1d. CUP Edgework Builders I C 1 T Y O P.C. DATE; May 17, 1989
\ V C.C. DATE:
I 4 CIIANEASSEN 7 CASE NO: CUP 89-2
IPrepared by: Olsen:k
STAFF REPORT
I •
U PROPOSAL: Conditional Use Permit for a Contractors Yard
and Screened Outdoor Storage on Property Zoned IOP
str,,.,
V
LOCATION: 8301 Audubon Road ; .___°_
' 1.i.. APPLICANT: Dave Stockdale _ ";; °
Q 7210 Galpin Blvd. -4;
Chanhassen, MN 55317 - -- ---
I I
PRESENT ZONING: IOP, Industrial Office Park
IIACREAGE: 7 . 47 Acres
DENSITY:
II ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N- IOP, Public Works Building
IS- IOP, Vacant
{„� E- IOP, Vacant
1 �'IA W- IOP, Audubon Development- Sites, Inc.
IW v WATER AND SEWER: The site is within the MUSA Line.
m PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site is currently used as a single
family residence and a horse barn. The
majority of the site is pasture.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Industrial
,t,"- / ca i ,i
` �a ► ai � F; :ru rr
® I
2 ita�,,.es4> 1,44 �i/
�1 r►
e \��; ern•t ltncr.[r
1IlrI g 6:3-41116-11:111F Mr M.
. 1� _ R.Mira M^a_
�r ter.: �n
�C�G MIA NW
I ` I I s• ,a cr..MIMI
IIIIIIII cmaia joap., _ �- rf�0 IAA A'�:'
I ailloWliq
U --ffiripMeMilr _
.. .,N
�� ��� �'� 3 7
I
' ��i 4rc MIOMW AV
'�� , � \\'mss;))
IOMD `l
, , ill
,__ .., 7.—
. _... 0 sr ,,,,
7/ ,_______,_, Ai 1 a,_
,,
4. -,' it? i
z Z.Z _ CAKE SUSAN ),,,,,,4111 -
co w
(DR.181 ao- -
4 BLVD. "�
1 1 i T ,� v
VI - -
8700—i •/ I i .'
v =
01 8800— G
, 111 * ET,.
N ■
' i :.,..7 1
\ Al
8900 % r 0 likti` w 11 N
i—n o
1D 9000 \ ILY _ �� 80ULEVARD C I8) 1,N ror(
, \
9100 ^
I I
` .
9200 I ( 4 411
9300 !='
i /r,�
ott
9400 - �� - - - I it . `�-
9500 r --�
i I
1
! lit
o
mar IR&co
I! 1
9600 a ,,
007;1.1111111
r
0=9800 • • t _��
a
100 ■ r'
1 Q
...
I I Q
200 / 1 '''',......\-/ �T�� ks Q 'a� TION 1 • - W <
f'" / -'-� - ►:T CR'RwOOO - -
400- r + i e e S■�,
` e` O \..SS, FA . • I\ =
500 { �:,'•41 \?- � j ;i^//~rr 1 I \ `` roc �';�i
600 \\ _ _ ��� �,`•'
moazilitic_
Stockdale Conditional Use Permit
May 17 , 1989
Page 2
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
' Section 20-1191 requires a 10 foot strip of land between abutting
right-of-way and vehicular use areas including one tree per 40
feet and a hedge wall or berm of at least 2 feet.
' Section 20-1192 requires interior property lines to be landscaped
with one tree per 40 feet.
' Section 20-1211 requires interior landscaping for vehicular use
areas.
Section 20-1178 requires that all trash disposal units be
completely screened on all sides .
Section 20-1125 requires one parking space for each 1,000 square
' feet of gross floor area up to 10 , 000 and one additional space
for each additional 2 , 000 square feet, plus one space for each
company vehicle. For office buildings , 3 parking spaces for each
' 1 , 000 square feet of floor area is required.
Section 20-1123 requires industrial district parking areas and
access drives shall be paved with a dust free all-weather surface
with property surface drainage and concrete curb.
Section 20-812 allows office and warehouse uses as a permitted
use in the IOP District.
Section 20-814 allows contractor ' s yards as a conditional use in
the IOP District. The definition of a contractor' s yard is "any
area of use of land or vehicles, equipment and/or construction
materials and supplies commonly used by building excavation,
roadway construction, landscaping and similar contractor ' s are
stored or serviced. A contractor' s yard includes both areas of
outdoor storage and the areas confined within a completely
enclosed building used in conjunction with a contractor ' s yard. "
' REFERRAL AGENCIES
City Engineer See Attachment #1
Fire Inspector See Attachment #2
BACKGROUND
On July 25, 1988 the City Council approved the site plan for an
office/warehouse facility for Merit Heating and Cooling. The
site plan was approved with the following conditions :
1 . A time schedule on improvements to the site be provided for
staff and City Council review.
Stockdale Conditional Use Permit
May 17 , 1989
Page 3
2 . All driveways, loading docks , and area under the dumpster be
paved with asphalt and provided with asphalt curbing.
3 . Provide required landscaping requirements and proper
screening of the trash enclosure and proposed dock area.
4 . There shall be no outside storage permitted. ,
5. The applicant shall submit a preliminary plat application
within one year (July, 1989 ) .
6 . Comply with conditions of Building and Fire Inspector.
7 . The applicant shall submit for approval by the City Engineer '
a grading, drainage and erosion control plan prepared by a
registered engineer prior to final approval.
8 . The applicant must connect to sewer and water once it becomes
available to the site.
9. The applicant must receive any necessary variances to the
Zoning Ordinance.
The applicant withdrew the proposal prior to any alterations to '
the site and has since relocated to the Chanhassen Lakes Business
Park.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for a
contractor ' s yard and screened outdoor storage located on 7 . 5
acres of property zoned IOP. The applicant currently has a con-
ditional use permit to locate his business on Galpin Blvd. As
with the past proposal on the subject property, the applicant
will be using the current buildings and existing features of the
site until the property is developed into industrial sites in the
future. The existing farm house, barn, garage, tack barn and
chicken coops will be used for office, cold storage and garages.
The occupants of the site will be five office staff and a field
crew of between 12 and 15 persons. Of the 12 to 15 crew members,
only 4 to 5 will be reporting to the site each day. -
The applicant will be using the existing septic system to provide
services to the office and staff . A letter has been submitted
stating the septic system is in good working condition. The
applicant is proposing to blacktop the existing gravel vehicular
area and is not proposing any curbing at this time. The appli-
cant is proposing to install a six foot high wood privacy fence
and a retaining wall around the parking area behind the barn/cold
storage area and in front of the driveway servicing the cold
storage area for screening from surrounding properties . The
I
Stockdale Conditional Use Permit
' May 17, 1989
Page 4
' applicant is also proposing an outside storage area located east
of the existing residence/office. The outside storage area will
' be gravel and will be surrounded by a 6 ft. high wood privacy
fence.
As with the original proposal for Merit Heating and Cooling,
' staff reviewed the proposed site improvements in relation to
the required improvements for the IOP District. The applicant is
providing pavement for the vehicular areas which is in confor-
mance with the ordinance. They have not shown curbing which is
required as part of the ordinance. The applicant is providing
screening of the vehicular areas by using existing vegetation and
new retaining walls. The dumpster is also being adequately
screened by a retaining wall and the outside storage being
screened by a 6 ft. high fence.
Since sewer and water is not available to the site as of this
date, staff is not requiring them to hook up or provide the ser-
vice to the site. The existing drainfield has been reviewed in
' the past by the City' s consultants and has been determined to be
acceptable for the use that is being proposed. Staff is recom-
mending that a second drain field site be located and approved
prior to final approval of the site. Once sewer and water is
' available to the site, the applicant will be required to connect
to the municipal system. The applicant is providing additional
lighting for the site in conformance with the requirements of the
ordinance. The driveway servicing the site from Audubon Road is
being improved to 16 feet wide as was a condition for approval
for the original site plan.
' RECOMMENDATION
The proposed site plan is meeting the requirements of the
Ordinance, except for the requirement of curb and gutter. Curb
and gutter helps direct drainage and provides stability to the
vehicular access .
' Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt the
following motion:
' "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional
Use Permit #89-2 as shown on plans dated April 28, 1989
with the following conditions :
1 . All outside storage shall be stored totally screened
within the outside storage area.
2 . The driveway shall be constructed a minimum of 16 feet
in width and shall be paved.
i
Stockdale Conditional Use Permit
May 17 , 1989
Page 5
3 . All parking areas shall be paved and surrounded by '
concrete curb and gutter in accordance with Section
20-1123 of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance.
4 . The applicant shall submit for approval by the City
Engineer a drainage and erosion control plan prior to
final approval.
5 . At such time as public sewer and/or water is available
to the site, connection to the municipal system will be
required and appropriate fees and assessments paid. "
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
On May 17, 1989 , the Planning Commission recommended approval of '
the conditional use permit for a temporary office, shop and yard
work and outside storage with the following conditions :
1 . All outside storage shall be stored totally screened
within the outside storage area.
2 . The driveway shall be constructed a minimum of 16 feet
in width and shall be paved.
3 . The applicant shall submit for approval by the City '
Engineer a drainage and erosion control plan prior to
final approval.
4 . Dumpster shall not be placed within 5 feet of combustible
walls , openings or combustible roof eave lines.
5 . At such time as public sewer and/or water is available '
to the site, the applicant shall be required to pay the
appropriate fees and assessments paid. However, actual
connection to the site will be required at the time the
property is subdivided or expansion of use occurs on the
site.
6 . All parking areas shall be paved. However, curb and
gutter will not be required if the applicant gives up
his present conditional use permit unless the City
Engineer determines or experience demonstrates that curb
and gutter is needed to prevent an erosion problem.
Ellson was opposed because she felt that it should meet all of '
the conditions of the IOP District.
CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
Staff still feels to be consistent with required improvements in
the IOP District, that curb and gutter should be required.
f
' Stockdale Conditional Use Permit
May 17 , 1989
Page 6
Staff recommends that Conditions #3 and #5 of staff' s recommen-
dations should be maintained as conditions of approval instead of
' Conditions #5 and #6 of the Planning Commission action. Staff
recommends the City Council adopt the following motion:
' "The City Council approves Conditional Use Permit #89-2 as shown
on plans dated April 28, 1989 , with the following conditions:
1 . All outside storage shall be stored totally screened
' within the outside storage area.
2. The driveway shall be constructed a minimum of 16 feet
' in width and shall be paved.
3. The applicant shall submit for approval by the City
' Engineer a drainage and erosion control plan prior to
final approval.
4 . Dumpster shall not be placed within 5 feet of combustible
' walls, openings or combustible roof eave lines .
5 . All parking areas shall be paved and surrounded by
' concrete curb and gutter in accordance with Section
20-1123 of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance.
6 . At such time as public sewer and/or water is available
to the site, connection to the municipal system will be
required and appropriate fees and assessments paid. "
ATTACHMENTS
' 1. Memo from City Engineer dated May 9 , 1989.
2 . Memo from Fire Inspector dated April 26 , 1989.
3 . City Council Minutes dated July 25 , 1988.
4 . Letter from Patrick Sullivan dated June 23, 1988.
' 5 . Letter from applicant dated April 9 , 1989 .
6 . Application.
7 . Planning Commission minutes dated May 17 , 1989 .
1
I
CITYOF
1
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer's
DATE: May 9 , 1989
SUBJ: Conditional Use Permit for Temporary Office, Shop and Yard 1
Edgework Builders , Inc.
File No. 89-9 Land Use Review
This site is located on the east side of Audubon Road and just
south of the Soo Line Railroad. This 7. 0 acre site has been used
as a hobby farm by James and Roseanne McMahon.
Sanitary Sewer/Watermain 1
At the present time City utilities are not within close proximity
of the site; however , the upgrading of Audubon Road from Trunk
Highway 5 to the railroad line this year will provide water to
the northerly portion of this property.
Sanitary sewer and watermain services have also been proposed to
be extended to Audubon Road via the Lake Susan Hills 3rd
Addition . Since this development and platting process has not
been completed, it is expected that utilities will not be
available until some time in 1990 .
For the present, the applicant will be required to prove that the
existing septic system will handle all project demands. In addi-
tion, this site should be treated as a rural site and a second
septic tank site should be located in case of failure to the
existing system. 1
If the septic system is permitted, the applicant shall agree to
connect up to sanitary sewer and water services as soon as they
are available to the site.
Access
The existing residence is serviced by a gravel driveway which is
approximately 12 feet in width. Based on the proposed use, truck
traffic can be anticipated. Section 20-1123 of the City' s Zoning
Ordinance states that all parking areas and access roads be paved
with an all-weather surface with concrete curb and gutter .
ATTAci ,i ENT *"/
' Planning Commission
May 9 , 1989
Page 2
In addition, the driveway access should be a minimum of 16 feet
' in width. This would be the absolute minimum driveway width that
would support two-way traffic.
Grading and Drainage
The proposed plan indicates a minimal amount of grading to
construct the parking lot and/or driveway surface. The plan does
' not address any form of retention such that the predeveloped
runoff rate is maintained. A revised plan which addresses this
issue should be submitted to the City Engineer for approval prior
' to final approval .
Erosion Control
' Similarly, the plan does not address erosion control . A drainage
and erosion control plan should be submitted prior to final
approval.
' Recommended Conditions
1 . The driveway shall be constructed a minimum of 16 feet in
1 width and shall be paved .
2 . All parking areas shall be paved and surrounded by concrete
' curb and gutter in accordance with Section 20-1123 of the
Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance.
' 3 . The applicant shall submit for approval by the City Engineer
a drainage and erosion control plan prior to final approval .
4 . At such time as public sewer and/or water is available to
' the site, connection to the municipal system will be
required and appropriate fees and assessments paid.
Attachments
1 . Letter from Sullivan Services, Inc. dated June 23 , 1988 .
a 2 . Location map.
I
CITYOF
1 S `
,5A
CHANHASSEN 1
;} 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
111
MEMORANDUM
I
TO: JoAnn Olsen, Assistant City Planner
FROM: Mark Littf in, Fire Inspector 1
DATE: April 26 , 1989
II
SUBJ: #89-2
I
Comments and recommendations : I
1. Dumpster shall not be placed within 5 feet of combustible
wells, openings or combustible roof eave lines .
II
I
1
1
I
I
1
1
I
ATM CHI MMt tT 1#Zr 1
•
‘.113‘)
t' t C,ity Council Meeting - Jul L5, 1988 t _,
p
II CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR RELOCATION OF OFFICE WAREHOUSE AND
CONTRACTOR'S YARD ACTIVITIES TO PROPERTY AT 8301 AUDUBON ROAD, MERIT HEATING AND /
[-
I COOLING, INC.
Jo Ann Olsen: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to relocate
II their business from the Industrial Office Park to a site just off of Audubon
Road south of the railroad tracks. The current locations is a horse farm. The
site is in the IOP district and also within the urban service area. It does not
II have sewer and water service available yet to the site. It would have to be
extended. The applicant is proposing to use the existing buildings on the site.
The barn and the tack...it is called for their business and use the existing
house as the office. They are proposing to expand and possible subdivide the
I property in the future and they do not want to make improvements to the site
that are typically required as far as site plan approval for an industrial use
at this time. Staff recommended that they provide us more detailed information
II on the future proposal and we did receive this plan from the applicant. This is
the location of Audubon Road showing that actually the site would be totally
changed and doing any improvements to it now would be a waste of money. The
II Planning Commission recommended denial of the conditional use permit. They felt
that the Site Plan does not meet the conditions of the ordinance. They felt
uncomfortable with approving a temporary use of the existing site.
II Mayor Hamilton: Steve, did you have anything you wanted to add to the staff
report?
I Steve Berquist: I'm Steve Berquist, one of the owners of Merit. Since the
Planning Commission meeting, I think it was a day previous to the Planning
Commission meeting we also submitted a tentative plat and a lot layout of the _
subdivision property. Was that included in the packet?
IJo Ann Olsen: No. I never received a copy. The only copy I saw was the one
Bob brought to the Planning Commission.
ISteve Berquist: According to that thing, I look at that thing on the overhead
and I drew that thing over a weekend after Jo Ann had called and said well you
better have some kind of plan for future development or, to paraphrase, you
I don't stand a chance. So I look at that thing on the overhead and it's a pretty
rough plan. What we had done in the meantime and what we did prior to the
Planning Commission meeting was we worked on some tentative subdivision ideas
II with the intent being to try and provide some minimum commercial spaces for sale
within the industrial park. Meaning a 1 acre lot ordinance and in essence
providing land available for businesses such as ourselves that weren't really
II eager to become landlords but we wanted to get into our own space. We didn't
want to be tenants any longer. So we worked on that and we came up with this
and I thought that Jo Ann had a copy of it and I was hoping that it might have
been distributed. It certainly can be at some point in time. This layout meets
'.. all the criteria that the City of Chanhassen wants for a lot size minimum,
frontage setback and so on and so forth. This would be our tentative plan at
this point. Originally the outline that I tried to follow when I put my
application together asked me for what our plan was over a time table and in
that I eluded to 1991 not really knowing whether or not 1991 was going to be too
[7
far down the road, too soon down the road or right on the money. As I said at
the Planning Commission meeting, I can not tell you what is going to happen
economically to Chanhassen. I can't tell you what's going to happen
40 A-Tl4c#,4 ,jj It.3
- _ S i
City Council Meeting _y 25, 1988
4,
economically when the new administration comes in and saying yes, we're going to
bring in sewer and water in 1991 through the. .. property and develop it, if
that's what you want to hear, I have a real problem with saying things that
t I know are not necessarily going to be the truth. I use 1991 as a rather
arbitrary_date with the intent being to do it sooner. As I told the Planning
Commission, putting our company into the existing facility is like putting a
. size 12 foot in a size 9 shoe. It won't work for long. I'm really a little bit
worried about it working for much more than a year so depending upon what
happens today, we fully intend to renovate the house, put our office in it. Do
a minimum amount of work to the barn. Put our warehouse in it and then proceed
along the line outlined by the Planning Staff and see just how feasible bringing
sewer and water is in this particular project. There are some things that have
taken place and there are some things that are about to take place from a
planning standpoint which will dictate whether or not we are going to be able to
bring sewer and water in at any time in the foreseeable future. The foreseeable
future being about 1 year. If that is the case, then we fully intend to develop
land within that year and what I would like to do is get the thing developed,
split up and build outselves our building and be occupying it by January of 1990
with lot sales could carry...
Mayor Hamilton: Steve, I'd like to ask you to, maybe you could give us the plat
so we could take copies of it. I'd just like to have the Council look at it so
they have some idea what you're eluding to. See what he's done is divided the
7. whatever acres into 6 lots which are all an acre or better.
Steve Berquist: Here's the railroad right here. Here's all the road. Here's
the existing farmhouse approximately right here. The existing barn would fall
upon this lot line. This is Opus. This is land owned by Opus. This is 'land
owned by Opus. You can see that we put a road through here with the possibility
of carrying it through the rest of the IOP area. If you look at the square
footages of the lot, they are right at slightly more than an acre so they
provide good space for small businesses to buy land and put a building up. I
think it's a good idea the more I look at it.
: Mayor Hamilton: It's a nice plan. If you could leave that with Barb so they
could copy it.
Steve Berquist: So anyway, that's where we're coming from. We wanted to get in
•for a, get in and occupy for a minimum amount of dollars we're spending
considering the fact that whatever money we spend now is going to be, when we
__ . demolish this, is going to be wasted. Our intent was to go in and bring the
- house up to code as far as commercial buildings code. Bring the barn up to
, whatever code the City wanted it to meet and work.
Councilman Boyt: I think this is a good example of somebody trying to make
something work and it reminds me of the Merle Volk property down south of us.
This is a challenge in that you're the kind of business that I think the City
would probably like to nurture along and you're in a location in which the
HRA really can't reach you to nurture you. It would seem to me that although it
doesn't help the current property owner, you might want to be talking to the HRA
about how they could help you locate in the business park. What kind of special
assessment reduction agreements they might be willing to agree to and this kind
(_ of thing. To the particular issue at hand, I'm interest to see how this works
out tonight. I think that putting a sewer in might run about $50,000.00 is the
41
.. - .....
.City Council Meeting - Jul( 25, 1988
Iestimate that I got. It seems that the Planning Commission was awfully clear in
saying that this set a very difficult precedent for development in this kind of
[-
I area for the future. I think that's what made them relunctant to do it and it
makes me somewhat relunctant to say on the one hand to someone who would develop
in our business park or other developers in this area that we hope come in, no
you have to asphalt things and curb them and sewer them and on and on. I will
I admit to being in a quandry. We do need to have a place in town that can
nurture businesses. The HRA may be able to do that. I'm not sure that this is
the place to be the first one in which we do nurture a business. I'm looking
IIfor some guideance and insight from some of the others.
Councilman Horn: My interpretation of why we created the contractor's yard I
think is slightly different than I heard here tonight. The reasoning that I
' recall we put it in for was for small businesses that needed a lot of space and
space in the industrial park was much too much at a premium for them to
economically stay in business. It wasn't, as I understood it, a means to allow
I somebody the chance to move out of the industrial park into another area that
might be the next tier of the industrial ring. That's what zoning is all about
in my mind so I'm having trouble unless I'm missing something in this report,
I finding out the justification for this of why it makes sense from a planning
aspect to move an existing business out of the park and put them into an area
where it really doesn't fit without special permits. Conditional use permits
and things so it seems to me that this wasn't the original intent of a
I contractor's yard unless my memory of that is wrong. That's all the comments
I have.
I Councilman Geving: I could certainly see why you'd want to not be a tenant any
longer and move into something of your own that you could build upon and
develop. I'm sure that this City Council could put all kinds of obstacles in
I front of you to prevent you from developing this in terms of ordinances, hook-up
to city sewer and water, forcing you to put in concrete curbs and gutter and
pave the area and I'm not so sure that's really necessary. I think there is a
need for a small business like yours in the community that wants to make a
I transition into an area that's now used as a horse farm and a single family
residence. I think that will get developed eventually and maybe you'll be the
people that will do that. I see nothing really wrong with your proposal. My
I problem is how much are we willing to give in terms of not making the hurdles
for you like the paving issue, the curb and gutter, the hook-ups for the sewer
and water. I think that will be very, very expensive and probably prohibit you
in fact from developing these properties if those were some of the conditions
I that we placed on approval for this tonight. I see this particular piece of
land in a transition stage. It's going to get developed. Whether you do it or
someone else down the road. It's the next tier as far as I'm concerned to add
I to our industrial park. It's a nice piece of property. It is accessible to
sewer and water. It's within our MUSA line and I don't see this really very
much different than what we did with Charlie Kerber's old house on TH 5. There
I was an existing barn there. There was an old farmhome and we decided that it
was good, on a temporary basis, to move a small office type operation in there.
I think they have maybe 12 employees total and they're utilizing that very
II nicely. There's no big concern of the City. It's a very small business and I
would say that I'm in favor of this project. I'm in favor to the point where if
we could work out some of the details that I mentioned and not have Steve going
through all the hoops but that we do have a plan from you Steve, a time table [7
IIand a plan like we saw you give to Barbara here, maybe you do have a time table
II42
263
City Council Meeting - J(7/ 25, 1988 '
until 1990 or 1991 in what you would like to do. Obviously you're showing us a II
plan tonight that's different than the plan that the Planning Commission saw and
it would be only fair for them to see your plan again if you do in fact have a II new idea. I think what they're looking for, what we're all looking for is a
time table, in writing, a time table that shows what you'd like to do as you
progress now in the next couple of years. I'm in favor of this proposal but it II needs to be refined and it needs to be honed to the point where I'm satisfied
that the sewer and water and all those issues are pretty well spelled out. I
like what I see and I think that there is a need for keeping Merit Heating and
anybody else in the community and if we need to do something to help him along
II
to make that happen, I'm in favor of it.
Councilman Johnson: I think it's interesting you bring up Kerber's out there, II the little place because there's a contractor's yard being operated out of there
without a permit called Admiral Waste. They're now headquartered in there.
They got permission to build someplace else, I don't know what's happening. I
think they're happy where they are now on TH 5. I don't know what's going on '
there. I do not think a conditional use permit is required. I think this is
not a contractor's yard. This is a trade shop. I tried to find the definition
of a trade shop. It's not in our rules. It's not anywhere. The closest thing
II
I could find was a trade school. A trade school is where his employees go to
learn how to do what they do so I define a heating contractor, an electrical
contractor, the skilled trades as we call it. In the industry if you talked
II
about a trade person, that's your electrical, your millwrite, your sheet metal,
all these type people. They are a trade shop and this is a permitted use within
1 the IOP so I don't think we even need a conditional use permit. That we're
doing just a site plan review here. I would like to see a time schedule on
II
1 this. I don't think the sewer and water issues are just totally blown out of
proportion here in that we have 18 employees of which most of them aren't on
site most the time who are drinking coffee. The use of the sanitary sewer
II
system, the septic system is going to be considerably reduced over the teenagers
and Jim McMahon's, the rest of his kids and his wife and his 30 or 40 horses
that he waters out there. I think eliminating 30 to 40 horses off that site II' will help Lake Susan and the other lakes that are tributary to Jim's property.
I see some good reasons for eliminating the horse farm in this area. If we had
- a choice of what we wanted to have in our industrial park, a horse farm or a
heating ventilating contractor, somehow you feel the heating ventilating
II
: contractor is more logical in the industrial park. I believe there is going to
=:-be one thing that's going to be increased and that's traffic. Traffic is going
to be considerably increased. You've got 18 people coming in in the morning, II-pick up the trucks, leaving. We're going to have a lot of trips per day going
- in and out and I don't think that small rock driveway is appropriate for that so
in this case on complying with asphalting of the driveway and the parking areas,
I believe that is a necessary requirement. I don't want the driveway to get so II
wide that it affects and possibly kills the line of trees on both sides of that
driveway. To put in an asphalt driveway 16 foot wide and end up killing 30 tall
pine trees would be ludicrous and we need to make sure our forester reviews this
II
site also as to what width of driveway we can put through there but I don't
believe 12 foot is appropriate for the traffic going in here. If 16 foot, which
is 2 foot added to either side, I don't think that's, probably 16 foot would
II
fit. As far as curbs, I would like to see this done either without curbs or
with asphalt curbs because I believe the access to Powers Blvd. is temporary.
That future access will be off of an internal road coming out of Opus so we're F
going to force him to take that access off of Powers Blvd. because this is only
II
43 I
MI
964
City Council Meeting - July15, 1988
until the future Lake Drive East? West, will come through.g I would like to see
a preliminary plat filed within one year and final plat. I think this is our
' time constraint. I think in order to approve this, we're actually approving
several variances and the variances on the curbing would be the one. I'd like
to see that one of the conditions is that we give him a time schedule to have a
' plat in here. Not a sketch or a drawing or something in the future but we want,
if the plat isn't in here by the end of the time schedule, they're looking for a
new place to go then. Whether that's a year or a year and a half or two years
for preliminary plat is debateable. I think a heating ventilation contractor is
' a necessary person in the City of Chanhassen just like any other service to our
citizens and we definitely don't want to force these folks out of our town.
They live here, they work here, let's keep than here. Another condition I would
' throw on here is no outside storage of parts equipment other than service
vehicles would be permitted. We're not permitting any outside storage for this
other than the dumpster that's going to have to be enclosed anyway. I'm glad to
' see that they're talking about getting a lugger to haul away their stuff instead
of sitting out back like it currently is. I know I've harrassed staff a few
times on the old furnances and stuff.
Steve Berquist: We've had a roll-off for a few months and it works real well.
Councilman Johnson: Those are my comments. I'm in favor of something inbetween
' what they want and what staff wants. I'd like to hear whether I'm right or
wrong on this being a permitted use. I think it will probably end up over in
Roger's court eventually.
Mayor Hamilton: I don't see this as a temporary use as was mentioned in the
report. It's a permanent business. They've been in business in this community
for a period of time already. They're buying a piece of property to move their
' business onto and in doing so they want to then finish platting the property as
a function on that property and then continue to operate on there. I also don't
see it as a contractor's yard. I think Jay had a very good point. This fellow
' is not a contractor's yard.
Councilman Johnson: It's a trade shop.
Mayor Hamilton: It's a trade shop. It's not a contractor's yard at all. It's
a part of the industrial park and it's appropriate that we get the residential -
portion of the industrial park finally gone and out of the industrial park and
' have industrial uses in there. The applicant has said he's willing to plat the
property, which he already has shown us a plat which unfortunately we didn't get
in the packet but he has put some thought to it. He has platted it. It's what
' he perceives is going to happen with the property but again you never know
what's going to happen to anything. Somebody may come in and offer. to buy four
of his six lots and change the use of it but we do have a plat and it gives us
some idea of the direction he's trying to go. The sewer and water uses need to
' be looked at to find out when, and I don't think Steve knows and I don't think
staff knows, when the sewer and water might be available to that property. I
don't think it's fair, at this time, to tell Steve and his company that you have
' to run sewer and water to your property at an exorbinate expense when not too
far down the road, perhaps in a year as McGlynn and the other people develop
[E7
across the street from this property, as more development comes in from the
east, sewer and water is going to be available and then they can hook into it
II and continue to develop the property. I see it as a great opportunity for that
' 44
En
+�f 6;.40
. City Council Meeting - July 25, 1988 �y
piece of the industrial park to continue to develop on a continuing basis. No
longer do we have a horse farm there and I think if they do a little bit of
screening and sprucing up of the place which Steve has said he'll do. He'll
paint the house and the barn and paint things up a bit, it's going to be a
better looking part of the industrial park. I agree with Jay on several items.
I think we need a time table. We need a plat. If we say within a year or two
years or whatever is a reasonable length of time although you already have the
plat so that can be submitted as we already have it. You can do some screening
on the property of the dumpster and whatever else is required. I don't see any
reason why he needs to pave his road at this time. If he puts Class V down,
widens the road a bit and makes a Class V parking area, that should be adequate
for right now until he continues to develop the property. I think it's a good
use of the property. I'm glad to see someone interested in coming in and
working with the property and as they're on there, we don't have to worry about
vandalism or just knocking things over. I think it's a good use and I'm all in
favor of it 100%.
Councilman Geving: Tom, can I ask you two questions? How do you feel about
this going back to the Planning Commission for them to look at the new plan?
The one that they haven't seen yet. Plan B.
Mayor Hamilton: I would like to approve this with conditions and then pass it
back to the Planning Commission for their comments and perhaps any additional
conditions they may want to put on but I think we need to get a clear indication
to the property owner and to the applicant as to whether or not they can move
ahead with this project. I know Steve is under a time constraint to get out of
the building he's in and that's a real concern.
Councilman Geving: I think the question I ask is an important one from a
planning standpoint. They have a responsibility and I think that they have a
right to see this plan but I agree also with you that we should give Steve an
indication tonight that this is either a no go, a go, a maybe so he can start
planning and the person he's negotiating with this property for so they know '
what could happen. How do you also feel about this item on the feasibility to
be conducted to determine the best way to get sewer and water to this property?
Is that premature? I would say that's premature until we settle how we're going
to handle the total property itself and that can come later. Do you agree with
that?
Mayor Hamilton: I think it's premature too and I think the staff needs to look
at what's happening with the McGlynn property and I'm not familiar with all the
sewer and water runs and where it's at down there but I think we need to have
that information given to us as to where everything is. I'm not even sure that
Steve knows how he could access sewer and water and what the costs might be so I
think we need to have more information about it.
Gary Warren: The purpose of the feasibility, you just described what a
feasibility study does. I think as a minimum, that there should be some
conditions that if, whatever combination of reasons that the sanitary sewer and
water does become available, that this property be required to hook into it.
Mayor Hamilton: Oh yes.
45
Zoo
It City Council Meeting - Jul L5, 1988
Councilman Geving: And then the other question I have, and I guess that would
be of Barb, if the Planning Commission had viewed this as several councilmembers
did tonight, that this activity is a trade shop and not a contractor's yard,
would that have made any difference to the Planning Commission?
Barbara Dacy: No. If it's a permitted or a conditional use, you're still
dealing with the same standards.
Councilman Geving: And they were still looking for a plan? They were looking
for a time table.
Jo Ann Olsen: They saw the preliminary plat. They brought it and showed us a
copy.
Councilman Geving: But apparently it was not an official part of the packet.
' Jo Ann Olsen: They did not feel that was adequate.
Mayor Hamilton: It's an architect's drawing. I don't know how more official
you can get than that.
Barbara Dacy: The issue still is, whether or not the Council wants to approve
it as proposed or if you do want to establish a time line on the proposal as is.
Whether they submit a plat drawing is not germane right now...able to expand.
Mayor Hamilton: I'm going to move approval of the, I guess it's a request for a
' conditional use and I guess you and I agree that it's not a conditional use.
Councilman Johnson: Their actual request said Site Plan Review and it got
' changed to Conditional Use Permit by staff's insistance I believe.
Mayor Hamilton: I still don't see it as a conditional use either because it's a
' use in the industrial park.
Barbara Dacy: Fine. That's fine. Then your motion should say, as a permitted
use.
Councilman Johnson: We're doing a Site Plan Review then?
Barbara Dacy: Right.
Mayor Hamilton: Okay, I'm going to move for approval of the Site Plan Review
for relocation of an office/warehouse to the property located at 8301 Audubon
Road, Merit Heating and Cooling, Inc. with the conditions that a time table be
established as to how they propose the property to be developed and how you see
your facilities changing. To improve the driveway to widened it to probably a
minimum of 12 feet using Class V for the road and the parking area. To screen
the dumpster area and to do any other screening that staff may feel is necessary
to improve the site. To submit a plat within one year of how the property is
going to be developed from this point. That there be no outside storage.
Councilman Geving: How about (c) here Tom?
[71
46
City Council Meeting - '.y 25, 1988 1
Mayor Hamilton: Yes, comply with the conditions of the Building and Fire I
Inspector.
Councilman Johnson: The feasibility study? I
Councilman Geving: I think the feasibility study will come later.
Mayor Hamilton: Yes, I think that could almost be generated by the staff. I II
guess I'm really wrestling with how, I know that sewer and water. Well, I guess
Gary's idea was when sewer and water becomes available that the property be II required to hook up to it.
Councilman Geving: Let's make that a condition.
Gary Warren: One correlary I guess that we would have here, at least in m II experience, with the Burdick property and the James property n
p petty where we did not
have sanitary sewer pumps at that time to service that property, we added a
II
condition on that developer that he not develop until the City had proceeded
with evaluating and had satisfied how we were going to get trunk sanitary sewer
to that property which generated a public improvement project which of
II
course.. .feasibility study. That certainly is an option here at this time
similar to what we've done with Lake Drive East and others is that Council
authorized a feasibility study to look at trunk sanitary sewer service for this
site.
II
I. Mayor Hamilton: I guess I see that as a little different property. You're
talking about property on the main street of the City that you know is going to II develop sooner. We felt it was going to be developing rather quickly. More
visible and you know there was going to be more activity there where this is a
new part of the industrial park, as I see it, and perhaps is going to be a year
or two. We already know that up front prior to, although we might be surprised
II
and Steve might be surprised. I told him, you get this platted and you're going
to probably find a lot of people interested in it so if that happens, I think
that's going to generate the feasibility study because he's going to have to get
II
sewer and water.
Councilman Johnson: In order for him to plat, he's going to have to do a II feasibility study to figure out how he's going to get sewer and water in there.
I would think that would be a condition of the platting was for us to do the
feasibility study.
Gary Warren: I believe it would be up, again to the Council, if you wanted to II
make that a condition or not. You could put approve the plat without having
sewer and water service there.
II
Mayor Hamilton: That's a good point Jay. I think we should follow that.
Gary Warren: As long as there's some condition that the developer understands U
that he would have to connect when we do come through. You've got Lake Susan
Hills West. Phasing of that could change overnight here along with what we do
with Lake Drive East so...
II
Mayor Hamilton: That's right and I think Steve's aware of that. There's a lot
s— of things changing out there and he's going to have to keep on top of how things I
47
II
' X68 r
City Council Meeting - July 1 5, 1988
are fluctuating and how it's going to affect his property.
Councilman Johnson: So 7 would be hook up to sanitary sewer and water service
when available?
' Mayor Hamilton: Right. That's my motion.
Councilman Geving: I'll second it.
' Councilman Boyt: I have some discussion. As I said, I was listening, trying to
listen carefully. I think any decision should stand the test of some logic so
I've got a couple questions. First question I have is how many variances are we
granting here?
Jo Ann Olsen: The paving...the screening and landscaping requirements, I don't
' know...
Councilman Boyt: So there's paving, sewer, the driveway, landscaping
potentially.
Councilman Horn: Erosion control?
' Jo Ann Olsen: Erosion control, drainage.
Councilman Boyt: Erosion control. Drainage. Okay, so that without Planning
Commission review I think I counted 7 variances that you're proposing that we
grant. So that was one question I had. The other question is, just so that I'm
clear, I'd like to hear how this is different than a developer who happens to
have the money to do the things we're requiring because one of the questions in
our variance is that there's something about this situation that demands
variances other than economic so I'd like to hear a bit about that.
11 Mayor Hamilton: Those are your questions?
Councilman Boyt: Okay. I think that's two of them and if we could resolve
those, I guess I question, everybody can enter this with good intent, what's the
' guarantee? In what way is the City in a secure position here? What are we
doing to avoid ourselves from creating an industrial use that really isn't under
our control? That Steve, in spite of all good intentions, decides that this
isn't working. He leaves the property and now we've got sanething that has been
zoned and approved for operation and is available to other conceivable so what
kind of guarantee do we have that in fact it will be developed along the lines
that intent says would like to be. So those are my three areas of questions.
Mayor Hamilton: Let me try to answer some of them. Starting at the last one, I
don't think we ever get any guarantees from anybody that's going into business
in this town that they're not going to walk away from any project.
Councilman Boyt: We sure do.
Mayor Hamilton: No we don't. You get your 1100 but that doesn't guarantee you
that the project's going to be completed.
Councilman Boyt: It guarantees you get the money to complete it.
48
City Council Meeting - Jr , 25, 1988 '�''`0'
Mayor Hamilton: I don't see that the City has any risk here since the applicant
wants to use the property in it's current state and temporary while he's
developing the property and using it for his business. I don't see that that
puts the City at any risk at all. If it doesn't work for him and he says the
heck with it, I'm going to South Dakota, the property is stilled IOP, which it
is today. We haven't changed that at all. Somebody else can still go in there
and pick up and develop it any way they want. He hasn't effectively right now,
let's assume he stays there for 9 months and things go to heck so he leaves
town, so what's changed? Nothing. The property is still for sale and somebody
else can come along and buy it and develop it or attempt to make use of it as he
has. So I don't see that the City is at any risk. I feel that this is a rather
unique situation and I guess I really do feel that we need to look at each, and
I try to always do this, look at each application on it's own merit. I don't
think I've ever looked or we've ever looked at anything quite like this. It
seems to me to be a good opportunity to keep a businessman in town and allow him
the opportunity to develop a piece of industrial property. The property's been
for sale for about 5 years. He's the only person to come along to say that he
would like to buy it and to develop it. I think that's what is different about
it. No else has come forward to attempt to do that. As far as the variances,
perhaps we do have to have some variances but again, I think it's a unique
situation and I don't see that granting variances on this particular property is
going to cause any hardship to the City or set any precedent. I think it's a
very unique piece of property. I've never seen anything like it or an
application like this on any similiar type property. I think it's a great
opportunity for the City.
Councilman Boyt: Let's go back to the Volk property. We couldn't get sewer
there but we were talking about light industrial uses. That got turned down.
We're losing the piece of property. It got turned down. Now we're going to 11 turn around within a year and say here's a place that could get sewer but we're
not going to require sewer so a similar business can start up.
Mayor Hamilton: They're totally different pieces of property. The Volk
property probably isn't going to have sewer to it from Chanhassen for the next
30 to 40 years. Somewhere in there. Sewer is going to be available to this.
It's already in the industrial park. It's within the MUSA line. It's going to
have sewer in the short term. There is a major difference. The Volk property
isn't going to have it.
Councilman Boyt: They are similar. '
Mayor Hamilton: I don't think so. The Volk property was looking more really at
contractor's yard type uses. A paving company or well drilling or that type of
thing who wants to function in an area for a period of time until the city grows
and then they keep moving out. The same as Merle's contracting yard. As the
city grows and the growth keeps moving out, it's finally going to push him out
and push others like him out to go out further west where they can get their
property and buy their 100 acres and spread out and have all their equipment
sitting out and as the growth keeps going, they just keep moving. This is a
permanent use. He's going to be on this property hopefully until he dies, and
until his kids run the business. I don't see this as the same type of use at
all. It's permanent. I don't see the temporary use. It's a permanent use of
that property. ,
49
•
City Council Meeting - Jule 3, 1988
Councilman Johnson: Temporary use of the buildings.
II
[-
Steve Berqui.st: If that was the case, there's no way we'd be paying $7.50 a
square foot for office and $3.50 a square foot for warehouse where we're at now.
If we could work out of a contractor's yard like Volk does, there's no reason
for us to be where we are now. We never would have done it.
Councilman Boyt: If we're trying to fill up a business park that we have now
' and we make it as easy as possible to leave that park, are we helping the City
in the long run?
Mayor Hamilton: I don't understand your question.
Councilman Boyt: Well, we're taking a tenant from the office park and we're
saying let's see if we can remove the barriers to leaving that office park and
' go into this IOP. That's basically what we've done and I guess the question I
ask is one of impact. Not just on this piece of property but on the business
park that loses this type of tenant.
Mayor Hamilton: I see a tenant in the business park saying I want to make a
long term investment in the city of Chanhassen. I want to buy a piece of
property. Put my business there. Own my property and my building. There's
already, as Steve has told me, the landlord already has a person ready to rent
the space as soon as he's out of there. I would hope that as Steve develops his
property, the tenant that goes into there is going to come over to Steve and say
' I want to buy one of your 1 acre lots to put my business on there permanently
and own my land. Somebody else will come in there and it's just a continual,
your a tenant, your business grows and you want to get into your own property.
I don't think it has an impact. I think it's a positive impact on the
commercial property.
Councilman Geving: In fact, I don't think it's really going to hurt our
' industrial park any at all. We're actually running out of industrial park space
right now. We don't have that many lots left down there. If we could extend
the industrial park area that we've been advocating for some time to the west
and to the south, I think it's to our benefit to do it. This is the direction
we've been wanting to move for a long time. We don't have that many spaces.
Maybe Barb or somebody could fill us in.
Steve Berquist: There are 7 spaces left in the Opus Park none of which will
support a building of anything less than 15,000 square feet without subdividing
the property.
' Councilman Geving: I was going to say less than 10 because when we started the
industrial park, we have about 35 spaces in there and if we're down to 7, I
think we've done a tremendous job. There's going to be more applications
caning in. We're going to fill that thing up before you know it.
' Mayor Hamilton: I think that shows you this isn't going to.. .
Councilman Geving: It's a need. There's a need.
50
City Council Meeting - ,r y 25, 1988 •2
Councilman Horn: I've seen a rental sign for the last six months on a building
that we can't rent out and their rates are no higher than this. I think that's
exactly why we have zoning for our industrial parks. If we feel our industrial
park is running out, then it's incumbant on us to create more areas that are
zoned where we don't need variances to build. I don't think this is the right
way to go about doing this. I'd like to have our Attorney speak to us about any
type of precedent we might be setting in this area and maybe a little review on
how we can allow this type of growth and expansion to take place from a zoning
aspect.
Roger Knutson: Your ordinance has a procedure for issuing variances that you
have all gone through lots and lots of times.
Councilman Geving: I think it's an unfair question to ask of Roger because
we're the City Council and we can make that decision.
Councilman Horn: I'm asking him to interpret the ordinance. '
Councilman Geving: He just did. I think he just did.
Councilman Horn: I'd like to hear the rest of his comments if I could. '
Roger Knutson: I was going to say, Dale's on the Board of Adjustments and
Appeals and he knows more than any of us here probably how variances are '
processed. As far as the precedential effect of anything, that depends. It's
always a judgment call. It's dependent upon how similar or dissimilar they are
to that case in point. The more similar they are, the more precedential value
tf they have. A precedent, in many respects, means treating people fairly.
Treating people similarly treated, similarly situated similar.
Councilman Boyt: But you can't use economic hardship. '
Roger Knutson: As a basis for a variance, no. Economic hardship is not a basis
for a variance. '
Councilman Horn: I haven't heard economic hardship is a point in this case. In
fact I haven't really heard why the move has to take place. There's nothing in
here that indicates that. It's only a desire to move.
Mayor Hamilton: That's right. What's wrong with that?
Councilman Horn: Nothing. I'm just saying, why do we have rules, I can
understand bending rules if there's some hardship to keep a business here. I
haven't heard anything that says we're going to lose the business if they don't
do this. That's the whole intent that we've had with this contractor's yard or
whatever you want to call those things.
Steve Berquist: Is that what we have to get to? I have to say we're going to
pick up and leave if we don't. ..
Councilman Horn: If we could finish our discussion, I'm saying that I haven't
heard that that is even applicable in this case. There seems to be a lot of
question as to just what this issue is. Is it a contractor's yard or what
should it be called? Why are there so many fuzzy issues? It should be fairly '
51
MI
11 7.2
.City Council Meeting - July• z5, 1988
clear cut I would think. Why s our...staff that do
y our planning and organizing
for us and set up zoning, totally against this application? Do we have input
that they don't have? I would like to have heard someone from the Planning
Commission as to why. I read the Minutes but it wasn't terribly clear to me why
they objected to this. That's the group that really sets up our planning
' standards. Just something doesn't seem very clear cut on this and I have the
same problem Bill does.
Mayor Hamilton: Well, we've got a motion on the floor and I have some
conditions and I'd like to add 3(g) from the staff's conditions. Jay, do you
have a brief final comment before we vote on this?
Councilman Johnson: Yes. I haven't commented on the motion yet. Item 2 of
your motion is improve driveway and parking to Class V. As Class V, that's
gravel correct?
Mayor Hamilton: Right.
Councilman Johnson: I'm not in favor of that. I still think we need asphalt
' there because of the large increase, especially the loading areas also, just as
I said with the last applicant, Lyman Lumber. Their loading dock area needs to
be asphalt. I don't see a larger reason why we should give than a rough
' driveway. As far as being equal, equal treatment. As I go through the variance
and what clobbers us on the variance side of it is that special conditions or
circumstances are not a consequence of self created hardship. I have some
' problems of really defining exactly what the hardship is. I see the improvement
to the City of eliminating the horse stables. I see that as something we'd like
to do. I see that this is an opportunity to remove something from the IOP
district that is a non-conforming use but I'd like to eliminate some of our
'
variances. The ones I'd like to eliminate mostly, I think by doing (g) , you
eliminated a couple there and I think asphalt will eliminate a few. We've got
almost none then. He's agreed to do the screening and landscaping that's
' required.
Mayor Hamilton: Can I just ask a question then Jay. Since we know that he's
' going to be changing the configuration of where he's going to be at as he plats
it and moves into a more permanent structure, I think he's only concerned about
doing asphalt driveway and parking was he's going to have to tear it out again
as he moves into a new building. Would it be fair to make the condition that, I
' don't know to quite phrase this, that he's going to have to pave it within a
year if something. If he can't show us how he's going to move or how the
property is going to be configured or if he doesn't have his plans in place. I
guess I'm just trying to save the guy a buck. I see no reason why we make a guy
spend money that we don't have to. I don't see that putting asphalt in there is
really a tremendous improvement to the property that absolutely has to be done.
As long as you put a good rock base but if there's a condition that says you've
got to do it within a period of time as he plats and develops the property.
Councilman Johnson: The way I see it, I don't see this in reference to Merle
Volk because I think it's a different issue there. I see it more like a
John Pryzmus. In that, if you can't afford to do it, he shouldn't be trying to
do it.
Mayor Hamilton: I don't think that's the point.
52
City Council Meeting - Y''y 25, 1988 -�'
Councilman Johnson: '
I think it is on the asphalt. I'm willing to cut the curb
and gutter because we have no storm sewer to direct the water from the curb and
gutter into. Curb and gutter directs water into a storm sewer and takes it off
and away. An asphalt curb will do it. In this particular case I see there's
justification for an asphalt curb and asphalt driveway. I don't see concrete
curb because I don't see it as being permanent. We're definitely not going to
have this thing connected to the highway for full time but the increase in truck
traffic justifies the asphalt. If their erosion control and ponding all
requires the curbing, then I think asphalt curbing would be appropriate versus
concrete in this situation. There's something unique about this situation that
says asphalt. This is a unique piece of property. It's the only existing
farmstead within our IOP. We have one other that's already been converted to an
industrial use. There is no other. We're not setting a precedent for the next
guy because there is no next guy. I don't want to set a precedence of gravel.
I'm against the gravel in the IOP.
Mayor Hamilton: The other one doesn't have blacktop. ,
Councilman Johnson: There's no blacktop on the other one and that's wrong too.
I'm still trying to figure out why there's garbage trucks back there but that's
a different issue.
Steve Berquist: First of all I want to say that I take exception to the '
comparison and that...
Councilman Johnson: Just on the money side of it. You're saying you can't
afford to do it. Maybe you shouldn't.
Steve Berquist: I don't have a problem with paving the driveway. I don't have
a problem with paving the loading dock. I question concerning paving the entire
parking area. I'm convinced that paving of the driveway and the loading dock is
the way to go if for no other reason than to help present a professional image
when our light amount of walk-in traffic does walk in but as far as paving the
entire area that we intend to park our vehicles on and put our dumpster, I take
exception to that in that I don't believe that is necessary. That's just a
little overkill. ,
Councilman Johnson: For your dumpster, asphalt underneath it. Impervious
surface underneath your dumpster.
Steve Berquist: Impervious surface underneath the dumpster. . .we have a
tentative grading plan there before you in the packet of information. What is
your feelings on paving of the entire surface area? '
Councilman Johnson: I think I'd like to see, there's a lot of fuzzy issues
here. I'd like to see a proposal of exactly what you think you can pave and
what you would like to not pave. More detail. We're kind of missing the
detail.
Mayor Hamilton: I think he just said the driveway and the dock area and not the
parking area.
Councilman Johnson: I'd like to see it in writing but anyhow. . .
53
. •
ICouncil Meeting - Jul':,~ 5, 1988
II
Mayor Hamilton: We can make it a condition. I'll change my condition number 2
Ito blacktop the drive and the dock area and under the dumpster.
Councilman Geving: Can we go through these again? I think it's important.
We're getting fuzzy.
IIMayor Hamilton: Blacktop and curb the driveway and the dock area and underneath
the dumpster.
ICouncilman Geving: That's condition number?
II Mayor Hamilton: 2. Condition 1 is a time table for development. 3 is to
screen the dumpster the same as 3(b) . Condition 4 was to have a plat within a
year. Condition 5 was no outside storage. Condition 6 was to connect to sewer
and water when available. Then we had item (g) which will be condition 7 for
IIthe erosion control.
Councilman Geving: We had also Building and Fire Inspector.
IIGary Warren: Rural requirements for any property which is going to be on a
septic system, we always provide for an alternate site. That might be something
to consider here. The same reason that if the site fails, we have a back-up.
I Councilman Johnson: Maybe if the site fails, then they're required to h
Y � hook up
to sewer and water rather than an atlernate site. If we've got a site failing
Iin there.
Gary Warren: It should stand the test of any other septic site that we approve
Ifor a subdivision request that they have...
Mayor Hamilton: I suspect the applicant wouldn't have any problem locating
another site should his current system fail since the system is in good working
I order. I don't suspect that that's going to be a problem since there will be
less use now than there will be with residential.
I Councilman Johnson: But you talked about doing the borings and getting the site
approved right now.
Mayor Hamilton: Do you have a problem with that Steve?
IICouncilman Geving: What's the cost on that?
I Barbara Dacy: I really think that maybe we should maybe place as a condition
for staff to review this. Being located within the urban service area, we
should really review in detail how the connection to sewer and water ties in.
IIMayor Hamilton: Make that a part of that whole thing.
Councilman Geving: Usually an urban requirement isn't it?
II Councilman Johnson: Rural. But this is an urban area.
[7
Councilman Geving: But it's a rural requirement.
II 54
E.
City Council Meeting - ..y 25, 1988
:411
Gary Warren: ...making an exception here to have them out of sewer and water.. .
Mayor Hamilton: I think Barb's suggestion is good in that we're going to look
at the whole sewer and water issue and staff should review if an additional
septic site is necessary or not. That can come back as a consent item.
Councilman Boyt: Several times early this evening I heard about the need for
public input. When we grant variances, we have public hearings. We haven't
notified anybody so you can't consider this a public hearing. '
Councilman Johnson: Granting a variance doesn't require a public hearing.
Roger Knutson: Take a look at Section 20-29. '
Barbara Dacy: I think what we need to define here is, the motion for approval
is for blacktopping a significant portion of the area. I know you've made a
motion for approval, maybe we just should sit down with the applicant and give
staff time to determine what is a variance and what isn't. If one is necessary,
then we'll have to go ahead.. .and go from there. It was advertised as a
conditional use and there was a public hearing on...
Councilman Horn: I think that's a good recommendation. That if it requires a
variance, then a public hearing.. .
Roger Knutson: Or the Board of Adjustments.
Barbara Dacy: If you wanted to do that as condition 10.
Mayor Hamilton: I think that would be number 9 condition that should it be
approved, that the variances would be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and
Appeals and advertised as such.
Councilman Boyt: That basically takes the whole issue and postpones it until '
they make a decision and if they make a decision, they basically, we can give
them the conditions you've outlined...
Mayor Hamilton: It gives them a leg to stand on. At least they know we're
willing to, assumed that it's approved, we're willing to approve it with review
of the variances by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals.
Barbara Dacy: They won't be able to proceed until there's a findings by the
Council that no other hearings are needed.. .
Councilman Boyt: So if we approve it tonight and the Board of Adjustments and
Appeals approves it, then it's a done deal?
Barbara Dacy: Right. Intermediary to that we'll bring the item back on the
August 8th agenda pending approval of this motion and discussion with the
applicant.
Councilman Boyt: I don't think it would delay anything to put it back in front
of the Planning Commission.
55 '
2 76
, City 'COuncil Meeting - Jul. 5, 1988
Barbara Dacy: The Planning Conuii.ssion made a very strong statement about their
dissatisfaction with the plan. I don't know if they would change that as ,
proposed.
Councilman Boyt: One never knows. They've got all sorts of Minutes that they
' can read that will give them insight into this situation. I'd like to see it go
back in front of them.
' Councilman Horn: So would I.
Councilman Johnson: This is really a tough one because I really like to enforce
our ordinances but since this is going to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals
for all the variance conditions on it, we're only voting on the site plan review
at this point, I'll go yea.
' Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve Site Plan Review for
relocation of an office/warehouse to the property located at 8301 Audubon Road,
Merit Heating and Cooling, Inc. with the following conditions:
1 1. A time table be established as to how the applicant proposes the property to
be developed and how they see their facilities changing.
' 2. To improve the driveway to widened it to probably a minimum of 12 feet using
asphalt for the driveway, loading dock area and underneath the dumpster.
' 3. Provide any additional landscaping requirements and proper screening of the
trash enclosure and proposed dock area.
4. Submit a plat within one year of how the property is going to be developed
from this point.
' 5. There will be no outside storage.
6. The applicant will hook up to city sewer and water when it becomes
available.
7. Comply with the conditions of the Building and Fire Inspector.
' 8. The applicant shall submit for approval by the City Engineer a grading,
drainage and erosion control plan prepared by a registered engineer prior to
final approval.
t9. After review by the City Staff, any variances required will be reviewed by
the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and advertised as such.
Mayor Hamilton, Councilman Geving and Councilman Johnson voted in favor of the
motion. Councilman Horn and Councilman Boyt voted in opposition to the motion.
The motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2.
56
k
I
l
S I
ULLIVAN'S
ERVICES, INC.
I
3660 HWY 101 SOUTH
WAYZATA. MN 55391
I473-4300
June 23, 1988
I
City of Chanhassen I
Planning Department
Attention : Jo Ann Olson
I
690 Coulter Street
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
RE : Jim McMahon
8301 Audobon
Chanhassen, Minnesota
I
To Whom It May Concern :
I
On June 22, 1988 we cleanea and checked the septic system
at the above mentioned address and found that it is in
I
good working condition to she best of our knowledge.
I
I
■
Li -611t,we "\ ':.rte,--`'' I
Patrick S. Sullivan
President
I
I
I
,;1;11 1988
LI f Y Or=CI
I EDGEWORK BUILDERS, INC.
201 W. 591/2 Street
I `7■11.111. Minneapolis, MN 55419
Nor ' vim
ow ' . IN (612) 861-1266
IMASTERS OF QUALITY CONSTRUCTION
IApril 9, 1989
I Mr. Steve Hansen
City Planner
City of Chanhassen
I 690 Coultier Drive
Chanhassen, Mn. 55317
Dear Mr. Hansen,
Enclosed is a packet of information required by the city for an application for a
I conditional use permit for a Contractor's Yard for the property located at 8301 Audubon
Road. In addition, I would like to provide some further background of my situation, and
projections for the future.
IIf approved, my intention would be to relocate my business, Edgework Builders, Inc.(EBI)
to this property. As you are aware, I currently have a conditional use permit to construct
a Contractor's Yard on some land zoned Rural Residential on Galpin Blvd. Although I am
Iconfident that my Galpin Blvd. site would be maintained to the highest standards, I would
prefer to locate EBI in an area that is zoned appropriately for our needs.
I Certain conditions were required of EBI on Galpin Blvd. Those included hard surfacing
of the main traffic areas, screening outside storage areas, and complying with local and
state building codes. It would be my intention to maintain these same standards on the
IAudubon Road site.
It would be my intention to use the current buildings and their supporting systems in
I some modified fashion until such time as I could develop the property into industrial sites
similar in nature to the industrial park to the North and East. Variables such as sewer and
water availability, market demands, and development of adjoining property all affect the
I practicality of site development, but I would hope to have the land developed to its fullest
potential within 5 years.
I now wish to identify the nature and intensity of EBI as it regards the current building and
site plan.
IBuilding Proposed use Square Footage Occupancy
Farm house Office 1580 SF 5
I Barn, upper
Barn, lower Cold storage 2275 SF
Vacant 2275 SF
Garage Garage 600 SF 1
,i,, Tack Barn Tool storage 1040 SF -
Chicken coops Cold storage 1200 SF -
1.
A- rr4 c.N.vl c N'1" .-
1
We currently have 5 office staff: Receptionist/bookkeeper, Estimator, Salesperson,
Draftsperson, and Field Supervisor. Only the Receptionist and Draftsperson are
expected to reside in the office full time. The other 3 staff members spend approximately
25% of their time in the office.
We employ between 12 and 15 installers in the field. In the past, all parties used report
directly to our yard, but that has been changed. We have reorganized our crews, and
now only the foremen report to the yard. These 4.5 people report to the yard, load their
trucks for the day, and are subsequently gone until their return at the end of the day.
In talking to septic system contractors, they would equate this use scenario to a family of
four The current owner is a family of 6. He also boards approximately 25 horses. I am
certain that the current septic and water use is more intense than what I am proposing.
I therefore feel that the current system would function adequately until such time that city
sewer and water could be made available at a reasonable cost.
In closing, I would like to re-itterate my desire to redirect my current CUP to property that
is more appropriately zoned. I can assure you that I will maintain the highest standards of
property maintenance with the current site plan. '
Attachments
Application
Site plan
Tabulations of physical conditions
Location map
Letter from Sullivans Services re septic system
Sincerely, '
David A. Stockdale
President
Edgework Builders, Inc.
I
I
I
1
I
LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION j =� '
I CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 Coulter Drive ■
Chanhassen, MN 55317
II (612) 937-1900
APPLICANT: David A . Stockdale OWNER: James & Roseanne McMahon
IIADDRESS 7210 Galpin Blvd . ADDRESS 8301 Audubon Road
Chanhassen . MN 55331 Chanhassen , MN 55317
Zip Code
TELEPHONE (Daytime ) 861-1266 TELEPHONE 448-3701 Zip Code
REQUEST:
IZoning District Change Planned Unit Development
I Zoning Appeal - Sketch Plan
Preliminary Plan
Zoning Variance Final Plan
Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision
Land Use Plan Amendment Platting
IIx Conditional Use Permit Metes and Bounds
Street/Easement Vacation
I Site Plan Review
Wetlands Permit
II PROJECT NAME Temporary office , shop and yard for Edgework Builders , Inc .
PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION Commercial/Industrial
IREQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION Same
PRESENT ZONING Commercial/Industrial
IREQUESTED ZONING Same
USES PROPOSED Office , shop & yard for contracting business
ISIZE OF PROPERTY 7 . 47 acres
IILOCATION 1/4 mile south of Highway 5 on Audubon Road
REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST To gain permission from city administration
II to permit operation of a construction
business on the existing premises until
such time as subdivision becomes possible .
• LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) see attached
4 TMcs itil -Air #6
City of Chanhassen
Land Development Application
Page 2
•
FILING INSTRUCTIONS : ,
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or
clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and _
plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before
filing this application , you should confer with the City Planner
to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements
applicable to your application.
FILING CERTIFICATION:
The undersigned representative of the applicant hereby certifies
that he is familiar with the procedural requirements of all
applicable City Ordinances .
Signed By /(AC.e..-Y .57/,,d- .�--- Date I�/�7
Applicant _
The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been '
authorized to make this application for the property herein
described .
Signed By Date
Fee Owner '
Date Application Received
Application Fee Paid
City Receipt No.
i
* This Application will be considered by the Planning Commission/
Board of Adjustments and Appeals at their ,
meeting .
•
I
1
L
•
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 16
1
opposed to it. I think there would have to be some very creative and
unique things done on that site to quality as a PUD using the contour of
the topography.
' Conrad : Just one last comment . I find the R-12 district to be totally
adequate for this proposal . I will take exception to Jim' s comment. I
think it' s not density. My issue is not density as much as it is open
' space. Like Tim, I thought this was a good property for apartments where
the density was stacked and where we could still keep open space for people
to play and walk. This proposal is really packed together. It' s back to
I back apartments . Back to back townhomes and that ' s not what I had
envisioned for this district.
Emmings: I want to go on record as adopting basically all of Ladd ' s
I comments just to keep it short. Anybody else got anything else on this one
then?
Erhart : Yes , I 'd just like to say my biggest concern is when you get all
of it done is that what' s going to happen is because they' re new, they' ll
sell. Obviously they know how to market the things. My concern, with that
density, you' re walking the fine line that the values would go down . If
11 you have a complex like this where the values go down, we will then own a
tragedy in the City of Chanhassen . I just don ' t think the amenities ,
there's something lacking to keep people interested in rebuying the units
I and at least the value goes up at the rate of inflation to take advantage
of the tax advantages. My concern is that it' s not there. It" s going to
be a diminishing value peice of property and that ' s bad for Chanhassen .
IEmmings: Can you tell them when this will go to the City Council?
Olsen: June 12th .
PUBLIC HEARING:
ICONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE LOCATION OF A TEMPORARY OFFICE, SHOP AND
YARD FOR EDGEWORK BUILDERS ON PROPERTY ZONED IOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK
AND LOCATED AT 8301 AUDUBON ROAD, DAVE STOCKDALE.
IJo Ann Olsen presented the staff report.
ISteve Emmings called the public hearing to order .
I Dave Stockdale: Basically just to summarize a little bit. In the past
process I was , I 'm sure you remember , I was denied at the Planning
Commission level and approved at the City Council level , my other project.
IEmmings : That would be comforting to the people who just left .
Dave Stockdale: Even though my conscience tells me that a site like this
— is more appropriate because of the zoning situation . I had some concerns
with some of the recommendations. Again, when you review Merit Heating ' s
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17 , 1989 - Page 17
approval by City Council , it' s my interpretation that the final
recommendations for asphalt only, no curb and gutter of any kind and I
wonder what has changed that I would need to follow that.
Olsen: Just maintaining the required improvements . '
Dave Stockdale: I 'm kind of on the same premise that at some point in the
near future when sewer and water becomes available and I 'm required to hook I
up to it, any additional costs that I incur now will be undermined and
circumvented by physical installation of the sewer and water . . . .the
blacktop, I would just as soon not have to go to the extent of curb and
gutter at this point. One of the reasons for curb and gutter is that it
brings the water into the storm sewer . There is none so I do not
understand this point or the need for that.
Emmings: What is the reason?
Olsen : It ' s for directing the drainage but it' s also just for
stabilization. For snowplow removal. It maintains, it keeps the site
manicured longer .
Erhart : Is it required by the ordinance? 1
Olsen: But exceptions have been made .
Dave Stockdale: I guess I 'm asking for an exception. On the same lines of 1
the engineering report, their checking the sewer and water might be
available in 1990. I 'm not going to take possession, if this goes through, I
until October of 1989 which means that if I do blacktop up to the Audubon
Road access , because the connect to the farmhouse is on the backside , to
avoid damaging all those mature spruce trees , the sewer and water line
would go down the driveway that if it is blacktopped . . . On the other hand ,
if you're sure it's going to be available in 1990, any postponing for the
blacktop would be addressed in some contractual arrangement to be put in
immediately after the sewer and water connects . I 'd like to have that
considered . If on the other hand it' s not going . . .
Emmings: What do we know about that?
Wildermuth : Is sewer and water going to be concurrent with what Scott was
in here? Isn' t that part of what that was all about? The extension.
Olsen : Oh Todd? Well that' s going down. It ' s not all -the way to that
site. It' s just to where the public works building and it' s in that
location. Lake Susan Hills 3rd Addition , they' re still industrial property II
inbetween. I don' t see us, maybe engineering knows something I don' t know
but I don ' t see it happening. This would be where Lake Susan Hills would
be here and then you still have all this industrial in here.
Dave Stockdale : There 'd be no motivation for the City to come out and to
join it unless there was more development next to me?
IF
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 18
IOlsen : Right and if you requested it. I don ' t know if 1990 will happen.
Dave Stockdale: Well I just saw it discussed in the packet. Also, did you
have the drainage plan?
' Wildermuth : Unless I 'm reading this map all wrong, it' s going right across
the street?
Batzli : It ' s on the other side of the road .
' Emmings: It's south of the tracks where that other stuff is north.
Dave Stockdale: The other question I had , they were requesting a grading
and drainage and erosion control plan. I'm basically not changing what' s
I there now and I 'm wondering what erosion we' re talking about that ' s
different than what' s been happening for whatever number of years .
I Olsen: You had stated that you'd be, there'd be some grading like for the
outside storage and just for the paving.
Dave Stockdale : I thought I had shown that on this .
I
Olsen: The erosion control?
' Emmings : I think what they' re saying is that to the extent you' re doing
any grading, they want to know how you ' re going to control the erosion to
the areas you' re grading . They want to know what you' re planning to do to
control erosion until it' s stabilized on the areas that you are grading .
That' s all .
Dave Stockdale: The only other thing I noticed the difference between mine
I and theirs was there wouldn' t be any recommendation or request for them to
provide a second drainfield site . Basically I expect I ' ll be using about
50% less than is being used . . . So if this is working for 6 people, our
work is 4 people. . .
Olsen: I think that was meant to be a condition and it' s not .
Wildermuth: It's not a condition this time around and it was for Merit I
think.
IOlsen : It should have been .
Ellson : It ' s pretty standard that we at least tell you where it' s going to
Ibe. Not use it but .
Olsen : Yes , we always have to have , just for our protection , your
protection, we always like to know if there ' s a second site available so
Ithat should have been a condition.
Erhart : We do that on subdivisions , not on conditional use permits?
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 19
Olsen : Well anything that ' s using a septic system we always like to know
that there is a second site for emergencies but if you don' t feel it
necessary, that 's fine.
Batzli : Good planning practices Tim. ,
Erhart: I'm not saying it' s bad.
Olsen : And they' ll have no problem finding another site . '
Erhart: I just don't know if this is the proper time to require it.
Emmings: I don' t recall doing this previously. Whenever somebody wants to
plat it or bring in a plan for a piece of property but I don' t recall ever
seeing this when somebody' s going to use something that exists . Have we
ever done that before?
Olsen: I don' t think we ' ve ever had a site like this . Your other
conditional use required you to have two sites on there.
Dave Stockdale : But there was no precondition saying that one site was
good and one was bad. We have a site where the drainfield site is still
good .
Olsen : We' ve always , whenever there ' s been septic systems, we' ve always
had a secondary site.
Dave Stockdale : I don ' t see the record of that happening for Merit
Heating.
Olsen : It might not have.
Dave Stockdale : So not always . You haven ' t always done that.
Olsen: Obviously not. '
Dave Stockdale . So again to me that implies a certain historic . . .that I
don't think needs to be done. '
Emmings: Okay, this is a public hearing . Is there anyone else who wants
to be heard on this?
Erhart moved , Ellson seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. ,
Wildermuth : I like your landscape plan. I 'm sure it will be a good one.
I guess I 'd be inclined to waive the requirement for curbing as based on
how solid the plan is for sewer and water . I 'd be inclined to waive the
requirement for a paved roadway if we know that water and sewer is coming
in 1990. Other than that I agree with the recommendations less the curb
requirement. ,
t
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 20
I
Emmings: How do you feel about the second septic site?
Wildermuth: I don' t think locating a second septic site is a big deal .
What are we looking at for expense?
' Dave Stockdale: $1,000. 00.
Wildermuth : Really?
Dave Stockdale: They do the borings and everything else. It ' s in that
' range.
Erhart: What do you do if you can' t find one?
Emmings: How many acres is this?
Dave Stockdale: 7.4.
Wildermuth: Somewhere there ' s going to be another septic site.
Erhart: That' s the point. You ' re not going to change your decision on
' whether you find one or not so I think it' s sort of moot issue to require
it.
' Wildermuth: In view of the fact that he ' s going to have fewer employees
than there were residents in the place, I guess I wouldn' t really be too
upset.
Batzli : I assume that you 're going to give up your other conditional use
permit if this is approved? Is that what 's happening?
IDave Stockdale: That was my intention.
Olsen: I believe they are only good for a year if there has not been any
Iimprovements to the site .
Dave Stockdale: . . .it' s one or the other .
I Batzli : I agree mostly with Jim' s comments . That would be my only
question.
' Ellson : I think it should have all 5 conditions including the second
drainfield site. I think that it' s nice of us to be conzerned about how
much it costs him to locate that sort of thing but that ' s not what should
a, make up our mind. Well , if it was only $20. 00 then we'd all say go ahead
and find your second drainfield site. That doesn ' t seem very reasonable .
ow I think that what' s best for Chanhassen is to have a backup site.
Something could happen if there is only 4 people in that thing . The thing
could pollute our ground water or what have you and I don' t want to be the
one who didn' t have a backup site there ahead of time. I think if curb and
gutter is what we require in other areas in the IOP, then I 'd want this to
have it too . So I 'd like all the 5 conditions plus one about the
drainfield.
Planning Commission Meetin g
May 17, 1989 - Page 21 '
Conrad : In our conditional use permit Jo Ann , basically the site cannot be '
utilized more than what the applicant has described in this request right?
Olsen: Right. If he expands it , he'd have to come in. '
Conrad: And you' re really not doing much to the site right now is my
understanding .
1
Dave Stockdale: Filling in a couple of low spots and flattening out.
Other than that there' s no physical change. . . '
Conrad : It' s real minimal . Especially to the north. Most of the stuff is
closer to the south of the property. Is that right?
Dave Stockdale: The southwest corner .
Conrad : And just out of curiousity, do you have longterm, when sewer and 1water comes, what do you think you ' re going to do? Any thoughts?
Dave Stockdale: I'm still in the early stages of that . I saw the previous '
discussion that Merit had proposed. . . My impression is that it showed up
right at the last minute . . . industrial park. Probably two phases .
Developing the part to the north first so I can continue using my buildings
with the intent of moving my business in an approved fashion in that area
and then redeveloping the south portion.
Conrad : As this site has sewer and water , and it can be fully developed,
if we don' t ask for curbs and gutter now, when can we ask for them?
Olsen: I was just thinking that. You can make it a condition that once II sewer and water is placed on the site that as part of the improvements that
applicant or whoever owns the property at that time would have to install
curb and gutter. I 'm just wondering if that would get lost along the way.
That condition but that would go with the conditional use permit that would II
be recorded at the County. That' s one way to do it.
Dave Stockdale: My first concern with that is . . . It may take a while to
accomplish that. There's a minimum time period in which to put the curb
and gutter in on pre-existing blacktop that you know in 3 years in the
cycle of development that that whole portion of blacktop is going to be
redesigned . . .As soon as sewer and water is in , that you' re asking a game
plan for total development.
Batzli : Wouldn' t it make more sense to require it at the time that it was
developed further?
Conrad : It might .
Batzli : If he modifies it or expands it , he' s going to have to come back
in anyway and we could take a look at it so whether he develops the site or
expands his business , we' re going to see it again . I
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17 , 1989 - Page 22
I Conrad : I just want to make sure we have the control so when it does get
developed, we bring it up to specs .
Dave Stockdale : I would certainly, in the broad picture, when I develop it
' as an industrial park, I would expect to meet the same . . .
Conrad : Other issue on the second drainfield . Second drainfield? Boy, my
Itendency is to require it but I don't know. Somebody can persuade me.
Dave Stockdale: If a family of 6 moved into it.
IIConrad: Yes, but it's an industrial site now. You've got an industrial
use on that site. What do we want at this point in time? This is the only
chance we have to talk to you. If the site 1 fails and we allow you to
II develop it or use it as an industrial site , well you can continue. This is
the City' s chance to make sure we have other alternatives. Jo Ann, is that
site , are we suspect of the site? But we' re really following city
Istandards?
Olsen : Right.
IIConrad : Okay, I 'm through.
Erhart : Dave, the 4 people that you' re talking about there . Are they
' going to be on site during the day or do they go off site and work on a
job?
I Dave Stockdale: I ' ve got a full time office manager . Full time. . . I ' ve
got myself and a field supervisor that are. . .
Erhart : So in a sense it' s both a contractor ' s yard and an office?
IIDave Stockdale: Right. The existing house will be used as an office .
' Erhart : I 'm trying to be consistent with my position on the Merit Heating
proposal. I was adamantly opposed to that because I viewed they were
putting a manufacturing company in the industrial park and I felt they
- should live within the same standards that all the other people in the
industrial park live by. I 'm looking for an exception why are you
- different than Merit Heating?
Dave Stockdale : I don' t have the same. . .
Erhart: No, but Merit Heating didn' t either and I was adamantly opposed to
- giving Merit Heating a conditional use permit .
Wildermuth: That had quite a few more people though didn ' t they?
Erhart : I think that' s the difference . If I remember that one, we were
talking 10 or 15 people and it was a production facility. That' s different
than what I 've got in the industrial park. The other thing that ' s changed
since that time is apparently we' ve changed the ordinance that the only
place for contractor ' s yards is industrial park?
Planning Commission Meeting
1
May 17, 1989 - Page 23 '
Olsen : I think it' s still in the business fringe.
Erhart: No, we took it out there too. I 'm trying to be, as a result of I
that, trying to be a little more lenient in my thinking . If this is truly
a contractor ' s yard in the sense that you' re really a construction company
and I would tend to say that I think what you' re trying to do here is
pretty good . It' s different than what Merit was proposing so I would go
along with, in that light, go along with the proposal . The problem with
the sewer thing , and that is, maybe it' s because of my farm background and
so forth but over the 3 years I 've been on here I have failed to understand I
why everybody is so anti-septic system in the city. Maybe not anti but
they fear septic systems.
Emmings : Because they' re not maintained and they' re not put in properly '
and they're not maintained. That' s what we've found.
Erhart : We have an ordinance now that requires that septic systems have to I
be inspected periodically and when they aren' t operating it' s not the
ground water that the problem is, it' s the surface water because overflow.
The number one problem is the toilets don' t flush. They over run, it' s the I
surface water . It' s pretty obvious they' re not working .
Wildermuth: If it's any time of the year at all , the building occupier is
the first one that wants to get it fixed . '
Erhart: Yes, and I don' t understand why we got a lot here that' s almost 8
acres , why we want to rush hooking this onto the sewer system when in fact
a properly operated septic system is the most ecologically correct way to
do this as opposed to running it in the river and adding chemicals and
going through all the energy to pump water and going through all that.
Secondly I would propose that when we tie this into when the property is
subdivided or a major building improvement is made, that we then require to
hook up to the city sewage system. Maybe there' s some other hooks but the
idea of just saying because the sewage system is at the end of the street '
you have to hook in when your current system is working properly, to me
that just doesn' t make any environmental sense to do that. So I guess I 'd
like to propose that. I ' d also like to in exchange for the curb and II gutter, I don' t know if it's reasonable to ask Dave to relinquish his other
conditional use permit because I was adamantly opposed to that too, and in
exchange for relinquishing that giving up on the curb and gutter. I think
you' ve already stated that you' re not going to exercise that conditional
use permit. In fact, I believe you had it for a year and it 's already
delinquent or no?
Dave Stockdale: I ' ve got 3 months .
Erhart: 3 months?
Emmings : Are you asking us to transfer the conditional use permit you have
to a different piece of property or is that even possible?
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 24
' Erhart : I don ' t think he' s asking but I 'm just saying in exchange for a
variance on that curb and gutter we would, as a condition that the
applicant would give up his other conditional use permit that he already
has which he apparently intends to do anyway.
Wildermuth : So it will run out in the fall?
Dave Stockdale: Unless I act on it.
Ellson : There could be 2 sites for all we know.
' Erhart: That's just it. I 'd like to. . .
Ellson: Only have one?
Erhart: If possible.
I Dave Stockdale: I 'd be willing to work in that direction. I like your
idea . . .whereby I didn' t have to hook up to sewer and water until my
development is established .
IIErhart : Well obviously I know you 'd like that one . I ' ll just throw that
one out for the other planning commissioners. If they have any interest in
tying in the other conditional use permit with granting the variance on the
Icurb and gutter. Those are my comments .
Ellson: Jo Ann , remember we had a thing on contractor ' s yards, they had to
be within 1 mile of another. You didn' t really mention that in here. Has
that been dropped because. . .
Olsen : That was a specific condition of the conditional use in the RR
Idistrict.
Batzli : You can half a million of them in the IOP.
IOlsen: We didn ' t have a specific condition for the IOP, industrial
districts .
IEmmings: For my comments , it seems to me that if this was coming in as a
development proposal for this piece of property, I think I 'd be looking at
it a lot differently than I am. There ' s something there that exists and I
IIthink it' s pretty apparent that what ' s there now will not be what ' s there
once the industrial park fills up. I think this property is going to
change sooner rather than later and rather significantly. I agree that the
= curb and gutter , there ought to be tied to further development of the
property because again there just is not that much being changed here. I
agree as far as the second septic site goes , I think Tim' s comments are
good ones. First of all I don' t see any reason to require hook-up just
because it' s available if he ' s got a working septic system.
Batzli : What about water? Are you going to need a lot of water? What are
your water requirements?
Planning Commission Meeting
II
May 17, 1989 - Page 25
Dave Stockdale: Very little.
I
Emmings: I guess I don ' t know what the issues there are as to why the City
requires to hook up to water as opposed to sewer .
I
Olsen : I believe that there' s an ordinance that if you' re within like 100
feet or 150 feet of sewer or water you have to connect. Why, I don' t know.
I think anyone that once they get hit with that assessment will be
I
improving the property.
Emmings : I guess the other thing I have to think of, I guess I tie that to I
further development of the property also. The other thing we could do is
to simply say that if he can' t find a second site, if he has a problem with
the site that's there and he can' t find a second site, then he' ll have to
I
put in a holding tank and pump it until there ' s sewer and water available
and just see how that plays out because I think sewer and water will
probably be available. It' s hard to imagine that on that 7 acres he
wouldn't be able to find a second site. Otherwise I 'd be in favor of tying 1
them to further development also. The Fire Inspector actually made a
recommendation on this about a dumpster or something and I don' t see his
comment over on the conditions .
I
Olsen: It didn' t get in .
Batzli : Not being within a certain distance or something?
I
Emmings: Yes .
Olsen: Right , he had to be separated there . II
Emmings: Should that be a condition?
II
Olsen : Yes it should.
Emmings: Have you reviewed that one Dave? Is there any problem with that? II
Dave Stockdale: No. On my site plan I ' ve got it within 5 feet of the
building. I
Emmings : Are there any other comments? Does somebody want to make a
motion?
Erhart : Yes, I ' ll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of II
Conditional Use Permit #89-2 shown on the plans dated April 28, 1989 with
conditions 1, 2, 4 as shown on the staff report . Also , the condition made
II
by the Fire Marshall as an additional item. Another item, at such time
as public sewer and water is available to the site , the appropriate fees
and assessments will be paid. However , actually connection to the site II will be required at the time the property is subdivided or a major building
improvement occurs on the site. Just summarizing that means if the water
goes past , you have to pay the assessments just like any other project . To
hook up, if the site is improved, obviously you probably would do it if
II
your system failed or so forth. The last item, all parking areas shall be
II
Planning Commission Meeting
tzng
May 17, 1989 - Page 26
paved . However , curb and gutter will not be required assuming that the
existing conditional use permit that the applicant has runs out at the end
of it' s period .
Batzli : I think what he' s trying to say, can I interpret?
Erhart: I brought it up before. I didn' t get any laughs .
' Emmings : I just didn' t understand what you just said . What I 'm saying is
as long as the other conditional use permit ' s going to run out, not require
' them to put in the curb and the gutter .
Batzli: Why wouldn' t you ask him to actively relinquish it?
I Erhart : If you don' t feel comfortable with that , we can leave that out.
I ' ll make that motion and if somebody wants to amend it so I stick with
what I said.
IEmmings : You' re making the . . .
I Erhart : The condition that it does not require curb and gutter on the
condition that he relinquish the other conditional use permit that he
already has in the city for a contractor ' s yard . I ' ll make that motion.
If other members feel it' s inappropriate , make an amendment to take it out.
' That ' s it.
Emmings: Okay, is there a second?
Wildermuth: I ' ll second it.
I Emmings: One thing that I forgot to mention during my comments and I ' ll
take this opportunity to do it, is that the City is getting something here.
Assuming that he does relinquish that other one , we ' re getting this thing ,
since you were here the last time, the City Council has acted to ban these
Ithings in anything but the IOP. The City is getting something valuable
here in that we' re going to get one out of an area we don' t want it and
into an area where we do want it. Is there any other discussion to Tim' s
motion?
111
Conrad : Tim, you don' t want to require curb and gutter when the property
is developed?
IErhart : I guess I didn' t include that because I assume that' s going to
happen when it gets developed.
IWildermuth : It has to come back again.
Erhart: It' s going to be subdivided. It' s going to come back in and it ' s
going to be building plans , unless I misunderstand that.
Conrad: Does that make sense Jo Ann? By not requiring curb and gutter , do
you see any potential for drainage or erosion problems?
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17 , 1989 - Page 27
Olsen: There' s always potential . '
Conrad : But we are requiring an erosion control plan.
Olsen: That's just during construction on the site. It' s definitely a
benefit to have curb and gutter but if it is going to be removed in a year
or so, I can see the point too.
Emmings : Could there be a condition such that curb and gutter would not be I
required if he relinquishes the conditional use permit he holds on the
other property unless experience shows that there' s an erosion problem that
needs to be addressed with curb and gutter to prevent erosion.
Batzli : I think that sounds like an excellent friendly amendment
personally.
Ellson: Who' s going to go out and check that? We' re not going to have
someone going there in 2 years to check that out? I don' t think it' s
realistic.
Emmings: But if there' s not a problem.
Ellson: Who' s going to say there is a problem or isn' t, that' s what I 'm
saying .
Emmings : I don ' t know.
Ellson : Then it ' s worthless . Maybe you want to tie it into an inspection
in 2 years or something like that.
Emmings : No . I think erosion on the site is not a problem. It' s only his
problem. It only becomes a problem if it affects something off site and if
it' s affecting somebody else' s property, they' ll bring it to the attention
of the City.
Batzli : Then if there ' s a condition that he has to do something about it ,
that does put a little bit more teeth into it.
Erhart : The problem with curb is it' s going to direct the runoff to 1 or 2 II
or 3 spots.
Conrad : The sheet flow, sometimes it ' s better not having curbs in. We
don' t know. We simply don' t know.
Ellson : We tell all IOP' s that they need curb and gutter and we said we
want these in IOP' s .
Erhart : But they have storm sewer .
Wildermuth: And they generally cover a large amount of the surface area
with impervious surface too .
in
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 28
I Emmings: Right and they' re going in and they' re changing the whole
characteristic of the site and that's not what ' s going in here. They' re
going in and grading and putting in a building and doing landscaping and
he's taking an existing site. I think it' s a real different thing. Also,
I in the IOP everytime they' re directing it to storm sewer . They' re
directing it either into the street to a catch basin or something else. We
don ' t want the sheet flow there but on what ' s essentially an agricultural
site, sheet flow makes probably more sense.
Conrad : Do we want to have the City Engineer take a look just to make sure
Iwe're not creating an erosion problem by not requiring gutter and curb?
Wildermuth: Knowing the way Dave has kept his other property, I think if
there was an erosion problem, he'd probably be out there correcting it.
IEllson: Well it' s not just him, it ' s the next owner or whatever might have
it and it' s the next one that comes in and wants to be in the IOP that
I doesn ' t want to curb his because he doesn ' t have the money for it right
now.
Batzli : How many IOP areas are there that are unsewered?
IOlsen: This is it and the adjacent land .
I Batzli : Yes, there' s not going to be another person unless it' s the one
piece of adjacent property that has this .
' Emmings : Okay, how about I ' ll suggest an amendment to Tim' s motion that
curb and gutter. Let ' s see. Your condition was that curb and gutter would
not be required if he gives up his conditional use permit that he presently
has.
IEllson: That ' s a weird tie in. Should we just require them to turn in the
one anyway?
Emmings : I don' t know that we can do that . I 'm even a little
uncomfortable.
Conrad : No . It' s not going to make it through.
Ellson: You have to relinquish a right that you already have.
' Emmings : This is highway robbery. But I think Dave is basically in here
representing that he' s not going to put his business at his home. He ' s
going to put it on this property and I wish he 'd come out with a little
more concrete statement to that effect but I 'm not going to ask him to do
that . I would amend that simply by saying , unless the City Engineer
determines or experience demonstrates that curb and gutter is needed to
prevent an erosion problem. I 'm only adding to his condition that he
- wouldn ' t have to put in the curb and gutter if he gives up his present
CUP unless the City Engineer determines or experience demonstrates that
curb and gutter is needed in a specific area to prevent an erosion problem.
Planning Commission Meeting
9
May 17, 1989 - Page 29
Erhart: I ' ll accept it. '
Conrad : I ' ll second it.
Emmings : Anything else? '
Batzli : I think when he made his motion , we' re talking about sewer and
water when it has to be connected and the wording was when there was '
development or major building modificaiton .
Erhart: Yes, was subdivided or major building construction. '
Ellson: Who' s going to define that?
Batzli : Rather than have the word major in there , what are you looking for I
in building? Any building construction? What' s major building
construction? I have trouble with major .
Erhart: Let' s say if he added a garage or something I wouldn' t consider '
that major but if you add a permanent building where you were going to
increase the number of people there. '
Batzli : Rather than major building , don' t you want to talk about expansion
of the use or something?
Erhart : Okay, expansion of use I think that ' s okay. If that ' s defineable
in your mind, that ' s fine.
Batzli : I think that makes better sense than major building . '
Erhart: Okay, I ' ll agree .
Emmings : So you' re going to amend your motion to that?
Erhart: Yes, I ' ll amend the motion.
Conrad : I ' ll second it.
Dave Stockdale: My interpretation of expansion of use , if I have another
truck sitting there, is that expansion of use?
Batzli : I think expansion of use ties back into you have to come back in
and get a modification of the conditional use permit .
Dave Stockdale : You define it as increasing the occupancy load? '
Erhart: Have you listed the number of trucks in your conditional use
permit and the number of people?
Olsen: The number of people.
Dave Stockdale : No I haven ' t other than I ' ve talked about the office
staff .
a
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 30
Erhart : I think Brian hit it right on the nose . Essentially saying , if
you have to come back in for another conditional use permit amendment, then
that would be reviewed at that time the way that reads.
' Emmings: I don' t know that we define that anywhere but the basic notion is
that if you' re use becomes more intent in any way than what we approve,
you've got to come back in and get an approval for that expansion of the
use. Whatever it means . Alright, is there anymore discussion on this?
' Erhart moved, Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Conditional Use Permit #89-2 as shown on plans dated April 28,
1989 with the following conditions :
' 1. All outside storage shall be totally screened within the outside
storage area.
2. The driveway shall be constructed a minimum of 16 feet in width and
shall be paved.
I3. The applicant shall submit for approval by the City Engineer a drainage
and erosion control plan prior to final approval .
I 4 . Dumpster shall not be placed within 5 feet of combustible wells,
openings or combustible roof eave lines .
' 5. At such time as public sewer and/or water is available to the site,
connection to the municipal system will be required and appropriate
fees and assessments paid. However , actually connection to the site
will be required at the time the property is subdivided or expansion of
' use occurs on the site .
6. All parking areas shall be paved. However , curb and gutter will not be
required if the applicant gives up his present conditional use permit
unless the City Engineer determines or experience demonstrates that
curb and gutter is needed to prevent an erosion problem.
All voted in favor except Ellson who opposed and the motion carried .
IEllson: I think it should have all the conditions that any other IOP
permit should have.
IPRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE APPROXIMATELY 5. 5 ACRES INTO 9 SINGLE
FAMILY LOTS AND TWO OUTLOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED DIRECTLY
SOUTH OF 64TH STREET AND WEST OF HWY. 41 , REED' S ORCHARD RIDGE, GARY REED.
Public Present :
i
1
1
1
1
1
I
1