Loading...
1h. Plat Approval to replat CHADDA into 4 Lots 1A ' P. C. DATE: 7-5-89 / C TY 0 F C. C. DATE: 7-24-89 CASE NO: 87-28 \'�1 ' C H A N H A S S E N Prepared by: JoAnn Olsen &i 1 Hoisington Group Inc. 1 STAFF REPORT ' F- z PROPOSAL: Preliminary&Final Plat request to subdivide 1.96 acres into four(4) lots. 1 < LOCATION: Northwest corner of Great Plains Boulevard and West 78th Street J a I a' APPLICANT: CHADDA Hagen and Mason Investments P.O. Box 100 33 Tenth Avenue South, Suite 100 • Q Chanhassen, MN 55317 Hopkins, MN 55343 1 by f city Aerrrinisw,,r, PRESENT ZONING: CBD, Central Business District � ' ' "B:nd',rsed V b(A)Pc- ACREAGE: 1.96 acres ___ IQ DENSITY: N/A .etc ZLL.,;,,t , ' Q ADJACENT ZONING '' ' I AND LAND USE: N- R-12, Vacant Multi-Family and Dry Cleaner -------- S- CBD,Pony/Pauly I W E- OI, St. Hubert's School W- CBD, Commercial Uses 5 WATER AND SEWER: Municipal utility services are available PHYSICAL CHARAC;1'ERISTICS: The site is relatively flat and occupied by Colonial Shopping Center and Loren Anderson's Gasoline Station 1990 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial • 4p j r 0 $ �� fa -4, -...a, 4...0410 ra Itits,..4,, L ..0>A1.. ...;31c.. tr. / an= 4°61644� ci. ,-- ,......a ' —1 lb o ■ /' �r• \�� LO R AiCall° et. -11 *- Me Ii-klISIII ii.ghlt ttlrlf 4 idi It'III it 10V iS__. "03."---- \ ,, mi.• ll , ..%.i 1 i • .4N • o ,j ' ' al w `t `.O . • mow- • emrmr." w w , - ■�" / 1 ter. NOW ow. �'A ._';��l at "W.' MP MN .... nom !!' k, I"111 stia • ., ilai _L flwe 4; :1111 IIPV , • w. • J. 4144k, B G 7 B IF „ , ue ' R'';„.'..” - � ' ' ' ��- v ,„i 4,1 it1lia1m tea .rm•. r 1 C ` � �� Elf- ��ira. 1 01 - -. if 1 :Mal IOP i` � lisittati i I • jft'�e — Et _ _ \ �AKO AN MARSH -/' , 1 - R CIRCLE in, L A KE SUSAN ! ` .� 1' RS ;, s _- , - RD �.�• RICE C E AI SN • ,; \ _ _ �� \ - NE_- _n' ' __ ' • ' -- A _ I 86 TH ST 111.1111111W P"0--....1) ID A --t R4 — 1 ' CHADDA Second Addition July 5, 1989 Page 2 ' BACKGROUND ' This is the second time that the CHADDA Second Addition has been before the City of Chanhassen. On July 20, 1987, the City Council approved the preliminary plat (Attachment #1) . Final ' plat approval was granted on February 8, 1988. The original plat included three lots (Attachment #2 ) . Lot 1 was to have been occupied by Building Block Daycare Center facility. ' A small parcel lying between the daycare center lot and Loren Anderson' s gasoline station was proposed to become part of the City' s municipal parking lot. The original Lot 2 contained ' Colonial Shopping Center, the southerly portion of which was to have been divided off by metes and bounds and placed in the ownership of the HRA to be used for pulbic parking lot improve- ' ments . For a variety of reasons, the Loren Anderson parcel has been added to the plat at the request of the City and the City has ' entered into an agreement to purchase the Anderson property so that it might be cleared and used as part of the north side public parking lot improvements. ' Since the original plat was approved, the daycare center has decided not to purchase the parcel lying westerly of the Colonial 1 Center and the HRA has an agreement with CHADDA to purchase that parcel, including the original small Lot 3 . It has also been agreed that the Chanhassen Realty Company property should be divided into two lots as part of the platting process and the ' northerly line of proposed Lot 4 correlates with the southerly edge of the Colonial Center sidewalk. Since the original appro- val, all of the concerns relating to the original Lot 3 , the ' inclusion of the Loren Anderson parcel and the division of the Chanhassen Realty property to reflect future public parking needs have been resolved. ANALYSIS The proposed plat for CHADDA Second Addition includes four lots. ' Proposed Lot 2 contains Colonial Shopping Center which is sche- duled for a major face-lift to be completed in 1989 . Proposed Lots 1, 3 and 4 are to be incorporated as part of the City' s ' public parking improvement project ( site plan included) . While the City will own proposed Lots 1, 3 and 4 , cross easements are being prepared by CHADDA across the rear of Lot 2 , behind the Colonial Center Building and Lot 1 to provide access for Phase I of the Medical Arts Project. Because Lot 1 has no street frontage and, therefore, technically requires a variance to be platted as a lot, we are recommending that Lot 1 be redesignated as Outlot A and that each of the other three lot numbers be changed accordingly. I CHADDA Second Addition July 5 , 1989 Page 3 1 Public easements that already exist will be shown on the final plat. Included is the sanitary easement over the west side of the Anderson property. Easements that are still needed and must be shown on the plat include a triangular drainage easement behind the Colonial Center structure plus a 25 foot drainage and utility easement behind that same building as illustrated in Exhibit 1. Also needed are 15 foot utility easements for water and sewer over Outlot A plus a 15 foot storm sewer easement through the middle of the Colonial Center parking lot (Exhibit 2 ) . All of these latter easements are need in the event the city does not become or remain the owner of said parcels. Also, an existing sanitary sewer easement which is no longer needed shall be vacated (Attachment #5) . RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the ' following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Subdivision ' #87-28 as shown on the plat dated June 23, 1989 , and subject to the following conditions : 1 . A change in lot numbering including the redesignation of Lot 1 as Outlot A. 2 . The provision of additional easements as per Exhibits 1 and 1 2 . All easements to be verified by BRW before filing of the plat. 3 . Acquisition of requisite cross easements over Lot 1 and Outlot A. 4 . Vacation of sanitary sewer easement. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission recommended approval of the subdivision with staff' s conditions and amending Condition #1 as follows : 1. A change in lot numbering including the redesignation of Lot 1 as Outlot A and renumbering the remaining Lots 2 , 3, and 4 , to Lots 1, 2 , and 3, respectively. ' CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: ' "The City Council approves Subdivision #87-28 as shown on the plat dated June 23 , 1989, and subject to the following con- 1 ditions: 1 I ' CHADDA Second Addition July 5, 1989 Page 4 1. A change in lot numbering including the redesignation of Lot 1 as Outlot A and renumbering the remaining Lots 2 , 3 , and 4, ' to Lots 1, 2 , and 3 , respectively. 2 . The provision of additional easements as per Exhibits 1 and ' 2 . All easements to be verified by BRW before filing of the plat. 3 . Acquisition of requisite cross easements over Lot 1 and ' Outlot A. 4 . Vacation of sanitary sewer easement. " ' ATTACHMENTS 1. City Council minutes dated July 20 , 1987. 2 . Original plat. 3 . & 4 . Existing conditions. 5 . Sanitary sewer easement. I 6 . Exhibit 1. 7. Exhibit 2 . 8 . Staff report dated February 2, 1988 . 9 . Staff report dated July 20 , 1989 . 10. Application. 11. Planning Commission minutes dated July 5 , 1989 . 12. Plat dated June 23 , 1989 . I 1 I 82 i City Council Meeting - July 20, 1987 ' 4. Installation of fire hydrants as required by the Fire Department and coordinated with BRW. 5. Revision of the site plan to indicate the gas pumps 50 feet from the edge of Laredo Drive. 6. Compliance with all other conditions of approval from the original plan review. ' 7. Special consideration be made for the safety of the service drive. The Public Safety Director should review the plan to determine the appropriate technique for the safety of the service drive and shall report back to the Council with his findings. 8. Mr. Hoisington shall review the revised landscaping plan. All voted in favor and motion carried. PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 2.15 ACRES INTO 2 LOTS TO CONTAIN THE KENNY'S SUPERMARKET BUILDING AND A DAYCARE FACILITY, LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WEST 78TH STREET AND GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD, WATERFORD DEVELOPMENT AND CHADDA. Barbara Dacy: The parcel, as you are well aware, is located directly west of where the existing Kenny's market is on the north side of West 78th Street. Currently the property that is represented on your preliminary plat sheet is the property that's indicated by a solid black line. The daycare center is to be located on the northwest corner. Also indicated on the plat is the edge of the gas station. That's this parcel right here. You will also note that between the boundary lines of the gas station and the proposed day care center there is a 20 to 30 foot strip that's located in this area. Basically what the plat is doing is creating this new lot in the northwest corner of the site and one of the recommendations is to resolve this 20 to 30 foot strip. CHADDA has indicated to staff that this will become part of the parcel to the south so the revised preliminary plat will reflect that. As you are also aware, the HRA is in the process of considering authorizing condemnation of that parcel and the HRA would be responsible for the demolition of the gas station. 'therefore, the area could be cleared so that area could be used for parking area for the proposed facility. By creation of this lot in the northwest corner of the plat it is technically landlocked and we had addressed that issue in the report. There will need to be cross easements filed for access purposes. However, in all practicality the lots will have street frontage from a practical standpoint. BRW has also provided some comments about the proposed storm sewer plan and access for utilities that are recommended as a condition of approval obtaining necessary easements to serve that parcel. The Planning Commission at their meeting did recommend approval of the proposed plat subject to the four conditions that were in the staff report. Councilman Boyt: BRW and Hoisington's comments, I would like to have those addressed sometime. 30 T ' City Council Meeting - July 20, 1987 Councilman Geving: This is the time to do it. Barbara Dacy: I think a number of Fred's concerns had to do with the site ' plan issue. BRW did have some concerns about utility easements. Councilman Boyt: I think you've written those into your proposal so I'm okay with that. ' Councilman Johnson: Looks good. I Councilman Geving: I have no comments. I like what I see and I think Staff has done a good job in bringing this to the Planning Commission and the recommendations are in order. ' Councilman Johnson moved, Councilman Horn seconded to approve Subdivision Request #87-28 subject to the subdivision of a revised preliminary plat indicating the following: ' 1. Identification of additional parcels, such as the Anderson parcel, as lots. ' 2. Identification of utility and drainage easements. 3. Consummation of an acquisition agreement by the HRA of the Anderson parcel including execution of proper access and parking cross easements in conjunction with the ,filing of the final plat. 4. Inclusion of the 20-30 foot strip into Lot 2 or the parcels to the south. All voted in favor and motion carried. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A DAYCARE FACILITY LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WEST 78TH STREET AND GREAT PLAINS BLVD. , WATERFORD DEVELOPMENT AND CHADDA. Barbara Dacy: This transparency is the interim parking plan and it shows the ' location of the 5,900 square foot daycare center. As we talked about earlier in the item regarding the commercial revenue bonds, one of the items that we did look at was potential reuse of the building if it were to swing from the daycare center to another use. Based on those parking requirements, ' additional parking spaces are going to be needed from the parking area in front of the Kenny's building and the area that will exist after we remove the gas station. Again, cross parking easements will be needed to be filed. Of more importance though is, as was pointed out by our consultant was the overall function of the site especially during peak traffic hours during drop off and pick-up times especially under this proposal there is kind of dead end that's formed along the west lot line. Mr. Hoisington suggested that the City consider a municipal improvement project for this parking area and for the area to the west so an overall circulation can be achieved. The City Manager also wanted to address that issue and after I'm done I think he wanted to make a couple of comments about that. Further, the proposal is a separate free 31 • i i t • It NI". A!--1 / L -:, ",/.., "`�;` i i S y/�n 1 e°, ' o y'9h1on 5 3g w ` `33g / I Oralna9e and \ 3a_ 7Ufrlif3 Easement ` \ _72.767,_:,00 950 i r-I N Cu o Ito in z,..1 a- Drolnage and Utl1)�y ( 17 I o Easemenf CI a I �O Ce o Z `6 I?3�° o �.ao• o\-157\�� Drainage_and z W w„ f Ufilify Eosemen4- ■ j \\ �� 1 _ - ---- - 136.12 _� - I � ' '— N N 89°43'56'I,/ tnI Neo 6 E 3 /] 1 6 1 aO��W ,7.51 r11°yyA� ~ 2 TS: 136 18 N8• I CP is .- '-3�2 OI O • -160 p-� � 001 NaeO6'20"W J - TI N 5� \ o ' NI N -u)(V 000 OZ<t O q0° �_, zQ II a.Z o W I 0 / I m ° In o m - i I10 F. lorarnage and Q — /_L'flllig Eosement-1 W CC • rase°06'20•1"/ o 0 90, i ' $ i C.S.A. HWY. NO. 16 1 I N88°06'20"W A -170Oo- S line o{the SE!a orl7e SW%4- • m An ' et2-- I ' iI 75TH STREET --lim Y N II ~ L CJ 0 0.E.MORROW * O m z-m _.,. _ . .... . ... .... . . . . _ ,...., H 4 < IOU 4 p 9 1,, 4 ? II 4 N BK 130,P106 = 66 loo ro 0 cc Q' 3 I 2 230.4 112 5 nzs 7 7 l 10 5 9 8 �v 5 10 5 I ° BK.43,P435 �•• I I V I V i 66 9 CO 6 8 6 50 �7 6 9 6 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 9 1 9 Cr 8 LU 7 5O 8 7 I . CHAN. . VIEW , ) 1.27 — 100 S0 T ` iEW 17,E "I• ROSE B.PAULY " 1 2 3 I. ,I I I BK.IOI,P 70 p o� S X CHAN. , 165 a -1 1 x.-33' 3 100 Q iit �,y', -,BK 43,P436 /� Et • C H A t 397.53 . �" o BK.1628 W 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 M P 367- DONALD HANUS i r'; -10 CTF NO 14058 CHURCH OF 3 100 Z p�Ul►S•—+E 131,11 BLOOMBERG CO INC. d 8 250 1 150 7 _ 93 BK.175,P237 C.O. ST. HUBERT �BK82 0 A00 1 �P44O CC • 2 In I BK 52,P 2 os 0 R.B BONGARD I t c, BK 52,P328` �r r /BK 81,P464 BK 140,P5 93 _ •BERNARD H HANSON . AN REALTY CO. % i 2 BK 139,P130 BK 169,P 165-C.0 NO.9780 ! SI • 100 i JOHN HAVLIK JR. THOMAS KRUEGER 8 p p , :�=i ` ? 1 OK 163,P 35 BK.171,P 475 a :100 . a IC. J`� v . 1 on a CO '107 : 53 /AY-P' 6Q' -.• i I.. ' I 1 2 3 33 - BK. MISC. 0 98 0 P 436 " � `o,N • 1 66 . a� n I 107 6Q5 .1 ,. 'it' L —NO-.^ 250 N� i . 1�? 16.5" ' _ 159.5 • 170 7 — —H • —NV. - M A••1 (. HANUS • MODEEN-HENDRICKSON `M �MCiO w BK.138,P 58 BK.165,P 216 BK 44,P.90 BK 139,P 126 BK 35,P 577 Q • BK. 76,P 187 BK 39,P 295 CTF.NO 10655 ALPHONSE SCHROEDERJ LOREN ANDERSON MIKE LABALO BK.61, P 80 BK.I73,P.24O-C.D. BK.171,P 147 A.O.D. BK 155,R 384 ' D.HANUS BK.155,P 145-C.D. or' I (.J . • - tf . \ I I -ING STORM SEWER N I OSED STORM SEWER ON CURBLINE ED ON PARKING SURFACE 1"=40' I TOLE OSED ELEVATION I ACE DRAINAGE /-----------------------------------...„.... CHAN ' I it 116w // / / / 1 ll / iI / / ► / / / / / / / i,/ i HERITAGE PARK - H___,APARTMENT BLDG. I F. F 981.0 .r A \ \ ■ I 1 12��r 12" I. , tttl ( I �{ I O� RETAIL 'I I a I I I 1 I 1 ' 133 1 _ FIRST FLOOR ELEV. 974.0 5 RNII co I • 974 I .7-71-77 0 .J �, IIIIIII THIIJ�s' .1 HI" II H I 1 __ 1 1,f ' S I cp , ,r • ' `` .5 1 I " ,� �� :1 1 IISt1� 1ztt 112tt ...j.,..9 1 `aTMlib .q A ■ • I 1e �!!r' �!!!` ►' • I I I I I I i ' 9q3 � `/,�11�1+ �„ �, , RETAI © ' , LaT/2- Len 3 \, • o Em'i��a� 974 75 Na� me F.F.976.6 4 / all 11 1 Mum 1 1 1 974 Unit / Eh. Amami Wa 974.5 MI6.. I -0 / T4 I • c it 4- 1 hereby certify that Mta plan, ORIGINAL OA'E AUG speClfttation or report■as ��' "I;Iti,, REVISIONSyYM 19 CITY OF CHA prepared by or under my direct NORTH SIDE t supervision and that 1 am a duly .««,«, X H I B I T 6 R apt e ten d Prof.SIto4Ol EnOtnaar PARKING under the State a M1nn. Stafutae "`w;a""t Settlone 326.02 to 326.16.=..aa.:�';,;'"" CESIGNBY GR SURVEY BR NO GRADING STOI ORAKN 8Y M F.t S. oati MMm. Rp. No.16140 S.A.P. NO. SHEETA_OF4 11 _ ...7:i• \-r.--.. - 0 F — 7-=-------- --=--:=. — T.C:- a * _ps Ii- 11r .T., . - I -, •,...,...W ClaSEVOLd r> - .rn - i puo aoou t r).J0 z kill , , , ls-'3 Ln / i IP 0 - • S (.? 41/\' I 041, ! .4 . , .. i 0 .7-- tn 0—z I ■ 06444 :tr, !k" , -- cM„03,90.88N (-.) P eh,E Z C) ., • bf - -,* , , ...„ .9,4 Ls; . .7;_l- f ,,. . g m I 3. _.: ,.., IA `..., J,' 1 '' s1./.1asre,79.2 1 1 Tr . rt °°''P'°\12sc' - .. ":t..I . I -t---7— /M.9S, b.bg , ,5 , J .- - 1 1- I 44_ _ ,..„,„ ;,,,------- ___________z,4-9 , ,f, .- 1 1 I 1 N *.: ,(1) a ! , , ,' '-- , . llg I -n rl.) I ' - .. . ,,.....----.4.-, M.,' a'a-t<t-i<40■ , . / ari . 11 ol . --.... --...I Ni i.. f\‘.- IS _.V.,31--')v-I .1._--tiv,.I ... 7. ) I )...it — .31----"Cibe" r__... 7' r'' Ili Cn 6). 0 ---- cr - i ' >c.c)t, % i , _Luawaso3 __ir-j:r.,71, is ,oli_p_ 0 . --- , ' • I ssa_J53 pLo ssaJoui .• ■\ Gi--'1P-1>*)---"'iii'‘) '• I * '' I ss YL ., _____.. I _ _.. -..... ...._____... .. ;., ... '. • li," - .. ------- Li__ _ I ..._: .--- r...•••zsz.,- [-, Il '%alk■, rilW - •••--.••••-'- --- - , „il • ;1...,... .. .......... .....mmwm, Asimmanom -,- -) .-• ..61ft..NI-Mr-gWrfr7remir: .....AM - MIII ,Hi L'i3-t7t7 a Goo's,oaa(7 Jo/9, 0021 Jed I ...._..___. .ituawaso3 James h.lopuog I --■..... ,.. . ...01, • ..... . . , os I I, /i *uaillaso3,_F,u),4n... . ---1 I ... 8E.... ------- ----- ,- puo a bob,o_10 1 I 3,' r, '-'0 slot-4N./ . `-"--- .-- 1"-is"-i-t -- - 1 9 ..,, , , d POO ----__ dik , \ 4,?' 41, .-; it/6/ , / . . . / I I ' I . I a • ""' r ,, I ) 1 ',.."- :: V G :-.NH1 aFo VGli G V Eiiiii i. , .., ,. ,., , I : ... .... ,„:„..:,_,,:..,.„.r ..,-414., -„,.4?::=,;.,-;,---....:. .-;,...V. :;.1.r.::-'f,='.;;;.:,-......,----;::'''±''''-'-i'' '-'•-• -;i,-,-''-'. ' -:---''''' - ''' ' ' ' . I-,'-:...:-. -., ,,','-;',"-.:-.;-:,!-.--.-. -=::::i...;,f;.3';'-'-:-):.:.`'.r.;.-7'.;1''-';'1,-;::ii:e-..--1-'.:',S''----'- ''' '-' ' '--•-•-•: -. . . ' ''' - .-:,,-,-.s.,-,,..*;141t-i.444;43,1-,4-:,... -'7-'-‘'-"‘ '-i.i.,...;-•;1--=.-:--.---- ...-',%:- . - ' -- -,- ---. .1- ''•••• - - .--r.- .. . _ ... .. .......,..., .,_ I• _ , . . . _, • . I -I N i A Qf o Pi :M..-- t 0° Ille 1 Lil v/ \-- ...... r ....: as * _____ ..... .,ft>...._%%_. f y► r 1 101 • co i f I 0) / ' L_.. , al -1?- O N F 1141 . w v ,i W 1 1-- . . . 4 - h : , N • •fl r • 4g P ' . . 1 0 1 . • 0%Acr% c‘--\. -.-r. ..zit t L. ...., .. - C3 • tkl, :f CO mr 1 Q m / IL tw M i o91 O 65'Z�? •� ; _ 1 .T, o ` ./ _,_ // .o- 1•- .. / ■ N cn Z SY v C) N o _f1 -1E N . i \• 'o ! i-0 E a) °1' ;-1 n Cn O 1 I r �► t-- I N (E) t.4d IVALVE 3 VALVE s■_______.......___._....______s____i i-----------------------„,_ Ctikv _ li-FW I ,I / / / - I..,..,,,,/ ....._...... / / // / / / / / Il1III I 1 T' II ; 111 r HERITAGE PARK �'l APARTMENT BLDG. I r ________)I 14 �\ \ 11t11 PROPOSED___., C r HYDRANT it Cfl ow I I I . I > — -- I I i�, isi K�A+rt1iL+tiA4 4 RETAIL 2 1 I I I 1 — PRCc.d M OIN6 I St►.+►� ( ' I33 I 5 J SED 8� — CL I I 1SANITARYISE ER 1- kid.,, ,, 000 'N H I . 9 w .. _ 4�� ii I I I I I I I � . 1 1 cc ;i H;H , I i III I It t_ / b CONNECT TO EXIST �1 n i 1+ I l ',11 tom 18 'a 1IIV F E' 1 ' 18 O RETAI CONNECT TO EXIST allii ,r. -- I ._______ -■ . J -1E I EXIST HYDRANT--t• _ j YDRANT _ EXIST 8"SANITARY SEWER I0 1"••– •EXIST. 6" WATERMAIN I I R.r.►y lyrNly awl M,• CAM OnicoN•\.".I'E A1..i O M e mow.. °NKt �Y�'t,C„� nfv SONS Icy lbi5 CITY OF CHANHASSE .e.e,t,(.t.M M •.e.rt we. "''ti*,u4�1.1... (Z ."e..•»NM w I'St I ewe duly `� NORTH SIDE PUB!. ▪ 'timed ~'�""°"" E,I,..., PARKING LOT w.a.. the Ste..et N.nn SteM.. .7`,10=77,,,.. S..ne”. uaO1I. Sj{.1ll SANITARY SEWER I �ESK;N ov G R SUPYE•B.t NO . DRAWN BY ML.:s AND WATERMAIN " Etete WA nN No. /9— IS.A.P. NO. SHEET A_OF 8 I0l No .■ -- 1 bi 1 t. CITY QF I ti cHANBAssEN 1 , , 4 7,2.!. ‘ , 0411r7 if �` ► 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 rte' (612) 937-1900 II MEMORANDUM �,■ I TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Barbara Dacy, City Plan er � _l / / /k . II DATE: February 2 , 1988 SUBJ: Final Plat Approval - CHADDA Second Addition V'' /i '4. II BACKGROUND II On July 20 , 1987 , the City Council approved the preliminary plat for Building Block Daycare. The preliminary plat was conditioned II upon the following: 1 . Identification of additional parcels such as the Anderson II parcel as lots. 2 . Identification of utility and drainage easements . 3 . Consummation of an acquisition agreement by the HRA of the Anderson parcel including execution of proper access and parking cross easements in conjunction with the filing of the II final plat. 4 . Inclusion of the 20 to 30 foot strip into Lot 2 of parcels to II the south. ANALYSIS Since preliminary plat approval , the HRA has proceeded with I authorization to execute the agreement required by condition #3 . Concurrently, the City Council has approved the feasibility study II to create a public parking lot in front of the Kenny' s complex. By so doing, Lot 3 will be used as future access to the west and the city will obtain ownership of the southerly portion of Lot 2 . Gary Ehret has identified the proposed location of the lot line II through proposed Lot 2 that would divide the municipal parking lot from the Kenny' s building. This line coincides with the edge II of the sidewalk in front of the Kenny' s building . The final plat should be amended to indicate this new lot line. Therefore, the city will own Lots 3 and the southerly portion of Lot 2 . The II daycare will own Lot 1 and Herb Mason, owner of the Kenny' s building will retain ownership of the northerly portion of Lot 2 . II . ■ Mr. Don Ashworth ' February 2 , 1988 Page 2 ' The proposed final plat has been reviewed by Gary Ehret from BRW to confirm that the proposed placement of drainage and utility easements is consistent with downtown utility planning ( stormwater, sewer and water) . Existing on the lot as shown in Attachment #1 is a sanitary sewer easement which provides access to the existing sewer main. Through the redevelopment process , ' this sewer main will be abandoned and the easement will no longer be necessary. An easement vacation application will be filed and will be brought before the City Council at the March 14 , 1988 , ' meeting. Because the parking area in front of the Kenny' s building and the daycare center will be a municipal parking lot, cross easements as originally required will not be necessary. ' RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the final plat for CHADDA Second Addition subject to the following conditions : 1 . Vacation of the existing sanitary sewer easement through Lots ' 1 , 2 and 3 . 2 . Revision of the plat to locate a lot line through Lot 2 as recommended in Attachment #3 . ' 3 . Execution of cross parking easements . 4 . Transfer of clear ownership of the southerly portion of Lots 2 and 3 to the City of Chanhassen. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Location map of existing sanitary sewer easement. 2 . Proposed municipal parking lot site plan. ' 3 . Proposed lot line through Lot 2 for municipal parking lot. 4 . City Council minutes dated July 20 , 1987 . 5 . Proposed final plat stamped "Received January 6 , 1988" . 1 ■ V I TY 0 CHANHASSEN DATE: 7-8-87�\� C.C. DATE: 7-20-87• r CASE NO: 87-28 SUB Prepared by: Dacy:k ' STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat request to subdivide 2 .15 acres into two lots. LOCATION: Northwest corner of Great Plains Blvd. and West 78th Street Cl. APPLICANT: Building Block Nursery Herb Mason Q School and Day Care Center Hagen and Mason 3650 Annapolis Lane North 33 Tenth Ave. S . #100 Plymouth, MN 55441 Hopkins , MN 55343 PRESENT ZONING: CBD, Central Business District 7`47��,-7 ACREAGE: 2 .15 acres / '7/07 DENSITY: N/A 7-ao- P7 _ ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- R-12 , Vacant multiple family and dry cleaner S- CBD, commercial uses E- OI, St. Hubert' s ' Q W- CBD, commercial uses W AND WATER N t— SEWER: Municipal utility services are available . PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site is currently developed with commercial uses and is fairly flat . 1990 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial 111 I ' Building Block Nursery July 8 , 1987 Page 2 ' REFERRAL AGENCIES ' BRW See Attachment #3 Fred Hoisington See Attachment #4 BACKGROUND The proposed plat includes three existing parcels ( see Attachment ' #1) . The Mason property contains the existing Kenny' s Market and Dry Cleaners. The Anderson parcel contains the existing gas sta- tion. To the west of the Anderson parcel is the Roger Pauly parcel which contains the Beauty Parlor/Tanning Salon building. The ' proposed day care facility is to be located in the northwest corner of the Mason property. ' The Anderson parcel is currently under purchase negotiations by the HRA (developer of Retail West) . It is intended that the gas sta- tion be removed from the property in order to become part of the ' parking lot contemplated in the overall proposed development plan proposed by CHADDA ( see Attachment #2) . ANALYSIS ' The submitted plat indicates two lots , Lot 1 which contains the Kenny' s building, and Lot 2 , the proposed day care center. The ' existing Anderson parcel should be identified as Lot 3 as it will be under separate ownership from the remaining parcels . The Pauly building is also indicated on the plat sheet. This should be Lot 4 if it is to remain part of the overall plat. A 20-30 ft. strip between the day care center parcel and the Anderson parcel will exist. CHADDA intends to acquire this ' parcel . It is recommended that this strip become part of Lot 2 , or the parcels to the south, as part of the HRA acquisition so a remnant strip is not created. ' Lot 2 , as proposed, is landlocked. In order to grant a variance for a lot that does not abut a public street, the following findings must be established: ' 1 . The hardship is not a mere inconvenience. ' The Anderson parcel directly in front of the proposed site of the day care center is currently under negotiation for purchase by the HRA. Despite the ownership, the area will be used as parking area for not only the day care center, but for parking for the Kenny' s building and the Retail Central building to the west. Cross easements for access by all uses in the Retail Central and Retail East buildings will be 11 necessary. The hardship is not created by the applicant; rather , the hardship is created by the process of redevelopment. 1 Building Block Daycare July 8 , 1987 Page 3 In fact, access to the Pauly and Anderson parcel is currently under investigation. There may not be access to either of these parcels. If so, access would be gained from Great Plains Blvd. 2 . The hardship is caused by the particular physical surround- ings, shape or topographical conditions of the land. Because of the existence of three lots under separate ownership, direct frontage cannot be attained. 3 . The condition or conditions upon which the request is based are unique and not generally applicable to other property. ' The circumstances affecting this project is directly involved with the acquisition of two to three parcels . This situation is unique to the downtown area. 4 . The granting of the variance will not be substantially detri- mental to the public welfare and is in accord with the pur- pose and intent of the Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and Comprehensive Plan. Granting the variance will not be detrimental to the ' surrounding properties . Because the parcel will have full access by easement and because the area will be used as parking area, the proposed is keeping with the intent of the ordinance. Grading and Utilities As noted by BRW, sanitary sewer service is recommended to serve the parcel from the new service to be installed behind the Kenny' s building. Water service can be provided from West 78th Street or Great Plains Blvd. Utility easements for both water and sewer services will need to be reserved on the plat. The revised storm sewer plan needs to be prepared and reviewed by BRW to coordinate with drainage patterns on adjacent parcels as well as their ultimate distribution to the storm sewer system to be installed this summer. Easements should also be dedicated where necessary. Access 1 As noted earlier , easements for access and parking will need to be executed across adjacent parcels to serve Lot 2 . These ease- ments will be part of the title of Lot 2 , so that if the use changes to another commercial use, access is maintained. The applicant has submitted an interim parking plan indicating pro- posed traffic circulation patterns prior to full development of 1 I t Building Block Daycare July 8 , 1987 Page 4 ' the north side of West 78th Street. This is discussed in more detail in the site plan review. ' RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: The Planning Commission recommends approval of subdivision request #87-28 subject to the submission of a revised preli- minary plat indicating the following: 1 . Identification of additional parcels, such as the ' Anderson parcel, as lots . 2 . Identification of utility and drainage easements. ' 3 . Consummation of an acquisition agreement by the HRA of the Anderson parcel including execution of proper access and parking cross easements in conjunction with the ' filing of the final plat. 4 . Inclusion of the 20-30 ft. strip into Lot 2 or the par- cels to the south. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ' The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval subject to staff' s conditions . ' CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve Subdivision Request #87-28 subject to the subdivision of a revised prelimi- nary plat indicating the following: 1 . Identification of additional parcels , such as the Anderson parcel, as lots. 2 . Identification of utility and drainage easements . ' 3 . Consummation of an acquisition agreement by the HRA of the Anderson parcel including execution of proper access and parking cross easements in conjunction with the ' filing of the final plat. 4 . Inclusion of the 20-30 ft. strip into Lot 2 or the par- cels to the south. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Application. 1 LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 I APPLICANT: G D,q OWNER: 6-1-4N), /4 Ass' r ° Cc ADDRESS PO - I O b ADDRESS 1 0/4f- - SIO� �` ViES'� I 61-16r\ii-tAss'qt,i q:;3( 7 jeua S'S 3 Li-3 Zip Code Zip Code I TELEPHONE (Daytime ) q 3 y--yS 37 TELEPHONE 9 3Y -- 7C ?Lt AND REQUEST: o(Zsr,j /� rJ I rcanJ/f1 .g5357 '13 4--6zs� Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan II Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision II Land Use Plan Amendment X Platting M II etes and Bounds Conditional Use Permit Street/Easement Vacation II Site Plan Review Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME Ci-MQ0A 2, D. ADf-0ory I PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION Co,k-v-G--F-4-1/1.1- REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION A^^'r� I PRESENT ZONING Ifj D REQUESTED ZONING S4M I USES PROPOSED MU;v 1 L1i/i2 I12- i v 6 ( v i yrvo ,,,,,u� -cam I SIZE OF PROPERTY Ay... b� BOO So.. F LOCATION Nu...) cc Fz,0_ of- V v e q—�6 i r+ S- /az.,V') 6-0Kr l/�"l S l Vi) I REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST II II LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary ) II II Planning Commission Meeting July 5, 1989 - Page 11 IL. ' Emmings : No , but I agree with you. That ' s the one thing- I don' t see here that should be here. It should be specific as to what we' re doing . ' Batzli : So remaining Lots 2, 3 and 4 shall be renumbered 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Erhart : Okay, I ' ll amend my motion . Conrad: Dave, will you amend your second? Headla : Yes . Erhart moved , Headla seconded that the Planning Commission recommend ' approval of Subdivision #87-28 as shown on the plat dated June 23, 1989 subject to the following conditions : ' 1. A change in lot numbering including the redesignation of Lot 1 as Outlot A and renumbering the remaining Lots 2, 3 and 4 to 1, 2 and 3 respectively. 2. The provision of additional easements as per Exhibits 1 and 2. All easements to be verified by BRW before filing of the plat. 3. Acquisition of requisite cross easements over Lot 1 and Outlot A. 4. Vacation of sanitary sewer easement. All voted in favor and the motion carried . PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE CITY CODE, SECTION 20-237 REVOCATION AND INSPECTION REGARDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS. Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report . Chairman Conrad called the public hearing to order . Emmin s : I have a procedural question here I think. Under the open discussion packet, this same thing appears . My impression was that under the open discussion stuff, we' re just going to take a look at these. Olsen : This one was published . Emmi.ngs : Okay, so then we won ' t be considering this one again? Olsen: No. What happens is we 've been sending things back and forth to Roger . I ' ve been working with him and he just combined everything at once. This had already been separated out . ' Erhart : I assume the sequence here is if someone complains , then they have wording that Scott Harr can go out and check, which they could do anyway. Planning Commission Meeting July 5, 1989 - Page 12 Olsen : Right . This really is just for the public to hear . Batzli moved, Emmings seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in II favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed . Batzli : I have a couple problems with this. One is , it appears that you' re going to give notice in advance of a City Council review. Does tha mean that an inspection is part of that review? Olsen : Well we usually call . It' s practiced now. We always call and let them know that we' re going to be coming out. Erhart : That ' s not what this says . This says the City Council will reviel it. It doesn' t say that you' re going to notify them that you' re going to go out and look at the property. Olsen : This says review of the permit itself. What we' re doing with Lowell Carlson next Monday. Batzli : It doesn ' t appear to me that there' s proper antecedent basis if II you will for what you' re talking about. When I read this I had no idea what it meant and I kind of feel like I 'm kind of familiar with that Code I Section. Maybe other people felt comfortable with it. Conrad : So you' re concerned that there ' s not cause for calling an inspection? 1 Batzli : I don ' t know what the City Council ' s review of the permit is? Has the City Council ever reviewed a permit? Olsen : A conditional use permit? Batzli : Yes . ' Olsen: Yes . Emmings : I think I can remember some. Conrad : What we do , when an applicant comes in typically for expanded use" Olsen: The one I remember now is Lowell Carlson. Emmings : Of course he never had a permit . ' Olsen: No, he does have a permit. He' s had one since 1985 but he ' s never met any of the conditions so we' re bringing that up for consideration of II revoking his permit next Monday. \_ Erhart : Brian , to make it consistent with the first run on sentence where it goes on to say sufficient cause for the termination of the conditional use permit by the City Council following a public hearing . We could change Planning Commission n Meeting ' July 5, 1989 - Page 13 C ' the last sentence to say the property owner shall be notified in advance of the City Council ' s review of the permit following a public hearing . ' Batzli : Do they need a public hearing to review it the second time around? Olsen: To review the conditional use permit? ' Batzli : Yes. Olsen : For the possible revoking of it , yes it is a public hearing . ' Emmings: I think that gives them their due process. ' Erhart: What you' re saying is the language just isn ' t clear . Emmings: I 'm not sure what' s bothering you. Can you explain it again? ' Batzli : Yes . I guess this sentence , this dangling sentence. The property owner shall be notified in advance of the City Council ' s review of the permit. As I recall , we don' t talk about the City Council reviewing the permit before we say that in this section. Olsen : But in the section right before it, I don' t know if it says for the termination of a conditional use permit by the City Council following a public hearing . Emmings : And the section is called , part of the title of the section is ' revocation and the first section deals with the fact that failure to comply with the condition can be sufficient cause for termination or actually that should be revocation. Where that says termination, if that said revocation ' that would help it make sense I think. Olsen: Maybe the last sentence in Section 2 isn ' t even necessary or we could maybe add , maybe that actually belongs up in Section 1. Emmings: Well does the Council ' s review take place concurrently with the public hearing? Do those two things happen at the same time so the fact that there' s a public hearing , that' s notice to the owner but this is just to be sure there' s a separate notice that goes to the owner in addition to be sure that he knows that something is taking place on his permit I ' assume. Erhart : `No . Jo Ann I think hit it on the nose. That last sentence belongs in the first paragraph. It belongs at the end of the first ' paragraph because you ' re dealing with the subject of revocation and in the second one you' re dealing with the subject of inspections . Batzli : Yes. I like that a lot better. That makes more sense then. Erhart : And change the word termination to revocation I think. Batzli : Currently in the code it ' s termination . Planning Commission Meeting 1 July 5, 1989 - Page 14 C Emmings : Well you could change the title if you wanted to . One word ougll to get changed. It doesn' t matter which one. Olsen : Okay I ' ll go through that because I know revocation is another section in itself. I ' ll make it consistent. Batzli : My other question, my first one was such a big hit , why again ar you removing, or any other violation of this chapter? Was that Roger ' s idea? Olsen: We' re just cleaning things up. One of his reasons was that the II conditional use permit, you have those specific conditions and then your general conditions of a conditional use but if you' re going to revoke it or do anything as far as misdemeanors or penalties against it, that it should, be specifically that they' re in violation of those specific conditions of the conditional use permit and not for the Council to say, well their lights were on one night or something . It was just to make it more specific. ' Batzli : I see two things happening then if you do that. One is you' re going to get a lot of additions that Steve likes to put in that says they have to comply with every other thing that they put in front of us like th, site plan, the this, the that, the this, the that. You' re going to end up listing a bunch of other things in there. Or alternatively you ' re going ( end up with a catch all thing in the wetland alteration permit that says , they have to comply with every other section because otherwise you ' re goin to have people for instance on let 's say a wetland alteration permit and a conditional use tied together where they violate the wetland alteration permit. You want to cancel their conditional use permit but now you can' t' because that ' s not the thing that they' ve violated . So either the staff has to be very, very careful to include as conditions to tie it all together or we have to review it. You' re taking away a large club. Olsen: It wasn' t, we weren' t really strongly, we could go either way. That was just his feeling that we should focus on this specific condition II and the general review. Focus on the conditional use. He was looking at it in the other way where it could be too general . Emmings: I agree with that . Batzli : It could be too general but then just as a caution to us and you, if we do conditional uses requiring compliance with a lot of other things,' we should include those conditions . Emmings : My guess what Roger is thinking is , you ' re taking away a real I substantial property right and they' re going to fight you tooth and nail and you' re going to have a hard time withstanding a vague and indefinite Constitutional type challenge. ' Batzli : You' re cited for a nuisance because you leave your lights on all night and a neighbor complains. Planning Commission Meeting July 5, 1989 - Page 15 Emmings : Yes and I think he wants to get away from that and you' re right, ' g we' re going to have to be real careful on the conditions to be sure that we' ve got all the bases covered when we write them. ' Batzli : But that' s putting a heavy burden on us . Conrad : Yes , which is appropriate . Emmings : And that' s fine because you want it to be a significant breach before you ever invoke something . ' Conrad : You also want to force the conditions , us to make a decision what the conditions are. If you don' t, then there' s no reason to have it. Then it' s a catch all but it' s not enforceable. ' Emmings : Although some of the conditions we do put on are pretty trivial too . Lights is a good example. You ought to shut them off at 8 : 00. Well ' what if they' re on until 8 : 10? Now they can' t be there anymore? You hope people use good sense on stuff like that but you worry, especially about a highly charged political issue like Eckankar. This is coming out in response to Eckankar is creating the thing that is ripe for abuse . There' s so many people that don ' t want Eckankar here and made it so obvious and our City Council had 3 people on it who didn' t vote yes for it . At least not out loud. This bothers me because it comes out as a response to that. It' s like let ' s design something so we can, this certainly could be interpretted that way. As a way to maintain a measure of control to get rid of them later and I 'm sorry to see it for that reason but I don' t think this says ' anything that we couldn' t do already really. I think we could have put in as a condition that unless they live up to all the conditions we ' ll revoke their permit. We can put that as a condition in each one and accomplish ' the same purpose . Batzli : Well what was the last conditions , speaking of that? Didn ' t they put in some condition that it was going to be inspected annually on the ' Eckankar one and that ' s because this ordinance amendment hadn ' t been passed yet for review? ' Olsen : Right . A lot of times with a conditional use that condition is always put on. Not always but most the time. Emmings : It' s so punitive though. Okay, we have to pass your permit but we're going to be watching you. That ' s what it sounds like. Olsen : That ' s what people wanted to hear . ' Batzli : In the past there have been abuses of conditional use permit where this probably would have been, put a little bit more teeth into . . . ' Conrad: My only other comment on this is the City Council may order annual or more frequent . That' s sort of washy washy and I guess I ' ve always felt that it' s important on conditional uses that they be reviewed every year for compliance . I think we set , I don ' t believe that staff has the time to really, or it is a priority right now, let ' s put it that way. I don' t Planning Commission Meeting July 5, 1989 - Page 16 believe it is a priority for staff to p y go out and review conditional uses. II I think it should be. Batzli : How many conditional uses does the City currently have approximately? Olsen: Lots . I can ' t tell you exactly. Conrad: There definitely is a staffing impact on what I just said. To annual review. We' re not talking about something that doesn' t cost money. Batzli : Like is lots 100? 200? 500? ' Olsen: I would say 50 to 100. Conrad : So talk about each one being half a day to review a year . Batzli : It' s going to take somebody a month to review them all . ' Conrad : Yes . So the word may is real , my preference would be to put teeth in conditional uses so there' s an annual review. I 'm not going to make II that an issue of mine right now but I 'd like to send that signal through til the City Council that I think that 's significant. That they should have an annual review and that if they can justify the cost , it should just that. The terminology could still read or more frequent based on this specific II need or cause but I 'm not going to change the language or I don' t propose that we change it from what I see here. I just want to raise that flag to the City Council so they can review that . Anything else? , Erhart : I agree with you 100%. You could set up a process where people would have to pay for an annual review. They have to get licensed every year . Conrad : It ' s a significant priviledge on their part . Emmings: You' re talking about licensing again now. It' s more like licensing than it is like a conditional use permit and I think that ' s a real interesting idea. I ' ve been interested in it. I think it' s a good II idea . Erhart : Licensing? Emmings : Sure. When you sell cigarettes you have to come into the City every year and get a license. You pay a fee and if there' s been trouble with you selling cigarettes to minors in the past year they slap your hand , and say you better shape up or we may not pass this next year . The same thing with the liquor license . Why not with conditional use permits? Headla: You brought that up before and I think you had a good point. ' Emmings : I think the trouble is just it would overwhelm the staff . Conrad: It' s more paperwork, yes . Planning Commission Meeting July 5, 1989 - Page 17 C Emmings : But I don ' t know that. ' Erhart : Except I 'm not sure staff has to do that . We ' ve just added an enforcement person to the city, Scott Harr. Since that position wasn' t filled 2 years ago, it might be that maybe he would have time plus the additional income coming in from the licensing might off set his expense. ' Usually when you create a new position, there ' s a period of time there where you kind of create your work. ' Emmings : Arguing the other side of the issue, I think the problem is, I 'm not going to build my business here if you can' t give me some assurance that I 'm not going to be allowed to continue it' s reasonable operation. ' Usually when it's a conditional use permit, a lot of times there' s real substantial building going on or people are spending a lot of money to locate something here and they come in, they bought an option on the property but they' re not going to go any further unless they' re sure ' they' re going to be able to operate and a licensing would result in so much uncertainity, they'd go someplace else with their use . Batzli : You said it earlier in regard to the vagueness and the indefinite issue is people probably have a substantial property right or interest as part of the conditional use. ItEmmings : That ' s the problem with that idea . Batzli : But then again , a liquor store probably has a very significant ' interest in something like that too . Olsen : The problem with conditional uses is that even like with Lowell ' Carlson, even if they revoke it Monday night, so what? It doesn' t stay there . Still , he ' s just a non-conforming use . Maybe if it is licensed , it seems like I asked Roger about that. Did I give you an answer on that? I remember asking him about licensing conditional use permits . I think ' it's something you can do. Emmings : We talked about doing that in a situation where we wanted to have ' an interim or a temporary conditional use and then the legislature made it possible to have it so I assume we just forgot about going that other route. Conrad : On the item in front of us , does anybody want to give any different direction on this other than what we see and trust that City Council will read the Minutes and review the tape . ' Emmings: Do we need a motion? ' Conrad : We do need a motion , yes . Is there a motion? Emmings: I ' ll make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment #89-1 to Section 20-237 of the City Code as written in the attached ordinance with the following changes . First of all that in paragraph 1, the word termination be changed to Planning Commission Meeting I July 5, 1989 - Page 18 k revocation. Secondly, that the second sentence in paragraph 2 be moved ull to the end of the first paragraph. That ' s it. Erhart : Second . Emmings moved , Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment #89-1 to Section 20-237 of the Cit Code as written in the attached ordinance with the following changes : I paragraph 1, the word "termination" be changed to "revocation" . Secondly, that the second sentence in paragraph 2 be moved up to the end of the fill paragraph. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Batzli : I would like to pass a resolution on to City Council to strongly I urge the Council to explore the possibility that all conditional use permits be inspected annually. Conrad : I think that would be a good resolution to pass forward . Batzli : Well I 'd make a resolution like that. , Conrad : Do we need a second on that resolution? Erhart: Are we going to discuss it? ' k Conrad : Yes. Erhart : I guess before we do that , I 'd like to see us look at the various conditional use permits and look at each one and see what kind of abuse we' ve seen or abuse is possible before we just pass up a resolution like • that. We may, without really thinking about it, we may be suggesting, if we' re suggesting a licensing or an annual review, maybe we' re suggesting something that's not needed. Batzli : The resolution is to explore doing that . Not that we immediately' implement it. Erhart : But why don' t we explore it? Batzli : It certainly isn ' t on our list of things to do that they gave for us to do. ' Erhart : That doesn ' t mean we can' t do it. Batzli : You ' re going to have a staff person look at 50 to 100 conditional" use permits and tell us what they all say. Erhart: No. I was thinking in terms of the various conditional uses that' f exist , what are those that would really be a benefit to the City to have C them reviewed annually. I Planning Commission Meeting July 5, 1989 - Page 19 Batzli : But see I think that would involve having them look at every 1 conditional use. You' re going to take a lot of a certain staff person' s time . 1 Erhart : Well what are you asking for? Batzli : I 'm asking for the City Council to kind of put it on our list of 1 things to do so we can get somebody to look at it. I don' t want to ask Jo Ann to go off and do something that the City Council isn ' t going to want us to look at. 1 Emmings : You' re basically asking them if they think it ' s worthwhile for us to take a look at it? Batzli : Yes . Conrad : You' re right . I think that' s really wise but I didn' t hear . I 1 think Brian is ask the City Council to say this is a priority for us to take a look at . That ' s how I understood your resolution. 1 Batzli : That was the intent. Emmings : Right now do we primarily depend on complaints? Olsen: An annual review would be great. I think it' s needed. Emmings : Are our files arranged or our permits arranged in such a way that 1 you can just go up to your office and say, I can identify every conditional use that ' s been approved in the City right here? In something? 1 Olsen: Yes. We' ve got a listing, a notebook. Emmings : A list in a notebook of all conditional use permits . 1 Olsen : Yes , and then they' re all in the file cabinet together . You can just look through them. 1 Batzli : We' re in the 60 ' s. Olsen : We' re trying to get them on computer too and what I was trying to 1 do was to have it so I could sit down every day and punch in and see what would be up for an annual review. What the conditions were and we just haven' t got it on computer but we' re getting it. We' ve got an assistant, an intern working . 1 Conrad : So Brian , what ' s your resolution again? 1 Emmings : Maybe this is too formal . Maybe we could just ask them if they want us to look at it. Batzli : That was the intent was whether we should explore whether an Iannual review is needed on conditional use permits . Should be implemented. 1 • Planning Commission Meeting 9 9 July 5, 1989 - Page 20 1- Erhart : Are we in open discussion yet or do you want to wait? Conrad: Well that was what we want to pass forward. I don' t know that we need to vote on that? , Erhart : No , I 'm in general agreement . I think an annual review of these things I think would be good so I 'm in agreement with Brian that it' s wor exploring with the City Council to see if they look favorably on it and w could study it further . Conrad : With that comment Brian and Tim, do we need anything else Jo Ann?' Olsen: No, I ' ll just put it in the update. Erhart : In that light , I ' ll bring up another subject before we get into th next thing because I was going to wait to the end , if I could say somethin Mr . Chairman? Conrad: Go ahead . , Erhart : I 'm really disturbed at the lack of progress . On a page and a half, almost two pages of issues , this Planning Commission has attempted t' work on in the last year and a half and have spent considerable time and effort, personal time and effort without compensation to try to push forward and doing a good job as Planning Commission members . That we have failed to make progress due to the fact that our city does not maintain th staff positions that are available. I really don ' t know how they expect that we' re going to make any progress without getting these positions II filled and I just want to emphasize to the City the frustration that I 'm beginning to have being on the Planning Commission. Coming to these meetings and not making progress on this list of things . I can only attribute it to the fact that we' ve had months and months of not having a II planning director . I guess I 'd like to hear the rest of your comments but I 'd like to see us move forward on this because it ' s getting very frustrating to not work on this list . There ' s a lot of important issues II here such as the blending ordinance. I can list 7 others on here that I think need attention and these have been on here for more than a year with no progress. I guess I 'd like to encourage the city adminstrator to get II these positions filled , which are budgeted and to allow us to go forward here. Conrad : I think we all have to support that comment . Jo Ann , what is the' status of interviewing? Olsen : I don ' t know that we ' re interviewing . I know the deadline for the' applications was a week or two ago but I don ' t know that anything ' s happened yet. Emmings : How many applications were received? Olsen: I saw that we got quite a few but just not real good applications. I don ' t know. I haven ' t talked with the City Mananger . I , Planning Commission Meeting July 5, 1989 - Page 21 Batzli : I hope whoever we hire doesn ' t read that art of the transcript . pt . Emmings: If nothing else, maybe, I don' t know. They' re not paying, that staff position right now it' s funded but nobody' s getting the salary. Why couldn' t they give it to someone like Mark and have him come back. Olsen: We' re using him as much as we can . Emmings: Yes but why couldn' t he take one of these at each meeting and get some action on it and kick it along? If it' s going to be a long time, because I agree wholeheartedly with Tim. If we' re not going to see any progress on this stuff, I don' t know if they'd authorize any expenditure so they could put together a little position paper with a suggested course of ' action and we could act on one every time we meet until we ' re done. Olsen: Actually Mark is finishing up all the Comprehensive Plan so A, 1, 2 and 3 is going to be done. I ' ve also given Mark the blending ordinance. ' He's working on convenience store moratorium. The rezoning of BF district to A-2, he ' s got that also . Emmings : When will we see those back? Soon? Olsen : I 'm also keeping him pretty busy with some of the planning reports when we get heavier agendas. Convenience store moratorium, that' s almost IL done. Batzli : What I 'd like to see though as part of any kind of really ' corporate practice, I 'd like to see a target date for when we' re going to discuss some of these and if you give them to Mark, indicate that they' re in Mark' s lap and get a tentative date for when we' re going to see them ' because I 'd rather see some progress than just ongoing, although ongoing is better than nothing. It doesn' t say to me which ones we' re really concentrating on and when we ' re going to see them. Headla: All we' re really asking the Council gets an interim city planner until they get one assigned . ' Emmings: Someone to fill the function maybe. Conrad : What issues are we real concerned with here? We ' ve been working ' on the Comprehensive Plan for 2 years and I think that' s a major issue. I think that ' s kind of embarrassing . How can you be working on a plan for 2 years? By the time you get it done, it' s time for a new plan. I think if people were paying attention , they'd say what are we doing? How can you be ' working on that for a couple years? But as I go through the rest of these, I don ' t see anything , they' re all important . We put them there . City Council has reacted to some of them and Jo Ann is going to summarize their ' comments but I don ' t see anything that is just really urgent that I would assign Mark Koegler that he' s not already working on. So I guess Tim, your comments are real valid . I think it' s really tough working with a one person planning department but the fact is there' s nobody else right now and I think the message is going to go up and they' re going to say well , we are working on it. To make it more urgent, I would say are there things Planning Commission Meeting 9 July 5, 1989 - Page 22 that are really critical that have to be reacted to within the next 2 months? Erhart : I 've always felt the blending ordinance was pretty important to something and I think it was reflected in the Council ' s opinion of what w ought to be working on with our priorities . That was one that they listed . We've been talking about that one I think since the last election which w what, a year and a half ago. A year ago. Also I think this number 15 , t standards for parking and garages. I realize that' s fairly recent but in my mind I 'd like to see that put to the forefront . Batzli : Ladd, what you' re saying is Mark has currently got some of these I in his lap already and you' re saying those, you think are the important ones. You don' t know which other ones you would give him? ' Conrad : I don ' t see , given a typical lead time, I don ' t see anything that I 'd elevate from a normal priority of Mark working on or staff working on. I have a hard time saying yes , let' s go out and hire somebody to do one of these. Personally. I think the Comprehensive Plan is just really important to wrap that up and get it done with. I can' t wait for 2 months or whatever to wrap that up because we' ve been working on it for 2 years but Mark is working on it and I heard him give us some dates so I 'm kind o' comfortable that that one' s progressing and how it impacts the MUSA line. I think that ' s really significant . Those are real important . Beyond that, in my mind, I 'm not sure that I would elevate any here to say let' s hire somebody, and I don ' t care if it' s Mark or somebody else . Erhart: I 'm not suggesting that. I guess what bothers me is we come in I here and we' re going to leave here at 9 : 00 and not have worked on one of these issues. That' s what kind of bothering me. Conrad : It ' s a real good point in that Jo Ann will work on the developers' who come in which takes precedent on everything on this list. Absolutely guaranteed so that ' s the real valid concern that I have in that the things that we want, the planning stuff that we want to work on, that we can ' really add value to , we don' t get to because the developers take priority. But the staff has an obligation to, in a timely manner , address the issues. Sometimes we also tell her to come back in 2 weeks because we table something or whatever so we set her calendar a little also but I think wha, you just said , to put some dates , or Brian , to put dates on here when they have to be back, that may help prioritize and allow Jo Ann to say, no we can ' t get it on next week' s agenda because we are reviewing some other things. But what I don ' t want to do is fill our meeting up until 12: 00 midnight . I 'm not going to do that . It ' s lousy management to come in her and work until 12: 00. Emmings : But Brian ' s point is well taken . Under status it shouldn' t say ongoing. It should say, if for example, I said maybe Koegler could be working on these and then I find out he' s working on 3 or 4 of them. I knell he was working on the Comprehensive Plan of course but I didn' t know he was working on the blending ordinance. I did know about the convenience store moratorium but forgot but let' s change that. Let' s make that status colum' more meaningful . The other thing is the Comprehensive Plan , really 1, 2 'Planning Commission mmzssxon Meeting July 5, 1989 - Page 23 and 3 are really all kind of comprehensive plan issues in a way. We ' re ' going to be discussing all of those and then number 7, under B will kind of follow from what happens on the Comprehensive Plan so really there' s 4 ' things being worked on on one there I think. And there' s some things when I look down here now I 'm not even sure why they' re, like the noise ordinance. I 'm not sure why that' s down on our list. I can' t remember. It says over here, public safety proposed an ordinance. That does make some ' sense that it would come from there rather than here maybe. I don' t know what it' s all about but I don' t know, does that belong in ours? ' Batzli : I think it was raised when we were talking about the lumber yard and things like that . I think it got on our list when we were talking about the conditional use permits, hours of operation things and it got on our agenda and public safety. We were the ones that did something with it. Conrad: Anyway, if we started putting down dates Jo Ann. ' Olsen : I can say that . . . Conrad : And I don ' t think you need to do that right now. ' Olsen: I can' t put dates on a lot of them. Blending ordinance, I could put that Mark Koegler is working on it but I wouldn' t be able to give you a date. Conrad : We need to know if it ' s , other than the word ongoing , we need to know if it' s in progress and then I think there has to be under status, the ' words are not assigned , consultant , staff to review or something that says what 's going on but then I also think there should be a column out there that says date when we would expect to see it . Batzli : And if you have to say to be determined, I suppose you have to say it but I 'd like to see a target date on some of these . At least for a draft. It doesn' t have to be the final thing but a draft or kick around some ideas or a status report on some of these would be nice. Erhart: But this is a great improvement over having nothing . I agree with ' all that . You would really make me feel good if you took item 1, contractor ' s yards off now. Olsen : It ' s got the status . It' s been approved . It ' s finished . ' Erhart: Yes , once it ' s approved, you can take it off . Olsen : Then you wouldn' t feel we' re making progress . ' APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Batzli moved, Emmings seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated June 21, 1989 as amended on page 46 by Steve Emmings to change the word "liberal" to "literal" . All voted in favor and the motion carried .