06-5-91 Agenda and PacketFile
AGENDA
CHANHASSEN PI,ANNTNG CO}N{ISSTON
WEDNESDAY, JtNE 5, 799L, 7i30 P.I{.
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 590 COULTER DRrVE
CALL TO ORDER
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Prelininary plat and lot area variance for property located incarver Beach zoned RSF, Residential Single Fanily and 1ocatedat 6724 Lotus TraiL, Roger and DarLene Byrne.
2. Zoning and Subdividion ordinance anendment to amend sectionsregarding landscaping and tree preservation requirements.
OLD BUSINESS
NEI{ BUSINESS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CTTY COUNCIL UPDATE
ONGOING ITEIT{S
.ADI.{INI STRATM APPROVALS
OPEN DISCUSSION
3. Bluff Protection ordinance.y
ALTOI.'RNIIIENT
CITY OF
EHANHISEEN
STAFF REPORT
PC DATE:
CC DATE:
cAsE #:
By:
June 5, 19 91
June 24, 1991-
91-4 SUB, 86-2 VAC91-6 VAR
A1-Jaff/v
Fz
()
=(LL
ko
lrJFa
Lot Conbination Replat of Three Substandard Lotinto Two Single Fanily Lots with Lot Areas of L3,55and l-1,326 Square Feet
vacation of Willow Road
,450 square Foot Lot Area variance to construcingle Fanily Residence
PROPOSALs 1)
APPLICANT:
2)
3)
Wi11ow Road is locate
A1aS
Roger and Darlene Byrne
6724 Lotus Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Lots 1164-1179, Carver Beach.south of these parcels.
PRESENT ZONING:
ACREAGE:
DENSITY :
ADJACENT ZONING AND
I,AND USE :
WATER AND SEWER:
PHYSICAL CEARACTER. :
2OOO I,AND USE PI,AN:
RSF, Residential Single Fanily
Approxiroate ly 25,300 square feet
N - RSF, single fanily & Tanarac Road whiis a paper streets - Willor Road - paper streetE - Lotus Trail and Lotus Lake
W - RSF, single faniJ.y
Available to the site.
The site is heavily wooded with extremeLsteep slopes. A single fanil.y residence ilocated on the northeast portion of the site
Low Density Residential
s
I,OCATION:
F
o
o
9
I
ca
I
oo
I
o
I
I
co
I
oo
I
HE NN
oo
PIN C JNTY
C
c..!,LE | ,asa^",
!xa! rl c r-. l
t a5:
clYlPq !'!gg
CHP/rH) s
,: aat t
5rAS.l ,'rla J
'- lfs l
-L
I
L'l
.r!-rL E lrmt
RS
S'1
:-l
ai
t\-
!I
?.ir€\7!t
-1
':1
-l
i
LAXE
RD D
I
I
Ce
4
-RU
'-'r:{:J- - t.€
. :.!. -
t',tZ
I
f-l_
T
t\
Y&
0-o IiS
I
L
I
CARVE
P,'op;..,..{P\"i,
EEACh Va...:fi+, r i
a^a vacalt on
V iOLE T
ROA9 \N(Jx r n
LOTUS
LAREPARK
RD
!
E,A
I
L OTUS
,
LAKE
I
.?
B ,tlo
oq
R
rc
o
C
,l
liil
r:l?
l.-_<-
'lra..J"1
l
3
- 7400
-
I
Byrne Subdivision
June 5, 1991,
Page 2
BACKGROUND
The carver P"ach subdivision came into existence in 1927.predates the zoning ordinance. The najority of the lots have
average width of 20 feet and an average length of 1OO feet.
It
an
PROPOSAL/SUMI.,IARY
The applicant ohrns three contiguous parcels that are substandard inarea. The first parcel containing Lots 1164 - 1158 has an area of9,200 square feet. The second parcel containing Lots 1,169 - 1125
has a 1ot area of 9,000 square feet. The third parcel which has anexisting residence and contains Lots 1170 - 1174 has an area of
7, 100 square feet.
The applicant is prpposing to recorobine Lots 1164 - 1169 and Lots
1,178-1179 with the first parcel as weII as requesting the vacationof Wil1ow Road and adding the vacated area to that parcel . Thisparcel rri1l be a neck 1ot and wiII have an area of 13,550 squarefeet and will be referred to as Parcel A. Lots 11.75 - 1177 areproposed to be combined with Lots 1170 - 1174. This parcelcontains the existing residence and wiLl have an area of ]-L,326
square feet. This parcel will be referred to as Parcel B.
The applicant is also requesting the vacation of Willow Road.Willow Road is a paper street and not maintained by the City.
Steep grades on Wi1low Road have nade it inpossible for the city to
develop this street. City staff would be in favor of vacating thestreet with the understanding that a 20 foot wide drainage andutility easenent would be reserved in favor of tbe city. The 20foot easenent would be centered on WilLou Road. The City Councilrevielred and approved the vacation of !{i1low Road in 198G.
However, a condition of approval was that all property owners alongthe street sign off on the request. This was never accomplished
and the vacation was never filed. Under the current reguest, alllots along the street, except 3 parcels currently in tax forfeitstatus, are controlled by the applicant and an adjoining property
olrner lrho supports the requested vacation.
The request is fairly sinple although it is cornplicated by theissues that often occur i.n Carver Beach rrhich boil down to non-standard lot dimensions and setbacks. fwo variances forwill result and the existing hone, to be located on Parce
an existing 23.5 foot front setback variance but this rril
exacerbated or relieved by this proposal .
lot1B1n
area
, hasot be
staff has found the variance requests to be reasonable. Based uponour review, there is a neighborhood standard of 11,100 square footlots in this area. Both Parcel A rrith 13,550 square feet andParcel B with !L,326 square feet exceed this standard. Thus, no
Byrne Subdivision
June 5, 1991
Page 3
neu precedents would be set by this request. We also note that theproposal will combine 3 substandard lots into trro lots that are
more consistent with area standards. Lastly, ire note that theapplicant Eay be in a position to acquire 3 additional lots whichare located adjacent to ParceL A that will elirninate that parcelrslot area variance entirely. These lots are currently tax forfeit
and Carver County anticipates auctioning then off within 10 months.
Public utilities are available at the site. Grades are steep buta new horne on Parcel A can be accommodated sulrj ect to provision ofa satisfactory grading and tree preservation plan at the tinebuilding permits are request.
Access to Parcel A will be over a driveway constructed in thevacated WilLow Road right-of-hray. Staff is recornmending that thedriveway be conbined with an existing gravel driveway alreadylocated within the right-of-rray that serves an adj acent hone to thlsouttr. The short conmon section of the driveway should be paved toa width of 20 feet according to a plan approved by the CityEngineer.
Staff is recommending that the requests be approved subject toappropriate conditions.
Parcel A $ri]I be nade available for nev construction. If thevacation of Willow Road is approved as reconnended, this parcelrri1l have a 60 foot street frontage on IJotus Trail and wilt Ueaccessed by a private driveway. Section 2O-GI5 requires flag lotsaccessed by private driveways to have 1OO foot uidth neasuiecl atthe front building setback line. Section 18-52 (o) perroits up to4 lots to be served by a private driveway if the city finds thefollowing conditions to exist:
1. The prevailing developrnent pattern nakes it infeasible orinappropriate to construct a public street.
Based upon a revien of the surrounding area, staff has concludedthat a street extension would not serve additional parcels andcould result in extensive tree 1oss.
Acces s
At theprivate
2 After revierring the surrounding area, it is concludedthat an extension of the public street systen is notrequired to serve other parcels in the arla and proveaccess or to provide street Eystem consistent rith ttreCornprehensive P1an.
present time, only one residence will bedriveway and then extensj.on of the public util i z ingstreet is the
not
Byrne Subdivision
June 5, 1991
Page 4
required to serve other parcels. After surveying the surroundingarea, it is apparent that there will be no other residencesutilizing this private driveway. However, there are 3 currentlytax forfeit lots located west of Parcel A that rril1 becone
landtocked by the vacation. The applicants have stated a desire to
acquire these lots but have been told that carver county will notauction them until early next year. This 15 foot side access
easenent over the vacated street will need to be naintained untilthe Byrne's are able to gain possession at which tine the easenent
can be vacated.
The use of a private driveway will pernit enhancedprotection of wetlands and nature trees.
This site is heavily wooded. Shoul"d the applicant provide a streetup to city standards, a large number of trees would have to berenoved. As it stands right now, no additional trees wilt be
rernoved.
3
On Uay 19, 1986, the City Council heard the application for thevacation of willow Road. At that tine, staff recoEmended the CityCouncil table action on this vacation because the City Attorney hadadvised staff that although the vacant lots abutting Willow Roadare undersized, the city cannot deny access to those lots. Inorder for the vacation to occur, abutting property olrners uouldhave to sign a waiver stating that they have no objection to -thevacation (Attachnent #4). The vacation was approved subj ect togaining written approval by all property owners. This wai neveracconplished and the vacation was not filed. Since then, theapplicants have purchased alL of the vacant lots abutting WiIIow
Road except for the 3 lots located to the north of their propertywhich have gone tax forfeit.
There is an existing gravel driveway in the right-of-way thatserves a hone located to the south. Staff is concerned with thepossibility of having two curb cuts on Lotus Trail locatedimnediately adjacent to one another from a safety standpoint.Additionally, due to steep grades in the area, it is irnportant thatcurb cuts be properly designed to naintain and direct drainage.Therefore, we are recomnending that a conmon shared driveway be
developed when the hone on Parcel A is built. The short conmonsection of the driveway should be paved to a width of 20 feetconsistent with city code. A driveway design indicating proper
drainage provisions should be prepared for approval by the City
Engineer.
Streets/Vacat ion
Although the Planning Conmission does not act on vacation reguests,the Comnission should be aware of the situation.
Byrne Subdivision
June 5, 1991
Page 5
The city is in favor of such a request with the understanding thata drainage and utility easement on the existing right-of-way 20feet in width be reserved. In addition, a 15 foot wide access
easernent nust be naintained to serve the 3 lots located west ofParceL A. When/if these lots are acquired by the applicant andconbined rrith Parcel A, this easenent may be vacated.
Park Ded icat ion./Tree Preservation
The Park and Recreation Cornmission reconmended that park dedicationfees be required in lieu of parkland. A tree preservation plan
should be prepared and approved by staff prior to issuance of abuilding permit.
Utilities
Municipal sanitary serrer and water service has been extended from
Lotus TraiL to the property line due to the topographic constraints
on the parcel .
Easements
The city is requesting a 20 foot nide drainage and utility easementcentered on the centerline of wilLo!, Road. The applicant hasfailed to show the tlrl)ical drainage and utility easements (1o footfront, 5 foot sides and rear). Such shall be reflected on thefinal plat. A 15 foot rride access easenent nust be provided toserve the 3 lots located rrest of Parcel A. At such time as theselots are acquired by the applicant and nerged with Parcel A, thecity can vacate this easenent. A coEmon driveway must be providedto benefit Parce1 A and the adjoining parcel to the south on LotusTrai1.
COMPLIANCE WITH ORDINANCE - RSF DISTRICT
Lot
Area
Lot
width
I-ot
DeDth
Home
setback
ordinance 15,000
Parcel A
Parcel B
L25l
7.25 |
85. 51 r *
30i front/rear
10r sides
N/A
5. 5 I front*10' rear
17 t N-side
1O0 r s-side
901
100 |
160 r
13,55O-Vr *
LL.326-Y2 *
Vt - 1,450 square foot
Vz - 3,674 square foot* - Existing variance
Iot area vari.ance - Parcel AIot area variance - Parcel B
a
A variance nay be granted if aII of the following criteria are met:
That the literal enforcement of this Chapter would cause unduehardship. rrundue hardship't means the property cannot be putto reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings,
shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use nade by anajority of conparable property within five hundred (5OO) feetof it. The intent of this provision is not to alIow aproliferation of variances, but to recognize that in developed
neighborhoods pre-existing standards exist. Variances thatblend with these pre-existing standards without departing frornthen neet this criteria.
*
*The conditions
neighborhood.
are unique to the Carver Beach
That the purpose of the variation is not based upon a desireto increase the value or incone potential of the parcel ofIand.
That the conditions upon which a petition for a varj.ance isbased are not applicable, generally, to other property withinthe sahe zoning classification.
c
d
* The purpose of the variation is to allow the property
owner to enjoy and make better use of his property-.
That the alleged difficulty or hrrdship is not a self-createdhardship.
*The difficultyhardship is hardship isresult of created. The
non-conforming
sel f
oId
or
a
not
an
Byrne subdivision
June 5, 1991,
Page 5
Variances Required
b.
Staff surveyed the area qrithin 500 feet and found theaverage lot size to be 11,100 square feet. The hardshipin the case of Parcel B is not self created. CarveiBeach is one of the areas that predates the zoningordinance. The applicant is trying to improve anexisting situation by inproving lot area. parcel A neetsthe average standard within the surrounding 5oo feet. Asindicated earlier, if the applicant Danaged to purchasethe adjacent 3 lots located to the west of parcel A, avariance lrould be elininated.
f
Byrne subdivision
June 5, 1991
Page 7
subdivision. Theexisting situation.applicant is trying to improve an
e That the granting of the variance ri11 not be detrinental tothe public welfare or i.njurious to other land or inprovementsin the neighborhood in vhich the parcel of land is tocated.
The granting of the variance rril1 not be detrinental tothe public rrelfare or injurious to other land or
inprovernents in the neighborhood in which the parcel ofland is Located.
That the proposed variation will not inrpair an adequate supplyof light and air to adjacent property or substantially
increase the congestion of the public streets, or increasesthe danger of fire, or endanger the public safety orsubstantiaLly dininish or inpair property values nithin the
neighborhood.
* The proposed variation will not irnpair an adequate supptyof light and air to adjacent property nor will itincrease traffic.
Staff must also point out the fact that the applicant could conbineLots 1169-L175 with I-ots 1164-1158 which would eLininate thevariance on Parcel B but would Leave Lots 7]-70-1174 with an area of
7, L00 square feet.
RECOMMENDATTON
Staff reconmends the Planning Conmission approve Subdivision
Request #91-4 lot conbination/replat rrith a 1,450 square foot lotarea variance on Parcel A and 31574 square foot lot area varianceon Parcel B, subj ect to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall reflect aI1 of the typical drainage andutility easenents on Parcel A (Lots 1154-1159 and Iots 11ZB-1179) and on Parce1 B (Iots 1170-1177).
Park and trail dedication fees wil.l be required in lieu ofland dedication. Fees wilt be paid rrhen a building pernit isrequested for Parcel A.
The applicant shal1 supply grading and drainage and treepreservation plans along with the building pernit for reviewand approval by the city Engineer.
A structural engineer nust design the foundation for thefuture home on Parcel A ( Lots 1164-1169 and Lots 11?8-1129)
)
3
4
Byrne Subdivision
June 5, 1991
Page 8
due to the nature
provided.
of this lot. Soils inforrnation nust be
5 A commor^ curb cut shal1 be utilized to serve parcel A and the
home located to the south that is currently served by a gravel
dri.veway located in the right-of-rray. When a hone ii bultt onParcel A, the connon section of the driveway shal1 be paved toa rridth of 20 feet and renaining sectiona serving iarcel Apaved to mininize erosion and naintain drainage. Drivewayplans, incorporating appropriate drainage provisions, shatl blprepared for approval by the City fngineer.
Provide the following easenents:
a. Standard drainage and utility easenents.
b. A 20 foct wide drainage and utility easement in thefonoer willow noad right-of-way.
c. A common driveway easement in favor of parcel A andadjoining lot to the south over conmon sections of thedriveway.
A 15 foot teDporary access easement over forDer right-of-way to serve 3 lots located west of parcel A. Eisenent
may be vacated if lots are acquired by the applicant andcombined with Parcel A.
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
Plan showing Lots 1154-1169 and Iots 1178-1179, Carver Beach -Parcel A.
Pl,an showing Lots LLTO-LL77, Carver Beach - parceL B.Location of the 3 tax forfeit lots in relation to parcel A.Staff -report and City Council minutes dated l.{ay 19, 1986.ueno fron Dave Henpel dated Uay 24, Lg9L.llemo from Steve Kirchman dated April 11, 1991.
d.
ATTACHMENTS
941-3031
t tttif.icgtr @f $ttrbty
Survey For
?
.\!
IjWillc'*
ir--Ir 4o-r
ll_1-
Book_lgll Page 55 File-
N Srole. t.3o'
- -.774
tF|5
<t
'e gtnt'?
+d C..1a/alt itro,\
- * *€i'l: f
d
^J
io
E.
e
i!
I
o - -5a,I.P -!i1,13
588 sr'?o
P'coci
t
.L *-(\J
oAJ
oIo
a!o
FT
o.l.- llon ,
-l rl ''l {,-(
I h..-, c-d, ltr rh. . . rr rrd crr6 ,.F-..n.ra. .l r !gr\,.t d lh. b@di- dr^-V CUr Con,,,. vfi..r..,!d d n- kio d.l b.,i8i,E lL.s\ .,4 J
raba.,!cro..h'.nr., il.,r, t,om d o. r- a'6. s,'*.t,.d n, ',.,"a 19 d.t "{---l
?cr,4-zo-Qo A+lo.c\r n.r erd#L
-- 61.?3',- -
il18
o
o
Gl
(_
o
s il79
Ar';
o
fq
C)
AJ
r3. c5 2r.25 zl.13 z0
I
o
8
D
Li o
E
ltt5
o
-1
oo
I()
1,o
(.o
\il;i
h
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
OPEN
66.Sq
lt,)li: ilt(1
at.50
j
?o.o
941-3031 ECen Prairie, MN 55344
t tttititdt* @f Sur0ru
Survey For i.l
5ltpe }.
;)+
b'
By-.rte Book_}!L PagE_56_ File_
II
o
s
I
I
!
rld-x r I rfrrat li^t ,a
5.+ t
u Co^cratg ron
Zo
2
?
I
26
o
qu
66
r
-C
...J
L
5
go
I
E,I
.€
€att
I
_str
III
<D
(a
v
o-
*
Il
o
I Scola;..39rG
zo
5r.+ I. P pr..r - 58s3t'zo'E a..r L
I lE-y dra, lt'n rha a r rM.r! cs,.d r.ar-.iirEr d I rrw.t., fi. !.!la.r- .,l
2o
ef
Carvc.
-
C@dy. t in -dl,rd d rh.lGZq.I b!i6 f. lhr.on. d d
Attacln'r\^'e^\t#2
illo r45'I;l-
5t
oI f ttl *6124
ll
Drivr Ill13 r
t:l
o
ci
NJ il14
3ai t.i - 'aoN
IoN - -b'?.23-.
I
I
12.'l4
.tt
e
-l
r115
v.bb.nc,o..nrEn6.
't
ut. t,cn o. o. rrd L^d. Surcrld b, .rt
Q.u 4 - 2o'g'
I
aN
N
l
rl
I
ot:<tJ
I
I
I'?4.31
cq
o
o
Nl
-- 57.5t- -
Oe<'k
aI il15
51.32
llTl
-\
/.- -q
I
Iq
_j
tc :-:{--.-i-
1l
D
-{
9R
ao
7-
-^
i,--\
a.
I
,y,
Rlv t
$
r.
.t
I
os')i'I :i
;AW'\ F iPr\/E
:,
.\Y
a
,/z Parce)
7r,*
E
1
3IA
LO
xro
Ts F,rtff.;::
L
\
l-,l T
-,'.i- 1R i
T-
t'. :
;!,ivD cR,vt
)oT
t\
$aa:-,4,
l
\
.q
.Y,J
't!9
EAG. E f,i
1
I
-t :Zz
I
I
\1
\*
,.. .4
,!- -il
.4
:)
C
- : ...-.1
I
el B
4
c
f'
.!
\
I
t.
r-Lr, -.-
rli:
Al-fo.c\, \y\ €r.t
t
!
-l __J_
I
JITY OF
EHINHISSEN
,. DATE!
C.C. DATE: t'lay 19, 1986
CASE l{0: 86-2 Vacation
' Prepared by: Dacy/v
Carver Beac hLOCATION:
APPL ICANT:Mr. and l4rs. Brett Discher
5728 Lotus Trai I
Chanhassen, i,lN 55317
STAFF REPORT
Fz
oJLL
PRESENT ZONING:
ACREAGE:
DE]I5ITY:
ADJACENT ZONING
AI{D LAI{D USE:t{-
s-
E.
t{-
}IATER AND SE}IER:
PHYSICAL CHARAC.:
R-I, Si ng le Family Residential
Vacant parcels and one existing residence
R-l; one single fanily residence
Lotus Lake
Intersection of Hopi Drive and Carver Eeach
Road
l{o existing service within r/w
Extreme slope from Carver Beach Road to
Lotus Trai I
ko
lrJFa
ft\\xc-\rcn enl
#+
I99O LAND USE PLAN:N/A
PRoP0SAL: To vacate the ttiI low Road right-of-way
REFERRAL AGENCY REVIEI,ll
Ci ty Eng i neer
Mi nneg a s co
BACKGROUND
Staff recommends that the proposed vacation fequest be tabled for 30 days sothat affected property owners can file their opinions to the matter.
REPORT ATTACHI'4ENTS
The applicant has requested the subject vacation in order to obtain additionat'lot area for construction of a garage. The applicant has also applied for avariance to the existing right-of-way line in case the vacation petition is not
approved by the City CounciI.
l,r/illow Road has a 40 foot right-of-way and contains extremely steep slopes.
ANALYSI S
liiliow Road serves three vacant lots and two existing single family residences(which also abut Lotus Trail). Although the terrain is eitremety iteep, [illow
Road was intended to service abutting parcel s. The City.Attorney has aivisedstaff that although the vacant lots may be undersized, the City tannot deny
access to the properties. In order for the vacation to occur, abutting property
owners would have to sign a "waiver,, stating that they have no objection to thevacation. A private access easement Hould also be necessary to serve the parcels.
As of writing this report, staff has not heard from affected property owners.
They may appear at the hearing. Staff cannot at this time recommend approvalunti I all affected property owners consent to the vacation.
RECOMME IIDATI ON
1
2
3
4
Letter from li1r. and l{r
Letter from Mr. and Mr
Appl i cat ion.
Oetailed locati on map .
s. Brett Discher dated April 30, 1985.s. Roger Byrne dated April 30, 1986.
I'li lIow Road Vacat ion
l4ay i9, i9B6
Page 2
Right-of-way does not contain cityservices. Topography prevent s
construction of an improved city
st reet .
No objection to vacation.
April 30, 1985
Ms. Barbara Dacy
City of Charhassen
Chanhassen, I'liuresota 55317
Re Appl ication to Vacate Willcr, Road - Carrer B€ach
Dear l*ls. Dacy:
we are plarming substantiaL imPro\rsnents to our tsne which is located at 6728
Iptus Trail. We o,'rn Lots 1998 - 2007 in tlle Can er Beach tract.
Adjacent to our lot line is a "paper load" tlEt we would like to vacate.
According to Charhassen City Engineer BilI Monk, there are no utilities
present it the road site. 'Mr. Irlonk does not otrPose vacating this road,
ana nas indicated that it would be next to fupossi-ble to txrifd t}is road
due to the s lope and drainage factors.
we are plam.ing to build a garage on our ProPrty and rmlst access the road
frcrn our existing driv*ray, which is where the road is drarwn. oll' neighbors
also use tiis area to access their PlotrErty. I have spoken with tiese
neighbors, |4r. and l"lrs. Byrne, and tltey I'vould like to have tlre road vacated
aS r4rel I .
please process our appl ication to vacate willcN Road, as you and I discussed
on the telephone. Attached is our fee ard aE)Iication.
Very truly yours,
'iIt, il;i; li:,i. .ifr.{ ,f,lirlut
Mr. and Mrs. Brett S. Discher
ffi.{a6t74l
Apri] 30, 1986
Ms. Barbara Dacy
City of ChanlEssen
Chanhassen, l{innesota 55317
Re: Vacating Willcftr Road - Carver Beach
Dear l'1s. Dacy:
lSe Hould like to see the application to vacate WiI tcrv, Road brought by Mr. and
Urs. Brett Discher be approrred. We do not olpose vacating Willo^, Road.
Very truly yours,
W *'74*
l,!r. and Mrs. Roger Byrne
frr1V.i7f{a.r{7-
i:tECa:-. z-)
lt|AY - ^: 1935
CITY OF CHANHASS.. I
I.AND DEVELOPTENT APPLICATIONCIry OP CEANEASSEII
690 Coulter Drive
Chaahasseo, MN 55317(612) 937-1900
AIPLIC;.\T: [irr. -rr ,-
ADDRESS
i1 r' O{NER:iw
ADDRESS ILlfi,(
i irir'i.1..(
r4 1 Y LTI,\tv'Jit I
5
TELEPHONE (Daytine ) ll J::,n "oo'TELEPHoNE 41!i-ti) I z r.P Codet;i
REQTJEST:
Zoning District Change
Zoning Appeal
r\ Zoning Variance
Zoning tex: Anendment
Land Use plan enendruent
Conditional Use permit
Site plan Revi.ew
PBOJEC? NA.YE
PRESENT I.AND USE PLAN DESIGNATION
REQUES?ED LAND USE PLAN DESTGNATTON
PRESENT zoNrNG R- t
REQ IIES TED ZONING
Planned t nit Development
_ Sketch plan
_ Preliminary plan
_ Final plan
Subdivision
_ platting
_ Metes and Bounds
Str ee t/.n-:r*"'|t racation
l{etlands permit
x
fn,szd ,/LC/z n?tt1C A/W{3 Ca/'71 C
I.OCATION li/f-i1)1
ir 71"i;ttt
a'/tK /qciS -7./,.,'j
iili,f,i6p
fr,fr4tila,T t7
LEGiL DESCRfPTION (Attach legal if necessary )
USES PROPOSED
SIZE OF PROPERTY
REASONS FOR THIS REQT'EST
^:!.. ^.: ^L--:.("
Lanc Degelcpneni Application
i\t q':r? r.aa -/r.\\te -
aF?ir 7=
SigneC By .Q.a277,tv-2 fD/La
AFp
The uniersibned reore-sentative of the applicant hereby certifies:l3i'::.i: :i$';i:,::i;-I;;';';;.;;;"i' requilenents rt iii
Th:s appl:ceiicn must be conpleCed in fclearly cri n:eci anciprans requi:eci by ",1Y:!
b' ;;;;;;";iJ"oti :li fr:H:liliti,'u"'iir iig - in=i.- ;;oii":!ijii"ij: $:lr3'::llnce provis il,I l' -i"ro.=
to decemj.::" ti" a;;;il'i"'II"i'jII:: ::i':: with the ciry pranner
app r i cioi'i"i" l;J":;;ii:.:i:i:"nce and prcce<iurar ."!oi.'.i.,,."
Dat e ,5//1ru
:;:r.'::::;t::"S"::';:I cerriries rhat rhe. appricent has bec,ioescr:cei h:s app.Licarion for tir._ i."p.iiv..tr!r!ii
Sigaei Ey et.,Zt-ai:ZZL Jt &z'r c ,,h-tr.Date r/i/iFeeOwner 6
Dat.e Application Recei ved
Appljca:ion Fee paid
City Receipt No.
r lhi s -Applicarion wiLJ.
;.'::i";: AdjusLnents b ons i dered
ppeal,s a t.an
ecdA fil"i:" Plannins conmission,/
(
V"a
oruz
5>oo a)
,
mn
of)mm t
mt,-{
rn
@m
oI
oE
a0 ,tr
1 n}.
!ml
-,!1L
i;
,-
-II--
i
EIlw]I
-----II
rr-r
I
ElI
--I
-
GI
!f{<fno
ao
,o
ul
o
B-zFI
rrt
ao
oI
m
v€
At,o
o
P
m
To
)
(roU e---
tL
ar(
[{
\1-
N
-
t--aL'
III
I
I
-
.>
trfrrrru@r/ #/
Er'l1i
)\
-I
,.r
Chanhassen City Counc i I Minutes-t"lay 19, 1985
Mayor tlamilton moved, Councilwoman seconded to a[prove Item 2(d) on the
Consent Agenda. AII voted in favor ard the motion carried.
2. d. Approve Carver B€ach Bstates Final PIat.
PUBLIC HEARING
STREET VACATION REQUEST, WILLOW ROAD IN CARVER BEACH , BEf,SY DISCHER.
t-
t
R llic kesent
Betsy and Brett Discher 6728 totus Trail
Councilwoman Svrenson moved to close grbl ic hearing, secorried by Cor:ncilmanHorn. All voted in favor ard motion carried.
Mayor Hamilton: Do the council members have any comments? ltre Board ofMjustments ard Atrpea1s dealt with part of this isst:e, did they discuss theroad vacation?
Councilman Geving: that really doesnrt have a bearirg on this issue here.I think we wiII pick that q, at the aEpropriate time.
ltis paper street, Willow f@d, was platted a few years ago just to evenout the plat ard make some access to totus I:aiI, but it kind of remirds roeof the Devil Slide area. If ire eere ever to build a road it nould be t}lemost difficult thing to do ard to maintain foreve!, ard I rrould be totalyagainst ever building Willow Road as a street for the city and I think tltebest thing we could possibly do is to vacate this road to the at rttirE
ProPerty owners ard give it up.
Courci lwoman watson: ltre only problem is the three prolErty owners who
have lard that would have literally no acless if they arenrt granted some
I
7
.,1 IiJ 7-
l.tayor Hamilton: Is there anyone from the Erblic that rrould like to make a
cqtrnent?
Betsy Discher: WiIIow Road is currently a paper street that is plAtted in
Carver Beach. there hatrpens to be about a 99 degree slope there. It has
been indicated to me by various staff frqn the city that it would be nextto impossible to build a street in that area. Olr prolErty abuts Willow
Road and we have requested a variance to do some improvements on tlrat. We
rdould Iike to proceed with the vacation process. I urderstard that there
are some lots whose only access is Wil}oe, Road and rre rrould be willing togrant an easement across the protrErty to accempl ish that. I am surethat the city isn't interested in, first of all, making ttre road tlpre, nor
maintaining it because of the difficulty of the site.
Mayor tlamilton: Is thele anyone else bere who would like to speak aboutthis i tem?
(hanhassen City Council Minutes-l,tay 19, 1996
PT'BLIC HEARING
PROPOSED STREET I MPRO/EMMIIS
"l"v-u.
IP TAKE LT'CY ROAD BE'TWEEII GALPIN AND POWERS
Rrblic Present:
I
L
Rosanary Steller
EI i zabeth A. clacltm
Joyce Slater Poppe
Walme Poppe
Don lGzzenga
AI lcueger
A1 Klingelhutz
1931
I510
t95s
L95g
6731
L6gg
86gg
&estview Ci.rcle
Iake [l]cry Road
&estview Circle
CrestviEw Circle
Galpin Blvd.
Iake trry Road
Geat Plains Blvd.t
8
JJ
sort of easement over the lard where Willoh, Road is rnw planned. fheyIiterally could never get to that pro1Erty. I don't thi;k any of *to.selErcels are buildable.
Barbara Dacy: l,to, the lot sizes are substardard. However, the CityAttorney was very emphatic in his advice to me that they have to siln awaiver alrowing rhe street vacation before the city cari actualry va6ate theroadway. Otherwise, we_are denyirg them acrcess. ftrlt is tbe rejson we arerecommending a -tabl.ing for approximately thirty (30) days on the vacation.request. Ihe abutting prolErty owners bave been notified. Ttey live outof tosrn. ltrey should have received the mailed notice, but Mr. -xnutson basadvised that they sign a waiver first before the city'vacates Cie sli"et.
Councilman Horn: Altnor:gh I heard the recommendation from Staff totable this for the next thirty (30) days, I believe it would be inorder folts to approve thi"" sr:bject to the 30 day notic€ perioa indhopefully the approval of the other abuttirg property owneis and ifthere was no objection it would come back do-us on tlre consent agerdaard we wo,ld just approve it at that time. Rather than aeafing ;ii;-this at that time, I rrculd just as soon dispose of it.
_ Mayor Hamilton: If it were a cordition ard tbe approval came backfrom- the people who owned the protErty and made tiieir rights, tf*" *"rrculd see it again.
Counci I woman Sr.renson: I urderstard your Motion to say now that thereceipt of the filing of their opinions ard comments be received oftheir approval of the affected prolErty oh'rErs?
l,ayor Hanilton: Ttrat is correct.
RESOLUTTON 86-28:Gurcrf an Giiig- moved and Mayor Hami rton seconded, to approve the streetvacation request for wirlow Road in cawer Beach with the-iordition itratthe abutting prgpgrty owners give their written approval within ttrirty r:gldays. A11 voted in favor ard tnotion carried.
CH[NH[ESEN
690 COUTTER DRIVE . P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (512) 937-5739
}IEMORANDIJI'{
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUL':
Sharmin AI-Jaff,
David C. Henpel,
Ylay 24, L99L
Planner I
Senior Engineering Technician
Proposed Byrne Subdivision - LUR 91-7
The site is heavily wooded with very steep slopes ranging.fron 2Otto 358. The property is bordered by Lotus Trail to the east andWill-ow Road (a paper street) to the south and residentiaLproperties to the north and east. The existing property lyingsouth of wiIlo!, Road currently utilizes a portion of- thJ cilyriright-of-way (willow Road) as their driv-eway. The drivewayconsists of gravel base with a steep grade (approximately 12g to15t slope). This type of terrain puts constraints on thJ type ofhouse design for this 1ot. The lot nay be linited to a tuck- undertype design in order to provide a workable driveway slope out toWi11ow Road.
To nitigate erosion, it is recornmended that a reguirement beimposed that the new driveway be constructed of either- concrete orasphalt and the appropriate culvert Etructures be placed tonaintain the existing drainage pattern along wi1low Road and LotusLake. The exact cuLvert dinensions should be calculated by aprofessional engineer.
As previously nentioned, Willow Road currently provides access tothe property south of the applicantrs parcel.- The city does notnaintain Willow Road. Due to the topographic constraiits, it isdifficurt to imagine wi11or.r Road being extenaea in the future. Theapplicant may fornally request the city to vacate willow Roaal.staff lrould be in favor. -o.f such a requeat rith the understandingthat a drainage and utility easenent centered over the existiniright-of-rray, 20 feet in width, be reserved. This nay afi& tfr-applicant to acquire additional square footage. If Wiliow Road wasvacated, the additional property rrould allow enough roor0 for twodriveways. However, in an effort to lirnit acceis points, theparcels should share the existing driveway. This rrould qualify the
CITY OF
Site Conditions
Ms. S
l,!ay 2
Page
harmin A1-Jaff4, l99l
2
driveway as a private driveway with two accesses which wouldtrigger the private driveway ordinance and require construction ofthe driveway to 7 ton design and paved 20 feet in width.
Utilities
Recornrnend Cond it ions
Municipal sanitary serrer and water service has been extended fronLotus Trail to the property line. Due to the topographicconstraints on the parcel, extending service to the house locationwill reguire additional tree loss.
1 The applicant shall subnit grading and drainage plans with thebuilding plans at the tine of building perroit application forreview and approval by the City Engineer.
The properties lying north and south of Witlow Road shallutilize a conmon driveway. All nerd driveway constructj,onshall be hard surface, either asphalt or concrete, and theappropriate drainage cutverts installed.
2
3 The properties lying north and south of Wi11ow Road shallshare a connon access point/driveway. The connon drivewayshall be upgraded to conforn uith the cityrs private drivewayordi.nance.
pc: Charles Folch, City Engineer
690 COULTER DRIVE. PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
Slrarurin Al-Jaff. Planner I
CITY OF
CH[NH[SEEN
c<
1 :\10R.\\ DL !1
TO:
FRO\{:
D..'l f :
s t'R.r :
Sleve A Xi rchman, Bui lding Official
l93rApr i I l1 .
Planrring Case: 9l -4 (B"r'rne)
.:, s:ilr. ins[)cclion on 4/'11/91 confi rmed the lot is vcr;, steepl]-sloped. l,Ba Sec. 302 (b) permits ttre Building Official to
ri.rr'; ire 1>l anr: anrl specifical.ions be prepared by an engineer orarcliiteel. Due to thc nature of this lo1. a structural engineernrusl des i Cn lhe f ourrdal ion. A geotr:chnical eng i nee r must al soapprove lhe soils. Structural calculations nust be submittedwilh plans al the t irue of permit application.
A\!o.-\'r'"" lrt*s
r'tFt)' 31 '51 1 U:.,] I TE!] STEE L FF|:!J'-E Eg3 FB].
r.:?f erenced lots that was,
f c ilowing reconrnendations
to :uiid a single fanily
k;ep as many tr.rcs as
"eoeta!ion cover or c1
e: os i c.rn .
n ,:t,' f ()
it ir; my
b('au1 i t uJ
Posl-lt !raird lax lransmifial memo 7671rlay 29, 1991,
Ilr. arrd Ilrs . Roqer Byrne
57 24 Lotus Drive
Chanhassen, Hi,nnesota 5l 3l ?
To prere):t erosion of
pos s i bIr-. anY Provide
landsce.pe plar; designed
Dca:' Mr. a..C Mrs . Byrne.
After the inspection oi:he abc)'e
made on !.1ay 12, 1991, I of f e:- the
to be incorporated in y(.'lr p1a!rs
residenc€ or. the site.
l,ors 1 l.5d Ehru 1169, 1178 ana 1179
Carvc'r tseach
Carver CounEy
Cj.ty of Chanhassen
Because cf the steepr,er.s of '-n€ hill and the adjoi.ning
prcperty. do not Locat-: e:-ry struct\rr t within 20 f eet of l;he
lekesidc of IoL 1159, If possiblc, p:'.ser'l'e and protect ally
exist:t]a veoeLaci.on which rrow €):l:5tt
Make pror,isions in you! t:ens to divt-'r t any stornr:ate:: runof f
away froi the Struclure, especially orr the uphill side. The'
c:,a:J scil and excessive r.ater can contille to creatrr st'13' higlr
latcr.,l loeds on ihe f oLndaE:otr ',r':1is as well as i,lcrcasilro
tire inciCence oi a leai:ir,z ba!;erf cnt *aL1.
Obtain prof essionai t:elir in tltc- d. si5n of any ba::,':,,r ttt or
subgrade space . The co:rbinat,ion (..f t:1r' 5te(f p hi11s j dr, ;r.rrd Llrr
clay soil wiil excrt lateral cr r.ori.2ontal forces on Ehc
basenont '.rnl1s wh j.ch are n:uclr greatel than v,ouId l)e elipecieil
on a "rro:'nal " si.te. Th.: f oundatic:r xalls will plt>babIy be
hea.;!1'; reinf orced to t esist tlrt:5'i 1oads. In addi.t.i on, a
wail:ouc typ,: cf baserretrt ,iay ltr.iuce s) iding of the whol e
structure :if t:he foundar.i,ons a! i-' nrt desigtled to resist thc
slr-clng.
the soil .
a qcinFl..!t i)
to elinlrrat.c'
lf. th(]se cautions ar,_, troted ar:d final p]aDs
inccrrporale solutions t-o tLe prcl-1'-'nlt orttlined.
opi.nion tl)at the site . can be Ce'.'r,loPcd into r1
a ol ,qger ,
otels
Co.
)^IESi;I
, A, NORRIS BREIV] R
Prof essicnql Eng irieer
83d1 178th Lar)€Forest Ler.e, L.innesola 95025
Irr. And Hrs. Byrne
Page 2
settinq for a hornesite,
Sincerell' yours,
a
A. No ris BreivikProf e!isional EncrineerMinltesota Registration Nu. 7 320
\
CH[NH[SSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE ' PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
!{EI{ORANDI'U
To: Planning Conmission
FROI,!: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner
DATE: Uay 22, 199L
SU&f: Iandscaping Ordinance
On April 3, 799L, the Planning Comhission reviewed the existing
landscaping ordinance to conment on what needed to be anended andupdated. Staff presented cornnents on the existing landscapeordinance and proposed changes. The follorring ordinance reflectsstaffrs proposed amendments to the landscape regulations resultingin a higher standard of development in the city. The proposed
changes include:
1. Additions to the intent statement on visual inpacts, buffering
and tree preservation.
2. Changing the tetter of credit from 12Ot to 11Ot to beconsistent with other letter of credit requirenents.
Alternative landscape provisions.
Landscape budget.
Standards for screening of visual inpacts.
Foundation and aesthetic plantings.
Subdivision regiulations for landscaping single fanily lots andsubdivisions .
CITY OF
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Article XXV, LaDdscapiDg andt !!rea Renoval.
DIVISION ].. GENERALLY
(g) Boulevard atrdthe city.
Section 2O-1L76. fntent, scope and conpl iance.
(a) The intent of this article is to improve the appearanceof vehicular use areas and property abutting pubtic rightl:of-way;to require buffering between non-conpatible land uies; and toprotect, preserve and pronote the aesthetic appeal, character andvalue of the surrounding neighborhoods i to promote public healthand safety through the reduction of noise pollution, air pollution,visuaL pollution and glare.
(b) This article does not apply to single fanily detachedresi.dences in the AL/L2/PR/RSF Districts uhich are regulated bylandscaping require.ments contained with the Subdivision Ordinance.
(c) No net site developnent, buitding, structure or vehicularuse area.is a11owed, unless landscaping is provided as required inthis article.
. (al No property lines shall be altered nor shall anybuilding, structure or vehicular use area be expanded, unless thenininun landscaping required by the provisions ot tfris article isprovided for the entire property.
(e) The lardlscapiDg standarats shall proviae for screeniug foryisgal inpacts associatail yith a givea use, iacludiag but Dotlinited to:
o truck loading areas io trash storage io parking lots, interior lot areas aDd perinetels,o large uaadlorneil buildling nassitg;o garlge doors aggociated ylth ruto orierted usesi aldo vebicular stacki.ug areaa for drive through uses
.(f ) Buft€riDg shall be provid€d b€tu€eD high lDt€DsityIos intensity uses rnat betreen a sl.te aad uajor streetibighrays aDat ia areaa rhere bufferiDg is r-egulredt byCoDprehensivo PlaD.
aDal
aad
the
atre€tscape plantlag 8ha11 bo pursueit by
(h) Naturo staDds of trees shalr, b6 preserved.
(i) ReforestatioD shall b6 puraued as appropriate.
Landscaping Ordinance
Ylay 22, L99L
Page 2
Landscaping ordinance
lilay 22, 1991
Page 3
Section 2o-LL77. PIan Subroission and approval .
The property owner or developer shaff prepare a landscape plan
dravD by a registered laldacape architect o! other profegsioDal
acceptabla to the city for review by the city. The city shall
apply the following conditions in approval or disapproving the
plan :
(1) The contents of the plan shall include the following:
a Plot plan, drawn to an easily readable scaIe,
shorring and labeIling by nane and dimensions, allexisting and proposed property lines, easenents,buildings, and other structures, vehicular use
areas (including parking stalls, driverays, service
areas, square footage), water outlets and landscapematerial ( including botanical name and conmon nane,installation si.ze, on center planting dinensions
nhere applicable, and quantities for all plants
used).
I:pical elevations and/ or cross sections as nay be
required.
Tit1e block with the pertinent nanes and addressed(property orrner, person drawing plan, and personinstalling landscape naterial), scale date, northarrow (generally orient plan so that north is totop of plan), and zoning district.
b
c
d Existing landscape naterial shallrequired plan and any naterialcondition may be used to satisfy
whole or in part.
be shown on thein satisfactorythis article in
(2) Where landscaping is required, no building pernit shalIbe issued unti} the reguired landscaping plan has been
subrnitted and approved, and no certificate of occupancy sha1l
be issued until the landscaping is conpleted as certified by
an on-site inspection by the building inspector, unless an
@ irrevocable letter of credit fron abanking institution, has been p*id subroitted.
(3) If neeessariy, t\e e:ty iay reqEire a +etter of ered*t te
ercure---proper-insEa}}at+on of
,,^-r- -^-r:-l^i r-.-gJ -:t[g*q},g-;9IEEqE--r,
Landscaping Ordinanceylay 22 , 1-99t
Page 4
p+aa--re**e*-preees+..
t3) wteD screeDing, laDdlscaping or other sinilar iEproveneDtsto property are required by thi8 ordinalce, a lettef of cr€ditshall be supplied Dy the oyaer ia aD anouDt 6qual to at l6astoDe hundred tetr (110) percoDt of th6 value of such acreening,landscaping o! other inprovanente. The aocurity Dust igsatisfactory to the city aDd sba1I be conditioaed upoureiDburseneut of all erpeDses iucurred by th6 city iorengineering, legal or otb6r lees in coanection vith uakiag orconpleting such inproven€Dts. lrh€ giuarartee sha1l be providedprior to the issuanc€ of atry buiidilg pemit alrd ;hall b€valid for a period o! tiEe aqull to o;e (1) fu1l growing
seasoD after the date of lnstallatioD of the laDdtscapiDg. fbacity nay accept . letter of cr€dlt or cash escrow-. fn tbeeveDt coDstruction of th€ project ia lot coupleted rlthiD th6tiue prescribed by building pariDits aad othir approvals, thecity Eay, at its optiou, coEpleto tbe yolk requireA ai tbe€rpeDse of tbe oyDer and the sur6ty.
Tbs city uay a1lov aD oxteDded period of tiue forconpletior of all laDatscapLng if the delay is atuo tocoadlitions rhich ar6 reasoaably beyondl tbe control of thed€veloper. Extensious rhicb nay not exceed Dine (9) DoDths,Eay be graDteal due to seasoDal or reathe! colditioDs. fheD anextension is grauted, tbe city sDal1 reguire such addltioaalaecurity as it deens appropriate
(4) @iens e.t+st yhere st
eau-e a
_(a) - Reguests for us€ of alt€rnativa landscapiag provisions
are_ justified oDry vb6D oD6 or Do!. o! the folloiini -conilitioag
APPIY:
a.
b.
c.
The sits Lavolves
ehapeil parcel8.apace liuitations or uausually
lopography, aoil, vog€tatio!,coDditions lro gucb that fullinposslble or lnpracticable.
or other siteconPlialcs ig
aD existiDg sito, -theIarger tbar catr be
Due to a chatrgoreguired buff.rprovialeal, ald
of us€
yard of
ig
d. aafety coagidleratiola ar€ involved.
Landscaping 0rCinance
Ylay 22, l99l
Page 5
DIVISION 2. TREE REMOVAL REGUIATIONS.
Section 2o-117a. General Iy.
(a) It is the policy of the city to preserve natural t oodfand
areas throughout the city and rrith respect to specific site
developnent to retain as far as practical, substantial tree stands
which can be incorporated into the overalf landscape plan.
(b) No clearcutting of woodland areas shall be pernitted
except as approved in a subdivision, planned unit development or
site plan application.
(c) The following standards shall be used in evaluating
subdivisions and site plans:
(1) To the extent practical, site design shal1 preserve
significant uoodland areas.
(21 Shade trees of six (5) incheg or roore caliper atfour (4) feet in height shall be saved unless it
can be denonstrated that there is no other feasible
way to develop the site.
(3) The city nay require the replacenent of removed
trees on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis. At
nininum, however, replacenent trees shall conformto the planting requirenent identified in Division
3 0f this article.
(4) During the tree rerooval Process, trees shall be
renoved so as to prevent blocking of public rights-
of-way or interfering with overhead utility lines.
(s)The renoval
perrnissible.
of diseased and damaged trees is
(d) Tree remova] not peruitted under subdivision, planned
unit developnent or site plan revj.ew shall not be allowed withoutthe approval of a tree removal plan by the city council. Tree
renoval plans shall include the content requirenents as dictated in
section 2o-LL77 and Ldentify reasons for tree removal The plan
shall be subnitted three (3) weeks in advance of the city council
neeting at which it is to be considered.
Landscaping Ordinance
l,Iay 22 , 1991
Page 6
DIVISToN 3. IANDSCAPING STaNDARDs M.
Sectioa 2O-,-,-?9. Lardlscap€ Budg6t.
(a) Tbere shall b€ provid€d landtscaping neetiag the ulninunlaDdscapiDg budlget provided iD tbe table Leloy
PRq'ECT VAI,UE UINIUI'}I
V}IJUE(ItrcludiDg buildlDg coDstructioD,eite preparatiol, aait slte inprov€netts )
Belos $1r 000 r 000
91r000r001 - 92, OOO, OOO
$2r0o0r001 - $3, oOO, OO O
S3r000r001 - $1r000r000
IJANDSCAPE
2*
S20,000 + lt of
Proj ect Value iD3XC€ga of
91r000r000
$30r000 + 0.75*of ProJ.ct
Yalue La orccsgof 93r0oor000
$37r500 + 0.25tof ProJ6ctvalua iD €xc€ssof $3,000,000
Over $t,000 r 000 t.t
lbe uiuinrrn laDatscapa value r€quir€d lay be flexible tfpresenration is appllad to eristiDg vegotalioa oa tla sitj.
Section 20-1180. visual rnPacts.
. (a) Any serir.i€e-€+rt*etr*fe visual inpact, including but Dotlinited to, truck loadLDg ar€aa, trash itorage, p""iiit fot",interior lot areas aDd -pelinet€rs, rarge unadoiaed uuriara6ma_ssiag, garage doors associated vi.tu auto orl.eDt€d ugis aaavehicutar atackiag areas for drive-thru usea sharl be Bcreened orbuffer€a whenever rocated in any residential, "o.r"i-ii:. o.industrial zone except si.ngle fanlliy resldeaceil" it.-ii,fz, nn
grouped together, however, screening 'heighl requirenent= ,itl b.based upon the talLest of the structlures.
1) Required ec_ree.liag_or bufferiDg for aDy visual inpact lraybe achieved ritb fences, ralli, earti berns, hidges or
tree
Landscaping Ordinance
lqay 22, 1991
Page 7
otb€r laDascape nateriale. A1I ralls ard f€Dces Bhallbe arcbl.t€cturally ha!![onious vith the priacl.palbuildlag. Ealth ber:D3 rhall Dot €xce€d a slope of 3:1.
![be screeD ahall b€ lleaigaed to enploy natarials ubicbprovide aD €ffectivs viaual barier duriag all seasons.
All r€quired acreeaiag or bufferiag 8ba11 be locatoal olth€ lot occupied by tbs use, bullitlag, facillty orstructuro to b€ Bcrosaed. No screeaiag or bufferlag'shall be locat€A o! rDy public rlght-of-uay or rithinsight (8) fset of ths traveled portior of .ry Btreet or
highray.
3)Ecreeal.ag or bufferl.ag reguiredl by thia sectior shall beof a b€ight lr€etlaal to acconplish tb€ goals of tbisBectl.ol. Beight of plaatiags required under thig sectionBhall b€ Doasured at tho tl.[e of LDstallatioD.
.(b) llhe followiDg uses 8ha11 be 8cr€eDeal or buffered in
accordaace sitb the requireneats of this gubdivision:
1) PriDcipal buildlngs aDdl Btructur€a aDd any buildingor structura acc€ssory tber€to }ocateal in aDybuslness, industrial or pIaDDad uDl.t developEeDtalistrict coDtal.niDg DoD-r€BidoDtl.al uses sha1l bebuffered fron lots usedl for aDy residlential
PurPose.
2'Prilcipal bulldiaga anA structures and aay buildiagor structur€ accossory tberoto locat€d itr ary Ra,
R8, R12, R16 Dl3trlct or plalDoil uult davelopna[tdlstrict coDtal.rl,Dg resideatial al€velopneut atdensities Gxcesdlng a uDits p€r acr6 ahall be
buff€r€al froD lots locatod La eay 11, 12, IIR or RgFDistrlct.
3)rdditiolal buffer yard requir€uoDt8 ar€ establishedby ths city conpraheasive Pla! .Dal llsteal inladlvidual digtrict staDdards.
r)
2t
Outslale storag€ la aay district 3ubject to th6aeprovisloas aDA .lloreal by other proviaioas of thlg
ordi.aance, ahall b. 3creeDeA tro[ atl publlc viewa.
SectioD 20-1181. vehicular lleas.
(a) Parkitrg lot perlnatarg where par*+r}g vohicular areas,including driveways aad llrl.ve aisles, are not entirely screenedvisually by an intervening building or structure from any abuttingright-of-way, there shall be provided landscaping bet*eea -sueh:-area
Landscaping ordinanceylay 22, t99I
Page 8
alesigned to buffer dlirect vieysof cars arrd baral surfaca areas. The goal of this section Ls tobreak up expaDses of hard aurface aleaa, belp to visually defiaebouLevards anal soft6n direct views of partlDg areas.
(b) Interior Landscaping for Vehicutar Use Areas:
1) Any open vehicular use are (excluding loading,unloading, and storage areas in IOp and SCDistricts) containing nore than six thousand(6,000) square feet of area, or twenty (2O) or Dorevehicular parking spaces, shall provide interiorlandscaping in accordance with this division inaddition to I'perimetertr landscaping. Interiorlandscaping nay be peninsular or island types.
2) For each one hundred (100) square feet, or fractionthereof, of vehicular use area, five (5) squarefeet of landscaped area shall be provided.
3)
4)
s)
The ninirnun landscape area pernitted shaIlsixty-four (64) square feet, with a fournininum dinension to all trees from edgepavement rrhere vehicles overhang.
be
foot
of
fn order to encourage the required landscape areasto be pfoperly dispersed, no required llndscapearea shall be _larger than three hundred fifty (350)square feet in vehicular use areas under thirtythousand (30,000) square feet. In both cases, thaleast dinension of any required area sha1l be iour-foot roininum dinension to all trees from edge ofpavenent shere vehicles overhang. Landscape areaslarger than above are pernitted as long as theadditional areas are in excess of the -reguired
nininun.
A nininun of one (1) tree shall be required foreach tuo hundred fifty (250) square* feet orfraction - thereof, of required lindscape area.Trees sha1l have a clear trunk of at leasC five (5)feet above the ground, and the renaining area shalibe landscaped with shrubs, or ground co:ver, not toexceed tlro (2) feet in height.
6)Parked vehicles nay hang over the interiorlandscape area no nore than two and one-ha1f (21)feet, as long as a concrete curb is proviaea ti>ensure no greater overhang or penetration of thelandscaped area.
AII landscaped areas shall be protected by concrete
curbing.
Sectio! 20-1182. trouBalatioD rld lesthatic Plattiags.
(a) LaDdsclping plans shall provide for an appropriate lix ofplantiugs around the erterlor footprj.nt of all buildlags. Theirtent of tbls sectioD ia to inprova tbe aPitearaaco of the
structur€s aaal, vh€re Decesslry, brsal uP large ur.dorned buildingelevationg. llhese plaDtiaga are aot lateadea to obscure views of
the builaliDg o! acces3ory aigraage.
(b, All uDdevelopedt ar€as of th€ aite, e:cludiag protect€d
retlaDds aDal tree preserrration areas, shall be sssd€d or sodded.In aalalition, .D appropriate ni: of tr€€s alal other plaDt Daterialshall be provided to cr€ats aa aesthatically pleasiag aita.
(c) Ifb6r€ uDdevalop€dl or opeD ar€as of a site ara located
adljacent to public light-of-ray, tbe plan sbalI Provide for
overEtory boulevaral tloes. A uiainul of oD€ (1) tr66 for everyforty (ao) fe€t of froDtaga ia required.
Section 20-1183. Landscaping t{aterials.
(a) The landscaping rnaterials shal1 consist of the following:
(1) I{alls and fences. walls shalI be constructed ofnatural stone, brick or artificial naterials.
Fences shall be constructed of wood. Chain link
fencing niII be perroitted onty if covered with woodstrips or plant materiaL .
(2) Earth berns. Earth berrns shall be physical
barriers which block or screen the vie!, sinilar toa hedge, fence, or uall. Ilounds shall be
constructed with proper and adequate plant naterialto prevent erosion. A difference. in elevationbetrreen areas requiring screening does notconstitute an existing earth nound, and shall notbe considered as fulfilling any screening
equiprnent.
(3) Plants. All plant nateriafs shall be livingplants, artificial plants are prohibited and shall
roeet the follorring requirenents:
a) Deciduous trees. Shall be species having an
average mature crown spread of greater thanfifteen (15) feet and having trunk(s) which
Landscaping Ordinance
Ylay 22 , 1991
Page 9
7)
Landscaping Ordinance
lqay 22, 1991
Page 10
b)
c)
d)
can be roaintained with over five (5) feet ofclear rrood in areas which have visibilityrequirernents, except at vehicular use areaintersections where an eight (8) foot clearwood requirenent vill control. Trees havingan average nature spread of crorrn less thanfifteen (15) feet nay be substituted bygrouping of the sane so as to create theequivalent of a fifteen (15) foot crownspread. A nininun of ten (10) feet overallheight or nininun caliper (trunk dianeter,neasured six (5) inches above ground for treesup to four (4) inches caliper) of at least twoand one-halt (2'a) inches iEhediately afterplanting shall be required. Trees of speciesrrhose roots are known to cause danage topublic roadways or other public works shallnot be placed closer than fifteen (15) to suchpublic works, unless the tree root systen isconpletely contained nithin a barrier forwhich the nininun interior containingdirnensions shal1 be five (5) feet square andfive (5) feet deep and for which theconstruction requ5.rernents sha1I be four (4)inches thick, reinforced concrete.
Evergreen trees.niniDun of six (G)caliper of one andplanted.
Shrubs and hedges. Deciduous shrubs shall beat least thro (2) feet in average height whenplanted, and shall conforn to the opaiity andother -requirenents rithin four (4) ylars lfterplanting. Evergreen shrubs shall be at teasttwo (2) feet in averagre height and two (2)feet in dianeter.
Vines. Vines shall be at least twelve (12)inches high. at planting, and are generaLliused in conjunction with walls or feices_
Evergreen trees shaIl be afeet high with a nininunone-half ( 11) inches rrhen
crass or ground cover. Grass shalI be plantedin-species normally grown as pernanent 1awns,and- pay be sodded, plugged, sprigged, orseededi except in swales or ottrei areassubject to erosion, where solid sod, erosionreducing net, or suitable nulch sha1l be used,nurse-grass seed shal1 be sown for inmediate
e)
Landscaping ordinance
May 22, t99L
Page 11
protection until conplete coverage othen iseis achieved. crass sod shall be clean andfree of weeds and noxious pests or diseases.
cround cover such as organic materiaL shall beplanted in such a manner as to present afinished appearance and seventy-five (?5)percent of complete coverage after two (2')
conplete growing seasons, with a maxirourn offifteen (15) inches on center. In certain
cases, ground cover also roay consist of rocks,pebbles, sand and sinilar approved materiaLs.
f)RetailtDg ralla exceediag five (5) f€et i!height, lacluding rtage ralla uhichcuDulatlvsly orceeA fiv. (5) f€€t ir height,
DuBt be coDatruct€d La accordaaco yith plarE
prapared by a regiatered engineer or landscapearchlt€ct.
DIVISION 4. MAINTENANCE AND INSTALI,ATION.
Section 20-1184. Generally.
The oyaer, teDaDt, rad their respective ag.rts shalt be helajoiDtly aDal Beverally reapoasibl€ to lalDtair their property aDdl
landlscapiag ia a coadition presentirg a healthy, n€at aaal oralerly
appearaDce aDd free fro! r€fuse aail debrl.a. PlaDts aDal grouDd
cover rbich are required by aa approvod gitc or laDdscape plan aDalrbich have alied Bhall bo replaced uitbil tbree (3) loDths ofaotificatioas by tho city. Eoweyer, the tlne for coDpliaBce [ay be
exteDded up to aine (9, DoDths by the director of plaDDiDg iD orderto al1or for aeasonal or rsather coaditioas.
EUBDIVTSION ORDINIIICB
i€n?
(a) Exists*ng healthf trees and nat*ve vegetatiorrshal* be
i-,-- -...-^-I 3^- - : t^.t ^ --' -r- ^'!t,lg-E!urIg-..q-aPEIz9EEEEEqqr i€n?
nE, ex+st+ng Ereesey are r+tably@
Landscaping Ordinance
lqay 22, L99l
Page 12
eeve+opment=
eded or -6dded Ee peres:i€a=
s€ctioD 18-51. LaDdscapiDg aDat Ire6 pr€s6rvatioD RequireEeDts.
(a) nequired LaDdscapiDg/Resideatial Bubdivisiors
1) Each lot Bhall be provlded yltb a niainun of thr6e(3) trees. coDiferous trees nust be at least 6feet hlgh aad deciduoua tr€ea Dust be at 16ast Ztiaches ia dianeter at the tina of installatioD. Aaleast oDe (1, ateciduous tree [ust ba placedl ia thefrort yard a!ea. lfrees Dust be iDstalled prior torecel.ving a certificate of occupaDcy or fiaancialguarattees .eceptable to tbe city Dust be ptovidedto €Daur6 tinely installatioa. This requlr€DeDtlay b€ uaived by the clty vben the applilaDt caDdenoDstrrto that suitabls treea baviag a DiDiuundianeter of 6 iDches aDd I feet lbove tha grouldare located ia appropriate locatioua oa the lot.The yaiver Bhalt be Epplied for elch axisting treeagaihst each required tree on r oue-for-one 6asis.
l2') nII ar€as disturbed by aite grading alayorconstructioa nust be seealed or soatdeat inneittat'efyupon conpletion of yolk to nitinize erosioa. fneicertificates of occupaDcy rre requast€d prior toth€ satl.sfactioD of tbia reguireuent, finaaclalguaraatees rcc€ptabl€ to th6 city, [ust beprovided.
(3)No dead trees or uprooted stultrs aball reDaiB afterdev€lolrueat. OD-Bite burlal is not peml.ttedl.
f,aDdscapeal buff€rs aIouDd tha exterior of th6subdlLvisl.oD shall be requl.red by the city rheD theplat Ls contl.guous yith col*ctor or arterialatreets as definedl by tbo Conprehersiva pLaD andtyber. the plat is adjaceDt to uore inteasive laaduses. R€quireal bufferiDg ahall consiat of belEs
({)
Landscaping ordinance
Ylay 22, 199L
Page 13
anal laadscape uaterial consistiag of a mi: of trees
atral shrubs aDdyor tre€ preservatio! areas. fhere
appropriate, the city nay requLre aalditional lot
alepth and ar€a oD lotg coataining tha buffer sothat it caD bs adsquat€Iy accoE lodat€d aral the
honeE protected fron lnpacts. Lot deptb3 aDd aE€asnay b€ increased by 25* over soniag districtsta[dards. lth€ laDdscap€ platr nust be daveloped.with th6 prelininary aad final plat suDnittals forcity approval. Appropriate financial gruaraDtees
acceptalrle to the city shall be requiredl.
b) It iE the policy of the city to preserv€ Datural yooallaDa
areas throughout the city aatl with respect to specific aite
development to retain as far as practical, aubstantial tree stands
whicb can be incorporatetl irto the overall latrilscape pIaD.
c) I{o clearcuttiDg of yooalatrd areas shall b€ p€t itted
except as approved ia a subdivisioa, pltnrred unit d€velopDeDt orsite plar applicatioa
d) The follorirg staDdardls sbalI be used in evaluating
subdivisions andl site plaas:
1) Io the extent practical, site design ahall preserve
sigDificaDt soodlatra areas.
2l Shaale tregs of air (6, inches or Dore caliper atfour (a) feet iD height sLall be saveal unlegs it
can b6 denorstrated that tbere is !o other feaEible
way to alevelop the ait€.
3)Tbe city nay require tbe replaceDert of renovedtrees or a caliper i[ch per caliper iuch basis. At
DiDiDun, horever, replacemetrt trees sball coDfolDto th6 plaatlng requirenent Ldentifleit in Oivision
3 of tbis articl€.
r)DuriDg the tree renoval process, tr€es sball be
reEoveal Bo as to prevent bloctiag of public rights-of-rray or LaterferJ.ng vith overheaA utlllty J'f.nes.
s)fhe renoval of diseased and danag€d trees ispernissible.
e) Tree renoval not per.Eitteal unaler subdivision, planDed unit
aevelopmeut or site plau review shall trot be alloweil vithout theapproval of a tr€e removal pIaD by the city council. Tree reEovalplans EhaII include the content reguiremeuts as atictated in gection
2o-LL77 aad idteatify reasoDs for tree renovaMhe plau Bhall be
Landscaping Ordinance
lqay 22 , L99L
Page L4
subnitted three (3) seeks iD advaDce.of the city couDcil neetiDg atrhicb it is to be colsidered.
REPEAL SECTION 20-177, Irlaintenance of site and 1andscaping AND
SECTION 2O-LL9, Landscaping financiaL guarantee required.
CITY OF
CH[NH[EEEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
MEI'IORANDUIII
To: Planning Cornmission
FROM: PauL Krauss, Planning Director
DATE: February 26, l99L
SUBJ: Issue Paper/Iandscaping Ordinance
BACKGROUND
RecentLy there has been considerabLe discussion concerning theCityrs Landscaping Ordinance and improvenents that nay be nade toit. Improvenents that would result in a higher standard of
development in the City have been established as a goal by the
Planning Commi,ssion and sinilar sentiment has been echoed by atleast several nembers of the City Counci).. This report is intendedto give an overview of the purpose behind landscaping standards as
r4re1l as current ordinances, reviewing their positive aspects and
shortcornings. your response to this infornation will be given forconsideration for inclusion in any new ordinances that rrould be
developed.
GOALS
A discussion of the landscaping standards should begin lrith
agreernent on goals as to what is to be achieved by the ordinance.
The following goals are presented for discussion purposes. The
Planning Conmission is encouraged to redefine, add or subtract fronthis list as appropriate.
The landscaping standards should provide for aestheticplanting of sites and buildings. These plantings should bedesigned to add color, natural grow'th, as weII as anintroduction of the natural environment into sites.
Landscaping standards should provide for screening for visual
impacts associated uith a given use, including:
o truck loading areas,o trash storage,o parking Lots, interior 1ot areas and perirneters,
1
2
Landscaping Ordinance
February 26, 1-99L
Page 2
3
o large unadorned building nassing (reference the recentsite plan approval for l,lcclynnt s that used landscaping tomininize the visual iropact of high, blank walls,o garage doors associated with auto oriented uses, ando vehicular stacking areas for drive through uses
Buffering betueen high intensity and low intensity uses shouldbe outLined as to where this is required and whad constitutesa suitable buffer.
Buffering of a site for najor streets and highways relative tonoise and visual inpacts.
expectations are without unduly }initing designIn our opinion, there are a nunber ot
5 Boulevard or streetscape planting should be investigated.Boulevard and streetscape planting typically takes pface offsite and is often not the direct respbnsibilily of adeveloper. At the present tine, the City is working with
MnDoT on a Highway Beautificati.on program for the new slctionof Highway 5 through dolrntorrn Chanhassen.
tlature stands of trees and natural areas such as wetlandsshould be protected. protection of existing features andtheir enhancement where possible should be the prinary focuswith replacenent being considered only after altlrnati-ves arereviewed and disroissed.
7. Reforestation should be consj.dered where appropriate.
ORDINANCE FORMAT
The following constitutes our understanding of rrhat needs to beincorporated into an effective Iandscaping ord j.nance. Theseguidelines, ptus any. others proposed by lhe-flanning Commission,should be used to critically review any ordinance am;ndments thaiwe wish to consider.
The ordinance should be conprehensive covering all sorts ofdeveLopments. At the present tine, the ordinan6e is effectiveonJ'y. under site plan reviews. Regulations affectingsubdivisions are handled elsewhere in the ordinance ana ii5less effective. p.U.D. rs do not have any specificrequirements.
6
2. The ordinance should provide anple guidance as to nhat -theCityrs designflexibility.
1
landscaping ordinances that becone so regj.mented in theirapproach to defining landscaping standardJ that you wind uDwith a cookie cutter approach to Landscaping desigri. Itteal1y,
CURRENT LANDSCAPING REOUIREMENTS
DTVISION 1. GENERALLY
Section 2o-L776. Intent, scope and conpJ, iance.
(a) The intent of this article is to improve the appearanceof vehicular use areas and property abutting public rights-of-nay;to require buffering betveen nonconpatible land usesi and toprotect, preserve and promote the aesthetic appeal, character andvalue of the surrounding neighborhoods i to pronote public heaLth
and safety through the reduction of noise pollution, air pollution,visual pollution and g1are.
(b) This article does not apply to single fanily detached
residences.
(c) No new site development, building, structure or vehicular
use area is allowed, unless landscaping is provided as reguired inthis article.
(d) No property lines shaLl be altered no shall any building,structure or vehicular use area be expanded, unless the ninimunlandscaping required by the provisions of this articLe is providedfor the entire property.
Landscaping Ordinance
February 26, l99l.
Page 3
the ordinance rrould allow a good designer to reflect the
denands of the site and the setting it is placed in.
3. llininum standards should be provided to ensure that a baseline
feveL of guality is achieved.
4. The ordinance should be relatively easy to interpret andenforce. There are a nunber of ordinances that have beendrafted that pronote 'high quality design but are so conpJ.exthat only a landscape architect can reliably 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 example, an ordinance mayrequire rr808 opacitylr in a landscape screen between a parkinglot and a residential site. In ny opinion, this is alnost
inpossible to enforce since it is difficult to define what 808opacity actually neans and then get a reliable interpretationof this out in the field.
The following is a revie!, of the various landscaping requirements
contained in our current ordinances. Iandscaping standards are
found in several different portions of the ordinance.
Article XXV, IJaDdlscaping aDdl Tres ReEoval.
Landscaping Ordinance
February 26t 199L
Page 4
COl.lIrlENT :The intent sectj.on is good to have although quitepossibly we woul.d consider expansions to better define theCity's purpose in landscaping. The exclusion of single family
development is noteworthy. Single fanily development does notundergo site plan review, therefore, the only effectiveordinance that comes into play is the Subdivision ordinance,No. 1,8. This will be coDmented upon later. We aLso note thatdue to the language of the current pUD ordinance, puDrs arealso exenpt fron provisions of the Landscaping Code.
a
Section 2O-L177. Plan Subnission and approval .
The- property owner or developer shalt prepare a landscape pl"anfor review by the city. The city sha1l apply the fotlo;ingconditions in approval or disapproving the plan:
(1) The contents of the plan shall incl.ude the following:
Plot pIan, drawn to an easily readable sca1e,showing and labe11ing by nane and dinensions, allexisting and proposed property Iines, easenents,buildings, and other structures, vehicular useareas (including parking stalIs, driveways, serviceareas, square footage), water outlets and 1andscapenaterial (including botanical nane and conmon nane,installation size, on center pl.anting dimensionswhere applicabLe, and quantities for all plantsused).
b
c
I\pica1 elevations and/or cross sections as nay berequired.
Title block with the pertinent names and addressed(property orrner, person draning pIan, and personinstaLling landscape naterial), scale date, northarrow (generally orient plan so that north is totop of plan), and zoning district.
d Existing landscape naterial shallrequired plan and any naterialcondition may be used to satisfywhole or in part.
be shown on thein satisfactorythis article in
-(2) _ where lanrr<caping is requirld, no building pernit shal1be issued untiL the required landscaping pl ain has beensubmitted and.approved, and no certificate of 6ccupancy sha1Ibe issued until the landscaping is conpleted as cirtii:.ea lVan on-site inspection by the buifding inspector, unLess i
Landscaping ordinance
february 26, L99L
Page 5
perfornance bond, or irrevocable letter of credit from a
banking institution, has been paid
(3) If necessary, the city may require a letter of credit toinsure proper installation of landscape naterial as with
complete cost of all work certified by landscape contractor,
with the bond amount to include the actual cost plus ten (10)percent. The bond shaI1 be released upon satisfactory.
conpletion of the work as deternined by the city.
(4) where unusual site conditions exist where strict
enforcement of the provisions of this article lrould cause a
hardship or practi.cal difficutty, the planning cornrnission andcity council may waive the requirements as part of the siteplan rev j,ew process.
cot{UENT: Plan subnittal guidelines nay need to be fleshed out
sornewhat to give staff and the Planning Conmission sufficienthaterial to revielr. Iten #3 pertaining to a letter of credit
has been superseded by section 20-119 approved by the'Planning
Commission and city Council Last year.
Section 20-1178. Landscaping for service structure.
(a) Any service structure sha1l be screened whenever locatedin any residential, conmercial or industrial zone (except RR and
RsF zones). Structures nay be grouped together, however, screeningheight reguirenents will be based upon the tallest of the
structures.
(b) A continuous planting, hedge, fence, waII or earth noundsha1l enclose any service structure on all sides unless such
structure nust be frequently noved, in rhich case screening on all
but one (1) side is required. The average height of the screening
rnaterial sha1l be one (1) foot Dore than the height of the enclosedstructure, but shall not be reguired to exceed eight (8) feet inheight. whenever a service structure is located next to a buildingwaII, perineter landscaping material, or vehicular use area
landscaping rnaterial , such talls or screening material nay fulfill
the screening requirement for that side of the servj.ce structure ifthat rralL or screening naterial is of an average height sufficientto meet the height requirenent set out in this section. Whenever
service structures are screened by plant material, such naterial
may count tohrards the fulfilltnent of required interior or perineter
landscaping. No interior landscaping shaI1 be required vithin an
area screened for service structures.
Landscaping ordinance
February 26, 199!
Page 6
(c) Ithenever screening material is placed around any trash
disposal unit or waste cofLection unit nhich is enptied or removed
nechanically on a regularly occurring basis, a curb to contain the
placement of the container shall be provided within the screeningnaterial on those sides lrhere there is such material. The curbingshal1 be a least one (1) foot from the naterial and shall be
designed to prevent possible danage to the screening when the
container is enptied.
COlttlENr: This section is a good example of a highly detailed
standard that is specifically designed to deal with one issue,in this case, service structures. This type of standard
should also be developed for each of the goal statementsidentified in the beginning of this report. However, I notethat frorn a design standpoint, there does not appear to be
much flexibility in terns of design creativity in thissection.
Section 20-1779. Tree removal regulations.
(a) ft is the policy of the city to preserve natural uoodlandareas throughout the city and rrith respect to specific site
development to retain as far as practical , substantial tree standswhich can be incorporated into the overall landscape pIan.
(b) No clearcutting of woodland areas shall be permitted
except as approved in a subdivisJ.on, planned unit developnent orsite plan appl ication.
(c) The following standards shall be used in evaluatingsubdivisions and site plans:
(1) To the extent practical, site design shal1 preservesignlficant woodland areas.
(2) Shade trees of six (6) inches or Dore caliper sha11be saved unless it can be demonstrated that ttrereis no other feasible rray to develop the site.
(3) The city nay require the replacenent of removedtrees on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis. Atninimum, horrever, replacement trees shall confornto the planting requirement identified in division4 of this article.
(4) During the tree removal process, trees shall beremoved so as to prevent blocking of public rights-
Landscaping Ordj.nance
February 26, 1,99L
Page 7
of-way or interfering with overhead utility 1ines.
(5) The removal of diseased and danaged trees ispernissible.
(d) Tree renoval not pernitted under subdivision, plannedunit developnent or site plan review shall not be allolred withoutthe approval of a tree renoval plan by the city council. Treerernoval plans shaII include the content requirenents as dictated inSection 20-1J.77 and identify reasons for tree renoval The planshalL be subnitted three (3) weeks j.n advance of the city councilat which it is to be considered.
COUIIENT: This section is very good fron an intent standpointalthough it needs to be significantly iurproved and revanpLd tobecone truly effective. AIso note the exclusion granted tosingle .and tvro farnily lots of record. As the planning
Commission is aware, staff is working with the DNR on anexperinental program relative to identification of elements ofthe urban forest warranting protection as weII as areforestation p1an. This section should probably be revisedbased upon the outcone of this program.
DTVISToN 2. PERII.IETER LANDSCAPING REeUTREUENTS
Section 20-L191. Generally.
. (a) Where parking areas are not entirely screened visually byan intervening building or structure fron any abutting right-61-way, there shall be provided landscaping between such area and suchright-of-way as follows:
(1) A strip of land at least ten (10) feet in depth locatedbetween the abutting right-of-way and the vehicular usearea which shal1 be landscaped to include an average ofone (1) tree for each forth (40) Iinear feet or fractionthereof. Such trees shall be located between theabutting right-of-way and the vehicular use areas.
(21 fn addition, a hedge, taII, berm, or other opaque durablelandscape barrier of at least two (2) feet in heightshall be placed along the entire length of the vehicularuse area. If such opaque durable barrier is of nonlivingnaterj,al , a shrub or vine shall be planted along thestreet side of said barrier and be planted in such amanner to break up the expanse of the waII. A tlro-footbern may be usedi however, additional landscaping atfeast one (1) foot in height at tine of planting shall be
Landscaping ordinance
February 26, L99L
Page 8
installed. The rernainder of the required landscape areasshaIl be landscaped with grass, gtround cover, or other
landscape treatnent.
(b) This division applies to perineter landscaping.
COI{UENT: This section deals specifically with landscaping
around the perineter of parking lots and frou an intentstandpoint, this is an acceptable thing to do. However, the
standard of 1 tree per 40 linear feet is frankly, archaic and
does a disservice to the design standards which already existin the city and which are 1ike1y to be irnproved as a result ofthis analysis. In addition, the standard berm around theparking Lot does not lend a large anount of creativity. We donote, however, that this standard has been nodified someuhatby newly adopted regTulations using a performance standard to
a1Iow the property owrer to achieve reductions in parking lot
setbacks.
One of the nost noteworthy things about this and relatedsections is that there is a complete lack of mininum
landscaping standards for the site itself. In other tords,there is no ninimum amount of planting that nust be done on agiven site which Leaves staff in a position of using sectionssuch as this to in essence, coerce a legitinate landscapingplan out of a developer. Staff can think of several ways toaddress this. One technique that I have used in the past isto establish a nininurn landscaping budget that utilizes afornula of linking project developnent costs to miniroun
landscaping value. The table used in the ![innetonka Ordinanceis provided belo!, as an appendix.
PROJECT VAIJUE
( Including building construction,site preparation, and site
inprovenents)
Below S1, 000, OOO
s].,000,001 - $2,000,000
2t
$20,000 + 18 of
Proj ect Va1ue, inexcess of
91, 000, o00
S3o,ooo + 0.75tof Pro j ect
I,IINI}fi'}I I.INDSCAPE
VALUE
$2,00o,001 - $3 , 000, ooo
Value in excessof $3,000,000
$3,00o,001 - $4,000,000 937,500 + 0.25tof Project
i.n excess
,000, ooo
over $4,000,000 1t
Section 2o-t192, Required landscaping adjacent to interior propertylines, Section 20-1193, Conbining with easements, and section 20-
l,l-94, Existing landscape naterial.
(a) Where parking areas abut property zoned or, in fact, usedprirnarily for residential or institutional purposes, that portion
of such area not entirely screened visually by an located structureor existing conforning buffer fron an abutting property, thereshall be provided a landscaped buffer which should be naintained
and replaced as needed. such landscaped buffer shaI1 consist of
plant naterial , waII or other durable barrier at least six (5) feetin height neasured fron the nedian elevation of the parking area
closest to the conmon lot line, and be located between the conmon
1ot line and the off-street parking areas or other vehicular use
area exposed to the abutting property. Fences shall be constructed
according to the standards in Section 20-1018.
couuENT: Again, I believe the intent is good but that better
nininum standards offering design flexibility are warranted.
DIVISION 3. INTERIOR INNDSCAPING TOR VEHICI'IAR USE AREAS
Section 20-1211. GeneralLy.
(a) Any open vehicular use are (excluding loading, unloading,
and storage areas in IOP and BG Districts) containing nore than six
thousand (5,000) square feet of area, or trrenty (20) or morevehicular parking spaces, shatl provide interior landscaping in
accordance rith this division in addition to xperineterrl
landscaping. Interior landscaping may be peninsular or island
types.
(b)
areas .
rhis divislon applies to interior landscaping of such
valueof $3
section 20-1212. Landscape area.
Landscaping Ordinance
February 26, !991
Page 9
DMSION 4. IANDSC,APING.ITiATERIAIS, ETC.
Section 2o-L23L, cenerally.
(a) The landscaping naterials shall consist of the following:
(a) For each one hundred (100) square feet, or f,ractionthereof, of vehicular use area, five (5) square feet of Landscapedarea sha1l be provided.
(b) The nininum landscape area pernitted shall be sixty-four(64) square feet, with a four foot nininum dinension to all-treesfron edge of pavenent where vehicles overhang.
(c) In order to encourage the required landscape areas to beproperl,y dispersed, no required landscape area shall -be larger thanthree hundred fifty (350) square feet in vehicular use areas underthirty thousand (3O,OOO) square feet. In both cases, the Leastdinension of any required area shall be four-foot roininurn dinensionto all trees fron edge of pavement where vehicles overhang.Landscape areas J.arger than above are pernitted as Long as theadditional areas are in excess of the required ninin'rn.
Section 2O-\2L3 . Irlinirnun trees .
A ninimum of one (1) tree shall be required for each twohundred fifty (250) square feet or fraction thereof, of reguiredlandscape area. Trees shalI have a clear trunk of at least- five(5) feet above the ground, and the remaining area sha1l belandscaped nith shrubs, or ground cover, not to exceed two (2) feetin height.
Section 2o-:-2L4. Vehicle overhang.
Parked vehicles nay hang over the interior landscape area nonore than two and one-half (2t) feet, as long as a concreie curb isprovided to ensure no greater overhang o-r penetration of thelandscaped area.
Coto.tENT: In general, I believe that this is a very goodsecti.on and deals vith a scenario that Dany ordinances €end tooverLook. Large expanses of blacktop are not only unsightly,they actually change weather conditions in th-e iDD;diat;vicinity. In addition, large unbroken expanses ot livenentcreate a Dore difficult drainage problen. - This seciion notonly establishes the intent but also nininun standards in whatare generally effective ways.
Landscaping Ordinance
February 26, l99l
Page 10
Landscaping Ordinance
February 25, L99l
Page 11.
(1) Walls and fences. Wa1ls shall be constructed ofnatural stone, brick or artificial materials.
Fences shall be constructed of wood. Chain link
fencing wil.l be pemitted only if covered with woodstrips or plant naterial .
(2) Earth mounds. Earth mounds 6ha11 be physical
barriers which block or screen the view sinilar to.a hedge, f ence, or wall . l,founds sha1l be
constructed with proper and adequate plant rnaterialto prevent erosion. A difference in elevationbethreen areas requiring screening does notconstitute an existing earth mound, and sha1l notbe considered as fulfilling any screening
equiprnent.
(3) Pfants. All plant materials shall be livingplants, artificial plants are prohibited and shall
neet the following requirements:
(a) Quality. Plant naterials used in confornancewith provision of this division sha1l conformto the standards of the American Associationof Nurser)men and shall have passed any
inspections required under state regulations.
(b) Deciduous trees. shall be species having an
average mature crown spread of greater thanfifteen (15) feet and having trunk(s) .which
can be maintained with over five (5) feet ofclear uood in areas rrhich have visibilityrequirenents, except at vehicular use areaintersections rrhere an eight (8) foot clear
wood requirenent viII control . Trees havingan average nature spread of crovn less thanfifteen (15) feet nay be substituted bygrouping of the same so as to create theequivalent of a fifteen (15) foot crownspread. A nininun of ten (10) feet overallheight or ninimum caliper (trunk dianeter,
Deasured six (6) inches above ground for trees
up to four (4) inches caliper) of at least trroand one-half (2\) inches irnrnediately afterplanting shall be required. Trees of species
whose roots are knolrn to cause danage topublic roadways or other pulrlic works sha1Inot be placed closer than fifteen (15) to suchpublic works, unless the tree root systen isconpletely contained within a barrier forwhich the mininum interior containing
dinensions shalt be five (5) feet squarefive (5) feet deep and for whichconstruction requirenents sha1l be fourinches thick, reinforced concrete.
and
the
(4)
(c) Evergreen trees.
ninimuro of six (6)caliper of one and
pI anted.
Evergreen trees shal,l be afeet high with a nininumone-half ( 11) inches when
(d) Shrubs and hedges. Deciduous shrubs shall beat least trro (2) feet in average height rhenplanted, and shall conform to the opacity andother requirenents within four (4) years afterplanting. Evergreen shrubs shall Ee at leasttwo (2) feet in average height and two (2)feet in dianeter.
(e) Vines. Vines shalL be at least tweLve (12)inches high. at plantj.ng, and are generiffyused in conjunction with lral,Is or fences.
(f) crass or ground cover. crass shall be plantedin species nonoalty grown as pernanent lawns,and nay be sodded, plugged, sprigged, orseededi except in swales or other areassubject to erosion, where solid sod, erosionreducing net, or suitable nulch shall be used,nurse-grass seed shal1 be sown for irnhediateprotection until conplete coverage otherrriseis achieved. crass sod shall b-e clean andfree of weeds and noxious pests or dj.seases.Ground cover such as organic uaterial shall beplanted in such a manner as to present afinished ,appearance and seventy-five (75)percent of conplete coverage after two (Z)conplete groving seasons, with a naxiroum -oi
fifteen (15) inches on center. In certaincases, ground cover also nay consist of rocks,pebbles, sand and siroilar approved naterials.
Coul,lENT: I will be honest to state that while this sectionappears to be weLl thought out, that I do not claim to be alandscape architect and quite possibly the standards should bere-examined by.an appropriate profeslional. ttre requirenentfor having Dinimum G foot height of evergreen tree! and 2Linch caliper for deciduous tiees is sta-ndard and unifoilacross the Twin Citiesr cornrnunities.
Landscaping Ordinance
February 26, L99L
Page 12
Landscaping ordinance
February 26, 1-99L
Page 13
Section 2O-f232. aintenarice and installation.
Col,U,lENT: This section is fairly good
superseded by better language locatedsection, Section 2O-1t7.
but has been since
under the site plan
section 20-1233. Required opacity.
cot0{ENT: This is a perfect exanple of an ordinance that isvirtually inpossible to understand, rnuch Less enforce. Notonly does it differentiate between 5Ot and 7Ot opacity atdifferent tines of the year, but it also requires that oneproject forward four years of growing tine to undertake theanalysis.
Section 20-1234. Curbing.
COI,OIENT: This section is fine without change.
Section 2O-LL45. Landscaping and screening.
QQUUENT: This section, nhich is located in the Parking
Standards, requires that all berths (loading areas) requirescreening. As such, it is a good concept but is poorlydrafted. It should also deal with outdoor storage in asirnilar manner.
COUI.{EIT: These sections are new and we believe them to be
good fron a conceptual point of view. Setbacks for parkingLots are established using a perforDance tlrpe of standard,i.e. the better the buffering, the smaLler the setback. Inaddition, the creation of buffer yards around incornpatible
Land uses, as illustrated in the conprehensive Plan, will. bea najor long tenn benefit for the city.
Section 20-695, 2O-7L5, 20-735, 20-755, 20-774 and 20-815, Parking
Setbacks and Buffer Yards.
Landscaping Ordinance
February 26, l99l
Page 14
Section 2o-L17. Maintenance of site and landscaping.
CoUUENT: This was a section added by staff to the site planordinance last year that nore specifically requires thernaintenance of all landscaping in accordance nj.th site planapprovals.
Section 2O-1L8. Retaining wa1ls.
COIIUENr : This section providesbuilding code to support theretaining waIIs.
a necessary tie in with theuse of safe and effective
section 20-11-9. Landscaping financiat guarantee reguired.
COU}lEtIr: This section was instituted by staff ].ast year tomore specifically require. the deposit of a landscape guiranteenith each site-plan. prior to the drafting of tliis-section,no such reguirenent existed and enforaenent was oftenundertaken on a hit and miss basis.
Section 18-61. Tree removal and conservation of vegetation.
CoUUENT: This section is the only reference to tree renovaland landscaping contained within the Subdivision Ordj.nance.As such, it is the. only regulation that is applied to singlefanily developnent. staff believes that -i,his is higf,Iyinadequate and needs to be addressed in a more signifi6aninanner.
SU}IMARY
staff is seeking direction fron the planning conmission on how toproceed rrith developDent of a revised landscaping ordinance. your
comments on the tnaterial outlined above are eisentiat if we are tobe able to prepare a code revision that adequately neets yourneeds.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COM].IISSION
REGULAR MEETING
HAY 15, 199L
Cha j r ma l.r Enrmi ng:.
I{EHBERS PRESENT :Tim ErharL, Ladd Conrad, Annette Ellson, Steve Emmings,.Brian Batzli, Jeff Farmakes and Joan Ahrens
STAFF P T:Pau I Krauss, Plarrni ng Director; Jo Ann OLsen, Senior
I nspectorPlanner and Steve Kirchman, Building
IC HEARING:
CONDI T I ONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A STORAGE SHED TO BE LOCATED
called the meeting to order al 7i37 p.n
].IITHIN THE 75 FOOT SHORELAND SETBACK FOR PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT
D1O2 SAN YHO OK ROAD PETER HOSCATELLI .
Jo Arrn Olsen presented the staff report on this item.
Emmings: t^Jhat is the status of the adoption of the new Shoreland
Ordinancel
Olsen: l^le've gotten our notification that we have to do it. I'm going to
be me:Ling with CeiI next month to get the process initiated.
Emmi ngs: t^ihat do you have to do?
Olsen: [^le have to pretty much review a]l the lake designations to stilI
make sure if it's a recreational or environmental . Then we go through achecklisL of uhat our ordinance currently, what we have to change, Just go
througlli the sl-rorel.and regulalions and whether or not ble 6gree to them and
charrge whatever we uJant to change.
Emmi. ngs: l,^lasn'L Lhere something abouL us having to have it done by a
cel ta i n t i me?
olsen: 2 years. [^le have until Januayy of 7993.
Emmings: Oh, okay. t^Jhen do we expect to get iL done?
Olsen: tjhen do we expect to?
Emmings: Yeah.
olsen: HeII I was hoping !o do it this summer. But next year, I would not
count on it being completed until next year.
Batzli: Until the summer of 1992?
Olsen: Yes.
Emmings: 5o, aLright. This is a public hearing. If the applicant is
here, this urould be an opportuniLy to telI us anything additional .
Peter Moscatelli: f'm here but I don't really have anything additional .
I
PIannin3 Commission
May 15, 1997 - Page
Meet i ng
2
Enrmings: AIright. Are there any other members of the public here that
r^ianL iii ; J,lr.:.-s thernselves to this application? Is there a motion to close
t lre pLrL.): r he :r'ir'gl
Erhart moved, Batzli seconded to close the public hearing- All voted infavor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed-
Erhart: t^llry do h,e restrict water suppLy? lJhat dif ference does it make?Is it- the app.Iicant's requesL or staff 's request to restrict the water-..?
Olsen: You mean for habitation?
Erhart: No. I understand the habitation. I,m just saying trhy not, whycan't he have a water hose? f mean a guy can put a hydrant anyplace outthere - A 9r.r/ could put an underground sprinkler system in. t^lhat,s thereason for t hat?
Olserr: I think that's the wordage that the DNR uses for the restriction soI don't- k noi,,r why iL couldn't have water supply. I think it was more forhabitatic,n- For clearri rr9 fish or something.
Erhart: Oh yeah. I mean clearly. Everybody. . .habitation. That's my onlycomment...that just seemed, I don't knour why Lhat's in there_
Emmings: And along the same lines you know, there's a lot of our lakes,the sewer goes between the house and the lakeshore. It,d be very easy, ifyou wanted to bring the waler in too and uater's actually harder to get in.BuL having a toilet or something in there...
Erhart: You mean your concern someone uould use it for human habitaLion?
Emmings: r don't really care but rm sure that's what the DNR's coricernedabout.
Erhart: r just think sometimes it's usefuL for accessory buildings to havea hydrant fc-,r like putting out lawn sprinklers and stuff. I'm just
wonder i n9 why .
Emmings: Or just gardening or pottine or whatever.
Conrad: Was the resident to the north senL a notification? Or to the
uJest ?
oLsen: Right. Everyone within 5oo feet... r knoN that even Mr. pfankuchor Frost was in. fs he to lhe uest of you?
Peter Hoscatelli: He's to the east
Olsen: The resident to Lhe brest, they were notified.
Peter MoscateLli: There's actually not a resident.
Planning Commission
May 15, L997 - Pase
Conra,J: Is that- a
Peter Moscatelli:
Conrad: LJhaL is .
That 's our current
Olsen: For size?
Peter Moscatelli: No, notdiretion so t'hat lot wouldthe lake- - -
all. Becausethe other uay
MeeL i ng
vacant?
It 's a vacant lot.
r standard for height on a building? It says 10 feet.standard. tlhat is the standard for size?
Co nr aci : Yeah -
Olsen: tJell now the ordinance, it can't be Iike 1,OOO square feet.
Corrrad: Because thaL's a back, that has nothing to do taith a lakeordinance? That's really just a residential lot ordinance?
OIsen: Righl . That's our accessory structure -
Conr acj: Accessory Structure.
olsenr t^lh-r-'3 the height of the building thaL you're puLting up?
Peter Moscatelli: Oh, well. It would be a maximum about 7 feel. - . I'l.I
keep it as short- as possible because it's kind of down, tucked into thehill so t lre visibility from my house to the lake over it.
Conrad: And what do you think if somebody built to the west of you, dothjnl it's goins to be, is it obstructing any visual line of sight that
can see?
you
you
at
be
Lhe
and
]n
is
la ke is off
the bui.Lding
the wester n
back from
Conraclr I guess I'm uncomfortable with the ordinance. I don't know wherestaff is coming from in lerms of the next ordinance that we take a look atbut Lhe 10 feet in height in my mind is not acceptable. This has nothingto do wilh the applicant right nour. That's not an acceptable height to me.
olsen: .,.hish?
Conracl : Yes, absolutely. 1O feet is as high as this ceiling. On the lakeside, I just can't imagine. If my neighbor put up a 10 foot building,that's going to block my, that's going to be offensive. [.,e're not dea]ingwith a back yard. [.le're dealing wiLh Lhe lake side which many people treatas a front yard. It's a whole different mentality here. The 75 foot
setback change to 50, that doesn't bother me Loo much because,environmenLally thaL doesn't bother me. There's enough screening andthings like Lhat? In 50 fee! you can do a lot so I'm comfortable withthat. I'm not comfortable that the new ordinance or hherever hre're goingis taking care of neighbors and that's uJhy I tras asking if the neighbors
were in fact notified? I lhink in this particu.Lar, in a 25O foot standard,
Planning Commission
May 15, 1997 - Page
Meet i ng
4
again that's a big building in somebody's fronL yard. t,ell on the lake andif we'r.: talking boa! houses, I'm not sure what r,le're talking about. I'mreally kind of uncomfortable with maybe what I see. The staff report issaying our new standards are going to be. I think we need to look at them -I thinl. we need loxe people inpuL to teII us r.lhether they're right or wrongand obviously we'll go throush a public hearing but I think we should makean effort, and I know Jo Ann you will, to make sure the lake associationsare informed. ThaL aside, the applicant and uhat they,re asking for, urhathe's asLing for tonight, I'm comfortable with. I just don't know that, Iguess I'm only uncomfortable with am I setting a precedent? Is there anyprecedent s€.Lting, you knour we haven't gone through a public hearing andwe're saying 50 feet is okay because that's what our new standard is goingto be and f 'flr not sure yet. f haven't had the input.
ELlson: Something new proposed?
Conrad: Ri€,h1 . And so I'm trying to justify it basedsure of but I do feel trrat the applicant's proposal iswhat I can see-
on somethi ng I'm
accepLable based
not
on
I
to
AS
EIIson: f agree that it ]ooks fine. I did u,an! to tell peter thoush.was greetecj at the curb by your nice growling dog so I didn,t really get
see the back yard. After talking with him, the dog kind of liked me butI took a couple mcre sLeps he started growling so I didn,t even comecLoser.
Batzli; Sam? Is
Peter l'loscateIIi:
Batzli:Okay. I
Yeah, heEIIson:with it.
t here a
Yeah.
called
didn't
dog house back there with Sam on it?
Lhe dog the wrong name. Apologize for me.
quite like redheads but I don't have a problem
Batzli: Is that about
dog house is?
where the structure is going to go? Back where Lhe
Peter Hoscatelli : Yeah.
Batzli: Because really then the vacant lot to Lhe t,est is it? That,sreally up a slope in addition to the dog house being down a slope so Iguess I don't have a problem with this particular location.
Peter Hoscatelli: rf r could comment on the location of the structure. rtwould tend to obscure the vieo of the rake from my house more than anywhereso I'm kind of taking on every effort to minimize that. To be as short aspossible and to be tucked into the hi]l as much as possible.
Batzli: r just had a comment on the first condition. r assume t^rhen ure saythat it's made of cedar siding, that we're talking about it has an exteriorof cedar sidi n9?
Plenni ng Commission Heet i ng
May l:, , 79.:7 - Page 5
OIsen: Ri ght .
OIserr; Right .
Batzli: And in number 4 Jo Ann. Does that mean they have Lo maintainvegetation between the accessory structure and Lotus Lake and the accessorystructure and the neighboring properties? In other Nords, it's between theuater oriented accessory structure and both Lotus Lake and neighboringproperties.
but
not
OIsen: tlith the Iake,
Batzli: I guess just
goe-, dourn there r ight
BatzIi: That's okay?
vegetat ion alc,und the
Ahrerr:-: I tl-rink the
aI t hough I'm kind of
accessory str ucture .
lake.
rea.Lly hypertechnical
now so obviously it's
r j ght .
You're just talking
structure?
f mean there's a path that
Iike contiguous.
about you need some natural
Olsen: .r-rnd to maintain what's there. Maintain that screen.
Batzli: That's aIl I have.
Farmakes: I think it's in an unobtrusive spot. I don't see wheregoing to bothcr any line of sight or anybody's visual sight to theI have no objections to this.
iilsIake and
siLe is
cur i ousIt just
fine too. I don't have any probj.em with it
as to t^rhy we call this a water oriented
seems like it's a storage shed located near a
olsen:
of this of the mai n purposes
Ahrens: But it doesn't have to be used for a uater accessory structure?
OIsen: No.
Ahrens: It doesn't have to be used for.
Olsen: No. It can be used for others.
Ahrens: ...anything that says they have to use it for any specific
PUr POSe?
O]sen: No. He can still put his lawnmower in there.
Ahrens: Uhy is it called uater orienLed then?
O]serr : Again I'm jus! starting to, that's the terminology used in the DNRregulations currently and the new one u,here it is primarily for the boataccessories. Motors, things like that that need to be closer to the lake
That's essentially what it was. But also one
was for his canoes and paddles and boats.
Planning Comm i ssion
May 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
(,
so people. clorr 't have to haul it as far. That's one of the reasons thatthey'v: a11or,l.-'J excepLions inLo the 75 foot setback.
Ahrens: But, iL doesn't really have to be used for that?
Olsen: No .
Ahrens: Somethi ng seems odd Lhere to me. I don't know, It seems Iike ifit's not going to be required to be used for water oriented activities, whyshorrld we give any special treatment as to how close it is to the lake?
The setbac k .
Batzli: I think the people who live on the ]ake would say that anythingbuiIL beLween the house, the standard kind of Iine of the houses areinbetweerr the lake and should be considered that so you don't end up withthings on the ]ake. You need to have that setback whether it,s going Lo be
or jerrted for u,rater uses or just a backyard tool shed.
Ahren:: I understand that but I'm wondering why ure call iL someLhing if iLdoe:r''t l-av€. to be used for that purpose.
Batzlii Because it gives it more restriction if you call it that.
4,hrens: Hor.J?
BaLzIi: Because then it needs to have a larger setback. I mean if youjust callecJ it a tooL shed and you didn't consider thaL you were on theIake, then yc,u just need what? A 5 foot, 10 foot setback off the back lotline:
Emnrings: No. Ne, t,ecause you can't build a structure within 75 feet ofthe lake- To have a structure in that area it must be either a boat houseor a urater oriented accessory structure. You can't put the 1,OOO foot.
01sen: Garage .
Emmings: Yeah, or the sLorage building within 75 feeL of the lake. BuLyou can build something you caII, so you change the name a little bit. Ithink as a matter of fact Joan, I have one of these, I have a r,rater
or iented.
Ahrens: t^lhat 's i n your shed?
Emmings: A11 the inflatables LhaL you blow up for the kids Lo play on.The paddles and the knee boards and the ski equipment and it would -be, lifewould be pure hell for me if I didn't have it I can tell you.
Ahrens: Nel I , that lrras my point.
Emmings: BuL I think as a matter of fact people, at Ieast with myneighbors and things, the stuff like ]awn mourers and aII the stuff you
norma] Iy put in a storage shed stays away from the lake side and Lhe sLuff
PIa nni n: Corninission
May 15, 1997 - Page
Meet- i ng
7
noticing that the appl icant said it u,as going to be
Iatrn equipment. That's aII I have.
setting a precedent on this case?
that ,3e:ts dou.Ln there by Lhe shore is, it's either picnic stuff or directly
associat.-'-l with t.h,? lake somehow .
Ahrens: I was just
used for storage of
Emmj.rrgs; clright. The only thing I've got is in number 4. Jt seems to methat the app].icant should be required to screen this by vegetation. Notjust maintain by vegeLation. But other than that, I don't really have aproblem with this. Is there any further discussion?
Conra.i:Are Ne
I don 't
Are we
O l-r no -
Olsen:bel i eve so.
I'm stilI usins
Co nr ad;prejudici ng the new
the
ordi nance in any way?
same criteria thaL we've dealt before
Emmings: Llnder the new ordinance thjs r^rould be a permitted use if we adoptit the wal it is. Here it's a conditional use permit and we're going underthe c,1d, f guess we're going under the old ordinance. The only question
is, thct I suppose you could raise would be, if we don't urant these thingsat all and if we're goi.ng to make a stricter standard than the new
ordinance thal's coming out, do ue uant to apply thaL in this case? Maybethat's the same question you're asking.
olsen:
wit h.
Conrad:
75 feet,
Ahrens; But if we don't know what the
Emmings: It's hard to apply a standard
standard is,
you haven't
how
made
only
can ure apply it?
AII you can do is what ure're doing and the
vet.
thing ure've got is
Batzli: f move that the Planning Commission recommends approval ofconditional use permit *91-3 as shoun on the plans dated Hay 8, 1991 withthe f ollor.ring conditions. Condition 1!o read, the structure musl have anexterior of cedar siding and a roof of cedar shakes and be painted asimilar color as the principal structure. Number 2 and 3 as in the staff
report - Number 4 to read, the applicant must screen the water orientedaccessory. NoN wait a minute. tJhat did you have for that?
Emmings: It doesn't make sense the way f have it.
Batzli : Alright. The applicanL musL
bett'teen the wat-er oriented accessory
neighboring properties.
maintain for the purpose
structure and both Lolus
of screeni ng
Lake and
Ahrens: HouJ abouL for the purpose of screening? VegeLation for thepurpose of screening.
Planning Commission
May 15 , 7e'-)L - Page
l'4eet i n9
a
Is there a second?Emm i r,aj.:
rl l- ...3econd.
Emmings: Any discussion?
Batzli moved, ElIson seconded that the Planning Commission
approval of Conditional Use Permit *91-3 as shown on plans
1991 u,ith the follourins conditions:
recommend
dated May 8,
The st-ructure must have an exterior of cedar siding
shake= and painted a similar color as Lhe principal
The slruc'ture rTray rrot be used for human habitation
water suppl)- or sewage treatment facilities.
The applicant must maintain for the
a.rater or iented accessory structureproperties.
and a roof of cedar
structure.
and may not contain
3, The structure may not exceed a height of 10.feet.
purpose of screening between the
and both Lotus Lake and neighboring
All voted in favor except Ladd Conrad who opposed and the motion carriednith a vote of 6 to 1-
Emmings; Lacicl why?
Conrad: f.]o reason. No, f 'm astandard. I think I'd Iike to
standards lhat we appl i ed .
IittIe
review
bit
the
u ncomfor !ab I e
new ordi nance
with the 1O foot
before , or the ner^r
Emmi ng: :
maximum.
C:onr a cl : I
feeL.
Emming::: t^lait a minute. We're approvingplan of the strucLure showing a heighL?
olsen: ft doesn't really show the height
Emmings: AIr isht .
Conr acl : fL passed"
Erhart; Can you make sure il's clear in
Em[ringr: t ell I certainly passed iL with
f eet nraxinrum i.s whaL he told us.
Olsen: I'11 put that to the Council when
t^le}l, but my understand Ladd is thThat's the plan we're approving fo
aL he's got to have a 7 fooLr him.
his plan. Has he presenled a
didn't see that on the plan- ft can'! 90 to 10 but it's not 7
on it,
it goes to Counci I .
t'tre Mi nutes what you're.
the understanding that it'd be 7
1
Pla nni ng Cr,mmission
May 19, , 1s'rl - P6ge
l4eet i ng
9
Bat
in
Pea
:1
he
k.?
j: ue]l
isht and
I tl-,ink,
then ycu
put wordspeak. Is
his mout h
7 feet at
not to
have a
inir that that 's the walkthe highest? At the
Conrad: But- it's also dug into the hiII.
Peter Mc..atelli: Yeah, Itha: 7 l/2 cr 8 feet. Verypiit! r,rhi,:!-r it has to... I
Peter Moscatelli:
can't
close
would
The hiII would. . .probably at
i!'s going to be. - .uncertain6 point.
imagine, it certainly wouldn't be moreto 7 feet. There's a requirement on thi:try pretty hard to keep it r^Jithi n .
Yeah.
I thi nk
ma ki ng
And for
Ieast that hi9h.
with some of ourconrad: Visually
standards and I'm
Emmi ngs : Okay -
Ju ne I Ot l-,?
his benefit this will go to the City Council when?
Olsen: June 1OLh.
PUBLIC HEARING:
I NTER I M USE PERMIT FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE DRIVING R GE AT SI.'INGS GOLF
RANGE O N PROPERTY ZONED A-2 AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHI.IE ST CORNER OF HI^'Y 5
AND GALtrIN B OULEVARD. JOHN PRYZMUS.
Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff reporL. Chairman Emmings caIled thepubl ic hearing to order,
Emmi ngs: John,
John F'r yznrus :
do you want to address us on Lhis aL all?
Yeah.
Emnring:: ff yorr could come up here please.
Johrr Pryzmus: Just a couple things. The plan Lhat I used when f did thealterations uras a plan that you have had. It was done by a landscapearchitect irr 1985 so that's with the berming and what was proposed in 1986is whet ure had. And I just had never finished anyLhing north of theparking lot sc, up until this point, I did all the berming from the north ofthe parking lot to Lhe end and I did an additional berm to screen myequipment because the equipment is then sitting in the parking lot. And sothe additional berm to the north. Now as far as the additional tee area,you know .it'6 not at this point, and never wiII be, i!'s for the golf pro
and his student. I just wanted him to be away from Lhe rest of the people
and the club which is coming out so slaff is protraying it as a bigexpansion to my operation. It's just one person teaching another person
how to gc,J f back there. The batting cages would be aII outdoors. Therewould be nets similar Lo... And the building there urould be for the golfpro for his office and you have TV's in there to review your video of your
swing and th€t. Then I would have it for an additional storage for theNinter. My equipnrent is getting pretty beat up. I can't keep anything
Planni ng Comriiission
Ma). 15, 79e1- - Page
Meet i ng
10
runnin3 r.ihen it has to sit out in the snow banks al] winter so I would,that': uh;'I need, I uras proposing to have another building like the one up
abor,re altl-,ough the berming that I've done with the .Iandscaping would pretty
much screen iL. I don't even knore if you'd be abl6 to see it from theroad" lt's set du,ln in back of. the berms so what I've done so far to t.hispoint- is pretty much Iandscaping and the dirt I moved r.ras for the]and:caping and nox the site for the proposed battj.ng cages would be, you
wouldn't have to do any more work to it so in effect while I Has doing all
my landscaping, I was moving dirt from strategic areas. As far as sewer, I
had paiJ a sewer operation Lo come out and we had planned on having a
bermed s.eptic systern and somebody somewhere, it wasn't me, decided I
couldn't- have that and they made me put in the tanks. I didn't know
anythj ng about the tanks. AII of a sudden that's what my option Nas. Ididn't have any other option. So even though I had already paid for all ofthe technical ulork for the seoer, somewhere I suppose being that there will
be sewer and water out there, they didn't want to have another Septic
systern put jn there for something.
Erhart: Excuse me - tJho's they? tlas
John Piy'zmue: The staff, City staff,
Erhart: Can you respond to that?
it the
yeah.
C i.Ly"
ft wasn't me.
tanks wereyou wor ked
approved and Iwith on the
Olsen: It's urrclear exacLly why the holdingnot sure, was it- Machmeier and Anderson that
sept i cs?
fil
John F'ryzmu:, : I think they came out. They were recommended by the Cjty to
come out and do Lhe soil testing. Larry Vandeveire had set out, I hiredLarry Vandeveire to set out !o do the septic system. But noh, as far as thetank itself, it gets pumped whenever iL geLs 3/4 fuLI. Jeff Swedlund stopsby. He works closely with the people of Chanhassen so it said in thereport lha! they never get a repor!. He works with the City. I don't know
who he )'eports to but he pumps it. He goes by every day so he checks it
and we've never had. I mean if 3 more people used my tank it would cost me
more to pump it but it isn't going to cause any effect on the environmentor anything else. The septic company just comes and pumps it and at thispoint I don't know. t"lhen it gets 3/4 full and then he checks it and that's
maybe once every 2 ueeks, 3 weeks. So I would say with my total expansion
proposal , I'm not 9oin9 to have but 3O-4O-50 more people with the batting
cage, maybe more than that in the real peak season right away in the springbut if it fills up every h,eek I'1I just have to pay Lo have it pumped every
week instead of every 3 weeks. So it's not an environmental problem to
have a tank. I thought once the city staff made me do it, I thoughL it wasa great idea. You knot.l as ]ong as they're going to put in, we're going to
have the MUSA line out there someday anyway, then aII we have to do is just
hook up to the l-,tUSA Iine and I don't have a big septic system to deal with.But ]ike f say, I didn't, that wasn't something I just dreamt up.
Emmi.ngs: Just one question John. I'm
hear an explanation as to why we see a
sure everybody up here urould Iike tohistory I i ke Lhis . l^lhy it appears
FIanr, r : g Coftr:iis:ion
M:\, 1r 1/)O1 - i,.\-
Meet i ng
11
frcm r,rl-,;t h,e ha\re in fronl of us and from our prior expet-ience with you
ulith )'c,-rr f;c- j li1y, why we've imposed condiLions in the past t.hat have
beerr fulfilled on the one hand. On the other hand, you've repeatedly
improved the site or made alLerations Lo the site hlithout getting prior
approval from the City and I'd ]ike to know why.
and
not
John Pryzmus: NelI first of all-, I didn't write Lhat story. If I'd haveNrote Lhe sitory it r.rould have read a Iittle different. I just explained toyou when I came up here that that plan uras submitted in 1986 and it r^rentall t hror.rgh Lhe process. I didn't get it all done at the time becausefinancially I couldn't. Once I didn't get the building, I didn't get allthe bernring clone and all Lhe trees pLanLed and I just worked at it uhen n.
money hecame available to do the whole expansion. And aIl of the trees andall th: Lerming- I don't know if you ever go by there but every year I'mdoin3 more and more and it.'s always to enhance the beauty of it. It's
always landscaping. f haven't built anything. I haven't built one morebuilclin:;. I haven't built anything and I still haven't.
Emmings: Are ).ou putt irrg up a fence?
John Pryzmue: Ihat was part of the original approval. I was supposed to
have a fence not over 6 feet high in the Minutes of a deal a long time ago
and I put Lhe posts in 3 years ago bul being that I have to go back andforth uith clirt and trees and landscaping, f 've never put the fence up.I've haj the w.ire ever since and I jusL never put the fencing on but Lhat
was a F.art of the original approval.
Emmings: Alrisht, thanks. Is Lhere anybody else here from the public trho
wante to be heard on this application? Is there a motion to close thepubl ic hear i ng?
Conrad moved, Batzli seconded
favor and the motion carried.
to cl-ose the public hearing - AII voted in
The public hearing Nas closed.
Ahrens: I think the site is a real good sile for all the things that theapplicarrt is trying to do here. I think it Iooks to me like there wasn't alot of capita). to begin Nith to develop al] Lhe things he needed to developit from so he's tried real hard it Iooks Lo me, even though Lhere's been aIot of problems with the ciLy and I'm not sure who's to blame for thoseproblems. But it seems to me he's trying real hard to make it into a niceplace. Even though he's got sorne problems Nilh completing a lot of thesethings he's trying to do as far as Iandscaping goes. I have a problem withthe whole holding.tank sewer issue and I don't understand. If the Cilyap i-oved holding tanks, uhy the City is now forcing him Lo install a septic
system.
olsen: The only reason we could figure out why they would have approvedthe hc,Iding Lank is that the two approved septic sites had been altered.
There u.ras e l.rt of gradi ng taking place out on lhe site where the Lt^Jo siles
urere supposed to be preserved and from urhat I can teII from the
co,; respondence that those sites urere lost when the applicant was grading onthe site and his only alternative then was to not be permitted what he had
i, l:j,,-,, rr ( irai,:r.t -: r( n
Ha)' 14, 1!)a1 - P.!e
cr t i l-na 1.. LrF,
su dC.:' . ' h. w:s
Ahr6ns: But they
large problem out
were approved.
Lhere. It has
Mee t i ng
t.:, the holding tank. It's not clear. It's just alI of aallowed to have the holdi.ng tanks.
And it doesn't seem to be causing any
been pumped.
Ofsen: I don'tgett i ng .
know. We don't know how often he's pumping. tre're nc)t
Ahrens: Th.-re':. no impact on the environment or anything like that?
OIs:r.: if it's being done properly but we don't have, one of Lheconditions of the holding tank was that he do, he does have them pumped andthai hc d.:.,: provide us with those records and we haven't received those.
Ahrens:
I mean.
fs there any reason why he couldn't continue using those besides,
Olsen: I'm nc,t sure what kind of capacity. -.
Kirchm.:r,: Th,; caPacity of the tank canis. So there wouldr,'t be a problem with
be whatever the size of the tank
cont i nued use .
Ah:-en:: Thele u.:ould or would not?
John Pr yzmus:
Kirchrnan: It would not be a problem Nith continued use if there are noctha: e::... 3v.1i Iable for septic. I guess oqr feeling is, the individual
sel^rage treetrn.nt rules, from the SLate of Minnesota prohibit holding lanksif septic sites are available. There were tuo sites available at one time
and they urere apparently destroyed - If the use on the site doesn'tinLen=if>', holding tanks were approved and I would suggest ule let himcontinue using those as long as ure're provided with a pumping contract andrecords of pumping as originally agreed on. Hor^lever, if Lhe use isintensified, then I would suggest that the applicant search the site tofind if there are any acceptable sites for sewage treatment mounds and putin trealment sites.
Ahrens: Are there any accepLable sites?
Kirchman: [Je don't know. He's got a ]ot of acreage out there. If it'sall been disturbed then there would be no sites. It has to be onundisturbed soil and he r.:ou]d have to get someone out there to investigateas he did before and rope Lhe sites off and protect them from anyconstruction activity until the septic systems are put in.
I think aL the time the only site that was available was thesite to the north of the parkins lot. That's where the tuo sites h,ere.There was going to be a hiII and berm system. And at that time they wereboth approved and they were roped off. Then once they sit, and I don't
know why th6 tank became an option but once it was, then that site r^,as notpreserved anymore. There weren't any oLher sites because it was aIlaltered.
Ahrens: There are no other sites is r.rhaL you're saf i ng?
been scraped-.. You have to stay so f6yJohn Pryzrrl,s:
frcm the cr-eek
Everything hadyou have to. . .
i ssues
tanks
No,
and
OLsen:
cleai-Ly
EUt thoee Here two sites that Here protected and that was very
undersLocd that Lhey uere supposed to be preserved so.
Kirchrean: l.le don't know when the sites were disturbed. ff they were
dislurbe,C af[er he put his holdins tanks in or before. [^le're assuming Lhat
the)' were disturbed before because I can'L imagine why we would have forced
hinr to have holding Lanks when he had Lwo sites that were roped off andprotected. That's the whoLe idea of it uras to have sites available for
setr+,i: s. oLrr assumption is that they urere disturbed before the holding
tanll: r^:ent- i n. The reason the holdi ng tanks were al lowed was because the
site= Norc. disturbed and there Here no available sites. But here again we
dorr 't lra,./€ a rr). r ecor ds to bac k thal up .
Ahren:: t,,ha t are thesti I I r.rh;' t he hol di ngsite.
i nvolved? I guess
aren't sati sfactory
I realIy don't understand
even if he expands the
Ii-^L,-^.-. rr^I l
Kirchmarr: l.lel1, holding tanks traditional.ly have problems in that they
deLeriorate under ground and they get cracka and they Ieak, Pumping has
aluays been a problem. Getting the pumping contracts. Getting them pumped
oLrt properly and then properly disposing of the sepLage after they're
pumped. 90 that is why' an individual or a septic site is the preferable
r,jay to tresi- seuJ3ge as opposed to Pumping.
Ahrens: Eut if it's. maintained r^rel. L and.
Ahreni: f nean septic systems can leak too right?
if they're designed correctly they urork "
Ahrens: Right. But if the holdingthey're maintained they'Il t,rork too
tanks are desi gned
r ight?
correctly and
Kirchman: That is correct. However, another point is that
says that if another site's available, he can't have holding
sites aren't available and that's no choice, then that would
alternative.
State Statutetanks. So if
be his only
Krauss: If I might add too, there's a poLicy question involved here.'
t^,e'v" ju:t gone through a 2 yeay effort to get the MUSA Iine moved and fthink you're all fanriliar uiLh that. one of the concePts with the
MUSA Iine that the Hetro Council feels strongly about, I think as a policy
question we should feel slrongly about. Is that areas outside the MUSAline shor.rld not be on the metro service system. That's the whole point of
it. Holding tanks get around that- Basically h,e're not having on site
^l --rr i rr.i C--rrir,.is.!icri l,leeting
1t.-i t
Kirchman: If it's maintained welI.
I iann. i-, La':tiiI::i.-n
Me)'iir l!!.1 - trase
Meet i ng
l4
djsprsal . All that stuff is trucked to where ue do have a site and d,-rmpedir,to cr.r s) 3t.'n and it's Lhe City that's paying for the treatmgnL of thisstuff. I'm sure there's some kind of a clrop charge.,.but it gels at, yoLr'
kn,:i.,r th;re's a related issue that, remember several yeays ago MiIIs Fleet
Farrrr r,;ag tal k j ng to the Metro Council about some sort of special al]or^ranceto aI.Ioi,r thain Lo have tankage for on site systems on the presumption that
t- he;', c i,ul,C t,e developed as a ruraL use. l.,ell , I mean this is sort of anodCit:" and we're willing to live with this oddity as a status quo. Bur-thera's eonie Fc]icy Iimit.ations if you're allowed to expand based on the
use cf t-h. t.ank and it goes against the building code, it goes againstl4etro Counc.il policy and it goes against what I think is good rationalpolicy for us to adopt in the City as weIL
Aiirn:: I cl.n't argue with you on that Paul . It's just that it was
approved by the city at some point and t.he approval may have been againstpublic pc,lic>' at that time but there was an approval for him to use that.
Ol-- -;,: GLrt i ,r +- n.'ceisat'ily for expansion.
/ h-,i i. : il,- , 1.,.t the e >:parrs.ion here involves some batting cages, a
f h.:r-': i: ir, :, 1.1 coritain, it's not really going to increase the use
r. 'ilr. -l'l c.,.':c gi,irrg to have a storage area for some equ-ipment andy..r': i.ii, :r ,., i.Jr:o?
hujlding
by that
what
A T!' screen to show your, the pro usesgolf Iesson... Right now he's using hisl'ris van until r.re get an acceptance.
a video camera when
van. He has a
Ahrens: IL juei doesn't seem like the use is going to be that intensified.f mean it's rrot f .i ke tl-re gtaLe Fair or something where you're going to have
thousarrds an,J thousands of people going through every day.
Krauss;
too that
par ki ng .
We don't have
t- he appl icanL
good numbers for this but I think it shouldis desiring to have substantial increase in
be
on
clearsite
and
hu ge
Ahren=: tlel l that aLso
Kraus3: They get pretty
may be a very optimistic move.
busy .
Ahrensi Yeah they do but most people go
then leave. Anyway, do you plan to havefor the batting cages.
on
as
the site for
many, f mean
about an hour
Lhe area...is
John Pryznnus: No, mine wou.Id be about half that. you *ould never havemore than, weII the person that comes Lo hit r.lill spend about a half -anhour hitting softballs and so righL now I ton't have any parking problemsat aII. f'm assuming Lhat I could but with my berming and with my design
ancl I tlrink [rave, when I was doing the ]andscaping, I already predesignedto make sure the drainage goes into a holding area with rock and so itseeps out into the grass. lJe r.ron't make any additional runoff ... you can
have -..nnaybe 10-15 more people there but ue don't get hardly any use of the
MeeLing
15
L,at hrc,r', ,: . That 's why, and reaLly I will have Jef f dropof hi. pumFins. I thousht he was doins that. I didn'ta pri,l l €nr r..rith tl-re septic until a couple days ago. Butlit-tIe ue.e of Lhat facility at this poinl. People that
t here .-',d t he; ';e Lhere f or about half an hour .
off
k now
there
t he receipts
there uas evenis very
hit golf balls cc,r,c
Ahrens: Yeah, I can't imagine.
Johrr F r'; zmus: They
have dinner and you
c,f I iquicls and then
Emm i nge: Time out
the 10 v idei-r games
he 's been required
do use it periodically but it's notsit there for an hour and a half or
use the bathroom.
something wher e
two and drink a
YOUIct
Ahren:.: l'l o , f agree r,rith that. That's reasonable and I 'm going to
recomn,end approval of this despite the problems. However I uould like to
cc,nCition t-hat on you coming into compliance in at least the landscaping
area-r ancl t he bermi n9. That was an issue? I don't have a prob.lem with the
buil-din, . It's going to be the same size as the existing building. It'snot e v€ry large buildir,s. f don'L see that the use of the bathroomfacilit,iE: ie gcin? to increase that much to require a septic system, to
r.:q,-:ire r-hat the applicant have tc.r comply with septic system requirements.I thir,l, a hc,Idirrg Lank, if the City r,lanLs Eo require conditions that he
sub.rrit tl,e. receipts- Are there receipls of the pumping of the holding
t6nka or something or regulate the upkeep of the holding tanks, I'd go
aIon3 r^: -i t t' that L,ut I t hink it's suf f icient for the use that's there now
an,.i t;-al- r,: i I I be there urhen the expansion Lakes place.
Your recon)nendation is that ule approve the sign and
and otherwise deny any improvements until everythingto do in the past has been done, right?
Ernri:'n9:,: lrnci t he alternative they're asking for Joan is, if
aF,prr,. - expansicn, then they uiant us to table it so they cancondition:. Are you saying something different than that?
were saying t hat
tabl i ng until we
we're going to
deve I op
should you
can.
Ahr ens: Their
games and t hat
recommendation is that we approve the sign and the video
we deny the improvements to the site period.
Emmings: Okay. Is that urhat you're saying?
Olsen: Right. On page 13 at the bottom we
reccnmend approval, lhat we would recommend
Emminge: lJait a minute. l.le have too many conversations going here.
eatzli: Take charge.
Emmings, : I think if we followed your recommendation we'd be denying theexpansion. The other improvements that he Hants. And I take it that ue'dconsidsr those again once he's done, lived up to alI the conditions that
h.:ve been imposed on him in Lhe past that he has not yet?
Planning Commis -on
ttlay 1a', t99l - Page
l''leeL i ng
76
Olser, : RighL.
Emmi n:;: I Okay -
you. can det,eloF
0Isen: Correct .
Emmings: AJright. And I want to know ifthis approved, if you're saying something
t hi ngs?
That's one of the options. That's correct.
But if there's going to be approval, you Hant it tabled so -condi t i o rrs?
when you said you'd ]ike todifferent than one of those
see
two
Ahr ens :
to permi t
Emmi ngs :
Ahrens:
I'm recommending that we approve the sign. Th6 interim use permit
the signage
Okay. And?
And the expansion of the site.
Emrni rrgr: : Llith urhat condjtions? ThaL's the problem I,m having- tJe don,thave conditions- !!e ha,: a few here from the staff but the staff says theydon'L feel they've deve).oped, adequately deveJ.oped conditions for anapprov:. 1.. ajr are you jusl going to approve it the way he wants to do just
whatever ht- 's proposi ng?
Ahrerrs: t.rell there are existins, I'm a little confused about this. Thereare eli:.tin? condit-ions of approval as I understand it.
Olserr : Correct for Nhat was approved.
Ahrerrs: . . .condiLions.
Olsenr t^le.l I those were just some. Giving you a start on whal we would berequiring- Like grading and drainage plans.
Ahrens; Tl-rose are jusL some, That's not a complete list?
O]serr : No, it's rrot a complete IisL because ue need more, to rea.Lly
recommencl apnrcrval we need more complete pLans. It,s still not real clearthe parking that he's proposing.
Emmings: t^tell, we don't know if he's proposing batting cages inside oroutside. If it's inside, what the building,s going to Iook Iike. If it,soutside, is it going to be lighted.
Ahrens: I thought it was outside.
Olsen: tJe don't know LhaL.
Emmings: t,elI it may be.
Ahrens: He said yes.
Emmi.ngs: Bu! he hasn't submitted a p).an in enough detail for the staff toeven Iook aC it Joan I think is the problem.
Planning Commission
May 15, 1991 - fage
Meet i ng
77
Ahrens.: Ma),t,e we're looking at this prematurely then, the whole deal?
OIsen: For approval,
Emmi ngs: Okay . Why
yes .
don 't you think about it.
do I have?Ahrens: I wilI Steve. How much time
Emmi ngs; 4 mi nutes . I '11 be bac k .
BaLzli: By the time it gets back to her, she'll have a lot more..-
Farmakes; The plan thaL I'm looking at right nou, says '86. This plan
showing vegetation that's planned or is it also showing existingvegetation? There's a notation on the north side that says existingvegetation and it's got a little arrow. Is that the only tree He,relooking at that's stiII standing or, I was out at the site today and there
seems that there's some vegetation that's not on Lhis plan. Do you intendon altering the vegetation as it stands now or where the batting cage 6reais or Lhe parking area is by Lhere?
-1ohn Pryzmus: Nc., I basically, other than ure're doing a massive flowerplanting...geraniums this past weekend and another 60O vinca vines and
we'l. I be doing a couple thousand petunias but I will be adding shurbs andtrees periodically buL I'm about 952 done. I mean the berms trith theevergreens arrd the shurbs and the willorus and a Lot of the trees havestayed there" f saved them aLl. They're expensive so I tried to save as
many trees as I can, This spring now I planted 21 more Black HiIIs sprucein case someday the willow trees, you know I have to take the willow tree
down or somethi ng. I 'm trying to repl.ace. . .
Far ma kes: Do you
No,
intend on cutting down many trees Lhat are there now?
John Pr yzmus :not aL aII.
Farmakes: So your i ntent
have the funds to do it?
then is to...this plan here eventually when you
John Pryzmus: Yeah. This is, I'm done. I mean I don,t have to move any,aII the dirt I moved was for the berming purposes and the planting of thetrees and the flowers and making the f l"ower beds. In other words we,reiust about done with making our planters and what have you. Ue've gotabout a...and flower planting is what we're doing now.
Farmakes: In the plans thatcage l isted in there?
you submit.ted in 1986, was there a baLting
John Pryzmus: No. Ongoing to go, there was
Farma kes: tjhat would
structure urith a. . .
that particular plan, uhere the batting cagd wasa proposal for an indoor golf and batting building.
be the maximum height of that cage? Is that a tent
John Pryzmus: Yeah .
would be, I desisned
berm, maybe only
was bui ldi ng the
5 feet above the
berm preeLy much
From theit when I berm. It
co nta i ned
Planning Commission
Hay 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
18
witlrin my 6yea. That's the tree planting, what have you. I would hope
Lhat you couId.,.as far as seeing additional building going on now...whal-I'nr propt,sing now. The new building I'm proposing is set inbetween two
berms and you won't see it from the road. The batting cages will be,you'lI be sternding where you won't be able to be seen from the road. The
machine will be pitching up from doun. You knoH the balls will run down. fdon't know if you've ever been to a batting cage.
John Pryzmus: Some of them the ball comes rolling back down this way andthen it goes on an efevator. These would 9o down. You know I think they
made a note that there was some washing. t^lell my berms all the grass hasstarted t-o come down. I've sodded around.into there...but I didn't doanything with that area that would be...I think I'm going to put blacktop
and then carpet instead of Iike...has concrete.
Farmakes: Do you have any architectural things that you've submitted? Doesthe staff have anything as to the height of Lhis cage or u,hether or not it
would be seen or would be screened?
Farma kes: Yes .
OIsen: t,le haven'L received anything.
Farmakes: S,o it Nasn't submitted in'86 and it's not submitted now?
John Pryzmus: I said what was submitted in '86The berming and planting and that. On the plan
right where I put one of the teaching holes.
was what I've done so far .in '86 there was an area
Farmakes
what ever
9,o it wasn't your intent to build these batting cages oruntil you submitLed Lhe proper?
John Pryzmus: Right. UntiI I set the plans. l"lhat l'm saying is, I didn't
do anyLhing basically thaL was iIIegaI Like it makes it sound like I wasdoins all kinds of things illega] . I Has planning on coming and getting apermit for the batting cages once I can financially do it. f ulon't be ableto f inancia.I.Iy do iL this year but I am getting, I'm basically getting
pressure from the city saying I'm expanding HithouL permission so noH I'mgoing to get a permit hopefully and I'lI maybe for next year...
Farmakes: WeIL, I have some concerns. One is the maintenance on theholding tank. The other one is I'm a little, this is sort of the secondtime around and there seems to be a bit of an attitude problem on some ofthis stuff for development and it seems naive to me to think that if you'vegot approval on plans in 19a6 oy L987 that you believe that construction isalright to begin in 1991 . Times change. Ordinances change and I don'tthink it enhances that aLtitude or a r^rorking relaLionship uith the city toget into this sort of thing. I hope that's changed or that that atstitudewill change. I Iike the facility. I've used it r.rith my children and Iagree. It seems that the }andscaping and so on, they're making an effortto improve it and make the place Iook nice and I hope that that continues.
And I hope that the relationship that you have urith the City staff, maybeit will. improve. Maybe it's a matter of circumstances. f hope that's thecase. f guess I would approve this with conditions and I believe also that
one of those conditions shou.Ld be that ure should hold that until he
Planning Commission
f4ay 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
79
confor m., to somethe extent of my
c,f the points that city staff has ]isted on here. That's
comments
Batzli; A year and a half ago I started out by saying I have a real tough
Lime being objecLive on this application. ft seems Iike he does something
and then we find out and he says, oh by the way can I have that- That's-;kind c,f irritating. I'm starting to sound like a broken record I guess butf guess I'd Like to see follow through on both sides. If we havecondition: and if we have these things, you know both sides I think havr" to
show a little L,it more commitment to following through on these thinge that
uJe agree on and I'm not convinced yet that if we come up with conditionsthat we're going to get anywhere with them. So I don't know exactly whatkind of conditions we're supposed to put in here. If that means he
complies with them 5 years down the road, does that mean he compl ies wjth
them right away? I like the faciliLy. I've used it. I think it'sactually' an ass.et but the cavalier attitude about doing Lhings and then
comins in after the fact is irritating. I still try to look at thisobjectively but that's tough to get over. That part of it. I think thatgiven the fact thal ue imposed Lhe holdins tank on him as a condition andhe's made the investment in that, if in fact he can get the contract in
here an.i demonstrate that it's pumped regularly and what have you, I don't
see why we would rrake him go to a drainfield kind of thing'. I'd Iike to
see this tabled. I'd like to see the staff urork with hi.m, See if we can
hrork with him and come up with something and a tjme table for doing thesething:. If we're just going Lo put conditions on here that says he's goingto do something and not put a time table where if he doesn't have it done,then what's the point? That's aII I have.
Ellsc,rr: I would recommend denial of the expansion until he brings -it up. Idon't- know that I would be heavy duty on the septic system though if we'vealreacl) said it.'s okay to have a holding tank. But I think that if some ofthe other things haven't already been met Iike he needs a certificate of
occLrpancy, ]et's get it all cleaned up. Since the batting cage is probably
a nexl year apparatus and things later, f'd rather not see myself approvingall that until the rest is cleaned and totally agreed upon between the two
and therr mo.ye forward with the next request
Conrad: t^then the hoLding tank uas put in, do we inspect that?
Steve Kirchman: We inspecLed the insLallaLion. The only inspectionit's a manufactured tank. Ne just take a look at the installation tosure LhaL iL was properly installed.
Steve Kirchmarr: ft's a concrete, basicallY a septic tank is r.lhat itIt's concrete and it comes in different sizes. It's got to be u,aterIt's got to have a manhole cover and two clean outs on each end-
Conrad: So can you have different conditions of holding tanks? Can it beused or do they have to be neu urhen they go in? tlhat are the sLandards? Idon'L l.rnow u.ihat u,e're tal ki ng about . Is this a metal? Is this synthetic?tlhat is the holding tank?
IS,
ma ke
t i sht .
Conrad: And how do
Steve Kirchman: It
we knota thaL it uras t.|hen it
it went
wenL in?
was i nspecled when ]n.
Planrrin.3
Mai' 15,
Commiss,ion
1991 - Page
Heet i n9
20
Conrac'i : 9c uJ( k rri--,r,r Lhat it was good" tJhen it went in, it L,as a state of
the art, holdins Lank?
Steve I<ir( l-rfirarr: Tlrat 's correct.
Conrad: Okay. There a]'e some things that I think just have to be broughtup tc, st-andards before I even consider anything here. And John, I think weIikc, t, h:: facility out Lhere. I Lhink people are using it. I just really
want tc, see the few things" The things that have not been done, I don't
want tc consider anything, sign, video, anything until I can see what Iperceive to be some si.mple things jr"rst done. Some things that haven't beenapproved. The flood Iight issue is still there and my undersEanding is
Lhey weren't approved except for security and apparently maybe not on butthey're there and pointed in the urong direction or something. I'm notsure aL,c,ut the fence. The fence uras not approved in the beginning?
Olsen: On tlre exterior, yes.
the orclinance requires you to
There's now fence on the interior and nourget a permit for fencing.
Conrad: So it r,tas, say iL again Jo Ann?
Olserr : There was ferrcing shown on the first approved plan along Galpirr and
TH 5. That's urhere there's posts and nou, Lhere's some internal fencingaLso. Again, they just need to get the permit. It's real simple. Makesure the heisht is the right height.
Conrad: You know, that seems Iike a simple thing to do, The permit forthe fence. I think the building has Lo receive the Certificate of
OccL,panc),, There's just some simple things but until they're done, Ireall; don'L urant to see anything. I just Hant to get rid of this and it
has to be done right before Ne take a look at any sort of expansion. And Ithink these are real simple things. They're not difficulL but I'm not
budgi ng on that until they're done.
Erhart; Let me lry to get clear in my mind. Nhat is the problem? t^lhat doyou thjrrk they've done? t^lhat do you think they haven't done and what doyou think they have done? tjhat's not conforming today in your mind Jo Ann?
Okay, I sot. one- You think there's flood lights?
Olsen: Right .
The hours wer e
haven't.
Thereset at
are flood lights out there forsunrise to sunset. So that's I ighti ng
one i ssue
after hours.
that we
Er har t i
OIsen:
How many flood lishts are out there?
HoH many?
Yeah.Erhart.:
Olsen: There arepoles or urha teversides. 3 si des?
about, f
and they
z 5l. oes /
not i ced
were on
about e' or 3 alongthe buildins. Sau,
the telephoneIeast 2
5on
on at
Erhart: And who are you?
THir
Planni ng Comm is:. on
Hay 15, 1991 - Page
Heet i ng
.:)
gtev€ Lirchman: 9'ter.re Kirchman. I'm a bui ]ding i nspector.
Erhat t-: AIliglrt. I don't know, did you introduce yourself or did I miss
t l',^t ^
O]sen: I kind of introduced him
EIlson: Jo Ann introduced him while you were sleeping.
Erhart: t^lhile I was sl.eeping? Okay. John, what are the flood lightsfor? Are you using them? t"lhat are you using them for?
John Pryzmusr Yeah, we use them for up lighting on aII the shurbs is uhatthe original approval was on it.
Erhart: Tc, do r.Lhat? Up lighting?
John trryzmus: Yeah. You know they're only Iike this hish off the ground
ar,d to shin: on al] the paths,
Er hsr t : For- r.J I'ra t- ? PeopIe to get around af ter dar k?
-Ioh n trr-yzmus: Yeah.
Erhart: 9c, yoll are, ),ou're using the faciliLy as a business afler dark?
John Pi yzmus: The miniaLure golf has been open yes, after the sun went
cJor,r r, .
Er har t : And t hat 's not permitted.
Olser, : Not- permitted.
Erhart: Okay, so in fact you are using it after dark and that wasn'tpermitted. Ckay. tlhat else? You're saying you have some internal fences?
Olserr : He just needs 6 fence permit for that.
Erhart: If Bluff Creek GoIf Course came in and uanted to put up a fence
between their club house and the first tee, r.rould they just do it or would
theT come in?
E.Ilson: If you Nanted one you'd have to come in.
Olsen: I can't tell you what they would do. They would be required to get
a permit.
Erhart: Is there any limit to how short the fence can be? Le!'s say they
wanted to puL up cedar rails or something.
Olsen: It's still a fence. You know we don't
can go but how hish it can 90. The video games
Erhart: Hang on. Let me get this clear in my
sorne internal fencing going on not shown.
have a limit on how low itis another thing which.
mind. So you think there's
PIanni ng Commis on
May 15 , 7991 - trase
Meet i ng
??
Olser',: I k rrsL..r there Ls .
Erh; -t: Crir .. gc,lf c c)ursie you can'L move fences ujithout a dif ferent site
PIan?
Olse.n: Yeah, if it's different from the site pIan. The only fences are
agricultr-:ra1,
S,te\/e K.i icl,nan: The only issue here is he has to come in and get thepermit. Nobody's objectins to his fence but he does need a permit for hisperinreter fence. He just has to come and get a permit.
Erhart-: Okay. t^lhat else then? You said there's some grading going on?
Emnri n.:r:: He got a permi t f or that didn't he?
ol:..r-ir : H; got a grading permit for some of the grading. Correct Dave?But :ori,:' of jt sti]l was 9oin9 to be part of this whole permit because jt
inc-lril:.:J some of the tees. The parking lot. Grading for where t.he battingc.,;e i - .lr,j t l,: Jrai rrag.-- Ue don't have any plans on that. We don't have
L h., detai leJ grading.
Erh.rrt: lloLr n,arry cubic feet are being graded?
Olsen: tje wouldn't know. t^le need Lo know LhaL.
Erl',art; UhEt cJoes. the ordinance read?
Olsen: It.'s 50 cubic yards-
Erliart: Is it more than that or less than that?
HempeI: Definitely more than that.
Emmings: ll€ needs a certificate of occupancy is another one Tim-
Erhart: Yeah, I'm geLLing Lo that. Before we get to that one, any other
ones?
conrad: He needs to supply us with a schedu.le of the pumping of the septic
tank.
Erhart: I'm waiting for that one for last.
Olsen: The video games. It's the hours of operation.
Erhart: Yeah, I got that one.
Olsen: He is currently putsting in the parking Iot. It looks that way.
Erhart: Was that on the '86 plan? There's so much sLuff here. Okay, Iet's
9o back to the septic system. If you Iook at Lhe conditions on page 3there. Condition 4 is that two septic sites be protected from grading. Incondition 5 iL says the applicant shall install a holding tank. t^lhy r.rould
we have done that?
Planning Commission
Hay 15, )9c.1 - Pege
Heet i ng
OIgs,r,: t.ll',..r r ar . you?
Erhart: Your page 3 of the report. On the bottom Lhere. 4 says two
I septi. :.:i,e,n 3iLes shall be protected from grading activities. Then youl- 9o oi, r,.:itl, item 5, the appl icant shall install a holding tank.
Olsen: ShaIl comply with ordinancethere uras conversations between the
D.-, ycu r enrcr,ber ?
1OB. That's Nhere it, f remembet- that-applicant and I believe Don and Barb.
Johrr F r) zrnus.: I dorr 't remember why i t r^ras
' Erharl: This Has part- of the condiLionaLto the conclitior,al use permit right?
Olsen: I believe that it
recol I ection was that the
that there was a meeting
changed from septic.
use, These were the conditions
installins.I rememberwith Barb .
that if you've got sites
system .
was one of the issues. was cost ofapplicant wanted the holding tank.in Don Ashworth's office I believe
fi.1
Erhart: eefore it went Lo Council. Alright, so let's not try to do that-Let's go back to Steve. Your Ietter then. Essentially is it. clear to
everybody that we gave him, per your letter here, essentially approved a
holdi ns Lan k?
Steve Kirchr,ran: A permit was issued for the holding tank and theinstallation was inspected and approved.
Erhai-t: Okay. Then you 9o on to say, I sLrongly urge that no further
developmenL be permitted on the property until existing violations are
correctecl . Thjs would include installation of an approved septic system.
Does that- contradict What?
S,tet,e Kirchman: tJell, State Codeavailable, that you have to have a
requ i res
sept i c
Erhart: f understancl but.
Steve Kirchman: If the possibility exists that there are no availablesiLes. So if there are no available sites, then he has to continue withthat holding tank
Erhart: I understand but I guess hrhat I'm saying is, I think there's a
tremendous insensitivity here. This memo drives a lot of urhaL's going on
here -
Steve Kirchman: I realize that.
Erhart: Okay. On the one hand it says that r,le've told John and gal;e him apermj.t to put in this holding tank and then a few inches dor^rn the paper
here you're saying don't do anything here unLil this comes into conformityessentiail>,.
Steve l(irchman: As ] said earlier, I'm assuming the reason that we let himpuL in a holding tank uas that Lhe original septic sites urere disturbed.That's just an assumption on my part. I don't know why anyone would let
F'l-:-I.,1-, I { 4,n,i.::.a rail
ria) ,r-, I "t - rc,!rr
Meet i n9
hiin r:Lrt jr h,:.Idint; tanks-
[rh.i:-t: I d.,rr'r, think th..t'e the point" The point is if you've giVerr l-,im
appi.-.'J..I , Llrr n ;'o'r've given him approval. I don't think we can go baq k
then and s.;-,id ge r. whiz, yc,u can't do anything because.
0Isen:
That':
But that is, you knora the whole driving force behind this report
c,ne of the reasons. It's also that there's additional .
ErharL: tJeII thaL seems to be the only major one of all Lhese. I gues:,
establishing whether they can continue using the, Nhether he can expanci
usin.3 tho holding tank or not. I guess my recommendation I think is pretty
much along *ith everybody elses. I guess overall I think the facility isfine and useful t-o people here and John has made his way of trying to makethings work. On the other hand I think sometimes, I think ble have to be alittlr,: more sensitive to these styles of businesses. Not everybody is ablet.o put in a p).an, able to work in a normal, limely fashion. And if wepreclude that process, I think we preclude a lot of creativity. On theothcr hand it appears to me Iike Johrr seems to be alittle more organized
toda)/ than I thir,k when he started in 1986 and so I think we're bothlearnj nlr orr hor,r to get along a little bit better here. Both John and the
c.itz., . r l',.-. issui, on the septic sysLem, I realize that the Code says you
can't, we:'re nct supposed to go in disturbed areas but that's, practicality
is that f.tt can make systems work in disturbed areas.
Steve Kirchman: I disagree. If the area's been disturbed,
destroys t-hc properties of the soils of accepting effluent.
may not show L,ut it also Non't get treated.
then
The
it just
effluent
Emmi ngs: Can you do
Erhalt: Esse-nLialIy
soi } AnC certainly
SLeve Kirchrrr;n: No,
Erhart: You jusL Iay
SLeve liirchman: You
you 're not aI loured to
go.
iL in a mound?
when
in a
yc,u go ancl do a septic system you do disturh the
mou nd .
don 't .
on top?
you
it
Iay it
drive
on top and you have to use track machinery anda truck over the surface where Lhe mound is to
Erhart: l.le]I anyway, I think obviously the tank is working and I don't seethat this is, it appears that it can work. Steve, I think you're sayingthat it can u,ork properly if properly maintained. On the other hand, I
would prefer to see a septic system. On the other hand, when do you expectLhe sewer line to be puL through here?
Krauss: tlell we're looking at serving the area behind, across the street
from this site hopeful.Iy next Friday. Theoretically, but this area is not
incluCed in the l'lLlSA Iine expansion. This area is Lhe study area so there
would L,+; no service to this property in the foreseeable future.
Erhart: So that's what you, the other thing is I think it'd be to lheir
advantage to get this as an interim use permit so I'd agree with your
recommendation to try to, anyway try to get it
kind of date on this. So I guess I'd go along
in terms of approving with the video games andpermit and try to come back uriLh, table it andto see him clear up, maybe Steve or someone to
recommendation on whether this holding siLe or
so it's a little clearer at the next meeting.
to that so ure can tie some
r.rith staf f 's recommendationtrying to get interim use.
come back. I guess I'd liketry to clear up a uniform
septic system or somethi n9
And then have conditions.
Olsen: Yeah, we'1I confirm the capac.ity and things Iike thaL.
Erhart: That's finally it.
BatzIi: Second.
Emmings: Is there any discussion?
Conrad moved, Batzli seconded to table the Interim Use Permit for Surings
GoIf until the conditions of the Conditional tse Permit are satisfied. AII
voted in favor except Ahrens and Erhart Hho opposed and the motion carriedwith a vote of 5 to 2.
Emmings: Do you t^JanC to put the reasons on the record?
Conrad: Yes, I movesatisfies the staff's
Ahrens: WeIl I've been thinkingstaff recommendation on Lhis for
denial. of expansion of the site.
that we table action until the applicant brings Lhe,
concerns about the previous conditional use permit.
about this and I can go
approval of the I nter im
along with
Use Permi I
the
for
Erhart: t^Jha! was your second one?
Ahrens: Basically the staff's recommendation. DeniaIthat the staff continue Lo work t"rith them to bring lhe
compliance.
of the expansion but
site i nto
Planning Commissi.on MeeLi ng
May 15, 1991 - Page 25
Emmings: Okay. I'm going to adopt Brian's comments and Ladd's commentsjust to shorten things down. I'm not 9oin9 to, I don't care too much aboutthe sign or video games. tJhether we do something with tha! but he has to
do, in my mind, he has to do what he said he would do in the pas! or
fulfill the conditions that were imposed on prior approvals before f'm
willing to look at any expansion. And that's primarily because although
I'm sure that John has his own version of how things have evolved out
there, aII I've seen here over the years is John filling in the wetland.
Being told to stop. Coming in and asking for a permit. Being denied. And
nour he's doing something else and he's being told to stop and he's coming
in again for a permit after the fact. I think he's had enough interaction
with the city to know Lhat he should come here first and he hasn't been
r.rilling to do that so I'm not willing to look at an expansion until he gets
everything up to snuff. If it uras one time I could understand it but it
hasn't been one time. This is at least the third time that I can recall
sitting here and looking at this and maybe it's the fourth. So that's
where I stand. Is there a motion?
Planni ng Commission
May 15, 1991 - Pase
Meet i ng
Erhart: okay and I think that u,as what I was thinking. That's uhat I wasvoting for denial. So if thaL's what it is, that was mine.
Conrad: Now with my motion, I just want to make sure that the tank, the
holding tank. It is permitted so de're not asking staff at this time to
f igure out how to do a drainf ield. [.le're not asking John to do that. t,le
are bringing it into conformance with the previous conditional use permiL
and what the city has granted John to do.
Emmings: And you're not
r^ror k toget her to br i ng i tthey've got one.
any u,ay discouraging them from continuing toto snuff and then look at a proposal when
in
UP
Conrad: That's all I want - I just don't see there are a lot of thingsthat you have to do John. I just do want, I want to force you and thestaff doing things together the right way. [.re're not trying to be the badguys. I Hant to do it the right way so we can review this without having
some history and some negatives out there. Then we can take a look at thereal issues.
Emmings: Right. I think ure ought to at this point take a quick break for aNorth Stars update -
Emmings: f understand that you're recommending that we table this matterso that we can notify affected property owners and then hold a public
hearing and complete the official map. tlhat shouLd we do on this tonight?I thi.nk that's obviously the thing to do.
O].sen: Look at the map.
Krauss: tJe'd like you to look at the prel.iminary draft of the official map
we had. Ue'd also Iike to discuss some sLandards uith you that are in theordinance. In fact Jo Ann and I had a long conversation. After comingback from the bluff hike, Bluff Creek hike, my personal opinion is that
some of the standards that the DNR recommended aren't adequate to protect
uhat we h,ant to protect over there. One of the other things we wanted todo, first of all what we're proposing is an ordinance based on an official
map rather than a we know it when we see it approach and so to designate
r"rhere this thing is. You should know though that when you see this mapyou'II see it. It really does interfere indirect ulith a Iot of properties
up there and a lot of property olrners may fell disinfranchised by it and Ithink that the environmental benefits of lhis have to be so, in addit.ion we
have to have some mechansim wherein exisLing situations are grandfathered,
Not made non-conforming but grandfathered so we accept the status quo.
Ellson: That couldn't expand? t,lould that be grandfathered?
Krauss:could if
ear I ier .
t"le Ll^ no, I think we'd Iike to u,ork out some language where theythere wasn't prejudice against Lhem because they happened to build
The oiher thing that we'd like to do too for the public is, Dave
PUBLIC HEARING:
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDHENT TO AI.IEND THE CITY CODE TO CREATE A BLUFF LINE
PRESERVATION SECTTON -
Planning Commiss ion
Hay 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
27
and I have been involved with a number of properties on the bluff that haveincredibly severe grading problems because of how they messed up drainageor they built in an inappropriate place.. Basically man made problems thatare, I mean ure want to get this on video for you and xhoever comes t.o this
meeting because they're so dramatic. You really have to see what theseare. For example, we were out at the Dypr.licks property the other day.
This feLlow had built a storage buildins of some sort that's probably about
20-25, maybe 3o feet from the bluff. The erosion here is something you
would not believe. You stand on a precipice and you ]ook out and you're
Iooking 70 Lo gO feet and there's a sheer drop. And there's two seLs oferosion. There's erosion that drainage uras tinkered wilh coming off thisfield around this building and he is dumping huge amounts of garbage and
Iiterally trash basically in an indiscriminant manner in an attempt to stop
the problem.
Erhart: l,Jhere is this?
Krauss: f can show it to you on the map but it's off of TH 1o1 . l.Jest of
TH 1o1. In the process of doing this, this is making maLters worse. He's
actually thror^rn a ]ot of money inlo this but when Dave and I went around
the. back of his property where the second serious erosion problem is, he
actually tried to channelized the water where he collects it in a system
and puts it in a pipe. t"lelL the pipe just outletted at the top of the
bluff in that sugar sand and that pipe is now suspended 15-20 feet in space
because the cliff is gone. And Lhe urhole reason this drainage problem
existed is because whoever built this house, either he or whoever built it,
excavated out a lou, Ievel garage door and to drain that area they built a
trench from the house all the uray to the bluff. And now aII the water's
funneled through there and you've got a problem that's just got to be seento be believed"
Emmings: t^Jhen we were on the hike in Bluff Creek, a guy from the Ri]ey
t^latershed Distr ict . t^las it Ri ley-Purgatory?
Kr auss : Yea h .
Emmings: l"latershed district was along and he said that that's a big
problem in a IoL of bluff areas that are in that u,atershed district because
when people build their houses close to the bluffs, you get alL that runoffjust from the roof concentrated and iL has a dramatic impact on the bluff
he says. Just even that change. Apparently these areas are real fragile
because of the slope.
Olsen: WeII, anyuray do you want to look
Emmings: Sure. tlhere do you want to do
O]sen: tlell I thought we could just put
It's kind of an odd shape.
at the map?
ir?
it and maybe stand around it.
( Staff presented the bluff line preservaLion map to the PIanning Commission
and outlined points of interest. )
Planning Comm issi.on
May 15, f99t - Page
Meet i ng
2A
Krauss: I just Nant to do t.his cautiously. I think we've got to recognizethat there's a selling job that has to be done u,ith this. There's a real
need to be diplomatic with these folks who have gone around thinking thatthey can do whaLever they need to do and all of a sudden we're intrudi.ng intheir own private ]ittle world. That can be a disturbing thing to happen.
Even though is probably ecologically and philosophically the right thing todo, they sti]I need to be...
Far ma kes :
t hem?
Is there any outside financial advantage that can be sold to
Emmings: You ought to have him look at a sampling of propertiesit out. TeIl us for this property would mean this tax advantagethat wou.ld certainly speak loud to people. Uhat else do you wanttonight?
to figure
beca u se
us to do
Krauss: I don't know if you have any more guidance to give us. Otherwisewe'll proceed with it. I'm not sure it's going to get on the next agendabut...getting video done and talking to the County Assessor and getting the
map together.
Batzli: I think that after Saturday there's a lot of enthusiasm by theCouncil and various Planning Commission and other people and I think ureshould proceec! full steam ahead while we have that enthusiasm.
Ahrensr I taould expand iL too
west , across the.
to this area as Fim suggested. Is that
Ellson: I Iike the idea of touching bases with Chaska.
Eatzli: I would aL least talk Lo them and teII them uhat we're doing andseeing if they have any interest in at least preserving that.
Krauss: One of the things also that's personally related is Hoon VaIIey-Just to update you quickly on that. I'm having the City Attorney reviewthese things because we're in Iitigation with Hoon VaIIey. Judge Canninggave Moon Valley an additional , Judge Canning supported the City's position
in that we have the right to require that they get a permit. He gave Lheman additional 30 days to get it. They have retained John Voss who's aplanning consultan! who I've known for quite a whiIe. He's a legiLimateconsu.Ltant, !o prepare their permit application. But they just told himabout it and the drop dead date is May 25th. It's been my expectationsince we've gotten into this that hrhat we're going to get is an incompleLepermit request which will have to go to the Judge and get some findings on
and then nrhen we take them through this, when we actually have conditions,
Krauss: tle]I I did ask Roger, after that came up last time, I asked theCity Attorney to Iook at that and there is a tax abatement that can begiven for Land designated for certain public or environmental purposes todo that. I'm ncL sure that this particular land has been assessed at aIIthat great a t'ate anyu)ay. tre need !o bring in the County Assessor. I meanif he's already only valued this at some nominal amount because of theslopes, then there's probab.Iy not much of a net tax benefit.
Emmi ngs: t,est of Chaska.
Planning Commission
May 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
29
then they're going to take the conditions back to the Judge and it's going
to be a very long, drawn ouL process, But this is, I mean it's integral tothe bluff line. Here ure have, I mean if you talk to Tom Zwiers, as far ashe's concerned, the bluff should be knocked down to the cornfield type land
and flatten it ou! and that will make it good for development. So I thinkyou have a clash of values there and I'm not sure how that's going to get
resolved. You assume that he's got some rights to do what he's doing to acertain extent. There's going to be a conflict.
Ahrens: Is the application in front of the Judge?
Krauss: Excuse me?
Ahrens: You said, uhat was going to the Judge?
Krauss: !,JeII, the only thing that's been to the Judge so far is they sued
us teLling us that we didn't have the risht to require them.
Ahrens: Risht, but you said something else was going to the Judge?
O1sen: He feels the conditions will be contested.
Krauss: I think they're going to conLest everything along the way.
Emmings: I just noticed that this is a public hearing. I want to ask ifthere's anyone here who wants to comment on the zoning ordinance amendmentto amend the city code to create a bluff line preservation section, Can
someone make a motion !o close the public hearing?
BaLzIi: Let the record show there's no one in the room that's willing to
speak on the topic and I move to close the public hearing.
Emmi ngs: I'll second it.
Batzli moved, Ernmings seconded to close the public hearing- AII voted in
favor and the motion carried.
Krauss: Don'L you Nant to continue the public hearing?
olsen: Close iL or do you cable it?
Krauss: Conti nue it -
Emmings: t^le 'I I continue it.
Batzli: I'Il withdraw my motion. I move that we continue it.
Emmings: tJhy didn't you say something before He voted? tlhat do we have to
do to undo this?
Krauss: tie'I1 just correct Lhe Hinutes.
olsen: That's okay. Just close it. Do what you did. He'Il just open it
again.
Planning Commiss i on
May 15, 7991 * Page
l'leet i n9
30
Paul Krauss presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Emmingscalled the public hearing to order.
Erhart: Let me ask you this. t^lhat other reason why a developer would wanta PUO as opposed to, anything oLher than a smaller lot? t"lhat other reasonsin a residential area? Is the crux?
Erhart: t",le I I it seems to me it ought to be done on the average IotNot use the minimum lot size at a]l. And you have a scale so thatit does allow him to get more total lots as the average gets smaller
exchange !",e get some open ]and but I don't think you can just pick a
and say that's it.
size.
yeah,
and in
sPot
E]lson: You're saying as we squish people more, we get more open space?
Erhart: Yeah. And the advantage to the developer is that he gets moreIots and r.,e get more open space but what you can't do I think is pick onepoint and say, if you're going to come in for a PUD, r.lhatever the reasonis, you're going to be on that point. Because then you give up anycreativity at aII to adapt to the land itself or what the developer'strying to accomplish there.
Krauss: Realistically though nobody, I can't understand why somebody would
come in with 15,OOO square foot or beLter IoLs and requesL a PUD. If the
soJ.e purpose of thei.r requesting a PUD is to be Let off the hook on setback
standards or street widths or someLhing else, then there's no net gain forthe ci ty.
Erhart: Okay, so that's just as unrealistic as the guy coming in with 144
9,OOO square foot lots? tJhat I'm saying is there's going to be someplace
between that spectrum. That particular development or that developer or
Emmingsr Okay. I Iike that. ft's easy,
BatzIi: Strike my withdrawa.L .
Emmings; Ooes anyone else have anything on the bluff line? You have ourblessings here to do whatever...
PUBLIC HEARING:
ZONING ORDINANCE AI.IENDMENT TO AI,TEND ARTICLE VIII OF THE CITY CODE
CONCERNING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS -
Olsen: The setbacks.
Erhar!: Okay, so then the question would be, let's say the guy just b,anted -different setbacks. So he wanted Lo go to a PUD but the way this is formednou, he automatically has got to give up 25g., even though he's willing tostick with the 15,OOO sqaure lots. That's r.rhere I guess in Iooking atthis, if you .^,ere to use the minimum ]ot size which you ought to have as ascale. Like if it's 9,OOO, then it'.s 252. If it's 10,OOO then it's ZOZ.If it's 11,OOO it's 182
Krauss: That's a possibility. If you figure it on the average }ot size.
Planning Commission
Hay 15, 799L - Page
Meet i ng
31
what he's trying to accomplish in terms of house styles and values of the
houses, that he's going to pick and what ue ought to do is, you want tonail it down so it doesn't get to be a negotiating, tota.Ily arbitrary ani.let's put a little table together. It says okay, if your average Iot sizeis 10,OOO square feet and the City wants 2OZ, every size is 11,OOO square
feet...so you allow the developer to kind of, you can still create. lre canget what uJe want but he can still create the development that he has in
mind.
Krauss: That might be reasonable. Again, we're flying a little bit by the
seat of our panLs on this one . l''lany communities exper iences with singlefamily PUD's are similar to Chanhassen's and there's not, and that I'm
aware of, there's not a lot of progressive thought on okay, you 've all been
burned. How do you then fix an ordinance that doesn't do that? r mean
it's clear to me the lrade off is, some of the trade off involves open
space. tjhat the magic number is I think is an issue.
Erhart: Yeah. If it's just open space for the same number of lots,
there's no incentive Lo pay the extra fees and everything, You're going to
have to give them a little bit of incentive to give us the open space by
actually irrcreasing the number of lots. I don't think it has to be a ]ot.
Krauss: [,le can certainly play with that.
come rn
f guess I
Conrad: Would we sti1l get a Near Mountain development urith this? Near
Hountain is a good PUD. I kind of Iike ulhat this does but I guess I don't
know what it discourages or if it forces one thing versus another. So
I guess my feeling is that I'd like to have staff work a couPle scenariosjust like this one so we can see what it does encourage. And one would be,
if it could go back and reconstruct the Near Mountain PUD and see what this
r.rould do to it. Now they have a ]ot of ponds and, I'd just ]ike to know if
we could have another development like that or if this would not allot^r a
Near Hountai n.
Erhart: f know that a guy's going togoing to be 9,Ooo square foot lots.
envisioning that.
Krauss: tJe could certainly check that. I
doing this I was, my gut reaction uas that
ff it doesn't, then something's wrong.
with the whole p.Lace
'm having a hard lime
isn't
eve n
didn't have the time
Near Hountain shou ld
but inqualify.
Erhartr Oo they geL 25e. open space?
O]sen: They may have to give more open space.
Krauss: Except that ure've credited, I mean there are urays to crediLl
l.Je're not only looking for, this is open space that the public can use or
that's comrnon open space, tre're saying that of youy 252, one quarter ofthal can be park, You're probably going to have to dedicate more than that
but it could be. one quarter of that can be uretlands but then we've said
if you'rs protecLins other natural features. For example Near Mountain has
a Iot of forested areas. If we had those forested areas, which may or may
not be on somebody's lot, protected by a conservation easement, then that
would be, you could attribuLe that towards your requirement because we're
Planning Commission
l1ay 15, 1991 - Page
l'1eet i ng
32
that open space amenity, that natural feature is going to
perpetu i ty .
guaranteecl t hat
be preserved in
Krauss: It's kind of tough adopting that after the fact too because thoselots were not strucLure wiLh this sort of ordinance in mind. What you'd
have to do is go back and make some assumptions which you may be able to dobut I think it's a useful exercise.
Conrad: What I don't want to do is force, you know I don't want to stiffelthe creativity and I don't trant developers coming in here h,ith aII 9,OOO
square foot lots. So Near Hountain had a mixture and that's kind of whatu,e're trying Lo look for, plus Che open space and I get lost in theformula. t don't knou urhat happens. So again, I think some of the
concepts is kind of neat if it urorks. If it r^,orks for multiple sizeddevelopmenls. Now I don't knoN how it Nor ks from a 10 acre subdivision or
PUD to 1,OOO acre so I guess it's a neat concept to pursue.
Erhart: I think you ought to try it with the average because uJe don't wanLaII 9,O0O square fooL lots, This is what...kind of what we're encouraginghere. Tab]e of different averages and see hor,: that works. I think thatthe concept that you're working on is right on.
Emmi ngs: Haybe you ought
feedback from him.
to show Terry Forbord your example and get some
Krauss: I will. I'II bump a copy over to Shardlow too -
that Tim isn't talking aboutEmmings: And also ask him if the systemwouldn't be, I think that's kind of...
Erhart: I think you actually
Krauss: In facL he suggested,the topics that we thought of.
mentioned it.
when he and I were talking, that was one of
BatzIi:
from the
Pau llot , !.lould your zero IotIine, would that come
li ne type thi ngs ,under your single
if it was 4 foot awayfamily detached?
Krauss: I intentionally didn't deal r.rith that and Roger raised it again asa concern. The most recent ordinance I've Hritten before lhis one, Iactually set that up as a separate district.
BatzIi: separate from the PUD?
Krauss: l^lelI no, as a PUD but it was separate standards. Single famiLy
detached IoLs on typicaly single family homes t.rere treated one way. Zerolot lines !.rer e treated another way. As I read through this ordinance againtonight though, I think Lhat the reason for that is when you get closer.
t^Jhen you're building on the zero lot line, you have more implications as touha! the architectural design is. How you're imposing on t,he adjoiningproperty owner. How you want to treat common space because there has to be
Olsen: ...remember where the outlot, the summit? That u,as originallygoing to be condos and noul it's single f amily Iots - That probably r.rouldn't
have been . . .
PIanni ng Commission
May 15, !997 - Page
Meet i ng
34
more common space Nhen it's that tight. But as I thought about it, theordinance, the way we've structured it right now, the single family
detached works pretty well because we've, buiIL aII that architectural stuffin there and the Ianguage is Ioose enough that we could allour zero IotIines under the same set of procedures and standards. I don't think we
have to change ver / much to allor.l that. One thing you may r.rant to considerthough is some communities have a problem Nith zero lot line homes being insingle family neishborhoods. I don't know that I ascribe to thatphilosophy because basically they're single family homes. They're just
scrunched to one side. I don't see us lowering the lot size much. I don,tsee us lor"rering the lot size beLow 9,OOO ever in the RSF district or in theIow density distric!. If somebody elants to do a high intensity zero Iotline development, it really in my opinion ought to belong in areas that areguided for medium or high density use in the Comp PIan because that's thedensities you're dealing with. And I think we can make thatdifferentiation. It's not that hard.
Batzl i : Did Forbord I i ke , did you shor.r
Krauss: I don't know. f suspect he didn't have a probLem
because that's the way they design their project anyway.specifically designing for Lundgren Brothers Homes.
the whole proposed standar ds?
down . I just br ief ed h.im on
with t hat
I mean we're not
him
sitKrauss: No,
the . phone .
we haven't had a chance to
Batz]i: I was curious what he Lhought about Lhe foundation plans andarchitecLural sLandards. The other elemenLs of this besides the 252.
Ahrens: Yeah, I was going Lo say. Terry Forbord, it's fine Lo run somethings past thim but ue're no! designing our ordinance for him. Especiallysince he's going to be coming in with probably another PUD. He has someproperty in Chanhassen and we don't Hant to give him our ordinance and say
hot^r do you wanL Lhis to read and Hhat's the best deal for you and then he
can design it around whatever development he r^rants to come in with.
Batzli: No, and I wasn't proposing thaL. I just thought it wasinteresting because other developers don't develop to their standards andwhile Terry might not have had a problem including certain number of trees
and p.Lantings around the foundation, I'Il bet you a Iot of othei developerswould. I uras just curious.
Krauss: WelI I'11 be happy to sit down with him. t,e can certainly dothat. He's useful as a gaugins point though because on the spectrum ofresidential deve.Iopers, they tend to be a ]ittle better than most.
Ellson: Risht. If you h,ant to encourage anybody it would be him.
Krauss: Yeah, and if he has a significant problem h,ith something, it'sprobably note worthy. If he believes he can live t^rith something, itdoesn't imply that aII other developers can live with it buL it may mean tous so what? That's the standard of development we uant to achieve.
Planning Commission
May 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
35
Ahrens: But there are a Iot of good developers in toNn too. You may want
Lo run it past them.
Kr auss :
and see
Ne can send it out to a few people who develop in the community
what t.hey think.
conrad; I had a couple just statements or comments on what lJe see in front
of us and I think Paul's going to uork some things but just philosophicaLly
my intent on this ordinance was not to put more density in but to shift it.If there is more density that's fine, I guess I r.,as, ueII if there is moredensity, I want to make sure that it's good quality density. That's just ageneral. comment on my part. I'm interesLed about the density transferissue too because I realLy feel that that's a viable thing. Again, ifI had my way, if a siLe is approved for 1O units and Ne can shift 5 of
those units to the other half of the property and leave the other half
open, Lhat's what I'm trying to do. So I don't mind building up thedensity. I'm kind of interested in how the transfer formula works, Usinggross versus net. Is there a conversion factor? l.le've always used netbefore in terms of unit- per acre and now we're going to use gross so have
t^te compensated for that changeover in terms of the number of uniLs allowed
Per , acre?
Krauss: There's no standard factor Ladd because it's really highly
contingent upon the individual site, How much park are you dealing with?
Hoh, much wetLand are you dealing, with? I think though that the PUD gets atthat issue in another way. It's demanding higher quality design. It's
demanding higher quality landscaping. It's going to demand some modicum ofadditional open space. You know you're achieving your goals through adifferent mechanism and if the developer happens !o get more units out ofit but it looks beLter overall and is less impacting, I guess that's a fair
compromise.
Conrad: But what is the standard? The standard thatper acre. How did we get Lhere? How did we get Lo 1
you set is 1.7 units
7?
Krauss: We developed that in doing the Comprehensive PIan. Basically wha!
we wanted to do is the Metro Council was telling us that the rule of thumb,
everyone develops 2 !/2 un:.Ls an acre. tJe said well that's not anappropriate assumption here because we are basically a no net loss wetlandscommunity. Our park dedications are pretty stiff and alI this and so we
went back in. Jo Ann and Hark and I and took apart, I don't know, 12 or 15plats we've done over the ]ast 5 years and tried to find what the averagedensity is. Nor.r this i.s standard platting. This is not PUD's.
conrad: So average gross density?
Krauss: Risht .
Conrad: Based on history? And that turned out to be L -7?
Krauss: Cor r ect .
PLanning Commission
Hay 15, 1991 - Page
Heet i ng
36
Conrad: Okay . Over how
Krauss: I would say it
many years?
was the plats over the Iast 5 years probably.
Olsen: Maybe even 10.
Conrad: And just
than one building
does that mean?
a picky point. On page 5, Ietter (g)
may be placed on one platted recorded
It said; mor eIot on a PUD. Hhat
Erhart: That's where I think you tie in this average thin9.
ElLson: BuL if someone does 9,OOO and it Iooks good and Lransfer andthings like that, I think we have to, we don't know.
Emmings: t,lhat b,ere, the loLs that He Here all remarking about in.
Krauss: tJere 9,Ooo square feet. That's where that number came from.
Erhart: Yeah I know but there was only a lot here and there. It h,asn't a
mass of these lots. Were there?
Batzli: Yeah, they're all on one end.
ElIson: It's one group of them and they're very well done.
Conrad: There's probably about 60. 40 to 60. Something Iike that.
Krauss: nII of the professional Iiterature says that, don't take the micro
view of what the property line says. tlhat kind of context is iL sittins
Krauss: Under standard zoning you're obligated to have a separale laxparcel around each building. tlithin a PUD you're approving an overall
master pJ.an. You've got a lot of control over exactly what happens.tlhat's built where. It becomes less important to us if an industrial
occupant has three buildings on a single tax parcel . You've exercised aIIthe conLrol you need.
Conrad: O kay .
Emmings: Does anybody have anything else on this? Any other comments?
BatzIi: Yeah, I don't like 9,OOO feet. I think it's too smalI.
Ahrens: You think 9,OOO is too small?
Emmings: I wonder, what if it said something. Instead of saying you can
have single family residential PUD allows ]ot sizes down to a minimum of
9,OOO square feet and seeing some developers just licking their lips.Can't wait to go in here and make a development of all 9,OoO foot ]ots.
t^lhat if we just said that some of the lots may be as small as 9,OOO squarefeet.
Planning Commiss ion
May 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i n9
'17
in. f mearr if you
forest , it's going
in a cornfield.
have a 9,OOO squa r e
to Iook a whole Iot
foot lot backing up to a protected
better than a 15,ooo square foot lot
Ahrens: I think though that
to give them someLhing that 're worried about implyingreally have no intention of
we
we
t hat h,e
giving 're going
them.
Batzli: I think if somebody comes in here with a bunch of 9,oOO squarefoot lots, we're all going to be stunned and we're going to sit here andsay, help us. l,Jhat can we do to stop this?
Ahrens: I think r,re'd better put
right to reject it.some language in there just to give us the
Emmi ngs: Or that
9,OOO square feet
it a lot more.
we consider PUD's
but, not less than
some of the lots were
Something but you've
as small asgot to ma ke
wherethat.
Kr auss :
work.
But we have that existing PUD that has the average, it doesn't
Emmings: f don't understand.
Olsen: t^lell we have it right now where there's an average of 13,5OO andyou can go as low as 12,OOO. And it has tlorked where it's not aII 12,OOO
square foot lots but lhe PUD's haven't been successful for other reasons.
Because we stil.l don't require preservation of open space and creativity
but . . . average doesn 't wor k .
Krauss: t^lelI I think what came across loud
Forbord uras thaL a deviance of 1,5OO square
anybody to do anything.
and clear though again forfeet isn't enough to induce
Ellson: That's why we came
Erhart:"..gross
But Pau I
densi ty .
Erhart: I'm not saying whether it should beto work it out what it is. The way you havepoint and it has Lo be 252 and !.rhat. . .
Krauss: ttelI that's variable but I thought
away from the hard and fast, thou shalt have
you're doing.
mor e
then
I ots
to
low. You kind of haveyou've only picked one
uP with
That's
Lhe 9
not now uhat
formula .Conrad:is changing the
Erhart: No, he's increasing the gross density. You're getting
on the original piece of Iand. So that gives him the incentivepreserve some other piece of land.
Krauss:
mi nimum .
But you're not going to get more lots if you have a high average
high orit now,
the
an
intent of this was
average of no I ess
to get
than 13.
Planning Comm i ss io n
May 15, 7991 - Pase
Heet i ng
3a
E]lson: That's what I Nant to do too. I think we shouLd ]eave the 9,OOO
and our intent in here is telling them that we don't want to see all thatand then you guys are certainly going to see it and the fact t,hat it's a.
PUD, uJe have a chance to negotiate. That's the whole idea behind it butwe're putting more fences around them before hre've even seen it. t,le're not
even giving them a chance to try to bring something to us. t^le're telling
them right off the bat we just have decided there's no ra,ay you can do itoeII and don't even bother.
Erhart:
here now
I guess I'm a little confused there. You don't want a formula inor you do?
Krauss: No, no. [.Je're talking about two different things. The open spaceformula I think we need because that's one of the trade offs ue're gettins.
That's one of the benefits of going uJith the PUD. The question is Nhatkind of minimum lot area do you adhere to and from a strictly designed,philosophical standpoint, f don't care if a]l the lots are 9,OOO squarefeet if everything else is done weII.
ElIson: 9,OOO.
Erhart : No, no.
El.Ison: That's what I'm saying. If he can do a thing of all 9,OOO squarefoot and it looks good. See you're making an assumpLion that you'II never
see a 9,OOO average that would look good. You're making a big assumption,Like he said, if they're alL backed up against this bluff area and thingsIike that, it might not be that bad.
Erhart; That's not real istic .
It is if 25z of your Iand has to be in open space.Krauss:
Erhart:
Conr ad :
Ellson:
Iike it,
BatzIi:
EI Ison :
Batz I i !
say why
Ellson:
oh, I see.
That could be.
I think you ought to give them a chance to do it and if you don'ttelI them then.
The problem is, somebody's Eoing to come in with a plan.
That's uhen we deal with it.
l,reLl, it's going to happen and then we're going to look atin the world did we Iel them build 9,OOO.
No, we didn't IeL them- tle get a chance to ]ook it over.
ir and
Erhart: Okay, but what we could do to satisfy I think the concern is tosay yeah, you can have 9,OOO square foot lots but your average can't be anyless than.
Planning Commission
May 15, 7991 - Page
l'1eet i ng
39
Conrad: t^le don't give them the PUD. fL's not t^lhat He're ]ooking for.
EIIson: You're not trusting them enough.
Batzli: l,Je've seen what, never mind. I'm not convinced that tre will Lookat it and know what we're Iooking at because every time we Iook at PUD's wesit there and we say, gee. tJe don't rea]Iy get a sense of what they'redoing and ue don't see this and r.,e don't see that. t^le r.lon'! see it. WewiLl not see what is actually occurring in the PUD until it's in and thenit will be too late.
Krauss: One of the problems we've had trith PUD's is, and I've heard the
same thing echoed on the Council, is Ursula's often going well what are wegetting out of this. [^le're supposed to get something. tJhat are wegetting? And l don't have a good ansHer normally because our PUD ordinanceright now doesn't demand anything.
EIIson: And ue haven't given an intention of it to anybody
to Hant this,
until now.
you 're going toKrauss: This ordi.nance says, if you're going
have to earn it and here's how you earn it.
EIlson: I think because of that inlention trill ward off the guy who thinkshe'II be able Lo seII us a PUD with a 9,OOO back to back thing. He'lI goweII I knor^r I'm not meeting it. I'm just trying for it. tte,ve go! everyreason to say forget it. I don't think we should say an average, I thinkit could potentially be done. Who am I to say no without seeing it?
Krauss: There's lols of examples to demonstrate it. I have some slides ofit. I can give you books that show those kinds of plats. Hhat happens
when you bottle up that space. It's a fairly...
EIIson: It's not like we're changing the residential Iot to9
Krauss:
into that
r ezoni ng
what your
sta ndar ds
Keep in mind too that a PUD is a rezoning and I think it fal]slegislative ability of the city. You can be fairly arbitrary onand especially when there's an intent secLion now that Iays outexpectations are. If you realIy feel something doesn't meet thethat you've adhered to, don't approve it.
Ellson: That's the leverage we have.
Conrad: Do you feel PauI that we have to, my statement tras, I'm not rea]Iytrying to pack more in. I'm just trying Lo shift it so it's economically
more viable but basically it's your gut fe:el that we really should al]ow
more density to encourage, Economically we need more units per acre tostimulate the open space?
Erhart: tJhet you're saying is if the average . . .maybe . It'd be interesting -to look at.
Planning Commission
May 15, 799! - Page
Meet i ng
40
Krauss: WelI there's cerLain trade offs there. I mean Forbord indicatedthat that, indicates when you c.j.uster you save money on streets, You save
money on utilities. You save money on development costs. You probablv
make a more attractive development which wiII help you sell it quicker butI don't philosophically have a problem if they get 15? more lots and we've
achieved the open space thaL we uant and we got the better standards,that's fine too. They're still consistent with the Comp PIan. They can't
exceed the gross density that we have in that.
Batzli: I just, you knour my feelings aret I live in a PUD. f don't even
know uhat size my lot is. t^le have a big park next to us. I still thinkthe lots that our houses are on are too small. I'm the kind of guy, I likea big yard. Maybe it's just personal but I'm in a PUD every day and if you
made the lot sizes 9,OOO square feet, and I90 by those in Lundgren aII thetime. I Lhink those are too small. I mean the picture makes them Iookreally nice but those things are crammed together. They back right upagainst the little extension of Town Line Road there. t^lhatever it's called
there.
Ahrens:Pleasant View?
But do the people that liveEmmi ngs :there like them?
Ellson:not that
Is there
customer
a market for it? That's what Terry uas saying. You're
but there evidentally is people.
Batzli: They're tiny lots and I don't find them attractive personally. Now
maybe there's a market for them but I don't know. I would be hard Pressedto find somethins that I'd like, you know if I had a chance to look at it.
If enough ]andscaping, enough transferring, enough open space to make it
worth while to give them that small of a lot.
Ellson: WeLl his examplethinss like that.
was that people wanted a 15 minute mowed .Lawn and
Batzli: I would buy something else, yeah. If I did it again.
Ahrens: l.lhere are ure 9oin9 on this?
Emmings: WeII I guess whal I hear is that you're going to work out some
more examples. Haybe give us a little more concreLe idea. Haybe try and
uork out a schedule and get some input from some other peopfe to r^rhatyou're doing here and bring it back again. This is a public hearing again.
Did we close it? Do we need to close it? tJhy is it a public hearing?
Krauss: one thing you may uant to consider. There doesn't seem to be a
whole lot of concern or issues any Ionger wiLh the body of the PUD
ordinance. It's .the single family section that's generating the comment.
I'm growing increasingly concerned that if the Metro Council does r^rhat I'm
hoping they're going Lo do in the next week or two, we're going to need
this pretty quick.
you Proposeto the city PauI? Can you puII that section out and get
Council?
oasically just pulling out 20-506?
if somebody came in with asking for a single famiLy
Emmi ngs :
the r est
Kr auss :
Emm i ngs :
Krauss:
Emmi ngs :
detached
t,lhat dogoing up
Yeah.
So it's
Yes.
Now what
PUD?
Krauss: t^Jell there is an existing single familyue would not be eliminating until ule replace it.that because it's a bad section.
detached
You may
PUD section that
want to ca nce I
Emmings: Risht. Couldn't you do something like this? Could we put in anew section 20-506 to replace the o]d one that says that the City,s in theprocess of developing s-andards and just use that to retract the old one?And just not have standards but put everybody on notice that standards arein the process of being developed.
Krauss:in place
spot for
You know you'd almost besince nobody wants to use
us.
better protected by leaving the old oneit anyway. It will kind of hold our
For passing the rest of the
should just leave. You're Lalking about not making theErhart: I think we
change at all then?
Emm i ngs: No ,
And
it.
we pass everything that's here
we'II leave the existing single
Section 20-506 -
intact until we can
except
fam i lyKrauss;
replace
EIlson: So you
really quick?
Krauss:
seem tothey're
Batzli: I didn't. feel like ure're that far auay on 20-506. Iwhinning about the square footage but I'm a sole voice here.trying to see if anybody is... If everybody else likes 9,OOO.
really think that if it gets approved r^re'II have stuff
I don't know how quick it's going to be but we've got people thatbe chomping at the bit. But some of these projects are so Iarge,9oin9 to take a Nhi]e to get off the ground.
Conrad: So your intent is !o vote on lhe rest of the motion tonight?
Emmings: That's what PauI is proposing.
mean f 'mI'm just
Planning Commission Meet i ng
May 15, 7997 - Page 41
Emmingsr Okay, Is there a reaction to that?ordinance and jusl pulling ouL 20-506?
Planning Comm iss ion
Hay 15, 799t - Page
Meet i ng
42
Conrad: No, we're just looking right nob, Brian. [.le don't know yet and it
may be, yeah I jusL don't know so it's not that I don't agree with you. Ijust don't know how to handle. I think PauI and Jo Ann have a good, there
seems to be one simple solution ahd that's r.Jhat they've presented but I
want to see how that works in a variety of circumstances. I haven't
disagreed with anything you've said yet. If we want to pass the rest, thenI've got to get back into something on page 3. Under Section 2O-5o5,
Required ceneral Standards. Under Section (b). The applicant shalI
demonstrate that the PUD plan offers the City high. That's the Hord I'mquestioning. Hish quality...and then the last Iine says that represents
improvement over normal ordinance standards. So are we saying higher? Isthe word hieher?
Krauss: In that sense that's r.rhat you're looking at.
conradr Maybe that's just a small thins but I guess I'd raLher see the
word.
Batzli: t,hat about the word highest?
conrad: I guess I Iike the word higher in there. And then I get back downto my density transfer. In single family detached, which is what we're
debating, so f don't know what that means. I don't know hot^t that works. Idon't knou how to approve that right now unti] I see what we're doing insingle family.
Krauss: t^lel l that wouldn't be applicable until you passed the new section
anyway.
conrad: Until Ne passed the new section? Okay. f'm comfortable-
Emmings: Anybody else want to comment on whether the, what they think
abouL passing the rest of this except for 20-506?
Batzli: Paul on 2o-5o5( f )? Is parking lots and driving lanes shalI be set
back 20 feet from aIl exterior ]ot lines?
Krauss: Yes.
Batz]i: Never mind. I was confused. Do Ne cover in here or have wepreviously covered our recurring problem of somebody putting in a road next
to an existing lot? Do we talk about that at all anyulhere in here?
olsen: t^le did somewhat address that with the setback.
Batzli; In here?
olsen: No...accessory structures and... That was something that you could
determine as part of the subdivision of the PUD. You could say no, we
don't approve...application. To determine setback for a road. l.le found
out it was difficult.
Planning Commission
t4ay 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
43
Krauss: I don't understand the question.
a street at
happened in
the edge of a PUD connected to
VineIand.
Batzli: You've coveredput in later. Okay.
it for existing streets but not streets that may be
Emmings: I think ure need a motion to close the public hearing.
Ahrens moved, EIIson seconded to close the public hearing. AII voted infavor and Lhe motion carried. The public hearing uas closed-
Emmings: Is there a motion with regards to the ordinance?
Erhart: I'Il move that we recommend adoption of the PUD ordinance asoutlined in the memo to the Planning Commission, May 6, L99L. Is that agood way to descr ibe it? Do we actually have the ordinance Nritten out in
here?
Conrad: It's right here.
Erhart: Okay. AIright. The ordinance as stated in Article VIII, PlannedUnit DevelopmenL District except for Paragraph Section 20-506( e ) which willbe lef t open r,;ith a note that.
Krauss: tJeII I think you'd wanL to preclude the whole 20-506.
Erhart: Okay, the who-Ie 20-506 which wiIl include a note that says, what?
Krauss: If you just exclude this one, what wiII nappen is you'II have a
new PUD ordinance with the old single family section. So you don't have to
do anything. Just exclude this.
Erhart: Okay, so we're going !o exclude Section 20-506.
Emmings: I'II second it.
Ahrens: Did you have some changes Ladd?
Batzli: I thought Ladd made some changes.
Erhart: Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, Ladd had some changes-
Emmings: He intended to incorporate those. I heard him say thaL.
Erhart: Yeah, I said that.
Emmings: And I intended that in my second also.
Olsen: tle don'L want to
somebody else. You k nouJ
allow
Iike
Batz]i: Paul, is the old standards for residential 506?
brand new section isn't it? tJhy don't tre just put a 506
this
there
Or
in
IS A
that says
Planning Commission
May 15, 1991 - Page
MeeLing
44
or somethi ng?
Eecause, is the singLe family PUD section that we ha_ve now calLed
reserved
Emrn i ngs :
20-506?
Kr auss :
Emm i ngs :
Batzl i :
Erhart:
Emm i ngs :
detached
Not u n Iess
We don 't
we're real
have a 5O5
lucky, But 1'll change the numbers around.
right now.
It's 5O4.Because 5O1 , well.
It's not going to
Krauss: Ltel I yes it would.delete this one and replace
just replace, if your motion says
Section , blhere am I?
work.
If you
it r.rith
Kraugs
BatzIi:20-504.
Delete 2O-5O5 with and add existing.
Section 2O-5O4.
Erhart:
olsen: tle'll be sure not to repeal that section. The single family kind
of, it's not real separate.
Batzl i ; Yeah, that 's the probLem.
Ahrens: l,,Jhy don't we just identify the standards as guidelines for single
family detached PUD's? l.Je're reserving that section.
Emmings: Yeah, and not have one. t,e'II iust won't have anything for
single family until we pass one and Iet's Put in the section heading andjust say, Lo 2O-5O7 reserve for single family
Ahrens: 50€,.
506 .
PUD,S.
Reserve
o kay?
for standards and guidelines for single family
Is that okay Paul?
Krauss: Sure.
Emmings: AlrighL, do you want to include that in your motion? I'Il
include it in the second. AIright. Any more discussion?
Erhart moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of ordinance amendment to Article VIII , Planned Unit DeveloPment
District with the following changes: Amending Section 20-506 to state that
it's being reserved for Single Family Detiched Residential. Changing in
Section 2O-5O5(b) the uord 'hish' to 'higher'- All voted in favor and the
motion carried unanimously -
Planning Commission
Hay 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i n9
45
APPROVA L OF I'IINUTES: Chairman Emmings noled the Hinutes of the Planning
1991 as presented.Commission meeting dated May 1,
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE:
Krauss: f gave out tonight copies of the Metro Council's staff
recommendations on our Comprehensive plan. They,re favorable. They're
recommending that Ne get what we r.rant, In fact they totd us we could haveasked for 3OO or 4OO more acres if ule really wanted. Now this is with
voodoo stat.istics that I don't know how they got to this number but I'mhappy that they did.
Ellson: For this reason alone you deserve a raise.
Krauss: l.ie're basicalLy agreeing to disagree on population and employment.So what? There are conditions attached to their approval and it's on page15- It starts, there's 11 condiLions. l'4ost of them are real nominal. Theones that are of particular mention are, they,re appLying the same waterquality. First of aII they acknowledge that we are an advanced communityin terms of environmental sensitivity and b,aLer quality initiatives and aIlthis- And hJe received a lot of support particurarly relative to the Iackof response they received from Eden prairie on the same issues. Butconditions 4 and 5 are the same conditions Lhey appried to Eden prairie.
we're being asked to adhere to better standards. Better requirements ongrading and erosion control. I don't have a copy of what they,re quotinghere yet so I'm not exactly sure what we're buying into but to the extentthat it's better technology that we use right now, I don't see why ule,dhave any problem adopting it. r'm sure it's more construction managementtype things that we'd be looking for. Number 6 is an interest.ing one.t^lhat they're basically saying in number 5 is that as 2lZ is built, thehighwav 17 interchange should not be construcLed until or unless the l-,lusAline's expanded to include the interchange. And we have a very short run.It's only about a quarter mile. t^lhen you think about timing, I don,t thinkthat this is a]I that big a deal . This interchange is no! going to be openuntil 1998 anyway and t.his is in our 1995 study area so presumably thedates will work out. The Metro council is right now in a veyy major battlefishting the cities of Shakopee and prior Lake and Savage over a proposedinterchange that they want with the new Hb,y 18 bridge. prior Lake wants toaccess it but the area r^,here the interchange would go is beLween prior
Lake's MUSA and Shakopee's HUSA so the Metro Council is opposing it. Andthey're insisting Lhat they be allowed to grade the interchange but notpave it, r think is their compromise position but their whole premise isthat there's not supposed to be any highway facilities that induce growthIocated outside the MUSA Iine. They're very sensitive to this issue nowand we technically fall into that caLegory, even though it,s only a nominaldistance to the existint MUSA- rt courd trip us up if 10 years from norlwhen the highwav comes.through that part, if ue're not prepared or able !obring it into the MUSA ]ine. If they stil'I want to argue it so it,spotentially a problem. It's a Ionger term concern I guess.
Erhart: tJhich intersection? TH 101?
Planning Com.nission
May 15, 1991 - Page
Meet i ng
46
Krauss; No, TH 1O1 is fine. 101 's in the MUSA. It's 17. I would beurilling to raise Lhis, tle're going to Lhe committee tomorrou and to MetroCouncil next week. I'd be willing to raise this as a concern but I'm veryleery to because I don't want to rock lhe boat at this point. I mean we'regetling 99.9e; of everything that hre Nant and this one has a ]ong enough
horizon on it tha. I think he're going to get it anyway that I'd rather notkick too mr-rch. But basically those are the only substantive conditions.It's a pretty clean recommendation. So unless somebody comes up with areal r.:ildcard on the committee tomorrow or on the Hetro Council Thursday, Ithink r"re've got it. tle'II see.
El]son: Ne should at least send a coPy to Barbara.
approved the Kurvers Point recommendationEmmi ngs :
trit h just
Krauss:
Ahrens:
Farma kes :
Kr auss :
Conrad:
Emm i ngs :
t^, ha t
ft uJas
And the
B i gger
I see that Lhe Council
a Iong cu I -de-sac .
Yes they did.
That 's not a s, rPr.t se .
Kraus3: No. It was sometrhat of a difficult meeting. Not only did the
Kurvers of course not uJant to construct the cul-de-sac, they didn't wan! toconstruct the emergency access and our fallback position on that was to sayokay. Look you got away Hith a less than optimal intersection at the
existin? curb cut. If that's alI that's going to remain, we think thatthis should be upgraded to having full turn lanes into there. I mean
everybody's talking about safety here. This is a safety related issue.llell the Kurvers even kicked about that. They did what I thoughl they weregoin; to do is they called up somebody at HnDot and said MnDot doesn't uant
us to do this. tdho are you to demand that we do it? tlell, MnDot doesn't
care abouL TH 101 . It's been a fundamental problem from the slart. We
have to care about TH 1o1 because ure're eventua]Iy going to have it or the
county's going to have it. t^le have talked to folks at MnDot t^rho Lhink that
this is a dandy idea but officially they're not able to write you a letter
that says that, The Council did finally agree...to make some improvemenls
but we're supposed to work Hith HnDot on exactly what they are.
Emmings: And they gave the applicant their alternative plan on the
Chanhassen Medical Arts facility to have a 3 foot sign band as a
compromise. tle said 2. They wanted 4. They came in after the meeting
here, they came into the City Council ttith a 3 and the Council gave it to
them,
was the vote on that?
4 to nothing. Tom abstained.
3 foot gives them bigger, what was the mechanical problem?
tYPe .
Planning Commiss ion
May 15, !99f - Page
t'4eet i n9
47
They agreed to 12 inch ]etters which I thinklooking at 10 inch, they were looking aL 12.
rnal'iing neon backlit letters, you cannot makethat they can fit these Lubes in is 12. Nor^r
Krauss:
You were
were the standard.
t,lhat they had sa i d
them 10 inches. TheI don't know if
t,,a S
sma I
t hat
I est
Emm i ngs :
Kr ausg I
Conrad:
Krauss:
Give me a break,
That's what their sign consultan! Nas saying.
But on a 3 foot band can they stack words?
They can stack it 2 high.
There's no color restricLions? They can make it whatever theyFarma kes :
want?
Emmi ngs: Okay , wel I .
Krauss: Risht.
Ahrens:
Kr auss :
Ahrens:
Batzl i :
Krauss:
f saw you on TV.
My 15 seconds of fame?
Yea h -
Hor,r come they cuL Lhe Hayor ?
f don't know.
Krauss: A coupJ.e other things briefly. As I said, the Metro Council,scoming up. The bluff line tour, I'm not 9oin9 to get into. It u,as auseful exercise I think. June 8th is scheduled to be, June gth is aSaLurday. It's scheduled to be the bus tour visioning kind of a start of aprocess on TH 5. It's going to be held with you fol.ks, the HRA and theCity Council and we're in the process of laying out some sites and we,re9oin9 to have aL least 2 designers on board one of whom, Barry l.larner hasworked with the HRA and a lot of dourntoun stuff out on TH 5. It wiII begood for vou to see !hat. The other guy is a ferlow named Bilr l'1oore whoworks for the Universitv uho r attended a seminar he gave and he's sort ofan interesLing guv. You know it's an academic slant on things so take itwith a grain of salt buL iL should be an interesting exercise. Last thingis tonight ure comp.Leted the short list before this meeting. The short listof consultants to do the Surface t,ater planning for us. He,ve got it downto 5 firms. We're going to be sending out final requests for detailedproposals from them and hopefurly before Lhe end of June we will assemble agroup of ourselves being staff. some of you and some of the city councilto spend the better part of a day interviewing these people and selectingsomebody so we can get this show off the road and get going on that work.That does it for me.
Planning Commission
May 15, 1991 - Page
MeeL i ng
48
Ahrens: They had a ]ot on a couple of the other cities though. I was kind
of d i sappo i nted .
Krauss: NelI except lhey gave, they had the Polster's on. Chris PoLster
and his wife. The lead in to Lhe sLory was abouL Chanhassen so I guess if
you figure in hcrw much time they gave it but that uJas an hour and a half of
intervieuring belween Lhe l*4ayor and myself, To wind uP with 15 seconds.
Conrad: l^ias there a point to the thing?
Krauss: I di.dn't think the whole thing was very welI constructed.
Conrad: There was
lJas no conclusion.
nothing. That Nas the disappointing part to me" There
Emrnings: Is there a motion Lo adjourn?
Erhart moved, EIIson seconded to adiourn
and the motion carried- The meeting uas
Submitted by PauI Krauss
Planning Director
the meeti ng -adjourned at
AII voted in favor
10:30 p-m- -
Prepared by Nann Opheim
CITY OF
EH[NH[SEEN
690 COULTEB DRIVE ' P.O. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
}IEMORANDU},I
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBT:
1.
Ptanning Conmission
PauI Krauss, Planning Director
l,!ay 31, 1991
Report fron Director
The Metropolitan Council gave final approval to the Chanhassen
conprehensive PLan on Thursday afternoon, May 24th. The plan
and our efforts to develop it received compliments from Mary
Anderson, the l,letro Council Chair. A copy of the approvalletter and of the fornal Council findings on the plan are
attached. conditions of approval were pretty Duch r.rhat I had
outlined for you earlier. For the Dost part, the conditionsdo not represent significant issues or concerns. one
condition worthy of note is that the construction of the Hwy.
21-2/c. R. 17 interchange is to be scheduled in conjunctionwith urbanization of this area. Ilhat this ueans is that
unless the MUSA line is extended into the south study area inthe vicinity of this interchange, the Metro Council will
oppose its construction. I do not think this will present us
a significant problen since the interchange is not like1y to
be built until the late 1990s by which tine the MUSA line will
probably be extended. Even if it is not extended in any
major sense, it would not be too difficult to extend the MUSAline a short distance south of Llman Boulevard to acconplishthe interchange area.
with the adoption of the comp Plan, we have brought to closea significant chapter in the developroent of our community.
The PLanning Connission and city council and all of the
residents who participated in the process should feel positivethat we now have a plan on which to build the connunity's
developnent over the next decade. Of courae, this is not the
end of the line. The Plan outlined a series of uork stepsthat urust now be undertaken in a nunber of areas including the
Hwy. 5 corridor, bluff line protection and others. As tirne
aIIows, I will be rorking with l,lark Koegler to edit a final
copy of the plan and have it printed for distribution.
Report
May 31,
Page 2
fron Director
19 91
2 You all will probably recall presentations that Peter Olin, ofthe Landscape Arboretum, nade before the City Council
concerning the Conprehensive Plan. lrtr. Olints comments boiled
down to his belief that the city had an obligation to preservea rural atnosphere around the Arboretun. He also took sornerather uncalLed for pot shots at the guality of planning andthe environmental sensitivity of the conmunity. MR. Olin isnot letting this natter drop even though the conp plan hasbeen adopted. He appears to be not only concerned withdevelopnent in Chanhassen but has recently gotten enbroiled inargurnents with the Cities of Chaska and victoria overencroaching developnent and highway iuprovements concerningthese communities. He took the step of sending out a noticeof a meeting to state legislators and administrators fronstate departnents involving environnental protection to invitethen to a neetingT at the Arboretun to discuss local landplanning issues and their inpact on the Arboretun. Thisneeting was originally scheduled for the nonth of Uay and itrras noteworthy by the fact that Mr. Olin neglected to inviteeither nyseLf or any other planner from any of the threeconrnunities surounding the Arboretun. Cbuncilnan Wingintervened and the neeting has been rescheduled for th6afternoon of June 12th starting with a lunch at 12:30 p.n. Iwill be there to represent the city and rny position wiff Ueone of wanting to cooperate rrith the Arboretun, however, theArboretun and Mr. OIin in particular nust learn to deal withthe realities they are being confronted vith. In ny opinion,Chanhassen has proven to be an extraordinarily responsiblecommunity relative to the sensitivity to which ourComprehensive Plan was developed, the new and inprovingstandards to rrhich developnent is being held ana ouisensitivity to environnental protection issues for which wehave becorne widely known in the rnetropolitan area. I baveprepared infornation for this Eeeting that will attetopt toconvey these points. If any of the planning Cornrissionerswish to attend, please let ne know and I uill- certainly keepyou posted as to the outcoDe of the rneeting.
Work is proceeding tolrards hiring of an engineering consultantto work with the city on preparation of pians associated withthe surface water Utility. The city Engineer and f havedeveloped a short list of five final.ists out of 1G firns thatpreliminarily responded. . They are currently preparing finalproposals for review and interviews ni1l be scheauled ior thenorning of_ Thursday, June 2oth. The interviews will take upto 4 to 5 hours to conduct. As you wi1l recal1, the procesiagreed to by the City Council would enable nenbers of thePlanning Conmissj.on to work with representatives of the CityCouncil and staff to select the final consultant. The
3
Report from Director
Uay 31, 1991
Page 3
Planning Commission is urged to appoint at least one delegateto sit in on these interviews. Unfortunately, there is asignificant amount of tine required since each firn will
undoubtedly want to give a presentation and then need to
respond to questions and answers. Lunch will be provided.
4. The Planning conmission sill recall the uetropolitan Councilstaffrs pretiroinary report on new rural area policies. Thecity subnitted conments on these policies for initialconsideration. The report now appears to be going through
fornal. adoption by the l{etro Council. Bonnie Featherstone,
our neu lletro Council Representative forsarded a copy to ne
and asked for connents. I have attached a copy of my letterto Bonnie along nith the Uetro council 6taff report. I have
also attenpted to contact the l,tetro Council regarding our
requests to nodify the Lake Ann Interceptor Agreenent to
eliminate mininurn lot size requirernents in rural areas while
rnaintaining a 1 per 10 acre density. At the time of writing,I have been unabLe to track down the status of our request but
will try to provide this inforroation at the Planning
Commission neeting.
5. The city has retained the firrn of Bonestroo, Anderlik and
Rosene to conduct a conprehensive sewer and uater study and
plan for the newly expanded uUsA area. It is hoped that this
study can be cornpleted within 50 days and will be used as the
basis for designing utility systens to serve nelt develoPment
proposals in this area. When conpleted, it is ny suggestion
that this be adopted as an addendun to the conprehensive Planitself. At this point, this is a technicaf study that, in ny
opinion, does not directly involve the Planning Counission but
upon completion of this study, I lrill certainly provide you
with details and recoumendations.
5. The Planning Conmission Eay sish to be kept aware of
devetoproent proposals that are being worked on by staff at the
present time. While our agendas have relati-vely littJ.e in the
way of neu developnent proposals, there has been a growing
nunber of individuals interested in developing ln our
comrnunity, often with significantly sized projects. I{e expectthat many of these projects viII come before you some timeduring the sunmer or fall, in all likeLihood resulting inconstruction activity next spring. fhese include thefollowing:
' Ryan Construction is doing prelininary design workon two large industrial parks. The first is
located south of the railroad tracks al.ong Audubon
Road in an area that is gruided for industrialoffice in the Comp Plan. The 90+ acre site is the
Report
May 31,
Page 4
from Director
1991
area in which the U. S. Weather Servj.ce is lookingto locate their 10 acre Tirin Cities tleteorologicalStation. Ryan is also looking at the 137 acre sitenorth of Tinberwood. The Planning Commission will
reca11 that rrhile the City council. continued tonaintain the residential designation recomnended bythe Planing Conmission in this area, there wereguidelines establi.shed under which non-residentialuses nay be considered. These conditions nouldallow office/industrial type development under thefollowing conditions:
1. Developnent would only be considered up to thewest branch of Bluff Creek vith the remaining
acreage reserved for a school site.
There should be a strong orientation to officecorporate headquarters with office useconprising at least 5ot of the total floorarea.
Creeks, uetLands and tree cover sha1l beprotected along with the 100 foot wide bufferstrip. llaxinum hard surface sha11 not exceed60t.
2
3
4
5
ArchitecturaL style should have a strongorientation to the use of brick and glass withlighting, landscaping and signage coordinatingunifonoly of high quality.
The area nust be developed as a pUD.
Ryan understands these constraints and isdeveloping a proposal that conplies rrith then. Thecity is currently investigating nethods ofobtaining ownership of the school site for theschool district uhich in aII. probability nay usetax increnent revenues that could be generatld bythis project. Staff continues to believe that anindustrial office developnent created witbin theseguidelines offers a substantial inprovement to boththe Tinberrood area and to the City of Chanhassenas a whole over rrhat in a1I probabilitv would below-end single fanily residential uses -that wouldotherwise result. we do not underestinate thei.ssues that nay arise fron this nor the need totrork with area residents on developing anacceptable plan.
Report from Director
May 31, 1991
Page 5
Potential Cadillac Dealership located on Hwy. 5 near theDataserv property. Staff has been approached by adeveloper who is seeking to build a high end autodealership in our cornmunity. I'ly initial response sras atraditional one of rrnot in ny town you lronrtrr, but I knowthe developer and lre spoke about the guality ofdealerships that are currently being developed. If youare familiar with newer dealerships, they are often in.extremely high quality buildings and often a well
designed site plan and landscaping. The proposal callsfor approxirnately 80* of the vehicles to be storedindoors rrith other storage taking place off site inanother comnunity. As I thought about it nore, I
developed the opinion that this nay be equal to or betterthan the quality of industrial building ttran we havegotten in the area and indicated that I was willing topursue the natter and see what kind of a plan could bedeveLoped. It is ny understanding that they arepresently in the process of developing a concept plan forreview by the Planning Commission and City .Councj.l .There is littIe risk for the city since we are in astrong position to say no if the plan does not meet ourexpections. I expect to have this available for youshortly.
Lundgren Brothers is working on potentially 3 plats inour community. The first is a potential division locateduest of ltinnewashta Parkway and north of Lake St. Joe.This area was in the previous ITIUSA area. Their interestin this project seens to have cooLed sornewhat due todifficulties of assenbling the land fron a nunber ofdifferent property otners but the last I heard, they weresti11 pursuing the project. The second site is the onethat uas reviewed by the Planning Cornrnission during theclosing stages of developnent on the conprehensive i1an.This site is located between Galpin Boulevard and Hwy.41, north of the 1995 Study Area. The third and latestproposal is the one that is nost likely to come beforeyou first. This is located along Lake Lucy Road andincludes the Ersbo Subdivision that was appfoved undertwo different plans by the Connission but never developedand the adj acent land owned by Ortenblad which fornerlywas located outside of the MUSA line. It is myunderstanding that rre may have a plan for this site topresent to you sometirne in July.
The Klingelhutz subdivisi.on, off of Lake Riley Boulevardthat was reviewed by the Coumission earlier this year hasbeen put on hold to al1ow conpletion a set er and waterfeasibility study. This study is nearing conpletion and
Report
May 31,
Page 6
from Director
t-9 91
will be presented to the City Council in a short periodof tine. Development of this site could be allowed to
proceed at that point.
Ches llar FarDs. Staff has been rrorking with anindividual who is buying property in the Ches Uar Farmsarea. This is an extrenely quirky site that rras
developed under the PUD ordinance due to the presence'ofa 5 unit apartnent building having no access to cityutilities. The individual re are working with isbasically going to revanp the PUD to elininate the 5-unitapartment and redevelop lots for single fanily
development. This represents a significant decrease inintensity of development and is nuch uore in keeping withthe conmunityr s expectations for this area. Thisproposal is scheduled to cone to the Planning Cornrnissj.on
on June 19th.
There have been a nunber of smaller proposals that have
been discussed by a variety of individuals. We are
beginning to see individuaL property owners having 5 to
10 acres of property in the ner, IIUSA area expressing sonedesire to divide their lots. In several cases, these
were individuals who indicated their opposition to the
Comprehensive Plan several months ago but these requests
have been by no means linited to then. We expect to be
seeing several of these requests on a Commission agenda
over the summer.
The folLowing iteDs were reviewed by the City Council at their May20, L99]-, ureeting:
1. Lake Susan Hi11s West 7th Addition was given final plat
approval . Joe Miller Homes continues to be very successful inthis area and it is probably the most active subdivision interms of building pernits in our connunity.
2 Prelininary plat to subdivide a 39,885 square foot parcel intotwo single fanily lots for Ken Lund and Dana Johnson, Washta
Bay Court Addj,tion. The Planning Comnission will recall thaton a split vote it nas your reconnendation that this requestbe denied due to the existence of lot area variances. These1ot area varj.ances rrere unusually snall but issues related tothe plat were raised and it was not reconnended for approval.
The City Council found that these sites were acceptable andthat the varj,ances lrere nominal at best and grantedprelininary plat approval .
/ll 6t2 29t-6359 FAX 6t2 291-655A Tn',6t2 29t-{)901
N{ETROPOLITAN COUNCIL
.ll,tr: turl CL'ntn. )30 E)sr Fi.fth Straer. Sr Rnt. M,\ 55101-1631
May 28, 1991
Paul Krauss, Director of Planning
Cit-v of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
RE: City of Chanhassen
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review
MUSA Expansion Request
Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 15339-1
Dear IvIr. Krauss:
At its meeting on May 28, 191, the Metropolitan C.ouncil considered the city of Chanhassen's
comprehensive plan amendment. This consideralion was based on a report of the Metropolitan
and Community Development Committee, Referral Report No. 91-33. A copy of this rePort is
attached.
The Council approved the following recommendations contained in the above report:
That the Council adopt the staff report and findings as stated above as part of these
recommendations.
That the Metropolitan Council approve the city of Chanhassen's plan amendment
including the modification of the MUSA boundary.
That the city of Chanhassen maintain is initiative in reducing infiltratiodinflow
wherever it finds problems.
That the city of Chanhassen adopt standards, criteria and guidelines for erosion control
and surface water management of the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District if
the District adopts a 509 plan with a water quality element acceptable to the Minnesota
Board of Soil and Water Resources prior to development within the MUSA expansion
area.
1
2
3
4
Paul Krauss
Ill{ay ?2, 1997
Page 2
5.
10.
Sincerely,
MEAIv
Attachment
Vl,*f
u^rye. A"r*o
Chair -6r?Lq,
In the event that the watershed district plan is not approved prior to development of
areas within the MUSA expansion area, the city of Chanhassen adopt either the
MPCA's "Best Management Practices for Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" or
the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resource.s' 'Construction Site Erosion and
Sediment Control Planning Handbook" for erosiou control and surface water
management that will be used in review of development proposals within this
expansion area in order to remaiD consistent with the Councilt Water Resources
Manaqement Guide policies 51-59 and 3-3-3-6.
Construction of the TH 2lzlCS.IJl 17 interchange should be scheduled in conjunction
with urbanization of this area.
The city of Chanhassen should cooperate with EdeD Prairie and the Metropolitan
Airports Commission to organize a Joint Zoning Board to be involved in the Fllng
Cloud Long Term Comprehensive Planning process.
The differences between the Council's and the city's functional classification! of
CSAH 17 and TH 101 should be reconciled through the Transportation Advisory Board
proc€ss.
The city should included policies regarding the land use implications of helicopters and
heliports.
The city sbould develop implementation policies or tools to achieve a mix of housing
styles and cost ranges.
11. The city should reconcile differences in its parks plan with the 1991 Resional
Recreation Open Space Develooment Guide/Poliw Plan.
6.
8.
9
fi
Sharmin Al Jaff, Planner, City of Chanhassen
R.A Odde, Metropolitan Waste C-ontrol C.ommission
Richard Thompson, Metropolitan Council Staff %
7.
0/ilo,ar,r/
Metropoliran Council Me€ting of May 23, 1991 Buslness Item' B-2
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mcsrs Prrt ClntrG' 230 E st Flfth Sr, SL Prul, Mlnn6orr 55101
5t2t29L6359
REPOR,T OT TEE METR,OPOLITAN AND COMMUMIY DWEIOPMENT COMMNTEE
Referral Repon 9l-33
DATE Mey 23, 19r
TO:Meuopoutan Cruncil
SIIBJECT: City of Chastrass€s CoBptchensive Plsn AmeDdmcnt &
MUSA Brpansion Request
Meuopolibn Council Referral Filc No. 15339-1
Metropolita! Couocil Disrrict No. 14
BACKGROUND
Ar iE mccting oa May 16 1991, the MctropolitaD atrd Cornmuniry Darclopnat ComEirtcc discussad a sraff
repon aad rccommendations dealing with rhe r6,i€s, of thc Ctarhass.[ ComprchcEsil€ Pla! Updare ald MUSA
€apansion requcsl The plaD amendBetrl represeBrs e complctc updatc of rtc ciys 196l coEprchcnsiv. plan as well
as a fequ€6r ro erpaad rhe MUSA by 27& acI6 (grcs) or l57l .cr6 (Det).
ISSUES AND CONCMNS
Richard Thompoo' @uncil staE (c[t 6457) prcscntcd tic rcpon ard e[swcrEd qucstiotrs fuE thc CoEmitte€. Jim
Krau*rcmer qu€stioBcd Oe llsc of ric $ord thould' in $c r€coEocndstioas Thompon cnplaitrcd thar unlcss
there was 8 systcm iopacr, rhc Council dirt lot hrw Oe poxrcr to rcquirc cnrngcs itr l cDtnm .iys plan. In
responsc to Krautkrcmefs qu6tiol rcgarding surfacc water runofi End tic Milncsou Rhrcr, Artrc Hurlbun
cxplained that surface *aler, althoug! iEponaDq is Eor ,cr r slstcE Shc fclt that suracc watcr may bc crcMng
inro a s!6rem. Paul Krause, plenrsl f6J thc city of Cheilas$E, addad lhat tic city vicn rd tlc rcoommcndadons as
condirions, and it is sh EoDrbs into r storE watcr study e8d pleL
FINDINGS
1.For purposes of thir Enicn, the population and borschold forecass br Z)fl) ued in the
TH 2f2 Study rcrc ucd" An euployncnt forecast of 7,ffi ia thc ycar aX)O for the city
of Chaohasscn sar urcd.
The estimated denaad for iodustrial and rcsidcntial laud ia thc city of Chanhassen in the
year 2000 will b l9l2 aet 8crcs, Thc city's rcqucsr for lJTl rct acrca is consistcnt with
policics of thc MDIF.
Thc reviscd florw projections by iDtcrceptor prwidcd by thc city arc highcr than the flov
projections in the Warcr Rcsourccs Manaqemcat Devclopmcat Guidc/Policy Plan. but therc
will be no systcm impact oD tbc lnetropoltu intcrccpor systcn through 2010.
L
3.
4.
M
c
D
c
B
The cityt policies for nrral arca dcvelopmcnt of I pcr t0 (a pcr tlO) arc consistcnt with the
Councilk rural policy.
5 The amount of infiltration/inflow app€ars to be above what is normally acceptable. bur rhe
plan appean to address both existing and future intiltratiory'inflou
6.
1
The city of Chanhassen's on-site sewer s),stem program fully meets the Council's
requirements.
The plan does not address the issue of private wastewater treatment planB. The city needs
to revise its plan indicating that it will not allow any privatc wastervater treatment plants in
its rural service area.
10.
11.The city has indicated that it is onc of the cityt policics to ooorrol pcak runoff from
urbanizing areas so that it can be haadlcd by dornstrcam drainagc fcaturcs
12.The transponation clcment of the Chanhassen Comprchcnsirrc plan is consistent with the
Transportation Policv Plan and is an adequatc rcsponsc to thc 1988 ransportation s)6tems
statemeot.
13.Thc Eastcm Caner C.ounty Transportation Study, upon which Cbanhasrcnt (and.other
communities' transport8tion plaas are bascd) is adequatc insofar as thc city of Chanhassen
is concerued
14.The city's funaional classifications of CSAII 17 aad TH 101 arc diEerent ftom the
Council's
15.Thc loog-tcrm mnprchcnsirrc plaa for Flying Cloud Airport includcs a prcpotd !o lcngtheo
ruuvay 927 at sonc futurc darc, which ir oot addrcsscd in thc plao
16.Thc city's plaa docs not iocludc policics that addrcss the land usc inplications of hclicopters
and hcliports
17.
The city'a local park plao which prcposa a balanccd rccrcatiou syrrcm which appcals to a
broad basc of population aod prwidcs rccrcation appropriatc for both activc aad passive
uscrs is consistcnt with thc Councill Egg[!{ig_Ebe
8.
18.
The city has requested that the rcuthcm part of thc city bc included in planning for the
Chaska Wastewatcr Treatment planl The Council agrecs to rccommend looking at that
area in mnjunction with long range planning for that facility, but the Council is making no
mmmitment as to the timiog and/or location of an intcrceptor to s€rve the southem portion
of the city. The threc interceptors that currently scrve the city have capacity for at least
aDother 20 years.
A goal to reduce nonpoint sourcc pollution cntering thc MiDncsota Rivcr by 19% W q
p€rc€Dt hortr 1980 levels has bccn cstablishcd In order to addrcss this goal, the ciry needs
to complete is local water Eanagemctrt plan which should addrcss the commcab made as
part of this staff reporL
The city has adoptcd a '!o tret lcs" policy that is coosistcnt with thc C.ouncil's policy on
wetlands.
Thc city of Chanhasscn prcscotly has no publicly-assistcd bousiag uaits in the city. A
reccntly built 60 uoit buildils has 20 pcrccnt of iE utriE rcscrrcd for lorr aod moderatc
income houscholdr
9.
RECO}I}IE\DATIONS
That the Metropolitan Council approve thc city of Chanhassenb plan amendment including
the modilication of the MUSA boundary.
That the city of Chanhasscn maintain ia initiativc in rcducing infiltration/inflow wherever
it finds problems.
That the city of Chanhassen adopt standards, critcria and guidelina for erosion control and
surface water managcmcnt of the Rilcy-Purgatory-BluE Crcek Watenhed District if the
District adops a 509 plan with a water quality elcmcnt acccptable to the Minnesota Board
of Soil and r#atcr Rcsourccs prior to dcvelopmcnt within thc MUSA expansion area.
ln the evcnt that thc watcrshed district plan is oot approvcd prior to developmcnt of areas
within the MUSA cxpansion arca, thc city of Cbanha,scca adopt cithcr thc MPCA's "Best
Managcment Practiccs for Protcctiag Watcr Quality io Urbaa Arcas' or thc Minnesota
Board of Water and Soil Rcsourccs' 'Constructioa Silc Erosion aad Scdimcnt Control
Planning Haodbmk' for erosioa control and surfacc watcr Eaaagcmcnt that will be used
in rorian, of derclopmeot propoals within this cxpansion arca in ordcr to rcmain consistent
with the Councilt Water Rcsourccs Manaqcment Guidc policics 5l-59 and 3-3-36.
Coastruaion of thc TH 2IZCSAH 17 inrcrchaoge should bc rchcdulcd in'conjunction with
urbaniza tion of this arca.
Tbe city of Chaahassco should copcratc with Edcn Prairic aad thc Metropolitan Airporu
C,ommission ro orgaoizc a Joint Zoniog Board to bc inohrcd in thc Flying Ooud l,ong
Term Comprehcnsivc Planning proccs.
Thc differcaccs bctseco thc C.ouocil's and thc city's fuactional classificatioas of CSAH 17
and TH 101 should bc rcconcilcd through tbc Transponation Advisory Board proccss.
8.
9 The city should iacludc policics rcgardiog thc land usc inplicatioos of hclicopters and
heliports.
10.The city should dmlop implcocDtatioa policics or toolr to rchierc a nix of borsiag sylcs
aod cct ranges.
11.Thc city should rcconcilc dificreoccs ia its prrks plao *ith thc 191 Rcqiond Rccrcation
Ooea Space Dcvelooncnt Guidc/Policr Plen
I
2.
3
4.
That the Council adopt the staff repon and findings as statcd above as pan of these
recommendations.
5.
6.
7.
Rcspcctfully submittd
Susan Andenoo, Cbair
Merropolitan Council of rhe Twin Ciries Area
Mears Park Centre, 230 E. 5th St. '
St. Paul. Minnesou 55101
612-29 | 43 59 lTDD 29t {D04
DATE: May 10, 1991
TO:Metropolitan and Community Development Committee
FROM: Richard Thompson, Research and Iong Range Planning
SIJBJECT: City of Chanhasscn Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Revised Comprehenslve Plan and MUSA Expansion
Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 15339-1
Metropolitan C,ouncil District No. 14
TNTRODUCTION
The city of Chanhassea has proposed to u$ate its comprehensive plan that was originally
completed in 1981. The updated plan addresses all aspects of a comprehensive plan including
goals and policies, natural features, population, households and employment, land rxe,
transportation, housing, recreation, public sewer and water and capital imprwements. The plan
update also includes a report entitled Tinancing Storm Water Projects Using a Surface Water
Management Utility.'
Included in the plan amendment is a request to add 2780 gross acr€xt (1571 net acres) to the
metropolitan urban service area (MUSA).
AUTHORITY TO REVIEW
The Metropolitan Land Usc Planning Act of 196 requires that ameodments to local
comprehensive plans be prepard submitt€d to the Metropolitan Council for review and adopted
in the same matrner as the original plans (Mian Stat- 473.864, subd" 2, 198). Guidelines adopted
pursuant to Minn StaL 473.864 for revicwing proposed amendments prorridc a 9Gday ranicw
period for amendmenr potentially aEecting one or more of the metropolitar systems, and a 50-
day raniew period for amendmenb that do not have a potential impact on metropolitan qEtems.
The city of Chanhasisen subnitted its proposed comprehensive plaa amendmcnt on February 5,
1991. Oa March 6 191, the Chair determined that the amendmcat was a major amendment, and
that the Council would rerriew the amendment and comment on the r6'iscd plaa and cxpanded .
MUSA requesr Therefore, the 9(Hay rcview period apllies and will concludc on May 2d 191.
Documents submitted in support of this plan amendment included:
l. Report entitled 'Fhancing Storm Water Projecs Using a Surface Water
Management Utilif, August, 1990.
2. 'City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan-1991'
3. Attachment F: Public Information Materials
DESCRIPTION OF CHANIIASSEN
The city of Chauhassen is located in northeastem Cawer County on the southwest side of the
Twin Cities metropolitan area. (see Attachment 1). It is bordered by Chaska and Victoria on its
west, Shorewood on is north, Eden Prairie on is east and the Minnesota River on its south.
The city has experienced rapid population, houschold and industrial growth during the last
decade. especially since 1985. According to the U.S. Censrs, the lfi) population of the city grew
to 11,700 people, almost double the 1980 population of 6359. Households grew from |283 in
1980 to 4,016 in 190. Industrial grorth was spurred by expansion of cxisting indrstries and
location of new businesses in the community. Notable nan, or expanding businesses include
- Rosemolrnt, McGlynn Bakeries, Empalq Data Serv, and Redmond Products. The community has
become an important center for the prioting industry in the Twin Cities area-
The city is also home to the Minncsota [-andscape Arboretum (which also cxteDds west into
Victoria) the Chanhassen pinn6l Jhg31613nd I:ke Minneryasbta Regional Parlc
ANALYSIS
METROPOLTTAN DEVELOPMENT A}.ID INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK
The Metropolitan Development and Investment Frarne$rork (l"DfD shour the city of
Chanhassen in three geographic policy areas (see Attachment 2): developing are4 Primarily on
the northeast and northwest pars of the city; commercial agricultural area in thc south part of the
city, aad general rural use arca ia tbc ccntral part of the city. This nixturc of gcographic policy
areas is characteristic of communitics on tbc dcvcloping fringe"
FroE the standpoint of the MDIF, there are two salient issucs that mrut be addrcsscd. The first
inrolves the MUSA expansion aad is magritude. The sccond inrolvcs thc land use cbangcs. The
MUSA expansion requ€st is based on three factors: cxisting laod supply, household aDd
employment forecasg aod future land dcmaad. Both the MUSA erpansion requcst ald Proposcd
laad use changes are contingent on interceptor and sewage trcatmert capacity.
Forecasts
Chanhassen's comprehensive plan revision questions the Metropolitan Council's forecass and
presents its own range of forecasts for population and households. It is extremely difficult to
predict future population and household growth in an emerging suburb such as Chanhassen.
Initial population forecasts generated in the mid-1960's anticipated much more growth in the
region, while low forecasts of the mid-1980's were influenced by the prwious 15 years of very
slow regional growth. This resulted in the current forecasts made for Chanhassen in the MDIF
being too low.
Because of this more rapid grovth in Chanhassen, the Council, as called for in the MDIF,
reviewed its adopted forecasts for households and population and agreed that for use in planning
for the TH 212 corridor, higher forecasts should bc used. This was done in 1988 in cooperation
with the city (see Table 1). This substaotially increased the city's 2010 forccast, allowing for 3,200
to 3,400 additional households aod 7,5fl) mote people in the next 20 years. This represents a
slowdown in the rate of grorrh, but not as much as the slocdown projected for growth nationally,
which the Council expecs to affert grmrth in the Twin Cities.
TABLE 1
FORECAST COMPARISON
zffi
Chanhassen TH 212 EIS
17,782 r53oo
6586 5,600
2010
Chanhassen TI{ 212 ETS
29,813
11,250
19,50
7,M
The TH 212 study forecasts for Chaahasseo provide for r() percent more growth itr the D€rt
twenty years over the previous dccadg comparcd to a ortional grw,th ratc of only 32 percent
over the same period Chanhasrcn's population forecast also rellects a much sharpcr decline in
household size than in the U.S, shich mears that Chanhasscn wi[ bc growiDg crlcn faster in
terms of residential developmeot than natioaally.
Thc city's forecast altcrtratives prcscntcd in the plan arc bascd oo a pcrcetrtagr rate of growth,
which is increased over the forecast perind- The Couocill forccast method relies on allocating
households to communities withirr s rcgi6aal control forecast based on thek past trcnds (ia
numbers of housing unis), their rc6gining land supply, thcir location within thc rcgioa aad land
avaitability of other commuaitics. Thc latrcr t*o factos become cspccially importatrt factors for a
city such as Chanhassen, which is on thc derrcloping cdge" If tbc rcgioa gro*t faster, as thc
Council once expccted it to grmr, thesc communitics will boonl but if growth slocn, the outsard
pressure is reduced and they could scc Euch slorrrcr gorrrtb" Thc Councilh maior difficulty in
J
?opulation
Households
forecasting in the past has been caused by the sharp changes in regional and national growth over
the past three decades.
The preceeding discussion of national fogecasts above is preliminary, but indicates one type of key
analpis that will go into preparing regional forecass. The Council staff has now begun to update
its forecasts. This is part of a regular (approximately every live yean) schedule of forecast review
and revision needed to slstematically correct descrepancies. Work on the new forecasts should be
complete within one year. The Council will accept the cityt figures as input to the forecas
revision. the city wil be contacted during the forecast process for additional review and oommenl
4
The interim forecast review process (such as was done in the TH 212 study) does not attempt to
provide a oew forecast, but is intended to proride input for various regional and local plaoning
decisions that need to be addressed immediately. (As such, the TIl2l2 household forecass will
be used in calculating land demaod in Chanhassen). Any commitments based on thesc numbers
would oot be revened if the Couocil later changes its official forecasts. The new forecasts will
not use Dumbers agreed upoo as part of any past interim adjustments.
Emplolment
The growth of employment in Chanhassen has accelerated during the 1980's, especially the latter
half of the decade. Tbe city's employment of 985 in 1970 increased to 1,300 in 1980, ao increase
of 32 percent. Betweeo 1980 and 190, according the to cityt annual cmployment survey, the city
grew to 5,900 employees. Full-time emplqurent increased 290 perccnt over this pcriod
The rise in employment in Chanhassen rculted from several large indr:stries locating in
Chanhassen. Corporate officcs and light manufacturing facilites have been attracted to thc city
due to high ameoity industrial lan4 availability of transportation facilities, high quality housing
and the planned expansion of. TH ZlL The city articipatG that the industrial growth trends
experienced during the 190's and 1980t will continue beyond the year 2000, provided cnough
adequate industrial land is arrailable.
Fmployment growth in Chanhasscn has been dillicult to predicr The Council has forccasted total
employment for the city at 4Jfl) for 2000. According to the city's employment survey, this
number was already excecded substantially in 190. Sincc the employmcnt numbcr was not
adjusted for the TH 212 study, it was agrccd at a meeting on April lZ 1991, that for purpccs of
the plaa amrnendment, an adjrstment muld be made in the 2000 employment forecasL (The
C-ouncil will adopt a formal emplqoent forecast in conjunction with is overdl updated forccast
tn 1992) For purpces of thc plan, Chanhassen's 1990 employment was 6,000. The Meuopolitan
Couocilt 1990 employmeat projections for 1990, 2(tr0 and 2010 sere 3,500, 4J00 aad 6100. The
city therefore qc€cded thc Council's projcctions for 190 by }SOO. Adding Chanhassent
employment difference (2500) !o the Metropolitan Council! 20@ employment projection of
4500 yields a projected employmcnt of 7,(ffi for thc year 20m. This b a fairly conservative
growth estiBate, but it will bc used until thc rerdsed forecast is prepare4
Land Suppty and Demand
Since the household forecasts were revised for purposes of the TH 212 Plala, those foiecasts wilt
be used for the purposes of estimating the demand for land in the urban service area. The plan
projects 1990-2000 land demand for various residential land use categories in the city. That
demand including a Lrc year overage indicates a need for approximately 1,366 acres of land for
residential development.
According to the city's estimates, Chanhassen currently has 361 acres of vacant residential land
within the MUSA line. The draft comprehemive plan calls for 1,()28 net acres (net acres
represents developable land, land minus areas of steep slopes, parb, wetlands, highway rights-of-
way, etc.) of land to be added to the MUSA for residential purposes,for a lGyear supply of 1,389
acres. The proposed supply exceeds the demand based on the TH 212 projections by 23 acres.
The 1,389 acres of land identified for residential purpo66 does not include major wetland areas.
However, it does include small wetland areas and slopes that may be unsuitable for danelopment
due to city ordinances.
Besides residential, the other mportant component of land demand i! the city of Chanhassen is
industrial. Presently, the city has a ratio of&3 jobs per industrial acre. Assuming that a similar
-ratio would be maintained for the ncxt 10 years and employment in 2fiD of 7,000, the city could
expect a demand of &43 indrstrial acres. Adding in a S-year overage indicatcs 8 total demand of
approximately 1,255 acres. The Chanhas.sen plan proposes to add 639 acres of industrial land
(net) for development. The city currently has 96 acres of land available within the MUSA for
industrial gowth, excluding scveral tracts held I existing corporatioDs for future growth.
In order to estinate the net land available in thc community, thc city has excluded some areas. ln
addition, the city has adopted a Do-aet loss policy for wetlands which has the effect of lowering
development densities to 1.7 units per acre in single family districts. The 1389 acres also does
not include the Eckaukar, Prince, and Carlson properties. According to thc city, these parccls are
categorized as vacaut agricultural, although both could bc characterized as 'cstates' or
"compounds" (the Carlson propcrty is enrolled in the Grcca Acres Program). The net
developable area of these parcels cf,cluding major x/etlands is:
Eckankar
Princc
Carlson
113 scres
93 rcrcs
54 acres
260 acres
Thesc parccls ac@utrt for part of thc differcncc b€twecn the grcs laad propccd to bc added to
the MUSA (2,780 acres) and net acres QJTI). Thc others consist of areas already devcloped
into large lot suMivisions (467 acrcs)areas of propocd park cxpansion (9/ acrcs), major wetlaods
and proposed high*ay righaof-wayr (291 acres). (Attachment 3 coataias aD cxplanation of
special circumstances relatcd o t*o of rhcsc propertics).
5
Adding the demand for residential land (1,366 acres) and the demand for industrial land (639
acres) yields a total demand for residential and industrial land of 1,932 net acres of developable
land, which appears to be justified.
Rural Use Area Policy
The city has adopted a policy consistent with the MDIF regarding development in the rural area.
The city allows development at a density of one per 10 with a two and a half acre minimum lot
size. The city is contractually required to adhere to these standards by the Lake Anne agreement.
Two parts of the rural area are designated in the plan as 1995 Study Areas. The city intends to
look at these areas in 1995 to determine how they should be planned. The Council encourages
this and will be open to review a more detailed plan for these areas after 1995.
NATURAL RESOURCES (Froat, Osgood)
2W
2010
701-730
901-959
These flow Egures have not b€€D rwised based oD the Councilt updating of its population and
bousing projections for the Highway 212 study.
The Council's Water Resources Manarcmcnt Develooment GuidePolicy Plan establishes the
cootent requirements for thc local scwer element itr the city's comprehensiw plan To satis$
these requirements the city nccds to project population, houscholds, employmeat aad flour by
interceptor servicc area for ZXD and Z)1O In the April 18, 191, Mcmoraadum from the city's
Planning Director, Dew IIow projcctions by inrcrceptor for 2000 and 2010 have beea madc. These
new flow projectiong while they arc higher than the flow projections it thc EC!9I_BE9CS9E
Manasement Dervelooment Guide/Poliqr Plan. indicate that there will bc ao systcm impsct on the
metropolitan iaterccpor sptcn throug[ 2010.
Based on historical data for thc city, it appcars that the city has au iafiltrationfnOow (I & I)
problem- This plan cstablishcs a Baragemeot plan for ad&essing (I & D io thc city's bcd
collection sptem- This plaa appcars to address both existiag rtrd futurc (I & t). Tte Apdl 18,
1991 Memorandum also indicatcd that thc pcak 0 & D lras beea reduccd sirce thc latc 1970's. .
Howeveq the amount of (I & f; still appear to be above what ir aormally acccptablc. Thcrcfore,
the city oeeds to maintain is initiatirrc in reducing infiltratiorv5nllow wherever it finds problers.
6
Sanitary Sewen
The city of Chanhassen is prwided with metropolitan sewer service via tbe hke Ann/Red Rock,
Purgatory Creek and the Shorewood interceptors. Flous in these interceptors are mnveyed to
the Blue L:ke wastewater treatment plant in Shakopee for advanced sccondary treatment before
being discharged to the Minnesota River. In 1990 the flow from Chanhassco was 550 million
gallons per year (MGY). Future flm, projections for thc city arc contained in thc Council\
Water Resources Manaqement Development Guide/Policv Plan aod arc as follom:
Range (MGY)
The city has not included a policy statement in its plan stating 1) that under no circumstances will
Private wastewater treatment plans be allowed or 2) the conditions under which these sFtems
will be permitted. However, in the April 18, 1991 Memorandum the city has indicated tlat it
does not envision the use of any private waitewater treatment plants in the rural area and that
the city is willing to amend its plan accordingly.
The city has indicated that it recommends that wheu the MWCC cxamincs solutions to the
Chaska wastewater treatment plant expansion that it also examine future interceptor needs for
the (Bluff Creek) southem service area of the city. At the preent time and in the foreseeable
future there does not appear to be any need to expand the iDterc€ptor capacity for the city.
However, as part of any anal,,sis of alternatives for the Chaska WWTP, the C.ouncil would
recommend that this area b€ considered. Howevcr, it should bc clcarly understood that there is
no commitment as to the limitg and potential locatioa of any facility that falls ouside of the wo
year Implementation Planning proc€ss" (For additional conncDls from thc Metropolitan Waste
Control Commission regarding saaiury sewers, r€c Attachnetrt 4).
On-Site Sarer Sptems
The city of Chanhassen is a developing community and is planning for urban sewer services.
However, in accordance with thc citics plan, a large part of thc city will rcmain rural and be
serviced by individual on-site septic sptcms. Therefore, the city nccds to also plan for the
contiouation of these on-sitc qntems. Currently, the area ouaide thc city's MUSA is zoned I per
10. However, some developmcnt has occurred at deDsitics grcatcr that I pcr 10 before the city
adopted is cunent zoning. Thc city has an on-site treatmcnt ordiaancc which requires the
liceasing of dcsignen, installers and pumpcrs; rcquires installation data; prwidcs a prooes to
mnect failing sFte[ts; and requircs pumping once every threc yEars. ID iddition the city has
adopted the Minncsota Pollution Control Agcncy rcgulation 7(80 rcguding oD-site q6teros. The
city also has ao education program to inform homeorners otr thc propcr usc of an on-site sptem.
For ncw homes in the rural area the city also rcquires that tulo scptic tank drainfields be available
on site in case one of tbe draialields fails. The city also indicates that it will establish an
inspection program to etrsurc coEpliance with all aspeca of iS ordinanccs. Thc city's on-site
program fully meets the Couacil's rcquircments
Watcr Quality
In January 1990, thc MPCA and EPA agrccd on a goal of rcducing aoopoint rourcc pollution in
tbe Mimesota River by z() pcrccnt hom t9B0 lerels: This goal is to bc achisrcd by July 1, 196.
The Council has been working with varior.rs Eoups to establish thc framework to d6/elop its
Water Resourccs Manasemcnt Devclopment Guide/Polic] Plan s,hich will addrcss ho*' this goal
cao be mel Sincc mct of thc city drains to the Minneota Rirrr via Purgatory, Riley or Bluff
Creeb, it is necessary that the city plaa for water quality Esnagcmcot from both its urban and
rural scrvicc areas. Mceting this goal may require rrcry rcstrictirrc cootrol of aonpoint rcurce
pollution in runoff from futurc devclopment if concurrent stcps arc oot taken to eEcctively
reducc present levels of nonpoint sourcc pollution in cxisting runoE Bascd oo thc cityl rcquest
to add 2,780 grcss acres to thc MUSA therc is a great potential to crusc scrious water quality
problerDs to both locd lakes and thc Minneots River if storm warcr runofr ir not managcd
propcrly.
7
The Council has exprassed is concerns over the water quality of kke Riley (a priority lake of
the C.ouncil) on several occasions and most rec€ntly in a review of the city of Eden Prairie's
request for a MUSA expansion. In addition, the MWCC has monitored both Riley and Bluff
Creeks since 1989 to ascertain the impach of nonpoint rcurce runoff on the quality of the
Minnesota River. Based on preliminary results of this monitoring, both tributaries carry high
amounts of pollutans during storm events. ln some cas€s state water quality standards are
violated on these tributariss.
Unless a comprehensive watershed plan is dorcloped and implemented, continued dorclopmcnt in
the lake Riley watcrshed will le.d to the continued degradation of q,atcr quality in hkc Rilcy
and the Minnesota Rivcr. This potcatial dcgradation is inconsistent with scrrcral Council policics
in the Water Resources Guidc and continucs to b€ of Eajor coocem to the Council At an
interim measure tbe city of Chanhasscn should adopt currcntly available guidctincs for storowatcr
EaDageEeDt likc the MPCAb manual oa Bcst Managcmcnt Pradicca for Protccting Watcr
Quality ia Urban Arca'.
The city is participating in thc Couocil'r Minncsota Rirrcr tcchnical advisory group which will hclp
C.ouocil staE prcparc a long range plan for addrcssing watcr quality irsuca in thc Miaocsota River
basin. Hwaneq it is not anticipatcd that this planning will bc complctcd uotil lstc h l99Z
Thercforc, any actions taken by thc city bcforc this plan is completed Ertst bc cognizant of thc
impacts of thesc actions on $ater quality aad takc appropriarc action to mitigarc tbccc impacts
Thc city has also indicatcd that ir ir in rupport of a 'no oct lcs' policl for city wctlan& which is
fairly consistent with tbc Couacilb policy on *Etlao&. Tbe Couacilb policy oo *etlaa& also
discusses the wetlands ccological funaion, which also must bc prcscnrcd This aspcct should be
addressed in the city's local watcr EtamgeEcDt plao As part of the cityb natural rrsourcei
E
ln November 1990, the city of Cbanhassen adopted a surface water management utility districr.
This district collects fees from property owlers in relation to the amouDt of storm water runoff
the property generates. This utility fce should Eeatly increas€ the cityl effectiveness in
implementing its long range management plan by cnsuring a contitruous fuoding sourcc. The city
has indicated that one of its taslcs is to prcpare a stormwatcr managcmcDt plan which will address
flood control issues, preservation of wetlands aod watcr quality consideratioos. This planning is
critical in order for the city to protect its local watcr nesourcc. This local water managcment plan
is also required by the Metropolitan Surfacc Water Managcment Act (Chapter 509). This law
requires the local water Ea8ageEent plan to be in conformancc $'ith the approved watenhed
plan. Since the city is both urban and rural it is neccssary that the local water managemcnt plan
address both areas in a comprehcnsirr Ba tcr.
However, the Council aod the Minncsota Board of Water and Soil Rcsourccs currcntly consider
thc Riley-Purgatory-BluE Creek Watcnhcd Districtt Watcrshcd Managemcot Plan dcficient in
several areas including its revies policics for protcction of natural storage and rctcntioo arcas and
is plans to assess the contn'bution aad rcduction of nonpoint pollutioo fron propccd
developments. The currcnt &aft of thc wstcnhed plan does not addrcss water quality ou a
watenhed-wide basis. Givco this situation thc city of Chanhasscn should adopt currcDtly available
guidelines for stormwater manageEtctrt, and along with the Watershed District, pursue a rcgional
approach as the most cost effcctirrc and ellicicnt method of protecting the area's urctlands, lakes
and streanrs.
implementation strateg/, the city is planning a program to address exc€ssive nutrient loadings to
its surface waters. While this is commendable, it is also necessary for the city to address loadings
from suspended solids, organics as well as toxics (pesticides and heavy metals).
The city has also indicated that it is one of the cityt policies to control peak runoff from
urbanizing areas so lhat it can be handled by downstream drainage fcatures. This is a good
practice. However, total pollutant loadings, especially phosphorous, are critical to lake water
quality and are not moderatcd by controlling peak flour. Therefore, if late water quality
improvement is one of the city's goals, holding total phosphorous loading to predevclopment
conditions will be necessary. As the city is dercloping its surface water management platr, it needs
to be cognizant of all thc paramcters it needs to mntrol, as well as the total loadings from various
pollutans.
ln addition to general lakc quality problems, thc Council is speciEcally conccmed about
devclopment draining torard Ricc Marsh Lake that wiU lead o additiooal ruooff into tbe lake.
From 1958 uDtil approximatcly 198, the Lakeview Hills Wastes'atcr Treatmcnt Facility treated
wastewater from the (thcn) village of Chanhassen and discharged eEluent to a ditch less that 1/4
mile long that flowed directly into Rice Marsh hke. During the lifetime of that facility, which
had a long history of operational problems, the majority of srspcndcd solids passing out of the
l:keview Hills Facility was dcposited in Ricc Marsh kke. Thce suspended rclids are organic
matter rich in phosphorors and othcr outrients. A large accumulatioo of organic, nutrient-laden
materials now exists in Rirc Marsb l:ke water and sediment column. This is bome out h a
study conducted by the Council in 1983 entitled: Diasnostic-Feasibilitv Studv of Sc\rcn
Metropolitan Area lake: Part Trro: Iake Rilev.
The study indicated that lrtc Rilcy rcccivcs outllow from Rice Marsh Lakc as well as surface
runoff from thc devcloping watcnhcd surrounding it- I-akc Riley is eutrophic, expericncing algal
blooms and nuisance macrophytc grovrths. The study determined that phosphoror:s was the
critical nutrient for phytoplankton gr6'th in I-ake Riley. The surface in0or to kke Riley from
the outlet of Ricc Marsh ktc prwided 83 percent of the anaual surface inllow of phosphorous
to [:ke Riley during l9BZ Aaalpis included in thc study shorrcd thst thc phmphorors load is
proportional to the flow bctwccn thc tro lakes. By controlling flw out of Ricc Marsh Late, one
can control the phcphorour bad hom thc lake. Thc study concludcd that thc out0ow rolumc of
Rice Manh I:kc can bc controllcd by cither reducing the volumc of ruooE in its wateshed or by
increasiag storage within thc latc. Further Couocil studies sincc lE har indicatcd that
Degative impacts on thc latc, probably due lo urbanization, arc incrcasing, Flo, out of [,akc
Riley and Ricc Marsb Lakc uually occurs only in thc spring aad carly summer whco nutricn8 are
highly concentratcd in &c satcr column as a result of spring turaorrcr aod oixing of rcttled
nutrient-ladeD scdimcnts Tbcrcforc, to improve or stabilize thc quality of hke Rilcy il is
Decessary to both achievc rcduccd runoff rolumes to predevelopment lerrcls as nell as rcducing
coDcentratiorB of phospborors in tbc runoff. It is thc Council! position that if this src8 b
developed using a rcgional approach (including more than tbc city of Ctatrhasscn), orcrsizing of
temporary runoff holding basios (over tlpical design sizing), could reducc thc r-ount of nrooff in
this area o belos prcdarclopmcot lcrcls. A corsulting enginecr could &rcrminc tbc tcchnical
and Enancial feasibility of pmsiUtc optioas that will Ua to improving warcr quatity in arca hlcs
and the Minncsota River.
9
TRANSPORTATION (Braden, Filipi)
The transportation element of Chanhassen's plan includes a description of both the regional
highway and local street networks, identifies trauiportatioo issues and sptem deficiencies, and
describes planned and recommended improvements for them. The plan also includes a section on
transit.
The transportation component of the Chanhassen plan is consistent with the Transponation
Policy Plan and resoonds to the l9B8 swtems statemcnt which asked the city to address the
following issues:
o Increasing trafEc congestion on metropolitan highwap;o Relationships between land r:se intensity and transporation;
o Travel dcmand managcmcnt; and
o Transit
Highwap
Chanhassen contains segmcnr of two mctropolitan highwa;n: a portioo of TH 7 in the northwest
comer of the city, and future TH 212, which will run on a diagonal in thc southern pan of the
city. Chanhassen has bcen actively invohed with other cities and the Metropolitan C.ouncil in
recent studies for both highwap.
TH 7 was the subject of a corridor study iD 1986. It *as recommended that Chaahassent portion
of the road between TH 41 and Minncwashta Parkway be upgraded to a five-lane road with a
continuous center lcft-turn lanc and consolidation of existing access poins to TII 7.
Chanhassen's plan notes that eventual implementation of this remmmendation will improve
conditions in that area
10
The Final EIS for TH 212 is undcr prcparation. The road has beeu officially mapped as a four-
lane freeway with intcrchangc aoocss at TII 101 and CSAII 17. TH 5, although not a
metropolitan higbway, scrves as thc prinary east-west route through Chanhasrcn. It is currcntly
being reconstructcd as a four-laac cr<prcssway &om TH 4l to 1494-
Thc plan also addrcsscs de6ciencicr on othcr non-metropolitan highways (c.9. TII 101, Plcasant
View Road, CSAII 17 and Minaa'ashta Parkway) and identifies the improremcos Dccded
Many of thesc improvemcnts isvohrc inrcrscction upgrades, safety aad gcomctric inprorcmcns,
road extensions aod acccss cl6urcs. Thcsc kinds of projeca improrc local traffic flo*' aad may
divcrt shortcr tripE froE thc metropolitan highwap. (For additional MnDOT commcnts rcgarding
transportatioD scc Attachrncot 5).
knd Usc aod Transportation
Traffic forecasts, analysis and rccommcndcd roadway improvemcnts for Chanhasscn arc bascd on
the Eastcm C.arver County Traosportition Study. This 190 study includcs thc citics of
Chanhassen, Chaska, Carvcr, Victoria and Waconia and scraral tryashipc in thc county. Tbc
socio-cconomic forecasts uscd io thc Canrcr County Study are higher thaa thcc uscd for the
The plan's functional classification of roadwap includes principal arterials and tuo catcgories of
minor anerials and two categorics of collectors. (The Council's classiEcation sptem has only one
category of minor arterials and collector roads.) Thc Couacil's rystem curcntly identifies TH l0l
as a collector and CSAII 17 as a minor arterial (Cbanhassent recommendcd fuoctional
classification identifies TH 101 as a minor arterial (Oass tr) and CSAII 17 as a collcctor). The
city's functional classification plan should be consistent with that adoptcd by the Council's
Transportation Advisory Board AIso, thc DEIS for TH 272 indicatcd that these roads would be
included as minor ancrials in thc cityt comprebensive plan Interchanges bctwccn these two
roads antl TH 212 havc bccn idcntiEcd in thc TH 212 DEIS. Only roads classificd as minor or
principal anerials should interchangc with principal arterials; thcrefore, it is important that the
classification of these two roads bc resolved.
The TH 212ICSAH 17 iotcrchaoge is locatcd about 1000 feet outside thc Chanhasscn urban
service boundary, in an area dcsigpated by the city as a 195 StuE Area" Mn/DOTs current
schedule for construction of this scgnent of TH 212 will be post 199&99. Construction of the
interchange should be scheduled in conjunction with urbanization of this area-
Travel Demand Management and Transit
Chanhassen, Edea Prairic and Chaska arc prwided with transit sendce by Southurcst Metro
Traosit Commissioo. Tbc scrvicc iacludcs a fqed schcdule route, a dial-a-ridc program and
express rcwice to downto*'n Minneapolis
The city has requcstcd Southrrrcot Metro to provide reverse @Emutc r€rvicc to thc city bccause
the cityt rapid growtb as an cmployment conc€nration warrants such scrvicc for uork tripe. The
city also advocatcs the dcrrclopncnt of a multi-community, multi-county partncrship trrith thc
busincss community to promotc trarcl dcmand management stratcgia Thcsc arc appropriatc
step for reduciog pcak bour raEc coogestiou
The plan also conteins thc Soutfilcst Mctro Transit Commission Study which rccommcnds a
number of park-and-ridc silcs within thc southwest area Not all of thesc sitcs mcct currcot
Council guidelincs for park and ride btr. Thcsc park/ridc guidelincs arc bcing rcviscd as psrt of
the updatc of thc C,ouncil's Traosportatioo Policy Plan. The nc* guidclincs will bc uscd to
cvaluatc thc recommcndcd park aad ridc sitcs.
11
Council's 2010 traffic forecasts, and result in recommendations for capacity improvemens on a
number of state and county roads.
Because the Council has not had the opponuDity to review the Carver County study againsr is
own forecasts, approval of the Chanhasscn plan does Dot nccssarily mean concunencc with the
findings of the county's study. The Carver County study recommendatioos for roadways within
Chanhassen are consistent with the Councilt cunetrt expectations for road improvmeas within
the city, but may not be for othcr communities. The study notes that th6e forecasts and
recommendations should bc discussed with Mn/DOT aod the Metropolitan Council to implement
the needed capacity and safety improvements oo such roads as TH 5, TH 41, TII 101 and TH
212. This discussion should be held soon.
The Chanhassen plan mentions that two LRT routes may ultimately be extended into
Chanhassen. The regional prioriry and potential timing of thase routes should be noted in the
plan. The RTB's Regional 20-year LRT Plan does not call for LRT in Chanhassen before the
year 2010. However, the Council supports reservation of abandoned railroad rights-of-way for
future recreational or transponation use in the meantime. (For additional comments regarding
transit from the Regional Transit Board, See Attachment 6).
Airports
The material included in the comprehensive plan revision submitted by tbe city of Chanhassen is
adequate with regard to aviation under existing conditions. However, the Aviation Section has
several minor comments to make on the submittal.
The long-term comprehensive plan for Flying Ooud Airport includes a proposal !o lenghen one
of the. runwap (Runway 927) at *me furure date. Thereforc, the city of ChaDhasscn should
consider the potential necd to cooperatc with Eden Prairie and the Mctropolitan Airports
Commission to organizc a loint Zoning Board to bc inohed in the Flying Ooud long Term
C,ompreheosive Planning proccss, sincc no such board now cxists. The city should also bc
prepared to implement and/or adjust local ordinances to reflect a new airport zoning district to
control obstructions in an extended istrument approach corridor related to the runway extension.
The city of Chanhassen ttray also wish to include policies regarding thc land use implications of
helicopters and heliports. The city should rerdew the model heliport ordinaacc prcparcd by the
Metropolitan Council and considcr any policy base it might oeed to cstablish in its comprchcnsive
plan to support the adoption of such an ordinance. It is better to adopt such an ordinance before
someoDe wants to build a heliport, rather than after the permit rcquBt has been submittcd. If
the city needs further information on the model heliport ordiaance, it can contact the Aviation
Section at the Council.
HOUSING (Dougherty)
The Cbanhassen comprehensivc plaa contains a Horsing Implementation section which idcntifies
the number of employnrent opportunitics that were added between lH) and 1989. Howcvcr, it
does not contain aay typc of projcctioos or othcr informatioo such as idcatification of the various
rental cost rangcs, numbcrs and tlpc of publicly-assisted housing units or houscholds by incomc.
It docs not include implementstioa policica or tools. The plan should iaclude vays in which thc
city plans to activcly punuc thc impleocotatioo of itl policics, aDd whrt rtrtc ed/or fcdcral
PrograEs thc city plans to use.
ln a memoraodun to the Couocil datcd April 1& 1991, the city indicated il could gcncratc
information rclativc to rcntal cct rangcs in thc city. The memorandum pointcd out that thcrc is
a small number of reotal unis in thc city at this time. The mcmorandum slso statcs that thcrc
are not publicly-assisted borsiog units in thc city, although a 60 unit building that was reccntly
conpleted reserved 20 pcrccnt of thc utrits for lov and modcrrtc incomc houscholds, This
project was a city sponrcrcd projcct with Enancing assistance providcd by thc cityl Horsing and
Rcdevelopment Authority. Thc mcnoraadum also states that tbe city ir in thc carly stagcs of
assessing the viability of city-spoosorcd, modest+ct housing for thc cldcrly.
12
PARI6 (Mplajek)
The plan properly acknowledges regiona! recreation open space facilities and the distinction
between them and local park facilities.
I:ke Minnewashta Regional Park is located within the city of Chanhassen. The city also shows a
potential regional trails corridor running north and south through the city that is consistent with
the present regional plan. The plan liss present and future facilities at Iike Minnewashta
Regional Park but the list needs to be updated
The city's plan uses an outdated venion of tbc Metropolitan Councilt classification sptem. A
few changes have beeo made since that time. Thc currcnt rrenion (part of the l99l Regional
Recreation Open Spacc Development Guide/Policy Plan adopted by the Metropolitan CruDcil
March 28, 1991) should bc us€d
On page 9 the plao lists prcscnt and future facilitics .t Irte Minncsashta Rcgional Park Thc
list nneds to be updated to iacorporate thc folloving information:
Existing facilities include a swimming bcach and bathhouse, scrrcral picnic areas, scveral
picnic shelters, hiking and cKxrtountry ski trails (grmmcd during thc whter), t$,o boat
ac.esses and an informal field games arca Water, electric scrvicc and rest room facilities
are scattered throughout the parlc A 7s-acre'big woods' hardurcod reforestation Project
is undenray.
Future plans call for an expansion of thc beach, further picnic arca dorclopmcnt, a large
play structurc for children, a visitor cootacl building which will rcrvc as a trailhcad/nature
center/administrative headquarterq further trail development aDd cxpansion of utilities and .
improved maintcnancc facilities"
The 1985 Recreation Oocn Spacc Policv PlanrDewclopment Guidc sho*cd a poteDtial rcgional ..
trail corridor running oorth and south througb Chanhassea. This is shoqm iD Chanhassen's 1980
Compreheosive Plao- Somc of the local rails propced by Chanhasscn in the rcvision to its
comprchensive plao arc along thir samc .ligpmcal The Policy Plan/Darclopment Guide adoPted
io March 1991, rcmoed this trail conidor from thc systcn plan map. But uDdcr thc 'SFtem
Ctanges from thc 1985 Plaq' th€ 1991 Policy Plaa includcs thc starcmcnt that:
A long-rangc rcgioual trail rprcm rhould include additiond corridors cspcctally ia thc fully
developcd and the deraloping ruburban are:s wherc there arc fc:w cxkting or propsed
facilities. A morc complerc rcgional tr.il sptem plan will bc incorporatcd into thc policl
plan prior to is next Bajor schcdulcd re{dct, and revisioo in 1994...
Tbe city of Chrnhasscn sbould bc esarc of thc bcnclits of coordinating ic local planning for trails
with the planning for rcgioaal traib thtt Eay Ecur in thc rcxt frvc ycar"
The ptan does not have thc title of thc Minncsota Vallcy National Wildlifc Rcfugc and
Recreation Arca corrccL It *ould bc appropriatc for thc city o add in ic discussion that thc
Minnesota State Trail, adminictered by thc Departmcnt of Natural Rcsourccs, is iorolvcd here
also, eveo if not in Chanhassen Contrary to $'b8t is stated in the plan, the Minnesota Valley
l3
National Wildlife Refuge and Recreation area and the Minnesota State Trail extend past the city
of Carver, even though all parts of it are not as yet develop€d.
In addition to regional parks and trails, the plan also addresses the local park and trail sptem.
The city is to be commended on its local park plan which sbows considerable planning effort and
ao attempt to achieve a balanced recreatioa sptem which appeals to a broad base of population
and provides recreation appropriate for both active and passive users. The plan includes a good
detailed capital improvements program for parks. The city has a park dcdication ordinance and
also imposes a trail fee for new development. The plan and the city sccm to be responsive to
wishes of residents who indicared preferencc for more trails. The plan givcs attetrtion to the
value of connecting to trails in other communities as well.
FINr'DI]iGS
The cstimatcd demand for industrial and residential laod io the city of Ctanhassen
in the ycar 2000 will be 1,932 net acrcs. The city's requcst for 1J71 net acres is
consistcnt with policies of the MDIF.
The cityt policies for rural arca development of I per 10 (4 pcr 40) are consistent
with the Council's rural policy.
The rcviscd flow projections by interceptor prwided by thc city are higher than
the flow projections in thc Water Resources Managemcnt Dcrclopment
Guide/Policv PIan but thcre will be no sptcm impact on thc metropolitan
interccptor qntem througb 2010.
The amount of in6ltration/inllorw sppcas to be aborc wbat ir normally acceptable,
but thc plaa appeas to ad&ess both c*istitrg and futurc iDfiltration/in0w.
The city of Cbanhasscab on-ritc scq,cr system progran fully nccts the Council's
rcquircmcots
Thc plan docs Eot addrcss the issuc of privarc wastcwrtcr trcatncDt plarts. lAc
city occds to revilc its plan indicating that it will not etbw 8oy privat wastryater
treatmcat plaaa io its rural scrvicc arca
The city bas rcqucstcd that the southern part of thc city bc includcd il plenning
for thc Chaska lVasta'ater Trcatmcnt planl Thc Council agrccs to rccommcnd
looking at that Erca in conjunction with long rangc phnniog for that facility, but
thc Council is making ns comni1rn611 as !o thc timiog aad/or locatioa of aa
intcrccptor to scrvc the rcuthcrn portion of thc city. Tbc thrcc intcrcepton that
curreDtly scrvc tbc city harc capacity for at lcast anothcr z) pars.
2.
3
14
1.For purposes of this review, thc population and hor.rscbold forccasr for 2000 used
in the TH 212 Study was rsed An cmployment forccast of 7,000 in thc year 2000
for the city of Chanhasscn s,as used.
I
6.
7.
8.
9 A goal to reduce nonpoint source pollution entering thc Minnesota River by 1996
by 40 percent from 1980 levels has been established. In order to address this goal,
the city needs to complete its local water management plan which should address
the comments made as part of this staff report
The city has adopted a 'no net loss' policy that is consistcnt with the Council's
policy on wetlands.
The city has indicated that il is one of the city's policies to control peak ruooff
from urbanizing arcas so that it can be handled by downstream drainage features.
The transportation element of the Chanhassen Comprehensive plan is consistent
with the Transportation Policv Plan and is an adequate respoDse to the 1988
tr.nsportation q6terDs statement.
The Eastem Canrcr County Transportation Study, upoa which Chanhassent (and
other communitics' transportatioo plans are based) is adequatc inrcfar as the city
of Chanhassen is concemed.
The long-term comprchcasivc plan for Flying Cloud Airport includcs a proposal to
lenghen ruatny 9D7 at rcme futurc date, shich is not addressed in the plan.
The city's plan docs trot include policies that addrcss thc land usc implications of
helicopters and hcliports.
The city of Chaohasscn presentty has no publicly-assistcd borsing unis in the city.
A recently built 60 unit building has 20 percent of is units reservcd for low and
moderate incomc houscholds.
The city'a local part plaD which propc€s a balanccd rrcrc,ltion sptem which
appeals to a broad base of population and prwidcr rccrcetion appropriarc for both
active aad passirrc uscn is consist nt with Oc Council's Parls Policr Plao.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1
a
3
That the Council adopt the stafr report and finding 8s statcd abovc as pan of
these recommcudatioos
That thc Mctropolitan Council approrc thc city of Chanhasscnl plan amendmcnt
including thc modificatioa of thc MUSA boundary.
That the city of Chaahasscn maintain is initiativc in rcducing infil6s1i6nlffi6qr
wherever it 6nds problems.
The city's functional classilications of CSAH 17 and TH 101 arc difrerent from the
Council's.
l5
4
5
8.
9.
6.
7
That the city of Chanhassen adopt standards, criteria and guidelines for erosion
control and surfac€ water management of the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek
Watenhed District if the District adop6 a 509 plan with a water quality element
acceptable to the Minnsota Board of Soil and Water Resourc€s prior to
development within the MUSA expansion area.
In the event that the watershed district plan is not approved prior to development
of areas within the MUSA expansion area, the city of Chanhassen adopt either the
MPCA's 'Best Management Practic€s for Protecting Watcr Quality in Urban
Areas' or the Minncota Board of Water and Soil Rcsourccs' 'Construction Site
Erosion and Scdimcnt Control Planniag Handbook" for crosion control and
surface water management that will be r.lsed in ranicw of dcvelopment proposals
within this expansion ares io order to remain consistent with tbe C-ouncil's Water
Resources Manaqcment Guide policies 51-59 and 3-3-3-6.
Construction of the TII 21ZCSAH 17 interchangc sbould be scheduled in
conjuoction with urbaaization of this area
The city of Chanhassen should coopcrarc with Eden Prairic and the Metropolitan
AirporB Commission to organize a Joint Zoning Board o bc inrclved in the
Flying Cloud Iong Term Comprehensive Planning proccss.
Tbe dilferenccs bctwccn thc Councilt and the cityb firnaional classificatioos of
CSAII 17 and TH 101 should be reconciled through thc Transportation Advisory
Board proccss.
The city should iacludc policies regarding the land usc implications of helicopters
and heliports.
The city should daclop implementation policis or tools to achievc a mix of
hor.rsing sylcs and cct raages.
The city should rcconcile differenccs in its parls plan with the 191 Reqional
Recreation Open Sgacc Derrclopmcnt Guide/Policv Plan"
10.
11.
l6
ATTACHMENT 1
T
fm
t'"'..'^.,
I
City of Chanhassen
Regional Location
wasrir{6roR co
e 'i*':...
l2
METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL
caivlr co
oLo..r'0
t
T
f'
I
=_
,--...,
F 1-
I
I
I
rJ.rotooolL
lac
I
I
I
I
I+
I
IL
---T
r-l
---TT__---J 1
I
t.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.T
I
o.L
I
I
I
I
..H..
I
I
I
L
tr
co.tco?t
I L _J-T
I turtr.qri
___-f-----
I
I
I
I
It-
I
-t{+!.1 .t j---r-
rl
__t____----)
rrlas a lo ll 20 2a
t----)- J "-J
NA/IN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA
Political Boundaries, 1988
A!9fA.- County BoundrryllEr- unicipal Boundsry.g.!oll-- Townrhip Boundlry
co
a,
ntfalllrlla co
w
!Il
(j
I I)tarafY co
o^xota co
tu
I
I
l
u
S
o t
\-
CITY OF CHANIIASSEN..GEOGRAPHIC FOLICY AREAS
ATTACHMENT 2
,y'w
{
I
Devcloping Area
C-ommercial Ag:icultural Arca
General Rural Usc Area
Cha
Ca ACKSON
0,
--{
'2;rr.3
B
L0
I
v
at
ATTACHMENT 3
Eethods of
discussed.
Richard Thornpson,City Response toApril 18, 1991
Page 3
ltetropolitan Council
Issues Raised
we understand that the parcels lre have identlfled for specialtreatment listed above present an unusual problen for Metropolitan
Council staff. we clearly differentiate between these parcels andsituations involving nornal property ownership where a property
olrner Day or Day not desire to see their land developed in a given
period of tine. Tbat leaves us t ith two large estates, one owned
by Prince and the other by JeroDe Carlson. The Prince Estate is
nanaged as a secure coDpound and lt is unreasonable to think thatthey wou).d be developing the property at any tine In the nearfuture. In the case of Jerone carlson, llr. carlson has gone onpublic record (copy attached) during one of the Planning Coumission
reviews of the coEprehensive PIan lndicating hls long term intentfor the property. t{e note that he has recently acqulred additional.parcels and is llving in a newly conpleted hone and rre very
reasonably believe he intends to roaintain the status quo for theduration of a valid life of our culrent coDprehensive P1an.
Durinq review of our PIan prior to subBittal to the lt{etropolitan
Councj.1, a nunber of individual3 asked us to explore deletingindividual parcels fron tlre UUSA Line anendlent. Carlsonis andPrincets property could reasonably have been deleted froE this
scenario and we would not now be having this discussion. However r.
we fel.t that it was unreasonable to have a checker board pattern inthe MUSA Line, fror0 both the City standpoint of being unable toservice property in a reasonable Eanner and froE a lletropolitanCouncil standpoint in tems of regional, developDent and policiesissues. Ann Hurlburt confirmed this position and iras very
supportive of city staff in ensuring that rre rrere able to produce
a reasonabl.e IIIUSA Line e:<pansion. 9Ie therefore continue to believethat these properties should reasonably not be counted touards
developable acreaE€.
Ernolovrnent
At the Eeeting slth Uetropolltan Council staff,projecting land denand based on eEplolErent
Baseline assuaptlons for both sere as follows:
Chanhasaon exceeded tho lfetropolltanenployrent proj ections by 2,50O.
trro
were
1
2
Chanhassen I a 1990 eaplolpent qras 6,000.
Hetropolltan Councilts eEplolrDent proJections tor 1990,
20OO and 2O1O rere 315OO, 41500 and 611OO, respectlvely.
3 Councilrs 1990
Chanhassen has a current ratl.o of 8.3 jobs per industrialacre of property.4.
13,
€
ATTACHMENT 4
Mears hrk Cenrre. 130 East Frfth Strect. St. hul. Mrnnesota 55101
6l::::-8r:3
April 1, 19 91
Us. Lynda voge, Referrals
Hetropolitan Council
230 East Fifth Street
Mears Park CentreSt. Pau1, MN 55101
RE: Hetropolitan Council Referral Fil.e Nurnber 15339-1
Dear Us. Voge:
The Uetropolltan Waste Control Connj.ssion hag reviewed the 1991
Conprehensive Plan EubDitted by the City of Chanhassen as a najorplan amendDent to its existing conprehensive plan. The anendnentproposes to add 2780 acres of land to the Uetropolitan UrbanService Area (MUSA) .
The' City of Chanhassen is provided netropolj,tan seirer service bythe Lake Ann fnterceptor and the Shorewood Interceptof. The plan
amendment indicates all of the land proposed to be added to the
MUSA uilI be served by the Lake Ann Interceptor. Subsequent to ourrevier of the plan anendment we offer the follorlng coaEents and
recoEDendations:
1 The year 2000 I{USA line j.ncLudes a part of Chanhassen nithinthe Bluff creek drainage area. The p).an aDendDent indicatessanitary sewer service for that part of the Bluff Creekdrainage area rrithin the proposed I{USA siII be sErved bytenporary connections to thg Lake Ann Interceptor. The
aDendnent states that developnent in the Bluff Creek drainagearea wi.ll. be nonitored to ensure that the city does not exceedits allocated flovs for the Red Rock Interceptor. At present,neither the .Uetropolltan Council Wasterrater TreatDent andHandling Policy Plan nor the Con'nisslonis approved 2o-yearInpleDentation PIan lnclude plans to conatruct an interceptorto serve the Bluff Creek drainage area. the city vill need tosubnit tnforoation on the tiDing, total acreage to be served,the nature of future developnent, and the direction of futureuasterrater flor ln the Bluff Creek dralnage area to justify
the need for a separate netropolitan facility to aerve this
area.
The city projecta a year 2000 wasterater flou of 3.218 nilliongallons per day (EEd). ThiE aDount of uasteuater floU exceedsthe year 2000 regional uaateuater flos projection for the cityof 1.92 ngd. Adequate capacity is available in the Lake Ann
and Red Rock fnterceptors to acconnodate the higher wasteuaterflorr projected by the city. The year 2oO0 flow projections donot exceed the amount allocated to the city in the Red Rock
Interceptor.
Equal Opponunity/Atlitttativa Adion Emplo),"?
-o
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
2.
3 The anendnent should include forecasts of household,
e:nployees, and uasterrater flows shovn by metropolitan
interceptor area for the years 2000 and 2010. For exarnple,the interceptor service areas are the chaska Bluff creek,Riley creek, Lal(e Ann and the Shoreuood interceptor serviceareas. In addition, the plan anendment should include a rnap
showing the interceptor service areas and trunk serrer staging
through the year 2010, including interconlnunity connections
and any proposed changes in government boundaries.
The city should indicate the conditions under rhich it will
a1low private uasteuater treatnent plants to operate in thecity, if any.
The conmission is presently preparing a System fnProvernent
study (srs) for the chaska waEteuater Treatnent Plant (wwTP).
The study recoEnendatlons uay affect the design of long tern
netropotitan seuer service (10-{0 years) to the chaska service
A.rea. The plan anendDent expresses the concern of chanhassen
for its future seser gervice needs ln the drainage area of the
city adjacent to Chaska. The city of Chanhassen and the
l,tetropolitan Council should advise the coEDission on the
tining and future develoPDent needs of any portion of
chanhassen that should be considered for future Detropolitan
sewer service through the chaBka Servlce Area.
At such tine as the council revlew of the conprehensive plan
anendnent is conplete and the anendnent ie adopted by thecity, the city should revise and subnit to the Connlssion an
anended conprehensive aewer plan (csP) that includes the
f ollowing inf ornation :
a) Iocation, size, capacity and design flou for exlsting and
proposed trunk serrers and lift station facilitiesi
b) copies of any interconrounity agteeDents for joint
sanitary seuer service;
c) the nuDber of existing and projected residential
eguivalent connectlone as sell as the existlng and
estinated increaee in seuered population and uasteuater
florrs should be shorn by netropolitan lnterceptor service
area. This data ehould be provided by year for the next
five year period and for the years 2oo0 and 2010.
5
6
very truly yours,
.7a Az
R. A.odde
Municipal Services llanagor
R,AO: EJB: J lE
,#d,${}}H,$l[i"tjj,;[fjrff;{d,},
CITYTOCIASS
ATTACTIIVIE\T 5
MN/DOT
CIASS
MA.CIII CL'
lvlA.ClII PA
Ir,TA.Ct[ PA
MA.OII PA
DATE: March 6, l99l
TO; Richard Thompson, principal Revicwer
FROM: Tim Her*cl, Senior Transportatjon planncr
SUBJECT: t0Day Initiat Dcrerminatio .
COMMENfiI
STREET FROM
I
T,H. tol North r imit South Limit
T.H.2t2 Wcst Umit t6e/212
T.H.169 T.H.2t2 East Limir
T.H.169 T.H.2t2 South Limir
ty cnl
[Id.:#.fls ji{f j{"ffi ffi l'$iltrd,ffi if,lii#t'",,lf ,3%i"$iBff r,lir
I*jrfflif#X,friilii;;ill"Eilliiijp;?!.Ig l. wilr cxist rs a rour ra,c
PAGE I
,T'H. 101 . Hcnncoln county scccptcd jurisdiction of r,H, t0l from T.H. 12 ro rhe ciryof Rogers.
Jurisdiaion -__Mn/DOT.soff supports r,hc rc+valuadon of state, county, and local
lunsglctlotl .llowelcti uritnout 8 rcgion8l study gving somc morc spccific- guidencc to
Jun6didional trsnsfcrs throughour rbe rcgiou lrgp a regional perspcdtivc, iris unwisc tocomrnenr on aoy spccific chapggs in sraic jurisdiction [roposid any ciry'trarisponirjonpran, I hls ls crpccraily true ot plenDed futurc routcs and locations.
The Mctropolitan Dlstrict (Golden Valley and Oakdalc
recomrnend'jurisdiaional candidates. The Metro District co
local jurisdiaion thosc roadwap whicb:
a) do aot scruc a stetewldc transponation needi
b) duplicate the cfron of r- rimilar parallel facility (i.c.: havc already becn rcptaocd
duc lo improrencnt 8nd/or construction of a Darallel roadway an-d arc eff&ivclv
locel succu, rcnc.a loerl functloq and/or thc-cxisrcnce of hijher funcdon and/oimarkct arrcry pardlel routcs);
.l
;Si,.tl$.trip
lcngrhs (lorgcr uip lcngrhs impty nore of a nced for uare
d) scrvc as frontagc roub
If thc gpportunity ariscr for thc Distrtcr to turnbaclr onc or morc of rhc candtdatctumbsck router bocausc of tb9 complction of an improvemcnr project or by somc orherrgrccmcnt with e locat unit of goveiucnt (ncgotidte! indepcridcht of spc'cilic projjai
or pro6rams), tbrt omorrunity'i,ill be rcrivcty punued.
rcgarding thc t transPons
nsidcrs for turn
E8n
tl0n lssues Di thc
to
In sumnary, wc fccl that
exccllcnt b-asis for strdiog
the
PACE 2
SI.IT{MARY
area-
ATTACHMENT 6
REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD
M.ors Pork C.nlr.
230 Eost Flrlh sk..t. Sl. Poul. Mlnh..olo 5510!
612t292-C7C9
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
The Regionol Tronsit Boorcl hos no mojor comments on the City of Chonhosson's
Tronsporlotion Plon. We do hove severol odditions ihcrt should b€ included in the plon.
'1. The plon identifies the Pork ond Rid6 Study in the AppendL, onc, colls ottention to the
TDM.meosures the stucly discusses. we suggest the plon olso oddress ond estoblish
implementotion tor ihe lronsit design issues mentionecl in the stucly. Ihe city should olso
insure thol tronsit tocilities ore occessible to persons with disobiliti€s. Mony design
solutions for tronsit con be implemented ot the site plon review level, oncl ore especiolly
importont in o growing suburb like Chonhosson.
2. The plon should include o mop of the Southwest Metro roule ond pork ond ride
locotion in Chonhosson. Ihis could be includec, on the LRf conidor mop. to give o
better picture of pres€nt ond fulure tronsit opiions in the ctty.
3. Ihe Lm discussion in the plon shoulct note thot the LRI route to Chonhosson is not
included in the Regionol Tronsil Boorcl's moximum 2oyeor LRT Developmenl ond
Finonciol Plon. Despite the cleorcd discussion in the oppenclix on LRT. the plon itself
should mention the schedule oncl inclicqte thot LRf b o long-term option.
4. The plon should olso stote thot public tronsit seruice is supplied to eldedy ond persons
with disobilities in Chonhosson through Melro Mobility. Corver County Rurol
Tronsportotion Services (CART$ olso provides demond-tesponsive ond flexible fixed
route seMce for lhe eld€rty, economicolly disoclvontoged, ond peEons with
disobilities.
5. Anhough the RIB hos no oc,ditionol comments on the City of Chonhosson plon, it will
conduct o seporole review of the Pork ond Ride Study included in the oppendix,
primorily to oddress fiscol ond reglonol coorclinorion issues.
Morch 7. l99l
Richord lhompson, Nletropoliton Council
Gometh p"t.*nW[
Revbion of City of Chonhosson Tronsportotion Plon
t-
i-
,.-
rt
s
e
a
t-
i-
q
l-
I,
i,
s
g
By Thornes l-rpic
- As of Thundav May 23, Chan.
hass.n has approimarely 1,02g morcn€t ac-r€s for rcidentiaj, ind 639 acrcs,or indusrrial/com-mercial devclop_mcnr than it had Wcdnesrtay. May22.
_Thclrctropolitan Council ap_proved C]lanhasscn's comprrh€nsive
plan, which me_ans in pan,'according
to (.}ladlasscn Phnning Drecror pau'i
N"uss, that L'hanhasscn hasa fiame_worl_'that will cnable us to dcal withoevelopment, cnvironnentat Drotc{_tton, and-n.ighborhood prascivation
rlrough 2000."
-. At thc samc timg accordine tol(Iauss.. norhing is going to cha-ngctoo rapidly. "Bc&usc ic havc rficcomprchensive plan .pprovcd docsnot mean.that wc will stan runningYatcr 8nd scwer to various Dans oitDe clty ovcr night.
Wh.v thc comprrhcnsivc Dlan:The city has bccn work'inE in_tcnscly on thc oomprchcnsivc -olan
lorjust over two yein. Its tast cbm_
?liTxlfi .ll"J.Iff
"f,To",ilfl nl,l!l Dao a tramework to manaliEowlh
rDd d€vclopmcnr urtril rtrc icai2mO.But bcraus. of crtraordina;y growth,riar ptan bcc.mc ortdarcil -bv rhinid.-198(h. According ro lGaui. rhccrty's poputarion doubled sincc I9g0rnd cmrloymcnt tsc eppmximarctyau, pcr ocot.
., ln thc facc of such rapid growth,
lhc_city frccs a probtcm.'ln 6rdcr too€lrvcr city scrviccs such rs scwcrrno w8tcr to rEsidcnts novinr into
lhc area it h8s to hrvc an ovcraii olanwhich is rblc to .ccomnodatc'dc-
mand. At thc samr timc, rs thc om_mercial rnd industrial scctor of thcrrca, rconlinucs- to crpand, thc cify
Dccds ro mcd Uis rising n;cd.
.ttoyevcr, thc city b not rlonc in8ffi,3.ffi #tsfli:Iff*.luthoriad thc
'rt
crropolibn eol,Dcilrs _lhc govcmnent aim which con-ttols rnd managcs grow6 for thccnurc scvcn counw mctro rrca-As. rcsula bf Chanhasscn,s
SroMh end thc growth of ahc Gntirc
:r.cC-!hc cily had ro work -wilh rhcMcl C.ouncil to arive aa t Dlan thalrccommod8tcd Chanhasscn-.s rrow-
mg nccG but-also rcoomrnoOarfo thcM.t (buncil's visioD for growrh intltc southwcst.
Chan comp
plan is done -. Xnuss lid thal thc @mprehen_:I. plrn rLso alows a ciri ro sit
#ii {: ;lJ:':..1;Blx ;hx"J3loor.aox,n -rrd qcalc a vision for it.,,.. .rD ao(lluon, $atc statutc,cquires
rnar a crty submit ! ncw comprihen_sryc ptrn whcn thcrc is a major pro_
q,J-ffi8.+,i.t{ffi j,iffi rx,
=
uar [r!9 which is drawi arounarD. rrta wiahin which crnah uriliricstrt Buar-ant .d. tVith Oranhasscn,sgHfl'8'f&H,1*:i:
ncw cooprchcnsiyi olan. ' '
Tfrc rcason Chenhisscn Drot 6c.trn locrt t l,o tlc MUSA 'lini wes
occausc r'ilhout rn cxpansion, Chrn-
ffil"Xf virrrurY'ur of &vclo-
_ firc pmccss:
*fi.,%HfmHJ;l:i&
oo rB work
Mayor Doa Ctrmicl said hc wastrT onl-{ p.lcescd wi$ lhc plan ibcff,ffifl.#,ffi#[*
l1ilil'f"ffJ,H,::l*.ffirI
?T Dl! tgel thlt rcgardless of rhcoucomc of lhcphn itsclf, thc Dcoolera_l.Danhassca.would fccl rhit rlicywrr! bc.fil during thc writing of rhi
--_lfdine .!o OlDict, rhc cityc.Dourr-gd rnd Fccivcd inpu fi,omtE Ftblic at cycry .lcp of 6c wey.
Looklni fotrrrd:
$ -Xo* 6dic.rrd, rhcrc wil
nor bc.haE.fic ovcmight clrenrcs inr-rad[sscn. Although- thc coiorc-rctrsryc pten with is ovcn sduhmmc*lrt hrs just bGGD rfl;or,c{
P_ "ty. !1 bea incoilhntingcrenEcs in thc city duriDr dr Dm-css. F-or instrDca, &c ciri tas'bccn
IToqng rad modifyirg 6rdinanccs,
si,ffitu:Hifi**H*l
ncnt -oJNatulll Resourccs O cxilnCgrc Minncsot Vdhy Witdlifc hcf-Effffiil,H-,nffi#
qrEob o s6nn xa(a-lun Odqrla
lD3 Surfrcc W.tcr Udlitv-
- I! aho4 Krruss reid rcsidcnaTi[ 8cc 'horc of tDc rrmc..
i -
So ,rLt"d.tory o! p.g. tt
,f
h
Met council acts on Chan Planrffiffiffiffiffiffidi#ir'rffi$-#iTr nnnffi
CITY OF
CH[NH[ESEN
690 COULTER DRIVE . PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-s739
May 30, 19 91
Ms. Bonnie Featherstone
908 WoodlawnBurnsville, MN 55337
Dear Bonnie:
On behalf of the City, I rrould like to again thank you for yourconsideration and assistance on obtaining approval. for Chanhassln's
Conprehensive Pl.an. we truly believe that preparing the plan andgetting it approved has been a tean effort involving nany people
such as yourself. Now we come to the exciting part of the processwhich is working to ensure that the goals and vlsions containedwithin the plan come to fruition over the coning decade.I am sorry for the delay in getting corDments back to you on thedraft amendnents to the UDIF to inplernent rural policy changes.However, I an sure you can understand that I arB relatively busy onother matters at this tine. As I Dentioned to you when we lastrnet, the City of Chanhassen essentially is highly supportive of thewhole policy initiative. l,letropolitan CounciL Staff 's recognitionof the special nature of transition areas is long overdue and ofcritical importance to communities such as ours that are on theurbanizing fringe. We have only trro conments of any significance.The first is, the one that I Dentioned to you, ttrat €fre City of
Chanhassen supports the one per ten acre density that has long teenthe position of the lr{etropolitan Council. As you may recal1, weenacted an ordinance to enforce this back in 1987. Hy only concernis how the density is calculated. The Uetropolitan Council Staff'sreconmendation is that it be calculated on a 640 acre basis whichis equal to one 9{uare Dile or section. A E4O acre analysis ofdensity nay work in a -purely agricultural area but, in ny opinion,represents problens in areas such as ours. Ehe rural irea inChanhassen has undergone significant division into lots ranging insize frorn 2l acre holrestead! up to 1OO+ acre farns. In oui case,this can cause a problen since there nay be situations uhere thedevelopment on gross acreage, due to prior construction, exceddsthe l per 10 acre density when figured on the 540 acre basis butdoes not exceed that density on an individualrs 40 acre p1ot. We
Ms. B
Uay 3
Page
onnie Featherstone0, 1991
2
would then be in the position of telling the individuaL rrith 40acres that they lost their right to develop property becauseanother property ouner sonewhere else in that section of land had
an opportunity to buiLd before their request cane along. This doesnot seem particularly fair and anounts to a concealed transfer ofdevelopnent rights. A connunity could also allow one propertyowner to use anotherrs rights to develop uith or nithout theirknowledge or agreenent. I an not sure hol, often this t)rpe of casewill occur but I do not believe it is an intended gol:. ot tfreCouncil staff. Enforcing the pollcy the uay Chanhassen does, on a1 per 10 acre basis regardless of the lot size, is more equitableeven though in sorne instances it Bay result in gross densitiesslightly in excess of this standard.
Our second concern deals uith the notion of transition areas aslaid out in the proposal . Again, yhile rre applaud the idea ofestablishing transition areas, there appear to be no specialconsiderations that would be given by the trtetropolitan Councll. I
am concerned that the Uetropolitan Council nay continue to play therole of actively trying to discourage developrnent in these areas.
We recognize that there should be no actions €o encourage prematuredevelopment in these areas; however, it is in everyones bestinterest to lay the ground rrork for the eventual exiension ofroads, sewers and other faciLities at such tine as these prove tobe necessary.. Uy concern boils down to, for exarnple, ihe roadextension policy. As rre have discussed, Hwy. 5, which is currentlybeing upgraded to four lanes through downtown^ Chanhassen, reallishoul.d hav-e been upgraded to four lanes out to fiwy. al 1eading int6Chaska and Excelsior. This transitional area i! incLuded in thenew ITIUSA line that was recently approved by the MetropolitanCouncil. Holrever, prior to this tine it was clearly a trairsitionarea, one that the city had identified for the next 6tage ofgrowth. uetropolitan councir staff uas responsibre for killirig theproposal to extend Hvy. 5 inprovenents through this area in jpiteof the fact that the traffic warranted it, because it pa-sedoutside the then existing MUSA line. As an identified traniitionarea, the lrtetropolitan Council should have been nore responsive tothe need to construct this roadway. paralLel situatlions haveoccurred t ith Hwy. 212 in Chanhassen and Chaska and, as you areDOre arrrare than r, there are soroe related concerns with ttreshakopee bypass. I aro not sure how this should be addressed bycouncil . staff except that there should be soDe recognition thattransition areas rrarrant different considerations ielative toMetropolitan Councit developnent policies, for other rural areaswhich are not subject to transition area status.
for the delay in getting thero towish to discuss this further.
l,ls. Bonnie Featherstone
Uay 30, 1991
Page 3
I hope you have found these
sin I
L
uI Krauss, AICPDirector of Planning
PK:v
pc Planning ComrnissionCity CounciJ.
useful and again, apologize
Please give ne a call if you
,/'a U a Lz ..4z -,t/ tZ
L/- /; i. / /' ;-l'-L'/'L',?f.u1 7,/i4tL a,U
r'/Aorn t,/h -
MET?,OPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mears Park Centrg 230 East Fifth Str€et, St Paul, Minnesota 55101
Date:
To:
From:
Attached for your review are the draft amendmeots to the Metropolitan Development and
Investment Framework (MDIF) that have been prepared to implement the chaages to the
policies for the rural service area that were approved by the Council ia January.
will affect three different sectioDs of the MDIF. New language is io{icated by
guage to be deleted is *de&ee.
Subject:
The amendments
underlinine. Lan
The third sectio! Gages 18 through 20)
Development aDd Investment Framewor
are two new appeodices to the Metropolitan
k (MDF). The first is Criteria for C.ouncil Aoorwal of
Pages 1 through 11 of the draft amendments would modiry pages 22 through 25 of the MDIF,
beginoing with the section titled 'Rural service Area'. This is part of the Geographic policy
Areas section of the MDIF, and contaios the policy statements.
The second secrion of the draft (pages 12 through 17) shows amendEeDts to pages 33 to 35 of
the MDIF section titled fl6nning and Investmeut procedures: the Council and Metropolitan
Systems.' This section gives direction for the future revisions of other chapters of the
Metropolitan Development Guide; in this case the wastewater Treatment ind Hailtidg poliq
Plan aad rhe Transponation Poliq Plan. There is also a small change recommeaded to the
section on Park which relates to the rural area. This change is being made at -hi( tiEe in order
to incorporate policy direction from the rec€ntly adopted Regional Rioeation open space
DevelnPment GuidelPoliq Plan because it is consistent with discussions of urban-genirated uses
held in connection with the rural policy study. There may be other changes that ire needed in
this section to reflect chaoges in the policy plans made since tbe MDIF was adopted, but those
changes will oot be made uDtil the Dcxt overall update of the MDIF in lgg2lg3-
teD wl Area A separate staff rcport,
containing an exaople of how the exception policy might work for an Aooka couoty tonrnship
(Linwood), wili be provided The second appendix, I:nd Uses in the Rural Area. will clari$ for
the C.ouncil aod local governnen ts what land uses are appropriate.
t
The draft ametrdments werc reviewed with tbc I-and use Advisory committee (LUAe at their
4pdl 19' 1991 meeting. They made several minor conmeats whiih have been incorpoiated into
the &aft.
nrcflyt0
l/,AY 2l tggt
,' ., -.i -,', -,/;- V r" L/L /-/ y' / :.! (
May 1, 1991 '1:4.'t ''l' la'v'"| i /
Metropolitar and Comuunity Development Committee
Aune Hurlburt and Carl Ohrn
Draft Ameudmetrts to the Metmpolitatr Development and Inveshent Frame ork
(MDIF) to Implement Rural Policy Changes
^tt\, nE r.E o rrrro (( Fir
April 11, 1991
DRJAFT AI.G NDI,I,ENT A
Metropolitan DevelopEent and Investment Franet ork (IiDIF)
additional lancruaqe / d€*€+i€hs
(niddle of page 22 through page 25)
RUR.AI.. AERVICE IREA
The focus of the Council rs qrowth-panaoenent strateqv of
encouraqinq orowth within an urban servi.ce area reouires an
accompanyiLct policy that linits qrohrth in the rural area.
Extensive developnent outside the petropolitan urban senrice areais not appropriate because it can Lead to preEature and costlv
dernands to extend reqional services such as sewers and hiqhwavs,
and does not take advantaqe of reoional investnents that have
been nade in the urban senrice area. Develoonent outside the
urban service area contributes to urban sorawl and increases thecosts of services. Sone senrices that reauire lrioherconcentrations of Deople to be cost-effective. such as transit,
mav becorne orohibitivelv expensive.
Whi I e erri sti no scrvi r:e 'l ewel s nav be 1ou. ne w residents arelikelv to dernand additional serrrices. Develoonent can result inerosion of the natural and nan-nade environEent that attractedresidents in the first p1ace. Conflicts often develop betrireen
new exurban residents and residents vho depend on aoriculture forallorDart of eir livelihoods.
Develoornent in the rural area can have adverse inpacts on thecrualitv of the natural environnent. Protectins and maintaininothe qualitv of surface water and qroundrrater is a kev concern of
tha narrra i I LIh.i1a +aalrr^t^ai^.'l a.lt rh.-ae h ad rrn-< i taov
sewaqe disoosal svstens, their prooer installation andnaintenance is sti11 a critical concern.
A comnon nisconceotion is that aqriculture and other mralactivities are onlv tepporarv Land uses. iust rraitino for theland to be developed. Uost of the rural area will r,rot be neededfor urban develoonent in the foreseeabl.e future. AqricuLture andrural land uses are leqitinate and oernanent Land uses in these
areas,
As the reqion qrows, there w111 be a need to expand the urbanservice area into some areas that are currentlv rural. There arepotential reqional, as well as 1 a I imDacts fron inaoorooriatte
de a l annrant nf f ha rrrra l araac ih.t rir.u l.ra naadad ter awrand f ha
urban service area. If copmunities do not plan for their future
urban service areas before developEent occurs. it is possible
I
Devel.opment in the rural area also results in denand for loca1services. and can chanqe the ctraracter of rural conmunities.
Draft MDfF Amendnents, April 11, 1991
d e
re qLo nal urb an erv Lce
h
t
r
o
o
D s T ere for t ec ounc i1 av eou re c un1 1es to dl fvehesLvEDansthtae1ncsLstenw.1 he po1 cLeth
S
t doc en t.
CoDEerciaI lgricultural lr.a
The co.Dercial aqriculturar area incr.udes those lands a"iticl.aby locar' Eovernn6nts as e:.igiuie iol-igricurtural prese::ves unarerthe 19go Metropolitan agricriiiuioi-irl=.r-,es Act. This approachpraces the responsibiliiy t"i-a.iinini agricultural. lands.onlocar sovernnei:rs. . niir,'ci"igii';;;;:".ion pollcies forconmerci'ar sqricult|lg rocusei-onii-ii "r..= vhere there arei3iil33"!I3I:* 3*":":"a-pi't"iiii"iI' ro'ir -;il-';;il;.i
The anount of r'and included in the coEDercial agrlcurtural areais larse, coverino atout ooo,iio6"i.ilf :.n.l+8slllgo. thisconstitutes over 6a1f th"-;;;i;"i-ii'trr" seven-county area.
The geographic area defined as the corucrcial agricurtural areals subject to freouent-crrang--wi;; ;i; to the Agrlcultural.Prese!'r'es Act beciuse rana Ein-gJ"riirana out of certiflcatronwhen local governuents aeciai-ti-ail'il rt" statua. Iocal
I;iE[i3.i:iii:i:liE^!li.Fifi.,i* ;*:":;iF"t3,ii"ng" i,,
process . For the Dut?oses of this aoiilcnt, the corn,r,ercialagricu).tural area is -&erinea-"J:'ii"-ii.'" certifled aE of lrarch 1of each year. rhis dati iJ-tt. iiii ii'119r, counctl reportingyear required under tfre lEricuit"ii=f-ir"r"t ves Act.
Under the Agricultural- presenres Act, a. local goverDEent passes a.resor'ution certifving -rana eiigibi; -i";' protectlons and banef itsand linitins housinq-density-t3-i"! iiit per 4o acres. Tlrecertified area is rtien Jonria.i.i"i"ig'igera agrlcultural land.
)
I
Draft MDIF Amendnents, April 11, 1991
The 1ocal corDprehensive plan and zoning ordirance nust reflectthis land use and zoning. Farners owning land within thecertified area Eay then enter the prograB. Land in the prograr0
is referred to as covenanted land. The Agricul-ture Preserves Actprovides protection for the farmer from urban assessments,property taxes at developnent value and conflicting land uses in
exchange for a legal cornraitment to continue farming for at least
eight years.
I{ithin the commercial agricultural area, all land has beencertified by IocaI governuents as eligible for the aqtriculture
preserves prograD. However, the Council recognizes talo levels ofprotection in the coumercial agricultural area: prinary and
secondary protection areas.
A large part of the general rural use -area is devoted toagriculture. The council supports the bontinuatl.on of agriculture
and encourages J.ocal governnents to support it by zoningagricultural land at one unit per 40 acres. For farns within an
Priuary protection areas are lands covenanted as agriculturalpreserves. They rrill receive the greatest protection possible
fron incompatible uses because the greatest level of cornrnitmentto farning has been established.
secondary protection areas cover the falTs in the area that have
not yet @ agricultural preserves.
The council believes the conmercial agriculture area is a place
where agriculture is the best permanent use of the Iand. Long-tern investments in fa:a equipuent and in Iand preservation can
be nade r,rith the confidence that urban developuent is not goingto destroy or linit these investEents.
GeDeral Rura1 Use lr€a
The general rural use area Ls the area outside the urban service
area that is not designated for couoercial agriculture. over 40
percent of the land in the l{etropolitan Area fal1s in thiscategory. The area contains a wide variety of land uses,
including agrlcultural, residential and urban-tl1)e facilities.
There are sizable parts of the general nrral use area that host
no particuLar kind of land use--land that is often called
unused. llost of the area looks nrral, but nany of its residents
are tied economically to the urban ar.a and Dany of its land usesprovide services to people living ln thc urban senrice area.
General FarDland
J
Rural residential de vel opuent
1nothemise unsui ted to agricult
e e
t k
1.,
1o ca1 D1a n].n obi ect ves.D1 ent ncI e ens tan ard AStv
Draft !.,DIF A.nendments, April 11, 1991
area so zoned that are subsequently cerror- trre ;;;;;"iiil"' pr.r"*.= prosra', ffireclassifv thetr as pirt oi.:itre'""iiEili.r agricurturar area.
Rural Residential DeveLopEent
could resul in theneed for urban setrri,ces such as package serrerqgg disposalsystems.
nav
4
Draft MDIF Amendnents, April 11, 1991
ds.At a minirnrrh +h.r, c har'tr'l al airqrr?a .a+ I arc+tr.rn car.r= rra
s Ids
.Ln
Treatment and Handlino Policv Plan to ensure aoainst neqativeirnpacts on the environment and the rnetroooli.tan wastevaiertreatnent svsten.
Existing Urban-Density Developnent
Residential subdivisions, Dobile home parks and clusters ofmoderate-density residential developnent also exist in thegeneral rural use area. They frequently deDand urban servicesbut are in locations where urban setieices are difficult or costl.yto provide. The Councilts principal concern is the potential
need for the costl,y extension of central sanitary serrer andparticularly Betropo-itan sewer service. @ i€€&evels ippretrr:ate fer a rural area. Local governnents uithexisting urban-density developEent should address the operati.on
and naintenance issues of on-site systems to avoid potentialproblens and the eventual need for costly Local investnents.
Urban-Generated Uses
Many facilities exist in the general rural use area that requireisolated and spacious locations but nay be intended to serve theurban or entire netropolitan area public. Ttrese facilitiesinclude campgrounds and recreational vehicle parks, regional-parks, trails, waste disposal installations, racing facilities,gun cLubs, festivals, nining sites and sinilar facilities, 4Qare usuallv public or cruasi-oublic in nature. The general ruraluse area
Council t s
adecrua te
is an appropriate location for these facilities. Theinterest is that these facilities are provided with
nutl ic senrices , consistent sith localand regional plans, and to the extent possible, that they do notinterfere sith agricultural activities.
Other nd Uses
fn addition to aqriculture. sinqle-familv residentiatdevelopment. existinq development and urban-qenerated uses. thereare other land uses that Eav be appropriate in the qeneral ruraLuse area. Whether or not a land use is appropriate depends on?hether it is corlsistent irith Ioca1 and reoional plans and if itneets all environmental dualitv standards. An appropriate landuse would not eduire urban-level- suBDort se ices (such ashiqhwavs, transit or sewers) . Uses should be of a scale
5
Draft MDIF Anendnents, Aprit 11, 1991
docunent.
L
t
nural C.Dt.rs
Rural centers historically have se::"ved as retail rerivlce centersand transportation center; e", tt e-siiroundinE nrral area.Houever, chanses in agri-uri"i"iia-Iiiid urban expansion havechanged the traditionir rurii-i"ii.!-i"res of uany of tbesesnall centers to resid.ntiii-"iiii-iE ',rru"r, people and rocatlonsfor industries with.ritii.-tr!-il-rilir agrlculture. Ehe ratternake use of avairabr. ralor-Ii iirii-ii""" ?r9, by thelr nature,tend not to be deoenaent on ;i";;-;;rilct rrith other fi::as fortheir suppries or- criticaily-;;;;;;i'"n transportatlon.
The council has identifl:g 35 rural centers, rith populatlonsllngins fron just over 1oo to n"i"-tiin s,ooo. so,e nrralcenters, such as Nor?ood ana-r-ung iiEli"i, -ii..il;..$:.enttre
::y$:ii *3i$. 3'"i*f .:'it*i; iill;:;iH;i! -Lit="i,o,
6
Services available within rural centers vary. Sone have centralsanitary seueri others depend on on-site rraste disposal systens.Sone have central water systens. Sone provide the full rlnge ofconvenience retail stores, while others have only a bar or gasstation. Sone have smal1 nanufacturing or serviEe businessesiothers are alnost exclusively residential . The Council does notsupport the extension of regional systens to rural centersbecause of the distance frorn the urban center and the smallpopulations of rural centers.
Rural locations in the past decade have been attractive and soDe,although not all, conr"unities have experienced an upsurge ingrowth, principally residential developnent. Developne;t trendsare down froE the highs noted in the early 1970s but continue atrnodest levels into the 1980s.
Several setivices are inportant in adequately serving additionalrural center development, but sewage disposal is the mostcriticaL. Urban-density developnent in in unsewered rural centerposes the risks of on-site senage systeD failure, contauinationof groundwater and eventually the expense of new on-site orcentral sewer system installation. The possibility also existsthat renedying a pollution problem may require an axtension ofnetropolitan sewer serrrice through rural areas. Lack of sewerservice is a serious constraint on the anount and type ofdeveloproent that rural centers can safely accoromodate.
SoDe parts of the rural etropolitan Area, especially Anokacounty, are receiving large aDounts of scattered urbandevelopuent. Ehis scattered developEent poses service problens
and Eay, at a later date, resul.t in very high loca1 senricecosts. The Council proposes a strategy that offers localgovernment an alternative way to structure this developDent bydesignating and creating a rrlrral center.r Ihese new centerswould be linited enclaves for urban-density fand uses, facilitiesand serrrices rrithin the local goventnents I broaderiurisdictional boundaries. They vould ng! be coternin-ous withthe entire corporate liuits. Under this strategy, a localgovernEent wouLd identify an area to receive urban-densityresidential , counercial and lndustrial developnent and thafacilities, including local central sewer, vhere appropriate,needed to senre it. Financing of necessary support setiviceswould be a Local responsibility. Areas of existing urban-densityuses are like1y candidates for selection as new ruial centers.
Rural centers should acconrnodate additlonal developnentconsistent with their ability to finance and adnin-lster serrric6s,including sel{er, roads, water and stornwater drainage. Ifadditional land is needed to accomroodate growth, mial centersshould extend serrrices in a staged, contiguous Eanner.
7
Draft IIDIF Amendments, April 11, 1991
Draft UDfF AhendDents, April 11, 1991
Residential, commercial and industrial devel.opDent at urbandensities should be acconnodated onty in rural centers Lrithcentral sanirarv seuers thaa-;;; i!!trig- state and federar uaterquality standarls. r,""g"i-proj."II-Jiou:.a be located i.nfreestanding growth cen€ers'tdi-il";"; ful1 range of serrrices.
Rural-to-grDaa trapsitiop pl.ptripq
o-
area.
ev
necessarv.
e
ll
t{th he nte ntio vi ].ncr th uh
it
ens et3,ces arenor to be
8
Draft l.lDIF Amendnents, April 11, 1991
urbani ation in the future. Fo examDle, a use that re ]'res a
SD C I us, isolat ed locatio should I3r obablv not be located whe reit is ikelv to be surrounded b inconpat ib1 e urban deve oDnent
T hec ai l r.r i l1 r.a 1 'I aaa I aer;nnroha cirrc n'l a're +lrr+i rrr.l rrAa
1a o-tthe fut re extension of metroDolitan se ices to serve the area
servlce ar ea. The Council will continue to aoolv i s Dol icies
c areqional n eed has been denonstr ated. The Council n 1I suooort
The Council will examine the need to olan for urban-to-ruraltfansition areas in its metropolitan svstens plans. Iocal pl.answill be considered but !ril1 not deternine the transition areasdesiqnated for reoional purooses.
urbanization.
RUR.IIJ SERVICE AREA ROI/TCIE8
17. Tb€ Netropolitap eoupcll docs pot rupport artcpriy€
dev€1oDD6nt ou tsid€ tha urbaD s.rgLc. aEer bacau3. Lt canlead to tho pralatulc arpapsr,o! o! loca1 ap6 raql,olal
Lcc araa.
The cululativc poqativa iEpacts of d.voloppept that l.gincons i s t t Yith th. couEci1 t s rurtl 8r6a Do1:[ciL6 3 EaV have
arcaDtl,oDa to t ha policirc for locll oov.rl!.Dts that caDDotueet tho policl.3 bccau!. ol .rlrtilo subdlvLrl,op! or l8!aldavelopuelt.
Connercl,al lglicultural lr.r
8b. llctropolltaa coulcLl ruppott! thr loag-gjr! coltiDurtl.oDof rgrl.cultura lD tb. rutrl s.Fyl,c. .r.a. th. eouDcll rl11us. tb. follorlnE raDLlDg.la dcclrloDr to lcooDDodrt.lecilitlea ..F l,DE urbtD !.8ial.Dtr.
Prinary protectlon area: Iand covenanted lnagriculture presen es uill receive priroary protection.
Urban facilities should be prohibited in this areaunless there is atrong docunentation that no other
a substaptial ippact o! or copstltut. . 3ubrtaptlaldepartura !!oE potropoll.tar trrpsportatiop raat rasteyttertr€atEept sv3tcEs plaps. Iha!€foE., thc coulcil nav raquirecoEpupitiGs to lodifv copprabGpsiv. plals that rreipcopsistapt rl.th thr polLcica. I!. Couacil vitl copsidcr
1+9.
1
9
in the future.
locations in the liretropolitan Area can adequately neetthe siting and selecti'o, "iii..r..2, secondary protec€J.on area: lands certified but notpresently in agricultural preserves wi]l receive aleve, of proteEtion ="""nairy to agriculturalpreserves. urban facitities-shout6-;a-;;-i;cated inthis area unless ttrere is-strong evidence that aproposed urban use cannot ue rJ6a[ea-i"-iti-iJ"!r.rrural use area.
GaDcral nu!a1 Ura lr.a
Draft IIDIF Amendnents, April 11, 1991
,i1€19t. Th€ XGtropolltu Coulcll au;rporte I oDE-t.r!prcscnatioD of rEricultura Ilrldh th. galar8l tutal u!€lrca. Eoyavar , th. Couacll ylll rb o rupport r.sid.Dtiatd.YclopEeDt rt d€acitl,.! of ao rori tbl! o!. utlt p.r 10rctss coE[rutad oD r gao-rcrc brsir (r larlEua of rLrtv fouruDlt3 par {g--re-eeauF€y).
T
d €Io DE6 t,dt rl ult ral lan dth rt t .D des I qDat ed
t
c ust ria th at u1 vclat€al !fo r lcc 3.
l!€3 rfac .I t€r aDd aal IE tro Lt teD q ev rloh ts -o tIav.
198.o
v o
6
o€s
fa11.
19c. 8D. Couacl.Llll pot .rt.!(t E.tropollt.! !yrt.!a to ronourDaa-deasl'ty r.lrd.Dtrrr co"iiiiioat ra th. g.!.8rr ru.lur. u.a. rD.r. urbrl_aearfty Civir o c ar - tovoriirit,uour c raai. fu -i;ili33'i:r"'ll.i;.r, !l.ii3, .prattcutrrty oa-rtto ..r;-;;;;;-ipo*ttoa rad .tatolraco.
19D.
au
l0
Draft MDIF Amendments, April 11, 1991
eI
c e o
deEaDdls Io thc crt€t oossiblr tb should aot i t6rf€ re
sith aqricultural lctivitl.3.
Rural CoDtors
219.
Rural-to-Irrba! Trapsitlop PIaDDiDo
3q+t llhr xetaopolltrD couDcll rl11 tupPort r nrrel c.!t.rtt Plals '
to accoruodrt. aatdltloDal grortb ProYlC.d th.y rr.
coasistcnt ulth th€ c.nt.r'! tDllity to fl'naaco and
aat[ialsta! ..ryicos, P.rtLaularly rcrcr t.r l'ca. Eh€
couDcll luttoEt! rural caDta! tarvl'co luprovrurat! but Dot
at rogloDal atlraD3e.
Tbe couDcl.l ril1 supPort r 1ocrl gov.rDlaDt I r Pla! for a DCr
rural c.ltar rrl lts rrquartt lor ltato rDal ta6.r!I graDts,
provial.d tbo locel govrraacat acrttr.ctt urb'! d.!rltr'.s troE
iurrouadiag nrral aicas 486 rl'11 suPIrort thc arr c.ntor rith
!€c.s3rr-t' !.rvlc. ilvattlaDtr.
t
Tbe co cll ulll aot conuLt to the futura arta Loa of
€
d€t€ae trausitl ol areas deg L6nat6dl for reoLoaal pu o963.
22.
11
Draft UDIF ABendEents, April 11, 1991
(pages 33 to 35)
pl..rllgg_ltrD rlrvEsrHElxr pRocEDsREs :BEE eoENcrL rxo rcri6piLrrAx sysrEua
3|:.I;:'iI'i"'i:'.F::': + f . is concern"d^.,-i-.1 l3'as*e netropor itani:*"st:i":1.*"::l::ili:ii:i =.1*i.!i:"TF:fii.i"jii*1g,":; ii:]i I ii: ;"
:y: i:1, ff isTi ii=! "i i!{i u' I" 3 i : rr'' i" i r
"-i ii?
f *';:'t,ux;fxtfll.i'itl,ii=''il:.ftTft {il;:l:$il;:"
I{ETROPOLTTI}I 8Y88Et,t GUIDEEINES
Il:, iiit::,"i:, i:Ti:T,1* 3:*i::,i+i:, "il:i.;:I,ff : 833, ",,Sill
"
lnjr.r":::::"::y.l opnent "i' iiJi iit ies. substant ial ry inconmissions i. .o ,?9
,."d. rhe chalreng". to thJ-IJiiiii lru
"na.'=i,ini .."ii.fllur::irtii::: sround betueen o"!'i,iirii,,s .,.,a
;ifi f:;:'t:';: ;lr1!,"eriver ser*ices :?_t1,.. urban serr.,ice area
;=*,il_rli"f "#',ff iil=k"F.*:r:'::rilt#l;ri;fr_i!r;;;"
J,ocation of natural
;:fr i:H :ffi ;,::., : :i'ii i= ;;. r if . : 1;:, iff . i:';iii;' l*,
rural._serwi.. ""."rrn"
acreages wirr riieiy_i!-i"#ila in the*:r".i:"i:::ff :i;Ely*ryfu ffi ii+if .tii:,'iili"il::"tre this region to r
;: i::I:::.,in;rl:l- "ri'i"'-ai!'' "-d
:ff =ff :" j:.1::r**J_tu;u!,"*i.:; j$:::d j,l$ii:i'i:it:
8aYCr3
Only land within the
n+x#*#:dg+T#'r*;;tii:1T,"ii:ffi ,,
72
Draft MDIF Amendments, Ap!i1 11, 1991
transport selrage generated by users in the urban service area andto treat it to the extent necessary to meet the requirements ofthe nationa). pollution discharge elinination systen perroit for
each treatment pIant. Central, serrer service currently provj.dedin rural centers can conti,nue at leve1s consistent with eachcenter's ability to finance and operate systeDs 1ocal1y. Inrural centers or any other part of the rural area receivingregional sewer service, the Council niII deternine regionalservice allocations for sewer flow using the sane procedures thatare used for other conmunities located within the Eetropolitanurban service area.
The Council will assure the continuatj.on of service adequate to
Deet the needs of development currently receiving regional sewerservice. In order to neet this coririitment, the Council
enphasizes the need to uonitor the condition of older sewers and
sewers with a history of probleDs, as well as the trends in
sewage voLume as opposed to design capacity.
The Council vi1l also work for increased coordination betlreen the
selrer and the solid rraste systeD in the area of planning andproject developEent of conposting and co-conposting. Recycl-ingresiduals fron the rraste treatnent process with rnunicipal solid
waste Eay help resolve disposal problens confronting both the
sewer and the solid rraste systems.
The Council will establish standards for on-site sewacre disposal
svstems in the rural area to protect the reqionrs crrounduater andthe health of rural area residents. and to prevent the need for
oremature extensions of the reqional seuer svsten. AII eleuentsof the l,Iinnesota Pollution ControL Adencv standards for on-site
sewaqe disposal svstems should be followed in all areas. Al.1
comrnunities should recruire at least tuo selraqe-disposaldrainfields to be located on each buildino site, a orimarvdrainfield and a reolacement should the orioinal svsten fai1.
Exceot in the connercial aoricultural area. aII facets of the
Councilrs standards for the proper dcgiqn. location,
in<ta1'lrf i6h rneintanrnaa rnd an-r'reri na rarritarind 6f 6rr-<itF
svsterus should also be adopted. Thc Council ril.I reanrire all.
conrnunities to certifv that thev havc lct these standards oriorto approval of locaL comprehensive Dlan aDendments or nakinqfavorable recoomendations in proiect revierrs.
The council will review its existinc oolicies concernino
conmunitv on-site sewaqe disoosal svstens and oackaee treatmentplants in the rural area in liqht of the councilts policy to
encouraoe clusterinq in the rural area and the inproved
technoloqv which is or nav becone available in the future.
13
Draft l,lDIF Amendnents, April 11, 1991
u
s
se wer vste
TraDsportati oD
Metropolitan highway ^iDproveDents will be- planned and devel.pedto serve the needs of r;sident= in tfr" urlin senri;;-.;;;;includins the freesta"ai"g-gi",ti""Jii"r=. Highrravs uilr beprovided in accordance wi€n-irre-E""iii,s regional transpoltationpolicv plan and rocal conpr.r,.""i""'ii"n= 6;;-;;! ii-.Iii"r-itvr.rith the council ' s resionii
. ;i;;. ' n5foing -ie,reil-oi. rriiiii.yser,ice !ri1l continue-to exiit-i" trrl-".ran serrrice arei due totraver behavior. developneni-p.Il";; and the ;"r;;"-;;-uiEnwaysfacilities, but efforts^"iii 6"-iiie-to provide a reasonabLe
I :::] _?t l.tropoL iran rrisheiy-ieii-Ie -trrroustrout the urbanservlce area.
fhe council influences--netropolltan highuay developnent in avariety of hrays. rhe uinnesli.-o!p"rir.nt of Transportation(MnlDor) constructs ana nainiiir;;;;;'of the roads in theuetropolitan systen, and the uiiir"t.-""thorlty a;; ;-id;;yprosrarnnins decisions rests vrih-il;-;;a;-;"iii!Ii.ii!I"Iitransportation. Houever, lfnlDOl serl-usty conslders the
;ii:iiiii,li?t:i,":::,liir=:+l:;i*i::r ;*'eiu"ll"il*$:t,constrarction on conrrou;d-aac;;;-;i;;;"y, anar develoDsgruidelines for settins r,ieil;i;;iliiii"31]';.ii';:"fildetinesror approval or inter6|""6i ii,pii;;il;;.. The councll is arsoresponslble for endorslry-r.a-iii'erJ'rjru' and rnter'tatesubstitution fuadinE pri5rities,-rl-iEu-"r. set by rocar elected;:j*l"r= actins trrioirsh tt" i",l".Ii;, rr"r,=portiti"n iaJil"rv
Highway planning is _very iuportant becau-se the ablllty of people:? tikg advantage of thi "pi"rt""iti"=-."" area oflera andacquirins essenriar gooas iira ,a;i;; depend on-rri"iig:iooahishway systen and ofr 1!"piiis ri-ipllltjri-i;lri. T;i:,.:.l=roads on the existing sysleu-uu=t-8.-iii"-to-pii"riii-ir,"-[yp" .r,a
t4
Draft MDIF Amendments, April 11, 1991
1eveI of service designated in the Councilrs transportationpolicy p1an. Traffic nanagement strategies or new constructionwill be necessary when traffic volumes approach designcapaci.ties, when road conditions pose hazards and slowdowns, andwhen nery developments are proposed that differ substantially fro:nassunptions nade in the regional tlansportation plan.Inplenenting traffic Danagement strategies for netropolitan
highways is a state or regional responsibility that frequentlyhas direct or indirect inplications for local systeDs. Localgovernments will have prinary responsibility for carrying outtraffic managenent strategies on local systeEs.
l,letropol itan hiohvavs in the rural area will be olanned tosuooort a leve1 of develoouent consistent with the Councilrsrural densitv policies. The Councll lrill not plan for a Ieve1 ofsenrice that uouLd support or encouraoe developpent qreater thanthe policv exceot where an exceotion has been aooroved accordinoto the quidelines of the trletropolitan Developnent and fnvestpent
Franelrork.
Hiqhwav plannLncr uust also consider the urban-to-mra1 transi.tionareas. and hov riqhts-of-wav fcir the svstem of orincioal andninor arterials that will be needed in the future should beprotected froE incoEpatible development.
Buses operating on streets and highrrays ui1l probably doDinatepublic transit senrice through the reuiinder of the century.This does not preclude the introduction of soDe fixed-guldewayfacilities in heavily traveled corridors, but costs and tine
15
New sources Eay share the responsibility for funding newconstruction rrith the traditional county, 6tate and federalsources. New sources nay include the region, local, governDents
and the private sector. With the potential for funding andoperational linitations, denying access to the regional systeu
may also be necessary for unanticipated new developnents.
Highway pl.anning should al.so address air pollution caused byheavy concentrations of auto, truck and bus traffic. Althoughthis problen has traditionally been associated with the two netrocenters, it is a growing probleE in the regional businessconcentrations where highways are reaching capacity.
The relationship between netropolitan highways and outstatel{innesota is another consideration in highway planning. Thecouncil recognizes the iroportance of outstate connections,particularly for economic developuentj_@
sy€+€#
t
areas.
Parks
ii!:IiilFi"r.*; {i"i::i{!::".:f::. *q}:s:i :::i:l:iff #.,;3ffi"[i:l 3iu.ES*I:u t.-i".i.-ti!=i!!a. or today,s,,ui,,-
l:$,':fi iJ:;,itrff *i5l.tti:j.ti:ii";,tit:*:;';iii:',.
15
Draft MDfF Anendments, April 11, 1991
constraints work aga'nst a nassive shift in.forD over the next 15years. Nevertheleis, .the c"""Eii-"iii^g11,11"_u. to seek creative,forr''ard-lookins sorutio"= i;l;;;=ii'1.*r."" problens-
Locations uith large numbers of househr::i:: : :
i"ii;, :'ii i.. *;:.:i:f . iH"$ii$:i:il ff .I$*i"lht!l:
#.*:;":;, "i|ilr;"' tl-iiii'Jr :- i;i;' s"".ilrit;;;,.,J"!r5.,ry,.h;;; -;;;;il iiii'iiSilioil"r"Yilli.nii3i:,.,Il!IiaiG-""i"i".-t6
SoDe parts of the urban senrice area uith lor-density developDentEay be served onlv by p.i"i"in=ii-ii I,o.r.r,d basis. This isal.so true ror sonl "?_ih;-;;;;lii_ilp!"a.nt people who rive inlow-density areas or cannot use tfre-iuilic. systen. Regrularl.yscheduled resional transit ""rJiJ!-"iii not be provide, to theruraL service area, _lut iesia!;G-";^fi. area can arrange for and;i:i$:.!:'ii'3'Elil',:I I:::i*3'*F,""i;-.;-a;i;11H i, .n.v
xl*i:+*ii,r;Tffr1i.,H;*+':5ti:*r**'r;::r.,'appropriated for this puryose.
Draft MDIF Anendments, April 11, 1991
to develop such facilities in the rurat service area. adecruatesupport services such as roads and serrers nust be provided.
lirports
Every effort w111 be made to get the maximum use out of theexisting airport systen, consistent with the Councj.lts airportpolicy p1an. This is especially iuportant for the rrDajorrr and
rr internediaterr airports, all of which are located in the urbanservice area. These facilitj.es should continue to operate and tooperate safely even if it requires substantial upgrading of
exi st in
uses ancriticaat the
qf
dd1t
reg
acilities and nodifications or controls on nearby landevelopnent proposals. Land use coupatibility iso ensure future as well as current adequate operationsional airports.
If a new rninorn airport site is needed, lands in the conmercialagricultural area as defined in this docuDent should be avoided.In addition, the only facilities developed on or adjacent to theairport should be those directly involved with naking it useable
and safe.
Oth€r Lrea SystsDg
This franework focuses on the four metropolitan systeus ofsewers, transportation, regional parks and airports because theCouncil has special obligations and responsibilities for thenunder the liletropolitan Land Planning Act. Under the Waste
Management Act, the Councilrs solid rraste progran has the sanestatus in nany respects as the four Eetropolitan systens and willreceive the sane level of protection as those systems.
However. The Council aLso has planning responsibilities forseveral other systeros that aetive tlre residents of theUetropolitan Area. currentLy, the council has adopted plansdealing with housing, health, surface water Eanagenent, Juvenilejustice and water resources, as well as naJor position papers onthe aging, arts and developnent disabilitles. A11 of theseplanning documents and the programs assocLated with thencontribute to netropolitan resource DanageEent. The council Eustdirect attention to the iupact of this fraDesork and Eetropolitan
system plans on these other area plans and prograDs, as uell asthe extent to which the other plans and prograns nodify the
developDent and investEent fraDework and rnetropolitan systetrplans.
The council also recognizes that numerous interrelationshipsexist among the other area syateD plans and the netropolitansysteu p1ans. Exanples include aging and health, transportation
and housing, and sewers, solid waste and rrater resources.
t7
Draft MDfF Anendments, April 11, 1991
For sone of the other-systens, the relationships are lessobvious. However, au af d;'=;;;"il] wnetrrer designated asmetroporitan or not. have the i;ii;;ii.n .r,. connon: a) assuuptionsabout future direction. "r-l'i."rrii.'#.,.i, and change andreliance on a uniforn set. of forecastil b) accountabil.ity tocouncil lesislative nanaatei;-ct-;;;;;",iitr,-"il-"ii;-;;i .
econonic develooment,. a; aarrere;";-;;-il. saEe process ofresional pranniiq "": g::Fi":iiiiiii, "lna e; reliance on thearears populatioi for Dost or tneii iinincial support.
18
Draft II{DIF Amendments, April 11, 1991
Appeudix:critelir foE ouDcil ADDloval of Local D aDs that areIpconsistept rith NDIF Rural. Ar6a polici6s
Some communities in the rural area have existinq developnentDatterns that are inconsis tent nith Council oolicv.
SDe c Itl ca 11v.ome comrnunities have al readv develoDed atresidential den ities oreater than one unit oer 10 acres. This
appendix provides criteria and procedures for review and aoorovalof locaI coBprehensive plans that are inconsistent uith thedensitv pol icv.
Exceptions to the policies for the rural area nill be consideredonlv for conEunities that capnot neet the policv because of theexistino subdivisions or land develoDment. The Council mav
aporove an exceotion as part of its review of a local,
conprehensive pIan. The extent of the exception wiLl- be based
upon how well the coNtrunitv lril.L or has:
protected qood aqricultural land;protected wetlands and other environmentallv sensitive
areas t
implernented perfo:mance standards for on-site sewaoedisoosal svstens that are c nsistent with the Councilrswastewater Treatnent and Handlino Policv Plan; and
adopted a coBprehensive plan consistent lrith allMetroDolitan DeveloDment Gui e chaDters, esDeciallv thosefor the metropolitan svstens (severs. transportation,aviation and parks. )
fn order for the Council to support an exception to the nrraldensitv policv. the connunitv nust orovide the follolrino as aoart of its conorehensive olan anendment:
The total land area (acreaoel of the connunitv. adiusted forsurface water and naior hiqhwav riohts-of-wav.The nurnber 6f eri st ns lots of record -
The anount and location of land oryned bv oublic aoencies or
occupied bv institutional uses and restricted fron
developnent.
The anount and location of undevelooed land. sith ananalvsis of its developpent potential based on current and
orooosed olanninEl and zon j.ns.
The anount and location of land planned and zoned for usesother than aoriculture and residential developEent. with a.descriotion of uses that will be oernitted.
The anount and location of a icultural land uses. and anv
areas that lrilI be certified elioible for the lletropolitanAqricultural Preserves orooran.
l=
2.-L.
4.
a
6.
(nev, appendices to be added to }iDIF)
t9
Draft t{DfF A.Dendtrents, April 11, 1991
e
DE rfo ce tan da sf r s te 1SD osa 1 sy temewage
L.
&_
9.
10.
11.
a
stsv 1an
20
Draft UDIF Amendnents, April 11, 1991
Appepdix: Lapd Uses la tho Rura1 llea
This appendix helps clarifv wha t land uses mav be suDDorted bv
r'.\rrr'rr.i l '1^'l i..r, f^r tha firral ca ri r-a :rar r;rl rrr^ui A6e rnr i danr.a
for both the Council and local oovernnents.
ft is iraportant to renenber that even thouqh a Darticular land
use mav be acceptable in the rural area fron a reoionalperspective. the Council will not recoEpend that everv conmunitvprovide for everv possible land use in its rural area if it would
not be consistent rrith 1ocal p1ans. All uses ltoufd also be
sub'iect to anv 1ocal , reoional or state pemittino or licensino
recruirements .
[:nd Use Recommenda for the Rural Area
Era.oplcr of CourLst [t L&d Us6
Coooercial
ASricultural Rcgio!
Agricultursl: broad raogc of agriclrltural laod uscs' incjudi!8 bors. boarding and
!raini!8, kcnncls, sod farros, ucc faros, Esh producrioo aDd PrGsinS, storage 8rc3s or
buildiDgs; for priEary prolcction arcas, us€s @DsistcDt wiG 1980 ASricultural Prcs.rvcs
Act
RcsidcBtisl: si!8lc hEily rcsidcnc6 at a Eaximum dcBsity of 1/l() affcs, accessory
aPartmcDls
IlstitutioBrL urbaD geocratcd tacilitics, such as e"stc dispcal hciliaics; prohibitcd &otD
primary protcctioo arcas uolcss uo othcr lGtion ar,tailablc; Prohibitcd Eom sccotrdarl
protcctioE area uorcss Do sitc iD tancral Nral usc arca 8t/ailSblc
Gc!.rel Rursl Us.
Araa
Agricultunl 8U uscs listcd fo. comEcrcial aSrioltural Policf arca
Rcsidcuddr siogc hEily r6idesces at a 64iEuE dcDsity of 1/10 actcs coDPured oo
abc basis of 640 a(rc parcsls (oDc squarc Eilc), twi! homcgduPlcxcs (Dc.ri!g dcDsity
st3odard), acc6sory apartEcols, goupliving hoEcs rrirh sharcd 6bDg Eciliries
Coo.ncrleVRccrtedold rnd Urbro-Gclcntcd Ut !r urbgD-geDcratcd us6, iocludi.Dg
rc.reatioDal v"hictc parts, rzcctracB, fc$iral sitcs,, caEPgrouDds' 8un club6, Prilf3rc
airports, solid rastc hciliticq suto sahagc aod rEqrcliDg, oticr similsr facilitics,
ocighbortood cdvaoicDc?AcNice/ictsil us.s, suct 8s fDarcial ofEccs, vk .o sttrcs,
gasoliDc, Srcdcs, da),carc ccDtc6, comrDcrcial6crvicclrelail us.s adjaccDt lo or scrvcd
by cxlsti.og rocuo higbcEy!,, agic-ultural produGs ptcsi"& boG cupetioan bcd aDd
brcat alt lodginS hcilitics, dcotist 8Dd dclor ofEcrq tsDtliDg atcas br ultraliglt and
@odcl airplalcs, rcrcaa tacilitics, tolr coutras
Ildustrld: saDd 8trd grav"l mirilg, urbaD-gcEcratcd u!.s that rcquirc 8 spocious'
isolatcd l@ti€'D. sEall Eaouhcturing 6rEs origipatiog froE hoEc ErPaliods, c,il or
gasolilc a@rage taDt htE1 rc6Dcrics, solid r.a$c EaEsfcrDroccssiot hcilili6
tlstitutorr} urbaE-tclcr"tcd ,t"", -i t *"dirp*"| i!$a[rtioo1iaiq Prisoos,
pubtic sirpons, huEan sarvicr agcoc, satcllitc ofEctq p6rts, trails, oPcD sPacc, oucr
siroilar bcilitics, uniquc oatural or coDs.wadoo arcas, scb@ls' churchcq crE€rcri6
8:
27
Poticy Ar!8
CoEE.rcirvlldustrir} saall oD-fatE operadoDs ootEsly associated sit! hlEiDg
ONGOING ISSUES
Comprehensive PIan Issues
1. * CotTrprehens ive Plan
2. 1995 Study Area (North)
and Hwy. 5 Corridor Study
3. 1995 Study Area (South)
OTHER ITEI'{S
L. Blending ordinance
2. Rezoning BF Dist. to A2
3.*BIuff Protection
Ordinance
4. Sign Ordinance
5 Tree Protection ordinanceMapping of significantvegetative areas
STAS"US
1995 Study Areas - Work effortto begin after adoptj.on of newConp P1an. Council isrequesting that this be
conbined with a HrIy. 5 corridorstudy developed by a joint
PC/ CC/ resid,ent/devel oper taskforce. Joint PC/CC/HHCorridor Bus Tour tentatively
scheduled for June 8, 1991.
Inactive
Staff directed to developscenarios - low priority
Staff directed to draft apotential new zoning districtordinhnce. Fish & Wildlifeand DNR have agreed to expandrefuge boundary to include al]land 1yin9 south of Hwy.t6e/2L2.
Draft to the planning
Commission.
Inactive/Cc has requestedacceleration of sork on newordinance.
ItlnDNR undertaking accelerated
uapping progran and wiII workrrith city to develop. Ner.,ordinance/spring/suDmer, 1991
Schedule future agendaSpring, 1991
6. Rezoning 2\ Acre Lots to RR
REVISED MAY 31, 199 t
APPROVED I,IAy 24, l-991
8. Shoreland ordinance
9. Group hone ordinance
10. * zoning ordinance Anendmentfor satelli.tes on
Recreational Beachlots
11.Structures below OHWM Dust
have a city pernit.
12.ordinances pertaining to
antenna towers.
13.Rura1 Area Policies
ordinance changes stlmming
14. * Landscaping standards
15. * PUD ordinance
1,6 .Pc input in Downtorrn
Planning and Traffic Study
t7.Review of Architectural
Standards to Pronote Eigh
Quality Design
18.Bluff Creek Corridor
Greenway
Budgeted noney for update 2year timeframe for storn raterutility fund - consultant shortlist established - Interviewsin late June.
In January we receivednotification from the UnDNRthat lre are a priority
cotnrnunity with a 2 year
deadl ine
19 91,/ inactive
Adopted and published.
fnact ive
Inactive
Adopted by PC sent to CC.continuing on Residential
standards.
19 91longoing
19 91
t99L/1992
Work
PUD
change in status since last report
7.* wetland ordinance
City request to elininate
nininum lot size requirenentshas been subnitted to l{etroCouncil. Approval is ixpectedby late April . Ordinancerevisions required.
Planning Commission review on
June 5, 1991.
C{\IPBELL. }:NUTSON. ST--C)TT & FUCHS, P.A.
,{rk,ri\',i,,:,...,,
Uay 3o, 1991
RECE'UTS
MA'/ .-i -L lJeg?
ClTy OF CHAi\,rhASsr.r *
(61:).+;r'-oilo
Fa\ (r,ilr li.-oiil
Ms. Jo Ann Olsen
chanhassen City Ha11
690 coulter Dri,ve, Box 147
chanhassen, Minnesota 55 317
RE: B1uff Protection Ordinance
Dear Jo Ann:
Enclosed please find revised ordinance anending chapter 20 of
the City code concerning protection of bluffs. Changes from
previous draft dated o5/24/9L are in Section 1, Bluff (1), and in
Sec. 20-1401(1) and Sec. 20-1404 of Section 2.
yours ,
SON, SCOTT
FUCHS,
Knutson
RNK: srn
EncI osure
cc: Paul Krauss
\ankee Square Oftice lll ' Suite 201 . 3460 Washingttn Drire ' Eagan, \4N 55111
THE CITY COUNCTL OF
SectioD 1. Section
THE CTTY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS:
20-1, Definitions, is amended by adding
such as a hi1l,characteristics :
above the toe of
the following:
Bluff. Bluff means a topographic featurecliff, or embankment having the following
(1) The slope rises at Least 25 feetthe hluff; and
(2) The grade of the slope fron the toe of the bluff toa point 25 feet or more above the toe of the slope
averages 308 or greater.
(3) An area with an average slope of less than 188 overa distance for 50 feet or rnore sha1l not be
considered part of the bluff.
Bluff Inpact zore. Bluff inpact zone means a bluff and landlocated within 20 feet from the top of a bluff.
IDtensive Veg€tatioD CleariDg. Intensive vegetationclearing means the conplete removaL of trees or shrubs in acontiguous patch, strip, rohr, or block.
Toe of tbe Bluff. Toe of the bluff neans the lower point ofa 50 foot segrment with an average slope exceeding L88.
Top of the Bluff. Top of the bluff neans the higher pointof a 50 foot segTnent rrith an average slope exceeding 18t.
Eectior 2.Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code isanended by adding Article XXVfII to read as follows:
ARIICLE XXVIII.
BLUFF PROTECTTOI{
Aec. 20-1{00. StateEeDt of lDtent.
Development, excavation, clearcutting, and other activitiesvithin the bluff irnpact zone may result in increased dangers oferosion, increased visibility to surrounding properties and
ros / 30 /91
CTTY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COI'NTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
ElT ORDINATCE IIiTENDING CEAPTER 2 O OF EEE
CIAIIEASAEN CIITY CODE, TEE ZONTNG ORDINANCE,
CONCERNING PROTECTION OF BI,UFFA
thereby endanger the natural character of the fand and jeopardize
the health, safety, and rdelfare of the citizens of the city. To
preserve the character of the bluff impact zone rrithin the city,
atteration to the bluff iupact zone will not be pernitted except
as regulated by this Article and by the regulations of the
underlying zoning district where the property is located.
sec. 20-1101. Structura 8etback3.
(1) Structures, including but not linited to decks and
accessory buildings, except stairways and landings, areprohibited on the bluff and nust be set back fron thetop of bluff and toe of the bluff at least thirty (30)
feet .
(2) on parcels of land on rrhich a building has already been
constructed on June 1,, 1991, the setback from the topof the bluff is five (5) feet.
8€c. 20-1102. Stairsays, Ll.fta, aldl LaDalings.
Stairways and li.fts sha11 be used for access up and downbluffs. uajor topogtraphic alterations are prohibited. stairways
and lifts nust meet the following design requirements:
(1) Stairyays and lifts may not exceed four (4) feet in
width on residential Lots. Wider stairways may be usedfor commercial properties, public open-space recrea-tional properties, and planned unit developments.
(2) Landings for stain^rays and lifts on residential lots
may not exceed thirty-two (32) square fee! in area.
Landings larger than thirty-two (32) square feet Day be
used for cornrnercial properties, public open-space
recreational properties, and planned unit developments.
(3) Canopies or roofs are not allowed on stairuays, Iifts,or landings.
(4) stainays, Iifts, and landings may be either
constructed above the ground on posts or placed intothe ground, provided they are designed and built in a
manner that ensures control of soil erosion.
(5) Stairways, Iifts, and landings must be focated in the
most visually inconspicuous portions of lots.
(6) Facilities such as ranps, lifts, or nobility paths forphysically handicapped persons are also a1lolred,
provided that the diroensional and performance standardsof sub-items (1) to (5) are conplied with.
-2-
8ec. 20-1{03. ReEovaI or llteratio! of Veg€tatioD.
Removal or alteration of vegetation is allowed within abluff inpact zone subject to the following standards:
(1) Linited clearing of trees and shrubs and cutting,pruning, and tritrrning of trees is allowed to provide a
view from the principal dwelling site and to
accoamodate the placenent of stairways and tandings and
access paths.
(2) Intensive vegetation cleaning is prohibited.
8ec. 20-1a01. Topograpbic ltterations,/cradiDg atdl Pilling.
The drainage fron property within the bluff inpact zone Eaynot be redirected without a perrnit from the City. The perroitshall be granted if the proposed al.teration does not adverselyaffect the bluff impact zone or other property. An earth workpermit will be required for the novement of more than ten (10)cubic yards of materiaf within bluff irnpact zones. FiII orexcavated material shal1 not be placed in bluff impact zones.
sec. 20-1405. Roads, Driveways, aDd parkiig lreas.
Roads, driveways, and parking areas nust meet structuresetbacks and must not be placed within bluff iropact zones hrhenother reasonable and feasible placement alternatives exist. If noalternatives exist, they nay be placed within these areas, and
must be designed to urinimize adverse iurpacts.
sec. 20-1{05. Official ltap.
This Article shall apply only to the bluff inpact zoneslocated on the official bluff inpact zone nap dated June L, L991,which is incorporated herein by reference and which is on filerrith the City clerk.
SectioD 3. This ordinance shall be effective irnnediately
upon its passage and publication.
PASAED AND ADOPIED by the Chanhassen City Council thisday of , 1991.
ATTEST:
Don Ashlrorth, Clerk/Manager Dona1d J. Chn
(Published in the Chanhassen Villager on
1e f , Ilayor
r,99r.. )
-3-
\
CITY OF
CH[NH[ESEI{
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147 . CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739
UE}4ORANDI]M
TO:
FROM:
DATE 3
SUBJ:
pc:
dU)
Planning Conmission
Iitayor and City Council
Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner
May 31, 1991
DNR Forestry Presentation
On Friday, June 7, 1991 at 8:30 a.m., the Minnesota DNR ForestryDirector, Mr. Gerry Rose, uill present the city a urosaic of aerialphotographs of Chanhassen and a digitized nap showing areas andtypes of vegetation throughout the city. The DNR ForestryDepartment has been working with us to promote an urban forestryprogram. The presentation on June 7 is the kick-off of theprogram, which is the first of its kind in I!{innesota. The prograrnwill be expanded to inctude conpilation of nore inforrnation onexisting vegetation, a ne!, tree preservation ordinance and areforestatj,on program.
The presentation will be very inforrnal allowing representatiVes ofthe city and the DNR to talk over coffee and donuLs about what lrelrou1d like to see happen and how rre can accornplish it.
Please 1et rne know if you will be able to attend.
Don Ashworth, City lIanagerPaul Xrauss, Planning Directorcharles Fo1ch, City Engineer
Chanhassen Villager
CITY OF
EH[NH[EEEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. PO. BOX 147 ' CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
IIE}.{ORANDIJIII
TO:
FROM:
THROUGH:
Don Ashworth, City Managerllayor and City Council and Senior Commission
Shamin A1-Jaff, Planner I
PauI Krauss, Planning Director
DATE :May 28, 1,991
su&r:Field Trip to Chaskars Senior Commons - Auburn Manor
At th'e May l7, L99I, neeting, the Senior Citizen Coromissionrequested that staff arrange a field trip to the Chaska Senior
Conmons to compare the facility to other centers the Connission hasvisited and tearn about the type of prograrnming avaiLable.
The field trip has been scheduled for Friday, June 7, 1991. wewill neet at city HaII at 10:00 a.n. and then leave to Chaska inone group. I{e will be expected to arrive at 10:30 a.n. A tour ofthe. facility will be given, follorred by lunch in the congregatedining roon. Ms. I'largaret Winter wil] be available to answer anyquestions.
If a ride is needed, please feeL free to contact ne and a ride wil1be arranged