Loading...
PC 2014 02 18 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 18, 2014 Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Kim Tennyson, Lisa Hokkanen, Maryam Yusuf, and Steven Weick MEMBERS ABSENT: Stephen Withrow STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; and Bob Generous, Senior Planner PUBLIC PRESENT: Curt Kobilarcsik 9149 Springfield Drive PUBLIC HEARING: CAMDEN RIDGE-PLANNING CASE 2014-03: REQUEST FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE CAMDEN RIDGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO ADJUST SIDE YARD SETBACKS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED HOUSING ON 36.2 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RESIDENTIAL (PUD-R) AND LOCATED WEST OF HIGHWAY 212, NORTH OF PIONEER TRAIL AND EAST OF PIONEER PASS (CAMDEN RIDGE). APPLICANT: LENNAR. Generous: Thank you Chairman, commissioners. As you stated this is a Camden Ridge development. The public hearing is tonight. This goes to City Council on March 10, 2014. The developer is Lennar. The actually representative for the developer contacted me today. He was stuck out in California and could not get back in time. His flight yesterday was cancelled and the one today was delayed so he won’t be back until later this evening. The other representative is at another public hearing in another city so, however we believe this is a fairly straight forward development proposal and so they asked that we present it and go forward. The property is located at 1500 Pioneer Trail. As part of the Camden Ridge development they actually extended River Rock Drive south from Bluff Creek Boulevard and it follows this alignment and then comes into the development. They have started the preliminary subdivision work and so they have the first phase, well it’s all being done in one phase but they have the temporary road in so they can start their first building right at the entrance to the project. The request is to amend the planned unit development standards for single family homes setbacks. Currently all the setbacks are 7 1/2 foot side yard setbacks with the 15 foot separation between the buildings. However for the single family homes within the project they’d like to make that a 5 foot setback and a 10 foot setback with the 15 foot separation. This is the same setback requirements as in the residential low and medium density district and we have it in other, the Pioneer Pass project and other projects within this area. From all practical purposes you won’t be able to tell that there’s a difference in setback between the building. 2 1/2 feet’s not a lot so this map shows the portion of the development that will be impacted by the new setback requirements. Basically the reason for it is a slight curve in the road meant that these homes right here would not be able to meet the setbacks requirement and rather than come in and request variances for the those, they decided let’s change the standard and we agreed that that is very easy to do and then it’s easier for us to administer and everyone in the neighborhood would have the same requirements. The specific in the amendment, we just added the single family detached requirement of 5 and 10 feet setbacks with the 15 foot separation and noted that the other, 7 1/2 foot setback is for the twinhome development. Staff is recommending approval of the amendment to the planned unit development side yard setback Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 18, 2014 requirements and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. With that I’d be happy to answer any questions. Aller: Bob, I don’t see and I don’t believe there would be an impact on the hard cover. Generous: No. Aller: That’s still going to be required to be meeting the minimum? Generous: As part of the overall project they developed a table for maximum site coverage on each lot and they will still have to follow that. Aller: Any other questions? Weick: I had a question on the setback. Just as a point of clarification for me. That’s the distance between, we’re talking about the distance between two homes right? Generous: Well that’s the 15 foot separation. The setbacks are always established from the structure to the property line. Weick: So it’s 15 feet and it was 15 feet. Generous: Yes. Weick: It’s just the question of one is going to be a little closer. Generous: Yeah, it shifts 2 1/2 feet. Weick: And the other’s going to be a little further away. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Aller: Based on the responses any additional questions? Okay, thank you. We’re going to open up the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak either for or against the request that are being made this evening can do so at this time. Seeing no one coming forward I will close the public portion of the hearing and open it for commissioner comments. Great. Well I think the report covers the basis. I don’t think the applicant had to be here so I don’t think he was prejudiced at all at this point. I’m sure they’ll make an effort to be before the City Council if they feel that it’s needed. With that I’ll entertain a motion. Undestad: I’ll make a motion that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the Camden Ridge Planned Unit Development residential side yard setback requirements and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Hokkanen: Second. Aller: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Undestad moved, Hokkanen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the Camden Ridge Planned Unit Development residential side yard setback requirements and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. 2 Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 18, 2014 PUBLIC HEARING: TH LAKESIDE 8 ADDITION – PLANNING CASE 2014-04: REQUEST FOR SUBDIVISION OF TH .2338 ACRES OF PROPERTY (REPLAT OF LOTS 1-3, BLOCK 3, LAKESIDE 7 ADDITION) INTO TWO (2) LOTS; AND A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE A THREE-UNIT TOWNHOUSE TO A TWINHOME ON PROPERTY ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-RESIDENTIAL (PUD-R) AND LOCATED AT 35, 45 AND 55 RILEY CURVE, TH LAKESIDE 8 ADDITION. APPLICANT: RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION (REC, INC.) Generous: Thank you Chairman Aller, commissioners. This is just a slightly more complicated project. th It’s a Lakeside 8 Addition. They’re replatting three lots into two and they’re amending the site plan so that they have a two unit building instead of a three unit building within the project. This property is located on Riley Curve within Chanhassen which is on the north side of Lake Riley. This is the last, the th 7 Addition was the last phase of this project that was platted. As you can see the three unit structure was right adjacent to the internal private street system. They’re proposing to go the two unit structure in two lots. Again they’re replatting three lots into two and they’re amending the site plan to change a three unit structure to two unit structure. This shows how the plat, they have the three lots currently. They’re going to add a new lot line in there and vacate the existing one. There’s no drainage and utility easements within, internal to the plat. They’re all outside so there was no vacation required as part of this. The site plan, the structures get a little bigger because they’re a two unit structure instead of the three unit structure. Slightly narrower on the entire site and complies with all the other setback requirements. The grading plan, this will be a lookout unit so about 7 feet of the lower level will be exposed and then they’ll have a, on the building elevation you can see. This is the lookout level and then they’ll have the main level slightly up, 7 feet above grade. Continues a lot of the same material elements from the rest of the project. Slightly different elevation from some of the other buildings in there so. And again this is what thth the overall 7 Addition with the new 8 Addition will look like so again instead of having a three unit structure like this, they’re having a two unit. Staff is recommending approval of the subdivision and the amendment to the site plan for a two unit building and adoption of the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. With that I’d be happy to answer any questions. Aller: I’m going to ask you the same question Bob with regard to hard cover and water, potential problems or lack of problems. There’s no impact? Generous: There’s no, actually there’s a little reduction in the hard cover but minimal. This is a planned development. We looked at the entire project all the way up to the lakes so. Aller: And as a practical matter they’re just shifting the use of the space into two. Generous: Right. Aller: Consolidating. Generous: And the applicant is here tonight so he can go into that further if he likes. Aller: Any additional questions based on the report? Weick: Is it here because it was approved with three? Generous: Yes. It was 3 lots and administratively we couldn’t change those lot lines. Weick: Okay. 3 Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 18, 2014 Aller: Okay. If the applicant wants to come forward he can do so at this time. If not, that’s fine as well. Welcome sir. If you could state your name and address for the record. Mike Roebuck: Mike Roebuck, Ron Clark Construction. 16431 Highland Circle in Lakeville, Minnesota. Aller: Welcome. Mike Roebuck: Good evening. Just I’m here for any questions. I think Bob kind of explained our reasoning. Get a little more side yard and the two unit building fits the lot a little bit better than the three did. Aller: Is this primarily market driven? You just think it will market better as a larger unit or is it? Mike Roebuck: Yeah it’s really just I guess a combination of that. Just the building fits. We kind of had it squeezed in there pretty tight so this gives us a little more green space and gives us the ability to enlarge a few rooms than the previous design. Aller: Great. Any other questions of the applicant? Yusuf: Bob I think you mentioned that it will look different from the other houses in the same development, right? Will it be significantly different? Mike Roebuck: Actually it looks pretty much the same as the three unit building right across the street. Yusuf: Okay. Mike Roebuck: It’s the same style as that. The other buildings, the other twinhomes we built out there were a little bit different but as far as the building right across the street, pretty much the same. Yusuf: Okay, thank you. Aller: Great. Thank you sir. We appreciate you coming in. Mike Roebuck: Thank you. Aller: With that we’ll open the public hearing portion of the meeting. Again anyone wishing to speak for or against the request being made before us tonight, please come forward to do so. Seeing no one I will close the public hearing portion of the meeting. Open it to comments. Any additional comments? Weick: No. Aller: Looks good. It’s consistent with the other plan. With that I’ll entertain a motion. Yusuf: I’ll make the motion. Aller: Okay. Yusuf: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends City Council approve the subdivision creating two lots out of three lots and an amendment to the site plan to permit a two unit structure in place of the three unit structure, and adopt the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 4 Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 18, 2014 Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Hokkanen: I’ll second. Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion? Yusuf moved, Hokkanen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends City Council approve the subdivision creating two lots out of three lots and an amendment to the site plan to permit a two unit structure in place of the three unit structure, and adopt the Findings of Fact and Recommendation subject to the following conditions: Subdivision th 1. The development shall comply with the conditions of approval for the Lakeside 7 Addition. 2. The reduction of one lot will require that the City process a $1,400 credit in park fees. Site Plan 1. Buildings over 9,250 square feet in area (floor area to include all floors, basements and garages) must be protected with an automatic fire protection system. 2. A final grading plan and soils report must be submitted to the Inspections Division before permits can be issued. 3. Retaining walls over four feet high require a design by a professional engineer, a building permit, inspections and final approval. 4. Walls and projections within five feet of property lines are required to be of one-hour fire- resistive construction. 5. Buildings are required to be designed by an architect and engineer (licensed in the State of Minnesota) as determined by the Building Official. 6. The developer and/or their agent shall meet with the Inspections Division as early as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 7. The site plan shall comply with the conditions of approval granted in conjunction with Lakeside th 7 Addition. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Hokkanen noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated January 7, 2014 as presented. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: CITY COUNCIL ACTION UPDATE AND FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEMS. Aanenson: Thank you Chair, members of the commission. We did not have a meeting the last time so some of our items haven’t gone to council because there’s been a bit of a lag time there so for the January th 27 one we did look at the Interim Use for the parking lot construction so that’s one item that has gone forward. Just for your information too, with the water tower that’s up there, I’m not sure if you’re aware of that. So the water tower that we toured, the new water tower. So the utilities on the old water tower are being moved over, except for the AT&T. They’re doing a temporary structure there so that will be on the middle school site and once the tower is down, which should be happening sometime here in the next 5 Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 18, 2014 couple weeks, they’ll move that back onto the old water tower site for a few months then eventually that building where they get their electronics and everything will be constructed and they’ll move their facility over there and so that site will be vacated. And then of course you approved the Hummingbird metes and bounds and that also was approved by the City Council. I think we’re waiting for a few issues to come in th on that and that will be ready to pull permits on that one too for those two lots. And then on the 10 there was no items of planning in so. And as Bob indicated these will be going yeah March. Second one in th March for the March 10 for the, for action. So with that. Aller: Future agenda items. Aanenson: Yeah, thank you. I wanted to make sure we went through that too. We did have two other subdivisions that came in. The Arbor Cove and the Fretham and both of those had some issues with them. Some little nuances that we’re trying to work through. One, a drainage ravine kind of going into the property and the other one actually had kind of an encumbered easement we’re trying to resolve so we had some legal opinions on that so we’re trying to get those two issues resolved, so they were taken off. They came in actually two weeks ago and then they didn’t submit again last Friday so we’re still trying to work through those issues with the applicant and probably property owners and the like but we do believe those two subdivisions will come forward. Again one of them was on a property that we had some issues with before so we’re hoping that solves some neighborhood problems there. Then the other one, so those th are kind of a place holder for the 18 but for sure Boulder Cove will be in. Lennar’s picked up that project and that’s on the north side of Highway 7 and that one looks good. We’ve gone through that to make sure th that the applicant is still alive so we do have a meeting on March 4. We do have one item coming forward and that’s an industrial site. So then our work session on the first. So your task later tonight will then be to interview potential planning commissioners. I did want to clarify that Commissioner Undestad is reapplying so he will not be in the interviews and anybody that’s reapplying will not sit in the interviews. And then for the work session right now what we have in place is kind of what we do, we’ll do kind of the general order of business. Chair. Vice-Chair. Kind of set the schedule. We’ll also talk about year end review. Kind of give you an idea of all the projects that we did. Building permit activity and the like. Then also we’re kicking off the 101/61 corridor study. The City Engineer and myself would be meeting with the, we’ve got an engineering firm looking at utilities and then another planning firm looking at the land use down at the southern end of the city so this group will be pretty involved in that discussion too so while we had that kick off meeting here this Thursday, we’ll get you up to speed when we meet in April but we’ll have a couple open houses and you will kind of be some of the hosts for that too to kind of hear feedback on what our residents think about that. And then we’ll also talk about on our work session the new regulations for stormwater management and how it’s affecting some of these developments, and that’s some of the reasons these projects are getting hung up a little bit too, trying to work through those new regulations. Now having said that, there’s always a, the difficult thing trying to balance, we have a lot of projects that are kind of coming together here and I don’t want to have you, you know have 3 or 4 on one meeting so it’s always trying to juggle that so having said that, if those two other thth smaller subdivisions don’t come together for the 18, then we miss the 18. We have, yeah. They didn’t thst make the 18 so actually they would down til April 1 so what we would do then, if we can get these issues resolved, they’re really, you know they’re 3 and 4 lot subdivisions so they’re less complicated. st Hopefully if we get the issues resolved. Then I may put those on for the April 1, depending on what else. I’m just again trying to juggle so we don’t have everything piling up on us now because we’re working on a couple other projects too so we’ll just play that by ear. I just want you to know that we will have meetings here the couple next, I anticipate through the rest of the year now. Things are getting, it was cold. We were having getting problems with our projects that were out in the field getting footings in and kind of trying to keep working on things so I think things are underway. So what we may do, because we have to have the oath of office at the beginning of the meeting and do that order of business, we’ll take that part of the meeting. Do the public hearings if there are any and then we’ll go into work session so that one might be a little bit longer. And we’ll see if we can start a little sooner. Usually that’s 6 Chanhassen Planning Commission – February 18, 2014 something that we have a light meal of something. We’ll see how that plays out so we’ll keep you posted on that but sorry, that was a little bit lengthy but trying to get the year off to a good start here so, with that you do have in your packet then the candidates so after your adjournment then we’ll go to a different room. It’s a little more comfortable instead of you being up in the. Aller: Rather than being up here. Aanenson: That’s all I had Chair. Aller: Great. Anything from anyone else? Commissioners, any announcements? Great. Well with that I’ll entertain a motion to adjourn. Undestad moved, Yusuf 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 7:20 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 7