3. CUP for Landscaping Contractors Yard, 7210 Galpin Blvd. I C I T Y O F P.C. DATE: Sept. 21,3.
1988
\\\� CHANHASSEN C.C. DATE: Oct. 10, 1988
CASE NO: 85-2 CUP
IPrepared by: Olsen/v
I
STAFF REPORT
I
I PROPOSAL: Conditional Use Permit for a Landscaping
Contractor' s Yard
icr' , ' rm stratcr
yr;rs?e_.
MOdificd
I V LOCATION: One-half mile north of Hwy. 5 Date iH S
y• Date= �`---�—
1.1: hate _ubmitted .J/:u:�i!'�ISSk;i4
sae SkLilt d ) L —1,AL
Q APPLICANT: Dave Stockdale
7210 Galpin Boulevard `°--�-_c if --• _
Excelsior, MN 55331
1
I 1
PRESENT ZONING: A-2, Agricultural Estate
IACREAGE: 12 .1 acres
DENSITY:
IADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N- A-2; single family
IS- A-2; agricultural & Bentz Contractor ' s Yar
E- A-2; vacant
I d W_
0.-, A-2; vacant/agricultural
IW WATER AND SEWER: The site is outside of the Urban Service
Area without city water and sewer
IPHYSICAL CHARAC. : The property is fairly level with a wooded
area on the north of the site.
I2000 LAND USE PLAN: Agricultural
I
J
Stockdale CUP
September 21, 1988
Page 3
3 . Installation of additional evergreens measuring at least four
feet in height along the south property line to adequately
screen the parking area.
4 . There is to be no signage advertising the business establish- f
ment on site.
5 . Vacation of the 60 foot easement on the south side of the
property.
6 . Inspection of the septic systems by the City Engineer.
The Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit to have
substantial construction take place within one year from the
date from which the conditional use permit was granted. If
substantial construction has not taken place within one year, the
conditional use permit is void.
The applicant did not begin construction on the contractor' s yard
within one year of the approval and also subdivided the property
by a metes and bounds subdivision on August 23 , 1985, to separate
a 6 . 46 acre parcel to the north of the contractor' s yard where
his residence is now located (Attachment #7) . The conditional
use permit that was recorded with the county subsequently became
void because the legal description had been changed due to the
subdivision. Therefore, the applicant had to resubmit an appli-
cation for a conditional use permit for a contractor' s yard
because development of the site had not taken place within one
year and the legal description for the contractor' s yard had been
changed due to a subdivision.
ANALYSIS
Site Plan
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for a
landscaping contractor' s yard on a lot directly south of his
residence. The contractor' s yard will consist of a 55 ,000 square
foot pole barn which will contain a 25 ' x 25 ' office area, a 25 '
x 45 ' workshop, and storage space for 7 trucks , 3 trailers and
bobcat. The inventory of vehicles are as follows: 3 single axle
dump trucks, 2 one ton trucks, 2 3/4 ton pick-ups, 3 skid loaders
and trailers. The contractor' s yard will employ 3 staff person-
nel and 12 field personnel. The hours of operation proposed are
kl
from 6 : 30 a.m. to 5 : 30 p.m. with peak hours between the hours of
6 :30 and 7 :30 a.m. and 4 : 30 and 5 : 30 p.m. The applicant is pro-
viding
a paved parking area and the site will be accessed from
Galpin Boulevard located at the southeast corner of the site.
I
r
Stockdale CUP
September 21, 1988
Page 4
Access
The applicant will have to receive an access permit from Carver
County prior to installation of the driveway and if the site
results in more than 20 trips per day Carver County may request
that turn lanes be installed on Galpin Boulevard. Carver County
also commented on landscaping near the Co. Rd. 117 right-of-way.
These are existing trees .
Septic Systems
' Because the contractor' s yard building contains an office,
bathroom facilities will have to be provided which will require a
septic system. The applicant has performed soil borings
' locating two septic sites . The soil borings and location of the
two sites still need to be reviewed by the city' s consultants,
Machmeier and Anderson. The site is fairly level and staff does
not feel that the location of two septic sites will be difficult.
Approval of the conditional use permit will be conditioned upon
approval of the septic sites by the consultants.
' Drs . Machmeier and Anderson have commented on the information
they have received to this date (Attachment #8) . Drs . Machmeier
and Anderson are requesting a profile view of the sewage treat-
ment system to determine if a pumping station is needed. They
are requesting a detailed location of the well and noted that it
must be properly separated from the septic system and any other
' chemicals/fertilizers stored on the property. The applicant will
be washing three trucks per week. The applicant is proposing to
have wash liquid drain into a settlement tank and then into the
' septic system. Staff is rcommending that a holding tank be
installed for the waste water instead of using the septic system.
The applicant must provide a contract with a pumper and provide
the city with documentation stating the holding tank has been
' pumped.
Landscaping
' The applicant is providing berming along the easterly and
southerly portion of the property to screen the site from CR 117
and the property to the south. The elevation of the parking area
' and building is 982 . The proposed berm will reach an elevation
of 988 which will be 6 feet above the parking and building area.
The applicant is also providing a retaining wall at the edge of
' the parking and storage area. The berm will adequately screen
the parking area and partially screen the building. The appli-
cant has provided a landscaping plan and elevation for the berm
area. The applicant is providing 6 foot Blue Spruce 20 feet
apart which meets the requirements of the ordinance. There is an
existing stand of trees screening the site from the north.
Therefore, landscaping is not required north of the building and
parking area.
1
Stockdale CUP
September 21, 1988
Page 5
Grading, Drainage and Access '
The Assistant City Engineer addresses grading, drainage and
access in Attachment #4 . 1
Specific Conditions for Contractor' s Yards
The Zoning Ordinance has eight specific conditions for contrac- I
tor' s yards , as follows :
1 . The minimum lot size is five (5) acres . I
* The property exceeds the five acre minimum.
2 . All storage and yard areas as well as buildings must be set '
back one hundred ( 100) feet from public or private road
right-of-ways and five hundred (500) feet from an adjacent
single family residence. I
* The applicant is not providing the 100 foot setback
required from County Road 117 for the storage area. An
amended site plan will be required providing for the 100
foot setback.
The contractor' s yard is located within 500 feet of the 1
applicant' s residence which is located directly to the
north and is also located within 500 feet of an existing
home on the east side of County Road 117, located
northeast of the site. The property located directly
across from the site on Galpin Boulevard does not contain
single family residences at this time but has been sub-
divided
by Mike Klingelhutz for single family homes.
3 . The site must be located along a collector or minor arterial
as identified in the comprehensive plan.
* The site is located along a collector.
4 . All outdoor storage areas must be completely screened by one '
hundred ( 100) percent opaque fencing or berming.
* The applicant is providing berming and four foot walls to
completely screen the outdoor storage located in the
parking areas. The outside storage will not be permitted
above the 4 foot walls and retaining walls. '
5 . No two (2 ) contractor' s yards shall be located within one (1)
mile of each other.
* Currently, there is a contractor' s yard located just south
of the property on County Road 117, Theodore Bentz
1
Stockdale CUP
September 21, 1988
Page 6
(Attachment #9) . Theodore Bentz received a conditional
use permit for a contractor's yard on February 4, 1985, by
the City Council. Staff has contacted Mr. Bentz and his
contractor' s yard is still in use, therefore, the appli-
cant' s proposal would not meet the one mile separation
from an existing contractor' s yard.
' 6 . Hours of operation shall be from 7 : 00 a.m. to 6 : 00 p.m. ,
Monday through Satuday only, work on Sundays and holidays not
permitted.
* The applicant has stated that the hours of operation would
be from 6:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. The hours of operation
would have to be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
7 . Light sources shall be shielded.
' * The site has one light source which shall be shielded.
8 . No outside speaker systems are allowed.
* There will be no outside speaker systems.
General Conditions for Conditional Use Permits
The Zoning Ordinance also has 12 general standards for con-
ditional use permits.
1 . Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neigh-
' borhood or the city.
* The location of the contractor' s yard in the rural area
' and the size of the contractor' s yard should not be detri-
mental or endanger the public health, safety, comfort,
convenience or general welfare of the city.
2 . Will be consistent with the objectives of the city' s compre-
hensive plan and this chapter.
' * The landscaping contractor' s yard will include activities
that are consistent with the city' s comprehensive plan
for agricultural land, but the proposal does not meet all
Iof the conditions for a contractor' s yard.
3 . Will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so to
be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended
character of the general vicinity and will not change the
essential character of that area.
* The applicant is proposing berming and landscaping so as
to screen the activity from surrounding properties and to
maintain the rural characteristic of the site.
(7 47 1
Stockdale CUP
September 21, 1988
Page 7
4 . Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned
neighboring uses .
* The site is within the required 500 feet of existing resi- ,
dences and future residences, therefore, could be
disturbing to planned neighboring uses. The screening of
the site and other standards required for a contractor' s
yard should limit the impact of the site to surrounding
property.
5 . Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services, including streets, police and fire protection,
drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems
and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities
and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible
for the establishment of the proposed use.
* The size of the operation can be adequately served by a ,
septic system and private well and will be served ade-
quately by County Road 117.
6 . Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities ,
and services and will not be detrimental to the economic
welfare of the community.
* The proposed contractor' s yard will not create excessive
requirements for public services and facilities and will
not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the com-
munity.
7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials,
equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimen-
tal to any persons, property or the general welfare because
of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes,
glare, odors , rodents, or trash.
* The contractor' s yard will not involve uses or materials
that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the
city. The applicant is proposing the hours of operation
that exceed what is allowed with a conditional use permit
which could result in traffic and noise that could be
disturbing to residences. Provision of a holding tank
will help prevent any possibility of ground water con-
tamination.
8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not
create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or
surrounding public thoroughfares. I
* The applicant will have to receive an access permit from
Carver County which will ensure adequate site distance
Stockdale CUP
September 21, 1988
Page 8
I onto County Road 117. Should the site generate traffic
of 20 vehicles or more per day, Carver County may require
turn lanes to be provided on County Road 117 that would
provide safe traffic movement.
' 9 . Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar
access, natural, scenic or historic features of major
significance. -
* The location of the building and parking will not result
' in destruction, loss or damage or solar access, natural,
scenic or historic features of major significance.
10 . Will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
* The proposed berming and landscaping of the property will
allow it to blend in with the area and be compatible with
Ithe area.
11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values .
1 * Since the property is located in an agricultural district
and is a semi-agricultural use, it should not depreciate
surrounding property values.
' 12 . Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided
in this article.
' * The application does not meet all of the specific con-
ditions for a contractor' s yard as stated in the report,
specifically, #2, #5, and #6.
Although the application is a smaller business run by the appli-
cant who lives directly adjacent to the property, and is more of
' a family run operation, the application does not meet all of the
standards required for a contractor' s yard as a conditional use
permit. Therefore, staff cannot recommend approval of the con-
' ditional use permit for the contractor' s yard.
RECOMMENDATION
Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the
following motion:
' "The Planning Commission recommends denial of Conditional Use
Permit #85-2 for the following reasons:
' 1 . The contractor' s yard is located within one mile of an
existing contractor' s yard.
2 . The contractor' s yard is located within 500 feet of a resi-
dence.
Stockdale CUP
September 21 , 1988
Page 9
3 . The hours of operation exceed those permitted. '
Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the contrac-
tor' s yard, staff is recommending the following conditions: '
1 . The applicant shall provide a revised site plan which
conforms to the 100 foot setback requirement for the storage
areas.
2 . The applicant provide soil boring information locating two
septic sites for approval by Drs. Machmeier and Anderson for
use of a bathroom facility in the contractor' s yard building
and provide a holding tank for waste water with a contract
from a pumper and documentation when the tank has been
pumped.
3 . The applicant shall receive an access permit from Carver
County.
4 . The applicant shall maintain hours of operation between 7: 00
a.m. to 6 : 00 p.m. with work not permitted on Sundays and
holidays.
5 . There shall be no signage advertisting the business ,
establishment on site.
6 . Conditions of the Building Department.
7 . Conditions of the Engineering Department.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION '
The Planning Commission voted 4 to 2 to recommend denial of the
conditional use permit for the contractor' s yard for the
following reasons:
1 . The contractor' s yard is located within one mile of an
existing contractor' s yard and the contractor' s yard is
located within 500 feet of a residence.
Commissioner Ellson, who voted against the denial felt that
the contractor' s yard should have been grandfathered in because
of his original conditional use permit and since the city did not
require the one mile separation at that time. '
Commissioner Batzli, who also voted against the recommendation
felt that he wanted to raise the flag to the Council that there
was a feeling that the applicant would have a fairly well run ,
contractor' s yard and there was a feeling of fairness that since
the applicant had already received a conditional use permit that
he should be able to proceed with his contractor' s yard. 1
1,
Stockdale CUP
September 21, 1988
Page 10
In general, the Planning Commissioners all felt that staff should
investigate if there is a way to recommend approval of this
contractor' s yard application without amending the ordinance and
' without an existing hardship.
Staff confirmed with the City Attorney that the proper way to
recommend approval of the contractor' s yard would be to approve a
variance to the conditions of the conditional use permit or to
amend the Zoning Ordinance. Should the City Council wish to
recommend approval of the conditional use permit request for the
contractor' s yard, a variance must be granted to the condition of
the contractor' s yard being located within one mile of an
existing contractor' s yard and the condition that the contrac-
' tor' s yard cannot be located within 500 feet of a residence.
CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council
"The Planning Commission recommends denial of Conditional Use
Permit #85-2 for the following reasons:
1 . The contractor' s yard is located within one mile of an
' existing contractor' s yard.
2 . The contractor' s yard is located within 500 feet of a resi-
dence.
3 . The hours of operation exceed those permitted.
Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the contrac-
tor' s yard, staff is recommending the following conditions :
' 1 . The applicant shall provide a revised site plan which
conforms to the 100 foot setback requirement for the storage
areas .
' 2 . The applicant provide soil boring information locating two
septic sites for approval by Drs. Machmeier and Anderson for
use of a bathroom facility in the contractor' s yard building
' and provide a holding tank for waste water with a contract
from a pumper and documentation when the tank has been
pumped.
3 . The applicant shall receive an access permit from Carver
County.
4 . The applicant shall maintain hours of operation between 7 : 00
a.m. to 6 : 00 p.m. with work not permitted on Sundays and
holidays .
Stockdale CUP
September 21, 1988
Page 11
II
5 . There shall be no signage advertisting the business II
establishment on site.
6 . Conditions of the Building Department. I
7 . Conditions of the Engineering Department.
ATTACHMENTS 11
1 . Excerpts from City Code.
II
2 . Memo from Building Department dated September 12, 1988 .
3 . Memo from Public Safety Director dated August 24, 1988 .
4 . Memo from Engineering Department dated September 14, 1988. II 5 . Letter from Carver County dated September 13, 1988.
6 . City Council minutes dated March 18 , 1985 & conditional use permit.
7 . City Council minutes dated July 6 , 1987 .
8 . Letter from Resource Engineering dated September 7, 1988 . '
9 . City Council minutes dated February 4 , 1985 .
10 . Letter from applicant dated September 1, 1988 .
11. Planning Commission minutes dated September 21, 1988 II 12 . Site plan.
II
II
I
II
II
II
II
I
II
JJ- �3` ),..` 3" :,
� Q t
aa`� `.0k• O21NQ
ZONING § 20-256
i
(2) The structure must be in compliance with local building and fire codes.
(3) The site will be reviewed annually through a public hearing process.
I (4) Septic systems must be in compliance with chapter 19, article IV.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 9(5-9-1(2)), 12-15-86)
ISec. 20-254. Commercial kennels,stables and riding academies.
The following applies to commercial kennels, stables and riding academies:
1 (1) The structure must be in compliance with chapter 5, article III.
(2) The site must be located on a collector street.
I (3) The structure must be a minimum of two hundred(200)feet from wetland area.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 9(5-9-1(3)), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-255. Contractor's yard.
•---_
IThe following applies to contractor's yards:
I(--i (1) The minimum lot size is five (5) acres.
(2) All storage and yard areas as well as buildings must be set back one hundred (100)
feet from public or private road right-of-ways and five hundred (500) feet from an
I
adjacent single-family residence.
A3 (3) The site must be located along a collector or minor arterial as identified in the
comprehensive plan.
1 (4) All outdoor storage areas must be completely screened by one hundred(100)percent
opaque fencing or berming.
1 (5) No two(2)contractor's yards shall be located within one(1)mile of each other.
(6) Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday
Ionly, work on Sundays and holidays not permitted.
(7) Light sources shall be shielded.
I (8) No outside speaker systems are allowed.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 9(5-9-1(4)), 12-15-86)
Sec. 20-256. Commercial communication transmission towers.
Commercial communication transmission towers not designed to collapse progressively
shall be set back from all property lines a minimum distance equal to the height of the tower.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. V, § 9(5-9-1(5)), 12-15-86)
1 1173
c ,_
CITYOF
.1 1
.,, CHANHASSEN
,,,,, ,),,
_....
,- .„ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(m 937-1900
II
MEMORANDUM
II
TO: JoAnn Olsen, Assistant City Planner
FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Inspector c )4: I
DATE: September 12, 1988
SUBJ: Planning Case 85-2 CUP (Stockdale) I
Pump and underground tank installation must be reviewed and
approved by the State Fire Marshal before a permit can be issued. I
Building must be sprinklered.
Septic design must be submitted to the City and approved prior to II
issuance of a building permit.
Building requires at least one lavatory and water closet.
II
Separate facilities for each sex must be provided if there are
more than four employees and both sexes are employed.
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
it., I
CIT'T' OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Assistant City Planner
FROM: Jim Chaffee, Public Safety Director
SUBJ: 85-2 CUP (Stockdale)
' DATE: August 24 , 1988
From the information provided, this office has no public
safety input regarding the conditional use permit for a
landscape contractor ' s yard on 12 .1 acres of property zoned
11 A-2 , agricultural estate and located on Galpin Boulevard
approximately 1/2 mile north of Highway 5.
I
11
I
1
c c , .I
CIT'/ OF li,
\ '._,\L.,„
,. ..,_. -
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
.'' �n (612) 937-1900
II
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission I
FROM: Larry Brown, Staff Engineer pr4e
IIDATE: September 14 , 1988
SUBJ: Conditional Use Permit for a Contractor 's Yard
Planning File No. 85-2 CUP, Stockdale II
This site is located on the west side of County Road 117 (Galpin 1
Boulevard) approximately one-half mile north of State Highway 5 .
This 12 acre site is comprised of rolling topography with a
mature grove of trees located on the northerly portion of the
II
site. The Exhibit "C" shows that the applicant also owns and
maintains a northerly lot as his residence shown on the plans.
Sanitary Sewer I
This site is located outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service
Area (MUSA) . The applicant has delineated an area for the pro-
posed septic system sites. These sites will be required to be
staked and roped off prior to any construction to prevent any
construction traffic over the proposed drainfield. I
Watermain
Municipal water service is not available to the site. On-site 1
sources will have to be developed by the applicant.
Access I
This plan proposes to access County Road 117 by the construction
of a private driveway. This will require a permit from the
II
Office of the Carver County Engineer. Comments submitted by
Carver County indicate that if the site generates more than 20
vehicles per day, an analysis for a right turn lane into the site II will be required.
I
II
II
Planning Commission
September 14, 1988
Page 2
Gradin g Drainage
and Draina g
The plan proposes the construction of the building, parking lot
and berms surrounding the parking lot on the south and east sides
of the site. In addition , the plans propose to construct a
gentle flat berm in an east/west orientation through the westerly
half of the site.
The plans indicate that there is a natural ponding area located
in the central portion of the northerly lot. The construction of
the flat berm mentioned previously will increase the retainage
potential of the ponding site which maintains the predeveloped
runoff rate and has adequate storage for a 100-year storm event.
The plans do not show any provisions for a culvert or constructed
' outlet for the pond thus leaving the overflow for the pond
natural , which would run through the proposed parking area and
may endanger the building site itself ( refer to Attachment #1) .
Provisions for a culvert and berming to ensure that the emergency
overflow situation can be accommodated without endangering the
parking lot or proposed building should be incorporated into the
plans.
' The proposed driveway will be required to have an 18-inch
diameter minimum culvert underneath the access adjacent to County
Road 117 (refer to Attachment #2 ) .
The parking lot runoff has been directed to the southeast corner
of the parking lot . As proposed, this would create a ponding
situation in the area of the proposed storage for sand, gravel
and black dirt. Page C of the plan set indicates that some sort
of culvert or storm sewer structure will be placed in this
southeast corner. This plan is not acceptable as it would
transport the stored materials such as black dirt or gravel
through the storm sewer system and into the County ditch.
I Provisions for directing drainage away from these storage areas
should be made along providing details for the proposed storm
sewer system. A revised plan shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for approval prior to final review.
11 Erosion Control
The plan does not address erosion control. A revised plan
showing the proper erosion controls shall be submitted to the
City Engineer for approval prior to final review.
' Miscellaneous
The plans are required to be signed by a registered professional
' engineer. Revised/future submittals will be required to have
this signature.
11
' I
Planning Commission
September 14, 1988
Page 3
It is therefore recommended that the conditional use P ermit 85-2
CUP be approved upon the following conditions .
1. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of
the access permit onto County Road 117 as issued by the
Office of the Carver County Engineer. I
2. Provisions for an emergency overflow shall be indicated on
the plan set which does not endanger the building or proposed
parking lot shall be incorporated into the final grading plan
and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval
prior to final review.
3. An 18-inch diameter culvert minimum with flared end sections
will be required underneath the proposed driveway just prior
to the existing blacktop of County Road 117 . 1
4 . The applicant shall obtain and comply with all conditions of
the Watershed District permit .
5 . A revised erosion control plan which includes the City stan-
dards for Type II erosion control shall be submitted to the
City Engineer for approval prior to final review. ,
6. Storm water drainage for the parking lot shall be directed
away from all storage areas. Provisions for outletting the
drainage from the parking lot to the appropriate drainage
swales shall be incorporated into the plan.
7 . A valley in the driveway shall be constructed prior to the
existing blacktop of County Road 117 to ensure that drainage
from the driveway or parking lot is not routed to the County
road. I
8. All revised future submittals will be signed by a registered
professional engineer.
Attachments
1 . Emergency overflow path diagram. 11
2 . Driveway detail plan.
1
I
I
I
•
. ._ .
::4 . - - :, ATTe CHMEN # c 1 I..
.• :
I,
—* 8
1,
_ .
, Ar,7, •• 1 ,
. , . , • :. ....1
-.
' .
II ..::"e•-•1
. .
2'
' .;
‘I.': • •.." -:' . •
.
..I . ... -
. • •
' .. ... .'
I
. _
I \ i
i
. . .
•.. ..- -
-I ,
,.
.
•
•
.. ••
- •
• t
...■.. .' 4 .
, .
••
• ..t, , • A.
. , I .
'
-..-'''-'''''''.."'---7 -
. . .
-.. • . )
• 7."*".... ..........e......-.7.
.7.1.)..........'-' - - . ..
•s" •
. .
- - .-
1111 PATti..br MERGENCY
..
,
"--.•- -
. .. . :....... .,,
- - L
- -. • 6/
-
I : T V E R E L a ill
.: ,•4-r 7.-- - ' ' . .
• • .
--::- ..--'•:• '1 '
:. Sell ."." ,•- . .
. •• .. .-. - - <
4--.,-• ' •.-- •-;-? ... r
. . -
• ._ -1 • ..
1,1,$)e • -
" N
• • —
•
-• .
- •-
—.•-f-i'..
N1/4". N „
c,
I . , . ,•---..-;.„,_____
- ,.
, - • .
- ,---
- . ss'..14.1
• 9.3_, , .• )1 • .
. . ..
I •
IN
. •
-...
-...,_ .
•
\\
. . .
•
.•
•
:- • , •
.,,,,,,
/ : 1
:1-- I I \i__ ,7 . . . •
• a
. -
___4 1 ;f
S' YI !
I
/ .., :.t° .
I.■-'4 ,, . •
gl
1 • .' i.
4-:;r-,-.
i • ."de-•;t 4 k ,,,,,..."'"'"";:ie.
-
_.,,,- •E
---..,
,. .
I Ai,' • 6 ,o,,,, +,z (-I:1:w;
._ ,
i . •
..- .:C-a:
/ i i
, - -
„„csarr.mr. ..,...4 ;'::•'"Pam._ _ i; i ,
i
.•„7.r . .. 1 , i:../....e•.:,.c
.. _. i 1_,_________Z_________42: e .,
4--- '5-0_,„•• , PI ,,
I ... - . .... ...
,.
_ Al ■ . .,.
. -.
- •
I .. .- .,.......-----
..._,,,,:,i-.11
. -
. ,
N..._,
.1 7
I -
r;S-.- , - t
..... .11 •. ..
ti„,.....- l IT
1 - i
,''''
4r , ,
I -N,' "-'
'.I)-: .i s E%-",-,-T.*. \
I Z `I'Aj
i
)•
N..e
1
. ...
• te , ......._
A Z .
I 1./ r-, o''................' + 4_1 L_____________ L......"5.1 .„, /.
••••■■,......4 c5 ' .
s•-...,_ .
i Lai
0 CI
0
••C 0
cc. ._ . .
I '''° = - (
N.
... S .,..
,e.-.•
.' ... . ..
ci.
.7% is. --------. I'
I
(..)() .(C.1\:- = .-• i
an.
, c,Li
....-
I .
ec (./) ...
------ t.;...1 f // -a :. •
, / - . x .
L., 4 lt..., re n+ 4.0 Dpe.,./
5' 4 .
)4..0' 6,To j_...,e„,,.,c .
,
11 , `?i 4 .
(
. ' .—_.
I! 4.1.- .,
. . .
1 __—R-z_z__.______-------.._______:= --------. ---' ---/--1 / .. . " •
i --_,_„_ --._______----''44-----' --------------:.----■,..
•••••--,.....„ --------. -------.....„,.-,-.
--__,,iTo.......-■•••• ____------- -4
______ _r 76-. ' 1 •. ..,.‘• s
., ..
, N ...
: ..
, . .
s. . .
. .
_• . .
• . . .
. ..
_,• ..
-- - .-. ..••_._... .. •._. ... _. :______ • • .•• •
. •. .
•
-
\ i
q _ ..
•
.. .........., . -:.. ;:-::..--1.';::-,:i c."
''".,-y 1(...ms Et
Z -
•
••• - .,_
?,.., . _
, , .
a3y 1
f„.---f
\
9sa \ \
G . .
o.
/ IlOog: I J `1 11 -\ ,C\\I 1 )-1 o
1
• OI:. ti I 4 ..4
"' z•
•
i///''''(":1;:`
•
•
•-•
_0" 10-0 1 f
,��.'
�+ • TMOgti
7 ao.‘,
.•.•. .
*.
r
411 8 IN. CULVERT i--
r ).
J ice' t
c'GU ry �1 VP
al • I
/ •
R Z
�9a: W a
/ y fl
r.• _ `
\I/ 'i..1.--■7. cs• .
'-.--• .d .1 Z 1 ti
4
jp,r =
11J G1
1, l / to =
a' If / v i.-.—...... !ILI'. ,)7 I '7
•
-lk ,
t� r�q s v rr"" ✓ y 76
•
. N _
I --
E;R'COl 4, y
‘"� it.
t 1 CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE
i■ W 600 EAST 4TH STREET
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT l CHASKA,MINNESOTA 55318
1 (612) 448-3435
4rjN1V E S0-C
I
COUNTY OF CA VEQ
September 13 , 1988
11
IIMs. JoAnn Olsen
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
I P 0 Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
II RE: Conditional Use Permit 85-2 (Stockdale)
CR 117
Dear Ms. Olsen:
IIWe have reviewed the information submitted for the Stockdale con-
ditional use permit. The following comments are submitted:
II1 ) Installation of a new entrance onto CR 117 (Galpin
Blvd . ) will require a permit from the Carver County
II Engineer ' s Office . The applicant is responsible for
all the entrance construction costs including a culvert
if required.
11 2) Tree plantings along CR 117 should be set back a suffi-
cient distance from the right of way line so future
growth does not infringe on the right of way. The ex-
II isting right of way line is 33 feet from the centerline
of CR 117 .
II Thank you for the opportunity to submit our comments . If you
have questions concerning this matter, contact me at your con-
venience.
11 Sincerely,
IIWilliam J . Weckman P. E.
Assistant County Engineer
IIWJW/c j r
1 SEP141988
I CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer �G
T5
Council Meeting, March 18 ,=_985 -2-
washed away . They will pick one weekend after all of this and go over everything .
They will pull any weeds that they see coming up, and will paint any spots on the
fire hydrants that didn 't get painted the first time . There were a few extras that
they asked the City of Chanhassen to do to complete his project . He would like the
City to paint the curbs and crosswalks. He would like the Carver County Herald to do
a story on the group as they are doing the project . He will be taking pictures
before, during and after the project and then give a presentation to the City Council
on what they did at the end.
Mayor Hamilton asked if the City was to supply the equipment needed for this project.
IfJim Gregory replied yes.
Councilman Geving was wondering who would be working on this project.
Jim Gregory said that he and his Scout Troop. In order to advance in Scouting, you
have to give service hours. The Scout Troop needs the time just as Jim does .
Councilman Geving also suggested that he would like to see the city sweeper run by
the areas that the litter is picked up. He was also wondering if anything was to be
done with the 2} to 3 feet posts . He felt that it is a great project. ,
Jim Gregory stated that they will be pulling the weeds around the posts and spray
around them also . i
Bill Monk stated that he did not know if the posts were private or if they were city
property . He was to check into this. He felt that it was not worth it to paint
them , as they would then have to continually paint them .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Councilwoman Watson moved to approve the Council Meeting ,
Minutes dated February 25, 1985. Motion was seconded by Councilman Horn . The
following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, and
Councilmen Horn . Councilman Geving abstained. Motion carried.
Councilwoman Watson moved to note the Planning Commission Minutes dated February 27,
1985. Motion was seconded by Councilwoman Swenson . The following voted in favor:
Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Horn and Geving. No
negative votes. Motion carried.
APPROVAL OF ACCOUNTS: Mayor Hamilton moved to approve the bills as presented:
checks #022309 through check #022392 in the amount of $253,850.67 and checks #024790
through #024883 in the amount of $72,488 .34. Motion was seconded by Councilman
Geving . The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and
Swenson, Councilmen Horn and Geving. No negative votes . Motion carried.
Item #5 - Side Yard Setback Variance Request, 720 West 96th Street, Ronald Landin .
This item was approved unanimously by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals at an
earlier meeting this evening. It was therefore removed from the Agenda .
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LANDSCAPING CONSTRACTOR'S YARD ACTIVITIES, DAVID
STOCKDALE, ONE-HALF MILE NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5 ON GALPIN BOULEVARD:
BARB DACY: This certain parcel totals 18 acres in size . Earlier this winter, it was
part of a subdivision that was passed by the Council creating four lots. A six acre
parcel was to be tied in with Mr. Bentz 's parcel , which is 14 acres.
.#0
Council Meeting, Marc 8 , 1985 -3-
'1 Also this winter, Mr. Bentz applied for a Conditional Use Permit for the existing
contractor's yard activities. As you recall , he had approximately 9 vehicles and
all of them were to be stored on site in the existing buildings . This application is
for a landscaping contractor 's yard . What is being proposed is the applicant's
single family home, 3,200 square feet, with a three-stall attached garage . As far as
the contractor's yard, what is proposed is a 50 by 100 pole barn building which
will be used as an office, and workshop and storage for 6 trucks . The parking area
is surrounded by a 5 foot berm along Galpin Boulevard, complimented with a number of
six foot Colorado Spruce, 14 feet apart . We are recommending that he continue the
same type of evergreen vegetation along the south property line. The elevations that
he is proposing to achieve with the grading in this area is that the parking area
will be lower than the finished grade of the property around the site so the property
owners to the northwest will see the roof of the building and the parking area will
be screened from the north and west . This is the first new application for a new
contractor's yard. All the previous applications have been for existing establish-
ments. In between the Planning Commission meeting and this meeting it has been
raised in the memo, that the Council may want to consider restrictions or additional
conditions that new establishments have to achieve because the existing applications
that we looked at are on a one to one basis. It has been suggested that a 150 foot
setback from a public road to the contractor' s yard be implemented . I contacted the
applicant today and from what he has represented to me, he has agreed to remove the
retaining wall that is supporting the berming area and let the berm taper out . So
what will be removed is 30 feet of the parking area . You would then have a setback
of 80 feet from the front property line to the edge of the parking area . The
Planning Commission did recommend approval based on the following four conditions:
1 . The recommendations of the City Engineer as stated in his memo of February 22,
' 1985.
' 2 . Installation of additional evergreens measuring at least four feet in height
along the south property line to adequately screen the parking area .
3 . Signage to the proposed site shall not exceed two square feet as required by the
Sign Ordinance .
4. Vacation of 60 foot easement on the south side of the property .
What we are proposing is vacating this easement and moving that down to the south
between the two 5-acre parcels which can be accomplished with the cooperation of
the property owners themselves .
Councilman Horn: Do we have any other instances where we have adjoining contractor's
yards?
Barb Dacy : No . As I mentioned in the report, that was a concern because they are
approximately 600 feet away from each other; but the activity that appears from Mr.
Bentz's operation is minimal , all of his vehicles being stored inside and the county
road is a 9 ton weight limit , most of the traffic would be directed onto the county
road and then down to Highway 5.
Councilman Horn: Is this going to be a retail operation?
11111 Barb Dacy: No . This is storage for landscaping materials, timber , gravel and for
the trucks to come at night and be stored inside .
Council Meeting, March 161985 -4- 1
Councilman Horn : Will people come there to contract? Will he be using his facility
as an office for his business?
Barb Dacy: There is an office involved in the pole barn .
David Stockdale appeared before the Council and showed them a colored sketch and
explained his proposals .
David Stockdale: My business would be pretty much a contract. I often do the work .
Occasionally I would have people come to see plans that I have drawn up. I would go
and meet them on site . I employ eight people seasonally and four people full-time .
They come to work between 6:30 and 8:30 and they go out to job sites.
Councilman Horn : Do you have large vehicles coming in dropping off gravel?
David Stockdale: Once a week a semi load comes in with timbers and other than that
it would just be my trucks.
Councilwoman Swenson : According to the zoning ordinance , there are not any provi-
sions here for business operation . This is a business operation .
Barb Dacy : The only other example that I can think of is R & W Sanitation . They
use the house that they are living in now, which they are renting from Mr. Volk .
They operate their office in their home to do contracting and so on . A
contractor' s yard owner usually operates from that yard to conduct their trade .
Councilwoman Swenson: Why would they need a sign to advertise that they are there
if they are not a business? I do not want to see a lot of signs of contractor ' s yards
all over the city . Somewhere along the line we are going to have to make an amend-
ment to this ordinance .
Don Ashworth : I don ' t know of any contractor's yard that has been approved that
really hasn't had the same elements that we have on this one . Where else would you
put this kind of business?
Councilwoman Watson : I think it is o .k . , but I don 't see a need to have a sign
out there. I
Councilman Geving: I don 't believe there needs to be a big sign out there . In this
particular operation, the employees come to work, report to the work sites, they
return . There should be no reason for people to be looking for this particular place .
I like the idea of moving the yard setbacks. On this particular site, it seems
to me that they are using a lot of land for a big parking area . I am also in favor
of the new road between the two 5 acre plots. I was interested in the soil per-
colation test that Paul Waldron commented on . He said that according to the per-
colation test and on-site investigation , it is my considered opinion that a design
plan be completed to insure the proper system for these sites . Would you explain that
to me a little more Bill?
Bill Monk : The on-site investigation is really the testing that goes on at the time
of the building permit and is done in all cases.
Councilman Geving: So then any conditions we place on this, I would like an inspec-
tion report as part of our conditions.
11
1 Council Meeting, Mar& 18 , 1985 -5-
Councilman Horn : In your recommendation of 150 feet , Don , is that based on any
previous applications that we worked on?
Don Ashworth : Not in this community . I have seen it done in other areas .
Councilman Horn : How would our existing contractor ' s yards be improved to comply
with this?
Don Ashworth : They would not .
Councilman Horn : I agree with the setback . I prefer 150 feet.
Councilwoman Swenson : I would like to have included in the recommendations that
the septic system be checked out by the City Engineer so we don ' t have any problems
11 with that .
Mayor Hamilton replied that the driveway was acting as a terminal for the trucks to
pick up material and so forth .
Councilman Gevinq: What will we see when driving along the road?
David Stockdale: The lumber should lift up above the berms, and you also will see
part of the buildings.
Councilman Horn moved to approve the Conditional Use Permit for Landscaping
Contractor' s Yard, David Stockdale, on Galpin Boulevard with the following
conditions:
1 . The recommendations of the City Engineer as stated in his
memo of February 22, 1985, which are:
Utilities: Municipal sanitary sewer and water facilities are not
presently available in this area so the proposed use will be ser-
viced by a septic system and private well . Percolation tests for
a septic system were performed as a part of the recent lot split
involving this site and were found to be within acceptable limits .
Streets: All driving surfaces are proposed to be blacktopped and,
as with the City ' s rural street section, drainage will be handled
in ditches in place of concrete curb . The applicant will be
required to secure an access permit from Carver County for the
proposed entrance onto CR 117 .
Drainage: Proposed site grading is minimal and does not
materially change the existing drainage patterns. The bituminous
surfacing will increase the volume of runoff although the overall
rate of runoff from the site will not change due to the creation
of a small ponding area . The proposal as submitted does not pre-
sent any negative drainage impact to this area of the Bluff Creek
Drainage area although approval by the Carver County and the
Watershed District will be required. Conditions of approval by
these agencies should be a condition of any City approval .
2 . Installation of additional evergreens measuring at least four
feet in height along the south property line to adequately
screen the parking area .
Council Meeting, March 18 1985 -6-
3. No signage on the proposed site.
4. Vacation of a 60 foot easement on the south side of the property .
5 . Subject to the City Engineer' s inspection approval of the septic systems.
6. Based on the revised plan presented at the Council meeting showing the reduc-
tion of the parking area by approximately 30 feet along Galpin Boulevard .
#6 amended 4-15-85, Page 1.
Motion was seconded by Councilwoman Swenson. The following voted in favor: Mayor
Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson, Councilmen Horn and Geving. No negative
votes. Motion carried. 1
FINAL PLAN AMENDMENT, WHITETAIL RIDGE, NORTHEAST CORNER OF LAKE LUCY ROAD AND GALPIN
BOULEVARD, PAUL PALMER :
Barb Dacy : The parcel is located in the northeast corner of the Lake Lucy Road and
Galpin Boulevard intersection . Waldrip' s Addition was passed in 1981 and part of
that plan was the creation of three lots for duplexes along Galpin Boulevard, five
single family lots, and the lot to accommodate the 7-unit apartment building that
exists there now . At that time in 1981 it was anticipated that five single family
lots could be placed in the subject outlot . They changed the name of the Orchard
Hills plat and came in with five single family lots. So this request is to amend the
final development plan for Outlot B , which had previously been 5 single family lots ,
for eight townhomes . At the Planning Commission meeting there was some confusion as
to what is the exact process the applicant is going to, and to reiterate again this
final plan amendment is for townhomes. Single family homes, townhouses and multiple
family structures are permitted uses in the P-1 District . Also raised at the
Planning Commission meeting, was the overall density of Waldrip' s Addition . As ori-
ginally planned it was 2 units per acre . That included the three duplexes, the five
single family lots in Orchard Hills, the 7-unit apartment building and the five
single family lots in the Outlot B . With this amendment, by creating eight townhomes
it is increasing the overall units to 27 and the overall density of Waldrip's
Addition is 2.2 units per acre . The density of the individual lot , however , is 2.9.
The townhomes are clustered along the ridge and the low areas in the southeast and
the southwest corners of the lots . The landscaping plans proposed is a combination
of evergreens and maples along the south side of the property on Lake Lucy Road
and along the east side of the property . Evergreens are also being proposed
along the north . The Staff recommended that the primary function of the
evergreens is to screen the parking area occurring on the north lot line . It
was recommended that they be four feet high . Access was also a major issue at
the Planning Commission meeting. The Commission met with Carver County
Officials out on the site . The letter that I distributed this evening just came
this afternoon . Basically , what that letter is saying is that the County would
prefer that the access come off of Lake Lucy Road . Secondly , they are looking
for 350 feet of stopping site distance. It is not known, and they are still
working on it to see if this meets that criteria . However, it appears from this
preliminary evaluation that the location of the existing access, at this point ,
does not meet that criteria . It appears that this access would have to be moved
to the south and the County is saying no further south than across from 65th
Street . They also say in the letter that if it is found that the existing
access is to be maintained, vegetation would have to be cleared on either side
100 feet to the north and south of that existing access to create adequate site
(a
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1 . Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set
forth herein, the City of Chanhassen hereby grants a conditional
use permit for: Landscaping Contractor' s yard activity
2. Property. The permit is for the following described
property in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota:
See attached legal description marked Exhibit "A" .
3 . Conditions. The permit is issued subject to the
following conditions:
1. Based on the revised site plan submitted on March 18, 1985
and as contained in Planning File #85-2 Conditional Use
Permit.
2. Compliance with the recommendations of the City Engineer as
stated in his memo dated February 22, 1985 .
3. Installation of additional evergreens measuring at least four
feet in height along the south property line to adequately
screen the parking area.
4. There is to be no signage advertising the business establish-
ment on site.
5 . Vacation of the 60 foot easement on the south side of the
property.
6 . Inspection of the septic systems by the City Engineer.
I
I
I
-- C 4. -1
le'r--
5. Criminal Penalty. Violation of the terms of this 1
conditional use permit is a criminal misdemeanor.
r 1
Dated: 711a-A-e,i(JcIr� /'efS
II
CITY OF CHANHASSEN 1
B /
Its Mayor I Q /7‘,
1
BY: oL,a .- _
Its Clerk 1
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
ss
II
COUNTY OF CARVER )
The f--o1�,�regoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
17`� !day of >> .-4--'!.G,.� , l9 2i-, by Thomas L. Hamilton, II
Mayor , and Don Ashworth, City Manager of the City of Chanhassen,
a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation .
II
Notary 7ylic II
:.,� P=_N J. ENGELHARDT 111
S'•w 7UNTY
:`:`,. M) Con y• .-.3 Oct.11 1883�
. 1
w .•
. s _voodNA.,.+
I
I
1
I
I
IIca 4, AI, 6----, ,___ 3 ._,
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
I REGULAR MEETING
JULY 6, 1987
1, Acting Mayor Geving called the meeting to order. The meeting was opened with
the Pledge to the Flag.
IMEMBERS PRESENT: Councilman Boyt, Councilman Horn, Councilman Geving and
Councilman Johnson. Mayor Hamilton was absent.
II STAFF PRESENT: Don Ashworth, Barbara Dacy, Jo Ann Olsen, Gary Warren and Todd
Gerhardt
II APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Horn moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
approve the agenda as amended with the following additions: Councilman Boyt
wanted to add discussion about Park and Rec and discussion about building
inspection. Don Ashworth had an update on the sprinkling ban. All voted in
favor of the agenda as amended and motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Geving stated that he did not see any formal
I letter asking for phasing of park dedication fees for Gary Brown's Mini-
Storage and in the future he would like to see these requests in letter so
they become part of the packet.
11 Councilman Horn moved, Acting Mayor Geving seconded to approve the following
consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations:
11r a. Conditional Use Permit for a Telephone Equipment Building, Lot 7,
1 Block 1, Chanhassen Hills, Northwestern Bell Telephone.
I 40. Request to subdivide 12.5 acres into three single family lots,
located on Galpin Blvd., 1/2 mile north of TH 5, David Stockdale.
II c. Final Plat Approval, Jeurissen Addition
e. Planning Commission Minutes dated June 24, 1987
If. Approval of phasing park dedication fees, Gary Brown Mini-Storage.
All voted in favor and motion carried.
IIVISITORS PRESENTATIONS: There were no visitor presentations at this meeting.
II PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF PLEASANT VIEW ROAD/VALHALLA DRIVE, CITY OF
CHANHASSEN.
IPublic Present:
IL Name Address
Kevin Pieper 541 Indian Hill Road
Gary & Jane Kendrick 550 Indian Hill Road
1
-07
li
E
- 1 M MN w - MI - MI I M . I a N N r 111111111-11111111r"
•
•
•
• I MACICENDALE
ADDITION
•
I I
r
I-
I +— -------- 4
r
Nari .:1111 /I/I- - I
I / %% l8ele—
i s
i.1 \ \. \ `.... ,.,, ,. .,//6 r ,...-_-,,,,, N. ...„ ,„ / /fr i i
' ir I I ' lq I i i '\ •\ "...... „...---"--?". ,,.5', ...., f I I i \ \ ......::-.... . --;:-..--/,//it . ;
I I i 4 ll'ig
If I ( /4 6 i i i ..... 1
. ____..k, \• -.-.. ff,,h - ' 1
11.1 i 1 I ' $1 ,
• •
dam : kr \ \
1 \ , , ,\\\ 1`. •� \\ •\ , � �% Y 1111/ �'— \ / // �,/ ;//� / ' I
lib...,
g isk r _ % // / \ , / a
1\ \ '� i,F ash`' —� — — �// /Vii_—• ( C....//////.' } I
fir
—N.N'ol'tO•t
I /CAl[t 1 INCH tO 1lIT
1 OAT/ =AANYARy 1.,1511
Rlr. 1
littlaitiatffiffif
" 'NIiii{I'1df;f111{1,P•1 d!!{!9ifdll! ,{,Iiazi 1',1 : E
I� = fii,If= I=11 = i! it +I:q3 == ,«,./,»A/ MII.»,:::4:7,..... .,M
I I 111 11�'�I 1 ii il.1f `f i .S.,...5:111:IM W�.H.M«�NM •..ti
i#J�it:111 I 1 1, 'I, J► t:i v t i Ii IIDAHD POI; DAVE: ®fi®C DALE *1n„N/5►.M 1n,.1/« ...t n» u..« .A.
Iii,uu r 11.11 i„�i,�:1 !Ws N YH,nwIA
1' „ /1„„I,I ,+, „, K /�IIA�E9 X111 HEDLUND ENGINEERING RING BERVICEls1 INC. b,
« , .i„i u,}. i i „ file Mile tire,
11;11; �=I �' il I I.Lrl, .Iliiu, RA1T t1OO111NOTON/55455 r +rH M•M Ilua.Aq.r� Nrrr
ri « ,_}_}.I,„1, „ (I e!lElE11BRI YINNttOTA 55111 [NeO111NOTOR,YINNt tOtA 5[555
111111111;` ,.li,i. dl,,l I. u, 1 i,in /N8i Ie111 et!•11te
1111110.11:141111 4 1 � = n. 1 . ii mna u,i(( tNONR=U1Q ttt•5ttl
;iji) i=i# 1 fi i b I Ihiili .ilj'iL'::,"IL«'I.ii',.i
0� HEDLUNO ENGINEERING
0 SERVICES,INC.
R RE OURCE ENGINEERING
Roger E. Machmeier, P E James L Anderson. C.P.S S.
29665 Neal Avenue 3541 Ensign Avenue, North
Lindstrom, MN 55045 New Hope, MN 55427
(612) 257 2019 (612) 593-5338
September 7, 1988
I
Jo Ann Olsen, Assistant City Planner
City of Chanhassen
P. 0. Box 147
Chanhssen, MN 55317
' Re: Planning Case 85-2 CUP (Stockdale)
Dear Jo Ann:
We have received maps titled Exhibit C, Exhibit D and
Direction E from your office in regard to the above project.
The print entitled Direction E appears to be a landscaping
plan of the proposed building and improvements.
On Exhibit D an area is proposed for the drainfield. No
soil texture data, no depth to seasonally saturated soil nor
any percolation test data were submitted to us. In
addition, the estimated sewage flow rate would need to be
' submitted by the developer in order to determine the amount
of drainfield area required. Consequently, we cannot
comment on the suitability of the site with respect to the
installation on an on-site sewage treatment system. It must
also be noted that any site proposed for the installation of
an on-site sewage treatment system must be protected against
any and all construction activity which would damage or
compact the original soil.
When the design of the sewage treatment system is submitted,
a profile view will be necessary to determine if a pumping
station is needed to deliver the septic tank effluent to the
drainfield area. The maps submitted to us show no
elevations of the source of the sewage in the proposed
' building.
The location of the water supply well is not specified. It
' should be noted that the well must be properly separated not
only from the sewage treatment system but from the buried
fuel tank and any other chemicals and fertilizer which may
be stored on the property.
It is noted on the map entitled Direction E that "Liquid
waste from truck washing , etc. , to drain into settlement
tank buried under floor and then flow out to drainfield. "
We would strongly advise against allowing this design
11
SEP i " 1988
' SPECIALISTS IN ONSITE SEWAGE TREATMENT CITY OF CNarvE,AsSEN
I
Planning Case 85-2 CUP (Stockdale) Page 2
because of the possibilty of g roundwater contamination. The
on-site sewage treatment system should handle only
domestic-type wastes, that is from toilets, showers, kitchen
facilities , etc. If there is a service bay for vehicles
which are lubricated and washed with the wastes flowing into
a floor drain, this type of liquid waste absolutely must not
be discharged into a subsurface sewage treatment system or
subsurface drainage system. Any liquid wastes associated
with servicing vehicles or the washing of vehicles must be
discharged into watertight holding tanks. This liquid waste
must then be removed from those tanks in a proper manner and
transported to a waste treatment site operated by the
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. I
The reason for this recommendation is that when trucks
or cars are washed or are in a service bay, there is likely
to be used engine oil, hydraulic fluid and other
petroleum-based products containing hazardous wastes
introduced into the drainage system. Many petroleum
products contain PCB's and other toxic chemicals, which must
be handled and treated in a manner that will prevent their
introduction to the environment. These materials will not
be filtered or removed by the soil, and if they flow into a
subsurface soil treatment system, they will percolate
downward with the water through the soil and be a potential
hazard for groundwater contamination.
In addition to the service bay drainage and petroleum
products, it is likely that during the winter , road
chemicals will be washed from vehicles and introduced to the
floor drain system. If these compounds are discharged into
a subsurface absorption system, the soil will not adequately
treat these water-soluble chemicals and they will also move
downward with the percolating water and be introduced to the
groundwater.
As soon as soils data are submitted along with an estimated I
daily sewage flow rate so that the size of the onsite sewage
system can be evaluated, we will make a field visit to
verify that data. '
Sincerely yours ,
7aor 1'726tritm,vai,'
Roger E. Machmeier, P. E.
RESOURCE ENGINEERING I
REM/jjm
[ Council Meeting February 4( A( -2- .
I CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CONTRACTOR 'S YARD, 7300 GALPIN BLVD, TED BENTZ:
Councilwoman Watson moved to approve a conditional use permit , Planning Case
t84-20, for a contractor's yard at 7300 Galpin Blvd . subject to the following
conditions:
1 . Expansion of the existing operation beyond what has been represented in this
application must be approved by a conditional use permit .
2 . All equipment must be stored within a building or the outside vehicle storage
I area must be screened on all sides with adequate fencing of at least six feet in
height.
Motion seconded by Councilman Horn . The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton,
Councilwomen Watson and Swenson , Councilmen Horn and Geving. No negative votes.
IMotion carried .
PIPER RIDGE SUBDIVISION , PRELIMINARY PLAT, RANDY HERMAN :
Barbara Dacy - Based on the Council recommendation , the applicant has revised the
preliminary plat to locate the proposed road right-of-way to the west of the wetland
area . All the lot sizes meet the riparian and non-riparian lot area requirements as
established by Ordinance 65. However, involved in this approval , the Council has to
I consider variances to the 75 foot structure setback "for the building pads on Lots 1,
2, and 3. As it appears the proposed building pads for Lots 2 and 3 are within 20
to 30 feet of the edge of the wetland area . However, the building pad for Lot 1 is
much closer, within 5 to 10 feet of the edge of the marsh . As I pointed out in the
report, several criteria to base your decision on a wetland or not if variances
should be granted, as you recall from the first proposal much of the work was -
disturbing at least 50% of the wetland .
Councilwoman Swenson - On page 3 of the staff report, I think there is a typographi-
cal error here, #3, first paragraph, "That the granting of the application will not
be 'immaterially ' , I believe that should be materially or substantially or signifi-
cantly .
Barbara Dacy - It should be materially .
Councilman Geving - The last time that we met we had some discussion on Lot 1 and the
fact that there would have to be substantial amount of fill placed in that lot area
on the pad to make that a buildable lot. As I look at the map , I would like to have
someone verify this for me , where it says proposed rambler walkout, there is a nine
and a five and then there is a blur there . I can' t tell whether that' s a seven or a
I one.
Randy Herman - That ' s a seven.
' I Councilman Geving - It' s 957. The last time we met I discussed this and I suggested
that we look at the lot on the north side of the road which is also 957 and I have
driven by there many times and I have noticed that water has always stood in that
' I area just north of the bituminous section of the road and if we are going to build ,
the back of this house will sit at 957 . I really have some reservations about that
and Randy when we left here that night you were going to ask your engineer and you
were going to do some more indepth soul searching whether or not you could actually
build on that lot . How do you feel now?
Randy Herman - The place where you get your feet wet down in the actual marsh area is
about 953 . That ' s where it 's wet . If it gets any higher than that it flows out .
There is a natural ditch that flows through there . There are trapped pockets of
water in there at 953 . The standard that we use and the one set up by the Federal [E7.4
Housing Administration that says that the lowest floor in any dwelling should be at
least four feet above the nearby water table . It's not actually a water table but
I 429
o/►5 9/7 -7/zG
as0:Wrrg •
LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION �"`' 444 S�
CITY OF CHANHASSEN c pts 1°
C.A8s141
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
A (612) 937-1900 I +
APPLICANT:--1)■A % OWNER: bLK_LL14.M(
ADDRESS 112.40 UA•t471lk 'L V D. ADDRESS 1%0-7 4 1 1 Ict I
C( rtt-t't'vs1M, t, 5\"33 f ktomi q ,R b,
Zip Code Zip Code
TELEPHONE (Daytime) $V(-(2I L TELEPHONE
REQUEST: I
Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development
Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan I
Preliminary Plan
Zoning Variance Final Plan
Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision'
Land Use Plan Amendment Platting
Metes and Bounds
X Conditional Use Permit
Street/Easement Vacation
Site Plan Review I
Wetlands Permit
PROJECT NAME atiIVALTUS Ykkb
PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION
REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION _ I
PRESENT ZONING
REQUESTED ZONING I
USES PROPOSED
SIZE OF PROPERTY lt,. 1
LOCATION !J).1'16 aj-(41149MSu►1}-400S S. k.1�C�rtell 1210 bI�N�11t
./
REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST COt1�1nONt'tL tl'�b�_} -ro Srkrjuh11- Bk'S1l-
. TANI Lti-11.)175itus
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) AnNtft› I
I
I
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
Applicant _ Date
' The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been
authorized to make this application for the property herein
described .
1
Signed By
Fee Owner Date
1
' Date Application Received
Application Fee Paid
City Receipt No.
1
* This Application will be considered by the Planning Commission/
Board of Adjustments and Appeals at their
meeting .
1
r - .
II
Planning Commission Meeting _
September 21, 1988 - Page 22 1
conditional use permit . I
Batzli : So a conditional use permit isn ' t available in this?
Olsen: No.
Batzli : I don' t see the hardship really. As I recall last time they Were
talking about a couple of square feet, not doubling in size. I also don' t
necessarily think that amending the ordinance is the way to. go . I think
we've got a good ordinance that we made good and tight for a reason. I
don ' t see the need to readdress that issue.
Wildermuth: I would like to try and avoid a variance also. I guess the
requesting from a visual pollution standpoint is one large sign any less
offensive than two small signs or is it more offensive? I would be
willing to take a look at the sign ordinance again but I don' t think
there's a hardship in this case. I
Headla : I think we should ask the staff to go back and take a look and
see if we want to reword in certain situations .
Conrad : Yes , I don ' t think this justifies a variance either . I 'm not
sure I 'd change the ordinance but I think what we need is City Council
direction on how staff uses it ' s time. If they feel the sign ordinance II should be reviewed for the business neighborhood district, they certainly
can do that . Is there a motion?
Batzli moved , Ellson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
denial of Sign Variance Request #88-12. All voted in favor and the motion
carried . I
Conrad : A footnote to that motion I guess Jo Ann is to make sure that
•City staff gets direction from the City Council in terms of review of the
sign ordinance.
PUBLIC HEARING: '
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A LANDSCAPING CONTRACTOR' S YARD ON 12. 1 ACRES
OF PROPERTY ZONED A-2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE AND LOCATE DON GALPIN BOULEVARD
1/2 MILE NORTH OF HWY. 5, DAVE STOCKDALE.
Public Present : •
Name Address
Dave Stockdale Applicant
Mike Klingelhutz
Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report . I
Chairman Conrad called the public hearing to order .
11
1
Planning Commission Meeting
September 21, 1988 - Page 23
Dave Stockdale: First off, a minor Y
glztch for the total 55 , 000 square
foot building. It should have been 5, 500. A little history, I 've lived
out there, I bought the property on a conditional use permit about 9 years
ago. For one reason or another, I wasn' t able to executed upon my
conditional use permit at that point in time. Basically what I 've done on
this proposal , I 've reduced the size of the parking lot and did some of
the screening . I understand . . . the 1 mile limitation has been . . .and that
seems to be the biggest stumbling block as far as things hanging. The
other two issues are hours of operation and the other one was working
within the 500 foot distance to my neighbor to the northeast. I don' t
know if the letter . . .for consideration. My intention when I moved out
here was the fact to run a business next to me for obvious reasons of
effeciency of running a business . This happens to be kind of . . . I have
been in business for 13 years and have really. . .professional operation
both in the field . My intention is to carry that through, to maintain a
very clean site and . . .
Mike Klingelhutz : . . . I was wondering if a conditional use, or whatever
he' s applying for , does that go to the person who buys the lot?
Olsen: Yes .
Mike Klingelhutz: . . .your house is separate from the land that you' re
planning to. . .you could sell . . . Is that your intention?
Dave Stockdale : No . . .
Mike Klingelhutz : That ' s just one of my concerns . His house is
beautiful . His yard is beautiful but say he sells his house, it will
' still be a conditional use permit and I wouldn ' t appreciate it if that
happened but if he retains ownership of it and works there and lives there
and keeps it up the way it does his house . . .
Conrad: It' s a good concern. Contractor ' s yards are a real problem for
us to deal with here . A lot of pressure to eliminate them all together . I
think we've tried to accomodate people who wanted to live and have their
work on the same property that they' re living . I personally felt
comfortable doing that but we' ve had people who wanted to do different
things. Here ' s a case where by having it separated because of mortage is
an interesting deal but legally is a problem. You legally could sell that
and you 'd be in different land . I guess that gets me a little bit
uncomfortable. I guess our Attorney would have to advise me on that but I
think all he could say was that that land is transferable and a new owner
would take the right to the contractor ' s yard .
Olsen : It just could not be expanded . It would have to remain as it is .
Conrad: I think the biggest thing is dealing with the 1 mile issue.
Dave Stockdale . Just to clarify, whatever stipulations . . .so that
whatever . . .
Planning Commission Meeting c
September 21, 1988 - Page 27
of fairness , it seems to me that he ought to be given back what he came I
out here for and what he had. Particularly in view of the lack of
opposition and the quality I know of his operation . Tonight I think I 'd
have to vote against it unless somebody could think of a way that we could
get around that 1 mile.
Conrad : I feel the same way. I have two problems. The 1 mile and no •
matter what, I 'm not going to do anything that jeopardizes the
restrictiveness of contractor ' s yards. I do not think that we should do
anything that will open up the floodgates because we' ve had so many
problems. The other problem is dealing with land owner not really on the
property. Therefore, tonight I 'd have to turn this down but I guess I 'd
like to direct staff, between now and when this goes to City Council , to
work with the applicant in seeing if there' s a way to solving those two
problems. One, can we tie Mr . Stockdale to this particular property?
Emmings: Link the two properties back together for this purpose?
Conrad : For this purpose because the intent of the ordinance is to allow
somebody to, we want people working on their own property. If they' re
going to have a contractor ' s yard , I want the owner there. By not having I
that included in anything that we do, we ' re saying , hey, you can sell this
off. Which you' re not going to do but it sets precedent in other cases .
Somehow I 'd have to find a legal way of tying them in so if he were to
move, that permit would vanish along with it. The other item is the 1
mile and I think it' s a case of fairness versus the absolute . I don ' t
know how to break the absolute. There is a really valid reason for having I
that 1 mile radius . Again , here ' s another case where I would challenge
staff to see if there' s a way we can, without granting a variance, which I
don' t want to do , is there another way to get around this problem?
Tonight I 'd have to turn it down. The only other option is for us to look I
at the 1 mile , to go back to the ordinance and take a look at the 1 mile .
Wow, that' s just like something we don' t want to do. Why show up every
other Tuesday night to do that stuff . I don ' t know as though that ' s
something we can deal with.
Emmings : The other thing that I wrote down here that I forgot to mention ,
we have approved a variance to that one mile thing in the past. In the
case of Gardeneer on the Volk property.
Conrad: Do you recall the rationale for that?
Olsen : . . . it was on the same site . That it really wasn ' t . . .
Emmings : Why is that better? I don' t remember the rationale. I think at I
that time we were kind of thinking it would be better to have contractor ' s
yards lumped together in an area rather than, that was in the discussion ,
rather than having them spread out all over a mile apart . We maybe I
should, staff maybe should take a look at that to see what is similar in
this situation or different .
Conrad : Anyway I think I 'd look for a motion right now. Dave do you feel
any sensitivity? You' re pretty much against it. Is there anything here,
J.
Planning Commission Meeting
September 21, 1988 - Page 28
' you ' re concerned with traffic and the ordinance itself.
Headla: The other thing I didn ' t mention is , yes the resident within 500
' feet did write a very nice letter . I don ' t put any credance to that . I
don' t know if that person' s going to be there in 3 years. So in 3 years
that person that lived there wrote a bad letter , are we going to take it
away? I don' t think we can add weight to that .
Emmings: The weight to me Dave is that if that person is planning to move
and they think this will detract from the value of their property, they' re
' never going to write a letter like that . That ' s the importance of that
letter .
' Batzli : The people moving in will have a chance to see what they' re
moving in next to. If the contractor ' s yard wasn' t there when they
purchased it . . .
Headla : Let me make a motion the Planning Commission recommend denial al of
Conditional Use Permit #85-2 for the reasons listed by the staff. The
' three.
Emmings : I ' ll second it. I think I would like to add , the hours of
' operation I would take out because he says he 's willing to change that.
I 'd replace 3 with the fact that we' re concerned with the legal
consequences of allowing a conditional use permit on a parcel of land
that ' s separate from the parcel in which his residence is on.
Batzli : Don ' t we have other contractor ' s yards that there 's no residence
on them at all? Are we concerned that here we' re in the wrong district
for that?
Olsen : There ' s nothing that says you have to live on the land . The Harry
ILindbery one, he doesn ' t live there .
Emmings : My understanding is that was exactly what we were trying to
approve.
' Conrad : That ' s what we wanted but it' s not in the ordinance. That was
the intent but it ' s certainly not worded that way. But that ' s good logic.
' Emmings : If logic was intended , that means we ought to put down as a
reason for . . . •
' Conrad : So what did you want?
Emmings : I would just take 3 out because I don ' t think it ' s a problem
anymore. He said he' ll comply with those hours of operation. I 'd just
replace 3 with the fact that we ' re . . .a conditional use on a parcel of land
that' s separate and distinct from his residence which kind of violates the
• intent of the ordinance . If it were to be. . .
1
i
Planning Commission Meeting
September 21, 1988 - Page 29 1
Headla: Do you feel comfortable saying this is the intent of,the '
ordinance when we really haven' t discussed. . . I feel uncomfortable
listing that now because we didn' t discuss it at all before that other
item. '
Emmings : Fine , take it out . Let' s drop it but to me that was sort of the
essence of the contractor' s yard out here. The notion being that we want I
to allow someone who lives on a large parcel of land , if they have a
business that requires them to use trucks and bobcats and stuff like that,
to keep the stuff at their home.
Headla: I agree with what you 're saying there. I think it 's appropriate
here but I also think if we take 3 out. . .
Emmings : Okay, let' s just take 3 out and compromise . The fewer reasons II
there are to turn this down, the better I like it .
Headla moved , Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
denial of Conditional Use Permit #88-2 for the following reasons :
1. The contractor ' s yard is located within one mile of an existing
contractor ' s yard.
2. The contractor ' s yard is located within 500 feet of a residence. '
All voted in favor except Ellson and Batzli who opposed and the motion
carried with a vote of 4 to 2.
Ellson: I somehow feel he should be like grandfathered in to his original '
permit. We didn' t have the 1 mile then.
. Batzli : I 'm voting against it partly for my free association earlier
which didn' t make much sense but I guess I 'd like to see and raise the
flag to the Council that there was a feeling that this person would
probably have a fairly well run contractor ' s yard. That there was some
sort of feelings of fairness that something might be done in this case .
Conrad: And as an additional footnote Jo Ann, I think in general if we
could communicate this to the City Council . We feel that the applicant
would operate a good contractor 's yard and we would like to see if there
are ways that we could help the applicant without granting a variance and
without changing the ordinance.
Batzli : I agree that we don' t want to necessarily change the ordinance
unless it is to put back in what apparently was the intent and somehow got
lost along the way. Because we' ve been granting or looking at a lot of
contractor' s yards and the residences were nowhere near the contractor ' s
yard . The farm house . The garbage hauling operation. The telephone
• operation.
Emmings : But just slow down . The farm house , we turned that one down.
I
1
Planning Commission Meeting
September 21, 1988 - Page 30
Batzli : I know we did.
' Emmings : The City Council didn' t but we did .
Batzli : I know but there was no residence at all . We never discussed •
turning it down because the residences wasn ' t located there.
•
PUBLIC HEARING:
GOLF DRIVING RANGE AND MINIATURE GOLF COURSE OPERATION, PROPERTY ZONED
A-2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE AND LOCATED AT COUNTY ROAD 117 AND HWY. 5, JOHN
PRYZMUS.
A. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 20, ARTICLE IV, DIVISION 3,
REGARDING STANDARDS FOR GOLF DRIVING RANGES WITH OR WITHOUT MINIATURE
' GOLF COURSES TO PROVIDE REGULATION OF SIGNAGE, TO PROVIDE REGULATIONS
AS TO LIGHT STANDARDS AND TO ESTABLISH HOURS OF OPERATION BEYOND
SUNSET.
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO INSTALL LIGHT STANDARDS , EXTEND
HOURS OF OPERATION BEYOND SUNSET AND PERMITTING THE INSTALLATION OF A
SIGN.
' Public Present:
Name Address
John Pryzmus Applicant
Mike Klingelhutz
John Hennessy
' .Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report .
Chairman Conrad called the public hearing to order .
' John Pryzmus : The hours of operation obviously will be determined as the
season goes. Right now I close at 8 : 00 at night. The season will be
ending here in another month so we' re closed for 6 months approximately. . .
' The sign that I put up was the same sign that was approved . A 12 x 8
plywood sign. . . The video games , the City Council I guess we were trying
to accomodate children so. . . Other than that, I didn ' t think originally
the Council had . . .on trees and berming . Now, I think we' ve added 16
' more . . .on the site right now. Light standards , basically there isn' t
anything that the Council sai.d . . . li.ght standards of a baseball field or
something like that . . . It does help. I ' ve kept the lighting at a minimum
' so I can extend my hours . When it starts getting dark and people can ' t. . .
two closest competitors of mine are 7 Hi and Excelsior . Excelsi.or . . .days
and weekends. The guy at 7 Hi. . . .
' John Hennessy: I live across the street from this thing . So far he has
run a pretty good operation. . . .the basic guidelines of the basic. . . I
1
NORTHWEST AIRLINES,INC.•WORLD HEADQUARTERS•2700 LONE OAK PARKWAY•EAGAN.MINNESOTA
MAILING ADDRESS:MINNEAPOLIS/ST.PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
ST.PAUL,MINNESOTA 55111•USA
September 19, 1988 '
The Planning Commission '
City of Chanhassen
Dear Sirs:
We built our house directly across the street from David and Anga
McBryde-Stockdale's property and moved in two years ago. During
that time we have had a chance to observe both the personal
upkeep of their residence, and the style and method in which
David approaches his contracting business.
David approached us two weeks ago with copies of his site plan,
expressing his desire to limit the impact of the presence of his
contractor' s yard upon our residence and lifestyle. Upon review
of his plans, and consideration for his professional manner, we
would like the Planning Commission to know that we have no
objections to the project as it is proposed, and are confident
that David will maintain the property in a neat and orderly
manner that should have no negative bearing on the surrounding
neighborhood or the community-at-large.
Sincerely,
Bret A. Davidson
1
Assistant Manager
Flight Standards, A-320 '
r
City Council Meeting - October 10, 1988
Don Ashworth: No.
Acting Mayor Geving: Okay,Y g ay, that s the special. I'd prefer not to meet that
night but if that's the night that we accept, we'll go with it.
Don Ashworth: Would you like to do an early?
Acting Mayor Geving: If that's the only thing we've got, it's up to the
Council. I'd just as soon not have a special meeting. We're open for a motion
for adopting the resolutions and Andy you're going to prepare those correct?
Andy Merry: Yes.
Acting Mayor Geving: I move the adoption of a resolution to approve the sale of
the bonds for November 7, 1988 at 7:30 p.m..
Councilman Johnson: Second.
Resolution #88-109: Acting Mayor Geving moved, Councilman Johnson seconded to
adopt the resolution approving the sale of the bonds on Monday, November 7, 1988
at 7:30 p.m.. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Councilman Johnson: Can we have the resolution for our meeting on the 24th, for
in our packet?
Andy Merry: Yes.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A CONTRACTOR'S 4 TOR S YARD, 7210 GALPIN BLVD., DAVE
STOCKDALE.
Jo Ann Olsen: The Planning Commission recommended denial of the conditional use
permit because it was within one mile of an existing contractor's yard and
within 500 feet of a residence. Those are two conditions of the conditional use
for a contractor's yard. The Planning Commission also felt that this is exactly
the kind of contractor's yard that they had intended so they were hesitant in
denying it but they couldn't justify the hardship. They did ask staff to look
1 into how it could be approved but again, it can't be approved unless you find a
hardship or amend the ordinance. Staff is still recouniending denial because it
does not meet those two conditions.
Dave Stockdale: I'm Dave Stockdale. I live at 7210 Galpin Blvd.. ...the third
option would be that the variance is granted with the one mile radius. My
understanding coming out of the Planning Commission meeting was that there are
three key reasons why they had to deny it. One was the one mile radius.
Another was the 500 foot limitation of a residence and the third was the hours
of operation that I was asking for. I was willing to adjust my hours to meet
the time conditions of the request. I had a letter that was in the Planning
Commission from the resident that lives at the residence 500 feet away and he
was basically in favor of my proposal. Did they get a copy of that letter?
97
76
City Council Meeting - October 10, 1988
for a change in venue. It's just about too late. This is a tough one. I hate
these where your gut says one thing and your mind says another thing. U
Acting Mayor Geving: The way I reviewed this, I looked at the timing of this.
Mr. Bentz came in on February 4, 1985 and he got his conditional use permit for
a contractor's yard and put up his operation and went into business. You came
along the very next month and did the same thing. Had you gone ahead with your
conditional use permit and built your contractor's yard, you wouldn't be here
tonight obviously. I think that you had the right intention of building a nice
business out there and keeping it covered. You're just caught in this
administrative web right now. In the meantime the rules were changed. As much
as I want to see you in our community with your business, I don't know how we
can bend these rules. My sympathy is with Mr. Stockdale because I think that he
had in good faith received a conditional use permit for this contractor's yard
from our Council in 1985. Everything was going along smooth. Why he didn't
pursue it and build, he said he had personal reasons. That's his business. I
would like to see us grant this variance. I have a difficult time however
following our rules to grant you a variance based on a hardship because I just
can't see it. So we're kind of hung up here. I think that your explanation of
why you didn't start your business is a good one. The fact that you were forced
to subdivide based on your mortage, is reasonable. That's what they've done
with everybody on these loans. The building of this house, the resident across
the street, is something that you had no control of. The one mile variance, to
me I think we've got a number of situations in our community where the one mile
exists. I think of the Volk property. What do we have there? At least 2
businesses. At least 2 contractor's yards on the same site so that doesn't
disturb me.
Councilman Johnson: There's only one yard. L _
Acting Mayor Geving: There's one yard but there's several different businesses
aren't there?
Councilman Horn: Yes, but it's one contractor's yard permit.
Acting Mayor Geving: But aren't there other contractors within a mile of that
site as well? There is no others? Well, I think we're ready to call the
question on this. Anyone want to make the motion?
Councilman Johnson: I move we deny it.
Councilman Horn: I second it.
Councilman Johnson: I should say with regret.
Councilman Boyt: It seems as though what we're talking about here is that there
hasn't been any physical progress towards establishing a contractor's yard.
What if there has been? Does that change things?
Councilman Horn: Has there been?
Acting Mayor Geving: I get the impression that nothing has happened? Have ou �I
done any work out there at all Dave? y
100
City Council Meeting - October 10, 1988
I
Dave Stockdale: Other than driving stakes...
II I Acting Mayor Geving: You haven't built a berm up?
Dave Stockdale: I wish I could say I had. There's some rocks there.
Acting Mayor Geving: Probably the reason he hasn't is because he hasn't had the
active permits. You wouldn't do that either. He'd violate the ordinance. On
' the other hand, I've seen other people go ahead and do something and it's
already up.
' Councilman Boyt: How would the Council feel about, he did have an application
in to subdivide this into 2 1/2 acre plots. Is there anyway we can resurface
that?
' Councilman Horn: How does that show activity for a contractor's yard?
Councilman Boyt: It doesn't. It doesn't. It's just the land is losing value
by leaps and bounds here. We're taking away all use of the land except
farmland.
Jo Ann Olsen: There's no way he could pursue that 2 1/2 acres.
Acting Mayor Geving: Not anymore. How many employees would you have on this
site if you had a contractor's yard?
Dave Stockdale: I have 12 employees. Two-thirds of them would come there...
' Councilman Boyt: Gentlemen, it seems as though there is a delay. ..
Acting Mayor Geving: I don't know how we can do it.
Dave Stockdale: I don't understand the process. Is there, can you only grant a
variance based on hardship? You can't grant a variance for any other reason?
' Acting Mayor Geving: Well, I just don't see the hardship. That's our problem.
Dave Stockdale: I understand. It's a self-imposed hardship but if in fact it's
considered a desirable addition or an acceptable physical additional and the
hardship is not going to grant a variance, are there other...
Acting Mayor Geving: I think that's why the Council is having so much
' difficulty with this because I think we would like to have you have your
business right where you're proposing but we can't find a way through our
ordinance to grant the variance.
Councilman Johnson: There are approximately 5 items that all have to be found
in favor of to grant a variance. One of those 5 items is hardship. The other
procedure is to amend the ordinance to where a variance isn't needed which gets
sticky in that you'd have to amend an ordinance to where someone previously,
prior to 1986 or something that was granted a conditional use permit, it gets to
be such a site specific thing that it's seen through completely.
' 101
78
City Council Meeting - October 10, 1988 J '
Acting Mayor Geving: We would be absolutely ruining our ordinance, taking the
teeth out of any ordinance provision we had just to grant this if we wanted to d
It
that. I can't see us amending the ordinance for this particular case.
Gentlemen, the motion has been made and seconded.
Dave Stockdale: Do I have one more option? Is it too late to withdraw it? '
I don't feel I'm able to...
Acting Mayor Geving: You have that right. If you want to withdraw it at this
time, there will be no motion.
Councilman Horn: Does that make a difference?
Roger Knutson: If he wants to withdraw it before you act on it, that's his
option.
Dave Stockdale: I'm asking to withdraw it for now and bring it back.
Acting Mayor Geving: You want to table it?
Dave Stockdale: Table, I'm sorry.
Councilman Johnson: I make a motion to table it to the 24th. I
Acting Mayor Geving: What would be your purpose of doing that Dave?
Dave Stockdale: Since it's pretty late. I don't have the clearest
1!
indication.. .
Acting Mayor Geving: If you would feel better from a personal standpoint and '
making that presentation on the 24th, a motion has been made and I'll second it
to table this item until October 24th.
Councilman Johnson moved, Acting Mayor Geving seconded on conditional use permit request for a contractor' s yard for Dave Stockdale per
the applicant's request. All voted in favor except Councilman Boyt who opposed
and the motion carried with a vote of 3 to 1.
Councilman Boyt: The reason I'm opposed Dave is because I think you've got a '
pretty good sense of where the four of us are coming from. There's some hard
issues here that aren't going to change 2 weeks from now.
Acting Mayor Geving: On the other hand though Bill, I think as a citizen he has
the right to do that and I can't deny him that.
Councilman Johnson: I'd like to give him every opportunity. Unless something
amazing comes up...
INFORMATION UPDATE, TH 5 IMPROVEMENTS, MNDOT. '
Gary Warren: This is Carl Hoffsted. Planning Manager for MnDot.
•
•
102 '