Loading...
PC Minutes 05-21-2013Chanhassen Planning Commission – May 21, 2013 Hokkanen: I move the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the amendment to Interim Use Permit 96-2 to allow for a lot line adjustment subject to the amended and re-stated Interim Use Permit and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Tennyson: I’ll second. Aller: I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Comments or questions. Hokkanen moved, Tennyson seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the amendment to Interim Use Permit 96-2 to allow for a lot line adjustment subject to the amended and restated Interim Use Permit and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: BLUFF CREEK WOODS: REQUEST TO REZONE 3.57 ACRES OF PROPERTY FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT (A-2) TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (RSF); SUBDIVISION WITH VARIANCES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PRIVATE STREET AND USE OF A NECK LOT; AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BLUFF CREEK OVERLAY DISTRICT. PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 7331 HAZELTINE BOULEVARD. APPLICANT: MARTIN SCHUTROP, PLANNING CASE 2013-09. Generous: Thank you Chairman Aller, commissioners. Bluff Creek Woods is, the applicant is Marty Schutrop. It’s a proposed development located at 7331 Hazeltine Boulevard. It’s on the east side of Highway 41, just across from Tanadoona Drive. The property’s approximately 3 acres in size. The request is to rezone the property from Agricultural Estate District to Single Family Residential District. Subdivision approval with variances for the use of a neck lot and the construction of a private street and a Conditional Use Permit to allow development within Bluff Creek Overlay District. The applicant is proposing to divide the property into 3 buildable lots. The existing house would remain on the middle lot and then there’d be 2 new building sites. The most southerly portion of the site would be put into an outlot status. As part of this the Bluff Creek Overlay District is being redefined. Under the existing mapping system that we have it shows that the whole property is within the primary zone. However we know that there is actually developable area and as part of the process the City is permitted with the developer to look at the site and determine what would be an appropriate delineation for that primary zone. The three green lots on here include 2 of the new building sites and existing single family home in the middle I should note that I did hand out earlier, put in front of you an email that I received from Hal Newel. He’s opposed to this development because of the addition of traffic onto Highway 41. It’s hard to tell from his comment whether he thought that there would be two new driveways going on there or if he’s aware that we’re forcing them to have a common access point out onto Highway 41 and that’s part of the reason for the variance because of the private street serving more than one property. Aller: Just for the record we have received and read the email. Generous: Okay. All the lots comply with the minimum requirements in the City’s zoning ordinance. The smallest one is 33,000 square feet which is about three-quarters of an acre and the other two are over one acre in size. The most northerly, Lot 3 is the neck lot and that’s any lot that does not have it’s full frontage on a public street. We wait until it gets back to the lot width hits 100 feet and then we have a valid lot and that’s where we establish the setback area from. As part of their application they did show a plan for a private street. However staff in going out to the site and reviewing it was concerned that the access to Lot 1 would require additional grading and take out some significant trees that are on the 3 Chanhassen Planning Commission – May 21, 2013 Highway 41 side of the development so what we are recommending is that at the current turn around, hammer head area, that they extend that, you follow that alignment and extend that for access into this property. That provides a turn around area right in this corner and it also will reduce the amount of grading that they’ll need to do to build a house on this one site. The use of the private street and the creation of the neck lot are not mere inconveniences. It’s due to the unique nature of this property because of the angle of Highway 41, the most northerly lot becomes narrower at the street frontage but then it widens up as you go back through the wetlands and the natural area behind it. Otherwise all the lot lines are following, are at 90 degree angles to the roadway which is what our ordinance prefers that development follow. The most southerly part is the Outlot A. This will be part of the primary zone. There is a drainage swale system through here that runoff comes to the site and into the wetland complex behind it which is the head waters for the Bluff Creek. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare and it meets the intent of the subdivision and zoning ordinance as well as the Comprehensive Plan. We believe it’s justified in this instance for those two criteria. As part of the realignment of the Bluff Creek Overlay District this orange area on the schematic shows what we will be defined as the primary zone boundary. What’s required under the ordinance is then a 40 foot setback from that boundary for structures. What that will do is force Lot 1 and Lot 3 to move the housing sites from where they put them preliminarily. However as you can see there’s significant amount of buildable area in both of those lots. Grading of the site will be, as each individual lot comes in they’ll have their own grading plan reviewed. We looked at some initial things to see that they could comply with our driveway slope ordinance and look at the house placement for sewer and water services but they will have their own plan. And utility services provided off of Highway 41. The applicant has provided a tree inventory and tree removal plan. Their landscaping plan basically exceeds city requirements so they’re not required to provide any additional landscaping unless they remove additional trees on the Highway 41 side as part of the construction of the development. This area is served, there’s a neighborhood park just to the southeast of this and then to the north you have a regional park. As the driveway crosses a regional trail that the City recently completed so it is adequately served by parks and recreation facilities. The development will be paying two new fees for the new lots as they’re built so staff is recommending approval of the subdivision, rezoning subdivision with variances and conditional use permit subject to the conditions of the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation attached to the report. With that I’d be happy to answer any questions. Aller: What was the Department of Transportation’s response on traffic? Generous: They did not have a concern. They just said any alterations within their right-of-way will need a permit. Aller: Okay. So to go through that permit process as we move forward. Generous: Yeah, for any alterations that they do within the right-of-way. Aller: And then the Outlot A is non-buildable? Generous: Non-buildable. If it’s not donated to the City then it will be under a conservation easement so. Aller: And then the water usage and runoff will be looked at as each building is located, placed and built. Fauske: That’s correct. Aller: Okay. And then we have the one home location which will stay where it is, and then as a condition, if we approve this, those properties will move forward out of those areas that you had 4 Chanhassen Planning Commission – May 21, 2013 delineated as being green so they’ll have to move those buildings from the spot they originally requested forward and the setback would be increased. Generous: Right. They would have to comply with the setback based on the primary zone boundary. Aller: I don’t have any further questions. Anyone? Weick: I do. Can you go back to the streets and access? I just don’t understand what’s existing and what’s new that’s being proposed in this. Aanenson: Bob make sure you show what’s a trail up there too. Generous: Yeah, this is the trail system that actually continues to the north. It’s not shown on this plan. This is the existing driveway. Weick: Driveway, okay. Generous: And it goes to service. Fauske: That’s the trail. Generous: Or, the trail yeah comes right here but this is the driveway and it goes up to the house to the north of it. And this is the existing driveway that services the house on this property and so this is the turn around area that’s in place and that’s where we recommend that they align the driveway for the property to the south through there. Weick: Okay. Okay. Got it. That’s all I had. Aller: Great. Hokkanen: I have a couple questions. So the existing house is staying in the middle, so two new houses are going to be one on each side of the existing home that’s there. Generous: That’s correct. Hokkanen: Correct, so it’s not 3 buildable lots. It’s 2 plus an existing. Generous: Yes. Hokkanen: And then did the Department of Transportation have any say or across 41, when you’re coming south on 41 to turn left into these, into this private road, is there a, like when you come and you turn into Lake Lucy off of 41. You turn into Longacres off of 41, they have a, what is that? You know what I’m talking about? Fauske: A bypass. Hokkanen: Bypass lane, yes. And up by the church they do as well. And there was only one home here before. Do they have any concerns about that with more, because you can’t have individual, they have a home that was on 41 that had to change their driveway into Hillside Court a couple years ago from 41. Is there any concern with the Department of Transportation on that? 5 Chanhassen Planning Commission – May 21, 2013 Fauske: The Department of Transportation did not provide any comments on limiting the access. The point with this particular development is they’re not proposing to construct a new access point onto Highway 41. It’s the addition of two homes that will ultimately access at that location. With regards to, in the past your example on Hillside Court, in that example there was a development that could provide an acceptable and appropriate access from a grading standpoint and from an access standpoint for that particular property. In this case, given the site constraints with the wetlands and the trees, the tree cover on the site, there really is no other appropriate place to provide access and so that’s why we’re supporting the proposed access as shown. Hokkanen: Thank you. Aller: Okay, good question. Okay, applicant wishing to step forward and make a. Marty Schutrop: The only comment I have is that. Aller: Could you please step up to the podium. Thank you. Marty Schutrop: The only comment is, actually there’s two people that access point. Aanenson: I was going to say that too. Marty Schutrop: Not just one currently so. And also we pretty much have complied with the Outlot A as far as, I mean that’s a huge amount of land that we’ve pretty much donated to the City to make the other two lots appropriately you know acceptable so. Aller: Right. Marty Schutrop: We’ve you know conformed to everything the City has asked on that property so. Aller: And of course there’ll be hardscape requirements when it goes to permit that will have to be fulfilled. Marty Schutrop: Yeah, and I have to comply with all those obviously. Aller: Right, and it sounds like your overstory trees and landscaping right now are fine. Marty Schutrop: Yeah, and we’re taking a minimal, minimal amount of trees out of the property just because of how we laid out the lots too so. Aller: Great, thank you. With that I’ll open the public hearing. Any individual wishing to speak either for or against the project, please step forward at this time. State your name and address for the record and let us know what you think. Bruce Geske: Hi, I’m Bruce Geske. I’m the neighbor right to the north and we only have a couple of concerns. One being the drainage on the Lot 3. It’s the driveway appears to be coming in over a current culvert that’s there and the drainage was never put in properly to begin with so the water has always been on our neighbor’s property and we’re concerned that with the new driveway would we now have a lake in our yard. That’s our first concern. Our second concern obviously is the trail system in Chan. There’s been several near misses because people are confused of our turnoff being the entrance for Longacres and they come flying in there and several families have had to scramble into the grass to avoid accidents so that would be our only two concerns. 6 Chanhassen Planning Commission – May 21, 2013 Aller: Great. Bruce Geske: Thanks. Aller: Thank you. Comments on? Fauske: With the comment with regards to drainage, we could certainly look at, and I apologize I don’t have a great scale to provide you some comfort but I’m more than willing to talk to you after the meeting if you’re available to go over your concerns and show you the plan and we can talk a little bit more about that and insure that the existing drainage patterns are met and create either an equal or better drainage pattern that currently exists. And then with regards to the pedestrian, the pedestrian concerns, we can certainly talk to our parks and rec director about that to see if there’s something that can be done. You know trail. See if we have some ideas. If the residents have some ideas, work with them to see if there’s something that can be done to help alleviate that situation. Aller: Great. I don’t, because it’s a current access, that’s really not going to be changed or modified correct? Fauske: Correct. Aller: So really that’s a concern that should be addressed in any event, whether this moves forward or not so we’d appreciate if that could be followed up on. Fauske: Certainly. Aanenson: If I may I think one of the things too the Fire Marshal mentioned too is addressing on that so if we clearly put the address on a post or something on that end, even though they’re private we still have addressing for that and that would identify those 3, or those 4 houses. Their address there and try to clarify what the purposes are. What’s the road right-of-way. What’s the trail and what those addresses are. Aller: How are they addressed now? Are they addressed on a post now or? Aanenson: I’m not sure how they’re addressed now. We can find that out. Aller: Maybe if there’s nothing there, maybe that is the problem. Aanenson: Correct. Right. Aller: Great, thank you. Anyone else wishing to come forward, speaking for or against? Seeing no one come forward, close the public hearing. Comments. Questions. I think it’s great that the concern, the water concern is being met. I know that the City has been in the past and will continue to be concerned about drainage so I don’t really foresee a problem with that. Hokkanen: Actually it is a problem over there. I’ve seen it personally so if they will address that issue when it comes up. It never affected anybody before. Aller: But now we’ll be building a pad Hokkanen: Right. 7 Chanhassen Planning Commission – May 21, 2013 Aller: So there’ll be some modification over there. It’ll be a good opportunity to look at the drainage. Hokkanen: And even though the signage doesn’t affect anything with the moving forward of this, there is some confusion with the trail there and that driveway so maybe just, you know after the park and rec can address that with a trail sign too or something. Aller: Warning sign of some sort. Hokkanen: Yeah, something. Aller: Further comments, questions. Would anyone like to make a motion? Withrow: I will. I move that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the rezoning preliminary plat with variances and a conditional use permit subject to conditions of the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Yusuf: I’ll second it. Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion, questions or comments? Withrow moved, Yusuf seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Rezoning, Preliminary Plat with Variances and the Conditional Use Permit subject to the conditions of the staff report and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation: 1.At the entrance off Hazeltine Boulevard, a monument sign displaying all four address numbers shall be installed. In addition, at the start of the individual driveways to each home, an address sign shall also be installed. Submit proposed signage to Fire Marshal for approval. 2.Park fees shall be collected in full for the two new homes at the rate in force upon final plat submission and approval. 3.Any use of or work within or affecting MnDOT right-of-way requires a permit. Permit forms are available from MnDOT’s utility website at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/utility/. 4.Outlot A and the conservation easement shall be coincidental with the primary zone for the Bluff Creek Overlay District and shall be recorded with the final plat. The primary zone shall extend to a point 18 feet from the northeast corner of Lot 3. 5.A structure setback of 40 feet is required from the primary zone. No disturbance shall occur within the first 20 feet of the setback. The proposed grading plans shall be amended to show how the lots may be developed. 6.The Bluff Creek Overlay District primary zone and the corresponding setback shall be shown on all plan sheets. 8 Chanhassen Planning Commission – May 21, 2013 7.Signs clearly demarcating the Bluff Creek Overlay District primary zone shall be installed at all major angle points and at the intersection of lot lines with the primary zone boundary. Site plans shall be amended to show the placement of the signs. 8.In keeping with the purpose of the Bluff Creek Overlay District to protect natural resources, the proposed driveway for Lot 1 shall share a common drive with Lot 2 until the existing hammerhead. 9.The applicant shall provide drainage calculations for pre-development and post-development conditions. 10.Preservation of natural vegetation shall be allowed as a volume and rate control tool. Water quality best management practices are still required. This shall meet the requirements of the NPDES permit for drainage to an impaired water or NURP plus enhanced treatment, whichever is stricter. 11.SWMP charges shall be waived in lieu of in-perpetuity protection of land through a combination of conservation easement and the dedication of Outlot A to the City. 12.Water that now heads west and then south along the trail and away from this area will be directed northwest into the depression north of the shared entrance. An adequate outlet must be provided for this area and the existing drainage patterns must be maintained. 13.Prior to grading, each lot shall install tree protection fencing at the edge of grading limits. 14.Building permit surveys for each lot shall be required to show all inventoried trees within the grading limits and 10 feet beyond and their removal or preservation status. 15.The developer must revise the Existing Conditions plan to show the power pole, utility box, propane tank and shed. 16.Ground shot elevations must be shown on the Existing Conditions plan to verify that a topographic survey was completed. 17.The developer shall work with staff to realign the access to Lot 1. 18.The developer must provide proof that the common portion of the driveway to Lots 1 and 2 meets a 7-ton design. 19.If the existing driveway does not meet the 7-ton design standard, the developer must install the 7-ton driveway and submit an escrow with the final plat to ensure that the driveway meets this specification. 20.The driveway easement shall be recorded as a separate document; all references to the driveway easement shall be removed from the preliminary plat. 9 Chanhassen Planning Commission – May 21, 2013 21.The grading plan must be revised so that the grades do not exceed 3H:1V. 22.A permit is required from MnDOT to install the sewer and water services as well as grading in the right-of-way. 23.The City must be notified a minimum of 72 hours before the sewer and water services are to be installed. 24.The sewer and water service connections must be inspected and approved by the City. 25.The developer must submit an escrow for the necessary boulevard restoration associated with the service installation. 26.Lots 1 and 3 will be subject to the City sewer and water hook-up charges and the Metropolitan Council Sanitary Access Charge. These fees shall be collected in accordance with the City Code at the rate in effect at the time. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: TH 760 WEST 96 STREET: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 20-904(A)(1) OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE TO CONSTRUCT AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN EXCESS OF 1,000 SQUARE FEET ON PROPERTY ZONED AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TH DISTRICT (A-2) AND LOCATED AT 760 WEST 96 STREET. APPLICANT: CHUCK WORM, PLANNING CASE 2013-11. Generous: Thank you Chairman Aller, commissioners. This application is a variance request to construct an accessory structure in excess of 1,000 square feet. The applicant is Chuck Worm. The property is th located at 760 West 96 Street. This is an area of larger lots in the community and they currently, this th property’s, he owns two properties at the end of this West 96 Street. On the most westerly one there’s a 10,000 square foot storage building and some fields and pasture lands and riding areas and then his house is on the property to the east with additional, I believe the stables are on that location. The variance is to construct a 7,120 square foot accessory structure for the storage of hay and agricultural equipment. There currently exists on the property 10,240 square foot accessory building. An additional 9,960 square feet of accessory structures are on their house site so there’s a total accessory structure of 20,912 square feet. Part of staff’s concern with this is the creation of these large accessory structures in an area that at some time in the future will be converting to single family housing on smaller or more suburban style lots when urban services become available. In May of 2004 the City approved an Interim Use Permit to allow the riding academy on the property. Annually they have to renew their stable permit to continue the use of that for horses. In researching this property for this development we did discover that there was a contracting business associated with the property and our concern is that the existing accessory building is being used in conjunction with that instead of or in addition to the existing agricultural use. Equipment and hay storage on the site so part of our concern is that they’re not utilizing the building in the appropriate way for the zoning district. There have been other variances in the neighborhoods for accessory structures in excess of 1,000 square feet. Within the last 2 years there were two. One for an 1,800 square foot accessory structure and one for a 2,560 square foot accessory structure. This property is at the end of the street where those are all located. Then in 2007 there was a variance for an accessory structure off of Homestead Lane which is a large lot development area. The person wanted to expand 10