Loading...
PC 2007 08 07 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 7, 2007 Acting Chair Papke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kurt Papke, Mark Undestad, Debbie Larson and Kathleen Thomas MEMBERS ABSENT: Jerry McDonald, Dan Keefe and Kevin Dillon STAFF PRESENT: Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer; and Joe Shamla, Project Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A STORM WATER POND ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3300 TANADOONA DRIVE, PLANNING CASE 07-17. Public Present: Name Address Gretchen Starks 3301 Tanadoona Drive Alyson Fauske presented the staff report on this item. Papke: Okay, we'll start with Commissioner Larson. Larson: I want to know what an environmental manhole is. Fauske: Certainly. An environmental manhole is a large storm sewer structure and what it does it has, it essentially will swirl water in through the manhole and through that swirling action some of the sediments will drop down. Larson: So is it a covered thing or is it an open hole or? Fauske: It's covered. Larson: Okay. Fauske: Completely covered underground. Larson: So it's not something you would see driving down a road? Fauske: You wouldn't even see it. It would just appear as a regular manhole cover. The whole system is under ground. It's a large chamber. Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 2007 Larson: Okay. Thank you. Fauske: You're welcome. Thomas: I do have a question on option 1. What is the impact? You said the feet on the option 2 I believe the impact. What's the impact on option 1? Fauske: Option 1 is 6,000 square feet of impact. Thomas: Thank you. No other questions. Undestad: No. No questions. Papke: So just to make sure I understand the visibility from the lake here with Option 2 with, I think you mentioned it was about 60 so, 60 feet or so of tree coverage. Fauske: 640. Papke: Are we expecting this to be completely invisible from the lake so boaters going by won't even know this is there? Fauske: That's correct. Papke: Okay. You also mentioned that there was some differential in the tree impact there. Any trees of substance in the area? Are these you know scrub trees? Elm or are these big oaks and maples. Qualitatively, should we be concerned about tree loss or anything of that sort? Fauske: Qualitatively a lot of them have sustained some damage because of the seasonal inundation…in looking through the report, I don't know that, I think she said that was mostly sugar maples, basswood forest in the upland area. And there's not a lot of upland area within the area we'd be ponding. Papke: Yeah. I'd expect there to be box elder, you know things that would survive degradation. Fauske: Correct, and ones that could not sustain the inundation have died. Papke: Alright. Alright. Any differential in visibility to the surrounding properties? The home to the south is reasonably close to this. From their perspective, would there be any qualitative difference in the two proposals? Fauske: Yes there will. There'll be some tree clearing along through here and we'll be talking to the property owners and it's staff's recommendation to provide up to 6 trees that are appropriate for one, the slope and two, the amount of water in the area to give him some screening. We wanted to leave it open so that the property owner could work with staff so that we're not saying we will be putting in these types of trees. We wanted to work with him. See what his screening 2 Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 2007 requirements are. Does he want something more in line with what was in previously or would he like to see maybe screening with an evergreen so we're remaining flexible with that, to work with the property owner. And then to the north where the camp is, we've been having a lot of conversations with the camp. You know there was a lot of, is this an attraction for campers to head over there and there's actually quite a substantial wooded area from their beachlot for them to travel and find the storm water basin. We feel that it's really quite well hidden. Papke: Any other questions of staff? Larson: One more. Can you point out on the map where the drainage manhole is? Fauske: Certainly. The drainage manhole that we've already shown, and I apologize it's not a really clear drawing. This would be the roadway. Through here. The manhole option would be approximately at this location. Papke: Okay. At this point I'd like to open up the public hearing for public comments. If there's any members of the community that would like to get up and speak or ask questions on these, please do so. If you'd step to the podium please and give your name and address for the public record. Gretchen Starks: Everybody knows me. Gretchen Starks, 3301 Tanadoona Drive. I just had a question on the property, on the new construction, it's my understanding that it would put curb and gutter up, is it going to be from my driveway all the way around or is it just halfway down now? Fauske: There's two different kinds of curb. Of curb and gutter style they're looking at. On the north side is what we call high back. It's where it meets the 90 degree curb, and that's because of the slopes on the camp property and to get good flow characteristics through that. On the south side, near where your wetland complex is, it's called a ribbon gutter and that's essentially just a concrete gutter to go and channel the flow and to keep the drainage characteristics. Gretchen Starks: Probably going down to flow, and there will be a culvert going down over to the new retaining pond, is that correct? Fauske: There will be two culverts. Gretchen Starks: From my, where mine is? Nothing has been changed so. Papke: It might be helpful to point out where she lives. Fauske: Certainly. Mrs. Starks lives at this location right there. Papke: Oh, okay. Fauske: What she's referring to Commissioner Papke is that there's a wetland complex right through here. On the north side we're not putting storm sewer in the majority of Tanadoona 3 Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 2007 Drive because of grades, so we're leaving that to the existing flow conditions which is going to the south to the wetland complex through here, and what we're looking at, what Mrs. Starks question is, as we've been working with her and her folks to come up with a plan for some… running along here, her driveway location is right here. The wetland is coming in in this location at the west side of the berm because we're unable to get this storm sewer to the pond that we're proposing so this will carry a little bit of runoff. There's an existing culvert right here so we need to put some storm sewer in through here and then of course further, keep it further to the west we'll be replacing the culvert that existingly connects those two drainageways. Gretchen Starks: So the berm should also keep some of that south and stuff from the road…? Fauske: Correct. Gretchen Starks: Storms in the. Fauske: Yes. It will channel it to the west. Gretchen Starks: Excellent. That's all I wanted. Papke: Thank you. Any other members of the public like to comment or question? Okay. Seeing none, bring it back to the commissioners. Any comments? Issues? Things you want to discuss? Larson: No, I'm good. Papke: Alright, I'll entertain a motion. Larson: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council Wetland Alteration Permit. Is this the correct one? Papke: Yep. Larson: 0-17 to permit 2,100 square feet of wetland alteration subject to the following conditions, 1 through 4. Papke: Okay. Is there a second? Thomas: Second. Larson moved, Thomas seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the Planning Commission approve Wetland Alteration Permit 07-17 to permit 2,100 square feet of wetland alteration subject to the following conditions: 1.Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, 4 Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 2007 according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (Maximum time an area can Steeper than 3:1 7 days remain open when the area 10:1 to 3:1 14 days is not actively being worked.) Flatter than 10:1 21 days These areas include constructed stormwater management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a stormwater conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 2.A minimum of six trees will be planted on site. Native species shall be used. 3.Tree protection fencing shall be installed at the edge of grading limits prior to any construction activity. 4.Tree removal limits shall be inspected by the Environmental Resources Specialist prior to any removals.” All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Undestad noted the summary and verbatim minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated June 19, 2007 and the summary minutes of the work session meeting dated July 17, 2007 as presented. OPEN DISCUSSION: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION: TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT. Papke: So now we'll have our open discussion of the comprehensive plan. Members of the public you're welcome to stick around to listen to this. It's not a public hearing. We won't be voting on anything. This is, but if you'd like to hear a little bit about what's happening with transportation, you're welcome to listen. Do we want to meet informally or should we stay up here? Generous: You can stay up there. I don't have anything to put up. Well I have this. Part of it, we'll talk about some of the road projects. As everyone probably heard, the 212, or 312 project is ahead of schedule and so we're looking at the opening up to 41 this year potentially instead of just to Powers Boulevard so that's, will be nice for us. We won't have the end of the freeway here and hopefully it will help with some of our local road issues. We're looking at working with Victoria, Waconia, and Norwood-Young America on expanding the Highway 5 west from Chanhassen. Right now it's 4 lanes up to the 41 and then it goes back to 2 lanes. Within both the county, Chanhassen's comp plan and the County plan we know that it needs to be widened. The County comp plan is looking at potentially having that 4 lanes west of Victoria by 2030 so. So we're working on that. That's the assumption they're going on. We'll see if there's enough 5 Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 2007 funding to do that. The draft Environmental Impact Statement for the new river crossing, the th comment period ends on the 10. The City has prepared a summary letter that we're going to, there's some issues that, minor issues we have in the EIS itself. DEIS. But basically we did an analysis, a matrix analysis of the rankings for the 4 alternatives and we, the two alternatives that they actually tied for the least impacts based on our analysis were the W2, which is the most westerly one, and the C2. The worst one was actually the C2A and the two easterly alignments in Chanhassen so. Papke: So did the City of Chanhassen make a recommendation for one of those roads? th Generous: Not yet. They have a meeting on the 8 that they're going to and then they'll send our letter after that. Papke: I think it was in the Villager or something like that. There was some discussion about apparently Carver wasn't real happy with the westerly route. Generous: Well and also Chaska had said that that was their preferred alignment and so. Papke: Right, I know there was some controversy about the historical nature of the property that they wanted to run it through the old fair grounds or. Generous: As they said and you probably read in the article that no one really wants it in their community. Papke: Right. Generous: They want, everyone agrees that we need a river crossing but. Papke: It's the old NIMBY problem. Not in my back yard. Generous: And so we tried to do it, you know based on the information in the DIS and rank each alternative by social, environmental impacts and it actually came out that those two were, they tied. I did the matrix. I didn't know what the end result was. I just you know, what the best alternative for each measure that we looked at and there were like 8 that we used and so, so that will be going on. And then the rest of them, we're looking at some transit issues and let's see here. Hennepin County and the eastern communities, and the color doesn't show up very well on those maps. This map represents the corridors that are under study for transit ways. One, a commuter rail. Dedicated bus ways and light rail transit. The commuter rail line would be along the Twin Cities and Western line which runs through downtown Chanhassen. Initially as part of the proposed study they were proposing to use Galpin and Lyman as approximately the station for, the train station and we told them that was unacceptable for the City of Chanhassen. That it needed to be in our downtown area. That met all of the characteristics of, for transit oriented development. It had mixed land uses. We have the park and ride facility there. We would look at expanding that and so we said somewhere between Market Boulevard and Great Plains is a target area that they should look at as part of this study. And so they've agreed to do that. As part of the light rail transit, there's two phases. There's a group transit league, group that St. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 2007 Louis Park, Eden Prairie and Hennepin County has been leading the charge on, and they're looking at, there's 3 alternatives that they're going onto the next phase of environmental review to try to determine which would be the least impact on that. And then from where their study ends and their trail line, light rail line would end, it would start in the Chanhassen and there's two alternatives we're looking at. The primary one is in the 312 corridor. Down the middle, it's been designed to permit that. And then we're also advising that they should continue to look at the southerly Hennepin County Regional Rail trail corridor that goes down on the, close to the river bluff. And what their response to us was that if the alternative looks viable as part of this initial study, that it was close enough so that they would look at both alignments to determine in the next phase if it was worth going forward and so we just wanted to leave that open. Because we have this, there's some things down on the old 212, Flying Cloud Boulevard that we might do differently if light rail transit goes into there. So we are looking at some land use changes that either alternative would work for but that one we might add additional multi-family down there. Papke: Are anything of these projects between Highway 5 and the light rail, commuter rail, anything we should be thinking about for the comp plan that we're working on here? The impacts. Generous: Not really. It's just, we're saying that we're open to all these as part of the comp plan and we'll support the study. We have provided opportunities to make it work in our community, if they use the 312 corridor, down at 101 there's already the park and ride facility that's going in there and there's some commercial and multi-family development taking place there. If we do the regional mall, from a land use standpoint, so it's really the land use standpoint and the development alternatives. We could, as planners we're going to recommend that we look at the development at any of the station locations, but that would, in downtown we already do that. Papke: Speaking of the regional mall, the only thing I noticed looking at these is, is none of these go past the regional mall so. Generous: Only the 312 corridor would. Papke: The 312 and the light rail both come within maybe a half mile or something like that but unlike the Mall of America for instance where light rail stops right at the mall. It looks like none of these would actually stop right at the mall, is that correct? Generous: Yeah, the closest would be at Powers and. Papke: Or Lyman there it looks like. It looks like one of the light rail alternatives has a stop on Lyman Boulevard there. Generous: Yeah, and that can, that's really a design phase because what the study will do is use that traffic analysis information and see if it's, what works feasible. You have to do a benefit cost analysis is one of the things that they do. One of them, will it move enough people in that given location, so the interesting thing about the commuter rail is it will go all the way out to Norwood-Young America so we wouldn't be the end of the line here so I think that is, actually if 7 Planning Commission Meeting - August 7, 2007 you look at the numbers, it's quicker. That comes in to go downtown from Chanhassen than to take light rail. Papke: Fewer stops. Generous: Yes. At least they're looking and still, there's no funding for any of this. Papke: So in terms of our 2020 comp plan, none of these are likely to have any impact. You mentioned Highway 5. We're talking 2030. These are probably 2020 at this point? Generous: Yeah, well our next comp plan will be a 2030 plan so we can recommend it and we encourage that we go look for federal and state funding and local cooperation. But we really, we're not the lead in any of this so. Papke: Very useful. Very helpful. Generous: And then you know as part of the whole commuter rail thing is we're not the only corridor that they're looking at. They have a whole octopus of lines that would go out. The North Star, it hasn't had funding. Only the first one that's done. It will tie into downtown and the Hiawatha rail line and then you have the central corridor between Minneapolis and St. Paul's probably the next light rail line to go forward but we're all trying to make sure that our future facilities are being looked at now. And they become part of the Met Council's awareness and MnDot's. Then I have you know, the only thing I really would be in here is I did the draft transportation goals and policies. I had mostly what we had in the past. I've updated it with some different roadways but pretty close to what's there now. That we do, I think we do a good job of planning local traffic in the regional systems and inserting transit opportunities in most developments. Papke: Okay. Any questions anyone? Okay. I think we're done. Acting Chair Papke adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 7:25 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 8