PC Minutes 10-21-2014
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 21, 2014
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Lisa Hokkanen, Kim Tennyson, Steve
Weick and Dan Campion
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Maryam Yusuf
STAFF PRESENT:
Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior
Planner; and Alyson Fauske, Assistant City Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING:
TWIN CITIES SELF STORAGE: REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1987-02 TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF STORAGE
BUILDINGS; AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR FIVE ADDITIONAL STORAGE
BUILDINGS ON APPROXIMATELY 16.5 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED BUSINESS
FRINGE (BF) AND LOCATED AT 1900 STOUGHTON AVENUE AND 1875 FLYING
CLOUD DRIVE (CR 61). APPLICANT/OWNER: BRUCE LAMO, TWIN CITIES SELF
STORAGE, CHASKA LLC, PLANNING CASE 2014-31.
Generous: Thank you Chairman Aller, commissioners. Planning Case 2014-31 is an
amendment to an existing Conditional Use Permit for a storage facilities down on Stoughton
Avenue and site plan review for the expansion. They’re proposing 4 additional, or 5 additional
buildings. Each one 14,250 square feet. Tonight’s a public hearing. This is scheduled for City
th
Council on November 10. The applicant is Bruce Lamo who is also the property owner.
Again this is located in southern Chanhassen. It borders on Chaska to the northwest and then
Chanhassen is to the east of it. It’s currently composed of two parcels. One of the conditions of
approval would be that they recombine these parcels as a zoning lot and so that’s what they’re,
there are existing 6 buildings on the site. There’s a storage, outdoor storage area that’s gravel on
the northwest corner of the existing storage facility. The expansion would be all to the west
along the south property line and an additional building in that area. Once the final building is
built the outdoor storage would go away. This amendment increases a number of storage
buildings on the property and the site plan review is actually for the details on the site.
Development and redevelopment. Twin Cities Self Storage is the name of the project. Again
there are 6 storage buildings located in the southeast corner of the property. There’s a gravel
area located in this area and as well as on the west side of the property. This is where the
expansion would take place. There’s a stormwater pond that as part of this development would
need to be expanded to accommodate the additional stormwater runoff that would be generated
from the hard surfaces. The property is zoned Fringe Business District. This district
accommodates limited commercial uses that are considered temporary in nature. When urban
services are eventually brought down to this area we think all the area will intensify it’s uses.
Cold storage and warehousing are conditional uses in the BF District and the BF District is
limited in that only 40% of the site may be developed under the current zoning category so with,
even with the expansion 60% of the site would be available for future development. The
property is guided for office industrial uses and the City is in the process of looking at the 61
corridor for land use potential amendments or urban services extension to this area. I believe it’s
Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 21, 2014
a project that we’ll be bringing over the winter and next spring for adoption. As part of the
current study this land would be continue to be guided for office industrial uses. Again the
storage facilities are cold storage and warehousing are conditional uses in the BF District.
They’re increasing the number of buildings and so that’s what the amendment is. The previous
approval had 8 buildings total and this one will bring it up to 11. As part of the conditional use
permit there’s not any specific findings for storage or warehouse facilities so we used the general
findings under the conditional use permits. And the conditions of approval would be that they
comply with the site plan approval criteria conditions. A site plan, their proposed expansion
would be phased over time. The first two buildings would be developed would be P-1’s. They
would be immediately west of the existing buildings and then as those are leased out they would
build the next building and then the next one and then finally the fifth building if that take place.
We did look at this briefly to make sure that this could accommodate future access potential from
the northwest, which would be an extension of, possible extension of Engler Boulevard which
would serve this property as well as the ones to the north and west of here. And again as part of
this development they will be expanding the stormwater area to accommodate the additional
runoff from the hard surfaces. The building materials consist of block and a stucco finish on the
metal. They’re low profile buildings. It will be a tan stucco and it’s a reddish brown brick. It’s
very traditional in color and design. The brick would only be on the end but these are the ends
that would be visible. Potentially visible from the public. However we doubt that that will
happen because there’s several rows of trees that are between that and Stoughton Boulevard. All
the doors are angled towards each other interior wise so you won’t see those elevations and they
would have the stucco metal finish between the doors. They would continue the colors within
the, earth tone colors that are within the rest of the development. Again these are very low
profile. Shallow roof angles and it will be difficult to see from on site. The grading plan.
They’re proposing to grade the area that is proposed for the expansion. Provide a drainage swale
from that area down to the stormwater pond and again expand the stormwater area to
accommodate the additional runoff from the site. Landscaping. There are some revisions that
they’ll need to make. They’ve currently shown all the trees along the south property line.
However there are additional buffer yard requirements from the north and west and what staff is
proposing is that be limited or pulled in around, immediately around these building areas so that
it can provide potentially future buffering between a future use to the north within the property.
Staff is recommending approval of the amendment to the conditional use permit to allow the 11
storage buildings for cold storage and warehousing and site plan review for 5 additional 14,250
square foot one story storage buildings and adoption of the Findings of Fact and
Recommendation. With that I’d be happy to answer the questions.
Aller: Any questions? It looks like Bob that they’re going to phase this in building by building.
Generous: Yes.
Aller: So as the use actually increases that’s when they’ll undertake to do the building of the
buildings themselves or construction of the buildings.
Generous: Mr. Chairman, the intention is to build the first two buildings and then as those fill up
they would come in and start the next process so it’d be just a building permit process as we go
forward.
Aller: Okay and then.
2
Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 21, 2014
Aanenson: If I may Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. We did talk to the applicant
too about that as we look at municipal services down there and timing and just kind of keeping
that in mind as those buildings. Even if we go to office industrial, these would still be a
permitted use within the district but then looking at higher and better uses as a possibility in the
future, just to keep that in mind so I think they’re just, he’s taking you know just kind of a wait
and see. You know he’s got an option to go forward but if the market changes he can adapt to
that too.
Aller: Great. And then the grading will be done all at the same time or as these buildings are
constructed?
Generous: It would all be done at one time because they have to provide that stormwater system.
Aller: And that was my question. The stormwater will be for the entire site regardless of the
future use so we’re protecting and preserving that area from the runoff. How does it look down
there?
Fauske: As indicated in the staff report there’s still some minor revisions to the plans that the
staff has requested. Since the report went out staff has been in contact with the engineer and
feels very comfortable with the way this plan is progressing and that they can meet all the
conditions stated in the staff report.
Aller: Okay.
Campion: I have one question.
Aller: Commissioner Campion.
Campion: The environmental resources, the trees they had none planned right? No trees, shrubs
or what not that I saw in the staff report. That we were asking them to make up for some of that
so in total are we requiring that they would meet you know the total requirements?
Generous: Yes. They would have to meet those minimum standards and I believe he’s actually
beyond on that southern property line so it’s more reallocation on site and working with Jill. The
City Forester to come up with an acceptable plan.
Campion: Okay.
Aller: Any additional questions? Okay, if the applicant would like to come forward and make a
presentation they may do so at this time. If not, that’s fine too. Seeing no one. Okay. He
doesn’t have to come forward if he doesn’t want to.
Bruce Lamo: Sure I can.
Aller: Great. If you could just state your name and representation.
3
Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 21, 2014
Bruce Lamo: I’m Bruce Lamo. I’m the owner of Twin Cities Self Storage and appreciate your
time and attention. Just to clarify, I did propose putting in a lot of trees to begin with because I
knew with the homeowners that are on Stoughton, I didn’t want them to be, even though I think
my buildings, I think they’re relatively attractive. That’s my personal taste. I didn’t think it was
something that they wanted to look at so I knew from the very start that I’d be, I would be
coming in with a, what I think is an attractive row of trees to separate my property from them so
that was always the intention and you know I want this to look good because it reflects me and
my business and it’s, I’m part of the city so I want it to look good for everybody. As far as the
phased building, you know I don’t know if I will fill all the buildings and she was correct that my
plan is, if I can, if there’s a better use that comes along 5, 10, 15 years down the road, if I haven’t
built out the buildings. If someone else has a better use for that land you know I certainly will be
interested, particularly if you bring more utilities down there so it does give me the flexibility
and I purchased 9 ½ acres and I’m only able to use about a hundred and some thousand square
feet now but that will all change if and when that development changes, and that could change
you know everything in the neighborhood so I don’t want to get ahead of myself and build a
bunch of empty buildings now and have them sit there so I think everyone is looking at this the
same way. Hopefully it’s acceptable to everyone.
Aller: Nor do we which is why I was asking the question. I think it looks like a prudent thing to
do.
Bruce Lamo: Yeah.
Aller: And at the highest best use of the property is what we always want for our homeowners
so we’re glad to see that happen.
Bruce Lamo: Right.
Aanenson: Mr. Chairman if I could just make one clarification. Just clarify what Mr. Lamo was
talking about. There’s a few homes right on Stoughton that are going to be abutting the
expansion. You’ve got the cemetery that’s actually in Chaska that Bob’s pointing to right now
and then there’s a couple homes right in there and that’s what Mr. Lamo was talking about
planting that landscaping because you do have homes closer there and then we did receive some
calls from those homeowners and also the ones across the street for their visibility so that was the
intent with the additional screening of the landscaping to provide that.
Aller: And it sounds like there’s no opposition to doing that.
Bruce Lamo: No. I want them to be comfortable and happy with what they look at when they
look out the windows or drive by so.
Aller: Great. Any additional questions? Comments. Thank you sir. Appreciate it.
Bruce Lamo: Thank you.
Aller: With that I’ll open the public hearing portion of the meeting on this item. Anyone
wishing to come forward speaking either for or against that item can do so at this time.
4
Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 21, 2014
Welcome sir. If you could come forward and step to the podium and state your name and
address.
James Kavorian: Yeah my name is James Kavorian. My address is 1905 Stoughton.
Aller: Welcome.
James Kavorian: Right across the street from my good neighbor and we’re buddies and I was
just kind of concerned about you know some of the lighting and things like that because we like
our dark neighborhood and Bruce has been really good with us when he moved in to at least turn
some of the lights that he had put in before and get them out from lighting up our yard because
we’re really right across the street. So I’m kind of concerned about you know that. You know
lighting and then I don’t know or I am concerned about whether there’s going to be another
entrance to that property because there is, basically it’s right across from my driveway
practically and I’m just kind of concerned about congestion there or more traffic right in front of
our house so. And that’s all. I’m just asking those questions.
Aller: Thank you. No, we appreciate your concerns and we’ll see whether we can have a
discussion about those items.
James Kavorian: Alright.
Aller: So if we could, if you could address those that would be great.
Generous: As far as lighting, we did look at that. He’s only proposed wall pack units on the
building. No aerial lighting so it will be minimal. The hours of operation are very limited. I
believe he locks it up by 10:00 at night. There is only, currently there will be only the one access
point but this isn’t a peak trip generation place so, and then in the future provided that roadway
extension takes place, that would relieve for future development to the west.
Aanenson: Just to clarify that. So there’s no additional entrances being proposed. Yep.
Aller: Right.
Bruce Lamo: Well if I.
Aller: Please go ahead.
Bruce Lamo: From a storage facility perspective I wouldn’t want another entrance. I have one
entrance now and it’s much easier just to control with one gate and I had no intention of moving
it so the gate will stay where it is. All the traffic that comes and go will stay at the same place.
There is a, the neighbors driveway, which the former owner used to use to service that property, I
think there might have been some concerns with some people that that might become my new
business driveway. That was never the intention. That is the neighbor’s property. I don’t plan
on using that driveway. I’ll just use the driveway that I have with the gate system that I have.
Aller: Okay. And then the use of the property because you’re building two extra buildings, you
don’t foresee any major increase in traffic then which would be the other concern.
5
Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 21, 2014
Bruce Lamo: No. I mean there will be some. We’ll have more customers but self storage is a
fairly low traffic volume business. You know on any given day it could be anywhere from, in
the winter it’s very slow. It could be 2 to 3 customers a day or sometimes less and sometimes on
the weekend in the summer it could be 15 or 20 cars in a day. You know it does peak, you know
holidays sometimes people coming and go but it’s on a day to day basis it doesn’t change all that
much.
Aller: Okay. Any additional questions in light of what’s been said? Thank you sir. Anyone
else wishing to come forward speaking either for or against an item. Seeing no one come
forward I’ll close the public hearing portion of the meeting on this particular item and entertain
discussion or seems pretty straight forward.
Hokkanen: Looks good, yeah.
Aller: I’m glad that we went with, or the applicant’s going with a stucco instead of steel.
Hokkanen: It looks nice.
Aller: I think the traffic won’t be too bad if we’re looking at just the 2 additional buildings based
on the history of the buildings themselves and the standard that is there so. Does anyone wish to
make a motion at this time?
Hokkanen: Okay, the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council
approve the amendment to the Conditional Use Permit to allow 11 storage buildings for cold
storage and warehousing and site plan review for five 14,250 square foot one-story storage
buildings subject to the conditions of the staff report and adopts the Findings of Fact and
Recommendation.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Campion: Second.
Aller: I have a motion from Commissioner Hokkanen, second from Commissioner Campion.
Any further discussion?
Hokkanen moved, Campion seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission
recommends that the City Council approve the amendment to the Conditional Use Permit
to allow 11 storage buildings for cold storage and warehousing; and site plan review for
five 14,250 square foot one-story storage buildings subject to the following conditions and
adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation:
Conditional Use Permit
1.The 60 parking stalls for vehicle storage shall be confined to the area labeled Building P4.
2.The development shall comply with site plan 2014-31, plans prepared by Carlson McCain
dated September 5, 2014.
6
Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 21, 2014
Site Plan
Building:
1.The buildings are required to have automatic fire extinguishing systems.
2.Building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of
Minnesota.
3.Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit
must be obtained prior to construction.
4.Detailed occupancy related requirements will be addressed when complete building plans are
submitted.
Engineering:
1.The applicant must provide adequate evidence that there is no area on the subject property
suitable for infiltration. The discussion must include the practicality of altering the site
layout.
2.The hydrologic modeling must be completed with accepted literature values for the soil type
present or the applicant must provide evidence that the infiltration rates are equal to the 3.97
inches per hour assumed for the model. The applicant must provide water quality modeling,
acceptable under Section 19-144(a)(1)c. of Chanhassen City Code, showing that the water
quality treatment conditions are met for the required water quality volume from all new
impervious surfaces.
3.A comprehensive, standalone SWPPP document with all elements required by Part III of the
NPDES construction permit, the provided checklist and Section 19-145 of city code shall be
prepared and submitted to the City for review and comment before any earth-disturbing
activities, including but not limited to removal of any existing surfaces or structures, and
removal of vegetation will be allowed or any grading permit will be issued.
4.The conveyance must be stabilized along the entire length and energy dissipation and erosion
prevention practices must be designed and implemented to protect the infiltration basin from
unnecessary sediment deposition.
5.The applicant shall include a materials list and engineers opinion of cost for all items
necessary to meet the SWPPP requirements for erosion prevention and sediment control
including the materials necessary for six (6) inches of topsoil and final stabilization. This
amount shall be collected as escrow for erosion control.
6.The applicant shall prepare an operations and maintenance manual for the channel.
7.Assurances shall be provided for the conveyance channel consistent with the MS4 permit
requirements for systems not owned and maintained by the MS4 permittee. Specifically:
7
Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 21, 2014
a.It must allow for the city to conduct inspections, perform maintenance and assess costs
when the permittee determines that the owner and/or operator of the structural stormwater
BMP has not conducted maintenance.
b.It must include conditions that are designed to preserve the permittee’s right to ensure
maintenance responsibility...when those responsibilities are legally transferred to another
party.
c.It must include conditions that are designed to protect/preserve structural stormwater
BMPs and site features that are implemented to comply with Part III.D.5.a(2). If site
configurations or structural stormwater BMPs change, causing decreased structural
stormwater BMP effectiveness, new or improved structural stormwater BMPs must be
implemented to ensure the conditions for post-construction stormwater management in
Part III.D.5.a(2) continue to be met
8.The applicant must procure and comply with the requirements of all other jurisdictional
agencies with authority over the project area.
9.The plan shall be redrawn to 50-scale or larger, and must show the location of the benchmark
used in the survey.
10.The first floor elevation and corner elevations of the nearby buildings must be labeled to
confirm that the grading will allow water to flow away from all structures onsite.
11.The pond’s Emergency Overflow Elevation and location must be shown on the plans.
12.Due to the location of the open channel drainage, the developer’s engineer shall submit
phased grading and erosion control plans. The plan phasing shall illustrate the erosion
control that will be in place as the different buildings are constructed in Phase 1 through
Phase 4.
13.The plan sheets must identify any proposed stockpile locations and the erosion control
measures to contain them.
14.The aisles around the perimeter of the buildings must meet a minimum of width of 30 feet to
allow 8-foot parking on one side and a 22-foot driving aisle.
15.The corners of the parking lot shall be modified to provide adequate aisle width.
Environmental Resources Specialist:
1.The applicant shall provide landscape buffers to the north of buildings P2, P3 and P4 and the
west of P3. The required number of trees for the vehicular use area shall be incorporated into
the buffer landscaping.
2.The applicant shall submit a revised landscape plan showing the additional buffers as well as
an alternate selection to blue spruce.
8
Chanhassen Planning Commission – October 21, 2014
Fire:
1.The new buildings will be required to have an approved fire sprinkler suppression system
installed. Plans shall be drawn by a sprinkler design professional and submitted to
Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval.
2.Twelve-inch building address numbers must be installed on each end of the
building. Numbers must be of contrasting color. Contact Fire Marshal for additional
information.
3.“No Parking Fire Lane” signs will be required. Contact Fire Marshal for specific areas to be
signed.
Planning:
1.The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary
security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping.
2.The applicant shall create a zoning lot and recombine the two properties as one parcel.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
7015 SANDY HOOK CIRCLE: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LIMITATION TO CONSTRUCT A DRIVEWAY ON
PROPERTY ZONED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RSF) AND LOCATED AT
7015 SANDY HOOK CIRCLE. APPLICANT/OWNER: RICK KOLBOW, PLANNING
CASE 2014-32.
Generous: Thank you Chairman Aller, commissioners. Again this is a hard surface coverage
variance request. Planning commission as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments can make a
final determination provided they have a 75 percent vote on it. The applicants are Rick and Julie
Kolbow. The property’s located at 7015 Sandy Hook Circle. This is in, what was it? Colonial
nd
Grove 2 Addition is the name of the plat. It was platted in 1980. The Colonial Grove was
actually originally platted in 1956 so it’s an older subdivision within the community. Oh I
should point out that I did hand out tonight two emails that we received after the packets went
out and also we have an alternative findings for the commission if they so desire.
Aller: Thank you and for the record we have received the two email items and the additional
Findings of Fact and Decision as an alternative.
Generous: The property owners as part of their request to get a 4.8 percent hard surface
coverage variance to expand their garage and to create a parking area next to their, to the garage.
In the future they intend to use this parking area to build an additional stall on the garage and so
they would not be increasing any of the hard surface coverage at that time. It would be currently.
They’d also like to use gravel for that parking area on the side of the garage as an interim cover.
However city code does require that a driveway be an improved surface. Asphalt, bituminous
pavers, things like that. Staff in reviewing this we determined that they actually over calculated
the hard surface coverage on the property because they included the driveway portion within the
9