06-19-91 Agenda and Packetl-
3
t 11e
, AGENDA
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMTSSION
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19, 1991, 7:30 P.U.
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIyE
CALL TO ORDER
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Conditional Use Pemit for installation of a portable chenicaltoilet on an existing recreational beachlot, located on
Minnewashta Parkway across from Linden circLe, Minnewashta
Creek Homeowners Association.
Conditional Use Pernit Amendment to al1ow a sth bedroom in aseparate structure to the Bluff Creek Bed and Breakfast sitelocated on property zoned A2 and located on Bluff Creek Driveapproximately tr nile north of Hwy. 2L2, Ann Karels.
Ches Mar Trails, property zoned PUD-R and RR, located on Hwy.41, approximately I nile north of Hsry. 5, Craig Srraggert:
PUD Amendment to anend the Ches ljlar Farn PUD to create 4single farnily lots and 1 outlot.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to arnend from mediumresidentiaL to residential Low density.
Conditional Use Pernit to create a recreational beachlot
wetland Alteration Pemit to instal,l a boardwalk througha class A rretland.
Zoning Ordinance Amendment to create a bluff protection
ordinance section to the city code.
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
APPROVAL OT }IINUTES
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE
ONGOING ITEI.{S
AD}{INISTRATIVE APPROVALS
a
b
c
d
4
OPEN DISSUSSION
5. Eighway 5 Corridor.
6. Arboretum Issues.
ADJOURNTiIENT
2.
CITY OF PC DATE: June 19, 1991
EH[NHISSTN
STAFF REPORT
CC DATE: July 8, 1991
91-5 Ct P
A1-Jaff: v
E #:
By:
cAs
Fz
C)
=(LL
B
UJFa
Ilinnerrashta Parkway across fron Linden circleOutlot B, ![inneuashta Creek Second Addition
Uinnerrashta Creek Honeowrers Association
3 891 Linden CircleExcelsior, MN 553 31
PROPOSAL:
I,OCATION:
APPLICANT:
PRESENT ZONTNG:
ACRXAGE:
DENSITY:
ALTACENT ZONING A}{D
LAND USE:
PUD-R, Planned Unit Deyelopnent-Res ident ia1
Approxinately 9,600 Equare feet
WATER AND SEWER:Available to the site.
PHYSTCAL CHARACTER. :The site is
llinnewashta.
a riparian lot to Lake
2OOO I.AND USE PI,AN:Iow Density Residential
AEendment to the Conditional Use pernit to Install, aPortable Chenical Toilet During the Summer Season on aRecreational Beachlot
N - RSF, single fanily
S - RSF; single fanily
E - Lake Uinnewashta
W - PUD-R, single fanillz
$ixol
a
A
'1IIY
-.1200
otoo
4000
3900
s000
-5600
-
33OO
5500
3200
IInr
\-l
u,\
\
h
\
t
t
\
\
L
(a
\
.l
\
Dg
!Cg
Ir roo
D.-
g
o.r)
d=
t.,q*
0
oI,
\
s
sI
N
$\\(,)
.-sooo N
.)
I !Cr{ ---
rJ F\
I n
F
]I
*
\
t--\>r\
q
o
t\
f
HANHAS I'
l6r
l(,l.
t..
f,,
:'1
t
ifr
@t)
T
\)(
tA
I:l
F .-r--
- CITY OF
H
I
o,
oinl
,.. ,..)
. .1' C)
:"ah 2.\ 1,,
rHtl
,
-!"''
Ir
rT
(
-
a
lt
1),y
3700
+a
Ir!I IIIIIIIII
J: ",
0
!roo
I
On August 13, 1990, a variance request rras heard by the Board ofAdjustnents and Appeals and city Council requesting installation ofa portable chemical toitet during the summer seasons on therecreational beachlot located on l,linnenashta parkway across fronLinden Circle by the Minnet ashta creek homeowners. The Board ofAdjustments and City Council denied the variance requestunanimously. They believed that this request would be noreappropriately reviet ed as an anendment to the ordinance. Theydirected staff to prepare an ordinance anendment that would a1lowfor chemical toilets. Staff rrorked closely with the planning
Commission to develop an ordinance that would allow portablechemical toilets on recreational beachlots.
BACKGROUND
on November l, ]-979, the City entered into a conditional use pernit
agreement with Minnewashta Creek Honeowrlers Association to aI1owthe creation of a recreational beachLot. The site was allowed asand beach, a fence and a sign stating xPrj,vate Beach . AlL otherstructures were prohibited such as docks, piers, boat racks, canoeracks, etc.
On May 6, L99L, an ordinance anendment was
council .
adopted by the city
PROPOSAL/ SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing to install a portable chenical toiletduring the summer seasons on the recreational beachlot owned by the
Minnewashta creek Homeowners Association. In 1929 when thisrecreational beachlot received its conditional use permit, it hadto meet the condition that the beachlot was operated by aresidential neighborhood association. Although this beachlot doesnot meet todayrs standards, it is extrenely rrell kept. A fence islocated to the north and south edges of the property. A sandblanket i.s located on the east portion of the property. The sitealso contains a 42 inch caliper oak tree located to the north ofthe site which is the approximate location of where the applicantsare proposing to install the portable chenical toilet. Theportable chenical toilet is proposed to be encLosed in a franeworkof wooden lattice, on three sides with an extension in frontconcealing the vie!, of the door. The appticant is also proposingto plant clinbing vines at the base of the lattice on aII threesides of the structure. Staff is recommending approval of theconditional use permit request with appropriate conditions.
Minnewashta Creek HOAConditional Use Permi.t Amendment
June 19, 199L
Page 2
.-.rndif i.tnal TTqa Parlnif
Section 20-263 of the City Code, subpara. 16 allows portable
chenicaL toilets as a condition of approval of a recreationalbeachlot. Iltinnewashta lloneorrners beachlot rras approved with aconditional use pernit in 1979. The ordinance states that any useof chemical toiLets on recreational beachlots shall be subje-t tothe following conditions:
a. The nininun setback fron the ordinary high water nark shatt be75 feet. Side and front yard setbacks shal1 be uaximized toachieve naxinum screening fron adjacent Lots and the lake.
It nay only be used Memorial Day to Labor Day and shall beremoved fron the lot during the rest of the year.
The appl,icant is proposing to locate the portablechenical toilet at a distance of 129 feet frorn theordinary high water mark of Lake tlinnerrashta, rrith a lOfoot setback to the south, 45 feet to the north and 40feet from llinnelrashta Parkway. The portable chernicaltoilet wiLl be enclosed in a framework of wooden latticeon 3 sides with an extension on the front concealing theview of the door. clinbing vines wil,l be planted ai thebase of the lattice on all 3 sides of the structure tornaxinize screening.
b
*The applicant has subnitted a copy of a serviceagreement. A date for delivery of the unit has not beenspecified as of yet nainly because the applicant iswaiting for city approval of the conditional use permit.They have agreed to abide by the outlined ti:nel imitations .
It sha11 be securely anchoredtipping.to the ground to prevent
The applicant has requested a BFI portable toilet unit.Each BFI unit is nounted on skids which extend fron thefront and back 1 to 3 inches. To stake the units to thegrround, they use 3 foot wooden stakes that driven intothe ground and then nailed to the skids on all 4 sides ofthe unit. AIso, building a wooden shelter around theportable toilet to contain the unit will leave verylittIe room to nove or rocli the unit, thus discouragin|vandal isn.
*
l,[innerrashta creek HoA
Conditional Use Permit Anendnent
June 19, 1991
Page 3
c.
Mi.nnewashta Creek HOAConditional Use Pernit AmendmentJune 1.9 , 1991
Page 4
d. It sball be screened fron thewith landscaping.
lake and residential property
ls pentioned earlier, the applicant plans on providing alattice framework on three sides of the unit with -an
extension in front conceating the view of the door.Clinbing vines are proposed to be ptanted at the base of -the lattice on all three sides of the structure. A 42inch oak tree located rrest of the proposed location ofthe portable toilet vill provide additional screeningfrom Minnewashta Parkway.
e.It sha1l be serviced at least weekly.
*
The contract indicates that the unit wiLl be serviced atleast once a week by BFI .
Only rnodels designed to nininizenay be used.
the potential for spillin!
1) Nane, address and phone nunber of applicant.2) Site plan showing proposed location.3) Nane, address and phone nunber of chemical toiletsupplier.4) PIan for conrnercially naintaining the chenical toilet,including a copy of any agreement ior naintenance and thenaBe, address and phone nunber of person responsible foruaintenance.5) A rritten description of how the applicant intends toscreen the portable chenical toitet fron aII views intothe property, including vLerrs from the lake.
* The applicant has subnitted atL of the above reguirenentsas shoun in the attachnents.
f
s
* BFf uses specially designed tanks that are slope designedso that the contents cannot spill out if tipped unlessthe tank is over half fuII. Furthermorel - nFI useschenicals that are bio-degradable to be environnentatlysafe in case a spill did happen.
Receive an annual license fron the City planning Departnent.The License sha1l be issued unless the tonditioni ot approvalof this ordinance have been violated. AlI iic"rr""applications shall be accornpanied by the followinginfornation:
Although therecreational theona
applicants are seeking to intensify the use ofbeachlot by adding a portable chenical toilet
Minnewashta creek HOA
Conditional Use Perrnit Amendment
June 19, 19 91
Page 5
beachlot that does not neet todayis standards, the applicants havekept the beachlot well naintained. If inprovenents were believedto be necessary, in the opinion of staff, we rrould have proposedthat these be required. Horrever, upon review of the site, te findit to be satisfactory. The portable toilet will be at a reasonabledistance fron the high water mark of Lake t[innewashta and will bescreened with a wooden framework as well as vegetation. The 42inch caliper oak tree will provide additional screening.
RE COMMENDATION
Staff recommends the
motion:
2
Portable chenical toilet application.
Plan showing proposed Location of portable chenical toilet.I{ritten description and sketch of screening the portable
chenicaL toilet.
copy of service agreenent betrreen BFI and uinneirashta creek
Iloneouners Association.Letter from BFI dated June L2, L99L.L€tter fron BFI dated June 5, 1991.Zoning Ordinance No. 6A. 04.Staff report and PLanning Conmission minutes dated July 23,
L979.
copy of conditional use perroit dated NoveDber 1, 1979.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Planning Cornmission adopt the fotlowing
'rThe Planning Commission reconmends approval of Conditional UsePernit #91-5 to aIIow a portable chenical toilet on }linnet ashta
creek Honeowners Association Recreational Beachlot (OutLot B) withthe following conditions:
1. The applicant appLies for a license from the city on an annualbasis prior to installation of the portable chenical toilet.
The portable chemical toilet shaLl only be pernitted fronMenorial Day to Labor Day and shall be removed from thebeachlot during the rest of the year.
The beachlot sha1l be rnaintained in good condition in a nannerconsistent rrith previous approvals and current ordinance
requirenents . tr
ATTACHITIENTS
3
CITY OF CHANIASSEN
590 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, l,IN 55317
937-1900
PORTABLE CtrEI,IICAIJ TOILET APPIJICATIOII
Name of Person Applying c c
Address -3 fq I i,vdtN Ci"cl
Telephone No. Daytine 4ry4-2059-Evening _ J.4j1/1€
Name of Chemical Toilet Supplier
Address
.553 - /5,r 7
4//
Name of Person Responsible for Uaintenance
Address
J A(
The folloving information Bust be subnitted:
1. Site plan showing proposed location of chernical toilet.
2. A written description of how the applicant intends to screenthe portable chemical toile froro all views into the property,including views frou the lake.
3. A plan for connercially naintaining the chenical toilet,including a copy of any agreenent for rnaintenance.
TeLephone No.
ApprovaL Date
-5.s.2 - t..r 7
Honeolrners Association Na^e /tl i lt ru n, :nSlfA CpSer ilo nrfUtUtB,S
v
Telephone No.
ClW OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317.
(612) 337-1e00
OEVELOPMENT REVIE}Y APPUCATION
t ciA-rAPPLICANTC
ADDRESS -4 Pq I (rpctt ebds ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE (Day rime)4 r74-3c52-
c )3
TELEPHONE:
1. _ Comprehensive Plan Amendment I t. _ Subdivision
2. i( Conditional Use Permit 12. _ Vacation ol ROVEasEments
3. _ Grading/Excavation Permit 13._ Variance
lnterim Use Permit4
5. _ Notitication Signs 15._ Zoning Appeal
6._ Planned Unit Development 16._ Zoning Ordinance Arrendment
7. _ Hezoning 17. _ Filing Fees/Aromey Cost
18._ Consuttant Fees
9._ Sign Plan Review
10._ Site Plan Review
Twenty.sir full size totded coples o, the pbn3 mu3l be tubm ed.
8\k'X 11'Beduced copy of transperency tor !!ch phn aheet.
A list ot all property owner3 within
lncluded wirh fhe !pplicltion.
500 test ot the boundarles ol the propeAy mu3t
r NOTE - when multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged lor €ach apdication.
14. _ Wetland Alleration Permit
8. _ Sign Permits
TOTAL FEE $-
pRoJEcr NAME rtul, r'11]r-c.wii5ht r, Ltec< Hanree"q6g1^e Brr..cl \c,l
LOCATION L <i',{,ii 1 .:rshto.Pof<,-ncy
i <- r-;:a Ft-Ocn
LEGAL DESCRIPTION =- .\ \-,-\r-!rnd.er1 L-iac-\e-rr< c.- [-.r-- & .
PRESENT ZONING
REQUESTED ZONING ')( iD- R
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION
REASON FOR THIS REOUEST
This
and
Plan
This
wilh
whor
own(
aulh
lwill
und(
aulh
olm
1
2
llinneHashta ParkHay creat€s a potential hazard to any p3destri8ncrossing 1t. Although there ls a palnted crosswalk andpedestrian crossing slgns posted, most vehicles lgnore them, and
fey motorists obey the posted 30 n.p.h, sp6ed I'lnlt.
}{e believe ln a clean environment and a clean lake to svim in.l{hiie ye yould hope all beach users you'ld take the time to go
home and use their oHn toi]et facilitles, ye knoy this ls nothappening. Especla'l1y xlth sma1 I children yho usually "run outof time". . Th€ portab'le chemical tollet cmpanies re have
contacted havB assurad us that the unit Hould b6 clelned a
minimum of once peJ xeek or more often lf d€emed necessary.
There yould be no cost to th€ Clty of Chanhrsson. The
Assoclatlon trlll assume a]'l costs for the rental and malntenanceof a portable chemical toilet.
)r complying
am the parly
I ol proot of
or lam the
rn. I further
prior lo any
:t to the best
rre recorded
y Recorder's
J
{
i
I als
agai
Otli(
Due to the lack of a clty malntained r€creatlona'l faclllty ln or near our
ne ighborhood, He feel our requ€st 1s falr and r€Esonablo.
Signature of Appl Date
nature of Date
Application Received on S"df 1/ Fe'e Paid aeceretNo.316K
rw14 5-a0 -? /
i-iiD-P
RI
REOUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
ll information
lter with the
rlication.
5-e0-?t
6lse
Thls applicalion will be considered by the Planning Commisslon/Board of Adlustments and Appeals on -...-
-60 43
ooz(
,Y./\
PLANNLD?(>I<I-\BLE..€ hlEMt.-trL
-l-oI.r-gr..., foaq1or,\
01
o
oc
CA\--*
€
F
ft
\s*rl
v+
6C\
:>
t-
P.
^r\
F
ln3o=l
)o(
B
-={
\
c
\tl
I
-. I--o!-P.r 76
st
oxFr.i,
E56
-$* *;
t's" "
*n'46
f,<
yZ6-n>I{t^
z
{
/;
_> \-./=2
^tb ./'
" r3?-
''--1 -
a
+
\
In
2R
_ 6\ \i./.. 4
T
o
Vt
cA
ftlY
C
2a
tb
Z
/.,/r'--
(p*0.\
\-/
t{
\
a",
I
I
I
,o
,.ea_---,
r(
\'
I
(
It
c
a
6bo'
,I
\J\
u
t43o<
2)
.+
2
6
t
ot
rr
+
oI
I
I
I
I
I
t
N
1
r\
3
E L' 61 -F gt_r,^4r^ .:
__J-
t
:(,
t^,
..i.
1....
l j'.
{.-
,t-a(r')l
8,
o
!
\
(
;
>
II
lr
I
F
a:r
,.:-{-.,
. Poprtb/e c*rn,'oit ei/er ui// be.
EttcJqscd t u_ ,e feeueuo,ep o{-t)oodeu
/iriiie, )i-irlirr .sr'drs Wirn AN EX.
TEN.//oN i u -}eou J Qottee* li *tZ ir'iw
OF e.t'/,1b-iNG- ,ifr€s u;7/b a
7l+wia 4r
l)l €A6
TTCE oN 4/l 3
Min ewashta Creek
rlemeownerc Assoclatlon
--.
A:,
I i
i
I
;
,*p7n-ot,
f s5z€acrhtR.€
k Ucr rV t\-.E rrgr rui:rvtiilrl l'PCi;".5-E
SERVICES''
LocArroN coot IOO
E:6Ernsrrre cusrcMEPI cxaruoe sERVicE LEvELI orxen cxaruGE
REASON CODE,
LS
ORCEq DATE ,5-/*:
rccoux, HoJ 3544 l3
E(lrew accdu'Nr I NEv, sERVrcE LocATroN
SPECIAL OCCASION:
:- TO gE BILLEDi- c o.o
"'I plro rN ADvANcEsaueseensor I SUSPEND
a I
NAM E
STREET NUMBER
STREET NAME
t.LX55 l/2
CITY:
ztP.)PHONE NO.i (
BearlL / al
a -
slAlE wAME
STREET NUIJBER
SIREEI NAME {MD
/4att/,aoaA
CONTACT
I INVOICE CODE
-l
IN
)la UNT CLASS t4/AGREEMENT OURAIION
SIGNED AGREEMENT
APPLY TAX
NEW CONSTRUCTION
TAX EXEMPT
ACCOUNT TYPE: I...T,P S'
crrY coDE: J7O
COMPETITOR CODE .
MOS
ACTUAL OELIVERY DATE:
-
SEBVICE DAYSWED THURS FRI SAT SUN
(Y/N)
(Y/N)
(Y/N)
(Y/N)
SCHEOULED DELIVERY OATE:
SPECIAL CLEANS
DISPATCH COMPLETED BY:
DATE:
L__.1
WLN
DEL, v EBY,. r, !fiffi /etfionz.l__qry h flry 5/"/v
ROUTE
MON TUES
U
EOUlPI,' ENT SPECIFICATIONS
l
SEBIAL NO
I
I N EErESlnBcEs
01 ru::-r:
na3i.1--
e'r3
Ort!
O.,,.
O,,!
l-02 q::;-a.
n::"_r.
03
04
i,,!
G't!
O,,l
1',!
, -)io-:
0hrt
oD,l
Otrr3
at,t J.OO
SALES TAX
TOTAL CUSTOTNER CHARGE 3
,e..\'e-r 5. OO
sre:a3aa:s,6B.t
::j:1I
"frfa?kr
8.ra Sa ..r Ra€ . I
Ara Sa .::! na€ . t
8asi S!'t.: la€ . I
Ara S.-r * nar . I
01 TOTAL 3
Relr Rq9 . I
nerr ne€ . t
0...9cf,al!.I
Lda 3sa taa . I
bb.-
.50
PO NUMEER
ESIIMAIED DURATION OF CUSIOMER PRoJEC{S {ln mos.)
lF DAMAGE WAIVEF lS DECLINED I c,eclrne lhe Damage Warver. and I understand by dechnrng I accepi full responsrbrlrty lor oa-,.:i -f i ,.t
on equrpmenl renled ,rom BFI ln(rals
Eruz,
THIS AGFIEEMEIiT iS A LEGALLY BINOING CONTRACT ON THE PART OF EOTH BFI ANO CUSTOIIER AND THEIR FESPECT'.E .!,
SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS IN ACCOFiDANCE WITH THE TERHS ANO CONOITIONS ON THE BEVERSE SIDE
TERtvlS: NET 10 DAYS
BFI PORTABLE SERVICES, INC.
BY (SIGNATUBE) X
NAME OF Enct,'\,.,3.FEtars'.DusrFris
( LL -'(h^
SUBSIDIART
EFFECTIVE CONTRACT OATE
CUSTOMEB COPY
BY/T lT LE b 5s3- /fi7
44./z
STATE CITY
CONTACT
PHONE NO.: ( )
i
,lt2
| ' vt-
GRAND TOTAL (or, 02, 03, 04)
TOTAL ONE.TIME CHARGEI
CUSTOI.IER NAME
-
PRINT NAME E TITLE
:-;;/'
Bcc!,cto prt
Services
Grolfl
EROWNINGFERFIS NOT.,:iTRIES
June 12, 1991
Attn!
Re:
City Planner Offiee - Sharrrin A1 rJaffMinneEashta Honaovners .Assoc.
PRoCEUJRE 1! STAKE Dor.E\- FoR:IBLE RESTROOI,{S FOR pRnATE A!,rD PUBLIC USE
Cindy KragnessBFI Serviees Group, jnc.
/At at aa.t ae6^
Each BFI lnlit is Elrlred on sklds rlhtch er.terd frcm the front ard backi to 3". To stake the units to tho groLEd vc use 3, uooaen sArcsJLtare drivql into the qroLl.rd arC the:r ;atted ro the skid *, "fi
-io*
"i?""of the unit.
h':rcx -s."aked into thE grounil the unie cathot be noved by a 6torE, stllallchildren or a sinsle adult. rr r.ou1d be possibie G il; G-"iili,i'UefS hi! by a vehicle or a gnoup ot adulL on each side of it" ,-ltieither of Lhese uouLC
".-use dar.ge to the unii.
ff.the unit is tipped over BFf has an additional saf,eguard of ghe cllllanrsbeing spiued out b;r rhe use of a speciaril' aeitgnea i.r* *,it-i" liiildesifiied so !ira+- rhe c-o!r-,.enrs cannoi spiri'oui-ii'-ripp.c*'il;Lii liit""*o,spi11 out fonrarc uluess rhe tank is oir.i-i7i-rr11.
Ij the coxtents do spiu out sl thc EroE"li, the chemical $e use ls bircegracable, to be er.vi ronmentally safe.
IaIe find +-he r:nits that are tipped orrcf nost fregueltiy aro units utlt areon co:tc:ete or blacktop. Us:d at lanClngs, AocG or parxs - tfro" *ea"save been abrc to dec:ease tre vandatisrn-ty hiraing wooden sh6rters aroundthe restroqis ro crcntain. the urlit reavinq i=ry-ritti.,oo,l to'JJi-ir1o",.the '.:-1it, thus discouraging vandalisu.
Minnerashta Honeouners AsEociation has requested their unit to beservicec one ti,e 56!'.n.,e€k. rnis is-sti'dard service roi-ioereationrenr,ars. rf requeited rhts ";;i";-";;obe lnercased. BFr ,,tlrstake doBn this uait-as reguestea by Mlnnewashta Assoc.r and ui11be equipped with a stope tank as all BFI units are.
Any questions please fee.l free to contact ne at 612-553_:5g7.
Thank You,
z,oa ' 39Ad
216 27TH AVE. NO MINNEAPOI IS [,INN II,'r .E'8 1f I8].SIq IJ8 NOdJ EE:9I I6. AI NNf
:-+-a - :
t
I
R..y"* Fpa, ;
Services
Grold
BROWNII.IGFEFftS} INDUSTFIES
June 5, 1991
Attn: City PLanners C;-f lce
sharmin A1 'Jaff
Re:Minna*ashta Hooeo'rners Asse.
Placemeng of Portrble Restroom
Dear Sharurin,
The'foiloslng pages vi11 desciibe the Quallty Standards that
BFI Services cioup, Inc., enforces $ith a11 of.our unlt' pLaceacnts.
The list covers our repair and service procedures, if you have
any further questions, please ieel free !o contac'- me at the
nunber beIor.
Thank You,
Cindy Nragness
BPI Services Group, I nc.
553-1587
.1a o-rrl) a\/E Na, . u:t:l:i rP,.tr !a !-"lN SSr:'! li:2: !1':i.?9
T'TF,w
Ci.eaJtLincss
A. Srl](s
3. Side _Eanels
No scale b:ili-up, no eJicessive dir-. buitd-up on to.5,o:
wina!, hosc assa{bly ani a:ound IIP a:ea.
Ulit aus-,. bc serrrieed acco:dinE to :h: SI se!-vice
prcccdr:res siih at*,ention to all i-'srs asove and beio$.
gErPed ali debris; rgtrcved :cp, se+--, anC sPLash ba;:fe.
ssusbpc and toveLed.
Dist Seas ;elatively iust-free lrith ccnsii'-ra'-ion io
stecific site corditlqr.
Scn bbad abore aJd balot' uritEl area.
piaasant - nqt-€ffensi\re.
&,a urittal bleic or one scrg:t bloclc flsf, be !:r the uut
or scenE s-iriry usad {! desigmated.
garo roils of prpcr i!s'.e]l.ed on ttre "5!iet
paeer dispenser
- if ieo oa:=.ial rolls are left, a third roU- @! 5e- lcft
in the rsrit betl,ecn the'\rert pipe and tha side parei.
W:ped dorn aad debrls rffivBal frat around sides.
vi.sibIe, IegtlbLe, Erd located in tno areas.
2
3 ,?!^i I 6+ -t^ar
ser.rice
Floors
Er!i" nlEbcrs
6
a
EB}!,:
ITBI UNIT PL\CBAiTT
1. Veniilation Oldt set alray frcE sEuslure that vould !astrj.c+' tshe cross
ventilation of tbe urli+-.
2. Pleltrellent God accessabllity to rcrl<crs, good accessability for
serrrieng, unlt Plaeed on solid I.\ref gBound avEy fro any
safety ha.alds
the aborre list is a qnri deLinE for all p.rsonnel iuvolrpd in scnricing, and in
gual j.ty cdrtrol. Host of the ibrsrs rill be dealt sitb on a sr:bjeceive basis
LAth at',.ention to al-l
eaned i
of the abone EFI sarricc procduras -
tr82'39Ud
nso-:iriced rtl-idl ra11 prsyide a clean
l-L6 lra: I +h dicritv of the end users of a BtJ le restroed.
rc: ltike tlotf,ard
I,€e Sota
Iauren Harstad
ON8 1]IUISITJ TJq HO!] I':EI r5, E NNI
; .i
SE'fICE @NDIT:ONS
-qcsEFT!3LE COIDi?IOll
3. Odor
4. urinat block
DaLe:
Tor
PrcE:
RE: '
Janua:y 1, 1990
AII Driv*'s , sales, opetaciolls
sleve 3yarC, qDetaticrs Hj.*1aalolls B:a:ch
Quaf i'-y Cont:o1 S',,endi:cs
]TB1
Toilet pale! holcer
'n1rT ?aDl Tp
Sr o: the -.,:re t]?e holda-rs in place and in pro?6J
ccndition - tlro rolters.
2. vent ssecns
3. Iloil.t seat
1, Fastane:s
A Ij i FF.G
6. !-qo
1 . G€ne.ral
oca of l-hc nes '-1?q hclder in p:,aca and i! prcper
csrdi tion - one ro]ler.
Sir( scie€ns al! in pIace.
three s'rinl.ss steel hi'rges in place and se(rura :cr the
'.rin shee-" frdl" ar':d bl,or mlded !ron--s.
!or:r Botrer idnges tn p:.ace and secl]:e for the singLe sheet
fron"s. If hirgcs were rcplac€d - a:.1 hj.Eges Eust be
'c},anEed i.e., no uri:<ing of Bffier alC s'lainless s:ee] llllrgas L
Fc tr - (be aach sida fron'- of the Edt. F..qrt logo Efl'ls;
ccn--a:,E the prope! pipDe nlhbc5s fo! tha brancn loca--ion.
A.1y o'-her 1te6 that ray ar'fect eho proper flIlaiion oi the
unit i..-; door Ia!ci-, skid, urinal, !{ust bc in Props
In lhe case of hoo)< lEdts - all safe',.y eq -rDonsrts j,n
placa and Sacnre.
0?8 l.ltillstq Ilg t{orl @E:gr rE. s NntE@A'19'ud
la-F7lr E? F /Y]rTiiT?nN
Onc !n place - tight:.y sectrled -rD tari<, no eaclls.
.Al1 push ri.up:s anC ceps in pl:ce and tlgiDt (up to +-]]ree
:ive'-s lllissing -"t If be acaegtable as Long as lhcy a.re i:oE
or, '.he sa'!s .iu" retinE su.r:3e)
Al"l iag s.-rs's ar:d !.J:ber cl-ad reshet3 i:l placa a::c' scc''.5e.
..,-_-.....
: .-.1 ':l,.:.i:i-::
., ' a: :ti:fSection 6A R-IB S ln
6A.0t
le Famil Residence D 1 s trict.
recogn
Purpose .rtron of defThe Counciliciencies as
of !.he Ctty of Chanhassemeasured unden l.the pres ent day s
n hae taken.
tan.:rdards of the curri nt Chanhassen Slrbdiviblon a nd zoning Ordinang esthe plattin gofce rta 1n land par cels which Ii e within p latted I ub-'divisions,which subdivi sions ha ve leen parti ally devel oped underPrr.or less than adeguate standardg, and which Lie vrithi n the former..iChanhas sen Township areas t hich becane a part of the
I
of Chanhass en at the time o f the Chanhas sen Townshi p-Vil1age me rger
Present cj.t vin 1957. These plattin g deficienciss r ender it i mpoesible for Cer-tain of the lots wLghin said plats to meet the mi ninum yard, 'a rea;and lot rrid th and depth regulations of the curren t subdiyisi6n andzonlng ordi nances, uith the conseguence that the owneta thereaf ne {
suffer the loss of inherent property rig htE.. '." .t'.1.
The Council of the Cit y of Chanhassen t herefore decl,a res that for thepreservati.on of property ri ghts wirhin said def,icien t.ly platted sub-'divisions, and in order to provide for the orderl Yde velopment thereof
I
it is necessa ry tha! regu lations and s tandards a sde scribed b y this
I
I
I
Section 6A R-I8 Single F ami Iy Residen ce District,govern the develo pment of said areas.be enacted to
ft is the declared intent of the Co uncil of the ci ty of Chanhass en th.the within Section 6A,B-lB Single FaniIy Residenc e Di8trlct, sh a1l beapplicable onl.y to pla ts of record prior to 1957 i n the offlce o f theCarver Count v Recorder or Registrar of fitles whic h are served by thesanitary s ewer system of the Cit Yr dnd in uhich th e platted lot 3donot meet the st andards of the c urrent subdivlsion and zoning ordinance
6A.02
or land Within an R-18 Residence Distric t, no buil.di n9dweLlings.cept for the following use:single family
5A.03 Accesso Uses . lfi thin an R-18 Residence District, thefo llowi ng uses sha allowed as a ccessory to the permitted use:IIPrivate gara ges.2.Privately ow ned .swimrning pools and tenni s courts for the
3.use and conveni ence of the residents of the permitted use-Rental of rooms for occupancy by not more than two Personsper dwellin g uni t, except that no separate dwelling uni tshall be al Iowed and that one off-streec parking apace pertenanE sha).I be p rovided.
6A.04 Uses Condi tional U se Perm ]'t Within an R-18 ResidenceD1Stric
Pe.rnigtgd uses.
sna J.l' be used ex
o owrng uses may ea lowed but onfy upon the secuiing Iof a Conditional Use Pernit:Parks a nd recreational areas o wned and oPerated bygovernmental unit-a and ore s ide ntial el hbo
t
I
I
I
2-
3.
a ocia tion s.N on-profit s ch ools havin g+reg ar course o f s t udy. a.-ccreil it ECby the Statc o El nnes ot a.Goverrunent own ed and operated ci vlc and cultural lnsti tutloninc lud i n 9rb ut not Iimited'to, adml.nlstratlvs offlcesI ibrarie s, public safetsy ibu ildings, and places o!. ass 9'blv.
-- - *:-E.L- --,-!- --+-!*- _ .-
I
_r._+-n_]Tl-llz*
,
CITY OF
CHINHISSEI{
76]0 LAREDO DRIVE.P.Q. BOX 147.CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
PI,ANNING REPORT
DATE: July 23, 1979
TO: Planning Conmisslon and Staff
FROM: Assistant City uanaget/Plartnet , Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Beach Lot Conditional Uae Permit, Public Hearing
Minnewashta Creek Seconit Atlilition
APP],ICANT: ROMATCO, INC.
PLANNING CASE: P-499-\-.---
The Planning Commission ordered this public hearing Purguant to
Ordinance 47 in order to gather neighborhoodl aentiment to the
subject proposal. Since the previous review of this item by the
Planning Commission, thia office haa sent the beach lot Plans to
the Minnesota Department of Natural ResourceE, antl the Minnehalra
creek watershed bistrict, and as sho!fll ln the attacheil materials,
neither agency finils the Proposal to be in need of a permit.
As brought forth in the June 25th, 1979 planning rePort the.only
consideiations of this office were that the private beach sigm be
reviewed by the Sign Corurrittee and that permit atatus be obtaLned
from the DNR and the Watersheil Diatrict
Reco:runendation
I recommenil that the Planning comniEsion reconmend that the City
council preliminarily approve a conititional use permit for the subject -reguest, and direct tbe city Attorney'a office to PrePare a draft
conditional u6e permlt for final approval by the City Council.
\
$
t00
MINN EHAHA
WATEESHEtr
CREEK
D ISTRICT
rrTttlBtD l!ur ir r,
P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391
lolto of xAtlct8s:
D.!id X. C..h,.o, Prc3. . l. D.l. P.hrtj.r. Ath.rt t. L.hmri . ,.h.! S. n6r.I .lan tyili.nr
olr trvE P
Mr. Robert WaibelAssistant City ManagerCity of Chanhassen
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, llinnesota
Re Minnewashta Creek First Addition, Outlot BGrading and Lanalscaping
Dear Mr. Waibel:
Pur
advfor
ica
cerlet
J Atl/ gaz
cc: D.
sua
ise
th
1Ivtifter
nt to your telephoned request of July L7, L979, this willyou that we see no need for a watershed district permite subject proposal. Such a determination refers specif-to the PIan prepared by Clark Engineering Company withicatj,on dated June 14, L979, transmitted io us-by coverdated June 28, 1979 fron Bob Ritter.
Any revision of this plan could result in a determination diff-erent from that described above.
If you have any guestions please caII.
Sincerely,
E.A. HICKOK NiID ASSOCIATES
Eng ineers for the District
,fohn A. Holnquist
Cochran
Macornber
c:
.\J
JUL1979
RE CENED
VILLA OE OF
CHANH ASSEN'
MIN N.
5 LII
Lltt I nitIoltt
July 18 , 1979
+
DNR.8
u^*
STAIE Or
Nh0trs@TA
DEPARTMENT
I'1etro Region hiaters ,
OF NATURAT RESOURCES
1200 hlarner Road, St . Pau1, l'lN 55'106
til. No.
July 17, 1979
Bob Waibel
Assistant l,lanager/Planner
7610 Laredo Drive
P.0. Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 553'17
RE: PROP0SED BEACH DEVELOPMENT' LAKE I'IINNEWASHTA' CHANHASSEN' }'IINNESOTA
Dear 1"1r. Waibef :
Pursuant to your July 12' 1979 correspondence, I have reviesred the
site plan for Romarco Corporation's proposed beach lot develope.ent adiacent
to Lake Mlnnewashta. The proposed 6'r sand blanket r wttich will be focated
at or above elevation 944.4 (NGVD-1929), $riu not require a perrdt froo the
DepartBent of Natural Resources (DNR).
If the proposed project is trodified to involve Placing fill below the
ordinary high water elevation, a permlt may be requlred frcm this office.
The attached brochure entitled I'Beach Sand Blankets'r outlines present DI\IR
permit requirements for this type of activity.If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact nry office
at 296-7523,
Sincerely,
L
Regional Hydrologist
W/TL/ch
Enclosung
al
+
JUL
'979
E
I
AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
!0,
ez
PHONI.
?oi
1/4.7-,
7,t
Iti\_l
r
a aa /a
@
@
El Leke
eogJtcrlrlblt R, z
E
s
l-o
-ta
f,rrctn;oti 1 * I
I
T
I
t-
- -: : i.-r.J:':::
e
e
ii
I
iI
i
G
3
I
I
i.
t&.-
at
<',
e
I
CITY OF .. - ). --.
. a9z
Minnewashra
I I I I I II1
o
3t
?5oI
-t-
u\6g 1+l,o o;....q
i
.}r
(:rJ
ft)t
o
v
tz lL.'
t
\,o
Lr,t
1+6
F
IU
33'
L
o_t ION WO O O
!..!
S3 lltrtne
NOTE:
\./ATERllAy 30
.74
I'1ARKS
ydrant, N.l'1. corner of Outlot Btion = 948.88
anhole, centerline of County Road 15tion = 950.15
CERT I FICAT ION
+2 OAK
x
+' A5
Aii
3o"
t6
A'APLC
OEAD
ta
T
2o'
2-l
l2'
crn
o
r
(9)o,Pe t2"
+
A5H
T s uRvey
-DP
-D 1[1 L INE
9.1
o 0l B
7t6
q*9 oo
o
\0
t6
145,146
+7
48
?-llLtovJ
C LM
t6
2
(o
I hprphv r.artlfv that thl< nlnt wae nrenarod hv mp nr rndar mrr
\
|4
q
(,
:
((
o
,.1.i
;.:i
I
I
5o"
,..,:
lo = 201
U
Walter Thonpson - This man has some property and he rants to se11 lt off, onyour rordlng you are rnal<lng it lnposslble for hlrn.
clark Horn - r dontt lmor that re should force srnaller proprty orners to go intoa shole deveLopnent effort. I think that is the questlon ue areasking at this point, are ne golng to nake then go about dolng thlngs. ]lke a large developnent, or are re going to treat this as a subdivisionby a slngle property omer. f guess I donrt see any. pnoblen rdth it.
Gordon Fleeburg - I dontt see any problem nith or nlthout water.
The Asslstant city Attoraey stated th Eu the state Lav on subdlvtsions requlres apublic hearlng, but doesnrt say arythlng about rhat happens if there ls a longtine delay betreen the hearing and the ultimate approval. l'rhat 1t coaes dom tois if you feel th at there has been no substaDtial change in the plat shorm at thepubli c hearlng last Novenber, then you 8re free to go ahead and plocess theapplication. If, however, you feel rrhat lrou are voting on ls guite a bit dlffer-ent fr on rhat you showed the publLc, I thlnk you have an.obllgation to schedule a
neu publlc hearlng.
REOUL{R PLA]iiIINC COI"{MISSION }.IEETINO Jwte 21 , l)79
lalter Thonpson - I donrt have any ploblen rrlth setting off those tHo 1ots.
Jerry Neher - I rould nant to see
Irm not in favor of subdivlding regardl.ess of rhether rater is thereor not.
Ronan Roos - If re grant the recontaendation for dlvlding off the tno lots,lrrespective of public rater, and the July 2 hearing says there rt11
be pubI1c rater, he siI1 have to attach to it. If the hearlng saysthere will not be rater then rhat is the hang up there?
Jerry Neher - Parti.al subdlvlding
Walter Thonpson noved to grant the Subdlvislon Reque st on Lots B and C of
Ba!dre11 Acres as marked on the topographic nap, Sormer Rlrst Addition dated
August 2, 1978. llotion seconded by Gordon Fleeburg. Approved: Ronan Roos,
Pat Srenson, Walter Thonpson, Gordon heeburg, Clark Horrr. opposed: JerJr Neher.
Hotion approved.
The Assistent City Marrsger/Planaer recomnended that the area surourdlng it be
incorporated lnto a plat as outlots, that these tvo lots be platted off, and the
rernainder become outlots.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMI? REQUEST,
BEACH IOT FOR I.II}T{EI'ASHTA CREEK ADDITION
The Assistant City Manager/Planner stated i-"""o, fnc. ls pnoposing to establlsh
Outlot B of the Hinnerashta Creek Addltlon as e beach lot for the residents of the
hones to be constructed in the l.linnevashta Creek 2nd Additlon p1at. It was his
recorunendation that the plannlng corrnLssion order a public hearlng to be held for
the consideratlon of establishing a private beach lot at outl-ot B of Minnewashta
Creek Second Addition.
Page 1[
€
t
(
RMUIAR PIANNING COMHISSION HESUNG Jwte 27, 1979 Page 15
Irr. Robert Ritter stated that at this tirne they are entertainlng no thoughts of
constructlng ary beech house or anyfhing else. If that Ls ever to be done tt rt11 -
be done by the hone oxners that Ei1I be 1lwlng ln there at that tfune. The develope
ril.1 have no parL of lt.
?he lssistart 3ity Attorney stated that lrould require an anendnent to the perrnlt
that Hes issued. As he says, he 1s applylng for a permlt to run a beach lot not
including a beach house, and lf the honeorners assoclation ln the futule decl.des
they irant a beach house, they rould have to apply for a pennit amendment. He
described certain alteratlons that he ls going to do and one is the sand blanket,
he therefore rould have to get the approvals fronr the Hinnesote DePartnent of
Natural Resources and Minnehaha Cleek lratershed District.
Jerry Heher noved to hold a public hearing on July l.'l, 1979 at a tine scheduled
by staff. Motion seconded by Gordon lleeburg, and uranirnously approved.
CAI$ION BAI,L RESTAUM:{T,
PREIIUINARY DEYEI'PM8}IT PI.AN REUIEII
The Assistant City Uaneger/Planner stated that any further rerrierr of thls
proposal rould be prsBture until the appllcant can denonstrate that sanltartrr
sener Ls evailable to or lnminent to the subject property.
He recorrnended that the planning ccrd|rlsslon tske no actlon on the proposal except
to advi se the appl5.cant that he nust denonstrete not only hor the property riI1
be Gerved uith sanltary serer, bu! hor the lnproveraents tIl1I be assessed. Thet
rould involve petitton for the serer, feaslbllity study, guarantees of cost for
the feasibility stu{y, gu cantees of cost for putting ln the sewer, through the
public hearing process.
I1!. Jim Burdl.ck stated he ol.ns 2? acres of land sterting a bit rest of lnlnal Fair
and going dorrn to the point. He has a party rfio tould like to put a restaurant,
have ne build a restaurant and lease lt to then. I rould remaln the oxner on a
long term lease. The plans are to Frt lt on the point of Porers B1vd. r lrboretun
Boulevard and the rnain street of Chanhassen. He discussed the serer sltuatl,on
a$d horl this souLd be handled. He stated thele 13 one Cannon BalL Xitchen at the
present tinre at Glenwood, l{lrur. ft 1s qulte slrdlar to a Country l(itchen.
Rornan Boos stated thet ,e rrouLd 1lke to see you exert the nost lnfluence ;rou can
to give us the greenvays area for the entrance to Chanhassen. If that ls possible
then I thlnk re rrould be yer1r anen{b16 to looking at this overell developnent.
The Assistant City ltanager/PLanner stated that he can at his orrn optlon go out 8nd
incur the expens€ and do a feaslbility stu{y of his ovn that neets approval of thecity engineers for sererage, or you can petition the Ctty Council to constder
ordering a feasibility study to get the serer dorn there, and then nayte go !.nto
site plan conslderatlon.
(
(
Ronan Roos calIed the neeting to order at 7:30 p.n., rrith the foLlouing nenbers
present: Clark Hom, VlaLter Thompson. Pet Srrenson and Cordon lleeburg uere
absent. Tom Droegenueller uas present.
OATH 0F OEFIC-]: The Assistant Clty Attorney adnlnlstered the oath of offlce
to Ton DroegeEue Ller as a nembet of the Plsnning Colani ssi on.
,1, Walter Thcropson moved to note the July 2, l9?9 Clty Councll mlmrtes.
Motion seconded by Clark Horn. t{otion carled. Abstain: Tom Droegemreller.
BEACH LOT, CONDTTTONAI USE PEnMrT,
UINIiR/ASI{TA CREEK 2nd ADDITIoN PUBIIC HEABING
Rornan Roos calIed the hearlirg to order at 7:l$ p.n. rith the follorlng lnterested
Prsons present: RgH"lltfitfiLr, Ir030 westgate Rd., Ii{tka.
Ihe Planning Conrnission ordered this pubIlc hear'l,ug pursu8nt to Ordinance lr?
ln order to gather E.ighbolhood sentiment to the subJect proposa)-.
The Assistant City t{anager,/Planner recomnended tb at the Plannlng Colronisslon
reconmend that the City Councll prelininarJ.ly apProve a conditional use per:tlt
for the neighborhood beach 1ot at the subJect property end direct the City
Attorney! s offlce to draft a Conditional Use Perrnlt for final approval by the
City Council.
Ur. Xenneth Durr stated he oms approxlnately E acres rithln a fer hundred feet
of the proposed beach property. He ranted to knor the plannlng conirnlsslonl s
feeling on docks, and to rhat use the beach Property rould be put. He ras
concerned that lf there are accesses allored to the lake for propertles that
are not contlgu.ous separated by a county roadway partisulsrly, putting quite a
heavy load on the Lake, rrhat hePpens in the years to cone nhen the lnvestors
that have property that ls contlgrous to the lake core for access for those lots
that they aevitop that are not inunediately on the rraterfront, and the comaunlty
objects Lecause a lot of eccesses to the leke have been allosed for propertles
not contigu.ous.
walter ?honpson rnoved to close the public hearlng. Hotlon seconded by clark
Horrr, and uanlnouslY aPProved.
clark Horn - I guess ny perceptlon is lt vould not have a ranp. we rould allow
a iack for canoei, a sigrr, no beach houses, no ranps, no rnotor
vehicle access. The real question le dock.
walter Thompson - Thls gentlenen has raised a question in rqy rnind as to hor you
are going io control dockage. I arn not responske to a long dock
out lnto the lake reallY.
Bob Rl.tter stated that at the tine they subnltted theLr plat, they also subndtted
irr" ty-f""" of the honeormers essociation uith the Clty Attortey. Besically, the
Ui-f.i"-""V If they rant a dock, they heve to go to the City Councll or DNR
RECUI.Li, PI"{!{NI}IG CO}EIISSION }IEETING . JULY 25, 1979
'ELEPHONE(Gre) a35-e365
Llnsox & Mrnrz
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
raoo FrFst NAIToNAL 6Axra aiJrLDtNG
MINNEAPOLIS, M IN N ESOTA 55402RUSSELL H. LAFI5ON
CFAI6 M, M ERT':' \
HAIIVEI E. SXAAR
T'AF I( C. I" CU LLOUG H
1r4r . Bob Waibel
City of Chanhassen
7 610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Beach LotRe: Romarco
Dear Bob i
The City Council, at its October 15, 1979, meeting, approvedthe proposed conditional use permit for the Minnewashta Creek Home OwnersAssociation Beach Lot. Enclosed you will find the original eopy of thepermit.
The permit should be signed and the performance bond,/letter of creditshould be f il-ed hrith the City prior to @mencement of alteration work.The performance bond or letter of credit should be reviewed by this office_prior to your final acceptance of the same. In addition you should obtainfrom Romarco the certification described in October g, 1979, letter.
Ver y truly yours ,
I 7n
CRAIG M.MERTZAssistant Chanhassen City Attorney
CMM:rb
Enclosure
ocJ 1979
RECEIVED
VILIJOE O?
CHANHAS'I'{'
c1
I
+
}{INI'
1?-3
P(,tD
October 17, 1979
'?'4-<
day ofInc., a
Minne so
and the
( here in
This permit and a s reement, made and entered into this /*
n M lnnewa s ta Creek
1 979, by and between Romarco Develo pment,Homeowners' Association of Chanhass €D,ta (hereinafter refer red to collectivel y as the Applicant)City of Chanhassen,a Minnesota munici pal corporationafter referred to as the City)
Recitals.
WITNESSETH:_ That the City, in exercise of its powers pur_suanr to M-s. s462.357, and other applicable state i"", -"ia'-s2.04 0fthe Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance, ireilfy grants to the Applicantherein a conditional use permit to maiitiin u"a -op.i"t"-I-iiirrut.
neighborhood association iecreatio"ii ii." upon outr.ot B, Mi,nnewashtaCreek First Addition,. Carver County, Minnesota (hereinafter thes:uj.ugt. propertv), subject to the t"rr"*i"s r"d;-;e--;JiIitio.r", .rrof which shar-I be srrictly complied with ai ueing ";ces=iry-i", ttr"protection of the pubtic interest:
1.01
Developmen
one Donalddors, have
Second Add(36) resid
t, Inc., as c
Prior Plattin of uinnewashta Creek S econd Addition.ontra ct or ee ven ees, act 1n9 n concB. Berkey and one Jane L. Berke y, as contract for deplatted a tract of land in the 1 ty as l'linnewashta Cition (hereinafter Second Aildition consisting of thential lots -
Romarco
ert with
ed. ven-
reek
irty- s ix
I.02 Outlot B- lom3fco Development, Inc., (hereinafter Romarco),has purchadddl-EEr6r B, r"linnewasrrta' cieei ri,rsi daaiti""l -iio. ..iaDonal'd B' Berkey and said Jane L- Berkey under a contract ior aeea.
1.03 llomeowners ' Association .ttlinnewasht@i(hereinafter the Association) for thtaining certain common properties foIots in the second Addilio;. Romarcpurchasers of tots in the second Addto acquire the fee title to Outl-ot Band to convey the same to the Associ
Romarco has incorporated theation of Chanhassen, Minnesotae purpose of acquiring and main_r the benefit of the owners ofo has, by various contracts withition, become 1egaI1y obligated, Minnewashta Creek First idditionation as a co[unon property.
-1-
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CONDITI ONAI USE PERMIT
BEACH IOT - MINNEWASHTA CREEK ADDITION
Section 1.
)
1.04 .Development Chronolo gv-
A. The City Planning Comnission held a public hearing on July25, 1979 to consider the issuance of the within conditional use per-mit and to consider the approval of the Applicantrs grading andIandscaping plan for the subject property.
B. The City Council, by its resolution of August 6,
approved the issuance of the within conditional use permit
the Applicant's grading and landscaping p1an.
L979 ,and approved
Section 2 Special Conilitions.
2.01. Permit Not Transferable. This permit is personal to the
trans ferab LeApplicant anal to EhEEssoalaEIon, and is not assignable or
except upon the written consent of the City.
2.02.Release of Romarco.
release Romarco from its obl aga
The City, upon written request, shaI1
tions hereunder upon receipt of documen-
tation which demostrates (a) the proper incorporation of the Associationpursuant to Chapter 317 of !4innesota Statutes, and (b) the conveyanceof title to the Subject Property in fee simple to the Association forthe benefit of all o$/ners of lots in Minnewashta Creek Second Addition.
No such release shal-l be given until such docunentation has been
approved by the City Attorney as to J-egal sufficiency. No such
release as to Romarco sha11 have the effect of releasing the Associa-tion from its obligations, covenants, and agreements hereunder.
2.03.Rights Under This Permit Not Expandable to Other Owners.
Thi s permit is issued for the benefit of the owners oJ-he th@si"Iots in Minnewashta Creek second Addition. The Applicant agrees thatthe use and enjoyment of the Subject Property shall be limited to the
oh,ners of lots in Minnewashta Creek Second Adclition. The use and
enjol,rnent of the subject Property may not extend to persons other than
such owners, The term "o\rners" as utilized in this 52.03 sha1l mean
and refer to any natural person who is either (a) the record owner ofa fee simple interest, or (b) the record owner of a contract for deed
vend.eers j.nterest, or (c) the holder of any possessory leaseholdinterest, in the whole of any 1ot or double 1ot in the Second Addition,including authorized guests and family members of any such persons.
2 -04.
subj ect
De scr i tion of Pro ert Subto the w t tn co l-t .lonaa
ect to This Permit.
use Perml t are edescr
The premises
as follows:
Outlot B, Minnewashta Creek First Addition, accordingto the map or plat thereof on file and of record in theOffice of the County Recorder., in and for Carver County;Minnesota.
-2-
2.05 Certain Site Alterations Authorized. The Applicant ishereby aut "a f a"h's-ape--pf anpl:p"T:d by Clark Engj.neering Co. under certification ot iuni ta,1979 (hereinafter the Applicantts plan). Except as provided in saidgrading plan and landscaping p1an, no portion of tfr"'Sulject property
may be developed, altered, or disturbed in any way.
AlL vrork performed i-n execution of the Applicant,s plan shalI besubject to the inspection and approval o?-the city rngine;ii. Incase any work shall be- rejected by the city as uniuitiute or defectlve,then such rejected work shail be done anew to the satisfaction andapproval of the City at the cost and expense of the applicant.
2.06.Schedule of Work. The Applicant agrees that it shal1 haveall work d one and the improvements described in 52.05 above futcompl-ete to he satisfaction and a pproval of the City on or be foreL9 ?o The Applicant shall submit a writtenedulncatn9e proposed progress schedule and ord.er of com_pletion of work cover ed by this contract which schedule sha1l be apart of this contract Upon receipt of written notice from the A Ppli-cant of the existence of causes over which the Applicant has no controtwhich will delay the comp letion of the work, the City, in its discre-ti on, may extend the date herej.nbefore specified for completion.
2.07. Erosion Coltxe]_: Applicant, at its expense, sha11 providetemporary dam-s, eeltn:TworE-or iircrr other devic." ;;a-;;";ti;;.,including seeding of graded areas, as shaI1 be needeh, i;-$e judgmentof -the ci'ty Engineers, to prevent the washi.ng, rrooaingl--sedimerrtationand erosion of lands and roads within and ouf.side tne 6uuiect premisesduri-ng all phases of-construction. Applicant irriri L"-f-iii purricstreets free of all dirt and debris resulting from consiru"lr6" by theApplicant, its agents or assignees upon the Subject er"p-iiy.
2.08. certain structures prohibited.. Except for the fence and signdescribed ucturL may be constructed,erected, or maintained upon the Subject property. No docks, piers,boat racks, or canoe racks shaLl be constructedl erected, or maintainedon the subject property or in the waters abutting the subject property.
2.09 .
other
Ca In Prohibited.person s a camp overnig
No owner, as defined hereinabove, orht on the Subject Property.
2 -10 .Motor Vehicl-e Parkin and Boat Stora e. No watercraft shallbe parked or stored overn r.g t or on a permanent baProperty. Except for construction equipment necestion of the Applicantrs plan and as necessary forSubject Property, no motor vehicle shalI be driventhe Subject Property. No boat trailer shall be aLProperty. Nothing in the preceeding three sentencprohibit the launching of any watercraft from theaccomplished without the assistance of any motor vrrheel-ed do1ly upon the Subject property.
sis on the Subj ectsary for the execu-the maintenance of the
upon or parked upon
lowed upon the Subj ectes sha11 be deemed toSubject Property ifehicle or trailer or
-3-
1y
Section 3 Munic j-paI Disclaimers.
3.01. No Liabilily !o Suppliers of Labor or l"laterial. It isunderstood and a theagents and emp.oyees of the City shal.1 not be personally liableor responsibl-e in any manner to the Applicant, the Applicantrs con-tractors or subcontractors, materialmen, laborers, or to any otherperson, firm or corporation whomsoever, for any debt, c1aim, demand,
damages, actions or causes of action of any kinil or character arisingout of or by reason of the execution of this permit and agreement orthe performance and completion of the \rork and improvements hereund.er;
and that the Applicant will- save the City, the City Council, and theagents and employees of the City harmless from any and all cJ,aims,
damages, demands, actions or causes of action arising therefrom andthe costs, disbursements, and expenses of defending the same.
3.02. Written Work Orders. The Applicant shall do no work norfurnish ma tEiIEI1 wliether covered or not covered by the Applicant'sPIan, for which reimbursement is expected from the City unless a
wrj-tten order for such work or materials is received from the City. Any
such work or materials which may be done or furnished by the Applicantwithout such written order first being given shall be at its own risk,cost and expense, and Applicant hereby agrees that without such writtenorder, Applicant will make no claim for compensation for work ormaterials so done or furnished.
Section 4 Miscellaneous.
4.01-. Severability. I n the event any provisions of this permit
shal1 be held invaLid, i11e9a1, or unenforceable by any court of com-petent jurisdiction, such holding shall, not invalidate or render unen-forceable any other provision hereof, and the remaining provisions
shal1 not in any way be affected or impaJ.red thereby.
4 .02.
executed
and all
Execution of Courterparts.in sEvEiElI countelparts, eachof which shall constitute but
4.03-Ileadi4gs.
graphs hereoE Eie For
sidered a part of theits construction.
4.04 .Proof of Tit1e.the ci ty with evidence sat I
This permit may be simultaneouslyof which shall be an oriqinal ,one and the same instrument.
Headings at the beginning of sections and para-
convenience of reference, and shall- not be con-text of this contract, and shall not influence
Upon request, the Applicant shall furnishsfactory to the City that it has acquiredoperty .fee title to the Subject Pr
-4-
4.05. Notices. A11 notices, certificates and other conmunicationshereunder sh-aTI-Ee sufficientLy given and shal1 b" da;;.;-;;en whenmailed by certified mai1, _return receipt requested, postag6 prepaid,with proper add.ress as indicated be1ow. The city ana trre-appricant,by written notice given by one to the other, may designate 'any addressor addresses to which notices, certificates or other communicationsto them shal1 be sent.when required as contemplated by this permit.unles s . otherwise provided uy the respective pirties, ir:. ,roticu",certi-ficates, and communications to 6ach of lhem sha11 be addressed asf oI l-ows 3
4.06 -furni sh
copy ofini tia I
4.07 .
2009 .
Term of This Permit.This permit sha11 expire on August 6,
Section 5 Enforcement Provi-sions .
Owners to be Notified of This permit. The Associatj-on shaI1each own 52.03 above, with athis permit within thirty (30) days of iny such owner,soccupancy of any residential structure in the Second Addition.
5.01. Reinbursement of Costs. The Applicant shal1 reimbursetheCityf@reason.ai1eengineering,iegar,pIanning
and administrative expenses incurred by the citt in coniection with allmatters relating to the administration and enfoicement of the withinpermit and the performance thereby by the Applicant. such reimbursementshall be made within fourteen (I4) days of the date of maiting of theCityts notice of costs as provided in 54.05 above. The Appli6anttsreimbursement obrigation under this section sha1l be a coiriinuing obliga-tion throughout the term of this permit.
To the City: City of ChanhassenCity Ea11
7610 Laredo Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317Attn: City Manager
To Romarco: Romarco Development, Inc..3295 Hillsboro Avenue SouthMinneapolis, Ir{N 55426
To the Association: Minnewashta creek Homeowners' Associationc/o Romarco Development, Inc.
3295 flillsboro Avenue SouthMinneapolis, MN 55426
5.02. Performance Bond. For the purpose of assuring and guaran-teeing to tne-elty- tEatTEe improvements to be by the Alplicant con-structed, installed and furnished. as set forth in 52.05 hereof shallbe constructed, installed and furnished according to the terms ofthis agreement, and that the Applicant sha1l pay all cl-aims for workdone and materials and supplies furnished for the performance ofthis permit, and that the Applicant shaII fu11y comply with all ofthe other terms and provisions of this permit, Applicant agrees tofurnish to the City either a cash deposit, a corporate surety bond
aPprovirrevo ed
c
by the City and namj.ng the City as obligee thereunder, or anb1e letter of credit approved by the City in the amount of
$
5.03.Remedies Upon Default.
A As ses sments -In the event the Applicant sha11 default inthe perf ormance of any of the covenants and agreements herein con-tained, and such default sha1l not have been cured within ten (10)
days after receipt by the Applicant of written notice thereof, theCity, if it so el-ects, may cause any of the improvements describedin the Applicant's Plan to be constructeCl and installed or may takeaction to cure such default and may cause the entire cost thereof,including al.1 reasonable engineering, lega1 and atlministrative ex-
pense incurred by the City, to be recovered as a special assessment
under M.S. Chapter 429, in which case the Applicant agrees to paythe entire amount of the assessment ro11 pertaining to any such im-
provement within thirty (30) tiays after its adoption. Applicantfurther agrees that in the event of its fai,lure to pay in full any
such special assessment within the time prescribed herein, the Cityshall have a specific lien on all- of Applicant's real property withinthe Subject Property for any amount so unpaid, and the City shaI1have the right to foreclose said lien in the manner prescribed forthe foreclosure of mechanicts liens under the laws of the State ofMinnesota. In the event of an emergency, as ileterrnined by the CityEngineers, the notice reguirements to the Applicant shall be andhereby are waived in their entirety, and the Applicant shall reimbursethe City for any expense incurred by the City in remedying the condi-tions creating the emergency.
B.Performance Bond.
may also institute legal actsurety on its performance boletter of credit delivered hthe City fox the cost of makcost, including reasonable e
expense incurred by the Cityin its performance of any ofherein.
In addition to the foregoing, the Cityion against the Applicant and the corporatend, or utilize any cash deposit made orereund.er, to collect, pay, or reimburseing any of said improvements, or for thengineering, Iega1 and administrative
, of curing any default by the Applicantthe covenants and agreements contailed
-6-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the partiespresents to be executed on this lot d,ay of
RO
a1 Proceedin
may i,nsti t ute any proper act ioprevent violations of the vrithtions of the within permit,orSubject Property.
DEVELOP INC.
By
And
Its
In addition to the foregoing, the Cityn o! proceeding at law or at equity t6in permit, to restrai-n or abat6 vi6ta-to prevent use or occupancy of the
hereto have caused the se
1979.
ASS ION OF EN
B v
ItS
And
CI TY HANHAS
By
ts Irlayor
ATTEST:
1-ty Manager
197 9 befly appeared
ore me.
P4-f.^L
notarypub 1ic
and , to meduly sworn did say that they aand the
instrument was sighetl in behBoard of Directors, and said
acknowledged said instnmentcorporation.
unty, Perso napersonally knovrn, wre resPectively the
to
C .I
STA?E OF MII{IJESOTA
COUNTY OF
On thiswithin and
ss.
la* day otfor said co
a
of Romarco Devel opment, fnc., analof sa corporat io
ho,be r-ng ea yme
that san by authority of its
andree act and d eed of said
KAREN J. t ]'r''iELHARDT
}IOTAFY PUBLI'. INNESOIA
CARVEiI COUNTY
l,' Comm,ss'o. EiP,,E! Ocl. tl.'lSEffi
-7-
Notary P
MINNEWASHTA CREEK HOT,IEOWNERS '
, MINNESOTA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COI,JNTY OF
On this /oL day of.for said coun
SS.
public within
and
and
1979, befo e me, a nota ryty, persona y apPeared
, to me personally known, wh er-ng eac vme duly sworn,
and the
did say that they are respecti,vely theof I4i nnewashta Creek Homeowners Associ.a-
Chanhas sre11 lilinnesota, and that said instrument was signed insaid cor poration by authority of its Board of Directors, and
tion of
behalf o
said '&
acknow
and
sa1 d instrument to be the free act and deed of said
otar Pub c
STATE OA MINNESOTA
COTJNTY OF CARVER
On this
pubLic within and
and Dona1d w. Ashworth, to me personally known, who, being each by meduly sworn, did say that theyare respectively the l4ayor and City
Manager of the corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and thatsaid instrument r.ras signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation byauthority of its City Council , and said Walter ilobbs and Donald W.
Ashi,rrorth acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed ofsaid corporation.
Notary P c
KAREN J. [:,., ::r_HARDT
iIOTAFY PUELIC. MINNESOTA
CARVER COUNTY
Ity Gonvair!6a1 6tr,..r Ocr . tag
ss.
/.fr auy of 7/rO-tpn*1pr,., , lg'1g, before me, a notary
E6i-Eaid counq;lG?E6;eT1y appeared wa lter Hobbs
.r*''\.'
tup
-8-
P'AfiI PUBL'C . MINNESOTA
CARVEB COUNTY
at Oadi't!'or L^p,r€s Oct. lt. las
J. ENGELHAROT
corporation.
CITY OF
EH[NH.lSSEN
STAFF REPORT
PC DATE:
CC DATE:
June 19, 199L
July 8, 1991
ol sen/v
E #:
By:
cAs
Fz
C)
=(L
(L
E
LrJF
v,
Amendhent to a Conditional Use permit to ALlow Expansionof a Bed and Breakfast Establishnent
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:116 L Bluff Creek Drive
APPLI CANT :Anne Karels
1161 Bluff creek Drive
Chaska, MN 55318
PRESENT ZONTNG:
ACREAGE:
DENSITY:
A2, Agricultural Estate
.91 acres
ADJACENT ZONING AND
LAND USE:agricultural
agricultura Iagricultural and single familyagricul.turaL
.
Not available.
PHYSICAL CHARACTER. :The site contains
changes.
no severe topographica I
2 O O O I"AND USE PI.AN :Agricultural
a
N-s-
E-w-
42,
e'2:,
A'2,
42:,
WATER AND SEWER:
?r
-.1
tiiITl
-t
CREE KWo00
tr.
loN)EER TRAIL
a
t-
-)t
Ia er- -O.
o
r>-
,f \,;s, 'i.--
o
-& tJ'-
'Dl' q/t\
/(o'u'lr
vo 6at
tNL1R
I
I
Qr
{
rJ
o.(-
l.,.cA{lal q
rbT
/rztZg
=/d)?
I
,/1
zI
I
!
ROH
R
C
1N u
o\)o OR i!
&rpcl+,ta{*a
i
:
I
:
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
T
^J
I
u
(
BACKCROUN D
On February 25, t985, the City CounciL approved a conditional usepermit request for a bed and breakfast aatablishment on propertyzoned Rl-A located at 1161 Bluff Creek Drive (Attachnent #1). Aspart of the request for the conditional use pernit for the bed andbreakfast estabrishment, the zoning ordinance was anended to aIlowbed and breakfast estabLishrnents in the Agricurtural ResidenceDistrict. The definition of a bed and brlakfast establishnentadopted by the city code is as follows:
rrAn owner occupied principal dwelling iLess roons are rented on a nightly basisthan seven (7) days. lteals nay or nayresidents and over night guest's.-rr
rn addition to the definition, the city code uas arnended to providespecific conditions for a bed and breikfast establishrnent a'nd theyare as follows:
Two (2) off-street parking spaces plus one additionalspace per rental roon must be provided.
There shall be no more than one (1) enployee in additionto the residents.
1
2
n hlhich five (5) orfor a period of lessnot be provided to
nore than seven
3
4
5
Establishnent nust be owner occupied.
There sha11 be five or less roons for rent.
A room shall. not be rented forconsecutive days to the sane person.
fn Pebruary of 1990, the city further amended the City code tochange bed and breakfast establishnents as a conditional use to aninterirn use in the A1 and A2 Districts.
PROPOSAL
The owner of the Bluff Creek Bed and Breakfast, Anne Karels, isrequesting pennission to add a fifth bedroom for rent over thecarriage trouse/garage. DIs. Karels was in the process of having anew septic site and plurabing instalLed in the garage when iheBuilding Department placed a Etop work order on the sii.e until theapplicant could receive a perroit fron the city for the proposgdexpansion. Planning staff explaineC to the ippi.icant €hat theorigina)- conditional. use perrnit was only for up to tive bedrooms inthe ,'principal owner occupied dwellingra and that the proposed unitover the carriage house/garage lrould not be perrnitted irithout an
Karels Conditional Use Permit Anendment
June 19, 19 91.
Page 2
Xarel.s Conditional Use Pernit Anendnent
June 19, 19 91
Page 3
amendnent to the conditional use permit and an amendnent to thezoning ordinance for the definition of a bed and breakfast. The
amendment to the conditional use perrnit is required to aLlos/ thefifth rental unit to be located over the carriage house/garage.(Since it is an existing condj.tional use pernit, staff chose to
anend the existing conditional use permit rather than process a newinterirn use perrnit. Any new requests for a bed and breakfast
establishment will be processed as an interim use perrnit. ) A
zoning ordinance amendment to the bed and breakfast definition isrequired to remove the requirement of owner occupied .rprincipal
dwellingrt and replace it with owner occupied ltestablishmenttr.
The carriage house/garage that the applicant is proposing to alter,
by adding a bedroom suite, rrras constructed in 1986. The carriage
house/garage is made of barn siding to natch the character of thesite. currently, there are onLy four roons being rented within the
chaska brick house *hich is also hrhere the ordner resides. The si.teis well removed from any surrounding uses and has been a neII runestablishment. Staff is confortable sith what is being proposed by
the applicant. Circunstances of this site are such that the intentof the ordinance is still being rnet. Four of the five bed andbreakfast units are in the owner occupied principal dwe11ing. Theapplicant wishes to expand to five units and to provide a deluxeunit used for special occasions such as honeymoons, anniversaries,etc. It was not possible to provide such an expansion within theexisting structure without significantly changing the structure andcharacter of the Chaska brick house. Staff Hould prefer to seeinternal changes to an existing accessory structure than external
changes to the chaska brick hone. The site contains nore than
adequate parking for expansion to five rental units.
Staff worked with the applicant on the different rrays to perroit
what they are proposing. The various options included connectingthe garage to the principal structure so that it rrould beconsidered a principal structure, applying for a variance to thedefinition of a bed and breakfast establishnent and finally
arnending the conditional use permit and definition of bed andbreakfast. The first option rras not pursued since it rras notpossible to connect the garage with the principal structure rrithoutit visually changing the whole character of the site andobstructing the drivelray and parking area. The second option wouldbe difficult since the applicant wouLd have to prove hardship inorder for the variance to be granted. The third option appeared tobe the best way to process this application. A bed and breakfastestablishment is only allolred as an interim use pernit in the A1and A2 Districts. If any new bed and breakfast proposals were tocome to the city, they would be 1inited to ahose two zoningdistricts. ?he city can then place any appropriate conditioniagailst the perrnit that they feel necessary. fire ahendment to theconditional use pernit will allow the fifth rental unit to be
located above the garage. The bed and breakfast establishment isstilI owner occupied and will not be exceeding the five rental unitlimit set by the ordinance.
The amendment to the definition of bed and breakfast establishmentswas not published in tine for it to be reviewed along lrith theconditional use perrnit amendment, but is being processld for thenext .meeting. Rather than rnake the applica;t wait for theadditional nonth to process thd zoning ordinance anendnent, staffis recommending that an anendnent to the conditionat use pernit beapproved and processed with the condition that an amendrne-nt to thedefinition of bed and breakfast establishments is adopted by thecity. staff will. be reconmending that the definition'of be& anabreakfast establishnents be anended by replacing fiprincipaldwelling" with 'restabl ishment' . the speciiic c6nclitidns df uea anabreakfast establishments set by the city code wiLl sti1l requirethe estabrishment to be owner occupied and linrits the roons forrent to five. The proposed changes to the Bluff creek Bed andBreakfast will continue to rneet thlse conditions.
KareLs conditional Use Pernit AmendrnentJune 19, 19 91
Page 4
RECOI'S,IENDATT ON
Staff recornmends thenotion:Planning Conmission adopt the folJ.owing
rrrhe. Planning cornmission recornmends approval of an anendment toconditional use pennit #85-4 alrowing l- fifth rental. unit for theBluff creek Bed and Breakfast establilhnent to be located over thecarriage house/garage with the following conditions:
1. The city sha11. process ald approve a zoning ordinanceamendnent changing the definition of a bed an-cl breakfastestablishment fron an .olrner occupied principal dwelling to ano!/ner occupied establishnent.
2
3
4
5
6
The bed and breakfast establishrnent shallthan five rental units.not contain more
The structure shall neetrequirenents.all Unifono Building and fire Code
The structure sha1l roeet
Department of Health.
all requirenents of the Minnesota
f$ro off street parking spaces plus one additionalrental room nust be provided.space Per
There shouLd be no rnore than one employee in addition to theresidents.
Karels conditional Use Pernit Amendment
June 1.9, 1991
Page 5
7 The bed and breakfast establishnent must be owner occupied.
A unit,/room shalL not be rented for [ore than 7 consecutive
days to the same person. tr
ATTACHMENTS
1.The original conditional use permit ard original site p1an.Letter fron the applicant.
Photographs of the site.Site plan.
Appl icat ion .
2
3
4
5
CET,TIFICATION
have compared the foregoing copy of Conditional
)
)
)
STATE OF MI}iNESOTA
COU:\-TY OF CARVER
certify that I
Use Permit all ow].n Bed and Break fas t
I, Karen J. Engelhardt, duly appointed, qualified and acting
Deputy clerk for the city of chanhassen, Minnesota, do hereby
establish ment at 1161
Bluff Creek Dr ive
h'ith the original copy, now on file J.n my office,
the same to be a true and correct copy thereof and
City Council.
Witness my hand and official
this 18th day of March
seal at Chanhassen, Minnesota,
,4 .t-/
nJ rd Deputy CIerkn
and have found
as approved by the
(t/i-,--I:l'
, 1e_!!_.
"ozto
'_/
l-/
OOCUMENT NO.
OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF CARVER
This is to certify that this document
was liled in lh is office on the -q:!dayof l'n rrr'i ti 19..j A.D. at s .6 o'clockrl M. and was dulv recorded on roll3 of microf ilm pagel3q'13'1
Carl W. Hanson Jr.
?J.:
o'.-: ra::!
RECI_1.-,.ED
APR 1 0 l.,ots
clrY os c(ANnassE
by V...- r,->
J
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, UINNESOTA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1. Permit. Subject to the
forth herein, the City of Chanhassen
use permit for: A Bed and Breakfast
terms and conditions set
hereby grants a conilitional
es tab 1i shmen t .
2. Property.The permit is for the following describetl
property in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota:
1.161 Bluff creek Drive - See attached 1egal description markecl
Exhibit ,'Ax.
3. conalitions.The permit is issuetl subject to the
following conilitions :
The structure meets all Uniform Builtling and Fire Code
requir ements .
The structure meets all reguirements of the llinnesota Departmentof Health.
Trrro (2) offstreet parking spaces plus one (1) ailditional
space per rental room must be providleil .
One non- i 1lumi nateil sign nay be erecteil on the property, notto exceetl six (5) square feet in size.
1
1
3
4
6 The bed and breakfast establishment must reflect the approveil siteplan (Attachment *4 of Planning Report dated February 13, 1985;Planning Case *85-4 Conilitional Use Permit).
'?35
5 There shall be no more than one employee in aitdition to the
res iilents .
5. Criminal Penalty. violation of the terms of this
contlitional use permit is a criminal mistlemeanor.
D ated :-flt*,"2)u t4, t?[s-
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
By:
By:
I t
Its Cler
STATE OF MINNESOTA)) ss
COUNTY OF CARVER )
,Th/,J,h d,ay of
!4ayor, and Don Ashworta Minnesota municipat , City , 19$, by Thomas L. Hamilton,
Ir{anager of the City of Chanhassen,corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
e for egoing instrument was acknowledgetl before ne this
L/'-* 1,/-ary P
(AREN J. ENGELHARCT,lOrAiY aJltlc - ltt?lNa!6rl^
CAFVEF COUNTY
tay Comm|rttort Errnr.r O.i rt tla
,?3C
&]
Har old He ss o
:cd AIccrr
EXHIBIT "A''
F tr. JACKSON
tc.
io
L\T.ID -URYEYON
lacraranro uxoar L.Awa or atatl 07 rrraxaraora
LrcrxaaD aY ororraaxca oa clrY o, rtaar.aarioa-la
lurbryor'l 6crtifiratr\..--r -"]X7"-'o
,
Sra /e, / ". /oo'
o Dcnol.s Iron
R.vlsod thts 23rd. d.y c f octobcr A. D. 1984
BuiIdlnB LocstioD Oct. 2Ist, l98l
Nrte: See rhect 2 for descrlp!lon
cf thec pert of houac lytng
ulthln Btuff Creck Drlve.
?37
19?3
5rca.a
,t
.V
0
o
,$
{
T
t
14
,)
'"
3,
.f,}h
{
bi
.\
h
"L-
I xriaav crartrr lHAr ?xa aaova ra a riua axo (Dtarcl Atl or a aurvry c,
ThBt psrt of tho tlorf,h l,/2 of Sectlon 5 S r!ornah!,p--l16 rRrrnge 25rC..rvor County,!{lnnesota,doscrlb6d aa f oll.ows scoslrlonclng at tbo }{orthwo!t cornor of aaltl Noitbl/2;thence S.88,-1,9 r 50'rE. ralluEd bearlng,along tho north ltno of sald North l<2dlstanco of 1049.12 feot to ltc lntorsectloa rlth tho contsr 11no of Torn Boa ;thonco S.48'-3?t 8. slong sald contGr-1lnc 242.86 to€t;thoncc 8.33344t8.elong aaldcentor 11no 115O'O foot;thenco S.38:50rts.a1ong srrld oonterllno ?1O.?6 fecl;tb-o
S.25933rE.a1ong sgld corrter l1no 5O7.30 f6ot;thcncc S.68918rE.slong rald ccn c1lno 5o9.0 fooi;thonco S.58919 r 50[8. along rald ccnton l1no 94.0 feof to tboactual polnt of beglnn1ng ;tbcnco oontlnulng S.58319 | SOrE.along lald contc! Ir.nc181.o foot;thonco S.12g4Ot3O'tW. a dl stunco of 254.5 foct;thenEo tI.5831,9 t SOrf .-edlstanco of of 181.0 f oot ;thonco lI.12s4O tSOrtE. s dlstunco of 2il.5 feot to th -polut of bogl rur!,ng. C ontrilnlng 1.O acros. SubJect to an orrsnrnont for Tovn Boad
ov6r th6 northoasterly 35 foet theroof.
A. .urvsrro .t .. ,r,.-OiX-oev oe-A!8r-e .g. 1968
--Bcvls od thls 2{Jt}r dr^y of tderch rt.D.
F.C.J
-
o
L,
q
14
I
7,/rL)o'1"
cKsoN. Lta.rtaor.tcraraattoaa. liao. t6OO
Sol6 EAsr 55ax S7PsET 55417 727 -34A4
Or. 92O7-t
126-74t
I
I
I
-@ aal
tbt
eo'
4ot
ARrl q
Mu4 Ao>lan
? 2 cx.UxaC
0 ?8J$4, fA-
24p
*
>k
x
*
i6
,+
)t=
211,
L
1t
.hl :. /,\33
K4J
'd
t5t
a^<,gc-\\)?
lrd4' a'tt1
l[bl Arf F
aE-F-.rh CAaU L
bEo o
_ ffrlt**rr $r * s
btuff C<r;11 eztvo
.22 |
I
i
I
!
I
I
Attach;ent B
The Bluff Creek lnn has been a llcensed Bed and Breakfast for
Inn is a historlc site in Carver County da.ting back to 1860.
renovated and lias voted by the qlg4, Tritune as one of the
the nidwest.
six years. The
It has been
l0 best B&Brs in
The C.L'.P. allous five guest roons. The signifJ.cant property tax lncrease has
jeopardized the Inn's economlc future. CoDpetltlon fron other touri.st areas,
i.e., St. Croix River, St. Paul etc., requlres that we keep pace lllth our aervice
in order to be competitive. Six years ago, when the Inn opened, there were ten
B&Bis j.n the state of Mlnnesota. Today there are approxinately one hundred B&Brs.
I{e have served thousands of guests who have patronized the Chanhassen Dlnner
Theatre, arboretum, and many other businesses ln the comunlty, We belleve we
have served the area with friendly, professloflal servlce.
I began the project ln good falth and know that ue have brought a needed servlce to
our area. We truly need the extra room. Pleaee eone by to see our facll1ty and
the lntended project. I know you would flnd lt a dellghtful place. The coffee 1s
always on.
S inc ere 1y ,
nru-,j {*JJ
.4t /
On our propert)' there are two structures, the nain house, and seventy feet away a
srna11 carriage house/garage. The Carriage House was Dostly conpLeted lrlth plunrblng
to it at the tirne the C.U.?. r,as issued. All lre l,ish to do ls lnstaIl bath
faail.ities and a deck, and a garage under the deck. We very much need the extra
roon. There is plenty of off-street parklng. There are no homes 1n the area.
On llednesday, Ma1' 29, 1991 pernlts to3 01son Excavatlng and Duwalter Plunbing
had been i.ssued. They began the project on l,led. Morning. Ol !Jed. afternoon the
city Iiispector closed the proJect because the new flfth rooE tJas oot allol,ed
unless it xas 1n or attached to the oain house. l{uch of the pluroblng work had
been completed. The new septlc systen hail been lnstalled. The yard 1e ali torn
up. Thls shut-dor.n was an alarmLng.shock. No where ln the copy of the Condltlonal
Use Permit does lt nake reference that all gue6t rooos have to be Ln the oaln
residence.
'r.: .
ar
..,.tJ. .-
:lt,
A- B,rot llLl Bl..9f erc"t b.:vr
€.!'++La, rryr w .fSri
BL,{I e'a--L sctv<-
1
il
h t---
'; +'
{
I
I
.\,lrl
?
; LL* l'"''t_
.'f hrr:i b'l\rt-' .
:r lc jrfi
ulr u
r{*l
Ii
l'-,
?A.<tvA\/
,t*l!t'2-
tPo' .r
\r- ./
.L
.i<
,tIt b
*
s
_,i.'J
1 rl,
9e'
!t I
rr,iCI."iED
sEP 0 8138;
clTY Of CHAr{Hlssf
Crr'?
'f
I
?)
6s
I
t
I
i
''- :/-f
r{'
P
TT
4855 Lanark Road . Mound, Minnesota 55364 . 612-472-7609
I.EN.
Eesidential-and Commerical remodeling/Design and.li .r'' ; r.-.:ri< t!::: , _- - _._..._
f ine craftsmanship
i
\
L€onard S. Murphy
I lc 1.2'l
-!-
I
I
;
1. '')
., t-(
t
74'
DEaK ,v
2l 61,...6.g
?
ttl
1,r'
,r'
'.;flAc z
[-i+ r. t.
7
L{
---2
r---
I
(iu,L d.^.,..-,a A {n;.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
890 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317. (5 12) 937-1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIETV APPLICATION
OWNER ?a'^<)
,L'J-
7 rpputcerlr
ADDRESS:
L
I ,A/<-7?-*-./
TELEPHONE ///5'-r 73s'
3
Comprehensive Plan Amendmenl1 11. _ Subdivision
12._ Vacation of Row/Easements
3. _ Grad ing,/Excavation Permit 13. _ Variance
lnterim Use Permit4 14. _ Wetland Alteralion Permit
5. _ Notif ication Signs
6. _ Planned Unh Development
7. Rezonino 17. _ Filing Fees/Anorney Cost
8. _ Sign Permits t 8._ Consultant Fees
10._ Site Plan Review TOTAL FEE $
A lisl ot all property owner3 withln 500 teet ol rhe boundtrl$ ot the property mu3t
lncluded with the !pplicltion.
Twenty-six tull size tolded coplei of the pl!n3 mu3t be aubmned.
8%' X 1t' Reduced copy ot rlnrplrency lor !!ch pltn rhrat.
r NOTE ' When multiple applications are processed, the approprhte fee shall b€ charged lor each appticarion.
1..
ADDRESS:
I
TELEPHONE (Daytillle) /y''"e 7 3 5'
2. Conditional Use Permil
15. Zonino Aoo€al
16._ Zoning Ordinance Amendment
9. _ Sign Plan Review
ln*,^,--.J;r{,- (o4 ,C,*t Q or-,^' PBOJECT NAI.IE ..
- LOCATION t Lk4 L-3L a
.. LEGAL DESCRIPTION (/ [1,t,'/,.) t-.Ja--
PRESENT ZONING
PBESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION /,J
BEOUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
,i8 /,tr.-.2".t
/z-t^./ "-'..
C- l": F
.tz'{-,-/-(..tt'
X FEASoN FoR THIS REQUEST aift,..,/-'n,-.,.n6
This application musl be compleled in lull and be t)rpewriflen or cleady printed aM must be accompanied by all inlormation
and plans required by applicable City Otdinance provisions. Before filing thls application, you should ;onfer whh rhePlanning Oepartmenl to determine the specific ordinance and procedural rJqukements appticabte to your application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible foi complyingwith all City requiremenls wilh tegard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and t am tne parr!whom the city should conlacl regarding any maner penaining to this application. I have attached a copy ol proor olownership (eilher copy of Owner's Duplicate Cenificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am rhe
authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this appiication.
I will keep myself informed of lhe deadlines tor submission of materhl and the progress of this application. I lurther
understand that additional ,ees may be charged lor consuhlng fees, feasibilir,y studies, etc. with an esiimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the sludy. The documents ard infornution I have submined are true and coneci ro the bestof my knov/ledge.
I also understand that after the approval or granting cf th3 permh, such permhs shall be invalid unless they are recorded
against the title to the property for which the approval/permh is granted within 120 days with the CaNer County Recorder's
Otfice and lhe original document returned to Chy Hall Records
Signature ol Applicant Date
| 1 ,'r*- t i--t
Signature of Fee Owner
Application Received on
(/ LL
FF=:
Receipt No. _Fee Paid
This application will be consideted by the Planning Commission/Board of Adjustments and Appeals on
l
FEOUESTED ZONING
-
4a-
Harold Hesse
142 5 Bluff Creek Dri.ve
Chanhassen, lL\ 553I8
Dittnc- G,tLc't/son
i/,/() 8/4 ff 3tecK 0r.
Oha nl as s('4, l'7tL' .-53/ Y
I1ST OF PROPERTI' OI$;ERS I{ITHIN 5OO IEET OF PROPERTI BOLNiDARY.
That part of the North Half (N 1/2) of. Section 35,Township 115, Range 23, described as follows:Commencing at the Northwest corner of said North lialf ,thence South 86047'50', East, assuned bearing, along theNorth line of said North Ha1f, a distance of lOg4.33feet to its intersection with the center line of TownRoad; thence South 48o32' East along said center line197.50 feeti thence south 33o44, East along said centerline 1150.0 feet, thence South 3go39, Easl alonq saidcenter line 710.75 feet; thence south 25033, East alongsaid center line 507.30 feet; thence South 6golg' Easialong said center line 590.0 feet; thence South58o19'30" East along said center line 94.0 feet to the
:9!y91 point of beginning; thence continuing South58"19r30" East along said center line l8l.O feet;thence Southn 12040'30" t{est a distance of 254.5 feet;thence North 58o19i30" l{est a distance of l8l.O feet;thence North 12040,30" East a distance of 254.5 feet tothe point of beginning.
Attachment A
CITY OF
EHINH[SSEI'I
PC DATE:
CC DATE:
CASE #:
By:
June 19, L991 i-
July 8, 1991
91-1 PUDolsen:v
Fz
()
=(LL
ko
UJh
CN
PUD AnendEent
conFrehensive plan Amendment
Conditional Use pemit for a Recreational Beachlo
Wetland Alteration perrit for a Boardwalk
- Approxinately I north of Hwy. 5 off o
PROPOSAL:
IOCATION:
APPLICANT:
Ches Mar FarD
Hwy.4l-.
Craig Shraggert
2800 Stone Arch RoadWayzata, I.IN 55391
PRESENT ZONING:PUD-R, Planned Unit DgvelopnentRR, Rural Residential
28 acres
.14 units/acre (gross) .44 units/acre (net)
AL]ACENT ZONING AND
I,AND USE :N-s-E-w-
RR'
RR,
PR,
RR,
Lake llinnewashta Regional park
CaDp Tanadoona ,
single farnily
Lake l[innewashta Regional park
I.{ATER AND SEWER:Not available.
The site contains steepand vegetated areas,
Minnewashta and wetlands.
slopes to
Lakeshore
the
on
south
Lake
PHYSICAL CHARACTER. :
STAFF REPORT
1.
2.
3.
4.
ACRXAGE:
DENSITY:
CrH
r
a
l,dat:.o.r q
?lcp6g-,
,.J
0Rrv
i,i
,oto
@
oL
S HTA
A2
?i
i
PUD-
@
o
Y
J
-a.i;-aB Rt +.--:--.
ru)
ches }lar Trails
June 19, 1991
Page 2
PROPOSAL,/ SIJ]'{I'{ARY
On October 7, L985, the City Council approved the prelininary platfor the Ches lilar Farm PUD (Attachnent #1). The subj ect site r{as
one separate parcel with two single fauily residences, a duplex anda six unit apartrnent building. The duplex and apartnent buildinglrere nonconforming uses. The PUD created four 1ots, one containing1.03 acres with a single fanily residence, one containing 2.4 acresand a duplex, one lot containing 2.5 acres and a single fanilyresidence and one lot containing 5.1 acres with the six unitapartment building and several out buildings. The pUD designationwas proposed by the applicant to a1Iow the single fanilyresidences, duplex and apartment building to be conforning and tocreate separate parcels which could be sold. The pUD was approvedby both the Planning Commission and City Council but during revj,ew,it was cornmented that the lots should be as close to 2.5 acres aspossible and there should not be any increase in the existingdensity. The density of the existing PUD uas 10 units per 11 acres(.9 units,/acre). The PUD was approved with the following twoconditions:
The applicant is proposing to anend the existing pUD by adding anadditional 21.5 acres to the renaining 6.5 acres of the original
PUD and replatting the newly forrned 28 acre parcel into four lots
and one outlot. As part of the application, the applicant nust
amend the original PUD, amend the Land Use Plan fron Residential
liledium Density to Residential Low Density, receive a conditionaluse pernit for a recreational beachlot and receive a wetlandalteration pernit for the installation of a boardwalk across aClass A rretland.
1. A homeowners association rrould be created to naintain outlotA which contains a provide.
2. There shall be no increase in density.
Since the creation of the PUD, Lot 1, Block 1 of the originat pUD
which contained 1.03 acres and the single fanily residenca has beensold aS has I,ot 1, Block 2, uhich contained 2.4 acres and theduplex. The renaining lots on the 6ite are Lot 4 with the 6 unitapartment building and Lot 3 with the 1ar9e single farnily residencethat was lnoved onto the site (Hernan house).
The proposal increases the acreage of the PUD and reduces the
number of dwelling units. The PUD a4endment will bring the siteinto better cornpl i-ance with the land u'se and zoning of tht site and
surroundj.ng properties. The Conprehensive Plan will be anendedfrom llediun to Low Density rrhich also fits better with thesurrounding area. A conditional use pernit is requested for arecreational beachlot to provide access to trro of the Iots. A
PUD Amendment
The proposed plat is as fo11ows.
IOT
lpt 1, Block 1
DESCRI PTION
Lot 2, Block 1
Contains 2.5 acres and is proposed for a new
single fanily residence.
contains 15.3 acres and is proposed to renain
vacant.
Lot 3, Block 1 contains 2.7 acres and is uhere the Hernan
house used to be located (it has recently been
denolished) and is the site for a new
residence.
Lot 4, Block 1 contains 3.9 acres and contains the existing
apartnent building.
outlot A contains 2.7 acres and is proposed to be used
as a recreational beachlot for l,ots l,and 3.
Lot. 2, Block 1 wilI be under the same osnership as Lot 3, Block 1
but is shown as a separate parcel for mortgage purposes. staff has
stated to the applicant that Lot 2, Block 1 either has to be
combined with Lot 3 or designated as an outLot with the
understanding that it can not be developed unless the Property isreplatted. The replat would not be pernitted until the land iswithin the urban service area. The applicant has agreed to
designate Lot- 2, Block 1as an outlot. The existing six unit
apartment building on Lot 4, Block 1 will either becone a duplex ora single fanily residence. The applicant is in the process ofgetting bids on the building being converted to a duplex or asingle fanily. The applicant rrould prefer to convert the buildingto a single fanily residence but if that is not economica).Iyfeasible, it wiII be converted instead to a duplex. The applic-ant
has stated that no nore than trro units wouLd renain on Iot 4. Theexisting home on Lot 3, Block t has been reDoved and will be
replaced by the applicant (Craig Srraggert) rrith a new one for his
own res j.dence. L.ot 1, Block 1 wil.L be the location of a new
residence for cary Kirt. Both Iot 1 and Lot 3 will have access to
Lake Uinnevashta through outlot A.
ches Mar Trails
June 19, 1991
Page 3
wettand alteration perni.t is requested to pernit a pernanent
boardrraLk through a class A wetland for lake access. This is
consistent with city requirements by allowing access while
preserving the wetland. staff is recoumending approval of all the
requests with appropriate conditions.
ches llar Trails
June 19, 1991
Page 4
Lot 1 and Lot 3, Block 1 will be serviced by a private driveway.The proposed private driveway will be located through Lot 2 a;dwill be designed to the city private drj.veway standirds. Lot 4wiII continue to be serviced by an existing drive from StateHighway 41. The private drive and driveways will be fairly steepwith slopes up to 15t. I)rpicatly, staff reconmends diiv6way nosteeper than 12t but this is not required by City Code. Theprivate driveway will require an access pernit frtn MnDOT foraccess off of state Highuay 41. A driveway easenent is requiredacross Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 and Outlot A to ensure driveway iigfrtsfor the residents. The propos_ed driveway crosses an existiirg aitctron Lot 1, Block 1. The applicant shall be required to inJtall aculvert sized by as professionat engineei to acconmodateanticipated f1ows.
The property is zoned RR, Rural nesidential and is regulated by theone unit per ten acre density requirement of the ruril area. Theexisting PUD (containing the trro lots renaining frorn the originalPUD) contains 7 dwelling units on G.G acres with a net densily of1.1 units per acre. The two lots exceed the nininun 2.5 acres butdo not meet the 1 unit per 10 acre requirenent. The proposed
amendrnent to the puD adds an additionar 21.5 acres to the- suljectproperty and reduces the nunber of units from 7 to 4. The new netdensity is .14 units per acre. Although the property still doesnot neet the 1 unit per 10 acre density, the proposea arnendrnentgreatry decreases the nunber of units whire adaing a substantialarBount of acreage to the site and therefore is nore in conformancewith the ordi.nance than the existing situation.
The applicant is in the process of having soil borings andpercolation tests.perforaed on lot 1, Block l Lnd is also rdquiredto confirm the existence of two acceptable septic sites on iot :,Block l- and nust confirm the location and suilability of existingsites on Lot 4. outlot A and l-ot 2 are not required to have twoapproved septic sites since they wi1l not be developed. Theprelininary plat nust be amended to show the proposed hiuse pads,el.evation and septic sites prior to final plat approvat.
COUPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE
Lot
Area
Lot
width Lot
DeDth
Home
Setback
Ordinance 2
BIOCK 1
Lot 1
.5 ait/L 200 i 200 |50 r
1un
2.5
cres0 acres
185*589 r n/a
Ches l,[ar Trails
June 19, 1991
Page 5
I-ot
Area
I,ot
width
I-ot
DeDth
Home
setback
Lot 2 (outlot) 16.3
Lot 3 2.7
Lot 4
228 |
514 r
584
2001(lake frontage)
206 |
22ll
207 |
n/a
n/a
30r front**
8Oi rear
*
3.9
outlot A 2.7 680 t
Variance required - existing 1ot line liurits the width - the
200r requirement cannot be met.
**
Comprehens ive PIan Amendnent
currently, the land use ptan. designates this Property as
Residential Mediuro Density. This was designated to acconnodate the
existing ches uar Farns PuD. vlith the addition of more property
and the reduction of units, the land use plan can be amended frout
Residential Mediurn Density to Residential Iow Density. This will
bring the property into confornance with Irhat the zoning would
nornall,y permit. Amending the land use plan from a higher density
to a fower density should be easily accepted by the ltetropolitan
Council and staff is reconmending approval .
Recreational Beachlot
outlot A is proposed as a recreational beachlot to provide lake
aicess to Lot I and Lt 3, Block 1. Outlot A contains 2.7 acres
and meets the 1ot area and lake frontage requirernents for a dock on
a recreational beachlot. The applicant is proposing to instaLl a
perrnanent dock through the wetlands to the open rrater. The
recreational beachlot has only enough lake frontage for one dock.
The zoning ordinance pernits one dock with overnight storage ofthree boats. Launching of boats is not pernitted fron therecreational beachlot and the applicant understands that the boats
would have to be launched frou the public boat launch in the
Minnewashta RegionaL Park. The applicant is not proposing any
canoe racks or other improvernents and gxpansion to the recreationalbeachlot will require another conditional use pernit and iretlandalteration pernit.
Existing non-confornance. If not structure constructed
setbacks will be net.
ches llar Trails
June 19, 1991
Page 6
wetland Alte ation Pennit
The applicant is proposing a lretland alteration penoit to installa permanent boardwalk through a Class A rretland adj acent to LakeUinnelrashta. A boardnalk is perrnitted by the City Code and is whatis recommended by staff. A11 other wetlands on ahe site and shownon the prelininary plat will not be disturbed. The proposed driveto the recreational beachlot should be noved away frorn the wetlandin the southrrest corner of Outlot A to prevent iny disturbance tothe wetland. Staff is reconnending a 10 foot buffer betweeen thedrive and the rretland. Any filling or grading of the wetlands isnot perrnitted.
RECO DATION
Staff reconmends
motion:
rrThe PLanning Conmission reconnends approval of the pUD Amendnent#9L-1 shor.rn on plans dated l,!ay 29, L997, with a variance to the ]otwidth requirenent for Lot 1, Block 1 and the following conditions:
1. The PUD agreement will be drafted and recorded against theproperty. The pUD agreenent niII contain all conditions ofapproval for the pUD.
the Planning Commission adopt the following
either be a duplex orunits nust be vacated
(outlot B),
2. A revised prelininary plat nust be subnitted redesi gnating Lot2, Block 1 as Outlot B.
3 The residence on Lot 4, BLock 1, shallsingle fanily unit. The 6 apartnentprior to final plat approval .
The applicant shall receive an access perroit from UnDOT forthe proposed access servicing Lots 1 and 3, Block 1 and OutlotA and B.
5
6
A driverray easeDent shall be provided across Lot 2Lot 1 and Outlot A.
PUD.
Denolition pernits are required for aII denolition.
The appJ.icant shall be required to install a culvert sized bya professional engineer to acconmodate anticipated flowlthrough the existing ditch on LJot 1, Block 1.
No more than 4 dwelling units will be permitted as part ot ine
ches Mar Trails
June 19, 1991
Page 7
9. A revised preliuinary plat shall be subnitted showingexisting and proposed on-site sewage treatment sites
proposed house pads and elevations.
all
and
10.
1L.
If a new residence is constructed on Iot 4, Block 1, it nust
neet all required setbacks.
The applicant sha1l rneet any and all conditions of Conditional
Use Pernit #91-4 and Wetland Alteration Pennit #91-1."
ItThe Planning Conmission reconmends approval of conPrehensive PIan
Amendment #91-1 changing the Land Use Designation from Residential
uediun Density to Residential Low Density. !r
There shall be no fitling or grading pernitted with in the
wetlands.
The applicant shall receive a pennit frorn the Departnent ofNatural Resources for the perianent boardwalk.
The proposed drive shall be constructed at least 10 feet array
fron the wetland located in the southwest corner on Outlot A.
The wetland shall be pernitted to return to its natural stateafter installation of the boardwalk.
1
2
-,
'rThe Planning Connission reconnends apProval of conditionaL Use
Pernit #91,-4 for a recreational beachlot on Outlot A as shown on
plans dated uay 28, 1991, t ith the following conditions:
L. The recreational beachlot will be pernitted only one dock uith
overnight storage of up to 3 lratercraft.
2. Launching of boats from the recreational beachlot is
prohibited.
3. The conditional use perrnit for the recreational beachlot is
only for the proposed dock iutprovements. Any additional.
irnpiovenents to the recreational beachlot shall require
another conditionaf use pernit and tretland aLteration pernit.
4. The applicant sha11 neet any and all conditions of the PUD
amendnent #91-1 and Wetland Atteration PerDit #91-1.'
rrlhe Planning Co:nrnission reconmends approval of wetland Alteration
Permit #91-1 for construction of a perrnanent boardwalk through a
class A wetland with the following conditions:
5. No other alteration to the eetlands are perrnitted. withoutreceiving another wetland alteration pernit.
6. The applicant shall neet any and all conditions of the pUD
Amendment #91-1 and conditionaL Use permit #91-4.tt
ches Mar Trails
June 19, 1991
Page 8
ATTAC}I},IENTS
City council Einutes dated october 7, 1985.Planning Cornrnission ninutes dated Septenber 25, 1985.
Ilemo from Dave Hempel dated June 13, 1991.
Ueno from Steve Kirchman dated June 11, 1991.Letter f rorn applicant.
Appl ication.
Plans dated l{ay 28, 1991.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Counci,l l,leeti.ng, 0ctoL.1 1985 -lt-
t-SEIEACX VARIA\CE REQUEST,
'71', SOUIH CEOAR DRIVE CL I IFORD PEDERSENxa8 approved at En !srli!r 8o8rd of AdjustD!nts end Appesls nreting.no Council ection is rcqui!ed.
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP},IENT CREATINC FOUR LOTS CONTAININ6 I{ULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL
IJNITS LOCATED ON PINE CIRCLE.
8s rb Dacy: 0ne rcconriendatioo
GARY XlRT:
FRONT YARD
Thi s iteir
Therefore,
Councilmsn Geving: The only concern t.ould
large snd it seems to rnc that they could be
thst I rould likr to point out ig thet re r!coonended
t
the Iot Line bc ae closc to 2.5 acrcs aB posaiblr. Especislly io the northresteotner. This lot ia ahorn sa 2.4 acrrs. The auDveyor haa contact!d ac and aoid thstIt rsy Ectuslly be 2.5 acrea r.h!n th!y do the flnsl pl8t. Ihia r"preaents thc recon-Dcndetion of stsff rnd CounciI.
Counci I xolnen Slenson: I heve only on! probleD therc. 0n the a!cond tGcgrn?ndationthere should be no incresgcd d!nsity. In Iooking st the atructurr of thc lot, itrguld appear that, froo past !rpericnce, it ia not inconceiyablc thet !oDeonc rouldrant to aeparote one of those ln thc futurc. t ronder if rr could rord this aon! tay8o thBt rould cncoDpass the futurc sa to opposcd to just nor. Ihcrc ahould bc noincreaar density at eny tirc. Ther" iE slrays rooebody rho iB looking for aone tech-nicality that puts ua in 6 difficult position dotin the roed. I rould rclcooe snyauggeations ss fsr rording is conccrned.
.lultipl! fsnily unit. fhey ar" so
€vcn further.
be thc
spl i t
do hsve the right to
dccision on the fe ct
of the district
ia thcrr noi ia
Earb Decy: IF somebody does rent to plat lot, onto lot 2, they
oske that rotstion snd a futurc Council could siDply bsse thrirthst th! increaa! ln thr structure ia too inten!e fot.the intentitsclf. The Plsnni,ng ConEissj.on i8 Just trying to say that l,hat
6ppropr.iste snd th8t is it.
Estb Docy! Thst h88 becn iDpl"D?nted on
&-gnci ln8n G.vinqr Hor about th! privatc
8i I I ilonk Thcre rill bc no change rith
and the utit ity avEj.lsbil lty.
thc pllt.
rrl I s end
th!t cithrr
srptic sy 8tlrB?
becaugc of the pras!nt.zoning
COuncilnooan Srenson nov"d to sttprov! thr prcliDinary rnd final dev"lopnG,nt plenr"quest 184-2 fot Chcs-r8r FarDs including r"zoning to p-1, plsnned n"8id!nti.lDcvrlopEcnt based on th. prcri.inery prEt sts!p!d "icccivcd srpt"rb.r 4, r9gr.illotion res s!cond.d by }layor Herilton. Th! folloring votcd in flvor: H!yo8Hanilton, CounCilrorGn l{atson and SrCnson, CounCi,la!n Horn and GCvlng. *o ntgativevot!s. Hotion c.rri"d.
*1
Counciltnsn Horn noved to approve thc final plEt for South Lotus L8ke, phEs! I.llotion r8s seconded by Counci,lDsn Geving, The follor.ing voted in favor! itsyorHalnilton, Council|.onen l{.tson snd Srenson, Counci.lncn Horn 6nd Geving. to ncqativevotea. Motion car.ied.
councilnonan srenson: I ragn't ao concercd about thr apartornta sa I raa sbout thcsctusl lots snd the subdivision of the lots.
Hsvor Hsnilton! If they rant to subdividc it a couplc of ycara donn th! road that issoDething re can't decidc today thet they canrt do 20 ye.rE ftoo nov.
x
L
councilnsn Gcvi^o! I rould lik" to rcfer to tha city Engln!.rr8 oGDo of Dec;ober 5,1984 psrticularly j,n terDa of thc strect sccooDendetions. Do you ferl stronglysbout thet, Bill?
aPlanning Commission Minutes
September 25, 198 5
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARING
P 1a nned
MuIt i
Res i dence located on P 1ne Circ
Residential Deve 1o ent *84-2 Creat in Four Lots Contain tne Res- Jent ial ts on Pro ert Zoned R-la rI cu turalUNI
e M Ie North of Tanadoona DriveViest of and Adiacent to Hwy.41 , Gei K .rr t, a pp1 i can t
Dacy stated that the intent of the applicantrs request for aPranned-uni.t Development with rezoniiri to p-r is {o eliminate thenon-conformi.ng status of the existing structures. she noted thatthe p-1 District not, onry ar.10ws sinile family a*eriinqs-is .permitted use, but also allows two fimily..na'^;iai;i.'i.iifystructures as.a permitted use. she expliinea ttrii -i- trornloir", ' "association rvilI be formed to nraintain'the privai. dri;-;;lregulate other matters concerning the suuaivision. -it,.-".ILa
that platti.ng the property sri1l ilso allow the sale of individuallots and structures as in-other subdiv:.sionil- it.-"iit"i-ii,u. noad<iitional development is proposed. She stated that by apfrovingthe proposed requesr, the plal wirr elimin.t" i i.ngt[i iE["".nabounds Iegar. descriptioni the non-conforming "t"ir"'"i' "*i"iingstructures will be removed; and each structure will be indivi_dually owned and maintained.
Public Present
Mary Sapa
J. Thompson stated that it wassituation.
Canp Administrator - Camp Tanadoona
Mary Sapa of Camp Fire cirl.s and Boys, stated thatcerned that eventually this properti would be rnattesmaller parcels and also sewer lnd -water will conethey will be forced out of the area by increasingvalues.
Dacy stated that the site is located wel] out of the Urbanservice Area- she stated that this site and.the tanadoon. c.*pFire Girls site are rocated to the south of it. st. "iii"a-tn"tif and when sewer service would be made availaU:.e, it-ro"iI Ueafter the year 2000 and even after then it is doubtrur oeciu=ethe city's sei{er capacity is regulated by the uetropol i iin-w."t "control commission and the Metropolitan council. s-tre staieJ tnatas far as further subdivision into smarler lots. she stateJ trrat2)1) acres is the ninimun 1ot size in that area.
they were con-into even
through andproPerty
J. Thompson moved, seconded by Emmings, tohearing. All voted in favor ind the-motion
close the
carri,ed.
publ i c
a solution to ,cleaning up" the
approving this request andConrad asked about justifications forits implications for future pUD,s.
A'.-fta,ruH-frt 8)
*
,
aD
Dacy stated that the Zoning Ordinance was established aftbr thesestructures were bui1t. She stated that the lengthy 1ega1description wilI be eliminated, the non-conforming- sta[.us ofthese structUres wilL be rernoveil, and each structure wouLd bemaintained b6tt.r because of individual ornership. She statedthat this is an existing situation which the citt had no controlover rrhen the buildings were constructed.
Planning Commission Minutes
September 25, 19 85
Page 3
Noziska felt that a condition should be placed indation that stated that there will be no increase
the recommen-in density.
Enunings moved, seconded by J. Thompson, that the planning
Commission reconmends approval of preliminary and FinalDevelopment Plan reguesr. *84-2 for Ches Mar Farms incluclingrezoning to P-l , Planned Residential Development based on thepreliminary plat stamped nReceived September 4, l9B5r with thefollowing conditions:
1. A homeownerrs association rnaintain Outlot2. There should be no ipcreased density.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
A;
Site Plan Revieh, *85-7 for a 15 000 s uare Foot
Manu fa ct urrn Warehouse Faci 1i t on Pro ert Zoned P-4 Plann edIndustrial Develo ent D strict and Located in the South$re s tCorner of the Hwy. 5 and Par Drive Intersect ion,LSR Properties,appli cant
Dacy stated that the applicant is requesting site plan approvalfor Phase I construction of a 15,000 square foot product ion,/storageand office building for Lane Envelopes. She stated that the pro-posed site is located at the south$rest corner of park Drive andHighway 5. She stated that the proposed driveways will be frornPark Drive and park Court and that there is adequate separationfrom the intersections. She stated that the site plan irovides30 parking spaces for phase I rhich is based on thl ordinancerequirement of one space. for each employee on the rua jor shift.She stated that the applicant is proposing a two foof berm alongthe perimeter of the
-
parking
- areas adjacent to the road right-of-crays. She also noted that along the top of the berms, the-appli_cant is proposing six Green Ash trees complimented by eight 5foot Austrian pine trees which should provide adequaie s6ieening_of the parking activities. she noted.-lhat the el6vation oi tte--area adjacent to the loading dock wili rise two to four feet flomthe pavement of the loading area. she noted that the combinationof the fast growing vegetation and the rise in topogtaptry-wi lIadequately screen loading activities. she arso n6tea itr-at irrareas of the site are designated for sodding except for the area
\
It{EMORANDUM
TO:
FROM :
DATE:
SUBJ:
Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner
Dave Hempel , Sr. Engineering Technician
June 13, 19 91
CITY OF
CH[NH[SSEN
W
Prelininary PIat Review for Ches Mar TrailFile No. 91-8 tand Use Review
Upon review of the preliminary plat
dated May 14, 1991, revised ltay 28,
comments:
prepared by Schoell & Madson
1991, I offer the following
1. The applicant will need to obtain a driveway access permit
from MnDOT for access off of State Highway No. 41 .
2. Due to the topography, the proposed driveways will be fairlysteep. Slopes wilL range from zero to I5t. I)pically, staffrecommends driveways be constructed in the lOt to 12t slope range.
3. Plans alo not propose any site grading at this t.ime. It is
recommended that a development plan proposing house padlocation, elevation and septic sites be submitted foi reviewand approval prior to final platting.
4. The proposed plat is outside the MUSA boundary; therefore,municipal sewer and water service is not available.
5 On Lot 1, Block 1 the proposed driveway crosses an existingditch. The applicant shall be required to install a culvertsized by a professional engineer to accorDmoalate theanticipated flows.
6 Since there are no proposed public utilities,contract may not be necessary. Contlitions ofstipulateil in the PUD Agreement.
a development
approval may be
7 The appropriateall of the lotsresidents.
driveway easementsto insure driveway
be conveyed overfor future
should
rights
ktm
c: Charles Folch, City Engineer
690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
CITY OF
EH[NH[ESEN
690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORA\DU}I
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJ 3
{-+t
JoAnn OIsen, Senior Plannen
Steve A. Kirchman, Bui lding
June 11, l99l
Planning Case 91-1 PUD (Ches
Official
Mar Trails)
The following conditjons should be included with the planned unit
development:
if any.conl inue in use
1, Demoljlion_permits requiled for all demolition.-
All buildings and foundations require a demolition permit.
Wells associated r+ilh the proposed demolition that will noIonger be used must be abandoned by a licensed well
contractor, with proof of abandonment furnished to the
City. Septic sJ'stems associated with proposed demolition
must be abandoned by a licensed on-sile ser+er contractor.
Tanks must be pumped prior to abandonment. Furnish proof
of abandonment and pumping to the City. Appl icant must
notify City of destination of the demolition debris. Dump
si le must be approved.
2, ]!S!_! i f y existinE on-site sewaEe-treatment sites that nill
The number of tanksr their size and location must be deter-mined, Distribution trench locations and lengths must bedetermined. It may be possible to use all or part ofexisting systems. Existing on-site sewage treatment sitesshould be shown on the prelininany and final plats.
3. Identify oroposed on-site sewage treatment sites.T$o proposed sites, a primary and an alternate, for eachproposed dwel I ing must be identified and roped off. Sitesmust be determined by a licensed site evaluator. Each sitemust be a minimum of 50'by 100'. A perc and boring shouldbe done on each site, with logs subnitted to the City. Thesi te evaluator should submi t a brief description of eachproposed site detailing soils, topographJr, vegetation, pro-
posed type of system, and site limitations. Sites shouldbe shown on tlte preliminary and final plats. The City mustveri fy the acceptabi I i ty of si tes prior to final approval .
c
8
I
s 83I9
{2/
t8I
I
ax
B
I
I sI
s8a
I
8
I
g
I
.Ft'aILa te
vSeJas
\
Ia
7'Iaa
\A(9
I-t
II
j
--T_
a
I
8
is i s ii
I
JFil'18 l8r"l
I
ffi#I
re
.SLE
LatE antt
r199
-_.1
S
c.
DY
ru
0
€
)odt 90
.AODED
*
I !
Et c,DRAFT
e
D
i-
I
I
I
LaxE LACf
I
I
craig T. Ssaggert
28oo Stone Arch Road
Wayzata, It}{ 55391
Jo Ann O160ncity of chanhassen
P. O. Box 147
chanhassen, l{N 55317
Dear Jo Ann,
As requested r an Bending you a brief outline of our propos€d
changes of use at tches llar Famsn. Currently there are geven
Ilving units there. our proposal would reduce that nunber to no
uore then four. Ihe following are the najor points of our Proposal .
Io reduce the nunber of units on lot four to no Dore then two
unl-ts.
* To reDove the underground lrarage on lot four.
* fo renove the existing out bullding on 1ot four.
* To replace the dwelling on 1ot three with a neu houEe.
* 'To build a new house on 10t on€.
fo create a recreatlonal beach lot ( outlot A).
To create a new ghared driveway off of
one and three.
Hwy 41 to servlce lota
t
*
*
our lntent ls to get thi8 property as close to conforuing use asis econonlcally possible. lle hope our plans rill neet wlth city's
approval .
Sincerelya,
crafg f. Sraggert
?t
,,;
T
,L-
i)t
ri !,ri'
':.
j)
cltr
,)
lr
)o
il[i't1!
:: rt
t t lt
xnF
=2
,
F
oI
+-
o-mo
=!
!
(t,
I,
i
I
I
J
i!!!:i:;
E iiIir!
;Bi'i
!l
I
I
.
I
T
EI
I
b
Lr
(
t
JI
\
s
i
t
a
.\
-:l
aa
..
:
,i
T
a
5
ra!
x;i ,
I:i
I
l
ii
i!
;i
!!.
i1
Ir
9r'!
tt
H:'lr
tillr
Hitit lil
,,ii
:i ii
s
\'
-.t
I
a
I
i
i
I
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937-1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPUCATION
APPLICANT (..S*r,6(.,AT-OWNER .hw C.lat ,lffi
ADDRESS: JD) 57ode l,ff'q l0 ADDRESS:2fu0 STv)t .rrfr// fr,
?/tu Sr-Jq/
//ff- qO# TELEpHoNE: qr/?-7of <
I
,. ! Comprehensive Plan AmsndmEnt t t. t-lsubdvirion
Conditional Use Permit2.y'
3.
-
Grading/Excavation Permit 13. _ Variance
, o. -,yjw *^rA Ateration Permit
15._ Zoning Appeal
6. -1,," Planned Unit Development 15. _ Zoning Ordinance Amendment
7. Rezonino 17. _ Frling Fees/Anomey Cost
8. Sion Permits 18._ Consultant Fees
10._ Site Plan Review ToTALFEE $ 6 60
A lisl ol lll property ownerc within 500 leet ot the boundlrl* ot the property mu3t
lncluded with the !ppliclllon.
Twenty-rlx ,ull 3lze folded copie3 ot the plan3 mu3t b€ tubmlned,
8y.' x 11' Reduced copy of trunsprrency tor elch phn ah.et.
TELEPHONE (Day time)
12. _ Vacation of Row/Easemenls
4. _ lnterim Use Permit
5. _ Nolirication Signs
9. _ Sign Plan Review
r NOTE - When mulliple apdications are processed, the appropriata le€ stull be charged lor each application.
,S tA mtPBOJECT NAME
LEGAL DESCBIPTION
PRESENT ZONING
P D 0 C*/,filGe
PBESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION thh'
REOUESTED I.AND USE DESIGNATION
HEASON FOR THIS REOUEST
4ixttl /h20.Its. <u)
This application must be comdetedin full and be typewrinen or dearly prlnted and must be accompa'nieo oy all lnformalion
and plans required by applicable Chy Ordinance provisions. Before tiling this application, you should tonfer with thePlanning Department to determine thE specific ordinance and procedural requiremlnts applicable to your application.
This is lo cerlify that I am making application for lhe described action by the City and that I am responsible for compllng
with all City requhemenls with regard to this request. This application should Ue prbcesseo ln my name and t am tne pirr!whom lhe City should contact regarding any rnaner pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof j
ownership (ehher copy of Owner's Ouplicate Cerliticate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreementl, or I am theauthorized person to make this apdication and the lee owner has also signed this apdication.
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines tor submission c materhl and the progress of this application. I tunher
understand that additional lees rnay be qErged for consulting fees, leasibility str.rdies, ac. wlth an esiimate prior to any
aulhorization to proceed with the study. The documents and infonrultlon I have submitted are true and coneci to the besr
of my knowiedge.
I also understand that after the apprwal or granting of thg permit, such permlts shall be lnalil unless they are recorded
against the litle to the property tot which the appro/al/permh ls granted wfthin 120 days wtth the Carver County Recorder,s
Ofiice and the original document returned to City Hall Records.
c gnatUre Applica Date
{/*,2,
Sign
Application Received on_ Fee PaiJ_ Receipt No._
This application will be considered by the Planning Commisslon/Board of Adjustments and Appeals on
LOCATTON _
REOUESTED ZONING
Date
DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE
o Comprehensive Plan Amendment
a. $500
b. $100 M:,,or MUSA line for failing on-site sewers
Condilional Use Permil
/lc'
@
$400
3.Grading Permils
a. Under 50 cubic yards $0
b. 50-1000 cubic yards $50
c. Over 1000 cubic yards - processed
as IUP-use UBC
4.lnlerim Use Permit
a. RSF uses
b. All Others
$75
$400
6 Planned Unit Oevelopment
a. Concept Plan $750 + $50/acre for combined application
lncludes a., b. & c.
b. Preliminary Development
Plan
c. Final Development Plan
d. Amendment- Mi;il;;,'n @
Maior Amendment -Tame As PUD
7. Rezoning $S00
8. Sign Permlt
Sign Plan Review $150
(if separate lrom site plan)
$35
$s0
I
@
a. RSF uses
b. All others
Notilication Signs
$50 rental
$100 damage deposit
a. Temporary -
b. Permanent -
10. Site Plan Review
a. $250 + $10 per lmo sq.tt. cf buitding
area tor commerchl and industrhl districts + $S per dwelting unh in .esuenthl districts
b. Administrative Site Phn 9100
Subdivision frln8nce
a. Create less than 3lots $rSO'
b. Creale over 3 lots
c. Final Plat - lnduded in one time tee
d. Metes and Bounds Dlvlslon glSO + $50/lot over 3lots
e. Consolidate lots - $1OO
Vacalion ol RovEasements $1OO
Variance - $75
Wetland Alteretion Permit
a. Single Family Residence
b. All other uses
15. Zoning Appeal $o
16. Zoning Ordinance Amendmenl s0
17. Filing Fees/Anorney Co3ts
a. Recording Documents $10 + Csunty peeg
qlo
' .fs
ff:,
12.
13.
14.
Consultants required by the
City to review development
proposals including but not
limited lo lratfic and water
management issues
u
Cost based upon orior written
proposal and agreAment. Fees
daced in escrow.
4,otb
b. Recording Plats & Related Documentst) 1-3 lots $100 + County Fee
2) 4-10lots $125 + County Fee
3) 11{0 lots $200 + county Fee
4) 31 + lors $350 + County Fee
Anorney's time to ensure Cost billed back to applicant
proper drafting & documentation
18. Consultant Fees
+ ils/tot
CITY OF
CH[[IH[SSEN
On April 3, 799]- , the^ planning. Conrnission reviewed a proposal bystaff to create a bluff protection district ordinance. htre generalstandards subnitted by staff were froD the new DNR sh5relandregulations. The Planning Conmission, for the most part, was j.nfavor of such an ordinance. conmissioner Erhart fClt that theordinance may be too extreme in protecting areas within the citythat should be permitted to be developed. The pranning connissioirdirected staff to further work on the proposed ordinaice.
After the Planning Comnission meeting, staff met with CornrnissionerErhart and Rick Sathre of sathre aergquist to review just howextensive the DNR regulations are and if there are areas within thecity ttlat would be ilnpacted that should not be regulated. tt ,.=deternined that_ the.proposed reg'uLations did in fact go beyond whatthe intent of the city nay be and it was then decidea tnal a bluff
590 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (512) 937-5739
MEI'TORANDIJ}{
To: Planning Comnission
FROM: Jo Ann O1sen, Senior planner
DATE: June 11, 1991
SURT: Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Create a B1uff LineProtectioh ordinance
BACKGROUND
The city has been observing alterations to our bluff areas in theform of tree removal, indiscrininate filling/grading and danagef rom erosi.on. These alterations inpact s-de-nic vistas, rraterquality and loss of property through erosion. Staff has neentrying, with lirnited success, to eli;inate these problems ihrougnour grading and tree 19nova1 regulations. After c-ontinuing io =."more destruction of the bluff area, the city and staff ielt weshould look at the bluff area as a whole systern rather thin in apiece rneal fashion. An ordinance creating I ututt district whichrrould be protected by specific regulations Lras drafted. Thepurpose of the ordinance is to define and nap our significant bluffareas and prevent its destruction fron -Learcutling, filling,grading and erosion. The ordinance rrj.lI preserve -i vifuaUteresource of the residents along the bluff, thL city and region.
Bluff Line Preservation District
Uay 10, 1991
Page 2
protection ordinance should be desigmed specifically for the
Minnesota River Valley and Bluff Creek area in the city.
Staff has had the Engineering Departnent denote the bluff areas onaerial maps. ft is staffrs intention to fornally adopt a bluffIine map and that those areas designated on the nap will beprotected by the new bluff protection ordinance. The ordinancewill regulate only those areas designated on the nap. staff has.notified the property olrners affected by the ordinance and hasinvited then to the public hearing on June 19, 1991.
The draft ordinance has been changed to include exenptions forexisting structures, create an official nap, setbacks fron the toeof the bluff, requirenent for an earth work pernit and protectionof existing drainage patterns. The DNR has subroitted a reviseddefinition of top and toe of the b1uff. This revision addresses
the concern that the first definition resulted in Dore than a 30foot setback from the actual top of the bluff. staff has added the
revised definitions to the ordinance.
Staff feels that the bluff protection ordinance will be verybeneficial to the city to prevent past problens fron occurring.
The bluff protection ordinance will help prevent the destruction of
the bluff fine such that has occurred on the Mike sorenson property
Iocated on Hwy. 212 (clearing and grading) and on the Halla Nurserysite (indiscriminate filling of a bluff val1ey).
RECOMMENDATION
staff recommends the Planning Comroission adopt the following
motion:
lrThe Planning Cohrnission reconrnends approval of a zoning ordinance
amendrnent to Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the Zoning
Ordinance, concerning protection of bluffs as shown on Attachment
#1."
ATTACHMENTS
1
2
3
Proposed arnendment.
DNR definitions dated Uay 15, 1991.Planning Commission minutes dated April 3,1991.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AI.IENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE
The city council of the City of Chanhassen ordains:
Section 1.
adding the follow .Section 20-1, Definitions is hereby amended byfng:
hi11,
of the
B1uff. Bluff neans a topographic feature such as acliff, or enbankment having tha fblloning characteristics:
(1) The slope rises at least 25 feet above the toebluff; and
(2)
(3)
The grade of the slope fron the toe of the bluff to apoint 25 feet or nore above the toe of the slope averages30t or greater.
An area uith an average slope of Less than 18* over adistance for 50 feet or nore shall not be considered pirtof the b1uff.
Bluff Inpact ZoDe. Bluff inpact zone neans a bluff and Landlocated within 20 feet fron the top of a b1uff.
IDteDsive Vegetation CleariDg. Intensive vegetation clearingmeans the conplete removal of trees or shrubi in a contiguouipatch, strip, row or block.
Toe of the bluf(. Toe of the bl"uff means the point on a bluffwhere there is, as visually observed, a cleaily identifiablebreak in the sIope, fron gtntler to steeper sl6pe above. ffno break in the slope is apparent, the toL of thl bluff shallbe deternined to be the lower end of a 50 foot segrnent,neasured on the ground, rrith an averalre slope exceedint 1gg.
trop of the bluff. Top of the bluff means the point on a bluffwhere there is, as visually observed, a cleaily identifiablebreak in the slope, from steeper to gentler slope above. Ifno break in the slope is apparent, the top of thL bluff shallbe deternined to be the upper end ot a SO foot segment,measured on the ground, with an average slope exceeding 1gt.
- q?ctioa ?. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code is anendedby adding Article XXVIfI to read as follows:
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND IIENNEPII{ COT'NTIES, UINNESOTA
ARTICI.,E XXVIII.
BLUFF PROTECTION
Development, excavation, clearcutting and other activitieswithin the bLuff inpact zone nay result in increased dangers of
erosj.on, increased visibility to surrounding properties and thereby
endanger the natural character of the land and jeopardize thehealth, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the City. Topreserve the character of the bluff inpact zone uithin the city,alteration to the bluff inpact zone rrill not be pennitted except as
regulated by.this Article and by the regulations of the underlying
zoning district where the property is located.
section20-1{01. Etructur€ Setbacks.
(1) structures, including but not linited to decks and
accessory buildings, except stairways and landings, areprohibited on the bluff and nust be set back from the topof the bluff and toe of the bluff at Least thirty (30)
feet.
(2) On parcels of land on which a building has aLready been
constructed on June 1, 1991, the setback fron the top ofthe bluff is five (5) feet.
sectioD 2o-Ltoz. Stairrays, Lifts atrd LaDdiDgs.
Stainays and lifts sha11 be used for access upbluffs. llajor topographic alterations are prohibited.
and l-ifts nust neet the following design requireroents:
and down
Stairways
(1) Stairrrays and lifts nay not exceed four (4) feet in width
on residential lots. Wider stairways may be used for
commercial properties, public open space recreationalproperties, and planned unit developments.
(2) Landings for stairuays and lifts on residential lots naynot exceed thirty-two (32) Equare feet in area. LandingsIarger than thirty-tt o (32) square feet nay be used forconnercial properties, public open space recreationalproperties, and pl.anned unit developnents.
(3) Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairways, Iifts, orIandings.
(4) stairways, lifts and landings nay be either constructedabove the ground on posts or placed into the ground,provided they are designed and built in a nanner thatensures controL of soil erosion.
2
SectioD 2O-1a00. StateEeDt of fnt6Dt.
(5) Stairuays, lifts and landings must be located in the nostvisually inconspicuous portions of lots.
(6)
s€ctior 20-1103. ReDoyal or llteratioD of Vegatatior.
Removal or alteration of vegetation is allowed rithin a bluffinpact zone subject to the following standards:
(1) Linited clearing of trees and shrubs and cutting, pruningand trirnning of trees is allowed to provide a view tronthe principat dwelling site and ao accommodate theplacenent of stairways and landings and access paths.
(2) Intensive vegetation cleaning is prohibited.
sectioD 20-1toa. Topographic ttteratioDs/craatiag aad Fitling.
Facilities such as ranps, lifts, or nobility paths forphysical.).y handicapped persons are also alloweaf providedthat the dinensional and perforrnance standards of sub-iterns (1) to (5) are conplied with.
. - The drainage fron property within the bluff inpact zone maynot be redirected without a pernit fron the City. The permit shal1be g_r-anted if the proposed alteration does not idverser.-y affect theb).uff inpact zone or other property. An earth work peirnit will berequired for the movenent of nore than ten (10) dubic yards ofmateriar within bruff inpact zones. Filr or excavated -naterial
shall not be placed in bluff irnpact zones.
Section 20-1405. Roaats, Drivorays aad partiag lrsas.
Roads, driveways, and parking areas nust neet structuresetbacks and nust not be placed within bluff inpact zones whenother reasonable and feasible placenent alternatives exist. If noalternatives exist, they rnay be placed within these areas, and mustbe designed to nininize adverse inpacts.
SectioD 12-1a05. Official l.rap.
This Article shall apply only to the bluff impact zoneslocated on the official bluff inpact zone nap dated June 1, 1991,which is incorporated herein by reference and shich is on fiie withthe City clerk.
Section 3.This ordinance shall be effective inmediately uponpubl ication.its passage and
3
PAssED AllD ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this _day of , 1991.
ATTEST:
Don Ashworth, Clerk/l{anager Donald J. Chniel, }Iayor
(Pub1ishedinthechanhassenVi11ageron-,1991.)
4
"Top of Bluff" and "Toe of Bluff"
The Land Use Coilnittee in lts llay t5, 1991, meeting discussed and agreed on thefol lowing definitions drafted by the shoreland manigement staff:
1. Top of the Bluff. rTop of the bluff" neans the polnt on a bluff rhere
there is, as vlsually observed, a c'learly ldentlflab'le break in the slope,
from steeper,to gentler slope above. If no break ln the slope ls apparent,
.the top of bluff shall be determlned to be the upper end of I sO-foot. -segment, measured on the ground, rlth an ayerage ilope exceeding 18
percent.
2. Toe of the Bluff. rToe of the bluff" means the polnt on a bluff yhere
there is, as visua'l ly observed, a clearly ldentlfiable break in the slope,
from gentier-to -stee?er. slope above. If no break ln the slope is apparent,
the toe of bluff shall be detennined to be the louer end of a s()-foot._ segment, measured on the ground, Hith an average slope exceeding 18' percent.
DEFII{ITIONS
llay 15, 199!
P).annin3
Apr i I 3,
Cornrr:ission Meeti ng
1?91 - Page 48
Emnin3s: trarrl hacl some specific questions on the summaryreport here. Or Jo Ann. f'm sorry.
Krauss: Do you want to start this nour given the time?
Emming:: I have a feeling this one won't take that long.
ough! to do it.
on page 6 of his
Yeah , I think we'-
€rhart: Yeah. f 've got some issues on it.
Emmings: The only one f 've got, since I've got the floor, was when you
talk about the bluff impact zone within 20 feet of the top of the bluff.just ri;n:ler why it isn't a bigger number. The bluff impact zone talksabout, page 2 is, I don't know why it's not 1OO feet?
I
Erhart:
Emmi ngs :
El Ison:
Er har t r
Emmi ngs :
Uh":t I i ne are you on?
.Page 2. Bluff Impact Zone.
S,eco rrd rna jor paragraph.
Under item 1?
Nc, above there where it's defined.
Olsen: Act-u.. II7 they're finding the opposite. That the definition of
bluff is where it has to be 3OZ for a certain amount and then if it ]eveLs
out, th.,.n the sLeep slope or it's not a bluff so actually, the uray bluffs
usua] ]y are, is that there will be a steep slope and then you'Il have itIeveling out but that still, the top of this is still, or the top of thebluff so y'ou actually already have a pretty decent amount of area levelingout from the bluff before you do take that 20 feet.
Batzli: I thought the b]uff, the only part
was over 30?. That's where I was confused.
of the bluff wis the part that
olsen: But the top of the bluff is a higher point. . -.segment with
So you've got 3O."a and then you could have anything wiLh 182. That's
considered part of the bluff
78"," .StiII
the
OLsen: fn fact, I don't knour that you need more is what I'm settins at.The DNR finds that Lhe 2OZ might even be...
Emmi ngs: Let me lellbluff impaci zone butstructure onIy, what ?
you , well okay.
a building only
Bu t' you ' ve
needs to be
restrictions on
back 30 feet. A
90tset
Erhart: You're gett i ngbring up here and lhaL
the broader question but I urant to
Hy impression of this, I guess I've
i ntois.comment , to -bee n
BLUFFLINE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE.
Erhart: 50 foot ?
PlanningApril 3,
Commission Meet i ng
799t - Page 49
Yeah, I just don't undersLandthe bluff is that someone can
it. To me that's part of the bigbuild on it and take advantage. of
pusl-,ing to tr),to preserve this bluff and everything Iike that from
commercial development. On the other hand, I guess I'm a Iittle awestruck
by this whole thjng is that one of the'Lhings I'm trying to preserve is sopeople can build houses on top of the bluff and overlook it and I guess myreaction is, 1'm concerned hle're being too restrictive in terms of the guy
who u,ante to build his house and have a deck that is up essentially to whatyou ca]l the top of the bluff and have it essentially overlook th6 va]ley
and stuff, A 1o! of which those existing houses are there. You'reapplying standards which rea]ly are, there's all kinds of houses there now
which would noL meet this standard and I really question why we're tryingto do that r^rhen f thought whit we were trying to do was protect the blufffrom development right essentially down in the valley and that area there.
My concern is nor^l , that's one concern, It kind of goes agaj.nst what.you're.
Emmingc: Yeah, because 1'm including the top of the bluff.
Erhart:
value c,fit.
Emm i ngs :
oughL to
Erhart:not onlythe ciLy
I don't mi nd
be set back a
them building houses on top of it but I think they
ways.
Secorid conc€rn of the whole lhing is the way this reads it r,,iiIljust anelx to bluffs but I'lI tell you. There's a lot of hills inof Chanhassen thaL this thing wilI make practically unbuildable.
BaLzl i: L.J e can limit it to the BF DistricLs.
Erhart: oh yeah.
Erhart: Because I'II telI you, and the reason I ask. You're taking thisout cf the Dl.lR shoreland ordinance and you Lalk about 25 feet above the
ordinary hj.gh water and then you're just taking that number and applying it
to number one. And you're saying that a slope rising at }east 25 feet
above the Loe of the slope, no! the high water mark and I think that
nun'ber's too small. I like the overall thing. I really like it but
I think where it's getting too broad and we're going to be applying this
thing to hiLls. As a result, you're going to have a major imPact on how
things will get done and I don't think that was our intent. I have a lot
of hil]s on my property that are over 25 feet tall.
Emmi. ngs: !,lith slopes I i ke these?
Emmings: But you don'! want to
do you?
Lrhart:I think that's what's
Risht up to the edge
t^tel I the deck.
Emm i ngs :
build at the top of a steep slope like that
valuable about the land.
of it though?
Er har!;
nf
?
Planni
4rr,r i l
Emm i ng= :
t:here .,r'-r
Commission MeeLing
t99t - f-age 50
A rr.j )'oLr dorr't wcrryg: slidin: auray down
Oh in Eden Prairi.e.
Or Eden F rairje just
about having a deal like in California herethe hilL.
Ahrens:
ElIson:
thoe':. . .
during that 1OO year storm there were some of
Erhart: In the first place you've got 50 feet of an 18 foot slope and thenyou've got another 30 feet of the setback. You're talking aboutrestricting a lot of land from use by .Iot'owners.
Emmings: That's r.ihat I thought this was aII about.
Ellson: ft was for impact wasn't it? It wasn'! to save a bunch of decks
on top of the bluff. You're preserving how nice it looks.
Ahrens: I t-hought this will al] about protecting bluffs, not protecting
the:r for the developmenu' of houses on the top of them.
ErhErt: I understand that but there has to be a point b,here you draw aline. I mean if people uant to build houses, why don't we just say you
can't L,uild hcuses on ]akes because I don't want to drive by in my boat andsee e hou:.e arrd you wouldn't have a house. So there's a practical Iimit
anC I t,hirrk ure'r,e gone, nhat scares me is apparently some of these numbersare already incorporated into the DNR ordinance.
Olsen: [.Je're
Or di na nce -
going to be having to adopt these r^rith our Shoreland
Erh6rt: 25 feet is, that's nothing. That's a hill here in Chanhassen.There's a lot of places that are hills that have nothing to do r^,ith whatwe're ta1king about pluffs that will fall into this regulation.
Emming=: They did say, somewhere in here they told us what you thoughtwould actually be protected here. I don't know. I can,t geL too excitedabouL a hiII. I don't know exactly h,hat a hill is I guess. -
Olsen: It's steep slopes
development of that,h,as uJhat maybe you're picturing and you do allow
Erhart: That's what Igoing to anymore.
'm saying but I think with this ordinance uJe're not
Olsen: Yeah.
Emmings; Remember Tim h,hen wecourse and somebody L,anted toout over the bluff almost andBoth because it imposed on theit didn't, Nell I don't know.
me in addition.
tal ked about the land that Nent by the golfbuild a house that was kind of going to hangI think r.le were all real opposed to that _creek there, the valIey thaL was there andI remember thinking it didn't sound safe to
Flanrring
April 3,
Commission Meet i ng
7991 - Page 51
Erhart: Eut
182 e lope.
steve, there's a difference betureeir 80 foot setback. you have
Emmi ngs :
Erhart:
Emmi rrgs :
Emmi ngs :
Er hart :
Emm i ngs :
I IM.
From urhat?
From hrhat I would consider really where
Look at this
the bluff
diagram.
tJhy are you saying BO?
Because you have 5O feet of 182.
You've got 50 feet going what direction?
Back from essentially where the 3OZ slope is.
182. slope and then yourve gbt another 30 feet of
Then you have 50setback. That's
star ts .
Look at this oneI don't agree r,rith that.
Erhart: The top of the bluff means.
EIlson: There's a picture of it. It's described here.
Emmings: A picture's worth a thousand urords,
Erhart: I've got it. Let me read it for you. The Lop of the bluff meansthe higher point of a 5o foot setgment wiLh an average slope exceeding 1Bz.
Conrad: Oka),, and that's this part.
Erhert; Nc,, that's the 3OZ. f,m reading the ordinance to you.
Olsen: The top of the bluff is where it levels out.,.
Emmings: Put this one up.
Erhart: I know but that doesn't agree with urhat it says here.
Emmings: I think you're reading steep slopes. Isn't that the steep
slopes?
Olsen: The steep slope is kind of between these areas and that's uhereCeiI r,ras saying that either 20 feet...and then in Lhe area of 1aZ, then youhave. This would be the top and then you'd have 20 feet setback from here.
Emmings: I like that better.
Erhart: ft's where your 3OZ is. Then you have another 50 feet where i.tdrops down to 182. I'm just saying, so then you finally get to the top andthen you've got enother 3O feet so your house is 80 feet back from where.
Erhart:feet of
80 feet.
Emnirrgs: In that
no 18 at all? It
peculiar case yeah but what about here where you've got
goes up 30 and then it starts to level off.
Erhayt: ff you go walk those Mi.nnesoLa River bluffs, it's far more common,in fact you have variaLions aII the !,ray up like Lhis. It doesn't go up andjust stop Iike that picture. That's not the way that l,1innesota Valleylooks. In fact f'm not even sure, u,e]I. I quite frankly think it's going
to get a hard time. It's going to get so restrictive because the fact
it dips back down. It's pretty idealistic.
that
Emmings: Haybe we ought to step back because I thought Nhat h,e were trying
to do here was keep developmenL off the top. The edge of the s]ope. tje
don't uJant to see development on the slope itself and basically from the
river to the top of the slope a little ways back we didn't h,ant to see any
development. That's where I thought uJe were coming from.
EIIson: So nature wise it just looked Iike 1OO years . . .
so Hhat did you have.inEmmi ngs: t^Je I l
mi nd?
you're the one r.rho proposed this
Erhart: I never had in mind that. f was trying to get rid of the
development actually down by the highuray. This is alI kind of shocking to
me. I'm not opposed to me because I think it will urork but I'm just saying,there's got to be really, ule really need to define what our goals are here. -I guess I clcn't have any problem with the houses way up there that have
decks that come right to the edge because they like to look over thevalley. I really have no problem with that. It's no differenL than other
houses around. Housing. on lakes. It's an amenity that those people uant
and jt's really not that intrusive-
Emrnings: And residential development like that at the top of the bluff
doesn't bother you but you wouldn't !.rant to see any other kind?
Erhart: I don't want to see commercial/industrial development in theval.ley or situations, t^le don't h,ant houses on 3OZ slope. I absolutely
agree with that because of the erosion problem. And the thing is, that
sounds good here but there's a Io! of places in the world uhere houses arebuilt on 3OZ slope as a rule.
Emmings: And they wash out into the lake.
Conrad: They shouldn't be there.
OIsen: The DNR's bisAgain, this ordinance
thing is more visual . They Nant to keep things.is for the shoreland ordinance so it's bluffs along
Planning Comnrission Heeting
April 3, 7991 - Pase 52
Erhart: tJell you wouldn't bui'ld a house in puerto Rico- Nobody would livethere in Puerto Rico if you couldn't build a hquse on a 3OZ slope.
Conrad: Let me follow up. The reason for the setbacks Jo Ann would be forerosion? l.lhen we had that 2O?
Conrad: I just kept thinking that Tim, if you put a house right on theedge of the bluff. vou've got a lot of water coming off your roof and itjust seemed, you knor^t for a rain storm, it just seems like you,reaccentuating the erosion. That's how r interpretted the ordinance. rf youkeep your house back a little bit, you're reducing the erosion. l,laybethat's not a big ijeal but that uras my interpretation of Lhe reason. Minehlasn 't vi sua I .
Ellson: Prus not arl the decks are good looking and things Like that.
Ahrens: It's too urindy to have a deck up there anybJay.
Erhart: This can be applied, unless I'm reading it wrong, to a lot ofhills in the City that have nothing to do with blrff". i6Z ,i=..
Krauss: Tha!'s a questfon we have ulhen we looked at starting to puttogether a map of r^rhere these things occur. It,s not only the HinnesotaRiver bluff ]ines. rt's around Lotus Lake. rt's in some different areasand there are more than r think we ulould have thought. you're raising avalid point- on the other hand, r think there's a problem with allowingpeople to clear cut 30 foot openings in tree cover because they want tolook at the Hinnesota River.
Erhart: I have no problem r^rith that.
Krauss: tJe've beerr talking to a couple of guys who are amateur naturalisL
r^rho grew up in this area and have been ural king Bluff creek for 20 years andwould -like the city to be more active in preserving the natural areas of
B.Luf f creek around the golf course, And they've offered, r think we'regoinE to probably try to schedule this for May sometime. They're going toconduct a tour, a walking tour of the area doun there and I was soing ioinvite vou and the Park Board and whoever wanted to 90 on the city council.But thev poi nted out, there's a new home being built and it's by one of the
Redmond son-in-Iar.r's on an 80 acre tract of ground past the golf course onBluff Creek Drive- You can go to see it. [here they met our setbackrequirement from B]uff Creek. The creek itsetf but they chopped, I meanit's a very steep bluff where they built and they chopped, clear cut thetrees so that their home could be hung very dramatically. It's aspectacular home. Hung dramatically out over this pristine vaIl.ey. Andthese guys said they were horrified. They uJere walking through there andhere's this area that no intrusion has ever been in and now you walk upthere and you see this thing over hanging the valley. Notd they may own it.They do own part of it but should Lhey have been alloured to intrude in thatway? f haven't seen that aspect of it but the spector of it I findtroubl i ng .
Erhart: I agree and maybe urhat we have to do is find out uhat areas urewant to protect in this manner. tJhere you don't uant to see anything andprotect those areas. On the other hand you've got a guy r.lho ouns a ]ot onLotus Lake and you've got 1,OOO houses that are parked right up to the edge
Planning Comnrission Meet i ngApri] 3, 1.997 - Page 53,
the ]akes so thev don't want it cleared completely right up so you can seethe homc. The setback is for visual but also for erosion.
Pla nni rrg
ApriI 3,
Commission Meet i n9
1,997 - Page 54
cliff, and now this guy just because
now wants to build houses, his housethan aII the existing houses?
of the
years,
fur t her
O.Lsen:
we can
he hasn't bui 1t
has got to be 80
on t t
feet
for 30
bac k
Emmings: No he doesn't because isn't there a regulation that says ifyou're coming into an established neighborhood you can vary, or you build
so you're building up at the level of where the existing homes are?
but that's something tha t
Krauss: AIso, it should not apply. I mean if you've got rolling terrain,we're in marin country here. The glacier stopped here and dumped out piles
of rocks al] over lhe place and nou, some of them have trees on it or
they're steep. Those kinds of things are sort of abberations on the
landscape and just because they're steeP, you're right. They shouldn't
automatically trip this regulation necessarily.
That's in the Shoreland Ordinance itself
apply to this ordinance.
Emmings: f dorr't Lhink that's our intent.
conrad: tJhat you just said about building on a Iake and steep slope..
There's just no way it should be done. Just absolutely no ra,ay so I don't
care what the previous residents did. There should be no building on a
steep slope going to the lake. There's no uray they can prevent erosiongoing in there. There's absolutely no ..lay.
Erhart: Are you talking about steep slopes? 3OZ oy !8v"?
Erh6rt: I'm rrot disagreeing with that Ladd. But h,hat we've got
a counter
here.
point.Conrad: But Steve
don't be]ieve that
uas making a point and I
that should be done.
was making I
Erhart: Again, my concern is that you've got 80 feet of 18? that we'realso restricting and again urhi).e it may be appropriate for the, you knor^rthe B]uff Creek thing by the golf course is the classic case. It's level
and man it drops but most other areas don't quite fit the classic case. Ithink r^re'v got to put some more thought into this.
Emmi ngs: I don'tstarted aII this.think anybody sitting up here had hil]s in mind urhen ue
Ellson: No. In fact I'm only looking at one place in a]l of Chanhassen.
l'1i nnesota River VaI ley .Emmings: I was thinking
Krauss: You know but it's across Lake Minnewashta from
Tanadoona where those homes are perched up on that bank.
you. It's off that -
Conr ad : Lle I I 3OZ -
Emmings: t^tell there's two places by the lake. There,s Minneb,ashta.There's around in tha! Iittle bay r.lhere there's some houses high on the
PlanningApriI 3,
Con,mission Meeti n9t99t - Page 55
hill and therr there's that oldin this- There's a real steepmentiorring. It's right on thecall it. That's right on that
Gover nor 's
hi 1I there,
Tanadooraproperty.
manslon
which I
pr oper ty .
that probably r^rou I d fitthink is the one you're
Or Tuna Noodle as ure
conrad: But if we're looking at bluffs, r guess we've got to be looking atbluffs r egar d less -
Emmi ngs:: [^]e don't have to.
Conrad: Don't ure?
Emmi ngs: tJe don 't have to do anything.
Define ourErhart: [.] e don't have to.goals of what.
bluffs.Conrad: Sc, the goal is to preserve the
Erhart: tJelI iniLially the goal u,as to preserve the Hinnesota River VaIleyand r think we should include Bluff creek and some of those other ravinesthat feed into the Minnesota Ri.ver. r think He've got to decide whetherwe're trying to preserve bluffs on Lotus Lake and Minnewashta.
Conrad: l^telI if it applies, I think ure should.
Erhart: Maybe rewrite it so it doesn't apply.
Emmings: See on |.,linnewashta and Lotus I uould expect that theshore] arrd c)rdinance will apply and take care of that. r don't think we'vegot to worrv about that. t^le've alreadv got something that covers that. Tome this was, and I agree ulith Tim. The idea was the Minnesota RiverVal.iey. The creek beds that come down to it and I don't knou, maybe bJe canspecif y r,rhere jL applies.
Krauss r tlelI you could.
can agree on tahere Lhose
designate that.
You could dothings should If we
Olsen: It's going to be tough. l.le know certain bluff areas like you're
saying where you urant to protect them but there might be a bluff area that
meets the 3OZ slope that Ne don't know about but should sti]l be protected.
It'd be hard to determine, how do you knob, u,hat's a bluff and what's not abIuff.
Emmings: Aren't there topographic maps that you can look at?
Olsen: I started to have one of our engineering Lechnicians try to.
Emmings: f suppose you go crazy ]ooking at them.
Olsen: He goes crazy because Iike you say, it's bluffs but the same, untilthat development comes in, then they would be requi.red to show us what's
this as an overlay district.
be found or are found, ure can
PIanni ng
ApriI 3,
Commission Meet i ng
7991 - Page 55
bluff
urou I d
and r.rhat's steep slope r.hen they come in with their plan. Then we
k nor^: .
Krauss: f guess I don't think, yeah I agree with Joprobability exactly delineate where this happens butof box in areas wf,ere this ordinance appLies.
Erhart: Is that Nhat Eden Prairie does?
Krauss: I don't think they do. I think they
ordinance that applies wherever it occurs. In
slope ordinance. It's not the bluffline.'
just have a standi ng
facL it's called the steep
Ann,
what
tle can't
we can do
ln
is
alI
sor t
Batzli: r agree with Tim. I think the original intent of this uas toprotect something that, I mean ue have a maior thoroughfare through the
city and we were trying to avoid having it aII commercialized and ruin the
bluff in the meantime but I guess I'm not adverse to b,here it's 9oin9 a
Iittle bit. I don't know that somebody, I guess I would rather see
somebody have Lo have a setback off the top of the bluff. I think that's a
reasonable requirement I guess. I like the direction of it and I guess I
don't nrind applying it to other Places in the city-
conrad: So far I agree uith that until I can get a better feeling of what
we're talking aL,out and how iL pould restrict develoPment or hurt PeoPle. I
like the general direction. I don't think tre're talkins hills. As much as
I'd Iike to preserve hills, I don't u,ant to bulldoze them buL I don't knor.t
that this, that that's the point of this ordinance.
Olsen: I tl-rink...def inition of bLuff. It might be steep slope but again,
that allor,rs alteraLion with certain conditions which uould be nice to have
too.
ErharL:
consider
Maybe what I can do is shor.l
uiere the areas of concern.
areas of r^rhere I would
misunderstand.
appl ies .someday and see
you some
Maybe I
if itKrauss: Let's 9o out
andOlsen: Or come in Iook at the topos and figure out where it is.
Farmakes: tJould the area inbetween Lake Ann Park and Greenwood ShoresPark, there's a steep slope area there off of the Eckankar property. Itoverlooks La ke Ann ,
Krauss: There's actually a ]ittle
Farmakes: tJouId that be considered
bit of a bluff
a bluff? It
there.
seems to make this grade.
to meet this definition.Olsen: It might not
Lle'd have to Iook at
have enoughthe topo.
Krauss: Uhy don't we comefollow up on some of these
distance though
back to you Hith some more information. h,e'Ilthi ngs .
Planni
Apr i l
Conrrnission Meet i n9
1 9.-r 1 - Page 57
Emmings: tlell the definition of bluff incl.udes
have tl so yo,-r're going to have to.
ng
a hill so you're going to
ElIson:that.
OIsen: It gives
be a steep hill.
Call it a steep slope ordinance. Now you know why they went wi'th
Emmi ngs: You can call it a bluff but maybe you don,t urant it a hilt.
you the specifics that it has to be... t4aybe thaL could
Erhart: I think the number that really hit me was the...in chanhassen isjust nothing. rf we had picked enough - rL could be jusL a hiII and whereyou have development, vou mav have one street on the iop of the hilt andhouses up there and then another level of the street - That's real commonthroughout our city. The number I uould have picked for that was 50. Ithink would have then defined it more as a really big change in elevation.25 feet in Chanhassen js. nothing. This room j.s 10 feet hiah. Thedifference betr^reen diffeient neighborhoods is 25 feet. yoi,re chewing up8o feet. potentia] lv of making land unuseable. That's where r was going. rthought- the number ought to be 50. t^lhat's concerning me is tha! apparentlythey've al'readv adopting 25 in the shoreland ordinance. However, it onryapplies to shoreland areas so if we want to pick that number,.I,m justtrving to point out that it's going to be applied to a ]ot of placts thatwe hadn ' t considered -
Emmings: Alright. Paul's got I think the next thing we ought to do isPauI's got some news about various things. Oh, I have to go back to theIandscape c,r"dinarrce for one minute. Here,s a folder l,m soing to give toPauI. rt-'s frorn the t'linnesota Nati.ve pLants society. rt's about nativeplant enthusiasm and it's called Ethics and consideration. r know ure'vegot an ordinance that says you can't ret areas grow wild and have weeds and
a-l I that and I also know that there's, it's getting to be more and more
common and it's promoted by this Minnesota Native plant Society and otherprivate concerns to landscape using natural prairie grasses and otherthings that are noL mowed. I even saw a booklet out at the Arboretumwhen r uJae out there one dav that had a proposed ordinance in it Nhich rmeant to copy and forgot about but I'Il get a copy and get that in. But Ithink we ought to, basically this thing said if people b,ant to try andconvince the City and their neighbors that what they're doing isn't justletting their yard go, they've got to do things like keep track of theexpenditure and the effort that urent into landscaping uith natural plants.
Make sure they're keeping just common weeds out of it and making an effortto maintain it, even though that doesn't include mowing. I don't know. IIike that idea. I think it's appropriate. I thought about doing it in my
own yard. Letting some areas go natural.
Erhart: Do
comes out?
we have a mouli ng ordinance here that
Emmings: Yeah, you can be tagged.
if you don't mow the City
Plannir,3
April 3,
Commission Meet i ng
1997 - F'age 58
Krauss: LJe have a noxious weed ordinance. But the weeds have to meet thenarrori tjef init-ion of being noxious and there's a defined Iist. So you may rbe able to get ar^ray urith doing this right now. You may get complaints
but I'm not sure the City could do anything about it assuming that you're
actually achieving that type of a yard
Emmings: okay. t^JeII I would just hate to see that kind of landscaping I
foreclosed because I think it's kind of interesting. rf you don't think
our ord.inance does that, then I'm not 9oin9 to t,orry about it. Otherwise .!
I'll bring in that ordinance that f saw. I
Krauss: I'd be interested ih taking a look at it.-'1
Emmi nss: O kay , I 'I I do that .
Ahrens: It's landscaped around the University of Hinnesota with prairie -grasses.
Ahrerrs: Around, it's been so many years I can't remember the name of the
bui ldings.
:Emmings: Uhich campus? tJhich State?
Ahrens:Yeah.It'saroundNorthruPAudiLoriumandaroundthe'they've
Iandscaped these beautiful areas and they have Planters with natural
srasses around the architecture building. Around aII the older buildings
in there and it's just beautiful . But you know those are hard to find. The-
seeds and stuff are.
Emmings: There's a private, Prairie Restoration is a private company that
deals in these kinds of .seeds
Erhart: It sounds like you're trying to screen the Electrical Engineering
Building. f can understand Lhat. .r
Batzli: tJell they built a new one you know.
Emmings: It's 1O!2O and it's time for Paul's News. l-
Krauss: Now for something really different. Ue have a neb, Metro Councilrepresentative. Bonnie Featherstone who resides in Burnsville. I can tell -you that that raised a few eyebroh,s amongst a number of people that, DakotaCounty has three representatives because of a quirk of how the districtsIay out. And there was concern that if somebody isn't truly from thewestern suburban area, is he or she going to be representative. I.don't Iknow how that's going to turn out but I got in contact with her yesterday,
or today. I can't recall, and we had a 45 minute conversation and I foundher to be very receptive to having an open mind and she's going to come out ;-here and meet with us. The l.layor and the City Hanager will take her to I
lunch and show her the community and fill her in on the Comprehensive Plan.
She says that she's not territorial . She doesn't have a political agenda. -
Plannirrg
April :.i,
Commission Meet i ng
791L - Fase 59
Tl-'at she's receptive to making the l'1etro council more responsive to localgcvernfl,.rLf- ar,.l that's one of her issues uhich is great. So we're trying tooperr up the lines of communication with a new person and ure're very hopefulthat- that will be successful and f ,Il keep you posted as to how that'sgojng. The otlrer thing Nith the Metro CounciL is they have had our plansince Februayy 28r h or whenever it ulas, and they have set up a meeting thatr have to go to tomcrrow morning where they're going to have about e oftheir st:ff people who reviewed our plan and u,ho have questions aboutvarious aspects of it. t^,hat I'm hearing is that nobody,s coming up withany bis bon,bshells at this point. That basically they,re looking forrefinements and some additional informatio.n. r understand that llichaelMonson agrees that his population projections urere wrong. I guess it,s bigof him to finallv agree to that but he still won't agrei Lo what,s righ!.He apparentlv feeLs that we should wait a year until he gets around toredoing his numbers which is a position r find ]udicrous. But r believethat thr-: re:L cf the MeLro council staff is 9oin9 to find a-way around it.Nor"r this has been one of the key issues since thi get go on this. r don,tknow what elsc we could have done. r mean Hike's numbers are so far out ofwhack that I don't understand uhy he has any credibility left at all, buthe apparently does. I r,iill also keep you posted on that. I,m takingf'1ar k Koegler down there. t,e aLso retained the firm of Bonestroo, AnderIikand Rosene to assist us in representi.ng some comprehensive plans, sanitarysewer issues before the Metro council. The reason for that is we don'thave a citv Engineer and the fellow that we're using at Bonestroo, Bobschunicht was the project engineer, consurting project engineer for theMetro r,Jaste on the Lake Ann rnterceptor so he's veiy famiiiar with thisarea- But again, I'11 keep you posted- Eastern Carver CountyTranstr.rt6Lion Study. The City basically adopted this because tre stuck itin the comprehensive Plan which was approved and r think yo"'ru somewhatfamiliar with it. t,e've never had a chance to get a specific discussion onurhat'e in it and hrhat are the implications and what else needs to be done.There was a meeting held in late December, early January in carver countythat we couldn't go to because we had a city council meeting that night butwhat !,e had decided to do Has the same thing that chaska did which wis tohave Roger Gustafson, the county Engineer and Larry Dallam, who is theconsultant project manager, give us a talk about it and respond toquestions. And through scheduling confricts of one sort of another, wehaven't been able to arrange it until recentry. [^le're going to be hordingthat discussion at the citv council meeting on Monday. Ue'll be giving iouand the HRA agendas. rf you could make it, that would be great. tJe don,thave a real big council agenda so r don't think it's the kind of thing thatanybody's going to have to sit around until midnight to hear this. ButI,II get vou the agendas out and it should be an informative discussion rLhink. Medical Arts Building or Ridgeview Hedicar Arts Building r guess isthe current name. r met with them after the planning commission meetingand basically, you outlined some parameters for an alternalive plan thaiwould achieve some additional tenant signage. BasicalIy leaving that
monument sign out front the uray it u,as approved and tinkering with the signbands as a part of an overall sign package. tlell, they've submittedsomething that we think is consistent uith what you wanted to see. No!^,there may be some detailed questions but basically you can see what it doesis it wipes out that middle sign band that was the temporary sign. It sayst)ental office and instead replaces it with larger, 4 foot wide instea d of 2
PIannirr3
Krauss
Cori,i,is.sion Meet i ng
7997 - fage 60
f oct r.: jde sig;', L,ancl . And in that sign band would allow multi-colored signsr,lith logos. All the other signage on the building is supposed to be thewhite letterE that ere uF there now. The Goldstar Mortgage, there's aprovi--:.c,n i.n the sign covenants that when that tenant changes,- they'II have
Lo bring their eign into compliance. As I said, the monument sign outfront is beck to what it's supposed to be. I guess 10 square feet or 1Ofeet r,ride or whatever it uras.
Emmi n?s: t^that- does it say?
the building name.IL just says
Emmi ngs: O kay .
Conrad: MaCe out of what? Di.d they do any, is it a simple?
Krauss: I think iL's an internally lit, it's a ground mounted sign with
plastjc cuL out... Lexan cut out type of thing,
Olser: There's additional wall signs if you t"rant to point that ouL.
Krauis: Yeah, th€re's basically tNo new tenant signs.
Olsen: Sr they adde,C the. . .
Emrni ngs: All in the middle? Yeah.
Bct:I:: Is this on both sides of the building or just the one side?
Krauss: l*lc - The back sta)'s the same as it was,
Farrnake-,: So there's one additional sign on top of the two? The one wasthe denti=t sign? Is that col'rect?
Kraus.: Yealr. t^Jhat they did is, I don't think they shoued that.
Farmal.,es: I see three in the middle there.
Krauss: This one now says Chan Oentist.
Farmakes; And what's the one on your left?
Krauss: ft says. . .
Farmakes: So there is an additional sign then?
Krauss: Right. There's a total of two more tenant signs with this.They've given us a set of comprehensive cavenants which I think are okay aslong as they're relying to this kind of pjckage. There are some additionalprovisions on what I've written in there like this building should not beallot.red to have any portable trailer mounted signs out front or banners.It's still an office building. It shouldn't have any paper signs in the
windows or anything else. This should be a sign package.
P) a rrn.i n-:
ApriI :, ,
Comnnission Meet i ng79i! - trase 61
E n',;,I n::: :
sa\- .'."-
tje I I , but when ure say this is Nhat you get, do Ne also have togct anything else?
Kraugs:
OIsen:You already said that.
Krauss: tLell. ' Ne now have it in a covenant package that we file r^rith theprop.-r't y . Nou.J what ue've done thus far is we've written it up to the Citycouncil and said that the PIanning commission denied their application hutthat vou seem to indicate that this ulas along the lines of what you urantedto see. l,,le told the City Council that you have two options. you caneither inlerpret what the Planning Commission said and approve this or youcan apprc\'€ it in concept and send it back to the planning commission fordetailed review and approval. r guess d like your feedback on what you'dprefer. Gettirg it back here for your final review. Is this reallyconeistent l.rith what you were thinking?
Conracl : Did you say, that Nas a 4 foot strip in the middle versus a 2?
I l hjnl. yc,u do.
Krauss: Ri ght .
Emmings: It locrks smaller, not bigger on this drawing.
Ahrens: That-'s done on purpose.
Krauss: l;eIl no, I think what they're showing isthey tend to be a little moreThey've got the width so theyIetlers.
you 're going with your
compact and dense anddon't need the leng+- h f or
ccr
bui
tha
porate
It aror-r
r_ Iong
Iogos and
nC t.hat .
stream of
Batzl i : Al I T can say is when !.re geL the sluff , make surec,f plans with one date and aII the dimensions on the plans
scal.a as r.Jhat they say. You knoh, this is just incredible.
Conr-aJ; Do we like the two different size of bands?
I ittle- bit of a problem. I didn't think it r.ras going
and I know some of us said ule liked taller.
I guess
to come
ther e 'sare the
one set
sa me
I'm hav i ng
back that
a
way
Ahrens: I didn't think it was going to come back multi-colored. Iguess f'm a Iittle confused PauI when you said the next tenant who replacesthe Goldstar Mortgage sign is 9oin9 to have to bring the sign into
compliance because it's not in compliance now because it's not whitelettering but we're 9oin9 to allow colored signs in the middl.e - Thatdoesn't make any sense to me.
Krauss: That's where it gets, that's where it becomes subjective and alittle different. I wasn't sure r.rhether that meL the critiria thai you
were talhing about or not, But r,lhat they're talking about is the white
].ette rin3 on the outside urings and on the portico's. The only other
variance to that would be the colored signs Hith logos in the middle.
Farmakes: These are backlit after hours right? After business hours?
Planning
Apr i I ? ,
Commission tteet i n9
19q1 - Page 62
i Crn't
I c:n ''.
Like
I i ke
that.
It.
Ahrene: I tl,ink it should all look the same.
most the time but I think on this buildins itattract ive a buil<.,ing.
I mean I
needs it.
hate conf ormi t.yIt's not that
Krauss: NeIl, I can convey those comments to the City Council. But inprinciple, is this concept, whether or not you agree urith the actual
sigrrage, is the concept particular r^rith the sign bands?
Emmings: Oh yeah. That's fine.
Conrad: I think them having that middle sign band. They can Put three
nanr€s out there. I just don't feeL, from ulhat I see, that it's
aesth.'.icalIy urhat I thought bre were trying to encourage.
Conrad: Yea h .
Emrrj ns=: Ne don't make final decisions.
Kraurs: t^lhy don't I try to encourage the City Council to
conc€pt and we'Il bring it back to you for final action.
maI,.^ th. final decision on tha!.
accePt the
That way you can
Ernmi n3r- :
You
c)h
would if the Council a.Llows you to.
real ly? That's real pohler man.
Conrad; Just so yoLl're communicating at least what I thoughL He were
to do is srive them a 2 foot band just like the rest and it was going
look uery similar to the balance. I really didn't care if they had 3
in there oy ?,1just was going to give them a band in the middle.
9oin9to
names -
Emmin3i: And you Here pro color.
Conrad: f made that speech buL I don't know that I made it.
Batzli: You're renigging now.
Conracl: I don't knouJ that
developments. I think Timthe logo stuff.
I made it for that buildins.
made the speech for color and
I Iike
Iogo.
on ot her
1i ked
ir
He
Erhart: I do but that's, I mean you've got some ofof it white, ft doesn't make any sense at all.it color and then some
Conrac,: f guess against the wood exterior, I just don't think that this isan e f f ecti.r,,e design. I Iike the practicality. t,hat h,e're doing is letterpeoplc [.nor that they're there. It's a quasi advertising deal but it's
more of e, in my mind it's more of just saying, hey they're here and
Planning
April 3,
Commission tleet i ng
7997 - Page 63
helpi ng citizens
sign.
find where they're ]ocated more than a glaring advertising
Batz]i: 90 if they made all
is that going to be okay?
three of them the same as the outbound ones,.
Conrad; Then I'm comfortable with that.
Emmings: And the 2 foot band. t^le don't have to go to 4 feet.
Krauss: I'II convev that. rnterestingly enough r uas stuck in a lrafficjam in Phoenix last week and I lookbd up and f saw the American Family signon a single story office service building and the sign, the logo lookedexactly like that but it uas white.
Emmings; Okay. Did you take a picture of that?
Krauss: No.
Batz I i r Butas the ot her
would you allow urhitesigns? tJould you }et
Krauss: I will try to
Erhart: I sLilI Lhink
uith the logo if it r.ras the same colorthem put their logo up there?
comments to the City Council.
take the signs off the porticos.
convey your
they should
Conrad; Crf f of uhere?
Erhart: Off the porticos. To me that,s what kills the building. Thoseporticos should have remained undecorated and the signs could be in thebackground. See to me that's the whol.e pountinance of tn:.s.
Kraus€: I'Il try to convey the sentiment I think I hear to the Council butvou mav want to contact them individually. Theoretically they could justapprove it this wav and that's the end of it. So alr r can do at thiipoint is convey. . .thoughts and I,d be happy to do that. LEst couplethings. Briefly. The surface water utility district. He,ve sent outrequests for qualifications on about 17 firms.
Emmings: You also sent out bills and I got one.
Emmings: I didn't mean what I said.
Krauss: Oh, we didn't adjust yours. But.by and Iarge the concern that, wesent out 5,OOO bills and ure maybe had 20 people caII up about it so itt,,asn't a great number and I think ue've been able to resolve any issuesassociated wilh thaL. AnyHay, by Friday afternoon ule wiII have gotten backinitial proposals from consultant teams on doing the three phased study forus, the wetlands, the storm water and water quality. Hhat ue are proposing
Krauss: tJe've gone through a whole billins cycle. l^,le've had somecomplaints, [^,le've had some questions and some urere valid and ue've madesome adjustments in the biIIing.
Planning
ApriI 3,
Commission Heet i ng
t997 - Page 64
to do at that poj.nt is, I've talked to the Mayor about this, is with an in-
house committee is review those things, those 17 or however many uie get
and con,re up with a short list of maybe 5. Then ask those 5 firms to
prepare detailed responses, Nor^, I 've isked the t'layor to set up a task
force, or to set up people to sit with us and intervieul the 5 because we
don't Hant to make that decision. This is a long term relationshiP. We
think it warrants having some Council representation and some Planning
Commission representation on that review committee. I'd also Iik6 this
committee to Hork on setting up a task force to wor k with whoever r.re pick
over the next probably, it's about a 2 yeaY Program to develoP this stuff
because it means some changed ordinances. It affects ProPerties. There's a
Iot of policy things. I hon'estly don't specifically see it as a sole
Planning Commission responsibility. I ]ike the idea of having some Counc.il -
representation. Some Planning Commission rePresentation and some Lake
Associations. Some interested individuals wor kins together on this so we
get more of a cross section of PeoPIe. Possibly a develoPer if that's
appropriate. But we'II keep you tracking on this and I'Il let you know
when this is coming uP. I'm asking the Council to think about this on
Monday so they can give us some names to work with. The last thing we have -is we have another request for proposals out on doing a comprehensive sewer
and water plan in the new HUSA area. tje've had some significant interest
raised on different properties in the neu MUSA area and the first question
is alxays, where do you r.ra nt us to hook uP to water and sewer? Where
should the CiLy trunk lines be and the answer is, we don't know, l.le've
only got vague ideas but never ]aid them out so we took some initiative and
we put out proposals Lo get some folks to work urith us and work uP that
plan. I'11 be taking that to the City Council in a couPle ueeks. Hopefullv
r,re can get somebody on board and get that study out by early summer so
people have better information to work with. But there is a lot of
interest out there. I think that does it for me.
Emmings: okay. Does anybody got anything else?
Eatzli moved, Erhart seconded to adjourn the meeting.
and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planni n9 Di r ector
Prepared by Nann Opheim
AIl voted
10:37 p-m-
in favor
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COT.IMISSION
REGULAR i.IEET I NG
JUNE 5, 1991
Chairnran Emmings calIed the meeting to order at 7:4O
Batz1i, Joan
P.m. .
Ahrens, Ladd Conrad,MEMBERS PRESENT:Steve Emmi ngs, Br ian
Tim Erhart. and Jeff Farmakes
STAFf PRESENT: PauI Krauss, PlanningAI-Jaff, P Ia nner
Director; Jo Ann- Olsen , SeniorIPlanner ; and Sharmin
Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report
urere presenL. Chairman Emmings caIIed the
on this item.public hear i ng
The appl icantsto order,
Emmings: The applicants are here. Do you havethis time? Any reaction to the conditions that
anything you wish to add at
have been imposed?
Roger Byrne: Yeah. I'm Roger Byrne. First I'd like to say thaL yourstaff is greaL. Thev did a great job. r mean r ulas impressed for arl thework they do for what, it seemed ]ike a pretty simple thing to me. InIooking through it, most Lhe stuff I agree with. A couple of things Idon't on the proposal there, The access road I guess is the main thing.There's a driveway there noul that's used by the house next door, or on theother side of t-he paper road there and I don'l know, it just says in therethat they u,ant it paved. I've got a problem with the paving there I guess.t^lell first of all they want a 2o foot road and there's a fire hydrant thereand urhere the road is now on the easement, the driveway, the existingdriveway, gravel driveway on the easement, between the fire hydrant and thehilI, there's only probablr about 15 feet there- That's the driveway note.So if we u,ere to pave it La a 20 foot r,lidth, we'd have to cut 4 or 5 feetback into the hill on one side and the other side it'd be right, it'd haveto be paved right up to the fire hydrant to get a 20 foot road. Or
driveway Lhrough there. And then as far as the paving goes, well it's kindof steep. It's kind of steep grade right off the road right Lhere anyway
and one of the reasons I uias given they never paved that below this trail
down Lhere uras because they said in the Ninter time it never, urhich istrue, it'd never get much sun dou,n Lhere and it don't burn off and it gets
awfuL slippery down there. And to come down and make the corner and get upa paved driveway if it's slippery, it's tough with the gravel now. But itjust doesn't seem to make sense to me to have to pave it there. I realizethe ordinance says if two families use the same driveway then the ordinance
says it's got to be paved for Lhe common area of the driveway but I don'tknour, I guess I'd like to see some kind of variance there. Or maybe haveit tied to, if the road is ever paved, then it shouLd have to be paved
instead of just because two people are using it you know. Something morethat will make more sense because I don'L think they'Il ever pave Lhe road
PUBLIC HEARING:
PRELIHINARY PLAT AND LOT AREA VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN CARVER BEACH
ZONED RSF. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAI,iILY AND LOCATED AT 6724 LOTUS TRAIL. ROGER
AND DARLENE BYRNE -
I'IEHBERS ABSENT: Annette EIlson
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i n9
2
because it's just going to make i! tough in the winter. It's tough enough
now wiLh the gravel
Emmings: L,Jhen you're talking about the road, you're lalking about LotusTrail?
Roger Byrne: Lotus TraiI, right.
Emmings: And Lhat's what's not paved
Roger Byrne: Right. Lotus TraiI isn
dr iveuay that's there.
Emmings: Alright- Now can you teII
reddish color mark there, that's the
Roger Byrne: Risht .
Risht. That wiII
it also serves the
now?
't paved and neither is the existing
me, maybe uhere she's coLored the
common dr iveway?
Emmings: And then that will serve what's marked on here as Parcel A?
Roger Byr nc ;serve Parcel A
Emmi ngs: And property to the south?
of Lhat.Roger Byrne: RishL, Lo the south
Emmi ngs: And
dr iveway?
will those be the only Lwo ProPerties coming off that
Roger Byrne: Righ!. That's the only two. t^lell the one to the south
already, it already serves Lhem. They live Lhere. They have a garage uP
there and it serves them. It also serves that Parcel A there already for
Lhe fact Lhat I have a LiLtIe Parking Iot over there. I park, we Park so I
do use it now anyuray.
Emmi ngs: Okay. But those wi]l be the only LNo properties served by that?
be the only two properties served by thatRoger Byrne: Them would
dr i veway , yes.
Emmings: And Parcel B you come off, right off of Lotus Trail?
Roger Byrne: Right. Parcel B is down about uhere you see it startingthere. It just kind of cuts in at an angle and goes up into ParceL Bthere. That's gravel too but that's flat doun Lhere- It's just that whenyou come off of Lotus Trail onto the, where she marked that little red
thing there, it's kind of steep and gravel makes more sense than pavement.
Besides that, pavement costs money and we're trying to keep the costs down.tlith just two families using that, I don'L knou. To me it doesn't seem to
make too much sense. Other than that, lhe rest of the report f guess, they
come up with some good stuff. You know about having engineers look at thesite and develop it. Figure out the plans and stuff like that. I guess
Planning Commission
June 5, 799L - Page
Meet i ng
3
that's a good idea, Something I never thoughL of before - It's always good
to have I guess. I'm not sure uhen I'm going to, you knour build in there.
I'm jusL tryirrg to gel this straighten out now. Kids are grown up and the
house is too big and ure want something -smaller and ure figure that's thep1ace. t^le like it down there. So se]l the other one and build up in
there. Don't t4ant to move too far, That way uJe won't have Lo rent a bigtruck, I just carry things over. That's the plan right now. Anyway Iguess that's aII, that Nas my only real concern is the driveway pavement
bus i ness .
Emmi ngs: Alright, thank you.
Byrne: Darlene Byrne. I've talked !o my neighbor Betsy Dishlerwould Iike to see the driveway stay graveled because it would blendwith Lhe road and blend in with the area lhere.
Emmings: This is the neighbor Lo the south who uses it?
Dar 1e ne
and shein mor e
Darlene Byrne: Yes. She wanted
meeLing so she just wanLed me to
to come lonight but
say that for her.
she had a not her
Emmings: 0kay. This is a publi.c
to make any commenLs on this?hearing. Is Lhere anybody else who r,.rants
Batzli moved, Erhart seconded to close the public hearing- AII voted infavor and the motion carried. The public hearing Has closed.
Conrad: Just a couple quick comments for staff. I'm interestedcriteria for granting variances. One of the criteria is you'repreventing somebody from a reasonable use of the property and ain here said reasonable use includes the use made by a majority
comparable property within 5OO feet. Is that true?
ln
not
statement
of
Krauss: Yeah. It
Conrad: So that's reasonable use?
Krauss: And that's a new definition for variances. That's something that
the ordinance was adapted to include las! year. tlhat it does is it allows
us to recognize the uniqueness of areas such as Carver Beach and not have
to throw the book at them and say we don't care that this area b,as platted
in 1920 and that everybody else lives on a 20,OOO square foot lot. You'regoing to come in on a 15,OOO square foot lot. So it allous us to assess
basically is there a neighborhood standard that deviates from the rest of
the city. And if there is, as long as we don't decrease the standard in
any way, it would be acceptable and this fits that biII
Emminss: We talked abouL it under the rubric of neighborhood standards and
I remember particularly thinking about it on setbacks where ule had places
that had 30. foot setbacks. tle thought it didn't make sense to make
Emm i ngs: Ladd?
Planning Commission
June 5, 1997 - Page
Meet i ng
4
somebc,dythat ar ea
and setaII 30.
it back 50
That's the
new come ). n
they uere
conrad: I kind of like that but I can't play it in other scenarios to
how. In this case it fits in the neighborhood and I like thaL. But
there's something that's sort of uncomfortable about that same thing.
think it's good for this particular area. Recommendation for Paving.
me about that- tlhy? Tha! doesn't seem ]ike it's in characler with the
area. The frontage road.
or some other larger number if in
one I remember.
see
I
TeI I
Krauss: tJell a couple things. First of aII Mr. Bvrne is correct. t^,e r^rere
out there tonight and rae walked around on the driveway with him and
concluded that the full 20 foot wide common driveway that'6 required by the
ordinance for a shared driveway is inapPropriate - That it doesn't fit in
between the fire plug and the trees and it would wind up coming too close
to the existing garage. It's kind of a goofv situation. That garage
serving the southern home looks to be located onlv about 10 feet off of
what is actually Lhe righL-of-way. The undeveloped right-of-uray. Now so
Ne've agreed with Roger that something ]ess than 20 feet really needs to be
considered there because there's no desire to cause any damage to the
trees, and they have pretty significant Lrees over there. NotJ the reason
that uJas in the ordinance though, and that's on the Privaee drive ordinance
that if you access a IoL by PrivaLe driveway. The reason that's in Lhere
is because we've obligated to Provide fire and PoIice protection and we
wanted to insure ourselves Lhat at the very least we have the ability to
move equipmenL in and out in some reasonable way if we are going to aIIoN
homes to access off of privale driveways. Many communities, ourse).ves
included up until a year or two ago, said no- t^le iust will noL allow those
kind of subdivisions to exis! period. So there's flexibilitv that Nas
given and the exchange for that flexibiliLv is the cost of paving the
driveway. One of the other things that entered into our conversations here
is the extreme grade on the site and the fact that it runs righL down into
lhe lake. It's true the street is not paved and I can't you that we have
it in our plan6 to do paving on there, alLhough I've gpt to believe at some
point in time it's 9oin9 to become necessary to do so. For a couPle of
reasons. The City does not maintain very many dirt streets anymore. It
becomes more and more difficult to have equipment just to maintain a few
stretches of dirt sLreet. l.lore importantly, everything that runs down that
street, there's some significant grading problems and drainage problems in
Carver Beach, run straight into Lotus Lake. And you know the evidence Lhat
we have is that Lotus Lake has somg growing problems with water quality.
And you become more concerned as you introduce more channelization and hardsurface lhat's going to increase the flow ripping down the driveway,straight across the street and into the lake. There's already a little bitof erosion there and t"rhen we sat dourn with our engineering folks and said,
what do you real]y think should be done here they said, really the right
h,ay to stabilize this is to come up with a paved dri.veuay that with a good
culvert design, you know there's a ditch section in the street there. A
good culvert designed in there and possibly you may even need a curb or
something to direct water down at the very bottom. RoIIed bituminous curb.
Something that doesn't cost very much but does the job. To realLy make a
safe and more efficient situation. I can't tell you that that's not
Planni ng Commission
June 5. 7997 - Page
Meet i ng
Conrad: It's ki nd
function?
of inconsistent uith the neishborhood yet it has a
Erhar"t: I'nr assuming aII Lhe other neighbors have gravel driveways?
Krauss:
does or
have an
It's realIy a matLer of personal preference. I
rrot . t^.le didn't Lake a survey but the City doesordinance that mandates the paving of driveways.
don't k nownot at this who
time
Emmings: The paved portion isthe two properLies so how longTrail?
only lhe portion Lhat's used in common towould that paved portion be from Lotus
Krauss:
there, I
tJeI I if it
suppose if
40 feet?
goes up to the,you went to the
I think it's a 3
back bay of that
car garage that'sit teould be...
Emm i ngs :
conradi Boy, that's a tough one. That's just really, the ordinance isthere for a good reason. There's some rationale in terms of runoff and thelake dc,es need help. It absolutely is in incredi.ble shape. poor shape.
Erhart: fn your honest oPtnron r ight?
Conrad: AII you've got to do is 9o down there and look. And al] you'vegot to do is set your disk reading and you'll see how bad it is. I thinkthe variance, I'm in favor of this. I think iL makes sense. It fits intothe neighborhood and the sLandards set in the neighborhood. Hy onlyconcern is the staff requirement of the paving and right now I probably
would vote for it.
Emmi ngs: Okay . Tim?
Erhart: t^iell I agree with Ladd. It aII looks pretty reasonable and pretly
simple although I would say that it's unreasonable to expect anybody topave their driveway if the street's not paved. It seems to me thaL could
be jusLified just by the variance, reading of the variance. It'sconsistent with the other neighbors - I would suspect there are probabLy
few driveways that are paved - In any effect, I guess it would seem to methe firsL step would be get the street paved before we start requiringpaved driveways. That's the only thing I've got
Conrad: can I jump in? If the streetforce the owner to go back and pave it
is paved, Lhen there's nothing to
So there could be.
Batz]i: Nhy can'L hre require them to pave it when the sLreeL's paved?
irrconsistent with that neighborhood because it i's. The neighborhood is alitLle Lough to deal with in all kinds of aspecLs. t^le have two driveways
c-orning out basically overlapping each olher and f can't figure. out uhere'the street ends and the driveways begin. That's Lhe Hay it is. Anyway, sothat's the long and short of it.
Conrad: Right .
Erhart: Is there any ordinance that r-equires !hat?
Planning Commission
June 5, 799L - Page
Meet i ng
6
Ehat if you iust made it
when the street b,as Paved,
f suppose that's Possible.
t^lould there be a wav for
Not very easily.
Krauss: No, we don't and from time to time I've talked to the engineering
department about the validity of a driveulay ordinance. A lot of
communities do have those. It's not something we pursued actively and if
we did, I'm not sure how it wouLd become retroactive. Now when you pave a
street, theoretically you can Pave a Iittle bit of an aPron going up in
there.
Emm i rigs :
pave it
Krauss:
Emm i ngs :
ChmieI:
a condition of approval that they would
which I think is tlhat you !.lere saying?
that to be caught at that time?
Conrad: Just caII your memory Paul .
Krauss: I t^ras hopi n9 .
Emmings: Alr ight . Joan?
Krauss: I'm afraid so. You know we keeP Lalking about having a GIS
computer based Iand parcel identification system urhere aII this stuff can
be fed in. tJhen somebody comes in for a buiLding Permit, you punch a
couple of buttons and out come aIl the conditions that have always been
applied to that Piece of ground. tJe're not there yet '
Ahrens: Next wee k?
Ahrens: t^iell, I have lhe same concerns as Tim about the driveway. I would
Iike to see this approved if at alI Possible with a condition of aPProval
thaL the driveway is paved at the time the street is Paved. But again, I
don't see why, if the City's going to go in and Pave a road, they can see a
driveway that goes into the road is not Paved, whv at that time can't
somebody bring LhaL up as an issue then? I would image before a road is
paved the engineers go ou! there and ]ook at the area and see that there
are cerlain unpaved driveways that wiII be going into that.
Kraussi They do but it's not normally in
Lo make improvements on private property.a public wor ks program or budget
Ahrens: Uhat if the City didn't pay for it Lhough?
Batzli: Other communities have offered to
their expense but it's cheaper because all
example.
pave the adjoining gr ave I
the equipment's out there
atfor
Planni ng Commission
June 5, 799L - Page
Heet i ng
They could just assess the cost to the homeowner. That's the way
to see it done. Otherwise, I don't see any problem at all with, I
r^rith the staff recommendation on Lhis.
Emmi ngs: Okay . Jeff?
Ahrens:rd Iikego a.Iorrg
Batzl"i:
some way
erosion?
Farmakes: I went ..ly and ]ooked at the property. I agree with everyLhingthat's been saiC here. f guess I'd like to add that I think the reasonsthat you'r'e asking for a variance are aII the correct reasons. UnIikeprevious cases that we had in here earlier which met none of the criteria,I think you've met it all. The reasons to ask for a variance and I lhinkthat's important to say that because I was against the earlier variancejusL for that reason. Not that it Nas l foot ]ess or 1,OOO feet less, Ithi.nk it met the reason for variances and you have. I would agree that
when the street is paved, your access road should be paved also but as itis n,:w, I think you shou.Id be given the option of Ieaving it as it is. Asa dirt road. I have no further commenLs.
f alrree with a majority of the comments already made.that they can Lo something with the gravel driveway to
Is there
help the
Krauss: We can ask our engineeri.ng department. I know at the very ).eastthey want to make sure that there's an appropriately sized culvert for theditch unclerneath there. one of the problems we have with where that streetruns and as Ne get into the waLer quality program, what you'd like to do isthere's a tremendous flowage coming over that hill and there's real.LyIittle or no room to impound it and let sedimentation occur before thewater is ciischarged out into the lake. I donnt know what Lhe answer'sgoing to be over there. f'm not sure Lhat there,s going to be a good onebut in a more limited aspect Brian, yes. Our engineering department shouldbe given authority to approve the driveway curb cut. Designed to theirspecification, paved or not,
Batzli: I guess I'd recommendthat reads, the common section
what 's that road asain?
lhat we amend thaL sentence inof the driveway shall be paved
paragraph 5
[.Jhen the,
Emmi ngs: Lotus Trail?
Batz.l.i: Lakeshore Drir,re? Is that what iL's ca]Ied there?
conrad:TraiI.
Batzlr:Trai I .
Emm i ngs :it Lotus Trai l?
Batz]l: Lotus Trail is paved. And I thi.nk that way we end upof the width of 20 feet as well. But I would like staff to ask
engineering department to look into how Ne can minimize erosion
meantime.
Lo tus
Lo tus
Isn 't
getting rid
ourin the
PIanni ng Commission
June 5, 7991 - Pase
Heet i ng
I
Emmings: Okay. f have a queslion on 6(c). You've got a dr j.veNay easement
in favor of Parcel A and the adjoining lot to the south. Now, that
easement will be on the, there u1ill be a vacation of Willow and then half
of Uillow will be going to the properLy to the south and half to Lheproperty lo the Byrne's right to be added to Parcel A?
Krauss: That's the presumption, It's I guess a County court has to
admi nister that but yeah.
Emmings: okay, and I guess Ladd's concerned about your conditioning this
approval on easements for that driveway that they'II be driving on both
halves of that but I'in wondering, can you imPose lhis easement on somebody
who isn't here as an applicant?
Krauss: tle I lproperty. t^Je
consi deration
Kr auss :
develop
Emmi ngs :
been made
Erhart:
Council
stated
revised
servingat the
keep in
re goi ng
we Nant
mind we're imposing the easement on what's
to release our interest in it in exchange
to make sure that that easement is filed.
nowfor ourthat
hle can have Roger
down to the county.
Emmings: But you've got to get anput the easement there firs!?
easement from them, or are we going to
Krauss: No. tle have the ability to Put a permanent easement over iL
before we reLease our right-of-way easements. We're basicallv maintaining-
t^le can do it either of two ways. Either , and I think both oulners are
cooperative in this regard. Either they can establish the easement when
they've established tiLIe to the vacated right-of-wav or we can Pre-fiIe an
easement that He won't release. t^le'Il release the right-of-ulay easement
but maintain the appropriate driveuray easement which we utould then involve
the city in Lhe chain of title but we'd allow the two ot^,ners to use it.
Krauss: l^Je can do it that way.
don 'tEmmings: 0r if you can. I even know lhat you can.
Yeah, and ule do all the filing now in-house so
those easements and just take the whole package
Okay. Otherwise Ihere. Has a nybody
agree with all the other comments that havegot anything further or is there a motion?
I'II move that lhe Planning Commission recommend to the City
to approve Subdivision Request S91-4 uith aII the conditions as
with the exception of item 5 in which the second sentence will be
to read, the common section of the driveway and remaining section
Parcel A shalI be paved Lo minimize erosion and maintain drainage
time Lotus Trail is paved. And to add a senLence that staff to
Emmings: okay. The way it is here, you're requesting the urhole thing from
them and tAey can't give it. I guess that's what bothers me. But it's
here as a condition of approval but we don't have the People to the south
here and they don't have title so it may be, it would seem to me the urav to
do it would be to impose the easement and then do the vacation.
Planning Commission
June 5, f99f - Page
MeeL i ng
9
pr ov i cle recommendations to theyou necl any change regarding
on urays to minimize erosion. Didthere Steve or is that just lefl?
appl icanlyour issue
Emmings: No, I just wanted to bring that up and make sure that.
BatzIi: Second -
Erhart moved, Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommendapproval of Subdivision Request S91-4 Iot combi nat ion,/r eplaL with a 1,4SOsquare foot lot area variance on Parcel A and 3,674 square foot lot areavariance on Parcel B, subject to the following conditions:
1 The applicant shall reflect a]l of the typical drainage and utiLity
easements on Parcel A (Lots 1L64-1f69 and Lots L!78.-L!79 ) and on parcel
B ( Lots 777O-r777 ).
P.rr k and trail dedicationdedication. Fees wiII beParcel A.
2 f ees
Paid
wil.I be required in Iieu of land
when a building permit is requested for
4
5
6. Provide the following easements:
a Standard drainage and utility easemenLs.
b
C
d
A20
Roa d
fooL wide drainage and utiliLy easement in the former t^lillow
r ight-of-way .
A common dr iveway
Lo the south over
a l<
SCTVE
I ols
easement in favor of Parcel A and adjoining lot
common secLions of the driveuay.
foot temporary access easement over forme.r right-of-way to3Iots Iocated uest of Parcel A. Easement may be vacated ifare acquired by the applicant and combined t^rith Parcel A.
AII voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
The applicant shall supply grading and drainage and tree preservat ionplans along urith the building permit for review and approval by theCity Engi neer .
A structural engineer design the foundation for the future home onParcel A (Lots LL64-LL69 and Lots LLTA-LL79 ) due Lo the nature of thislot. 9oils information must be provided.
A common curb cut shall be utilized to serve parcel A and the homelocated to the south that is currently served by a gravel drivewayIccated in the right-of-way. tlhen a home is built on parcel A, the
common section of the driveway and remaining section serving parcel Ashall be paved to minimize erosion and maintain drainage at the timeLotus Trail is paved. Staff is directed to provide recommendations tothe applicant on ..rays to minimize erosion-
Publ ic Present:
Name A.l
Richard tli ng 3481 Shore Drive
Emmings: Jo Ann, is there anything you prepared
0Isen:
L hr ough
I Nas just going to kind of
what we changed if you Nant
go
me
through or
to do that.
to present?
take comments.I can go
Emmi ngs: Oka)', that
wants a staff report
intc it then. Ladd?
indicated pretty clearly.
this? AIright. okay, then
Is there anybody that
Iet's just get r ightNAS
on
conrad; I don't have.
Emnrings: oh, excuse me. This is a public hearing and mavbe, we
closed the public hearing and I know Dick, you wanted to address
didn't you? Haybe :'row would be a good time. I'm sorry.
haven 'tthis
Richard Wing: I'm Richard tling of 3481 Shore Drive, Minnewashta Heights.
f attended a seminar with staff some months ago and thev discussed, well'
one of the panels at the end of this, if you recall, we had some
developers. one was a develoPer, iL raas a bane] and the Panel members were
a group Lhat did slr.ip malIs, a Vice President from a large merchandise
store, chain in the Twin cities area and the other one was a develoPer of
single residential homes which had done work in Chanhassen in the past.
And as this debate got on and they were talking about ordinances and
Iandscapinsi and so on, the seminar had to do uith Parking Iots and hor^l
they've got Lo change and just to Pave over with imPervious surface isn't
doing the job anymore. But at any rate, one of the quesLions I
specifically asked was uould this developer, who kepL bragging about hisquality of homes in the develoPment he was Putting in, he was talking about
how they were taking soybeans and cornfields and turning them into these
wonderful hor.rsing projects, and I sort of said ueII good for you. Their
entryways were Landscaped rather elaborately, primarily for advertising
purposes and Lhen t^,e Nent beyond that and there was nothing. I said wouldyou ever put in or ever put back. It used to be a hardr"rood forest, wouldyou ever put anything back if it wasn't required? He said, ueII you mean
beyond the l FHA ob.Iigated tree? And he said no. I said, well hor.r would
we ever encourage that. He said ueII the City Ordinance would have torequire it. I said that's fine with me and that's when I brought this upto PauI specifically so my comments I Nanted to make on Lhe Iandscape
ordinarrce is extremely narrow and I'lI apologize for that. I mean this is
much broader and much more complex but on page 12, under Section 18-61 .
Required ]andscaping for residential subdi.visions. [.,e now require 1 tree
PIanni ng Commission Heet i n9
June 5, 7|291 - Page 10
PUBLIC HEARING:
ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AI.IENDMENT TO AHEND SECTIONS REGARDING
LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION REOUIREHENTS.
Planning Comnission
June 5, 7997 - Page
Heet i ng
11
and as I por:nded the pavement if you uiII, dur j.ng election tirne and went
through the subdivisions that had been cornfields and soybean fields, they
were terribly stark and no ]andscaping except the l tree that i^:as required
and that's a little ? L/2 inch tree sitting there. I just felt we could domore. I felt that the new people coming into Chanhassen for a real minimalimpact on their pocketbook could contribute a Iittle bit more and thedeveloper could be pushed to maybe to contribute a little bit more so Ispecifically requested that our l tree upped to 3 and the City Council wasfairly receptive. You know we tossed numbers back and forth and I wouldhave Iiked 6 but that's impractical so 3 bras someHhat picked arbitrarily.But I would reguest your support on and !.Jhat I,m asking for just as aresident of the community, and I'm addressing you just as a resident, isthat we 9o with the 3 Lrees. But I'd like to see rather than just the 3trees Iisted, I'd like to see specifically 2 deciduous trees which is kindof nry goal Paul has some good comments about Hhy Ne urant to put in thepine trees and in my discussions with him I don,t disagree wiLh that but Iwould sF.ecifically request this Section A(1) to require 2 decid0ous treesand to prevent a developer from coming and just buying green ash or anapproved tree or they're also very cheap and he could come in and just
blankeL a neighborhood r,rith green ash. I would Iike to require 3 trees butspecificallv 2 6e deciduous and out of that, r'd like one to stick with our
namesake of Lhe City of Chanhassen, the maple leaf, or the maple tree andthe emblem behind you again is the maple leaf so I don't Lhink it's askingtoo much that one of the deciduous trees be required to be maple. Theother lhing f 'nr concerned about was, my initial lhoughts were that we tryto create more of a boulevard effect and that 2 of Lhese trees be in thefront yard. I think this is somewhat of a difficult question. I don,t
know if I uould even put Lhat because many people want tight control oftheir landscaping as they buy these homes. But if I was to have my choiceI would require 2 of the trees be placed in the front yard and then 1 inthe back yard, if it's even practical to determine a placement. So I wouldIike to bring up at a future time the appointment of a shade treecommittee. Other communities do have this and one in particular has beenquite successful to Lhe point urhere they're now even getting money from theCity Council to go out and buy trees to specifically place trees in certainareas in the city but that's a little bit ahead of the game at his point so
my only comments tonight were, I'd just Iike your consideration and support
on A(1). I'd like to see the 3 trees mainLained and I'd like to see a
minimum of 2 deciduous and I think the locations of those trees are urorthyof some discussion.
Batzli: L.lhy do you want 2 deciduous as opposed to coniferous?
Richard tling: I guess I'm Iooking for a shaded appearance. PauI's
comments about the trees 6-7 months out of the year are bare and lhese pine
trees, or the coniferous trees if you wiII. That's the only word I can
remember, provide more body throughout ther year and I'm not opposed to thatbut Lhe effect I'm looking for is the hardtrood forest. The Bluff Creekcorridor if you will or the city boulevards in Minneapolis where al one
time were heavily elns and now they're pretty much putting back mapl-es. Iguess I look at yards that have a variety of trees and I find the yards
with the shade trees to have more aesthetics personally and that's what I
PIanni n3 Commission
June 5, L991 - Page
Meet i n9
12
would be supporting here. I thj.nk that for the summer shade and for urhat
I'm t-rying Lo accomplish for the clean air and the environment, the
deciduous trees are maybe a little more the goal I'm after, I guess nr
trying to replace the hardwood forest and the reforestation of the hardwood
forest more than I am the pine trees but that's certainly a reasonableposition Paul is taking and I'd be haPPy uith anything ue got.
Batz]i: when you're talking about establishing the boulevard, are you
suggesting that you put these in the right-of-way of the road there are is
9oin9 Lo be back off lhe street 20 f eeL?
Richard t^ling: I think the tree's are going to be Part of a Person'spurchase. They're going to be on their Personal ProPerty and another
Councilman pointed out, he would want total control of where Lhey uould go
and the ordinance aIlows that. It gives them a year with certificates to
purchase what trees they want and Put them uhere thev u,ant. I guess if
I had a choice, I would have the ordinance state that 2 of the trees would
be in the fronL porLion of the house. Hou,ever you want Lo define tha!-
uhethe'r it started in the middle of house front or from the corners of the
house out. The DNR has recommendations for Planting trees to best suit the
house in urinter and summer in terms of the shade and their use and I lhink
they favor' the urestern side and the southuresL corner if I remember that
artic.Ie. BuL I'm not real knowLedgeable on that so I don't' that's just mv
ourn personal opinion. I'd like to see more trees in Lhe front yard to
create a IittIe b.it more of a shaded boulevard effec!.
Emmings: Thanks Dick. There are no other members of the public here. Is
there a motion to close the public hearing?
Erhart moved, Batzli seconded to close the public
favor and the motion carried- The public hearing
Erhart: okay, wetl why don't we jusL start with
on. The lasL tjme I remember, I somewhat agreed
the trees that u,,e're going to require should be,
hearing. All voted in
was closed.
the subject thaL Dick was
with Dick and felt that
I felt, boulevard trees.
Emmings: t,lhen you say boulevard, wha! do you mean?
Erhart: I mean deciduous trees with the intent at maturity they wiII hang
over the street .and provide essentially both a scenic and the shade for thepublic area of the subdivision which is the street and sidewalk' if there's
a sidewalk. on the flip side of thaL is I have a hard time going in and
essentially requiring a developer to go in and do t{hat I consider thepersonal landscaping of a }ot which is putting in the evergreens and the
stuff in the back yard and then bushes around the house. I mean that's
something that's left up to the individual homeouJner. Those are not public
areas of the lot. That's an individual so I agree and I would even suggest
to carry it one step further saying that all the trees that are required,
and if 3's Lhe right number, that's fine. They all be deciduous and that
they should be somehow defined to be planted somewhere along in the
viciniLy of the street so that they're planted for Lhe intended purpose of
boulevard trees. So I'd 90 one step further, The other thing is I agree
PIanning Comrnission
June 5, 1991 - Page
MeeL i. ng
t3
entire.Iy that no more than onc Lree should be a green ash. A green ash,while it's a very durable tree, it's not on the highest quality tree. Itgreens up late and loses i!'s leaves early and doesn't have much color. Ithink requiring 1 tree to be a maple makes sense.uhat ue ought to.'r is, if we want to pursue lhis
approved trees and put some control on urhat they snotes I had here, somewhere in my notes her.e is th
it mar ked.
Iandscaping standards. On page 10?
suggest that maybe
to provide a Iist ofId be. One of the
we only require
Iot of treesof junk.
I
is
hou
at
deciduous tree to meet a 15 foot ulLimaLe height. To me a 15 foot ultimateheight is not a tree. Tha!'s a bush or a shurb and so, I mean they couldput in Canadian Red Cherry in there which is a Lree...more than 15 feet.That's not a boulevard tree so there's something wrong here I think.
I think we may have deleted that section.Krauss;
Erhart:
OIsen:
Let's see
Thai's one
I've goL
of those
Erhar!: Page 9. Last sentence. Deciduous trees shal1 be species havingan average rnature crown spread of greater Lhan. Oh, that's a crown spread.Okai, I nrisread that. I nrisread that. I take that back. 5o anyway, going
back to thai one, again it's like Dick states, It's kind of a personalthing. That's what I see and it's like when you puL trees in the backyard, it's getting into someone's own personal taste for landscaping. flike the 3 trees. t have a question in that paragraph though. Are He aIittle inconsistenL when we say, if you put in these 3 trees they have tobe 2l/2 inch caliper yet Lo use an existing tree it has to be 6 inchcaliper. Thot doesn't seem right. To qualify not to have to put in a neultree, your existing tree has to be 6 inch caliper. That doesn't seem rightto me. It seems to me if there's a 2 L/2 inch tree that meets theordinance thaL's existing, then that ought to qualify as one of the trees.
Olsen: I think the reason Ne're doing that is to be consistent becausethroughout the ordinance we're saying that anyLhing that large with a 6inch caliper can't, would be considered clear cutting and you need toreplace it if you do have to cut it dor.rn. I think we're just trying to be.
Krauss: It trips the Lree preservation requirements over that width.
Richard Wing: It may not be transp).antable either - A 2 1/2 inch tree can
be transplanted easily and grows fast. A 6 inch h,ould Lake a tandem truck.
Erhartr f understand that. f'm saying, let's say you have a 6 inch tr€ethat's on the boulevard. Let's say a 3 inch tree is on a boulevard at just
exactly r^rhere you would plan! one of these 2 t/2 inch trees anyh,ay. tlhywouldn't thaL qualify as one of those trees? To me iL just doesn't seemfair. If it's an existing tree that's got...
Krauss: I Lhink there's also a concern though. There's athat don't 6ver grow more than 3 or 4 inches lhat are kind
ErharL: Oh, okay. Alright, Iet's say that it's a 3 inch tree.
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
74
Krauss: If you want to go with your approved list.
Erhart: I 've got
One of them , Lhat
of thi ngs sothere i n 'that don't lry
par agraph
all of them here.
same page it says.
a lot
Hord
Lo a nsuJer
1 on that
Emr, i ngs: tlhat page?
Erhart: [^]e're on page 12. Section 18-61 in the subdivision ordinance.
Just for editing there. t^lhere it says 6 inches, is that suPposed to be and
or as it's stated in the following page? Just look at lhat Jo Ann.
olsen:Where are'
Paragraph
you at now?
Erhart:
and.
L. It would be that twelfth line down where you use
Olsen: 6 inches and 4 feeL above the ground?
Erhart: Because on the following page you the uord or I think.use
!heKrauss: 6 inches as rneasured 4 feet above ground.
Erhart: tlell, anyway. Details. The last sentence on that paragraph says -
a waiver sha]I be applied for each existing tree against each required tree I
on, f guess that's okay. I guess now as r read that' that's clear - Let's
see. As long as we're on the subdivision ordinance. I talked to vou today -about Lhis on the phone PauI and that is, utiLity companies coming in and i
I thousht your word today was Perfect. Using Agent orange to essentially
clear cul- for their pourer Iines. I had my personaL experiences with that
and it's very upsetling and I knotr we as a City have had one evPerience ouL ;
on l'linnewashta ouL there. I'II teII you, I read this and it tells me that
they can't come in and do that. The Problem is, I don't think they would
agreetoLhat.rgueSSI'dIiketogettheothercommissionersfeeIings
about this. I think Ne ought to, you knor^r this is not New Germany and
someLhing out nexL to a cornfie.Ld tehere there's box elders growing uP into
their lines, f mean the trees that they Agent Orange mine. I planted
those trees. Those uere ash and sugar maPle and a variety of trees and
they came along with their big guns and trucks and boom. They .,Jere gone,
and they Heren't underneath the power line either.
Ahrens i tJho did that?
Erhart: Hi nnesota VaIIey Poh,er. Hinnesota Valley Electric. And of course -I called the guy and he pulls out his easement and says hey rnan, I've got
40 feet and f can do anything I Nant to. Don't bug me. Those trees
ureren't bothering his lines. I bras doing some reforestation and I guess, -you know f understand. They have a right, we have to maintain the lines ibut what they did h,as nonsense. The lines were 50 feet up in the air andthe trees were 3 feeL hish and they'ye 20 feet off to the side. And
again, f read this and it appears Lo me that Lhey have to come in and geL l-
a, per the text, a permj.t !o do this or they have !o do something. Do you i
read it that way?
Plannins Commission
June 5, 7997 - Page
HeeL i ng
15
Krauss: l^1e11, 1'd Iike to interpret it that way. It's been my experienceove)- t.he years that highway companies, railroads and the University ofMinnesoLa are not part of Lhis earth. 'They're kind of forces ontothemselves and managed differently. We can ask Roger if there,s somethingwe can do with that but rhen you get into a State approved franchise
agreemenLs that give them certain authorities, usually they,re beyond ourcontrol. However, h,e do make them get permit approval to construitbuildings and sub-stations and those kinds of things.
Emm i ngs :
in e x cessthis under
But a guy uho has an easement on my property doesn,t have rightsof what I have on my own property and I wouldn,t be allowed to dothis ordinance would I?
t
butof an
Emmings: You know Joan, you do real estate stuff and a Iandowner can,grant, grants an easement Lo the power company to maintain their lineshe can't give them more rights than he himself has can he? A grantor
easement?
Erhart: t^le]l vou knour, r read this and it says no cLear cutting in woodedareas shalI be permitted except as approved in the subdivision, plannedunit development or site plan application. ILem (e) it says tree removaLshalr not be permitted under subdivision, planned unit development or siteplan review shall not be allowed without the approval of a tree removaLplan by the City Council. I mean Lhat covers it.
Ahrens: No, but most of the time the easements all-ow pouJer companies to dowhatever they want to that land that's within the confines of the easementto enable lhem to carry on whatever business Lhey're entitled to do on thateasement. Whether it means clear cutting trees or whatever. They cangenerally, the easement allows Lhem to do that.
Emm i ngs :
easement,
But
can
if the Iandowner couldn't do itthe person holding the easement
Lhe grantor of their?and he'sstill do
Conrad: The landowner can do it.
Krauss: Yeah. There's nothing in our tree preservation secLion, as r readit, that precludes a homeowner from chopping down a tree.
Emmings: No. And I'd be against it if there were. t^le're talking heremaybe about. clear cutting though and we do have restrictions against thatdon't we?
Krauss: AII I can say is-
Emmings: This is worst than clear cutting.
Krauss: Theoretically we do. I believe Jo Ann blas once involved in asituaLion urhere a homeowner near, r think it was Lake Riley did clear cut.After the fact clear cutting of property and we did pursue that.
Olsen: And we had them plant other trees. Revegetate as I recall -
Planni n9 Commission
June 5, !997 - Page
Mee t i ng
16
Emmi ngs : t^Je I I
Er har t : l"l hat
And
maybe.
I'm dr ivi ng at.
maybe not.
tihy not? Because this is not covering what an individual can do.
Emmi ngs:
Conrad:
Emmi ngs:UelI I don't know.
o].sen: We do have a Liee renioval section that goes for everything.
fact this was taken starting at I think (b) on down is actuallv the
remova] section which is back at the start, On Page 5 so we do have
general tree removal section.
Olsen: On page 5 we have the general tree removal regulations ' tJe
same thing urrder subdivision and under the zoning ordinance. tle've
subdivision ordinance and the zoning ordinance.
In
tr ee
a
Emmings: It says over here, no cJ.ear cutting of woodland areas shall be
permitted except as approved in a subdivision, Planned unit develoPment or
site plan application. That's PreLty broad.
Batzli: Yeah but this is for a, isn't this a subdivision section?
Putgot
the
the
Emmings: t^le're kind of stepping on
but does lhat apply to me on my 1o!
in a subd iv i s io n?
Ahrens: PIus public utilities, they're.
The City of Chanhassen doesn't have to go
every time they move dirt around.
Ther're quasi -gover nme nta I units.
in and ask for a grading permit
emi nent
took them.
your toes here a litLleor does this only apply
bit here Tim
to a deve ] oper
Olsen: The general tree removal , I apply that. t,e apP]y that throughout
the city with everyone.
Krauss: tJe do but I wouldn't want to stand here and teII you that
conclusively that rJe prevent clear cutting on .Lots, Homeowners don't know
the requirements. Ne don't know that they're ouL there cutting. There's
no obligation thaL they come ask.
Krauss: And power companies I believe also have the right of
domain and they didn't buy these easements necessarily. They
Ahrens: That's r ight .
conrad: okay , I 'm r'eal ly confused.
Lo take thaL court I'lI teII you.Ahrens: I wouldn't want
Erhart: This easement was purchased.
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
17
conrad: Pape 2, thi.s landscape, Tree removaL. ft says this Article doesnot apply Lo single family detached residences.
Krauss: You've got to separate the two. There are two ordinances in thispacket. one is the site plan review ordinance, which you're Iooking aL onpage 2 and that does not affect single family homes by ordinance. Siteplan review doesn't, The one that does affect single family homes is the
one at the end which goes into the subdivision section.
Conrad: But that's the one -
subdivisions that are subject to Lhat requirement.Krauss: That is newThat's a good poi nL .
Emmings: Except they do cross reference each other because down here itsays, under (e) on the bottom of page 13 it says tree removal plans shallinclude the content requirements dictated in Section 2O-f177 so some of theprovisions are the same. They do reference each other but they,re noL.
Conrad: But f guess I find no securily in that fact. I guess the problemthat Tim is bringing up, f see no security in thinking that the pou,er
company - I think it'd be foolish to think that the power company wouldn,t
come in and that we have any kind of control over it.
Emmings: Maybe even the step before Lhat we've got to check with Roger and
see if ule've got any leverage to bring these people, somehow I think do you
ultimately Nant to go a step beyond that and have them make sure thaLthey're not just going out and killing everything in a certain swath but
doing this with some kind of a reasonable approach to meet their ends?
Erhart: I want make sure that there's a r'easonable approach. If we can dotrimnring. If we can accomplish as much with trimming and surely sometimesyou're going Lo have Lo do some clear cutti.ng. I'm sure there's times it'sappropriale to spray, Right nou, it's not reasonable. I think we all hope
we a1.1 ... And I think just the fact that they would knota that we're
Erhart: I've got an idea. Here's my i.dea. My idea is to take and writethe power companies a letter saying that it's our intent Lo re::late clearcutting and spraying, clear cutting either by ax or by chainsa,. i.,r byspraying. Here's a copy of a new ordinance that we're discussins risht nowin a public hearing that wil] cover that ordinance and Nhat we're trying todo is not prevent you from clear cutting where required but to require youto apply for a permit just like everybody e1se. And we invite you to
respond to this. Let's get. Lhe thing aired because I'd Iike t.. hear their,I guess I'd 1ike to hear where their views are. Nor., maybe there's some
compromise we can come to that we can aII be happy and get what we want. I
hope you're buying inLo what I'd like to see but I'd like to see them comein and if they want to do clear cutting in uhatever form they use, they get
a permit just Iike everybody else- The place to start is just to
communicate that intent and draw Lhem in. Nor., it might be surprising the
outcome but l don't think we're going to accomplish anything just byputting out the ordinance h,ithout getting them involved in the process.
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
18
watching and we're inlerested. Risht Loday, I don't think, and like
Minnesota Valley Electric. They're in New Prague and LeSuere I think itis. They're in the frame of mind that this is just like LeSuere and you
expect to drive along the country road and spray box elders from your
truck. That's just the way it's done and I just think we've got to
communicate that's not the way you do it in Chanhassen.
(There Nas a tape change at this point.)
Ahrens: Yes they do. They liv.e right across the street from me. They' cut
a huse area of trees down. It was quite a large area. They cu! some
really nice trees down because they thought they might put some kind ofpipe in the road but they changed Lheir minds so al] these trees were cu!
down and they just walked away from it. This happened Iast summer.
Erhart: Bi9 trees?
Ahrens: t^JelI yeah. Bis, mature, beautiful trees. Birch and pine and all
sorLs of real nice Lrees. I would have gone across Lhe street and saved
Lhem. Put. them in my yard. The City did that. It was on the, what's the
property that Lundgren Brothers wants to devblop on? They have a big sign
out in front that says the Ponderosa.
Krauss:
Ahrens:
ortenblat.
Ortenblat pr oper ty .
Krauss: I don't know. We're not pure in this.
on backhoes and we've gone out and stoPped them.
some Ler,,el of sensitivity to them. I don't know
this one but I r^rouldn't be surprised
[,Je've f ound our guys ou!
You try and communicate
this particular issue on
Emmj.ngs: Sensitivity and chainsaws don't usualLy go together.
conrad: one real good example is r.rhat we LaIk about on the southeast
corner of Minnewashla and the power company went down. I know when Tim
FosLer uras in here and they jusL took a, I couldn't believe the path that
they carved. It was just incredible.
Emmings: L,Jas it 40 feet or 50 f eet?
Conrad: It was mammouth. It's just hard to believe.
Krauss: It uas so Iarge
And it led us to believe
Crimson Bay.
it made a roadthat you could
where there never used to be
now run a road down the hill one.
to
Conrad: But anyway, I still don't understand why Tim you feel that there's
any glimmer of, this is in the back 18-61 . This is a subdivision
ordinance. This is a subdivision amendment ordinance. IL has nothing Lo
do with what somebody does on your property.
Erhart: If it isn'L, then I suggest that h,e change it or have another
ordinance so we can mail them.
Olsen: I was going to say, this tree preservation secLion, both the onethat's in the subdivisi.on and the one that's under the general
requirements, we are going to be changing. I had a note to that in herebut that's out. But ue're working urith the DNR Forestry Department. Idon't knc,w if you saw that memo- We're getting the mosaic this Friday andthey're getting, they've mapped aII the trees in the City and Lhey'reworking with us as a pilot project. As parL of that we're going to be
amending our ordinance. Our tree preservation ordinance working with themwith reforestation. tJith what the City is. tJith what they've lost and
what we need to do but as a part of that we can, Ne're going to be drafLinga who]^e neur eection. This whole new section and then as part of that wecan look aL doing existing Iots and single family lots and existingcommercial lots and things Iike that.
Erhart:
agairrst
You agree r^rith Ladd that Lhis doesn't, this would not be appliedexisLing subdivi si ons?
Emmings: Yes you agree or?
OLsen: f agree it doesn'!.
Erhart: t]e] I then would, al.right let's 9o this way. l.lould you agree it'stime to br-ing the power companies into this discussion and let ourinLentions known so we get a productive?
Ahrens: I think Ne should ask Roger.
Emmings: Nunrber one we ask Roger and number
separate ordinance in addition to what we've
two, maybe that's part of agot in front of us.
olsen: Yeah.
Krauss: It's an experimenta). program. It's a Iittle
iL's going to develop but they are presenting us with
information on Friday and they do have somebody h,ho's
Ann on developing a neu, ordinance.
tough tothe base
9oin9 to
know how
mapPi n9
wor k with Jo
Planning Commission Meet i ng
June 5, 1991 - Page 19
Krauss: As Jo Ann points out, t.here's been a Io! of ground work. Jo Ann's
been spending a ]ot of time with Lhe DNR. I think you're aware that we'rea special project for them. They're using us as an experiment in forestry.
t^le felt we were clearly under pressure to get better landscaping sLandards
up and running now. Huch the same reason as Ne did the PUD ordinance last
time but in discussing this Jo Ann and I didn't know, r mean we clearly had
not clapped out a new and improved tree preservation section so rather than
kind of slapping something togeLher, ure said let's just roll over what we
have nor.r and as Jo Ann said, there was a note that was dropped out of here
thaL said r^re ui.L I be proposing signif icant modif ications !o you I would
guess within the next few, up to 5 months from now.
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 * Page
Meet i ng
)d
Emmings; l^lelL l guess I had proposed that we concenlrate on whaL's here.think it's an important issue that we should check with Roger and see if
do have, what we need to get a handle on this and maybe propose, Iet himpropose or you could draft an ordinance or another part of our Iandscape
ordinance that would address how utility companies maintain their
right-of-way for their easements for their power lines. Okay.
I
tJe
Erhart: I've got some more here. on paragraph 4 there on page 13. Under(dX4). r guess I'd say, during the tree removal Process, lrees shall be
trimmed and if required, removed as to prevent blocking of public rights-
of-way and interferring with overhead utility lines. Let's try to make it
as restrictive as possible. Then on item 5 again, removal of diseased and
damaged trees. I don't know. A guy goes uP and Puts one hachet in the
tree and says, oh. It's damaged. Cuts it off. Maybe He ought to change
the urording a little bit to make it a .l.ittle bit, the intention is if it
can't be sat,ed or something ]ike that. That one is smal]. I think number
4, I'd Iike to see that changed if nobody has any obiection. Let's start
in the beginning of the, I bet you all thought you were going to ge! out of
here at 8:3O. In the landscaping ordinance. LeL's go to page number 6.
Dealing with fences and ualIs. Again, in general I pesona.Lly think that
the walls we have in town, wood walls we have in town suck,
Batzli: TeIl us hoN you really fee] .
Erhart: Every one of them that I can think of is falling down. It's
uslier than if it wouldn't be there at aII, I would venture to say in some
cases and I really have to question whether we really encourage wooden
fences. If we are, boy get this thing nailed down more than this. Because
two of the things Lhat strike me- One is that something that's going to
keep them from leaning over after 5 years or faster. Being swayed all over
the place and the second thing is Lhat I think if someone's going to use
walls or fences for buffers, that we ought to require intermittent
Landscaping on the public side of those walls. An example would be Iike 35
going downtown where every 1oo feet you've got a planting of some
evergreens and things Lo break up this waII. I think a wall's ugly. I
really do. t,ooden walls particularly after a few years gets really u91y.
And reinforcements and to require additional Iandscaping adjacent to thewaII, I think ought to be required if that's going to be used as a screen.
Kraussi I don't think we have a problem !.rith it being masonary. That'spretty much, I mean when we say architecturally harmonious, that'stypically what. ff we're talkins about screen structures Like Harket
Square where they uanted to have the outdoor storage for Lawn and Sports. I
mean Ne made them do a masonary waII that h,as identical to the rear wall ofthe bui ldi ng .
Erhart: Let me pin this down...
areas Iike in Lhe industrial park I'm talking about encl.osures for parking
down there.
Krauss: The dock p]ace.
PIanni ng Commi ss ion
June 5, 799! - Page
l.1eeL i ng
21
Erhart: The dock place. The one up here between the cement factory andthe Hanus building. That would meet the ordinance.
Olsen: Ne
have Lo be
ErharL;
BatzIi:
Olsen; lre
Batzli: It
OIsen:
Krauss:
Erhart:
Krauss: No ,that kind of
can add that if they use retaining walls or fences lhat theyscreened. I mean landscaped.
So:'ne ki nd of landscapi ng .
For example the lumber company that put up the wooden fence.
required them !o screen, landscape.
would have to be landscaped around.
Nc). It hes to be, I wouldn't consider ground cover rocks.
t^l e could def ine it.
A car loL parking ]ot is rocks.
I think u,estuff.mean things Iike English Ivy and Ground Vetch and
Krauss: In fact that's an example of a fairly well maintained wooden fencebut it's probably the exception Lo the rule.
Erhart: As long as that ouner's there and profitable it will bemainLained. I have a queslion on page 8, paragraph 5 ulhere we say thetreecJ aieas within parking ]ots will be landscaped with shurbs or groundcover. Does ground cover include rocks or what is ground cover in thisordinance?
Olsen: t^le'II see if that's defined though.
Erhart: f don't know, you may uant to look at desi.gn. The other thing onpage 9. l think we discussed this the last time but item 1. t^lalls shouldbe constructed of natural stone, brick or artificial materials.
Krauss: I thought we had gotten at that. So what we've done is, on the
Iandscapi ng materiaLs, ue have refined what you were getting at on page 7to state that it must be masonary. Oh, I'm sorry.
olsen: No,
KrauSS: tle
fences must be wood.
need to define Hhat's a HalI and what's a fence. A screenwall.
OIsen:
Erhart:
And then add that they always have to be landscap6d.
Okay, then
materials
page 9 there. Did we set
paragraph 1 Lhere it says
the last time this
walls shall beartificialon
in
Planni n9 Commission
June 5, f991 - Page
Meet i ng
a)
construcLed of natura.l stone, brick, ar!ificial materials. Does !hat leave
anyblodt hanging at aII or is it just, me?
BaLzli; l,lhere were you? I'm sorry. Page 9, paragraph l under.
Conrad: t^lhat is, yeah what's artif icial?
Olsen: It's somthing that's always been there.
conrad: It 's not biodegradeable .
Olsen: Plastic?
Conrad: Li ke plastic?
Krauss: Actually you hesitate to say that but now there's comPanies that
are processing recycled plastic into some Pretty nice, heavy duty fencing.
Screen fencing that's supPosed to be much more durable than wood -
Erhart: Arlificial materials designed for the purPose of use in a wall or
a fence mayLre?
Olsen: Maybe we shouldn't be so specific and just say it has to be
consistent with the building material Iike we did the...
BatzIi: That's already in here isn't it?
Olsen: It's in the front.
Batzli: It's in lhe same section. tJe]L, it's just one secLion down.
Ahrens: HeIl if they come i.n with something outrageous, can't you deny
that anyway?
Krauss: Hell you do have a little bit of discretion. This is a site plan
view. We do not aLtempt nor do we think we should be terribly, completely
explicit in a site plan review. There is an art to doing these things and
you Han! t.o encourage some creativity on their part and some flexibility to
review it on yours.
Emmings: !^lhy don't we just say walls shall
stone, brick or other appropriate materials
artificial maleriaI is appropri.ate for some
approve it.
be constructed of natur a l
and if it turns out that someparticular project , uJe can
Erhart: That's aII I have.
Emmings: That urasn't too bad. Ladd?
Conrad: I agree wiLh a ]ot of Tim's comments relating to fences and uJalls.
The landscaping to break up fences and those. I really believe Lhat a Iot
of things that we've required can make it look ug]y, uglier than what we're
trying to cover up. f'm not convinced that a fence and a wal.I is asolution. I think there's some real natural ways to solve some of our lessattractive cornmerciaL enlerprises. I guess I don't have a solution tothat,. In fact,I Lhought about it. Should we force people. i couldn't
come up urith a different solution than what's recommended in the staffreport so I'm going to go right beyond that, other than the fact that onIong type of walls or fences, I think we need the landscaping to break thatup. On page 8. t^jhere did those standards come from? They kind of makesense but did we pull Lhose from?
O.Isen: The old one .
Conrad: And that means we beli.eve
Olsen: They've been working reallylooking parking lots from tha!.
that they're r i 9ht?
u,e]l. tle usually get pretty good
Conrad: Okay. So Lhat came from here, I'II leave Lhat.Iandscaping materiaLs under Section 20-1183, paragraph 1.strips. Have uJe seen wood strips that are attractive?
Ahrens: I think they're uglier than chainlink.
On
IT
Pag e
said
9 under
wood
Olsen: tJe've talked about that before. They're real ugly.
Conrad:
somethi ngle] I me t
aga in I'm
Sot
ha
n
basically what we've done is screen something that's ugly withhat's uglier . I have a problem with that. No{,,, somebody couldt there are attt-active wood strips and fencing but I'm just,
ot convinced that yeah, I guess I'd like to see Lhat ouL un.Less.
Krauss: You kncw where the problem comes about is that Nhen you have
somebody like Redmond when they were looking to build their new facility.They have a compound of active area thaL includes, I don't knor^r, f5-ZOacres. Nor.r on their plans, and Lhey have security concerns. On theirp).ans, which never t^rent anywhere but what we got them to do was to use
wror.rght iron fencing along the street boulevard but internallv Lhev uantedto 9o with chainlink for cost and for security you know because you can put
the Iittle pokey things up on Lhe chainlink and they didn't particularly
h,,ant to do a wood fence that you could just rip apart or climb over.
Krauss: Yeah, it was a concealed locati.on.
olsen: Maybe just say perimeter fences?
Conrad: So when you
side yard?
say interior, their interior fences, we're not on the
Krauss; It wasn't on a public right-of-way. It was an internal area iff recall.
Planning Commission Heet i ng
Junc 5, 7991 ' Page 23
Olsen: It !^ras inside and it was screened.
PIanning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
Emmi ngs: I nLer naI mea ni ng?
uri thi n their si!e.Krauss: Sornewher e
Erhart: That's a good question.
fences betureen property Iines? I
r ighL-of-ways .
Are Ne going to
guess . . . t h i n k i ng
Iandscaping of
ones along publ ic
requrre
of the
conrad: Yeah, that's what rm thinking.
Krauss: t^lell, Iet's look at one whilre I don't think it was done which is
the ]ittle shopping center right over here. ihe wall that was built back
there which has been a real conLentious item for a lot of homeowners- I
don't believe we .landscaped behind it or the deve.Ioper landscaPed behindir.
O1sen: Yeah we did.
Krauss: As a result of, because there was a ]ot of concern abouL that.
Olsen: tje' added a lot.
Krauss: That's a fence that's in cLose Proximity. It's. ="r""n fence in
very close to a single family home.
Erhart: And they Nere existing when they came in with that...so we could
require thaL. , .for special reasons
Krauss: tJeIl even if Lhey weren't existing. I lhink there's alwavs the
presumption that if vou're the applicant who's ProPosing a higher inLensity
use, you heve an obligation to screen existing or ProPose lower intensity
uses on the facility. It's the cost of doing develoPment in the citv.
Emmings: Nor,r what are you going to do? tJe're talking about chainlink
fence has to be covered with plant materials so you're talking about Iike
growing ivy on it or something like that? Some vine?
Krauss: or putLing a row of coniferous trees in front of it.
Emmings: Well but anybody Hho wants to put it up, some people are going to
want to put it up on their property line.
Krauss: This doesn't affect homeowners.
Emmings; No. Buc won't there be businesses that want to put it up on theproperty 1i ne?
Krauss: Yeah, probably.
Emmings: You can't put it up on the property line and screen the outside
of it. You can't plant your trees on somebody else's property.
Plannirrg Commission
June 5, 7991 - Page
Meet i ng
?a
Batzl i : You cou.Id do v1nes.
Krauss: And keep in mind, while a fence can go on next to a property line,there'else s
secur iPut th
s sLil. l required seLbacks for parking and buildings and everythingo there invariably is a green slrip there and if their concern isty, they ca, always move that fence back within that setback area.eir ]andscaping on the outside and nol really lose anything in the
Process.
Emmi ngs: O kay ,
Olsen: Shou]d we say LhaL chainlink fences are only allowed if forsecurity reasons? f mean do we want to just make that an exception?
Krauss: r don't think r"re just want to say for security reasons becausethat puts it in the context of do you rearry want this for security or isthere another reason? To define the motives of who's ever proposing it.
Emmings: And they'Il jlst say it'sproblems with chainlink fences?
for security. Does 6nybody have
Ahrens: I don'L think they're so bad. I mean there are black ones nowthat are kind of nice.
Emmi ngs: Prince has them
Erhart: Again. if it's onthink real ly welI.
around his property and around this
a public right-of-way it should be
out up here.
Iandscaped J
Conrad: Eut .Iet's t.al k about separating two businesses. Do we care ifthere's a chainlink fence between tuJo businesses? Don't you?
Erhart: ff you're talking about !r,Jo commercial type, retail?
Conrad: Two commercial. IndustriaL/commercial.
Emmirrgs: Yot're talking about down in the industrial park?
Conrad: Risht .
Krauss: Don't we have a chainlink fence around our maintenance building?
Olsen: ProbabIy.
Batz)i: Yeah, there is one down there.
ccnrad; And it's a good raLionaLe for security reasons to do that.They're ugly.
Batzli: Chainlink around that substation I think. Down south. hlith a lotof pointy things on Lop I think-
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Ahrens:
conracl :
Ahrens:
Ahrens:
Batzli: It's such a rarroH
Lhought it just looked like
somethi ng .
Meet i ng
z6
I don't think they're always ugly.
They can be
I think the
oh, I thi nk
You do?
nice,
one around Prince's place looks f ine.
that one sticks out.
e nc.I osur e
trying to
arouhd Lhat bui ldi ng.
keep the vandle hordes
I always
out or
Erhart: It's not normal. to put a chainlink fence around your commercial
building. HouJever, if you want to I guess is there any Problem in
requiring then you have to break it uP with some landscaping? If that's
the exception, then f guess it ttould seem to me reasonable to require
breaking it up.
Conr ad :
colored?to pur sue
Do you want, does it make sense to force the chainlink
Are you comfortable with the galvanized chainlink? I
a nswer s
t roode n
on this. I reallythis too fbr. I don't have
Lobea
don 't u:a nt
don'!.
Ahrens: 1t- Iooks better than tilting fe nces .
Conrad: Absolutely.
Erhart: ParticuLarly if they're broken up with landscaping.
Batzli: The one I think actually is the one around Eden Prairi.e's High
Schoo.i with all of the vines on it. That doesn't look bad.
olsen: Do you want to take out the uood striPs and just keep only if
covered urith plant material?
Conrad: Yea h .
Emmi ngs: or otherwise landscaped .
conrad: Yeah, Iet's jusLify my last 15 minutes of conversation by...
Batzli: So you wouLdn't aLlow someLhing Iike the lumber yard where theyput the wood fence on the ouLside of the chainlink?
conrad: Yeah, that's i nteresti ng.
olsen; L^le required that .
Batzli: They had to cover the chainlink. They wanted the security of lhe
chainlink so we made lhem put lhe other fence around it.
PIanni ng Commission
Jurre 5, 1-997 - Page
Meet i n9
?7
Olsen: I". haC to be tolally screened.
Ahrer,:: Ther a brick wall on the outsi-de.
Emmings: Coniferous trees and then deciduous
Batzli: So you wouldn'! allow that? I don't
Conrad: l^louldn't allow the.
Batz]i: l,Jou.Idn't aIlow a situation where youthe chainl i nk?
Emmings: It says here they can have fences,
trees.
know.
put fence on the outside of
Lhe chainlink fence wiLhplant material right?
BatzIi; No,a wood fence
Or otherwise
but you wouldn't allow them screening
because here it says you have to have
landscaped.
o.]sen: But we're adding, even the wood fence woul.d have to be randscaped,
Krauss: gee Building Components has a storage yard there that's visiblefrom TH 5 if they didn't build that waII so lhe purpose is a little bitdifferent.
Olsen: That was part of the CUP.
Emming:: t.JhaL would rnake them landscape a uood fence?
Olsen: I thought that we were going to add that in this section. In lhatother section where it tal.ked about fencing, it's not just a fence buE italso has to have some landscaping.
Emmings: Okay, so that wiLl apply to uralls. It uill apply to fences, both
wood and chainlink.
Krauss: I think the place to do that is in 20-1182 on page 9.
Olsen: That's uhere we are.
Krauss: Okay. I'm behind the a ball on this. I thought I had some new
information.
O.Lsen: t^,e would also put it I think on that pase 6.
Emmings: [^,,here on 5 Jo Ann?
O]sen: On 1at lhe bottom there and then at the top of page Z r,lherl it'stalking about screening. I think both spoLs.
Batzli: These are the same.
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Heet i ng
2A
Olsen: Nell we'11 figure it out,
and make iL clearer or something.
OIsen: And
other ?
Maybe we'lI just break it out completely
t^le 'l I look aL it.
Batzli: I guess I would have just i.n Section 2o-r182, or 20-1183 f guess
in (aX1). Even if you just refer back to lhat previous section so it all
lies together. I'd hate, otherwise it's just going to get long if we keep
on saying the same thing over and over,
Emmings: I just said or olherwise landscaPed.
Olsen: OLherwise landscaped. So do ule need to exPlain u,hat Lhat means?
Emmings: I don't know. I like to leave things kind of open.
Olsen: tle have Lo argue what it means. Like weII I don't know tlhat iL
means. You're talking about broken uP? or otherwise screened with
Iandscaping? Like that?
Emmings: tJell, you say it anyblaY you want to.
Erhart: I think sLaff has to kind of come up with a recommendation. Do
you need to get specific or can you leave it general?
Conrad: t^le're not coming up r^rith absolutes here.
Krauss: The difference here from what we had before is, vou've established
a criteria that they have to meet. Before we had to do that first and Lhen
tel] them what we thought was accePtable and we weren't backed up by an
ordinance that said you must do something. I think we've got a big leg up
on it now because it does say that.
Emminss: r asr-ee. tlhile we're right there. rn (a)(3) where it savsplants. It's at lhe end of that sentence. It says artif icia.I Plants are
prohibiLed and shaII meet the following requirements. So I Lhink you've
got to put a comma after the word prohibited.
Olsen: t^lhere are you?
Steve, when you said or other, you said Plant material or
page 9, (aXa). You need a comma after the word
Do you find it?Emmi ngs: On 20- 1 183 ,prohibited real bad.
oLsen: Yeah I see it bu! just a comma?
Batzli: After tshe uord prohibited soplants to be deciduous trees. It's a
catc h .
you don't require Lhepicky thing that only
arLificial
Steve would
Krauss:
rna ter iaI If you put
shal I meeL
a period after prohibited and say a new sentence, plant
the following requirements.
Planning Comm issi on
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
29
0Isen: And artif icial?
Emmings; Then really you should have aartificial if you realIy want to do it.
separate two sentences by a comma.
sem j. -co 1o n after plants, beforeI can't help it. You can't
Olsen: I was doing an and not a comma. Can't you do that?
Conrad: Jo Ann, all I'm trying to do is get some cuality, I,m trying tobuild some quality into this. If that,s in an intent statement or ifthat's in some words in here, f think that's better than some of theabsolutes because I can't come up with the right ones. Okay, moving on.Still my turn. Page !?, under Subdivision Ordinance. I guess I do agreer^rith the 3 trees. I do Iike, and I,m trying to think if ure're being naiveon this one but I do like Lhe one maple and I do like the 2 deciduous. IIike 2 deciduous, 1 coniferous tree. one of the deciduous of which being amaple. I agree with Tim's comment on page 13 under (4). page 13. t^ledon't have a maintenance section. So in other uords, in a subdivision youcan come in, plant i! and we don't have, we haven,t said anything aboutreplacing and I would think we r,,ould treat the subdivision just like urewould the oLher districts. t,lhy wouldn't He lalk about repLacement? Andagain, I don't know what He can require in terms of replacement.
Krauss: It becomes real dif f icul.t in subdivisions. There,s nobody outthere, there's no single unified property owner or controlling party toafter. You r.rind up having to go after individual homeowners saying your
maple tree died. You owe us a new one. Or even you know we,re nowrequiring buffering, landscaping and to some extent boulevard plantingsa subdivision. l,le're requiring the developer install that at the outsetbuL if a tree cJies 5 years from now, who do we go after to replace it?
O.lsen:
that's
Krauss:
Ahrens:
Batzli:luck. It
Krauss: tJelI eee we do require that theythey've giving us a urarranLy for a year.
back until the stuff's survived the first
t^Je've got nraintenance in the other section but I don't know ifsupplying, we don't have iL referring to this one.
I bet most of them do that,
tlell you know you go back to the developer and they say, toughdied. Sue me.
9o
tn
Batzli : I , as a neta homeowner. t^lelI , new in a subdivision of this city,required that the developer give the first purchaser of the property acertain year guarantee on the trees. Let the homeowner have the ammunitionto go after them because most homeowners will. If it dies, they,re theones who are going to want to replace it.
WeI I yeah , that 's true .
guarantee that the tree,
Ne don't give them Lheirfull growing season.
Ahrens: That's already in here?
f mea n
money
PIanni n9 Comnrission
June 5, 7991 - Page
Meet i ng
30
That's what we do with the landscaping,
sut,division -
under the general . That's under lhe other Articles.
That's not residential subdivision.
That's like saying we should have referred
KTaLJSs-:
Batz ].i :
Olsen:
BatzIi:
olsen:
fn a
That 's
Krauss: Yeah, Iet's add in because it trorks real
Fundamentally lhat's what we've done anyvlay.
it.
uel I for us,
Ahrens: I think 1 year is the maximum.
Emmings: But this is really critical . This is a]l the more reason to
require more deciduous trees and feuer coniferous because those trees have
to move into winter, especially when they're young they're sensitive to the -sun. tlhen Lhey get older they're not. Evergreens. And they have to go
into winter welL waLered and unless, you know a ]ot of first time
homeowner-s' nay ot may not know that. It takes a lot, thev're a Iot fdssier -than deciduous trees
conrad: I buy what Dick said in terms of Lhe aPpearance. The larger
appearance. I do Iike coniferous trees. [,Je are tlithout Ieaves on our
trees for 7 rnonths a year, Anyway, so I like the mix and I guess in this
case I think thaL the two deciduous is the right proportion but I like the
mix. ue need the greenery or anything to break uP the scenerv in the
wintertime. So I like that. Mv Iast comment ulas something I said last
time and rnore than like]y I'm still concerned about maior highwavs. The
subdivision ordinance might play, might feed into let's say you're backing
up to TH 101 or to TH 41 urith a subdivision. Do we want Lo require on our
major highways or arterials to have any kind of increased pLantings?
Ernmings: A buffer zone. tJe've been calling it a buffer zone.
Conrad: Yea h .
Krauss: It's 18-61( 4 ).
Conrad: O kay .
Batzli: But this is only in the. isn't this one in a residential
subdivision one?
olsen: Yes.
Emmi ngs: How deep isstiII have a minimumarterial?
it
size
PauI? Is there any extra depth there? Can you
Iot right up to that street? That collector or
olsen: It says tha! lhey can be, the steps can be increased.
Plannins Comm i s:
June 5, 7997 - P
Emm i ngs: Because
depth don't you?
about.
Meeting
3t
if you 'r e
I mean it
to do mor e
seems to me.
lon
age
90r ngjust
Krauss: Yeah. L. -er on in there
be increased by 252 over district
landscaping you need
That's what you're mor e
talking
h,e say that lhe lot depths and areas may
sta ndar ds .
Emminss: AIright. I like it.
Krauss: In Iooking at the development along Audubon Road and over the
comp planning process realIy hit home that, and that's clearly an areauhere this needed to be done and wasn't and there's going to be hell to pay
as soon as we have the industrial project across Lhe street being proposed.
Emmings: l^lell we're going Lo wind up imposing it on Lhem right?
Krauss: Yes . tJiththe siLes that Ryan
the buffer requirements.
Dev.Iopment is wor ki ng on
uray, that's one ofAnd by the
righL noH.
Conrad: I'm done.
Emmi ngs: Okay. Br ian?
Batzli: I'm confused about the solution to Ladd's problem so I might aswell slart out wi.th that since we're right there. It was my understandingthat Lhere hiere two sections to this. One appJ.ies to industrial,zoffice andone applies to detached single family. Is that true or not true?
Krauss: One is lodged in the site plan
to non-single family development. The
section which onl y appliesin the subdivision code.
review
other is
Batzl i : Soplan r ev iew
applicable to everything else? Site
Kr auss :No.
Then
Wel I
Batzli:why are Ne doing it that xay?
Krauss:you have to do it that way.
Batzli: But we have things in one section. Like for example the buffer
along the rna jor arterials/collectors uhatever. That's only in Lhesubdivision, not in lhe site plan review. Is that right?
Krauss: tlelI yes but, the reason why it's in the Subdivision Code first ofalI, it aF,iIies to sing]e family development which only has to jump throughthat hoop. In that case you're lrying to screen residences from the
freeway.
Batzli:
through
is the subdivision stuff
pr ccess?
I thought we were trying to make it nice and pretty to drive
too?
Plarining C()mmission
June 5, 1991 - fage
Krauss
MeeL i n9
32
tlell, it- r.rould accomplish both those purposes.
Batzl i:
because
PIans?
But onl y
you're not
on .I i ke
9oin9
every other lot as you go through
to be covering Lhe things thaL are
lhe Cityjust s.i te
Krauss: okay, it's treated a little differently but on ?o-L7a2 on page 9
where we Lalk about foundation and aesthetic plans. Under (c). tlell first
of all we require that the site, not only that you ]andscaPe Parking lots
and screen trash enclosures but that you have landscaping around building
perimeters, break up building walls and ultimately scieen fences. And that
aII undeveloped ar-eas of Lhe site be landscaped. And then (c) r.rhere
r.rndeveloped or open areas of the site located adjacent to public right-of-
way, then we go back to that standard that we've always had that you have
to put in at .least l tree for every 40 feet of frontage.
Emmings: But why isn't this, I Lhink whaL and I'm sorry to butt in but.
Batzli r No. Please. You're doing a good job.
Einmings: I think urhat he's saying, if our standard for residential
applies to collectors and arterials, why doesn't our standard here? tJhy
isn't it in the same language so it's clear that h,e want to make sure that
our roads .look nice and we have buffering betureen them.
Ahrens: Particular Iy if they're
which cou.I d happen.
across the street from a residential area
Krauss: tJelI, I guess the problem is you're talking about two different
classes of use generally. Now this could cover multi-family housing as
weII but you are often tal.king about uses that want the visibility fronn the
highway. If you're talking about industrial park or a Target or whatever
else, they're not looking to be screened or buffered. I'mean we're going
to try to get them to do that to some extent but they're looking for thatvisibility. You don'! want to shut off that view.
Emmings: tJeII, ue don't give them a lot of visibility. If you
industrial park here from 'IH 5, except for one little buildingabout, they're not depending on any visibility from IH 5.
loo kI can
at the
think
KraLrss: That's true but you look at the 35 acres in front of Mcclynn's.Mcclynn's is charging a premium for that and it's considered to a premiere
site because it's on an intersection on TH 5 and it's for a company that'sgoing to want to be prominent and wanL the visibility that is going to pay
for it.
Emnrings: See if you 9o with Ladd's notion that as you drive down TH 5 as
an example. That it ought to be attractive and that's going to be
accornplished by open space and landscaping, he's asking are we going to be
able to apply. You know here we've got residential and we know we can get
a little more space with this section. t^Jh;rt about on the commercial and
industrial proper t ies?
PIanning Commission
June 5, L991 - Page
Heet i ng
Batz]i: But we're going to have l tree every 40 feet. You're going to
have them high visibi I ity .
Krauss: l^tell , f i.rst of aII that's a minimum. Secondly, if they have aparking lot there they trip a whole different section of the ordinancewhich requires screening of.the parking lot. If they have a buildingthere, there are sections that require Iandscaping around the building. Ifthey are across the street or adjacent Lo louJer inlensity uses, they tripthe buffer standards that are in Lhe comp plan that are nou in ordinancehere. I mean we're getting at this with a 4 or 5 prong approach. It's notjust the 1 tree per 40 feet a! all. In fact that 1 tree per 40 feet isjust the infill. If you don't have a parking lot, you don't have abuilding and you don't have some other kind of area there, you're going to
have to do lhis on top of everything el^se.
Erhart: This is almost like an outlot situation. Unused area that will beused sometime later on.
Krauss: If you look at t.he DaLaServ site, we have a large lawn area Lhere.t^lelI under this regulation, that large Lawn area would have scatteredaesthetic plantings throughout and it urould have boulevard trees.
Erhart: Are you saying PauI that. 40 feetfor a mature boulevard tree? Is tha! 40?
is the ideal .l.ocation for spacing
uell, iL'd probably be more around 30Krauss:
Erhart:That's thewaII there is about
BatzIi: 35.
KI aUSS:
tend to
solution. tlhat's
what , 30 feet?
foot
of
center.
Yeah, the 30 foot centers is where the crowns for a mature tree
come toge!her.
Lhe width this. From Dick to that
thousht the 40 feet was a little bit
see it, He tend to see people. They go
and they put in trees that are minimum
Batzli: I don't
Iengthy but onlywith the minimum
size.
knour. I a I urays
because when we
they can put in
Krauss: Tr ue .
Batzli; I guess it depends on what we're trying tso do here. Are t^re trying
Lo make the commercial people happy or are Ne trying to, I Lhought Ladd's
idea was we're trying to make the highNay look nice. And now if you want
to encourage the people to clutter and -high visibility, then ule go to t^rhatyou're saying. tle're saying fine. tJe'1I give you high visibility.. tJe'regoing to let you have 494 strip.
Krauss: No, I don't think so. I think dhat Ne're saying is Lwo differenL
thi ngs .
PIanni ng Commission
June 5, !997 - Pase
Meet i ng
34
Balzli: And in 25 years it may.look great but until that time, it lookslike you've got dinky little trees 40 feet apart.
Krauss: tjell we'd be happy to decrease Lhat down to 30 or 25 or
you wish. I don'L think we should overlook the fact though that
change here is that the oLd landscaping ordinance only required,
require anyLhing except 1 tree for every 40 feet.
Emmings: And l tree per Iot in Lhe subdivision and Lhat was it,
BatzIi: Okay. t^leII,anyu,ay.
look aLKrauss: So should we knocking this down to 25 or 30 feet?
that.Batzli: I would Iike to see
here I guess,
and that's aII
it says that
they want to
minimum is 4O
are we going
whatever
the major
it didn't
f eet ,
Lo IetEmmings: The poi nt
Now if people come
them do that?
I5
IN
the
do,
Kraussi t^JeII you have some flexibility. If there's nothing there behind
there that they're obligated to do more Iandscaping, you're probably in a
tough spot. But they also now have a minimum they have to sPend and they
have to demonstrate that they're spending it and if they fulfill their
other requirements and still have funding left over, you can force them to
do whatever you want them to do,
Emmi ngs: O kay .
conrad: Brian, do you have a vision for arterial and collector streets in
terms of what Lhey should Iook Iike?
BaLzli: I don't know. I look at the TH 1O1 souLh of TH 5 that I
originally envisioned and it would have been nice to have kind of more
of a boulevard approach. I don't know. Sumac. Maples. t,lho knows buL it
r.rould be nice to do something like Lha! and if we only require the
residential subdivisions to do it, you're going to have a hodge podge of
this stuff doxn the street and everywhere else you'II have the 4O foottrees and parking Iot stuff in front of it. And maybe that's what we urant.
Maybe it's better to break it up.
Conrad: ff you Iook at the TH 5 corridor, that will be, the landscaping
requirements on that could be inLeresting, I think as you talk to PeterOIin out at the Arboretum, Lhere could be some fun things to do on thatparticular entryway. I guess variety is kind of neat too so I kind ofhesitate when I said before I like the 2 deciduous and the l being a maple.I think there are a lot of, you can have some flowering trees that arerather neaL. I think we should be thinking in essence that there is a
doorway to the Arboretum and we could set it if we wanted to and the
Arboretum couLd help if we didn't have to pay a consultant to help us out
rdith that. But again, I think the TH 5 section might be taken care of as
we look at Lhat or TH 41 but I think I just want to challenge us aII to
Planni n9 Commission
June 5, 7997 - Page
Meet i ng
35
start thinking. There can be some neatarterial streets. But I've got to have
whether it's i.ndustrial or residential ,of this and a little bi! of that unLess
al.ternaLives on ma jor
kind of a master plan
it's just going to be
PauI and Jo Ann can.
coLleclor
otherNise
a I ittle
and
bit
Krauss: t^lell there's another element that's coming into the mix whenyou're talking about something Iike TH 5. For those of you b,ho are goingto be able to come along on Saturday, I think you'll get a feel for some ofthat. The HRA has, ue've got plans that have been approved by the HRA andCity Council to do a design element plan a]ong TH 5 as it's rebuilt. Itincludes landscaping. It includes special pavement treatments. Itincludes monumentation at the entrances to downtown- The whole key Lo, Ithink special Iighting. The whole idea of the thing is t'o Iet people knobiwho are traveling through on TH 5 that they've just come into a differentcommunitv and one that cares ahrout itself and what it looks like. MnDot iskind of tough to work. They have a lot of, veyy limited flexibility withintheir r ight-of-war but we've acquired land outside their right-of-r.ray to dothese things and we have every intent of working, probably with the sameindividual as TH 5's expanded out to TH 41 to do a similar design effort.In fact that individual is going to be on the bus on Saturday and can givean idea.
Krauss: Barry Warner from Barton Aschman. He'lI give you an idea aboutwhat's already been approved and will be developed over the coming year andhopefully what directions we mighL be able to go in in the future. So the
TH 5 streetscape is an eLement onto itself and it's beyond something thatindividual developers can or should exert controL over. Now what we're
9oin9 to wanL to do is build upon that and make sure lhat landscaping plansare complimentary to that as they border that area.
Conrad:It's lough to, you knoul we're babbling here.
I'm not .Emm i ngs :
conrad: You
t,ould be nicevision comesBrian said, I
Chanhassen, f
and a Iot of
want to talk?
are too. You're saying nice things Steve. You're saying itbut if Lhere's that vision and maybe you're right. Maybe theout of what we .Learn on TH 5. I don't know what it is. Likethought our connection Lo IH 2L2 and the entrybray to
thought that was our chance for a grand entryuJay but budgetthings sort of interrupted that. tlhat are you doing? Do you
Erhart: When
Conrad: Okay ,
you're done. I'd just kind of encourage you to get done.
I'm encouraged .
Emm i ngs: t^lho's Lhat?
Emmings: l.,eII it wiII be nice. If we have something like a successfulvision and plan for TH 5 and then ure can always point to that as something
we want to emmulate in other parts of the city so that uould be nice to
PIanni n9 Commission
June 5, 7991 - Page
l.1eet i ng
36
Erhart: Let's just offer a proposal to change it to 30 feet. At somepoint these things do cost money but I think 40 feet is from that waII tothat urall. That seems to be a long ways and then add a sentence that says,alternative, well staff can make up something that invites alternatives tothis if it meets the inten! which aLlows us.
Emmings: tle should always have language like that. Let somebody come up
with a better idea and let's be ope; to it when it coines and let's also be
able Lo say no.
Batzli: Yeah, good idea. Section 2o-1r77 on page 3. hle're going to .require that the plans are drawn by a Registered Landscape ArchitecE or
other professiona.I acceptable to the City. I don't know. I read that and
I wondered why you were requiring that and I started thinkins of goofy
situations like what sort of professionaf,
Krauss : l^lhaLever we I i ke .
Batzli: Yeah.
Krauss: The purpose is, we've seen too many Plans that are drawn up by
people who'are not Landscape designers and frankly it doesn't cost a dhole
heck of a lot more to employ the proPer Professional doing it- But you'll
have engineers who decide that I've designed the piPes in the street,
hitting .it wiLh a tree stamP a coupLe times is nour easy. Or architects do
it. They think they have a better sense of design but reallv they're
trying to make their building stand out and their Priorities are a little
different. This is not a professional landscaPe architect emPloyment act
but it's a desire to get appropriate professionals doing what they should
be doing.
olsen: It's allowed to let Iike landscaping contractors to do the plans
too like people from Halla or something.
Batzli: I guess I urould agree with this as Iong as it is limited to, wel]
see I think this gets back to my original Problem of ulhaL does, which
seclion applies to what type of development. I think that this should
apply to most commercial developments. Not the ma and Pa subdivision but
the larger subdivisions. There's a lot of different questions about who
should this really apply to and it's clear that this should apply to Lhe
major subdivisions but I don't knot^t that it does.
olsen: I did have something in there where it uras Iike referring to the
commercial inside plans and then I also had something Iike if it was 3lots
or less you don't but if it's a larger subdivision it does have to be aprofessiona.L.
aatzli: Where is that?
olsen: I had somelhing in there ]ike that. It broke it doun to where the
bj.gger ones had to have it and the smaller ones.
Planning Commission
June 5, 7991 - Page
Meet i ng
Krauss: Ne can go back to that. I think we lost it when we got away from
more detai Ied Iandscaping requirements.
Olsen: tiell we got away from it with this dealing with residential too and
then when we took out lhe residential.
Batzli: That's my bi.ggest problem with the current organization of it. Ilike a lot of what's in there but I'm confused as to which applies to what "Nhich sections apply to residential. tJhich apply to ih general and Lhereare some good provisions in each and should they apply to both. I think we
har,re to reso.Itre those issues. l,lost of comments are picky things because Itake after Steve. Buffer yards on page 4. It's the new paragraph 4. you
reference it here. a(c). Due !o a change of use of existing site, therequi.red buffer yard is larger than can be provided. Uhat kind of bufferyarcl would that be? I thought we defined buffer yard in the comprehensiveplan as.
Krauss: He did and this is lhat Ianguage but.
Olsen: ThaL one is again, I thinkdelaiLed those buffer yards but we
t ho6e .
whaL we did r.ras Look out a Section thatforgot to take out this reference to
Batz]i: I didn't know what thaL meant.
Olsen: So we should maybe just take lhat one out.
Krauss: That'sstandards, it's already done.in there.
If you Look up the individual dislrict
So init.a buffer yard for example the one that's, can't thinkBatzli: Okay.
of the name of
Krauss: Around Timbernood.
BatzL i : I r^,as lhi n ki ng of the one
substation. There's a buffer yard
there . Sunr ise CourL.
adjacent to Bluff Creek with the poulerjust north of that litLle development
BatzIi:to do in
Krauss: Sunr idge Court.
So in somewhere there's a standardthe buffer yard that's going to go
Ofsen:
maP.
that tells lhem what they haveover the pipeLine?
That's going to be on the Comp Plan. It's on the Land Use PIan
BaLzli: But if we jump ahead to page 7 momentarily, to paragraph (b)(a)
where we talk about addi.tional Suffer yard requirements are established bythe City Comprehensive Plan as Iisted in individual district standards.Are we going to do thaL? Are these really the buffer, buffer yards that we
estab I i shed?
Planning Comm i ss io n
June 5, 7991 - Page
l',1eet i ng
38
Krauss: Risht. And it's on each individual district.
Batzii: It is?
Olsen: tlell the buffer, the perimeter buffer yards' are aren't they? Like
on t,lilliam's Pipel.ine, I don't think.
Batzli: I'nr talking about the special buffer yards that we created.
Krauss: Delineated in Lhe Comp PIan, yeah.
BatzIi: Yea h -
Krauss: That was written into the ordinance a couple months, or around
Christmas actuaIIy.
Batzli: I didn't remember that. Did you remember that?
Emmi ngs: Of course .
Batzlir So what it'd say?
Emmings: I'm the Chairman and you're out of order.
Krauss: It hasn't been codified yet, It's a xerox insert into the thing
and f actually had to have the original pu]Ied out so I could find it
again.
Batzli: Is
we're doing
it good stuff? Does it accompLish what we want to do what
in here? I don't remember it aII.
Emmings: I don't either. Do you
this thins is going to have to be
think it
come bac k
would be
again.
useful if , obviously
Does everybody agr ee?
BatzI i : Yeah.
Emmings: And when it comes back, we should probably, it should either come
back with everything else out of the ordinance that applies to landscaping.
A11 Lhe buffer yard material. and everything else so we've got eveything in
a package that we can look at it aII and see how it fits together. Or ifthat's too big a job, then at least give us reference to those other places
so we can find them easily.
Krauss: UeIl in fact that reminds me. TheiL's attached to the back uhere we tried topert.aining to Iandscaping from aII over the
we gave you,
regulations
Emmings: Okay buL I guess maybe PauI what's got to be done is it's aII got
to be pulled together and you've got to be satisfied that it all f j.ts
together. And there may be changes to those other ones that will be
necessary as a result of r,rhat we've talked about tonight. But I think
we've got to have it aII pulled together in one packet so we knot, r^,hat
first memo that
compile all Lhe
ordi nance .
Planni ng Commiss ion
-'Tune 5, 7991 - Page
Heet i ng
39
we're ]ooking at because it's real confusing right now I think. At lesatit's confusing for the other people.
Batzli:
Conrad:
Nc,L for lhe Chairperson.
For the record he was pointing at Tim.
Krauss: Here's Lhe insert right here. I!'s Ordinance No. 136 amending20-695, blah, blah, blah and aII the others regarding parking setbacks andbuffer yards. It was the same time we gave the flexibility for Redmond todecrease the.
Batzli: f don't recall Nhat we did in the buffer yard. In any event,okay. Moving back to page 6. 2O-!L79, paragraph (a), the Iast sentence.The minimunr ).andscape value required may be flexible if tree preservationis applied to existing vegetation on Lhe site. I guess I didn,t like itbecauee of the way it was worded. I think hre,re trying to encourage treepreservation and i! Iooked like it was saying well, you can do this if youdo that. The inlent seemed muddled up there. That tree preservation isencouraged and I don't know. I don't know if anybody else had a problemwith that but it ]ooked to me like ure were stating it negatively when itshould somehow be more positive. Anyway.
Conrad: But. the intent I. assume was that
some of the financial requirements?
existing vegetalion could sat i sfy
Batzli: Ri9ht.
Emmings: But I think you could say it this way. you could say treepreservation is encouraged and can result in a reduction of the amount thatyou're required to spend so it encourages preservation. That,s the idea.
BatzIi: In Section 20- 1142
end phrase, the bui. Iding on
on page 9, paragraph (a). The very last,accessory signage. Is it or accessory?
tail
Olsen: Yeah , or accessory .
Batzli: I had a queslion about hora far back in that paragraph
where the overstory boulevard trees planted. Are they plantedpublic right-of-r.ray and how far back are they planted?
(c) thenin the
Krauss: They're never planted in the public right-of-way.
Batzli: l,Jhy do they do that in Minneapolis then? They have thesebeautiful arching trees over the roads and we can't do it?
Krauss: They also have sidewalks and curbs that burst out. I don'.t have agreat ansu,er for it. Unfortunately modern suburbs seem to be designed by
Lhe guy who drives the snowplow more often than not. They cause you
problems from Lhe standpoint of utility mainLenance. They cause you
problems from the standpoint of installing things like cabl.e TV lines.
They cause you problems in that they bust up the pavement and they look
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
l''leet i ng
40
awful pretty. I guess Lhere's a Lrade-off but this is much the same waythat MnDot doesn'! allow us to do anything in their right-of-Hay for safety
and mairrLenance reasons, or very little in their right-of-way. Our public
works people and engineering staff balk at the planting of large trees thatin what they believe to be their right-of-way.
Erhart: t"Jhat is it, a
r isht-of -u.,ay?
32 foot wide streeL typically with a 50 foot
Krauss: 60 foot -
Erhart: Now we're asking for 60.
Krauss: tJhich tends to, ure just sent to Sharmin to a conference where, and
they rightfully say we have absurdly r^,ide streets and rights-of-way.
I mean it's designed so Lhe guy that's turning the snowPlow around can do a
35O with one hand. tJeII, do you rea]ly want to design your city to that?
Erhart: [,,e've got absurdly tlide streets?
Krauss: t^lell we have wide streels. I don't want to classify them
absurdly uride. I've seen wider in some communities but you've got
recognize that there's positive standpoints from d6ing that. From
maintenance and design. The down side is you have awful large dead
AS
to
zo nes -
Batzl i : Large dead zones?
Erhart; Ar,JfuI Iarge asphalted areas.
Krauss: t,jell either they're asPhalt or they're just going to have sod
because you don't aIIow anything else. There are solne bushes. Now in
typical residential neighborhood you have the, is it 28 or 32 do we use
there? 28 I think for the paved area on a street and the righ!-of-way
indistinquishable from somebody's front yard.
our
inis
Erhart: Nhy did we 90 to 50 feet?
OIsen: To be consistent.
Olsen: No, we just did it in December.
Emmings: Consistent with what?
Olsen: They needed it for the, Lo conLain the sidewalks that we're nowrequiring and for the utilities and we h,ere finding that we r,rere having the
roads and utilities and the sidewalks on the private ]and. Having to get
additional easements. It aII comes down to the size of the street. The
asphalt part of it " Because of the size of the street hJe need that
r ight-of-way .
Batzl i r tle just did that a couple years ago too.
PIanni ng Comrrission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
47
mind that these are new ]ots and they've all got
They should know exactly where the righ!-of-way
ErharL: lsrr'L it possible, getting back to this., isn't it possible
okay the trees can not be planted within 10 feet of the curb insteadt.rying t c-, define it in terms of public right-of-way hrhich you don't
uhere it starts and sLops. tlhy don't ue, can you find a number?
to say
of
k now
Krauss: Keep in
corners on them.
and stops.
sta ked
star Ls
Erhart: We.l .I yeah I know but if you've got a 6O foot right-of-way andyou've goL a 28 foot r^ride street, that's 12 feet on either side.
Ahrens: I think a lot of them don't though. t^lhere their lot ends andthe right-of-way begins and they're different within a subdivision.
Erharl: Here we're talking about the developer.
Krauss; ft's not uniform .
Ahrens: So you
Lucy - You haveor Hhatever that
Emmi ngs: Trai I?
Ahrens: Trail easement. 15trees in. They'd be sitting
have, along some streets you may have, well Like along Lakea 10 foot utility and a 20 foot or 15 foot r.ralkway easementis.
oY 20. Huge -in the center
You could never put boulevardof people's yards.
Batzli: That's my point. It doesn't seem to me they're
when you end up putting them 20 feet off the bouLevard.
boulevard trees.
boulevard trees
They're really not
Krauss: But they're not, I mean typically they're going to be, you know ifyou put them right on the edge, they're 1O or 12 feet back and a tree crownwi.lI extend well beyond that when it matures out,
Ahrens: And
anYway .
Lhe utility lines all run along there too and get cut off
Krauss: All utilities are below grade
subdivisions. The only thing that areIines.
now.
above
2O-11a3, paragraph ( a )( 2 ). Last
screening requirement? I didn 't
tie requiregrade are
in al]distribution!hat
major
Balzli: Okay, keep moving here.sentence. LasL phrase. Is that
understand that -
In
any
Emmings: f can't find where you're at.
Batzl i : Page 9.
stole your thunder
20-1183
ther e .
( a )( Z ). Earth worm section, yeah. Sorry, I
The required opacity, opacity. However you say
PIanni ng Commiss ion
June 5, 1997 - Page
lleet i ng
42
that. The section that's gone now. Is that needed for anything? Did thatgo someplace? I didn't see it.
Olsen: ft's gone.
BatzLi: It's toLally gone. Did we need it for anything?
Krauss: tlelI you've established where you t.lant screening. You said'physical.Iy thou shall do it in these areas. rn these inslances. The
required opacity Has an unenforcable sLandard. It was a criteria that was
gpen.to different determinaLions by. anybody who's doing i! and asked you to
think forward 10 years from now and see Hhat percentage of Lhe view would
be obscured and Lhere's rea.Ily no hard and fasL criteria that you can
uniformily apply for that thal makes sense. So I think what u,e're going to
be resorting to is sort of a more touching feeling way of demonstrating
this. tJe're going to go teII the designer the nearest home is over here -
You show us what lhe view's going to be like from that home. Do a
perspecLive.
BatzIi : But isn't
could have. told the
shooti ng f or , Not^,
screen it.
this going to be more subjective? At
regisLered Iandscape architect ' thisyou're just kind of giving him touchy
least before you
is what you're
feely sayi ng
Batz]i: I don't know. Maybe we need more intent then of what the
screening is supposed Lo do. I mean I thi.nk you've got a good intents
section already and the new l"andscaping sLandards section. I don't know.
I'rn an engineer. I like the pseudo scientific stuff. I like the two
deciduous trees. I think if one's maple that's great. I think that if vou
have a wa ir.,^er however , you shouLd stiII require 1 in aII instance. That'sjust rne. I just look at the dying forest and I say Put at .least 1 neLJ tree
in. And I say that because my folks have 60 year old elms and oaks and
maples and they're all going to fall to the ground and they haven't planted
a new tree and it's going to look like a cornfield in about 3 years
probably. So I would say you can do it on a 1to 1 basis but you still
have to put 1 in. I Iike the facL that you're going to have Lo seed or sod
immediately. And my last question is, I think we need to say something in
here about Iandscaping non-buildable outloLs and subdivisions. t^le have to
do somethj.ng to take care of tha! somehow. I happen to live in a
subdivision where the entry Iot was landscaped kind of and then left by thedeveloper. There's no association. The City doesn't own the land. The
development doesn't own the land. Nobody owns the Land.
Krauss: Are you in Pheasant Homes?
BatzIi:
tJhether
Fox
iils
HoIIow. And we have to get
in anolher section where you
here about th
association th
a t
L
somethi ng
require
IN
an ow ns
Krauss: No, it's no more subjective than the other one was in that it's
not couched behind a pseudo scientific standard that Has meaningless. f
think instead of doing that it says we want to accomplish this goal.
Oemonstrate how you're going to do it
Planni ng Commission
June 5, 199L - Page
Meet i ng
the property anci they have to take care of it, or in this secLion if you're
goin3 to build an outlot thaL's not buildable or Ieave an outlot, you've
got to take care of i!. You know something that they take care of these
Emmings: tJel.l somebody owns it. It can't be not ouned.
BatzIi:
car6.
so who
usually
Batzli:
own iL.
l,Jel I that's the point Lhough. TheThey're not part of the development,
takes care of these things?
person who oulns it doesn't
They're not part of anything
Well if an outlot was
deeding it to the City
truly created with no specific purpose,
or maintaining it for drainage.
drainage at this point but the City doesn'tIt sits basically for
Krauss: See the City took, in Pheasant HiII we were supposed to takepossession of I Lhink 7 out.Lots and because He didn't have our aLtorneydoing the filing of the subdivision, the guy never gave it to us. Therr ulefound out they were going tax forfeit 6 and 7 years later and they hadn't
been maintained at al]. If we take title Lo them, we maintain them butthey still should be landscaped so they don't just be kind of a weedy sump
because our gLlys don't 9o out Lhere to mow these things. t^le don't have the
manpouer to do Lhat so it should be some sort of a self maintaining type of
I andscapi ng arouncl. !hat.
Batzli: ft's part of the subdivision process where bJe have to fix it butLhere are instances in the city {.,,here you end up kind of screuy like thesetwo situations. Fox HoIloN and the other one. It can be an eye sore. I
happen to live in a neighborhood r^,here a group of people banded together
and a couple times a yeat they go down there and clean it up a ]ittle bitbut they're spending a lot of money on this guy's property trho I don't even
krow trho the heck he is. In any event?
OIsen: tJas it bought recently?
Batzli: No.
who owns iL.
comments.
Rottlund doesn't own it. Not the developer. I don't know
Ladd owns it? In any event, that's it. Those are my
Far ma kes :
upon I'm
Emmi n9s :Jeff?
t^Jell most of the comments that I had have already been touched
sure.
lO or 72 times.Ahrens:
Farmakes: I still am not totally, although I think 3 trees are fine, I'msLill noL convinced that there's any carved in stone reason for why it's 3
and not 4 and not 5 or as Councilman t^ling said,6 but he thought that would
be too much. I wish there was a betler guide as to r.,hat it is attainable
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
or what we should be asking for rather than 3's 3 more than we ask for now.
Perhaps maybe some of these design people lhat are going to be here this
weekerrd, maybe Arboretum people 'or something. But is there some
expectation of t^rhat this is going to be t^rith the sizes that ue have here
and the amount of trees that we're requiring as to what we're going to have
5 years from now or 10 years from now or how long it's going to take before
those trees become a real viable foresLed area. I'm kind of getting the
impression that r^rhat we're doing is upping Hhat we've got or condensing the
distance of the plantings or upping the figure with, I wish r^re had some
idea in mind of r^,hat we were going to have in the end result ' Or how long
it r^ras going to take to get Lhose areas reforesLed. Coupling Lhat u,,ith the
DNR report of what He've goL now and what our intent was or plan was. t^lha!
!^re were 9oin9 to wind up with in the year 2OOO or 2O1O.
Batzli: It's inLeresting. That's an excellent Point but if you
Edina to places where lhey develoPed in the 60's, you can still
neighborhoods and teLl the new from the old neighborhoods'
go to
go to
Farmakes: You bet. t"le used to live there and the Harriet Manor Addition
down by the river which is right over by Xerxes which borders MinneaPolis
and Lhat was developed in'48. If you go through there, there's just a
tremendous diversity in the forestated areas. These are malure trees now
and every year has 4 or 5 different types of trees. There is no smattering
of elms or of maples or whatever. There's iust really a diversity in that
urban forest. It really is quite beautiful and quite thick. I mean it's
certainly , I don't knou. t^lhat's '48? It isn't Lha! Iong ago ' 30 vears.
But that brings me to another point lhat He were talking about. If we
require that 3OZ of aII the trees that were planted are a particular genus
of lrees, and I'm not against that. I can undersLand vour reasoning behind
it. I wouLd like to get maybe some professional input as Lo whether that's
a Hise idea because 70 years ago I'm sure there was a commission in
Minneapolis that thought that elms uere a good tree to Plant and a maiority
of the plantings in Minneapolis r^rere a Particular tree. And it didn't turn
oul to be too wise years down the line and I'm noL sure if 30? is overplanting of one tree or not. f can see where we require a certain type ofquality of lree but I'm not sure it's a good idea to ge! one particular
type of tree for lhat high of a requirement. That's it.
Ahrens; As Dick tling's recommendation, I like 3 trees. Any number we come
up with woulo be arbitrary to me. 6,7, a would be great but develoPers
aren't 9oin9 to do that. They're just not. Especially when ute're
requiring Lhem to, which I think is a good idea, to seed or sod all of the
IoLs. I mean a lot of developers won't do that because it's expensive.
They'II give you a sod allowance -
Kraussr By the way that's an existing requirement. That's noL a new one.
Batzl i : 9,i nce Nhen?
Kr auss I I
for year s ,
mean i
and a
don't want to tell you how
ue only started enforcing
t's been on the books
half ago .
long .
it a
I
yea r
Planning Comm i ss ion
June 5, 1997 - Page
Meet i n9
l,Jas it on there in '86?
Oh yeah.
Is this getting personal?
Yeah.
B.;tz1r:
KraLrsrE:
Emm i ngs :
Batzli:
Ahr€ns:
Batzli:
Ahrens:
Yeah, I Iive
a lot
in a subdivision right now that.
of money sodding my yard, twice.I spent
It's 2 years o1d. Not even 2 years old I don't think.
Krauss: Undoubtedly the developers built that cost into the cost of the
house buL ure went through a process where people were complaining aboutthis a couple of years ago. tle kneur this was on the books and that ithadn't been enforced and it rea]Iy becamea ni.ghtmare because it was in thesubdivision code but r^,e couldn't after Lhe fact enforce it because iLr.rasn't written into the deveropment conLracts which were recorded with theproperty and in several instances urhere it was written against the
development contract, the engineering department I think unknowingly, whoadrninistered those contracLs, reaIIy only cared about getLing Lhe streetsand utilities built and as soon as they were done, they cancelled outresponsibiliLy for the contracLs and voided them so we had absolutely noteeth to go after these people. t^le've since revamped our procedures sothat everything we'ys approved in the last year is permanenLly written intolhe developmenL contrac!. t^,le only give partial releases when we keepgetting calls from attorneys who want to have clear tiLle passed along.You know we only release Lhose elements that have been taken care of and
some of these requirements are permanent. Sharmin administers a program
where when somebody comes in for a building permit, we give them a handoutthat says, this is what your obligations are. Sign off on this so you
understand - I can't answer for what happened before but that,s whatthey're doi ng nour.
Ahrens: f
noL done.
can tell you what happened before, It wasn't done. Absolutely
Batzli: They sodded the right-of-way basically is what they did.
Ahreirs: As a matter of fact they came in our subdivision and said, you
have, f don't know. It was a minimal amount of sod and they said you have!o use this firsL in the right-of-way. I said forget it. t^te urouldn'L let
them do it. We uranted to put it in our yard and ]et the right-of-Hay.
T hey
Ahrens: Yeah, but we have uhole areas of our yard.
and a half. l,Je had most of it unsodded and unseeded
The
and
yard
a lot
15 an acre
of the olher
Krauss: That's because the developer was trying to ge! out of our
requiremenL when we accept a public street they have to landscape. '
have to sod the right*of-way.
PIanning Cornmission
June 5, l99l - Page
Meet i ng
46
I ots i n the subdivi sion have
HeI I it's not only
Yeah and a]l
areas thaL are still jusL weeds.
Krauss:
i ssue .
Ahrens:
Olsen:
a visual problem. It's also a uater quality
a wetl.and i n the sumnner .
ft never said to be sodded.
Krauss: It said alI disturbed areas had to be sodded or seeded.
these ]ots drain inLo
Lhat the whole Iot had
Batzli: My whole lot tas didLurbed.
Lotus. That's why the water quality
development ulere disturbed for years
surampy end !here.
Our whole development drains into
is so poor. A lot of Lhe IoLs in our
and they drained righL down into the
Ahrens: And our lots drain into Christmas Lake and it's one of the problms
they're having there.
Krauss: Again, we can't address those Past buL we did correct it so.
Ahrens: t,ell, at any rate. I think that I'd hate to see a requirement
that 2 of the trees have to deciduous because I think every ]ot is
different and I think even though some lots that are maybe more exPosed
than other lots should have the right to have coniferous trees. It may be
more appropr iate for Lhat lot. I think the idea of having the maPle tree
is great but I agree. tlho knows if a maPle tree worm will get us in 10
years. AIl the maple trees wiII be gone. I think as long as they're
decent type of trees, I don't care what they are. Is there such a thing as
maple tree worm?
BatzIi: I don'L know.
Ahrens: I don't have anything else. Everything else has been brought uP
and hashed and rehased.
Emmings: I don't know if I've got maybe what f want to say. Ohl First on
page 6 - Below $1 ,OOO,OOO.OO is 2Y. -
Krauss: I knobr. l was just ]ooking at that. The middle one doesn't trork.
If you look aL the formula, it doesn't Lrack uell. You've got, in the
second one you've got 2oz. Betueen a million and 2 million you've got
$2o,ooo.oo plus 1% of the project value in excess of l million dollars.
Batzli: It should be $1o,oOO.oO shouldn't it?
Emm i ngs: No .
Krauss: Then does the
$3O,OOO.Oo in the next
mi 1l ion dollars but the
when you get up Lo 30? You've
.752 of projecL value in excessonly 2 to 3 million dollars.
math wor k
one plus
range is
90tof3
Planning Comnrission
June 5, 1991 - Page
MeeL i ng
47
Kr auss :
nor ksheet
asks them
The way I
with the
ve administered this in the past issite plan revieur packet. It breaks
you
out
give
t hese
them a
items and
Emmings: What they're planning on spendi ng?
Krauss: Right.
Emmings: You use their numbers?
Kraussr tJeII, yeah. Unless they typically, well I'm not going to saytypically lie. f mean f only caught somebody ).ying in a major way once.They were so obvious about it and it uJas a 10 story off i.ce building thatyou can get it very easily. Typica]Iy the people Nho are doing these plansare fairlv responsible on this. They are again registered professionals
and if thev bolcl face li.e, you can report them to lheir society and to theState Commissioner of r.rhatever.
Emmings: And it's something you can check against, you can check up onthem.
Krauss: tle do. You take a Bachman's
Ia ndscape va lue . t^lhen you get , thereconstruction per square foot,
catalog and you see, in terms ofare some ballpark figures for
Emirrings: Okay. And then my only other question h,as, urhere does the 22come from and what is that going to mean in terms of, is there anythingIike a typical? I r^ras trying to figure out t,lhat it mean!.
Krauss: It's hard for me to answer that except that this ordinance, thatsecti,3n, I probably shouldn't admit it but it goes back to something that
BRl,l developed about 15 years ago and it was writlen into a series ofordinances that BRt, sLaff people did for various communities. I workedwith this same standard in Oakdale and from Mi.nnetonka and f can't tell you
why but I know it works.
Emmings: Okay. That's what I uJanted to hear I Eless. That there's some
experience with it that wiII tell you that it wiII put enough money into
Iandscape materials !o make the kind of impact we Nant to see.
Krauss: Keep in mind it's a minimal too. You set standards.
criteria that people have to adhere to. If they have to sPend
Lhat to achieve it, that's just the way it is.
Emmingsi And lhen Jeff's comment on the Jr."= *rd" me uonder,
Am I getting mixed up between, yeah I am. No I'm not I guess.
You set
more than
let's see -
The 3 trees
Emmings: It should be in excess of 2 million. That urasn't my point buL it
needs to be changed. Belour a million aL 22- and uhat is the value, what
value is iL ?',. of? tJhat's the million dollars?. It's building construction
and site preparation and site improvements, aIl of Lhat? So at what point
do you determine lhe requirement for the lot?
Planning Comm i ssi on
June 5, 7991 - Page
Meeting
48
trould be required on, for example our minimum 15,OOO square foot Io!, And
we see a lot of subdivisions where they'll be 15,OOO square foot lots andthe same subdivision will have a lot in it that's 35,OOO or 40,OOO squarefeet. Is it the same requirement there? t^lould it make any sense to
require 1 tree per 5,OOO square feet of ]ot?
Ahrens: l''laybe some people don't Hant lhat many trees in their yards .
Emrni ngs: Yeah, that's right.
Batzli: But there are lots, there are homes in my neighbor.hood where they
haven't done anything more Lo it than t^lhat was done which means they have
one boulevard tree. Some of the people did that because they don't want to
go out and buy $1oO.Oo Lrees and I think, now this gets back to if they had
purchased the horne and they had had the option of putting the trees in
their mortgage over 30 years, they would have done it. No question about
it. They just don't hant to go out and spend $15o.oo on a good sized tree.
And some of them just, they have homes for other reasons. It's just kind
of a tax shelter and lhey're living there for a couple of years and they
don'L want to do anything to the yard. There are Lhose kinds of people too
buL I think iL would have improved the neighborhood had there been higher
minimums in the number of Lrees.
Emmings: I guess for myself I'Il say that I think that there shoul^d be 3Lrees. f'm comfortabLe going to thaL as the next step. I think it will bean improvemen! however arbitrary. I think that 2 should be deciduous andthey should be in the front yard but I don't case uhere. you know I
Krauss: I think Jeff raised some rea]. valid comments about, is this just
an incremental approach, particularly wiLh the single family and the answer <is yes it is. You asked is there a vision as to trhat this is going !o
achieve in a single family neighborhood? No. There isn't. It's a fairlv
blunt approach. It tries to get around too much of, I mean bre can envision
aII we want but in this case visioning means imposing the City's wiII on an -
individua]'s decision about their ProPerty. And even I, I have a tough
time doing that with sing.Le family homeowners. I don't have any Problem at
aI] doing it Lo anybody who's develoPing commercial ProPerty or retail
property or multi-family or anything like that. I viere that in a totallv
different context. If you're going to refine that any further ' we're going
to have to'be more explicit as to you've got to have, He want floweririg
shurbs over here and we want something else over there and f'm very :relunctant to do that. I think what this is going Lo get at uith kind of a
meat ax approach is the Joe MiIler tyPe of cornfield development- It
serves a purpose because the value's there in the housing buL it's Pretty
ugly. You go back to...town 40 or 50 years after and it starts to ]ook
nice because people sort of did this thing over the- Iast 40 or 50 years.
uhat r.re're trying to do is make sure that the Joe Miller's of the future do -this up front. That there be some modicum of develoPment in there. And
Brian in your development, PeoPIe have Paid enough for homes that lhey're
going to do this on their own by and large. This is a small Percentage of
r,rhat's going to uttimatety be there. I don't know that that's the case in "]
the Joe l'1i I I er developmenL.
Planning Commission
June 5, 799f - Page
i'4eet i ng
49
tiouldn't care, I don't care that Lhey're not nroved to t
boulevard or whaLever. I don't care where they are. A
thi nk r.re liave to have this come back. Dick?
Richard t,ling: Just a quick comment as I've Iistened and you use the wordtrees. In the ordinance it specifies several types. Shade trees,
ornamentaL trees, coniferous trees and...and when ue're talking about treesfor, I'm Losing my Lrain of thought here. tJhen we talk about this 1a-61 ,the residenLial lots, we're specifically talking about shade trees andthey're the elms, the ash, the lindens, maples and so forth. They're thetowering broad trees. Those are Listed specifically but if we just sayLree, that may be able to be interpretted as ornamental tree also.
Emmings: I think what I hear is, I think
Richard tJing: Right but I mean I think it
he front on the
nd Lhat's aII and I
taI king abouL shade trees.
to be specific.
we're
needs
Emmings: tJeII I Lhink we're going to get even more specific than that.I thi nli r.rhat I 've heard up here is that we hrant to have , maybe have someIists and it nray be a srtuation where you tell them, )zou,re 9oin9 to have 2decid:ous shade trees and ue LJant you to pick one out of Column A and oneout'of Column B. Column A maybe we put a lot of common trees. Maybe theashes ancl maybe even maples and other things. I don't know but in theother one maybe put some oLher trees Iike hackberry and kinds of trees thaLpeople don't cornmonly plant to try and encourage some diversity in what wehav+. I don't know but ther-e are things you could do like that Loof suF;:,ose.
Erhart: Have one column as the real high value. you could just say one ofthem hes to be either a sugar maple or a red oak. That's the highest valuetree. That nay it avoids the thing of having every third tree a sugarmaple. Ii means you'Il get some will be red oak and some wiII be sugarmaples but require one to be of the real high vaLue and the other ones in
Column B. I Lhink that's a good idea.
Krauss:
Iooking
UelL that's maybe a question Ne can raise with Alan Olson. you,re
for specimen lrees?
Emniings: Yeah, that's right. In the front yard. Go ahead Dick.
Rich:rd tJing: An.w time tree is mentioned, I Lhink we have to specify inthis case r.re'I1 call them shade. In other sections it was the boulevard.I think r^re're stilI talking shade trees...fences, ornamental trees would bealright. I just think we need !o.,.specify rrrhat leveL of tree ule'retaI ki ng about .
Emmings: Okay. Do we have to do anything formaltable it or continue the public hearing? Okay, dotable this and continue the public hearing?
on
hJe
this? tJe'1I just
have a motion to
Batzli: So moved. I think we already closed it. ShouLd He reopen it?
:Tu ne 5, ,
Comm ission
1991 - Page
Heet i n9
50
Kl-aus:: You c3n jus! continue action on the itern.
Olsen: It r^ri I I be back
Emmings: BuL will it be back as a public hearing?
Olsen: l^Je don't have to.
Krauss: Not unless you r^Ja nt Lo re-open it as such,
conrad: It r,ras published this 'time and nobody came.
Emmings; Alright. So do we have a moLion or Hhat?
Batzli: t.le moved to tabLe.
Conrad: second.
Batzli moved, Conrad seconded to table action on Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinance Amendment to amend sections regarding landscaPing and tree
preservation requirements. AII voted in favor and the motion carried-
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: ChairmAN Emmings noted the Hinules of the Planning
1991 as presented.Commission nreeting daLed May 15,
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE:
Emmings: Next is a ]ong report from the Planning Director.
thai everybody read it. Is there something in here PauI on
There's something that could potentially go to here on June
Let'sitem 2
12rh.
ASSLIME
Krauss; Yes, in fact lhere was a handout that was on your desk tonight.
t^Je are to the point where Ne are going to, we short listed the number of
consultants ure want to use, or consider for the water quality program.
Emminss: That's the next iLem. That's item 3. Go ahead.
Krauss: okay, I see Peter olin. I'II get to that Loo. Anyway, tte're
looking to, we've agreed to a procedure with the Mayor and the Council
where we're going to try to set up a review committee comprised of some of
you and some of the City Council. It's not clear how many. At this point
I'm going to say whoever wants to come. [.te realize it's a morning Lhat
somebody has to give up but this is a pretty imporlant decision. Not only
is this going to cost a lot of money, but more imporLantly it's going to
have a major bearing on water quality and environmental protection issues
for a good Iong time in the community and r^te'd like to get the best cross
secLion of opinion on who's the best candidate to work with us. l.le think
of the 5 firms that we selected, short listed, Lhey can aII do the job but
Lhe question .is, is there a good fi! urith the expectations are for this
work produc!. Is there a good trorking relationshiP tha! you see. It's an
interview.
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
51
Emmings: Do people knour if they've got
attend? f know I've goL a conflict.
Batzli: I hron't be in Lown.
Ahrens: I have no idea.
Conrad: Annette said she might be able
Farmakes: This the L2th you're talking
Emmings: No, we're talking about June
can make iL calL PauI and let him know.
some of our members there.
interest or ability to
ca.L e nda r .
But I guess if you
nice if we could get
the time
I c hec ked
or
MY
to.
about?
2oth on this.
I t r.rould be
Farmakes: I misht be able to make it.
Krauss: If you can give me a call Jeff and let me knowgoing t.o order coffee and donuts and a box lunch.
Ahrens: t^lhat kind of lunch?
Krauss: l,lhat sounds sood to you Joan? I mean there's
Emmings: Now going back to item 2. June 12th and ourthe Arboretum.
because we're aLso
var iables .
fr iend Mr. OIin and
Krauss: I don't knoH hor,J best Lo get into this. I think you're aware thatPeter obviously made presenLations Lo you and Lhe City Council in the CompPlan. As I recall, there were a IoL of people who weren't very receptiveto u,hat he was saying. He was rather presumptuous in the way he cameacross. I think were Lectured on the fact thal the Arboretum is a pearl
and we have an obl-igation Lo maintain it's setting or something along thoseIines. He really knocked t.he City very unfairly I believe in terms of our
environmental initiatives and our sensitivity to these things. And thenall it took was, I mean Joan asked some very critical questions of him and
somebody shouted from the audience how much do you pay a year in property
Laxes and Lhat was about it. UeII apparently Peter has feLt
disinfranchised by the whole thing and has since had gotten into argumentswith Chaska and Vj.ctoria who were looking to construct some roadurays closeto but not adjacent to the Arboretum which apparently he doesn't Iikeeither and he's concerned about encroachment. I mean I can understand hisposition to that degree. t^lell, Peter's response !o that, and most recentlyit was Victoria and Chaska that got him going, But Peter's response tothat r^,as to set a meeting date in t,lay to discuss local land use planning
that was conspicuous by the fact that he neglected to invite any Iocal land
use planners. I found out about it throush the Metro Council who dot aninvite and then Dick contacted me because he had heard about it. I thinkin large part because of Dick and our conversations brith him, Peter
rethought Lhe advisability of going ahead tactically with a meeting likethat and re-scheduled it for this date inviting myself, Chaska and Victoria.
And the same ground urhich he invited the last Lime which Nas State
Planning Commiss io n
June 5, 1991 - Page
Heet i n9
52
Legis)ators and the DNR and the PCA and some individuals. Dick's one of
them and I think he's expanded it a little bit. It's still conspicuous bythe fact that Peter, who everybody that dealt t^rith him, and f haven't dealt
uith him Lhat much but feels lhat he lectures to you. He doesn't talk in
these situations. But that we urere not invited to participate in the
development of the program. [^,e Here inviLed to hear what he's got to say Iguess. I think we're beyond reproach. I rea]Iy do. CIearIy we can
continue to do more but in preparation for our bus tour on Saturday I did
up a list of things that Ne've done in the last couple years. t^le beingyourselves, the City Council and the HRA, that really have a bearing on
TH 5 and f was going t6 present this to Peter. Peter by the uay is doing
things Iike h.is memo inviting people Lo the meeting shows that b,e intend toput a major shopping center on the southeast corner of TH 5 and 41 and that
we've already basically permitted the Fleet Farm Lo 9o in north of there.
So it's a rather inflammatory thing and you'II see Lhe maps which are
obvious.Ly wrong and I think Peter knouls they're wrong. He also did things
Iike, he wanted !o find out apparently how the City Permits develoPment so
he called my secretary to get copies of ordinances which are the ordinances
that he requested when I think the aPProPriate form would be to sit down
with any of the 3 of us and say if f uere proPosing a development, what
would I be obLigated to do. He's obviously trying to create, I think
obviously. I could be urong but create a scenario where he's going to hit
these people up with an image of some horrendous university avenue tyPe
deal and claim that this is what's alloured in the city of Chanhassen.
Emmings: This guy's a real master at creating, weII you know. The
saddness is that tue probably agree with a Iot of what he's goL to say but
the way he says iL makes you want to not listen to him. After I listen to
him I want to put up a big flourescent sign on the corner of TH 5 and 41
that says Arboretum with an arrour pointing that uray- Just to spite the guy
because of his attitude and approach. It's just too bad.
Krauss: t,ell I think first of all, for a TH 5 corridor and then for this
meeting, I Lhought it was real good for us to sit back and say, what did ue
accomplish in the last few years and when you see j.t listed out in this
paper which you couldn't have read yet because it was given to you tonight,
there is no way that one could conclude that what could have happened 2
years ago is what ue would allow to have happen today. There's just so
much that's changed and so much that is changing. Even if we did nothing
more from Lhis point out it would be dramatically different types of
development than previously had been the case. And I did that as a
sounding board too because u,e're starting this TH 5 corridor study which is
one of the other things- I think you've been called and some of you are
able to come along on that. And hopefully a lot of good things are going
to come out of this. It's really a Iaunching pad for further work on thecorridor taking the things, the initiatives that we've already got and
refining them and getting some more focused planning efforts done. But
we've done a Iot already and we're not reinventing the uheel . [.re have areal good base to work on and that's what this is Lo get across. f'm also
meeting with Victoria and chaska Honday f guess before the meeting on
tjednesday to strategize a lilt]e bit with them because I guess f'm
conceited enough Lo think that we do a better job than either one of those
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
MeeL i ng
53
two communities but I'm sure they have a lot ofthemselves too. So I suppose anybody,s invitedhaven't been direcLly invited, let me know andfor you.
good things to say aboutto be there. If you
I'II phone in a reservatign
Farma kes: Is the format
and a nsuler s afterwards?
of the meeting, are there going to be questions
Krauss:
Farma kes ;
Krauss:
I don't know -
My guess is t hat
Farma kes: I understand.
or is this just strictly a presentation
Lhis wil I be reminiscent
of his?
of you being in college.
Emmings: Going to be at Lhe knee of the master.
and he's invited us, or CityConrad: So Peter has called the meetingrepresentatives as well as who else?
Krauss; state legisrators, the pcA, Lhe DNR, the HeLro council. publicRadio. Dick and I hrere interviewed by publj.c Radio in the last coupledays. So it remains to be seen what he,s up to. I just have a verystrong f eel"ing r know what it is. Now originalLy when this thing came up,r saw this as direcL interference h,ith Lhe comp pran. you start gettingparanoid about these things because the date of his first meeting was thedate of our commiLtee hearing r Lhink at the Hetro council and it turnedout it was chaska and victoria that Lripped this off and not us, which wasa relief to find out.
Farmakes: Can I ask a quick question here? This is the individual ,missed the earlier public hearing urhere he was here. This is theinclividuaL who you had lunch with I believe and you asked if they hadideas or input on Landscaping or improvements here in the cities andquoted you his rate?
any
t hey
Krauss: Oh yes Lhat's true. That happened to somebody.
I
Erhart: Dave Headla and myself and Barb Dacy.clear that lhey're, someHhat that they were tohelp.
Essentially, uell it washelp or he was willins to
Farmakes: As a vol untary?
Erhart: There was going to be awasn't clear who was going to do
charge,
that.There is a rate for doing it. IT
Farmakes: I mean potentially they could be a valuabl.e resourcewe're trying t.o do here on Lhis other stuff. It's a shame thatkind of environment or attitude tha!'s going on,
for urhat
that's the
Planning Commissi on
June 5, f99t - Page
Meet i ng
54
Krauss: Nell in fact, on this bus tour on Saturday, Printari.Ly because of
Dick and Dick's wife who's taking some courses at the U, we've gotten in
touch with a fel]ow named BiII Moresch'who runs the University's Urban
Design Center. Now as an other University emPloyee, he's kind of a
compatriot of the folks at the Arboretum and knours them fairly weII- I
think BilI Moresch has said a couple times that he thinks that olin reallv
blew it in terms of how !o handle these things but we're using Horesch as
urban desisn expertise as kind of a critic in residence or something like
Lhat who's 9oin9 to ride along on the bus and trv to PuL some things in
perspective and work with us. I think he's pretty excited about doing that
and maybe that wil] help to convev back to OIin Lhat we're not Lhe ogres
he's protraying us to be. I don't know. He's going to be there by Lhe
Nay .
Emmings: He doesn't think we're ogres, he thinks we're stuPid is my
impression.
Farmakes: He's going !o be there?
Krauss: As I understand it, I
be one of the speakers at lhis
asked to particiPate. tle were
thought Horesch told me thaL
Lhing next week. But again,
asked Lo be there -
he 's going Lo
we were not
Ahrens:
Krauss:
Farma kes :
Is Olin going to be on the bus tour?
No,
No, you were talking about the meeting on Lhe 12th'
Krauss: Right. And there was frankly an intent and this was something
that Steve and I have discussed and... tlhen we're talking about how to
proceed with Lhe TH 5 corridor and who should be directly and who should be
indirectly involved, Lhere h,as some sediment that Olin represents an
interest group, much the same as Hary Harrington did. Hopefully Peter's
more rationale, t^re I I .
Ahrens: Their tactics are similar.
Krauss: But if you have a single PurPose grouP, you urant to be very
cautious about where they're interacting. ClearIy they have a right to
interact but should they be able to direct the Process from the outset and
I think we've always taken the tact that you and the City Council rePresent
the best opinion, or an unbiased, best attempt at getting an unbiased
opinion to develop these things and then throw it oPen for public
criticism, comment and revision- t^re made a decision not to olin on the bus
frankly. Same as we decided not to have John ShardLow on the bus - t^lhv is
he any less significant. He's controlling 160 acres.
Ahrens: Is Lundgren Homes
Krauss: No.
going Lo be on the bus?
Emming:: J erant to move on to number 4. you're going to update us on thesLat-us of .
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
Krauss: Now f know, yeah and I'vegoing to go up to the council.
it's in
asked to
Emmings: On these potential development thingsquestion on the Ches Mar Farms. Did they burnthis attempt to get this cleaned up and maybe,
same effort? And does it include that propertythere? You know that other piece.
and we can check on t,he status?
be informed as to when it's
Krauss: Oh yeah, I called over there. f guess there,s two things i.nthere - Eonnie Fe :herstone gave me the staff report on the rural areasissues that we commented on back in, I don,t know Tim. t^,hen was that? you
uenL down to that meeting in Chaska. It ulas probably October or Septemberor something like that. And r got back to Bonnie and gave her some wriltencomments uhich ve attached here but we had requested contract revisionsto the Lake Ann Jnterceptor Agreement. I called one of their attorneysover at the Metro Council today. Finally got a hold of him and apparentlyit's proceedi ns through the bureaucracy. There's no real problems thatthey've found. They reviewed it in house and decided Lhe Metro Councilstaff didn't have a problem with it. Then they bumped it over toMetropolitan tlaste Control Commission and that took a couple months andthey had no concerns abouL i.t. Now they,ve got to geL it on a Councilagenda because it's a contract language change and it sounds like it wirrbe done in 30 to 45 day-.
Emmings: Okay, we know who,s hands
you have here. I had a
down lhat house as part ofis Lhat aII part of thatthaL's in the Naegele Trust
OIserr: At Ginger GroSS?
Emmings:the f i nger
OIsen: It
l.lell yeah. Thethat goes douln
Gross property got cut offLo Lake Mi nnewashta .
from that. It's got
Cc,es i nc.I ude that .
Emmings: It does include that?
Olsen: Yes.
Krauss: That's the one that Gary Kirt's going to build on?
Emmi ngs: tlho's this developer?
Olsen: Just a realtor who's buying the property for myseLf.
Emmi ngs: !^lho is it?
OIsen: SNaggert.
Emmi.ngs: So he's combining those th,o pieces?
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
l'1eet i ng
56
Olsen: t'le's
Single fariily
Emm i ngs: Oh
olsen: He's
comb,ining Lhem all and then splitting them into four lots.
lots.
so it's 9oin9 to be not very intensive.
getting rid of the apartments and aII that.
Krauss: It's still a little clunky because it doesn't adhere to the rural
area standards uJhich is why h,e 're PerPetuating the PUD but it's a
signif icant improvement.
Emmi ngs: ttell anyLhing wiII be an improvement I'm
Brothers development?
sure.
North of the or te nb.l atAhrens: What 's theproperty.Lundgren
Krauss: t^Je]1, we harren't seen it. t^lell we've seen a very Preliminary
draft ol. it. RighL nour they're trying to figure out how to run utilities
into there because the sewer ]ine in Lake Lucy Road is uP too high to serve
Lhe area. BuL they're looking aL, it's kind of tough to comment because
we've only seen, Jo Ann arrd I've seen that back of the enveloPe -
Ahrens: f mean how many houses?
Krauss: I think it was something like 26 oY 29.
Emmings: tJhich one nou?
Olsen: South of where Joan ]ives.
Emmings: I don't know where Joan lives.
Krauss: Do you remember Ersbo's subdivision r^ras. You got to see it twice
and nothi ng happened.
Emmings: That was on Lake LucY Road?
Krauss: Yeah. They're actually includins that.
O]sen: And the wetland !o the Nest.
Emmings: oh good because I didn't like the wav that turned out. Anv other
questions for PauI on his report?
Conrad: Just a quick question and it related to two meetings ago when the
City council decided not to have a second access for Kurvers Point. Not a
fire access. tJhat uras the rationale?
Krauss: That's a tough one to ansNer.
olsen: Essentially that it was never going to be necessary.
PIa nni ng Commission
June 5,, 1991 - Page
Meet i n9
57
he ]ack of perceplion of lhe immediancy of demandby the intensiLy of the people who didn't want to
Krau5
uras o
happe
s: That t
u ture ighed
n.
ki nd
have
of
iL
Emmi ngs :
going toir.
Ma P.e sure you get thatput that over my desk.
word for wordI don't think lhe HinuLes becausesaid anything but I
in
he
I'M
Iiked
Erhart: My comment is, I think I support yourdealer. If it's done nicely, it's good if notscaLe commercial .
analysis onbetter than
Cadi I I acother large
that
some
Krauss: r hope so. t^re haven't seen where the rubber meets the road yet onthis one. t^Je're a little concerned r.,ith some of the carl.s ure're getti.ngfrom their architect but r mean crearly that's the intent and we're in ihedriver seat on that one. you're under absoruLery no obrigation to Iift af i.nger to help these guys and unless they tow the line, forget it.
Emmirrgs: on our ongoing issue Iist, under comprehensive plan issues.[,Je'l] remove number one and change the numbering there for next time?
Krauss: I guess we could.
Emmings: I know Lhat's going Lo fee]
Under other items, I'm just wonderingLet's get stuff off of here.
good to me not to seeif number 10 ought to
t hat
come
on there -off there -
Krauss: tlel ] xhat ule 'vetime. This was a changegotten there yet.
done Stetre is yeah, that ruiIIin status from the Last time
c ome
where
off the nex tit hadn 't
Emmings: But then there's a number of Lhem that look Lo be like theywouldn't be, they r^rouldn't take a lot of time and we could maybe becrarrkj ng one or two of them for our next meeting. There may be, I don,tknow how to priortize them but r just checked Like number 2 and number 6 onthe first page. Are those things that are going to take a 1ot of your timeor staff time to get together? They may not be the highest priority butif they don't take a lot of time, maybe h,e can get them done.
Krauss: You're right. They're probably not incredibly tough to do. Uhattakes time is sitting down and figuring out aII the properties thaL areinvolved and notifying everybody and assuring them that it doesn'! changeanything on their property. That kind of thing. We can get on top oflhat- r don't know. rt won't be for Lhe next meeting. rt will be shortrybecause ule have notification requirements and we have to deverop a -mai.I.ing
I ist .
Olsen: tje can bring it up for discussion.
ve been given the go ahead from the planningKrauss: I
Commission
don'tto do
know , we
both.
Planning Commission
June 5, 1991 - Page
lleet i ng
58
Emmings; And then that PUD ordinance we were going to do some residential
standards there and I'd Iike to get that done. I don't know if there's
other items here that PeoPIe would like, can sPot thaL might be easy to geL
off our list. It'd be nice if we could be crossing off one or two of these
at every meeting. And maybe you can try and do that. And then there are
Lhings like the s'3n ordinance that the city council's indicated they want
attention paid to. Now I think it came uP with the building over at
downtown and r think PeoPIe are sLill very concerned about it but I don't
know hor,:, I mean that is going !o take a lot of time I assume.
Krauss: Yeah, to do it right' It not onlv takes a Iot of Lime to Iav out
the ordinance but real]v vou've got to be verv sensitive to working with
the business community and even folks like Ladd uho have some exPertise in
their job and what signage needs to be. I know Naegele's always willing to
stick people on those committees for obvious reasons.
Farmakes: But important I think' Particularly when vou're talking about
TH 5 and aII these other things we're doing.
Emmings: t^Jell we've got a couple choices here. [.Je can wait for you to
comc back with something or we've got peoPle, I know Jeff has exPressed
int6rest in that before and I don't know if we want to make'
Farmakes: It's cerLainly not a short term Project
are just so many things iL encompasses that you're
input.
Krauss: I've go! to be hOnest with you. I mean we tlant to do nork for you
that's of a high enough guality that it really represents a good efforL.
tJe've gotten to the Point where' even though develoPment's down, I think
we're quite busy. tle've all got new committees and commissions thaL uJe're
supporting, Respo ns i b i I i t i es not only to you but to senior commission,
Recycling Commission. To comp Sewer and t^iater sLudies. To surface tlater
programs. To Southwest Metro and we are frankly stretched Pretty thin so
the signage is something Lhat realIy warrants an effort where there's going
to be a r,rorking group on this that meets on a regular basis and is going to
need material prepared for those meetings and I'm honestlv real scared
about taking on those kind of responsibilities before we knoa that we can
do juslice to it.
Emmings: Haybe you ought Lo communicate that to the city Council since
they've specifically indicated that thev wanL us to get working on it.
Haybe you talk to them about it' I don't knor.r what else to telL you. I
think lhere are, I know there are a lot of issues on that list that
interest me more lhan the sign ordinance. And I knor.r that Jeff has a lot
of interest in Lhe sign ordinance. It mav be tha! we uant to have a
sub works on a sign ordinance and maybe Jeff could undertake that with
anybody else that wants to participate.
I uouldn't think. Ther e
going to need a lol of
BatzLi: Is that a motion?
Planning Commissioh
June 5, 7997 - Page
Heet i ng
59
Emmings: No. Just a suggestion. Haybe there'sCouncil Loo since they're promoting it who would
somebody on the Cityalso be inter'ested in ii..
Krauss: No question and Lhen I think ure have to go out to the Chamber ofcommerce and whoever erse. Get a cross section of opinion Lo work on that.
Emmings: WelI, again those people ought to be having input but shouldn'tbe on tlrt: comnittee as far as I'm concerned, but that,s just my otrn bias.Those people have, I'd rather have it be people Nho are on the Council andthe Comrnission.
Farma kes: You 'rerepresented?
lalking about not having Lhe Chamber of Commerce
Emmings: Right. I think they should beshould have input but I don,t think theyapproval on the final product.
meeling. I th.ink they
be putting a sLamp of
at the
should
Farmakes: I don't knor^t if I agree wiLh that.
Emmings: tJe1l I'm sure there wiII be a lot of people who don,t.
Krauss: There's also something to be said for having somebody like aNordquist 9ign represerrtative or something who can actually telI youtechnicall;- uhaL can and can't be done. r remember the most recent issueover here was it going to be 36 inches high or 24 inches hish and we'rebeing told that the sign companies said you physically can'i prt a neonlube in anyLhing that's uncier 24 inches. yeah, r know we said that but rdon't know if it's true or not.
Farmakes: I checked on that and it is true.
Emmi ngs: It is true?
Farmakes: It has to be a certain distance away fromIetter. There has to be a certain amount of cooling[.Je're talking about a back]it sign here,
Emmi ngs: Now
thi ngs .
itin ori
the
t wi I I melt the
back of it.
waiL. You sound Iike you're talking about tr^,o different
Farmakes: You're talking about the backlit on theabout that comment tha! was made i.n the notes thatheight to get them to a certain r.ridth.
Emm i ngs :
] etter s .they had
I'm tal kingto be a certa i n
Far nra kes :
And that 's true?
Yeah, you're Lalking about neon now?
Yeah.
t,e]I it's a neon tube inside the opaque plastic face.
Emm i ngs :
Kr auss:
PIanni ns Comm ission
June 5, 7997 - Page
HeeL i ng
50
Farmakes: f ura: talking about the character letter. As I understood it
was noL a nec,n tube.
Emmi ngs: t^JeI L , you've
that they've got to be
ordinance.
Emmings: The Bluff Protection Ordinance
Iittle bit. Now h,e've got another draft
our packet but I thought, and again it's
stuff again. I'm not clear why ule have
going to map out.
got to have the-technical expertise bu! I don't know
sitting on the body thal decides the shape of the
Ahrens: I absolutely agree with that.
Emmings: You need them there to tell you what vou can and can'L
technical suppor! staff as far as I'm concerned but I don't care
done. GeL the baII up and get rolling. r don't know hot'l ue're
set the ball roll j.ng on that.
do.
how
going
Thatir's
to
Farmakes: If it could conveyed correctly and if vou could bring in
business, t.here are advantages to having limitation of signage in some
businesses in a kind of competitive sense. Larger franchisees, Iarger
companies make it difficult for small store ou,ners to compete in some
j.nstarrces. There are examples that we have right here in town. The S and
A over on TH 7 and TH 41 and the difference iust across the street from the
pylons and more of lhose so we have a few examples of other business
people. It,d be interesting !o know whether or not that s & A for instance'h"u
"*p". ienced probl,ems with not being able to be seen. It doesn't seem
to be. There are plenlv of cars there.
Krauss: Well there's a couple of things in terms of our ability to staff
up things that are going to be happening over the summer which I think are
going to be real critical to what haPPened. t^le're getting Lhe surface
watei utility program hopefully off the ground by JuIy and August and we'll
be able to get a handle on what does this mean. t^le're Lrying to minimize
the cost asiocialed urith hiring, a consu.ltant by undertaking some of the
responsibilities ourselves. t^lelI, I',m not sure exactly what that means vet
and until we have a firm program clapped out, I won'! know. tJe have this
TH 5 corridor group. I fully expect this to spiral into something that
requires some regular meetings. t^le haven't asked the Council for formal
approval of it yet but we are looking Lo Lhe possibility of bringing on
somebody part time and we're going to see if we can work something out with
that so that would help a lot. So aII I can sav at this Point is I'II
keep you posted.
BLUFF PROTECTION ORDINANCE.
that we got, this confused me a
here daLed Hay 30 from Roger in
alt that language about hills and
Lhis because ure decided we were
Olsen: Yeah. tte also wanted to have the definition so if anyone questions
iL, we can tell them this meets the definition of a bluff.
Plannins Commissi on
June 5, 1991 - Page
l'4eet i ng
61
Erhart: Section 2O-L4O6 on the back page.
Olsen: t^Je do ,
is but it's not
t^Je havea b Iuff the official map and the definition of what a bluffif it's not on the map.
it can be
such as a
Emmings: So hJe're going to have all this language in here abouta hill? It's aII in there. A bluff means a topographic featurehiIl, cliff or errbankment having t.he fo]Iowing characteristics.
Olsen: Yeah but those other characteristics it's not.
Batzli: ft only applies Lo the bluff impact...
Emming:: Okay. That- makes sense.
Erhart : See that h,as one of my concerns. It r.,,asn't clear that if there'sa flat area in Lhe zone, they could still build on it. tle're notpreventing building in the bluff area. tJe're only preventing building onslopes uithin the bluff area.
nl
th
b1
sen
uff
: tJell, using thaL definition of the bluff,s ncl: part of the bluff. It might be on theso that's r,lhere you need those def i.nitions.
if you have a flat area,
map but it's not the
Krauss: So if ue have a flat area at the top, that shouldthe bluff district. If we have a bench lhat's midway downarea, LhaL's considered urithin the bluff because it's from
bot!cm.
be outside ofa steep bI uffthe top to the
Olsen: t^JelI if i!'s a certain ]eve] , then it doesn'L meet that definition.
Erhart: If it's big enough, it might not be.
Olsen: Then iL doesn't meet that definition of a bluff. Then you just
have two bluffs. AIso, I think it's getting late enough that ue don't needto get into. This will be a public hearing at the next meeting but we do
have, remember I told you the definition of the DNR where if you have thesteep slope and then it's just leve1 . That's still part of the bluff andthen you Lake your setback from that disLance - So they have changed that
now so it's, the bluff is like this and then stops here. That's the top
even if it's gradual Iike a Iittle hiII Lhere. This is the top. So I'IIthat neuJ language in here. So then you don't end up with 1OO foo! setback
frorn uihere the bluff. really is. I can pass Lhis down if you t^rant to readit.
Batz.Ii: In Section 1 of the definilion of bluff, number 2
more above the toe of the slope. Is toe of Lhe slope ever
25 feet or
def i ned?
Emmi nge: I thought hre urere going to define the bluff area, I thought r.re
decided to define the area Lhat the bluff protection ordinance applied to
by putting it on a map,
Planning Commi.ssion Meet i ng
June 5, 1997 - Page 62
olsen: I think thai's supposed to be toe
Krauss: Toe of the bluff is defined.
Batzli; To. of the bluff is defined butI just, maybe that's why I was confused.
Olsen: Yeah, I think it's supposed to be
double check that one.
of thd bluff.
that said toe of the slope and
ShouLd that be toe of the bluff?
toe of the bluff. But I'Il
Emmings: I'm done. Is anybody else done?
Conrad moved, Batzli seconded to adjourn the meeting.
and the motion carried. The meeting uas adjourned at
Submitted by Paul Krauss
Planning D i r ector
Prepared by Nann Opheim
All voted in favor
10:40 p.m . .
CITY OF
EH[NH[ESEN
690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDIJ}.{
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUB':
Planning Conmission
Paul Krauss, Planning Director
June 13, 1991
Report fron the Director
At the City Council rneeting of June 10,were taken.1991, the following actions
1
2
3
on the consent agenda, the Council approved the conditionaluse pernJ.t for construction of a storlge shed within 75 feetof the shoreland setb-ack at 102 Sandy Hook Road and gavesecond reading the ordinance anend:nent to clarify that theZoning Administrator is the planning Dj,rector or dlsignee.
The _Council approved a proposal to undertake feasibilitystudies for a senior housing developnent and a senior centeiLritltin the city. This program is- a recomnendation of theSenior citizen conmission and cou1d, if results are positive,lead to the construction of these facilities within- the next3 to 5 years. Staff uil,I keep the Commission inforned as tothe progress since these facilities couLd have a bearing onthe area in which they are located and this will nost protilfybe in and around the Central Business District.
The Council revielred the Downtorrn Traffic Study prepared bythe .f iTn of strgar-Roscoe-Fausch. this repori tr-aa ueeircommissioned by the HRA to get a handle on do:wntown trafficissues. The planning Conmission may reca11 thatrecommendations include signalization starting at the ZBthStreet-creat Plains intersection rrith the nost Iikelysecondary location being at Iilarket Boulevard. In attclition]the report concluded that the existing design of the downtownstreet- systen was. acceptable with sone nodifications,including the likelihood that four lanes wiLL be ""J.-=.{,west of llarket Boulevard on 78th Street.
Report fron Director
June 13, l99l
Page 2
The Council approved the zoning ordinance amendment providing
revisions to the PUD regulations for first reading. There lraslittte or no conment on this subject, in all probability dueto the late hour but also I believe due to the conmon visionthat is shared by the Planning Conrnission and the City Councilin its quest for high quality developrnent. We rril1 obtain
second reading of the ordinance at the next meeting and have
already begun to utilize it during developnent reviews.
Discussj.on of accessory structure ordinance. Recent
anendments to the accessory'structure ordinance clarified that
accessory structures over a certain size were subj ect toj.ncreased setback requirenents. The ordinance also cLarified
the definition of structure and accessory structure. Recentlystaff received several inquiries regardi.ng potential problenswith the ordinance. In several cases, the ordinance has
prevented the construction of in-ground switnnring pools xhosesurface area plus deck would exceed the 1000 square foot
requirement, thus tripping a 30 foot rear setback and a 10foot side setback. In another instance, there was anindividual who wished to build a 440 square foot sandbox and
was upset when he found out that this would require that a
setback be naintained. The sandbox would have been as largeas Dost two car garages and we later found out that theindividual was operating a legal cornrnerciaL day care out ofhis hone.
Staff asked the City Council if they rrished to re-evaluate the
ordinance in view of these requests. The conclusion rras thatthey did not wish to do so believing that the standards are
reasonable and prevent undue inrpacts of adjoining properties.
Therefore, staff will not be pursuing this natter further. Wealso note that the sandbox builder ultinately decreased thesize of the sandbox to below 399 square feet and thus rdas ableto satisfy nore lenient setback standards.
On Saturday, June 8, 1991, staff conducted a bus tour of theHwy. 5 corridor for nerolrers of the Planning Conmission, CityCouncil and HRA. Accompanying staff nas Barry Warner, alandscape architect with Barton Aschmann Associates who isworking rrith the HRA on dourltown and streetscape inprovementsalong flr.ry. 5, and BiIl Horrish, rrho is a professor at theUrban Design Institute at the University. The trip was ahighly productive kickoff to rrhat will be a long term corridordesign prograrn. Staff will discuss this iten nore fu1Iy atthe Planning Conmission ueeting.
5
1
Related ftens of fnterest
Report fron Director
June 13, 1991
Page 3
2.Arboretum land use issues. On several occasions in the past,staff rnentioned to the Planning Connission that the Arboietunwas attempting to becorne involved in local land use planningissues due to Peter O1inrs fears of the inpact of devLloprnenton this facility. Staff lrill present nore detailedinfornation on this rneeting to the ptanning Commission at themeeting.
CHINH,[ESEN
590 COULTER DRIVE . PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SU&T:
Planning Commission, city council and HRA
Paul Krauss, Planning oLre*or Ql-
Ytay 29, L99L
city Initiatives Affecting the Hwy. 5 corridor
BACKGROUND
The new city Conprehensive Plan has recently been approved for
adoption by the Metropolitan council , and the city is about to
embark upon an exciting and hopefully fulfilling process ofestablishing a community vision for the Hwy. 5 corridor. Beforestarting this program, I believe it vould be useful to step back
and gain an understanding of the trenendous anount of work that hasalready been acconplished over the past few years. In a verysignificant way, the Comprehensive PIan and other initiatives thatare outl-ined below have truly changed the ground rules regardingthe type of development that wiII occur and our expectations of
what the conmunity is going to become over the next ten years.
CO},IPREHENSIVE PI"AN INITIATIVES
1. General Overview
The new Conprehensive Plan was undertaken in part because we havea 1ega1 mandate to do so and in part because this is the only
rnechanism by which we are able to relocate the MUSA 1ine. However,
one of the primary goals of undertaking the new Comprehensive Planplanning process is to develop a vision of what our community is
and what it can becone and to start the process, through the LandUse Pl.an and Plan Text, of enacting this vision. The new
Cornprehensive Plan was developed with several goals in nind andthese are described in further detail below. It should bestressed, however, that the Comprehensive Plan was not deve).oped topromote grorrth at any cost, but rather a very conservative approach
was taken rrhereby selected and directed grosth becane the strategy.Even the uetropolitan Council, in their review of our p1an,indicated that r.re could have requested up to 4OO additional acresto the MUSA line, hohrever, there was a conscious decision during
CITY OF
Hwy. 5
Ylay 29 ,Page 2
3.
corridor
19 91
the preparation of the plan to only attenpt to accommodate what wasbelieved to be in the conmunity I s best interests.
2. Conmercial Developnent
The Conprehensive PIan focused retail cornmercial developnent in andaround the Chanhassen Central Business District. This was aconscious decision in keeping with the Cityrs long terln goals ofrenovating our downtorn. As you all will reca11, we have had'significant pressure to develop retail cornmercial elsehrhere alongthe H$ry. 5 corridor that has thus far been resisted. Chanhassen iiin a unique_ position of controlling its retail destiny. Unlikemany co nunities where. developrnent occurs just outsidE ttre cityIine that is destructive to the CBD, we lre in a position oicontrolling our destiny since the potential outlying commerciaLarea happens to be within our community. The non-CBD site mostoften discussed is the northeast t of the Hwy 5/4L area where litillsFleet Fanr has acquired property. The conmercial focus on the CBDalso allorrrs for significant improvements in the quality of retailcommercial that is deveJ.oped and the avoidance of strip -roads alongor adjacent to Hwy. 5.
5,/41 f nterse tion,/Hwv. 5 st dy Area
The Hwy. 5/41 intersection is of priniry inportance to the city forseveral reasons. It is a najor entrance to our conmunity tortraffic coning from the south and west; it is adjacent tb theMinnesota Landscape Arboretun, which lre regard as a iensitive landuse worthy of a strong. enphasis of protecting the sitei and,because there is extraordinarily high deveropnencpotential in thisarea which should be realized only after a good deal of thought.We note that the intersection is 5Ot in the control of theArboreturn hrhich owns land on the north and south of Hwy. 5 rocatedwest of Hrry. 41. The northeast corner is in part owned by MiIIsFleet Farm, but the city has designated this area as a 199-5 StudyArea. _This designation rras done in part to control prenaturecoranercial deveLopment and in part because this 1and was excessedto the ci.tyrs needs for land consurnption at this point in tine. Onthe south side of the intersection, the city enviaions high qualityoffice industrial development that is consiltent with uhal i; beinadeveloped on adjacent parcels in the City of Chaska, althoughhopefully of higher qual. ity.
4 N orth Side of Hwv. 5
In preparing the Conprehensive plan, the planning Conurission wasextrenely sensitive to a desire to avoid the dLvelopnent of acornmercial or industrial strip road along Hvy. 5. In !enera1, itis believed that the higher quality residen{ial land ias Locatednorth of Hwy. 5 due to topographic features and proxiurity of other
Hwy. 5
lqay 29 ,
Page 3
corridor
19 91
residential neighborhoods. Thus, the Comprehensive Plan envisionsthe entirety of the north side of Hwy. 5 as being developed forresidential uses. The south side of Hrry. 5 was broken down into anix of residential and office/industrial uses designed to use,
wherever possible, natural features to separate the different uses.
5. Middle School Site
The city worked lrith the Chaska school District to define their -
growth needs during the 1990s and it is believed that by 1995 theywill have a need to develop a new niddle schooL. We worked withthe school district to identify potential sites and eventuallysettled on one Located in the southeast guadrant of thej,ntersection of Galpin BouLevard and H}ry. 5. In this location, the
school site has fairly good proximity to nuch of chanhassen as well
as to other communities that !ri1l be served by the school . It alsois uniquely positioned to help bridge the Huy. 5 coridor withresidential-type developnent rrrhich was intentionally done to avoid
naking a residential island out of Timberwood Estates and the
surrounding area. In addition, the school site represents
considerable open space. out of approximately 40 acrEs being
looked at, 10 acres would be in buil,ding and hard surface rrith the
rernaining area permanentLy set aside as recreational open space.
The city is now conducting additional neetings with the schooldistrict and with potential developers of the area in an effort toget the site set aside for eventual construction of this facility.
6. Timberwood Area
This area was intensively studied during preparation of the Plan.
The result rras that the area located between Hwy. 5 and thesubdivision was guided for 1ow density residential uses. Horrever,the PIan would allow for office/ lndustrial uses only if they wereof particularly high quality from a standpoint of architectural,landscape and site design, preserved the school site and
environrnentafly sensitive features and developed to a relatively
low density. Vlhichever way this area is developed, we beLieve thatthere irill be a positive influence on the Hwy. 5 corridor.
7. Buffer Yard Concept
After extended discussion, the Planning Comnission settled on theconcept of establishing buffer yards to allow for more sensitivedevelopment and separation between land uses of differingintensity. The buffer yard concept requires an additional 50 feetof landscaped and screened setback area along external rights-of-way and 100 feet internally. These areas exist around theTinberwood subdivision and around the Arboretum, in addition tooccurring in a number of other places. The buffer yard isestablished by the Comprehensive Plan and an ordinance anendment
Hwy. 5 Corridor
May 29, 1991
Page 4
requiring its inpJ.enentaticjn has already been adopted in the cityzoning ordinance.
8. Public Open Space
The city already contains a huge amount of public open space.Included anongst these are Lake llinnenashta Regional park, theMinnesota Irandscape Arboretun, the Uinnesota River wildlife Refugewhich the city is working on with the U. S. Fish and WildliieService to expand the park boundaries and Iast, but not least, avery extensive park systen which is proposed for expansion, mostnotably Lake Ann Park, which represents a significant open space onthe Hwy. 5 corridor. Preservation of all of these arLas isoutlined in detail in the conprehensive plan.
9. Preservation of Natural Features
The comprehensive PIan provides directions for preservation of arecreational corridor along Bluff Creek, city pafks, the MinnesotaRiver Va11ey, the lr{innesota River Bluff Line ind uature trees andcreeks. Preservation of natural features is outlined in theComprehensive Plan and these areas, plus significant rretlands, areused to separate incompatible land uses hrherever possible. It ishoped that in conjunction with high quality landscaping plans whichwould be required with new development, that preiervation ofnatural features can be used to significantly break up theintensity of use along the Hwy. 5 corridor and rnaintain a feil forChanhassenrs natural environment as one travels through thecornmunity. In some cases I firnly beLieve te can do better thanwhat currently exists today. For example, the Bluff Creek Corridoralong Hwy. 5 has basically becone an agricultural fence line sritha few scattered trees. I believe that if this is acquired andprotected by the city as outlined in the Comprehensive plan anddeveloped as a recreational amenity, that we can offer significantimprovements over the status quo.
10. Surface water oual itv./Wetland preservation prooran
The Conprehensive Plan outlines the Surface Water Utility program,
which is the cityts water quality vehicle. In point oi fact, werrere able to get this prograrn off the ground in advance of theConprehensive Plan and f night, add that this significantly aidedour abiJ.ity to get the plan adopted by the trtetropolitan Council .work undertaken under this progran will be used to refine ourlretlands protection methodology along with water quality
improvernents and flood control efforts. Along the way theire aregoing to be opportunities for the city to use funds genelated underthe program to protect numerous water bodies that occur throughoutthe area which will then also serve as permanent open space. Ofcourse it goes r{ithout saying that this plan will be used to
Huy. 5
lqay 29 ,Page 5
Corridor
19 91
significantly refine our efforts
environment fron inpacts that night
new deveLopnent.
of protecting
otherr.rise have
the naturaL
occurred fron
LL. Hsrv. 5 Corridor Studv
The Huy. 5 corridor Study upon rrhich ue are currently ernbarki.ng isa direct result of the visioning process that was started by the
Comprehensive Plan. Initially this qrtew from an effort to definerrhat the Hwy. 5 1995 Study Area should be planned to accommodate,but has gro$rn into a visioning study for the entire highwaycorridor. It is a good exarnple how a comprehensive plan and the
work undertaken to conplete it enables people to get their thoughtstogether on their conmunity and take an active role in deterrnining
how it is to develop in the future.
1. site Plan Review Recruirement
Last year the city adopted a new site plan revj.eu ordinance
conplete with significantly irnproved standards. These standards
demand higher quality developnents and Dore accurately define thecityrs role in this process. This ordinance should play a najorrole ensuring that the cityrs desire to obtain quality developmentis achieved.
2. wetland Protection
The city has had a strong no-net-Loss wetlands progran for over 8years. As you are ar{are, no-net-loss wetlands protection is now a
reguirement of state law and your city pl.anning staff played a rolein drafting this legislation. Through the Surface Water QualityProgram, rre are proposing to officially nap retlands and revanp andupdate our qretland protection policy. Approval of our
Conprehensive Plan by the Metropolitan Councj.L rrras in part aided bythe fact that rre have a no-net-loss rretlands progran. Because ofcity initiatives like the no-net-Ioss wetlands protection,
Chanhassen tends to develop at a considerably lower densities than
have been experienced in Eden Prairie or Bloonington, for example.This feeling of openness that results fron no-net-Ioss uetlands isa significant factor in the feel of existing Chanlrassenneighborhoods and it will be perpetuated and irnproved upon in thefuture.
3. PUD Ordinance
The PLanning Conmission recently recommended approval of a new pUD
ordinance for by the City Council . Staff has been pushing thedevelopment of a new PUD ordinance since we believe it uiII be a
Htry. 5
May 29,
Page 6
corridor
1991
prinary and highly effective toot for developing large tracts ofland in the expanded MUSA area. The neu PUD ordinance provides fora definition of the cityrs expectations for quality/sensitive
development in exchange for the inproved design freedom andpotential cost savings provided for the developer through the useof this ordinance. The new ordinance also has sone very welldefined development standards to ensure that we get quality
developnent consistent with city goaIs.
4. Bluff Line Preservation
Whil.e not directly related to Huy. 5, the Planning Cornmission andstaff are currently r,orking on new ordinance Deasures designed toprotect the Minnesota River bluff line and tributary creek bLufflines. It is believed that this is a significant visual andenvironrnental area worthy of special protection and the ordinanceseeks to do this.
Staff and the Planning Connission are currently rrorking on irnprovedlandscaping requirements for all developments subject to site planreview in our conmunity. These standards would also require
enhanced landscaping for residentiat plats which are viewed undera separate section of the ordinance. fnproving landscaping
requi.rernents plays a significant role in the quatity of deveLopnentthat results during the site plan review process.
6- Tree Preserv tion Reouirements
The city has long naintained efforts to protect stands of maturetrees. We have been working with the DNR on rrhat is for then anexperirnental program of identifying tree stands worthy of specialprotective neasures. Ordinance changes designed to accomplish thisgoal will be proposed in the near future. Preservation of Daturetrees along with plantings of new naterial along Hwy. 5 wiII allowthe conrnunity to avoid the strip road vista that occurs elsewhere.
7. New Shoreline Protection Recrulations
Staff is currently in the process of working with the DNR todevelop new and inproved shoreline protection ordinances.
HRA INITTATIVES
1. Highwav 5 Desion Effort
The HRA has been actively involved in design improvenents to beincorporated on nainline Hwy. 5 in conjunction with its expansion
5. Tmproved LandscaDinq Recruirernents
H!ry. 5 Corridor
Ylay 29 , )-991
Page 7
fron trro to four lanes. These design eLements include specialpaving treatments, monumentation, landscaping and signage, atldesigned to ensure that the driver knorrs that he or she is passing
through a special conmunity. It is not unreasonable to think thatas IIwy. 5 is expanded further to the west that sirnilar elenentsshould be incorporated.
2. Clearance or Improvement of Bliqhted Sites
The ERA is actively involved in the clearance of a nuDber of sites
which are visually blighting influences and irnprovernents to othersthat are to remain in p1ace. Anong these properties include the
Taco shop and App1e valley Red-E-Uix which are scheduled to beacquired in part or entirety with the realignnent of Hwy. 101.AdditionalLy, the HRjA has recently acquired property around theperineter of the Hanus buiLding and it is in the process ofcleaning up these sites as weII as working rrith the owner torenovate the Hanus building and landscape the exterior. The IIRAparticipates directly in our dorrntown renovation program andthrough the use of tax increment financing in the forn ofsubsidies, can exercise considerable controt over neu deve).opmentof this area in the future. In a sinilar vein, if tax increnentfinancing is used on developments new to this area, this financingr
mechanism can be used to exact site design irnprovenents beyondthose required by the ordinance in exchange for the financialconsiderations.
3. CBD Redevelopnent
The Long years of rorking to redevelop Chanhassenis CBD as thevibrant center of our connunity is norr achieving its goals. Theoverall design effort has nade the iurportance of this area clear toall who experience it. There has already been a considerableanount of new and renovated development and it is now appearinglikely that work on lr{arket Square and a new bank will start Laterthis year.
Strf Pioto by J..ry Hon
ql+rE Gai ht3r a carl tdta lbr, !E t!.iotd lI, 'ilq'E trgdr lln frit ql
'
lr Zd't Lr' h trttr"rllt
Cities look harder at cul-de-sacs
Too much of a good thing can be bad, they find
ItMIl.L.d
SufrWrilcr
Hor t!l!, od+.6 al! to
6r!yod+€?
h'! r ouaarion bina atLd lrdt
frcou.'otlv i! auburbia rh.rt lb
cutic-rr. r dcrd<ad nrct
caDoad br r tadl rutlaroutA b
t iq iffir.5ilaly Er|tilirall
Hou!6 oD cul+r.t fu{Ell}y
fct b h[htr pric6 bdur of D
lirourh urfiq kr! .Ir!a!l3
or., iui.t t EiAborbood. ad
lc! *orq .bul childra C.YIBi! |ha r taal.
-P.oDk rould rr"ftt lo h od'
d.-'rai.' taid Jrnca Odrua, I
lon8i dtG$burbD d.YcloD.r. 'A'
.rlld+rra (toDa) codt aor!.
ThcrE r t 9r!fi iuE alaoairllal
airi i!'
8ur 3uburb! othcirh tr!
baa|nrias to rotrd.' ?talllr le
nuny culda.aad hoda uP I otY
rad rD.t il hrtd ro tlr 116
roflL Solrc citial old at Eda!
hriric- m? hlv. t ,olif
orohibitior'uDD...3.at' o[al'
ils Th. E!.D Pniric l.tdl
dr3tricr aho $ll noi *!d htG
iDro cul{a-as lEur il ca! ll
difiofib q!! u!$td i! liic
So@ grtotb! of6ci.b ray rbcy
.r. rcrii lhr Gdd..$ !lat!
h irr& fa artt|rLE rld 6r.
Eudr io tlt atould lb cit,
ouidlv. tf,{ G., L.vr
;owDlo*r rith m tLa. to liLEr'.rd e, cvto dirnid.b Oa
qolity of &itti{ rtl.t
gt r Itr,nroult hd aosnlG4 il
t d ato;$dGs, trd up ro l5
trl .ddcd c..t !,4r. Th.l iL
r,rrhd ia r cotfi,.iqiuour d
orcrl thrt &o'r coou - 6t
ilnaE, 29rl AY. 6 ti. catr .il.
o(tL city rld ahh AY. d tb
rat rvtr Dgl
Ar oflrd tl\ !92 o(E&n
hriri.'. trblic dr!.$ crdcd i!
orb.r.!, ud Frh.F lO Dd!
cd{cla.t r€tt oo Fiv{a l6da.
Minrtonh . tuburt Brc llY
En s brvi4 ltc 6oar cub_
E, Dry baYC b call
-W. rotaHt 16l aoual
roe*trcrt rhcr rO or m. . . .
W. do brva a! reful lot oflh
tcr.,- trid Tctl} S.tLro.
tt.irlllt ciq tu!.t. .
S.r(t Krn Hrnull! I w@dt.lt,
ciry omci.l 'Th. PluEila
I>BnItlc stdtY hat r 9otk,
. . .-(rBubtint) dE Lrt$ gfcul
ib.s lnd tha luEt.l ofculG
6._ Tb. titv haa l9t culdcs
ard mr ,.riiir ool, od f(r
crl', !0 t[Eivirb LB -
Did C.tbuir. PtrEr!'t
annor oforUi n&O, nid lhc
plr.. FBr.ny dool htvt r
FlblctD FiB lrouttd !.gltt
o(o*dFas, tut h. ar6 ltl
Errlr & h.Y! I hl,d lill
nlr ca.ro{td i! 6cD"
'9. LrE a ld 04.b.0,-
Crrbuir rA of rt cu!&E
H. .id.d rir.h . hu.!- 'But 6.
citt't Etr.r dBisrcd rDr.! rLl
rf,; did r'ilh Milrqoab" Tt
ti6; fvr drivlo oor dt r! I 6rd
Elrlf pitt b.t !a m?t r.._
Tba ir$r tlcantly calta ro r iaad
i! Ed.! P itic with wdta!
Punrtotr, CrEl 6ll Additioc.lv.iAout. crlloriot ol l!
.riirli rubdrvitirc Tb
ilv.lorr rtd tb. ncithldr
rrDcd ro 9(t!.wa a ntaat orltrad
wdrlr! waY a! a culda_E cvat
ritr $. oc; bou*. r,t'l ddd.
Bd $. cin. rhi'h hlr a goliq
$rl m a;l cr{int ir I cr|!+
B €r h. loDtct thrn 5@ ft.!'
Ltbd tlta!. ir t r lhrtri. E*
booraa rodd caura W fiwt,
ro b.Eo@a. l,5ocfoodort3 d.d
ard ot l. Artlou3b tb city
cYllldly dlotl.d ti ort4c
..licrr!- |l dl8rcIfiiq, ro
f, d oui atidy hor tDa!, ol!.'
s Eh P?rnt b.lr.
'I tlint tlartt a r lrolt. cnricr
i! ri. rt3i&ntid rrlaa 6r flL
rbe rlt ni.r ro liv. i!,- !.ll
G6. Diro, lh. citYi FtUa
Dri IrE.i.t orH.E or{.r
vrri.r, of EobLar itd'ditl a
brrr ouliD ofdtinlint fltli.
H. qii cid; .I uturlb foc.d to
isull . dard.nd erE ndni!a
cuH.L Ttrf !.kt E)ia,
EdE tLc auEbrt ofdirtaiitE
rrEr oo lbr. rtrcl c! brrt
ir ovErl eudit,.
'Wa'r rol to trt*c tlrl! DaogL
crn id 6on I'oitl a to Poi.r ll"
oalcea Hrrir ea E&a Prriric
crw Couril EaEtd ibo ]tatt
6oi! rquLtonr for cul{.'s.
'ulrilnaaly, thc fcY.r uroualr_
drlala rr l[va, tha lDo(t
coo|lrd tlG, riI E.-
E
ta. ttulYTl}rsdai/ut &'lSl
REVTSED JUNE 14, 1991,
1
ONGOING ISSUES
comprehensi.ve Pl-an Issues
1995 Study Area (North)
and Ewy. 5 Corridor Study
2. 1995 Study Area (South)
OTHER ITEIIIS
1. Blending ordinance
2. Rezoning BF Dist. to A2
3. * Bluff Protection
ordinance
4. Sign ordinance
Tree Protection Ordinancellapping of significant
vegetative areas
6.* Rezoning 2\ Acre Lots to RR
STATUS
1995 Study Areas - Work effortto begin after adoption of newConp PIan. Council isreguesting that this be
conbined with a Hwy. 5 corridorsttrdy developed by a joint
PC/Cc/resident/developer taskforce. Joint Pe/CC/IIRACorridor Bus Tour held on June8, 1991.
Inactive
Staff directed to deveLop
scenarios - Iow priority
staff directed to draft apotential new zoning districtordi.nance. Fish & wildlife
and DNR have agreed to expand
refuge boundary to include allIand lying south of Hwy.
L69/212.
Draft to the Planning
Conmission - Public Hearing
June 19, 1991.
fnactive/cc has reguestedacceleration of work on new
ordinance.
MnDNR undertaking accelerated
roapping progran and will workwith city to develop. New
ordinancer/springr/summer, 1991
Schedule public hearing on JulyL7, L99L.
7. wetland ordinance
5.
Budgeted noney for update 2year tirneframe for storn waterutility fund - consultant short
8. Shoreland ordinance
list establishedin late June.
Interviews
In January we receivednotification fron the UnDNRthat we are a priority
colDmunitywitha2year
deadL ine
19 91l inactive
city request to el.ininatenininum lot size requirenentshas been subroitted to lltetroCouncil. Approval is expectedby late April . Ordinancerevisions required.
Planning Connission reviewed onJune 5, 1991. Schedule onfuture PC agenda.
10.
9 Group home ordinance
Rural Area Policies -
11. Landscaping standards
l-2. * PUD ordinance
13. PC input in Downtown
Planning and Traffic Study
14. Review of Architectural
Standards to Pronote High
Quality Design
15.Bluff Creek Corridor
Greenway
* Change in status since 1astreport
Adopted by CC. Work continuingon Residential PUD standards.
19 91longoing
19 91
L99L/lee2