Loading...
PC 2018 12 04CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2018 Chairman Aller called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Mark Undestad, Steve Weick, Nancy Madsen, John Tietz, Mark Randall, and Michael McGonagill STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; and MacKenzie Walters, Planner PUBLIC PRESENT: Rick Morris 3790 Lone Cedar Lane Karen White, Paisley Park 7801 Audubon Road Tim Fitch, Paisley Park 7801 Audubon Road PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER VARIANCE TO BUILD AN ACCESSORY BUILDING (GARAGE) AT 3790 LONE CEDAR LANE. Walters: Alright the first item is Planning Case 2018-20. A variance for 3790 Lone Cedar Lane. If appealed this would go before the City Council on January 14th and the variance is for a 13 foot front yard setback and a 4 foot shoreland setback variance for the construction of a 1,000 square foot detached garage. So the location in question is actually the vacant lot next to the property address as 3790 Lone Cedar Lane. The property is zoned residential single family. It would typically be required to have a 30 foot front yard setback, 10 foot side yard setback, 75 foot shoreland setback and there is a wetland along the north which is required to have a 40 foot wetland buffer and then a 20 foot wetland buffer setback for accessory structures. Residential single family has a maximum for 1,000 square feet for accessory structures and is limited to a maximum of 25 percent lot cover. So the current site, the applicant owns the parcel at 3790 Lone Cedar. That has an existing single family home and then has also acquired the vacant parcel to the east. The vacant parcel is about 15,000 square feet. The parcel that has a primary structure has about 17 ½ percent lot cover. It does have a non-conforming 75.5 foot wetland buffer setback but it meets all other standards for the district. Regarding the two parcels there is currently a drainage and utility easement separating them. It’s 10 feet on each side. The applicant intends to have the City vacate that easement and I believe it is currently out for review with the Department of Natural Resources and other agencies but the vacation request is in progress and would be a condition for granting the variance. That that be vacated. And as I mentioned there is a large wetland to the north which is of the preserve class so that is the second highest quality wetland present in our city. So the applicant is proposing to combine Lot 1. So Lot 1 and Lot 2 into one parcel. Vacate the drainage and utility easement and then construct a 1,000 square foot accessory structure on what had previously been the vacant parcel. In order to Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 2 do this they would need a 13 foot front yard setback variance and then the very corner of this structure would be within the 75 foot shoreland setback so that would necessitate the 4 foot shoreland setback variance. The main, one of the main arguments in favor of granting this variance is that as a lot of record Lot 1 could potentially be used for a single family home. That’s what it’s zoned for and that is generally what would be considered reasonable use for the parcel. By combining the two parcels the potential for a new home to be built on that lot is essentially removed forever going forward and the accessory structure represents a much less intense level of use for the parcel than a single family home would. The applicant has talked with staff, the Water Resources Coordinator and other agencies and has made every effort to locate the accessory structure as far from the wetland and lake as possible and that is why they are requesting the front yard setback variance to move it outside of the buffer setback and try to protect that aquatic resource. It would also minimize the amount of impervious surface needed to access the garage. So staff, looking over the proposal as I mentioned, agrees that combining the lots and constructing the accessory structure represents the lowest intensity of development that could reasonably be expected for the vacant parcel. And to combine the parcels would mean that a single family home would not be built on that which would have a much larger impact on the wetland and the lake. Looking at the vacant parcel staff calculated the buildable area essentially that’s clear of the setbacks and as you can see due to the triangular configuration it’s a non-usable space. Some variance would be necessary to grant use of it. Because the applicant has proposed the forward location to help protect the lake and because the parcel’s location at the end of a private road with no adjacent residential uses, no residential use across the street that would have a view of it, staff believes the proposed front yard setback would have minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood and that many of the concerns that typically make us reluctant to recommend approving front yard setback variances do not apply in this case. For all these reasons staff is recommending approval of this. Both the DNR and water resources have also expressed their support for this. If you have any questions I would be happy to address them at this time. Aller: Any questions of staff? Commissioner Weick. Weick: In your opinion if you need two variances for a 1,000 square foot garage how would you reasonably build a single family home on this lot? Walters: Because it is a lot of record we are required to grant reasonable use and reasonable use for a lot zoned for single family occupancy would be a single family home meeting the City’s minimum standards so that would be a two car garage. A minimum of 960 square foot footprint if it’s a rambler so we would be essentially required to grant the variances necessary for the construction of that home or we would be in a regulatory taking. If that makes sense. So because the lot’s platted it somewhat ties our hands. Aller: Commissioner Madsen. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 3 Madsen: Are there any prohibitions for an accessory out building to prohibit people staying in there? Are they able to put plumbing in there? That sort of thing. Walters: So the city code would prevent a dwelling unit so they wouldn’t be able to have a bedroom, kitchen and bathroom in it. That being said the, they would be allowed to run plumbing. You know a lot of people have a workshop garage and have a bathroom in there. But it would not be able to be used for a home occupation under the city code and it would not be able to be used as a dwelling unit. Madsen: Okay thank you. Aller: Any additional questions? Hearing one if the applicant would like to come forward. Please state your name and address for the record and tell us about your project. Richard Morris: Hello I’m Richard Morris or Rick. I go by Rick Morris. I just bought the property in late September. Moving over this way from Medina. So yeah I’m looking to build a garage. My father’s getting on in years and has a nice ’59 Corvette convertible, red and white so it’d be a nice little showroom for that to be safe. I only have a two car garage right now and I come from a house over in Cottage Grove where I said well I had 6 cars so I’m really stuck in a two car garage right now with a motorcycle, two cars. I now have a lawn tractor. Snowblower. It gets tight as you guys know so it just seems like a really good place for a garage to be. It’ll be a nice garage. It will be concrete eventually and you know I’ll landscape and put shutters on those windows and things like that so would appreciate consideration on this. I think it’s a good solution for the city because as opposed to trying to sell this land off as another lot and try to make money on it. I plan on being here for a long time and this seems to be a good win/win for everybody. Aller: Okay. Any questions of the applicant? Thank you sir. Richard Morris: Thank you. Aller: Okay at this time we’ll open up the public hearing portion of this item and it’s an opportunity for individuals present to come before us. State your name and address for the record and give us your thoughts on the item. Seeing no one come forward we’ll close the public hearing and open it up to the commissioners for comment. And/or motion. Anyone? I think the report was very good and I’ll start off. I think it was a great explanation of the opportunity that I see being presented here to utilize this property in a highly beneficial fashion for both the homeowner and the City and the City as a whole because our water table and our shorelines will be that much better off not having an additional project going based upon the fact that it is a separate lot so I appreciate it when I see a homeowner come in and work with the City to find a win/win like this so I will be voting in favor. Anyone else? Commissioner Weick. Weick: You know I spaced out. I did have a question for the homeowner. Is it? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 4 Aller: It has to be a good one. We can open up the public, or actually just the homeowner. The applicant so come on up here. Weick: Yeah I was just sort of thinking about something else but did you consider building the structure anywhere where you wouldn’t need a variance? So somewhere else on the property or anything like that. Richard Morris: Yeah it’s really a tough landscaping situation. Weick: I’m not familiar with it. Richard Morris: Yeah it’s Highway 5 which is basically a freeway now as you know every night and so it’s very noisy and loud and there’s no room in the front of the house. It’s just some protective trees. Two layers of trees that the previous gentleman planted and then the back is all setback with the lake of course so there’s really, that lot is the best spot for it to be. Weick: Okay. Richard Morris: It’s grassy. It’s got nice trees in the front. A little bit of a buffer with trees and so we moved it as far forward as we could. Weick: Good explanation, thank you. Aller: And while I have you up there, just to keep you going. There will be, and it’s been indicated if this is approved, a request that you go ahead and designate those trees. The trees, the plan hadn’t been provided prior to the hearing so if there a problem with doing that? Just interested. Richard Morris: No. No, there’s a ditch. There’s a ditch right where the PID is listed. That’s about the only, those are the trees and then there’s brush along the wetland in the northeast corner. Aller: But having read the report you don’t foresee any difficulty in complying with any of the conditions? Richard Morris: No there’d be no trees removed at all. It’s basically grass right now. Aller: Awesome thank you. Richard Morris: Thank you, yeah. Aller: Okay having that additional information would anyone like to then make a motion? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 5 Undestad: I’ll make a motion. Aller: Commissioner Undestad. Undestad: If Kate will bring it back up for me. Make a motion the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 13 foot front yard setback and a 4 foot shoreland setback 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? Weick: Second. Aller: Having a motion and a second, any further discussion? Undestad moved, Weick seconded that the Chanhassen Board of Appeals and Adjustments approves a 13 foot front yard setback and a 4 foot shoreland setback variance subject to the following conditions of approval and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision: 1. The applicant must apply for and receive a building permit. 2. Parcels PID 251700010 and PID 251700020 must be combined. 3. The drainage and utility easement between parcels PID 251700010 and PID 251700020 must be vacated. 4. The applicant shall include all trees 6” dbh and larger within the construction limits for the accessory building and note trees to be removed. All preserved trees must be protected during construction. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. Aller: Motion carries. Congratulations sir. Welcome to the neighborhood. I think Medina’s a fine place to live but I welcome you to Chanhassen. PUBLIC HEARING: PUD AMENDMENT TO ALLOW LIQUOR SALES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A TEMPORARY EVENT PERMIT AT PAISLEY PARK MUSEUM. Aanenson: There’s no visuals up on this one so I will just go through the application here. So this application is a request from PPark Management. Paisley Park Museum to allow, request an amendment to allow in the PUD the use of the property, liquor on the site as a temporary event permit. Through the temporary event permit so as you recall over a year ago they did request for the Super Bowl to have an event out there with liquor. As we reported back to the City Council Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 6 last summer there was no problems with that. Since then they’ve had two other special events out there. Most recently with the Timberwolves and then last weekend with Red Bull. Neither one of those involved liquor because it wasn’t permitted at that time. So the special event permits limits the number of those type of activities that they can do that would involve liquor and catering so we would regulate that way. So what they’d like to do is through that process be able to provide alcohol. And again it does require the catering license. Also with a special event permit it does require that they do a floor layout plan so the fire chief can check that. Also it goes to the different departments so MacKenzie on our staff would be reviewing those. Someone from engineering and so to date we’ve had no problems. We have a good relationship with them on that so again it is tied to, and our PUD ordinance which I did attach, and I apologize the language isn’t clear in there so what we would want to put in there, where it talks about the liquor sale consumptions we would say limited to the special event permit process. So typically those go to a maximum number of. Aller: Is it 15 dates? Walters: Yeah so typically our temporary events, they’re allowed 15 per year. In this case I believe the PUD limits it to 12 indoor concerts. Aanenson: Correct. Walters: And it’s linked then to that limit. It’s a little more restrictive. Aanenson: So that’s how it would be handled. Again they would have to come in to get that special event permit so we have to make sure that they’re managing. A lot of what we manage is to make sure that the traffic circulation works. That they’ve got all that put in place. Again the fire chief makes sure that they get a CAD or a layout of the floorplan and then it’s inspected before the event and any other little nuances that would go with it. If they need the sheriff’s office for security and driving, routing so that’s all put in place with that permit. So that’s how it’s been managed and again like to date we haven’t had problems with that so the staff is recommending approval of those limited use of alcohol. Again not all special events are going to have alcohol but it gives them that, affords them that opportunity whether it’s a corporate event or some other type of special event so with that we are recommending approval and I’d be happy to answer any questions that you have. Aller: Any questions at this time? Commissioner McGonagill. McGonagill: If we approve this and let’s say their behavior becomes not what is expected. Can you pull this back? Can you reduce it? How do you discipline them? Aanenson: That’s a great question. So certainly we can always amend the ordinance back if there’s problems yeah. Or not give them a temporary use yeah. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 7 Walters: Yeah under the temporary events ordinance violation of terms of a temporary event is grounds not to issue one for one calendar year so if, again not that we anticipate this but let’s say conditions were not followed. There were significant issues. We would likely withhold future events until we were given assurances that would not happen again. McGonagill: Is that decision to withhold one that staff can make or does it have to come back to the Planning Commission to withhold? Aanenson: That would be a staff decision. So there’s a two prong process. I think certainly we would work with the, with PPark Management and explain what happened. However it happened. If we can correct that. If it seems like it can’t be met then we maybe do a suspension. Or if it’s can’t be resolved then you can always come back and recommend that they remove that. McGonagill: Okay, thank you. Aller: Additional questions of staff. Commissioner Weick. Weick: So right now they can’t serve alcohol. Aanenson: That’s correct. That was part of the original PUD that we put in the packet right. Weick: And then with this they would be able to apply. Aanenson: Right up to so many times a year correct. So it’s not wide open. Again they still have to come in through the special event which requires that they get a licensed caterer so that’s all the things that we approve. So we’re approving who the caterer is. That they’re capable and then any other requirements of the special event and I did attach the special event and that’s one that MacKenzie had written. It’s been very successful. We use it for a lot of other events too. Just to know who’s in town. If they need additional security. Goes from anywhere from school fun runs to Paisley Park. Weick: Thank you. Tietz: Kate I just have a quick question. How is this different, when they had the Super Bowl event they had to come in for a special right? Aanenson: Yep. Tietz: A variance. Aanenson: So that was a one time. We only amended this PUD. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 8 Tietz: I know. Aanenson: Yep. Tietz: But why would they not be able to, they can still go through that process every time. Aanenson: Well because this requires a public hearing at the Planning Commission and then it’s sent up to City Council and sometimes it’s a time line issue. So I think we felt like, they just had two recent pretty close events with the Timberwolves and we haven’t, and again neither one of those had alcohol but sometimes they’re working with somebody that that’s something that they want to accomplish so right now what they’re saying, there may be 6. I’ll let them address those questions but so we would manage it that way. And often times they have an estimated number and it’s usually below that so I think it’s just a time commitment. It also gives them if they’re working with somebody that’s for example American Express and they say well we’re not sure. We have to go through the process. It limits their ability to try to market the property. Tietz: And then the hours of operation they could not sell liquor after what our local hours? Aanenson: It’s the same hours yep. Tietz: It’s tied to what our local bars are tied to. Aanenson: Yeah, yep. Or the hours of operation of the museum under their permit yeah. That’s a good question, yep. Tietz: Okay. Aller: Commissioner Madsen. Madsen: The current PUD prohibits outdoor events. Does this change that at all? Okay so it would always be indoors. Aanenson: Correct. Madsen: Okay. Aanenson: If they want to do under special event permit that’d be something that we’d have to process but yeah. Right now that’s not the intent. Aller: No additional questions of staff. Hearing none would the applicant like to come forward. State your name, address, representational capacity and then tell us about your plan. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 9 Karen White: Sure hi, I’m Karen White. I’m the Sales Manager at Paisley Park. I was here last year for the Super Bowl. Aller: Welcome. Karen White: We are looking and seeking approval for, as Kate had mentioned, an ongoing you know I guess permission to serve alcohol or accommodate requests by our clients for private events where they are looking to provide alcohol. And also as Kate mentioned it is really kind of a time constraint issue that we hate to take up your time every month as well and these things do come to us you know at the last minute sometimes. For example the Timberwolves, they did want to serve liquor. We explained that we couldn’t because there was a Planning Commission meeting that we would have to attend and apply for and it just, you know again for ease of use it would be nice to be able just to submit our event plan to you each time and then designate whether it’s an alcohol event or not. And not all are as Kate also mentioned. Aller: Okay. Any questions? Alright thank you very much. Karen White: Okay. Aller: I’ll open up the public hearing portion of this item. That gives again an opportunity for an individual to come before us and speak either for or against the item. For those of you at home watching, again these items are on the website. You have an opportunity to review them before the hearing and then come in and take part in this public hearing process. Seeing no one come forward I will close the public hearing. Open it up for commissioner comments and potential action. Comments? I think it’s been a year since we were here with, I think it was last December when we talked about it and I remember there were some individuals that had come forward and were indicating that they were concerned about some potential problems. Thankfully those did not appear. I think Paisley Park has been a good partner in the process. They’ve amended traffic plans and different things and this process to accommodate the needs of the citizens in the city and it’s been a real, a good partnership so far and I think that there’s no reason why I would not be, and I will be voting in favor of this to allow them the same opportunities as other businesses in town to allow for these special permits. With that I’ll entertain a motion. Weick: I’ll propose a motion. Aller: Commissioner Weick. Weick: The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve an ordinance amending the PUD to allow liquor sales in conjunction with a temporary event permit. Aller: I have a motion. Do I have a second? Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 10 Undestad: Second. Aller: Having a valid motion and a second, any further discussion? Weick moved, Undestad seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve an ordinance amending the PUD to allow liquor sales in conjunction with a temporary event permit. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. Aanenson: This item will go to the City Council not until January. Their first meeting in January. Aller: So this is our last meeting certainly of the year and I guess it would be the January 14th then? Aanenson: That’s correct. There is a meeting next Monday but typically we don’t turn them around that quickly so. Aller: So this item, if you wish to follow the item would go to City Council on January 14, 2019 so mark your calendars. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Madsen noted the verbatim and summary Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated November 20, 2018 as presented. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS. None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Aanenson: I would just add that as you mentioned this is our last meeting of the year. We do have a meeting, our first meeting of the year will be on the 15th of January. As I mentioned our first meeting of the year would have been New Year’s Day and I figured most of you probably had other things to do so we only have one meeting on that Tuesday. So it actually is a back to back Planning Commission, City Council meeting. But that meeting we are anticipating Galpin coming in. They’re trying to meet a deadline of getting their plans in for the 14th. As soon as we get those, I know people are interested. We’ll upload those as soon as we get the full set of plans in and then the first thing we have to do is make sure it’s a complete application so we’ll do that but they’re anticipating going on then to the Planning Commission on the 15th and that would be actually a February, the first City Council meeting in February would be the date that that would be on so do anticipate trying to keep that agenda limited because that will probably be a lengthy discussion at that meeting. I think there is one other registered land survey. Pretty straight forward that we’ll take care of that one first and then now we’re trying to keep that as the only thing on the agenda. It gives everybody adequate time to address all the issues on that. Chanhassen Planning Commission – December 4, 2018 11 McGonagill: Kate this is a process question. Will there be a work session around that before or after. Before the City Council meeting or anything or is it just going to be this session and the council meeting. I know they had a work session. Aanenson: Yes. McGonagill: Is there going to be another one? Aanenson: Yep so the only work session, they had a neighborhood meeting so that work session was just to discuss with the council what they heard at the neighborhood meeting and what accommodations they were making on that so. I’m just going to close this. So that was, there was a neighborhood meeting held and so that will be obviously part of the, to talk about what’s changed since the concept. Where we moved so everybody can understand that. How the plan has changed and give direction. Your recommendations that you would give to the City Council. I think the plan, City Council may want to take between your meeting and their meeting, maybe take another work session. It’s a pretty deep you know project and you might not get through all in one meeting. It might take two meetings for the Planning Commission too so if there’s a lot of questions that you have too. But if anybody wants to talk to me about it as they get it or sit down with engineering department individually that’d be great too. So that is all I had Chairman. Aller: Great. With that entertain a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Undestad moved to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0. The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim