Loading...
PC 2016 01 19 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 19, 2016 Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Nancy Madsen, Steve Weick, and Lisa Hokkanen MEMBERS ABSENT: Maryam Yusuf and John Tietz STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and Terry Jeffery, Water Resources Coordinator DISCUSSION OF UPDATED SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. Jeffery: Sure Planning Commissioners, thanks. Appreciate the opportunity. I apologize. I had every intention of tonight being the night that we’re finally we’re going to put the local water management plan to rest. Sent it out for comment and then 60 days from now approve it. However state statute changed this last summer and the most significant change affecting our local water management plan is that the local water management plan must be adopted after December 31, 2016 and before December 31, 2018 so can’t really go forward with it right now but in addition to that there have been a few other changes. Well more significantly the good thing about the timing of this is that now rather than having the merry-go-round where Minnehaha Creek finishes their plan. Then we have to respond to it. Then Riley-Purgatory finishes their plan, then we have to respond to it and that just keeps going around and never seems to end. Now they’ll all be on this very similar 10 year plan so they will update at the same time and we’ll just follow suit with it. So right now in order to stay with that timing Minnehaha Creek is in the process of updating their plan. They’re not changing any of the rules at this time. They’re just looking at their capital improvement plans and then the way that they’re going to cost share with cities. It actually should be beneficial to all of the cities involved. Riley- Purgatory is doing what they are calling a refreshment of their plan. Again they, because their capital program was rather prescriptive what they’re finding is that every time they had to deviate a little bit from a plan because of an engineer’s recommendation they had to go back and update their plan just to, Lake Susan Spent Lime that we’re putting in right now. That facility in their plan was a iron enhanced sand filter. Because that’s not what’s going in they had to amend their plan so they’re just more changing their language so that it’s a little more lenient. There’s a little more discrepancy. Carver County WMO is the one body that is changing their rules. Unlike the other watershed districts the WMO is permitted under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System as an MS4 authority. When the PCA reviewed their rules they found them to be lacking. They didn’t come to the 1 inch standards really is what it boiled down to so they’re in the process of updating their rules. Lower Minnesota River Watershed District just finished their plan update. At this time they have no rules but in the conversation that I’ve Chanhassen Planning Commission – January 19, 2016 had with both the district engineer and the district administrator over the last 2 weeks they have both indicated to me that they might start to exercise some rule authority but on a minor or a very scaled version. They’d be looking at bluff areas or areas that discharge to Seminary Fen. For most of the watershed district doesn’t have any bearing but for us that’s entirely all of what we have in the lower but all of these organizations plan on doing whatever it is that they’re changing in the 2017 year so we should all be on the same schedule moving forward from there. The other change that has come about is the plan content or the clarity content of our plan. So like the plan before we had to have an executive summary. Self explanatory. We need to include water resource agreements so right now for instance we have an agreement with Carver County WMO to jointly do educational programming. They have full time staff that does water resources education. We just partner with them usually in a financial way but we will help the staff hours…where we can. We also have an agreement with the Carver County SWCD to do erosion inspections on some of our larger sites but the other agreements that will be included will be the memorandums of understanding that we will eventually enter into and you will be a part of the drafting or at least reviewing that draft as we update our local controls or our code to meet their plan requirements. So really what the memorandum of understanding is going to do is it’s going to say well yes, we’re going to go ahead and we’re going to take regulatory authority for these items. Stormwater management for instance, erosion control, flood plain. Those are the things that have the largest effect on our land use plan. It’s what makes the most sense in here but then there are other aspects that the watershed districts like Minnehaha Creek or Riley-Purgatory have in place such as water body crossings which is really just the DNR gave a general permit to the watershed districts to enforce those rules on behalf of the DNR so it really doesn’t make sense for us to update our rules so that we take that authority because then we’d have to enter into a subsequent agreement with the DNR so those we’d probably just leave to the watershed districts to administer. What we have completed to date and is required in both plans are the existing and proposed physical environmental land use so what you see in the image to the right is just, it’s the Lake Lucy, we call it the H&H model. The hydraulics and hydrologic model for Lake Lucy. We need to show every sub-watershed how much water, the volume of water, the rate of water and the flow path of water coming out of it so we can manage for that now and in the future. We use that to identify potential flooding or capacity issues that we might have. Kate will be talking with you later about the Comprehensive Plan and that’s where most of the land use information is going to come from as that is updated. Then this will be then used for the next part which is to identify existing potential issues throughout the city. We have a lot of them already. The storm events of June 2 years ago showed us a lot of them. Flooding events are a lot of the issues but we also have the H&H model. We have worked with Riley-Purgatory to update the use sustainability assessments for Lake Lucy, Lake Ann, Lake Riley, Lake Susan. We’re currently working on Lotus and Rice Marsh Lake and all of those, what those allow us to do is to rather than say well we need to find some water quality treatment somewhere in this watershed. It allows us to target areas that we know are significantly greater in their contribution to the pollutant load as opposed to, in essence allows us to get a more efficient use of that money rather than just saying let’s put in a feature because we need to put in a feature. Why not instead we take it and put it over here and use that. But in addition to the issues we also will need to take public comment on that so I’ll be working with the Environmental Commission to put together a 2 Chanhassen Planning Commission – January 19, 2016 survey and to hold neighborhood meetings as needed. And then lastly the local limitation plan. How are we going to address those issues and that’s everything from the actual structural best management practices that we’ll do to the local controls that we’ll be updating. So a lot of that is, what’s notably absent that we had to do always before this and actually that is the bulk of the plan that we already had done is goals and policies. We don’t need it. They don’t need to be put into these plans anymore. Your goals are to comply with the watershed districts authority and NPDES permits, etcetera so we had a large part of this plan done but rather than, and then we’ll be working on the local controls as we move forward and so we can put the entire plan together in one. Prior to this I was actually going to say that we’ll put the plan out for review and then we’ll work on the local controls after but since we now have this new change in schedule we’ll work on the local controls throughout the summer here so that we can put the entire plan out for review and comment at the end of the year. Here’s again a chart of what’s going on. Don’t worry about this. I’ve got a condensed version of what’s really going to be germane to this body but like I said I am going to be using the Environmental Commission to do a lot of our public outreach so we can get the stakeholder businesses and residents to identify what they see as issues. The end date for all of this is January of 2017 so January 22, 2017 is when I want to have approved the plan. Adopted the plan. So Planning Commission. This is when I, see you’re in th the top column. The top row. I want to be back before you on the 9. Some of this will be, well th all of this will be new to Kate too. I want to be back before you on the 19 of April and at that time I would like to talk about the flood plain, erosion control and the storm water ordinances and flood plain and erosion control should be very little change. There’ll be some. Mostly including definitions that are already there. Just make sure that we clean up language so it’s consistent with the watershed districts. The storm water ordinance will be an entire re-write. It will be completely new from what we have now. If that goes well, depending upon your th recommendation and the public hearing then we go to council on May 9 with that. I left buffer management for the June meeting because that’s the one that I still don’t have an idea how to best address it. In addition to having 3 separate buffer rules from the 4 management organizations, we also as a city have 4 separate sets of rules depending upon when an area was platted. So I want to some how simplify that because that’s just, it’s too onerous for everybody. Anybody to undertake. For this body to understand. For a developer to understand. For the homeowner to understand and for staff to manage so I want to come to you in June with a recommendation of what we’ll do with that buffer ordinance. Council in July. That would mean th October 4 would be when I would like to come back to ask for approval to distribute the plan for review to Met Council, to the watershed organizations, to the surrounding cities. October rd 23 the City Council will act on your recommendation. 60 day comment period would end about the middle of December. Will come back, address any comments that we receive and then th January 17 be back before this body in 2017 to approve the plan adoption. Going before rd council on the 23. That’s all I wanted to do at this time. I just wanted to get you thinking about it again. I know that a little over 12 months ago I was talking to you about yeah, we’re going to be going. We’re going to be done with this by now. We’re not. Starting all over really in essence with the rule changes but January will be it so if you have any questions I’d be happy to answer them. Otherwise thank you for your time. 3 Chanhassen Planning Commission – January 19, 2016 Aller: Any questions from any individual? I just have a comment and I appreciate all the time and effort you put into these matters Mr. Jeffery. With the extra time obviously it sounds like you’ve got it set up to simplify these rules, which adds to the transparency and is a benefit to all the homeowners because they can get a better understanding and idea what they can and can’t do with their property, which is beneficial to all so thank you for everything you’re doing. Alright, so with that we’ll move onto the first public hearing and last public hearing tonight. PUBLIC HEARING: 6421 HAZELTINE BOULEVARD, PLANNING CASE 2016-03: REQUEST FOR AN INTERIM USE PERMIT TO PERMIT SITE GRADING TO WIDEN THE MAIN ENTRANCE/EXIT DRIVEWAY AT MINNETONKA MIDDLE SCHOOL WEST. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT (OI) AND LOCATED AT 6421 HAZELTINE BOULEVARD. APPLICANT/OWNER: MINNETONKA SCHOOLS, ISD #276. Jeffery: Chairman Aller, Commissioners, thank you. Tonight I think Paul and Cliff from the school district are here to represent. Minnetonka Schools is requesting an interim use permit. As you’ve already mentioned it will be going before the council based upon your recommendation th on February 8. This is a public hearing. The property is located at 6421 Hazeltine Boulevard which is Trunk Highway 41 so it’s in the southeast corner of Trunk Highway 41 and Highway 7, just south of Melody Hills. There are, the request is for an interim use permit because they are moving materials in excess of 1,000 cubic yards. The site plan in front of you shows 2 of the 3 proposed improvements. So if. Aanenson: …shows up in red. Can I use the mouse for a second? I’m sorry. Jeffery: Take it. Oh not that one. I don’t want to go there. Okay. Aanenson: Sorry. Jeffery: Alright. Okay so where did you find the laser? Aanenson: We lost it. Aller: We’ll have to get some Minnetonka students to come in and code us and use their experience. Jeffery: Laser. Oh look at this. Aanenson: It’s your friend. Jeffery: Alright. So this area here is they propose to expand the driveway, the ingress and egress from Trunk Highway 41 and the school. This is to improve traffic flows within the school. 4 Chanhassen Planning Commission – January 19, 2016 Buses will be routed around the outside. Automobiles will be routed around the inside. They will also at the same time be removing this island and replacing the pavement to get additional parking. That’s one of our comments is to maintain that pedestrian access that’s provided for that right now, and then the part that you can’t see is up here by the tennis courts. They’re going to do some trail work to improve pedestrian traffic flow through that area. There were originally, if you look in your staff report there’s discussion of storm water improvement. At one time the school district was going to improve the pond to improve drainage out there. In discussions with them, staff didn’t think that was necessarily well. While it was appreciated, it wasn’t necessarily needed with this project at that time so we’re not doing that. There is some minor drainage improvements that are going to be made in association with the trail but otherwise it’s really about widening the access driveway onto the site. Staff does recommend approval of this with the conditions and Findings of Fact. Yep speak up Bob. Generous: Well I was just saying, put up that email that we received today and they’re really, the concern that we’re seeing is for the traffic on 41 and we are in the process of working with the school district and MnDOT to evaluate traffic conditions there and hopefully as part of that study we can see some improvements that may be possible in the future. Aller: Just quickly for the record, and for those of you at home we did receive an email correspondence regarding this matter which Bob was just addressing. That will be part of the package that goes to the City Council and will be attached to the package on the website so if you want to take a look at this and all the drawings regarding this matter you can do so on the City’s website. Jeffery: There is no reason to believe that this improvement would result in increased traffic. There’s no reason that the daily trips would increase. It’s the same use. We are recommending approval of it with the conditions in the packet. As I said Cliff Buhman who is the engineer for the project and Paul from the District are here. Aller: Great. Any questions of staff at this point? Would the applicant like to come up? Ah Commissioner Weick. Weick: What is the significance of the path that goes between the, that cuts the parking lot? Aanenson: If you go to this first map. It kind of shows the when they walk. Weick: Is that just to keep a walkway to the tennis courts? That’s the idea? Jeffery: Well this trail system does connect to Melody Hills and it connects to a larger trail system so it would be best to continue that. Somehow have that north/south connection. Aanenson: Just so you know what we’ve done in other subdivisions in the area we’ve made connections. There’s one on the south that, and then there’s also one on the. 5 Chanhassen Planning Commission – January 19, 2016 Generous: Southeast. Aanenson: Yeah. On the. Jeffery: Take it. Aanenson: I can’t get the pointer. It’s not working. Yeah over on that side. Yes so we’ve connected both those neighborhoods. You can see there’s walking trails through there so we just want to make sure that that’s continued. Aller: Would the applicants like to come forward? They don’t have to if they don’t want to. Otherwise you can, alright. So with that I’ll open up the public hearing portion of this item. Anyone wishing to come forward to speak either for or against the item can do so at this time. Seeing no one come forward I’ll close the public hearing and open it up for commissioner discussion. I’ve been up there a lot. Commissioner Weick and I, I think that’s a good safety feature up there. The courts are used. Weick: I agree. Aller: The courts are used all the time. It’s a well used property. Weick: I just didn’t know if it was beyond just to keep the walkway there so. Aller: Any questions? I think the packet is pretty self explanatory. Has all the information you need so I’ll entertain a motion at this time either for or against. Undestad: I’ll make a motion. That the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit to permit grading in excess of 1,000 cubic yards to allow parking lot alteration. Widen the main entrance/exit driveway and drainage improvements and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Hokkanen: Second. Aller: Having a motion by Commissioner Undestad, seconded by Commissioner Hokkanen. Any further discussion? Undestad moved, Hokkanen seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends City Council approve the Interim Use Permit to permit grading in excess of 1,000 cubic yards to allow a parking lot alteration, widen the main entrance/exit driveway and 6 Chanhassen Planning Commission – January 19, 2016 stormwater improvements subject to the following conditions and adopts the Findings of Fact and Recommendation: 1.The applicant’s engineer shall adjust the slope of the expanded drive lane to convey runoff to the northeast gutter line. 2.The plans must be revised to label the catch basins to match the CB/MH Schedule on Page C5. 3.Slopes shall be labeled on all proposed pipes. 4.The note for the draintile shall be revised so that no sock is used on the draintile. 5.The applicant shall submit an erosion control plan (including additional detail plates) for this project per City Code §19-154. 6.A $5,000 escrow to guarantee restoration and erosion control measures will be required with the permit. 7.Staff will require that the applicant provide a proposed haul route for review and approval. 8.An as-built grading plan is required at the completion of site grading to ensure compliance with the approved grading plan. 9.MnDOT comments shall be incorporated into the plans. 10.The parking spaces and aisles must be adjusted to meet the Chanhassen City Code requirements. 11.The parking lot design shall be revised to provide a travel path for north-south pedestrians. 12.The applicant shall submit documentation to the city for how the queues will lay out with use of the gates. 13.The plan must follow all applicable State and Federal guidelines. 14.The applicant shall install a total of two islands in the reconfigured parking area and a minimum of four deciduous trees. 15.The interior width of the landscape islands or peninsulas shall be 10 feet. 16.The applicant shall install perimeter landscaping to correspond to existing parking lot site conditions. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. COMMISSIONER PRESENTATIONS. None. 7 Chanhassen Planning Commission – January 19, 2016 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Aller: City Council action update. Aanenson: Yes. Thank you Mr. Chairman. We didn’t have any items on the last City Council so there are no updates so these items are on now will be before it. I think we tried to fast track some of the items at the end of the year to get them passed through. I will give you an upgoing future agenda items. We are working on a few subdivisions so you’ll be seeing some projects come forward. Right now we’re kind of trickling in on some of these but we will have a meeting on nd February 2. There’s a wetland alteration permit variance setback and then we also have one for th the February 16 and we’re also planning on doing Planning Commission interviews so those interviews would be the people that are reapplying wouldn’t be a part of those interviews. But then the council will interview all applying applicants so, we’ll see who applies and how many interviews we may have. Don’t know all that yet. Just plugged in some of Terry’s stuff coming up but we do anticipate a couple projects. Like I said we are working on a couple subdivisions right now and potentially another restaurant. That’s what I read in the paper. And that’s all I had. We’ll do work session after the close of the meeting. Just spend a few minutes kind of going through comp plan. Kind of segue into what we talked about with stormwater management so. Aller: Great. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Hokkanen noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated January 5, 2016 as presented. Undestad moved, Madsen seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 8