The URL can be used to link to this page

02-21-90 Agenda and PacketCALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Wetland Alteration Permit to fill in a portion of a wetland located on property zoneil RSF and located a Cheyenne TraiI, Charles Hirt, Lotus Lake Betterment Association. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS CIass Ar 7007 2. *Item DeletedSite Plan Review for a 57r000 squfacility on property zoned IOP an Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5t Companies. foot of f i ce/warehouse ocated on Lot 6, Block 1,ddition, Hadley aredIhA 3. Joint l{eeting with City Council to informally iliscuss the Land Use PIan Chapter of the Comprehensive P1an. 4. Conprehensive Plan coals and Policies Discussion. APPROVAL OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEIIS OPEN DISCUSSION AGENDA CHANHASSEN PTANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 2L. L990, 7:30 P.M. CHANEASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE ADMINSTRATIVE APPROVALS ADJOURNMENT CITY OF P.C. DATE: Feb. 21. 1990 C.C. DATE: tIar. 12, 1990 CASB I{O: 89-1 wAP Prepared bys Olsen/v STAFF REPORT t-z oJLL E lrjt U, L L wetlanil Alteration Permit for FiIl along Lotus LakePROPOSAI,: Colonial crove Recreationa] Beachl.otLOCATION: APPLICA T!Lotus Lake Betterment AssociationDr. Charles Eirt 7007 Cheyenne Trail chanhassen, uN 55 317 PRESENT ZONING: ACRE.AGE: DENSITT: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USEs T{ATER AND SEIIER: PEYSICAL CEARAC.: 2OOO LAND USB PLAIT: N- s- B' w- RSF, Residential Single Fanily Approxinately I acre - N/a RSFi vacant RSF;'ringle fanily RsF, single fanily Lotus Lake t{ater anA serer is available to theproperty. ?he lot alopes toward Lotus Lake with the area adljacent to IJotuE Lake previously containing wetlandl vegetation. Ihe area now containe rock and sodl. Residential Low Density EHANHISSEN UIi J Z 6tzLa ooll \r ) t/\r!otol10t{ xoJ I -- lsvt,-, vrsvxE ts:r H- t I + 4mo,lvlJq I I -- --Eg il il,-z Iit gEltrllttr !I IESIt l-a- ffiillil a ^tl,YlsvHs 3 'rJlota'ldYIl frv, ; Ir A. T , dl10 i J I \ az TH EA/ z lil Jx77 \-rI \Etf snto 7 totus Lake Betterment Assoc. WAP February 21. 1990 Page 2 BACKGROUND A wetlanal area adjacent to Lotus Lake nas filled in the earJ.y summer of 1988 along three properties (Frost, Pfankuch andrecreational beachlot - Attachment #1). while the property rrasbeing fi1Ied, staff was contacted by a resident guestioning whether this was approved. Staff from the Planning anclEngineering Department went out to the siLe to determine exactly what was taking place. The staff that visited the site stated tothe applicant that rdhat they were doing required a grading permit and that any further activity on the site was not permitted untila grading permit was obtained. The contractor filling the site came to City HaII and fi11ed out an application for a gradingpermit ( Attachrnent *2the site to determine wetland vegetation hamit was required. St what \das occurring wapermit (Attachment *3 Staff was in contact with the F Engineers and the Department of beginning of this process. Thein violation of Minnesota Rules The City and the DNR ar over the wetland. The The DNR has required ththe ordinary high water has staked out the oHwlq he Planning Department again visited wetland existed. Staff saw thatsted and that a rdetland alteration per- ontacted the applicants and stated thatpermitted without a wetland alteration ish and Wi ldl i fe June 30, 1988 he applicants, an ish and Wild1ife, Corps of Natural Resources a ). T if ad exiaff cs not ). Staff visited the site with PauI Burke of th Service r+ho provided a report on the site da(Attachment *4). After several contacts wit EF tedht application was filed for a wetlanil alteration permit by Mr. Frost and Mr. Pfankuch on January L2, L989. The application for the Pfankuch and Frost wetland aLteration permit was brought before the Planning Commission on February 15, 1989 (Attachment *5). The Planning Commission tabled action until it coulil be clarified what actually occurred between the applicants and staff and to allow time for the Lotus Lake Betterment Association(recreational beachlot) to be included in the wetland alterationpermit application since it became apparent that the Iretland on their property was also filled. DNR responcled tha 6115.0190 and tha hefill waspermit to enied. Patdinary high area restored. uLd work withn agreeable to tt dr e o a tt the any fiII below the ordinary high water mark would be Lynch of the DNR stated that any fill below the o water mark woultl be required to be removed and th Since the DNR was involved, staff felt that we sh the DNR and the Fish anit Wildlife to provide a pI all regutatory parties as to the amount of fill area that neededto be removed and how much of the wetland shoufal be restored. e the Fish e pro ma rk vrher two agencies which have jurisdiction and wildlife was used as a lesource.perty owners to remove the fill up to by t{ay I, 1990 (Attachment 5). The DNR e the applicants have to remove the fil1. Note: The year between tabling action by the Planning Commission and the current application (February, 1989 through February, 1990) was a result of staff and the applicant waiting for the DNR tc decide hor,v much of the wetland had to be restored' Lotus Lake Betterment Assoc. WAP February 2l , 1990 Page 3 ANALYS I S Dr. Charles Hirt, representing the Lotus Lake Betterment Association has made application to the City for a wetlandalteration permit (after the fact) to al1ow for the filling of a wetland adjacent to Lotus Lake. The applicant is proposing to remove the fill below the orilinary high water nark as requireil bythe DNR. Staff has reviewed existing conditions prior to deve- lopment of the area and more recent surveys to determine theexisting edge of the wetland prior to the alteration in 1988(Attachment *8). Staff also used the nsurvey" provided by thecontractor filling the area in 1988 as part of the grading per-mit (Attachment *9). After review of past conditions, it is apparent that the wetland boundary went well beyond the ordinary high water mark. Attachment *10 shows the approximate edge of the wetland over thethree subject properties. The property owners stated that thepurpose of the fill was to remove purple loosestrife. purple loosestrife is a noxious weed for which there is no knorrn way to remove permanently from wetlands. What is known is that alt6ringa wetland by dredging and fi11in9 only increases and proliferatespurple Loosestrife. The photographs providetl by one of the pro-perty owners shows purple loosestrife growing thlough the sod(Attachment *11) . The City has consistently maintained a policy of no net loss ofwetlands. When wetland alteration permits are permitted the endresult is an improved wetlanil. Typically, Class B wetlands arethe type of r^retland allowed to be altered and improved. Class Awetlands are typically not allowed to be altered and onl,y if itis an improvement to the quality of the wetland. Fi11in9 a ClassA wetland is not an improvement, to the quality of the wetland. The filling took place prior to the contacting the City, DNR,etc. and at the very least the contractor doing the work shouldhave known to contact the applicable regulatory agency. As aresult, an extensive amount of wetland has been removed andreplaced with sod and gravel. Whatever benefits the wetland pro-vided in terms of water quality, natural habitat, etc., no longerexj.sts. If the applicant had following the correct procedure indapplied for a wetland alteration permit prior to any alteration,staff woulal have recomrnended against filling the wetLand andwould have recommended another means of removing the purposeloosestrife. Therefore, staff is recommending that the fillbe removed to the previous edge of the t etlanal, beyond the DNRisrequirement of only to the ordinary high water mark. We not onlydesire to return a valuable wetland to its natural state, butalso to avoid creating what we believe to be a poor precedent.If fill is allowed to lemain it would send a signal Lhat i11e9alfilling is an acceptable way in which to circumvent the wetla;dprotection ordinance. Lotus Lake Betterment Assoc. wAP February 2L, L990 Page 4 The applicant is proposing to remove a 25' x 36r x 30' area of fill (Attachment *12). Staff is recommending that the area of fill rernoved be 25' x 45r 30r (Attachment 13). Staff is increasing the depth from 36 feet to 45 feet. This is consistent with the approximate edge of lhe unaltered wetland. The dock on the property will have to be accessed by a boardwalk which will permit the wetland lo return to its natural state. A pathway or other means of access to the dock which removes wetland shoulcl not be permitted. Staff will stake the area of fill which sha1l be removed. RECOMMENDATI ON Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission ailopt the following mot.ion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of WetlandAlteration Permit *89-1 with the following conditions: The applicant sha11 remove 25'x 45r x 30r of fill measuring from the property line adjacent to Lotus Lake as shorrn on thefinal p1at. The fill will be removed using the typical cross section provided by the DNR. I 2 The applicant shall restored iretland to The area of removeclnatural state. be permitted one boardwalk provide access to the dock through the fill shall be allowed to restore to a3 4. Any purple loosestrife that returns shal1 be immediately renoved as recornmendedt by the Fish and Wildlife Service manual, "Spread, Impact and Control of Purple Loosestrife in North America Wetlandsn. I 2 3 Area of Fil1ed wetland. Grading Permit Application for Pfankuch. Letter to Pfankuch and Flost dated August 25, 1988. Letter fron US Dept. of Interior dated July 11, 1988. Letter from US Dept. of Interior dated August 3I, 1988. Ir{emo f rom Paul Burke alated February 10, 1989. Planning Commission minutes dated Sebruary 15, 1989. Letter from DNR dated February 2, 1989. Letter from DNR dated October 27 , 1989. Plan inilicating pre-existing wetland conditions. Area grading for Lots 1 and 2 proposetl by contractor. Edge of wetland prior to alteration. Photographs.appli-anl's site plan illustrating area of fiIl to be removetl. DNR proposal of removal of fill. 4. 5. 5. 8. 9. 10.II. L2. L2a. ATTACHMENTS Lotus take Betterment Association WAP rebruary 21, 1990 Page 5 13. 14. 15. 16. City's proposal of removal of fiII. DNR typical cross section.Letter to Dr. Charles Hirt from DNR dateal December 6, 1989. Letter to Dr. Eirt, Mr. Pfankuch and Mr. Frost dated December ll, 1989. L..rt'a COLONIAL GROVE AT , DA,QELLE A/YD SURVtb ASSOI/ATES, LA/VD 2E/> O? t"tgfl,Are ft}l.u9.G ? I/-- b IL-) o$iDrp, \iE +tE.l.r.te,R2).- 'r: t/b, R.?r. \- 20 {0 =r- ry 6g"9g <5 'k, fI n{ 4 R./9/. qc go l&,t -44 >/% Z Z '5l:l-rr6\ \.!o oo 6' u..- >< l-tv oF t85 t 25 /3 a 5!'J7-?r 5 ,i 9* \ Ir\: n B\ 8\ 747 'tEat oE \ Ir0 \ \nII\\/ 7 t\ a.2l 15 a- '4r+9 73.?2 o\( '-) /.- \Gs-I -/9 ) $\'s" I \T G-\.J\o$ 6 \ \ E I \t25 6 IE \ \ Z N{ op IE t :.q:E_12, 7 ,E I I I \ \ \ b 8 ,i 3\7 t-7 Ohrners Name Address Excavator I.ot BIock Site Address @ Descrio on fw rk to be do Date 1t Pe.rDit No. APPLIC ArION FOR EXCAVAT ING PENMTT Fee: Te le hone r/ -9cra bt5 "4,I ot4 tfiuat/,@ Te le one Subdivisi.on 6 Indicate in+.ended: the use or occupancy for whi h the p roposr:d uo kis Est.inated quantity of excavation I o Plot pJ.an showing present elevatlons Elevations afte! excavation is c@tpl.e ted s Elevar-ions of neigh.coring property within 15 cubic varCs 8q7.v feet of excavation: Iocation of any builuork is to be perforstructures on land oof the property or w ope ra tions : dings or structures on the property where thcmed and the location of a ny buildings orf adjacenE ouners shlch a re uithin i5 feethch may be affected by t he proposed grading +a- -?:-=E------..---.'-- I ss Address rt-e CITt'OF EEif,IfiHISSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 5*t17 (612) 937-19(x) Augus C 1988 r l,lr. Steve Frost 80 Sandy Book Road Cbanhassen, ttN 55317 cc! Barbara Dacy +b Mr. andl tlrs . Bob pf ankuch 100 Sandy Hook Road Chanhassen, ltN 55317 anil Dear Mr. and l{rs. pfankuch and Mr. Frost: Enclosed for your review is a leEter from Mr. paul Burkereviewing his field investigation of your property adjacent toLotus Lake. Mr. Burke is our contact fron- tha Fi;h aia iifafiteService for consulting on retland issues. Itr. Burke felt that wetlands rrere present on the subject sitesprior to.being filleil and sodded. we are sending Uri aurie-yo"rinformation.and pi,ctures of irhat the eetr.and loofi.ed rrie-liior torEs alteration. We have asked him to coment on the fillinE ofthe wetlands and if that was an acceptable oay to try to ieiovepurple looses trife. Since it has been confirmed that h,etland characteristics existedprior to the alteratlon of your shoreline arear it will biDecessary for you to receive a wetland alterat,ion perEit from thecrty. The wetland altesation perDit.process is a public hearingaad is.reviewed by rhe-ptannin! Conniision ana Citi du;cil; ThecrEy wr.l.I wait to receive cotlnents back fron !tr. Burke on tbeiaformation you have submitted prio! to iniiraiing-itre-relrinaalteration permit. Once the lnlornation has been-received irom!1r.. Burke, the city will contact you to advise you of wnin lneaext . applica E.ion deadllne is and ihat lnfornatiSn is necetsiry toBubnit for the wetland alteration pernit process. Should you have any guestions, please feel free to call me. S incerely, )a/**t O2AJ, Jo Ann OlsenAssistant City Planner 7 l. l, United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WTLDLIFE SERVICE "rB^*'IH.ggs-lorSPFO /to( SL paut, tifi".r_or.:iiror ,Iuly 11, 1988 - I- - DI TEPLY REFEB TO At t achllnent Ta *+ I lrs . *ro.qnn OJ.senAssistant City plannerclty of ChanhassenP.O. Box 142Chanhassen, Minnesota Dear !ts. OLsen: ilu":iiff:":*fu*l :t.lil*i!ilEffEi.;,T;,:i*:.iHr" ", i"i:i[l:;ing herewith a copv or his reporr ror your ;f.#: *ff.::""g":;'i:ff ::J:ff:ff.additional inrormation, 55317 Sincerely, I Y .a .li5+r-- l>alr. .;iir i .i 1338 crw iF cHAfihAssEn WelfordFieldSupervisor f a ', ) I I t- r i, utlItt, F I This is a lake shore wetland behind the colonial GroveTennis and Beach club, BO Cheyenne Terrace, and fOO CheyenneTelrace. The affected area appears to hav6 Ueen reciniii---'-filled to an elevation of appioximatefv f fooi-tv;;ai;;ijabove-previous grade, sodded, and stabilizea at'tfre iiiEi,"edge by a cobble wall. By eianining the conditio" "i-iir. - shore line.veseration on Each of thE bounding ni"l.;1"-1;.",I found evidence of hydrological conditions ttrlt i,oufd ----' confirm my determination thit the adjacent propelties arepalustrine emergent and palustrine scrub-shiub-wetlandi(circular 39 I)pe chalacteristics of 2, 3, and 6). ihaevidence provided the positive identification of 'eactr--of three paraaeters needed for wetland delineation. fire i"ifswere a peaty-silt (histosols), and all histosols aiJ-"-----hydric.soil type. The vegetation canopy was dominated byred-ozier dogrwood (Cornus stolonifera ) , - and ground .o"ei'cons i s ted pr j-mari Iy-EF?EedfEilEJEEai s ( phi 1ar j. sergndilgcea), broad-Ieaved cattaif (frrptra.EEE[fa), andpu r p le l o o s e s t r i f e ( Lvth rum s a l i c a r iEJl-eic n o-ilEe' above -species are classif iEl-as r.ld-, or--ietter desig"aii"", - ' - hydrophyres. The water leveI a! ttre iime ot tfr6 sfie--visftwas less than one vertical foot below the median elevationof the affected wetland. rn consideraiion ot recent drouohrconditions, it is reasonable to a"su*J itJ tvai.i"; &-;;;-site ranges from saturated to p"r.in.ntiy fl;oded. -- Barrlng any information to the contrary, ere can assune thatprior to the recent. shoreline ent ancE iit project at thissite, most, if not aII, of tt. i."."tiv sodded area was a ',etland r'rith charactcristics ."4 ;;1u;i stunilir io-tt"se-found on the adjacent- properrier. -irre-.aja;iay ;i fi;;;wetrand values could be ricoverid ii--irrJ ii:.i iei. iemo"ea,and the area allowed to revegitiiel- -"- .-t I I sDE!.: Report of Fieltl Investigation of four wetlahdsites within the City of Chanhassen, carvercounty, Irtinnesota Field fnvestiqator: paul Burke Date: ilune 30, 1988 Fol10wing my on-si.te review, r have determined that wetlandsare present at each of the four subject sites, and each ofthe first three sl.res have been or iiU Ue Giaciea-;t:ii"development. Site No. 1 I I ^Fl United States Department of the Interior ,art- \Eiffi:s --- II II Da tt Lt ItErTo SPFO FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE sr. PAt L FIED OtfICE (Ett) 50 Park SquE Court,t(lO Slbliy StnctSL PauL IlEtroot! 5510t AuEust 31, 1988 -\ !:s. JoAnn Olsen Assistant CitY Planner City of Chanhassen P.o. Box 147 chanhassen, l{intresota 55317 Dear Ms. Olsen: This responds to your Augrust 24, 1988 letter regarding the unauthorized placement of fiII in a rretland as a hethod for removing PurPIe loosestrife. We have reviewed your letter, along with the attached photograpfis of the affected site. ApParently, it is ifre p5sition of the Property owners that the PurPose of the ietland fill activity $ras to rid tlre affected area of purple loosestrife (Lvthrum salicaria)- The foliowing cotnments are Filovided for your consideratj'on. Purple loosestrife ls a non-native Plant species, a hardy perennj-al introduced from EuloPe. Being an exotic species, lt has thrived i.n the absence of competition from other Plant and animal sPecies that are native to the EuroPean continent. Such an aggressive invader tends to crowd out other uetland species that are native to our North American continent, which substantlvely reduces the flsh and wildlife habitat values associated wlth the affected si.te. Hovrever, the other knosn wetland values, such as floodwater retention, vrater quality enhancement, gloundlrater recharge, etc., remain largely unaffected ty purple loosestrife domiuation. It is for this rEalon that ure consider the destruction of a wetland to lemove purple loosestrife to be an inappropriate remedy. Attached is a small pamphlet from the tltinnesota - -Department of Natural Resources that proscribes both me'crranical and chemical controls for Lhls undesi-rab1e species. we encourage the organization,of nelghboring piop.rty orrners for the Purpose of develoPing and sEP i 1988 a lnstituting a control progrErm that can produceeffective controls in three to five years with thelimited use of herbicides and without the Loss of other t etland values. Sincerely, iranes L. Actlng Field Supervisor Attachment cc: Eoward Krosch, MN DNR, St. paul, MN I 2 r LI Date: February 10, 1989 To: FiIe - Chanhassen From: P. Burke, SPF0 SubJect: The Lotus lake lletlands Restoration Such Iacustrine anin hel ping to main of Lotus Lake. Th condition of I acus I conducted a site vlslt rith Steve Hanson (Chanhassen/p'lanning) at the Lotus Lake shore l'lne wetland site near the Colonial Grove Beach Club. The Colonial Grove property, and the neighboring Frost and Pfankuch properties, have had part or all of their wetland frlnge backfll'led and converted to turf. The historic retl and boundary ras a line roughly paralle'l to the lake shore but rpproxlnate'ly 50 feet landrard. The subJect wetlands rere destroyed between the western boundary of the Pfankuch property to the eastern slde of the Colonial Grove property, or Just east of the club's dock. a'lustrine vetland resources play an important role n the physical , chemical , and bio'logical lntegrity oss of llttoral rctlands can dramatica'lly alter the ne systems. I have reconrnended that the affected area have portions of the wetlands restored in an effort to recover some of the resource values lost to project implementation. I have generated a plan that lncludes the approximate size, shape, and location of retlands that should be restored. The plan displays 5 areas, in dark-shaded trlangles' that should be excavated to a depth of 12 to 16 lnches below existing grade. These areas will act to trap, filter and improve the guality of surface runoff moving toward the lake. Revegetatlon rill occur natura'lly lf the area is left undisturbed by the I andowners/managers. 0nce established, these restored wet'lands shou]d be protectCd from further dlsturbance, including any attempts to alter the vegetation, soils, or hydrology.'Given the compositlon of vegetation on adjacent retlands, tt ts likely that the area wil1 recover wlth a mix of hydrophytes that uill be dominated by cattails and purple loosestrife. Even a monotypic canopy of purple loosestrife ls of greater ecological value to Lotus Lake thanls the existing turf. The size of each of the five areas uill vary slightly, but the lakeward base of each trlangular area should be 15 feet ln length and the landward height of each area should be 30 feet ln length. dp taieltri cc:Steve Hanson, Clty of Chanhassen (Planning) Jerry Smith, U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers, St. Paul (Reg. Functlons) .--v'" ") FEB 15 1989 C,M[ OE CI{ANHASSET a o r ?lcrse cootact thlg offlcc rlthlu 30 daya of aecelpt of tb:t E lctte!to dl.cuss thc approprlate Detbod rs6 3i-r,i oi rcato.atloa. rf se 1o _ooa. rece-lve - a reaponae rlthh tbat;h. r eG !u8t lEl.tirt.approprlate lcgal sctloa aeccsaary to uphold the ler .od ;.t*;-;;;publlc I s latereBt. Plcasc coDtect pat LFch of Ey 8trff to cooldlD8tc yonr rcatoEatlooefforte. Siacetely, MLA,.-s(; Jof,l Ltac strne X.eltr o."1 Eydrologlar l{r. StcveD Proet Pagc Trro cc: PL209:tap JoAra Olaca, Clty of ChalhalscD Bea Barrell, USCOE 8ob obcrucycr, Barr Eoglaccrlag Stevr faltcr. C.O. ) CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR I,IEETING FEBRUARI 15, 1989 Chairman Conrad called the meetj ng to order at ?:35 p.m.. }TEIIIBERS Batzl i , PRESENT: Steve Emm j.n9s, Jirn Wildermuth and Dav id Annette EI l son, HeadIa Ladal Conrad, Brian IN AND SODDING OF A !{ETLAND ON 8g SANDY HOOK ROAD, BOB PFANKUCH T{EI{BERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: tuings noved, agenda to a fter Dotion car r ied. l{r. and }lrs. Bob pfankuck !lr. and Hrs. Steve Frost Cindy Gi Iman thonas Gi lman Barbara Montgomery Susan Conrad Tim Erhart Steve Hanson, Planning Director Batzll seconded to Dove the Organizational Itens on thethe Approval of Uinutea. All voted j.n favor and the , PDBLIC HEARI NG: OJ{ETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR THE FILLING 4-PROPERTI ZONED RsE AND LOCATED AT lOS AND AIiID STEVE FROST, APPLICANTS. Public Present: 100 Sandy Hook Road 8g Sandy Hook RoadPresident, Lotus Lake Honeowners Assn.66I3 Horseshoe Curve Lane7gI7 Dakota Avenue 6625 Horseshoe Curve Lane Steve Hanson presented the staff report. Conrads Just one comment. Our rretland ordinance is more restrictive thanthe DNRrs and our netrand ordinance speciflcally talks about areas abovethe ordinary.high water mark. Basicarly shat slaff ls reconmenaing-in - tbls report- is saying that the areas thit are sanition.d-bt othergovernnental bodies uiIl get aome feedback. r.D curious $f,at ue.retalking about. in terns of the property that.a above the orilinary high- rrter nark ehj.ch our ordinance governi. Haoson: The area above the ordinary high rater mark is...Fish andlfildlife talked about. , - Conrad: So in the red? Hanson: yes. Conrads And then in the blue?+? Name Add ress ,} Planni ng Commiss ion February 15, 1989 - Meeti ng Page 2 Hanson: The blue is actually the edge of the shore}ine. In thealternative, we looked at estabrishing... rn talking with Fish andl{ildlife, they thought that was probaSly going a tit[Ie too far. Conrad: 9kay, we ,,ill.open it up for public conments. What I would liketo do is.have the applicanEs for the pirmit speak to o" iii"t. Either ofthe applicants in reration to the staif reporl o! anything eIse. if yourould Iike. Sirst of alll Itm a little unclear about theIs this. . .? That r s just representaEive.in the last paragraph thatinland 30 feet. In his meno,they shouLd be I bel. ieve he 15 feet in length Urs. Pfankuch: recomnendation. Hanson: No. stated a size and come back l{rs. Pfankuch: Hanson: That i s Hrs. Pfankuch: One between ourproperty and . . . Hanson: Ri ght. Andl what is the blue line? just delineating rhere the edge of the water js no!r. So theytre asking for a triangle between our property.property and the Honroer s property and one letneen our !lrs. Pfankuch: werl, arr of the informati on is in the file but rrha t rerere attemptjng to do is get rid of the loosestrife. We called acontractor and he came down and started to do the excavati ng and thevillage came and looked at it and tord us to proceed. we c6rtainry wantto cooperate with the DNR and whoever. we don,t rant to cause a problem.r- guess werre not totally convinced that roosestrlfe is ress of "-proui"rntban that sod- we didn']E have cattails. we had loosestrife totatt|. 7feet tall. you couLdnrt see anything but Loosestrife. As far asrildrife, now ,erve got geese riving-on the shore. -i" e""tr'they,re anuisance. our dock is srippery froi the geese so as far as'wiiaiiie, theycertainry Like it beEter nor. -That isn.t to say that rre ue don.t t,ant tocooperate, t,e do but r guess re're a little uncLear about exactly whatuerlr accomprtsh by teaiing up horever nuch we.re taiiinj af,out trere. conrad: r think, and r donit know if r can be a spokesperson for thatbecause r havenr t seen the pran and t.ro not an expErt in ttre area but wedo have a hretland ordinance and werve been pretty restrictive on a rot ofyour neighbors. Having bui.lt boardwalks whlrg tirey would liie to putdocks. They had diffeient opini.ons of rhat they16- fife-io-ao but reenforce the ordinance because the runoff, especialry through your area isslgnlficant. witb the^wetland behinir your hiuse "na ;;;;-iioomberg,ssetland- being destroyed, uhich is probabty one of the best settands intorrn, that nhore area ls real susc-ptible to, the water quarity is realrygoing to take a major hit every tini ne destioy. iiaai.';;I of wetrand.But r don't know tfrat thatts ai issue. rt loit t.ppi.l-tili tn"tparticular probrem is in your area. But ario, theie is a'iot or waterthatrs goi.ng into the laki and $€r ES a community, have been tryj.ng to Planning February Commission 15, 1989 - Meeting Page 3 prevent tbat kind of runoff. Whether it be wetlands that are under ourcontrol or rdetlands Ehat are under DNR control or somebody elses. Itrs been a city policy to be real stringent on rrhat we do. llrs. Pfankuch: And rre donit disagree with your having a policy. Certainly ue donrt want to cause a problem. The loosestrife, our understanding when we stalted the project, was tttat the loosestrife ras anajor problem. It certainly was a noxious thing on our shore. we had these big clumps of yuk and the tj.res would float in and stick in lt andit was a real mess. Itis hard for ne to be convinced that loosestrife isbetter. You were talking about the rretlands, nhere? Behind our Property? You nean up where they've dug out the cattails and build the houses? Conrad: tes. And the only reason that happened is because they got the permit to do that many, many years ago. They had a subdivision that superceded our ordinance. Thatrs probably one of the best functioning uetlands in the city. It's beautiful but i.trs being buried light now.Itrs not your problem and it doesn't really, it may end uP to be a littlebit of your problem but that has nothing to do on this particular one. llEs. Pfankuch3 we have the serrers also, and lrn sure you're arrare of that. lfe have two sewers on our property. one between ours and Frostrs property rdhere the water runs doern and then out a culvert. Noht Ehe loosestrife had totally filled that culvert. That rras not draining into the lake. It lras backing up and doing whatever because the loosestri fe had clogged the opening of that outlet. That stuff, I donrt know lrhat you know about it but that stuff is like, Ijke from outerspace. It just takes over. But rrerre certainly not in disagreement eri.th talking to the DNR anal see t,hat it is that theyrre proposing. we donit wanE to be disagreeable here but we are concerned about the Lake and certainly about ecology butthat loosestrife is awful. Conrad: Thanks for your comments. Cindy Gilman: I live on Horseshoe Curve. I arn currently the President of Lotus Lake Association. I guess a couple of the thi ngs that I sas concerned about is that you said that the loosestrife is. probl.en rndthat it needs to be hanclled. Ttrere are chemical treatments to handtle theloosestrife so that the uetlands can become healthy again anil help be restored instead of clearcutting and fill.ing in and then there uould be no chance of any type of a natural filter to help the lake along there. Illso guestion, I guess the way it nas done. fhe contractor that did it, I assune nost contractors know that there are larrs that they have to follos.I had someone cone in to look at part of my lakeshore to help redo it because it eas falling aparE and nost contractors are aware that they needto clear thi.ngs through the DNR. That there are thjngs that are properly done and things that are not properly done on a lakeshore. An!4ray, soI question the contractor. The contractor that filled it in. I guess it botheEs me t.haE it lras gone ahead and done and then after the f.ct, theyare lookj n9 to get the permit noe, insEead of before. It aeems that there eas an awareness there. There was an auareness of Ehe purple loosestrife and you knew that was a problem and why you djdn't seek help or talk to ) to people to find out tbat you could do about thewhat was legal and hrhat was not. I guess thatrs it. Thomas Gilman: rrm also from Horseshoe curve and r guess my problem lriththis is that thls has been done previously where peo;le havi come in.rheyrve altered their rand. r don,t thini ttrese ieopte just fell off acabbage truck and r think, that they know that you'n"id a-peimit tor itristype of thing. r think that they 6ecided to step atread of ine t"r. Havethe uork_done figuring it uould be easier to coml and get a permitaftersaEds. r think they should be requlred to reiuin'ii io it,s naturarcondition and then once ihatrs done, tlien come ln and naie ifrisPresentation because this is an afterfact. r donit think that the lakeras taken into conslderatj.on. t think that the loosestrj.fe is Uein!-useaas kind of a scapegoat. conrad:- Trro quick connents. t{hat are the contractor rs responsi.bi 1itiessteve rhen they start excavating around a rake? t{hat do thly have to do?Do they need a building permit? l{ildernuth: Do we require an excavating perrait of dirt contractors? Hanson: yes. Wildermuth: So he didn,t come jn and apply for one? Hanson: r found an excavating permit in the fire. r don't know thehistory behind when it was done. It courd have been done after they hadstarted but I.m not sure if thatrs true or not. conrad:- would you make sure that city councir knows whether it was trueor not by the time this gets to them. llildernuth: It sounds like the contractor ought to be... conrad: r think so. The appricant nade sone comment about 6taff givingthe permission to go ahead_and naybe that was the permit but r.E curtouiabout staff saying go ahead. H!B- Pfankuch: Do you have a copy of the pernit? A copy was aent to you. Planning Commission Meet j. ng February 15, 1989 - page 4 counsel or ta lkloosestrife and Thank you. H.nson: I think ltis the t{ildermuth: The gues t ion The actual work. Itrs. Pfankuch: It did not postdate... last page in your packet. is, did that predate the $ork or postdate it? conrad: steve, can r assume that rhen lt says paid, 2391.g that that meanswe gave, tbe appli.cant. gave money uhich basically aays we gaveperoission? Is that what lt takes? PIann ing February Coramission 15, 1989 - Meeti ng Page 5 Hanson: well, thatrspermit there I s someone Sheet and I donrt know not. Conrad: I think by the ti.melittle biE more and maybe Mr.that. Any other comments? where Irm a litEle confused because normally o rdho has signed off on it. Irve only got hisif therets sornething signed on the back sheet you should1ittle bit nafront or know a OD th i. s goes Ashwor th to Ci ty Counci I, can fill us in a BaEbara l{ontgomery: My name js Barbara !{ontgomery and I live on Dakota Avenue about a block above where this development ls. I guess I eouldjust like to say, I've ljved there a very long tine. t{y husband and I noved in in 1960 and I feel. very protective of the area. Veryprotective of the lake. I loved it dearly and Irve natched anal uatched and rratched as all of the growth has taken place. Someho* I just have thefeeling tbat perhaps some of the people who are noving in are not enough aware of the importance of keeping the lake cl.ean and rhat's golng to happen. Who rrants to live around a dead lake full of dead fish? It does happen. It's bappening to lots of the lakes. I'd just like to make aplea roaybe for more public understanding. Maybe for nore respect. Maybefor tougher policinq of the ordinance. I guess thatrs all I have to saybut I really feel very strongly about the area and I think maybe that aIIof you do or you wouldn't be out here. ) Headla noved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. AIl voted infavor and the motion carrjed. The public hearing was closed. Headlas l{Es. Pfankuch. you indicated that ther I donrt know what your exact uords irere. You got the go aheatl from the Village. What exactlyrere you referring to? You got the go ahead from the ViIIage. !lrs. Pfankuch: It's in the permit. Have you seen the perrsit? May I shoeyou the permi t? Headla: I'n not sure if I'n looking at the same thing you are. !lrE. Pfankuch: Our contractor, they stopped the uork anil they came doen.nd looked at it ani! they issued this pernit. l{y understanding is thatthe peroi t. f,eadla: Okay, it's the same thing. So you interpretted thaE as the go .head? llrs. Pf.nkuchs yes. They didnrt say stop. HeadLa: Iou indlcated here the reason you t ere doing it ia to lmprove lotto lake. I see no Eention on loosestlife at all but yet that tenda to bethe doninant reason noe. lrra. Pfankuch: It.s always been the reason. HeadLa: I didn't see it on the applrcatlon. PIannin Februar ommission5, 1989 - Meetj ng Page 6 9cyI !lrs- Pfankuch: r didntt do the applicati on so r don.t kno$ but we hadearly letter, in fact r think it predates that apprication, aiscussi.ngloosestrife. r don't know about Lhe chronology.-'r,ra got some otherinformation here. an the Headla: Tbat.s fine. I guess I look at thls the samethe first.of the year. I think ue shouid not go for aon a permit. I think we're loading down the s€aff. Ittris even came before us until thoie 3 conditions thatrecommended to approve, I see no reason at all uhy thosahouldnrt be met before the planning Contuission .ir"n ".:::-t-,..I_:hl:k we_ousht to rable it intii they do s"i iprnow erhat the DNR is going to approve. Our londiiions-restricti.ve and I,d like [o see'ttrat-Uefore frd even cothis. Thatis aII I have. lray I started out10t of cond i. t ions see no reason whythe sta ffe cond i t ionses that. At theproval. I donrtare a little morensider approving ordinance is. It should be underWildermuth: I itn trying to find ohat ourthe boats and waterways section right? Hanson: Itis under the wetl.ands section. tlil,dermuth: r see it- How and in what manner are te more restrictivethan the DNR in terms of...structure? Hanson: r guess m not necessariry sure that werre more restrictive. rthink ue have a more detail.ed reviei and ue require tuem to-ao a rret}andalteration permi t and when you do that, that r s r"rhen you trave ttreflexibirity to allow what kind of alteiarion you do.'No;;;ily I rhink inthis siEuation, if they had come in, I-doubt you $ourd have rooked at anrrteration other than arrowing them to have a boardwark out to the dock.r think that wour.d be your noimar approach to Ehis situation, if it h,asundisturbed. wirdermuth: rf thatis tbe case, if that rrere the approach that lre pould *:: ::l:"-1"i:i:lty, rhere a wettand arrerarion p.iiii-".ria not .e.r.iynave Deen an issue, or- according to the ordlnance atructure nould have '' reconnended a boardwalk, r think that thelr ahoreline atrouia be reetoredto ltis original state and if a boardnark is aes ii"a--uv-'it-!-prop". tyoHners, then r think_ that rrould be appropriate. r,m sirrprlsea lhat-paut 1..-l:_il-l:=.Srriginar tetrer nhere hi- usid aome riirri-eiiois ransuageaayrn9 that the rretranal alteration permit shourd definitely not begranted, would come back- and make what appears to be a relitivery tokenrequirenent of these. l5 by 3s trlangles-.--Right ."iosi iioi-tt"i'piop"ityuas the Dolce property or-adjacent Eo that a;d tre...-- ---'- Conrad: lfe didn.t let them do anything. l{ilderrnuth: Ttre planning Coromission did not allor anything to be done!!.r:. The city.councir did nor alro', anything to ue'aone'ttrere. r rhinkrE re go arong with paurrs latest reconmendation, re senal a nessage tolakeshore oerners that- they can perform this work. rtrev cai arter theuetland and come in for a-permi-t after the faci ina-itis-i-iriet,t. i ) PIann ing Febr ua r y Commission 15, 1989 - Meeting Page 7 further think that it oughtget an excavating permit inall I have. to be very difficult for thisthe City of Chanhassen in the contractor tofuture. That r s Batzli: I guess Ird like to feel the way Jim does to some extent. Ilook at that permit that t{as issued, whlch we donrt really have a1I thefacts on it but if r ras a landowner and my contractor rreDt and brought neback a permit like that, Ird go ahead and do lt. For us to say nou, thatrell you shouliln't have done it and we don't know under what circunstancesre issued a pernit, I think ls a little bit critical on our part soI guess I'm not in a position to say they should or shouldn. t have beenable to do it and lim not going to cast stones at this point because Ithink to some extent they may have depeniled on that perEit and Irm not goi.ng to, I think therets been kind of some allegations that they acted inbatl faith and Irm not willing to take that step ri.ght now. l{ildermuth: But therers no indication the pernit was granted. Iou paythe fee uhen you f j.le the permit. Erom this we can.t tel.l. anything. Bob Pfankuch:Not in all cases. Therers one culverl betweenMrs. Pfankuch:our property and the Frosts. Batzli: Okay. I rrould assume that tbisoain runoff occurs between the propertiesis the exper! and I'd be, at this point, go ahead and do it his way. Coorad: Did the same contractor do report was generated on where the and Ird llke to think that Burkeerithout knoning other facts, say llanson: f assume so. I donrt knou on Coloni.I Glove? a f.ct. the contractor on thethiok so. AI the uork that for smith easfildernuth: I don t t Colonial Grove j ob. Hanson: On the entire subdivision, is that rrhat Conrad: No. That'sit to you. sort of before your time. you.re talking about? I shouldnr t have addressed Batzli: I know and I canrt tell anything and thatrs why I'm trying not tocast stones one way or anotber. But irbat I guess I,d like to see happenis I would prefer at this point, without knowing additionat facts, irerrenaking a jualgment when werre in a position where we donrt knou all thefacts. I assume t-hat we've got these triangles here because therersculverts running between the property lines? Or no? Where are theculverts Iocated? tlilderrnuth: Thls one looks like Harlan Johnson. Somethlng Johnson. Conrad: Didn't we have some problems elth Colonial Grove durnping, rell,that's another story. Planning Comrnission Meeting February 15, 1989 - page I Ellson: r don't have a whole lot new from what these gentremen said. rrmpretty much in agreement_. rrm surpEised that this comlronise is whatrsbeing offered by Mr. Burke, to tell. you tbe truth. I irould r{anE it to be,go back to where itrs supposed to be. r think it does again send a badsignar to people. rf we put in Laws to protect these things, the wirdllifeand you want the nests to grow there and- things r;.ie-tt "i--iia tni" ""nhaPpen as easily as this did, it rearry disturbs me. Barbara ts retter isdated on the 29th of June and there rai a reply and yet ihe-appricationfor this arteration permit isn,t done rntii i"i,r";i.'-; ioi't xno* auootthat- I don't kno, rrhy it uasn'.t fi1ed. tf garbaia rent on this andthere nas conversaEion; I-think theyrre alnost forced to th; point ofnaking this come to a-head and they'w-ie-trying to ivoiJ ii-as mucrr aspossible rarher than facing ir heaa on uy ritting thern ,aii lnis rong. rsould-see going back and nrltting the 5, ieet baci io-rr,.i.-ri is. r don.teven like- the conpromise of theie litir.e- triangres. i a;;,i'ttinx that,sfair to the lake or fair to all the people that se have told you can notdo this in the past. -plcep! you guyi bicause you already did it andI rear'ize that. r don't ttrlnl ttrStis fair to inybody erie ana to h,hatuerre trying to preserve rith these lakes. Emmings:or not theCity or Fido uith yo IUyk sh ur ould like to know fron the pfankuchs and the Frosts irhethern.y pTigl .to doing any of rhis uork rhat there may be ONn-inaand Wildlife regulations that uould affect rrhat y6u want to--property? We haven't heard you say whether you-knew... Bob Pfankuch: Can I comrnent again? Can I say something in addition tothat? Yourve discussed a nholi rot of things that some-oi--th" "n"*"rs are:y?i]"!lg to you that h,ere. not presented on open discussion prior to. Ithink this needs to be a give and take sessioi. it;.-r.t-iii. *" pr.""ntour case and you guys talk about a Lot of things and sometimes in - ,gnorance because they haven't been discussed. rtrs how much do youPresent them with in tbis case? Number one, the contractoi, HarlanJohnson. Harlan eras recommended to me because he does ,ori'on Lakelllnnetonka. on the shorerine of Lake ninnetonka and works in thecommunities in Lake Hinnetonka taking care of Heeds, ;";iin; the lakeshore80 I assume that he knows something ibout taking caie of fai"". I am nota laeyer. t am not an expert in the DNR or wetlands or on the cityordinances. I am a property owner. I have. a -responsibilj.ty. I thoughtr-exercised that-by hiring I contractor that does-work on gike !,tinnetonkaunrcn ts supposedry the great lake of uinnesota, or at least for the Twincities. r hired Harl.an Johnson. He came down iod estimaiJ the $ork. Hetalked to ny neighbor steve. we agleed on a price. siiJ,-ao you knoi,rhat-you. re doing? you work on Laie Iinnetonia, yoo ,r"ii -yes, noIrEobren. r hate to say- thaEr6 ignorance rnd r.n itilr responsibre and tagree with tbat. .r stirl am and-hers only_ny .g"nt uut-iiis- not rrie-youI:y". !o go !o-the- legislatuEe to do.a litire-roit on-yo"i-rot is whar ilnEnrnxrn9. Hers the expert. I hired the expert, althouch stillresponsible. Harlan proceeds nith the work-. s6meuoai-6omes aown andl!?!".'Ilir:,-_I" 9:.. down to rhe.city HalI. coroes balk t'r,ii ""." day and::1: ll::.ol"y.- r-was, working sithout a permit or whatever. The pei.ii;sDeen granted and lrve been allorred to proceed and complete the work. Andwe can argue about how rnuch eas started and hon nuch was left but itrs avery crear point in fact, according to Harlan Johnson ina-iccoraing to the Plan n i ng Febr u a ry Conmission 15, 1989 - Heeting Page 9 documents, that the city allowed the work to proceed. Now I had talked toBarb Dacy shortly after I moved into this property. Granted, Irm not a 2gyear old landowner who has seen thjs grov, from an urban, wonderful green reserve Iake into an urban recreational 1ake. Thatrs another argument. . You may be a prolectionisEs and you may thi.nk that we need to grow. Ihate to bring that ln but it is a fact of life. No$ there are severalother facts having to do rrith this. The sewer which runs, and itrs a sewer by the way, which runs down between my property and the Frosts,carrles a1l of the garbage out of the city street directly into the lake.Tin cans, pop bottles, you nane it. Several unmentionables flor into thelake until theyr re impeded by the reeds antl they build up and eventually shoves this whole nasty garbage out onto the lake. The fact that therer s 50 feet of almost impassable reeds makes it impossible to police antl cleanthis wonderful Lotus Lake lakeshore. Of the trash ttratrs left by the ice fishermen, meaning the bottotls of fish houses frozen into the ice andcanit be removed, which I personally removed this year after I had accessto them. And the tin cans and the pop bottles and the tires anil aII the garbage because Irm on the batl side of the lake which is where the winil blorrs so I get all the garbage. If I don't have access to that, I can hardly be expected to clean it although I was in up to my hips in the muck, this wonderful hretland, estolic soil or whatever itrs ca1led by the DNR. Carrying all of this garbage sitting on the lakeshore. I nean itisreally a beautiful site. You ought to come dohln and see it. In factt rrhat I recomflend is that you table this h,hole discussion until next AugusE and Ird invite you all down on a Saturday to look at the lakeshore, thatrhich has been improved by Erost and Pfankuch and that irhich has not been improved and you can decide what is the best thing for Lotus Lake. I'vegot to believe that you would be in our favor. I do an awful lot of irork on that lakeshore. As far as rdetlands are concerned, right now in this drought condition which may exist for another 50 years, there is now 50feet of wetland out beyond the end of tuy 35 foot dock rhich in 3 rreeks time takes loosestrife from seed to bloom and more aeed. You just canrtlnagine what thatrs like. Itrs totally destroyed. Tl'tere rraa an articlepublished in the Chanhassen Villager which talked about loosestrife ingreat detail, published last August and I brought copj.es along andhighlighted the issues. It totally destroys the area for nildlife. Thelssue about wildlife is bunk. If you have loosestrife, you donrt havewlldlife. I have personally picked up one of thoEe clurDps. I awear togod it relghed 150 pounds. This big nasty, mucky, floating neas on the shoreline and you just about can't destroy it. I put ao little sod in, the City Planner said about a foot, if you look at the plot, I think thatthe elevation is 6 inches. Itrs a half a foot over trbat the ordinary highrater level is at the finish cobble nall, as it's call.ed. The rock wal.lthat I put in. I believe that if the lake coDes back to it.s naturallevel so it'd be at the top of the wall which will prevent the loosestrife from growing. The loosestrife grows right at the edge of the rater and then it proceeds fron there in both directions, is a totally unmatchablePlan. It has been declared a noxious need. The property oroers are responsible for jt's removal and the only removal is a totally nonselecEive chemical called Rodeo which has to be sprayed on the plants. ThaE neans it kills all of the groiring thlngs. Al1. According to the DNR, Hollandhorst, rrhoever he isl I believe it Has froto the DNR, once you do that, the next year, the only thing that groes on this valuable retlantl ) Planning Commissj on Meeting February 15, 1989 - Page Ig ) is roosesErife. Thatis the onry thing that comes back. would you like topour Rodeo into Lotus Lake? Because lhe weed grows in the wate;, not inthe di.rt. That's the suggestion to take care of loosestrife. rt is anoxious weed and it is the responsiblrity of property ohroers to remove it.rn fact, the state has offered funds to iretp itre-proierty oirnels removeit- rire didn't ask for that. we didn,t thriw in -e elet 6r tirr rite-wisdone in cattail suamp on TH ro1. r put in G inches of dirt only to leveLit. That was the only purpose of th3 fil.r oas to level it so it "ouia u"sodded so it courd be-mlnaged. yet, the picturi",-ite-coioied pictures - that were- presented, shows that the rooseltrife is continuing to grow upthrough the sod. r nean r didnrt bury it to the point ehere-r kiired ii.r thought r did or r thought r xourd 6ut at reast r can moi, ii ana-i-ef-it*lli:^-r!1i :-t:il.elor= to z feer. rf anybody.s been our ro the ora r,oeTnearer and r.ooked around the grounds out there, you can see that thatproperty has IiteralIy been talen over ana oestio]ea uy puilfeloosestrife. That is a very real hazard. rt.s a hazard to Lotus Lake.It doesn't.do anything. to _the rildlife, the property orn.i", the lakeusers and it prevents me from cleaning'up thi girua6.-iiiit iorrs dorrn thestorm serer from the street. Dead anirnai.s. r-nean-you n.aa it, it,"there. -rf you.think-that.itis great for Lotus Laker'coa heip art of us.End of discussion. Any other qiestions? Conrads Did that ansr,rer your question? Emmings:. No. I'ly question h,as whether or not you were aware before youblred this contracror to do work there that tnE wori yo; ;;;" proposing todo might be subject to DNR regurations, ciry r"guriii6n, oi-regutatr on byany other governmental enEity? Bob Pfankuch: steve., I- started out by saying that rrm not an attorney.rrn not familiar with the DNR. r'm not fimiiiar irith chanhassen,sregurations regarding wetlands. r hired a contractor who does work on thelake. Does work on Lake Minnetonka and on Lotus Lake a fair aEount. Heprobabry never wirr again after this and with or wittrout-ciuse, thatis for Y?P !9 decide. The point is, I hired a lakeshore "ontr..ioi irho does aroE or worr(. tor governments around Lake llinnetonka. Ttte naturalassunption is that thls person knows t,hat he.s doing. ir v., need aper.it, if you need a rretlands alteEation pernit, i-Uoiiaiit'permit,r. nean when you hire a contractor you expelt thai perion-io'u. abre to dothose things. Thatrs a normar exp-ctation ana r cirry-[nJ-.."ponstbi].ity.I accept that but, isnrt that normal to expect that? Ermings: f guess lt Just doesnr t ansh,er my guestion. Bob Pfankuch: The question is no, r eas not at are that anything nasrequired on Lotus Lake but r uas aware that if lt were reqiired, it rourdbe. recognized by a contractor rrho does work on a riie - i" -ii in""ot. in theTrin cities area, Lake Minnetonka. EotDings: rs that true for the Frosts as werr. Tbat you were not arrarethat this would be regulated by any government !t the tiEe? Planning February Commission 15, 1989 - Meeti ng Page 11 steve Frosts Ttte contractor came down and he got a permit and r assumedthat everything was okay. He got the permit. That ras our understanding. Emnlngs: so again, then you're terling us too that prior to the time thecork uas begun, and rrm not tarking about the time oi the permit. prior tothe tine the work was begun, you were not auare that there seEe anygoverntoental entity that might be regulating what lt nas you uere going todo to your shoreline there? llrs. Pfankuch: We came and talked to Barbara before. I don't know, ayear before and ue said irerve got this loosestrlfe all over the atlore. What can se do? And she said, uell werre not Bure rrhat to do about it.That's shat she said. She said, werre not sure what to do with it. Ifyou can get rid of it, get rid of it. Thatrs what she told us exactly. We didn't do anything until later rrhen ue decided Eo call Harlan because we didnrt know what to do. She certainly didn,t say to us, you dastentouch the loosestrife because it has aIl these valuable properties andI resent the implications that eretre trying to do something underhanded.l{e're concerned about ecology aIso. Bob Pfankuch! I'll do nothing to the !.akeshore, and you cone down in August and look at it. Yourre goiDg to not be happy. Itrs like a cessPool. l{rs. Pfankuch: It rras just full of j unk. my question. contractor tothat he had Emningss Mr. Frost didnrt answer Stevtodhiri e Frost: I left it erith theo to get permiEs and anything ng you to do that. do what he kneu he neededto do, thatrs your job. Irn hmings: And did you say that to him before he started there rrere any necessary permits, herll get them or didhe'd take care of it? was it discussed at all uith hio? his you iror k? That ifjust assutoe Steve Flost:I hired hio, ...he souLd do that. Thathe's supposed to do that.ras Part of his job. l{hen Enoings: Did Steve Frost: Emings: was Steve Erost s Emings: Were tha t? estimate from hirn? $aa yes. itens on thele for pernits or anything like you get an Yes. it wr i tten? I think it there any ) Steve Frost: All he gave us was a total of the job I think. PLanning Commi ss ion February 15, 1989 - Meet i n9 Page 12 Emnings: The appl i cationget an excavating perm i t renoving? for the excavating permit, I don't know, do youwhen you fill somettring in as opposed to Hanson: Ies, you would. In both cases. Emrings: The excavating permit is rea!. vague. rtrs hard to know grhattbey're going to do but I think there nas i screw_up in our, it looks tone like there was a screlr-up in whoever might hive -i "io.a -lfri " -ei.i"a tiigpernit because lt clearry included a uetrand. There shourd have been aretland arteration pernit. which can only come rrom ine iity touncir.something got screq,ed up here. who knois what bui ""iu. y'ou'."n findt outnole about it between now. ind the city council, r.ike iadd'suggested. Theother thing, r wondered why re've got another p..p"i ti-irviivea nere.This.colonial crove properly and tieir propertlr ii at?eciea by this pr.anof Fish and Witdlife to do some restoralion tei" t.o Uri-ttr"y,." not infront of us for a perrnit. Hanson: l oo ked a ssume not. that officially rrhen paul and I went dotn andsee that that area had been altered too. Ithe same ti.me but I donrt know that it was or Bob Pfankuch: It was. Enmings: It $as al.l done at the same time by the same contractor? Bob Pfankuch: yes. And it was mentioned in one of the compraintsthe City in an earlier letter and then subsequently droppea'for noleason other than the fact that probably l5g -peopti beli'ng to thatAssociation. Emnings: Just comment r,rise, first of all, I have no doubt that thePfankuchs and the Erosts did sornething that they thought iras anirnprovement to their property andt the! don't haie any-desire to hurt thelake- rrm not even remotery- suspicio-us of their motivation-but theprobletn we have with doing nothing here ls that it nakes it, rike Jimsaid, it becones the smart thing Lo do to be duDb. To be unaware ofregulations that are there to piotect the 1ake. rf r go out and do therork, r get my hand slapped.and maybe r have to sit and-listen to peopletalk nasty about ne but r uind up basically uith uhat r wanted. wieriasif I go and apply to the City for a peruit-to do the sa.e ,ori, f,n-loingto be denied. so that rearry puts a prernium on being a coh,boy and thatsure is not ehat rre t ant to see. on the other hand, r donrt lhink it wiltserve any purpose .at all to punish these folks by naking them letuEn that50 feet to ehat it nas if the people who are supposed to understand thisthing fron a technicar point of vien, rike Burke, thj.nk that something canbe done to-get some value to the eretrand back there such as tnis pianl --- whether this is a reasonabre plan or not, r_have no way of knowin! but Irould trust that he does so r guess I'id be incrined to go arong ,itn in"staff recomnendatj.on aa a tay to get the matter resolve5. aoa'r guesi i'asay to the Frosts and the pfankuchs too, that re realry see a lot-more ofthis than we uant to. we.!e constantly seeing peopte ;o;i;g in here I became aware ofat the property tothat it hras done at from stated ) Planning Febr ua r y Cornmission 15, 1989 - Mee t i. ng Page 13 asking for wetland alteration permj.ts after theyrve altered the wetlandsand itrs real irritating to us. yourre presumed to know that cityordinances are and Mr. pfankuch is absolutely right r.rhen he say ii's hisresponsibility. It is. So I guess Ird go along with the stafireconmendation but the only change that rrd make is on nu.rnber 3. rf thisis approved, that the applicants provide a schedule and I.d just insertthe rords, acceptable to the city staff, for completing restoration. Justso the schedule is a reasonable one. I guess I think ihat whatever DNR,the hoops that DNR and Fish and wildlife-make them jump through I guess uould be punishment, if thatis Hhat it is, enough as far a8 IrE concerned.Thatrs all I have. wildermuth: Just for a point of clarification. Did $elretIand, or I mean did we actually issue the excavatingcontractor? actually issue a Permit to tbis Hanson: Thatrs where .I .n unclear whether it was or not. documentation I've come across is what was in the packet. The only Ifildermuth: l,lr. Pfankuch said that the contractor came backeverythingrs aIright. He applied, made tbe application. llrs. Pfankuch: They came dolrn lrith the contractor and lookedproperty. The City did. They vrere down there walki ng aroundJohnson. Now we assumed thaE if they came dorrn and they gave Permit, we had Do reason to believe that... and said that at thewith Harlan him thi s tlildermuth: It sounds Like wetve got an internal problem. Headla: lte donrt know what the story is. tlilderrnuth: I'm surprised that this excavating conEractor with hisexperience and working in wetlands and !,tinnesota, rrouldnrt know that hehad to come in for a permit up front. But even after he did come in forthe pernit, if he did get a pernit, an approved pernit, apparently EheCity didn't raise any objection. hmings: He may be savy enough to knou th.t lt does pay to be a coEboy. Headla: There are very successful men in our company uhors tDotto uas,yourre better off going abead and do rrhat you want to do and get it done,beg forgiveness and get your hand slapped than get prior approval. Bolrbe got a lot of stuff done. I see the same thing here. Enoings: Irve given that as advice to cllents because it does rrork. Idon't know tjhat you do as a City to stop it but here ne had the perfectopportunity to stop it. We discovered it sas going on and stopped it andttren let it continue. Thatis our fault. That.E the Cityrs fault, itseeEs to me. urs. Pfankuch: we heard a lot of tark about wetlands after the fact arso.Ile didn't even know this was a wetraod. t{e tried to mot, it. vferd go dounthere, it rrasnrt a srramp. It rras just clumps of loosestrife growi.ni. Now ) ee realize it.s an exotic wetland but... Conrad: I hate to besituation but I think are ninor compared toyou with details herethe stuff running intosee, thatrs fine and i Urs. Pfankuch: I don't know if that can Bob Pfankuch: you need to come doh,n and Bob Pfankuch: Hoo about the Bodeo eprayed into the lake? conrad: Rodeo eould not be- acceptable in ny nind but purple Loosestrifels better than destroying arl ki-nds of f ir.tiatton. -i.i""-i" not .fil.tration system. tE.doesn.t do the job. Wetlands, the thing eithpurpl'e loosestrife is it chokes out th6 cattaila ana'now-tne cattailsdonrt have a chance to grow. so if you showed ne hon yoo-"i" restoring itso the cattails could growl t could Lnderstand it Uri io, fr""..,t done it.The grass is not a filfration. an educater and I don't like doing that in thisthe things that you see being a 1itter in the Iwhat a wetland does. Again, Iim not going to bbut a wetland is really- taking the cb6micils outhe lake. The tires and somt of the stuff thatrs disgusting and we agree. ake oret oft you Conrad: I don,t kno!, that it can be doneDe is not a solution to the probl.em. be. either but what yourre Eetling Conrad: I see it fairly frequently andtrying to be an educater, weil I am. I look at it. I'd be happy to. Again, I,m notan. susan- conrad: r just rrant to make a cornment about the education. r donrtknow how rong you've rived on Lotus Lake but every year, at reast once ayear, a_newsletter goes to.evely homeowner on the llke educating auoui lnevalue of setrands. Arso, in thE newspaper, the Lotus Lake assoiiation haipubrished articles about wetl.and valul ind about the contror purpleloosestrife and the value of loosestrife ao *,e h.ee not onry, as anAssociation, sent out retters but we have heLd oeetings and'talked andeducated and ee have done that for at reast 5 years. so not being awareof wetlands and not t,lying.them identifled, uniess you just moved onto thelake. wetlaod identificaEion has been availabre to'all-of-us and sent to-arl of us on Lotus Lake and all of the city but the Lotus Lake xomeowoeiiAssociation has gotten that information to their horoeo*ners. And as far,r have just one more point, as far as the DNR recoomenatng iattin; [h.---'eetrand back to itrs originar state. tly experience, whicf, most of youk-now- has been years with the DNRr has uien lnat their jurisdiction 3nas atthe high water mark so they rrill not even venture to rEcommena anyttrin! -- beyonal that. r wourd ask the planning conuuisslon to invite the c6rps 6rEngineers in to tell you r,hat the va].ue ls beyond that because they alethe only agency rrve run across that can give-you a total gicture and fogsn-'t get hung up in jurisdictlons. rhiy do-haye 9 Juri'saiction "naingbut. they aT9 -g - recormending body rather thin- perrnittini in-many cases.Eish and wi.rdrife does thaf eve-n better so thiy can teil- you trre wtrolepicture and rrm sure that,s why the. DNR is saylng to renoiaie a portion ofit. rhey can only tark to rhe portjon that tieyir; .;;;;;;ilre for. Planning Commission ttee t i ogFebruary 15, 1989 - page 14 Planning Febr uar y Commi ss ion 15, 1989 - Meet j n9 Page 15 conrad: r want. to make a few comments without being redundant for othercorunents. one, it rooks like tbere was an internal problem ana r reiiryrould like, r.really do need staff to telr us what hippened. the cornneitsfron the applicants are valid. rf we donrt catch itr-if our staff doesnitlook at the documents, these are charted wetlaods. it,s not ttrai ttrey;sg-Dot.charted. They are so it rooks like we screwed up lnd r need stafi toreview that. And staff to review it t.o tell us how lhey,re going toPtevent that. I just doesn,t make sense to me. Secondlyl I.m not surerhether the appl.icants knew what they rere doing or not and I.n real.concerned with the conEractor and r guess we should, rrd arso l,ike to havestaff telr us what they would recommend that ue do to the contractor whoras doing this. Anybody rlho is in the area knows that Chanhassen is atough ordinance, period. And we do that for a purpose because we have alot of lakes and we have a lot of runoff andt a lot of building.contlactors should know so I guess steve, r'd rike to have staff review tous what we should do w'i Eb a contractor's that more than likery knords whathers doing. Third, I agree. I dontt think ne need to restora the rretlandtotally. vle can probably do with what Mr. Burke is recommending here andget some value out of it and I would hope that ne could agree. I thj.nk nybigqest concern is we really have been strict with your neighbors and youi neighbors care. They care a whole Iot. I think we donrt want to set an er(ample, for whatever reasons, rre just donrt uanE Eo set an example thatit can be done. I{e want to set an example that people still cara aboutthis and I think you do. I guess ItIl take !lr. Burkers recommendation asbeing valid and acceptable. On the other hand, Irm not convinced Stevethat lre've really Looked at it from our ordinance standpoint. Again, it.san easy ray of looking at this thing and saying, well, this other agency rrho- cont.rols everything above the high water mark says this but f rint youto be EeaI confident that our ordinance, that we haven, t set an examplefor another situation. If this is fine, this takes care of the problem,lro okay sith that. If what r. Burke says ls going to filter the runoffttratr8 coning down betneen the houses and get the miximun value, thatrsokay rith me but I rrant staff to taII us and if you need help from theCorps of Engineers or irhoever, I think werll ask them that. The questionin ny nind is rrhether we issue the permit. Irm really hung up and thereall.y philosophic thing is that a wetland arteration peroit rhictr hasbeen arready, the wetlandr s been filred i.n. r{e issue i peroit to restoreit. I don't know. I don.t know how to deal nith that one. Those are nycoEoents. I'd take a motion from sonebody. Emings: I.n going to nove that the planning Commission recomnendalrProval of the Wetland Alteration Permit 188-13 subJect to the conditionsthat .re set forth in the staff report rrith the addiLion that r Rentionedin number 3 nhere.the appricants provide a achedure acceptabre to the cityStaff for completing restoration. Batzlis I'11 second it. what do Conrad: That I s another comroent. re do sith Colonial Grove? I think they should be in here. here who've made an appllcatlon. I thlnk somehor rerve got to teII thetn they.ve Emings: Well, we.ve got thatrs not part of this. people I tilae Planning Commission Mee t i. ng February 15, 1989 - Page 16 got to come in and apply for a netland alteration permit too. Thomas Gilman: Anal they can get their hand sl.apped too. E:nnings: WelI, yes. I. guess it.s not my job to beat people up whenscrew up- Especiarry when the city seeml fo have screied- up aL thetiue. Conrad: I think it is a separate issue but I thjnk we do want to. they saoe Emnings moved, Batzli secondedapproval of Wetland Alterationconditions: 1 2. that the Planning CommissionPerloit 188-13 subject to the r ecotrmend foI Iowing 3 Prior to City Council consideration, the applicants agree tomitigation plans and . requirements oi uinnesota Departnent of NaturalResources anal U.S. Fish and Wilallife Service. Applicants receive pernits from t{innesota DNR. Applicants provide a schedule acceptable to the City Staff forcompleting res torat i on. Emrnings, Wildermuth and BatzIi voted inHeadla, and Conrad voted in oppositionwith a tie vote of 3 to 3. favor of the motion. EIl,son,to the notion and the motion failed Elrson: r move the planning cornmission recommend denial of the wetrandAlteration perBit t88-13. Batzl i :to do? I'1I second it for discussion purposes. What good is that going WilderDuth: That, s just Ellson: I uant it trant them to bash outhat tttey got the ok tbe converge of what re just voted on. forward to the City Councll sith something but Idetails. Like you said, it will be on recorddo it. I donrt want that to be there. couad: But the main reason r voted against steve.B notion is because hetalked about, werre really reacting to what the DNR aaid and r donrt knowthaE re.re reacting to $hat our ordinance says. wildernuth: our ordinance, r Basnrt too proud of our ordinance nhenI just read it. Emings: Hy cornment there Ladd nou!.d be. our ordinance terl,e us uhat todo when somebody comes in and appries for the pernlt piioi-ti doing thenork. we got a problem eith our ordinance nayLe nhen'p"olre- co.e in and ill:_rly. already done the eork and now r'm bere to gel ttre perruit. Haybetnere shourd be a provisi.on in there. rrn not even ilear wtr! ttrey apprieit ogot the ay to Planning Febr ua r y Commission 15, 1989 - Meeting Page 17 for a permi t. Conra.d: Because the staff has been asking them to. Emings: But what if they just said, no, thank you? Conrad: Then werd have to 1e9a11y take care of that. Emraings: That got them in front of us. Their applicationfront of us and then I guess, I don,t knoe. I don.t thlnktells us, gives us much guidance in this case. Conrad ! lt doesn I t. 90t our them in ord inance Conr ad : Vlethat doesnrt accoulpl i sh . be doing what precedent for sho u ld set a is best, that the ordioance intends andfuture situations. Thatrs Hhat I want to hnings: I agree and it seems to me, if they come ln and Eheyrve got retland there and they say we irant to modify it, then we look at our ordinance and we say no, because Lretve done that before right Dext tothen. We say, no you canrt do that. Iourre going to just have to liverith your Loosestrife and put out a boardrralk and that.s that. a fildernuth: But the contractor came in and got a permit approved. Ellson: But it sasnrt signed. tfildernuth: But if you read this letter from Barbara real careful!.y, towards the back of your packet. Read this letter from Barbara realcarefully. your contractor, l{r. Johnson, prorDptly complied irith ourrequests to submit plans and the needed information for issuance of agrading permit. It implies that the grading pernit rras granted becauseshe goes on to say, howeverr it has come to our attention that the areauhich you conducted the grading may have contained wetland vegetation.aPParently, when whoever it rras from the City l,ent down there sith thecontractor to look at this thing, sornebody from the City agreed to thepersit. The implication is that the pernit Has granted and Mr. pfankuch said tbat he had a permit. So you caort fault the property orrner. 1n So Headla: Does the ordinance give you any guidance if they don,t follow it? Or the best te could help for is that, I tbink Jim pointed out that youjudge it from how would you treat other people if they came in with thepermit? IF it's a boardiralk, the rrorse scenario for these people would bethen that they'd have to go back to that and I donrt believe in penalizing them like that. But to me that would be one way that does it. Emmings: I suppose tbe other thing you can do here too, if you rdant to send a real clear message, the City Council I guess could ask, $hat they have done there may well be a criminal offense under the ordinance andthey could ask the City Attorney to review it for prosecution. That wouldcertainly get peoplei s attention. But again, thatrs not our functjon bere. PIann in Februar gCy1 onnission Meet i ng5, 1989 - Page 18 I Emmings: we've got a rretland, we want to alter it. we say no. r thinktheyrre comj.ng in at a point where, rrhatrs there? They've qot an alteredwetrand. They've removed the wetrand or destroyed it ind w6've got. tosay, what are we goi.ng to do now? Given that al the baseline, i[ aIIdepends on what you want to pick as a baseline. ttreyir"-;. -ing in andsaying, here's erhat we've goE now and werve goi . -liin-trei.l a6uin, i-h"u"n9 uay of judging it's efficacy as restor i ng - ruhereier the piopirties are,the.t etland.you want Eo keep, but at reast fhere,s sorneuoa|-nlre wtro -ayithat this wirr do the job to get it back to at l.east some iort ofreasonabl,e. .. wildernuth: Therers.no guestion in ury mind how r.d vote if sonebody reregolilg l1r lor a permit and no work hal been done. ro qo""tion at atl.But r think there's an event here that took place ttrat'i.iii-not a brackand white i ssue. Emmings: And I think $e,ve got dirty hands. Batzli: .lrerl rrm grad the two peopre that voted for the notion are ina9reement now. Ernnings: you voted for it too. Batzli: Yes, but I already agreed wj.th you trdo. wildeEmuth: yes, but I didn,t agree with you to begin with. Conrad: Dave, your disagreement stems from what? How is sonebody goingto swing your vote? Headra: I donrt berieve that it shourd be denied. r rearry berieve itahould be tabl.ed untir we find out irhat in the worrd did ;;'rearry telrthese peopte. r think staff can telr us. r want to 6ee rrhat the DNR hasto say. r have no idea $hat theytre going to say or the other approprrateparties- Then r think the peopll ougtrt to be able to 100k at that andthen nhatever is recommended, Lhen corne in with a scneduie. Then rre canrct. on- lt. werve got something docuoented. Until that, i'don.t think reought to touch it. conrad: This is under discussion of a notion for deniar right? okay.lhatrs not bad Dave. rf we don.t know. we can vote on iti oe can kil.l.It or she can nithdraw it lf she so chooses but r thini- yo,i;re absoruteiyright- we donrt know what staff did. steve hasnit done a good job ofresearching the staff on this one and r think even whether,-he can do itfor city council or he can do it for us. we night as ,eii'hear h,hat itis- we've got the ordinance and rre can help thit orainance. we can herpinprove it if we understand ho., it doeanrt let enforcea. -ii,e prouauiy-'good. that he- bring back a scenario of hor{ ttris trappened. sot r .rrothink rrd rike, other conmeots that you sald. r,a-like staff, thints thatcone in at the last secoDd just bothers me. staff hasn.t reviewed fhisand reviewed it to see how our ordinance pertains, which ii ray problen.Hy -biggest problem. Itrs coning ln today and staif hasnrt totd rne how ourordinance gets impacted by the recomnenditlon so r guess ihere,s some Planning Eebruary Comm iss i on 15, 1989 - t'tee t i ng Page 19 validity for tabring it other than the fact that we have to bring it backin. That.s a real pain. I hate to do that to anybody but... Bob Pfankuch: I asked for you to table it for 6 nonths. Conrad: Well., 6 months of Hater going in, if it's bad irater, is probablynot rorth the risk but I think... Bob Pfankuch: ...$ater that goes into that lake? conrad: A whole bunch of bad water goes into the rake and rre probably apend more of our lives up here looking at the bad rater than r{e caEe tothink about. Bob Pfankuch: ltay I ask that the City serrer from the street be removed?Not be allowed to drain into it. $IilderiDuth: I guess if it's any confort, in a ner.r subdivision thateouldnrt happen because there would trave to be some kind of a ponding areabut I donrt thiok you $rant a ponding area in your backyard before it goesinto the lake do you? Batzli: I think the City might want to look into a catch basin or ascreen or some sort of trap if thatrs in fact vrhatrs draining into theIake at that point from a storm sewer. conrad: llhere is all. the coroniar crove, being that that retland is beingused up by a contracEor, where is that water going Steve? Is it comingbetueen? Hanson: I have no idea. conrad: can you find that out because that just fascinates me. ltost ofthatrs coming in from Eden prairie. Most of that rater is coning fromundet TH 1{} going into the rdetland. I.m Just real curious if iirs goingto the subdivision to the north. tlildlernuth: It.s golng into all the basenents around it. Conrad: EIlson: Conrad: EIIson: But anyrray, Annette, you.ve got a motion. I rlthdran the notion. or ye can vote on it? rithdraw it and Dave, rrhy donrt you do yours. sithdras your aecond Br ian?Conrad: Do you want to Batzli: Sure. Headla: I flould like toget better definition of Do you t,ant to No, I'd rather make hrhat a motion tha tdirection the ire tabLe this. vi11a9e really r.d gave like to these I Planning Commiss j.on February 15, 1989 - Mee t i. ng Page 2g when do you think this rrill cone back? Any idea? A people- .If we regl1{ gave them the erong direction, r think rrerve got tolook at it a lot different and maybe the City has to suffer theconsequence. Ird Iike to understand, see strat the DNR is going torecommend anal then have .our appricans look at it and subrai[ some type ofschedure and r think at tbat lirne the colonial crove peolre stroura'ie partof this. l{i ldermuth r Second . Headla noved, Permir t8g-13find out what submit a scheuith. A1I vo Conrad: Steve, couple of reeks? Wildermuth seconded to table action on Wetland Alterationso staff can research rhat happened at the City level . io -DNR is- going to reconmend and Lhen that the apilicantsdule, which the Colonial crove people should bi- includedted in favor of the motion to t;bl; and the motion carriea. Hanson: I doubt it. Ithat period of tirne firsproblens I.m run into trhave to do some of thatbelieve there. s anyt h i n9 It believe Irll have a response from DNR inf all. Secondly, I'n not iure rhat type of9 to research it because I think I,m going toPhone calls rrith previous staff becauie I don'tthe fi le. REQuEsr FoR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FoR PARKTNG AND srrE r!,tpRovEnENTs, oNPROPERTY ZONED CBD, CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED JUST EAST OE' 480wEsr 78TH srREET, CHANHASSEN PRoFEssroNAL BUTDLTNG - pHAsE r, ARvrD ELNEssARCHITECTS, INC. Steve Hanson presented the staff report. Conrad: Brad, vrhat do you think? Brad Johnson: werve given them some modificatlons that are minor, fromour point of vierr. you'vg ggt to reneober.. this is ueing designei uy -u" City for us. Thatrs why he-does the presentatioo. Conrad: Iou can be critical nor. Brad Johnson: r think it ritl work fine. He's gotten our comments. rtlooks like most of them have-been put ln there. Like r sii-, it," preityclose to l.hat ire rere requiriog. rn fact, the traffic auyi-tr.re to rookat it... you should note that ne have taken 15 feet ofi the back of thesouth- side of the apartment buildting and put it into ttre pJiting tot.That has beeo done as part of your Previous approva!. of t-he sit6 plan forthe apartment. buirding. That's rrhy this orilinat siaeriii had soundarouDd here- rt $as getting too-crose to the-rooros. you knor, for aPulli: rark right nexE to somebody's bedroom is noi-a iooa"ia"" so it rasPull'ed over' to the right.- werre really excited auout-this whole projectbecause it just has a real nice r.ook to it. rtre ,riv-it-"ii "o."" dontoyin by in .' STATE OT Nh0trs@Tr.A DEPARTMENT OF NATURAT RESOURCES 296-7s23 a rely, Pat Lyn Hydrologist cc: }IETRO REGION DIVTSION OF WATERS1200 WARNER RD., sr. PAUL, !Or. 5,i06 FILE NO Irtr. Stephen Hanson , planning Directorcity of Chanhassen 690 Coutter Drive, p.O. Box 14?Chanhassen, Minnesota 55 317 Dear Mr. Hanson: RE: PLANNING CASE 88-13 WAp, WETLAND ALTERATION, LO:ruS LAKE( 10-5 ) Tlill L?: I?: .l: opqgflunity to revie$, and comnent on appricatj_onu6-rr wAp regarding fiJ-ri1q-a_nd^,s-odding of a portio., ot-i-otr." r,.r"( 10-Gp r . Minnesota Ru]gs- 6115. o19o pro-n$ir a?ry "i"i".ii-"-" ii t:.ubelow th_e ordinary - hig_h water tilgwj- e:.evaii.on -oi inv- stateprotected hrater for development purposes. Lotus _Lake, a state p.J9!9cted basin, has an established oHwelevation of 896.3 feet (NGVD, Lg2g). ihe plans ""rritt"a-ri&, trr.pgrrit apprication indj.cate iire proposea i.ii"itGr -r-ii-r "ii"r,ra. filling/soddins below this protedt:.on e1lvati"".--rifiiii ii' tti"nature is inconsistent with Minnesoti Rures and-;fiia i-ot l.permitted. Again, fiuing and sodding berow the oHw erevation is not a110wed,and permit application- -gg-13 wAp strould be denied. Amended planswhich eliminate any fi-11,/soddins ;i-i"iti"= u"i"iigeli.i:il ffii;meet with ou! approval. ff you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. SinceI Lotus Lake file ( 1O-Gp ICity of Chanhassen file #ta ; il:Cir :1!:!.) lotuslkpI AN EOUAL CPPOBTUNITY EMPLOYER CIIX OFCliANrrAsssr PHONE NO. February 2, L989 FE8 0 6 i989 f ETATE OFh0h0trs@TA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES UErRO nECION IIATERS - 1200 IiABIIER I'OAD, ST. PAITL, llN 55106 alorExo.296-7523 C FIE lto. October 27, 1989 Dr. Cberle6 Elrt 7007 Chcyeana fra1l Chaohaeaeu, llN 553f7 8E! VIoLATION ,v89-6055, ITNAIImOBIZED rIIJ, LOmS t {rF (l(F6p) , CEANEASSEI I CARVER COUNTY Desr D!. Elrt ! On SeptcEbcr 22, !989 Dcpar6lat of f,atsrsl Bc8ou8c.a peremacl,. aloug rlth reprcaeatatlvla fr@ the II.S. Arzy Corpa of Eaglaec!8, agaln vlsltcd your property r.letlve to flLl lctlvl'tlGs rodertrl,caeatlle: elmg your bl.efroEt prop.lty. th. ordr.lary htgh Brtet cl.vetloa ((m) of lotur Latc hra bcea eatsbllshed !t .levatloa E96.3r (NGTD, f929). ltl'r clcvatto hes beea surveycd ead rtated to tb. cl8t of thc Colmle1 E.tatc8ptoprrty aad lrocdlatcly eeat of !lr. Pfaalueh I r ptopcrty. Polt1oaaof the thrce eontlguouB lota bctreca Chosc strl,e8 hlvc baaa A[Icgally flllcd below thc OEE. Ioula 18 oEG 3uch lot. l.lleaota Ru1es, p!!t 6115.0190, eubprrt 3. rt.t.a, ltr prrt,r?lacocnt (of flll) ahql t lot bc perdtt.d 1a thc follorlag cescr: A. to achlcve vcgrtatloD coatrol; l. to crcrte uphad erea.r Iorr flll lctlTltlls r8c lacoDsLstcit rlch rt8t. !nl.i, .ni! th. flll pleced beloY t'hc OEf anst bG rcod.d t! lta Gltls.ty. lurthcr, thc latcbed lgat bG rcstorGd to tt3 orlgtD.I' croaa-.cctlm. A rtltt.a Echcdulc for rertotatlo! Drst be epprovcd by thc Df,E. fc taccmrod Irou pur.u. volsatstT r.atoratlo[, .8 lt ooliir .ddlCloDrl cost &d lcgal ectloo. You arc furtbcr ailvlaed that you rurt .1ro cqly rdth rL:' tbcruIes, regulatloDs, aDd rcqullco.Ets of otbar rpplleablo fcilerrl, atale, &d local rglacler. ti, AN EOUAL OPPOBTUN]TY E PLOYER [7 CERTIFID lor t WED I l \'' \ t6 I t ! ?r.rretgtq.a7rll Caarfao LoTL rC bt ti; , t; wt4-aP "&,alqao , ,E I ) r{ ;r I > I I 1 t 1 e$ncfrx2t& ?L l L 7, * . -.:.: '!- -a 1471 cot-+or$aao V-Y4L*-O -i. o o o You b; ,/.a.t)*, L+r(F?*,h,c+ iWo>l 9o l/, /-"ree -tq//Lol B 0,tn{/) {anI%p trqs {., / bYg-s^ cy ea(A.-Lt-tQ- ) & t, r I ff1 \ 7-f a L t : G*J,'u 9 L fiye sf +' d 0 et ,o3 0 h.t tl,"^ H /4 (rt e lh ea tt/t -_-._-_ -tI fl*",ru Punyb Lsoge n/" sl__ ,t"I ,-t-.t! :f C.ftl>)lN|1 i-i'r, --J^LHt+tr [co,?., i (7;22-y-rwtLt" lruOs\ lV"I f,r"^ arrl t e I I 0 I +1a / Jstrs to 7 COLONIAL GROVE AT )DARETJ-E AND AsSoc/ATE,,LAND SuRv, -5 t .l)tDrI P /,-2O E e 7ot*1o *{74]ra4 a ^.q ry 39c99 IL 3t ll'b .5t 4.R,n/.q a.b>zOY 2*,,4 7 z5$t q 2o )5 t ,E etE.I .t16, Rz9. Ttb.R.2). IEo7 \N B\ 8 h \BI 8i I L) I qo- I t \ \B N r.t s € \dt25 E r'e+*^tz, t1 o ,6 b ilo 3 I I 2 N Iv I I r1 / V\ \ :-: 5 I ii # :);.:.; 1;5 1 I l t,1.{t t :.li -.i_.i ts :!, :i i+.'+ .t- t'' i #:*t a, { ..'-'-:i 1.11'; sri r,; :;t -{. :l? , 1..: '+- '!vr '- I t I rrl 'i,/h ---?,u {iuEA fnait olt\c( f{Lr- tsrD Grs f.E ttot^rA t) ,Sx3br30' (rU tl.o t{of-r 3b nry{^ a{E sllde,t^tM.- STATI -r-AAK LAN D trr urf tral o hr ,o 6 1 ,.i -t '.. rr i - -!***,r?.rr :)'J \ I ft) sd ( \ L,?j:- I 7- \q @ ]- b,:. ,, \ s o F \tOI s ? .q 5 @ (I ae (,B -gr l-i';-./ ii;j ?-l-:rr8r.-- ri I Z F rao ---'ts i ,'., 3 i: .g t-) P ---dt o9- '' :' e 5 ri oftt- Itc .\. tg 'ot oo o t,-l R o (A 61 ..Jj',.! o B 11-a @": o:t'\;:lr ! -.)I t I -._rt c > 2A,eE /-(_E A/yD OLONIAL GROVE AT A sSoc/ATE5 ,LAND 5URV, ( I +$, 4*trEN '-) /\. 99-€s \s $o(ts C6, l- LOT I \ e \TIv E€ \ :,t s 6tE. <E { .p; o { o 7 eg.1 - ry 9g aau |aA 't- IL ,t 4.R.n/.% 4 z Z tA,6>ol R./8E5,e SAri t 25eP \ 8\3 t \ t{E oFrE-.I .Ttt6, Rz, T b,R.?) R 2* \ BI 8i7h t_=q8_lzt .,4 E o ,E > I I I Z Ilr' I I \ \ 1/ Z \ 'l)u( b t1 c OLONIAL GROVE AT E/ LE t L AND S ue 1,. >DAR <E .dp, {a - ry 39o9g sl)tk -t- .ilR,) Z zt.lo> t oFrE.I .2trc, ezg 7:lb.R.Z) t1 eY L. tq ,tci e5 9* SArt ?o 29 I t t \ lrI 7ollr G 'ls BI Bi EI 7 2 ll.I v I I .aA 15 t'\ I ),+$, \€s- :\I 3 tz \1/vtE**^nz, 3 o I I \ s50c /ATEs (rf\ A2 b IL- E N ,,4 aa fe I.! I G, Zo l-lF dol-v) lrJd. IrJv J (/) t-t^tJJ P ffool trJtr>FO<frrfiuJj r^r lL co oz)ZoorF u-< dacg.t! t-- z l-rlZiO .,tHLDt- 'JO 'JF(,rFaov)7o:qA tJ IgF,4tff:e+l>Lll-- \ \ & UJF- Srnlsle.lS a, r-a =z,.9DZL :s.LJaJolrJ I *A \ 1.,,-.+ \ I \ STATE OFh0h0trs@TA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES UETRO REGION AATERS - I2OO I{ARNER ROAD, ST cc:JoAnu Oleoa, Clty of ChaahaLsacu Ken Earrell, USCOE . PAt L, UN 55106 PxoxE xo. 296-7 523 FILE XO. Dr. CballGB Elrt 7007 Cheyeuae tral1 Chanhassen, UN 55317 RX vroLATroN t89-6055, rU,L, LOTUS I,AXE (10-6p); CARVER COTJNTT Dear Dr. 81rt: I've enclosed 8 typlcal croas-sectlon lDdlcatltrg tbe rrteBt of f1llto bc reuoved. Plcase Dotlfy &e rlth1a 15 days of the scheduledercavetlou. Sloce you are voluutarlly reaovlng tbc f!l,I uatetlal aad restollng the area, !o Dl{B pcrrlte rr111 be rcqulrcd, nor rdll aay flaes be 16sued. The reEtoratloo should be coDpl€trd by }{ay l1 1990. If you chooee to utlllzc Datural roek rlprap atoag tbc rastoredbr-k, you aay do ao 1a accordanc. El.th the eacloaed brocbure. Ifthe rlprap caauot Eeet tbe csltclla outll.acd 1! tbe brochulGr 8perrlt froE thls offlce w111 be rcqrlrcd. Thaat. you for your coopclat1oa la \aolvfag thls tatte!. If you have questloD.s or rlab to dlscusa furth\, p1er8c do aot hGlltatc tocaII. erel let Ly! Area Brdrol Ecaclosure glst .--e----J DEC 07 lgnl ettYofcltANhlAssEr{Bob Oberaeyer. Bar! EDElneerlDePL170:kap Al{ EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EIPLOYER *t') Deceaber 6, f989 Th[s lette! aervea to couflm our leceDt telcphoae couveraattoa of october 30, 1989, la rrhlch you agrced to voluntarily tcDove the flllEaterlal plaeed beJ.ow the ordlaary hlgh rarer elevetloa (OBII) of Lotus Lake, 1n accordaace slth our prcvloue correspoudcacr to you, dated October 27, f989. You rr111 satj.Bfy DNR coacerog lf theEatellal ls dlsposed of at aa upland slte sbove the OEI{. Iou sbould check ,1th the Clty aad the Bllcy-Pulgatory-Bluff Crcek lJaterahcdDlstrlct to eDsure your propoaed spol1 dapo8ltloB Blte 18 1D coupllalce vlth thel! regulatloas. t9ro a Decenber 11, 198 9 Dr. Charles Eirt 7007 Cheyenne trail Chanhassen, ltN 55 3I7 I{r. Robert Pfankuch 100 Sandy Eook Road ChaDhasseD, IrtN 55317 Hr. Stephen Frost80 Sandy Eook Roaat Chanhassen. ltN 55317 Dear Centlemen 3 ctrv'or EH[I{H[SEEN W-t= uJ4? rhe city has receivedt the retier rroi the Department of NaturalResources dated December 6, 1989, ln tegard -to your viofilionfill along Lotus Lake. The Departuent 6t Naturel n"io"i"."-letter states that-you have vol.untarily agreed to renove itre rirlmaE,erlar. p]acecr berow the ordinary high water elevatlon of LotusLake and that the restoration ehalf U6 conplete--bi-u"i il tggO. The-clty has been waiting for the Departrient of Naturar Resourcesto.determine exactry whai extent oe itrr beedea to -1"-i"ro"Ia toBatisfy.their reguirenents-prior !o ploceeding rrtt-iooi ielranaa-l-teration _pelni! applieatron on -fl1E with th6 ciii.' -5io.i -tt. DNR has nade tbelr flnal deterulaetlonre are.30u ibre-a;-;roceedrith. your applleation. The City needs a survey gubnltted irouall three parties chouing the aiea of fill, tni oiainiir-Ui"trater mark and the area of -fill thqr"_rir:L.be telroved as'retiired fV tne DNR. -Atthough the violatiod.tf .tte DNR reg"iriions't""been resolved, the actioa is sdlll ln vlolation oi i[.-cfiv;,netland ordinance and you are stilt required 6 ;; 6;;gi'til"Iletland Alteration pernit procets. The_next application deadtllnes are araDuary g, and aranuary 22,1990- we are reguesting thar you provrde-thi reeu.ited-iuiviy uy htu 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAx (612) 937-5739 o enber 1I, 1989 Page 2 either January I or aranuary 22. LggO. ff you cannot oake theapplication by these dates please aubmit a letter statint rhy theapplication needs to be posLponed further. thoultl you have any queEtlona please feel free to contact ne. S incerely 1 )ot>---,'q-t iroAnn Ol son Senior Planne! JO:n City Counci I Planning Conmission Paul Nrauss, Planning DirecCorPat Lynch, DNR o ) CITY OF CH[NH[SSEN IIIEUORANDUU TO: Planning Commission and City Council FROU: Paul Krauss, Director of planning DATE: February 15, 1990 SUBJ: Land Use plan Discussion The attached materials are provided for the joint planning Commission,/City Council discussion on the drift Iand ,"" il"n.The draft plan incluiles changes requested by the planning' Commission to date. As all partiei should 6e aware, no iormalpublic hearings have been held and although some parties havecontacted staff or attended the meetingsl public input has notactively been sought at this point. rt is- our belilf trrat lnisplan is not intended to be a ttatic document but rather one thatis-to be. conti nua11y . refined- by public input gainea auring-infor_mar meetings and official publ ic- hearings-. Tf,e plan itseif willnot rea1ly be finalized until it is prepared for- submission tothe ltetropolitan Council. Also included in the.packet. is an updated schedule of meetingsfor Planning Conmission review. $te anticipate a high work loadfor staff and the planning Commission to alhieve su5mittal toMetropolitan Council by July. Enclosed you will also fild a copy of the revised and updatedpopulation, households-and enployment paper. In it you will seethat City staff is anticipating a year 20OO populati6n of l7,7OOrrith a 2005 population of approximitefy Z:,0-OO. we believe thisis based on a reasonable rate of growth with this figure derivedby conservative and realistic projeclions. Summary informationis provided on the land use plin itself. It is imiortant io notethat we have concluded that there are 531 acres of-vacant singlefamily land nithin the existing UUSA line. At present rates ofgrolrth, this replesents a two year supply of vacant 1and. Thesupply of industrial land is virtually- nonexistent while conrmer-cial and multi-family parcels still have some availabiliti:Asain, we point our Ltrit this is well below tha io a;-li-;;",supply of developable land that the Uet Council has definla intheir policies as a goal for community growth. Staff had hoped 0L 690 COULTER DRTVE . p.O. BOX 147 0 6111111115SEN, MTNNESOTA 5531 7 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937_s739 Planning Commission and City Council February 15, 1990 Page 2 to provide information for continued discussion on goals andpolicies. we nould Like to bring them to you in a comprehensive manner so that you can see how they are laid out and interact with one another. Unfortunately, we have a glitch in our word processing system whereby the material has been inputted but wonrt come out. Rather than trying to cleliver this to you on an incomplete basis, these will be presented to you at an upcoming special meeting. I Land use i nv en tory i nformati on for Chanhassen is contained .in thefolIowing four charts. Three of the four charts relate to specificgeographic portions of the City. They inciude the area ins'.ide theexisting MUSA line, the area outsiOe of the existing l.lUSA line butwith-in .!.!9^Oloposed XUSA-line and f ina11y, the area Iotally outs.ideof all MUSA lines. The fourth chart is i -tota'l of the f ir"st three. These.chart-s provide an overview of chanhassen's existing land usea1d !hey al so ident.ify- - a- breakdown of the areas propo-sed to beadded to the 2000 MUSA I ine. Iithin the existing'ilUiA I ine,Chanhassen has the fol lowing I and avai lable: Based upon residential building permit activity over the past twoor three y ears, S3l acres represents a two y ei. srppiy oi-vacantland' A similar situation oicurs in the indlstriat'ialeqori. lt !he pr-esent time, ll3 acres of industrial land rs c u r r e n t t! - vi c a n t .This figure is somewha.t.misleading because it inctudes" iianneoexpansion areas for existing businesses. For example, Data Servand McGly nn Baker ies have pl anned second phases ttrit iccount fora total of approximately 45 acres. Excltision of this committedland results in an existing industrial supply of only OA"ic."s.This total corresponds to ai little as a oiri year sup[ly. In order to accommodate growth in each of the Iand use cateooriesbetween now and the y ear ZOO0, the I and use el ement o-f thecomprehensive plan calls for expansion of the HUSA line. Theextent of that expansion is shown on the chart entitled Land use -Ins ide- Expanded l.lUSA Area. If approved by the l,letropol itanCouncil, the proposed expansion will ;dd Z,0ZZ'acres of land'to thesewered area of the community. The following is a breakdown of theland area additions by land use category: S ingl e Family - 531 acresMulti Family - 223 acres Commerc ial - 113 acresIndustrial - ll3 acr es Single Farni ly - 860 acresMulti Family - 106 acresIndustrial - 462 acres The propos ed distribution of Iand use p 1an entitled 2000 Land Use Pian. is shown on the l arge scale LAND USE INVENTORY AND MUSA LINE EXPANSI()N A c Dl! tr lt! It! i ! I rl !r t r t I lt tt E ilti Ft I r r rt !if-ll I 2 ll 3 dfY OF C}IA,SIASSEIITttErt TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ZONES Sub-A16a Boundries -l-1 .t :-l aaarlolr{asgffiEr -tD !9. r-. 6 i, Itr --]540-it o , 539-2539-1 alz-, 4540-22 -' -.q40-r\l --::J _ i__.] -T- 0 540-18L_ -24 r51@6 i;ll '-rO *7-1 i!. T - - Il--r+ 7 B 4 5 lt6 v )' 541:-1 : I ,tr t'tr I I LAIID USE - I[SIOE EXPAI'OED TUSA AREA TAZ 559:r 539- 2 540-l TOTAL ARE A--------fE- DEVELOPED L AI{O SF---T flF Col ,t It{o PAR( PUB !,/IA SF [F C OI{I'I I NO PARK -____34- PU8 UIA UNOEVETOPAELE 54 540-e 540-3 540-4 540-5 540-6 540-7 540-8 540-9 s10-10 540-11 510 - l2 540 - l3 540-t4 540 - l5 5il0-16 540-17 510 - l8 540-l9 540-20 540-2l 540-22 s40-23 540-2tl 540-25 540-26 541-l 541-2 541-3 547-t 848-1852-I 84 226 5l 89 548 25 171 342 419 3t2 231tt9 ?o t2 46 135 45 8{ 57 22 7 6 44 37 3l5 6 5 99 3 24 37 36l8 22 l1 l5 l0 10 l3 35 95 179 71 ll 93 i 45 153 111 32 0 9 6 2 187 53 72 38 121 14 l6 583 60 TOTAL 8 I I VACANT L AIIO 146 36 228 l8 LAID USE - oUTSIDE ll-L l,luSA tlEA DEVELOPED t AT{O VACANT LAIIO TAZESFI 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540 - 540- 540 - 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540 - 540- 540 - 541- 541- 541 - 547 - 848- 852- TOTAL AREA-----T7-- 5F-- - Xr: f,oBl,l IND--3il- - PARK PU8 - -T58345 184 l9l utA 4 UTTOEVELOPABLE____lir__ 539-2 737 9 14 7 129 49 2 0 0 364 86 l3 0l 887,:, I 2 3 4 5 6 7I 9 l0 l1 t2 t3 14l5 l6 t7 l8 l9 20 2l 22 23 24 25 26 I 2 3 I I ll 0 255 ?3 144 98 l1 238319 202 26 l9 225 690 153 25 90 27 TOTAT 20 ,I rrrlllllllllllllllt t- COt.It,I INO PARK PUEt{F LATID USE . TOTAL TAZ AREAS DEVE L() PED L AI{D VAC AI{ T L AIIDTAI 55trT 539-2 540- t 540 - 540- 540 - 540- 540- 540 - 540- 540- 540- 540- 540 - 540- 540 - 540- 510 - 540- 540 - 540- 540 - 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 540- 541- 54t- 541- 547 - 848- 852- TOTAL AREA t{F coit}t---1-- t4 3 8 26 5F-T,l 117 t 43 187 286 IND PARK PU8 -6 --rrl345 184 5r t{t -T3 s -L2 l6 c ori$r Iilo PAR( ----34- PU! Y/A - -84129 5 6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9l0ll t2 l3 14 l5l6 17 l8 l9 20 2L 22 23 24 25 26 I 2 3 I I I t 29t 883 160 197 343 83 l1 356 156 340 208 226 115 209 518 139 510 128 517 312 237 319 73 202 64 t6s 211 456 1122 58 887 781 t6 80 308u2 2t8 106 t2tl 199 57l2tlllI 144 37 ll tt9 20 26 l5 32 54 255 4 25 l0 24 36lt l5 104 7 99 5 36 48 42 l8 22l8 28 4 5 ?0ll 8t 238 t23 79 I 90 21 6 8 13 58 ll 8ll l0 49 24 26 187 23 60 l0 22 3 46 24 60 32 141 34 0 825 t2 3 2t 38 9 5 l5 l0 t0 30 46 135 45 3 35 7 t 86 110 153llt ?4 48 32 l9 146 t02 228 l8 60 29 93 73 7 44 104 34 6 8 66 133 59 122 55 202 21 29 27 9 160 58 t7 3 75 30 60 26 t9 3 225 20 59 4l 191 690 153 25ll 31 TOTAL tttttttttttllltttttt UI,IOEVEL()PABLE ll LAID USE - lllsl 0E Ett sTIx6 llusA AREA OEV E LO PEO LAND VACAT{T L AND F -t c0 llr 0 PARK PUE -6 -T3 ytA 5r- f,F Collll -T3s - -5 l6 2l ll 65 48 69 It{O PARK 66 PU8 V/A UIIDEVELOPABLETAZ 559:r 539-2 540-I 540-2 540-3 540-4 540-5 540-6 540-7 540-8 540-9 540 - 10s40-ll 540-12 540-13 540-14 540-ls 540-16 540-17 540-18 540-19 540-20 540-2I 540 -22 540-23 540 - 24 TOTAT ARE A---- 6X6 146 t60 197 34 3 83 77 356 156 340 124 5F -tr6 108 143 187 286 308ll2 218 86 3 8 26 13 58 tl Ill 82 30 I 5 6 l0 49 60 32 l 24 20 ?6 4 25 10 24 36 8 2 2 l2 6 38 9 5 010 30 120 115 3 79l 19 9 3 46 24 Il4 339 105 104 98 26 170 73 202 64 165 5l 34 66 133 t5 55 23 60 59 4l 34 ?5 17 8 t2 7 28 5 56 3 75 2l 29 27 4 30 540-25 540-26 541-l 541-2 541-3 5 4'l -l 848 - l 852-l 241 418 8 9 144 l1 79 6 6 58 3 iu 80 11 3l T()TAT lIIIIIIIIIIII 15 32 population, households and employment (1/e0) I TITROI) UCT I ON Population, households and employment are important components ofcommunity planning,efforts. The projected growth of a community,spopulation and employment bases is indicatfve of land al Iocations necessary to accommodate expected building and development. llanyof the key sections of Chanhassen's Comprehensive PIan are based upon the population, household and employment projections that arefound in this chapter. Types and amounts of land use, locationsof parks, required san itary sewer capacitJ and changes to theexisting roadway network are all quantified based on theseproject i ons. Chanhassen Township was organized in ilay of 1858 and by 1890, thetownship's population was listed at 683. After the 1967 merger,the city's population was estimated at 4,112 people. By 1970, thetotal number of peop 1e I iving in Chanhassen had ri sen to 4,879 andby 1980, the population had increased to 6,359. Chanhassen's future growth is dependent on state, reg i ona 1 andlocal policies and market conditions. Regional policies in the Twin City l,letropol itan Area are f ormulated by the lr{etropol itanCouncil. The i,letropol itan Council's policies are implemented bythe agency itsel f and in cooperation with a variety of otherregional agenc i es such as the Metropol itan llaste Control Commission (l,,ltlcC), the Regional Transit Board (RTB) , etc. The pol icies andimpiementation techniques adopted and util ized by thesejurisdictions have a profound impact on Chanhassen's future growth. Sewer capacity and the allocation of sewer capacity is an issuethat is beyond local control . Therefore, Chanhassen's growth isrequired to conply with capacity restrictions and limitations imposed by reg i ona 1 agen c i es. Local policies and market conditions are al so critical componentsof Chanhassen's future growth. The city's attitude on growth asreflected by the goals and policies included elsewhere in this planis one of advocating wel I planned growth. This position isconsistent with Chanhassen's physical 'location in the southwesternportion of the fwin City lletropolitan Area which has been a leadinggrowth area for the past 15 years. POPULATIO}I OVERVIEY Chanhassen was incorporated in its present configuration in 1967.At that time, a merger took place between the o'l d town of Chanhassen and the surrounding township. This merger increased thearea of the community from 2 square miles to over ?2 square miles. 1980 CEt{SUS recent census for the City of Chanhassen occurred in 1980.available through the 1980 census presents comprehensive The most The data phe-1 phe-2 (l/s0) demograph i c information, however,is now dated and only valuableproject ion of existing -conditions trends. According -to the 198-0 data, Chanhassen had 6,359 residents: 3,219males and 3,080 femares. ilinorrty poputafion t--stitrffi oniy r.zz9I !h9 tot-al popuration. -An anar!s'rs'of the ase statijiici"rdvearsthat the chanhassen population i-s youns *i1n "i;;Ji;;-uii li zs.sJears with 361 of the populatioi un-der t!,. age ot-"i0.- Agebreakdowns- are- important in. tne proviiion of com unity iervices,particular'ly for item.s. such as'.park raciritiii wtr#e -provioeo faci I ities need to match the desi'res of specific igi i.Jrpr. Abreakdown of the l98o -popuration by age gioups 1co-norIsi'tan uefound on the chart enti'ilLd l9g0 Ag'e oiit"iurfion..--"-'--, since 1980 Chanhasse.n hgl y.ndg.gqne significant groHth. ilost ofchanhassen's growth is attributadte to i'n-migratio;.- ii; comiunityj: a desirable-plate to tive and the rEsidential ;*,-i;t hasresponded by offe.ing consumers a choice oi- nrr"rori'ir-ousrngdevelopments. Corres[ondingly, resirleniiat g"or[r, l, -r".rri.o oynew housing starts reiched ieioro arounis in'the iat. iig0;s. The -liletropol itan co_u.nc i l_ compiles annual est imates of Iocalpopulations. According to their esiimates, crrJnrriisen'rrao an ::!iT3!:d_ -poprlation - in .Apri I of le88 9f e',225: i; -ievilwins Dur r0rng permit data for the balance of l9gg, thanhassen eiiimateiit's year end 1988 population at lo,loo aisuming;'ai-;;;.;;y'.ut.. REGIOT{AL ATIO COUIITY PROt'ECTIOXS unfortunately this informationin providing a base for theand the extrapolation of f uture Population forecasts for chanhassen have been compired by severalsources. The ilDIF proje-ctions prepared in tgso iieniiriio-i rggoproje.cted pgpulation oi .9,000 add d eooo pogrllttbn- ii'i0,606. Bythe.lretropolitan council,i own estimates, both the igs0'ini zoooprojections were surpassed tn the mid Lo iaG- igiiir;,.'-- -"- revisedthe base C o r r e s p o n.d^i n g I y , the l.letropol itan Counc i I 's tlemooraoherstheir estimates in lgBB is a part of the -iirie,i'oi' ' The most recent regiona.l projections for municipalities andcounties are f ound i.n _the 'iret-ropor itan couniii;i 'fetiop-'Jr rt.n0evelopment Investment Framework iUOfii as adopted Septenber 26,1986. The irDIF identif ie-s^-a metro'por it'an area 'r980 poiuraiion orl!985,873 and 1990 and 2000 estimdtes of z,zoa,0dri Ii[-iliio,ooorespectiy.tv. carver--countv's- 1980 poputiiion'',ii Ji,oq-i-*itn .1990-estimate of 44,600 and-a 2000 eiti'mate ot qs,zg6.'-iioi rgaoto 1988, chanhassen's population expanded at a raie-oi sg:."'rti,compares to the 1980 to-1990 MDIF projected growth ratls ioi-carvercounty and the metropolitan area 'ot'zoi ana'ttz reip-ectiriri. CHAIIHASSET PROJECTIOTS phe-3 ,899,e! o-4 5-9 10- 14 15- 19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75+ 1980 Age Distribution male female 485 521 654 654 508 532 654 576 398 372 313 253 125 111 84 119 crooooC,oOro6baooao;;(rGlc,rri oooooooooDoooooo:ttg,',GaGaiF'F (1/e0) i nf ormat i on be i ng as s emb I ed for th e prepa rat i on of th eEnvironmental Impact Statement. The reviied estimates cal I2000 population of 15,000 and a 2005 population of 17,500. Population.projections are derived from household data. Therefore, ?ri9f t9 discussing Chanha.ssen.s, anticipated population groxth, ii'ls rirst appropriate to take a c'l oser 'look at anticipated-houselioldgrowth. HOUSEHOLDS phe-4 TH ?12for a 0ver ^t h_e past 20 years, the composition of chanhassen,s householdshas fol Iowed nationa l and regional trends. These trendi traveresulted in a significant exparision of Hhat Has once characterizedas non-traditional households such as those headed by singleparents and those involving. unre'lated individuals. Accdrding-toItletropol itan council estimites prepared in 1998, non-i.aolt'ionalhouseho lds account for- armost '70' percent of Itre "egionai newhousehold growth. Single parent fam'il ies are expected io accountfor l9 percent of the new household growth trom i9B5 io ioOO. In chanhassen, househol d size is decreas i ng in response to changesin_household compositio.n.- In -1970, Chanhissen na'A in ireiige-of3.59 .persons. p-er -household.- BJ 1990, the number ot [eopiti per.household had fat len to 3.04. in 1998, it was estimate.d-iiii tr'ehousehold population hact decreased io 2.7 people pei -unit. Household popylation.is. expect-ed to remain at abbut'2.2 ieop.le perunit through 2000 and drop slightly to 2.65 by 2010. '-'' As part of the revised estimates prepared by the l,letroool itancouncil for the rH Tz EIS, househor'd projecti6ns were-iompieteo.The fol lowing is a presentation of thoie 6stimates: HOUSEHOLO PR()JECTI()NS - METROP()LITAN COUNCIL Agency 1980 1990 2000 2005 2010 In.1986, chanhassen compl eted a report ent i tl ed year z00o Land useand Transportation Study analyzing transportation in and aroundit's downtown area. . T_hpt report -Contained a methodology for thepreparation of household an.d.populat.ion projections thal- is beingapplied .to. this p19n update. The dethodology used ln thetransportation and Iand use report assumed ttrit chanhassen,shouseholds- wil l_ -e-xperience a net increase of approximately 4.75xpqr year from 1987 through 2000 and a 5.52 ariiual net i-ncreaseafter 2000. The increase in the average annual net householdincrease after 2000 is indicative of ili'e tightening supp.ly ofvacant available I and in Eden prairie. Application of the 4.75 - s.5t annual household growth rate resultsin the following projections: phe-5 (2te0) H()USEHOLD PROJECTIONS 4.7 5X 5.52 ANI{UAL INCREASE 1980 1990 2000 2005 20102783 T,TZe 6-933 E.Tdz 1-rF43 Chanhassen's increase in population and households is a relativelyrecent phenomenon. From 1980 to 1988, the city's population grew by 59X. 0n an annual basis, the increase amounted to 6.3I. From 1980 to 1990, Chanhassen's households grew at a compounded rate of67. The previous decade is not normal ly a sufficient amount of time to establ ish a historic trend. In Chanhassen's case, however,the years prior to 1980 are not indicative of the community'srecent growth nor it's future growth potential. The current configuration of the commun ity's corporate boundaries did not even occur until 1967. The following is a summary of household growth from 1980 -1988. YEAR ' ()F H()USEHOLDS PERCENT INCREASE Aoencv City 1980 1 981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 99 24 ?L 104 L5? 265 262 323 4t2 4.3X 1 .02.9t4.0: 6.01 9. 9Z 8. 9Z 10.02 11.72 Continuation of the 1980 - 1990results in the following household compounded growth rate of 6fprojections: H()USEH()LD PROJECTIONS 61 ANNUAL It{CREASE 1980 1990 2005T;mS ffiSe T0;3'83 POPUTATI Oil l{hen Chanhassen assembled it's 1980 Comprehensive Plan, the City prepared population projections that *ere higher than those of the l,letropo l itan Council. In retrospect, the 1990 estimates prepared by the liletropol itan Council were Iow and the 1990 estimates prepared by Chanhassen were high. These projections were yaluable, however, in establishing a range. This range enhanced theflexibility of Chanhassen's 1980 plan. A range will again be used in this plan to portray population and household growth. The three sources of household growthprojections wil I be used to establ ish the range of projectedpopulation growth. In all cases, population is calculated by apply ing the number of households to the expected occupancy 2000 I3E3 2010 ,-a-;zeT AoencvEIly- i2t e0) characteristics and accounting for a 5Z vacancy rate.of a household occupancy rate of 2.7 persons periletropol itan Council's TH 2lZ household pro;ecdionsfollowing anticipated population I evel s: phe-6 Appl icat i onunit to the y ields the P()PULATION PROJECTI ()TIS l.IETROPOLITAN COUNCIL Aoencv Het Co 1980 1990 2000 unc i I 635e TIT00 TfF00 2005 TISoo 2010 Utilizing ?.7 persons per unit (2.65 inhousehold estimates based on growth rang.ingyield the following population -estimates: 2010 ) , Chanhassen's from 4.751 to 5.57 POPULATION PR()JECTIONS - 4.757 - 5.5U ANNUAL INCREASE Aoen cvr-lTt-2000TI7s3 1980 19906-35e IrJ00 Extrapol ation of popul at ion estimatesresults in the following estimates: 2005 zr.744 2010 Ttr3zs growth trendsfrom historic POPULATI ON PROJECTI ()NS 6Z ANNUAL INCREASE AoencvctE-1990It;{3s1980r35e 2000TVt6 2005fils1 2010 T6571 PROJECTIOTI COTIPOSITE Given. strong economic conditions, any of the three population andhousehold projec_tions -presented in the precedin! text areattainabl e. Realistically, however, sustain'ed growtl at the 6lcompounded annual rat-e is not l ikely to occur. - From the city ,s perspective, the likely scenario is the realization of the 4.75i -5.51 proje.ction.s which represent the mid range numbers. This planyill continue to present information based -on all three seti ofprojections with an emphasis on the mid range projections. Thisestabl ishes a planning framework which is -readily adaptable ifgrowth approximates the lletropol itan Counci l,i conservativeprojections or even if it reaches a Ievel comparable to thehistorical rate that Has experienced from 1980 - l'988. The fol lowing is a composite of the three projection methodolog.ies: H()USEHOLD AND POPULATION PR()JECTION COIt,lPOSIT E T l9 0IH 2L2IH 212 4.75-5- 5t{.75-5.5t 6X 6X 4;ti4 1l,000 f,329 11,100 4,458 1l,435 Bas i s 2000 s75T 15,000 2005 6;J[EI l7 ,500 2010-TT- NA 1l,843 30,378 14,297 36 ,67 1 ouse 0 s Population Households Population Households Population 5 t7 7 20 ,933 ,783 ,983 ,47 6 9 23 l0 27 ,062 .244 ,683 , 401 COHPREHEI{SIYE PLA}I SCHEDULE February 21, 1990 Planning Commission/City Council l,leeting Review Goa1s, Population and Land Use Park and F inal v v v l,{arch l3, 1990 Recreation Commiss i on MeetingDraft - Recreat i on Chapter March 14, 1990 Planning Commission MeetingFinal 0r aft - Natural Resources, Land Use & Housing v April , 1990 PI ann ing Comm-i-ssion tteeting Tran s por tat i on, Utilities and Implementation Apr i Publ ic Meet ilay , 1990- Land Use Plan t- ings v v J une, l9 90 Comprehens ive Pl an Publ ic Hear ings March 28, 1990 P1anning Commiss ion i,leeting Recreat i on and Sol id l{aste 1 A 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ]lir C 1_ i 1 ! !fi t !I- r ' , I E P i h 3 ! t F '--.i--` •_ jw — reiffAillipai I „, , �1 1 T � '!'s`c - • Ili^`� • ; .r•C'ag ._ ��, � ♦.i16nna IQ,' =j. ■•■ ��IY• k � � ",� r�� _ Clr! 4 9 /. d =• 1 7: - 4 Cry 11111r:L;,k.N-'4 40:011 Ago - =' 539-1 : ,539-2 $ 1 54o-:0.• I ' 51 lh -- ll .sirl's 1.511170.5 7,71'' °V •4011.!L, .�';v►. ...., -- ___ ,1 jr. e 1 1 , r'..f. : is-ria'4;',;il, . '' , I:: ti 2 E ,I. le U111" ° Et.� _r_w , � r a� s -— -- --- st. • !? /R1 nr; 852-1 •Y' .. © 540- 6 I _ o- 'rtiSiworry,vim—=G: i,-. - - CHANHASSEN PLANNING COI{MI SS ION REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 7, L99g Cha i rn,an Conrad cal led PRESENT: Ladd the rieeting to order at 7:35 p.r,.. Conrad, Steve EF,rr,ings, Jin Wildermuth and JoanMEMBERS Ahr ens MEMBERS ABSENT: Tin, Erhart, Brian Batzli and Annette STAFF PRESENT: Par] 1 Krauss, Planner i and Steve KirchF,an, of Planning; Jo Inspector E1l son Ann 01sen, SeniorDi rector Bu i Iil ing PUBLIC HEARING: HIKE SORENSON, COLD STORAGE WAREHOUSE EACILITY LOCATED ON HWY. 212 JUST NORTHEAST OF HWY. 169: A.CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR THE EXPANSION OE THE FACILITY. SITE PtAN REVIEW FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE SITE.B. Ptrbl ic Present : NaFie Address lli ke Sorenson Bob Srtri th Terr]r Bearrchane AppI icant Ron Krueger and Associates 249 Elyi^g Cloud Drive Jo Ann Olsen presenteil the staff report on this iteF,. Conrad:prolect, met . Just a what I s point fron, n1, knowledge. When therethe Cityrs process to rrake sure that are conditions with a the!, go about being Olsen: WeIl we do annual reviews now as perr,its are cor,ing in. If hersgetting grading pern,its and whatever, we tr!' to Frake sure and to buililingperr,its, that everything is being r,et. It's kind of an ongoing process. Conrad: Therers nothing that really triggers at the end of a project? Krauss: There is. When a certificate of occrrpancy is reqrrested, we go out- and inspect the site and r,ake sure alt the conditions are corr,pl ietl with.In this case, the building was occupied and has been used and still doesnot have a certificate of occupancy so there was nothing to trip that - review. Conrad: Hrrh, interesting. And this partictrlar case, there dr€ so Frdn! areas where the applicant has not met what rre require. It's really bard review it and Irn, curious. f donrt rrant to waste their tirr,e because it'shard for rr,e to be serious about the expansion. Whatrs our dut:, as aPlanning CoFo,ission in teviewing the site? What are we obligated to doright now? I guess Irr' looking for, lroutve already, it,s been. brought tous tonight to look at expansion. I think, and I havenrt talked to the to Planning Februa r y Coru', i ss i on Meet i ng 7, T99O - Page 2 Planning Cor,r',issioners but we're going to dwe11 on perfor.rr,ance that hasnrt been accor.rplished and therefore not really focus on new issrres. Eventhough new issues niight grride the applicant into should he pursue this anda rrhole lot of things. Is it appropriate ee go through the entire siteplan review? Are we obligated to go throrlgh tonight? Krauss3 }{r. Chairrran, I think you should take action on the request one wa:/ or the other. If itts !'our desire to deny it, do that. If itrs ]'ourdesire to continue it until conditions are rret, do that. I should also addthat this was a ver:l tough call for us and we recoFr,ended approval after aIot of deliberation and soniewhat reluctantllr because we thought it was,therers so Fr[ch that happened here was the onl], hra], to rripe the slate cleananil get ever:,thing done that we wanted to see done there but I wanted toassure ]rou that if this proposal is denied tonight, rre have ever]r intent ofpursuing satisfaction of the conditions of the original approval. Conrad: Oka1r. Are you !1r. Sorenson? Bob Sn,ith: No I ir, not. I t rr, Good evening Mr. Cha i rt',an. Mr. Snith frorrr Ron Krueger and Associates. Conrad: Good evening. Yorr up f or publ ic corrrr'ent r ightrepresenting the appl icant? cor[rrents and norrtrall], I just open itirant the applicant or are :iou and Associates. I rF, Iril like to go through a torrched on here this evening.tirre to review the staff ago fror, vacation in Texas so heard now an Fiy dI Bob Sr,ith: Yes. Conrad: To go first. Obviousll, Irn real concerned about how we haven'tmet nhat we asked for and it's real though for rTre to look at additionalexpansion when so rrran!, So r',any r,ajor things are not up to what we askedfor in the past. so it's tough to review new things anil thatrs whlz I wastalking here, before old things have been taken care of. So in that light,ItIl let you, werll give )rou the floor so :/orl can taLk about where you wantto go but honestly, r{erve got to hear rrhy things haven't been done. Thebottori line is, things have to be done before any expansion's going to take Place. Irrn speaking only for r..rlzsel f right now but I have a prett:r highcorr,fort level that other corrrrrissioners and City Council wiII join in. Itr sjust, werve n,issed the boat in nanl' cases here so lrith that, I hranted togive you a sense or a feeling where ererre at and I thlnk you should tr:/ toread sorre of our corrrnrents. Itts going to distort the future a little bit because of the lack of perfornance in the past. If that Frakes anlr sense. Bob Smith3 I an' Bob Snrith frorrr Ron Krueger!1r. Sorensonrs planner. Mr. Mike Sorenson.couple of the, sorr,e of the issues that rrerveUnfortunatel:, I havenrt had a great deat of recorrrr,enila t i ons . I I ve just beerr 45 nrinutesif I'm a little bit behind here. l{ike Sorenson: Might I say son,ething first? Conrad: Sure. PI ann i ng Febr uar !t Con,r',ission Heeting 7, L990 - Page 3 Mike Sorenson: First of aII, staff seerhs to want to dwell on alt of thethings that werenrt done on this site and they donrt erant to dwell on thereasons whlt and the problems that Irve gone through with this site. Thereasons the:t want to nake Mike Sorenson out to be one of these kind of guysthat just goes and does r,hat he wants to do for no reason at aII. That isnot the case at all over here. I have good sound reasons for why thisproject capre off the wa]' it did. I sat dorrn in good faith with the Cit]' totry and straighten this project out to expand it and to fi'eet atl theconditions and aII the things that went wrong rrith this project. Nobodyknows. All you guys things is, he just lrent up there and did what he wanted to do. He tore out all the trees. He didn't build fences. Hedialnrt do this sithout once taking into consideration why this wasnrt done anal this is a little bit... Conrad: Did thinqs?Itou cor,e back to the Ci ty rdhen lrou knew you couldn't do those uike Sorenson: Absol ute I ],. Conrad: And rrhat did thelz tell ]rou to do? The]r irere, I didnrt get an:/, there was nothingMike Sorenson: Nothing. done about it. I wrote... Conrad: l.lr . Sorenson, I've been age is sort of sorrrethlng that I but . . . I donrt r{ant to use agesay. Ua]rbe I shouldn I t here, shou Id and n aybe be here uike sorenson: star ted. It sounds to F,e Like we're beaten before werve even Mike Sorenson: Thank !rou. Nor, look, aII Irve got to say ls, I knoi,therers a lot of conditions that havenr t been trret. I.ve been talking aboutthis for 3 r,onths worklng with the cit:r. I know therers a lot of thingsthat rrerve done $rrong. I know there was a lot of r,istakes made. On theCityrs part and on trr]r part anil I know there was a lot of conditions on thissite that needed special attention which arose after I got into theproject. Thatrs the reason for all of this. Not because I do not, am nota good developer and do not build a nice road or put a nice project together. Now I cart,e in now anal I sat down rsith the Cit!,, finally :rou got sorrrebody here that's going to keep the job for a while and not be gone - Conrad: I yranted to corutrunicate the fact that in the 1g ]rears that Irve been on this Cor'rqission I havenr t seen a case like this with so Fran!, Iackof perfornances. Ever. So 1reah, F,alrbe ]tou were rtisled anil r',aybe you hail - Probler,s brrt Irlt telling 1zou, in 10 lzears I havenrt seen as many lack ofperforn,ances based on conditions that we asked for and yourre cor,ing inright now and saf ing you had causes so I just $ant to give you that feellng - that yrourre very uniqrre. Therefore, to look at futrrre. To believe you. Hike Sorenson: Wh}, donrt you listen to what live got to say. - Conrad: Thatrs what we.re going to do. like, I started the project with Barb Dac:t. I caEe in and tried to talk with steve Hanson anil he didnrt sta:, here that long and I finall:r got an opportrrnity to cor,e in and talk to sor,ebod], about the project and frve been working with PauI on it. Now, we're finally at tbe point where ire cancorrect all of the things. Instead of dweJ,Iing on all of the things that eJerenrt done and werre going to refuse the project before it even gets offthe grorrnd or before ltou hear an:rthing abotrt it, wh open r',ind anil f igrrre out what ne|re trying to do.site here. Werve got a lot of probleFs on it and I Conrad: Well wh1' havenrt :tou in the speed and we're going to be far Frore ydo wervtrr, t nrt we just take ane got a very unique r!'ing to put togetber sor,ething decent so we can build buildings and put tax structure ancl have soF,ething that the City will be proutl of like n,y other building here in town. Where the auto parts store is. I o$rn that building theretoo and all IrF getting is negative, negative, negative since I walked in the door here. Like Ittr, shot dorrn before I even start. Thatis aII I lranteal to sa]r. Conrad: And lrer I1 listen to ]'ou tonight. I wanted to cor,n,unicate, ]rou come in and donrt perforr, in the past, itrs hard to look at the Thatt s what I said to start this little scenario off. You havenrtperforr,ed. Itrs ver], tough to not consider the lack of perfornance we review a new project. If I were you and I was cor',ing in, I rrould up to what I said I was going to do. Then I'd cor,e in and then... l,like Sorenson: That's what I'rr, going to do right here. vrhenfuture. in how live past? Ilhy donrt 1'ou bring it up to posi tive. l,!ike Sorenson: Conrad: Yes I lli ke Sorenson : Did )tou read. . . ? did. Did you read rt)'Ietter at the back of the report? Conrad: Yes I did. llike Sorenson: Did you see all of the probler'"s and things... Conrad: You had a lot of probler,s. Ma]rbe this should not have been built there. I'like Sorenson: Absolutel]'. I agree with )tou 200t. But it is nevertheless there and I have to deal with it. Conrad: Right, and we're tlealing with 1zou. Fiike sorenson: That's why I rr, in here. Irrrr just trf ing to deal with it. Conrad: Absolutel], and we're going to have to deal with that too. So go ahead with l.our presentation. Bob Snrith: Good evening Mr. chairr,an. Planning Corr,n,i ss i on I'leeting Eebruar:7 7t L99A - Pag 4 eI'anni n9 Eebruarl, Corr,rt ission Meeting7, l99g - Page 5 Conrad: litr . SF,i th. Welcon,e back. Bob SF,ith: Let rrre take a couple steps back here. Ttris has been a prett]t long involved process. sor,e lTears ago this project rras submitted to build- one building at the tin,e. The plans tttat irere proposed rrere rather incor,plete, to sa!, the best at the tirne. A proper grading plan had not been srrbn,itted and several other things. What l,like has done, he carrre to us - about 3-4 r,onths ago wanting to build s orr,e more buildings on the thing. Irve had sor,e past dealings with PauI . Vfe've work with each other quite a lot here $ith Paul and we hait an opportunity to sit do$n and talk about _ what has and hasnrt been corrpleted on thls site. We realize that the grading is not been cor',pleted to the point of the original stipulations. Part of this proposal as lre see here this evening will colt,Plete before anything happens with the structure on this site. The grading will be - co&pleted. As I said, the previous plans that were subr', i ttecl rrere rather incon,plete and it has spot elevations rather than a corrPlete grading plan and a corr,plete landscape plan which was not necessar!, at that tir,e. What I - show on this particular plan andl can be s€€n Fruch more clearly on the graaling plan on the screen, is that we've provlded for a back sloPe. Provided for a back slope on this side uP in here. we're proposing 3 - additional buildings. we are providing for a berrt along both front areas- so that it can be icreened fror', tn teg. This was ir,portant to show thls so that Mike can cotrrplete the requirerrents and the stipulations fron the first approval that was r,ade. Therers a couple Points ln the recoFa,endat i ons - that I'd like to touch on but first Ird like to also take another steP back. This has been a cotrrPlicated ProPosal, site fror., the verlt beginning. It was a r,ultiple nurlber of sn,all }ots that he is incorporated into one - addition at this tir'e. The original vegetation tas succession growth, 6r',all undergrowth, sur',ac antl what I'1I caII cover brush. PrickIY ash. Buckthorn and the box elder. That was cleared off in preparation for the first site. That was constructeal. what he wants to do now is come back in - at this tir'e, do all the correct grading. Do aII the landscaPing that is necessar!' and then get a building perr.,lt for the first bullding. The first building Mr. sorenson proposes would be on the front ln this location. But - before thls building would come ln, aII the grading on this site would be in p1ace. The grading on the back slope here so that lre wouldni t have a cliff here. There's basically a cliff rlght not that cot,es in along the - back in here. That would al1 be graded out. The grading along the sides. AII the pads would be brought up to constructlon grade as well as the berrt,s along thi front. AIl site and lree vegetation in the form of hydosprings or s;eding, the steeper sloPes, anything over a 3:1 irould have an Excelsior.' tr,a t pegged in place. In addition, as you can see on the colored trp p1an, pine- tiees would be Planted along the berr' and along the side to forlt screening so that this hrouldn't have an irpact fror, TH 169 down here. soFre - of the conditions, we've hail the oPportunity since ltrs been such a Processthrough the staff level , that }re tried to uork out r,an:, of these probler,s. We've had the opportunit!, to get a recorr,F.endlati on fror, the llinneaota Valley Watershed Distrlct. The plan that you see before you this evenlng has been - approved b:' the Lower Minnesota watershed District. UsualI!' that doesnrt corr,e in until after the City Council but since therets been, since geive taken our tirte and ver]r carefull:t $orked things out with the staff and as - PauI said, this is a very difficult site. Werve taken in the recorrlqenda t i ons frorr the Watershed District. The recolrarendat ions are that Planning Februar:' Corr,rt ission Heeti 7, L99g - Page 6 the ssales uere to be put were to be put in place aholding pond around the bthe side. Not to put infor the basic reason that which would increase a surunoff into the watershedin here, irerre breaking t t atershed that would cor'erailroad tracks would corr,irould be installed at thi The eater would be slowed dischargecl slorl]' through then hold the water. Dis were up above the pipe, ithe watershed district an rrould overflow on the top down across along the strwith this site too. you this water would then be Through a piping syster, dvegetation that I s in this A second reason why froFr storrr, pi pes wou Id add a csurge basin is the prin,ar what would happen to theIf yorr recall back a coup Hoon Valle:, had a washout landslide out onto TH 169various levels throughorrthis nar,e slips r'"y rr,ind noDistrict. The engineer. and this recor,n,enda ti on cfrorr the Watershed Di str icatch basin piping slrsten'It r',a1' work very wetl butengineer f rorv, the Watershthis site. To use the hointerest to Hr. Sorenson This particular type of balthough the Code I beliesprinkling, this particul f or no hurrran hab i ta t i on .stipulations is hurr'an hab sorenson does have a prob the entlre project. Onceto protect the edging of second in this particular lntending to do is allowof this particular area.put in bituminous ro1led down in this location so cars drive over that edge s in place. The swale then holding a holding pond ong the top. Swales corting down enlarging thettor, and a swale and a sr,all holding pond alongpiping syster,. Not to put the piping syster, init would concentrate the flow into this locationge at this location which would cause a quicker district. What this does is by providing a pond e site into several different areas. Theoff of this upper area a1l the rray back to theinto a pond located in here. The snall pipelocation. This would then act as a surge basin. down before it hits the botton,. It would bea sFraller pipe to a secondaryr pond which wouldharge through a pipe and if in fact the hraterit overflowed, therers been a recorur,endation byhe was verlt eFrphatic about it. That the waterside so that it worrld not cause erosion.t and then down through a MnDot ditch.ave i sFraller iratershed disttict in here.rought into a surge basin very sir,ilar to thls. $rn into a ditch s:tsterr, then across the naturalarea dovm into the ditch that MnDot has provided. he developerrs standpoing, the addition of thest that worrld be prohibitive to the site. Thereason. The cost factor is not as irtrportant asntire watersheil district aII the wa:r down here.e years ago when we had the torrential rain. TheIt had a concentration of water that forced a B1t doing this, in slowing the rrater down inhere, itrs elir.,inating that erosion. Hr. Larr]r,. The gentleFran that directs the Watershed Has had F,an:t, Fran!, ltears of working in thiS areaes directly fror, hir',. Vle alread!, have approvalt so Ir11 have to take and question the rrse of ain this particular instance. In other instances, 1n thls particrrlar instance, Ur. Sat[stad, theDistrict, had r,ade specific recor$,endati ons for Back The sar,e That ding ponds. The second issue that is of extrer,eS recotrrrrr€'rdatlon 3 on the sprinkling systeFrs.ilding, being a netal f rarred anil rrretal building,e calls for anlzthing over 2rgg0 sq\are feet needsr building is strictl1, a cold storage building The ordinances, if I recall, one of thetation. That i s one of the things that l,tr. errr rrith. Second is the 8-612 curb and gutter foragain, the tlro reasons for curb and gutter. One,he bitur',inous all the way around the property. Acase is to direct storFt water runoff. What werrehe edge of the blacktop area to forrrr as the basin we arenr t recorrrrrend i ng or saying that we lroulilurbed edglng along the outside of the drivewayhat water will not go over the edge nor wiII the The i{ater will be diverted back across the Plbnning February Cor,r',ission Meeting7, L99g - Page 7 _ street lnto this particular holding pontl . But fror, the constructionstandpoint, the sr,a1l areas of bitw,inous...all the edges will all beconcentrated along a curbed area. The concentration of water is theprir,ary concern in.this project. As I have said, the part of the proposat- that tlr. Sorenson is giving this evening is that he nil1 perforr, all - grading, all site revegetation and brlng aII their constructlon pads up toconstruction grade before, and he realizes, before the issuance of anv - building pern,its as part of the recor.,r,endai ion this evening. When t{rlSorenson caF,e ln, that rras one of the ver!' first things thit we had talkedrrith Mr. Krauss that this site had to be Lrought up to standards of the - previous recon,n,enda t i ons and thatrs the first step of thls project tbat wesee this evening. First off the construction, beir',ing and veg6tatlon.second would be the apprication for the buirding perr.,it on the firstbuilding which tlould now be building two and then when the r,arket der,and- allows, then the other two buildings on the test hal.f of the site wourd beconstructed- Along with the original constrrrction of building 2, thebiturtrinous roadwalt would be put in along all the way to the back of the - site and the eastern half of the site will have the biturtinous on lt. Thewestern half of the.site wirr be vegetated in a terrrporary seed. rf we prrtbitur!,inous on the higher site, what wilr happen is Lhat wttr art break irp - or we'11 have a problert with it later on when the other trro builctings ar-constructed so the bitun,inous will be constructed on the east half and thedriveway arong with the rolled biturtinous curb on the lorrer driveway. Atsuch tir,e as the r',arket der,and allows, at that point buitding 3 and- - building 4 would be constructed and the bitur,inorrs would be put in at thattirtre. All the ponding will be constructed now as well as brought up tofinlsh grade. There has to be sor',e grading on these tlro pads to bring theni - to the correct elevation also. Other than that I donrt think therers anyother real probler,s that Mr. Sorenson sees here. As has been said, werve worked the last 3 or 4 rnonths in trylng to get these lss[es resolved. Thereally difficutt issues we rrnderstand that. Mr. Sorenson ls willing to do- all the grading first that should have been done a couple lrears ago. It was done in part. what he wants to do now in order to finish the project, getthe grading done now... If lrou have any questions, I would certainly like - to answer ther'. Conrad: Good . We n'a:/ have sor',e later on. Other publ ic corr'Frents? - Terry Beauchane: U!, narrie is Terry Beauchane. I live at 249 Fl:ring Cloud Drlve which is tH L69/212 just down the road fror, this proposeil site. I guess rrlr corrdrrents are as rr'uch directeil toward !,ou folks on the Planning - CoF,rr,ission and the City Council as the:' are against this particular project in general. It seeFs to me that the last number of rr,onths, everything tbat seerrrs to be happening down there on TH 169 and 2L2t that little itty bltttr - stretch of Chanhassen that everg'body seeFrs to have forgotten for Fran]r, Fran!, lrears, seetr's to be going on pieceneal. Everlttime I corr'e to a r'eetlng, whether it's thls rr,eeting or Clt!, Council rr,eeting, I always hear the wordgranilfather coF,e up. Grandfather this and grandfather that and this\ rr,eeting is ren,iniscence of the Cit!, Council r'eetlng that ltoon VaIIe!, was dlscussed at the last coupLe of r,eetings because of a grandfathering. NowI don't know who this grandfather is but grandfather keeps cor,ing up and - grandfather seeFrs to allow a lot of things to happen down there without F.uch restrlction. So I guess m:, basic question is, as the cit!' planning Planning Pebr uary Cor,rt ission Heet ing 7, L990 - Page 8 coF'Irrission, has an1'one sat doern and looked at that eJhole area? That littlepiece of strip of Chanhassen sitting on TH 169 and considered what should be done with it overall and what might be proposed as far as not just projects like this but the overall concept of what's going to happen rrith that piece of highwal' down there. Now I donrt know if you folks realize hoe, r,an!' horr,es and residences are down there along wlth this kind of coFrrercial propert:r and so on but it seen,s to r,e that peoPle go in down there and if they orrn a piece of land, they either just arbitrarily do whatever the:z darrn well please with it or they colr,e up and get a perr,it and then the!, do rrhatever they dalrn eeII please with it and nobod!'rs controlling an1'thing down there. Irr, just wondering where does this control cor,e fron,. Moon Valley was the instance, the last tirte. Their grandfather, rrhoever he is, told thelTr that the!' could go ahead and dig another hole soneplace else. Now grandfathert s cor,ing in tonight and saying that weII, Irve got one shut up so I can build 3 nrore. Irregardless of vrhat the Planning Cortr,lssion has decided or the Cit1, decides or anything else. Where is the control in all of this? I donrt see it anCl I donrt hear an!'body responding to it either. In this particular situation it was adr,itted that certain requiren'ents were not Fret and so on an(l so forth. I just have this feeling this if this was r':, hor'e and I had a pern.it to do son,ething and the!, carre out and inspect it and I was cited for not following the rules, that I would at the verlr least be back in front of hte Planning CoFm,ission and the City Council trying to explain r,], way out of it or at the worse sitting in front of a judge getting fined for not doing an1,of this stuff. I donrt know, there seen,s to be absolutel!, no control as torrhat's going on down there. I have to ask ,here is the control. iilhere is i t suppose to cotr'e f r oFr? Conrad: well the zoning district is calletl business fringe and we put thatin several :tears ago because it had a lot of non-confouT,ing uses and theidea was to legalize those uses so that there was going to be greater control on what was being used. Terrlr Beauchane: There still seeFs to be no control. Conrad: The idea wasa variety of reasons.natural area. Hav i ngfor tlpical cor,rt erc ial be there and so :routrebut it is zoned. to not intensify use. The area is a problerrr area for Being on a F'ajor highway. Being across fronr a verlt sorre slopes that are unique. Not being appropriateuses which a highway nould lead lrou to belleve couldright. The Cit], and we have struggled with it's use Terry Beauchane: What is it zoned? Conrad: It is zoned business fringe. Terry Beauchane: what does that rrrean? Conrad: There are son,e requiretr'ents. I canrt list therr to yrou right nowbut itr s low intensity use was a concept that ire felt corrrfortable with rv,anyyears ago. currentl], rrerre reviewing ioning again. There,s a Fren,berthatrs not here tonight that is real interested in how we zone thispartlcular parcel or this particular business fringe area. He has requested that we rezone it agricultural and therers a question whethershould zone it residential. The fact of the r,atter Is, there arecoFr,ercial uses down there and incorporating tbose rrses. If the:r wouldgrandfathered in. The grandfather strikes again. we be Terr:, Beauchane: I get the feel ing. . . Conrad: And it is a probler, and I think we as a planning Con,rr,ission, :iouknow, recognize that and we have to coF,e to grips with the long ternr use ofthat propertlr. Tonight the applicant has to persuade us that nhat he wantsto do is legalllt acceptable according to our zoning conditions. So hecanit go be:tond unless we provide a conditional or a variance but hecertainly has the rlght to do rrhat that zone perrr,its hir., to do. Whethertbose guidelines are accurate, rhether the zone is accurate, is sorr,ethingthat we cantt reall], debate tonight. The zone and the guidelines are whitthe], are. - Terr]' Beauchane: WeII I understand that but it just seens that grandfatherls rrrnninq that whole area down there. In other erords, by the tlrr,eanything is done as far as the planning Conrr,isslon and the Cit!, Council areconcerned with that area of land down there, as far as the zoning and what- is perrr,itted and whatrs not pernrltted and rdhat restrictions and lo on areput ol it, it's going to be too late. So while we.re all sitting heredebating it, this should have been decided probably Lg-L5-29 g,eais ago. - But at any rate, that vras n,1' first cor,r,ent. Trro, the subject of thisparticular developF,ent itself, I have a very personal concern and I woulillike to raise this for consideration for the Planning Cord',ission. It was _ brought up earlier about the possible traffic probler,s down there but Ithink it was grossl:t understated about the traffic probler,s in that area. Idonrt konw if any of you folks drive that stretch of highway during the dayzbut if lrou don't, I would invite !,ou to do it and you rr,ight understand - whatrs going on down there. Now, rrlt concern with that whole project, r[orethan anything else, is the traffic and the problerns that that trafficcreates. I have to turn into rrry driveway fror' TH 169 antl it is a death - trap. Now a lot of the vehlcles that go into this particular slte areconing fror, either the Chanhassen or Shakopee area. The:7 are also r,akingleft hand turns across that highway into that site. Now I guess I t ould ask whether the Planning Con,r,ission or the Cit!, Council or the Plannlng- Departrrent has ever bothered to get an1, statistics fror. the State of Minnesota or HnDot or whichever department accurtrulates these statistics as to the nun'ber of accidents that have happened on that highwalt betreen super - Arrerica and Lionrs Tap in the last 5 yearg. Even Fore ir'portantly, how rr.an:, people have been killed on that stretch of highway. And now we aretaLklng about aggravating the situatlon even r,ore. Conrad: Is it :rour belief that there are quite a feer? Terr]t Beauchane: oh, itrs not rr!, belief. Irve seen theFr. u!, daughter has - been in an accident on TH 169. U:, neighbor has been in an accident on TH 169. I saw son,ebody pushed through the rindshield right in front of superAr.,erica. Now lrve llved down there 11 years and the trafflc probler, dorrn - there has probabJ.y quadrupled in those 11 :'earB and I know a big part ofthat probler, is because of all the congestion cor,ing out here to the ruraL Plbnning Cortr,ission Meeting February 7, L99g - Page 9 areas and I understand that TH 2L2 sorreda:, nra!, help alleviate part of thatproblerrr. TH 169 by-pass sor',eday r'.ay help alleviate it. TH 5 son,eda:, r,ayhelp but these are all things that are going to happen 5-10-15 years downthe road. None of those highwalrs are going to be done toFrorrorr. Bltcreating F,ore traffic probler',s b!, these t]rpes of projects is just going tocreate n,ore death. Plain and sirtple. l,lore people are going to get killed. Last !,ear rre rratched a cerient block trrrck roII over the top of r,y rrailrran when he was sitting on TH 169. Now you people probabl!, donrt hear about these tbings but I live down there. We see theF,. The]r are real and it is dangerous. I think sorrebod!, ought to finall1' stop it. I have corrplained to tbe highwal, departr,ent. Both the highwayr patrol. The l.{nDot and anybod:,else that would listen about at least doing sorr,e rtinin,al things dorrn thereIike reducing the speed llr,it. Putting in no passing lines along that stretch of highway and so on and so forth. Thel, wontt do anl,thing. I guess it cor,es back to the grass roots, the lowest level and thatrs lroufolks. If :/ourre going to allow this kind of developr'ent to continuer then a1l yourre doing is signing a death warrant for n,ore people. And I donrt know if anybodlr has ever done any research on any of the traffic probler"s doern there and rrhat they reall1t are like but I think that ought to be done before anything else. Thatrs all I have to say. conrad: Thanks for your cord,ents. Are there other con.rrents? An:'thing else? Bob Sr,ith: Can I F,ake a brief corrfl,ent? Planning Cor'.,rr,ission Meeting Februar], 7, L99g - Page 1g Conrad: Sure. Bob Sr,ith: Pursuant to the last approval, Mr. Sorenson did have approvalfron, the MnDot to have an access at that location. Itrs part of the approval of this, MnDot is looking at specific conditions that would appl!,to this Project. Mainl:' turn in/turn out lanes but Mr. Sorenson does havean access approval from MnDot for this project. A couple things I'd Iiketo address that I didn't initially. The variance to the ordinance and tothe conditional use perr,it. crandfather and this is the continuation of apreviously approved project in this one. The conditional use perrv,i t on thestorage is for, as I'ou know, the fringe brrsiness. The rrretal storage wouldbe a conditional use for this. Previousl:' this project rras approved alsofor rretal construction and this is a continuatlon of the previously approved project. Since the project eras started once, 1986 I believe isirhen it was done. Just recentllr there was an arr,endFrent to the buililingcode or to the rhetal storage, F,eta1 building portion of the code prior tothe approval of this project. fifhat I,r, asking for also is that a variancebe approved for this project since it is a project that ls already in the wor ks . Er,r'lngs: Let rte ask you a question. yourre saying there was a project approved previously and this is a continuation of the sarre project? Bob Sn.ith: That is correct. Er,F,ings: And n,y understanding is that a single rtetal building waspreviously approved on thls site anil thatrs aII. one r,etal butlding. Planning Eebruar:, Corr,rr,ission I'leeting 7, L99g - Page 11 Bob Sn,ith: That is correct. EFdr'ings: Youi re not suggesting that se're sor,ehorr, that sorr,ehow there areany grandfather rights here to build r',ore rrretal buildings are you? Bob Sr,ith: What approved plan.I'nr saying is, this is a contlnuation of the previously Err,n ings' I heard :rou sa:, that. Is it your position thto build ft,ore Fetal buildings because you have a r,etalIs that what :'ourre salzing? at ltou have a rightbuilding out there. - Bob Snrith: Yes it is. Er,n,ings: And :/ou think that's a defensible position to take as a _ grandfather issue? Do you think that thatts defensible? Bob $t,ith: Irnr not an attorne:r... From a 1ay position here, the intentsas to have one building approved initially. !,!r. Sorenson had an englneer - that did not correctl!, incorporate alI four buildlngs in the originalsubr',ission. Mr. sorensonrs initiar intent lras to have arr four buildings approved as the!, were to be constructed. What wet re doing now is rather - than having each one done ln a piecer,eal fashion, that all buildings areapproved and then a building permit would come through on each inctividual.building so it rouldnrt have to cohe back for everlzbodlr I s approval. Itwould be approved under an urtbrella. Mr. Sorenson's originaL intent rras to- have the project approved. His engineer incorrectll' presented it as thegrading plan nas incorrect. - En,rr'ings: And you know that thatrs not a basis for granilfathering anlrthingis it? Bob sF,ith: rn this particular case I believe it is. The intent eas to continue the project. Was not approved or submitted on the initial subrr,lssion but it iras the intent that it nould eventualllr come to a corrPlete . . . tEtarings: Thanks. Conrad: Anl' other corfirents? Is there a rrrotlon to close the hearing? E,r,lngs r,oved, wilderr,uth seconded toin favor and the motion carried. The close the public hearing. AII votedpublic bearing was closed. - Bob Srri th : I i F, not an attorne:r so f can ! t corrrrrent . h'rrings: Oka3r. What I s :7our opinion on that? - Bob Srrith: Whatt s my opinion? Errnrings: Yeah. Is that a sound basis for grandfatherlng something? Planning Febr uar:t Coru',ission Meeting7. L99g - Page 12 Conrail: Joan. werII start dovJn at your end for conurrents. Questions. Ahrens: Thanks. This is a Fress as far as I rrr concerned. we have several unresolved issues that I think we need to deal rrith. One is the zoning anal one ls the nretal. building lssue. I think I know where Steve was going with the grandfathering in of the r,etal building and I don't see how we can do that. I don't think that is defensible. The existing Project is in such substantial non-corrrpl iance with the original perrtit that r just can't see r.,oving ahead with a new project at this point. r think we should either continue it and have Mr. Sorenson work with the Citlt to cortrpl]t rrith the original perrr,it. That's the rr,ost generous I could be. wilderr'uth: Do we have an!, Plans for requiring that the offices be taken out of the existing buildlng? Because in fact we have a contractor's ]rard and not a cold storage building. Krauss 3 Thatrs one of the, I r,ean there are so Fran:, confusing aspects about this and how these things car,e to exist. I rras brought into this in earl], septerr,ber and at that tirre I wal.ked through the building and there was one office with no bathroonr that had been, the Citl' staff at the tir,e that was built knew about it and authorized it because there uas supposed to be a watchrran. If there's going to be a watcfu.,an, there has to be a bathroor,. One follorrs the other. Then there had to be heating and of course they Put in a septic s:/ster,. The thing nushroon,ed. It wasnrt controlled very well frankly and thatrs what's there. I canrt verif]t this because I havenrt seen it r,1'self but possibl!' Mr. Kircfurri/l our building inspector is here tonight can. I've heard that a recent inspection indlicates that therers F.ror€ offices being fran,ed in in other ba:rs of thebuilding. We rrould certainly want those rer,oved. I n,ean the prer,ise that allowed the first one to go in we can accept seeing the City staff apparentl:t knew about it but that certainly doesnrt allow for repetition ofit. The contracting yard aspect is one thatrs a Iitt1e confusing. The ordinance didnrt alIow for contractor's yards at the time the original aPproval. was given blt the Cit!,. HoYrever, it was acknowleilged b:, the Cit:tthat there would be contractor yard frrnctions down there. It had been rr.entionetl I believe you know in earlier staff reports and was inherentllr, we believed, allowed because it nas knoyrn about. A lot of this is who knew rrhat about rrhat at what time f rar,e. We contacted fornrer cit:, staf f tr,er,bersto find out what the!, knei, about it and there was a Lot that happened therethat they were inforr',ed about or cdFr€ to know about after the fact andthere was a lot of atterrpta to lrork things out. None of erhich appeared tobe terribly successful to date. Leaving us nith what rre have today. wilderr,uth! SoFrehow it seerr,s hard to believe that werre going to see fullcon,pliance here when the contractor doesnrt want to sprinkler the builalingsas the fire niarshall has requested. Doesnr t lrant to put in concrete curbs.llerve got the lssue of offices... Our engineer has reconr,ended a storrr,serrer s)rster, and one larger pond as being a more efficient rra:, to handlethe runoff erater. I don,t know rrhere the runoff water to the east and westof this property is going to go except onto adjoining properties which I dssllttr€ the contractor doesnrt orrn so that will probably create sorr,e otherproblerr,s there. I think :rou know, therers probably a nistake made at the Planning Febr ua r y Corru.,i ss ion Meeting7, L99g - Page 13 beginning and I think wer ve got an opportunity now to try to cut our losses and I think we should take advantage of it. If this whole project i{erebrought up to speed, up to compliance in a 6 rr,onth perlod, I personally t ould be inclinced to look favorabl!' at another building down there. !.talrbethe adjacent building in the back but as the condition exists or asconditions exist now, I think the project has to be brought intocorrrpliance. I understand that the-coitractor experier,."6 . lot ofunanticipated things but I guess thatrs, itrs not the Citl,rs fault thatthere are artesian wells and there are springs ancl that grading the siterealllt aggravated that Problet. Conrad: In the futrrre if thel' brought thisthe staff report had a lot of condltions incor,fortable with rrrost of those conditions? after corrpliance Jir', andIn sun'r,ar!r, do you feel bac kit. Wilderriuth: Yes. I think the conditions that were irr,posed,would add one and that rrould be that the site should have ainstalled and larger retention pond as our City Englneer isIt seeF,s like it would be n F.rore efficient wa:' to go. I guess I storrrr selder r ecort'Iiend ing . Conrad: Joan, what do 1'ou think about that?couple r,onths once conrpl iance is rr,et. Would recora,endat i ons? If it did cor,e you hold to the back in astaff report Ahrens3 I think that there or€ Sorrr€ issues that arenrt aaleguatel:/ addressed in here. NuF,ber one is the traffic. I think this gentler,an isright. There are traffic probler's and I canrt inaglne why addlng 3buildings and if therets going to be trucks going ln and out, or whatever they do out of these buildings I't', not quite sure, lt is going to addtraffic to that intersection anal there are no turn offs there are there? Or an!'thing. I think that has to be studied. I !r, not convinced that thatisnrt going to be a probleF. adding 3 r,ore cold storage buildings. I also have a prob1efi, $rith the netal bulldings. I donrt think the]' should begrandfathered in. I donrt see a justification for that. I don't thlnkthis is a continuing project. I think the original project was an approvalof one building. There rra:t have been an intent in the future to developthis site with 3 r,ore buildings but that, I don't think that's how it was presented to the Cit1, at the tirte. So I couldn't go along wlth that. Conrad: Okay. Steve? Er,$ings: I don I t know where to start and hoi, tr,uch to do but obviousl],there is sotr,e, the Clt1, r.,a1'be didnit glve ther, sorre dlrection at sone tin,es rrhen they could have heatled off sor,e of the problerrrs. Just looking at one i terr, on the original approval that stated that existing vegetation fror, the front lot llne to the 750 contour shall not be disturbed other than the driveway and norr, I'r, hearing tonight that all of the vegetation was rerr,ovedfror, there. I doubt that an:rbody in the City approved that. In hisletter, Hr. Sorensonts letter, it sayts that the trees, the existing trees antl vegetation. It $as deterr.,ined after lnspectlon that they, should be rer,oved because the!, vrere growing in unsuitable soll which would F'ake it inrpossible to do soil correction. AIso, the trees were very large and unstable creating a hazard to structures or any roail that tjould be built. Planning February Cor'.rn,ission Meeting 7, L99g - Page 14 For all I know that's true but we put a condition on and irhat :rou did wascontrar!, to that condition for whatever reason and therers a credibilityprobler, here. We sit here kind in the abstract and tr!, to do a reasonablejob of-putting conditions on things and if people rronrt coRpllr with then,,that creates soFre real serious problerrs. I'm frankl:r kind of unwiLling toIook at a bunch of conditions on a new project because I dontt know erhatwill happen to then,. so I donrt have rr,uch enthusiasr, for doing...newproject. I trieil to distance F,yself like Mr. Sorenson asked us to do and I can see his point for doing it. I don't think yourre a bad F,an or anythinglike that. I think ltourve got sonre real probleF,s doern there and I tried to distance nrlself a little bit and say, weII if this project was coming in now all new and also looklng at it as a rrress that's got to have a solution, what would I think of it then and I still donrt think I'd like lt verlrr.,uch. But I have a real probler, getting that kind of distance because of the history. I don't understand. If having offices in the existingbuilding rr,akes it a contractor ts :rard rather than cold storage, how we can al.low that. we ilonr t allow contractor's :rards and this wasnrt approved asa contractor rs yard. It was approved as cold storage and if sorr,ebody at the Cit!, said weII, if you want to have a night watchn,an down there thatrsfine and lrou can put in sewer facilities. That fine. Then it ought to be used by the night watchr',an and not by any,bodl' fror, an office. Thereshouldnrt be any offices in there. We donrt allow, oe jrrst got done with several :tears of debate over whether rre were going to have contractor rs 1,ards or not and God, we fuddled with that ordinance for years here andtried severaL different things and finally decided just the hell with it. Werre not going to have therrr in this toirn and now werve got one under adifferent nar,e. You shouldn't be able to do indirectly what !,ou canrt dodirectly antl it seeF,s to lrre thatrs erhatrs happened here. There isabsolutel]' no ground, f donrt ttnderstand how an1'one can say therer s aground for a variance for nretal buildings. There is no doubt in niy nrindthat nothing has been grandfathered in here except the one brrilding that was approved. There was never any approval for additional buildings andcertainl:, and obviously never an!, guarantee that herd be able to build rr,orebuildings or that theytd be metal if he was allowed to build anyr and avariance requires a hardship and there isnrt any hardship. There arespecific standards for granting variances. We donrt aIloe, rrretal buildingsan:lryrore. Your application carre in after rve disallowed ther,. Therer s nohardship there rrhatsoever. An econor',ic hardship is not a hardshlp underthe ordinance. Hardships you in,pose on yourself are not hardships underthe ordinance and that's aII you've got here so I canrt see how we cangrant a variance. Our standards wonrt allot, us to do it. Irr, not clear ona lot of things. I donrt know about sprinklering the buildings. If ourfire inspector sa!'s the], should be and hers got a ratlonale, which ls acode, then they ought to be sprinklered. Not onl:, should those 3 besprinklered. The new ones, but he rrants to build r,ore, I think we shouldat least Look and see if we can require the other one to be sprinklered asa conditj.on of an approval if he should get more building there. I would t ant to Look at that. The road issue, as far as the traffic hazard,there's no doubt in n,y nind that an), additional trafflc tr!,ing to start outfron, a dead stop at 169 is going to add a danger to danger. i drivethrough there once in a white and I alrra:,s feel like I'r, taking r,], life inr,]' hands in that area. I know that traditionally there have been rots ofaccldents there. I guess Irn willing to rely on unDot to aone extent PI ann i ng Febr uar !' Corr,rr,ission Meeting7, L99g - Page 15 because, well I think itrs in their jurlsdiction for one thing and I don,tthink we have a hell of a lot to sa:i about it. But I think there should bea turn in land there and a lane out and I don't think any traffic ought tobe allowed to conre out of there and go east. Kind of r ight- i n,/r ight-outsituation alrhost but those are technical issues and Irry, not an engineer soI donrt know. On the storni sewer and how the uater is handted and whatkind of curb there ls or if there ought to be sheet flow, those areengineering issues again and if our engineer sa:rs they neett thertr, thenI support our engineer and if your engineer can talk hirr, out of that stuff,then thatrs fine with rr'e too. I rronit take a positlon on them except thatIrLI support our engineer if I have to vote and if he says you need it,then I sa!, !,ou need it too. I think another thing we ought to look at onthis, since it is a conditional use, would be houis of operation now thatitis gotten 4 tinres. Now werre going to have 4 tinres !f reater use of theslte and there are residences right next door to this ihing. I think thathours of operation is sortrething we rtight want to rook at for an additionarcondition if werre going to approve lt. M!, own feeling is that the waythis should Probabl), be handled, the wa:/ Iid feel best about tt is if lfr.Sorenson would establish his credibility with the City by fixing thedrainage. Building the berms. Doing the landscaping. Cet the traffic anddriveway, the traffic resolved. Get the driveway, get a bltur.,inousdriveway in there. Get rid of the offices out of the other building andthen rderIl talk about the rest. I certainly support, Irtr, going to voteagainst this now if I have to vote tonight and getting letlers of creditfror, this applicant I think is inportant and appropriate for alt the in,prover.ents. - Conrad: Thank you. You don't hrant to hear what I have to Bob SF,ith: Sure. Conrad: Then I'11 let you talk and I,r, not going to add nruch. I think theprevious coFarents kind of put our hands around this thing. I think werretrlzing to let owners down there have a reasonable economlc use of their- land and yet sor,ehow F.raintain the character of that area and the loi,intensive use that rre santed ln that area. It seer,s to rtre that vrhat has happened to change that a little bit. With the trees dosn, that reall:, is - going against a Iot of the things that re struggle for in Chanhassen. Especially in that particular area because lt is, whether the trees irerequality trees or not, it was still added to sor,e of the buffering and some - of the charr, of the river valle!'. I'r, a litt1e bit concerned with increasing intensit:' of use. whether be it this parcel or other parcels which nerve tried to r',alntain and not expand. This was slanted. Had no rrse and we did feel that a passive use, which rr,eant no people on site, rr,ade - sense. It seer,s to r,e that it nas gone away from that. I see trro otherthings that terve got to do lnternally. one ls that the Planning CoFo,ission, Citlr Councll really have to, as ire've been prodded to b:, our - neighbors down there, rrrake sure !'ou take a good look at this area and be sure that itrs zoned properl]r, and I think we should. It rta!, sta:t fringe business or buslness fringe but I think we really have to take another good Iook at lt becarrse everlitirrre $e do sor.ething down there, lt seens to get a- little bit n,essier. So I would hope that we could review the zoning relativell, quickl1,. Irrrr sure l,!r. Erhart rrhors not here tonight rrould like Sa!t? PIann i ng Febr ua r y Cor',r,ission Meeting7, L99g - Page 16 to believe we could. Another thing lrd like paul or Jo Ann, if you coulddo, which I'd like you to do. I rrould like a staff report to the Cit!,Council on how the City has kind of led us in, has participated in sor,e ofthese probler's. Because it looks like we had a hand in it. Itrs not forthe sake of punishr,ent or reprirtrand. It's for the sake of understanding irhat rre did and how ne Lead a developer on and r'aybe in a passive rray brrtjust so the City Council and r,aybe the Planning Cor,F,ission can understand sonre of these things as to how we would allow a restroorr' down there andfurnance when we said no. I'd like staff to prepare a short report on thatthat rrould go to the City Council. In terms of this particrrlarapplication, as !'ou Probabllt could guess fronr nry opening cor'firents, what has been done reall1, slants n,]t opinion for the future. I canrt really give thefuture an open r',ind becarrse s or,e of the things that are dear to ttre have sort of been negated or not done at aII. I believe that before I could consider this I would have to see the site brought up to the standards that we believe it should have been in the first place. What I also tried toget out of the Planning Cor,r',isslon rrreF.rbers tonight is their openness for the future so that would give Hr. Sorenson and Hr. $r,ith sor,e idea of wherethe Planning Conm,ission sits so that we donrt have you spinning your wheels anal that you have an understanding of, if you came back, where we night be.I think :/ourve heard individual cor,n,ents. I donrt know that there's a surrdr'ation I can give you. You've got to take their corr r,ents as theirindividual corrarents. I think in terrts of drainage and sor,e of the runoffissues, we are very concerned about that but will trust that ]'ou couldsolve that. Whether it be son.ebody's engineer. I think werre verlrinterested in the water issue but I think lrou could resolve those. Thatissue. My particular feeling is that rrost of the staffrs r€corrdrr€ndations Irould get behind unless there was a good arlf uFr€nt against. The sprinklingI worrld probabll, get behind and say I agree unless the Cityrs code issir',pIy arbitrarf in that rrratter. But if it's specif ic and has jood rationale, I'd stand behind that. An:'thing that prevents soF,e of theerosion, I would stand behlnd. Anl'thing that takes the site appearanceback rrp to the standard that I thought rre had, which rteant sor',e greenery infront. we were not trying to create that highwa!, as an intense business use visuall!, or traffic wise. we wanted to son,ehow keep the character downthere and it seer's that yre havenr t and I rrant that character rebuilt. Andif thatts Probabl], what werre talking about is trees and bertr, and I thinkthat can be solved but I think just as a cotr,rrrent, I felt Frost of the recorr'F'endat ions by staff I would stand behind if this carrre back just for 1'our infornation. You could persuade us on a couple. As I listined tocor'F,ents here. t!r. Srrith, do you want to rrake sorre corrdnents? Bob Srrith: Yeah, just a couple corr[rrents ttr. CoF,r,issioner. First off, Ihave.a question on the land alteration and grading permit. As originallysubniitted, it really wasnrt a grading plan. t aon'L recall who th6engineer was. A slr,all outfit as I recall. It wasnrt a gradlng plan. Ithad two spot elevations and very insufficient. part of the approval thisevening is to get the grading perrtlt or land alteration perrtit. If I canalirection either fron lzourself or frorr the staff on whether we have to gothrough this whole process. The planning Cordr,i ssion/City Council forapproval or denial, to get a land alteration permlt to corr,plete the firstPhase. The first portion of thls. The grading and the revegetation of thesite. Thatis basllally one of the reasons we'ie here this eiening so we Planning Februar !' Cordr,ission Meeting?, L99g - Page 17 can bring the site uP to standards. The second corr{rr€ht I have is a conrn,ent r,ade, your engineer isnrt here to defend himself but I have to questlon hiscontradiction to the Lower Minnesota VaIIe!, Watershed District. Hr. SaF,stad has 35 years with the district. I think he.s done a real good jobat it and we follow his recor,rr,endations to the T, to the letter on thisproject. For :/our engineer to come back, and It11 call this sandbagging atthis point. To sanilbag Mr. sar,stad and the watersheil District on this.- locreate the irater concentration which would ln rrr:r opinion and ny engineer'sopinion, create an erosion control or erosion that wourd far eiceed what wehave proposed. Thirdly, the 850 contour originally was about in thisIocation. Part of wtren this project was originall!' brought in, the gradingworked out s orre of the different areas. There l,as a spring that was-openedup down here. It was a ver:, small spring initially and once things golr,oved around a little bit and the:r prrt a road in, you canrt grade juit aroad. You have to have shoul.ders and side slopes. It opened up a- springdown here. caused s orr,e additional grading. Thatrs one of the ieasons forgrading below the 750 contour. There nas a site specific probrem tbat wasencountered. Eor the fourth cor'r,ent appries to the variance of the r,etalbuirdings. we cane in as Mr. Krauss had said, he had reviewed this projectbeginning back in Septerr,ber. This r,ight not be the place to pick a Lon6with but we had nuch discussion, good faith discusslon with the staff foraborrt 4-5 F.,onths now. We could have brought this thing and subF,itted itand signed our application for the fee ir,nediatel!'. We had good faithdiscussions with the staff 3 or 4 rtronths ago. what happened is that in theprocess of this discussion to try and work out all the probler,s that thissite has, an ordinance rdas brought in. We rrere sanitbagged. We feel asthough we rrere stalled in the process of good faith discussions to trl, andbring this site up to a good point. If ln fact rre rrould have brought our Plans in the day that we talkeil to I!!r. Krauss, the Planning Cor'.,rr,ission, thePlanning Departr'ent, the Engineerlng Departrrent, we worrld have been, wewould have cor,e in prior to the change of the ordinance. Era'ings: And r'a]r or Fay not have received approval. Bob SF,ith: Thatrs correct but nonetheless, hre would have not had theproblen,s of being in after the ordinance. We feel , Hr. Sorenson feels thatthere has been a stall. That this project caF,e in after the ordinance has been done and I apologize to the staff if I.r, picking a bone at this point. In surtoratlon, ne think this is a reasonabLe use of this site. It's been zoned as fringe. If we would have had a tirrel!, subrr,ission. If we worrld have not had good faith discussions, se would have had a tinely discussion. We worrld have been in prior to the change of the ordlnance. We would have had a cor,p1iance with the r,etal buildings although we rrould have had to have a conditional use perr,lt for the rr'lni-storage ln this zoning area. Etn,ings: And lrou understand that this is not a pernitted use in this area. Bob Sn,ith: Thatt s correct. Er{rrings' Itrs a conditional use. So theret sapplication date. Whether it cor'es before or nothing naglc about the a fter . Bob Srr,ith: Metal buildings, it was. Planning Cor,r',ission !,teeting Eebruarlz 7, l99g - Page 18 Etr',ings: You F,a], or r'ay not have received approval because itis aconilitional use and not a perrr,itted use. Bob Srrrith: once again, :rour intentions for a passive use, to quote passive use. No people on the site. Eringe business does not, :7ouhave people on the site for fringe business type zoning. This is a compatible t!'pe of use for fringe business in the location that itrs O1sen: If the]r dontt go ahead with the conditional use perr,it, if denied, they worrld have to receive a grading perrtit and they rrould have to receive the Watershed District approval. MnDot approval . You, a have to 1n. Er,r,ings: As a conditional use. Bob Srrith: As a conditional use, that is correct. Eirrings' Not Per['itted. Bob Sn,ith: At this point I could ask for a continuance. I rlt, reall], not sure which wa:r to approach this fronr the lanil alteration perr.,it standpoint. t{e want to take and bring this into conrPliance. we want to be able to get the grading done so we can satisf:, the Planning cor,r,ission and the cit!' Corrncil. we rrould rather not get a negative recoFdrrendation at this point. If I corrld get sorr,e recoFrtnenilation fror', either the Planning Cor,r,ission or frort staff on land alteration perrr,it to conforr, to the grading perr,it. I think we've had sor,e, r',uch discussion with staff and brought it to the Ievel that it would be an acceptable project. wilderr,uth: Is there a land alteration perr,it they're shorring? that I s still Bob SFrith: werve got watershed District approval alread:r. OLsen: WeIl we would discuss with what our Citl, Engineer feels is a better way to handle the runoff. They would still go through the grading perrr,it. Krauss: Ird just like to relterate too that we have a conn,ltr,ent fror', a developer to cor,plete a project in accordance with what rras agreed to 2 !'ears ago. Obviously that has not been fulfilled. The prert'ise under whichI aliscuss things frorr the outset with this developer. H!, predecessor based on his correspondence discussed irith hir,, was that hey look. you got aproblem here. You created it. Yourre going to have to fix lt and yourregoing to have to deF,onstrate good falth or nobody,s going to buy into this.I Itrean it was a prer,ise that, you can read the letters for yourself.Theyrre in the packet. Mine is nearly 6 r,onths old and Steve Hanson's isover a !,ear oId. Itrs a problen, that wetve been trying to reniedy. Wefully intend, as I said earlier, to pursue satisfaction of those conditlonsirregardless of what happens tonight. The!, have a corrrtrr i trr,ent to perforrt and rre fu11:, intend to see that cor,tr'itFrent carried out. Err,r',ings: But I hear h ir',, saying though is lf we want to do the berrr,ing andthe landscaping and fix the drainage problems and r',aybe get the driveway upto snuff and get aII that stuff taken care of to shoT, the City that werre PI ann i ng Eebruar]t Cono,ission Heeting 7, !999 - Page 19 good neighbors, are we going to be able to get the pernrits and the eooperation f r ortr the Cit:, that we need to go ahead and do that work? Isthat kind of what yourre saying? goU Sn,itfr: Thatts exactl!, right. Krauss: To bring the slte into coFpliance, certainly. Erfiiings: I don't need lrour input right nor. Krauss3 In fact, Jo Ann and I worrld need to talk about it but I rrouldnrteven feel that l,erd need to give h irr, another grading perrr,it. l{e11, we Probabl]' ought to rectify what'a been done. lili lderrrrrrth : An:/ uork that has to be done should be done under the old agreeF ent . Krauss: Yeah, kind of degraile what... Err,rt ings: So the ansser to h itr, is the!, won I t have any problerrrs. Krauss: Oh no. Er.r,ings: The only thing that I would say, I think thatis nhat ]rou orrght todo and it sounds to n,e like yourd just as soon have it tabledt while you dothat stuff and then coFe back later and I think thatis a good idea. But Ithink you ought to work very closely with the Clty so they know, rith theStaff so the:t know what yourre doing as yorr do it. So theret s no surprisesat the end. Thatrs the only thing Ird say. - Bob Sn'ith: What :rou are recor',rt end ing is that we be in strict cor.,pliancenith the original plan that nas subrritted I believe in 1986? - Krauss: Thatrs a problert, that irerve had frort day one rith this ls thatit's inpossible to be in strict corr.pl lance becauae all the trees are gone. Er,r,ings: I think erhat you irant to do is solve the drainage problenr, and- this is your personal choice but solve the drainage problerr, in a way thatwilL accor'modate what you ultir,atel:' rant to do with the propert:,. - Bob Sniith: To rrhich the orlginal rgrading plani, spot elevation plan had. Er,r.lngs: well thatrs fine brrt look, hereta the problerr. once there were - trees out there and now it looks like the Froon so xe donrt really have totalk about what reallyr rras there before. lfhatrs a llttle, lt's a littlesilly at thls tine. - Bob Sr,ith: I understand that. What I ar, asking ls, do you wish to have conforrrance or cor'pliance with the approved so called gradlng plan or con,pliance with the altered grading plans that ne have? Ert'rrrings' Yorr have to do sor,ethlng thatrs sensible and lf you work lrlth thestaff. Planning Con,r.,ission Meeting Februarl, 7, l99g - Page 20 Bob Sr,ith: That's what werve been doing for the Last 6 F,onths. Ero.ings: Well :reah. Thatrs not a wa:, to win their friendship or r',ine isto take shots at thep, like that. That's not working with therrr. Thatrstaking shots at ther,. What I'r', saf ing is, if :rou sa:/ look, here's what irerve got. Here's where re've got to get to. Letrs get together and get the engineers together and get a reasonable plan to get to that spot. I have no doubt that theytll work with lrou on that. WeIl, now thatrs i,hat Icall a sFrirk and that doesnrt win !,ou any of n'y lo:talt]t or friendship again. Itr, saying we've got to cooperate here. There's been probler,s. Idonrt think it's an:rthing that canrt be overcorr,e. If you just decide toget it done, it r{ill get done. If 1'ou decide to be unfriendly to each other, it erontt get done. It will jrrst be unpleasant. Bob Srr,iths I said we worked in good faith for nearly 6 n,onths. Itrs just since we've resubn,itted on this revier.r that we got thls f r orr, the City Engineer. Norn,aII:/ the whole process is gone throrrgh. The City Council approve it before it even gets to the watershed. Ile've had so much t irr,e on this through the staff level , the watershed District has already approved this proj ect. Enoiings: I think :'ou and our engineer and the watershed's engineer should sit dorrn and go over it brrt don't ask us to second guess our City Engineer. Bob Sn'ith: Mr. saF,stad has had snfficient discussion with Engineer prior to this tine. Thatrs why hers approved it. the Ci ty Ero.ings: Yeah, but ithat fir, salring is, if our Cit!, Engineet wants A and l{r. SaF,stail wants B, don't ask us to support Mr. Saristad if our City Engineer believes what hers doing is right. Thatrs what irerve got hirrr herefor. llhat ltourre doing is asking us to tell hip, we think he's incor,petent and tee arenrt going to do that. Bob Sr,ith: That I s fine. Bob Sr,ith! I do. The original plan showed a lack ofrunoff of the entire project. My grrestion is, do you grade to show the berFrs, the storr, water runoff whichoriginal plan. On the original plan was put a corrple6 qguple flat pads in here and grade it dorrn. any storrr water want us to take and is contrarlz to theflat pads in here and Krauss: If I corrld by way of guidance. We initially got into thisarrdfl!€Fr€ht to rectif], the problerrs that rrere out there. The grading planthat you see illustrated on this proposal rectifies the probler,s that werecreated. Irregardless of whether 3 additional buildings are built, ltfixes what we found to be the problenrs on the site. Now if no r,oredevelopr,ent is to take place on this slte, therers not going to be as rnuchrunoff because therers not going to be as r,uch hard surface coverage.Sorrething less than the systeF, we proposed r.,ay suffice if nothing else isdone. But in terr,s of screening and how the access is being worked out and Erdt,ings: Yor: rnder stand? Pl ann i ng Februarw Corto,ission Meeting ?, l99g - Page 21 the drainage concept,plan does the j ob. yes. We think this grading plan, that landscaping Thatrs not going to be an issue because it's alread!, graded flat Conrad: I think those issrres could be worked outgot it to Cit], Council. irithout bringing lt back.to us an!'n,ore. Iou know. You reallY donit. Conrad: Yorr r,ay be spending son,e F,oney. Bottorl line to r,e is you r ve gotto.pull the whole site into confornrance without even conteF,plating 3 nenbrrildings. Thatts where rrtt, at and staff and the engineers can flgure thatout. flat out. At that point in tirrre, then I would consider taklng a lookat 3 new buildings. But at the saF,e tir,e, I rrant to take a look, werd betaking a look at that whole zoning area dorrn there. I think we just owe itto the neigbbors to take one Frore final Look. l,lore than likely you'd begrandfathered in but intensity of use t]rpicallf is not grandfathered in.Iq tha-t right? But that's where I rr, at but I really do believe that !'oushould takL this, regardless of positive or negatif,e. I thlnk tablina;anot going to give you the inforn,ation you want right now. Bob srr,ith: what I rr,ight suggest is that lrou continue it for anotherr,eeting so that the engineering departF'ent has an opportunit!, to discuss s orr'e particular points with either Watershed District, Mr. Sorenson thatpossibly continue for what, sa}, 3g days so that can be worked out and lroucan be informed of whatrs happening. betrdeen now and when you You donrt want to listen Krauss: Ur. Chair.an, lf I coulal also explain sor,ething about the Watershed District. The watershed districts have different standards and we have several iratershed districts and aome of ther' are rrore strlct thanothers. Irregardless, when a watershed district r,akes a recor'F,enda t i onit's a Frinir,uF, recon'r,enda t i on. ft's rrhat thelr need to satisf], theF,selves.It no na], binds the Cit], or indicates what will satlsfy the Cit!'. Bob snrith: That I s correct. Krauss: an:twaY. Er,!,ings: WeII and it's hard becanse, if we teII theni to grade to accoFrF,oilate the 3 r'ore buildings, yorr know that irould put ourselves in areaI. - Etn,ings: Okal'. We certainl:t donit want to guarantee an:rthing because ifwerre going to table it, werre not going to look at the propotal unti).Iater on and we sure donrt want to hear that :,outve been sandbagged. Werve - heard enough of that word here tonight and I donrt Bant lrou to tlrinX ttrat wer re sandbagging you . _ Conrad: I real.l think, Steve to jun,p in. I really think we shoutdn, ttable it. I think it shorrld go to Cit!, Council. i ttrint< yourve got tohear irhat they think. - Etrr,ings: That probably is a good idea. Pl anni ng February Coru',ission Meet ing 7, L99g - Page 22 Bob Sr,ith: At this point I erould recoF,Frend a continuation fror, Irr. Sorenson I s standpoint. That he does have an opportunity to work a F,ore closellz with the staff and bring it back to lrou for one finalit is passed onto City Council if that would be possibLe. PLAN REVIEW FOR THE COUNTRY STREET AND MARKET BOULEVARD, HOSPITALITY SUITES HUTT CONSULTANTS, this i ter,. Iittle before Conrad: Let's see if son,eone rtrakes that motion. Is there a Fiotion? Is there anlrn,ore discussion? Err,F,ings: I guess if he wants it tabled, then r think we orrght to table it. Conrad 3 Me too. Enrn,ings: It doesn I t seer', unreasonable. Conraal: Itrs their probtert, because the:, have to talk to us again. Er'F'ings' And we're going to say exactl)t the sar,e stuff next tir,e. conrad: No, no, no. Errr'ings: Well I an,. I'n, going to read it out of the l,linutes. Conrad: Is there a nrotion? En,nings: IrIl nove that we table the conditional use pernrit. Oh, siteplan rev iew? Conrad: It's tlro things. Ero,ings: And site plan review for the cold storage units as proposed by Mlke Sorenson. Ahrens: I i 1I second it. Etrtings Frov€d2 Ahrens seconded to table action on the Conditional UsePerr,it Anendrrent and site plan review for expansion of a site for Mike Sorenson, cold storage warehouse facility located on Hrr1,. 2I2 just northeast of Hwy. 169. All voted in favor and the r',otion carried. REVI SED ON WEST SITE 78TH Paul Krarrss presented the staff report on HOTEL, LOCATED I NC. Conrad: So an:/t a]r, if 1'ou buy rrhat, I worrld listen to you. If ]rou'd liketo table it, you know IIII lobb], to table it. I think itrs to your benefitto take this up to City Council. Hear what the!, have to sal'. Yourre going-to get their cards. Yourre going to know where they're at. I think lrout regoing to get sorr,e better long terFr direction. PIanning Eebr ua r !, Con,r.,i ss I on Meeting7, l99g - Page 23 Conrad: Do we have in Chanhassen? a cedar standard? A cedar shake standard for a rooftos Krauss: Well there rras an issue that, ]rou knoi{ therers a downtown inage and PeoPIe can argue rightl1, or wrongly that itrs a good inage or a badirtage but it's an irtage. There has been a desire on the part of the peopl.ein the City and the HRA to develop some consistency that you know voulre- in dohrntown Chanhassen. To the extent that :,ou donrt take prototypicalarchitectrrre that rtay fit in werr and interchange in Nebiaska lna ptant itin the downtown, lreatr it becorres an issue. The cedar shake roofin! takesoff fror, the fact that the Frontier Buildlng and the Dinner Theatei hascedar shake Fansured. Other buildings have tried to er,ulate that but soFreof the newer buirdings are using those Tirrrberline shlngles and froFi adistance they give the saFre appearance trhich was why' the Council waswilling to accept that. Therets also a qrrestion of whether or not :roucould do a cedar shake roof with the new roof design. That it wo,rlE be tooheavl' anil fire proofing would be ver]' difficult. Conrad! So lre do have a standard? Whors enforcing that? Is that FredHoisington? How is Fred gettlng invorved in some of these archltecturalgoals that we have? Is he still used to consuLt? Krauss: Mr. Chairrtran, he is antl frankly thatis soniethingdiscrrssion.that needs sor'e Conrad: Itrs a real intriguing thing and not that I don,t, I like cedarIook and I like Tin,berline shingles anal thatrs all flne with rr,e. yet, saFreness is not necessarily a goal that I personalllr have in dorrntown Chan.I donrt know. I guess Irn, kind of intrigued by... Krauss: This building rill be physically linked to the Dinner Theater at sorte point in the future. The concept calls for... Conrad: Oka!'. End of presentation? Shor, us this corrrtlrard. CIa:'ton Conrad: Cla!'ton Krauss: Johnson: I donrt have anY drawings of the corrrtyard. No drawings? That's the onl.:' thing Irr, interested in. Johnson: I think ever!,body has sorre drawlngs except me. Therers a detaileal provided here. cIa:,ton Johnson: A couPle things. I rr, cIa!,ton Johnson representing the BlooF,berg Con,panies. I think itrs very lF,portant that you unalerstand thatthere ate two different parties here. I represent Bloor,berg Corrpany. Dave HeFlFringer is here frorr D.W. Hrrtt Consultants. Dave represents thepartnership. We are only one of four partners ln the hotel project so !rou're talking here to two different owners and I think everybody.s had aaifficult tir.,i dealing wlth that. I just wanted to take l,rst eairl , onesn,all exception to !'our staff rePort. I just got a chance to read it toda], and that is, nhen you orlginally considered the hotel , the large gabletl roof building was in place and 1,ou approved it on the basis of that old Planning Eebr uar:. Cor,r',ission Meeting 7, L99g - Page 24 E,r,ings: The new brrilding will be rrhat conpass direction fron the hotel? Clayton Johnson: It will be east. So is the existing building that houses Anirv,al Fair r.rith the f ireplace and the bricks, that rrill. stay. Brrt the wood building lnbetween, which I call the gabled roof building and the onl!'- building being there. Oka:,? At the tirrre that :rou apProved this way back rrhen, the gabled roof building was intending to sta:r. subsequent to that approval the Cit!, conderr,ned the gabled roof building and we reached an agreerr'ent to tear lt down. So the original srrbrr,ission showed a 25 foot court:'ard Paul. Not 30 anal thatrs not a big deal brrt itrs 25. 2q feet fror, the edge of the old building to the propert!' Iine of the replatted propert:, and a 5 foot setback frort the building. Frotn the hotel . Can I go over here to the board just a &inute? Conrads Please. I thought you were going to have picture to show rrs. clayton Johnson: cabled roof buildlng. okal', the big one with a1l the wood shingles on it. The flat toof building which houses Hooketl on Classics. This was proposed to corr'e dorrn right? And the hotel , herers the propert:, line of the replatted PropertY. This is a 26 foot dir'.ension and the hotel h,hich rrill be 5 feet fron that propert!, line or a 25 foot green area. okay? subsequent to, and this is rrhat ltou approved. vfhat happened now is that the City has conder,ned this building and this t ill all cor,e down. we will be cor"ing to )rou with a PIan for a new buiLding. Alright which 1'ou have not seen yet. In Parrl's staff report, he is asking to rtaintain a 30 foot courtlrard or a green area and I donrt know where the 30 feet caF,e fror,. we sa], itrs 25 and we are certainly agreeable to the 25 foot corrrt!'ard. This building wiII be 17 feet. If the new plan is approved, it will be 17 feet from the property line to the edge of the hotel so therefole, in order to n,aintain 25 feet se'd need an 8 foot easer,ent fron, the Bloomberg Cor.,panies. Noer werre rhore than willing to give- that. That's not a problem. When we corie in with orrr plan for our nee, building we wiII at least r,aintain that and it wilt ProbabLy be greater but werre willing to give the easetr,ent to assure tbe original courtlrard area. The only other thing is that ln the staff recororendation there's one thing -thatrs been ignored. It rras discussed at the r,eeting that was held between the attorne]'s of both parties as nell as the staff but there will. be a connection connecting the hotel to this new project. When we cor.e in for the approval of the new buililing, there ,i11 also be a proposal to connectthe hotel so the Bas€rrr€rlt that we grant here, i{er re Frore than willing togrant. The onl:r thing ls, hrerve got to provide for the provision that the connection wilL be perr,itted on that €Ers€rrr€nt. Er'Frings: Is the connection enclosed? Cla:rton Johnson: Yes, it's enclosed. I think that's, so realllr the onllt exception PauI we rroul-d take to the staff report is te would agree with the conditions rrith the exception that it be 25 feet. We would grant ]'ou an easeRent that would assure a 25 foot courtyard and werll corr'e back with ourplans and our plans are to have a generous courtlrard orrt there because wethink it's going to enhance our bullding also that we rill be building onthe site. Planning Febr uarv Con,rr,ission Meeting 7. l99g - Page 25 reason it isn't doi{n alread}, is that rrerve been leaving the brrilding inplace to keep the frost fror', going into the ground until we get backthrough Planning Cor.,r,ission and Council to see if theyrII approve thischange. Thatrs the onl:, reason the buitding is still there is to preventfrost frorrr going down to the 4 L/2 feet it ras on the other area. Okay? Dave Herrfi.inger: I rnight add that we had BRW look at howl if a bus couldget ln and around that area and they... Conrad: Good. ttlilderrrruth: Wh:t rras it condeF,ned Cla!,ton? cla!,ton Johnson: well this is an issue that gets back to, the canop!,. Idescribed and I donrt know if you read the Council Minutes. f desciibedthe canopy as Pinnochiors nose. How it continued to grow. Frorr the tir..rethat !'ou approved the hotel, BRW in stud!,ing the traffic stacking in thiswhole area conc}uded that werre going to have a heck of a probrert on thatintersection and what the], wanted to do is get the building backconsiderably frorrr the road to allow ther, to redesign the e;trlrway and toredesign the stacking at that intersection. So th;t rr,eant thit i gooashare of the front of the building would have to 9o. The engineeris rookedat it and concluded that reall], if you took 3g feet off the iront of thebuilding, it'd be Eore econoFrical to take the whole thing because therewouldn't be enough of the strrrcture left. So what happened, so then thenext thing. So thatrs an agreeable recortur,endation. We fina1l:, gottogether and agreed on that but nov, what happened, in the proc-si ofdesigning the restacking, when BRW did it, the!, now provided for a busaccess through there. we want because of the bus traffic into the theatre,therers going to be a lot of bus traffic at the hotel so the:' redesignedthe road in front of the hotel. Now the canopy, lnstead of Leing a ianopl'over a LS or 2g foot drivewa:/ now is a canopy over a 3, foot driveway sorrhen it got down to the final bidding process the onl!, thing, of aII thechanges, the onl:/ one that really dealt with econor,ics rras this issue ofthe canopy. The canop:, ended up 44 feet Iong b1' 35 feet nide and withoutan:t center support irhen the bids carr,e in, it cost nrore to build the canopythan I think it did to put the pool in so thatrs why we find ourselves backhere today h,ith these two changes. Wilderr.,uth: So the problen was resolved b!, putting the center island in? cla]rton Johnson: Yeah. so nor, vrhat we've got ls basically a woodstructure. Tirtbers like what Herb built on the Dinner Theatre instead of asteel superstructure that would have had to have been covered up. So Ithink we ended up with a F,ore attractive design. Er,r,ings: How long is lt? Cla]rton Johnson: {4 feet. Itrs the sar,e length. It goes all the rra}r outbut itrs anchored in the r',iddIe. And :rourll get a better feel for, :rou.llbe able to see that frorr Hain Street rrhen that big gabled roof building corres down. YourIl get a little better feel that lt's reall!' going to enhance I think all of Main Street. Planning Eebr uarl, Corur,i ss i on Meeting 7, L99g - Page 26 I have nothing to add. 25is r,agic. r think the:'r lI feet, I donrt think 25 do , as long as gre rr eet Cla:rton Johnson: We'Il still have the bus traffic flowing through and underneath the canop!' and it wiII all work. Ylildern,uth: Whatrs your feeling on the canoPlt area? Are !'ou happ]' with it? Do ]rou think that it enhances the appearance? c1a:rton Johnson: Yeah. nerb likes it. Herbrs the one thatrs reall:, worked it through. He's placed the canopy as we ended up with it ls aesthetically very... wi lderlnuth : canop]r. I thought 9re were going to lose sonething when rre lost the Clayton Johnson: well werre also trying to please Countr:, Hospitality and of corrrse they're growing very rapiilly. They've got a few buildings up now. Actrrally the idea of shrinking the Pool area caFre back fron, ther,. The pool area, if it's not attended 24 hours a day b1' a lifeguard, which it is not, thelr've found that the:, want it very secure and they don't want the pool are real large. They want the PooI. People trant the PooI. The:' want - vhirlpool . The exercise area but they donrt want it be a large area thatrs unsupervised so thatrs kind of rrhere the 12 foot coFring off the building car,e fronr. Itrs not 12 feet off the whole building. Itrs 12 feet off the -whole pool,/Iobby area. conrad: oka:r. steve, an!, other qrrestions or cor'F,ents? Errringss I have no objection to an]rthing, the changes that have beenproposed. I think that we should add into condition I that thelrrve got toprovide the easeFrent to protect the court!,ard and I'd just add onto that son,ething like, and for a futrrre enclosed connection to a buililing to be built east of the hote}. As far as the courtyard din,ension ls concernecl,donrt care if itrs 2g or 3g or 25 frankl1, but since the1, proposed 25, Ird go with their nultrber. I llilderrrruth: Wha! t s :'our feel ing on that PauI? Krauss: WeIl, you knor, I got to the point where yrourre looking at aproject with a fine tooth corrrb. I had looked at an earlier plan that I thought I scaled off at 36 feet. I just looked through, to be honest -though, I just looked through the file here. The!' gave us subsets of thereare a lot of plans that have developed but one of the plans thel, gave us inthis packet that vre delivered to you shoers a 25 foot dir,ension. 25 foot is- what lre need to satisfy building code so thatrs a critical nurrber. Wecanrt go below that. If yourre corr'fortable with that, werre fine withthat. Ahrens: I go along wlth the staff recor,rr,endat ion on thls. Conr ad : wha tever or 3g or code . Pl ann i ng February Cono,ission tteeting7, l99g - Page 27 wilderF'uth: I I d like to rr,ove the Planning Cor'.rrr.ission approve the site plan 89-2 for the Countr!, Hospitality Suites as proposed subject to thefollowing conditions. Nurrber one, and nrrr,ber one rrould be changed to read and providing for an enclosed corridor between the hotel and a new proposedbuilding. Does that rr,eet your requirer,ents Steve? Eru.,ings: Sounals good to me. Iililderrrruth: And nun,ber two, the 30 feet would be changed to 25 feet. Conr ad :Is there a I r 11 second Discussion? sure rrhat to Your F,otion second? Ahrens:it. Krauss: 12 feet.would accept the plans as thev are which deletes the Conrad: was not now did this rr,otion affect the 12 foot? do rrhen they reviewed it. Our nrotion. Citl, Counc i I Krauss: ones... Essentiall], the Plans that lrou're adopting todalz supercede the Conrad: Which deletes thethat because the plans are 12 feet, okay. So we didnrt need to highlightthe plans and the:, deleted the 12 feet. Cottt,i ss i on recotr,rr,end Suites with the Wilderr,uth n,oved, Ahrens seconded that the Planning approval of Site Plan *89-2 for Country Hospitalityfollowing conditions: 1 Ptovision of a satisfactor:t eaSenr€nt protecting courtlrard areasat the east and southeast sides of the bullding providing for an enclosed corridor between the hotel and a new proposed building east. located to the 2.The n inirrurrr feet. court:'ard dir',ension located east of the hotel shall be 25 PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE A}IENDMENT TO CREATE AN R-16 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DI STRICT. Paul Krauss presented the staff report on thls item. Conrad: what does R-16 look like? Do rre have any plctures of an R-16? Krauss: What a developFtent in the R-16 tright look like? AlI voted in favor and the F,otlon carried. Plann ing E ebr ua r:, Cor',rt ission Meeting 7, 1990 - Page 28 Conrad: Yeah. Are rre talking apartrr,ents or are we talking condos? Whatis lt? And vrh!, is it different than R-12? I guess I have to go back tothe fundar',ental question. IlF, not srrre why the R-16. I don't know thereto put it. I would put it irhere the R-12 is because I donrt know, it sounds to rtre like we're solving a parking probler, that just occurred because of the new parking standard. I donrt buy that. I have to bu:' therationale for the need of the zone which is high densit], and then I have tobult the need to have two which are fairly close. Do we need an R-20 or anR-24? Do we need four higb density zones because therers a reason forthat? The only reason I see for this one right now is for one car parking stalLs underneath. Explain trrore to lr,e so f can have a better grasp of arationale for trro high densit:, zones. The!'tre still not real high buthigher. Krauss: No. Realisticalllr when Irou look at the R-12 district :rou cannot, Irnr not saf ing it's irtpossible but it would be very difficult to econor'.ically build an apartr,ent or condoF,iniun project such as you r',ight see in Eden Prairie or llinnetonka or Bloorrington. Ones that I personally relate to that fall into that densit], range would be sorrrething like Chasewood Gates which is in Hinnetonka on Crosstown Highway. I donrtrecall the exact densit:' in there but I think it was between 16 and 17 units an acre on that project. If you like we can give you a list ofprojects and their densities. Conrad: But do we need the two? Krauss: Er,r,ings: Conrad : go back Arguabl], the R-12 distrlct beconies Yeah. It just won't be used. So the process is we'll get rid of to the old parking requirer',ents that That te just got rid of. redundant. R-12. Put in the R-16 and used to have. the we Er,rrings: Wilderriuth: Then ]rou get better quality of construction in the R-15 versusthe R-12. What you see ln the R-I2 is not very irr,pressive. Krauss: In lry own judgrr,ent, no. I think the problen, here is the R-12 district didn't do or doesn't do rrhat it l,as intended to do. It was intendetl to be our high densit!, district. Where it fails in on two points. It doesn't alloe, enough density to build the kind of buililings that r,ost developers build at a higher density range because yourve got to build ahigher densit], than that and it also hinders therrr because when !'ou bulld abuilding of that size, when you knock orrt !'our parking and your driveaisles and :rour paved sidewalks and whatever else you do, plus thebuildin9, fTou I re be:rond 35t. Erdr'ings s But woulal it be right to think that an:7 developer corrring inatten'pting to do a denser t:tPe project, thelrire all going to look for the R-15 and none of theF are going to be interested in the R-12 it soundslike. Planning Febr u ary Cor.,r, i ss i on Meet ing7, L99g - Page 29 Krauss: when ltour re sgueezing a developn,ent every which wa1z, irhich to anextent we're entitLed to do and itrs warranted. Youtre going to rr,odel or 1'ou're going to produce a certain kind of developrrrent. quality of developr'ent is another issue. I r,ean you can have people that buildquality or not in anlz density tange. You donrt want to point fingers atany one project but the R-12 t]rpe of densit!, produces or seerr,s to producehere anyway, soFrewhat sprawl]r barracky's looking buildings that are as corr,pact as possible to n,ake that 35t requirement anil are corrpletel!,uncreative in terr,s of design. No!, does the R-15 district nrean thatinherently you will get a better design? I don,t think so. It would allownore developers to take a shot at it. wilalerr,uth: worrrdnrt ue be better off nraintaining the R-r2 and increasingthat to 45 or 50t coverage to allow for rr,ore creativity in design? Krauss: WelI :'ourd certainly give sor,e flexibility dolng that. Thecritical factor being that the], can't, developers are palrlng x nurrrber ofdollars per acre. Now r.re dontt norFrally get into the econor,ics of thesethings but the:'rre going to pa!, the sar,e dollats per acre shether thel,iregetting 12 rrnits an acre or 16. When liou do to the expense and with theR-16 district werre insisting that the parking be underground which is anexpensive proposition and sor,e of the cities do that. I.tinnetonka does it.Edina does it but therers not a whole lot of third ring suburbs that do it.We're proposing that we do it and I think yourve backed us up on that andthe Council has as well so werre derrancling a hlgh grade building in thatdistrict. Wilderrtruth: How is it a high grade building? Give us sor,e comfort as tothe guality of building that !,ou get in an A-16 wlth unilerground parking versus what yourd get in an R-I2. Krauss: I think it's a tr,atter of how Bruch Frone:r it takes to buitd abuilding that vrould fit into an R-16 district. Wildernruth: I can see where the R-15 on an acre of land is going to be a Iot r,ore productive in terr,s of revenue for a deveLoper. Krauss: To rreet the right of passage here is that !,ou have to build a building that will probably be 3 stories high and r'rrst have undergroundparking. Underground parking requires rrrasonry construction at least to the lower level . You know you look at the buildings werre been getting in the R-12 and the]rire franed. It reguires fully sprinklered buildings which inthe R-I2 district has not been the case. Therers ways of getting aroundbuilding codes in those districts. Those are fairly n'ajor expenses anal to recoup those expenses the developer is then probabl:, going to have to bullal a building thatrs going to attract the kind of rents or purchase price thatrs going to do that. Ahrens! So b:, developing R-16 housing we're not necessarll!r expanding any affordable housing base for Chanhassen? We could be building r'.ore expenslve housing? I Frean, for sor,e reason I had ln the back of r,!, r,indthat the reason the R-I6 was being developed rras so that there could behigher density houslng and n,aybe n,ore affordable housing for aIl kintls of Pl ann i ng Febr ua r y Cotr,r,ission Meeting 7, L99g - Page 39 Krauss: what werre getting is you tilI not find develop€rs econoFrically building the types of apartr,ent units that you find in other cor'r,unities. I canrt teII you that trodern, that the apartr'ent buildings that have been built in the last 7 :,ears in that boom tir.,es for apartr,ents are cheap. The:r're not. Theyrre considerabll, F,ore expensive rrost of therr than are the older buildings. It does provide a st]rle of housing that we don't offer. That has the potential for offering sort e differences in rents and for sor,e lower rent depending on t hat prograr,s thelt use and this is not directly in orrr control . If it's in a tax increrrent district ltou can reqrrire that a percentage of ther, be made available for lower cost housing. Right now i{er re not getting those kinds of product in the tax incrertent districts. The]rrre not being proposed. Nothing that would generate enough revenue that l,ou can float tax incren,ent to offset anything. Ahrens3 I think because of the restrictlons developr"ent. that the cit:' has also on Krauss: f don't know that.thatrs true but I couldnrt nould be speculation. I sort of thinkit. sa], that we create an R-I6 district.Iike to ask. Tha t Prove LetrsEFIr,ings: I I d where is it? Krauss i llr. Dean Itis nonhere to start irith. In fact I had this discussion with Johnson the morning after. Er,rr'ings: That I s Irrw next question as a F,atter of fact. peoPle. I F,ean did that have an1'thing to do with it or t,as that sor,ething that I ir,ag ined? Krauss: No. I think it alid. It iras certainl:' a concern that the Planning Cor,tr,ission had and the Cit:t Council echoed s or',e of the san,e feelings. Tbefact of the nratter is that rre, people are telllng us we have a need in this -town for higher densit:, housing. we donrt have higher densit!' housing. Sorr,ething hasn't happened out here that has stopped it. Noi, I personall!, think a lot of that is the dynarrics of the rt'ulti-far,il:, housing tr,arket. Chanbassen was not in the rrode to accept that kind of horrsing or needed it -at the tirte the tax Laws rrere structured that every develoPer iras building. Wilderrr,uth: ...construction. Nrauss: No, our prerr,ise is that I mean we have an A-1 distrlct thatdoesn't exist anyplace. What we would do lf this alistrict paases. t{e rrould Put lt on the F,ap. It sould sta:t ln the ordinance and sonebodlr rrould have to bring forth a project that we flnd acceptable wlth a concrlrrentrequest to rezone it R-16. Erfi.ings: Okalr. Wilderr,uth: WeIl rrouldnrt rre just autoF,atically look at the R-I2 areas? Conrad: Thatrs your first thought. Planning Eebr uar:/ Corr,rr,i ss i on Meeting 7, L99g - Page 3I Ahrens: There was sor.,ething in the Minutes, the City Council Minutes. EFrr'ings: ThatIs Wi lderrrruth : But where wourd look but . . . if the R-12 would be reduntlant. . . R-15. Krauss: The R-12 and the R-I6 district are keyed into the high densit],designation on the Cor.,prebensive Plan. Theoretically they can be used in terchangeabl y. Realisticall!, there is sor,e latitude on the part of theCit!, as to r.rhether or not the:r,11 accept a rezoning and it's contingent inr,!, opinion on sorr,ebody' bringing... WilderFruth: Approvat would have to be done on a case b]r case or an areaarea.bw Etr',ing s : And accused of? thatrs not spot zoning? We donrt have to t orrlr about being Krauss: I donrt think so Corrprehensive PIan. Cor,rr,issioner En,r,ings because it I s baseal on our EFa'ings: One of the questlons I had is, when ]rou think about thatproperty, Iir', sure that Dean Johnson rdas ver]r interested in orrr havingR-I6 and sees it as a wa], to get the project hers iranted to do done inHalrs. Mal'be he does. Ma:'be he hasnrt but when I think of buildings 50tall on top of that hill up there, itrs going to dortinant our skylineforever. an SOIrre Wildermuth: It's going to be the Acropolls. Etrtings: Yeah, itrs going to look like the Acropolls. Yourre right. Wilderr,uth: So n,ay'be that R-12 doesn't becoF,e R-15. Err,rt,lngs: Well not autorraticall!'. And the other thing ls, why does a 3story building have to be 50 feet tall? Krauss: The:trre not rrsually. A 3 stor:t building is usuall], about 49 soFre odd feet tall. If you hranted to. I rr'ean the ray ordinance is structrrredright now is it opens up, it gives latitude for a 5 stor:, building tooccur. If thatrs sorrething that :rou rranted to preclude, the ira:, to do thatis to go back and say that the rr,a x irr,ur, building height is whatever we havein the R-12 district which I think is 46 feet. {9 feet is sufficient for a 3 stor!' building. Er,F,ings: f t's !'ou F,ight wantto buiLd it on one of those things, itrs real hard because I can see that to build a 5 stor], building soFreplace but :,ou rr,ight not wanttop of that hill. I donrt know ho$ ]'outd get at that. Ahrens: what hill. are you talking about? Planning FebE uar:r Conur,ission Meeting 7 ' ]-99g - Page 32 Erro,ings' You know when you're right onjust before it hits Posers B1vd.. Itrs the aIl West now end of g r aded 78th Streetkind of flat here Probably if 2L2 that, thatr s whythatrs a nunrber Ahrens:Bv the tohrnhouse on Kerber I s? olsen: Just to the irest of those. Ahrens: Okay. I know where that is. Err'$'ings 3 Yeah, if lrou just go doirn west 78th street to rdhere it hits Powers Blvd. and then you look, if lrou're driving this wa!, and Powers BIvd.is in front of )'ou. Off to your rlght thatrs aII graded in there and itrs up on top of that hill shere we've had a lot of proposals fror' a developer hrho uants to put rr,ulti-far,ily housing up on top of that hill. ItIs real visible. Wildern,uth: F"a ter ial i zes Krauss: In that instance u€ r€corrrFr€nded 50 ove\ 7 g that worked. we donrt have very niuch R-12 we'I1 have opportunities for at the lrorrrent. fiOf e. Ahrens: Paul you had said, rrIt, sorry were ]rou finished? Wi lderrt uth: Yes . Ahrens: Parrl, ]rou had said that lrou had worked on the Minnetonka ordinance and lrou had a r,axir',ur, hard surface coverage of 7O\. How did ]rou corrre uP with nunJcer in uinnetonka and in Chanhassen the recoF'Frendat i on is for 5g*,? Krauss: Donrt take this as a cop out but rrrrr afraid itrs lost in the r,ist of tine. I donrt recall. we had a standard of 80* coverage for cortn,ercialareas. For indrrstrial areas it was 85t. 70t as near as I can ren,en,ber seeF,ed to be a reasonably good nurr'ber. Nobod:/ argued with it at the tir,e and it becar,e part of the ordinance. Now having worked with that orilinancefor probabll' 5 lrears after the date of adoption, I sincerell' believe itrsfar belrond what's needed. As I salr, we didn't have a project that approached that and sorrre of those projects vrere fairly dense. l{ilderr,uth: What were the}r? Were they on the order of sgt? Krauss: Yeah. 453-59t. Erfi,lngs: But if soF,eone had cor,e in at 70t you woulilnrt have been able to saw no- no and that I s whlr, because exper ience having showecl done tha t Conrad: worked for what? worked for residentialKrauss 3 conrad 3 wor ked which for al.I residtentlal? occuring in that denslt!, range, yeah. The high densl ty? It IN dens I tlt range? PI ann i ng Feb r uar y Corr,rtission ueeting7, l99g - Page 33 Krauss: The higher densit!' range. Conrad: Vlhatrs the downfall of that? As yorr brlng in higher density and vrhat :rourre sa]ring is these people need less space. werre going to buildsFaller units. Stack therr and the:, need less space to recreate outside. The], donrt really need. Is that what se say? I irrl not pl.aying a gaF,e. IrFrtrying to rationalize a different standard or does it say that highdensit]r, because they need less space, rre have to F,ake sure that parks goup next to theF, or the!,rre located close to a place to recreate. That oneI reall!, have a problerr erith. I guess I canrt sa!, that 35* versus 50t isgoing to be r',ake a great deal of difference but on the other hanil , it seer,slike a contradiction. The rr,ore we stack on top of each other, the lessspace rre need for those people to be outside and I donrt know. Thatbothers rre. En'n'ings3 It's not unlike, ]rou know we put hon,es on highways so the tess desireable apeople vou put there. double horr,es and rrrrrlti-famiI:rplace is to live, the rrore Krauss: One other r,ra!' of thinking of that though is, first of al1 werrepreserving 50t of the site. You bul' yo\x L5 1A00 square foot 1ot and Idonrt know if the analog:, is so good but that salrs :rou cantt touch half ofit and then yorr can build on the rest. you also have to ask why would anapartn'ent or condor,iniun, dweLlers in Chanhassen require Frore open spacethan do the sarre people living in most other suburban coro,unities. Conrad: No, no. We donrt have to ask that. Not at aII. I don't feel irehave to. That presur,es the:r're right and we are leaders in a lot ofdifferent cases so yeah. Looking back, itrs like going back to Richfield and looking at Richfield anal Bloor,ington to see their r,istakes and say,r.reIl the], lived through this and letrs dupllcate ther,. No, I can't acceptthat. Rrtle that argur,ent out. Start with a loglcal one. Not somebod!,else did it. Ma:'be the I5t difference doesnr t nake any difference. Itrr'ight not in a high density. I t rr, F,ore concerned right now that we r',akeaffordable building well built. I think thatts where we started here. Itappears that our R-12 sir',ply doesnrt give us a good product yet it iras ourfeeble atten,pt to have sor,e affordable housing in there but rrer re not doingit. Itrs sort of an artificial. It seerT,s like werre ending up with a bad zone based on- Conrad: Yeah. wllderEuth: Or itrs uaeless. Conraal: Yeah. tlilderF"uth: BaEed on a lot of the projects that have gone in. Ahrens: But the zoning doesnrt sound like the problervr. It.s juBt thegualit:, of the Project that rent ln. Krauss: Therers aor.e truth to that. Pl ann i ng Febr uar y Corm,ission Meeting7, l-99g - Page 34 wilderr,uth: Yeah, but the price of the land is the saF,e. Krauss: The developer that we had built, he took that district and he r,axed it out. The Product that :'ou saw is what happens when a developer does tbat. Now it could be any developer doing that in any district. Sooner or later a developer I s going to tr:' it anlrwhere. As I saidearlier, I canrt guarantee that !,ourre going to get better guality in anR-I5 district. I know that it's golng to cost the developer trrore to buildin that district on a per unit basis than it does in that R-12 district because Cenvescors whole prer,ise of single car garage on slab doesntt flltin the R-16 district. The open space guestions are valid. Itni verycor,fortable with 50t of the slte is a huge arrount of land but one thingthat we have done with the Corr,prehensive Plan is yes. Higher density sites-are t!'pically located near soFre of our parks. That rras one of theintentional off shoots of that the plan did. Therers a nunrber of higberdensity sites around the park just, on the Eck site and then werre proposing it erest of that propert]'. That was intentional. ETdr'ings: In addition I suppose that if soFreoners cor.,ing in with sorvrething in the R-I6, Park and Rec looks at the plan and salrs lrourre putting a lotof people on this land. We're going to require a 5 acre park, or a 3 acrepark or whatever. Now :rou take that park away and then 1'ourve got a 50trequirenient. So if Park and Rec is doing their job on r.,aking sure thattherers sorr,ething on site for people and recreation, it's sti),l only 50tthat the!' can cover not counting the park. So F,a]rbe thatrs protection there. Conrad: Might be. If we put R-16 in, Dean Johnson could put his project in exactLy the walz he presented it? Krauss: Yeah, it wouldn't change. WeII. Conrad: So t erd have the sar,e, we'd have his configuration Noir he wouldnrt need, but now hers got driveways. He's got surface ratio taken care of. on that site.the ir,per v i ous Krauss: No, no. Dean Johnson could not put that project in an R-16district. He can't even put it in the R-I2 ilistrict anytr'ore. Erfi,ings: He canrt have, the R-16 isn't going to allow buildings on slab? Krauss: Hers required to have L L/2 garage statls per. Err,rr,ings: It isn't going to allow these single car garages? The parking'sgot to be underneath? Krauss: Well yeah. have changed ln that Letrs talk about the R-12 district. distrlct f r orr, the date :rou revlewed A Iot of thingsthat pr oj ect . Conrad: Yourre really flying through a lot of these things. I.r, stiIltrying to catch up to rrtla t Steve said. What would keep hirtr from... Krauss: Frorr, building in the R-12? Conrad: FroF, that district. what hers got or he proposed Erur,l ng s : conrad: Why wou),d he not be ablein his current site if we to bui ld zoned it exac t1!' R-I6? First hers got to get it rezoned to R-16. that. Er,n,lngs: Then second, now he's got to put the garages underneath.canrt build on a slab ingTrore. Hets got to build over a garage. WilderFuth! He's got to have a superstructure then. Oka:t, but letrs sa:, hre go along irith So the R-16 in all. cases, yourve got towerre assur,ing it an apartFrent building? have a garage tucked under He Conrad: beca use Krauss: Letr s focus forhers been operating in.proposing before. a second on the R-12 district because thatrs erhat He can't bring :rou the product that he was Olsen: He doesn't rrreet the new parking. Krauss: It needs I l/2 enclosed sta1ls per dwelling.to be contained off street. His drive aisles have tofire departr,ent turn arounds. He has to have visitora quarter stalls per unit. His drive aisLes canrt be now. Now that AII his parking hasbe wider. He needsparking at a rate ofas long as the]r are. werve gone fropr 35 toConrad: But werve probably got space 55. Krauss: Tha t district hasni t changed. The Itve rezoned it because thatrs I think nhat he $ants to do lsOlsen: wel l would be... Conrad: Reall:, the garre Irn, playing is, Irm trying to figure out thequalitlz of developn,ent that ire get Eor,eplace. If we sirr'ply rezone what we have there to the 15, we're still stuck with the sar'.e qualitlz ancl that says Irr.r not sure f like the R-15 if thatrs the case and thatrs not contrarlr tol,lr. Johnson at all. Itrr just trlring to understandl what we get at an R-15. Er,r..ings: I don I t I see read the orclinance looking for the garage underneath and Conrad: But Krauss: The Er,r'ings:here in R-12. the logical thing to do. build in the R-12. The R-16 j ustit. I the garage underneath? It' s parklng. saw it discusaed ln the cit!, Council inutes but I donrt see it ordinance i tsel. f . in the parking ordinance.Olsen: Itr s Planning Coro,ission Meeting February 'l , ]-99g - Page 35 Planning Febr uar:/ Corut ission Meeting 7, !999 - Page 36 Krausss There was another part of this. EF'n'ings: See because it allows garages as an accessorlt use which I guess. Krau6s: There! s an issue here. The rra:, the parking ordinance was atructured was that if lrour bullding included 20 units or less, :,ou corrld have free standing attached, free standing outside garages. Err,rr,ings: Yeah, and? What gets us to a garage underneath the building? Krauss: More than 2g units. Err'Frings: Oka1t, and that I s in the. . . Frauss: well, therers an accorrrpanf ing ordinance that for lioFr€ r€asoh didnrt get printed with this one that just changed that one, weII it just provided an R-16 standard. Err,r.ings: And rrhat did tt sa!, roughl!,? Krauss: It said :routll have I enclosed in a garage. One outside and L/4 visltor. Krauss: It would. Olsen: And requi reless than 20 uni ts.therr. to only have underground. Say even if !7ou have Er,n lngs: Oh I see . If Krauss: The eray to get that any building bui lt Conraal i So what are bui 1d ings? lrou I re in R-15 and lrou're to that is to tell us to in the R- 16 d i str ict rr,ust than 20 units. the ordinance so trnderground parking. - for apartFrent Iess write ha ve rre constructing? Is this a zone Krauss: Yes. For condo buildings. ar.It ings: And when it says I enclosed in a garage, does that garage have to- be under the building or can it be? Krauss: weII the ordinance that was approved, the parking ord j.nance that iras approved said if 1,ou have r.rore tha^ 2g units ln a building it had to be underground. If lrou lrant to nake sure and your question is a valiil one. could Dean Johnson do this in an R-I6 district. I think theoretically he could unless we changed that to sa:' that an], builiting in an R-16 ilistrict r.ust have underground parking. Er,r,ings: Why wouldn't anlt building in an R-15 zone have to conrply with R-16 stanila rd s? Conrad: werre rr,aking up the standards, whatever thelr are. Planning Eebr ua r y Corr,r",i ssion f,teeting 7, L99q - Page 37 Er.fi,ings: . . . zoned for underground garages. For underground parking. I tn curious about sor,ething e1se. I donrt know if I rr, stepping on the wrongsubject here but it says rt inin,ur.., Iot depth ls 155 feet and with 50 foot setbacks, front and rear. I donrt understand that. Krauss: VIeII your rr,l n i r,rur. lot rridth In an RSB district is 99 feet and ifyou r',ultiple lrour width b1t !'our depth lrou don I t c orre up with LS rggL. Errdr,ings: Thatrs okay. The rrr i n irt,urt depth, I don't even kno9, a nunber dorf,n there because you couldntt build, your building :/ourd have 5 feet of buildable space that seerrs kinil of, 1'ou' ha I lway . irhy :rourd want worrld have rre building a Krauss: Yeah. carried forwardprobably isn I t. ErrrTrings. buildin9. Conr ad : long as Err,r,ings: Krauss: Er,r,ings: Krauss: Err'r'rings: Thatrs another carr:, over. Oh. Yeah. I would cross out Just sa], townhouse or... No. Just rrr i n irrurtr lot area is oh. oh aure. A11 the the districts have a standard for rt inlrr,ur', lot depth. R-12 standard. Is it a relevant standard? No, it I Hinirnurr, lot depth has to be LOi feet plus the depth of theIt doesnrt sa1, an:tthing rea1ly. I have no problerr irith this ordinance if we want to put it in astherers underground parking. If thatis what rre want for a zone. Ahrens: Hoi, do you have underground parking under a townhouse? Krauss: Yourre not and thatts not supposed to be in this district. Ahrens: On the second Page of the ordinance it says the following r,i n irr,urr, requiren,ents shall be observed in an R-I6 district subject to the... Nur,ber one, nrinirkur, lot area for a tounhouse or rr,ul t i - far.,i lyr. everything up to the. 2,790 sqtare feet per dwelling unit. Conrad: tJt:, onl:t other cor'r,ent on Page 1 that is accessory uses in nur,ber 5 aa:rs home occupations in an apartr,ent buildlngs so what are we talking about ? Krauss: The accountant pho brlngs books home. I mean lt's nominal . Olsen: We have a llEt of horqe occupations. Er'rr'ings' You do but it isnrt the accountant who brings books hone. It includes, I could have, as an attorne:, I can have an office in ny hone $here I see clients in a residential district. Planning Febr ua r w Corutission Meeting 7, L99g - Page 38 Ahrens: Whord r,rant that? Et'rlings: Oh God. In fact I knew ana farn,site and he turned the r,achine drove up on his farn site. attorne]t out in shed into a 1aw the countr]t who boughtoffice and people Conrad: Yeah 1 to r.e definition if itrs an hor',e occupation is n,ore intensive but if thatrs,bv attorne], or an accountant, Ent lngs 3 The]t can everl,thing eLse. have a place of business there I guess. and have cLients in and Olsen: I think it specifies that you can't really' be bringing any traffic. that .Conrad: Like 3 or 4 visitors a dayz or soF,ething like Endtings: I read it for rrr!, own situation, just as a Fiatter of curiousity and thought I wouldnrt have any problerr at aII. Olsen: Itrs on page 1238. CIearIy incidental to residential use. No F,ore than 25t of floor area. No garage or accessorlt buildings are used. Itstates professional services such as architect, engineers or attorne]rs, dress r',aking, painting...services. Et'r,ings: You can have one non-resident errplo]ree. olsen: Yeah. You can have one sign too. Ahrens: Is that an exclrrsive Iist? Olsen: It just says the following hor,e occupations not Krauss: Srrch as. Such as architectssin,ilar to that - which presun,ably Perr,i tted . if sorr,ething was Errorings: You have to have adequate off street parking. Olsen: No F,ore than 3 parking spaces. Yeah, thatis right. Then you getinto parking and itrs already short on parking. Krauss: Irve had a lot of discussions with Planning Corr,r',issions over thattoPic for sorie reason over the :'eara and therers a couple sides to lt oneof which is, whyr should lrou treat these people any differentl:, than ],ou do anybody else? The obvious reason is you're living in a r.,ore intense aleveloPn,ent than anltbodlt eIse. Horrre occupations b:, nature should beunobtrusive. If !'ou have 2 or 3 cars for a short period of tlr,e or I car,shatever it is, in a parking lot that has 200 cars in lt becarrse there, sIg0 aPartr,ents, ltourre not going to notice the difference. The outside Conrad: ?he!t're ver!t domPatible uses. Ertrr,ings: I thought it was great but no, hor'e occupations is sorr,ething rt,oreintense than that. Planning Eebruar:z Corr,n i ss i on Meet ing 7, L99g - Page 39 er,plo]ree. Sone of this stuff iras adopted fro!, the Minnetonka ordinancebefore I caRe here so I didn't do all these things but the Minnetonka ordinance prohibits the one outside eF'p1o]ree in the n,u1ti-fanily districtso that didnrt get carried over for sor'e reason. It also prohibits thatsignage but ererve aLso found over the !,ears that itrs a self containedsituation. If 1,ou're in an apartlr,ent building, the rr,anagen,ent takes careof, tlrpically, lt takes care of problerr,s. Nobod:rrs going to set up a woodworking shop in their apartrrent and get awa!' vrith it. If itts acondor,iniun, building, the association takes care of it. Ahrens: Plus werre talking about 1 or 2 bedroorr units andbegin with. I rr'ean what could you, yourre lir,ited to whatan area that size. theltr re s',a 11 toyou could do in Conrad: I guess r,y onllz thorrght lras on parklng space. If you did havetraffic and there are s orr,e interior decoraters that have things set up andr,a]'be that doesnrt fit in an apartF,ent. That probably is not practical brrtthere are s oFre uses where you could have 2 ot 3 parking stalls taken at atir,e and hov, that inpacteil parking. But rt,aybe this ls not taking usanyplace. I guess nr]r preference is not even to see it get there but rtaybeitrs okay to sa!' itts perniitted. I didnrt idant to flip hon, occupations tothe non-perr,itted but, an]rbody,s direction on that? Ahrens: I donrt have an1, probler', with it. Conrad: Oka]'. So rrerre probably getting close to cor,fortable on thisthing. What we had done is created an apartF,ent building zone which isbetter than the R-I2. Do we still have probler.rs with the R-12 district?Is that a district l{e should review because it seer.,s like it was ouratteF,Pt at higher densit:' and rr'aybe itrs standards there. Ma:rbe ererre notgetting out of it what we'd llke. I don't know. Anl,bod!' rrant to reviewthat thing in the future? The R-12 district. No takers? Epur,ings: Well we can. r,ight as weII. I think it was interesting to son,ebod!'. Then ne Ahrens: well R-l2 sti IIbuilding r ight? serves a purpose of townhorrses and lower dens i tw Krauss: It does. Ahrens: Because R-16 wonrt address that issue. Wilderrtuth: What neIve gotten to date though has not been ver1, ir."pressive. Ahrens: No but again itis a different t:,I)e of houslng. Err,ings: You know there are issues there. For exarrple, if we had R-I2, if we looked at it and uould thlnk about lt in terr,s of n,a]'be salring they haveto have baseFents. Is that going to klll theni? No, because ire've seen ther, with baseF,ents here. We had one project came in with baser,ents. Theytve got to have r,aybe a certain aF,ount of storage area eitherassociated lrith a garage or not. But there nright be thlngs there that we Pl ann i ng Febr uar y Cono,ission Heet i ng7, L99g - Page 40 coul,d do to reall:t niake R-12 a whole lot r,ore palatable. Conrad: And at the sarre tir,e, Jln probabl:, wonrt j urrrp on this bandwagon. We could increase the lnpervious srrrface to rra:rbe rr,ake it econoF icall:tworthwhile. I donrt know where I'rr, at on that but it seer,s to &e the R-I2construction is not too great. We have a lot of probleF,s with it and r,aybe werre forcing, rna:rbe we're forcing those probler',s and not really heLping brrt I donIt know. Itts probabL], tortherhile to look at. WilderF,uth: I donrt know, in R-12, rrould we the irt per v ious surface? be better off in increasing Krauss: Argueably our ir'pervious surface is difficult ln all those distr icts. Wi lderr,uth :to an R-16. Making it 50t in the R-12 and just leave it alone and not go Krauss: when ]routre looking at districts, I would encourage lrou to not look at these things individualllt but look at the fact that yre have how rtany residential districts. If ]tou lrant to start out with rural residential, rrerve got rural residential. Single farr,ily, 4, 8, 12 and noi, -16. Itrs like alI these n,otel chains segn'enting the nrarket. Do lrou really need so r\any seEJr'ents? Itrs ni!, belief that werve Probably overdone it a bit. l,ta]rbe an R-Io }rould have taken care of that range. I don't knord what the answer is but it seerts to r,e that wer re reall! cortrpaEtltrentalized thething be1'ond what the market is dolng because they haven't fiLled these niches. lililderr'uth: The thing that bothers me is, I Iook at for exar,ple in Edina. I look at the four plexes. I look at larger, higher densitlz apar trrrent con,plexes. The qua1it1, of construction is just so r,uch better than rrhat we're seeing down here. Errr,ings: Of area do 1'ou Ahrens: wel I State. cOUr Se ltOU i ve got athink so its suppor ts desire aF,ong rrore people to live in that a higher? it has the highest rents too I think of any corr,r',unity in the Err,r,ings' People irant to live there so bad the:rrre willing to pa!, it? Thatr,ust be it. Ahrens: I think itrs the locatlon. CentralIy located. Wilder!,uth: But also Sorre of the lorrest taxes ln the rretro Ahrens: Yeah, but that doesn. t affect renters. you canrt apartFrent there for Iesa. Krauss: Edina also very actively subsidizes housing to get and lower rtrediunr incor,e people in. area . find an r',ed iutt, incor,e PI ann i ng E ebr uarlz Cor',r,i ss i on Meeting 7, L99g - Page 41 Ahrens: WeII in one area. Ahrens: One developnrent. Krauss : $Ie 11 no . Ahrens: There are soFie buildings on the other side of France Avenueare all clustered together that are subsidized. Then therers the new Edenborough thatrs subsidized but onl}, solrre of those are srrbsldized. Krauss: Then there's Centennial Lakes as well. that Ahrens: Yeah, but I r,ean if yorr look at the kindin there, thelrrre subsidized for yrrppl65 a lot ofUnfortunately thatrs whatrs happened with sor',e of Edenborough is a lot like that. ac tua I !,are. Krauss: Un f or trrna tle!' we f or lncon,e srrbsidies. live in a world these da:/s where yuppies qualify EI',F,ings: You knold this list of cor,n,unities and their n,axir,un, hard srtrfacecoverage. That rras jrrst surprising to nie because how were they dealinglrith these? I donrt understand how theyrre dealing with this iss,re. Webring it up again and again. I know it alwalrs coFres up in the businesspark and it always coF,es up strongl], in the R-12 and youive got a lrhole brrnch of con,rtunitles with no standard at all anil thelrrre getting along f ine. Horr, are they handling it? Krauss : SoFre coFrF,unities get plo jects lrou probably worrldn' t rrant out ofthat too. En,It,ings: Brrt does that Frean that ground rrith hard surface...they sinrpllz let ther, cover as r,uch of the of people who aretheF,. I rr,ean theythe ther'. I Fean Kranss: Well realistically no because the:, have greater: setbackrequireltients than we fotrr,erly had around here. The:, also protect their t etlands as well, and the!, ray have. $lhen I iras city pLanner of Oakdaleirrote an ordinance that said you had rrulti-farril!, dweLLings, lrou had to have a percentage. You had a publlc park dedication responsibilit!' butalso had a private recreational responsibility that was going to equalof the vacant area so ]rou had to activel], develoP it for recreational purPoses. we you r0t En,nings: And in the paragraph ahead of that :rou sa!', in reviewing the standards it ttust be recognlzed that according to current ordinances, 1otcoverage reqrrirerrents is calculated on the Iand left after designatedwetlands and park dedications are excluded fror, the total site. I thoughtit was based on net densit:, which also took out roads. That I s trlre . to bel ieve. Krauss:led you Public roads would be taken out. Itrs worse than I Krauss: Yes. Pl ann i ng February Cor,rt ission Heeting 7, L99U - Page 42 conrad: Do r.re have donr t think we just a zone that we can created a ffordable create affordable hous ing . housing in? I Krauss: expensive Conrad: Zoning does not housing. create affordable housing. rt can create It can contr ibute . Conraal: Howrd that happen? Didn't we just, that hasn't been that long ago that ere looked at the PUD. Er'rl,ings 3 I think :rourre being a little qrrip aren,t you because I donrt thlnk thatts what it does. Krauss! Not if you would talk to some of the cortr',ercial developers. looking atolsen: It's real strict for single farr,ily. when ltourrerrrultiple f ar',ily and corrltrercial, we have nothing. . . Ero,ings: Oh, okalt. Eno,ings: It I s their idea. Krauss: But I think ]rou have an easier, zoning has an easier tirte working -in the opposite direction. There tJere a lot of Froverients were fought in the 60rs and 70rs against exclusionary zoning. The Metro Council for r.,any lrears was on Eden Prairiers back because Eden Prairie required 3 car garages. That's exclusionary. Who can afford a 3 car garage? Now everybodl' has a 3 car garage. well not everybodlt. A lot of People do and standards have changed but there are court cases and IrII defer to the attorne],s in this because nry Planning law was, I hated that class but ]rorr know Barrington, IIlinois was sued over having exclusionary zoning which the:, got at by having verl, exPensive building requirenents. Yorr just couldn't F,eet it unless you threw a lot of lt,onel, into it. we would never encourage lrou to go that route. On the other hand, there are standards beyond what ]rou wouldnr t want to drop and possibly teceive Projects that have pushed that I ir.,it. i{lilderr,uth: PUD's and higher density Projects... Krauss: our PUD ordinance, these things unravel. our PUD ordinance is another r,atter that rde'd probabll' tike to talk to :rou abotrt at sorre Pointin the future. our PUD ordinance just says yourve got a PUD and it doesnrt sa:, rdhat :rou do lrith it after that and that everything is thrown out the window. werre a little concerned about that. Conrad: Okal', rtoving right along. These are fun issues becarrse se cteate zones and we create standards and we donrt really know what those standards-did to the zone. Do we want to rnove R-16 along or do yre want to send, table it and have PauI and Jo Ann kind of look at the R-12 ln conjunctiont,ith it? And send it as a little package to the City Council. ThelrrIl Probabl!, be verl, supPortive of the R-16 but is there any. Wilderrruth: Why are rre doing this R-I6? Wh]' are we looking at it? If lroudon't tend to influence qualit:, construction or create or influenceaffordabilitlr, wh:t are ere even looking at it? Krauss! vlhat werve got right now ls a situation that artificiallyprecludes a t]rpe of housing. Whether or not that housing is built in anaffordable range or not, lrou canrt build it here now. What the Cit],Corrncil was saying is, letrs at least give the opportunit:r for it and thenwe rranted to get soryre reasonably, something developed to a reasonablestandard. CounciLn,an Bo]rt even indicated sorr,e recepitivity to the ideathat if you built in this densit:, and brought us a project which the Cit!,rranted and found eneouraging, found acceptable, and it was built in a taiincrerrent district, that lre shonld look at partially subsidizing that toget the kind of housing that vre uanted in the price range that rde wanted. Wildernruth: Werve got these F,ulti-fan,ily projects donit pa:r their orrn eraltfror'" a tax standpoint an1'wa1' and then *";.i g6ir,g to suUsiaize ther,? Krarlss: No, r',ulti-fan'i1!t does. Multi-fan,iI!, generates a treF,endous aF,ountof incon e. Conrad: Is there a preference? Do rre care? propert:, tax on a 2 bedroori rrnit, the 2 bedroonr units inthat I'r, aware of generate $2rggg.gg a year ln propert], taxIrrdicrous since it didn't cost $2gg,ggT.Sg. Itrs taxed ats the rate of a single family house. wilalern,uth: Incotr,e but not tax. Krauss: No tax. A 2 bedrooFr apartrrent. Wilderniuth: Just before lrou carr,e though the City Manager put together astud!, that. Krauss: It should sa:r that because the rrrulti-farrillr houstng...screaF,ing atthe State legislature every year. Conrad: Itrd be interesting. I'd like to check that because what we didsee was single. It ma!, have said single farr.ily. Er'Itrings: That I s rrhat I r er'errber . Conrad: Single family under g7gr00A.AO brut it didnrt, I,rr, not sure. Wilderrruth: It didn't talk about rrultl? Etrrings: I donrt werve got enough experience. tfe donrt have an:, so how do rre know? Wi lderr,uth : Krauss: The Eden Prairie wh i ch seer,s about 3 tiF e Nobodlt does an5.ore. ' Plarfning CoF,t',ission Meeting Februarlt 7, L99g - Page 43 Er,r,ings: $2'8Ag.gg? So :'ou've got 92A9.00 you've got to charge for the aPar tr'ent . Krauss: Just to r,ake. Ertm,ings: You Least S2gg . Ag anlzthi ng eI se cheap. don't even quite r,ake it. So the ownerrs got to chargefor that unit just to get the tax out. Thatrs before heout. So these are not going to be cheap. Those arentt at gets Conrad: ton i 9h t? Okay, any preference for how we rrant to deal with the issue Ert'rtings: I feeL real funnlt about this because in sorre ways I think itIs a good idea to have this available. It seeF,s to be but I donrt reall1, thinkI know what it is. Probably because Irve never ilealt with lt before so IrF,-kind of uncor'fortable nith it at the sar,e tir,e. You said at the beginning could ire see a picture of a project thatts brlilt along these lines. Krauss: we can certainl!, do that. Ht'rr,ings' I think sorrre exarrples sbowing us, showing us soFe exar.,Ples of what it is that we're approving here rrould be a big help to tY,e. Hot hot is- the City Council to get this done? we donrt have anything zoned for it an:rwa:r. ile don't have a zone for it so vrhatrs the difference? There are no plans on the table. Krauss: weII werve got Dean Johnson chor,ping at the bit but I ilonr t knoet that... Er,rr,ings: But has he redrawn his plan to f it this? Krauss: Theoreticall!r, the]r have a draft theoreticall:, thet/r re Planning sor,ething. irrelevant. That shouldnr t rrrake you feel coP!, of the ordinance and we havenrt seen it. Thatrs one rray or the other about it. Er',F,ings: I could go either way. In so!.e wa:zs I'd like to look at it agaln and it n,ight be nice to have input from Brian and Annette and Tin, too sinceit's kintl of new thing. Conrads I donrt think lt hurts but as Paul said, itrs another zone. Itrs another district out there. Er,r,ings: But it isn't out there until yre put it orrt there. Conrad: And I donrt know that the old ones are right :ret but I any harr, in rrhat werve got. It does perr,it sorrething so, okay.feeling that we should table it until we see a picture of what do rde not care? What does it look like? donrt see Is it athis is? Or Btrn,ings: I care. Planning Con,r',ission I'leeting February 7, L99g - Page 44 Planning Eebr uar y Con,rt ission Heeting 7, l.99g - Page 45 Wildern,uth: I care but I dontt know that I could look at enorrgh pictrrresto get a good feel for what werre looking at. I donrt Eee rrhere itrs goingto do a lot of good but I guess on the other hand, how nruch harrt is it 9oin9 to do? Conrad: It's going to put a garage underneath the building whlch is not bad . Wilderr',uth: That r,ight be an interesting change. Conrad: It allows a real positive thing in my r,lnd. I just dontt know thatit deserves a special zone to tell you the truth. Itrs zoned to allow a 9ara9e . Wildermuth: I can't recall a good example of a quality R-12 project. l,!a:rbe it would be worthwhile trying this. Conrad: Joan, rrhat do you think? Ahrens: I donrt think I need to see any pictrrres real1:,. I have sorr,e ideairhat a 3 stor!, apartr'ent srith an underground parklng looks like. I thinkthat therers.a danger in looking at pictures too because sorr,etimes you buyoff on the pictrrre of a specific developnrent rather than what it could loaklike. I Frean it could look a lot worse than that. &'rr,ings: So I Rake nrlself clear. I wasnrt thinking about looking atpictures of buirclings. r don't think that will teIl rr.e anything. rrd liketo see a developr,ent that,s done to thls kind of I ntens i t1'- wher6 :'ourve gotrrore than one brrilding. Get a feel for whatr s building and whatr s spaceand rrhatrs around and stuff like that. Ualrbe you shorrld tell rr,e wherethere is one and I can just go look. Ahrens! Do lrou think York P]-aza? Do lrorr know rhere that is? york plaza right by Southdale. Do lrou know nhere that is Paul? Krauss: I think I knot whlch building that is. Ahrens: Thatrs on York. York Avenue. Krauss: Dorrrl b], the senior bulldings. Ahrens: Fairl!' close and therers a lot of buildlngs and itrs right behlndBlrerlyrs. All the buildings, the:'tre rhite and the]r all have undergroundparklng and I think thatis probabLl, real close to what werre talklng about. wilderrr,uth: Ivhere the librarl' is? Ahrens: Yeah, it across f rorr. the library. Krauss: Hot rranlt stor!, buildings? Therer s a couple of while ones that arehigh rises in there. PI ann i ng Febr uar y Coro,ission Heeting7, ]-99g - Page 46 Ahrens: These arenrt bigh rises. These have little balconies. Theyr re F,ade out are of . the n ax irt ur', 3 stor]r. They aI 1 Err.tr.ings: Papierr.,ache. Ahrens: Yeah. No, thelrrre white concrete or you know. Therer s malrbe 7 or 8 buildings in a cluster in there. Krauss: I think you'11 find that that densitf is probabll' higher. want to look at a project that I think is in this density range' IrF, sure it's close, if you're driving by on TH 169 :rou can sort of seeproject called the Park in Eden Prairie. Itrs right, :rou knoi, where Cathedral just went in? Itrs right in there. Conrad: Yeah, If you - Prett!t the the Ahrens: oh, behind that litt1e shopping area in there? Krauss: Yes. Ahrens: Okay. Krauss: In fact I vrorked witb that developer. The:' did another project in Hinnetonka. Er,r,ings ! These gu:/s reall!, get around. I donrt know an1' of these Places. yourre all out in farr, countrlr. I suppose thatrs it. Densities out there are 1 unit PerErr'rrings: Yeah '169 acres. Ero,ings: I'r', kind of bothered byz the 50 foot height. That still nakes me kind of queez:, and I dontt know if it's a problertr. tlildernruth: Thatrs urban sprawl con,ing there. Krauss: I think thatrs a valid consideration. building that I think rould ever be a high riser,ight want to consider is a senior building and buildings being proposed. Frankl:t the onll, t!,pe of out in Chanhassen that you we don't have any senior Errfi, i ng s ' Krauss: Ero,ings' Krauss: Err,rtings: The new apartlrent dorrn there r,as 3. What that 3? 3 rri th underground parking. So thatrs an exar,ple of. how nany floors? Just 2? Ahrens: That worrld be a good exaFrple. PI arm i ng Febr uary Cono,ission Meeting7, 1990 - Page 47 Krauss: Thatrs one of the reasons was supposed to be. whv It looks so big. Itrs higher than it Etr'r,ings: How high is that? Krauss: 4A feet. Hrm,ings' 40 feet? Olsen: ...6 feet higher...Itrs not WiLderrtrrth: Where are our buitding sortrething 1i ke that? at grade. Itrs 6 feet above. inspectors? How do the:r get away with Ertrtings: Ladd did it one night irhen none of the rest of us yere here. Krauss: It's one of those things that r,akes staff look totall1, inept and Ikeep telling lrou that werve changed a lot of things and I hope nobod!'proves us wrong. So ar' I hearing you that we should fix the ordinance soany brrilding thatrs built there n,ust have underground parking and that teshould go r{ith a straight 40 foot building height. Those are the changesthat yourre looking for? Conrad: I think so. Krauss: And change the lot to either elirr,inate the lot depth or coFre upwith a size that's coryrtrr€nsuEa te wlth that tlrpe of building. Eto,ings: I donrt even know ifThatrs going to be governed by you the need to put setbacks. that in there at all- Krauss: And the hard sqrface coverage. Conrad: Yeah I think it.s taken care of. EtF'ings: Signs. Dorrn there nurr,ber 5 on the bottorr, of page 1. It sa]rssigns so thatrs a slgnal to lt,e, a sign to rne that we should go to the signordinance to find out whatrs going to be approved and appropriate in the Krauss: Not itrs not because that building, sorrebod:, solr'ehow pushed it upin the air so the parking lot iE not, itrs sort of at grade. Itrs not asbelow as itis supposed to be. Er'rtings: You F'ean the garage ls rea1ly first floor? Krauss: vlhat they did is the]r pushed the building up to use an old sewerIine that ttrey werenrt supposed to uae. Conrad: whlch one are we talking about? Etn,ings: The ner, one. conrad: Her i tage? Planning February Corat ission Meet i ng 7, L99g - Page 48 R-16 andl there's not gging to be anything in there. So when it says signs, that does it rt ean? Olsen: ...high dens i ty. Errtriings: t{eII re donrt have an R-I5 under signs though. Krauss: Thatrs a good point. I see nhat youtre saying. Well ue could refer it back to the R112. Err,r',lngs. You could if that's appropriate. Krauss: werre talking about rnortrurr€rtt signs, yeah. conradi It probably is. Olsens we just have td add an R-16 in there. Er',r',ings: I see :rou ean have one dock. I think we shoulal requlre that thelr- al.I have one dock. La\e or not. one dock. Itrd be a little hard to ir',agine these on a lakg but... Conraal: Do we need a riotion on this? we Probabl!, do. IEnr,ings' Theyrve recotri&ended that we approve the attached ordinance. Conrad: SoF"ebod:, want to r.,ake that notion nith the changes that we noted? l Er'rt i ngs : So n,oved . Wildermuth: Second. , Etrrlngs rroved, Wilderr"uth seconded that the Planning Corur,ission recorrrrend approval of the Zoning Ordinance AF'endFrent to creat an R-16r high densitltresidential district with the changes aliscussed bl' the Planning Cono,ission.-AII voted in favor and the lrotion carried. Conrad: An!, interest ln reviewing 'have an interest. we're going to we').1 just figure it out. the R-I2 d i str ict?put that down in our I think we should. I- iror k plan and then Er,rr,ings:it on the list. conrad: wha t? when I say review the R-I2 district, it r,eans review it for Put And Er,rr,ings: QuaIitlr. Conrail: Yeah, therers a good tord. Intent. yeah. Is it achieving what ee thought it was really designed to achleve and thatrs probably higherdensity. Hore affordabXe housing. Planning Febr ua r1z Con,r,ission Meeting7, L99g - Page 49 Etr,lngs: But it sounds like too, paul is saying rre're overl:t cor'Par trr'enta I i zed here. Ma:rbe rre also rrant to look at that lnwith the other three zones that wetve got and r,aybe even decideit. Ahrens: else. connectionnot to have I think if you look at R-I2, yorr should look at R-Io and whatever EFrr'ings: tlight as well. Conrail: I donrt rrant to create a gorilla to review here. Krauss: I think what rre could do ls glve ]rou a aur,niary of what ere thinkthese districts are accor,pl ishing. Conrad: Thatrs probably real valid. Like hon nran!, do se have or whatrsgone in and what are ]rou hearing is the need. What are the developerrssa:,ing that rre need. Er'rrrings: And erh:r are the:r all even nurr,bers? That I s what r want to get at.I want sor,ething with odd numbers. Conrad: Letrs rr,ove on quickly and get out of here if we can. zoNrNG oRDTNANCE AMENDT'IENT To rHE BH, HrcHwAY AND BUsrNEss DrSTRrcr ro ALLOW BANK DRIVE-THRU WINDOWS AS A PERMITTED USE. Conrad: Without an!, staf f cotrrFrentg, do ge have any corr,lrents? Htr,ings: In Section 2 in the ordinance I ir, looklng at. Krauss: You know soF,ething, the!, stuck it in there. En,r,ings: Yeah, and that doesn't have. NuF,ber one,with banks and nunrber two, lt doesnrt aay anythingthe building. tha t about has nothing to do being underneath Krauss: I{ell no. Ahrens: This is what iras Frissing last tine. Krauss: Thatrs in the text of the original ordinance. I knen I wrote lt.I rras getting frustrated. The parking ordinance has, this ls only onecorrponent. One line of that parking Iine. The parking ordinance itselfthat hras approved had.. . Etrr,ings: So that Section 2 orrght to be deleted out of here? belong in this one thatts for sure.Krauss: welI it doesn I t Planning Februarlt Cor,r',ission Meeting7, !999 - Page 50 Yeah, on the ongoing list.to cit:, Council? Therers noI rras just curlous. I llke the report on the clt:, Er,rr,ings: So what, Section 3 should be Section 2 and Section 2 should be del e ted ? Krauss: Riqht. Etttings: You gu:ts sat and tried to sandbag us again. Ahrens: Itrs like a picture of the hotel sith a green roof. Wilderr.uth: Donrt rorry about it. The roof isn,t green. In fact, that wasnrt even the hote1. Err,r,ings: And nobod:, noticed. Everybody looks at the building and nobody notices itrs not the buildlng that the!"re proposing. Krauss: I was standing behind Joan and werre going, what is that? That doesnrt look an:rthing like the thing. Et,n,ings r,oved, Wildern,uth seconded that the Planning Corr,r',ission recorrrtrrehd approval. of the Zoning Ordinance Arrrendrrrent to the BH, Highwalt and BusinessDistrict to allow bank drive-thrrr windows as a pern,itted use ar,ended to delete section 2. A11 voted in favor and the r',otion carried. APPROVAL OF HINUTES: Errrings: Can ee pass ttrese with 3 of us? we can canrt we? Wi lderr,uth: Sure. Etrr,ings: On the uinuteb with just 3 of us because he $asn't here? Krauss: I think all yoh need ls a slmple rr,ajoritl'. Er,rr,ings: well you do hhve a Eirqple r.ajoritlr. Eru',ings moved, Ahrens seconded to approve the Minutes of Cor,rr,ission F,eeting dated January L1 ,1990 as presented. except Wilderr'rrth who abstained and the r,otion carried. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE. Conrad: An], questions? theAll Planning voted in favor - F'$'ingsi thing so Honda:t? When da te does tha t on here. recreational beachlot Monda]r? OkaY, thi s Conrad:counc i I . Planning Febr ua ry Corur,ission Meeting 7, L99g - Page 5L Conrad: Yeah, we did it. As and closed list and the staffreview. Then rder ll just take far as Irrrr concerned. We can have an open can have the closed list for their annuala look at the ones that are still open. Er,n,ings: Recycling of oil. Therets a recycling coFrr,ittee, so I donrt knon!rh], thatis on our list. Light rail transit. That r.ight be a planningissue but it's probabllr out of our hands. When it corrr€S w€rll get a trackat it but that isnrt going to be toF,orrow. Itrs an ir,portant i terr, forsure. And son,ething like the n,ax irr.urt chrrrch lot. Thatrs an issue that theCit:, Council has stalred on a litt1e bit. The!'lre still lnterested inlooking at it sort'e r,ore brrt we I re done rdith that rrnless it cortes back to usfror, the city council r think so again, that nright be an i terrr that could bedeleted. oI sen :we do have to review the Oh okay. You will stlll be uorking conditional use perrr,i t conditions for... Errr,ings: someday. the Cit!, Council is asking us or is on it wha tErdr'ings: it? But this lsnrt a list of Krauss: Itrs an aII inclusive listvehicle for you and the City Council should be doing. as on a what we seen it on occaslon but rrhat werd going to get late but that once :routhat werll pass it along to ther, and to hopefully it COFre tO SOFre rould serve concurrence Er'rr'ings' Do the], see thi s? Krauss: Have they seen this? The:7rve like to do, we were hoping. Tonightrs coF,e to SoFr€ altr€€Frent on nhat lrou t ant, and see if the:' rrant to add.sorr,ething. Conrad: Absolutel:r. And thenreport up to therr, to see. even like on a nronthly basis to forward this Errut,lngs' Could we start knocking things off here when theyrre done? Conrad: I think so. Er,r,ings' It's nice to see we did sor.ething but it.s getting kind ofcluttery and like nur.ber 9 there is done so. It says ltis done. I donrtreFreFber it but it say's it|s done. Olsen: olsen: The inactlve ones? Er,rr,lngs: Well, thatrs another question. SoEe of thertr like, for exar,ple.Eurasian Water ltilfoil. What would rre ever do rith that? public Safetyapparentl:, has the issue. I donrt knoU that itta reall], a planning issrre. Conrad: I donrt think itrs planning, no. I agree. Olsen: ...Cit], Counc i I . Er'r'ings: Yeah, I think that's a good idea. Herers what the:rrre doing. Coniad: I couldn't find rr,ine. I went through rear,s of paper anal I had allthelr coro,ents and dog gone it, I lost thertr aLl. What Bo!,t said and rrhat, 1,ou know I had atl their Minutes. !,1:, secretary just is not dolng her job anyryrore. The onI:r thing, I think LetIs go through it hrhen we have fuller coFrrrission B,err,ber participation. I would Iike to elevate that rezoning BFto A-2 or at least a review of that. I guess I'd like staff to present tous. I'd like to revisit the whole issue down there. Just to review rrhat we think is appropriate. If itrs reall!,, and Paul I know your cor'rrrents have been naybe it's not suitable for residential or rrhatever but Ird just like to dialogue about that and get yours and Jo Annrs coF[nents on thatarea. Then coF,e to sorre kintl of agreerrrent as to increasing use . Decreasing use. or at least just plain revisit or refresh the new r,er,bers on shat that zone should be doing. Krauss: would you like it in the context of a position paper kind of? InforF,ational docurr,ent or would vou like it in the forr' of an ordinance change? Ahrens: I'd like to know a Little history. Wilderr,uth: Yeah, a position paper I think would be good. The thing that frn' r"ost interested is how do to arrest irhat's happening down there. Hol{ to arrest the evolutlon I guess. I donrt know if that requires an A-2 classification or not but rr,a!'be sorrething other than BF classification. EII,r',ings: what did :rou say? wilderniuth: How to stop the proliferation of irhatt s happening doern there. I know we canrt halt all activity down there. We canrt halt aII developr'ent because people have a right to do sorr,ething with the property that thel, own and are pal,ing taxes on but it seeFrs like the mess is getting rrorse. It seer,s like it's proliferating. Erlrrings: What garbage trucks right now? ever happened with the propert!, that was going to have the on it? I know that project is dead but irhatrs the status Krauss: That was up in the industrial park wasn't it? Er'r,ings: No. Conrad: No, that was right off of TH 101. The:' had an access right be]'onal -the br idge. Planning Con,rr,i ss i on Meeting Februar:, 7. L99g - Page 52 Olsen: It did fall through and therers nothing happening... Er'tr'lngs: Nothing going on at all now? No one talking to you about it at aIL? Planning Febr uar!t Con,r,ission Meeting 7, l99g - Page 53 Krauss: You should also be anare, in already, but werve got an applicatlonthe BF district - fact the newspaper printed it for a celLrrlar telephone antenna in Er,rrings' Krauss 3 Er,rr.ings: Where? On the Werve propert:, just east of Sorensonrs. alreacl:, approved one antenna west of there. Krauss: Yeah. Therer s a heightened sensitivity to whatr s happening downthere. You hear radio antenna and it shouLd raise, understandably s orr,e redflags. On the other hand, the], can denronstrate that the], can put this inthe A-2 district on a site but that it worrld irrrpact horres located on top ofthe bluff and you alread:' allow it as a conditional rrse in the A-2district. Itrs one of those things thatts corring along at an inopportunetinre but itIs corting along nevertheless. Er,n,ings: How tatl is it? Krauss: Itrs I9g feet froF, the bottoF, to the top. Now, thelrrregive us s orr,e graphics that hopefully der.,onstrate that if yourrethe top of the bluff looking through the trees, it,s going to becrown of the trees because the base is set down. This thing isinto the . . . Olsen: The soils are, that toner will be able way the soils are be locatetl there. there, whether or not even }lnDot . . . about it. rre have? going tostaniling on below the aI ready a joint rteeting i t n'oves voted in favor P.It.. the to itKrauss: Thel, canrt stop but theyrre concerned Conrad: Next r,eeting, vrhat klnd of an agenda do Krauss: Your ve got a ver:, light agenda but lrerve scheduleclwith the City Council on the Con,prehensive plan. Haybe ifexPeditiousl], aIong, it r',ight be an opPortune time. Conrad: Absolutel]t. Maybe thatrs irhat werll do. WertL talk to thetr about an]t priorities that the:, have on our work plan right after t e talk corr,prehensive plan. Rer',ind r,e lf I forget to bring that up in the meeting. Ahrens rr,oved 1 Ertrt lngs secondeil to adjourn the r,eeting. A1I and the r',otion carried. The r'eeting h,as adjourned at 1r:55 Subn itted blr Paul KraussDirector of Planning Prepared b:r Nann OpheiB, A. B. 2 1 3 ONGOING ISSUES COI{PREEENSIVE PLAN ISSI'ES Comprehensive Plan Update Amendments to UUSA Boundary Future Use for Areas Out-side the UUSA Boundary ZONIIiIG CODE AIiBNDUBIIIS Update Zoning lrtap Blending Ordinance Rezoning BF Distict Co A-2 Ongoing fnactive i InactiveStaff e City Attorneydrafting a proposal Inact ive Ongoing l. 2. 3. rl. Sign Ordinance 5. Update Zoning Code 6. Tree Ordinance - Mapping ofsignificant vegetative ireas 7. Rezoning of 2l Acres Lotsto RR District C. OTEER ITETIE! 1 Computerize land use files,pernits, conditions andexpiration dates on a par- ce1 by parcel basis Reappraisal on Wetland issues,ordinance and mapping inconjunction with storn water managenent Ongoi ng CUPra completed Staff processing a positionpaper to review retlandordinance & enforcementBudgeted noney for update2 year tineframe Revier llarch r 1990 Suurer, 1990 Spring, 1990 I{arch, 1990 - CC directed6taff to expedite. 2 3. Definition of atructures 4. Shoreland Ordinance 5. Flood zone Ordinance 6. crad i ng,/Ui neral Extraction REVISED FEBRUARY 15, 1990 STATUS Attoption 9,/90 Adloption 9,/90 19 95 Study Areas I{orking with DNR Forester DNR Inventory due spring, 19 Inact i ve \ CITY OF cH[NH[SSEI{ 690 COULTER DRTVE . P.O. BOX 147 0 991111115SEN, MINNESOTA 5531 7 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 UEMORANDUM TOs Planning Coursrission FROM: Paul Krauss, Director of Planning DAIE: February 15, 199 0 SUBJ: Report from the Planning Dlrector Items cons idered 1990: at the City Council meeting of February 12, 1. The City Council approved the final reading of the ordinanceamending site plan review procedures. The ordinance wi1lbecome effective upon publication. The Council alsodiscussed. the possibility of requiring signs to be posteilwhen significant developments are proposed. The Councilstrongly supported the concept ancl reviewed several urethodsof implementation. The Council tlirected staff to do rrhat wasnecessary to establish a program rhereby signs would berequired. The signs would be owned by Ltre -ity with a rentalfee and damage deposit charged for their use. The City Council approved the final reading of the ordinance amenilment regarding the creation of an interim use permitsection of the ordinance. In the final reading of Lhe ordi-nance, the Council relocated a number of conditional useswhich were temporary in nature under the interim usesubheading. Final plat approval was given for the pleasant Hi11s 2ndAddition. Under this plat, land around the city water torrerwill be sold to an adjoining property owner. The City Council reviewed a request to vacate the BaldurAvenue right-of-way located south of pleasant View Road. Asthe Planning Commission will lecaLl, the status of BalilurAvenue has figured prominently in discussions regarding aproposed subdivision for Robert Sathre. The planning - Commission reviewed this item and reconmended its aplroval in 5 2. ? 4 Final plat approval was given for the Crossroads plaza platat west 79th Street and Market Boulevard. Pl ann i ng Februa ry Page 2 Commission 15, 1990 January. The applicant has since requested that staff with- hold action on the application. Staff recommendetl approvalof the Baldur Avenue right-of-way since there was no public purpose to its continued ownership by the city. The CiEy Council approvetl its vacation. The City Council approved the preliminary and final plat for the subdivision of 3.9 acres at 2150 crestview Lane for ilean ShiveJ.y. The Council supported the Planning Commissionis recommendations !o require dedication of right-of-way suf-ficient for the extension of Crestview Lane to the west butnot including staff's original proposal co extend a right-of- iray connection for future use to the south. As at the Planning Commission meeting, issues regarding the trail con- nection were discussed extensively. The Council determined that no trail dedication or easement would be required. Preliminary plat to subdivide 20.9 acres into tiro lots on Dogwood for Peter Brandt. The Planning Commission hatl recom- mended approval of this plat with staffrs recommendations regarding the provision of right-of-way for a new cul-de-sac foi oogwood and a partial right-of-way for future extension of a street that would serve to loop back to H!ry. 41 or to Tanadoona Drive. The Council agreed with the Planning Commission that a new right-of-way for the cul-de-sac should not include construction up to current city standards at thistime. However, as at the Planning Commission meeting, the issue of a potential extension of a street between Dogwood and Crimson Bay was again discussed. The item was continuedto al1ow this matter to be further researched. 6 7 a The City Council approved the first reading of an ordinanceto modify the recreational beachlot ordinance to clarify lot depth requirements. Commissioner Emmingrs work on Ehis matter was given special conmendation by the Councl1. The City Council approved the first reading of a zoning ordi- nance amendment dealing with standards for the use of Privatedriveways and with lot frontage. This ordinance had been amended based upon the direction of the Planning Commissionto include rural residential subdivisions as rreI1. In adili- tion, changes reconunended by the City Attorney hail beenincorporated. As the Planning Commission may recal1, por- tions of this ordinance were structured so that homes built on neck or ftag lots and are accessed by privatetl driveways would have increasetl setback areas consistent rdith the needto provide buffering from the rear yards of other homes in the vicinity. The City Council supported this direction in the plan and gave it further emphasis by adding a requirementthat these lots maintain a 151000 square foot lot area on the main body of the 1ot. The language will define the main body as that portion of the lot excluding the neck or flag extension to the street. 9. Planning Commission February 15, 1990 Page 3 10.Staff presented a letter from an attorney representing UoonValley Aggregates to the Council. As the Planning Commission may reca11, questions regarding Moon Vall.ey have recentlyfigured prominently at City Council meetings with staff beingdirected to take action to halt newer expansions of the faci-lity and to prepare ordinances that would a11ow the city enhanced regulation over this type of use. The attorney fo! Moon Va1ley Aggregates threatened the city t ith an $800,000lawsuit unless these actions on the part of the city werestopped. The City Council wi.11 need to confer privately withthe City Attorney but indicated that it was their expectationthat staff would proceetl in drafting the ordinance. I CITY OF CH[NH[SSEN 690 COULTER DR|VE. p.O. BOX 147 0 6g1p1163SEN, MTNNESOTA 5s317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 February 15, 1990 Ur. John Sharillow Dahlgren, Shardlon and Uban300 First Avenue North, Suite 210Uinneapolis, uN 55401 Dear John: I have had an oppor 1990, nith the Chai nrad has indi make your pr anning Commi shat we sh regard i n cheduLedis reiteffice on tunity to dis rnan of the P cated that heesentation atsion and City extend an o!ur land use a session which ng the tti scusday evening aComnission meet cuss your letter of February B,lanning Conmission Ladil Conrail.felt it would inappropriate forthe joint rvorksession betweenCouncil. Ee did however, indi-fer for you to make a presen-Lternative land use plan at therill occur in !!arch. fhission I had uith Ed Easek front the. Park and Recreation Ur. Coyou tothe Pl cate ttation l etteryour o next s ould 9yoworkrati Tues in9. In you! letter you indicate a concern tbat you have an oppor-tunity to present yours anat the Highway 5 DEvelopment Coiiition'spoint of view regarding the land uie plan. e,s you are aware, tbeland use plan to date is the proituct of rorksesiions of thePlanning Commission and public-input has neither been activelysought nor received. tie are of course anticipating a ratherextensive public hearing proceea durlag rhich- time-you and yourgroup will have ample opportunity to aake presentations. f'nepresentatioa described above is actually i.n ailvanee of rrhen nostof_the public will have an opportunity Lo comrent. _.-f believethis. fu11y satisifies your.needs andt Lreats you anil your group ina fair manner consistent with lnput that othEr citiz3ns niydesire have into ttre plan. I also indicated to Bd that it-is nydesire to meet with you in advance of your presentation ao thattre may review your materials. :If it le possible to arrange thisneeting prior to the February 2lst joint plannlng Connissionworksession and we believed that inioruration we iainecl was rele-vant to the p1an, se wouldl be happy to carry thii forsard at thistime. .You pointed out in your l-Lier that ;ther people have hadinput into the plan. This is correct, we have urahe iome changes Mr. John Shardlow February 15, 1990 Page 2 to the plan but tforthcoming aboutstudy their propo I look fort ard to Sin v Paul Xrauss, AICP Director of Planni PK:v ndividuals that have spoken to us have beenir proposals and allorred us to verify and. To date you have not done this. rking rith you on the plan in the future. I S I RECE|v:i) FEB 09 l99C UITI OFCI{AN}IASSEIT CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 3OO FIRST AVENUE I{ORTH SUITE 2]O ltln$NEAPOLIS, MN 55J01 511.339.3300 8 February 1990 Paul ts;ause Direclor of Planning City of Chanhassen P.O. Box I47 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 553 t7 Dear Paul: On August 24, 1989 I wrote to formally notif the City of Chanhassen of the creation of the Highway 5 Development Coalition. This group includes seven land owners and a total of 637.1 acres of land along the Highway 5 Corridor througlr the western portion of the City. As I stated in my letter, we worked hard to convince these land owners to agree to join forces, and we looked fonrard to working closely with the City in the comprehensive planning process. Since that time, we have completed considerable research and have conducted a great deal of land planning analysis. You have also notified us of several Planning Commission Workshop Meetings, which wc have attended. To this point our role at these meetings has been limited to listening and monitoring the proceedings and occasionally offering a few comments about the subjects that the Commission and Staff arc disanssing. Quite candidly, I had hoped for a more meaningful involvement in the process, and frankly, i,:;as rtle 1o sonvincc thc.land o.:raers alcag the Corridor to foro the CoaLiticn.hrge!., because I told them that the City would welcome the opportuilty to work with an organized group of land owners. I also told them that I thought that we could be more effeaive as a group. So far I have nothing to illustrate any advantage related to the creation of this Coalition, and the membership has made me very mudr aware of their frustration. At the cnd of the meeting on January 24th, you disctsscd the upcoming Joint Workshop Meeting with the City Council. You told the Commission that we (myself on behalf of the C-oClition) have been very patient to this point in the procesg but that an opportunity should lrc provided in the near future for us to present our position to the City. PauI Kreuse, 8 Febnrary 1!D0 Page 2 I am writing to formally request the opportunity to make a presentation to this Joint Meeting of the Planning Commission and City Council on February 21. I assure you that I will present the information that we have prepared in a concise and succinc't fashion. I will also submit a report to you in advance oflhe presentation. I would appreciate hearing from you at your carliest conveniencc to confirm this opportunity to make a presentation at this meeting. In all honesty, I need to provide the Coalition with some assurance of the opportunity to have some meaningftrl input into this process in order to convince them to support this organization. Sincerely, DAHIGREN, SHARDLOW AND UBAN, INC. z.J4-d- John /grrs Shardlow, Vice President l CITY OF CH[NH[SEE[I 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739. .-. February 8, 1990 llr. Steve f,eefe, Chairmanuetropolitan Council Uears Park Center 230 E. 5th StreetSt. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Chairman Keefe: I an t riting to you in ny capacity as Planning Director for theCity of Chanhassen to reguest an extension of time in respondingto the amenalments to the Metropolitan Systems Plan. This reguestis being sent to you relative to your letter dateal Novenber 13. 1989 to Don Ashnorth, City i{anager. A formal City Council reso-lution requesting the extension accompanies this letter. I feel a bit of background relative to the City of Chanhassenrsrecent planning efforts and the system Etatements themselves maybe of benefit. Chanhassen has been in the process of developingan anendment to it's comprehensive ptan for approximately thLlast year and a half. The anenalments to the plan started as anoutgrowth of the Lake ADn fntercepter lgreement to which both theCity and Metropolitan Council. were parties. Due to staff turnoverand other factors work on the plan amendeent was somerhatprotracteil but has assumed an excelerated pace beginning in thefall of 1989. The plans that have been dleveLopeil to dlate by the Citydraft form only anil are in the proceaa of belng prepaiehearing prior to submittal to Uetropolitan Council. _ Thinvision a very significant expansion of the ilUSA Iine are ind for e planswithin theconmunity. We believe -'that such an expaasion ls both reasonableand essential if the City is to continue to develop since we arerapidly reaching depletion of land that is currently availablefor developurent. We belleve that we can demonstratL that theCity has groern at a much more rapid pace than had been antici-pated by the Council, most recently in the systems statementsthemselves. For exanple, the 1988 Systems Statement lnformationsupplied to the City indicates a year 2,000 popul.ation of lO,OOOpersons. The City currently has a population of over 11,000 andis growing at the late of approximately {00 new single family homes per year. Year 2000 employment was projecteil at 4nunity. A survey undertaken in the fal we have alreaaly exceeded this nunber anwith several major clevelopers that woulgrowth in the very near future. As I iCity is rapidly approaching a total dep vicedl land for development. At the rat suning property our supply of industria longer than the present year, while our lancl equals a two to four year supply dlation projection are util i zed. letion of available ser- es which we have been con-1land will not last much supply of residential epending upon which popu- the cles t 1y wo onal above during the development of our Comprehensive Plan anily intention of continuing to do so. we have deil with Carl ohrn regarding information sinilar to presented abover dating back into Septenbe! of 1989 and meetings with litichael llunson and Ann Hurlburt regardinghave had 500 jobs within 1 of 1989 indica d we are current cl provide adtlitindicatetl to you om- hat rki ng , the tle have attempted to keep uetro Council staff posted on our Progres s have ever corresPon which is the plan. Our current schedule anticipates havingtal to the lletro Council during surnmer opate having continued discussions with y plan as it is developed. plan ready for submit-this year. tle antici-r staff relative to the af ou Thank you for your assistance in this Eatter. Sin yyo UlS r / Paul Krauss, AICP Director of Planning cc: Chanhassen City counc+ Planning Conmissiont,/ Don Ashworth Chairnan Keefe Pebruary 8, 1990 Page 2 PKsns CITY OF CEANHASSEN CARVER AND EENNEPIN COUNTIES, I{INNESOTA DAIE: ilanuary 22 1990 RESOLUTION NO: SECONDED BY: 9 0-11 }IOTION BY:D inler l{orkman A RESOLUTION REOUESTING A TI}IE EXTENSION TO COUPLETE TEE COIIPREEENSIVE PI,EN 22nd day of January ,1990. ATTEST : IIEEREAS, in the sprlng of 1989, the lr{etropolitan Council sub-nitted the ltetropolitan Systen Policy plans to the City of Chanhassen for revieu anal connent, and I|EEREAS, the City of Chanhassen is actlvely lnvolved indeveloping a naJor plan anendnent to the Conprehensive plan; and WEEREAS, City staff has connunicateal regularly withMetropolitan Council staff regarding said plan anendtnent i and I{EEREAS, it is anticipated that the City w111 submit theConprehensive Plan anendment to the Uetropolitan Council duringthe summer of 1990. NOI,{, TEEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of theCity of Chanhassen that a tine extension is hereby requegted tocorrect the Uetropolitan SysteEs plans as it relates to Chanhassen and to amend our Conprehensive plans accordingly. Passed and adoptetl by the Chanhassen City Council thls Don Asht ort ty Uanager 1r-a Dona c , Uayor YES Chmiel Boyt Johnson l{orkman D imler NO None ABSENT None l CITY OF CH[NH[SEEI{ 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 I{EMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss, Director of Planning DATE ! February 9, 1990 SUBJ: Article on Recommendations for Zoning Eearings The zoning News recently publishetl an article on conducting zoning hearings that you may find to be of interest. h zo/nr^I AMERICAiI PL,I]iIN IN(i assoclaTloN H majority of rhe zoning board is rcquirEd to appmve the pctition.' Hc also states that, in such csscs, thc board should make a specific finding wirh rcspccr to the sufficicncy ofthe signaturcs. Smith cautions that 'no siaNte ot ordinanc. makes thc populariry ofa proposed use onc ofthe sandards for dctermining whether [a discrctionary permit] should be granted.' It should also be naed that pctition signarures are often colledcd on the basis of misinformation or inaccurarc ponrayals of the proposcd usc by thc opporcns of an application. Ofcoursc, the dccisions ofplanning commissioncrs can often bc swayed by a room full of irar rrighbors. -ln the abstraci, citiz!tr inpul rnay compromise thc decision-making process,'says R. Michael Chardlcr, I zoning specialist wiG the Virginia Coopcrarivc Extcnsion Scrvice, "but citizrn panicipation is an impona p8rt ofzoning.. Chandlcr says, 'The rcal gut-check tirnc comcs whcn thc opinion of the ovcrwhclming rujority of thc righbors flies in thc facc of thc ordinance. Then the board mcmbcr has to choose between upholding the law or bcing swaycd by public opinion.. To cnsure fairncss , public hearings rooms mu$ also bc able to accommodate all Urc people who anend. Some boards or commissions, whcn factd with a crowd that spills into thc corridors, are resourccfirl enough to call e spccial rcccss and reconvcrr in a larger mceting placc or announcc additional hcarings. Boards and commissions also can placc timc limits on prescntations 8t crowded hcarings, cspccially whcn time limits arc coupled with t}le rcccptancc of lorgcr wrincn tcstimony. Zo,ning boerd ofiiciels musl rEnrcmbcr thet the petitioncr for s conditional usc Fmrit or a zoning variance has thc burdcn of proof in a zoning haring. Thc spplicsnt should be crpecrcd to submil cvidcnce that demonsralcs @mpliancc with ordinance sradards. Applicants shorld bc infornrcd ofthc sandards uscd for thc rcvicw ofthcir applications and thc types of prmfs (e.9., traffrc srudias, environmcntal imFcl assessmenE, or propcrty rppraisals) thsr may hclp thcm succccd. In Eugcnc, Oregon, both thc rpplicants ard thc surrounding property owmrs aIl srnt s lisr ofcritcri.lhat will b. uscd to evsluatc the rpplicsnfs rcqucsr. Public adiccs also inctudc informuion ot how citizcns can rc*i!, thc ordcr in which Orc tcstimony will bc he.rd, and rights ofappc.l. By informing citizcns sbour thc formar rnd subsrrncc of rhc hcaring, rhiJ qpe ofDoticc cncourages a formal and controltcd atmospherc. A zoning berd or planning conrmission cen edop nrlis that rcquirc wibcsscs to tskc sn oath 8rd be subjcd to iucstioning.Althorlgh rnosr local zoning hcarings arc infoErd rtd nontcchnicsl, thc srakes can bc high, and tlrc principlc panics should havc thc right to qucsrion wiutcsscs rrd llbut tcstimony. Oftcn, thcrr is contlicting testimony. In such c.ses, thc planning cunmission or zoning board nrmUcn stroutd bc rrsponsible for soning out thc f8cts and judging rhc quality of thc tcslimony. The board chairpcrson a:rn prcvcnt problems by fccping Recommendations for T,oningHearings Is ir lcgal for the chairman ofa zoning board to ask the eudiencc at a hearing for a show of hands ofthose who favor and ofthose who oppose a controvcrsial prcposal? What should the chairman say if thc spokcsman for the opposition eccuscs the ;rtitioner of past criminal activities but offers no proofofthe accusation? Is ir lcgal for zoning board membcrs to closc a mccting after all the testimony is givcn, leave the hearing room, and consider tlc maner in private before disctssing thcir decision in public? lfyour zoning board has faccd these situations, yor need the hclp of an anorney . They all raise questions of fairncss and duc process. And, in fact, these situations have occurred. Zoning harings operac democratically. Sometimes, this democratic process results in hearings that arc vcry informal. Tlt frcquency oflitigation in zoning mancn rcquircs that Iocal planning boards and zoning boards ofappcals devclop sound rulcs of procedure that help cnsurc fair and objcctive hcarings. Well-organized hearings and procedures will lead to lcgally defensible decisions. Described bclow are recommendations to hclp achieve these cnds. They come from various legal rreatiscs on zoning and from intervicws with the cxecutivc sccretaries ofzoning boards. Thesc guidclines are trot cxhaustivc but arc intended to bc r $arting point for boards to begin devcloping their own rulcs. Felncss in Hearings Hcarings should be used to son out rclevsnt cvidencc , collccl pcninc facts, and hear argumcnb. A fair hcaring requircs adcquatc notice ('rdequate' is typically defincd by $ate or local statue) to the applicant, ncighboring lardowncrs, gcncral public, and other concerned panics. After public nodce, the intcrested partics should be givcn the oppomrnity to bc hcard. Finally, hearings should makc it clcar that dccisions arc bascd upon thc cvidcncc prcscntcd and that the cvidcncc must dcmonstrate clcady whcther thc proposal complics or docs Dd clmply B,ith ordinancc slandards. Acaording ro Robcn M. Anderrcn, ia Anuican law of Tating (firc l:rvycn Cmpcrative Publishing Scnicc, 197), 'unless the hcaring is capable of asscmbling cvidcrcc md tcsring its quality, it is cithcr an empty rioal or a forum for thc rclcssc of ncigibothood 8Dger.' An applicant should not bc dcnied a fair hcrring simply bccausc opponcnts turn out in forcc or bccaurc they have collcctcd signaturcs on a pctition. ln a prcsc ation at thc 1985 Zoning Inslitute, Marlin Smith stated that, in most cascs, pctitions 'accomplish nothing morc than darurstrating that thc applican's request is locally unpopular.- According to Smith, Ftitions arc only worth sorrthing whcn thc zoning enabling act specifies thar, Ifs ccnain pcrcrnagc of the propeny owncrs within 8 spccificd disrrnce of thc propeny involved filc such a pctition, u cxtraordinaDr active board or commission members may say they are against "tm many apartment buildings'or'too much low- income housing.- Ifso, this may be a clear indication of prejudice. A commission or board member may vote on a maner in which he or she has a direct financial interest. A commission or board member may have contact with petitioners or opponents outside ofthe public hearing. The nature and extent of this contact should be disclosed at the hearing. If it becomes known without voluntary disclosure, it may give the appearance of bias. local boards may fail to act consistently in their decision making or fail to tred similar applications in the same marmer. Eugenc McQuillan, inThe law of Muaicipal Corporations (rev. ed., Callaghan and Co., 1987), states that, while zoning boards are nol subject to strict rules of adminisrative procedure, the anitude and conduct ofthe board should be judicial and impartial. If $e applicant proves compliance with ordinance sundards and establishes facts that demonstrate this compliance, a board or commissio[ must grant an application. The final decision must be ressonable, not arbitrary or discriminatory. Hurricane Hugo Incites Stormy Debate For those whos€ homes were reduced to rubble by its high winds and waves, Hurricane Hugo was nothing more than an unmitigated disaster. But some coastal planners, while acknowledging the severity ofthe destruction, view the aftermath of the storm as an opportunity to rethink development along the Souh Carolina coast. Already, an emotionally charged debate has bcgun between property owners and planners over just how much of the state's ravaged coastal development can and should be rebuilt. I.asr year, South Carolina passed the B€achfront Management Aa that r€stricts rcpairs to damagcd buildings and limits new construction along its 180-mile coast. Many environmentali$s have touted the law as a way to prcvent funher damage to the South Carolina shoreline, which has historically experienced some oftbe highest ratcs oferosion along the csstem scaboard. 'However disastrous the hurricane was, it may have had one healfty rcsult,'Gcrcd Lcnnon, a geologist with thc South Carolina Coastal Commission, told the New Yo* Ttmes. 'It hopcfully will rein in some of the unwisc developnrnt we have along the coas.' Many property owners disagrec. The law prohibis rcw constnrction or rcplacernent of destroyed buildings wihin thc no-construction or tead zone' OBt begins 20 feet inland from thc cEst ofthc first sand dunes and runs scaward. Repairs may bc nade to buildings rhat sustain damage amornting to lcss that twothirds ofthcir total value. Restrictcd developmcnl csn l8kc place wirhin the 's€rback zone- that is le.tcd inland from th€ no construction zone. The law does not include provisions for variances or monetary compcnsation for property ov.,ners wbo cannot rebuild, prompting some to prcdia a flurry oflitigation. Some cxpens add thar, because Hugo's swath ofdestruction was so extensive, any requiremant to compensate owners could make c1rbtrol olEr the hearing. Clapping and disruplive outbursts by the audience should not be permitted. The chairperson should remind speaken to limit their remarks to points or issues that have not previously been brought fonh. Many ofthe common problems ofpublic hearings can be solved by the adoption of rules ofprocedure. Too oten, however, these rules only cover the noncontroversial issues- c$ablishing a quorum, the sequence of testimony, and the rccording ofvotes. Many ofthese rules should be wrinen with controversial hearings in mind. They should address issues like time limits on testimony , rules on the reconsideration of spplicstions, and rules about hearsay evidence. Importence of Findings TIE findings of fact should clari! the basis of a zoning decision and demonstrate that zoning offrcials weighed the evidenc€ relative to ordinance standards. The findings should be in writing and should identify the crilica.l testimony, documents, or exhibis that the board used to reach its decision. The most imponant evidence will be that which addresses the issue of compliance or noncompliance with ordinance stardards. The record should make it clear that zoning officials considered the evidence and based their conclusions on whether the applicant proved his or her case. Records of hearings must be kept and must be accurate and rcasonably complete . If a case goes to coun, a judge will be sympathetic to local officials ifthe record makes it clar that the relevant issues were considered and ifthe final decision is supponed by facts discovered in the hearing process. Ifthe planning staffcollects information relevant to a zoning case, it is impona to inroduce and record this evidence. Recommendations from other city depanments (e.9., police depanments or fire depanments) should also be pan ofthe rccord and subjecr to examination by interested panies. Applicants, in panicular, should have the opportunity to respond to any report or assessment that may have an adverse impacl on their applicalion. If the planning commission or zoning board members rcly on their personal knowledge ofthe community, they should discuss this special knowledge and make it pan of the record. lf the personal knowledge or opinions of board members are discussed, i erested parties should be given the opportunity to rcfute this knowledge or these opinions. Patrick Rohan, in Ttning and land-Use Contok (Matthew Bender, Inc., l9E8), states that, the opinions of both lay and expert witnesses are accepxlble al a hearing - - . although cxFn testimony is much preferred.' Often, the anorneys for applicants or opponenb tesdfy in aress in which they have no spccial cxpenise (e.g., traffic generation, parking demand, and public service and utility costs). They should be qoeslioned when they do so. Zoning board or planning commission members should be careful to undersand very clearly the limits ofthe professional expertise ofcach witness. Iinal Dccisions In rendering a final decision, il is imponant for all panies to undersland that the administralive body has made its decision solcly on the evidence. Donald Hagman and Julian Juergensmeyer, in UrDan Planning and land Develqment Coatol law, (2dd., West Publishing Co., 1986), cire four cramples ofbias or prcjudice. These situations should be avoided to ensure fair hearings and legally defensible decisions. Local offrcials may app€at to have alreedy taken a public stance on mning dispures. In local elections, politically