Loading...
PC Minutes 09-21-2010 PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 The Planning Commission met with the City Attorney in a work session prior to the regular meeting to discuss the Supreme Court Ruling on Variances and Zoning District Uses. Denny Laufenburger was elected as Chairman and Andrew Aller as Vice Chairman. Chairman Laufenburger called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Denny Laufenburger, Andrew Aller, Kathleen Thomas, Kevin Ellsworth, and Tom Doll MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Undestad STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director and Bob Generous, Senior Planner PUBLIC HEARING: GEDNEY EXPANSION: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 39,000 SQUARE-FOOT WAREHOUSE ADDITION ON PROPERTY ZONED INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK (IOP) LOCATED AT 2100 STOUGHTON AVENUE, PLANNING CASE 2010-11. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Laufenburger: Before we ask the applicant to step up, are there any questions for staff? Kevin? Ellsworth: Bob, do you happen to have a picture that shows where the city boundaries are? Generous: Yes. This one shows the red outline is the city boundary. So it’s in Stoughton Avenue, Audubon and then that’s that small strip of land between County Road 61 on the north side of the site. Ellsworth: Another question regarding the storm water treatment. Is it typical at this point in the stage of the applicant process that that design’s not done? Generous: They show a design that works except for the model doesn’t and so we believe that it will work and it may require that they put in some state wear systems or something in that swale system. We just need them to provide us with those calculations. Ellsworth: So when does that fit into the process? To make sure that that happens. Generous: Well to get it finalized, before we’ll issue the building permit it would need to be done. Chanhassen Planning Commission - September 21, 2010 Ellsworth: Okay. Aanenson: Maybe I can address that too. And typically when you do a subdivision we do a preliminary so it goes to Planning Commission and City Council with a list of conditions of things that they would need to address before we’d final. In this circumstance we would still do a site plan agreement that we would initiate but I think it’s prudent you know before it goes to City Council that we have a little bit more definitive information because there’s not that second look so it would certainly be a condition that that would have to be demonstrated but I think having it more clearly demonstrated at time of council would be a good idea. Ellsworth: Alright, thank you. That’s all. Laufenburger: Okay, Kathleen. Thomas: Not at this moment. Laufenburger: How about Tom? Doll: No. Laufenburger: Andrew? Aller: I’m just in line here with the water treatment. The condition that we’re going to place on that, is that they meet the requirements in the code and not necessarily that we adopt this particular mode of meeting that? Generous: Well if you, they believe that swale system will work. We just need to have the calculations to confirm that. Aller: Okay, but the conditions are going to be that we have a water system that works. Not necessarily that it’s a swale system. Generous: Right. Aller: Okay. Generous: But we believe that’s what they do. Aanenson: So there’s a broader condition, correct. Laufenburger: Anything else? Aller: Nothing, thanks. Laufenburger: So in fact Bob as I read this there are a number of things that are not correct right now but if we approve this it means that our staff will make sure that various things, whether it 2 Chanhassen Planning Commission - September 21, 2010 be landscaping, trees or any parking stalls, all of those are met and agreed to by the developer. Is that correct? Generous: That’s correct. Doll: I did have one question. Laufenburger: Go ahead Tom. Doll: Now is the number of parking stalls, is that code? Is that ordinance per square footage of the building? Generous: It’s several things. Because it’s three different uses, warehouse, manufacturing and office, we can calculate for the office portion and then for the warehouse portion and then the manufacturing is based on the largest shift. And so you add them all together and you meet that… Doll: Because I was seeing that they you know somebody looked at an area and only counted 73 cars in the parking lot and you’re kind of busting them on 2 parking stalls which… Aanenson: No, and in that circumstance if I may Mr. Chair, we do allow proof of parking. Sometimes we have uses that are an anomaly and that may never use those so we’ve actually done projects where we say well we’ll, if you can show us on site you can put another 15 on there, we won’t make you put those in now. If it becomes a problem then we’d make you do it but in this circumstance, like Bob said, we used a different calculations and then that’s part of when we do the final inspections for the building permit to get occupancy that we would check to make sure those things are in place. Doll: Okay. Laufenburger: Okay. Bob, there’s just one specific question. Top of page 7, 7 of 10 and I’m quoting from your report. Staff recommends that the applicant verify with the utility company, I’m assuming the utility company is the people who have the substation, is that correct? Generous: Or Xcel. We’re not sure if they have an agreement with Xcel I believe. Laufenburger: So staff recommends that the applicant verify the utility company that the proposed addition is acceptable, specifically if the addition encroaches on the transmission easement. If we approve this but the utility company says it’s not acceptable, what’s the resolution? Generous: They’ll have to work it out with the utility company. Laufenburger: Okay. Generous: The balance of the building is already under that. 3 Chanhassen Planning Commission - September 21, 2010 Doll: Yep. There’s a large easement going across the building as it sits. Generous: This is different. Laufenburger: Alrighty. There being no further questions of staff, do we have an applicant present tonight or a developer that would like to speak? I would ask that you step to the podium and state your name and address. Phil Johnson: I’m Phil Johnson, the architect on this project. The owner of the property called me about 10 to and he said he is on his way. Expecting to be here about 10 after. Laufenburger: Okay. Phil Johnson: He was in St. Boni. I don’t know how long it takes from St. Boni to get here but I expect him any minute. Laufenburger: Well let’s hope he obeys the speed limits. Phil Johnson: Other than I can sure answer or try to answer any questions that you have. He was talking about the utility easement. I made contact with Xcel. They talked as if, and they presented me papers as if that was their easement that went over the top of the building. The property owner has seen that and the conditions regarding it and he has signed on that paper for the purposes of Xcel. I don’t know if there’s another utility that also owns a piece of that. The actual portion that’s in, within this easement is a 10 by 10 triangle in the piece and that is well away from any wires that are overhead. The wires being within the center 60 feet of 125 foot wide, plus or minus easement. I’m not sure what the easement is. As far as parking my number was, my count of numbers was 2 off from what was determined. I think I can find 2 more spots. I think I presented in my report that there’s about, from the manager of the plant or whatever, from his comments, there’s about, between 70, 70 and 80 cars that are parked regularly on the property. That all fits within the, what should I call it? The southwest L of the building area. And in fact I looked at a aerial photo from sometime, I believe it was 2006 and counted up about 70 or 75 cars and it looked it was 9:00 or 10:00 in the morning on that. In addition to that there’s a lot of paved area that is not being utilized at all for anything but you know miscellaneous traffic right now that could be striped and provide for parking places that are asked for. Are there any other questions? Laufenburger: Any questions of Mr. Johnson? I just have a couple. Pickle business must be good. Phil Johnson: It’s interesting. I found out very little about it but. Laufenburger: But I mean that they want the expansion. Do you have any experience or any reports on how storm water travels away from the building at the present time? 4 Chanhassen Planning Commission - September 21, 2010 Phil Johnson: We’ve retained a civil engineer that has experience in the storm water and the site circulation and everything else. From soil tests that we’ve gotten he has proposed this, at my request actually, that some storm water detention facility right around the east end of the piece of property. Laufenburger: It’d be kind of the north east of the proposed expansion, right? Phil Johnson: Yes. Laufenburger: Okay. Phil Johnson: And he proposed the trench to dispense of the water and he called me and said you know I’ve done this at your request but the water’s not going to run 100 feet before it’s gone. Laufenburger: It’s going to dissipate in the. Ellsworth: I see sandy soils in the other picture… Phil Johnson: He has recommended to me that we dissipate this water out on side street from the building downspouts. Forget the ditch for right now. If there’s further development on the property things could be handled differently. Additionally more things. Right now we’re covering, I don’t remember the percentage. 40% of the property in hard surface. As that increases there’ll be a need possibly for more detention, retention and everything else. The present use is, this water isn’t going to get anyplace. It’s going to go into this ditch and if it travels at all it might get 100 feet. Laufenburger: While I respect his experience on that it’s important that we comply with the recommendations of the staff to ensure that the calculations are made properly. Phil Johnson: I don’t know for sure what these are but he did provide 6 pages of this kind of graphs. I think I sent them over. Generous: They have that. Phil Johnson: And if they are what you’re talking about is models and so on he has a 24 hour one year event on this. 24 hour 10 year event and so on for rainfalls of 4 inches and so on on that. I can’t read them. Maybe one of you can so. Laufenburger: This is why we rely on our staff to do these things. Kate, you were going to say something. Aanenson: No. Well I’ll just say, and I think this is something that we need to reconcile before. I think part of the issue here is that, it was built in, what’s being handled for, is the pickle vat as you go down towards the PCA. There’s not a lot of on site storage so we’re not penalizing them and saying you have to go back and rectify that but there is, I mean if you have a heavy rain 5 Chanhassen Planning Commission - September 21, 2010 event, you have a lot of hard surface. Plus you’re adding additional hard surface so some of the treatment plans are for the processing part of it so there’s also the storm water calculations so I think we’re just, it’s my understanding, the Water Resources Coordinator just wanted to make sure, as did Chaska. This was also their issue. If any water going off, it’s volume and rate, would affect their property and they’ve got the mobile home park on the other side of Stoughton too so we just want to make sure that that’s managed as best we could with the expansion and again we’re not trying to go back and remedy the other so we’ll work between now and City Council to make sure that we’ve got a clear understanding of that. Laufenburger: Just be sure the processing water is handled through that, those areas that are down by the, down in the lower area. Aanenson: Right, and that’s what I’m saying. That’s processing but right now on site there is no storm water collection on site so when you’re adding more hard cover we’re saying at some point, and that’s what Chaska’s issue is. It’s got to go somewhere and it, the rate increases with more hard cover so it’s going off the site faster. And yes there is sand there but we need to just make sure it’s working properly. Laufenburger: Okay. Any questions of Mr. Johnson? Alright, thank you very much. Phil Johnson: Thank you. Laufenburger: Do we have any other, anybody else from the public that would like to speak at this time? Or any other applicant or developer that would like to speak? Okay, there being not then at this time I will open the public, open for public hearing. For public input on this item. There being no public input I will close the public hearing and commissioners, comments. Andrew, how about you? Aller: I’m just concerned that we do meet the requirements for the runoff based on the increased hard surface because my understanding is the City of Chaska, as well as other locations downstream would be looking to us if there’s a problem with our watershed district as a result of runoff and so I just want to make sure that we’re taking particular care for those resources. And then the other thing that I think is in the conditions that I like to see would be the additional landscaping requirements. That they’re met so that we don’t have an eyesore. I think the building looks good. I think that the way it’s situated out there now with a tree frontage is good and I’d like to see that continue on the extension as well. Laufenburger: Bob, can you speak to both of those? Are you confident that you, the staff have identified and know what needs to be done to ensure that both the water and the landscaping are handled properly? Generous: Yes. Short answer, yes. Terry told me that he, the problem is the model says that there’s going to be some discharge and then the engineer’s saying water won’t make it and he just wants to get a model that shows what’s going to happen with it. But yes, we think even the idea of sheet flowing it across the property would work but we just need him to do the 6 Chanhassen Planning Commission - September 21, 2010 calculations. And for the landscaping, yes as part of the, the approval’s in place. We checked it with the building permit to make sure that the landscape plan complies with what’s approved. Laufenburger: Okay. Alright, thank you. Tom, any comment? Doll: Expand away. Laufenburger: More pickles huh. Doll: It’s a Minnesota pickle. Laufenburger: Minnesota pickle, exactly. Exactly. Pickle on a stick at the State Fair. Kathleen. Thomas: I’m fine with it, thank you. Laufenburger: Okay. Kevin, how about you? Aller: Mr. Chair my concerns with the water were addressed quite well. All that came up in my review, thank you. Laufenburger: Alright. Good job staff. Thank you Mr. Johnson for appearing as well and I think it looks very clear. Yes, there are some things that need to be done but I’m confident that the approval of this would ensure that those things happen. Would entertain a motion at this time. Aller: Mr. Chairman, I’d move that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the site plan for a 39,000 square footage, one story warehouse expansion, plans prepared by Phillip D. Johnson dated May 12, 2010, subject to the conditions in the staff report and the adoption of Findings of Fact and Recommendations therein. Laufenburger: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? Doll: Second. Aller moved, Doll seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed 39,000 square-foot, one-story warehouse expansion and adoption of the attached findings of fact and recommendation subject to the following conditions: Fire Marshal: 1.The applicant shall provide information of the product commodity per 2007 Minnesota Fire Code Section 2303 and the proposed storage height in order to determine if fire apparatus access is required to parts of the building. If apparatus access is required but not practical due to topography, power lines, railways or similar conditions, the fire code will accept additional fire protection in lieu of apparatus access. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for 7 Chanhassen Planning Commission - September 21, 2010 additional information. City of Chaska: 2.A Metropolitan Council SAC determination will still be required and Chaska shall be reimbursed at a rate of $1,157 per SAC unit for providing trunk service to the building expansion. Building Official: 1.The entire facility must have an automatic fire extinguishing system for consideration as an “unlimited” size building (Ref. 2006 IBC Sec. 507); if any portion of the facility is not sprinkled, fire-wall separations may be required. 2.The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 3.Compliance with Minnesota Accessibility Code (MSBC 1341) is required. 4.The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 5.A demolition permit is required for building removals that take place before the building permit for the addition is issued. Environmental Resource Specialist: 1.The applicant shall increase the number of overstory trees by four. The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan for City review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 2.The blue spruce and Redbud species shall be replaced from the City’s approved list of landscape material. 3.All ornamental trees must be at least one inch in diameter. Planner: 1.Mechanical equipment shall be screened if any is installed. No wooden fences shall be used on the roof for screening. 2.The developer shall show that 213 parking stalls can be accommodated on site. 3.The developer should investigate the use of clerestory windows around the building expansion. 8 Chanhassen Planning Commission - September 21, 2010 4.The expansion should investigate the use of columns to help break up the building elevations at approximately 40-foot intervals. 5.The addition encroaches into the electric transmission easement. Staff recommends that the applicant verify with the utility company that the proposed addition is acceptable. 6.There are wooden bollards around the existing electrical tower. Any bollards damaged or removed with construction must be replaced. 7.Prior to the development of the vacant property north of the existing building, the City will have to undertake a feasibility study to determine the cost effectiveness of the extension of utilities to the property. Water Resource Coordinator: 1.The developer must provide rate control for an area equal to the addition. 2.The developer must provide water quality treatment for the same area. 3.The developer must comply with any requirements for discharging to an Outstanding Resource Value water. This can be accomplished through infiltration and discharge through non-structural BMPs at a relatively low cost. 4.The developer will need to apply for and receive an NPDES Small Site Construction permit in the event that one acre or more of disturbance results on the entire site. 5.The developer must provide a detailed grading and erosion control plan compliant with City Code. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Laufenburger: Just as a comment, this, Kate can you tell me when this item will come up for action on the City Council? th Aanenson: October 11. th Laufenburger: Anybody present may want to follow this action on October 11 at the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 20, ZONING CONCERNING TEMPORARY OUTDOOR SALES. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Laufenburger: Does anybody have any questions of staff first of all? Kevin? 9