PC 2011 05 03
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MAY 3, 2011
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Andrew Aller, Tom Doll, Mark Undestad, Kevin Ellsworth, Kim
Tennyson and Lisa Hokkanen
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Kathleen Thomas
STAFF PRESENT:
Bob Generous, Senior Planner; Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; and
Terry Jeffery, Water Resources Coordinator
PUBLIC HEARING:
CITY CODE AMENDMENTS: CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 18,
SUBDIVISIONS, (SECTION 18-57 STREETS), AND CHAPTER 20, ZONING (SECTION
20-407(3) WETLAND PROTECTION, SECTION 20-505(E) HARD SURFACE
COVERAGE, AND SECTION 20-1502 BUILDING PERMITS), OF THE CHANHASSEN
CITY CODE.
th
Al-Jaff: Chairman Aller, members of the Planning Commission, on April 5 staff presented an
issue paper addressing potential code amendments to Chapters 18 and 20. The Planning
Commission directed staff to proceed with these amendments and that’s why we’re here before
you today. Section 18-57, the City Code addresses private and public streets design standards.
Some street classifications reference zoning districts while others reference land uses. Also the
City Code does not address standards serving areas within the code that are mixed uses. The
same principle applies to multiple sections within Chapter 18-57. This includes Section (o), (p),
(r) and (s). We are recommending that the City Code be amended to reflect consistency
throughout by referencing land uses. Also Section 18-57(p) of the City Code addresses methods
of calculating density and hard surface coverage of properties served by a private street. The
current City Code permits areas that are low density residential to be served by private streets to
exclude the area as well as the density of a private street from the overall calculations of a
development. That’s not the case for medium nor high density developments within the city of
Chanhassen. Staff is recommending consistency in that type of development as well and the
hard surface coverage requirements should be consistent. We are recommending the City Code
be amended to incorporate these changes. The following change deals with Section 20-407, for
wetland protections. Back in 2009 the City Code was amended by moving a section of the City
Code pertaining to wetlands from Chapter 6 of the City Code to Chapter 20. We discovered a
line item within Section 20-920 that still references Chapter 6. We’re recommending that it be
changed to reference Chapter 20. Section 20-505 of the City Code sets general standards for all
planned unit developments within the city of Chanhassen. Hard surface coverage is calculated
based on the comprehensive plan designation. One of these designations is mixed use
developments. The current City Code does not address mixed uses. We’re recommending that
that designation be added to the City Code and the hard surface coverage would be 70%. Section
20-1502 addresses requirements for towers and antennas. The current language in the City Code
Chanhassen Planning Commission - May 3, 2011
references the Uniform Building Code. The City adopted the International Building Code. Staff
is recommending the language be amended to reference the Building Code. And with that we
are recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of these changes. They
include Section 18-57, Section 20-407(3) which addresses wetlands, 20-505(e), hard surface
coverage, and Section 20-1505(g), building permits. Thank you. And I’ll be happy to answer
any questions.
Aller: Any questions Tom? No? Commissioner? I guess I have a quick question regarding the
hard surface coverage. When we’re talking about mixed use and we’re creating a mixed use at
70% coverage. Can it, is there room for an abuse there by allowing somebody that has an excuse
to take a lower coverage and use more surface area than, abuse the surface area? In other words
something that we normally would say, we wanted 30 or 40 percent coverage on for a residential
use or something like that. Because it’s mixed to a small degree be able to increase the coverage
to 70% for the entire area. Am I making sense?
Al-Jaff: Yes you are and it’s one of the things that we discussed at length. Mixed use
developments are defined as areas that may be developed as high density residential as well as
commercial. Typically commercial developments are at 70% hard surface coverage. Office is
70% hard surface coverage. The only component that is lower would be the residential high
density development which is at 50% hard surface. One of the glitches that we would run into in
situations like that would be if the first floor on a building is retail, which is what we have in
Villages on the Pond and then above that you have apartments. How do you address something
like that? Where do you, what direction should you go? Should you go with lower? Should you
go with higher hard surface coverage so one of the things that we need to bear in mind is
regardless of what the coverage is, they still need to meet all of the requirements as far as
drainage goes. They still need to provide the landscaping. Buffer. The room for the term you
used was abuse. Can they abuse it? It is staff’s opinion that that would not be the case.
Aller: Okay. And it looks like from the uses now, the high density residential is 50 so it would
be about a 20% differential that we’d be playing with.
Al-Jaff: Correct.
Aller: Okay. That was my question.
Tennyson: No question.
Undestad: Nothing.
Aller: Okay, thank you. Comments. Discussion. None? None? None? Well overall I see it as
a matter of taking the land uses versus title and creating a situation where we’re becoming more
consistent so I would think that a recommended motion was appropriate here with the one caveat
that of course that planning, we want planning to make sure that they watch out for that 50 to 70
percent differential where maybe before this is approved before the City Council, maybe that can
be discussed a little bit more.
2
Chanhassen Planning Commission - May 3, 2011
Generous: And Chairman also if I may, whenever we do these developments we have the design
for all the hard cover in worst case scenario if you will so they’re not going to, from a storm
water standpoint they’re not going to gain anything. And they’re getting a little more coverage in
the high density portion of the site but overall they’re going to be able to accommodate it.
Aller: Great, thank you. Okay. I’ll entertain a motion.
Al-Jaff: Public hearing.
Aller: We need to have a public hearing, that’s right. That’s alright. It’s always good to correct
when we need to have one. So I open the public hearing. Anyone that wishes to speak on the
topic would come forward. Seeing no one coming forward I will close the public hearing. And
now I’ll entertain a motion.
Ellsworth: The recommendation on page 7?
Aller: Yes.
Ellsworth: I move that the Planning Commission approves the attached City Code amendments
to Chapter 18, Subdivisions, Section 18-57 Streets; Chapter 20, Zoning, Section 20-407(3)
Wetland Protection; Section 20-505(e) Hard Surface Coverage; and Section 20-1502(b) Building
Permits.
Aller: Okay and those amendments are attached to the documentation. I have a motion pending.
A second?
Doll: Second.
Aller: Seconded. Any further discussion?
Ellsworth moved, Doll seconded that the Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council approves the attached City Code amendments to Chapter 18, Subdivisions, Section
18-57 Streets; Chapter 20, Zoning, Section 20-407(3) Wetland Protection; Section 20-505(e)
Hard Surface Coverage; and Section 20-1502(b) Building Permits. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Doll noted the verbatim and summary
minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated April 19, 2011 as presented. All voted
in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS:
None.
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE.
3
Chanhassen Planning Commission - May 3, 2011
Aller: We had recommended the TH 41 trail and underpass project for approval. That was
approved at the City Council’s meeting and any further discussion? Comments. Presentations.
No? I entertain a motion to adjourn.
Ellsworth moved, Hokkanen seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was
adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
4