PC SUM 2004 10 19
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
SUMMARY MINUTES
OCTOBER 19, 2004
Chairman Sacchet called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Uli Sacchet, Steve Lillehaug, Bethany Tjornhom, Kurt Papke,
Rich Slagle and Craig Claybaugh
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Dan Keefe
STAFF PRESENT:
Sharmeen Al-Jaff, Senior Planner; Josh Metzer, Planner I; and Matt
Saam, Assistant City Engineer
PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS:
Janet Paulsen 7302 Laredo Drive
PUBLIC HEARING:
SITE PLAN REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR RETAIL
BUILDING LOCATED AT HIGHWAYS 7 AND 41, PLANNING CASE N0. 04-34.
Public Present:
Name Address
Dave Willadsen 2325 Melody Hill
Brian Mundstock 9905 Johnson Circle
Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Lillehaug
expressed concern with the proposed building blocking the view of the current store
front. Sharmeen Al-Jaff clarified that it was the same owner for both buildings. Brian
Mundstock with Sunday Engineering, the consulting civil engineers for the project stated
he has been working with staff on the approvals with respect to the green space, the
amount of impervious and questions regarding storm water management. Chairman
Sacchet called the public hearing to order. Dave Willadsen, 2325 Melody Hill Road
asked the Planning Commission to keep in mind the traffic concerns at the entrance on
Highway 41. Chairman Sacchet closed the public hearing.
Lillehaug moved, Claybaugh seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of Site Plan #04-34 for a 6,400 square foot retail building and a conditional
use permit to allow multiple buildings on a single lot as shown on the plans dated
Received September 17, 2004, subject to the following conditions:
Planning Commission Summary – October 19, 2004
1. Applicant shall preserve all existing trees outside of the grading limits. Any trees
removed outside of the limits will be replaced at a rate of 2:1 diameter inches.
2. Applicant shall install tree preservation fence at the edge of grading limits along
the west property line and around the landscape island in the parking lot.
3. All plans must be signed by a registered civil engineer in the State of Minnesota.
4. Show the dimensions of the new parking stalls on the site plan. The new parking
stalls are required to be 9 feet wide.
5. Add the latest City Standard Detail Plate Nos. 1006, 2101, 3101, 3102, 5300,
5302A.
6. On the plans, show the proposed water pipe CL52 and sewer class SDR35.
7. On the grading plan:
a. Add a benchmark.
b. Add a legend.
c. Show the parking stall grades for the accessible stall. The maximum slope
must not exceed 2%.
8. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections
through the City’s Building Department.
9. The applicant must show the location/elevation of an emergency overflow point
along the west side of the building that is 1.5 feet lower than the proposed
building elevation.
10. Storm sewer sizing calculations will be required at the time of building permit
application. The proposed storm sewer must be sized for a 10 year storm event.
11. Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for the new building.
The 2004 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 per unit for sanitary sewer and $2,814
per unit for watermain. The 2004 SAC charge is $1,425 per unit. All of these
charges are based on the number of SAC units calculated by the Met Council.
These charges will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. Sanitary
sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel.
12. Fire Marshal conditions:
a. Yellow curbing and “no parking fire lane” signs will be required. Contact the
Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and location of
signs to be installed.
2
Planning Commission Summary – October 19, 2004
b. The building must comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention
Division Policies 34-1993, 36-1994, 29-1991, 07-1991, 06-1991, and 04-
1991. Copies enclosed.
13. Building Official conditions:
a. The building is required to be protected by automatic fire extinguishing
systems.
b. The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the
State of Minnesota.
c. Submit a site plan indicating the location of all property lines.
d. An eight foot access aisle is required for the accessible parking space.
e. Detailed occupancy related requirements cannot be reviewed until complete
plans are submitted.
f. The owner and/or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections
Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures.
14. All roof top equipment shall be screened.
15. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the
necessary financial securities.
16. Wall signs shall be permitted on the east elevation of the building only and must
comply with Neighborhood Business District requirements. The applicant must
obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signs on site. A detailed sign plan
incorporating the method of lighting acceptable to staff should be provided prior
to requesting a sign permit.
17. The applicant shall provide a survey signed by a registered land surveyor
verifying that the hard surface coverage on this site does not exceed 65%.
18. A detailed lighting plan is required and only shielded fixtures are allowed as
prescribed by ordinance.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
VARIANCE FOR LOCATING A STRUCTURE AND GRADING WITHIN THE
BLUFF ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8850 AUDUBON ROAD, PLANNING
CASE NO. 04-33.
Public Present:
Name Address
Steve & Mary Pat Monson 8850 Audubon Road
3
Planning Commission Summary – October 19, 2004
Dennis & Ruth Chadderdon 8900 Audubon Road
Josh Metzer presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Lillehaug asked for
clarification on the need to obtain permits for the work performed. Also that it appears a
neighbors house, which was built 3 to 4 years ago, was built within the bluff and asked
for further clarification on the definition of a bluff. Commissioner Slagle asked for
clarification on the extent of the bluff. Commissioner Papke asked if there was
precedence for this type of variance request. Commissioner Tjornhom asked for
historical information on when the parcel was subdivided, if the bluff was identified at
that time, and what options exist for restoration. Commissioner Claybaugh asked for
clarification on the height and setback of the retaining walls and regulations regarding
grading. Commissioner Papke asked staff to reiterate the damage that would be done if
the applicant were asked to re-establish the bluff, and impacts to Bluff Creek. Chairman
Sacchet asked staff to address the statement made by the applicant that the city asked
them to change the plotting of the 5 acres to run east and west, which puts most of their
2 ½ acres entirely on the bluff. He also asked for clarification in the two Finding of Fact
reports, item E seems to contradict each other. The applicant Steve Monson, 8850
Audubon Road addressed the issues regarding the previous subdivision and what was
requested by the city and the amount of dirt that has been moved on the site. Mary Pat
Monson stated when they built a swimming pool on the site a few years ago, there was
never mention of a bluff at that time and comparisons of their property to a neighbor’s
down the road which appears to have steeper slopes. Chairman Sacchet opened the
public hearing. Dennis Chadderdon, 8900 Audubon Road, the neighbor directly south of
the Monson’s stated there’s been no erosion problems as a result of this construction
work and that he supports the variance request. Chairman Sacchet closed the public
hearing. In talking about runoff, the applicant stated they would build a trench filled with
rock on the south side of the garage to catch runoff. He also showed pictures of the
neighboring property in relation to the slope. After commissioner discussion, the
following motion was made.
Lillehaug moved, Claybaugh seconded that the Planning Commission approves
Variance #04-33 for the construction of a garage/storage building in a bluff as
shown on the plans stamped “Received June 22, 2004”, with the following
conditions:
1. A building permit must be applied for within one year of approval of the variance
or it shall become void.
2. The proposed addition must be built per plans stamped “Received June 22, 2004”.
3. The applicant must submit plans for the ramp before proceeding with
construction.
4. An after the fact building permit for grading must be applied for.
4
Planning Commission Summary – October 19, 2004
5. The graded slope must e entirely reinforced with a retaining wall which will
require a building permit; or must be restored to a slope less than 3:1.
6. 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, according to the following table of slopes and time frames:
Time
(maximum time an area can remain unvegetated
Type of Slope
when area is not actively being worked)
Steeper than 3:1 7 Days
10:1 to 3:1 14 Days
Flatter than 10:1 21 Days
These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a temporary or
permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man-made system that discharges to
any surface water.
7. Permanent native vegetation shall be installed on the slopes to minimize the
potential for future slope failure.
8. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RLS (registered land
surveyor). The survey must show the following:
a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations.
b. Driveway location and slope.
c. Garage floor elevation.
9. The driveway must be hard surfaced and comply with City Code Sec. 20-1122
(attached).
10. No home occupation or business use will be permitted in the existing attached
garage or proposed detached garage/storage building, as stated in City Code 20-
977:
“…No garage or accessory buildings except accessory agriculture buildings
existing on February 19, 1987 shall be used for any home occupation.”
11. The applicant shall submit for staff approval and construct a French
drainage system, along with gutters on the garage/storage building.
All voted in favor, except Papke who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of
5 to 1.
5
Planning Commission Summary – October 19, 2004
PUBLIC HEARING:
ARBORETUM SHOPPING CENTER PUD AMENDMENT TO ALLOW
ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE USES (CENTURY PLAZA
RETAIL CENTER), PLANNING CASE NO. 04-35.
Public Present:
Name Address
Paul Andrescik 710 Debbie Lane, Carver
Timothy Bohlman 7500 W. 78th Street, Edina
Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Tjornhom asked
for clarification on the definition of exercise health club, and if that would include an
establishment such as Curves. Chairman Sacchet asked staff to explain how they
determine permitted uses in the Neighborhood Business district. The applicant, Timothy
Bohlman, Senior Project Manager for Minstar Builders and Arboretum Exchange LLC
explained he was seeking clarification of uses allowed for their project, Century Plaza
Retail Center. The ordinance as it reads today is vague and confusing and requires
frequent, almost a case by case request for individual approval from city staff every time
they seek to execute a lease. The applicant is requesting to modify the PUD for this
development to give a very specific, clear picture of what is and is not permitted for this
shopping center. Commissioner Slagle asked the applicant to clarify the ownership of the
property. Commissioner Claybaugh asked for clarification on what was being requested
by the applicant and what was being recommended by staff. Commissioner Papke asked
for clarification if the intent of the city was to keep off sale liquor stores within the
downtown area. Chairman Sacchet opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the
public hearing was closed. After commission discussion, the following motion was
made.
Papke moved, Tjornhom seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
denial of Planned Unit Development Amendment #04-35 to include all lawn and
garden centers, all off sale liquor stores, all radio and television studios, all
appliance sales and services, however to include health and physical exercise clubs
up to 5,000 square feet, based upon the following conditions:
1. The district has a reasonable selection of permitted uses.
2. The requested amendments will be in conflict with the comprehensive plan
because the users are not inherently low scale and would be in competition with
commercial development, particularly in the CBD, BG and BH Districts.
All voted in favor, except Lillehaug who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote
of 5 to 1.
6
Planning Commission Summary – October 19, 2004
Commissioner Lillehaug’s reason for opposing the motion is that he supported staff’s
recommendation. Chairman Sacchet summarized the Planning Commission’s issues as
being, they struggled with the wording of the motion, but decided to include health and
physical exercise clubs up to 5,000 square feet as an acceptable use but did not want to
give further flexibility to the other 4 proposed uses.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Tjornhom noted the summary and
verbatim Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated October 5, 2004 as
presented.
Chairman Sacchet adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 9:00 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
7