The URL can be used to link to this page

01-4-95 Agenda and Packet FILE AGENDA CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISS] WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 4, 1995, 7:30 1 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE 6:30 p.m. Transition Zone Discussion CALL TO ORDER 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Preliminary plat of approximately 1.8 acres of land into three lots located at 6240 Ridge Road, southeast corner of Christmas Lake on the Shorewood-Chanhassen city limits, Wm. Patrick Cunningham, Cunningham Addition. 2. Item Deleted.* 3. Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development to rezone 89.59 acres of property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD; preliminary plat one block (46 units - 13 twin home buildings and 5 fourplex buildings) and 2 outlots located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Hwy. 5 and Galpin Boulevard, Autumn Ridge, Good Value Homes, Inc. (Betty O'Shaughnessy property). 4. An interim use permit to spread approximately 5,000 cubic yards of excavated wetland materials on three sites located at the southeast corner of Lake Lucy Road and Galpin Blvd. and the southwest corner of Lake Lucy Road and Powers Blvd., City of Chanhassen. 5. Amendment to the Chapter 20 of the City Code concerning grading and erosion control. The amendment requires S500 cash escrow or letter of credit to be furnished before a building perimt is issued to guarantee compliance with the plan's erosion control measures. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 6. Organizational Items. APPROVAL OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS OPEN DISCUSSION ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 11:00 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. Item Deleted 2. Preliminary plat to subdivide a 2.22 acre parcel into 4 lots on property zoned RSF,Residential Single Family and located at 6660 Powers Boulevard, Golden Glow Acres, James Ravis. .4 CITY OF 40 4,,,,..,. C IIANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: December 29, 1994 SUBJ: Transition Zones BACKGROUND A. At the last Planning Commission meeting on December 7, there was discussion about what is a transition zone and how could it be applied in situations where there is a change not only in uses but densities. The commission directed staff to research this item. Staff has reviewed the literature and contacted the Planning Advisory Service, which we are a member of as part of the American Planning Association located in Chicago, for information. They had very little information on transition zones, but provided us with standards on buffering and screening from other communities. Transition zone is not standard terminology used in the planning field. Transition zones have two meanings: one is buffering between two types of uses and the other is changing from one zoning to another. Staff believes that the approach that the planning commission had was how do you make the change in one lot size to the other. We have done some research and taken slides representative of different lot sizes, different densities and intensities of use adjacent to each other throughout the city and have prepared a brief analysis of that information for your review. ANALYSIS One of the few books that directly talks about transition zoning is a book called, "The Subdivision and Site Plan Handbook" by David Listokan and Carol Walker. They cite in their chapter, site design regarding circulation system design, that the building placement of all types of residential development should be based on topography, privacy, building height, orientation, daylight needs, drainage and aesthetics. Conventional wisdom has been that spacing between buildings varies depending on building types. For example, apartments next to single family should have some kind of buffer. They also state that mixing different Transition Zones December 29, 1994 Page 2 housing types without buffers or transition area when done carefully "can result in significant benefits in terms of promoting the concept of community." The authors recommend a building setback, rear to rear, of 50 feet minimum. In the case of Lake Ann Highlands/Windmill Run subdivisions, the setbacks exceed this standard. The rear setback requirement in the city is generally 30 feet, so rear facing homes are a minimum of 60 feet apart. The book defines single family housing to include single attached housing and multi-family housing. These housing types have been classified in different ways by the number of dwelling units per building, by the dimensions of a building (e.g. a 4-story building as a garden apartment, midrise townhouse) or by relating structures to one another (e.g. attached, detached or row). The book states that by using a generic classification alone to describe the housing type a problem arises because terminology varies from location to location. In some areas, a townhouse refers to a specific identifiable design solution and in others it is used to describe individual adjoining units within another entity, for example, a one bedroom townhouse inside of a garden apartment. In still other instances, it is used to distinguish for sale housing from accommodations occupied by tenants. They go on to define single family attached as townhouses, plexes including duplex, triplex, fourplex, patio home or a court garden house and on to multi-family. So there is such a thing as single family attached and the term is used commonly in the planning field. That is the way the city's comprehensive plan is set forth. When talking about density ranges, we are not necessarily designating attached or detached housing. Although as stated in the comprehensive plan, the predominant housing type in this city is single family detached. One of the other sources of information that we use to review transition zones was the practice of local government planning. This is a green book put out by International City Management Association, ICMA, and is viewed as a guide for local governments. In this book, we could not find any discussion about transition zones in the practice of local government planning. Although they talk about transition or buffering in the design of a PUD and the different approaches of clustering and separation of different types of uses under the PUD guidelines. The only other discussion we could find about transition zones regarded through different design applications whether it be a PUD, clustering, allowing for greater setbacks, requiring increased vegetation or landscaping to create a buffer. There is also a lot of discussion about applying this sort of transition as it relates to the continuity of neighbors. Again, you are trying to create a sense of community, where you want neighborhood identity but not necessarily isolation. The Planning Advisory Service sent information regarding buffering and screening ordinances. They included ten jurisdictions. Of the ten, 6 seemed appropriate approaches to buffering. Lake County, IL, Clemson, SC, Raleigh, NC, Bellevue, WA, Daytona Beach, FL, Fairfax County, VA have similar approaches to transition zones providing buffering standards that are Transition Zones December 29, 1994 Page 3 easy to interpret and apply. The ordinances provide charts that include all zoning districts and abutting districts giving the required buffer setback and landscaping intensity level. As a note, the city already has a buffer requirement that is a part of the comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance and city code. I believe the city standard exceeds the other community standards. However, none of the ordinances require buffering between duplex and single family homes. The Lake Ann Highlands project proposes substantial landscaping between the single family area and twin home project. The article in the zoning report is informative regarding transition zoning, but again it does not address different lot sizes within a single family development. Again, I believe Chanhassen has looked at buffering between different uses as a part of different land uses and made provisions for buffering as a part of the comprehensive plan and city code. Staff took some slides showing applications that we have in the city, some close to City Hall, South Lotus Lake, Kurvers Point, Saddlebrook subdivision; some adjacent to Timberwood with Stone Creek; some in Lake Susan Hills where we approved medium density adjacent to homes in that area: some in Sunrise Hills and the adjacent Bluff Creek Estates. Another application is where we approved Red Cedar Cove PUD adjacent to single family homes in the existing Lake Minnewashta area. We will review these slides as a part of our discussion Wednesday evening. In all of these circumstances, staff feels that the design has worked not as a detriment to the neighborhood, but rather as an enhancement to the surrounding property. At one time, there was a discussion from the planning commission at the stepping down of lot sizes where you have the large lots. Instead of going down to the 15,000 square foot, maybe there is a transition from a 21/ acre lot down to a 1 acre lot down to a 15,000 square foot lot. This goes back to the discussion that the reason there are 21/ acre lots is those lots that were built under the premise of exclusion from urban services, and they therefore, need to be that size to handle the two drainfield sites and a well. I am not sure having larger lots with no urban services makes a lot of sense long term. Although some people may want to live on larger lots to say they need to be an acre and a half or one acre minimum may be excessive. In addition, it was felt that when you have a 212 acre lot there is already a large buffer and by putting another large lot next to it, what are you buffering? The transition zone or the transition requirement when you are planning another subdivision was never implemented. Staff still stands by the fact that there are other ways to create transition besides requiring some arbitrary number of square foot lot in between and that can be accomplished through landscaping or additional setback. Transition Zones December 29, 1994 Page 4 RECOMMENDATION Staff has provided this information for your review and consideration and is not recommending any changes to the city code at this time. If you would like to give us some direction for consideration, please let us know. Transition Zones December 29, 1994 Page 5 Bibliography 1. The Subdivision and Site Plan Handbook, David Listokan and Carol Walker, 1989, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey. 2. Residential Development Handbook, Urban Land Institute, 1978, ULI. 3. Practice of Local Government Planning, 2nd Edition, ICMA, 1988, ICMA. 4. Zoning ordinances: Clemson, SC Raleigh, NC Bellevue, WA Daytona Beach, FL Lake County, IL Fairfax County, VA 5. Zoning Report, Vol. 5 No. 12, October 19, 1987, "A Tool for Better Neighborhood Zoning, A Small Scale Transition Office Zone," Charles Reed, AICP. ; ,- -34.E - - •ter:' =- - ',-4- C 2O4IREFERENCE ZE2O LOT LINE DWELLINGS or garden apartment units—are typical. (Higher densities are, of ` course, permissible, especially to provide for affordable housing.) \ '` J "Zero lot line" and conventional single-family detached units can ; ^ � be grouped in neighborhood clusters. For all residential types, I I 1 I ,,� T access to open space is desirable. i SECT ION K' " PLACEMENT OF UNITS 2-=«0"SEr....— Building placement for all types of residential developments _ 7- "K, should be based on topography, privacy, building height, orienta- l— -7,-;..-,....... S tion, daylight needs, drainage, and aesthetics. The conventional wisdom has been that spacing between buildings varies depending '17."""` on building type. For example, apartment complexes would not be 1 �� ,...� .... placed next to single-family units without some kind of buffering. I �� <..�. Arranging units in self-contained clusters is not the only approach, '� however, and some municipalities may prefer different arrange- L ----:I---1�rt iments. Mixing different housing types without buffers or transition areas when done carefully can result in significant benefits in i T G C C T PLAN terms of promoting the concept of community. For those communities preferring separation between hous- Illustration 3-6. Zero lot line ing types, the spacing distances shown in Exhibit 3-2 can be used arrangement allows consolidation of as general guidelines. These recommendations apply to spacing outdoor space. between residential buildings that are similar in design, with adjustments depending on the specific site.24 When residential buildings are different in design, some sources recommend provid- ing an area of transition between them.25 SUMMARY OF RESIDENTLAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES 1. As a general practice, buildings should be clustered in groups; alternative designs may, however, be considered if con- sistent with community design goals. 2. Layout design should be guided by such factors as the topography of the site, privacy, building height, orientation, day- light needs, drainage, and views. Environmentally sensitive areas should not be developed. 3. Spacing between buildings that are similar in design can be closer than spacing between buildings that are different types. 4. A transition area, consisting of a natural feature, a park, a landscaped buffer, or a gradual density change, can be provided, if desired, between residential units that are different types. i SITE DESIGN s are, of EXHIBIT 3-2 housing.) [nits can RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SPACING GUIDELINES .al types, Windowless wall to windowless wall 20 feet iopments Window wallto windowless wall 30 feet orienta- Window wall to window wall ;entional Front to front 75 feet spending Rear to rear 50 feet d not be End to end 30 feet uffering. Any building face to right-of-way 25 feet Dproach, Any building face to residential access street curb 30 f.eet arrange- "ansiti0n Any building face to subcollector street curb 35 feet refits in Any building face to collector street curb 40 feet n hous- Any building face to common parking area be used 12 feet spacing Source: Harvey S.Moskowitz, P.P., AICP n, with •idential provid- 5. Each unit should, if possible, have a private outdoor area and access to the open-space network. Circulation System Design The circulation system is the pedestrian and vehicle move- red in ment pattern through a town or development. Streets and side- if con- walks or paths form the circulation system, with streets being the most important element. The layout of the circulation system is as the basic to the design of a new subdivision and to the arrangement of n, day- buildings on a development site. areas Circulation systems should work efficiently, safely, and aesthetically. This is no small task: public roadways cover some 30 sn can percent of our total metropolitan land, and cars dominate the apes. landscape. Standards regulating the circulation system are 1 park, designed primarily to serve auto efficiency.26 Roads are wide and Ivided. straight to speed traffic along, and houses must be set back in order to minimize the intrusion of automobiles. For those hardy _ 1111111111111M Land Subdivision Regulation 247 There are several ways to compute the amount of common or public open space provided in a cluster subdivision. One approach requires open space to at least equal the sum total of the lot-size reductions allowed for each of the lots. Another approach simply requires some minimum percentage of the gross site area (e.g., 15 percent or 25 percent) to be devoted to open space, regardless of the lot-size reduction allowed. . Cluster subdivision design lends itself to both single-family detached and single- family attached housing. Single-family detached cluster subdivisions are generally organized around courts,cul-de-sacs,or short loop streets. In one variety,detached zero-lot-line houses are located to one side of each reduced-size lot. The second type of cluster subdivision is designed for single-family attached housing. (Some jurisdictions still classify any form of attached housing as multifamily, but this approach is nearly obsolete.) Because attached or semiattached housing units extend from lot line to lot line, the cluster concept is particularly appropriate for this type of housing. Town house or row house developments with six or eight units to a group are one of the most common forms of single-family attached units. Clusters of attached or semiattached units in pairs, triplets, or quads arranged around a private court or parking area are also increasingly common. Many ordinances fail to make clear whether the cluster option is available for both detached and attached single-family housing in a particular zoning district or for detached single-family units only. Some ordinances allow single-family attached housing types (such as town houses) on smaller lots, with or without open space requirements, but do not characterize this as a cluster option. Although the cluster concept is promising. cluster subdivisions are still not a common form of development in most communities. In some areas, developers are not interested in using the cluster design and providing common open space unless a significant density bonus is provided. In other areas, developers have used the affordable-housing argument to convince the governing board simply to rezone their properties to allow the development of smaller lots in conventional subdivisions. Because clustering dwellings on different lots requires special design and archi- tectural treatment,many planners believe that such a project(particularly involving single-family attached housing) deserves more careful scrutiny than a conven- tional project. As a result, application requirements and review procedures for cluster subdivisions may be more complex. In some cases, a site plan showing building locations and even building elevations may be required, and a special permit under the zoning ordinance may be involved. A small developer inex- perienced in establishing homeowners' associations and in transferring control to them may try to avoid forms of development requiring common open space. Many' housing consumers are wary of housing involving communal property ownership of any kind. Many consumers, particularly in metropolitan areas, have found cluster hous- ing satisfactory and more affordable than conventional alternatives, but the first choice of a majority of housing consumers is still apparently the large-lot—large- house combination of conventional subdivisions. Manufactured-housing and related subdivisions Despite the attention devoted to affordable housing,municipal zoning ordinances in many states still prohibit or restrict the placement of manufactured houses ("mobile homes") on individual lots in some or all residential zoning districts. This stance has discouraged the development of manufactured-housing subdi- visions in which manufactured houses are sold on individual lots or in which lots suitable for manufactured houses are sold separately. Although manufactured- housing subdivisions are not yet common, neither are they particularly special. The streets, utility lines, fire protection facilities, and lot and street layout required Informed land development practices alone will Development Alternatives not prevent the conflict between the need for land to develop housing for a moderately increasing popula- Development alternatives are a matter of scale. The tion and the preservation of the natural environment. most innovative design of a cluster, PUD, or even a Reforms in land regulatory policy will also help result new town development may prove of no lasting value in the resolution of land use conflicts.Regulatory pol- if the scale defies local employment opportunities, • icy remains on the macro level, outside of the direct market factors, or prejudices of housing type. control of the developer, but not outside his influ- ence. Small Parcel While a developer does not have direct control over The practice of land development has changed. No the broader phases of environmental protection and longer is the single lot the typical unit of growth.In- conservation, he is responsible for his activities and stead,the subdivision has become the accepted mode products. A development which is sensitive to en- of conversion or reconversion of land for residential vironmental and conservation factors will incorpo- purposes.A subdivision is defined as the division of a rate the following: land parcel into two or more lots. Subdividing can • Selecting open space with regard to enhancing take the form of a simple lot split or a new community the natural characteristics of the land such as comprising 10,000 acres or more. vegetation or a body of water. Attention to detail is especially important in small • Devising mechanisms to protect natural beauty subdivisions. "The prime concern for the small proj- while at the same time reserving certain areas for ect is setting,landscaping,and surrounding uses.The recreational use. care given to these items can produce a tasteful set- • Designing storm drainage facilities as an integral ting that enhances the living environment of the fu- part of the development plan, with an effort ture owners."3 The emphasis is on economy, har- made to locate open space near natural drain- mony, variety, and privacy. Occupants of a well- ageways. designed site will have enough interior and exterior • To the extent possible,selecting open space from privacy so that they do not feel as if they are living in a land lying between the direction of prevailing goldfish bowl. Scale relationships must be handled winds and the areas of human occupancy to fos- judiciously to assure compatibility between struc- ter temperature control, sound control, and tures in the subdivision and contiguous uses.Most of clean air. all,sites with limited size must be treated with imagi- • Planting vegetation,if the land is devoid of it,in order to foster temperature and sound control nation.' and clean air. Maintaining such vegetation by Cluster creating a perpetual organization to take care of open space as mandated by restrictive cove- In cluster development the structures are arranged in nants. closely related groups. Rather than spreading houses • Preventing erosion in areas with steep grades uniformly over an entire tract,the developer of a clus- and those susceptible to erosion.Insuring that in ter project builds at higher densities in certain areas the future this land is used for purposes consis- and preserves natural features in others. Structures tent with the preservation of open space. are placed on suitable terrain; thus installation costs • Designing drainage systems to minimize the for streets and utilities are lowered. Clustering is possibility of soil erosion,siltation,and damage based on the concept of density transfer-overall due to flooding. density will be within acceptable limits, but the in- • Keeping in mind that the PUD principle clearly dividual density of clusters and open space may be offers a framework for good design,environmen- higher or lower than the average. tal concerns, and energy conservation through the cluster concept. Further, energy inefficient development patterns are outmoded2 and add to the cost of housing. 2 See"Energy and Land Use:A Statement by ULI-the Urban Land Institute,"Environmental Comment, September 1974. • Applying good housekeeping practices to con- 3 Land Development Manual(Washington:National Association struction as well as the finished product. of Home Builders,1974),p.57. • Being aware of water and air contamination, 'Projects using small sites have been written up in magazines — such as Professional Builder and House and Home.See the follow- land despoilment, erosion, and noise during ing House and Home issues:April 1972,p.88;December 1972,p. construction. 64;July 1973,p.64;and August 1973,p.36. 112 A. •.bra-*"- '- +; - ii l'it 4 x - �f \�9` %,-,. . .., .• . ,?.; rj i te . . , _ ,,, ...,.. ,, ,, ,,; .,, ',+ 4 11• C w 4 , � 1� ''A 4`` .te t . ' ') Illi .i If ~ + •tJ t L'\-t-. P.,.`' " _,.,.. - - ic.a.- „,.. _ T5 Y .1,: - _ '; !/ '[' �r Ili ,`.i %. - email +:.;7Sr`+i- +r - ` . . -@.:-:‘ktti\ — • J., % fi. r :\: . _.46:-.. A , 1i_ p - - se 100 100 000- lid=d1111•11Mmimil FT .Y., O 10 so 100 - M 3-1 The cluster site plan for Sumner Village near Washington,D.C.,derives from the character of the property,portions of which have slopes over 20 percent. Within a cluster all units are typically of the same PUD type,although diversity of housing type can avoid the sameness which becomes more unfortunate as the Whereas clustering is a design solution based on den- scale of a cluster increases.Cluster planning requires sity transfer, planned unit development is not only a more design skills than conventional subdivision design concept but a legal concept. Planned unit de- planning. Unskilled planning or exploitation of the velopment (PUD) can be defined as a land develop- cluster concept can easily generate an ugly bunching ment project which is planned as an entity, grouping of dwellings instead of aesthetically pleasing build- dwelling units into clusters,allowing an appreciable ing groups. amount of land for open space, mixing housing types 113 and land uses,and preserving useful natural features. "In essence, the PUD process discards the traditional The preliminary development plan stage is the most critical of the three steps because a major portior use districting, self-executing development regula- project tion for the more open process permitting the applica- makes a formal applicati nnforrta PUDreview is dn. Atodthe ]local tion of sound planning principles to the development planning commission by submitting written doc- of various size parcels ranging from small,cluster de- uments—schematic drawings which show the site's velopments to entire new communities."5 visual characterand how people will use it,a site plan, A simple planned unit development may contain a and other supporting documents. number of dwellings of the same type combined with Following approval of the preliminary plan by re- common open space. A complex PUD may include a view authorities,a developer has a set period of time variety of housing types—detached single-family before he is required to submit a final development houses; townhouses; and garden, mid-rise,and high- plan. Typical design trade-offs are obvious: open rise apartments—along with open space and common space,exterior design,site planning,schools and rec- areas containing recreational and community fa- reational space dedication, trail systems, and low- cilities, such as a swimming pool,a school,or a corn- income housing.Any trade-offs should be in writing. munity center. The final development plan stage is not a time to Residential PUDs may range from a few acres to discuss matters previously agreed upon. Participants well over 1,000 acres in size. The number of units in- discuss items which remain unsettled because "it is stead of area is a better determinant of size. The the last opportunity the review authority will have to minimum number can be as few as five or six units, ensure that the PUD conforms to the intent of the or- although 50 units or more would be more likely as a dinance."7 However,the final development plan will qualification for applying the concept.Again,the res- probably not vary substantially from the approved idential density averaged over the entire area being preliminary plan.Following formal acceptance of the planned offers the control, not individual lot specifi- final plan,the planned unit development is recorded cations of minimum size and setbacks. and the zoning approval phase of PUD is complete. Fundamental to the planned unit development Subsequent steps are typically administrative and in- process is negotiation between the principals in- clude detailed site plan and architectural approvals volved—the developer, a public review authority for development phases, the issuance of building (typically a professional planning staff and lay plan- permits,and construction inspection.If a subdivision ping commission), and the public at large. Since a will also be recorded, the subdivision is typically PUD ordinance usually sets out parameters in very processed concurrently with the PUD. general terms, there is a good deal of discretionary Contrary to most conventional zoning ordinances control on the part of local government. Conse- which rely on a separation of uses, a PUD ordinance quently, PUD works best when all the parties under- frequently allows mixed land uses. That is, most or- stand the process and conduct their negotiations in a dinances allow nonresidential uses, but only those well-disciplined government framework. which are for the convenience of the residents. Non- The negotiation process involves site plan review, residential uses can include schools, churches, corn- although a wide range of alternative procedures munity centers, commercial buildings, and conven- exists. Site plan review is the major tool used to im- ience retail outlets. plement the objectives of PUD, and it offers a direct opportunityfor tailoring development proposals to planned the innovations possible using p p unit development require sophistication on community objectives. Usually general rules and the part of the designer and knowledge by the de- standards are prescribed for the submission of site veloper. Approval authorities also must understand plans,which are then reviewed and approved by local and endorse the concept. As stated earlier,flexibility officials. The American Society of Planning Officials in regulatory controls works best when government is recommends a three-step review process: (1) a pre- application conference, (2) a preliminary develop- S Frank S.So et al.,Planned Unit Development Ordinances,PAS ment plan, and (3) a final development plan.6 Report No.291 (Chicago:American Society of Planning Officials, In the preapplication conference(which in practice 1973),p,2. has not been mandatory), the planning agency helps ve o sment o see Robert W.Burchell(ed.),Frontiers of Planned Unit De- to familiarize the developer with the process.The de- p weer w iNew Jersey:Center for Urban Policy Research,Rutgers University,1973). veloper in turn informs the community of his ideas. PUD:A B71). Way for the Suburbs (Washington: Urban Land Nothing at the preapplication conference is legally Institute, 1971). See So,Development Ordinances, pp. 14-24. binding. Ibid.,p. 19. 114 i SUBTERRANEAN J47„......f T• ---BLDGPKO BELOW ..1f ` • UNIT BOO 11 • • t ,,� - ,,V.. 4. 4,4%,' --) li, UWel y y r51. • t t t A. * ANC eTa i -I �: - f.. '� . 010 !0 73 100 /"�• FT i Q 4 UNIT BDG N 0 15 30 111.11111 M 3-2 Seascape is a 3-acre 51-unit planned unit development of two-story townhouses and apartment condominiums. responsive,for residential zoning in the conventional For planning purposes, traditionally the extent of sense usually cannot produce the new type of corn- the neighborhood is determined by the service area of munity development. an elementary school, adjacent open space, and con- venience shopping, although in the future other Neighborhood Unit commercial elements may be more appropriate. With The neighborhood still remains the basic measure- school enrollments dropping in some areas, with ment used by urban planners in evaluating elements some schools becoming surplus property, and with linked with people and areas in the formulation of a children being bused from distant locations, it is no comprehensive community plan. The neighborhood longer valid to consider the elementary school to be concept is equally valid for guiding the development the extent of a neighborhood per se. of new suburban residential land and for redevelop- A neighborhood should be bounded by main traffic ing central city areas. arteries, not cut by them. Local streets within the In a sense neighborhoods are local communities. neighborhood should be designed to serve the needs Each has well-defined boundaries.A neighborhood is of residential access rather than promoting the use of the geographic area within which residents conve- streets by through traffic. Minor cul-de-sac and loop niently share the common services and facilities streets are recommended. needed in the vicinity of their dwellings. Neighbor- New neighborhoods under the planned unit de- hood boundaries are typically set by natural features velopment concept, whether closer in or outlying, such as topography, stream valleys, or terrain; by may have various dwelling types at different densi- major streets, including freeways; by artificial fea- ties appropriately located for variety in price range.A tures such as railroads, power lines, or other de- modest variety in price range is acceptable in a neigh- velopment obstructions; or by planning elements borhood. Generally it is better to group similar types such as recreational and other open space uses or and similarly priced dwellings together. This ap- community facilities. proach helps to maintain real estate values within a 115 r 3-3 Neighborhood Unit Principle I lc Ii I�V40 * i___. \' ( ULNIOR9 HIGHMUNITY SCHOOL _/.,,, COM \ 0 0 I • FACILITIES PEDESTRIAN WAY PLAYFIELD UTILITY LINE OR OTHER DEVELOPMENT OBSTRUCTION . i I • • ) 1 A NEIGHBORHOODS BOUNDED BY ARTIFICIAL FEATURES NEIGHBORHOODS BOUNDED BY PLANNING ELEMENTS neighborhood, and as such, it is an indigenous cordance with plans for major thoroughfares, trans- American planning concept. European planning portation,parks and playgrounds,and other physical, tends toward a more heterogeneous array of housing social, and economic factors. types and prices. Although the neighborhood concept is valid for a Well-planned commercial shopping areas and in- developer as an overall planning tool, perhaps mor dustrial parks may be established near or in conjunc- important for the developer is the creation of sub tion with several neighborhoods to form a complete neighborhoods which more than anything else lend a satellite community.If they are soundly planned and sense of place to the residents of a development.Resi- properly financed, the new neighborhoods represent dents perceive their immediate environment more reasonable costs to the homebuilder, the home pur- vividly than any larger context called a neighbor- chaser, the renter, the taxpayer, and the local gov- hood. According to Residential Council member ernment which services the new areas. The develop- David Sunderland, "the neighborhood has lost any ment of a complete neighborhood is not prevented social meaning beyond three blocks in any direction even when the area contains several small sub- having consistent value." divisions under separate ownership.Through careful It would be wise for a developer to build this sense cooperative planning, these tracts can be integrated into a development which will eventually, form a of place and value into subneighborhood units to pro- complete community. This is increasingly important tect the ultimate vitality of his project.Mission Valley since a complete neighborhood will tend to minimize in Fremont,California,is an excellent example of the outside trips for its residents and thus offer the fringe subneighborhood concept. The site was divided into benefit of energy conservation. six subneighborhoods varying from 23 to 88 lots, all The residential developer should keep the neigh- served by one collector street. Special character is borhood concept continuously in mind from the given each of the subneighborhoods by the landscape standpoint of his own investment and because it is a area in the cul-de-sacs,and special entry features and sound growth pattern. The neighborhood concept is pedestrian ways allow neighboring between clusters. not limited to raw land development. In studies of New Community new growth areas in cities or in the replanning of old- er sections, planning commissions use the neighbor- During the 195Os and 1960s the scale of residential hood concept as a basis. The size, type, boundaries, development had been progressively larger,although and community facilities of neighborhoods have been by the 197Os the trend began to reverse.Many of these determined on the basis of existing physical barriers large-scale developments have loosely been calle and an exhaustive land use survey, modified in ac- new communities, when in fact they are really large- 116 I Date IIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIIMIIMIIIIIIIMIMIMIIMIII ,i it it I SHOPPING • . t.*j. -.• ...'..-. .fro L..=.).., .. : I4.... '..• �: • APARTMENTS \ * .-pRAIIiABE -r . `- -.J i .-_. /:i''`..• - . TO WN MOUSES STING ...7--.1- 4..; .: j pi.AJ OR COLLECTORS 1 • : 111411111111P ....-_..... ,I : I rupia I AeLE.ILUFF i ..----' ' ' . s - .\.:. .: ., . ‘. . al NEIGHBORHOODS BOUNDED BY NATURAL FEATURES NEIGHBORHOODS BOUNDED BY MAJOR STREETS scale dormitory suburbs or special purpose corn- gle-family house on a large or small individual 'ses, garden apart- . munities of retirement, resort, or recreation-oriented ments,ot, clustered and highhiise apartments. This housing must ousing. The well-planned, successful —developments have a fairly homogeneous population be available to a mix of age groups and economic living in an environment which features open space levels,for a new community is designed to be a corn- and recreational amenities.These do not meet the def- plete city,not a white collar middle-income enclave. inition of a new community which would presuma- New communities will not solve all urban prob- bly have a more heterogeneous cross-section of the lems. They suffer from maladies of their own not the i population,reasonably representative of the national least of which is the risk they involve. The front-end I profile. Although the definition of a new community investment is tremendous,and the return is uncertain is discretionary and open to debate, a distinguishing and painfully slow. Nevertheless, in a general sense i factor exists: a new community requires the element thewincommunity development.oncept repIt combines iss a logical EJ o f an employment base within the community. progression Whether this base is provided at the outset or whether elements of completeness and unity which create a it comes later, it must be present in the planning self-sustaining community and does so on a large stages. Developers should note that few if any new scale. These elements are planned in advance and towns will succeed if the employment base lags be- protected legally so that orderly growth can continue hind or is disproportionate to the resident popula- with enough flexibility so that changes can be made tion. from time to time for the benefit of the community as a The new town developer is not actually building whole without injury to those who are already citi- anything which has not been built before.He is going zens of the new town. New communities exercise architectural control, beyond the small parcel subdivision where land is rotective covenants, and establish community used only in relation to the growth trend within a seg- use passociations in greater complexity but in the same ment of an existing urban area. Sufficient acreage should be available to the developer to allocate land for industrial, commercial, and residential uses to support an ultimate population ranging between a It may be arbitrary to assign an ultimate population figure but 50,000 and 100,000 to support eventually all of the the point is that the cultural and educational attractions of the type institutions normally found in a city: library, mu- indicated do not become available until cities reach about 100,000 seum, concert hall, theater, community college, or more people.For example,in a tract of 10,000 acres,only about 50 percent would be productive acreage of residence,business,and and others.e The new community will provide all industry.The remainder would be used for open space,community types of living accommodations including the sin- facilities,and streets. 117 • -#4,3/441 t„t-it,. , . .sy.--,:, • . , , , i --- -.-r. .• t - - -. .., • ,ASf ii 1 IL '14'41 -: i-i-Niz, - .....s.. A. 1 fairy, 1 ;i1,--.......1 A p:,fe ' , . I. ..‘''.11 . ., .”( 4kLe.... --,--- ,-, ------ --- - : !. ---, . .t. : . )1-,,.• "IP 41,...>:::1 ' I ii It r iii, . . • . , 4 11 14;-,:r f., i • .t. - ",...,: ‘ , .I.: 1 1111 ,4 , itF t , (lip • I- ` -O.1. i ' I - }ate _ -�a" - f .. __ .;iit l .i li li-e: :' - -7 ,. 3-4 Lake Anne in Reston,Virginia,showing several residential types. manner as smaller subdivisions. In most new com- Its greatest successes will undoubtedly be found in areas munities the developer retains management control of the country experiencing rapid growth, e.g., Orange of development by either doing all the residential County,California; Houston,Texas;metropolitan Wash- ington,D.C.These successes will occur despite the bur- building selling dens imposed on the developer by municipalities and selling large tracts to approved builders. The new will reflect returns in tight markets. Unfortunately, the community which is well located and planned, and benefits that could accrue to hundreds of communities as adequately financed and administered,provides a fa- a byproduct of this development will be limited to only a vocable opportunity for both small-volume and few.The reason new communities will have only limited impact is that without direct government aid there is no large-volume builders.9 way that the private sector can finance front-end costs, It is too early to judge the success of the present withstand economic downturns,and tread water during crop of new communities from a sociological stand- community-imposed delays. If new towns are to be a point. But two assessments can be made: new corn- basic element in our society's attempt to manage growth, munities use land more efficiently than typical then it is essential that a hard look be given to what is subdivisions do,and new communities promote order happening to our existing new towns as a result of pres- ent legislation,funding mechanisms,and the like." and beauty instead of the unsightliness and waste connected with urban sprawl. At the moment most 9 The federal government became involved in new community new communities have come about as a response to development through Title Iv of the Housing Act of 1968 and later the regional growth around central cities, and as with Title VII of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 which provided loan guarantees for the financing of new commu- such, they are satellites of these cities. nity developments.See Hugh Mields,Jr.,Federally Assisted New In terms of economics,however,new communities Communities:New Dimensions in Urban Development(Washing- are easier to assess. Large-scale development will ton:Urban Land Institute, 1973). continue to be engaged in for profit by the private sec- 10"New Communities—Afloat or Afield?"Urban land, March 1977,p. 13. tor, with or without government assistance, but its Also see Bernard Weissbourd, "Satellite Communities,"Urbai impact will be limited. Land,October 1972. 118 Residential Development - �.. t�•�: 1t Types . 4' ; , 'u . ,,; The single-family detached dwellingon its own lot - '• t `'�` "¢ continues to remain the goal of most homebuyers. IN,. f • - , ' - +.• :�;.•: And many of these buyers will only accept less if a , .11 • 4: , 3i J. ",+%., large house on a lot is not readily available for any i - number of reasons." In fact, many have purchased a jv�; � . *. basic house with few extras to get a detached house on -. . ` J a lot.Others,however,face reality and purchase some 1 - _.. .1rl.► form of attached housing;some prefer attached hous- ' Frx - - ,s=- - _' �y.S."'"1-.: ...:M,.�-' ing; and there are those who want the convenience -- -;r--:�-!-- .. _ <.7:«:- - s - ?o:;-s-.,...." and sense of community available at higher densities. • •. .' . _ • -; • ..•- Whatever direction individual tastes run,the escalat- 3-5 Single-family detached house on a sloping lot. ing cost of all types of housing and the desire for a good living environment tax the imaginations of de- (strategically placed landscaping is simple and easy), velopers to continually upgrade the quality and tech- or direct views(design can orient major glass areas so niques of residential planning and design to a high that neighbor's yards are not visible). David Rhame, degree. Residential Council member from New Jersey,sums it up by saying, "the proper use of existing amenities, Single-Family Detached that is,trees,views,hills, is by far the most important In designing single-family detached housing,as with job the land planner and developer have in design." any other type of housing, the basic concept begins The shape and size of a lot require only a two- with the lifestyles to be accommodated, and is fol- dimensional solution to a problem.But there is a third lowed by the land. Plans for single-family houses dimension—slope—which affects housing design. should maximize the natural assets of the land and The housing design should answer the problem that enable the homeowner to take full advantage of his the slope or grade presents.The size and shape of the lot. Houses need not be lined up in a row facing one lot may determine whether a house will have one, another. By developing wide and narrow lots,rectan- two,or three stories,but the grade will determine how gular and square lots, and others of different shapes, the house might be arranged on the lot. houses can be sited in a rational way. A street be- Even though the single-family detached house may comes pleasant to look at by avoiding the monoto- remain the first choice with consumers, developers nous parade of housing facades. should analyze what is involved in that choice, espe- A developer should avoid a western exposure if at cially economic feasibility, environmental concerns, all possible. He should create privacy by directing natural resource consumption, and personal costs. It major glass areas away from public view. Roof lines appears that in some selected instances,single-family should alternate and change direction to prevent an detached housing of a certain type creates economic obvious level look. The developer should create dif- deficits for some municipalities.13 Developers should ferent housing massing or forms to suit different lots. Most importantly,he must use the lot."Small,narrow "See"What Your Buyers Want•"Professional Builder, January lots tend to be surrounded by the house. By putting 19Ne. Nearly 70 percent of those surveyed felt they would accept a the garage in front, and setting the house on the back smaller single-family detached home if they could cut costs. of the lot, an interesting,private outdoor living space 12 David E.Link(ed.),Residential Designs:How To Get the Most is created in the center. Wider square, or rectangular from Your Housing Dollar(Boston:Cahners Publishing Company, t� Inc.,1974),p. 11. lots are given an atrium, L-shaped treatment.' "See Housing and Suburbs:Fiscal and Social Impact of Mul- The siting of individual houses on lots can create thornily Development(Trenton:New Jersey County and Municipal good views or bad views. A house which looks di- Government Commission,1974).The commission discovered that rectly into its neighbor's is no bargain.Privacy should deficits of$150 to$300 per house were evident in certain New Jer- sey municipalities.The study only looked at four-bedroom single- be a primary design objective.In fact,says Residential family houses which cost$40,000.As with most studies,the con- Council member George Writer,privacy may be more clusions are very much timebound and can only be used as general important than such real amenities as swimming examples.The commission analyzed revenue sources—direct and indirect property tax revenues and miscellaneous revenues— pools.Proper siting can create views(an atrium house against municipal costs—school service costs and municipal ser- creates an inward view), block undesirable views vice costs. 119 weigh the probable costs generated over and above to location. In some areas, a townhouse refers to — the prospective revenues. specific, identifiable design solution. In others it Because of various environmental and energy con- used to describe an individual dwelling unit within servation factors, the large single-family detached another entity, for example, a one-bedroom town- house will probably become a less significant seg- house inside a garden apartment. In still other in- ment of the residential development, as it will give stances,it is used to distinguish for-sale housing from way to more economical developments of somewhat accommodations occupied by a tenant. Due to such higher density.14 The ULI Energy Ad Hoc Committee difficulties it is important to relate the housing type to agrees. "The cluster concept in its various forms— other structures and to identify the size of and number attached units, detached units on smaller lots with of units in a building. common open space, and other configurations—will become more prevalent." The report goes on to say Townhouse that the PUD concept "clearly has an added factor of The townhouse, once known as the row house, is a opportunity for energy conservation. This conserva- single-family attached unit with party walls.The unit tion will occur both in first cost and, more impor- has its own front door which opens to the outdoors, tantly, in long-term costs for energy consumption for and typically each house is a complete entity with its transportation within the project through reduced own utility connections. Although townhouses have travel distances."15 In addition, the cluster concept no side yards, front and rear yards can exist. Units makes far better use of open space, putting private have common walls. The townhouse appeals to open space close to the dwelling and permitting more families who want the advantages of home ownership common open space for recreational purposes. with freedom from yard maintenance. The townhouse is one design transition between the single-family detached house and more typical "The report issued by the Real Estate Research Corporation enti- 13w11 ' 11 Fill * - tied The Cost of Sprawl indicates that low-density sprawl de-— m velopment is more costly in terms of environmental effects such r nt. air and water pollution and energy consumption than higher den- ir.} L " sity developments. The developer should bear in mind that this , l - - I- j — _'.1..1.-PJ., study is an analysis of prototype development patterns and not of —t — actual developments,although empirical data were used. -- e 'S"Energy and Land Use,"Environmental Comment, p.5. y" � House and Home (October 1974, p. 83) argues that in close-in - higher density areas, "some compelling factors will push the tra- - ditional single family house closer to and eventually up against its '.-019.- - • - neighbor. "First there's cost. Attached housing requires less feeder-road 3-6 With some imagination a monotonous series of housing frontage and shorter utility runs.And roads into cluster cul-de-sacs facades such as this can be avoided. don't have to meet the higher specifications of feeders. "Second,there's density,which relates to cost.Attached houses permit higher densities,hence lower per-unit land costs.They can Single-Family Attached also create more open space. hence a more attractive living environment—vital to successful marketing. When discussing single-family detached housing, "And third, there's the whole matter of ecological impact. At- there is no question that one is referring to a house tached houses leave much more of a site undisturbed—an in- which stands apart from others on its own lot with creasingly important element in zoning approvals." three or four yards and which is intended for occu- "The definition of family varies from zoning ordinance to zon- ing ordinance, but typically the definition refers to one or more pancy by one family.16 Other residential development persons related by blood,marriage,or adoption•living and cooking types are less easily defined. Single-family attached together as a single housekeeping unit.Insome instances two unre- lated persons performing the same functions may qualify asafam- ily, but the question of larger groups of unrelated persons living classified in various ways:by the number of dwelling together has been decided by the U.S.Supreme Court.In Village of units per building; by the dimensions of a building, Belle Terre v.Boross, the Court ruled that the community of Belle Terre,New York,acted reasonably by zoning out all but one-family that is, a four-story building; by some generic name, shons.es and forbidding occupancy by more than two unrelated per- for example,garden apartment,mid-rise,townhouse; or by relating structures to one another, that is, at- For a discussion of its exclusionary effects, see Legal Notes, tached, detached, or row." By using the generic Urban Land,May 1974. classification alone to describe housing type, a prob- "See Robert D. Katz, Design of the Housing Site (Urbana, 11- classification arises because terminologyvaries from location sity of lin li Homes Council,Building Research Council,Univer- lem sity of Illinois, 1966). 120 • 1 > -. ` • t " . Id '. ....:11,-. - s - . 11 `3. • - a irk if - -- ftp II >.. _ - .. 3-7 Two-and three-story townhouses with a lakefront setting. forms of multifamily dwellings, including garden, development. Rolling land creates opportunity for mid-rise,and high-rise apartments,and it offers a de- the introduction of down-hill units with basement velopment opportunity for both closer in and outly- rooms and interesting views. Flat land requires even ing sites. The townhouse may be offered for sale or more skill in order to produce clusters having in- rent. How the unit is financed or owned (whether teresting visual effects and to avoid monotony in rental, straight sale, cooperative, or condominium) building mass. Usual practice calls for treating the has nothing to do with being called a townhouse. facades or groups of facades differently to give the Townhouses are characteristically built as in- impression that each was constructed separately. But dividual units in a series of five to ten houses, with carried to the extreme,this treatment results in a jum- common walls between units and a side yard on the ble of styles. Townhouse planning is markedly dif- end unit only. The unit may have one, two, or three ferent from single-family detached planning,because stories, depending upon siting, room arrangement, as marketing consultant Carl Norcross explains,"lots internal stairways, whether basement or slab con- are narrower,houses are connected,and densities are struction is used,or whether built-in garages are con- from three to five times greater,in many instances."18 structed as part of the unit.Typically the townhouses The design and location of common and private are two stories.In some cases townhouses can be built open space is of prime importance in a townhouse on top of each other on moderately sloping sites project, not only because the units are attached and where an upper unit has at-grade access on one side of the side yard has been dispensed with,but because of the building and a lower unit has at-grade access on necessary zoning approval for the higher density.The the other side. These are referred to as stacked town- common open space serves as private parkland for houses. Recently many developers have included a residents. one-story plan, which has the two-fold advantage of Townhouse densities will vary, although in gen- appealing to a broader market and adding architec- eral,six to seven units per gross acre is normal.But as tural diversity to exteriors. Townhouses must be designed to fit a particular "Carl Norcross,Open Space Communities in the Market Place, Technical Bulletin No. 57 (Washington: Urban Land Institute, piece of land, its location, and the price range of the 1966),p.63. 121 r Residential Council member Ray Brock explains, private yard is essential. Access to common open "Many plans with densities over eight could appear space from the garden is convenient. This of cm quite open,as some with six units per acre would ap- will depend on site characteristics, orientation, and pear quite tight. Much depends upon the unit type climate. The individual fenced areas should not be and price range, the arrangement and amount of car large enough to create maintenance problems. Resi- storage, the topography, building siting, amenity dential Council members could not prescribe a size package, and vegetation." Fritz Grupe, Residential for these patios; 100 square feet to 600 square feet Council member from Stockton, California, advises seems acceptable. developers to check the street frontage as a basis for Good design mandates limiting the number of units density, or whether or not the development is next to in a row. Residential Council members feel that some natural amenity. And Residential Council townhouse groupings should have no more than four member John Schmidt says that, "six dwelling units to six units in a row, and perhaps fewer. Much de- per gross acre may be too low for a decent job of land- pends on the design, the site, the location, and the scaping.If the units are small there might be too much market.In some cases,it is possible to have a block of space left over. For lower cost projects with a green- eight units that has more appeal than a block of four belt entry,ten dwelling units per acre may be a better units. Residential Council member Fritz Grupe pre- number than six or seven. Front entry versus green- fers four units in a row, but six is permissible if they belt entry will make a difference of about two dwell- are all one story and the layout has staggered set- ing units per acre." backs. With the entrance,service features,and built-in ga- Minimum lot width is arbitrary. Residential Coun- rage or parking on the street access side,a rear garden cil members have encountered good designs ranging with a terrace for outdoor living in a walled or fenced from 16 to 30 feet. A 20-foot lot will accommodate a ' ilitt_11:4 , 'LI\ 117._ .-N .m, il I 1 !. .• lip.. .., ..:‘,11:307---' Pergr-- .7-:r- r 1111 ' mil 1111 27117. IleAlii • r-Att ..„..,,, ,,,AN...... 1.... .... _..„. _ A..- :,‘, .1\,;.::: ill` 1100,1; Vii----.-{wNMI trileter 27,..-z Ow �_ Ins ■_ i 4 .-' -- '� =Mill7 11 i � �== , _ hi . !! = ,, ' • ,, • � is;;r , ill a.l4,. irm .,yam “fulioI 1;:mmumm -- 0••• i • ‘II f.4 Zi III . I IMM‘" 1 rt ' EN 1111 11111111111,111, I I 3-8 Example of a townhouse cluster with six units in a row and staggered setbacks. 122 i ;I t II iI r - ._._ ` �_ r T ._. _._._. a t - .• _ _Y=e w `.• i•T — -.�— ... ('. .-a: ; ' .,-:,. 77r"'": a— s._ .�lti�• •- - I I 3-9 Duplex units at Mountain Park in Lake Oswego,Oregon. two-story unit with some of the features of modern triplex; for four, a fourplex or quadplex; and so on.e I detached housing, including, for example, a built-in prefix refix identifies the number of dwelling units per ar- llen garage, two bedrooms, a front setback, and rars de, building." to disrepute. As marketing tools a varietyhas of alter- ' den. For units with second-story rooms sideby ) either in front or back, lot widths of 22 to 25 feet are nate terms have been devised—twins or paired essential. houses for duplexes and quads for fourplexes are In townhouse planning and development, the best examples. In some vid- allowed on corner lotssinf neighborhoods the country zoned for exes are site solution will incorporate these things: nrec- single-family detached houses. uality, convenience, adequate parking, prestige, reational facilities, privacy, outside patios, and free- Patio House II' dom from the cares of yard maintenance. The de- veloper should keep in mind that buyers and renters The patio house garden rde ng. In terms of design house is another form ; will not accept conditions that are too crowded. Ac- of single-family attached houcording to Residential Council member Robert Eng- the patioin elopmenhbased on some historic precedents ouse is an innovation in residential dis strom, "It is usually simpler and more acceptable the marketplace to plat small lots rather than using a most often one- ory,a basement. Thee fire lotaarea ped is usedr the cont condominium form of ownership." cept is based on the lot line to lot line construction of a Plex house with a living area in the enclosure or garden Plexes are similar to townhouses,yet they have many court.20 of the characteristics of single-family detached hous ,9 Duplex is also used in multifamily housing to describe apart- ing. This dwelling type may or may not occupy its ments which occupy two floors.These are also called maisonettes. own structure from ground to roof but does have an 30 See Donald H.Vance,"The Patio Home."Urban Land,March outside entrance,it is separated from other structures 19Al by yards or other open space, and it is designed for so see William K. Wittausch,The Patio Home (Washington: Urban Land Institute,1963). occupancy by one or more families. A structure for Norbert Schoenauer and Stanley Seeman, The Court-Garden occupancy by two families is a duplex; for three, a House(Montreal:McGill University Press,1962). 123 iiiw The customary side and rear yards are consolidated �-,„, - • v into one or more garden courts, either partially or �"z( '''.•0'''.•0r t. -,- completely bordered by rooms. These garden courts i!' -"• c.01 et�„ are enclosed either by the house or by walls.The out- `'At•% door and indoor areas become one secluded space for ' `•�'' . i living with no openings on two or more exterior site y Cr' S •^;{ i'.'' , C 1',� walls. This inward directed house provides privacy, `, .,r. 1 '• 'v9 yet allows increased density without giving up the /0/'.1�� _. N'•., '� ,,C feeling of openness. According to Residential Coun _ �2 cil member John King,traditionally one side wall was •. , I -' L�- S ',%�_ placed on the property line, but it now is more corn- - _ - '',i I ri- '-SJ z 4,3,l� ik-- mon to set the house back 3 feet and give the residents 1 T an easement. t - to The one-story, L-shaped, zero-lot-line patio house Pri "'-'"" _ t ;f, can be designed as a two-, three-, or f I ��®.L �L�LJL�' . r'', four-bedroom , ,.� 1 a unit on lots 80 to 100 feet deep by 40, 50, or 60 feet ' �� .. ,��^r wide, at a density of five to seven families per gross �r� [] ] � + r - acre.Patio lots can range upwards from a minimum of '.1"... -- — - M1 %,,, t.•v. approximately 2,000 square feet,however.Relatively '` flat land is best for patio houses. rnr 7...).' yf• * .,r Built as a one-story unit, the patio house is de signed in group or cluster arrangements, By grouping the units, land saved from individual house lots can be used as common open space to preserve natural features of a site. Within any site, introduction of high-rise apartments, two-story townhouses, and one-story patio houses must be skillfully arranged, which rooms open. The court may be placed ant again emphasizing the importance of site planning. where that room arrangement dictates. The atrium In a suburban location, patio house clusters can be house maybe two stories or more in height,and it may readily designed to preserve the open setting that is be free-standing, or attached in rows, groups, or customarily thought of in suburban living.21 Other clusters. advantages of the patio house are: for the developer, lower land costs per unit and lower lot development Multifamily costs; for the buyer, excellent privacy and security Although the single-family house remains the prefer- and lower heating and air conditioning costs than conventional detached houses. The patio house, ence of most housing consumers,it is a form of hous- however, is not cheaper on a per-squarefoot basis ing which is becoming unaffordable without some sort of assistance to a large sector of the population. than a conventional house of comparable construction. Many married couples in their early twenties are not Any limitations of the patio house are due primar- ily to climate.North of the Fortieth Parallel,for exam- yet ready to purchase homes. And many more older ple,the patio house should be oriented for maximum couples whose children have grown (empty nesters) sunlight. The width or length of the court in relation are ready to give up the big houses they no longer to the height of the enclosing wall or eaves of the need. Single-person households are also on the in crease. For all of these groups, multifamily housing house is the governing factor. Privacy is one of the big selling features of a patio may be the answer.22 Apartments have customarily been built in central house, privacy from the street and privacy from neighboring houses. A stark, walled-in appearance cities. Increasing urbanization has caused rapid can be tedious, however,unless the monotony can be broken by shrubbery,staggered fencing, and curvin See House and Home, October 1974,p. 86,for a patio home g example. sidewalks. Also see House and Home, May 1972,p.94. Atrium House 22 See J.Ross McKeever,Apartment Development:A Strategy for Successful Decision Making (Washington: Urban Land Institute, A variation of the patio house is the atrium house, 1974)' l Norcross and John Hysom,Apartment Commun which has an open court within the interior onto NextrBig Market (W a h ng on:Urban Land Institute, 1968)ities: The 124 276 The Practice of Local Government Planning Beyond traditional zoning: Other approaches to land use control As the assumptions that once guided zoning have changed,a number of approaches to land use control have evolved that reflect—and encourage—shifts in devel- opment patterns.These include planned unit developments,the use of performance (rather than design) standards, phased development controls, and growth man- agement systems. The next four sections consider each of these approaches in detail. Planned unit development controls • A planned unit development—or PUD—involves a mixture of single-family residences, town houses, apartments, some commercial and institutional uses and, occasionally, some industry. Such a mixture flies in the face of zoning's traditional assumptions about the superiority of the single-family home. Planned unit development controls were developed largely by the private sector to provide the public sector with an effective means of regulating such developments, a concept which did not fit comfortably under traditional zoning district regulation. Planned unit development controls can be viewed as an attempt to merge the zoning and subdivision procedures into a single, sequential development review process. Early advocates of PUD were trying to escape the use-segregation require- ments of zoning as well as to find relief from the detailed, lot-by-lot design requirements imposed by traditional bulk regulations. Such requirements often encouraged developers to bulldoze the landscape in order to make it fit the gridiron development pattern that optimizes land use under traditional zoning design requirements. Supporters of PUD pointed out that varied lot sizes and clustered homes would preserve open space without increasing density and with- out increasing the effective impact on the community. Implemented responsibly, the greater flexibility of PUD allowed for site design that was more creative and responsive to environmental considerations. Zoning by negotiation Simplicity and Too much flexibility in standards can clarity are major advantages of tradi- create a system of "zoning by negotia- tional zoning over many other systems tion," whether by accident or by of regulation. In most cases. a quick design. The negotiation may cover the review by a junior staff member will ultimate density of the project, or the determine whether a proposed struc- developer may be encouraged to ture complies with zoning "donate" certain additional amenities to requirements. On the basis of that the local government in consideration • determination, the structure is either for development approval. The practice approved or disapproved. Simple. at times smacks of what once was called "contract zoning," a practice Reviewing applications for complex frowned upon by the courts as a bar- development projects that may cover tering of the police power. However, dozens, or even hundreds, of acres when such requirements are imposed and be built over many years is far as conditions for approval of a complex more complicated. Even after detailed development, rather than being tied up technical review, it is often difficult to in a traditional contract, they may be determine whether the project complies hard to detect as such. with all applicable standards. The issue is made more complex when the local In a 1987 decision (Nollan v. California government has adopted a more flexi- Coastal Commission, 1987), the ble and, at times, "standardless" form Supreme Court found a particular of regulation. negotiated land use decision to be 278 The Practice of Local Government Planning requirements,mismanagement is more likely to occur and harder to detect. Most communities need some form of planned unit development controls, but those controls must be carefully implemented. Performance standards Performance standards offer an alternative to traditional design or use standards. Performance standards in a zoning ordinance set out a minimum requirement or maximum limit on the effects or characteristics of a use. For example, rather than specify a traditional list of uses, a zoning ordinance that incorporates per- formance standards might describe the allowable amount of smoke,odor, noise, heat. vibration, glare, traffic generation, and visual impact of uses permitted in the zone. This approach defines precisely what the community wants as an end result but allows the developer choice in the means used to achieve that result. Performance standards, which are also used in subdivision ordinances and building codes, depend on the technical possibility of quantifying effects and measuring them to ensure that they meet ordinance requirements. The most advanced work in performance standards has been in the area of industrial emissions. (Local requirements in many fields, especially pollution control, have now been superseded by federal or state regulations.) Because such measures require technical skill and often some expensive equipment, small communities tend to prefer the more traditional approach of specification standards, which substitute clear statements of purpose or intent for precise,measurable standards. Phased development controls Phased development controls require or encourage development to be staged in a way that is consistent with the patterns of expansion of public facilities. The most common form of development phasing is the establishment of an urban growth zone with an outer boundary beyond which no development will be approved for a specified period of years. This effort to match development to the availability of public facilities has faced two sets of problems. First, the outer boundary essentially proscribes development on land outside the boundary and gives a stamp of public approval to land inside the boundary. Second, by limiting the supply of apparently developable land, the local government effec- tively allows landowners inside the boundary to raise land prices, resulting in increased housing prices and commercial occupancy costs. Such systems have not fared particularly well in the courts. Partly because of the arbitrariness of most boundary lines, and partly because most courts believe that local governments should expand their public services to meet demand, challenges to urban growth zones by landowners outside the boundary lines have been relatively successful. Other communities have used an approach to phased development that is a hybrid of performance standards and phased development requirements. Ramapo, New York, a pioneer in this area, required any new development to obtain a permit; eligibility for the permit was based on a point system. with points based on the availability of various public facilities. Although such a system allows development to occur first in areas served by the most public facilities, it is not really based on performance standards, because a developer may achieve the requisite number of points without having all services available. Although its system strongly influenced other communities, Ramapo itself abandoned the system after approximately fifteen years of use. Requiring developers to meet performance standards to obtain access to major arterials and sewer and water service has much the same effect as a phased development system, because it encourages the development of land closest to major facilities first. However, it avoids the problems of a strict phased devel- Zoning 277 Part of the appeal of PUD lies in the emphasis on planning. As noted earlier, traditional zoning bulk controls were designed to regulate development lot-by- lot, but the flexibility built into PUD controls can be achieved only if a larger tract is planned and developed as a unit. Planning larger tracts offers developers both the opportunity and the incentive for better planning. Since the developer owns all the land in the project, a major error in site design or in locating adjacent land uses will create difficulty in selling the land. Planned unit development controls were gradually accepted in the 1960s and early 1970s and are now a common form of land use control in most states. Planned unit development controls are usually implemented as part of a zoning ordinance containing one or more PUD zones. Such zones may be "overlays," which are effective in addition to the basic zoning for a parcel of land. In other cases, the implementation of PUD regulations is triggered by a request for rezoning to a PUD zone. Not all planned unit developments include nonresidential uses, nor do all planned unit developments contain clustered housing with common open space, although most do. Some ordinances provide only for clustering, with minimal variations from basic bulk regulations: such provisions are sometimes called "cluster zoning" rather than PUD. All PUD or cluster regulations do involve variations from bulk controls. The most common variations are the use of density rather than minimum lot size to measure intensity and the reduction of yard setback requirements. One problem with planned unit development controls is that some commu- nities have eliminated traditional zoning standards without replacing them with other guidelines—standards for maximum density and general performance. for example. If the PUD classification simply creates an open, "standard-free"zone, the community risks "zoning by negotiation." (See sidebar.) Planned unit development controls are an effective modern regulatory tech- nique if properly implemented. However, like any other form of regulation, they can be mismanaged by intent or by neglect. Because planned unit devel- opment controls are more flexible and thus more complex than traditional zoning unconstitutional and held that the gov- negotiated or imposed in the review ernmental entity involved should pay process without advanced study. damages for a "taking" of private prop- erty. In the case. a special state The practical problem with zoning by coastal commission had approved the negotiation, whatever the motives, is issuance of a building permit for a that it represents decision making in a beachfront house, but it made the policy vacuum. Lawyers have a saying approval subject to the condition that that "hard cases make bad law." Plan- the owner provide public access along ners could say "hard cases make a • the beach. The Court held that there bad plan." The hard cases are those must be a "nexus" (logical connection) that are not clearly guided by estab- between the approval granted and the lished standards and policies. They condition imposed and found such a result in bad plans because it is impos- nexus missing in the case. The deci- sible for the governing body to set sion of the Supreme Court in that case good policy in a public meeting room points out the legal hazards of land use with an eager developer on one side, regulation by negotiation. It is much unhappy neighbors on the other, and a easier to demonstrate a nexus between specific piece of land in the middle. a proposed development and a stand- Good policy must be established in the and included in an ordinance and abstract, away from such particular supported by planning studies than it is pressures and concerns, and then to show a nexus between a develop- enforced in the review of individual ment project and a permit condition applications. y _ 246 The Practice of Local Government Planning Cluster residential subdivisions3' In a cluster development, dwelling units are grouped on certain portions of a site, and other areas in common or single ownership remain open and free from development. In a cluster residential subdivision, which is a specific application of this concept, lots are smaller than in a conventional subdivision, the lots and units are clustered on those portions of the site best suited for development, and common or public open space is provided. Clustering is an environmentally sound concept,because it allows development in the most appropriate areas and prevents development in inappropriate areas such as flood-prone corridors and areas of unstable soil or steep terrain. Cluster subdivisions take advantage of natural methods for handling stormwater and preserve open space and other important natural features. Clustering is also economically sound, because it reduces infrastructure costs (the length of street and utility lines can be drastically reduced). The flexible location of buildings permits designs that save more energy than do conventional designs. Although the cluster concept might seem to suggest that a cluster subdivision be developed to the same overall density as a conventional subdivision, only with a different pattern of development, many ordinances allow cluster subdi- visions to include more units. The shape, size, and topographic limitations of the site prevent most conventional subdivision designs from achieving the max- imum number of lots that theoretically could be platted. In most instances, the flexible open space of a cluster subdivision allows the maximum number of lots permissible under the ordinance, and most formulas assume no "inefficiency" in platting. Furthermore. some jurisdictions provide a bonus by ignoring the amount of land that would have been devoted to streets and other public areas had a conventional subdivision been designed, which may increase the number of units permitted in a cluster subdivision by 15 to 25 percent. Figure 8-17 Zero-lot- I � line atrium housing with staggered or"z'- -� r shaped lots. i , I t rj "Z"-shaped lots i allow a larger backyard than rectangular lots would Atrium space 4,500 sq ft lot 1,400 sq. ft. dwelling 0r2 (r 0H (• /4"A-4\-9.- o-�aC, .rnc ,,c.E. Section 4700 Bufferyards The amount of land and the type and amount of planting specified for eac.. bufferyard requirement of this Chapter are designed to ameliorate nuisances between adjacent land uses or between a land use and a road. The plantinc units required of bufferyards have been formulated to insure that they do, in fact, function as "buffers." Bufferyards shall be requires to separate land uses of different intensit;=s • from each other in order to eliminate or minimize potential nuisances such as _ dirt, litter, noise, glare of lights , signs, and unsightly buildings or parking areas, or to provide spacing to reduce adverse impacts of noise, odor, or danger from fires or explosions. The minimum setback required between any building and the center of the right-of-way of any street shall be the sum total of the minimum distances required for the minimum half-width right-of-way of such street (see Section _ 4703) plus the width of the required bufferyards , plus the width of the required easement of access , if any (see Section 4905) . The minimum half-width right-of-way requirements (as measured from the center of the right-of-way are: Local Street 33 feet Collector Street 50 feet Arterial Street 60 feet Freeway 10C feet Any street yard required pursuant to Section 4700 shall not be less than 15 feet when adjacent to any collector or arterial street or freeway. The buffer- - yard shall be located as far away from the existing right-of-way line as is feasible in accordance with the requirements of this Section . COMMENTARY: One of zoning' s most important functions is the division of land uses into Districts which, in theory, contain compatible uses. Under conventional zoning, the location of Dis- tricts is supposed to provide adequate protection to all uses. In practice however this is often not the case as different Districts must necessarily abut each other, usually to the detriment of the uses allowed in the less intensive Zoning District. Performance - zoning attempts to catagorize land uses by both the type of use proposed and its development intensity with' respect to the type and intensity of permitted surrounding land uses. Bufferyards are - required to separate these differing uses to insure that each use is afforded adequate protection. I - ... I - 4-55 - • Section 4701 Determination of B uffervard Requirements • A . To determine the type of bufferyard required between two adiace: parcels or between a parcel and a street refer to Section 4704 , Table of B ufferyard Type Requirements and identify the bufferyard required — pursuant to one of the following procedures: ( Required data regarding intensity classes is determined by Section 4601 and regarding street classification by Section 4902) 1. If any adjoining property is improved , determine the required bufferyard by cross referencing the "proposed land use intensity class" with the "adjacent land use intensity class." Identify the required bufferyara type. 2. If any adjoining property is vacant, determine the required - bufferyard by cross referencing the "proposed land use intensity class" with the "adjacent vacant zoning land use District" . 3. If a collector street adjoins the property , identify the land use across the street as either residential, nonresidential or vacant and - determine the required bufferyard by cross referencing the "proposed land use intensity class" with the "land use across collector street" . 4. If any adjoining property is a freeway or arterial highway determine the required bufferyard by cross referencing the "proposed land use intensity class" with either "freeway" or "arterial" highway. 5. If any adjoining property is located within a zoned municipality, the Zoning Officer shall investigate the applicable municipal zoning district regulations and shall determine which district established by this Ordinance is most equivalent. Requirements for bufferyards shall then be the same as if the adjoining property were zoned in the equivalent County zoning district. B . Knowing bufferyard type, refer to Section 4705 , " Bufferyard Require- ments." Section 4702 Bufferyaras: Location Bufferyards shall be located along the perimeter of a lot or parcel. Where a parcel extends into the center line of an existing road , the bufferyard snail be located along the ultimate rights-of-way line of said road. Bufferyards shall extend to the lot line , parcel boundary line or rights-of-way line, except where easements, covenants or natural feature:: may require the bufferyard to be set back from the property line. Section 4703 Determination of Bufferyard Requirements Exceptions: A . Where there exists a "panhandle shaped" parcel and the panhandle portion is intended or being used solely for access , the bufferyard requirements along the panhandle may be reduced to the bufferyard requirement of the proposed land use intensity abutting a residential street. • B . Plant material existing on a parcel which meets the bufferyard planting requirements of location , size and species may be counted toward the total bufferyard plant material requirements. C . B ufferyard plant materials existing on an adjacent developed parcel of land may be counted toward total plant material requirements; provided that the minimum bufferyard width is provided and a voluntary agree- ment with the adjoining landowner can be negotiated in accordance the provisions of Section 4708, subsection B . • • - • Section 4705 Bufferyard Requirements A . The following bufferyard illustrations graphically indicate the specifi- cations of each bufferyard. Bufferyard requirements are stated in terms of the width of the bufferyard and the number of plant units required per one hundred (100) linear feet of bufferyard. The requirements of a bufferyard may be satisfied by any of the options illustrated. The "plant unit multiplier" is a factor by which the basic number of plant - materials required for a given bufferyard is determined in accordance with the selected width of that yard. The type and quantity of plant materials required by each bufferyard , and each bufferyard option , are specified in this Section. Section 4810 specifies size and mix of plant _ materials. Appendix A specifies species. Only those plant materials _ identified in this appendix , or their equivalents as determined by the Zoning Officer, shall satisfy the requirements of this Chapter. - Commentary: The options within any bufferyard are designed to be equivalent in terms of their effectiveness in mitigating the impact of adjoining uses. Cost equivalence between options was attempted where possible. Generally , the plant materials which are identified as acceptable are determined by the type(s) of soil present on the site. The following illustrations have mathematically rounded the number of plant units required for each option within a given bufferyard. In actual practice, mathematical rounding would be applied to the total amount of plant material required by a total - t length of bufferyard , not to each one hundred (100) foot length of bufferyard. All of the following illustrations are drawn to scale and depict the bufferyard according to the average projected canopy diameter of plant materials at five (5) years after planting. B. Each illustration depicts the total bufferyard required between two uses. _ I C. Whenever a wall , fence , or berm is required within a bufferyard, these are shown as "structure required" in the bufferyard illustrations, i I wherein their respective specifications are also shown. The erection and maintenance of all required structures shall be the responsibility of the higher intensity use. Whenever a wall is required in addition to a berm, the wall shall be located between the berm and the higher intensity use in order to provide maximum sound absorption. 0. All bufferyard areas shall be maintained free from all forms of develop- I ment or storage of equipment or materials except as allowed for under Section 4706 (Use of Bufferyards) . A ground cover of vegetative or organic material shall be provided. Bufferyards shall be maintained free from junk or debris. Dead or diseased vegetation shall be removed and replaced with healthy vegetation. The responsibility to maintain and replace plant materials shall be that of the landowner on whose property the plant material needing maintenance or replacement is located. E. The density and type of bufferyard planting shall be arranged to achieve reasonable protection to adjoining less intensive uses. - 4..........••••=••••••••••=smimmimir . 11 •TS jNICI4) 0 r C L E -r OJ r6 O1 t,/) CO CO U U C..) O O O LL L C 0 rp • C Cr 4.d 0 VI N O U O W Li C7 2 •--• •7 .• L C N r CV C 4J C7 C7 C7 C7 i pf • 'r C C) m Q Q . .a m m m CO ea e C r0 +I i 'CI r I U _ O) rp r 0) L r 0) ++ OC CO O C Li C. 2 •--• '7 '7 4- >. • IOC 4-1 N 0 S- 4./•'^ 4 C 'r• .0 0) t0 CU Ca 4- . O +4-3U W CO V C..) C L •••.. ^ C9 = �- 7 4- 4- - 0 U C ea 0 O N 0 N • C Q N CO CO L) C..) C La. C7 = .--. C) W 0 N VI 17 0 C - 4J L eO C.) U CO C..) CO L L7 L 2 ...e a IIS MICMI O O) • 01 C CI- 'r ep r N 4.0 S. 0 N C - • L C CZ • O) ea C•'1 r I" CI. J N e0 r _ .� VI I .. r- C C) ^ N >1 S S E • Q1 •-J ••- )- W C C.) CO I I v a • CU 4- .. N 4, = ..- r •r • o' Co •-. W C) c.) I II Lei C R N C) • I-- L O) ••- Z rZ 4J 4J Lt) -0 C C _ n = L r. 2 = 2 C UI I I CON• W r0 N CC ?, N V1 ..- C) .-• L rp ID N N • Cr 4- 01 U 1.0 CO CO CO C.) I I I U U C) OC 0. W4- • C u L CC .o_ . 4� X • • r 111. Li) in..-- IL 0. 0) 0) N Id) W W W I I IC)• C O L N r- >- .0 4J X C 0 0 ID F- ++ O W O) L Z CO ..W4-) rnw 0 •.- r ! CL' 4-) OJ C •--. Q O O O I I C.) C) W I) to tp r- Y L N 0 Z)CU CI) 0 r O ` CC O)v ea N U O) f") r W 4- "'7= S.. Li 0) • C9 O O CO C W CO = •--• '7 L N 01 - r Um IL Lan QC U N ea = 0 C .r ea CO (1) r-. ep .C .- S.. • . _ Q J LL .0 NC.) Co C C W CO = •-• '7 3 t..) W 0 la C 4J O N C ) .O •' + eta W '- O L 0) J N 4J O) N • CO .0- U •--• I U O C W CO = 0-) '-7 r "0 ..- .):C ..0 O) e0r l-- 4) N r N 4J C C -- , r. C O t0 Q 0) U e- 0 "0 . _ Cu VI !\ N .0 0) i .17 0) 4W L r = um C 0) N - 0 N = N C t C +) 0.-0 0) N Q N •-• .. U O C 4J to a L ria C _ N 0. J .-+ U .--t IN C'') Q IC) 10 r- CO 01 .-• N Mik 4o U .-r — N O N N N G,.) p LL LL. _ J C) .r e0 0 0 4.1 c a 444, C) .-- •--, N N 'CI N tel N Cr CZ L- LS- .”4 T if/ r0 N O L C) CC y C) L ^ _ L w in O N 4- C0 �6 C) N U NN o C] m coC] V V D W f4- 0 o v os U Q R7 vOf 4-14.00 ;dS. C ' C) C - Cl) Cl) N N N N N CO V C) 1a T • J N -0 C) y = L c v +-) 0 c 'r O • S.- 4-4 4-) N fa 3 17 CJ C) O L _ .-- L T fp - w 7 Cr L ip C) y C C C U G W Li.. CM " L C CJ Q i0 t ar _ in N 7 fp C) �o v • C � C) >, c 44- .0. _ a ▪ c L• LL Li- W = C] = CO U p N r LL L 3) fp rC 44. C t C C) U O O ▪ •:J 3 • C)ID - Q L 441 GU O CJ ami v- O CJ N.� O y y _ O N .^ O O C 4/1 C) L N J^� h- fd 3) • V .--� N C 7 L) ID CC) CT BUFFERYARD Ag Raspberry Bushes • Thorny Understory 0 Thorny Shrubs Hedgerow Shrubs Viz REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' 100' Structure Required :tet;,i .r• . 'iFi .r•i', 76 Raspberry Bushes 30' i..• 4, 60" woven • -,.. �,' t :•� wire fence 0 ti d 20 ThornyUnderstory �,� ��+� � 60" � 4401%• � ¢ ¢� woven 38 Thorny Shrubs 25' 400 a nO„�', • wire fence • 10 Thorny Understory ' Oft , d 38 Thorny Shrubs 20' our; ase sfat,� 60" woven 34 Hedgerow Shrubs , ;; ,flllll'n 11111A II I );1,11111rh . 11114 In wire fence Non-Ag Use T 38 Thorny Shrubs b �Q �a;,d 60" woven 34 Hedgerow Shrubs 15 „'I11IUtWn II .peri ;Illl�n lllll'nl tut" i 1111.1 wire fence y Agricultural Use NOTE: Required fences and hedges shatl be located as dose as possible to the • property line between the two uses. • • BUFFERYARD B - REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' 1 Canopy Trees :pre: 2 Understory Trees t Shrubs _ Evergreen Trees/ rt Conifers 1 - Plmt Unit 100' Multiplier _— I .4 25' 0 I _ I .6 20' itI 0 I .8 15'I At; i 1.0 to 1 4. BUFFERYARD C REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/I00' I Canopy Trees 're' 2 Understory Trees C) 3 Shrubs d Evergreen Trees/ Conifers Plant Unit 100' Multiplier 1 1 + 11 1 .4 25' 0 .6 20' 0_I64 .8 15 r =�_�: d3 _1 1 .0 l -Ai d • • BUFFERYARD D REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' — 2 Canopy Trees = `= 4 Understory Trees 6 Shrubs d — Evergreen Trees/ gib Conifers — Plant Unit 100' Multiplier 4 30' At, .86)p - a 1 .0 15'1 $a �� =► o • BUFFERYARD E REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' 3 Canopy Trees :7e' 6 Understory Trees 0 9 Shrubs d Evergreen Trees/ >� Conifers Plant Unit Multiplier L 100 Structure 1 Rep.ed . .6 30' (0 IN dd . (38 .8 25' 1t $ "vAft,o 1.0 20.1 _eAP .14 4O _r,_ j .%`d _0 v Lower Intensity Use \►% _We to y I Higher Intensity Use BUFFERYARD F - I REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' •' 1 5 Canopy Trees AA. 10 Understory Trees 0 15 Shrubs a I Evergreen Trees/ >� - Conifers Plant Unit100' Structure Multiplier J, } Requred 6 30' aodp ' PIM 0 � . dpa 'or dita to 0 ori i 0 201 �1 .0. t'.`r`� a / e�Jt � J� , SNL. . .%& a _ .1O_ 1;4;7,,.Z` el lire i -,.';'� 2 .. Lower Intensity Use 8 10'1 44 41 4r ?r.:-`4.".r ^0't 4, Higher Intensity Use — BUFFERYARD G • REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' 4 Conopy Trees ` 6 Understory Trees 0 24 Shrubs d Plant Unitloo' Structure 12 Evergreen Trees/ Et Multiplier I Required Conifers 1 .6 4O' d� D gc.,-9D _ r s * .1:28.`/r. :... .E330' �0 �` $1 • • • S T N# ASP1.4 • _u• .75 20' ,�='= '1`.`,o►aa �•i� �,' Lower Intensity Use IS' it wZaAQar:w:-rciars U '% F4 �I•.-.. i��-.1 '. _ Hiller Intensity Use _______,7 -. --, BUFFERYARD H . . . - -) - I REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/I00' .... i 5 Canopy Trees ,it 7.5 Understory Trees 0 , 30 Shrubs d 15 Evergreen Trees/ a ' Conifers Plant Unit 100' Structure , Multiplier 1 j Regured r II Cli�a .1%. M ica .6 50 ..w,1:20 �, d .. ii � r 1.;.lir .,w _ 6. 0 .8 40' as;.as' da =CP -►Z or - ;10 aa :: ; .t 1t aa ' _ i • :Ai.� . .1. ,,�?sak.4.,,,:� ft, B2 I 30' 'r�� ' 1�-�,►'tVI�!'•r.�t •t'dt o r «.. a — I Lower Intensity Use ,b ��sv dMiar-41, , �'Y��.t .6 .41.14.1..;:..--'�iAt it/ a K; r5 / ii /sari'/ii r...iii/J//i _ y Higher Intensity Use — I. 1 _ _ 3UFFERYIARD . Plant Unit 100 Srrucriae Multiplier Reginred REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' 6 Canopy Trees ��` 00�d =4? €..� •� 'i\- '- r� �� ,1 a g Understory Trees 1 . .6 75' a A4, a 0 e 36 Shrubs d q. diD dl" d _ika 0 Co 00 18 -vergreen Trees/ IID ). •,-:g Conifers :AAP awe° 1: rta B -.: 8• 50' team/ :1=.: r'� d ��. or 0.4 d:,: • -...— a i7,M.,ii N q : 411tH r -' �.� +.a B 1 .0 40' X 19 a„{� ., �.�.i-i,1��, V: or ovir.tizikta_12_. i="f� :. _...�. tL'rait... F4 Lower Intensity Use T _s• .6 25' V tHrii:;�'� !� i'Vit` F6 ta Iiil%I'...IM 4, Higher Intensity Use BUFFERYARD J ..., I REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' I:: 8 Canopy Trees ;It i,- 12 Understory Trees 0 Plant Unit Structure III Multiplier 100 Required - 48 Shrubs a _. ii 24 Evergreen Trees/ a Conifers _1kp d 0 gd ®d r him 517,� ag :fix•-�� a aI .''1..�:.: •t;'t /t.� � 3 I .0 .. ! 2 A 50 � 4`•1 iiNi4t 1_: .t . or I ji w. r�ti ` - II - ` �. 1_., BW _ 40' 1� %t �24 a� ��l _" 1 y; `' .1''�i�� F6 d�.�tLi ,. �:1i;,. 's .tom t;;,;_� — Lower Intensity Use T .s*�+` i11•,, .mow g.. 2 , , Higher Intensity Use _ ` 1 BUFFERYARD S , & S2 S , Plant Unit 100' REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' Multiplier I Canopy Tree V. 1 .0 lo' _ � 52 REQUIRED PLANT UNITS/100' 2 Canopy Trees . l 4-71 FE \ CES TYPICAL MINIMUM SYMBOL HEIGHT MATERIAL OPACITY F 44" - - - - _ � I 25% Wood Rail f At' AAAAAAAAAAAAAA'\/\ F2 4 8" 50% Wood Picket • F3 6' - 95% F4 8` - L _ ! Wood Stockade 11111111111101111111111111111111 11111111MIIIIIMMIIMININE 95% MEMINEEEMMEMMilliiF 1111.11111.111111111=.1111111.11111.111111111=.1116 111.1=111.111.1..1.1.1..= • Masonry Wall (Required) (Poured Concrete, Cement Block, Brick, etc.) 4-72 — • BERVS SYMBOL HEIGHT MATERIAL . B, 4� EARTH . B2 B3 6► 0". BERV WALLS SYMBOL HEIGHT BW, 4' BERM W/6' MASONRY WALL BW2 5' BERM W/7' MASONRY WALL BW3 6' BERM '"/8' MASONRY WALL LESS! MORE ! i INTENSIVE j INTENSIVE J � r 4. �( m 4. r Section 4706 Use of Bufferyards: A. - A bufferyard maybe used for Y passive recreation and it may contain pedestrian, bicycle or equestrian trails, provided that: a) no plant material is eliminated, b) the total width of the bufferyard is maintain- -- -1 aintain- _ l ed, and c) all other regulations of this Ordinance are met. Utility easements may be included within bufferyards provided that the utility requirements and bufferyard requirements are compatible and canopy trees - 1 are not planted within said easement. Commentary: This Section provides flexibility for the passive use of larger bufferyards. It enables public or private use of buffer- yards for limited recreational uses, so long as the total required buffer is provided. Passive recreation includes activities associat- ed with extremely low noise levels and individual activities: i .e. birdwatching, walking, jogging, bycycling, horseback riding and picnicking. Motorized activities of any kind are not included, nor activities which involve competition, large groups or special - 1 facilities such as tennis courts, ski hills, skating rinks or swimming pools. Lighting, if provided, is extremely low level and associated with pedestrian walkways in "campus type" settings. _ Section 4707 Ownership of Bufferyards _ Bufferyards may remain in the ownership of the original developer (and as- signs) of a land use, or they may be subjected to deed restrictions and subsequently conveyed to any consenting grantees, such as adjoining land- owners , a park or forest preserve district, or an open-space or conservation - I group, provided that any such conveyance adequately guarantees the protection and maintenance of the bufferyards for the purposes of this Chapter. Section 4708 Excess Bufferyard Where the bufferyard required between a land use and vacant land turns out to be greater than that bufferyard which is required between the first use and - the subsequently developed use, the following options apply: A. The subsequent use shall provide one half ( .5) of the bufferyard required pursuant to Section 4704 and 4705 and the existing use may expand into the original bufferyard area, provided that the resulting total buffer- yard between the two uses meets the bufferyard requirements of Section 4704 and 4705. B. When an existing bufferyard provides the total bufferyard required between two uses pursuant to Section 4704 and 4705 , the developer of the - subsequently developed use may negotiate an agreement with the owner of _ the existing bufferyard to share the bufferyard. Provided that such an _ agreement can be negotiated, the initial use may provide the second use some or all of its required bufferyard and/or extra land on which it might develop. The existing use may reduce its excess buffer by trans- ferring part or all of the excess buffer to the adjoining landowner to serve as its buffer. Any remaining excess buffer area may be used by the existing use for expansion of that use or for transfer by it to the adjoining landowner to expand that adjoining use. Commentary: Since vacant land may not be developed for years after the first use is established, this provision attempts to address the uncertainty about the higrforv?r4 . 1 It would not be equitable to require that the second use be respon- sible for all the buffer needed. This provision makes it possible to require buffering from the initial use established and, there- after, if more buffer exists than is required, makes it possible to utilize land originally set aside for bufferyard. Section 4709 Contractural Reduction of Bufferyard Abutting Vacant Land When a land use is proposed adjacent to vacant land, the owners of both parcels may enter into a contractual relationship to provide for a bufferyard equivalent to the bufferyard which shall ultimately be required. Such a contract shall include: a. A statement by the owner of the vacant land of an intent to develop at no greater than a specified land use intensity class which the reduced bufferyards would reflect, and b. An agreement that the owner of the vacant land assumes all responsibility for additional bufferyards required by the development of his parcel with a more intense use than had been agreed upon. The contract shall be in the form of a covenant or deed restriction, recorded with the County Recorder, which shall run with the land. Commentary: This contract mechanism provides a means for avoiding the provision of too large a buffer in areas where the owners of vacant land have relatively firm plans for the ultimate use of their land; which plans do not include land use intensity requiring the greatest bufferyards. Section 4710 Bufferyard Exceptions a. When a land use is proposed adjacent to a lake , a wetland, a high-tension powerline property which is at least three hundred (300' ) feet in width or a railroad right-of-way, no plant - material shall be required if a bufferyard width equal to or greater than the following is provided: Bufferyard Type Bufferyard Width AG 60' B 30' 35 ' D 45' E 60' _ I F 80' G 100' H 125 ' 1 175 ' ' 250' _ 1 1 I _ _ I I Section 4600 Land Use Intensity Class Standards In keeping with the concept that performance should be the relevant - measure of any land use regulations, land uses are classified according to their respective impacts (all uses falling in a given intensity class - are considered to have an equal impact on neighboring uses ) . A developer _ may choose to develop a use at a lesser intensity which, with minimal bufferyards, will minimize nuisances to neighbors or provide denser _ bufferyards and develop at greater intensity. The impacts of greater intensity may include greater impervious surface coverage, with - associated increased runoff , heat generation, reduced percolation and open space, increased traffic generation with associated noise and congestion, and other nuisances. Thus, for example, an office use may - meet the standards at any . of the intensity classes but performance standards are specified for each intensity class. Exceeding any single - standard in an intensity class moves the use to the appropriate higher _ number intensity class. r r 4-80 1(4 0 a ch gr. a a U .t a 4 4 Q 4 Q EF+ 0 U a U a U U U U U U U co E vl E u) U) v ha z p Isl z a . I : • n) iki czrz as az z z z z z z y E 67 TAN tn E .� c.4 E t •-1 N cn In 44D n m ch D yfij y N 111 ; N aU NU Cl)I U) aaaaaa 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pti El M U) Q 0 - ❑ 01 .. + pa O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y W r•1 r-- If1 111 0 0 Y1 In O O O O i (y� •"1 e"i N lO O O O O .. N N .--4N to e1 H Ul0 • W Ira 44 Ir/ k• la Gu Gu Gu kr Gr H i aDI 4~ ~ CO M In 0 in 0 K1 O 0 an O u1 co O U N Ee•1 en P'1 el e•1 e•1 e•1 en e v It 10 >1 W we 0 0 Gil - b M U _ �! E ►a Z rti CK O 0 en U1 O co a o O o .1.411..i •-I .-a N N rt in F•e2 I I • 1 • • • 0 k7 En to [A y O) U e. i OUO (./ E M 4 M in co in O O in it, H H > lk. E .-1 N N en of Q 4,-) in in Z i W O g 1 • I • 1 • r• a) '0 fs7 4-4 U7 O ►1 .-I ad pa d H CG A d Q ill 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H U) g N 1 • 1 • 1 • • .--1 iQ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 eO - —I .- •-1 .I ,C M tn ti)«v. ♦ VI • In W CO W WJe U) U) U) U) U) (1) 14 W0 W O W e11 U) U) U)0 a o a0 r Q 4 • • • • • • i FFz zHz HU) CA Cl) U) cn ti) c W F W H z W E U) U) U) U) IInn E 0 0 0 0 0 0 a O ] ] U) a E 1 0 a a a a cw a W 6-1 a C4 s a Q a a a Q a < • Section 4700 Buffervards The amount of land and the type and amount of planting specified for each -- bufferyard requirement of this Chapter are designed to ameliorate nuisances between adjacent land uses or between a land use and a road. The planting units required of bufferyards have been formulated to insure _ that they do, in fact, function as "buffers. " Bufferyards shall be required to separate land uses of different intensities from each other in order to eliminate or minimize potential - - nuisances such as dirt, litter, noise, glare of lights , signs, and unsightly buildings or parking areas, or to provide spacing to reduce - adverse impacts of noise, odor, or danger from fires or explosions. - COMMENTARY: One of zoning' s most important functions - is the division of land uses into Districts which, in theory, contain compatible uses. Under conventional zoning, the location of Districts is supposed to provide adequate protection to all uses. In practice however - this is often not the case as different Districts must necessarily abut each other, usually to the detriment of the uses allowed in the less intensive Zoning District. - Performance zoning attempts to catagorize land uses by both the type of use proposed and its development intensity with respect to the type and intensity of permitted surrounding land uses. Bufferyards are required to separate these differing uses to insure that each use is afforded adequate protection. u • • 4-82 Section 4701 Determination of Bufferyard Requirements: A. To determine the type of bufferyard required between two adjacent parcels or between a parcel and a street refer to Section 4704 , Table of Bufferyard Type Requirements and identify the bufferyard • required pursuant to one of the following procedures : (Required data regarding intensity classes is determined by Section 4601 and regarding street classification by Section 4902 ) 1. If any adjoining property is improved, determine the required bufferyard by cross referencing the "proposed land use intensity class" with the "adjacent land use intensity class . " Identify the required bufferyard type. 2 . If any adjoining property is vacant, determine the required bufferyard by cross referencing the "proposed land use intensity class" with the "adjacent vacant zoning land use District" . 3. If a collector street adjoins the property, identify the land use across the street as either residential , nonresidential or vacant and determine the required bufferyard by cross referencing the "proposed land use intensity class" with the "land use across collector street" . 4. If any adjoining property is a freeway or arterial highway determine the required bufferyard by cross referencing the "proposed land use intensity class" with either "freeway" or "arterial" highway. 5. If any adjoining property is located within a zoned municipality, the Zoning Officer shall investigate the applicable municipal zoning district regulations and shall determine which district established by this Ordinance is most equivalent . Requirements for bufferyards shall then be the same as if the adjoining property were zoned in the equivalent County zoning district. B. Knowing bufferyard type, refer to Section 4705, "Bufferyard Require- ments . " Section 4702 Bufferyards: Location: Bufferyards shall be located along the perimeter of a lot or parcel , except in the following instances: A. Where a parcel extends to the centerline of an existing street or where an adjacent existing street contains less than the right-of-way width specified in section 4901 , the bufferyard shall be located along the ultimate right-of-way line of said street . The _ minimum half-width right-of-way requirements , unless otherwise established through the subdivision approval process, (as measured from the center of the right-of-way) are: 4-83 C. WIDTH OF ACCESS. The width of access driveways shall be determined by the appropriate highway authority having jurisdiction over the roadway from which access is being taken. However, in no case shall an individual driveway width be greater than thirty five ( 35 ) feet. Where a highway authority has not established driveway width requirements and standards, the standards andrequirements used by the Lake County Division of Transportation shall apply. D. CURB CUTS AT INTERSECTIONS. - A curb cut for a corner parcel at the intersection of any streets shall be located the maximum practical distance from the center of the intersecting streets, without intrusion into any required bufferyard other than a street bufferyard. The number and location of the curb cut must be approved by the appropriate highway authority having jurisdiction over the street from which access is being taken. Where a highway authority has not established curb cut requirements and standards, the standards and requirements used by the Lake County Division of Transportation shall apply. E. EASEMENTS OF ACCESS. 1. If a parcel is to be developed with any non-residential land use, an easement of access shall be provided by the property owner to adjoining properties which front on the same street and which may be developed or are developed with non-residential land uses. Easements of access shall have a minimum width of thirty ( 30 ) feet and shall be situated parallel to the street right-of-way line abutting both parcels and at the minimum right-of-way line unless otherwise established through the subdivision approval process . Easements of access shall be maintained by the property owner . 2. The Planning Director, after consultation and timely written consent of the appropriate highway authority, may waive the requirement for an easement of access required above in those cases where unusual topography or site conditions would render such an easement of no useable benefit to adjoining properties . 3. The Planning Director, after consultation and timely written consent of the appropriate highway authority, may approve the vacation of an easement of access in those cases where adjoining parcels are subsequently developed with a residential use. SECTION 4906. Table of Average Daily Trip Generation Rates by Land Use: The purpose of this Section is the establishment of the amount of traffic which may be expected to result from the development of particular land uses . The total amount of traffic generated may affect the amount of land required to sustain the land use intensity established by Section 4601 (Table of Land Use Intensity Class Standards ) . It may also affect the minimum bufferyard required by Sections 4601 and 4700-4710 (Bufferyards ) . 4-117 Relative to the figures listed, GFA = Per one thousand ( 1000 ) square feet_ of gross floor area, DU = per dwelling unit and acre = per acre of lan' actively utilized by the listed use. Use Category Land Use Trip Generation Rates Per Day Industrial Industrial Park 62 . 8/acre Manufacturing 38 . 9/acre Mini-warehouse . 28/unit Truck Terminal 81 . 9/acre Warehouse 4 . 88/GFA All other industrial uses 52 . 4/acre Institutional Church 7 . 7/GFA Community or recreation center 25/GFA Day-care center 79/GFA Hospital 12. 2/Bed Library 42/GFA Nursing Home 2. 7/bed Schools, elementary . 91/student high 1 . 1/student college 2. 2/student All other institutional uses 19/GFA Financial Banks, S&L ' s and all other financial 169/GFA institutions 169/GFA Banks and S&L's, 290/GFA drive-in Office Business or professional office 17. 7/GFA Medical or Dental office or clinic 54 . 6/GFA Office & research park 276 . 6/acre All other office uses 20 . 0/GFA Recreational Amusement Park or Fairground 202 . 0/acre . Boat launching ramp 4 . 8/ramp Bowling Alley 33 . 0/lane Golf Course 6 . 9/acre Outdoor Theater 125/acre Park with swimming area 7 . 4/acre Park with hiking, picnicking or camping area . 5/acre Race track 125/acre Swimming Pool 18 . 5/100 sq. ft. of water area Tennis Court, outdoor 27 . 0/court Tennis, Racquetball or handball court or club, indoor 11. 7/GFA All other indoor recreational uses 19/GFA All other outdoor recreational uses 6 . 0/acre 4-118 Residential Single family 10 . 0/D.U. Multiple family 6 . 1/D.U. Townhouse 8.7/D.U. Mobile Home 4. 8/D.U. Retirement community & elderly housing 3 . 3/D.U. Resort & Recreational rental housing 12/D.U. .-A11 other Residential uses 5.6/D.U. Retail Sales and/or Service Discount Store 70 .1/GFA - Grocery stores and supermarkets 125. 4/GFA . .. Grocery store, convenience 730/GFA Hotel or motel 10. 5/unit Restaurant (standard, sit-down) 164/GFA Restaurant, Fast-Food 680/GFA Retail sales or store 62/GFA Service business 31/GFA Shopping centers: under 100,000 sq. ft . 82 . 0/GFA 100, 000 to 1, 000,000 sq. ft. 50 . 0/GFA over 1,000, 000 sq. ft. 37 . 0/GFA Tavern 133/GFA All other Retail and/or service uses 31/GFA 4-119 I `! '11 ARTICLE 13 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1 13-100 GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION 13-101 Purpose and Intent 13-102 Applicability 13-103 Administration 13-104 Standards 13-105 Landscaping Plan and Planting Requirements 13-106 Maintenance PART 2 13-200 PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING SECTION 13-201 Interior Parking Lot Landscaping 13-202 Peripheral Parking Lot Landscaping PART 3 13-300 TRANSITIONAL SCREENING AND BARRIERS SECTION 13-301 Transitional Screening and Barriers,General Provisions 13-302 Transitional Screening Requirements 13-303 Barrier Requirements 13-304 Transitional Screening and Barrier Waivers and Modifications PART 4 13-400 TREE COVER REQUIREMENTS SECTION 13-401 Tree Cover Requirement Standards 13-402 Tree Preservation Credit 13-403 Tree Planting Credit 13-404 Modifications,Waivers and Exceptions Supp.No.30,1-25-93 13-1 ARTICLE 13 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING PART 1 13-100 GENERAL PROVISIONS 13-101 Purpose and Intent The purpose and intent of this Article is to preserve and promote the health, safety and general welfare of the public; to facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community; to conserve natural resources including adequate air and water; to conserve properties and their values; to preserve the character of an area by preventing the harmful effects of prejudicial uses; and to encourage the appropriate use of land. More specifically this Article is intended to make incompatible uses compatible by requiring a screen or buffer between the uses in order to rninimi7e the harmful impact of noise, dust and other debris,mo- tor vehicle headlight glare or other artificial light intrusion, and other objectionable activities or impacts conducted on or created by an adjoining or nearby use. Additionally, this Article is intended to require the landscaping of certain parking lots in order to reduce the harmful effects of wind and air turbu- lence, heat and noise, and the glare of motor vehicle lights; to preserve underground water reservoirs and to permit the return of precipitation to the ground water strata; to act as a natural drainage system and ameliorate storm water drainage problems; to reduce the level of carbon dioxide and return pure oxygen to the atmosphere; to prevent soil erosion; to provide shade; and to en- hance the blighted appearance of parking lots. Additionally, this Article is intended to require the preservation and planting of trees on sites to provide a specified percentage of tree cover in ten years. 13-102 Applicability The provisions of this Article shall apply to all development where site plans are filed in accordance with the provisions of Article 17, except the following: 1. Site plans filed pursuant to a special permit, special exception or variance approved prior to December 10, 1977, or 2. Site plans filed pursuant to proffered conditions or a development plan ap- proved by the Board of Supervisors prior to December 10, 1977. 13-103 Administration The Director shall be responsible for the administration of this Article. 13-104 Standards The following standards shall apply to the preservation, installation and mainte- nance of all landscaping, tree cover, screening and barriers required by the provisions of this Article. 1. The planting and maintenance of all trees and shrubs shall be in accord- ance with the provisions of the Public Facilities Manual. 2. All trees required by the provisions of this Article shall be a minimum of six(6)feet in overall height at the time of planting. 3. Generally, planting required by this Ordinance should be in an irregular line and spaced at random. Su pp.No.30,1-25-93 13-3 13-105 FAIRFAX COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE 4. Existing vegetation which is suitable for use in compliance with the re- quirements of this Article, and which is protected according to the provisions of the Public Facilities Manual, when supplemented so as to provide planting and screening in accordance with the purpose and intent of this Article, may and should be used as required planting. 13-105 Landscaping Plan and Planting Requirements 1. A landscaping plan shall be submitted as part of every site plan required by the provisions of Article 17. 2. Such landscaping plans shall be drawn to scale, including dimensions and distances, and clearly delineate all existing and proposed parking spaces or other vehicle areas, access aisles, driveways, and the location, size and description of all landscaping materials and tree cover in accordance with the Public Facilities Manual and the requirements of this Article. 3. The landscaping measures and tree cover required by this Article shall be shown on such plan, and shall be completed according to specifications prior to approval of any Residential or Non-Residential Use Permit in ac- cordance with the provisions of Sect. 18-704. 13-106 Maintenance 1. The owner, or his agent, shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair and replacement of all landscaping materials and barriers as may be re- quired by the provisions of this Article. 2. All plant material shall be tended and maintained in a healthy growing condition,replaced when necessary and kept free of refuse and debris. 3. Fences and walls shall be maintained in good repair. Openings within the barrier= may be required by the Director for accessibility to an area for necessary maintenance. 4. When required tree cover is provided on individual lots in residential dis- tricts, the homeowner, subsequent to Residential Use Permit issuance, shell not be precluded from adding, removing or relocating tree cover. Supp.No.30,1-25-93 13-4 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 13-202 PART 2 13-200 PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING 13.201 Interior Parking Lot Landscaping 1. Any parking lot of twenty (20) or more spaces shall be provided with interior landscaping covering not less than five (5) percent of the total area of the parking lot. Such landscaping shall be in addition to any planting or land- scaping within six (6) feet of a building, planting or landscaping required as peripheral planting by Sect. 202 below, and transitional screening as may be required by Sections 301 and 302 below. 2. The primary landscaping materials used in parking lots shall be trees which provide shade or are capable of providing shade at maturity. Shrubs and other live planting material may be used to complement the tree landscaping, but shall not be the sole contribution to the landscaping. 3. The landscaping areas shall be reasonably dispersed throughout the parking lot. 4. The interior dimensions of any planting area shall be sufficient to protect all landscaping materials planted therein in conformance with the Public Facil- ities Manual. 5. The Director may waive or modify the requirements of this Section for any use in an I district wherein vehicles are parked or stored, provided the use is screened from view of all adjacent property and all public streets. 6. The Board, in conjunction with the approval of a rezoning or special exception, may approve a waiver or modification of the requirements of this Section. Such waiver or modification may be approved: A. For an interim use of a specified duration, and/or where deemed ap- propriate due to the location, size, surrounding area or configuration of the parking lot; and B. Where such waiver or modification will not have any deleterious effect on the existing or planned development of adjacent properties. 13.202 Peripheral Parking Lot Landscaping If any parking lot contains twenty(20)or more spaces and transitional screening is not required by Sections 301 and 302 below, then peripheral parking lot landscaping shall be required as follows: 1. When the property line abuts land not in the right-of-way of a street: A. A landscaping strip four(4) feet in width shall be located between the parking lot and the abutting property lines, except where driveways or other openings may necessitate other treatment. B. At least one (1) tree for each fifty (50) feet shall be planted in the landscaping strip; however, this shall not be construed as requiring the planting of trees on fifty (50) foot centers. 2. Where the property line abuts the right-of-way of a street: A. A landscaping strip ten (10) feet in width, which shall not include a sidewalk or trail, shall be located between the parking lot and the property line. B. At least one (1) tree for each forty (40) feet shall be planted in the landscaping strip; however, this shall not be construed as requiring the planting of trees on forty (40) foot centers. Reprint 12/90 13-5 13-202 FAIRFAX COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE C. Where peripheral landscaping required by this Section conflicts with street planting regulations of the Virginia Department of Transpor- tation, the regulations of the latter shall govern. 3 The Board, in conjunction with the approval of a rezoning or special exception, may approve a waiver or modification of the requirements of this Section. Such waiver or modification may be approved: A. For an interim use of a specified duration, and/or where deemed ap- propriate due to the location, size, surrounding area or configuration of the parking lot; and B. Where such waiver or modification will not have any deleterious effect on the existing or planned development of adjacent properties. Reprint 12'90 13-6 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 13-302 PART 3 13.300 TRANSITIONAL SCREENING AND BARRIERS 13-301 Transitional Screening and Barriers, General Provisions 1. Transitional screening and barriers shall be provided in accordance with the matrix presented at the end of this Article and in accordance with the provi- sions of this Section and Sections 302 and 303 below. 2. Transitional screening and barriers shall be provided within the zoning dis- trict and on the lot of the use indicated in the left column of the matrix where it is contiguous or across the street from land used or zoned for uses indicated across the top of the matrix. 3. Where the structure is to contain more than one use or category of uses as presented in the matrix, the more stringent requirements of the matrix shall apply;provided, however,that the Director may allow the lesser requirements of the matrix upon a finding that the need for the more stringent requirements has been eliminated by the arrangement of the uses. 4. The uses in the matrix are listed in abbreviated form. Other similar uses, as may be included in a listing presented in the district regulations, shall be subject to the same regulations as are presented for a use listed on the matrix. 5. In those instances where a proposed use and/or an existing use on the abutting property is not listed in the matrix, the Director, using the matrix as a guide, shall determine whether or not and to what extent transitional screening and barriers shall be provided. 6. In addition to the standards set forth in Articles 8 and 9 for a particular use, all uses allowed by special permit or special exception in a given district shall be required to provide transitional screening and barriers as determined by the BZA or Board, as the case may be, using the matrix as a guide. 7. In affordable dwelling unit developments which contain a mixture of different dwelling unit types, transitional screening and barriers shall not be required between different dwelling unit types within the affordable dwelling unit de- velopment. 13.302 Transitional Screening Requirements 1. Transitional screening shall be required only at the outer boundaries of a lot and shall be provided except where driveways or other openings may be re- quired. 2. Transitional screening may be provided within the required minimum yard. 3. There shall be three (3) different transitional screening requirements as iden- tified on the matrix, which shall be provided as follows: A. Transitional Screening 1 shall consist of an unbroken strip of open space a minimum of 25 feet wide and planted with: (1) One large evergreen tree with an ultimate height of 40 feet or greater for every 10 linear feet, plus one medium ever- green tree with an ultimate height of 20 to 40 feet for every 5 linear feet OR (2) With approval of the Director, one large deciduous tree with an ultimate height of 50 feet or greater for every 15 Reprint 12'90 13-7 13-302 FAIRFAX COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE linear feet plus one medium evergreen tree with an ulti- mate height of 20 to 40 feet for every 5 linear feet. B. Transitional Screening 2 shall consist of an unbroken strip of open space a minimum of 35 feet wide and planted with: (1) One large evergreen tree with an ultimate height of 40 feet or greater for every 10 linear feet, plus one medium ever- green tree with an ultimate height of 20 to 40 feet for every 5 linear feet, plus one deciduous tree with an ultimate height of 50 feet or greater for each 30 linear feet OR (2) With approval of the Director, one large deciduous tree with an ultimate height of 50 feet or greater for every 15 linear feet, plus one medium evergreen tree with an ulti- mate height of 20 to 40 feet for every 5 linear feet, plus one small deciduous tree with an ultimate height of 20 feet or less for each 12 linear feet. C. Transitional Screening 3 shall consist of an unbroken strip of open space a minimum of 50 feet wide planted with: (1) One large evergreen tree with an ultimate height of 40 feet or greater for every 10 linear feet, plus one medium ever- green tree with an ultimate height of 20 to 40 feet for every 5 linear feet, plus one large deciduous tree with an ulti- mate height of 50 feet or greater for each 30 linear feet, plus one medium evergreen shrub with an ultimate height of 12 feet or less for every 15 linear feet OR (2) With approval of the Director, one large deciduous tree with an ultimate height of 50 feet or greater for every 15 linear feet, plus one medium evergreen tree with an ulti- mate height of 20 to 40 feet for every 5 linear feet, plus one small deciduous tree with an ultimate height of 20 feet or less for each 12 linear feet,plus 7 medium evergreen shrubs with an ultimate height of 12 feet or less for each 10 linear feet. 13.303 Barrier Requirements 1. Barriers shall be generally located between the required transitional screening and the use or activity in connection with which they are required where they will most adequately screen such activities from the existing or proposed first floor level of adjoining development as determined by the Director.Any bracing, supports or posts shall be on the side of the barrier facing the use which must provide the barrier. 2. Where options are presented on the matrix for a type of barrier, such option shall be available to the developer unless otherwise qualified. 3. In certain unusual circumstances of topography, or to alleviate certain specific problems, i.e., the blocking of glare, muting of noise, etc., the Director may require the use of an earth berm or more specialized fence material in lieu of, or in combination with, any of the barrier types set forth below. Reprint 12190 13-8 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 13-304 - 4. There shall be different barrier requirements as identified on the matrix, which shall be provided as follows: A. Barrier A shall consist of a 42-48 inch wall, brick or architectural block faced on the side facing the existing use and may be required to be so faced on both sides as determined by the Director. B. Barrier B shall consist of a 42-48 inch solid wood or otherwise archi- tecturally solid fence. C. Barrier C shall consist of an evergreen hedge with an ultimate height of at least 42-48 inches and planted size of 36 inches. D. Barrier D shall consist of a 42-48 inch chain link fence and may be required by the Director to have inserts in the fence fabric, to be coated, or to be supplemented by trees and/or shrubs. E. Barrier E shall consist of a 6 foot wall, brick or architectural block faced on the side facing the existing use and may be required to be so faced on both sides as determined by the Director. F. Barrier F shall consist of a 6 foot high solid wood or otherwise archi- tecturally solid fence. G. Barrier G shall consist of a 6 foot chain link fence and may be re- quired by the Director to have inserts in the fence fabric or to be coated. H. Barrier H shall consist of one row of 6 foot trees averaging 50 feet on centers, such trees being a variety of types. This requirement may be omitted in cases where the building is 6 feet or less from the property line. 13.304 Transitional Screening and Barrier Waivers and Modifications Transitional screening and barriers may be waived or modified by the Director in any of the following circumstances. The Director may attach conditions to any waiver or modification which would assure that the results of the waiver or modification would be in accordance with the purpose and intent of this Part. 1. Transitional screening and barriers may not be required between uses that are to be developed under a common development plan or series of development plans within a PRC District or a common site plan. 2. Where the strict provisions of this Part would reduce the usable area of a lot due to lot configuration or size to a point which would preclude a reasonable use of the lot, transitional screening and/or barriers may be waived or modified by the Director where the side of a building, a barrier and/or the land between that building and the property line has been specifically designed to minimize adverse impact through a combination of architectural and landscaping tech- niques. 3. Transitional screening may be modified where the building, a barrier and/or the land between that building and the property line has been specifically designed to minimize adverse impact through a combination of architectural and landscaping techniques. 4. The transitional screening yard width and planting requirements may be re- duced as much as two-thirds (2/3) where the developer chooses to construct a seven (7) foot brick or architectural block wall instead of the lesser barrier indicated by the matrix. This wall may be reduced to a height of six (6) feet Reprint 12'90 13-9 • 13-304 FAIRFAX COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE where the Director deems such a height will satisfy the purposes and intent of this Part. 5. Transitional screening and barriers may be waived or modified where the adjoining land is designated in the adopted comprehensive plan for a use which would not require the provision of transitional screening between the land under site plan and the adjoining property. 6. Transitional screening and barriers may be waived or modified where the adjacent property is zoned to allow a use similar to that of the parcel under site plan. 7. Transitional screening and barriers may be waived or modified where the adjoining property is used for any public purpose other than a school or hos- pital. 8. Transitional screening and barriers may be waived or modified «:nen the ad- joining land is used for a sawmilling operation or for a wayside stand. 9. Transitional screening and barriers may be waived or modified where adjacent residential property is used for any use permitted by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Board of Supervisors as a special permit or special exception use except nursery schools, day care centers, schools of general and special educa- tion. 10. Transitional screening may be waived or modified when the adjoining land is an R district and is used for off-street parking as permitted by the provisions of Sect. 9-609. 11. Transitional screening and barriers may be waived or modified where the subject property abuts a railroad or interstate highway right-of-way, except the Dulles Airport Access Road. 12. The Director may waive or modii: he barrier requirements where the topog- raphy of the lot providing the transitional screening and the lot being pro- tected is such that a barrier would not be effective. 13. The Director may waive or modify the barrier requirements for single family attached a welling units where a six (6) foot fence has been provided to enclose a privacy yard on all sides, and such fence is architecturally designed and coordinated with landscaping techniques to minimize adverse impact on adja- cent properties. 14. Transitional screening and barriers may be waived or modified for any public use when such use has been specifically designed to minimize adverse impact on adjacent properties. 15. In affordable dwelling unit developments, where the strict application of the provisions of this Article would preclude compliance with the provisions of Part 8 of Article 2, transitional screening and/or barriers may be waived or modified. Reprint 12/90 13-10 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING 13-403 PART 4 13-400 TREE COVER REQUIREMENTS 13-401 Tree Cover Requirement Standards 1. All developments requiring submission and approval of a site plan shall in- clude the preservation and planting of trees on the site to the extent that, at maturity of ten years, minimum tree cover shall be provided as follows: Zoning Districts Percentage Cover Commercial;Industrial;PDC;R-20;R-30;PDH-20; Ten percent (10%) PDH-30; PDH-40; R-MHP; medium and high den- sity areas of a PRC District R-12; R-16; PDH-12; PDH-16 Fifteen percent (15%) R-A; R-P; R-C; R-E; R-1; R-2; R-3; R-4; R-5; R-8; Twenty percent (20%) PDH-1;PDH-2;PDH-3;PDH-4;PDH-5;PDH-8;low density areas of a PRC District 2. The tree cover requirement shall be calculated and shown on the landscaping plan in accordance with the provisions of the Public Facilities Manual. 3. Compliance with these requirements by the approval of a landscape plan and subsequent issuance of a Residential Use Permit or Non-Residential Use Permit shall be deemed to meet the requirement of tree cover at a maturity of ten years. 13-402 Tree Preservation Credit 1. Existing trees which are to be preserved may be included to meet all or part of the tree cover requirements if the existing trees are identified on the landscape plan and the trees meet the requirements for tree preservation in the Public Facilities Manual. 2. The credit provided per freestanding tree or cluster of trees will be 1.25 mul- tiplied by the area defined by the boundaries of the existing drip line of a freestanding tree or group of trees as surveyed in the field and delineated on the plan. A credit of up to 2.0 may be granted by the Director for trees of outstanding size and quality. 3. The minimum size tree to be allowed for tree preservation credit shall be as required by the Public Facilities Manual. 13-403 Tree Planting Credit 1. Planted trees that may qualify for tree cover credit shall include the trees in interior parking lot landscaping, peripheral parking lot landscaping, founda- tion planting,transitional screening, landscaped open space,revegetation,tree supplementation,tree replacement and other trees that are planted on the site. 2. The tree cover calculations for the planted trees shall be based on the projected ten year tree cover area for each tree as shown in the Tree Selection and Cover Guide in the Public Facilities Manual. Other trees and larger tree sizes may be given tree cover credit with submission of supporting tree cover data to the Director. 3. The minimum size planted tree that will qualify for tree cover credit shall meet the minimum six foot height requirement of Sect. 104 above and the minimum one inch caliper requirement as shown in the Tree Selection and Cover Guide in the Public Facilities Manual. Reprint 1290 13-11 13-404 FAIRFAX COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE 13.404 Modifications, Waivers and Exceptions 1. The tree cover requirements may be modified by the Director for areas corn- prised of the following features, provided those areas are identified and delin- eated on the site plan: A. Floodplains and wetlands. B. Nonwooded developed recreation areas, such as athletic fields, tennis courts, multi-use courts, playgrounds and tot lots. 2. Tree cover requirements may also be modified or waived by the Director where the strict provisions of this Part would reduce the usable area of a lot due to lot configuration or size to a point which would preclude a reasonable use of the lot. 3. An exception to the tree cover requirements may be approved by the Director for areas comprised of the following features, provided those areas are identi- fied and delineated on the site plan: A. Lakes and retention ponds,based on the normal water surface eleva- tion, and swimming pools. B. Lands under active commercial production or management of agri- cultural, horticultural or forest crops; landfills and quarries. C. Major utility distribution easements of twenty-five (25) feet or more in width. D. Absorption fields and seepage pits for on-site sewage disposal sys- tems. 4. The Director may impose conditions to any modification, waiver or exception which will assure that the results of the modification, waiver or exception would be in accordance with the purpose and intent of this Part. 5. A waiver or modification of the parking lot landscaping or transitional screening requirements shall not be deemed a modification, waiver or exception to the requirements of this Part. • Reprint 12;90 13-12 rte_6 ‘11 . N t0 n er en X C W - 1 , o f� Q V °' _ Z w g co U Cn en Z - O E t0 cn Z ., X z a t o` U x - < `o U - o c.. 1 _' e' - a• oc .. - Q` 0 4. -Q oc.. .. m oU - ❑ 8c..1, N � `00 CC o '� `N . ` c. -Qc.. NOot.. �Qoc.. NpoG.. � W oU .r .re —Q G (V — Q OLL — Q O - Nc Oca. — Q CG. N C,] •`p C.. W t7 W `p �v u u e.es ! ih a 3 d 17 V IJ r+ 5 S7, .ycL a u ` . `SmA VD u � n naOnD Gp > ` 2 u v J[ 2 1. p C E u m Wr L „ 4 4 Est L .u ` o 03 VI-E E • . t, a ` .c i > D E e - e c m ,52r, u 3 C r .ul • r, . L V u V.' m et ec ILL-. T C u .: d .` - nO. L m ` n 7 CC ` u = Dv DC C C — cE uLu7. E LO. u OV 0EO ! -` ` 3 .� - . — 7 .V :-7., 'c ' j 2, 7,' um V L j m > oE mY n " — U E. a3 ` ? C o s o : " LV - ° Nu c u u L u3 3 3 3 L L � C.. Q rCUUZa. U � 4, [lc, 0u ct r. e. mUmc.. G. 0 toe- > > c - N el .6 iD N tq O) .' a d a b y Q, U F N O '.o • 2 e �y C "0 *S O C = n O C" * ccc :7_3i > n z r CD f l a n n R°1 7 u a n o B. 3 g. c 1 R• n 1 R* " c 7- O e 7 d a 2. c7 . tCs is 0 o - 'g. 7 Q ' 5' 0. < 0. 6, ,--nC �[ ^ e, - u 7 A T G p n a c a 2 _i :, Q .7s a A a ^ n ,� o C o n g ? _ a = m a 2- m. R• o S n. n C m S 2 E: ,T,-; n _ i o n' "... C n 3 ,Sr �t ^ 0 7 7 - Q, m o7c m 7 n� I a C - 6 n 3 A •i,.. 7 S c a. .. CA o e aw 9 o o e^ e ; es n' 9 c `‹ m c a — E A v g s g. g R n y EL c ^ g • I :1 0 A a 0•e m w lc n n C e .n7. ._m^, __ m _ `'e S= m o `'. .7....i A m n 9 2 w —•c s n Q. �° d ma a u — n C Q s .,F., S c- ?. er v d T R F. '*], �w +7 .0, �w •e7 � �w '*1a c CZ '*] � STN ..7o t". '°]: `, N � Z1, .4 — •.1 .9, Pt!,c.3 'Y7'� •�w TJX �W V t7I '�' �N � O iN "7 9, PN 1 •,7 .9 ' N C0 N N "7 „ N I +I , N 9 W I '*7 ti LT N M 4 "7 4 C N 1 T 4 ^J — .. „ m— ' T" In .T7 fi7 ^ •v c T T a v T c 7 ... r— m :; ; T O D iT7 I r I MI I / I 1 I .7 9 P— .7.oma `” r; D _ r c Z • cat si ; n , m — n , R7r +7^ n '7� ci 2 ra ll n$ >•- n 0 LrJ [l7 N w a N v çfoiik Wyk ARTICLE 16 OVERLAY CLASSIFICATIONS AND REGULATIONS Article-Page Section 1: Purpose and Application of Overlay Classifications 16-1 Section 2: Historic Classification 16-1 2.1 Purpose 16-1 2.2 Historic Classification Established 16-1 2.3 Local Register Established 16-1 2.4 Development Activity While Classification Pending 16-2 2.5 Development Activity After Classification 16-2 2.6 Bed and Breakfast Facility as Special Use 16-2 2.7 Office as Special Use 16-4 Section 3: / Transition Classifications 16-4 3.1 Purpose 16-4 3.2 Transition Classifications Established 16-4 3.3 TA Classification 16-5 3.4 TB and TC Classifications 16-5 3.5 TD Classification 16-6 Section 4: Scenic Thoroughfare Classification 16-7 4.1 Purpose 16-7 4.2 Scenic Thoroughfare Classification Established 16-7 4.3 Minimum Setbacks Along Scenic Thoroughfares 16-7 4.4 Design Criteria 16-9 4.5 Appeal 16-10 Section 5: Waterfront Classification 16-10 5.1 Purpose 16-10 5.2 Waterfront Classification Established 16-10 5.3 Building and Bulkhead Lines Established 16-10 5.4 Development Activity Beyond Building and Bulkhead Lines_16-17 5.5 Steps Permitted Beyond Bulkhead Line 16-17 5.6 Swimming Facilities Beyond Building Line 16-18 5.7 Docks16-19 5.8 Sea Walls 16-20 5.9 Temporary Vehicle Ramp 16-20 Section 6: Airport Impact Classifications 16-20 6.1 Purpose 16-20 6.2 Definitions 16-21 6.3 Airport Impact Classifications Established 16-21 6.4 Height Restricted Classification 16-21 6.5 Noise Zone Classification 16-22 4/15/93 Table of Contents City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code ARTICLE 16 OVERLAY CLASSIFICATIONS AND REGULATIONS SECTION 1: PURPOSE AND APPLICATION OF OVERLAY CLASSIFICATIONS (a) The overlay classifications are established to provide location or site specific regulations for properties which share unique characteristics without affecting the underlying zoning district boundaries. (b) Some overlay classifications apply to property automatically due to its location. Other overlay classifications are applied to specific property in the same manner in which zoning districts are applied. Where an overlay classification is applied, the overlay classification may be indicated by the addition of a suffix to the conventional district designation, and the regulations of both districts shall apply. SECTION 2: HISTORIC CLASSIFICATION 2.1 Purpose, (a) The City of Daytona Beach has various historic neighborhoods and structures of historic significance. Public encouragement and incentives for the rehabilitation and preservation of these historic sites and structures is beneficial to the community as a whole. (b) Special uses are provided for historic properties to allow additional revenue generating uses in the historic areas of the City, encourage redevelopment and preservation of historic resources, provide alternative temporary lodging facilities for area visitors without creating rooming or boarding houses, and provide an appropriate and creative use for historic structures while protecting residential districts. 2.2 Historic Classification Established. The historic classification is hereby established as an overlay and shall be designated by the suffix H. 2.3 Local Register Established, The Local Register of Historic Places is hereby established. Upon classification, all subject properties and districts shall be entered in the Local Register. The Local Register shall identify and classify various sites, buildings, structures, objects, and districts within the City which have been classified as historic or architecturally or archaeologically significant. 4/15/93 Article 16 - Page 1 City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code 2.4 Development Activity While Classificatio■ Pending. No permit shall be issued for alteration, construction, demolition, or removal of a nominated site or of any significant or contributing structure within a nominated historic district, from the date the nomination is filed until the final disposition by the City Commission, unless such alteration, removal or demolition is authorized by the City Manager or City Commission as necessary for public health, welfare, or safety. 2.5 Development Activity After Classification. (a) Within any district classified historic, or on any site classified historic, a Certificate of Appropriateness or Certificate of Economic Hardship shall be required to: 1. Materially alter the exterior appearance except for ordinary maintenance of a building, structure, or object listed individually on the Local Register, or of a building located in a district listed on the Local Register and which is classified as significant or contributing to that district. 2. Erect an addition to an existing building, structure, or object listed individually on the Local Register or to erect a new building within a district listed on the Local Register. 3. Demolish a building, structure, or object listed individually on the Local Register or to demolish a building, structure, or object located in a district on the Local Register and which is classified as significant or contributing to that district. 4. Relocate a building, structure or object listed individually on the Local Register or to relocate a building located in a district listed on the Local Register and classified as significant or contributing to that district. (b) Any application for a demolition permit or for a building permit affecting the exterior architectural appearance of a designated site or of a structure within a designated historic district shall be reviewed to determine whether a Certificate of Appropriateness is required. If no Certificate is required, the permit application shall proceed as usual. (c) If a Certificate is required, the applicant shall be notified in writing, and shall promptly submit an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness or Certificate of Economic Hardship to the Historic Preservation Board. The original permit application shall not be acted upon until issuance of a Certificate as required. 2.6 Bed and Breakfast Facility as Special Use. (a) Bed and breakfast facilities shall be permitted as a special use provided the following criteria are met: 4/15/93 Article 16-Page 2 City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code 1. Bed and Breakfast facilities shall be located only in buildings listed on the Local or National Register of Historic Places. All renovation work shall be designed and performed in a manner which reasonably preserves the historic integrity of the structure and site. 2. An owner, manager, or operator shall live on the site as a permanent resident. 3. Off-street parking shall be required at the ratio of one parking space per guest room, plus one space per three employees. A manager or owner living on site shall be counted as an employee. 4. Only temporary short term lodging of no more than 14 consecutive days per guest within a 30 day period shall be permitted. The facility shall maintain a guest register with the date of arrival and departure, guest name, and current home address for each guest. Current registers and those for the - immediately preceding 12 month period shall be available for inspection. 5. Each guest room shall have its own private bathroom, and shall not contain any cooking facilities. In RDD-2 and single family districts, a maximum of 10 guests rooms shall be permitted. 6. All Bed and Breakfast facilities shall serve daily breakfast to registered guests. The room rate shall include breakfast. Only facilities with a restaurant as an accessory use may serve meals other than daily breakfast to registered guests. 7. Receptions or private parties for which a fee is paid shall be permitted only to the extent that they do not adversely impact the neighborhood. A special use permit may be reviewed, and specific conditions may be imposed as needed, to insure that this requirement is met. 8. Signage and other advertising shall identify the facility as a Bed and Breakfast, not as a rooming or boarding house or any othe- type of lodging. All signage shall meet the standards established for redeveiopment areas. (b) Restaurants may be permitted as an accessory use in Bed and Breakfast facilities with 5 or more guest rooms provided: 1. The restaurant location shall be compatible with the existing land uses in the area and seating capacity shall not adversely impact the historical integrity of the structure's interior. 2. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the requirement for restaurants. 4/15/93 Article 16-Page 3 City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code 3. The restaurant shall be operated as a conventional table service restaurant. Outdoor seating and service may be provided if it does not adversely impact the neighborhood. No food or beverage service shall be provided to persons at walk-up windows, drive-up windows, or in parked cars. Counter stools shall be prohibited. 4. No additional signs shall be permitted. The restaurant may be included on permitted Bed and Breakfast signage. Restaurant sign lettering shall be secondary in position and size to the Bed and Breakfast lettering. 2.7 Office as Special Use. Business and professional services may be permitted as a special use provided the following requirements are met: 1. Business and professional services shall be located only in buildings listed on the Local or National Register of Historic Places. All renovation work shall be designed and performed in a manner which reasonably preserves the historic integrity of the structure and site. 2. Off-street parking shall be provided. Parking and parking lot requirements may be modified by the City Commission where appropriate to meet the intention of this section. 3. Signage shall be limited to one ground monument sign. SECTION 3: TRANSITION CLASSIFICATIONS 3.1 Purpose: (a) The transition classifications are provided to allow for the gradual redevelopment of selected single family districts to multifamily, business, or professional uses by establishment as special uses; and to establish strict controls for areas which have been subject to such redevelopment, while maintaining a primarily single family character. (b) The special use criteria are intended to insure that a site is of sufficient size to successfully accommodate all necessary elements of a development, and discourage the conversion of single family homes when the building and site are insufficient to accommodate safe and orderly redevelopment; insure that before redevelopment, the applicant assembles sufficient land and commits to a specific development plan meeting minimum redevelopment standards; provide for proper ingress and egress from office developments; and insure compatibility between new developments and adjacent existing single family uses. 3.2 Transition Classifications Established. The transition classifications are hereby established as overlay classifications designated TA, TB, TC, and TD. The Zoning Map shall identify any areas classified transition. 4/15/93 Article 16 - Page 4 City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code 3.3 TA Classification. In addition to uses provided by the underlying district regulations, multi-family developments shall be permitted as a special use on any property subject to the TA classification, pursuant to the following requirements: 1. All multifamily developments shall meet the minimum lot and building requirements of the R-2b district, except that the minimum lot area shall be 16,000 square feet, and the minimum lot width and street frontage shall be 70 feet. 2. The size, layout, and features of the proposed development area shall insure that neighboring single family uses will be reasonably protected from any potential adverse impact generated by the special use. 3.4 TB and IC Classifications, On any property subject to the TB or TC classification, business and professional service developments shall be permitted as special uses upon meeting the following requirements: 1. The development shall meet the minimum lot and building standards in the table below. TB TC Minimum Lot Area 30,000 sq. ft. 30,000 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 150 ft. 120 ft. Minimum Lot Depth 200 ft. 200 ft. Minimum Frontage on US 92 150 ft. 120 ft. Minimum Front Yard Setback 40 ft. 40 ft. Minimum Interior Side Setback 15 ft. building 15 ft. building 5 ft. parking lot 5 ft. parking lot Minimum Side Yard Setback 30 ft. building 30 ft. building 10 ft. parking lot 10 ft. parking lot Minimum Rear Yard Setback 30 ft. 30 ft. Maximum Building Height 40 Ft. 40 Ft. Maximum Building Coverage 35% 35% Maximum Impervious Coverage 60% 60% 2. The minimum lot area, lot depth, and front yard may be reduced by not more than 10% upon finding that the reduction will not adversely impact adjacent residential properties. 4/15/93 Article 16-Page 5 • City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code 3. Existing structures which do not meet the minimum lot and building - requirements may be used on a temporary basis if located on a corner parcel with no access points on U. S. 92. Off-street parking shall be provided to the rear of the structure. The structure must be removed at or prior to the completion of the FDOT six lane improvement project. 4. The size, layout, and features of the proposed development shall insure that neighboring residential uses will be reasonably protected from any potential adverse impact generated by the special use. 5. The use of highly reflective surfaces such as reflective glass and reflective metal roofs with a pitch ratio of more than 7 to 12 shall be prohibited. This restriction shall not apply to solar panels, or copper or painted metal roofs. 6. Access points shall be located on W. International Speedway Blvd. Additional or alternate access may be provided on intersecting side streets if there is a median opening on W. International Speedway Blvd. at the intersection and it is determined that adjacent residential areas will not be adversely affected. 7. Signage shall be as permitted in RP districts. 3.5 TD Classification, (a) In addition to uses provided by the single family district regulations, the following shall be permitted as conditional uses on any property subject to the TD classification: 1. Duplex uses with a minimum lot area of 7,260 square feet and compliance with R-2 district building setbacks. 2. A single family dwelling shall be permitted one accessory apartment provided the total minimum lot area is 7,260 square feet and adequate paved parking is provided behind the front building line. The apartment may be attached or detached from the principal structure. (b) In addition to uses provided by the single family district regulations, multifamily development shall be permitted as a special use on any property subject to the TD classification, pursuant to the rollowing requirements: 1. All residential developments in excess of two units shall meet the minimum lot and building requirements of the R-2 district. A maximum of four units per building or eight units per development shall be permitted. Parking for each unit shall be as required in Article 8 §2, LDC. 2. The compatibility standards, Article 18 §1, LDC, shall be met. 4/15/93 Article 16-Page 6 City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code 3. In order to maintain architectural compatibility within the neighborhood, new developments shall submit building elevation drawings as part of the special use application. Architectural compatibility shall be determined by evidence that a similar architectural style is proposed, with sensitivity to buildings currently existing on the street. (c) All developments existing prior to application of the TD overlay, which meet the minimum lot, building, and density requirements of the R-2 district, shall be considered conforming with the TD classification. SECTION 4: SCENIC THOROUGHFARE CLASSIFICATION 4.1 Purpose. The purpose of the scenic thoroughfare classification is to provide for the development and preservation of landscaped front yards along the City's main travel routes. 4.2 Scenic Thoroughfare Classification Established. The scenic thoroughfare classification is hereby established as an overlay classification. All properties adjacent to the roadway segments identified in the table in §4.3 are hereby classified as scenic thoroughfare properties. 4.3 Minimum Setbacks Along Scenic Thoroughfares, (a) Minimum setbacks are established in the table below for all lots or parcels subject to the scenic thoroughfare classification. The minimum setback area shall be landscaped in accordance with Article 18, LDC, and in addition shall meet the design criteria set forth in this section. 4/15/93 Article 16-Page 7 City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code Thoroughfare Location Min.Yard Depth from R-4W Beville Rd. From Ctyde Moms Blvd. 50 Ft. west to Corporate Limits Bill France Blvd. Entire Corridor 50 Ft. Clyde Moms Blvd. North of Mason Ave. 50 Ft. From Bellevue Ave. to Beville Rd., excluding 25 Ft. Ridgecrest Unit II Subdivision Pine St. south to 25 Ft. Corporate Limits Dunn Ave. West of Clyde Morris Blvd. 50 Ft. Eleventh St. Entire Corridor 50 Ft. Hancock Blvd. Entire Corridor 30 Ft. Jimmy Ann Dr. South of Mason 50 Ft. North of Mason 25 Ft. Mason Ave. West of Clyde Morris except 50 Ft. South side in Madison Heights Subdivision South side of Mason Ave. 20 Ft. West of Clyde Moms Blvd. and within Madison Heights Subdivision Nova Rd. Entire Corridor 25 Ft. Ridgewood Ave. From North Corporate 15 Ft. Limit to Live Oak Ave. From Live Oak Ave. to 20 Ft. South Corporate Limit W. Intl Speedway Blvd. From Nova Rd. to 40 Ft. Clyde Moms Blvd. From 1-95 to west 50 Ft. Corporate Limits Williamson Blvd. From east Side of W. Intl 25 Ft. Speedway Blvd., North to Mason Ave. Remainder of Corridor 50 Ft. 4/15/93 Article 16 - Page 8 City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code 4.4 Design Criteria. (a) Any of the following native plant materials existing within the setback area shall be preserved and incorporated into the final landscape design: Saw Palmetto Florida Red Maple Sabal Palm Magnolia Holly spp. Slash Pine Wax Myrtle Longleaf Pine Oaks spp. Bay Cypress spp. (b) A minimum of one tree per 500 square feet shall be provided in the setback area. Trees shall be preserved or planted to met this requirement as follows: 1. Existing trees with a minimum 2 inch trunk diameter measured 4 feet above grade and palms with a minimum clear trunk of six feet shall be preserved. If the distribution is not generally uniform, or if the required tree count is not met by existing trees, then additional tree plantings will be required to create a balanced effect. 2. Introduced trees shall be shade tree species as identified by the Plant List with a minimum caliper of 2.5 inches. Trees shall be ten feet high at the time of planting. 3. Sabal Palms with a minimum clear trunk of six feet may be used, but shall be planted in groups of three and each group shall count as one tree. Sabal Palms may count for no more than 20% of the required tree count. (c) Stormwater retention areas, ponds, berms, swales, ditches, easements, driveways, walkways, paths, fountains, and other features as measured at the furthest limits of clearing may occupy no more than 30% of the setback area. This 30% area shall not create cleared gaps void of preserved trees and vegetation greater than 100 feet in length or greater than 20% of the frontage whichever is less. (d) An automatic underground irrigation system shall be required for revegetated areas and any other landscaping installed within the scenic setback to provide 100% coverage. A temporary irrigation system may be installed in areas where drought tolerant plants will need watering only for an establishment period. (e) Efforts shall be made to locate all utility easements and service lines away from the setback areas. When they must traverse the yards, they shall be located away from the existing vegetation to be preserved. No utility easements or service lines shall pre-empt the preservation or establishment of a landscaped area or the preservation or installation of trees. 4/15/93 Article 16-Page 9 A (��T(Drlf-L— �f&T r-L S City of Daytona Beach Land Development Code (f) Special pavement treatments such as textured and earth-tone colored brick, pavers, and concrete are encouraged at permitted entrances provided they meet roadway construction and safety standards. Only landscape lighting fixtures may be used. Patios, decks, balconies, projections, play fields, ornaments, banners, balloons, structures, fences, free-standing walls, and like uses are prohibited. (g) Signs may be permitted, but shall be designed and located to minimize the removal of existing healthy vegetation. (h) The setback shall be maintained by the property owner in the manner and design of the approved landscape plan. If required plants die or are removed, they shall be replaced by equivalent plants within 30 days. 4.5 Appeal. An appeal from any application of the design criteria may be made to the Planning Board by a written request with the appropriate fee at least 38 days prior to the Board's meeting. The GCcision of the Planning Board shall constitute final administrative action. SECTION 5: WATERFRONT CLASSIFICATION 5.1 Purpose. The purpose of the waterfront classification is to provide uniform regulation of development activity along the City's waterfronts with respect to physical characteristics and development activity unique to upland parcels. 5.2 Waterfront Classification Established, The waterfront classification is hereby established as an overlay classification. All lots of parcels of land adjacent to the Halifax River or the Atlantic Ocean beach are hereby classified as waterfront. 5.3 Building and Bulkhead Lines Established, (a) Halifax River East Shore, All properties abutting the east shore of the Halifax River shall be subject to the building line established pursuant to the table below. All distances are perpendicular to the centerlines and westerly of South Peninsula Drive and Halifax Avenue. 4/15/93 Article 16 - Page 10 THE ZONING REPORT For Planning and Zoning Professionals ISSN 0748-0083 VOL. 5, NO. 12 — OCT 9, 1987 — Charles Reed, AICP, Editor/Publisher - $48/year/subscription ":I A TOOL FOR BETTER NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING - - - v _ ' - - - A SMALL SCALE TRANSITIONAL OFFICE ZONE !• (Part One of two parts) Here is how you can use a transitional office ideas and rules to follow in writing such zone. Use it to cap off strip commercial along zone. In Part Two, which you receive in twi major streets which also have residential uses. weeks, on October 23, we provide you wilt Use it to provide land development solutions sample text language quoted from actual anc for left-over small vacant parcels too undesir- enacted transitional zones. able for residential use but too small for most See other past issues of The Zoning Report commercial uses. Use it to allow careful corn- that touch upon transitional zones. These in- mercial use of existing residences across busy clude: our September 24, 1984 issue: "How to streets from major shopping areas. Use it to obtain successful screens between commercial form a buffer of specified uses around shopping and residential zones"; March 18, 1985: "A new centers located amidst residential subdivisions. look at defining the term 'fence' "; and two issues: Parts One and Two, March 21 and April This issue of The Zoning Report is Part One of 25, 1986: "How to write general zoning stan- a two-part discussion. We suggest caveats, dards for conditional and special uses". Alternatives for transitional zones Create two new transitional zones within your and fringe communities. Since sites are vacant zoning code. One zone regulates vacant parcels and abut low-density residential uses and for new construction for transitional uses, the zones, very strict zoning development sten- other zone regulates existing buildings to be dards are required to assure compatibility after converted to transitional usage. the site is developed. The applicant for the To create only one zone, use the develop- transitional rezoning must meet these zoning ment standards of the new-construction zone. standards by showing them on his site develop- Allow conversion of existing buildings for tran- ment plan, to be approved by your CPC as part sitional usage as a conditional use by filing for of the rezoning application. This assures that changes in zone yards and height to fit the this compatibility will be provided by the de- existing situation. veloper as promised. New construction transitional zones work Conversion transitional zones work best in best in newer outlying fast-growing suburban urban built-up in-fill areas and central cities. ° 1987 by Charles Reed — Our new mailing address: PO Box 6529; Margate, Florida 33063 THE ZONING REPORT Page Two In contrast to new-construction transition parcels. The opinions of residential neighbors -tones, conversion zone district standards are are too important to allow such areas to be inimal. The principal building that will be decided administratively. 3modeled for the new transitional use is al- eady on the site, with known yards and height. Thereby, you must accommodate your Outline the basics zone district requirements for yard, height and of your transitional zone lot coverage to the existing buildings on the site to be converted. You establish yards, Write a "purposes" section for your transitional height and lot coverage on a case basis by re- zone. Since this zone deals with controversial quirirg a site plan to be submitted and ap- cases, it needs a clear and unmistakable ra- proved with conversion rezonings. The appli- tionale plainly obvious to everyone involved in cant is bound to the zone yards, bulk standards the rezoning. The purposes section provides the and location of parking and screening approved guide for selecting the uses allowable in the for his site plan. zone and for supportirg strict development zone regulations. Another alternative is to revise an existing Your purposes section has two provisions. It zone in your zoning code to become a transi- describes the function of the zone—which is to tional zone. For the revised zone, you reduce provide a transition or buffer between more the number of allowable uses and impose very intense commercial and industrial zones and strict development standards. You need to sur- uses and less intense residential zones. And it vey projects already existing in your communi- describes the character of uses and develop- ty in the zone proposed for revision that would ment standards in the zone that accord with be made nonconforming if the zone district is the transition/buffer concept. Character is es- revised. tablished by listing the general category of On a case basis, you might consider allowing uses allowable in the zone—offices and profes- non-transitional projects conforming under the sional offices—set within a high level of pro- regulations of the previous zone to be rezoned ject and site design that achieves compatibility to other districts. Existing projects in transi- with residential development. tional locations are subject to your revised zone district standards or are approved individ- Link development standards to your zone's ually with otherwise nonconforming yards and transitional/buffer purposes. The standards are heights as conditional uses. the vehicle for carrying out the purposes. This is done in five ways: through locational Or create a "Transition Area" rather than a standards for all parcels included in applica- t ransitional zone. A Transition Area imposes tions for transitional rezoning, to reduce spot strict screening standards within a buffer strip zoning challenges; through architectural ap- of defined width in all commercial and indus- pearance and harmony with residential dwell- trial zones abutting residential zones anywhere irgs; by similarity of the size and bulk of prin- in a community. The width of the buffer strip cipal buildings on a transitional lot compared -anges from 50-300 feet, with 50-100 appropri- to residential dwelling buildings; through simi- te in built-up urban communities and 100-300 larity of the character of open space and in fringe and suburban communities. greenery of transitional zones to residential • Transition Areas are rarely used in zoning zones; and through performance standards for des. They are not zoning districts and are noise, lighting, traffic, privacy and security :ministratively regulated by staff. Most board similar to residential zones. Members and commissioners are not willing to Recognize the smallness of sites typical of dive up the opportunity to regulate critical transitional rezoning applications when drafting October 9, 1987 Issue • F,! _ • ii 1 - Page Three Ij THE ZONING REPORT • your zone standards. The site plan must set professional. These include lawyers, account- aside sufficient land on small sites for all re- ants, ministers, engineers, consultants and quired zone yards, buffer yards, off-street architects. These exclude medical professions— parking, driveways, loading areas and trash doctors, dentists, medical hygienists and test- storage areas while providing an economically irg laboratories. feasible amount of floor area for the principal Medical offices and clinics are the next most use- common by-right use and the most common conditional use listed in transitional zones. Require special uses to be approved by the Medical uses are slightly less desirable as tran- CPa/elected board as conditional uses rather sitional uses than other professions since they than as exceptional uses by the BZA. The close generate, for each practicing professional, a and intimate relationship of conditional uses on much greater number of trips and require high- transitional sites to abutting residential uses er off-street parking ratios. goes beyond the secondary and minor nature of Any type of health professional is allowed adjustments and variances within the scope of for medical offices—physicians, dentists, podia- the BZA's duties and functions. Conditional use trists, psychologists, chiropractors, and pare- approvals nay be tantamount to rezoning ap- medical practices such as dental hygienists. proval since the conditional use is often tied The use excludes any overnight visitation by by the applicant to his rezoning application as patients and ambulance services. its sole basis for rezoning. Veterinary clinics for small animals are al- Exceptional-use decisions of the BZA are lowed in some codes as a conditional use. All generally appealed directly to courts, which activities must take place in enclosed build- are awkward and expensive for neighborhood ings, with no animals boarded overnight. groups to challenge. It is far easier for neigh- Consumer office services provided to the borhoods and the general public to appeal for general piblic include real estate agencies, reconsideration of conditional-use decisions of securities and stock market brokerages, insur- the CPC directly to the community's elected ance agencies, financial and tax services and board in pt.blic hearings, counseling. These uses are less compatible with residential uses. They generate higher travel trips per square foot of GFA, have periods of Uses allowed in transitional districts daily peak-period rush hour traffic, have longer business hours that extend into the evening and Determine the number and variety of uses to on weekends, receive more deliveries, and gen- allow in your transitional zone. A zone with a erste Later pressure for on-site expansion by short list of allowable uses trades greater resi- asking for relaxation of yards, height and lot dential compatibility for a zone with a long coverage. list of uses that will be used much more often Banks and savings and loans are allowed in a in your community for transitional purposes. few zoning cones as conditional uses, but are not allowed drive-up facilities or outrioor Office and institutional uses are the most corn- ATM's. Banks often later apply to modify their patible and economically feasible transitional approved site development plan to expand their uses. But only some types of office and institu- activities on the site—usually seeking larger tional uses are allowable. logo signs, free-standing ATM's in the parkin Among all possible uses, professional offices lot or on the wall of the bank building, more is the best transitional use available. It is al- floor area and drive-up bays. lowed by all transitional zones. Professional Administrative offices or general offices are offices are delimited from other office uses by Billowed as a conditional use by aoout rat( the describing non-medical occiip tiorrn considered transitional zones in zoning codes. These -kr"! October 9, 1987 !i s • • • • THE ZONING REPORT Page Four restricted to no sales at retail or wholesale, no Institutional uses allowed are those that are storage of products, no display of merchandise similar to office uses. These include libraries, visible outside the building and are often limit- public art galleries (with works not normally ed to one firm occupying the entire principal for sale as in a private art gallery), museums, building. While administrative offices may be a and neighborhood branch offices providing principal use on a site, their clerical function over-the-counter public services such as tax may be secondary to the business enterprise of payments and auto tags. Post offices are not the firm occupying the building. This often allowed in the zone. You need to obtain agree- creates neighborhood complaints if corporate ment from your elected board and legal counsel owners start using their offices for non-cleri- that such public uses are subject to the zone's cal uses—storage, display, delivery and pick-up site development standards. of products for sale or repair, and storing com- pany vehicles on the site in violation of the Uses that are allowed by right in the preceding zone's parking regulations. highest-density residential zone are commonly Business services to office uses are allowed allowed by right as carry-over uses in transi- conditionally by a few zoning codes either as a tional zones. The office transitional zone is principal use in a few transitional zones or as often the first zone in a zoning code listed an accessory or ancillary use in most codes. after all residential zones. But we suggest You Business services are limited to serving the allow carry-over uses conditionally (except sin- firms occupying the principal building and take gle-family dwellings), to review their locational other restrictions of ancillary uses. appropriateness next to single-family dwellings. These uses include duplicating and quick- Problem carry-over uses include rooming and print litho, blueprinting, collating, mail packag- fraternity houses, very high density multifamily ing and receiving, secretarial and steno ser- dwellings in large and tall buildings, funeral vices, and sales limited to common office and homes, and clubs and lodges otherwise allowed drafting supplies. with food service and liquor permits. Child day care might be allowed as a transi- Studios for artists are allowed conditionally by tional conditional use if the need can be dem- a few zoning codes or as a special form of orstrated that the surrounding neighborhood home occupation on the site. Studios include lacks sufficient day-care services. dance, music, painting and sculpture, drama and other one-on-one instructional and practice List specific uses to be excluded from your facilities for arts and crafts. These activities transitional zone. You remove any doubt that must be conducted in fully enclosed buildings applicants can gain an interpretation to allow to block sound transmitted to the outdoors or an excluded use in a transitional zone. Uses to the property line. As a special type of home often excluded are: barber and beauty shops; occupation, the business operator must live on fraternity and sorority houses; rooming and the premises, with his studio located inside his boarding houses; clubs and lodges; any sign or dwelling. billboard as a principal use; any drive-up or Antique stores and other arts and crafts drive-in use; outdoor vending machines; ATM stores with very low volumes of traffic often machines; restaurants, taverns or any eating or are allowed conditionally in such zones. Since drinking places; and parking for off-site uses. these are retail sales, we prefer they not be allowed in transitional zones. This sets a clear Ancillary and accessory uses are allowed to precedent, from our experience, to open up serve only the principal uses allowed in the your zoning code for later text amendments zone. Conditions imposed on ancillary and ac- inserted in the transition zone to introduce cessory uses assure that they remain secondary other retail uses into the zone. and incidental to principal uses. They must be October 9, 1987 Issuue Page Five THE ZONING REPORT housed fully within the principal building, Lot standards for transitional zones have lit- where appropriate. No show windows, display tle cc no minimum requirement for lot size, windows, outside display, outside entrances or width or coverage, to recognize that most par- signs are are allowed. cels included in rezoning applications for tran- The total floor area for all ancillary uses on sitional zones are small. a parcel is limited to a percentage of total Minimum lot size, where imposed, is small— floor area on the parcel to about 20-30% of ranging from 5,000 to 7500 sq ft. Lot width is GFA. This floor area limitation also includes only 50-100 ft. Lot coverage by buildings is business service uses, whether allowed as an- constrained by other zoning requirements for cillary or principal uses. Ancillary uses include small sites. Off-street parking, a loading and beauty and barber shops; sales of common of- delivery area, zone yards, buffer landscape five and drafting supplies; sales of personal strips, driveways and aisles, and a low height sundries and accessories; coffee shops; lunch limit may effectively restrict lot coverage by service and vending machines. the principal building on the site to no more Some principal uses are allowed specific an- than 30-50%. Where lot coverage is imposed, it cillary uses. Medical clinics might be allowed a ranges from 35-65% of lot area. pharmacy. Blueprint and duplicating shops might be allowed limited retail sale of conveni- Bulk standards for transitional zones strongly. ence office supplies. reflect residential bulk standards. Zone yards Accessory uses and structures for principal are large and building height is limited. ses allowed in transitional zones include signs, Transitional zones require a deep front yard, art sculptures, flagpoles, mail boxes, loading usually 15-25 ft depth, to match residential docks, fences, trash storage bins and air condi- zones. The front yard must be completely land- tionirg compressors. Trash storage bins cannot soaped except for drives and allowable signs. be located in any zone yard and must be se- Side yards are small-8-10 ft is typical. Larger cured with a decorative opaque fence or wall sites allow 10% of lot width per side yard be- with the gate secured and locked when not in yond the 10 ft minimum yard. Street side yards use. Commercial vehicles must be garaged in- may range from a full 25 ft if the side street doors overnight and cannot be parked to serve is residentially zoned, to no side yard if the as portable signs on the site. side street is commercially zoned. Rear yards can accommodate parking and range in depth from 15-25 ft if they abut residential zones. Regulatory standards Building height is limited to that of low-den- for transitional zones sity residential zoning. Maximum height ranges from one to three stories and up to 40 ft, but There are four types of regulatory standards: 2-1/2 stories and 35 ft is a very common locational standards, lot standards, bulk stan- height limit in most transitional zones. Where dards and site design standards. first-floor off-street parking is allowed within Locational standards require that all parcels principal buildings, the height of the building in transitional zones abut arterial streets at includes such parking. the time of rezonirg. Individual parcels compri- Exceptions to zone bulk standards are allow- sing a transitional zone and all groupings of ed—smaller yards, greater lot coverage and contiguous parcels in applications for transi- greater height—if these exceptions are filed as tional zones must abut commercial and residen- a conditional use. The exceptions provide flexi- tial zones. No one parcel need abut both resi- bility to accommodate special transitional situ- 3ntial and more intense commercial zones, as ations, such as office uses proposed to abut long as two or more parcels, as a group, abut tall apartment buildings or on the lower slopes these zones. of hir'sides. October 9, :Jr Issue • • THE ZONING REPORT Page Six Site design standards are shown on site devel- back-lighted or indirectly illuminated. The opment plans for parcels within transitional ground sign must have a setback of 10-20 ft zones. These standards include buffer screen- from the front ROW line. ing, special buffer strips, architectural review, For corner lots, one additional wall identifi- signs, parking, loading, noise and lighting. cation sign and one ground identification sign Buffer screening is the most important site is allowed, one for each street frontage, pro- standard described for transitional zones. vided that the side street is not a local resi- Screening includes landscaping, shrubs, fences, dential street. Pole signs, roof signs and signs walls and berms. on canopies or fascias are not allowed. Flash- Landscape screens must abut all lot lines of irg or rotating signs or beacons are not allow- transitional parcels that abut residential zones. ed nor allowed within windows of buildings vis- These screens are often described in great de- ible to the property line of the parcel. Direc- tail. Tree species are suggested, usually re- tional signs for driveways and parking areas quired to be evergreens at least 6-10 ft high, are limited to 2 sq ft per sign. Temporary planted on intervals of 10-20 ft, along with foot-shove or small wall-hung real estate for- shrubs and hedges that meet the crown of lease signs are allowed, discretely compatible trees to provide a screen from ground level to in design and size to residential for-sale signs. • 6-10 ft within three to five years after being Parking and loading requirements have no planted. Berms and decorative fences and walls special limitations in transitional zones. Park- may be substituted, subject to approval on the irg ratios for transitional uses are those listed site plan. for all allowable uses in your zoning code Special buffer strips that abut residentially chapter on parking. Parking areas are not al- zoned parcels are often required on transition- lowed in front yards cr in street side yards ally-zoned parcels. These strips accommodate along side streets that abut residential zoning. the landscape screen. The strip, usually about Screening standards for parking lots are those 10 ft wide, is required in addition to side and required for all parking lots, subject to more rear yards. However, we suggest that such a restrictive standards in transitional zones for buffer strip be allowed as part of side and rear buffers and landscape screens. Drives for park- yards, since buffer strips added to zone yards irg lots are allowed in side yards subject to might make small sites difficult to develop. screening and fencing if they abut residential The buffer portion of zone yards must be land- zoning. scaped and cannot contain any accessory struc- Noise cannot exceed ambient background ley- - tures, parking areas or driveways. els at the ground level at property lines of Architectural review of proposed buildings is transitional parcels. LightinK standards require . required in some codes. Buildings might be re- all lights to be shielded from direct shine and quired to have all facades architecturally fin- glare into residential zones. ished. Drawings of building elevations must be approved by a deciding authority before the * * * * * * * • applicant obtains his building permit. Signs are severely limited in transitional We make every effort to present accurate in- zones. Most such zones allow, as a minimum, formation and sound opinion in this report. one flat wall identification sign, with a maxi- However, we do not guarantee results, accu- mum of about 50 sq ft, on the front wall of racy, or assume liability for errors, omissions, the building, indirectly illuminated. Some codes or for information you may act upon. This pub- also allow either a wall sign and a ground sign, lication does not purport to be engaged in the or both. The ground sign can be double faced, practice of law or give legal advice, but is the 3-10 ft maximum height, 50-100 sq ft total for opinion of the editor and publisher solely as a both faces (or 50 sq ft for a single-faced sign), professional urban planner. October 9, 1987 Issue ? / I THE ZONING REPORT For Planning and Zoning Professionals .t= ISSN 0748-0083 VOL. 5, NO. 13 — OCT 23, 1987 — Charles Reed, AICP, Editor/Publisher - $48/year/subscription A TOOL FOR BETTER NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING - - - - - - A SMALL SCALE TRANSITIONAL OFFICE ZONE (Part Two of two parts) We have divided this topic into two parts. Part residential dwellings; through similarity of the One, our October 9th issue, which you received size and bulk of principal buildings on a transi- two weeks ago, discusses our suggestions and tional lot compared to residential dwelling deas for writing or updating your office and buildings; through similarity of the character institutional transitional zone. of open space and greenery of transitional This issue, Part Two, provides sample quoted zones to residential zones; and through per- text from transitional zones in zoning codes formance standards for noise, lighting, traffic, that illustrate our commentary from Part One. and privacy similar to residential zones. Summarizing key points from Part One: Instead Other past issues of The Zoninz Report with of creating a new transitional zone, consider quoted sample text on other topics that could creating two such zones—one for new con- be useful for drafting a transitional zone for struction on vacant lots, the other for existing your community include: our September 24, buildings to be converted to transitional uses. 1984 issue: "How to obtain successful screens Construction on new lots takes very strict de- between commercial and residential zones"; velopment standards whereas conversion zones March 18, 1985: "A new look at defining the require minimal standards—to accommodate the term 'fence' "; and two issues: Parts One and yards and height of existing buildings. Two, March 21 and April 25, 1986: "How to The purposes section of the transitional zone write general zoning standards for conditional describes the need and the character of the and special uses". zone. The need is for a zone in your code to buffer higher density commercial zones from low density residential zones. The transitional Sample text zone allows office uses within a setting of high quality site design to achieve compatibility We divide the sample text into four parts: (1), with nearby and abutting residential zoning. purposes and intent for transitional districts; Link five types of zoning development stan- (2), uses allowable by transitional zones; (3), dards to your transitional zone purposes: standards for transitional zones; and (4), Tran- hrough locational requirements that reduce sition Areas, in lieu of a transitional zone dis- the number of obviously non-transitional appli- trict. cations and reduce challenges of spot zoning; We underline quoted material to highlight and by architectural appearance and harmony with locate key topics within th ! body of the text. a 1987 by Charles Reed — Our new mailing address: PO Box 6529; Margate, Florida 33063 • THE ZONING REPORT Page Two Purposes and intent "The Office-Service District (O-S) is designed for transitional districts to accommodate various types of office uses performing administrative, professional and "0-1 Quiet Business District: This district is personal services. These are typically small intended to provide a buffer zone between office buildings which can serve as a transi- commercial and residential areas for proles- tional use between the more intensive uses of sional and business offices and related activi- land such as major thoroughfares and/or corn- ties." (Hot Springs AR) mercial districts and the less intensive uses of land such as single family residential. The zoning code quoted below has two transi- "This district is specifically intended to pro- tional districts—to increase the range of pos- hibit commercial establishments of a retail na- sible situations for applying transitional zoning. ture or other activities which require constant The professional office district is set forth as short-term parking and traffic from the general a narrowly defined use district with intense pt.blic except as provided in (this district for landscaping and compatibility regulation. The conditional uses)." (Southfield MI) general office district has a wider use list, almost commercial in nature, with less empha- (Conversion of existing buildings): sis placed on screening as essential to the "The 0-1 Quiet Office District is established zone's purposes, but allowing broader applies- in order to provide for orderly conversion of tion of the district throughout the community. older structures no longer useful, serviceable "Professional Office Districts provide areas or desirable in their present uses to office use. for low-intensity office uses. Structures shall The area standards provided in the "0-1" Quiet have exterior designs which are compatible Office District anticipate that office uses will with surrounding developments, vegetation and be located in established areas of the City and topography. The Professional Office District in close proximity to apartments and other res- may act as a buffer between residential and idential uses. Height, area and off-street park- more intensively developed properties. ing regulations are designed to acture that of- "(General) Office Districts provide areas for Tice uses will be compatible with adjacent resi- business, financial and professional service of- dential districts. (ices, located on arterial or commercial access "New construction designed to reinforce ex- streets. In the proximity of other major busi- isting desirable characteristics of the neighbor- ness and commercial districts, this district may hood and not detrimental to the continued use serve as a buffer between residential areas and of surrounding properties for residential pur- more intensive commercial districts." poses shall also be accommodated in this cis- (Bellevue WA) trict." (Little Rock AR) "PB Professional Business District: The "PB" "0-1 Limited Office District. This district is Professional Business District is created in or- intended to permit administrative, executive, der to provide a zoning district which would professional, and research activities carried on protect and encourage a high standard of pro- by a single establishment in new and existing fessional office development. The setback, structures and specified institutional uses. Such area, height and off-street parking regulations uses shall be established only when they would provided in this district anticipate that proles- act as a buffer between residential and non- sional business uses will be located in close residential uses located along highways, as proximity to apartments and other residential identified in the Memphis Urban Area Tran- uses and will be compatible with adjacent rest- sportation Study, as amended, and/or when dential districts. . . " such uses would abut a non-residential use. . " (Arlington TX) (Memphis TN) ge Three THE ZONING REPORT Uses allowable "(1) Executive, administrative and professional by transitional zones offices. "(2) Medical offices, including clinics and medi- "A building or premises in this (Professional cal laboratories. Business) District shall be used only for the "(3) Facilities for human care, such as hospi- following purposes: tals, sanitariums, convalescent and nursing "(1) The non-residential uses permitted in the homes. "R" District. "(4) Banks and similar facilities. "(2) Offices of professionals specifically list- "(5) Libraries and government office buildings ed in (the following table)— and public utility offices, but not including storage yards or post offices. Primary Use Incidental Use "(6) Private social or fraternal clubs or lodges. 1. Physician: office Medical laboratory "(7) Churches and related facilities. and outpatient facili- Physical therapy "(8) Public or private schools or colleges for ties (clinic) Dispensing optician general or vocational education. Dispnsing apothecary "(9) Nursery schools. 2. Dentist Dental laboratory "(10) Photographic studios and interior decorat- 3. Attorney at Law Land title insurance ing studios. 4. Architect "(11) Funeral homes. 5. Landscape Architect "(12) Establishments which perform personal Certified Public services on the premises such aam beauty par- .ccountant lcrs and barber shops. 7. Registered Engineer Registered Public "(13) Veterinary clinics and hospitals provided Surveyor all activities are conducted within a totally 8. Land Planner and permanently enclosed building. 9. Licensed Social Workers: "(14) Accessory buildings or uses customarily office, counseling be incidental to any of the above permitted uses. testing facilities (Conditional uses): "The following uses may 10. Psychologist be permitted upon the review and approval of 11. Chiropracter the City Council only after a recommendation 12. Podiatrist by the Planning Commission. The use or uses may only by approved when the following gen- eral standards have been satisfied and subject "(3) Uses customarily incidental to a primary to the conditions hereinafter imposed. use located on the same premises, as specific- "(1) Standards . . . (generally for conditional ally provided in (the above table), subject to uses) the Special Conditions . . . "(2) Uses: "(4) The following uses only when incidental to "(a) Pharmacies and prescription centers one or more the hereinabove-named primary when located in, or near, medical offices, uses, subject to the Special Conditions . . . medical clinics, hospitals, convalescent or "(a) Coffee shop; "(b) Barber shop nursing homes or similar facilities. "(c) Beauty shop" (Arlington TX) "(b) Private or public athletic clubs or health spas when conducted within a completely en- (By-right uses): "In an 0-S, Office-Service Dis- closed building. trict no building, structure or land shall be "(c1 Office and drafting supplies. 'rected or used except for the following speci- "(d) Reproduction and duplicating facilities .ied uses unless otherwise provided in this and other complementary office services, but Chapter: not a print shop. October 23, 1987 Issue THE ZONING REPORT Page Four "(e) Office warehousing when storage or ware- (For the PB Professional Business District): housing of goods cr products does not exceed Yards Front-25 ft, street side-15ft, interior 60% of the usable area and further provided side-10 ft, rear-15 ft. No minimum lot area. that: 60 ft lot width. 40 ft maximum height. 60% lot "1. No manufacturing or production of goods coverage by bldgs. or materials is conducted on the premises. (For the 0 general Office District): Yards: "2. Loading zones are not on any street fron- Front-25 ft, street side-15 ft, interior side— tage and are adequately obscured and 10 ft, rear-10 ft. No minimum lot area or screened from any residentially zoned pro- width. Height-40 ft except in "S" overlay over perty. Loading and unloading shall be res- 0 districts—see below. 60% lot coverage. tricted to normal business hours. (For "S" overlay over 0 District): "To provide "3. The parking of trucks, truck trailers, for an appropriate transition from district hav- vans or cars incidental to the use shall not ing more restrictive height limitations, por- exceed a period of 24 hours. tions of the "0" District may be designated by "4. The outdoor storage of display of goods the suffix "S". In the portions so designated, no or materials is prohibited. building or structure shall exceed one story in "5. The retail sales, on a "cash and carry" height. Such suffix may be added or removed basis, of goods is prohibited. from the Zoning District Map only after public "6. The minimum site size shall be 3 acres. hearirgs in accordance with the procedure es- "(f) Buildings in excess of 2 stories or 25 ft, tablished for amending this (zoning) ordinance." but not in excess of 3 stories or 35 ft in (Arlington TX) height, provided that: the minimum site size shall be 3 acres; the minimum setback from any "Required conditions: single familyresidentially zoned property shall "(1) No interior display shall be visible from be not less than 75 ft." (Southfield MI) any property line. "(2) The outdoor storage or display of goods or materials shall be prohibited irrespective of Standards whether or not they are for sale. "(3) Warehousing or indoor storage of goods or For the PO Professional Office District: materials in quantity greater than normally Yards: front-30 ft; side-20 ft per yard; rear— incidental to the above permitted uses shall be 25 ft. No minimum lot area, width or depth. 20 prohibited. ft maximum bldg height; the allowable height "(4) Not more than 50% of any front or side may not be increased one story if the ground yard abutting a street shall be used for vehicu- floor of the bldg is devoted to parking for that lar parking or driveways. This parking restric- bldg. 35% maximum lot coverage by bldgs. tion is necessary to maintain the transitional "All structures subject to design review: The character of the area that this district is in- - City shall not issue building permits for new tended to preserve. construction in the PO District unless the "Signs and lighting: Planning Director . . . has certified that in his "(1) All signs shall be accessory to the princi- judgment the plans for the structure's exterior, pal use of the property upon which it is locat- including finish material, color and landscaping, ed. All signs shall indicate only the name and/ are visually harmonious and compatible with or insignia and/or address of the principal use. the surrounding land uses, vegetation and topo- "(2) All signs shall be attached to the buildings graphy to promote quality design, reduce the and shall not extend above the roof line nor adverse impact of uncoordinated development project beyond or overhang the wall or any and protect and enhance surrounding neighbor- permanent architectural feature by mare than hoods." (Bellevue WA) one ft. October 23, 1987 Issue • Page Five THE ZONING REPORT "(3) Necessary directional or regulatory signs "Buffer strip: of not more than two sq ft each shall be mitted. Si per' "1. Location. A buffer strip shall be required gns pertaining to the sale or lease of alorg an within all Non-Residential District the property shall not be more than one sq ft boundaries immediately adjacent to a Resi- per 1000 sq ft of lot area. dence District and may be required along "(4) No moving or flashing parts or lights or within the rear, and/or side lot lines n any devices shall be permitted. All incandescent Special Permit use. Such buffer strip shall light sources shall be shielded from view from comply with at least the following minimum residentially zoned property. No lighting fix- provisions: ture shell be so located and directed as to be "(a) The buffer strip shall be at least 15 ft in a hazard to traffic safety." width and shall be retained as an integral part (Southfield MI) of the develc)ment project. "Sign regulations: "(b) A berm, mound, hedge, wall or fence of "Si Each office structure or suitable location, height, design and materials professional use approved by the Planning may have one sign flat against the front of the Sion may be used in conjunction and with Zoning por- building facade, facing the street on which the tion of m any pier lot fronts, the required planting and/or buffer "B. Each office structure or professional strip. use may have one double-faced, freestanding, in- "2. Standards: The buffer strip shall include ternally illuminated sign not exceeding 10 ft in evergreen plantings with at least one tree for height, measured from ground level, nor 24 sq each 10 ft of buffer length as measured paral- ft in area. lel to the "C. All freestanding signs shall be set back a "3.lel property line. minimum of 20 ft from the street ROW, except type o pe C Plants: The desired effect of this that signs having less than 6 sq ft shall be set the activitylonthe lot.is complete The visualshall of a minimum of 10 ft from the street ROW. sist d evergreen trees at plantingleast 8-10 11ft in "D. (Design and colors of signs): The back- height as shown on the . ground o>of all signs, whether or not illuminated, Standards". Non-evergree . planting "Landscape and/or a Ba shall be a neutral color, buff, white or tan, screening berm, hedge fence or wall atlleast 5 and the lettering thereon shall be either black ft in height may be used in conjunction with or dark brown; provided, however, that the the evergreen trees. The evergreen tees shall background of a sign may be black or dark be planted at 10 ft on center. The evergreen brown with lettering having the neutral colors trees may be grouped at staggered intervals of buff, white oc tan. Nothing herein shall pre- provided that the elude the placement d a logo having spacing between groups is other than those set forth above,gng colors infilled with a screening hedge, berm, fence or the color and design have become identified byt (West t least 5 ft in height." the public with a particular name. No colorePort CT) lights may be used to illuminate the signs. "Architectural review: "E. On a corner lot an additional freestanding "When the exteriors of existing :structures sign and an additional building facade sign may are to be remodeled or enlarged or 'hen new be permitted for each major street on which buildings or structures, including sig,s, walls, the lot fronts; provided, however, that no addi- fences and exterior lighting fixtures are g t onal signage shall be authorized on a side ofto Such building, posed, the designof these shall be subject to which side borders on a resider-- review and approval by the (CPC) to insure tial zone." that they will be compatible in a (East Brunswick TownshipNJ) a •once and performance with the residential arrea ea. • THE ZONING REPORT Page Six "(Hours of operation in . . . ): "(The 0-1 "Setback: The minimum setback from a pro- Quiet Business District is) defined to be nor- pertyline abutting a Single-Family or Multi- mally 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. Monday through Friday, Family District is 20 ft unless a larger setback limited activity on the weekend days." is required (elsewhere in the zoning code). (Hot Springs AR) "Parkin : Parking and circulation areas must be locate and landscaped to minimize adverse (Noise): "Exterior noise levels generated by any impacts on an abutting Single-Family or Multi- use in this district shall not exceed 55dB(a)L family District. 10 during the day, 45 dB(a)L10 during the night "Li htin : No building or use may have any (measured at the property line and at a height uns e e source of light as measured at of 10 ft above grade) or shall not exceed the ground level at the boundary with a Single- ambient noise level, whichever is greater. All Family or Multifamily District. noise producing equipment, fans, vents, etc., ". . , shall be oriented away from residential areas "Modifications: The applicant may propose to and/or appropriately screened." modify any Transition Area requirement of this (Mountain View CA) (zoning) Code, excluding definitions, procedures and other requirements unrelated to design through the Administrative Design Review Pro- cess. Transition Area, in lieu of riteria: The Planning Director may approve a transitional zone district a modification of the requirements . . . only if: "1. The proposal will accomplish the same or Definition: "Any property in any (commercial, better protection of an abutting Single-Family office or industrial) District that is within 300 or Multifamily District from adverse impacts of ft of any lot in (a low-density residential) Dis- noise, traffic, air quality, water quality, light trict or within 300 ft of any lot in a jurisdic- and umecessary obstruction or diminution of tion outside the City boundaries classified pri- views. marily for single-family dwellings is hereby "2. The proposal does not modify any height or designated a Trarsition Area to Single-Family setback limits of the underlying Land Use Dis- Districts. trict. "Any property in any (comm.rtial, office or ". . . industrial) District that is within 150 ft of any "4. The proposal is compatible with surrounding lot in (a multi-family) District or within 150 ft properties. Compatibility includes, but is not of any lot in a jurisdiction outside the City limited to, size, scale, mass and architectural boundaries classified primarily for two or more design. . . " dwelling units per structure is designated a (Bellevue WA) Trarsition Area to Multi-Family Districts. • • • • • • • • "Building height: The maximum building height within a Transition Area to a Single- We make every effort to present accurate in- Family District is 30 ft, unless a lower height formation and sound opinion in this report. is required (elsewhere in the zoning code). However, we do not guarantee results, accu- n racy, or assume liability for errors, omissions, "Access: Wherever available, principal access or for information you may act upon. This ptir to a use within a Transition Area must be de- lication does not purport to be engaged in the signed so that traffic is not directed through practice of law or give legal advice, but is the or adjacent to an abutting Single-Family or opinion of the editor and publisher solely as a MultiFamily District. professional urban planner. C I T Y O F PC DATE: January 4, 1995 � � :DATEJanuary t , Y CUA1IIAEI'TCC Ja 23, 1995 CASE #: 94-20 SUB By: Generous:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat approval to subdivide a 2.04 acre parcel into three lots with a 11 1/2 foot lot frontage variance for Lot 1, Block 1, Cunningham Addition I- Z LOCATION: 6240 Ridge Road, Section 36, Township 117 North, Range 23 West, and Q Sections 1 and 2, Township 116 North, Range 23 West on the Chanhassen and (� Shorewood corporate limits J 0.0. APPLICANT: William Patrick Cunningham 865 Pleasant View Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 • 474-8377 PRESENT ZONING: Single Family Residential, RSF ACREAGE: 2.04 acres DENSITY: 1.47 units per acre ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - residential, City of Shorewood Q S - RSF, single-family homes E - RSF, vacant W - Christmas Lake WATER AND SEWER: Available W I. PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: Severe topographic changes from east to west down to lake. The site is densely wooded. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Low Density (Net Density Range 1.2 - 4.0 units/acre) • E 8 LeteikTIONs. F 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ILILAC LANE 52 i L,i I 1 ! V CHRISTMAS ' l 1 HENNEPIN • • II ....... .. 1911T111 . ,, LAKE , gmit11.$ .11V El a r us ;L. t• RI imi.,......!_„j-lff-lgsPi c„,___ „-- , . Wililit Err ER Iliwk tPljilriri,c-t57 - *4111111r-"11 • IlvIlili4INAtitliVlit,.. imei -0N eirlor .,A ,101._ Y Ill lallitiMAA1`46 sl), _• sm.1111111n riussigi iwill PAMIR. 411,481 F Bill a Ali1P7.--' vTo_Aw, al iit : I —7. 0 RR prmi Tx re464 m a La volllivAtivirgraimor. FARMS! iu rilillkut 11111 4\ • 4* a PARK 1111111N114.1% L ..4" Mr.% long 4$ vs 474 414 — r Ink 411.6 418 '''Z'no■'• ‘ ' \ N A- '' elphAtti4 4*r 4 1,..mm,(' i:! lta '2.%1 111201114 p Pt:Ca* ‘ ,*44 N416* „ ,,,_, roille.git 1: 1 1611.11rat reg4Aragligum II'' #/ rimwrilnip. 011111111M0 vigiseR--ihey.!, - })c,,,. 'NrAlia pplimprel =Innuommhok Is: virz kiii ..;; . 'VER A- R B E A C H 'Ates:es*\7 ' Ida I p Merill&t.1 I::' is .....z. , BEACH \A - • LPL A GROC/No •NV 1111 . Etat7. ma A'11 BP! I* PARK i 0 4: ....: IncLE Do Ellentu wii ov, WENN 0r. /l __ ,,, ..,11141/4% : 19151:44* •4711'. VIOLET -40- 1't 1 ,, whAl 2 31 Um mvirma, rim "lui.vvk _ milrotime = ed: rfrs1 -444r-7* Irr-:Inv•\ -** ‘..4 • \\ ...... lin iik 3 rov;• ‘ tv iri 4 gerk,V7T4* -1 s \ \ °ft v ) \V4 • Ai.' ''' ___Yy -- 1 ”dliWliiii mat la 141:114 r.41.AU.---::4-s-s-i D w ariwIV It . 11-•011610 - ri r.--5 'AjgreiPP( `41 Q17,i 14 -a - tL,,010_..... A K E Luc Y Ole artruis — Er t:IS 4.-- ).'4'y'g*A vsmf•frtift - ' 1LsifiTow•__......skY ' ea* --- EA tee-*-A tio 1, 4: me .-,-. • k.,-,..________- - ..— 1.—\' ( atae _...„ iv_ :=.,... .1.:.,. _,.. err gwAhdh, ' AIL' - ---- IX t-Zie. - Il 114 i .Mk EL iu — rl trotizir Elf . III* .", ..i *AU 41 q a ,.11,-:f. r„.,•44,a; it:a ym.,14 6 4-T, IMPI14-• \, oiimars,;:i T.:. !. A.-. REEN W• • • 1.4?::::••••• '* ,11&4 400,441111 I. ) , . SHORES P- 11 I-;SIONCROWIrelli 11111111101111151101110//1;) ., ARK Cc-0 iflinonbao- -_-4kii. railealltlelkyaVV!liV MEADOW "PM'.:46v* "''-,,„ii iv a 1,11*SA,IPV• 41tv.siiI \ "if ANN GREEN PARA' gro F741 S. 45 ''''w iii ilk aiiii0' 11/20• le\. a * a i witi 4:111 sway - i/ )1 ,V '41 V. • II 11II-IIN---j i11 , ..0 ,. ...l.1-,1.-„11-* 1-1-7 OM al e glea rA Ems ji sit otty Z.L.Dul - __--_= ----- Pwr .1411:4 gill I IIIP ii: "Its kg: i 11,,e1:7-zxv‘!"'"1" i . Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY A complete application was submitted on December 6, 1994. The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval to subdivide a 2.04 acre parcel into three lots with a 111/2 foot lot frontage variance for Lot 1, Block 1, Cunningham Addition, on property zoned RSF. The lots average 29,563 square feet and range in size from 28,458 to 31,586 square feet. The minimum lot area required on a Recreational Development Lake for a sewered lot is 20,000 square feet. The proposed subdivision exceeds this requirement by a minimum of 27 percent for the smallest proposed lot. Lot 1 is located in Shorewood but will be serviced by Chanhassen for sewer and water. The existing cabin on proposed Lot 2, Block 1, is a nonconforming structure in that it does not comply with the shoreland regulation of a 75 foot setback requirement. The proposed subdivision of the property does not increase the nonconformity. However, the cabin is therefore governed by Section 20-72 of the Chanhassen City Code. Subsection (a) There shall be no expansion, intensification, replacement, structural change, or relocation of any nonconforming use or nonconforming structure except to _ lessen or eliminate the nonconformity. Subsection (b) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, any detached single-family dwelling that is on a nonconforming lot or that is a nonconforming use or structure may be altered, or expanded provided, however, that the nonconformity may not be increased. If a setback of a dwelling is nonconforming, no additions may be added to the nonconforming side of the building unless the addition meets the setback requirements. Subsection (e) Maintenance and repair of nonconforming structures is permitted. Removal or destruction of a nonconforming structure to the extent of more than fifty (50) percent of its estimated value, excluding land value and as determined by the city, shall terminate the right to continue the nonconforming structure. The western portion of the site meets the bluff definition of city code. In order to determine the top of the bluff, staff is designating the following contours as the top of bluff: Lot 1 - 974 contour, Lot 2 - 978 contour, Lot 3 - 980 contour. A minimum 30 foot building setback must be maintained from these contour lines. When building permits are applied for, the applicant or future builders shall provide a survey showing the appropriate contour elevation and the minimum 30 foot setback. Sewage Treatment. The existing dwelling on proposed lot 2 is not served by City sewer. In order to insure the untreated or inadequately treated sewage is not entering the groundwater, Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 3 the applicant must demonstrate that any effluent generated on the property is properly treated. There are three possible paths to compliance. 1. Confirm that the existing individual sewage treatment system (ISTS) is a conforming system. A licensed ISTS evaluator must be engaged to evaluate the system for compliance with ISTS Standards, Section 7080.0060. It is unlikely that the existing system is a conforming system. Lack of the required three feet of separation from unsaturated soil is the most common determinant of nonconforming ISTS in Chanhassen. Nonconforming ISTS must be abandoned. 2. Do not generate sewage on the property. One method of achieving this would involve removing all plumbing from the structure. This would include all waste piping, gray water or black water, and all interior water piping. This would have the effect of converting the structure to something other than a dwelling, a conversion that may not be permitted by Chanhassen City Code. Another method of discontinuing waste generation is to remove the structure. If demolition is considered, it should be noted that a permit is required to demolish the structure. 3. Connect to City sewer. Connection to City sewer would involve construction of a private lift station and possibly upgrading plumbing within the structure. Sewer and plumbing permit requirements as well as a Sewer Availability Charge would be applicable. Shoreland regulations require that lots not served by city sewer systems have a minimum lot area of 40,000 square feet and a minimum of 150 feet of lake frontage. In order to permit the subdivision of the property, as proposed, the applicant would need to comply with these minimum requirements, connect the cabin to the city's sanitary sewer system which is located in Ridge Road, or demolish the structure. Water Service. The Minnesota Plumbing Code (4715.0310) requires the water distribution system to be connected to an accessible public water supply. It is unclear if this section can be applied to an existing unchanged water distribution system. It is clear that the building must be supplied with potable water(4715.1700). It is possible that the lake water used in the dwelling may be potable, but it is the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate its potability on a continuing basis. Permits and Inspections. The proposed dwelling on proposed Lot 1 does not lie within Chanhassen, but utility service is provide by Chanhassen. Sewer and water permits and the water meter and horn are required to be obtained from Chanhassen. SAC fees and sewer and Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 4 water connection charges must also be remitted to the City at the time the meter horn is issued. A final plumbing inspection is required to be performed by Chanhassen mechanical inspectors before the installation of the water meter. BACKGROUND In November 1978, the city approved the Meyers Addition subdivision (#78-12 SUB) creating three lots on the east side of Ridge Road. As part of the subdivision approval, a variance to the subdivision requirement for lots to front on dedicated public streets was approved. The concern at the time was to have an assurance that the lots would be able to access the private drive in perpetuity. It was also not felt that Ridge Road would ever become a public street. In January, 1981, the city approved the Edwards Addition subdivision (#80-5 SUB), creating two lots on the west side of Ridge Road. As part of the subdivision approval, a variance to the subdivision requirement for lots to front on dedicated public streets was approved. The concern at the time was to have an assurance that the lots would be able to access the private drive in perpetuity. It was also not felt that Ridge Road would ever become a public street. On March 4, 1994, the Board of Adjustments and Appeals approved a variance for the Cunningham property to permit up to three access points for his property on Ridge Road, a private street (Variance 94-1). LANDSCAPING/TREE PRESERVATION Staff estimates that the site is 90 plus percent covered by tree canopy. City code specifies that the post development canopy coverage must be a minimum of 55 percent. Fifty-five percent of 2.04 acres is 1.12 acres of canopy coverage. A worst case scenario would permit the applicant to remove approximately 32,000 square feet of canopy area. The plans provided show a potential tree removal of 12,000 square feet of canopy area. Based on this review, there are no forestation or replacement planting requirements. In order to assure that the minimum canopy coverage is maintained, staff is recommending that the following conservation easements be recorded: The western 100 feet of Lot 1, Block 1; The western 140 feet of Lot 2, Block 1; The western 180 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. Within these areas, approximately one acre of tree canopy is being preserved. Within the conservation area, only minimal shoreland alteration as provided in section 20-482 of the Chanhassen City Code shall be permitted. The existing cabin on Lot 2 may remain, subject to the nonconforming ordinance requirements. Tree protection fencing shall be incorporated on the site during construction to protect all trees that are to be preserved. WETLANDS Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 5 There does not appear to be any wetlands present on-site. Staff would like to have verification from the applicant verifying that there are no wetlands on-site that will be impacted as a result of the proposed development. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) that serves as a tool to protect, preserve and enhance water resources. The plan identifies, from a regional perspective, the storm water quantity and quality improvements necessary to allow future development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general, the water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker, Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on the projected future land use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to determine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. Storm Water Quality Fees The SWMP has established a water quality connection charge for each new subdivision based on land use. Dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of $2.50 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond. Since the water quality basin for this site is already in place these fees will be charged according to the volume of ponding needed for the site. A credit for the one existing house/lot has been applied. The proposed SWMP quality charge has been calculated at $800/acre for single-family residential developments. This proposed development of 0.66 acres (lot 3 only since lot 1 is in Shorewood) would then be responsible for a water quality connection charge of $528. Storm Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average city-wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Single family residential developments will have a connection charge of $1,980 per developable acre. This proposed single-family residential development of 0.66 acres (lot 3 only since lot 1 is in Shorewood) would then be responsible for a water quantity connection charge of $1,307. Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 6 GRADING & DRAINAGE The site is densely wooded with a variety of trees and steep slopes that meet the bluff criteria. A high ridge intersects about midway through the parcel and slopes down significantly to Christmas Lake and gently towards Ridge Road. Lot 3 has an isolated knoll which is proposed to be built on. The plans propose grading for the driveway and house pad which will result in lowering part of the knoll approximately six feet. The driveway grade is proposed at approximately 9 to 10 percent which is the maximum allowed by city ordinance. Staff believes raising the garage floor 22 feet would reduce some of the grading and possibly tree loss in the front and side yard areas. However, the resulting driveway grade would be approximately 12% which would require a variance from the city ordinance. Staff has also looked at re-routing the driveway through Lot 2 (shared driveway); however, because of the utility service location on Lot 3, staff believes raising the garage elevation or constructing retaining walls is more feasible from limiting the grading impacts on Lot 3. The utility service stub for Lot 3 is situated approximately where the driveway is proposed. A detailed grading, drainage, tree removal, and erosion control plan should be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit for each lot. The western portion of the site drains into Christmas Lake where the eastern portion of the site drains toward Ridge Road. There are no storm sewer improvements in Ridge Road nor are there any planned. Currently, the storm runoff sheet drains to and across Ridge Road towards the wetland complex adjacent to Silver Lake located in the northeast corner of Ridge Road and Pleasant View Road. The City's Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) proposes a future water quality treatment pond at the south end of the wetland complex adjacent to Silver Lake to pretreat approximately 11.7 acres of drainage area. This area includes the drainage from these lots. As a result of this subdivision, staff does not believe that the increase runoff from this subdivision will adversely impact the wetlands. At this time, staff is recommending the applicant pay the applicable SWMP fees in lieu of constructing any of the downstream stormwater improvements. UTILITIES The existing structure on Lot 2 is currently on a septic system which is approximately 20 years old. According to the property owner, the cabin is used only during the summertime on a very limited basis. The water supply is taken from Christmas Lake. Since the septic system is very old there is some question as to whether the septic system is operating properly. The Building Official should address this item in further detail. Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 7 Municipal sewer and water lines are located in Ridge Road to service this subdivision. Individual services were stubbed to each lot. The applicant has previously been assessed for one sewer and water lateral assessment. The assessment was larger than the typical assessment due to the extra large square footage of each lot. Staff believes the assessment will cover two of the three lots due to the extra square footage assessed and that one of the lots should still be assessed for another connection charge and all three lots should pay the hook up charge at the time of building permit issuance. Since most of Lot 1 is actually in the City of Shorewood, a Joint Powers Service Agreement will need to be prepared between the cities for the City of Chanhassen supplying the property with utility service. This is similar to past subdivisions such as Deer Ridge, Holly Lane and Lilac Lane where the subdivision was actually in Shorewood and the City of Chanhassen provided sewer and water services. STREETS The parcel gains access from Ridge Road which is a private street. The City recently granted the applicant a variance for subdividing the property without improving the street to urban standards. Staff recommends that the applicant dedicate the necessary right-of-way for future upgrading. The typical urban street section is 60 feet wide; therefore, the applicant should dedicate 30 feet from the center of Ridge Road with the final plat. Staff is concerned that if the right-of-way for Ridge Road is not required, the City will need to acquire the property in the future. The street will need to be upgraded with improvements such as widening, curbs and gutters, and storm sewer improvements as the neighborhood further develops. Since Ridge Road is a private street, the applicant should obtain and convey the necessary cross-access or driveway maintenance easement agreement for the new lots to gain ingress and egress to the site. MISCELLANEOUS The standard side, front, and rear drainage and utility easements should be required on the final plat documents pursuant to City Code. COMPLIANCE TABLE BLOCK LOT AREA (SQ. FT) FRONTAGE DEPTH 1 1 31,586 78.5* 300 • 1 2 28,458# 90 310 1 3 28,645 90 320 88,689 Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 8 * Does not meet minimum frontage. However, a variance is being requested as part of the plat. # Does not comply with shoreland regulation requirement of 40,000 square feet for unsewered lot. FINDINGS 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; Finding: The subdivision meets all the requirements of the RSF, Residential Single Family District with the exception of Lot 1 which is 11 1/2 feet short of the minimum 90 feet of frontage. However, as part of the application, the applicant is requesting an 11/ foot variance for this property. In addition, in order to comply with the city's shoreland regulations, the applicant would need to connect the existing cabin to the city's sanitary sewage system or demolish the structure. 2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable plans. 3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the conditions specified in this report. 4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure. In order to comply with the city's shoreland regulations, the applicant would need to connect the existing cabin to the city's sanitary sewage system or demolish the structure 5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage subject to — conditions of approved. Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 9 6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record. Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements. 7. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. b. Lack of adequate roads. c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate urban infrastructure. A variance (#94-1) has been granted permitting up to three access points for this property to a private street. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve Subdivision 94-20 with a 111/2 foot lot frontage variance for Lot 1, Block 1, Cunningham Addition subject to the plans dated December 6, 1994 and the following conditions: 1. All structures shall be built within the Shorewood city limits for Lot 1, Block 1, Cunningham Addition with the exception of fences and the driveway. All appropriate permits shall be applied for from the responsible jurisdiction, 2. The following contours are designated as the top of bluff: Lot 1 - 974 contour, Lot 2 - 978 contour, Lot 3 - 980 contour. A minimum 30 foot building setback must be maintained from these contour lines. When building permits are applied for, the applicant or future builders shall provide a survey showing the appropriate contour elevation and the minimum 30 foot setback. 3. The following conservation easements shall be recorded over the property: The western 100 feet of Lot 1, Block 1; The western 140 feet of Lot 2, Block 1; The western 180 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. Within the conservation area, only minimal shoreland alteration as provided in section 20-482 of the Chanhassen City Code shall be permitted. Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 10 4. Tree protection fencing shall be incorporated on the site during construction to protect all trees that are to be preserved. 5. The existing dwelling on the property must connect to City sewer and water or demolish the structure. This shall be done prior to the issuance of any building permits for Cunningham Addition. 6. The applicant shall inform the builder of Chanhassen permit and inspection requirements. This shall be done prior to the issuance of building permits for lot 1. 7. The applicant should revise the garage floor elevation on Lot 3 to 996.5 and/or employ the use of retaining walls to minimize grading impacts. A variance to the 10% driveway grade is recommended on Lot 3. The maximum driveway grade shall be 12%. 8. A detailed grading, drainage, tree removal, and erosion control plan shall be submitted to the City for each lot. The City Engineer shall review and approve the plan prior to issuance of a building permit. 9. The applicant shall be required to pay the surface water management fees in lieu of constructing downstream stormwater improvements. 10. The applicant shall enter into a joint powers agreement between the cities of Shorewood and Chanhassen for providing utility service and billing for Lot 1. 11. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat one-half of the necessary street right-of- way for Ridge Road. The final plat shall dedicate the easterly 30 feet of Lots 1, 2 and 3 as road right-of-way for Ridge Road. The final plat shall also dedicate the necessary side, front, and rear drainage and utility easements per city ordinance. 12. The applicant shall obtain and convey the necessary cross-access or driveway maintenance easement agreements to provide access to the newly created lots. 13. The applicant shall verify that there are no wetland impacts to the site." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Development Review Application 2. Letter from Wm. Pat Cunningham dated 11/5/94 3. Proposed Cunningham Addition 4. Tree Inventory Cunningham Addition January 4, 1995 Page 11 5. Letter from Joe Richter to Robert Generous dated 12/15/94 6. Letter from Richard J. Pilon (Minnegasco) to Robert Generous dated 12/19/94 7. Memo from Steve Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 12/20/94 8. Notice of Public Hearing and Mailing List 9. Preliminary plat dated December 6, 1994. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: William Patrick Cunningham OWNER: William Patrick Cunningham ADDRESS: 865 Pleasant View Road ADDRESS: 865 Pleasant View Road Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 TELEPHONE (Day time) ( 612 ) 474-8377 TELEPHONE: ( 612 ) 474-8377 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review ✓Notification Signs I'D - 1 50- 9. Site Plan Review X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost" $100 CUP/SPRNACNARNAP ate, $400 Minor SUB/Metes & Bounds 10. / Subdivision 5-0 — TOTAL FEE $ 500 .� A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must Included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 8W X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. " Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME Cunningham Estate • LOCATION Christmas Lake LEGAL DESCRIPTION See attached (Exhibit A) PRESENT ZONING R-1 REQUESTED ZONING same PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Residential REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION Same REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Subdividing existing 1 lot into 3 lakeshore lots This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. • t also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records. f �C J Gym II- /6 - Signature of Applicant Date .' Signature of Fee Owner / ff Date Application Received on i i/ /(' Fee Paid 5DO. Receipt No. 5 Z y 37 The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. November `'. 19M To:: The decision ma.kln<r pesonnel Ior the city. o2 Chanhassen My name is *.am ''Pat" Cunningham. I live at 86S Pleasant view Road in Chanhassen. Forty years acro I bounht a piece of property on the Christmas Lake Ridge. This property has: 26;i: feet on Ridge Road and S27 feet of lakeshore. I bought this property for the recreational use for myself and mu family. I have kept this land in it's natural state for the entire -ICI years. To the best of my knowledge this is one of the last remaining stands of virgin timber. This property is now in two cities. Chanhassen and Shorewood. There are two pie shaped pieces that need to be transferred from one city to the other to produce three buildable lots. The plot plan indicates the three lots with the land transfers shown. The entire propel-t1j is entirely shaded eiicept for a strip about 2S feet wide and about iuti feet longi- a_t the waters edge a.nd another area in Shorewood where an abandoned tennis court was once in service. This space provides a natural level spot Iol a house to be built. shortly after purchasing- this land I built a recreational cottaqe at the Lakeshore. i received the proper permit Ior buildin . this cabin and I remember the man in chart-e indleatMg where it could be built. Mu cabin is strictly recreational. Ito one lives in the cabin and my families use it about three and a half months of the year. The principle trees on the entire property are red oak. maple, fir and birch and one hu a cottonwood tree. Concerning the tree population the Shorewood lot tParcel I) has fifty trees over 1::" in diameter covering the entire lot eiicept the before mentioned abandoned tennis court. I intend to work closely. with whoever buys this lot in art effort to save trees. The center lot tParcel 2). I have placed in a family trust so it should be unchanged for the nein 160 Sears. It has c:7 trees over 12" at the base. The south lot (Parcel )has '13 trees over 12" at the base. I believe T.Zrorki.-�' with l t LJL i tL e .11 future butters we can work a plan that will call for veru little tree removal. I am informed that the City of Shorewood is receptive to the plat as shown and 1 inceriv hope the City of i..hanhassen will also be receptive. I want to thank each oI you for your consideration and if I can be of further help please advise. 'sincerely. gm fat Cunnlrttrha.m ir (3,:itt__ .1[: ii -- ``* \ `tel-—• t -t-_' - ' .ti.' --:.*.'•4. ` -:.:.....-\,,,w, i .--z„.„—z,,,,.;.; -r^ ` ` ,,,.`_'tib- Z-iwxE_ _ ` trSw� i` ‘ -.4„... z.-", '''------T-- "27".pl;-‘2;‘'N ;.: , • "--1, \ :- • AtIA\‘‘c.:"1,......,-....4,.... % -------7 • -.,a- i j 'sj j`� getV \I.\\ •\ �r�_ a_ \1 '• ijt TO t. `�r� ' � -�� tis \ "i / , . ',r A `.f-f ; army,, • 17_ // O � m ai•. ,_ --•i7 �2.!.,- ;. \�/1.^• - m 1 m ��'t7.r [tea -, \ . ��, • z 5 \C.. t "1��. / Z g , i1`i iK ! ,-_.rim Z 1 5 1 CD s ; ,' # r 11 / I1(s s sgY _ c _ _ pp iF =jam{"F .2` .tra F (iii !'ff ! -fl:*. E t 12 a 34 t tilWg r i;1 zlt sr i1 1t;� 'iiiI ttt 1F1t1IL ]f t 111 a II 3� t�i:t4111 T � l:Vi i t s. [lic i}i=€.ice T1=11 'i " i {• ri Fy 4, I/ tol'igIt 3} .i [ s : s. I!j! sgt11 :1111 ;I If 11111110i ..71 f li I If : =:i� i 1tp o ii ma 1111111.111i1ligfil11 iiiiit T ilifttigt:Inligfi l' 4-1/111 I . Iii$ tai:t=t t � i1 It i . T itiiiIi II: 1. 1- !i till 121::11 11;"11 I a ;litII % ` IiI !llhiJE€lF = ` i !I14 _ Et , ; 1i ; :=fit WILLIAM P. CUNNINGHAM CHRISTMAS LAKE PROPERTY TREE LOCATION. SIZE AND TYPE TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE 1 4'0" OAK 19 1'0" PINE 1A 1'8" MAPLE 20 3'0" ELM 1B 1'4" BOX ELDER 21 1'4" MAPLE 2 1'2" PINE 22 1'4" MAPLE 3 1'2" PINE 23 1'2" MAPLE 4 1'6" PINE 24 2'0" OAK 5 1'4" PINE 25 1'8" BASS 6 1'0" PINE 26 1'2" MAPLE 7 1'6" PINE 27 3'0" OAK 8 1'6" PINE 28 2'4" OAK 9 1'2" PINE 29 1'8" OAK 10 1'4" PINE 30 1'6" MAPLE 11 1'0" PINE 31 1'10" BASS 12 2'0" ASH 32 1'0" MAPLE 13 1'6" PINE 33 2'0" OAK 14 1'0" MAPLE 34 1'6" OAK 15 1'6" PINE 35 1'4" OAK 16 1'6" PINE 36 1'6" ASH 17 1'6" PINE 37 1'4" ASH 18 1'0" PINE 38 1'4" ASH TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE 39 1'4" ASH 59 1'3" MAPLE 40 3'0" OAK 60 1'6" MAPLE 41 1'6" ASH 61 1'4" ASH 42 1'0" MAPLE 62 1,0" MAPLE 43 1'6" BASS 63 2'0" OAK 44 2'0" ASH 64 2'0" OAK 45 1'8" BASS 65 2'0" OAK 46 1'2" BASS 66 1'2" MAPLE 47 1'0" MAPLE 67 1'2" MAPLE 48 1'4" ASH 68 1'4" MAPLE r 49 2'2" OAK 69 2'0" ASH 50 1'2" BASS 70 1'8" MAPLE 51 1'2" MAPLE 71 1'6" ASH 52 1'4" ASH 72 2'0" MAPLE 53 1'4" ASH 73 2'0" ASH 54 1'4" ASH 74 1'8" BASS 55 2'0" OAK 75 1'8" BASS 56 1'4" MAPLE 76 1'2" BASS 57 1'4" BASS 77 1'2" BASS 58 1'4" BASS 78 2'0" BASS TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE 79 1'6" ASH 99 1'8" OAK 80 3'0" OAK 100 3'6" MAPLE 81 1'0" ASH 101 1'4" BASS 82 1'4" ASH 102 1'2" BASS 83 1'4" ASH 103 3'2" OAK 84 1'6" ASH 104 2'0" OAK 85 1'4" ASH 105 1'6" OAK 86 2'0" MAPLE 106 1'8" OAK 87 1'4" MAPLE 107 1'8" OAK 88 1'6" BASS 108 1'6" BASS .- 89 1'0" BASS 109 1'6" BIRCH 90 2'0" BASS 110 1'4" BASS 91 1'8" BASS 111 1'0" MAPLE 92 1'4" ASH 112 1'8" BASS 93 1'8" BASS 113 1'8" OAK 94 2'0" MAPLE 114 1'8" MAPLE 95 1'6" BASS 115 2'0" MAPLE 96 1'6" MAPLE 116 1,0" MAPLE 97 1'8" MAPLE 117 2'0" OAK 98 3'6" MAPLE 118 1'8" BASS TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE 119 1'8" BASS 140 1 '4" MAPLE 120 1'8" BASS 141 1 '6" BASS 121 1'0" BASS 142 1 '8" BASS 122 1'6" MAPLE 143 1 '8" MAPLE 123 1'8" MAPLE 144 1'8" BASS 124 2'0" BASS 145 2'0" BASS 125 2'0" BASS 146 4'0" OAK 126 1'6" BIRCH 147 1'6" BASS 127 3'6" COTTON 148 1 '8" BASS 128 2'4" ELM 149 1'8" BASS 129 1'8" BASS 150 1'8" BASS 130 1'8" BASS 151 1'4" BASS 131 1'8" BASS 152 1'4" BASS 132 1'6" MAPLE 153 1'6" MAPLE 133 1'8" BASS 154 1'4" MAPLE 134 1'1" BASS 155 1'4" BASS 135 1'2" MAPLE 156 1'4" BASS 136 1'2" MAPLE 157 1'4" BASS 137 1 '6" MAPLE 158 1'8" OAK 138 1 '8" MAPLE 159 2'0" ASH 139 2'0" MAPLE 160 2'0" ASH TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE TREE NUMBER--TREE SIZE--TREE TYPE 161 1 '8" MAPLE 168 2'0" OAK 162 1 '6" MAPLE 169 2'0" OAK 163 1 '8" ASH 170 1 '8" MAPLE 164 2'0" OAK 171 1 '2" OAK 165 1 '8" OAK 172 1 '8" BASS 166 1 '8" OAK 173 2'0" ASH 167 2'0" OAK 174 2'0" ASH 175 2'0" ASH STATE OF nrn DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE NO METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55106 772-7910 F LE NO December 15, 1994 Mr. Robert Generous, Planner II Planning Department City of Chanhassen 600 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Cunningham Addition, Christmas Lake (27-137P) , City of Chanhassen, Carver County (City #94-20 SUB) Dear Mr. Generous: We have reviewed the site plans (received December 7, 1994) for the above-referenced project (Section 2 , T116N, R23W) and have the following comments to offer: 1. Public Water, Christmas Lake (27-137P) is on the proposed site. Any activity below the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation, which alters the course, current or cross-section of Public Waters, is under the jurisdiction of the DNR and may require a DNR permit. The OHW for Christmas Lake (27-137P) is 932 . 77 ' (NGVD, 1929) . 2 . The proposed plan does not indicate how the stormwater will be managed. You are advised that the DNR would object to having the stormwater routed directly to Christmas Lake. Stormwater sedimentation/treatment basins, or other appropriate stormwater treatment features, should be included in the stormwater management plan. If stormwater is routed directly to Christmas Lake, it can cause sedimentation and water level bounces that are detrimental to wildlife values and water quality. 3 . Christmas Lake has a shoreland classification of recreational development. The shoreland district extends 1000' from the OHW. The development must be consistent with city's shoreland management regulations. In particular you should note: a. The western half of the subdivision contains bluffs (i. e. , slopes that average 30 percent or greater and rise 25' above the (OHW) top of the bank) along Christmas Lake. The bluffs overlooking Christmas Lake should not be disturbed and all structures should be set back at least 30' from the top of the bluff. b. The vegetation and topography should be retained in a natural state in the shore and bluff impact AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Mr. Robert Generous, Planner II _ December 15, 1994 Page 2 zones. The minimum shore impact zone is an area within 37 1/2 ' of the OHW. The bluff impact zone is an area within 20' of the top of the bluff. c. The structures in the subdivision should be screened from view from Christmas Lake using topography, existing vegetation, color, and other means approved by the city. 5. The following comments are general and apply to all proposed developments: a. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their equivalent, should be followed. b. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10, 000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, the contractor will need to obtain a DNR appropriations permit. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. c. The comments in this letter address DNR - Division of Waters jurisdictional matters and concerns. These comments should not be construed as DNR support or lack thereof for a particular project. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, L &L Joe Richter Hydrologist JR/cds c: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Gary Elftmann Chanhassen Shoreland File Minnegasco' A NORf WI ENERGY COMPANY December 19 , 1994 Mr. Robert Generous Planner II City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re: 94-20 SUB Cunningham Addition William Patrick Cunningham Dear Mr. Generous : Enclosed are your prints for this project with the location of Minnegasco' s natural gas mains indicated in red. Individual services are not shown. Natural gas service is available to this property from the main shown. No addition work is anticipated at this time unless requested by a developer, builder or owner. The developer/builder should contact Terry Jencks of Minnegasco' s Residential Energy Services, 525-7607, to make application for natural gas service. Minnegasco has no objections to this development proposal . Sincerely, Richard J / •ilon, P.E. Senior Administration Engineer Engineering Services 612-342-5426 cc: Mary Palkovich Terry Jencks 700 West Linden Avenue PO.Box 1165 Minneapolis.MN M-I4f1-I165 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official 'CH) DATE: December 20, 1994 SUBJECT: 94-20 SUB (Cunningham Addition, William Patrick Cunningham) I was asked to review the preliminary plat stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, DEC 6 1994, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. Analysis: Sewage Treatment. The existing dwelling on proposed lot 2 is not served by City sewer. In order to insure the untreated or inadequately treated sewage is not entering the groundwater, the applicant must demonstrate that any effluent generated on the property is properly treated. I have identified three possible paths to compliance. 1. Confirm that the existing individual sewage treatment system (ISTS) is a conforming system. A licensed ISTS evaluator must be engaged to evaluate the system for compliance with ISTS Standards, Section 7080. 0060 . It is unlikely that the existing system is a conforming system. Lack of the required three feet of separation from unsaturated soil is the most common determinant of nonconforming ISTS in Chanhassen. Nonconforming ISTS must be abandoned. 2 . Do not generate sewage on the property. One method of achieving this would involve removing all plumbing from the structure. This would include all waste piping, gray water or black water, and all interior water piping. This would have the effect of converting the structure to something other than a dwelling, a conversion that may not be permitted by Chanhassen City Code. Another method of discontinuing waste generation is to remove the structure. If demolition is considered, it should be noted that a permit is required to demolish the structure. 3 . Connect to City sewer. Connection to City sewer would involve construction of a private lift station and possibly upgrading plumbing within the structure. Sewer and plumbing permit requirements as well as a Sewer Availability Charge would be applicable. , Bob Generous December 20 , 1994 Page 2 Water Service. The Minnesota Plumbing Code (4715 .0310) requires the water distribution system to be connected to an accessible public water supply. It is unclear if this section can be applied to an existing unchanged water distribution system. It is clear that the building must be supplied with potable water (4715. 1700) . It is possible that the lake water used in the dwelling may be potable, but it is the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate its potability on a continuing basis. Permits and Inspections. The proposed dwelling on proposed Lot 1 does not lie within Chanhassen, but utility service is provide by Chanhassen. Sewer and water permits and the water meter and horn are required to be obtained from Chanhassen. SAC fees and sewer and water connection charges must also be remitted to the City at the time the meter horn is issued. A final plumbing inspection is required to be performed by Chanhassen mechanical inspectors before the installation of the water meter. Recommendations: 1 . Determine that the existing ISTS is a conforming system and connect to City water or connect to City sewer and water or demolish the structure. This should be done prior to the issuance of any building permits for Cunningham Addition. 2 . The applicant should inform the builder of Chanhassen permit and inspection requirements . This should be done prior to the issuance _ of building permits for lot 1 . g:\safety\sak\memos\plan\cuninghm.bgl o c a CHR/STAM S ',1„�F_ NOTICE OF PUBLIC . '►� LAKE � _•`" HEARING s'��fl PLANNING COMMISSION , - '/ 1.18111rtrce MEETING Wif ilk ' Wednesday, JANUARY 4, 1 J 1� 995 �� ■ ■ dm. at 7:30 p.m. ,�' Ea City Hall Council Chambers '�� 690 Coulter Drive .(4,04 lu! ato14.--.* Wee J411 VI old vi I Project: Cunningham Addition 4 .ttb `' 4 r Sh ��=� -,,��' i' s' y■ ��itrb:w1�NC Developer: Wm. Patrick Cunningham !'' 0111114.15112 NIV :*;^ie%7, =11■■i■■■i■■0,.1,44z 1 Location: 6240 Ridge Road G CLF NDO•1�IrIZEUFQ� it I:4! Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is proposing a preliminary plat of approximately 1.8 acres of land into three lots located at 6240 Ridge Road, southeast corner of Christmas Lake on the Shorewood- Chanhassen city limits, Cunningham Addition. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937-1900 ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on December 22, 1994. James J. Meyer Susan Karyl Price Dean Wetzel 6225 Ridge Road 6250 Ridge Road 6260 Ridge Road rhanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Jon & Irene Joseph Jerry & Katherine Snider John S. Fess 6290 Ridge Road 6270 Ridge Road 6280 Ridge Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Michael & Mary Eastwood Richard & Sherry Aguilera 6001 Morningside 790 Pleasant View Road Kansas City, MO 64113 Chanhassen, MN 55317 PC DATE: 1/4/95 C ITY OF CHANHASSEN. I CC DATE: 2/13/95 \�I , Y CASE #: 93-5 PUD _ �� By: BG, DH, DD STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development to rezone 89.59 from Agricultural Estate, A2, to Planned Unit Development, PUD, and preliminary plat creating 1 Block with 47 lots, and two outlots and associated right-of-way for a residential low density development consisting of 46 dwelling units consisting of 13 twin homes and 5 fourplex buildings. The Z development is called Autumn Ridge. (� LOCATION: Southwest corner of Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard (County Road 19). APPLICANT: Good Value Homes, Inc. a. 9445 East River Road NW Q Coon Rapids, MN 55433 (612) 755-9793 • PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate, A2 ACREAGE: gross: 89.59 net: 11.4 (less wetlands, right-of-way and outlots) DENSITY: 0.54 units/acre (gross); 3.99 units/acres (net) ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - A2, Highway 5 and Miniature Golf and Driving Range S - PUD, Trotters Ridge and a wetland complex E - A2, Elementary School Site, single-family homes, and Galpin Boulevard QL W - A2, vacant, proposed Opus Industrial-Office Park 4r1WATER AND SEWER: The applicant has petitioned the city for the extension of services. PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The site contains a large wetland complex (43.8 acres) with an upland W agricultural area that was farmed most of the last decade. There is a tree line along the property I. limits. The buildable area along Hwy. 5 is generally flat but then the site drops off toward the wetlands to the south. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Medium Density Residential north of collector road and Low Density Residential south of collector road I e •at.Ili1bf I I d 11- / Ir�V� ( - • a `,�, I � © I LAKE `� ii A I .DArvc ' �;.� i I • I 6+ • I a; E i . Caboit _ __ 87 A AY ____,,_. A ;01. \/ I III 1 %- I ...................... r. —-—-- - __ - --- is $ ;::y Air. . I0 70 Irlier 1_ i Atm:.. ..-- 1 \ I _ARK Sift', LILYMAN BI7D (C R IB ^{ / a.. \mo•' • I s- - I -i--- _ rts I i o pr... 4* PARK —IAA 8700-1 nSt A o in en n., 8800— ...,'''''''' I \ 300 .-.1.... N \ I i 1 ` I CITY OF 9b0 ANHASSENy , .. 9200—7 : . , BASE MAP 9300 9a00-- s% 1- _ -- _- _______ 9500 z o I-- m 960^, o 9700 - / C7r. [' <I 9800 y_ ,: _ e;--- i . 9900 Q 1 % '., , .rSr r f; 3200 I 1ASSEN ENGINEERING DEPT. IS 300 ,/-1/.4,111 I AA I InnA t1^ 1 Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY A completed application was received on 12/20/94. The applicants are seeking conceptual and preliminary PUD approval at this time. Good Value Homes, Inc. is proposing to build 46 townhouses on the project located on the southwest corner of Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard. There are a total of 18 buildings proposed consisting of thirteen 2-unit buildings and five 4-unit buildings on a net area of 11.4 acres of upland. This property is currently zoned A2, Agricultural Estate, but it is guided for Medium Density (4-8 units/acre) Development and Low Density (1.2 -4.0 units/acre) Development. The developer is proposing a net density of 3.99 units per acre south of the collector road by averaging the density over the upland areas shown as Block 1 (9.21 acres) and Open Space dedication (2.19 acres) located in the southwest corner of the property. While this density is within the density range specified by the comprehensive plan, the PUD ordinance requires medium density land use to permit this project. Section 20-508 (a). Standards and guidelines for single-family attached or cluster-home PUDs states "Generally. Single-family attached, cluster, zero lot line, and similar dwelling types shall only be allowed on sites designed for medium or high density residential uses by the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan." In order to permit the proposed development south of the collector road, a minor comprehensive plan amendment from residential low density to residential medium density will be necessary to permit attached single-family homes. The total parcel is 89.59 acres. There is a wetland which is 43.8 acres through the center of the site. The property that is suitable for development will be split by the extension of the collector road that will eventually connect Audubon Road with Highway 41. This road is part of the City Comprehensive Plan and the alignment was refined in the Highway 5 Corridor Plan. The extension of the collector road must cross a portion of DNR protected Wetland 10- 210W. The collector road has been moved to the south to accommodate the school site east of the project. The final alignment on the west end must be determined in conjunction with the development of the Opus site. Based on the size of the development, the parcel being split by the collector road and the large wetland complex, it would be difficult to develop single-family at this location and clustering of units is a reasonable alternative. The design of this project appears to reflect many of the Hwy. 5 development standards. Careful measurement of this project against these standards needs to be made. The building design include the pitched roof elements, variation in facade treatments with dormers and window placement, variated building components, and the use of colorful and functional plant materials. The applicant has not provided the city with building materials, textures, roofing treatment, and color schemes. Staff has asked for additional information on specific issues such as tree preservation calculations, perspectives from Highway 5 toward the development, and building materials and colors. Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 3 Staff is recommending that this item be approved subject to the conditions outlined in this report. Additionally, a minor comprehensive plan amendment for the property south of the proposed collector road changing the land use designation from Residential - Low Density to Residential - Medium density will be required to bring the development in compliance with Section 20-508, standards and guidelines for single-family attached or cluster-home PUDs. This amendment is necessary in order for the developer to transfer the residential densities from the west side of the wetland to the uplands on the east side of the wetland and to allow the attached single-family residential dwellings as proposed. Staff can support this proposed amendment based on the development proposal submitted for Autumn Ridge, contingent on the applicant agreeing to the transfer of the development rights from the western portion of the site to the eastern uplands, and believes that this type of development provides an excellent transition from the school site and single-family homes to the east and the proposed industrial-office park to the west. Staff supports the rezoning of the property south of the south Highway 5 collector road known as Block 1 and open space dedication from A2 to PUD only. Until such time as Outlot A and the remainder of Outlot B come in for development approval, A2 is the appropriate zoning. Site Characteristics The site is currently agricultural and has corn growing on the upland areas. An abandoned farm home and out buildings are located in the far northeast corner of the site. Shelter belt plantings of large spruce and pines are found around the farm home and along the highway with box elders, aspen and eastern cottonwood, black willow and American elm growing within delineated wetlands and on some uncultivated areas. REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 89.6 acres from A2 to PUD, Planned Unit Development. The following review constitutes our evaluation of the PUD request. The review criteria is taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance. Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety of uses, internal transfer of density, construction phasing, and a potential for lower development costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 4 sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. FINDINGS It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the City's expectations are to be realized as evaluated against the following criteria: 1. Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, mature trees, creeks, wetlands, lakes and scenic views. Finding. The major site characteristic of this property is the large wetland complex. The wooded area in the southwest corner of the site will be dedicated as open space and will largely be left intact. A Woodland Management Plan and Tree Preservation Plan needs to be developed. 2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels. Findin . Because of the wetland on the site and the collector street that bisects the site, the property is split into two developable parcels. Because it is against city ordinance to have a subdivision lot to have direct access onto a collector, it would be difficult to develop this property as a traditional single-family subdivision. The transfer of development rights and the clustering of housing units are a more efficient and environmentally sensitive means of developing the site. 3. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along significant corridors within the city will be encouraged. Finding. The property to the west of the subject site is being developed as a business/industrial park. The site to the east is an elementary school. Timberwood Estates is to the southeast of the proposed townhouses. While this is not the optimal location for single-family housing, townhomes with their ability to be clustered and develop internal amenities are an appropriate transitional use. 4. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Finding. The Comprehensive plan guides the area to the north of the frontage road for medium density 4 - 8 units an acre. The location of the collector streets has been modified since the adoption of the 2000 Land Use plan. This road has been shifted to the south to accommodate the proposed elementary school. It appears that the Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 5 maximum buildable area for the entire site is around 32 acres after elimination of wetlands and road ROW. This project encompasses approximately 12 acres of the developable area. Staff would support the buildable portion of the site to be designated medium density. The net density of the developable area south of the collector road is at the upper limit of the residential - low density permitted densities. While the net density south of the collector road would meet the comprehensive plan requirements, Section 20-508 of the code permits this type of development and transfer of density only on lands designed as medium or high density residential uses. Therefore, a minor comprehensive plan amendment will be necessary. 5. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city. Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and overall trail plan. Finding. The development contains a large wetland complex that will be maintained and enhanced as part of this development. A 2.2 acre area, located in the southwest corner of the site, is being dedicated as open space for the plat. A passive park of over 100 acres will be located on this site and the Gateway property to the west. 6. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD. Finding. The price of the "for sale" units has not yet been determined. Staff believes that these properties will be sold for market rates. 7. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sightings and the clustering of buildings and land uses. Finding. The site is graded generally to take advantage of the natural ground elevations. The grades have been designed around the location of the proposed frontage road and the wetland complex. Staff has made the applicant re-evaluate the proposed grading plans to minimize site grading. 8. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate. Finding. The site will have access from Galpin Boulevard. A collector street will tie this site with the property to the west and east. This collector street will include a trail. Access to this site will not be through any existing single-family neighborhoods. Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 6 Summary of Rezoning to PUD Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility, but allows the city to request additional improvements and the site's unique features can be better protected. The flexibility in standards allows the disturbed areas to be further removed from the unique features of the site. In return for the flexibility, the city is receiving: Development that is consistent with Comprehensive Plan Preservation of desirable site characteristics (wetlands, water quality in lake, trees, topographical features) Sensitive development in transitional areas More efficient use of land GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE Good Value Homes, Inc. is proposing to build 46 townhouses on the project on the southwest corner of Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard. There are a total of 18 buildings proposed consisting of thirteen 2-unit and five 4-unit buildings on a net area of 12 acres. The townhouses are located around an internal private roadway system that is accessed via a south Highway 5 collector road. The project has two sets of development standards to comply with, one is the PUD district and the other is the Highway 5 Corridor Development and Design Standards. The PUD district allows a maximum of 30 percent impervious surface. The applicant has provided the following impervious surface calculations: twin homes - 48,568 square feet, quads - 33,710 square feet, drives - 17,790 square feet, and streets, 38,282 square feet for a total impervious surface of 138,350 square feet or 3.18 acres. The total upland area included for this portion of the property is 11.4 acres. The impervious surface coverage is 28 percent. Parking, as shown on the plan, meets the city requirements. Two enclosed parking stalls per unit are required. An additional 1 parking space per four units for visitor parking must be provided. The applicant has driveway area that could be counted for visitor parking. Because the applicant has mixed housing types, which the city encourages, it would not be feasible or desirable to provide segregated parking areas for visitors, since individuals adjacent to these parking areas may take a proprietary interest in parking located adjacent t their homes. City code prohibits parking on the private street. The development and design standards for the Highway 5 Corridor have been incorporated into the applicant's development proposal. Building height is limited to 3 stories or 40 feet. This proposal is for two story buildings. Buildings shall incorporate pitched roofs, variations in the rhythms of the building components and details including dormers and colonial Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 7 windows, the use of colorful and functional plant materials, variation in the mass of buildings with 2- and 4-unit buildings, and the provision of open spaces and sight lines. The applicant has not provided the city with details on building materials, textures, or colors. For the interior collector, the setbacks are 50 feet minimum and 100 feet maximum. Parking should not be in these setback areas. This proposal meets these standards. There will be no roof top equipment. Signage is proposed for the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and the proposed public frontage road. Detail specifications are not available at this time, but the signage must be compatible with the project design and low profile. Lighting is proposed for the exterior of the building as well as the standard street lighting. Exterior lighting will be on garages and entrances. Exterior lighting will be controlled with photocells. Lighting shall be consistent with city standards of 1/2 foot candle at the property line. WETLANDS Almost fifty percent of this site is characterized as wetland according to the wetland delineation. The wetlands on site can be broken into three separate basins that are described as follows: Wetland A - Wetland A is approximately 43.8 acres in size. This wetland has an ag/urban classification by the City's Surface Water Management Plan. DNR established an ordinary high water mark (OHW) of 931.2 for the drainageway south of this wetland in the interest of the development and the proposed frontage road. The drainageway and the wetland south of Wetland A is DNR protected water 10-210w. The western portion of this site shown as upland may have additional wetland, however, at this time development is not proposed for the site and the City is exploring the options of obtaining this area for park. Wetland B - Wetland B is located near the west property boundary and is characterized as an ag/urban wetland. This basin, which is approximately 0.3 acre may be impacted by the proposed frontage road. Mitigation for this wetland will be investigated by the City when the road project is implemented. Wetland C - Wetland C is located in the northeast portion of the site and is characterized as an ag/urban wetland. This basin, which is approximately 0.3 acre will not be impacted as a result of the development. Buffer Strip - The buffer strip width for Wetland A is 0 to 20 feet with a minimum average width of 10 feet. The principal structure setback is 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. Since a park trail is incorporated along the wetland buffer, an additional 8 Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 8 feet outside the buffer area will be necessary for the trail. Therefore, the range of widths for wetland and trail easement requirements is 8 to 28 feet with an overall average of 18 feet. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP). The SWMP will serve as a tool to protect, preserve, and enhance the City's water resources. The plan identifies the stormwater quantity and quality improvements from a regional perspective necessary to allow future development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general, the water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William Walker Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on projected future land use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to determine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. The City requires storm water quantity calculations for pre and post developed conditions and water quality calculations from the applicant prior to final plat. After review of the calculations, the City will make recommendations for approval of the stormwater plan in accordance with the SWMP. Water Quality The SWMP has established an connection charge for water quality systems. The cash dedication will be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using the market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of $2.50 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond if the applicant constructs the pond or $4.00 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond if the City constructs the pond. The water quality charge has been calculated at $871/acre for a duplex and $1,530/acre for a townhome with 3 to 8 units. This includes the land cost estimate of $21,000 per acre for duplex lots to $24,000 per acre for single family lots and excavation fees at $2.50 per cubic yard. Since there are 26 duplex units and 20 townhomes, 56% of the area is considered duplexes and 44% of the area is considered townhomes. Therefore, the proposed development has approximately 6.9 acres of duplex and 5.3 acres of townhome and the water quality connection charges are approximately $14,119. Should the City be petitioned to construct the ponds the excavation fees will be $4.00 per cubic yard. Fees are reduced based on the costs of the developer's contribution to the SWMP design parameters. Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 9 Water Quantity The SWMP has established an connection charge for different land uses based on an average, city-wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes all proposed SWMP trunk systems, culverts, and open channels and stormwater ponding areas for temporary runoff storage. The connection charge is based on the type of land use for the area. Fees will be based on the total developable land. Undevelopable area (wetlands), public parks, and existing development is exempt from the fees. The fees are negotiable based on the developer's contribution to the SWMP design parameters. Low density developments (duplexes) have a connection charge of $1,980 per developable acre and medium density developments (townhomes) have a connection charge of $2,975 per developable acre. The proposed development of 6.9 acres low density and 5.3 acres medium density would then be responsible for a water quantity connection charge of $29,430. DRAINAGE The site drains naturally toward the large wetland and will continue to do so after development. One stormwater retention pond is proposed on the site. A large sediment and nutrient trap is shown in the west central portion of the site. The ponds' side slopes should be designed as either 4:1 overall or 10:1 for the first 10 feet at the normal water level and 3:1 thereafter for safety purposes. The City requires the normal and high water levels associated with the ponds and wetlands on the final grading plans. Storm sewers are proposed to convey runoff from the lawns and streets to the City's future storm sewer along the frontage road which will discharge into a retention pond. Detailed storm sewer calculations for a 10-year storm event along with ponding calculations based on Walker's Pondnet methodology shall be submitted to staff for review and approval prior to final plat consideration. GRADING The plans propose to mass grade the site in order to accommodate placement of the multi- family type units. The existing topography shows an elevation change of approximately 32 feet from Galpin Boulevard to the wetland located approximately in the middle of the site. The proposed grading plan maintains an elevation change of approximately 28 feet in this same area after development. The developer's engineer has revised the grades to be more compatible with the existing grades, thus resulting in maintaining the existing rolling terrain. In conjunction with reconstructing Galpin Boulevard (County Road 19), the existing roadway grade will be lowered. Commencing at Trunk Highway 5, Galpin Boulevard will be lowered by approximately 7 feet. At the intersection of the proposed frontage road and Galpin Boulevard, the grade will be approximately 4 feet lower than it exist today. These grade changes are necessary in order to improve sight lines along both Trunk Highway 5 and Galpin Boulevard. These modifications are proposed to be completed sometime in 1995 in Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 10 conjunction with the school construction. The applicant's grading plan is designed to be compatible with the future street grades along the frontage road. As previouslymentioned, the entire site is proposed to be mass graded as a result of the development. The site contains scattered trees throughout but the majority of the site has been employed in agricultural uses. There are significant wetlands along with a significant stand of trees located in the southeast and northeast corner of the site. Some of the trees in the southeast corner are proposed to be lost as a result of the grading for the streets and building pads. Staff has thoroughly reviewed the applicant's grading plan and believes that no further modifications could be done to minimize size grading and retain the slope characteristics. Berming is proposed along the frontage road. Typically along collector-type streets a combination of berming and landscaping is incorporated into the site plan to minimize noise or provide screening. All berming shall be located outside the City's right-of-way. EROSION CONTROL The plans propose a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Erosion control fencing is shown around the wetlands. Staff recommends type III erosion control fence adjacent to the wetlands. The slopes may also require some form of terraced erosion control fencing. A final erosion control plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval in conjunction with final plat and construction plans and specifications approval. STREETS The City's Comprehensive Guide Plan proposes an east/west collector-type street (Frontage Road) from Galpin Boulevard to Trunk Highway 41. This frontage road will also serve a future industrial park lying west of this development (Opus). The frontage road is also designated on the City's Municipal State Aid System (MS A). The applicant will need to update a petition to the City to construct a portion of this frontage road, specifically from Galpin Boulevard to the easterly edge of the wetlands. Both the applicant and staff has had concerns with regards to extending and funding the frontage road through the wetlands to the west property line of the site. Staff has been working with the applicant and Opus to align the frontage road to minimize impacts to the wetlands. Other concerns such as outside governmental agencies (DNR, Army Corp of Engineers, etc.) will also have to be consulted and the appropriate permits obtained prior to extending the frontage road. Staff feels comfortable, though, in obtaining the necessary permits to construct this frontage road due to the fact it's been on the City's Comprehensive Guide along with being designated on the State-Aid system. The DNR has mapped the wetlands to determine the ordinary high water - level which has given the City and applicant a better perspective of exactly where the road Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 11 may be extended. Based on this survey, it appears the frontage road alignment is the most feasible from an engineering standpoint as well as minimizing impacts to the wetlands. The applicant is concerned with future assessments for the extension of this road. Staff understands that the road may not be assessed to those parcels of land which do not receive benefit. There may have to be alternate funding mechanisms employed such as Tax Increment Financing (TIF) or State-Aid funds to assist in the construction of this segment of roadway across the wetlands. However, State Aid funds are currently encumbered up to the next five years. The city's bonding capacities are also maxed out. The city will be prioritizing the public improvement projects earmarked for 1995 shortly. Since the frontage road plays a significant role in accessing this development, a condition should be placed in the approval process that the subdivision is contingent upon the City receiving the necessary approvals for extending the frontage road across the wetlands. Should this not be the case, the applicant will have to go back and redesign the street system layout to include possibly a right-in right-out only on to Trunk Highway 5 and/or extending the southerly cul-de-sac back out to Galpin Boulevard. The cul-de-sac could access Galpin Boulevard directly south of the home on the west side of Galpin Boulevard at the cost of removing some trees. The Carver County Highway Department will also have to be consulted regarding all access points along Galpin Boulevard. The City/applicant will also need to apply for and obtain an access permit from the Carver County Highway Department for the proposed frontage road access. As previously mentioned, this frontage road through the site is listed on the City's MSA route and therefore must be constructed in accordance with MSA design standards. The interior streets are well laid out from a traffic circulation standpoint. The streets all connect back out to the frontage road with the exception of the southerly cul-de-sac. All of the streets which branch off the frontage road are proposed to be private streets and not maintained by the City. The private street shall be constructed in accordance with the City's private driveway ordinance. The minimum street width for multi-family zoning is 24 feet face-to-face with concrete curb and gutter. Parking will be prohibited on all of the private streets. Since the frontage road will be directly benefitting this development, the applicant should dedicate to the City with final platting the necessary street and utility easements for extending the frontage road and utilities through the site. Since there will be public improvements constructed in conjunction with this development, the applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security and administration fees. Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 12 UTILITIES The City has previously authorized extension of trunk sewer and water facilities to service this area. The trunk sanitary sewer is proposed to be extended by the City along the wetlands next spring. The alignment may be modified to follow the trail alignment in an attempt to minimize disruption to the wetlands and provide a better maintenance access route. Other than construction of the trunk utility lines and the frontage road, the remaining portions of the site are proposed to be private. Due to the magnitude of this development, it is recommended the applicant use the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates for construction of the private utilities. Utility inspections for the installation of the private utilities will be done through the City's Building Department. There are three existing homes along the west side of Galpin Boulevard. Water service is available to these residents from Galpin Boulevard but sanitary sewer service is being provided from this development and/or the frontage road. The applicant should be entitled to reimbursement of the cost of providing sanitary sewer service to these homes when the parcels hook up. The exact reimbursement cost will be determined based on lateral construction costs for extending sanitary sewer through the site. This development will sustain assessments as a result of the extension of the frontage road and trunk and lateral utilities to the site. The assessment methodology is proposed in the feasibility study. LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION The western and southern portions of the site are heavily wooded consisting of central and lowland type hardwood forest species. Significant tree stands are located within the wetland complex. The significant tree inventory of the site verifies these tree types consisting of maples, oaks, box elder, and elm. Conifers have been planted in the area of the farmstead. The applicant has provided the city with a base line canopy coverage calculation of 0.8 acres. Staff believes that the applicant has only included the significant tree canopy area located within the southeast corner of the site in their calculation. Staff estimates the base line canopy coverage as 4.89 acres (2.19 acres in the designated open space area and 2.7 acres in the southeast corner of the site). This calculation needs to be verified by the applicant in order to determine the adequacy of the proposed Landscaping Plan. Staff estimates that the base line canopy coverage is 36.5 percent (4.89 divided by 13.4 acres). The minimum canopy coverage requirement for a medium density residential development based on the base line canopy coverage is 25 percent. This requires a post development canopy coverage area of 3.35 acres. Based on this base line canopy coverage, up to 1.54 of the existing canopy coverage could be removed without any forestation or Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 13 replacement requirements. Of the existing canopy coverage, 2.68 acres will be removed. Code requires a replacement of trees that are removed that would meet the minimum canopy coverage requirement at 1.2 times the canopy coverage area being removed, in this instance, 1.37 acres of replacement trees ((3.35 - (4.89 - 2.68)) x 1.2). The replacement tree planting that will be required is 55 trees. The tree preservation plan must be revised to accurately reflect existing tree canopy and proposed tree removal. The landscaping plan provides 165 trees which exceeds the estimated forestation/replacement planting requirements of 55 trees. There are 14 different tree species included in the plant schedule. Of the total trees provided, 33 trees are ornamentals (20 percent), 55 are conifers (33 percent), 40 are primary species (24 percent), and 37 are secondary species (22 percent). Staff believes that the applicant has provided an excellent landscaping plan which complies with the PUD ordinance including boulevard plantings, buffer plantings along McGlynn Drive, and foundation plantings. PARKS AND RECREATION The Park and Recreation Commission met on November 15, 1994 to discuss this development. The Commission made the following recommendations to City Council: 1. Full park and trail fees shall be collected per City ordinance. 2. The applicant shall dedicated a 20 foot easement for trail purposes as identified on the preliminary plat for Autumn Ridge dated October 18, 1994. 3. The developer shall construct an 8 foot wide asphalt trail per city specifications within the trail easement. This construction shall be completed in conjunction with street construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by the developer and approved by the Parks and Recreation Director and City Engineer. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the conceptual and preliminary Planned Unit Development to rezone 89.59 acres from Agricultural Estate, A2, to Planned Unit Development, PUD, and preliminary plat creating 1 Block with 47 lots, and two outlots and associated right-of-way for a residential low density development consisting of 46 dwelling units consisting of 13 twin homes and 5 fourplex buildings subject to the plans dated December 20, 1994 and the following conditions: Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 14 1. Depending on scheduling of the frontage road, the applicant may incorporate construction of the retention pond into the overall development plans and receive credits towards their SWMP fees. Detailed storm sewer calculations for a 10-year storm event along with ponding calculations based on Walker's PONDNET methodology along with pre and post-runoff conditions shall be submitted to City staff for review and approval prior to final plat consideration. 2. The applicant will be responsible for the appropriate water quantity and quality fees based on the City's Surface Water Management Plan. Staff has estimated the proposed development would be responsible for an estimated water quantity and quality fee of $21,997 and $10,517 assuming 9.2 acres of developable land. The applicant may be credited against these fees for portions of the trunk storm system or water quality improvements they install as a part of the overall development in accordance to the City's SWMP. Staff will review the final construction documents and determine the applicable credits, if any. 3. The applicant shall petition the City to construct the frontage road within the development from Galpin Boulevard to the wetlands in conjunction with the overall site improvements. The frontage road shall be constructed in accordance to State-Aid _ standards. Plans and specifications will be subject to review and approval by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, State-Aid office. The applicant shall dedicate to the City at no cost the frontage road right-of-way. 4. Subdivision approval is contingent upon the City receiving the necessary permits and approval from the governmental agencies such as DNR, Army Corps of Engineers for extending the frontage road across the wetlands to the Opus parcel and awarding a bid. 5, The applicant will be required to enter into a PUD/development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security and administration fees to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval. 6. The applicant shall design and construct the street and utility improvements in accordance to the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications for the public improvements shall be submitted to City staff for review and approval. 7. The applicant shall provide a copy of the covenants for review and approval by the City and shall be filed at the County with the final plat documents. 8. The applicant shall provide "as-built" locations and dimensions of all corrected house pads or other documentation acceptable to the Building Official. Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 15 9. The applicant shall apply for and obtain all necessary permits from the regulatory agencies such as the MPCA, Health Department, Watershed District, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers, MnDOT and Carver County Highway Department. 10. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction. The applicant will comply with the City Engineer's direction as far as abandonment or relocation of the drain tile. 11. The applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Type III erosion control fencing will be required around the wetlands. The site may also require additional erosion control fence on the slopes and/or temporary sediment basins. 12. Drainage and conservation easements shall be dedicated over all wetland areas within the subdivision including outlots. Wetland mitigation measures shall be developed and subject to approval by the City. The mitigation measures shall be completed in conjunction with the site grading and restoration. 13. The final plat shall be contingent upon MnDOT's State-Aid office approving the street alignment for the east/west frontage road. Construction plans shall be revised accordingly as a result of the State-Aid review process. 14. Wetland delineation along the western portion of Basin A should be re-evaluated. 15. The applicant must meet City, State and Federal permitting requirements for wetland alterations. Staff recommends that the wetland permit applicant combine the proposed project and the frontage road as one project. 16. The developers and/or property owners shall waive any and all procedural or substantive objections to the special assessment resulting from the City's public improvement project for construction of the frontage road including but not limited to hearing requirements and claims that the assessment exceeds the benefit to the property. 17. The private streets/driveways shall be constructed in accordance with the City's private driveway ordinance for low and/or medium density zoning. 18. The applicant shall provide sanitary sewer services to the existing three homes on the west side of Galpin Boulevard. The applicant shall be reimbursed their fair share of the cost to extend service to these homes when the parcels hook up to the sewer system. Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 16 19. The applicant shall work with Southwest Metro Transit in the provision of bus stops/shelters within the development. 20. The applicant shall submit additional information and more detail on issues such as tree preservation calculations and a Woodland Management Plan, perspectives from Highway 5 toward the development, and building materials, textures, roofing treatment, and color schemes. 21. Full park and trail fees shall be collected per City ordinance. 22. The applicant shall dedicated a 20 foot easement for trail purposes as identified on the preliminary plat for Autumn Ridge dated October 18, 1994. 23. The developer shall construct an 8 foot wide asphalt trail per city specifications within the trail easement. This construction shall be completed in conjunction with street construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by the developer and approved by the Parks and Recreation Director and City Engineer. 24. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review and approval prior to final plat approval. 25. Adjust property lines to permit openings and projections in exterior walls or confirm that no openings or projections are planned. This must be done before preliminary plat approval. 26 A ten foot clear space shall be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, N.W. Bell, cable television transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance Sec. 9.1. Fire hydrant placement shall be subject to review by the Fire Marshal. 27. The canopy coverage calculation needs to be verified by the applicant in order to determine the adequacy of the proposed Landscaping Plan. The tree preservation plan must be revised to accurately reflect existing tree canopy and proposed tree removal. 28. A legal document shall be recorded combining the proposed 2.19 acres of dedicated open space to Block 1 of the development. This document shall also specify that all development rights for the dedicated open space have been transferred to Block 1 and that no future development of the dedicated open space area, with the exception of public trails, shall be permitted." Autumn Ridge January 4, 1994 Page 17 ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Applicant and Reduced Plans 2. Public Hearing Notice Mailed 12/22/94 3. Notice of Cancellation and Rescheduling dated 12/1/94 4. Notice of Public Hearing Mailed 11/21/94 5. Memo from Steve Kirchman to Bob Generous dated 11/4/94 6. Letter from Joe Richter to Robert Generous dated 11/7/94 7. Memo from Bill Weckman to Robert Generous dated 11/18/94 8. Letter from Richard Pilon to Robert Generous dated 11/8/94 9. Park and Recreation Staff Report dated 11/15/94 10. Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated 11/8/94 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: GOOD VALUE HOMES OWNER: GOOD VALUE HOMES JOHN R. PETERSON ADDRESS: 9445 EAST RIVER ROAD ADDRESS: 9445 EAST RIVER ROAD COON RAPIDS, MN 55433 COON RAPIDS_ MN 55433 TELEPHONE (Day time) 755-9793 TELEPHONE: 755-9793 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5.-fir Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review - V Notification Signs — 9.'/. Site Plan Review - . X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost' • $100 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP . $400 Minor SUB/Metes & Bounds 10. /� Subdivision - �� - �-- ;S- -, - TOTAL FEE $ - . • - ;�. LU'J t.. _v_ `V .. A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must Included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 81/2" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. • NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. • Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME AUTUMN RIDGE LOCATION OFF GALP I N BOULEVARD IN CHANHASSEN LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEE ATTACHED PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING P lJ Y) PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION T'A qE ITS" REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION V' REASON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records. \ Signaire of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. ! ,I!l��F�jI rr�`!Tr�k=I I!F!f _. it r 4 g' TROTTERS RIDGE, ADOM011 r;l1r!!!!; ,111'1'it siert It ; // 4. 110; {1.tI«{rri f;1,1 ►i • ' — ——— — — — — — — _ — £,'ftprEEr�l[trj i� L — _ _ "'.mall•a Cif'r{ I !iri `if Fr tr •ra sr•i fF+iiia ii j r�r��ti fiL ii�l1 .F o i 'ir k' ifib/4 JI[ I! gid v o N H I /4111.iIi( 1;3:4 f NI! !i sg g yn m j 9 I > A 2 O O jg Y y tzi i F iv l• 1174! itS Pig a " I 1 tt lf ;I ` "g f 9 t t I p Jil :9 r r au i[Iii (! i" zf Vii`. °a i �� ; rt8. r tF,F l "N\ is ��E��E E�f ifs ! ��\ �� F, ,I;FE s i �� . h,�.,iIiil r, �I I \ P .Ji Er ; .11 Mar 111 WWII'1 I V • //.a.. . . t /14,10,:\\.J rag \ 1 40, ci:i ,. ..,. ., , .,\\ oma / gy/' i \\\ it. i e ,,,i, ri,, . .4. ,� _111)111'4 ,c ...-- "/ :� VT/ ��is 3 ' t o �.�\'� - j � y'i O O > 0 .p a -0 y pug it o a o / i. 4. TETIAND DESIGNATION t• r T2/3 PEYB/Cd 0.3 ACMY 3 / a '• C , / 4'7 •I i i _ _ DrbiccrrD RO./. - - -_ _ • I tea. _ _ _ _ _ ' STATE TRUNK HIGNwAY N0. amara— — 5 I IMO' .MSaaC i ____ __ AUTUMN RIDGE PASSE ENGINEERING, INC r "r:.a'0 _i ,, �,,, _ PRELIMINARY PLAT 9445 EAST R ER ROAD SUITE 203 —- p�.i.:�,A. ..' XINNEIPOUS, MINNESOTA 55433 "' "` T C1't'Y OF CIIAN1-IASSEN, 1(14 PHONE(612) 755-6240 rix(612) 755-1362 „LC,.,o,,..,, ,. — '''''"'"° i ZOCI-GOZ (v9)XVI OfZ9-S9G (19).31,c0tId ...,....._Lusa. KM'tgissrionnu 414 Alt3 — e ..,..., rsr) CCI19 VIDSAWIlf .S170dY3AIMIM NV1d DNICIV210 AliVNIIVITIcl COZ 31111S aroar 213418CI MS Mt ............,a.rW.11:_Las. A.'"'• orArr.T.,r-ersa-....r-Lnrm ' 3DIH toininv .,a----- --LF-t--T06-i.1 ON! 'ON1a133NION3 3SSYcl. ...: .11 SNOIS.NI 31,0 I • , • .• I ... / ./ .. ...... ,... .....1, ' .. • • • . 041 i • ,....., . • •• I ill ..' 1 ... ; i ; 0 i i : ''. / .; I / ''.• . i / ; . I ; i ;. 1. : : ••• .: •...... • ;.N i?... II Z : • , - • . . ,„. . „ . . . •. .. ,•• , . • • , 1L4 • ,Ct3..... .......0_,., //"I' ::OL1.7 fk\ alripii.4. . •:,,..._ '-I_.. - -"---:i N '-.-- I ". ••••'1%, ..... . -,. I i 1c . • I.1 \Irill*"1111411111V:'41pr*4:7.''':..""' .'- .. V) ..--.-:-.' 1/7. .f? ii.:. .--- if,00010.0 , _.: :0.0100-71111k-- -ii .1.;• ..,.:"-,, ..--"" ••••••‘, N.\ Y1 t , ,,,A (-- • ' -n m --'111IN., 40.4;44:12,,,z,;.-... , /./7 IlliP" ViVOL ' . ' 14 4 PINT if(ra I r k"W % 4'7".: "tir;4111111)-t \ IP 0,s's it SA e'14, /hilii -7-711-!'&4-44401-711-WV/ -: ''.'' °I. 62-- 164ri\lre;,440,0004'. /41544/1104104 "7 ".:- .• '.. ,. ... $ •Nlpii:,_,- 40.. . ' '.• i s 1-- 4AN04, itt '''..'. .-.1- \':" • 42t.A41114 .4. /ill '‘. '''.. / : / . . -- "•• 4 4;4 CtiON..4,,'• ;/ • i I ' 1 :-/./ 0. '''.:t,:\\S‘teN,.: VNilk mal....- el it i 7---,:fie / / / .4 .4'1 • . . \ %.. ‘......,.., .... , *..44ikVIS:. lii • „,‘,..\ i ; !,.., ,./ / . . • . . i . . .. .. `.. V.N IP.441 {1. ta....alq....0 • 1114:/1 1. ; 1 . • ...\'11 -,7422,,,.... ..,... . ,.‘.,..i: kid., . 1 . -.. - . -. \\N.L__,,....„__ -.---- • f:',7rN k_ I . • . \ . . ' ,.,;,- ---_:___-:- .... t's-... ' •11.,1 ir, 1 1 V V 1 .; ' cl .. tc,0,0, .,. .i...21114 , ,,, ,. II 11 i. .... ....r''', \ci \ '4 I ' • .. : •, •., . '. t-• 1. ep, ;4114,110.- \i 1... •‘-. I I ill . ..... \ .1611 ( \ . . „. .. 0 ET i ramp \ ri\\ 'i 411;AU \ .) • cil • 26 \ 1 ,,(74, , I li Ow it . .• Oittzi " i I 211 IV 1 • i !.1.: 3 Is' .‘ / •.'7. ./7.:0;'°' ) • •al i 1 ii? . a i i E-•En., : I \ 5 , •••• .... • . \ I % 0444 A (I g ii ligli) : ... .• : N I '`.. %, &..katakt,•M. •••1 :1 . 17-1 .•; ........% 1 .• -. "..' . 4..... .7 4 4•1 LETS 1 ----.- ‘..•-''...--% .•.•.. • '`,‘ ,•11,::t.tiON. ''• 40. . • .„.• ...'•••- .-"•• - .......-.. \ ''••„_..\ •., 4,,..0.4,1,....i...7R\ ,..„4-_ riil ''-- - ........ . ••. __...... z • \ ''.f. -,... •1111::- -,,\ - 1 1.. l I • ..1 tial IP I I i i 1 .••• * Ch..4 ... „ Pi 11 ..7.-: . II ."---.. \ ...ii• s'.. -....„.77,2.-.._ .•... _____, -,..-• It 4 , ei, 1 1 1 1 z i -- 1 I 2 .Jll1111. ' li 1 • - =. 01 =1 o ia • =— 3 i i; § bli 11 1 I iL44 'I ' iiilli . . . . MI ii ) s 1 I c.) Lta •! t-e—‘....2, L.,„ 1-1.1 ...a == 1 0 14 I to '- .•: 4i i, 5 J ' T•••C La.' i •1 .1---:1 EL >- 1-' - ;" ..L'it,' NV'Id 3dVDSGNV1 Cr4,r""`i " i tisir•, aiir.�.m o-pc•.I N .A VNIWll3tld view...eu6.+uJ.nv, .*m •LL J..n a,a.a.�.wxw+. t�.t,.tl 1 % aDGII MN�ninV a,..�.....,a.�.,y....� ... 1 6. s M u 75 a� w S 1. to ,10%-.:!.:,,,,i,. -•:. •• - /,�/##//moii�iviiiNN, 1.11 9 ! '%,f...,..;:..:.N:;;‘,::•!--- - ,,,,,,,,,, • ititt F512 qg p fO w l+;, 0 ase moher '"'�, - / �� '�//�/ of �e• • �*• �`i�illa • ;`b ast-vs., �� 5,�"'''tell tt�a- ♦ 0 / Q.-, a Si/40,44'o 14• i 04,.. ryt44 el. , *iii ylk 41'4 , . ea0t, O. 4 / 0* Rig- • / J' . \ 4 d .1P-.. rii a 4 V h . 4, .110 it • k.104' '/*ilia- * . • i // ''f�I . s, 4 '2, feltArelimp, , otTit' ,. 0Iv ASA_Jo* t }/�'.��b 4w ( I / 1- •. ._. =-7,it ch. - • . - / t. gill 1 ii. \ . (O..,----- n......,---,..N.• lir Iliii ‘i ti- \ / 7-'- :W t �'- , g 3 318' A J i ft J 9 Miffigi t Z d� JltittoLActz,l.z. 111111100 '1 . Q'1iz \ % z d9 =amore .Gqsr 1 ihf" ; 5 36 O . g ,aoaow..az_,,„,,. + 3Mits ��ll. t . 01 \• \--„, .1P.rcilll , MN 1R'Iiii , 9 6gs ' 1 1 1!, s aa 9RR Wy i W '1 womb!h l ; �•Di: III •ii, .. .. may;, q /lliiii _N C W +� ' II fEj IN ffco BE pp iii -4: BE ,,,, 61 Agoill ,c-3.47: ,:_2, � � iliii Millei N ff ih i !tF{ ,� (� f 71 IP h R 2 1 W' ,,• �! 'x• 11• Ili I ! i , ► I- i1"1111'i III ; 3 �� 1JiibhI11i(1P F. !, !;� i I !! i d z� �j � Il� � �� i A ��` fiii�liilli 1 0! � , Z-�„ SOMWYTd INAIVOid.0 YJ059NfIV'KflSYHNVIU f 'r+ ek+ „�,,^ NV"Id 3dVDSQNV'I var S3IAIOH 31YIVA GOOD 3DQRI NNIf1LfIV 2 F•^s .:...� AYYNIIO Li1Y ... . v.,. LLQ` III �..- • i! 3 fii e aaaa oo d t 1 S.' b . ! f eo 0 J t. 1 ii It A Ni J I 1 1 1 3 if 1 1 i 3 3 e a T: s ;S�i dk ii t ..e,„}i- .,. j fit';, �.Y' f •-,-,,, -.•2•- • / .- �• :: • . / _ _3 n / , , ... . \ ,,,,, . : 1'lir tor' .-4' •- " •I - El _ Acez� __ n c9 Rigel OVA'i (1 fit3i O o//:///// I Neriliiii2kWIPPlifailireV1111111111.•,%, i 3 -.•• • (t-:114/!1 ` - 3 Y I t jS E It 3 it D rt , iii 4 i 3t r z= $ = $z 4} 3x it /Ic $t 3t di to ‘) NF ,1 I 11* NOTICE OF PUBLIC " A s : tic) X' HEARING • PLANNING COMMISSION f ><yr{ry>: `: MEETING •. . Wednesday, JANUARY 4, 1995 I -=> `<± ' , at 7.30 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers r , , :u{j }a:;r' 690 Coulter Drive ; - Pik Project: Autumn Ridge Developer: Good Value Homes, Inc. • , • � — (CR lei I ..R �rM64 e:vD - - Location: Southwest Corner of Hwy. 5 i g F e700—s11111hiblik11APw and Galpin Boulevard o 0 Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is requesting a Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development to rezone 89.59 acres of property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD; preliminary plat one block (46 units - 13 twin home buildings and 5 fourplex buildings) and 2 outlots located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Hwy. 5 and Galpin Boulevard, Autumn Ridge, Good Value Homes, Inc. (Betty O'Shaughnessy property). What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937-1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on December 22, 1994. L� 1 - Lawrence & Florence Raser Patrick & Karen Minger Roger & Gayleen Schmidt 8210 Galpin Blvd. 8221 Galpin Blvd. 8301 Galpin Blvd. -"lanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Timothy & Vicki Dempsey James C. Avis Dale & Marcia Wanninger 8241 Galpin Blvd. 111515 Bender Court 8170 Galpin Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chaska, MN 55318 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chaska Gateway Partners Mitchel & Mary Krause James & Linda Leirdahl 3610 Hwy. 101 S. 2380 Timberwood Dr. 2350 Timberwood Dr. Wayzata, MN 55391 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mark & Julie Taintor Curtis & Jean Beuning Andrew & Susan Richardson 7481 Saratoga Dr. 2381 Timberwood Dr. 8210 Pinewood Cir. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mark & Nancy Bielski HTD Assets of Oshkosh, Inc. Trotters Ridge of Chanhassen 8140 Pinewood Cir. 4275 Norex Dr. 2765 Casco Point Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chaska, MN 55318 Wayzata, MN 55391 Larry & Elizabeth Vandeveire Mid America Baptist Social Jay C. Dolejsi 4890 Co. Rd. 10 E. Services Corporation 6961 Chaparral Lane Chaska, MN 55318 2600 Arboretum Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Excelsior, MN 55331 J. P. Links, Inc. c/o John Przymus 642 Santa Vera Chanhassen, MN 55317 4 CITY OF „_.. , : : , , ..... \,,,,, , CHANHASSEN Y `` 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 December 1, 1994 Dear Homeowner: This letter is to notify you that the public hearing for Autumn Ridge development, Good Value Homes, Inc. has been rescheduled for Wednesday, January 4, 1995, at 7:30 p.m. The item was to appear before the Planning Commission on December 7 (see other side). Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, . -7--i,--4---_, i _,..„. t,,,,i_,_____ Robert Generous, AICP Planner 11 BG:v ( . :1-----7--7—,,1 „f ., -_=,_ -- . NOTICE OF PUBLIC JL4 .1= t 10 (lik‘ i - HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION • z • MEETING . Wednesday, DECEMBER 7, 1994 ' %.<>�<- :i:C at 7:30 p.m. mem .. , I City Hall Council Chambers _.r; ::000:.0 ' Amro t r= •' 690 Coulter Drive ;�Q= ' Project: Autumn Ridge Z i a iv ! rnim Developer: Good Value Homes, Inc. :1?- --Y,. ' c (Ca ,81 a,N L.MAN S: Location: Southwest Corner of Hwy. 5 ' , and Galpin Boulevard g'°° /"'"� �'_ Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant is requesting a Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development to rezone 89.59 acres of property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD; preliminary plat one block (48 units - 14 twin home buildings and 5 fourplex buildings) and 2 outlots located in the southwest corner of the intersection of Hwy. 5 and Galpin Boulevard, Autumn Ridge, Good — Value Homes, Inc. (Betty O'Shaughnessy property). What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions or Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937-1900, ext. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on November 24, 414, 1994. 1, i iyg-I `" r i Lawrence & Florence Raser Patrick & Karen Minger Roger & Gayleen Schmidt 8210 Galpin Blvd. 8221 Galpin Blvd. 8301 Galpin Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Timothy & Vicki Dempsey James C. Avis Dale & Marcia Wanninger 8241 Galpin Blvd. 111515 Bender Court 8170 Galpin Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chaska, MN 55318 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chaska Gateway Partners Mitchel & Mary Krause James & Linda Leirdahl 3610 Hwy. 101 S. 2380 Timberwood Dr. 2350 Timberwood Dr. Wayzata, MN 55391 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mark & Julie Taintor Curtis & Jean Beuning Andrew & Susan Richardson 7481 Saratoga Dr. 2381 Timberwood Dr. 8210 Pinewood Cir. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Mark & Nancy Bielski HTD Assets of Oshkosh, Inc. Trotters Ridge of Chanhassen 8140 Pinewood Cir. 4275 Norex Dr. 2765 Casco Point Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chaska, MN 55318 Wayzata, MN 55391 Larry & Elizabeth Vandeveire Mid America Baptist Social Jay C. Dolejsi 4890 Co. Rd. 10 E. Services Corporation 6961 Chaparral Lane Chaska, MN 55318 2600 Arboretum Blvd. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Excelsior, MN 55331 J. P. Links, Inc. c/o John Przymus 642 Santa Vera Chanhassen, MN 55317 4 CITY OF , _ _ _ , 0 ,,.. CHANHASSEN . ,_ , .„._ • .•'_-'= 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 f (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official -i� ,�� DATE: November 4, 1994 SUBJECT: 93-5 PUD, 94-18 SUB & 94-9 REZ (Autumn Ridge, Betty O'Shaughnessy property) Background: I was asked to review the plans stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, OCT 31 1994, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. Below are an analysis and recommendations from the Inspections Division for the proposed project. Analysis: I have enclosed a copy of my June 6, 1994 memo to you concerning this proposal. It appears that none of the items pointed in that memo have been corrected in the new submittal. Consequently, analysis of and recommendations for this proposal have not changed. Street Names. In order to avoid conflicts and confusion, street names, public and private, must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department . Proposed street names are not included with the submitted documents. Building Pads. Locations of proposed dwelling pads and the type of dwelling is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department to perform a satisfactory plan review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance. For the same reason, proposed lowest level floor elevations as well as garage floor elevations are required to be indicated on the proposed pad location. Standard designations (FLO or RLO, R, SE, SEWO, TU, WO) must be shown for proposed dwelling types . These standard designations lessen the chance for errors during the plan review process. The memo explaining these designations is enclosed. Demolition Permits. Existing structures on the property which will be demolished will require demolition permits. Proof of well abandonment must be furnished to the City and a permit for septic system abandonment must be obtained and the septic system abandoned prior to issuance of a demolition permit. Structure Setbacks. The sides of a number of buildings appear to be on the property lines . Table 5-A of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) prohibits openings in walls that are within three feet of a property Bob Generous November 4, 1994 Page 2 line. Projections (decks, overhangs, etc. ) must comply with UBC 504 and 1710 which generally permit projections to extend a maximum of one third the distance to the property line, but require these projections to be of one-hour fire-resistive construction. What this means is that property lines should generally be four to five feet from the buildings. Recommendations: The following conditions should be added to the conditions of approval. 1. Submit street names to the Public Safety Department, Inspections Division for review prior to final plat approval. 2 . Revise the preliminary grading plan to show the location of proposed dwelling pads, using standard designations and the lowest level floor and garage floor elevations. This should be done prior to final plat approval. 3 . Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading on the property. 4. Adjust property lines to permit openings and projections in exterior walls or confirm that no openings or projections are planned. This must be done before preliminary plat approval. enclosure: January 29, 1993 memorandum June 6, 1994 memorandum g=\safety\sak\memos\plan\autmrdge.bg2 At C I TY OF „.., 0 lel.. . - . -,4 .191 , ,, ,,, CHANHASSEN ‘...... . :-A,. ,4,,,, .. er:./.. ,.‘.. . oio., .., ,v_:;'7' ., �+ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous, Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official 4. -1< , DATE: June 6, 1994 SUBJ: 93-5 PUD (Autumn Ridge, Betty O'Shaughnessy property) Background: kv I have reviewed your request for comments on the abovswreferenced planning case, and have some items that should be added as conditions of approval. '-'4. Analysis- ,- fl 0 lit In order to avoid conflicts and confusion,stree names,publicand private,must be reviewed by the Public Safety Department. Proposed street names are not includedith the submitted documents. Locations of proposed dwelling pads ainie type of dwelli - is necessary to enable the Inspections Division and Engineering Department perform a satisfactory{ Ian review of the structure at the time of building permit issuance. For th. e reason,proposed lowest:evel floor elevations as well as garage nfloor elevations are required to b dicated on the proposed pad 1 `ation. Standard designations (FLO or RLO, R, SE, SEWO,TU ,'must be shown for proposed dwelli3 types. These standard designations lessen the chance forteriod during..the '1.• vie p •c- s Jje 'limo explaining these designations is enclosed. 4wc Existing structures on e'p operty which will be demolished will require demolition ermits. Proof of well abandonment must be furiu' id; a City and a permit for septic system abandonment must be obtained and the septic system abandon pnortikissuancceoffa-demoli % permit. The side of a number of buildings appear to be onTbe oroperty lines. Table 5-A of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) prohibits openings in walls that are 'An three feet of a property line. Projections (decks, overhangs, etc.) must comply with UBC 504 and 1710 which generally permit projections to extend a maximum of one third the distance to the property line, but require these projections to be of one-hour fire-resistive construction. What this means is that property lines should generally be four to five feet from the buildings. A CITY of CHANHASSEN' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORAN i UM TO: Inspections, Planning, & Engineering Staff FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official 4ce DATE: January 29, 1993 SUBJ: Dwelling Type Designation We have been requesting on site plan reviews that the developer designate the type of dwelling that is acceptable on each proposed lot in a new development. I thought perhaps it might be helpful to staff to explain and diagram these designations and the reasoning behind the requirements. FLo or PLO Designates Front Lookout or Rear Lookout This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to approximately 4' above the basement floor level. R Designates Rambler. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. This would include two story's and many 4 level dwellings. SE Designates Split Entry. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4'below grade with the surrounding grade approximately level. SEWO Designates Split Ditty Walk Out. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 4' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to lowest floor level. TU Designates Tuck Under. This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8' below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the front of the dwelling. WO Designates Walk Out This includes dwellings with the basement floor level approximately 8'below grade at its deepest with the surrounding grade sloping down to the lowest floor level in the rear of the dwelling. t SE R 'Stwc�' WO F/ L4\ -- - , - - - - -- °rRLD�� Inspections staff uses these designations when reviewing plans which are then passed to the engineering staff for further review. Approved grading plans are compared to proposed building plans to insure compliance to approved conditions. The same designation must be used on all documents in order to avoid confusion and incorrect plan reviews. ��«►* PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER STATE OF �r CD Ll Q DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55106 PHONE NO. 772-7910 FILE NO. November 7, 1994 Mr. Robert Generous, Planner II City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Autumn Ridge, DNR Wetland 10-210W, City of Chanhassen, Carver County, (City Numbers 93-5 PUD, 94-18 SUB, and 94- 9 REZ) Dear Mr Generous: We have reviewed the site plans (received November 2 , 1994) for the above-referenced land development proposal (Sections 15 and 16, T116N-R23W) . In addition to our comments in our letter dated June 6, 1994 (copy enclosed) , we would like to add the following comment: The official ordinary high water elevation for Wetland 10-210W is 931. 2 ' (NGVD, 1929) . It is not clear from the plans whether the proposed road is below the OHW of Wetland 10-210W. Should any portion of the work for the proposed road be below the OHW, a DNR permit would be required. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, Joe Richter Hydrologist JGR/cds Enclosure c: Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, Bob Obermeyer U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Gary Elftmann City of Chanhassen General File RECEIVED 1994 CITY OF CHANHA55tN AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RCot. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 0/1 ;1 ` CARVER COUNTY COURTHOUSE (612)361-1010 ` / 600 EAST 4TH STREET,BOX 6 FAX(612)361-1025CHASKA,MINNESOTA 55318 /``'N g 50 . e- COUNTY OF CQV EQ November 18, 1994 TO: Robert Generous, Planner II FROM: :) Bill Vlieckman, Assistant County Engineer ��!`C• SUBJ: Conceptual and Preliminary Planned Unit Development Autumn Ridge (94-9 Rezoning and 94-18 Subdivision) Following are comments regarding the conceptual and preliminary planned unit development for the Autumn Ridge subdivision transmitted to Carver County by your memorandum dated November 1, 1994. 1. Previous comments concerning this subdivision were sent on September 24, 1993. 2. It is the County's intent to have CSAH 19 (Galpin Boulevard) reconstructed in this area in 1995. Through traffic will in all likelihood be detoured off CSAH 19 with local access provided by the contractor. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the subdivision and site plan for the proposed development. Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper Contains Minimum 10%Post Consumer Waste Minnegasco. A Division of Arida, Inc. November 8 , 1994 Mr. Robert Generous Planner II City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Re: 93-5 PUD, 94- 18 SUB, 94-9 REZ Autumn Ridge Good Value Homes Dear Mr. Generous : Enclosed are your prints for this project with the location of Minnegasco' s natural gas mains indicated in red. Individual services are not shown. Natural gas service is available to this property from the main shown. Also enclosed is a copy of a relocation project that is currently scheduled. No addition work is anticipated at this time unless requested by a developer, builder or owner. The developer/builder should contact Terry Jencks of Minnegasco' s Residential Energy Services, 525-7607, to make application for natural gas service. Minnegasco has no objections to this development proposal . Sincerely, Richard J. P on P.E. Senior Administration Engineer Engineering Services 612-342-5426 cc: Mary Palkovich Terry Jencks RECENED tt�E� ! g 1 ,3 CifV OFCHAivr,,,.,, N AMMEMINMEMEMMV 700 West Linden Avenue P.O. Box 1165 Minneapolis,MN 55440.1165 CITY 0 F PRC DATL 11-15-94 _ PC DATE: �. CC DATE: HOFFMA N:k /#7 - ..., - _ gnu. STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conceptual and Prelimi::.• .:nnec; t Development to :_zone .59 aL of property zone I A2, A grid.: -a1 L- to PUD; Preliminary Pi: 'ne F k (48 units - 14 twin home bui: _ ::gs and 5 fourplex buildrgs) and LOCATION: Southwest corner of the intersectio"" of Highway 5 and Galpin B3ulevard. Autumn Ridge 'Betty O'Shaugh-c"... Property). U 0 APPLICANT: Good Value Homes, Inc. 9445 East River Road, Suite 201 Q Coon Rapids, MN 554: PRESENT ZONING: A2, Agricultural Estate Disuk.. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - State High\ av 5 S - Tr c_ ia::. Development E - C. .,levard W - Agn.1ultural Estate (Opus) 4COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN This site lies within the park service area of the neu recreation center park, the future S1 reek neighborhood park and the future nature p—serve par:. to be partially located on the same . Ay as this development. • is COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLA: This deve t; site contains or is adjac nt to three trail/sidewalk corridors. • (f) 1. Interior Corridor Abutting Wetland: The applicant has identified a 20 ft. walkway easement along the wetland as requested by the city. An 8 ft. wide asphalt trail shall be constructed per city spy.. .fications by the developer within this easement. This portion of the public improvements shall be bid as a lump sum separate from other improvers'-• with 2 mi- um • . ,,� Autumn Ridge Development November 15, 1994 Page 2 of three bids being received. Upon completion of the trail and the acceptance of it by the city, the developer shall be reimbursed for said construction from the park and trail dedication fund. 2. Sidewalk Parallelling Proposed Parkway: This sidewalk is a mandated public improvement whose design and construction is administered by the planning and engineering departments. 3. Trail Along Galpin Boulevard (CR 19): This future trail will be constructed within the dedicated right-of-way of Galpin Boulevard. OPEN SPACE DEDICATION: The applicant has identified an area of upland (2.81 acres) for dedication as open space to accomplish a density transfer to the portion of the property being developed. However, the area proposed as open space is not currently owned by the applicant. The city is currently negotiating a purchase agreement (for park purposes) with the underlying owner (O'Shaughnessy) of all these parcels and the granting of any density transfers will be incorporated into this agreement. City ordinance prohibits this open space area from receiving a double credit, i.e. it cannot be used for a desnity transfer and be counted as open space dedication. RECOMMENDATION It is recommend-s that the Park and Recreation Commissi. - ecommend the city council require the f. owing conditions of approval in regard to parks .1 d trails for the proposed Autumn • ':ge planned unit development. 1. Full park and trail fees be collected per city ordinance. 2. Dedication of a 20 ft. easement for trail purposes as identified on e preliminary plat for Autumn Ridge dated October 18, 1994. 3. The developer shall construct an 8 ft. wide asphalt trail per city s•. • ications within the trail easement. This construction shall be completed in conju ction with street construction. Final alignment of this trail shall be staked by th- developer and approved by the Park and Recreation Director and City Engin- -r. �ct11 submit- ee bids-t e .• . • :. : -•. .. + . .• i_-•-n o • e l• -- —• •• . = - - • • . - ignition for this work, the applicant shall -. - - - - - -.. _ _ . •.. _ s park and tras .. , ,,„ 0 ,,f CITY OF ..._,., CHANHASSEN _ _ , -'f'°_ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 -r (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Generous, Planner II FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: November 8, 1994 SUBJ: Autumn Ridge, Good Value Homes, Inc. Betty O'Shaughnessy Planning Case 93-5 PUD, 94-18 SUB and 94-9 RE2 I have reviewed the rezoning request in order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department, Fire Prevention Division and have the following comments and/or requirements. 1. Cul-de-sac shall be designed with a 45 foot radius. 2. Submit street names for approval. 3. A ten foot clear space shall be maintained around fire hydrants,i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, N.W. Bell, cable television transformer boxes. This is to insure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance Sec. 9.1. 4. Comment regarding fire hydrant locations: Add 2 fire hydrants; one at each proposed parkway and private drive intersection. Relocate 3 other fire hydrants. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for specific changes. g:'safet y\vnf\autunmri.dge PC DATE: 1/4/95 CITY OF CC DATE: 1/23/95 r \1� CIIAA� �� CASE #: 94-3 IUP \�1 By: Desotelle STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for Interim Use Permit to grade three sites with excavated wetland materials associated with a water quality project for the City of Chanhassen. Z LOCATIONS: Southeast corner of Lake Lucy Road and Galpin Blvd (two parcels) and Qthe southwest corner of Lake Lucy Road and Powers Blvd. (one parcel) V APPLICANT: City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Q PRESENT LONINU: Kura' xesiaenuai ACREAGE: Site 1: Larry Kerber 6420 Powers Blvd. Approximately 0.5 acre - see attached figure Site 2: Scott Mezzenga 6731 Galpin Blvd. Approximately 0.2 acre - see attached figure (north parcel) QSite 3: Marty Kuder 6831 Galpin Blvd. Q Approximately 0.1 acre - see attached figure (south parcel) L] ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: Rural Residential and Single Family Residential WATER AND SEWER: Available to site PHYSICAL CHARACTER: Upland/open space Galpin Blvd. IUP January 4, 1995 Page 2 INTERIM USE PERMIT/GRADING PERMIT PROPOSAL SUMMARY The City is seeking an interim use permit to allow site grading at the above three sites of excavated wetland materials associated with the water quality project at the intersection of Yuma Road and Woodhill Road. Staff believes the request is reasonable. The excavation and grading proposed by the City will benefit the water quality in the Lotus Lake Watershed. The landowners of the three sites have agreed to allow the City to spread, grade, and seed the excavated materials. The City will save a great deal in trucking costs since these sites are nearby to the project site. The locations are shown on the attached figures. All sites will be graded in order to maintain present drainage patterns and the disturbed areas will be revegetated. According to the City, approximately 5,000 cubic yards of excavation will be involved as part of the overall wetland excavation. All of the excess material will be removed from the site. The haul routes will make use of Kerber Blvd., Carver Beach Road, Lake Lucy Road, and Powers Blvd. The City will be responsible for maintaining hauling routes, cleaning of dirt, etc. Working hours will be limited to 7:00 a.m. to dark Monday through Friday, with no work occurring on holidays. Since the City is the applicant, the administrative fee and letter of credit necessary to secure the grading permit will be waived for all three parcels. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The City approved the wetland alteration permit for this project last fall, however, it has taken a great deal of time to obtain the Federal permit to excavate a wetland. This permit is one of the first to be applied for under the City's unique Surface Water Management Plan and the agencies have had to be educated on the purpose and measures of the plan since they have never had to review or have the legislative tools to approve such a plan. The attached figure shows the wetland and proposed excavation areas. SITE GRADING AND DRAINAGE There are three sites that will be receiving portions of the 5,000 cubic yards of excavated wetland material. They include the following: Site 1: Larry Kerber's property at the southwest corner of Powers Blvd. and Lake Lucy Road (6420 Powers Blvd.). Galpin Blvd. IUP January 4, 1995 Page 3 Site 2: Scott Mezzenga's property at the southeast corner of Galpin Blvd. and Lake Lucy Road (6731 Galpin Blvd.). Site 3: Marty Kuder's property at the southeast corner of Galpin Blvd. and Lake Lucy Road (6831 Galpin Blvd.). FINDINGS The standards for an interim use permit are as follows: 1. It meets the standards of a conditional use permit set forth in Section 20-232 of the City Code. 2. It conforms to the zoning regulations. 3. The use is allowed as an interim use in the district. 4. The date of the event will terminate. The use can be identified with certainty. 5. The use will not impose additional costs on the public if necessary for the public to take the property in the future. 6. The user agrees to any condition that the city deems appropriate for the permission of the use. The general issuance standards of the conditional use Section 20-232, include the following 12 items: 1. Will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. Finding: With the appropriate controls as recommended by staff, the issuance of the interim use permit shall have minimal health, safety and welfare impacts on the neighborhood and community. 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. Finding: The preparatory site grading furthers allows the City to improve the water quality within the watershed without unnecessary impacts elsewhere. The grading supports the approved use of the site. Galpin Blvd. IUP January 4, 1995 Page 4 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. Finding: The grading being proposed by the City will conform to the existing land use of each site. While the grading of the site will temporarily alter the physical appearance of the area, the restoration will leave the area similar to its existing appearance. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. Finding: With the appropriate controls as recommended by staff, the issuance of the interim use permit to grade the site shall have minimal impacts on the neighborhood and community. 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. Finding: Alteration to the proposed use will not change. 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Finding: These sites are not being developed. 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. Finding: With the appropriate controls and conditions, as recommended by staff, the development of the site will have minimal impacts to persons, property, and the general welfare of the community. 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. Galpin Blvd. IUP January 4, 1995 Page 5 Finding: Access to the properties is from Powers Boulevard or Galpin Blvd. which are both collector streets designed for higher traffic volumes. 9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. Finding: The requested action does not destroy significant natural, scenic, or historic features. Trees or significant features will not be impacted. 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. Finding: The City with the landowner will assure the aesthetic compatibility of the project with the surrounding area. 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. Finding: The City will not change existing use of the property. 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. Finding: The City will comply with all conditions of the grading permit. Staff is recommending approval of the Interim Use Permit to permit the filling and grading of the three sites. Again, the reason for the interim use permit is to spread excavated wetland materials on nearby open spaces at minimal cost to improve the water quality within the Lotus Lake Watershed. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves Interim Use Permit #94-3 as described herewith and shown on the attached figures, subject to the following conditions: 1. Existing drainage patterns will be maintained. 2. Erosion control measures shall be in-place prior to site grading and be maintained until the site is fully restored and removal is authorized by the City. 3. The applicant shall obtain and receive the necessary permits from the regulatory agencies such as the Watershed District. Galpin Blvd. IUP January 4, 1995 Page 6 4. Since the applicant is the City all fees associated with the permitting shall be waived. 5. Haul routes will be designed and approve by City staff. 6. Construction trucks and vehicles shall access the site at approved rock construction entrances only. The City will be required to keep haul routes clean of dirt and mud, etc. Any damage to streets, curb or other public facilities shall be repaired by the City. 7. Working hours for the grading operation will be limited to 7:00 a.m. to dark Monday through Friday with no work occurring on holidays. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map. g:'eag\diane\s wmp\yumaproj\grding.iup LilAL r Ufa • •rrIM�_ I - :tali '! • !imam ,t\ .mE. . Ila /WARM;111 WE Mal 5,5„.6° t ; Mr 40111401111 ME nu limn\ re wi ma 1 1= 1/445110M vui pi■■a s, rt� 'Mar M itirgjfg " �� wit lib• Ell sla,v44,"4 r:• rilica ��iL� ■ PARS, r.,r�� P.M • °a pit .., f PARK i—gh.• \.,111 ,...1.4.1.P HMS' ...4 e �1�� 4k41-4 I �■�l ��lyi��limil two w\��\ c.:Ra `7 , atatta tin ►gig■, �-,,■r.r--�ll�leAllR no IIA ,.• ,�1=J _• 4" ice."R,} ■■ s--ow. -ilii ..., �a LA 6'3;0841C ` l gini�n oo, �•o ,,'lifa LeKE p ',�1�' mftli 4�I •i I- VIOL MI re MI WI filet Ma VIAPI 0 ;AM -,44.111.1m111,411 2 • t. / \07,1h ' fir. 1#1-11) � 11 414: al `t�.1 9 ?) .—onmumt,----1110--. eitt gm? t,e*...c;ist4 .4.........m...„— -.4 r-al. ‘,- ii‘o, - , ) RRISQN !, L '_ __ 44.1 . h•bl huh V. /se�'at is y r : o .mg//iii- Trot_,wiripst,1 k • UUI��., oAt: 0.4we oSHORES ; 10 ct Ia. e �� 'ARK -i1iiiti�no u ■I�IIoV- 11 . MEADOW our ��w��■��'4� p Mi ,,��-' �, (--Z--)(1:7-; LAKE ANN /! GREEN PARK -10.;-,,,,t.. AS �gir �m� ilk�w a � ° 2 /111 1 11 '-, ,�.1 � - A11, 1I r INIV�• he11.h- 13� ".llb Ni1111 ilk Alb m• �_____ .1._______.--- ji l AK: 41 . 1144itirl all 0 los-arit .___________ ________ ill ANN ti " PAL-K 1111L. 1...,-,..." im .,:,,,h t.:4, .. IR A R:OR I'• BOULEVARD / T (miwq LEVARD - Ij IL IfW 111 � E d: ----1--r- 1 ---1 '1 Wetland to be Excavated 2 Larry Kerber's property 3 Scott Mezzenqa's property 4 Marty Kuder's property FIGURE 1 IUP 94-3 A CITY OF ,-.-.:.__• lip 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 _ CHANHASSEN (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 I MEMORANDUM TO: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director FROM: Diane Desotelle, Water Resources CoordinatorT )J. DATE: December 20, 1994 SUBJ: Zoning Ordinance Amendment Concerning Erosion Control Background Sediment is considered to be one of the most damaging pollutants in Minnesota and is the major pollutant by volume in state surface waters. The City is growing at a very fast rate and this means there is a large amount of construction occurring within our precious watersheds. Runoff from construction sites is by far the largest source of sediment in urban areas under development. The rates of sediment loading from construction sites are 5 to 500 times greater than those from undeveloped land (USEPA, 1977). Uncontrolled erosion during construction results in enormous amounts of sedimentation that works its way through our stormwater systems including lakes, wetlands, stormwater pipes, and stormwater ponds . We can make a difference in protecting our natural water bodies by proper planning and design before construction and maintaining erosion control structures such as silt fencing, hay bales, and re-vegetating areas as quickly as possible during construction. City staff is doing their best to keep up with enforcing erosion control practices until areas are re-vegetated, however it is very difficult to do since people power is limited and it requires constant maintenance and upkeep. City staff has been working with our City Attorney in an attempt to better administer and enforce erosion control on developments and building sites throughout the City. There were various ways we considered in order for us to have better enforcement action. They include administering citations, issuing stop work orders, or providing for an erosion control escrow. Since citations and stop work orders back up the building inspection workload and increase the timeline for construction, we concluded that an escrow fund would be the best alternative. In this way, the City can employ a company using the escrow funds to install or maintain the erosion control if the applicant fails to do so. Kate Aanenson December 20, 1994 Page 2 Analysis Our conclusions have been two fold. First, we recommend that Chapter 20 of the City's Zoning Ordinance be amended to require a $500 cash escrow or letter of credit to be furnished to the City before a building permit is issued to guarantee compliance of the erosion control plan and best management practices. This will allow City officials to enforce maintenance and upkeep of erosion control devices such as silt fencing, hay bales, and fabrics that need to be maintained until the area is restored. Second, a change in the development contract to require the developer to be responsible for cleaning and maintenance of the storm sewer system for two years after the public improvements in the plat have been accepted by the City. If this zoning ordinance is approved, these changes will also be added to the development contract. Both the zoning ordinance and development contract amendment will be brought before the City Council on January 23, 1994. Recommendation Staff recommends that the amendment to the zoning ordinance implementing an erosion control escrow be adopted. DD:jms Attachment: Zoning Ordinance Amendment g 4ng`diane\planning\ec-dev pc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, CONCERNING GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 20-94 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read: Sec. 20-94. Grading and Erosion Control. (a) A satisfactory erosion control and grading plan consistent with the City's Best Management Practices Handbook must be approved by the City Engineer before a building permit is issued for construction. A $500.00 cash escrow or letter of credit shall be furnished before a building permit is issued to guarantee compliance with the plan. (b) The grading and erosion control plan must provide spot elevations of proposed grades in relation to existing grades on the subject property and adjacent land. Areas where the finished slope will be steeper than five (5) units horizontal to one (1) vertical shall be specifically noted. Also, location of erosion control devices shall be clearly labeled. (c) Every effort shall be made to minimize disturbance of existing ground cover. No grading or filling shall be permitted within forty feet (40') of the ordinary high water mark of a water body unless specifically approved by the City. To minimize the erosion potential of exposed areas, restoration of ground cover shall be provided within five (5) days after completion of the grading operation. (d) Every effort shall be made during the building permit application process to determine the full extent of erosion control required. However, the City Engineer may require additional controls to correct specific site related problems as normal inspections are performed. (e) All erosion control noted on the approved plan shall be installed prior to the initiation of any site grading. Noncompliance with the grading and erosion control plan shall constitute grounds for an order from the City Engineer to halt all construction. 19245 r11/08/94 (f) All construction activity that results in disturbance of the ground shall comply with the City's Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Best Management Practices Handbook, as amended. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1994, by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen. ATTEST: Don Ashworth, Clerk/Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on , 1994). 19245 r11/08/94 2 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: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director DATE: December 20, 1994 SUBJ: Organizational Items a. Election of Chair and Vice Chair The Planning Commission should make nominations and select a Chair and Vice Chair for 1995. b. Adoption of Planning Commission Bylaws The bylaws should be reviewed and adopted every year by the Planning Commission. The commission should discuss any comments or changes they feel necessary at this time. c. Liaison Attendance at City Council Meetings In the past, a schedule has been formulated where all the Planning Commissioners would rotate attending the city council meetings. The commission should discuss whether or not to elect one person to attend or to schedule all commissioners on a rotating basis during the year. d. Planning Commission Packet Binders Starting in January, staff thought maybe it would be easier for the commission packets to be put together and delivered in binders. At the end of the meeting, please leave your binder in the Chambers for the next packet to be delivered. e. Meeting in July Staff noticed that the first meeting in July is on the 5th. Staff would like direction as to if we should change the meetings to the second and fourth Wednesdays (July 12 and 26) or just eliminate the first meeting. BYLAWS PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CHANHASSEN The following bylaws are adopted by the City Planning Commission to facilitate the performance of its duties and the exercising of its functions as a commission established by the City Council pursuant to the provision of Subdivision 1 , Section 462 . 354 Minnesota State Statutes anotated. SECTION 1 - Duties and Responsibilities - Planning Commission: 1 .1 The Planning Commission shall serve as an advisory body to the City Council through carrying out reviews of planning matters . All final decisions are to be made by the City Council . 1 . 2 The Planning Commission shall prepare a Comprehensive Plan for the future development of the City and recommend on amendments to the plan as they arise. 1 . 3 The Planning Commission shall initiate, direct, and review the provisions and standards of the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations and report its recommendations to the City Council . 1 . 4 The Planning Commission shall review applications and proposals for zoning ordinance amendments , subdivisions , street vacations , conditional use permits and site plan reviews and make their recommendations to the City Council in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. 1 . 5 The Planning Commission shall hold public hearings on development proposals as prescribed by the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances . 1 . 6 - Establishment of Subcommittees The Planning Commission may, as they deem appropriate, establish special subcommittees comprised solely of their own members . SECTION 2 - Meetings: 2 . 1 - Time Regular meetings of the Commission shall be held on the first and third weeks of each month at 7 : 30 p.m. at the City Council Chambers , 690 Coulter Drive, unless otherwise directed by the Chairman , in which case at lest 24 hours notice will be given to _ all members . Regular meetings shall have a curfew of 11 : 00 p.m. which may be waived at the discretion of the Chairman . All unfinished business will be carried over to the next regular Planning Commission meeting. When the regular meeting day falls on a legal holiday, there shall be no Planning Commission meeting. 2 . 2 - Special Meetings Special meetings shall be held upon call by the Chairman, or in his absence, by the Vice-Chairman or any other member with the concurrence of four other members of the commission, and with at least 48 hours of notice to all members . Notice of all special meetings shall also be posted on the official City Bulletin Board . 2 . 3 - Attendance Planning Commission members shall attend not less than seventy- five ( 75% ) percent of all regular and special meetings held during a given ( calendar) year, and shall not be absent from three ( 3 ) consecutive meetings without prior approval of the Chairman. Failure to meet this minimum attendance requirement shall be cause for removal from the Commission by action of the City Council . SECTION 3 - Commission Composition, Terms and Vacancies : 3 .1 - Composition The Commission shall consist of 7 voting members . Seven members shall be appointed by the Council and may be removed by the Council . 3 . 2 - Terms and Vacancies The Council shall appoint seven members to the Commission for terms of three years . Vacancies during the term shall be filled by the Council for the unexpired portion of the term. Every appointed member shall before entering upon the charge of his duties take an oath that he will faithfully discharge the duties of his office. All members shall serve without compensation . 3 . 3 - Quorum Four Planning Commission members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business . Whenever a quorum is not present, no final or official action shall be taken at such meeting. -2- SECTION 4 - Organization: 4 . 1 - Election of Officers At the first meeting in January of each year , the Planning Commission shall hold an organization meeting . At this meeting, the Comission shall elect from its membership a Chairman and Vice-Chairman . This shall be done by secret ballot. Each member shall cast its ballot for the member he wishes to be chosed for Chairman . If no one receives a majority, balloting shall con- tinue until one member receives the majority support. Vice-Chairman shall be elected from the remaining numbers of the same proceeding. If the Chairman retires from the Planning Commission before the next regular organizational meeting , the Vice-Chairman shall be Chairman . If both Chairman and Vice-Chairman retire, new offi- cers shall be elected at the next regular meeting. If both Chairman and Vice-Chairman are absent from a meeting, the Commission shall elect a temporary Chairman by voice vote . 4 . 2 - Duties of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman The Chairman or in his absence , the Vice-Chairman, shall preside at meetings , appoint committees from its own membership, and per- form other such duties as ordered by the Commission . The Chairman shall conduct the meeting so as to keep it moving rapidly and efficiently as possible and shall remind members , witnesses and petitioners to preserve order and decorum and to keep comments to the subject at hand. The Chairman shall not move for action but may second motions . SECTION 5 - Procedure: 5 . 1 - Parlimentary Procedure Parlimentary Procedure governed by Roberts Rules of Order Revised shall be followed at all regular meetings . At special work session meetings , and when appropriate, the Commission may hold group discussions not following any set parlimentary procedures except when motions are before the Commission . SECTION 6 - Public Hearings: 6 . 1 - Purpose of Hearings The purpose of a hearing is to collect information and facts in order for the Commission to develop a rational planning recommen- dation for the City Council . 6 . 2 - Hearing Procedure At hearings the following procedure shall be followed in each case: -3- a . The Chairman shall state the case to be heard . b . The Chairman shall call upon the staff to present the staff report . Required reports from each City Department shall be submitted to the Planning Commission before each case is heard. c. The Chairman shall ask the applicant to present his case. d . Interested persons may address the Commission, giving infor- mation regarding the particular proposal . e . Petitioners and the public are to address the Chairman only, not staff or other commissioners . f . There shall be no dialogue among the Commissioners , giving information regarding the particular proposal . ( The Planning Commission members may ask questions of persons addressing the Commission in order to clarify a fact, but any statement by a member for any other purpose than to question may be ruled out of order. ) g . After all new facts and information have been brought forth , the hearing shall be closed and interested persons shall not be heard again . Upon completion of the hearing on each case, the Planning Commission shall discuss the item at hand and render a decision. The Planning Commission if it so desires , may leave the public record open for written comments for a specified period of time. h. The Chairman shall have the responsibility to inform all the parties of their rights of appeal on any decision or recom- mendation of the Planning Commission. 6 . 3 - Schedule At meetings where more than one hearing is scheduled, every effort shall be made to begin each case at the time set in the agenda , but in no case may an item be called for hearing prior to the advertised time listed on the agenda. SECTION 7 - Miscellaneous: 7 .1 - Planning Commission Discussion Matters for discussion which do not appear on the agenda may be considered and discussed by the Commission only when initiated and presented by the staff and shall be placed at the end of the agenda. 7 .2 - Suspension of Rules The Commission may suspend any of these rules by a unanimous vote of the members present. -4- 7 . 3 - Amendments Amendment of these bylaws may be made at any regular or special meeting of the Planning Commission but only if scheduled on the meeting agenda in advance of the meeting. 7 . 4 - Review At the first meeting in January of each year , these bylaws shall be read and adopted by the Planning Commission. Adopted: Date: Chairman -5- (l PLANNING COMMISSIONERS 1995 SCHEDULE FOR ATTENDANCE AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Planning Commissioner will receive City Council packets as shown on the following schedule: Harberts January 9 Mancino January 23 Scott February 13 Nutting February 27 Conrad March 13 Farmakes March 27 Ledvina April 10 Harberts April 24 Mancino May 8 Scott June 12 Nutting June 26 Conrad July CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 7, 1994 Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Diane Harberts, Ladd Conrad, Joe Scott, Nancy Mancino, Jeff Farmakes and Ron Nutting MEMBERS ABSENT: Matt Ledvina STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer; Bob Generous, Planner II; and Tom Scott, City Attorney PUBLIC HEARING: REZONING OF 49.9 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED A2, AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO R4, MIXED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, PRELIMINARY PLAT OF 49.9 ACRES INTO 92 TWIN HOME LOTS AND ONE OUTLOT, AND A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5, APPROXIMATELY 1/4 MILE ON THE EAST SIDE OF GALPIN BOULEVARD (CR 117), LOTUS REALTY SERVICES, LAKE ANN HIGHLANDS. Public Present: Name Address Sharon & Mark Pryor 7541 Windmill Drive David & Cindy Jensen 2173 Brinker Street Jeff Stone 2103 Brinker Street Margaret & Rick Manning 7460 Windmill Drive Michelle Hammer 7421 Windmill Drive Jeff Steinke 7481 Windmill Drive Steve & Judy Selinger 7480 Windmill Drive Michael Perry 7521 Windmill Drive Bret Davidson 2200 Majestic Way Lars Conway 4415 Fremont Ave So, Mpls Betty & Larry VanDeVeire 4980 Co. Rd. 10E, Chaska Peter Beck 7900 Xerxes Ave So, Mpls Jack Lynch 700 Third Street, Mpls Ross Fefercorn 7625 Metro Blvd #145, Mpls Kevin & Joan Joyce 2043 Brinker Street Amit Diamond 2117 Brinker Street Virginia Bell 7476 Crocus Court 1 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Name Address Patricia Lynch 7475 Crocus Court Susan Reimers 7495 Crocus Court Jim Fiedler 7500 Windmill Run Julie Wojtanowski 2145 Brinker Street Thomas Turcotte 7240 Galpin Blvd. Mary Jane Olson 7461 Windmill Drive Brian Erdman 2091 Brinker Street Carol & Bob Oberaigner 2075 Brinker Street Kathy Halaeman 2059 Brinker Street Steve Thornberg 7511 Crocus Court Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Scott: Questions or comments? Mancino: I just have one, well I have several questions but I'm going to wait until after the public hearing but Bob the one that I had is there are a couple of outlots and according to the preliminary grading and drainage plans that I have, I don't see where the outlots are. They're not marked on our most recent documents. Generous: Outlot A is the large parcel to the south of that north...road and then Outlot B is in the corner of the plat but next to the Hennesey property. It's a small triangle of land that's located in this area. The little triangle. That's one of the conditions that we put in was either combine it with the abutting lot or attach it to the Hennesey property. The applicant has expressed his desire that they would like it to be attached to the Hennesey property. That's approximately 1,300 square feet. Mancino: I'm sorry, the northeast corner of the Hennesey, northwest corner? Generous: Northeast corner of the Hennesey property there's a small triangle. Mancino: I'm sorry, I didn't get a copy of this. So if I could ask the applicant questions... thank you. Scott: Good. Any other questions or comments from the commissioners. Any other comments from staff? Okay, would the applicant like to make a presentation please? 2 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Brad Johnson: Mr. Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, my name is Brad Johnson with Lotus Realty. The presentation this evening will be basically a review of what Mr. Generous has just done from Jack Lynch who is with BRW and then introduce Ross Fefercorn from Country Homes who will go over his product. I think we tried to address the major issues that were raised at the Planning Commission last time and we hope to be able to address those. In the last 2 or 3 weeks we've had an opportunity to make the changes I believe that were requested of a technical nature and we've had a chance to meet with the neighbors to explain exactly what type of product this is and... Relative to recommendations of the Planning department, we gave them a letter which they may or may not have gotten to you, that this deals with 6 or 4 issues that we would have, that I don't think are major and are more a negotiation thing that will probably happen between now and the time we go to the Council but one is we, for reasons of in discussion with Mr. Hennesey, he may or may not want to have access into his property instead of having to go over to a new drive...CR 117 so one way of assuring him of that would be either to create an outlot, which we have done, or just simply attach it to the property. They're not hung up on that. It just seemed like it might be a good idea at the time. As far as park fees are concerned, we understand that we would be required to have a conservation easement across the river that comes through there. However, we're trying to offset some of our costs. There's about $180,000.00 of fees involved in this and we assume that if it was going to be used for trail or park purposes that sooner or later, either in this plat or as part of the outlot that's being platted, that we would be given credit for that. I believe we can work our way through it but I don't know if the standards to require architectural standards in a single family project that we're recommending. That if we find that to be...we'd like to discuss that later. We have a feeling for what we're going to be doing exactly and then items 24 and 25, again these are conservation easements. As part of the plat...20 feet of right-of-way, additional 20 feet of right-of-way to the new Arboretum Boulevard and we'd like to be compensated or offset some of your water quality and water quantity fees and I think those are primarily things that we probably negotiate...by the time we got to the Council. With that I'd like to introduce Jack Lynch who is a planner with BRW and he'll go over the technical things that...were requested and then following him Ross Fefercorn will make a slide presentation about the product. Jack. Jack Lynch: Thank you. I think the staff covered the issues that I think you asked us to take a look at. The landscaping's been changed. The building pads are the building pads that will be built. The pads that are shown on this graphic with options might be lengthen but are not increased in any width at all. The one concern was the grades on the knoll. The knoll has been dropped. The previous grades were reduced by half. There was a concern on staff about the landing areas on here. But built into that grading plan is a landing area that's about 2% to 4% so we're confident that there will be no safety issues. I think that addressed the comments both by commissioners and...if you have any questions, I can certainly answer them. 3 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Scott: Okay, thanks. Any questions? I guess we don't have any questions so. Ross Fefercorn: Ladies and gentlemen of the Planning Commission, my name is Ross Fefercorn from Country Builders and I've got a short slide presentation. A little bit about our company before I start. We've been in business about 10 years. We've been very active in the Burnsville, Apple Valley, Woodbury, Eagan, recently Eden Prairie and hopefully Chanhassen markets. I checked with the planners in Apple Valley, Eagan, Woodbury today, and Burnsville, and asked if there were any questions if anybody from Chanhassen could call them...the product so you're welcome to call the folks in those cities. I think that was... My slide presentation shows some streetscapes of a couple of our sites. It shows some details and elevations of a typical building. However in Chanhassen and Eden Prairie we are going to be adding about 60% brick to the exterior whereas these are all wood sided. Our price ranges in these developments are now averaging $195,000.00 in Woodbury, to the high end about $280,000.00. The low end about $150 and with Eagan, which is another active site, our average price is about $185,000.00. It's substantially the same product, it just happens to be what options people have chosen on the two sites. Also in Eden Prairie we're a little bit higher. We're averaging about $250,000.00 there, although the neighborhoods just keep growing but we hope that that will be the average... With that, ret me proceed with the presentation. I'll walk through it and describe a few things. Also one thing that's really important to point out about the planning that BRW and Lotus has done for this site with our home. The average size lot, that's per unit lot at Lake Ann is 12,500 square feet. The average sized lot at all the other developments I just described is 7,500 square feet so these are substantially larger lots. 60% larger...so there's considerably more width than what I'm showing you but yet one of the ideas of the presentation was to show landscaping and so forth between buildings. One other thing I'd like to point out is that both at our Eagan site and our Woodbury site we have...in approximately 7 trees per home. I think in Woodbury right now we have moved 350 trees onto the 20 acre site and we have about 200 trees left to go as we complete the buildings so we do an incredible amount of landscaping. I like to brag about it. I think we do more than any other builder in town. Believe in it as part of the environment and that shows. Most of the pictures you'll see here, the landscaping is not more than 3 months old at the time the pictures were taken. One of the things, I accidentally flipped on the date sequence on the camera unwittingly and this is not the right date. These were taken in the summer. Late summer. This is the entrance to our development called... Country Homes in Eagan. It's 70 homes on 20 acres. It's a brass monument put in place and entry landscaping. Behind that you see one of our two unit buildings. Both sides are different. That's why the garage has changed orientation there a little bit in size. This is a streetscape looking down on roughly about a 6% grade. What you see to the right hand side is a landscaped center island for a cul-de-sac. We like islands in the cul-de-sac. They make very fine opportunities for a significant landscaping and so forth. This is looking at that same particular island at two buildings or four homes. Each one, each half of those double homes 4 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 is a, in that particular cul-de-sac is about $250,000.00. Looking back at that cul-de-sac on an individual's yard. That happens to be one of the larger yards of this site. This is another landscaped cul-de-sac that's a little bit larger. In the lower left hand side of the photograph, there's a 3 car garage. Just suppose with a 2 car garage turning the garage doors different directions than is shown on this plat for Lake Ann which changes the streetscape quite a bit. Also one thing that we always do. There's always at least two windows as you can see in every single garage so we don't just leave blank walls. There's always...windows and then details around those windows. The gable end treatment is a shaker town type siding. You can't see...some other little details of the gable ends which change the shape and size and so forth as we look at the project. These trees that you see on the lower right hand in the middle, all the trees that have been planted on the landscaped cul-de-sac are machine moved species taken out of a forest. This is again looking at that same landscape cul-de-sac and again at a, on the left hand side you see a 2 1/2 car garage. On the right hand side you see a 2 car garage. Both with gable end details. Another...but this is all brand new landscaping this summer. Now behind this you can see a two-2 car garages. One garage is oriented one way. The other garage is oriented towards the street. This is what we call our Legend Rambler Walkout. It's about 3,400 square feet including a 3 season porch. It's a walkout that people can finish. It is a 2 1/2 acre garage. All of our homes feature a nice sitting area off of the breakfast and dining area which is where you see the umbrella. And the keystone retaining wall with our landscaping is typical of our walkout homes. This home today is about $250-260,000.00. Another vignette of that particular home to see some of our landscaping. Also showing a lower level walkout area which has a covered porch also. This is typical of our entry landscaping with mature hedges and spreading junipers and the rock mulch and the river birch type tree and some of the details on the bay windows. Now in Chanhassen, as in Eden Prairie, this elevation will substantially be brick. This is a one story home with a master suite on the second floor. We call this our Legend suite. That home today sells for about $200,000.00 and this is a typical treatment of what our homeowners do with the hanging baskets. There's a lot of personal detail and attention paid and individuality to each and every home we build. This is another home that was constructed this summer showing a 3 car garage. What that starts to look like. That happens to be the Legend suite plan with the upstairs again. A little gable end detail which I wanted to show you with the 3 car garage jutting out and the gable end of the 2 car garage behind it and the little details below the overhang on the gable. This is pretty typical of what we do throughout all of our... Harberts: Excuse me, what's the representation of the 18-2, or excuse me 81-2-18? Ross Fefercorn: As I mentioned earlier, I had accidentally flipped on the date on my camera, not knowing it was on. It wasn't set for any particular date. That's a 2 1/2 car garage which is an addition onto a 2 car garage which is an option on our home. A lot of people do it. It adds additional storage and some people park golf carts. They create little work areas there 5 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 and that's typical of the windows and...elevations of our garage doors. 3 car garage again. Here I wanted to talk, to show a little bit about what the neighborhood starts to look like as you walk into it. This is a typical neighborhood and this is a typical little patio area and how people treat it. I think earlier we saw some other hanging baskets. This was somebody else's treatment of their own patio. This is another treatment. Somebody else's patio area and that, the little door behind goes to your breakfast area and your kitchen and your kitchen sink overlooks this little area that's intimate with your home. Swinging porch is sort of the traditional kind of feeling. This is a very typical distance between buildings and keeping in mind that Lake Ann will be 60% larger than this. I think this is about 45 feet between these buildings and I think Lake Ann averages about, what is it, 70 feet? 70 feet between buildings so it's almost twice the distance between these buildings. It's very, very generous. This shows a little bit of the roll in the elevation. The way we treat the driveways with the landscaping around it. The mailbox treatments. The hedges again. The sidewalks and what this is coming to, there's a street on the other side where instead of a drive...so we're really looking for two streets, two layers of our homes. Same...looking through two layers, back to back. Again this is all landscaping that was installed this summer. Now I want to walk through the interior of this one. I just have a few pictures, if you don't mind. This is looking from the dinette and the kitchen. That's the door that goes to the patio. Incidentally, for this home, back in 1994 we were awarded the 1994 Reggie Award, first place for quality and design in the $185,000.00 to the $285,000.00 price range for attached single family homes by the Builders Association, which we're very proud of. This is the dining area looking through to the living room. The entry area behind it. The den behind and way behind that, it's a very open plan, is the 3 season porch. To the left down the hallway on the other side of the fireplace is the master suite and this is what the master suite looks like. There's also a very large master bath attached to it and more closet space and built-ins and so forth. This is the 3 season porch. It's very typical of how most of our customers finish them with tile floors and half round...window. This is the lower level of the model finished with another fireplace and more built-ins. It has a bar area and open staircase that goes down. This is typical of our customers. This was about 8 years ago. These people were featured in a newspaper article. Typical customers. And this is typical activities around our sites. That's our Reggie we received this year. Any questions? Scott: Any questions? Brad Johnson: Chairman, Peter Beck who is our attorney would like to also speak to you... Scott: Sure. Peter Beck: Chairman, members of the Commission, Peter Beck. 7900 Xerxes Avenue South. We asked Ross to make this slide presentation that you just saw because there were 6 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 concerns expressed the last time...exactly what is proposed in terms of this site. What the homes look like and we felt it's a legitimate...and we asked them to come and show. We also, once we had seen it ourselves, thought it would be very helpful for you to see this because I think it demonstrates without a doubt the quality of the project that is proposed here. We have not said that this is going to be identical to the development...but what we do believe very strongly is that this project will be very compatible with the existing development to the north and the proposed higher density development along the highway and will operate as a very appropriate transition between those two levels... We think that Chanhassen has an opportunity to provide the type of housing which doesn't exist in this town right now and to do so with a very high quality developer and very high quality project. And I again would want to reinforce with that said that this project as proposed is consistent with the comprehensive plan and all the planning that the city put into the Highway 5 corridor over the past several years that many of us have been attending task force meetings. Farmakes: Our staff report also says that the applicant does not have a specific builder at this time for the development. Is that still current information or not? Peter Beck: No, Ross is the proposed developer at this time... And I think one thing that Ross didn't talk about, just remember the staff report had mentioned about some variety of color and as Ross did mention, this Chanhassen project will include a fair amount of brick on these buildings...color available to them ranging from a beige to earth tone type colors. In this project there will be some... Farmakes: Kate, is it your understanding that the developer, a builder has been part of this or this is a disagreement in the staff report. That's what I'm asking. Aanenson: Well up until, the first review or discussion meeting that we had, my understanding was that they hadn't picked, they were looking at two different developers. Peter Beck: At the time the staff report was written, it was quite accurate but in response to the concerns at the last Planning Commission meeting, again I'm not going to say that there's any contracts entered into, and I don't know for a fact that there are but it's certainly Dr. Conway's intent that if this would be approved, Ross will develop it. Dr. Conway: Can I just speak? I'm Dr. Conway. Scott: Oh please. Step up to the microphone. Dr. Conway: This is kind of a chicken and the egg type of problem. I don't want people to think that there's something going on that's not going on. When we've talked about this 7 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 development it seems, I did talk with two different developers. We talked with Ross and another fellow and the other fellow in particular had said, well do you want to sign a contract in advance of doing anything and I said, well that doesn't make any sense. We don't know what we're going to have approved for this site. I don't want to enter into an agreement. It's not to your advantage. It's not to mine. I kind of want to know what we can do before we enter into any agreements. Since that time we've worked just with Ross and I think as this process goes through, I haven't made any, I haven't written a contract with Ross. We do have, we've talked about figures in terms of how we approach it and I think that we agree. But we want to get through this process in terms of what we can do before finalizing our arrangement. That's basically the approach we had. I'm not knowledgeable about these matters. My understanding is if you go into a PUD, you have something that's a specific plan. You work it through. We're not approaching this as a PUD. We were bringing this through as a subdivision with the idea that once we get that through, then we can finalize our agreement with the developer. So anyway that's just, I'll be quiet now because I start getting out of my... Any questions I can answer for anybody? Scott: Thank you Mr. Conway. Anybody else from the applicant who would like to speak? This is a public hearing and given the nature of the issues that the neighbors have, one of the things I'd just like to ask, well first of all. Anybody who has something to say is welcome to come up and say it and please identify yourself and give your address. If the neighbors have an individual or individuals who have, are planning on representing, please do so. If you happen to want to come up and speak after someone already has and you agree with them totally, it's certainly appropriate to come up and say that. But what we're looking for here is clear and concise, non-repetitive information and I think we can make the best use of everybody's time and go from there but I'd appreciate that, thank you and who would like to speak first. Mancino: Should we open it? Scott: That's what happens when you only meet every 2 weeks. Can I have a motion to open the public hearing please? Mancino moved, Fannakes seconded to open the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was opened. Pat Lynch: Just in case it was approved, I was already here. Scott: Well that's good. You make good use of the time that way. 8 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Pat Lynch: My name is Pat Lynch. I live at 7475 Crocus Court. I can guarantee I won't be repetitive because I'm the first one here... There will be 2 or 3 of my neighbors that will be clearly concise and clearly non-repetitive that will speak for me...as neighbors we have attempted to be responsive to both the issues that were raised in both the conversations with staff in our first discussion here in November. What we attempted to do initially was react to something that people felt angry about. What we've attempted to do since then is to come in and say, what is it that makes most sense. What we've looked at is something that says, and in all due respect to the counsel for the development, an appropriate transition of housing may be in the eyes of the beholder. What we would choose to ask you to consider are plans that would have some integrity with the neighborhood which we represent. The people in Windmill Run. What we've looked for is some integrity with the perceived covenants that people thought they understood prior to the time that we built in Windmill Run. What we've looked for is some congruity in the neighborhood, not exclusively similarities to the houses in which we live but a congruent flow in lying with both the comprehensive plan and the Highway 5 development, what makes the most sense for that neighborhood to grow. Thirdly, we'd like something that is truly well planned as well as truly well built and in looking at the pictures may say something that's well built but it may not be well planned. Fourthly that we're looking at roads and access that makes sense in terms of the safety of our children. In terms of what makes sense for people. Not just to move traffic. So what we've asked our neighbors to do is to come in and share with you what we think about those things. Kevin Joyce, Joan Joyce and Virginia Bell have each have aspects of what is it that we've looked at and what is it that we'd like to do and we will attempt to be very concise. Kevin Joyce, a neighbor...speak to one of those posts. Scott: Thank you. Mr. Joyce. Kevin Joyce: Kevin Joyce, 2043 Brinker Street. I was present at the last meeting on November 2nd and I did address the commission regarding a visit I made to the planning staff the last week in December, 1993. At the time I was in the middle of making a decision on whether to purchase a lot in the Windmill Run development and I was interested in that proposed land just south, that development that we're speaking about this evening. I was told that this area was planned for single family houses. Single family detached homes and this really was an important part of my decision to build in the Windmill Run development. Obviously I was rather shocked when I received the notice from the proposed development of the twin homes and I felt there was some misinformation presented to me by the City of Chanhassen. Clearly I feel this is the basis for a lot of us being here. We purchased with one idea and somebody with something else comes up and I guess it would have had a radical effect on my decision to build in Chanhassen and at Windmill Run if I had the information or was told the proper information of what was being proposed for that development. I'd like to invite a few of my neighbors up and we'll be very, very brief but I think it's important. I 9 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 don't want to belabor this point but I do want them to get their say on what exactly happened in their purchase of their properties. Dave, Jeff, why don't you all come up. Harberts: Mr. Joyce? Kevin Joyce: Yes. Harberts: If I may interrupt. In the event that this proposal is in it's form, or some form is approved by the City Council, is it your intention to stay in your home or do you have plans to move? Kevin Joyce: It depends. We've come up with some compromises here. We realize that there was going to be development there. We knew there wasn't going to be a cornfield out there the whole time. We did know there was going to be development but we were told it was going to be single family detached homes and we bought our property with the idea that we would be in an integrated family neighborhood. I think that's important. I think these people had the same idea. So that's why I wanted to bring them up but that's a good question. I don't know. I have to find out exactly what's going.to happen with this plan and we have a plan so. Jeff Stone: Good evening. My name is Jeff Stone. We live at 2103 Brinker, which happens to be the street most affected by this development. I represent my wife and two small children who couldn't attend. It's bedtime. We, before signing a purchase agreement, did contact the city planning department and were told by a member of the staff to expect single family housing in that area behind Brinker. Thinking we did the intelligent thing, and with some forethought, maybe we were wrong in our thinking but I can tell you without a doubt, had we known, had we had this information, we would not have built on Brinker Street. And it has crossed our minds and depending on the outcome, it's kind of up in the air whether we'll stay in Brinker for an extended period of time or if we'll just cut our losses and pick up so that's what I have to say. Scott: Good, thank you. Desiree Brown: Hi. My name is Desiree Brown and I live at 2131 Brinker Street and I too am on the same road as... Before purchasing our home we also, as a matter of fact I called the city...about what would be built behind us. I was told that they would be homes, single family detached homes like the ones that we have on Brinker Street. I just feel that we were misled about that because I based my decision on that. It is our first house and I thought I had done everything I could do to get that information and I requested what was going in... 10 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Scott: Thank you. David Jensen: I'm David Jensen, 2173 Brinker Street. I talked to two different city planners. One before we signed our purchase agreement and one after and both of them had told us that it was going to be single family homes. I was kind of surprised when this came along and as far as staying in the area, I don't think I can afford to sell it right now. If you guys want to buy it then I will consider it, but that's all I have to say. Scott: Okay. Amit Diamond: My name is Amit Diamond. I live at 2117 Brinker. I'm located in...Our real estate agent advised us where to buy a house here and he recommended Chanhassen. Prior to buying a house in Chanhassen we moved to Eden Prairie and with all the heavy development that there is around here and in every development that we looked we saw a combination of single family homes and then twin homes, he advised me not to buy. Anyway when we got to Windmill Run he called and talked to the city planner about...single family detached houses. That's what we thought. I would not have...buy a house if I had known that there was...twin homes. I'm very disappointed and I don't know what•I will do...sell my house. Thank you. Scott: Thank you. Susan Reimers: My name is Susan Reimers. I live at 7495 Crocus Court and I too was informed...department here at the city and confirmed what we were told by the sales representative. Of course I thought that was very prudent to do. As to what was going to be built in the area adjacent to our particular...or subsequent home we were building. And was told that, and I was told that it was to be, and I quote, that the... Harberts: Could you repeat that again please. I didn't catch that last part. Susan Reimers: Because my voice was shaking? That the homes that were going to be built adjacent to the development would be comprised of similar type and size homes...with the Chanhassen Planning Department, which I did in a conversation with a person on February 7, 1994. This is my agent writing a letter to those of you who will be...purchased at Windmill Run...due to my recommendation which was based in part on information received from this particular person. Had this information that the vacant land adjacent to your development might be converted to multi-housing sites, twin homes, townhomes, condominiums, apartments, I would not have recommended that you purchase at Windmill Run. Scott: Thank you. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Susan Reimers: And in response to his question. We also do not know whether or not we would stay in this development if there was twin homes adjacent because it is not... Virginia Bell: My name is Virginia Bell. I live at 7476 Crocus Court in Chanhassen. In the last week of March of this year I visited with the planning, people in the planning department in the city prior to our decision to build in Windmill Run. The purpose of my visit was to find out what was going to be developed in the adjacent land. I worked with one of the members of the planning department and asked and I recall the words he said to me. He said you don't have to worry because it will be single family houses. I am also, that concludes the portion of our presentation on that issue. I am going to move into another issue. As Pat indicated, at the neighborhood, some of us have looked at the proposed developments and have done some research and done some background work and in addition developed... and Mrs. Joyce will be presenting that. What I'd like to talk to you about is some of the research that we've done and some of the findings that we've come up with and I do have some visuals that I'd like to share with you as well. I'd like to talk about three things. First of all it'd be consistency or inconsistency of the proposed development with the comprehensive plan. Secondly the visual affect that the proposed development would have on this area. And thirdly, the fact that this development may in fact be premature and therefore contrary to the ordinance and talk a little bit about that. After hearing from all of our neighbors that they have heard the same thing about single family developments, I was curious as to exactly where this had generated from and I went back and I checked the comprehensive plan out of the library and I did review it. I think that it's fairly clear that that area that we're talking about is designated for low density. When you read the definition of low density in the plan what it says is predominantly single family. That is single family detached. That these neighborhoods will be predominantly single family detached so had I gone the next step before I bought my house and read the comprehensive plan, I probably would have had the same idea that I got from the city planners. That this is an area that was designated for and was going to be predominantly single family housing. The next category that you see in the comprehensive plan is for medium density and that is designated for...close to the Highway 5. So the area that we're talking about is low density and then along Highway 5 we have the medium density. Medium density is defined in the plan, it of course has a density requirement but it says that it continues to accommodate townhouses. So granted, the comprehensive plan does speak primarily to...with respect to densities but there also is a clear indication that the low density is to be predominantly single family and I think that's what a reader would understood and that's in fact what was represented to the residents before they... Currently I think that the plans or the proposed development is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. Yes, it meets the technical density requirements but I think it is inconsistent with the intent of the plan and with the...plan indicates predominantly single family housing. I'd like to move on and talk a little bit about the visual effect of the proposed development on the neighborhood and I do have some visuals and I think that 12 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 seeing visuals will also reinforce the notion that the low density that this is designated for is not the right area for the location of this kind of development. What I have are overheads so I'll step over here and if anybody can't hear me, please let me know. We visited the Country Home development in Eagan and in Woodbury and also in Eden Prairie. I don't have any pictures of Eden Prairie because it's not built yet. I think we have to accept that Brad Johnson has given us his best shot in terms of Country Homes and what he intends to build there. This is the entrance to the Country Homes development in Woodbury and the reason I show this is Country Homes market these twin homes as townhomes. And in fact right next to this sign there is a building that says single family home sales office and I went in there and I said, I'd like to get some information on the twin homes. He said, well the townhomes are marketed down there where the sign is pointing to and I said, well I'm not interested in townhomes, I'm interested in the twin homes. And he said, well twin homes are townhomes. You'll need to go down there. Ross Fefercorn: Can I interrupt? That's not my sign. That belongs to... Virginia Bell: Right, but when you and your partner, we inquired about that and with Country Homes and the developer intended. Ross Fefercorn: That's not my sign. Virginia Bell: Well let me show you your sign, okay. This is your sign. This, obviously the Country Home sign in front of the Eagan development and these same signs appear in front of the Woodbury development and direct you to both of the developments so the point is, there's no question but these marketed as and dealt with in the marketplace as townhomes. And going back to the comprehensive plan, if you look at the definition of medium density, it says that it's intended to accommodate townhomes. We saw some pictures earlier of the Country Home streetscape and these are the streetscapes that I saw when I went out. These photographs were taken last weekend and this is looking down into what I understood was a street into a cul-de-sac area. I was trying to get a sense of what we would see as residents and what other people in the city would see as they were driving by. One thing that I noticed is that, what you primarily see in the streets are the garages. The fronts of the homes, which we see in a lot of the brochures and a lot of the advertising, they face into each other so the streetscape does not include that. What you see primarily is the garage. Here is one where we're not seeing the garage and this is what we're seeing. This is adjacent to the area that we were just looking at and I think we're still in the Woodbury development here if I'm not mistaken. This is the same view that you saw earlier. This is in the Eagan development and Mr. Fefercorn showed you a picture of this. This is the same. I took a picture standing at almost the same location and this is what it looks like. I guess the reason I show this is the uniformity. This is very monochromatic. I understand there's some discussion about 13 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 encouraging color choices but what I saw in both Woodbury and Eagan was all the same colors and there's a very, you know there's a sameness to it. This is also in Eagan and it's looking the other direction from what, the direction that we just saw. This is looking up the street. You saw looking down the street and the reason I show this was again to show the uniformity and also how close these are to the road. One of the things that struck us when we were looking at this was sort of the lack of traditional yards. Front yards and back yards. This is something that we think about with single family homes but you didn't get that feeling when you were in this neighborhood looking at it. And also again the uniformity and what we're primarily seeing again are the garages. The other thing that we looked at in looking at the development was how the development was integrated into the area around it and whether it was located near single family housing, and if so, how it was buffered. Up to the single family housing or what buffers there were between the single family housing and these townhomes. The Woodbury development, this is looking from the rear of the Woodbury development and what you can see, this is a commercial area. The back of the parking lot and there are, you know gas stations and Holiday type stations and kind of a medium sized commercial area. And that's what these twin homes, townhomes are butting up against. On the other side are another set of twinhomes which is the sign that you're referring to and they are a lot more expensive than these. They are units that the sales office told us were a million dollars for both sides. They're very expensive. And then beyond that you get into the single family houses. I think the point that I wanted to make here, this was used as a buffer to commercial or as a transition I guess to commercial and the single family housing that was behind this was quite large. So this was sort of at the corner of the single family housing as a transition to commercial. And finally where we see the development of these townhomes adjoining single family, what we saw was a great deal of buffering. Here we have on the left the back of one of the twin homes and then single family housing you can see down to the right and the street and then a large embankment and then obviously some, it looks like there's either landscaping or trees that have been there buffering it so there's quite a bit done to separate the development from one another and none of the streets from this single family homes run into the townhome development. The streets are separate. After I looked at that frankly I find it difficult to envision that kind of development right up against a single family neighborhood of Windmill Run, Royal Oaks Estates. I think they're visually it would be jarring. It's not consistent. It doesn't make a lot of sense frankly to me. The way that it's planned. The two of them right up against each other. In addition, going back again to the comprehensive plan, I think the notion of a low density, primarily predominantly single family neighborhood, to me doesn't jive and isn't consistent with the proposal for this kind of a townhome development in that large of a space right up against our single family homes. The other issue that I would like to address is one of prematurity. As you know, the...can't be premature. There has to be adequate roads and...so forth. Many of the residents in Windmill Run are concerned about these issues. The first issue being the road, the access road along Highway 5. I won't belabor this because I know it's been discussed at the prior meeting. We 14 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 don't know yet where the road is going to be, north or south, and without that designation and knowledge, it seems to us that it's premature to be going in and putting in and approving a development not knowing about where the road is going to be. The other issue is, there are no parks up in this area and there is no, until the road is built, there is no trail access down to Lake Ann. So we will have a much larger neighborhood here with no access to any kind of park facility. So in essence we are... Lastly, and this is an issue that was raised by one of my neighbors who could not be here tonight. Apparently the sewer connection is a second phase of this, is one that's going to come up from the south. I guess underneath TH 5 and there is concern and a question of whether or not that is in fact going to happen and should we be approving development when that, plans for that sewer are not part of...Those are our concerns and I thank you for your time. Scott: Good, thank you very much. That was very well prepared. Very concise. Thank you. Yes ma'am. Joan Joyce: My name is Joan Joyce. I live at 2043 Brinker Street and myself and several of my neighbors have put together just a concept. We're not developers. We don't claim to be. It's an idea. We've looked into a lot of different alternatives here and we'd like to show you what we have on our minds with regard to what we would like to see because we feel that is something that is important to use with regards to safety, traffic for our neighborhood and developing and establishing our neighborhood as a separate place... So I have some handouts for you and then I have an overhead to show also. Now what I did is we just copied off of what was sent out to us. This is apparently not to scale with anything but there are three really big issues that I would like to point out with this. One is the concept of the overall plan. The other one is buffers and the third point is the traffic flow with regard to the roads. And first of all to start with, I'd like to point out that the concept we felt that this provides is logical in terms with the fact that you have the single family homes that are already in existence right here and then they end right here where this cul-de-sac ends, right here. We think that it's only logical for this road to continue on to more single family homes as we were expected to see sometime in the future. They would be homes equal in size to our's along with value and lot size. And then that road would go back out onto Galpin so that we can keep our neighborhood completely onto itself here. And beyond that, a little bit closer to Highway 5 would be a park or something like that with buffers and trail systems. I do understand that a lot of us have already paid into this sort of thing with our community and I'm sure we'll be seeing it sometime. I thought this was a logical place to provide something like that and then further on down closer to Highway 5 we'd have the higher density housing. This way there's again, it's a natural progression from one density to another density with again the second buffer inbetween, which goes to my next point. The buffer, whether it's a park or trails or just a large expanse of land with several hills and trees, I think it's really essential that we have something like that because again it divides the two different kinds of 15 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 neighborhoods and I don't think that it makes for a good neighborhood to have them connected in any way so that's why we have the road...we feel most strongly about is with regard to safety for our children. Right now, the way our neighborhood exists, there is no public area for them to play in other than each other's back yards so the children end up crossing the street and starting at the age of 3, 2. When they're allowed to be out in the front yard and wander, they do not know the rules and regulations. You know you've got to look both ways. If we were to have traffic coming through our neighborhood and going to some other higher density area, there's absolutely no way our children could be outside and cross the street and go to each other's homes. Even with the children who are old enough to ride their bikes in the streets, there's no way we could allow that. So by providing a street in our neighborhood that comes off of Galpin and goes back out, the only traffic we will have in our neighborhood will be within our own residents and therefore anybody coming from downtown Chanhassen and wanting to go up here is not going to cut through our neighborhood and therefore having a threat to the activities that go on in our neighborhood as far as the children go. Based on those three points, this is what we feel we would like to see. I know that there have been several considerations and we wanted to bring up something here that we thought maybe was the closest to what we've seen so far, which is this layout here. There was some talk about possibly coming across this way and making all of these single family homes, with the larger lots. You know that's a step in the right direction but again, our big fear is that we've got these roads going right through the higher density. We're going to have that traffic going right through our neighborhood. That was the big concern and the other concern again is that there's absolutely nothing with regard to public space for our children to play in and there are no buffers between the two areas. So that's why we feel that this sort of thing is really much more logical. Do you have any questions at all? Scott: Questions? Mancino: Just a clarification from staff and that is in the...service report the Park and Recreation Commission voted to take full park and trail fees in lieu of land dedication. Is that? Generous: That's correct. Audience: We can't hear you. Generous: That's correct. The Park Commission believes, there is a Stockdale park planned on the west side of Galpin, right across from this development and they felt that it wasn't a good idea for the city to have a second park in this area. Mancino: Did you hear me? 16 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Audience: No. Mancino: Okay. My question was, in the staff report the Park and Recreation Commission has already voted and discussed this development and the decision has been made to accept full park and trail fees in lieu of land dedication. So there isn't, the Park and Recreation Commission has not asked for a park in this area from the applicant. And that is something that they are recommending to City Council. Sue Reimers: Sue Reimers, 7495 Crocus Court. My question to you is, does Chanhassen planning plan for having children to cross a 45 to 44 mph road to play in a park? Open ended. Harberts: I don't know but I have a question. What was your expectation when you purchased the house? Did you ask the developer as to what park would be located within your subdivision? Sue Reimers: Yes. And we were told across the road but we lived adjacent to a park in Eden Prairie prior to moving here and it was fully used by the children because they were adjacent to it. We have no intention of using that park because we drive to Lake Ann and we fully expected the development, a further similar development of single family dwelling development to be to the south of us eventually and expect us to be able to get to Lake Ann eventually. Harberts: By what means? Sue Reimers: Roads or. Harberts: By walking? By? Sue Reimers: Walking. Mostly walking or riding bikes. Or I would drive around the other way and avoid sending my children out onto Galpin. We don't even walk on Galpin Road. But that's, you know I didn't know if that would be an option... Farmakes: You're aware that there's a separate commission that deals with the issues of park and recreation. It's not just... Sue Reimers: Okay. So you don't work together at all? Farmakes: Yes we do but I'm just pointing that out as some information as that's part of the process also if you disagree with that... 17 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Sue Reimers: So when they approve something do you, is that said and done? Farmakes: Primarily they make a recommendation and we get it in our staff report. Sue Reimers: They make a recommendation to you and then you go through the process and then recommend to the Council? Farmakes: That's correct. Sue Reimers: Okay. So it's one to the other... Conrad: No, they report directly to the City Council. Sue Reimers: Oh, okay. Farmakes: But it's part of our process and in our information packet that each development that comes into Chanhassen has either a neighborhood park within a development or a private park within a development or in lieu of a park or park space, they dedicate fees to the general fund. Sue Reimers: So our money is going across the street? Or across Galpin at this point, is that where our money will be... Scott: Well it's part of the total fund and some of that money can end up at Lake Ann. Some of it can end up across the street. There's also a Public Safety Commission that, what we try to do is try to, we have our pockets our expertise. Planning, public safety, park and rec are three of the most active committees and what we do is we rely very heavily, since I don't consider myself to be a public safety expert or a park and recreation expert, I put a lot of credence into what people who have gravitated toward those two committees and it's not very often, we may question what they're doing from time to time but basically speaking we trust their judgment and that makes the process go smoother but most people who come in contact with the process if you will, either at the Planning Commission level or at the City Council level but there's a lot of work that goes on at other commissions that are equally as important as our's. Sue Reimers: Well thank you for your time. Scott: Sure. Would anyone else like to speak at the public hearing? If someone else would like to come up first, or come up for the first time. If there isn't anyone who would like to come up for the first time, please add additional comments. 18 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Joan Joyce: We did put a lot of time and effort into the plan and concept that we presented and there are several people who would be interested in your personal, your own opinions with regards to whether the plan has good points, bad points. Whether it's something that's feasible in your eyes. We'd like to... Scott: I think what we can do is when we close the public hearing there's, for those of you who haven't been to a Planning Commission meeting, what we do is prior to making a recommendation or individual recommendations to the City Council, we make our comments and the pluses and minuses of what we see and then basically supports the reason why we vote one way or the other so we have a public discussion process and we react. What we do is we react to all of the facts that we have seen at a meeting and try to put them into some sort of a format so then we can make our decision then so that's part of the process that happens after the public hearing. Joan Joyce: Okay. So therefore there are no questions on your part at this time? Scott: Not from me. Joan Joyce: We did such a good job you don't have any questions? Scott: As I mentioned before, it's well prepared and very concise and that's what, when we have questions that's usually when something is not easily understood so you've done the kind of job we dream of. Good. Anybody else like to speak? Steve Bell: I'm Steve Bell. I live at 7476 Crocus Court and I'm not as well organized as my wife. This is my notes... I wanted to tell you a story that I just read in Readers Digest...and I think it's a little pertinent... A guy was talking about when he was younger and he joined the Cub Scouts. And when he joined the Cub Scouts he...they would set up the chairs and they would let you look at those chairs and then they'd blindfold him and let him walk through it... and I think we kind of forget that...the chairs get moved a lot, so if...we're still a little upset the chairs got moved. I'd like to address the fact that, I agree that this is a premature development in that with the access road to the south not yet determined, this plat, if it did go south, and then the whole phase two of this proposal is moot. They'd have to change and start all over again and that seems to me that that's not a very finalized plan. When you have to___that control to a second phase. There is no sewer to that second phase. It has to come 3/4 of a mile up to the school first and then maybe they can piggy back and get under the road next year but maybe not next year which would put it a year down the road. And I'm not so sure, I'm not a drainage expert but I haven't really been sold on the fact that this drainage is well taken care of here yet on this property. How it will drain and where it will pool so that's all I'm going to say about that. With respect to the access road, Chanhassen has 19 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 made some extraordinary and gotten some extraordinary commitments from extraordinary demands on the design of their buildings along the corridor. From Taco Bell I understand... their own paint scheme. They don't want this ugly thing that Taco Bell always does. This is along the corridor and granted these are nice townhomes from the pictures. They're all the same but they do not, I would find it hard to believe that you would require a national corporation like Taco Bell to change their color scheme and then you would say, but we don't care if we have 92 townhomes where the city Planning Commission has told us that maybe 70 is what you normally would put in this spot to begin with. So we're already at a higher density. I'd like to address the Park Board approval. The Park Board has approved this. The Park Board has approved this because they're getting fees in lieu of land dedication to finish the Stockdale park and I would venture to guess that they would have fees in lieu of land dedication from a single family development, they would approve it just as they need the money for the Stockdale park, according to their Minutes. They did express a concern as to the way this development was proposed and it's in their Minutes and you've got a copy. There's been some concern raised, and particularly by a former City Council member...that there's really a lot of pressure on the city to do affordable housing. I would like to think... that this would somehow fit into...affordable housing. This is just another type of housing. It is not by any means affordable housing. And last but not least, I ain't never moving again is my concern so if what goes in there, I'm not moving...so thank you. Harberts: In your opinion, what's affordable housing? Steve Bell: I don't know if it's my opinion but affordable housing I believe is closer down to $80,000.00. As a matter of fact I've heard the figure of 40. If you get down to where a family of 4 making over the poverty level, which is what $14,036.00, you're going to have to get down, way down...so there's no way that even the base price I believe on these homes are $129,000.00? Ross Fefercorn: It's not affordable housing. Steve Bell: Right. And that's what the sales people told us, $129,000.00 was the base up to $189,000.00 so it was a little shocking to hear the prices. But by no means should there be pressure to...and I also talked to Workman's office. Tom Workman's office and to get an idea of what the Metropolitan Council had in...information of the sewer lines and we...Maple Grove and the legislator who's in trouble for... He told me that as long as the city has a comprehensive plan, and the city sticks with the comprehensive plan, they tend to go along with what the city decides. Staff is recommending that this fits the zoning. That this development will fit the zoning if we change the zoning and I think my wife made an excellent case that that may be true except we don't think the zoning fits the spirit or the intent of the comprehensive plan and so yes, if this housing development would fit that 20 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 zoning but does that zoning fit the comprehensive plan and we have read it. We've not read it as much as you guys have but we have read it and we feel that there's a lot more to be considered on this as far as how this would fit with the plan. Thank you. Scott: Good, thank you. Would anyone else like to speak at the public hearing? Yes sir. Rick Manning: My name is Rick Manning. I'm at 7460 Windmill Drive. I had a question I guess. There seems to be some great confusion and some disagreement between the commission and the city from the staff at the last meeting regarding the alignment of the frontage road and I'm wondering if there actually is a plan by the city. If that disagreement has been settled or if the planning staff actually knows what the alignment of the frontage road is at this point right now. Aanenson: I'm not sure I understand what his question is. Rick Manning: The way I understood it at the last meeting, there has been a resolution passed for the alignment of the frontage road, whether it would be a southerly or northerly alignment, is that correct? Harberts: What's the current position of the City Council? Aanenson: The most recent one that is not on record. That was in a workshop. That was a public meeting, was the northerly alignment. There was on the public record that was a resolution for the southern alignment so until we hold the final public hearing. Harberts: So Council action right now is. Aanenson: It's the northern. Harberts: It's north. But there's been discussion at the public workshops that it's south. Aanenson: No, other way around. Harberts: Okay, sorry. Rick Manning: So it hasn't been resolved. Harberts: Well it has been resolved by Council. It's just a matter of if the Council decides to revisit it. Because if they're on...resolution, that's the direction. 21 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Farmakes: How can it be decided prior to the public hearing? Harberts: But there's a resolution, that's got to be...action until they take any other actions. Farmakes: Then what are they holding public hearings on? Aanenson: The resolution was for the environmental assessment document. The final public hearing will be held when MnDot and the Federal Highway Administration sign off on the environmental assessment document. The City Council did say during that information meeting there was a resolution for the southern alignment. Since that time they had a workshop that was public. That they revisited. They brought back in the consultant on the study, Barton-Aschman and Bill Morrish from the University of Minnesota to go back and revisit the purpose of doing the whole study and they concluded that they probably should think about the northern alignment and there seemed to be a consensus to go back to the northern alignment. Scott: I guess what's the bottom line? Aanenson: The applicants they asked us what we believe right now the feeling of the Council is and we said that we're not certain but the latest was the northern alignment and that's the direction we gave them. Obviously the City Council, if this gets to the Council before the Council's held the hearing, the Council's going to have to make a decision. Scott: Okay. And then the alignment that's shown on the preliminary plat. Aanenson: Is the northern alignment. Scott: Is the northern alignment, okay. Aanenson: Correct. Mancino: And they can make a decision based on this plat versus having a public hearing on the EA document? Aanenson: They may say it's not consistent with what, they want the southern alignment. It will force them to make a decision. Rick Manning: My next question was, if this plan should be approved, could that force that decision and that would...and that could happen? 22 • Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Aanenson: Yes. Rick Manning: If this is approved, that frontage road. Farmakes: It doesn't force the decision. We just make a recommendation. To force the position certainly it is another domino set up. Nutting: They can choose to table it at Council until. Farmakes: Or to deny it. Nutting: Hold the public hearing and finalize it. Rick Manning: But it seems to be a major issue within the city on whether or not to take the southerly or the northerly alignment. I guess shouldn't more emphasis be put on making that decision before a development makes that decision for the city? Scott: Well as far as this development goes, the first phase will'not be affected in a major sense by the position of the road but the second phase of the southerly portion of the project will definitely be impacted by it. Farmakes: Part of the whole situation, I don't know if you've followed Highway 5 but essentially what made it difficult was that it was essentially a wash. North and south cost about the same. EPA the same. Everything was just about the same and the only difference that we spent arguing about was philosophical and how it drives development. Rick Manning: How? Farmakes: How it categorizes or corridor or kind of compartmentalizes everything and where it falls. That's essentially what the argument was about so just, sorry to interrupt you but I thought maybe they don't know. That they somehow they think we're making that decision and made a recommendation. Rick Manning: Does this development include the frontage road? The first phase of this development does include the frontage road. Scott: The southerly portion of the first phase is actually shown as the northern route. Rick Manning: I guess I'd like to echo Joan Joyce's comments about public safety and the safety of our children. I have three that play in the street and ride their bikes and should our 23 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 development be attached by that road into this twin home development, that road continues on to the frontage road and I know that people are going to cut through our development to get to that frontage road and down out to Target. I know because I would do it myself so I'm very concerned about where that frontage road goes and the fact that it will be... Scott: Okay, thank you for your comments. Would anybody else like to speak? Yes sir. Bret Davidson: My name is Bret Davidson. I live at 2200 Majestic Way. I was not at the previous one so I'm a little bit at a loss...My biggest concern is the traffic and the road alignment. I mean we all expect, at least around where I am, we expect roads through our neighborhoods to carry our residential traffic. My concern with the plan I see here is we may have happening exactly what Mr. Manning just said and that is we start using our residential neighborhood as a short cut for this frontage road or the access road to Galpin Boulevard. I would think there would be ways that you could change that or you could look at changing that either by tying Windmill Run. If you let the plat go through in a little more westerly position so it takes a couple of turns. If you were going to short cut through there or to have a temporary cul-de-sac on Windmill Run where it would tie into the access road until the access road travels all the way through. My biggest concern is that we don't, as this development comes on board and this comes about, that we don't have a situation where we're using a residential street for short cuts. There's a lot of ways we can fix that. By putting a temporary cul-de-sac across that or moving the alignment but the way that it's proposed right now, it's almost a straight shot off of the frontage road or the access road, Windmill Drive all the way back to Galpin. And the problems that we have at the corner of Galpin and TH 5 it's going to significantly increase the traffic through our residential neighborhood. It's not our residential traffic. It's people that are taking a short cut. So I'd like to ask you to take a look at that and how you approve it and make sure that we don't have traffic through there that's not neighborhood traffic. Scott: Hey Dave. Could you talk a little bit about the connection to Galpin that's shown on the northwest portion of this development and how that, when is that going to be made relative to when the units are going to be occupied. Hempel: Let's see, with the first phase of development proposed to have access out onto Galpin Boulevard...south from the Windmill Run development. The second phase then where they extend Windmill Run probably down to connect to the frontage road. Scott: So without the frontage road there,just generally taking human nature of taking the straight shot from Point A to Point B, that people in my opinion and you express your opinion, people are going to make their right in or their left in into the new development by the connection that's made specifically for that purpose. You see people coming in through 24 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 the other development and going south to get into their development? And I'm just, my human nature would say that's going to be pretty much the point and unless someone is going off on a scenic route, they're probably not going to be getting involved and driving through Windmill Run to get in and out of this first phase when we don't have the frontage road in. Is that kind of what your thought is? Hempel: Right. When the frontage road is, the most direct route to Galpin and to the north would be the frontage road from a speed traffic standpoint. Going through a residential neighborhood is slower. It's out of the way. Scott: So the frontage road does have to be in and connected all the way through to Galpin. I mean taking a look at this I would say at least myself, I would not be making a right turn into the twin home area. I mean I'd just continue straight out to Galpin and go up so I mean I don't see a particular reason why anybody would go through there. Conrad: But Dave, is there a potential. I don't see the neighborhood connection as a problem. I agree with you Joe. But let's say, is there a possibility for the frontage road to be built through Lake Ann, through this development up to this development but not being connected to Galpin... Scott: Yes. That would be a problem. Conrad: I thought that was where you were going. Scott: That we would not want to do. Then they will take shortcuts. So the question is, is that a possibility? Will we force the connection to Galpin to happen when we build the frontage road, whether it's north or south. Will that definitely be there on the same time frame that the balance of the frontage road all the way to CR 17 would be built? Hempel: Yes, that's correct. The frontage road is on our state aid route and in order for that route to be built, the frontage road would have to be connecting from two other state aid roads, which would be Galpin...this one section of frontage road to this development and carry it east to Lake Ann, no. That would definitely pull the traffic through there. Scott: Also too the, probably the development, I believe it's, I don't know if it's Mr. Gorra's. I believe it's Mr. Gorra's property. We're probably not going to be building a frontage road there until he decides he wants to put forth a project so basically the bottom line is, we're not going to get any assistance from the state unless we connect to Galpin. Hempel: That's correct. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Scott: If we don't get assistance, we're probably not going to build it. Hempel: Right. Scott: Okay. Well as long as I understand where the money is coming from, I have a high amount of certainty that that connection, I mean I believe what you're saying but then that's the state getting involved and as a major partner to this particular construction project. Hempel: It would be of a financial... Mancino: So one last point to clarify. We could do Phase I and Phase II. Allow the right- of-way to preserve frontage road. Build Outlot A. And we can't build Outlot A without the frontage road, correct? I mean we're just not going to build the segment either from Galpin to the end of this property. Would we do that? Hempel: I don't believe we would, no. Too short of a stretch. We would extend that further on to the property... Scott: So the primary access would be from here and there wouldn't be any access to Outlot A from Highway 5 at all. Hempel: That's correct. Scott: Yeah, okay. Bret Davidson: Can I just ask a question? So in that...until that was finished would be a temporary cul-de-sac going on to a stop sign then? Hempel: Phase I it would be a temporary cul-de-sac. Bret Davidson: And then with Phase II? Mancino: With Phase II it would be too. Hempel: Phase II, I believe that we would want to see the frontage road construction. Scott: There'd be no access. Aanenson: It's not going anywhere. It's not connecting with anything. It doesn't connect with TH 5. It doesn't go anywhere so it's not serving any purpose except it's an interior street 26 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 for those front facing lots. It's not connecting to TH 5. It's not going across Mr. Gorra's property. Mancino: So you could stop and have a temporary cul-de-sac right here. Bret Davidson: So what we're understanding is prior to that being hooked up to...hooked up to the west. So there's no way we'd have a short stub there to make a short cut? Scott: No. Bret Davidson: Okay. That's my concern. Scott: I'm glad you raised your point. Yes sir. Rick Manning: When I raised the concern about traffic going through Windmill Drive, it actually would start through the Majestic Oaks neighborhood and then continue on through Windmill Drive and down into the frontage road. As I'm looking at that as development that's going to be done on Galpin Boulevard, you look at the school. You look at the 200, I think it's Centex townhomes across the street on the south. The southwest corner. When you look at Lundgren and they're developing 250 homes down the road. You look at Lake Lucy with 43 lots now. As the development that's going to be coming, I think you can be pretty assured that that traffic at that corner, at that intersection is going to back up all the way to Windmill Run. It's not going to flow through there. People aren't going to be able to get to the frontage road, is my concern. I shouldn't say that with, I mean that's my concern is that people won't even be able to get to that frontage road. When you think about the cars that are going to be stopped at that intersection. Scott: Well if they were not going to signalize that intersection like they're planning to in concert with the new elementary school, absolutely. But I would say just prior to the elementary school being open, that's going to be a signalized intersection. Rick Manning: And I'm taking that into consideration even with the signal. Think of the cars that are going to be coming out of the neighborhood. Lundgren alone. You've got to figure about 350 cars every morning. Our neighborhood. Then the townhome development. I mean signals or not, I'm pretty confident that those cars are going to be backed up on that road and they'll be backed up a long ways, long enough that I think people will be cutting through Majestic Way on the way to Windmill Drive and cutting through. Scott: Okay. 27 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Amit Diamond: I'm not so good public speaking so I try. We have tried to reason and to bring up...and we also tried to talk to the developer and we had that same speech over here I think about a week ago and we asked him a question and we said...and the city asked him to put some single family homes as a buffer and I got to tell you, I got the answer as a straight no because the answer was that this developer doesn't build single family homes. Or single family detached houses. I'm not a builder but I think if you build a building, it doesn't matter what you build...so I couldn't get any answer why he hasn't cooperated with the city in bringing up this...or put up a buffer of single family homes...most amount of money for financial gains. I personally, I got to tell you, I didn't know the name the city of Chanhassen up to a year ago when I checked with this state and I didn't know what Edina meant or I didn't know what Hopkins was or all this and I just basically hired somebody familiar with this place and he said, go to Chanhassen. They learned from the mistakes that Eden Prairie did. Eden Prairie is over populated. Put houses here and put houses there. Single family or...there's a mix and it didn't work out too well. City of Chanhassen's more, he told me, is learning from their mistakes and is going to put in whatever low density. Is going to...and not to combine so much high density in order to...so I don't know the history of Highway 5 or what... I know what we were told, or at least I was told by my realtor that is who I trust... this place was going to be single family detached houses. I'm asking the city Planning Commission that if you do it anyway of changing the plan development and have a developer to listen to the neighborhood...I don't think we're going to lose so much money. I think they're going to be the same amount of money that there is now. And I do ask the property owner, if he has anything to say, to what we have concerns. The reason that we bought the houses...and thank you very much. Scott: Okay. Can I have a motion to close the public hearing please? Mancino moved, Farmakes seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Scott: Ladd. Conrad: A question for staff. In terms of what the staff report reports versus what the developer has shown us tonight in terms of increased landscaping and buffering. Does the staff report incorporate the little green marks that I saw on the overhead? What has the developer, is the staff report accurate in other words? Generous: Yes. 28 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Conrad: And that's what the developers has done. So there's a significant amount of vegetation. The buffering, what is the buffering between the two areas? How many trees? Bob, do you know? Generous: Boy, I didn't count them. Conrad: We know there are going to be how many trees on this site? 300 some. Generous: Well there's 357 I believe all total. Conrad: And today there are how many? Generous: On the original plan they had half of that. What they have now, there's two stands of trees. Maybe 18,000 square feet. I've had BRW said they estimate that it was less but they went with our numbers. Just inbetween these two developments it was. Conrad: Has the developer done what you've asked them to do in terms of buffering the two sites? Generous: I believe so. They provided the vegetative transition or distinction between the two developments. Conrad: Dave, the 10% grading issue. It's not in the staff report. It's there but in the motion there's nothing relating to it. Does that mean you're comfortable? Hempel: It wouldn't be the only street to have a 10% grade. We have compromised in other subdivisions to reduce grading to save trees. If we had had an acceptable landing area in the bottom of the intersection there. Conrad: Do you have control over that? Hempel: Yes, we would have control with the final plans and specifications. Conrad: Okay. There's a part in the motion that talks about housing styles and colors. We hit this one all the time. We can't dictate how many this and that but I'm curious. Every time we talk about this we say well staff take care of it. How do you take care of it other than making sure that the developer provides those options? Do we have any teeth? I think the community brings up a real valid point in terms of styles and monotony and I think this development is different than what they've seen. The community. But still it seems like a fairly upscale development but how do we assure variety? 29 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Generous: Yeah, that's one issue we raised the first time and that's something that Brad and I have been discussing ever since the first report came out. How can we assure that? Well. Conrad: What do you do because the last time we just, the last development two weeks ago we said the same thing. Generous: Well they had a site plan approval so they gave us the specific building types that were different. The applicant has said that they're going to provide options for this. I don't know. Aanenson: I think if there's a concurrence, and maybe Peter can tell me this, if there's concurrence and you want to make it a condition, if they're agreeing that they're going to provide various colors, we can certainly make that a condition of approval. But that was always, and in Bob's original staff report, that was one of our concerns is the monotony and... visual impact. And changing the colors we believe is one way to break up that monotony. Conrad: Just a quick aside. Is this a case where we don't have the control we'd like? Aanenson: Well it's a standard subdivision. We don't get into the business of colors on a standard subdivision and that's the point that Brad made originally but I think as Peter indicated, or someone from their team had indicated that they'd be willing to look at that as a condition. Conrad: That one concerns me but I think we need to work with the developer so they will but I don't know that we do have the control on that based on our subdivision ordinance right now. I think we've talked about the other issues that I was concerned with. The other thing Mr. Chairman that I've heard that always bothers me is communication. It's folks hearing one thing and I guess it's easy to misinterpret. It's also easy to, I'll be brief. We heard too many people say they heard something other than what could have been allowed and I think at some other time, not tonight, I think we should take that issue up and make sure we know how that happens. It's extremely important that people know what's going in. Extremely important and I guess we should just be very updated on how the staff communicates the process so it's really clear communication. Those are my only points Mr. Chairman. Scott: Good, thank you. Diane. Harberts: I support the concept of the development. I'd like to see a little bit better transition though between the two divisions. It would certainly be my preference to see a PUD. I think the value, integrity is there of the site. I tried to locate other similar sites I guess in terms of transition of twin homes, townhomes, whatever you want to call them to single family occurs. 30 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 It's happens. It seems to work. People seem to be living there. My understanding Kate with regards to, I think I'm a little concerned. Ladd maybe touched on it and I don't know if that was the area in terms of the communication. In terms of what to expect if I was a homeowner. Is it my understanding that the land, the current zoning for the land, low density. No, I'm sorry. It's low density residential? Aanenson: The current zoning is agricultural. Harberts: Oh agricultural, sorry. And that's where the representations were made by staff perhaps that usually in those cases that it is single family detached homes, is that correct? Generous: I can specify what I said. Harberts: Well in terms of the density of the homes. Generous: Yeah, we say single family homes. Harberts: Is usually what it is. Generous: Right. Harberts: But because of this rezoning that is being asked from us, to consider that or the opportunity for I guess a higher density of homes or other than detached single family homes, is that correct? Generous: Correct. Harberts: And so that's one of the things we're acting on is if we want to change it from an agriculture to a zoning that would allow for more of a density of homes. Aanenson: What it's zoned right now is Agricultural Estates. The comprehensive plan, which is adopted by the City Council, guides it for future development. It's guided for low density. Low density is 1 to 4 units an acre. Harberts: Which typically has been single family homes? Aanenson: Exactly. That's the way it was indicated. They said predominantly single family. That doesn't mean that other alternatives. We told you tonight there are other alternatives for you to consider. That could be a PUD with 11,000 square foot minimum lot size. We've got 31 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 those throughout the city. They've come forward with something that is consistent with the density requirement of 1 to 4 units an acre, which is considered low density. Harberts: But in your experience, or in the city's experience, this is the first type of change of this nature, isn't it for the city? Aanenson: Is it the first application for a duplex or twin home type? Harberts: Yeah, that nature. Aanenson: No, we had one. We had one... Scott: We had zero lot line twin homes. Aanenson: We had Spinnaker Wharf. Scott: Yes, thank you. Mancino: But we denied that. Aanenson: Because they were asking for an up zone to medium density. This isn't asking for an up zone to medium. It's staying within the guided zoning. Harberts: So in that one it wasn't the rezoning request wasn't. Aanenson: They were asking for, to go to a medium density because the way the ordinance reads, in order to less than, if you're going to go with a PUD, the minimum lot size is 11,000 square feet. Mancino: That was a PUD? Aanenson: You wanted to do PUD because we encourage them for architectural reasons. But if you want to do a smaller than 11,000 square foot lot, you have to have medium density zones which means you have to up zone it. Okay, so they were going beyond what was guided in the comprehensive plan. You felt uncomfortable doing that and the Council concurred. They felt uncomfortable upzoning it and opening the opportunity for higher density, which would be the next 5 to 8 units an acre. Harberts: ...but anyway. I guess I'm going to, you know I see these pictures. I think they look nice and they look like very nice homes. I was commenting to Ladd that they have a 32 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 higher value than what my 3 year old home is. Single family home. If I was to look at this, my only hesitation is that I'd like to see a little bit more of a transition between the single family homes and the twin homes. I think the twin homes are nice. They seem to meet, or are equivalent or exceed the lot sizes of the single family homes but I believe the foot pads, as I understood it from the last meeting were similar in size. I'm not aware of what the values are. If I recall, when those gentlemen from Windmill came in with the development it was somewhere around $130,000.00-$150,000.00 but I don't recall. For some reason that's what sticks in my mind. I guess I'm sitting on the fence right now. I guess I would like to see it as a PUD. There always are some signature pieces where we feel it enhances the development I guess for what we like to see at Chanhassen. I think the gentleman, the last resident that spoke made a good comment which was, we do care. We do take, we look at the details in our subdivisions that come in and under a PUD it would certainly allow that. I guess with regards to public safety. I know I received a letter dated December 5th and it talked about that it would not be safe to be routing multiple...housing traffic through streets lined with single family housing. David, do we have any information on records that would lead us to support that? That this might be a public safety issue. Again, I look throughout the city and I've seen some of this but I don't know that there's that kind of public safety issue. Given my professional life, I deal with things like that so I guess I'm asking if there's anything on record to help us understand if there is a public safety issue here. If this has been presented to the Public Safety Director. Hempel: This has been submitted to the Public Safety Department, building department. The comments generally come back from the Fire Marshal and street names and so forth. The street system proposed for this development is identical to the single family development to the north...it's going to be a similar street section that you have...townhomes in Chaparral I believe it's called just west or east of Powers Boulevard to the north here a little bit. I'm not aware of any problems with traffic. There's a normal type... In fact they probably have less vehicle trips in a day than... Harberts: Thank you. I guess I would certainly be willing to support this if I was convinced that that transition was there with the Windmill development and this one because that is an issue that we seem to be very sensitive to. I'm not convinced yet that that transition is there. That I'm comfortable with so I think at this point I would be more intent to deny this because I'm not convinced that that transition is there and that's what my big issue is with it. Scott: What kind of transition would you support? Harberts: If there was more of a physical barrier. Maybe if it was a berm or something. I'm not too sure in terms of how heavy the vegetation is there to make that kind of transition. Clearly a simple one would be to maybe have a transition of single family homes or 33 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 something of that nature. Maybe less number of twin homes in that area. I don't know. I'm certainly open to it. I'm just not convinced that that transition is basically at the level that we want to be sensitive to. Otherwise I think it's a good proposal. Did they go on record saying this is the developer or is it just that they're thinking of it? Brad Johnson: We'll go on record that that's the development if you approve it. Harberts: I know there was a comment from the attorney that it would be similar. Again in a PUD we're able to be comfortable with testing the interest of the residents as well as the community in a PUD. I would like to see a PUD. Even if it came back in a similar fashion. I'm alright with it but it's just the little pieces that I think with the input...the material from the community, they've taken the time to provide input to this process. I think this process needs to listen to them but we also have a responsibility to the development. To the people that own the land. That's what the role of government is and...I see that's what our role is. If I would see a little bit more of a transition I would be in full support of this project. I'd like to see more projects of this nature in Chanhassen and I'd like to go through a meeting without mentioning Myron Orfield's name because I think he's way off base. Scott: Thank you for your final comment. Wait a minute, hit the microphone 3 times. Anyway, Jeff. Farmakes: I'm going to start with a little different tact, although I don't disagree with anything I've heard so far. A property owner mentioned the term which came first, the egg or the chicken. That's an interesting concept here because we see this over and over again. We have a piece of farmland. You have a highway and you have a MUSA line that was extended to the west. First came the highway, then came the MUSA line and then came development. If you take that area of farmland which it's currently zoned for, after the highway and MUSA, then came Windmill Run. And you sort of ask yourself what dictates development in a situation like this. Some of you who have moved here from other states may have come here from mature communities where you just didn't deal with this sort of stuff. The houses have been there for years, or decades, and you just never dealt with it. What we have here in Chanhassen is sort of a fluid situation, and as I'm sure some of the homeowners who called me anyway and tried to discuss this issue. This is a fluid situation. This property is zoned Ag Estate. That's what it's currently zoned at so if you come in and ask a recommendation or you purchase property for single family when it was changed for your particular area, Windmill Run, you had to know that there's no guarantees from anybody at the city. That when that zoning is changed, what it's going to be. There's guides. A comprehensive plan but there's a process that follows and that's what we're doing right now today. We're going through that process. There's community input of surrounding property owners, we have developers, we have city staff and we have something that we haven't 34 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 discussed here in great detail which is Highway 5 which really precipitated this whole thing. That's the egg. As we expanded that and we looked at which route was going to access to the city on the northerly side of TH 5, we spent 2 years dealing with that. So for some of you who have just moved into the community, part of this besides dealing with the buffer on your development, that we're dealing with here, is we're dealing with an access road that goes all the way from downtown Chanhassen out to TH 41. And that also defines how that property is going to develop. Not only the property to the south but also the property to the east of you. And ultimately the property to the west. So you need to be knowledgeable about what is happening with Highway 5. And what is happening with that access road. I think Kate discussed the issue of chronologically where the city is at with which route. I'm concerned and I want to touch upon that briefly so it may seem like I'm jumping off to another point but I'm concerned that we have a vote on record to the southerly route and then we have a workshop meeting where consultants were called in to change that back to the northerly route and now we have a development showing us the northerly route again. It certainly would have been a good idea to at least keep Minutes of the workshop meeting then or at least have pro and cons being sold at that meeting as to where that route goes. I think the correct terminology would be to say that the Highway 5 task force, the majority supported a northerly route. There were dissenters to that direction. The majority of the commission supported the northerly route but there also were dissenters to that. If the city was going to get together in a workshop situation, I think also there should have been information provided to those who dissented. Not just bringing in people who support the northerly route. In my conversations with our consultants, it was a wash. And what we're dealing with here is really there's sort of a hidden agenda here and I don't mean that there's a plan on the part of staff or the consultants but what this is, what is hidden here is that where that road goes really defines how these properties develop and it compartmentalizes where those densities are going to go. Now to me you start at the beginning and this is why I voted against it both on the task force and on the commission, against the northerly route between Lake Ann and Galpin. Because it defines two._.And I realize that some of the people from Windmill Run have not been following that park. Out of site, out of mind. It's farther away from you than the adjacent property but it's really going to affect the development of the properties around you so please become involved in that process. This is part of what goes on here. You're probably going to do this a lot more than you want to in moving to an area like Chanhassen but you've got to be part of this process. In here to complain. Call your elected officials and so on. I think ultimately what should go there is a PUD situation all the way to the highway. I would like to see the southerly route of the city acquiring a buffer along the highway as well as additional single family, at least two rows up by Windmill Run. The reason being is that if someone comes in now to purchase those properties, if they're adjacent to twin homes, townhomes, whatever you want to call them, then the developer's dealing with that. He's not putting that burden on the adjacent single family detached housing. That purchaser can make the decision whether they wish to purchase that single family home next to the twin homes. 35 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 That's their decision to make. As to the highway issue, I agree with you Joe. That you would not be driving that in that direction. But certainly again, premature to be discussing this highway situation when we don't know where that access road goes. In dealing with the issue of color schemes. I think the comment was, you're seeing this type of housing in Eden Prairie, on the ends here as you come into town by the Press. You're seeing large roads, the same colored houses and we've discussed this issue. It's cheaper to paint all the houses one color. And it's the economics of building. Certainly if you buy 100 of something, it's cheaper than if you buy 20 of this and 20 of that. It is disturbing, it looks like barrack housing eventually because of the similarity of that development. The last person that we had in here I think had 5 or 6 different colors but they were all muted types of colorations. I'm not sure if that's the current trend in that type of housing or not but what we're seeing up here is not. They're all gray or beige and so on. So variety I think again if you're trying to make a transition between single family, or what you see in single family homes, to that twin home situation where you have something that matches. As this stands currently, just to touch briefly on the issue, we're building this type of housing next to Highway 5. What I can envision as a row all the way out to TH 41, from what I see. Because we're looking to bring in, currently as we're looking at this, a retirees who want to buy $250,000.00 houses that they don't have to mow the lawn on. Certainly we're not looking at subsidized housing or low income housing based on these pricing structures that we've heard here. They seem to be higher medium priced considerably than the housing that's in Windmill Run. So that's not an issue. So if we're going, if we're driving this type of higher density housing along TH 5 and we need all that statistically, what is that we're accomplishing here? We're building more medium cost homes at $250,000.00? That certainly isn't helping the workers in United Mailing or whatever we were told that we need here. So I don't think that it's going to hurt anything statistically if there's a couple of rows of single family housing up there to buffer this situation. We're not losing any low income units that I know of. The issue of the park situation and going across, what is it? I believe 117 is a county road, is it not? Typically the proposal is lowering speed limits on these types of roads come with development where, as long as there's 7 or 8 farms, they're 50 mph. If you start getting 700-800 homes in there, it's no longer necessarily true that the county's going to maintain a 50 mph speed limit. Again, that's a jurisdiction situation in the county. But I would think for those of you who have been here a short period of time, we're also wrestling in the Highway 5 issue with how the trail system works and winds up at Minnewashta or goes over to Lake Ann and how these things also will be interwoven, so that's another reason also for you to become involved and knowledgeable about how this Highway 5 thing is working. I think that's it. I think I've given enough...high points that have come up but I would vote to deny this based on that it's premature. Scott: Does that raise a bigger issue about any other developments that we might see that would come in prior to having this access boulevard formally platted? 36 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Farmakes: We can take the position that we will let the development drive where the road goes or that we will put in the road and let the developments follow the road. There's going to be one that's going to start the process and that's this one here and that's probably why it's out in front of us. That's probably why it has the northern route. Scott: So your thought process is that we should have a formal location of this road before we start entertaining development? Farmakes: Absolutely because where that road goes is going to affect the property to the east and the west. Mancino: That was one of the main purposes of having a Highway 5 task force. Was to be proactive. Farmakes: So what we're getting here is we're getting development coming down from the north driving where this road goes and it shouldn't. It should be the other way around, in my opinion. If you look at the intent statement of Highway 5, where it should go. Scott: Okay. Ron. Nutting: I guess first question for staff is, I'm still struggling a little bit with the definition of low density and there is the one piece which is the zoning and the units, and then there's the other which is predominantly single family and how did you resolve those two with this development in terms of. There's one piece that says predominantly single family which does not require to imply totally single family. But then there's the units issue which the development does comply with but. Generous: Well basically when it says predominant single family it's just a descriptive of the type of development that is taking place in Chanhassen. It's not prescriptive. The prescription is that development in the low density land use is between 1.2 and 4 dwelling units per acre. Implementation of the comp plan is through the zoning ordinance which provides, in this case with three different zoning alternatives for the property. The PUD, the RSF or the R-4 zoning categories. In this instance the developer brought forward the R-4 zoning which would permit mixed low density, twin home and detached single family. Nutting: Okay. I'd also like to just elaborate a little bit more on Ladd's first question in terms of the vegetation and the barrier that is proposed. What type of vegetation are we talking about? What will this look like winter time? Summer time. What is the plan and is that cast in stone or. 37 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Aanenson: We can ask them to address that. Mancino: Is there any berming to it? Nutting: Yes, that was part of my question because that was one of the issues raised by the residents in terms of. Peter Beck: The plan shows a combination of...in fact to address Commissioner Harberts question about the transition, Ross will be happy to put in virtually any kind of plant material in almost any amount that the Planning Commission would like to see. His plan shows what the ordinance requires. From his point of view that is far less than what he's going to do and if the Planning Commission wants to see you know a lot more along that edge, it will be put there. A berm could be put there. If that is an issue that's of great concern to the Planning Commission. It can be, as I say, virtually any level of landscaping that you think would be necessary. Staggered rows of evergreens on a berm of course is the maximum if there's one wall back there or something...little more aesthetic approach would be fine too but we will not let this project fall because there aren't enough trees there. We will put in whatever. And if you want to leave that to your, if you want to give your staff some direction on how we should go there, I can assure you that it won't be an issue that we felt they're asking for too much. Scott: Any other comments? Nutting: I guess that's issue number one. Issue number two, echoing the issue of varying the color scheme. I've heard the previous discussion. In terms of going forward in the condition I would like to see some working together between staff and developer to provide a reasonable color scheme differential in the process to break it up so it doesn't look like the Rottlund development on Dell Road and Highway 5. I've been on the commission a year and I don't know how many times we've come up with these issues of the cart before the horse and it's happened time after time after time and I have a hard time disagreeing with a lot of those comments on that point. I also struggle with what we are supposed to do with the proposal before us and there's record for the southerly route. There's commentary towards the northerly route. That decision will happen at the Council level. We can move this project forward with approval only to have the Council turn around and say, we need to look at that issue before taking anything forward and moving it back. I guess my question always is, what is the most constructive use of everybody's time at our level and at the Council's level. Is it best that we table or deny until these issues are resolved or do we take the issue forward based on what's been presented with the assumption that the northern route will be there. If the northern route is not there, this is not the development likely that's there. I can't say that for fact but that's certainly a possibility. That's my struggle with this. I think it's a nice 38 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 development in terms of the quality of the product that's there. I think that there are ways with proper vegetation and berming to create a significant transition, if you will. It's not going to be perfect. It's not going to be what was imagined but when you moved in you were dealing with agricultural estate zoning which wouldn't yield this type of product but we're dealing with a rezoning and we're dealing with a product that, according to staff meets the requirements and spirit, although I'm not sure I fully agree with the spirit side of that but I'm not knowledgeable enough to give anything other than my opinion. So that's my struggle here is do we take what's presented to us and upon the assumption of the northerly route and move it forward. And it seems to me that that's a more productive way at times of dealing with these than the constant denial and tabling process. I'm not convinced that, if the Council has and makes the decision based on public opinion or hearing, that the northerly route is there, then this project is in place so. I don't know. I guess I'd like to listen to Nancy's comments and Joe's then put this thing to a vote. Scott: So your position is? Nutting: I'm leaning towards moving it forward with conditions dealing with the barrier, the transition and the color scheme I don't know, of the development. I would be open to requiring to bring it back to see more detail. The drawings or schematics or other things that laid it out there but that would be the only condition I would have. Scott: Okay, Nancy. Mancino: A couple of things. I thought Jeff had a lot of good points about this being premature and that is dependent upon where the frontage road goes. My concerns, this is based on the northern route. If the City Council goes in it's final resolution with the southern route, I then need to see to this development an east extension into Gorra's property because I would think that there, the Gorra property if you have the southern route, you're going to need a route coming from Galpin over into Gorra's property so this would need to be extended some way so that Gorra's property has, depending on what happens there but there needs to be, we need to look ahead into that property also. So if the City Council does pass the southern alignment of the frontage road, I would look at this plat differently. So the way it is to the north, I'm fine with the frontage road and the way it goes through the Gorra property because it will get us into there to allow development there. To go south, it just won't do it. And we have so many times just looked at small parcels and have years or months later wished we would have looked past the individual parcel that we're looking at to see how it all connects. Secondly, I do agree with Jeff and Diane on seeing this all as a PUD. I would like to see it as an R-4 PUD with Phase I being single family. To have a transition between Mill Run. When I went to a couple of the sites, I noticed that the one in Eden Prairie is not completed. There's one townhome but there is quite a transition between the single family. 39 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Across the street from it is apartment and I think it shows on what we received from Country Home, that the single family that abuts these twin homes has a nature area between it. And so that they did consider it. It has not only a roadway but a nature area so they did have a nice transition and I think that that would be in order here. So I don't see moving this forward until City Council makes a decision on the frontage road. Scott: Okay. Well I'll just touch on two issues. Just for those of you who are relatively new. We had a similar development. Actually it was more dense come through as a, I'll call it a PUD which is a planned urban development. Basically what that allows is that allows the City of Chanhassen more control as to the type of materials, the appearance, the mixes of density and so forth. What the developers get, and obviously it has to be a quid pro quo, is that they get more density. They get a little bit more flexibility so I mean people opt for that if they're looking at developing some sort of unique piece of property or there's some property with some particular difficulties. What we ended up doing at Mission Hills is it was abutting some large lot, 1 and 2 acre lots and what the developer did is they put single family housing along the area that was abutting the larger lots. And then from there they transitioned into six plexes, eight plexes and 12 and then I believe 16 plexes. That's what I would like to see here. There are two issues that I see. One is the transition. Assuming that the City Council puts forth a definitive answer as to where the frontage road goes, the only issue I would have with this development would be having a single family transition on the north end and that's something that we've done in the past. The bigger question however is that we don't know where that frontage road is going to go and I would agree with Jeff that we really need to have in I believe in concrete before we can do the kind of planning that we'd like so I would recommend, and I don't know what the vehicle is here but I would recommend sending on to the City Council, to make our job easier, that we would like to see the location. Mancino: And the developers. Scott: And the developer's job easier, to see precisely where this road is going to go. And then once that's in place, that's going to remove a large amount of uncertainty and allow us to do our job on I guess a more timely basis. So that's really all I'm going to say. I'd like to have someone make a motion please. Harberts: I'll move denial of rezoning 49.9 acres, Case #94-14 with property zoned A2, Agricultural Estates to R-4, Mixed Low Density Residential, preliminary plat of 49.9 acres into 92 twin home lots and one outlot and the wetland alteration permit located north of Highway 5 approximately 1/4 mile on the east side of Galpin Boulevard, Lotus Realty Services, Lake Ann Highlands based on, I think the driving factor here is that the city, from my perspective the city is on record, it's the southern alignment. This plan is not consistent 40 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 with what is the direction of City Council. The other issues include the transition and I would like to see a PUD process. Scott: Okay. So basically you're denying the rezoning, the preliminary plat and the wetland alteration permit in one motion? Harberts: Right. Scott: Okay. May I have a second please? Mancino: Second. Scott: It's been moved and seconded that we support the motion. May I have some discussion please, if there is any? Conrad: Yeah there is. I think the Planning Commission should have a little bit of a workshop on transitions. I really don't think we know what a transition is and right now we're talking, we've got 13 houses backed up to 9 and we're talking transition. The 13 houses is on the Windmill Run. The 9 is on this one. I don't know what we're, I think we're making some real arbitrary decisions. The premature, this plat, this subdivision is totally dependent on the northern alignment. It cannot go forward without approval of the northern alignment. It is contingent on the northern alignment. We wouldn't be doing our job as planners if we let it go and said well, if it's the southerly alignment, this plat is fine. It isn't. On the northern alignment, if that's the one, it in my estimation, with some modification, it works. If it's premature, semantics are rather critical here. We approved the northern alignment, what a year ago? My understanding is that probably the City Council should move on something within a year. I don't know if the development, I would call this development premature. It was our job to get a road in place. I think the task force did. The city is at fault here. The developer has all the right in the world. This is a sewered area. They have all the right in the world to come forward. So the city has to figure out where this road is going. This development is going to force that issue but unfortunately what it's doing is it's forcing it on a timeframe that may not be right. It should have been worked on prior to this and maybe somebody's ready to do something. The other thing that I'm just going to get, I'm counting heads and seeing where this is going but you know, so that's why I said workshop. I don't think we know what transition is. I really can't figure out what we're doing here is dictating that Chanhassen is going to be single family oriented because twin homes is obviously not single family. I don't know what we're going to do as a commission when somebody starts bringing in real affordable housing. We'll never be able to find transitions for it. Maybe we'll have a $70,000.00 house and then an $80,000.00 and then a 90. I'm really concerned 41 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 that we are not sure what we're doing. Reinforcing the motion. This can't go forward until the northerly alignment is approved. Farmakes: Or disapproved. Conrad: Or disapproved, yeah. We could move that this is approved. We can approve this. That's not what the motion is but we can approve this contingent on the northerly alignment. That would have been my motion. Scott: Basically what happens from our standpoint is that it goes onto the City Council so it does not stop here. It goes on to the City Council and then they have to deal with that but actually it's, my thought process is what we want to see happen is having the access boulevard fixed into some location it is probably not fair for us to send this thing on simultaneous with having them locate the frontage road. My thought process is, I mean you have to have one first so denial basically sends it on, is basically all we're doing. Nutting: That then implies that the Council listens to everything we say. Harberts: Oh, which they always do right? Nutting: Which they've proven time and time again that they don't. Scott: Isn't that right Mr. Mayor? Mayor Chmiel: No comment. Farmakes: But isn't the reversal true. That the other implies that if you send a development with the northerly route, a couple of weeks after you have the consultants in telling you why you should go with the northerly route, it seems to me that there's a part missing out of there which would be the discussion as to why you should use the southerly route and that interpretation. Conrad: But if we as a commission voted on the northerly route. Farmakes: A majority. Conrad: A majority did. We also voted on some, I think we all endorsed the comprehensive, or the Highway 5, well and again there are exceptions but I think we all saw some higher density, medium density and lower density in this area. And this is following that. This plan 42 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 is following a lot of the things that this Planning Commission endorsed. The neighbors have some good gripes. This plan follows what we've said we want it to do. Farmakes: Although I would respond by saying that the same densities and the same plan could be followed with the southerly alignment. More creativity being used on the total parcel but not using the frontage road to compartmentalize where it goes. That was my. Conrad: And there are trade offs. Farmakes: This whole thing is nothing but trade offs. Harberts: I'll just reiterate. I think it's a good plan. I'm just uncomfortable with some of the aspects with regards to, I don't have enough information in terms of what the, I guess what some of the details are. I know under subdivision we don't get into that kind of detail. I think with what the community brought up though, I think it warrants that we at least insure that those type of details, those type of elements, that we can confirm back to them that the integrity, that the values are there. The question, when I asked, is this the developer. The response was, well if this is approved. Well that doesn't get us anywhere. I'm just looking for a little bit more solid. In terms of the transition. If the only issue is transition, I'd be more inclined to pass it on with an approval because you can do the berm or trees or something and leave it up to staff. But that was just a subpoint considering what some of I see the main issues are. Again, I'd like to see more of this type of development in Chanhassen. I don't think there's anything wrong with what's going on in the region. This is the best thing that's coming this way. It could be a lot worse folks. I know what's going on out there and I think Jeff has a flavor too. I think the City Council needs to look at some kind of direction in terms of goals. If it's affordable housing, if it's more multi-housing. I think this legislative session is going to be very interesting as well but like I said, I think this is a nice plan but all the elements aren't there for me so that's why I'm moving denial. Nutting: Diane, I take your point. You're saying that if it were just the issue of transition that you could see moving it forward with. Harberts: With some type of status. Nutting: ...so your main issue then is the northerly/southerly alignment? Is that the main thing... Harberts: The main issue really is what drives development. Is it the developers or is it the road or what? Nancy brought up a good point too in terms of what's happening with the Gorra property. This isn't really addressing that. In a PUD you have that opportunity. It's all 43 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 of those type of things. But like he said, I like it. I like the proposal. I like the concept. It's just that not all the dots are connected for me but the real driving point is that this isn't consistent with what's on the position by the City Council. Ladd you're certainly right. You could say you know, you know subject to whatever the approval is, and I also think that the City Council, sure it's not an easy job but they have to get on a position and my understanding they are by the resolution and that's what I'm following. I think that this is a good project that forces the decision. I hope it forces the decision because we've got to get going. That's one of the problems with government. We sit there too long. Scott: Is there anything else? Nutting: Yeah I guess I just want to echo Ladd's comments because I've heard this issue, and not a very long period of time about transition and it takes a different form with each development but if the transition is always to be single family, you've got the same issue even with the transition of the transition. You're going to ask a developer to come in and say, we want you to put single family here and then put your multi unit townhome or other development there. It may or may not develop with those requirements. The developer may have the same issues as the residents. I mean it's a real can of worms. Farmakes: But there's several developments here like that...there are several developments here that the developer's strings are sort of weighing itself there for single family to have transition. Nutting: No question. Farmakes: It's not necessarily units or how many units of property. Ifs also, it could be types of housing. Nutting: Well types is numbers. Conrad: We obviously figure this, you've got a buffer with single family. That's obviously the leaning of the commission. And how were we going, how were we ever going to make a transition to Highway 5? I don't understand it. Farmakes: I think your hearing in the marketplace here right now. It's not necessarily in this cases, these are homes probably more expensive than the houses they abut. So it's not an issue of economics. It's not an issue necessarily of sight. These are nice houses. It's an issue perhaps of the types of housing and perhaps the housing next to it. In other words, not the adjacent property. The property after that and how many units you're looking at in a short period of distance. So the question here is, you're hearing what the market's saying. The 44 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 market's coming back and saying, I bought single family. I want to see single family next to me. That's where it's at. Nutting: That's where everything is. Farmakes: We had the same problem with a couple of the other developments in here. Once that was taken care of, the resistance died down and I can't say that when we look at a buffer situation that you're going to come up with one solution for everything because I'm amazed by what we, the berm that we're seeing over on that property on Minnewashta Parkway and TH 7. It looks like a fort. That's not a berm, that's a hill. Conrad: I think we should move on but I think we've got to talk about this stuff because we're creatively, we're ad libbing. Nutting: The other unknown for me is, to put it to rest is, what do we then get with the PUD process and what type of development will evolve from that. Will we get, maybe we'll get the single family home buffer because we can control that but then what's the rest of it, and economics, it will drive everything in the process because it's driving the development right now. But there are give and takes in the process so. Farmakes: We will create the same problem that we did when we approved Timberwood up there. That's going to be the nucleus to drive all the development around it and should it be that way? Should that be what dictates that in this regard? After all the monies that have been spent along the highway and 2 years worth of work and studying. It seems to me, not only for this property, but adjacent properties that what you're proposing in the current motion that's out on the floor is appropriate. That we should know where that is. Mancino: Staff, or Bob, could you answer the question about what do you get with a PUD that Ron asked, versus a regular standard subdivision? Nutting: I know there are, my question is what is the developer going to want to put with a PUD versus with the standard approach. That's where, they're not going to answer that. They don't have that answer. Peter Beck: We will answer it. Harberts: I think we should call the question. Conrad: Yeah. 45 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Scott: Okay, there's a motion on the floor to deny the three items before us. Harberts moved, Mancino seconded that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council deny Rezoning #94-7 rezoning 35.1 acres encompassing the land north of the north Highway 5 collector road from A2, Agricultural Estate to R4, Mixed Low Density Residential; to deny the Preliminary Plat #94-7 and to deny the Wetland Alteration Permit #94-6. All voted in favor, except Commissioners Conrad and Scott who opposed the motion, and the motion carded with a vote of 4 to 2. Scott: This will go to the City Council on the 9th? Aanenson: January 9th. Scott: This is not the end of the process. Please follow your issue and I'd like to thank you all for coming to this and do you guys want to take a 5 minute break? We'll reconvene at 15 after 10:00. REVIEW OF CONCEPT PLAN FOR REVISED PLAT FOR TOWER HEIGHTS. Public Present: Name Address Renelle R. Ulrich 6581 Nez Perce Drive Dick Osgood 22035 Stratford Place, Shorewood Daryl Fortier 408 Turnpike Road, Golden Valley Todd Noteboom Doherty, Rumble & Butler, Mpls. Larry Moloney Doherty, Rumble & Butler, Mpls. Todd Johnson 1061 Lake Lucy Road Teresa Schrempp 1041 Lake Lucy Road Karen Green 1021 Lake Lucy Road Teresa Drake 980 Lake Lucy Road Jay & Marlene Payne 1081 Lake Lucy Road Linda Barck 960 Lake Lucy Road Colette McKinnon 941 Lake Lucy Road Kristi Weinstock 1101 Lake Lucy Road Tom & Anne McGinn 1121 Lake Lucy Road Bryce Fier 1040 Lake Lucy Road Len Kluver 1080 Lake Lucy Road 46 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Darryl LizAnn Wills 1060 Lake Lucy Road Scott McCann 1100 Lake Lucy Road Tom Scott: The Commission has a report from our office outlining why we're here tonight for this matter and let just summarize that real briefly. Back in May of last year the city initiated condemnation proceedings to condemn a lot owned by Frank Beddor for purposes of extending Nez Perce Drive to Pleasant View Road. Mr. Beddor then sued the city challenging the extension of Nez Perce on environmental grounds and that matter was, continues to be in litigation. It was tried before the District Court in Carver County in February and March of this year and the trial court judge in Carver County in July of this year decided in favor of the city and dismissed Mr. Beddor's lawsuit. Mr. Beddor has appealed that decision to the Minnesota Court of Appeals and that appeal will probably be decided sometime in June or July of this year. Now recently, as outlined in my report to the commission, Mr. Beddor's attorneys have approached the city about a potential, conceptually a potential settlement of the lawsuit. And what that settlement would involve is that Mr. Beddor would drop his opposition to the extension of Nez Perce to Pleasant View Road so that Nez Perce would in fact be extended to Pleasant View Road. Second component of this settlement framework that Mr. Beddor has approached the city with is that he would donate to the city the right-of-way over his property upon which Nez Perce would be constructed. The city would drop it's proposal to take the entire lot that Mr. Beddor owns. And the third component of the settlement would be that the Tower Heights plat, which is a 13 lot subdivision that was approved last year, which there was preliminary plat approval. As it was approved it would access to the north, to the extended Nez Perce Drive. Now the concept that's been proposed by Mr. Beddor now is that the Tower Heights plat would access to the south through an outlot that the city owns onto Lake Lucy Road. Now what we're looking for the Planning Commission and the City Council next Monday, is direction as to whether or not the city wants to consider a settlement of this lawsuit to end this litigation which would involve this framework. Nez Perce being extended through to Pleasant View Road and with the Tower Heights Addition being replatted to access to the south, utilizing this outlot to Lake Lucy Road. If the city is willing to consider that type of concept, and obviously the main component is whether or not the access to Lake Lucy Road of the Tower Heights Addition. If the city's willing to consider that, then we will go forward and negotiate a settlement agreement with Mr. Beddor conditioned upon formal plat application with the revised Tower Heights plat. Formal approval of that, ultimate approval of that plat and ultimate approval by the City Council of the overall settlement agreement. So that's why we're here tonight. To see whether or not the city, the commission and next week the City Council, wants us to move forward with a settlement that would be structured along those lines. Mr. Beddor's attorney, Larry Moloney is also here and I believe he'd like to make some comments to the commission at the appropriate time. 47 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Scott: Okay. Questions or comments from, or is there any more staff? Harberts: What is staff looking for from us specifically? Tom Scott: We're looking for direction as to whether or not we want to consider this type of settlement which would involve the Tower Heights plat. The concept with the Tower Heights plat accessing off of Lake Lucy Road. Harberts: What's staffs recommendation? Aanenson: We haven't looked at the plat. All we're doing is asking for your input. Obviously if it's something conceptually, you'd recommend that to the City Council. They would still have to make a motion on it. Then it would have to come back through the platting process. What we're looking right now is this something you'd like to consider as an option for the settlement of the city. Harberts: Mr. Chair, in my perspective, I don't have enough information to, I guess what are we compromising. We went through the process. It got approved. The city had, they wanted to condemn this property, or whatever the steps they took, that's what they took so they had an idea of what they wanted to achieve. I don't know what, by compromising or by settling, what that would achieve. If we would still achieve our overall goal or not. I don't know that. I guess if we could still achieve our goal without compromising it, fine. Then let's move ahead because we're creating a positive situation for both parties. If we're compromising it, if the city is compromising something in which we're not achieving our goals, I would be more reluctant to say no. Let's go on but again, I don't have enough information to really give you much more than that. Tom Scott: Well the thing that would be accomplished is number one, the litigation would end. Number two, Nez Perce would be extended through to Pleasant View Road. Aanenson: Which was the whole reason. Tom Scott: Which was what the battle was all about. Now at the same time that that issue came up, the Tower Heights plat also came in at the same time. Harberts: Yeah, I recall that. Tom Scott: And the Tower Heights plat was designed to access off of the extended Nez Perce Drive. But the main battle, the main objective was to extend Nez Perce Drive through to Pleasant View Road. That would be accomplished by this settlement. 48 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Harberts: But at the same time, what other neighbors, what other residents would be impacted? What would be the impact? I recall there was some kind of grade consideration. Scott: Well the issue, as I see it is the, and I believe it's very bad planning to do this, is that there is, it's kind of confusing so I got a hold of an aerial that I think really in my mind points it out. Basically the bottom line is, I'm sorry you folks can't see this but Nez Perce is supposed, and we can pass this around. Nez Perce is supposed to come through like this on actually Peaceful Lane. I believe it's JMS who's got the development here. Their property is going to access out this way. Well part of the settlement is that of course this goes through but this development will go out the back onto Lake Lucy Road. Now the houses that are in place now are not shown on that and Dave, if you could tell me, how much, what's the actual dimension inbetween the two homes that are situated on either side of that outlot. Or if one of the, do you happen to know how far apart those? I was there, it looks like, I don't know 50 feet. Hempel: The outlot that the city owns is a 50 foot wide outlot. The homes that are set back from the property line I believe about anywhere from between 24 to 28 feet. Scott: Okay, but were there variances granted to place those homes where they are? Are they too close or are they within the setback? Hempel: I believe they are within the setbacks based on the status of that outlot at that time, it was an outlot. Kate may want to touch on the setback issue. Tom Scott: Yeah, I can also discuss that one. I believe they're 27, 26 feet back from the outlot. At the time those homes were built, it was designated an outlot. It's not a dedicated roadway. It's an outlot. So that it was determined by the Planning Director at that time, Mr. Krauss, that they did not require a 30 foot setback because it was not a dedicated right-of- way. It was an outlot. So they were permitted to build closer than 30 feet which would be the required setback if it were a dedicated right-of-way. Mancino: Excuse me, it wasn't a dedicated right-of-way. So why do we have the outlot? Tom Scott: It was, as is often done in the planning process, it was designated as a potential future access point at some point in time. Mancino: So it's always been designated that way that a road may go through there at some point. Tom Scott: That it may. 49 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Mancino: That it may. Scott: Yeah there was a comment by Mr. Krauss that was in the, these are the City Council meeting Minutes of July 12, 1993 and one of the things, that was my question too is that, you know why have the outlot and his final comment was, "there seems to be an implication that the city was studying or is thinking about studying the widening of Nez Perce south of Lake Lucy Road, or Pleasant View Road itself, or an additional connections to the Fox Chase subdivision." Which I believe Fox Chase, now that's on the other side of Troendle? Tom Scott: Yeah Fox, it's further to the east. Scott: Okay. And none of these are in fact the case. None of those have been talked about the 4 years I've been involved with this issue so I mean that's another part of it but the thing I'm trying to figure out is that if we do in fact have two homes and we have what, 25 feet, we basically have 100 feet inbetween the physical houses that this, as part of this settlement we would be putting a 30 foot section through. Hempel: That's correct. Scott: And the grade, as I recall, would go from 1016 to, it's like an 8 foot drop. I just got that from the grading plan. Dave talk a little bit about, what is that going to look like. It just seems to me to be kind of a. Hempel: The rough grades that were proposed on the grading plan I believe did range, at one time they looked at a 5% slope on there which necessitated extension retaining walls at the property line or slope easements to do the grading beyond the outlot. There was also an attempt to reduce that impact by increasing the street grade through there. Anywhere up to a 10% street grade. In doing so, it did lessen the impact to the adjacent properties but some grading may have to be done. I'm not, I don't have the plan in front of me on what the grades would be. Scott: So basically what the trade off is that if, as settlement of this litigation Nez Perce gets connected, but the Tower Heights subdivision is going to have access off of a relatively steep roadway that's going to be put inbetween two existing homes. That's basically the trade off is that Tower Heights ends up off ingress and egress to Lake Lucy Road. Mancino: And they'd have to have a variance. Correct? Hempel: The final street grades haven't been. 50 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Mancino: But they'd have to have...variances in here because of the setbacks. Hempel: The setback would be an issue I guess. Aanenson: It could be a legal non-conforming situation unless they try to add to it. Tom Scott: Well, the setback of the homes? Mancino: If you put the road in, then you would have a variance too because there'd be corner lots and two fronts and you wouldn't have a 30 foot setback. Tom Scott: That's correct. They would be within the 30 foot setback once the road is put in. Mancino: So we would have to grant a variance. Harberts: Well I think, again I'd just like to mention to the commission, I mean we're looking at technical detail that in the past we usually rely on staff to look at. Bring forward the recommendation. The only thing that I'm understanding here that you may be looking for is do we make a recommendation to you to take to the City Council. Should we try and settle this to prevent any further litigation? From my perspective, I don't have enough information to say that. I would have to vote no, that we don't settle. That we go forward simply because I don't know what the alternative here is. It seems that if the city, we went through the planning process. The City Council was adamant about yes, this is what it was. That's why they litigated with the resident on this that they wanted to move ahead. Now all of a sudden we're halfway through, or all the way through, or part way through or what, and they're saying that okay now, okay maybe this isn't such a good thing. Let's come back. I don't have enough information and I don't see how the, unless we have technical information in terms of what the impact is by compromising, we already started walking into other questions about setbacks and road grades and things like that so, I'd be the first one to settle in terms of a compromise but I don't know what I'm compromising on so at this point my position is no until I get some technical information to make a decision here. Scott: Well there's also an interesting situation here is that we saw the development, the preliminary plat approval, and is there anybody from JMS here or any representatives of JMS? Those are the guys who own the land, and they're not here. I mean we have someone, I have a problem with. If I was in their situation and I see somebody else replatting my property that I've already gotten preliminary plat approval. Larry Moloney: I could probably address that. 51 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Scott: Excuse me, this is not a public hearing. Yes sir. Tom Scott: Mr. Chair, that's talked about in my report and I didn't mention it in my summary but this is premised upon the fact that Mr. Beddor will obtain control of the property and will in fact resubmit a plat along these lines. And if this concept is something that the city wants to consider, so. Harberts: I think that I'm open to any considerations but from my perspective it has to go through staff, to our experts to tell us. Conrad: It's real tough to react tonight, seriously. Harberts: Yeah, I can't. I'm open to it but. Conrad: Mr. Chairman, I really think we should, I don't know if we need to table this or not but I couldn't tell you a thing. I've forgotten most of where we were when we wanted to runt he roads a different way and to say, should we settle the litigation means I'd have to reconsider the whole road alignment and why go off Lake Lucy versus why go off Pleasant View, or Peaceful Lane. Harberts: I'd rather see a recommendation from staff before I can say either or. Scott: Or I'd like to see too a drawing that shows, here's where the two homes are. Here's where the road's going and then something that says, okay there's going to be a retaining wall that's going to be 8 feet tall here and then as we know, when you have a grade like that and you're putting in a 30 foot section and there's any sort of a grade, there's going to be earth that's going to have to be moved that will probably end up on the, I assume end up on the property of the people next door. I don't know. Tom Scott: I guess what the intent tonight was to simply see, assuming the engineering details work and assuming that the commission and the Council are ultimately satisfied that those things work, conceptually do we even want to move forward with entertaining this type of layout with Lake Lucy, with this plat accessing to Lake Lucy Road and Nez Perce extending through. And maybe, and what I'm hearing is that you don't feel you even have enough information to react to the concept. Scott: Can we get some other comments? Harberts: It could be a good plan but I don't understand. 52 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Farmakes: Kate how, I mean even if we were to vote on this, how could you sort of disregard what took place during the public hearing because there's no input. Scott: We already made a decision. Aanenson: I know. Farmakes: That would be made by the surrounding property owners. Scott: Well it's like saying the access boulevard is going to go south and then all of a sudden it goes north again. I mean we made a decision. Farmakes: Well it's cutting a deal without open debate. Aanenson: No, this is just conceptual. Tom Scott: We just want to get, that's one of the reasons we came here because, and that's why all the residents were notified that we wanted number one, conceptually we want to know whether or not it's even worth negotiating with Mr. Beddor on this particular concept. I can understand, maybe you don't feel you have enough information to even give us that direction. If it's worth pursuing, then we would go forward and negotiate with Mr. Beddor. Reach an agreement subject to, which would involve formal submission of the replat of this property. Go through the platting process with a formal public hearing and then ultimately for the City Council to decide on whether or not they'd approve a replat to end the settlement agreement that would go along with that. So the purpose of this is just, are we wasting our time in either pursuing this concept or should we move forward. Mancino: To me you're wasting your time pursuing this concept as it is in front of me. What I would look at, and this is really out there, is number one, I mean you'd have to get approval from JMS that they would do this. Secondly, I just would not see the road going in the outlot. I would not approve a variance to the homes because those homes have been there for I don't know how many years but quite a few years. The only way I can see at all going onto Lake Lucy is if Beddor actually buys one of those homes. When the homeowners actually wants to sell the house and land to Mr. Beddor, and they would have to say yes. Scott: Is it for sale? Mancino: Is it for sale? Or trade for a new house...but I mean that's how far I would need to go to conceptually say yes. And those would all have to fall in line for me. 53 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Nutting: It really comes down to do we want to say conceptually yes with no guarantees. I mean conceptually sure. Go ahead but you're going to have to come back with a plan that's going to have to go through the process and it gets through the process and we say, no. We liked the way we did it in the first place, you know. Scott: Well the City Council made their decision twice. And the Minutes, in fact the Minutes that we received, I think it was Ms. Dockendorf or maybe Councilman Mason made the motion and Ms. Dockendorf seconded it or vice versa, they said no. We already made our decision. And personally I feel, we already made our decision. Harberts: Well I don't want an answer to this question either but you know I'd like to know where our position is as a city in terms of this case. But again, I don't want to know publically. And second, I think staff did a great job the last two times, or one time. So at this point based on what I have in this document, my position is no. We just go forward with the path that we're on. Again, I would rather see a recommendation from staff but based on what I have right here, my response as an individual is no. Scott: Do you want to go down the line and give the input. Ladd, what do you think? Conrad: I don't have a clue. I couldn't react one way or another. Scott: Okay. I'd say no. We made our decision once and that's enough for me. Mancino: I say no. Farmakes: I think it would be a bad precedent. Scott: Ron? Nutting: I don't have a clue either. That's not a no, that's not a yes. I hear you. I always get into these conceptual issues too. It's like the concept but I understand what you're trying to do. This is a litigation decision that's trying to drive a response that can't happen. I don't know, I think we're going to have to. Mancino: But we have a particular. Nutting: I think we just from a, we have to decide where we're going to go. If we've got a case, you take it forward. If we don't have a case, then you get with city staff and everybody else and say, we need to look at bringing something forward... 54 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Harberts: I think Jeff said it well too in terms of precedence because it doesn't reflect well on the city's decision making process, or the staff experts. I'm not willing to put ourselves out there. Scott: Well and also too, when as we go through from the District Court to the Court of Appeals to whatever, the Judge, is it Goggins or Groggins? I'm sorry. Tom Scott: Goggins. Scott: Goggins. Not only did he find for the defendant, which is the City of Chanhassen, but he also ordered the plaintiff to pay a portion of the City of Chanhassen's legal fees. So in my mind that's a pretty strong statement that we are on the right path. Tom Scott: We have a strong legal position. There's no question about it. Scott: It's...issue of...and it's like we back off and you guys save money, give us what we want. That's what. Tom Scott: We have a very strong legal position. This is a matter of ending the litigation and saving that cost and secondly getting this road, Nez Perce extension constructed during the 1995 construction season. Mr. Beddor will be donating the right-of-way instead of us condemning his lot and paying him for that. There may be some other financial things we can build into the settlement. The reason we're here, if from a planning standpoint the city does not conceptually want to consider utilizing that outlot off of Lake Lucy, then we go nowhere with it. There's no sense spending our time on this so it's really a planning issue on whether or not we want to consider using that access. And if we don't, then fine. If we're willing to look at that then there are financial issues relating to ending the litigation and the acquisition of the necessary property to build the Nez Perce extension. Scott: Well I think we gave some pretty good, we have four no's and two, no los contondres I guess. So is that sufficient for you to know what our position is? Tom Scott: That is sufficient. Scott: Good, well thank you very much. Tom Scott: Thank you. Scott: Do we have any new business? 55 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mancino moved, Harberts seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated November 16, 1994 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Aanenson: The Shamrock Ridge plat which was reconsidered by the City Council regarding grading, the applicant at the meeting recommended dropping two lots so that's how the Council approved it. With two less lots which would be the most westerly portion had 4 lots on the private drive. One was dropped and then the other cul-de-sac, there was 5 homes and one lot was dropped off there so now there's 4 there. They approved Hoben's Wild Wood Farms. They approved the preliminary plat for Powers Place. And then they tabled the amendment for gazebos. Some of the issues that Nancy had concern about. The definition. They wanted to make sure that we've got standards as far as electricity, plumbing. Make sure that we've got enough control on that so that was tabled to give some more consideration for that. And I did have one other item that I didn't put on here but McGlynn's is doing another addition and I just wanted to let you see, take a minute to look at, just take one second, their plan. You know they are on the Highway 5 corridor. It's less than 10% addition which the Director has the authority to approve but I did want you to see the addition because they do have two different components to that building. One is the industrial component, which they keep snapping additional phases on, and that's how that building was designed. It's kind of a precast. And then they've got the office component and what they're going to be adding on is additional, what they call welfare which is really locker rooms and that. So I asked them to give some renderings just to make sure that I was comfortable with it visually what they're doing. The problem is those two types of architectures really don't tie together. Although the portion that they're on isn't really the portion that's seen from Highway 5 but I just wanted to give you an opportunity to see what it's going to look like and see if you had any additional comments. Otherwise I was going to give them approval. It's a small addition. This is the industrial portion where they're adding on right now, where the loading docks are and they're redoing the landscaping. They're screening, actually it's going to be a better screen visually for the loading docks. And the part that they're adding on is right in this area here. Scott: That little do dad? Aanenson: But what I'm saying is the office component, when it got added on a few years ago was a completely different architecture than this and what we said in the Highway 5 design standards is that you can have different components but they need to have harmony or a theme carried through. 56 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Mancino: Compatibility. Aanenson: Compatibility. The only theme that there's this theme here...but that's about it. And you've got two different colors. But on this portion here that they're adding on and this side here, you can't really see because it's the southerly portion of that. The frontage road will be to the north. So I felt based on that, I wanted to see... Mancino: This is already here? Scott: Yeah. That's that office piece... Aanenson: I asked about that. That was one of my recommendations and it's all locker rooms. Harberts: Well what about something that. Mancino: It needs something. Harberts: Yeah something that compliments there like color tile. Scott: Maybe something like color. Aanenson: Do some banding. Scott: Yeah, there you go. Same color to kind of give it, yeah... (There were a number of comments being thrown around at the same time at this point.) Scott: Thank you ma'am. As far as open discussion. I would like to open the floor for nominations for Chairman or Chairperson. Personage of the Planning Commission for 1995. Mancino: I think we should wait until we see who's going to be on the Planning Commission. Harberts: But do you think it's going to be a new person? Mancino: You never know. Aanenson: Your first meeting, I don't think the, the City Council will not be making a decision. They've got one more meeting and they will be making recommendations in 57 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 January but I don't believe before your first meeting. That they'll have a recommendation by then so your first meeting is January 4th. They don't meet until a week later on the 9th. Do you want to stay the Chair and wait? You may want to do that. Scott: Can we nominate somebody now? Conrad: We should wait. Scott: Well think about it. I think we should think about it. Think about who a likely candidate would be. Ladd, I think you've got a lot of experience. Conrad: No, I'm not a candidate. Harberts: Neither am I. Scott: That narrows it right down. Harberts: Why won't you be? Scott: Oh no, no. I said I'm not a candidate. Harberts: Well neither am I. Scott: Well wait a minute now. Is there some rules of succession where the Vice Chair becomes Chair? Has that ever happened? Conrad: Yes. Farmakes: I think that's an ordinance. It's somewhere in that book right there. Scott: But anyway, we'll think about that. Any open discussion? Mancino: Yeah, I have a couple things. Scott: Yes ma'am. Mancino: One thing that I would like to do as a commission is once a quarter, and actually this is just a suggestion. Scott: This is when you're the new chairperson you'll be able to do this. 58 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Mancino: Yeah, once a quarter is to take an hour, maybe before the Wednesday evening meeting. Maybe it has to be, I'd like to do it in the daylight hours, and go and see some of the subdivisions that we have passed and that have gone through us and see what they're like now and actually, you know you do it in a business. After you've worked on a product or a plan you actually put it in front of you and you do some evaluation on it and I'd like to do that. You know. I'd like to go as a group and say, look what we did. What would we like to do differently, etc, etc. And you know, once a quarter would be very helpful to me. And I'd like to do it as a group. Scott: Then we'd also be able to go, well that's not what I thought it was going to look like. Farmakes: We did that? Mancino: Yeah, what do we learn from this? Harberts: Do we have to do it, can we just do it during like a meeting time instead. Mancino: Well that's what I said. Harberts: Take a meeting and do it. Mancino: I don't care when. I just know that at night at 7:30 in the winter, it's not going to. Harberts: Well I can tell you at 5:30 you won't get a bus. Peak. Farmakes: One of the things that I noticed we were arguing the issue about signage. We've done some things that were right and we've changed some of the applications that have come forward and a lot of that stuff has given us a better building. I think that there is a resentment to that but I guess the question is, do you roll over and give that up? Maybe we do. Maybe the Council says we get into that too much. Maybe we should be dictating that. Maybe we should be looking the other way. I can't say. There's no doubt that when you look at that S&A or you look at what happened with, the compromise that they came up with Abra or some of these other things. Those weren't everything we were asking for but they're certainly a better product than what we've had. Scott: And there's an indication that, what I consider the general public to actually have noticed it was a fellow who mentioned the Taco Bell. He said and you guys, da, da da, and here's what, and sometimes, at least I think sometimes that what we do perhaps is not noticed. But to me I thought it was very gratifying to have that fellow step up and actually somebody 59 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 from the general public actually saw it. Because you take it, see the public is taking this standard for granted now and I think if we did have. Nutting: Is that good or bad? Scott: I think it's good. I think people are, the tone is when you come into town and you see a Goodyear and an Abra and... Nutting: I'm just talking about the Taco Bell... Scott: Can I just make a comment of something that is now becoming near and dear to my heart. In 1996 our city is going to have a centennial celebration. It's going to be this year long thing and I was invited to the first meeting on Monday. And one of the things, I think it had a little bit to do with planning, is that there are a number of farmsteads that are in various stages of disrepair and part of the architectural heritage of our city. And one of the things that's going to, there's a fellow named Marlin Anderson came up with this great idea. He's going to call it the Habitat for History where part of the thing he's doing for the centennial, among other things, is to raise funds to try to maybe pick a particular example and there's a piece of, there's a homestead on the Arboretum property that is particularly interesting. But anyway, one of the things we're planning from that standpoint is actually getting some people together who are interested in the preservation of some of the historical architecture in town, which there is very little, and take these people around to show them these sites. Harberts: I think this is another bus trip. Scott: I think that is. But anyway, I'm not going to say. If you're interested in it, let me know. We're going to be meeting in the first part of January and kind of planning where we're going with it. Harberts: Actually I'd like to, Joe if you could let me know when they're going to meet again as a group for the centennial planning. Scott: I'll put you on the list. Harberts: Yeah, I'd like to. Scott: And anybody else who's interested but other than that I don't have anything. Does anybody else have any open discussion? 60 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Conrad: Have we gone through our plans for the coming year? Kate gave us a list once upon a time of stuff that she was going to do. Have we reacted to that? Scott: I haven't seen that. That used to be a regular part of the packet. Conrad: I just threw it away. Well that was an ongoing deal but she gave her 1995 goals to City Council or somebody, and maybe, well I got it in the packet. I think it's so important that we beat the issues to the pass. We don't win killing issues like we may have tonight. We win by thinking about what the issues were and spending our time fixing it for the future. I guarantee you, we don't accomplish a lot in some of these meetings. Farmakes: Can we drive that decision though Ladd? Conrad: Oh yeah. Farmakes: Isn't part of the process though that there must be an application like the one we saw tonight that must drive that process? Conrad: I think we could have. Farmakes: When we vote to deny it, it now goes onto the Council and now they must make a decision as to where they want to be. Not with that application...where that alignment goes. Conrad: We didn't do a thing. We have nothing to do with it. The developer did that. Farmakes: But we could have tabled it. Conrad: For a short period of time. The developer is still causing it to happen. We didn't manage the process. Farmakes: We could have tabled it for 2 months until they made the decision but that will help, that will force them to make a decision. Scott: If I could just make one comment. The only, and it's something that I remember Batzli said probably the first day I was here and it didn't sink in until a little while later, is that the only control that we have in the process is to table. And that's the only time we get what we want is we say, this is Mr. or Ms. Developer, this is what we want. You're here for a while so humor us or whatever. Whenever we deny something, it's like we're not even here. 61 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Conrad: There's part truth to that Joe. All it does though is it delays something. It doesn't, if they need to break ground, then you've got some leverage. If they don't, then we have none. The point is, when we see important things, whether it be Highway 5. Whether it be trees. Landscaping things. When we see those things, we've got to get ahead of the issue. Then we have total, those things just fly through here. You know we don't debate landscaping that much anymore. We don't debate some of these things... Mancino: But I think part of the way that we get ahead of things is that when staff knows that somebody's applied for it, maybe we have a work session that talks about transition. Maybe it comes up at that time because it's applied for, may be a month before it gets to us. Conrad: Well we'll never. Farmakes: Affordable housing. Tell me how we're going to jump the gun on that? They can't even define it. Conrad: Yeah, there's one I can't define. Mancino: No, but what was brought up tonight is not only transition but also we're going to have more and more multi-family because, as you said, it's going to come along Highway 5. How are we going to, we're all concerned about the monotony of one color. We're all concerned about the monotony of the same architectural features. What do we do? I mean you brought up a very good, and not only do I want to talk about conditions but I want to talk about that also because it's going to keep coming up and I, for one, don't want it to be just a sea of 90, I don't care whether they're twin homes, I don't care if they're quads, I don't care if they're triplets, whatever you call them, of just a sea of these things all the same color. The same architectural. I don't think that does our city any good. Conrad: And those are some issues that again, along with planning for '95 we should be bringing up. Should we examine it? What are our priorities? There's so many things going on and with development pressures, we won't get to many but I just want to make sure that we take a look at what her priorities are and that we agree and then we put those things that we, over the last year that we have seen as issues and decide if we want staff to play around with it. Farmakes: To me the ultimate intent, solution for that area north of Highway 5 is PUD all the way to Highway 41. Conrad: But you can't force that. 62 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Farmakes: But you can't force that. Conrad: So why talk about it? Mancino: You can rezone it. Sure you can. Conrad: No you can't. The developers got to agree. You've got to lure the developer to get into a PUD. Mancino: The City Council can say that they will rezone it PUD. Conrad: No. No. If they can do. Mancino: If the can meet density. Conrad: They can do, as long as they meet, they can do a subdivision where, as long as we meet all the rules. Farmakes: They can't, I don't think they could rezone it. The applicant has to ask for a rezonement. Conrad: But they could sue us you know if we don't do it. Scott: We could change the guide. Mancino: Exactly. Because Roger said that the only way to do it is rezoning. It has nothing to do with density or anything else but if you want to stop it, you don't approve the rezoning. Conrad: Yeah, and if you do it after the developer comes in, you can't do it. It's illegal. You've got to beat them to the task. You've got to beat them before the proposals in here. Otherwise we don't have anything. We've wasted staffs time. We're trying to do one thing and they know they can't do it. Farmakes: But the rest of that property, as far as I know, other than individual homeowners, that's really the only development on the north side of this existing that probably would border that type of housing. Mancino: Yeah, you're right. 63 Planning Commission Meeting - December 7, 1994 Conrad: Jeff, you're never going to vote for anything that goes on the north side of Highway 5 because it's not to your liking. I don't even want to try to persuade you on anything any more because I know that you don't like what was voted on. Farmakes: No, actually I thought...that wasn't the point though. Harberts: Can we call the meeting and then you can... Scott: Can I have a motion please. Conrad moved, Harberts seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 64 CITY OF 01- CHANHASSEN690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: December 29, 1994 SUBJ: Director's Report On Monday, December 12, 1994, the City Council took the following actions: 1. Approved a metes and bounds subdivision to subdivide Lot 3, Minnewashta Park into two lots located north of Orchard Lane and south of Hwy. 7, 2540 Orchard Lane, Obed and Mildred Melom. 2. Reviewed the concept plan for the revised plat of Tower Heights. This was a consideration of the Beddor proposal. The Council declined consideration of the proposal on a vote of 4 to 0 with Councilman Senn abstaining. 3. The Council approved the preliminary plat to subdivide 8 acres into 2 single family lots, Delwiche Addition, located at 4131 Pipewood Curve. 4. Amendment to the City Code regarding the sign ordinance. Some minor changes were recommended and the second reading is scheduled for January 9. A CITY OF 0. ,itioor . " CHAN' IlASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director DATE: December 28, 1994 SUBJ: 1995 Goals and On-going Issues The following is a list of goals I presented to you back in October. The council also reviewed this list during the budget process. I will be attaching this list as a part of the packet. January 4, 1995 ISSUE STATUS 1. Highway 5 Corridor Study and City Council hearing date set for January Land Use Recommendation 23, 1995 to select road alignment. Subsequently the City Council will review land use recommendations including northern 1995 study area. 2. Southern 1995 Study Area: BF Staff is proposing to study the remaining District and remaining city land land outside of the MUSA. We will be uses outside of the MUSA Line. studying property in conjunction with the Park and Recreation Commission open space study. We will also be recommending land use by the end of 1995. In early 1996, we will begin evaluating the timing for the Planning Commission hearing process and determine how much, if any, area should be brought into the city's MUSA area. Planning Commission December 28, 1994 Page 2 3. Slope Protection Ordinance. The City Attorney is working on an ordinance that will further define the preservation of slopes. 4. Revise PUD Ordinance. The standards of the PUD ordinance do not necessarily merit the increase in the flexibility it allows. Staff believes the PUD should be a process. 5. Bluff Creek Study Staff is working with the Watershed District, DNR and Metropolitan Council to secure funding and to study and develop standards for the protection and enhancement of the Bluff Creek Corridor. 6. Joint Meeting with Park and Request from the Planning Commission. Recreation Commission This is a good opportunity to meet and review the Park and Recreation Commission's Comprehensive Plan and plans for preservation and future park sites. g:\planNk.a\95goidss