The URL can be used to link to this page

11-18-92 Agenda and Packet • FILE AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISS,,,i. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1992, 7:30 P.M. CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE — CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Preliminary plat to plat four lots on property zoned BH, Highway Business District and located north of Hwy. 5, south of the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad tracks and eat of Hwy. 101 on 79th Street, Gateway First Addition, Lotus Realty. 2. Beissner, Ltd. proposes the construction of Goodyear Tire and Abra facilities on property zoned BH,Highway Business and located south of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East, and east of the Chanhassen Emission Control Station: a. Replat of Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition into 3 lots. b. Conditional use permit to locate an auto service related use in the BH, Business Highway District. _ c. Site plan review for a 5,397 square foot Goodyear Tire building and a 6,494 square foot Abra facility. _ NEW BUSINESS OLD BUSINESS APPROVAL OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS OPEN DISCUSSION 3. Discussion of Tree Conservation Easements. 4. a. Cul-de-sac length b. Landscaped islands and parkways c. Philosophy of Planning Commission meetings and reports, i.e. negotiations with developers, number of conditions, Planning Commission's role in site/plat development process and other concerns. ADJOURNMENT C I TY 0 F PC DATE: 11/18/92 I L CHANHASSEN CC DATE: 12/14/92 \�I Y CASE #: 91-1 SUB : : •lsen:v _ STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat to subdivide 3.9 acres into 4 lots of 18,726 sq. ft., 20,300 sq. ft., 72,145 sq. ft. and 58,179 sq. ft., Gateway 1st Addition Z — Q LOCATION: NE corner of Hwy. 5 and 101, directly north of the Amoco Station V J - 0- CL, APPLICANT: Brad Johnson Q Lotus Realty — P. O. Box 235 Chanhassen, MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: BH, Highway Business District ACREAGE: 3.9 acres DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - railroad LQ S - BH, Amoco Station E - BH, Apple Valley Red-E-Mix 0r - W -Hwy. 101 W WATER AND SEWER: The site has sewer and water. (f) PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site is developed except for Lot 4 which is vacant 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial ' --r,r9011p —%_'• -ji4 . R4 �� +. '•r- w.;„affil 4 vi i or -. ):: - ANN A :', ^� r , 0 0 -� - I • . As - R -:� 12 I or a W i ----/ - r �J -__I + I 4 Ry INC. a J Ij c '175. 1 M[111111/ rttpow NI >Rmtto •MLA , ..._ __.-- rythHal ---.„........_,....., PAC1, ..quirSil° s. ..* )5\-- 4(3. d i on-,,i-- 1): •-.! ....- _ �__� ff7 -�-`ItFC .‘,D'6- '�en ' ► . - e*jos , y „... . .,, SUS ""' i. ..1„ , f 7. • V4-'46P 6 - 110„ c AL C-' .--:- P/ . 41 14 1 I—%t 1 `,°.- . -—. . PM riv in” st° I oN 3 �'� �,�� I r in `71�► MARS`"= c. °da a,4`' is� c�Rc�[ LAKE '� or LAKE lr PARK - E SUSAN �_UD-R �� ! , �i • R "... pig' _ , /4 • \\ + 8/CE %- 'Ili - K i •j► - /41., 411* ; ' PUD'" 4.a le _ .- ; ,I ,, :6 T N ‹.,.. :: 1 !! 1 ' 1 AL .1% .1111"iir 4 _________ -_____ • 71i)-- • i OJ .4� � •,.i...H--y . _ - RS .,.. P- POSE - R12- Gateway 1st Addition November 18, 1992 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The subject site recently went through a subdivision in 1991, to create the lot for the Valvoline site. The subdivision created two remnant parcels on either side of the Valvoline site. A condition of approval was that the whole site would be platted to combine the remnant parcels with adjacent lots (Gary Brown's car wash and the Hanus site). Since the previous subdivision, the City Housing and Redevelopment Authority has purchased the Hanus site, the road right-of- way and the property east of the Hanus building. The proposed subdivision combines the above mentioned remnant pieces with Gary Brown's property (Lot 1) and with the City property (Lot 3). The proposed subdivision also creates Lot 4 (which is owned by the City) and maintains the Valvoline site (Lot 2) as previously subdivided. The City recently completed improvements to W. 79th Street servicing the car wash, Valvoline and the Hanus building. The improvements brought the street up to city standards and provided landscaping. The street improvements end with a cul-de-sac at Lot 3, Block 1. The plat provides right-of-way to service Lot 4, Block 1 (shown as W. 79th St.). The right-of-way must be increased to 60' so that a full street section can be constructed to service Lot 4 The Apple Valley Red-E-Mix property is directly adjacent to Lot 4 (south and east). The City is in the process of acquiring the Red-E-Mix property. Lot 4, Block 1 and the Apple Valley Red-E-Mix property will most likely be developed together. Staff is recommending that Lot 4, Block 1 be platted as an outlot so that when it is proposed for development in the future, dedication of right- of-way for access to it and the Apple Valley Red-E-Mix property can be determined and the properties can be replatted to create buildable lots. All of the lots meet the Business Highway requirements. Lot 1, Block 1 is below the 20,000 square foot requirement, but this is an existing situation, and in fact the lot is being made larger by this subdivision. The preliminary plat provides a "clean" subdivision, removes non-buildable remnant parcels and provides right-of-way to service the lots. Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat with the stated conditions. PRELIMINARY PLAT The preliminary plat is proposing to create 4 commercial lots. Three of the lots are already developed and the fourth lot(Lot 4) could be developed separately or combined with the adjacent parcel (Red-E-Mix). Both Lot 4, Block 1 and the Red-E-Mix property will eventually be under City ownership. Staff is recommending that Lot 4, Block 1 be platted as an Oudot so that it can be replatted in the future to be developed along with the Apple Valley Red-E-Mix property. The preliminary plat is combining two remnant, unbuildable, parcels with adjacent property, which was a condition of approval of a previous subdivision creating the Valvoline site. The right-of-way provided on the plat, shown as W. 79th Street, must be increased to accommodate a city street section to service Lot 4, Block 1. Staff is recommending that the Gateway 1st Addition - November 18, 1992 Page 3 right-of-way be increased to cover the northerly 60' and westerly 10' of the northerly 65.89' of Lot 3, Block 1. The increased right-of-way will cross into the existing Hanus building. The City has the right to remove the three most northerly stalls in the Hanus building if necessary. If the street is improved the Hanus building would have to be altered. Until this happens it is permissible to plat right-of way across an existing structure. Compliance Table Lot Frontage Depth Easements Use Area Ordinance 20,000 100' 150' 10' F/R 5' sides Lot 1 18,726* 149' 126'* 10' Brown's 5' Car Wash - Lot 2 20,300 141' 148'* 10' Valvoline 5' - Lot 3 72,145 285' 192' 10' Hanus 5' City owned - Lot 4 58,179 178' 172' 10' Vacant 5' City owned - * Pre-existing condition Miscellaneous The name of the plat, Gateway First Addition, is similar to another proposal the city is reviewing, Gateway West Business Center (Opus Corporation). Staff is recommending that this proposal name be changed to avoid confusion. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Preliminary Plat # 91-1 as shown on plans dated October 19, 1992, with the following conditions: • Gateway 1st Addition November 18, 1992 Page 4 1. Lot 4, Block 1 shall be platted as Outlot A. 2. Right-of-way shall be dedicated along the northerly 60' and over the westerly 10' of the northerly 65.89' of Lot 3, Block 1. 3. Cash in lieu of park land dedication shall be required at the time of building permit issuance. 4. The plat name of Gateway First Addition shall be changed. Attachments 1. Memo from Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician dated November 3, 1992. 2. Plat dated October 19, 1992. CITYOF ':0:41111CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 - MEMORANDUM TO: Jo Ann Olsen, Senior Planner FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician DATE: November 3, 1992 SUBJ: Review of Preliminary Plat for Gateway First Addition File No. 92-18 Land Use Review STREET ACCESS The parcel is currently served by 79th Street which is a dead-end cul-de-sac off of Trunk Highway 101. The preliminary plat proposes sufficient right-of-way for existing 79th street except along Lot 3. The City's typical street section for commercial/industrial type use is 80 feet wide. However, due to the existing site characteristics (existing buildings and railroad corridor), the right-of-way could be reduced to 60 feet wide and still function efficiently. The building, however, would encroach within the new right-of-way. With the uncertainty of development east of Lots 3 and 4, it may be prudent to leave Lot 4 as an outlot at this time and dedicate a 60 foot wide right-of-way through Lot 3 together with additional right-of-way along the westerly side of Lot 3 to provide a 10-foot buffer outside of the easterly curb line of the cul-de-sac. This can be accomplished either by providing a 60-foot wide radius from the center of the cul-de-sac through Lot 3 or moving the northerly 65.89 feet of the west lot line easterly approximately 10 feet. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The proposed plat is essentially developed with the exception of Lot 4. Storm water runoff is conveyed through the downtown's storm sewer system and is retained in existing ponding — areas. Lot 4 is a vacant lot at this time and future considerations regarding drainage will be reviewed with the site plan submittal. �s t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Jo Arm Olsen November 3, 1992 Page 2 UTILITIES Both municipal sanitary sewer and water service is available to all four lots. Currently, the three existing buildings are connected to City sewer and water. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Lot 4 should be changed to an outlot and right-of-way should be dedicated along the northerly 60 feet and over the westerly 10 feet of the northerly 65.89 feet of Lot 3. 2. The City currently has a preliminary plat proposal in the concept stage for another development named "Gateway Addition". It is recommended that this plat name be changed to something other than Gateway First Addition to avoid possible confusion. ktm c: Charles Folch, City Engineer P.C. DATE: 11-18-92 CITY O F C.C. DATE: 12-14-92 \LClIANIIASSEN CASE: 92-3 te Plan 92-2 CUP 90-71 Subdivision � BY: Al-Jaff STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: 1) Site Plan Review for Goodyear, 5,397 Square Feet and Abra Auto Service Center, 6,494 Square Feet 2) Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 3.1634 Acres into 3 lots with an area of 0.939 Acres, 0.778 Acres, and 1.445 Acres Z 3) Conditional Use Permit to Allow an Auto Service Facility in the BH District VLOCATION: South of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and east of Emission Control Testing Station APPLICANT : Beisner Ltd. Chanhassen Holding Company Q 6100 Summit Drive 14201 Excelsior Boulevard Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Minnetonka, MN 55436 PRESENT ZONING: Highway Business ACREAGE: 3.1634 acres ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - Hwy. 5 S - RSF; Chan Estates and Lake Drive East E - IOP; DataSery W - BH; Emission Control Station QSEWER AND WATER: Services are available to the site. W SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is undeveloped and vegetated primarily with mature poplar and elm trees. 2000 LAND USE: Commercial Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The applicant is proposing to construct an Abra Auto Body Repair and a Goodyear Auto Service facility. The site is located between Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5 adjacent to the Emission Control Testing Station. The area of the Abra site is 33,918 square feet and the Goodyear site is 40,908 square feet. Both sites are located in a Highway Business District. The site is visible directly from Highway 5 and has access from Lake Drive East via a private drive. In an accompanying subdivision request, the site is being divided into three lots, one of which will contain the Goodyear building, the second will contain the Abra building, and the third will be reserved for future development. The parcel is zoned BH so that high intensity commercial uses are likely to be proposed but staff is not aware of any pending developments. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. Conditions proposed for review would result in dedication of all required easements. The site plan is reasonably well developed. Staff has been working with the applicant for the past three months on the site plan and building architecture. The design has improved considerably and the applicant has been quite cooperative with staff. The Goodyear building is a split face concrete block accented by a sandable decorative texture finish structure that will have a series of service bays and a pitched roof. The Abra building has decorative integral color concrete block. The north and south elevations have a pitched element to them. All services for both facilities will take place inside the buildings. Staff would have preferred to have the buildings utilize a coordinated architectural theme. However, the underlying zoning and lack of HRA involvement does not provide a great deal of leverage. Minor architectural revisions are being proposed to further improve both building designs. Parking for vehicles is located on the north and west side of both structures away from Lake Drive. This location is ideal since it places these areas further away from residences south of Lake Drive. The Goodyear site will be operated from 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. on Saturdays. The Abra site will be operated from 7:30 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. on Saturdays to provide estimates on work required on a vehicle. Body work will take place from 8:00 a.m. until 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Both sites will be closed on Sundays. There will be no outdoor storage or outdoor servicing of vehicles. Staff is further requiring that there be no outside storage of damaged or inoperable vehicles. The site landscaping is generally of high quality due to the attention that was paid to this issue by staff and the applicant. Additional landscaping is being requested on the north side of the site along Highway 5, and along the parameters of the retention pond located to the south of Lot 3. There is a large number of poplar and elm trees on the site. All of the trees on both Lots 1 and 2 are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not of • Goodyear/Abra Facility _ November 18, 1992 Page 3 valuable quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. Their loss is unfortunate but is unavoidable if the land it to be developed. When the Emission Control Site was reviewed, site access was a major concern of staffs throughout the design of the proposal. Our original thinking was that a public cul-de-sac should be required running north from Lake Drive since there may ultimately be 4 sites accessing Lake Drive via that connection. However, staff was concerned that the need to create a cul-de-sac at the end of the street would result in a hazardous traffic situation, whereby traffic entering and leaving the sites would be cutting across the cul-de-sac in an uncontrolled manner. Therefore, we recommended that the plans be revised to utilize a commonly owned and maintained private driveway system that will avoid the traffic conflicts outlined above. The private driveway was built to city standards which required the full 32' pavement width and a 9 ton design and curb and gutter. The current access provisions are acceptable, however, plans to provide the driveway's long term maintenance by the land owners should be clarified. Staff regards the project as a reasonable if unexceptional use of the land. It is unfortunate that the Hwy. 5 Study could not have been completed earlier since it will likely result in development standards that are more sensitive to the corridor's image. The Planning Commission may want to consider referring the request to the Hwy. 5 Task Force to gain their input. However, the city's ability to leverage substantial changes to what is otherwise a reasonable request, based upon current ordinances, may be limited. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the site plan, without variances, conditional use permit and subdivision requests for this proposal. BACKGROUND On January 28, 1991, the City Council approved final plat #90-17 for Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition. The subdivision resulted in dividing 5.59 acres into 2 lots with an area of 1.9 acres for Lot 1 and 3.0 acres for Lot 2. Lot 1 became the site for the Emission Control Testing Station which was approved as a conditional use permit concurrently with the subdivision. Lot 2 was reserved for future development and is being proposed for subdivision into three lots with this application. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The building is situated parallel to Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5. Access is gained off of a private driveway which connects to Lake Drive East. Parking is located to the north and west of the proposed buildings. The nearest home is located 350 feet away from the south edge of the actively used portion of the site. Direct views of the service bays will be screened by berming and landscaping from both Hwy. 5 and Lake Drive. • Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 4 The Goodyear site is located 75 feet from the north, 30 feet from the east, 75 from the south, and 75 from the west property line. The Abra site is located 105 feet from the north, 10 feet from the east, 45 feet from the south, and 55 feet from the west property line. Materials used on the Goodyear building will be split face concrete block accented by a sandable decorative texture finish. The Abra building will be constructed of integral color concrete block with a pre-finished galvanized steel canopy accent. Pre-finished metal overhead doors will be used on the east and west elevations of the Goodyear structure and on the north, south and west elevations of the Abra building. The buildings' architecture meets the standards of the site plan ordinance requirements. The Goodyear building will have a pitched roof that is a 100 feet in length. Staff is recommending the introduction of dormers along the roof line to break it up and reflect what has become typical Chanhassen CBD design. The north and south elevations of the Abra building have a pitched element to them, however, the north elevation looks bare. Staff is recommending the pre-finished galvanized steel canopy be extended along the north elevation. Auto services at both facilities will take place inside the buildings. The roof system is being used to screen roof mounted equipment. The applicant is showing the trash enclosures screened by a split face concrete block to match the Goodyear building materials. The gate to the trash enclosure is shown facing east on the elevations plan, and facing north on the site plan. Staff recommends the gate face to the west to minimize views from Hwy. 5. The Abra site plan shows a trash enclosure located at the northwest edge of the building; however, the applicant has failed to show the trash enclosure on the elevation plan. It is recommended that the trash enclosure gate face east. The gates to the trash enclosure will be constructed of chain link fencing. PARKING/INTERIOR CIRCULATION The City's parking ordinance for vehicle service stations requires 4 parking stalls per service stall. The Goodyear site will require 16 stalls. The applicant is providing 32 stalls. The Abra site will require 24 stalls. The applicant is providing 25 stalls. Berming and landscaping is proposed along the north side, adjacent to Highway 5. This will provide screening of cars parked in the lot. ACCESS Access to the development is provided by an existing private street off Lake Drive East which services the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station (MVIS). Similarly, this development does not propose any public right-of-way for extension of the proposed street and therefore access to the lots will be private. A driveway or cross-access easement should be recorded in conjunction with the final plat recording to guarantee access to the lots. There should also be a joint maintenance agreement, acceptable to the city, filed against each parcel. We do not wish to see the city petitioned to accept the street at some point in the future. • Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 5 The existing private street was.built in accordance to the City's typical commercial pavement design with the thought that someday it would be dedicated back to the City for ownership. Engineering staff feels with the concept proposed the City will not be taking ownership of the street and therefore the street pavement/parking lot designs may be designed accordingly. The preliminary plat provides the necessary drainage and utility easement for the public improvements with the exception of a storm sewer line along the easterly line of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff recommends that the easement be increased to 20 feet wide to provide adequate room for maintenance. We also recommend that a standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easement be dedicated on both sides of the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. The plans propose extending the private street from the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station located adjacent to the development. Since this roadway will not be a public street, staff is comfortable with the proposal. The layout is similar to a mini-mall type parking lot design with one access from a public street (Lake Drive East). LANDSCAPING The landscaping plan is very well conceived. Staff worked closely with the applicant to design the landscaping plan. Benning is proposed along the north and south side of the site. The vehicles that will park along the north edge of the site must be totally screened by the berms and landscaping. Additional landscaping is being requested on the north side of the site along Highway 5. The tees shown on the landscaping plan are 16 feet in diameter. It is likely that they will reach this size in 10 or 15 years, but until then additional landscaping will be required. Staff is recommending that 8 spruce or Black Hills evergreens be added to each site. Also, along the south lot line of Lot 3, the applicant is proposing a retention pond. This pond will have a depth exceeding 8 feet with an average of one foot standing water. Staff is recommending that the pond parameter be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site is also lacking in trees. Four additional evergreens are required. There is a large number of poplar and elm trees on the site. All the trees on both lots 1 and 2 are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not of high quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. The applicant is attempting to replace some of these trees with a better quality. LIGHTING Lighting locations have not been illustrated on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than ' foot candles of light at the property line as required by ordinance. An acceptable lighting plan should be submitted when building permits are requested. • Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 6 SIGNAGE The applicant has submitted a signage plan. One monument identification sign is proposed at the north edge of the site facing Highway 5. Staff proposed that if the Goodyear and the Abra signs were combined into one free standing sign, the third parcel located to the south would be permitted to have signage facing Highway 5 too. This third sign would be part of the Abra and Goodyear free standing sign. The applicant has been working on a design for the free standing sign; however, we believe additional refinement is required. The area of the sign is proposed to be 60 square feet. The ordinance allows 64 square feet in area and a maximum height of 8 feet for monument signs. The sign is designed as a monument and not a pylon due to the height of the sign board above the ground. The applicant is requesting a height of 12 feet. Considering the fact that the applicant could place a pylon sign with an area of 80 square feet and a height of 20 feet, staff is in favor of granting a 4 foot variance for the height of the monument sign. It is a clear benefit to have one coordinated sign instead of two individual pylon signs. Both buildings have two wall mounted signs along the north and west elevations. The ordinance requires that no wall mounted sign exceed 80 square feet of display area or 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the sign is mounted. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the sign on site. One stop sign must be posted on the driveway at the exit point of both sites. A sign plan acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site is approximately six feet lower than the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The plan proposes to regrade a portion of the access drive to provide a smooth transition between developments. Storm drainage from the proposed development will sheet flow across the driveways and parking lot areas and then conveyed via storm sewer system to a proposed detention pond located over the southerly portion of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff has reviewed the size of the detention pond and found it is under capacity and needs to be enlarged to accommodate runoff from this development and the adjacent MVIS site. The pond should be modified to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927' contour line. This will also provide a 2- foot freeboard around the pond basin. The pond is not designed to meet NURP standards as is the city's current policy. To do so would require additional wet area which would severely compromise the utility of the remaining lots. Staff believes that this problem can be addressed downstream at a city owned pond. The developer should be required to pay an equivalent fee into the Surface Water Management Program fund to accomplish these improvements downstream. The charge is currently being computed by the city's consultant and will be made available at the Planning Commission meeting. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 7 The applicant is proposing a series of catch basins and storm sewer to convey runoff to the ponding basin. From the city's standpoint, the catch basins and storm sewers located within the drainage basin and main street access should be owned by the city to maintain drainage. The individual storm sewer line extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 from the street should be maintained and owned by the individual property owners. Erosion control measures shall be incorporated onto the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly sides of the development. PUBLIC UTILITIES Both municipal sanitary sewer and watermain are available to the site. The plans propose on extending the existing 6-inch watermain and looping to the existing 10-inch watermain located just east of the development. Sanitary sewer was extended previously in conjunction with development of the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The applicant is proposing to extend sanitary sewer and water service to each lot. All utility construction should be in conformance with the latest edition of the city's standard specification and detailed plates. Formal plan and specification approval will be required at time of final platting. Since the development will include construction of public improvements, it will be necessary for the applicant to enter into a development contract and provide the financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements. Upon completion of these public improvements, the city will formally accept for perpetual maintenance and ownership most of the utilities within the utility and drainage easements. The city will not be responsible for ownership and maintenance of the storm sewer extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. This is considered a private storm sewer line. All three lots will be served with municipal utilities. The appropriate hookup fees will be charged at the time of building permit issuance. MISCELLANEOUS As a part of Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition, an outlot (A) was created. This outlot covers the existing private street. The intent was for the developer to dedicate back to the city, at some future date when the street was extended, the street and Outlot A as public street and right-of- way. However, as proposed the city would have no reason to accept the street. We do not want to see the outlot go tax forfeit nor do we want to see the driveway's maintenance be avoided by the property owners. Therefore, staff suggests Outlot A be incorporated into the replat as part of Lot 3 or resolved in some other acceptable matter to the city. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 8 COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT Ordinance Abra Goodyear Building Height 2 stories 1 story 1 story Building Setback N-20' E-10' N-105'E-10' N-75'E-30' S-25' W-10' S-45'W-55' S-75'W-75' Parking stalls 24/16 stalls 25 stalls 32 stalls Parking Setback N-25' E-10' N-60'E-10' N-27'E-15' S-25' W-10' S-45' W-15' S-35' W-26' Hard surface 65% 62% 64.6% Coverage Lot Area 20,000 s.f. 34,163 s.f. 42,410 s.f. Variances Required - none PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES The City is requiring that park and trails fees be submitted in lieu of park land. Fees are paid at the time building permits are requested. These fees are currently assessed at a rate of$2,500 per acre and $833 per acre for park and trail fees, respectively. As such, the Goodyear site will be charged $3,245 in park and trail fees, and the Abra site will be charged $2,614. SUBDIVISION The subdivision proposal is a relatively simple request that will serve to divide the site (3.136 acres) into three lots, one of which will contain the Goodyear building (40.904 square feet), the second will contain the Abra building (33,918 square feet), and the third (62,969 square feet) will be reserved for future development. The parcel is zoned BH so that higher intensity commercial uses are likely to be proposed but staff is not aware of any pending developments. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. Conditions proposed for review would result in dedication of all required easements. The following easements are either illustrated on the plat or should be acquired: 1. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeters of all lots. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 9 2. Drainage and conservation easement located over the pond on lot 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Auto Service Facilities are permitted in the BH District as a conditional use. The following constitutes our review of this proposal against conditional use permit standards and with conditional use permit standards provided in the draft ordinance revision pertaining to emission control testing stations. GENERAL ISSUANCE STANDARDS 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, - convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or city. FINDING - The site is zoned BH. The proposed uses will not create any significant or unexpected impacts from this use and, in fact, in many respects impacts generated by this use are less by a significant factor then would have occurred or could have occurred if more intensive uses allowed by the Zoning Ordinance were to be developed on the site. _ 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. FINDING - The proposed use would be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. The Hwy. 5 Corridor Plan is not yet completed or incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. FINDING - The site is located adjacent to a major highway and a collector road. It is in the Chanhassen commercial district and as such a commercial building is fully consistent with this site. Staff has worked with the applicant in an attempt to achieve design compatibility with the Chanhassen CBD and - Hwy. 5 design efforts. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. FINDING - There will be no measurable impacts to the existing or planned neighboring uses. • Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 10 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. FINDING - Full city services are available to this site. Roads serving the site have recently been upgraded and are fully capable of handling the access needs of this proposal. 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. FINDING - There are no projected needs for public facilities and services beyond those which are already provided in this area. 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. FINDING - This site will not create adverse impacts to persons,property or the general welfare of the area. Hours of operation, orientation of the bays away from residence, and lighting standards will comply with city ordinances. 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. FINDING - The site is visible from a major highway and is accessible from that highway by 2 signalized intersections and a collector street designed to commercial standards. There will be no direct traffic impacts to any area residential neighborhood. 9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. FINDING - The development of this site will result in the loss of a large number of poplar and elm trees. These trees currently act as a buffer between the highway and area residential properties. These trees are not of high quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. In order to develop the site, the majority of the trees will have to be removed. Extensive landscaping is being required in part to make up for this loss. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 11 — There are a large number of mature evergreens located along the south side of Lake Drive East that still provide the required buffering. 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. FINDING - The site plan is well designed to provide adequate landscaping and buffering from adjoining properties. The buildings are to be built of brick and decorative concrete block. Site operations are designed to maximize off-site screening as much as possible. 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. FINDING - The site is being used for a commercial type of operation which is consistent with its designation. 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. FI DING - The following is our review of conditions of approval and appropriate findings: a. No unlicensed or inoperable vehicles shall be stored on premises except in appropriately designed and screened storage areas. FINDING - All operations will be conducted inside the buildings. b. All repair, assembly, disassembly and maintenance of vehicles shall occur within closed building except minor maintenance including, but not limited to, tire inflation, adding oil and wiper replacement. FINDING - There will be no repairs performed outdoors. Staff is further restricting outdoor parking of damaged or inoperable vehicles. c. No public address system shall be audible from any residential parcel. FINDING - The buildings will be at a distance that exceeds 300 feet from any residence and will be screened by landscaping. d. Stacking areas deemed to be appropriate by the City shall meet parking setback requirements. FINDING - There are no drive through facilitates being proposed. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 12 e. No sales, storage or display of used automobiles or other vehicles such as motorcycles, snowmobiles, or all-terrain vehicles. FINDING - Both operations specialize in repair of vehicles, not sales. f. Disposal of waste oil shall comply with PCA regulations. Facilities for the collection of waste oil must be provided. FINDING - A condition is being added requiring proper disposal of waste oil. g. Gas pumps and/or storage tank vent pipes shall not be located within one hundred feet of any parcel zoned or guided for residential use. FUNDING - Not applicable. h. A minimum separation two hundred fifty feet is required between the nearest gas pumps of individual parcels for which a conditional use permit is begin requested. FINDING - Not applicable. Based upon the foregoing findings, staff is recommending that the conditional use permit be approved with appropriate conditions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: I. SITE PLAN REVIEW "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #92-3 as shown on the site plan dated September 21, 1992, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant must revise plans to include trash screening for the Abra site with a gate facing east and a second for Goodyear with a gate facing west. Plans must be submitted for staff review prior to City Council meeting. 2. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Provide a detailed sign plan for staff review prior to the City Council meeting. The monument sign may not exceed 12 feet in height. Sign covenants are to be submitted outlining the • Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 13 use and limit of one common sign and allowances for its use by the remaining undeveloped lot. 3. The applicant shall provide an additional 16 evergreens along the south side of Highway 5 to provide better screening of the parking area. The retention pond parameters shall be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site shall be provided with four additional evergreens. The applicant shall also provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. 4. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 5. The applicant shall provide flammable waste separator as required by building code. 6. Provide a complete, final set of civil engineering documentation to staff for review and approval. 7. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal Memo. a 8. The applicant shall post "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Signs shall be placed at 100-foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. 9. The applicant shall introduce dormers along the east and west roof line of the Goodyear building to break it up. The pre-finished galvanized steel canopy shall be extended along the north elevation of the Abra building. 10. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 11. The applicant shall pay $7,580 the Surface Water Management Program fund for water quality treatment downstream of the site." II. SUBDIVISION "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #90-17 for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition as shown on plat dated September 21, 1992, with the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits are requested. 2. Provide the following easements: • Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 14 a. A standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. b. Drainage easement located over the drainage pond. c. A drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. 3. Enter into a development agreement acceptable to the city. 4. A driveway or cross-access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. 5. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the Watershed District, Health Department, etc. 6. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze-up, special modifications to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 8. Oudot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The outlot shall be replatted/combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927.0' contour line. 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. 11. The applicant shall reimburse the city for all engineering consultant fees associated with the storm water study." III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit#92-2 subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with conditions of site plan and plat approval. Goodyear/Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 15 2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site. 3. No parking or stacking is allowed in fire lanes, drive aisles, access drives or public rights- of-way. 4. No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored over night on the Abra site." ATTACHMENTS 1. Revised monument sign plans. 2. Example photocopies of the proposed buildings. 3. Memo from Dave Hempel dated October 14, 1992. 4. Memo from Mark Littfin dated October 8, 1992. 5. Memo from Todd Hoffman dated October 12, 1992. 6. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District. 7. Memo from the DNR dated October 2, 1992. 8. Letter from MnDOT dated October 29, 1992. 9. Site plan dated September 21, 1992. / Post-it'brand fax transmtttat memo 7671 •of Pears ' • • 1110M111111111.1111111111.1 r • 508? ^" BL A4 DI l _ • ActOrr -4l I • 111111 .,;..,- %.,......: - . --" . "r 1 I Pot-IP brand fax transmittal memo 771 .of M " ° / — I •R MOM WriffAlaggieginpal -1- MOM 1 MEM !1. 77771111741171:111 11111111 1!111OMM11MmMmUMI•EM=MAWIIE= ME; 41h 11111IMMEMUMMMUFMERMMlIIMMOMMIIMMME MEM MOW 11111111111111111111111111IM 1 111111111111111111111111 1 ME= mummilimmillommummammmommOMMomm.011.1111 IMIlinan MEM I ---`''--- - • • II UMIM= 1111119T1111 BEI IIMIIIIME MOM 1 _ ,m-7 - -- 11 I1 um swum Emma mums a 5E1 liCEPIIP AUT° ;16816Cft PAIINIPP9MIll ELIE IRU Ill mg u.•.m•.Hi-mor i •. , . ,...._. ainuai ,. • •• imr. . vimmir" Imam= 11111111 11 • giro ," Ammurnammommu III 11 ppodorirmiopwrair III iddimmleAshoppopm . mommumma m _momps mom IIPPMMINIIIIMPITI 1 LE•iii - .. • sui mum In .111111° 11111111111 -avg. 111111111111110 . Rummillillimill _:.-- , 0 UMW 1 :ZIAII -11 1111111 116111 t . opus up! m mot 11111111 REMO '1 . ..r• MI wil i =MM v MEMI Mrs Milummill 111E Elli -l _at.rmt :it 1,10. 41; -1 0 LI 111 MI j_.. . MI • I __ • . -- • . Geoorra- 1 am.... -4. ...., alr..alai.:... ',.!.......-it;:v, .,...... .. -- -.•2L.-"T" .-- I ...... I I li. akf-...... # ....''''''7.1=: r..,,..... ..,,,. Mit'.."" A-. am. Lk ' ' IF ..•m ' .a.-•• • ' 7.71 .......0"=M.:.471.7:.e...'.A_..11--J:•_•-•.-.-77 .1; -.:,,...t.r.z#PI-Z cs '"- - --..10.--,--..i.,;........-,-,:,..........•.. — . I - •• _ _ v....0 * ' -1 ri. I f."."..r...•.'.r.;.1..-I 2 Ws-:. . ::11-1"11".- i '''''..- ----- _ •Z` .4... ...":"." t, , I _ .0 r or---.._.. .1,4111111111,.- OM i'' ....3.•fr.,:rt:• 5 ,, ,, Nip.• 111$.1-4111L' -.111m.or 1/71 426. 'OPVI '.. . • .... 1..;li: .L...,:.----- ....,._4 I I I II I Fl a,a V 1 1.- I- 4 • Ali""...ie.* -..'-. 4$5111.1. , • . -,--4-4- -1C;PrAtlf 1.1 . . 'i Iri'in • - -----...........,......,--........... - _ . . • -- _ -• "'s'*'%"...%".%%%%."'""'%.................................. ..___s''- . _ . _ _ , - - - . -- ---- - - — . -..... . ..,,,,,............._ __________________ , ...• ..-----5-- --.---- _ _ _ .... •,----=.----!---- __. _ o'- - •. _ .......--"" :---- ;•,Ari-- sa• •--zuts:;..... c.:; •:.--3 ......•- ---"-- - ......... -12k-,-__:. .......-... iiArTg. . ..... _ __ _ . • _ k,...--...-=,-.--- - --- - -- -- -- -- --- . _ --_ _,.,. ... , --._.......„..... . r ....................•.••... ....... A ...... .. ........==.Z.,...- ........=&... : 8 "-'-. .... .1_1__.... .... ..m.. .-J 4177 .-...--............_- - .1 ' -' MO.17.1.14..... ..,, Wr-. V-6.1.22P-' I Al 4 . air ii ,- I "'-,,,-MINOmr._.- - ANY-.11.- .- •' p -• • . ,..,b. •„.• ----P---,,-,.......,„,,......-.... .—_,.=____"•-.B . • . DT 52-114-8R •-• -:." 450 'a it....07.7......... '• ••• ,' -......r Aa..., i •-..._ -... - -_-... ..., ,.....1..... ,...._.....14141..........,.. -.....--:...—:-. .....,...._- .....,..........c. :-.... - —....-- '.7.1;.--::---- -;:`,...-7- — ---- '- .*. -. •-•-• - erg••••am.e.• •••••• i -............. ._ I . . '..,......,.. .1.........., ............. _ .... . i• ..%V._,.,.i... . -...__. ...., ........ '..-4 . :• : r .- areepri 0111.T.••finS M... - ..... --- _ ___. SIMILUTIMINED ' ---- ....7--- ------------GooDA-- ....._:-..t„,,:..;..,.......„,.. __-_ ____ i. .. ,.....„ 1 _ 4_ x„.. ........ cAIR _ • .e ...,.. ._ . ....._-- GOODAEAR Ili ' ---,e- 41('- ----- - i 111• 4.=fr.-- . •A - climi.p.roPPP- Arr:'' ... 1 ........`"".•.":". •11.4111.1p.- ..46111111111111 ----....-.. , I mr.• • ._ _ ,...... • ,„„ W= ...- Allim.„--Ir - ...„ 091-91-8 - •, -:-,7,• ------:--,. -._-•., , - -- - '-----0 • ......._ V — -.oar.. ....0 - - • • • • • . • .; .- .... • -.•-•••••:,-. _ - - ir• C, • '- 1. ‘ . - - • . . .-• ' % . - 4 -, -. _. . •.A•r.‘104'!(;. • • , - • % • . * 'A . .. ..P•'...•:"-. '-'• : - . • ••- . . . . ,,, 11$ '••••.•:77U.,'• ` ....-.-.' ' 'r..- . ••'.- - .J .ts ' - ' ' 1-; • '•••,-_,..4.--c. ...• - 'Z.' - ; • i." ' - •'•• •:'-: . •••q.• x ,-..}. •:trie•::..-• 7 • .• • ; -.3: 4.71 •-.'•41•••• • . -Z ..••'."7,:%i• it ' 4' -'e.-..:7.-..f..:'"A?:.7:=,,'"%.„--#4/t._c,, '- -- `•• - 4 -- - -.••-•,,-.ti,•--. - • • ' lity.,,---fiA .'_ • - - •- ,_ ' • •• .-1. :•I•ttl'5.••• ••. r ::: .: • i # - . •or-_III:th‘Y.7.ftt! -.!,-z- • 4•Ak...••zt.f _ -- • ••• --..-• , . -,•%:•1••- xY....."...• . .• ::" ; •• •.-.4' J. 4 •••••-...*:f 4..:-.• - .'•-•.;.' ' . - • . i'.•7‘, - •b•c;:r.• ,-• .•• •• • • • , - . .-7.7-t.-.1.2•- . • -••7 •• sr-...e 104.. ..i. .• . t s • • - ., , 1,...T0-' ...a.....,,,44,4',.:4,• -' '''e---.I4-- --:--` s'-- q ''''- - ' i 't.'‘. ..•:.(.-‘7..s-4-'rils'. '''':-‘ g -• sa ' •'' • 4.: • a 4 . ••:•-..i.1.-. •"•1 ..`.•'',.,•-•-•-•' • . • r. . ..- .,..-%.-......11.:7:•....7....n.,.4.-r-, r.•:"•1 t ill. ,., a . . ' .• , -e .----0•:*-4„..:... . ., .• • I ' `-.• • - . -4••••••„4,-. ( , . •-- • - • 111. • .:!-• e :•V N••,r ,--: - 4.* • ,- '''' `•:-.** -6.-•%.. ' .• ...TA, •• :4: :;6.4'0%.1•••;',f.1.4.7*.• si$-'.....-_;.•••---.-• ' • , . - •••••=--40-, • - • • ....-.....8.-.k.-Q.1.1, .%,'- ..•-•:„---. ' • • • -- •7,.• .I, ,t.•1111..-aa.If a N, • -a ••• 1.7° .:•it. 1 ..trf .) ,Z•47•?•e• AZ" . ••••,4 , ifttt '. . . .„. ... . `.,.• ,7 •_ IG.,••...J.,-.;:iffir,;?..,....-„,..BL:•.y.i _r_.c%. 46- .•• Allf •-• -'•i••-•-y---,-,:rx•iv ;vs.,--..--...rr --,:....rz: . - -• .L-• --,-.•,,._Ptk--. - •""re-•••••••-' •Z" •- . r.•'''• . •-•,•'.. - -:•-•• '-•:-: -v.,.r•.....a -c• -,_:•:-.••• *-.4k.- • ' ill• . ...1 ..?*Mt...?. !•••• .i to W.4 •••tril-.7-• t. . .. •V!.1 -k - -!..-..ti,.4.;ict • •-.' '70404:61..!.....4,1-.I.,,:ei.•%!-•-•,:k.. :. .. %.:., .....tlp...c.vf:It 4.3: li.•;.`,...te;••-'•if . ..}.• .41., it..e.... ..... 1.•-7,4 ..z. 4.......;,..••;, _... . ,. ' .••••:0-• ..e.fv,:•••,;:fllf,F../ • .....7Ar,.1.i,.• ‘ . ..\ e_g _,... i . ........•trO.,,,ive-• "••Ir-A, ..,rqs:t. -4-,e,-- :,.. . * 1 - , le •••. • .4.,.- ....:....... ..‘••4••-ii•••••••• • •r.•••.---7.:1 • .....• •f*...--•• ,,,,F?)•••• "•- ' c , „ ..4..f :-••;•...:4`;`•:Si.4}-...P" Ili 2.••1 4••••4-••••5:-;:.• • * • 1 . .1 ... - . .•:.-... .. .,--...,i.:e• ._-,,-...!..4.-,:., .1.:,..;-__...,.-... },•. i _ , _ $ I ! . , ,;.,,--,*-.••.1",...4-#... ..,i, . .-..,:.:i.;,,.... -.* 4- •VI- 44 7...... ;.•r.: I •7 ..ti•F• i,.::, 41", ' - r ''..4. .. . .:-..-- ...-•I-Lt.-et-4z t„i.: . -4.....ft•....,..-- . _. .-fo: ..i... )7,..!...,,e,,,,:. !•• : ' 11 - ,.. --;..- ----4IL--•••4.-.-•tza;-*-. •::.,•ir'•• ' • I $ i. `..,:-?&:-.'1,4-4):0-*•:. :4.#... -t j.-.-e-.-: • .- .••••Lk:Ce,....lt"-11-IFT,•:.4. • 3-•!--v4•: •,-•.72 44 • . --.1rit t 1 . : ••4.4:- A"--*4% - ••.-1.,Y4.4..• •11 :.41, ....,== , .. . .N:...:1.--• vt-....1-q..... --....,-,...- ?ft _. .... - . ,,,,...1... A.,... • , ,i... . .-,...- . .„..... s fa%a A. 4••- 14.--.-; T• -• -•• 1.•' I II g rs .4.44.Ni•f-J141.11ZA1+2.,ty4t- •-'1,,,Y-•ir- --, T - .. t.,..i IF:•,•-11/4.''..••.0•--.. ali•- r# 4...:.:!-- , - - _.•:.0. •-•..--T'1•=4:4-.A-1k •-itc:.•;:-•-'''.. •-•• • vit.,': f.... :- . - .. . . .• ...4".;:.V....1t;:••%,4:77;t4,`1-.44-V ) - • 1.,1.--i r , -..---1 t-,t,J--•,•/-....i. .74`• •• .4 ' ,. . t:-•;:;:l.t..•ir-al%•-•'` 11.1.tN"•• • •••••••Atf• t-• •. r • t•::•1,••• !1-.!...K..4 -••••••••C•17..t. .11f,r: "4:4 • I. - ••1 ,•. .• - l .11 • •. - •..-% ;• t• 4114:.it.-Widitt1t,1 -.Sf•':',:i.-V--_-A,4 , .. •Pts..<•-••!..%•,,,tost::::, ,,,Ar•-....: " 4:a(.41 141 z „.„. .. .-,•-. .,..••-• ; •tiolt.!..!. -it...tes-iiiktli: 4 ..- -- .. *-: ,,, ; -.‘•-:- •3/4;.•,,e0.444.7.-1. 4 ' ' ';;••43.3.p*. ••-•. , • . oh*-al, ,,...„, .• • . .,w.••A.,,..1 . ille,7••• .7, - cr•''''...'" . ...6!..1e46...a,,Y.: Tisliz ,,,,_,:‘,..r.,..- -.;. . i , ,. . .........1„ ,,:i.:-.....1.4,... ... ,,.!. .... :,. .k.".,-,..7. ,. . ..%4 ;A.. • • 1 . .4.! ‘14,.. .t..-...._.3A,2 ,..:;,,,,..,... .i., .. AA-r.g. -' - i g ••••• t• • ' ).' -. la . ._.- • 'Fs.•L''••••• ".; •jr•Kut.X.'•#.iti..„:411..5q"-,00 '.`"At. j • - t , . .. ,,...v.i....--- .......,,,,..,-,.•..,„..-41-.........-••••••.we'4. • . .. 'T.I..-- ,•7. 7 " :174k • 4.-4•,--7-ift -..Stft-Itimie ........c. • •••• - .'. •••i* • ' ' ...04...--- ,-0-- ;.-. .,)..4t...-..,.•,-..* i 1:20g- .4 ---.? • . •4"P"Xu.e,aket.'..t- -47..el.W4••••%;....1.,.... 46.4&-.V.I.r.:4:4-r• Zr••• :t$ '''." ' • I' a.g 1 • - -..... • .4.'...tilf-t"I•.4'•• .1'..:•-•/.1. •••14:1".. .i'..t.-P•-"„. •I r .- . "'• - A.:s 4,,,:;,s•-pc'.157•&",..1.1...: .t 1 -,0 - - . a ' - 'VI& ;Ai'•' * .ii 1.4.•!•••a. • t...."•.:.'•••••"t"-••"s": • " • ".''''•' ' • •,.••_ • ..it •••-•.44:',A".• 1•,•.;•••A'''''r.- 4.1••e•••11' A -. --•,Jr.• .; _ti. .1,. :.•-w-t.i „:„..-_ 144,....;?•/. 4..1..I.•.e•lit•it:-; ' •i •:7r .•••- ••• . ' 7•••1,1•4•-_-•••••1:-.._-.; - 4^_m_..s..Pl?'-'*;-•i:;3•'...A...:`:42:•1 4:* '`'' d..::: 4. i i ..-..-ortfa---1,:.:-,,-...,t--..., . '.1 .-:•:It...A.' .0'. F. ...3e..it.‘,..1k•-t...•..t••;•:•--'1.••"Ii•••:•.' 2 1;•-•',*-_e . r'e . •. ... I • •. , s. ye.. . 7- ...'-........1.' : . . ... b...‘.. Ni N. .. - . • .-s.. i•-•.1? 4.V. -It.7,irri 4,• t.:...c2.`.• i-1,-•••••- •1-- lic,, .... • i •-•( ... ai,.......- -,11.--_-‘` - ..-^ •• ..... . tar-• jilr.......P•,..„Ii .r.sig, .-,...•. t, • • --tt •112',..". ,,,, I/ 1 • S" ti • ••' • '4'.7.1-':-IP.,,•••-i'i••••• :.^:-_•.••••••••1-1.',..-f.t.....-. _•..•;•V.; - • - ••:..e. ... .- ert•Int-t,-..i.fur 2.;.. 7...c•-":C li.r.' l'i'''..T.. • - ' t. 1 •• ;.,- : ,. ne-.....---....--,...,---...„....-,,:‘,:-..--..1.,.:„....A......-4p. , ......--.0„. . .... , •,--40-.?...,.- ..i'..:.4 ....,t,i.s,.,„,4*_11--*....,,q 1,-.-.44....•.1.4••.. A!,,4•:.••• :.- al i - -,.. 4 :-_-... -•c•• , _ •.1."-.- 1•••• ......A.,,.....„,-e-:..t...:-,...-... - _._..,„.1-.1,, . I ..-• I - , ,,-..: -•-•-'4-- "4 .17:' ••••• .47t•- -•• _f,.: -4- -= •• . ..-'••-1 1:r . . , .1.:41-•••7511"....-"%.7.-.4,..--4..A-zr2,,........4.- --. ...0,>;•• •- v., -3, • .• • •,, .,= 41:4:.••-•••tf1;,...*-,,Ic_1,-..%,46.t.;•--:-.4..., e:4 .- MN I Z , ..z.r-e-4-.. '- •t47.4- . h ..= 73 ...A.,. s..... , „,.... ...k 1..-..1--,... ....„,iii.... . .....,.---4'.v...‘.*••••ea: .141•*'•••••••,'•••..44......• •" •••-• . ',• •-•.<- 1)1 0: _...j4,•. ... ,•;., ,..--....--1:-...,......4-,t,:„.,:.....(..._-.1,•.:-#:._01,. ---- -. ... -,• • - • ' -'Sz.,--"L- • ..Ar•,-t--..;;A:".%.„,w-•.:1,-.:11:74.:z•-•_r4. --.; . -:1 i - .• z-•;:,.-ig.......-.4.:..„-,; -- I'7•F't--.':$;•••';)1 - , •• , II! ;I. •. ,--; -, ;44'.:"••••t•t'r•• •r 47.-'r 1::•`:1.-‘•.:e4r-7 '• • -' I ! - - '•,:•••••.Y:-,. -1 .."-i-t-`..-•."::r -*•-...s.,: 1/41,•!'-!.- ,-;',..-,..-,.-9.-:= • .. -, . ...,...,:d•••• •••..-i.•••"'.-' r: 1 e, - ,.r.r. +z- 4.,4-..e- -•!,•,...r.,...- -......44,,a1„:.•ir;'•._...".:,........•4 --.• -;...-;...,,......z ...,..., , ,.. N i•F71.t'.......754:.•:7•iTitil:::fr.".::::'.1:7;.4...1-;,..7.r,.‘.71.Ae--..7ttT11....:;7:::::::1::-.::.:. •r. .......t.x.,,..s.....--mice . • -,er- I', • 7., - r•4•1k.,....7..tt,'';n•‘-••__-.'•. I •-• f..i......i*.-1•;'%.••V•;:.•--.71A-- k:- .7.a....;';';', : .. .. •••:• ... .----.-, • . - ..- ...:-.. •• .-.... "....„ .4-0.4,,......, .,,,,,s.,...,4........:. •-.1--- .. -.47.-••----,-. : . .:., ,,,....,„.,....?: . • . : -'•*" - •;••4-..-‘-"' ..at'•'t-•,,,p;. - . •• -- :=' 1", .. ,- --, •: : ..-•••.-.-.-.- •••••••••., . -- •- -. - -- ..-- ) ' •,-..': b-4.-."•!`.f7;3111"- 4 b- . . .•.- • - s ,-4,.w- 41i.. •.:c •. ,- !•- c•,•-•••%.44.1." 8,.; • - %. . .. - - , •It';te:• ' *-'e t - : .- •- - • ..-1:-.,..'1- • t , : 1 .i . _,1,.......•4:=, ••• ' - - • . ---:...7..,_ • . 1* .r. _ • - . . . ._ • . - i .. - _,--4--- • . :j-- •-•••• .4.4,•-,-,...-.4,.-:-; ' : . -1/2 •--,_ -• ... : -• . :.•1 ._ ... , ,• --lib -... ..: 4 1 • It! - • . - • . '° ' - .1. 4 if•'•v--- - -' -- ,. , . .. . . . . i ,. • CITY OF 11,0110 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 - MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner I — FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician Of SP"' - DATE: October 14, 1992 SUBJ: Review of Replat - Lot 2, Block 1 Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition into — Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition; Site Plan Review for Goodyear and ABRA Auto Service Center Project No. 92-16 and LUR 92-17 Upon review of the preliminary plat for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition, I offer the — following comments and recommendations: ACCESS Access to the development is provided by an existing private street off Lake Drive East — which services the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station (MVIS). Similarly, this development does not propose any public right-of-way for extension of the proposed street and therefore access to the lots will be private. A driveway or cross-access easement should — be recorded in conjunction with the final plat recording to guarantee access to the lots. The existing private street was built in accordance to the City's typical commercial pavement — design with the thought that someday it would be dedicated back to the City for ownership. Engineering staff feels with the concept proposed the City will not be taking ownership of the street and therefore the street pavement/parking lot designs may be designed — accordingly. The preliminary plat provides the necessary drainage and utility easement for the public improvements with the exception of a storm sewer line along the easterly line of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff recommends that the easement be increased to 20-foot wide to provide — adequate room for maintenance. We also recommend that a standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easement be dedicated on both sides of the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. — «I PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER - Sharmin Al-Jaff October 14, 1992 Page 2 UTILITIES Both municipal sanitary sewer and watermain is available to the site. The plans propose on extending the existing 6-inch watermain and looping to the existing 10-inch watermain located just east of the development. Sanitary sewer was extended previously in conjunction with development of the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The applicant is proposing to extend a sanitary sewer and water service to each lot. All utility construction should be in conformance with the latest edition of the City's standard specification and detailed plates. Formal plan and specification approval will be required at time of final platting. Since the development will include construction of public improvements, it will be necessary for the applicant to enter into a development contract and provide the financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements. Upon completion of these public improvements, the City will formally accept for perpetual maintenance and ownership most of the utilities within the utility and drainage easements. The City will not be responsible for ownership and maintenance of the storm sewer extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. This is considered a private storm sewer line. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site is approximately six feet lower than the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The plan proposes to regrade a portion of the access drive to provide a smooth transition between developments. Storm drainage from the proposed development will sheet flow across the driveways and parking lot areas and then conveyed via storm sewer system to a proposed detention pond located over the southerly portion of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff has reviewed the size of the detention pond and found it is under capacity and needs to be enlarged to accommodate runoff from this development and the adjacent MVIS site. The pond should be modified to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927 contour line. This will also provide a 2-foot freeboard around the pond basin. The applicant is proposing a series of catch basins and storm sewer to convey runoff to the ponding basin. From the City's standpoint, the catch basins and storm sewers located within the drainage basin and main street access should be owned by the City to maintain drainage. The individual storm sewer line extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 from the street should be maintained and owned by the individual property owners. Erosion control measures shall be incorporated onto the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly sides of the development. • Sharmin Al-Jaff October 14, 1992 Page 3 MISCELLANEOUS As a part of Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition, an outlot (A) was created. This outlot covers the existing private street. The intent was for the developer to dedicate back to the City, at some future date when the street was extended, the street and Outlot A as public street and right-of-way. However, as proposed the City would have no reason to accept the street. Therefore, staff suggests Outlot A be incorporated into the replat as part of Lot 3 or resolved in some other acceptable matter to the City. Our concerns are that the outlot could be left to go tax forfeit. SITE PLAN REVIEW - GOODYEAR/ABRA Upon review of the plans prepared by Blumentals Architecture, Inc. dated September 21, 1992, I offer the following comments and recommendations: — SITE ACCESS The plans propose on extending the private street from the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station located adjacent to the development. Since this roadway will not be a public street, staff is comfortable with the proposal. The layout is similar to a mini-mall type parking lot design with one access from a public street (Lake Drive East). UTILITIES All three lots will be served with municipal utilities. The appropriate hookup fees will be charged at the time of building permit issuance. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Preliminary Plat Approval 1. The final plat shall dedicate a drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. 2. A driveway or cross-access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. • Sharmin Al-Jaff October 14, 1992 Page 4 3. A standard 5-foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. 4. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the Watershed District, Health Department, etc. 5. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze-up, special modifications to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. 6. The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The outlot shall be replatted/combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927.0 contour line. 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. Site Plan Approval 1. The applicant shall post "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Signs shall be placed at 100-foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. jms/ktm c: Charles Folch, City Engineer CITYOF.• CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner I FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal Fire Prevention Bureau DATE: October 8, 1992 SUBJ: Site Plan Review for Goodyear & Abra Auto Service Center Planning Case 90-17 SUB, 92-2 CUP & 92-3 SPR The Chanhassen Fire Marshal reviewed the proposed site plan and has the following requirements: 1. Ten (10) foot clear space around fire hydrants, i.e. NSP, telephone, trees, shrubs, etc. City Ordinance. 2 . Fire Department Policy #04-1991 (included) . 3 . Fire Department Policy #06-1991 (included) . Placement to be determined prior to issuance of CO. 4 . Fire Department Policy #07-1991 (included) . 5 . Fire Department Policy #29-1992 (included) . t«: PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CITYOF rS ft•VCHANHASSEN _ • • „. . '7,1:�r ;o► 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 ' FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REOUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE 1. Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18" . NO 2 . Red on white is preferred. PARKING FIRE 3 . 3M or equal engineer 's grade LANE reflective sheeting on aluminum is preferred. /\ 4 . Wording shall be: NO PARKING FIRE LANE 5 . Signs shall be posted at each end of the fire lane and at least at 7 ' 0" .-75 foot intervals along the 11f ire lane. 6. All signs shall be double sided facing the direction of travel. . 7. Post shall be set back a minimum .4of 12" but not more than 36" fromthe curb. - 8 . A fire lane shall be required in (NOT TO GRADE front of fire dept. connections SCALE) extending 5 feet on each side and --along -all -areas designated by the -' :-- �.F e,_Chief• ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL J3E SUBMITTED IN WRITING, WITH A SITE PLAN_, FOR APPROVAL BY-SHE FIRE CHIEF. IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE--)DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONTINUITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDING ,THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF FIRE LANES. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #06-1991 Date: 1/15/91 Revised: Approved - Public Safety Dire ctor Page 1 of 1 - A TO' PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER • . _ z C I TY O F _ 0, ,.--:„, ,,v,4, . , .t....„, . 1 -' ' --.4":10 itter f-i CHANHASSEN u ,..„.. . ;6::,0-i.-- •_a` i:i40690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 _ (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES TO BE INCLUDED ON ALL SITE PLANS All the following required inspections shall be scheduled 24 hours in advance with the Fire Marshal: 1. Witnessing the flushing of underground sprinkler service line, per NFPA 13-8-2 . 1. 2 . Hydrostatic test of sprinkler system and 24 hour air test for dry systems. 3 . Testing of all smoke detection, manual pull stations, and fire suppression systems. 4 . Installation of fire extinguishers 2A-40BC rated minimum. Install one by each exit door and as designated by Fire Inspector. r `- 5. Extinguishers shall be provided before final approval . 6 . A final inspection by \a Fire Inspector before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Fire Department access roads shall be provided on site during all phases of construction. The construction of these temporary roads will conform with the Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for temporary access roads at construction sites. Details are available. Onsite fire hydrants shall be provided aizd in operating condition during all phases of construction. i The use of liquefied =petroleum °qas �sha1l be in conformance with NFPA Standard 58 and .the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code.. A list of these requirements is available. All fire detection and fire suppression systems 'shall be monitored by an approved UL central station with a UL 71 Certificate issued on these systems before final occupancy is issued. F t. j Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: Page 1 of 2 es t0, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER An 8;" x 11" mylar As Built shall be provided to the Fire Department. The As Built shall be reproducible and acceptable to the Fire Marshal. An approved lock box shall be provided on the building for fire department use. (- The lock box should be located by the Fire Department connection or as located by the Fire Marshal. The domestic supply from a combination domestic and fire protection line shall not exceed one fourth (1/4) the total pipe size at the line. High-piled combustible storage shall comply with the requirements of Article #81 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. High-piled combustible storage is combustible materials on closely packed piles more than 15 ' in height or combustible materials on pallets or in racks more than 12 ' in height. For certain special-hazard commodities such as rubber tires, plastics, some flammable liquids, idle pallets, etc. the critical pile height may be as low as 6 feet. Fire lane signage shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshal . (see policy #06-1991) . Smoke detectors installed in lieu of 1 hour rated corridors under UBC section 3305G, Exception #5 shall comply with Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for installation and system type. (see policy #05-1991) . Chanhassen Fire Department / Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991 . Date: 11/22/91 Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 2 of 2 ._ ...tTN, CITY OF lk.; . .,.r„... -.14. : , , ,,,,.. -,, ClIANIIASSEN , , „ ... i,:=�=,iy 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 - CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY PREMISES IDENTIFICATION General Numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. Size and location of numbers shall be approved by one of the following - Public Safety Director, Building Official, Building Inspector, Fire Marshal. Requirements are for new construction and existing buildings where no address numbers are posted. Other Requirements-General i v- 1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color from the background. 2. Numbers shall not be In script 3. If a structure Is not visible from the street,additional numbers are required at the driveway entrance. Size and location must be approved. 4. Numbers on mall box at driveway entrance may be a minimum of 4". However,requirement #3 must still be met 5. Administrative authority may require additional numbers if deemed necessary. Residenttai Requirements(2 or less dwelling unit) 1. Minimum height shall be 5 1/4". 2. Building permits will not be flnaied unless numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department Commercial Requirements 1. Minimum height shall be 12". 2. Strip Malls a. Multi tenant building will have minimum height requirements of 6". b. Address numbers shall be on the main entrance and on all back doors. 3. If address numbers are located on a directory entry sign, additional numbers will be required on the buildings main entrance. Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #`29-1992 - Date: 06/15/92 Revised: Approved - Public SaVty Director Page 1 of 1 to, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER • A - ,, 7:‘,.... . .sf ._,„; , . CITY OF cnAnzissrx „...,,,„ ,,," `,��;€;�•. `. _•.,,,- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • C(612) 937-1900 • FAX (6 2N 9937-5739 MINNESOTA 55317 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY REGARDING PRE-PLAN Prior to issuing the C.O. to the Fire Department for a pre-plan, site plan shall be submitted shown on the plan. PProval. The following items shall be 1) Size 11" x 17" (maximum) 2) Building footprint and building dimensions 3) Fire lanes and width of fire lanes 4) Water mains and their sizes, indicate looped 5) Fire hydrant locations 6) P. I.V. FireP or deadend Department connection 7) Gas meter (shut-off) , NSPshut off 8) Lock box location { ) 9) Fire walls, if applicable i 10) Roof vents, if applicable' 11) Interior walls 12) Exterior doors 13) Location of fire alarm panel 14) Sprinkler riser location 15) Exterior L.P. storage, if applicable 1 16) Haz . Mat. storage, applicable 11 17) Underground storage tanks _ loca 18) Type of construction walls/roofions, if applicable 19) Standpipes Z.i:._yr ::. _ 4.^. sZ-'.-.uaio" ➢i: -z 1- iie Y r^+ Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #07-1991 �" Date: 01/16/91 Approved - Public Safety Director Revised: Page 1 of 1 F A t41 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPPR CITY OF . CHANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner One FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator DATE: October 12, 1992 SUBJ: Goodyear and Abra Service Center The above mentioned site plan review will be formally addressed by the Park and Recreation Commission on October 27, 1992. To meet the plan review schedule of October 12, I am forwarding this preliminary report. Situated in the Highway and Business Service District of the city, this development is subject to commercial/industrial park and trail fees. These fees are currently assessed at a rate of $2,500 per acre and $833 per acre for park and trail fees, respectively. As such, the Goodyear site will be charged $3,245 in park and trail fees, and the Abra site will be charged $2,614. If you have questions in this regard, please see me. pc: Park and Recreation Commission, October 27, 1992, Packet «, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER we ••r• .CCL Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District ° `' Engineering Advisor:Barr Engineering Co. 8300 Norman Center Drive Suite 300 • a Minneapolis,MN 55437 832-2600 Legal Advisor: Popham,Haik,Schnobrich&Kaufman 3300 Piper Jaffray Tower 222 South Ninth Street Minneapolis,MN 55402 333-4800 October 9, 1992 Mrs. Joanne Olson _ Senior City Planner City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mrs. Olson: The engineering advisors to the Board of Managers of the Riley - Purgatory - Bluff Creek Watershed District has reviewed the preliminary information as submitted to the District for the Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition in Chanhassen. The following policies and criteria of the District are applicable for this project: 1 . In accordance with Section E (2) of the District's revised Rules and Regulations, a grading and land alteration permit will be required from the District for this project. Accompanying the permit application, a grading plan showing both existing and proposed contours must be submitted to the District for review. 2 . A detailed erosion control plan must be submitted to the District for review and approval. 3 . A stormwater management plan must be submitted to the District for review and approval. Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing this project at an early date. If you have any questions regarding the District's comments, please call us at 832-2857 . cerely / . Ro.ert C. Obermeyer B.rr Engineering Comp ny Engineers for the District RCO/kmh c: Mr. Ray Haik Mr. Fritz Rahr 23\27\053\JO1 .LTR STATE OF It DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE No. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 5519 772-7910 E� r,EEir _ I t iuu October 2 , 1992 OCT - 1992 Ms. Sharmin Al-Jaff - Planning Department {TY Ur L ri„ I�,n:SzP City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive - Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: GOODYEAR AND ABRA AUTO SERVICE CENTER, CHAN HAVEN 3RD ADDITION, CASE 90-17 SUB/92-2 CUP/92-3 SPR, CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER COUNTY Dear Ms. Al-Jaff: We have reviewed the site plans dated 9/21/92 (received September 24 , 1992) for the above-referenced project (NE 1/4 , NE 1/4 , S. 13 , T. 116N, R. 22W) and have the following comments to offer: 1. The project site does not contain or appear to involve any public waters or public waters wetlands; therefore, no DNR protected waters permit is required. 2 . No floodplain or shoreland concerns were noted. 3 . Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their equivalent, should be followed. 4 . If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10, 000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, a DNR appropriations permit is required. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, (-Ic Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist cc: Bob Obermeyer, Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek WSD Wayne Barstad, Ecological Services AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER • CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: Beisner Ltd. OWNER: Chanhassen Holding Company ADDRESS: 6100 Summit Drive ADDRESS: 14201 Excelsior Boulevard Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Minnetonka, MN. 55436 TELEPHONE (Day time) 560-0246 TELEPHONE: 935-3486 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. X Subdivision 2. X Conditional Use Permit 12. Vacation of ROW/Easements 3. Grading/Excavation Permit 13. Variance 4. Interim Use Permit 14. Wetland Alteration Permit _ 5. Notification Signs 15. Zoning Appeal 6. Planned Unit Development 16. Zoning Ordinance Amendment - I 7. Rezoning 17. Filing Fees/Attorney Cost - (Collected after I approval of item) 8. Sign Permits 18. Consultant Fees 9. X Sign Plan Review 10. X Site Plan Review TOTAL FEE $ 930.00 A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. SW X 11' Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet * NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME Good Year & ABRA Sales and service stores LOCATION Lake Drive & State Highway 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 2 , Block 1 , Chan Haven Plaza, 3rd Addition PRESENT ZONING Business Highway REQUESTED ZONING same PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Busniess Highway REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION same • REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed In full and be typewritten or dearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying_ withall City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof ol ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any- authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and Information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be Invalid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approval/permit Is granted within 120 days wtth the Carver County Recorder's Office and the ori docu ent returned to City Hall Records. September 19 , 1992 ignatur of Applicant Date >~� Q / ✓ 93— Si6nature of Fee Owner Date C �� /�� Application Received on �- Fee Paid $9... 4"---C Receipt Na 41-c313 This application will be considered by the Planning Commission/Board of Adjustments and Appeals on I'- 5if y ri I ✓ \' I: i ? Z = -azo Ty11!:_!,r,-, M rMnq ...,�•Acm, - 4 I2 s NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING E. J® � � "1!NI111P81"", . irrii.PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING _ > , Wednesday, October 21, 1992 ,,�2 ',, „,�„ "'"'""" a 7:30 P. M. ,, ' f.� :.: � a / `,t _ ' ��-11; tW—r00 City Hall Council Chambers ` • �'' '4 - 690 Coulter Drive ro s, { °—uoo � • �..�,�R�CE z 1111111 .---, \' esiv t� . LAKs+:o LIKE W Project: Goodyear Tires/Abra srls�x �, M - �"� <. .>� 4,7 r�;1Fite, �\ RICE b NSIILAKE Developer: Beisner, Ltd. r , ,e/ �� f��"_ -.. _ - .( _ �/ Ei , 0 0 Location: Lake Drive East - South of -.. - TS Hwy. 5 and East of the �), �--- , 6700 Emission Control Station / ~�� 1 _ Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. Beisner, Ltd. proposes to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition into 3 lots. A conditional use permit and site plan review are also required for the construction of Goodyear Tire and Abra facilities on property zoned BH, Highway Business and located south of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East, and east of the Chanhassen Emission Control Station. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Planning Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Sharmin at 937-1900. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the Planning Department - in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 8, 1992. q3i j;k Chanhassen Holding Co. McDonalds Corp. (22-146) Systems Control, Inc. 14201 Excelsior Blvd. AMF O'Hare 755 Mary Avenue No. Minnetonka, MN 55343 P. O. Box 66207 Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Chicago, IL 60666 Thomas & K. Kotsonas James & Janice Gildner Michael & Cynthia Koenig 8001 Cheyenne Trail 8003 Cheyenne Avenue 8005 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gerard & Lindsay Amadeo Alex & Marilyn Krengel Alice L. Sieren 8007 Cheyenne Avenue 8009 Cheyenne Avenue 8011 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Sinclair Marketing, Inc. Terry & Margaret Lewis Chanhassen Center Partners 550 East South Temple 8013 Cheyenne Circle c/o Builders Development P. O. Box 30825 Chanhassen, MN 55317 P. O. Box 637 Salt Lake City, UT 84130 Wayzata, MN 55391 Lotus Lawn and Garden Center Thomas & Patricia Redmond 78 West 78th Street c/o Redmond Products, Inc. Chanhassen, MN 55317 18930 West 78th Street Chanhassen, MN 55317 • ..--.1 igL.........gti: . v . 4,-. ...11,,p,.z4.,.‘ 1 mfr.- 'FA, Er= F.:' .•'''01.,,i,I it J• etn;."-hricitivitz.--7-;.*a�iw�-• : a ww1�y. u.NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING � , , �� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ,~_-= �`' +• 0.w:0 _^SRR ;`NdM ,E: �a rs- Wednesday, November 18, 1992 � ,�,. �._ ,� �- .. �� . _ _ 7:30 P. M. ...Nu 7..';04i ��i�,�--- ra.. ;.. �` r�+� 1—'°° 690 Coulter Drive , �•'� ' L �N.0 ,,4 r Ntif =—.t0o LAA£ _ Project: Goodyear Tires/Abra . ""', a/SAN r .. _ �- ,`„ Ar•di7S` , -41t- war br ram LAA'E Developer: Beisner, Ltd. ili/.'" �4,r/ ! __ , Location: Lake Drive East - South of -_ - Hwy. 5 and East of the r ), � •• , Emission Control Station liri �� ' .A . — Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. Beisner, Ltd. proposes to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition into 3 lots. A conditional use permit and site plan review are also required for the construction of Goodyear Tire and Abra facilities on property zoned BH, Highway Business and located south of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East, and east of the Chanhassen Emission Control Station. — What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Planning Commission Chair will lead the public hearing — through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. - 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The - Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. _ Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Sharmin at 937-1900. If you _ choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the Planning Department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. _ Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on November 12, 1992. `�fq I° • RAYMOND & K KNIGHT LEE & PATRICIA JENSEN WALTER & K SCHOLLMAN 8007 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8009 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8011 DAKOTA CIRCLE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RAYMOND & M JEZIERSKI GARY & M FANDEL DENNIS & S UN-LE 8013 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8015 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8017 DAKOTA CIRCLE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL WILLIAM FARRELL 8024 CHEYENNE AVE CHANHASSEN 4 i££SS 21OIS13JX On XOg C.. )138k1.111 NW A'I 6Z£N VO V.INV LLV LI£SS NW N:3SSVHNdH.) S 2IQ NRIVd 3ALLf1D3X3 6S LI£SS NW N3SSVHNVHD 069 X08 Od OZI 3.LII1S J 332LLS H.L8L M 08L81 3ARiU O2LLLVf1O 09c dlIOD NNYINf1S DNI SS32Id MIL DNI 3I3.LAV/\ Chanhassen Holding Co. McDonalds Corp. (22-146) Systems Control, Inc. 14201 Excelsior Blvd. AMF O'Hare 755 Mary Avenue No. Minnetonka, MN 55343 P. O. Box 66207 Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Chicago, IL 60666 _ Thomas & K. Kotsonas James & Janice Gildner Michael & Cynthia Koenig 8001 Cheyenne Trail ; 8003 Cheyenne Avenue 8005 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gerard & Lindsay Amadeo Alex & Marilyn Krengel Alice L. Sieren - 8007 Cheyenne Avenue 8009 Cheyenne Avenue 8011 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Sinclair Marketing, Inc. Terry & Margaret Lewis Chanhassen Center Partners 550 East South Temple 8013 Cheyenne Circle c/o Builders Development P. O. Box 30825 Chanhassen, MN 55317 P. O. Box 637 Salt Lake City, UT 84130 Wayzata, MN 55391 Lotus Lawn and Garden Center Thomas & Patricia Redmond DONREED PROPERTIES 78 West 78th Street c/o Redmond Products, Inc. 337 WATER STREET Chanhassen, MN 55317 18930 West 78th Street EXCELSIOR MN 55331 Chanhassen, MN 55317 — ALITA LOWNSBURY JEROME & RENEE GRIEP GERALD & M WASSINK 8000 DAKOTA AVE 8002 DAKOTA AVE 8004 DAKOTA AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BARRY & M GREGERSON ROBERT & P PETERSON PAULINE M CALDWELL 8006 DAKOTA AVE 8008 DAKOTA AVE S 8010 DAKOTA AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RONALD & AMY DVORAK P. Hegstrom ! - _ 8003 DAKOTA AVE 8005 Dakota Ave CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Chanhassen MN 55317 •:IIS!'i• 's•.- • l • 1i. - _ • - *. • ROBERT & B ARMBRUST DOUGLAS & K BAGLEY GEORGE & A JENNINGS 8022 CHEYENNE AVE 8105 81ST STREET 8018 CHEYENNE AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 VICTORIA MN 55386 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 N EINAR & V SWEDBORG DANIEL & L ROBINSON MITCHELL LOBENS & 8016 CHEYENNE AVE 8014 CHEYENNE AVE MICHELLE RIEHM _ CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8012 CHEYENNE AVE • I • • ' CHANHASSEN MN 55317 • RICHARD & B FRASCH WILLIAM &E KRAUS CURRENT RESIDENT 8010 CHEYENNE AVE x008 CHEYENNE AVE 8003 CHEYENNE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 - Mike and Cindy Koenig CURRENT RESIDENT STEPHEN & J MACDONALD 8005 Cheyenne Ave 8007 CHEYENNE AVE 8017 CHEYENNE SPUR Chanhassen MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JON, SR & D WILSON GLENN & B HAGEMAN THOMAS & JOY EASTMAN 8019 CHEYENNE SPUR 8021 CHEYENNE SPUR 8023 CHEYENNE SPUR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CURRENT RESIDENT ALOIS & M STUMPFL GEORGE & T THOMAS 8025 CHEYENNE 8027 CHEYENNE TRAIL 8029 CHEYENNE AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PHIL & CONNIE CHAN ROBB LUND RALPH LYTLE 8031 CHEYENNE AVE 8023 ERIE AVE MARY ANN ROSSUM CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8021 ERIE AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 THOMAS & S KOEPPEN CLAYTON & M SODETANI TERRANCE & S THOMPSON 8009 ERIE AVE 8005 ERIE AVE 8000-8002 ERIE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 VENCIL & C PREWITT JEFFREY PAPKE VERNON & B HUSEMOEN 8004 ERIE AVE 6180 CARDINAL DRIVE 8015 CHEYENNE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SOO LINE RAILROAD PER MAG CORP FRANK JR & M BEDDOR SOO LINE BUILDING C/O MAG CORP - R FELLOWS 649 5TH AVE S PO BOX 530 14956 MARTIN DRIVE NAPLES FL 33940 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55440 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 �N4t4F-s°74 Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District Transportation Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 5542? Reply to 593-8753 Telephone No. October 29, 1992 Mr. Paul Krauss Planning Director City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 In Reply refer to: TH 5 C.S. 1002 Chan Haven Plaza, 4th Addition TH 5 Near Lake Drive East Chanhassen Dear Mr. Krauss: We are in receipt of the above referenced plat for our review in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03 Plats and Surveys. We find this plat acceptable for development with consideration of the following comment: • A permit will be required from the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 593-8753. Sincerely, c Tim Henkel Planning Supervisor cc: Mary Anderson, Metropolitan Council Roger Gustafson, Carver Co. Engineer John Freemyer, Carver Co. Surveyor RECEIvEE OCT 301992 • CITY Ur MLNNESOTA 1990 An Equal Opportunity Employer • • I I 1 •. J 1 iciii I: s i IS ' 1 111 $444 s .r: 1 . : :a ii Ef /.: 1./ ;Y F ]UIM Y:114 _i d , =H i. A 12111 3 ;i; _:: z x -L z� �, Imo- ae: i :tl iee ":lz *=1. 5 iVsIf iZ``., I } • ; ae sae s, u� J .. 1 MEM t '.\\ - Cl��(��j=1 1��,\A1C;• a E� W c i�;i=i m i a 'c. t. 3 moi" 11� r9' �. 4 \ IIfF'yj d e . E E i i < iiiii -:I, 1 'czi H 1ti — 1 'sk':\‘\ 1 + I L a. I r i �I '\.. , i 1 , Li 1 . 2 , 1.i.: •:—.:.-,-.,.......,.., ' -.i -', s'i,„„ i.ii\li: t i}i' I ! :i �— I1 I ,t, . I ,l, ' _ hill I. iy _ •— ash., .n. i ,l i..il ,-...-r.••i .y"'; .` , I • I Q, ' 1 .1�,="! , - i 11.111 .11-1.11,1 • `. _ 's ' ;i � �4E2i •f !'111 • -- 4'11. lf . W _ pp'i r a %. 1. 81T1 I , i W Z Wf+ lit .41 L � � - 1, 1¢ ' �-:. �• I i i ir1 lYi ��w e Q , 4..! �; ,,•u. v. .:p< .r,. ..I W c ' Ij'z . . } . `•t«• �1 •N I°¢ W'R h s 1!'111 !I� hi Y..1 °,� o -t+. ..j.�, I� - E. �,1 :I 1 IL CO - - c 11 .10, I . — 4- �. I. at. 11 d 1 < z S t, i .I .t , "1 —-.. •o 1 i%! I .. • ' J I• I J 7 f 10 11, ? i ,l- 'N _ .�f i I f 1 I.' �,•1° .yid•_ nil I"1.1v. ..11III1 11 J I 1_1,1 I I' , z l ! 'L' ° _ ,�; ti 11 ',III .. 2. .. - I•M,.1 �`!� 1 1 I L qit 1 •� � it; ..— i I yyi _ ^/ I ti IZwo" i 11 Iiry I I §1 • I ii '_ — t_.— -- - ---- - -J =i :Ic :c ii it scE .. .. f! ii. 7:"El. :Nil rilei ._ Icl. I — : : '- L _ -- ::::..: 1 !?-a _IIu LEI 111i: - '- 1 _ :zi :s I Ei:s:= :-": : fit:: : i' c f i _:i? �c:i f :e si�i }• r - C I e i s ! _ _-r pp� .i ' •c"ss is •i L _ri fp:: €• s I — I I I # w •!:a _:g ! !:11 - �:' • - /hi i 11; : ' g i :.:i. - E ' r t - = =i.i 0 .0:li Ler:: Ei ie: �:: .:its i g $tiE$ ! W E t:di E!i:s:a•s : 4,0i 1,..::::s i - L s ! ! • le ! _ 1 II 1 I! ! W . s • 1 .. ! 0 i R i :ia ° ;fE i! a�ll i lilri1 W tr 'i '::E= _;' - ' I1y -- W = i -i a 0 ^ 41 is i H — W ' S 9 =..,i-• . W /i .i _. ..4.• 8y ��. A 142~ = i ey a �!'21 i O~ :- as 6: f.i6:i it: sera i11: U !Oil 11::114.4i Yyji 5� I • Y fag i 3 i; 11 __ > 1 is: s: iti •. . ) ., 0 • 22 rio:_. 1. j : i ii. :� ![. !. Hi mGS _ tt 1 9 t U J �11 �, i ' 1xS\\ I; Sill __ ,_,,. , L. 1.• 3 J`' 16 _ �, -- i . -I _ �; ;=i f. I;i 1,4,,i . I liI 1 t ' — 1 II i •1"" Wit... , : N, • . tS ; of 1 � I i In 1 : 'c io ; I r .% - �1 1 I Z= 1 • -IA jI �/ r = �� i r Jz 'Ili `� ii TL A- S I 61 %../---` rw v:"'m".i" . I $ I i1 W t / 1 ' 7S L I 'Il ,1 ~ l�> ftj �iVg ( LYS`•`_ ; , i ili �,\:.i.'0./ is 4 O oyE II • i. !• IIIJN i O i'. j�• I Ec fI W•,1 i q i 1 Y ift ��I� I — -- f r I• • l I i rl' 'I`I�ii �` . b6f'�el I'��l I I I �_l I '�i; : x t �1 t/V(+ ---...._.-. .-re_ . . . . . 7 . _•_w. ;i,\ ••, ,I Iii_ I `'SII , ° , 7„7 : I 1 1 • 1 — ;x -- ---- - I 1 'Le . 91 . 9 SNOI1VA313 i . owning ....... ...... - - ----.U.M1141.1• .0JAOriktv ..... •••••M_ 11Y342009 t — 1,1 * 2 0 15 . 0- t ,..) 00 if, 1 I e CC ,vEr ....... : / i 1:izt. 0 ...1 k g, ... - / .11. 01.'onf.. Ei . , 1 . . I fitt,11w.111.1 C- — hi O. / . , 4iii , 1 I •X , , Ill ' -IMF \ —. \ ---- 4 IMII,k - MI iiiiiiiiiiim ,- _ .. . ./ E1 i I I lb ,, . /1 , k.. . I lif ..... h,I Li 'aniin Id as iti ,k1 , 1 ' OI I D !, • ..i ^ • I ur 'i•J . 3 I _ p • \ , it . , ___, A" \ . g! ..- . • . (::;)" I , k is , 5 i. R. ! C- I • d / ,.N - i P! 1 I , „„,i ti. I t ,..„ anne 1 .. f it9; 1 1 • 0,9 - s d rl .\, I . I1 1 II 1 1 11.11 thi ..... ,..- , O 1 . 1 —I.min. 4O' I 1 . . . g \I I 1-. ia I.. . I 4 : i . . OM= 6 - I . . g... • .. J........•.. it i .II V * ! I I 01.11.,...t.t A Loe .. .. i 1 . ,..... am. ... ..— am. ! ..... • t3 x I�ul • C N d a• . i c • i asp:: cir W P 3 i ZF _ p W 4 Ow W Wz OL 02 z 1 MI -I ,I;I I5 COm '.- II i I .. 0= m lids t., J;qt 4 hito II 1 I, mii. z . 1m -_ o I Gr I V' L ''l ' o I' ' ;• I''I • o ' i, W i W ' L. �-ij I W i I II ' I W . r t+ I , .h,,I, 0•. :t , i1I. I.I,1�, g L u . 0 . Z, �s . . 3t i; tt :•.� • _•A 4e 8 i F!s5 �/. p 'I T .411 ii r I j I 1. • — I• \ ► •III . i • —-I I \ —.-.\---=--- . �� 1 _- — lit. I p0i ' m --1 , _ ��— • L-- ,‘,4__ ____z d o g 211L__ rz il � IJ • W GH. r� I � (—r.. ..ISI' -- i , W I • — r ----" . ii .— i _ H i N < 2 CV 0. w c., I 1 CO 0 Ch CP' F- '-"/ 0 t : 1 a G 6 T I E CL 1i F X ci z p.7 ! Iri g U ' • 1 .1,1 .- ,g re t, 2 ., >- Z ! 11; i — -•, ,;i:lf: ig .f..t ' oi I _ J.. !: i. 111; ; !! ii i w Z 1-- t- ., ,.., ii ii ifti!i:i :. . 1 — cc D- < . ! !:. , -.1 i'5••.*2 ,./1E-II! 14 11.t. : I !. ii Erq;.•il-: 1 /^1 4:2:.C11 1 0 _ d ri:i ' iiffiti!;i1.i 1 1 I;1 II .. ' '- —fl C)— • .— I i - \ — ti\ - \ i - . i 7 \ , •\ 1- ' ..•.s "" \ ILI - IV: ,i,. •• - — 1-' .,;.1,1 ..... 1 . .• A' -. . •• - .... . 1 t I ,: 4:: I- — -,- ----- • '" (a • - '' I - tz-----------r •I• ! I :I \ e -----!!! •-- - -:- 7 it. 1. 1 i'•, .: q , • I 1 ‘1/4 ' '.. .'A' g I .i. ., . ;• ' ...- ! , -1 • - • - ! , ,i .. l t• :....,..........,,p......b, I•: 1 A 11- CNA • I .; I .0, . Li . : III .. . . I '21 '•,-.1,.. 4- ,... .. e- E -..:. in II I 1: - • i • 1-I i, ,..-1.• • 1 :.. ,..i: ! .-„1 i•. . • 1 .1 • L 1 ...I % 1 t I 0 44:,.; Mom !1 .1, I (51 , . z -4 •I ;TA-, • : ., i• ' c._,- • • I • , I lir. 1 I. • , :71 ..11 -4. .•,• I 7,:. 1- 4 Zzt i f . ' t I 1 , f •1 u) 2 46..-. • Ill .•- IOC • . / --.F-11 1 - ... I )1,* , [... , •!, ..• g: 7 !:. I 1 „ ' I • –971 h v.,, . oi,T4 .g 0 ,: ! : ,! . r . g. ''. I . 111 i — •,-. ., x : ! 2,il 4 ' ' ' - 1 ; 1 ...,..•',i.:'. . .. • la it i .. .... - '41 . ; :.,•::...,,- :• ;1 - . ,. ‘:1 if* • I ,Z'. i.' -., I- ..• ,••• ,t ...t 1 . ' I, 'I 45 ij.1 ' 1 111 I IA : ..,. • I' 1 ' .- ....- ,i. ' ,. As — -t .• . t: ‘,. i.: - . ,, •; — • . . ;; i[,:\ . .? -1,:, . - - _ I i. Ji' I • • it-•-., il I i ..i . . . . . .. .. .‘:I g ss.r. -, 0•.. v: I ,• .•'• Id%-f7->-:''' 1 ' • , I !...• .1 •,..-"\-•it <9 „--.,--- - --, 1 ,1 i ; it ',, t ; ,., • / ...,:-.-- N.,:: 1 ilg .-1 ,.,. •c•\• :., .......4.--'-'-.--):""--) k 1;., !. 1 -1.11 10)- '. liv . .. . :i 1. 3 — t .11 ; ' '': li i I =''• ' • II! i i ,,,,, ..),..,\.......-• _ — - 1---‘ I , '.".., '-• -•-- iI1.1 iir• 4,4. , *.•,, ..=„. ,...,! \ i 1 1 I \.... ..) •,, •,.!;%,i ii. 1_ .. .. ... „,„. -- 1 , .•r... 'S '-.- " I ;H ll — .. .:_....1--.,•.•: . -.. .---.-.......,., ._... .... ..14:< ..•.. - . ,/I .,,I -...... \-, -..5 ...44s• ...-.._. , klz .! .:lk ••'.,••, .0". / s• .., - I v .1 .! i .1 ...N ...,..,.... "---. ...,. — • '..- V •ct. .p--.-.711Iiiiialii 1 . I ', f. .: : .•L,.. _I , 1 , --,- - -,.,.......&,..,- i . , .. . IIL-ill ' — 1 ' 1 ...____... — ..... . ..1 .t. ....." ! .1!.. 1 .. `!:: 1 . '.- • 1) .. ._ gz:1 - ; v. ., ., i , I 41.j . •, — I - •- -- ---- - - --- - - - --_I } ,i• ' , \.... $ 1 • F` z . d.ii < I- e,l z W L / ! a • -r. W 2 f 1s t Z C6 I' ....II _ t E ¢ t p 0101 : r 1 IS aq 1.- Z r V ;CI -• a y '- + 1- L L f W y N W u�� N je j q t y — `,i 114 u �s! I b ' § a Uf L I (uII J e W" !il:. s . • -, 1 < ii!i; o L . u , , W ' Q hL 1 • ta : . . . .\ l%3`� is ij 1 – -- ------------ _ .. - �_ , —...__A___ ,--- S -'Z _% tF 1 t !, ! t� 11 I ' •11.ji � �,,1 t\ JtJLe4t'81 i1411l kill «I !;' '• 1:11; 10 1 . . '' _ 1 1I 11 ":4 1 5 !I �I •iI Iii I�FIII� iI fEc it •1 / Q. I `e4 �S ill I !II h, I € lllo m .- 1111 III!II' • .1■ V- °gil`;'Y 14: • {,I 1:�� z` 8 ,blitibio •,1 u.1 rills- it s rojoi,o te 'I I; �'• 'I'I l�R. tom,_ �_ 9 _ lip ill Ii + y �.� f � . l Illigj' III J • ., i I ,1, ;1 �, __ . _ { 1,11 �� II s - '..k, i 0 ,( ,-.7 , e , i. 1 Ie I — lEIBl'l 1 Ir G lle.li. 3 ' – •••:-_C)— t 1 naea6yxeE I i II jIb o l o 167 v Ix I I.' 2 0 1 i a c \ -• t II W is I I. ! . < - oo a I 6 ii11: : n 1 r S n ff 5 .c r z — 1 • I- W p 4 W ~ N N 78�j '� " " TI ' e Uz i W!. ! `•e G W= ' N I 9 53.-2'i kT', f t 6= i 1}; i $ '4 W 0 i1c 1 c �1J a O i t' ► s o { � _ ° 5j 1 U `±ili • p -U 11 W ii :J it 'ssi ; 1 0 • I • 1 . ¶ \ , . _ „. .. , ,,, , ,,,, • ••••••••••16 666.61•6•• ,t--..„1/4 . .,1 \ t.c A. • •• I?!I �I IS — II 4'� i'1ii =t I .. . .! 1ti I r f.1., E. I Q "9sY'tli; + �. ; I lir* 3A .� S *i� I- i.Q I-. -,. - 0 I., ittf, ",,r•I 1 II I _ - - `` 1 ,tii l; ;1 'It I /_. I. 1 11A I i-u _l_IJJJ_! '' �t •4•; -_z--- ,: �;I t 1 ', o t:, •�: 1�1i L. .i_ ... - • zl •1 �r.•.. ..ga `.•• � ,I fj / I \, i `.,I =x ; s . �; 1 I \•....." \ 4 . g I ei .l. I 1 g 1i t 1 11 1E g 1 i hiinli u :e115° �O R ' "i6 +4. I ; rf. .. i i at t t 1 to la 1'; f )i a ,0 -- ! i I 11 1 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 4 , 1992 Chairman Batzli called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p .m . MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Batzli , Tim Erhart , Ladd Conrad , Matt Ledvina , Jeff Farmakes and Joan Ahrens MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Emmings STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss , Planning Director ; Jo Ann Olsen , Senior Planner ; Kate Aanenson , Planner II ; and Dave Hempel , Sr . Engineering - Technician PUBLIC HEARING: PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR 112 RENTAL UNITS AND 105 TOWNHOMES AND A CLUBHOUSE/OFFICE ON 27 .04 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED R-12 , HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND LOCATED NORTH OF WEST 78TH STREET BETWEEN KERBER AND POWERS BOULEVARD , OAK PONDS/OAK HILL , LOTUS REALTY . Public Present: Name Address - Bob & K . Dianne Bohara 7510 Canyon Curve Mike & Mary Henke 7560 Canyon Curve Jack Thien 7570 Canyon Curve _ Tim Anderson 7550 Canyon Curve Randy Swatfager 7511 Canyon Curve Karen Branow 7490 Canyon Curve Hans & Mavis Skalle 780 Santa Vera - Karl & Mary Kollar 7550 Chippewa Trail Kevin Crystal 940 Saddlebrook Curve Greg & Cindy Hromatka 7580 Canyon Curve _ Mark & Cindy Schallock 7501 Canyon Curve Dave Callister 7540 Canyon Curve Brad Johnson 7425 Frontier Trail Arvid Ellness 5115 Knox Avenue So . , Mpls - Kay Halla 770 Creekwood Gordon Christenson MN Valley Surveyor Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item . Batzli : Can you generally provide an overview as to what the developer 's gaining by this being rezoned a PUD and what the City is gaining? Aanenson: Well the intent was to hope is to try to preserve the trees . Again , that 's the question right now . It appears that as it 's been staked that the grading plan is not , it seems to be inconsistent with what 's out there . There 's some concern about that . Paul would like to address that . Krauss: There 's a couple reasons for it . One of the more fundamental ones too I think that goes beyond the usual trade-off . . .that 's being looked at , is we 've got a site out there that 's zoned R-12 and it 's a real Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 2 wild card . I think there 's a lot of concern . Most of the folks are here tonight because there 's been one plan after another proposed for this site . One of the good things about a PUD is for all intensive purposes i becomes contract zoning . If there 's a plan that 's approved for the site under a PUD , that becomes the zoning district . It 's no longer R-12 . It '= that PUD plan . And the City 's control and the neighbors ability to input if this project doesn 't proceed from that point forward , is much greater . They basically have to come through another rezoning action . You eliminate a lot of that wild card status . In addition , under the PUD we 're talking about two different types of housing . Owner/occupied and rental . We 're talking about private recreational facilities . We 're talking about trying to manage a site in a comprehensive way . The PUD district provides the added controls that we need to do that . Under straight zoning we don 't have the right to commit a developer to enter into a contractual agreement to protect what we 'd like to protect and - maintain what we think needs to be maintained and those kind of items . But I think you have more focus on those kind of concerns than you do specifically a trade-off . Batzli : So what are we , maybe I wasn 't focused intently enough on what you just said . What are we gaining by making this a PUD in terms of natural features of the land other than the trees? Anything? - Krauss : You 've got the , well start with the topography . Earlier versions of this . _ Batzli : Graded it more significantly . Krauss : Lopped it off and make it a plateau . You 've got the trees that you 're picking up . You 've got communal private recreational space that serves a good purpose but it needs to be maintained by a homeowners association . I believe some of the , correct me if I 'm wrong but we were - looking at some of the standards relative to street width and grades bein modified and some setback internally to be modified a little bit to make the plan work under the PUD . We think in exchange we 've got a better _ quality product . You 've got a great deal of flexibility from the developer in terms of product . . .these things are going to look like . On the owner/occupied we 've gotten , we 've managed to pick up preservation of the trees , not only on the . . .hill itself but internally . A lot of those - things are a lot less flexible under a straight R-16 zone . Batzli : Okay . Would the applicant like to give a presentation at this — time before I open the meeting to the public? Brad Johnson : Mr . Chairman , members of the Commission . My name is Brad _ Johnson . I live at 7425 Frontier Trail . I 'm the developer of the project . I have with me this evening Arvid Ellness , who 's the architect . Gordon Christensen who's the Surveyor . Has .done the surveys out there . And Kay Halla who is the Landscape Architect for this particular project — so we can later on address any specific questions to them . Arvid would like to come forward after I 'm done and just do a brief presentation on color drawings I guess . If you recall correctly , when we first presented_ this , we were going through a three process process here . The first step is conceptual , which we 've gone through and listened to the neighborhood ' Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 3 concerns about the original proposal that we had . We 've been through the Planning Commission . Listened to your concerns and also the City Council . So we 're now going through for the preliminary approval and we 're trying to adjust somewhat to the input that we 've had from everybody so far and I would say most of it has been a very positive process . Initially our major objective on this particular project , only because I saw through this last time it came through here , which was about 3 or 4 years ago , was to maintain as much as we could the stands of oaks that are there and there are also scattered oaks on that site . So that was one of our goals . The second goal we had , as far as the development was concerned , is to do asminimum amount of grading as we could . So we actually went ahead and adapted a new type of rental structure so that it would fit the lines of the property . The third thing was to produce a project which would fit into what we perceived to be the Highway 5 corridor plan as far as what visually was planned for this area which was primarily to maintain the trees and then when everything was all done , you 'd have a nice looking project on the hill . Because it will be visible from Highway 5 . Those are the major objectives we came . One of the things we did not address , and probably because I , not because I forgot about it but this particular site to the east is R-12 . To the west is R-12 . And to the south is our highest density commercial property in the city . So it 's basically a transitionary parcel . In talking to the developer of Saddlewood , when he did this particular project years ago and he and James arranged for the zoning . First it was zoned R-12 prior to , is it Saddlebrook . What is it , Saddlebrook . Prior to Saddlebrook being zoned whatever it was , the property on the hill was R-12 . So he had to deal with how to buffer his property to this particular property . And the buffer that he used was the wetland area which is approximately 200 to 300 feet across . And he felt that that would be the buffer . In talking to Rick Murray , that 's how he perceived it . Thus he had a little point in here , which was an outlot of the parcel zoned R-12 also to coincide with the zoning that was there already . Later on , that 's been purchased subject to that zoning so our proposal assumes an R-12 zoning in that property and whatever goes along with that . Since we 've met with the neighbors , and all the Planning Commission and talked to the staff , things that we have done is reduce the total number of units from 240 to 217 , which is a net density drop of down to about 10 .4 . I think we 're actually at 9 .6 or almost lower than that and I think the report shows that as far as our total density in a zoning area that requires 12 . We 've gone from 168 rental units to 112 . We 've increased the for sale . They were concerned that we had too many for rent units in the propject and some of them that were directly visible to the neighbors to the north so we have changed the for sale mix to from 72 to _ 105 . Primarily the for sale unit increase was in the northeast corner which was originally our Phase 3 rental . We 've lowered the rear elevations of all the buildings to appear to be 2 story instead of 3 stories that look directly onto the neighboring houses . As I said , we 've added a northeast for sale . We 've added quite a bit of new landscaping . And this again is probably an oversight on our part but we added quite a bit of landscaping in the original proposal to the north side . There is one barren hill there so whatever was built there would be seen . But we 're putting in pine trees . One of the things that we did do , I 've jogged through there periodically and I always wanted , like we do on the other side , job along the pond so we put in a trail system that went along the wetland pond that 's in that neighborhood . That met with quite a bit Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 4 of objection from the neighborhood . I think they just didn 't want people running through their rear yards , which is reasonable . And secondly , - there 's quite a bit of wildlife in that area so we 've taken that out . There was no need for that . We have however been requested by the City , and we 've agreed to do that , is to add a trail and a trail easement as a - part of your trail plan along Powers . CR 17 , whatever it is . That stree so we complete the trail system connecting the downtown area to this . We have worked with the city on the drainage . The storm water drainage plan _ for that which I believe Kate reviewed with you and basically our positio is that we 'll use the City 's consultants to design that . Just assuming that they ' ll come up with the best solution . And then finally we 've increased , I don 't know most of your parking for rental units run around parking spaces per unit . In some communities it 's a lot less . Our parking is currently 2 .25 parking stalls per unit which is quite higher than average for most communities and higher than your requirements that - are here . With that I 'd like to have Arvid just go over the plan . Those are the things that we have changed in the project . I think Arvid can review the actual project with you . Batzli : Brad , do you have any objections to the current conditions in th report? Have you had a chance to look at the staff report? Brad Johnson: The only one that I 'm concerned about , and this is more of a financing problem , is that one of the requirements is that we put the road in all the way through right away and that really has to do with how_ we finance the project and whether the lender , whether we 're putting the road in . The City 's putting the road in . We haven 't dealt with that issue as of yet but no , the rest of those conditions are things that we 've talked about . There 's some issues about trees . I believe we published , - you have received a document that was sort of incorrectly drawn by a computer as to where trees were located in one area . That 's been corrected and the surveyor is here to verify that was the case . We drew - in the wrong grading line . Our intent is to preserve as many of the oaks As far as I know at this point , we are only taking 2 oaks overtly I guess that we have to take . And there 's 5 to 8 elm trees and that type of trees over 12 inches that are in the path of the development way over on the west side . There 's a lot of trees in that particular area but I think we 've been as sensitive as we can to the project . But no , I don 't have any problems with any of the staff concerns . Other than that one and we - haven 't really talked about it . It just showed up in the discussion so far , so Arvid . Would you like to go over the project itself? Arvid Ellness: I ' ll just kind of recap some of the highlights of the plan . We sort of presented the conceptual thinking on the project in the earlier meeting which is basically an idea of where the rental units should go and where the for sale units go based on the variable that we wanted to preserve the natural topography of the land as much as possible Use the building type on the hillside that gave us the greatest deal of flexibility and could be nestled into the ravines and the positioning of - the trees . The unit that we had in mind for the for sale unit has a lot less flexibility in that regard so those decisions were discussed and debated and resolved in earlier discussions with the Planning Commission at the earlier meetings . Now to highlight the things , and I don 't know i you all can see . To highlight the things that Brad brought to your Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 5 attention . The area in the northeast corner here where we 've made the major change is that we 've taken out the rental units up here and we 've gone to a for sale unit . That for sale unit is a staggered type . Third type design for the project . It 's designed specifically for that area . It has a lower roof line on the north side and it 's a staggered type design so that it has a softer and creates more of a shadow effect . These units are somewhat lower than the rest of the units and they fit down into the hillside as a phase which was our Phase 3 development area . We then planted some additional trees on the north side here . Conifer type trees to give us additional screening and softening those facades as much as we can . We 'll have some elevations to show you . What we 've done with the elevations is kept it very schematic in terms of bulk and size to determine the height of the building . The scale of the back wall and things of that nature and the refinements of design in terms of detailing of the windows and how the building materials and colors will go together , will be a phase of development that we 're anxious to go into . But at this point we 're trying to get the parameters of the project established and with respect to scale location and positioning on the site . The other two _ buildings that were referred to by Brad that we 've lowered the roof on . On the north side which is the area closest to the neighbors to the north , are these two buildings here . We 've brought the roofline down to a 2 story effect on the backside rather than a 3 story expression that we 've been showing above on the project . Before on the project along the major embankment area here . The area of the grading discrepancy , one of the areas was in this central area here where we were showing some grading that was inaccurate . That 's all been corrected and the new plans have been submitted and they have that on file here as well as documents enclosed in the set here . We also have some retaining wall work that we 're going to put in around these oak trees here to make sure that our position that we 're saving the trees is maintained . I think the other components of the site that you 're somewhat familiar with from earlier discussions so I ' ll just go on to some of the other sheets . This is a building type that you 've seen before . It 's a building in which the garages are located on the street side into the community type area and the back side of the project is where the unit face out into the oak trees and overlook the wetland area . The configuration of that building is pretty much as we had shown it originally . The exception to it is that in some areas we 've been able to take the roofline and actually lower it to a 2 story effect which we 'd use on the buildings closest to the neighbors to the north . So we would represent to everyone that this building , - that 's been identified on the plan will have a 2 story facade on the backside as it 's predominant elevation rather than the 3 story facade on the backside that we had shown earlier . Materials remain as we had proposed . Final siding is a predominant maintenance free material . The colors and things of that nature will be resolved in the course of development of this _ design . The other building type which has been a pattern of refinement over the periods . It 's the one that 's being marketed for sale very successfully throughout the metro area . It 's referred to as the back to back for sale unit . Very popular unit . Very well selling unit and priced in the moderate range so that it 's retained that popularity . The materials and the configuration of the building has been refined somewhat from earlier sketches but it generally represents a building of this scale . Of this height and with these widths . All have 2 car garages and other features that we identified earlier . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 6 Batzli : What is your targeted moderate range? Arvid Ellness: What is what? Batzli : What is your moderate range? Brad Johnson: Price wise? Batzli : Price , yeah . Brad Johnson: Under $95 ,000 .00 . Arvid Ellness: This unit here is the new entry into the design and it v.a basically here is the unit that we 're referring to on the northeast corner of the project . It has a 2 story type expression on the back side . It 's— staggered in a sawtooth pattern so it will have a softer look . It 's a fc sale model . It 's a unit that we think fits into that particular segment of the site and into the contours in that area . More appropriately than _ the other for sale model that we had used on the south side of the property . So this is a custom design unit that would be marketed and sol_ in the northeast quadrant . And it 's been figured so that it still , the bulk is much less than what we had planned to do on the south side . It also allows us to use this particular design is set up to be a single loaded approach where you park on one side . The units face out the back so it 's a much narrower and carries a much smaller scale in terms of bulk— on the site itself . The other drawings mostly go into the detail development of the project as required by the ordinance . The actual configuration , the hard shell lines of the streets and configuration of _ the landscaping and all the grading contours and detail information that supports these general conceptual plans . And I won 't take the time to co into that but we ' ll be able to answer questions I believe on those . So with that , do you want to comment anything more on the landscape or anything? Brad Johnson: Why don 't we just wait until , would you like to have us comment on the landscaping plan at this time? Conrad: Sure . Brad Johnson: Why don 't you pull out the landscaping plan . Kay Halla from Halla Nursery . Kay Halla : Hi . I 'm Kay Halla and basically what I tried to do , I walked through the site and looked at what existing trees were there and the topography . And I found it very important to add more oaks . White oaks in the upland areas . In through here and along in here . And some pine oak and swamp white oaks when you get into some of the areas that may be _ little more wet so that the species , once they were planted , they would survive . Also , I tried to go with related species such as American linden . Things that were found naturally with oaks in upland areas . American linden , sugar maples . And then as far as the evergreen species , Douglas fir , white pines , Austrian pines , flathill spruce and in some of - the lower areas the balsam fir . They can handle more moisture . So I tried to make it very natural because that 's the feeling I got from the Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 7 site . And also I think it 's a very , the trees and things that are existing are very rough looking and I think if you , by adding more oaks and American lindens , things that are very rugged looking trees . Not too many delicate looking trees , I think that would continue the feel of the site . And also I felt that there are quite a few trees added and I think that will really make a difference in softening the buildings . And again , adding more evergreens along the north to screen from the neighbors and along the south for the corridor TH 5 views . Adding kind of a variety of some evergreen and some of the shade trees . And then also some sumac = down below on that hillside so that when you 're looking up there you 'd again get that natural kind of feeling . Any questions? Batzli : We ' ll take public comments later . Thank you . Does that conclude your report Brad? We 'll now take public comment . What I 'd like to have you do is go up to the microphone . Give us your name and address please for the record and if you can , keep your comments brief . We would appreciate it . Thank you . Tim Anderson: We have at least one resident who was going to speak tonight who 's not here yet because of the move up on the agenda so , I don 't know what we can do about that . Batzli : Your name and address . Tim Anderson: My name is Tim Anderson . I reside at 7550 Canyon Curve in Chanhassen . We put together a video . Myself and two of my neighbors showing the site and it was done a couple days ago in a snow storm so I apologize for it 's quality . Batzli : How long is this? Tim Anderson: Oh , not very long . Batzli : Is this a 6 hour tape or? Tim Anderson: Is it possible to rotate that slightly so I can kind of narrate it as we go . Okay , from what we wanted to do , first of all is show how imposing a 30 to 35 foot building would be at this site . So what we did is put together a 32 foot long pole and held it up to the site . We 're looking north . This is the hill where the row townhouses will be . Looking south across the row townhouses . . . Farmakes : Is it north on the other side of the wetlands? Tim Anderson: Yes , this is looking over the farthest west , farthest east pond . Now he 's panning over through the wetland area . You can see the trees . The oak trees and such . And as you can see that 's , even the smaller townhouses will be quite imposing on that hill . We really don 't have any arguments for the townhouses . Okay this is we went out , Mr . _ Johnson had the surveyors put the stakes down and we discovered that one set of stakes delineated one of the buildings as actually probably on top of at least 3 trees and very close , within a drip line of two more . And the statement saying they 're only going to cut down 2 oak trees is rather misleading . This is another building corner we went out and set the pole Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 8 on . We had bad weather conditions so I apologize for the quality of this- This is looking south again from my next door neighbors backyard at the wetland area and the detention ponds . Farmakes: Your first pole staked to the east that you showed first , was the elevation at a stake? Resident: Yes . F'armakes: Okay . Tim Anderson: Yeah , exactly at where the stake was . Resident : . . . I 'm sorry to interrupt but how sparse it is on this side . . . - Tim Anderson: What we 're concerned about too now is the location of this one building which was delineated with these stakes and essentially the _ trees that would have to be cut down is the buffer between our houses and these apartment buildings . Another thing I wanted to state is we measured , if I can use the , when we get done here , I can use the overhead . We measured the distance from the . Okay , here he 's walking a line betwee two of the stakes on one of the buildings . As you can see , he 's going to be walking right through some trees . Obviously you 're not going to be able to preserve those trees . I think you get the general idea . We can - probably cut it out . I want to talk about several issues tonight . I ' ll try to keep this as brief as possible but I feel it 's important to myself and my neighbors that these items be covered . First of all the site _ configuration . Currently there 's two types of , or three types of units t be built . One is the apartment units which are facing , directly facing our houses . And then there are what Brad called the back to back units . The villas which are , those face south towards the commercial area and then there were the row townhouses up in the northeast corner . We are concerned about having for rent units within 200 feet of our houses . 200 or 250 feet of our houses . I was a renter for several years . 7-8 years before I bought my house here in Chanhassen and as a renter I know , even though most renters are really good but one thing they really aren 't concerned about is what 's going on in their community and they tend to have large turnover . Every 6 months . Every year you get turnover in these apartments and we are uncomfortable having that type of turnover SD near our home . I 'd like , for an example , how many people here are from the Westwood Village Apartments which are also right next to this - development? Is anybody here from those apartments? See , not that I 'm criticizing them as much as renters know that they will be moving on . Going elsewhere . I 'm also concerned about one of the buildings . I want to put up the previous grading plan if I can . Okay up is north . This wa the building that we have , it 's essentially on top of 3 or 4 trees and if you go down , one of the ponds facing our backyard is with an 85 feet . Ole of the buildings . That is the same distance as our houses are to the pond . Essentially it has the same setback as a single family unit and it 's facing a single family unit . This is a much larger building . Much higher building . Much more imposing building . Neighbors that are going to have a lot of turnover . There 's going to be probably a lot more noise than you would expect from a single family homeowner . That . . .to me . You 've got to excuse my land use map . I 'm not a planner . This is the for Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 9 sale units . The back to back for sale units . . .townhomes . This is the row of townhomes . These are the apartments . These are our houses . This is Saddlebrook up here . What I tried to show is , we would like to see the for sale units be placed to the north adjacent to our homes and the apartment units with higher turnover with the larger per family per acre density than these would have , facing the north . Or excuse me , the south . And one of the things the City should realize is that these for sale units , currently this whole area down here is undeveloped . I went through _ and grabbed an old set of plans for the Target . I understand it 's changed a bit the last couple weeks . This was the Target . These are some outlots which could take fast food restaurants or other types of restaurants . Restaurants with drive thrus and such . A lot of lighting . Parking lot lighting . I kind of made up some buildings up here . It could look like this . Strip mall , a K-Mart , a Taco Bell . Look how close potentially these townhomes could be , owner/occupied townhomes could be to a Taco Bell or any type of fast food restaurant . So obviously . Batzli : Paul , I 'd like you to leave that up when you 're done and I 'd like Paul to clarify the record if anybody watching this , that what you 're suggesting has not been approved . And I want to make that very clear right now . Tim Anderson: I apologize for that . This is just an example . Anything to the north of 78th Street is an example . Taco Bell or any of the fast food , Hardee 's . Any type of fast food or any type of auto service area is going to produce a lot of noise . This land is zoned commercial . I don 't know how the owner of this land feels about having owner/occupied units within probably 50 feet of their building . These people who buy these units will . . .this area is developed , naive like we are I guess . They 're going to be coming to a Planning Commission 5 years from now complaining about the construction of a fast food restaurant . The construction of some type of auto body shop or car dealer . That is very , very close to an owner/occupied . To me it 's like maybe . . .of Chanhassen where they are that close . But you 've got to understand , this is at least 10 , probably 30 feet higher than this . Expect this part of this house or this unit probably 10 to 15 higher than the ground level down here . They will be overlooking it . You will not be able to buffer a berm as such on a down slope like that . You plant trees , it takes a long time for those trees to mature . So you 're going to have these , I bet you in 5 years you 're going to have the same people who purchased these units are going to be here just like we are in Saddlebrook , complaining about the development that will occur right down the hill . Second of all , the property values here . I would think Chanhassen would like to keep their property values at least steady if not rising . These won 't . I 'm not a realtor but I don 't think , especially in the end units here . They are very close to a commercially zoned property . So these people will not , will have very , will have some difficulty selling these properties and would probably face those property decrease . Renters , like I said , I lived in apartments . As an apartment owner , you don 't worry about land values . It 's more a convenience possibly that there is going to be a Taco Bell down the hill or grocery store or a K-Mart . It makes more sense to have that transition from commercial . Very high density . These people are not going to have a nice view of essentially 80-90% impervious . It 's not going to be parklike . Highway 5 is going to be right here . There 's going to be noise from Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 10 Highway 5 and these people were here . There 's no sound protection here . These unit sections come down the hill slightly if you look at the gradin plan . All we 're proposing is for the good of the city and the good of us , is to place these units or similar . . .townhouse units which are adaptable to the site without taking out oak trees . They 're . . .these types of units where they can be essentially dropped down the slope similar to what they were proposing for these . I 'd like to then put the apartments against - here which will provide a more logical and thoughtful buffer between very high density residential , the single family subdivision of with half acre lots . One other thing I wanted to cover here is Brad Johnson will talk about how much setback there is here but you 've got to understand . Our houses are 10 to 15 feet above these pond or wetlands . His development i . about 20 feet above that . If this was Fargo , North Dakota where you could plant trees , flatter than a tabletop . . .buffer wouldn 't bother me . That 'd be quite a bit . I 'd be very happy with it . But we are looking across a valley at it and then up 3 stories at it . And I 'd like to have you think about that . Is this really proper land use to have , proper land use transition to have it the way it is shown here . Do you want to keep this up? Batzli : Yeah , keep that up for just a minute . Thank you . Tim Anderson : I have some other topics to cover . Batzli : Paul , do you want to at least point to the map to the things tha are approved and the things that he was discussing that aren 't approved just to clarify . Krauss: Well the only thing that 's going to authorize to date that has been approved is the Target , right over here . That should be under construction shortly . This area out here , this outlot area is kind of conceptual but it is fairly similar to the various concepts that were reviewed with Target . Target was , there 's 4 to 6 outlots . Target was limited to only 2 fast food restaurants . You are limited as to lighting . — It 's got to be 1/2 candle to the property line . Every property in Chanhassen has to adhere to that . Commercial hard surface coverage , max is 70% . In terms of what 's north of 78th Street , it 's conjecture . You _ know it 's hard to argue that this would never happen but then again , what we 're looking at right over here , which is off the map , is the City and HRA plans for having a central park out in front of City Hall . Between City Hall and 78th Street . That will be a focal point to the community . It 's a green area . It 's something actually fairly nice to look at . And one of the things we begun to talk about and it 's really conceptual at this point , is where the K-Mart is illustrated , we 've actually talked about that as potentially a senior housing site . But again it 's all conjecture . Tim Anderson: Well what is the zoning for this site? Krauss : It 's got commercial zoning right now . If we went with senior housing , we 'd have to rezone . Tim Anderson: Yes , similar to how our , or the property across from us is R-12 right now and we took a chance and we lost . This will be the same Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 11 risk it would take by putting those type of housing very close to and above the commercially zoned property . I also want to comment that City Center , or the park you 're talking about would actually be east of Kerber as I understand it . We 're not directly adjacent . Krauss: That 's correct . Tim Anderson: Yeah , so it 's not like it 's going to be adjoining it . Krauss: Which is just off the map there . Tim Anderson: Right , I understand that . Thank you . The second thing I 'd like to cover tonight is the ponding issue . Storm water . I have some background in it so I can say most of what I 'm saying with some confidence . Storm water 's been kind of left out of everything . You keep - hearing comments in the staff report about it and it will get fixed . It will get fixed . I 'm concerned that if you approve a site plan tonight that possibly it cannot be fixed properly . First of all they 're talking about enlarging the pond to the east . The farthest pond to the right on the overhead . If you look at the contours of that adjacent to it , they would be cutting into a hillside that presently has anywhere from 5 : 1 to 3: 1 slopes which is extremely steep . There is a townhouse , a row of townhouses planned above it . Essentially you would walk out from that townhouse , probably roll down a 3: 1 slope and directly into the pond . I don 't think this would be very bright considering children will probably be living in those townhouses . So there 's a big safety issue there and I hope the City considers that . And second of all , I have heard from the Planning Department that these ponds are , with additional runoff , these ponds do not meet NURP standards , which is National Urban Runoff Program standards created by the EPA which I believe the City requires developments to meet . Developers to meet or somehow pay to have additional ponding trade somewhere else . And I would like to see some , where this NURP ponding is going to go because there is downstream of the two ponds are wetlands and I believe just downstream of those is Riley Creek . And I don 't think you want to put a NURP pond in Riley Creek . So I was just curious as to where these NURP ponds or this additional volume of water will be put and I think that this should be commented upon before approval . And finally , the staff report states that the development of a single comprehensive drainage system will maximize the effectiveness of nutrient removal effort while reducing the City 's long term maintenance cost . First of all it doesn 't , maybe at one time it did have a single comprehensive drainage system . The drainage now goes in three directions . I don 't know the percentages exactly . Some of it goes directly into the farthest east pond . Some of it goes into the wetland . Protected wetland area . The Type II wetland directly to the northwest . Some of it will be put to a storm sewer system along Kerber and actually , and then put the drain to the east towards Chanhassen Pond Park . This isn 't a comprehensive or a single comprehensive drainage system anymore . And it 's not low in maintenance anymore either . They 're proposing a sump manhole to catch sediments . Sump manholes is one of the most highly maintenance , high maintenance things you can put in . They have to be cleaned out quite frequently . And they 're also planning a sedimentation basin where I cannot see they can fit one . Essentially in the wetlands . The protected wetland to the northwest . That , if they build it , would be very small and Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 12 - would have to be cleaned out quite frequently . That is not low _. maintenance . Finally I 'd like to know why , somehow has the Planning Department or developer commented on why on-site ponding was not considered at this site . I believe there are locations for it . They just deny that they say they 're not there . I want to comment , I think the oak- trees have been commented on quite a bit . If you saw on the video that looks like they may be removing more oak trees than they say . If you look at the parking lot . This area , these are oak trees right here . They 're - overhanging the parking lot . Oak trees are very sensitive to earth work and you have to do earth work to build a parking lot . And those weren 't counted in the 2 that he said would be lost . As you have read in the staff report , or at least may have , the engineer technician who reviewed the grading plan basically said all the oak trees would be lost . I saw a new grading plan . I agree that it probably will be , it 's much better than the original one but I question that it 's a matter of trust . They say , - originally one end said one tree would be lost . Now two trees . When wil it stop? I would like to see some type of proof and this proof includes that there be a detailed survey done of all trees greater than 6 inches in diameter . Then the developer should go through and identify which trees are lost due to construction . And then have , the developer should pull some type of bond so that any oak trees that are lost up to approximately_ 3 to 5 years after development could , would have some financial penalty for that . The bond would be used to replace those trees because oak tree are very sensitive in the long term to development . Not just during construction . And also the developer should replace all landscaping if i- dies . Especially in the buffer areas between our houses and the units . Steep slopes . Page 5 of the staff report says that planned unit developments are to encourage the following . Preservation of desireable _ site characteristics and open space . Protection of sensitive environmental features including steep slopes , mature trees , creeks , wetlands , lakes and scenic views . They 're not doing a very good job on the steep slopes . These are 4: 1 , 3: 1 slopes he 's planning to build on . Very sensitive to erosion . Many communities including Carver County , which of course has no zoning authority in Chanhassen , has a limitations and setbacks to construction on steep slopes . I don 't know if , I 'm not - familiar enough with Chanhassen 's zoning ordinances about construction on steep slopes . I ' ll be curious to get a comment about that when I 'm done . Especially since these units will be constructed halfway down an 80 foot _ hill or more than halfway down . It does also kind of destroy a very good view which is not something that should be encouraged . And finally I war to talk about something that I 'm not sure . I 'm not an expert on but I know a little bit about this . Enough to be dangerous . I see that Mr . Svoboda , the City 's consultant on wetlands is here and maybe he could eve comment on it but I got one more overhead . This area here , this is approximately where the road will be built . This does have the hydrology matching a wetland . It 's approximately a half acre in size . It also contains blanco soils . Blanco soils is the same soils that are in this wetland and that were up here and also the wetlands adjacent to Chanhassen Park Pond . I would like to see this somehow addressed . Checked out . Is- it defined as a wetland according to the City of Chanhassen? I called Jo Ann Olsen about a month ago asking what a definition of a wetland would be . This is a Type II wetland I would guess . From my knowledge of it . - And she had told me that it would probably be protected and have to be Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 13 mitigated probably on a 2: 1 ratio . Loss filling of this wetland . That 's all I have to say , thank you . Batzli : Thank you . I 've misplaced your name . Is was? Tim Anderson : Tim Anderson . Batzli : Does anyone else wish to address the commission? Mike Henke : Hi . My name is Mike Henke . My wife Mary . We reside at 7560 Canyon Curve . I live directly , when you looked at the tape , when you saw the berm that runs inbetween the two existing ponds , I 'm looking straight at that building that 's on that hillside . To just make it short and sweet . I just , it 's really hard , there 's so many different , you asked in the beginning Mr . Chairman what the advantage would be to put it into the _ PUD and they said the preservation of the trees . And then on page 2 of your notes for tonight , it says the main , in the last paragraph , it says the main wildlife area around the wetland as well as the wooded hillside will remain untouched and protected under the proposal which is a complete falsehood because the marker that 's , the survey stakes that 's on the hill is 85 feet from the water . They 're taking that whole hillside out of there . . . .not be true but I 'm just really concerned about the trees I guess . I mean I 'm not trying to be looking at . It started out in the notes for the meeting in July 15th I believe where it says . . . 1 tree would be lost and then the letter he sent to us was 2 trees . On page 5 of your notes tonight it says a few trees . On page 9 of your notes tonight it says many trees . So I think that we need to give it some real serious consideration and maybe have them mark the trees so we know exactly what we 're talking about there . I mean you go a long way from 1 to 2 to even so many . Thank you . Batzli : Thank you . Dave Callister : My name is Dave Callister and I live at 7540 Canyon Curve . I apologize first of all for being late . I had another meeting so if I repeat myself , I apologize . When we first looked at this proposal it was hard to assess the impact on our particular neighborhood . I think I originally stated that we all agreed that there was going to be apartments or multi-family housing in this area someday . Or at some time or another and my intent was to minimize the impact of that work with the city . Work with the developer in minimizing that impact . As I look at the situation now with the survey stakes that have been placed there , I 'm totally , I can 't agree with where they 're placed . It 's not minimizing the impact . It 's 85 feet to the pond . By the time you go straight measurement on the survey , it 's probably less than that . All of our houses are 75 feet away . Like I said , I don 't know if I misunderstood originally where this was located but I really , I really can 't understand why they 're located so close to the pond area . As outlined , did they get a copy of this here? That 's fine . I 've got one I was just wondering if they had seen it yet . I don 't know if this has been mentioned tonight . I know it was mentioned before regarding the logical transition for any type of development or any type of zoning would be from single family to mid-range family to high density . Multiple family dwellings . I don 't see that here and I realize there are some circumstances that we can't control but like I said , all Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 14 we 're trying to do is minimize the impact and enjoy our property . I think we all paid a premium on our lots that face this area and one of those reasons being the trees . As you , the tape was shown? As you saw in the tape , it doesn 't make sense . The trees are going to be taken down . There was 5 of them with one building . It 's hard to tell from the 4 stakes in -- the ground . So I guess that 's one thing I would like to have required of the developer is to stake that property out to show the citizens . To show the City where those buildings are going to go so there 's no question about it . I complained before about them showing the solid stand of oaks It 's not on the maps anymore but it was a solid stand of oaks and it was my impression that no development would come on the north side onto those oaks and that 's not the case with the stakes that are presently out there- Another thing that I would like to address would be the roofline . The developer has worked with us on reducing the impact by reducing the roofline so that it looks like , not a full 3 story walkout . But he 's only. done that on a few buildings and I would like to request that the Plannin Commission consider making that a condition on the rest of the buildings that face the Saddlebrook development . I believe they 're only on like these three and I guess I would like to see them on all of the apartments that are facing the development because those are going to be sticking up out of the trees . And I would rather , much rather look at a roof than a full facing and then a roof on top of it . As mentioned before , I think - that the Planning Commission needs to have more detail information on the landscaping part of it . The existing trees and so on . A site survey showing exactly where every tree is located. There 's so much confusion . _ Everybody says something different about where those trees are located . Those trees are an asset not only to our neighborhood but to the entire community and as contained in all of your ordinances , you do whatever you can do preserve those . So I think that more details need to be presented` so that we can find out where exactly those are and the ones that we 're going to lose , we need to know that in advance and not find out later that somebody chopped down a tree they weren 't supposed to . The only other - thing would be a traffic study and we talked about it a little bit last time . I don 't know if the County is doing a traffic study on Kerber . Or not on Kerber , but on Powers Boulevard there but I don't know whether the City has ever , is considering doing a traffic study but anytime you add that many residences in a type , high density type situation , you 're going to have an impact . Not only on traffic but other things and I hope that gets addressed before thise project proceeds . In closing I guess I 'd jus'- like to say that I do appreciate the fact that the development up in the northeast corner was changed . That 's certainly acceptable to me . The thing that I do oppose is the proximity of these three buildings right here . And to me the location of those three buildings are unacceptable . Thank you . Batzli : Mr . Callister . This document that was signed by the residents , - was this ever given to either the developer or City staff? Dave Callister : No . This was something that was developed in the last 2- or 3 days , yeah . After our neighborhood meetings and after our initial meeting . Batzli : So the Chanhassen Planning Department hasn 't seen it? Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 15 Dave Callister : No . They have not . Some of them are the same concerns but there are a few additional ones . Batzli : Thank you . Would anyone else like to address the Commission? _ Greg Hromatka: My name is Greg Hromatka . I live at 7580 Canyon Curve . About that survey that you have . That 's basically a thumb nail . Meant to be concise . Readable for you all and for the persons that we went to to get to sign it . It 's always been talked about the oaks . I wouldn 't know an oak if it bit me but that 's probably the only way so I want to be sure that there 's big trees . Elms , lindens . Maybe they 're not as desireable as others . Actually when they 're this big around in the trunk and they 're going to take 20 years to replace , they 're pretty desireable . And so I think that has to be considered too . Batzli : Did you give your name and address? I 'm sorry . Greg Hromatka : Yes . Bob Bohara : I 'm Bob Bohara . I live at 7510 Canyon Curve . I 'm concerned about the transition area . As they said on two sides it 's high density residential and on the other it 's commercial . If they build apartments on the north side then , you 'll have high density on that side too so you ' ll have this small little area of owned homes there with lesser desireable type buildings all around them . That seems to be not good for the people who buy those homes and having the high density apartment buildings next to ours doesn 't seem to the best way to go from transitioning from this higher density downtown like area to the single family homes in our area . We live actually on the western most end . Back over here and I have a couple additional concerns that weren 't mentioned . I 'm not very good at reading these things but it looks like the road they 're putting in is very highly graded in that area and that 's something of a concern to me . One of the places for the extra drainage is down here . . . lines , that 's very steep in there . I don 't see how they 're going to get any extra drainage in there for this property development . And the final thing is that _ there 's also supposed to be a path here . It 's actually a city requirement , not something the developer volunteered to do . That area is right along CR 17 . I think the plan at the moment is to put it in the utility easement and at least part of that is very highly sloped away from Powers Boulevard there and I 'm concerned about how they 're going to do that . It will take some kind of heavy build-up there or terracing or something and once again you run into this wetland . . . Batzli : Thank you . Mary Henke : I just have a short thing . My name is Mary Henke . I live at 7560 Canyon Curve and on page 3 of the staff notes , at the very bottom . It says the residents to the north would also like no trespassing signs placed on the property limits . I would just like to know if that is still going to be part of the development . If that 's going to happen . And also , remember when I asked you about those , the buildings . On Monday at our meeting I asked you , are they going to be on top of the hill and you said yes . And after the stake was placed there , I don 't know a couple of Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 16 days ago , it 's like right in the middle of the hill . I would like to knoAL why that was changed . Thank you . Batzli : Do you want to address that Kate? Respond to her question . Aanenson: I went out and looked at the stakes today myself . I was kinc of surprised as far as the location . I 'm not sure how they were placed . We had the same concerns about them . Paul and myself went out and looked- at those . It 's obvious that there 's going to be more trees taken out tha even originally ourselves thought . That 's why I raised the question tonight . We 'd like to see more detail in that . I 'd like to hear from tha developer . Exactly what those stakes represent . He did it out after the meeting that was held with the neighbors last Monday night . They asked for some stakes to be placed and I 'm not sure exactly what they represent . If they 're off-set . If they 're on corners of buildings or what but I would agree that the ones that are in the trees come down the hillside a ways . The other ones to the , that are on the northeast side , that 's the way I always felt they would be located . . .misunderstanding on that but th- other ones we are concerned about that location. Ahrens: The three buildings? All three of them? - Aanenson: Those three buildings that Mr . Callister pointed out . The 8 unit . The two 8 unit rentals and the one 12 unit building . Batzli : Is there anyone else who would like to address the Commission at this time? Okay . Jack Thien: My name is Jack Thien . I live at 7570 Canyon Curve . I 'd like to go on record that I agree very strongly to what some of the other people have talked about here tonight . And I also would like to thank all of you for taking the time and hearing our concerns . One thing that I do want to point out or make mention of is , I live on the , it would be the furthest pond to the east . And this past summer the berm that was moved back a little bit closer to Kerber I think in itself has created a little- bit of a problem in water runoff . Okay . So it brings up a strongly concern of mine of what 's going to happen to all this extra runoff that 's going to be coming from that adjacent development . Being that close , I have many opportunities to see what that water looks like going to that pond and coming down the street , Canyon Curve at times when it 's a fairly strong rain is considerable in itself but now in addition to that , with that berm being moved back a little bit , there 's an additional at times a- river that actually comes through there . And it 's actually starting to cut through , cut past Greg and Cindy 's home . Coming right across to mine and there 's already a fairly good sized , I don't know what it would be - called . A little canyon it looks like almost . And each time that it rains it creates a more mitigation of that soil and stuff that actually goes into the pond and I 'm not sure what to do about that myself . But _ it 's getting worse so my concern is also with all that impervious land that 's going to be up there , where 's all that really going to go? And ca you really make that pond big enough to handle all that extra runoff and personally I don 't think so because of what I 've already witnessed so . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 17 Batzli : Thank you . Dave , are you aware of the area that he 's talking about? Hempel : Yes I am Mr . Chairman . Recently this past summer three of the residents got together and applied for a grading permit to relocate a berm that was located in their backyards which is just north of the most easterly pond . Essentially they did that to create a more useful backyard and essentially the same drainage pattern is being maintained . There may be with the relocation of the berm , there may be a more concentrated flow through the most southerly yard but it can be taken a look at . I know they 've resodded the yards up there and it 's been all approved by us . Batzli : Okay , thank you . Would anyone else like to address the Commission? Cindy Hromatka : Hi . My name is Cindy Hromatka . I live at 7580 Canyon Curve . One thing I just want to go back to this transition area thing one more time . In the City Council meeting on August 10th , Mayor Chmiel did ask that they demonstrate why it cannot be switched and I don 't see that that has happened at any point here . No one has demonstrated yet why we cannot have the owner/occupied facing us . The rental on the other side . I 'd like to see that done because obviously we all want the owner/occupied there and I think it makes sense and I would think the City would see it the same way . Would see that the same way . So I 'd like that . The other thing is the oak trees again . I was told , Brad Johnson told me before the City Council meeting last time that he had talked to someone and they had told him that they actually needed to have driplines between , well two driplines from the oak trees . That they couldn 't build within the two drip lines in order to preserve those trees and that they would incorporate that into the plan . That obviously hasn 't been done . You know in a lot of cases as Tim pointed out , they are building within one drip line . I would like to see an expert maybe consulted on this to find out how close you can build to oak trees in order to preserve them you know like 3 to 5 years from now . That 's a big concern . You destroy those roots and then the oak trees die way down the road when the developer is done . Those are the two issues I want to talk about . I 'd like to see something that would show why we can 't have the owner/occupied facing us . Thank you . Batzli : Thank you . Randy Swatfager : Hi . My name is Randy Swatfager . I live at 7511 Canyon Curve and I think one of the things I wanted to address was the lighting . We had talked with Mr . Johnson before and he said he could work it into the covenants . The size of the lightings . The height of the lighting . The lighting itself so if you look at it in perspective , we ' ll be looking up at this and there will be a lot of light pollution coming down from that site . So I 'd just like to have some assurance that the lighting will stay where it 's needed . Not where it isn 't . Obviously enough to make the residents in there feel comfortable but not enough to make us feel uncomfortable . And the only other thing I 've got is , I believe traffic is going to be horrendous in that area . I 've got kids going to school shortly that will be walking that area and I haven 't seen any studies , as has been mentioned before . If that 's been addressed or not . I 've got a Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 18 question for Ms . Halla . The trees that you 're going to be putting in , what size will they be? Kay Halla : . . .there are certain standards that the City . . .how many units , and it 's a money thing . Randy Swatfager : It 's always a money thing but I mean . Kay Halla : So the size is really , it could vary and I can 't say at this time . . . Batzli : Excuse me sir . Kate can probably help you on the size of the , - the minimum sizes at least . Aanenson: Well there 's a conifer standard and a deciduous standard . - 2 1/2 inch caliper on deciduous and 6 inch on a conifer . Krauss: However , we recognize that trees don 't grow overnight and we often times when it 's warranted , insist that trees be installed at 12 foo heights and 4 inch diameter trees . It 's very difficult to do that across an entire site . Really it does cost a tremendous amount of difference . But where screening needs to be provided quickly , we do . . . - Randy Swatfager : So in layman 's terms they 're going to be what size? Krauss: The minimum they can be by ordinance is 2 1/2 inch diameter , 6 foot height for conifers . But again , on a number of instances , I 'm not sure exactly here but we have the ability to say no . You cannot put . . . What 's needed back here is 10 to 12 footers at installation . Randy Swatfager : Are you thinking of doing that? , Aanenson: Well I think that was one of the things that came out of the neighborhood meeting is that the residents had asked for in those areas that screening needs to be done , that Mr . Johnson had committed to put _ that in immediately . Randy Swatfager : Yeah , we keep asking some things but we never . Aanenson : Yeah well I put the , I think I 've got a lot of the comments the conditions . The lighting is in one of the conditions . That was addressed and the staff put that . Randy Swatfager : Yeah we know it 's a condition but we 're just trying to put it in perspective and get some details on these things . Farmakes : Paul isn 't there also probably , we 've had landscape people in here before talking about if you put too big of a tree in , you greatly increase the chances of a dieback as the years go on within 5 years . Is - that? Krauss : Well , Ms . Halla can probably reflect on that . I think Halla 's _ known to have the biggest tree spade in the State but yeah , there is a limit to it effectively and there 's a limit for what kind of soils you ca„ Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 19 put it in . Also , you can 't get one of those trucks on steep slopes . Kay Halla : Can I make a comment? At the nursery we ' ll ball and burlap , which you can manually plant . Balled and burlapped trees . 3 1/2 inch trunk diameters for deciduous trees . When you get into 4 inch , it 's recommended to go with a smaller tree spade . Then you can go along up to 18 inches . A real huge one but it is difficult on it , you know depending on access and that kind of thing to get a spade in certain areas . But in _ some areas but it may not be possible but the maximum would be a 3 1/2 inch balled and burlap . That would be safe to handle . Randy Swatfager : I guess keeping it in perspective , when it 's on the hill . Here 's the house and here 's the tree . I mean we 're still looking at the house so I think it 's all the more important for us to keep the trees that are standing . We keep hammering away on that point but it 's something that we 're going to be living with here so . I just got one question for Mr . Johnson . You had mentioned the median priced home of the townhomes would be $90 ,000 .00 , is that correct? Brad Johnson: What I said was that the , under $95 ,000 .00 . Randy Swatfager : Under 95 . What would be the lowest point in that? Brad Johnson: Probably about 70 . Randy Swatfager : Would these be the higher priced ones? Brad Johnson: Absolutely . They may run 110 . . . Randy Swatfager : Okay . Just once again , I just want to go over some of the same things that everybody else did . I don 't like the transition . I 've got a question with the traffic and I guess we 're looking for the Council to follow up on our concerns and we appreciate it . Thank you . Batzli : Thank you . Would anyone else like to address the Commission? Is there a move to close the public hearing? Erhart moved, Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried . The public hearing was closed. Batzli : Kate , before we take comments from the Commissioners . Can you briefly run over whether it was in fact explored to move the renters , the rental units to the south , and if it was explored , why it wasn 't done . Aanenson: I 'll let Mr . Johnson answer that question . As far as what I know and I think he can explain in more detail , is his best alternative as far as the grading was to come back with just the owner/occupied in the northeast corner . Again , it 's a grading issue . I ' ll let him answer it in more detail . Batzli : So did you see a plan which moved it to the south? The rental units to the south . Aanenson: A flip flop plan? Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 20 Batzli : Yes . Aanenson: No . Batzli : So you never saw a plan? Aanenson: No . Just in our sitting down and meeting and looking at the issues why it couldn 't be done . Batzli : And what were those issues? Aanenson: I think I ' ll let him explain a lot of those . Batzli : Well I 'd like . Aanenson: The grading is the main issue . The amount of grading that would have to be done . And the types of the buildings . Batzli : And you agreed with his arguments that it couldn 't be done that way? Aanenson: Well it 's a trade-off . Of course it could be done . There 's a - trade-off . Krauss: The trade-off you know , anything is theoretically possible . You- can go out and start with a completely different product and maybe it wil fit . Maybe it wouldn 't . The way , trying to , you know what they 're trying to do with this market , this type of unit and the way it 's been designed , _ there 's significantly more grading required for the rental units than the smaller for sale units . Yes you can flip it if you want to but you basically wind up flattening large areas of the site which is then reminiscent to what the plan was 3 or 4 years ago and there 's a cost . I - mean if you 're willing to look at sacrificing , if in this scenario you 're willing to look at sacrificing the trees up on top , you can do that . Aanenson: Another issue too I was going to bring up is you recall the first site plan had larger 16 unit buildings . Again , one of those trade- offs is to reduce , the neighbors were concerned about the massing of those buildings . Those were reduced to 8 unit buildings along that side . Agai it kind of punches it forward a little bit more into the hillside and again we 're concerned about how far it 's going down but there has been some modifications . There was a . . .and staff was too about the 16 unit building up against the single family . So again , there 's another trade- off there going to two or three 8 unit buildings and what that means as far as spacing and how much land it takes up . On this proposal again to _ revisit this whole issue is trying to go with a lower profile . The proposal that was before this one had larger unit buildings . I think Mr . Johnson . . .and staff 's recommendation was to •make the smaller units . Reduce the massing and spreading those buildings out and that 's a trade- off issue . Batzli : Does it make more sense , everything else being equal , to put a - transition from owner/occupied to rental? From a pure planning perspective , do planners see any difference in owner/occupied versus Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 21 townhomes by way of transition from single family to general business district? Krauss: I can give you an answer but it 's probably going to sound kind of gobbely gook . There is nothing in the planning literature that 's been written since the 1920 's that insists on a hierarchy of zoning . It 's one of the original concepts of zoning . It 's long been surpassed . What most communities try to achieve is called performance zoning . Where theoretically you could make anything fit into any place given the proper design . Now most communities , Chanhassen included don 't take it to that extent but we have a PUD . One of the advantages of the PUD is that it 's a comprehensive project . It 's developed as a package . It functions as a package . Internally , from a land use design standpoint . I realize the residents are raising other concerns . But from a land use design concept , it doesn 't make any difference whether people live inside the 4 walls are paying rent every month or a mortgage every month . What matters , from a land use design standpoint , it makes no difference . Now I understand that you 're raising other issues about who 's living there and what their intent might be and how they might exist but in terms of a site plan , a site plan doesn 't know . You know it really doesn 't matter . It 's the concept of the building . You can take this thing to fairly extreme lengths should you so desire . We could ask Arvid to come back with a 4 or 5 story apartment building that only tinkers with a very small part of the site and will save everything . I 'm not sure that that would be found to be acceptable either but what you do is you try to find an medium here between significant disruption to the site and significant impact to off-site properties . Batzli : I have one other question . Does the assumption that it would be graded more depend solely on the type of building that they have come up with? In other words , they 've come in with a particular type of building that they are going to build regardless and so they have to grade the site to make it fit the building . I 've always been told that you pick the site and then you choose the building to go on it to fit the site . It seems to me like they 've kind of turned this on it 's head . Krauss: Certainly there 's an element of truth to what you 've said . You could come up with , I mean a lot of different variations that are deemed to have different amounts of impact . I could sketch out for you a single family development of that site that 's much more disruptive because the land area around each home is much larger . The yards are much larger . Each home is physically separated . You need to grade a bigger pad for each area . You 're talking about a site that 's guided and been zoned , it has been for many years , for high density housing . Within those parameters , what fits . I mean you have townhouse designs . You had quad home designs . You have multi-family 3 story , you know 3 story midrise kind of a thing design . Theoretically you could have a highrise . Within those parameters , I 'm sure somebody may be able to come up with a better idea but this is fairly consistent with what you 're going to be seeing with anything that would be consistent with that density . Batzli : Would anyone on the Commission like to hear from the developer on why they did not choose to go with it? Brad , do you have comments on? Planning Commission Meeting - November 4 , 1992 - Page 22 Brad Johnson: I 've got a couple comments . To get this tree issue out of- the way . I just looked at our plan . Our goal , and we may have screwed u but our goal is not to take anymore currently than 2 oak trees and looking at the plan , we actually moved the buildings back from the oaks . It is of fact that we take 5 to 8 linden trees and some of those that you saw that were the large trunked trees were lindens and elm . Maybe you want to speak to elms and lindens Kay as to their lifespan and are they fast growing trees or slow growing trees because we understand . We 've got oak trees you want to preserve and we 're trying to do that . And if we misplaced it or misstaked it or whatever , we 'll change that because that 's not our goal . Kay Halla : I haven 't been out since these stakes have been in the ground but when I was out earlier , I noticed that there were more of the linden - and elms along the slopes and I found more of the large oaks in the cente area where they are being preserved . There seems to be , there 's got to bC some sort of trade-off . That in order to preserve . Brad Johnson : These are the oaks . Supposedly . And these are lindens an things like that down here . So we 've had to move the trees away from the oaks . The buildings away from the oaks which then cuts into other trees .- Kay Halla : And it seems like in order to preserve that , which I feel is very important from a design standpoint . That central area of oaks which_ when I was on the site , that seemed like a very important part of the site . From not just the homeowners direction but from all directions . And I think in order to preserve that , some of these buildings have to go somewhere . You have to adjust them so rather than jamming then all on th- top of the site and destroying that , they maybe do have to come down alon the slopes a little and remove some of the elms . And again , I haven 't been out to see where these stakes are but the elms are a faster growing - as are the linden and as far as value , you know big trees are valuable ba as far as value compared to oaks , they 're a lesser value tree . They grow faster and the elms are a shorter lived tree . Batzli : Thank you . Resident: Could she answer how old those are and how much longer they would last if they were left there? Kay Halla : I 'm sorry I don 't know . - Batzli : How long does an elm live generally? Kay Halla : Well lately they aren 't living very long . They generally , they 're not as shortly lived like silver maple or something but they 're becoming pretty diseased with the Dutch elm disease and that kind of thing . So they 're not as long lived . And as far as value from a nursery- standpoint , we don 't even sell elms anymore because they 're trying to develop new strains of them but they are not , they don 't hold up to the disease so we 'd recommend something more like a linden or something fast growing . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 23 Resident : Well the trees we 're talking about provide the buffer between _ the apartments and our homes . I mean that 's the key issue . And being no matter what it is , mature tree . . . Brad Johnson: We 're replacing that with is a large amount of trees that are evergreen types . . . Batzli : Excuse me . The public hearing is over . If you have comments , please address them to me and if we have time , we ' ll get back to you . Brad Johnson: The other thing is , and I agree . You forget why you do things . One of the reasons , if you look at the Highway 5 corridor plan and all the concerns that people had about that . They wanted to maintain this stand of oaks so it looked okay from Highway 5 . They wanted to maintain as much of the trees over here as they could. . .so when we were approached by the site , you also have to deal with economics . Today you don 't build large apartment buildings . We 'd love to build a large apartment building . It 's a far more efficient way of doing things but you _ can 't finance them . And secondly , a large apartment building on this particular site would have to be set back again over in there . Secondly , we 're building to a market and the market happens to be today , if you 're going to build something you 've got to be able to either rent it or to sell it and if we 're going to build something for sale , the type of unit that we have put here is what 's selling . And that particular unit can 't be redesigned to go over here because this is flat and this is undulating . We did design some higher priced units than these for here . Now the question is , have we changed? Yes we did . We took out all the rental units that were here and all the rental units that were here , because we could perceive that there was a problem because in fact these people , this is a barren hill . And we 've cut the number of units there from like 28 down to 16 . We put this staggered unit . This is a far more expensive unit to sell than this one . The developer is at risk when these go on the market . We do not feel that they 're at risk here and the project will actually get done . So I would say that we are faced with the real marketing opportunities within the community of Chanhassen and throughout the western suburbs . That this is the type of unit that sells . And I guess our , the reason we can 't really remove from that is we can 't come in here with a project we ' ll never complete by trying to design a for sale that would go over here . You can also see that the density drops. dramatically when we do that . So then we have to make up the density someplace else . And that 's , as I understand it , this was zoned R-12 and to me that means high density rental for the whole parcel . That 's what R-12 means . It could even be zoned up to R-16 . To me if the zoning was R-2 , R-4 , that is transitionary . That 's what I 'm used to seeing . Or even R-8 but this is R-12 and so someplace in the world , in the process of approving both Saddlebrook originally . After this was done , the City itself made the decision that they would want to encourage high density here whether it be rental or not . There 's no requirements I don 't think in any of your rules that say people can 't have to own versus rent in an R-12 . It 's considered to be an R-12 zoning . I 'm a developer . To me is a rental zoning . Now the current owners were aware of the zoning there . I 'm sure they could have contacted the City . I 've talked to the developer of that parcel a number of times and he 's always told me they were aware of it and he put up , there 's a buffer . This particular point here is Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 24 about 150 feet from here , which is the property line . And up to about 250 feet from their houses . This point over here is about 200 . Some of thes parcels are as far as 300 feet . That 's a football field , away from the homes . We have tried to handle the site as well as we can Brian . I don 't know exactly if we could economically do it differently . We 've got it into the FHA approval for the rental sides so we could accomplish that . They like the project . And it 's not a low end rental . It 's tough to do any of these kinds of things today and to finance them . They like the project and that 's what , it 's economics when you get to that point . We don 't think we can design a for sale in the Chanhassen market , which is probably under $100 ,000 .00 for a townhouse , and put them on those sites . _. Batzli : So assume for a minute that you had a flat parcel . Would you pu_ the owned units to the south? Brad Johnson: I think we would , yeah . Batzli : Why? - Brad Johnson : No we wouldn 't , if it was flat . Right . You 're absolutely right . Batzli : You 'd put it to the north then? Because you could charge a higher price then? Brad Johnson: It 's a premium site . I think , I happen to run along the ridge up there and my feeling is , these are not the type of site , the way those units are designed , if you notice that the decks are on the second floor . They ' ll be able to look out over most everything . They 're not going to be looking down on roofs . They 're almost what 40-50 , at least 4, feet above what is going to go in next door . There 's pretty nice views from up above looking south. There 's going to be great sunsets . If you look down to the , south and west . If you look over at the Rottlund project . That 's on the freeway . Right up against the freeway . It 's a nice project . It 's sold out . As fast as they could build they , it sold .- It 's buffered by a freeway . It looks right into it . We don 't have to build a big wall because we ' ll look right out over it and I don 't think , in talking to the marketing guys , they see no reason why these will not bg sold . They think it 's a great site and a fine for sale site for this typ of project . And it 's economics . Now we 've tried on the other hand , Arvid , is there a difference between a for rent building and a for sale building? Arvid Ellness: From an architectural point of view? Brad Johnson : You 've only done 15 ,000 housing units . Is there a difference? Arvid Ellness : From an architectural point of view? Brad Johnson: Yeah . Arvid Ellness: No . It 's the bulk and it 's the enclosure . It 's the occupant . The issues that I heard from the residents . . .the occupants and Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 25 not the buildings . The building type I 'd say would have the same configuration and massing . If there was a market for that to sell , the design would be very similar . But I don 't think there 's a for sale market . Batzli : Thank you . Brad Johnson: So , in answer to a couple questions . We are , I 've got the plan here . We think we 're not on top of any oak trees and we ' ll warrant _ that , other than I think it 's two . We think we 're taking out 5 to 8 linden trees . A couple of those stakes could appear to be either way . There 's some porches there and the corners that we have put the stakes are actually on the porches . If they 're off , this is a computerized world and the whole thing is done by a computer , we 'll change the site plan . We 're not here to you know , not do that . We 've modified that site plan on the north side a number of times to try to meet the requirements of everyone and we did discover that there were more oak trees on the hill right here which forced us to move the building a little bit away from it . That 's been the goal . And as far as the water issues are concerned , we have basically put our fate in our hands of your engineer . And we 're simply saying that you hire the people . You tell us how to do it . I agree . There is not a quick fix over there for where the water 's going to go . Ideally it will go across the way through a large tunnel into the Eckankar property into what apparently is not at yet owned by the City and we dump a lot of water over there . Apparently we can 't do that yet so we have to deal with that kind of an issue . We 're willing to work whatever program meets all the various standards . And I think staff will admit that that 's what we 're trying to do . Isn 't that true . I mean Dave . It 's in your hands . Hempel : In the storm water consultant 's hands , yes . Brad Johnson: Well I know . Basically we 're working with it to try to do it the proper way , so that 's an answer for those two things . Thank you . Batzli : Thank you . Erhart : Now Brad , why are you requesting a PUD zoning? Brad Johnson: Oh , we 're doing the PUD primarily because we can preserve - and still get the density . Erhart : Who 's asking for it , the City or the developer? Brad Johnson: I think it 's a combination of the two . When I came here , all our projects lately have been PUD 's because we felt that even though they 're an onerous procedure , such as we 're doing with Target and Market - Square , it 's onerous because you have to run through twice . And secondly we can 't just go build . We could just simply subdivide this and pull a permit , am I right? Subject to the building approval but we felt that the site had a lot of sensitivity and by using the PUD approach , we could preserve the site . That 's from a developer 's point of view . Erhart: What advantages are you getting as a developer? Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 26 - Brad Johnson: We 're getting a higher amenity site , in our mind . Erhart: Okay , so it 's totally value . You 're not getting higher density . You 're not getting . Brad Johnson: We 've lowered the density . Erhart : You 're not getting a higher percentage of impervious . Nothing . Brad Johnson: Nothing . What we 're asking for is , we 're trying to have , and it doesn 't sound like we 're getting there but I think we 've come a long ways , a higher amenity site for the City . And I don 't know how else you would do it . Otherwise you could simply put a road through there . Subdivide each lot off into whatever is necessary for an apartment project and sell off the lots . We 're coming with , at risk with a complete projec4 saying , this is how the project 's going to look and then we 're trying to adjust for that . And it sounds like we 've got some problems in this area , which I agree . We did adjust this . We can probably adjust here . I 'm kind of surprised where the stakes are too . And that 's a risk we took because we didn 't think we had a problem . They asked us to put some stakes up so they could go look at them , so we did . And it snowed , so I haven 't gotten over into there myself but we 're trying our best , and remember when they say we are putting a lot of pine trees . 8 , 6 , 8 foot pine trees and you look up . Pine trees look pretty big most of the time when you look up at them . They ' ll block off that lower . They ' ll block - off , wouldn 't you say the lower level? And I don 't know what we can do about the upper level so . Batzli : Thank you . Tim , do you want to go first? Erhart : Well I missed the first meeting on this so I 'm going to let you fellows here , and Joan and let the meeting take the bulk of this . But just a couple things . I think in listening to the property owners to the north here , I think the , and I appreciate the fact that you 're losing an amenity that you had on a temporary basis but it ought to have been Clea- __ that this was zoned R-12 when these lots were purchased . You know you also got to keep in mind that the owner of the property is the owner of these trees . It 's not you and it 's not us as a city . So we have to keep this in perspective because it has a tendency , there 's a lot of emotion - into this thing and I 'm not sure it does any good . Your thing that I hea is amiss is that ignoring the fact that they 're putting in a lot of trees here to replace the ones that are being taken and I think the point that - I 'm going to make later in this meeting is that , you know what 's the life of these buildings . How many years do you expect to see these occupied on this site before they 're torn down? Brad? Anybody . Arvid Ellness: At least 50 years . Erhart : I ' ll bet you ' ll see them there a lot longer . Arvid Ellness : Well they can go 100 years too . Erhart : Yeah , and you know a lot of these trees , and while you may not b, living in those houses there in 30 years but a lot of these trees that arC Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 27 going to be planted are going to be fairly well along in 30 years . If you _ look through Chanhassen here , these trees weren 't here 30 years ago . A lot of these areas were farms . Most of the trees that you see have been planted so I think in looking at this thing , one of the things that we have to look at is what 's this development going to look like in 30 years . And it bothers me sometimes because I think we 're laying out these developments and I 'm hearing a tinge of it here tonight . We 're putting the owner/occupied , I thought I heard . Well I 'm not sure but we 're putting the owner/occupied maybe not in the best location because we 're trying to save trees . And I 'm not sure that we 're making good trade-offs there . Maybe we ought to look at the long term life of the project and see what it 's going to look like 30-40 years from now . Maybe you 're right . Maybe the owner/occupied buildings should be in the north as opposed to the south and we 're putting too much emphasis on these trees . Originally I , someone explain to me this trail that went along . On the original plan there was a trail down by the wetland? Krauss: The original plan shows a trail traversing . Erhart : On the south side? Krauss: Yeah , on the south side of the wetland . It had been requested by the Park Board . It was thrown in by the developer who thought it was a good idea . Erhart: It was going to go across to Kerber? Krauss : Yes . Erhart : And we 're taking that out when the developer volunteered to put it in? Krauss: The residents objected to the proximity to their homes . We realized we could put a sidewalk . . .street anyway . . . Aanenson: We 've got sidewalks on either side of the street so it was thought that . . . Erhart: I think you 've got to be crazy . This is an obvious place that the developer 's willing to put that trail in along that wetland and . . . not only just the people who own the homes to the north . It 's a tremendous amenity to be able to walk along an amenity for people of this community as opposed to putting the trail along the street . It 's just unfathomable to me that we would tell the developer not to do that because it 's a much bigger inconvenience to the people who are going to live in those apartment buildings in that they 're going to have people walking close to their residences . If he 's willing to do that , I think we ought to leave it in there . Let 's see . Going through the report . What are we going to get out of a street study? Aanenson: I 'm not sure it 's warranted . They felt strongly because the County had asked for it . Because we kind of looked at this when we did the superblock area for the West 78th Detachment project . Where the Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 28 lights should be and that 's sort of the issue . I 'm not sure that 's warranted but Dave may want to add . Erhart: What 's the worst that 's going to happen? Are we going to chance Kerber and Powers because of this study? Aanenson : No . Erhart : So what are we spending the money for? Aanenson: I think the deceleration lanes is what we 're looking at . Krauss : Yeah , the County Engineer raised the question of the intersectio on the west side and how that relates to West 78th Street which will be in the area of how it relates to Highway 5 . It will function in the big system but as Kate points out , when the Target proposal was brought in , w expanded the traffic study for that to include this intersection so we became comfortable that it works . Aanenson: I think the issue still is , as Dave , is a deceleration lane . Erhart : Currently what the County is requiring . Hempel : The County is the one with the issue with regards to turn lanes . Deceleration lanes . By-pass lanes on Powers . That , I anticipate , would — be the major ingress and egress through this development since this is th closest access to Trunk Highway 5 . Erhart : Okay . So the developer 's not offering to put the lanes in at this time? Hempel : I don 't think we 're totally aware of what lanes were needed out there at this time . Erhart: Well that 's the purpose of the study . Hempel : That 's correct . Batzli : But when we did the traffic study for the Target proposal , we didn 't take into account the density at this site yet? Krauss : Actually it took into account higher density . Aanenson: Right . It 's just what those decel lanes should look like in more specifics . Erhart: Do we actually have an ordinance that says we can 't have more than 7% grades? Or is that a policy? Krauss: Yes . It 's in the subdivision code . Hempel : We have granted variances to it in efforts to save trees or reduce grading limits , yes . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 29 Erhart : Okay , and I was a little confused on the storm water . Is all the storm water ultimately going into an existing wetlands someplace? That 's the objective? Hempel : There 's 3 different components , yes . Ultimately it will end up in , all 3 components will end up into a wetland . Erhart : And we 're not doing NURP ponds because there 's not enough room? Hempel : We 're going to attempt to design a sedimentation basin to NURP standards along Powers there . In that area . Erhart : Okay . And then lastly , why are we requesting a conservation easement over the wetlands when the wetlands are already essentially preserved by our wetlands ordinance . They really can 't do anything with the wetlands , without a wetland alteration permit , which is a fairly arduous process . Why do we duplicate? It says the conservation easement shall dedicated to the City over the wetlands on a parcel already protected . Why do we duplicate? Again , it costs more money . Hempel : I think we 've done it in the past just so it shows up on the Title of the property . So the property owners are aware of it . That it is a conservation easement . And restricted to what can be done in these areas . In this circumstance there is a multi-rental type unit . Erhart : Well it just seems like again more duplication and more expense so . Batzli : Where does the expense come in Tim? Erhart : Well just writing the easement and you 're going to have to define where it goes . You 're going to have to go file it at the County . I don 't know . It 's not so much I guess in this kind of a project but it gets more what we 're talking about later . I ' ll pass . Batzli : That 's it? Erhart: That 's it . I mean otherwise I think it 's , well again I haven 't seen the first pass so these are comments are based on a pretty short . . . Batzli : Okay , Ladd . Conrad: First I wanted to comment about lighting . Are we concerned about lighting the elevation , Kate? Aanenson: Well there wasn 't , they ' ll have the street . Our standard street lights on the public street but on the interior , where the buildings are located and the parking lot areas , there wasn 't any lighting shown , so we want to see that specifically . And then the neighbors were concerned , the neighbors to the north were concerned about floodlighting to the back and their privacy . So we want to see that specifically to limit that . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 30 - Conrad : Just in general , and we sure hear the neighbors comments . I think that some of us who have been around on this Commission for a while always knew this was going to be a high density development . Maybe you didn 't but for years and years we were , this was the logical place to put it . So as we see this coming in and I guess you 're going to probably hea- some comments that they 're not sensitive to your concerns and I hope it appears that we are . Yet on the other hand , in our minds , at least in mine , this was the area that we were going to put apartment buildings on .- And you can see that the developer is trying to , you can make compromises You can save trees or you can go up and elevation and in my mind , over the years , I 've tried to make some of those compromises and I think in this _ particular case , the apartment buildings was always something that I thought was what 's going to go here . It looks like what 's being develope in my mind , and I 'm not a planner but I 've been around for a little bit . In my mind what they 're proposing is fairly decent . Hearing your concern- about who 's living where . That 's a tough issue to handle . This is the right place in my mind for a high density . I think the developer has taken it down a little bit . It 's a quantum leap better than what we looked at before . I 'm concerned , as you are , with trees and I think we 'v heard that and I think we 're going to do something about that . I think Mr . Johnson is trying to be as sensitive as , well we 'll see where trees are . I guess I 'd like to see some sort of , what we call a landscaping plan . I 'd like to know what trees are going in and what trees are going out at some point in time . I think that 's important . Not every tree 's going to be saved . It 's just not . And we can 't take everything away from this R-12 district . That 's the way we planned it . That 's the way it 's been for years and years . It 's a balancing deal and hopefully we can make it as sensitive as we can but you 've got to remember that there will be _ new plantings and I 'd sure like to see what those are . I don 't believe property values are going to disintegrate one bit . And we 've reviewed these property value issues for a long time . And to my knowledge the economy changes some property values out but I don 't think the way I see this is going to effect anything . Dave , I 'm concerned about what the residents are talking about in terms of drainage and whatever . It seems to me , we have a PUD here that , and it 's a large site PUD . We should be - able to develop something that 's not second rate in terms of all the things we 're talking about . Drainage and protecting wetlands . Not just funneling water to wetlands so I 'm assuming we can do a good job and the _ word assume is probably dangerous but it 's one of those things that we have a large site and I can 't imagine that we can 't design the drainage t our standards which I believe are pretty good in the city . Or they 're approaching a real comprehensive type of program . So again , my feelings -- are to protect the trees . I don't want to protect them all . I think there 's some reason that we have to , that the developer has the right to use this property . I would like to see how the trees are coming out and _ I thought I heard the developer say he 's sensitive to that and I think we need some kind of a plan . I do want to see the drainage . I want to be convinced that the drainage is being properly handled and Kate is telling me that the lighting can be a concern . I think I ticked off some things - that the neighbors were saying . If I haven 't responded , it probably mean that I didn 't , I wasn 't sensitive to the particular concern that you had . Those are my comments . - Batzli : Thank you . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 31 Conrad: The trail , yeah . And you won 't want me to hear talk about this one too . I love , when we have natural amenities , it 's great to put trails next to the natural amenities . I know it 's going close to your backyard and I understand that . And I 'm not going to change . I 'm not going to take up this position right now . But , very seriously , that 's where a trail should be . Right next to the wetlands . If we open up to people that can actually experience the habitat and the nature down there . That 's where I 'd be . I 'm not going to bring that issue back up . It 's out right now . The developer 's taken it out . But I thought I 'd give you my preference . Amenities in Chanhassen should be open . That wetland is an amenity and I 'd like to , if I were designing from scratch , I would have kept that trail there . One other comment , when Tim is talking to you about trees . Don 't think he 's not sensitive to trees . I think he 's real involved in the Arbor Day program . He 's probably planted more trees in Chanhassen than anybody else . Well there 's no doubt about it . So when he 's making these comments , it 's not that he doesn 't care about trees . Batzli : Is that it? Matt . Ledvina : I had a question regarding the for sale units on the south side of the project . I was looking at my grading plan here and that hill on _ the south side , the units go right up to it and I 'm wondering , are there retaining walls at the parking lot? On the ends of the parking lot and how does that all work? So there are retaining walls over there? Okay . And what is , how large are those retaining walls? Brad Johnson: You mean height? Ledvina : Yeah . What are we looking at there? Well a related question to that . I guess I could see that they 're likely in the vicinity of 10 to 15 feet or so . Or least that 's what it looks like from the grading plan . Brad Johnson: The width or height? Ledvina : Height . Brad Johnson: Well I don 't think so . Ledvina : Okay , then I 'm mistaken here . Arvid Ellness : It varies but it 's in the range of about 4 to 6 feet . Ledvina : Okay . I was concerned about how that would look from the Highway 5 location there . So essentially the retaining walls connect the building all along that south face , is that pretty much? Brad Johnson: Yeah , and then there are plantings in front of that . _ Ledvina : Okay . And then there 's like a , is there a walkout or something to that side? No , just windows? Okay . Alright , I was just , I didn 't quite understand how that was all laid out and concerned about how that would look from Highway 5 but we are talking . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 32 Brad Johnson: I guess what happened here and we put a lot of focus on what this looked like from , we started out what it looked like from TH 5 and now we focus on . . .what it looks like from the north . . .We are concerrie_ about that . Ledvina: Okay . Let 's see . One of the items in the staff report related to trespassing signs and also mentioned by one of the residents . I just. had a question . The residents are concerned with people trespassing on - their property so they want signs posted right at their property boundary is that the issue? Resident: The issue is that there 's two berms . Or there 's a main berm there right now and there 's a smaller one off to the side . Right now it ' being used in the summertime and in the springtime as a major cut through area . Anybody from the development beyond Kerber , walks down Kerber , cut— into the Saddlebrook development and walks down Canyon Curve and cuts right across the yard , . . .and back up the hills rather than . . . Ledvina : Alright . And a question that I had on the parking . On page E of the staff report we were indicating that we were concerned that there was insufficient visitor parking for the rental units . Has this been resolved Kate? Aanenson: No . I 've spoken with the developer and they can pick it up cn the other side . They are short the handicap stalls so that is mentioned — in the building official 's letter too . Ledvina : Okay . Is there a condition to that effect? Aanenson : Yes there is . 11 . Ledvina : Okay . And I remember when we first looked at this in the concept stage . Steve , when he was looking at it he had concerns about th parking actually for the for sale units . And now we made modifications there . Was that to decrease the density along this south side to provide— for more parking there and were those changes made accordingly? Aanenson: Well what they did . The ordinance doesn't require that but we felt like it 's necessary based on the way this is laid out . I 'm not sure that the wording is such to remove density to get it . I mean that 's happened anyway . But they have provided additional visitor parking which . . . into those for sale units . Ledvina : But the number of for sale units along the south side , is that essentially the same as the concept proposal? Aanenson : On the south side? Ledvina : Yes . Aanenson : Yes . Ledvina : Okay . Let 's see , I think that 's all I have for now . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 33 Batzli : While we 're talking about parking . Dave , in your opinion memo of October 27th , you talk about the 12 private service drives are too many and you attached a sketch but that wasn 't one of your conditions . That any of these can be blocked off . Apparently you were just trying to , was it just get rid of one or , that 's an old layout isn 't it? Hempel : I just tried to point out wherever it would be possible to eliminate an access out onto the major , I guess it 's called Oak Park Road , would be beneficial I guess from a traffic turning standpoint . I felt Oretty confident that it would be able to accommodate on at least one of the parking areas . To eliminate that access point out there . I may have inadvertently missed that as a condition of approval . Batzli : Because it wasn 't included in any of your conditions . Hempel : That is correct I guess . It would be appropriate if we could reduce . Brad Johnson: Kate , didn 't we take this one out? Aanenson: That 's the one we talked about asking to remove it . It got omitted . Brad Johnson: Not on our plan . Aanenson: We 've spoken to him about it . It did get on there as a condition of approval . He 's aware that we 've asked him to take that out . Batzli : Because on the October 22nd plans it was in there . Aanenson : Right . This was after we spoken to him about the conditions we _ wanted in there . So he has agreed to do that but you 're right , it 's not in the conditions . It should be added . Batzli : Jeff . Farmakes: I 'm going to touch off on a couple of things to start off with . There are issues on water runoff and sloping and trees . The developer said that the tree , the site plan needs some additional review and some additional work so I 'm not going to comment on specific issues on that . And the water runoff and so on , that 's really not my department . I 'm sure _ that the City and engineer can discuss that at length with some of the residents . The issue of the concerns that I saw on the statement that you brought forth . I 'm not sure , are you acting with the group here? Okay , and that 's a part of your association? It 's not the one individual? That 's a part of your whole group . Several of those comments resolve around existing ordinances in the city . Several of your questions . You should address that to the city staff . I 'm sure they 'd be happy to go over each one of those with you and comment on those . I hear a couple of words over and over again tonight . One of them is trade-off and the other one is change . We hear this over and over again here . A lot of people have a lot of anxiety to change , and that 's understandable . Many of you have just come out here or recently come out to Chanhassen . You built there . Saddlebrook I believe was built in the late 80 's . You have a nice Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 34 amenity that you 're looking at but as Tim said , that amenity is owned by another property owner that you 're viewing . And I think some of the issue here is responsibility . You 're asking the city to have a responsibility in developing this property . The developer has a responsibility to do a nice development within Chanhassen and come up with something that 's appropriate to the neighbors . However , at the same time he has a responsibility as a financial situation to do something that 's financial i feasible and that people are going to buy . You also have a responsibility to do your homework when you come here to maximize what you 're doing here-. You want the developer to make some concessions to you . I 'm assuming th you do and address your concerns . That 's understandable . I think some � F the work that you 're doing here , you need to address these issues in a _ communication loop between the city staff and the developer . Many of these things such as the list that you brought forth , as I said . These are things that are already covered in city ordinances and if you look into these things further , and again I know sometimes it 's hard to latch- onto atch-onto the right person . You can get a lot of these questions answered before you ever come into a public hearing . It would be helpful to you I think . To eliminate a lot of that . It would speed things along and it would lessen your effort here tonight . I think that the City and the developer has demonstrated a willingness here to work with you in resolving these issues . Perhaps if you selected one individual to represent you and come forth and work a little tighter and improve that - communication , things would go more speedily here . The history of that property we touched on earlier . I 'm familiar with the history of that property to the extent that in the early 80 's when Chanhassen was workin— on a master plan , I have to take some responsibility for the fact that t R-4 , R-2 is missing on that top ridge . I was in the audience with a group of homeowners , single family homeowners in the area that wanted the farm_ that your homes are presently on , to be single family zoned . The City wanted it medium density . In the ensuing process , that was changed . It was changed to single family . The idea being is that that development was going to follow along the lines of New Horizon, which was the previous development to the north on that property . Basically it 's a single fami development that 's wrapped by R-2 , R-4 type on the north/south and to t''e west . What you got is only to the north . You got that type of development to the north of your property because of a site problem . I : ran into a peat bog on that property and that 's that lake that you see there . Actually if the problem would have been solved in the overall design that you 're talking about , there would be duplexes or fourplexes where your homes are now . So in the long term thinking , yes you 're correct . There perhaps should have been another buffer zone there but had that been done , you wouldn 't be where you are today and that was a matte - of economics that was worked out between the City and the developer at a later date and I was not a part of that . We agreed that the general plan that they had was alright and we did not pursue that further . But then it brings me to the situation here . You have a responsibility when you purchase the property to know what your existing zoning is . When you co-s in here and deal with the situation , I think you have to assume some responsibility for that . And a city is only capable of doing so much . They have to work within the existing laws and the ordinances . They can arbitrarily say well the citizens don 't want it . We won 't put it here . Many times you certainly would like that. Sometimes to do that but we - don 't have the legal right to do that . We have to work within the ion Meeting Commission e 35 an 12 before vemb 9 1992 - Page as R rely the vember 4 ' that listed that certainly e master Plan has have t° admit that Property heY 're ! rules and the And SO you to developusing a POD which I cord :fisting dug hole there .r P property re you're andand ��, ever a ire their roP this case they 're us things that Y the 1 of l e ;toper is the zone . Now ea With some °f the The contour loop , lkineuld t ut . to 1yand deal The trees • The contour At rYin9 to maxim concerns are • thin that that You Ding to be co to me that within things loop is 9 in i ,ut • That your eemsome of tion em to me that the sI on - It would with communication in come upthat And it would se of fervor factor of have a improve this and importantwell have a lotalso imp position asork here and you But y° on this and s -ne time , an Your P ,s emotional homework u understanding done a lot of d , it our that You y as Tim said , really do your has shown really same cases you've t her nig think it would What of y ur q responsibility made areas o I tThat's my comment ' ssPooflb our comments r work If you'd do that . done some of You some and help You haven't process ens e1P this Proc fellow commissioners comments °f my defending tonight that they Joan . of gatzli � r listening tothe the comments of n say that that after one themu Well feel like I 'm project on ne Parents P Ahrens: I didn't hear rot -- andBrad Johnson , of all , I want the best Pfeel like we Sure , they They I almost opinion . Sure , mean homeowners • this Protect . you know , their we didn't want And Y d voicing 12 . That feel re e can project , c gfor being hereand was Zoned et I goesdon't think we taki - they scolding them this Prof they can g and I I ' that t Project towards them same thing here this Project , t the best attitude the exact front of my knew they don't wan realistic at ,d be doing right in recently. I that kind ° a paternalistic their shoesdidn't t get a have roteas nd I fought should If Imasure that I dwhen I did have a w with Lundgrenas only way you to want . And remember ' that's the ion be trying didn't lot of You And Commission the suremeetin a project was good • ow Planning that gets - house that I as I 'mthat Prof If You it's wheel this summer , sure Lha city - s the squeaky o done in meetings , also to make this it get anything City Council grease ghere . n and Baked tonight • meeting I I think they've squeaked I chaired the f it The trail . amenities - gatzli - Good for them .time • Let's d our naturalall our good • the first good idea around trails aroundasement5 ns Well , commentsa g have hadotters 11 their are Ahrens: a r that trails t we should should 9 in this city heard to think also think Lotus . The City to very have g t to that the city and I enders ,s a in the city , including �we have access But I think it but I lad in the As it is , ,s too issue . ands es everything • city . It The safety areas and wetlands for around have a beautiful Safety . drainage be a safety etY issue and we be going in . around big ,s going LO , not a safety problem , lots of kids that it's if it 's I f a trail won't s having you can assume nt building , ifi ren . �t buildings concerthink that y . the aPartme for Your the apartment spacing of don't living in ret of about the ed or is Dred now people around the P management question OHas that Chang the P 1ivlShould deal with the also had a Side . for You I thithey°90 ire , fSlerem mbQr on the south once esale units , 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 36 that still the same? I don 't remember why he had a concern with that except maybe it was just for parking purposes . Aanenson: That 's how I understood it . He wants the additional parking . Ledvina : Right'. He was concerned with the parking . Aanenson : Visitor parking . Ahrens: Yeah , I 'm not going to go into the drainage issues and everythi q else because I think those have been addressed adequately and I think tn, with the additional condition that was brought up tonight , I think that will , I trust that our engineers can handle that part . I guess those are my only comments but you know , I just want to reiterate that you have every right to be here and you 've got to make sure that this is a projec' you can live with . Even though that property 's owned by somebody else . Even though those trees are owned by somebody else , you do have . You 're— going to be looking at that and we do want to hear your concerns . I 'm sure that a lot of you were aware of the zoning but that doesn 't mean you don 't want the best plan on that site you can possibly get . That 's it . — Batzli : Okay , thank you . I have a couple of technical things that I we.: to ask first of all Kate . The driveway in the northeast sale units , takes a big old V , right hand turn . And we had just gotten done talking about how our firetrucks can 't get around islands in the middle of cul-de-sacs and I have to admit I didn 't read our Fire Marshal 's memo carefully enough to see if he commented on that . Did he? Aanenson: Yeah . What it has to do with Brian is the proximity of fire hydrants and he did show some relocations from those cul-de-sacs . Batzli : But what about the ability to get a truck in there? He didn 't comment did he? Aanenson : Not to my knowledge . Batzli : Or is that his number 7 which is the turning radius must be indicated . Brad Johnson: Brian . We 're not sure but we think that based on our experts , that the radius there is the same as the regular cul-de-sacs . Batzli : But see , they wouldn 't be able to , they 'd have to back out wouldn 't they? Krauss: That has the same radius that we have on our cul-de-sacs . Batzli : Where are the parking stalls on there? Maybe I 'm not seeing th, parking stalls . Aanenson: That 's why , he had asked for , what he 's asked for is for them to give specifics on the radius to make sure it works . That was one of the conditions of the Fire Marshal . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 37 Brad Johnson: They would have to back out . . . Batzli : I guess I 'd like to be consistent one way or another . And that 's on a discussion later tonight but I think we need to review these things . Whether it 's a circle or a V , same way . The number of drives , I guess that 's been handled in at least the color sketch . Are you happy with 11? I mean to me what 's the difference between 12 and 11? If there 's too many , does 1 really do anything for you? Hempel : Well , if it 's not needed , by all means it could be eliminated and I guess I felt that it could be . It 's not needed for a secondary access out there . Batzli : So you don 't mind all the other curb cuts? Hempel : I believe all the other ones would be necessary to promote traffic safely through it . Batzli : Given this layout of the buildings? Hempel : That 's correct . Batzli : Is it a safety hazard to have this many on this type of , what is this , a collector? Hempel : It 's getting to the collector status , yes . With the number of units and projected trips on the road , yes . That 's why we 've asked for a little wider pavement section through here . Than our normal 31 foot wide street . Here we 're requesting , and they are proposing a 36 foot wide face to face street . Batzli : So for example the one that 's on the outside radius of the curve , right when the road starts heading north . That wouldn 't be a safety concern? I thought we tried to avoid putting them on curves . Hempel : Is that the most westerly curve as you 're heading up the hill? Batzli : It would be just west of where the pool 's going to go . Hempel : I don 't believe there 'd be a site limitation with that access point . Batzli : Because it 's on the exterior of the curve? Hempel : Yes . Batzli : We heard several comments about sight line versus actual distance . When you 're looking at the grading plans and they 're talking about you know 200 , 300 foot buffers . Is that actual distance on the ground or are they looking , talking about as the crow flies kind of the line here? Hempel : I 'm assuming as the crow flies . With the grade out here it may be , if you were to take a measuring tape and run it along the ground , it Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 38 may be actually a little bit more but as the crow flies and scaling it off the drawings here , it is about 200 feet . Batzli : As far as Tim 's comments regarding the pond and Ladd I think followed up . They 're not to the NURP standards . We 're moving a lot of the water off of the site whereas currently I assume we don 't move as much of it off the site . It seems to me like there 's a lot of room somewhere on this site to do a good job on the ponds and including also perhaps , and I don 't know what the status of these particular wetlands _ are but why don 't we have a setback around the ponds? A do not disturb area which would be required under the new ordinance . Or will those be? Aanenson : We ' ll look at that when we do the law Brian . We 've tentatively identified this as an Ag-Urban so we can do mitigation . I ' m not sure if you understood what we 're doing as far as , what we 're tenatively looking at . What Bonestroo is proposing and that is that there be a . . . ( There was a tape change at this point in the discussion . ) Batzli : The trail by the wetland , can you give me the condensed version of why that 's not going in? Or couldn 't go in . Aanenson : You recommended at the last meeting that it be taken out . Th. City Council supported that too . Batzli : We recommended it? Aanenson: The neighbors felt it was an intrusion into their . Batzli : You were in charge . Farmakes: The developer said it wasn 't a major issue so . — Aanenson: Because the neighbors asked to have it taken out so I think . Farmakes: So it wasn 't , however at the time that we discussed this , it was a very fluid plan . Ahrens: I don 't think it was raised as a major issue . Batzli : Okay . Ahrens: Do you remember? Were you here? Farmakes : Who was here? Ahrens : I think I was the only one . Brad Johnson : What I said is , the neighbors came up with an objection — and I said no and the Planning Commission was sort of neutral on the whole thing . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 39 Farmakes: It wasn 't a major point guys . And when it got to City Council it was gone . Erhart : If we wanted it back in , would you put it back in? Brad Johnson : Would I? Erhart : Yeah . Brad Johnson: I guess that 's one of those , you know we 're having , we 're — trying to do some things for the neighbors at the present time . What I felt at the time was that the trail was a bigger issue than the trees . If you follow me . It was an emotional issue . They felt that the wildlife would leave the area and all those kinds of questions so I 'm trying to preserve the trees and I thought I 'd give away on that . I thought it was a good idea but I 'm not , from my point of view , you guys will have to tell me that but I think you were concerned about a trail there . Residents: Yeah . Brad Johnson: So I said , I agree and that 's where I left it . Resident: And the Park Board said that it wasn 't on your major trail plan and they saw no reason for it to go through . Resident: It 's also on a steep hill and you 'd have to dig into that hill and there was a concern about drainage as well as the sides of the path itself . . . Batzli : Kate , have we ever required , well I should , I haven 't asked the question this way . How long do we require a guarantee of trees after construction? Aanenson: One year . Batzli : Just one year? But for a saved oak tree for example . Aanenson: You can set something up different . Krauss: Normally for new landscaping , it 's a full growing season past the date of installation . As Kate indicated , we do have some flexibility to vary the standard for preservation . Batzli : Because we don 't have in our condition 9 , we say protected trees lost due to construction . How long would that condition last? Krauss: The way it 's worded , I mean once the construction is over and it 's still there , you 'd have to add a time extension onto that . Aanenson: Or bring an expert out to make a determination of the damage or something . Krauss: Yeah , it gets kind of difficult too . I mean we could say 5 years or 10 years or whatever but once a tree dies , what did it die from Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 40 at that point . You know our primary goal is to keep the equipment away from the roots . Keep the dirt from being impacted . Keep everything back far enough and take our best shot . Hempel : We could have these treed areas fenced off . We 've done that typically in the past to avoid inadvertent damage of the dripline and so forth . Batzli : But you 're talking about during construction? Yeah . CurrentlY _ the condition does require the fencing . It 's an issue of replacement . Do we , in the past we 've had several people go out and do the inventory and mark all this kind of stuff . Now that they 've gone out there and pounded in the stakes , do you want them to go out there and do a survey like that? Aanenson: They have submitted a tree survey . They haven 't done a tree - removal . I think that 's what was . Batzli : Right . Are we requiring that and/or should we be requiring that? Krauss : Yeah , I think in this case it certainly would resolve the question . As Kate pointed out , when we were out there tonight we had - many of the same concerns the residents did . That what we saw on the ground or in the snow wasn 't jiving exactly with what we saw on the plat . Batzli : Okay , but what do you recommend we do here tonight to ensure that what we 're looking at on this plan . Krauss : We 're looking for a tree removal plan that says , trees 35 thru 37 are going to be removed and nothing else will . And that 's what we will hold them to out in the field . Batzli : Do we have a tree removal plan with one of the conditions? Aanenson: No . Batzli : Do we need to add that? Aanenson: Yes . Conrad: Okay , and then where is our landscaping plan? Aanenson : They have submitted one . Is that what you 're asking? Conrad: Yeah . Erhart : It 's not in here though . Aanenson: It should be in with your , the architectural renderings . It should be the last sheet . Batzli : Say Brad , does your architect have the copy of this sheet that can be focused on by the camera so that everyone can see this? _ Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 41 Aanenson : The landscaping plan? Batzli : Yeah . Aanenson: I 've got it . Brad Johnson: One of the subtle things on this particular project is , these are the oak trees right here that we 're saving . And what that originally . . .not knowing exactly where they were and then we had to move them back to save that stand of oaks . In other words we were trying to build around the oak trees . Conrad : So the perfectly round circles on this plan are new . Brad Johnson: No . The perfectly round circles . Batzli : New deciduous trees . Brad Johnson: Those are the existing oaks . Conrad : No . No , the ones that have the jagged edges are the old trees that we leave . The ones that are perfectly circular are new . Brad Johnson: Right . Erhart : This shows what 's going to remain after it 's done . It doesn 't show what 's on the site now . Brad Johnson: We 'll be more than happy to , we 've got that so we 'd be more than happy to come in . I don 't know if . . .did we check on the elms and where they were? Gordon Christenson: Well the grading plan , the large elm trees are shown . Brad Johnson: There 's another plan that shows the large elm trees . There was a plan that was done . . . There are 5 to 8 12 inch trees that would come down . They 're primarily linden and elms . . . .by saving oak trees and it 's a trade-off guys . Batzli : Well I get the feeling though that the residents wouldn 't be happier if you moved the building further up the hill to become more massive . Not only would you take out the oaks but it would be more intrusive . Brad Johnson: Farther up the hill . Batzli : Farther up the hill . The coniferous trees that we 're looking at go around each of the units that are closest to the neighbors . Typically when we plant those babies , that 's just what they are and they 're very slow growing trees . How 's this going to help block the view of some of these things? It is just going to break up the base and hopefully they 'll grow big someday? Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 42 Aanenson: Well I think . . .neighborhood meeting also that they wanted to have more decidous trees . To give them more height in these areas here . Originally it was based on the fact that there was existing oaks . They wanted some more coniferous for the tree loss but in looking at this now realizing the height of those are only going to be maybe 8 to 10 feet . I think at the neighborhood meeting there was a commitment by the developer- to put some more of those deciduous trees on the backs of those building: to get some more height . Batzli : But that isn 't reflected on these plans? Aanenson : No . Erhart : Could I ask , would you agree that the coniferous tree is a slo4 growing tree? Kay Halla : Yes , slower than your deciduous . The original landscaping plan had quite a lot of deciduous trees in the north of the building . Especially up in the northeast corner . It was mostly deciduous because _ I felt that area might be kind of a lot of wet soils so I thought get some trees that could handle it a little better . But then based on the comments , I changed it . So they are a little slower growing . They only maybe get a foot in height where a deciduous tree , depending on the tree - can get , once it gets roots established , can grow . . . Erhart : How big are the coniferous trees you 're putting in here? Kay Halla : The City requires 6 foot . Erhart : 6 feet . Batzli : Do the rest of the commissioners feel that additional , either landscaping or some other technique is required to kind of temper the - view from the north of these northern most units? Ahrens : Why not put some dogwood in front of the , to provide some . . . Farmakes: Isn 't the majority of the problem viewing from the east where there 's no trees? At least on your video . The eastern part of the property where you 're showing the pole , there were no trees covering the - building . Resident : That 's a concern but I think to maintain , the big trees are a - buffer , even if they 're not an oak . The mighty oak . They 're big and they do a good job now . Resident : There is an area where there 's no trees at all and my house and my neighbor 's house basically it 's all open . . . Farmakes: Is that the eastern part of the property? Resident : No , it isn 't . That 's the center part . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 43 Erhart : Well I think it 's clear that the staff has to come to indication with the developer on what trees are going and I don 't know that we need to review that . Clearly they have to get a handle on that . Conrad: Yeah , I tell you . There are a lot of trees in this . We require one tree for a single family unit , right? Isn 't that our standard? There 's a lot of trees here . If you 're looking for some trade-offs , whether they 're the right trees , I don 't know . That 's up to staff and the developer and maybe with input from the , I think they 're listening to the neighbors in terms of what they must have heard . I 'm not sure if it 's the right assortment right now but it 's sure a lot of trees . It 's sure a lot more than what we see in a typical development like this . I counted 70 trees . Now that 's why , I guess when I looked at this , before the meeting , I didn 't treat it as real . Erhart : There 's about 200 evergreens going in? Conrad: Because there just seemed to be a lot of trees . Kay Halla : There are a lot of trees . Brad Johnson: She sells trees . Kay Halla : I tried to put the emphasis on trees rather than a lot of developers you might find large trees and then you 'll see a mixture of ornamental and shrubbery and I think as far as maintenance in a unit , in a development like this , you 're better off getting your impact from just trees . Conrad: Yeah . But this is a committed plan . Okay . Batzli : I guess my final comment is more philosophical and that is , it 's difficult to sit up here and have seen the plans that we 've seen and not think that this is a good one . But I don 't want to be paternal , as Joan said . It 's hollow words for you to hear us say , well gee this is the best one because the issue is exactly what Joan said . And that is , it should be the best plan that we can get for Chanhassen and for the neighboring residents , as well as the people that are going to move in . I think , I hope some of your concerns have been either talked about or recognized by us and hopefully you need to work with the developer in the meantime between now and when it goes to City Council because what we 're doing tonight , again to emphasize , is recommending to City Council . They will make the final decision and so your voice at the Council meeting is still very important and you need to follow it to that meeting . I know you 've probably attended several meetings by now . Stick with it . Go to one more . It will make a difference I believe . I would like to see a condition placed in here that the developer will work with staff to make sure that the sight lines of the northeastern corner buildings are modified to minimize the impact to the neighbors to the north . What that means I don 't know . If that means putting in a couple of more fast growing ones . Putting in deciduous . Whatever they 've got to do . I 'd like to see that instead of putting in a bunch of 5 foot pine trees that are going to take 20 years to get to be 20 feet high . That 's what I 'd like to see . I 'd at least like to see a commitment that they 're going to Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 44 work with staff and the neighborhood should give their input if , because I don 't think , looking at this and listening to both sides , I don 't know that , and this is conjecture but I think it would be worst to pull the - buildings further up the hill . They 'd be taller . They 'd be more massive . You 'd have an ever tougher time trying to minimize the impact . I don 't know that it 's so important to save the couple of trees on top of the hill . I guess I 'd rather minimize the impact to the neighbors . We 've got so many trees being planted here . If that would do it , if that would minimize it and help the development for everybody concerned , I _ don 't know why we 're worried about saving a dozen oaks . The oaks will , I 'm sure the developer would replant oaks . Obviously they 're not going to be as big but they will get big . If that 's the problem, if that 's what 's causing this , then we need to look at that because then we live i a world gone mad because we 're saving 12 oaks and we 're ruining everybody 's sight line from the north . That doesn 't make any sense . So , having said that , is there a motion? Ledvina : I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Rezoning to PUD #92-3 and Site Plan Review #92-3 as shown on the plans dated October 8th and October 22nd , 1992 and subject to the staff conditions with the following modifications . I 'd like to modify condition number 8 to make it a little more proactive . I 'd like condition number 8 to read , the number of parking spaces , including - handicap , must be revised to meet the parking standards as required by the zoning ordinance . And I 'd like to modify condition number 9 to read , fencing shall be placed around the oak trees to minimize impact during construction . Protected trees lost within 3 years due to construction must be replaced on a caliper inch basis in accordance with a plan approved by staff . I 'd like to add a number of additional conditions . Condition 13 . Elimination of access drives to Oak Pond Road in — accordance with October 27 , 1992 memorandum from Dave Hempel on his review of the Oak Pond site development plans . Condition 14 . Preparation and staff approval of a tree removal plan . Condition 15 . That the developer shall work with staff on sight lines to reduce impact on neighboring property owners . Batzli : Is there a second? I 'll second the motion . Discussion . Conrad : When you 're talking sight lines , you 're talking tree? Or are you looking at housing revision? Architectural revision . — Farmakes: There are several sight lines . Which way they look . Conrad: So what are we talking about? What are we saying to staff? Yo know we can solve a sight line deal with a tree . A major deal is if we 're talking about altering the units . The rental units and the elevations . Ledvina : Well I think what Brian was getting at was the screening issue . Batzli : Well , I was looking for screening of the northeastern units which don 't have any natural screening . Screening them from the development to the north . Breaking up the impact of the mass of the _ buildings more quickly by putting in something faster growing or bigger Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 45 immediately . That 's what I 'm looking for . Ahrens: But isn 't there some concern about the location of the building? I mean that 's what I heard from staff . Aanenson: Right . Krauss: They 're going to have to rationalize the tree preservation plan . . . It sure looked like out there tonight that they have . . . Ledvina : I think that 's what we were trying to get at in condition 14 . Regarding the tree removal plan . Conrad: Well let 's take that a step further . So if that means that the pads are in the wrong location based on cutting down more than 2 oak trees , then what 's the next step? Does that mean we shouldn 't be okaying , given the fact that we think it 's wrong , do you want us to react to a site plan? What 's our step on the site plan motion? Tree removal might force a different site plan . Should it come back here? Ahrens: Well I agree . I think it 's real unclear . Conrad : Yeah , and we 've got to get some . Aanenson: Unless you want to set a number of trees . Conrad: We wouldn 't know . Aanenson: Let staff decide if we feel it 's a significant impact . Conrad: We can let you guys go forward with staff and you take , you go to the City Council . You probably don 't want to come back and talk to us anymore , I would guess . Krauss: We 're occasionally faced with making decisions . You know there 's a lot of changes and accommodations that are reasonably made by the developer , between them and staff prior to going to City Council after you do it . If we believe that we 've transgressed across some gray line though so that the project is so significantly different and it 's not the one you approved , we hold up short and then we do bring it back . I don 't think that 's going to happen in this case but if it does , we would bring it back . Ledvina : We see it one more time anyway . This is a preliminary site plan approval . Aanenson: No , you won 't see it . Krauss : It 's worded incorrectly . This is the site plan approval and preliminary plat . Conrad: We ' ll see a wetland alteration permit coming back but that 's , then this is out of our hands . We have control of it right now . For the last time . If you think that 's control . Well I 'm comfortable . I think Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 46 what we 're talking about is a reasonability deal here and if it doesn 't appear to be reasonable , it 's going to come back to us . Batzli : Balancing test . You know it when you see it . Conrad : And I trust our neighbors will keep everybody honest on that deal too because if it gets to City Council and it 's not , well there may be a different definition of what 's reasonable but I think they 're sort of the watchdogs on this one . So I guess I don 't want to see it back here . For a while I thought I did . For a while I wanted to see what would happen but I think the developer 's saying he 's going to work on this and I hear staff saying they think they have a sense for it , so I 'm comfortable that it doesn 't come back . Batzli : Ladd , you started off by not liking condition 15 and you wandered into 14 I think . _ Conrad: I wanted to make sure that staff heard what 15 was and you clarified that . Because architectural , that 's a different , we didn 't make that , I want to make that real clear . Erhart : A question on number 9 . Kate , when you say that protected trees lost due to construction must be replaced on a caliper inch basis in - accordance with the plan approved by staff . Are you talking about trees that are identified as going to be removed during the development or are you talking about trees that die later because of development? Aanenson: Right . Erhart : Okay . So let 's say an 18 inch tree dies . So now you 're going — to put in six 3 inch trees . After the development is in and the sod 's laid and the people have moved in , how do you determine where those 6 trees go? One obviously will go to replace the one that died . Where do _ the other 5 go? Which gets to Matt , your proposal now to carry this out to 3 years . Is there a logistics problem with the concept of doing this'. Ahrens : No . Erhart : No . Well how do you , who determines? Ahrens : Play it by ear . Seriously . Erhart : Well I 'm just trying to be serious about this . Ahrens : No , I know that but I mean really . Erhart : Where do the 5 trees go? Krauss : There were some neighboring communities that when something like that happens and there 's no place to put it on site , they obligate the - builder to buy the trees and they stick them in a park . It still accomplishes the goal of reforestation . Ahrens : But on a site like this , there 's going to be room . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 47 Krauss : In terms of how you guarantee it financially , that 's not difficult . You just take the components of what the letter of credit for landscaping and carry it forward . Erhart : Okay , let me ask you this . Matt 's proposal to increase this to 3 years . Does that make sense? Can you handle that? Krauss : We haven 't done it to date but I don 't see why there 's any reason why we couldn 't . It 's just a matter of scheduling and going out there on the site . If we forget about it , I 'm sure the developer will remind us that we still have his money . Batzli : Well I would go a step further and eliminate the words "due to construction" . Krauss: Now that concerns me . I mean what if oak wilt comes through . Is the oak wilt due to construction activity or? Batzli : Well if I 'm the developer , I don 't replace a single one . In the third year I say that wasn 't due to construction . Ahrens : Right , exactly . Batzli : Yeah , I mean with due to construction in there , if I 'm the developer , I 'm sitting in the back row laughing . Fine . Give me 50 years . I don 't care . Erhart : But he 's supposed to replace trees that die from other causes? Batzli : Well , how are you going to prove it? Krauss : You know where the suspect trees are . I think Dave can attest _ to this . The idea of bulldozer drivers going bizerk is legendary . You know when they 've transgressed and knocked down a snow fence or compacted some dirt . And you start writing which trees you highly suspect have been suffered , may suffer damage . Erhart : That 's why I think the point of the snow fence is so great . Because I don't think you can draw the lines on this 3 year or due to construction . All these things are soft . A hard fact is you put the snow fence around and they don 't go inside of it . I 'm not sure that going beyond that accomplishes anything . That 's the point I 'm trying to make . Even if we had to increase the diameter of the snow fence to 1 1/2 times the drip diameter . . .actually protect that area . And by golly , if they run over that snow fence , man they just replace the tree . Batzli : So you 'd change it to fencing shall be placed around the oak trees at 1 1/2 times the drip line? _ Erhart : Well I don 't know what the right answer is . My point was that I 'm not sure , setting up a situation where staff 's going to go out 3 years and inspect this . It just doesn 't happen . If we 're concerned we 're not getting adequate coverage , I 'd focus more on something that we could measure which is the fence line . Drip diameter and things . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 48 Ahrens: So they knock it down and they go back and put up another fence . Aanenson : That went back to my original proposal and we bring in an expert to walk through the site and look at , make a determination and we say it looks like this tree 's been damaged due to construction or whatever . After it 's been final graded and , not only that but you know - after they 've graded the site , not all buildings are going to go up . They 're go up over a different timeframe . It 's not all going to be built at once so there 's going to be over a period of time , different things - happening . To say 3 years , I 'm not sure . I think with each building that goes in place we 're going to have to go out there and physically look at what 's been done after activity . Make a determination . If it looks like it 's been altered or damaged , which goes back to the snow fence thing . I think that 's the staff , although that 's easier to try to fence them off and go out and make a determination . Batzli : Well when do you go out with your expert? After final completion of the whole plan? Aanenson: I think there 's going to have to be a series of different times . After the final grade and then after each building goes up if they 're around an existing oak tree that we want to preserve . Farmakes : What 's the time factor in a stress situation like with an oak tree if it 's damaged in construction? Is it immediate? Kay Halla : No , not all the time . Farmakes : 6 months? Kay Halla : It can be , I 'm just basing it on a plan that I had that we put some landscaping in the year her home was built and just this , it 's been 2 years , her 2 trees are dead . She has . . . It was obvious that they had been really , really close to the house and really graded around . An( it took 2 years but it was pretty obvious . Farmakes: So no crown damage showed up until then? Kay Halla : No , they were totally dead . But again , it had really been graded around . Farmakes: Is there visible damage shortly after construction of some sort? Kay Halla : She knew a year later that there was some die back on the tips and that kind of thing . Erhart : What did they do? They ran equipment right underneath the tree'. Kay Halla : Well we think so . The home we went to , we did the landscaping after the home was built but it was , it seemed obviously likf comparing to what the neighbors land and how it was graded . It seemed like they have to get drainage away from the home and that there was some- soils put on top of the trees and then in one area the driveway was only Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 49 — 2 feet , the edge of the driveway was only 2 feet from the trunk of the tree . So it was right underneath . . .and it took , in 2 years they were totally dead but I think some can last longer . Batzli : If no one has a proposed amendment to number 9 , would anyone have any other discussion before I call the question? Conrad : Just one more thing in terms of runoff and ponding . Dave , what is it that 's going to assure us , from your department , that we really do have good specs for water runoff? Our good system . We 've got a consultant out there that we 've hired . They are making some recommendations and what are the standards that they set . They have to meet basic minimum standards . Hempel : That 's correct . They 're going to follow our latest storm water quality practices that we 're employing on storm drainage . Krauss : We should throw in a proviso there . It is possible that the consultant 's going to come back and say that by all rights , a portion of this should be handled off site and . . .developer shall pay x number of thousand of dollars into the city program so he can accommodate that . That 's very . . . Conrad : That 'a acceptable . Batzli : Is there any other discussion? Ledvina moved , Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Rezoning to PUD #92-3 and Site Plan Review #92-3 as shown on the plans dated October 8 , 1992 and October 22 , 1992 , and subject to the following conditions: 1 . A "No Parking" restriction shall be designated along the entire north side of Oak Pond Road . Appropriate "No Parking" restrictions/ signs shall be placed on the private service drives and northerly side of Oak Pond Road . 2 . The grading and drainage plan shall be modified to include erosion control measures in accordance with the City 's construction site handbook . 3 . The appropriate drainage and utility easements shall be shown on the final plat for all utility and drainage improvements . A conservation easement shall be dedicated to the City over the wetlands on the parcel . The final plat shall indicate all wetlands located on the site . 4 . The entire public street ( Oak Pond Road ) from Powers Boulevard to Kerber Boulevard shall be constructed with Phase I of the development . 5 . A traffic study on Powers Boulevard , as requested by Carver County , shall be conducted by the developer prior to requesting final approval . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 50 6 . Apply for a wetland alteration permit for the location of the trails and possible location of sedimentation pond before final plat approval . 7 . Park and trail dedication fees be paid in lieu of parkland . 8 . Number of parking spaces , including handicapped , must be revised to meet the parking standards as required by the zoning ordinance . 9 . Fencing shall be placed around the oak trees to minimize impact during construction . Protected trees lost within 3 years due to construction must be replaced on a caliper inch basis in accordance with a plan approved by staff . 10 . A lighting plan shall be submitted for the interior private roads . A 20 foot manicured area shall be maintained along the north , east — and west property limits , anything beyond shall be left in natural ( non-maintenance ) state . 11 . Compliance with the Building Official 's conditions as shown in his memorandum dated October 19 , 1992 . 12 . Compliance with the Fire Marshal 's conditions as shown in his memorandum dated October 21 , 1992 . 13 . Elimination of access drives to Oak Pond Road in accordance with October 27 , 1992 memorandum from Dave Hempel on his review of the Oak Pond site development plans . 14 . Preparation and staff approval of a tree removal plan. 15 . That the developer shall work with staff on sight lines to reduce impacts on neighboring property owners. All voted in favor and the motion carried . Batzli : Is there a motion on the preliminary . Is preliminary plat the wrong word here? Aanenson: No , it is a plat . Batzli : Preliminary plat? Is there a motion on the preliminary plat? Conrad: I make the motion that we recommend approval of the preliminary plat PUD #92-3 as shown on the plans dated October 8th and October 22nd , 1992 subject to the conditions in the staff report . Batzli : Is there a second? Erhart : I ' ll second . Batzli : Is there any discussion? I 'm still a little concerned about us not having the areas around the wetlands at this part of the process . Why are we taking that at the wetland alteration permit stage? Because — Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 51 that 's when we get it and that 's when we do it? It seems to me if there should be dedicating areas around the wetlands , we should be doing it now . I haven 't quite figured that out . Why we 're not doing that at this time? Can we at least put in here , well you already have in here that they have to get a wetland alteration permit . Okay , then that 's good enough? Okay . Any other discussion? Conrad moved , Erhart seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Preliminary Plat PUD #92-3 as shown on the plans dated _ October 8, 1992 and October 22 , 1992, and subject to the following conditions: 1 . The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the City with the necessary financial security to guarantee proper installation of the public improvements and compliance with the conditions of approval for final plat . 2 . The applicant shall obtain and comply with the appropriate permitting agencies , i .e . Watershed District , MPCA , Health Department , MWCC and Carver County . 3 . The developer shall construct the public utility and street improvements within the right-of-ways or easements to City standards and dedicate upon completion and acceptance to the City for permanent ownership and maintenance responsibilities . The remaining utilities outside the easement and right-of-way shall be privately owned and maintained by a homeowners association . Detailed construction plans and specifications including calculations for sizing of the utility improvements shall be submitted for formal approval by the City prior to final plat approval . 4 . A 20 foot wide trail easement shall be dedicated to the City along the westerly portion of the site adjacent to Powers Boulevard . The applicant shall dedicate to the City the necessary easements to provide for the extension of Oak Pond Road to Kerber Boulevard . All voted in favor and the motion carried. Batzli : When will this be going to City Council now? Aanenson: We 're going to do the wetland alteration permit before it 's forwarded on and we need to get the traffic study back . Krauss: Yeah , we want these issues resolved once and for all before we go to the City Council . What we 'll do is renotify you . . . Batzli : Okay , thank you all for coming in . Brad Johnson : Can I say one thing? — Batzli : Yes . Brad Johnson: I agree with Joan about the parenting role that some of you played with them today . From a developer 's point of view , that was a Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 52 very good point but I think you do have a better project because of your input . I know we 've kind of gone through hoops for you . I know that - that whole barren hill over there , I didn't even think about it when I started out the program and so I think in real life , it 's been a benefit and it 's obvious that we 're trying and we just , sometimes we can 't do everything you 'd like us to do , like not build it . So I do appreciate _ your input and I think we 've tried to improve the project because of it . You 've got a better project . Thank you . Farmakes : Do you feel that those objections are crystallized? Brad Johnson : In your mind? Farmakes : Yeah , because I got the impression here tonight that they 're not crystallized . Brad Johnson : Well I agree with what you suggested . That one or two of you are welcomed to sit down with , because most of our questions are tree and design . One on one and just sit down and work through some of the _ problems . You know we 've had neighborhood meetings . It 's always usuall we , they kind of a meeting . So if you guys wanted to appoint a couple people in the next couple weeks , because it 's about 4 weeks before we 're back here Paul probably . Krauss : Well it 's a matter of when we get the materials . Resident : . . .because there 's different issues depending on where you are . This is not an association of people here . The neighbors have primary concerns about the . . . _ Farmakes : Okay , what I 'm trying to suggest , to be productive , if you crystallize those things as a group . List them as the major elements of what you 're presenting and some of the sub-elements , it would help in th - negotiation process . It would make your position much more clear . Specifically . Do you understand what I 'm saying? Resident : They were on the paper . Batzli : Well yeah . We need to move this one along and I like what 's on _ the paper but that needs to be shown to City staff and the developer and you need to sit down and discuss those things with them . If it 's as a group or , it would be nicer to have a couple of people so that , it 's difficult to do things by committee . If you can have a couple people si — down . Go over those points with the developer , that will be very helpfj and we do appreciate you coming in and telling us these things and pointing out , because you 're intimately familiar with the project and how_ it will effect you and so we do appreciate that . Thank you . _ Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 53 PUBLIC HEARING: NON-CONFORMING USE PERMIT FOR A RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT FOR MINNEWASHTA MANOR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LAKE MINNEWASHTA . Public Present: Name Address Wayne Holzer 2911 Washta Bay Road , Excelsior Don Crenshaw 2961 Washta Bay Road , Excelsior Herb Pfeffer 2850 Tanager Lane Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item . Farmakes : Are you comfortable with the documentations that we 're holding these other applicants to? They they really address that . In general = terms that addressed that but it says that there was no record . Aanenson: Right . The gentleman that had to leave earlier was a Mr . Kimber and he 's lived in that neighborhood for 20 some years I believe . 25 years . And he had numerous documentation . He also did , we were trying to find a letter that was sent to him by Bill Monk that said if we vacated this street , that the Association would get all rights to that street vacation . In speaking with Roger Knutson today , the City Attorney , he said normally it 's turned over to the court and it 's split 3 ways so again , what we are recommending , if he can get , if the Association can get this property owner . This property all right here is served by private drive so a majority of this underneath here is under water . If this gentleman here is willing to quit claim to them his portion of that , that would give them more access because otherwise all they have is a very narrow strip . There 's nowhere to stand or anything like that . So all they do is go down there . Launch their boats or use the 2 boats that are at the dock . Erhart : So are you proposing to table this? Aanenson: No . I think the Association may want it tabled because I think that they 're feeling like , let me pass this picture around that was given by Mr . Kimber , the gentleman that had to leave , showing you how they get access . Batzli : In the meantime , since several people have stayed , I do want to hear from them . If the three of you , do any of you , I should say , are any of you with the Association? Don Crenshaw : Yes , I 'm President of the Association . Batzli : Are you other two gentlemen here on this issue? Are you with the Association? Herb Faber : I 'm a member of the Association but I live on the canal there so I was here as a matter of interest . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 54 Batzli : Okay . I 'd like to hear first from the President of the Association if I could . Don Crenshaw : My name is Don Crenshaw . I live at 2961 Washta Bay Road and a situation 's arisen that the Association 's not very well aware of _ what the Council wants from us or where the situation is . Unfortunately our little corner of Chanhassen likes to think it 's in Excelsior and we for example don 't get the Villager . So no one in our neighborhood was — aware of this meeting and this being on the agenda . One letter arrived to someone in the neighborhood that eventually , through a series of pho-c calls , got to me late last night and I 'm here basically in a situation of ignorance trying to gather as much information as I can to represent the — Association . Batzli : Do you understand that what we 're doing here is a process of _ bringing in all of the old time beachlots? Are you generally aware that that 's why we 're here tonight? Don Crenshaw : Yes I am . Batzli : Have you had a chance to look at the application that was submitted on behalf of your Association , even though you didn 't know it - was being submitted? Don Crenshaw: No I haven 't . When I found out about that last night , I _ made efforts to get in touch with Jim Senst and I talked to him but didn 't get a chance before I had to come to the meeting to actually get look at what he submitted . Aanenson : The gentleman that had to leave , it 's the other gentleman in the association that has seen that . Let me just clarify why you didn 't get notice . What we 've done with these is we 've worked through the Association President . We notice everybody on the lake so there are some people that did get notice in the Association that are lakeshore owners . Otherwise what we 've done is work through the Association President , that 's where there was a downfall . It was our understanding that he was the Association President and since he sent me back the application , that 's what I was under the assumption of , so I apologize for that . Batzli : So if you had your druthers tonight , while we 're figuring out our issues on access and things like that , would you want this matter tabled so you can review your application to see if it 's what your association wants? Don Crenshaw: Yes , please . Batzli : And you now have his name and address so we can send notice to the right people? I would like to hear if either one of the other two gentlemen that have stayed , if you have any other comments . I don 't mean_ to cut you off but if either of you two have something to say , I 'd be happy to hear you tonight so that you don 't have to come back in or you 're always welcome to come back in next time this is on our agenda . Whichever you prefer . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 55 _ Herb Pfeffer : My name is Herb Pfeffer , 2850 Tanager Lane . I live in Lot 10 . That 's my residence there and as long as this is going to be tabled , I suppose that 's fine because I can come up with more data at a later date but the only problem I have with the lot , or with the dock is that - originally when I moved in it was a single , two plank dock going straight out from actually the road . I think it was 4 years ago when we had the drought we dredged the channel out . At that time a T was added . An L was added to the dock to get access to the water which was navigable so to speak . But that does put it right on my lot line into their dock . And I haven 't had a problem yet but there 's nothing to prevent anything from happening I suppose in the future . Legally to have water go down again and let 's say a pontoon is placed at the end of that L section , which basically is over my water which is my lot . See the way this was plotted out , what 's shown there is the high water mark . The low water mark is , I mean this is the low water mark that you 've got up there . The high water mark is to a point where right about in that intersection where it says Lot 10 and the angular effect . That 's about where the water is right now . So if you extrapulated and assumed the dock was out to the end of that lot line , and then go say another 20 feet with a boat or a pontoon or something like that , well that would really obstruct my view . I wouldn 't care for that one bit because that would be on my property . Batzli : So the dock , the addition of the L shape was within the last several years? Herb Pfeffer : Yes . And now apparently that 's illegal because it 's on the lot line . Aanenson: I spoke to Mr . Pfeffer this week . That 's why I got a legal opinion on this issue . The dredging did not go to the beachlot 's lot . It stopped at the edge of Mr . Pfeffer 's property . In order to get the depth of the boats , they bring it all the way up to the edge of the property . Batzli : But what we 're trying to do is determine the intensity of the use of the beachlots back in 1981 . And so . Herb Pfeffer : In '81 there was no L . Batzli : Right , and so if we were to allow them to put in the L , if you will , it 's my understanding that we might be able to put some sort of condition on that since that would be an intensification of the use over a period of time . So I think what we should do is table this and that needs to be resolved to everyone 's obviously satisfaction here so that we _ don 't intensify the use over what it was in 1981 , but at the same time allow them some use of their lot . Herb Pfeffer : Fine with me . Thank you . Batzli : Did you want to address the Commission? Okay . Thank you for coming in . Is there a motion to table this matter? Ledvina : So moved . - Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 56 Erhart : Second . Ledvina moved , Erhart seconded to table the the Non-Conforming Use Permi for a Recreational Beachlot for Minnewashta Manor Homeowners Association for further review_ All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: WETLAND ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AMENDING THE WETLAND ORDINANCE . Public Present: Name Address Frank Svoboda Bear Lake Wetlands Center 22752 CR 7 , Hutchinson , MN Tom Kotsonas 8001 Cheyenne Avenue Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report on this item . Batzli : Philosophically , for the people that weren 't part of the wetlands/SWMP committee , why is it better to provide a buffer strip and - allow buildings closer to the wetlands and under the old system where there was a 75 foot setback? Olsen: The old system with the 75 foot setback did maintain a structure to be back further . But we were having lots of problems where there 'dbe a manicured lawn or there 'd be alteration right up to the edge of the wetland and we were finding that that was actually causing more harm to the wetland than the structure . And we 're finding , in speaking with other wetland experts , that it 's not necessary that 75 feet isn 't protecting the wetland necessarily . All it really is is visually and - that if you have a buffer strip that 's protected and it has that vegetation there to provide habitat and food for the wildlife and also it just provides protection from actual alteration to the wetland itself . That that 's more important and that a deterrent for being provided with that buffer that we could allow the structure to be closer . And actually it 's not the structure 's aren 't really moving from 75 feet to 40 feet . That includes the buffer strip so at a minimum the buffer strips I believe are still 50 feet . The structures would still be 50 feet from the wetland edge . So that 's still a pretty substantial setback . Batzli : I 'm sorry , minimum , as long as it 's not a utilized use . Olsen: Right . Batzli : So Ag-Urban above , it would be 50 minimum . Natural 60 . Pristine 150 . Olsen: Right . Utilized , we 're saying that that 's not even a wetland . That 's a storm water pond and that 's the way it should be considered . So that 's our philosophy on that . I don 't know if Frank wants to add any more on that but . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 57 Batzli : We 've got to make him say something . He 's been here for 4 hours or something . Olsen: I told him to come late . It 's his own fault . Ahrens : Jo Ann , as you know there 's been a lot of discussion about how to define a wetland . Federal government defined it in the past year as something other than what States , and including Minnesota have defined wetlands as being . How did we identify to find the wetlands in Chanhassen and what standard was used? Olsen: We did look at the three qualities . The vegetation , they hydric soils and the water . And when we did the on-site surveys , is that what you 're talking about? Krauss: I think you 're referring to the situation where Dan Quayle and his Council on Economic Competitiveness decided that they knew what a wetland was and changed the rules . Ahrens : Who 's Dan Quayle? Krauss: How quickly we forget . Olsen : There 's sheets in here . We did use those three different factors . Krauss : But what you 're referring to , there 's a Federal Wetland Delineation Manual and there 's two of them out there and originally the Feds wanted to go with the 1989 manual that was quite restrictive . Now there 's a '91 manual . It 's a modified one that 's much looser . It defines a lot less acreage as wetland . It really doesn 't matter in Minnesota because Minnesota State Law says the 1989 Manual is the one that is going to be used to regulate wetlands in the State of Minnesota . It 's in the State Statute . Now taking it off of that , there 's any number of ways to classify wetlands . There 's two basic systems that are recognized . The original one is Circular 39 which is , it goes up to a lot of different types but those are the ones . . . And then there 's the one I always mispronounce . The Cordian System . Ahrens : You 're getting a little over my head here but go ahead . Krauss : Our program uses a much simpler approach when we define it . What we 're defining is what the real intent of the wetland is and what the value and function is to the community . Ahrens: So you simplified this whole thing? Krauss : Oh yeah . But it 's , you can make it a lot more complicated . You can put it back into the classification systems that everybody else might use if we need to . Olsen: The survers that were performed defined the Circular 39 report . But then when they also , these are the sheets . You know we have all these sheets that were filled out for each wetland so we can go back and refer to each one of those other classifications but they also break it Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 58 down into our three definitions of wetland . And again takes into the vegetation and has it been impacted . Has it not been impacted . Those kinds of situations . Ledvina : Have each of the wetlands been physically observed? Olsen: Right . Krauss : Yeah . All the 400 whatever it is . Batzli : There was a comment earlier tonight which raises a question and that was , one of the residents stated that he felt that a certain part of a development was a wetland . What happens in a situation like that whe-e_ we either missed one , and I know Frank wouldn 't do that . I think it was his F250 pick-up truck by the way . What happens? In the ordinance is there a mechanism by which we can change either the number of wetlands or the type of wetland? And do wetlands change over time? What happens i'` - we create a utilized wetland and it becomes an Ag Urban wetland? Krauss : That can 't happen . Olsen: Yeah , see it 's not utilized wetland . It 's a utilized water body . Batzli : Okay , so we create a utilized water body and it becomes . Krauss : It takes on wetland characteristics . Olsen: But it 's always going to be a storm water pond . Batzli : Why? Krauss: We define it that way . Batzli : Why? Krauss: Because it 's got a function that way . We 're talking about a part of a drainage system . Batzli : The building gets blown down by a tornado . Erhart : I think there 's a good answer to this . Because the guy who built that paid for it to make it a utilized pond . Is it fair then to gc back and say gee whiz now , we take rights against that pond now but now it 's Ag Urban because it took on wetland characteristics . You 've got to - remember , all these utilized ponds were created . Olsen: For storm water . Erhart : Created by somebody who invested in that utilized pond . Krauss : It was created for the specific purpose of accommodating storm water and/or improving water quality . We have to go in and maintain these things . Every 3 , 4 , 5 years we 're going to go in there with a backhoe . We may develop technologies . People looking into setting up Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 59 NURP basins where you actually grow cattails and you harvest them because it takes up the nutrients and you remove it from the system . These are managed basins . They 're no different than pipes and culverts and storm inlets . Olsen: And they will take on the wetland qualities if they 're done correctly . They will look nice . Batzli : Just by way of example . The pond at the end of my road , which is a storm water pond , and whichever year they go in there and pull out a _ certain percentage of the cattails . But yet it takes on a wetland look over the years and in the spring and the birds come and nest and all this other good stuff . And what we 're saying is we don 't care whether people do anything to that . If for example none of , it 's on a piece of property that 's owned by a private individual . God only knows why , and our neighborhood happens to take care of it . Erhart : But you don 't know if that 's a utilized , designated as utilized . Batzli : It will be . But my point is , why not let that go . Why not require that some of these things go to? Krauss : Because then , under State Law and under our laws , what you would wind up doing is you would have to mitigate the mitigation . In fact we have some people at the PCA who are trying to do this right now . You actually construct the pond to protect the wetland . The pond you constructed takes on wetland characteristics . Therefore that becomes a wetland and you have to construct another pond to protect that one . That one takes on wetland characteristics . I mean where does this end . Batzli : A better world . The reason that I bring it up is not really because I mean it was supposedly going to be a loaded question but you answered it very well , and that is , there 's a lot of agricultural areas that are sometimes plowed and sometimes not and they 're kind of skunky right now and maybe they only have one type of vegetation in them and maybe they really don 't look like a wetland . But over time I 've got the feeling that , due to seeds floating in air and birds moving around and everything else , it would take on a greater diversity of stuff . Krauss : Those are not utilized wetlands as we define them . Batzli : So what is the process to upgrade those kinds of ponds or to look at them and say , is it a wetland or is it not at this point? Krauss: The way our ordinance is structured , you can take an Ag Urban wetland in a development that we review . Based upon the criteria . . . You can take an Ag Urban wetland up or down or leave it . Olsen: Or keep it that way . Krauss: Yeah , by that I mean if we , if the Ag Urban wetland , and they 're real dandy spots to mitigate , other wetland impacts and we 've seen that time and time again in developments . Where you have wetlands that have been drained by field tile or whatever else and they have organic soils . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 60 They 're naturally low spots . They receive drainage but the farmers been pumping the water out for 100 years . Those are great spots to turn back into Type III or IV wetlands with the proper regrading , busting up the drain tile and whatever else you 're going to do . And we do that quite regularly . At the same time we may decide that that 's the place the NUPP basin should go and sacrifice it . In which case if you sacrifice it to — that standard , you 're going to have to mitigate it . It 's kind of late , don 't want to throw too much philosophy at you but right now we 're a little bit of divergence with the State rules that are being developed _ that have not been approved . State rules should differentiate between wetlands of different quality because the law mandates that they do but the State rules don 't . The State rules say a wetland is a wetland is a wetland and nobody says one is better than the other . Treats them all - equal . Batzli : Where in the ordinance are you able to say that something is a _ wetland if it 's not on your official map? Krauss : There 's a statement that says our official maps are prima facie evidence of their being a wetland . Batzli : I know but you 're going the wrong way on me here . Where is it , how can you change your map? Krauss: Well we asked Roger that . Now neither Jo Ann nor I talk legal latin but we were told by Roger that , when he threw in the prima facie _ language , it would allow us to . Olsen : What 's on page 2 , that the Planning Director shall make a determination to maintain the officially designated wetland boundaries a - if the boundaries need to be corrected on city plans and maps based on data that is supplied . Batzli : So it 's going to be the . Olsen: The Planning Department . Page 2 , at the bottom there . Batzli : The Planning Director shall make a determination to maintain thm wetland . But see I thought that was in the event that an applicant is disputing . But you 're reading that as in any instance you can . - Krauss: If we missed one or it 's a different configuration , we can waive . I mean it 's still a wetland and we will amend the official maps _ accordingly . Olsen: Or if we go out there and find that it really isn 't a wetland . Ahrens : But that wouldn 't happen . They 're all right right now . Batzli : Well but see there may be areas that are agricultural that they quit plowing and it may become a wetland . Farmakes: Well that 's what happened in what we were discussing today . Cows grazed on that wetland down there for years . Down inbetween , that Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 61 low lying area there . Batzli : I think that needs to be clarified . Frank Svoboda : If I might add something . Under the State Statutes that the City . . .operates , any individual that 's proposing to do modification to their property , it is highly recommended that they obtain a certificate of exemption which means that someone qualified has examined that particular parcel of land to determine whether or not wetlands are present . And before they go and do any modification , just for their own safety , they should have this Certificate of Exemption in their possession . . .again under the Wetland Conservation Act , any Peace Officer of the State is empowered to issue a Cease and Desist Order if he believes that a construction project is impacting wetlands . And the only defense that a property owner has to end that Cease and Desist Order is if the Certificate of Exemption . So I think eventually what will happen as this process starts getting worked out , is that an individual will come to . . . , just for their own safekeeping , and say can we have this property examined . We want a Certificate of Exemption . . .And so I think that 's the safety aspect that 's out there in the event that something was overlooked . If the City . . . Batzli : Have we covered , we talked at one point I guess in the SWMP committee about things that are effecting the wetland that aren 't dredging . Things like that . I think in your prohibition section . Olsen: We added something about that . Batzli : Yeah , but I couldn 't find it though . Krauss: But we did add it . Batzli : I remember you added the discharge of storm water runoff that impacted it . Krauss : We also got into the cutting of vegetation was a wetland in there . Olsen: Well that was the edge of a wetland though . You 're talking about off site . Batzli : See I was thinking it was going to go in the no net loss Section 20-404 . And I was debating whether or not that covers the scenarios we were trying to come up with , or at least I was trying to come up with that night . I don 't know . Dumping oil on it . That alters it I suppose . I don 't know . I find it difficult once you start enumerating to then argue later on . It almost appears like we 're trying to enumerate all the possibilities and that 's what kind of scares me with that section and I thought we were going to put it in again later on in the ordinance . I don 't remember if you guys even remember talking about that . Krauss: . . .to discharge in contaminated water is concerned about? Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 62 Batzli : That or taking your motorcycle through there . I mean my example was to run your bulldozer through there with the blade up . Or drive a snowmobile through there all winter long on the same track . Doing thine: like that . I don 't know if that 's what we 're necessarily trying to regulate but on the other hand that 's going to damage the wetland . Erhart : Doing what Brian? Batzli : Driving snowmobiles through there all winter . Erhart : You think that 's going to damage the wetland? Olsen: That happens all the time . Batzli : It does . Frank Svoboda : There have been a number of studies done on the effects of snowmobiles on vegetation and there is documented information that it . . .suggest that just exactly that kind of repeated use will damage _ vegetation . . .snow and frost instead of snow acting as an insulated facto1 . . .conductive factor so . . .I don 't know if the city wants to get into regulating that or not . Erhart : Your point was to address that here? Batzli : I don 't know . If it 's going to damage the wetland , I think it — should go in here . I don 't know . We 're listing the things you can 't do in a wetland . Erhart : Motorboats might damage the wetland . Batzli : But see that 's on the water and what we 're regulating is above the water line here . I don 't know . I 'm raising it as an issue . I 'm just raising issues because nobody else wants to talk about it . We can pass it tonight if nobody else has any questions . I don 't care . Olsen : I think that 's an interesting point . . .get more information . Batzli : You know , we 're all tired . It 's 11 :00 . I can shut up . Conrad : Brian , you haven 't let us talk though . Batzli : Let 's close the public hearing . Conrad moved, Ahrens seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Erhart : We had talked on the SWMP committee that we were going to notify those people who had pristine wetlands because this has an impact on their property rights . Did we do that? Nobody interested? Olsen: Yeah , there 's really not that many people . Erhart : Yeah , about three . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 63 Batzli : Do you guys just want to go around , does everybody have specific questions that they want to ask? Okay . Joan . Ahrens: What would it take , I know this may sound crazy but what would it take to notify , row that you know where all the wetlands are , to send out a letter from the City to everybody who lives on a wetland . You can 't do that? Saying you live on a wetland . Krauss : Tremendously difficult to correlate all the properties that are effected by the 430 wetlands . I mean it can be done . Ahrens : Just curious . I don 't want to make your life that difficult but I thought if it would be . Krauss : Fortunately it 's not . We 're not to that level of sophistication yet . Theoretically it could be done . Batzli : How are we going to know when people come in with building permits then? Olsen: Everytime we pull out the half section , we 've got these . . . Krauss : And they are being put on a CAD system . Ultimately we will be able to do what you 're asking Joan by asking the CAD system to correlate addresses with wetlands . . .but the systems not up and running yet . Batzli : Is it in the budget for next year? Krauss : Well it 's supposed to be . Batzli : We 've been talking about automating this stuff for 6 years . That was always on our goals was to hire an intern for the summer to automate everything . Every year I 've been here I think that 's been one of our goals . Krauss: Well , I mean we 've actually got the CAD equipment installed upstairs and we 're digitizing maps now so it 's in process . Conrad: What would you do Joan? You 'd send out a letter to everybody that says , you 're now on , you live on a wetland . What would you say? Ahrens: You live on this type of a wetland . I mean if we could do this ideally . You live on this type of a wetland . This is what you can do . This is what you can't do . Erhart : The purpose of this letter is to stop what? Ahrens: Deterioration of the wetlands . Or destruction . Erhart : You think people are destroying wetlands? Beyond developers . Ahrens: I don 't know . No , I mean maybe an informational type letter . You know it would be . . .and your wetland and not use certain types of fertilizer maybe . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 64 Erhart : Yeah , but we 've addressed that and we did send out newsletters to all citizens of Chanhassen last summer . Every citizen . Ahrens: Well what I 'm saying is there 's a lot of people who live on wetlands who don 't think they 're wetlands . So they don 't think that stuff applies to them . Erhart : Yeah , I guess we really talked in terms of lakes more than wetlands didn 't we . - Krauss: We 've sent out a series of 3 or 4 newsletter and special mailings on the SWMP program . Erhart: Well you must remember them Joan . Ahrens : No , but I remember in the past we 've had people come and they - say they don 't think their wetland 's a wetland . Erhart : Yeah but we talked a lot on the SWMP committee about , and spent_ a lot of the money that we had on education . Krauss : We also , and we 're going to continue to do just that but we talked about once these maps were developed , having a series of public hearings on the maps and really preclude them to concentrations with the City Attorney better . These things would be long involved hearing in front of the Planning Commission . People may contest whether the - wetland 's there . Ahrens: I don 't think that 's a good idea . Krauss: Especially when you realize that we 've effectively had a no net loss wetlands program for 8 years and with the exception of pristine wetlands , as Tim pointed out , the fact that we mapped them has not changed people 's responsibilities at all . In fact we 're being more liberal to some people in some situations . Since it doesn 't have any tangible impact on them , unless they have a wetland , and unless they wan*- to do something , and then we have the ordinance . Why put ourselves through the ordeal . Ahrens : . . . I don 't have anything else to say . . . Erhart : I think you brought up a good point Brian . Regarding we have a list of what you can 't do in a wetland . We can certainly add to it . I wouldn 't do snowmobiles because you 're going to get tremendous , you 're going to have a riot here if you did that in Chanhassen . But I 'll tell you , I think there 's some other more destructive things in wetlands and that is 3 wheelers and . Ahrens : Yeah , they do that all over . Erhart : I 'll tell you , and to some degree horses . When you ride horses at the fringe of a wetland . To the extent you tear the turf up and then the rain comes along and all that gets washed into the wetlands so I - think there is some valid things if you 're willing to take them up Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 65 politically . If you 're willing to take them up politically , I think there are some valid things . But you know I guess we kind of dealt with what we perceived to be kind of construction related and not use related issues . Batzli : Okay , and that 's what I guess I 'm sitting here thinking if I 'm a homeowner and I 've got a wetland in my backyard and I change the oil in my car and I don 't think about it much so I take the drained oil and I kind of toss it in my back yard , and I 've got a wetland sitting there , I mean I would rather probably grade it right up to the edge than be throwing oil in there . And we don 't cover that . Maybe it 's illegal under another section under the City Code . Krauss : We 're also , it 's covered under State law but we 're also having an education program where we 're telling people about that . Jo Ann just got the mylar plate of grading stencils made where we 're going to painting on all the storm sewer grates in the city . Don 't dump waste down here . This flows into Lake Lucy . We 've got door hangers that are going out . - Olsen: We 're going to put , don 't pollute . Drains to wetlands . We don 't have any prohibitions . We only have what 's permitted and that 's one of the things we changed . Because that list could go on forever . Batzli : But that 's why I thought under 20-404 . Olsen: Those are just standards but there 's nowhere where you would say , = snowmobiling is not permitted in a wetland . Erhart : We don 't have prohibit . Olsen : Yeah , and that 's where , if it 's not permitted , it 's prohibited . . . So what we 've done , we only have this little list of what you can do and you have to get a wetland alteration permit to do anything else . Batzli : But I think Tim hit it right on the nose and that is , and maybe this has been my uncomfort because I 've been thinking of all these things that you could do to it that aren 't construction related that we don 't talk about . Don 't seem to cover . This section 404 , entitled no net loss . I never quite understood why it 's entitled that given what it says . I mean you would almost think the title should be something like , thou shalt not touch a wetland unless it 's permitted in here . End of sentence . Erhart : I thought we had that in here . What happened to the thing about having cattle lots right up to a wetland? That 's got to be in here . Feedlots . Olsen: We don 't permit feedlots . Erhart : You 're going to stop the farmer from feeding his cattle here in this town . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 66 Olsen: A feedlot . That 's not just a feedlot . That 's where you have concentrated , just cattle . Krauss : New feedlots are also licensed by the State . We stay away from the ag issues . Erhart : Okay , but in the old ordinance . We had some prohibitions like that . . . Where does it say you can 't dump in a wetlands? Isn 't that in here anymore? Olsen: There 's only things that are permitted and there 's no specific , so yes . You cannot dump . And under no net loss here you cannot . Krauss: A person may not drain , grade , fill , berm , remove healthy native vegetation or otherwise alter a wetland of any size or type except as defined herein . Erhart : Okay , but in our old wetland ordinance , we did have a list of things you could do . Krauss: But it was confusing . Erhart : Maybe I was wrong but yeah , I guess somehow I thought we had a - list of things you could do . Batzli : But can 't we put something in this no net loss section which actually addresses no net loss first of all . But second of all , says that we can 't drain , grade , fill , burn , remove healthy vegetation or you know this alter a wetland . I get the feeling that somebody drives their _ 3 wheeler through there , are we going to risk our reputation on saying that they are altering it by doing that? I mean is that how we 're going to cover it? Krauss : I honestly don 't know . I 've got to believe if somebody did it often enough , that they created a track through the wetland and actually destroyed the vegetation and we could prove who did it , yeah . We 'd go _ after them . Erhart : How can you do that now , if you have no law that says . Olsen : Because it 's not permitted . And it 's an alteration . Ahrens : We have the wetland vigilantes to go after them . Erhart : Where does it say it 's not permitted? Batzli : It says you can 't do it . Ahrens : If it 's not allowed , then it 's not permitted . Batzli : What they 're trying to say is that you can 't do it unless it 's permitted but I don 't know that what the words that we have in here are broad enough for that . And I would also , is there something in here that requires a no net loss per unit? Per parcel . Per development kind of a Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 67 thing . I thought that used to be in the no net loss section and either it got moved or . Krauss : Well there 's a part that says something about the ratio . Replacement ratio . Olsen : What was your question again? Batzli : As a policy , we have no net loss per parcel being developed or something . Didn 't we have that in there at one time? Olsen: Yeah , there 's all these lists that says you have to do it on site . If you can 't do it on site , you have to do it . Batzli : But as a philosophy . I mean we have an intent section that says it 's to avoid alteration and destruction of wetlands . But didn 't we used to have a purpose or intent that there was no net loss? I thought we did . I mean we keep talking about that . I mean everytime somebody gets up here and starts talking about a wetland , we say well we 've got a no net loss policy . We don 't even put it in our ordinance , do we? Erhart : I guess I don 't agree with you . I don 't think we really have to say we have a no net loss . We have a wetland preservation ordinance and have had one for 10 years . That 's what I remember hearing . That we 've not used that . Over used . What I consider over used . Krauss : Well not but effectively it has operated as a no net loss . I mean if somebody was going to make a wetland , they were required to replace it . Olsen: Under B , under the intent it says , when this is not feasible , mitigation must be provided to restore the lost or altered wetlands value and function . That 's essentially our no net loss . ( There was a tape change at this point in the discussion . ) Erhart : . . .saying that their trails include wetlands and lakes . Ahrens : And your backyard . My backyard . Krauss: They tend to try to avoid drafting ordinances that encounter all eventualities because they get very big and cumbersome and you 'd never be able to cover all the . . . Olsen : We 'd rather put something generic that we could . Erhart : Yeah , I think so . And that would include motorbikes or off trail bikes and 4 wheel drives . Olsen: I don 't think we 're going to get specific like that . Erhart : Right , a general statement that could be . Olsen: That destruction or alteration . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 68 Ahrens : Okay , next . Batzli : Do you have any comments? Farmakes: I had one question on Section 20-405 . Ahrens : I meant next item on the agenda . Farmakes : It says private boat launches requiring fill are prohibited in wetlands except on lakes without , they 're talking about lakes . I 'm assuming if there 's a wetland adjacent to a lake or it 's between the property owner and the lake . Olsen : Right . Farmakes: Without public boat access . What happens then if it doesn 't _ have a public boat access? Olsen: We 've had some cases , and this is kind of a recent amendment from the old ordinance where people , otherwise they had no means of access . They had a riparian lot but they couldn 't launch their boat or have access to the lake because there wasn 't a boat launch on the lake . Is that what you 're asking why we 're doing that? That 's a touchy one where- we felt that we needed to allow them some means of accessing the lake . Farmakes : Does that address that in here anywhere or is that just that line is just addressing the issue that it doesn 't have a public boat access . Olsen : If there is a public boat access , then we 're saying that 's what - you have to use . Farmakes: Right , but it doesn 't continue the line that they don 't have p- public boat access there . Or if they do , it just deals with one issue . Are you going to handle that separately? Or are you going to wait for them to ask? Olsen: I don 't know if I 'm following you . Farmakes: The line where it says wetlands except on lakes without a public boat access . If I was reading this and there was a public boat access , where would I coordinate the understanding between that? If I was a lake owner . Olsen : That you couldn 't do anything? Farmakes: Yeah . Would I need another paragraph somewhere and I 'd have to match it up with that? Olsen: Well no . Again , it 's just this is all that 's permitted . . .fact that you 're on a lake with a boat access , then you 're not under the permitted . Farmakes: Okay , so I would have to use the public boat access? Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 69 Olsen: Exactly . Batzli : Matt . Ledvina : Just one cuestion . When you talk about monumentation . Are you going to have like a standard plate for monuments so people don 't just pound a lathe into the ground and it goes away into the earth . Krauss : It 's got to be permanent . I think the ordinance does say that but I think it would be useful for the city to develop a standardized sign . Ledvina : Okay . And then who puts the monument in? Krauss : The developer . Ledvina : The developer does and you approve it then? Olsen : We go out and visualize . Ledvina : That 's pretty key in terms of enforcement as it relates to your setbacks and things like that . Olsen: Right , because we always lose it because the vegetation might go . . . Ledvina : Right . It 's going to be a battle to maintain those things . But you 've got to start somewhere . Batzli : Ladd . Conrad: I 've got several questions . If a wetland 's not on the map , we still can protect it right? Batzli : I want them to clarify that . I don 't think that 's clear . Conrad: Yeah , it just didn 't . Olsen: That 's our intent and we 'll get the wording so that 's clear that we can do that . Conrad: On page 4 , at the top . Number 4 . Is there a particular lake in Chanhassen? Is it just one lake that doesn 't have a public access? Olsen: Lake Lucy? Conrad: Yeah . Is that it? So that deal 's in there for Lake Lucy . Olsen : Well , Rice Marsh Lake doesn 't have one . Farmakes : It considered a lake . Is that a recreation lake? Olsen : Lake Lucy? Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 70 Farmakes : No . Rice Marsh . Krauss: Not really . Olsen : No , that 's an environmental lake . Farmakes: Lake Lucy just qualifies a D , recreational lake or something . Olsen : RD . Recreational development . So really that only happened on:e_ and I think we kept it in there because of that . In case it happens again but that 's not a real big one if you want to pull it out completely . Conrad: You know if it serves a purpose but private boat launches . So here we have a lake without a public access and we 're sort of saying , you can have a private launch to go through a wetland . — Olsen: Right . Conrad : You know , if we 're going to have a private launch , let 's not go through a wetland . Why? I don 't know . Farmakes : In some cases the lake may be ringed by a wetland and to — access to it , the State generally allows you like 50 feet or something tc get out to it . I think Eric Rivkin I think was , wasn 't that the issue on the other side of that particular lake . What he 'd go through like 400 feet of wetland . Olsen : Yeah , he wanted to build a canal . Farmakes : It became a jurisdiction issue . Ahrens : For a dock? Olsen : He wanted to dredge a canal for a canoe . Erhart : You 're suggesting take 4 out . Conrad : Yeah . Olsen: We can do that . I mean it 's brought up a lot of concern with anyone who 's seen it so I have no objection . Conrad: I think we should take it out . Then Section 20-406 . Wetland buffer strips . And we drop down to the last sentence , it says buffer strips . And then we get into the little chart and it says buffer yards . Are buffer yards buffer strips? - Olsen: Yeah . Krauss : That should be the same . Olsen: Would you like yard strip? Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 71 Conrad: Whatever and then I 'm , and this has bothered me everytime this has come through but I don 't understand this graph . And I turn the page and at the bottom of the next page it says table of wetland classifications . It says setback principal structure . And then I flip back to the other page and it says structure setback . Krauss: The tables should be , have a different title but the one you see on page 5 is for existing platted lots . Olsen : No , he knows but he 's talking about principal . You 're right . I meant to add in principal . Conrad: Well no , the principal is important too but I think Paul is , I 'm really confused . When I didn 't know what , why I was seeing that again . And I couldn 't sort it in . Olsen: It 's for existing situations . Existing plats . Existing platted lots of record . Batzli : New development requires the buffer strips . Existing , they don 't need the buffer . Conrad: I get it . Batzli : The thing that didn 't make sense to me that I was hoping you were going to ask , and I think Lundgren brought it up , was that they didn 't understand that you had to add cumulatively the buffer strip and the setback from the buffer strip . Do we say in here that the setback has to be from the buffer strip? Did we clarify that? Olsen : Right . Yes , that says 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip . Batzli : Buffer yard and that will be changed to strip . Outside edge . And do we define what the outside edge is in your little graph here? Krauss : Well , the graph illustrates it , sure . Batzli : I think you should just have a little arrow that points to it and says outside edge . Inside edge . Something like that . Conrad: Going back to structure . Going back to structure setback . The word structure . Is that in our definitions? Krauss : It 's in the zoning ordinance . Olsen : Zoning ordinance definitions . Krauss : It 's in the zoning ordinance . So does structure mean principal structure? Olsen: There 's principal structure and then if it 's just structure , that could be a wood pile . Remember we 've gotten into all that before . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 72 Conrad: Yeah . Did we ignore that because it 's confusing? Did the othe. committee . Olsen: Our intent was to have it be the principal structure . The main building including the deck . You know for a residence or . Batzli : So swingsets and sandboxes and kennels could be down by the . Olsen : Within the setback . Conrad: I guess I 'm not going to force that issue . Batzli : Otherwise you 'd have a backyard and you couldn 't use it . Conrad: Well , it 's just real confusing . Batzli : Is there a difference in our definition section though between principal structure and regular structure? Olsen : I thought there was one but there might not be . — Batzli : I don 't even know if we need the answer tonight but we should . . . Conrad : Brian , do you want to stay away from this? Batzli : No , go ahead . Conrad: Under permit required , and I guess I 'm just looking for a sense from everybody else here . A big concern I always had with the previous ordinance was it kind of looked like you could play around with the — wetland as long as you filled out a permit . Now I think the words up front are pretty strong that we don 't want . Olsen : Right , we tried to change that . I remember that was brought up as a concern . Conrad: Yeah . I think up front we 're saying we just don 't want to tamper . But then I get back to the permit and now I 'm getting paranoid again . It kind of , we don 't say it 's not permitted in the introduction of the permit . Okay , so it says you can , I don 't know . Maybe it 's just— the way that said but it said , drainage . I almost want to say Jo Ann that these are not permitted or encouraged but they possibly can happen in a certain situation . I guess it 's sort of a , maybe I 'm over reacting _ to that but that 's . Ahrens: Would you feel comfortable Ladd if you just put in after type on the third sentence , may be permitted under some circumstances but requires a wetland alteration? Conrad: I don 't want somebody to go to one section in this ordinance and then all of a sudden think , all I have to do is fill out , in fact who said it? A neighbor said it just the other day . Hey , you can do this . All you 've got to do is go to the city and get a permit . And that 's sort_ of a reaction that I 'm having . And even though it 's set up through here Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 73 that says we don 't want to . We don 't want to . All of a sudden it says permit anyway . Batzli : Well yeah so it makes 404 and 408 look like they 're in different directions . Conrad : Yeah . Olsen : Okay . We might have to like repeat what we did before . Conrad: Yeah . That would pacify me Jo Ann . Olsen : Yeah , because I know we did it in one place but you 're right , when you read it here . Conrad : It kind of says , go ahead . But that 's not really . Batzli : When we talked about that at length of approaching it from a negative standpoint . Conrad: And I think my only , okay . The only other , on page 8 . Under mitigation . The last 3 sentences . Mitigation will not always be based solely on an acre to acre replacement . Now I thought the State standards were too were 2 for 1 . Krauss: State standards are 2 for 1 . I 'm fully convinced that . . . Conrad : That what? Krauss : It will be overturned . Conrad: Well I guess what I 'm saying , I 'm not trying to minimize . I 'm not sure I buy a 2 for 1 actually when I think about it . But on the other hand , I 'm not trying to create an ordinance that 's less restrictive than the State either . I guess that just makes me uncomfortable that the State is saying 2 for 1 and here we 're out saying , hey we 've gat a really great ordinance . Krauss: The State only says 2 for 1 if you happen to live in a city . It says , if you 're a farmer and you 're next to God , it 's 1 to 1 . It treats similar people differently . The State law also doesn 't recognize getting value for improving wetlands . And some of this is in the rules . The rules are just out on the streets and can be changed . The law , there 's some legislative moves to change it . We said we 'd adhere to whatever is in force but here 's the way we want to do it . And this is one of the points that we 're taking a little bit of a philosophical stand that 's somewhat a divergence to the State law and we may not prevail . Conrad : So we are saying we don 't like the State law . I don 't know . Krauss : No , no , no . Conrad: You were part of that committee -Tim and Brian . I don 't know , did you pay attention to this? Planning Commission Meeting - November 4 , 1992 - Page 74 Erhart : Yeah , we thought we did . Conrad: So you knew . Erhart : Well I think it 's a couple things . Right away it strikes you . When one group has to do 2 to 1 and another group 1 to 1 and they 're boh really doing the same thing . A wetland 's a wetland whether it 's in a farm community or in an urban area . It 's unfair . Taking it further , Paul says that it 's probably going to be unconstitutional , and it ought to be . Therefore , we basically reverted to whatever the State decides . Krauss : And to build on that Ladd , what we 're saying is , we will apply the State ratio that 's in force . Right now it 's 1 to 1 . It 's supposed to go to 2 to 1 later in the year . We will apply that but we interpret - it differently . I mean we may give a developer spending $40 ,000 .00 or $50 ,000 .00 to increase a Type I to a Type III credit because they 've improved the quality and value of that wetland to our community . Therefore , instead of 2 to 1 land mass , we may get 2 to 1 with like a 1 to 1 land mass and 1 to 1 investment because it costs money to do it . State law doesn 't allow that now . I think it 's wrong . Olsen: That 's where those habitat units and everything comes into play . Conrad: This also gives you the liberty to be a . 1 for 1 because you can- do any , based on what you said in this , you can do anything you want . Erhart : Within the guidelines of the . Conrad : No , that 's not the way I read this . I guess I don 't read it that way and maybe the lawyers can tell me if I 'm wrong . I guess I 've read that as saying staff can really , we don 't have to do it on a 1 to 1 - basis . Now we know that the Statute says 2 to 1 and we 're saying , we don 't have to do it on a 1 to 1 which means we can do anything we want , and that 's what I 'm reading . Krauss : It says mitigation will be performed at the ratios required by State law to achieve replacement of the wetland function and value . Mitigation will not always be based solely on an acre to acre replacement but may also be , may be based on replacement of habitat units and there 'F. that procedure to do that . What we 're saying here is that we agree with the intent of the State law . We may have a problem with the fairness of - it . We agree with the intent . The only real disagreement here though the fact that right now , I mean you have a State law that in it 's title says that this is going to get at the value and function of wetlands , yet the rules don 't do it . The rules just say I don 't care what it is . It may be a piece of crap on the corner of a field . It 's a wetland . So you 've got to replace it in kind . It 's silly . I think you 've concluded time and time again that an improved wetland that offers more to the community offers better wildlife habitat and offers better visual quality , is a benefit to the city and it 's residents . Conrad : Yeah . I 'm personally not debating what you 're saying . I 'm really trying to get , so you have to follow this . This says you have to follow the State guidelines . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 75 Olsen: Because we 're not going to follow the ratio . I think you 're thinking ratio and acreage as the same and it 's not . It 's 2 to 1 . Krauss: It 's value . It 's value and function . Olsen: Well we 're saying value and function . The State 's saying acre . Krauss : But the law says value and function . Olsen : Yeah . The rules say acre . Frank Svoboda : The rules are not applying the intent is that . . . if you want to get into that now but I think the reason is , none of the biologist want to . . .they don 't know how to measure it . They know how to measure area . They know how to measure classifications but if they start venturing into this thing with functions and value of quality , all of a sudden you 're going to have to start making decisions that the City of Chanhassen has made through this ordinance which is , you 've classified wetlands according to the certain quality based on their existing vegetation and future intended use . . . But the State doesn 't want to have to deal with that because in their minds I think they 're afraid it 's going to weaken their position when it comes to protecting wetlands . As long as you deal with wetlands strictly on an area basis , you only have to justify protecting one wetland over another . So I think that 's why they 're afraid to even . . .with that subject . Conrad: And I 'm sorry I 'm keeping us here but I just really have to understand this . So we 've got to follow the State guidelines . Olsen: 2 to 1 but we 're saying , we 're saying you might have a wetland that has the habitat units of let 's say 50 . Okay , and that gets into that , that 's way beyond . We don 't want to get into that now but that 's that attachment that we have . So the wetland that 's there might be worth 50 points . What we 're saying is that you can give us a wetland , let 's say it 's 2 acres . We 're saying you could actually give us a 1 acre wetland that has 100 points . Conrad : So then you don 't , State Statute . Olsen: It 's 2 to 1 . It 's still 2 to 1 but it 's a function and value . It 's not acreage . Is that right? Krauss: Yeah . Conrad: That overrides the State? Olsen: No . Conrad : It doesn 't? Olsen: We 're not sure what 's going to happen . We 're hoping we can prove , once again that it does work as we have with our old ordinance . Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 76 Krauss: Just to sum up too . The State law is generating a lot of controversy . The ruling . . . It 's my guess that the rules , if they are — put into effect , will not be put into effect on schedule . If they are put into effect on schedule , they 're going to be changed radically each year for the next 2 or 3 years . And that we 've always taken the position that Chanhassen 's way ahead of the game . We 've got development going on — all the time . We can 't wait for the State to figure this out . Conrad: I 'm done . — Erhart : I really don 't have much interest in this stuff . Batzli : Okay , I don 't have anything . What do we want to do with it? ID( we want Jo Ann to make changes and bring it back? Are we comfortable enough with it that we let her make the changes and put it up to City Council? City Council? - Ahrens : Yep . Batzli : Can I have a motion? Do we need a motion to approve this? Krauss : Yes . Conrad: So moved . Ahrens : Second . - Batzli : Any discussion? Just as long as those changes get in there , I have no discussion . Conrad moved , Ahrens seconded to approve the Zoning Ordinance Amendment amending the Wetland Ordinance amended per the Planning Commission 's discussion . All voted in favor and the motion carried. Batzli : Are we ever going to have a development in the near future where there isn 't 500 people in the room and they all want to talk and show us — videos? So we can be proactive on all these other things that have been molding in here . Erhart : I heard they used the City 's video recorder to do that . Ahrens : I thought the movie was the best part . Batzli : The thing that bothers me is , again when we saw this 3 weeks agc or a month ago or whatever and again tonight where , in one case it was the applicant bringing in new stuff . And tonight it was all these homeowners giving us petitions and talking like there had never been a single homeowners meeting . And that was aggravating from the standpoint of . Ledvina : It 's confusing . Batzli : Yeah . — Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 77 Farmakes : Well there was another meeting that took place after here where I talked to them . After the last meeting and that 's why I was being a little , I was being kind of hard of them because they didn 't listen to a damn word I told them . And how to solidify what it was that they were bringing forward . And they still had a shotgun with a whole litany of things including digging in on the price of the house . I mean I explained to them , every person there that the City can 't deal with that . And it just goes in one ear and comes out the other . Olsen: The next meeting is slow though . Batzli : Okay , well let 's make sure it 's slow . I don 't want to see anything , I don 't care what a developer says . If he 's going to go bankrupt between now and Christmas . I don 't care . We need to talk about Tim 's stuff on the trees . We need to talk about cul-de-sacs . Krauss: We do have Abra-Goodyear which was supposed to be on last time and there was no last time . And it was supposed to be on tonight and we found out that we had made a mistake in legal notice so we couldn 't hear it . So it 's on for your next . Batzli : Well what else is on there? Farmakes: Is that going to be at that meeting tomorrow? Would you bring that to the meeting tomorrow? The potential development here for the Highway 5 committee . That 's tomorrow right? Isn 't that tomorrow? Krauss: That 's next week . Farmakes : Next week Thursday , okay . Is that a relevant topic of discussion at this point? Krauss : We might have the Opus project there . Farmakes: This might be a good example of types of projects that will be coming down the pike and a motivation for this alignment type ordinance . Olsen : So the other one is very short . It 's , you know the Valvoline site . That had to go through the plan. . . — Erhart : You 're saying the next meeting is short? Olsen: Well it was supposed to see that Valvoline site but now we have the Hanus building . That might be . . . Batzli : Well we 're going to have 3 things on there again , right? That was a drag that we had to cancel the last meeting , because we could have talked about some of this stuff at that time . Okay , is there a motion to adjourn? Krauss: Well we have to do two things . The Tree Board but also several of you talked to me about , we don 't have anybody who 's term is up this year but several of you have talked to me about , for personal reasons and what not , seeking to leave the Commission and move on . I 'm not going to Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 78 force anybody 's hand . I 'm fully content with working with you in the future . But I need to know if there are going to be departures because C. need to advertise . Now Tim , one of the things we had talked about was the Tree Board . The position that 's open , well there 's several positions open on the Tree Board . There 's the at-large positions but there is a dedicated Planning Commission position . Olsen : . . .who you are appointing tonight has to be a Planning Commissioner . - Krauss: So if anybody 's got anything . Batzli : Does someone want to be on the Tree Board as a Planning Commissioner? How often is this group going to meet? Krauss : It 's probably once a month . Olsen: If that . Maybe to get started , yeah . It 's one of those things , once things get started it will be . — Batzli : Anyone have interest in it yet? We held it over from last time because I think we thought you might be interested Tim . Erhart : Well as I told Paul , I 've been on here for 6 years and I 've gotten enough of these late night meetings . So I 'm going to resign soot . I ' ll give it one more meeting to talk about these trees and then I 'll - just send this to the Council and let them fight it out . I 've obviously had a big interest in trees and enjoy it and stuff and I guess maybe one of the things , if nobody else wanted it , I could take it and then resign _. from the Planning Commission and then represent the Planning Commission for a year and then you could appoint someone else but I don 't know if that 's the right thing to do either . In terms of you know certainly coming back and reporting anything relating to the tree group , to the Planning Commission , like I say I don't know if that 's the right thing tc do . Olsen: We don 't have any By-laws or anything like that . Conrad : I think it 's the right thing to do . Erhart : It would certainly be convenient unless somebody else wanted to be on the thing . Batzli : No , go ahead and do that . Erhart : Just make sure it 's clear what we 're talking about here . You 're- appointing me to it as a Planning Commission member . Then when I resign the Planning Commission and then I ' ll serve a year and then you guys , or at any time you can . Batzli : I 'm comfortable with that . Is there a motion to appoint Tim? Planning Commission Meeting November 4 , 1992 - Page 79 Batzli moved, Ahrens seconded to appoint Tim Erhart as the Planning Commission representative to the Tree Board. All voted in favor and the motion carried . Batzli : You 're appointed . What else do we have to do? Krauss : So should I advertise? Erhart : Yeah , you ought to go ahead . Just think Matt , you 've got 5 more years . Batzli : Are you going to turn in your pink slip? Erhart : You are Joan? Ahrens: I really hate to . I mean I 've really enjoyed myself but I was telling Paul that I have a new job and I 'm going to have to be attending Planning Commission and City Council meetings as part of my job in different places so I can 't handle any more than that . Batzli : So two it sounds like , unless Steve . Steve also or no? Krauss : I should call Steve . I haven 't heard that he wanted to . Conrad: He talks about it . Erhart : We all talk about it . Usually about 11 :00 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairman Batzli noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission Minutes dated October 7 , 1992 as presented . Ledvina moved, Ahrens seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried . The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 midnight . Submitted by Paul Krauss Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 101.111CITY OF CHANBAssEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director DATE: November 12, 1992 SUBJ: Report from Director At the City Council meeting on Monday, November 9, 1992, the following actions were taken: 1. Zoning ordinance amendment concerning construction site erosion/sediment control requirements was given final reading on the consent agenda. Upon publication of the ordinance, this will become effective. Staff will be working with Bonestroo to develop a final version of the workbook for distribution. 2. Zoning ordinance amendment to rezone 95 acres of property zoned A2 to PUD for Lundgren Brothers Construction. The rezoning request was given final reading on the consent agenda. 3. Zoning ordinance amendment to establish Residential PUD Districts, first reading. This item took well over a year for the Planning Commission to complete its work and forward it to the City Council. It has been scheduled on City Council agendas for at least the last 6 months, however, due to heavy work loads, it was always continued. The City Council finally got an opportunity to consider the ordinance and actually approved it on first reading. The City Council did however make several changes from the original Planning Commission draft. Minimum lot areas are established at 11,000 square feet and a — minimum average lot area across the PUD of 15,000 was included. Staff noted that we believe that this is consistent with both residential PUDs which have been approved in the last 12 months and could have effectively been utilized on the Hans Hagen proposal as well. The City Council also changed the minimum front yard setback from 20 feet to 30 feet believing that 20 feet was insufficient area to provide off-street parking. tI, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER ONGOING ISSUES REVISED NOVEMBER 12, 1992 ISSUES STATUS 1.* 1995 Study Area (North) and Hwy. 5 On-going work with Task Force Corridor Study 2. 1995 Study Area (South) Assigned to Planning Commission staff. Work to be initiated as time commitments allow OTHER ITEMS 1. Rezoning BF District to A2 Staff preparing updated information for Planning Commission direction 2. Sign Ordinance Work is continuing to progress with task force. Program expected to be completed shortly. 3. Tree Protection Ordinance, Mapping Inventory is completed. Over view of of significant vegetative areas existing tree protection regulations requested by Commissioner Erhart. Advisory Tree Board established by City Council. PC representative is Tim Erhart. 4.* Wetland Ordinance/Surface Water Ordinance approved by Planning Management Program Task Force Commission on November 4, 1992. established Scheduled for CC review on November 23, 1992. 5. Shoreland Ordinance Staff is currently working on draft of the ordinance. Initial comments delivered to MnDNR. Will place on upcoming PC agenda. 6. Group home ordinance PC reviewed on 3/4/92. Currently preparing draft ordinance. 1 7.* PUD Ordinance Given first reading by CC on 11/9/92. Provides for 11,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size, _ 15,000 sq. ft. average lot size and 30 ft. front yard setbacks. 8. PC input in Downtown Planning and Ongoing - Review ongoing projects Traffic Study discussed at 9/2/92 meeting. — 9. Review of Architectural Standards to 1992/may be combined in part with Hwy. 5 Promote High Quality Design work. — 10. Bluff Creek Corridor Greenway With adoption of Bluff Line Preservation ordinance. CC referred item to Park and — Recreation Commission. Staff working with Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District to develop joint Bluff Creek corridor — program. Meeting held on conceptual Bluff Creek park design prepared by Lance Neckar from U of M. — 11. Ordinance amendment to Non- PC approved - City Attorney to redraft. Conforming Use section to clarify — ordinance 12. Temporary uses, sales - new Guidelines memo reviewed by PC and ordinance scheduled for CC. Ordinance revisions to follow. Public Safety Director proposing _ changes to ordinance. 13. Truck and trailer rental standards Requested by PC. _ 14. Sexually oriented businesses PC reviewed on 3/4/92. Sent to Public Safety Commission. Reviewed on 7/8/92. _ To be forwarded to CC. 15.* Tree Conservation Easements To be reviewed by PC in November. — 16.* Fence Requirements To be reviewed by PC in November. 17. Open Space Zoning Requested by PC. * Change in status since last report. — 2 3 CITY OF CHANHASSEN -)J0 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning director DATE: June 25, 1992 SUBJ: Tree Conservation Easements At past meetings, staff has been asked to elaborate on tree conservation easements which have been utilized on several recent plats. The City Attorney has developed the easement format that is attached to this memo. What it essentially does is permanently identify an area that is to be protected for tree conservation purposes and bind all present and future property owners to maintain the forested area in its natural state. The only activities allowed in this area are removing diseased or storm damaged trees. Some of the commissioners have expressed potential concerns over permanently binding a home owner from doing anything relative to trees. I would point out that these tree conservation easements are used sparingly. They are used only when a specific concentration of trees worthy of preservation can be identified. Staff has taken pains to ensure that they do not hinder normal use of a lot to either build a home or accommodate normal household functions. I would also point out that these tree conservation easements are developed as a fundamental tool for addressing the impact of development. That is the preservation of these trees may often be the key to gaining approval of the plat and designing a development that is acceptable to the city and neighbors. Therefore, we believe it is reasonable to provide permanent protection for these areas. Arguably, some of the City Attorney's language is rather strict and some modifications may be appropriate. For example, while we would not want any permanent structures built in a tree conservation area, the construction of walkways, placement of playground equipment, or some other normal activities associated with single family lots may be appropriate. Staff looks forward to getting your guidance on this matter. _ Is t4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CONSERVATION EASEMENT INSTRUMENT made this day of , 19 , by and between ("Grantors") , and the CITY OF a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") . The Grantors, in consideration of good and valuable consider- ation paid by the City, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, grant the City a permanent conservation easement as that term is defined in this instrument over, under, and across the premises described in the attached Exhibit "A" ("subject property") . 1. Grantors for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, agree that the following are prohibited in perpetuity on the subject property: A. Constructing, installing, or maintaining anything made by man, including but not limited to buildings, structures, walkways, clothes line poles, and playground equipment. B. Cutting, removing, or altering trees or other vegeta- tion, except those diseased or storm damaged. C. Excavation or filling. D. Application of fertilizers, whether natural or chemical. E. Application of chemicals for the destruction or retard- ation of vegetation. F. The deposit of waste or debris. G. The application of herbicides, pesticides, and insecti- cides. H. Outside storage of any kind. CHAN:FORM Jnr /• r /nom _. CHAN:FORM r05/15/92 116AV i•.' , JL ..." .LS., 1'1V .VV .VV I. Activity detrimental to the preservation of the scenic beauty, vegetation, and wildlife. 2. Grantors for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, further grant the City the affirmative right, but not the obli- gation, to enter upon the subject property at any time to enforce compliance with the terms of this instrument. GRANTORS: GRANTEE: — CITY OF BY: Its Mayor — BY: Its Clerk/Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19 , by NOTARY PUBLIC -2- CAMPBELL , KNUTSON , SCOTT & FUCHS , P .A May 15 ,Q2 10 :26 No .007 P .04 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19 , by NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ( ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 19 , by , Mayor, and by , Clerk/Manager, of the City of , a Minnesota municipal corporation, in behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority of its City Council. NOTARY PUBLIC DRAFTED BY: Campbell , Knutson, Scott & Fuchs, P.A. 317 Eagandale Office Center 1380 Corporate Center Curve Eagan, Minnesota 55121 (612) 452-5000 -3- Planning Commission Meeting July 1 , 1992 - Page 65 Ledvina : If I understood the criteria by which this proposal was being evaluated , I would try to make some determination but I 'm so confused as to what we 're looking at . Farmakes : We were too . Conrad: But we voted . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairman Batzli noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated June 3 , 1992 as presented . OPEN DISCUSSION: DISCUSSION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT FORM. Krauss: That one I think we ought to maybe lay over because there 's some questions . Erhart : Also I think , I haven 't talked to Steve about this but I know in the history . . .he has strong feelings about people 's rights to do things in their own yards and if somebody wanted to hold this over , I think it 'd be just fine . . Farmakes : I 'd be curious as to how this fit in with this thing on Monday where they talk about the city compensating landowner 's for trees on their property . Krauss : Oh , you mean the Lucas Decision? Farmakes : The Supreme Court . Krauss: I don 't think anybody really knows yet what the implications are but I had a conversation with Roger about that decision this morning and I used to get all worked up about these Supreme Court decisions thinking the sky is falling and generally you find it 's because somebody screwed up or did something . . . I 'm not sure they 're nearly as pervasive as you might think at first blush . Batzli : Where 's that thing about this article? One Planner 's Reflection of the Edge City . You write that? Krauss : Yeah . Batzli : And it 's going in which issue? Krauss: It should be this coming on . Batzli : Congratulations . You downplayed your work . I liked it . Should we table this easement? Okay. If nobody 's opposed , we 'll table that over to the next meeting . Erhart: The next meeting is what , the 15th? Krauss : The 15th , yes . Erhart : Why does Council want to meet? Planning Commission Meeting July 1 , 1992 - Page 66 Krauss: The Council , I 've got to double check if that timing works but the Council wants , on an annual basis they sit down with all the Commissions and keep the communications open . Ask what your issues are but hopefully they ' ll tell you what their issues are . I 'm not sure if we 'll have frankly enough time to do it on the 15th . Erhart : Is this an annual meeting? Krauss: I think we 've gotten them once or twice before . Farmakes : Can I ask you a question since we spent so much time on this PUD and we just sort of skipped over the City Council update . Do they really believe you when you tell them that that 's jv-st sort of a variance guideline , the PUD situation? What 's your opinion on that? Krauss : What do you mean a variance? Farmakes: The Councilmen that I 've talked to on this PUD thing , it seems to be mistrust that what they 're doing is making an ordinance people can build on and that the City 's committed to . But the way it 's been explained to me over and over again is that it 's really a variance . That the City can refuse if they don't feel that it 's appropriate to approve it . So why then do I continue to hear this almost a reluctance that we 're approving this type of thing? Is there a trust factor there? Krauss: I don 't think it 's a matter of trust because staff 's relationship with the Council is a pretty good one . But I think , I don 't want to characterize it unfairly either but you 've got the Council , the people I 'm most familiar with on the Council are people who have moved to this community 15-20 years ago and they did it for some very explicit reasons in - terms of what kind of liftstyle was offered . I don 't know , maybe there 's something of a mind set that that 's exactly what everybody wants as the standard mode of living . There 's also , I mean they 're very comfortable with the lifestyle they have . They have good lives here and they think that that is something worthy to pass on . I guess I don't dispute that but I think there 's other ways of getting at it and I 'm not all clear if the Council 's going to go through with it or not . Farmakes: When they come in here , should there be more discussion with us in regards to those issues? Those issues and the second coming of American- city . A lot of stuff that we 're doing is the exact opposite of what they 're . Krauss: See that 's the thing . I mean you talk to people like Councilman Wing and he 's got very strong feelings of support for the neo-traditionalist movement and the kind of stuff we hear from Bill Morrish . This PUD is fully consistent with achieving those goals , yet they 've got a lot of trouble digesting that . I don't know how to rationalize that , except to maybe ask Bill to talk to him about it because they have some type of . . . Farmakes: Well a lot of traditional suburban planning , which we 've been into here for , since after World War II , or at least the past 25 years , is not really based on diversity . It 's highly suspicious of it and I get a Planning Commission Meeting July 1 , 1992 - Page 67 lot of feedback from that and I 'm sure maybe you do too . That that 's why the 10 ,000 square foot and so on . A buzzer goes off whether it 's relevant or not . There seems to be a lot of walls that we smack into there when we start to discuss some of this stuff even in the HRA and the downtown development . We continue to build these large parking lots facing access streets and we place the building farther back when a lot of current design information has been coming out the past 10 years saying no , that 's not the right thing to do . It used to be the right thing to do back in the 70 's but now we 've discovered that we should be doing it differently. We continue on . And basically the developer is framing that down into reality . We say yeah. It 's sort of a philosophical thing . I 'm not sure if we caught up with that and I 'm not sure , they 're sort of accountable to their voters . What kind of information they 're getting there and whether or not they really believe it . From a professional level . Krauss: There 's a real philosophical change I suppose that needs to come but you know , it 's one thing to see and read all this stuff and be interested and want to try some of this stuff but on the other side , there 's a reason that all of us , myself included , moved to the suburbs . And there 's a million and a half people in the Twin Cities did it . It clearly offered them something they were seeking so I 'm not as willing as the neo-traditionalist are to throw it all on the , and say everybody 's wrong . All the decisions you made were erroneous and you're foul people and you messed up the world and let 's remake it . On the other hand , I think Chanhassen 's in a really unique position to do some very nifty , innovative stuff that will make this a community that 's different than most of the suburban communities . And I think we 're well on the way to achieving that and it 's stuff that I 'm pretty convinced, maybe conceitedly that most people , once it 's here , most people are going to be real proud of it . And real comfortable with the changes it has . With the ability to have a real downtown . With the ability to walk to places or bike to places . With the ability not to go on a highway to go everyplace you have to go . Those are things that we can offer here that most people can 't . Most towns can 't . Batzli : So , do we talk to the City Council about these things? Krauss : I think it 'd be an interesting discussion. Frankly it 's probably a whole lot more interesting than, what do you want us to do next year . Don 't rock the boat . Batzli : One question before I want to adjourn and that is these provisional population estimates by the Met Council . Are these meaningful to us? Krauss: Very . Batzli : Why? That 's what I didn't get . Krauss: Did I give those to you? Batzli : Yeah . They 're on the back of your article . Administrative section . Planning Commission Meeting July 1 , 1992 - Page 68 Krauss: Oh . When you go to the Metro Council with a comp plan amendment , or to justify , rationalize building a road or to rationalize getting funding for a county park or a trail system . or build a sewage treatment plant like in Chaska . The first thing they do . They make projections okay and you think projections are innocuous . If it doesn 't turn out to be correct , we 'll change the projections . They don't . They change reality to fit the projections . You 're way ahead of the game to have projections that are real and reasonable . For the first time I . I think it was the first time I 've ever heard of it . The Metro Council 's population projections are actually larger than we projected when we did the comp plan . Now that doesn 't necessarily mean that people are going to come and knock on the door at Chanhassen tomorrow and say the Metro Council told me to move here so I 'm going to come . But it 's indicative of the fact that the Metro Council agrees with us that this city is in a real , it 's in the driver 's seat . Batzli : And everything else is moving along? Target 's moving? Task force 's are moving? Krauss: First task force meeting for the corridor study is on the 15th before the Planning Commission meeting . Batzli : When does the City Council talk to us? Krauss : It should be on the same evening . Batzli : Okay , so everybody will be here for that . Krauss : We 're starting to get a lot on that agenda . I 'm a little bit leery of it . Erhart: The 15th? Conrad: I won 't be here . Batzli : I don 't know if I 'll be here or not . Okay . as far as HRA , have you been getting the HRA packet now? Krauss: No . We talked about that this morning . Batzli : Here we 've got a guy who actually is going to go to HRA meetings for us . We 've got to start getting him the packet . Because they 're going a lot of stuff right now . They 're doing the bowling alley thing . Krauss: That 's why I included, in fact Ashworth asked me to make sure that you got all those reports because we thought you'd find it interesting . Batzli : On the Target and the bowling alley and all that stuff? Yeah . Conrad moved, Farmakes seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m. . Submitted by Paul Krauss Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim Tim A. Erhart _ 775 West 96th Street I `2 N0-1-44,' ( Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 612/474-1116 October 20, 1992 To: Paul Kraus, Director of Planning, City of Chanhassen Members of the Chanhassen Planning Commission HOMEOWNER FOUND GUILTY Homeowners have just been found guilty of the destruction of our forest. The sentence is perpetual banishment from the wooded areas in their backyard. The area will be described legally and recorded with the county at the homeowners expense. The guilty party and their successors will be prohibited from ever touching any live plant in the defined area . Sound crazy? It is. We've put the homeowner on trial and found him guilty of a crime which I believe hasn't been committed. Have we seen a pattern of homeowners doing something to destroy our urban forest? We may see an isolated case of someone doing something thoughtlessly but, I believe homeowners make good decisions about trees. They recognize their contribution to their home life and their value to their investment. If there remains a problem with developers needlessly destroying trees despite our oversight mechanism then let's deal with that. My concern is that we're starting to apply tree conservation easements on a regular basis without thinking through their need and their ramifications on neighborhoods and the tree stands themselves. Let's try to put trees and our urban forest in perspective: 1) While development initially may destroy some valuable trees, as a whole, urbanization increases forest cover. I estimate that undeveloped land in Chanhassen which exist in predominately agricultural use today has less than 25% tree cover. Urban areas, those in existence over twenty years, probably have 60- - 70% tree cover. Most of these trees were planted after these areas were converted from Ag to housing. 2) Somehow we have concluded that tree stands are irreplaceable. It seems that we are equating tree stands with wetlands in that it is an act against humanity to destroy any aspect of them. As opposed to a wetland, trees can be replaced. Sure, you can't replace a 100 year old white oak in thirty years, but you can easily duplicate the effect a of a mature tree stand within thirty years. They key here is to get planting now! Those of us over forty recognize that thirty years go by pretty darned fast! TIMPERST ANCOMM 10/20/92j -1- By use of a mixture of fast growing trees such as evergreens, ash, silver maple, red oak (which by the way is a relatively fast growing tree), I have been able to convert large areas of previously tilled fields on my farm to a woodlot in only twelve years. Some of the trees are over twenty feet in height. The key is to start planting as soon as possible. I welcome anyone who would like to see this project. 3) We seem to have the notion that tree and brush removal is harmful. Nothing could be further from the truth. Brush spreads disease. Trees which are too close together become deformed. Trimming and shaping trees is critical to their development if they are to mature into properly shaped trees. Lastly, many tree species in existing tree stands are useless and rob soil moisture and sunlight from those trees we want to invest in. A homeowner is wise to assess which trees are the most valuable on his property with regard to location, shape and species. Brush such as prickly ash and trees such as box elder, black cherry, ironwood, some ash, and linden may be removed to make the area more useable in an urban setting and to encourage the healthy growth of the more valuable trees. Sometimes mature trees (particularly oaks) need to be cabled together to prevent splitting. (Which incidentally can be prevented if they are pruned properly as they grow.) Occasionally an elm may be so valuable it should be treated for Dutch Elm disease. Best of all, removing dead branches prevents the spread of disease. Do you think a homeowner who is not allowed to remove brush and trim trees is going to remove dead and decaying branches? I believe homeowners have a darn good record of identifying which trees are valuable and working to make the wooded areas on their property healthy and more valuable. 4) What's the cost to the family buying the lot to have the easement area surveyed, defined and recorded? A couple of hundred dollars? More? Do we even know? _ 5) In order to "protect" tree stands from homeowners we're now attempting to require that developers place the house 20 feet from the street right of way. Drive through some of our sub-divisions in the summer. You will see cars, boats, motor homes, and the like, parked in driveways everywhere. Kids are running around them. Even in older sub-divisions with small lots, we never put garage doors that close to streets — they were put in alleys so people had space to park and care for the vehicles on their premises. We have an ordinance that requires a minimum 30 ft. setback. I think it's a pretty good one which without any discussion has been thrown out as outdated. Please, let's think about this. This ordinance has served us a long time. The idea of experimenting in neighborhoods and then going back after the homes are put in to see how it looks is very disturbing to me. I believe we have an obligation to the people buying their homes to determine on paper what a twenty foot setback does for useability, safety, traffic noise, lights and on-street parking, etc. TIIMPERSIPIANCOMM 10/20/92j -2- I'm always surprised at how short term things can be at times. When we design a neighborhood we need be thinking 100 years ahead or more. Once installed, our streets and houses are not going to move. Trees will die and be replanted. The forest will change and move to suit its new urban use. It's appropriate that it does. Yes, I'll say it, I think it is un-American (note that I don't use the term "Communist" anymore) to jump in and meddle with people's homes. I state this in light of the fact that we have not shown that homeowners have been detrimental to trees to the extent that their action endangers the health and safety of our society. Do we think somehow that Chanhassen's woodlots are unique? If you think so, just drive in any direction and you will find them all over the place. Hundreds of sites more dramatic than that of our Bluff Creek gorge exist all over Minnesota. What's unique about our woodlots is that they are among us — the 11,000 people who live here. With these easements we're attempting to freeze woodlots in their existing state because somehow we feel that the world is running out of trees. In Minnesota we have more tree cover today than we had in the early 1900s. What we must do is to make our woodlots more valuable to us — in an urban setting. This means access for people who cannot drive to the rural, undisturbed woodlots i.e., trails, etc. I'm not opposed to purposeful easements where their are appropriate. It seems to me that privately owned areas planned for quasi-public use may be an appropriate place to apply such easements. Steep slopes where the removal of any vegetation would cause erosion may be another. I ask that we define what areas are appropriate and what restrictions should apply and to think through the effect we are having on neighborhoods which will be there for hundreds of years. Instead of freezing these woodlots we should be concentrating our efforts on developing an ambitious planting program. In 30 years this will pay more dividends than freezing woodlots and forcing undesirable steet and house locations. I simply ask that we carefully think through the concept of tree conservation easements and then establish a clear policy to use if and when they are applied. I hope you've enjoyed reading this as much as I've enjoyed writing it. Sincerel 7Y Tim A. rhart TAE:j TAPERSIPLANCOMM I0120'92j -3- CITY OF CHANHASSEN690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director Q� DATE: October 14, 1992 SUBJ: Cul-de-sac Lengths Chairman Batzli has asked that we schedule a discussion on the question of cul-de-sacs and street connections. He has pointed out that the Planning Commission's recent reversal of its position on the proposed Lundgren subdivision indicates a lack of direction and agreement on how these issues should be handled. Furthermore, there is some question as to the City Council's positions on items such as the Kurvers Point Subdivision which was designed for a street loop and approved as such by the Planning Commission and which the City Council allowed to be built as a long cul-de-sac. There is no question that cul-de-sacs are highly valued by developers and homeowners alike. They provide a sense of seclusion, a sense of security, particularly for younger children who play in the area, and there is a belief that they are somehow safer since there is no through traffic. Typically, lots on cul-de-sacs are sold at a premium. Staff's position on cul-de-sacs is one of acceptance since they are a fundamental part of the suburban landscape. However, we typically raise concerns when cul-de-sacs are unusually long and will typically recommend that street connections be made, where possible, to minimize potential problems. The litany of staff's concerns relative to cul-de-sacs is becoming somewhat repetitious. After stating them so many times at Commission and Council meetings, only to find ourselves typically overruled with the final decision, the issue is becoming rather tedious. However, in our professional judgement there are significant problems with these over-length cul-de-sacs. These include the following: 1. The access pattern that results with extensive use of cul-de-sacs and inadequate provision of street connections is an inefficient one. Distances traveled are lengthened and this holds true not only for autos but also for pedestrians and bicyclists as well since the sidewalk or trail system tends to follow the streets. Thus, in many respects n t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Planning Commission -- October 14, 1992 Page 2 we tend to become a community isolated into tiny little pockets along cul-de-sacs rather than one of true neighborhoods in the traditional sense. 2. The provision of emergency services is made more difficult. In instances where time is generally of the essence, tragedies can result. We are often called fear mongers by residents and others when we raise this issue, but the fact remains that it is a concern. The lack of through street connections, with its poor circulation patterns, means that trips from fire stations and wherever a police car happens to be are necessarily longer than they would otherwise be. There is a significant problem of traveling down the wrong cul-de-sac only to have to turn around and go back. Perhaps this problem is somewhat minimized by the 911 system these days, but the fact of the matter is, it is a concern to our Fire Marshal and Fire Chief. We had two instances this past summer — where there were emergency calls up in the Teton Lane area. The fire engine found itself on the wrong side of the barricade that had been erected there to prevent through movements. In these events no harm was done but it certainly could have. I, myself, have witnessed an instance where an ambulance traveled down the wrong cul-de-sac, had to come back out and go back down another. Lastly, on this issue, is personal experience. I was the chief for a fire department run by my college in Vermont. There is often a significant amount of confusion in terms of gaining accurate directions to respond to a fire or emergency call. This confusion is made worse when you find yourself stuck on a dead end street only to see that the emergency is one street over. Yes, these problems can be minimized through improved knowledge the city street system and the 911 system in maintaining accurate maps in each vehicle, but why take the risk. 3. Over length cul-de-sacs have a much higher probability of creating a loss of access _ due to emergencies such as water main breaks and storm damage. It is true that this does not happen all the time or with great frequency, but it is a fact that it does happen. When it does happen, access into an area can be completely blocked or significantly hindered for a critical period of time. 4. Increased street length and travel distance creates problems for the provision of services. Miles traveled by school buses are increased which is a cost that the public, although not directly the city, must bear. It should also be noted that typically, school buses cannot turn around in cul-de-sacs and will not enter dead end streets. Therefore, — children must walk to the neck of the cul-de-sac which in some cases in Chanhassen may be 'A mile away. While the idea of kids having to walk a little bit is not of concern, there is a security matter particularly for younger children having to wait far from the parents direct view. Planning Commission October 14, 1992 Page 3 5. In a related matter, the cost of providing snow plow service is increased. It is really not possible to say how much it is increased, but it is appreciably increased when you have a community that has hundreds and hundreds of these situations repeated throughout the community. Any snow plow that travels down a cul-de-sac must travel back up it. The cul-de-sac turn around area itself takes some additional time to clean. When you are trying to get out the door the morning of a new snow fall, time is of the essence. Ultimately, the city will be pressured into adding equipment and personnel to allow us to respond to snow falls in a rapid manner. Chanhassen's ordinance formerly had a 500 foot limitation on the length of cul-de-sacs. Traditionally, this has been a fairly common restriction throughout the Twin Cities. Staff is currently in the process of calling other communities to find out what their most recent standards are and we should have this information available at the Planning Commission meeting. Chanhassen's ordinance used to contain a similar standard but this was eliminated with much fuzzier language replacing it a number of years ago. Section 18-57(k) reads as follows, "The maximum length of a street termininating in a cul-de-sac shall be determined as a function of the expected development density along the street, measured from the centerline of the street of origin to the end of the right-of-way." In essence, we have no limits on the length of cul-de-sacs now. _ As to what constitutes a reasonable limitation on the length of a cul-de-sac, staff has an opinion but this will take further discussion. Maximum cul-de-sac length should be in the range of 500 to 1000 feet. This would allow between 13 and 26 homes on a dead end street, based upon a 90 foot lot width. The ordinance should be designed to allow longer cul-de- sacs when, due to environmental and topographic constraints there are no other feasible means of accessing an area. Thus, a cul-de-sac length limitation should not unduly limit access to a development in a particular area, nor should it require environmental damage to mandate an inappropriate loop street. LENGTH OF CUL-DE-SAC SURVEY CITY LENGTH OF CUL-DE-SAC Eden Prairie May not exceed 500 feet . Bloomington Dead end streets shall be avoided. Cul-De-Sac Length may not exceed 600 feet . Bubble diameter must be 120 feet . Eagan May not exceed 600 feet . Burnsville Policy not to exceed 600 feet . Maple Grove May not exceed 500 feet . Plymouth May not exceed 500 feet . Maplewood May not exceed 1, 000 feet . Brooklyn Park May not exceed 600 feet .