Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
12-6-20 Agenda and Packet
AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSI FILE WEDNESDAY,DECEMBER 6, 1995,7:00 CHANHASSEN RECREATION CENTER 2310 COULTER BOULEVARD CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Consider an amendment to the development contract for Oak Ponds/Oak Hill site plan/development contract located between Powers and Kerber Boulevard, just north of West 78th Street. 2. Request to rezone 222,580 sq. ft. of property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to RSF, Residential Single Family and preliminary plat approval into 7 lots and a 20 ft. front yard setback variance. The property is located on the east side of Galpin Blvd. just south of Lukewood Drive, Dempsey Addition,Timothy Dempsey. 3. Ted deLancey for a request for preliminary plat approval of 8.9 acres into 9 lots on property zoned RSF, Single Family Residential,and located at 7505 Frontier Trail,Lotus Glen. 4. John Knoblauch for preliminary plat approval of 8.35 acres into 12 lots, one outlot and associated right-of-way on property zoned RSF, Single Family Residential; a variance for street grade of 10%; and a variance to wetland setback of 20 feet for Lots 11 and 12; property is located on the east side of Yosemite at the Chanhassen-Shorewood city limits. The project is known as Knob Hill. OLD BUSINESS 5. An amendment to the City Code for landscape nurseries and garden centers in the A2, Agricultural Estate District. NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS OPEN DISCUSSION ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 10:30 p.m.as outlined in official by-laws. We will make every attempt to complete the hearing for each item on the agenda. If,however,this does not appear to be possible,the Chair person will notify those present and offer rescheduling options. Items thus pulled from consideration will be listed first on the agenda at the next Commission meeting. I CITY OF 4 isCHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 -�s MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson,AICP,Planning Director DATE: November 30, 1995 SUBJ: Director's Report On November 27, 1995,the City Council took the following action: 1. Terminated the condemnation action of 2.35 acres of residential land in the Creekside Addition(Heritage Development). 2. Approved the site plan amendment for an addition to an office/warehouse facility, Microvision. 3. CSM was given preliminary plat approval for their two buildings located at Dell Road and Hwy. 5. Attached is an article on different layouts of a subdivision of APA"Planning"magazine. 18 Planning November 1995 `. P L A N N I N G P R A C T I C E When You Can't Go by the Book Coping with unconventional site plans and building proposals. By Joseph McElroy n school and on the job, planners are taught to follow the rules when - .' "�: reviewing proposals for T _ F ,. new projects.After all, s ' 1 c ,• -_ t,. .S • going by the book is the fair < r d- 4,--I.--='- � way-and the way to avoid ' lir. ;.o _. - y 2 charges of favoritism. - - -__ _ .. __1 Yet the development codes + �� - _ _ _ s; that city and county planners j J. Y` -- ' - _ . am must rely on may not have x 1 # 1f 1 been updated in years, and Z - y +l_ o - _ they may be out of step with a 1� __ _ _: recent trends-narrower streets ' _ < ' -11 �_ �`, in residential subdivisions,for - c - - _711 Ati� --= -% . instance.As a result,a builder4. • _ 1, -.h .'�,,�;�,.. �'= , may bring in a site plan that , ttt i �.-"- .�.s�,4 ,,,�•,i• �M-moi diverges from local require- \' �} ' "• ' ments yet is considered a posi- 1 `'• ' •-- " - '...7f . `` ` " tive development in many -. ways. elected officials, institutions, fWV,'t PARK If planners stick to the regu- or citizen groups. And most lations, they risk the loss of a sensible planners-especially [ 11 - III creative development that in areas with high unemploy- MEW could benefit the community. ment and an eroding tax base- -, - • �7 ,ter« >� ate€ _ But if they bend the rules to will usually accommodate eco N �- w ' .,� _ mm'T , 1 foster innovation, they could nomic development,while still _ _ ___ be held responsible if an a enforcingreasonable planning11111111r _-- : - E'_ P P �� ��, _ proved project turns out to be and design standards. :�� -tom , . a disappointment.As one public -- - _ . . works director put it: "If ev- Blank slate ,�!` ' ! - erything turns out great,some- Deviating from the rules would i7 11i 1 _ I -_ :1 body else will get the credit. seem to be easiest when a de- - . 41 ' ' ,y i �.1 L But if it's a disaster,the elected velopment is intended for a r �i � i . officials and the public will greenfield site.But that didn't I IL LI'�++. =gym - • � I come back and ask who the shorten the review process for ��j} s� , . "` heck did the review.' an unconventional site plan _ --••••"' - le --lk.- So what's a planner to do? proposal in Oswego,Illinois,a _ ' The answer depends on a com- village of about 5,000 located o plex web of technical, admin- 45 miles southwest of Chicago. - r r - istrative, political, and eco- Although the older parts of _-_f tild. t; ' -'` -nomic issues. Most lanners Oswe o are built on a classic 'I �;"� a!tl1:' iP g -• � _�are trained to deal with the Midwestern grid,the village's ,` _ i - r 1. la . 0 -� i technical questions and usu- zoning ordinance encourages - -;, . `:K ally pick up administration suburban-style development. i : F fairly quickly.But politics and Lots in the R-1 single-family j the market are trickier. residential zoning category Many planning directors must be at least 15,000 square - t, . y EI �- admit privately that requests feet-almost twice as big as = ,.Wit " I• �"R. , '` = �r for rezonings and variances most of the lots in the older -• w : " ,�.for d' w. •:.q. - - -moi"•' are more readily accepted when sections.The requirement en- -ac `. r• �' : '` s '°-,sP • • theybacked are by powerful courages typical, low-density 19 P L A N N I N G P R A C T I C E just an excuse to increase den- get people and porches back sity.But James Constantine of into their front yards—with k ,• •1 . -- i Community Planning & Re- garages in back—to provide .� search in Princeton, New Jer- some sort of neighborliness." ...A:4. sey,a neotraditional advocate The village board finally ap- "�' ; • and consultant to the devel- proved the preliminary plan `' ^•. ,_ oper, says Oswego Village by a four-to-two vote. , _ Crossing is the real deal. "It One reason for the approval ' has the element of mixed use; was Inland's agreement to dedi- -:r gip- ~:u S t '• ,y 1_ • �� i there is a village center—not a cate an 80-foot right-of-way - - __ - _Ire 2" q strip center—for people to walk and 10-foot easement to allow to," he says. "Also, there is an for the widening of Washing- , -' �y�R interconnected,modified grid ton Street, adjacent to its - _ L street system." project.An Inland official says 1 The greatest deviation al- they hope to break ground early .�`k✓'-,- _rte``-' n.. lowed for the new subdivi- next year. s.R-` tT _ sion is in lot size.Three differ- s f.„re-72.7._ , 3 `,- ..t4'' ``^— ent single-family house types How Charleston did it `ti „_. € 7-- - will be built on lots ranging Traditionally, planners have Leal''',„ 'giL-,> ._.'__ E,a! from an average of 10,800 been taught to refer first to L' ,: --� — '- � - r., square feet down to 5,800- their comprehensive plans, i . 1E,L a ' _ / square-foot zero-lot-line lots. zoning,and subdivision codes pil J. .--.7-- -.7.,-'- r . f -Jon m;= UI •� Lot width will be 50 to 65 feet, when reviewing site plans.But as opposed to the 100-foot width these documents alone can't required by code in R-1 areas, anticipate every situation that It took time, but eventually suburban development. according to Jeffrey Humm, will arise.Moreover,the wide- this unconventional site plan In September,however,the Oswego's public works direc- spread use of planned unit de- (above left/was approved for village planning commission tor. velopment classifications for Oswego Village Square,an recommended approval of a Front yard setbacks will large new projects and condi- 85-acre development near mixed-use development to be range from 10 to 20 feet, a tional use permits in built-up Chicago. built on 85 acres of recently variance from the 30 feet re- areas means that the planning Alleys—a neotraditional annexed farmland.The devel- quired by code. Single-family staff is often making what element—are featured on the oper of Oswego Village Square, lot coverage will range from amounts to a conditional rec- top part of the site, shown the Inland Partnership Asset 45 to 60 percent; Oswego's ommendation for approval. both on the left and in black Sales Corporation of Oak Brook, zoning code requires 30 per- Rather than a simple yes or no, on the plan above. Illinois, bills the project as the cent lot coverage,says Humm. the answer is often,"yes,under region's first true traditional In addition, some residen- the following conditions. . .” Above are five of the project's neighborhood development. tial streets will be just 24 feet In Charleston, South Caro- house models. The one at top The site plan,by Nuszer Kopatz wide,although most will meet lina, however, the planning left has the garage attached Urban Design Associates of the village's 31-foot standard. department recommends PUD at the front.At top right, Denver,shows straight streets, Some of the new streets will zoning only for parcels of more garage access is on the side. alleys, 16 acres of adjacent have a 40-foot right-of-way,as than five acres. So the city The three models at the bottom have their garages at commercial development,and opposed to the typical 66-foot took a different approach when the rear, with access from the a village green with a band right-of-way specified in the a national nonprofit organiza- alley. shell. code. tion,the Volunteers of America, The developer's proposal Anthony Casaccio,president came in with a proposal to calls for 199 single-family of Inland's development arm, build a 50-unit apartment corn- houses at a gross density of says the proposal faced initial plex on half an acre in a his- 4.26 units per acre and 104 resistance because of the den- toric district at the edge of the town homes at 12 units an sity. "But once the village got downtown. The site was part acre—a higher density than involved with the entire con- of a general business zoning most development in Oswego. cept," he says, "they began to district.The tiny efficiency apart- The village staff,which does look at it differently." ments—only 216 square feet— not include a planner, had to Humm concurs."Our people were intended as transitional determine whether the devel- saw what this is—going back housing for the homeless.They opment would be a real to traditional neighborhood val- rent for$250 a month. neotraditional community or ues," he says. "The idea is to The city granted several vari- 20 Planning November 1995 P L A N N I N G P R A C T I C E ances: for parking (75 spaces First things required in the zoning ordi- first nance, 12 allowed); density The first step in / :, (2,250 square feet of lot area any site plan re- per unit required, 458 square view is to de- - feet requested);and lot cover- cide whether ------::::::::::3:- age ',� age (35 percent required, 72 the proposed �` percent requested). The side land use is ap- �`( __rip! ' ,:...,//4\*....„ ___ _ 0 i and rear yard residential set- propriate for 1 = back requirements—three feet the location. If _ - . \�' - each in this area—also were the answer is z.�. .. . I I i 1=A- waived,allowing the structure yes,then there t x to be built to its property lines view can move ? I I • i i 1 1 t 1 's on three sides. on to the details " j,;...._41. i 1,� r�: The Cannon Street Apart- of site design. _ - :� -iii t�'. . - -_. ments opened last year and The zoning de �` - - x -_ • ^ .<< are "an asset to the commu vision comes = x ;. `' " nity," according to Lee Batch- first," explains E elder, AICP, Charleston's zon- Eleanor Love, t - ing administrator.He says the planning man- Charleston's Cannon Street Apartments have less parking and far development has encouraged ager of Lansing, additional investment in a stru less space per unit than other new developments. g Michigan."The gling neighborhood while pro- major decision viding much-needed affordable is whether to do it; then the the state capitol. The hospital nance. "Most of the city was housing in a community still question becomes how to do had already acquired some of developed prior to adoption reeling from the effects of Hur- it.' the old commercial buildings of the landscape ordinance, ricane Hugo in 1989. It's at that first stage, the re- on the south side of the street. so it doesn't contain specific The project's density caused zoning, where land-use issues Similar expansions elsewhere details like 'one tree per 40 "some misgivings among the are resolved.That was the case have often evoked neighbor- feet,'" says zoning administra- staff," Batchelder says. "We recently when Lansing's Spar- hood protests,particularly over tor James Ruff, who is trained i worried about so many units row Hospital,a major medical the loss of parking. But Spar- as a landscape architect. on such a small parcel." The center serving all of south-cen- row established a large em- In the end, the hospital re- staff finally decided that the tral Michigan,sought a rezon- ployee parking lot in an indus- ceived positive publicity lo- project was worth the vari- ing in order to expand its cen- trial area half a mile away. cally, in part because of its ance,he says. tral-city medical campus. The Most of the hospital's 3,500 willingness to help arrange The project's density also hospital wanted to build a new employees will park there and low-interest mortgage loans brought objections from neigh- six-story building for doctors' commute to the hospital on a for employees who buy hous- boring property owners and offices and ancillary services, free shuttle bus. ing in the neighborhood. Fur- from the Preservation Society and a parking deck. The con- Love says such efforts have ther,inspired by the hospital's of Charleston. The preserva- struction required a change gone a long way to improve expansion,Lansing's planning tionists were somewhat molli- from commercial and duplex relations with the East Side department adopted a small fied when two dilapidated residential zoning to DM-4, a Neighborhood Organization,a area plan,called the East Michi- houses were rehabbed and in- more intensive residential cat- citizen group that has been at gan Avenue Study, that in- corporated into the develop- egory that includes hospitals odds with the hospital in the cludes goals and guidelines ment. In the end,city staff rec- and ancillary facilities as per- past. "The hospital has gone for future redevelopment. ommended to the zoning board mitted uses.The existing 502- out of its way to accommo- of adjustment that the project bed hospital is already zoned date the neighborhood when- Waivers best be approved,and it was. DM-4 under the city's 1983 ever possible," she says. Updating codes to meet chang- 'I think the location made it zoning ordinance. Once the rezoning was ap- ing circumstances,as Lansing appropriate for approval be- The planning department proved, approval of the did, is a sensible alternative cause that part of downtown recommended approval of the addition's site plan, by Albert to granting zoning variances. has had problems with run- zoning change largely because Kahn Associates of Detroit, "If you use variances too of- down structures and being a of the land uses adjacent to soon followed. The city did, ten to accommodate flexibil- hang-out for undesirables," the hospital, which is on the however, ask for some addi- ity, you will undermine the Batchelder says. The apart- north side of Michigan Av- tional landscaping, beyond integrity of the zoning ordi- ments"certainly improved this enue,a major thoroughfare near what was required in the city's nance and expose your corn- piece of property,"he adds. both downtown Lansing and decade-old landscape ordi- munity to unnecessary legal 21 P L A N N I N G P R A C T I C E !, Crawford for- In their 1993 book, The New Imerly was plan- Illustrated Book of Development + f _� 0 _._ _ _ _._ _ _ ning director for Definitions,Harvey Moskowitz, \�- '' :-:3"" _ t,)a 1 1" 1 �I , Commerce Char- AICP,and Carl Lindbloom,AICP, ,", _ ✓ ',:q.�.o . -'-..-` jr ter Township suggest that zoning ordinances 2- Ja — = n-- ^ L „�iii,,i t near Detroit. He should include a provision for J recalls one case a "planning variance." They " in which he re- define it "a variance for bulk F......... I I 11111 i r� > --- --c' viewed a request relief that would result in an 1 1 i 1i by homeowners opportunity for improved plan- ' I I 1 I i ! I I_- for a special as- ning and zoning that would OW W 1=1 =E J sessment to pave benefit the community." Ex ist IN i •. ■. — . ,ff _or Q� a narrow, dirt amples include smaller park- \ !WI I —:^ 11 �y�„ _ _ 11,111., 1 hi.... ' road.If paved ac- ing spaces and narrower side �` ��F"'-`" ��_ - _�- r�•lcording to code, yard setbacks to allow more k,�f���=' I — J�� the three-fourths- light and air to reach adjacent l�i © � , = of a mile stretch buildings. +` — L of road would In effect, that was the ap- have been 27 feet proach used in Lansing. The wide with curbs Sparrow Hospital proposal was The project's density caused some misgivings, says Lee Batchelder.But the staff finally decided that the tradeoff—providing low-cost housing—was worth it. and gutters. approved because the planners Neighboring resi- felt the benefits to the city dents objected to would outweigh any negative risks," warns Mark Wyckoff, Richard Crawford, AICP, a the loss of rural character, he effect on the neighborhood. AICP,president of the Lansing- planner for the city of Con- says. Proposals that require ex- based consulting firm,the Plan- cord,California,says site plan "We needed to mediate be- tensive deviation from code ning & Zoning Center. Vari- reviewers should "think of tween two conflictingpolicies— requirements usually are best ances should be"rarely granted themselves as facilitators, not the ordinance standards ver- reviewed as planned unit de- and hard to get," he says, and just regulators. They need to sus our desire to preserve velopments. "PUDs are what allowed only in unusual cir- recognize the spirit, not just natural resources," Crawford give you the most flexibility," cumstances, as when an ir- the letter of the law."Towards says. In the end, the narrow- Lansing consultant Wyckoff regularly shaped lot is involved. that end, he recommends that est portion—originally 12 feet— says, adding that the underly- Another alternative to vari- planners scrutinize the"intent" was widened to 16 feet,enough ing district zoning should still ances,Wyckoff suggests,is the section of pertinent local ordi- to preserve most of the trees be used to establish land use. occasional use of waivers when nances to ascertain the under- while keeping fire department The hitch is that most zoning deviations are needed on items lying policy considerations,and officials reasonably content. ordinances mandate a mini- such as setbacks, lot size, and to get some historical context "They hemmed and hawed mum acreage for PUDs. parking requirements. Unlike by talking with longtime plan- about it," he says, "but they variances, which must be ap- ning commissioners and coun- were willing to go along with Bottom line proved by a zoning appeals cil members. it since it's a private road." The key to deciding when to board,waivers can be granted grant a variance or a waiver is by planning commissions or knowing when to bend and zoning boards during the re- '- when to hold firm.But Wyckoff view process. Resources . - . . cautions: "It's fine to allow "Waivers must be expressly d variances, exceptions, waiv- provided for in ordinances," i-'Crs • W e`*1Yl °{I4Pi off.in Lansing; ers—call them what you will. Wyckoff says. "For example, if }" : f,, � 1" • -- .Charleston at But there should still be some your standards require an eight- 03 78 .. '�-.I( s�, Inri Princeton at 7 set of standards in the ordi- foot wall, the planning corn- 609 683 ,4,,, �`4 . a }' ;." '-' : - nance, something specifically mission could waive that re- `Read iiirriiell7ew>Illus Book of Develop- called for to fairlyand consis t �,,,, , .e tint. quirement if the facts rnent a�f zit 4 • ,. _•ar,i ,:,IYio'skowr1z`' tently guide decisions." demonstrate that no benefit x-`•d�„li nab�loo% , -, .,�c'k,,%Ltgers tri r Bottom line: The best plan- would be achieved." But if a sityyCe t fora r.,1 i oh _` ' f� rch;315pages, ning departments will strive particular waiver is frequently 24.95- 1 t.'Ianr a tz,3.-.kstore).Model.' for both. called for, he says, there is Subdivision-Regulattortif-by t,:a.:Freilich;AICP - probably something wrong 'and Michael. Shultz (1995 9 pages; $59_95 a Joe McElroy is principal of McElroy with the standard. -- hardbound from-APA Plarinel's`Press). ' Associates, a planning and mar keting firm in Naperville,Illinois. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 15, 1995 Chairwoman Mancino called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Peterson, Bob Skubic, Mike Meyer, Nancy Mancino, Don Mehl, Ladd Conrad and Jeff Farmakes STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; John Rask, Planner I; Bob Generous, Planner II; and Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE FOR LANDSCAPE NURSERIES AND GARDEN CENTERS IN THE A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT. Public Present: Name Address Verne Severson 675 Lakota Lane Mark & Kay Halla 770 Creekwood Don Halla 6601 Mohawk Trail John Rask presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Do the commissioners have any questions of staff at this point? John I have one. If it is a conditional use let's say, and we decide on that tonight, and the conditions are met. If along the way, after 3 or 4 years and there is more single family development in the area and we would like to change the conditions, is that allowable? Rask: No. Not unless the applicant wanted to expand the use and would come back for an amendment to that conditional use. Then you'd have an opportunity to re-evaluate that. But no, you couldn't. Mancino: So you'd have to be very clear and think ahead at this point, unless the applicant wanted to expand the use on that conditional use. Rask: Correct. Farmakes: I have one question. What is the precedence for the other tier suburbs? I mean typically outlying areas around the metropolitan area you see a lot of nursery, tree farming. That type of thing. And then the transition that takes place from that, leaves agriculture and enters into the ag urban development. Eden Prairie. Eagan. Some of these other areas. How are they treating this transition issue? 1 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Rask: Yeah, I don't know how they handle it. Have been. We didn't survey any of them but I would imagine they're probably operating under similar circumstances that we are. They're either non-conforming and the area's grown up around it and they're allowed to stay as long as they don't expand. Or they've done it, a similar process where they would allow it as an interim or a conditional use and deal with it on more a site specific basis and not permit it outright in the district. Farmakes: Okay so, the reason I ask this question is, it's more directed towards the issue of retail sales of manufactured or value enhanced goods versus a crop situation. And the question is, more or less how they, not only broke the transition or how they dealt with the transition between dealing with the retail business or however you want to define that. Making the transition or commitment equally for permitting that use within an area that may be directed for other types of development farther down the line and how that interferes or dictates that type of usage. And it seems to me like we're kind of trying to reinvent the wheel here to come up with our own plan versus looking at how other transitions have taken place. It would be interesting to see that since it seems to be a rather typical of our type of tier suburb to have that type of usage go on. In other words, if it's a necessity of commerce for them to survive in that element or that type of usage, then the decision is, is that appropriate for that area long term rather than interim use and I'm not sure if interim use kind of seems a solution to, put a patch on the problem but I'm not sure what the long term planning issue is solved by that. Mancino: Any other questions at this point? Conrad: Ah yes Madam Chairman. John what's, who do you think the impact of this ordinance amendment change is on the Halla operation? Rask: I think it allows them to expand within reason. It gives them that opportunity. Currently they're operating under a non-conformance situation so they're pretty much stuck with what they have and if that's okay with them, they could continue to do that for eternity for the most part. When it comes to add an additional building, the interim use permit would allow them to do that. It gives something back in return by giving a termination date but it does allow them to do more with that site at this point. Conrad: A 500 foot setback, is that a restriction? Rask: Yeah, that's currently in the ordinance now. That is one of the standards listed for wholesale nurseries. What we did is just pulled those over. Certainly we could look at providing some other setbacks here. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: So you're saying in effect with the setbacks that are outlined in the staff report, they could not expand? Rask: The setback 500 is from an existing residence. I don't know if there's any existing residence out there that close now but with the subdivision coming in, it would probably pretty much eliminate any additional building once houses are built out there. Mancino: I'm sorry for interrupting Commissioner Conrad. Has that plat gone through final platting? Rask: Yes it has. It has not been recorded yet though. It got final plat approval through the Council. Conrad: The distinction in the motion that you gave us, I really had some difficulty dealing with the garden center and a retail nursery. Final recommendation really talked about a retail nursery, not a garden center. So basically that's restrictive in terms of the product. Rask: Correct. Conrad: So there is some impact. Rask: Yeah. I think they have, if you look at the definition of nursery that's being proposed here by staff, Halla may have to eliminate some of the items he sells based on that definition. The definition's intended to keep it more for those products that are directly related to wholesale and retail nursery. Not I guess what we would classify as a garden center. Something that branches out to other areas when you sale hardware, paint, stain, things like that. Fencing. Storage sheds. You name it so we're trying to narrow it down to that specific use, which would be retail and wholesale nursery. And limit it to those products directly related to that. Mancino: I can say and I certainly haven't been to every nursery in the area but almost every. Some of those that are in that I have visited, that are in a neighborhood area, in developing areas. There's Kelly and Kelly in Long Lake and there's Tonkadale, etc. They do not carry the other manufactured goods. I mean pet supplies, etc and equipment and still seem to be growing and doing very well. Their's is mostly, well it's all on products that have to do with gardening. So I have seen that, as I said, in other neighborhood areas. Any other questions? Farmakes: I'll save my comments. I'll save my questions for maybe a later date. Too much too soon. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: Okay. Does the applicant wish to address the Planning Commission? Kay Halla: Good evening. I'm Kay Halla and I live at 770 Creekwood in the city of Chanhassen. Good evening Madam Chairman and commissioners. I would just like to address some of the impacts. We sent a letter out to the commissioners and I'd like to kind of respond to some of the impacts that the staff felt would occur with a permitted use and I think we're focusing on permitted use because since we've been here since 1962 we can't foresee being terminated. Anyway. One of the first concerns on page 2 of the...the staff gave listed that...not all A2 zoned property would be appropriate for retail nurseries and an example is lack of public facilities. I think if the public facilities are concerned, the city does impose, as far as we understand, requires that new buildings used for retail on agricultural land must meet B2 standards. And those B2 standards do include the handicapped accessible facilities so as far as I think if a retail building is there, that issue of keeping...facility probably wouldn't be an issue. And I guess I feel that certainly not all A2 property is going to be perfect for every A2 use. But generally I think it would be kind of looked at an impact that...hard to deal with. I think generally nurseries are definitely agricultural and I think they are very adequate for agricultural land, zoned land. And number two, in response to the second impact I felt that retail nurseries and garden centers are inconsistent with other permitted uses in the A2 district. I took a look at that and I looked at all the different permitted uses...agricultural I thought we were consistent with that. There are some uses that, yeah I don't think nurseries are consistent with. Daycares and some other things so that's hard to show sensitivity there but I do believe that we can...agricultural and agricultural land and I contacted the nursery licensing through the Department of Agriculture just to get more detail on that and they do not differentiate when they give licenses to nurseries, whether they're retail or garden centers. I asked specifically if it's a growing nursery, obviously we are a growing nursery and we get our license through the Department of Agriculture. What if we're just, let's say a garden center and we're selling stuff and they said, you still get your license through the Ag Department. One way you can differentiate the nurseries is that they have different classifications and Halla Nursery, we're classified as a nursery stock grower which means that over 50% of the products that we sell are grown on site in our nursery. And we, for instance we grew 19,700 perennials or more just from little...and we grow over 10,000 trees and shrubs so we are definitely a grower and I think a lot of emphasis, at least in the last meeting was put on the retail and I do understand the public safety reasons. That concern but I think what's being over looked is the fact that we are not just retail and the majority of our business is growing. We are farmers of nursery stock so that's a big part of our company and that's what differentiates us from nurseries such as Frank's or Bachman's that are strictly, they have their retail outlets and they have a big supplier somewhere else. And that kind of leads me to the third impact statement that the concern that other businesses like Bachman's, Frank's, and other nursery and craft stores may be in conflict with surrounding residential or agricultural property. And I think that's where, as far a I can tell, the nurseries that are in the 4 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 city of Chanhassen that are in agricultural land basically are a lot different than Frank's and Bachman's. The plants are grown on site and why don't I, in fact maybe, I don't know if this is the right language but I thought maybe the concerns could be addressed in the zoning that, in the regulations saying that nurseries and garden centers which were in existence prior to the zoning change of 1990 would be allowed as a permitted use in A2 zoning. And I don't know exactly how that would go but I thought that would be one way, so you wouldn't have that concern of somebody just deciding to come out and build a big...right in the middle of an agricultural district. And also I think that stores such as that that are geared more towards the selling and they don't do their own growing, they'd probably prefer to buy a chunk of land right down in the business district where there's a lot of traffic anyway. And that's the way, when I see those stores, that seems to be, they look very retail and very... And then as far as the fourth impact, that permanent buildings may be constructed which may...if the nursery is vacated. For example auto repair, contractors storage yards, miscellaneous retail, etc. Yeah, I guess those could be permanent but I see that with farms and they are permitted in A2. The Arboretum has a permanent, very permanent, beautiful building that could be used for other uses and they're not cheap buildings either. So I think, I don't know if that impacts, it's certainly an impact that I don't know if it's fair...affects there are other agricultural businesses that are permitted...you could then build permanent buildings. And I don't know if these buildings, there must be something in the zoning that if you sell a chunk of property that has a permanent building, the concern is that maybe an auto repair shop or contractors storage area could be moved in there and I'm not, from what I read in the zoning it didn't, if it's not listed as a permitted use in agricultural, A2 land, I don't understand how somebody could sell their property and have it be an auto repair shop if it wasn't permitted anyway. So I think, I didn't think that was a very valid impact. And I guess as far as...we would like to be here forever and we would like to blend in nicely with the development and screen where necessary. We want to work with the builders and Don and his wife Sandy are working right now with a builder, Charles Cudd to make sure that the nursery becomes a nice focal point for the development. And...to impact, the use would be allowed in perpetuity. We'd definitely like to see that and I think if we had just been here for a few years and we didn't have all the things that are out there now it might not be as big of an issue because we'd know when we started that gee, we're not a permanent use but we've been there since 1962. We've got an underground sprinkler system. Very expensive well. There's a lot of things not even in buildings that have been there for a long time and as far as selling retail, and I started working there in 1984 and they were selling retail and sold dry goods out of one of the buildings that was moved a little bit and one of the buildings was torn down. So anyway I think that we'd like to definitely see a permanent situation out there. And with number 6. The impact that says, retail nurseries and garden centers and...would be in conflict with the comprehensive plan and there was a reference to the corner of Highway 5 and TH 41 which is currently zoned A2. I understand there's some conflicts between industrial and the need for retail. I'm not real sure about that. But I guess when I look at the comprehensive plan, I 5 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 worked as a park planner in Maryland so I understand it's a very big county out there. I understand why you need a comprehensive plan. I think they're very good. I also feel that there's got to be some flexibility there with existing companies and there's got to be a way to blend things together. And when I look at nurseries and think of new homes going in, they seem to go hand and hand. I was driving around and I looked at some of the farms and though, you know that'd be hard for these farmers to try to get their tractors and with all this housing going up but a nursery, with housing coming, housing being around it, it's great. We can provide services that homeowners need. We can help new homes meet the city codes for how many trees they have and that kind of thing. And I think as far as visually, we can fit in really well. So I think that even though on the comprehensive plan there's something that shows all homeowners or all...residential, I think that with some flexibility that we could blend in nicely with that. And finally, I read in the City Code that the intent of the A2 district is the preservation of rural character while respecting development patterns by allowing single family residential development. And again I think that, if I were a homeowner I'd prefer to live next to a golf course or a nursery other than a utility services or some of the other uses that are permitted in the A2 zoning. I think that a nursery fits in really well. It helps preserve some of that rural character but it does respect development. In fact I think it basically thrives on development so I don't think that a nursery's going to prevent development or anything like that. And I guess I'd just like to let the commissioners know that as a landscape architect I can understand...coming out there. The importance of getting homeowners privacy and that kind of thing and I think that nurseries, and I'm sure other nurseries...you want to look nice. You want to be a good part of the neighborhood and I think that since we're in the business of selling products and growing trees and shrubs, that we're going to want to use them on our property. I think that's about it. Thanks. Does anyone have any questions? Mancino: Yeah, I have one. Are you open all year long? Kay Halla: We are open all year long for our employees. As far as how much business we have, it's been real dead the last month I'd say and basically as far as customers coming in, we don't have much until May first and maybe the end of September. Those are the times when we have more traffic...but as far as the winter, it's just the employees out there. And sometimes around Christmas... Mancino: So your peak seasons are spring through summer or September, which is almost fall. You keep employees all year long doing what? Kay Halla: In the winter, just these last few weeks we've been taking out the material that had not sold and getting it bedded down for the winter. We take all of the...shrubs and bury them in straw and hay and all that. Then we prepare to...so we do a lot of things on the 6 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 computer and order a lot of plugs and plants and bare root stock and we do divisions of a lot of plants. That's done more in October when the ground's still soft but dividing up and such things like that. And then in the early part of, end of February, early. Probably the end of February this year we fire up the greenhouses and keep them really warm so that we can start growing all of our perennials and then as, we have just thousands and thousands of bare root trees and shrubs and you get those planted up early and give them a chance to root. Mancino: Okay. So you're working inside in the winter time? Kay Halla: Yes. We take vacations too. Mancino: And how many greenhouses do you have? Kay Halla: Currently we have two greenhouses. They're side by side and they're 30 feet wide by 90 feet long. And they were, we had them stocked to the hilt and even growing, we had to use the floors a lot to be able to grow...floor which is real bad. To grow them on the ground. You get a lot more aphids and things. Mancino: And during the winter, is your retail building open for retail sales of houseplants and other material? Kay Halla: We don't sell houseplants. The retail store is open. The hours are definitely less. For instance weekends, we're not open on weekends except around Christmas tree selling time. But in January and February. Mancino: But you're still open 5 days a week? Kay Halla: Yeah. Mancino: Okay. Farmakes: You mentioned, can you elaborate on, you mentioned the 60/40 mix. Can you elaborate on that? Or did I hear you correctly? Kay Halla: I mentioned something about if you grow over 50% of your nursery stock on your site, then you get the Department of Agriculture doesn't just give us a nursery license. We have a nursery growers license. And they do that to differentiate between nurseries and nursery growers and to get the nursery grower, you must grow over 50% of your stock on your site. And then also, under the Federal law, you have to meet, as far as paying overtime 7 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 and that kind of thing, we are under agricultural laws that allows for overtime because we are a grower. Farmakes: Okay, so when you said 60/40, you're referring to your business or it's a hypothetical qualification? Kay Halla: I'm not... Farmakes: Maybe I misunderstood when you were saying the percentages. I thought you said 60/40. 60%, 40%. I thought you were referring to 60% being manufactured, or being grown on site and 40%. I assume you're talking about total sales. Kay Halla: No. As far as what we grow on site, I would say 90% of our plant material...is grown on site. The only things we really get in that are not started from plugs or bare root stock would be our evergreens. They just take, it would take us forever to grow those and like juniper for instance. So we get evergreen stock... Farmakes: How would you define percentage of gross sales between manufactured goods that are being sold and organic material that you're growing on site? Kay Halla: I could have Don Halla come up and answer that because I'm not sure. Mancino: Just one second. Any other questions at this point? Thank you. Kay Halla: Thank you. Don Halla: Good evening. I'm Don Halla. I would be happy to answer that questions as far as the percentage of, I'll call them dry goods is our definition of them versus live, green plant material. ...between 80% and 90% of all our gross sales comes from green goods, as we call them, which is live living plants in one form or another. Very small percentage is manufactured items. Defining manufactured items, we've had discussions with the city and they define manufactured items as cattle manure, which we sell in 50 pound bags. And 40 pound bags. So I guess our definition might be slightly different than the city's definition of what is manufactured and what is agriculture and not agriculture. But basically all of the products that we carry are related to agricultural uses. Mancino: Any other questions? Thank you. Mark Halla: Hi. I'm Mark Halla. I reside at 770 Creekwood in Chanhassen. I just wanted to add a couple things. First off the city has again mentioned interim use and that's not 8 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 something that we'd like to consider. We have, this whole thing's kind of focused on our nursery and... In our case we want to, we don't want to be a use that's a non-conforming use that isn't allowed. We're simply coming before the Planning Commission to try to become acceptable so that there aren't issues. So if we want to put up a greenhouse, we don't have to worry that even though we think that it's okay for us to do that after the fact someone's going to say hey, you shouldn't have done that. So that's the whole purpose that we're here is to try and make ourselves permitted. We aren't championing the cause for the other nurseries and garden centers. We want to be allowed ourselves. I don't want...interested in discussing that and not...short term. We've got the grandfathered rights that allow us to continue with everything that we've been doing at this point. We simply want to become accepted so that we don't have to keep going back...this is what we've done. This is what we aren't doing. We have some non-related but related issue...comprehensive plan of the structures that we intend to put up. The maximum amount of structures that would be used on our land, with the other greenhouses and what not, we've given them a list of all the products that we carry to date. Basically what we've asked for is to say, hey. You say you're grandfathered in. We don't think that you really are. We don't even, we didn't even know that you're selling retail. Show us. Tell us what you're selling and when you've been doing this and they went back and gave a list of everything we've been selling. ...mentioned a couple times. We've been selling pet food since back in the 60's starting with fish food. So that's something that we've continued on. Maybe it's not agricultural. We're not trying to say that pet food has to be permitted in agricultural use. We are saying in our instance we've been selling it for many, many years and it's not something that we would stop selling because it wasn't a permitted use. It's not a great...market and maybe we can discuss that but the people coming in our place that have animals. They have farm animals. They have dogs and cats. We provide that service. I think that's really all I wanted to add. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. I'd like to open this to a public hearing. Do I hear a motion and a second to open this to a public hearing? Farmakes moved, Peterson seconded to open the public hearing. Mancino: This is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission at this time on this issue, may come forward. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing and a second please? Fannakes moved, Mehl seconded to close the public hearing. Mancino: Questions and comments from commissioners. Commissioner Conrad. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Conrad: Yeah, I'm going to ask more questions. Kate, is it basically, well we've got an ordinance in front of us tonight. Basically it's a general ordinance. Obviously it will pertain to the Halla's but it's really for everybody in the A2 district. So that's what we're reacting to. Then later on the Halla's, if that went through, they'd have to do their permitting and make their application for whatever they'd want. The question to me, and the length of operation in terms of, it's hard to talk about this one because we do have, it's a two part deal. We have an ordinance that applies to everybody but we're focusing it right on them. And those are different things. My concerns, basically I think the ordinance in general is appropriate. The community's filling up and sooner or later it will be all houses. But in terms of how it affects the Halla's is a bigger, it's an issue that I'm wrestling with. Is it basically our assumption that a nursery could never fit in long term with houses in Chanhassen? Is that a foregone conclusion? Aanenson: No. As John pointed out, the comprehensive plan has guided this long term for something else. Okay. Mancino: For single family housing. Aanenson: Correct. So in the meantime there's another use on the property that's got grandfathered rights. If it continues to operate that way that's, they have those rights. They want to add to it and we're saying we cannot, as a planning department approve an expansion of a non-conforming use. This is a mechanism to allow them to expand. They don't want to have an interim use. They want to have no final deadline. We're saying that in a planning perspective that's in conflict with our comprehensive plan. Does that mean it won't be a good neighbor? We hope it's there a long time and it's a good neighbor, but we feel we need to have that control if 30 years down the road it's not a good neighbor and times have changed and they want to move out, we don't want some other businesses to go in there. So we're looking at, from the planning perspective of the comprehensive plan and ultimately if this property was to become something else. We're not trying to push them out but we're saying we have to look at long term what the plan says and how it affects other wholesale or retail. Conrad: But right now we could design it so that they will fit. Aanenson: I'm not sure what you're saying. Mancino: As an interim use. Conrad: Well we can design it so that let's say if houses go, yeah. Long term. Now somebody probably would find it might be more beneficial to be healthy.._but let's say for 20 10 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 years when houses go up around the Halla property, we would have, we can make them fit in as a good neighbor, can we not? Aanenson: Well there's certain ordinances that are in place right now but they have grandfather rights. Conrad: So they can do what they're doing right now. Aanenson: Right, but they want to expand. That's part, they would like some additional greenhouses. And what we're saying is there's kind of cloud over that because it's non- conforming so this allows them to, if they're following the conditions or whatever, you can decide what that framework should be. Conrad: When they come in, let's say we adopt this ordinance. They would have to come in with an application and basically tell us what they want to look like. Is that not true? Aanenson: Correct. Mancino: And at this point they don't need to. Or if it's A2, permitted use in A2, they can pretty much build what they want to build. Conrad: So when they come in, that's our opportunity to say this is how you fit in the neighborhood that's going to be built up around you. Aanenson: Right. Conrad: That's my only question. Peterson: What's the interim use, the term of it going to be recommended to be? Do we have that thought through yet? Rask: No, that would be, if the ordinance is approved and the applicant wishes to come forward with an application, that would be something we could discuss at that time but there's a number of different ways you could go. You could say when it's brought into the MUSA. It would terminate at that point. When sewer and water becomes available to the site. You know that would be an end date. Or you could pick a specific year. Say 50 years from now. 20 years from now. Mancino: Would you have to have, would it have to say terminate or could you say be reviewed again by city? 11 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Rask: Yeah, I think you could always leave that option. You'd have to pick a date though. Some sort of, whether that's an exact date or an event. Like they did on Admiral Waste. They said the applicant may request an extension. You don't need to put that in there. I mean that's always a given that they could come back and ask the Council in 10 years to reconsider that. Mancino: It certainly puts a cloud on a business for business planning, etc. Conrad: Can I jump back in? This is cloudy to me. Aanenson: But it's cloudy right now because it's illegal right now. They can't expand. That's the cloud over it. We're hoping with the interim use, if you put an appropriate time frame, we were hoping that would take that cloud away because right now it is illegal. To expand. It's grandfathered so it doesn't have the right to go any more than what it has. Conrad: I go back. Maybe this is a foggy assumption on my part. Can it be an asset to a neighborhood? Or is it an automatic detriment to the neighborhood simply because there are tractors going through and you've got, you know so what are we. Aanenson: Well that's the reason for the interim use is to put conditions on there so we have some control. What are the hours of operation? How much traffic is going in there? Is it open 24 hours? What's Saturday, Sunday? We don't know. That's why you try to have some control so you can, if the neighbors are complaining or there is issues that we have a mechanism to resolve it. If it's permitted and people are complaining, there is no mechanism to resolve those issues. Mancino: Because you basically have three businesses. I mean you have your growers. You know the bidding that I don't think affect single family around it at all but you also have landscape contracting, which are crews getting ready and bobcats and everything going out to work at different sites. Clients. And then your third is retail which again affects their neighbors. So you really have, and there may be more than that but those are the activities that I kind of parroted out from the nursery and this particular one. And two of those could have an affect as this area develops into single family. Conrad: So you don't think it's an asset to the neighborhood? Mancino: I think it is. But I think that it needs to have some controls around that as far as, I think it's very much an asset. But I think that there do need to be some controls around that. I mean look at the traffic in the area and hours of operation, etc. 12 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Conrad: Excuse me for interrupting Craig...but the issue to me, the ordinance seems reasonable. But when you put a termination date on somebody it's like not making that company...concern. It's just real negative. And what I'm trying to envision is...and that's my struggle. I don't want to cast that over, and I said I like the ordinance. It's okay but not trying to say to the Halla's, well you've got 10 years and we think that the neighbors that are moving out have priority. I'm struggling with it sitting down here. Making it so it's not, it's a harmonious relationship, which means control. There's just no doubt. There are controls. That's part about what we're doing is you can't do whatever you want anymore in Chanhassen. There's too many people. So that's my struggle. Sorry for interrupting. Mancino: Commissioner Peterson, any other? Peterson: None. Mancino: Commissioner Skubic. Skubic: How many other landscape nurseries are in business in Chanhassen? Aanenson: At least probably three others. Four. Mancino: Wilson, Lotus, Ben Gowan. Aanenson: Erhart's. Mancino: Erhart's tree farm, yeah. Only to wholesalers. Probably five. Skubic: The issue here seems to be opening the door and making a permitted use and putting a constraint by putting a date on the interim use. Isn't there a way of structuring the constraints on a conditional use or even with a permitted use. I think it was brought up that for permitted or nurseries have been in existence since 1990 date. Could that be used to satisfy the needs of the comprehensive planning and at the same time preserving the Halla business? Rask: I think the issue is you've got to treat people fairly. It's tough to say well if you exist to this point, you can continue to do what you like. Anybody else who comes in has to play by a different set of rules. Skubic: In a way isn't that what we're doing in the agricultural district? 13 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Rask: Well they're allowed to continue as a non-conforming use. And the whole basis behind non-conforming uses is that you assume they'll eventually be eliminated. I mean our ordinance now limits what you can do with a non-conforming use. You can't expand it. There's some of those types of issues that come into play with those non-conforming situations. And if it's a conditional use, then you're back to well it's permitted. For the most part you have the ability to add conditions. Review a site plan but there's nothing to ever say that use is going to disappear. If it does become a problem in the future, or permanent buildings are constructed, the nursery decides well it's not feasible for us anymore. Well now you have several million dollars worth of retail buildings. How do you deal with that? Aanenson: It goes back to Ladd's point. We struggled with this same issue as a staff when we were going through this analysis and the same idea is being, if you do say there's no cloud on the issue because it's a conditional use and you get a mortgage for several buildings and now the business goes out, you've got mortgages on the building. Well certainly there's pressure then to say well we've got to have something else. You can't now disappear because now you've invested capital in there. And that's the whole reason why you look at these things as more temporary in nature. And again this is a little bit different because we're focusing on this one and not looking at them in a holistic sort of thing and maybe that's something we need to go back and kind of look at this in a broader perspective and not keep focusing on this one because this one is a little bit different. Some of the other types of businesses, treating nursery type businesses... Mancino: Commissioner Farmakes. Farmakes: I guess the reason I asked, I thought it was an open discussion. I'm interested I guess in asking a couple of questions of the commission here. I don't know if that's, is that permissible? Mancino: Sure. Farmakes: I don't mean to get an open discussion running along or eat up time but I have a couple of, I'm not sure when we discuss nurseries and retail nurseries, after reading this and after reading Halla's letter. There's obviously a difference of opinion as to what is retail. By approving this or voting to approve this or not to approve this, and then the issue of interim use, the way that it reads now says, the wholesale sale of plants grown on the site, imported to the site as well as accessory items directly related to their care and maintenance. Then it goes on to say that power equipment and da, da, da should be provided. Now certainly power equipment can be construed as being for the care and maintenance of trees or bushes or shrubbery. I'm not sure in my mind that I've defined. On one hand when you talk about a nursery situation, organic matter is for sale. It's grown. When you're talking about an 14 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 enhanced product or manufactured product where they refer to them as dry goods or the applicant refers to them a dry goods. And you get beyond the scope of grandfathering, whatever that use happened to be, at the time it was established when the usage changed or that the operation was in conflict with ordinances. How do you continue on that line by saying that it's alright to expand that use without getting into conflict with all kinds of things. In other words, getting into conflicts when you tell another applicant who comes in who has bought a piece of property or whatever and decides that this would be good for a kennel or fur bearing animals or a big box retail or when you define and when you start getting into the nuance of retail beyond what is grown on the property, where do we start picking a line? Do we start looking at where the bag of food came from or the power equipment or the, it seems to me that. Mancino: Well and that's what we're trying to do here. Farmakes: Very swampy bit of goods. If in this particular operation 10% of these goods is this problem, and we're defining an ordinance for these goods for sale of these goods to find a way to allow some expansion, I'm not sure that that's not in conflict of good planning or what we're talking about with planning. You're talking, I think another comment was made about, that we have a business that's been in the community a long time and you get this transitionary thing where it's making it difficult for a business to operate unless they remain competitive and obviously retail or wholesale of organic goods and agricultural use changes over the years, as the mix of development changes here in Chanhassen. Obviously any business wants to be able to change to whatever the market is. We've seen this problem over and over again. Either in fringe district where we see dumpster storage and so on or we get into a situation on TH 5 and TH 41 where the future investment of property and the thinking that this location would make a good use for this particular type of usage. Do we have development that is driven by that? Either by, this is going to get a little obtuse now but thinking in terms of Timberwood where you have an example, although usage is not the same. You have development that is driven by allowing a particular development or use at the time that seems to be a good idea but then there is a surrounding effect that is created. I'm trying to think of Bachman's say for instance in the middle of a single residential neighborhood in Minneapolis where the original Bachman's was. That used to be a farm. When you're saying that a nursery is a good thing or a good neighbor, is it the open space and the trees or is it the retail sales that would be of benefit to the neighborhood, or of dry goods. I'm not sure in my own mind that I've defined that because I'm trying to think of it as the use is now where you'd be talking interim permit, or down the line as you're talking about Ladd, once that's surrounded by homes. What is the benefit to the neighborhood? Because I see other types of tree operations, say for instance the one across from Paisley Park that was there. There wasn't any, that I know of, retail sales occurring there. It was an open field with trees and so on and I don't think you get objections from the neighbors in that situation. 15 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 But it seems to me a broader issue is that where do retail sales go in this town and when they expand outside of the normal business district, and you're looking at people who buy property with the idea, or have owned property with the idea of expanding that use beyond what their grandfathering is. Are we creating really a bad problem here where we're being inconsistent as to how we deal with it? It seems like we've been getting a lot of, I think there's a second item on the dock here for such a thing. It's not in retail area but it's expanding or asking to clarify usage of other types of businesses. Say for instance a kennel. And these are things that it seems to me that would be things that would come up in transition type property between agriculture and urban area. And as I go back on how we've dealt with some of these issues before in the fringe district for instance or we deal with dumpster areas where primarily you have a rural area and the storage of dumpsters there. There's not enough people surrounding the area to create the type of objection that you may have in a more developed area in the permitted, the use is allowed for an interim time. But from what I've heard the applicant's not interested in that and even if we were to approve that, are we setting a good precedent in doing that. I haven't heard anything of a legal opinion from our lawyer but when we go to deny that from other applicants, it seems to me that our argument is, well we have a defined area for retail of manufactured goods. That's how I see it. And we allow other usages of wholesale use or interim use outside of that area and we've pretty much followed that pretty closely. So it's worrisome to me that more or less the precedent that we'd be setting with even approving what's sitting here because I don't think it's defined. That part that's retail is not, is ill defined here. And certainly...it lists a few things that is not, that is prohibited but I'm wondering if that is geared more towards the current use of the applicant and eliminating those uses or sales versus. Mancino: Than looking at the big picture. Farmakes: The big picture between the sale of grown matter and manufactured goods. Goods manufactured off site and brought in or value enhanced goods, whatever you want to call them but they're the usual definition of retail. Mancino: Kate, would you like to respond to that? Aanenson: I think John would. Rask: Yeah, I think we tried to create a definition that would apply to all. If you look at the one being proposed here, I don't think Mr. Halla, he doesn't sell farm implements or power equipment. I think what we were trying to do there was further define what's not included. If you look at the definition it says accessory items directly sold. Like most definitions that's opened up to interpretation somewhat. 16 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Farmakes: What I'm thinking of, I didn't mean to cut you off but what came to my mind is I thought of other retail operations for nurseries so I'm thinking of Frank's for instance. In that line of accessories and items related to the care and maintenance is their entire in-house building. And that's retail. That's retail sales and no different than a grocery store or a hardware store. Again, that's a separate part of their business but that's not outdoor stock. So that's where the problem that I'm really uncomfortable with is that hand. Mancino: Is allowing the retail to stay there? Farmakes: To expand. Mancino: To expand as an interim use in the A2 area. Farmakes: Even as an interim use, yeah. Mancino: Even as an interim use. Farmakes: Yeah. Mancino: So your thinking is to keep the retail where it is right now. In this particular case. And not have it expand. Aanenson: Well first of all, we haven't defined that yet under this. I mean when they come in for an application, first of all we're setting forward the framework. I mean unless they come in and ask for an interim use permit, they just stay the way they are. There's two separate processes. This overall standards are what you evaluate any that would come in... Farmakes: But isn't your contention also, or did I misunderstand it, that retail use has expanded. Aanenson: Right, and that's a separate legal thing and it's my understanding they're not going to expand anymore. What they're trying to do is get additional greenhouses but that's still an expansion of that non-conforming use. So I don't see that as, that's something you can address. If it did come forward for a permit to say, you know one of the conditions of... plans to expand, you could handle that separately under that permitting process. What we're doing under this process is try to look at again the broader, all. Mancino: A2. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Aanenson: Correct. And what should be the appropriate standards as John's laid out in the report. Farmakes: Right, but what I'm saying is, does the line that says amended Section 20-1. Does that cover that or are you going to improvise that at a later date? I mean like I said, I don't see that as being any different than Frank's. Is that a good neighbor for a residential area? Rask: Sure, you can address that with conditions on a site specific basis if somebody came in and maybe you wanted to see it just limited to the growing or selling of plants, either wholesale or retail. You could put certain conditions that would prohibit the sale of certain items. Aanenson: I think you have to look at some factors such as the size of the parcel. Where it's located. Some of these sort of things. You've got to take all those factors and like John said, you try to leave it somewhat broad so you can develop it as need be but again, these are the framework for all nurseries. Farmakes: So you don't feel that by establishing this or approving this we're in the interim use allowing it to expand. That we're creating a precedence outside of the scope of how we normally handle this issue when we're dealing with retail sales outside of the scope of. Aanenson: Well I guess our concern is even though a lot of these places may say wholesale, we believe that they're probably conducting retail and we'd like to have some conditions on there that we do know what the hours of operation are. We do know that there is adequate parking and that's really what the purpose of this is. We believe that some of the other ones may have the same. May be doing retail. We're not aware of it at this point but if it's brought to our attention, we certainly wanted to make sure that those same issues are addressed. Farmakes: Okay. I have no further questions. Mancino: Commissioner Mehl. Mehl: Yeah, I came here with a whole page of notes tonight and about half of them have been asked already or talked about. The other half have been shot down but all I know is we've got an applicant here who's been at that facility for 35 years. I'd like to somehow see if there isn't some way to compromise or some special situation to make sure that we can permit both the wholesale and retail operation as they have and allow them to stay there with the right conditions. To me there are worse things to have as a neighbor than a nursery, you know assuming there are conditions on them. I don't know how to solve the problem. 18 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: So would you like to see that as an interim use? Mehl: Well an interim use, the only problem I see with that is there's a time factor involved and I know that if I were in business like that I wouldn't want to deal with the fact that next week I might not be here or next year or 5 years or whatever. Whatever the date is, nobody seems to know. I'd like to know that I'm going to be there for another 35 years. Maybe the answer is interim use with some kind of an automatically renewable timeframe. A business like that, it isn't easy to move. You know you just can't pull up the tent stakes and move out. It's difficult. You've got a lot of land involved. A lot of inventory. Maybe it's a conditional use, I don't know. Mancino: Okay, thank you. I do agree with the staff report that it should be an interim use for the A2 district with a nursery center. I do feel that I also have problems with the termination date and how to allow business owners to plan ahead into the future and how they're going to keep operating. I would like staff to give us some more information on that. How we can do an interim use and the sunset date that allows for renewal. I don't know if that is possible. I would also like to see the condition number 5, hours of operation a little better thought out meaning that if you're in the nursery business you do need to be open on Saturday and Sunday during your peak seasons or you won't make it. I don't think. And that on those weekends maybe there would be a different time for landscape contractors and when they could start up in that A2 district, especially with single family around it. I guess I have no other comments. I'd like to entertain a motion. Conrad: But can I ask a question Madam Chair? Mancino: Yes. Conrad: Kate or John, do you see, you can see where we're struggling with this issue obviously. It's not too difficult. Do you see a scenario, you know I'm struggling myself because I think the ordinance is valid that you proposed. I think you've done a good job. I also don't want to force the Halla's out of operation. I want them to determine when they, I want them to fit. I don't have a problem with retail. The ordinance will take care of retail and they'll take care of retail... But I want them to fit into the neighborhood. They're there first and that's one thing you've always got to remember here. They are there first. People who buy in know that they're there. The interim use will let people know, or whatever, will let them know what they can do. So the new residents are protected. We're going to have that mapped out. So it forces the Halla's to sort of plan. It takes away from their flexibility but it makes some sense to me. But my real key is, the key for me is, I don't want to force them out of business. I don't, I can term them an asset to the community. I may not term retail as an asset but I can term the nursery an asset. It could be a park. I don't need to force 19 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 the comprehensive plan... When they choose, it can do go residential. But I don't have to force a 10 year. I'm really nervous about saying in 10 years it will be renewed unless there's 27 complaints from the neighbors. That's what we'll end up doing so my big concern is, how not to force them out of operation. How to make them fit in, which means we take a look at their application. Make sure that in the long run, 5-10 years we say well geez. If you've got neighbors around that are 500 feet away, do they really kind of fit. Are they an asset and if that's the case, I think everybody wins but that's sort of a, you know I may be dreaming and whether we can do that but that's where I want to be, which really tells us that the real deal in the permitting, the application process, when they would come in and if I were them, I wouldn't trust us, you know. Mancino: Speak for yourself please. Conrad: ...but, so my question was. Mancino: How do we do that? Conrad: How do we do that? It's not tonight when we're not even, we don't even care about the Halla's tonight. Yeah we do but we don't care about them. We're putting in an ordinance that goes to A2 everyplace. So tonight is not their night. But when they come back and say you want to survive for 30 years or when we decide we want to subdivide or change, how do we make them. Mancino: Anybody who comes in and wants that. Conrad: Anybody, you're right. No, no. Them. The Halla's because they're going to come back later with this application or a permit and that's what I want to be able to forecast in my mind that I can kind of meet their needs...got 5 years. I don't really want to be in that situation and I'm trying to justify them fitting in as a good neighbor with residential, as treating them as a park. As an asset. As a farm. Rask: I guess if you treat them as a permitted or a conditional use, they're there. You can't come back in 20 years and decide well, we made a mistake. How do we correct it? You treat it as an interim use, again you can always extend it and if the need arises. Conrad: Take us past the ordinance. Aanenson: Okay, then they could sell it. Let's say they want to get out of the business and go somewhere else. Somebody else comes in and runs it differently or whatever. Again you can't just look at this particular property. That's why John gave you a map last time that 20 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 showed it city wide. If we could do it, if we felt comfortable doing it as a conditional use, leaving it there for perpetuity, we certainly would give you that as a recommendation. We're not trying to chase the Halla's. I understand the clouding issue but we think there's just as many damaging on the conditional use that could be negative as there are saying clouding it the other way. We struggle with the same issues. Nobody wants them to be gone tomorrow. But as John indicated, what if in 20 years we go back and look at it, maybe it's 30 years. We haven't decided what that timeframe is. I think that's going to be the struggle. First of all they have to decide if they want to come in for the interim use permit. They say that they didn't want to. But if they do, then that's the struggle. What is the appropriate timeframe? And at least there's somewhere we can go back and evaluate that down the road and we may not be here but there's some criteria to go back and say, is it still working. Does it still make sense? And if it is, great. We continue and give them another x number of years. Maybe this area's never brought into the MUSA. Maybe it continues to be this way forever and that's great but we're just saying that we think there should be an opportunity to revisit it. If you make it conditional or permitted, we don't have that opportunity of revisiting it. And have we thought far enough ahead? I'm not sure. Normally we don't put retail in an agricultural zone and we're saying we're opening that up for a lot of other places if that happened and there may be a lot of instances that we haven't thought ahead. If you want to give us some time, we can... Mancino: Think about that. Think about the one that Jeff had. I mean because we are opening retail up in A2 districts. Aanenson: Right. So the existing ones, but maybe the ones that haven't thought of...thought this was an opportunity to do some sort of a modified landscaping kind of quasi business or. Mancino: Commissioner Mehl. Mehl: Are we discussing details of conditions at all or is that, should it be done later? Mancino: No, we are. Mehl: Okay. I've got a couple comments here. On number 4. All outside storage areas. Maybe we should define you know what is a storage area or what's stored there or which ones maybe need to be screened. And then must be completely screened. To me completely screened implies 100% screened from all possible vantage points. Now is that practical or even possible to do now? Do you want to not be able to see it from your car on the road or what about if you're standing on a hill across a quarter mile away. I think it needs to be determined. Maybe buffered is a better term. I'm not sure. And one comment about number 5. The hours of operation. It talks about hours of operation Monday thru Saturday only and 21 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 work on Sundays and Holidays is prohibited. I think we need to define work. Does that include them coming in and watering their plants? What about you've got a holiday on a Monday. We've had 95 degree temperatures and you can't work on Sunday and you can't work on a holiday, this thing is going to be in bad shape Tuesday. So I think maybe the word work needs to be defined. Work is actively selling or is it work in bringing in equipment, inventory or sprinklering or is it maybe work involving management and planning and inventory taking and watering and this sort of thing. That's all. I wanted to bring those up. They need to be defined a little bit. Mancino: Well it doesn't seem, do I have a motion. Entertain a motion at this point. And that may be asking staff to come back and bring us more information that we need. Looking at it. How we can change in interim use for the retail and wholesale without a, as I said, without a cloud or sunset. How we can be more creative with that sunset date. Allowing businesses to plan. What are the other inferences of having retail in the A2? Farmakes: I'll make a motion to table this issue. I think that I'll put forward these items as the reasoning which you just mentioned. I also would feel uncomfortable unless the amended Section 20-1 is either, the issue as well as accessory items...are dropped. In other words, that ending of that sentence. Or that staff come up with a more targeted direction on that issue as far as what accessory issues are offered at retail. The issue of 5 probably should be defined in more reality and the issue of the market. I'm not sure that 5 does reflect that. The point that was made. Some of the other issues we really didn't discuss on there but I think that the ordinance probably covers them. Signage and so on. The termination issue. Although it allows the business for planning, I think that the real issue of an interim use obviously is to allow the community for planning as well. And I'm not sure what creative thought can be put into that. But there is also a reason for an interim use and there should be an objective there, although I have nothing against a business that has been here in these transition areas with transition type businesses to allow them to have the opportunity to decide when they cease operations. The problem always occurs however, at some point in time if it's opened ended, there is no reason to cease. You can adjust to whatever needs to be done and I get back to the point, there usually is an end result or a direction, other use in our comprehensive plan and I'm not sure if the staff is going to be able to resolve that. I hope they do. Mancino: Is there a second? Skubic: Second. Mancino: Any discussion? 22 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Conrad: Ah sure. So you want to table it for clarification of the motions. Definition of nursery, Jeff? Was that. Farmakes: Definition of nursery was the one that refers to Section 20-1. I'm uncomfortable with how that reads. Conrad: Okay. Did you agree with Don's comment on 4, that it's foggy? Farmakes: For the storage? Conrad: Yeah. Farmakes: I guess, I didn't make that a part of the motion but it seems to me that there are broader issues other than getting into the specifics of setbacks and so on. To me but we, we can add 4 if you add that to the motion since this is a tabled motion. I mean it's not a, although we're voting on it, these are issues of exploration that I would suggest. The real crux of the issue here that I see in this motion that is made, is that what is the definition of the use and if we're going to define it, how does that relate to practicality of operating a business and what is the end result that we're going to see from this as far as comprehensive plan? What happens when we're filled up? And then how does that use, what is allowed under the ordinance for that use to be expanded. Conrad: And did you have any concerns with number 8 on the staff report? Again, I heard you're tabling it. You know 8 doesn't allow for renewal. So everybody knows that. It says it's terminated and I think if we do consider this, you know there has to be a renewal option and I think the ordinance doesn't allow that. Farmakes: I think that the renewal option could be looked at for the issue of making it easier for business planning. I think I said that already. Farmakes moved, Skubic seconded to table an amendment to the City Code for landscape nurseries and garden centers in the A2 for further clarification. All voted in favor, except Meyer who abstained, and the motion carried. Mancino: We will table it and staff has direction and the Halla's will come before us again another time to present. Thank you. Don Halla: Can I just speak for one moment? Mancino: For one minute you may. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Don Halla: We already have a semi negotiated agreement with the city. The city hasn't signed onto it and we haven't signed onto it. We're very close to an agreement which really happens is exactly what you want. We're looking for basically a ruling to maintain our agricultural status of a grower of plant material. The building department says we do not need a permit to do so. Go ahead and build it. The planning department says you can't. That's...maybe some direction of a simple thing under State and Federal laws we're allowed to build. Under the city's building code we are allowed to build greenhouses. Planning says we can't. That's all we're looking for. The rest of the things we're working out with the city and I think we're coming very close to it. Maybe it was agreed upon today. I don't know but that's the point... Mancino: Thank you. CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR A MIXED LAND USE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL, OFFICE, SINGLE AND MULTI-FAMILY ON APPROXIMATELY 66 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5, BETWEEN GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD AND MARKET BOULEVARD, VILLAGES ON THE PONDS, LOTUS REALTY SERVICES. Public Present: Name Address Brad Johnson 7425 Frontier Trail Jill and Randy Meyer 330 Sinnen Circle Angie Bealczyk 310 Sinnen Circle Eric Johnson 320 Sinnen Circle Bob Savard 8080 Marsh Drive Steve Lundeen 8160 Marsh Drive Rita Klauda 8130 Marsh Drive Dave Kooumen 8153 Marsh Drive Gary Disch 8170 Marsh Drive Rick Hladky 8173 Marsh Drive Debbie & Brian Semke 331 Hidden Lane Barry & Lisa Thompson 8000 Hidden Circle Mark Honnold 8051 Hidden Circle Pat Hamblin 340 Sinnen Circle Greg Larson 8151 Grandview Road Ryan Johnson 8143 Marsh Drive 24 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 W.J. Ward 4510 Bruce, Minneapolis Al Simmon 8150 Grandview Road Walt Chapman 8140 Marsh Drive Mary Koonmen 8153 Marsh Drive Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Thank you. Are there any questions for staff? Bob I just have one. In your condition number 19, when you say the applicant shall make a commitment to provide for rental housing in the development. Do you mean high density rental housing or, is that what you're talking about? Generous: High density, yes. Within this. However it could be, if they decided to disperse it, maybe it's medium density. That would work. Mancino: So you just want rental housing. That's the purpose of. Generous: Right. We're looking at that primary goal. Mancino: And it could be either medium or high? Generous: Yes. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Mehl: Yeah Bob, assuming that the Planning Commission adopts this motion and approves it here tonight, what's the next step in the whole process? What do we get to see next? Or have we committed ourselves to anything at that point? How much flexibility is there from now on? Generous: Well the immediate next step would be that Council would also have to review it and agree that the direction we're providing as part of the conditions of approval are appropriate. From there then they would come back and actually do a preliminary plan for the project where we would develop more specific design parameters for the various sites on it. Get into more detail on the materials and building heights, setback, all of the more detailed information. Right now we're basically looking at the land use components. Are they appropriate? Is this what we'd like to see at the edge of the downtown area? Or for a continuation of the downtown. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Aanenson: Let me just continue with one other thing that you were asking about and that is what is your commitment level. Let's say that the project comes back and the next levels articulated something that you just can't agree with. Too much tree loss. Something you thought was appropriate. There's too much grading. At that point then you certainly say that we thought this might be appropriate for this land use but we see it just doesn't work...this is not binding. The conceptual approval and you certainly have the right to change based on what you see on the next level. Again they haven't gone through and filed the wetland surveys and all that. When that level comes back, it may change your direction a little bit. What they're trying to get is just some idea of what's... Mehl: So it just gives us, gives you the go ahead to create something, a little something more that we can take another look at. Aanenson: Correct. Mehl: Okay. Meyer: What about the land use as it's laid out here? Are we saying retail's going to go where retail is on...? Aanenson: No. Again, if it comes back at the next level as they've articulated is not happy with the design that they're coming forward with, any of those kind of components. With any of the land uses. If you're not happy with the, if you can't resolve those issues, then you certainly have a right to change the land uses. Meyer: Okay. Mancino: But if you know right now that there's a land use that you don't believe is correct for that site, speak now. Please. Generous: We would provide that direction. Aanenson: It would be helpful. Mancino: It would be helpful for the developer. Thank you. Does the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission? Brad Johnson: Madam Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, my name is Brad Johnson. I live at 7425 Frontier Trail. We represent the Ward family who owns this property and we would like to address a couple of the issues because, I think we missed the last 26 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 meeting, the first half. We didn't get a chance to actually present our proposal so I'm going to ask, and to keep this brief because most people have seen it a couple times. But we would like to go through a couple of things and then, so I'm going to ask Jack Lynch from BRW just to quickly remind you of what we're trying to accomplish. Feel free to ask any questions. You'll note that because we've had some meetings with the neighbors, and I guess what I'm sort...I'm the mediator in this particular thing a little bit. Our job is to try to bring a project that's good for the city and good for the landowners...in this particular case meets some of the neighbors requirements. So we have, as part of our current proposal and this is in answer to your question. This is kind of an ongoing thing. All of these comments that we get and the things that you put in the final recommendation that moves up, we'll listen to. We have to and the Council's going to have their own ideas and then we're going to start all over again. And we're just trying, you know we're designing this sort of by committee. Initially. We've got an idea. The ideas changed based upon what you feel and also how the neighbors feel about the whole thing. And it's kind of a long process. It's really, at least 4 very valuable public hearings. These two and then the next two. After that we're probably come in real life sometime in November. Or not November, I'm sorry. March, April, May of next year. So that's kind of where we're at. So I want to ask Jack to do that. I'm going to set it up. The one thing that he'll point out is that we have suggested, and this is more because I think it works for us, that we would go to an R8 designation in this area from a high density area and I'll get back to how we handle the rental situation in a minute but that would allow us to put in single family attached. For sale. Affordable housing underneath the $115,000.00 category which meets sort of one of this livable communities criteria. It doesn't necessarily meet the rental side of the criteria. We'll try to address that after Jack's gone through the whole package. Mancino: Thank you. Jack Lynch: I think to begin this is a parcel of about 65 acres. It's difficult from two standpoints. One you had studies on this for a number of years. You had at least 3 different studies that all recommend something a little bit different from your guide plan. The other difficult part about this site is, it's a sensitive site. It has a number of wetlands. It has a number of steep terrain. Sloped areas. And it has a number of pockets of good sized hardwoods. Typically the hardwood vegetation that occurs on steeply sloped terrain so we're trying to deal with that. The proposal is an extension of a downtown in a retail component of about 24 acres built in a style that's fairly typical with one and two story developments with peaked roofs. More as a residential feel than a commercial feel. The buildings would be highly articulated architecturally. And we're trying to develop a new concept in retailing. One where the retail stores would be up close to the streets and you could actually park on the streets and walk into the retail stores. Instead of parking in huge parking lots. So it's a back to the old days of retailing where you could pull up in front of the store on a public 27 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 street and park. So there's about 24 acres of retail on the northern portion. There's about 20 acres. 20 acres? 14 acres, I'm sorry, of office components. They occur typically on a more heavily terrained areas and more heavily vegetated parcels. The idea there is that we're going to have to go to a 2 and 3 story building. Small compact building sites. Typically cascading down the side of a slope. A portion of parking would be underground in small lots associated with the parcels. So it's a small building component. As Brad has already mentioned, we talked about another 11 or 12 acres of residential on the component along the eastern side and at this point down in the southern region of the property. There is about 25% of the property that will remain as open space for designated wetlands. I think as an overview, that's really it. I think the basic concept here that we're asking for is simply an inkle. That if we come back to you at the next level of approvals, and have generally followed these land use designations, and have accommodated the development in a sensitive manner and not destroying the intrinsic value of this site, that we are on the right track and that we will continue on through the approval process and ultimate development. So with that I think. Brad Johnson: Does anybody have any questions for Jack? Mancino: I'll decide that. Thank you Brad. Brad Johnson: I'd like to just show some slides and sort of a vernacular of what we're trying to accomplish here, which I did not get here early enough last time to do it. Some of these you'll recognize. This is downtown Excelsior. Basically the concept of the Villages is the look. Now obviously we're not going to have old buildings and things like that but the idea is that, that's.._accomplish certain traffic, handle certain traffic...turns out that the retail in the communities I'm going to be showing you have provided...to the street. One of the things that we're trying to do, I noticed with the latest plan for one of the city's projects, they're trying to pull things towards the street so we just don't have all parking lots. The problem is the consumer likes to park...and not too many of us like to walk too far. And that affects the process of retail so I'm just going to go through some slides and narrate them but this is the idea that we're under and we look at these because they're recognized to be successful. These are all successful retail areas. Many have had to go through redevelopment to be successful. Again a lot of two story type of buildings that we've been talking about. A lot of different kinds of architecture. In generally all have parking on the street. And it seems to be consistent throughout. Again this is Excelsior...cinema, you know. They've got parking behind and this is the typical parking lot that I didn't know, and I've lived here for a long time. This is the back of downtown Excelsior, which means that you've got to have large parking lots even when you have the street. Now we wouldn't design it this way but in most of these communities, they've ended up having parking someplace other than just on the street so we're saying put them on the internal section of it and for those that want to run in and out, like I used to have to do when I was downtown, you would use that. This is downtown 28 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Wayzata. Very popular place and again, they've been able to attract some clothing stores. Quite a few clothing stores. The day I was there it was a nice, sunny day. I tried to make sure, very heavy traffic. This is a little indent where they've had to build a building with parking off street but it has a nice feeling to it. All of these are sort of viable. That happens to be an office building that's built there. We don't know what's across the street but it's called Lake Minnetonka so it has a good view. The average rents in there are $24.00 a square foot on the second and third floor. It's a very popular kind of thing and the first floor happens to be retail. More of Wayzata. There's a restaurant. Again, I didn't put the lake in here because we don't have the lake, you know but it's there. This possibly is more of Wayzata. I'm not sure. This is Como Avenue. I went in the earlier part of town because a lot of people say can these streets handle the traffic. The last two streets you've seen are State highways with traffic loads probably in the 10,000-15,000 cars per day category which makes these streets equal to or greater traffic than we currently have on 78th Street and almost as much as we have on Highway 12. Yet they've been able to maintain the look, as you can see. Now this type of architecture probably which is more, what we'd decide it was, Bavarian? Is not the kind of thing you'd probably use today but the concept is the same. It's interesting as you see all these photos you'll see that they're all sort of two story Bavarian kind of things and they're in two or three different segments. This is a popular place over there. Again you've got parking out in front. This is a little indent corner which is very popular over there which is more pedestrian friendly. More of that. Again we have green space out in front of the building... Most of these places have parking in the back but nowhere to the degree that would make them really successful. Same thing, but this is Como Avenue. You guys can go over and look at it. These are just local things. Last couple of weeks, my son goes to Northwestern. It's known as a football school. And I was down there the last couple weeks and this is...Glencoe. These are those streets. Again this is Green Bay Avenue. Traffic, Highway 5 caliber. Goes slow. If you'll note, very slow because I got caught on it but there's a lot of traffic. This is Saturday morning. This is not a day, on the way to the football game type of day. They've done a really nice job in downtown...coffee shop. One of the brand name ones that has moved back into the community. You'll notice that most of these have two story elements. Bob, some of these actually are rental apartments and they seem to be successful. Again, it may be more difficult to do that but they have been able to incorporate historically that type of housing there. This is back on Como Avenue on a nice day. This is more of Como I think. This is a little bit of Wayzata. The church there. That's a church, that little building. Another church on Como Avenue. No special parking you notice because the parking is there on Sundays. There's just parking in the area. This is a little townhouse project that's in Deerfield. I used to live a block away so I knew it was there so I went over and took some photographs. This is probably the type of townhouse project we're thinking of for sale. I'm not sure, these are probably $300,000.00 today but they're not much bigger than what we're building here in good old Minnesota for $115,000.00 but that's kind of an infill townhouse project that is appealing. I ran...I'd say 50% of them are 29 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 families with children and 50% aren't. You can usually tell if they've got a pumpkin. It's a very nice project. A place that's the type of thing that we might be able to incorporate into our thing and that's generally the idea that we're doing. The main thing I wanted to get across is that since I started this project, which started at Freeport, Maine. We got photographs there. The tendency is, in all of these projects, the key to that look and the key for the success of the real retail portion of that is the pedestrian friendliness and traffic on the streets. And if we were not allowed to have parking on the streets, then we'd have to re-visit the idea. And that's a very critical portion of this particular project. As I said, we've met with the neighbors. Now I'm going to hand out something because in general I don't think they have a lot of...with what we're dealing with. There is some traffic concerns about this corner up here and Bob has some concerns about this layout. Those are the kinds of things we can work out over the next period of time because they're concerned about the traffic on the street. I told them we want all the traffic right here. That's where the business is. There's a concern here of more transition that if we started here with single family large lots and went to higher density, we would go in and build a high rise apartment or some large monster apartment building that would not be part of their area so we said well, economically we come out better if we don't do rental. I mean we're much better off doing for sale. So we said in this area we don't have a problem of doing what you just saw. Some kind of an infill for sale kind of thing that'd be lower scale. It does affect the sizes we told you before. And then the balance of the site they are concerned that we'd be building massive buildings, which is not our goal. At the present time at least. I mean that would be, if you're...we'll come back and have to live up to what we say here and then, so by doing this as a PUD, we really make a commitment as to what this project will be. We make a commitment to go through this for a year with you guys, as I perceive it. I mean it's just very much of a commitment. Relative to the staff report, I gave a couple there but this is my comments on the staff report generally so they're in writing and I don't forget what we said. And again we're not disagreeing or agreeing in those cases with the staff. I gave away mine. Generally speaking, here they are. Thanks. Generally speaking there are just a few items in here that we prefer to say we've heard your recommendations. Some of these things we simply have to work out and we're not in that mode as of yet. One of them is the preservation of the ridge line that's here. We're not quite sure we can build on it. Build around it. Through it or whatever and whether the road has to go through here. We don't know if it's a viable alternative either way so we said we'd work with the staff. The realignment of this road here actually related to the ridge road so we said in item number 2 that we'll try to work that out and come back with something that's probably acceptable. We proposed, it was a requirement that we provide affordable housing in the site. Affordable housing is designated by the Metro Council as having less than $115,000.00 for sale and we've checked with some of our friendly builders and we can provide that in somewhat...form on that area so we could meet that we project, probably 42 units max in that area of that type of thing. Economically we're better off doing that than rentals. Okay. Economically. Relative to the traffic, the streets, the type of streets, 30 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 whether we have parking on the streets. Whether they're public or private. What the configuration of this is. What the turn off of this is. Item number 13 said, we need a traffic study. We agree. And then after the traffic study, which is the current and then what somebody would project this type of thing would generate, we think that's the time to talk about the streets. You know, why don't we get the information in hand and then come back and design it. The reason that's important, as I said, is if in fact we meet the village concept. In other words we're trying to make parking in the middle here and pull things up. We need parking on the streets. It's very specific in the staff minutes that we can't do that. If you recall Fred last time said, keep your mind open on that issue. I think that's much of that is engineering. Much of it's the State. You know, we don't know. We'd just like to argue that case that we may die at this point. We may end up back with regular retail there because we just don't have any parking. So that's how we'd like to approach that. And then finally, as far as the affordable, the rental housing. We're not sure it's either feasible financially or physically to put it there. Or anyplace in Chanhassen. That's our feeling so if you go to the next page, what I've done is done an analysis in starting, I believe on Monday at 5:30 the community starts discussing how do we meet the livable communities standards that the Met Council has set for us. As I told-many of you, the problem there is that that's going to be a real strategic planning problem because it isn't easy. There are very good reasons we don't have a lot of rental property in Chanhassen. It can't be built. It's too expensive. And so we have to deal with that. So the bottom line here is I took an average rent of $500.00 per month. I capitalized the cost of development, which is what we do, and if we were going to build $500.00 a month apartments in Chanhassen, the annual subsidy is $5,604.00. And the developer would make no money and the buildings would break even. And this is real life because this is what we do for a living. If you have to subsidize it $467.00 per month. Now that's all possible. Okay, I mean they're doing it in Minnetonka. Just approved a 66 acre site like this and they're doing it. Okay. But I think what should be dealt with is in fairness to the staff and probably in fairness to you folks, is that there is probably a need for it. We could probably figure out how to put it in here and spread it out and strategically say, it's a good deal for everybody. Everybody wins. I don't think we can do it at this meeting. That's my feeling. Because I think my feeling is that the staff needs some strategic plan that they're working on and you guys have to understand what that is. It's very much of a financially driven thing. And so I don't know how else to handle it. I plan at being at every one of those meetings because I think it's important to me as a developer in the community to add my input because this is what we do. You know it's not...but all over the state of Minnesota. But this is real numbers on rental housing today and so my recommendation on that issue, and I don't know how you do that is that trust us. I mean you've got to trust the staff. You've got to trust the Planning Commission and that's tough to do but we're going to have to come back here, you know and we can probably incorporate some type of solution to this rental issue here. I don't know what that is. I don't know how big a subsidy the city will provide...I don't know. Because it will not be built if it's not financial. But this is not just 31 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Chanhassen's problem. It's the problem...through all of the United States and the last time we had a wave of rental development was 10 years ago when we had tax credits to do it, for those of you who were in it. We haven't had any and it's a problem in every community. And I don't know, my feeling is the Met Council has said to the staff, you've got to do it. I don't think any tools have been provided to us to figure out how to do it. Now as far as the retail mix and stuff...as you know I was elected to the School Board. Thank you for your congratulations but one of my missions was to figure out how do we increase the tax base so these folks can pay less taxes. This particular project will pay in taxes about $24 million when completed. And the last school referendum I calculated this morning, that would have paid $50,000.00 of the referendum. I don't know... they would have paid for 10% of the cost of the referendum under the normal formula. The school district deeply feels that we should start to try to balance, and this is from the school district now, balance. It doesn't have to be on this site but someplace in Chanhassen we have to raise the total amount of taxes that are passed onto the commercial people so the people living in the houses won't be taxed too much. And I think that's really the answer. In most of the communities where I go to, they love to have commercial/industrial. It's either for jobs or to lower the tax base. Or you know, balance the taxes and that's a very important thing. This particular community voted 2 to 1 against a referendum for the kids that we're sending through the schools. And we all have to come to grips with that. I think along with the livable cities thing that the staff is dealing with, the Council, not you guys, have to come to grips with what are we trying to do. Are you going to be taxed out of the world? What's going to happen and all those are kind of issues I don't think we can deal with tonight. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you...presenting for you? Brad Johnson: No. Questions. Mancino: Were there any questions from commissioners at this point? I'd like to open this to a public hearing. May I have a motion to do so and a second. Peterson moved, Conrad seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Mancino: Since this is a public hearing, anyone wishing to make comments, please do so now. Come up to the podium. State your name and address. Resident: One of the things that's been mentioned here tonight, along...was concerns for neighbors and also... One of the things that should be pointed out. People that moved into this neighborhood did, as this was being built, this area was zoned on the east side of the property...was for single family... The current plan holds it that way. There's also a proposal 32 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 into the Met Council as Bob had mentioned. It says right now to make this medium density. What the request is currently in your plan, this is one that's high density. That's not what we bought knowing. It is a change and I think there should be some concern for what the neighbors feel. Mancino: Thank you. Gary Disch: Gary Disch, 8170 Marsh Drive. I'd just like to reiterate that. I've been here for 8 years. I checked when I bought the house that this was single family below me and medium density in the middle. I checked 4 years ago. It was still the same thing. I checked last year. It was still the same thing. All of a sudden now we're getting high density rammed down our throat. I did not buy my property there to go in next to high density. Mancino: Thank you. Brian Johnson: Thank you. My name's Brian Johnson. I live at 8143 Marsh Drive. I'd like to echo the comments of my neighbors who just spoke up. I think when this City Council and staff gave single family residential zoning...neighborhood, you take on with that a responsibility to think of the concerns of the people who are going to live in that neighborhood. Again, most of us bought in that neighborhood expecting that we were going to have single family and at the most medium density residential next to us. Also the state statute on rezoning, if you look at that, requires that the rezoning has to be reasonable. I don't think it's a reasonable expectation to take single family residential land and move it all the way up to high density for rent kind of uses right next to existing single family homes. I don't feel that staff has really gone through and justified the position of why high density residential needs to be placed in these locations right next to existing single family homes. A compromise that we have talked with the developer is putting in medium density townhomes, which will help make you meet the criteria of the livable cities act. The current request by staff that you put for rent housing may or may not meet the livable cities criteria. As Mr. Johnson just went through the numbers on what the cost of rental housing are, and the cost to put that together, either requires some large subsidies from the city, the state government, the federal government in order to make that cash flow. So you end up with rental housing that does not even help you meet the livable cities goals. It's trying to get below $650.00 a month. The numbers just don't justify that. Couple other concerns. I would like staff and the Council to look at whatever precautions to limit speed on Lake Drive East. Currently Lake Drive East, a number of cars are already going 35-40-50 mph along the church coming up to Total Mart. It's the request of the neighborhood that the stop sign that's currently at the corner of Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive East remain there and that you look at the traffic at that corner so it does not become a high speed zone from TH 101 all the way down to the intersection behind McDonald's. Again, there's a number of small children in this 33 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 neighborhood. We've got some very, I'm concerned about how much traffic is going to be on Lake Drive East, and especially at what speed that traffic is going to be. I guess in summary, from the neighborhood meetings, Brookview residents oppose high density rental, especially in the area immediately adjoining the single family residential homes. Medium townhomes or medium density townhomes, we have discussed with the developer. It helps meet the livable cities goals. I think that's acceptable to the neighbors. I think staff has failed to show why high density rental is necessary and that the zoning change is reasonable. Staff also in it's comments has said that there are a number of other medium density zoned parcels within the city of Chanhassen that are currently vacant. Why doesn't it make more sense to take something that's zoned single family and move it all the way up to high density than taking other existing medium density parcels and moving them up to high density. Again, what I would ask you to do if you do move this along tonight, I would like you to remove condition 19 requiring rental housing and support the developer's current recommendation of medium density for sale townhouses in the area immediately adjoining the Brookview single family homes. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. Rita Klauda: Good evening. I'm Rita Klauda. I live at 8130 Marsh Drive. I want to support ...neighbors and I also am concerned about the traffic on Lake Drive East. At the last meeting I stated that concern and it was brought up that we just have to realize the traffic will increase on Lake Drive. The folks in our neighborhood aren't naive. We know that the traffic is going to be there on that road but we feel that with a traffic study and with proper use of that road, that traffic and speed can be controlled so we as a neighborhood can safely exit our neighborhood, whether it's on a bicycle. Whether we walk. Whether we're in a vehicle. I think the people in that neighborhood are owed that. That we can get in and out of our neighborhood without the fear of being hit by a speeding vehicle. I think that a traffic study that's done on the corners and help people to enter and exit the entire development, extend all the way down East Lake Drive. That that piece isn't forgotten because I think that's a big concern from our neighbors and for me, thank you. Mancino: Thank you. Bob Savard: Good evening. My name is Bob Savard and I live at 8080 Marsh Drive. My house happens to be the one directly across the street from Total Mart. There are two corners immediately adjacent to my property and it is Lake Street. I am very concerned about the traffic on that street. I've had significant property damage as a result of traffic on that road. And I do have two small children. I'd also like to add that I support all of the comments of my neighbors and I am very concerned about the transition between my direct property line 34 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 and this development and how it will affect property values of my home. Thank you very much. Mancino: Anyone else wishing to address the Planning Commission? Steve Lundeen: Good evening. My name is Steve Lundeen. I live at 8160 Marsh Drive. I hope you won't find me rambling tonight. In listening to the discussion with the folks from Halla and that concern, there seems to be a decent amount of concern on you guy's part that they were there first and they deserve some consideration with development that's made around their property and I believe that the same should be true for us. That we, that there is some consideration...on our neighborhood. Just like all the other folks have said, they are concerned with the transition and I reiterate everything they said. I called several realtors, one that I bought my house through and another one, and asked them what they thought of this transition and both of them said, no matter what kind of apartments are put there, your property value will not go up as well as it has been in the past. And you can maybe even expect a decrease. And at the current tax rate I don't know how I can justify even staying in the neighborhood with that being the case. You guys have all heard the little commercial by a local copier company...business decision. A lot of the scenarios that they play out are because the decisions were made in a hurry and they weren't thought through and they weren't planned well enough and I feel that because the Met Council is enacting you know this livable housing and the city has agreed to follow through, and I believe in the idea, but are we in too much of a hurry. You know that the money's not there to support it and it seems like well, here's an opportunity. Let's just slap it there and we'll be over our responsibilities and everything will be hunky dory. Another concern is the failing of the school referendum. I have four small children who I'd love to see have quality education in District #112 and if you noticed in the paper that Chanhassen was the major obstacle in passing that referendum. It's because the city taxes are much too high. I have friends in Chaska that live in the same value of property as I do. They're paying way less taxes. And another, co-workers that live in Bloomington, Plymouth and Eagan, they all have the same range of house I have and their taxes are even lower than mine. Some study that was in the paper showed the difference between taxes in various school districts and stuff and they said our school district was on a lower eschalon and I'm concerned about that. And if we provide more TIF financing, $5,000.00 a unit, the taxes seem unlimited. That's all I had to say. Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the Planning Commission tonight? Randy Meyer: Hi. I'm Randy Meyer. I live at 330 Sinnen Circle. There's a couple issues that I believe were raised by Council at the last meeting that were requested that staff look into. One was to prove whether or not, or at least put some documentation whether or not we need more retail and commercial and I do not believe that that has been addressed. Right 35 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 now we all know there's a lot of businesses downtown that their doors are closed. You know there's nothing in there. Just empty space and I don't know that it's been shown to anybody that we need more commercial and retail and I think that's one thing that was specifically asked of staff to do. I think another thing was asked to address the issue of the buffering zone, and I think specifically was asked to identify what would be, what it would look like. What things would fit in there. I haven't seen anything to address that issue. And I don't know if staff might have asked this or if Council asked but the people have all asked to see how this would affect our property taxes and our property values and I think that's very important to the people in the room, especially to all the neighbors and I don't think that issue has been addressed. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the Planning Commission. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing and a second please. Meyer moved, Peterson seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Mancino: Comments from commissioners on, well on several things. One of the biggest changes have been that the applicant has come in and asked to changed the R-12 zoning on the east side of the area to R-8, which would mean medium density and have so met with the neighborhood on that. Other changes that are significant. It's talking a little bit about East Lake Drive and the traffic that will be generated on that from this development. And if you could please address any other concerns that you heard tonight, that would be appreciated. Commissioner Mehl. Mehl: Well, we definitely have to have some traffic study done to see what the impact is going to be and what controls we'd have. I guess I personally support the concept of putting the medium density for sale units next to the existing residential. I think that's a good move. If I were there I would have the same concerns they have. I support that. I don't know where the rental units are going to go, if at all. Again, those are some of the things that have to be presented with the next phase of the project. I assume they're going to come in with those options... Mancino: And the mix of retail, that was another concern that we as a commission had. Mehl: Yeah, do I understand it correctly? That the...that staff is recommending additional retail. Mancino: Bob, would you like to reply to that? You are recommending that what the applicant is suggesting is. 36 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Generous: We are recommending approval of the addition of commercial space. Whether now the mix of retail, we can provide direction at that time. We think they primarily should address meeting niches in the community that aren't met but we'd really hate to limit it to only though because of the potential viability of the entire project. What if they can't get all specialty retail and a video store comes in? Are we really going to be opposed to that? Mehl: Okay. Mancino: Commissioner Farmakes. Farmakes: If I was to vote to approve this concept, that's what it is. It's a conceptual issue. I'd have to say that I understand the reasoning to add more retail. I'm not against adding more retail. If we go back and we look at the two packets that were provided to us as to why we would put in more retail, the primary culprit for adding more percentage has been the required parking, and our city's a pretty good example. You look outside and you see these large pocket developments here. You see that they are, they have a pretty hefty amount of parking in adjacent to their building. They hold a lot of customers. They're not like the typical town that you saw up here where you see a small retail area. They're very large retail areas. Some of them 60 some thousand square feet. They require a lot of parking. I'm not sure that a convincing case has been made here, it seems to be washed over, that we need at least, I think it was mentioned 4 or 5 acres I believe in the report. Let me quote it directly here. That should be a targeted goal except I'm not sure why that should be a targeted goal but it might be. Mancino: 4% to 5%. Farmakes: 4% to 5%. Maybe we can use the criteria that we used in the 3 trees. That 3 trees is twice as much as we have now so that's a good target. I would feel more comfortable if we knew at that ratio that that's going to service our community and we define it that it's, either we're regional or we're not regional. That we define that. We say it's this many acres and I realize that we have yet to have a highway built to the south. That will probably have some commercial development but that we should have a goal for that and a plan for that similar to how we have our central business district here. That we had an end goal and we shot for that goal and I consider that to be good planning. And that we have criteria established for that, or expansion of that. I'm not convinced that I've seen that. However, I would forward this with that motion involved, or added onto this, asking that to be specified to the Council. That they look at that issue or ask us to define that very clearly as to where we would want to be there. It seems to me that it's still pretty wishy washy as to where we're picking that percentage from. In particular if a large amount of that percentage of acreage is parking. Now I'm going back to the important factor here tonight that we've noticed that is 37 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 different from the meeting that we had before, and I think the recommendation of the city engineer is that we're, this development's contingent on having parking on the street. And it's interesting to note how full circle we get in a decade when we looked at the other developments here where you just couldn't get anyone to discuss street parking because hey, we can't get a building financed that way. We've got to have this many feet to the front door or we don't get our dollar. It's a great idea and I'm certainly not against that, as long as it's safe but that's outside my realm of expertise so I'm not going to, but I see that as a factor that in the studies that I looked at in here, the parking is a lot of that space. So if we're to look at that, it seems to me the parking issue could be, and I agree with Brad that that's a pretty basic issue in regards to this development or the reasoning that we used to expand that acreage or percentage of available land. Mancino: Do you have comments on the changing of density on the eastern. Farmakes: The issue of density goes beyond the issue of this development. It goes to the issue of affordable housing which is, if not there, where. And if not...who and it seems to me that that is, I'm not opposed to the solution that the developer's proposing. The issue of for sale versus rental. Rental is a real problem as far as the affordability or to be able to build it without the tax incentives. And I'm not sure what we're looking at, is this $5,000.00 really annually but we're looking every 10 years, $50,000.00 annually plus inflation so I don't know that if it's a rental situation, you know if our populous is going to buy into this. We may tell the, shrug our shoulders and say we don't have a choice but it's interesting to see these numbers and I'm not sure that they're accurate but it's interesting. These are the first numbers I've actually seen without adjectives of, pleasant adjectives in front of them. And these are really the issue in front of us. So irregardless whether they're factual numbers or not, I'm really going to discount those but really what we're looking at here is the basic problem is, we're looking at another thing that's being added onto this development. I think because of it's location on the highway and so on, that that's probably using as a criteria with other developments or other communities that that's probably an established precedent for placing that type of housing there. The mixed use on top and so on, that would be going back to the type of development that you see in the inner city or older type development. I have nothing again against doing that if it's a feasible issue. When we go outside of the realm of paying for itself, or heavy subsidization, we're leaving sort of the realm of planning and entering into the realms of politics. I think that's really for our elected officials to deal with. So I don't have a problem with moving this forward with some of those conditions and asking to see their response in this regard. Mancino: Thank you. Commissioner Meyer. 38 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Meyer: My concerns parallel I think Jeffs quite a bit. Concerned about having, requiring rental housing in the development. I do like what the developer has proposed in the R-12 area. Down zoning that to R-8. Mancino: The two parcels? Meyer: Yeah. The apartment concerns I think are something, I don't know if we can address it and...but that's a concern also. I guess the really big ones for me and if we could address those would be comfortable moving it forward. Mancino: Okay. Commissioner Skubic. Skubic: I've always liked the general plan. I think this is a large goal extension of downtown retail area and is also going to be our gateway to the city from the south when Highway 212 comes in and gives us a good plan in general for that. As the commissioners have pointed out, there are a number of things that need to be worked out yet but I would vote in favor that the commission would approve this so the conceptual plan could go ahead to City Council and the preliminary plan could start working out some of those details. I've always been concerned about the buffer area to the east to the neighborhood and I'm happy, I agree with changing the density. I also agree with staff and would like to put some, we'd like to make up that somewhere in this development. Perhaps without the central office site. A lot of the slides that were shown had two story buildings with rental above that. Perhaps something like that could be worked out. I'd like to see rental try to fit in here somehow, somewhere. The highway study is certainly going to be, it is necessary. Traffic flow in here and pedestrian passage is going to be a big concern. Market Boulevard is a pretty busy area. It will be more busy when 212 comes in and there's offices, proposed offices to the west that will require access to the village so I'm certainly going to require...for pedestrians. Mancino: Thank you. Commissioner Peterson. Peterson: The majority of the comments have already been made. Again on a conceptual basis I like the project. The only thing that I'm still uncomfortable with is where the placement of the potential rental units would be adjacent, directly adjacent to the single family homes. And I'm not trying to personally place them somewhere else. I'm uncomfortable in doing so nor do I think they to obviously, but I look at it and my first view is there really isn't, from a financial standpoint. Pushing it towards the lake probably isn't logical. Where it is probably the most logical. I'm just uncomfortable with it there as far a the transition so. You know R-8 all the way through that would be I think more tolerable from my perspective, and certainly to the residents of the area but other than that, I'm very comfortable moving it up to the Council. 39 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: Thank you. Commissioner Conrad. Conrad: I have very little to add. Maybe there's some neighbors that they probably should just take a look at the staff report because it may sound like we might not have looked at some of the issues but I think if you looked at the staff report, maybe it's a little bit of clarification in terms of retail. Mix and I think...not totally solved but staff has done a fair amount of work on that so again, taking a look at the staff report. I think the other issue is the transition to the east. I don't think you go from single family to high density. We've never done it. That's just not what we do and I think... Aanenson: Except for the senior housing project. Conrad: Yeah, well that wasn't my idea. Aanenson: Well we've got a couple other places in town that we didn't show you a slide. It has been done and I understand the issues completely. We're just saying somewhere on this site we'd like to see it. I understand the issue. Conrad: This site is just a great opportunity. Mancino: Good. I have a final, I guess I get to make final comments and I have a few and they mostly have to do with the conditions in here. I just want to make sure when one of the residents came up and asked about the traffic study. That it does go east on Lake Drive East, Lake Drive and we take in those comments that I think that she articulately expressed. Aanenson: I think we'd want to even include Rosemount. Mancino: That whole area. And this is kind of past, this is over and beyond this. Looking at East Lake Drive in that area and seeing what boulevard trees and making it feel more like a neighborhood area, it certainly as a car driver, when I feel I'm going through a neighborhood area, I slow down. I mean I don't really need a sign to tell me that but I'm sure we will look at posting speed limits and reducing them. But one of the other things in my mind, as I drive that I slow down is, if there are trees around. It feels neighborhoody, etc. And I notice that there's a fence,just a fence on East Lake Drive there and I think that we could do some plantings. That would help. I also agree with the rest of the commissioners on the transition from single family to the east to medium density townhomes. I also would like to pass onto the City Council a recommendation for rental housing and have them figure out where it goes. I don't think that it necessarily has to be east of TH 101. I do feel that it could be west of TH 101. There could be an underpass. There could be a pedestrian walkway so that those who live in rental property on the western side could get over to the 40 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 • retail on the east. I think that that would be, would work out well. And they can look at the economics that go with that because that's something that we won't be. I would, on another point and that is public streets. Parking on public streets. I would like to offer the suggestion that we change condition number 12 so that the applicant and staff shall investigate the use of parking on public streets. Making sure that it doesn't interfere with traffic congestion and public safety. But I would like that option to remain open instead of just closing it. I would also like to add a condition 22 so that if this conceptual plan goes through and we get to preliminary plans, that the applicant shall develop comprehensive signage and lighting standards which are consistent with the traditional architecture of the project as outlined in the staff report. So that we see it at the appropriate time and that is at the preliminary time. I think that signage and a mix use area and lighting is a major concern. I would also like to amend condition number 4 having to do with architecture. The applicant shall better define the vernacular to be used within the project. And that second sentence, and I'll give the rationale afterwards. Specific architecture development standards shall be developed and these standards shall be used in all land uses within the project. And what I mean there is that, I think one of the ideas that we all as a commission buy into and are excited about is a village concept. And not only do I see this for the retail commercial but also for the townhomes and that again the whole development has a neighborhood. Has a look and it's all very compatible. And that is, and many of the townhomes that we're seeing before us, the first thing you see or the only thing that you see are garages. And that is certainly not the concept or what I'm assuming that we will see in townhomes in this development. That it will be more of the neo traditional, new urbanism concept. Whether that means an alley way, whatever. That we look creatively at that. So that there is a good compatibility here. And I think those are all my comments. I'd entertain a motion. And I think that if one person entertains a motion, others of us would add friendly amendments. Peterson: I would make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend conceptual approval of PUD #92-1 with the conditions 1 through 21. Mancino: Is there a second? Skubic: Second. Farmakes: I'd like to add a friendly amendment. I'd like to instruct staff to define specifically what advantages and criteria expanding the retail area outside the central business district to the City Council and not to be referring to other reports but specify specifically the advantages to the community of doing so. Mancino: Is that friendly amendment accepted? 41 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Peterson: Accepted. Mancino: Any other friendly amendments? I would like to add a couple friendly amendments. And that is to condition number 4. That the first sentence stays as is. The second sentence changes to specific architectural development standards shall be developed and these standards shall be used in all land uses within the project. Is that friendly amendment accepted? Peterson: Accepted. Mancino: The next friendly amendment is on number 12. That the applicant and staff shall investigate the use of parking on public streets that does not interfere with traffic congestion and public safety. Peterson: Accepted. Mancino: Thank you. Number 22. The applicant shall develop comprehensive signage and lighting standards which are consistent with the traditional architectural of the project as outlined in the staff report. Peterson: Accepted. Mancino: Thank you. Any discussion? Oh! I guess I have a question. Does this mean that the new, question for Bob. That what we are approving here is the new revised R-8 zoning for those two eastern parcels. Aanenson: No, you approved what we had with number 19 in there. Mancino: Oh, okay. Generous: No, it would be the proposal. You would have to make that specific. That the applicant provide medium density adjacent to. Aanenson: Or transition or however you want to word that. Mancino: Okay. I just wasn't aware that that is not part of the motion at this time. It would remain R-12. Generous: Well what they're proposing. 42 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: What they are proposing in front of us. Generous: Yes. Mancino: Okay. Which is R-12 and R-12. Generous: Yes. Mancino: Okay. Peterson: I think we need another friendly amendment. Point of discussion first. I think, my sense was that we all agreed that there was a transition problem between the high density and the single family. At least I heard a few of us say that. So I think in turn, how we should integrate that into this. Meyer: How would you word that? Generous: Well as a motion maker you could add another condition that the transition, residential be no greater than medium density and your second could approve that. Peterson: To that end I would make an additional condition that the density be, between the residential, current residential and the new residential, that it be medium density rather than high density. Aanenson: I have a question. Can we get a number on that just so that we have the same understanding that what we say medium is 4 to 8 units an acre. Is that understood? Peterson: Yes. Aanenson: Okay. Mancino: 4 to 8 units per acre. Okay. Peterson: Was I succinct enough on that? Aanenson: Yes. I just want to make sure that everybody understood that that's what we classify as medium. Mancino: Any discussion? My next question is, are you meaning also to keep in 19 which would also have the developer looking at rental housing in another area of the development? 43 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Peterson: Yes. Mancino: Okay. I just wanted to make clear that that was it. Do I have a second on that entire motion? Mehl: I'll second it. Peterson moved, Mehl seconded that the Planning Commission recommend conceptual approval of PUD #92-1 with the following conditions: 1. The applicant has expressed the potential for preserving the ridge line that runs east-west across the northern portion of the site. This option should be further investigated as the project moves forward in the review process. In addition, the area south of the trail system on the south end of the parcel should be maintained in it's entirety. As an alternative, the density that is proposed for these areas could be transferred elsewhere on the PUD. 2. A mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet must be completed for this project. 3. The applicant shall develop individualized development standards for each parcel including setbacks, building heights and bulk, and uses. 4. The applicant shall better define the "vernacular" to be used within the project. Specific architectural development standards shall be developed. Specific architectural development standards shall be developed and these standards shall be used in all land uses within the project. 5. The applicant shall investigate realigning the Lake Drive East extension to follow the Great Plains Boulevard alignment until it is south of the east/west ridge on the northern portion of the project. 6. The applicant, in conjunction with the city, shall develop a strategy for the provision of affordable housing within the project. 7. The applicant shall work with the city and Southwest Metro Transit for the provision of mass transit opportunities within the development. 8. The applicant shall develop a tree preservation plan for the project. 44 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 9. The applicant shall develop specific methodology for the preservation of trees, slopes, and wetlands. 10. Lake Drive East shall be constructed in accordance with State Aid standards. The remaining public street shall be built in accordance to the City's industrial standards. Lake Drive East will require an 80 foot right-of-way and the southerly loop street a 60 foot wide right-of-way. 11. All access points onto Trunk Highway 101 will be subject to City and MnDot review and approval. 12. That the applicant and staff shall investigate the use of parking on public streets that does not interfere with traffic congestion and public safety. 13. The applicant should prepare a traffic study to provide data justifying access points and to determine necessary roadway improvements required by this type of land use. 14. Trunk Highway 101 will require upgrading in order to meet the traffic demands of this development. 15. All public improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of standard specifications and detail plates for construction. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide a financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements and conditions of approval. 16. The applicant shall implement the City's Surface Water Management Plan with regards to accommodating water quality and quantity measures with regards to surface water runoff from the site. 17. The City administers the State Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and the City's Wetland Ordinance. Staff requires the following information for wetlands: a wetland delineation report by a qualified wetland delineator, wetlands delineated on the grading and drainage plan, wetland alteration and mitigation areas shown on the grading and drainage plan, the applicable permit application for wetland alteration. 18. In addition to the requirements of the WCA, the City also requires a buffer strip and buffer strip monumentation around the wetlands. The buffer strip width required for natural wetlands is 10 to 30 feet with a minimum average width of 20 feet and the buffer strip width required for an ag/urban wetland is 0 to 20 feet with a minimum 45 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 average width of 10 feet. The principal structure setback for these wetlands is 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. 19. The applicant shall make a commitment to provide for rental housing in the development. 20. The applicant shall incorporate additional internal pedestrian facilities within the development. 21. The applicant shall develop design parameters to buffer the existing residential neighborhoods to the east from this development. 22. Instruct staff to define specifically what advantages and criteria expanding the retail area outside the central business district to the City Council and not to be referring to other reports but specify specifically the advantages to the community of doing so. 23. The applicant shall develop comprehensive signage and lighting standards which are consistent with the traditional architectural of the project as outlined in the staff report. 24. The density between the existing residential and the proposed residential shall be medium density (4 to 8 units per acre) and not high density. All voted in favor, except Conrad who abstained, and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: SITE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR A 9,400 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO AN OFFICE WAREHOUSE FACILITY ON PROPERTY ZONED IOP, INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK AND LOCATED AT 7600 QUATTRO DRIVE, MICROVISION CORPORATION. Public Present: Name Address Patrick Giordana Minneapolis Paula Jackels 8531 Merganser Court Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report. 46 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: Any questions for staff? I have a quick one. Can you keep that up please for a second Sharmin. They've already graded the parking lot. Okay. When, and is that part of what we were approving? The parking lot. The expansion of a parking lot. Al-Jaff: What we have done in the past is allowed grading to take place. Mancino: Now do you allow grading to take place? I mean what if there are trees there? I mean are there, do they have to put up fencing. Protection fencing. Would you allow grading prior to the Planning Commission okaying the site? Aanenson: It's still permitted through the engineering department. They would review the plans and make sure they're consistent with drainage and everything else. And there's only a certain level that they're allowed to permit administratively. Otherwise you have to go through this process. Mancino: So the engineering staff looks at the environmental effects as trees that are up and everything and how. Aanenson: No, they communicate with us to do that. Mancino: Okay. Aanenson: They approve it administratively but it's communications between the different departments but they are ultimately the ones that would administrate it. But they would confer with the Planning staff to say do you have any issues...Sharmin went out and looked at it. Mancino: Okay. Before they started grading you went out and looked at it? Al-Jaff: Yes. Mancino: Okay. Great. Thank you. Does the applicant wish to address the Planning Commission at this time. Pat Giordana: Good evening. I'm Pat Giordana. I'm the architect on the project and I'm representing Microvision. I think Sharmin did a good job of really walking through what we're proposing. On our revised elevations we've already added the windows to the east and the west as requested by the Planning Commission. And I'm really here just to answer questions. We feel, if you've been by that property right now, the blue striping, the new 47 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 company who is moving in or who owns the building right now, their company color is more of a earth tone burgundy and we feel that actually is an improvement to the... Mancino: Okay. Any questions at this point from commissioners to the architect? Skubic: I have one. Will you be adding any additional rooftop heating or ventilating, air conditioning? Pat Giordana: Yeah there will be three additional rooftop units and they'll be pushed to the back. I think as you drive by this site that the...quite a ways below the building. You'll be hard pressed to even see the addition on the back side. The building's actually getting buried about halfway back in the hillside... Skubic: You currently have some mechanicals up there? Pat Giordana: Yes. Right now the current mechanical system are all roof top units and we're going to take them to a new roof top units on the back side. Skubic: Staff, do these need to be covered? Al-Jaff: If you wish we can add a condition that reads all roof top equipment shall be screened. You won't be able to see them. Skubic: Okay. The current equipment is not screened. Al-Jaff: You can't see them. Skubic: Okay. Pat Giordana: From the angle from the road, the building really blocks out. Again you're sitting about 15-20 feet below the roof top. Even when you're in the parking lot, you can't see it. Skubic: Okay, thank you. Mancino: Just a side bar to that. On the northern side, is that residential? Al-Jaff: Yes. Mancino: And will they be able to see at all? 48 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Pat Giordana: There's also a...line there. Aanenson: Railroad tracks. Mancino: So when we get light rail transit and we come by all the time, are we going to see rooftop? That we're going to get next year, light rail transit. Okay, so there's no possibility of the residential seeing. Al-Jaffa Here's the railroad tracks. Here's a berm right here. Then you'd have woods separating the site from the residential neighborhood. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Any other questions at this time? Conrad: Where is the retaining wall? Pat Giordana: The retaining wall we had along the west and north of the parking lot. The civil engineer has actually revised some of the grading to deal to omit the... The property owner was able to get an agreement with his neighboring property to the west, which allowed him to make that transition more gradual and actually do about 15 feet of grading on his property to make a more easy transition. Mancino: Thank you very much. I think that's it. Thank you. May I have a motion to open this to a public hearing and a second please? Meyer moved, Peterson seconded to open the public hearing. The public healing was opened. Mancino: Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission on this item, please come forward. Paula Jackets: Good evening. I'm Paula Jackets. My address is 8531 Merganser Court. I am an employee of Microvision. I'm the longest standing employee other than the 2 owners and I've got to tell you from personal experience, it's a fabulous place to work. As a result of the company moving to the Chanhassen area I built a new residence out in this area... Our company has grown tremendously since we moved to this site. I think if anyone has seen our parking situation right now you would realize that. I don't know how much I should tell you but I know that we moved there with about 30 employees in February of this year. We now are over 85. This has brought tremendous growth to this area. I know there's a lot of employees that are looking at purchasing homes, as well as relocating to this area and I think that's one thing that the Council should take a look at because it is giving a lot back to Chanhassen as a city and I just wanted to make sure that you were aware of what this 49 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 company is allowing Chanhassen to grow with the company or whatever...because a lot of people are making a large commitment because previously we were renting our site and with the foresight to purchase, that was where my personal belief was yes. I do want to be a part of this company. I know what they've done. I know where they're going and I do want to move with this company and that's why we chose to relocate to this area. And I think by approving this site expansion you will see an increased growth in the company. They have done quite a bit and it will just roll over into an additional amount of employees and such that will relocate to this area. It's something that I felt very strongly... Mancino: Great, thank you. Conrad: What does your company do? Paula Jackets: We manufacture machine vision systems for the truck industry. Basically inspecting... Mancino: Say that again. Machine visions? Paula Jackets: Machine vision systems. Basically what they are are computer systems, table sized equipment that takes a look at...Basically inspecting those components. Mancino: Making sure that they work before. Paula Jackets: They're basically just taking a look at the inspection capabilities. There's no function. There aren't...It's a clean operation. There's no hazardous materials or anything. It's a quiet operation. I think the residents in the area will find that... We were actually looking at a home on the opposite side of the rail for ourselves when we relocated along Twilight Boulevard. Twilight Trail and I just didn't want to be within walking distance. But it is a good company and I think that you're really going to want to make sure that it does stay in this area because of the potential growth. I know there has been discussions of relocating to other areas, because I've moved I'd prefer that they would stay in this area but it is a really great company and I think they can do a lot... Mancino: Are you their PR officer? Paula Jackets: ...started in '87 and I've been through almost every change... Farmakes: Could we interest you in any land on TH 41 and TH 5? Paula Jackets: I hope a lot for the company, like I say... 50 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: Great, thank you. Appreciated your comments. Do I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing? Meyer moved, Faimakes seconded to close the public healing. The public hearing was closed. Mancino: Comments from commissioners. Commissioner Conrad. Conrad: Nothing. It looks fine. Mancino: Commissioner Peterson. Peterson: Looks great. Mancino: Commissioner Skubic. Skubic: It looks goods. Mancino: Commissioner Meyer. Meyer: Ditto. Mancino: Great. Commissioner Farmakes. Farmakes: Vote to approve. Mancino: Commissioner Mehl. Mehl: I'll add something. I drove by this site on Monday. Took a look at it and the applicant is very right in that, when he says that the addition probably won't be seen or very slightly seen from the road. It's going to be, it's really buried back there. You just won't see it, unless you're in a parking lot. And as far as rooftop equipment, you would never be able to see it. Looks good. Mancino: Okay, thank you. I have no additional comments. May I entertain a motion. Meyer: I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion. City Council approve site plan review #90-6 as shown on the site plan dated October 13, 1995 subject to the following conditions, 1 through 6 with the recommended change on number 2. That the applicant shall landscape the northeast and the 51 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 northwest corners of the new parking lot. Landscape materials shall be selected from the city's approved parking lot tree list. The existing trees on the west and northwest sides of the property are to be protected by tree fencing. Mancino: Is there a second? Peterson: Second. Mancino: Any discussion? Meyer moved, Peterson seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #90-6 as shown on the site plan dated October 13, 1995, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall add windows along the east and west elevation of the proposed addition. 2. That the applicant shall landscape the northeast and the northwest corners of the new parking lot. Landscape materials shall be selected from the city's approved parking lot tree list. The existing trees on the west and northwest sides of the property are to be protected by tree fencing. 3. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required for landscaping. 4. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 5. Concurrent with the building permit, a detailed lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 6. Meet with the Building Official as requested in his attached memo to discuss commercial building permit requirements. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 52 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 • PUBLIC HEARING: AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL RAISING OF FUR BEARING ANIMALS, OPERATION OF RIDING ACADEMIES, COMMERCIAL STABLES AND KENNELS IN THE BF, FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT, NANCY LEE. Public Present: Name Address Nancy Lee Applicant Patrick Blood Applicant Verne Severson 675 Lakota Lane Sharmin Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any other questions from commissioners to staff before the applicant presents? Okay. Would the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission? Nancy Lee: Thank you. My name is Nancy Lee. I would say my first request...included use but after Sharmin told me how much is indeed agricultural, it does not make sense to put it in there. ,..so there isn't much more I can say until she's had a chance to look into that... Conrad: What's your intent? Mancino: Yeah, that was my question. Nancy Lee: ...kennels. I have found that Carver County and Scott County don't have a humane society. That was one important aspect of it. Right now I was looking to see if it was something that would be allowed before I invest too much time and money into the issue... Mancino: Any other questions for the applicant? I think that's it at this time. Thank you. This is a public hearing. May I have a motion to open for a public hearing and a second please. Meyer moved, Conrad seconded to open the public hearing. Mancino: Anyone wishing to speak on this item please come in front of the Planning Commission if you'd like at this time. 53 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Verne Severson: I'm Verne Severson. I live at 675 Lakota Lane. We're the property just north of this site. Mancino: Excuse me Verne, could you show exactly where you are? Verne Severson: Yeah, right north of the railroad... And I don't have much of any comment... conditional use versus something... I think it is a problem finding a good use for this property and the only comment I have to make is I like the idea of something high class...The thought of fur bearing animals, I can't quite handle that so I guess I'd like you to consider that. I'd like the staff to...but other than that I think... Mancino: Okay, thank you. Sharmin, would you like to take just a minute and explain what conditional use is to Mr. Severson? Al-Jaff: Sure. Mancino: And what that would mean. Al-Jaff: Conditional use permit would allow us to allow the use that they are requesting. However it would have conditions attached to this application...that they would have to abide by. With conditional use permits we will look at them on a yearly basis to make sure that they are in compliance with all of the conditions of approval. Verne Severson: Depending upon how much agricultural land there is. Mancino: Could you come back up. I'm sorry, I should have. Verne Severson: I was just concerned if you find out that so much of Chanhassen has agricultural land and what were you trying to say when you said this wouldn't work in the other area. Al-Jaff: Okay. What the applicant requested was that we amend the term agriculture. Currently agriculture is a permitted use in the Agricultural Estate District, in the Rural Residential District and in the Fringe Business District. Those are three different types of zones. I highlighted those uses on this map and this is what I came up with. Verne Severson: Okay, that's agricultural. But our area down there is business fringe? Al-Jaff: Correct. What the applicant is requesting to amend is the definition of agriculture, which is a permitted use within all of those districts. 54 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Verne Severson: And it currently doesn't include riding stables and kennels... Al-Jaff: That's correct. It excludes them specifically. Verne Severson: So what you're proposing is something different than that so it only affects the business fringe district? Al-Jaff: Correct. Aanenson: We said that ag was too broad so we wanted to narrow the scope and just change it to business fringe so we're tabling that... Verne Severson: Well then I would be...suggest you table the motion and study it some more because...work something out. Mancino: Thank you. Thank you for your thoughts. Public hearing is closed. Let's move on to commissioner's comments. Commissioner Mehl. Mehl: What's the area down there? It looks from the map it looked kind of small. Are we talking about putting riding stables and, or academies and all of this into that small area? Al-Jaff: We don't have a specific plan submitted. What the applicant requested was just a general change in the zone so they would know whether they could make an application. Mehl: For that BF district? Al-Jaff: Correct. So at this point we're just looking at the type of use and how do we permit it in that area. They also didn't want to invest a large amount of money preparing a site plan for something that is not permitted in a district. They wanted to see how the city would address this zoning amendment first because without the amendment they really can't proceed. Aanenson: So what we're saying is we'll come back with some standards. Now they have 15 acres and that be the appropriate size but what we're saying is Sharmin wants some additional time to say, if it was a riding academy, how many acres would it have? If it is a humane society, how many acres is appropriate. What other conditions should we put in place to mitigate any impacts? Mehl: So it's conceivable that the BF district isn't, maybe wouldn't be big enough to handle. 55 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Aanenson: No, we would base it on a parcel size. Maybe we're saying if it's a riding academy it needs to be so many acres. But it could be less if it was a humane society. That's what we don't know. That's what we're saying Sharmin says I need some additional time to go through that and decide what impacts I need to consider to mitigate noise, and whatever else. We don't know the criteria yet. That's what she's going to need to develop. Mehl: Okay. You're going to have to take a look at some things. You know noise from animals. Trucks and trailers. If you're talking about horses, you've got to get them in and out. What the roads and traffic and you know. Aanenson: And we may decide horses are inappropriate. Maybe we decide it's got to be more something on a smaller scale. Mancino: Commissioner Mehl are you done? Mehl: I had just a couple other things here. You know you're talking barns and pens and riding areas and there's just a whole pile of things that's going to have to be taken a look at. Odor control. Disposal of feces. How you collect them. Aanenson: Some of those things are already addressed in city ordinances. We do have stabling permitting requirements and there are other ordinances in the city code regarding animals. So a lot of those standards are in place so it's just a matter of incorporating it into this. Say those other ordinances would also be followed. There are stabling permits already in...the city. Mehl: Okay. That's all I have. Mancino: Commissioner Farmakes. Farmakes: I have no general objections to looking at this. I think also however we should consider that for every positive issue, like a humane society, there are negative ones. ...puppy mill, which would come under the same criteria of use. It's intent of use would be different. Those are less palatable for aesthetics reasons. Also I think the raising of fur bearing animals for slaughter would be totally incompatible with an urban area. I'm not sure how that interplays with the issue. I know that I have some experience of just walking through a mink ranching area. There's a considerable odor involved. I'm not sure how that interplays either with certain types of animals that may be have more of an odor issue. Little harder to define than...but may affect neighbors. The noise issue as well for large concentrations of animals. Anyway I just want to bring up that point that there is also good and bad uses for the same type of operations so that's it. 56 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: Commissioner Meyer. Meyer: Nothing. Mancino: Commissioner Skubic. Skubic: I have nothing to add. Mancino: Commissioner Peterson. Peterson: Nothing to add. Mancino: Commissioner Conrad. Conrad: Were we going to study the BF area? Aanenson: Yeah. Conrad: Well what are we going to do down there and how does this relate to it? Al-Jaff: We did bring a zoning ordinance amendment before you approximately 5 or 6 months ago. Aanenson: Right but what he's talking about is the...follow-up. Al-Jaff: Correct. Aanenson: We're working on it. We are. Conrad: Does it fit? Aanenson: We talked about it and we think it may. It may be a very good fit. Because we really see this area as trying to get away from more of the true retail type of a nitch if it's done appropriately. Mancino: So you're going to come back to us with a whole BF ordinance and what's permitted and what's conditional. 57 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Aanenson: I'd like to do that. I won't be able to do that. We'll come back with some specifics, a recommendation on this and how we think it could fit in the direction we're going with that district. Mancino: So instead of looking at the whole, we're going to look at a piece? Al-Jaff: A district. Aanenson: Yes. Mancino: Okay. Aanenson: We've got quite a bit of information on what's happening down in that area. The direction, the way we think we're going and how this relates to it. If it's going with us or against. We'll be able to tell you that. Mancino: Okay, great. Conrad: But it is a good point when staff comes back to give us a status for that area and say we're thinking of moving it. Mancino: Okay, that would be great. Do I have a motion? May I entertain a motion? Peterson: The motion to table this request. Is there a specific? Mancino: And you're requesting the tabling because you want what done? Peterson: Tabling of it to let the staff further develop standards to allow the commercial raising of fur bearing animals, operating of riding academies, commercial stables and kennels as a conditional use permit in the BF district. Mancino: Is there a second? Meyer: I'll second that. Mancino: Any discussion? Peterson moved, Meyer seconded that the Planning Commission table action on the City Code amendment to further develop standards to allow the commercial raising of fur beating 58 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 animals, operating of riding academies, commercial stables and kennels as a conditional use permit in the BF district. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Mancino: The motion is tabled for staff to do some work on coming back to us with how we should handle this in the business fringe area. And I'm sure that you will be in contact with the applicant to let her know when this will come back in front of the Planning Commission and will also get the input from the applicant. Thank you. NEW BUSINESS: Mancino: Do we have any new business? Aanenson: Actually the Council met between meetings. By the time the packet went out, we didn't have a chance to put something in. Mancino: They did pass the Tires Plus. Aanenson: Correct. The Southern Oaks was tabled. That was back on the agenda. That was the property south of...that was withdrawn from the agenda. Then prior to that, the meeting before, I believe we've given you those so it's just been on the 13th. The other ones you had already gotten from October 23rd. Then just an update on the Pillsbury, which is meeting the deadlines that we had requested and seems to be resolving some of the traffic. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meyer moved, Mehl seconded to note the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated November 1, 1995 as presented. ONGOING ITEMS: LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT. Kate Aanenson updated the Commission on the Livable Communities Act. Mancino: So how are we going to, I mean the question that was put in front of us tonight and it's a very logical one. How do we do high density rental? Aanenson: Well I think, first of all that number was used 500 and certainly you can balance that out. We've seen that with projects, just similar like we did on the senior housing project. There's prices that are well in excess of that. There's 65 units in that senior housing project. Of those 37 are under 600 a unit so what you do is you take that whole range and it runs the gamut and that is at market rate. Those units but because you average, some have 2 bedrooms and more amenities versus some that are the smaller so not all of the units have to be affordable. What we're saying is we need to try to look at a portion of those and certainly 59 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 with this project, no one's saying that all of those had to be. They're trying to get a portion of those and that's what we're trying to say. Another way to make it happen is, you had pointed out, maybe there's an opportunity to put some of the rental on top of the retail. There's different ways of scattering those out. Nobody wants to just put all the units in one area of town and impose them on anybody and I think a successful project, that people aren't even realizing, we're subsidizing the downtown and the Heritage building right now. And it doesn't seem to be a problem so I think that's the best way to do it. Then it's not imposing on any one neighborhood. Kate Aanenson continued with her update on the livable Communities Act. Mancino: So we're going to be keep analysis, data on this? As we approve things, we're going to be saying and asking pricing of product? And what does that do about the market? Aanenson: Whether it's above 115, it's not an issue. What the issue is, it's those that are getting close to that margin and how do we accomplish that. Conrad: That seems like a really big contradiction. Mancino: Yeah. Conrad: And to the development patterns. That one's tough. Aanenson: It is a tough one. Conrad: It's a real contradiction. I think the other ones can do. I think. Aanenson: Oh, I agree with you. Conrad: But this one seems, like I don't know that I want to make that happen. It just seems real contrary to what all the resident moved out here for and the ratio of one out of two being affordable. Mancino: I have another issue. What's going to make different cities or different suburbs, whatever you want to call it, different from each other if we all have this strict guideline of what we can be? I mean we have to have so much here. So much there. Who cares where you live anymore? I've just got to take the opposite, stick some holes. Aanenson: Yeah. We can all be $300,000.00 and just say nobody else can come here. That's a second option. 60 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: I wasn't quite... Aanenson: I know but there's a lot of people who think that way and we're willing to pay the taxes, sure. I'm not going to, I'm just fulfilling the message and that's to say what's realistic and obviously the legislature decides this but you're right. The Council's struggling with that 50% too. What is the appropriate, is that but that's way below even the recommended benchmark. So it's a tough one. You've got to have some number that's realistic. Now are we going to be able to achieve all these goals? What the Council's looking at is some good faith effort to move in that direction. As they've stated, you can't turn the whole course of the ship but they'd like to see you moving in a direction. Now the Council has adopted a resolution that says they're willing to participate. The next step is for them to agree on the goals. And the next step kind of comes back to you too because there's going to be implementation. How do we achieve those goals? This goes back to, do we leave it as a PUD and try to be more creative in that approach? How are we going to do this? When we look at all these projects and to come back to your question Nancy, do we start asking what the numbers are going to be? Yeah, we're going to have to if we want to achieve these, there's going to have to be ways to do that. Farmakes: Who's going to pay for it? Aanenson: I don't know that we always have to pay for it... Mancino: Kate, what if we don't meet some of these? Does that mean, the Met Council says you can't extend the MUSA line? I won't give you dollars to upgrade Highway 5 from Powers to TH 41? I mean what's at stake? Aanenson: That's what the Council's struggling with now. We've gotten a letter from the Met Council staff and again the legislature's going to review this that says, if you're showing good faith but the market isn't there, then that's through no fault of your own. If you reviewed projects and have been creative in trying to review them, great. One project which we've done is the senior housing project which we're already getting credit for because we participated. There's other projects that we're working on that we will be getting credit for. If apartments aren't financable and we can't make it happen, are we going to be penalized? They're saying no. Farmakes: How do you define market for subsidy though? Aanenson: That's a whole other. 61 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Farmakes: Well it's an important issue. I mean this whole, once you throw away the life cycle, how do you deal with the entitlement of making up the difference of cost? ...but just cost. How do you make up the difference? Aanenson: There's certain things. Land prices. There's certain things and they certainly understand that. There are certain things that we can't control but there are things that we can control. As Ladd's indicated, keeping densities towards the upper end. There are certain things we can be doing. So that's what they're saying. Are you doing things to encourage or are you being punitive? Farmakes: But certainly the, well you can argue this ad infinitum. Aanenson: But anybody that's interested, then I'll report back to you what the Council looked at as far as, because the goals have to be in by the middle of December. Mancino: And if you get really interested, go to the work session. Conrad: So the Council is doing what? Setting goals or reacting to your? Aanenson: Reacting to it. They're concerned. They want to go through it more specifically. Is this a good number... I certainly don't want to be held accountable for goals that are unapproachable but I think that again we've got the zoning in place. It's using the right tools that we have and... Mancino: I think the zoning's in place but not affordability of homes. Conrad: I think the Opus site could solve every problem. Seriously. We bring in Rottlund, they can put in every, they can solve every one of these. Aanenson: They'll have to build a new school. Farmakes: Have you thought of that Ladd? We could rent our statistics. That's possible. We could have a surplus and send it to Robbinsdale. Aanenson: We can cluster with other communities. There's a lot of things we can do. I just wanted to mention too, I did put two zoning news ones in here. The lighting issue has always been an issue of the Council as far as how that affects... Mancino: I thought that was very apropos especially looking at mixed use. 62 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Aanenson: And then I thought the sign thing too was kind of a discussion that we've been talking about too. So when I think there's one that interests you, I always try to put them... Mancino: I would like to suggest that we look at a lighting ordinance, especially as we, in some of these areas where we're doing mixed use and we have to be concerned about lighting for retail. Lighting for residential and how they're compatible. So I think that would be something good to start looking at. I'd also like to look at business neighborhood. I don't know if anybody's had a chance to really look, drive through Mission Hills but that's kind of got quite a bit of multi-family. Is that medium density? And some high density. We have both there. Aanenson: Well it's pretty much, I think we squashed that one down. I've got it in the report. Let's see, I'll give you a real density. Mission Hills came out at. Mancino: Medium? Aanenson: Yeah. 7 units an acre. And actually if you take the gross, taking out the wetlands, it's 4.4 so again we squashed that one down. I mean the only one we've approved over 6 units an acre is the senior housing project and that was at 30. Mancino: It's the only one over 6? Aanenson: Yes. Mancino: Net? Aanenson: Gross. Net? The highest one, we've got two at 7. That would be Mission Hills and Oak Ponds. But those are the only two that are gross. Otherwise there aren't any other ones. Mancino: So we have nothing that approaches R-12, let along R-16. Aanenson: Not in the recent past. We have done Heritage. The one downtown but that was prior to what we did the last 5 years. To try to give you development trends. Mancino: Well my other suggestion is to look up the business commercial area down near Mission Hills that will be coming in and setting some standards for that because I think we'll have more of that. 63 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Conrad: But you know the interesting thing is, the zone was there for high density. Nobody chose to use it. My point has always been, okay eat it up... We still have some opportunities. Aanenson: It's a check and balance. Absolutely, I agree with you. Conrad: But why hasn't it happened? Mancino: I mean it's not because people come in and say they don't want it. Conrad: Developer's aren't making any money on it. Farmakes: Well if the market's not there, subsidize it. You know that. Conrad: There you go. Yeah. Raise the taxes. Yeah. Mancino: Can we have a motion for adjournment? Mehl moved, Meyer seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 64 5 CITY OF CHANHASSEN� s 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 �r ~. (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: John Rask, Planner I DATE: November 29, 1995 SUBJECT: Proposed Text Amendment to the A-2, Agricultural Estate District to allow Retail Nurseries and Garden Centers SUMMARY Mr. Don Halla, Halla Nursery, is requesting a text amendment to allow landscape nurseries as a permitted use in the A-2 District. The Commission tabled action on this item on November 1, 1995 to receive further information from staff concerning the different options of allowing retail nurseries in the A-2 district. On November 15, 1995, the Commission again reviewed the proposed changes. The Commission tabled action and directed staff to revise several of the proposed conditions and definitions, and add an intent statement to the ordinance amendment. BACKGROUND The broad issue associated with this amendment is whether or not retail sales should be permitted in the A-2 Zoning District. Staff indicated that retail sales in the A-2 district are inconsistent and in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and other uses in the district. However, staff recognizes that pre-existing conditions exist which may require special consideration. The zoning ordinance currently prohibits retail uses in the A-2 district, including retail nurseries and garden centers. Wholesale nurseries are currently allowed as an Interim Use in the district. Existing retail nurseries are operating as non-conforming uses or have expanded illegally. Recognizing these pre-existing situations, staff recommended an ordinance revision which would allow these retail nurseries to exist and expand provided that the operation complies with established standards set forth in an Interim Use permit. Staff is of the opinion that permitting retail nurseries as an interim use would allow the option of converting the property to a use consistent with the comprehensive plan. Allowing retail nurseries or garden centers as a Planning Commission Text Amendment in A2 District November 29, 1995 Page 2 permitted or conditional use would give permanency to the use. Permitting additional retail structures in the A-2 district would make it difficult to prevent other retail uses from occupying the buildings if the nursery vacated the premises. These problems can occur in any situation where permanent buildings are constructed. An example of this would be the Sorenson Cold Storage building located on Highway 212. This building was constructed in 1988 and was to be used for cold storage only. Today,three businesses illegally occupy the structure. Code enforcement actions have been taken in the past and will continue until the violations are corrected. (Please see staff reports dated November 8, 1995 and October 25, 1995). One alternative staff considered involved allowing existing legal non-conforming uses to retain their current status, and only require that any new buildings, storage areas, or other improvements be subject to the interim use requirement. This would allow the existing business to remain as it exists today without any termination date. Staff is not recommending this alternative. This alternative would also be in conflict with the zoning ordinance and the comprehensive plan. The intent of the zoning ordinance is to eliminate nonconforming uses. By allowing nonconforming uses to expand through an interim use permit would discourage the future elimination of the use. City Code, Division 4. Nonconforming Uses, Section 20-71, states that, "The purpose of this division is: 1. To recognize the existence of uses, lots, and structures which were lawful when established, but which no longer meet all ordinance requirements; 2. To prevent the enlargement, expansion, intensification,or extension of any nonconforming use, building, or structure; 3. To encourage the elimination of nonconforming uses, lots, and structures or reduce their impact on adjacent properties." The following is a list of properties located in the City of Chanhassen where nursery stock is sold either retail or wholesale(see attached map): 1. University of Minnesota Arboretum-zoned A-2; an arboretum is a permitted use in this zone; 2. Lotus Lawn and Garden-zoned BH,Business Highway; has a conditional use permit; 3. Wilson Northwest Nursery and Wilson Prairie Market-zoned A-2; have two locations in the city: One where trees are grown and one market area located at Great Plains Blvd. and US Highway 212. The market area is a non-conforming use; Planning Commission Text Amendment in A2 District November 29, 1995 Page 3 4. Gorra Tree Farm- zoned A-2; wholesale only,no other buildings are associated with the use except a single family residence; 5. Erhart Tree Farm-zoned A-2; wholesale only, no other buildings associated with the use except a single family residence; 6. Ben Gowen- zoned RSF; this is a legal nonconforming use that has been in existence for years and they have not intensified the use; 7. Holasek Greenhouse Inc. -zoned A-2; green houses are associated with the use, wholesale only, legal non-conforming. 8. Halla Nursery Inc. -zoned A-2, wholesale and retail sales Staff maintains that the only appropriate method for allowing retail nurseries or garden centers in the A-2 District is through the Interim Use process. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the zoning ordinance amendment as submitted by the applicant. The applicant's proposal requested that landscape nurseries be a permitted use or"legal use"in the A-2 District. Staff developed a proposal which would allow the applicant to operate a retail nursery. Currently,retail nurseries are prohibited in the A-2 District. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council amend Sections 20-576(7), 20-1, and 20-257 to permit both wholesale and retail nurseries in the A-2 District as an Interim Use, as outlined in the staff report dated November 27, 1995." More specifically, the amendments shall read as follows: Amend Section 20-1 to read: Nursery is defined as, "An enterprise which conducts the retail and wholesale sale of plants grown on the site or imported to the site, as well as accessory items directly related to their care and maintenance. Accessory items may include fertilizer, potting soil garden tools, seed, pesticides,potting soil,pots, and other gardening supplies. The retail sale of hardware, paint, pet supplies,power equipment, and farm implements shall be prohibited. Nursery may include greenhouses." Planning Commission Text Amendment in A2 District November 29, 1995 Page 4 Retail Sales is defined as, "Establishments engaged in selling goods or merchandise to the general public for personal or household consumption and rendering services incidental to the sale of such goods." Amend Section 20-257 to read: Intent Statement. It is the intent of this amendment to recognize that pre-existing retail nurseries and garden centers are located within the City and may be in conflict with the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance. These establishments pre-date current ordinance standards. To allow for planned and orderly development,the City finds it necessary to regulate the expansion or intensification of these uses and to provide standards for any future retail nursery or garden centers. It is the intent of this section to promote the health, safety, general welfare,aesthetics, and image of the community by regulating the creation and the expansion of existing retail nurseries and garden centers. The creation or expansion of these uses will be allowed only by Interim Use permit approved by the City Council. The following conditions will apply to wholesale and retail nurseries: 1. The site must be on a collector or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan. 2. The minimum lot size is five acres. 3. All storage and yard areas as wells as buildings must be setback ene-hundred00) fifty(50) feet from public or private road right-of-ways, and three hundred (300)fwe-luny feet from an adjacent single family residence or a minimum of fifty feet from a side lot line, which ever is greater. 4. All outdoor storage areas must be -. _ _ _ . . . . _ ... .. _. !! ._ __ - - - - fencing-et-beig buffered from adjacent properties. Buffering may be accomplished using berming,fencing,landscaping, natural topography, or increased setbacks. The City Council may require the storage areas to be completely screened by one hundred (100) percent opaque fencing or berming. • -• - .- -•• . . .. : = Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.. The City Council may further restrict hours of operation if the use is located adjacent to property guided residential as identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission Text Amendment in A2 District November 29, 1995 Page 5 6. Light sources shall be shielded. 7. No outside speaker systems shall be allowed. S. A termination date shall be established for the interim use permit. The use shall be permitted until a particular date,until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Prior to the permit expiring,the applicant may request an extension to the interim use permit. A new application shall be submitted. The renewal application will be subject to all city ordinances including any new ordinances enacted after the original approval. 9. One wall sign not to exceed ninety (90) square feet, and one monument sign not exceeding twenty-four square(24) square feet shall be permitted on the premises. ATTACHMENTS 1. Map of existing wholesale or retail nursery sales 2. Planning Commission minutes dated November 15, 1995 3. Exhibit A- Halla Nursery Garden Center Inventory 4. Exhibit B - Halla Nursery Advertisement 5. Memorandum to Planning Commission dated November 8, 1995 6. Memorandum to Planning Commission dated October 25, 1995 VA%111 .«Y n.'-N"3 l[ �% F �F�'-i..�• "�" �.• �.- _ - oar _ 1,wy...�, _ �. - "Mal' j^y•S �I- '� ,o M "Q� ..AA�— Il :....�:': ?�_ F•�r" c4.�` E-1; i *''', '�/- ' .w-.,. • lllt r: ':a'� ci .a"` _ _r.I� ,1��illmd �}` 1-. �h+ di '.e lllip. ..;; d.u1 ?'°:- -ad�4:.: .ri Igr- d,.^•`'•'a OZ% a' �`/1 _-sct'`.'. = 4~.�7g.., ..b4i�eI�'�145.'^j.` :.ti -- �, - } l';.` wRF t if }; ikritivk ,' 0� :rte , - s� unw_ `� +w w N -�e " ... il ��� <-1,r Vie roz”,._„.,t era , c........ ...„... .......,...... tr/!2 lir • Ile ( 13 —: . _ D _1 ` -+ter..._ – cri U.A.,M...i.....W--i-3--.-._1Vd,.4.,..e2 ...,,.. ` - >s/ r+,au-n► Ciba. I l i i t t t ; i i l `' a t t • _ irk ...—. � ' V. �of4_ _y' ,..A cm of w ..7 L.- �. 4 BASE MAP ...— , - .11•-• arr Lan .... - 11% - __,:::-.,----4_:...re- , , 1 0 �; -� PREPAM BY: �-_ -`; CHA1JASSt]i ENG,MEER,WG DEPT _ '- --� — Rcvraca .uw.,' - - -J ••.• 331 ,'err All'--. .-- PROP,' A T ITH ER WBÔLSALEI0 ' -� I : I , ' i , j I - CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 15, 1995 Chairwoman Mancino called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Peterson, Bob Skubic, Mike Meyer, Nancy Mancino, Don Mehl, Ladd Conrad and Jeff Farmakes STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; John Rask, Planner I; Bob Generous, Planner II; and Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE FOR LANDSCAPE NURSERIES AND GARDEN CENTERS IN THE A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT. Public Present: Name Address Verne Severson 675 Lakota Lane Mark & Kay Halla 770 Creekwood Don Halla 6601 Mohawk Trail John Rask presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Do the commissioners have any questions of staff at this point? John I have one. If it is a conditional use let's say, and we decide on that tonight, and the conditions are met. If along the way, after 3 or 4 years and there is more single family development in the area and we would like to change the conditions, is that allowable? Rask: No. Not unless the applicant wanted to expand the use and would come back for an amendment to that conditional use. Then you'd have an opportunity to re-evaluate that. But no, you couldn't. Mancino: So you'd have to be very clear and think ahead at this point, unless the applicant wanted to expand the use on that conditional use. Rask: Correct. Farmakes: I have one question. What is the precedence for the other tier suburbs? I mean typically outlying areas around the metropolitan area you see a lot of nursery, tree farming. That type of thing. And then the transition that takes place from that, leaves agriculture and enters into the ag urban development. Eden Prairie. Eagan. Some of these other areas. How are they treating this transition issue? I Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Rask: Yeah, I don't know how they handle it. Have been. We didn't survey any of them but I would imagine they're probably operating under similar circumstances that we are. They're either non-conforming and the area's grown up around it and they're allowed to stay as long as they don't expand. Or they've done it, a similar process where they would allow it as an interim or a conditional use and deal with it on more a site specific basis and not permit it outright in the district. Farmakes: Okay so, the reason I ask this question is, it's more directed towards the issue of retail sales of manufactured or value enhanced goods versus a crop situation. And the question is, more or less how they, not only broke the transition or how they dealt with the transition between dealing with the retail business or however you want to define that. Making the transition or commitment equally for permitting that use within an area that may be directed for other types of development farther down the line and how that interferes or dictates that type of usage. And it seems to me like we're kind of trying to reinvent the wheel here to come up with our own plan versus looking at how other transitions have taken place. It would be interesting to see that since it seems to be a rather typical of our type of tier suburb to have that type of usage go on. In other words, if it's a necessity of commerce for them to survive in that element or that type of usage, then the decision is, is that appropriate for that area long term rather than interim use and I'm not sure if interim use kind of seems a solution to, put a patch on the problem but I'm not sure what the long term planning issue is solved by that. Mancino: Any other questions at this point? Conrad: Ah yes Madam Chairman. John what's, who do you think the impact of this ordinance amendment change is on the Halla operation? Rask: I think it allows them to expand within reason. It gives them that opportunity. Currently they're operating under a non-conformance situation so they're pretty much stuck with what they have and if that's okay with them, they could continue to do that for eternity for the most part. When it comes to add an additional building, the interim use permit would allow them to do that. It gives something back in return by giving a termination date but it does allow them to do more with that site at this point. Conrad: A 500 foot setback, is that a restriction? Rask: Yeah, that's currently in the ordinance now. That is one of the standards listed for wholesale nurseries. What we did is just pulled those over. Certainly we could look at providing some other setbacks here. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: So you're saying in effect with the setbacks that are outlined in the staff report, they could not expand? Rask: The setback 500 is from an existing residence. I don't know if there's any existing residence out there that close now but with the subdivision coming in, it would probably pretty much eliminate any additional building once houses are built out there. Mancino: I'm sorry for interrupting Commissioner Conrad. Has that plat gone through final platting? Rask: Yes it has. It has not been recorded yet though. It got final plat approval through the Council. Conrad: The distinction in the motion that you gave us, I really had some difficulty dealing with the garden center and a retail nursery. Final recommendation really talked about a retail nursery, not a garden center. So basically that's restrictive in terms of the product. Rask: Correct. Conrad: So there is some impact. Rask: Yeah. I think they have, if you look at the definition of nursery that's being proposed here by staff, Halla may have to eliminate some of the items he sells based on that definition. The definition's intended to keep it more for those products that are directly related to wholesale and retail nursery. Not I guess what we would classify as a garden center. Something that branches out to other areas when you sale hardware, paint, stain, things like that. Fencing. Storage sheds. You name it so we're trying to narrow it down to that specific use, which would be retail and wholesale nursery. And limit it to those products directly related to that. Mancino: I can say and I certainly haven't been to every nursery in the area but almost every. Some of those that are in that I have visited, that are in a neighborhood area, in developing areas. There's Kelly and Kelly in Long Lake and there's Tonkadale, etc. They do not carry the other manufactured goods. I mean pet supplies, etc and equipment and still seem to be growing and doing very well. Their's is mostly, well it's all on products that have to do with gardening. So I have seen that, as I said, in other neighborhood areas. Any other questions? Farmakes: I'll save my comments. I'll save my questions for maybe a later date. Too much too soon. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: Okay. Does the applicant wish to address the Planning Commission? Kay Halla: Good evening. I'm Kay Halla and I live at 770 Creekwood in the city of Chanhassen. Good evening Madam Chairman and commissioners. I would just like to address some of the impacts. We sent a letter out to the commissioners and I'd like to kind of respond to some of the impacts that the staff felt would occur with a permitted use and I think we're focusing on permitted use because since we've been here since 1962 we can't foresee being terminated. Anyway. One of the first concerns on page 2 of the...the staff gave listed that...not all A2 zoned property would be appropriate for retail nurseries and an example is lack of public facilities. I think if the public facilities are concerned, the city does impose, as far as we understand, requires that new buildings used for retail on agricultural land must meet B2 standards. And those B2 standards do include the handicapped accessible facilities so as far as I think if a retail building is there, that issue of keeping...facility probably wouldn't be an issue. And I guess I feel that certainly not all A2 property is going to be perfect for every A2 use. But generally I think it would be kind of looked at an impact that...hard to deal with. I think generally nurseries are definitely agricultural and I think they are very adequate for agricultural land, zoned land. And number two, in response to the second impact I felt that retail nurseries and garden centers are inconsistent with other permitted uses in the A2 district. I took a look at that and I looked at all the different permitted uses...agricultural I thought we were consistent with that. There are some uses that, yeah I don't think nurseries are consistent with. Daycares and some other things so that's hard to show sensitivity there but I do believe that we can...agricultural and agricultural land and I contacted the nursery licensing through the Department of Agriculture just to get more detail on that and they do not differentiate when they give licenses to nurseries, whether they're retail or garden centers. I asked specifically if it's a growing nursery, obviously we are a growing nursery and we get our license through the Department of Agriculture. What if we're just, let's say a garden center and we're selling stuff and they said, you still get your license through the Ag Department. One way you can differentiate the nurseries is that they have different classifications and Halla Nursery, we're classified as a nursery stock grower which means that over 50% of the products that we sell are grown on site in our nursery. And we, for instance we grew 19,700 perennials or more just from little...and we grow over 10,000 trees and shrubs so we are definitely a grower and I think a lot of emphasis, at least in the last meeting was put on the retail and I do understand the public safety reasons. That concern but I think what's being over looked is the fact that we are not just retail and the majority of our business is growing. We are farmers of nursery stock so that's a big part of our company and that's what differentiates us from nurseries such as Frank's or Bachman's that are strictly, they have their retail outlets and they have a big supplier somewhere else. And that kind of leads me to the third impact statement that the concern that other businesses like Bachman's, Frank's, and other nursery and craft stores may be in conflict with surrounding residential or agricultural property. And I think that's where, as far a I can tell, the nurseries that are in the 4 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 city of Chanhassen that are in agricultural land basically are a lot different than Frank's and Bachman's. The plants are grown on site and why don't I, in fact maybe, I don't know if this is the right language but I thought maybe the concerns could be addressed in the zoning that, in the regulations saying that nurseries and garden centers which were in existence prior to the zoning change of 1990 would be allowed as a permitted use in A2 zoning. And I don't know exactly how that would go but I thought that would be one way, so you wouldn't have that concern of somebody just deciding to come out and build a big...right in the middle of an agricultural district. And also I think that stores such as that that are geared more towards the selling and they don't do their own growing, they'd probably prefer to buy a chunk of land right down in the business district where there's a lot of traffic anyway. And that's the way, when I see those stores, that seems to be, they look very retail and very... And then as far as the fourth impact, that permanent buildings may be constructed which may...if the nursery is vacated. For example auto repair, contractors storage yards, miscellaneous retail, etc. Yeah, I guess those could be permanent but I see that with farms and they are permitted in A2. The Arboretum has a permanent, very permanent, beautiful building that could be used for other uses and they're not cheap buildings either. So I think, I don't know if that impacts, it's certainly an impact that I don't know if it's fair...affects there are other agricultural businesses that are permitted...you could then build permanent buildings. And I don't know if these buildings, there must be something in the zoning that if you sell a chunk of property that has a permanent building, the concern is that maybe an auto repair shop or contractors storage area could be moved in there and I'm not, from what I read in the zoning it didn't, if it's not listed as a permitted use in agricultural, A2 land, I don't understand how somebody could sell their property and have it be an auto repair shop if it wasn't permitted anyway. So I think, I didn't think that was a very valid impact. And I guess as far as...we would like to be here forever and we would like to blend in nicely with the development and screen where necessary. We want to work with the builders and Don and his wife Sandy are working right now with a builder, Charles Cudd to make sure that the nursery becomes a nice focal point for the development. And...to impact, the use would be allowed in perpetuity. We'd definitely like to see that and I think if we had just been here for a few years and we didn't have all the things that are out there now it might not be as big of an issue because we'd know when we started that gee, we're not a permanent use but we've been there since 1962. We've got an underground sprinkler system. Very expensive well. There's a lot of things not even in buildings that have been there for a long time and as far as selling retail, and I started working there in 1984 and they were selling retail and sold dry goods out of one of the buildings that was moved a little bit and one of the buildings was torn down. So anyway I think that we'd like to definitely see a permanent situation out there. And with number 6. The impact that says, retail nurseries and garden centers and...would be in conflict with the comprehensive plan and there was a reference to the corner of Highway 5 and TH 41 which is currently zoned A2. I understand there's some conflicts between industrial and the need for retail. I'm not real sure about that. But I guess when I look at the comprehensive plan, I 5 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 worked as a park planner in Maryland so I understand it's a very big county out there. I understand why you need a comprehensive plan. I think they're very good. I also feel that there's got to be some flexibility there with existing companies and there's got to be a way to blend things together. And when I look at nurseries and think of new homes going in, they seem to go hand and hand. I was driving around and I looked at some of the farms and though, you know that'd be hard for these farmers to try to get their tractors and with all this housing going up but a nursery, with housing coming, housing being around it, it's great. We can provide services that homeowners need. We can help new homes meet the city codes for how many trees they have and that kind of thing. And I think as far as visually, we can fit in really well. So I think that even though on the comprehensive plan there's something that shows all homeowners or all...residential, I think that with some flexibility that we could blend in nicely with that. And finally, I read in the City Code that the intent of the A2 district is the preservation of rural character while respecting development patterns by allowing single family residential development. And again I think that, if I were a homeowner I'd prefer to live next to a golf course or a nursery other than a utility services or some of the other uses that are permitted in the A2 zoning. I think that a nursery fits in really well. It helps preserve some of that rural character but it does respect development. In fact I think it basically thrives on development so I don't think that a nursery's going to prevent development or anything like that. And I guess I'd just like to let the commissioners know that as a landscape architect I can understand...coming out there. The importance of getting homeowners privacy and that kind of thing and I think that nurseries, and I'm sure other nurseries...you want to look nice. You want to be a good part of the neighborhood and I think that since we're in the business of selling products and growing trees and shrubs, that we're going to want to use them on our property. I think that's about it. Thanks. Does anyone have any questions? Mancino: Yeah, I have one. Are you open all year long? Kay Halla: We are open all year long for our employees. As far as how much business we have, it's been real dead the last month I'd say and basically as far as customers coming in, we don't have much until May first and maybe the end of September. Those are the times when we have more traffic...but as far as the winter, it's just the employees out there. And sometimes around Christmas... Mancino: So your peak seasons are spring through summer or September, which is almost fall. You keep employees all year long doing what? Kay Halla: In the winter, just these last few weeks we've been taking out the material that had not sold and getting it bedded down for the winter. We take all of the...shrubs and bury them in straw and hay and all that. Then we prepare to...so we do a lot of things on the 6 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 computer and order a lot of plugs and plants and bare root stock and we do divisions of a lot of plants. That's done more in October when the ground's still soft but dividing up and such things like that. And then in the early part of, end of February, early. Probably the end of February this year we fire up the greenhouses and keep them really warm so that we can start growing all of our perennials and then as, we have just thousands and thousands of bare root trees and shrubs and you get those planted up early and give them a chance to root. Mancino: Okay. So you're working inside in the winter time? Kay Halla: Yes. We take vacations too. Mancino: And how many greenhouses do you have? Kay Halla: Currently we have two greenhouses. They're side by side and they're 30 feet wide by 90 feet long. And they were, we had them stocked to the hilt and even growing, we had to use the floors a lot to be able to grow...floor which is real bad. To grow them on the ground. You get a lot more aphids and things. Mancino: And during the winter, is your retail building open for retail sales of houseplants and other material? Kay Halla: We don't sell houseplants. The retail store is open. The hours are definitely less. For instance weekends, we're not open on weekends except around Christmas tree selling time_ But in January and February. Mancino: But you're still open 5 days a week? Kay Halla: Yeah. Mancino: Okay. Farmakes: You mentioned, can you elaborate on, you mentioned the 60/40 mix. Can you elaborate on that? Or did I hear you correctly? Kay Halla: I mentioned something about if you grow over 50% of your nursery stock on your site, then you get the Department of Agriculture doesn't just give us a nursery license. We have a nursery growers license. And they do that to differentiate between nurseries and nursery growers and to get the nursery grower, you must grow over 50% of your stock on your site. And then also, under the Federal law, you have to meet, as far as paying overtime 7 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 and that kind of thing, we are under agricultural laws that allows for overtime because we are a grower. Farmakes: Okay, so when you said 60/40, you're referring to your business or it's a hypothetical qualification? Kay Halla: I'm not... Farmakes: Maybe I misunderstood when you were saying the percentages. I thought you said 60/40. 60%, 40%, I thought you were referring to 60% being manufactured, or being grown on site and 40%. I assume you're talking about total sales. Kay Halla: No. As far as what we grow on site, I would say 90% of our plant material...is grown on site. The only things we really get in that are not started from plugs or bare root stock would be our evergreens. They just take, it would take us forever to grow those and like juniper for instance. So we get evergreen stock... Farmakes: How would you define percentage of gross sales between manufactured goods that are being sold and organic material that you're growing on site? Kay Halla: I could have Don Halla come up and answer that because I'm not sure. Mancino: Just one second. Any other questions at this point? Thank you. Kay Halla: Thank you. Don Halla: Good evening. I'm Don Halla. I would be happy to answer that questions as far as the percentage of, I'll call them dry goods is our definition of them versus live, green plant material. ...between 80% and 90% of all our gross sales comes from green goods, as we call them, which is live living plants in one form or another. Very small percentage is manufactured items. Defining manufactured items, we've had discussions with the city and they define manufactured items as cattle manure, which we sell in 50 pound bags. And 40 pound bags. So I guess our definition might be slightly different than the city's definition of what is manufactured and what is agriculture and not agriculture. But basically all of the products that we carry are related to agricultural uses. Mancino: Any other questions? Thank you. Mark Halla: Hi. I'm Mark Halla. I reside at 770 Creekwood in Chanhassen. I just wanted to add a couple things. First off the city has again mentioned interim use and that's not 8 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 something that we'd like to consider. We have, this whole thing's kind of focused on our nursery and... In our case we want to, we don't want to be a use that's a non-conforming use that isn't allowed. We're simply coming before the Planning Commission to try to become acceptable so that there aren't issues. So if we want to put up a greenhouse, we don't have to worry that even though we think that it's okay for us to do that after the fact someone's going to say hey, you shouldn't have done that. So that's the whole purpose that we're here is to try and make ourselves permitted. We aren't championing the cause for the other nurseries and garden centers. We want to be allowed ourselves. I don't want...interested in discussing that and not...short term. We've got the grandfathered rights that allow us to continue with everything that we've been doing at this point. We simply want to become accepted so that we don't have to keep going back...this is what we've done. This is what we aren't doing. We have some non-related but related issue...comprehensive plan of the structures that we intend to put up. The maximum amount of structures that would be used on our land, with the other greenhouses and what not, we've given them a list of all the products that we carry to date. Basically what we've asked for is to say, hey. You say you're grandfathered in. We don't think that you really are. We don't even, we didn't even know that you're selling retail. Show us. Tell us what you're selling and when you've been doing this and they went back and gave a list of everything we've been selling. ...mentioned a couple times. We've been selling pet food since back in the 60's starting with fish food. So that's something that we've continued on. Maybe it's not agricultural. We're not trying to say that pet food has to be permitted in agricultural use. We are saying in our instance we've been selling it for many, many years and it's not something that we would stop selling because it wasn't a permitted use. It's not a great...market and maybe we can discuss that but the people coming in our place that have animals. They have farm animals. They have dogs and cats. We provide that service. I think that's really all I wanted to add. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. I'd like to open this to a public hearing. Do I hear a motion and a second to open this to a public hearing? Farmakes moved, Peterson seconded to open the public hearing. Mancino: This is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission at this time on this issue, may come forward. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing and a second please? Farmakes moved, Mehl seconded to close the public healing. Mancino: Questions and comments from commissioners. Commissioner Conrad. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Conrad: Yeah, I'm going to ask more questions. Kate, is it basically, well we've got an ordinance in front of us tonight. Basically it's a general ordinance. Obviously it will pertain to the Halla's but it's really for everybody in the A2 district. So that's what we're reacting to. Then later on the Halla's, if that went through, they'd have to do their permitting and make their application for whatever they'd want. The question to me, and the length of operation in terms of, it's hard to talk about this one because we do have, it's a two part deal. We have an ordinance that applies to everybody but we're focusing it right on them. And those are different things. My concerns, basically I think the ordinance in general is appropriate. The community's filling up and sooner or later it will be all houses. But in terms of how it affects the Halla's is a bigger, it's an issue that I'm wrestling with. Is it basically our assumption that a nursery could never fit in long term with houses in Chanhassen? Is that a foregone conclusion? Aanenson: No. As John pointed out, the comprehensive plan has guided this long term for something else. Okay. Mancino: For single family housing. Aanenson: Correct. So in the meantime there's another use on the property that's got grandfathered rights. If it continues to operate that way that's, they have those rights. They want to add to it and we're saying we cannot, as a planning department approve an expansion of a non-conforming use. This is a mechanism to allow them to expand. They don't want to have an interim use. They want to have no final deadline. We're saying that in a planning perspective that's in conflict with our comprehensive plan. Does that mean it won't be a good neighbor? We hope it's there a long time and it's a good neighbor, but we feel we need to have that control if 30 years down the road it's not a good neighbor and times have changed and they want to move out, we don't want some other businesses to go in there. So we're looking at, from the planning perspective of the comprehensive plan and ultimately if this property was to become something else. We're not trying to push them out but we're saying we have to look at long term what the plan says and how it affects other wholesale or retail. Conrad: But right now we could design it so that they will fit. Aanenson: I'm not sure what you're saying. Mancino: As an interim use. Conrad: Well we can design it so that let's say if houses go, yeah. Long term. Now somebody probably would find it might be more beneficial to be healthy...but let's say for 20 10 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 years when houses go up around the Halla property, we would have, we can make them fit in as a good neighbor, can we not? Aanenson: Well there's certain ordinances that are in place right now but they have grandfather rights. Conrad: So they can do what they're doing right now. Aanenson: Right, but they want to expand. That's part, they would like some additional greenhouses. And what we're saying is there's kind of cloud over that because it's non- conforming so this allows them to, if they're following the conditions or whatever, you can decide what that framework should be. Conrad: When they come in, let's say we adopt this ordinance. They would have to come in with an application and basically tell us what they want to look like. Is that not true? Aanenson: Correct. Mancino: And at this point they don't need to. Or if it's A2, permitted use in A2, they can pretty much build what they want to build. Conrad: So when they come in, that's our opportunity to say this is how you fit in the neighborhood that's going to be built up around you. Aanenson: Right. Conrad: That's my only question. Peterson: What's the interim use, the term of it going to be recommended to be? Do we have that thought through yet? Rask: No, that would be, if the ordinance is approved and the applicant wishes to come forward with an application, that would be something we could discuss at that time but there's a number of different ways you could go. You could say when it's brought into the MUSA. It would terminate at that point. When sewer and water becomes available to the site. You know that would be an end date. Or you could pick a specific year. Say 50 years from now. 20 years from now. Mancino: Would you have to have, would it have to say terminate or could you say be reviewed again by city? 11 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Rask: Yeah, I think you could always leave that option. You'd have to pick a date though. Some sort of, whether that's an exact date or an event. Like they did on Admiral Waste. They said the applicant may request an extension. You don't need to put that in there. I mean that's always a given that they could come back and ask the Council in 10 years to reconsider that. Mancino: It certainly puts a cloud on a business for business planning, etc. Conrad: Can I jump back in? This is cloudy to me. Aanenson: But it's cloudy right now because it's illegal right now. They can't expand. That's the cloud over it. We're hoping with the interim use, if you put an appropriate time frame, we were hoping that would take that cloud away because right now it is illegal. To expand. It's grandfathered so it doesn't have the right to go any more than what it has. Conrad: I go back. Maybe this is a foggy assumption on my part. Can it be an asset to a neighborhood? Or is it an automatic detriment to the neighborhood simply because there are tractors going through and you've got, you know so what are we. Aanenson: Well that's the reason for the interim use is to put conditions on there so we have some control. What are the hours of operation? How much traffic is going in there? Is it open 24 hours? What's Saturday, Sunday? We don't know. That's why you try to have some control so you can, if the neighbors are complaining or there is issues that we have a mechanism to resolve it. If it's permitted and people are complaining, there is no mechanism to resolve those issues. Mancino: Because you basically have three businesses. I mean you have your growers. You know the bidding that I don't think affect single family around it at all but you also have landscape contracting, which are crews getting ready and bobcats and everything going out to work at different sites. Clients. And then your third is retail which again affects their neighbors. So you really have, and there may be more than that but those are the activities that I kind of parroted out from the nursery and this particular one. And two of those could have an affect as this area develops into single family. Conrad: So you don't think it's an asset to the neighborhood? Mancino: I think it is. But I think that it needs to have some controls around that as far as, I think it's very much an asset. But I think that there do need to be some controls around that. I mean look at the traffic in the area and hours of operation, etc. 12 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Conrad: Excuse me for interrupting Craig...but the issue to me, the ordinance seems reasonable. But when you put a termination date on somebody it's like not making that company...concern. It's just real negative. And what I'm trying to envision is...and that's my struggle. I don't want to cast that over, and I said I like the ordinance. It's okay but not trying to say to the Halla's, well you've got 10 years and we think that the neighbors that are moving out have priority. I'm struggling with it sitting down here. Making it so it's not, it's a harmonious relationship, which means control. There's just no doubt. There are controls. That's part about what we're doing is you can't do whatever you want anymore in Chanhassen. There's too many people. So that's my struggle. Sorry for interrupting. Mancino: Commissioner Peterson, any other? Peterson: None. Mancino: Commissioner Skubic. Skubic: How many other landscape nurseries are in business in Chanhassen? Aanenson: At least probably three others. Four. Mancino: Wilson, Lotus, Ben Gowan. Aanenson: Erhart's. Mancino: Erhart's tree farm, yeah. Only to wholesalers. Probably five. Skubic: The issue here seems to be opening the door and making a permitted use and putting a constraint by putting a date on the interim use. Isn't there a way of structuring the constraints on a conditional use or even with a permitted use. I think it was brought up that for permitted or nurseries have been in existence since 1990 date. Could that be used to satisfy the needs of the comprehensive planning and at the same time preserving the Halla business? Rask: I think the issue is you've got to treat people fairly. It's tough to say well if you exist to this point, you can continue to do what you like. Anybody else who comes in has to play by a different set of rules. Skubic: In a way isn't that what we're doing in the agricultural district? 13 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Rask: Well they're allowed to continue as a non-conforming use. And the whole basis behind non-conforming uses is that you assume they'll eventually be eliminated. I mean our ordinance now limits what you can do with a non-conforming use. You can't expand it. There's some of those types of issues that come into play with those non-conforming situations. And if it's a conditional use, then you're back to well it's permitted. For the most part you have the ability to add conditions. Review a site plan but there's nothing to ever say that use is going to disappear. If it does become a problem in the future, or permanent buildings are constructed, the nursery decides well it's not feasible for us anymore. Well now you have several million dollars worth of retail buildings. How do you deal with that? Aanenson: It goes back to Ladd's point. We struggled with this same issue as a staff when we were going through this analysis and the same idea is being, if you do say there's no cloud on the issue because it's a conditional use and you get a mortgage for several buildings and now the business goes out, you've got mortgages on the building. Well certainly there's pressure then to say well we've got to have something else. You can't now disappear because now you've invested capital in there. And that's the whole reason why you look at these things as more temporary in nature. And again this is a little bit different because we're focusing on this one and not looking at them in a holistic sort of thing and maybe that's something we need to go back and kind of look at this in a broader perspective and not keep focusing on this one because this one is a little bit different. Some of the other types of businesses, treating nursery type businesses... Mancino: Commissioner Farmakes. Farmakes: I guess the reason I asked, I thought it was an open discussion. I'm interested I guess in asking a couple of questions of the commission here. I don't know if that's, is that permissible? Mancino: Sure. Farmakes: I don't mean to get an open discussion running along or eat up time but I have a couple of, I'm not sure when we discuss nurseries and retail nurseries, after reading this and after reading Halla's letter. There's obviously a difference of opinion as to what is retail. By approving this or voting to approve this or not to approve this, and then the issue of interim use, the way that it reads now says, the wholesale sale of plants grown on the site, imported to the site as well as accessory items directly related to their care and maintenance. Then it goes on to say that power equipment and da, da, da should be provided. Now certainly power equipment can be construed as being for the care and maintenance of trees or bushes or shrubbery. I'm not sure in my mind that I've defined. On one hand when you talk about a nursery situation, organic matter is for sale. It's grown. When you're talking about an 14 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 enhanced product or manufactured product where they refer to them as dry goods or the applicant refers to them a dry goods. And you get beyond the scope of grandfathering, whatever that use happened to be, at the time it was established when the usage changed or that the operation was in conflict with ordinances. How do you continue on that line by saying that it's alright to expand that use without getting into conflict with all kinds of things. In other words, getting into conflicts when you tell another applicant who comes in who has bought a piece of property or whatever and decides that this would be good for a kennel or fur bearing animals or a big box retail or when you define and when you start getting into the nuance of retail beyond what is grown on the property, where do we start picking a line? Do we start looking at where the bag of food came from or the power equipment or the, it seems to me that. Mancino: Well and that's what we're trying to do here. Farmakes: Very swampy bit of goods. If in this particular operation 10% of these goods is this problem, and we're defining an ordinance for these goods for sale of these goods to find a way to allow some expansion, I'm not sure that that's not in conflict of good planning or what we're talking about with planning. You're talking, I think another comment was made about, that we have a business that's been in the community a long time and you get this transitionary thing where it's making it difficult for a business to operate unless they remain competitive and obviously retail or wholesale of organic goods and agricultural use changes over the years, as the mix of development changes here in Chanhassen. Obviously any business wants to be able to change to whatever the market is. We've seen this problem over and over again. Either in fringe district where we see dumpster storage and so on or we get into a situation on TH 5 and TH 41 where the future investment of property and the thinking that this location would make a good use for this particular type of usage. Do we have development that is driven by that? Either by, this is going to get a little obtuse now but thinking in terms of Timberwood where you have an example, although usage is not the same. You have development that is driven by allowing a particular development or use at the time that seems to be a good idea but then there is a surrounding effect that is created. I'm trying to think of Bachman's say for instance in the middle of a single residential neighborhood in Minneapolis where the original Bachman's was. That used to be a farm. When you're saying that a nursery is a good thing or a good neighbor, is it the open space and the trees or is it the retail sales that would be of benefit to the neighborhood, or of dry goods. I'm not sure in my own mind that I've defined that because I'm trying to think of it as the use is now where you'd be talking interim permit, or down the line as you're talking about Ladd, once that's surrounded by homes. What is the benefit to the neighborhood? Because I see other types of tree operations, say for instance the one across from Paisley Park that was there. There wasn't any, that I know of, retail sales occurring there. It was an open field with trees and so on and I don't think you get objections from the neighbors in that situation. 15 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 But it seems to me a broader issue is that where do retail sales go in this town and when they expand outside of the normal business district, and you're looking at people who buy property with the idea, or have owned property with the idea of expanding that use beyond what their grandfathering is. Are we creating really a bad problem here where we're being inconsistent as to how we deal with it? It seems like we've been getting a lot of, I think there's a second item on the dock here for such a thing. It's not in retail area but it's expanding or asking to clarify usage of other types of businesses. Say for instance a kennel. And these are things that it seems to me that would be things that would come up in transition type property between agriculture and urban area. And as I go back on how we've dealt with some of these issues before in the fringe district for instance or we deal with dumpster areas where primarily you have a rural area and the storage of dumpsters there. There's not enough people surrounding the area to create the type of objection that you may have in a more developed area in the permitted, the use is allowed for an interim time. But from what I've heard the applicant's not interested in that and even if we were to approve that, are we setting a good precedent in doing that. I haven't heard anything of a legal opinion from our lawyer but when we go to deny that from other applicants, it seems to me that our argument is, well we have a defined area for retail of manufactured goods. That's how I see it. And we allow other usages of wholesale use or interim use outside of that area and we've pretty much followed that pretty closely. So it's worrisome to me that more or less the precedent that we'd be setting with even approving what's sitting here because I don't think it's defined. That part that's retail is not, is ill defined here. And certainly...it lists a few things that is not, that is prohibited but I'm wondering if that is geared more towards the current use of the applicant and eliminating those uses or sales versus. Mancino: Than looking at the big picture. Farmakes: The big picture between the sale of grown matter and manufactured goods. Goods manufactured off site and brought in or value enhanced goods, whatever you want to call them but they're the usual definition of retail. Mancino: Kate, would you like to respond to that? Aanenson: I think John would. Rask: Yeah, I think we tried to create a definition that would apply to all. If you look at the one being proposed here, I don't think Mr. Halla, he doesn't sell farm implements or power equipment. I think what we were trying to do there was further define what's not included. If you look at the definition it says accessory items directly sold. Like most definitions that's opened up to interpretation somewhat. 16 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Farmakes: What I'm thinking of, I didn't mean to cut you off but what came to my mind is I thought of other retail operations for nurseries so I'm thinking of Frank's for instance. In that line of accessories and items related to the care and maintenance is their entire in-house building. And that's retail. That's retail sales and no different than a grocery store or a hardware store. Again, that's a separate part of their business but that's not outdoor stock. So that's where the problem that I'm really uncomfortable with is that hand. Mancino: Is allowing the retail to stay there? Farmakes: To expand. Mancino: To expand as an interim use in the A2 area. Farmakes: Even as an interim use, yeah. Mancino: Even as an interim use. Farmakes: Yeah. Mancino: So your thinking is to keep the retail where it is right now. In this particular case. And not have it expand. Aanenson: Well first of all, we haven't defined that yet under this. I mean when they come in for an application, first of all we're setting forward the framework. I mean unless they come in and ask for an interim use permit, they just stay the way they are. There's two separate processes. This overall standards are what you evaluate any that would come in... Farmakes: But isn't your contention also, or did I misunderstand it, that retail use has expanded. Aanenson: Right, and that's a separate legal thing and it's my understanding they're not going to expand anymore. What they're trying to do is get additional greenhouses but that's still an expansion of that non-conforming use. So I don't see that as, that's something you can address. If it did come forward for a permit to say, you know one of the conditions of... plans to expand, you could handle that separately under that permitting process. What we're doing under this process is try to look at again the broader, all. Mancino: A2. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Aanenson: Correct. And what should be the appropriate standards as John's laid out in the report. Farmakes: Right, but what I'm saying is, does the line that says amended Section 20-1. Does that cover that or are you going to improvise that at a later date? I mean like I said, I don't see that as being any different than Frank's. Is that a good neighbor for a residential area? Rask: Sure, you can address that with conditions on a site specific basis if somebody came in and maybe you wanted to see it just limited to the growing or selling of plants, either wholesale or retail. You could put certain conditions that would prohibit the sale of certain items. Aanenson: I think you have to look at some factors such as the size of the parcel. Where it's located. Some of these sort of things. You've got to take all those factors and like John said, you try to leave it somewhat broad so you can develop it as need be but again, these are the framework for all nurseries. Farmakes: So you don't feel that by establishing this or approving this we're in the interim use allowing it to expand. That we're creating a precedence outside of the scope of how we normally handle this issue when we're dealing with retail sales outside of the scope of. Aanenson: Well I guess our concern is even though a lot of these places may say wholesale, we believe that they're probably conducting retail and we'd like to have some conditions on there that we do know what the hours of operation are. We do know that there is adequate parking and that's really what the purpose of this is. We believe that some of the other ones may have the same. May be doing retail. We're not aware of it at this point but if it's brought to our attention, we certainly wanted to make sure that those same issues are addressed. Farmakes: Okay. I have no further questions. Mancino: Commissioner Mehl. Mehl: Yeah, I came here with a whole page of notes tonight and about half of them have been asked already or talked about. The other half have been shot down but all I know is we've got an applicant here who's been at that facility for 35 years. I'd like to somehow see if there isn't some way to compromise or some special situation to make sure that we can permit both the wholesale and retail operation as they have and allow them to stay there with the right conditions. To me there are worse things to have as a neighbor than a nursery, you know assuming there are conditions on them. I don't know how to solve the problem. 18 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Mancino: So would you like to see that as an interim use? Mehl: Well an interim use, the only problem I see with that is there's a time factor involved and I know that if I were in business like that I wouldn't want to deal with the fact that next week I might not be here or next year or 5 years or whatever. Whatever the date is, nobody seems to know. I'd like to know that I'm going to be there for another 35 years. Maybe the answer is interim use with some kind of an automatically renewable timeframe. A business like that, it isn't easy to move. You know you just can't pull up the tent stakes and move out. It's difficult. You've got a lot of land involved. A lot of inventory. Maybe it's a conditional use, I don't know. Mancino: Okay, thank you. I do agree with the staff report that it should be an interim use for the A2 district with a nursery center. I do feel that I also have problems with the termination date and how to allow business owners to plan ahead into the future and how they're going to keep operating. I would like staff to give us some more information on that. How we can do an interim use and the sunset date that allows for renewal. I don't know if that is possible. I would also like to see the condition number 5, hours of operation a little better thought out meaning that if you're in the nursery business you do need to be open on Saturday and Sunday during your peak seasons or you won't make it. I don't think. And that on those weekends maybe there would be a different time for landscape contractors and when they could start up in that A2 district, especially with single family around it. I guess I have no other comments. I'd like to entertain a motion. Conrad: But can I ask a question Madam Chair? Mancino: Yes. Conrad: Kate or John, do you see, you can see where we're struggling with this issue obviously. It's not too difficult. Do you see a scenario, you know I'm struggling myself because I think the ordinance is valid that you proposed. I think you've done a good job. I also don't want to force the Halla's out of operation. I want them to determine when they, I want them to fit. I don't have a problem with retail. The ordinance will take care of retail and they'll take care of retail... But I want them to fit into the neighborhood. They're there first and that's one thing you've always got to remember here. They are there first. People who buy in know that they're there. The interim use will let people know, or whatever, will let them know what they can do. So the new residents are protected. We're going to have that mapped out. So it forces the Halla's to sort of plan. It takes away from their flexibility but it makes some sense to me. But my real key is, the key for me is, I don't want to force them out of business. I don't, I can term them an asset to the community. I may not term retail as an asset but I can term the nursery an asset. It could be a park. I don't need to force 19 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 • the comprehensive plan... When they choose, it can do go residential. But I don't have to force a 10 year. I'm really nervous about saying in 10 years it will be renewed unless there's 27 complaints from the neighbors. That's what we'll end up doing so my big concern is, how not to force them out of operation. How to make them fit in, which means we take a look at their application. Make sure that in the long run, 5-10 years we say well geez. If you've got neighbors around that are 500 feet away, do they really kind of fit. Are they an asset and if that's the case, I think everybody wins but that's sort of a, you know I may be dreaming and whether we can do that but that's where I want to be, which really tells us that the real deal in the permitting, the application process, when they would come in and if I were them, I wouldn't trust us, you know. Mancino: Speak for yourself please. Conrad: ...but, so my question was. Mancino: How do we do that? Conrad: How do we do that? It's not tonight when we're not even, we don't even care about the Halla's tonight. Yeah we do but we don't care about them. We're putting in an ordinance that goes to A2 everyplace. So tonight is not their night. But when they come back and say you want to survive for 30 years or when we decide we want to subdivide or change, how do we make them. Mancino: Anybody who comes in and wants that. Conrad: Anybody, you're right. No, no. Them. The Halla's because they're going to come back later with this application or a permit and that's what I want to be able to forecast in my mind that I can kind of meet their needs...got 5 years. I don't really want to be in that situation and I'm trying to justify them fitting in as a good neighbor with residential, as treating them as a park. As an asset. As a farm. Rask: I guess if you treat them as a permitted or a conditional use, they're there. You can't come back in 20 years and decide well, we made a mistake. How do we correct it? You treat it as an interim use, again you can always extend it and if the need arises. Conrad: Take us past the ordinance. Aanenson: Okay, then they could sell it. Let's say they want to get out of the business and go somewhere else. Somebody else comes in and runs it differently or whatever. Again you can't just look at this particular property. That's why John gave you a map last time that 20 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 showed it city wide. If we could do it, if we felt comfortable doing it as a conditional use, leaving it there for perpetuity, we certainly would give you that as a recommendation. We're not trying to chase the Halla's. I understand the clouding issue but we think there's just as many damaging on the conditional use that could be negative as there are saying clouding it the other way. We struggle with the same issues. Nobody wants them to be gone tomorrow. But as John indicated, what if in 20 years we go back and look at it, maybe it's 30 years. We haven't decided what that timeframe is. I think that's going to be the struggle. First of all they have to decide if they want to come in for the interim use permit. They say that they didn't want to. But if they do, then that's the struggle. What is the appropriate timeframe? And at least there's somewhere we can go back and evaluate that down the road and we may not be here but there's some criteria to go back and say, is it still working. Does it still make sense? And if it is, great. We continue and give them another x number of years. Maybe this area's never brought into the MUSA. Maybe it continues to be this way forever and that's great but we're just saying that we think there should be an opportunity to revisit it. If you make it conditional or permitted, we don't have that opportunity of revisiting it. And have we thought far enough ahead? I'm not sure. Normally we don't put retail in an agricultural zone and we're saying we're opening that up for a lot of other places if that happened and there may be a lot of instances that we haven't thought ahead. If you want to give us some time, we can... Mancino: Think about that. Think about the one that Jeff had. I mean because we are opening retail up in A2 districts. Aanenson: Right. So the existing ones, but maybe the ones that haven't thought of...thought this was an opportunity to do some sort of a modified landscaping kind of quasi business or. Mancino: Commissioner Mehl. Mehl: Are we discussing details of conditions at all or is that, should it be done later? Mancino: No, we are. Mehl: Okay. I've got a couple comments here. On number 4. All outside storage areas. Maybe we should define you know what is a storage area or what's stored there or which ones maybe need to be screened. And then must be completely screened. To me completely screened implies 100% screened from all possible vantage points. Now is that practical or even possible to do now? Do you want to not be able to see it from your car on the road or what about if you're standing on a hill across a quarter mile away. I think it needs to be determined. Maybe buffered is a better term. I'm not sure. And one comment about number 5. The hours of operation. It talks about hours of operation Monday thru Saturday only and 21 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 work on Sundays and Holidays is prohibited. I think we need to define work. Does that include them coming in and watering their plants? What about you've got a holiday on a Monday. We've had 95 degree temperatures and you can't work on Sunday and you can't work on a holiday, this thing is going to be in bad shape Tuesday. So I think maybe the word work needs to be defined. Work is actively selling or is it work in bringing in equipment, inventory or sprinklering or is it maybe work involving management and planning and inventory taking and watering and this sort of thing. That's all. I wanted to bring those up. They need to be defined a little bit. Mancino: Well it doesn't seem, do I have a motion. Entertain a motion at this point. And that may be asking staff to come back and bring us more information that we need. Looking at it. How we can change in interim use for the retail and wholesale without a, as I said, without a cloud or sunset. How we can be more creative with that sunset date. Allowing businesses to plan. What are the other inferences of having retail in the A2? Farmakes: I'll make a motion to table this issue. I think that I'll put forward these items as the reasoning which you just mentioned. I also would feel uncomfortable unless the amended Section 20-1 is either, the issue as well as accessory items...are dropped. In other words, that ending of that sentence. Or that staff come up with a more targeted direction on that issue as far as what accessory issues are offered at retail. The issue of 5 probably should be defined in more reality and the issue of the market. I'm not sure that 5 does reflect that. The point that was made. Some of the other issues we really didn't discuss on there but I think that the ordinance probably covers them. Signage and so on. The termination issue. Although it allows the business for planning, I think that the real issue of an interim use obviously is to allow the community for planning as well. And I'm not sure what creative thought can be put into that. But there is also a reason for an interim use and there should be an objective there, although I have nothing against a business that has been here in these transition areas with transition type businesses to allow them to have the opportunity to decide when they cease operations. The problem always occurs however, at some point in time if it's opened ended, there is no reason to cease. You can adjust to whatever needs to be done and I get back to the point, there usually is an end result or a direction, other use in our comprehensive plan and I'm not sure if the staff is going to be able to resolve that. I hope they do. Mancino: Is there a second? Skubic: Second. Mancino: Any discussion? 22 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Conrad: Ah sure. So you want to table it for clarification of the motions. Definition of nursery, Jeff? Was that. Farmakes: Definition of nursery was the one that refers to Section 20-1. I'm uncomfortable with how that reads. Conrad: Okay. Did you agree with Don's comment on 4, that it's foggy? Farmakes: For the storage? Conrad: Yeah. Farmakes: I guess, I didn't make that a part of the motion but it seems to me that there are broader issues other than getting into the specifics of setbacks and so on. To me but we, we can add 4 if you add that to the motion since this is a tabled motion. I mean it's not a, although we're voting on it, these are issues of exploration that I would suggest. The real crux of the issue here that I see in this motion that is made, is that what is the definition of the use and if we're going to define it, how does that relate to practicality of operating a business and what is the end result that we're going to see from this as far as comprehensive plan? What happens when we're filled up? And then how does that use, what is allowed under the ordinance for that use to be expanded. Conrad: And did you have any concerns with number 8 on the staff report? Again, I heard you're tabling it. You know 8 doesn't allow for renewal. So everybody knows that. It says it's terminated and I think if we do consider this, you know there has to be a renewal option and I think the ordinance doesn't allow that. Farmakes: I think that the renewal option could be looked at for the issue of making it easier for business planning. I think I said that already. Farmakes moved, Skubic seconded to table an amendment to the City Code for landscape nurseries and garden centers in the A2 for further clarification. All voted in favor, except Meyer who abstained, and the motion canied. Mancino: We will table it and staff has direction and the Halla's will come before us again another time to present. Thank you. Don Halla: Can I just speak for one moment? Mancino: For one minute you may. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - November 15, 1995 Don Halla: We already have a semi negotiated agreement with the city. The city hasn't signed onto it and we haven't signed onto it. We're very close to an agreement which really happens is exactly what you want. We're looking for basically a ruling to maintain our agricultural status of a grower of plant material. The building department says we do not need a permit to do so. Go ahead and build it. The planning department says you can't. That's...maybe some direction of a simple thing under State and Federal laws we're allowed to build. Under the city's building code we are allowed to build greenhouses. Planning says we can't. That's all we're looking for. The rest of the things we're working out with the city and I think we're coming very close to it. Maybe it was agreed upon today. I don't know but that's the point... Mancino: Thank you. CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR A MIXED LAND USE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL, OFFICE, SINGLE AND MULTI-FAMILY ON APPROXIMATELY 66 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5, BETWEEN GREAT PLAINS BOULEVARD AND MARKET BOULEVARD, VILLAGES ON THE PONDS LOTUS REALTY SERVICES. Public Present: Name Address Brad Johnson 7425 Frontier Trail Jill and Randy Meyer 330 Sinnen Circle Angie Bealczyk 310 Sinnen Circle Eric Johnson 320 Sinnen Circle Bob Savard 8080 Marsh Drive Steve Lundeen 8160 Marsh Drive Rita Klauda 8130 Marsh Drive Dave Kooumen 8153 Marsh Drive Gary Disch 8170 Marsh Drive Rick Hladky 8173 Marsh Drive Debbie & Brian Semke 331 Hidden Lane Barry & Lisa Thompson 8000 Hidden Circle Mark Honnold 8051 Hidden Circle Pat Hamblin 340 Sinnen Circle Greg Larson 8151 Grandview Road Ryan Johnson 8143 Marsh Drive 24 EXHIBIT A HALLA NURSERY GARDEN CENTER INVENTORY (07-20-94) Landscape fabric Root feeder Bird feeders Augur Trellises Weed killer and preventer Bird house stands Accent lights Books Insect killers Garden netting Deer/rabbit repellent Garden staking Knee pads Hummingbird/oriole feeder Plant supports Green sweep weed/feed Vegetable seeds Lawn trash bags Plant seeds Seed spreaders Feeder wand Lawn seed Plant stands String Planter boxes Bird feed Live plants (A) Tree stakes Live shrubs (A) Sprinklers Garden tools Garden hose Hose Hose nozzles Hedge shears Gloves Lopping shears Watering cans Pruners Ceramic bulb planters Weed eater Steel bulb planters Power snow shovel Electronic water timer Hand tools Thermostat Gas-powered weed eater Thermometer Snow thrower/trimmer Planter boxes Rakes Pots Killer kane Potting soil Garden trellis and lattice Moisture meter Wind chimes Burlap Wood mushrooms Transplant booster Bird baths Plant starter Wood bench Round Up Wood cactus Plant food Clay pots Compost maker Top soil Fertilizer stakes Peat moss Drop spreader Sheep manure 167c4 EXHIBIT A I On the Grove ' at Halla Nurser: ! T • Everything is on the grow at Halla there's a high loss rate in transplanting A Nursery. Sounds of spring whisper as because they have to develop a new root i - ' • i J fir'Y' a landscape and design staff,growers and system. A clay medium is better for the Vic- P -, 4.: movers and maintenance people,managers tona and Chanhassen homeowner because of • p • - ie and other friendly employees at Halla tend to soils in that area" He also said that plants in s•` 4 - • r business. the field at Halla are root pruned every thrix .i,____. ' - ! Located three miles south of Chanhassen years to give them new and stronger roots. _ - ',.\t.'f ' on Hwy 101,Halla Nursery welcomes the The large new retail building,that houses `: -•-q t .,-'`f:" • community and invites you to visit their ex- "everything not green and growing,"opened -A V . `ql andelgarden center this springasyou shopon May1st this spring. There you'll find 1 ; j. . P for plant material for your home or business. fertilizers,tools,rocks,soil,spray,peat y, ' •t- \` ,J1 ' . •~•� ,j Loolang for annuals or perennials? Halla moss,manure,wildflower seeds,and other { 4 • 1 F has'em! Looking for trees or shrubs? Halla garden supplies. "We also anticipate a high j� .� ` :' has'em. Linking for mulches or fertilizers? quality bird house and bird feeder display," t {•� ;Bits .!r1-1;;.i.::::'::-i' Halla has'em. You'll encounter a wide said Don. "It's another way to serve our • + 4 . W. selection of plant material at Halla Nursery, customer better." ' : i ` • t. ' •'h �' f,-•I as well as a brand new 5,000 sq.ft.retail Halla Nursery hires certified nursery and ' •• _ .,t ..- •►a, .... garden center,and a large staff to assist you. landscape professionals. The education and irsr , 4", "1,, --_ -"Is . Halla has 100 acres of trees,shrubs,ever- training needed to become certified assures `�� e,--r,00. ��T��' greens,perennials,and annuals from which Halla that their customers will be assisted . - • - I c to choose. with the greatest of care and talent. i tom, Don Halla president of Halla Nursery The designers at Halls can draw you an `!•-. '_ 111 and second generation in the business,takes on-site rough sketch of landscape and plant- on Halla,president o(Halla Nursery and second pride in the wide selection and quality of ing possibilities,with an accompanyingigenvatien in tett buss plant materials at the nurs:-ry. "We have ten estimate,free of charze. Or,for a rebatable acres dedicated to the garden center,"he said, deposit,he or she can develop a comprehen- - -- .....--•• •-- • "and that includes two acres of potted shrubs, sive plan which can be implemented as your !`�` two acres of balled and burlapped shade budget allows. This plan is the product of a J� - t+• I l trees,one-half acre of potted shade trees, cooperative process that takes into considers- • - ,.; '• , . .- • gran houses,hanging baskets,and a 15,000 don the personal taste and desires of the • '• gj., �'+;�T sq.ft shade area for perennials. Our plant customer. , •• • - - matetial is in more mature sizes rather than Don also takes pride in Peacock Palace, ' f . as - ` r small seedling type plants." an area of the nursery•where he raises pea- c'•. '. _� •,�• "We have trees up to 18"in diameter," cocks,rare varieties of pheasants and ducks. -�, •"T• - `� said Don,"and we have the world's largest "We invite parents to bring their kids,"he ;14,-` . tree mover to move them." said,as the nursery has installed new play- hue .. • ; "We have over 250 varieties of peren- ground equipment and gazebo for kids to sN.% < c '-t 7 nials,100 different varieties of flowering enjoy while parents check out the nursery .-';rte'c, S _ (1, j shrubs,75 different varieties of shade trees stock. •.,_ "'!ice'11'.y i•• and flowering crabs,and access to the Yes,the growing season is sipon us. s r• �,f�� ��: balance of 100 acres. We have large shade "Soil temperatures have come up quite well, �'�O �o •f � - trees of 6"diameter at 50%off now. We and there is no frost in the ground anymore," •T;s .• have a wide selection of wild ferns,mulches, stated Don. "May 15th is about the right time `1. •- - "`- shredded hardwood bark,and rock mulch to plant." s - \ - products." Everything is on the grow at Halls ••'to. •' -'{•- Don explained that the plants at Halla Nursery. Come and enjoy.the sights and •! ".i • Nursery are gown in clay soil. "Plants w sounds of ! You'll be pleasantly - .7,,,..' ` - faster and easierin sand,"he said."but then surprisedS O. P y Lynn Biba,office manger of Halla Nursery,for • egM years. tis ` per: , . - .yr, b6w#.0• i=�+."=:^+' �., ! `-:• ;_ . r `\ :::: o ver. ,e y sem•, `�.4.,. s \ , - - Jam. - ` -I.�if.~•. 1 1 r- I i /� t t/'_ ; L.1,.. L. \ A • ,may ,p,:!.....:-.2.----- , • -t .,z/ , y` -nom -7 •'•: � t_ `' ." i. `• - 1i,,it. %--- _ ' f I . -`, .......0, ....t.. . ;.,..•-. - .4.: r -I . ilbt - V- . A ,0-..'2:-. -1-"'I- t: i•^;^�-...,• •••;! �,,:. ✓ = - :fit.161.--.1%....t ;>.a.:fes—___ce i�tit._:t .,�-„�,.�� n > - -.ttdr 1R=f •- `”tic"'=• ' - �--±7 4•'-x:. C `•AC'; . -.— -7I-,,:.,, ,: fjeo - Sheryl KtNiout,assistant garden center manger. Mark Halla,vice president and general manager at Hallo Nursery,and wife Kay Kona, licensed landscape crchttect. SINCE 1942 &IfIll'; i 4 • EXHIBIT LANDSCAPE DESIGNERS, CONTRACTORS, GROWERS, INC B TREE MOVERS AND GARDEN CENTER J!I 3 Miles South of Chanhassen on Hwy 101. l • CITY of CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: John Rask, Planner I DATE: November 8, 1995 SUBJECT: Proposed Text Amendment to the A-2, Agricultural Estate District. SUMMARY On November 1, 1995,the Planning Commission reviewed proposed changes to the A-2, Agricultural Estate zoning district. Mr. Don Halla, Halla Nursery, requested a text amendment to allow landscape nurseries as a permitted use in the A-2 District. The Commission tabled action on this item to receive further information from staff. More specifically, the Commission wanted to see a side by side comparison of the different options of allowing retail nurseries as a permitted use, conditional use, and as an interim use. The following definitions are being provided for discussion purposes: Permitted Use is defined as,any use allowed in a zoning district and subject to the restriction applicable to that zoning district. Conditional Use is defined as, a use permitted in a particular zoning district upon showing that such use in a specified location will comply with all the conditions and standards for the location or operation of the use as specified in the zoning ordinance and approved by the City Council. Interim Use is defined in Section 20-1 as, a temporary use of property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. By way of example, the use could terminate when the site is brought into the MUSA, when sewer or water is provided to the site, a date could be set for the use to end, or if the zoning district changes to a residential zoning. Planning Commission November 8, 1995 Page 2 Staff assembled the following table to illustrate the differences between permitted uses, conditional uses, and interim uses: IMPACTS OF ALLOWING RETAIL NURSERIES AND GARDEN CENTERS IN THE A-2 ZONING DISTRICT PERMITTED USES CONDITIONAL USES INTERIM USES Not all A-2 zoned property would By classifying a use a conditional Use is eventually terminated be appropriate for retail nurseries, use,special conditions may be allowing the property to be i.e.lack of adequate public imposed to mitigate the adverse converted to a use which is facilities impacts consistent with the Comp.Plan Retail nurseries and garden Conditional use must be approved if Would discourage the use of centers are inconsistent with other applicant meets all conditions set permanent buildings permitted uses in the A-2 District forth in local ordinances and other conditions imposed by the City Council May allow businesses such as, Not all A-2 properties are Not all A-2 properties are Bachmans,Franks,or other appropriate for retail nurseries or appropriate for retail nurseries nursery and craft stores which garden centers or garden centers may be in conflict with surrounding residential or agricultural properties. Permanent buildings may be Permanent buildings may lead to Encourage the use of constructed which may lead to other uses if the nursery is vacated, temporary structures or other uses if the nursery is e.g.,auto repair,contractors structures designed for a vacated,i.e.,auto repair, storage/yard,misc.retail,etc. specific use which would contractors storage/yard,misc. discourage conversion to an retail,etc. inappropriate use Use would be allowed in Use would be allowed in perpetuity Use would have a termination perpetuity date Retail nurseries or garden centers Retail nurseries or garden centers in By classifying a use a in most cases would be in conflict most cases would be in conflict with conditional use,special with the comprehensive plan,i.e., the comprehensive plan,i.e.,corner conditions may be imposed to corner of Hwy.5 and 41,which is of Hwy.5 and 41,which is currently mitigate the adverse impacts currently zoned A-2 zoned A-2 Planning Commission November 8, 1995 Page 3 The City Council recently approved a temporary sales ordinance. This ordinance applies to the business zoned districts only, i.e., BG, CBD, BF, and BH. Temporary sales are allowed as an accessory use to a permitted or conditional use, and are limited to 60 days per calendar year. Staff examined the possibility of allowing retail sales as a temporary use in the A-2 district. This would allow a"wholesale"nursery to temporarily sell retail products. The impacts of this approach are that not all A-2 properties are appropriate for retail use, the use may be inconsistent with surrounding properties, the use must be permitted if conditions are met, and would be very difficult to enforce. Staff is of the opinion that retail nurseries and garden centers are inconsistent with other uses in the A-2 district and the comprehensive plan. Allowing garden centers or retail nurseries as a permitted use would encourage permanent buildings and use, and discourage the conversion of the property to a more appropriate use consistent with the comprehensive plan. To mitigate these negative impacts, staff is recommending an alternative that would allow retail nurseries as an interim use (see memo to Planning Commission dated October 25, 1995). ATTACHMENTS 1. Memorandum to Planning Commission dated October 25, 1995 2. Map of Chanhassen showing current A-2 zoned properties. CITY CF CHANHASSEN r':_•' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: John Rask, Planner I DATE: October 25, 1995 SUBJECT: Proposed Text Amendment to the A-2,Agricultural Estate District SUMMARY Mr. Don Halla, Halla Nursery Inc., is requesting a zoning ordinance text amendment to allow landscape nurseries as a permitted use in the A-2, Agricultural Estate Zoning District. Mr. Halla indicates in his application that nurseries are currently prohibited and that landscape nurseries are an agricultural use and should be permitted. Further, Mr. Halla indicates that he has occupied this property since 1962 and his business is no longer a permitted use. BACKGROUND The intent of the A-2 District is, "preservation of rural character while respecting development patterns by allowing single-family residential development." The following uses are permitted in an"A-2"District" 1. Agriculture 2. Public and private parks and open space 3. Single family dwellings 4. State-licensed day care center for twelve or fewer children 5. Utility services 6. State-licensed day care center for six or fewer persons 7. Temporary real estate office and model home 8. Arboretums