Loading...
1981 09 09 e MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 9, 1981 AT 7:30 P.M. CHANHASSEN COUNCIL CHAMBERS APPROVED ON ~'9~ J Members Present: Chairman Art Partridge, C. Watson, H. Noziska, W. Thompson, J. Thompson, L. Conrad and M. Thompson. Members Absent: None Staff Present: B. Waibel, S. Martin, and B. Foreman Conditional Use Permit Amendment Requ~st, Hanus Auto and Truck Repair, 229 West 79th Str_eet, Donald Hanus: W. Thompson made a motion to move to Item #2 on the agenda because Item #1 was cancelled. Watson seconded the motion. All voted in favor and the motion was carried. Present: Don Hanus and Pat Swenson Bob Waibel, City Planner, read the Council Committee. Waibel pointed imately 20' between the buildings. that he may be able to purchase an recommendations of the City out that there will be approx- The applicant had indicated additional 50' to the east. e Partridge asked Mr. Hanus, the applicant, if he had any comments. Hanus indicated that he did not. Pat Swenson, from the City Council, stated that this is a hugh building but it will look better than the outside storage that is there now. Hanus stated that he realizes that the building needs to be painted and fixed up a bit. W. Thompson indicated that the recommendation made by the City Council regarding the webbing by the railroad track was unnecessary. There is nothing beyond this property on that side except for a cemetary and requiring webbing would just be an added expense for the applicant. Swenson explained that in the winter it is easy to see onto his property, also there are road repair trunks that will be parked outside occasionally. Hanus expressed that the fence the City Council recommended is very expensive. Hanus also expressed his feelings regarding the City of Chanhassen. Swenson stated that she did not realize that that type of fence was so expensive. M. Thompson asked Hanus what type of work does he do in the building that is there now. Hanus explained that he does welding, auto and truck repair. - M. Thompson asked if the City Council and Hanus had come to any type of agreement. Swenson indicated that there had been no agreement but recommendations have been presented to the City Council. Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 1981 Page 2 e J. Thompson asked Hanus how many employees he has. Hanus indicated that he has 22 daytime employees. Watson asked what size the existing building is. Hanus stated that the existing building is 220 x 80 feet, just alittle smaller than the proposed building. Noziska expressed his feelings regarding moving in a metal building into this area. He was concerned about setting a precident, maybe should look into this more closely. Scott Martin, Community Development Director, stated that in the proposed zoning ordinance metal buildings are not allowed except for farm uses. Conrad asked why the berm, plantings and fence. Swenson explained that that was recommended because it would be easier to main- tain than mowing the grass. Hanus asked the Planning Commissio'n if his business is an eye- sore. M. Thompson stated that there seemed to be a lot of signs on his property, someone indicated that they had been moved. Hanus indicated that he is proposing to move in a steel building not a pole building. He can't afford to put up a new building it would be much to expensive. Partridge asked the purpose of the building. Hanus stated for storage. e Martin indicated that the screening is legitimate but the extra building is making a non-conforming use more non-conforming. Watson asked Swenson if the proposed building would be an improve- ment to the property. Swenson replied that the outside storage is the problem. Something has to be done to remedy the situation, maybe moving in another building is not the best answer but it will be better than what it's like now. Martin stated that another building is not needed, screening would be enough. Hanus explained that he needs more room any- way for more storage. Partridge asked the Planning Commission to express their feelings on the metal storage building. Noziska stated that with the downtown Redevelopment project just a few blocks away this building might not fit in with their plans. Should look at other areas that have allowed this sort of thing. W. Thompson asked Noziska what he recommends. Noziska stated that maybe a cement building. e e . e Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 1981 Page 3 Conrad stated that he has no as it is painted, recommends south rather than east/west. problem without the building it is screened properly. problems with the building as long that the building be placed north/ He also stated that he has no and just berming as long as Watson prefers the north/south location of the building also. Would like it to be screened but can't really screen trucks. If the building is the best alternative than she is for it. W. Thompson explained that he has no objections with the building as long as it is properly maintained. M. Thompson stated that if Hanus agrees with these conditions and the Committee from the City Council agrees than he sees no problems with this request. J. Thompson stated that he felt that trees and screening would be enough. Partridge indicated that he has no objections to the building, the appicant needs more storage space. Partridge asked the Planning Commission to express their feelings on the fence. W. Thompson indicated that the fence shouldn't be required on the north side. Partridge indicated that he has no objections, Conrad stated that fences are ugly. Hanus explained that the fence is already there. Noziska stated that he likes to see plantings, he has no problem with slates. Swenson stated that Hanus is to work with the City Forester regarding the type of plantings. Watson stated that webbing is good for now to give the plantings time to grow. J. Thompson indicated that he likes the plantings and webbing. M. Thompson had no comments. W. Thompson stated the the webbing is immaterial if there are plantings. Swenson explained that there is a fire hydrant on the north but could allow approximately 3 parking spaces on the street for overflow parking. Most of the customers should park by the office. Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 1981 e Page 4 Martin stated to the Planning Commission that if a piece of property doesn't have enough room to park both the employees and the customers and then wants to put more on the property, then the property is being over utilized. Each site in itself should be able to support itself. Hanus indicated that Minnesota Roadways are still going to park their trucks outside. Swenson stated that this should be checked out with Dale Geving. Maybe the public hearing should not be held until this is straightened out. This was not the interpretation that she had. Swenson stated that the Planning Commission should consider alternatives if the applicant cannot purchase 50' to the east. Hanus stated that if he can't get the land then he could make an L shaped building. The extra building would fit somewhere. e Motion was made by Watson and seconded by J. Thompson to table the request by Donald Hanus for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment Request until discussion between Hanus and the City Council Committee has taken place to clarify the proposed use for the new building. The staff will have the authority to- set the time for a public hearing regarding this item. The Planning Commission concurs with the recommendations of the city Council as follows: 1. The applicant will begin immediately to arrange for webbing of the fence on the South alignment of his property from the south east corner of the building to the eastern corner and along the north fence to the east property line. 2. Upon receipt of the required permits, the applicant will flatten the berm on the south side of the fence only so much as to allow cutting and mowing of same and planting of bushes or trees along the top of said berm (the committee advised that this be done with the advice of the City Forester as to what type and size of plants should be used) . 3. The applicant will arrange for parking on the north and east inside the fence lines of the property so as to eliminate the need for employee parking along West 79th Street. e 4. The applicant requests permits necessary to move a building (now being used as a bus storage building located just south of the Industrial Park on Williston Road) onto the eastern end of his property. This is a metal building approximately 85' x 201' and 20 feet high rising to 24 feet at the center roof line. This building has 4 large overhead doors at each end. It is proposed that this building be placed toward the south end with the doors at the east and west ends. The location of the proposed building will be aligned such with Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 1981 Page 5 4It the property lines so as to allow only enough room for a driveway between the fence and the building. Said building shall be used to store all vehicles and other outside storage and shall eliminate all outside storage except for 2 or 3 new vehicles to be parked on the south side in front of the existing building inside the fenced in area for display purposes. 5. The proposed building will be painted a color to conform to the present color and shall be maintained so as not to become an eye sore problem. 6. The applicant will remove signs not in accordance with sign permit and will apply for any future desired change. 7. The applicant has requested that customer parking be allowed on the easterly 50% of the north side of West 79th Street not including the cul-de-sac. The Planning Commission also concurs with the Staff recommendations as follows: e 1. Provide a grading and landscaping plan for the area between highway 5 and the subject property. 2. Clarify the extent to which the newly proposed storage building will impact the maneuvering of vehicles between the existing building and the proposed storage building. 3. Post a filing fee of $100 & an escrow account of $700 with the City Treasurers office to defray staff cost in processing this application. 4. Provide the City with an abstractor's certificate indicating the names and addresses of the property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. Watson, J. Thompson, Partridge, and W. Thompson voted in favor, M. Thompson and Noziska voted against this motion. The motion was carried. M. Thompson stated that he did not feel that screening on the north side was necessary. Noziska indicated that this site is being over used, doesn't agree with the building. Discussion,' proposed Revisi'oht'o' Cha'nha'ssehZonihg Ordinance: The Planning Commission began to discuss the B-1, Limited Business Zoning District. e e . - Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 1981 Page 6 A motion was made by M. Thompson and seconded by Conrad to approve the August 12, 1981 Planning Commission minutes as presented. Conard, M. Thompson, Watson, and W.Thompson voted in favor, Partridge, Noziska and J. Thompson abstained and the motion was passed. Motion was made by M. Thompson and seconded by Conrad to approve the August 26, 1981 Planning Commission minutes as presented. Partridge, J. Thompson, W. Thompson, Conrad, Noziska and Watson voted in favor, M. Thompson abstained and the motion was passed. The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 a.m.