Loading...
1f. Second reading of amendments to article XXV, landscaping & tree removal and approval of an Ordinance summary for publication purposes 1 14. ill CITYOF 1 CHANHASSEN I , 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 kali B9 City AdmiAt Entionediji 1 Modified MEMORANDUM awected Deb, 10-c20-i_E 1 TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager lPlte Submitted to Commissioq 1 FROM: Paul Krauss, AICP, Planning Director Dote Submitted to Council /0 -25 DATE: October 19, 1993 /1— 8 -9 3 1 SUBJ: Second Reading of Amendments to Article XXV, Landscaping and Tree Removal and approval of an Ordinance Summary for Publication Purposes At the September 27, 1993, City Council meeting, the first reading of this ordinance amendment was approved. The amendment essentially puts into effect the "Target" standard for parking lot 1 landscaping by updating our existing regulations. Since that meeting, I have had the City Attorney assemble the ordinance in the standard legal 1 format. I have also eliminated one section of the ordinance to allow for further study by the Tree Board. The first was a formula that the Tree Board recommended to establish a value for tree preservation as an offset to new landscaping on site plans. The formula had been proposed by the Forestry Intern and while it may be technically correct, upon further reflection it does not appear to be something that most planning and landscaping professionals are familiar with or able to use. The Tree Board is continuing to work on related ordinance amendments regarding tree I preservation. I will be asking them to reconsider this question and hope to have a comprehensive. preservation ordinance completed in the next few months. At the meeting, the City Council requested that staff look into clarifying two points. The first was to ensure that parking lot landscaping not obscure views of the associated business on I signage. The second was to give flexibility on screening for special lots such as those developed for park- and -ride facilities. Both have been addressed. F . - �. , :.- r r. In keeping with standard procedure, we ar proposing the following ordinance summary be I approved for publication to save on related costs: I The ordinance amendment revises landscaping standards employed by the City to review site plan review requests. Specific changes include an increase in landscaped area in parking lots from 5% to 8 %, development of an approved plant and tree species list, 1 1 1 1 Don Ashworth October 19, 1993 1 Page 2 establishment of a requirement for irrigation systems, revisions to the minimum cost for 1 landscaping formula and related changes. I This item was pulled from the consent agenda from the October 25, 1993, meeting. Staff was asked to place a graphic in the ordinance and also Green Ash was added in place of Mountain Ash on the species list. 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION I Staff recommends that the City Council approve amendments to Article XXV of the Zoning Ordinance and an ordinance summary for publication purposes as shown on attachment #1. 1 pc: Tree Board 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A Nov 3,93 17:16 No.003 P.02 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, M1NNESOTA 1 ORDINANCE NO. 1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, CONCERNING LANDSCAPING STANDARDS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: 1 Section 1. Section 20 -1180 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read: 1 See. 20 -1180. Screening for visual impacts. (a) Undesirable visual impacts must be screened. Undesirable visual impacts include, but arc not limited to, truck loading areas, trash storage, parking lots, interior lot areas and perimeters, outdoor storage areas, large unadorned building massing, garage doors associated with 1 auto - oriented uses and vehicular stacking areas for drive- through uses, (1) Required screening for any visual impact may be achieved with fences, walls, 1 earth berms, hedges or other landscape materials. All walls and fences shall be architecturally harmonious with the principal building. The use of wooden screen fences or chain link fences equipped with slats is prohibited. Earth berms shall not" exceed a slope of 3:1 unless provided with landscaping designed to minimize mainte- nance. The screen shall be designed to provide effective visual barrier during all seasons. (2) All required screening shall be located on the lot occupied by the use, building, facility or structure to be screened. No landscape screening shall be located on any public right -of -way or within eight (8) feet the traveled portion of any street or highway. 61" 1 (3) Screening required by this section shall be of a height needed to accomplish the goals of this section. Height of plantings required under this section shall be measured at the time of installation. (4) Parking lot screening shall limit direct views of pavement and direct views of vehicles parked near the exterior of the site. It is not intended that this requirement result in significantly obscuring views of principal structures or permitted signage. (5) The City may make special allowances for establishing screening requirements for long term parking areas such as those developed for transit related park - and -ride facilities. Due to their characteristics of long duration parking coupled with long hours 1 having little or no activity, these lots may present special problems related to safety that require enhanced visibility. MC3:93 i CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A Nov 3,93 17:17 No.003 P.03 1 (b) The following uses shall be screened in accordance with the requirements of this subdivision: (1) Principal buildings and structures and any building or structure accessory thereto located in any business, industrial or planned unit development district containing nonresidential uses shall be screened from lots used for any residential purpose. (2) Principal buildings and structures and any building or structure accessory thereto located in any R4, R8, R12, R16 district or planned unit development district con - taining residential development at densities exceeding four (4) units per acre shall be screened from lots located in any Al, A2, RR or RSF district. (3) Additional buffer yard requirements arc established by the city comprehensive plan and listed in individual district standards. 1 (4) Outside storage in any district subject to these provisions and allowed by other provisions of this ordinance, shall be screened from all public views. • Section 2. Section 20 -1181 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read: Sec. 20 -1181. Vehicular areas. ' (a) When parking lot perimeters of vehicular areas, including driveways and drive aisles, are not entirely screened visually by an intervening building or structure or land mass from any abutting right -of -way, there shall be provided landscaping designed to buffer direct views of cars and hard surface areas. The landscaping must break up expanses of hard surface areas, help to visually define boulevards and soften direct views of parking areas and provide for reforestation with ovcrstory tree from the approved tree species list identified for parking or other species as approved by city staff. All new planting areas must have an irrigation system installed. Publicly owned and operated parking lots used for long duration parking may be exempt from this requirement when there is a demonstrated concern regarding security ' safety, 1 • �c • • 1 0 El, , I IC I )110 11 it 1 r1IICS/ 3 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A Nov 3,93 17:18 No.003 P.04 1 1 (b) Interior landscaping for vehicular use areas: 1 (1) Any open vehicular use areas containing more than six thousand (6,000) square feet of area, or twenty (20) or more vehicular parking spaces, shall provide interior 1 landscaping in accordance with this division in addition to "perimeter" landscaping. Interior landscaping may be peninsular or island types. Landscaped arca shall include all parking lot and drive islands and perimeter green spaces. Required setback areas 1 shall be excluded. (2) For each one hundred (100) square feet, or fraction thereof, of vehicular use arca, eight (8) square feet of landscaped area shall be provided. (3) The minimum landscape area permitted shall be two hundred (200) square feet, 1 with six foot minimum dimension to all trees from edge of pavement where vehicles overhang and a four foot minimum dimension to all trees where vehicles do not overhang. (4) In order to encourage the required landscape areas to be properly dispersed, no re- quircd landscape area shall be larger than seven hundred twenty (720) square feet in vehicular use areas under thirty thousand (30,000) square feet, unless there is a tree preservation area. In both cases, the least dimension of any required area shall be four -foot minimum dimension to all trees from edge of pavement where vehicles overhang. Landscape areas larger than above arc permitted as long as the additional areas are in excess of the required minimum. , (5) A minimum of one (1) tree shall be required for each two hundred fifty (250) square feet or fraction thereof, of required landscape area. Trees shall have a clear trunk of at least five (5) feet above the ground, and the remaining area shall be landscaped with shrubs, or ground cover (not to include rocks or gravel except as a mulch around shrubs and ground cover), not to exceed two (2) feet in height. 1 (7) All landscaped areas shall be protected by concrete curbing. All landscaping area shall have the proper soil preparation to ensure the viability ( ) r � � y of the vegetation to survive. The landscaping plan shall provide specifications for proper soil preparation. 1 Section 3. Section 20- 1182(c) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read: (c) Boulevard and streetseape plantings. Where undeveloped or open areas of a site are located adjacent to public right -of -way, the plan shall provide for over -story boulevard trees. A minimum of one (1) tree for every thirty (30) feet of frontage is required. The city may approve alternatives if it meets the intent of the ordinance from approved tree species list or as approved by city staff from the approved tree species list if the alternative meets the intent of the ordinance as determined by the City's Planning Director. • 9;1709.95 3 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A Nov 3,93 17:18 No.003 P.05 1 1 ' Section 4. Section 20- 1183(a)(3) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read: (3) Plants. All plant materials shall be living plants; artificial plants are prohibited. ' Plant materials shall meet the following requirements; a, Deciduous trees. Shall be species having an average crown spread of greater than fifteen (15) fect and having trunk(s) which can be maintained with over five (5) feet of clear wood in areas which have visibility requirements, except at vehicular use arca intersections where an eight -foot clear wood requirement will control. Trees having an average mature spread of crown less than fifteen (15) feet may be substituted by grouping of the same so as to create the equivalent of a fifteen foot crown spread. A minimum of ten (10) feet overall height or minimum caliper (trunk diameter, measured ' six (6) inches above ground for trees up to four (4) inches caliper) of at least two and one -half (2''4) inches immediately after planting shall be required. Trees of species whose roots are known to cause damage to public roadways or other public works shall not be placed closer than fifteen (15) feet to such public works, unless the tree root system is completely contained within a barrier for which the minimum interior containing dimensions shall be five (5) feet square and five (5) feet deep and for which the construction requirements shall be four (4) inches thick, reinforced concrete. Trees shall be selected from the approved tree list delineated in Table I attached hereto, or as approved by city staff. b. Evergreen trees. Evergreen trees shall be a minimum of six (6) feet high with a minimum caliper of one and one -half (1'/z) inches when planted. c. Shrubs and hedges. Deciduous shrubs shall be at least two (2) feet in average ' height when planted, and shall conform to the opacity and other requirements within four (4) years after planting. Evergreen shrubs shall be at least two (2) feet in average height and two (2) feet in diameter. Materials to be selected from Table II attached ' hereto or as approved by city staff. d. Vines. Vines shall be at least twelve (12) inches high at planting, and are generally used in conjunction with walls or fences. Materials to be selected from Table II attached hereto or as approved by city staff. ' e. Grass or ground cover. Grass shall be planted in species normally grown as permanent lawns, and may be sodded, plugged, sprigged, or seeded; except in swales or other areas subject to erosion, where solid sod, erosion reducing net, or suitable ' mulch shall be used, nurse -grass seed shall be sown for immediate protection until complete coverage otherwise is achieved, Grass sod shall be clean and free of weeds and noxious pests or diseases. Ground cover such as organic material shall be planted in such a manncr as to present a finished appearance and seventy -five (75) percent of complete coverage after two (2) complete growing seasons, with a maximum of fifteen (15) inches on center. In certain cases, ground cover also may consist of rocks, pebbles, sand and similar materials if approved by the city. Materials to be selected from Table Il attached hereto or as approved by city staff. 1 riifcar93 4 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A Nov 3,93 17:19 No.003 P.06 I 1 f. Retaining. Retaining walls exceeding four (4) feet in height, including stage walls which cumulatively exceed four (4) in height, must be constructed in accordance with , plans prepared by a registered engineer or Landscape architect of brick, concrete or natural stone. Artificial material may be approved if appropriate. A building permit is required. 1 ,Section 5. This ordinance shall be effective immediately following its passage and 1 publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1993, by the City y y Council of the City of Chanhassen. 1 ATTEST: 1 Don Ashworth, Clerk/Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor I (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on , 1993). 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r11iO3,93 5 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A Nov 3,93 17:20 No.003 P.07 1 1 • TABLE 1 1 APPROVED TREE LIST 1 Key to notations used: ST = Relatively tolerant to deicing salt I DT = Relatively, tolerant to drought or dry sites Size: (in terms of expected mature height) L = Large (over 50 feet) I M =_ Medium (between 25 to 50 feet) S = Small (less than 25 feet) Blvd = Suitable for boulevard planting and parking lot 1 Pkg = Suitable for parking lots ' Broadleaf Species Size Tolerance Location Restrictions I Ash, Green M PKG Protect from sunscald Sorbus spp. Birch, River M Relatively tolerant of wet Betula nigra sites Coffeetree, L DT BLVD 1 Kentucky PKG Gymnocladus • dioftus 1 Corktree, Amur , M DT Phellodendron 1 amurense Crabapple, pp , S BLVD Many varieties available; I Flowering check for disease Minus spp. resistance; protect from sunscald 1 Ginkgo M BLVD Male trees only Ginkgo biloba I Hackberry I. DT ST PKG C.eltis occidentalis I Hawthorn S DT S'i' PKG Thornless varieties Crutaegus spp, available Hickory, Shagbark L DT 1 Carya avata t 1 i73iD3)93 6 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.R Nov 3,93 17:20 No.003 P.08 I I Honeylocust M -L ST BLVD/PKG Protect from sunscald. Gledilsia Thornless varieties I triacanthos popular Ironwood M Grows well under shade 1 Oslrya virginiana of other trees Lilac, Japanese S ST BLVD Tree Syringa reticulata Linden, American L BLVD/PKG A.K.A Basswood; 1 Tilia americana Relatively tolerant of wet sites I Linden, Littleleaf M BLVD Tilia cordata i Locust, Black L Di' PKG Robinia pseuedoacacia 1 Maple, Amur S Shade tolerant. Acer ginnala Maple, Norway M -L ST BLVD/PKG Protect from sunscald. Acer platanoides • Maple, Red M -L BLVD Protect from sunscald. Acer ruhrum Grows best on moists, acid soils, 1 Maple, Sugar L BLVD Protect from sunscald. Acer saccharum PKG Prefers heavy, moist soils. Shade tolerant. Northern Catalpa M -L DT Catalpa speciosa 111 Oak, White L Quercus alba 1 Oak, Bur L DT ST BLVD/PKG Quercus I macrocarpa Oak, Red L ST BLVD/PKG Quercus rubra 1 1 Oak, Swamp L PKG Relatively tolerant of wet White sites Quercus bicolor a D 9Ii%O3/93 7 1 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.R Nov 3,93 17:21 No.003 P.09 1 1 • — -__- ' Ohio Buckeye M BLVD 1 Aesculus glabra Walnut, Black L I Juglans nigra CONIFERS 1 I Arborvitae, M American 7huja occidentalis 1 Fir, Balsam M Relatively tolerant of wet ' Abies balsamea sites. Shade tolerant, I , Fir, White M DT Abies concolor , Pine, Austrian M I Pinus nigra 1 Pine, Red L DT State tree 1 Pinus resinosa , Spruce, Black M , I Hilis Picea glauca densata 1 ' Spruce, Colorado M Picea pungens 1 , Spruce, Norway I, Picea abies 1 Spruce, White L Picea glauca I Tamarack L Tolerant of wet sites. Larix laricina Only conifer that drops , its needles each year in 1 fall. z 1 1 I ' / 8 rii a+ /es CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A Nov 3,93 17:21 No.003 P.10 TABLE II 1 1 .ST = Relatively Salt Tolerant - 1 SN = Relatively Tolerant of Snow Loading DT= Relatively Drought Tolerant . Botanical Name Common Name Size Tolerance Notes 1 Achillea filipendulina Yarrow 24" PT DT SN Artemisia schmidtiana 'Silver King' Artemisia 36" DT ST SN i Astilbe spp. Astilbe 12 " -30" SN Partial Shade 1 Aegopodium podagraria Goutweed/ 12" SN ' Snow On The Mountain Baptisia australis False Indigo 36" ST DT SN Shrub Like 1 Euophorbia epithymoides Cushion Spurge 18" DT SN 1 Festuca ovina 'Olauca' Blue Fescue 12" DT SN iliE 1 f Hemerocallis spp. Day Lily 12 " -30" ST DT SN Hosta spp. Plantain Lily 12 " -30" SN Partial Shade 1 Heuchera sanguinea Coral Bells 18" ST SN I Hypericum calycinum Si. Johns Wort 18 " -24" PT SN Lamium maculatum Dead Nettle 18" SN Sun or Shade . Linum perenne Perennial Blue Flax 24" DT SN Monarda didyma Beebalm 24" ST SN Parthenocissus Virginia Creeper 15" SN Partial Shade r quinguefolia Polygonum tricuspidatam Fleece Flower - 24" DT SN Can Be I 'Compactum' Invasive Pennisetum alopecuroides Fountain Grass 36" SN 1 Rudbeckia fulgida Black -eyed Susan 24" ST SN 'Ooldsturm' I Sporobolus heterolepis Prairie Dropseed 24" ST DT SN Full Sun Veronica spp. + _ Speedwell 24" T SN -� 1 1 1 CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A Nov 3,93 17:22 No.003 P.11 1 Shrubs Continued 1 2 1 Botanical Name — Common Name - Size Tolerance Notes 1 Yucca filamcntosa Yucca 24" ST DT Pull Sun A pectabile Stone Crop 18" ST DT SN Y 1 Iris siberica Siberian Iris 24" ST DT SN Corms alba 'Red Elf"DoplliMIIIIIIIIIIIod 'Red Elf' 3+V _ 1 Diervilla lonicera Dwarf Bush Honeysuckle 36" SN ' Juniperus horizontal's Juniper 18" DT SN r 'Hughes' Juniperus sabina Juniper 18" DT SN ' 'Arcadia' I Junipers sabina 'Baffalo' Juniper 18" DT SN I Lonicera xxylosteum Honeysuckle � 24" -�-, _� 'Emerald Mound' Potentilla fruticosa 'McKay's White' Potentilla 30" DT. SN I Potentilla fruticosa 'Gold Finger' Potentilla 30" PT SN 'Gold Finger' 1 Rosa spp. 'Carefree Beauty' Rose 36" DT • Rosa spp. 'Nearly Wild' Rose 36" DT 1 Spirea japonica'Alpina' Alpine Spirea 12" SN Spirea x Bumaida 'Anthony Waterer' Spirea 36" SN I 'Anthony Waterer' * NOTE: Other materials may be used subject to city approval, 1 1 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Hoffman: We won't sign any contracts for expenditures but we will be going Todd Ho gn y pe g g forward with the. Mayor Chmiel: With the idea and the concept...Good. ' ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR SITE PLAN REVIEWS. 1 Paul Krauss: Thanks Mr. Mayor. This has been a while in coming to you. This started last year with the approval of Target. As you know, Target came back through a number of times in a very short time period. I think we approved it in about 5 months. But there was a great deal of effort placed upon the landscaping for the Target site. Coming out of that there was something that we keep referring to as the Target standard. It was a new and improved requirement for landscaping and the City Council directed staff to put together an ordinance. First they directed us to figure out exactly what happened on Target. What set it apart? What made it different and making it better than what we used to do. And then codify it so that it become uniformily on all developments. Throughout staff maintained the position that once we looked into it, our landscaping ordinance is not a bad one. It didn't achieve the Target standard but it wasn't a bad one so in all probability we were looking at a modest tinkering with the existing code to make that Target standard the norm. Kate looked into it and tried to disect what we had done on Target. We found a couple of things we had done. We found out that the Target standard related mostly to the amount of landscape area in a parking lot, which was slightly more than what the ordinance used to require. It was the use of overstory trees in the parking lot instead of decorative trees or bushes. It was a couple of things of that nature. It was the scattering around of landscape areas so that it was spread through the site. There was also the fact that no one landscaped area was so big that it took up all the requirements. So there were a number of things we found out. We went back in and worked out what again I refer to as tinkering with the , existing code. I'll just tough on the highlights here. Just by the way it was approved after several meetings with the Planning Commission, a meeting with the Tree Board, which asked to take a look at it, and then back to the Planning Commission for public hearing. The first thing we did is correct the value of landscape materials. The formula implies the value. Making sure that it only applies to plant material and does not include seed or sod. Now, in reality we've only rarely had to use this formula. In fact I've never had to use it in Chanhassen. This is one of the things I'll tell you honestly I lifted from Minnetonka. Even Minnetonka wasn't original. In Minnetonka we lifted it from the Oakdale zoning ordinance where it was originally developed by, I guess I'm a little relunctant to say it but a BRW staff person way back when. But It seemed to work and it really defines the minimum type of landscaping. There was a formula that was introduced for calculating the value of significant trees, which was done to preserve tree cover. Apparently that's a standard type of formula that's fairly well accepted. In Section 20 -1181, on page 3, we made it clear that we were looking for overstory trees from the approved tree species list, and there was a list that was developed. And that is accompanying this ordinance. In fact the tree species list was developed with in -house staff supported by the Arboretum and some input we had from outside sources. In the future, it's proposed that all these planting areas have an irrigation system. It's commonly been done in the past but not always... The amount of the percentage of landscaped area, parking lot was increased from 5% to 8%. 3% difference doesn't sound like a lot but 'it really is. I mean it does make a pretty significant difference. The minimum landscaped area permitted was 200 square feet which was considered the minimum 34 1 1 . . 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 that's needed to maintain a tree. Sometimes you get these things that are so small that cars pull up on either side and smash what's ever in the middle. Or the snow gets thrown up and kills whats ever in ' the middle. And there's a dimension provided for the tree itself from the curb line so that... Some little things that sound little but ensuring that there be proper soil preparations. There's many examples where soil preparation is just wherever busted up blacktop is going...build the parking lot ' after you wind up in a tree planter and you've got a tree in there that hopefully will live for a year... There is the approved tree list. It is attached. One of the things that came up at the Planning Commission meeting was that there was not a comparable approved list of ground covers and... Kevin Norby, who is a landscape architect and lives in Chanhassen, was I guess monitoring the process for ' Brad Johnson, representing...Development but Kevin volunteered to come up with a list which has been included in your ordinance. Kevin wanted it known that it's not necessarily all inclusive. He knows that there's other material to be approved by city staff. We think it's a good shot at the initial run. Before this comes back on second reading, we'll run it in front of the Arboretum to try and get a fine tuning type comment. With that we are recommending that this ordinance be considered and approved. We think it will achieve that higher standard of landscaping. Uniformily on projects under your site plan review, which in Chanhassen is virtually everything except single family...Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thanks Paul. Well as I understand what we're going to be doing with this this ' evening is to basically review it and go through first reading on this. And that would be on our next October llth agenda. Paul Krauss: For the final reading? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Paul Krauss: Ah yes. Whenever you prefer. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Okay. Have we had a lot more input from any of the business people within ' the community regarding this? Paul Krauss: No. We sent out some copies of it. Well actually we did have some, come to think of ' it. We had John Uban at one of our meetings. We did send out notices to the Opus folks. To Ryan Development. And a couple of others who escape me right now but that's why Brad Johnson came in as well. To the extent that it is a standard we've already employed, we have some confidence that it ' seems to work. And it is not a major departure. We're not throwing out a whole landscaping ordinance. In fact, we've been operating under it for the last 4 years so we feel comfortable with that. It's a matter of building on that. We did have some comment received from Southwest Metro with the subject, pertaining to their particular situation. I believe they have somebody here tonight who's going to give you a little bit of discussion on their point of view. We did try to include as much comment as we got and then like I said, it was heard twice by the Planning Commission. Once by the Tree Board and then a public hearing on it. 1 35 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 ma Mayor Chmiel: Okay. So with that, maybe we'd best listen to hear some of the comments regarding 111 y y y this proposed parking lot landscaping ordinance. Is there anyone wishing to address this at this time? It took a long time, but you finally got here right. 1 Harold Shelbostad: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. My name is Harold Shelbostad. I'm a landscape architect with...based in Minneapolis. We are in the southwest...We are also consultants to Minnesota Valley Transit Authority and the MTC. Comments tonight regarding the landscape ordinance revolve around safety issues. Our goal tonight, with respect to those comments, is to talk about some kind of flexibility within the ordinance. There are lots of shalls and musts. What I would like to present tonight is perhaps a need for some kind of document flexibility in terms of the site plan review process. In our capacity as consultants to Southwest Metro and to other transit companies in the metropolitan area, we've had the opportunity to review a great many park and ride facilities. We've had the opportunity to review a great deal of parking situations with respect to landscape ordinances. With respect to criminal activities that take place in these facilities. Case in point, a couple of park and ride lots in the city of Eagan. Criminal activity has taken place there and it's increasing as those particular facilities mature. Specifically as plant material, landscaping and specifically screening matures with these various park and ride lots. Case in point on I -35E in Eagan. As these two lots, and they're beautiful lots. They were developed by MnDot on an access right-of- way for Minnesota Valley Transit Authority, done according to the City of Eagan landscape ordinance. So the screening, the buffering, is all in place according to the ordinance. Those lots are now 7 -8 years old. As the material grows around the perimeter, the interior of the lot becomes invisible. Therefore inviting criminal activity. What we are asking for here is a review perhaps on a use basis. Perhaps on a specific use basis but a review at a site plan level in terms of allowing some flexibility based upon the use of a particular lot or a particular parcel or a particular development for some kind of leniency perhaps. In terms of safety issues that are being documented now and I -394 is perhaps the next corridor which is going to experience these increased levels of criminal activities based upon landscape ordinances. Unusual, yes. I'm a landscape architect. I plant lots of trees. They do have consequences. With respect to, it was brought out at the Planning Commission level perhaps single use, large use, kinds of parking lots. It is an issue. It is an issue for park and ride lots. Park and ride lots are, a great deal of activity early in the morning. A great deal of activity late in the afternoon. But midday, there is no activity. These lots become targets. When you talk about mixed use kind of development. When you talk about a Target store, you have traffic coming and going all the time. When you talk about perhaps corporate headquarters, that's private property. Although the coming and going of traffic is not as great, there is somewhat of a sense of security. Again, our goal tonight is to make you aware of what's happening in the metropolitan area based upon landscape ordinances. Our goal is to somehow work into the ordinance some kind of document flexibility. The Planning Commission passed on the ordinance to you with comments that took place at the meeting stating, yes. We are well aware of what can and does happen in these kinds of parking facilities and we as a Planning Commission will keep that in mind as we review park and ride lots. And Southwest Metro will be proposing a park and ride lots within the city of Chanhassen. Planning Commission also • made the comment that we are sticking this, it's not ready. Planning Commission members change. We'll be the foresight and the education of what's happening in these facilities go with the changing Planning Commission. Likewise with the Council. Will knowledge about increased criminal activity, based upon a landscape ordinance, evolve with the Council as they change members. That's again the 36 1 1 1 J City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 reason for perhaps requesting some kind of document flexibility in the site plan review process. Those are our comments. ' Councilman Mason: Is now the time to ask a question? ' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. I was just sort of sitting here and really thinking about this. These criminal activities which is something that we don't really normally even consider but yeah, go ahead. ' Councilman Mason: My question would be with, and 1 believe that Paul addressed it or it was addressed in the Minutes somewhere here. At issue, and I'm curious to have your input on this. I know those park and rides at Eagan are just for that use only, right? ' Harold Shelbostad: Correct. Councilman Mason: So what's the feeling when we have park and rides that we're proposing that will ' be shared use by 3 or 4 different businesses. Legion. Perhaps a motel or what not where there would be a lot more traffic during the day. I mean has that issue been studied? ' Harold Shelbostad: Yes it has. In terms of contacting police departments throughout the metropolitan area and documenting what kinds of park and ride facilities are available within those communities. Eagan is a special case, as you mentioned. You're aware of those two lots. They are single use. ' They are isolated. They are islands. Other park and ride facilities within the metropolitan area share the use at Rosedale with Rosedale shoppers. So there is traffic moving around. Yes, the park and ride facility at Rosedale is isolated. It's off to one side but just because there is movement around the ' Rosedale area, the Rosedale police department could not-or would not...that in fact the park and ride was an attractive nuisance in terms of everything from heavy vandalism to auto theft. I had mentioned 1 -394. I -394 now has a string of single use, heavily landscaped park and ride lots. The landscape is ' new enough that you can still see into the lot. 5 years from now you won't be able to see... The Minnetonka police, St. Louis Park, Golden Valley police, are aware of those situations and they are sharing information with groups like Eagan, and anticipating situations like that. Anticipating it to such a point where they are now introducing surveillence cameras that monitor traffic. Introducing those to have the ability to monitor what's happening in the park and ride lots. So yes. In terms of mixing use with Southwest Metro and other uses in the area, that's a great example of how to discourage by use. I think the landscape ordinance still enters into the issue if during that very slow period of let's say 10:00 in the moving until 2:00 in the afternoon. There's not a great deal of activity going on in the lot. And the perimeter is heavily screened according to the landscape ordinance. It's still... Councilman Mason: Maybe at some point our Public Safety Commission needs to look into that too with this particular instance. I don't know. I'm throwing it out anyways. ' Scott Harr: Well we call that environmental crime prevention. I think the speaker very nicely articulated. What we're telling residents to do, keep in mind what's going to happen with those nice bushes and trees around the house that creates a barrier for the patrol officers or neighbors to see. 37 I R City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 There are consequences to think about. One of the things we're trying to get involved in more and more with residential and commercial plans is crime prevention from the site plan stage on because environmental crime prevention can prevent so many problems. Frankly it's one of the problems with some of the strip malls. We simply can't see the area from the areas that we patrol. Either because of how the building is located, or because as time goes on, the ability that trees and shrubs have to totally impair the officer's vision of the building so I for one am very pleased to hear environmental crime prevention being talked about. I think it's something worth considering and it's kind of tough for us at this point in the community that's rather young to be thinking about but having worked in communities where a number of crimes were perpetrated because the criminal could not be seen, I think it's a great thing to be thinking about. Councilwoman Dockendorf: I think this is such a select issue that we're talking about, and although we do have in mind where the park and ride lots will be and that the optimal would be to have them shared uses. We have to provide for potentially a park and ride lot where it will be an island so I guess I don't have a problem putting in an exception. Saying that for park and ride lots specifically we'll look at those individually and potentially waive the ordinance. Harold Shelbostad: One suggestion that that might be is that it's perhaps not just park and ride lots but it's perhaps large single use parking facilities might be more generic. Because things like 1 corporate headquarters, even though they are on private property and perhaps they have an aura of security built into them, there is documentation in conversations with police departments that other large single use parking facilities are equal to our's. Park and ride facilities are a new phenomenom and they are extremely attractive to criminals just because they know about the activities. Has it spread into the corporate headquarters size parking lot? Perhaps not as much because the park and rides are such easy targets. But again, just to perhaps another way of saying it rather than just park and ride. Large single use. And again, I think what we're searching for here is some kind of flexibility in the site plan review process. As I mentioned, there's lots of musts and shalls and so forth in the ordinance. I think...and staff, Planning Commission and Council are aware of environmental issues. If that can somehow be documented, that might be an option. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Well, there are a lot of shalls and musts but I also see a lot of room for 1 moving things around to avoid that and I would think that that would be looked at in the planning staff. Harold Shelbostad: It's just another layer of complexity that in our modem society we're having to take a look at. Councilwoman Dockendorf: But you also have a good point in that, I mean we may be looking at, ' I'm thinking of Opus and other sites where we're going to have large, isolated parking lots. It may be better to word that. Mayor Chmiel: I think you're hitting a very good point on that. And as it was eluded to before. when you're talking about for instance Target and with the kinds of things we have there. There is activity. There's constant going but still, you're still having some problems as far as criminal 38 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 activities come on. Even in those parking lots. They work fast. They move fast and away they go. But yet it's more likely to happen in more isolated areas and one I'm thinking of specifically is, was either Victory Envelope, and I know Scott just left. Or one of the other Carlson areas where they have had substantial amount of break -in's and there is some screening...but yet there's probably enough there that causes that to happen. And it's something you don't really think about that much but I think it's something that really has to be looked at and using just say with a large single use. I don't want to take out too many of the may's. I like to keep it sort of tight only because it's much easier for us to work with. But I think with some of the other things to put a specific use in there, I think it's something that we can look at but yet still come up with a decent recommendation. Mike, did you have something? Councilman Mason: No. ' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Mark? ' Councilman Senn: Well I like Colleen's idea in teens of the, at least allowing for the potential exception of the park and ride's. At least on the surface, the broad interpretation of single use facility bothers me. That's too broad. That's it pertaining to this issue I guess. 1 have some other questions I 1 wanted to ask Paul but they didn't have anything to do with this issue. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. Councilman Mason: Wouldn't this be something that a variance could be applied for then? If that was an issue. • ' Councilman Senn: That's one of the things I was going to ask Paul. Mayor Chmiel: Well, that's probably something. Yeah you can look at but, Paul. ' Paul Krauss: The concern that I have is real Pe rsonal and it's the same concern that you raised Mark. About single user parking lots. Most every lot is a single use parking lot. And the fact is, the main ' exphasize on Target's parking lot was not to create a forest around the periphery so you can't see that there's a Target there but to green up in the interior by using overstory trees that you can see under. So maybe we're not talking about completely different ends of the spectrum with that because it's the ' lower scrubby stuff, or shrubbery stuff that really does hinder the views. I'm real familiar with the parking lots in Eagan. I drive past them a couple times a day. Also that situation was somewhat unique too because some of these park, one of the park and ride lots is across the street from single ' family homes and clearly if something had to give, I mean put yourselves in the City Council of Eagan. If something had to give, then it's probably that parking lot needs better patrolling because it's not fair to let the homes have to look at it. You know I guess when this came up at the Planning ' Commission,the Commission was saying well. How many park and ride lots are we going to have. Two more. And we're looking at least one, the one down at Highway 212 stands to be, is currently designed kind of similar to the Eagan one where it's maybe off by itself. It may also be incorporated into a neighborhood shopping facility. The one we're looking at for the Legion site, I think is ideal. 39 1 1 • City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 It meets James Jacob's ideal for continuous view because Pe ou have people coming le comin in and out all the Y time, which is I think what this is trying to do. But it is kind of a one off situation. There are going to be situations, I mean you may have a, you certainly have a Rosemount which is, you can see a lot of their parking lot but they're off by themselves and they have parking for nearly 500 cars. They also have internal security. So I don't know what the, where the happen medium is. I think yes, the commission indicated that they would be happy to consider special allowances for park and ride lots and yes, we could call that out as a specical case but I don't know what else would be a special case. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I think I sort of agree with that as well. I do. Okay. With that. Councilman Senn: Could I ask some general questions? Mayor Chmiel: Sure. Councilman Senn: Not relating to this. Or not relating to the security issue. Paul, in terms of the Target example. I mean I like the Target example, like you say, because of the overstory trees versus the peripheral types of things because I believe that if you put a commercial area there, there's a commercial area there and the people ought to be seen as business people. You shouldn't try to hide your businesses per se. And looking through here, I understand what you're trying to do but I haven't really seen it tum around and eliminate the other. I mean on most businesses, most small businesses, especially for example we make a very deliberate attempt to berm and heavily plant the area between 1 the highway and them and I understand the change here which creates a situation to Target, and maybe I'm missing it but I didn't see the situation which kind of undid that on the other end of the spectrum. The other issue there is, I don't want to totally undo it because there's useage you want to hide, which gets back to some of the discussions we've had over, you know. I mean some of the uses you know whether you put it in the agreements or not, there's going to be outside storage or vehicles parked overnight and stuff like that. So I mean it's just a reality of life so to speak. And those types of things you may want to screen more. But in how, you know I'm looking for some direction 1 Paul Krauss: Well we can look at clarifying that. It has to do more with the language but if you want to go someplace in the ordinance where, maybe we should be more specific in terms of, you can have interior parking lot landscaping, you have building landscaping and you have perimeter parking lot landscaping. But the perimeter is designed to buffer a direct use of cars parked immediately adjacent to...boulevard. It's not designed to obscure the entirety of the building or the structure or the uses beyond. I think if you look around the city, the city's done a fairly good job of that... I mean when you look at the hotel parking lot and Town Square where there is landscaping around the parking lot. It's not high berms designed to eliminate views of the building. There's another example in Eagan, and not to belabor it but there's a shopping center in Eagan on...Road that...and it's the dumbest thing you've ever seen. I mean they've maintained this huge berm with one oak tree on it and you could drive past it for 2 years not knowing there's a shopping center on the other side. And it's totally empty and they eventually had to come back in and cut down the berm...We can clarify that I think. Councilman Senn: I'd just like to see it clarified because I like the berrning like you say to block cars and stuff but I also look at some of the vegetation we put on those berms and granted right now they 40 1 1 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 aren't hiding the businesses but when that vegetation matures, it's gonna. And again, I'd much rather see it go interior and second story the vegetation and stuff if we could. Paul Krauss: We can sure add some language in there. Councilman Senn: The only other comment I wanted to make was, whatever we accomplish by additional trees and stuff in Target and stuff, I think we undid by the candy red light posts. Paul Krauss: Yeah, that was a Target creation. There's kind of a story behind that but Mayor C hmiel: It's supposed to have white stripes on it as well. Councilman Senn: That'd make it even better. Paul Krauss: ...but they didn't go in where they supposed to... Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yeah, I thought we were going to make them change It Paul Krauss: Well, Kate was negotiating with them. I've got to get up there but they came in and said it's going to cost us an atm and a leg to move these things. Can we give you additional landscaping in areas around the Highway 5. I ( cil man Senn: How about painting them in earth tone, like most of them are. Councilman p g 1 Paul Krauss: I guess I can update you on that at the next Council meeting. Councilman Mason: Yeah would you please. I mean I don't care how much it costs them if they put 1 them in the wrong place. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. If hearing no other discussion. ' Councilwoman Dockendorf: I just have one question. Paul, how much did we get from that seminar that the Arboretum held last February or March? ' Paul Krauss: ...I was not personally there. I think what we got was some information on tree selection. I now Councilman Wing was there and he came back all gung ho about urban heat islands and the kinds of situations that it presents. On the other hand the lecturer was from California, if I remember right. Councilman Senn: Where they have heat. Paul Krauss: Yeah...And it wasn't totally clear how pertinent all the details were. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Oh okay. I was just curious. ' 41 1 City Council Meeting - September 27, 1993 1 Paul Krauss: Well but I think, I think that was concurrent with the Target issue...and then you fly over a parking lot in Illinois. Well, they did it them, why can't we do it. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Can I have a recommendation for the first reading and incorporate the other 1 part of which Colleen has mentioned with the park and ride lots. Councilman Senn: Yeah. I'll move approval of first reading with the exception that language be 1 added to allow for the possible exception of park and ride facilities, or special treatment of them through the site plan review process. And then also a clarification on the issue of the perimeter. Okay. Councilwoman Dockendorf: Second. Councilman Senn moved, Councilwoman Dockendorf seconded to approve the first reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the landscaping requirements for site plan reviews amended to include language to allow for the possible exception of park and ride facilities, or special treatment of them through the site plan review process. And also a darification on the issue of the perimeter landscaping. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 20-575 THROUGH 2O -595 REGARDING LOT SIZES. Paul Krauss: This again is...A couple years ago the Metro Council changed their policies on rural developments to promote clustering. The Planning Commission...minimum lot,size. They recommended to go down smaller than that in the rural area but you can't exceed the gross density so. in most rural areas you're still stuck with the 1 per 10 acres density. Anyway, when we discussed this item we had put in that stuff that was platted prior to 1987, were the only ones that were supposed to be excluded. Somehow in the codification of the ordinance that got dropped out and they were trying to figuring out where and when. I mean we had problems when people in Lake Lucy Highlands and... came in and said, well I'm not sitting on this 5 acre lot and you're now...half acre, 15,000 square feet can I subdivide. And the intent was never that we rocked the cart for existing subdivisions because clearly those things were fairly recent vintage and it was not, that was not intended to be the case. Anyway, Kate prepared an amendment that would correct that. That basically said Al and A2 residential districts located outside of the Metro Council's MUSA line shall be created with conformance to Article 10 and 11, which is the 1 per 10 stuff. Basically what it does is it has the effect of prohibiting anything smaller than a 2 1/2 acre lot in those rural divisions we have inside of the MUSA line, which is consistent with...the ordinance of these things were created under. So we... 1 Councilman Senn: This is the way it's always been? Paul Krauss: Theoretically yeah... 1 Councilman Senn: But we undid it and now we need to redo it again? 42 • 1