Loading...
03-30-91 Agenda and PacketFile CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEABINGS I 2 3 Conditional Use Pernitfoot sign on property Avenue, Sinclair Oil . for the installation of a 70 zoned BH and located at 79L0 square Dakota Conditional Use Pernit for a restaurant to be located onproperty zoned BN and located at Seven Forty-One CrossingCenter, Sang Cam Ky, Happy Gardens fI. Amendment to Site Plan Approval anending the signage for the Chanhassen Medical Arts Facility located at 470 West TBthStreet. OLD BUSTNESS NEW BUSTNESS APPROVAL OF MTNUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS OPEN DISCUSSION 4 Planned Unit Developnrent Ordinance Anendnents/Discussion of PUDrs and Proposed PUD ordinance by John Shardlow of Dahlgren,Shardlow and Uban and Terry Forbord of Lundgren BrothersConstruction. 5. Discussion itens: Landscaping Issues Paper Pending Wetland Legislation update. ADJOURNMENT a b . AGENDA CHANHASSEN PI,ANNING COM}IIISSION WEDNESDAY, l.{ARcH 20, L99L, 7230 P.}1. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE LCITY OF EHINHISSEN PC DATE: CC DATE: CASE #: By: 3/20/et 4/8/eL 91-2 CI,PAI-Jaff/v STAFF REPORT Fz C)J(LL ls ldl- @ Conditional Use pernit to Install a 70 Square Foot pylonsign PROPOSAL 3 LOCATION : APPLICANT: 7 910 Dakota Avenue Sinclair Oi1 6602 Portland AvenueRichfield, MN PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: DENSITY: BH, Highway Business District Approximately 28, OOO square feet ADfACENT ZONING AND LAND USE:N-s- E-w- Hwy RSF BN' BH, 5 Chanhassen Estates McDonalds Restaurant WATER AND SEWER:Availab1e to the site. PHYSICAL CHARACTER. :The site contai.ns anstation and 3 pyl,ons. Cornmercial existing Sinclair cas 2 O O O I,AND USE PI,AN : \ OI PRotusA I Cai)DfloNrrL L6E P*)L ll S SHA DOtf Y ERE LIKE 1€ -ac -42 t crl +, rE t- I r R1 OI I 4 ,/. J V lt3 RSF RICE I L'KE SUS'TU RD a lari !. "@lZ )-R H =, 7 Ei ( ( f ,tft , I I I ,l DD \ 2 / ,2 Section 20-1303 - High\rray and ceneral Business Districts. The signordinance permits orie plton business sign greater than 64 squarefeet no larger than 80 square feet after securing the conditionaluse permit. Such sign rnust be 1ocated at least 10 feet fron anyproperty line and sha1l not exceed 20 feet in height. BACKGROUND With proposed expansion of Hwy. 5 and the realignment of DakotaAvenue,. portions adjacent to the right-of-way fiorn the Sinclairsite wilL be taken. Existing signs-are loca-ted on that portionthat wiLl be taken by litnDOT and the existing signage has- to beremoved. on February 28, L989, planning Department Staff denied anapplication for two pyi.ons signs. ihe area of each sign wasproposed as 176 square feet. This is the only record the city hasof a sign application for the Sinclair site. At the present t.irne,there are three pylon signs on the site lrhich have a iotal area of1,12 square feet (Attachnent #1). Sinclair Oi1 CUP March 20, 19 91 Page 2 APPLI CABLE REGULATI ONS ANALYS I S 1. will not be detrinental to orsafety, confort, convenj.ence neighborhood or the city. The applicant is proposing to renove three pylon signs that have atotar area of 1r.2 square feet and install a -ign wittr a totar areaof 72 square feet and 20 feet in height (attachrnent #2). The Signordinance perrnits such signs after securing a conditional usepermit . Section- 20-232, ceneral Issuance Standards. The planning cornmission shal1 reconnend a conditional use permit and the councilshall issue such conditionar use pernit onry if it finds that suchuse at the proposed location: endanger the pub).icor general r{eIf are health,of the 2 * Th9 new sign will not be detrinrentaL to or endanger thepublic heal.th, safety, comfort, convenience or leneralwelfare of the neighborhood or the city. Will be consistent with the objectives of the citytscomprehensive plan and this chapter. * Tle proposed sign will be consistent hrith the objectives' of the cityrs cornprehensive plan and this chapt6r. Sinclair oi1 cUP March 20, 1991 Page 3 3 will be designed, constructed,. operated and naintained so tobe conpatible in appearance with the existing or intendedcharacter of the general vicinity and will not change theessential character of that area. The proposed sign $riIl. be designed, constructed, operated and naintained so to be conpatible in appearance with theexisting or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. Also, the proposed sign will be a nonconforrning situationinto conformance with the ordinance as the 3 pylon signswill be renoved and substituted with one pylon sign. will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. The proposed sign will not be hazardous or disturbing toexisting or planned neighboring uses as the proposed signwill be facing Hwy. 5 and will not be seen by residents of chanhassen Estates. wil-I be served adequately by essential public facilities andservj.ces, including streets, police. and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, $/ater and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishrnent of the proposed use. N,/A. Will not create excessj,ve requirenents for public facilities and services and r,ri11 not be detrirnental to the econornicwelfare of the cornnunity. * The proposed sign will not create excessive requirementsfor public facilities and services and wil,l not bedetrimental to the economic welfare of the connunity. Will not J.nvolve uses, activities, processes, naterials, eguiprnent and conditions of operation that will be detrinentalto any persons, property or the general r^relfare because ofexcessive production of traffic, noise, snoke, funes, g1are,odors, rodents, or trash. * The proposed sign will actually irnprove the existingsituation by elininating 3 illurninated pylons andsubstituting then with one illurninated pylon sign which subsequently will reduce the arnount of glare or lightthat is produced fron those signs. 4 5 6 7 Sinclair oil cuP March 20, 1991 Page 4 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do notcreate traffic congestion or interfere with traffic orsurrounding public thoroughfares. * The proposed sign will have vehicular approaches to theproperty thich do not create traffic congestion orinterfere with traffic or surroundin-g publicthoroughfares . 9. I{i11 not result in the destruction, loss or danage of solaraccess, natural, scenic or historic features of najorsignificance. * The proposed sign will not result in the destruction,loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic orhistoric features of najor significance. 10. Will be aesthetically cornpatible with the area. * The proposed sign will be aesthetically cornpatibte withthe area. 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. * The proposed sign uill not depreciate surroundingproperty values. 1-2. Will neet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided inthis article. The proposed sign willcertain uses as provided neet standards prescribed forin this article. the Planning conrnission adopt the The proposed sign rneets all the requirenents of the conditional useperrnit issuance standards. RECOMMENDATI ON Staff is recornmending thatfollowing motion: rrThe Pl.anning ComrnissionPermit Request #91-2 forfollowing conditions: recommends approval of Conditionatone 70 square foot pylon sign with Use the t 2 The sign may not exceed. 20 feet.in height. sign uray not exceed 72 square feet.The area of the 3 Sinclair Oil CUP March 20, 19 91 Page 5 The sign shall naintain a rninimum setback of 10 feet fron a1Iproperty 1ines. 4. The applicant must submit an appl,ication for a sign permit.t' ATTACHMEN?S Existing signs. Proposed s ign. Location of signs. 1 2 3 ?vi:liniAD sg L>li-"-r:J q)t?.rl .t^ 't \ Zxi sf i ,ta. Price:,a*-\ L\ sz Ft F= - !:sE= tl * + F I 9 rl I t6 i2a tagtir_tr'--- -r\l^....r.-- f36"t 16n afle1V 2nsrrlJ II It I I ,< I roSX.[b ,:_ i--. rr --',.,-. -, 9 -..f r (S'=i-,*\-a ];1 - r'; I I I I I I l L t )k.\l(>\ ,7 ' l:.eu i Gt.E qN,W,ll'lu 'lt'L,-.1(ti -i,{J::. 2; i:r.1.r 1. '.-c:/./-L.l 1ij::.1:, tr,.ci.:GP,,:)l l.l r) .....// 1i..rr.: I j-C i}1fr.r cr.liillLia Lrf.,i; ?trce5 Tr2t\tce taceD \tr\$^lNATe D 3\6i j t./u r rc e' I u- t , ^d L t,'rr' L __l L_L L \- .- 6' sr(;ir clqf,l-. 5iji.l).- $nCliir'I I l.l Gc.*a- s o fla PROPERTY OF t-iic4) F,.;Le' t,'ir"r.l-t€xd.t liior.l e r.ts.:e,r*u )L(,C.{) cot,{)u5 -- .t. t. - :. I0 I It I I 'i. ,..,- NL R U D .. .1 -_."ri, .j1., : .'. " '. ' ..: -. i. :'i ' " t) \\ $ I I I b I I I r( It -// IO.CURB T( BOTH' B6t8 C 8( \ I Exi*in 3Fr ice€ig)_- B6t8 C8G lo'R.\ lo'R ISTI IlG 8+2O SB. DRIVEWA c. to6t 7+8C NB REE 8 6'cofrcRE-l :7+33 SB.q DR|VEWAY PC. toTt 6+8r 6+57 t_€6t8 ( 6. b iD I t -f ;.1zxdID t ,' lO'R ===:_-::=::=l ==.::::__:::: LAKE DRIVE =r::: : =. : .:: : :__ __ __ __:,::: __:::' ::::::__: 6 +OO BEGI NSBR , , I a PROFIL E LINE a OO BEGIN NIPROFILE LII IItflIlt I I nS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CITY OF EHINHASSEI'I PC DATE: CC DATE: CASE #: By: 3/20/et 4/8/97 91-1 CUP Olsen/v Fz () =LL ls ldFa Seven Forty One Crossing Shopping center PROPOSAL: IOCATION: 2,805 Square FootConditional Use Permit for a Restaurant - Happy Gardens II Richard Heise Seven-Forty One Partnership 123 No. 3rd St., suite 808 Minneapolis, MN 554 01 Sang Cam Ky 15543 Sunset Drive Minnetonka, MN 55343 CIen Springer Weis Asset l,lgmt. 3601 Minnesota Drive, # 110 Minneapolis, UN 55435 PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: DENSITY: BN Neighborhood Business District AD]ACENT ZONING AND I,AND USE :N - BN, superAmericas - RsF, single fanj.ly E - RSF, single fanily W - RSF, single fanily WATER AND SEWER:Available to the site. PHYSICAL CHARACTER. :The site is currently developed as a shopping center lrith a SuperAmerica Stationlocated directly to the north of the shopping center. 2OOO I,AND USE PI,AN: l STAFF REPORT APPLICANT: Commercial #JlI -ond A tos tu t rl o n rl'FIIf,l .ri Ir HU 7 $ Cu,oaqs*ffi ?vg -hiloJrlzaeg ro J I ilrr T II 1r - stlf ffimn I - Iil.-,. I I ! o :l Aluo uu a ( 6 @' a l OU I XY,. N 3' oo Nooo N(, 8 N ^8 ,,(, 8 i\e,0 5o NF' '$oo8 o 3 t,oo ; Happy Gardens II Restaurant CUP Ilarch 20, 1991 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SIJ}.{MARY The applicant is proposing to develop a 2,805 square footrestaurant in the Seven Forty-One Crossing Shopping Center. ?herestaurant is proposed to be located in the nost easterly portionof the shopping center, where it is furthest removed fron the neighboring residential areas. The restaurant is called Happy Gardens II and is a chinese restaurant. The restaurant would have a capacity of 50 persons. Hours of operation will be 11:00 a.n. -9:00 p.n., l{onday through Thursday, 11:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday, and 12:00 p.n. - 9:00 p.m. on Sunday. Access to therestaurant will be through the r0ost easterly access entrance to the shopping center. The applicants are naking a separate request fora liquor license. The liquor license application will be considered by the City Council independently of Planning Conmissionaction. No Planning Conmission review or recoDmendation of theliquor is required and there are no specific zoning ordinance standards related to the license, except for increased parking standards . The subject location within the shopping center was previously approved for the 5,800 square foot PJis Restaurant. During reviewof PJrs Restaurant, parking was the rnaj or concern. This was due tothe fact that PJrs was over twice the size of the current proposal and also included a bar area. The current proposaL requires a much smaller nutnber of parking spaces. The existing site plan for the shopping center providing adequate parking sta1ls for the inclusionof the proposed restaurant. In addition, the PJrs applicationraised questi.ons regardinq the intensity of use. The PJrs operation would have been considerably larger, have a var area and represented a nuch more intense use than the current proposal . Based upon these findings, staff is recornnending that the conditional use permit be approved with the appropriate conditions. BACKGROUND There has been a lot of history on this site culninating with the rezoning of the property fron oI, office Institutional to BN, Neighborhood Business. originally, the request by the first applicant was to rezone it to comnercial with higher intensity uses than pennitted by the Neighborhood Business District. After a long process, the city did agree to rezone the property to Business Neighborhood District which is intended trto provide linited lowintensity neighborhood retail and service establishnents to Deetdaily needs of residencesrr . on April 25, L988, the city Council approved the first reading for the rezoning of the property at the southlrest corner of Htry. 7 and4L from oI, office Institutional to BN, Neighborhood Business Happy Gardens II Restaurant CUP Ilarch 20, l-991 Page 3 District. on the same date, the Council also approved thesubdivision of the subj ect property into 3 conrnercial lots and siteplan review for a 25,OOO square foot shopping center.An amended site plan was subnitted to the City for City Councilapproval and on July 25, 1988, the City Council approved the finalsite plan for the shopping center. The shopping center currently contains neighborhood services suchas a video store, a Subway Bestaurant and a sma1l Italian Restaurant . Site Conditions the landscaping No additionalthe restaurant Sublray Restaurant 11 stalls 11 stalls 1OO stalls Italian Restaurant 1stall gross The owner of the property has cornpleted alL ofreguirernents as part of the site plan approval.Iandscaping is required or proposed as part ofappl ication Parking provisions tere a najor concern of staff during review ofPJrs Restaurant application. The parking provisions arL no longera concern with the reduced square footage of the propoledrestaurant and removal of the bar area. The site plan currentlyprovides for a total of 2t2 parking stalls. the denalnd for parkin!stalLs is as follows: There are final inprovements on the off-site which need to beconpleted in conjunction with the retail developnent. Theseimprovernents include final wear course on West Gtth Street andboulevard restoration. The ponding area is complete. The 1etterof credit covering these inprovements will be held until theirnprovements are completed. a requirement of the pJrs conditionaLuse permit was that all improvements be conpleted prior to. issuanceof a certificate of occupancy. Staff is proposing to naintain thisreguirement. A certificate of occupancy witt not be issued untilthese improvements are conpleted. A11 other required on-siteirnprovenents have been conpleted. Landscapi.nq and Parkinq Renaining Retail(19,983 sq. ft.per 200 sq. ft.floor area) Ilappy cardens II Restaurant (2805 sq. ft. at 1 stal1per 50 sq. ft. of grossfloor area) TOTAL atof 55 stalls 1?8 ATALLA s iqnage The applicant is proposing two wa11 signs to be located on thenorth and east side of the shopping center. The subj ect parcel ,that the shopping center is located on, only has street frontage onH$ry. 41. The Zoning ordinance allows one rrall sign per streetfrontage per tenant. Therefore, the restaurant would only bepermitted to have one wall sign. Business Neidhborhood District Reoulations Section 20-69! states that the intent of the BN District is toprovide for linited 1ow intensity neighborhood retail and serviceestablishments to Eeet daily needs of residents. pernitted uses inthe BN District include convenience stores without lras pumps, neighborhood oriented retail shops, day care centers, prbteslionaloffices, private clubs and lodges, and shopping centers.Conditional uses in the BN District include convenience ltores withgas pumps, automotive service stations, drive-in banks, bed andbreakfast establishnents and standard restaurants. The ZoningOrdinance defines a standard restaurant as an establishnent whos6principal -business is the sale of food and/or beverages tocustoners in a ready to consume state, and whose principalnethod of operation includes one or both of the follorringcharacteristics : 1 Customers, nornally provided with an individual nenu,served their food and beverages by a restaurant enployeethe same table or counter at which food and beverages consuned. 2. A cafeteria-tlt)e operation where food and beverages generallyare consuned within the restaurant building. The proposed restaurant meets the definition of a standardrestaurant. are at are Specific Conditional Use Permit Standards for Standard Restaurants The one specific standard for a conditional use perrnit for astandard restaurant under Section 20-2A6 requires a standardrestaurant to not be pernitted rrlthin 1OO feet of any residentialparceL. The location of the restaurant in the snopping center is Happy Gardens II Restaurant CUP March 20, 1991 Page 4 In addition, the site plan proposes a 4rOOO square foot officebuilding which reguires 1 stall per 2OO square feet for a total of20 additional parking stalls. Therefore, the total parking demandon the site will be approxinately 198 parklng sta1ls which have been acconnodated rith the provision of 2L2 parking stalls on thesite. Happy Gardens II Restaurant CUP llarch 20, 1991 Page 5 at the most easterly end of the shopping center and all external and internal wal1s of the restaurant are ueII beyond the required 100 foot setback from any residential parcel. The ordinance is notspecific as to uhere the setback 6hou1d be neasured. otherinterpretations could utilize the property line, in rrhich case the setback would not be net, or even the front door. I{e reviewed thenatter with the City Attorney and he found our neasuring of the setback fron the nearest exterior rrall to be reasonable. General Issuance Standards for Conditional Use Perrnits The Zoning ordinance lists 12 general standards that must be netfor a conditional use pernit to be approved. The applicant is inthe process of applying for the liquor license which will be reviewed througtr a public hearing in front of the city council. Since the applicant is pursuing the liquor license, staff will be reviewing the general issuance standards in terns of the standardrestaurant serving liquor in the establ ishment. 1 will not be detrinentaL to or endanger the publicsafety, confort, convenience or general rrelfare neighborhood or the city. hea).th,of the 2 3 *The site is separated fron the neighbortrood uith itts own individual access to and fron Hwy. 7 and 41. There is no access from the site to the adjacent neighborhood. Therefore, people entering and leaving the site will not be directed through the adjacent neighborhood. Accessfron the neighborhoods to the nearby school will be provided through the trail system located south of thesite so again, the conflict of pedestrian traffic and peopJ.e using the restaurant is nininal. WiIl be consistent sith the obj ectives of the city's conprehensive plan and this chapter. * A standard restaurant uith a liquor license at this siteis consistent nlth the comprehensivd plan rrhich designates this area as comercial. WiIl be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so tobe conpatible in appearance wlth the existing or intendedcharacter of the general vicinity and will not change theessential character of that area. *The restaurant wilI be located vithin an existingshopping center and will not change the existing orintended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. The parkinglot configruration will change due to the addition of Happy Gardens II Restaurant CUP March 20, 1991 Page 6 4 parking staLls but all of the iuprovements to the siterrill meet the Zoning Ordinance requirements and providethe landscaping tlr;lically required for any developnent.Therefore, even with changes to the parking Iot, the sitewill essentially naintain the same characteristics. Infact, there will be soroe irnprovenent for the neighborhoodresulting fron the fact that additional screening isbeing requi.red across the currently exposed iearelevation of the structure. wiII not be hazardous or disturbing toneighboring uses. existing or pI anned Agai.n, a restaurant with a liquor license could beperceived to be disturbing to existing and plannedneighboring uses. There is the possibillty of inlreasedtraffic and activity on the site due to the restaurantrslater hours rrhich couLd result in disturbances to theneighboring uses. However, as noted above the potentialfor such disturbances will be rnininized by the iite planand location of the restaurant. will be served adequately by essential pubJ.ic facilities andservices, including streets, po).ice ind fire protection,drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systeursand schoolsr or will be served adequately by such facilitiesand servj.ces provided by the persons or agencies responsiblefor the establishnent of the proposed use. * The site is adequately served by the essential publicfacilities and services. The site was designLd toacconnodate the shopping center. There sill inprovenentsto the parking lot to further acconmodate the restaurantand the need for additional parking. W1II not create excessive requirenents for public facilitiesand services and uiIl not be detrinental to the econonicuelfare of the comunity. * The restaurant will not create excessive reguirements forpublic facilities and eervices and nill not bedetrinental to the economic velfare of the connunity. will not Lnvolve uses, actLvities, processes, naterials,equipnent and conditions of operation that will be detrinentaito any persons, property or the general welfare because ofexcessive production of traffic, noise, snoke, fumes, glare,odors, rodents, or trash. * 7 5. 5. Happy Gardens fI Restaurant gUP Ilarch 20, 1991 Page 7 8 *As previously stated, there is sone potential foradditional traffic and noise inpacts due to the hours ofthe establishnent. As far as the possibility for odors, rodents and trash, staff is requiring that all garbage bestored internally nininizing any irnpact froro excessivetrash as a result of the restaurant. t{ilL have vehicular approaches to the property uhich do notcreate traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. *The site has been designed to accoEmodate the shoppingcenter with separate access fron Hwy. 7 and 41. The restaurant rrill therefore, not create traffic congestionto interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares . Will not result in the destruction, loss or danageaccess, natural , scenic or historic features significance. ofof soLar naj or * The proposed restaurant will not be changing the designof the building, therefore, it will not result in thedestruction, loss or danage of solar access, -natural,, scenic or hi,storic features of major significance. 10. will be aesthetically conpatible with the area. *The existing structure will not be changed and therefore,will be naintained aesthetically coropatible with the area. 11. WilI not depreciate surrounding property vafues. There nay be clains that a standard restaurant with aIiguor license could depreciate surrounding propertyvalues. The only rray to deternine if this is true wouldbe for an appraisal of the property to be conducted andin our experience these studies have been inconclusive. 12.Will neet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided inthis article. The proposed restaurant does neet the one specificstandard for a conditional use pernit for a standardrestaurant in the Neighborhood Business District. * 9. Happy Gardens II Restaurant Ct p March 20, 1991 Page 8 RECOMMENDATION Staff recoEmends the not ion : Planning Coromission adopt the following rrThe Planning coDmission approves Conditlonal Use permit *91-1 forHappy cardens II Restaurant with the following conditions: 1. Atl trash sha1I be stored internally. 2. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, thereshall be conpliance with aII conditions previously attached toother approvals on this site. 3. The restaurant is only permitted one uall sign.I ATTACHMENTS 1. Application.2. Plans. CITY OI SEIIIEIAAE!| 690 GOI'LTBR DRIVE cElxElSSEtt, II 55317(612) 937-190o DEY:EIOPXETIT IEVIA' IPDIJICTTIOXMr. Richard Heise APPLTCANT: ADDRESS: Sang Cam Ky Mlnnetonka, MN 55345 933-4056 TELEPHONE: DlQlrBsS Conditional Use Permit - $150 x Interin use iermit - S15o Iand Use PIan ADendnent - $1oo _ Planned Unit DeveloprDent: - Sketch Plan - SZoo - Preliminary Developnent Plan S3o0 + S15 acre - Final Development Plan - S2oO - Anendnent to Final DevelopDent Plan - S300 + S15 acre llOTAIr PIrD OWNER:Seven Forty One PartnershlP .ER!'A ADDRBSS: tr1 N- rhlrd st.. suite 808 r'{l nneaoolJ s. MN 55401 339-2722 0 subdivislon: Prel iDinary PIat: - Sketch Plan - S2OO - Create less tban 3 lots - $100 - create Dore than 3 lots - $100 + S15 acre + $5 per lotlot created - Final Plat - $100 - Xetes and Bounds - $100 - ConsolLdate Iots - $100 !DO!!IIJ AI'BDTVIAIOTT 0 wetland Alteration Pernit: - Individual Single Fani).yIpts - $25 - All Others - 9150 0 0 0 0 I Site Plan Review - S150 0 AitninistratLve Site PlanReview - S15o 0 vacation of Utility orStreet EaseDent - S100 0 Variance - S75 O Rezoning - S25O lltcaty-alx full eize foldeA copica ol thc pI.D! tuat be suDElttrat. See ExhibLts A and A-l for site Plans r NOTE - l{hen Dultiple applications are procesBed, t}re appropriate fee shallbe charged for each appllcation. 0 Zoning Appeal - S75 0 zoning Ordinance lmendnent -No Charge I l'l3t of all proporty orD.r3 rltblD 500 f..t o! the Douadarl,cs ot tte -propetty rust b. Lacluded ultb tL. appll,ortloa. 15543 Sussex Dr. TELEPHoNE (Day tlne) PROJEC{ NAII{E Ea Gardens II IOCATION Seven Forty one crosslngs center, 2401 Hlghway 7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION See Exhiblt B PRESENT ZONING N ood Buslness PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Retall - Shopplne Center REQUESTED INND USE DESIGNAUON No chanee REASON FOR THIS REQT'EST Condltional Use Peroit for a restaurant vlth rine and beer llcens e aoolled for seoaratelv t4 qt si ture of 1lcant Date This application ,rust be coupleted in fuU and be typerritten or clearlyprinted and nust be accoropanied by all inforration and plans required byapplicable City Ordinance provisions. Before fillng thls application, yourhould confer with the Planning Departnent to detemine the specific ordj.nance and procedural requirenents applicable to your application. This is to certify that I an :laking application for the described action bytbe City and that I am responsible for coDplying with all City requirementsrrith regard to this request. This appllcation should be processed in my Daueand I am the party rrhon the City ahould contact regarding any Datterpertaining to this apptication. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership(either copy of Ow'ner I s Dupllcate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title oipurchase agreenent), or I am the authorized person to rake this application and the fee owner has also aigned thls application. I will keep nyself inforaed of the deadlines for subroission of material andthe progress of this application. I further understand that ailatitional feesnay be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. uith anestinate prior to any authorization to proceed uith the 6tudy. ,l!he docunentsand infotmation I have. subDltted are true and correct to the best of ny knouledge. I also understand that after the approval or grantLng of the perDlt, Euchpernits 6haII be lnvaLid unless they are recorded againat the title to theproperty for which the approval/permlt iE granted vithin 12O daya uith the Carver County Recorder t s Office and the orlglnal docunent returned to CityIlal.l Records. t4 F-u tt S lgmature of Fee Olrrer Date REQUESTED ZONING No chanqe ' Application Received on Fee Paid Recelpt No. This application will be considered by the Planning Coumission/Board of AdjustDents and APpeals orr - v I tlEO IIPDATE 105 2400 sF ^yStot lJ sf. -------{-t ------TT-i---.}tr \t800 sF t02 sullrlAY \ i l0l !10t. r l. i^ PNOIL'CT D.{TA o l-,L oF nEr.{ll. cElrn:n ltrcluco[n'loll o n.A- l?2 r.l. 26,060 t.l. Qoo ,.1. Beven ForLy Blroppl ng '"?" onB Crosslng Cen l-er oo Ifl.o,PI r .\ I.tt th \ l1 { Zaos 5q r'r i 2t,0m r I t \ ttlttt tttltttt lrttr aI t01 1200 SF \ \ \.\ to2 i I i i I I I I I I thlrArJf i{?laFn eccnssonv r.m LIt lrrfAt. o LA" 30.688 I l. I t.rillllo tflll. iEOltlFED IER lo0 t.l. O.l-.,r. I lillifll[filflJi,to ' rlortrrrr h[l8[l,Un&.ffil,liRl3*o ?r rr"tu ------....--..,:.,lfn{!. f.\nXnn nl:'QD lr{ rhllt J/r.. =e{rBr A- / $IOSPU\C CENIEP. Sr!= ?IIN EeveD Sorf .oDB Crossiag Eboppilg Ceuter lfl 1 N 1 \i rl,E!, . .A\ERI3AOL]]'T lil lllll!l I I I { I I - D 1 YXr )Y t\- r ) ACC=SSORY3.=AI! BIDG =J b \, t-\>llt I , I.t l I I Itnn'25 '0'50 f5 N I I I I I I I t!I qHlBITB SHOPPINd CENIER ITGAL DESCRIPTION Afl lhat part of Lot 2, Btock l, sFyEN FoRTy oNE csosstNc wtrich les easrerty andnortherly of the lolloring descriH 'Llne 1' and whlch lles souttussterly of the folioning described 'UnE 2'. :{ry 1' tr descrlbed as beginning at the norttEast comer ol Lot 1, Block.l. SFr'EN FoBTY oNE GBoSSING; thence So,th o degrees 17 mrnutes 22 secords wesl on anassumed bearing, along the sasl lrne of sald Lo( 1 and Its souherly exterBlon, adlstance of 223-35 leet; thencg sorJth E9 degnees 42 mlnlrtss 08 sscords Eas( adlstancs ot 171.00 reet: rhenc€ sorJth ro degro€s (N minuBs 39 s€conds East, edlstance of 200.78 leeti thenca Sotnh 74 dsgro€s 06 mlnutes 34 seconds Easl, adistance ot 56.37 leet to a pornt on rhe east lrne or saH Lot 2, Brock 1 drstant247.69 ,eet sorrh of lhe southgast comer o( Lot 3, Block 1 and sau fins there terminatlng. 'Llne 2' ls described as beginnrng at a pornt on the south fine of Lot 3, Brock r distant 48.00 teet west ol rhe souhsasl comsl: thonca sodheastedy ro a point onthe east line of Lot 2, Block 1 dlstant lel.Et le€t south of th€ sornheast corner of Lot 3, Block 1 and said line there termina$ng. r> -29fllrtr 4 /r ) \ ,c$ \ hst$ Ntrl o O .Hli 6I =r.J (D \trU trr)rq 1.. ;o:rr b' ?,3o*' o trl *ooar, €, C eg'l c- cY tn 4. t4. "6q:- -.4lrrxE4 z>,1g{ oa t- !i? a L.l l !ra -iEe F F O g A q' I ! _o i c EI aure -. OJ iQ EE::+ r!=. d --< -: lit-t'l E IEI ;l.l ctl8l:ll:llg{l Fa cl€"1 ( I It l-. Il.t I I II I I I a or.i O lr'o 6a (, E o\ ( rnf a) I ? I ha)---:3 tg O tll't !a!a l--c<U OFc- o>4. .t = (\. al' Ag =crIA- / SHOPPII\i! trENTER, Sri= PIJIN Eeve! 3orfi' Oue C=ossiag Eboppilg, Cente= ]fl Lru -t.iIJ 1 N o. .A 1 I I I .t I I - oz. r-) Z- PRCP3=) ACC=SSORY R=I4IT-'3]-DG .t I i:\>lil I I I.t l / I , 10n' - :5 '0'50 15 N ll I<-,All I t I Feb.l5,91 16:0d P.u2 t. CIIT OF CHAII NAs SEI{i i ollruflttY DE'JEt0Pr{Exr DEP; 690 CoULTC t {RlvEI Cr{Ar.HASSllr. lfi{ 65a. (6r?) 937-1900j: : Ai"IEIIT tt. J ,) te ,s 2+O/ l?t/./)' ? u/e9- ,rn,rltfi'f/ a;+Qery Z-- Crc! r le'|. lo. ^dd?.$ /o,3 THOrl4/+g 'Ae8T 6{uL r G*g-oz-zz : ?Gmlt fc! _ ?ofilno Dlstrict &s- Cc, tn t. ftolts_ fq . _-' Erlttlns SuDdlvl s tot-!locr- t ctlon xl_ sl_ - SsDt[G 0f SELM.PY a1/48v+ 4t{ //VE ff BE51>tue.yv T-- q^llloi E90TII6 -l coxPtEr rgx I ilS PECT t0I5 il{olt 93r-1900 I r'lcrtlon rnd rtitc trlt th! lnfor tlon 13 r rer t rnd rgrrc to urply rlth thc Chrnhasscn. ordinlncc5 !nr, tl. Strt! of lllnncsota la:r , iulDt{ng bulldlng constrectlon. I ( t, I t' I toreby .ctnori]edge that t ilv€ tlrd tlhls grl.tura of rfilttca gr,rcct l/A/rE?>lLs@aco !auaoh t 2?2 I o ,r Ul 5l lll xEr -.4.lLrERATlol- tlPAIt- lDmol- olfR--, ll : : t l -uountcAS Fr..-St ndtng- 0ttrr. (rrclfyt4 ?crrrrrnt--2S.fGom?v , Irntnrted* ton-tlllntn tcd-sprclflc ua F Eg?7,. ?/q- OryAiNT tftetnet't lr?a of Gofi3trtlctlo.r: ftc.$lrtrrltl trrrd) fru_..Fppn.'ld of Constr0ctlon: I rrT FIEIL,l.Z . 4 frrN /= t lZ . ft!_ *,m .. aPPttcATtofiS Fo8 A 1r1i l0 SCAft Srltllll0i\. I,tD STTIEIUTAL D @turct str?tot lb.: ;.rrltt d- s.thcl: fllnt _' Condltloo l_ i!,1. _- lon-Coato tir l.lr @rot soEt !Iq- ?tFrtT ttET !E ICGoOAIIED !t n ro coptEs of FttLy otr{xsto[ED pt n ^ItrE ProposED tocAlto! 0f rtf Srd{ 0x rrf stia.-aaEiATidri oenmro or rrc tAGr Hs 0F supponTs. im[. rtcE. to irioiiiir uivisa;- -'- & lot lrftt ln Ir?tE T tSSlfD I ]ELrg.IlriAssfll lxD IttE LArs 0t lt{E SllTt aF rr[Fv[^. txtq ,rlxrr rr uitrn t- uror ti vlr arrlF].ar TEL NO. - ?crblt.to, 0.t. ooa ao . 5,q. fErI tLEYATt0ilS mtl .. .-- r_._ '3l5t -,_ r_._ ES' .. lght Ft. UGlghr I E. s' I I lI ilII Nt\ N l\q INN I$lJU -- --+l lr'+t {i *N$ $I$$ t$t*i FC ,1 Ft E z t N Z , { (^ \$r 1\ t o L 0 \n I t 0t N N s rs U N I! Ij EBrEGll6bGD6 E= J-J 7/ ) N >21D aFdt OF 'lOacdt EY niversal Siensluuqrts e Ga.e*a-t*I I j _t l l _l l zairgfR\rcfl oll DgrAIL ,+lczfu t.^cEthz .-sffe c^94> tebB e-F?Ot*le.1.riJA.|.).bbe 60 f a- \.y2 t2- O L o5o $f?aFr1\rtt D.clbt,l1E& rEa oGt?F.-o a,\Fl o @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ;le rr + rr' * @ @ @ @ \G t' f FA4 beT1J I {ruF teFa\r} 1c95., /i6OLP ./+ eL,^e.tt ItlttlV>fntsttbr b4v1 I l I @.wp ,.l4l}r a{Allt.ltt- tlDorl It'.l*NHIAH vflLtott w ?IE^r{rrfi2Er.iE eF-( Fl<,?v Yo d l I l l l ;_l l TrAcAr:l Ur}\l\N TCP c4{AnrNel, t,ie*rrL o.*vota 6u;11ar1A'l---l2e'r:^r L - Na oci,l.E THIS DESIGN SEMAINS THE PFOPEBTY OF I UNIVESSAI SIGN CO. ANO lS TO BE I RETURNED ON DEMAND. NO REPRODUSTION SHALL 8E MADE qCEPT 8V WR|rlEN AGRETMENT. grrrn D,Orta AprroF6 b,Oa!. Orr'llr3 nc c- llt niversal Siens Anchorslgrrlnc v Scala *-l CITY OF EHANHISSEN PC DATE: CC DATE: CASE #: By: 3/20/9t 4/8/et 88-17 Site PIanAI-Jaff/v STAFF REPORT Fz C) =(LL E ldF U) Amendment to the signage as part of the Site plan ReviewApproval for an Identification Sign and a Directory Sign Northhrest Corner of Great pl.ains Boulevard and West 78thStreet Intersection IOCATION: APPLICANT:Bob copeland 7625 liletro BIvd., Suite 165Edina, l'IN 55435 PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND I,AND USE: CBD Central Business District N - PUD, S - CBD' E - CBD, W - CBD, Heritage Park Apartments comnercial commercial conmercial I^/ATER AND SEWER:Available to the site. PHYSTCAL CHARACTER. :The site contains the existing UedicalBuilding and is a fairly level -site.Arts PROPOSAL: 2OOO I,AND USE PLAN:Comrnerc ia1 Medical Arts Site Pfan Signage Amendment March 20, 19 91 Page 2 BACKGROUND/SIJI4MARY on I'Iay 3, lg1g, the city council approved the prelininary plat and site plan review for the Medical Arts building (Attactlnent fL). Included in the site plan review was a final facia, signage and external- tighting based on the plans stanped received April 14, 1989. The sign plan was required since the existing sign. ordinance did not aaequately provide for this building. In addition, the project was developed with HRA assistance and it nay therefore, Lav6 been considered to be reasonable for the city to expect a high standard of design. on May 30, 1990, the City CounciL apProved an amendnent to the signage plan for the Uedical Arts Building to allow a total of 10 wai:. iigns on the building, 5 on the north elevation and 5 to the south elevation. This arnendnent was requested after staff found 2 sets of plans dated April L4, l-989 and April 18, 1989. The 2 sets contained many differences as far as signage plan is concerned (Attachment #2). There are 2 proposed signs currently being reviewed. The first sign is one free standinq identificatj.on sign, with an area of 20 sguare feet to be located at the south$/est corner of the building. tlie sign was proposed to be 3r6tr in height. The applicant is reques{ing ttral tne area be increased to 29 square feet, the e'idth be -increaied from 10 feet to 14r6tr and the nain board to contain 2 sj.gns instead of one. The second sign is a directory sign to be Io6ated on the back side of the building. The free standing directory sign was proposed to be 4r5tr high and 3t6" across. The applicant is requesting the height be increased to 5 feet (Attachment #3). Approxinately 2 months ago, ur. Brad Johnson net lrith staff and d1lcussed the signage plans that were submitted. Mr. Johnson indicated that there had been a discussion between the fonner Planning Director, steve Hanson, and himself regarding the signage. Staff found two sets of ptans in the file. One set was dated April 1,4, 1,989 and one dated April 18, 1989. The onJ-y difference between the two plans is the size of the sign. The April 14th plan indicated a sign size of 1or x 316rr, while the April 18th plan indicated a 2or x 316rr sign. I1r. Johnson believes that the plans that were submitted on April 18, 1989, are the plans that were approved by the council. There is no uention whatsoever, thioughout any of the reports, nor the minutes of CounciL or Planninq Comrnission of the revised signage plans. The last report that diicussed the signage was subnitted lray 3 ' 1989 ' to the city council. one of the reconmendations of approval lras that the city Uedical Arts Site PIan signage Anendment l,larch 20, L991 Page 3 Council approve the revised site plin and final facia signage andexterior lighting based on plans starnped received April 14, 1989. on February 5, 1991, the applicant subnitted a revisedidentification sign. The sign rehained at 3.5 feet in height butthe width of the sign increased to 141 feet fron 10 feet. The second revision is that it is no longer an identification sign forthe building but rather identifies the building on one-half and hastenant signage on the second half of the sign. The directory signmaintained the 3.6 foot sign width but the height of the signincreased from 4.6 feet to 5 feet. Staff originaJ.ly reviewed the signage plan for the ltedical ArtsBuilding, as a package and did not hold the project to a strictinterpretation of the sign ordinance. The ordinance does nota1low Ior,i' profile identification signs in the Central BusinessDistrict. Staff made its recomnendation for the signage plan forthe building by keeping the design of the building in mind and recornmending approval of a signage plan. that would be consistentwith the cj,ty's expectations of its downtown. A buildingtsidentification sign should not contain another tenantrs sign on the same board. ThiJ buitding has nore tiian sufficient wa11- nountedsignage for tenants hlhere this sort of identification function canbe accomrnodated. Another issue which staff took into consideration was that rrhen the City Council approved the wall business signageplan arnendment on May 30, 1990, one of the conditions of approvalwas that tv/o businesses may not share the same band. Staff istreating the identification sign with the same type ofconsideration to give the building signage a unified 1ook. Staff nust also point out that at the June 4, 1990, City Councitmeeting, Councilnan Worknan asked the applicant, rlf you have a dernand for nore than 10 signs, are you going to be putting noresigns up?" The applicant replied, rrNo, werre quite comfortable. wer11 have 5 rnajor tenants.r' (Refer to notation on page 37 of theJune 4, 1990, City Council ninutes.) Staff bel j,eves that theoriginal plans that were submitted on Aprii 14, 1989, and as amended last year, provide an adequate and possibly generous signpackage. We are therefore reluctant to recommend approval offurther increases in signage and are recornnending that the proposed amendments be rejected. The applicant lrould thus be allowed toconstruct the identification sign rninus the tenant board and thedirectory sign, in confornance with previously approved p1ans. Medical Arts site Plan Signage Anendnent March 20, 1991 Page 4 RECOMMENDATTON Staff reconmends that the Pl,anning Connission adopt the followingmotion: rrThe Planning Conmission reconmends denial of the site plan reviewanendnent to amend the signage plan for the t{edical Arts Building.n ATTACH}iIENTS L 2 3 4 5 6 7 Memo from Steve Hanson dated.May 3, 1989.staff report and City Council minutes dated litay 30, 1990.Reduced signage plan dated ApriL 14, 1989. Reduced signage plan dated April 18, 1989.Approved location of signage as part of site plan review.Proposed directory sign. Proposed identification sign.City Council minutes dated June 4, 1990. tr1_CITY OF EHINHISSEN 6e0 couLrER oRrvE. P.o. t?J,;ilr;-,:ritNHASSEN, MTNNESoTA 5s317 Ci.ty uanager Planning Director ItIEI{0RANDUM TO: FROM: DA?E : SUBJ: Don Ashworth, Steve Eanson, May 3, 1989 Preliminary Plat Approval and Site Plan Review of Final Facia, Signage, Exterior Building Lighting and Revised Sidewalk anil Parking Layout Configuration for Chanhassen Professional Buildting The Planning Commission at its April 19, 1989 meeting approvetl the preliminary plat for. the north side parking 1ot subject !o the plans stamped "Received April ltl , 1989'. Regarding the site plan approval, the Planning Commission recotn- nended approval of the revised site plan anal final facia, signage- and exterior lighting based on plans stanped 'Received April 14,. 1989' subject to the following conditions: 1. No business may have nore than one uall sign. 2. No unpainted aluminum shall be allowed on the exterior. 3. Traffic engineering should reviet sideealk location on the east portion of the parking lot for Eafety with the possibi-lity of realigning the siilewalk andl adiling stop signs. 4. Review the r,est entrance of rcces8 to the north parking lot. This Dotion ras approveil on a 4 to 3 vote. The Planning Connission discussion'Dn the site plan centered on three issues. The first of those ras the sidepalk extending from Eeritage Park ApartmentE across'th'i parking lot in the directionof the clock tower. Generallyr,the Coutission felt that attdi-tional signage o! definltion of this pedestrian crosaing through the parking area should be adldedl. Concern is that sna1l children using the crosswalk would not be visible dlue to cars parked on either side of the crosssalk. Ihey requested that this be lookeilat closer by traffic engineering. Therefore, I have contacted BRw ana requesteil that they be in attendlance at the Council neeting on uay 22, L989 to adalress this Partlcular issue. turn into the fir building rather t parking 1ot to 9e r*as arrived at afRiviera. A copy meeting is attach should be noteil t in Phase II anil t parking configura Don Ashrrorth May 3, 1989 Page 2 The second item o adjusted parking ference expressed Attachmen ts f concern deals with the entrance and the configuration by the. Riviera. There rras a pre- for ihe access as it comes in to allow a right st bay of parking along the professional han hiving to go all the way to the back of the t into that paiking. The adjusted configuration ter neeting with the xruegers, orrners of the of a memo frour Fretl Hoisington suumarizing this eal to this memoranilun (Attachment 16). It hat this particular aaljustment to the parking is he approval at this time woulil be for the tion for Phase I. The thiril issue that rvas raised by Commissioner Batzli was the same concern he hail raised when this iten was before the Planning Commission previously. That issue is the neeil for the access west of creit Plains Boulevard on west 78th street. His feelings are that this access should be closed and that allowing it to remain in this vicinity only complicates the traffic flow at the intersection by the clock tower. Reconmendat i on Staff recommends that the City Council aPProve the prelininary plat for the north side parking lot based on Plans stamped "Receiveil April 14, 1989". Further, staff recommenils that the City Council approve the revised site plan and final facia, signage and exterior lighting basecl on plans stampetl 'ReceiveilApril 14, 1989" subject to the conditions of the Planning Commission. I 2 3 4 5 5 April 191 1989 Planning Cornmission ninutes. Preliminary plat for the north side Parking lot. Reviseal parking ).ot layout. FinaI facia and signage plans. April 19, 1989 staff report. uemo fron Fred Eoisington datedl llay 8, 1989. ( TYOF IH[NH[SSEI'l N42PC -ATE: l{ay 5, 1990 _ CC DATE: Uay 30, 1990 CASE #: 90- sign Fz () J(LL ls lrJF CN Northwest Corner of Great Plains and West 78f+. Ftfeet_fntersecti.on I.OCATION 3 APPLICANT: L6r F.:: s:5nij s5317 Z!:.!':- Brad Johnson Lotus Realty Box 730 Chanhassen, l,!N PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: DENSITY: AATACENT ZONTNG AND I,AND USE:N-s-a- If- PUD, CBD, CBD, CBD' Heritagi Apartnents commercial conmercial conmercial WATER AND SEWER: PHYSICAL CHARACTER. : AvailabIe iroperty is level and developed. 2OOO I,AND USE PIAN:colrlrrlercial STAFF REPORT PROPoSAL: 1. sign Proposal for Chanhassen Professional Buitding 2. site PIan Amendment E;.( D2? cBD, Central Business District tledical Arts Center- Sign Request Irray 2, 1990 Page 2 BACKGROUND On Uay 22, 1989, the City Council approved the preliroinary plat andsite plan approval for the' ![edical Arts Building (Attachnent #1).The site plan review uas approved with the revised site plan andfinal facia, signage and external lighting based on plans stanpednReceived ApriL 14, 1989n. One of the conditions of approval vasthat no business Day have nore than one ual.I sign as is regul.ateduith the Sign Ordinance. The approved final facia included fivebacklit sign bands, 3 on the south and 2 on the north side of thebuilding (Attachnent *2). ANELYSIS The applicant is requesting approval to allow tenants in the Chanhassen Professional, Building hore than one vaII sign. The applicants are not requesting any additional sign bands beyond what rras approved with the original plan but are reguesting that 2 of the sign bands be used for 1 occupant. The Uedical Arts Center is occupying the easterly portion of the Chanhassen ProfessionalBuilding. They are requesting a certificate of occupancy onFriday, April 27th, and will be opening for business on llonday,April 30th. The tenants are requesting that they be allowed to usethe sign band on both the south and north side of the building.Technically, the sign ordinance allows an occupant of the buildingonly one rra11 sign per street frontage. The subj ect site has only one street frontage along west 78th Street, but access to thebuilding is prinarily fron the north side where the parking area is Iocated. Staff originally uas requiring the applicant to go througtr avariance to the sign ordinance and an anendment to the site p).anfor the Chanhassen Professional Building. In neeting uith theapplicant, it sas found that the applicant uas only requesting theability to use the approved sign bands as designed by the tenant. Since additional signage was not requested, staff is confortablewith allowing tenants of the building to use the nurber of approvedsign bands on both the north and south side for their businessidentj.fication. The intent of the ordinance requiring business occupants to not have nore than one ualI slgn per street frontagenas to linit the anount of signage on buildings. Again, slnceadditional signage w111 not result by the applicantts request,staff is confortable with allouing theD to use tuo of the five sign bands for one occupant. Staff nade it clear to the applicant thatthis sould be only allowed uith the understanding that additionaluaIl sign bands sould not be persitted in the future should theyallow both sides of the sign bands to used by the larger occupants and not have wall signs left for snaller tenants uho rent space ata later date. The applicant agreed to this condltion. In Eunmary, staff feels that rrhat has been proposed by theapplicant is consistent uith the zoning ordinance and site plan Number of siqn Bands The site plan that was approved by the Planning Connrission and City Council sas the plan dated April 14, 1989. These plans show 3 sign bands on the south side of the building and 2 sign bands on thenorth side of the builtling. The Pl.anning file also contains plans dated April 18, 1989, and these plans Ehor, 5 aign bands on the south side and 5 sign bands on the north side of the building. TheApril 14, 1989, plan j.s the one that vas officially approved by the Planning Cornmission and City Council and is staEped the rrOfficial copyt'. In discussions with the applicant, it becane apparent that theyrere under the inpression that they had approval for 5 sign bands on both the north and south sides of the building. Staff revielredthe reports going to the Planning Connission and Council and aI1the corresponding minutes. The report that vas presented to the Planning Couunission by Steve Hanson referred to the April 14, 1989,plans as did the City Council report. There is no nention in anyof the reports or other infornation in the file of the site plan being approved for the 5 slgns on both the north and south sides. What has been a common occurrence with the developnent downtot n,such as with the hotel site, is that plans are subnitted afterapproval that have ctranges within then that have not been broughtto staffrs attention. The applicant believes that staff was awareof the change for 5 sign bands on both sides of the building andthat the Planning Cornnission and or City Council did approve ofthis change. Again, staff cannot find any nention uhere it hras brought up that the nur0ber of sign bands changed fron a total of 5to a total of 10. In the April 19, 1990, Planning Counissionninutes, there is sone mention of the number of sign bands needingto be discussed but this r,as not done. Ihe applicant (Arvid Ellness) nentioned plans subnitted on Friday vhich was April 14, 1989. Obviously, the applicant feefs that the 10 sigm bands were approvedand that is what they wish to install into the facade of thebuilding. staff feels that the 5 sign facade that had been approved is what should be nalntained. In revieving elevations of both plans, staff feels that the 3 slgn bands on the south and the 2 on the north slde are Dore appropriate for an office building. The elevation shoring 5 sign bands on both the north and south 6ide which provides signage alrnost directly across the total facade of the building is more appropriate for a shopping ual.l but not for anoffice building. PI,ANNING COMIT{ISSION ACTION The Planning Connission, on a vote of 4 to 3, approved 5 signs onthe north side and 5 signs on the south side of the building, fora total of 10 signs for the ChanhaEsen uedical center uith the l,ledical Arts center' sign Request Uay 2, 1990 Page 3 Uedical Arts Center Sign Request Uay 2, 1990 Page 4 condition that ban. there be ng Dore than one business nane per sign STAFF UPDATE - I.{AY 25, 1990 The applicant has subnitted docunentation which shows that anendedplans were subnitted to Btaff which had shown 5 waII signs on boththe north and south side of the building (Attachnent #8). Duringthe Planning Connission neeting, Iadd Conrad (Chairnan) recalledapproving 5 ra1l signs on both the north and south side.Therefore, it appears the anended plans nay have been what wasapproved by the Planning Connission and City Council . Since the rninutes and staff report do not specifically address theplan with 5 wall signs on the south and north side of the building,staff wanted the Planning Comnission and City Council to understanduhat was being proposed and to verify this is what wasland isapproved. RECOMIiIENDATION The City Council rnust decide uhether or not the 3 sign bands on thesouth and th9 2 signs bands on the north should be the nunber of signbands naintained. should the city council feer that they uould pref6r -to have the 5 sign bands on both the north and south sides, their they .!o"lq fornally approve the anended plan as shown on plans dated Aprii18, 1989. ATTACHI{ENTS 1. Staff report dated April 19, 1989.2. Planning Connission ninutes dated April 19, 1989. 3 . Ir{eDo from Steve Hanson dated lr{ay 3, 1989.4. City council ninutes dated May 22, tses.5. Reduced copies of site plan dated Aprit 14, 1989.6. Reduced copies of site plan dated April 18, 1989.7. Planning Coumission Dinutes dated Uly 2, ].gg}.8. Letter fron Arvid Elness Architects dated uay 4, 1990. TH[NHASSEI[ STAFF REPORT , . DATE: C.C. DATE: CASE l{O: 89 Prepared by: April 19, 1989 ltay 8, 1989 Ean s on/v Fz () JLL E lrJ tsa PROPOSAL: A) prelininary plat Approval Site plan Review of Final .Facia Signage and Exteriori:i:si"3"li?l:l::,:l' n'"i".i-Eii.#ii="na p;;ii;;-' IOCATION:78th Street and East of tgo West Tgth B) North of West S tree t APPLfCANT: Lotus Realtyp.O. Box I00 Chanhassen, llN 55317 PRBSBNT ZONING: ACREAGE: DEIISTTY: ADJACENT ZONIIIG AIID LEND USE: CBD, Central Business District lt- c- E- w- R-I2; CBD; CBD; CBD; proposed Beritage park Apartments conmerciaL use connercial uge conmercial use TTATER AND SET|ER:llunicipal services are avallable PEYSICEL CEAR,AC.:Site is level 2000 LAND OSE pLAN: Conmercial :ITY OF North Side Parking Lot April I9, 1989 Page 2 The site plan for this area, which is the location of the Chanhassen Professional Building was aPProved by the City Council at the February 27, L989. neeting. That aPProval ras subject to the following contlitions : 1 2 Platting the area. Submittal of final facia, signage and exterior building lighting for Planning Commission approval prior to issuance of building permits. Traffic engineering shoulil re east portion of the Parking I lity of realigning the sidewa 3 viewotflka sidewalk location on the or safetyr with the Possibi- nd ailcling stop signs or the access at the inter-ins Boulevard. Inre identified other than access was a negotiated as part of the overall ngineering Departnent urost ideal situation, is speed bumps to maximize accessibility. 4. Direct staff to have the consultants review the intersection to see if there is any possible alternatives and if possible have a modified alternative by llarch 13th. Since .that time the plat has been preparecl for the Property. The plat creates two building sites arountl West 78th street arld ;utlots generally to the rear of those two buildable lots for the parking ireas that will serve these buililings. The site plan has been ameniled to rnodify the location on the pro- perty on the west end near the Riviera. These amendlments were ilone- in order to improve the parking situation for the Riviera Restaulant. In addition, the sidewalk locations rrere evaluated on the east endIt was felt the the apartnent b clock to$er. T over to Colonia of the proposed Chanhassen Professional Building. best alternative eas to align the sidewalk from uilding in a generally direct alignment with the hen also a peilestrian link was made from that area 1 center. In evaluating means for making the pedestrian crossings through the parking.area visibler it was aetermined the besi solution was to put in large cross walk painted areas lined up with Iandscapeil featlres between ParkingitaI1s. rt ras felt Lhat the use of speedl bumPs in the parking lot vould not improve the situation for these cross access rays and that stop siins would be inappropriate in these locations. Peclestrian signs could be adldled to emphasize where the cross walks are. The City cou section of ll looking at t eliminating item eith th redeve l opmen has indicate acceptable f ncil asked staff to evaluate est 78th street and Great PIa his, no othe! alternatives ue this particular access. This e property ownels in the area t of this entire area. The E d this access, while not the rom an operational slandPoint North Side Parking LotApril 191 1989 Page 3 The app l ightin pos ing be locaThis si s tanili nacross. On poseil over tsize. On this shown in complies wit may have mo! gn is proposedof the building he entrances thlevation anothee of the buildiing requirement the same sizee proposedt no occupant 1icgf oneteil 9n 9dl ants have sumitted facia, signage and exterior buildingor Planning Commission review. The applicants arepro-free standing identification sign of 20 square feet tof then theto be back and andef I rndea P f at the southirest corner owill be 3r5' in height. Oirectory si faceoftuth e middl e zon the hreeeso the buildin back si4.6' hilit sige 36 sq band o he s ign vided t hase I. ree 3r5's are pro-eet in 9h n uat a9 ha brese arr s ignng. Ts, prohthethan one wall sign. The plans note only one lig No other exterior 1ightingbuilcting. The other site I irnprovements being done by to be located in the patio area.proposed on the exterior of thehting is part of the parking lote city. htis ig th The proposedl facia of the building is to be wshakertown sidingr with ornanental gri1le rorteh entrance features. The roof is to be aspPreviously the entlance features were goint Lcolors have been listed on the plans. The domaielials are not noted. These should not be oodlap andk and railings onhalt shingles.o be brick. Noor andl window aluminum finish. RECOMMENDATI ON Planning staff recormendsfollowing notion:the Planning Commission adopt the The Planning Commission recomrnends approval of the preliminaryplat for the North Side Parking Lot subject to the plans stamleil 'Received April 1{, 1989'. The Planning Connission recornmends apploval of the revisedl siteplan and final facia, signage and exterior lighting based onplans stanped 'Receiveit April I{, 1989. subjeit to the folloringconditions: 1. No business nay have nore than one wall sign. 2. No unpaintedl aluninun shall be alloredt on the exterior. 3. Pedestrian signs be added to cross ralks in parking 1ot. ATTACHUENTS Prelininary psite plan forSite plan for Elevations fo L 2 3 4 Lat.north side parking lot. Phase I Chan Professional Builiting.r Phase I Chan Professional Building. Planning Commission Meeting lpril 19, 1989 - Page 2g something like this as a possible PUD? Anytbing that rroul.d make you thinkthat yes, thatrs a PUD? Batzli: I think if they l,ere to...Lot 14 and get 6ome more open area uay and decrease the density a little... I think parkingrs a problen.like that they are actually saving aLl the trees even though itrs on a slope . . . Ellson: I can picture it.. . can you get into a situation where you rould pass this?conrad: steve, tha t I Enunings: I rrould Iike to see them nove this project... have any devel,opment. If rre lower sone density. I don' noved... The only thing that stilL sticks a little bit size of the apartment building. I'm Dot sure you can pu apartment building on there and still Eatisfy the... I convinced. lftkwitttthi Lot 14 doesn't noir rhat can be h :ne is thehat big of annk I could be Headla: I'd like to see the portion... Conraal: I think that neans re should table it and see if city staff can nuddle through some of the conments that ve rnade. work rith you and seeif you can come back rith us eith a revised slte p).an. Another conceptplan that might encourage us. Batzli moved, wildermuth Eeconded that the Planning Coruniasion table action on PUD 189-l Concept and Development PIan for Oak Vlew Heights so they can work with city staff. AII voted in favor and the Botion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: NORTH SIDE PARKING LOT ON PROPERTY ZONED CBD AND LOCATED JUST E[Sf OF {80 NEST 78TH STREET, CITY OE CHANHASSEN: .I. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL. B. SITE PLAN REVIEW. Steve ttanson plesented the staff report on this item. annrings: yes. conrad: And those are...what you discussed? fuings: Yes they are. Conrad: ...you don't think the developer could never achieve? Conrad: I guess you've heard that we havenr t ruled the PUD out. There are some amenities to the property that I think you could persuadle ne on. The numbers in certain cases look really great to me. I could go uith a PUD. Therefore, I guess what werre saying, the consensus pould be, other than Dave. Planning Commission HeetingApril 19, 1989 - Page 2l Chairman Conrad called the public hearing to order. Brad Johnson: I want to just say a couple comments then Arvid Elness ishere fron Arvid Elness and Company. This riII be the first, I don,t knowif you guys have seen the col.or rendering. This is the apartr0ent buirdingin the back and thatrs the...se,re propoiing on this part right here.Then Phase 2... At the request of the City ue droppe- phase 3 bere aspart of our program... That gives you an idea. Iive askeil AEvid toaddress, the signage issue I guess I uant to talk about too. The signsare kind of... we need the signs permitted by the ordinance... rt'a backrit. rt's that ban, what do you cltl it. rf you look at sometbing rike-Gerco. That sign. That-kind of sign that vetve got a dark opaque feeringand tbe letters are cut into that opaque. Arvid ian address ta;ia... Arvid Erness: rr11 just make a coupre points. This is the Boffit pran.Tso things that were addressed here... we did a number of studies and rguess our feeling architecturally had to do...one is a matter of... Thesecond is the fact that these elements are standing out in front of thisbuirding and r feel personally that they shouldn't-be distinguished as afeature or element that is different thin the nain buirding. r think itsill rook like a sirnple building with some large brick higf, risers hereEtanding and the facade standing out in front of it rith i change ofraterial. r notice the material used on that free standing erement thatstand out in front of it rrill characterize the tbeme of whit shourd haveproper materiars and shourd feel tike theyrre integrated in the design soour thinking is to take the same nateriali that reire using...so thi;erenent here looks like a part of this building and not diitinguish it assonething different. rn doing that, the materials of the main-buirdingare like lap siding. Theyrre cedar lap siding andt cedar shakes on theupper part and then ouE color ban that HiIl rrap around the building. Soin doing that rre just brought those rnaterials forvard rnd put them 5n thefront here...because tbis is rearly a free standlng sort oi spacial fornout in front and it creates a shadow. CEeateg gome lnterest and alsogives us the opportunity to put aome identification on there. Brad .skeduhat the signage said...veire talking about. t{e did aone studies as torays ue could do it on a professional type building .nd I think the...uasthat it was because part of the design of ttre buil.ding integrated andl rasserl controlled...color ban of the bullding or courd be used to lntroducesone backing. Then it aort of looked like part of the archtecturar... soitrs sort of designed and integrated into the buitding and to have...asopposed to a nore commercial. tlrpe brackets of aignage ubere therers acertain amount of freedloro through the slgnage to create an identlty andnark...so : think Herre comfortable that rrith the bannage aysteB that goes.bove the entry at eye leve1... The problen ulth the diawings sas that sesubnltted Friday without idtentlfying ihat re had agreed to ai the quantityof the potential site... So the tso lgsues I have I guess are the -cholce- of naterials on the exterlor of the building and I think thatig lncharacter with what I,m seeing in Chanhassen at tbis point and shatr eaappening around toern. These are nateEials that are very connon place... Brad Johnson: What about the lighting? Planning Commission !,teet i ng April 19, 1989 - Page 22 Arvid Elness: Then the City has some lighting pl.ans that we looked at for our standard ones that were going on the street... The lighting for theparking is taken care of on the plan. what He tried to do beyond that is because this element which stands out in front of the nain building hassort of a void, a space between itis...ue put stanalard lights on the back side of these high risers that stand out here so at night each one of these rnain areas irill be lit indirectly to the back side so theyrll glowuith itrs own light. Ttren the city standards out there witb the light... So we'11 do sone architectural lighting as ne caII it in these areas antl every place they refer around the building. Werll Probably Put sone Lightin the cupola on the roof up here... Those are the lighting ideas that we have. Signage I've explained. The aign ban... Conrad: Anything el se? Enmings moved, Ellson second to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Headla: I have no problems with the signage. foresee that to be a... Thatis the vray I look the skateboards coning down there, whatever. signs or parking s i gns? ...The sidewalk there. Iat it. Irm concerned about Are $e Putting up traffic Hanson: No. we're Dot proposing to put speeil linit signs. conrad: I think everybody's going to have the saroe kind of guestions. steve, maybe you can help us on this, or Brad. The last tine this rras .in, ue uere concerned irhere the sideralk ran across the traffic... lfe talked about speed bumps. We talked about signs. you eliminateil the speed bumps. You eliminated the signs and basically what you've done is painted the wal.k so can you give us more rationale for that? Hanson: I personally donit aee that as a problem...look at fron a traffic standpoint and their recommendation was striping ras tnore than adequate... speed ln the parking lot is not that bad and re should be abLe to...bringing those islands out and creating parking atallB lets you knos therers something trappenlng there and re can put in pedestriln crossingsigns. In ury opinion, that'6 [hat ee can do and thatrs... Conrad: Are they going to, the Pedeetrian traffic, are they going to go through this or aEe they going to go around? Are there other Bidewalksthat they're going to use? Hanson: I think sone of the traffic rlll go eround that uay. The other question, if somebody's walkingr uhy aEe they walking in theEe? I can see theB wal king . . . fenny I I Harket to buy groceries and then caEry then back... Headla: frm not concerned about PeoPle carrying lbout young people on akateboards and bicycles.office by a uindow on the second or thlrd storylot. Haveyou ever noticed those sPeedera in the atrocious the way they can speed. I've been hit grocerles. I rro concetned If you've ever had anor higher above a parking parking lot? Itrsin a parking lot... lt Planning Conrnission MeetingApril 19, 1989 - Page 23 happens. AII the rationale says it shouldn't, there are speedlers... Isimply can Dot believe... I want to see somettring to make that sidewalksafer. Wi ldermuth :I had a problem uith the sidewalk... I niss sonething or isnrt the lighting of the building goingBatzli: Ditlto be...? Brail Johnson: Itis all provided by the City as part ofitrs part of your site plan.the garking lot so Hanson: The other lighting was rrhat the architect had nentioned... Brad Johnson: I donit have a lighting plan because the lighting plan isthe parking 1ot plan that BRW put out. Batzli: The access here, the left area...access east... That's the one Italked about last time.. . Ellson: I donrt like the...parking...juts around. I agree rrith Dave. Ithink the thing that bugs me most about aII this is, we naturaltythink...then it stops and then youtve got this distance open but this goes:ight through and there are parking places on thls side and parking pliceson thjs side and therers a sidewalk in the raiddle. NorDally a person bnthe sidewalk is hidden behind two cars until they get out in thEre andI... and I don't like that. I think there should be speed bunps, stopsigns... Enmings: I have the same reservation. I essentially feel that... Idonrt have any problern with anything except the sidewalk directingtraffic... What Dave says about kids on Bkateboards anil Iittle kidswalking, they can walk out between two parked cars. If they're 3l/Z feetor shorter, the driver doesn.t have a chance to see then andt they dontt have a chance to see the car. Your re creating a aituation where I thinkitrs...driving dorrn streets, yourre always thinking about kids coning out between cars. Itrs happened to ne. I didn.t hit theE but other people have and werre creating that aituation. I think naybe ridening it out.El,ininate sone of the parking apaceB on each eide of that sideialk...sightlines, that would help. Having a painted crossealk I think rould be, Ithink thatrs rrhat we asked before. To Ee that,a esaential. Iid put Etopsigns there. ...Etop at that Bideralk at least until t uas absolutelyaatisfied thlough itrs u6e that the traffic on the aldewalk didn.t earrant6top Bigns. Irdl Etart rith that andl then make theB prove that it rasn, tnecessary. Then we'd just trave... finr Erhartrs discussion could not be hearil on the tape. Conrad: ...yet fron the aplrtment building atandpoint, theyrre 9oin9I go al nk ite the trs .probably going to be there. It,5 falrly straight. I.d have ong eith Steve. I think it nay be a little bit of overkilt but I should have aome klnil of signage. Thatrs ny only comnents. IIighting. I like the 6ignage. Is there a !0otlon? I guess ue to. torhilik Planning Comnission Heet ing April 19, 1989 - Page 24 have to close the public hearing on the preliminary plat. notion? Ellson novetl , Batzli seconded to close theprelininary plat. AII voted in favor andhearing was closed. Enmings: I guess I was a little confuseilpreliminary plat? ...sidewalk lssue. Hanson: ?he sidewalk issue is part of the docunent. . . Is there a public hearing on the the motion carried. The public about shat exactly... ras the site plan. That was the first BatzIi noved, wildermuth seconded that the planning approval of the preliminary plat for the North Sialethe plans stampted rReceived April 14, 1989'r. A1Inotion carried. Commission recommend Parking Lot Eubject tovoted in favor and the Conrad: Is there a motion for the site plan? Headla: ...1989'with the following recorunendations. The three IiEteit. The first trro. Pedestrian signs be added to crosswalks. I,d like to goto number 3 on the opposite page. Traffic engineer should review sidewalkIocation on the east portion of the parking lot for Eafety, wlth thepossibility of realigning the sidewalk and adding stop signs or speed bumps to naximize access j. b i 1i ty. Conrad: Is there a second? The notion fails for lack of second. Isthere another motion? Erharts I'11 make a motion approva). of the revised sitelighting based on the plansconditions, number I as is. by aaying what? that the Planning Co:urission reconmendplan and final facia, signage and exterior stamped "Received April llt, 1989" oith the NuEber 2 as is. Nunber 3, did you atart out Headla: Itis on the opposite page there. Nunber 3. Erhalt: ?raffic engineering shoul.al revleu aidewalk location on the eastportion of the parking lot for aafety, wtth the possibility of reallgningthe sidewalk anil adding stop signs. And lten nuEbeE {, to review therest access to increase access to the area for... To revlew the restentrance of access to the north parking lot... Hanson: ls the intent to try and get the acce8s coning back touardsthe...? I'D just trying to clarlfy that. Anmings: Did the PubIic Safety Director andplan for the access? They did? Conrad: Is there a second to Tini6 notion? Fire Departnent revies this Planning Conunission Heet ingApril I91 1989 - Page 25 Ellson: I I Il second it. Erhart moved, ElIson seconded that the planning Coramission recorunend approval of revised site plan and final facia, signage and exteriorIighting based on plans stamped nReceived April 1{, 1989" subject to thefollowing conditions: I. No business may have more than one wall sign. 2. No unpainted aluroinum shall be alloued on the exterior. 3. Traffic engineering should review sidewalk location on the eastportion of the parking lot for safety, with the possibility ofrealigning the sidewalk and adding stop signs. 4.. Review the west entrance of access to the north parking lot. Erhart, Ellson, wildelmutb and Headla voted in favor of the motion.Batzli, Conrad and Emmings voteil in opposition to the motion and the notion carried with a vote of 4 to 3. latzli: l.ty reason is, I still don't like the eastern entrance to thesouth. The eastern most southern entrance. Ermrings: It just emphasizes the sidewalk issue. I canrt approve the plan the uay it is. PUBLIC HEARING: COUNTRY SUITES HOTEL, LOCATED A? THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WEST 78TH ST,REET AND MARKET BOULEVARD, BLOOMBERG CO PANIES: A. PRELII.IINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOTS 1 AND {, BLOCK I, CHANHASSEN }TALL, INTO TWO COMMERCIAL LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED CBD. B. REZONING A PORTION OF BG DISTRICT TO CBD DISTRICT LOCATED BETWEEN HARKET BOULEVARD AND LOT 4, CHANHASSEN I{ALL. C. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR AN 89 UNIT HOTEL. Jo Ann Olsen presented the Etaff rePort on the above three items. Ctrairnan Conrad calledl the public hearing to order on the PreliEinary PIat Errnings noved, Erhart seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the notion carried. The Public hearing Pas closed. Emnrings novedl wildernutb seconded that the Planning commission recommend approval of Preliminary PLat 189-7 as ahosn on the Plat stamped rReceived April 11, 1989" rrith the following conditiona: CITY OF EHINHISSEN UE}4ORANDUT{ TO: FROM : DATE: SUBJ: Don Ashworth, Steve Eanson, May 3, 1989 690 COULTER DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 City uanager Planning Director Preliurinary Plat Approval anil Site Plan Review of Final. Facia, Signage, Exterior Building Lighting and Revised Sidewalk anil Parking Layout Configuration for Chanhassen Professional Building The Planning Commission at its April 19, 1989 meeting approved the preliminary plat for the north side parking 1ot subject to the plans stanped "Received April 1tl , 1989". Regarcling the site plan approval, the Planning Commission recon- nentled approval of the reviseil site plan anil final facia, signage and exterior lighting baseil on plans stanpeil 'Received April 14,. 1989" subject to the following conditions: No business may have more than one wall sign. No unpainted aluminum shall be alLowed on the exterior. Traffic engineering should review sidlewalk location on theeast portion of the parking lot for safety with the possibi-lity of lealigning the sidewalk and adding stop signs. 4. Review the rest entrance of lccess to tbe oorth parking lot. I 2 3 This notion reas approved on a 4 to 3 vote. The Planning Connission discussion Dn the site plan centereal onthree issues. The first of those yas the sidewalk extending fromEeritage Park Apartments across the parking lot in the tlireitionof the clock tower. Generallyr.the Conmission felt that aildli-tional signage or tlefinition of this pedestrian crossing throughthe parking area should be added. Concern is that enall childrenusing the crosswalk would not be visible due to cars parked oneither side of the closswalk. They requested that this be lookedat closer by traffic engineering. Ihereforer I have contacteil BRw anal requested that they be in attendance at tbe Council meeting on llay 22, L989 to address this particular issue. Don Ashworth uay 3, 1989 Page 2 The thiral issue that was raisecl b same concern he had raised when t corunission previously. That issu west of Great Plains Boulevard on intersection by the clock tower. Recommendat i on are that this access shoulil be cl renain in this vicinity only comp y Comnissioner Batzli was thehis item was before the Planninge is the need for the access West 78th Street. His feelings oseil anil that allowing it tolicates the traffic flow at the Staff recommends that the City Council aPprove the preliminary plat for the north sicle parking lot baseil on plans stampednReceived April 14, 1989". Further, staff recommends that the City Council approve the revised site plan and final facia, signage and exterior lighting baseil on plans stampedl 'ReceiveilApiil 14, 1989" subjects to the conditions of the Planning Commission. Attachment s 1 2 3 4 5 6 ApriI I9, 1989 Planning Commission Binutes. Preliminary plat for the north side Parking lot. Reviseal parking 1ot layout.Final facia and signage P1ans.April 191 1989 staff rePort. Mlmo f rom Fredl Eoisington dated I'{ay 8, 1989. The seconal item of concern deals eith the entrance anal the adjusted parking configuration by the. Riviera. There was a pre- feience eipressed for the access as it comes in to a1Iow a right turn into the first bay of parking along the professional building rather than having to go all the way to the back of the parking 1ot to get into that parking. The adjusted configuration was arrived at after neeting with the Kruegers, owDers of the Riviera. A copy of a meno from Pred Hoisington sunnarizing this meeting is attached to this memorandum (Attachment 16). It should be noted that this particular adjustment to the parking is in Phase II and the approval at this tine rould be for the parking configuration for Phase I. 7. Eovide the addition of 2 rDre Lirden trees on tle lardscape plan. AU voted in favor ard the motion carried.r Roger Knutson: irElude d (2) . E(cuse rE I'tayor. Ihe tEtion rEs Eecificauy d(t). Did not cournilnran Boyt trpved, Grrrilnan Johnson seconded to approve site pran 1gviewfor a 5 and 8 unit tgrnhcmg building for south t tus villas sn"'ntsDes. Arrvoted in favor arri t}le rrction carriea. - lD. ()1rS H. N.Rn, srDE 'ARK*E Lor n{pRovEMEM pRqr'r 82-17.J courrilairan t6rl(trEn: r bel ieve tlE rast tine t]tat E discussed this as a courrilthe.primary crollcern that E had was ttE south exit onto IH 1or or r€s€ Tgth W$*g+t*x'u3fr*:!i: m,.## Hil:ffi'#.:H:Li. Brian Batzri 3 r nade a cqment but everr.De else seened Eatisfied ,"ith it. courci]Jnan i{orknan: I guess lrd like cq Ents frqn the council t}ren as far ashow tney feel tlrat soutlr exit is. 6unci lman Johnson: r'u start ori tl't. r_.rr !?sicarly ruke the same cq Ent rnade last tine. As ]rou can red in here, they ara i-r"i ol'i"iii"tiql sitll theIxoperty odners that are palnDg for t}ese- iraprovarents, that aie beiDg assessedfor rleir nrprovyE :rd s"-"*y ray rhey wirl ",rr-itE gi;irn *a ploperryto tleir, i,s *Eir properry. rniv oi" it'. rr"i;;-;.ilrs,;'L"d it to t,,eCity at rD cost ard eren- ttei,re goirg toard-tr,ey ,="a-.,'t x.cess aciordr;g 6 ulfrvu,:$l:: Hfil"f"H:: f$,they're-going to rerrac! their off& to "g1_1 y: tt"-iil, ilil ila I read here.Iher: r€,ve got rD palking tot. tb nndical tri:afrrg.--G'ai"Joilr_rt. CourEiLlan tiorlfian: Are l,ou sayirry Eteyr re threatenirg l,!3 Jal? courrilnan Johnsdt.: thatis tre tone r get- out of here. rhey didnrt threat€n.rhat's basicauv the agreemenr re nade wi th ttEil for this -;;k;L rot anl it .echange the agreanent, go back oo t}re agreerE rt, they have -t}e rtlnt to do ti.t.r Then ue'u have to go into corrdgrmati oi to -..ir--tr=i;i",rd ;; bry it frmI ttrenr to do the sare-thing. ln *na**tiar ,Ey Eay ,,in the aarE argrmentL an) day. 161lor Ctmiel:of ttpse 1 ard CourEilnan Boyt: I Fuld agproval of itsn at(2). ourciluan Johnsdls IrIl secord that. 1.5 City Courri I l,teeting - ! 22, Lggg It Es ry urdelstardirE correring as it tas rErtioned uking both ._:'- J City Courci I tbeting - H. r2, I9B9 , couDci lfian r{orkman: so Jay t}en 1ou,re saying you.re furly in favor of thisegress at least csnirE out at that intersection? couDcilfian Johnson: r bel ieve tlrat for t}e people ntro have been tlere,businesgnen in our crnrnr:nity for a rong tirrcl trey tteserve tteir paiiirrg rot tobe convenienr for tleir businesses. Ihey rould like a full rigtt'tu;; feftturn. lE Degotiatd d*- p a right turrr in ard right tum ouf stly. 'Itts notthe best thing in tire mrld ht the engineers say ii,s safe ani itii a totbetter tlan it is nan because rpn it,s ridiculor:i uecause people try L t r.that left turn in t}ere. urtJ eEy etrrrt be able to hnrn r;ft- into ihat ao it,sgoing ts be an inpro.rsoent over tte c,rr€nt sltr.latidt Uut-ii;s-mi gJrE to beas good as I rf,ant it. Ihat,s $hat I think is the npst reasoruble, ife Uestcunprcuise to do. t€ have to llve witn those busiresssr t@. G 6't ir"tFrt t]ts' out of bEiness. so tjratrs *rere r sit. ts tlat it,r a reasonautecaqlroaise. l{a1or Grniel : t}Esula? @urci hullan Diml,er: I donrt have any cotElerns. oorrncilnan Bo!t: r fird it interestirE tE, r€ get ourserves into thesesituations of rtere r€, on u:" orp hard E have bJsirEss inte.ests Jo very Euchsant thaE rny in ard out of their pro[Erty. cr the other hanl te ta"e trecitizens rho are going to- drivg oro,ryn tiat intersection ard r,, iust arre,.hey.rre -not goirg to be pleased but r tlrink as Jay r*ttioned, tris-ti.a-ot partof tbe. deal -ard though r€ rnay rrt be happy sitl, ii, I think L "iff -G-UpV si th the medical arts center.- So althowh I Es olposed to this, i'n-,rifijie to -accept it. I think itrs the best curprooise rc're- loing to get. l'layor ctmiel: aasically f.g. !-t botn of 1ou have said ard r sort of agreewith each of those. r think tlre aocessib lty us to be uEre too for thebusinesses. i{e may.not be hapFry with r,rhat i s fhere but r think it,s the-bestthing e can have right rnw. I think BiIt rErtiorEd uEt. Courcilman workman: Okay, I.guess I,d just 1ike to say I,[' totaUy for tlebus-inessnan io the city. I in rr sy, strape or fotru Gnt to, "s iir"-Liabefore, there's rrEny other options for people to s[Erd ttreir'norny .itr*.-tir.ndorntohn eranhassen r'd rather see here. I€ in th; IEst have,*ai i-ri"t x. Ithink qr lhat corner by the cl.ock torcr ard r think ie,re aaingi iittre uitmre of a mistake to it. rf re have an otrportunity to fix it. -r sinceiely ffievg that i! is going to creare a problh if th6y ao ,rot frr.-tf,.t ;L*t'lere but r thinl( rEneth€ress ard r gLEss r rEnt to go on rectrd as saying rthink itrs goirB to create a problan ttnre. f Xrsr ttut IH IOI is soi'; 6o b"mved eventuarry so traffic shourd be reduced in tJlat are. but r sdrt tveoorEerns. 6wri Lman Johnson rnoved, 6r:oci lnan Boyt seclDded to a[prove tie rbrth sideParking t t lrD[rrorenent project 187-17: :. prel iminary plat ard Site plan 4rpEoval for the ttsdj.cal Arts Erilttingb. Esolution 189-702 AEprotre plans and Specificatiorts arrd luthoii;-tLAdvertising for bids. AIl voted in favor ard tlE motion carrisl. t t t 16 ltlra6si rllllEll I llliltb rt5 +'+fu1-llh. r t*t i t lI I t I t i , I I:I II J N d .it I !t' i. '.-li ...1-'t*H"Et.$ o o oo o o o o I I eI oI II t ffi I til i', llrI llr I T Ij I li I I(! I I I I I I I I I r;:: l:i1t E E E E o t t 1 I i I- I)! [1 Is$ i,,t'"& :'1 $ .l l 3, rs I 5 \ o o o 6 0 trlt ri !ril .!: ir tlr! irtlirit lillalrllltt -tr II '-l t I ,t --{t I { t ! ttl. ti ii$" iIHE ll@ -, *., t rl a t a.. : -..t e o o @ I qI oI Ii o I I I I I tr Etr I I I! aII i I - t ilfi il:i!i ;l:'it E-lL-l i$ T ll ri! H flffiffifl E I- IoI I a t a I T q! IoI II Ea E q E E Eg E tI iIt:III iI . - rat =r, I- { o 6 I I I tl 1 .:E! :;El o tE 1it I I I I I t I 6-as- -) 0 J 1, It I { I t {I -{ I I 1 I I --l !t J -t I I II I t.t.].' :, t' IIli \ iil l ll ,l o @ I oI @ o @ o o @(3I It ( -l fl t,l-!i i oI I oI I I I ! iai l[lI f, -j[E=n ruI llI r=:!lr= I $r! d I a 1 I3I I!I I t E IoT - i II xu lllts =- E E FI EI E E ! g I : ; iI I!iII if !ir il ,iri rllii illfl ;:a i:: HI E1 i:'. ligli; tt :11 ,I ilil I $ u I E [4 o o I I { I t fi t 1 I t I ! it i1 s t ItiI It t .f r o..) =q J SN r -t_ ,l' I t I I H" HI @ tl 1 t I I { .t I I I -{ Il. ! t ! ,i ,''l il lr t EE o o @ @ CtI C)I @ @ (3 (3 o I t \ I iI oI oI I ,. i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I F]I tr CHANHASSEN PLANNING COI{I,TISSION REGULAR I,IEETING itAY 2, 1990 Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m |iEltBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steve Emming,s, Annette ElIson, Ladd Conrad, Brian Batzli, Jim tJildermuth and Joan Ahrens STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Planning Director; Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner; and Sharmin AI-Jaff, Planning Intern PUBLTC HEARING: VARTANCE TO THE SIGN ORDINANCE TO HAVE 2 IIALL SIGNS AND SITE PLAN AHENDIIENT FOR THE CHANHASSEN }IEDICAL CENTER LOCATED AT !'EST 78TH STREET, BRAD JOHNSON. PubI ic Present: N-q-!Le. * Brad Johnson Bob Mi t hune John Jacobson , Vice Pres,of Professional Ser v i ces Dan Anderson Jo Ann called Ridgeview Hedical Center ['lanager, Chanhassen Hedical Center olsen presented the staff report on this item, Chairman Conradthe public hearing to order. C Johnson: I guess what I'd ]ike to address is the things that Jo Ann... addressing was primarily that this plan had not been approved by eithertne Planning Commission or the City Council yet 3 of us were at thismeeting uhere they approved it including Arvid Ellness and we've got records of shipment of plans to here on the 17th to Steve Hanson. The onlything ure're missing is Steve Hanson because he's not here to deal r.rith it because at that time we weren't dealing with this particular people on thestaff. So it's been our feeling from the very beginning and until r.rhat,Friday or Thursday of Iast h,eek that 5 signs had been approved on bothsides. So h,e're kind of surprised. Secondly then I think we'd just liketo present it based upon it's merit and you can reconsider it so that *e'11present our case once more and hopefully it comes out okay. So that'sprobably hot,r we'd like to approach it. l.le have John Jacobson and...fromthe Clinic...and Bob Hoveland r.rho worked uith us on the original review.Let us shor.r you uhere the signs would be located first. This is kind of abig plan of what downtown... To get a little history on uhy the buildingis r.rhere the building is so they'll understand. This is a total plan forthe dourntourn area. Site plan. Bob Hithune: Hopefu]ly you're all oriented so just briefly, this is theKenny's and so on, strip center right here. This is the neu professionalcenter, office building and this is the existing lawn sports and theRiveria over here. And the Heritage Park apartments are right here. Brad Johnson: Risht behind it. Addr ess_ AppIicanL, LoLus Realty Deve I oper ( Planning Commission t-1eet i ngj4ay 2, 1990 - Page 2 Bob Mithune: Origina]ly our first plans that ure submitted tothis building back here. Right along here and all the parkins the City didn't urant that. And the City didn't Hant it I guess number one, just like r.rhat is going on over on this side of thet^lhat's that called? the City hadin front but because River ia . Bob Mithune: And similar to this development and secondly, they thoughtthis would be more like a buildins in a city. Dountou,n city that's rightup close to these sider.lalks. So eJe went along with that and urhat thatresulted in is a buildins urith maybe 2 fronts. I think that's importantfor consideration. Brad Johnson: And where do we place the signs... Bob Mithune: t^lelI ue wanted 5this side, L, 2, 3, 4, 5. signs located !, 2, 3, 4, 5 and again on Brad Johnson: Nor^r if you're looking at the building, you can look at thezoning downlourn and you can have 152 of the front of a building can besigns from the CBD district on the main street...two fronts. This *i1l bethe only building in town that would have actually tuo fronts. It has anentrance on the parking lot side and then the other side so we did a quickcalculation and we are using 62 of the front of this building so we're weIIbelop the allowed amount of signage that would be on the building and we'vetraded, if you read all your oidinances, they uant to have a new proposed sign ordinance. I don't think uhich has passed. They prefer to have asign ban on the building urith a limit of height and everything so you have some control as to where those sisns uil] be so they're not plastered al]over the building so they have some consistency uith the buildinS. Andthis is any building in downtown, we've aluays been stuck to that concept- that u,e should have a sign ban. It also gives us control over what isthere. It b,as the opinion of Fred Hoisington I believe that also thisbuilding should have some color and he felt the addition of signs urhichuould be in varying colors potentially, the neon signs, they basically are neon backed signs, would add to the interest in the building itself. I can remember that discussion with Fred. So basically ue have the 5 signs on both sides. Basically they're there to advertise the tenants. This is not an office building as r.te think of it as a professional services building*here you'll. have insurance agency lnd your reel estate peoplc, nyself, r^lhol,ant to advertise the fact that they're in the building and they're not,sort of passive. One of the requirements of rll our tenants including thedentist is that they have some kind of identification on the buildins because that's one of the reasons they uant this locatlon is because theyrealize it's hish traffic area. So then the second problem you have is ifyou have signs just in the front and none in the back, people can'tidentify r.rhere they're supposed to go in and relate to lrhat it is so Iguess that's basically our presentation. Both sides are using about 5t ofthe available frontage for signs. They're on a sign ban. They're belowyour ordinance requirements. It is the only buildins like this in touJn andfinal.Iy, h,as approved once to our way of thinking because lle sent the stuff Brad Johnson: ToHn Square - t Planni n9 Commission Meet i n9 |4ay 2, 1990 - Pase 3 over here and f ..,,a s standi ng up here. It just wasn't an j.ssue at that meeLing. Everybody was interested in the control bumps and the traffic,I think you remember that. So I think it just blew right by and Headlasaid that, he used to sit right there, he said the signs look fine and that-xas the only commen! they said about signs and uhy did we want... I'II Ieave it to your discretion. Oo you from the clinic uant to say anything as far as the need of signs? There seems to be some concern here that businesses don't need signs such as yourself. John Jacobson: These are not alL commenLs that f have. I did have acouple handouts. My name is John Jacobson. I'm Vice President ofProfessional Services at Ridgevieur I'ledical Center and I did h,ant to takethe opportunity to introduce Dan Anderson who is the clinic manager at Chanhassen Hedical Center. Oan just recently joined us and I should say isdoing a very exce).lent job, particularly the last week in getting theclinic moved into a new ]ocation. I urant to thank the commission for theopportunity tonight to appear before you, As Brad suggested, r.rhat lJe arerequesting is aIl.owing the Chanhassen Hedical Center and our. BusinessHealth Services, which are businesses that are both owned and operated byRidgeview Hedical Center, to place high quality signage on both sides ofthe Chanhassen Professional BuiIding. As Brad suggested, we're reallyrequesting this for a couple of reasons. First of aII, as Brad did eludeto, we really feel that this building does have tuo fronts and signage isimportant on both sides, The street side from an awareness perspective. The fact that Business Health Services is there. The Chanhassen l,ledicalCenter is there and then on the parking lot side, to identify u,hichentrances people shouLd go in. As Bob indicated, if the parking uere infront of the building, this r.rould obviously not be an issue. l.le would bevery satisfied with signage on one side of the buildins. Secondly, if you -Iook at the building design itself, the northeast corner is realIy only forthe Chanhassen Hedical Center and people cannot get from that northeastcorner up to the second floor so b,e Eant to be sure that r.re have very clear-signage. The only ulay they can really get to the second floor on the northside is on the northurest side and not the northeast side so u,e Hant to havesignage that makes that ver)u clear. Thirdly and perhaps most importantly,oe feel and if I could paraphrase John Devins uho,s the.president ofRidgeview Hedical center who could not be here this evening and asked me totalk in his stead. He feels very stronEly that really as a major tenant inthe building, ue really do have the entire first floor between the Chanhassen l"'ledical Center and Business Health Services, Ue feel itextremelv important that b,e have appropriate signage on either side of thebuildi.ns. The signage that ue're proposing is a hieh quality, individually_illuminated signs with a type style that's referred to as clared on bold.The letters will be approximately 1o lnches in height and we anticipate thesignage to be very professional looking and really enhance the looks of thebuiIdinS. Those are my comments. If anyone has any questions orthoughts, I'd be more than happy to entertain them. I do have, in caseanyone is curious, copies of the specs on exactly what it is ue're talkingBbout. It gives you a little bit of a feel for the size of the letteringand the type of the lettiri.ng that we're talking about. Thank you. ( Conrad: Any other comments?. _( Planning Commission Heeting Hay 2, 1990 - Page 4 Conrad: Any other comments? Is there a motion to close the.public hear i ng? Batzli moved, tlildermuth scconded to close the public hcaring. All votedin favor and the motion carried- The public hearing xas closed. Conrad: Joan, He'1I start down at ),our end. Comments. Ouestions. Recommendations - Ahrens: I kni,* very Iittle about this building. fs there a lobby inside? Brad Johnson: Yes. On one end there's a... The way this works is there,sa ]obby coming in on the north there. On this end there's a lobby that'sfor the upstairs and downstairs... This is the north side. So you come inhere and you go upstairs to the tenants that are on the second floor andyou'd also 9o to Business Health Services uhich is Iocated on the first f loor. If you want to 90 to the l.,ledical Center...you go in this door. Ahrens: Because there's not an interior halltray? Brad Johnson: No. That's why they just take the whole floor and so thisentrance is only for the medical center. That's urhat John t.las saying. Ahrens: f assume there will be some type of a signage inside the lobbythat te]Is you r.rhere the location of the offices inside so people who comeinto the lobby will know where to go. Brad Johnson: Oh sure. But not for the medical center. Ahrens: Right. In the staff report, there's a statement in the background statement that says one of the conditions of approval uas that no business may have more than one wal] sign as regulated with the sign ordinance.tlall sign refers to the ban also? Is that uhat? Okay. I assume there's 9oin9 to be more than, how many tenants are going to be in the building? Brad Johnson: Major tenants, probably about 5 or 5 and then small, 10. Ahrens: So you r.rant to advertise the najor tenants in the buildins like a ban sign? Brad Johnson: Yes. That's basically xhy Ee have the 5 on both sides. Ahrens: But there will be more than one sign for the medical tenant risht? Brad Johnson: I think thet's r.rhat's beeq recommended and I think tbe staffsaid that's fine Ahrens: So what you Hanted 2 bans for each major tenant? Is that eJhat you r.la nted? Brad Johnson: Tl.to bans for the tHo major tenants which are here tonight. Then one for the balance of the... ( Planning Commission Heet i ngtlay 2, 7990 - Pase 5 Ahrens: So you want 5 in the front and 5 in the back? Brad Johnson: Okay, there uiII be 5 in the front and 5 in the back withl.ledical Health Services having 2. Or uhat do you caII it, Business HealthServices. And the Medical Center having 2 because they take up a good share of the building and that will give direction as to where people should 9o and identification. The balance of the tenants probably wouldhave one. As I read the staff report, u,hat they utere concerned about Hasmore not whether you really had one or tt.|o signs but that there Here nomore signs than aLloued. Is that right? Olsen: Than were originally approvedr yes. Ahrens: The plans that were submitted on ApriI Plans or whatever. I don't know how many plans Brad Johnson: We submitted the Second plans on Ahrens: Okay. Plans? So those are the plans that you 19th , the second setthey submitted. the 17th. referred to as April of 19th Ahrens: 18t h? 0kay. At was the purpose of having request Nere those plans submitted? Whatextra plans submitted? consulted rith us, Bobof signage we wanted. and ue said, heyverbally uith SLeve who's t hose Brad Johnson: Steve Hanson. tli ldermuth : [rle can blame it on Steve . Brad Johnson: No, no. tJe submitted a set of plans and they tlereincomplete relative to the signage so ue submitted those on Friday andHonday we came back. It ras a site plan that had the sign on it and theelevation that had the signs on it uere incomplete. Ue caught it trhen wereceived it and ue said to the architect r.rhy did you do that and that oasIike on a Thursday. So on Friday we shipped over the balance of theplans...and then we colored them up and presented them this way. Ahrens: t,thv would the first set of plans have 5 signs indicated on themand the second set of plans have 10? Brad Johnson: Oh, just because the architect hadn'tand I and the owners of the building as to what kindThat ras aII. So ule cauEht it uhen we got the plansthat's not right and we submitted it. tJe clcared itHanson. He's just not here. Ahrens: So you're saying that the City, Steve Brad Johnson: The Planning Commission, r.,e say,but we pr esented this plan. signs to the Planning Commission? Hanson, approved 1O signs? but there's no record of it Ahrens: tJith 10 OIsen: 18Lh, yeah. I Planning Commission Meetingj4ay 2, 1990 - Page 5 Brad Johnson: And it ulasn't even an issue at the meeting. Basicallythat's Iess signage than we could do just by ordinance. The ordinancepermits 152 which this is less siEnage. Emmings: Yeah, is that 152 is the maximum? Brad Johnson: Yeah. Emmi ngs: You get !.lhatYou're sayi ng things a gets appr oved .little. . . You don't automatically get 15?. Brad Johnson: It'S a good argument, Emmings: Yeah - Ahrens: Mv impression is that a lot of illuminated signs on the front of abuilding does make it resemble a strip mall. It seems that if the CityCouncil had wanted, there was a desire to have the building moved to thefront of the property so lhat it urould be more like a dountown type ofbuilding and that it wouldn't look like a strip mal]. So it seems to methat if you put that kind of signage on the front of the building, it kindof defeats the purpose of moving the building to the front of the property and having it look like a regular downtouln building. Brad Johnson: There was no discussion abou! that. tJe always presentedthis building. . . Ahrens: uell, they mayit.not have thought about that but I just thought of Bob Mithuner t,ell there was discussion but not part of the city counciland that's r.rhat the planners at that time wanted. Ahrens: They wanted the building moved to the front of the Iot. Bob ttiihune: And they tanted a lot of colorful signs. Ahrens: A lot of colorful signs? tlell, I can't imagine that uould lookvery good. That's my own personal opinion. That a lot of colorful signs onthe front of the buildine is Eoing to makc it look like a real professionalbuildins. Brad Johnson: tlhat is a rcal profcssional building? Ahrens: tlell, one uith less illuminated signs all ovcr the front. Lots ofcolorful signs. That's my personal opinion ]ike I said. I think it'ssubjective. There's no objcctive standard for what a professional buildingshould look like but if it's moved to thc front of the property where it's supposed to look like a regular office buildine in a dor.rntown area, I don'tsee the purpose for that and I think that if there is signage in the insideof the buildins trhcre people, it's not that bie e building where people would get lost trying to find. { i Planning Commission Heeti ng t4ay 2, 1990 - Page 7 Brad Johnson: It's a very large building when it's aII completed Ahrens: tlell I've been by it. It's not a huge building. Brad Johnson: No, there's another whole wing that goes with this thing. It-goes on alI the way down to the Riveria. Ahrens: It's not built yet? Brad Johnson: No. Conrad: You're only looking at half here. Brad Johnson: You're only looking at half the building. Brad Johnson: I appreciate what you're saying but this is not an office building. It's a professional service building uhich is Iike retail. The tenants that ure put in there expect signage. Ahrens: t^lell I think there's a big difference between a retail buildins and a professional building... . Brad Johnson: l,4y tenants' point of view. I'm the one...they uant signs or they wouldn't be here. Ahrens: l.lel I okay . I mean I don't want to my opinion and that's the purpose of having have any more comments at this time. you. r ight have more than one tenant on a sign bar? On a argue r.r i thour report givi n9 you I don't I'm nobJ . tli ldermuth: tlould you single sign bar Brad? Brad Johnson: two probably.l.1or e Eac h than one tenant on a single? The ban could handle Iike one of these bars. l",ildermuth: Then you uould plan to do Bomethins Iike thatZ I meanpotentially? trildermuth: How many tenants potentially uriII you have in the buildins? tenants and minor. tle'reBrad Johnson: You've got to talk abouttalking about 5 major tenents. t"l i ldermuth: Just total . Brad Johnson: 1.,e could have about 30 ma jor i Ahrens: tJel1,I think that signage i.nside a building up there is a lobby to direct people. I mean it's not a huge office building. Brad Johnson: Thcy have to come back each time we do e sign. l.le have enough sign space here ne think for our tanants... I Planning Commission Heet i ngilay 2, 1990 - Page I Ni Idermuth: Okay, so represenLation? there are quite a number that won't have sign Brad Johnson: Tha!'s right. It's mainly the ones like...doctor or dentistr.rho ure really are concerned about. l.Jildermuth: l.rell in aIl honesty, I'm not very impressed with theappearance of the buildins to begin with. rt seems to me that the frontthe building probably ought to have a single sign ban and maybe the backcould have 3. Something like that but rm not in favor of illuminatingsigns and I'm certainly not in favor of 5 sign bans in front and S signbans in back. The southdale Medical euirdine for exampLe doesn't havesigns. Brad Johnson:That's a different... How do you see thEt Brsd as a different kind of building? John, maybe you lrant to address marketing of health servicesis not, I'm dealing h,ith r.rhat the tenants require. Not so 1.1 i ldermuth: tli Idermuth: I understand. Ahrens: I understand lhat. of the any Brad Johnson: because this much . . . John Jacobson: r think part of our objective here is that the chanhassenHedical center is going to be attracting people from a fairly geographicarea and they're going to be coming into town. They'll know of thechanhessen Professional Building. They're going to perhaps see that mainsignage and vet there's stilt soing to be some question. l^,e just have aninterest in being able to be visible from both sides of the building if youwiII. Really for two different purposes. The front side being thelocation of urhere the Business Health Services is Iocated in the ChanhassenHedical center and on the back side, the different entrances. r misht addthat there is not a ulay in from the lobby area into the Chanhassen l.,tedicalCenter on the north, John Jacobson: You eluded that pcrhaps there should beIobby area and people could go in that uay. They can,tfrom that door. Conrad: Anything Glse Jim? Erian? siEnage inget to the theclinic Batzli: f assume that, lf f remember, phase 2 thc bulldingsand f assume at that point you would uant signs up and downback of Phase 2. The tuo buildings tie into one another. king of tie inthe front and Brad Johnson: That's right and lt's a r€taiI building. Batzli: Jo Ann, in the report I think you said that you didn't have aproblem uith the same tenant advertising on both the front and the back.That no variance would be required. And no variance uould be required Planning Commission Heet i ng llay 2, 1990 - Page 9 additionally if we approve the.10 signs here correct? Because they're not -over the maximum Iimit? I guess I uas kind of Iooking at this a little bisdifferently I think than Jim and Joan. I r.las picturing this as more of a downtown building. Hore retail like if it t.ras Excelsior it would be a cluster of different buildings. Each one of them r.rould have their own sign- indicatins who uas in that. Hennessy Trave1 Services. Ben Franklin. You knou, Excelo Bakery and so when I !,,as picluring this, I was Picturing it as if this is the type of buildins ue !',ere trying to do. r.re should give them the signs so that's kind of how I was looking at it and I don't have a problem with givins them the 1o signs. EIIson: I sat dor.rn and thought of it in terms of if I r.ras the tenant. Thev could see the sign in the front and they made the decision that thev uanted to go in there. I don't think if they l,ent in the wrong door in the back, number one, they'd only do it one time and they'd probably never make that - mistake again. Number two, I think they've made the decision that thev're going to 9o in there based on uhat the front is so I don't think the back needs to have quite as many. Then I thought about, what does my doctor's office have or r^rhat does my dentist have and my dentist is right uP against a street'and he's got it in front but he doesn't have it in back. The first time I went in there I eJent in the wrong door but ever' since I've been going into the right door so f can't see that many. I think that the - traffic isn't going to be in the back. The PeoPIe go in the back have decided they're going in there because they're going to Park. It's not Iike a hish traffic area that's going to draw PeoPle in unless thev're in the apartment buildi.ng or something like that so I don't see that that side is as important to them as the front street and I think the front street can dc it adequately r.lithou! having the back. So that's my comments. Emmingsr I looked at this the r.ray Brian did basically. f don't really have anything to add besides that so I'd be comfortable xith the 1O myself. A couple other things. comments I'd have is, if this is the Chanhassen Professional Building and if there winds uP being 6 major tenants and 15 small ones, it would seem to me you tdould want that name on the building someuher e . Brad Johnson: It's on the pylon. Erhart: I think the medical industry has changed significantly and uhat we used to think of as a professional building years ago or cven 10 years ago, today has become much more competitive and therefore I think today a professional building needs that signage to attract customers. f knor.r if I go to a dentist and f do. I9o to i'tike Leonard over in the building over by DeIl Road there and he's having a hard time getting 9oin9. There's no signage out there. ( Emmings: Okay. That's in front. Okay. That takes cafe of that concern and then the only other concern I'd have is having more than one name on a sign. I'm not real comfortable with that and I don't know if it means that the lettering gets smaller. If you tlind uP trying to put 5 people on one of those bans. I think it ought to be limitcd to, it probably should be limited to one tenant per ban. That's all I've got. t Planning Commission l',leet i ng llay 2, 1990 - Page 10 Brad Johnson: He's moving. Guess where he's moving? Erhart: Here? Brad Johnson: Guess urhy he's movi ng . him a sign?EIIson: Because you promised Erhartr Yeah, I asked him if he was and he hadn't decided yet but anyhJay,I think it's real competitive out there and I think they need the signageto get going so I'm in favor of the signage. Conrad: Okay, thanks Tim. It's real clear to me, I believe I approvedwhat I see here. Hy memory fads through time. In fact, over 24 hours itfades but I do believe that this is what I saw and it didn't raise anyconcerns with me then and it still doesn't because it stilI l^ooks tastefulI think it's critical in retailing, and I think as ue develop downtown Chanhassen, it's just reallr critical that we give people the signs thatdrive folks into, that hel.p people get to the right building. It's part of my business- I see it all the time. Signage is extremely important. One,we kind of impose the problem on the building. The city imposed it. Still,regardless of whether the City moved it forward or back, I think thebuilding has turo fronts and the consumer has the right to find thebuilding, the office that they $Jant to Eo to. I think the signs add someexcitement to it. It is, as somebody else said, it is retail space. It,smore than a professional office building Iike we're used to. The businesshas changed. Like Steve, I agree. I don't think we should allow muLti names on one ban. I don't like that. The only other thing that bothers me, the only other thing that bothers me i.s uhat this. If our ordinancedidn't allour us to allow 5 front and back signage, wall signs, I r.rould wantto revisit the ordinance. It does so r.le can do this and therefore r.le'renot setting a precedent. l.le are responding to a situetion that isjustified. At least in my mind is Justified so ure aren't settinE aprecedent. Olsen: As long as they're below. Conrad: The 15? but motion? bre can have, okay. Those arG my comments. Any Emmings: I'll nove that the Planning Commission recommcnd rpproval of thesign proposal allo*ing 5 signs on the frgnt and 5 signs on the back'for atotal of 10 signs and recommend approval of the site plen amendment r.,iththe condition that there not be more than one business name per sign ban. Batzli: second. t Brad Johnson: No. He's in a building that does not or hasn't set it upIike this. l.le're recognizing the needs. l.te also have another dentistmoving because of that I Enmings noved, Batzll sccondad that thc Plannlng Commlssion rcconmend.pproval of thc sign propoeal 5 slgns on thc north sid€ lnd 5 signs on th€ ( Planning Commission tleeting l4ay 2, 1990 - Page 11 Conrad: Annette, comme nts? any summary for uhy you voted against it other than your Ellson:No, nothing other than the comments I've had. The same? I uould imaginc the same. Very straight foruard. Okay.-passes. Goes to Council? May 3oth? I don't know if that's righ!. It's the tlednesday after... Conrad: Hotion A OIsen: PUBLIC HEARING: NORTHI..IEST NURSERY LOCATED AT 7AO1 GREAT PLAINS BOI'LEVARD JUST SOUTH OF LYI,IAN BOULEVARO: I.IETLAND ALTERATION PERHIT FOR THE ALTERING AND FILLING OF A CLASS B I.'ETLAND . B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE UHOLESALE NURSERY - Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report. Chairman Conrad called the public hearing to order. Hark vanHoef: I'd Iike to shor.r some slides. Obviously EII the drawings are a little cumbersome to work uith so I thought if I shotred some pictures of uhat we're rea]ly Iooking at that might be somewhat helpful. I just have a few slides to kind of compliment Jo Ann's presentation and then I'II make some comments as to some of her etches or sketchings. This is the area to the south of the entrance which has already been bermed andplanting screen of 8 to 10 foot Austrian Pines have been put in. Theproblem that Jo Ann eluded to and sorne of you rcmember, re Here hcre lastfall. This area right herc uas the only ditch iatch arca for any of theNater. And uhen ue irrigated the crop, the holding crop that ule had in the-holding area, that Eater then uould run into this ditch and the only outlet Has to run through a culvert at thc bcginning of our drivenay onto ourneighbor's propert)2, the Fing6r's property. It created eome problems. The-Finger's approached us. lle Neren't rcally in a position ue could doanything. l.re contacted tlnDot and at that time r.rere told that that uas thecxisting drainflor^r or uaterflow and ue ueren't allowed to nake any changes._ So the problem continued until it uas brought in front of the City and MnDot came back out. tle {orked uith the City and uhat r.lrs done. and I can show it in the next picture. Again, this is not the next picture going dourn the ditch area but this is the holding area that is behind that wind screen or that planting screen. Herc's TH 1O1 right herc and here's theplanting screen that goes across the highr.ray so this is the area that plant material uas stored on that the h,atcr runoff ues creating a problem. This -is taken early this spring afler xe did do some grading lest fall toalleviate the drain problem. l.lhat wc really acconplishcd here is a new south side for a total of 10 signs for the Chanhassen iledical Center r.liththe condition that there be no nore than one business name per sign ban-All voted in favor cxcept Ellson, tlildermuth and Ahrens rho opposed and theaotion carried xith a vote of 4 to 3. I lliii,,ii i: i il,fl -:'. ffi An'id Elness Architects lnc Mav o ? tsgt CITY 0F CHAI\hA.rrE Ms. JoAnn Olsen City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Dear JoAnn: I have been asked to review our fiIe on the approvals granted to the Chanhassen Professional Building as related to exterior signage. I attcnded the meeting at City Hall in which the attached plans were presented by Brad Johnson and myeelf. I personally described and discussed the sigrrage on the plans f? Apill 1989 and recall t}lem being approved alter Brad explained the necessity in order to athact profeesional service organizations. In regard to the above please find copies of our transmittale to Steve Hanson dated 14 April 1989 and lTApril 1989. The deecriptioa and remarke deecribe the aigaificance of the plans. The plan sheet AE dated 17 April 1989 wae labeled city submittal and was used on or about tlre day it *'as transmitted. I hope this might assist in clariffing this matter. Thank you, and ifyou have firrther questions, please contact me. Sincerely, ARVID S ARCHITECTS, INC. Arvid Elness, AIA PresidenUCEO Butler Nonh Buildins, Suite 200 510 First A\.cnue North Minneapolis, Irlinaesota 55403 Telephoae 612.339.5508 M May 1990 Letter of Trans,.ittal I., ll DATE: 11 . \a,u,9q JOB NO: d4.J'A/r/*) fu**,.rxg,- *uuv,*\ Arvid Elness Architects h-:. Butler North Building, Suire 200 510 First Avenue North Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Telephone 612 .339 . 5508 arta|lll rtllllllllYffftll lrllnlTmTrnT) Tir: 2t*- ?l-r^rurr.ra1 Crc< aF 4^r"a^ltu, 4,',ttl*e.l )( Prinrt [.] Planr D Change Orr . D For yrur infornruion - O Rcvisa arl resubmit O Subnrit -cooies I distribution' E Othcr - COPIES lo E For approal !, For pur usc tr As rcqrrsted DESCRIPTION Oqe. ?t*t, A** b-ev:rr,.)* E Apporcd as submirrcd tr Apprord rs mad ! For rwicw and comornt DATE NO. +t7.n tu ate* A+4 <b- tfflE u4rlrN4,,1 | Qt4J arlg e*lvEte Ft*l9)rgq, tEvr E^v. ?z..,\.'i1itAb e1 Oltxte ?s*t +l+,rrl €t*./tNrsr-. 6rqrl? - fta6rJ tE-=te? eJ rdg Nrarff arrta qu.1) EL F-.,, a f..il ? 1 o.tp Ac.frA qfiE- +ta$J ** e*l br.,6.tdtF .A .ut?E. COP/ TO:F.l lAr'z^re&@ SIGNED RE: \rlt r sctding )ou rlachcd: O Shop Drrwings E Copy of ktrcr E Spccilicuions REMARKS: Al, A9 I*tter of Transmutal DATE:ti' L*'w. fr dL.tbr/r.J fu**r*ll,r- illlr-prr.ra1 lt.,la Arvid Elness /rcftirects Inc. Butler North Building, Suite 200 510 Firsr Avenue North Minneapolis, Minnesota 5b403 Telephone 612. 339. 5508 ElTmlrYrnir Ilaa Lr.lfllllrrtrtlrrllITlTl-fITI'rrI) Tir: coPlEs lo REMARKS: ?tc.-.e fl^*a^l Pr-.r^rurrg4 fur Cff< q 4p4**J !, Prinr' [.] Plans fJ Chungc Ordr.r DESCRITTION 2qe ?tt o , tfuer 6*v:n*sg D Apporrcd as submittcd tr Approwd as nucd ! For lwir:rr and comnrnt C For your infornrltion E Rcvisc anl resubmt lJ Subnrit -copics for distribution DATE NO. +t+n Al, AE fu. 2rftr LErLhr.ral I gt+J l,e *rEle erSrC4aa tsrzrBsz. COPY TO:Fd ll,nrr.;z..e SIGNED )tu JOB NO: RE: rlb are lerdinS ,ou iltuched: D Shop Drawings D Copy of lrtter E SFcifications E For approral !, For your use O As rcqucsted D Orher - \Z'--..- + I : 1- to.a { 9-a- -1 -----, w, cttS ?r"f6 P }€lrrC\ZaO*2 --.- FLr.lt{, vrtrr€, ILL IElft3it -- Qlro.sra 71C36 .! ro \ $.' { AI L/ll I L I I 4_t_ LJ 1 I S ti IJ I a;ai. D{-ua lrjflar2 Dt,rcflaoNo rurc.l. \u{l fa ba1fa?., ?attat i -1o1"LeO' 1-- cottolga?j ?L1 1 l I I -t 1 L 5ra u I rSnate c,. t+. Ian afacnpeJ flp t131 cttAltlAsSB{ k- PRffiSlO.{ L t.l!}f,e I aI I I I I I t I I i Srau 2 Is *'lJ- + i 2t -o a It' l(r + $ 3 -t- el l^ tD }€Eia3a.,b -- -.- FLtJa.l, vral'g I l|rur,,tlrt/Lttlfti!/..4ta2era F.erqll 'llr i1 ll IJI L *.r-"- - +Srqu 2 1 Srau 1 t 1 - '-l cMlrj aaa. lltr, Prt fllll rtNrt Xt " ^'ai,,Ja irorl. rmrl rtrar. a $ Ll1 I Il *c 3nc\3e Ft"., t\o*rpeJ o{/Itrt^sE\l 'tffisq\rir lt.Lrr?--t lnoaa.Ei aI Ap.. lB . tq 81 4 I I prr!3-t - ei +,r- ,, Ae c. t z -99 iiE'Ea Ii II I lii rri lii I II ,, t l!t iir I I! ! lit,irrl !i of ;s Ir. ,,.e F 1,t ff E r][ i! I I a I t I ! II h T I tt I 1 3 3o9-I & J nEsIA.RA'{T =l-- =+ ==;- == E = = = a.(J !n!! *izti PI Br i I I at E a B i I II It I I GE I F-'O6LVA c 6 iI I mx 6 =5 B1 H [7 4 5 I,IItIIII1I IIIII a ::o.i .l F et_ - a <6_r < -l: o o. ro O I :::E o t -' .; trAau Er 3u.E,; c :0D ilt,\2 t E I 5 E 3 ( 0i h4 )Eti o-z n- 5{ 1, 1i E$;$ ,i ,r 3-l\ ' 5E Nat 3;gn Propogcl D i 5 -11 '"1 z'-e/t'-l 'j JG/'.g(taTr*r -q; E-'=:i . ?-&- Eki r: f. F1^r-a 14 z c-(i :'-lrA- L D' c.P, l-< lrhrr'a v,.r i, :YE SiiLE c'| T.:> i: c:-tl\. saP'' Z!2L> 3" eh'try?) -r9* sr./t-E- r- B;r.-ropr ,5 !.{L-Lvsl '/,-A her, 3c.A-.e ,". r'- a Business Health Services Thles & Talle Chanhassen Dental Dr. Fiedler, Orthodontist Goldstar Mortgage ,fdinor"tro* l-- ,r." "*o,.,,,r _A 2 t- ruc)orr Ridgeview Center 470 W.78th St. /^' \ l,.'y.*- xle.J te r \s.rr+/ i, dl l\ !"tI .tns r.r39avHr'Yk7AI' .r,.tr., P€rnrlEtGl' ...rrrY rr^"rr\ . qr.fl9cs, :J Y) Q--\:t <rrq'( gor!a l{l\'trrodYlNNrhl lrlart :Iv1 15la att ', N I /l N Y d W O fx9ts rstnoouoN /o lrcdon rq) ntu's?r,!q1 t.i-- s ln- Goa1-t \,.-(J a- {, { t1 T& I Ncp o ;- { }J i 11 l- a 3 s{ 5g ?" sPri\l F5'. g 4 B f;l; fl ;--p! ^o l5i ; iii? l;fL I$II T191ie\rr{i8 r lt+$l g 'J-( J{ $ 9 4. n L.36 0JsUE =No ._..t=? OJ ;bD oE\ 4, I E lr =g e UI5 t 0t- J d3 r i.tz i;ilrt ijsPvltt" :h1-,;, Eurf; ru[;flt na.i g{fll 2t )r* fi1p,s:J r3, i$-3+ '6-Jo i*]E10 it st IT I N .t, Yr 3t J I 5 7,t 7 tr5{rt1<0 ____+l s {l[-'lh 0 u J 0 a- l t ' City Council lteeting - rc rl, t990 t SNE PLAil TIIEIIDIIET{T TID SIGilEGE NEUIES, CHEil#ESEX PNOFESSIqAL !I.'ILDIilG, UESI 78IH STREET, 308 CPELittlD elo 8lnD Jo}IxSOX. Jo Ann olsen: The rhole reason rc're bringing this back in front of you is that the applicant first uas cohing thr6ugh rith a sign varlance to rllor one of the tcnants to have rore than one ral.l sign. then re looked ovcr through the lilesrhat the sign plan that ras epproved. re found th.t thlrr rcr! tuo diffcrentplans. one had 3 signs on the south side rnd Z on th! north rnd then there uas also a plan that shoued 5 signs on both sides. fhis is rlcht ln thc tiddtc ofuhere.,.planners changed aglin rnd it's not real clcar in tha rcport or the [linute Counci corres Coroisjust k aPPr ov stIr POn sio ind ed. hat this is actually thc rlgn proposal th.t r.s .pprov.d by the City nd Planning Comission. l,! did get . .llttlr fror the rpplicant shoring dence scnding tha plrn rith thc 5 elgns on both aidcs tnd the planning n Chairoan Lrdd Connd rcrerbcred epproving 5 on both sides. So re'reof bringing it beck in front of you to verify that thls is uhat rrsilot to have hir prove rh.t re fcel that r. rtnl. Thc planning Coonrission rcconlended thr 5 on both tides. CounciLuooan Dialer: tlhere did the confusion cote in? Itayor Chaiel: llas this . dr.ft pl.n or a finalizcd plen? Jo enn olsen: No, thay hrd to 90 through an officiel eign/facir plan. The confusion ras that there ucrr plans subnitted end thc rcck beforc thc planning Cooeiission packet and then ther? rere plans sublittcd th! taek of thc planning Connrission packet end I believc uhat happaned ras thr pltns thlt ccrc brought bythe developer shourn during tha discussion had thc 5 signs on both sidrs. I jusl don't knou if it ras evar ra.lly clcarly pointed out in thc rlport that that rasuhat uas being approvad, I'! not doubting thlt lt rasnrt ahoun. tt's just oneof those things that light havc bcen rissed along th. tay so r! Just rent to get verification- Counciloan Johnson: A typical 13th hour subnission. llhcn tftar the packrts have gone to Planning Connission, than a ner set of phns colc in. Thrt nar,r setof plaDs. Personally I don't rclarbcr tha 5. I rarcrbar thc 3. 3 on on: side end 2 on the other side. I thought lt ras tind of unusu.l thcy didn't put 3 on both sides. I don't ranenbar the 5 rnd 5 but I don.t hav! r problcrr rith 5 end5 actuall.y. tly lenory r.Drnblrs th! 3 and 2 but that tas r long tiae t9o to tryto reoenber. llayor Chaiel: ff it goes to thtt S, ukc aur! thrt thtre.r no tor! thrn one business n.ne per sign on thcra ai the Plenning Comlcrion rccorrcndcd .s rcll. Councilaan Johnson: So thtt alans h. crn only hrvc 3 buslna33ls tn th.tbuilding uhich ia . prett), big bullding for only 5 buslnesct. As 1on9 es thesquarr footage is hot ovlr our, I don't heva a problcr rlth 2 neres pci cign Pcrsonally rithlr rs long rs r! lnou .x.ctly the clzc of tho3r rigns rnd ell ofr sudden le don't get aom ll foot tell by 20 foot rldr rlgn. Uhrt.a thornthgra ere nice littlc slgns. Itayor Cheie]: Does lt splll out thc rxrct slze of thosa rigns? I'vc rcad this. Councilaan Bo),t: 12 inch lcttarc 13s ln thi3. 28 YY City Council fieeting - e a, 1t9O Councihan Johnson: Ue have sore prints nor. Councikoaan 0iol.er: This is thc official? Counc.ilun Johnson: Ihis is the 3 tnd thc 2 version. Councilhan Boyt: llaybe rhile you guys .r. looking.t it I can stetc a feu concerDs and then Brad or aoleone cen rlspond to. Like rany things dorntoun, once you see theo it ahays sa!!s ,ls though thrr!'a aore sort of surprisc ebout hou it looks. f rareobar talking about thc need to put this so close to the road uhen ue built it. Uhen I sre it thrr., on! of ry concerns is that rhen leput signs oh it' it's going to look avcn closar to thc road so Id }ike to haveyou talk about that I tinutc rhen you !!t up to eddrcss i:sues. Thc othcr oneis, as a rhat I rould think of ts r professional building in toln, in driving byprofessional buildings norralrv uhat r r.c therc is l mae for the building rndr don't see each individual tenant listed. And t lnor you'rc not going to listeach one. You're anticipating 30 trnrnts in therc end thcre's no iay iou're9oin9 to get that aany on there. So f s?e a concarn tnd you've referrld to itor sonei.rhere staff did that this ras a rctail office center sort of thing .sversus a professional building. r'i not quita sura rhat the difference is inthat. I can tell you that ty expectations ar. I littlc bit different than nhatI'o seeing shape up in teras of tha signs. I'! a little I guess the closenessto the road gives that building a trcrcndous irpact on th. rest of dountoun rndI'o rondering ifis. f unde rs t anpeople. I'n jus got any artist rI'd sure Ii ke to signs don't rake it a littl! tore.pparent yet than it alraadyd your tenant's desirc to heva thcir neaes out in front oft not real coafortab]? rith it so I'd aure like to see if you've enderings or anything that nlll .ake this a littlc rorc claar. see t heB. councilnan Johnson: As far !s the clcrrncss of lt, hou you backlight thesesigns too aakes a lot of diffarcnce. r !!!n you can put ln soaa quartz lights back there you knou rnd you can raad 100 yrrds tuay. you c.n rcad et nighiuith. r'd rant these signs for thc night tiac sidc of it vcry rinirelly backlitto uhere they rre readable but not graring. sorahol re've 9ot to spaciiy thatpart of it because you crn really thror r lot of rrttag! bchind therc end bcvcry axcessive. hayor Chaiel: te hevr to be rcnsitive to thc rrsidentiel ploplc. Councihan Johnson: Especially on thc north :ldc. ycrh. Councilr.n Boyt: If re takc thc llehts lcross hcrc in thc rest :hopping c!nt!r,or thr siEns, that signagr rakcs oonsc. tt.. mt ovcr bearing Uut ii fiinforeative. Yet it's sat, gosh rhet is thrt, tOO fe;t off t[a ctrJcti- 25 frltoff the strrct? ttor re'r. telking ZO f.rt off thc .tr.rt or lcst ro I,rlntercstrd in hou you'rc aoing to hrndlo thrt. councilran Johnson: r'. vlrv lntcrcstcd rn your crlling thlg e retrll. r'vcelravs thought of this es a profcssional building rhcrc you.ll hrvc-inglnccrsrnd dentists end doctors end stuff llkc thrt. t totally egrac. Counciluonan Dicrler: Profassional building? I 29 Gity Council lleeting - J r {, 1990 Councilean Johnson: Yea h. Councihonan Dirler: That ras the nate of th! project. Councihan Johnson: This is the first telk f've heard of rltail. ft,d.beinteresting your coooents there. Brad Johnson: lly n.De is Brad Johnson end f live .t ZaZS Frontier Trail. Ithink first of all for the racord I rant to point out thrt lt's our feeling thatthis particular progrer has been epprovad and r! h.v! ! nutber of peopb that have been through this eeeting end hevc vcrlficd thc frct th.t thasr plens rcre subrritted both to the Planning Coalission .nd to the City Council .nd r!r. approved at that tire. It'B rlso our fccllng that this :hould stend on thrir oun but in case ge do have a problce here, then rc'll probably hrvc to eppeal because ue feel that they rlrr approvld. l{.vr gonr ahud rith our phns for thebuilding. lle've gone ahead btsad upon thrt approvrl in .ttracting our tenants and re've included that in our lcases for our t.nants and that is sort of rhcre ue're al.. I believe you have l?tt.rs fror the rrchitect that thlse plans, you received the original phns on Friday. 0n ttonday lc had additional set ofplans. As the planner thrt uasn't herc that handled those plans, he can't ansuer that- Ue carried those phns through. ge did not knor thcy rlrc not inyour packet but ue subnittld theD each tire re presented thra rnd they rer! not an issue at that tine. That's kind of rherc r. rrr! very surprised but I could understand hor,r it could happcn that for sore rceson they never got into thepackets because they rere here fror daI one. 0n Friday th! ,.{th. Th! nlxt iloDday they uere here. They rere in Steve's hands. that retk ra subritted 10. There's a receipt saying that they r.r. hcrc prior to th! phnning Comlssion Deeting rhich is easily 30 daya beforc the Council r.eting. |tor rhy it didn't end up in your packet I don't knou. You tnol te don't 9et thrt part of thepacket. All re do is get the lettar. So that's kind of rhera le lre. Relativeto uhat the signs uill look likc, I'd like to htve 8ob Copeland addrrss that issue and then nunrber 2, rhy is this buil,ding or does eny building today need signs and ue're actually calling it e profcssional r.rvic! ccntlr. I,d Iikc to have the lolks that are the tlnrnts of that building cxphin that rnd rerve got Dan enderson and John Jacobsen here to rxplain the nrcd in today,s rerketlnglorld uhy this type of building ncads this typc of aigns. I tlso rant to point out that any building ln thc dorntoun district hes thc rlght to hav! 15t of it'sfront of it's building in signs. Thcrc is no rcstriction rlhtive to being aprofessional building or rhatever it is, you hevc e rlght to hrvc . crrt.in mount of signs tnd up to lst of th! ,ront of thc butlding tnd thrt's in ,ourordinances. This particular bullding l. ,.5t of thr front of thc building Insigns, As to uhy the building ia closc to thc rord t3 tt Is. thrt rrs r requirooent of the City during thtt tirc. If yos loot .t rn, of our prrvious suboissions of thc typc of building r! r.ntld to conatruct, rc h.d lt back erayfroa the street end it'r just tficre end thlt rrs rcqulr.d bt thc Clty .t.ff orplannlrs- At the tire that rr rant through this procl8s, thcy lndicatcd thrt rc rhould add color to thc building rnd rigns. ft'. mt thlsr 2 p.oplc harr, thrt signs rould be vcry rderntrg.ous to thi: bulldtng bcceuse lt rould edd colecolor. The signs that rc'rc thlnting .bout using ere ldcntlcel to rhlt rr. ln foun Square. fhey're not thr big rhit: licht bick llt oncs. Thcy,rc tndividualletters. Sone uill be colorcd rnd if ,ou loot et lt clos:ly...to livcn it up and that's rhere re are. Bob. do you r.nt to deal rith thr sign issue itself? 30 --'t t Eity Council tieeting - - re 4, 1990I i I Bob Copeland: Let ae just try to clarify rhal re're really talking about hereI because it doesn't sound lika cverybody understands ell the issues, at least theI uav r do. lre have tlo closely related issues that re're asking for. One is the nunrber of signs. lle uant 5 on each side of the building. rhai rould give us, - as Brad said, 7.5. r guess le calculated it vesterday. rt's just a little bitunder 6* of the face of the side of the buitding so rgain re uant 5x. ue alsosant the ability to allou a tenant and there are tro trnants that uant to have one sign on the south side and one on th. north tide. l{or thcsc signs, you cannot physically see these signs .t thc a.re tire so they face oppositedirections. so those are the tro issues. l{on thc pranning coroission saidokav. You can do that. They also edded that thay didn't iant to have rore thanone tenant on a sign band and re 9o along rith that. That,s okay_ So that'sbasicallv the issue. lror,, these sign panels ,ra z tcel high, Zrt lcet Long endthe nunber of htters and the erount of thr sign penel thit is takcn up Jependson the tenant. There night be ! tcnant rith e four lctter n c or thcrc rightbe sorre that have .any letters like Chanhasscn tledicel Crnter. fhc tcnant rilldecide rhether it's lit or not lit but re understrnd that re have to haveindividual Ietters lhich ue,re rilling to... ' councilnan Johnson: r'd think you'd rant thea all l^it or none of theo rit. Counciluonan 0imler: Absolutely. It has to be uniforo. Councilnan Johnson: yeah, I'd think you'd rant it uniforr. I ttaro. chniel: r'd assune that thev'd also 9o off et e epccific tire in theI evening t Bob Copeland: Ue could arrange that. councilnran Johnson: rs there 9oin9 to be r late hours out paticnt uith chantledical event ually? Bob copeland: r think if you hold that question, their reprrslntative cen giveyou the ansuer. Councileran Johnson: Because then turning it off ray not you knou. llavor choiel: r have a question. lle have one of thc relbcrs of thc planning conmission here. Brian, do you rareober discussion rt thlt p.rti;l.r rlJii"gand I'a reading so&ething herc fror thc phnnlng Couission iictinc of Aay injrnd Ennrings aoved the planning connission rccoeiend rpprovel of itrl srcn - allor.ring 5 signs on th! front rnd 5 signs on thc beck ior e totai of t6 rignsand recooaended aPprovtl of thc Site Phn A.cndlent rith the conaiiion ttraithere not be aore than l.busincss n..! per tign b.nd. rt says tiii you eacondcdit. Do you recall that discussion? Brian Batzli: veah. The discussion les th.t thcy dldn't croud nracrous lr..esinto each individual sign ras the intlnt of thet condition. ;a il; tir. r don,tbelieve Erad or anyona else had r problcr rlth thrt. Hayor Chariel: Is there eny other discussion? 3l t Eity Council fieeting - n! a, ltto Councilnah Boyt: llell yaah. t think thc side of the buitding that frces the.partoent building' rhen those busiacssas erc closed, that licht should be off. Counciluooan Dialcr: t lgree. llayor Chriel: Yeah, that ras the point that J brought up. Councilhan Boyt: fhe ones facing rain strlet, f Ouess I don't have ruch of a concern lith that or :s ruch of a conccrn because thc ones oeer herc r believelre on every tihe I go by so that could !e just part of rain str.et. llayor Chniel: Ih€y're ell 9oin9 to b! th! 8.!e 5 tcnants in that gartjcularbuilding. They r.rould noraally havc those syncronizad onto . tin?r tnd'they couLd split it but it's probably bettcr off if thrl, had ther both going off at aspecific tiae. 8ob vhat have have to h heh side goi n Copeland: Could I nake a point hare? t don't think you quita understand r,re're talking about. There are tuo tcnents nor that havc said they cant tosigns on both sides. Noy the rerainder of the tenants rill probably only one sign each. Either on the north slde or thc south side so re'rc going aee Dore than 5 tlnants. tlright so Dr. Hall is a dentist for cxarrple andas signed a lease and he's 9oin9 to have one sign. OnIy onr sign on oneo the other. And he,s probably 9oin9 to rant it lit and he's probably 9 to uant it lit into the cvcnings so paople rill drivc by.nd s.a.that's uhere his place of businass is, I think if you take a close look et sone ofthese oedica] buildings. this is not only a redical building but if you look atthen, you can see oany signs identifying other businessrs and things that go on. Councilnan Johnson: So if he rants it lit hc shosld bc on the strcet side because at night lhere's not that aany people running through the parking lot. Bob Copelandr Correct, 8ut ue only heve five on thc street side so not everyone's 9oin9 to be able to be on the strect side. Councilftan Bo),t: ttell you'vc certainly alen.orr of thcsc bui!.dings than Ihave. The ones t'vc s!en, the professional arts buildings htve not had litsigns that are 2 feet high end 21 tcct long on thc front of thr.. Usuelly you have to 9o through sone sort of centrel lntrance end in that entrence is adirectory and it r,rill havc rool 103 and rho!v!r': narc ir thcrc. Bob Copeland: Are you frailirr rith Southd:h tt.dictl building? Councilnan Boyt: Uell I havcn't becn thcrc in qultc . long ti.r. Bob Copeland: fhere's e florat rhop. Drug Stor.. A!.1 thosa businaea have signs outside. llor elso, our .igns ron't rccG33.rlly b: 2a fGrt uid!. That isthe ridth of the sign prnel. Thc becking board thet th! l!tl!r3 rlll be tountld on. Counciliran Boyt: okay. cxceed 12 inches high? An I right in the undcrctrnding that the lettrrs ron't 1 l 1 32 I City Council lleeting . Iune (. 1t90 Bob Copeland: No. Ue don't lnor rherc that rcstriction c.De up. te're linitedby the height of the panel. councilnan Bovt: Brad and r rould disagree about the point of rhy the buildingis sitting so close to the road. te crn say that's thc City rcquircaeni and rguess I'Il accept that part of it- The part that f have sone difficulty lith isuhy did the City require this. ft's beceuse it,s your.partnent buildingsitting back behind it and bctreen this building,s perking needs end iheapartoent building's parkinE needs, you couldn't put it enyrhere clse. Bob Copeland: fhat,s not corrcct- counciloan Bovt: okav, tell rc rhv that bullding't out close to the front? Bob copeland: r'll tall you. The rlrson it's out closa to the front is becausethe citv staff and the citv consultant planning rcqulsted that it be oui next tothe road and the reason didn't .have anything to do'rith p"riing-ot t ".-i han ttreydid not lant to see cars parked in front of this building "" iiu -aiir, -i'y on78th. Thev did not rant to have a streetscape that ras i"i. in-ri"r-.rr ,.tinre and then the buildings back aray frol the street. thcy ranted to-[ave astreetscape that is sinirar to aanv dountorns rhere the buiidincs ira-richt upnext to the road. In this case it's about 30 fcet alay. ft,s not rishi up nertto the road but thev vanted it right up so the prrking'is on ir,r-no.ti"sio"screened froh 78th. Ihat's the reasoD. Ue had plans rith the oppo.ii"... Council,ian Boyt: llell f lant to follou up on that in r tinute but rho,s JohnJacobson? John Jacobson: Right here. councilhan Bovt: 0kay, r'rr. Jacobson. The l.ctters l l be rpproxiratcry r0inches in heieht and re anticipate the sisnree to be very p;;?"a.i;;;l-ioo*ing. John Jacobson: ...uould have 10 inch lctt.rs. CouncilDan Boyt: end so rs Ursula aentioned, you,re then ilplying that re tayhave sone 10 inch lettcrs and sooe 24 inch liticrs. John Jacobson: tlell you yon,t be able to 9et . 2{ lnch lcttcr. Councilnan Boyt: 1g inch .laltcr, -rh!trv!r. Ihis is r,lly rhat ,ou rrnt to do?You uant to have that kind of variance 1r th. l.tt.r frcicfii:- -- Brad Johnson: Thrt's cxrctly lhat rc havc on roun squ.r! rnd it's cxactlyuhat.'.on aanv of thc prcsentrtions thlt EnrJ rnd-the'pi.rio"" pi"inliitia onsignage for the dorntoun eoDrunity. Councilnan Eoyt: Right, I rcraabcr thosc. Brad Johnson: Thev lantcd--.end then sorc verirnce rn th! lrttlrs rnd that,sbecone a-srandard. rf vou drive by niractc'iil....tir. iir-ir,il"-"iri"'Jnathey're in the process of chansins thar to cir!-ita UuifAing-a-iitii!"6ii oorclife. That,s the trcnd in sienaee. rt's ciicifi tf,. piiseitition'ii"i-i.ru 33 I : tity Council tteeting - .n€ 4, 19tO Dacv and the past planners did end re've tried to stay rith consistant signbands. t,e don't have signs going all over rnd then the ability to have color and logos lithin that standard. couhciloan Eoyt: uell if you're telling le it's going to be likc rhat ve seeover here. Brad Johnson: lle hope it ls. 2 feet doun to 6 inchcs. That'e :xactly our goal. Those .lettars vary fron Cou AB buiIr ren sPo 9et no !J reE ncilran Boyt: Iell ae about the position of the building. ff re've got just irrute because I've just had ty concept bloun out of thc iatcr so hor iid ihislding end up in front of the street. Because I rcncober. sce Todd rhat emenber, I've heard that I'r rrong but I,ll tcll you rhat I reacaber. Ienber the consultant coning in hcra and saying re naed this rrny parkingts and this is uhat I haard so lt .ust havc been rrong. The only'ray ,. canthen is by crealine one large parking lot betreen thase tro buildings airdthis gentlenan is coling back end saying that's not trqe so lhat do you eBber? Todd Gerha uent in fi already se t he liedica not u:ork u building i nake any s lot inbe t u t ouards th parking fo Point )'ou rdt : There las e varirty of things. f rean thr apartrcnt building and then the lledical erts building and rith the aprrtacnt buildingn p]ace, you have to uork off of that. There ras talk of puttingrts building back and the parking lot in the front but that uouldthe people in the aparthent building looking out their uindou to aheir front yard per se of the.partacnt building. It just didn'te so it flip floppad back the other uay and you have the parking the tuo structures. end it got pushed an additional lS feet oaduay to allou for rnother drive lane back thara rnd reduce thehat access. You have 2 drive lanes eround thc perking lot. 6t oney had one. Councilnan Boyt: Uhat I don't reaenber coning out of it r. saying that uJe uant this to sit up next to the rold so it r Uest 78t h Street looks. Councilnan Johnson: Actually I do rcoetber that but f thint that rasjustification after the fact. Such as the crooked o1d cltl, halL. f think they caae back and said yelh, rc'w done rhrt rc Grn. l{or l:t'a think of raasonsthat it looks good. r think that's rhat thc consultent did in thrt c.s! rhcn he caoe out 6ayin9 this. I ras kind of 9oin9 rh huh enylay rt th.t. polnt. Brad Johnson: Jrv. the origlnrl dorntorn pt.n dr.ft.d in 198s, or 1t84. priorto us doing this oodel had that rhol: ridc of thc .tr?ct rlth th! buildingspulled to the strret. And that ra3 thr pleh at that tilc end thc plinncrs ttrrtrere involved in that .lu.ys r.ntrd lt lo bc thrt rry. Thcn rc ctrc back end decided that ue had r tcnent for th.t rrr., .rlnl, llr- Jacobron rnd thc clinicud the hospital lnd our originel proposal r.s to dc6i9n e building thrt 3!yaore in the niddle and ran nortMsouth. 8lceusr of thc lnabllity iftcr r ycerof us to build on that sitr becruse cc could not r.loc!t! llr. Hanson rnd becausere could not relocate llr. Lorln Andcrcon end e rholc bsnch of othar rcesons that haC nothing to do really rith the st.ff, r! finrlly thrcl our hands up rnd saidrhy don't you guys tcll us hoy rc ctn do it end if you toot rt th! design of rsttiIA irhnt ens eenerrt onl s the city staflill changc th. ray 3tl j -- a+ a : City Council fieeting - nr l, lrr0 this particular building, i.t ras designed around llr. Hanson so re could buildright over hio because ue anticipated that, end hc,s still there. Ihis is hour aany years ago did ue sign the lease? 2 years? 2 Ln years ,go. fhey're just aoving in. lle're about to losc thc prcsence of our rain t.nants tnd they rerejust going to 9o elseuhere lnd re rould not thEn be lble to coaplete the dountoun and so finallrr, I think corrcctly so, thc ateff care back rith thisplan because ue uere unable to buil.d thc planned buildine that re had recoonended originally and that's really rhy it iappened. It,s nobody's fault except that land requisition in dountoun araas sotetires 90 slou ls lrou guys .re luare of . Counciloan Johnson: So therz's a lot of vrrious rllsons that this hes occurred and it has nothing to do rith th: tigns. llc'r. herr to ttlt tbout thc signs. Brad Johnson: Lle're happy rith tha r.y it loots. Councilnan Eoyt: ft has lots to do rith the signs because the building'ssitting there nou and sonehou re,ve cone up rith tha opportunity, rlthough debated by Brad to change thesa signs .nd ry point rould be, I rant thes- signsto be uery conservative because the building is rlrcady obtrusive lnd rhen reput lit signs on there, it's 9oin9 to be avcn tor. 60. end so I don't tnor uhatthe right ansuer is but I knou part of that ensrer has got to be that thesesigns are not 91aring attractions to th.t building. l'iayor ChEiel: tthat you're saying is you uant consistency lithin thosj signsBill uhether 12 inch or 15? Councilhan Boyt: I think f yant that- Brad Johnson: oefining that, re have r sign band of 20 inchcs. I think oursign band on the balance ol the buildings dorntorn is aora like 2 to 3 feet and sometimes it runs as high es s feet. ge've cut this beck lnd ocrled it back.The reason that the hospital has 10 inchls signs is becluse they have a lot ofletters. Right? so vou just can't be high and long .t thc seai tiae. There'nav be sonebodv uho just. rants to be DDS you knor and re'rc only trlking abouifive particular tenants but thosc t.nrnts rill oot sign lcascs ittt us.- uitrnot Dove in there unless they have idenl,ification blc.use that h.s becooc thekev to narketing. r think llr. Jacobson rrnts to sprlk to that rboui -hou iDportant it is to the oedical profcssion today that thcy havc signag! b"""r",that's the naae of the gane. ft's corpctitivc. U..rr tr)ring to itii .ittin,re've scaled do,n frol 15t dorn lo ? lr? end rc rcelly don't-have r iot ofsigns. lounciluan Johnson: For onr othlr purposr r lrnt to Just ary one thing. Forr..iblic safcty PurPoscs !!d pcoplc drivlng e]ong thc rotd, I'd lrrtc to itvc therigns uhare you have to look for thcr too herd. Thc tigns heve to bc obtrusive.nough to uhere thcv can be quicklv scen bccausa othcrrisc you,rc diiving ltiethis uhich sonc people do eny,ry-but no use givino thcr ruc'h .or: reisor. rhey John Jacobson: lrv nlne is John Jecobson. r.yr uicr prcsident of Ridgcviculledical center and as Erad has cludcd. rc erc thc .rjor t.Mnt on t[i-riistfloor uhich consists of the chanhasscn Hcdicel ccntci rhich is ol coursc or. 35 I City Council ttceting - .nr {. l99O Councilnan Uor krran: t1 Sout hdale, St. Francis for ny sickliness in ! understand the idea of quibbling a lit.tla bit back. I an concerned a aparthent complex, fhe had sone neighbors coop pot entiallr rnd so pcop don't knou if the third Brad Johnson: It's full. David llccollua and the essocirtes thrt r!'rr bringing on rith Dr. iccolluo and Eusiness Health services- r thint thc irsues heve bccn rell discussed thiscvening. I find the dafinition betreen rctail tnd profession intriging in the sense that ra not sure thrt thlre's euch :cparatencis enyaorc betraen rctail end professional. rn health c.re. rt lcast in the lest lo yrars in health care,larketing has becote, rhcthcr that,s good or bad, it,: bacorc thc rcelity of thefie]d. It's cart.inly rorathing that rc'rr ecnsitivc to. As. rattlr oi factthat's the rlason re'rc ln Chanhassen is becausc r!,r! ver), trarc of our service area and th? opportunities that this particular corrunity pr?scnts to us. Interos of the signage itsclf, ra fccl vcry strongly that r! nred to hevc signage on both sides of the building. Really on thc south oidc or on the straat sidifor identi.fication of thc busimss end on thc north side for rhcrc thoscparticular businesses are locatad. Drn end.rson rho's the clinic ranrger Juststarted a couple tonths back just descrtbed to rc. ,Gst.rday thcre rrs tnclderlv uocan that inadvcrt:ntly ralkad ln th! rrong door bcceuse re don't havethe signage, the appropriatc signage up ylt. f think for coapetitiva purposes,for aarketing purposes, for visibility purpos.s, for aducational purposes, ,efeel very strongly that rl! r.nt to hevc signege on both sides of the building.lle also are planning on cvening hours. lle rould certrinly. our prcferlncc rouldbe that the signage, particulerly on thc str..t side, 9o lnto the evening. Uethink it's ihportant th.t.s p.oplc co!. to the Chrnhrssen Dinner lhartai thatthev becohe auare that ro havc the chanhessen lladical canter therc end gusiness Heal.th services there. A lot of our clicnts core lror outsid! of th. conhunityof Chanhassen and as all of us arc :rarc in rarkcting todry, ,ou need to crcatean auareness and re need to have visibility rnd peoplc nccd to be .rarc thatre're here. r. |layor? lly aailbox rcakly I think hrs rail froo :nd l,laconia and llettodist .nd 30 tha,r'rc ell rarkctingy house rnd ra lrs denying thca vcry rell. But Iearkcting and trying to tarket. I think r€'r! llnost ?rsus 3 on the front versus 5 on th. front end 2 on theout the ncighborr that .rr going to coac in fror thlt'rc 9oin9 to havc :ore olouing tlgns in thare. Ue Justaining ebout pirtas doun .t TH 7 .nd IH al cooklng e 9!t .xcitld rbout rorcthing thtt raybc chrngas. Ifloor of that thlng'3 full yet or not. b YII councilnran lrorkran: rs lt? rha slgns es I reagincd th:a, r'r on pu5lic rccord as sayirrs I think this buildinc looks blttrr than f thought rhcrc it it rnd lit up rt night rnd sole of thc Ony tones rnd th? llghttng end ttuff. It rould.ppear to ne froa thesc signs tnd rhet ir potantially groposcd that lt Isn'tgoing to oaka it look rerlly tny bctter but l'! Ooing to luv: that to the ouners and potcntiarlv thr tcn.nts. oon't rG hrvc lllurlnrtion 3t.nd.rdr rs ferrs hou bright lnd naon varsue rnything clra? Don't rc hrvc rnythlng? Prul xrluss: Tha netr sitr phn ordlnrncc docs regulttc thr arount of foot candles thlt can appelr lt th! proplrty llna tp hrlf e foot crndlc. Lord th.t'snot very bright but you can sec soecthlng quitc I uy: off that,r beloy thetcuto{f. 0f course a sign is not shi.ldad. It's Just dcslgncd to projlct out so .l 36 I I I City Council lleeting - "rne {, 1990 it can Eeet that half ! foot candh standard and still be found to be ennoying to socebod)r trho's trying to sleeP. Brad Johnson: I think the ansuer to that oDe...cohcerned that re sirrply turn off the back signs uhen the busieess is done at the rnd of the day lhich, hou late rould you guys possibly run? John Jacobson: Typically our cvening hours rlll lnd at 8:00 but rc rre,.. Counciloan llorlnan: In the sunoer probably not at all. Brad Johnson: Not at all in the evenings. tlaybe 9:00 or 10:00 and sc couldjust it up for that rhole...end just lake that a rlgul.tion like ue have a lot of ot her regulations. Councilran lJorknan: Are you leaving this then rt 5 on rach side rnd that's it? Hayor Chmiel: Yes. Councilaan llorkoan: 0kay, is that r part of one of the stipulations? Brad Jghnson: No. Ue're quite colfortable. Lle'lI havc 5 arjor tenants. llayor Choiel: I don't know uhere they'd put then anynore Ton. Councilnan Johnson: In their rindor.rs. Brad Johnson: ...Iook like also. lle're going to have 5 signs. Ue do not anticipate, ue'll probabLy have about 10 tlnants in the building. 3 or .t of thecajor lenants, the second largest tenant in the building is not 9oin9 to have asign and that's the ouner. x Councilnan Ucrknran: f guess rnd I don't knou, re can all try to ilaEine houthis going to all look, .tc. but. Bra bac Per dJkt ait ohnson: Renerrbcr rc hrvc to colr back each tirc re o sea thase folks right? You'v! got your staff. tc'. fhera's rll linds of checks .nd b.l.nc.s. do do vr go . a sign. Ue'ret to pull e sign councilsan uorklan: ua rike to sae thcr Brad. But r gulss r don't tnor reallyuhat ue're 9oin9 to acconplish by 3 on thc front vlrsus s on the front lnd as itpans out, I don't knou. It.s the rholc rarketing qu.stion about . business'ability to prooot. itself and obviously thay hrv: thc right. They'r. not lvenfilling the requirerient. tlalf of their rcquirclent for the sign squ.r. footage and so I think ure uent I long ray around thc block on this one lnd I,d lika to aove approval. t 37 Ered Johnson: Lie're just saying that's uhat ue thought it ras approved and ue're con:ing back and arguing the point saying... Councilnan Uorknan: ff you have a demand for rore than 10 signs are )rou going to be putting nore signs up? a City Council lleeting - r! a, 1t9O Counciloan Johnson: than the sign lights. Straet lights in thc back perling lot tre going to be uorse Counciluooan Diller: end thcy'll be in hcrc corphining. Erad Jchnson: UelI that's I raquirelent that thc City had that it be ecr), lcIIit so ue didn't have crine in the back. John Jacobson: It's also vcry letc. 8), a:30 in thr av:ning in thc rintcrtioernd if se're open until 8:00, r! csn't. touncihonan Dirler: 9ell I hrve I fcr things thrt f'd like to !.y too. Iguess ry aain concern is that bec:use it is so very visible, I don't .ind 5signs on either side. r rould lika to tec uniforrity houcver end if that aeansuniforeitv on l?tter sizc. r guess r rould at l.ast on the 78th side. r rouldprefer to see it not lit up in the brck .t rll. I don't rind lighting in thefront because I can see. you knot re can hlvc raguletions that siy okiy they have 1o be ofl by 8:00 but ther!'s invariebLy going to ba I break in thrt andre'Il have the apartient pcople ln herc coaplalnlng. Brad Johnson: Raoanber Ursul. thlt rhola back ptrking lot's Lit. That's. rellIit bact parking lot. Brad Johnso anC there's Prinrarily t ones i Ccn' n: Ihe real problca ls pcoplc finding their uy to th. proper place 2 or 3 places in there that rrc aoing to be open in thc avining. he clinic is ona end the hcalth sarviccs. fhose are tuo. The othert think... Counciluoman Dirrler: uhat rr! you going to do rith thosc pcoplc cooing? Counciloan Johnson: Are they 9oln9 to havc seprrate entrances? Brad Johnson: Yes. There are diffcrcnt antrancls. l,layor Chniel: I think if uc lrava for those signs to 9o off et I rpacifi.ctire, I think that nould rllevirtr thlt. Erad Johnson: I think by 10:00 or t:oo or soiething likc that- It is golng to be uell lit. I nlan ther!'s 9oin9 to be I lot of cendle pouer btck thcic just froo the lights in the perking lot. Don nshuorth: Iharc is uniforlity in tlrts, rhen ra had first trtkad ebout tignage ue uerc conccrned I think trlth thc polnt that Gounclhcrbcr Olller,srttehptins to bring up rnd that's tha uniforrity. fhc rry that ras built in rasin the sign bands theasclvcs so that'r. vlry distlDct, cxtct.r!1. llc'vc usedthat sarne concept rith thc R.ttil lrst erce rnd rlso rith Xchny'.. ltor rlthin those bands though you crn g.t diffcrcnt .19n3 rnd r lot of thet dapands rgaln,.s they brought out, the nulber of tett:rs tn thc business. So Fann)r's rill be a different size tnd I thlnk Your Hour Glass Clcencrs 9or3 on for 10 f..t or sonething like thet. Your ilaj.st),'s. But lgaln. thc), erc ell controll?d touithin those sign band rrels. 38 l j, a City Council tleeting - -.n! {, 1990 counciloan Johnson: Probrbly diffcrcnt alres. rs thcra en, rcstricttons on having flashing? llayor Chnlel: These are going to bc Just l,it. lto fhshing. yaah, lid objectrtrongly to t hat. John Jacobson: tly organlzrtion, they rill not be fhshlng cigns. Councilaan uorkaan: gr11 I,d egain rovc.pprov.l rtth thc .tlpulrtion th.t thrybe of{ in th! r!!r once hours lre ov!r. Sorebody fltp off thc rigns. t'layor Choiel: 0key. thcrc'g r rotlon on thc ftoor. fr thcre r sccond? councilBan Boyt! I'll sccond that. f'yr got r quartion. tlayor Choiel: Go ehcad. ask your qucstion Blll- Councilaan Boyt: Uhere rrc you going to put thc pylon sign? As long !s re'retalking about signs, re tight rs rcll figurc out rhcrc that,r 9oin9.- Bob copeland: uell that hrs bccn on th! 3lt. plen end thrr.'r ncver bcen rnyquestion about that just to rcfrcsh your r..ory. rhc eylon crgn rs richt tti.c. Councilnan Uorkaan: By thc proposcd drivcray through thcrt? Bob Copeland: Thlt's corrcct. Thl3 rould be thc proposed drivcuay. councilaan sovt, -1s6 th.t rls hor high? Juet off hand. g.s th.t fairly closeto the ground? Bob Copeland: It's under 5 fret. Councilaan Johnson: 0h, that's r ground slgn thcn? Bob Copeland: Oh yes. Counciloan Johnson: tt's not r pylon rign. Bob copehnd: tt's not r_ressivc troco 0 trpa sign. rt'c rpproxiretcly afoot and a half hlgh, t{ f.rt sidc tod... Councih.n Boyt: Uhlt'r 9oin9 to be on thet? 8ob Copeland: U! don.t tnor yct. tlayor Chaicl: 0kry, ra hrd r rotlon on the floor rith r.!cond. councihan uorlrrn. rovcd, counctlren Boyt r:condcd to rpproua th: erandcd srtcpren as ahorn on thc plans- elcd eprn tB, ttgt rlth thc'conaition-itui-ihclights on th! rrer of thc bullding torerdi thc tgrrtrcnt a"iili"9-b;'ilrncd offrhcn busincss hours lrc ovcr. tll ,oted in fruoi eru ilrc-ioiio;'c;;il'unanilously. 39 Chairman Emmings called the meeLing to order at 7:35 p.m I,IEI"IBERS PRESENT: TiM Brian Batzli and Jeff Erhart, Ladd Far ma kes Ahrens Conrad, Annette Ellson, Steve Emmings, MEMBERS ABSENT: Joan STAFF PRESENT: PAU I Krauss, Planni nsAI-Jaff, P lanner Director: Jo Ann olsen, Senior I.Planner ; and Sharmin Kr auss : OIsen: Hr. Chairman, if possible, could we jump to 3- tJhere is that? It's not even on. [^,e've got Ceil Strauss from the DNR. Krauss: tJe have a represenLative from the DNR who's come t.o talk to you about some of the work that we're doing ongoing and r^re've had, just beenable to arrange for her Lo come and she's got a commitment to go home to her son and we said that we would get her on as early as possible. Itwon't take a terribly long amount of time. Emmings: That's fine. tlhy don'ttal k about here. you introduce her and Hhat she's going to Olsen: The purpose is thal there's a new shoreland ordinance that. we haveto adopL and we wiII have Lo do it within Lhe nexL 2 years. So she just h,ants to kind of go lhrough it, what the new stuff is and what the shoreland ordinance is for. Take it auay CeiI. ceil Stlauss: Is it okay to speak from over here? Emmi ngs: Sure. Conrad: Sure. CeiI Strauss: okay. Shoreland management program. And t^rhaL's the purpose of the shoreland management program? The goal is Lo protect and preserve Lhe shoreland environments in Minnesota and Lhe main areas that theguidelines address are water qualiLy and scenic and visual qualiLy issues. This gives you an idea of the lakes distribution in Lhe state and as you CHANHASSEN PLANNING COHHISSION REGULAR MEETING HARCH 6, t99L Ceil Strauss: First I'lI hand out some propaganda here. This is an older brochure lhat talks about protective Naters permit program and urhat I'm talking about here has Lo do more with our land use management and the shoreland rules. First off, I'm CeiI Strauss. I'm the Area Hydrologist within Lhe Division of l^laters DNR and I urork with actually most of the Hater related programs including the permits for working in uretlands and lakes and overseeing the shoreland mangement... I've got sort of anofficial presentation. I'm going to try and go through this to give you a little bit of an overview. Maybe I shouldn't admit it but you're sort of my guinea pigs here. I haven't given the formal presenLation before so hopefully it won't be too bad. Say Division of l,laters, DeparlmenL of Natural Resources and we're talking about., can you all see this? Planning March 6, Commission Heeting 7997 - Page 2 can see, Chanhassen's right here near a hish concentration of lhe lakes.l,later areas as I'm sure you're welI aware. There was, the original shore.land rules came out mid-7O's and Chanhassen does have an ordinance,welI in fact you basically adopted the original guidelines by reference. The guideLines uJere updaLed and became effective in July of 1989 and that's -what we're working uith now. l.,lost of the parts of the new rules are verysimilar to the old. I'11 try to highlight the Lhings that are different. As in the old rules, urhat's considered shoreland district is within 1,OOOfeet of the lakes and within 3OO feet or the landward side of thefloodplain. Designated floodplain, whichever goes out furLher. I knotr something that's been brought to my attention here and some of the other communiLies is urell, do we have to go out I,OOO feet. t,lell yeah you do because that's what it is in Stat'ute. We can't, change that. The situation u,here you may be able to change it from 1,OOO feet would be if you,ve got,if t'he drainage is such that it's drainins a different direction. It,sdraining to another lake or to another area before you hiL the 1,OOO feet "Say you get here and you've got a big ridge and all the r^,ater ftows theother way and your engineering departmen! probably has a lot of Lhat kindof information. That would really be Lhe onl.y situation where you can get any smaller than the 1,OOO. foot area. Critical definition is the ordinaryhigh water level . This is basical.ly the Iine of jurisdiction for aII the DNR permitting auLhority and relates to this program also. you probably, I -don't know how familiar you are with that but you probably have heard ofthat. It's essentially Lhe highest known, the point. where water's been fora sufficient period of lime to leave evidence on the }andscape. And weusually give Lhat as an elevation. It's LypicalIy where Lhe vegetation changes from aquatic to terrestrial vegetation. On a uJater course or sLream, river, it would be the Lop of the bank. As part of the shorelandprogram, lhe Iakes are cLassified into three main categories. That's something you've already got in your current ordinance, They're classifiedinto natural environment, recreational development and general development. These classifications uere determined back in about '68 and iL was based on _a number of different criteria. If you h,anted more details on hon your Iakes u:ere classified Hhat lhey Here, I could give that to you anoLhertime. The other thing I'd like to menLion is that you're required toinclude those lakes that were 10 acres and Iarger. They got classified the -first time around but we wou]d, and Lhe rivers too. The rivers that areprotected rivers or protected water courses on the DNR protected waLerinventory map but I uould encourage the City to consider protecting orhaving Lhe shoreland management guidelines applied to areas adjacent to some of the smaller lakes and addilional uletlands. That's an option you can choose to add. You can call it a separate category if you uant. Ifyou Hant to lump some of them into the other three classifications that are - already there. That's an option. Some of the oLher communities have say a35 fooL setback I know in Hinnetonka from wetlands. It's something you could consider. t^le'd really encourage you to do that since you've got a -wetland ordinance and you're doing some h,ork urith the Hetlands in the community already but we can't force you to, There are minimum lot sizesdepending on the classification of the lakes. There's some minimumsetbacks, Iot uidLhs, that kind of thing. They differ for the seweredversus non-sewered areas. ThaL's almost identical to what the old oneslrere. One of the few changes was, and this is a weird one but the general development, non-lakeshore in unsewered areas used to be ZO,OOO square foot '-minimum. It noul is 40,OOO square foot minimum. Planning March 6, Commission Meeti ng 1997 - Page 3 Erhart: can you pu! that one back up ther"e again? Sure.cei I Strauss r Erhart: You're saying that near within 1,ooo feet of the lake is CeiI Strauss: The Iakeshore 1ots, right, a recreational lake that a minimum 1ot 20,OOO square feet? Erhart: Oh, o kay " Ceil Strauss: The riparian lots are these combo and then the non-riparian or non*Iakeshore is the smaller lots. Erhart: t^Jhat's lhe object of that? So then natural environment lake, it's 40,OOO square acre. Sewered, what's the object of that? ulhat fee L you're sayi ng Iakeshore lot on a It's an Ceil Strauss: t^JeII it's a combination of the impact you get from the density in terms of visual quality and also when PeoPLe develoP lots, they don't just Ieave the Iot all in it's natural sLate. You've got a certain amount of the surface that's impervious. You've got driveways, ImPervious surface from the building itself. Disturbance from Lhe lawn. PeoPIe ferLilize. They put Need Be Gone on lheir lawn. AII these things that 9<rinto Lhe development of a lot have an imPact on Lhe Iake quality both from the aesLhetics and from the uater quali!y standPoint. Erhart: t^lhaL Iake do we have as a natural environment lake? Olsen; SL " Joe - Krauss: Rice Marsh Lake, Harrison. St.Joe , Rice and Silver. standards or we don't have to?Erhart: Okay, 60 hJe have to adapt these ceil Strauss: These are the minimums. Erhart: That the City has to adoPt. Ceil Strauss: That you have to adoPt. these standards. Erhart: 40,ooo square foot lots on Rice teII you. And actualIy, you already have Marsh Lake? l.Je don't do we. I Ceil Strauss: And these tables are in the booklets that you got there too that shord this. Emmings: l,JelI that's real interesting ulhen you think that that parcel that came over that's going to be bisecLed by the new 212 ' wasn't thaL hish density going right over to Rice Marsh Lake? tlasn't that a high densitv so they could never have built in there anyt"ray under those standards. OIsen: NeIl they never would have had riParian Iots'.. Planning March 5, Commission Meet i ng 7997 - Page 4 Emmi.ngs: But that's another good argument when they complain about that being zoned down Iike we have, they couldn't have built with that density anyway - O kay - Krauss: It does point ou! a problem with the State legislation. [.le've been talking to Ceil and other folks at the ONR about it. The SLatelegislature has a habit of designing a law that, it's a blanket. tJhile it works weII over most of Minnesota, it doesn't work as HeII in the TuinCities where within 1,OOO feet of the Iake we may have 5OO homes. And oneof our points of discussion is how we raLionalized that through varianceprocedures...we'd like to come up with a uray of making this as easy toadminister as possible. Erhart: tJeII I guess, my question is, l just don't understand why you'd take one lake which is a lake that probably has more capacity to absorbrunoff which would be a weedy Lake versus a deep lake and aII of a suddenyou require a l acre lots along that. I just don'L understand that. Ceil Strauss: WelI that was something that was discussed at greatat the time Lhat the original regulations were presented up there. Iength Erhart: t^,ell again, f guess I'd agree with Paul . A ]ot of these things,and it goes with this neL loss thing, that everybody in the legislaturetends to look at l4innesoLa as farmland and rural area and some of.thesethings I'm not sure they apply so r,,ell to Lhe ciLy. But go ahead. Cei. I S,trauss: Okay, the rivers and creeks h,|ere classified into a number ofdifferent classifications there. The only ones that really apply, it wasonly lhe bigger rivers like the Hinnesota River that got separate -classifications. Most of those in Chanhassen are the tributaryclassification. They also have Lhe minimum 1ot widths, setbacks. Something that's new in Lhese regulations is the idea of a shore impactzone. You're familiar with setback requiremenLs for structures. The shore - impacL zone is half the structure seLback and the idea behind that is Lhat you 've goL sort of a buffer zone. An area that you don't allow extremegrading. You try to encourage that more natural vegetation is left in that -area. That you don't have clearculling in that area and that's the mainthing behind it. I think it's a much smaller amount of grading in terms ofcubic yards that r,rouLd require permits say from the city than outside thatshore impact zone. Okay and that's just showing that shore impact zone ashalf the building setback. Anolher aspect in the new rules is more of aconcentration on building in the areas of bluffs,and steep slopes. Now abluff by definition in these regu).alions is, well we're just talk aboutbluffs that are steep areas that are within the shoreland district at 1,OOOfeet back. It has to go at least 25 feet above the ordinary hish of thatbasin and that it would need a 3oz slope and need to drain toHard thatbasin. And it can get real complicated showing how you figure out what's abluff and what's not a bluff but let's just Ieave it at 3OZ there. Thensteep slopes we would consider Lo be the slopes where the average slope isgreater Lhan LzZ and Iess than your 3OZ that would be a bluff. AnalternaLive would be if you have aII your soils mapped according to SoiIConservation Service type groupings there. you.may be able to use thatinstead of the strict tzz, 3OZ. Then Lhere's also a bluff impact zone inaddition to shore impact zone where there's a setback from the top of the bluff 20 feet before you would puL a structure so you're not putting buildings risht at the very edge of the top of the bluff. Krauss: This stiL] only applies to the 1,OOO foot because Commission is looking at bluff Iine preservation ordinance Minnesota River and I think that that's... PIanni ng the ceil strauss: A lot Lhat may be..further. You could Iook at these guidelines Lhat are in here and see what would be consisLent and I should mention at this point Loo. NoH both Jo Ann and PauI brought up the point that these are guidelines that are for the entire State and there are areas where they don't really quite fit your communiLy. They're not going to. You can'! come up urith a law that's going to be right for every single community and there is room for, there's a couple different categories of what I'd call flexibility. one is in an acLuaL flexibility definition where if there are extreme circumsLance where you iusL can'L meet the minimums in your community and you can come up wilh good reasoning for not meeting the minimums, then that's a possibility that we could Pursue. The other area that I ulould see being more }ikely here would be substantial compliance. Now you don't have to necessarily use exactly lhe same bluff definition we have or exactly the same way of ]ooking at PUD's but if, as I'm working with the community here and the staff r we can see thaL what you've got or Nhat you want to use addresses the same concerns n then-we don't care if it's exacLly the same words except for the same definition" So that may be something you'd want to consider with your bluffing. You don't necessarily have to use exactly that " You'd Probably want to have the same bluff definition in the whole city. Okay, this is showing Lhe setback from the top of Lhe bluffs. I Lhink PeoPle can understand whv you would want a setback. It's }argely for the aesthetics and also for the safety concerns if it's a sLeeper bluff situation. It uJasn't too far away from here during the suPer storm where they had that big area fall down - okay, another area that Lhe city can choose to be a little more flexible is for one water oriented accessory structure. Let's 90 right !o Lhe water oriented part. For normally a sEructure has to meet the building setback which r,lould be typically your 50 foot, 75 foot, tlhatever and in the rules the City can choose to aIIow one water oriented accessory structure that only needs a 10 foot setback as }ong as it meets certain conditions such as there's a maximum size, maximum height. You'd want to look at screening. Coloring types of concerns but that's something thal you can think about because that would be how you would handle gazebos, boat houses, some of these kinds of structures. You don't have to allow that but you can. Okay, now here we get into the idea of land use districts and this is another one of those areas where it's Sort of aimed at your non-meLro tyPe community. tlhat we're getting at here is the idea of saying what's going to be allowed in what areas. I'm just going to skip right to an examPle here- That's a river one. Let's go with a lake one. But the idea of having, and you're doing iL wiLh your ComP PIan and zoning and I think that'i going to be one of our areas where we LaIk about substantial comp).iance- But the idea is that you're deciding what parts of the lake are appropriate for residential . hlhat Parts are aPPropriate for high density, if any. l^lhat Parts are aPProPriate for what tyPes of use and that's something Lhat the MetroPolitan communities are very familiar with so I don'L think that r,rould be too much of a Problem here but I do think it's going to be a situation t^lhere tte talk about substantial comPliance rather lhan you using our five categories that we've got in the guidelines, thefor Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 7991 - Page 5 Planning March 6, Commission Meeti ng ].997 - Page 6 Arrd planned unit developments, . That's unfortunately, it's unfortunate thaL - our guidelines use that term because our planned unit developments do not,are synonomous with the planned unit developments that are used in the metropoliLan area. Essentially we don't consider it a planned unit development until you ge! up to about a fiveplex. Up to a fourplex, as Iong as they're on their own lot and they meet the minimum lot sizes, wedon't consider it a planned unit development. But the idea, I think you're -familiar with the idea behind planned unit developments. It allows someclustering of the units. You can try and keep the disturbance of the areaconcentrated for uLilities and for roads and that kind of thing and thentry and leave the more sensitive, nicer amenity areas as open space " It's - something that we do again, ue've got guidelines for what kind of thingscan be allowed within a planned uni! development in terms of density and wegeL int.o density multipliers and a whole bunch of stuff that we'II have to -Iook at how the city handles their planned unit development analysis orreview and see how Lhe end result compares. o.Lsen: tJith the PUD regulaLions... The new style isn't because we haven'tadopted it but for some reason. Cei. I Strauss: And I don'L understand why but for some r.eason theIegislaLure in their urisdom, somewhere along the way said. Olsen: As soon as that shoreland district now, was adopted...enforce if a PUD came in Hith aHe'd have to use these regulations. CeiI Strauss: Okay, and hle get a litt]e bit more into best managementpractices. tje wiII be having some brochures made up on best managingpractices for the urban areas. AgiiculturaL areas and forestry brhichprobably the urban area best management practiced. That'd be the mostuseful here. And do you have any unseu,ered lake? Okay. Another situationthaL is in the new rules that is really going Lo impact some of thecounties is that any time someone comes in for a building permit or anykind of permit and they're in the shoreland and they're in an unseweredarea, Lhey have to show that their septic system is compliant. Even ifthey're coming in for an addition on their house that has nothing to dowith the septic system. That it's written in the rules Lhat you,re going Olsen; And the City might be getting into thi.s subject also. Things thatthe DNR def ines as, requires to be. . .of a PUD uhich r,',e would not considerto be a PUD such as, like an apartment complex. You might with highdensity, you mishL not require it to 90 through the PUD but it would haveto go through Lhe PUD regulations. Ceil Strauss: Risht. The multi-unit aspect. Anything thaL we woulddivide into residential and commercial PUD's and residentia] is anysituation where you've got, we've got minimum lot sizes for up to thefourplex. Up to four units on the lot but when you get inLo an apartmentsituation or bigger chunks of tot^rnhouses there, then we'd consider that aPUD. tJe consider a hotel, a resort, campgrounds, all those kinds of, wellprison we're working on. Prison came up in Plymouth that we're discussing.But the commercial is transient, usually voluntary, livins quarters Lheye, And I'm not going to go into the detail on how that's analyzed but this issort of a schematic of what a PUD might al]ow. Some concentration of the development, Planning March 6, Commission Meet i ng \997 - Page 7 to use that as your time to go ahead and see whether that's compliant ornot and then the communities are all supposed to need to come.up wiLh somesorL of a monitorj.ng system. A Nay to get all the non-conformi.ng systems updated and replaced, So Lhat, I don't think you have too many to worryabout here buL thaL's a big wor kload in some of the other more ruralcounties. I Lhink the rest of this is just sort of more backgroundinformation. The administration. Host of that you're preLty familiarwiLh. Variances, conditional uses, non-conformities so I won't dr,iell on any of the rest of that. You will be gelting, or in the process of gettingyour shoreland grant. It's one of the few situations where you're beinstold you have to adopt something and actually being given some cost sharing money to do the adoption. So the City can get up to $5,OOO.OO in 5O,/5Ocost share grant money. And jus! as an idea of what the agenda wouLd be" The first thing wilI be that we'II take a Iook at the c l ass i f i cat i o ns . Make sure we don't have any disagreements on houl you want to classify your lakes and rivers and then we would look at some of the bigger areas like how you want to handle your PUD's. How you b,ant to handle your districts around the lakes and streams and rivers. Hopefully we'Il be to the draft ordinance slage at a minimum by 5 months before youy 2 years is up" Youjust got your notificaLion, 2 yeay notification in January here so you do harre until January, !993 officially to get an adopted ordinance. I'II be,iL's part of my job to be working uith Lhe community here. If you havequestions, if you Lhings are unrealistic, we can sit down and discuss them. There are a lot of things in the rules to address the kinds of problems that typicalLy come up, There's some additional wording on, for instance some of the things that used to be variances that were almost alwaysgranted as a variance. l.Je've got for instance, you have a number of smaller lots. You've got a lot that's undeveloped but the neighbor on either side and alI the other neighbors have non-conforming structures. They only meet a 40 foot setback instead of a 50 foot setback. There's language in lhere that you can use that basically says it's not a variance. You don't have to go through the variance procedure if that setback is the same as the adjoining neighbors. Some of Lhose kinds of things are included in the rules now because ure don't want to have a lot of extra uork but you have to look al what's realistic. Olsen: tJhat do you do if the setback is 75 feet and you have a house on one side is 6O and the other one is 50. Do you go 50 feet? Ceil Strauss: I think it talks abouL the 5Oz, you between. I'd have to look at the exact wording, basical Iy go halfway Emmings: l,Je've got 2 years to get this implemented. t,here is it on our work schedule? Is there any reason it should take Lhat 1on9? Olsen: tje haven't really discussed it..,get going !o really get going on it. on it. Now's the- time Emminss: tJhat's got to be done first? tlhat would be the first s!eP? CeiL strauss: The first step would be looking are and deciding whal you want to include under at what the classificationsyour management guidelines. wetlands under th is?Emmings: And you mentioned including maybe some Planning March 6, Commission Meet i ng fggl - Page'8 CeiI Strauss:Right. would be the advantage of that when we have the wetland we have? Emm i ngs : ordinance t^J ha t that CeiL Strauss: That I'm not Krauss: I think that we do sure of the details of your wetland ordinance. a mor e specific and more appropriate job... conrad: rnhat do you think about chemical toilets wiLhin 1oO feet? CeiI Strauss: I already took a look at that. I saw that you had the setback there of 75 fee! in your proposed ordinance there. ft seems Iike a reasonable distance. You definitely, I would wan! to see it meet the structure setback. I'm assuming these are recreational development Iakes. Olsen: ...accessory sLructures 10 feet back? CeiI Strauss: Oh, I wouldn't want it or ienled accessory structure because h,ater. 10 you feet back.don't have Nob, that's not a hjater to have it by the Emmings: First of alL you don't have a principle use on those lands so you can't have it an accessory structure right? So I don'L Lhink it would fit. Ceil Strauss: tlell actua]Iy, we would probably not consider it, we may no! consider it a permanent structure. It hasn't come forward to my attentionin the past so I haven't guidance on that but there's a ]ot of situations where someLhing's considered temporary and our rules only consider Lhe permanen! structures. That happens in our protected water regulations too. t^ie get people thaL will stick boats on blocks and the neighbors complained because they think i! looks terrible. I!'s on the bed of the lake but we have to consider it a temporary structure. You get into some gray areaswith that kind of thing. Emmings: Anybody else have any questions at this time? Okay. tle]l, thankyou very much. cei I Strauss: Sure . Emmings: We're going !o shift the agenda around a little bit because apparently there are people here on the zoning ordinance amendment regarding chemical portable toilets on recreational beachlots so we'regoing to take that item next. DMENT REGARD NG CHE}.IICA P T RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS. Sharmin AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Emmings: By way of a little further introduclion from me, I drafted wha!'s -here because Sharmin called me up and said I had to righL then and then I had Lo fax it to her so it could get on the meeLing. I put it off for like2 months and then I had to do it in 5 minutes so I've made some changesmyself. I've got some things that. Planni ng March 6, Commission l*,leet i ng 1997 - Page 9 Conrad:t^iha t The are you referring to Steve? last two pases is the draft Lhat we're going to be looking Batzli: It didn't ]ook like a draft to me. It looked pretty formaL and finalized. Emm i ngs : BatzIi: once? Krauss: appr oved not? Emmings: okay, I guess in some ways uthen I got done Hith this I thought gee, it-'s so hard to do that I wonder if people are going to think it's not worLh doing it and maybe tha!'s okay but the one thing thaL I added under (a) was Lhat, it says seLbacks from ordinarv high water mark shall be 75 feet. And I think maybe we should add that side and front yard setbacks should be maximized to aid and achieving a maximum screening. And in the reason I didn't put in side or front yard setbacks there was that I know h,e have, I know that on the lake where I live, on Minnewashta, there's a beachlot with a portable chemical toilet and I don't think that beachlot, do you knot^r how, is that 25 feet Dick? Do they have 25 feet of shore there? That's a}l isn't it? So I couldn't Lhink of anvwav, and then I know there's another one on the other side of Lake Minnewashta, remember where lhey had several hundred feet of shoreline and f couLdn't think of any way to write side yard setbacks for 25 foot lot. I mean it just doesn't make sense so I thoughL let's Ieave them out but the more I think about it, I just thought maybe we could say that thev should be maximized to help achieve Lhose screening. And then l put in another one, I don't know where iL goes. I put it in as, ueII it could be a paragraph (e) or wherever you'd put it and that is lhat a portable chemical toilet should be securely anchored Lo the ground. That utas in the first one and it wasn't in this one. I missed that and that ought to be in here and I asked sharmin to call them and ask them how they anchor them and aPParently they do have some uJay to do that. There's something else I wanted to say here and I can't remember t,rhat it uras right now. oh. On the first Page of vour staff reporL Sharmin it says that the amended version will require applicants to appear before the Planning Commission on an annual basis and lhat wasn't my intent. I Put it in here that, under (c) that it would require approval from the City planning dePartment. I thought this would be an adminstrative approval by the City planning department. That's whv I puL it that way. I don't see any reason for them to come through here- How about annual apProval though? Did you just want them to do it Emmings: You know, I didn't think about it. If thev're using, I guess to some extent if they can't screen it weII enough, then they have to get the neighbor's consen! in t,rriting and that's only good for one year. So it probably wouldn't be a bad idea to make it annual because otherwise the informatio isn't going to be fresh on who's resPonsible for mainLaining it and I think Lhat's a real important item. So veah, it probably ought Lo be an annual. you may want to have a permit fee associated wilh it too to Pay for the processing cost. Can f clarify something it would be approved as chairman? Now the i nitial a CUP through the Planning time Lhis Commission is or Planning March 5, Commission Meeti ng 7991 - Page 10 Emmings: I don't know. f saw this as something they'd come to the Cityfor a permit for. Krauss; WeII I think from our perspective, we'd prefer that at least thefirst Lime through, it came Lhrough here with the public hearing process. It adds formal notification. There's an opportunity for people to comment.I would be relunctant to approve those things initially at a staff level. Krauss: RenewaLs sure because we check compliance for conditions, process complainLs and we can go out and Emmings: That'd be alright then. That's fine with me if that worksbetter. And the other thing that was in the staff report that wasn't, itsays the consent of aII the residents using the beachlot wouLd have to besubmitted to the city in written form and Lhat's just a liLtle wrong. It'sneighbors thal have Lo consenL. In those cases like a 25 foot wide or someplace where Lhey can't. screen Lhe thing, that's uJhere you'd need neighbors consent in writing in order to have it at aII. I wanted to convey the idea that if everything is just right, you can have one of these and if everybody doesn't agree, then you can't have one. I don't thinkthey're importanL enough !o give to everybody. They seem to me to bestrictly a convenience. I think they're important h,hen some of thebeachlots, a neighborhood uses them LhaL lives and again I keep, I only know the specific examples around my Iake but there's one I think maybethat you folks are associated with where everybody.Iives across Minnewashta Parkway in an area of homes there and they aII come across there and if some mom comes down in the middle of the afternoon or dad with their kids, and they've go! 2 kids with Lhem and one of them has to go back home, that means everybody has to 9o back home !o go to the bathroom or whatever andit just seems to me to be a real reasonable thing to have for people's convenience if you can handle them in some way, Anyhow. Okay. Now r^resaid ue had a public hearing on this but I'm really wondering if we have because this draft ulasn't in front of anybody who got notice of a pubLic hearing. This has never been, is that imporLanL? Emmings: Are there, did you come on this issue? Gene Christensen: Yes. Emmi ngs: Did you Gene Chr i.stensen: get t,te wa nt to look at lhe ordinance the way it's been drafted? just got it tonight. tle're J.ookins at it. to make any commenls on urhat's here?Emmi ngs: Do you Emmings: So then it could be renewed on an annual basis? Krauss: You did have a public hearing on an earLier version of this. yes, _it was a different version but I think it's fair to say that those who wereinterested in partici.pating in the discussion had an opportunity and r,lenotified those same people for tonight. If you're comfortable with theordinance, I would feel comfortable with you passing it along to the C.ity Cou nc i I Lonight . PIanning March 5, Commi.ssion Heeti ng 1997 - Page 11 Gene Christensen: f have no objections to anything and I lhink it sounds reasonable to everything you've got in there. In regards Lo signatures from people. I mean on a yearly basis is somebody supposed !o go to alL Lhe houses and get signatures saying is iL okay for this year? That kind of seems like an issue that should be, I mean I can see it should be done but what's the process for volunteering for something Iike this. Emmings: t^lith your applicaLion, at least the way I see it. Eith your application to the city for your permit for Lhe year, if you don't have any ulay to soreen it from view, you'd have to go to the residential neighbors, in your case, on each side. I knot^r Lhere's plans. You've got houses on both sides of yours right? Emmings: Now Lhe house tha!'s on the north side of yours is going to be tourn down and lhat's going to be subdivided. I know Lhat's in the works and lhere's going to be two new houses in there, And to the south of you there's a house so you'd have to go to those two houses and say, if the cily lhought you couldn't screen it xell enough, you'd have to say. one thing you could say is it uras Lhere Iast year and were there any problems with it and otherwise sign this form giving us your consent so ure can show the city you don't have any objections " Is there anibody else here who'sgot commenLs on this? t^Je don't really have a public hearing going I guess. t^lell we'II see who's got comments here. Tim? Erhart: tJeIl okay. I absoluLely agree that the Planning Commission should noL review this on an annual basis. It should be a staff funcLion. I guess I'm more inclined to have it completely a staff function. If iL meets the ordinance, on what basis do we deny it anyway if it comes to the Planning Commission? I guess going a IitLle bit deeper, I'm bothered with, in the firsL place I think it's a great idea to allow chemical toilets on beachlols but I'm wondering if we shouldn't specify a littLe bit about which beachlots are allowed and which shouldn't be. I mean each loL Lhat's 25 foot wide with residents on either side, I'm noL sure we should be in the business of allouing chemical toilets at aII. Emmings: l^1e11 I guess if lhe neighbors don't care, do you? ElIson: But if the neighbors don't care. Erhart: okay. If the neighbors don't care. I guess r.,hat I'm getling to is, Iet's say you've got a 2OO. t^lhat's Lhe current ordinance for beachlot. Is it 2oo feet or 18o or Nhat? 2oo feet. You've got a 2oo foot beach.l.ot and you've got 4O,OOO square feet - Let's say you've got an acre and one neishbor is, his house is 2oo fee! away so he's got 50 foot setback. He's 15O feet away from the proposed chemical toilet and he's going to sav weII, I'm just not going to Let you do it. Therefore, I'm not going to agree. Now that's going to prohibiL. EIlson: N6, read the part about screening. You only get the neighbors consent if you can't screen it from them. I think that's the r.ray I look a! i+ Erhart: Is Lhal the u,ay it is? Okay. Gene Chr istensen: Yes . Planning Harch 6, Commission Meet i ng l99I - Page 12 Alright, so we're not saying Lhat one neighbor can disallowthis on there? ElLson: So if that guy is that far away, you could prove Lhat- Erhart: putt i ng EI Ison: I didn 'L where you get it. Emmings: No. At least I read it wasn thaE 't thi nki ng about it that way. at number 5 and see if that'sHay. Loo k Emmings: I don'L know j.f it says iL that r^ray but the notion was, you'vegot to screen it from view because they're ugly. If you can,t screen it,you can't have it. But on the other hand, if the neighbors that have LoIook at it aII the time don't object, and you can get them to consent toit, then why should we object? That 25 foot beachlot on Minneurashta had one last summer and I only think I noticed it once or two Limes driving byon the ]ake. You can'L see it from Lhe road. I don't know r^rhat Lheneighbors thought about it. Erhart: say in your ? I guess Ithere? Are HAS ute Iooking at a staff recommendation. l^lhere does iLIooking at staff recommendation or are ure Iooking I would have thought if we were going to do it, Ipicked [,4emor ial Day . AL ElIson: Look at the ordinance. Last page. Erhart: Maybe f was concentrating on Lhe urong thing. tlell okay. Thequestion arises, Iet's say thal that's covered. What happens if you have a25 foot wide beachlot, as someone had mentioned earlier. The other thing,Steve where did you come up r.rith, what u,as the purpose of the June 15thLhru September 5th? Erhart: Okay. Iguess I would have guessjust Day to a bis EI Ison: Memor iaI Labor Day. Erhart: It's notbefore June 15th, deal but I guess I remember the kids swimming Emmings: t.,ell that's fine. We can change it. ErharL: The oLher lhing. On Lhe chemical toilets that we have at thepark, do ure have a contract brith someone to maintain those? t^rho emptiesand mainLains Lhose? Emmi ngs: No. Emmings: Ri.ght out of the air- I thought they might u,ant to have it stillthere Labor Day but certainly not beyond Labor Oay and I just put in a fewdays for them to get it off of there. June 15th because that's about r.rhenschool gets out and I Lhink they start getting heavy use. Honestly I thinkfrom whal I've observed, if they were there from June 15th to the middle of -August or the end of JuIy would probably be enough. The area of the heavyuse of the lake is really very short Planning March 5, Commission Meet i ng 7997 - Page 13 AI-Jaff: BFI Erhart: t^lhy those as par t Gene christensen: That's and clean it. That's Part Batzli: So you 'drental agreement. does . not insist lhat they have a contract with someone to maintain of the conditional use Permit? Emmings: can you even rent them without a contract to maintain t hem? they come Erhart: I guess that was an automatic thing. If you rent lhem, of the rent process. The contract. my thought. Gene Chrislensen: It's going to be once or even Lwice a week, dePending on if it's used heavy or uPon request. Erhart: t^,e write it as if someone, Part of the grouP that is using it is going to be maintain it. That's the imPression I'm lefL utith whaL I've iead but then again it wouldn't be the first mistake in reading this. Erhartr There,s got to be a contract to maintain it. That way there's no doubt lef! that someone's going to Ieave it unmaintained- E]lson: So number 4 doesn't tel] you that? Hant as part of the application Process a coPv of their plan foryear oldErhart: t^lell I'm trying to, I'm strengthening it I guess. The maintaining it could be that well gee, Nick's son over there, 11 Nick needs a summer iob and he's going to maintain it. Batzli: Yeah r ight . Emmings: t^le Probably wouldn't aPProvo that - Erhart: Okay. In Lhat sense I'm making it easier for the staff to, I guess I'm also trying to Push this over towards the staff aPProval in6"gfr Paul doesn't liie it. It seems, it's a real good idea but I small thins is the ordinance is done correctlv. That's all I had ' conrad: Paul utould this be, r'rhat would apply for a sideyard setback as steve's ordinance is drafted right now? There's not in his ordinance - Krauss: There,s none and that's one of the reasons nhy I preferred that we didn't have it aL a staff Ievol initially. There's a lot of subjective juagr.nt lhat has to be made here. You run a little bit of a risk when vou io ir'.t in an ordinance but you lessen the risk when you have 7 Planning commissioners deciding subjectively Hhat a ProPer sLandard is than y-ou do if I do it. conrad: I just see that as a gap right now and I'd have to go along with paul. one, I don,t Iike chemical toilets. I think it's jus! taking a risk and a lot of other communities don't. Don't like them. Don't want them. Don,t allow them. steve, I think you did a nice job of drafting this. I think it got the intent of what. It Puts some flexibility in terms of okay. eve n think a PIanni ng Harch 6, Commission Meet i ng 199L - Page 14 allowing it where there's very, where we're not hurting the neighbors. [^,e're not hurting the environment. So from the standpoint of the draftit's not too bad except for some, iL sLi]l is open and in that case I wouldnot want staff to see it. It has to come here unless Ne put thoseguidelines in and I don't know that Ne're smart enough to put theguidelines in right now because every situation you've got outlots orbeachlots that are 25 feet wide to thousands of feel Nide and that variesthe same. The neighbors vary so I don't knob,. In terms of keeping itflexible, the way it's written, I think we have to review it. At least the -first time through. On an annual basis, then I think staff can do that butthere's just no doubt in my mind the way it's drafted now, we have to seeit, And again, I'm real nervous about chemical toilets. ReaI, rea.Inervous but I can 9o along with this if we see it and we protect theneighbors and we protect the environment. EIIson: No. I thought it was weII r.lritten. I guess I can understandPauI's idea of having it come through the planning Comm.ission but I'd can'tsee it ongoing but I could go along Hith that. And I think while they have some risk associated with them, I think that some of the alternates thatpeople are taking advantage of now is probably even Horst so I think youought to have those toilets there. Batz1i: I Lhink the benefits of allowing these in certain instancesoutweigh the disadvantage of the site. pollution, if you wiIt. I Lhinkthe risk of not having them, having Iived on Lhe lake grouing up on.LakeMinnetonka is that people tend to use the lake directly as a toilet andespecially younger kids or people who have a Iong walk home. And so Ithink this is actuarry an improvement over what you might otherwise see onthe lake. crass as that might sound. so m for this. r mean r see theseon some of the larger lakes and around public ]akes in Minneaporis andthings like that. I actually think they,re a good idea and if it,sadministered properlv, and that's the key. That's the key with all of ourordinances is the enforcement aspect and if this isn't enforced, then ue'renot doing a good job and then vou're risking the polrution of the Lake. rf -these things fill up, they're not properly empLied and some kids on a joyride with their Jeep tip it ov6r, you may get something to go into theIake. And so r thi.nk ure do need the setback to at least minimize that sort -of problem because I've seen several instances, and especially onHinnetonka where, at the Narrows, which is a fishing spot, they put themright next to the Narrou,s and people push them right in from time to time. _ft also happened at Libb's Lake and some other places where you have toclose beaches and you end up in a real sorry state if you don,t properlyenforce, administer, tie them to the ground. But like when you contactedthat person, thev basical.ry said if you have several adults pushing it or a -Jeep ' you're going to be abre to knock the thing over. So it's somethingthat might be a problem but ]ike r said, r think the advantages outu,eishthose negatives. r riked steve's additions. r would add thiee things. one -is, in paragraph (c). I would have it read, use of a portable chemicaltoilet shaII require initial approval by the Chanhassen planning Commissionafter conducting a public hearing. In each subsequent year. theapplication shaII be reviewed for approval by the city planning department. -That way, the applicant has to come in. They have a shot, AII theneighbors have a shot. It,s a public hearing. [.le can then apply the Emmings: Anything else? Annette? Planni ng March 6, Commission t4eet i ng !991 - Page 15 standards that we feel are appropriate and thereafter the administrative approvals would folIow in subsequent years. Paragraph, as it currently reads, in paragraph (dX2). I would add at the end, after the uord ordinance, or if the portable chemical toilet otherurise presents a nuisance. And I r.rould also change the word revoked in the first sentence Lhere in paragraph (d), I t^tould have it read denied or revoked. I would actually change that whole paragraph to number (e) and insevt a (d) that says, portable chemical toilets shall be securely anchored Lo the ground. I guess Steve already suggested that. Those are my comments. Farmakes: I Iive by the park in Greenttood Shores and I first noticed the need for a toilet facility there hlhen I was uralking through the Lrail one day and saw somebody going !o the baEhroom on a log. There are sPecific areas uhere people are channeled for recreation. Either ice fishing on the Iake or in the summertime suimming, uhere those facilities aren't available and rather than hop in the car and drive into totJn or drive to a gas station, when nature calls, they make the decision to do it there. So there are some areas where these things are needed but I would use discretion as to where those are. I would hoPe that the City ulould be very careful as to hor.r many of those are handed out. In Particular if somebody's going to do it Privately on their own, whether or not Lhey're going to maintain it. I'd rather see Lhese as a commercial tyPe structures that are mainLained commercially and as you said, that Lhey have Proof of maintenance contract and that they're being emptied ProPerIy. About twice a yeay the one at our park is tipped over and Lhese are BFI tyPe thins- They're made out of plastic and there's a vent at the toP in the summer and when they're tipped over, and it's ori a grade, effluent just comes out. They're not in any particular area or sand or gravel area. They're just on grass. I think the maintenance Lruck backs uP to it. Lifts up the old one and puts down the new one. They don't emPty it. I don't know how else, you know if you allotr that, even in a Park, to get too close to Lhe lake, it's going to go down the natural slope when it falls over - on 3, on this section here uhere it says Portable toilets be firmlv anchored !o the ground. Is there a definition of what firmly anchored is? The reason I ask, for these maintenance things they seem to have a thing urhere they lift them up and drop them off. Or at least the one by our Place. Is there, does that mean a chain to it or that we bolt it to Lhe ground? Emmings: That's why I asked Sharmin to call and see what they did about that and apparently what she found out, at leasL from BFI' that thev Put 2 foot long spikes that are driven into the ground to hold the thing down. d never heard of that before. Farmakes: The one on ours is not adhered to the ground aL all. Emmings: Maybe you have to ask for it. Ellson: I think you Probably would. I'm sure lhey get PeoPle it but it's probably easier for their guvs not to have it down of those ballpark areas, they probably don't even do it. that r equest so in some Farmakes: I think it would be nice if we define what, so that iL couldn't be tipped over if they were allowed. If that's how thev do it. And the other quesLion r have on 6 is the facility shall be constructed of PIanni n9 March 5, Conimission Meet i ng l99t - Page 15 materials compatible with the materials used in the neighborhood. Doesfacilities included, does Lhat mean a shelter? Emmings: I think you're looking at an old draft. The new draft is theIast two pages in the packet. Batzli: We got rid of the materi.als. Steve got requiremenls from that draft you Here looking at rid of the materials Emmings: I don't foresee anybody building their all and maybe we should make that clear, That they come from some commercial vendor and aremaintained by some commercial vendor. That,s r.rhat I had in mind. Ellson: ThaL's why you'II be able to deny that when you see the plan. Farmakes: That would keep them from deterioratingparticular leveI of workmanship and performance sonot goins to fail. or that they're at ayou know that they're Emmings: Somebody said last time we talked about this that theysomething about whether they leaked if they,re tipped over. Andyou're saying is very different than what I heard before. I don k new now urhatt know. Al-Jaff: There's abefore the or di na nce usual Iy doesn't leakalso state that they environmenl . Ietter from BFI that addresses that issue. Right and it says that if this is tipped over, that itbut I don't knou if there are any safeguards. Theyuse chemicals that are biodegradable to protect the Emmi ngs: Yeah , i t EI lson: Bac kuardsfuIl. says here it cannot if the unit is tipped over. spill out forward unless the tank is over half Erhart: That provides the way out is to require thatwall around it. Fence or a r.lall. reaL close to it andover. As you suggested in that Iast paragraph. they put a kind ofyou can't tip it Ellson: Then it's not so portable. In and out. Emmings: Then how do you get in it? Batzli: UelI what they do at some parks to avoid it is they requirefence be built and basically the fence, or it's a screen, Fence andbasically it hinges so in order to tip the toilet, you'd have to runpretty good fence. They do that in Burnsville and some other parks. a over a por tab I eskiingor drain Farmakes: The one at ourunit but the same unit isarea. That's in some sortthat in a different way.maintaining them. place, or in Greenwood Shores is just ainside the Carver Beach area over by theof enclosure so they must take that ouL So they must have more than one way of Emmings: Have you got anything else Jeff? Planning March 6, Commission Heet i ng t997 - Page 77 Farmakes: No, that's it. Emmings: I guess the uray I think about this is thal it's an experiment.I'm not sure that we ought to have porLable chemical toilets in beachlotsbut I know that there are some and I know that there are peop).e hrho Nantthem. I guess I regard this sLrictly as an experimen! and if it doesn,twork, I hope it's written such Lhat w.e can prevent them. If we find thingsthat are wrong with doing it, if ure decide to go ahead and do it, we wantto be sure we've got a tight rope that we can pu]l it back and get rid ofit because I can foresee that that might happen. But because there arepeople interested in having it, maybe it's worth Lrying !o do it !o see if we can do it in a way where we can keep a reasonable handle on it. Isthere anymore discussion on Lhis? If there isn't, I'11 ask for a motion. Mike Mason; I just want to make a couple of comments. I share someof Ladd's concerns about chemical toilets. I spend a fair amount, I ]ivein Carver Beach and f spend a fair amount of time dor,rn there in the summerwith my kids and I don't care how often it's cleaned, they stink- They'revery... Lake Ann, the ones at Lake Ann and clearly these won't be used anyr,rhere near a's much. I understand that but they do creale an odor and Ithink that's a concern, Listening to some of the commissioners, I find myself softening a little bit on that. I do think that if this is approved, it should be done on a yearly basis. You ge! the approval of allthe people in the neighborhood r,rant it. tlelL, in 3 years the neighbors change and there might be some... Certainly I think some kids are going togo use the lake for a bathroom u,hether you have a toilet for them or not. l"1y guess is use by Lhe Lake would be lessen. Use of the Iake would !el^essen. I aLso share some of the concerns that Jeff raises about them being tipped over. AlLhough the one in Carver Beach, I know they do have some sort of fence on one side of it so you really would have, it wou.Ldn't be just a matter of 4 or 5 people coming to knock it over. You really have to r.,or k at it to do it. I like .,rhat you're saying about the experiment. tlhat I see about thaL is once something like this gets in place, I think it's pretty hard to remove it. I'm just voicing my opinion on it, that's AII. Emmi ngs: Dick? Dick h,ing: I'd just to maLure this thing, it's got a ]ot of gray areas, before it sneaks out of here because then it iust gets aII the more confusing. Specifically I guess I don't understand where we Nound uP here on the setbacks. I look at Pleasant Acres who has no depth at all and thev had 1, 2 or 3 of them down there as I remember. They exisL now. They're in place now. Beaches have them nou, and I think they need to be controlled. l think there needs to be an ordinance to control the fact Lhat they are going to exist. So I have tb,o questions I'd Iike to see clarified before it leaves the Planning Commission and one would be the setbacks. I think Ehat needs to be clarified. Especially this one for Minnewashta Parkway area. It's a very narrow }ot with homes on both sides and new homes going in and that's going to be a real issue because I've had a phone call on it. I support the neighbors of the neighborhood and the owners of the property so I'm kind of going back and forth here trying to do whaL's fair, The other thing is screening. I think these are large structures. I think they're very unsightly structures, They're not compaLible...beaches so Lhe screening is a big issue. But to screen that Planning March 6, Commission Meet i ng t99t - Page 18 Iarge of a building or structure on some of these smaller ]ots is a major undertaking and I think that, I guess for me to suPPort it, the screening has to be wel] defined. And then the neighbors that are requesting it, have to realize that there's going to be quite a bit of inconvenience to them to properly screen it. Whether it's done with vegetation or done with the proper fencing. I don't know which would be best. I don't have an opinion but lhe issues of the setback and screening, I think the Planning Commission really needs to kind of set those in concrete a little bit.... here without those details. Emmings: My comment on that Dick is this. If we're going to sPtscify the screening and we're going to specify the setbacks, then I don't think tle can do it. And the reason I don't think so is this. It's going to have to be real site specific because you've got such a variation. If for exampleyou've got a siLuation Iike the one that Minneurashta Heights has, there's no way. They had one down there Iast summer and Lhere's no uay you could see it from the road. They're only 25 feet wide so both neighbors on both sides could see it and you could see it from the lake. I don't know howyou're go.ing to write any kind of a sideyard setback for that PLace because -even if you put it right in the middle, you're only 12 L/2 feeL away from each neighbor and that's not far enough really. And I think for someone Iike Lhem, it's going to depend on the neighbors past experience with that. -If they didn't Iike it there, this is a chance for them to put the kabosh on it, which I think they ought Lo have. A righL I think they ought tohave. But if it hasn't been offensive to them in the past and they knowthat signing a consent is only for one year at a !ime, they might say fine. - Go ahead and do it" As far as screening goes, if I've got again, a beachlot like that, there's probably no r.ray I can screen iL other thanbuilding a structure and again, if the neighbors don't care, I don't know Ehat we should care. And there wiII be some beachlots, I think urhere because of topography or other things. You know if you've got one that's 3OO feeL of lakeshore thaL's aII trees and shrubs, you can probably put one _someplace on there where nobody's going to see it from anywhere. And thaL one would be real easy to do. But I don't know, other than saying that weregard screening as critical and that if you can't screen it you can't haveit, I don'L know if ue can go furLher to say specifically how they're going -to screen it. There might even be places where you'd prefer not to have them build a structure because Lhe structure would be as ugly as theportable toilet itself Mi. ke Mason: Cou]d you puL somethingthe site specific statemenL because How come I can't have one here. Andalready. in the ordinance that would strengthen can just see hey, there's one there.I know you've got something in here I Batzli; But then you clearly, you know in paragraph (d) that you saycould be deni.ed or revoked based on violation of the intent of theordinance. That intent statement does set forth that some lots mightunsuitable - It depends on if you !.rant it strengthened. it be Emmings: Yeah. That's why when we wrote the, I wrote the intent it saysthe City recognizes lhat maintenance and use of chemical toilets on somebeachlots may be unsuitable because they cannot be adequately screened fromresidential neighbors or lake users. That was sort of the point there. Maybe it's not strong enough. Erhart: I guess, going back to what my thought was. You knoh, we regulate whether you can have a dock depending on how many feeL of shoreline you have so ule have set precedent for looking at the size of these things and it determines what you can do with them. I guess when I was reading this, I Hasn't thinking of a 25 foot wide beachlot. I guess quite frankly in my mind, the purpose, is not the general purpose of this is to serve a beachlot that has higher than, fairly high use? And I guess when I think of a 25 foot wide beachlot, tahat's the purpose of that? Is it iust for the purpose for someone to get access to the Nater but not hang around there? Emm i ngs :No, l,Jhat doErhart:they use it for? Emm i ngs: It to it than I down from it that's goi ng is am and to very heavily used, And I have to say, weII. You're closer Dick but I live what,4 houses down from it or 5 houses it imposes. tlhen I firsL looked at it I thought bov, be a pain in the neck and it really is not at all. Erhart: okay, but uhaL, do families take their kids dourn there and picnic? Emmi ngs: 0h yeah " Erhart: Is there a bigger area in the rear? Emmings: No, it's jus! liny and it's verv heavily used. Erhart: How do you keep the kids off of the neighbors Iatlns and stuff? Emmings: They have fences on both sides of it. I don't know if they do keep the kids off the neighbors lawns but they fences on both sides of it and they seem to me to be very resPonsible in their use of it- It's kept pretty neat. It Iooks Pretty nice aII the time as far as I can tell. EIIsonr .,-the neighbors mind, then they have a chance to say- no- Erhart: If you can't, it isn't wide enough. to have this thing so manv feet away from the property line, then it isn't big enough to have a Satellite. conrad: But the neighbors aren't going to decide- El]son: What if they aII say no, I'm not going to sign it? Conrad: They can screen it. Batzli: They can screen it. conrad: Remember the neighbors don't have control based on the way -the ordinance is worded. only if you can't sbreen it. Erhart: I'm all for this- I think it's a good idea but there comes a Point I guess where the Iot's just not adequate physicallv to- Ellson: There's one in all of Chanhassen that we're talking about? Planning Commission Meet i n9 March 5, t99l - Page 19 Planning March 6, Commission Meet i ng 7997 - Pase 20 Emmings: Again, I hate to be put in a position of defending this, andI feel kind of Iike I'm doins it but the flip side of that Tim is thatlittle one is getting heavier use. Minnewashta Heights, I don't know how many boaLs they have out Lhere which is something else ue really need toget a handle on in the city because that thing grows every year and they'renot under the ordinance. I know Lhey're grandfathered in but they've expanded the use of that tremendously over the years. But that heavy use may be more of an argument to have it than not to have it, I don,t know. Maybe it is. Batzli: I think it does. And given the nature of the use r^rith a lot ofkids, I think that's the kind of area that you need one of these. And thefact that it becomes odiferous actually probably means something positive,unfortunately. Somebody's using that instead of going where they shou ldn't . Hi ke Mason:getting that Emmings: tJe do have, you know rishtyou can't have them and we can leavethat we're talking about here. It doesn't to the nei.ghbors though. You know if they'rewhiff through the window aIl night long. Ellson: But you knou, I've been around some of them and I knour that I'vebeen around some smelIy ones but ve arso been around some that are reallycLean. I don't know if maybe those need to just be maintained more often. Mavbe thev need a dairy clean-up or whatever il is but isn't i.t possible tocomplain about those things and have them improved? Because I've reallybeen around some and I can't believe that so many people went through it. Dick t"ling: Again if I could offer an opinion. More than that, just duringthe Fire Department picnic at mv house...the first two years uJe had one andeven though we put it as far off the yard as we could, it Nas no man's land -that day and the next time I said, you know let's just use the house. It'smore pleasant but that's neither here nor there. specifically MinnenashLaHeights with that narrou, rot, whaL bothers me about these setbacks is thatif they put it anywhere in their outlot or their recreational lot, it,s soclose to the water that should there be any vandalism, it's in the lake.That's all there is to it. And in Greenwood shores, r think they'd be oneof the worst abusers, the citv itself and the city oughL to be requi.red toanchor these down. specificallv with Minnewashta, shourd you tip it over,iL's directLy into the drainage directly to the lake. So it's, I'm going'back and forth with you steve. you really can't write any rures. on theother hand, withouL t.he rures, they really can get kind of carried aulay.rn those littl.e rots 10 feet from the lake abutting the neighbors houses. now we do have an ordinance that saysit that r.,ay. I mean that's the choice Dick t^ling: Minnewashta Creek, who I think brought this up, has a goodsized rot and wourd adhere to your ordinance which is the main issue andfrankly I think that's...and then from that point on, I think other ]otsare going to have to faII in line. They,re either going to work or they,re -not going to work. They're either going to have to go home, and I don,tknow how much lake useage lhere actually is...litLle kids going to go upand use that anyway or is the ]ake stirr their primary means? so pollution -versus convenience, I don't have any idea on that. f'm really Horriedabout the smaller lots. The one u,e tJere discussing that brought this up, Pfanning March 6, Commission Meet i ng 1997 - Pase 2t going to be a problem.,. On Pleasant Acres there's no setback,.. I know the other Iakes. I'm not...beachlots or Carver Beach. Are we Lo, is the ordinance going to be so vague that they're just goins to aII over the place or are ue going to put in enough controls that areto say some lots can't have them?' isn't don 'tgoi ng exist goi ng Emmi ngs: Anything else? Erhart: I migh! offer that there i.s a way to keep them from tipping them over and that's attaching them on the bottom. Attaching them to a permanent waII on the side at least 4 feet high or something instead of trying to attach them to the base. Require that they have a concrete block walI or something which could be part of the screening and attached in the center halfway up. There's no way you're going to tiP iL over. The onlv question is, wil] the BFI company Provide a method of attachment 4 feet up. I don't know. Again, I think we ought to Proceed. [,te have Lo learn some things as we go along. I think in general it's a good idea. Emmings: Do you have a motion? BatzLi: f move the Planning Commission recommend approval of the ordinance amending Section 20-263 set forth in Lhis packet with the following modifications. Paragraph (a), second sentence i! says, side and front vard setbacks shaII be maximized to achieve maximum screening from adjacenL lots and the lake. on paragraPh (c), the first sentence shalI be amended as follows. FirsL sentence would read, Use of a porLable chemical toilet shall require annual approval The application shall be initiallv approved by the Chanhassen Planning Commission after conducting a public hearing, Each subsequent year the application shalt be reviewed for approval bv the Citv Plannins Department. In subParagraPh 4 of (c) I would insert the word commercially before the uord maintaining, New ParagraPh (d) which reads, the portable chemical toilet shall be securely anchored to the ground to minimize tipping of Lhe toilet. Letter (d) shall become (e). The words denied or shaLl be inserled before the word revoked in the first sentence. In subparagraph 2. After the word ordinance, the words or if the Portable chemical toilet otherwise PresenLs a nuisance shall be added. Emmings: Is there a second? Erhart: I'II second it. Emmings: AIright. As far as discussion goes, I think we've got a problem. tle can't approve anything can t,e? l,le can? tlithout C j.ty Council taking action on j.t? He said that the Planning Commission is going to aPProve. BatzIi: tleII Emmi ngs; Is Krauss: Sure " Yeah. Batzli: I meant to say we're recommending that they aPProve it- He knew r.r ha t I meant. we recommend that Lhe CitY that understood from what he Council adopts this ordinance, said? Emmings: Alrigh!. Is there any discussion? Planning March 6, Commission Heet i ng 1991 - Page 22 Batz1i moved, Erhart approve an Ordinance read as fol lows: seconded that the Planning Amending Section 20-263 of Commission recommend tothe City Code which shall THE CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL ORDAINS: 20-263{ 2 ) of the City Code shall be amended by deJ"eting chemical toilet'. 20-263 of City Code shall be amended by adding the the words Section 2 Section 1 a. Section "portable Sect i on foI lowing SecLion: 16) Portable chemical toilets may be allowed on recreational beachlotsso long as the maintenance and use of Lhese toilets have noundesireable impact on the environment, residential neighbors orlake users. The City recognizes that the maintenance and use ofchemical toilets on some beachlots may be unsuilable because theycannot be adequately screened from residential neighbors or lakeusers. Any use of chemical toilets on recreational beachlots shallbe subject to the following minimum standards: Setback from ordinary high water mark shall and front yard setbacks shaII be maximizedscreening from adjacent lots and the lake. be 75 feet. Sideto achieve maximum b The portable chemical toilet may only be usedfrom June 15 through September 5 and shall bebeachlot at all other- times. during the per i od _removed from the Use of a portable chemical toilet shall require annualapproval. The application shall be initially approved by theChanhassen Planning Commission after conducting a publichearing. Each subsequent year the application shall bereviewed for approval by the City planning Department - AIIapplications shalI be accompanied by the folLowing informatio;r : 1) Name, address and phone number of applicants. 2) Site pLan showing proposed Iocation of chemical toilets. 3) Name, address and phone number of entity providing chemicaltoi Iet . 4) PIan for commercially maintainingincludi.ng a copy of any agreement name, address and phone number of ma i nte na nce . the chemical toilet,for maintenance, and theperson responsible for 5) A written description of hou the applicant intends toscreen the portable chemica] toilet from aII views into the -property including views from the lake. The City regardsscreening as essential and no portable chemical toiletshaLl be allowed where it cannot be screened unless aIIresidential neighbors consent (in writing) to allow thetoilet without screening (any such consent sha]I be deemed C. Planning March 5, Commission MeeLi n9 1991 - Page 23 e 1) Complaints of residential neighbors; 2) Any violation of the intent of the ordinance or if theportable chemical toilet otheruise presents a nuisance, 3) Any evi.dence of failure to maintain the toilet odors and polluti.on or to maintain screening. to eliminate Section 3. This ordinance shalI become effective from and after its dateof publication. AII voted in favor of the motion except Ladd Conrad who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. Emmings: Ladd do you want to state your reasons? Conrad: I just don't think the benefits outweigh the risks and I dobelieve that as the ordinance is worded, I would change this and basically my direction, if ue are to be flexible, would be to have some certain minimum standards. 1OO yard l^ot width for sure. 30 yard side yard selbackfor sure. Anchoring to some permanent structure for sure. And probably astatement, intent statement that we, and this is my oun thought and it obviously doesn't reflect anybody elses here but generally discourages the use of chemical toilets except when certain conditions exist that protec! the environment and the neighborhood, Did I say yards? I meant fee!. Thanks for catching me. On those standards I was thinking feet. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO AHEND ARTICLE VIII PERTAINING TO THE PUD. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPI'IENT DISTRICT. PauI Krauss presented the staff report on this item- Chairman Emmings called the public hearing to order. Erhart moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing. AII voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing ras closed. Emmings: Anybody want to talk about this? Erhart: Yeah, wha! uas the reason when Mark, Iet me step one back further. !.Jhen we first redid our PUD ordinance, that u,as on here a few years ago Iguess, I uras always left with the impression thaL we were talking about a PUD related to residential development in a residential zoning district.It never occurred to me at that time we were talking about anything otherthan that. Then Market Square came along and all of a sudden we were d. to be given only for the year in which it is given and notfor any other future time ). The portable chemical toilet shall be securely anchored to theground to minimize tipping of the toilet - Approval for a portable chemical toilet may be denied or revoked upon any of the following grounds: PIanni ng Harch 5, Commission l'{eet i ng L99L - Page 24 talking about a lOOz commercial area I go urrong originally? And secondly is a PUD. and we were why, remi nd doing it me again PUD - Hhere did why Mar ket Square Krauss: WeIl I think, Tim your perception probably goes back to the fact that Chanhassen hisLorically has used it more in a residential setting Lhan -we have elser,Jhere. Now that goes against conventional wisdom because the reverse is usually true in most communities. In fact arguably, ue've had a Iot of problems with residential PUD's and that's why you got into that because the changes in the PUD ordinance were designed to address lhe problems that became evident after development in neighborhoods Iike Pheasant HiIIs took place and you saw that nobody had room for decks and Lhat sort of thing. I'm sorry, what was the second question? Erhart: t^lhat was the purpose what did we get out of that? in Harket Square? tJhy Has that a PUD and Krauss: tlell I'd Iike to think that the end result t^ras that we got a fairly high quality, fairly high level of design architecturally from a Iandscapi ng standpoi nt . olsen: t^,e got setbacks. It r.,as in the CBD t^rhere there is no setbacks. Krauss: I don't know what the trade off is supposed to be, I mean there was afways, it was an implied. Like I say, conventional wisdome was that there's supposed to be a trade off but it never said Lhat in the ordinance and it never gave you any kind of indication as to what we should expect. AIso the rationale for Market Square in part being a PUD is because the deve.lopment was intense enough that they needed the flexibility. They needed t,o be able to get around things like the hard surface coverage if they were going to make the development work. That's fine if you're getting what, if the City gets Hhat they want out of it. And I Lhink thaL one worked out. But it only worked out after literally dozens of meetings with the developer saying you know, putting our fooL down and ue're not 9oin9 Lo take this and trying to work out compromises, And as I reca]I 'the PIanning Commission ltself was negotiating archiLectural detailing aL the very end. Erhart: !^lere they negotiating or just imparting our wishes? Is one'of the complicating things here is Ehat you're trying to make one ordinance cover multiple zoning distr icts? Krauss: I don't think so. PUD is a generic term. It's a generic, admi.nistratively functionally it cuts across aII the land use categories. l^le have some specific standards for single family because of our unique experience in using it. Having seen some of the end results here withresidential PUD's, I personally r.rouldn't advocate that we ever do it again. Not for single family but I Lhink that if ue did it again with the singlefamily, we'd have better guidelines than we did before. Erhart: You don't think ue got additional open space? Krauss: I'm not sothat were protected t^lell in Pheasant HiIIs we did get some outlotscouldn't have probably protected them anyway. sure.but we Pldnning Harch 6, Commission Heet i ng 799! - Page 25 That uras before the. [^las Lundgren's af ter ? That wasn't a PUD. l^las Fox Hol ]ow bef ore or af ter? OIsen: Krauss: OIsen: BatzIi: Olsen: Before. Lake Susan HiIIs u,as one of the after ones and we diddefinitely get more. Erhart: It h,as my impression that the whole negotiation there hras that wegot open space ouL of that, Krauss: l^Jell again, if the City's getting what is meeting it'sexpectations. Pheasant HiIls was designed apparently on the presumption that iL would lower the cost of housing by going with smaller lots. Tha!clearly didn't happen up there. There are other ways of achieving LhaL.There's another type of housing that I talked about briefly in here but Ididn't propose standards for it but I Has familiar r^rith it from workingwith it in Minnetonka. Is that I found that with several developments overthere, zero Iot line or Z Lype of development. I don'L know if you're familiar r^rith it but they're single family detached homes on very smallIoLs that share, you know one urall of the house is virtually on theproperty ]ine and the waII of the house adjoing it is virtually on theproperLy Iine and then there's common spaces inbetween. I found that you had to develop specific standards to deal with that type of development such as you already did with single fmaily because you have people livingin such close proximity that if somebody sticks their air conditioner compressor under Lhe other person's bedroom urindow, you've got a majorproblem. or you wanL design flexibility in the house but window, you know one window here shouldn't Iook into the bathroom over there. Batzli: In that type of setting, are they physically, are the wal]sphysically attached or is zero just kind of you're a couple feet apart? Krauss: UsualLy you're a few feet apart. Emmingsi Can you put a portable chemical toilet inbetween? Krauss: SpIit the difference. Emmings: Just enough room in there. Krauss: I don't know if we're going to have that here. I've got that sooner or later somebody's going to propose that. I do haveof handling it but I didn't feel like muddying up the issues toothis poi nt . to assume some ways much at Conrad: I've just got some thoughts. I think we're going in some good directsions. [.,e've talked about some of these things in past years and someof it may be before Paul's time. Maybe Jo Ann and I were the onLy ones around but a lot of what happened- A lot of problems occurred when you get into PUD. t^,e don't have a clue what we're getting. l.le don't know whatwe're giving up value wise. Therefore, we don't undersLand the negotiation Pl anni ng March 6, Commission MeeLi ng 1991 - ?age 26 process- Strictly cily negotiating. There aren't concrete performance standards which a Iot of communities have. tle're not smart enough here orhaven't put the time in to develop those performance standards. tle talk -about them but we don't really know Hhat they are. You reduce density byx. You r^riII increase or you save a wetland, you will actually increase. ftwiII give you x percent increase in density. tle have a little bit of Lhat here but not very much. So it's Iike tre're bordering on something and toreally have good performance standards in one terrific, a whole bunch ofulork. Otherwise we're back in the same game of well, is staff negotiating? And I think, I don'L want to discourage what PauI is presenting here because I think anything that helps define more what we're doing is betterbut again, I just think for those of you who haven't been around a whoLe 1ot, performance standards can be extremely complex. They're great ifyou're smart enough !o figure out uhat they are. Typically you're smart enough. Don't put enough time into it so you kind of wing it when the developer comes in. But again, the thing that I need, I don't know that some of what we're giving Paul is meaningful. I don't know that taking a -Iot from 15,ooo square feeL down to 12,ooo square feet is meanginful . It might be but I don't knour r^rhat the developers think about that . l.le haven't seen them flocking in and requesting PUD's because of that. On the other hand, because I don't knor.r what that, how meaningful that is economically, I don't know what we can expect from a developer on the other hand. So again, from a commissioner, from a lay person, you almost have to trus! the staff can figure some of this stuff out. And again, it's a lot of, it's staff negotiation. In here PauI , I'm just going to wing a fer^r things about whaL's here. Under the alloured uses, Lhere was a section called specific uses and performance standards for each PUD shall be delineated in a developmenL plan. The performance standards. So you have to make those up every time a development plan comes in? Krauss: tlel. I you do, but that's part of the flexibility that a PUD gives. - I can give you an examp).e of one that, I was kind of pleased with how it turned ouL. The l,tinnetonka Corporate center is an industrial office PUD that TrammeL Crow developed. It's off of 494 and the Crosstown, When we wor ked the PUD agreement up for that, it laid out what types of buildings and what sizes of buildings and the number of stories where going to 90 on individua.I areas. It delineated all the tree preservation areas, ft delineated where wellands were going to be preserved. tJhere wetlands weregoing to be created. Where major Iandscaping features ulere going to go. It laid out a whoLe signage package. t^,e threw out the sign ordinance and came up urith a coordinaLed sign program. Came up uiLh a coordinaLedlishting program. There Nere general architectural standards that were approved in there uhere most of the buildinss were going to be glass andbrick and there was limited use of tip up panels where truck loading wasconcealed. l^lhere there'd be common spaces in some of the buildings - Andthis is a 15 year development program that was Iaid out and it was a bookthat was developed which was adopted and it was amended from time to timebut that book has essentially guided that development to where it is rightnow. Now it's not finished to this day but I think, you look at thegeneral level of development in there. The standards that have been adhered to and they're pretty good. That's what I see being adopted urhenhopefully, when lhe development group comes in with 160 acres on TH 5 and TH 41. That would an ideal spot to go lhrough a procedure like this. t,hatI would like to avoid like the p]ague on a site like that is zone the whole -thing IoP. Have it split up into 45 Iots and anything that comes over the Planning March 6, Commission Meet i n9 !991 - Pase 27 next 20 years goes. That 6eems like b,e'Te throuing out any kind of control Ne can exercise over it. Now you do exercise control over it lhrough your site plan ordinance and we're lrying to get beLter code requirements in there. But I think you're a lot better .off if you can Iook at the bigpicture on something, Iike that and get those areas Preserved that you want to get. Get the building massing in the right Places and get it all to wor k as an overall concept. Emmings: Now the site that you iust mentioned on an ordinance that uras similar to what we've !o review? t^lhat were the performance standards thaL that was developed under? IN goL in Minnetonka, was in front of us the Hi nneton ka thaL done here now ordi nance Krauss: That was developed under an earlier version of the HinneLonka ordinance. I wrote the current version of the Minnetonka ordinance and I took a Lot of that and kind of changed it a little bit but fit it into this current proposal that you're looking at now. tlhat was in Lhe Minnetonka ordinance though were basic expectations ' even the old ordinance, as to you knou, protecting the exterior of the PUD as to t,hat the City had a right to expect. The current version of the ordinance is more explicit. But Trammel crow was a good enough developer too that we were able to kind of wor k mutually towards this thing and basically the current version of the Minnetonka ordinance is reflective of my experience uorking tlith them on that and uhat we had a right to expect. Emmings: And just for clarifiation for me anybody, to the extent that I've been invol.ved with PUD's, it was always my undersLanding that, Iike you said in this one introductory paragraPh. It was kind of common wisdom in the city that a development has to earn a PUD zoning but it's not reallv, that expectation isn't written down anywhere. I know that when I was here through one revision of the PUD ordinance, everybody said if we don't get something that we want out of this. And it's not preservation of a wetland because they have to do that anyway. t^le don't ever, thev don't get any points for Lhat because they have to do it anyhow. They have to really give us something Lhat He want or we deny iL and that didn't $,ork over here on Lake, was it Lake Susan HiIIs? The big develoPment that's west of Lake Susan , what is that? Olsen: Lake Susan HiIIs. Emmings: Yeah. Because I remember the Planning Commission there felt we Heren't getting anything and ue recommended denial and lhe City Council sar^r it jusL the other way around. They saw it as a tremendous oPPortunity Lo zone a tract that uJas over 3OO acres and they said it t^ras a PUD so obviously in the city we haven't had any concurrence or any agreement on what we're doing here so laying this stuff out I think is real imPortant - conrad: In that case, they thought lhey were getting a good Park and we didn't lhink we were getting a good Park. Or plav area or Hhatever. There was just a whole Lot of difference of opinion on that and again, it goes back to we don't have a clue uhat ule're getting. t^lhat is the develoPer getting value wise for increased density or for something and what are we getting back? I've never had a handle on that one. And most of lhe times, most of the PUD'S I feel we're giving up far more than what ule're getting but that's just. Planning March 6, Commission Meet i ng 799f - Page 28 Emmings: And interesting, in that case too, the threat was if Ne didn't see it as a PUD, then they trould come in under the subdivision ordinance and just put in a straight subdivision. And we said, on the P]anning Commission we said fine. tJe think ue've got a good subdivision ordinance. Go ahead and do it because ue don't think that's what you r^rant but that didscare the City Counci. l. They didn't u,ant that-. Conrad: Yeah. And they have known something we didn't know. Emmi ngs: Right. Krauss: UelI I r.,ould like to be in a position to require developments togo PUD because I think we get better product and can work it better. Everytime I try it, the City Attorney tells me I can't do it. You can almostkind, you can ask somebody to do it. You can be very specific that we'renot going to let one variance go through unless. You can really put somebody in a position where they r^ranted it. AIso, developers these daysare more savy than they used to be and they realize that PUD's allowphasing. They aI]ow the City to look at different standards for streets. They aIlow them more flexibility at buildins clustering. Maybe moredensity than they would normally get. And the better developers are, you knor*r they're typically looking for Lhat. Conrad: f don't know. I Like PUD's. I don't think we offer enough in exchange in some cases. I'd like to real.Iy encourage things like open spaces and stuff and I'm not sure h,hat we are able to give really doesthat. In other uords, inslead of putLing 8 units on a piece of property, my posture and it's really changed over the years. Instead of the a, ifyou clustered them in a highrise which takes us to a different zoningcategory but you know, double, triple the number. Leave some open space.In essence what you're doing is preserving some of that lot for open spacesor whatever but you're really, you're kind of changing what the zoning You know, my philosophy, I'd be puiting in a highrise to do that and Idon't know that that's uhat the current ordinances allow. But phi. Iosophically, there's just some neat trade-offs that you can make but alot of people still love large l^ots and I think there are reasons to change -that because it preserves some other things out here that are equally asvalid. CoupLe other questions. I don'L uJant to dominate this buL the 5acres sort of bothered me because I don't know if you can have a PUD in 5 -acres. You said you've heard that's a standard that other communities havebut I'm just sort of, ),ou can't have a residential. It's though to have aresidentiaL PUD in 5 acres. Maybe you can have some other kind of pUD butthat's a real , I guess that gives us flexibility. The other point I wanted -to add on. I think in this thing PauI you should be saying we would, theCity encourages PUD's and maybe h,e can't require it but I think wordingwise, we urant to encourage it and at least my opinion is that t.le want toencourage it because we do, u,e can get some things that we like in Lhat.But I don't know if you want to word that in there. I do like the densitytransfer stuff but I'm not sure again, I'm not sure h,here that ]eads us. The density transfer there, under the required standards Paul and Jo Ann.ft says density. The increased density, increased transfer for density may be allowed at the sole discretion of the City...but it doesn't give inthat area, do we have to drop back Lo Lhe density? The increased density Conrad: Are there cases where we would require a pUD? Planning Harch 6, Commission Meet i ng 7997 - Page 29 could possi.bly go down Lo 12,OOO square feet. Is that where we'd flip backto the required standards 5O4? In 5O5 you said u,e encourage iL but therearen't any standards. But then we go back to 5O4 for residential and isthat what would apply? Krauss: For single fami Iy. Conr ad : going to For get single family? See in Lhat case, I much and I help put those sLandards are they looking for? feet? just don't know that we'rein. olsen: t^le aren't turning developers away as far as single family developments. tJhen we first meet with them, they'll compare Hhat they canget t,tith the PUD versus the straight subdivision and they 9<> straight subdivision. Conrad: I guess I'm sort of mumbling but if we want to encourage stuff, you've got to be able to hang a carrot ouL there. So far the carrot's not b-ig enough. Haybe that's okay. Maybe Ne shouldn't change .it, tllhaL do Lhey think is reasonable?Erhart: t^Jhat 1O,OOO square Emmings: Or'more c lustered? olsen: They aII want the single family and they want the sma]I lots. Emmi ngs: How small? OLsen; As I r,Jas just telling PauI , you know 12,OOO. That's our minimum but I don't know hour you can go much smaller but some of them Iike the 11,Ooo and 1o,ooo. I don't know because what we do is we do take out the weLlands first of all and we do take out the sloPed areas so there goes some of their net density right there. And then plus ue're saving ure're going to take parkland and trails and addiLional. And when we start taking all of that away, their density just goes, you know they're ]eft ulith maybe 50 Iots trhen Lhey might get 52 lots going. It's comParable. Krauss: Conceiveably yes. Conrad: And Lherefore we could get some open space. Krauss: Sure. I suppose if you had a large enough site and it could be designed, you could have some Lownhomes in some section of it. Conrad: And you feel comfortable u,ith 252 because iL the original zoning. The 75?, that's basicallv it. keeps the intent of Emmings: Then you wind uP again with a situation where they come in they lay out a plan and over here thev've got, what they want is the square foot Iots and they get some of those and they've got to leave open space and they ge! some multi-familv. They Put that in for vou and 12 , OOO some and Conrad: In the PUD that you're Proposing, 252 in this draft, 254 of Lhe original intended zoning can be altered so basically ue could move those uniLs inLo a multi-family area? Planning March 6, Commission Meet i ng 1997 - Page 30 In Lake Susan Hills though, the sites are sLill being held for and high densiLy developments. then they build Lhe homes and they never build the multi-family becausethere's no markeL for it. l think we've seen that in Lake Susan Hills. They were supposed to,have multi-family there and we wanted Lhat and wehaven't seen any and the reason I assume is that there's just no market forit. l,,e never will see it. Emmings: Yeah. Until they come back and say geez, we just can't seIILhem" Can hre change this and I fully expect that Lo happen and that waspredicted when they urere here with their plan. So that's another problemwith that is r^re don't have the range in the market out here. Uhen people come out here to buy, they come out to buy a single family home. IL seemsIi ke . At least now . Krauss: townhome Conrad: Let me give you a hypothetical case. I rea]Iy Iike densitytransfer and again it's not anything I've ever seen that h,ould do a wholelot here. But let's say Ne have a 30 acre PUD which under today'sordinance we get 3lots per acre or somethj.ng Iike that. So really theycould have 9O single family residential lots there. Let,s say we wanted to -put those on 45, no on 15 of the acres. So we had 30 acres to begin with. [.le want to keep 15 open and we're going to drop. t"le,re going to transf erthe density that they could have had in those 15 over to the other 15. Canthis ordinance handle that situation? Conrad: Again I'm just, that seems like something that you,d r.rant to do in -certain circumstances. We're going to move jus! half the Iots and we'IIdouble Lhe density over here. t^lell see f don't know that paul is rightbecause what ue did is bre took 15,OOO square foot Iot and we just took itdown to 7,5OO based on what I just said. Krauss: I think that's been Lhe traditional . t,eII, traditionaLly Chanhassen's been a bedroom community but I t.hink u,e've aII seen that change in the last 5 years. I've had severaL people making inquiries about -multi-family housing Iately which surprises me because there,s, since 1985 when the tax lat.t changed, there hasn't been much multi-family builtanyuhere in the Twin Cities and there's a glut on the market in mostcommunities. But there are some people looking seriously at it here Emmings: Do you think it's .because of the jobs thaL have opened up? It,speople moving ou! to be closer to their job. Krauss: I think it's because the city's changed and jobs are a big part ofit. tle have a lot of people who have children groh,n up here and then theyhave to Ieave town because there's no place Lo Iive. Krauss: Yeah. ELlson: By keeping the other one open? Krauss: t^1e11 no. The problem is we have separate single family standards.If you're LaIking about single family detached housing, you're stuck withthe 12,O0O square foot minimum. PIanning March 6, Commission Meeti ng 1997 - Page 31 Conrad: So we could only transfer a couple acres worth of density to the, tle could only open up a few acres basically until we got to that 12,OOO square foot minimum, tJhalever. So basically density transfer is an interesting idea. I don't know if we're using it to the Point where we can encourage really some significant benefit. You know, if you ePen uP a Iittte bit of space, who cares? It mighL not be that bis a deal where if you open up 15 acres for some particular reason, it may be a big dea]. I guess what I'm say.ing is, I've never seen our ordinance able to really encourage creativity because we havge some restrictions because we, the community are saying hey, we value single family so much out here we uJant big ]o!s. That's why I moved here, and r.re're not going to sluff that sLandard. So I bring that up. I don't have a solution !o that but density transfer I always .thoughL was a neat thing to do if we ever figure out how to do it, Some of the ratios PauI, in your hard surface coverage' Boy, I guess, and I don't know if they're right or wrong and maybe you robbed them from some other place but the one thing that's kind of neat that I alr.rays feel I have control over, even in bad situations. Even let's say in industrial/commercial uses, I think some of the neat things about our industriat park is that it does have green sPace. It does, we're set apart because it's not urall to uaII, concrete to concreLe, asphalt to asphalt stuff. I attribute that to one, good planning and some sort of plan. But Lwo, our requirement for imPervious surface raLios that kind of gives some berms out there. Kind of gives some trees. So when I see them, the hard surface, I'm not sure how much that's changed and maybe it hasn't changed at all" I'm just sort of talking here but lhat adds to the character of our industrial parks. The greenery in it and as much as I'd Iike to consolidate those parks, I stil] Iike the green. I stil] think we can make Lhem as pretty as what u,e've goL but I'm not sure I Iike sacrificing some of that and so, I sure could be Persuaded. You know my intent or where I'm coming from. I think those are the bulk of my comments on that. Emmings: Ladd, can you think of any lime we've had a PUD here where it's really given us something? t^lhere it's really tlorked the way we'd Iike to see it wor k? I can't, conrad: I'm having a tough things but as I said. I've time. never There seen a are PUD's where we're getting real creative PUD. some Emmi ngs: I haven 't either . Conrad: And you know, the smalLer the ProPerty, the less creative vou can be. BuL I don't Lhink we're really encouraging them either here uith what we give. I don't }ook at it as a toLaIIv what do we get out of this PUD. I think it's Chanhassen dants this, develoPer wants this and the develoPer can save him some money by clustering utilities and things over here and Chanhassen can add to it's qualitv of life by doing some other things. So it's a give and take buL geez, I get real frustrated by what they're giving and that's simply because I don't have a clue what u,e get now in some of these negotiations. I just don't know and maybe I never wiII. Emmings: It's a funny thing because it seems to me Iike a PUD is an ideal u,,ay to develop any big piece of }and. Any big housing development. Any commercial development or industrial develoPment. I'd Iike to see it al] done under here but if Lhat's right. The reason I Iike it is because I think ure get to have a hand in the Planning or the design so that we do get Planning March 6, Commission Meet i. ngf99! - Page 32 some things we like. t^lhether it's whatever, but it's never happened. know, do you have any idea PauI why worked here. Lake Susan Hills, Nesubdivision rea1ly. open space or extra landscaping So something is screwed up andit's never. I don't think iL's have PUD's but it's just another or I don 't eve r Krauss: I do think the Market Square is probably the best example, theclosest example of where that could work. If Lhat r,ras developed under the CBD zoning, anything would have gone on that property. I mean there were no setbacks anyplace. You have the l per 40 requirement for treesThere's no coordination of access " There's no architectural standard thatyou really adhere to. On Market Square we felt very cornfortable pushingvery hard for better than normal design. Remember we had the whole argument about the roof lines and they came back and said it's costly andyou were saying, weII that's part of the trade off. And we required verylarge trees and a .Iarge number of them, particularly in the back propertyline and through the parking lot. tJe developed architectural standards for -the two outlots. So we don't know what's going to go on there but tae knowthat it's got to be consistent with. Emmings: tJelI urhywe'II just detreIop rnir thaL case didn't they just say, Lhe heck r^rith you, with it CBD zoning? Olsen: The impervious uranted . Par ki ng . coverage and there were some things that they Emmings: Akay. So they couldn't 90 CBD Lhere? Just come in wilh something that fit. Krauss: Not and have the same project, no. Emmings: Because what you said just makes it sound Iikeour standards that we require for deve.Lopment in the CBD seem to me Lhat anything that goes into Lhe CBD ought to Maybe . we've got holes inreal1y. It would be done as a PUD, Krauss: t^lell the CBD is sort of a frightening district. NoH it's notunlike a IoL of communities that have a real old downtown where there wasno standard and iL's tough to begin a standard in that kind of a context.But I feeL very comfortable Lhat we did a Iot better r.rith the pUD overthere than we wouLd have done otherwise. And we got coordinatiori that wewouldn'L have had. I mean u,e have internal access roads. t^le had thembuild turn lanes. They're moving bus shelters. There,s a lot of stuffthat goes in there and it's tough Lo keep, for an accounting of this stuff. -I mean there's not a balance sheet that says r.re gave this. They gave thisbecause it's an ongoing process. I mean ble get something out of Lhem.They geL something out of us. In the meelings before it comes tothe Pianning Commission, t,he Planning Commission you Nent through thatproject 3 times that I was familiar urith. Each time there b,ere morecriteria. The City Council did the same thing. Conrad: But you know a Lot more than we do paul . you've done that.You've gone through it and you know Hhen we see it on a one shot deal, wedon't knou What's been negotiated really. tle're really in the dark. P.l.anning Maich 5, Commission Meet i ng 1991 - Page 33 Krauss: tJelI one interesting thing u,ith Market Square too that I Lhink points out why one aspect of why a PUD is a good thing to have. You're all aware that from time to time over the last 2 years it seemed like Mar ket Square was going to wither and die and go away. It now seems as though it's realLy going to happen but I've had from time Lo time interest in splitLing up the properties and being jusL able Lo develoP, Parcel things off and people have come in and said, I've got every right to do this. or you know, it's owned by 3 individuals right now. Burdick owns Part, Bloomberg owns part. Burdick wiII just take his Piece and develop it independently. I'm sitting here saying you can't do that. The whole thing is zoned PUD. The only thing that could go on it is Market Square and anything else that you want to do is going to have to 9o for a rezoning and we're not going to recommend approval of a rezoning unless there's a comprehensive plan that r.re find acceptable. So tle haven't gotten Market Square. in the ground yet but we haven't gotten Piecemeal stuff that's a problem. Emmi ngs: I even have a thought you had to have unity of ownershiP before you could PUD . Krauss: do that. That's fine. Therr the partnership agreement does say they would Emmings: oh, okay. So there is a partnership beLween those three on property? okay. l^JeII Lhis could go on for a ]ong time and we've got shorten it up somehow. Annette, have you go! anything? that Lo EIIson: tlell I like the idea of getting it a litLle stronger and I was thinking the same as you Steve. It always seems like we're in such a reactive mode and I think I say it like every meeting but I reallv think if we tJant to ask something and we think PUD's the ansNer, then }et's go ouL with our ideas and LaIk to people and heLp because by the time a develoPer likes this piece of land, he's already got it in his head and then we're going in and trying to do whatever . [^|e're so reactive. That's one of Lhe reasons I feel we don't always see oursefves getting involved because they've got it alL laid out. They had that 1OO homes in there or urhatever and if we could say, offer PeoPle. You know we're taking a Iook at density swapping. Are you interested because tle'd Iike to keep this grove of oak trees. Here's a couple ideas any developer, Iet's talk. I don't know. I'm thinking in terms of something like that buL f agree that this is like the most beneficial zoning we can have. l^le really could come out with stuff that we really urant and preserve everyLhing that our goals do if we work with this the right way. I also agree u,rith everybodv else saying that so far nothing Loo swell has come out of it vet but the potential is there- So I just think we have to 90 out and do some of that ourselves and offer Lhe opporlunity to peoP]e and the kinds of things that eJe r'rant to maintain and r^rhat we're willing to swap for. And you make the good Point. Do we have enough of a carrot to say, throw it aII on 7 L/2...allowed to do that but Ne could have such Potential . It just seems like you want to take advantage of it but I like u,hat you've done. It's verv difficult to fine tune it though. I tried to help but I don't know exactly where' So those are my comments, as inept as they might be. Emmings: Should we vote on how inept they are? Brian? Planning Harch 6, Commission Meet i ng!99f - Page 34 Batzli; PauI was right about one thing and that was that there was a lotin here and I think, as I sift through it, I still I don't think have quite figured out what we're really trying to do with this even yet. I guess, Ilike parts of it and parts of it I don't understand why it's in here. Idon't know where PauI got some of these things from, even in the intentsection so I think we need to have a Iot more discussion on this and whatit is we're trying to do. I think it was raised by several commissioners and that is, we seem to want this but we don't know why we're not getting anything with our current ordinance- And if our current ordinance isvague, by beefing up the intent and demanding more, I don't think we'Il geL -more in. So I guess I don't understand what we're hoping to achieve bytoughening an ordinance when we're not getting any PUD appl.ications in here now with a weak ordinance. That's a phiJ.osophical , rhetorical question. Idon't k not^r Farma kes: You made reasons that you're the not commentgetti ng that fora lot of financial reasons or mar ketapplications for this? Krauss: Sure . Olsen: Most def i.ni.tely . Farmakes:. Oo you believe that that's going to change orit's just Chanhassen in general? I mean if the ordinancethere are some peop)e who are inquiring about this? do is you think thatpeak, you say Kraussi The only thing t.hat ue're not getting right now is we're notgetting applicalions for residential, singLe family residential PUD's. Andfrom my standpoint, that's fine because they cause us more trouble thanit's worth. l.lhere I think you're going to be seeing this more and more is mixed use residential, commercial and industrial . tJe've reached the stagein our grouth where I guess for Iack of a better Nord, we've hit the bigtime and the kinds of development r.re're going to be getting out here overthe next 10 years require more sophisticated approach that a PUD can offer. The industrial park. Chanhassen Industrial Park should have been a PUD.I'm firmly convinced that as good as it is, we could have done better hadthat ordinance existed at that point in time. Nobr r.re have tracts of landsouth of lhe railway tracks. You know, assuming the MUSA line getsapproved. [^le've got a 90 acre chunk south of there. tle've got 160 acre chunk on TH 5. t,,e've got some commercial development around new TH 1O1 . I mean there are lots of sites where this is going to come into pla),. And Ithink you really need to change gears for a moment and project forward asto where this is 9oin9 to be used in the next decade because I think ourpast experience of, in this isn't really going to be very relevant - Batzli: Do you think we shouldright now with the new ordinancelhey be developed PUD? in and rezone areas that we want PUD PUDeffect and to basically demand that go in Kraussr tlell that's an option Commissioner Batzli. In fact, I don't LikeLo keep referring back to Minnetonka but when we developed the 394ordinance which is a corridor ordinance, ue rezoned everything to PUD upthere and then developed corridor sLandards that applied in those PUD's. Conrad: That really makes a ]ot of sense. PIainning March 6, Commission Meeti ngt99t - Page 35 E.Ilson: That's nol a bad idea at aII . BatzLi; That b,ou]d be the only thing that would make sense to me because otherwise you're going to, I think get exactly b,haL He've had in the past and that's somebody's going to come in. They're going to look a! our PUD and then they're going to say, weII I don't want to give you that much. I'm just going to develop it !o your lower standards that you've got inyour IOP district standards or your BF or your CBD. t,haLever ei.se you've got. I don't see that Lhey'll use this unless we rezone it. Erhartr Aren't you missing though, you don't get anything because they're not big enough? A PUD h,orks when you have a large Piece of land under single ownership. t^lhether you zone an area PUD or not thaLfs not under single ownership, you're not going to get anything. The key to getting something is a large parcel of land under single ownership. Isn't that really the crux of it? Krauss: That's a lot of it. That's the easiest, that's the best Place to get the most bang for the buck. But those are the same tracts of land. Those are the tracts of Iand that we have ouL there. t"le do have massive ownership. I mean the whole TH 5 frontage is probably in 15 Property ouJners hands. And they've a.lready formed a development consortions. EI Ison: Yeah , I these thi ngs. was going to say. Ihose peoPle were aII signing off on Erhart: And ure if can get them to do a PUD and collectively work together, it will be great. tlhat is a real thing here, if we want to get some neat stuff done here, is to focus on encouraging massive develoPments where you can go in and look at it from a broad Point of view. I'm not sure Ne can' this is going to do that much. Conrad: Let's say we zoned the entire TH 5 corridor PUO. Does that encourage Lhe current owners to consolidate ownershiP? Kr auss : I at i tude Emm i ngs : where we Conrad: PUD and there. Not to necessarily. tlhat it does do though is give you more design require what you think is apProPriate. Now we just went through a process for the Comprehensive Plan fussed around specifically laying out zoning. tle could have gotten out of aII of that Steve telling the residents tha! we didn't know what by just zon i ng was going to go irin Batz]i: But you can do PUD and it tJould just have to be develoPed underlying in accordance with the comprehenisve Plan. Krauss: t hich is land use- And in fact, one of the things that the city council did that I informed you about was when they talked about the 137 acres in front of Timberurood. The City Council aPproved language that basically Ieft that residential but stated conditions under which non- residential may be considered. One of the requirements b,as that it be developed as a coordinated PUD. You knotl , along r^rith the design Standards. In fact that brings to mind one thing too. John Shardlow in a]l his Planning March 6, Commission MeeLi ng 7991 - Page 36 presentalions. Remember John Shardlow Hasn't only a planning consultant,,he's a member of a consortion that ouns that 150 acres out there. He's already slated a couple of times that it's their inten! to come in with anoverall clevelopment plan. A PtlD developmenl plan. BaLzli: For the whole Krauss: No. For their Batzli: Nell they haddidn'L t hey? Krauss: WeL ] yeah . Batzli: NeII it was a Krauss: Yea h - Emmi ngs: Jeff, did you corridor? 160 acres. some sort of plan already that they tried to show us pIan. get a chance to finish? Farma kes :No, I have no further comments. Hoh, about you Steve? I think it's a good thing. Lllson: Emmings: I guess everybody's, I don't have anything to add really. Ithink it's important !o do. I don't know how we geL from where we are togetting a betLer ordinance Lhat wi]I get something done. And Lhe onlyspecific thing, whiLe somebody was talking here abou! open space, I don,tknow if any of our ordinances or anything ue have ever mentions open spaceas something. You know we talk about trees and other things but the pUD ordinance doesn'L mention open space and I think maybe somehow we ought tospecificallv reference it. That that's something thaL we u,rould consider anasset. Preserving open space is something. Batzli: That brings a smile to mv heart you guys talking about open spacesin a positive way. I Iike that. Emmi ngs: Very Zen.the trail?[^le're into Zen. But how can we get any further down Conrad: The one thing I'd Like PauI to say, I,d Like paul to tell us somethinss about, to do some criticisms of some of our stanciards. The 12,ooo"He basicarry left some things in place not wanting to really attack LhembuL just sort of an analysis to say, hey do we have enough flexibility?Density transfer's a neat word but is it really going to be useful? Or dowe have to change something. And maybe there,s some other things. Lotsizes. Is the 25!z LhaL he's now putting in to a particular pUD where wecan change it from the original intent, is that enough? I guess I,m justcurious, I'd like him to come back or staff to come back with somerationale for changing certain of our guidelines, Standards. Emmings: The other thing too I think, under the inLent section, all thethings that are listed Lhere are specific and somehow to me there oughL tobe some kind of a general statement of intent. A general statement thatwe'd like to encourage this kind of development. That He expect somehour Lo Planning Harch 6, Commission Meet i ngt99t - Page 37 get sc,mething and h,e expect to give something. Maybe it would be a good idea, I wonder if it would be a good idea Lo have somebody like John Shardlor,r or other developers who you know, or have worked urith in the past, come in and teII us what they want to get from us in order to.give us some of the things that we're interested in getting. Do you think that that would be useful? Krauss: I lhink that kind of dialogue might he]p. Somebody like Bob t^JorthingLon possibly might be willing to do that. John Shardlow might too, Emmings: tlel] maybe you ought to get 2 or 3. specific thing in mind when he talks to us and value to some extenL or you've got to be aware geL somebody who's more neutral. Conrad: AncJ then maybe PauI can also Lell The options of going back and zoning PUD's or we shouLdn't do it or should. Shardlow's obviously g,:t athat detracts from it's of it. But maybe if you can !o be l',la ybe ver y that Batzli : I 'd ]i ke Lo standpoi nt . see like the guy from Lundgren, from an RSF Emmings: Yeah. Those guys know what they're doing, They knowledgeable. I don't know if they ever deveLoped PUD's would help us get us to f igure ou! t^,,hat's going on. s eem but. EIlson: Yeah, because rae don't know what incentive items at this point- us some thi ngs right now. If zon i ng , makes se nse about t hat Erhart: You know hor.r you can get open sPace in residential area? You increase your minimum 1o! size and then you offer the 12,OOO foot--- I think we've alI agreed Lhat 12,OOO is getting Prettv close to the absolute minimunr . If you really want open space, you increase your average lot size or your minimum standard lot size in the subdivision to a bigger number like 20,OOO square feet. Emmings: Then you've got aII oPen space between houses. Erhart: Because when you do that, then the developer's going to come in and say, see urhiz. Alright nobl I've got some incentive to go to PUD because I can save. I can go from 2O,OOO square feet to 12,OOO square feet and I,m givins you up thaL density in terms of open sPace. But the Problem is, we've got our standard Iot now so small thaL Lhe spread between the 12,5OO and 15,OOO isn,t adequate to incentivize a develoPer to come i.n and develop open sPaces - Batzli: I r,Jould agree. districts. If you Iooked and say, this is why theY Erhart: f don't know if 15,OOO. But I think that's the Problem in each at iL district by district, vou could don't use PUD more. one of ourgo through Batzli: r would be. anybody's ready to increase our lot size from PLanning March €,, Commission MeeLi ng 7991 - Page 38 Krauss: If the focus is on the single family and I guess I would havepreferred to sLay away from that but I think you can actually go with asmaller Iot size in residential PUD's as Iong as there's a commensuraterequirement that architectural design is known ahead of time and approved and designed to maLch. The problems we've had is tae lel somebody build ona smaller ]ot and they puL the same, if not a larger house than they weregoing to do before. Didn'l te]l the property owner anything and put thisbig patio door over looking the backyard that really is iIIegaI to usebecause if you build a deck out there, it's in the neighbor,s lot. Thosethings can be, I mean they're design problems. You can go h,ith muchtighter lots. You can almost go down to the zero lot line situation asIong as you lay out the design parameters ahead of Lime. They're filedagainst lhe property, The owner, the purchaser of the lot understandsthem. The developer is obligated to build to that standard and you knoulwhat you're getting ahead of lime. It just doesn't work when you give somebody carte blanche to do whatever they want to do afLer the Iots arecreated and that's the problem we,ve had. conrad: Ycu know ulhy we focus on residential paul is because usually whenwe look at commercial or industrial, it is one building going in on oneparcel lt's not where you have 20 acres and somebody's coming in Lo, wedon't- see that much of that. EIIson; That's why he's saying, this is a potential IN the future. because weConrad; PauI , he's going to have to educate usreally don'L see much of it and we don't know. Krauss: There was an office zoning forLhey owned some loLs south of there thatLhem. Even though they were guided for because we knew that Fingerhut bought it the older part of the building andsti.lI had residential zoning onoffice use in the plan that we had and had sat on it for a number ofno way we could work it through the in lhat ar ea Krauss: One other example you might want, if you,re Looling past there, Ifvou wani- to see a monolithic one building puD that r think worked real wellis look at the Fingerhut headquarters on 494 and Baker Road. We did thaLas a PUD because it encroaches into a single family neighborhood and wewanted to be abre to give assurances to the neighbors that what we saw iswhat ,,r. got-. We bought a package and we wanLed to keep it that way and wewanted to incorporate high levels of design and a }ot of site buffering andwe Hanted Lo make sure that that was permanently required. That somebody 5years from now couldn't cut down a]l the trees just because they fert IikeiL' which thev could do under normal zoning. so that uas done as a pUD andr think if vou look at that, vou'rl see how i!'s designed to set into therewith rolling land and wetlands and ponds and trees. Batzli: But the issue I think we,re having problems with, how did youforce them to go PUD rather than develop it some other way? Did theyrequest a zoning change? Krauss: t^le couldn't selL it to the neighborhood unress we did it that way. Emmings: l.Jhat uras it zoned? years. But we told them that there uJasneighborhood in good conscience unless they went PUD . Planning March 6, Commission MeeL i n9 1991 - Page 39 The residential looking buildins by the Nater tower, was thatof the PUD? No" That's owned by Bob Naegele. tlhat's in that building? Yeah, what does he do there? It was supposed to be his restaurant empire which he has since Emmings: Is it just offices in there? Far ma kes : also par t Krauss: Emm i ngs : Conr ad : Kr auss : soLd off . Kr auss : inLo the offices and helhat faces the IL's side fought us. He h,anted to build a billboard interchange. Emmings: Okay, we've got to close this off. t^le're going Lo be here forever unless somebody's got some burning issue but I think, unLess somebody's got another idea, IeL's get some PeoPle talkins to us about whaL this means to them and you can address some of the things that Ladd broughL up because I think they're important. tJhatever they were. Conr ad : Emm i ngs : APPROVAL I can't remember lhem myself. OF HINU TES;Chairman Emmings so noted the Minutes of lhe Planning Commission dated February 6; 1991 as presented. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Emmings: Let's assume that everybody's read it. Does anybody have any questions for PauI? EIIson: I have a question on that Teton Lane thing. Jus! a quick question. I didn't understand it. I can't remember. I remember I wanted that road to go through. I can't remember how it actually got- They don't have to build it through and now the guv wanLs to subdivide? I remember this but I don't remember what CiLy Counci] ended uP Passing on that- You're looking at upgrading thaL but was it a condition for Lhem? Krauss: It was conditioned for the developer to acquire easements so that we could deed the road to us but Lhaf it be barricaded so nobody could ever use it because the proPerty owners, r.re]I Lhe ProPerty owners along side Teton swore that they'd never develop their Property and thaL they didn't need i! and Lhey didn't want the traffic to 90 through there - So the Council approved barricading of Teton even though it is a public street nouJ. No$ since that time Donovan split off the corner in a one acre Iot and he's now lalking to a develoPer about platting out another 10 acres of it and he owns more Iand in there. There's another ]ot tha!'s for sale and other Iots have develoPment potential . The Council Has Put in a tough position on ihat one. I mean here Lhev basically believed PeoPle Lhat said they r^rould never develoP ProPerty and nout , a yeaY and a half laLer, it's being developed. O kay . Planning March 5, Commission Meeti. ng 799! - Pase 40 Krauss: The first time this was heard by the Council the same neighborsgot up and said that they spoke to Donovan and Donovan denied that he r,rasLalking to a developer, HelI, lhe second meeting we presented a copy ofthe developmenL agreement. EIlson: Okay. t^lell that u,,as the question I had. BatzIi: The wiIdIife, protecLion expansion of Lhethe next step on that? Do h,e just kind of sit andand t^lildlife and those kinds of people to get back wildlife u,ait forto us? r efuge .the U.S Uhat Fish Krauss: Yeah. Fish and WiIdIife was making an appropriationCongress this month and they agreed to include us in there.expanding the boundaries of the park. Now what that means isapproved that acquisition of those lands in Chanhassen wouldfor funding but it's based on a prioritization and Tom Larsonunderstandably said that they have higher priorities for moreenvironmentally sensitivd areas Lhat are threatened. And mythat was that's fine. This is a ]ong term commitment and asour foot in the door, at this point we're okay. request Lo Basica 11yif it's be eligible position on Iong as we get Batzli: They don't think the auto salvage yard t^rould qualify as. Krauss: A sensitive environmental , a nesting site for something. Atpoint uJe might urant to become active wiLh our Congressional delegation know basically supporting funding for Lhe refuge so that they're in aposition Lo acquire those properties. some you BatzIi: Ito get rid Krauss: No question. BaLzLi; And I think it isthose are some of the urrong of an environmentally sensitive areas andto have in thaL area. say it kiddinsly but I think that area, it would be a good thingof some of those uses on that side of the road. kind uses Krauss: tJeII I'm g).ad that, since we discussed it here tast fall I had the -opportunity to go down and talk to Tom Larson and found out that when theydrew the park boundaries, they just drew boxes around any existing use thaLwas there figuring that it might as werl stay Lhere. [^le Heren't consultedat lhe time and r don't know if the city had Lhe same sensitivity to it butthose uses include the motel , the junk yard, the SuperAmerica, the burnedout drive-i.n. Conrad: It's sort of a garden spot isn,t it? Krauss: Yeah. Emmings: Anything else on the City Counci.l update? Anybody got any otherquest ions? Conrad: Good r epor t - ElIson: Isn't that surprising? PIanning Harch 6, Commission Meet i ng f99l * Page 47 OPEN OISCUSSION: A- DEFINITION OF STRUCTURES - olsen: t^le've been having a Iot of discussions from residenLs Iately and Lhroush the Planning Commission and City Council. what a structure actually is and hou do ue define it and how do h,e conLrol it. [^le have gbne through lhe definition before and it just never got through to the Council so I put that back in here. The Planning Commission recently did so through the def inj.tion. Ne kind of combined the tu,o sections into one saying, including but not limited Lo what structures are. So Lhat kind of helps the situation but what we're really having the Problem with is where the building code doesn't require Permits. So then we don't know thaL a structure is going up which should technically meet the setbacks and ule don't have the control over it. The only way we have control over it is if a neighbor calls or if that Person by chance calls and asks if that dog kennel actually has to meeL a setback. So in writing this, it's easv to poinL out the problems but there's rea]Iy no good solution. In talking with Roger, you know there's reaLly nothing we can do. It's like if we come up wiLh a sol^ution, there's lots of other cities that urould like to know iL Loo, So I don't really have resoluLion on that. [^le can. amend the buitding code. It's a real difficult process. So whal we're jusL going to try to so with is just education with our new citv newsletLer . lYY Lo make people understand that you might noL have Lo have a building Permit f,or a dog kennel but you do have to still meet setbacks and try to enforce it that way. if you have some good ideas on that ' Batzli: If we go urith the new definition that's tougher, is it a situation where the people that have the existing structures, accessory structures 'are those people grandfathered in? Olsen: UelI the problem is that they caII up and say I'm putting in a 1OO square foot storage building. Do I need a buildins permit? tlell ' thev're told no. The building Permit is rea]Iy where we catch the site Plan and LeII them where they have to meet certain setbacks' So even though the definition is str icter . BaLzli: If you're going to Put uP a dog kennel ]et's say and you were going to do it tomorrow and then you called the CiLy and said I'm going to put iL 5 feet from my rear lot ]ine. !.lhat would the City tell them todav? olsen: UeII it depends on who thev taLk Lo. Again, if it's the Building Department, usually urhat they ask is do we need a building Permit for LhaL. They uill probably, they'II be told no. And we've been trving to trork the communication where they'll say but, you need to talk to the Planning Department because you still do need to meet seLbacks. Most PeoPIe just don't even call in the first Place- They just asaume thev can have a dog kennel. or play sLructures. tle get Iots of comPlaints. You knour they're not just the swing sets anymore. Thev're the huge things with the bridges and people putting those right on other peoPle's ProPerty Iines and yes. Thal's a structure and yes, that does need to meet the setbacks but does it need. You know people don't even call to get the building Permit so it gets into more of an enforcement issue. Planning March 6, Commission Heet i n9 L99L - Page 42 Batzli: But r.rhat are we doing, I guess I'm confused. I thought currentlyit wasn't c.Iear that playground equipment and Lhose things h,ere structures and required to meet the setback today. Olsen: I think ble ulere thinking that that might be the solution to define ulhaL really is a sLructure but then it went one step furLher than that asto what we define as a structure versus what the UBC requires. tloodstructures, they require to geL a building permit which is realIy again where ure enforce setbacks. Batz]i: Okay but, I guess I'm still confused because I thought, thisoriginally came up because ure were trying to define structure better toinclude things that weren't currently included like playground equipment,things Iike that. Olsen: Rieht . Batzli: But you're telling would say thaL you can't put of the rear yar d? that if somebody asked you, you set within whatever number of feet me now todayyour swi ns Batzli: But how does this. Olsen: t^lha! we're doing really doesn't change the situation. That's whatI 'm saying. EIlson: AII you can do is depend on complaints. Olsen: And education and you departmen! to always say, andgood job of catching the ones know communicatinsthey're the ones.that aren 't . betNeen They're the bui ldi ng doing a rea]Iy Kraussr There's a couple of other anomalies Loo. For example, if youbuild a retaining wall over 5 feet high, over 4 feet hish, it requires abuilding permit. You cannot have a retaining waII wiLhin 75 feet of a ]ake -because it's a structure yet we have a lot of people who need to, you knowthey have a fairly steep bank and if they want a rear yard, they need tohave a retaining wall. I mean it puts us in a tough position. Should weIook the other uay because it's really not a structure? Technically it isa strucLure and iL requires a building permit. Another area uhere I have abit of difficulty is if you have a deck attached to your house and there,sa 25 foot rear yard seLback, if you Lake the same deck. Separate it fromthe house and maybe not make it as talL. Because it,s physically separatedfrom the house it becomes a patio. Olsen: It becomes an accessory has a 5 foot structure. Krauss; tJhich only setbac k . Olsen: I r.rould, if they talked to me or anyone within Lhe Planning DepartmenL, trould say yes, That's a structure and it does need to meetsetbacks. But normally when people ca]I to find out the regulations onbuildings or structures, they go through like the building department andusually the first question is do I need a building permit and it usuallyends aL Lhat poi nL . Olsen: It structures those dec k out the. can be off the ground. But that's when we get into accessory which is the next discussion. That's ulhere we jusL talked about variances and that's another. So anyh,ay, I just wanted to point Conr ad : t"lhat 's the setbac k f or a f ence Olsen: tJe have specific regulations in Emmings: I!'s lot line unless you agree don't, then it's a foot off isn't it? Jo Ann? the ordinance for that, with your neighbor and if you olsen: Right. tlell technically it just says it can't be on the lot line unless you have the neighbor's permission. Conrad.' Hhat's the setback for a dog kennel? olsen: A dog kennel would An accessory structure and from the rear . come under, we would consider so Lhat would be 10 feet from that a structure "the side, 5 feet Conrad: That's an accessory strucLure. Olsen; 0r- a structure. Emmings: It is a sLructure but if 's used as an accessory strucLure " olsen: But it's not required by the building code to get a building permit so most people wou.Ld never even lhink to contact the city to see if there's any specif .ic location that iL has to be in. So anyt^lay thaL's, I think that we shouLd stil] go wilh the new definition that we had worked on. I think LhaL would make it a little bit clearer. Conrad: O.Lsen: Emming: Is tha! the one that you got in the firsL page? Yes. And that's with your addition to it. Yeah" That was so long ago, I don't even remember doing it. olsen: I i ncI udi ng Lo do. I Emmi ngs : olsen:fron! of Emm i ngs : Emmi ngs: Hox how do people do people feel? feel about there almost forgot that u{e had done this. IL's got the legal, but not limited to. So I guess Lhere's nothing reallv any guess it's jusL to kind of let you knot^t tlhat the situation mor e is . HeII but nobr what is the sLaLus, did we? You recommended approval of Lhat definiLion but iL never got in the City Council And it's back here? olsen; To update you on the whole structure because PeoPIe have been questioning what is a strucLure and how we define strucLure. You know when I read this over this time, being no setback requirements for driveways? Planning Commission Heet i ng March 6, 7991 - Page 43 tJe don't have a driveway How would you enforce it? t^,lel I some cities requirethat you get a permit if Access permit? permit in the ordinance period.Kr auss : OIsen: Krauss: requ ires OIsen: driveway permits,you're coming out the same as MnDotonto a StaLe road. Krauss: Yeah, an access permit and a ]ot of citiessteep a driveway can be and where it has to enter. and that kind of stuff. t^le don'L have that at aI]. have regulations on hour -How far from a corner Olsen: Especially nexL to a weLland. Emmings: But I guess if we had a setback requirement, presumably deveJ.opers would know it and if somebody was unhappy trith someone drivingrisht down the ]ot Iine, they could do something about it. Right? Becauseit was always shocking to me that r.rhen people put in roads intodevelopments, Lhey can butt that road right up next door to, right up toLhe next door neighbor and I always, thaL just seemed so u,rong to me. That,f could be living on a Io! and it's been nex! door to me for, if he.owns abig parcel , he could develop that and he can put the entry road to thatdevelopment right down the property line with no setback at all from myproperty and thaL's always seemed just horrible to me. EI.Ison: Did you ever see it done? Emmings: T heypiece. That's talked about doing it up on, off of Lake Lucy Road on awhere it first came to my attention. BatzIi:Vine Forest? Vineland on Pleasant View?OIsen: Emmi ngs: No . BatzI i : Open space . Emm i ngs r Open space. P.Ianning Commission Meet i n9 March 6, t991 - Page 44 Or sidewalks? Driveways in particular. And whether there should be a sideyard seLback for. Obviously I don't think you need a front yard, you can't - have a front or rear buL a side yard setback for a driveway kind of makessense to me. Batzli: Yeah. Yeah, because that was the guy that uJas renting. Emmings: Oh yeah, there Loo. That's another one, That i^ras off ofPreasant View. on the other hand, in that case if you're going to bring in - a big long road into a subdivision you knou, and that guy had a long skinnyLot and there was another long skinny lot and he was going to bring theroad right down one side of it because he said that h,as the only way hecould build houses over here and r don't know that we necessarily wanL tocreate a Iong narrow strip for nothing. Planning March 6, Commission Heeti ng 7991 - Pase 45 Emmings: That's righ! " l^lell that's okay too actually with me. Krauss: But then nobody maintains them. Conrad: It's aIl real confusing Steve. Emmings: If nobody maintains it, we calL it a natural area. okay. By the way, it's kind of on the subject. If a person areas of their yard go back to nature, is that alr j.ght? And tha! 's ula nts to let olsen: Unless Lhe weed inspector gets you. Emmings: l^lhal if we plant a few wild f lourers there and caII it? olsen: I'd tell them to do it and,.. Emmings: That's what I'm planning to do. Conrad: Is i:hat to hide the portable toilet that you've got? Emmings: l,Jhen you come to my house, you won't be allowed to use it. But anyway, I Lhink there ought to be side yard setbacks for driveways and sidewalks. I don't know whaL sideulalks mean in this tot,,n and for roads. If iL makes sense, you know I just, I don't know. So this doesn't require any action. ls there anybody else that has any comments either on the strucLure definiLion or the accessory structure discussion in here? Olsen: t^lilI you fol]ow Lhe accessory structure one? Emm i ngs : Huh? O]sen: tlould you follour the accessory structure? Again, that's one that was tabled. Batzli: But there's no action is there? Olsen: No, there's no action but it kePL getting tabled at the Council. Do you agree with the most recent amendmenls to the ordinance and do you brant me to bring Lhat back to the Council again? The most recent amendments now say the maximum is 1,ooo square feet or. - -principle structure. That's uhaL you passed onto Lhe CounciI. Then the Council wanted to change that to 8OZ of the principle structure. That was their most recent."- Then Lhe other one is the gradual setbacks- So 5 foot for a rear yard seLback uP Lo 14O square feet for accessory struclures- 10 foot for 141 to 4OO square feet and then 30 foot rear yard setback for anything over 4OO square feet. So that's the most recent one that's been proposed by the Council . . . Emmings: I have a question on Olsen: t^lel. I Attachment *4 hasprinciple structure too. That that. That's Altachment +4 right? been changed with 8OZ principle and then the t"ras ta ken OUt . under that 2o-9o4, was B changed? The 3oZEmmings: Alr ight . is gone? Now has B, Planning March 6, Commission Meet i ngt99t - Pase 46 Olsen: 2O-9O4? No, Lhat's stiII there. There's stiII Emmings; Okay" Let me teII you what I think might bedon't know why iL says rear yard. Olsen: It's always said rear yard. Emmings: WeII it isn't always the rear yard. Olsen: Accessory structures . Emmings: Not riparian Iots. And I think, why doesn't area of the yard in which it's built? 3O"a - a prob).em there. it say 3O% of the I Kraussi Do you urant an accessory structure in the front yard? Emmings: I live on the lake, I clon't r^lanl to buildpeop.Ie buildins garages between their houses and thegarage, it's probably going to 90 in the front yard. a garage or haveIake. So if I built a Krauss: or side - Emmings: Front or side. That's why I say, Nhy not change itwhich it's built rather than just saying rear yard. UsualIybe your rear yard but now always. to the yard iL's goi ns in to Olsen: Is that number 2? I'm sorry. Krauss: But. if you did that though, you needrequirement and the accessory building shouldthan a principle building would be. Kraussr tlell you wouldn't unless you adoptedare the only setbacks that apply to accessory it with this because thesestructures, to be rdadd a front y no closer to at he street Emmings: l^lell sure you've got setbacks. Right? you've got the setback Lotake care of that don't you? Emmings: tJell what does a person do that !.rants to build a, does this thingas it's written. No, I know it says on riparian IoLs you can build it inthe front or rear yard. I don't know why you,d build it in the rear yardbut must comply urith front, side and applicable ordinary hish uater marks.That's fine but you don'L have your percentage requirement applying there.Don't you uanL it to? Olsen: Yes. So we'II just somehow tie those two together. Emmings: The other thing, the other question I had on that one is, itsays, in (c) it says in any residential district and then it says oragriculLural district, parcels with less than 3 acres. I take it thatparcels with ]ess than 3 acres goes with agriculLural districts there? Olsen: That one we kept changing. f lost track on it. Batz]i: I thought that went with both. Planning March 6, Commission Heet i ng \991 - Page 47 Emmings: uelI that's what I'm uondering. Olsen: I think Ne uJent with boLh too. Emmings: Oka/, fine then if it I thought maybe it just urent Hith agricultura] . That's goes with pr i nciple. OIsen: That's new. The adding of or agricultural districL, parcels Iess than 3 acres was one of the things that the Planning Commission wiLh added. Emmings: So is it your understanding does parcels with go with both residential and agricultural? less than 3 acr es OIsen: r,JeIl it's not real clear. Maybe we should make it. In any Parcels with ]ess than 3 acres and any residential district. Put that at the starL? Emmi.ngs: l.lhatever . It Nasn't clear when I read it today. Erhart-: NelI it was supposed to also include agricultural d.istricts. Olsen: Right. It says, we1I. Erhart: You have to say any lot less Lhan 3 acres Period. Olsen: But do we need to specify residential and agricultural? t"lhere it says commercial? Erhart: l,JeII what does this app]y. The ordinance is the what? olsen: It's any. Erhart: t^lel1, I guess leave it what you've got. ResidentiaL or agr icultural distr ict . Olsen: I'II make sure they're tied in together. Emmings: Does anybody else got anything on this? conrad: It's tough to reflect back. Emmings: It's impossible. Batzli: I read the Minutes and I couldn't recall any of it. I reallv couldn 't . conrad: Yeah, it's really tough. I feel kind of uncomfortable sending something to the City CounciI. Erhart: BatzIi:I said and it swimmin Even after reading alI of the old Minutes? Yeah, I read them and I was looking at my own comments going, that? My only comment was, and I don't know where this came from may have come from me because I seem to have been talking about g pools and tennis courts but the detached accessory structure may occupy not more than 3OZ of the area. How realistic is it to assumethat aperson's going to have a tennis court that doesn'L take up 8OZ of theirbackyard? I mean a tennis court is huse. Emmings: They can't have it. Batzli: Is that what we were really trying to do? Basically we're banningtennis courts. Ellson; You need to have a huge yard. Batzli: Because uie say it only has to be 10 feeL from back yard and sideyard but boy, in other ulords, If you have a huge yard, you can locate itright next to the guy but it can't take up more than 3OZ. Thal seemssiIly. I don't know. Ellson: Tha!'s the way it is. Conrad: So what's happening on this? Emmings: Nothi ng. Olsen: I just wanted...what I'd like to do is to take it back to theCouncil and finally get iL Lhrough. Conrad: t^lhat are you going to take through? You're going to take throughthe definition? Ofsen: Or we can bring it back and hold a public hearing on it. Conrad: Don't bring it back to us. I thought we made some good decisionsback then but I just can't remember why. Emmings: I think r^ie ought to stick uith what we did before, uhatever it was. conrad: Boy, the city council could rip you apart with what you'rebringing to them. Emmings: I think the last time it was members so it should be fun to take it Conrad: I wouldn't do it. Olsen; But bre need it. Ellson: Go ahead. They misht send it Emmings: The definition of structureis modified. the Council- had two different agai n . there bac k back but we'II and then dhat's Iet them decide . on the AttachmenL *4 Conrad: Yeah, and Lhat's one. And sidewal ks is out Steve. you don't want -anybody to review sidewalks even though Jo Ann said she was going to reviewsidewalks for setbacks. !.,ere we dropping sidewalks and driveways? Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 7991 - Page 48 Emmings: I don't know anybody that's got a sidewalk. Conrad: No. We don't a]1ow those in Chanhassen Emmings: I Iove sidewalks. I'm a sidewalk }over frankLy buL nevertheJ.ess, I t^rould want. I think there ought to be setbacks. Sideyard setbacks. Conrad: Basically Steve you don't. care because we don't have any so we're okay? Emmings: I care about driveuays but I don't knor,l if sidewal ks is, talking about sidewa.I ks is meaningful. Conrad: Yeah. Driveways urould be. Emmings: Let's abandon this interesting issue and go on to the Iandscape ordi na nce . Batz]i: t^lhat are we doing with it? Emmings: Nothing. l^le're not doing anything Batzli: Are we giving it back to Council? Emmings: Do you uJant iL back here? [^lho wants it back here? [,lho wants to Look at this again? Accessory structure. Olsen: I could hold it. . . EIIson: For an anniversary party. Conrad: An annual revieu. Emminss: I think you should take it to the City Council, and if they want us to Iook at iL again, because it's been so long, we wiII. otherwise they can deal r^rith iL any r^,ay they see f it. Balz.li: I have one more question. Does Section 20-615 which provides a 20 foot setback for accessory structures in RSF district, does thaL mean that people are going to have to puL everything 20 feet from all side yards, back yards , ever yt,hi n9? Olsen: I think that might be referring to height. Batzli: Is that heisht? okay. That's in the height section there? okay. conrad: Do we have to send City Council Minutes of our discussion o-n this Iast item? I'd just sort of like to prettsnd it's now getting to City Council after we reviewed it. Emmings: I think somehow Jo Ann is going to blame us for the de]ay. That's really why she brought it back here. Planning Commission Meet i n9 March 6, L99l - Page 49 Planning Harch 6, Commission Meeti ngt99! - Page 50 Emmings: Next r^re'vething we could spendto talk about Lhi.s? .I andscape ordinance issue Lhe rest of the night on. PaPer. PauI, Kraussr t^JelI Mr. Chairman, I'm wondering if you wanl to, I mean I,d Iiketo get into this but I uronder if you ulant to pay, ElIson: Let's do this another time? Kraussr Yeah, t e don't have a h/hole 1ot on our next agenda. EIlson: This would be rea]Iy r^rorLh discussing when we,re not in this stateof mind- Batzli; I move that we defer Lhi.s issue to our next meeting. Conrad: The only reason Richard has stayed with us this late. Dick Wing: Not at aII. I just know lhat there's a moralorium on buildingunti I we do something. Kr auss :we need to carry some stuff across to our got the most of A not her do you uant Emm i ngs : the nexL Krauss: Chairman Emm i ngs : appr ova I . Kr auss : Emmi ngs : As I say, Let's do meet i ng . I do have you also that . Does anybody disagree? t^,le ' I I bumpAIright. Considered it bumped. next this through and I think Mr.go through the. present it for Lhei r meeLi n9 . over to a few things I'd Iike to 9omentioned tha! you'd like to You and I wiII do that and Lhen we'IIThat can't be done by committee. Can f then touch on? There's sLi 1I . Krauss: The state is very serious about adopting no net loss legisrationfor wetlands which we applaud. I think it's about time that they did morethan recognize the DNR Netlands which is a good program but didn't go farenough as we all know. Now Chanhassen has beenrole in wetlands protection and we have a Lot o some of the bills that are out now for no net Ipending- One is the Munger Bill which is in thRepresentatives. The other is the Davis BiIl iBill is the one I was led to believe that has tbetLer coaLition behind j.t. t^JiIIard Hunger's b many years and this is I guess his Iast term anYeah. The problems we see uith the biII are no we've played a Ieadership fundamental problems withs- There's two billsState House ofthe Senate, The Hungerinside track. It's got an an envirpnmentalist forhis crowning achievement .the no net loss provision f OS e n he ee dtor even the 2 to 1 conversion. NoH you're supposed !o seek to avoidwetlands but if you do need to damage a uetland, to get somelhing done.It's approved. You have a mitigation plans approved. That every acre of LANDSCAPING ORDINANCE. PENDING I,.IETLAND LEGISLATION: Planning March 6, Commission Meet i ng 1991 - Page 51 wetland that you lose you have to create 2 new acres elsewhere. I don'tthink we even have a beef with that. Our concern is Lhe administration ofthe program" Basically whaL it does it sets up a whole new bureaucracy. EIIson: The County? Krauss: Nell, they changed tha!, ThaL was the, we had the earlier version of the biII. Now iL's the local water managemenL organizations Hhich arethe 3 or 4 Natershed districts that we deal with. But there's oversight review by this board, the Bouser Board. Board of Soil and t^later Conservation something or other, which nobody's quile sure exactly h,ho they are or what they do buL they're looking for urork apparently. But the existing infrastructure, the existing bureaucracy r^Je use with Army Corps of Engineers and Fish and t^lildlif e and DNR, aren't going to go away. It'sjust a whole new layer on top of that and there are things in there likeyou have to have a mitigation plan developed which is fine. t^le'd do that but then you have to get it approved by the l,latershed Hanagement organization. They don't have the staff or the time or the money Lo do these things. Kind of confused. Then the PIan gets passed along to the Bowser Board which is completely removed from our Iocal sPhere and they have 12o days to review it. Then it's got to be published in the EOB Moniter so anybody can protest it and if Lhey protest it, it's got to go Lhrough another review. Once the mitigation plan is aPproved, the law now requires, the draft now requires that you go do the mitisation and let it sit for an entire growing season, an entire year so you've go! a 2 year delay before you turn the first shovel fuII of dirt on the proiect. And we've obviously, we've got some real concerns with it because (a) we think we do a good job. (b), under Lhe storm water management plan, we're going to do a better job. (c), we don't think ue're the only community in the Turin Cities doing Lhis. I mean there are good communities. Bad communities relative to wetlands but we think we've got a good relationship established with aII these agencies and we do more typicallv than anybodv's ever asked us to do and we want to be in a Position to continue to do thaL" The biII was drafted, both bills in fact utere drafLed largely with ag interests at the sole root of it plus environmental interests. Counties have been allowed to participate in the drafting of the bill. Thev Prettv much completely left out local uniLs of government. Either intentionally or unintenLionally and they comPletely overlooked the fact that we're in the metro area and we're somewhat different. one of the other Problems r have with the bilI, and I was Lalking to Commissioner Emmings about this, is that the biII very heavily stresses Payment to farmers for wetland protection. I have a personal bias Lhat if I'm going to, weII first of aII. IL's more than that because we're telling develoPers we're going to Lake that weLland and Protect iL for free yet the farmer across the street is going to get paid by the State for doing something that he mavbe should be doing anyr,Jay. Be that as iL may, we don't u,ant to get into a shouting match with ruraL versus metro interests and we think that there's ways of working Lhese things out. Jo Ann and I have been active in spreading the word about these bills. There's been very Iittle said about it to date- Ne've been active. Jo Ann's going to be speaking before the Sensible Land Use Coalition. They're deveLoPing a meeting on this. l.le're working through the Planning Association. t^le called Munger up and met with him and his staff yesterday and he was very recePtive to the changes that we had proposed and in facL, we have Roger KnuLson right now drafting an alternative language biII that basically, it's not an exemption but it P.Lanning March 5, Commission Meeti ng 7991 - Page 52 treats metro area communities differently, If you adopt a wetlandprotection plan that meets the DNR guidelines, they'Il develop guidelines, it meets their gui.delines, it allows us to continue the program pretty muchas we've laid out today. And we're comforLable thaL we have the desire andthe uearuithall to do that and ue don't mind having DNR looki.ng over ourshoulders to make sure that we do it correctly. And if communities get these plans approved and then don't do whaL they're asked to do, the DNRcan revoke that IocaL authority. It's the carrot and the stick approach. EIIson: He's saying that that's something....need this Bowser Board? O.Isen: t"Je wouldn't have to deal Hith that. Emmings: or delay developmen! for 2 years. Krauss: Risht . That's whaL we're hoping. Ellson: So it looks ]ike he's goingreceptive to looking at our ideas? to be changing that or he seemed to be - Krauss: He was receptive. EIIson: He doesn'L need votes anymore so maybe,.. Krauss: But uJe've never, I've never gotlen into the lesi.slative arenabefore and it's kind of a new area for us and Jo Ann and I find ourselvesin the unusual position of this is that we got out. in front of the entiremetro area on this somehow and I think it was because we found out abouL itear.Iier than most. Yeah by chance because they rea]ly, weII t.hey reallydid not try to make anybody aurare of this thing so Jo Ann's on everywetlands group and Board in the Twin Cities and we happened to catch windof it. Some wildlife biologists people we knou, told us about it and some DNR peop.]e so we got involved, He'l.I keep you posted on it. We,re veryhopeful thal the final biII trill give us Lhe teeth that we need to back upwhat Chanhassen's been doing, Chanhassen's been, we've gone out on a limbbecause r.: e feel that wetland protecLion is worthwhile in it,s own right_And the City Council has backed that up. City Council can alutays changetheir mind if pressure were brought to bear and this is nol a criticismagainst them but there's no overriding State law to say that we have to do whaL we do. Plus somebody could teII us, weII I can move down the road toChaska. Haybe that's not fair but, or Rapid City or wherever, that doesn,!require us to have the same level of concern for wetlands so there,s acompeLitiveness aspect of it. t^,hen you have an overriding State LaN thatrequires no net loss of everybody, you eliminate that and I think that's agood idea too" It gives us more back bone to urork with. Emmings: Nou that Lakes care of the bill in the House side. The Senatebill you said r.ras different and uorse? Krauss: Yeah" It completely turns on it's headwetlands. The DNR's very uncomfortable with it.bill " every Nay of Iooking at The DNR favors Lhe Hunger Olsen: They also warns us to get active with that one. Planning liarch 6, Commission Meet i ng L991, - Page 53 Krauss: tle'Il be participating in thaL as welI. Emmings: I thought your letter was a good one. Krauss: THo more things. t^lell, actually three. Relative to that last one, I'm going to be meeting with Gary l.Jarren on Saturday morning so, he and I are going to develop the request for proposals for consultanL assislance for the storm Nater utility program, So now that r^re've got the Comp PIan out of the way, I've got a little bit of time so hopefully we'I1 set this going in Lhe next month and sta)-t getting some resPonses back and can start doing work with thaL. Related to that, there's an item in your packet. Metro Council Analysis of t,later Auality in Area Lakes, Emmings: I wanted to bring that up because I see that LoLus Lake got a C lo a D where Lake Hinnewashta got an A. I iust though! I'd mention that, ElLson; I thought it uas disappointing because of that. Krauss: There's some scarey information in here. I would ask you to use some caution. This is Dick osgood's work, Dick osgood is a rePutable scientist but he also has a personal agenda. He's got 10 or 12 years of research and he's got a mind set of hou things work. There are hydrologists out there who dispute some of his findings. 5o Lake it with a grain of salt. f'm not a scienLisL. I can't critique Lhis in any more detail buL f wanLed you to have this rePort card aspecL of iL because I thought it was important. Yeah, Minnewashta is a good clean, deeP lake and doesn'L seem to have any problems and they did not survey. I mean these are very few .Iakes LhaL they're surveying in the Twin Cities. It gets kind of interesling. You pick three lakes in Chanhassen to look at but Ri]ey is a C- which doesn't bold well for it and Lotus is a C or a D which is reallv kind of worr isome . OIsen; Krauss: mentioned You can I don' 't get much t know but a per iod. worse than Riley, there's been antidotal evidence and I know Ladd's over IT'Sconr ad :LerribIe. Krauss: But it's hard. It's like watching a child grow you know. You don't see it over time but if you 9o away for a year or 2 and there's obviously differences in the quality. So h,e've given a coPy of this to the CounciI. I think that this subsLantiates or helPs to substantiate whv h,e've sotten into this whole Nater quality arena at all and hoPefully we can turn these grades around and we'II be working on that- The last Lhing I wanLed to touch on and it's kind of an informational item. This may be breaking in Lhe Press on Friday. [,le've been talking to the U-S' t',eather Service about locating the Twin Cities Meteorological Station in chanhassen. AL first I was not terribly excited with the idea, I had heard different sites that they were looking at and they weren't consistent with the Comprehensive PIan. I assumed Lha! as a federal insLiLuLion they don'! pay property taxes. And of course, a weather statement has a weather radar which always causes problems. But they came out here- They flew some folks out from Kansas city and also had Jim Campbell along who's the Twin Cities Meteorologist. He's a high profile guy- In fact, Iater that Planning March 6,, Commission Meet i ng 799f - Page 54 afternoon I heard him talking on WCCO and whenever they have weatherquestions, he's Lhe person they- aluays ask. tlhat they're looking to, welIfirst of all, the site that they're looking at is in an area that you've guided f or indusLrial of f ice use in Lhe neur I.IUSA expansion area. It's the area jusL north of Rod Gram's farm on the corner of Audubon. EIIson: There's our open space right there. El]son: How talL does tha! thing go up? Krauss: The weather radar is 130 feet high from ground to Lop. Now He approved the cellular tower which is admittedly a smaller diameter toulerand doesn't have the golf baII on the top. It was approved for 185 feet,just got word back from the FAA that they made them lower it to 13O feet.This will be a high profi).e facility. ft not only has the meteorologicalstation buL it would also have the River Flood Forecast Center for most ofthe norlhern states and it also has Lhis remote sensing group Lhat usessate.Llite photographs to interrupl snowpack and what not. I El Ison: l^lhere are they now? Krauss3 t,elL a few of them aren't in the Twin Cities and the rest are atthe AirporL and they're in very crowded environs there and they reallywanted to be in chanhassen. tlelr our rocation is idear for them since mostof the severe ureather approaches from the southwest and brest. Emmings: You right now they always say the snow is measuredairport. t^lell , they'd be saying the snow, the of f icial snot,rour Chanhassen - and so at AS the measured in Krauss: I specifically asked them thaL and they said, yes they wou.Ld_ Emm i ngs : Krauss; tle'd have IoLs of PR. They're going to keep the the temperature thing a!a lot of the radiothe airport but they'II also have rar.n gauge one out her e Erhart; How big an area? Krauss: t^JeII they need a 10 acre site and that's part of one of the thingsI found ouL that I'd like about it. They need a 1O acre site. They'reIooking with a 15,OOO square foot building, office bui.Idi.ng that is apretty high quality brick str.ucture. They gave me an illustration of whatit would probably look like. The reason they need a 10 acre site is one of Lhe things they do from this staLion is release ueather balloons twice a day and in a high wind, they need enough acreage so that the weatherballoon gets up high enough before it clears the fence line that it doesn'L bump into the house across Lhe slreet or whatever it's g,oins to do. Butpart of the beauty of that is when you have a 10 acre site and a relatively -small buiLding, most of it is going to permanently be green 6pace. Krauss: NeIl it sits on the buffer yard area and f 've explained that tothem. Found out that they will be paying property taxes because in allIikelihoc,d lhey're going to have a private developer build this for them and they'Il Iease it. IL does have a weather radar. Planning l'1ar c h 6, Commission Heeti ng t99t - Pase 55 sLatic,ns will say, you know ouL in Chanhassen or when they cal] the Meteorologist, iL wilI be out in Chanhassen. They're white collar iobs.They're good jobs. I mean they're research scientist type of.facility. The antenna tower itself, I had questions about the healLh effects and they're going to provide some documentaLion on that. ApparenlLy this is even lower powered than the cellu]ar antenna was and Jim Campbell Pointedout that if there was any health effects, he wouldn't be putting his off i.ce right underneath the thing because this is manned 24 hours a day. BuL they will be providing substantial dala on any kind of health effects. I've asked them to provide a legitimate site plan for that site. ElIson:people will be working there? Krauss: Hoh, many I Lhink it's about 60. aI I theEmmings: Does lhe site 9o way down to lhe rai lroad tr ac ks? There's a 92 acre pieceKrauss: No- IL's just the over Lhere that's zoned IOP acres on the corner. would be zoned IoP. 10 or Emmings; ThaL goes further up the hiII? KTauss: the, not- Erharl; Are you taLking about accessing this directly from Powers Blvd.? Krauss: tJhat I talked to them about is I t{ant this to come in as a component of an overalt plan for the 92 acres. And lhe way I see it is they're probably going to have an access road coming in closer to the railway tracks. Bring an internal road uP to this thing. Now the reason this may come out in the press on Friday, they've been real cooperative r^rith r-rs " I 've told them I want them to wor k with the neighborhood - HoLd a loL of meetings and Lhey're going to do thaL. But there's an Assistanl Secretary from the Deparlment of Commerce coming into lown for an Emergency Preparedness Governor's Conference Thursday and Friday and NOAH lhe t^iealher Service is a Part of the DePartment of Commerce. Jim CampbelI believes thaL this guy may be coming to announce Lhat they've got a site for a new facilily in Chanhassen and he was very concerned that he ]et us know because he's talked to us about it, that it doesn't come as a surprise Lo you or to the City Council and I've exPlained this to most of lhe Cilv CounciI. Nobody's given them any assurances and there's no aPProvals of course for anything yet but it's at an early stage but I'm getting kind of hopeful that Lhis might turn out to be a valid Project for the Citv and I just uanted you !o know about it ahead of time. Emmings: Anybody got any commenLs? Sounds interesting - Erhart: You mighL want to renewing our Comp PIan. Iet lhe Met Council in on it too since thev're E.IIson: Do they have stations like this probably a]l over the countrv? Yeah. IL 's just the tl-re wi.I 1ow's but the other side - Lrees along t^lher e the fence Iine Rod Grams north fence is with I i ne " Krauss: stat i ons This is soing to be one of the three largesL meteorological in ihe country. They are redoing their weather radar system nationally and this is going to have a new weaiher radar but this is going to be one of the three largest sLations. You know when you menti.oned the Metro Council though and I can reca]l xhen the tornadoes came through the Twin Cities in '82, there uJas a tornado that sat down on the roof of Hike Munson's house which I lhought Nas devine retribution for, he's the demographer for the Metro Council. I recall his being on TV and being interviewed. Ellson: tJhat's the significance of dropping off the Comprehensive PIan at4128. It's like that's when the clicker starts or you were just so glad toget it over with you wanted to document i! to the minute? Krauss: I uJanted Lo know it got Lhere and I thought they closed at 4:3O. I.Iater found out they closed at 5:OO. I had Sharmin run dourn there.I promised them at the State of Lhe Region, I bumped into a Iot of l.letro Council people Lhere. Told them we would get it into them on Monday so wejust make it under the wire. Krauss: tJell they're supposed to be sending us a completeness of iL, meaning thaL they've accepted Ietter on their. El]son: Accepted it to look al it. Krauss: For- review and that the clock is ticking. I spoke to Rick. Thompson over there. He didn't see a problem urilh iL at this point and f Lhought f'd have his Ietter already. I should call him tomorrow but everybody I've contacted over there says that you'd better expect it'sgoing to take the fuII 9O days. Emmings; To review or to geL the letter? Krauss: No, to review it. Conrad: Do they pay taxes, the National t^leather Service? Krauss: They don't but if it's done Lhrough a developer building it andleasing it back to them, lhey wiII. Farmakes: t^,haL u,ould happen if there's no longer a tenant Krauss: If they h,ere no longer a tenant, if Lhey left, we decent office buildins and a tower that somebody would haveand the rest. t her e? would have a to knock down Farmakes: Good radio reception. Can you tell me, the 3OO foot radius tha!these two buildings require. These ouL buildings. Is that just flatground? I mean does that have to be non-obstructive or can that be landscaped or with trees? Krauss; Apparently the balloon releasing facility, they don't want realIarge trees right around that. I've told them they have to have Iargetrees in the buffer area and they're going to design accordingly. I think Planning Commission Heeti ng Harch 6, l99l. - Page 55 Emmings: RealisticalIy, when would you think you'd get any kind of feedback on it? Plann.ing March (,, Commission Meet i ngt99l - Pase 57 we're looking at a lot of open space. PossibLy that might be an area forprairie grass or some lower vegetation. Farmakes: So hJe'd do somelhing pretty serious out side of the 35O? BaLzIi: That would be nice. Otherwise you'd end up with prairie grass buildings which, so you'd have a lot of open space but I don't know ifballoon launching building is alI that attractive. and the Krauss: That's a small building. That can be concealed- They also saidLhat the balloon launching faci.Iity itself is noL a permanent structure.That Lhe technology aLready exists. The doppler radar can see wind flow which j.s why they say it can see where the torandoes are coming. tJeII, ifthey take a doppler radar and they shoot it straigh! up, i! can see the wind speed aL different altitudes so the technology is there but the machinery isn't available yet so t'hey see this being phased out over thenext 10 years. Farmakesi HouJ many people employed here? Krauss: 50 - Emmings: l,Jhy, because iL's around the clock? Krauss: Yea h , Farmakes: These cars are a little too big then not in thaL sketch, I'm just curious? huh? Hor,,J come the tower is Krauss: Well Lhey have a series of CAD. there's a series of CAD drawings that do If you flip through there, show the perspective. Emmi ngs r The same they don't put thejust forget. Batzli: I enjoyed come about? Hot"r 'd reason whenever you see an eleveation on rooftop equipment on there. They always a building, forgeL. They Farmakes: Is there any safety benefit of this facility here? Krauss: I don't think so. I mean the entire lwin Cities is on the same notification network, If a tornado pops out, by nature of the fact that that's here, we're not going to get any beLter warning than somebody in Maplewood r^rould get. But by nature of Lhe fact that the facilitv is in Chanhassen and not the airport, the entire Tr^rin Cities benefits. Emmings: Brian wants to talk about Lhe solf course. was a positive editorial . How did Lhisthe fact that it he get i nvo I ved? Krauss: Peterson? Batzli: Yeah " Kraussr I think he just sits at aII lhe council meetings. Planning l4arch 6,, Commission l,leet i ng 1997 - Page 58 LI-LSON: Batzli:push it? They wer e Uhat's the talking about the Counci I Anything? meeting probably. Anything we can do tonext sLep on i! at that? BatzIi: It wiII die. Krauss: It wilL die. Emmings: Appropos of that or nothing, in talking about study groups and soforth, ure've talked about doing that for the TH 5 corridor study and 1995study area, the north one. Now are we going to wait to start anything onthat until we see urhat happens with the Comp PIan? Emmings: How r^rill Lhis group be formed? I guess Iyou about it but I have a pitch to make on hour thatthe City Council uind up appointing that group? have , 9r ouP to r.Jill I 've tal kedis formed - Krauss: At this point, I think the best thing that can be done is if Lhere's support for it at the Council. To have Lhe Council appoint a uror king group on this, Ideal.Iy it would be a couple of Council people. A couple of Planning Commissioners, A couple of Park Board people to worktogether and see if they can flush out a concept better. Unless there's a.group pushing this. Krauss: lJe hjere not planning on working on the study unLil the Comp PIan came Lhrough. It may be useful to geL a group assembled you Inow to sit down and knock ouL some goals. By the time a group gets assembled,hopefully it wiII be later in the spring anyuray and getting close to thelinre the Metro Council hopefull.y wiII be finished- Krauss: I think they'II have Lo the way they structured that recommendation with the approval of the Comp Plan Emmings: Then maybe what we should do is ]et them know, I don't know whositting here is interest.ed but I think we should let them knou who wouldlike to do it and maybe, so they don't just, we wouldn't want them toappoin! people from here if they're planning to have Planning Commission members on it who aren't interested in doing it. You know I want to besure they vote for those most inLerested and h,ant to put in the time. But beyond that, I know there's been some talk about appointing developers andI think that's a real mistake. I think it should be run like, I think itshould just be people from the city who sit on that commission and thaLthey should get input from developers. But to have somebody on Lhe bodyitself with a buiLt in bias, I mean havins somebody on there Iike Shardlow comes to mind as an example: Not that I t,ant to pick on him but I think heshould come in and make a pitch because I think he has things to offer Same goes wiLh OIin from the Landscape ArboreLum. I wouldn,t parLicularlylike to see him on the Commission but I think he ought to be invited to come and give tesLimony and that stuff should be Laken into considerationby other people. That's wha! they do with legrisLative committees whopropose .Legislation. You know, they set up a certain number of the, Idon't know- Maybe they're some City Council members. Maybe they're somePlanning Commission members. Haybe HRA. Maybe Park and Rec. t^lhatever. Maybe just citizens at large. I r^louldn't mind seeing that but I don't Planning March 6, Commission Meet i n9 L991 - Page 59 Batzlir I agree uith you. Erhart: Are we talking about what? A TH 5 corridor and the 1995 study area? volunteer for it? group just to talk about theyou looking for people Lo special...are Emmings: tjell I don't know - I don't know what the City Council wa to do. Haybe you can find out. If they uant us maybe to recommend couple people from here. l don't know how many members they want. there are a Iot of people here who are interesLed in being on it. nts aI US think Erhart: UeII the same with the golf course. is that going to come back on the agenda for Krauss: It's no! scheduled to which is why go, somebody's got to carry the ball' Erhart: Somebody on the Council? Krauss: IdeaIIy. Emmi ngs: Can't aput on the agenda I mean is that back on the, discussion? I think some, if it's going to Emmings: Yeah. city council member who's interested in an item have it for action? think you should go around Putting PeoPIe with built in interest on thatgroup. I don't think you'd get anything for it excePt... So anv{ay. That's what I think. Anybody else. Dick Ning,: .,.just reference Council. I iust made a comment, it was something in passing, that I t,tas not willins to sit on the Council and have west of Powers BIvd. Iook anything like the east side of Powers BIvd-- I kind of puL them through this Iittle ride through town making fun of it and it's not very impressive and that got...I really nould Iike to see a corridor study done or a community task force. Corridor study...but a citizens task force from the PeoPle you're talking about. Citizen lask force to determine urhat do we urant our city to Iook like. Not a develoPer. Not anybody involved in commercial. tlhat do we as residenLs want that section of road to Iook like and everybodv uent...and that's the end-of it- The comments u,ere that it would incLude Park and Rec, Planning, Staff and city council and then some citizen inPut. That's where it was Ieft- Emmings: Can it go on the City Council's agenda as an item to take action on to appo i nt ? Dick wins: ...has to bring it up again. I Lhink the goals session is coming up with the Council and I'm waiting for the goals. Emmings: yeah, but that's not until Aprit. That's been Put off until like April 5th. Krauss: I don't know when it's Put off til. Is it APril 5th? .; Planning Commission MeeLi ng March 6, 7991 - Page 50 Dick Uing: Us new guys...admit that we're not really City Council... although this is an issue thaL I think has to be dealt with. I just don't know hor,r to get things moving p.roperly so it does get through. EI Ison: t^lel I these guys can help you . Emmings: tJeLl let's cLose the meeting. [^le don't need to ta]k about this on the regular. Anybody got anything else? Conrad moved, Ellson seconded to adjourn the meeting- AII voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p-m.. Submitted by Paul Kr auss Planning D i r ector Prepared by Nann Opheim ^/lltlll March 6, 1991 Mr- Paul Krause City of Chanhassen P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen MN 55317 MEA: EI IY UI CFIANHASSEN RE: City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plau Amendmenl Review Major Redraft of 1980 Comp Plan and MUSA Expansion of 2780 Acre.s Metropolitan Council District 14 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 15339-1 Dear Mr. Krause: The Metropolitan Council staff has reviewed the city of Chanhassent proposed comprehensive plan amendment received by the Council on February 25, 191. We have determined that the proposed amendment is a major plan amendment. A proposed amendment that is a major amendment may not be put into effect by the local government until the Council review is complete. The law allour the Council 90 dap from receipt of the proposed amendment to mmplete its revie* If the Council requires a modification to the proposed amendment, the amendment may not be put into effect until the Council has approved the modification. The 90-day review period ends on May 24, 1991. Within that 9Gday period, Council staff will complete a review of the proposed plan amendment and forward a mpy of the staff report to the city prior to consideration by the Metropolitan and C,ommunity Development C.ommittee. If you have any questions during the rwiew period please feel free to contact Richard Thompson, principal reviewer, at 2914457.'(v:w Chair Marry Waritz, Metropolitan Council District 14 Lynda Voge, Metropolitan Council Staff Richard Thompson, Metropolitan Council Staff {- METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Meon m* Cerre,2jo Eist Fifh srreet, sr. Pout, MN. sstoi 6t2 2s1-63se t:ir:.i?;B MAR 0 8 1991 The Chanhassen -Lake 'report card'backs concern c - ly lhvl ftdrrrcr 6 r! ri!@e dortioo, ald tb. ,c- rpn (rrd d EC of Cb..nhr&r'r Lt!. cdUd Cidr bo(! Gaotiolr. ADdFi. by 6! r ly&ologisl for -t M.aopoliuD Cou!.il Sivcs otr.It . !@d r?orl rLilc rPo othlrs ara c tta all.li[..qulcFtrl€t d by tb ntil8s, 6o[ataa! olEci.ls .rc prnicdrly - btarratad in 0. r.rdtr bcc.!s. n ha6 iriti&d pL!3 t[.r u! 8.rrcd to lclp i!- povr tb qulity of lt.s i! lhe sly.fLE orr it. colriluilg procaas EDrrizilg llr r6ulB of Uc Mcr -Cul!c!'a @ud Llc E@itori!8 !!8rE, rhid b.8r! i.! 1%0. Tb. 1990 tudy ilclud. 2l Lt.., roolf thr6 a!i'"1'r-a!'! lrlc Miaac- tBhl1 L.!,1! LL. .Dd lrtr Ril.y. - h GDard, tbr qudiry of Elly n go 1116 IB cosidarld iEprgvcd ovct ,!crd ycrn, Dosibly ba.lu3. dcral. IriDI.ll or'rlush.d- rwrvhi. eouoB of ouEiclrr &d rlg.i -tiat ca! ctoud Ltas. A.cordils ro Dy&ologist DicL(Ia@4 "Tlr uiundly Ligb culy.r.s riDq*bi:[drIld &. |t .,I E iliqucDl av.!t ltlt should lot hrd lo a (ds. aanaa thll lhc lrlcr !r.-bFovi!& Rrda, rbr hy&olo8ic wrols i! !990 L.d to a 6a.tiEa hFoi@aat oihar cvi&occ rrg- F{r 0{ ovrr bD8rr tiEc.fr.8lcl lEy ltca &r rtudly d.gndiar. - Ofood lot d lbr Fdi!8 l!. ediry of lt.i i. iEFfulr rD LI. t!Ea3c6 rlo tall ro lalr thc *a- Ilt oF! to llatt.lroD.|.t!Miewlbl.mtlal&.-brrG tErlark ! ald irhi!8, tras tivro aD'4" b lD. ludr, act!i!8.|t it r.r Eo! ti. D.n l0 Frc..rh trar.rtiroal !r.., Piltroul iEp&-EL L@ lrtc r.frd.di! tG'9!'nlrr, Eaailf llr ! La r6ttrbr.rt Ed F66?t S.ald tlla. rEoti6. lrl. liby, rhi.h taddL. th. Ch.Db...cD-Ed!o Ptai- iabotd.t lld i. trdl-rr.d ltr for.-trniro,.r!ad. t-" rrli!8. Tt dhr lt..rut.eylditr 1990, rloor rith tLit t.li!8r .r!: Uld. i.6; (aI Ir*!t Prkr (B); zrDbn E):*.i.no!t (&c! PErln (B\ r{vEhaBai kvu(Gl O.a -rCr xpt 6ro,[ nil (c] rotn idii bb.!&E (CI Mdfido. (cI i& cbiltr Firh (c-D! u9Pcr Prior t.oD) SFfu (D+) .!d C.d, (D -'' fi.'g rai-it tt ooa tvticrt E! i! tb E.Eo lrt+ ed l20lt.. bvr baao tt v.r!d dtE tDa Fo'!u t rt! i! 19m.- rll. 1990 ht. d.q .6 t U !dl -d dr. coll..tld bv 0. Md cocn' lL rta cooptod i'ith rrtrr +d'.lr edrfit tro, Ed aLdcaE aa &o&d .stt!!t dl, GethitqqFEdl.d. - Tt Llt rtft ropbd n rr+r.f .n& t(Gl &i.lAril t!ei!.d, @obcr 199q Ed-r.r! s- r.U, riritd t rec.o t r-8. EdE- Sr6d.. I..r coU6.d A(Ec taatioa le&d oylr tha tLa*ar -+oa rr rL @ d 6! llrr TiE , lrti r..tt r GodliD !d &dl u!& tta.ldad.'wrtlr ?r5 aol&dld tE tb Edra!, ritl lbr. rGda Ehad Ed n rrrorEd b t!. Lborasf ofll. McqoDolitE wa. 6arol CeliBioi tor o.lyd! Ggood GjutL that Egd Llc. m..r !o ba cha!8bS - Ea 6r thc b.n!l, a@. for tL. rG, S9.ci6.rly Lt Rilcy Ed iE r& rdr.Dld hrvc uo&rroe riraifcu ub.[ &Y.l@ i! tLc l9AL, -ior! ,olrrtioD .Dd filEil.t tiltr4rD r.|otd bc cnoctc4 t ..id i! fi t?olL Il6tl EC ( th. aG! raa drthY r6lt b EilA u. d; oftr'."irrs.a hrs eobrrtld 6 . ivr-tal Cl! b Lrarlt ld Eaata aadt .r,|&tllrtDrllEAFDgE Ot!.lrb hoD. ro Dror.<{ tt r.gre.lr.rict rat r.tIit, GLfaalr) ID(r. d.r-r- lL. tr{D d*a frl3,E -a t ltc crio.rrd st.?ailxa ofr bb.b3Fid tt &8tlrl. br{6.lolliE d r E{e r.E ailit Gisrr 5 dl Etrnv dlal titlia s" itt- riDc.'r['.,t io!3i&rtd !o L GdEiioti[ b tL qsdit, d tr.t lirt ns & O.t tiEF rr. E!,tt,lrtr-t6toEledbFtirlld- ir iodsd.d b th. silitt Etr lL itIortn dybillt ttilEl d tEdy, ihrtYiu l! Eita, -rrr -d ?.rar billilli;aiE r'c.8 hl ftrt il tr rtiL ttrnt arY bc roc Al*lfutfud'rEcBDdr4 doir. d rrsts &'r. tLl'r ril iEv Ll.aboE otlao Ert b ddr .in o6cirL. q.'rr brd r h &qiolc trU!l On t&.idrcriraIitltdbL"h- t.i4 atdis $r. Mt@t'!blsbabr,!!Da.EcE -t_-!!iLe. i & r!1 ^rlt ! &d tbl otr tE otre!.la,a !i& ht r -E! rr.EF D' L Mq .r--r..r .?.,8 .l,l! lo r-r ro ib 6. b}ra Efqt dcs -l -fE;rm?#EffLt tH,r-ffi#H#fJ EffilTrgTf,trs.!!.!n ai b.adht' aEHtr#:Eitrst:tIm""H*.tr,H*ffi tr r.: ;; -n y' t<- Lri;r;jilir= r.; . -.:; i-*--;-*;--..1 :;4,.i. !r . t::.j r+!..t'_li{'-,}: . ,..ljil.jr I.. .:. --rrtrtt T ,rY -,}1tr I ry %> V\ IG v a'! P - -^:ifts - :rFfI I t., i€?:.'5r€:E' i I t, a Responsibility for the river valley During thc first Chanhassen City Council mcet- ing over which Mayo Doa Chmicl pcsidcd oorc than two ycars ago, he rcccivcd &om sooc Cheska residcnls r pboto album cootaioiog ritet of thc "sccnic rivcr vallcy" in southcm Chaahrsca. It wasa tooguc-in-chcct ncssagc saying 'This is your rcsponsibility, clcan it up, ptease." The Mianesota Rivcr Vrlley is a brcatb-teking rnd cnvfuoamentally-fragilc ccosylcn th.t &scilcs Eorc attcDtioD thaa it is genhg, md Dot jusr fioD Chaahassen. The Bajority of locrl rcsidcots, wtile thcy may havc dtiven thc Hwy. 169212 corridor dozcns of timcs, may nol cvm realizc ttat tic srctch is withil Chanhassco's borders. Though thcre uc hgitiaratc busbcsr vcntures taking plircc elong tbc highwry, it docs oot givc thc best imprcssioo wben tsrvclcrs sce a junl yrrd, a gavcl pit, r crr satcs log e putiag lot, r couplc motels that bavc sccn bctta dryg e polc brm, ud e rua-down, boudcd-up orosio. Editorial Thc city is low bcgianing to trtc some charge of rtc riturtioo tbet it creatcd thcrc, scttilg somc short- tcrm rnd log-tcro go.ls to allow tie conidor ro cvolvc iato tbc qurint, couDtry drivc it should bc. Oac of thc goals thrt should be punrrd is cocoung- hg thc fcthnl toveroment to purchesc laud to incorpontc into tDc Mianesota Vdlcy Wildlifc Refuge. Unforrrurtcly, it will 619 rnrny ycus to rltum thc rivervdley to its piourcsque prst, if it is pcsiblc - rt rll. Hopefully, city ofricirls will oot pursuc rnore commcrcid vcnturcs for thrt strctch, but iastcad scct ingenious aod cquiteblc ways tophasc it out rad cleu it uP' -Ihrrd Pcdcnco Page 4 - Chrnhtttrn Vllhgrr - Ttr,rdry, M.rch ltl, l99l Thursday/M8rch 7/1 991 /8irr Tdbuna St. Paul taking steps to limit development of wetlands 8y Elll McArllfr SftttWrlt r Whllc .t!b.tc ovcr wc(snd protcc- llp_r n!!E up a$in st Uc arc and Fdcnl lcvel, rhc city of SL psul irrcurg on iB own to Drrscrve ilr rc-nuiniot walandt from dcvclopmcnl '['rcrolurion palsod Tucsday by s Fity Council commi[cc muli ccisb-lifi s morrlorium on tbc fillim orgrdins of$€ sndr,anrt on bu rilorrthll would "ncSarivcly affccr" wdi-lqldg unlcsc rhc dcvcloDcr, crrrlcs nDlSoemcni u,E{rrdr. TIic moratorium would rcmain inqllcct for one ycrl or undl cqually{rict rctulrtiont erc acvclopdt by oithcr thc lidcral or cuG sovcinmcnr 0r by dl livc wsacEhcd dirtricu rhrr gPatrlc ir rhc ciry, i'While thc fcderal government andlbc atslc loycrnment arc dcbatinr apolicy, we don't ws[l !o continue-tolosc werlands in St. paul," saidLbuncil Membcr Bob Long, who Spon8otGd thc lGsolurion- The measure is designed to prctect wctlands smaller than 27r acres -thosc lhat arE noa now regulatcd bv lcder8l or state aS,encies. St. paul hai 200 areas - many of ftem rinv -desitnated as wetiands bv thc iJ.S- Fish and Wildlif€ S€rvic{. - The resolution, which awairs full Citv Council approval, csublishes a ..nd not lorr" *rrhnd pollcy dm rr othrt undor oonrldffrdoo t[3 LdD leturc ud la Wuhiqrce D.C. - Chonhssscn, Blainc, Shorcvicw. Mahromodi ino M6uhar-iici-iiithc only citi6 in Minnctota thst havc nGnctJo$ rry€tlsnd Dolicic!. sc-q1(rnf ro Oc lrasuc of Minnciot* Lltrcr. Rcprcroudvcr of thc Sicns Club voiced suDDon ond Indtudc for lhc SL Psul Erolution ycrtcrday. But in.t lc8tt onc Sl. Paul LciShborhoo4 wcurnd lupponcrr Nsy lhc r*appiltpmvlrron lt Dadcqurac. . "Wc wrnt I mturG ttlt, trot rrump," rrld Prul Ollllrad. bornt Ecmbor of rhc Orrllr Eit gt& Community Councll, .,Wa wrnt !o Drc&rvc thst rrce io ilr nrtunl atalc." Tuminclly, who hss owDcd thc lsodrincc l%3, orBucs thtt by rrducin his propos.l from 22 hoirrcr to t[d.by qorUrnC for &c holdinlpond, hc hri mct thc Drcrervgtiondcmand! of thc ncighbbrhood. Hcsko insisE fhaf rftcr xrnnr faxcr on thc lsnd for ncarly 30 icerr ..Wc'rc toirt to build on tbrt prcpcny oleray or mothcr." Ironically, Tuminclly is rcckim morcthsn t 100,000 in ciry tundini rhar would pay for fillin8 iri thc wcttfud. Said Ln& "lr dootrt ms&c sny sense. lo havc rhem (r dcvclopcr) rpcnd their own money ro malic a ocw wethnd rnd for ur !o 8Dcnd ourr !o fill ir in." Jocl Jamnil, legislalivc counsel for the League of Minncsota Citie& saidgimilrr conclusions arc bcinr rciched stotcwidc, with municipaurfes climi.nating suhsidies to dcvcloDcrs for wctland prolcction. "Wetland areas are now vicwcd gs enhancements. lt's ludicrou to D8v develop€rs for somcthing that'in'- crcases the value of whal thcv have." Jamnit ssid. Dcvclopcr Csrmcn Tumincuy harproporod building l0 ringlo,family homct tn 8n arcr ncar lalc phrlcn known rr rhc Topic-McAfce Wet- lan4 r Gscre sitr routh of the inrcr-rcotion of Topic Lnc 8trd McAfcc St. NcirhborE hsvc opposed thc proj- cct, prElemng thtt lhc land. most of which Tumintlly owas, bG oonvertcd' by lhc ciry iolo psrlLDd. In panicuhr, they rrc crifical of Tu- minc.lly's offer .!o build s holdingpond on thc sitc in cxchanre forlilling in rhc wctl.nd. The-Dond would be a n8tursl dcprcssion rd col- Iccl rtorm-wrter snd htc runolf, The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Scrvie rrcognizcc holding ponds as wet-lan&i ro would the new St paul policy.- Bul rhe local nebhborhood councrl doc3 nor- Star Iriht lo meB Lni s8id hc did not scc lhc no-nct-lfls trsolution as a limit lo dcvclor mcnt in SL Paul. Hc said ir oniv cmphrsizer thc rolc of wctlands ii improving watcr quality and flood conlrol, and in orovldinr wildlifc habiral atrd acaftcric plessu:rc. "Wg want development l,o conlinuc. Wc just don't wsnt it rt thc exDcnrc of weds[&," hc said crimes against gays, lesbians rising, report says (h8te crimes) are r€poned thro oolicc havc sctuslly documcnEd. I ,1/a.ml., llrpl.mcd Av, d x tl. Prul Areaol&t ll 81. F.ul "Homophobia is endemic in our so-l8trd Dlice ltmer Itha.il,. ^lfl^^ ;- - . -.. .: ,' basic violalior of civil rishr 8nd ao establish a curriculum in ilementarv and secondary schools lo inform rtu'-denrr', r r I 0un DO 25-50, Pld( up .tor.rl(l. r.vlner A !, I Gombtaptt," b i I I,,II a a'a a : t" { ( : 4Pw Topic-McAlee wetland By lkfualoe Doortcllc Meanwhilc, reponr of hate crimesStsff Writer ort**r*,r*ysandresbians#"*l'^.#".t'r'l#$ii#jljf'Tfrfj}ili'::,".riifir,, ^"[*f '-.r;y "[]ir:-'-ii.'ii:::" I CITY OF EH[NH[ESEI{ Wetlandls - The Clty has long maintained a wetlands protectionprogran. we now seek to inprove the effectiveness andadministration of our progran, incorporate new nethodologies anddevelop an officiaL lretlands map. 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 Ilarch 15, 1991 Toltz, King, Duva11, Anderson and Associates 2500 Anerican National Bank BuildingSt. PauI , MN 55101 Dear Sir or Madam: The city of chanhassen is seeking to retain consultant assistancein preparing and irnplenenting a coordinated water quality improvement, no-net-loss rretland protection pfan and storm water management p1an. The effort and on-going work related to it isbeing funded by the Cityis recentJ.y adopted Surface Water UtilityDistrict. consultant selection r.riIl be a three phase process. Atechnical advisory conmittee will revj.ew the Statement ofQualification responses and develop a short list of up to fivefirms. These finns will be asked to respond to a more formalized Request For Proposal. Ul.tinately, after negotiations, the CityCouncil wiLl nake the final selection. roRx PRoGRA!,I/PROJECT ltEAr,r The city has elected to undertake a coordinated approach to thethree vork items. We believe this will result in the nost costeffective and environrnentally responsive plan possible. Althoughcoordination is required, each plan should be developed as a separate docunent in accordance nith an agreed upon rrork schedule. The City is willing to consider project teams conprised of severalfirns if this results in the best option for the conmunity. Hovrever, the project teams nust be developed by the respondingfirms and the principal firn will be responsible for aII internalcoordination, scheduling, billing, etc. BRIEP 8U!'TI(IRY OF TORX PROGRIU March Page 2 15, 199L SIATEIIEIIr OF QUAIJIFTCATIONS Stora fater l,taDageEeDt - The City has several liruited area managenent plans but is seeking to develop a coordinated systen forthe entire cornmunity. fater Quality PIaD - The city is seeking to develop a water qualitypl.an designed to maintain and iurprove the uater quality of ouiwetLands, Iakes and Minnesota River. The plan should develop shortand long range nonitoring programs and associated improvernentstrategies . S ince 1y, // PauI Krauss, AICPDirector of PLanning PK:v PJ.anning Comnissioncity Councit The Statenent of Qualificati.ons should include the followinginformation. The conplete response should run no nore then 25pages, including aII supplenentary infornation. 1. Brief overview on your firnrs approach to this type ofprogran. Describe nethodotogies you nay rrish to elrptoy. 2. Identify key staff people that would be directly involvedin the project and provide infomation on their relatedexperience . 3. Provide inforrnation on sinilar projects your firm hasundertaken. Your response should be received by the City no later than Friday,April 5, 1991. please contact nysLlf or charles FoLch, lssistantCity Engineer, if you have any questions. Toltz, Kinq, Duval1, Anderson and Associates 2500 American NationaL Bank BuildingSt. Paul , MN 55101 Mr. Ron Peterson Westwood Professional Services 14180 West 78th Street Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Mr. Robert Schunicht Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderl ik and Associates, Inc. 2335 West Trunk Highway 36St. Paul , MN 551L3 Mr. Bob Obenneyer Barr EngineeringSuite L00 7803 Glenroy Road Minneapolis, MN 55439 Mr. Dennis Kim Enviroscience, fnc. 8951 west 36th StreetSt. Louis Park, MN 55426 Mr. I'lark Lobermeier Short-E1 I iott-Hendrickson, 3535 vadnais center DriveSt. Paul , MN 551L0 Inc. Howard, Needles, Tammen and BergendoffSuite 260 6700 France Avenue South Minneapolis, lo{ 55435 Mr. Mark Koegler VanDoren Hazard Stallings, Inc.Suite l-04 3030 Harbor Lane North Minneapolis, MN 55447 -217 5 Bruce A. Liesch and Associates, Inc. 3020 Harbor LaneMinneapolis, MN 55447 Mr. Frank Svoboda Braun Engineering Testing, fnc. 6800 South Trunk Highrray 169 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Mr. Bud Osmundson Orr-Schel en-Mayeron & Associatessuite 238 2 021 East Hennepin Minneapolis, I"IN 5541,3 Donohue and Associates, Inc.Suite 200 7200 Hemlock Lane North Mapfe Grove, MN 55369 Mr. Bob Robertson Rieke Carroll Mul-1er Associates 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 2OOP. O. Box 130 Hopkins, MN 55343 Mr, Jin orrSchoell and Madson, fnc. 10550 Wayzata Boulevard Minnetonka, IUN 55343 Mr. Kel,ly Kading Eneco, fnc. 3050 Metro DriveBloomington, MN 55420 I'1r. Bill Engelhardt Engelhardt and Associates 1L0 5 Hazeltine Boulevard Chaska, MN 5531,8 CITY OF EH[NH[SSE[I 690 COULTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 ME}4ORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE 3 SUBJ: Planning Cornmission and city Council PauI Krauss, Planning oirector ({ l'larch 12, 199]. Proposed Weather Service Facility on Audubon Road As nost of you are a!/are, staff has been speaking to the Nationafweather Service about relocating their Twin Cities facility toChanhassen. This would be the regionrs nain forecasting facility and would house up to 60 professionals. The 10 acre site would house a 15,000 square foot brick office building and $reather radarr./ith the balance of the site in green space. The L30 foot highweather radar raises visual and safety concerns but ptans are being deveJ,oped to address these issues. Staff has also r{rorked with the agency to rnake sure that it is developed as a taxable use. we haveadvised the weather Service that extensive rneetings with arearesidents will be required. The attached article from the lttarch 11, 1991, Star Tribune,describes the facility. Please contact me if you want additionalinforrnation. F Weather help is on the way New satellite system will outperform star Doppler radar by decade's end By JIm Drmo SullWriter Evcry spring rnd summcr, lhc whinc of .ssrning sircns bocomcs r prn of lifc in Minnesots as wrlthcr wttchcr! w8m [Eoplc ofthc 20 romrdocr, 250 thundcrstorms rnd thc fcw llrrb Iloods rh.r typic.lly hit 0lC Lr.. Weathcr ndars snd ground a0otlrll watch thc thudcrherds build on lhc horizon, whilc satcllite 24,000 mihr in thc sky kccp trrck of l.rBcr *rarh- er psltcrns. N8lional Wcs$cr S.r- vicc mcteorolotists wstch thcir n- dancopca closcly, trying lo mrlc plr- dicrions in one of thc mo unplG dictable of spicnccs. They aakc phonc c8lls fmm pcoplc stonding on rooftop6 rnd chccf Uc rsrcllitc imltcs. tlrs boah hith.t€ch snd low-lcch, r complicsred ncllorl dcsitncd lo ssrn of bed thin8s rbout ro hrpD.n. And lhcy do hrppcn. ln thc UqiEd Staler last ycar thcrc wcrr 10,(m scvcre lhundcrstorms, 5,000 rriour noods snd l,(m lornrdci - morc mtuml disrstcB thln in rny olhcr courlry on Eanh. Yet much of thc warniry iystcm is bas€d on technology that grew out of world War ll, anchored solidly in rn era of vecuum-lubc clcctronics. Thc computcrs 8rc lnliquatcd, and Cvcn the $calher salellitc systcm lhst prG vidcs the broad oYervicw scen on TV ncvq showr c8ch dry ie in tmublc. trylt !o mltrc - I srro]lt iodicrriootlet r onudo ir formiru.- W.lpq tf rlnrcm ir io Dlrcc. C.rdc !lg,.:w.Ic.n re rcll yoir on'Frirteyrhtt rr _will bc unny on sunder. vou ftlBi,ti,';.9 " wirb eo to es *r*or But .lon3cr-ran3c forcculs, thdtc ITLr-nt up. ro 90 dsyt ino rtr fuiur,yoa'! tcl Dclrcr, hc w.rlcd. DuG bthc rhocr rizc rnd chaotic nrtun oflhc ttmocpherc, fcw ric[titr bclicl,rthrl. truly rccurrtc brr.rrnr! forEcduu wiu cycr bc poiiblc. - lim-Campbcll, hcrd of fic Twin Cir-rcs Nalaonrl Wcalhcr Scwioc ofic!d h9_!opcr ro movc nij-rrcliiiillmm M inncapolilsr. prul tntcmr. Sronrt Airpon b a lGrc{l airc ncerc'tunh[scn in 1993. Thc ncw ndrr.coslint rbout tz mitiioi.- wiriT ro3l,rllGd drcn, hc trid. rnd will bG tror ot thc 'trcund clu[r/'cru&d bvopcrllllrg to clocc to do*trrom Min'-ncrpolir rtrd SL plul- An idenricel rrdar c!4rtcm rlto wilt bclnstrlcd in Dulurh, hc reid. rnd will ff I"i,iS|!#. *onr or M inocou Weather , Cotlrrd limr ,.!r tf, I l' Onc of $c lwo orbitinr *c.rhcr trt- clirca for lbc Unibd Srltci brolcrvcrd ycart rto, rnd rhc lrtl rt. rcmpl to put r ncw onc ir oltit rr3 rboard thc ill-frrcd final fltlrl of rhc Ctrllcnfo ry.oc .hu[lc io 19t5. Tbc rclution is oomin& I t3 billion ovcrhrul of thc Nrliond Wc hcr Scrvir n€twork rhrl vill pur fivc !.rcllict in odit, build I 15 Dopplcl w3rthcr ndlrr rnd iortall l,?m rulomrtcd obrcrvrtioN rias. All of thc information irthcrrd by $cac ry3lcrDs will bc ricd ro3dhcr inio r comprrhcndblc form by e computcr- iz.d rystcm thal vill pc$nt forccrst-fl with .h!rp, clclI imrtrl of thc rtmocpDcll, "h givcr thc forccrsrcr: s powcr w€ll bcyond whsl thcy hsvc todsy," lsid Grry Crs c, dcpuly undcrsccrrEry for occlns snd rhosphcrio tl thc Dcpanmcnt of Commcrcc. Crrtlc, speaking Fridry rt r mcc$nf, of cmirycnc, worlcn in Minncepo-I lir rrid thc inulhtion of rhc ryrrm will bcjin ovcr tic mrl tcvcrrl yc.E |trd bc comDlcrrd by thc cad of thc dcc.dr, 'If rc'rc lucly, uc crn 3ivc you r couplc of milutcr' u6min3 of e lor- ordo trov," tc rftl. 'How roud you likc l0 nioulc.' rrmin8? Wc thint (vilh ttc acw ryrcm) w crn do th.L" Thc fivc rrtcllircr ecc6unt for tl bil- lion of thc nodcmizrlion, Cri c arid, rnd Oc ncw rtdan rnd autG mrtcd r€rthcr atationi will u3c rlrrir chunl of tic rBl of tic moocy. Thc nderc, Lnown rs Ncxrrds, u! Dripplcr rystcms thrl arr morc Ixrw- crful lhrn Oc Dopplcr nden now uscd by romc locel TV rlalions. Dopplc ndalr can lool insidc of r thunderstorm and, bccausc of rlrc rtrctchint rnd comprc$in8 of iB rs- drr xr0vc|, dctcrmitrc if rrin L bctin- Wcrlr ontinuod on neic 28 !ltttlllttttttttttt minutes' warning of a tornado now. How would you like 30 minutes'warning? We think (with the new system) we can do that." Gray CasUe Deputy undercecretary for oceans and atmospherios CITY OF EH[NH[SSEN TO 690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739 Pl-anning Cornrnission and City Council FROM :Paul Krauss, Planning Director DATE:I,larch 12 , ]-99]- SUBJ:Articles of Interest in Zoning News I have attached several articles of interest in recent Zoning Newspublications. The first deals with the siting of cellulartransmitters for cel.l-ular telephone operation. As you are aware, Chanhassen recently approved a l-80 foot tower Located near calpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. I was recently informed that theheight of this tower lras l-owered to 130 feet due to FAArequirements. The article gives an overview of the celluIar telephone program but also has interesting infonnation on potential health effects. It generally seems to agree with information that was provided to us with that proposal- to the effect that healthaffects are considered to be rninirnal. However, the summary ofaffects to exposure to radio frequency radiation provided in thearticle provides an interesting guideline against $rhich future proposals rnay be measured. The second article deals with making zoning enforcement effective. The article details procedures and staffing requirenents designed for effective zoning code enforcenents. The article also speaks to the need to develop an adequate record system, idea1Iy, a computerized data base, wherein these conplaints can be logged and actions fiIed. staff has been working tohrards the development of such a computerized data base but has not yet been able to acquire the software and some of the hardware, due in large part to f inancial constraints. Board of Adjustnents MEMORANDUM ql1k){:ita-- JAI{UAFY 1991zo/Rr l lMEnrclN PUII{NING assocrafloN H t T I I T I I I I r I I I I T I t Siting Cellular Tlansmitters Cellular telephones have become an imPortant method of communication since they were introduced in the early 1980s. They have become so widely used thal nearly 600 cellular communications networks have been established nationwide-a dramatic increase over the 32 systems in place only six years ago. Some inside the industry expect thar within 10 years one-fifth of all telephone communications will be transmitted via cellular units. As the devices become more popular. the antennas that broadcast their aansmissions are becoming common features on the landscape of America's cities and suburbs. And, like any new land use, these antennas present problems that musr be addressed in local zoning codes. Cellular communicalion systems operate through a network of "cell sites." Each cell site has rwo principal components, a l2-by-28-foot structure for radio and computer equipment and a broadcast antenna. The antenna may sit atop an existing tall strucure, such as an office tower or a naditional steel lattice communications tower, or may be a freestanding pole ranging from 60 to 150 feet in height. As the density of users increases within a cellular system, more cell sites musl be eslablished to keep pace with the demand. Local zoning codes have only begun to address the queslion of how to regulate rhese facilities. The issues center around aesthetics and compatibility with exisring land uses. Funher complicatinS matters is a growing concem thal microwave emissions from these facilities may pose a risk to public health. Labels and Categories One difficulty with cellular telephone transmission towers lies in defining them. ln many communities, cell sites are classified as "public utility disribution systems" or as "public utility stations." Many zoning codes allow these uses by right in almost every zone and allow them to be eshblished without any public hearing. In contrast, radio or television towers are often not permirted in residential and other zones where aesrhetics is a primary concem. Because the demand for cellular communications facilities has grown so rapidly and shows no signs of abating soon, communities should draft specific regulations that address their land-use impacts. One common approach to regulating cell sites is to include them in existing regulations for radio and television towers. Pensacola, Florida, took this approach when it was faced with the introduction of a cellular sysEm. The city amended the zoning code by expanding its delinition of a commercial communicadons tower: "a structure situated on a nonresidential site that is intended for transmining or receiving radio, television, or telephone communications, Monopole antennas, like this one on Chicago' s North Side, are pro lile rating alon g wit h the ccllular telephones they seme. excluding those used exclusively for dispatch communications." Another approach is a system of administrative review prior to approval of a new cell site. Cincinnati established seven criteria to protect residential districts from being overrun by cellular facilities while allowing for the network's orderly growth and development. r No new cell may be established if there is a technically suitable space available on an existing communications tower within the geographic area t}tat the new cell site is to serve. I All structures must meet minimum setback - requirements in lheir disrict as specified by the zoning code. r The entire facility must be aesthetically and archirecturally compatible with its environment. ! Fencing must be provided lo secure lhe site. No barbed wire or razor wire fencing is to be permined in residential districts. r Vegetative buffering must bc proYided to separate the facility from adjacent land uses. r The facility's owrer must file an annual repon with the building inspector's office detailing how the facility is continuing to conform to the above $andards. ! All obsolete or unused facilities must be removed within 12 months of cessation of operations at the site. I !. In addition, communication towers were eliminated as an as-of-right use in low-densiry residenrial zones. As a result, all towers proposed for a residential disarict now require a condilional use hearing. An exception is made for monopole towers. The inrent of this policy is to encourage their use because thel are less visually obtrusive than steel lattice towers or rooftop installations. Public H€alth Issues In addition to aesthetic concems, some communities have addressed the question of a possible health threar posed by the microwaves used to transmit cellular communications. Eugene Rosenberg, a cellular communications consultant in Milwaukee. says the ainount oF microwave radiation produced by cellular communicarions should not be underestimated. The telephones themselves, notes Rosenb€rg, emit between three and five watts of power at around 824 megahenz. This radiation has both thermal and nonrhermal effects. To illusrra(e the heating effect, Rosenberg says thar this power is enough ao begin ro cook a hol dog in about l5 minutes. B)' comparison- the fansmission bwers rypically operate at 75 \I'atts. but can emit appreciably more power in larger. rural service areas. The nonthermal effects of microwave radiation are less understood. As pan of a growing concem about the effecr of nonionizing radiation on humans. radiation associated with cellular communications has become suspecl. APA's research depanment has received numerous quesdons from planners about this concern over lhe last eight to l0 months. Cell siles. as well as all other electromagnedc radiators, are threatening to become the next big NIMBY issue. It is not within rhe scope of this anicle to discuss and assess the heahh hazard of nonionizing radiation. Table I is included to give an indication of what some of the effects might be at varying rares of exposure. Note that, generally, cell sites have been measured to emit 1?JJ than any amount of radiation that unequivocally will cause ill effects. Ahhough the federal govemment has not issued any regulations conceminB the nonthermal effects ofradiadon exposure for the public at large. some local govemments have addressed the subject. The following regularions are offered as examples of standards in place. Oldham County, Kentucky. has incorporated standards for communications facilities that regulate the amount of non- ionizing electromagnetic radiarion that may be emined. The Table 1. Summary of Effects of Exposure 1o Radio Frequency Radiation Exposure (mWcm:)Effects r00 28 t0 4 0.05 0.03 0.01 Threshold of cataract formadon Teratogenic (tumor-causing) effecrs Molecular, genetic effects (thermal) Threshold for neuro endocrine effects Decreased sperm counts lncreased brain amine levels Altered brain permeability Sourc.: w.R. Ad.). 'Tissu. lnr.r.crioos with Nonioniziog ElcctornisrEtic Fi.lds.' 1982. 2 county's zoning code requires thal rhe general public not be exposed to ambient radiation exceeding a power density of 0.2 milliwatts per square cenrimeter. PAS Repon Number 384 (1984), Regularing Radio and TV Ton'ers, offers a model ordinance based on land-use controls in place in Multnomah County, Oregon. That ordinance recommended rhat the rype of antenna used f6r cellular communications should be ai - least six feet from the surface of any habitable sructure and that its highesr point be at leasr 15 feet from rhe nearest exterior surface. The ordinance includes comprehensive provisions for regulating all types of communicarions facilities. An agency considering any son of comprehensive approach to broadcast towers or with an eye toward establishing performance standards for uses emitting nonionizing radiation should examine lhat reporr. D.B. -r""ar, t*.ct Developers to Pay for Roads Loudoun County, Virginia, is considering a plan this month that would require developers to pay for rural road improvemenls. The fees would be used to increase a road's carrying capacity to accommodate any proposed project. Developed with the assistance of land-use consultant Lane Kendig. the Fair Share Rural Road Improvemenr Polic) resulted from recent concems about rural road safety and rhe preservation of agricultural lands. According to Karen Gavrilovic, principal planner for the county, the measure has a "50-50 chance" of passage by the planning commission this monlh, but would nol actually be implemented for ar leasr a year if approved. The plan encourages the building of subdivisions near towns where adequate facilities such as roads already exist. County officials hope that developers will opt to build on parcels where a road already has the needed carrying capacily. As a result, agriculture in Loudoun County should continue withoul disturbances from residential development. Rural road safety, however, is the plan's most imponant consideration. Currently, half of the county's local rdads are unpaved, and the zoning ordinance allows for nearly three times more development than the rural roads can safely handle. Many consisr ofjust one l2-foot-wide lane, making two-way traffic extremely dangerous. One county board member has called western lrudoun County "rhe killing fields" because of its recent incrcase of traffic deaths. Although the area's A-3 zoninS district permits a maximum density of one house per thrce acres, the roads can only absorb the traffic generated from a density of one house per six to l0 acres. As an altemative to downzoning. rhe fair- share policy would let land be developed to its full potenlial. The fair-share method would entail a delailed evaluation of the curent road situation in Loudoun County. Variables such as lane width, available passing dismnce, presence of obstructions, pavement type, and terrain will be used in determining a road's carrying capaciry. In addidon, the county and the Virginia Depanment of Transportation would designate appropriate levels of service (which range from no congestion Uevel Al to lotal congestion 0evel Fl) for each road type. For example, rural anerials could be designated as r ',| Fine for the Record Book The largest known fine for a zoning violation by an individual property owner has been levied by the Califomia Coastal Commission. The commission recently settled the case out of coun when the owner agreed to buffer his propeny to screen it from public view. He also agreed to pay a fine of $325,000. The home belongs to Peter Viviano, who owns a San Jose trucking compan). Viviano built his home on a lot overlookinS Monrerey Bal in 1984. The commission originally approved a sile plan thar allowed the home ro be 6,800 square feet. In 1986, building inspecrors found rhar it had grou,n to 13,264 square feet. At that point, the commission issued an order to halt construction, and both paflies began to Iitigare. The setdement. reached in lare December, calls for Viviano lo reduce the size of his home to I I,000 square feet and to screen it from public view. The commission will use the mone)' for coastal improvement projects wirhin Sanla Cruz Countl. but at least S100.000 will be needed to cover legal expenses. D.B J Will This Ban Hold Water? Last summer. an advenising boat began flashing electronic messages toward shore as it floated up and down the waterways of Chicago. Outcry from civic groups prompted the city to propose an ordinance to ban advenising on Chicago's waterways. On October 24, the city council passed the ordinance. Lasr June, the Chicago Plan Commission approved the Chicago River Urban Design Guidelines, developed by the city and a local civic group, Friends of the Chicago River. (For information on rhe Chicago River plan, see the August l99O PAS Meno.) A major purpose ofthese guidelines is to "reinforce and expand the visually impressive urban cnsemble now in place along the river." Beth White, the executive director of policy of Friends of the Chicago River, says that she suppons the ban because such an advenising Zrrirt lv.x.r js a monrhl! n wsl.n.r publishcd by lh. Am.ricu PlanniDg Associarion. Subscrjprione n! !!!ihblc for 132 (U.S.) Dd l3t {forcign).Im.l Slollman. Erc.uriv. Dirc.ror: FErk S. So, Dcpury Erccuriv. Dirccro!. Zoai4g N.rs is prcdnc.d ^r APA. Jim S.heab. Edito.i Dsvid Bcrstns. Fry Dolnict. Chns Hsis. Crolln Xcorl.d!, Mary Moris, Hollis Russinof. Amy V.D Dorcn. R.pon.E: PaulThomas. Asrisbnr Ediror Copyn8hr 61991 by AmcncD PlrnniDg AsssirioD. l3l3 E. 60rh Sr.. Chicrgo,IL 60637. Th. An.ricm Plannin8 Associ.lion h,' h.adquarr.E ofric.s rl I 776 M.ss5.hus.ns Av... N.w., $ash'nEon, DC 20036. All ri8hts r.scrv.d. No prn of rhis public ion ,na, bc rcproduccd or uriliz.d iD tny forrn or b! sny m.$s..l..rroric o.m.chr.ic.l. includin8 phorocopyiDt, rlcording. orby my information $orrg. e.d rcricvd iy!t.m, wirhour lErlhission itr Eirin8 frcrn th. Am€nc.n PIuDirt Associ ion. Singing the Praises Suppose you were the Vemon, Connecticut, zoning board of appeals, facing a request from two sisrers ro allow ourside dining at their yogun shop, despire rhe fact thar rhey insralled the tables before realizing tbey needed a permit. They come armed wi& pedtions with 2,000 signatures and rhis diny: If you like sitting here in the clean fresh ab, enjoying our yogurt u,ith time to spare; We could use your help, 'cause the hearing' s real soon, to get the zoning boqrd to chang? its tune. You guessed it. The yogun sisrers won. J.S. Call for Information The Planning Advisory Service is gathering information for a report on transponation management ordinances. We would like to receive examples of ordinances, repons, and planning documenls covering the range of approaches to transponation manageme[t- Thanks for your assistance. Send materials to: Amy Van Doren, Research Associate, American Planning Association, l3l3 E. 60rh Sr., Chicago, IL 60637. next three years, creating up ro 100 new positions. In a city facing budget problems. that may mean a small Eoperty tax increase, but proponents argue thal the long-term savings in infrasructure costs and increased propeny values will repay the cit)'well. J.S. boat contradicts what the guidelines are trying to prolect. Bur Rod Zuidema, the advertising boat's owner, is contestinS the ban as unconstitutional. Zuidema is suing the city in federal disrict coun on the grounds that the ban violates his First Amendment righr to freedom of expression. His attomey, Roben Fioretti, argues that, since truck billboards are still permitted on tbe streels of Chicago. rhe ban unfairly singles out one form of mobile advenising. Fioretti also conrends that the city has no jurisdiction over what is considered a federally controlled waterway. However, Illinois state law grants all municipalities "jurisdiction over all waterways within or bordering upon the municipaliry, lo the extent of three miles beyond rhe corporatelimits...." The boat at iss\e,The Dutch Drear!. is a 65-foot converted houseboat that supports a l80-square-foor chan8eable copy sign. The 6-by-30-foot sign is comprised of I,792 45-watt light bulbs that are programmed to spell out commercial messages and community announcements as well as the time and temperature. Other groups, such as the Bumham Park Planning Board, also strongly oppose the use of floating billboards on Chicago's rivers and lakefront. Their major concem is thar the Dutch Dreom obstructs the natural beauty of Chicago's waterways. Barbara Lynne, the planning board's executive direclor, argues lhat the sign is "polluting the scenic beauty of the riverfront." The group cites as its other major concern the lack of respecr for the citizens' right not to be overwhelmed with commercial advertising everywhere theytum. c.H. CITY OF EH[NH[EEEN 690 COULTEH DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN; MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-s739 MEMORANDIJM To: Planning commission FROl,l: Paul Xrauss, Planning Director DATE: March 15, 1991 SUBJ: Proposed Revisions to Articte 8, pUD Developrrent District on March 6th, staff discussed proposed revisions to the pUD ordinance with the Planning Commission. The discussion lras ratherlengthy but focused prinarily on utility of the pUD district andproblens that had occurred in the past with Chanhassenrs, prirnarilyresidential , experience. The Planning Corrhission discussed thEpossibility of inviting individuals who rrere faniliar with pUDis toprovide you with background on their use relative to Chanhassen. Based upon your request, lre have invited John Shardlow of Shardlo$r,Dahlgren and Uban and Terry Forbord of Lundgren BrothersConstruction to discuss the use of PUD!s rrith you. John Shardlow is faniliar to most of the pLanning Comrnissioners dueto his representation of some property olrners providing their inputinto the Cornprehensive Plan process. !Ir. Shardlow is a wellrespected professional planner who has nany years of experience inrepresenting a variety of cLients. He also teaches a course inPfanned Unit Developments and has offered to bring sone of thatrnaterial for your review. In addition to providing infonsation onthe history of PUDrs, exanples of their use and a discussion of anodel PUD ordinance, I bave asked John to discuss the use of pUD's for industrial and connercial developnents. His firrn doesconsiderable design work for these types of projects and he isuniquely gualified to provide this input. Mr. Shirdlowrs firn isalso an active partieipant in the parcel of property located at thesoutheast corner of the intersection of Hrry. 5 and Hr^ry. 41. Lundgren Brothers Construction has an excellent track record ofdeveloping high guality residential developnents in our conmunity.In fact, the Near lrtountain subdivision, which they are currentlycompleting, is being developed under pUD standards; Mr. Forbord'ifirrn is also actively involved in developing subdivision proposatsfor the new l{UsA area that wil1 be incorporated under thecomprehensive Pl-an. He made a brief presentation in this regard at PUD ordinance Discussion Uarch 15, 1991 Page 2 the october public hearing on the conprehensive Plan and succeededin getting the boundary area of the 1995 Study Area revj.sed as aresult. !lr. Forbord has been with the finn for a nunber of years and is also well qualified to discuss the use of PUDrs in theresidential context. He is active in a nunber of groups includinghis position as a board member of the Sensible Land Use Coalition. Staff hopes that the Planning Conmission will find this discussionto be informative. Infonoation you learn from this discussion should prove to be useful in developing a revised PUD ordinance forthe community. It nay also help you to envision the type of development and the type of guidance the city can enploy relativeto new large scale developments along Hwy. 5. CITY OF EH[NH[SSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE . PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739 IIIEMORANDI,M TO: Planning Connission FROM: DATE: SUBJ: BACKGROUND GOALS Paul Krauss,Planning oirector fiL Recently there has been considerable discussion concerningCity's Landscaping Ordinance and irnprovenents that nay be ura-deit. Inprovenents that would result in a higher ltandarddevelopment in the City have been established as a goal byPlanning Commission and sirnil.ar sentiment has been elhoea tyleast several menbers of the City Council . This report is intento give an overview of the purpose behind landscaping standardswell as current ordinances, reviewing thei.r positj.ve aspectsshortcomings. Your response to this infornation will be givenconsideration for inclusion in any new ordinances that toulddeveloped. the to of the at ded AS andfor be A discussion of the landscaping standards should begin withagreement on goals as to what is to be achieved by the ordinance.The following goals are presented for discussion purposes. ThePlanning Cornrnission is encouraged to redefine, add oi subtract frornthis list as appropriate. 1. The landscaping standards should provide for aestheticplanting of sites and buildings. These plantings should bedesigned to add co1or, natural grorth, as well as anintroduction of the natural environment into sites. 2. I.andscaping standards should provide for screening for visual,inpacts associated lrith a gj.ven use, inctuding: o truck loading areas,o trash storage,o parking lots, interior lot areas and perineters, February 26, L991 Issue Paper/Landscaping Ordinance Mature stands of trees and natural areas such as'lretlandsshould be protected. Protection of existing features andtheir enhancement where possible should be the prj.rnary focuswith replacernent being considered only after alternatives arereviewed and disrnissed. 7. Reforestation should be considered hrhere appropriate. ORDINANCE FORMAT The following constitutes our understanding of what needs to beincorporated into an effective landscaping ordinance. Theseguidelines, plus any others proposed by the pl.anning Comrnission,should be used to critically review any ordinance amendnents thatwe wish to consider. The ordinance should be conprehensj.ve covering all sorts ofdevelopments. At the present tine, the ordinance is effectiveonly. under site pLan reviews. Regrulations affectingsubdivisions are handled elsewhere in tlie ordinance and ar6less effective. P.U.D. rs do not have any specificreguirements. 4 6 1 2 The ordinance should provide anple guidance as to what the 9ityl. -design expectations are without unduly limiting designflexibility. fn our opinion, there aie a number otlandscaping ordinances that becone so reginented in theirapproach to. defining landscaping standards that you wind upvrith a cookie cutter approach to landscaping desigri. Icleallyl Landscaping Ordinance February 26, l99L Page 2 o large unadorned building nassing (reference the recentsite plan approval for ucclynnrs that used landscaping tominiuize the visual inpact of high, blank walls,o garage doors associated sith auto oriented uses, ando vehicular stacking areas for drive through uses 3. Buffering between high intensity and 1ow intensity uses shouLd be outlined as to rrhere this is required and what constitutesa suitable buffer. 5 Buffering of a site for urajor streets and highways relative tonoise and visual impacts. Boulevard or streetscape planting should be investigated. BouLevard and streetscape planting typically takes place offsite and is often not the direct responsibility of adeveloper. At the present tine, the City is working with IInDOT on a Highway Beautification Program for the new section ..of Highway 5 through downtown Chanhassen. Landscaping Ordinance February 26, 1991 Page 3 3 4 the ordinance would alfol, a good designer to reflect the denands of the site and the setting it is placed in. Minimuro standards should be provided to ensure that a baselineIeve1 of quality is achieved. The ordinance should be relatively easy to interpret andenforce. There are a number of ordinances lhat have beendrafted that pronote high quality design but are so conplexthat only a landscape architect can reliabty interpret them. we should strive to have an ordinance that is understandableby 1ay people as well as professionals. Enforcement shouldalso be taken into account. For exanple, an ordinance nayrequire tt808 opacityrr in a landscape screen between a parking1ot and a residential site. In ny opinion, this is almostimpossible to enforce since it is difficult to define what BoZopacity actually neans and then get a reLiable interpretationof this out in the fieId. The following is a review of the various landscaping requirementscontained j.n our current ordinances. Landscaping standards ar€found in several different portions of the ordinance. Article xxv, Landscapiug and Eree Renoval. LANDSCAP N DTVISION 1. GENERALLY (b) This article does not residences, apply to single fani).y detached (c) No new site development, building, structure or vehicularuse area is allowed, unless landscaping is provided as required inthis article. Section 20-1176. Intent, scope and conpliance. (a) The intent of this article is to inprove the appearanceof vehicular use areas and property abutting public rights-of-way;to require buffering betlreen noncourpatible Land uses; and toprotect, preserve and promote the aesthetic appeal, character andvalue of the surrounding neighborhoods i to promote public health and safety through the reduction of noise poLLution, air pollution,visual pollution and glare, (d) No property lines shalL be altered no shall any building,structure or vehicular use area be expanded, unless the ninimumlandscaping required by the provisions of this article is providedfor the entire property. Landscaping ordinance February 26t L99l Page 4 COlrll,tENI: The intent section is good to have although quite possibly ue wouLd consider expansions to better define the Cityrs purpose in landscaping. The exclusion of single family development is noteworthy. single fanily developnent does not undergo site plan review, therefore, the only effective ordinance that comes into play is the Subdivision ordinance, No. 18. "his will be connented upon later. We also note that due to the language of the current PUD ordinance, PUDrs arealso exenpt fron provisions of the L,andscaping code. Section 2o-L1'77. Plan Submission and approval . The property owner or developer shal1 prepare a landscape planfor review by the city. The city shaIl apply the followingconditions in approval or disapproving the plan: (1) The contents of the plan shal1 include the following: PLot plan, dralrn to an easily readable scale, showing and labelling by nane and dinensions, aIIexisting and proposed property Iines, easenents,buildings, and other structures, vehicular useareas (including parking stal1s, driveways, service areas, square footage), water outlets and landscapematerial (including botanical nane and conmon name,installation size, on center planting dimensionswhere applicable, and quantities for aIl, plants used). Typical elevations and/ or cross sections as nay berequired. Tit1e block uith the pertinent names and addressed(property olrner, person drawing plan, and personinstalling landscape naterial), scale date, northarrow (generally orient plan so that north is totop of plan), and zoning district. a b c d Existing landscape nateriaL shaltrequired plan and any naterialcondition may be used to satisfyrrhole or in part. be shown on thein satisfactorythis article in (2) Where landscaping is required, no building permit shal.lbe issued until the reguired landscaping plan has beensubroitted and approved, and no certificate of occupancy shal1be issued untit the landscaping is conpleted as certiiied byan on-sj.te inspection by the building inspector, unless i Landscaping ordinance February 26, l99l Page 5 performance bond, or irrevocable letter of credit. from abanking institution, has been paid (3) If necessary, the city may require a letter of credit toinsure proper installation of landseape naterial as uithconplete cost of all work certified by landscape contractor,with the bond anount to include the actual cosC plus ten (1ojpercent. The bond shall be released upon satisfactorycornpletion of the work as deternined by the city (4) Where unusual site conditions exist there strictenforcement of the provisions of this article would cause ahardship or practical difficulty, the p).anning cornmission andcity council may waive the requirenents as plrt of the siteplan review process. COUITIENT: Plan submittal guidelines may need to be fleshed outsomevhat to give staff and the planning Comrnission sufficientmaterial to review. Itern #3 pertaining to a letter of credithas been superseded by Section 20-119 approved by the planning Comrnission and City Council last year. Section 2O-L178. Landscaping for service structure. (a) Any service structure shaIl be screened uhenever locatedin any residentiaL, conmercial or industrial zone (except RR and RsF zones). Structures nay be grouped together, however, screeningheight requirernents wiLl be based upon the tallest of thestructures . (b) A continuous planting, hedge, fence, rra1I or earth noundshall enclose any service structure on all sides unless suchstructure must be frequently moved, in which case screening on allbut one (1) side is required. The average height of the sCreeningmaterial shall be one (1) foot more than the height of the enclosedstructure, but shall not be required to exceed eight (8) feet inheight. whenever a service structure is located neit to a buildingwal1, perimeter landscaping nateri,al, or vehicular use arealandscaping rnateri?I , such waLls or screening material nay fu1fiIIthe screening requirenent for that side of the service str-ucture ifthat waIl or screening material is of an average height sufficientto meet the height requirenent set out in this section. I{heneverservice structures are screened by plant material, such naterialmay count towards the fulfillment of required interior or perimeterlandscaping. No interior Landscaping itra11 be required iritnin anarea screened for service structures. Landscaping Ordinance February 26, L99L Page 6 (c) whenever screening Daterial is placed around any trash disposal unit or waste collection unit which is enptied or removed mechanically on a regularly occurring basis, a curb to contain theplacenent of the container shall be provided uithin the screeningmaterial on those sides where there is such naterial . The curbing sha11 be a least one (1) foot from the naterial and shall bedesigned to prevent possible damage to the screening when thecontainer is eurptied. COI.{}|ENT : This section is a good exanple of a highly detailed standard that is specifically designed to deal ririth one issue,in this case, service structures. This type of standardshould also be developed for each of the goal statementsidentified in the beginning of this report. However, I notethat from a design standpoint, there does not appear to be rnuch flexibility in terms of design creativity in thissection. Section 20-1179. Tree rerDoval regulations. (a) It is the policy of the city to preserve natural woodlandareas throughout the city and t ith respect to specific sitedevelopment to retain as far as practical, substantial tree standswhich can be incorporated into the overaLl landscape p1an. (b) No clearcutting of l,oodland areas sha1l be permittedelcept as approved in a subdivision, planned unit development orsite plan appl ication. (c) The follorring standards shall be used in evaluatingsubdivisions and site plans: (1) To the extent practical, site design shall preservesignificant woodland areas. (2') Shade trees of six (6) inches or nore caliper shallbe saved unless it can be denonstrated that thereis no other feasible way to develop the site. (3) The city nay reguire the replacenent of removedtrees on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis. Atninirnum, however, replacement tlees shal1 confortnto the planting requirenent identified in division4 of this articte. (4) During the tree removal process, trees shall be removed so as to prevent blocking of pubtic rights- Landscaping Ordinance February 26, L99l Page 7 of-way or interfering with overhead utility lines. (5) The removal of diseased and danaged trees ispernissible. (d) Tree removal not pernitted under subdivision, plannedunit developnent or site pl.an review shall not be allowed withoutthe approval of a tree renoval plan by the city council . Tree removal plans sha1l include the content reguirenents as dictated insection 2o-1L77 and identify reasons for tree renoval The planshall be subnitted three (3) neeks in advance of the city councilat i'rhich it is to be considered. COUI.IENT: This section is v ery good frorn an intent standpoint although it needs to be significantly inproved and revamped to become truly effective. AIso note the exclusion granted tosingle and two fanily lots of record. As the Planning Cornmission is aware, staff is working sith the DNR on an experirnental progran relative to identification of elernents ofthe urban forest warranting protection as well as areforestation plan. This section should probably be revised based upon the outcone of this progran. DIVISION 2. PERIMETER I,ANDSCAPTNG REQUTREMENTS Section 20-1191. Generally. (a) where parking areas are not entirely screened visually by an intervening building or structure fron any abutting right-of- way, there sha1l be provided landscaping betlreen such area and suchright-of-way as follows: (1) A strip of land at least ten (10) feet in depth located bet\reen the abutting right-of-way and the vehicular use area r,rhich shall be landscaped to include an average of one (1) tree for each forth (40) linear feet or fractionthereof. Such trees shal1 be located betteen theabutting right-of-way and the vehicular use areas. (2) fn addition, a hedge, wall, bern, or other opaque durable landscape barrier of at least tlro (2) feet in heightshall be placed along the entire length of the vehicular use area. If such opaque durable barrier is of nonlivingnaterial, a shrub or vine sha11 be planted along thestreet side of said barrier and be planted in such a manner to break up the expanse of the waLl. A thro-foot berrn nay be usedt horrever, additional landscaping at Least one (1) foot in height at tirne of p).anting shalt be Landscaping Ordinance February 26, ]-99l Page 8 installed. The renainder of the required landscape areasshall be landscaped with grass, ground cover, or otherlandscape treatment. (b) This division applies to perineter landscaping. CO!.O!E!{T: This section deals specificalJ.y with landscapingaround the perineter of parking lots and fron an intentstandpoint, this is an acceptable thing to do. Holrever, thestandard of 1 tree per 40 linear feet is frankly, archaic anddoes a disservice to the design standards which already existin the city and which are likely to be irnproved as a reiutt ofthis analysis. In addition, the standlrd berm around theparking lot does not lend a large anount of creativity. We donote, however, that this standard has been nodified soDehrhatby ner{Iy adopted regulations using a perfornance standard toallow the property olrner to achieve reductions in parking 1otsetbacks . 2* S20, OOO + 1* of Proj ect Value inexcess of S1, oo0, ooo S3o,000 + 0.75tof Pro j ect $2,000,001 - S3,OOO,OOO One of the nost noterrrorthy things about this and. relatedsections is that there is a ionplete Lack of nininumlandscaping standards for the site itself. In other uords,there is no rninirnum anount of planting that nust be done on agiven site which leaves staff in a poiition of using sectionssuch as this to in essence, coerce a legitirnate lindscapingplan out of a developer. staff can think of severaL wayl toaddress this. one technique that I have used in the palt isto establish a rnininun landscaping budget that utiiizes afonnula of linking project developrneni costs to mj.nimunlandscaping vaIue. The table used in the Iilinnetonka Ordinanceis provided belo!, as an appendix PRq'EC! VAI,UE (fncluding building construction,site preparat j.on, and site inprovenents) BeLou $1, 000, OO0 $1,000,001 - S2,OOO,OOO }TI}IIITUI,I IANDSCAPE VALI'E Landscaping Ordinance February 26, L997 Page 9 $3 , 000, 001 $4, 000, 000 Over 94,000,000 Value in excessof $3,000,000 s37,500 + 0.25tof Pro j ect Value in excessof S3,000,000 1t Section 20-!192, Required landscaping adjacent to interior propertylines, Section 20-1193, Co:nbining rrith easenents, and Section 20- 1,194, Existing landscape naterial . (a) Where parking areas abut property zoned or, in fact, usedprinarily for residential or institutional purposes, that portionof such area not entirely screened visual.ly by an located structureor existing conforning buffer from an abutting property, thereshall be provided a landscaped buffer which should be naintainedand replaced as needed. Such landscaped buffer shall consist ofplant materia)., wa11 or other durable barrier at least six (6) feetin height rneasured from the nedian elevation of the parking are-aclosest to the conmon 1ot 1ine, and be located between the cornmonlot line and the off-street parking areas or other vehicular usearea exposed to the abutting property. Fences shall be constructedaccording to the standards in Section 20-1018. cout{ENr Again, I bel.ieve the intent is good but that better minimum standards offering design flexibility are warranted. DTVISION 3 . INTERIOR I.ANDSCAPING FOR VEHICUI.,AR USE AREAS section 20-1211. Generally. (a) Any open vehicular use are (excluding loading, unloading, and storage areas in IOP and BG Districts) containin!, Dore than sixthousand (5,000) square feet of area, or twenty (20) or Dorevehicular parking spaces, shall provide interior landscaping inaccordance with this division in addition to ltperirneterrl landscaping. Interior landscaping may be peninsular or island types . (b) areas. This division applies to interior landscaping of such Sectlon 2O-12f2. Land'scape area. Landscaping ordinance February 26, L99l Page L0 (a) For each one hundred (1OO)thereof, of vehicular use area, five (5 area shall be provided. square feet, or fraction ) sguare feet of landscaped (b) The nininun landscape area pemitted shall be sixty-four(64) sguare feet, erith a four foot nininun dinension to all treesfrom edge of pavenent where vehicles overhang. (c) In order to encourage the required landscape areas to beproperly dispersed, no reguired landscape area shaIl be larger thanthree hundred fifty (350) square feet in vehicular use areas underthirty thousand (3O,OOO) square feet. In both cases, the least dimension of any required area shall be four-foot nininun dinensionto all trees fron edge of pavenent nhere vehicles overhang. Landscape areas larger than above are pernitted as long as theadditional areas are in excess of the required mininum. section 20-12]-3. Mininun trees. A rnininuro of one (1) tree sha1l be required for each tr{ohundred fifty (250) square feet or fraction thereof, of required Landscape area. Trees shal1 have a clear trunk of at least five(5) feet above the ground, and the renaining area shalI belandscaped with shrubs, or ground cover, not to exceed trro (2) feetin height. section 2o-12t4. vehicle overhang. Parked vehicles Day hang over the interior landscape area nomore than two and one-half (21) feet, as long as a concrete curb isprovided to ensure no greater overhang or penetration of thelandscaped area. coultElqf : In general, I believe that this is a very goodsection and deals with a scenario that nany ordinances €ena tooverlook. Large expanses of blacktop are not only unsightly,they actually change ueather conditions in the inrnediatevicinity. In addition, large unbroken expanses of pavenentcreate a more difficuLt drainage problen. This section notonly estabLishes the intent but also nininun standards in whatare generally effective ways. DIVISION 4. I,ANDSCAPING }TATERTAI,S, ETC. Section 2O-]-23L, cenerally. (a) The landscaping nateriala shall consist of the follouing: Landscaping Ordinance February 26, L99l Page 11 (1) I{a]Is and fences. wa11s shall be constructed ofnatural stone, brick or artificial naterials. Fences shall be constructed of rrood. Chain link fencing will be pernitted only if covered rrith woodstrips or plant uaterial. (2) Earth mounds. Earth nounds shall be physicalbarriers which block or screen the view sinilar toa hedge, fence, or l,all . l,lounds shall be constructed with proper and adequate plant naterialto prevent erosion. A difference in elevationbetween areas reguiring screening does notconstitute an existing earth Dound, and shall notbe considered as fulfilling any screening eguipnent. (3) Plants. All plant naterials shall be livingplants, artificial plants are prohibited and sha11neet the following requirenents: (a) QuaIity. Plant naterials used in confornancewith provision of this division shall conformto the standards of the American Associationof Nurser)rtnen and shalI have passed anyinspections required under state regulations. (b) Deciduous trees. ShaLl be species having anaverage nature crovn spread of greater thanfifteen (15) feet and having trunk(s) rrhich can be naintained uith over five (5) feet ofclear wood in areas which have visibilityrequirenents, except at vehicular use areaintersections where an eight (8) foot clear wood requireurent will control . Trees havingan average mature spread of crown less thanfifteen (15) feet nay be substituted bygrouping of the saDe so as to create theequivalent of a fifteen (15) foot crorrrnspread. A nininun of ten (10) feet overallheight or miniuun caliper (trunk diaueter, measured six (5) lnches above ground for trees up to four (4) inches caliper) of at Least twoand one-half (2\) inches inrnediately afterplanting shall be required. Trees of specieswhose roots ale known to cause danage topublic roadways br other public works sha1lnot be placed closer than fifteen (15) to suchpublic works, unless the tree root systen isconpletely contained within a barrier forwhich the miniuun interior containing Landscaping OrdinanceFebruary 26, l99t Page 12 dinensions shall be five (5) feet squarefive (5) feet deep and ' for i,hiah - construction requirenents shall Ue iourinches thick, reinforced concrete. and the (4) (c) Evergreen tre-es. Evergreen trees shal1 be anininun of Bix (6) teei trigtr wittr-i-ifniiuicaliper of one and one_ha1t- fril i".nJ=-"i,Iiplanted. (d) Shrubs and hedges. Deciduous shrubs shalt beat least tuo (2) feet in average treighi-un"iplanted, and shaLl conform to ti:e "piiiiv-"ilother requirebents within four (4) vliii-irliriplanti-ng._ Evergreen shrubs srrali 6e it i;;;!r,o (21 -feet. in average height ;d il-i;ifeet in dianeter. (e) Vines. , Vines shalL be at least tuel.ve (12)inches high. at planting, .-r,a -ir. -i-.;;rJiii used in conjunction uith narll ", }.i""Il---, (f) crass or ground cover. Grass sha1l. be plantedin specie! nomaLly g.o"rn ." pernanent lawns.and .ly be sodded,- ptugged', ;p;ifi;,-";;seededi.except in swalds or 6ttr,if ir.i=subject to .erbsion, where solit Je;-"r;;i;;reducing net, or suitable nufcfr sfr-afl b;-;;;;:'nurse_grass seed ehall be sohrn for inmeaiai!protection -until conpLete coverage otheruiseis achieved. crass-sod sha1l ui cG;;-;;;free of needs and noxious pests or aiseises.cround -cover auch as organic Daterial ;h"ii-;;planted_ in such a uainer as to pr"s"ni -ifinished appearance and Beventv_iiv. _-llsf percent of cornplete coverage atter two.(ijcolrplete _glgyr:'.ng seasons, rrith a ,.*ir,.r. .Ji fifteen (1s)- inihes on ienter. f" cert.incases, ground cover also nay consist .f-;;i;;pebbles, Eand and sinilar ipproved nateriais] (b) The following tr.es Eay be used to Dret ptutiDg requireEeBta: Spccific Ne;ne SHADE IB,EES Maple, emerald queea Norvav Maple, crimaon L.ing Maple, 6p1'rn""r. Maple, jede green Norray Maple, royal red Norsay' bmmoaNanu Acer platanoi-dzs..Eaerald eueea', A ce r platanoidcs..Crirnson Kiag" A cer platanoi.dcs "Colu"."e'. Ac* plalanoidzs ',Jadc Glcu" A cer platanoidcs.Royal Rcd" Landscaping Ordinance February 26, L99l Page 13 A cer platanoi.d.e s "Schwedler" A cer plata no ides "Variegatum', Acer rubrum Acer rubrum "Red Sunset" Acer saccharum Betula ppryiter Betula ynnd.ula irciminta Celtis occi.d.entalis Frotinus pennslyvania &r;r,olztta,,Mar- ahall's Seedless" Gingho bilboba O lc ditsia tr icanthos inermis Gbditsia triconthos inermis .,Imperial" Cbditsb tliralthos inzrmis',SLyliae" Quercus elba Quercus macroharpa Quercus rubra Q uercus poulstris "Soweign" Tilia omericana Tilit ardata " C*eeuspire" Tilia r e uchlor a "Red"'ond" ORNAMENTALTBEES Acer innah Anelanchier Malus bclr:ala olumnarb Molus (various epecies) Eunus "Newport" Prunus trihba Pruzus uir ginbta *Scbubert" Rhamnus frotgulc "Columalrie" Syringa omuretuis j apnica EVERGREEN TNEES Piea gbuea densaa Picea puageu Pica pungcli gbuo Plnus gra Haus padercsa Ptaus rcsitrorc Hnus ebobus F,au cybcttrb (ffi. No.80, Art. VIU, I 5G+r, E{-S), t2.t6€6) Maple, schwedler Norway Maple, variegated Norway Maple, red or swamp Maple, red guneet red Maple, sugar or hard Birch, paper Birch, cut leaf weeping birch Hackberry Ash, manhall'e ae€dless gleen Gingko tree Honeylocust, thoraless Hoaeylocust, imperial Honeylocust, skyline Oal., wbite Oak, burr Oak, red OaL, soweign pin Linden, aoerican Liaden, greeurpire Liaden, rednond Maple, amur Serviceberry or juneberry Crabapple, coh'-'''ar siberian Crabapple, Oowering-Varieties: Dolgo, O"-.e, rediant, red, silver, tcd rpleador Plua, Ncrpct Pl""', flo*criug o rose trce of Chila Cholebcrry, rchuberts Buctthora, tellhedge blac, Japeacre tree $nrcc, Blecl Itilts $rucc, C.olondo greca Spnrcc, Colondo blue Piae, Austrisa Piac, ponderca Pinc,Notey Piac, wbite Piae, Scotch Landscaping February 26 Page 14 0rdinance 1991 cottttENT r f will be honest to state that while this section appears to be wel,L thought out, that I do not clain to be a landscape architect and quite possibly tbe standards should be re-exanined by an appropriate professional. The requirenentfor having nininun 5 foot height of evergreen trees and 2rtinch caliper for deciduous trees is standard and uniforn across the Twin Citiesl coDmunities. Section 20-]-232. aintenance and lnsta1lation. All landscaping materials shall be installed in a sound, workmanship like manner and according to accept€d, good construction and planting procedures. The owaer of the property shall be responsible for the continued proper maintenance of all laadscapiag materials, and shall keep them in a proper, neat, and orderly appearance, free from refuse and debris, at all times. All unhealthy or dead plant material shall be replaced within one (1) year, or by the next planting period, whichever coues frrst; while other defective landscape uatcrial ehall be replaced or repaired within three (3) months. COttl,tENT: This section is fairly goodsuperseded by better language locatedsection, Section 2O-1L7. but has been sinceunder the site plan Section 20-1233. Required opacity. (a) Landscape materials shall b€ iDstaUed to provide a miniroum of fifty (50) percent s'inter opacity and a seveDty (?0) p€rc€nt sumtDer opacity, b€twe€n two (2) feet above fraiahed grade level to the top ofthe required planting, hedge, fence, wall, or earth nouad withia four (4) years aft€r iDstallation. (b) The required lanilscape bufferyard raay be combined urith a utility or other essenent as long as all of tbe landscape requirements can be fully tDet, otherris€, fhe laadecape bulIeryard shall be provided in addition to, aad aeparate from, any other casenent. C!r6 or other objects shall not overhang or otherris€ intrude upon the required laadscape bufferyard hore than two ald one-half (2lt) feet. cotu.tENT: This is a perfect exaEple of an ordinance that virtually inpossible to understand, much less enforce. only doeL i€ differentiate betseen 50t and 70t oPacity difierent tines of the year, but it also requires that project for$rard four years of groring tine to undertake analysis. is Notat one the Landscaping February 26 Page 15 Section 20-1234. Curbing. All landscaped areas shall be proteited by coDcret€ curbing section 20-1145. Landscaping and screening. All berths shall be screened from public rightsof.way and from view from the property across the street frontage and,ior from the zoning district boundary when the adjacent prop- erty or property across the street frontage or side street frontage is zoned or used for residen- tial purposes. The screening shall be accomplished as required in article XXV. Section 20-695, 2O-715, 2O-735, 2O-755, 20_774 and 2O_815, parkingSetbacks and Buffer yards. Section 1. A. Section 20-695(6), Business Neighborhood District;Section 2O-715(5), Business Hlghway District, Section 20-755(5), BusS.ness ceneral District; Section 20-774(S) ,Business Fringe District; and Section 20-915(5i ,fndustrial Office Park District shall be aDended byadding the following: e. Parking setbacks along public rights-of-uay Bay bereduced to a ninl.nun of 10 feet if the appliLantcan denonstrate to the ratisfaction of €fre Ciqythat loot ecreening tE provided at least 5 feelabove the adJacent parkinE Iot. fhe intent of thissection is that the Clty is willing to trade a' reduced aetback for additional landsclping that isboth aD effective Bcreen and of h19h- qualityaesthetlcally. Acceptable screening -is -to beconpri-sed of berning and landscaping.- Screeningthrough the use of fLncing is not-pefritteil. 0rdinance , 1991 COUI.IENE: This section is fine rrithout change. co uElilT: This section, which is located in the Parking standards, requires that all berths (loading areas) require screening. As such, lt is a good concept but is poorly drafted. It should also deal uith outdoor storage ir\ a sinilar nanner. Landscaping Februarp 26, Page 16 0rdinance 19 91 B section 20-695(g), Business Neighborhood District;!::iiln 2o-71s(B), Busi.ness Highway Sistrict; s..tiln z6i755(7), Bus5.ness. Fringe_ Oisfrict; Section zo_izaii,Business - Fringe Distlict, and Section 20-815i7i;Industrial Office park District shall be anended to'adathe folJ.owing: c. Buffer Yards: The City CoEprehensive planestablishes a requirenent foi buffEr yards. Bufferyards are to be established in areaj indicatea onthe plan rhere higher intensity uses inteii"c.-ri[ii1ow. density uses. .In these areas, a fiftt iaolfoot buffer yard is to be provided wher'e 'tn! LnEerrace occurs _along a public street, a onehundred (100) foot buffer yira ls requiria whe;ethe interface occurs on int6rnal Gt tines. The . buffer yard t..s an additional setbackrequirenent. It iE to be cunulativEv caf culatedr.'ith the reguired setbacks outfinea -Lorre. Thcbe provided uith a coarbination of berrning,landscaping and/or tree preservation to naxiruizethe buffering potential. To the extent deemedfeasibl,e by the City, new plantings shall bedesigned to require the nininun of naintenance;houever, such naintenance as nay be required tonaintain consistency rrith the approved p).In, sha1Ibe the obligation of the property o$ner. Buffer yards shall be covered by a pemanently recorded conserrration easenent running in favor oithe city. In instances uhere existing topography and/orvegetation provide buffering satlsfactbry to ttreCity, or uhere quality site planning is ichieved,the City Day reduce buffer yard requirenents by upto 50t. Ihe applicant shaI1 have the fu1l buide;of deDonstrating conpliance uith the standards here in . CoNIttENT: These secti-ons are neu and ne believe then to begood fron a conceDtual point or view. letbacks r"ii"li.iiJlots are establis-hed. r-+"n.; p"if-.rr.n." type of atandard,i.e. the better the.buffe;i";,-ih;;;;ii", tn. Eetback. rnaddition, the creation of .bdff;-yi"-J"-around inconpatibleLand uses, as itlustrated in trre c<inp-ietrensive pi;;;;iii-;;a najor tong terr benefit tor ttre-ci[i.'- Landscaping OrdinanceFebruary 26, lgg]-Page 17 Section 2O-f]-7. Uaintenance of slte and l andscaping. T'e owner, tenant' and their respective agents sha, be heldjointry and severalry respon-sible to maintain their property and landscaping in a condition presenting a healthy, neat andorderly appearance and free from refuse and debris. prants and ground cover which are re-quired by an approved site or landscape pran and which have died shal be replaced wit]rinthree (3) months of notification by the city. However, the time for compliance may be ertendedup to nine (9) months by the director of pranning in order to allow for aeasonar or weather conditions. CO!,ll{E}lT: This uas a section added by staff to the site plan::gilil:: I"* y-""I t-hat Dore spdciricarry ,"q"i;;; -il; nalntenance of alr landscaping rn Lccordance' witt=-s-i-ie piaiapprovals. Section 2O-1I8. Retaining wa1Is. Retaining *'alrs exceeding five (s) feet in height, incruding stage wans which cumulativeryexceed five (5) feet in height, must be constructed in ac"oriaoce with plans Or"O;;;;.1registrred engineer or landscape architect. col0'IENT: This section provides a necessary tie in with thebuilding code to support the use of ea?e and effectiveretaining wal1s. section 20-119. Iandscaping financial guarantee requlred. When screening, landscaping or other similar improveDeDt8 to property are required bythis ordinance, a performance bond ahall be suppried by tbe owner in an atlou't equal to atleast one hundred twenty 020) percent [of the] value ofsuch screeniag, landscaping, or otherimprovements. The secwitv must be eatisfactory to the city aad shalr u" -"aui"J "p""reimbursement of all expenses iocu'ed by ttre city for eugineeriug, regal or otier fees iuconnection with inakinl .", prior t' the i'suance of any bu,ding permit and sha, be valid. for a peri;.I vl i,i-- ,-.1.-. ,- vr,o(l) full growing season aftcr the date of instarlatioa of the landscaping. Th" ",, .", ."*ni"retter of credit, cash escrow or boud. In the eve't constructioD oftbe project i"*, --pri,"awithin the time prerribed bv buildittg FrEits a'd other ipprovate, tie itv -.y, * rt" olptio"-,eomplet€ the worl, required at the erpenee ofthe owter and tbe eurety. The city may dlow aa extended period of time for completioa of ar randrapiug if thedelav is due to coaditions whicb are reasonabry beyond tbe coatrol ofth" a"relop"r. irtiarionswhich Eay not exceed niae (9) uoaths, may be ganted due to seaeonal or weeiher conditiong.when an extensioa is graated, the eity aharl require euch additionat Bcurity as it rtceureppropriate.' Landscaping February 26, Page 18 0rdinance 19 91 COU}IENI: This section uas instituted by staff last year to more specifically require the deposit of a landscape guaranteewith each site p1an. 'Prior to the drafting of this section,no such requirenent existed and enforcenent was oftenundertaken on a hit and niss basis. Section 18-G1. Tree reDoval and conservation of vegetation. (a) Existing healthy trees and native vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent feasible and shall be protected by adequate means during construction. (b) unless already on site, at least one (l) suitable tree shall be planted in the front yard setback on every lot. The type or species of trees planted shall be approved by the city. (c) consistent with approved grading prans, existing trees shall be preserved within any right-of-way when they are suitably located aud in good health. (di No dead trees or uprooted stumps shall remain after development. (e) All disturbed areas shall be seeded or sodded to prevent erosion. (0 Detailed landscaping requirements shall be 6et forth in a development contract. COIiUENT: This section is the only reference to tree renovaland Ia-ndscaping contained within the subdivision oiainance.As such, it is the only regulation that is appf:.-a-a;-;Ifii"fanily._devetoprnenr. -staif believes trrat'€trij is ;i;f,iyr'nadequate and needs to be addressed in a Dore signiii6antnanner. SUI,II'{ARY staff is i9-eXing direction fron the planning Connission on how toql0ceef uith. develop'ent of a revised ranasciping "iain.rri"."'vo",comnents on the nateriar. outlined above are eiseitiat ii-re-are tobe able to prepare a code revislon lhit "a"quit-+-i."-t":'yo*needs . 3. 1995 Study Area (South) o THER ITEMS 1. Blending ordinance 2. Rezoning BF Dist. to A2 Bluff Protection ordinance 4. Sign Ordinance STATUS Adoption by cc t/27/9L -Delivered to Metro Council on 2/25/91 at 4:28 p.n. 1995 study Areas - Work effortto begin after adoption of newConp Plan. Council isrequesting that this be conbined lrith a Hwy. 5 corridorstudy developed by a joint PC/ CC/resident/devel,oper taskforce staff directed to develop scenarios - low priority Scheduled Di scus s ionlSta f fdirected to draft a potential new zoning district ordinance -rrinter, 1991. Staff lrorkingwith staff of National wildliferefuge. Requests nade to MnDNRand US Fish and I{ild1ife forexpansion of the refuge into chanhassen. Sunner, 1.9 91 I nact ive 3 6. Rezoning 2l Acre Lots to RR REVISED MARCH L5, 199l- ONGOING ISSUES conprehensi.ve Plan Issues 1,. Conprehensive Plan 2. L995 Study Area (North) and Hwy. 5 Corridor Study 5.Tree Protection ordinanceMapping of significant vegetati.ve areas llnDNR undertaking accelerated napping prograrn and will workwith city to develop. New ordinance/spring/surnmer, 1991 Schedule future agendaspring, L99l- 7. wetland ordinance 8. Definition of structures 9. Shoreland Ordinance 10. Flood Zone Ordinance 11. Group home ordinance 12.Zoning ordinance Amendmentfor satellites on Recreational Beachlots 13.Structures below OHWM must have a city pernit. 14.Ordinances pertaining to antenna towers. Rural Area Policies ordinance changes stlnrning from revised Metro Council Pol icies ]-7. Staff processing a positionpaper to revieq, wetlandordinance and enforcernent Budgeted noney for update 2year timefrane or stom waterutility fund *fssues memo presented to PClilarch, 1991 - to CC on3/2s/et In January we receivednotification from the lfnDNRthat we are a priority conrnunitywitha2year deadl ine * PC Review 2/6/91 - CC approved 3/77/9L : Sent to DNRfor approval 3/f5/9L L991 * PC review 3/6 review on 3/ 25/91 Winter, L991 * fssues memoPC - March, 199L to CC for presented to 15. 16. Landscaping standards PUD ordinance containing improved standards 1,8 .PC input in Do$rntovrn Planning and Traffic Study Review of Architectural- Standardsto Promote High Quality Design 19. * Consideration by pC l,larch, 1991 19 91 * Change ln status since last report Inact ive 19 91,