The URL can be used to link to this page

10. Zoning Ordinance amendment to section 20-263 regarding portable toilets on recreational beachlots I CITYOF O i CHANHASSEN I 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN,MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739..,;, , , II MEMORANDUM r - = _9 C !f- TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager ; I FROM: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner I THROUGH: Paul Krauss, Planning Director 4_Z-Z_ 1� I DATE: April 22, 1991 SUBJ: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Section 20-263, li -. Recreational Beachlots Regarding Portable Chemical Toilets . At the November 7, 1990, Planning Commission meeting,, staff - presented a proposed ordinance amendment to Section ' 20-263 regarding portable chemical toilets on recreational beachlots. Many issues were raised by the Planning Commission concerning setbacks from the lake, screening of the structure and anchoring the structure to prevent tipping. Chairman Emmings proposed that he would undertake drafting of an alternative ordinance. The Planning Commission tabled action on III the proposed ordinance and directed staff to conduct further research (Attachment #1) . . ill On March 3, 1991, the Planning Commission reviewed the amended proposed ordinance which was drafted by Chairman Emmings. The amended version required applicants to appear before the Planning !h Commission and City Council to secure a conditional use permit for a portable chemical toilet on a recreational beachlot. The applicant would then have to make application to the Planning Department on an annual basis to renew the permit. Staff would then ensure that the applicant still meets all the conditions of approval prior to approving the renewal permit. The time period in which a portable chemical toilet would be allowed on a beachlot was proposed to be limited from June 15th to September 5th of each year. The proposed setback for the structure from the ordinary high water mark was 75 feet. The proposed ordinance will allow li staff to work with individual beachlots and assess each proposal on its own merits. The Planning Commission recommended approved and forwarded the ordinance to the City Council. LThe City Attorney reviewed the proposed ordinances and had some I concerns with one of the conditions of approval. This condition required the witten consent of all residents adjacent to the i 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I 0 II II 0 1 Portable Chemical Toilets April 22, 1991 Page 2 beachlot as to the location, screening, and side setback of the portable toilet. The item was pulled from the March 25, 1991, City Council meeting agenda, but Councilwoman Dimler requested that the item be discussed. One of the issues of concern raised by Councilman Workman was the reason why other cities recommended against implementing an ordinance that would regulate portable toilets. Staff again contacted the cities that were first contacted and was told that there has not been an urgency to implement such an ordinance. The only exception was the City of Minnetonka when a case of vandalism occurred where a portable toilet was tipped into Libbs Lake, the bay was contaminated and a public beach closed. In the case of the City of Chanhassen, staff feels that the situation could be remedied as the ordinance requires that portable toilets must be securely anchored to the ground. A new ordinance has been drafted by the City Attorney which is very similar to the ordinance which the Planning Commission recommended for approval. The only difference is the elimination of the condition which gives the residents adjacent to the beachlot to give their written consent as to the location of the portable toilet. This ordinance will be part of the beachlot ordinance and will be approved as part of a conditional use permit for the beachlot. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission recommended approval of proposed ordinance amendment on a vote of 5 to 1. Staff still has some concerns with the use of chemical toilets in close proximity to lakes. However, the draft ordinance addresses the issues that have been raised to the extent feasible. As drafted, chemical toilets will be allowed by a conditional use permit and will become part of the recreational beachlot regulations. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves Zoning Ordinance Amendment #90-9 for regulating portable chemical toilets as a conditional use permit on recreational beachlots as shown in Attachment #1." _ I I I/ Portable Chemical Toilets April 22 , 1991 Page 3 ATTACHMENTS I 1. New proposed ordinance amendment. 2. Old proposed ordinance amendment. 3. Staff report dated November 7, 1990. 4. Planning Commission minutes dated November 7, 1990. 5. Staff report dated March 3, 1991. 6. Planning Commission minutes dated March 6, 1991. 7. City Council minutes dated March 25, 1991. I/ 8. Letter from Ed Hasek. 9. Letter from DNR. I/ I/ I/ 1 I/ I/ I/ I/ I/ I/ I/' e 1 I I/ II CITY OF CHANHASSEN IICARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. IIAN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE CONCERNING IIRECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS ITHE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 20-263 (2) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read: IIExcept as specifically provided herein, no structure, ice fishing house, camper, trailer, tent, recreational vehicle, II or shelter shall be erected, maintained, or stored upon any recreational beachlot. II Section 2. Section 20-263 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding subparagraph (16) to read: Portable chemical toilets may be allowed as a condition of I approval of a recreational beachlot. The maintenance and use of chemical toilets on some beachlots may be unsuitable because they cannot be adequately screened from residential I neighbors or lake users. Any use of chemical toilets on recreational beachlots shall be subject to the following: a. The minimum setback from the ordinary high water mark II shall be 75 feet. Side and front yard setbacks shall be maximized to achieve maximum screening from adjacent lots and the lake. IIb. It may only be used Memorial Day to Labor Day and shall be removed from the lot during the rest of the year. II c. It shall be securely anchored to the ground to prevent tipping. II d. It shall be screened from the lake and rsidential property with landscaping. IIe. It shall be serviced at least weekly. f. Receipt of an annual license from the City's Planning Department. The license shall be issued unless the II conditions of approval or this ordinance have been violated. All license applications shall be accompanied by the following information: il II04/10/91 ATTACHMENT #1 II I/ 1 i) Name, address, and phone number of applicants. ii) Site plan showing proposed location of chemical toilets. I/iii) Name, address, and phone number of chemical toilet supplier. iv) Plan for commerically maintaining the chemical 1 toilet, including a copy of any agreement for maintenance, and the name, address, and phone I/ number of person responsible for maintenance. v) A written description of how the applicant intends to screen the portable chemical toilet from all I/ views into the property, including views from the lake. Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately 1 upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 1 day of , 1991. ATTEST: 1 1 Don Ashworth, Clerk/Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor 1 (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on , 1991. ) 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 I/ I I CITY OF' CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE CONCERNING RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 20-263 (2) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read: (2) Except as specifically provided herein, no structure, ice fishing house, camper, trailer, tent, recreational vehicle or shelter shall be erected, maintained or stored upon any recreational beachlot. Section 2 . Section 20-263 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding subparagraph (16) to read: .Portable chemical toilets may be allowed on recreational beachlots so long as the maintenance and use of these toilets have no undesirable impact on the environment, residential neighbors or lake users. The City recognizes that the maintenance and use of chemical toilets on some beachlots may be unsuitable because they cannot be adequately screened from residential neighbors or lake users. Any use of chemical toilets on recreational beachlots shall be subject to the following minimum standards: a. Setback from ordinary high water mark shall be 75 feet. Side and front yard setbacks shall be maximized to achieve maximum screening from adjacent lots and the lake. b. The portable chemical toilet may only be used during the period from June 15 through September 5 and shall be removed from the beachlot at all other times. c. Use of a portable chemical toilet shall require annual approval. The application shall be initially approved by the Chanhassen Planning Commission after conducting a public hearing. Each subsequent year, the application shall be reviewed for approval by the City Planning Department. All applications shall be accompanied by the following information: 1) Name, address and phone number of applicants. 2) Site plan showing proposed location of chemical toilets. ATTACHMENT #2 I I/ I/ 3) Name, address and phone number of entity providing chemical toilet. 4) Plan for commercially maintaining the chemical toilet, including a copy of any agreement for I/ maintenance, and the name, address and phone number of person responsible for maintenance. 5) A written description of how the applicant intends I/ to screen the portable chemical toilet from all views into the property including views from the lake. The City regards screening as essential and I/no portable chemical toilet shall be allowed where it cannot be screened unless all residential neighbors consent (in writing) to allow the toilet without screening (any such consent shall be deemed to be given only for the year in which it is given and not for any other future time) . d. The portable chemical toilet shall be securely anchored I/ to the ground to minimize tipping of the toilet. e. Approval for a portable chemical toilet may be denied or I/ revoked upon any of the following grounds: 1) Complaints of residential neighbors; I 2) Any violation of the intent of the ordinance or if the portable chemical toilet otherwise presents a I/ nuisance. 3) Any evidence of failure to maintain the toilet to I/ eliminate odors and pollution or to maintain screening. Section 3 . This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon I/ its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council this day I/ , 1991. ATTEST: I Don Ashworth, City Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor I/ (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on , 1991) . I I/ I/ I/ 1 _ TY 0 F Pk. 11/7/90 \ Y CC DATE: 11/19/90 , CUANIIAEN I • CASE 4t: 90-9 ZOA By: Al-Jaff/v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Section 20-263, Recreational Beachlots (2) Portable Chemical Toilets II Z Q LOCATION: II U APPLICANT: a. I a. PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - E W • WATER AND SEWER: d . - PHYSICAL CHARACTER. : W II 5 2000 LAND USE PLAN: ATTACHMENT #3 1 ZOA for Recreational Beachlots November 7, 1990 Page 2 BACKGROUND ' On August 13, 1990, a variance request was heard by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals requesting installation of a portable chemical toilet during the summer seasons on the recreational beachlot located on Minnewashta Parkway across from Linden Circle, for Minnewashta Creek Homeowners. The Board of Adjustments denied the variance unanimously (Attachment #1) . The ordinance currently prohibits the use of chemical toilets. While there was some desire to see the ordinance changed, it was believed that there was insufficient reason to support a variance. The City Council agreed with this determination on appeal but instructed staff to prepare ordinance amendments that would allow for chemical toilets if this could be done in an environmentally sensitive manner (Attachment #2) Staff contacted the Department of Natural Resources and the Cities of Eden Prairie, Bloomington, Burnsville, Eagan, Edina, Minnetonka and White Bear Lake to find out if there were any regulations pertaining to portable chemical toilets. Each city that was contacted recommended that Chanhassen not adopt such an ordinance amendment that would allow portable toilets. These comments were due to environmental concerns and difficulty with monitoring. The City of Minnetonka had a problem with a portable toilet in a city park which was vandalized and tipped over into Libbs Lake. The bay was contaminated and had to be closed for the entire summer season. The Department of Natural Resources views the matter in a different perspective. I Portable toilets are not addressed under the state shoreland guidelines, thus the DNR does not regulate them. Staff requested ' a professional opinion from the DNR. A letter from them will be presented to the Planning Commission but they commended Chanhassen for trying to deal with a difficult problem. It was recommended that the structure be set at least 50 feet from the high water mark, that it be chained and anchored in such a fashion that they cannot be easily overturned and that they would be permitted under a conditional use permit. The DNR staff suspect that the desire to utilize portable toilets will increase in the future as common accesses and outlots become more prevalent. Staff has attempted to develop standards that recognize that chemical toilets have ' potential environmental and visual impacts. We also tried to deal with the fact that their placement on recreational beachlots could further impact adjacent residences due to odor, noise, etc. Thus, the following standards are proposed: 1. A 50 foot setback from the ordinary high water mark. 2. A 20 foot setback from the side yard. ' I/ 1 ZOA for Recreational Beachlots 11 November 7, 1990 Page 3 ' 3. The portable toilet be firmly anchored to the ground.. 4. The portable toilet be fully screened by landscaping. 5. The portable toilet shall be cleaned as needed to avoid odor and environmental problems. 6. The facilities shall be constructed of materials compatible with the materials used in the neighborhood. SUMMARY Staff continues to have concerns over the use of chemical toilets in close proximity to lakes. However, the draft ordinance 11 amendment addresses the issues that have been raised to the extent feasible. As drafted, chemical toilets will be allowed by conditional use permit and will become part of the recreational 11 beachlot standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the following: Section 20-263, Recreational Beachlots is hereby amended as follows: (2) No structure, portable toilet, ice fishing house, camper trailer, tent, recreational vehicle or shelter shall be erected, maintained or stored upon any recreational beachlot. Add the following: (16) Portable chemical toilets may be permitted on recreational beachlots subject to the following minimum standards: a. Front setback - 30 feet Side setback - 20 feet Setback from ordinary high water mark - 50 feet b. The portable toilet shall be firmly anchored to the ground to prevent tipping. c. The portable toilet shall be fully screened by coniferous vegetation. I 1 i 1 I ZOA for Recreational Beachlots November 7, 1990 Page 4 d. If a permanent structure is built to house the toilet, it shall be designed to be compatible with residential architecture. e. The owner shall be responsible for servicing the ' toilet as often as required to eliminate odor and environmental problems. ATTACHMENTS ' 1. Staff report dated August 13, 1990. 2. Board of Adjustment minutes and City Council minutes dated August 13, 1990. I/ 1 1 1 I/ 1 I/ I/ I/ • I/ 1 I/ I/ I/ ,...)A DATE: 8/13/90 C !T Y Q F ._._. CC DATE: - \�! CUAN1AE ? CASE #: -90-5 Variance By: -Jaff/v I STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Installation of a Portable Chemical Toilet During the Summer Season IF- Z LOCATI Recreational Beachlot Located on Minnewashta Parkway I a Across from Linden Circle Action My A?�!,k••...., V b41) II J APPLICANT: Minnewashta Creek Homeowners Association Koc t c/o Gene and Nancy Christianson i. 6561 Kirkwood Circle MN 55331 .K'.Ex.r Deli - P- /3 -qc 1 PRESENT ZONING: PUD-R,, Planned Unit Development Residential ACREAGE: Approximately 9,600 square feet - DENSITY: N/A ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - RSF; single family IIS - RSF; single family Q E - Lake Minnewashta W - PUD; single family IIQ WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. PHYSICAL CHARACTER. : The site is a riparian lot to Lake 1 W Minnewashta. moms I2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential 1 1 E.___ - (^� :4-1.4.0 51 a t � __ i - S si fi i• t,1i 3 • - Mena* ._--- - t Sw -i 0� 11- fly �• �F l�.� /�- : 11 _____, / �iti � :titer ■ ■►= ttt «.�:..., ./tom �: ./�. r_ _ filir till‘.t:4:Z*'. .11% 4 i _ __ 1:1___ill. !_1110_,iii_.1.6500 lit qv ArdistitX,16.. --..- -- - 101; PIP ix 'Ka 7 ir..".•ior•- .--..r. la &\ " 4 , .•.• f.tzi,-„-%;iii,.■ ( I _ AA - jpirthg fir Gila: te.:::, • ._ _ _ ___ ____ __ _ ._ _ /14 rr. �P n �r M • ; Lo a ion* of.NS II (i• ,, r 'av- gi.irampt wil ws■ „ proposed varianc; - r _ .r / • ' 6500 �• i LIFFIIIVI. '..I / N 1V E W A S N T A > 1 St 00 --= D 1•• . PUD—R•moo KING ROAD \\\\\, . j , w . _ _ AT i�llil/ 4 t''f100 Q LAKE a,s� Vf C \4, - _ 1_ 'S1✓O£, �a ��%/11 # X rift I"' , AU., L 7200- �� to>. \ .14. i } tv ■u aAPIA !NORIO T M- Allir � S X300 F.3 7 II Neu li A w■ver 11 Ar � Soo W1 i ad Ezpr.■ e--- , . 1 ;7600 •. = I_::.. t IV k1700- f 711.11i I 1 7aoo . - - - - I i___ -- gl • _ _ LA - ! _ I/ Minnewashta Creek HOA Variance August 13, 1990 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-263 (2) prohibits portable chemical toilets to be maintained or stored upon any recreational beachlot (Attachment #1) . ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to install a portable chemical toilet ' during the summer seasons on the recreational beachlot owned by Minnewashta Creek Homeowners Association. The applicants believe that the toilet is necessary for the use of the beachlot and that I it represents a safety improvement since it would avoid having pedestrian crossing Minnewashta Parkway to use facilities located in their homes. The Zoning Ordinance prohibits such use. Staff considered amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow portable toilets to be installed on recreational beachlots and contacted other cities to find out what their experience has been. The Cities of Eden Prairie, Bloomington, Burnsville, Eagan, Edina, Minnetonka and White Bear Lake were contacted and each recommended that the City of Chanhassen not adopt such an ordinance amendment that would allow portable toilets. The City of Minnetonka had a problem with a portable toilet in a City park being vandalized and tipped over into Libbs Lake. The bay was contaminated and had to be closed for the entire summer season. A variance may be granted by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals or City Council only if all of the following criteria are met: ' a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances but to recognize that and develop neighborhoods pre-existing standards exist. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. * Staff surveyed the area within 500 feet of the beachlot and found two additional beachlots that are located within the survey area. The two are Minnewashta Heights and Pleasant Acres Beachiots. • Both contain a portable toilet. These toilets predate the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the beachlots, therefore, they are grandfathered in. Staff does not advocate the use of these two existing non-conformities to support granting the variance request. We note that unlike setbacks I i I Minnewashta Creek HOA Variance August 13, 1990 Page 3 applied to homes or decks on RSF lots, a portable toilet is not a principal or accessory use on a beachlot and is specifically prohibited by the beachlot ordinance. 1 b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. * The conditions upon which this petition for a variance is based are applicable generally to other properties within the same toning classification. Thus, it would establish a precedent for all beachlots. c. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to ' increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. * This does not appear to be the case. The applicant is attempting to utilise the portable toilet as an amenity but this will not have a significant effect on land values. I d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self created hardship. * Staff has difficulty in findin g hardship.hardshi . When the beachlot was designated as a beachlot, the owners were fully aware that portable bathrooms are not a permitted use. Users of the beach can still use bathrooms at their private homes as their homes are located within walking distance. ' e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare of injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. * The granting of the variance may be detrimental to the public welfare if the portable toilet tipped over, Lake ' Minnewashta would be polluted. In response, the applicants have verbally indicated that they would have the toilet serviced as frequently as required and that it could be chained to prevent tipping. There is also the question of visual impact since portable toilets are not attractive nor consistent with residential development. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or .substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially I/ diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. I 1/ I/ Minnewashta Creek HOA Variance I August 13 , 1990 Page 4 I/ * The portable toilet is proposed to be located to the northwest of the property. It is to be partly screened by an oak tree. To the north of the proposed location of the portable toilet is an existing fence. The proposed portable toilet will not impair the supply of light and air to adjacent property but will be an eyesore as portable toilets are not an attractive scene. RECOMMENDATION ' Staff is recommending denial of Variance #90-5. We believe that it would set a precedent for all beachlots and that it could pose visual and environmental problems. If the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and City Council choose to recommend approval, then staff would recommend the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall work with staff to screen the portable toilet. 2. The toilet shall be anchored firmly. 3 . The toilet shall be maintained and cleaned a minimum of two ' times per week. 4. Staff be directed to prepare an ordinance revision that would allow portable toilets on all beachlots. ATTACHMENTS ' 1. Zoning Ordinance Section 20-263. 2. Site plan showing proposed location of portable toilet on beachlot. ' 3. Letter from applicant. I 1 . - I I 1 I • § 20-263 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE , (1) Recreational beach lots shall have at least two hundred(200)feet of lake frontage. *--(2) No structure,Dortable chemical toilet,ice fishing house,camper,trailer,tent,recrea- tional vehicle or shelter shall be erected,maintained or stored upon any recreational beach lot. (3) No boat,trailer,motor vehicle,including but not limited to cars,trucks,motorcycles, motorized mini-bikes, all-terrain vehicles or snowmobiles shall be driven upon or parked upon any recreational beach lot. (4) No recreational beach lot shall be used for overnight camping. I (5) Boat launches are prohibited. (6) No recreational beachlot shall be used for purposes of overnight storage or overnight ' mooring of more than three (3)motorized or nonmotorized watercraft per dock. If a recreational beachlot is allowed more than one(1)dock,however,the allowed number of boats may be clustered. Up to three (3) sailboat moorings shall also be allowed. Nonmotorized watercraft such as canoes,windsurfers,sailboards and small sailboats may be stored overnight on any recreational beachlot if they are stored on racks specifically designed for that purpose.No more than six(6)watercraft may be stored on a rack. The number of racks shall not exceed the amount of storage necessary to permit one(1)rack slip per lot served by the beachlot;however,in no case shall there be more than four(4)racks per beachlot.Docking of other watercraft or seaplanes is permissible at any time other than overnight. (7) The maximum number of docks on a recreational beachlot is three(3).No dock shall - be permitted on any recreational beachlot unless the beachlot meets the following conditions: a. Shoreline of at least two hundred(200)feet per dock, and b. Area of at least thirty thousand(30,000)square feet for the first dock and addi- tional twenty thousand(20,000)square feet for each additional dock. 1 (8) No recreational beach lot dock shall exceed six (6) feet in width, and no such dock shall exceed the greater of fifty (50) feet or the minimum straight-Iine distance necessary to reach a water depth of four(4)feet.The width(but not the length)of the cross-bar of any "T" or "L" shaped dock shall be included in the computation of length described in the preceding sentence.The cross-bar of any such dock shall not measure in excess of twenty-five(25)feet in length. (9) No dock shall encroach upon any dock set-back zone, provided, however, that the owner of any two(2)abutting lakeshore sites may erect one(1)common dock within the dock setback zone appurtenant to the abutting lakeshore'sites, if the common dock is the only dock on the two(2)lakeshore sites and if the dock otherwise conforms with the provisions of this chapter. ' (10) No sail boat mooring shall be permitted on any recreational beach lot unless it has at least two hundred(200)feet of lake frontage.No more than one(1)sail boat mooring shall be allowed for every two hundred(200)feet of lake frontage. Supp.No.2 1180 ' I i . I' .------ -• 6 0 4 3' _.. .._ ,_. I .. -- 0 C). L'7s , •It. ) t ;.. .‘ .,...? . 1:::fn 11' • /I . , . t • . ,, I ?- - .. r r 0 —Z fi'13; gz‘ ••,Pil° _ .. i - 1 .• , G., v+ , •.r I /- • --A 4- 1 .x. ,.....\ r,),., • : \\c). 't lo / z - / // . ' / , . y I V • v," /$6, xi< PLI\NKIEm , I ,,_. /,,, --, \ ! , Tolz-n\-FLE , :.... ,0....., ,t i / II . ‘ \ / % • 1 . r..C.1 L.e_--r . i( r l .... . _cx....p.....r,c,1.,... •...- \ ■ A .., ! i -i• . \ , i? ..:.. s ■ --- , , 0 i • .•.. .... 11110 I . '•, 3 \ - \ 0 "."4. . • .. -"' ■ , I :: ) ' ,, il .. .. . . I 16- : ..... „,...................--"...9 13 - ..- - W t • I ir / pc; ..... / Z is '3 ... i t • 9 1 ii r‘ ps ■ i 4:00:".„.. .....e>„ A) c I 4. ....C. ' / 1 1 .... ..1 fr. rti • i. --- _ 1 1 c 11\ Tv NC IL ., u, 111 1" h• (i* CP* 1 '07 c..1 . 1 ! e" r. ,s, .... f • t . / , • -:::. - . v 5 .. 2 ; ;C.) ■ I t- - ? — -.■ • in I s. \ / ' .. :.:. 4.) g„ s',"••••■......... C I ; \ ' • , . .. .• .. ....:;::•', .... 111Posilt. '.:;f:::' .qc.. ... .....____ i ii / a —.......... a 74 III 7-2-- . S • g t') ii) ..ir4 i-141 ill < r— co a• a - 4 s• •• I :-.Z 5 t ....fll . all 7 z pi, t• I ,_--I .., ..., 1 June 26, 1990 I Dear Planning Commission, I We represent the Minnewashta Second and Third Addition Homeowners Association. We are a group of 43 homeowners who jointly own and maintain a beach outlot on the east shore of Lake Minnewashta. There are currently 40 occupied homes in which 63 adults and 57 children reside. Approximately 60% of those families use the beach outlot regularly. On a typical weekend, families remain at the beach outlot an average of 5 hours longer if the weather is particularly warm. Besides the annual Association picnic in July, many association families host family reunions, birthday parties, and small company picnics at this beach lot. , The Association represents community-minded people who are concerned about the environment. We have demonstrated responsibility by maintaining a clean and well groomed beach outlot. We have provided containers for - recyclables. We also employ a natural lawn service that uses only organic material to fertilize our lawn. We do not want to harm Lake Minnewashta with unnecessary pollutants. The Association is requesting a variance to zoning ordinance section 20-263, specifically item. #2 which does not allow a portable chemical I/ toilet to be erected, maintained, or stored on any recreational beach lot. We are asking for this variance for the following reasons. 1. Minnewashta Parkway creates a potential hazard to any pedestrian 1 crossing it. Although there is a painted crosswalk and pedestrian crossing signs posted, most vehicles ignore them, and few motorists obey the posted 30 m.p.h. speed limit. 2. We believe in a clean environment and a clean lake to swim in. While we would hope all beach users would take the time to go home and use their own toilet facilities, we know this is not happening. Especially with small children who usually "run out of time". The portable chemical toilet companies we have contacted have assured us that the unit would be cleaned a minimum of once per week or more often if deemed necessary. 3. There would be no cost to the City of Chanhassen. The I/ Association will assume all costs for the rental and maintenance of a portable chemical toilet. Due to the lack of a city maintained recreational facility in or near our I neighborhood, we feel our request is fair and reasonable. I/ I '_ L I/ -2- I/ Please consider our appeal and grant a variance that would allow us to place a portable chemical toilet on our beach outlot for summer seasonal use only. Attached you will find a map of our beach lot which indicates the selected location of the portable toilet. Please note there is a large tree which would protect it and hide it from the view of Minnewashta 1 Parkway. • Sincerely, 1 de..;2.,■"2"11--7-") Gene Christensen, President lee 1 Nancy Ch istensen, Co-President Minnewashta Creek Homeowners Assn. 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS MINUTES AUGUST 13, 1990 MEMBERS PRESENT: Jay Johnson Willard Johnson Carol Watson STAFF PRESENT: Sharmin Al-Jaff Paul Krauss Willard Johnson opened the meeting. I Variance request for installation of a portable chemical toilet during the summer seasons on the recreational beach lot located on . Minnewashta Parkway across from Linden Circle Minnewashta Creek homeowners. Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report. Willard Johnson opened the public hearing. Nancy Christenson, representative of the Minnewashta Creek Homeowners Association, indicated that the Association plans to screen the portable bathroom. When they first created this specific beachlot there were five families living in the neighborhood, today there are 60 families, the majority of which use the beachlot. Minnewashta Parkway is a busy road. There is a crosswalk but it is always ignored. She indicated that the toilet can be chained to prevent tipping. They do not plan on putting it in this year but they are requesting that approval be granted for next year. They plan on putting it in starting Memorial Day through Labor Day. I The type of fencing is going to be a redwood fence and Nancy Christenson indicated that the beachlot is very well maintained and they plan on keeping it that way. They do not want to become offensive to anybody. Willard Johnson indicated that he has received complaints about City portable toilets at parks that have an offensive smell. Nancy Christenson indicated that if need be, they will clean the toilets every day. I/ Jay Johnson indicated that in the staff report there was an incident where a toilet was tipped in Minnetonka and whether Paul Krauss would elaborate on that. Paul Krauss said that Libbs Lake is located at the far southeast corner of Lake Minnetonka. The City maintains a beach and one night a vandalism -incident took I/ place where two portable toilets were tipped into the bay. The bacteria count was very high as a result and they had to close the bay for the entire summer season. Paul Krauss also indicated that this might not be the case in Lake Minnewashta. The characteristics of Lake Minnewashta might be different than that bay, but the chance of vandalism is still there. Jay Johnson wanted to know the kn he difference between City and private beachlots. He indicated that there is no difference between a City bathroom and a private bathroom. He said that the City should start working on an environmental ordinance. It does not have to be a part of the zoning ordinance, but that is the direction staff 11 Board of Adjustments and Appeals Minutes August 13, 1990 Page 2 ' should go with creating an environmental ordinance. Paul Krauss indicated that the difference between a private bathroom on a beachlot and a City bathroom on a beachlot is the City monitors portable bathrooms in parkas on a daily basis; and has direct control over them. In a case where it is a private beachlot, the City would be faced with a difficult inspection problem. Jay ' Johnson recommended that staff take a look at the City as a whole to see what is a temporary use and how it is monitored such as on July 4. - Willard Johnson closed the public hearing. Jay Johnson moved to deny the variance. Carol Watson seconded the motion. All voted in favor. Jay Johnson moved to request staff to further investigate portable bathrooms and create an ordinance pertaining to portable bathrooms. Carol Watson seconded the motion. All voted in favor. Approval of Minutes: Carol Watson moved to approve the minutes dated July 23, 1990. Willard Johnson seconded the motion. All ' voted in favor. Willard Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting. Jay Johnson seconded the motion. All voted in favor. I I I 1 I 1 . 11 1 City Council Meeting - ,..mot 13, 1990 AWARD OF BIDS: UTILITY TELEMETRY SYSTEM, PROJECT 90-3. Mayor Chmiel: Who's going to address that Dave? Dave Hempel: Hopefully there's an individual from OSM here this evening. I Dean Sharpe: Your honor, members of the Council, my name is Dean Sharpe. I'm with OSM consultants. We prepared the plans and specs for this project. We received three bids for this project on July 27th. They range from a low bid of $270,596.00 to a high bid of $478,687.00. This project utilized pre-qualification of bidders. We checked references beforehand. Past experience in projects of this nature and such. We pre-qualified four parties to bid and three of them did so. The low bid we find to be responsive. Have done projects like this before and are presently serving the City and we recommend award to Bentec. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. This is something that I have been hoping for us to get for a long time because over the overall run, it's going to save us a lot of dollars. A lot of labor and a lot of truck time. A lot of checking every 1 mornings and labor costs are going to lower in itself so I can't make the motion at this particular time because we're lacking to have 3 members here. If one of the Council people can hear it, I'd like them to come back in here wherever they may be. Tom? Councilman Johnson: Well, we can make the motion and the second. We just can't vote on it. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Right. I'll make that motion. Councilman Johnson: I'll second it. Mayor Chmiel: It's been moved and seconded. Tom Workman, can you come in here? Oh Ursula. Never mind. Councilman Johnson: Just say yes Ursula. • Mayor Chmiel: There's a motion on the floor with a second to approve the award of bids for utility supervisory control and data acquisition Project No. 90-3. Resolution 190-101: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to award I the bid for the Utility Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System to Bentec in the amount of $270,596.00. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE REQUEST TO INSTALL A CHEMICAL TOILET ON A BEACHLOT LOCATED ON MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY ACROSS FROM LINDEN CIRCLE, MINNEWASHTA CREEKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. Councilman Johnson: At the Board of Adjustments and Appeals tonight we denied the petition. Although there was a lot of sentiment that the use of chemical toilets at a beachlot may be appropriate versus the use of the lake for the same • reason that the chemical toilet's used. But we went way beyond this beachlot to say well we've also got these at all of our city parks. Those adjacent to I 21 I 1 I City Council Meeting - Au ;. 13, 1990 waterways and everything else. That it may not be the zoning ordinance that should be totally controlling port-a-potties or chemical toilets and that's why I've asked for it to be on the Council Presentation tonight so we can get some action on looking at the overall use of portable potties or chemical toilets throughout the city. The people are still here from the Association I see. 1 • Mayor Chmiel: If anyone would like to come forward and address Council in regard to your particular project. Nancy Christensen: My name is Nancy Christensen. I live at 6561 Kirkwood and I'm the President of the Association. Mayor Chmiel: You're aware as to the position,` that the Board of Appeals has reviewed your subject matter of a port-a-potty on your beachlot? As it appears, there seems to be some inadequacies throughout the city and I really sort of ' agree that we should review this to come up with a conclusion and I think this year is probably almost gone by the wayside unfortunately but this is something that we can have at least an answer for this, at least for next year's beachlot so unless you have something else you'd like to say, we'll be more than happy to listen. Nancy Christensen: Well, it 's not necessarily have a lot to say. I •have some things to say. That we have about 60 families using this beachlot. We really feel that' it would be better for our ecology to have a portable chemical toilet on site rather than use the lake, the bushes or whatever which is what people do. Minnewashta Parkway is almost an impossible road to travel or to cross and it's really difficult to send small children across it. You can't do it. We have a crosswalk and it's ignored. The 3 years I've lived there, not one person has ever stopped for me or my children. So for that reason we feel that it's somewhat of a hardship not having a toilet down there. Sometimes there's really large gatherings and we don't have, there's nothing there. What do we do with 100 people and that's why we're asking for a seasonal use permit and that's it. 11 Councilwoman Dimler: I do have a question. On the two lots that are there that were grandfathered in that do have chemical toilets, can somebody address how that's been working out? Nancy Christensen: Well I have a letter from them. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Are they seasonal? Nancy Christensen: They're seasonal and the people I've spoken to from there, ' the President and the secretaries, they said they've never ever had a problem. It's just there like the sand is there. Like the water is there. People expect it to be there. They've never been abused. Councilwoman Dimler: And nobody's tipped it over? The fears that were voiced. Nancy Christensen: No. And our beachlot we plan on probably, I'm not sure if this we will do it right away but more than likely we'll put a cement slab down. Stake it down and put a fence around it so it can't be seen. It can be cleaned in 2 hours notice. I mean it will automatically be cleaned once a week, probably twice a week, especially in the months of July when it's really warm. 22 1 City Council Meeting - AL .s. 13, 1990 I/ I mean today when I was down there, there were probably 25 people down there. Most of them children. I Councilman Workman: Mr. Mayor, is this something that we can act on tonight? Is this something we're going to act on? Councilman Johnson: I have it also under Council Presentations but we can move it to this point just as easily and direct staff to look into it. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, I think it would be good for you to move that up right now Jay to this particular one because it's one and the same. So maybe if you'd just reiterate. i Councilman Johnson: Well basically we want to look into chemical toilets throughout the city. Construction sites. Where should they be located? You go into a construction site and they locate it right next to the creek. Setbacks from wetlands. Property line setbacks. The whole use of chemical toilets at the 4th of July celebration and whatever. Numbers for the numbers of people. What were the problems in these other cities that they don't recommend them , being on beachlots even though they have them themselves on their city parks at the beaches. I'm not sure if the one in Minnetonka got thrown in the lake or just dumped over and it ran into the lake. They don't carry that much stuff in them. But if it's a matter of it getting thrown into the lake, that can be solved by 'anchoring them and requiring it to be anchored. You can require it to be visible from the street. There's lots of requirements that can be put on there to where you know, if it's more visible it's less likely to be vandalised. I Councilman Workman: Visibility is one of the problems people see with them. Mayor Chmiel: We've had ours in the city park, Greenwood Shores Park for the last 3 years and we've not had any problems with that. Councilwoman Dimler: And we have a homeowners association too where a lot of 1 people think it's going to be a good idea to put one down there. Councilman Johnson: You don't have one at yours? I Councilwoman Dimler: No, we don't. But a lot of people ask about it. Councilman Johnson: Yours is a bigger homeowners association than theirs. A , lot bigger lot too. Councilwoman Dimler: Right. I Councilman Johnson: The thing is, there's going to have to be a minimum distance back from the lake and all kinds of rules and regulations on how to do this before we start granting them. That's what I'm proposing that we look into is what are those rules and regulations. Councilwoman Oimler: Greenwood Shores has had one huh? How they'd get it? , • Mayor Chmiel: It's a city park. 23 11 • 1 City Council Meeting - A , . 13, 1990 Councilman Workman: The City's different. Councilwoman Dimler: Ah, I don't like that. I don't like that.. !, Mayor Chmiel: That's the . I point that I brought it up you know. The City parks have it. Beachlots can't. I guess I don't understand. Councilwoman Dimler: Free water and chemical toilets. Councilman Johnson: But the one at Carver Beach is right up next to the road. It's the only place you can service it and it's probably 50 foot from that nearest house. Councilman Workman: How many beachlots on Lotus? Councilwoman Dimler: Private or public? Councilman Workman:- Both. Councilwoman Dimler: There's Carver Beach. There's ours. There's a public landing. Mayor Chmiel: Three that I'm aware of. Councilman Johnson: Oh, more than that . Councilwoman Dimler: A public and two privates that I know of. Councilman Johnson: There's two private next to you and then there's a private over on the other side. Councilwoman Dimler: That 's right but they don't do anything to keep up their lot. There's another private one that is not kept up yeah. Councilman Johnson: There's at least 3 private beachlots on the east side that I know of. Brian Windschitl: Jay, my name is Brian Windschitl. I live at 6591 Joshua Circle and I don't know if it will help you at all but I feel everybody has a bad taste for chemical toilets. They've come a long ways. If they're tipped over right now, they're spill proof unless they're totally overused. Most people think of chemical toilets as like when they go to the State Fair or any functions which they're over used tremendously. I. work construction so I'm with them all the time and within 2 hours I could have somebody out there and take care of it. I mean if somebody comes in to me and tells me that they don't like 1 the odor or they don't like how dirty it is in there, in 2 hours I can have somebody out there and have it cleaned so I think most of the people and probably you people, the only time you see them is at 4th of July function or State Fair where like I say they're just totally over used. They're not as bad as they have been 20 years ago. I mean they've come a long ways and they are designed to be staked down. They have the holes right in the runners. Kids don't even care to tip them over. That kind of went out with the twist too. They're too lazy to tip them over. You know the other thing that we kind of 24 11 I _ 1 City Council Meeting - Au‘ 13, 1990 I feel, being on the far west end of town is, we don't really have a place for our kids or for that matter for us to go and that is our park out there and there's a chemical toilet on every park in the city that I believe and I don't really see a problem. We don't have, I noticed in the Boards of Appeals there they said that they thought that it might _be too close to the neighbors. Well, the neighbors got the letter and there's nobody here that would have a problem with having it out there so I mean. Councilman Johnson: She's dead. One is. 1 Mayor Chmiel: If you got a comment from there you'd be. Thank you. Jay, do you want to finish what you were saying? Councilman Johnson: Yeah, I do agree that the technology of chemical toilets has changed a lot. I was just at the Star of the North games and they must have had, or not Star of the North, USA Cup Soccer Tournament and they must have had 40-50 of those things everywhere but they had a truck continously going around emptying them at that thing. After spending some time in the mountains recently with what they call the pit toilets, no running water or anything. Just a building and the pit underneath it, this is a vast improvement over that. My gut reaction without actually getting any real study on this is it's better off to have a chemical toilet the proper distance away from the property line and the lake than it is for the kids to go in the lake and create a warm spot. , Councilman Workman: I'd like to move this along. I think we all understand that this is getting into the dog you know what scooper rule here. I'm sure everybody's aware and the homeowners are aware of the aesthetics. The potential pollution problem. I think we have to be very careful about, because once you - say go on this, you're going to say it. We have 11 lakes or so and so it's going to be a big impact and so I think we're all sympathetic to the situation out there and what kids do and what even some adults do when it's late and they're drinking beer and everything else. And so I just think we should be very careful about how, and I think that's what the Board of Adjustments was saying that why did the Council in the past say, the ordinance in fact say none of these toilets. If there's been changes and innovations then we should look at them and we should change with the times if it's prudent but it's a very delicate situation I think. Resident: Are you talking about all size beaches? Is that what you're talking about or are you talking about the City? I Councilman Workman: Well apparently the City has special priviledges. We can put them anywhere we want apparently. I Councilman Johnson: Our city park's not a beachlot. Councilwoman Oimler: Yes it is. 1 Resident: .. .private access beaches? Councilman Workman: Right. I'm just saying it's not just one Satellite. It's 1 many. 25 1 1 City Council Meeting - F 13, 1990 Resident: Well how many times has this been brought to you by another private association that want port-a-potties? Councilman Workman: Well Ursula's has said that they want one. . { Resident: So that's one? • Councilman Workman: I'm just saying, when you open up the gate then it's going to happen probably everywhere. I can sit here and predict sure but I mean. Mayor Chmiel: I don't know if you're aware but we do have presently a City Code that does read, no structures, portable chemical toilet, ice fishing houses, camper trailers, tent, recreational vehicles or shelters shall be erected, maintained or stored upon any recreational beachlot. We have to change the Code first of all but I think what we have to do is look into it and study what's the best way for us to go about this to make sure we're not causing any more given problems than what could exist. I guess that's what Tom is really say right? Councilman Workman: Yeah. In addition to decks and everything else because we have those variance requests all the time and we have to say look at the overall. And again, it doesn't mean I'm against you having a, I'll refer to it as a Satellite, out there but once we say yes, then that's a part of the Code .1 that 's going to, somebody's going to come in with a deck and more the other side and all the way around and it's going to be. And so the overall protection of the lake is what I'm looking at. Nancy Christensen: You can't say it's alright to use just temporarily on a trial basis? Mayor Chmiel: Not according to our Code. We'd have to change the Code first. Resident: But with that Code, would it be taking into consideration that seeing you have a 45 mph, which everybody drives 70 mph speed limit and you have a crosswalk that these people are supposed to slow down at and you've got a trail of small children, 8,000 lawn chairs, 2 alligators trying to get them across this crosswalk and it's very dangerous. I've called and complained to the police department because my kids have almost been picked off trying to get them. You know they've got to pee and you don't want them peeing in the lake and it sounds trivial but it is a frightening thing to a small child and we've got like under 9, we've got about 50 kids out there. It's a real frightening thing. It is. You can't say well just run home and use the bathroom or run home because you have to be there to watch those kids to cross that walk. And even the policeman that I talked to said hey, we're not out here and unless we get complaints, they don't come. Mayor Chmiel: I've sat out on Minnewashta Parkway several different times watching the speeds and not having a radar gun unfortunately, I would say yes. There are some cars that do exceed their limits. ' Resident: You know we don't have the sidewalks. and we don't have the bike paths and we don't have those other things so, and being that the park is across the highway, what mother is going to send their children. Right across TH 7, watch I 26 I r City Council Meeting - t 13, 1990 out for the semi's and you can go play not knowing whether they're going to come back or not. I Councilwoman Dimler: Plus if you had more kids, you're not going to leave the other ones at the beach unattended so you have to take them all. It's terrible. - I've been through it. Resident : It is very much so. Councilman Johnson: Basically what we're saying is two fold. One is, we don't believe it deserves a variance to the zoning ordinance in this case. Two, we believe we need to know under what conditions we should have them. What distances from the lake. Distance from lot lines. We need m ore study. Third, you're not going to put it up this year anyway so there's thetime involved and I think that we want to look at it this year over the winter months and get something going so that next spring this can be addressed. It may turn out that we want to say that any beachlot with more than blank families on it has to have one of these in there. Nancy Christensen: So you'll be able to give us an answer by perhaps next spring? Councilman Johnson: That 's what we'll be shooting for yes. Mayor Chmiel: That 's what I'd try to do, yes. Nancy Christensen: Okay, that's fair. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I Nancy Christensen: How will we know? Councilwoman Dimler: We'll put it on the agenda. I Mayor Chmiel: We'll put it on the agenda again to discuss it and if you'd leave your name and address with Paul and Paul will make sure that you have that. ' Councilman Johnson: I believe we've basically given direction to staff. We don't really need to vote on that. I Mayor Chmiel: I don't think we need any motion on this. Don Ashworth: No, because the Board had acted on it. I WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR ALTERING/REMOVING VEGETATION IN A CLASS B WETLAND LOCATED IN CURRY FARMS SUBDIVISION. JOYCELYN HUGHES. , Jo Ann Olsen: You have the report with all the history and this has been presented to you before. We did send it to the Planning Commission who felt to be consistent with past action and with what tae ordinance states, they recommended denial. They did not feel that what was being proposed was an improvement to the wetland. They did not agree that it should be permitted. They sort of left it with direction to the applicant to further work with DNR, I 27 11 11 11- _ City Council Meeting - F _ 13, 1990 Fish and Wildlife and whoever to see if there were a way to remove some of the vegetation in a manner that would be seen as an improvement to the wetland. In speaking with the applicant, they still wanted to pursue it through the Council to get full action to see exactly what the Council directs them to do. I'll just throw out what we did. We came up with a survey for the wetland showing • ' the perimeter and the square footage. The applicants are proposing to clear away the vegetation on the easterly side opposite of where the city parkland is. Rather than get into the rest. . . Mayor Chmiel: And the direction on that Jo Ann, what direction from city park? Would it be south of that? Jo Ann Olsen: No, they're directly east across the wetland from the city park. Mayor Chmiel: Well the one south is Class A. Alright. Jo Ann Olsen: This is an old plan that kind of shows the parkland. Another issue was that there was discussion whether or not the applicants should be ' required to pay the $25.00 application fee. There are two applicants with this and one of them has paid and Joycelyn hasn't because she was given direction that that would not be required. I explained that that Would be really a Council action also whether or not to see. . . So you can also act on that Itonight . - •Councilman Johnson: $25.00? The $25.00 was paid? • Jo Ann Olsen: Yeah. $25.00 has been paid from the Bearrood's. . . Councilman Johnson: Is it one application or two applications? Jo Ann Olsen: Two separate applications. There are two separate lots involved. 11 Councilman Workman: Are you through? Councilwoman Dimler: I do have one question Tom. Oid you want to go ahead and comment . I have one question. I missed the reason why they wanted to cut the vegetation. Did you say anything about that? Jo Ann Olsen: The applicant's reason? Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe if we have the applicant come up and please state your name and your address. Lynn Hughes: My name's Lynn Hughes. My wife's the one that submitted the request. What we wanted to do is we wanted to alter the property, or our property right behind us that's classified as a wetland. When we originally purchased the property 2 years ago, it was shown that it was a drainage easement. There were no cattails. No build up of any kind of vegetation. We just want to go down there and clean it up. We don't want to alter it. We want to bring in some beauty to it with wildflowers. We'd like to get some ducks in 11 there. We'd like to get all kinds of wildlife so that's what we're trying to 28 1 Planning Commission Meeting 1 November 7 , 1990 - Page 8 Wildermuth: Probably replacing Y r P 1ng the architectural features as landscaping features . Batzli : Second . ' Wildermuth moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan #88-3 and Conditional Use Permit #88-2 for McGlynn Bakeries for expansion to the production plant area and refrigeration equipment room as shown on the site plan dated October 16, 1990 with the following conditions: , 1 . The applicant provide staff with a plan indicating how the landscaping features of the office will be extended to the production plant addition . 2 . The applicant shall provide additional Colorado Green Spruce along the , south entrance leading into the southerly parking lot . 3 . Comply with conditions of approval of staff 's administrative approval of the parking lot expansion ( Attachment ) . I 4 . The applicnat shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District permit . 5 . Working hours shall be between 7:00 a .m . and 6:00 p .m . Monday through Saturday with no work allowed on Sundays and holidays . 6 . To guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval , the applicant 1/ shall furnish the City with a letter of credit from a bank or a cash escrow in the amount of $6 ,000 .00 . The security will be released by II the City upon satisfaction that the conditions contained herein have been complied with . All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. II PUBLIC HEARING: ., ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTION 20-263 (2), RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS TO ALLOW PORTABLE CHEMICAL TOILETS ON RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS. Public Present: 1 Name Address Gene & Nancy Christensen 6561 Kirkwood Circle President , Minnewashta Creek Homeowners Association Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report . Chairman Conrad called the public hearing to order . Nancy Christensen: I 'm Nancy Christensen and I live at 6561 Kirkwood Circle and I 'm the President of the Minnewashta Creek Homeowners Association and we earlier requested this variance and whatever else we asked for . I 've been working on this thing for a long time and I guess ATTACHMENT #4 11 ' Planning Commission Meeting November 7 , 1990 - Page 9 what I 'm just saying is I 'm extremely pleased with Sharmin 's help on this situation and I thank you for her recommendation . Thank you . Conrad: Thank you . Any other comments? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Batzli moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed . Conrad: Steve , I know you 're opinionated . I 'll start at your -end . Emmings: We get into a different kind of odors on this one . I think I 'm kind of in favor of at least trying this . We 've got a letter here from the ' Department of Natural Resources I know and they seem to be a little leary of doing it but recognizing that it 's something that maybe is coming and I guess my approach would be a little different than is presented in the ' staff report . One thing is I know that we have several of these in the city at the present time . We have beachlots where they have set them up . In fact you had one last year . Well , I say one on there . Nancy Christensen : For a while . Couple weeks . Emmings: Yeah , and I think they have one at Greenwood Shores didn 't they , or did I see that in the staff report? And I know there 's another one on Lake Minnewashta . The Minnewashta Heights folks have one down there_ and that was there all this past summer . And I don 't know if we got complaints about it . Have we ever had any complaints about these? Olsen : I haven 't heard any . Emmings: Which to me maybe suggests that it 's possible to find a way to do this but I guess I would not , at least initially , I think we ought to be very restrictive until we get a little more experience with it . I don 't think it ought to be a permitted use . I think it should be a conditional use and that we should look at each and every one of them and that also that allows , they have to give notice to neighbors so neighbors can come in and give their opinions about them . I don't think it should be a permitted use . Al-Jaff: We are recommending that it be a conditional use . Emmings : Well that 's not what it says here . It says . Krauss: Beachlots though are conditional use and this is an amendment to the beachlot ordinance . Emmings: Oh , okay . IIKrauss: So somebody that comes in , if you have an existing beachlot and want to do this , you would have to have a modification . . .to the beachlot . ' Emmings: Alright , then let me ask you this then. If it 's a grandfathered beachlot and they want to take advantage of something that 's allowed in the ordinance , do they have to then meet all of the conditions of the? 1 Planning Commission Meeting , November 7 , 1990 - Page 10 Krauss : Not necessarily . We talked about this this afternoon . I can only' tell you what we 've thought about this . The grandfathered use does not have a CUP okay? Having a toilet added- represents what I view as an II intensification of a non-conformity . The way to deal with that is to make the offer of a CUP available . If it 's a CUP , they can legitimitize the beachlot . Change the status of it recognizing that you may in fact want to apply . I mean when you 're intensifying something , when you 're legitimizing something , I view it as something of a two way street . They 're coming in to ask for a toilet but you may have aspects of that beachlot that are non- conforming that you would like to see made conforming or at least made an II improvement to as a condition of getting the CUP . I think that under the CUP you would have the leverage to do that . Emmings: Okay . Because you know that , I think that Minnewashta Heights I beachlot is only 25 feet wide so there 's a whole bunch of things they obviously couldn 't comply with in our ordinance but on the other hand I think that 's a good comment . Well , then there 's no doubt that if it 's a I conditional use , that 's important to me that we look at each and every one of these . Another thing is that I don 't know why . Conrad: I don 't understand that though . The conditional use . Therefore , I because you apply for a beachlot it is assumed that you can have , it 's not like you 're looking at it . As long as it meets the rules that have been described here , basically it 's there . So in other words , if you grant the beachlot status and you meet the 2 or 3 rules that we 've got , it 's there and that 's . Emmings: Well wait . We don 't have enough rules and I 'm getting to what I II think the rules ought to be . One thing is , here you 're putting basically a structure within 50 feet of the shore and I think the shoreline , I thought ' the Shoreland Ordinance , I didn 't look it up but I thought the Shoreland Ordinance says there can 't be anything within 75 feet so I don 't know why that number wouldn 't be 75 . I 'd get them back away from the water . Krauss: Yeah , I guess I couldn't argue that . I mean certainly the 11 structure setback is 75 feet . Is this a substantial structure? We could come up with standards that would theoretically allow the placement of chemical toilets but realistically not and I 'm not sure whether 50 feet versus 75 feet is honerous enough to do that but at the very least we felt that the 50 feet was sufficient to guarantee the physical separation for II the anchoring in the case of spillage and it was the recommendation of the DNR , if I recall . It was more of an environmental constraint .. If you wanted to go with the 75 , I don't think we 'd oppose it . I 'd just ask you to make , I don 't know the situation with all the beachlots . I mean they 're " varied and they 're . Conrad: But is there anything allowed within 75 feet of the lake? There is no structure to my knowledge in Chanhassen . Emmings: Well canoe rack maybe . Something like that . Wildermuth: And a dock . II Emmings: That would be but those are real different to me but anyway . Another thing is I don 't know why this isn 't limited as to time . I take it il I 1 ' Planning Commission Meeting November 7 , 1990 - Page 11 that they 're going to lease these units from somebody who then is going to maintain them and I don 't know why we wouldn 't limit this to say June 15th to August , end of August because that 's the only time people are using the property in any concentration that I 'm aware of . I think , then you talk about a permanent structure being built to house the toilet but I 'm not sure what that means . In ( d ) . To house this unit that they rent to house this Satellite type unit? Krauss: I think we were trying to cover all the bases . I mean portable ' toilets seem to come in two different types . I mean you either get the Satellite type that 's molded in the factory and they plop it on the site or you get something that 's , you know a chemical toilet that can be installed 1 in a boat or recreational vehicle or something else . Using the later , we 'd like to have a structure that looks like it fits . Emmings : Well there for sure we want that 75 feet back I would think . I would . And I would think that that structure , we 'd want to have separate approval on that too . Or that it would be approved as part of this . Okay . I guess I think there are beachlots that exist in the city where we wouldn 't want to see one of these because they 're so small that there 's no way to keep it from impinging on the neighbors and I don 't think , this is a convenience item and to me it takes a lower priority than the pleasure of ° the neighboring residential owners . So I guess what I 'd put down here , 11 I wrote a little intent section and I also added some . And the intent I think is that , I think it should go something like this . I don 't know . This is right off the top of my head but it is the intent of the City of Chanhassen to allow chemical toilets at beachlots to long as the maintenance and use of these toilets have no undesireable impact on the environment , residential neighbors or lake users . On Lake Minnewashta where I live , we 've got I don 't know how many beachlots but there 's got to be I don 't know . Do you know how many? 4 or 5 , 6? And I don 't want to drive around the lake and see a Satellite from the lake looking into it , see a Satellite on every one of those . It could be quite a few and Lotus has quite a number don 't they? Conrad: A couple . Emmings: It 's more than that from what I read in here . I don 't know but it sounded like . It is being allowed primarily for the convenience and safety of children who often cross busy streets to return home to use toilets . It is recognized that maintenance and use of chemical toilets on some small beachlots may be inappropriate because they cannot be adequate screened from residential neighbors or lake users . Then I had another 1 condition which was the conditional use permit may be revoked if there are complaints from residential neighbors . If there 's any violation of the intent of the ordinance or if there 's any evidence of failure to maintain the toilet to eliminate odors and pollution . So I guess overall my.point is that I think there 's a good reason to 'have them for a short period of time during the year and that if we could be very restrictive about it , at least initially , I could get behind it . Ahrens: What would they do? Come in and tow them away? ' Emmings: Well see , you lease these things . Now you leased the one you had out there this summer didn 't you? I Planning Commission Meeting November 7 , 1990 - Page 12 Nancy Christensen: Well someone in our Association had . . . Emmings: Okay , so you lease them and then you have a pumping agreement where they service them and all of that and I guess I see this as a situation where that would be the way to do it . Have it there for 2 1/2 months because I can tell you that from watching , the way people use the lake , there 's very little use of the lake even in August . The end of June ' and July it 's used very heavily and then it tapers down real fast . Even at the end of July . In my experience . But if it was there from June 15th until when people returned to school the end of August . Batzli : The season 's kind of Memorial Day to Labor Day . Emmings : But I tell you the heavy . Batzli : Well I know the heavy use is . Emmings : The heavy use is right around the 4th of July and after that it really starts falling off . At least on Lake Minnewashta . From my observation . But anyway , that 's what I would . Conrad: Okay . Good comments . Brian? Batzli : Well he stole all my thunder so I 'm just going to ask kind of a II rhetorical question of the staff and that 's why , if every one of the communities that we called said don 't get into it . Don 't do it . Don 't do 11 it . Why are we doing. it? Krauss: Who was saying don't? Oh , the cities . Well to be honest , I mean this is , we are not incredibly excited about the specter of dealing with 11 another issue on a lake . You know it 's one of those things that you 'd prefer that it go away and never happen but it is happening . We 've been asked to deal with it in the most effective way we know how . As to why other communities have not dealt with it , I don't know . Sometimes the situation is different . Sometimes you don 't have the recreational beachlot that the common use on some of the lakes . I don 't know why other communities haven 't confronted it . When I get calls from other planners too , I mean your reaction is to air on the conservative side . If you don't know the answer , then don't do it if you don't have to . Well , we 've been asked to do it and so we 've done what we can to make sure that it 's done as safely and as sensitively as possible. If the ordinance goes ahead like this , it 's something that we could administer and we could live with . Batzli : Would it be helpful at all to require that if in fact most of these things are leased , and I assume that most of them would be , would it be appropriate to have a copy of the contract on file with the city or something? To make sure that they 're. ' Krauss: Frankly , I would prefer not . I mean I 'd prefer to deal with the owners of the beachlot and not who they contract with . In my view the owner 's liable for the maintenance . The owner 's liable for the conditions of approval . However , they obtain compliance with those conditions is really their business. It presents a little bit of another layer of administration for us and I 'm not sure that it 's necessary . 1 ' Planning Commission Meeting November 7 , 1990 - Page 13 Batzli : Who then is responsible if there is some sort of , if they tip it over into the lake? You 're going to try to hold the beachlot owners responsible for that? Wildermuth: The Association . Batzli : The Association? Conrad: And what 's the penalty? Krauss: Well I don 't know . That 's the concern . I mean I raised the initial concern when I was with the City of Minnetonka you know we had one ' of these things , or several of these things tipped into a bay . Now it was from a city park but they were not anchored and were vandalized and tipped into Libb 's Lake . Libb 's Lake does not flush very readily from Minnetonka . It 's the eastern most arm of the lake . As a consequence , for the rest of ' the season , for a month and a half , that lake was unswimmable because the . . .count was too high . I don 't know whether any of our lakes in Chanhassen exhibit the same characteristics . They don 't have that kind of 11 a bay structure certainly with a narrow little inlet that Libb 's Lake has . We are taking the active approach here in requiring that these things be anchored so hopefully rather than dealing with the aftermath, of a problem , 1 we can try to avoid the problem in the first place . And we 've also got the physical separation from the lake which if it 's 75 feet , particularly more than 55 feet , you know these things don 't have a tremendous amount of capacity and by the time it gets to the lake , hopefully a lot of that will be intercepted by grass or sand or whatever . Batzli : I think these things are a favorite target of college , high school , whatever aged kids . They seem to be fun to tip over . I know that they 're tipped over frequently at Crescent Beach in Shorewood/Tonka Bay . Whatever that park is actually in . I was familiar with the one in Libb 's Lake . It seems to me that you know in those instances you 're talking about a city owned park and you should have more control over it and yet they don 't seem to have any control over it and for us to require the beachlot owners to control it , I don't know if that 's going to be effective or not . ' That 's why I 'd almost like to see them , this may be out of the realm of possibilities but post a bond or something . I like Steve 's additions if we go ahead with this . Wildermuth: Believe it or not I laid awake last night thinking about this . Conrad: With all the political stuff going on , you were thinking about portable toilets . Wildermuth: About whether or not this is a good thing or we should be ' looking at something like this and I guess I came to the same conclusion that Steve did . That it 's probably worth while looking at and it 's probably something that maybe who 's time has come for these beachlots . I would favor a time limit and I would like to see the whole concept limited to a portable structure only . Nothing permanent so that would probably mean taking ( d ) out of there . Reference to a permanent structure . Especially if we 're still going to look at 50 feet because that kind of violates everything else that we 've got . I 1 Planning Commission Meeting ' November 7 , 1990 - Page 14 Batzli : Some of them do have like a fence like stockade type approach ' YP PP ach with a little entrance and the back swings open so they can take it out . Now that 's the kind of screening almost that you may or may not appreciate over the proposed screening but . Wildermuth: I think if I were a neighbor I 'd want to see vegetation type I screening as opposed to some kind of a fence . I think that 's pretty well addressed in ( c ) . Fully screened by coniferous vegetation . I don 't know what the time limitation on it should be . Staff can decide that . If it 's Labor Day to Memorial Day or whatever . Or Memorial Day to Labor Day , whatever it is . But I think there should be some kind of time limit on it II and I would like to see it restricted only to portable structures , And would this be reviewed on a case by case basis as it 's currently proposed? This ordinance? So you 'd have a chance to look at all these grandfathered II lots? Krauss : Yes . Each one would have to come before you and make their case at a public hearing . Conrad: But you 'd apply the rules that you lay down now . I Wildermuth : Right . Apply these rules . The beachlot association that I belong to , I think if they came in for one we 'd probably deny it because it 's an odd configuration and it just , I don 't know how you could do something like that and satisfy the neighbors . That 's all . Ahrens : I don 't have a real strong feelings about this but you know I guess if there 's a need for this we should be looking at it . I 've heard II a lot of discussion tonight about the appearance of them and some beaches are too small and some beaches are big enough to handle these and it seems II like we 're getting into such subjective criteria in determining where they should Le and where they shouldn't be and if a neighbor complains and they should be taken out . I have a lot of problems with that . I think that if we have an ordinance that says that they 're allowable , then I 'm_ sure there 's children on all the beachlots and I 'm sure there 's a need if that 's . Paul said there 's a need because there 's children who have to use the portable toilets when they 're out there and then Steve says he doesn 't II want to see them on every beachlot as he 's riding around on the lake because of the appearance of that . I mean how are we going to determine? Every other lot or you know , 2 out of 4 . Only half the beachlots get them ' because more than that would be aesthetically ugly or how are we going to determine that? It seems to me that if we 're going to allow these things on beachlots , we 're going to just have to allow them . Either that or we say only on beachlots of a certain size . I Wildermuth: Well , I think that some of the conditions that are put in • there are going to preclude that because .if the beachlot that we have on II Lotus Lake were to come in and ask for one , the thing would end up having to be located in the middle of the tennis court and it just doesn 't work . Ahrens : Because of the setbacks? 1 Wildermuth: Yeah . Because of the setback requirements . The fact that they have to be fully screened I think is some kind of assurance that . , r Planning Commission Meeting November 7 , 1990 - Page 15 Batzli : There has to be at least one opening . Ahrens : Why can 't they just plant things around it? Wildermuth : Well they can . Ahrens: So you 're saying the setback requirements will limit the number . Wildermuth : The visual impact . Ahrens: I think that we should be concerned with these so close to the lake but on the other hand if people need them they need them and I think we should provide them . I imagine we haven 't had a lot of problems with them on with Greenwood Shores because nobody can get to that beachlot anyway . It 's probably never even used except for 2 or 3 people a year . Who walk 4 miles down from CR 17 to get to it . Wildermuth: Who knows it 's there? ' Ahrens: Yeah , right . But you know I do have a problem with it . 'I guess Steve , maybe you could explain what you mean if there are complaints . I mean we get a lot of complaints from a lot of people and some of them ' have some merit and a lot of them don 't . If an association is approved for putting one of these things in and a neighbor maybe , I don 't know do they have to be right next door to the beachlot or are they across the lake from the beachlot . If they say I don 't like the way that looks , then do' we pull ' it? Emmings;: I would presume that if a person that , well first of all . You ' would any should come in before we permit it because they 're going to have to , to get a conditional use permit they 're going to have to give notice to the neighbors that they 're planning to put one of these things in and everybody pretty much knows what they look like so you expect to see those neighbors in here complaining then . And frankly , I 'd have a hard time unless the association , if you have a neighbor who says I don 't want to look out . I don 't mind looking out my window at people playing on a beach ' but I do mind looking out my window and seeing a blue hut there that people are going in and out of constantly . I don 't want to do that . I 'd have a hard time , unless the association could tell me how they were going to ' screen it in a way so that that would be the satisfaction of that homeowner , I would say they don 't get it . Ahrens: What if they come in after the fact? Emmings: After what fact? Ahrens: After it 's already granted . Emmings: Who? Who comes in? Ahrens: Well some neighbor who lives there . Emmings: Coming in and saying what? Ahrens : They don 't like it . They don 't like to look at it . I Planning Commission Meeting 1 Novernher 7 , 1990 - Page 16 Krauss : If I could . Anybody can make a complaint against things at any time and the most we can do is. follow up on that . And if it 's a complaint that we can 't resolve at a staff level that we think is verifiable , we 'll 11 bring the item back before you and the City Council to re-evaluate if they 're violated the conditions of the approval . And if they have , you can yank their permit . Ahrens : I like the intent statement that Steve added onto this but I think that maybe the rest of the wording may be a little too restrictive . Emmings: I guess my notion is just that if we 're going to venture into this , which I 'm not sure we should , but if we 're going to venture into this , -I think we should be real restrictive to start with and if they turn II out to be no problem , maybe we want to make it easier for people . But it 'sll going to be harder to go back and get more restrictive . Well , it might not be . I shouldn 't say that . I was thinking it would be harder to get more 11 restrictive later . It 's harder to take something away once somebody has it . But if there 's a demonstrated problem , I 'm sure we could find a way toll do that . Ahrens : That 's all I have . Conrad: Thanks Joan . ' Wildermuth : Doesn 't Steve want to make this motion? - Conrad: Well , I have a real tough time with this one . I think a case could be made for allowing them on certain properties but I don 't see the restrictiveness yet which I think everybody has said . There are just so many negatives that can occur . It 's just one of these things saying why II are we doing this in the first place . As many outlots as we have or beachlots , we really haven 't been , that have been in existence for 10-15 years , I really haven 't heard all that much demand for this . The notes II that we have from one resident who has . You really have to be within 350 feet of the beachlot to be a member of that beachlot and I guess I 'm not . Emmings: 1 ,000 isn 't it? ' Conrad: Ah , it is 1 ,000 . But even so , that still doesn't seem to be a big inconvenience to me . Yet on the other hand ,. I think I could be persuaded ill we had the right restrictions and we don't right now. On the sideyard setback , if somebody put a chemical toilet within 20 feet of my property line I 'd go wild . I just , I 'd go bezerk you know . That is so far away II from what we 're intending . A beachlot of a priviledge . It 's not a right . It is a priviledge , not a right . It allows more people access which is a priviledge on that lake and whatever that means to different people . It really is an important difference yet here you can 't impinge on the neighbors with the volume of people . I can consider designing an ordinance!! that said that if beachlot owners , if members of the association are of that beachlot were on either side of the beachlot , then I 'm passified a little bit because they 're part of the process. They 're part of the decision making process or the process that the owner who subdivided this land in the beginning had to deal with when he subdivides it but if that beachlot is abutting on individual residents that 's not part of that particular recreational beachlot . I think we don't have the controls right I Planning Commission Meeting November 7 , 1990 - Page 17 • now . So what I 'm saying , without belaboring the issue , 50 feet is not . Well , I can 't build a little leanto within 75 feet of a lake and therefore the F,0 foot in our current recommendation has to go to 75 . It just has to . 25 foot from the sideyard doesn 't make any sense to me at all . That 's just , I just don 't want that . There 's got to be more protecting a neighbor . I think the length of time that Steve said is important . I ' think there should be a penalty or some recourse worked into the ordinance . I think the portable toilet has to be colored to be , you know I 've seen a lot of ugly ones that aren 't necessarily the prettiest things in the world . ' I 'm not sure what firmly means . Does that mean it 's on a slab? I guess my bottom line is I don 't see anything I can vote favorably for tonight so if somebody wants to make a motion and wants my vote , the best they can do is to table it otherwise I 'll vote no . Emmings : What would you do , can you tell us what restrictions you 'd want so maybe we could put something together here or do you want to work on it? Conrad: I think I said the things that I felt . I think if surrounded , if that beachlot was surrounded by other members or properties , then I could Jvote for that . Emmings: The trouble with that though Ladd is in the subdivisions where you h.-,, - beachlots as part of your subdivision , the neighbors on each side ' aren 't part of the beachlot . They have their own beach . They have their ow•-i le:Eeehore so that 's , so right away that doesn 't exist . But the real problem here is that on most of the older beachlots , see now we 've got to i have 200 feet on lakeshore . You 've got quite a bit of space to work with . 3 ,000 square feet but on the old ones they 're all , some are 25 feet wide . I think that one on Lake Minnewashta is 25 . How wide is yours? How much lakeshore have you got? Gene Christensen : It 's 9S I think . Emmings: Yeah , and there on that one you 've got on one side of you there 's a home . I • Gene Christensen: Both sides . Emmings : Both sides? They are private homes that have no , they 're lakeshore property or nothing to do whatever with that subdivision or the use of this . Conrad: See in that case I would have to , the only way I would grant something in that case Steve would be if the neighbor agreed. That 's the only way I would do it . One , I 've got to be satisfied that environmentally we 've taken care of the situation . There is a reason the other communities ' haven 't allowed these and I don 't think we should be real naive . It 's a problem . Tipping over and maintenance and smell and you know , the smells of chemical toilets are not great . We 're talking about McGlynn 's , I don 't want to be next to that smell . Now there are ways to solve that problem . 11 It 's not that it 's absolute but it 's a real pain . Administratively we 're creating a pain for the city . If we have to monitor . If we have to deal with this . I can visualize a need but again, I would have to look at it on a case by case basis . I would have to inform the neighbors and if they felt it was offensive , I would have to decline. I would have to reject the 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 7 , 1990 - Page 18 • use . So if we work the language in that way , then the beachlot has a 11 chance az long as I 've solved the environmental things and some of the setback things . Then I would feel good about it . Ahrens : I don 't think we can solve the environmental problems . I mean it 's there and it may be tipped over and it may cause problems . Conrad: Well no , if it 's firmly and I guess I just challenge what firmly . In this draft it says firmly and that 's what I say . Is that a concrete slab where it 's bolted down and then it 's going to stay . If it 's screened , ' what does screened mean? One tree . Ahrens : Well I don 't think so . Conrad: But see that 's what , if we 're going to put the ordinance in . Ahrena • It says fully screened . 1 Conrad: Okay , so one tree on each side? And what kind of tree? I 'm getting picky but again , you 've got to have that down . If you want to have a conditional use permit , you 've got to know what you 're talking about . Now, it 's not that we 're going to get different dimensions of the portable . We know what it is . We know that it's this big by this big so what are we talking about? I guess I 'd prefer to be as definite as possible if we want' to alloy; it . I 'm not real convinced I want to tamper with it but if the balance of you feel it 's worth responding to the City Council 's need , then I t- nk we should put some specifics in here to deal with it . Yes sir . G:=r- Christensen: I think I feel the same way as you do as far as looks . I mean obviously if I lived there I wouldn 't like it either but you 're talking about putting trees . You 're just talking 1 tree or 2 trees . Being !' I 'm part of the association , I want to hide it just as much as you do . We w;rt to make it look nice . Conrad: And that 's where I want to leave the problem because you 'll take II care of it because you live there and that 's really what I want to make sure of . I want to keep out of this mess and let the association take care ' of it but what happens in those situations is the immediate neighbors and that 's what I 'm most concerned with. How do we handle , how do we make it? You can work out things within your association but how do we take care of the immediate neighbor and that 's the issue that I have to address myself . Emmings: In response to that Ladd . Now the one that you had on your lot , because I drive by there all the time, you couldn't , you essentially 11 couldn 't see it from the lake unless you looked for it . They had it way back towards the road . It didn't look great from the roadside but it didn 't look bad either . I don't think it was really objectionable . Then II we 've got this one on Lake Minnewashta Heights . This narrow 25 , I think it 's only 25 feet wide . They had one down there all summer . I never saw it from the lake except a couple times when I looked for it and then I saw 11 it and it 's just sitting out there . They have residential neighbors on both sides and I don't think either one of them could see it due to the topography . So there maybe it 's perfectly appropriate and there 's no way they met any setbacks like this because it 's 25 feet wide . They couldn 't II meet any setbacks . So these are going to have to be reviewed on a case by 1. Planning Commission Meeting November 7 , 1990 - Page 19 case tasis and it may be that somebody like Minnewashta Heights could get the neighbors to agree to have .it by simply going to them and saying we 've had it here for 3 years . It hasn 't been a problem for you . Would you sign something that would allow us to continue to have it? So I don 't know . I think it needs. to be rewritten . ' Conrad: I agree with what you 're saying Steve . I agree with that . I think there 's so many different situations with these beachlots . It 's hard to develop an ordinance that meets them all . Sometimes they 're screened . Sometimes the neighbors are a distance away and won't be a bother . You know Lotus Lake Estates is a good example . They have 3 ,000 feet of lakeshore . They can put it there and nobody 's going to know . You know and there 's . Wildermuth: Lotus Lake Estates? Is that the one up on the hill there? Conrad: Yeah . See they 've got 3 ,000 feet . In that case , there 's no problem with neighbors but then again , we have a lady who 's talking about , who 's writing us and saying hey , I don 't want that going next to me and that 's real valid because again , you look at the problems of smell and. ' sight and that 's , I don 't think that 's the intent of what we want a beachlot to be . ' Emmings: I 'd move that we table this and try , I think it 's worth persuing am I think we ought to work some more on drafting it a little bit . I 'd like to take a shot at it . At drafting something . Krauss : One note of caution though . I always preface this by saying I 'm not an attorney , especially when I 'm confronted by 3 of them . We can 't ' write an ordinance that says if you do x through z you 're entitled to something unless somebody objects . Emmings: Well , but we could require them to secure the consent or not have ' it . That could be a requirement . If what you 're saying is right , then we could require consent . Batzli : I guess I would be more in favor that it would be revocable by the city if either safety or environmental concerns over the toilet arose . I don 't know that I want to preface their right to continue using the toile on a neighbor . Emmings: Once it 's granted. Ahrens: I agree because in that situation where , like you said there was a beachlot that 's only 25 feet wide or something and nobody can see it on either side but what if they complain anyway? ' Krauss: Right . With conditional uses you 're talking about a class of uses that are considered extraordinary and potentially obnoxious but if they meet criteria that you 've established , then you 're committing yourselves to i say okay . I mean it met the criteria , it 's fine with us . One of the ■ things you also have to recognize though is you 're not , when you 're reviewing CUP 's you 're not limited to those 4 or 5 criteria that we came up with or Steve , what you 'll come up with . There 's the 8 or 10 , whatever it is , Mom and Apple Pie CUP conditions that preface that section and they Planning Commission Meeting November 7 , 1990 - Page 20 gi you a great deal of latitude . 11 Conrad: But it 's also the intent statement . You know what we 've got to doll is be able to do a good job of helping staff or helping neighbors understand what the point is . That 's why Steve 's introduction of what we 're trying to accomplish is very important because what I don 't want to II do is lead somebody down the pike and say hey , you might be able to get this . Or it is yours for sure . They have to know the intent for what we 're trying to do and when you 're controlling smells and stuff like this , it 's a bigger deal . I think you all have to put yourself in the position II of being next to one and say okay , how would I want to be guarded . How should the City guard me and I think there 's ways to do it . I 'm not sure what the words are . There 's a motion to table . Is there a second? Batzli : Second . Emmings moved, Batzli seconded to table action on Zoning Ordinance ' Amendment to amend Section 20-263(2), Recreational Beachlots to allow portable chemical toilets on recreational beachlots for further study. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously . ' • Conrad: We appreciate you coming in . I said a lot of negative things but trying to make sure we get the right thing there . It 's not just yours it applies to everybody . Emmings: We 've got time to work on it before next spring too . Conrad : Yeah , but we appreciate you coming in and talking to us and listening to what we have to say and maybe we can call upon you to help us as we draft something . I PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTIONS 20-695, 20-715, 20-735, 20-755, 20-774 , 20-795 AND 20-815 CONCERNING ALL COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS TO INCREASE FLEXIBILITY IN ESTABLISHING PARKING SETBACKS BY ADOPTING A PERFORMANCE ORIENTED APPROACH TO STANDARDS AND AN AMENDMENT TO ' ESTABLISH A REQUIREMENT FOR BUFFER YARDS IN THE IOP DISTRICT. Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Conrad called the public hearing to order . Batzli moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Ahrens: The buffer yards you talked about in relationship to the comprehensive plan , is this what , the 50 .foot buffer yard. Is that what well put in? Krauss: 50 foot along rights-of-ways 100 foot from internal property lines . Ahrens: I don 't have anything. Wildermuth : It looks fine to me . 1 Iyled Pam I WI Services • I Group'" BROWNING-FERRIS INPUSTRIES 1 . IFebruary 28, 1991 , IIPROCEDURE TO STAKE TOWN POR".ABi. RESTROOMS FOR PRI"ATE AND PUBLIC USE Each BFI unit is motnted on skids Which extend from the front and back II 1 to 3". To stake the units to the ground ''e use 3' wooden stakes that are driven intc th_ ground •-r.d then r:a:iled to *,.he skid on all four sides of the unit. IWhen sta:ed into ti-1 ground the unit r_ nnct be moved by a storm, small children or a s ingl€, adult. It would be possible to move the unit by being hi;, by a vehicle or a c:roux cf adults or. each side of the unit, IIeither of these wou:.d cause damage to the unit. If the unit is tipped over 3F' has an additional safeguard of the contents 1 being spilled out by the use of a specially designed tank that is slope designed so that the contents cannot spill out if tipped backward and cannot spill out forward unless tha tank is over 1/2 full. IIIf the contents dc spill out on the ground, the chemical we use is bio- degradable, to be environmentally safe. II We find the units t:1at are t peed over most frequently are units that are on concrete or bloc:ctOp. Used at landings, docks or parks. These areas have been able to decrease the vanaalism by building wooden shelters around I the restrooms i..o contain, the unit leaving very little room to move or rock the unit, thus discouraging ',vandalism. 1 Myrna Kragness Special Events Cooriinator II . 1 216 27TH AVE. NO. • MI'1NEAPOLIS.MINN 55411 - (612)529-3689 Z0E ' 39t 008 i. dlSlQ Ida W083 11 : 11 18 , in E3d j CITYOF 1111111111! CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 ' FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner One 1 DATE: March 3, 1991 SUBJ: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Section 20-263, 1 Recreational Beachlots (Two Portable Chemical Toilets) On November 7, 1990, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposed 1 ordinance amendment to Section 20-263, regarding portable chemical toilets on recreational beachlots. Issues were raised concerning setbacks from the lake, screening of the structure and firmly anchoring the structure to the ground to prevent tipping. The Plaanning Commission tabled action on the proposed ordinance and directed staff to conduct further research. Chairman Emmings proposed that he would undertake drafting of an alternative ordinance. Staff contacted BFI 's Portable Restroom Division who is one of the suppliers of the City's portable toilets which are located in Lake Ann Park. We spoke to their Special Events Coordinator, Ms. Myrna Kraness to inquire about whether there is a way to prevent portable toilets from tipping. Ms. Kraness indicated that there are stakes that are 3 feet long which are driven into the ground. The portable toilets are mounted on skids. The stakes are railed to the skid on all four sides of the unit. This method is usually used to firmly anchor the portable toilets. Staff inquired whether a portable toilet could still be tipped if somebody tried to. She stated that it would be possible to move the unit if it was hit by a vehicle or a group of adults on each side of the unit (Attachment 2) . Chairman Emmings invited staff to review a new draft ordinance for 1 recreational beachlots that allow portable chemical toilets. This amended version will require applicants to appear before the Planning Commission on an annual basis and permission would be granted for the time period from June 15 through September 5 to use a portable toilet. The consent of all residents using the beachlot would have to be submitted to the city in written form. The setback from the ordinance high water mark would have to be 75 feet. This version seems to address the issue in a fashion that ATTACHMENT #5 1 I ZOA - Portable Chemical Toilets • February 28, 1991 Page 2 would allow staff to work with each beachlot individually and ' assess each application on its own merits. A public hearing on the ordinance was held in November. Thus, the Planning Commission is in a position to act upon the ordinance should you so desire. ATTACHMENTS 1. Staff Report and Planning Commission minutes dated November 7, 1990. 2 . Memo from BFI Portable Restroom Division 3 . Proposed Ordinance Amendment _1 • I I 1 I 1 • Planning Commission Meeting , March 6 , 1991 - Page' S • Ceil Strauss : Right . Emmings: What would be the advantage of that when we have the wetland ordinance that we have? Ceil Strauss : That I 'm not sure of the details of your wetland ordinance . I Krauss: I think that we do a more specific and more appropriate job . . . Conrad: What do you think about chemical toilets within 100 feet? I Ceil Strauss : I already took a look at that . I saw that you had the setback there of 75 feet in your proposed ordinance there . It seems like all reasonable distance . You definitely , I would want to see it meet the structure setback . I 'm assuming these are recreational development lakes . Olsen: .. .accessory structures 10 feet back? , Ceil Strauss: Oh , I wouldn't want it 10 feet back . Now that 's not a water oriented accessory structure because you don 't have to have it by the water . Emmings: First of all you don 't have a principle use on those lands so you can 't have it an accessory structure right? So I don 't think it would fit . ' Ceil Strauss : Well actually , we would probably not consider it , we :may not II consider it a permanent structure . It hasn 't come forward to my attention in the past so I haven 't guidance on that but there 's a lot of situations where something 's considered temporary and our rules only consider the permanent structures . That happens in our protected water regulations too . We get people that will stick boats on blocks and the neighbors complained because they think it looks terrible . It 's on the bed of the lake but we have to consider it a temporary structure . You get into some gray areas with that kind of thing . Emmings: Anybody else have any questions at this time? Okay . Well , thank you very much . I Ceil Strauss: Sure . Emmings: We 're going to shift the agenda around a little bit because ' apparently there are people here on the zoning ordinance amendment regarding chemical portable toilets on recreational beachlots so we 're going to take that item next . ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING CHEMICAL PORTABLE TOILETS ON RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS. I Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item . Emmings: By way of a little further introduction from me , I drafted what 's II here because Sharmin called me up and said I had to right then and then I had to fax it to her so it could get on the meeting . I put it off for like 2 months and then I had to do it in 5 minutes so I 've made some changes , myself . I 've got some things that . ATTACHMENT #6 I Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 9 11 Conrad : What are ou referring to Steve? Y g t Emmings: The last two pages is the draft that we 're going to be looking at . ' Batzli : It didn 't look like a draft to me . It looked pretty formal and finalized . Emmings: Okay . I guess in some ways when I got done with this I thought gee , it 's so hard to do that I wonder if people are going to think it 's not worth doing it and maybe that 's okay but the one thing that I added under ( a ) was that , it says setbacks from ordinary high water mark shall be 75 feet . And I think maybe we should add that side and front yard setbacks should be maximized to aid and achieving a maximum screening . And in the reason I didn 't put in side or front yard setbacks there was that I know we have , I know that on the lake where I live , on Minnewashta , there 's a beachlot with a portable chemical toilet and I don 't think that beachlot , do you know how , is that 25 feet Dick? Do they have 25 feet of shore there? That 's all isn 't it? So I couldn 't think of anyway , and then I know there 's another one on the other side of Lake Minnewashta , remember where they had several hundred feet of shoreline and I couldn 't think of any way to write side yard setbacks for 25 foot lot . I mean. it just doesn 't make sense so I thought let 's leave them out but the more I think about it , I just thought maybe we could say that they should be maximized to help achieve those screening . And then I put in another one , I don 't know where it goes . I put it in as , well it could be a paragraph (e ) or wherever you 'd put it and that is that a portable -chemical toilet should be securely anchored to the ground . That was in the first one and it wasn 't in this one . I missed that and that ought to be in here and I asked ' Sharmin to call them and ask them how they anchor them and apparently they do have some way to do that . There 's something else I wanted to say here and I can 't remember what it was right now . Oh . On the first page of your staff report Sharmin it says that the amended version will require applicants to appear before the Planning Commission on an annual basis and that wasn 't my intent . I put it in here that , under ( c ) that it would require approval from the City planning department . I thought this would be an adminstrative approval by the City planning department . That 's why I put it that way . I don 't see any reason for them to come through here . Batzli : How about annual approval though? Did you just want them to do it once? Emmings: You know , I didn 't think about it . If they 're using , I guess to some extent if they can 't screen it well enough , then they have to get the neighbor 's consent in writing and that 's only good for one year . So it probably wouldn 't be a bad idea to make it annual because otherwise the 11 informatio isn 't going to be fresh on who's responsible for maintaining it and I think that 's a real important item . So yeah , it probably ought to be an annual . You may want to have a permit fee associated with it too to pay for the processing cost . Krauss: Can I clarify something Chairman? Now the initial time this is approved it would be approved as a CUP through the Planning Commission or not? 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting , March 6, 1991 - Page 10 �: don 't know . Emmings: I d t k w . I saw this as something they 'd come to the City for a permit for . Krauss : Well I think from our perspective , we 'd prefer that at least the I first time through , it came through here with the public hearing process . It adds formal notification . There 's an opportunity for people to comment . " I would be relunctant to approve those things initially at a staff level . Emmings: So then it could be renewed on an annual basis? Krauss: Renewals sure because we process complaints and we can go out and check compliance for conditions . • Emmings: That 'd be alright then . That 's fine with me if that works ' better . And the other thing that was in the staff report that wasn 't , it says the consent of all the residents using the beachlot would have to be submitted to the city in written form and that 's just a little wrong . It 's 11 neighbors that have to consent . In those cases like a 25 foot wide or someplace where they can 't screen the thing , that 's where you 'd need neighbors consent in writing in order to have it at all . I wanted to convey the idea that if everything is just right , you can have one of thesell and if everybody doesn 't agree , then you can 't have one . I dpn 't think they 're important enough to give to everybody . They seem tome to be strictly a convenience . I think they 're important when some of the beachlots , a neighborhood uses them that lives and again I keep , I only know the specific examples around my lake but there 's one I think maybe that you folks are associated with where everybody_ lives across Minnewashta ' Parkway in an area of homes there and they all come across there and if some mom comes down in the middle of the afternoon or dad with their kids , and they 've got 2 kids with them and one of them has to go back home , that II means everybody has to go back home to go to the bathroom or whatever and it just seems to me to be a real reasonable thing to have for people 's convenience if you can handle them in some way . Anyhow. Okay . Now we said we had a public hearing on this but I 'm really wondering if we have because this draft wasn 't in front of anybody who got notice of a public hearing . This has never been , is that important? Krauss: You did have a public hearing on an earlier version of this . Yes , " it was a different version but I think it's fair to say that those who were interested in participating in the discussion had an opportunity and we 11 notified those same people for tonight . If you 're comfortable with the ordinance , I would feel comfortable with you passing it along to the City Council tonight . Emmings: Are there , did you come on this issue? Gene Christensen: Yes . I Emmings: Did you get to look at the ordinance the way it 's been drafted? Gene Christensen: We just got it tonight . We 're looking at it . , Emmings: Do you want to make any comments on what 's here? II I Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 11 Gene Christensen: I have no objections to anything and I think it sounds reasonable to everything you 've got in there . In regards to signatures from people . I mean on a yearly basis is somebody supposed to go to all the houses and get signatures saying is it okay for this year? That kind of seems like an issue that should be , I mean I can see it should be done but what 's the process for volunteering for something like this . Emmings: With your application , at least the way I see it . With your IL application to the city for your permit for the year , if you don 't have any way to screen it from view , you 'd have to go to the residential neighbors , in your case , on each side . I know there 's plans . You 've got houses on both sides of yours right? Gene Christensen: Yes . Emmings: Now the house that 's on the north side of yours is going to be town down and that 's going to be subdivided . I know that 's in the works and there 's going to be two new houses in there . And to the south of you 11. there 's a house so you 'd have to go to those two houses and say , if the city thought you couldn 't screen it well enough , you 'd have to say . One thing you could say is it was there last year and were there any problems with it and otherwise sign this form giving us your consent so we can show the city you don 't have any objections . Is there anybody else here who 's got comments on this? We don 't really have a public hearing going I _guess . Well we 'll see who 's got comments here . Tim? Erhart : Well okay . I absolutely agree that the Planning Commission should not review this on an annual basis . It should be a staff function . I guess I 'm more inclined to have it completely a staff function . If it ' meets the ordinance , on what basis do we deny it anyway if it comes to the Planning Commission? I guess going a little bit deeper , I 'm bothered with , in the first place I think it 's a great idea to allow chemical toilets on beachiots but I 'm wondering if we shouldn 't specify a little bit about which beachiots are allowed and which shouldn't be . I mean each lot that 's 25 foot wide with residents on either side , I 'm not sure we should be in the business of allowing chemical toilets at all . Emmings: Well I guess if the neighbors don't care , do you? ' Ellson: But if the neighbors don 't care . ' Erhart: Okay . If the neighbors don't care . I guess what I 'm getting to 11 is , let's say you 've got a 200 . What's the current ordinance for beachlot . Is it 200 feet or 180 or what? 200 feet . You 've got a 200 foot beachlot and you 've got 40 ,000 square feet . Let 's say you 've got an acre and one 11 neighbor is , his house is 200 feet away so he 's got 50 foot setback . He 's 150 feet away from the proposed chemical toilet and he 's going to say well , I 'm just not going to let you do it . Therefore , I 'm not going to agree . Now that 's going to prohibit . Ellson: No , read the part about screening . You only get the neighbors consent if you can 't screen it from them . I think that 's the way I look at I it . Erhart: Is that the way it is? Okay . 1 Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 12 Ellson: So if that guy is that far away , you could prove that . 1 Erhart: Alright , so we 're not saying that one neighbor can disallow putting this on there? Emmings: No . At least I wasn't thinking about it that way . Ellson: I didn 't read it that way . Look at number 5 and see if that 's I where you get it . Emmings: I don't know if it says it that way but the notion was , you've got to screen it from view because they 're ugly . If you can 't screen it , you can 't have it . But on the other hand, if the neighbors that have to look at it all the time don 't object , and you can get them to consent to it , then why should we object? That 25 foot beachlot on Minnewashta had one last summer and I only think I noticed it once or two times driving by on the lake . You can 't see it from the road . I don 't know what the 11 neighbors thought about it . Erhart : I guess I was looking at a staff recommendation . Where does it say in there? Are we looking at staff recommendation or are we looking at II your? Emmings : No . 1 Ellson: Look at the ordinance . Last page . - Erhart : Maybe I was concentrating on the wrong thing . Well okay . The question arises , let 's say that that 's covered. What happens if you have a 25 foot wide beachlot , as someone had mentioned earlier . The other thing, Steve where did you come up with , what was the purpose of the June 15th thru September 5th? Emmings: Right out of the air . I thought they might want to have it still " there Labor Day but certainly not beyond Labor Day and I just put in a few days for them to get it off of there . June 15th because that 's about when school gets out and I think they start getting heavy use . Honestly I think from what I 've observed, if they were there from June 15th to the middle of " August or the end of July would probably be enough . The area of the heavy use of the lake is really very short . Erhart: Okay . I guess I would have thought if we were going to do it , I I guess I would have just picked Memorial Day. Ellson: Memorial Day to Labor Day . , Erhart: It 's not a big deal but I guess I remember the kids swimming before June 15th . , Emmings: Well that 's fine . We can change it. Erhart: The other thing . On the chemical toilets that we have at the park , do we have a contract with someone to maintain those? Who empties and maintains those? Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 13 Al-Jaff: BFI does . • Erhart: Why not insist that they have a contract with someone to maintain those as part of the conditional use permit? Emmings: Can you even rent them without a contract to maintain. them? ' Gene Christensen: That 's an automatic thing . If you rent them , they come and clean it . That 's part of the rent process . The contract . 1 Erhart: I guess that was my thought . Gene Christensen: It's going to be once or even twice a week , depending on if it 's used heavy or upon request . Erhart : We write it as if someone , part of the group that is using it is ' going to be maintain it . That 's the impression I 'm left with what I 've read but then again it wouldn 't be the first mistake in reading this . Batzli : So you 'd want as part of the application process a copy of their 11 rental agreement . Erhart : There 's got to be a contract to maintain it . That way there 's no 11 doubt left that someone 's going to leave it unmaintained . Elison: So number 4 doesn 't tell you that? Erhart : Well I 'm trying to , I 'm strengthening it I guess . The plan for maintaining it could be that well gee , Nick 's son over there , 11 year old Nick needs a summer job and he 's going to maintain it . Batzli : Yeah right . Emmings: We probably wouldn 't approve that . Erhart : Okay . In that sense I 'm making it easier for the staff to , okay . ' I guess I 'm also trying to push this over towards the staff approval even though Paul doesn 't like it . It seems , it's a real good idea but I think a small thing is the ordinance is done correctly. That 's all I had . Conrad: Paul would this be , what would apply for a sideyard setback as Steve 's ordinance is drafted right now? There 's not in his ordinance . Krauss: There 's none and that 's one of the reasons why I preferred that we didn 't have it at a staff level initially . There's a lot of subjective judgment that has to be made here. You run a little bit of a risk when you do that in an ordinance but you lessen the risk when you have 7 Planning Commissioners deciding subjectively what .s proper standard is than you do if I do it . Conrad: I just see that as a gap right now and I 'd have to go along with Paul . One , I don 't like chemical toilets . I think it's just taking a risk and a lot of other communities don't . Don't like them. Don 't want them. Don 't allow them . Steve., I think you did a nice job of drafting this . I think it got the intent of what . It puts some flexibility in terms of Planning Commission Meeting 1 March 6 , 1991 - Page 14 allowing it where there 's very , where we 're not hurting the neighbors . We 're not hurting the environment . So from the standpoint of the draft , it 's not too bad except for some , it still is open and in that case I would ' not want staff to see it . It has to come here unless we put those guidelines in and I don 't know that we 're smart enough to put the guidelines in right now because every situation you 've got outlots or II beachlots that are 25 feet wide to thousands of feel wide and that varies the same . The neighbors vary so I don 't know. In terms of keeping it flexible , the way it 's written, I think we have to review it . At least the first time through . On an annual basis , then I think staff can do that bull there 's just no doubt in my mind the way it 's drafted now , we have to see it . And again , I 'm real nervous about chemical toilets . Real , real nervous but I can go along with this if we see it and we protect the ' neighbors and we protect the environment . Emmings: Anything else? Annette? , Ellson: No . I thought it was well written . I guess I can understand Paul 's idea of having it come through the Planning Commission but I 'd can 't see it ongoing but I could go along with that . And I think while they have ' some risk associated with them , I think that some of the alternates that people are taking advantage of now is probably even worst so I think you ought to have those toilets there . I Batzli : I think the benefits of allowing these in certain instances outweigh the disadvantage of the site . Pollution , if you will . I think the risk of not having them , having lived on the lake growing up on "Lake Minnetonka is that people tend to use the lake directly as a toilet and especially younger kids or people who have a long walk home . And so I think this is actually an improvement over what you might otherwise see on II the lake . Crass as that might sound . So I 'm for this . I mean I see these on some of the larger lakes and around public lakes in Minneapolis and things like that . I actually think they 're a good idea and if it 's administered properly, and that 's the key. That 's the key with all of our ordinances is the enforcement aspect and if this isn 't enforced , then we 're not doing a good job and then you 're risking the pollution of the lake . If these things fill up , they 're not properly emptied and some kids on a joy II ride with their Jeep tip it over , you may get something to go into the lake . And so I think we do need the setback to at least minimize that sort of problem because I 've seen several instances , and especially on Minnetonka where, at the Narrows, which is a fishing spot , they put them right next to the Narrows and people push them right in from time to time . It also happened at Libb's Lake and some other places where you have to close beaches and you end up in a real sorry state if you don't properly enforce , administer , tie them to the ground. But like when you contacted that person , they basically said if you have several adults pushing it or a Jeep , you 're going to be able to knock the thing over . So it 's something II that might be a problem but like I said, •I think the advantages outweigh those negatives . I liked Steve 's additions . I would add three things . One is, in paragraph ( c ). I would have it read, use of a portable chemical toilet shall require initial approval by the Chanhassen Planning Commission " after conducting a public hearing . In each subsequent year , the application shall be reviewed for approval by the City Planning department . gi That way , the applicant has to come in. They have a shot . All the neighbors have a shot . It 's a public hearing. We can then apply the Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 15 I- standards that we feel are appropriate and thereafter the administrative approvals would follow in subsequent years . Paragraph , as it currently reads , in paragraph ( d )( 2 ) . I would add at the end , after the word ordinance , or if the portable chemical toilet otherwise presents a nuisance . And I would also change the word revoked in the first sentence there in paragraph ( d ) , I would have it read denied or revoked . I would 11 actually change that whole paragraph to number ( e ) and insert a ( d ) that says , portable chemical toilets shall be securely anchored to the ground . I guess Steve already suggested that . Those are my comments . ' Farmakes: I live by the park in Greenwood Shores and I first noticed the need for a toilet facility there when I was walking through the trail one day and saw somebody going to the bathroom on a log . There are specific areas where people are channeled for recreation. Either ice fishing on the lake or in the summertime swimming , where those facilities aren 't available and rather than hop in the car and drive into town or drive to a gas station , when nature calls , they make the decision to do it there . So there are some areas where these things are needed but I would use discretion as to where those are . I would hope that the City would be very careful as to how many of those are handed out . In particular if somebody 's going to do it privately on their own , whether or not they 're going to* maintain it . I 'd rather see these as a commercial type structures ,- that are maintained commercially and as you said , that they have proof of maintenance contract and that they 're being emptied properly. About twice a year the one at our park is tipped over and these are BFI type thing . They 're made out of plastic and there 's a vent at the top in the summer and when they 're tipped over , and it 's on a grade , effluent just comes out . They 're not in any particular area or sand or gravel area. They're just on grass . I think the maintenance truck backs up to it . Lifts up the old one and puts down the new one . They don 't empty it . I don't know how else , you know if you allow that , even in a park , to get too close to the lake , it 's going to go down the natural slope when it falls over . On 3 , on this section here where it says portable toilets be firmly anchored to the ' ground . Is there a definition of what firmly anchored is? The reason I ask , for these maintenance things they seem to have a thing where they lift them up and drop them off . Or at least the one by our place . Is there , does that mean a chain to it or that we bolt it to the ground? ' Emmings: That 's why I asked Sharmin to call and see what they did about that and apparently what she found out , at least from BFI , that they put 2 foot long spikes that are driven into the ground to hold the thing down . I 'd never heard of that before . Farmakes: The one on ours is not adhered to the ground at all . Emmings: Maybe you have to ask for it . Elison: I think you probably would . I 'm sure they get people that request it but it 's probably easier for their guys not to have it down so in some of those ballpark areas , they probably don't even do it . Farmakes: I think it would be nice if we define what , so that it couldn't be tipped over if they were allowed. If that 's how they do it . And the other question I have on 6 is the facility shall be constructed of I 1 Planning Commission Meeting 1 March 6 , 1991 - Page 16 materials compatible with the materials used in the neighborhood . Does facilities included , does that mean a shelter? Emmings: I think you 're looking at an old draft . The new draft is the last two pages in the packet . Batzli : We got rid of the materials . Steve got rid of the materials I requirements from that draft you were looking at . Emmings: I don't foresee anybody building their all and maybe we should make that clear . That they come from some commercial vendor and are maintained by some commercial vendor . That 's what I had in mind . Ellson: That 's why you 'll be able to deny that when you see the plan . , Farmakes: That would keep them from deteriorating or that they 're at a particular level of workmanship and performance so you know that they 're I not going to fail . Emmings: Somebody said last time we talked about this that they knew II something about whether they leaked if they 're tipped over . And now what you 're saying is very different than what I heard before . I don 't know . Al-Jaff: There 's a letter from BFI that addresses that issue . Right I before the ordinance and it says that if this is tipped over , that it usually doesn 't leak but I don 't know if there are any safeguards . They also state that they use chemicals that are biodegradable to protect the environment . Emmings: Yeah , it says here if the unit is tipped over . I Ellson: Backwards it cannot spill out forward unless the tank is over half full . Erhart: That provides the way out is to require that they put a kind of wall around it . Fence or a wall real close to it and you can 't tip it over . As you suggested in that last paragraph. II Ellson: Then it 's not so portable . In and out . Emmings: Then how do you get in it? ' Batzli : Well what they do at some parks to avoid it is they require a fence be built and basically the fence, or it 's a screen. Fence and basically it hinges so in order to tip the toilet , you 'd have to run over a II pretty good fence . They do that in Burnsville and some other parks. Farmakes: The one at our place , or in Greenwood Shores is just a portable II unit but the same unit is inside the Carver Beach area over by the skiing area . That 's in some sort of enclosure so they must take that out or drain , that in a different way . So they must have more than one way of maintaining them . Emmings: Have you got anything else Jeff? 11 Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 17 Farmakes : No , that 's it . Emmings: I guess the way I think about this is that it 's an experiment . I 'm not sure that we ought to have portable chemical toilets in beachlots but I know that there are some and I know that there are people who want them . I guess I regard this strictly as an experiment and if it doesn 't work , I hope it 's written such that w.e can prevent them . If we find things that are wrong with doing it , if we decide to go ahead and do it , we want to be sure we 've got a tight rope that we can pull it back and get rid of it because I can foresee that that might happen . But because there are ' people interested in having it , maybe it 's worth trying to do it to see if ' we can do it in a way where we can keep a reasonable handle on it . Is there anymore discussion on this? If there isn't , I 'll ask for a motion . Mike Mason : I just want to make a couple of comments . I share some of Ladd 's concerns about chemical toilets . I spend a fair amount , I live in Carver Beach and I spend a fair amount of time down there in the summer with my kids and I don 't care how often it 's cleaned, they stink . They 're very . . . Lake Ann , the ones at Lake Ann and clearly these won 't be used . anywhere near as much . I understand that but they do create an odor and I think that 's a concern . Listening to some of the commissioners , I find myself softening a little bit on that . I do think that if this is approved , it should be done on a yearly basis . You get the approval of all the people in the neighborhood want it . Well , in 3 years the neighbors change and there might be some . . . Certainly I think some kids are going to go use the lake for a bathroom whether you have a toilet for them or not . My guess is use by the lake would be lessen . Use of the lake would be lessen . I also share some of the concerns that Jeff raises about them being tipped over . Although the one in Carver Beach , I know they do have some sort of fence on one side of it so you really would have , it wouldn 't be just a matter of 4 or 5 people coming to knock it over . You really have to work at it to do it . I like what you 're saying about the experiment . What I see about that is once something like this gets in place , I think it 's pretty hard to remove it . I 'm just voicing my opinion on it , that 's all . Emmings: Dick? Dick Wing: I 'd just to mature this thing , it's got a lot of gray areas , before it sneaks out of here because then it just gets all the more ' confusing . Specifically I guess I don't understand where we wound up here on the setbacks . I look at Pleasant Acres who has no depth at all and they had 1 , 2 or 3 of them down there as I remember . They exist now. They 're in place now . Beaches have them now and I think they need to be controlled . I think there needs to be an ordinance to control the fact that they are going to exist . So I have two questions I 'd like to see clarified before it leaves the Planning Commission and one would be the ' setbacks . I think that needs to be clarified. Especially this one for Minnewashta Parkway area . It 's a very narrow lot with homes on both sides and new homes going in and that 's going to be a real issue because I 've had a phone call on it . I support the neighbors of the neighborhood and the owners of the property so I 'm kind of going back and forth here trying to do what 's fair . The other thing is screening. I think these are large structures . I think they 're very unsightly structures . They 're not compatible . . .beaches so the screening is a big issue . But to screen that 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 18 large of a building or structure on some of these smaller lots is a major II undertaking and I think that , I guess for me to support it , the screening has to be well defined . And then the neighbors that are requesting it , have to realize that there 's going to be quite a bit of inconvenience to them to properly screen it . Whether it 's done with vegetation or done with the proper fencing . I don 't know which would be best . I don 't have an opinion but the issues of the setback and screening , I think the Planning , Commission really needs to kind of set those in concrete a little bit . . . . here without those details . Emmings: My comment on that Dick is this . If we 're going to Specify the II screening and we 're going to specify the setbacks , then I don 't think we can do it . And the reason I don't think so is this . It 's going to have to be real site specific because you 've got such a variation . If for example II you 've got a situation like the one that Minnewashta Heights has , there 's no way . They had one down there last summer and there 's no way you could see it from the road . They 're only 25 feet wide so both neighbors on both sides could see it and you could see it from the lake . I don 't know how you 're going to write any kind of a sideyard setback for that place because even if you put it right in the middle , you 're only 12 1/2 feet away from each neighbor and that 's not far enough really . And I think for someone like them , it 's going to depend on the neighbors past experience with that . II If they didn 't like it there , this is a chance for them to put the kabosh on it , which I think they ought to have . A right I think they ought to have . But if it hasn't been offensive to them in the past and they know that signing a consent is only for one year at a time , they might say fine . Go ahead and do it . As far as screening goes , if I 've got again , a beachlot like that , there 's probably no way I can screen it other than building a structure and again , if the neighbors don't care , I don't know that we should care . And there will be some beachlots , I think where because of topography or other things. You know if you 've got one that 's II 300 feet of lakeshore that 's all trees and shrubs , you can probably put one someplace on there where nobody 's going to see it from anywhere . And that one would be real easy to do. But I don 't know , other than saying that we regard screening as critical and that if you can't screen it you can 't have it , I don't know if we can go further to say specifically how they 're going to screen it . There might even be places where you 'd prefer not to have them build a structure because the structure would be as ugly as the portable toilet itself. Mike Mason: Could you put something in the ordinance that would strengthen ll the site specific statement because I can just see hey , there 's one there. How come I can 't have one here. And I know you 've got something in here already . Emmings: Yeah . That 's why when we wrote the , I wrote the intent it says the City recognizes that maintenance and use of chemical toilets on some beachlots may be unsuitable because they cannot be adequately screened from " residential neighbors or lake users . That was sort of the point there . Maybe it 's not strong enough. Batzli : But then you clearly , you know in paragraph (d) that you say it could be denied or revoked based on violation of the intent of the ordinance . That intent statement does set forth that some lots might be unsuitable . It depends on if you want it strengthened . 1 Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 19 ' Erhart : I guess , going back to what my thought. was . You know we regulate whether you can have a dock depending on how many feet of shoreline you have so we have set precedent for looking at the size of these things and it determines what you can do with them . I guess when I was reading this , I wasn 't thinking of a 25 foot wide beachlot . I guess quite frankly in my mind , the purpose , is not the general purpose of this is to serve a beachlot that has higher than , fairly high use? And I guess when I think of a 25 foot wide beachlot , what 's the purpose of that? Is it just for the purpose for someone to get access to the water but not hang around there? Emmings : No . Erhart: What do they use it for? Emmings : It is very heavily used . And I have to say , well . You 're closer to it than I am Dick but I live what , 4 houses down from it or 5 houses down from it and it imposes . When I first looked at it I thought boy , that 's going to be a pain in the neck and it really is not at all . Erhart : Okay , but what , do families take their kids down there and picnic? Emmings: Oh yeah . Erhart : Is there a bigger area in the rear? Emmings: No , it 's just tiny and it 's very heavily used . Erhart : How do you keep the kids off of the neighbors lawns and stuff? Emmings: They have fences on both sides of it . I don 't know if they do keep the kids off the neighbors lawns but they fences on both sides of it and they seem to me to be very responsible in their use of it . It 's kept pretty neat . It looks pretty nice all the time as far as I can tell . Ellson: . . .the neighbors mind, then they have a chance to say no . Erhart: If you can 't , it isn 't wide enough. to have this thing so many feet away from the property line , then it isn 't big enough to have a Satellite . Conrad: But the neighbors aren 't going to decide . rEllson: What if they all say no , I 'm not going to sign it? Conrad: They can screen it . Batzli : They can screen it . Conrad: Remember the neighbors don't have control based on the way .the ordinance is worded . Only if you can 't screen it . Erhart: I 'm all for this . I think it 's a good idea but there comes a point I guess where the lot 's just not adequate physically to . Ellson: There 's one in all of Chanhassen that we 're talking about? 1 Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 20 Emmings: Again , I hate to be put in a position of defending this , and I feel kind of like I 'm doing it but the flip side of that Tim is that little one is getting heavier use . Minnewashta Heights , I don 't know how many boats they have out there which is something else we really need to get a handle on in the city because that thing grows every year and they 're not under the ordinance . I know they 're grandfathered in but they 've expanded the use of that tremendously over the years . But that heavy use may be more of an argument to have it than not to have it . I don 't know . Maybe it is . Batzli : I think it does . And given the nature of the use with a lot of II kids , I think that 's the kind of area that you need one of these . And the fact that it becomes odiferous actually probably means something positive , unfortunately . Somebody 's using that instead of going where they shouldn't . Mike Mason: It doesn 't to the neighbors though . You know if they 're getting that whiff through the window all night long . Ellson: But you know , I 've been around some of them and I know that I 've been around some smelly ones but I 've also been around some that are really clean . I don 't know if maybe those need to just be maintained more often . Maybe they need a daily clean-up or whatever it is but isn 't it possible to " complain about those things and have them improved? Because I 've really 11 been around some and I can 't believe that so many people went through it . Dick Wing: Again if I could offer an opinion . More than that , just during the Fire Department picnic at my house . . .the first two years we had one and , even though we put it as far off the yard as we could , it was no man 's land that day and the next time I said , you know let 's just use the house . It 's more pleasant but that 's neither here nor there . Specifically Minnewashta II with that narrow lot , what bothers me about these setbacks is that if they put it anywhere in their outlot or their recreational lot , it 's so close to the water that should there be any vandalism , it 's in the lake . That 's all there is to it . And in Greenwood Shores, I think they 'd be one II of the worst abusers , the City itself and the City ought to be required to anchor these down . Specifically with Minnewashta , should you tip it over , it 's directly into the drainage directly to the lake . So it 's , I 'm going II back and forth with you Steve . You really can't write any rules . On the other hand , without the rules , they really can get kind of carried away . In those little lots 10 feet from the lake abutting the neighbors houses . II Emmings: We do have , you know right now we do have an ordinance that says you can 't have them and we can leave it that way. I mean that's the choice I that we 're talking about here . Dick Wing: Minnewashta Creek, who I think brought this up , has a good sized lot and would adhere to your ordinance which is the main issue and frankly I think that 's . . .and then from that point on, I think other lots are going to have to fall in line . They're either going to work or they 're not going to work . They 're either going to have to go home , and I don't know how much lake useage there actually is . . .little kids going to go up and use that anyway or is the lake still their primary means? So pollution versus convenience , I don 't have any idea on that . I 'm really worried about the smaller lots. The one we were discussing that brought this up , il • I Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 21 isn't going to be a problem . . . On Pleasant Acres there 's no setback . . . I don 't know the other lakes . I 'm not . . .beachlots or Carver Beach . Are we going to , is the ordinance going to be so vague that they 're just going to exist all over the place or are we going to put in enough controls that are going to say some lots can 't have them? Emmings: Anything else? Erhart : I might offer that there is a way to keep them from tipping them over and that 's attaching them on the bottom . Attaching them to a 11 permanent wall on the side at least 4 feet high or something instead of trying to attach them to the base . Require that they have a concrete block wall or something which could be part of the screening and attached in the center halfway up . There 's no way you 're going to tip it over . The only question is , will the BFI company provide a method of attachment 4 feet up . I don 't know . Again , I think we ought to proceed . We have to learn some things as we go along . I think in general it 's a good idea . Emmings : Do you have a motion? Batzli : I move the Planning Commission recommend approval of the ordinance amending -Section 20-263 set forth in this packet with the following modifications . Paragraph ( a ) , second sentence it says , side. and front yard setbacks shall be maximized to achieve maximum screening from adjacent lots and the lake . On paragraph ( c ) , the first sentence shall be amended as follows . First sentence would read , Use of a portable chemical toilet shall require annual approval . The application shall be initially approved by the Chanhassen Planning Commission after conducting a public hearing . Each subsequent year the application shall be reviewed for approval by the City Planning Department . In subparagraph 4 of (c ) I would insert the word ' commercially before the word maintaining . New paragraph ( d ) which reads , the portable chemical toilet shall be securely anchored to the ground to minimize tipping of the toilet . Letter ( d ) shall become ( e ) . The words denied or shall be inserted before the word revoked in the first sentence . In subparagraph 2 . After the word ordinance , the words or if the portable chemical toilet otherwise presents a nuisance shall be added . Emmings: Is there a second? Erhart: I 'll second it . rEmmings: Alright . As far as discussion goes , I think we 've got a problem . We can 't approve anything can we? We can? Without City Council taking action on it? He said that the Planning Commission is going to approve . Batzli : Well we recommend that the City Council adopts this ordinance . 11 Emmings: Is that understood from what he said? Krauss: Sure . Yeah . Batzli : I meant to say we 're recommending that they approve it. He knew what I meant . Emmings: Alright . Is there any discussion? 1 Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 22 Batzli moved, Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend to approve an Ordinance Amending Section 20-263 of the City Code which shall read as follows: THE CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL ORDAINS: Section__1_. Section 20-263( 2 ) of the City Code shall be amended by deleting " the words "portable chemical toilet" . Section 2_. Section 20-263 of City Code shall be amended by adding the following Section: 16 ) Portable chemical toilets may be allowed on recreational beachlots so long as the maintenance and use of these toilets have no undesireable impact on the environment , residential neighbors or lake users . The City recognizes that the maintenance and use of chemical toilets on some beachlots may be unsuitable because they cannot be adequately screened from residential neighbors or lake users . Any use of chemical toilets on recreational beachlots shall be subject to the following minimum standards: a'. Setback from ordinary high water mark shall be 75 feet . Side II and front yard setbacks shall be maximized to achieve maximum screening from adjacent lots and the lake. I b . The portable chemical toilet may only be used during the period from June 15 through September 5 and shall be removed from the. beachlot at all other times . c . Use of a portable chemical toilet shall require annual approval . The application shall be initially approved by the 11 Chanhassen Planning Commission after conducting a public hearing . Each subsequent year the application shall be reviewed for approval by the City Planning Department. All applications shall be accompanied by the following information: II 1 ) Name , address and phone number of applicants. 2 ) Site plan showing proposed location of chemical toilets . 3 ) Name , address and phone number of entity providing chemical II toilet . 4 ) Plan for commercially maintaining the chemical toilet , II including a copy of any agreement for maintenance , and the name , address and phone number of person responsible for maintenance . 5 ) A written description of how the applicant intends to 11 screen the portable chemical toilet from all views into the property including views from the lake . The City regards screening as essential and no portable chemical toilet shall be allowed where it cannot be screened unless all residential neighbors consent ( in writing ) to allow the toilet without screening (any such consent shall be deemed 1 Planning Commission Meeting March 6 , 1991 - Page 23 to be given only for the year in which it is given and not for any other future time ) . d . The portable chemical toilet shall be securely anchored to the ground to minimize tipping of the toilet. e . Approval for a portable chemical toilet may be denied or revoked upon any of the following grounds: Complaints of residential neighbors; I1 ) • 2 ) Any violation of the intent of the ordinance or if the • portable chemical toilet otherwise presents a nuisance. 3 ) Any evidence of failure to maintain the toilet to eliminate odors and pollution or to maintain screening . iSection 3 . ordinance shall become effective from and after its date of publication . All voted in favor of the motion except Ladd Conrad who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1 . 11 Emmings: Ladd do you want to state your reasons? Conrad: I just don 't think the benefits outweigh the risks and I do= believe that as the ordinance is worded , I would change this and basically my direction , if we are to be flexible , would be to have some certain minimum standards . 100 yard lot width for sure . 30 yard side yard setback for sure . Anchoring to some permanent structure for sure . And probably a statement , intent statement that we , and this is my own thought and it obviously doesn 't reflect anybody elses here but generally discourages the use of chemical toilets except when certain conditions exist that protect ' the environment and the neighborhood . Did I say yards? I meant feet . Thanks for catching me . On those standards I was thinking feet . PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND ARTICLE VIII PERTAINING TO THE PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. rPaul Krauss presented the staff report on this item . Chairman Emmings called the public hearing to order . Erhart moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Emmings: Anybody want to talk about this? Erhart : Yeah , what was the reason when Mark, let me step one back further . When we first redid our PUD ordinance , that was on here a few years ago I guess , I was always left with the impression that we were talking about a PUD related to residential development in a residential zoning district . It never occurred to me at that time we were talking about anything other than that . Then Market Square came along and all of a sudden we were i City Council Meeting - ' h 25, 1991 Councilman Workman: I'll move zoning ordinance amendment , first reading. Item (b), definition of accessory structures. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? Councilwoman Dimler: Second. I Councilman Workman moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve the first reading of zoning ordinance amendment to amend Chapter 20, Section 20-1, 20-615 and Section 20-904 regarding Accessory Structures as shown in the attached ordinance amendment. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 00, 1 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 20-263 REGARDING PORTABLE CHEMICAL TOILETS 1 • ON RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS. Jo Ann Olsen: We were going to pull this from the agenda tonight because there was some issues that need to be resolved with it and maybe Roger can get into those. But Ursula also let us know that there's some people who wish to speak on this so we thought we could still let them speak, since they're coming tonight and maybe Roger can also explain. Do you want to get into that now? Mayor Chmiel: Roger, why don't you just give a quick, brief explanation and we'll have .the people address the issue. Roger Knutson: I received a copy of this on the first time on Friday and I discussed it with Paul. We just weren't able to get a redraft for you in that 1 short a period. I had some concerns with it . Among other things, a basis for denial of chemical toilet is neighborhood complaints and that under the law is really not per se a basis for turning anyone down for anything. I mean people can complain about chemical toilets as a guide because they don't like their neighbor for example and if you don't like your neighbor you can just call up and say, I hereby complain and the permit won't issue. There's some technical issues with the ordinance which have to be dressed up. When staff issues a permit , or renewal permit in this case for chemical toilets or anything else, they have to have some non-subjective objective criteria upon which to act. It's confusing the more I think about it but the rule is, staff can't exercise discretion. It does but it really can't in a sense. Staff carries out the ordinances which you publicate. They can't exercise discretion on subjective matters when it comes to issuing permits. That's the Council's perogative so a few things like that have to be spruced up. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Very good. Is there anyone wishing to address this specific issue? If you would please come forward to the podium and state your name and your address. Lee: Could you read the ordinance as it's currently proposed? I Jo.Ann Olsen: Why don't I just give him mine. Mayor Chmiel: I don't think we have it in here. 14 • ATTACHMENT #7 1 __ _ _ 1 City Council Meeting lrch 25, 1991 Roger Knutson: It's stuck in there somewhere. I know I found mine. It's really lengthy. It 's like two pages long. Mayor Chmiel: Maybe it 'd be best if you just read that. We're basically not going to. Councilman Workman: The last page? Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Adopt this this evening as was indicated. Councilwoman Dimler: Do you have the very last page? Jo Ann Olsen: It 's not the very last page. Mayor Chmiel: No, it 's the one prior to. Right here. ' Councilwoman Dimler: This is what you're proposing? Jo Ann Olsen: Yeah. That's what the Planning Commission. . . Mayor Chmiel: You've had an opportunity to look at it? Lee: Yeah, I just wanted to find out for sure what was in front of the Council: I'm with one of the residents with the Sunrise Hills Civic Association. We've got the private beachlot on Frontier Trail and I guess I was the one who actually got this all started when I gave Ursula a call to find out what could be done just to address some specific problems that we were having. I don't think they're at all unique and that is, with that large a number of people, and I believe there are 57 members that span out over 3 or 4 blocks, having access to a temporary use toilet facility, I think is a very practical request . I'm glad to see the City Council taking this up. Just in looking through what was proposed. What we would like to see is have it essentially from Memorian Day weekend thru a period just after the Labor Day weekend and I see that June 15th is proposed. But the other conditions that are being set forth, actually look very feasible. The alterantive that is not having access to a facility I think is not very workable. We have kids going behind the trees to use the trees as toilet facilities and that's certainly not what the Council would like to see. I suppose the worse condition is kids just going right into the lake which is a real possibility. But really prompted this was that the chemical toilets are used by the City on some of the other public beaches such as Carver Beach and we note that there are usually two chemical toilets set up right on Carver Beach Road. They're right on the road itself, maybe 5 feet back from the curb and so yeah. If they're well maintained, which is what I think should, that may not be something that 's addressed, and I would not mind actually seeing in the ordinances that they're maintained by a professional third party. I believe Ursula you had mentioned there was some discussion about having permanently constructed. I don't know. As just now a resident of the City, I don't know if I could like to have something that's not professionally maintained. What we had proposed was that it would be serviced under contract at least once a week so that we know that it's taken care of. That the disposal of the chemicals are not an issue with the environment. None of the residents want to see that stuff go into the lake and I think that's something that should 15 r City-Council Meeting - • ,h 25, 1991 be in the ordinance to prevent any kind of abuse. That way you know it's being externally maintained and monitored. Mayor Chmiel: Yes, that's part of the Planning Commission's recommendation. 1 That it be commercial taken care of. Lee: Yeah. Ursula had mentioned that there was some discussion about. a permanently built one. I don't know that that makes sense because that will fall into disarray very quickly I would guess in all likelihood. As far as the setback if it were, I don't know that, I see you're proposing 75 feet here. If it were professionally maintained and properly anchored, would it matter 50 feet back? I'm just thinking now of our specific layout. It might be close. We're probably at what I would call a normal water line. Where we would propose to have it , it 's very close to the 75 foot mark and if it were professionally maintained once a week, would it matter if it was 50 feet back but still supported so that it was tip resistent? Does that really matter? Mayor Chmiel: Jo Ann, do you have any? , Jo Ann: One of the reasons we used 75 feet was the shoreland setback and then just to remove it as far as possible if there's a tip over. There are going to be circumstances where there are recreational beachlots that don't have that depth. I don't have any in front of me so I can't but it seems like where there were those situations where you don't have that depth. It can be all contained so it wouldn't get in over land. Mayor Chmiel: It also indicates in here. . .setback from ordinary high water mark shall be 75 feet. Side and front yard setbacks shall be maximized to achieve - maximum screening from adjacent lots and the lake. Some of those are the considerations that are taken into it. ' Lee: I actually think that's a pretty good recommendation. The only other thing that I guess I would point out is if we have to apply for annual permits. Are you going to have a list of authorized vendors to make it real simple or I authorize third party service? Jo Ann Olsen: I'm sure that wouldn't be, that would be real easy for us to provide that to you. Lee: Yeah, that might be something to consider. If you've got a recommended or approved list that you, that the city knows will provide professional services. I'm not too concerned about our group because we'll probably go with one of the major suppliers but I'm thinking now of other people around the lake who start using them, will that be subject to abuse. And the last question I have is, once it's approved do we have to come back for an annual permit? Is there going to be an annual fee? Councilman Wing: You bet. I Lee: How much? Jo Ann Olsen: For the cost of the review? 16 r 1 City Council Meeting - ' •ch 25, 1991 Lee: Yeah. What 's the permit going to be set at? Mayor Chmiel: I think it will be very minimal like maybe $500.00 a year. No, I'm kidding. I would imagine that 's something. Councilwoman Dimler. A conditional use permit is $150.00. The original. And then every year just to review without a fee is the way I understood it. Lee: Okay, so you would expect it would be a one time but every year we should file a plan? Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. To make sure you're still in compliance with the ordinance. Lee: And after that, and you said you expect there would be no fee after that? Councilwoman Dimler: That 's my understanding was. That once you pay for the conditional use permit, then you just have an annual review but no fee. Lee: Okay. No, I think that would be fine and part of the renewal .I think should include a copy of the contract and so on so that you know it's going to be properly maintained. But I'm real pleased to see this change. Thank you. Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. I don't see there being any further discussion. We'll pull this from the agenda and I don't think we even have to have a motion on that proposal do we? Okay. • Councilwoman Dimler: Can we make a few comments? Mayor Chmiel: Certainly. Councilwoman Dimler: I guess I agree with Lee's comment about, I think June 15th is kind of an arbitrary date. I think I would like to see it go in at Labor Day. That's when most picnics start. And maybe let it go, I mean Memorial Day. Did I say Labor Day? Mayor Chmiel: Yes you did. Councilwoman Dimler: I'm sorry. Memorial Day. And then have it go a little bit beyond Labor Day so they have time to get it off. Maybe September Sth. Sometimes Labor Day is a little bit later than September 5th. It's been as late as September 9th so maybe we want to move it until the 11th or something like that. Mayor Chmiel: We can probably determine that. Jo Ann Olsen: Or we can just keep the holidays. You can just, it doesn't have 11 to be a specific date. Councilwoman Dimler: Yeah, just keep it to the holidays. Memorial Day to Labor ,. Day. Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? 1 17 I City Council Meeting - M- - ti 25, 1991 Councilman Mason: Steve, real quickly. What was their rationale for having. . . I Steve Emmings: . . .I think that in our experience. . . Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? If not, we'll move on to the next item. Councilman Workman: Do you need a motion on that? Mayor Chmiel: No. I Councilwoman Dimler: Do you need a motion to table it? Mayor Chmiel: No. No, we just pulled it. 1 Councilman Wing: With the neighbor's consent , just to clarify, is only if it's not going to be screened. It doesn't require neighbor's consent unless it's not going to be screened. Is that correct? Roger Knutson: Well you really can't delegate that to the neighbors. That's one of the things we have to. Mayor Chmiel: No, you'd have to do that. Making sure it's screened properly. Councilman. Workman: My only comment on this whole thing is this lies in the 11 • face of everything that we're trying to do in this city with lakes. Cleanliness and I can't understand. I can understand why we want to do this. I can't, I mean I'm not that ignorant but I just, everything surrounding these portable toilets, visually, sensory, and other. I understand the relief that they bring to people who are going to stay at the beachiots all day but boy, for what they • do, the potential risk, I can't understand how we're. It just seems like we're , kind of letting this thing go a little easy. I guess I'd be curious to find out, as we got a little more time to find out what Eden Prairie, Bloomington, Burnsville, Eagan, Edina, Minnetonka and White Bear Lake know about these things that we don't because they all said no. Don't do it. Mayor Chmiel: Well, maybe it's something that we can find out. I Councilwoman Dimler: I was just going to say that in this comments that we've got from Mr. Hasek. He says that the yearly phospherous loading comes from ducks and geese about 11% and I was thinking that maybe we could teach them to use the chemical toilets instead. Councilman Workman: Diaper service. I Mayor Chmiel: Anybody else? If not, we'll move on. Councilman Wing: I might just comment that they are in existence and the I beaches have them at this time and all this is trying to do is control an already existing situation. Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. And you have the ducks and geese on your lot right? 18 11 I 1 03/25/91 09:46 DSU, INC. 0 001 I 1 Honorable Mayor Chmiel, Members of the City Council I city of Chanhassen, Minn. - • • Sir: I I am unable to attend the meeting of 3-25-1991 at which time the issue of portable toilets on beachlots is scheduled for discussion. However, I did want to offer a few comments for cocideration on I this important issue, particularily as it relates to neighboring land uses and to water quality. The situation that brought this issue before the planning Icommission was a desire to place a portable outhouse on our assocition beachlot off Minnewashta Parkway. Some felt that it was inconveniet to return to their homes to use toilet facilities, and I others concidered that it would help to clean up our lake. While I firmly believe that every step should be taken to protect and preserve all of our natural resourses, I question the impact this Iconvenience on this lake. . I have taken the time to contact several of the state and local I agencies that are directly involved with water quality and wastewater management including the Department of Natural Recourses, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Metropolitan Council, and the Metropolitan Wastewater Control Commission. Upon I briefly explaining the prospect of a. portable toilet on our beachlot, the initial response in every case was that the reduced impact on the lake would be minimal at best. With a watershed of I over 5 square miles, and with residential development as the major land use in the watershed, their stated concernes for the lake were phosphoruse loading from soil erosion from construction, fertilizer I run-off from residential lawns, roadway run-off,sand placed on beaches, and feces from water fowl and feed lots. In fact, using information provided by the P.C.A. , and some assumptions about the water fowl population of the lake and our beach usage, it was I estimated that 11% of the yearly phosphorus loading comes from ducks and geese, while only .001% comes from people using our beach for summer recreation. While the impact on the lake appears to be minimal, the impact on abutting single family properties could be significant.our beach I lot is only 60 ft. or so in width. The home to the south is set back from the street about 35 ft. , while the home to the north is set back considerably more than .35 ft. . In fact, the front of this house is nearly even with the rear of the house south of our lot. I Where will the toilet be placed so 'it will not impose on our neighbors? If it's placed along the north property line, and behind the building set back of that home, the toilet will be in the I existing picnic area of the beach lot. If it is similarly placed along the south property line, it will be within 15 ft. of that home. Would a responsible neighbor even ask to impose this type of =necessary necessary use on another neighbor? I think notl ATTACHMENT #8 2 think that if this type of convenience is found to be necessary , for the "public health, safety, and welfare", it should be a permanent structure hooked up to the existing sewer line and be constructed to be compatable with abutting residential homes. If the city is sincere in protecting its lakes and wetlands, the M.P.C.A. , the M.W.W-C. , the D.N.R. , Met Council, and perhaps a half dozen other state and local agencies and private firms could be contacted to get the necessary information with which to make an informed decision. The simple truth is this. If a swimmer is going to use the lake to urinate, they will do it if there is a convenient toilet or not. And unlike water fowl, fish, and other water type animals, humans don't deficate in the water. Clearly, portable toilets on beach lots are a convenience to the beach users, and nothing more. I support the citys intent to do everything possible to keep our natural resources entact, but in this case the impact on the neighborhood could far outweigh any mitigative benefit to the lake, or convenience to us, the lake users. Si I2S.L.A. Minnewas a Creek Addition Homeowner 1 • 1 1 1 I 1 1 I Past-If'b4= d fax ' niltta!memo 7o7I =WA ' ???.111101111. ;51 I #t? STATE OF ' DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES METRO REGION WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST.• PAUL, MN 55106 PHONE NO772-7910 FILE NO. October 31, 1990 - ECE[v ED ' !v nv 0 2 1990 Ms. Sharmin Al-Jaff ►* T .,► E.:r+ANHASSEN City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 ' Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Ms. Al-Jaff: 11 RE: PORTABLE SANITARY FACILITIES WITHIN SHORELAND DISTRICTS As we discussed during our telephone conversation of Friday, October 19, 1990, portable toilets are not addressed under state shoreland guidelines, thus, the DNR does not regulate same. However, you asked for my opinion on the use of such facilities on shore lots, ' and I've consulted with others in the organization for their input. Fran an aesthetic and water quality perspective, such portable facilities are not well-suited for use along waterfronts. The potential for flooding or vandalism may jeopardize water quality in - sane sensitive areas. I'm sure there are occasions where special events necessitate the short-term use of portable sanitary facilities. In such cases, perhaps a conditional use permit should be required. I think these ' facilities should meet a setback fran the high water mark of at least 50-feet, and be chained or anchored in such a fashion that they cannot easily be overturned. I/ To the best of my knowledge, neither the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency or the Minnesota Department of Health regulate portable toilets. iI suspect that the desire to utilize portable toilets will increase in the future as common access and outlots become more prominent. I appreciate your community's foresight in anticipating same. Early strategizing will make for more widely accepted and enforceable management. Thanks for requesting our input. 1 ' r'Y. • at Lynch Area Hydrologist ' PL238:kap AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ATTACHMENT #9