's my concern in that I don't want to over burden this developer if Bluff Creek goes out and sinks three new wells a year from now. As this is drafted if there is an impact on the neighbors, we really don't really have to establish where it came from. We can assume it came from this applicant. If the wells are put in by Halla Nursery across the street, or they're put in by Bluff Creek Golf Course, they could have significantly greater impact on these residents than this little par 3. Saam: Well let me go back to what I said earlier. There will be modeling done by. Feik: So you will benchmark where they're at today somehow before the well goes in? And then measure after. So you actually do some measurements? Saam: Yes, we can do that. The Department of Health though is the one that has that type of data and it's a State permit. They're doing it already, but if you want to say that the City will do it, I guess we could do that too to ensure that it's going to get done. Feik: Well I just don't want to over burden, assuming this goes forward, I don't want to over burden this applicant by activities that would be going on around this site that could have a greater impact on the aquifer than this applicant himself. Saam: And that's a good point, but I just want to make the point that there are modeling programs that will look at zone of influence to try to narrow it down to say hey, this is the one that's drawing the water. Not Halla Nursery a mile away, or whatever. Feik: So let me ask you this then, as drafted this item 20, you're comfortable with the wording? That we're not over burdening. Saam: Can you repeat that, condition 20? Feik: Condition 20. That we're not over burdening because... Saam: ...so we're saying if that one causes interference with the surrounding wells, so we're not allowing it to be. Feik: I'm not injurious so I'll trust you, thank you. I just, okay. That works for me. Thanks. Sacchet: Thanks Bruce. Craig. Claybaugh: Yeah, I would just like to dovetail Bruce's comments with regard to condition number 20. And what would be, you touched on some modeling capabilities of the Department of Health, but when you're making your presentation you identified that one of your criteria's would be receiving phone calls regarding water pressure. Just want to make sure that there was a definable process in place so it didn't become a circular debate if there was a problem, and I don't 9 know if any, the city's best management practices or if there's something that can be incorporated by reference but something that makes it more objective and less subjective. Saam: Sure. Well again the Department of Health will have base line data for the surrounding properties, and we can get that too. So using that data, and the modeling and the test well data, before the actual well goes in they'll be able to determine if hey, this well might need to go down deeper. Something to that effect. Now, even if they do that, this well could potentially affect the surrounding properties so that's where I was saying you know phone calls later on. But as I said when Commissioner Feik spoke, if you wanted to attach a condition that the City would verify with the Department of Health that this well... Claybaugh: I think something needs to be attached or something needs to be done to give it a little bit more teeth. One, to protect the developer and two, to protect the residents. It needs to be more of a definable process rather than somebody calling down and thinking, commenting that I think ! have less water pressure. Like I said, that will just become a circular debate so if there is something within your grasp and can be incorporated in there that defines the process or how it would happen so you know, it doesn't get bogged down, I think that would be advantageous. Saam: Okay. Claybaugh: That's all the comments I have. Sacchet: Thanks Craig. Couple of quick questions. First of all, a conditional use permit goes with the property, correct? A1-Jaff: Correct. Sacchet: But this potentially is just limited time use, so why didn't we consider an interim use? AI-Jaff: The applicant could continue this use and it's permitted as a conditional use under our ordinance. Sacchet: Oh it is? So that's the framework that this fits in from the start? A1-Jaff: That is correct. Sacchet: Okay, whether it's permanent or temporary doesn't play into that then. A1-Jaff: The applicant has leased the property but he could purchase it and the use could continue. Sacchet: Okay. For the private street alignment, is there actually a condition in the conditions right now? Because ! was not sure. Saam: Yes, number 21 in the new sheet that Sharmeen handed out. Sacchet: Okay, so that's reference to the plan of July 18 is the realignment with Halla Nursery Drive? Saam: Correct. 10 Sacchet: And Sharmeen you confirmed that the dumping into the bluff has been taken care of?. That there's no more dump. AI-Jaff: We're working on it with Carver County Soil Conservation and yes, I have asked the owner of the property to stop dumping. I have had a conversation. Sacchet: They seemed receptive to the idea? I mean telling them. A1-Jaff: We're working on it. Sacchet: They've been told before, I would think. Last time when we discussed this item there was an item of no lighting. I think that's a condition we probably would still want to add. That would go under the conditional use, right? Not under site plan. Al-Jaff: Correct. Sacchet: So that's going to be a number 9. Now the water regulation, it seems like that was pretty much cleared up that the water regulation is on a State level, so generally we would not go, this is an engineering question Matt. So generally we rely on the State agencies to deal with the water issues in terms of the wells and coordinate that? Normally the City does not get involved with that? Saam: Not to a huge extent. As I said, there's a permit through our building department, but other than that the State Department of Health permits all the wells that go in the ground. Sacchet: That's where the coordination really takes place. Saam: Yes. But we can sure help to facilitate it or double check on this one if that's a big concern, and I'm hearing that it is so. Sacchet: Yeah, you said that before. In terms of the improvements to 101 and Pioneer, there are easements in place that would allow for those roads to be wider and so forth. So we're basically just asking the applicant to be aware of that and do the landscaping according, is that pretty much the... Saam: Are you referring to the State letter, the MnDot letter and the Carver County letter? Sacchet: Yes, those two. Saam: ...for future upgrades. Sacchet: Yes, that's what I'm referring to. Saam: I didn't get that impression from their letter. What I got was that they're going to be looking to purchase additional right-of-way from this property owner. Sacchet: So that they would impact that property further basically. Saam: Correct. 11 Sacchet: Potentially at least. Okay. Alright, that's all my questions. Claybaugh: Mr. Chair? Sacchet: Yes. Claybaugh: Just coming back to the point that Steve raised regarding the right turn lane on Pioneer, where that shake out with the left turn by-pass. Right turn direct. When Matt made his presentation I identified we should probably add it as a condition, a right turn lane on Pioneer, or right turn striping. Steve came back and commented that would be contradictory to a left lane by- pass. Where'd that all shake out? Sacchet: I believe the letter actually says it has to be re-organized or what, can you comment on that please Matt. Saam: Sure. I mean the County letter says presently by-pass lane is striped. Traffic markings will need to be changed to reflect a right turn lane, and then Steve brought up well won't a left turn lane be needed there too. I agree that it will be and I know with the upgrades of 101 and Pioneer Trail they're going to be adding lanes. That's why they want the future right-of-way. But I deferred to the County on that since it's their road. I would recommend that, yeah a left turn will be needed there, but I don't know that we can require the developer to do. Ultimately it's going to be the County who's issuing the permit who will require it, so. Claybaugh: My comment was specifically that he identified that we may want to add that as a condition. Saam: Yes, the right turn lane. Claybaugh: Is that still your opinion or? Saam: Correct, yes. Yes, that's my opinion. Sacchet: Rich. Slagle: I just had one last thing on MnDot for the potential upgrade of 101 and it sounds like, from what I have either seen or not seen, that there really isn't anything in writing that shows where that potential road will go, at least tonight that I can see. Saam: Yeah, the traffic signal we saw very preliminary plans on that upgrade, and when I say preliminary it was just lines drawn on a topo map so nothing was really designed or anything yet. But as for any other upgrades, no. We haven't seen any of that, at least to my knowledge. Slagle: Here's what I'm getting at Matt, and Ron it might be just more FYI than anything but you've got the big curve at Halla, okay? I think everybody would agree it's probably not a safe curve, and if the State is going to upgrade Highway 101, my guess is one of the things they'd look at is not to have this sharp curve. So I mean potentially someone could come and say gosh, this golf course, Hole number 8 and Hole number 7 in the way. So I know, it's hypothetical but I mean my question to staff is. Lillehaug: Eminent domain. 12 Slagle: Well I know but I mean here we are in this, ready to approve I think this proposal and. Claybaugh: It's a snapshot in time. Everybody knows what the potential is. They make decisions based on the information at hand. Sacchet: It really all it would do is to shorten 8 potentially. Slagle: Which would be good for us. Claybaugh: You might be shooting par Rich. Slagle: I can reach. Feik: If you leave it at 4. Slagle: Alright, just thought I'd bring it up. Sacchet: Alright, thanks. Alright, that was questions of staff. So I would like to ask the applicant to come forward if you want to add, what changed since time. Comments to what you've heard from our discussion, appreciate it. If you can state your name and address for the record please. Kevin Norby: Thank you. Kevin Norby, golf course architect representing Ron Saatzer. I'll just touch on a couple things that, I'm not sure you got the answers you were looking for yet. Number one, it is our intent, if possible, to get approval from you and then the City Council and begin construction on the golf course this fall. Our hope would be to dig the irrigation pond, maybe start roughing in the parking lot, and the driving range. Sacchet: And seeding. Kevin Norby: And seeding those areas. We understand that the process of getting permits from MnDot and the County may take more time than that and so it's not our intent to begin construction in the right-of-way. I did have a number of conversations with both the County and the State and that's why you have the letters that you see tonight, is that we, after the last meeting we did approach them and ask them for their thoughts. When we got their initial letter from MnDot, one of the questions we had was where did the net issue come from and which plans were you looking at, because I had not sent them plans. They said that they received plans from the City. Had not had a chance to respond, and based on the plans it looked to them like maybe they needed a net along the side of that hole and I said did the plans you have show any trees or have you seen the updated plans that showed the hole realigned, and they indicated they had not. And I asked if it was a reasonable thing to ask that they review either the completed plans or the project once it was completed before they made a judgment on the net and they thought that was reasonable. That's why you see the second letter clarifying that it wasn't their intent to require a net, just a suggestion and that they now would just like to reserve the ability to look at that later. So I also pointed out the plans were still being generated for the improvements at 101 and Pioneer and that they didn't expect to have those plans out and ready for bid until the fall of 2004, with construction starting in 2005. So it would be our intent to actually finish this project in the fall of 2004, at which point we would still not have necessarily all the answers but could probably apply for permits for access roads and so forth. So the suggestion they made and it's on the letter there was that maybe you ought to not put trails in, put landscaping in and we'll continue to work with you, mesh our plans so that all the information works. I did ask him about right-of-way because 13 them was a reference there to a 10 foot, possible 10 foot right-of-way acquisition. He asked how far exactly we were from the right-of-way and ! told him I thought we were 40 to 50 feet with the parking lot and we were in excess of that with Hole number 9. He said that was more than enough. That the only reason they would need the 10 feet would be to extend the culvert that goes under Pioneer Trail, and then they would need a 20 or 30 foot construction easement, temporary easement so they could do whatever grading they needed. So we're feeling pretty good and pretty comfortable. We've talked with Matt and we talked with Sharmeen and I think that as long as we can move ahead with some construction here this fall and next spring and then continue to modify maybe exactly how that tie in aligns with Foxford Road, we think that will work well for us. We can deal with that. So on the dumping issue, I understand from Sharmeen that you're working with Mr. Halla and Carver County. Again we're feeling a little bit like that's not really Ron's issue. We're hoping that that's not a condition of approval that is going to come back and hurt him at some point. It sounds like it's moving along pretty well and we'll leave that be I guess. As far as the well issue, I asked Ron while we were listening to your comments if he'd be willing to be involved in the monitoring of some of the neighborhood wells, and I know for a fact that the Department of Health does monitor neighboring wells so that they have some benchmark for these sort of phone calls. Phone calls are not a good way to monitor whether we're having problems in the area so I think if the Department of Health or the City wants to test some wells, have a benchmark, Ron would be in support of that. I think it would actually be in his best interest to know and to have that benchmark. And then I should just point out that based on some of your comments last time, we have realigned number 7, Hole number 7. We've moved it away from that south property line. We've located some of the existing trees that are in there. There's a large grouping of trees. I'm sure you'll find those homeowners are happy with that new location. We've also pushed the tee for number 8 closer to 101, which changes the alignment of that hole, therefore hitting away from number, excuse me Highway 101 a little more. We've also pushed that dog leg, that turning point further away from 101 so it now is we believe a safer condition. I think if you were to drive by there you'd see that there's probably 40 or 50 trees that are 25 to 35 feet tall that will remain there, and the opportunity to review that netting situation in the future I think is appropriate. As far as the railing, I'll just comment quickly, on Hole number 3. Ron was indicating when you were talking about the railing that in his opinion he would like a railing there. Just as a safety factor, even though you may not require that, I think as a landowner and as a business owner, he would want the railing there so he's looking out for the public interest. As far as the bike trail along Pioneer Trail, you'll note, if you can read it on the plan that Ron has offered to construct the bike trail on the private property, that is the property between the pond and the parking lot, but he's asking that since the trail can't be built in the right-of-way along Pioneer Trail at this time, that that's something that the City look at doing with their bike trail funding if they have that, or look for some alternative means. We're not sure, or Ron's not sure that acquiring permits from the County and going through that process of constructing that is something that should be his responsibility, and we'll defer that to your judgment I guess. And then lastly, as far as the proposed realignment of the driveway at the southwest comer of the property, I believe what we heard last time from the homeowners was that they didn't see this as an existing problem, and Ron's feeling is again he will participate in resolving that if he can, but since he doesn't own the property, if the City and Mr. Halla can come to terms on how that project or how that realignment is resolved, he's willing to participate and help construct that. One of the homeowners I think suggested that maybe even a 50 foot alignment instead of the complete realignment might be a suggestion. So I think that's all we have at this point. Oh, you had asked why we were showing the gravel road, existing gravel road on the south side of the property. We simply showed that because you had indicated you wanted to see it. At this point I don't know that we have intentions one way or the other. I think that was quite honestly it was a gravel road that Mr. Halla was using for accessing that portion of the site so we don't have a particular need for it. 14 Sacchet: Any questions from the applicant? Slagle: Just a couple. On the bike path, if I understood you right Kevin, that Ron will support the path between the pond and the parking lot out to whatever portion of his land and then, am I to understand in discussion with staff, am I to understand that with the work on Pioneer and 101, that would be prior to them opening for business or would be afterwards, and what I'm getting at is, if there's a temporary path, and what my goal is to allow the kids to be able to ride their bikes to the course, even if it's not a complete path. Is everybody okay with that? Staff? Applicant? Al-Jarl: What we have done in the past is taken a letter of credit that guarantees the work be completed. Now in this situation there will be construction taking place dealing, by construction I mean the widening of Pioneer, realignment of the road. They could do it at a later date but there will be a path, a temporary pathway will be acceptable until the permanent path is in. Slagle: Okay, and I guess on the applicant's behalf we wouldn't expect the applicant who has to pay for the temporary, if it's going to be torn up and then pay for a new one, is that what we're sort of asking? A1-Jaff: If you look at page 14 of the staff report, condition number 6, is the Park and Recreation Director's condition to have the applicant to provide the connection. Slagle: I'll leave that up to you guys. Just trying to be fair you know. Claybaugh: On that, you had indicated in your comments on that that you're looking at taking it to the right-of-way. Could you refer to the map and just definitively show what areas you're taking responsibility for at this stage. Kevin Norby: What Ron has indicated he's willing to do is to pay for the construction of the trail from this point, basically the club house to the right-of-way. His expectation or request is that the City be responsible for construction of the trail within the right-of-way, and whatever permits the County requires for that. I believe they actually constructed a trail on the north side of the road and again similar situation. Ron understands that there would have to be a letter of credit for the landscaping and the work that can't be completed at this time because of the realignment of the road. I don't think he's looking to contribute on the bike trail within the right-of-way so. Claybaugh: Sharmeen, just for clarification though, staff's condition number 6 identifies that the applicant would be responsible for taking it all the way to the intersection, is that correct? Al-Jaff: Correct. Claybaugh: So there is a contradiction, okay. I just want to make sure that I was clear on that. Kevin Norby: We'll defer that to you. Slagle: One last question, the phosphorus Kevin. Any thoughts? Kevin Norby: Yeah. Actually there was some discussion last time about some testing and some base line monitoring. My suggestion to Sharmeen was that we might include a condition for instance that says that the golf course superintendent who is responsible for taking care of the turf grass at the golf course, be a licensed pesticide and fertilizer applicator. That's a State issued 15 permit. There's continuing education that goes along with that and I think you'll find any reasonable golf course operation would have a qualified superintendent who meets that criteria, that license requirement. Slagle: Is there a diminishing use of phosphorus by golf courses or increased? Kevin Norby: I think what's happening is that the golf course superintendents are becoming more and more educated, and so they're going through again not only the initial permitting and testing, plus the licenses to buy fertilizer, but they're doing the continuing education and trying to understand how much of the chemical, a particular nutrient is needed. Fertilizer is very expensive to put down on a golf course. I mean they spend thousands of dollars a year and they don't want to spend any more than they have to so typically what's happening is they're now applying, instead of large doses 2 or 3 times a year, like you might on your lawn, they're actually doing what they call spoon feeding the fertilizer so they're putting down very small amounts of fertilizer, almost on a weekly basis, and that minimizes the amount of runoff and potential nutrient leeching into lakes and streams and so forth. So again this might be one of those issues that would be a little difficult for the City or anybody else to monitor, but through proper education and permitting and licensing, I guess you could at least meet the current standard. I think if you wanted to do some sort of testing, again you'd have to determine somehow what you're going to use as a base line, and I think the comment in the staff report was that if there was sufficient nutrients in the soil you wouldn't apply any. That's sort of a difficult one to monitor or to deal with because you know what's available in the top half inch might be different than what's available 6 inches or a foot down. Slagle: Again I think it would be fair though to ask, I mean as I have your thought. I mean if there's a seven county metro wide ban on phosphorus starting next year, that staff's condition of saying no fertilizer containing phosphorus may be applied unless the soil test results demonstrate deficiency in phosphorus. However that baseline is arrived at seems like a fair request. Kevin Norby: Yeah, I don't think that we can contradict or refute a state wide or a county wide requirement, so I'm not familiar with that requirement but if, I'm sure a good superintendent would be, and if testing proves that he needs it or doesn't need it, I would assume he would handle it in an appropriate manner. Slagle: I'm certainly not against this applicant here... Sacchet: Any other questions from the applicant? Feik: One quick question for Kevin. The exterior lighting. As the applicant's representative, you're comfortable with not having exterior lighting on the site? Kevin Norby: Yes. Feik: Would there be a need so we're, I don't want to be too mundane about this, but do you need convenience lighting at the exits of the buildings? Kevin Norby: Well I believe that there would be. Feik: Your steps and stuff. Kevin Norby: Some lighting at the, I guess we're talking about area lighting. 16 Feik: Right. Kevin Norby: Like parking lot lighting. Feik: I don't want to just blanket say no exterior lighting. Kevin Norby: I'm not that familiar with that portion of the city's ordinance but I believe we're talking about area lighting. I think we would want lights at the club house entries. We might want them at, adjacent to the sidewalk and maybe at the sign, you know lighting the entrance sign or something in that order. Feik: Okay, thanks. Sacchet: Steve. Lillehaug: Yeah, just a quick comment/question. The drive road at the south. Previously I asked you guys to show it because it wasn't shown on the plans and I didn't know where the existing roadway is. Now I know that it is on the property for this site. What is your comment as far as removing that road? To obliterate it and... Ron Saatzer: The road really has nothing to do with the golf course or me personally. I'm not going to use the road so I don't really have any say in what goes on with that road. Kevin Norby: I think that's, maybe that's an issue that again as part of the resolution for the dumping, you know or the bluff re-establishment. Maybe that's something that can be resolved with Mr. Halla. I'm not sure if that's even in the portion of land that you're leasing, is it? Ron Saatzer: No, that has nothing, we talked about that the first time around. That has nothing to do with me as the applicant and it has nothing to do with my property lease either so it's really kind of a moot point. I mean you guys asked for it. Lillehaug: It isn't a moot point though. When we look at this site, the City's looking at realigning the driveway that's not on your property either. This is part of the site. This roadway is part of the site. When we look at the site plan, the whole parcel is part of the site, correct me if I'm not wrong staff. AI-Jaff: It is part of the site. It's shown on the plans. Lillehaug: And this is the tool, one of the tools the City has to mitigate a problem, an ongoing problem out there. So that's why I requested to have it shown on the plan. Kevin Norby: At the time we last presented this, and it wasn't on there, I don't think there'd been any discussions between Sharmeen and the owner about how to deal with the bluff issue. We showed it and quite honestly until tonight I wasn't aware that they had been discussing it as fairly as they had so. Lillehaug: Okay, that's it. Sacchet: One more quick question. This netting stuff. So it's my understanding that you're opinion is that the trees should be sufficiently protecting the cars on 101. 17 Kevin Norby: The trees and the alignment of the hole. Sacchet: Between the alignment and the trees. Kevin Norby: Correct. Sacchet: You consider from your experience, which I understand is certainly more extensive than anybody else's in here with golf courses, from your experience you don't see a need for netting? Kevin Norby: I do not. Sacchet: Okay, that's what I wanted to hear. Okay, if we don't have further questions from the applicant, I'd like to open this public hearing that anybody would like to come forward, comment to this proposal, please come forward now. State your name and address for the record and let us hear what you have to say please. John Lonstein: Thank you. I'm John Lonstein, 9861 Deerbrook Drive and my concern is with the water and availability of water in the future. When we put our house down 10 years ago we sank a well. We had to sink it deeper because we didn't get water initially. Since then for water treatment I've had to put in two water treatment systems because of the quality of the water, at great expense. The water use I understand for this development is going to be about a million dollars, I'm sorry, a million gallons a week. I don't know what this means in how many houses does a million gallons or how many townhouses does a million gallons a week equate to. I've heard that this is being monitored by the Department of Health. They have never been to my property to see what my use is and how much water I'm using and what my pressure is, so they've got no prior history to know what's happening in the last 10 years. I don't know what condition 20 says in detail, in other words if I have no water, or my water pressure drops...what have been taken from the aquifer, what recourse do I have? If I'm suddenly without water, what do I do and who do I call? Making a phone call's not going to solve my water problem. That's the one comment. The other one is just, I'm a little amazed as a resident of Chanhassen, we've had two proposals this evening where one big problem that has come up has been traffic, and it's kind of been solved as where do we put in an access road and how do we take care of it, rather than not looking at the big picture. The impact on Chanhassen. The impact on 494 and the impact on the area. Thank you. Sacchet: Thank you. Matt, could you address what somebody would do when their water vanishes. Saam: Well I guess if I could tackle it this way. What I would recommend, after listening to everybody is that we propose a condition similar to the developer to assist the City or to finance the monitoring of the adjacent wells to ensure, to find that baseline and to ensure that this commercial well will not adversely impact those neighboring wells. So I'm hearing that's a real big concern tonight, and it was last time so maybe we need to add a little more teeth to that. Sacchet: And would you also be able to address Commissioner Feik's concern about even larger water users impacting this particular applicant so that, I mean it's protecting both ways. Saam: Yes. I think. Sacchet: This is not as easy, it's very. 18 Saam: With neighboring wells being drilled, I guess we could add a condition at that like if Halla, as Commissioner Feik brought up, if he would come in for an expansion of his site would require a permit, we could add the same type of condition upon installation of that. Sacchet: Or the other golf course for that matter, yeah. Saam: Yes. Sacchet: You wanted to add something to that? John Lonstein: Yes. That still doesn't answer the problem because nobody knows how much water is in the aquifer. I can bet nobody can predict what's going to happen in the future with the water taken out. Nobody has predicted in the past, you know Highway 5 was built and remodeled. I would put my money down, and I'm not a betting may, I would put my money down that the projections made for traffic volumes today are far lower than the actual traffic volumes, so we can't predict what the water's going to be. I want to know what's going to happen. It's no good monitoring and saying we'll see what it is and we'll project if there's enough water. You don't know how much is in the aquifer. It's impossible to know. Sacchet: So the good thing is we'll find out, but then the bad thing is we'll find out. John Lonstein: Right, and what happens to me? You know I can see what's going to happen. What will happen is, the City will come to me and say sorry you have no water. We'll have an assessment so we'll bring in water to you. We're putting sewer lines and water lines. That's not solving the problem. Tjornhom: I have a comment. Obviously this isn't the first golf course being built in the Twin Cities, you know that doesn't run on city water and do other golf courses drain the wells dry from, I don't even know where there would be, ! don't golf. I don't know whether there would be a golf course not on, you know or you know what I' m saying. Saam: I don't have experience with golf courses and their impacts on the private wells. Sacchet: But that's a good comment Bethany. It's obviously not the first golf course. Let's maybe hold our comments til we get through with the public hearing. It's a good comment though, thank you. Anybody else? I'm sure there are other people that would like to address this particular topic. Please come forward. State your name and address for the record please. Debbie Lloyd: Debbie Lloyd, 7302 Laredo Drive. If you end up recommending the private street realignment which I believe is point 17 on the condition, if that hasn't changed to 21. Sacchet: It's still 17. Debbie Lloyd: Then I would like you to add the developer shall provide inspection reports to the City for the private street, because without that clause there's no inspection of private streets. Correct? Saam: Yes, that's a good point. 19 Claybaugh: I thought previously we had incorporated that into more of a standard that there would be, that the entity providing a private street would provide a monitoring process and testing and submit those final results to the city. Saam: Yeah, and the standard procedure as a condition, more of a standard condition... Claybaugh: So each time it needs to be incorporated as a condition. Saam: Correct. We haven't changed the code. Claybaugh: Okay. Sacchet: Alright. Debbie Lloyd: And then I do have one other question, comment, concern, whatever. Hearing about the water and remembering some discussion in the past about the fen. That development upland from the fen can have an impact on the fen and I'm just wondering if that has been at all looked into relative to the golf course. That's it, thank you. Sacchet: Thanks. This is not in the watershed for the fen is it? Not directly. Saam: I don't believe that this will affect the fen but that could be looked at. The fen, the Seminary Fen down on 212. Sacchet: It's a little further west. Saam: Yep. Sacchet: Alright, more comments. This is public hearing. Anybody else like to address this item, express your concerns, questions, opinions, views of the world, please come forward and let us know what you have to say. Name and address for the record please. Steve Walstad: Steve Walstad, 10071 Great Plains Boulevard, and you really don't want my views of the world I'm assuming. Sacchet: It's getting late without that. Steve Walstad: No. Just a couple of things, as far as well testing, oh by the way I'm just south of the practice range right here. So I'm one of the closest properties here and I am on the I'm assuming the aquifer will flow toward the river so I'd be after the water would be taken out here. Yeah I guess I have not heard of any problems with the golf course drawing water out of the, with Bluff Creek right next door, much larger property and with the Nursery is also drawing a lot of water. I'm not an expert but I think it is something, a valid concern and it would be, I agree with the previous gentleman. It's a big issue that if my well runs dry I want to know why. I don't want to just blame somebody and have Ron, who's excellent to work with by the way. Appreciate all you've done but I don't want to put him on the defensive, nor do I want to blame Halla nor do I want all finger pointing all around, but I think it's a good point that we really need a structure of okay, in the meantime I don't have any water and what happens. My well burns out. You have to pay for that, and it's a he said, she said type thing. I think there's got to be some kind of testing done, or some kind of monitoring to know that. We've gone almost what, a month and a half with very little rainfall, and don't want it blamed on that. Well it's not me, it's 20 that. And again, it can't be that subjective. There's got to be some ways of doing that. As far as the driveway again that is, ! am one of the properties on that driveway and a couple of things just to clarify. This is something that the neighbors that have been on that driveway have talked about quite extensively obviously and it impacts us directly. I've been there 5 years. It hasn't been a huge issue. I can see it is a safety issue. However turning the driveway north and putting us in line with the people driving golf balls is also a safety issue. And I'm just, I know that they're doing their best to align the holes for the state highway and everything else but if we align the tee for number 8 to the west, how does that leave room for an access road change? Is it critical to me that that changes that we have a safer access? It would be nice to be safer. Is it critical? I guess I don't think it is critical. As far as the future development, and this being a temporary type lease situation, I think it'd be very naYve of me to assume that after 10 or however long years the lease is that this, when the MUSA line comes through that this wouldn't instantly be turned into private properties again so I think it'd, I know it'd be great to have a golf course that stays there but dollar wise I'm not a developer but I can see some developers looking very strongly at that property and making very attractive offers so. And I'm assuming at that time any temporary type road changes to the private drive would again be addressed when it gets redeveloped. And so this is kind of a temporary situation as far as realigning the road. There was something else but I can't think of it right now so I won't take your time but I do appreciate. One thing I'd like to say, I think there's been a lot of thought that's gone into this from everyone here and I do appreciate your keeping the concerns of the neighbors in the fore front, thank you. Sacchet: Thank you very much for your comments. Anybody else? Please come forward. State your name and address for the record and let us hear what you have to say please. Gary Koch: Gary Koch, 9901 Deerbrook Drive. More just a comment. I believe that we've got 12 residents on Deerbrook Drive that are very concerned about the water situation. I don't know why we're building a 9 hole golf course. I believe...saying, I think there's an end game here and I think it's from a development perspective, but if we have an issue with water, we need to get that resolved now. Not then. Because I'm going to be quite pissed off if I can't take a shower in the morning. So study it and understand that you've got 12, what have we got? 12. They pay a bunch of taxes on that road and we need some water and I think that if it becomes an issue, it will be your issue. Sacchet: Thank you. Anybody else? David Teich: Hello, my name's David Teich. I'm at 1217 South Monroe in Shakopee, Minnesota. I own the property to the south of this project, and was born and raised on that farm. All the property being talked about here was where I was born and raised. I've got an issue with the road. The access that's being proposed. Sacchet: The realignment of. David Teich: The realignment of the access and then the, that would involve I think easements. Creation of easements on Halla property to get to the property that I own. I do not wish to see that. It's a complicated, impractical procedure as I see it. As I understand it, the golf course is not to use that road. They have no need for the road so why'd they make that part of this project, I don't understand. I can appreciate the concern of the safety of the road, but I think the City's concern of the safety would have to be a concern when the road becomes public and it's not public. It's a private road. So I think that's about all I've got to say. 21 Sacchet: Thank you very much. Appreciate your comment. Who else would like to address this item.'? This is your chance. Tom Gertz: Hello. My name is Tom Gertz. I'm at 10001 Great Plains Boulevard. This property right here. Regarding the, I'll only be slightly redundant, regarding the realignment. ! don't support it. It's nice to get something for free once in a while but I don't think this is applicable. I think the change for safety concerns is only a slight change in safety. I think it's marginal. It doesn't warrant all the effort, the expense, and I think it increases, I mentioned this last time. I think it may increase our hazard for aligning us with that tee box, especially if it's going to move to the left. I enter that driveway 5 times every day, and it already is extremely close to our entrance, so with the new alignment of that tee box, I'm not sure there's any space any longer so it may require some more complications. As far as an easement from Halla, maybe. But this is leased property and I don't know what happens in 10 years when that expires and Halla owns the property. Someone else owns the property. Perhaps the developer, and if you close off the existing access we have now to Great Plains, can we re-open that? And I don't know who's in the power position at that point. Maybe because it was existing they have to work around that. Someone has to buy it. I'm not sure, I just think it might be, I think the whole issue is kind of complicated and I think a lot of things go away if we just go back to what's existing, and maybe there's some, and I mentioned this last time too. Maybe we can just improve it a little bit. But I don't see it as a huge hazard. Also in this, and maybe this is for the engineer. This doesn't show it, but the way that the proposed entrance is, is that that curve, currently it's very difficult to get a large truck in there. I know we had our moving vans come in, they're 48, 60 foot tractor trailers. They almost cannot make that turn now, and if you look at the proposed curvature where we're aligned with 101 and then we have to swing, I think it would have to be re-done again. To move around that. If this is to scale, and I assume it is, it's already difficult to get around that corner so I just don't know how much space there is to work with that. I appreciate the due diligence of you all in the city and helping us with this but I think that's one helping hand we don't need. Thank you. Sacchet: Thank you very much. Who else would like to address this item? This is your turn to speak up about this. Concerns. Issues. Nobody else wants to address this, I am closing the public hearing and bring it back to commissioners for comments. You want to start over there? Slagle: Sure. I think simply put, I'm in support of the golf course application with this following caveat if you will. And that is, I believe in it like a macro sense. Our look, our process of how we look at water usage has been interesting in this process and what I mean by that is, and I don't know if this is the largest application, certainly in my time here, that is well based. If this was city, you know I think maybe I and others would just sort of think well the city, it's just city water. The city gets it's water somewhere, but it comes from the same place these wells do so in some respects I think it's really an issue for the city. Not just the folks at Deerbrook because if they eventually get hooked up, or Bluff Creek does. Is Bluff Creek well at this point? Aanenson: Yes. Slagle: Can I ask a question that I think, sorry now I've just thought of something. Sacchet: Go ahead. Slagle: What's an average household use a day? Any idea from staff? So we don't even know what an average household uses for gallons. 22 Saam: 1,000. Throw out that. Slagle: 1,0007 Okay. Anyway, make a long story short. I just think that the process has been somewhat interesting and I am willing to approve this application with a, it doesn't have to be a condition but just a real plea to staff to get our hands around this water usage because as time goes on, I just came from up north, I mean just as an FYI. Castleton, North Dakota ran out of water. The Army had to deliver trucks and there was some reason that the tower lost pressure but basically folks, their source of water was drying up. And it happens. So that's it. Sacchet: Bethany. Tjomhom: For the record I just want to say that I am concerned about everyone's wells and their water and my comment about this can't be the first golf course ever created that doesn't run on city water, wasn't really what I meant. It obviously works for other places and you know. My next comment is, were you saying that you didn't want your driveways corrected? When you were up here. Is that what you were saying? Sacchet: That's what I heard. Tjornhom: Okay. So, well with that then I guess I think too it would be a good asset to the community. It'd be good for kids to be able to go and learn to play golf so I too support it. Sacchet: Thanks Bethany. Kurt. Papke: In talking to some other area residents over the past couple weeks, everybody I've talked to seems to feel this is a lot better than a bunch of houses on the same property so I think it's an overall good for the area. I agree with Rich, it's been an interesting process to see how the water has become such a central issue where we didn't really start out with that as much of an issue when we began the process two weeks ago. And ! guess I'd like to make sure, I understand with staff what our level of discretion is here. I mean if the applicant follows all required permitting, licensing, etc, etc, etc, are our hands tied behind us and just cruises on through or what, outside of the obvious. Saam: ...add additional conditions but typically that's the way. Papke: But that's it. I mean we can put a couple conditions on it but if they follow the rules. Aanenson: No, let me just... If you go to page 4 of your staff report, there are findings of a conditional use. General issuance standards. Papke: Right. Aanenson: And you have to find findings that they meet those. Will not be detrimental or endanger public health, safety, comfort of the general neighborhood. Okay, so that finding says it won't be but it seems to me that there still is a little bit of a question that you're asking us to follow up on regarding water. If there was lack of water that could be detrimental to the neighborhood, so yes. You have to find findings in the general issuance also. And how you can do that is add conditions to mitigate or. Slagle: But with all due respect, if I can just ask, in defense of, not defense of the applicant but just thinking of the applicant, water usage goes down 6 months from now or next summer to the 23 point where people's wells run dry. How in the world are you going to ascertain legally that it was due to this golf course? Saam: I don't have that answer. That'd be something we'd have to explore with the Department of Health. That's not something we deal with on a day to day basis. Papke: Okay. Overall I think it's a very good plan and I think we've done our due diligence here. That's about it. Sacchet: Thanks Kurt. Steve. Lillehaug: I want to hit on the water a little more too. First off Mr. Saatzer has mineral and water rights to his property period. The city does not regulate his water rights. We have a city code that the Planning Commission enforces and that does not address water rights. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Health are the ones that regulate and monitor well usage. Mr. Saatzer's well contractor has indicated that they're going to have to go into an aquifer well below the bedrock. Well below all the residents aquifers that they're using. It's not the city's position to monitor or regulate. The city can ensure that the applicant is doing what he's supposed to do with the Department of Health but for residents to hold the Planning Commission and the city staff responsible for their well running dry I don't think is appropriate because it's not the city's position and they're not the regulating authority so I do want to just say that that is my interpretation of it. I agree with the applicant that he shouldn't be held to the standard to correct that driveway to the south. I think with the unknown of the possible realignment of 101, that it's just not providing a big enough benefit at this time to put the burden on the applicant to address realigning that driveway. And ! would also like to indicate that if a driveway, if it stays in it's current position where it is, I think the applicant tree plan has to be modified to actually delete the trees right adjacent to that driveway to provide a better sight distance. So there's a portion of the trees there adjacent to the driveway that I think staff should review with the applicant to ensure that appropriate sight lines are obtained because the way it sounds, that driveway may be left as it is. Looking at the construction of 101 and Pioneer, the County's indicated that bid letting is 2004 with a construction of 2005 so does it make sense to have the applicant put a temporary or even a permanent trail in MnDot or County right-of-way? I don't think it does at this point. I think the better result is just for, as Sharmeen indicated, to withhold money to complete that trail as part of that project rather than constructing a temporary at this point because with the staging, it sounds like the temporary would get ripped up before it'd be utilized also. I would like also to ask staff, to re-address with the County the left and right turn lane at Foxford because it's my opinion that the left turn lane is more important and more significant than having a, putting a right turn lane in there, so I think it'd be good to talk with Mr. Weckman with the County there to ensure that he hasn't overlooked something there. I think that is all I have, thank you. Sacchet: Thanks Steve. Bruce. Lillehaug: One more. One more. Sacchet: Go ahead. Lillehaug: In absence of seeing where the applicant's leased property is versus non--leased property, I don't have a boundary on here and I think it is viable to have that access road removed on the south there going to the bluff. I think it's low cost. I don't like putting costs on Mr. Saatzer but I think this is something that can easily be incorporated into this plan, thank you. 24 Sacchet: Thanks Steve. Bruce. Feik: I'm generally in favor of the plan. I'd like to thank the applicant for coming back two weeks later and bearing with the process. I know it's frustrating for you. I fully agree that we should not be relocating or realigning the road, the gravel driveway on the south side. I look at that as basically a taking. There is no benefit to this property as it's being conceived at this point. There's no access for it. I really don't see any reason to move that driveway at this point. I have a bigger concern with the curve that's further south than the driveway itself. So I'm in support of the application. Sacchet: Thanks Bruce. Craig. Claybaugh: Likewise I'm in support of the application. I agree with my fellow commissioner that in lieu of putting in the bike trail, that the applicant should submit a letter of credit and coordinate that with MnDot improvements. With condition 20, which deals with the well, again that's a two edge sword. It's not just to protect the residents. It's to protect the applicant as well, and it may come down on further investigation from the staff that it's just a function of shedding the facts or light on the facts so both the residents and the applicant know what to expect. But that certainly needs to be cleared up. I guess that's all the comments I have. Sacchet: Thanks Craig. Real quick, will not be lengthy hopefully. I do want to thank the applicant for really addressing a lot of issues in a very short time. It's very commendable the progress that's been made. Also staff has addressed some of the issues in addition so I think we've come a very long way with this application. It's a great application. The water issue, the water issue is huge. The water issue affects all of us, and I think it'd be unfair to penalize one particular applicant for a problem that potentially could affect us all at some point. At this point we have to deal with the framework that's in place for that, which is it's being regulated on a State level, and are those regulations adequate or not? I don't know. Frankly personally I think they're probably not in terms of what we're envisioning. What the situation could become with water usage and water needs. On the other hand here in Minnesota we're probably better off with water than anywhere, or most other places in the world. The private drive, I think we have pretty clear input from the neighbors that they don't really care about this being improved, and I do have a problem with this going in to, onto a property that has no benefit from it. It's a dichotomy there. I would think that once this area is going to be changed in use, which is more than likely once sewer and water becomes available there, that it will be developed for residential. Then there will be roads and then that will be the time to make a good solution. Whether it includes that property with the golf course or not, whether it's just the property on the south, either way there would be a road system put in place that at that point issues could be addressed in a permanent solid way. To open the sight lines a little bit I think is a very important aspect. That's something that can be done right now so when you come out that driveway you see further than just a tree. I think that's reasonable, responsible action to do. I do believe there are a few things to still look at as this goes forward from here, assuming that we pass this tonight to the council. I would like to make sure that the MnDot and Carver comments are fully integrated and looked at. I mean we saw the Carver County comments first time tonight. The MnDot comments were attached to the report but weren't really fully integrated yet. They're a little bit integrated into the conditions now. I would like to request to really full due diligence to make sure to fine tune and solid integrated before this goes to council. That's pretty much my comment. With that I would ask for a motion here. Feik: I'll make a motion. 25 Slagle: Just point of clarification. Do you think we should at least sham that... Sacchet: Where does it come from? Okay Matt, just for information, since we were talking about water usage, our engineer... 100 to 200 gallons a day, so that gives us 1,500. Slagle: So Matt, if I can use my math, would be the equivalent of the, our first subject site tonight for 650 acres that we talked about. 1,500, so again. It's not the applicant's issue but I hope going forward City Council water will be an issue. Sacchet: Thanks for clarifying that Rich. Do you want to make a motion Bruce? Feik: I would like to make a motion. I move that the Planning Commission recommend the approval of Conditional Use Permit #2003-4 CUP for the construction of a golf course with club house as shown on plans dated August 25, 2003, with the following conditions 1 through 8. And a ninth being added that no exterior lighting shall be permitted with the exception of convenience lighting for safety. Sacchet: There is a motion. Is there a second? Lillehaug: Second. Feik moved, Lillehaug seconded that the Planning Commission recommend the approval of Conditional Use Permit ~2003-4 CUP for the construction of a golf course with club house as shown on plans dated August 25, 2003, with the following conditions: 1. Hours of operation shall be seasonal and limited to sunrise to sunset. 2. No outdoor speaker system shall be permitted (individual pager systems are permissible). No commercial kitchen shall be permitted in the club house. There shall be no cooking equipment permitted on the premises with the exception of a microwave oven, pizza/ toaster oven, etc. The intent of this condition is to put the golf course operator on notice. The proposed septic system design does not allow for any cooking grease to be disposed through the system which will cause the system to fail. Approval of the Conditional Use Permit is contingent upon approval of Site Plan Review #2003-7 SPR. Soil tests must be performed at least once a year. Results of all soil testing must be submitted to the City of Chanhassen. In addition, annual reports detailing all applications of fertilizer (including nutrient content for nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium; application rate in pounds per acre; date of application; and total quantity of fertilizer applied) must be submitted to the City of Chanhassen. No fertilizer containing phosphorus may be applied unless the soil test results demonstrate a deficiency in phosphorus. No grading, disturbance or dumping shall be permitted in areas designated as bluff or in bluff impact zones. Runoff from cart paths, fairways, greens or tee boxes on Hole 3 shall not be directed into bluff impact zones or bluff areas. 26 7. On-site grading may not increase the rate or volume of runoff downstream from the site or onto adjacent properties. 8. The applicant shall enter into a conditional use permit with the City. 9. No exterior lighting shall be permitted with the exception of convenience lighting for safety. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. Sacchet: Can I have a second motion on the site plan? Feik: I make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend the approval of Site Plan Review #2003-7 SPR for the construction of a club house and a maintenance building for a golf course as shown in plans dated August 25, 2003, with the following conditions, listen closely please. 1 through 20 with the following additional deletions. So I'm deleting 21 and 22. I'm deleting, as shown, 2, 3, 8(c), 9(c), (d), (f), (h), (i), 10, 11, 14, 17, and the last sentence of 19 as shown. Saam: Commissioner Feik I'd also recommend, if you're going to delete 17, which is the realignment, you delete 18. That ties to it. Feik: Works for me. 18 as well. Lillehaug: And 167 Feik: With the access from the north side, he still needs to get that. Lillehaug: That's County. That's a County road. Saam: I think the MnDot letter though says you're going to need a, they're going to need a drainage permit. Lillehaug: Okay so. Sacchet: So leave it or take it? Saam: I guess you could delete the, end at MnDot permit period, if you wanted. Feik: So we'll delete a period after the word permit. Delete the words for the new access. Saam: Yes. Slagle: Point of clarification. Do you want to keep in 20? Do you want to re-word it? Do you want to. Feik: I'm willing to discuss it. I'm willing to delete it if that works. I'm willing to try to carve it up and make it work but as drawn, or as, it's very subjective. I don't really want to burden the city with a lot of testing and monitoring. 27 Lillehaug: It might not have any merit. I mean it might be here but doesn't hold any weight. I really don't think it does. Sacchet: It doesn't. Feik: I'm willing to delete it at this point. But I'm also willing to discuss modifications that you guys can make it work because as it's drafted it doesn't work. Slagle: Well I would be in favor of deleting it because legally I think there's no basis but I don't think in fairness of either the applicant or the citizens, I mean what I'm getting at here, I think there's got to be something to staff or, saying help us. You know I mean, leave it up to the staff and the city attorney or I don't know. Feik: Why don't you make a second and do a friendly amendment. Slagle: Oh, no way. Lillehaug: I'll second it. Ron Saatzer: ...if there really was interference with surrounding wells, wouldn't... Saam: Yes, and the city would get involved too of course. Ron Saatzer: So doesn't that make this redundant? Claybaugh: I don't believe it makes it redundant. I think there's a little more due diligence that's required at this point, like the gentleman said. The day you come in and turn your spigot on and nothing comes out, he doesn't want to be responsible, if he's not responsible for the problem. It could be something else. Some other source of the problem. These people want to know what direction it's going to go I think that at least some preliminary framework, whether you leave condition 20 in and just say, to be developed by staff through discussions with the residents and the applicant, so you have something to present to council but even if it's just something there. There's been a lot of discussion about it. It's something that needs to be investigated further. The only options as I see it is to table it or to take that condition 20 and basically allow staff to investigate it further because we don't have sufficient facts or information tonight to really put something meaningful forward. Sacchet: Could we take condition 20 out, however instruct staff to study that particular issue further before it goes to council. If appropriate add maybe more refined, fine tuned condition to this for council. Claybaugh: I think more time is required to investigate... Saam: Yes, we'd certainly research it with the Department of Health and the DNR. Feik: I don't want to slow the application up. So I. Sacchet: So are we leaving it in or taking it out? Feik: I mean how much time do we need for this discussion and. 28 Sacchet: Between now and when it goes to council. Not coming back to us. Feik: Okay. Sacchet: But the question is do we leave 20 in or not? Claybaugh: How can we write 20 that it leaves it open ended so you can do what you're directed to do? Or is that not possible. Aanenson: How about this. When you do your. Sacchet: We make summary comments. Aanenson: Thank you. Sacchet: Thank you, alright. We take it out. Feik: Delete number 20. Delete 20. And we need a second still. Lillehaug: I seconded it. Sacchet: Do we have the right turn lane on Pioneer in there somewhere. He already seconded it, yeah. Saam: No, it's not in there. I checked. Sacchet: Do we want to add a right turn lane for Pioneer? Feik: I think that's going to come out when he gets his permit for access. What MnDot or... Sacchet: So that would clarify 167 Feik: You bet. Saam: We should maybe add, I'd recommend comply with MnDot and Carver County permits. Claybaugh: Do you want to expand on 167 Lillehaug: How bout just a new one? Would it be 23? The applicant shall comply with the county access permit and all the standards set forth in the permit. Feik: The county and MnDot? Lillehaug: Well they already got one for MnDot. This one would be specifically for the county. Sacchet: Is that acceptable? Feik: Why don't we just add County and MnDot to 16. Sacchet: Do 16 to say MnDot and Carver County permit. Okay. 29 Feik: That works if you want to just add County to number 16. Lillehaug: Yep. Sacchet: That's. Feik: Acceptable. Sacchet: Acceptable, okay. We have a motion. We have a second. We have accepted friendly amendment and we want to hear everybody in favor say aye. Feik moved, Lillehaug seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #2003-7 SPR for the construction of a Club House and Maintenance Building for a golf course as shown on plans dated August 25, 2003, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of the Site Plan Review application is contingent upon approval of the Conditional Use Permit. All trees to be preserved must be protected by tree protection fencing. Fencing must be installed prior to grading. 3. No vegetation may be removed within the bluff impact zone. The applicant shall provide a pedestrian/bikeway connection to the City's trail system at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Pioneer Trail. 5. Fire Department Conditions: Please contact the Building Official and Fire Marshal to discuss the sprinklering requirements for the club house and storage/maintenance building. bo If a fire hydrant is available, a 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Qwest, Xcel Energy, cable TV, and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. Co "No Parking Fire Lane" signs and yellow curbing will be required. Please contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbs to be painted yellow. do The builder must comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division regarding maximum allowable size of domestic water on a combination water/sprinkler supply line. This is only if a sprinkler is required. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #36-1994. eo The builder must comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-1992. 3O A post indicator valve will be required on any building that will have a sprinkler system. Submit radius turns and dimensions to City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. Building Official conditions: Submit a detailed floor plan of the club house so the occupancy classification and fire suppression requirements can be determined. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. c. An accessible route must be provided to all facilities on the site. Submit a design of the on-site sewage treatment system for review and approval. Two sites must be provided and these sites must be protected from damage prior to beginning any construction activity on the site. The system must comply with the requirements of Minnesota Rules 7080.0600. Detailed occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed until complete plans are submitted. The owner and/or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review, permit procedures and fire suppression options. Engineering Department conditions: Staff recommends that Type I silt fence be used along the northwesterly and southerly property lines. The applicant should be aware that any off-site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. All disturbed areas are required to be restored with seed and mulch within two weeks of grading completion. Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Numbers: 5201, 5203, 5207, 5300 and 3001. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regulatory agency permits. d. On the grading plan add a benchmark. The applicant must submit detailed architectural plans for the club house and maintenance building that meet the design ordinance requirement. The applicant shall enter into a Site Plan Agreement and provide financial guarantees to insure compliance with the project. 31 10. Only one (1) monument sign may be permitted on the site. The total sign area shall not exceed twenty-four (24) square feet of sign display area, nor be more than five (5) feet in height. 11. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with a MnDot and Carver County permit. 12. Per MnDot's review memo dated September 2, 2003, the need for a net along TH 101 will be evaluated upon completion of the golf course. If it is determined that a net is needed, then the applicant will be required to install it. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. Sacchet: This goes to council. Summary for council. We find that the most sticky issue that is far bigger than this application is the water issue, and we would like to, engineering to further study how the water situation can be mitigated should the unfortunate circumstance arise that some wells get negatively affected. In order to find out how, what affects it. How does it come and can any responsibilities be assigned for that, how does that get dealt with. We would like to instruct staff to have a clear understanding how the State agencies deal with these type of issues so that we are ahead of the curve and not reactive should ever anything happen in this context. That's the water issue. The issue with. Claybaugh: Can that information be forwarded to anyone that was here at the meeting? Sacchet: And we request that we would see maybe that as well, is that something that you could include for information to the Planning Commission? Slagle: I think also residents. Claybaugh: Residents yes. Sacchet: And residents that. Claybaugh: Certainly the affected residents that receive mailings as part of this application that showed up at the meeting. Sacchet: Do we want to just use the residents that signed in or would we want to? You know how to do it? Okay. You know how to do it, that's good enough for me. Any other water aspects? Lillehaug: I have a couple other comments. Sacchet: Let's do water. The private drive to the south, we figured based on the neighbors, what seemed quite unanimous statements that they're not interested in this line up and we had some reservations impacting the Halla property, which at this point does not benefit from that driveway at all. That we feel that a better solution for this drive can be found once further development occurs in that area, either on the Halla property or to the south. And however that we would like to see some tree trimming where that drive comes out on 101 at this point, to maximize sight distance without having to do an actual realignment. Anything else on the driveway? Alright, other things Steve? 32 Lillehaug: For staff to work with the applicant to insure that the sight line is adequate with the tree layout. Feik: He just said that. Lillehaug: Did you? Sacchet: Yeah, I just touched on that. Lillehaug: I thought he said tree trimming. Sacchet: Same idea. Anything else you want to add for summary to council? Saam: Nets on 101. Sacchet: Nets on 101, yes. To the south. Saam: To the driveway. Sacchet: The private road. The private road. I do want to mention in summary to council that the applicant has shown really good effort addressing the issues that we brought up the first time we looked at this application and asked to be looked at. I mean that's important because I really appreciate that. Lillehaug: I have one more. Sacchet: Yes Steve. Lillehaug: It didn't get put in as a condition but I'd like staff to work with the applicant and the current owner of the land to get that roadway removed. Going to the bluff. Sacchet: The gravel drive to the bluff, that should be eliminated with clean-up of the bluff. Stopping of the dumping. There's no road needed any more. Might as well get rid of that road. Good point. Is that it? Alright. Wow, do we need two minutes of a bio break? I think we need, we'll get back, let's shoot for 10:15. 33 A-INO SONIMV~(] "lVSOdO~dd ~OajOPJa'"u~oo I au~oJ_-I-!Url O-O-9000L-vqod : Ot X 09 X O~ ~'O/£1./gO :'3J.va NOLLclI~IOS:3(3 ONI(]"III~g uo~.ueB 'O_-INI ~eeJ~,S Xuv sseu!sna JnoA 'O.-INI aOX:X3 X'h'M O~ X UO!~DA@I-:t ~. IID~@p!S ? \ \ \ ? ~O(X3 X3YM O~ X O-O-90001.-vqod :roadI°p'~ecucu°O I ecuoJj-iun 01. x 09 X £O/£L/BO :"~YO NOLLdI~IOS3O ONl(]'91ng uolu9B Sift 'O-INI eeeu!,,na JnoA 'O_-INI uo!~.D^@lq 1. IID~pUq :rOU~Ol:ue~u~uoo I m.uoJ.~-!u~i O-D-9OOOL-~Dd OL X 0g X OC ~'O/£t/gO -'~3 NOLLdI~OS30 u,:qua8 S~ 'O.:JNI B3¥40.LSrtO MOONIM g~' X Bt J. IIDMpU3 MOaNIM B'~ X ~ A-}NO SONIM¥;BC] 9VSOdO~Jd 0-0-9000 L--¥qod ~o/~ ~/~o :pO~jdlD!2JaLULUO3 t aulD J j-jun o L x 09 x 0[' :3.~¥0 NOI±dlSOS3Q ONt(]-IIr't8 uo~ua8 S~ 'OJNI ~3!~01sr13 ~aa~;s Xuv ssau!sn8 ~noA 'OJNI ~3-1~f3Q aooc] 12Y~H,N2~O ,B X ,~ MOQN~ B~' X ;~L 5UOWJeAO ,,~'~ !, AgNO SONI~V~iO 'lVSOdO~ld :roNdlOpJ~LUUUOO I 0-0-9000 l.--vqod O I. X 09 X 0[' ~O/~/gO :3rva NOIJ.dl;~3S3O ONIOglRB 'O~NI ~3~0IS~3 ON4~-t~3AO ON3 ON49qB3AO 3OtS UOld J oo1_:1 I x / I \/