PC Minutes 07-21-2015Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
Aller: Make sure that we’re on site with easements and.
Aanenson: Total hard cover, yeah.
Aller: And that the hard cover is not exceeding 25 percent is the goal. Any additional items to
look at?
Madsen: And just for clarification that would include what we’re calling option E which would
be on the west side and then option F which would be on the east side. Are we still looking at
those two options?
Aller: What we’re calling them. You can come back with a clean, with a clean application that
says option A and option B. Option C. Whatever you want to come back with but you do know
how we feel about the other options already so.
Gregg Geiger: Yeah, those are.
Aller: So we want to focus on what potentially will work. So having a motion by Commissioner
Hokkanen and a second by Commissioner Yusuf, any further discussion?
Hokkanen moved, Yusuf seconded that the Planning Commission table the request for
variances to construct a detached garage at 3603 Red Cedar Point. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
LAMETTRY’S COLLISION, PLANNING CASE 2015-19: REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON A SINGLE
LOT AND TO PERMIT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY
DISTRICT; AND SITE PLAN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT TWO COMMERCIAL
BUILDINGS ON PROPERTY ZONED INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK (IOP) AND
LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AUDUBON ROAD AT MOTORPLEX COURT –
LAMETTRY’S. APPLICANT/OWNER: RICK LAMETTRY.
Generous: Thank you Chairman Aller and planning commissioners. Planning Case 2015-19.
It’s our public hearing tonight. The applicant is Rick LaMettry. It’s for a conditional use
permits and site plan review. The property is located at 1650 and 1651 Motorplex Court. It’s on
the west side of Audubon at Motorplex Court which is doing the research on this I found the
addresses finally so it’s just north of the railroad bridge that is on Audubon. The property is
segmented into two parts. There’s a small connection of land between the front and the back part
so that’s why it shows up there’s two parcels but it’s actually one. When Audubon Motorplex
originally came in there were two properties except for their configuration was slightly different
and as they’ve expanded the Motorplex over time we’ve adjusted the lot lines to take in part of
the one parcel and put into the other. That’s significant because of one of the conditional use
permits that they’re requesting. The Motorplex was approved in 2006. The site plan review at
the time showed 12 buildings that they were including as part of their complex. One of the
30
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
conditional use permits would have allowed them to have up to 14 buildings on one site.
However that was assuming that these two front parcels would be brought into the rest of the
association. Now a separate owner has taken over that second property and Mr. LaMettry is
coming in with this site plan review for his auto body shops and development. However as part
of that original development access was through this little private driveway that goes into that
and is part of conditions of approval we would want to make sure that an easement for
maintenance and access purposes was recorded against the property benefitting the Motorplex.
Again the conditional use permit is to allow multiple structures, in this case two principle
buildings on a single lot and to permit development within the Bluff Creek Overlay District.
Additionally we’re doing site plan review to construct two commercial buildings on the property.
Again back to the conditional use permits. We’re grouping two buildings on one property. City
code allows that through the conditional use permit process. The findings for it are general
standards under the conditional use permit standards. Also under the City’s Bluff Creek
protection ordinance we require that any development within the Bluff Creek corridor receive a
conditional use permit. In this case we want to make sure that we’re protecting the natural
features in this corridor. The area in blue represents the Bluff Creek primary corridor and the red
area is the buffer area that we maintain around the outside of that. As you can see this is a
connection of two branches of the Bluff Creek corridor. One goes to, towards the, what is it? We
call it the Chanhassen Preserve which is on the corner of Galpin and Highway 5 and the rest of it
follows the main Bluff Creek corridor coming down from the north that goes under Highway 5.
The one condition or two conditions that we have under the conditional use permit is to again
maintain the access to the existing Motorplex property and to dedicate the Bluff Creek primary
corridor, the back part of this property to the City so that we can protect that area in perpetuity.
So with that we are recommending approval of the conditional use permits for this development.
The site plan review consists of two buildings. The northerly building is 18,290 square feet and
it contains 3 garage storage units. The south building is 22,115 square feet and it would contain
9 garage storage units. On the north building the garage storage units are oriented towards
Audubon. It’s in an excess corner of the building from them and on the south building it would
be on the west and the south sides. This is the primary review process has taken us through
significant architectural changes. This was the initial submittal to the City requirements. Part of
our problem we had with this is our code prohibits the use of metal materials except as an accent
and in this instance it was exceeding the 15 percent for that. We requested the applicant work on
addressing some of our architectural concerns. We also noted that they needed to provide a pitch
roof element which is required under our ordinance and we requested that they provided greater
articulation on the building so this actually affected both of them but I’ll go through the north
one first. They provided a first revision to this north building and they, in this instance they’ve
added the architect, the roof treatment that would tie it into the rest of the Motorplex
development. They’ve added some architectural detailing on the outside that those white lines
and then they also provided transition to this building to get it. We did specify that the
commercial component of this we wanted to have more a commercial feel to it and look to it and
so we were trying to work with them. Again they provided this canopy element over their
entryway and the window area in going into that unit. That’s one of the elements I really like
and in the staff report we said that we wanted to make sure that this canopy was both
architecturally appealing and functional because that’s a south elevation and I’ve learned from
the past that those rooms can get very hot during the summer months and even into the winter so
I wanted something that would work with them. The back side of these buildings will be hidden
31
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
and so they’re really not visible from the, to the public so there will be landscaping but I also
wanted to make sure that they provided some articulation on that and in this case they added
columns. However we were running into problems between how do you transition from the
garage unit into the commercial unit and so when this last one came in last night I think and what
they’ve done is taken the brick and aggregate materials and turned them into gray which more
closely represents the existing cement board panels that are used on the garage storage units.
The one element that he changes to change the canopy into this fascia board front and I believe
that really we should go back to the canopy element up there. I know our discussion was to try
to create some type of presence for the entry into the building. I’m not sure this is the one that
we’d like. Again I believe we should use the canopy in there and let them put the lettering above
that. But architecturally the building blends, flows better and it has a lot more architectural
interest in this one. Then we go down to the south buildings. Again their initial presentation
was, had the metal fascia which greatly exceeded the City’s code requirement and then they had
brick and aggregate. We requested that they look at and try to blend it in more with the rest of
the Audubon. The Motorplex development and that they’ve added these pitched roof elements
and then they also did some architectural changes. However again we were having difficulties
with the transition from the garage units into the commercial buildings and so finally they
submitted this one which brought in again the same building colors, materials as the north
building. They continued this fascia element above the entry. Again we believe it should go
back to a more canopy entrance covering there and then they added, we wanted them to address
Audubon as their primary public fascia and so we wanted them to provide more articulation and
so we believe this elevation or this plan set will work to do that. The rest of it, the site grading.
They’re going to mass grade the site as part of this development. There are 3 retaining walls that
are incorporated in this. This north retaining wall on the north end of the parking lot goes up to 8
feet. If you look at the back elevation of the building there’s quite a drop in that too so the
building itself acts as a retaining wall. On the south building there’s two retaining walls. One’s
along Audubon. This northerly one is 4 feet tall and then along the south side of the building this
is a 5 foot tall retaining wall. In conjunction with, well I guess that’s in my grading plan. Thank
you. As part of this whole thing they will need a national NPDES permit and a SWPPP plan.
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System or something like that and it’s a permit to
make sure that stormwater complies with State and Federal requirements as well as surface water
management plan. As part of the utilities, City sewer and water are available. It was extended
down Motorplex Court and so they will tie into those services. As part of their stormwater plan
they are providing underground treatment systems and water will be treated in this and then
discharge into the existing stormwater system and eventually into Bluff Creek. Part of our
requirements is to verify that that will meet City and State requirements. The landscaping plan
they’re going to provide landscaping around the entire building. They comply with our
minimum requirements for trees. They’re a deficit in shrubs and a condition of approval would
be that they meet those requirements. Again this will help to transition the building. Soften
some of those elevations. And here on the north side, this is where the most deficit. We’re
requiring that they provide additional shrubbery or shrubs along this north elevation. There are
some other ones on the east side of the building. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan
and conditional use permit subject to the conditions in the staff report and adoption of the
attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation. With that I’d be happy to answer any
questions.
32
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
Aller: Questions at this time. None at this time.
Yusuf: Can I just make a comment?
Aller: Absolutely.
Yusuf: Just a comment Bob. I think it’s really good that the way you worked with the applicant
to try to revise the plans to make it blend in better and also advising them about what would be
better for cooling the office area too.
Aller: What is the difference between the canopy and the fascia that has been presented? What
would be the benefits as you understand them?
Generous: Well architecturally I believe the canopy will be both more functional and fitting with
the rest of the building. They’re using canopies on the south buildings and on the east side of the
north building and so I want to continue that architectural harmony. And also just the big red,
blue boxes subjectively is something that I didn’t prefer so.
Aller: Questions. Alright we’ll have the applicant come forward, if you want to come forward
and make a presentation at this time. Please come forward. State your name and address and
representation.
Richard LaMettry: Good evening. My name’s Richard LaMettry. I’m the chief managing
member of G & R Chanhassen LLC that owns the property. I have my engineer and architect
here if you have any questions of them and I’m willing to answer any questions you have but the
engineer was going to present the project.
Aller: Okay, well thank you very much. Have you had an opportunity to take a look at the
report?
Richard LaMettry: Yeah the only comment I wanted to make is on the canopy. You’ll see on
the south building there’s two protrusions each side of the canopy face and typically we extend
those out 4 feet so it gives the screening for the sun and on the northerly building it doesn’t show
that and it should match. They should both be the same so we didn’t get the protrusions on each
side of that canopy and that blue is a little intense. Our’s is a grayish blue so it’s not that intense.
Aller: Great, thank you very much. We have architect coming forward. Any of your team can
come forward and just speak in turn.
Jeff Schneider: I’m Jeff Schneider with RDS Architects and we’ve been working with Rick and
Bob on the design of this building.
Aller: Welcome.
Jeff Schneider: Thank you.
33
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
Aller: So tell us about the building. How did you come up with the design and how is it
perceived?
Jeff Schneider: Well that first rendition you saw with the blue all the way around it kind of
resembled some of his other buildings that he had and we kind of just were king of working with
that and then realized with talking with Bob and with the other buildings on you know the
Motorplex site that we you know should blend it more to those and kind of make it all, you know
all look like the same construction basically so the rental garages have the same look as the
Motorplex buildings somewhat and then the shop areas are a little bit different. Not industrial
but more commercial we felt but we still wanted to have it kind of in my opinion it’s got the old
world look to the buildings so we’re kind of trying to go with that.
Aller: With the difference in the signs, the canopy versus the presentation that’s presently been
provided, architecturally and structurally what are the differences? If any.
Jeff Schneider: We have the same projection on it so like the shading is going to be the same
with either one. I think Rick brought up the point where those piers, the brick piers on either
side were supposed to project out to the face or beyond the canopy on this version so it wouldn’t
look like a big box sitting on the side of a building.
Aller: So there’d be more articulation on the surface there.
Jeff Schneider: Yeah.
Aller: But structurally either one is acceptable.
Jeff Schneider: Oh yeah.
Aller: So it’s really aesthetics.
Jeff Schneider: Yep.
Aller: Price point, is there a big difference to the?
Jeff Schneider: Yeah I would image more that you’d have to add onto the building it’s going to
cost more but it’s you know all with metal framing and it’s, they’re panels. They’re aluminum
panels. Pre-colored panels and definitely not that blue of a color but similar to that.
Aller: And would the intent be if there was a canopy that the signage would be just above the
canopy?
Jeff Schneider: Right, yeah in one of the versions it would be, it had the blue. Yeah, this one
here.
Aller: Except it’s a more mute blue.
34
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
Jeff Schneider: Yes. Yes definitely.
Aller: Great. Any additional questions from anyone?
Tietz: I have a question. I need to understand and maybe learn more about Cultec Recharger
system. I assume that it’s been used in the metro area before but it looks, going on their website
it looks like there’s either a retention type system with a slow release. Otherwise there’s a media
bed beneath these cones and I don’t know what happens so help me understand it.
Jeff Schneider: I’m not the engineer.
Tietz: Well he’s right behind you.
Jeff Schneider: I’m sorry.
Aller: Your team. If you could just state your name and representational capacity please.
Nate Herman: Yeah, Mr. Chair, members of the commission. My name is Nate Herman. I work
with Sathre-Berquist. I’m the engineer of the project and to touch on Mr. John, what’s your last
name?
Tietz: Tietz.
Nate Herman: Tietz, okay. And it’s a good question. Not many people understand the Cultec or
the underground stormwater systems. Essentially when you don’t have a whole lot of open land,
what we’re doing is we’re putting ponds underneath parking lots or anywhere you really can so
instead of filling, instead of digging a big hole and filling it with rock which will get you maybe
you know 40 percent air voids, you end up needing a lot of rock for what would typically be all
open space in a pond so these Cultec chambers, what they do is instead of being a pipe they’re
essentially like half a lips that allow you to create many more air voids to simulate kind of an
open space pond underneath your.
Tietz: You still have a media or rock base underneath that’s part of the filter system?
Nate Herman: Correct, yep. Yep there’d be pre-treatment through a sump manhole and then the
Cultec system has a sediment, a sediment trap row that’s designed to catch any sediment that can
be easily vac’d out and then surrounding these chambers is, it’s an igneous rock that’s angular in
style shape to provide structure component to it but also designs for extra voids and also the city
and the watershed require a stormwater volume requirement. And so depending you can
obviously design these in any way, form or fashion to which would ever meets the need but a lot
of times the area underneath your chambers in the rock is your volume voids for your volume
retention.
Tietz: You mentioned, I have a question about operation and maintenance. That’s a privately
held system and you talked about a vacuum. If you have to remove debris and siltation that gets
35
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
in it that’s, is there a maintenance agreement or how is that handled with the City so that you
know that the system is going to work 15 years from now?
Nate Herman: Yeah this is, it’s different in every case but typically there’s a maintenance
agreement between the owner, the property owner and the city.
Tietz: Okay.
Fauske: Mr. Chair.
Aller: Ms. Fauske.
Fauske: If I may provide clarification to Commissioner Tietz’s question. On page 18 of the staff
report under the Water Resources conditions of approval there is condition number 3 is the
ownership operations, pardon me. Operations and maintenance manual for that.
Tietz: Yeah I saw that Alyson. I just wanted to hear more about it.
Fauske: Okay, certainly okay.
Tietz: Concerned when I saw the big vacuum truck down on Lyman and right by the high school
this morning when I was out biking. Obviously there was some overflow with the storm last
weekend and there was a huge truck down there cleaning up something so I’m just curious if it
has, if this system is in place in the metro area. Is there any, it looks like it’s a California
company so obviously these systems are used throughout the US.
Nate Herman: Yes. There’s various manufacturers. Cultec right now is the one we’ve been
working with this one and we’ve also used Trident and ADS makes them. They’re very similar.
You know they all have their special strengths or so but they’re all very similar in fashion and
there’s hundreds if not you know a thousand or more in the state of Minnesota.
Tietz: Okay, thanks.
Nate Herman: Yeah they’re becoming quite popular.
Tietz: It’s a good solution.
Nate Herman: Yeah I mean just in our firm alone right now we probably have 6 systems going
in you know in different projects. Yeah.
Tietz: Thanks.
Nate Herman: Yeah. And I’m happy to address any other engineering comments so.
Tietz: Does the rain water from the buildings, does that get into the system then too? I couldn’t,
the drawings are, my eyes are getting really hard to read the drawings.
36
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
Nate Herman: Yeah, the idea would be.
Tietz: So the full, the full system all the hard surfaces are brought down and rain leaders are
brought into that system then too?
Nate Herman: Yep and you know we can work with the architect just to make sure that all the
inlets are going to best catch the roof water but the systems are designed to capture all the hard
surface from the roof.
Aller: Additional questions? Thank you sir.
Nate Herman: Yes, thank you.
Aller: Alright well we’ll open the public hearing portion of this item. Anyone wishing to come
forward to speak either for or against. Mr. LaMettry.
Richard LaMettry: On the blue, it’s similar to your chairs.
Aller: The public hearing is open. Anyone wishing to speak for or against this item can come
forward and do so at this time. Seeing no one come forward, I’m going to close the public
hearing and open for discussion with the commissioners.
Tietz: Looks like a great solution.
Yusuf: I’m excited. I like it.
Madsen: The revised picture that they have shown, is that the final picture that we’re voting on
or could there be more revisions? And I’m just being sensitive to the letter that had been
submitted about the concern to just have it fit in with the other buildings.
Aller: And that was my concern too coming in but with the new design and the new structures
that have been presented, the articulation is different. The colors are different so I think it meets
those needs and I don’t know if there’s anyone here.
Aanenson: We can make sure that the motion includes the date that those plans were received.
With plans dated, architectural plans dated. I think the comment was regarding the first ones that
got put out online. The first architectural comments which we concurred with so we have the
date that those are on we can add that to your motion of approval. Architectural plans dated.
Aller: So the newest version and then we do need to discuss the request for the signage.
Whether or not it would be canopy or not. I personally, I look at the, you know we hear the bad
words around here, big box and that’s what you think. You know they’ve got the big blue box
up there and I really like the softening of the canopy and I think it, it just goes well with the rest
of the building and so that would be my inclination. And structurally, architecturally it seems
like it doesn’t matter.
37
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
Weick: Canopies are fabric is that?
Jeff Schneider: It can be metal.
Weick: So it doesn’t have to be right? It’s not like an awning that’s made out of cloth or
something.
Aller: It could be.
Weick: Could be.
Aller: Right.
Hokkanen: But it won’t be.
Aanenson: Applebee’s are. Perkins are.
Hokkanen: Oh that’s true.
Aanenson: Yes we do have some fabric and that’s one of the ways that actually we got the
pitched roof element working with Perkins. Not with Perkins but certainly with Applebee’s by
using the effect of canopies to try to give some architectural to that building.
Hokkanen: That’s true.
Weick: I like the sign but I’m not…
Aller: So if there’s no further discussion on it I think it looks like it will be a great project. The
letter did talk about sound and different things that were going on on Fridays and Saturdays and
I’m going to leave that.
Aanenson: We are managing that on a separate process and we’re aware of it. We’re working
on it.
Aller: …the City so it’s not before us.
Madsen: An additional question. Will the sign, which ever way it, they decide to go, will there
be lighting on that sign and I’m just assuming if so it would be in compliance with the lighting.
Aller: It would have to meet our, is there any lighting anticipated?
Generous: I’m sure they would be internally lit.
Aller: Internally lit which would meet our signage requirements.
38
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
Generous: They also have to come in with a separate sign permit review and provide us with all
the detailed information for that. Compliance with city code as well as making sure it sticks to
the building.
Madsen: Thank you.
th
Generous: And excuse me, the plan, July 20 was the elevation date that, when we received
that…
Aanenson: If we could put that in under planning conditions. We have number 4, the
applicant’s architect work with plans so you may want to modify that one. I’m on page 18 of 19
in your staff report.
Aller: So the staff report will be amended.
Aanenson: Yeah so we’d say to work with the, you know they’ve worked with us and we have
th
plans dated July 20, is that correct Mr. Generous?
Generous: Yes.
th
Aanenson: So there’s just some final tweaking to those plans dated July 20. Then everybody’s
making sure I think a good point that we’re operating off the same architectural plans.
Aller: And we adopt all other Findings of Fact and Recommendation.
Aanenson: Correct.
Aller: So with that I’ll entertain a motion.
Undestad: I’ll make a motion here.
Aller: Mr. Undestad.
Undestad: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the
site plan and conditional use permit subject to the conditions in the staff report and adopts the
attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Madsen: Second.
Aller: I have a motion by Commissioner Undestad. Second by Commissioner Madsen. Do I
have any further discussion?
39
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
Undestad moved, Madsen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission
recommends the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit to allow multiple
structures on a single lot and to permit development within the Bluff Creek Overlay
District, and Site Plan Review to construct two commercial buildings on property zoned
Industrial Office Park (IOP) and located on the west side of Audubon Road at Motorplex
Court subject to the following conditions and adoption of the attached Findings of Fact and
Recommendation:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1.Access must be maintained for the property to the rear (Autobahn Motorplex). If not
currently in place, an access and maintenance agreement must be recorded.
2.That portion of the parcel located westerly and containing the Bluff Creek Overlay District
shall be dedicated to the city.
SITE PLAN
Building:
1.The buildings are required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system.
2.The buildings are required to have individual water and sewer connections.
3.Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
4.Retaining walls over four feet high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit
must be obtained prior to construction.
5.Detailed occupancy and accessibility-related requirements will be addressed when complete
building plans are submitted.
6.The owner and/or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as
possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
Fire Marshal:
1.A three-foot clear space shall be maintained around all fire hydrants.
2.Additional fire hydrants will be required (one for each building). Contact the Chanhassen
Fire Marshal for exact locations.
Engineering:
1.Minor modifications to the grading plan are needed to clarify the proposed grades,
specifically:
40
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
a.The proposed 952 foot contour northwest of the entrance to Audubon Road closes in on
itself, and
b.The proposed 944 foot contour at the south site’s middle entrance.
2.The eastern retaining wall on the south site must not encroach into the adjacent drainage and
utility easement.
3.LaMettry’s and Auto Motorplex must enter into a cross-access agreement for the existing
private street. Staff recommends that this agreement address maintenance responsibilities
and costs.
4.On the south site, the drive aisle between the east of the building and the parallel parking
must be at least 22 feet wide.
5.On the south site, ensure that there is adequate space for vehicles backing out of Unit #1.
6.A building permit is required to extend the sewer and water services to each of the buildings;
a plumbing inspector shall inspect the connections.
Environmental Resources:
1.All transplanted trees shall be warranted for one year from the time the overall landscaping is
complete. Any trees that do not show 75% canopy at the end of warranty shall be replaced
with new trees.
2.Minimum bufferyard requirements must be met.
Planning:
1.The developer shall provide a sidewalk connection from Motorplex Court to Park Road.
2.The applicant shall prepare a lighting plan with photometrics prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
3.The applicant shall provide staff with a description of the sign locations for both buildings
and monument sign.
4.The applicant’s architect shall work with staff to develop transitions between the different
materials and the architectural detailing of the buildings as shown on plans dated Received
July 20, 2015 to make them compatible with the entire development.
Water Resources:
1.A standalone Surface Water Pollution Prevention Plan with all elements required in Parts III
and IV of the NPDES Construction permit shall be prepared and submitted to the city for
review and approval prior to any earth disturbing activities.
2.The city-developed maintenance agreement shall be revised accordingly, executed and
recorded against the property.
41
Chanhassen Planning Commission – July 21, 2015
3.The applicant shall develop, or cause to be developed, an operations and maintenance manual
which shall specify anticipated inspection and maintenance, as well as schedule, necessary in
order to ensure there is not significant decreases in the practices’ efficacies. This operations
and maintenance manual shall be referenced in the maintenance agreement.
4.The applicant must demonstrate that the required 90% reduction in TSS will result from the
proposed storm water best management practices using P8, the MIDS calculator or another
approved methodology.
5.The applicant shall provide documentation that adequate pretreatment is provided for the
Cultec Recharger™ systems or that pretreatment is not required per the manufacturer’s
specifications.
6.Surface Water connection fees in the amount of $118,134.00 will be due with final approval
and prior to being issued a certificate of occupancy. In lieu of these fees, that portion of the
parcel located westerly and containing the Bluff Creek Overlay District may be given a
unique PID and dedicated to the city.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
Aanenson: And again just for the record “as amended.” The conditions “as amended.”
Aller: Correct. Motion carries. The conditions had been amended prior to the motion so that’s
the way I was treating it but to be clear it’s as amended.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Yusuf noted the verbatim and summary
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated July 7, 2015 as presented.
COMMISSIONER PRESENTATIONS.
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
Aller: City Council action update.
th
Aanenson: There were none. Council did not meet on August 13 so your last items that you
looked at, the specialty retail and the Glaccum subdivision will be on next Monday night, the
th
27. Going further along for their agenda, upcoming items. We did receive a couple of
th
applications but first going to August 4. We hope that you are participating with your
th
neighborhood for National Night Out and we will have a get together on August 6 with two of
the other commissions. The environmental and the park commission so we’ve got a couple
things lined up. I’ll share with you what those are. We are going to visit, go down 101 from
Pioneer down to the bottom of the wye. The roundabout’s been paved. I’m not sure we can get
on there but we’ll head down that way. On our way down there we’ll talk about the design that
they’re working on for the environmental assessment. You’ll see some of the improvements.
How that will tie into the existing 101. The park commission and environmental commission are
kind of interested in the Lotus Lake and we look at the AIS inspections and some of the
42