1f. Site Plan Approval Addition to an Existing Private Garage •
C I T Y O F P.C. DATE: 5-17-89
e
`
: ' �
\ 0:7 Q C.C. :: :;1:::CASE 89-3
-.....1--
IPrepared by: Olsen:k
STAFF REPORT
I PROPOSAL: Site Plan Review for a 2, 920 sq. ft. Garage/
Warehouse Facility
Iz ✓ -
V LOCATION: Lots 1 and 2 , Park One
• a_ to'D -
APPLICANT: Daryl Fortier subr."ed ;�;cL:xit
907 Fortier Associates &--_12_--":4_
408 Turnpike Road
IGolden Valley, MN 55416
I
PRESENT ZONING: IOP, Industrial Office Park
IACREAGE: 2 . 15 acres
DENSITY:
ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N- IOP, WayTech
IS- IOP, The Press
E- IOP, Versatil
IW- IOP, Lyman Lumber
IW WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site.
I (1) PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site contains vegetation along the
north and west side of the property.
I2000 LAND USE PLAN: Industrial
1 A
MI
4 I
• i -7-'-:\ 14.
11 .
\CZ= --'•---7‘,., • \s, -
I 1( I
-7200
Ato a,N 4 A irE ,t
, z
I
AtAlhi& v 0
• OO* = 730C
71. mnif '\14
I
1 ilidgilk- I-
ori- •
„„„b......• a 114:A \ \■04, ' 0 o o
. •••••■. : FRI ,c.. 0 (cv
o 03
03
- c0
INTIVITrii .--
7500
Atktil 0.0,--
711RE11/ molv (4‘ ‘11*.v."1 , .
-fiallgullIN New 1/ Mow Cd 0 -1 ,1 -'..-.'.'. 1- c761-j ' -----7600
I
lam Ion 010 - r IimisvA \ .
.4 am- Num MI - wistit.A.
-vs--uxnEt.u. -
---_/---- cn .
1 Mx rut r:r1 on
- / Li cn itt
a -
1114PW1111,41 atWo_...-- - -c‘,..”- __..-- ;•-4
..r.41---.7700 •
• /- 11 . OA. (5-ing ' `7'. - _-,_-<- -- -- 1E I
- 1
--1 .-----.7' al Ilin inn
mille
.
_. ,. Yi 7TH ST _
- =:... .
r HI ST ,• MU I
U.
•
) Orrirs, . . j." .
c,) .
LI-
. . t-- __, 0
5 _---. -:-•-.111 I ,
I
:1111111 1
7800-----.---.4"
J . ..-
-1-
, ttli -7 - pa • ' IMINIMMENEENEEEmmionnen. 8000 •
AVE 41101‘.. '-' W sr 4 - ■I■
. e
- - -, ‘.,''' - • ethip ■ C 8 o
io
. , \..,■, tg,"01;"1 . a ., tehl 44 co
z co •
i 0, 1.7.• — Vi
"sr— • arl. ri. . isedivram=r4, eg, _ _
_ _8100
.- •
- 115 v `- c(,. air mit FE ii
' '''''l q•\,- Una V't P IOW.-
) ......
■ •• ) ., a%
1 WI a4 uti: .1W
lis T-
— 9200 ,-......... --...) ../
. 4./ RS
I
I-- I
PAK° . t..Ar '
IN
NEN ._.-_________
_
/ - ------- . -8300
I
. cl..cLE . Y \
, .
'\
I
C— ---- 1 ,
-; I 8• II% ,
/ ;Ws- SH LAKE
NC.:
l.
I
-. -- - 5-500 7,-L/
- 4 — 8600
) 1
....---
wisagaiw •
__.
' Site Plan 89-3 , Fortier
May 17 , 1989
Page 2
' APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Warehousing is a permitted use in the IOP District.
' One parking space is required for each 1,000 square feet of gross
floor area.
' The landscaping ordinance requires a strip of land at least ten
feet in depth located between the abutting right-of-way and the
vehicular use area which shall be landscaped to include an
' average of one tree for each 40 feet. In addition, a hedge, wall
berm or other opaque durable landscape of at least two feet in
height shall be placed along the entire length of the vehicular
use area. One tree per 40 feet is required along interior prop-
erty lines (Attachment #1) .
' REFERRAL AGENCIES
City Engineer (Attachment #2)
Fire Inspector: No comments at this time.
Building Inspector: No comments at this time.
BACKGROUND
The City Council approved a site plan for an auto garage on the
' subject site on December 16, 1985 with the following conditions :
1. A detailed location and acceptable percolation test for the
' septic system must be submitted prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
2. Details of the gas storage must be approved by the Fire Marshal .
3 . No outdoor storage is allowed.
' 4. All drains from the site be connected to an approved septic
system or the municipal sanitary sewer system with an in-line
oil separator and flammable waste trap. Additionally, the
' owner provide for a waste storage system for disposing of oils
and other automotive fluids .
' 5. Final site plan for the building permit denote the septic
system location or sewer hook-up, water service location and
driveway layout along with septic system design details.
' 6 . Hook into sewer within one year.
The existing garage is used for storage, maintenance and repair
of automobiles. The site has conformed to the required con-
ditions of site plan approval except that trailers are being
stored outside.
' 0
II
Site Plan 89-3, Fortier
May 17 , 1989
Page 3
ANALYSIS ,
The applicant is proposing to construct a second garage/warehouse
on the site located just north of the existing garage. The
garage is proposed at 2, 920 square feet and will be used solely
for storage of automobiles . There will be no maintenance or
repair of automobiles in the proposed garage. The applicant is
aligning the front of the new garage with the existing garage and
is maintaining adequate setback from the westerly lot line. The
applicant is providing additional bituminous paving in the front
of the garage which will connect with existing bituminous paving.
The proposed garage will be serviced from the existing driveway
from Quattro Drive. The construction materials proposed for the
new garage are consistent with the existing garage.
There are existing trees along the westerly lot line of the prop-
erty.
The garage will remove some of the vegetatian. The appli-
cant is proposing additional landscaping along the southerly and
easterly lot line adjacent to West 77th Street and Quattro Drive.
There are also existing mature trees on the northerly lot line
which will be removed as part of the storm sewer project
( Attachment #3 ) . In his letter, the applicant has stated that
the trees that will be removed as part of the storm sewer project
are being replaced with the proposed landscaping. The
landscaping that is being proposed meets requirements of the
existing ordinance. Additional landscaping will be required to
act as replacements to the trees that will be removed as part of
the storm sewer project and garage construction.
The applicant is providing adequate parking for the site and is
proposing to store a transport flat bed trailer between the two
garages. The trailer will be screened from the north and south
by the garages and will be screened by the vegetation and slope
from the westerly lot line. The landscaping along Quattro Drive
will partially screen view of the trailer from the east. Any
other outside storage should not be permitted unless the appli-
cant receives a conditional use permit for screened outside
storage.
Since the proposed garage is located on Lots 1 and 2 of Park One
Addition, the applicant must receive a replat of the site to com-
bine the two lots into one. It is necessary to remove the
interior lot line and the need to maintain setbacks from the
interior lot line. The applicant has made application for the
preliminary plat and will be pursuing the preliminary plat in the
near future.
RECOMMENDATION '
Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the 11 following motion:
.1
MI
Site plan 89-3 , Fortier
' May 17 , 1989
Page 4
' "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan No.
89-3 for the construction of a 2, 920 sq. ft. garage facility
' as shown on Site Plan dated April 13 , 1989 with the following
conditions :
1. The garage will only be used for storage and there shall
' not be any maintenance or repair of automobiles within
the new facility.
' 2. Additional landscaping shall be provided on a caliper
per caliper basis to replace the trees that will be
removed as part of the garage and storm sewer construction.
3 . The applicant shall receive a replat of the site to com-
bine Lots 1 and 2, Park One.
' 4 . There shall be no outside storage other than the
transport flat bed which shall be stored between the two
garages .
' 5 All parking and driveway areas shall be paved and
surrounded by concrete curb and gutter in accordance with
Section 20-1123 of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance.
1 6 . The applicant shall submit for approval by the City
Engineer a drainage and erosion control plan prior to
' final approval .
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
' On May 17, 1989 , the Planning Commission recommended approval of
the site plan with the following conditions :
' 1 . Additional landscaping shall be provided as required by
staff.
' 2 . The applicant shall receive a replat of the site to combine
Lots 1 and 2 , Park One.
3. There shall be no outside storage other than one transport
' flatbed which shall be stored between the two garages.
4 . All parking and driveway areas shall be paved and surrounded
' by concrete curb and gutter only if now or in the future the
City Engineer determines that they are necessary.
' 5 . The applicant shall submit for approval by the City Engineer
a drainage and erosion control plan prior to final approval.
Ellson was opposed to the motion because she wanted condition #1
' staff' s recommendation to be included in the motion.
i i
Site plan 89-3, Fortier
May 17 , 1989
Page 5
Conrad was opposed because he felt the item should be tabled. He
stated that 4 out of 6 conditions the applicant disagreed with
staff on and he would have preferred the engineer to look at. He
also was concerned about the future owners and what the property
looks like.
CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
1
The applicant has submitted an amended site plan with the storm
sewer moved to the north. The Engineering Department has
reviewed the new plan and made recommendations (Attachment #7) .
Staff feels that condition #5 of staff' s recommendation should be
maintained for the curb and gutter improvements instead of the
Planning Commission condition #4. Staff recommends the City
Council adopt the following motion:
"The City Council approves of Site Plan #89-3 for the construc-
tion
of a 2, 920 sq. ft. garage facility as shown on Site Plan
dated June 8, 1989 with the following conditions :
1. Additional landscaping shall be provided as required by staff. '
2 . The applicant shall receive a replat of the site to combine
Lots 1 and 2 , Park One.
3 . There shall be no outside storage other than one transport
flatbed which shall be stored between the two garages.
4 . Site plan approval for proposed garage #1 only - any addi-
tional buildings will need future approvals.
5 . Developer to supply hydraulic calculations for review.
6 . Preservation of the hardwood trees along the west and north
lot lines.
7. All parking and driveway areas shall be paved and surrounded
by concrete curb and gutter in accordance with Section '
20-1123 of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance.
8 . The applicant shall submit for approval by the City Engineer
a drainage and erosion control plan prior to final approval.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Excerpt from Zoning Ordinance.
2. City Engineer ' s memo dated May 10, 1989.
3 . Memo from Fire Inspector dated April 26 , 1989.
4 . Letter from applicant.
5 . City Council minutes dated December 16, 1985 .
6 . Planning Commission minutes dated May 17, 1989.
7 . Memo from City Engineer dated June 7 , 1989 .
8 . Site plan dated June 8, 1989.
IZONING § 20-814
ARTICLE XXII. "IOP" INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK DISTRICT
' Sec. 20-811. Intent.
The intent of the "IOP" District is to provide an area identified for large scale light
industrial and commercial planned development.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 16(5-16-1), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-812. Permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted in an"IOP" District:
(1) Offices.
' (2) Warehouses.
(3) Light manufacturing.
(4) Trade shops.
(5) Health services.
' (6) Printers.
(7) Indoor health and recreation clubs.
I (8) Body shops.
(9) Utility services.
' (10) Recording studios.
(11) Off-premises parking lots.
' (12) Conference/convention centers.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 16(5-16-2), 12-15-86)
' Sec. 20-813. Permitted accessory uses.
The following are permitted accessory uses in an "IOP" District:
' (1) Parking lots and ramps.
(2) Signs.
' (3) Retail sales of products stored or manufactured on the site provided no more than
twenty(20)percent of the floor space is used for retail sales.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 16(5-16-3), 12-15-86)
' Sec. 20-814. Conditional uses.
' The following are conditional uses in an "IOP" District:
(1) Concrete mixing plants.
' (2) Communication transmission towers.
1227
§ 20-793 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
(2) Signs.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 15(5-15-3), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-794. Conditional uses.
The following are conditional uses in the "OI" District:
(1) Adaptive reuse of vacant public or private school buildings for private business uses.
(Ord. No.80, Art. V, § 15(5-15-4), 12-15-86)
State law reference—Conditional uses,M.S. § 462.3595.
Sec. 20-795. Lot requirements and setbacks.
The following minimum requirements shall be observed in an "OI" District subject to
additional requirements, exceptions and modifications set forth in this chapter:
(1) The minimum lot area is fifteen thousand(15,000)square feet.
(2) The minimum lot frontage is seventy-five (75) feet, except that lots fronting on a
cul-de-sac shall have a minimum lot frontage of sixty(60)feet. g
(3) The minimum lot depth is one hundred fifty(150)feet.
(4) The maximum lot coverage is sixty-five(65)percent.
(5) Off-street parking areas shall comply with all yard requirements of this section,
except that no rear yard parking setback shall be required for lots directly abutting
railroad trackage; and, no side yard shall be required when adjoining commercial
uses establish joint off-street parking facilities,as provided in section 20-1122,except
that no parking areas shall be permitted in any required side street side yard. The
minimum rear yard shall be fifty (50) feet for lots directly abutting any residential
district. Side street side yards shall be a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet. Other
setbacks are as follows:
a. For front yards, thirty-five(35)feet.
b. For rear yards, thirty(30) feet.
c. For side yards, fifteen(15)feet.
(6) The maximum height is as follows:
a. For the principal structure, two(2)stories.
b. For accessory structures, one(1)story.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 15(5-15-5), 12-15-86)
Secs. 20-796-20-810. Reserved.
1226
,1
I
' ZONING § 20-1179
Sec. 20-1178. Landscaping for service structure.
(a) Any service structure shall be screened whenever located in any residential, commer-
cial or industrial zone (except RR and RSF zones). Structures may be grouped together;
however, screening height requirements will be based upon the tallest of the structures.
(b) A continuous planting, hedge, fence, wall or earth mound shall enclose any service
structure on all sides unless such structure must be frequently moved, in which case screen-
ing on all but one (1) side is required. The average height of the screening material shall be
' one(1)foot more than the height of the enclosed structure, but shall not be required to exceed
eight (8) feet in height. Whenever a service structure is located next to a building wall,
perimeter landscaping material, or vehicular use area landscaping material, such walls or
screening material may fulfill the screening requirement for that side of the service structure
if that wall or screening material is of an average height sufficient to meet the height
requirement set out in this section. Whenever service structures are screened by plant
material, such material may count towards the fulfillment of required interior or perimeter
landscaping. No interior landscaping shall be required within an area screened for service
structures.
' (c) Whenever screening material is placed around any trash disposal unit or waste
collection unit which is emptied or removed mechanically on a regularly occuring basis, a
curb to contain the placement of the container shall be provided within the screening material
1 on those sides where there is such material. The curbing shall be at least one(1)foot from the
material and shall be designed to prevent possible damage to the screening when the con-
' tainer is moved or emptied.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VIII, § 4, 12-15-86)
' Sec. 20-1179. Tree removal regulations.
(a) It is the policy of the city to preserve natural woodland areas throughout the city and
with respect to specific site development to retain as far as practical, substantial tree stands
' which can be incorporated into the overall landscape plan.
(b) No clearcutting of woodland areas shall be permitted except as approved in a subdivi-
Ision, planned unit development or site plan application.
(c) The following standards shall be used in evaluating subdivisions and site plans:
(1) To the extent practical, site design shall preserve significant woodland areas.
(2) Shade trees of six (6) inches or more caliper shall be saved unless it can be demon-
' strated that there is no other feasible way to develop the site.
(3) The city may require the replacement of removed trees on a caliper inch per caliper
inch basis. At minimum, however, replacement trees shalt conform to the planting
requirements identified in division -1 of this article.
(4) During the tree removal process, trees shall be removed so as to prevent blocking of
public rights-of-way or interfering with overhead utility lines.
1253
1
§ 20-1179 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
(5) The removal of diseased and damaged trees is permissible.
(d) Tree removal not permitted under subdivision,planned unit development or site plan
review shall not be allowed without the approval of a tree removal plan by the city council.
Tree removal plans shall include the content requirements as dictated in section 20-1177 and
identify reasons for tree removal. The plan shall be submitted three (3) weeks in advance of
the city council at which it is to be considered. '
(e) This section does not apply to single-family and two-family lots of record.
(Ord. No. 80,Art.VIII, § 7, 12-15-86)
Secs. 20-1180-20-1190. Reserved.
DIVISION 2. PERIMETER LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS
Sec. 20-1191. Generally.
(a) Where parking areas are not entirely screened visually by an intervening building or
structure from any abutting right-of-way, there shall be provided landscaping between such
area and such right-of-way as follows: '
(1) A strip of land at least ten (10) feet in depth located between the abutting right-of-
way and the vehicular use area which shall be landscaped to include an average of
one (1) tree for each forty (40) linear feet or fraction thereof. Such trees shall be
located between the abutting right-of-way and the vehicular use area.
(2) In addition, a hedge,wall,berm,or other opaque durable landscape barrier of at least '
two(2)feet in height shall be placed along the entire length of the vehicular use area.
If such opaque durable barrier is of nonliving material, a shrub or vine shall be
planted along the street side of said barrier and be planted in such a manner to break '
up the expanse of the wall. A two-foot berm may be used; however, additional
landscaping at least one(1) foot in height at time of planting shall be installed. The
remainder of the required landscape areas shall be landscaped with grass, ground
cover, or other landscape treatment.
(b) This division applies to perimeter landscaping.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VIII, § 2(8-2-1), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-1192. Required landscaping adjacent to interior property lines.
(a) Where parking areas abut property zoned or, in fact, used primarily for residential or
.institutional purposes,that portion of such area not entirely screened visually by an interven-
ing structure or existing conforming buffer from an abutting property, there shall be provided
a landscaped buffer which should be maintained and replaced as needed. Such landscaped
buffer shall consist of plant material, wall, or other durable barrier at least six (6) feet in
height measured from the median elevation of the parking area closest to the common lot line.
and be located between the common lot line and the off-street parking areas or other vehicular
use area exposed to the abutting property. Fences shall be constructed according to the
standards in section 20-1018.
1254
111 ZONING § 20-1212
(b) In addition, an average of one(1)tree shall be provided for each forty(40)linear feet of
such parking area or fractional part thereof. Such trees shall be located between the common
lot line and the off-street parking area or other vehicular use area.
' (c) Where such area abuts property zoned and, in fact, used for office, commercial, or
industrial purposes, that portion of area not entirely screened visually by an intervening
' structure or existing conforming buffer, shall comply with the tree provisions only as pre-
scribed in this section.
(Ord. No. 80,Art. VIII, § 2(8-2-2), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-1193. Combining with easements.
' The required landscape bufferyard may be combined with a utility or other easement as
long as all of the landscape requirements can be fully met, otherwise, the landscape bufferyard
shall be provided in addition to, and separate from, any other easement. Cars or other objects
shall not overhang or otherwise intrude'upon the required landscape bufferyard more than
two and one-half(21/2)feet and curbs will be required.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VIII, § 2(8-2-3), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-1194. Existing landscape material.
Existing landscape material shall be shown on the required plan and any material in
satisfactory condition may be used to satisfy these requirements in whole or in part.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VIII, § 2(8-2-4), 12-15-86)
' Secs. 20-1195-20-1210. Reserved.
' DIVISION 3. INTERIOR LANDSCAPING FOR VEHICULAR USE AREAS
Sec. 20-1211. Generally.
(a) Any open vehicular use area (excluding loading, unloading, and storage areas in the
IOP and BG districts)containing more than six thousand(6,000)square feet of area,or twenty
(20) or more vehicular parking spaces, shall provide interior landscaping in accordance with
this division in addition to "perimeter" landscaping. Interior landscaping may be peninsular
or island types.
' (b) This division applies to interior landscaping of such areas.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VIII, § 3, 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-1212. Landscape area.
(a) For each one hundred(100) square feet, or fraction thereof, of vehicular use area,five
' (5)square feet of landscaped area shall be provided.
C (b) The minimum landscape area permitted shall be sixty-four (64) square feet, with a
four-foot minimum dimension to all trees from edge of pavement where vehicles overhang.
1255
CITYOF
1
-, ,
T ' CHANHASSEN II
'Nkis.
1
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
K (612) 937-1900
1
MEMORANDUM 1
TO: Planning Commission -/
w`
FROM: Gary Warren , City Engineer II
DATE: May 10 , 1989
II
SUBJ: Beddor Garage Addition
File No. 89-11 Land Use Review
1
LOCATION
The site is located on Lots 1 and 2 , Block 1, Park One 3rd 1
Addition.
ANALYSIS
II
The applicant is proposing a 2, 920 square foot building for the
warehousing of the property owner ' s cars. The structure will be II
located just north of the existing garage on this site.
There will be no outside storage of cars and the remainder of the
II
site will remain in its natural state. The structure is set back
60 feet from the north lot line and 47 feet from the west lot
line. These setbacks are adequate and would allow for the pre-
servation of most of the existing trees to the west and north of 1
the site (attachment #1 ) .
UTILITIES 1
Sanitary sewer and watermain are not an issue under this expan-
sion. This structure is to be a warehouse/cold storage only and
IIno work bays, wash bays or bathroom facilities are proposed .
Therefore, staff is not recommending that detailed plans showing
the exact location and acceptable percolation tests for septic
systems be submitted prior to approval of the building permit.
II
ACCESS
The existing site is serviced by a bituminous driveway approxima- 1
tely 24 feet wide. Based on the proposed use, Section 20-1123 of
the City' s Zoning Ordinance would apply (attachment #2 ) which
II
states that all parking areas and access roads be paved with an
all-weather surface with concrete curb and gutter.
.1
Ir
Planning Commission
May 10 , 1989
Page 2
The present width of the driveway access is adequate to support
' two-way traffic.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
' The proposed plan does not indicate the amount and/or limits of
grading necessary to construct the proposed building and parking
lot.
' The plan does not address any form of retention if necessary 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 . Preservation of the hardwood trees along the west and north
lot lines .
2 . All parking and driveway 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.
ATTACHMENTS
' 1 . Location map.
2 . Zoning Ordinance No. 20-1123 .
NM
1
I
I
�._
t.
•3p `,fie` \`\9 \ =1,L.
_ r
•
I I �;,; s m.«.e I �� �� \ \ N
•4 ,. __\\ \ Fr - %\' ( r E �� /•••• u ze 4r.•Me { sb'Oa�c tss / - 1I 1` ' ,' \ .e,. � ^ _= �c & u1 11 ,/;.,,--
' I\ J• 974. \, �T __ ‘2-1 •I t ..� of l \ ��� / •hiL ` ,aI
`‘1�•'Oek 'i / NKI
A 1111 1 \ li I \c-i-\\:)
1 \\\\ " r / 24-.....— 6.414 db 1
47t-oj1- — 04:41 30t•0 - '\\"\\I I \\ `2. ` � p_Z� ���\ / c,i v`� a°aea a�a.r,e 1,1 I ; �.4 �2.t q2e Wit; -� r<
1 1 I II :` �� !��1) (� -ARA'�fi 6T.:541-110,., \\`� `mssA. i tp/ ki
S o \ c i ;�;_= \
1 1 1 i R ! Fin ft:it N ••s=
11 \_ I r-0. ■- ELEV. 927471 ' :r,.r.. ti total III g
• I Iva -%1I �•ti t2 I 1` 1 CL
\ \ TZ \ \` � \� F.--a_ r. F'�It :F nEv �\ I \ a
�, \\3 - I\ \ Sa+vat,.•.a ' — -:%--E .,E..ST I \ I ' 3 s
I 0
11 „\I r, ,;,' I 1 ► 3e••29 ,a,• �i o MI
o
I \VI ` -FRAME o I 7 ` I to
\ -FRAME N \
o I\ ff\
I \ ,(( 1 -' c I � I �
I I 44{, \\ \ .�e . I I \,\ I \
` I i.e a I \ ...n. t Pi
C t 1 � .au� \ I F� '
11. \::I I \ I ri n I-STORY v I v:i 1 ; I I144 I -BRICK ' :�. .✓
I \ I
2
a //
1' \ �\ ,i; i II I N \\ \\
. i . • ,,.., .94....... ‘1 \ I v \
�' + N \ e,,,..,,,-....... QfCO •',"-s• i
\ 2.0 RIOT. I\ n.» L\\ = I a. �„
2 1 � a 9is+� za a+ ��1�5._ ... mw to . off
d_ E1/4J--, — 1.5 �y4.
11 \< \ 1,.., / _.— ,r---2\74.7,G,,
I
lj I 1
r Ir ' /•�>.-a p.54°13 j0 .'i°1--_'-' s -9z,+�-_ WEST 19764 tt,t Concrete.` .wtu-
7 Z'`/ ....= •C.er.cr•,.cure — ' D .._ qz�]f -_ •-PK..�,p'
zi/Ail
I 1.'%
/ 9 ! '/
, 9.•\1--'
t
r
1033/ WEST 77TH . STREET
, �.v
ATTACHMENT 1
1
- .1
I ,::` ZONING § 20-1123
4-,-. -,:
I .t Sec. 20-1118. Computing requirements.
� In computing the number of parking spaces required, the following shall g overn:
,-. : ._ (1) "Floor space" means the gross floor area of the specific use as defined in Article II.
(2) Where fractional spaces result, the parking spaces required shall be construed to be
the next largest whole number.
(3) Uses not specifically mentioned in this division shall be determined by the board of
adjustments and appeals. The factors to be considered in such determination shall
include size of building, type of use, number of employees, expected volume and
turnover of customer traffic and expected frequency and number of delivery or
I' ffi. service vehicles.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VII, § 1(7-1-3), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-1119. Yards.
' On-site parking and loading facilities shall not be permitted in the required front yard,
side yard or rear yard, except as provided otherwise in this chapter.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VII, § 1(7-1-4), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-1120. Buffer fences and planting screens.
p
'' x� On-site parking and loading areas near or abutting residential districts shall be screened
Itq "` in conformance with the provisions of article XXV.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VII, § 1(7-1-5), 12-15-86)
- Sec. 20-1121. Access.
I _
Parking and loading space shall have proper access from a public right-of-way. The
number of width of access drives shall be located to minimize traffic congestion and abnormal
I traffic hazard.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VII, § 1(7-1-6), 12-15-86)
' Sec. 20-1122. Location of parking facilities and combined ned facilities.
Required on-site parking space shall be provided on the same lot as the principal building
or use, except that combined or joint parking facilities may be provided for one (1) or more
- buildings or uses in business districts and in industrial districts, provided that the total
number of spaces shall equal the sum of the requirements for each building or use.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VII, § 1(7-1-8), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-1123. Construction and maintenance.
I In multiple-family, business, office and industrial districts, arkin
P g areas and access
drives shall be paved with a dust-free, all-weather surface with proper surface drainage, and
concrete curb. The operator of the principal building or use shall maintain parking and
I
loading areas, access drives and yard areas in a neat and serviceable condition.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. VII, § 1(7-1-8), 12-15-86)
II t 1247 ATTACHMENT 2
■
MN .
1
I
=�
�`\ \—. <V� ..p •
\\\ \\nom_
I '\ 1,•-••50..•'`i l�' ,I l__S. ...IA 310 46 .--_ � �� Jss� /
- �\� \ \ \_ `I• •
1 'I , ... 1.2o Mw.n.• e l %"w•c •Mt �_ / ` I i \ Rv tl
:.aw g \\ l
• 1 II11 1 II I \�?Er� ioN \`— �ij o0i'a
l' iii I 1 I ,I.ns I �t J4•Q `- I GPCA C,o .�`�r (iY•W. h�Zy E 4iwS..„1 �. `� I -I I•
°S I I I ` 1`�. �J.L�ai, FUN '{`Low` J �%/ c r r Ie 1} /�--' (••"i :
i I I I , I 47!e": , L _ _ J =•.o�.rriei.•et3 r,+-.« / �C_t 1•
• 1 I i I i ( �e I'1 / _ . S S CV-is-q/
1?M _ �.J' M"� I ■
•
• I I I ` tl e�lJ PW�P�iED nEw. •�\ `~:.e.: tzz ph
II I I•
,;1 '4y}� 'QRQ,L :$'v�Vmb.= I \\` \'tt �' IC
.«.,1 I R � - flit FAR �\ .R, J
i 'I ; _ •,-.• \ ELEV. 927.471
II r---1-..
o .y'1 t
\
1\3 t f-e yyT "f nE:v I I I
-.. Q' T .II` Si•i.i.iN..a `- :-R.:.-E ,:1•y� \ I I ; '
1 8‘, . c aD i _ I I rt1--.b.v� ,a.• \ O.7I
o 1
�4 1
D 1 M 1--)%!•-z I \� I ` 1-STORY o /.;r,,, 1 •- I \' 0 1
1 •e I\ i \ FRAME N I i \ I \ H 1
1 1 i� \ I 2v I \
•;:• �i� I 1 - ' . I ! ` I z.
111 \\\\ I _1114 -I t \ \I , TBRICK 2e . ;'. `.ri 111 \\ I I t !i Ili 1D I \\ -�
1 s D I p
1
II
l \. \ i 1 \ B..Jt�.tVV� area "''1. � I •
el
I , T� V r.f1� 1 I \ ••.,..... \� IMM
sue' i.e •asn
1 \ ' I ° \\ I I I Se. ricer• 'H \ ''''‘ii.III
Mil .,A YS I 1 2109 •w(.�l 1 \ I
D I I ' ,f.n• L \� -G.,.er•.•Lure •.-� 11 i ( yn
•\ I I 1 \ Cr E • ii•M I,M _������5-' f« I0 .w
�i� /�• n=54°I_SO �^'a°-z—.. _ v:•_._ —WE----ST 1976a _
T iii / .:.o .ncre.e
/ / I /��Z'/O 1' �-" -Co.,c....Curl
.:mow -1-•' •-Ow-ya•w '
LL i//� �2hO j/ O•.w.••w.e
/ / -0' WEST '•/ 0-<'' 77TH a STREET
Ii•
ATTACHMENT , , 3 1
1
I
CITY OF
1 CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: JoAnn Olsen, Assistant City Planner
FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Inspector
' DATE: April 26 , 1989
SUBJ: #89-3
Comments and/or recommendations :
No comments at this time.
- rt r• � �p
0 ti
O
rt .
w ro
w
'11 ta
n / '
'^ 1, 1989 FORTIER &ASSOCIATES, INC.
ARCHITECTURE PLANNING INTERIOR DESIGN'
o'
n K•
The Honorable Mayor
City Council
Planning Commission and Staff
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Re: THE GARAGE ADDITION
PARK ONE
Comm: 88-06
Ladies & Gentlemen:
At the request of Mr. Frank Beddor, -Jr. , we are herein submitting our '
request for a grading permit to install a storm sewer and also a site
plan review for a new private garage. Please accept this letter as a
suppliment to the Drawings in describing the proposed improvements. '
GENERAL
Owner: Mr. Frank Beddor, Jr. '
910 Pleasant View Road
Chanhassen, MN 55317
474-6010 (H) ; or 474-0231 (W)
Applicant: Mr. Daryl P. Fortier '
Fortier & Associates, Inc.
408 Turnpike Road
Minneapolis, MN 55416
593-1255
Engineer: Ulteig Engineers Inc.
5201 East River Road
Minneapolis, MN
571-2500
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Park One Third Addition.
STORM SEWER;
Park One ' s natural topography includes a swale or drainageway '
through the center of the northerly 20-acre section. In working with
City Staff to design public improvements, it has been envisioned that
a storm sewer would route the water from the Lyman Lumber overflow
discharge to the east side of Quattro Drive. Construction has been
designed to facilitate such a storm sewer as part of the system. Our
request is to now install the storm sewer.
408 Turnpike Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55416 (612) 593-1255
•
Ir
City Council,
' "" Vining Commission & Staff
i1 11, 1989
a omm: 88-06
The route chosen is within the building setback and side yard of Lot
2. This will ensure that future buildings will not encroach on the
storm line. We have kept the line as far south as feasible and yet
' allow future buildings. There will be unavoidable loss of mature
trees (see survey) . To mitigate their loss, considerable landscaping
is proposed, planting two trees for each one lost.
GARAGE
' Currently, Frank Beddor, Jr. owns a garage on Lot 1 that houses
his personal automobiles and storage needs. It is a private facility
and not open to the public. The new garage will provide more storage
' space with similar, private use. Construction shall match existing
with a white and red face brick facade and painted white masonry side
and rear walls. (Side and rear walls are not visible from the
' street. ) There will be no roof top equipment. A transport flat bed
trailer will be stored outside between the two buildings.
All zoning ordinance requirements appear to be fully met and no
variances are being sought.
Previous work has accomplished the necessary grading work.
' Excavation is therefore limited to footings. The building area is
currently a gravel parking lot. The center portion of the site shall
be kept open as it serves as a concours site and helicopter landing
pad (no trees or curbing allowed due to function of space) .
We believe that this facility is well located and will be a welcome
' neighbor in this industrial park. Should there be any questions or
need of additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
' We appreciate your consideration of our request.
You ul
, (
Daryl P. Fortier
DPF/sf
encl: Application and Plans
i r
Council Meeting , December 16 , 1985 -7-
Mr. Roman: We certainly would consider it , but I am sure we are not going to be able
to sell this property at that price. Sooner or later it will sell , but by then this
lady will absolutely not be able to pay her bills at the nursing home.
Councilman Geving moved to deny the waiver of platting request 'at Red Cedar Point
Road, Delores and Peter Roman. Motion was seconded by Mayor Hamilton. The following
voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton , Councilwoman Watson , Councilmen Horn and Geving.
Councilwoman Swenson opposed. Motion carried.
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 2,527 SQUARE FOOT WAREHOUSE BUILDING, OUTLOT BZ PARK ONE,
FORTIER AND ASSOCIATES:
Barb Dacy: The parcel is located behind The Press , north of Highway 5. It is zoned
P-4, industrial. The Press is located just north of West 78th Street and Highway 5
and south of West 77th Street. The proposed structure is on Outlot A, which is to be
intended for future industrial development. The applicant is proposing a warehouse
for the primary purpose of storing cars. There will be accessories of gas storage of
race test fuel , as well as wash bay facilities. The location of the proposed ware-
house
on your site plan meets setback requirements and should be adequately screened
by the existing vegetation. The applicant intended to put the sanitary facilities to
a septic tank and has submitted a perc test. However , the perc test results are
rather high and in some cases , did fail. Since the Planning Commission review there
maybe an opportunity to hook into the existing sewer line. We are now researching
that possibility. When taken to the Planning Commission originally , they tabled the
request so that more information could be determined about the requirements for sep-
tic tanks and waste of oils , etc. draining into the septic system. Staff came back
with our research on December 11 , and met condition #4 (All drains from the site be
connected to an approved septic system with an in-line oil separator and flammable
waste trap . Additionally , the owner provide for a waste storage system for disposing
of oils and other automotive fluids. ) The Commission accepted this amendment and
also passed staff,' s recommended conditions. It is also my understanding that the
applicant has amended the size of the fuel storage down from a 5 ,000 gallon tank to
3 ,000 . He is also proposing to locate the storage tank further north , away from the
proposed building. The applicant is here to answer any of your questions. The
Planning Commission did recommend approval subject to conditions 1 , 2 , 3 and 5 and
our amended condition #4.
Bill Monk: The Planning Commission did add a phrase that did not get in the report
in condition #4. It should read as follows: All drains from the site be connected
to an approved septic system or municipal sanitary sewer system with an in-line oil
separator and flammable waste trap . As Barbara said, we are still reviewing the
possibility of connecting to the sanitary sewer .
Councilwoman Watson: With #4 I would be far more concerned about their oil traps ,
etc. if they connect up with our sanitary sewer system , because floor drains and
areas such as this and dumping all that oil and junk , I don ' t see that as a terrific
idea.
Bill Monk: They would still be required to provide for a waste storage system for
disposing of oils and other automotive fluids . Basically , it will be handled as any
commercial service station.
Mayor Hamilton: This says it is a warehouse.
Barb Dacy: The primary use of the warehouse is for storing the cars . It is true
that they will have fuel storage there as an accessory to get at the primary use.
, 1
U
.�>
• \ `J,
Council Meeting , December 16 , 1985 _8- �� G~ bt
Councilwoman Watson: Why do they need so much fuel storage and why is there concerns a o
o
about drains and oil , etc. What is going to occur here that creates all of this
concern?
II Barb Dacy: It was a concern at the Commission level because the cars will be washed
on site , oil changes , etc. If you change your oil at home , the oil drains out onto
I the driveway and runs out into the street , likewise , there may be some oil spillage ,
etc . getting into the septic system.
I Darryl Fortier: These cars are primarily for the Beddor family . They are the same
cars that you see on the street every day. This original request was to put a four-
car garage up on Christmas Acres as a residential garage and not have a house
attached to it. Since Mr. Beddor owns the Press and if we were to make it into a
I warehouse, Mr. Beddor could store the cars there. He will be doing routine main-
tenance on them, therefore we decided to put in a flammable waste trap and put in a
floor drain. He also increased it into a six-car garage. It has always been viewed
I as just generally warehousing over the winter and occasional use in the summer. It
is not a commercial venture. It is strictly private , but if neccesary , the Press can
have ownership of it. The use of the fuel tank is mostly , I think , for convenience
II for Mr. Beddor. These cars are fairly high. in performance. He does use a higher
test fuel. I don ' t think this is a commercial venture in any way , but we are cer-
tainly willing to live up to the requirements of a warehouse. Therefore , when we
started looking at changing oils , etc. we were concerned about the environment and we
I do want to connect to the sanitary sewer as soon as possible. For that reason , we
had to look at what this is closest to. This is not intended to serve the public in
any way .
Mayor Hamilton: The thing that kind of throws a erson I
p , you say that the retaining
tank will be for "race test fuel . " Does he burn race test fuel in his street car?
IIDarryl Fortier: Race test fuel is a way of saying high octane .
Councilwoman Watson : Being somewhat familiar with that sort of thing , some of these _
I fuels used are much more flammable than your standard gasoline products and probably
would be more of a hazzard of just the storage of high test unleaded gasoline .
IICouncilman Horn : Do you think they are talking about alcohol fuel?
Councilwoman Watson: I don ' t know. I think that is what we almost have to know what
he means by that because some of these things would be extremely flammable .
IIDarryl Fortier: I am the one that brought up the words "race test fuel . " I guess
Mr. Beddor has never been asked by what he means by "race test fuel . " All of his
II cars can burn the very same fuel that you go down to the service station and load up
with fuel for. He drives everyone of them on the street . The only reason I refer to
"race test fuel" is because if and when Mr. Beddor may want to run his cars privately
II somewhere a little above the speed limit , on closed tracks , etc . , then he might go
for the highest octane fuel that he can find.
I Councilwoman Watson: But then he would probably be going for something that he
wouldn ' t bother to store.
Darryl Fortier: The other problem is that if you burn any of these fuels that are
II mixed with extremely flammable materials , your engine has to be modified to burn C
them. You literally can ' t burn them in a street car if you are thinking that explo-
sive of a fuel.
1
! I
Council Meeting , December 16 , 1985 -8-
Councilwoman Watson: Why do they need so much fuel storage and why is there concerns
about drains and oil , etc . What is going to occur here that creates all of this
concern?
Barb Dacv: It was a concern at the Commission level because the cars will be washed
on site, oil changes , etc. If you change your oil at home , the oil drains out onto
the driveway and runs out into the street , likewise , there may be some oil spillage,
etc. getting into the septic system.
Darryl 'Fortier: These cars are primarily for the Beddor family . They are the same
cars that you see on the street every day. This original request was to put a four-
car garage up on Christmas Acres as a residential garage and not have a house
attached to it. Since Mr. Beddor owns the Press and if we were to make it into a
warehouse, Mr. Beddor could store the cars there. He will be doing routine main-
tenance on them, therefore we decided to put in a flammable waste trap and put in a
floor drain. He also increased it into a six-car garage. It has always been viewed
as just generally warehousing over the winter and occasional use in the summer. It
is not a commercial venture. It is strictly private , but if neccesary, the Press can
have ownership of it. The use of the fuel tank is mostly , I think , for convenience
for Mr. Beddor. These cars are fairly high in performance. He does use a higher
test fuel. I don ' t think this is a commercial venture in any way , but we are cer-
tainly willing to live up to the requirements of a warehouse. Therefore, when we
started looking at changing oils , etc. we were concerned about the environment and we
do want to connect to the sanitary sewer as soon as possible . For that reason , we
had to look at what this is closest to. This is not intended to serve the public in
any way .
Mayor Hamilton: The thing that kind of throws a person , you say that the retaining II
tank will be for "race test fuel. " Does he burn race test fuel in his street car?
Darryl Fortier: Race test fuel is a way of saying high octane .
Councilwoman Watson: Being somewhat familiar with that sort of thing , some of these
fuels used are much more flammable than your standard gasoline products and probably
would be more of a hazzard of just the storage of high test unleaded gasoline.
Councilman Horn : Do you think they are talking about alcohol fuel?
Councilwoman Watson: I don ' t know . I think that is what we almost have to know what
a
he means by that because some of these things would be extremely flammable .
Darryl Fortier I am the one that brought up the words "race test fuel . " I guess
Mr. Beddor has never been asked by what he means by "race test fuel . " All of his
cars can burn the very same fuel that you go down to the service station and load up
with fuel for. He drives everyone of them on the street . The only reason I refer to
"race test fuel" is because if and when Mr. Beddor may want to run his cars privately
somewhere a little above the speed limit , on closed tracks , etc . , then he might go
for the highest octane fuel that he can find.
Councilwoman Watson: But then he would probably be going for something that he
wouldn ' t bother to store.
Darryl Fortier: The other problem is that if you burn any of these fuels that are
mixed with extremely flammable materials , your engine has to be modified to burn
them. You literally can ' t burn them in a street car if you are thinking that explo-
sive of a fuel .
M
Council Meeting , December 16 , 1985 -9-
' — Councilman Horn : I see this just like the City garage . It is the same type of
thing.
Councilwoman Watson: I think he should be limited to a simple high test version of
unleaded gasoline on this property . I think if he wants to race his car , I think he
can get that fuel separately. I don ' t think he needs to store that kind of fuel on
I site.
Councilman Horn: I think as long as we specify that it 's not the high flammability ,
Ihigh performance racing fuel it's all right .
Councilman Gevinq: I get the impression that this is going to be a wood frame
warehouse facility . Is that a true statement? If that is true, I would view this as
I a temporary nature used for only a short period of time until sometime in the future
it be replaced. Is that correct?
I Darryl Fortier: We originally asked for this facility to be constructed of a wood
frame for just that reason. We did view it as a temporary facility and we antici-
pated that it would be removed within about two or three years. Since that time , the
I Planning Commission responded that they would like to see a permanent structure
constructed of mansonry. We , therefore , issued the documents to allow for masonry
construction. If the cost is not prohibitive , Mr. Beddor will build out of masonry.
1 Councilman Gevinq: I guess that is the point that I am getting at. I, too , would
like to see a more permanent structure; one that would be made of masonry products
and that would contain a water system such as we have here for fire suppression. I
would have to assume that this is a part of our building codes on all warehouse faci-
lities and you would have to adhere to that. Is that your intention?
Darryl Fortier: We will comply to every single building code that will be brought to
Iour attention .
Councilman Gevinq: The other thing that has been brought up several times on the
Istorage of that tank , will this be an outside , above ground tank?
Darryl Fortiw This will beq.,.A below grade tank .
II Mayor Hamilton: Presumably , that tank will have to meet whatever requirements there
are for underground tanks.
IIBarb Dacy: Also , condition 163 states no outdoor storage is allowed,
Councilman Gevinq: One other point that I would like to make and that is the hook up
II to our sanitary sewer system. Sewer is not available to this site at this time . I
would like to make a condition as a part of this approval that within one year that
the sewer is available to the property that this site must be hooked up . I would
like to have that considered because I think that would tend to make this a more per-
' manent structure .
I [ Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve site plan 1685-10 stamped "Received November
13 , 1985" for a 2 ,527 square foot warehouse building on Outlot A, Park One , Fortier
and Associates with the following conditions:
1 . A detailed location and acceptable percolation test for the septic
I system must be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit .
II
i
.; •
' li
,;ouncil Meeting , December 16 , 1985
-10-
2. Details of the gas storage must be approved by the Fire Marshal. II
3. No outdoor storage is allowed.
4. All drains from the site be connected to an approved septic system
or sanitary sewer system with an in-line oil separator and flammable
waste trap. Additionally , the owner provide for a waste storage
system for disposing of oils and other automotive fluids.
5 .' Final site plan for the building permit denote the septic system
location , water service location and driveway layout along with
septic system design details.
6. When sewer is available, the applicant has one year to connect
to the sewer system. 1:
II
I
Motion was seconded by Councilwoman Watson.
Councilwoman Swenson: II
I noticed there was a question about washing the cars at the
Planning Commission. There was some comment that the cars would be washed elsewhere.
Darryl Fortier: There is an allowance for a car wash. A person I o
of the stalls and wash his car inside the building. There wasa commentvatlthede one
Planning Commission that they were concerned about the quality of water that would II
dissipate from a car wash and how much there would be. I think Bill Monk explored
some of this through the DNR.
Councilwoman Swenson: As long as there is no hazardous waste 1 take care of it, is that correct? You figure that will
Bill Monk : Yes . III
The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton , Councilwomen Watson and Swenson ,
Councilmen Horn and Geving. No negative votes . Motion carried.
II
APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FOR LAKE ANN INTERCEPTOR:
Bill Monk: Don , Barbara and myself did go over the report . We did have some major
points that we wanted to cover and we convinced ourselves that they wouldn ' t make II
changes that we were going to recommend to the Council that they approved the version
in front of them. They were somewhat accommodating on almost all of the changes and
are now in the final draft of the agreement , which they want to take to their systems II
committee January 6, 1986. The changes from the agreement that you have got in your
packet are relatively minor . I think that we have basically come back around on
almost all of the points. There was a lot of give and take on both sides. With the
Council members having read the agreement in the packet , I would ask II overall or about specific sections and we would work on the sections rasopossis of
before the final draft is there . Staff' s position is still that we possible
having an interceptor that the agreement still represents something that swec can elive II
with. With that , I would ask the Council for any comments on the agreement .
Mayor Hamilton: I guess I was confused about this when we looked at this the last I
time. I think we talked about making some changes , additions or deletions at that
time and we were told what we say is what we got . I had all kinds of comments on that
one . I am sure I was told , that ' s tough , you just don ' t get a chance and now we are
back renegotiating.
a'
MM
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 42
1
' 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and
provide the City with the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the
proper installation of these public improvements .
' 6. The applicant shall provide screening between the southerly lots and
the Gowen property.
All voted in favor and the motion carried .
' SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE ADDITION OF 2,920 SQUARE FEET ONTO AN EXISTING
PRIVATE GARAGE (BEDDOR) , ON PROPERTY ZONED IOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK AND
LOCATED ON LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 2, PARK ONE THIRD ADDITION, FORTIER AND
ASSOCIATES.
Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report.
' Emmings: Daryl , do you have any comments?
Daryl Fortier : I 'm Daryl Fortier with Fortier and Associates . We are
pretty much in agreement with the staff report. We hope it' s a brief
' report for you tonight . The additional landscaping, point 2 on the staff
recommendations , we would like to simply see the provisions for caliper
inch per caliper inch basis deleted and say that we will work with staff
' and the DNR forester for appropriate replacement. Our simple concern here
is that if the owner wishes , as he' s expressed , to keep the center of the
site free, we are losing 6 trees in this area and we've already proposed
' landscaping around the edges. If it' s caliper inch per caliper inch , we
would have to be putting in so many trees, we think there' s a real crowding
problem. We would rather simple say let' s look at the actual trees and
meet with staff and the DNR forester rather than make the provision that it
I be caliper inch per caliper inch. We' re not objecting to replacing trees.
We are proceeding with the replat that Jo Ann suggested. The issue of
outside storage, I think she suggested , that ' s actually located right at
I this location. He has a flatbed trailer which is about 24 inches high or
so to haul his vehicles to different shows and different events . Parking
and driveway curb and gutter . I 'm sure that ' s fine . . . Previously this
portion of the building was built and there was an exemption from curb and
Igutter . The curb and gutter for the property is along this portion of the
driveway and is all along the south portion of the driveway right up to the
building and that channels water to storm sewers in this location. The
' remainder of the curbing was deleted specifically because the center of
this site is used for auto contour shows . Mr . Beddor has two automotive
clubs that he operates out of his garage. They do not store their cars
I there but he does invite them there for display and car shows . Only one
that I know of that I 've attended so I really can' t say that this is
frequent but I can say that there are a number of cars . I think last time
there were about 60 cars that showed up and they are parked on the grass
Iand they go out in an array pattern with a main tent , their hospitality in
this location. Curbs would be very difficult to drive over, especially for
a bulk of the cars . They simply wouldn ' t do it so the provision of curbs
' in this case would be defeating his purpose of having a specific facility
for automotive display and car shows . The second reason we want to keep
Planning Commission Meeting '
May 17, 1989 - Page 43
the center of the site open is that one of the vehicles they' re storing I
there is now a helicopter. It is a safety problem to land a helicopter on
a curb. Of course they have to land on skids. They don' t necessarily have
wheels and after you land you have small wheels that drop down from the
skids. You can think of it as a horse drawn sleigh if you will . The
runners are about the same size. The wheels are attached to the runners
and you snap lock them into position. They are about 2 1/2 or 3 inches.
You then have to push the helicopter. It is a small 2 person helicopter.
You then have to push the helicopter into storage. If you drop is over a
curb of course you' re subject to damaging your equipment. You can. . .when
you jar a fuel line loose or whatever the problem would be. The second
thing is that pushing the helicopter back up the curb, once you're in the
garage and you try to push it over a curb, it' s a real tough problem. You
simply can't do it with 3 inch wheels when you have a 6 inch curb. The
runners would prevent you from pulling the helicopter into position unless ,
we were to make a special asphalt helicopter landing pad . That would be
the only alternative and it would have to be large enough so of course you
have some safety margin and that' s the reason we' re requesting no concrete I/curb and gutter. The final point I 'd like to clarify is the applicant
shall submit for approval by the City a drainage and erosion control plan.
This is a little more complex. There are actually two proposals before you
tonight . One is for drainage improvements in accordance with the previous 11
engineering plans for all of Park One which envisioned that at some time we
would connect from Lyman Lumber ' s overflow with an underground storm sewer
pipe to the public system. This could never be built as part of the Park
One improvements because it' s on private property. It' s a private
improvement and we cannot spend the funds for it. We' re now intending to
do that . It' s this reason that we' ll lose trees. The issue of ponding and II
so forth has been raised by the engineer but it' s already been addressed.
The 20 acres in the northerly part of Park One has created a very large
outlot down here. Part of the Ver-Sa-Til project contains this large duck
pond that we' ve created in the site and maintained trees . Create a natural
site. That' s intending to drain all of Park One. It' s been appropriately
sized for settlement and contains . . .so we would not have individual holding
ponds in small lots. The lots were simply too small so we' ve already sized
them and did all the engineering . . .public funds partially and partially
project funds and it' s been assessed against the property so we'd like to
point out that a greater amount of impervious surface here has already been II
calculated. . . .as parking lot so that' s the basis for the calculations and
we are not even approaching anything near that for runoff capacity.
Secondly, a grading plan. There is literally no grading involved with the
exception of excavating for footings on the garage. The site does not
require any grading. It' s already perfectly flat. Our survey has been
submitted . The reason the engineer doesn ' t see any grading changes is
because we' re not changing grades by more than a couple of inches and our
surveyer cannot be that accurate . Neither can our contractor so he may
have missed the grading plan but it is indeed there. The issue of erosion
control has been addressed and again it may have been overlooked but it is
actually being addressed as part of the storm sewer line. We have asked
for silt fences and we have asked for 5 cubic yards of rip rap to be placed
at this location. This is the very same standards we use in the
construction of all the improvements in Park One including the City' s
public improvements so we think that' s adequate and since it ' s the same
.1
II '
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 44
I
I standard that the engineer has participated in approving as well as the
city' s consulting engineers, we feel that should be adequate on the present
plans as we' ve requested . With those comments , we have no objections to
the staff report.
IConrad : What do you agree with?
I Daryl Fortier : We certainly agree that, I 'm not sure why, it ' s a large
issue, we are not imposing utilities for this. It is intended to be
essentially dry storage for this if you will . There is not intended to be
I any maintenance but I 'm not sure why we want to put a condition suggesting
that they never do maintenance. If it' s going to be approved as a
commercial permanent structure which is what the Council wanted, I 'm not
sure why we' re limiting it. He has no intent of doing repairs but I 'm not
IIsure why we are limiting it.
Olsen : Because we got into all those traps .
IIDaryl Fortier: If we put in drainage, then we have to worry about pumps.
We put in sanitary sewer connection onto the building as previously
requested. We did that immediately during construction. It has flammable
Iwaste traps . It has oil separators . It has a hydraulic lift . It has a
parts washer . It has solvent recovery. It meets all the requirements. It
has testing facilities and where the fuel tank can be monitored on a weekly
I basis if necessary. Yearly by the State Inspector . I think we' re in
full compliance with absolutely all the concerns previously listed for this
structure. One of the concerns is whether or not it drains . If we put in
I drains. . .all the protection . In this case there are no drains . No
proposals to hook up plumbing whatsoever so the ability to do those types
of repairs to provide water just doesn ' t exist . I 'm just not sure why
we' re making it an issue. We certainly agree with replacing of the trees
I for the forester , point 2. We certainly agree to proceed with the plat. We
agree no additional outside storage should be permitted . It ' s an
industrial use. We would ask for an exemption for point 5. We think the
I curb and gutter should be deleted for the reasons I mentioned . Not for
economics but for other hardship reasons and we would agree that we will
discuss or we will consult with staff concerning grading and so forth but
we believe we've already submitted sufficient information and it perhaps
' deals with mutliple plans that ' s been overlooked . That ' s all unless you
have questions.
I Emmings : Let ' s see if there are any comments here. Jim, have you got any
comments?
IWildermuth : No .
Batzli : How do you feel about the curb and gutter?
IWildermuth: We didn ' t require it the first time, why do we need it the
second time?
I Ellson: Ah ha . There' s that precedent that you just said about the last
guy. You ' ll ask him the next time he comes in but as soon as he does ,
I
l .
EN
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17 , 1989 - Page 45
he' ll say but I didn' t do it the first time.
Batzli : I was going to talk about condition 1 a little bit first of all .
I guess my question was whether we would allow maintenance or repair of
automobiles anywhere on the site or were you only trying to limit it in
that new building?
Olsen : The reason that I put that condition in was if they do start the
repair and maintenance then we get into the other things that the other
garage had to do with the traps . That' s the only reason I had that
condition in there was so they would not be doing that work in there
without having the accommodations for it.
Batzli : Okay, so the garage and the new facility are the same thing?
Olsen : Yes .
Batzli : So really what you' re saying is , you' re only going to use the new II
facility as a garage and if you use it for anything else, you' ve got to
talk about it. That' s what you' re trying to say?
Olsen: That's what I 'm trying to say. '
Batzli : I think I would go along with landscaping being done on a staff
approval basis. I think that the curb and gutter , there' s a certain amount II
of logic to it but I think that you can make a little ramp or something . I
don't think it ' s the kind of thing where you eliminate all of the curb and
gutter throughout the entire site because you' re going to drive some cars
on the grass. Finally I think condition 6, if that is the case then I
think the condition should remain but add something to the effect that
these things only have to be submitted if required after consultation with
the City staff. ,
Emmings : Now Annette . What about curb and gutter?
Ellson: This doesn' t have it because originally this was never required
right? Not because we gave them an exemption at one point?
Olsen: I don' t remember . I don' t know if we even required it. ,
Wildermuth : Curbing was waived right?
Conrad: The first time it was waived.
Ellson: That really doesn' t matter now but . . .
Conrad: It really appeared at that time that it served no purpose.
Ellson: Then why do we have it as an ordinance? Then maybe it should be
looked at on a case by case basis but if we write it in there that
everything around here should have it and yet we use it and enforce it on a
case by case basis, then it ' s stupid to have it in there so I 'd just as ,
soon follow what the ordinance says . Like Brian said , like have a cut out
II '
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 46
I for a driveay to actually help the wheels get down. It might be easier
than on the wet grass or something like that to have a little concrete ramp
or who knows what that' s connected to a curb. I would be satisfied if Jo
I Ann said the tree replacement is good enough, then I go along with her
saying . If Dave were here though I know he'd want 1 inch for 1 inch, an
eye for an eye.
IErhart : What happens if it' s a 12 inch tree?
Ellson: I know. That' s just it. We' re going to have to decide that.
I I think there' s some merit to the reason we were going to that is because
we really lost something once and never returned so I 'm giving Jo Ann that
leeway. But I want the curb and I think number 6 should stand . If they've
got it in, then just show it to them that it is here. I 'm done.
Conrad : I thought this was a simple deal but now that we get into it and
Daryl doesn' t like most of the staff report, I think we should table.
I There are too many technical things that I just don' t understand . I think
he had a comment. It showed me that the engineer is not looking at what is
there and I 'd like the engineer to comment to me about the issues and I 'm
I not smart enough to figure out whether we should or should not require curb
and gutter here . The engineer said the grading plan yet Daryl says hey,
we' re not doing anything . Something ' s askew and it' s not for me to make
up. I think I would recommend tabling it .
IOlsen : The engineer does understand that he wants to still drive up there
and stuff.
IConrad : He' s still saying that. But I hear from Daryl , I heard some
comments from him that it didn' t sound like there was communication and
maybe some different points . Maybe that ' s not the one but others . I don ' t
I know. I don' t know whether curb and gutter should be required here. I
know we slipped it the first time through.
I Olsen: Again, we were waiting until the mini-storage and further
development .
I Conrad : Daryl , just one other comment . The trailers are now being stored
outside. Is that taken care of? The staff comment to us was that existing
garage is used for storage/maintenance. Site is conforming to the request
and conditions of the site but there are trailers being stored outside
I which was not anticipated in the beginning . So is this new plan taking
care of that? They' re saying we ' re storing one trailer between buildings
but what about the trailers that are currently outside now?
rDaryl Fortier: I 'm only aware of one trailer that' s outside right now.
There may be more . If there are more it ' s probably because we pulled them
I out of storage so he could do something in the garage. There is presently
room in here. They do store a trailer inside but he recently purchased , I
understand, a larger trailer which sits in here. That ' s the only trailer
I 'm aware of which is too large for the structure.
IConrad: Staff is saying trailers are being stored outside .
I
,
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 47
Olsen : The day that we visited , there were 2 or 3 on the lot.
Daryl Fortier : I think that could be much like saying cars are stored
outside. He had brought these out and put them out here. . . ,
Erhart: I visited the site this evening and it's a very neat site.
Regarding , well let' s take one at a time here. Not having maintenance in a II
building. What' s this trap you' re referring to Jo Ann?
Olsen : I believe the first time they went through they had to have a
special trap for the fuel oil .
Wildermuth : For spills.
Olsen: There was a lot of discussion on that.
Erhart : Any building in any industrial , in any garage a guy can pull a car II
in and maintain it.
Wildermuth : But with that original garage I think there' s a floor lift and I
a wash station and all kinds of areas for working on cars .
Erhart : The problem with this condition is that , then we ought to apply
this condition to everybody. Everybody that' s got an overhead door in the
city ought to have this condition applied to it.
Emmings: My recollection of this Tim, and I don' t know if it helps or not,
is that what I remember us saying when we considered this is what we' re
creating here is essentially a service station. The same kinds of
consideration ought to be given to this building as would be given to a
service station because that' s essentially what it is. It' s private rather II
than. . .
Erhart: But someone doesn ' t come in with their car to have it fixed that
he charges them does he?
Emmings : No but he' s got the same equipment and doing the same kinds of
things that would be done down at the Standard station.
Erhart : I do that at my home too in my garage.
Conrad: Not everyday. Not multi-cars .
Erhart : I don' t think anybody feels strong about condition 1. To me it
also seems pretty much over control .
Batzli : This is a commercial area and you' re not. This would be a
permitted use in this area .
Erhart : I could pull a car into my industrial plant too and tear the
engine out, there' s no one that says I can' t do that . '
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 48
' Ellson : They wouldn' t like it though.
Olsen : If you' re going to do it , we just like to know that everything else
is taken care of that needs to be done as part of it.
' Ellson : He didn' t seem to have a problem with that one . He had a few he
had a problem with, that wasn' t one of them.
Erhart : Let' s move on. I agree with him it seems a little bit over
control . The next one on the landscaping. Essentially the line where that
I ditch is right now, essentially is just grown over and to go in and measure
which trees are caliper per caliper basis could mean that you have to move
the, you might have to just literally that whole edge of the lot to replace
I caliper to caliper so I don't know. I 'd be just satisfied to say
additional landcaping shall be provided as required by staff and just use
good judgment on it because it' s very difficult to use a technical approach
to it . The outside storage, in other industrial sites there' s outside
I storage and then the whole thing has to be screened right and here we' re
allowing an exception essentially by allowing one outside.
Olsen: It is essentially screened on 3 sides .
I
Erhart : Yes , the whole area is pretty wooded . I guess I don' t have a
problem with 4 leaving it the way it is even though technically I supposed
I it might be not in accordance with our rules . The next thing is the curb
and gutter. I think in this case the specific intention of the use of this
owner here , in the first place there ' s a lot of asphalt there now for the
I small lot and none of it' s curbed and gutter so to go in and require curb
and gutter on this new section would mean you have about 20% curb and
gutter and 80% just like your home driveway which would really look out of
place. Now how I can justify in my mind allowing this building owner not
I require curb and gutter is that he has a specific requirement that he needs
his driveway tailored in the manner in which it is . The Level of the
asphalt is level with the green grass and I think we ' re not setting a
I precedent. Somebody else would have to come in with a specific need to
have their asphalt driveway the same level as the grass so I guess I don' t
have any problem in extending essentially the same rules on that.
Batzli : Can I interrupt just for a second Tim? What did we do with, was
it Lyman Lumber that had the asphalt strip and then behind it they had a
bunch of piles of rock and stuff and they were going to use, I don' t know
I if they were going to use forklifts or frontend loaders or something . Did
we make them have gutter? I think we did .
Wildermuth : The unusual part about this thing is that the applicant is
going to use a commercial location in an industrial office park location
for a non-commercial use . I don ' t know if you've been in there but a lot
I of houses that are built look like the inside of this garage.
Erhart: The exterior is definitely, it' s definitely an industrial
building.
IWildermuth: Yes right .
1
Planning Commission Meeting II
May 17, 1989 - Page 49
Erhart : It' s a good quality industrial but it is an industrial building so II
it fits in from that standpoint . Lastly, where is this grading thing in
these conditions? Is that in here?
Conrad : The last one. Daryl is saying there' s not much grading to do.
Erhart: Okay, I think we should just leave 6 the way it is and let the
applicant and the City hash that one out and I guess I 'd like to pass this II
on to Council . I think it' s ready to go.
Emmings : I 'd like to ask you about the helicopter . I wonder if we knew we II
had an airport in town and can you basically have a helicopter anywhere you
want to?
Olsen: We don' t have any restrictions against them. We have had
complaints about the helicopter .
Emmings : This was proposed and approved as a garage for automobiles. I I
know I don' t know what' s going on with the helicopter or if there are any
safety issues or noise issues or anything else.
Olsen: But we are getting complaints . We ' re working through public safety
on how to address it. We don' t have any definitive answers . The zoning
ordinance doesn' t regulate them and we' re working with public safety to
possibly regulate them. I know that Prince has one on his site too and
they just have to meet the FAA.
Emmings : They'd probably pre-empt anything we'd do . I don ' t know except '
for something like noise or something.
Erhart : I would venture to guess that cities would have ordinances which
we ought to look at that would have some kind of space requirement. Some
distance requirements from a landing pad to a building and to the next
person' s property. I ' ve just got to believe that that would be common in
an ordinance regarding helicopters .
Olsen : What we' re working on now is we' re telling the resident that when
you hear the noise or whatever, try to get somebody out there to test it.
Use the noise ordinance and it' s not going to work.
Batzli : Did we have a noise ordinance? '
Olsen : Yes .
Batzli : The beefed up one didn' t pass but we have a noise ordinance?
Olsen: It' s more of a nuisance ordinance rather than a noise ordinance.
So we have no way to deny them.
Elison: Hours of operation maybe.
.1
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17 , 1989 - Page 50
I
I Emmings : I don ' t know if we should table it or pass it on. I guess I 'd be
comfortable in passing it on but I think there are things that need to be
worked out between now and when the City Council gets it . Things like
traps and stuff, it seems to me you only worry about a trap if you've got a
I drain and there aren' t any drains so I 'm not that concerned about number 1.
Number 2, I agree with everybody else that it should be done by the staff
and we don ' t have to worry about a caliper inch by caliper inch. That ' s
I because Dave's not here and that' s the only reason I have the courage to
say that . I don' t see any reason now to impose curb and gutter . If we let
it go before looking for some kind of a reason we thought to be valid at
I the time, I don ' t see any reason to impose it on this small section. I
think we should keep in number 6 and you should just discuss your
differences with the city engineer prior to going to the City Council .
That' s all I 've got. Any other discussion on this? If not, is there a
Imotion?
Erhart : I ' ll move the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan
I #89-3 for the construction of a 2, 920 sq. ft . garage facility as shown on
the Site Plan dated April 13 , 1989 with the conditions as follows . Number
2, change to additional landscaping shall be provided as required by staff.
I 3 as stated here. 4 as stated changing the word "the transport flatbed" to
"1 transport flatbed" . Number 5, all parking and driveway areas shall be
paved period . And 6 as is. And that' s it .
IBatzli : Did you delete number 1?
Erhart : Yes .
IOlsen : And number 5 I changed just to say all parking and driveway areas
shall be paved.
I Emmings : We could do that one like we did on Stockdales . You could say
unless the City Engineer determines .
I Erhart : Ours is a recommendation so if the City Engineer came to the
Council .
I Emmings : I mean unless the City Engineer determines now or in the future
that curb and gutter is necessary. . . Just a suggestion.
Conrad : That ' s a good way to do i.t .
IEmmings : Alright, we ' ve got a motion. Do we have a second?
IWildermuth : I ' ll second the motion .
Batzli : I 'd like to see condition 1 in there and I would also at a minimum
like to see your proposed . . .
IEllson : Gutter idea?
I Batzli_ : Gutter idea but the problem I see is that , the only reason I
really agreed on the guttering last time is he ' s not in a sewered area
I ,
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 51
and it didn' t make sense to me. To me gutter is directed to a storm sewer
as well as maintaining erosion, or keeping erosion at bay. I think if we
do this , we might as well be doing it on everyone that we do from here on
out.
Wildermuth : But have you seen the site Brian? The initial portion, 80% of
it isn' t going to be guttered.
Batzli : That might be true but I can' t help what they did before. Maybe I II
did it before. Maybe I didn' t know any better .
Emmings : I think it was your motion. ,
Batzli : Maybe it was but I guess the argument was somewhat appealing.
However , I guess you can do it by other. means . I
Wildermuth: This is a unique situation. It' s a non-commercial use of a
commercial area . '
Erhart : The only problem is if the guy sells the property to somebody who
then wants to use it for a commercial use and it doesn' t have curb and
gutter . If you' re starting fresh from the site, that ' s probably a good
enough argument to require it and it probably should have been required .
Wildermuth : Initially? t
Erhart : Yes . The fact that the site is already 70o developed .
Ellson: Then isn ' t that exactly what' s going to happen when Stockdale
expands and we just put that in . We' ll want him to put that in when he
expands and now we' ll have the same viewpoint.
Wildermuth : He has to come back if he expands.
Ellson: I know like they' re coming back with the idea that we curb and
gutter as he got bigger which is the idea behind Stockdale and we' re not
doing it now we won' t do it then. Pretty soon we' ll have 50-50. Half have
it, half don' t. ,
Emmings : I don ' t think that ' s a realistic danger at all because when
Stockdale' s place gets water and sewer , as part of the IOP, everything
there is going to be torn down and that place is going to be redeveloped
and that' s different.
Wildermuth: Not a comparison. '
Emmings : But it ' s funny we get two of these on the same night . It makes
it so hard that you have to justify so many things .
Daryl Fortier : Maybe I can help. . .with curb and gutters . One of the
differences first of all on this plan is that ever since Frank first held
out these two pieces of property for personal use, it was because such a
use at his other residential lots would have been inappropriate and after
,1
II '
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 52
I
I talking with staff we had to put it somewhere. You earlier had a proposal
in here for townhomes and the object is, where do they store their boats
and trailers and you said well they' ll rent a space. Where do you do it
when you' ve got multiple vehicles? Not in a residential district so we
IIwind up here . . . .that this is indeed the best use , ever since though
however , why didn' t he just set aside one lot? He ' s been following a
master plan and that master plan is still being reflected and eventually it
I will have another driveway connected here. That' s exactly why the storm
sewer has been located by the City and by the developer . We are following
a pattern. It' s not a haphazard development. It is a master plan and it is
I proceeding in accordance with the original designs . The curbing has been
stopped here. It has been extended over this side. That is along the
perimeter of the property. It will be continued along the perimeter of the
property including this portion thus all the perimeter of the property will
I be paved , curbed and guttered in accordance with the ordinance even if it
were to be transferred to someone else. It would be fully. That will
still keep the center portion of the site open . It will contain already
I water and runoff. It will serve all the purposes of being curbed and
guttered . The future owner may or may not paved this or may or may not do
something else with it 5 or 10 years down the road but a better idea may
I well be to support this since this is following a master plan, all
perimeters of the property will require curb and gutter to serve a
permanent statement or a compromise position and that ' s , whenever he makes
any additional cuts in here or adds to this perimeter area , he would indeed
Ihave to add curb and gutter .
Emmings: But we' re not seeing any perimeter work on this plan so I don ' t
I think it would make sense to add it as a condition here. When he adds that
driveway over there , would that come back to us or would it just go to the
engineer?
IOlsen : Are you talking like the mini-storage?
Daryl Fortier: Right. He' s already proposed the second driveway in here.
IOlsen : If he just put the driveway in , no but if they come in with a site
plan for mini-storage, then yes we would see that.
IEmmings : If he put the driveway in , where does the driveway go?
Daryl Fortier : The driveway goes right in front of this future building
Iand connects from here to here .
Olsen: It would be part of that mini-storage addition.
IDaryl Fortier : That ' s correct .
Olsen: Then you would see it .
I
Wildermuth : What kind of a mini-storage addition is this going to be?
I Daryl Fortier : Mr. Beddor seems to becoming a collector of things . Some
of them look like, I noticed that he' s looked at some Jaguars recently and
I .
Planning Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 53
he may well become a vintage car collector in which case it would be
private mini-storage. He also has a few friends who would say they would
like to store their vehicle here so he stores all his own vehicles but if
he ever wanted to invite personal friends to also store or other members of
the car club, he would undoubtedly put them in these mini-storage. It
would again be for vehicles. That' s the best I can predict at this time
but you' re fully informed at least .
Emmings: I 'm glad somebody has a master plan.
Daryl Fortier : That ' s part of what the previous Council and Planning
Commission was based on. There is curb and gutter along this area. Also
along both sides of the driveway to make sure that any runoff coming from
the site is funneled in this storm sewer. It was not a blanket statement
saying no curb and gutter required . '
Emmings: And the site isn't being changed. Are there any existing
problems with runoff or erosion or anything else? '
Daryl Fortier: From this area , all the erosion and runoff would go
immediately to this small area where we have erosion control measures and
this new holding pond is going to happen because we cannot prevent it .
It' s a low lying area that it will fill up if there ' s an unusual amount of
rain and that' s in addition to the previous pond for siltation and erosion
control . So it' s well covered that any possible injury by not having curb I
and gutter is just a miniscule possibility. Aside from any injury on his
property but to the public benefit there would be virtually no affect. I
hope that helps somewhat. 1
Emmings: It just doesn ' t look like curb and gutter is going to make any
difference here. I guess if the City Engineer, if the motion passes the
way it' s schedule, if the City Engineer has a different opinion on that
when he gets to City Council . . .but the site, all of it seems to have been
taken care of on the site .
Ellson: But your motion you still didn' t put number 1 in right?
Batzli : And you didn' t accept Steve' s friendly amendment about the adding
it at a later date and that kind of thing?
Erhart: I ' ll do it if somebody wants it in there, I ' ll agree.
Batzli : Do you agree with that amendment?
Wildermuth: Sure. ,
Erhart moved , Wildermuth seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of Site Plan #89-3 for the construction of a 2, 920 sq. ft . garage
facility as shown on the Site Plan dated April 13 , 1989 with the following
conditions :
1. Additional landscaping shall be provided as required by city staff .
IPlanni.ng Commission Meeting
May 17, 1989 - Page 54
I
I2. The applicant shall receive a replat of the site to combine Lots 1 and
2, Park One .
I 3. There shall be no outside storage other than one (1) transport flat bed
which shall be stored between the two garages .
I 4 . All parking and driveway areas shall be paved and surrounded by
concrete curb and gutter only if now or in the future the City Engineer
determines that they are necessary.
I5. The applicant shall submit for approval by the City Engineer a drainage
and erosion plan prior to final approval .
I Erhart, Emmings , Wildermuth and Batzli voted in favor of the motion and
Conrad and Ellson voted in opposition of the motion . The motion carried
with a vote of 4 to 2.
I Ellson: I want
number 1 a.n there.
IEmmings : Annette wants number 1 in there. Ladd wants to table it.
Conrad: I think it should be tabled. There were 4 out of 6 points that
I were disagreed to by the applicant versus staff and I think somethings, I
would have preferred to have the engineer look at. I 'm also very concerned
about future owners and what this property looks like and I don ' t know that
Ithat has been incorporated as a sale could occur .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES : Conrad moved , Ellson seconded to approve the Minutes
I of the Planning Commission meeting dated May 3 , 1989 as presented. All
voted in favor except Batzli and Wildermuth who abstained and the motion
carried.
IOPEN DISCUSSION.
IEmmings: Do we want to add airports to our on-going? I was outside
watering my garden this morning at about 6 : 15. A helicopter was out going
over TH 5 and I think it was probably one of the traffic reporters .
IConrad: The one that was out by our house had the ability to spray. Had
the big tubes on the bottom.
1 Emmings: It was incredibly loud .
Batzli : Is there anything in the City ordinances about landing airplanes
Iwith pontoons on them on the lakes?
Emmings : Yes . Minnewashta is the only one that we' ve got that they can do
I that.
1 '
CITY 0 F
cHANHAssEN
- 4L
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner
FROM: Gary Warren, City Engineer n ` u
DATE: June 7, 1989
SUBJ: Update of Memo dated May 10 , 1989
Beddor Garage Addition
File No. 89-11 Land Use Review
LOCATION
The site is located on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 , Park One 3rd '
Addition.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing a 2 , 920 square foot garage expansion
(garage #1) for the warehousing of the property owner 's cars.
The structure will be located just north of the existing garage
on this site. Two additional garages are shown on the plan but
are not a part of this site plan review request.
There will be no outside storage of cars and the remainder of the
site will remain in its natural state. The structure is set back
60 feet from the north lot line and 47 feet from the west lot
line. These setbacks are adequate and would allow for the pre-
servation of most of the existing trees to the west and north of
the site (attachment #1) . ,
UTILITIES
Sanitary sewer and watermain are not an issue under this expan- ,
sion . The structure is to be a warehouse/cold storage only and
no work bays, wash bays or bathroom facilities are proposed.
Utility service is presnet in the existing building. ,
ACCESS
The existing site is serviced by a bituminous driveway approxima- '
tely 24 feet wide. Based on the proposed use, Section 20-1123 of
the City ' s Zoning Ordinance would apply (attachment #2 ) which
states that all parking areas and access roads be paved with an
all-weather surface with concrete curb and gutter.
I
' Jo Ann Olsen
June 7 , 1989
Page 2
The present width of the driveway access is adequate to support
' two-way traffic.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
Although the plans indicate grading of the north and north-
westerly portion of the site , the exact amount of grading cannot
be determined from the plans although it is anticipated that
' large mature trees will be removed for grading and storm sewer
installation.
' The plan shows construction of a 15-inch RCP along the northerly
portion of the site. This is proposed to allow the owner as much
flexibility as possible for his future expansion plans. This is
a revision from previous plan submittals where the proposed storm
' sewer took a direct route from the sediment pond (northwest
corner of lot) to the existing storm sewer stub in Quattro Drive,
thereby saving a large portion of existing trees ( see attachment
#3) . This proposal will eliminate 6 or 7 mature hardwood trees .
The proposed sediment pond in the northwest corner of the site
does not show an overflow elevation and the 12-inch pipe line
coming into the site from the northwest (Lyman Lumber) has no
inlet elevation shown. More information will be needed to deter-
mine that no upstream ponding will occur on Lyman Lumber should
Ithis storm sewer become plugged or damaged.
This proposed 15-inch RCP line will be privately owned and main-
' tained; therefore, hydraulic calculations will be needed to
verify proper sizing so that the predeveloped runoff rate can be
maintained.
' 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 . Site plan approval for proposed garage #1 only - any addi-
tional buildings will need future approvals.
' 2 . Developer to supply hydraulic calculations for review.
' 3 . Preservation of the hardwood trees along the west and north
lot lines .
4 . All parking and driveway areas shall be paved and surrounded
' by concrete curb and gutter in accordance with Section
20-1123 of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance.
1
a ,