PC Minutes 02-16-10
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 16, 2010
Acting Chair Laufenburger called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mark Undestad, Kathleen Thomas, Tom Doll and Denny
Laufenburger
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Debbie Larson, Dan Keefe and Kevin Dillon
STAFF PRESENT:
Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; and Angie Kairies, Planner
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Bobby Jensen 7568 Arbor Lane, Savage
Andrew Aller 460 Trapline Lane
Jim Schaffran 845 Creekwood Drive
Jessie Bent 2779 Century Circle
Colleen Dockendorf 2061 Oakwood Ridge
Whaley 851 Lyman Boulevard
Jack Appert K.A.
PUBLIC HEARING:
SCHAFFRAN VARIANCE: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A
RETAINING WALL WITHIN THE BLUFF IMPACT ZONE ON PROPERTY ZONED
AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT (A2) AND LOCATED AT 845 CREEKWOOD
DRIVE. APPLICANT: BOBBY JENSEN’S LANDSCAPE JUNCTION. OWNER:
JAMES SCHAFFRAN, PLANNING CASE 10-05.
Kairies: Good evening Chair Laufenburger, members of the Planning Commission. The
application before you this evening is for 845 Creekwood Drive, Lot 1, Block 1 in the Vogel
Addition. The property is zoned A2, Agricultural Estate. It’s bordered by, or it’s located south
of Pioneer Trail and west of Highway 101 and is bordered by the Bluff Creek Golf Course. The
site was platted and the home on the property was constructed in 1985. Much of this site is
encompassed by the Bluff Creek Overlay District boundaries as well as the bluff located over
much of the site. The Bluff Creek Overlay District was adopted in 1998. Typically a conditional
use permit would be required to do any construction within the Bluff Creek Overlay District.
However the City Code does have an exemption for properties who’s principal structure was
constructed prior to 1998, which again this was constructed in 1985. Therefore no conditional
use permit is required. A variance however is required due to the location of the bluff on the
site. There is a bluff located on much of the property. The variance is to construct a retaining
wall within the bluff impact zone which is the bluff itself and the land located 20 feet from the
top of the bluff. There’s an additional setback from the top of the bluff so there’s a total of 30
feet for any structure to be located. The reason for the retaining wall is due to the erosion and
runoff problems inherited by the current property owner who purchased the home in 2007.
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 16, 2010
Much of the vegetation as you can see from the photograph was removed and has caused severe
erosion problems into Bluff Creek. The intent of the wall is to mitigate the erosion problems and
runoff. In addition to the construction of the retaining wall the applicant is proposing to
revegetate portions of the bluff to further stabilize the land. The second wall is a supporting
wall. The wall shown in the red color is a wall that currently exists and was replaced. The wall
further down, which is the blue dotted line which follows the 915 contour, will be supporting that
wall. In the area between the two walls there is a 3 to 1 slope. The idea of this wall is not to
create a yard in the rear of the property but to maintain the natural features of the bluff. It’s
staff’s opinion that this wall will be a benefit to the natural bluff, therefore staff is recommending
approval and at this time I’ll take any questions.
Laufenburger: Okay, thank you Angie. Any questions for staff? Mark?
Undestad: No.
Laufenburger: Kathleen, how about you?
Thomas: Nothing.
Laufenburger: Okay, Tom any questions?
Doll: Just the item number 10. Zoning permit will be, shall be applied.
Kairies: A zoning permit is a permit that is required when a building permit is not required. A
building permit’s required for any wall over 4 feet. The proposed wall is estimated to be about 3
feet tall.
Doll: That’s all I had.
Laufenburger: Okay, thank you. Is there an applicant or an owner that would like to speak to
the commission? If not, stand at the podium. State your name please.
Bobby Jensen: My name is Bobby Jensen and I am the applicant.
Laufenburger: Alright, welcome.
Bobby Jensen: It’s a really pretty simple project. It’s a retaining wall. We will revegetate. We
did speak with the township, Angie help me? Terry.
Kairies: Water Resource.
Bobby Jensen: Water Resource to work in conjunction with him for what we can use on the
lower side. Actually he thinks we can get some DNR maybe down the line to revegetate and get
some money from them to do it. If you could tell from the pictures, it’s got a gully. It’s getting
worse and worse and we replaced the top wall and we would like to replace the second wall to
mitigate the problem. To protect Bluff Creek pretty much is what we want to do and it’s a pretty
2
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 16, 2010
simple deal. It’s not complicated at all. The wall, I think except for that one point where it
meets the two is probably no more than 3 1/2 to 4 feet high. That’s about it in it’s simplicity.
Laufenburger: Thank you Mr. Jensen. Any questions? Mark.
Bobby Jensen: Any questions?
Undestad: Just one. The area between the two walls, is that entire area going to get the 3 inches
of mulch and?
Bobby Jensen: It will be mulch. The whole thing will be mulch and there is a landscape plan on
here that we will use which was talked about with staff and approved by staff prior. Basically
the vegetation that’s going in is all stuff that will hold on a hillside.
Undestad: Okay, thank you.
Bobby Jensen: Thank you.
Laufenburger: Ah just a moment. Any other questions? Kathleen?
Thomas: Thank you.
Laufenburger: Tom, I’ll ask you.
Doll: No.
Laufenburger: I do have a question.
Bobby Jensen: Yes.
Laufenburger: In the material that the staff provided, we had a picture of the previous retaining
wall that looked to be a timber.
Bobby Jensen: That’s gone.
Laufenburger: Yeah. No, that’s gone and that’s been replaced by a rock?
Bobby Jensen: Boulder wall. It’ll be matching.
Laufenburger: Boulder wall, okay.
Bobby Jensen: It’s a boulder wall and the lower one will be a matching boulder wall. So it’s all
natural.
Thomas: Yeah, they’ll hold up better too.
3
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 16, 2010
Bobby Jensen: Alright?
Laufenburger: Alright. Thank you very much.
Bobby Jensen: Thank you.
Laufenburger: At this time I’d like to open the public hearing for the Schaffran variance. If
there’s anybody in attendance this evening who would like to speak or comment on this, you’re
welcome to do so. Stand up to the podium and state your name and address. Not at this time. I
will close the public hearing. Okay. Folks, what do you think?
Undestad: Looks good to me.
Thomas: Makes sense to me. It’s probably the only way that’s going to keep the property in
good proportion and not lose more of it to runoff and a boulder wall will be great because I’ve
seen timber walls you know explode.
Laufenburger: Yeah, as this one apparently did.
Thomas: Yes, that’s the you know 20 years or so and they just blow apart.
Laufenburger: How about you Tom, any comments?
Doll: No. Looks good to me.
Laufenburger: I think it’s good stewardship on the part of the new owner. Obviously they
inherited something when they purchased the property that wasn’t suitable and wanted to take
steps to prevent any further erosion and silt and sediment going into Bluff Creek so I’ll entertain
a motion.
Thomas: Sure I’ll move. I’ll make a motion. The Chanhassen Planning Commission as the
Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a variance to construct a retaining wall within the
bluff impact zone subject to conditions 1 through 10 in the staff report and adoption of the
attached Findings of Fact and Action.
Laufenburger: Okay we have a motion. Is there a second?
Doll: Second.
Laufenburger: Any further discussion?
Thomas moved, Doll seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission, as the Board of
Appeals and Adjustments, approves a Variance to construct a retaining wall within the
Bluff Impact Zone as shown in plans dated Received January 14, 2010 and adoption of the
attached Findings of Fact and Action, subject to the following conditions:
4
Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 16, 2010
1. Erosion control measures are to be installed on the slope and maintained until final
stabilization is achieved. These measures should include staggered silt fence with J-
hooks or staggered bio-rolls with J-hooks.
2. The applicant shall vegetate the bluff in accordance with the Landscape Plan submitted
by Bobby Jensen’s Landscape Junction, stamped “Received January 14, 2010”.
3. No area within the bluff impact zone and below the more upslope retaining wall is to be
maintained as yard.
4. No mowing shall occur within the Bluff Impact Zone except as needed per an approved
vegetation management plan to control noxious weeds or to establish native vegetation
consistent with the surrounding plant community.
5. Recruitment of seedlings from the surrounding seed source trees shall be allowed in the
area below the second retaining wall. No efforts shall be taken to control the growth of
trees in this area unless they are considered invasive, such as common buckthorn or black
locust.
6. Imported soil materials need to be granular with no greater than 10% clay content to
allow for infiltration.
7. Location of drain tile outlets shall be such that it does not create a nuisance condition nor
promote erosion. Stabilization BMP’s shall be placed at the discharge point and shall be
inspected by the Water Resources Coordinator.
8. The applicant shall work with staff to determine the height of the step when connecting
the proposed wall to the easterly portion of the existing wall.
9. The retaining wall shall be located no lower than the existing 915’ contour.
10. A zoning permit shall be applied for and approved prior to construction.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
PUD AMENDMENTS: REQUEST TO AMEND THE FOLLOWING PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENTS LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 212, AT THE NORTHEAST
AND NORTHWEST INTERSECTIONS OF LYMAN BOULEVARD AND HIGHWAY
101: SOUTHWEST VILLAGE AND CHANHASSEN GATEWAY. APPLICANT: CITY
OF CHANHASSEN, PLANNING CASE 10-03.
Al-Jaff: Chairman Laufenburger, members of the Planning Commission. On December 1, 2009
staff presented an issue paper to the Planning Commission explaining the need to amend various
planned unit development ordinances governing developments within the city. Staff is proposing
that in the event the PUD is silent on an issue that we reference the city code. For example the
5