PC 2018 06 05
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 5, 2018
Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, John
Tietz, and Michael McGonagill
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Randall
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; and MacKenzie
Walters, Planner
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Richard Hamblin 340 Sinner Circle
Tom Braman 8040 Stevens, Bloomington
PUBLIC HEARING:
1110 LAKE SUSAN DRIVE: LOT COVER VARIANCE.
Walters: Alright this is Planning Case 2018-07. As mentioned if appealed this would go before
th
the City Council on June 25. The applicant Mark A. and Rebecca L. Erickson are requesting a
3 percent lot cover variance for the construction of a 144 square foot storage shed on their
property. The property is located at 1110 Lake Susan Drive. This area is zoned planned unit
development residential. Has a minimum of 11,200 square foot lot areas which have 80 foot
minimum lot width, 30 foot front and rear setbacks, 10 foot side setbacks and the district is
limited to 25 percent lot coverage. The current conditions for the property are, it has an 11,263
square foot lot which has a 76 and change foot lot width. Currently it has a non-conforming 26.8
percent lot cover but it does meet all the district setbacks. The applicant is proposing
constructing a 12 foot by 12 foot, so 144 square foot storage shed in the rear of the property.
This would increase the lot coverage from 3,013 square feet to 3,157 square feet for a 28 percent
so because it does have the existing legal non-conforming when we do the variance we give it for
both the non-conforming and the addition. The justification is this is one of the smallest lots in
the subdivision. Within the subdivision the largest I could find was 150 square feet and then
there are about 10 that are around this 11,200 square foot size. The applicant has noted that
about 75 percent of the lots within their subdivision would be entitled to this lot cover under
and the applicant does not feel that the additional 144 square feet of lot cover will significantly
impact either the neighborhood stormwater or aesthetics and it will provide needed storage for
ordinance. Staff looked it over. We believe that the 25 percent lot cover limit is appropriate for
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
the development. However we do concur with the applicant. Most of the properties within this
are well over the .26 acres so that 11,200 square feet. The total amount of hard cover they are
proposing for the property as well as the use is both reasonable, and again this would be allowed
on most of the other properties within the districts. The Water Resources Coordinator has added
a memo which I attached to the report. It was her determination that on a development level as
maintenance in the area and staff does not believe that the proposed shed would alter the
character of the neighborhood and so here I did just kind of put in the regional context for the
Chanhassen Hills subdivision. The Lake Susan Hills Preserve is here. Lake Susan and the
s
time.
Aller: Does anybody have any questions based on the report?
w
commission and it would help with that, thank you.
Walters:
applying the stormwater management is my understanding. If you have.
they were 25 pe
different today than they were put in place then so in some of these older neighborhoods they are
smaller lots.
McGonagill: Was there historical scientific studies that drove the 25 percent? You know as
opposed to 22 or 28. I mean just, it was just a number that.
Aanenson: Just a standard.
McGonagill: Okay, thanks.
Ma
e anything that the homeowner
could do?
Walters: Yeah looking over that property, one of the reasons why staff is recommending
2
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
patio is I believe 6 by 8 feet. You know the sidewalk is not excessive. Arguably a little bit could
a case where the applicant, you know had constructed a 300 square foot patio and is now trying
theory you know could the sidewalk or patio be replaced with pavers to create a little bit better
stormwater infiltration? Potentially.
Madsen: Thank you.
Aller: Commissioner Weick.
Weick: Just on page 4 of 7. The last paragraph. I just, is that a typo where it says lot sizes
ranging from 150,000 square feet?
Walters: It is not. So without going too deep into the weeds on the history of
with average lot size and what we let developers do was average lot sizes throughout the entire
development. In this case they appear to have front loaded several properties with very, very
large lot sizes. Mostly those within the shoreland overlay near Lake Susan and then use that to
get a lot of 11,000 to 12,000 smaller lot sizes but their total lot size average over the 174 unit
subdivision ended up being like 14,900 and change but a lot of that was from having two or three
very large lots.
Weick: Thank you.
or discuss their project. Welcome sir. If you could state your
Mark Erickson: Yeah, Mark Erickson, 1110 Lake Susan Drive, Chanhassen.
Aller: Welcome sir.
Mark Erickson: Thank you. Not sure what I can add to it. I did look at reducing the current lot
back. Ther
driveway and to get down to that 25 percent, the driveway would have to go down to 15 feet 11
Aller: That makes sense.
3
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
down to a two car.
Aller: Can you talk about the project itself? The shed. The use for the shed.
got wheelbarrows and lawnmowers and like everybody usually would. If I could get that in
in there in the winter too to keep it from, well just the snow and the frost and things like that.
Little safer to take off when she drives away or well just when she leaves in, during the day in
the wintertime. Less scraping things like that so just to use that stall actually for a car instead of
stuff that people get all the t
Mark Erickson: Yep thank you.
forward and speak either for or against the item before us can do so at this time. Seeing no one
Are you clearing your throat?
property as compared to the other units and lots. Even as t-
want to make sure that the people get the value out of their property so the resident can use the
property the way it was in
Additional comments. Questions. Motions.
Aller: Commissioner Weick.
Weick: My vote against. I would just say th
anything t
4
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Aller: Any additional comments? Questions. Mr. McGonagill.
homeowner, if it does be approved to consider, and I was looking at the plot line it has like a 8
foot grade drop from front to back if I read the plot right. Encourage the homeowner, you know
consider things like rain gardens and things like that just to help infiltration and help the water
e things, you know you know the lot
better than I do but as I looked at it I said well maybe you could do something like that. Just as a
comment or suggestion to you.
Aller: Commissioner Undestad.
Undestad: Alright, the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 3 percent lot
coverage variance subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Fact
and Decision.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion?
Undestad moved, McGonagill seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and
Adjustments approves a 3 percent lot coverage variance subject to the following conditions
and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive a zoning permit.
2. Lot coverage may not exceed 3,157 square feet.
All voted in favor, except for Commissioner Weick who opposed, and the motion carried
with a vote of 5 to 1.
Aller: The motion carries 5 to 1. Moving onto item 2.
PUBLIC HEARING:
340 SINNEN CIRCLE: LOT COVER VARIANCE.
5
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Walters: Alright this is Planning Case 2018-n for a 5 foot
front yard setback variance for the construction of a garage expansion. So the property is 340
Sinnen Circle. This is zoned planned unit development residential. Has a 7,500 square foot lot
area. This, the Hidden Valley PUD has a 25 foot front yard setback except for properties located
on cul-de-
and 10 foot side yard setbacks. This planned unit development allows up to 30 percent lot
coverage and restricts that to 25 percent within the shoreland overlay district. The current
conditions on the property are an 8,500 square foot lot. It has a 61.4 foot width at setback. It
currently has 27.1 percent lot coverage and meets the 30 foot front yard setback as well as the 30
foot rear and 10 foot side setbacks. The applicant is proposing extending the front of the garage
5 feet forward to create an additional 112 square feet of storage space. The additional storage
space would allow for the indoor storage of 3 cars. I believe the plan is to knock out a wall to
the shop to let him double park here and the main justification is that you know the 3 car storage
mentioned that the Hidden Valley PUD allows 25 foot setbacks for properties not located on cul-
de-sacs and that the proposed expansion will still meet the 10 foot side yard setbacks and it
would not exceed the 30 percent lot coverage. The way the properties are configured the
expansion 5 feet forward would not in any way impact the view of the neighboring properties.
Staff looked over it and I did an assessment of the 69 houses in that section. 69 of the houses in
that PUD. Approximately half of the properties within the subdivisions have front yard setbacks
between 30 and 25 feet. It is pretty consistent that those on the bulb of the cul-de-sac are held to
the 30 foot setback. I reviewed the notes from the original planned unit development and it
appears to me that the primary concern was having the 30 foot setback in order to maintain the
10 foot side yard setback. The development had been initially proposed with alternating 10 and
5 foot side yard setbacks and that had been amended to require the 10 feet. So staff believes that
scape and since about half the properties in the neighborhood are held to the 25 foot setback
f the PUD ordinance and would not negatively impact
at this time.
Aller: Any questions of staff at this time after the presentation? Commissioner Madsen.
that would be involved in
feet.
6
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Walters: Yep.
Madsen: Okay, thank you.
Aller: Any additional questions? Hearing n
your name and address for the record please.
Richard Hamblin: Yes, Richard Hamblin, 340 Sinnen Circle here in Chanhassen.
Aller: Welcome Mr. Hamblin.
Richard Hamblin: Hi. He had mentioned the intent was to knock out a wall to my workshop
area there. There is no wall between the garage and that currently so I measured it and I
5 more feet there
and one of the other so I could get all 3 in there so that would help as far as the way it looks. As
far as the clutter of the neighborhood and so forth so I think it would be a good deal. And plus I
my neighbors and nobody has an issue. They all said yeah, fine. Go for it. Looks fine. And
difference. And one more thing I wanted to point out is, all the documentation says the front
yard setback is 30 feet. The driveway from the curb to the front door is 50 feet. Now I guess
0 feet long so if I
Aller: Great thank you. Do you want to for the record just to go ahead and address that issue?
Walters: Just to clarify. That cul-de--of-way
discrepancy comes from.
Aller: Any questions of the applicant at this point? Seeing none thank you.
Richard Hamblin: Okay.
either for or against this request can do so at this time. Seeing no one come forward I will close
the public hearing. Open it up for discussion or action by the commissioners. Commissioner
Weick.
7
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
etty
nice job by MacKenzie to say the original intent of the increased setbacks for properties on cul-
de-sacs was to insure sufficient lot width at building setback and since this is already, this is
t that lot width requirement to me makes
Aller: Great. And I am looking at it that the coverage is not an issue in this matter so that works
as well and I think it sounds like it should have been marketed as a two car garage with a bonus
room but we might have a 3 car garage now.
Tietz: Chairman Aller?
Aller: Commissioner Tietz.
Tietz: Just a question and kind of point of clarification for MacKenzie. The diagram that you
show shows the driveway going right straight up to the entrance to the garage yet on site and in
the image that you have on page 4 it appears that the driveway is wider to accommodate the
width of 3 cars in parking. Was that taken into consideration in your evaluation?
Walters: Yeah I agree that it seems to be a little wider than it is in the diagram. I requested that
the applicant field measure the driveway width and submit those numbers. While I did not go
out and personally you know verify. I believe from looking at the aerials and rough calculating it
Tietz: Thank you.
Aller: Commissioner Madsen.
Madsen: The Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 5 foot front yard
setback variance subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Facts
and Decisions.
Aller: I have a valid motion. Do I have a second?
Undestad: Second.
8
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Aller: Having a motion and a second. Any further discussion or comment?
Madsen moved, Undestad seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and
Adjustments approves a 5 foot front yard setback variance subject to the following
conditions and adopts the attached Findings of Facts and Decisions:
1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
CUP transmission line.
PUBLIC HEARING:
TRANSMISSION LINE: AUDUBON AND LYMAN CUP.
Thank you Chairman, members of the Planning Commission. This is
an application by Xcel Energy. We do require a conditional use permit for certain wattage of
electricity in excess so this is a conditional use. Want to go to the next page. So this will also go
to the Planning Commission regardless of how you vote on this tonight. So the location is south
of the intersection of Audubon Road and Lyman Boulevard. You can see the larger area on the
left and the portion in Chanhassen is a little over 700 feet. That is that area in red that is covered
by the line itself. Can you go to the next slide. So the proposed transmission line consists of
constructing approximately yeah, 1.5 mile long, double circuit, 115 voltage, kilovolts, am I
saying that right? There you go. Transmission line and suspended over 18 overhead structures.
Two of those would be within Chanhassen so because of the voltage that is on there does require
a conditional use. Because this is a larger project this does require, as the applicant has done, the
environmental assessment document so there was hearings held on that and some Chanhassen
with Chaska on this and let them be the LGU. The government authority because of a majority
of that is within Chanhassen. So they are following that. The process for the closing of the, I
0 more days, working days after the project to take additional comments. Am I
right on that?
Audience: Correct.
Aanenson: Yeah about 10 more days so people still have the right to comment on that but this is
a conditional use will then catch up to that by the time we get through. So with that we did the
conditional use permit findings. Again because of the transm
the staff felt it met the findings that are required for the conditional use permit. So we are
Sometimes our poles, if yo
-Jaff who worked on this project was
9
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
actually at the neighborhood meeting and was able to talk to Chanhassen residents that were
there so we are recommending approval of the conditional use permit and then also the Findings
with tonight is two representatives of Xcel, Brian Sullivan and Gene Kotz are here to answer any
questions that you may have too.
communication and cooperation with other entities which is always helpful. Our portion here is
very small but in looking at it it appears that the report has hit all the required findings. Are
close and should be examined?
Aanenson: No.
Aller: Any other questions of staff? Commissioner Madsen.
Madsen: Kate it appears that this transmission line is in a commercial area.
Aanenson: Correct.
school. As you know in front of the high school there is a transmission station there. The
Madsen: So if, were there any notices sent out to any neighborhoods?
Aanenson: Yeah it was all within 500 feet.
Madsen: Just the standard 500 feet that we normally do.
went out.
Madsen: Okay thank you.
the applicant to come forward and make their presentation. Perhaps you can hit that issue right
off the bat after you state your names and addresses and representational capacities.
10
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Brian Sullivan: Yeah this is Brian Sullivan with Xcel Energy and I have Gene Kotz here also
together and did all the work so maybe we sho
Aller: So you hide him in the back and you get to speak.
Brian Sullivan: Yeah exactly. You know we just want to claim all the fame and glory I can
here. Not really but, so on the notices I believe we sent out to 500 feet within the route there and
part of the route, part of the reasoning for the route was we wanted to stay away from residential
areas as much as possible and so the route was on the side of Lyman Boulevard that was on, that
he south side of the railroad tracks until we hop over
into, hop over the railroad tracks at Lyman at the light there and then into the new substation
minimize the impa
There were other considerations that we looked at but this seemed to be the least intrusive route
on that. lesale provider
with the City of Chaska. The City of Chanhassen and Chaska have been talking back and forth,
back and forth, back and forth and so we feel li
might have.
Aller: I know the answer but this is for the general public who are watching and of course they
should also know that these reports are again on our website so that you can review these and
follow the item to final action with the City Council but were other sites and routes examined
and considered?
Brian Sullivan: Yeah we looked at, we looked at 3 or 4 other routes. One was to, well and some
following the lake across or trying to sneak through the neighborhood there and that caused some
issues with just having
use of that there. Not only the environmental issues but the view shed issues there for that. We
looked at going on the other side of Lyman but, and Gene can talk about the engineering issues
way down in the hollow down there. Down in the wetland a
that when we start to cross school properties we start to get a lot of people come in and to voice
opposition to that. An
are flying over either the top of the school property or flying through the back yards of neighbors
and those seemed less reasonable also.
11
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Aller: Sounds like you also had some communication with the public and open houses. How did
those discussions go?
ed everybody
have a lot of people, a lot of people showed up. Mr. Degler
showed up and some of the other residents in the area showed up and some were there just out of
interest to see what was going on and some people were concerned about the location of it but
so.
Aller: Any additional questions? Mr. McGonagill.
McGonagill: So on the, any other spurs or extensions planned off of this line to go to other
substations or growth or is this just tying two nodes together and this is it?
Gene Kotz: This is a circuit that is called an in and out capture where, Mr. McGonagill?
McGonagill: Yes.
wait for somebody to connect and go somewhe
no expansion for the future.
McGonagill: Will there be any additional wires run to up the load do you think or is it just this?
Gene Kotz: No.
Gene Kotz: Correct. We could not ever expand that anyway because it would require, if we
get a larger easement width so all propertie
McGonagill: Okay.
Gene Kotz: But this will stay at 115 KV.
Aller: Additional comments or questions? Thank you gentlemen.
12
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Brian Sullivan: Thank you.
wishing to speak either for or against the item before us can do so at this time. Seeing no one
come up we will close the public hearing. Open it up for discussion and/or motion. Another
complete report.
Undestad: Then I will make a motion.
Aller: Commissioner Undestad.
Undestad: That the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional
use permit to allow a transmission line to be located south of the intersection of Audubon and
Lyman Boulevard, Planning Case 18-08 subject to the conditions of approval and adopts the
attached Findings of Fact and Decision.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Tietz: Second.
Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion or comment?
Undestad moved, Tietz seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends
approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow a transmission line to be located south of
the intersection of Audubon Road and Lyman Boulevard as shown in the attached Exhibit
A, Planning Case 18-08, and subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of the Conditional Use Permit is contingent upon final approval of the EA and
a resolution declaring no need for an Environmental Impact Statement.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0.
Aller: Motion carries.
Aanenson: Chairman just wanted to, because we
and those have been upgraded over time and also we are serviced by two electrical districts.
side and on the southern end Minnesota Valley so we have, we did a
anybody remembers that but that was Sharmeen worked on that one too but that also services
going from
worked with Xcel on this one so I think we got all of our questions answered ahead of time but I
appreciate the questions that you asked so make sure those got on the public record so thank you.
13
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Aller: Okay thank you. Okay and again those individuals wishing to follow this item to final
th
action, this is set for June 25
business.
BEEKEEPING: CITY CODE AMENDMENT.
Walters: Alright so this first came before the Planning Commission during a public hearing on
th
May 15. It was tabled and staff was directed to investigate allowing on smaller lots and to
investigate the possibility of requiring a permit and including a neighbor notification component
to that permit.
more on the public hearing. Some of the questions that had been asked by the Planning
Commission was impact to bees on pure cities. I did a little detective work. Not as much as I
would have liked in terms of answers but Carver and Chaska allow without any regulations so
Edina has
difficulties with the smaller lot size. I was able to talk to the folks over in Shorewood. They
allow up to 4 hives on lots without concern for lot size. The planner there was not aware of any
complaints although she did mention they require 75 percent of the neighbors to consent so that
would weed out a lot of potential
with any concerns and they allow them on any size lot. So the other two points we mentioned
was using the permit as a way to guarantee that neighbors are notified and for the City to verify
re contemplating here and I
comments we heard during the public hearing. The general was support for the ordinance but
again it was felt that the half acre was unnecessarily restrictive. Individuals had indicated they
were willing to go through a permitting process especially if it was coupled with allowing
smaller lot sizes and it was also observed that back yard beekeeping should not be considered or
regulated like the agricultural practice because these scales are different. Beyond that this is
essentially the same ordinance that was brought before you. The main changes are as mentioned.
We moved from the half acre minimum to a third acre and then staff is proposing requiring a one
time permit with a $25 fee and we would use that to verify that the applicant had contacted their
neighbors. That they had received 16 hours of training. Had the minimum lot size or placing the
colonies within the required 25 foot setbacks and were meeting the density requirements that
may have.
Aller: Any questions of MacKenzie at this point?
Tietz: Good update.
14
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Walters: Thank you.
Aller: Commissioner McGonagill.
on the, you went down from a half acre to a third. Just due to the public comment is that why
you went down?
Walters: Largely due to that. The reason why we settled on a third acre is because most of the
third acre properties can accommodate the 25 foot setback which we do feel is important to
guarantee the bees are flying high enough. And the third acre also corresponds roughly to the
15,000 square foot which is the base minimum lot size for our RSF district so we felt that was a
pretty equitable cut off point. When you get into our smaller lots, a lot of them would struggle to
meet the 25 foot setback and there is still a little bit of discomfort with the idea of putting them in
McGonagill: Okay thanks. The nex
neighbors.
couple, three questions and you can say kind of if this would work. They inform their neighbors
over their ability to have bees. If the individual was keeping bees in a way that constituted a
nuisance then the City would take action to a complaint and would revoke the permit and we put
being a responsible beekeeper and following every aspect of the ordinance, if the bees are not
serving as a nuisance the bees would be there.
McGonagill: So a follow up with that particular question. You did not choose to go with the 75
percent approval level like you mentioned Edina has. Why was that?
Walters: I suppose some of it is philosophical preference. I become somewhat uncomfortable
another potential issue you have there is if you require neighbor consent what do I do if my
objects. Do I then revoke the bee permit because they no longer have neighbor approval so.
15
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
McGonagill: In fact that was one of my questions. My last question is how does this work when
ed to
beekeeping. What is the process that new neighbor can, maybe if they move in in the winter and
Walters: There is not as currently written a provision that would allow them to take action to
remove the bees as long as the bees were being kept within the bounds of the ordinance. At a
certain point one would hope people would be mindful and sympathetic and respectful and work
McGonagill: If the bees become a nuisance, this is my last question. If the bees become a
the neighbor can follow to raise the awareness with the City, how does that work?
Walters: The same as any other code enforcement. Individuals call, well me daily to be honest
observe the conditions with the hive. The reports. We did structure the ordinance in such
a way that even compliance with it is not a defacto defense against it being found a nuisance so if
we go out there and there are lots of bees all over the neighbo
our opinion that yes this is a nuisance. Yes this is not as it should be, we would then have the
authority to revoke the permit.
anybody like that.
Walters: It would be a staff decision. Under city ordinance any staff determination could be
and she felt I was as staff wrong she could appeal to the City Council and they would review the
matter.
Aanenson: And I would say that sometimes too you have neighborhood disputes over something
so really the nuisance is the best way to do it. We may make the interpretation of a nuisance. It
gives an opportunity for someone to appeal it and give you know factual data so we think the
a lot of things about
following the standards that are placed that it should be doable.
16
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
allergic child they
would just know that and work through the process?
reason
McGonagill: Than
Aller: Commissioner Madsen.
Madsen: When someone applies for a permit and they get the permit, will you maintain a list of
member of the family
has a severe allergy, you could at least look and say these are the people who have applied for a
permit in the past.
Walters: Yep we keep records of everything.
Madsen: Okay. So they could avoid it you know if they check with you.
Walters: Yep.
Madsen: Okay thank you.
Aller: Additional questions, comments, concerns.
Aanenson: Let me just follow up with that question too. I think what we would do too is just
kind of track, and we could give you a report back. You k
just kind of, just monitor it just so you could see. You know in the first years what the response
rate is and how many we have.
that.
Walters: Yep there is. I buried it in the ordinance. I believe we are proposing 2 colonies for
properties under 1 acre. I believe we do 4 colonies for 1 acre to 2 ½ acres. And then we do 8
colonies for 2 ½ to 10 acres and no limit for 10 acres or higher because at that point it could very
well be agricultural land.
17
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
one of the presenters during the public hearing the last time who I thought was very
knowledgeable on the subject was talking about the fact that you could have a number of bees
on the property. It seemed like it would be satisfactory at that point based, and so I think this
limitation is certainly reasonable to have as a, almost as a prophylactic protector in making sure
sizes but I appreciate the hours of work that have been put into this so
Weick: Right.
Aanenson: Then if things are working well in a couple years we could re-examine it and see
Weick: Yeah, I
Aller: That being said.
Aller: Any additional comments? Hearing none.
Weick: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopts the
attached ordinance amending Chapters 4, 5, and 20 of the Chanhassen city code concerning
beekeeping.
Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Undestad: Second.
Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion?
Weick moved, Undestad seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends
the City Council adopt the attached ordinance amending Chapters 4, 5 and 20 of the City
18
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Code regarding beekeeping. All voted in favor except for Commissioner McGonagill who
opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1.
th
?
th
Aanenson: The 25
th
Aller: So this item would also go before the, at the City Council on Monday, June 25 at their
next June meeting. So those individuals wishing to follow that please take a look at the website
and you can see the actual reports and follow along as they discuss the item on that date or come
on down and have a visit.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Madsen noted the verbatim and summary
Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated May 15, 2018 as presented.
COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS.
administrative presentations. City Council action updates.
updates for that but I do want to kind of go through a schedule. We do have a subdivision
variance whic
th
. We may put some other discussion ones on
rd
we typically do not have a meeting because it falls right
th
before the 4
th
to get a quorum so we will not have a meeting then. But July 17 we are still planning on having
in
And then there may be another large
residential property that we might do a concept review on too so if I see that that application
working on some other smaller subdivisions. Those are almost trickier than some of the larger
of that. You can see some of those
going on. The Venue should be ready to start maybe next Monday of tearing down that building.
They had
working, I think I mentioned on Powers Ridge. That last building out there and the apartments
19
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
to go. Taking down the old hotel there yep, and so yeah some changes going on. And
Aller: Thank you. Commissioner Tietz.
some land use changes proposed sometime back.
Aanenson: Yes.
at again?
one of the properties tomorrow
with Jill, the Forester and Park and Rec Director.
Aanenson: Off of Powers Boulevard.
Tietz: Yeah.
Aanenson:
ded but we have a lot of
stuff between, one of the things that you talked about I believe Commissioner Tietz was that we
for the next 5, 7, 10 years. Someone can always ask for a land use amendment in the future but
construction of 101. The piping but we need another lift station to develop anything further
Tietz: Good.
th
Aanenson: But you will see those when we have the meeting on the 17.
Tietz: Okay.
Aanenson: Yes in more detail.
Tietz: But the position of staff remains consistent?
20
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Aanenson: The same.
Tietz: The same.
Aanenson: Yep, yep, yep.
because I think there was
Tietz: Alright, that was part of the, that will be part of July?
more detail on the four different districts of what their expectations are for our plans to come
in summary but none of that has changed. I think the loose end was really the land use and then
where we were with the water resources on the four different watershed districts combining to
ents
some changes on that.
Tietz: Okay and then one
that?
Aanenson: Oh my gosh.
Tietz: Sorry.
that their application has been accepted by the watershed district. I just found that out this
morning. Thank you for asking that question. So right now we have it scheduled to go to the
th
City Council on June 25 for their grading permit. All things being completed so right now
remind everybody with that application we will approve the PUD as was preliminary platted.
T
residential units and
will find good. Trying to reduce some of those large parking lots. Pushing the buildings closer
21
Chanhassen Planning Commission June 5, 2018
Commission will also comment on that too so you will see a more formalized, detailed
presentation on all the changes but you will have to make a recommendation to the City Council
on that. The grading permit will just be on consent with the preliminary plat as you approved it
-of-way
a-of-way dedication, if that makes
sense.
Aanenson: Exactly.
Tietz: So we should be comfortable that the stormwater will be satisfied with approval by
council.
Aanenson: Right and that was some of the wrinkles.
Tietz: Yeah.
Aanenson: You know as the buildings moved around where can they put temporary ponding and
ere was just a lot of heavy lifting on the engineering
there so.
Tietz: Cool, thanks Kate.
to adjourn.
Commissioner Undestad moved 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 8:00 p.m.
Submitted by Kate Aanenson
Community Development Director
Prepared by Nann Opheim
22