1985 11 20
-
-
-
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 20, 1985
Chairman Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:36 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Steven Emmings, Robert Siegel, Bill Ryan, Howard Noziska and
Mike Thompson.
MEMBERS ABSENT
Ladd Conrad
STAFF PRESENT
Barbara Dacy, City Planner, Jo Ann Olsen, Asst. City Planner and
Vicki Churchill, Secretary.
PUBLIC HEARING
Subdivision Request #85-19 to plat 85 acres of property into 19
lots and one outlot on property located in the southeast corner
of County Road 117 and Lake Lucy Road and zoned R-la,
Agricultural Residence District, Merrill Steller, applicant.
Public Present
Merrill & Rosemary Steller
Milton Bathke
Al Klingelhutz
Al Harvey
Michael Houdyshell
Darrell Johnson
Jim & Doris Mielke
Warren & Arleen Phillips
Martin Kuder
Terry Olsen
Art Kraikowski
applicant
8404 Great Plains Blvd.
8600 Great Plains Blvd.
1430 Lake Lucy Road
17070 Creek Ridge Tr., Minnetonka
1941 Crestview Drive
1645 Lake Lucy Road
1571 Lake Lucy Road
6831 Galpin Lake Blvd.
6360 Forest Circle
7031 Redman Lane
Olsen stated that the applicant is proposing to subdivide 84.5
acres into 19 single family lots and one outlot. She stated that
the lot sizes range from 10.3 to 2.5 acres. She noted that Lots
12 and 13 contain a Class B wetland and Lots 3, 4, 5 and Outlot A
contain a Class A wetland. She stated that the site will be
served by County Road 117, Lake Lucy Road and the proposed
realignment of Lake Lucy Road. She stated that Lake Lucy Road
has been designated for realignment on the municipal state aid
system to become a collector street. She noted that the appli-
cant has worked with staff to come up with a suitable alignment
that it works well with the site, maintains the existing 67th
Street access onto County Road 117 and improves drainage from the
site. She stated that the existing Lake Lucy Road and County
Road 117 intersection will be closed with the street ending in a
cul-de-sac. She noted that there will only be two new accesses
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 2
-
onto County Road 117 and a maximum of 4 driveways onto the pro-
posed Lake Lucy Road. She noted that the applicant is proposing
a private driveway for Lots 7, 9 and 12 off of the existing Lake
Lucy Road and that Lots 7 and 9 have the option to be served from
the rear where the building site are located rather than locating
the driveways up a steep slope. She stated that each lot will
have its own well and septic system and the applicant has pro-
vided two percolation tests for each lot and all meet city regu-
lations. She stated that the proposed subdivision will not
alter the existing wetlands as all lots affected provide ample
area to provide building sites which meets the setbacks for both
the residence and septic system. She stated that Outlot A may
be reserved for future park acquisition or will be maintained by
a homeowners association. She noted that the city is park defi-
cient in that area and the Park and Recreation Commission will be
reviewing this item on December 3, 1985 to decide whether to
acquire this land for lake access.
-
Bill Monk stated that the right-of-way previously believed to be
dedicated along the west line of Outlot A as noted on the half
section maps actually did not exist so Outlot A would need a
separate access to Lake Lucy Road and the conditions of approval
should be so modified. He also stated that it was now apparent
that the city would have to acquire the Watershed District permit
as a part of the improvement project to realign Lake Lucy Road;
however, the condition as recommended for preliminary plat
approval did not necessarily need to be modified.
Terry Olsen asked if there were any plans for connecting County
Road 117 and Highway 4l?
Monk stated that there were no plans at this time. He stated
that Lake Lucy will come straight across and tie in with 67th
Street. He stated that at this time no land has been dedicated
to reserve right-of-way.
Terry Olsen asked if all the traffic would be taking Lake Lucy
Road across to Highway 4l?
Monk stated that in the future, a need exists to provide another
east-west road between Highway 5 and Highway 7. He stated that
Lake Lucy has always been designated as that road or the collec-
tor for that area. He stated that there are no development plans
for the area between County Road 117 and Highway 41 at this time.
Mike Houdyshell asked if any research has been done on city sewer
and water in that area and what the impact will be ten years down
the road or if there was any research done on septic systems
overflowing and possibly polluting the lake?
e
Dacy stated that as part of the plat application, the applicant
has submitted two percolation tests for each lot. She stated
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 3
e
that the subdivision is located outside of the urban service
area. She stated that septic systems have to be located at least
150 feet from the wetland areas and the perc test data shows that
each lot can meet that requirement.
Dacy also stated that there is no alteration of the wetlands so a
wetland alteration permit is not necessary. She stated that the
watershed dist.rict requirements have to be met for grading
alteration.
Olsen stated that the developer would be doing the construction
in phases, starting at the western edge, which is also what the
watershed district recommended.
Ryan asked about the runoff from Pheasant Hill which drains
across this site?
Monk stated that the drainage pattern will be maintained and
there will need to be drainage easements across some of those lots
which should be a condition of approval.
Ryan asked if there was enough being done to protect the wetlands?
e
Monk stated that there are existing low areas not designated as
wetlands that can and will be used to accommodate the drainage
from the proposed plat and adjacent properties. He also stated
that they will be repairing a drainage problem that is presently
at the end of 67th. He stated that because they are not touching
the existing wetlands and using the existing low lands to full
advantage he feels comfortable with the proposed plat.
Warren Phillips stated they look favorably on the development and
good use of the property. He asked if the new road is put
through the property will there be no work on the existing road
east of that point?
Monk stated that the only work being contemplated on the existing
Lake Lucy Road is paving which the Council has not considered
yet. He stated that there will be no major changes in grades or
width.
Noziska moved, seconded by Emmings, to close the public hearing.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
M. Thompson asked how we handle the MSA roads.
e
Monk stated that as the portion of Lake Lucy Road is constructed
there would be a certain percentage of the cost would be born by
the city and a certain amount would be born by the benefiting
property. He stated that it would be likely that the city pay
for oversizing costs for a deeper section. He stated that Lake
Lucy Road is to be built as a rural section with a width of 24
feet and gravel shoulders.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 4
e
M. Thompson asked if anyone talked with the property owners to
the south about the assessments?
Monk stated that they have not.
M. Thompson felt that the developer subdivided the property and
ended up with a piece (outlot) that did not make a lot of sense.
He did not know how much of it would be useable.
Monk stated that one of the reasons Outlot A was created besides
being used as an association lot is the city looked at this
property about three years ago when looking for a boat access
on Lake Ann or Lake Lucy. He stated that at that time it was a
very desireable site because the west portion would provide for a
very nice canoe access. He stated that he did not know if the
city was still interested in the site after the boat access in
Lake Ann has been put in. He stated that the Park and Recreation
Commission will look at the item on December 3, 1985.
Noziska felt that there were several lots that would be small to
handle a home and a septic system and still maintain the setbacks.
e
Monk stated that the only lot he was concerned about was Lot 12,
Block 1, but a home and septic system can still be placed on the
far corner of the lot and still maintain the setbacks.
Emmings asked about the flood elevation discrepancy.
Olsen stated that DNR called staff and confirmed that the eleva-
tion was 956 for the high water mark.
Ryan asked the applicant if any of the lots were high enough to
tie into the existing sewer systems that are going to be used in
Pheasant Hill?
Mr. Steller stated that he was always told that the sewer for
this property would have to come from the Lake Ann Interceptor
and would not be available until the year 1990 or later.
Ryan felt that 2~ acre lots were too small in the unsewered area.
Ie
Monk stated that by a modified sewer system some of the lots
could be served; however the MUSA line runs along Lake Lucy Road
in this area and servicing the proposed lots would not be allowed
by Met Council.
Ryan felt it was inconsistent to allow 2~ acre lots with 19
septic tanks that have a potential to fail because the city does
not really want to fight the Metro Council and use good engi-
neering judgement.
Monk stated that the city had to go through a lengthy process to
get all of Pheasant Hill included in the MUSA area and it was
e
e
Ie
Planning commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 5
just barely approved. He stated that there was no question in
his mind that the health department, the PCA, the Metro Council
and Metro Waste would not approve any further junctures to the
south.
Mr. Steller stated that if the Commission were to average out the
lots per acre they would find that it averages about one house
per 4 acres.
Ryan stated that the city has had septic systems that have failed
and sometimes it falls back on the community to solve the
pr ob lems .
Mr. Steller felt that a lot of those that have failed have been
in for many, many years before they had proper regulations like
the city has now.
Ryan stated that the sharing of the driveway creates double fron-
tage lots where it serves them off of one street and they back up
on Lake Lucy Road. He stated that the back of the houses on Lots
7 and 9 will be facing Lake Lucy Road instead of the front of the
house and felt that it was not desireable.
Mr. Steller stated that he felt that the front of the house would
face Lake Lucy to take advantage of the lake view.
Emmings moved, seconded by Siegel, to recommend approval of the
Preliminary plat #85-19 as shown on the site plan stamped
"Received November 1, 1985" with the following conditions:
1. A maximum of 5 new driveways entering the Lake Lucy realign-
ment and a maximum of 2 driveways entering onto County Road
117.
2. No alteration to the existing wetlands be permitted and all
existing drainage be maintained except as affected by the
proposed street construction.
3. The applicant must receive a grading and land alteration
permit from the Watershed District.
4. There must be drainage easements reserved over all of the
necessary lots to maintain the existing drainage pattern.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
e
e
e
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 6
site Plan Review #85-11 for a 56,000 square foot office/warehouse
building on property zoned P-4, Planned Industrial Development
District and located on Lots 1 and 2, Block 4, Chanhassen Lakes
Business Park, Opus Corporation, applicant
Olsen stated that the applicant is proposing a 56,000 square foot
office/warehouse building as a second phase to the Chanhassen
Lakes Business Center. She stated that the design and layout of
the building is similar to the existing Chanhassen Lakes Business
Center and all of the truck docks will be located in a center
court screened from the view of surrounding properties. She
noted that the site is bordered to the north and east by Riley
Creek which constricts the area suitable for development because
of the watershed district's requirement of a 100 foot creek set-
back. She stated that the building and parking area will be
located towards the southwest corner of the site. She noted that
there will be one driveway located on Park Drive and two
driveways on Park Road. She stated that all accesses provide
adequate site distance and allow smooth traffic flow. She stated
that the plan proposes 195 parking spaces and also proposes 29
spaces for future parking. She noted that this number is higher
than the requirement because the applicant had found in the first
business center the building was used more for office space which
required more parking. She stated that as noted earlier, the
building will be located in the southwest corner of the site to
maintain the creek setback; however, it places the parking area 8
feet in one area and 10 feet in another area away from the road.
She stated that in the P-4 District there are no required
setbacks for parking areas but in the past the city has con-
sistently maintained a 25 foot setback. She stated that the
applicant is seeking relief from the requirement to minimize the
distance from the creek. She stated that staff feels that the
proposed setbacks can be maintained with the addition of heavy
landscaping to screen the parking area. She stated that the
drainage design follows the overall drainage plan for the busi-
ness park; however, the development is 30 feet within the
required 100 foot setback to the north and a variance must be
obtained from the watershed district. She stated that the appli-
cant has already started this process. She stated that the
landscaping plan is adequate; however, with the reduced setbacks
from the road, staff is recommending additional plantings such as
shrubs also be installed between trees on the center island adja-
cent to Park Road.
Mr. Bob Worthington was in attendance and stated the proposed
high-tech office space is in demand and this building could be
100% office space. He noted that the loading docks were in the
center court yard of the building to screen the loading facili-
ties and to keep noise levels down. He stated that they want to
provide enough parking space in case the building is leased as all
-
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 7
office. He stated that they are marketing for service oriented
and industrial users as opposed to office users. He stated that
there is a low area to the east of the site which the majority of
the site will drain into. He stated that this area will remain
as an open space area. He stated Opus owns the lots to the north
and they would prohibit development on that site into the
required setback area.
He stated that the staff report incorrectly indicated that the
building was two stories. He stated that the building has a very
high ceiling in the showroom area and may have been interpreted
as such. He noted that the signage would be similar to the
existing business center sign. He stated that they have no
problems with any of staff's recommendations.
Noziska asked for a clarification in that the applicant is
talking about brick and the plan shows precolored textured
concrete masonry with accent bands and he wondered if the accent
bands were brick.
Worthington stated that it was explained to him to be brick. He
stated that if it is not brick it will look like it.
e
Siegel asked about pending the watershed district's agreement for
the easement of Riley Creek, he wanted to know how that affected
the acreage to the north as far reducing the lot size for future
development?
He stated that because of the topography on that site there is
limited amount of space to work with so the lot may have to be
combined with the lot north of it.
Ryan asked if the applicant was putting in a small restaurant or
deli in one of these two buildings.
Worthington stated not at this time. He stated that type of use
would only be accessory to the industrial/office users.
Ryan stated that he has seen these types of buildings with a
center court area; however he felt that the opening was fairly
small and wondered if fire equipment could gain access easily
through the area.
Olsen stated that Jim Castleberry, the Public Safety Director,
had no comments on the site plan.
e
Worthington stated that the distances between the front and back
bays of this building is shallow, where access could be gained
through the front of the building.
e
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 8
Siegel moved, seconded by M. Thompson, the Planning Commission
recommends approval of the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park Two
Site Plan #85-11 as shown on the site plan stamped "Received
October 30, 1985" with the following conditions:
1. That additional landscaping be planted between the Austrian
pine and Summit Ash on the center island adjacent to Park
Road.
2. The applicant must receive the required permits/variances
from the Watershed District and DNR.
3. Concrete aprons including gutters be constructed at each
access to maintain the flow of runoff in the streets.
4. The most easterly section of the storm sewers must be RCP (in
place of plastic) with a flared end section and rip-rap.
5. Restabilization of all disturbed areas outside the construc-
tion limits as soon as possible following initial grading.
6. All bituminous areas be lined with concrete curb.
e
7. silt fence shall be installed along the north and south
property lines to protect creek and pond from erosion during
construction.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Site plan Review #85-3 for a 9,784 square foot bank building on
property zoned CBD, Central Business District and located at the
northwest corner of the West 78th Street and Laredo Drive inter-
section, State Bank of Chanhassen, applicant
e
Olsen stated that the State Bank of Chanhassen first proposed to
expand their existing building in the summer of 1985. She stated
that due to the high cost of remodeling the existing building,
the applicant decided to build a new building on a new site. She
stated that the location for the bank is directly east of the
existing building on the corner of Laredo Drive and West 78th
Street. She stated that the building is situated towards the
easterly side of the site with the parking area on the westerly
side. She noted that the building ranges in height from 13 feet
to 34 feet which includes an outdoor sunken garden area. She
stated that the site will have three driveways; one main
entry/exit on West 78th; an exit only on West 78th Street and a
minor entry/exit on Laredo Drive. She stated that the plan pro-
poses 44 parking spaces which is consistent with city requirements.
She stated that the bank site is in an area affected by the
downtown redevelopment plan and it was necessary to look at the
e
e
e
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 9
site plan in relationship to the redevelopment plans. She noted
that the proposed redevelopment plan shows a north-south segment
of Coulter Drive connecting to West 78th Street which is located
just west of the proposed bank site. She stated that pending
approval of the redevelopment plan, construction of the street is
estimated to begin within one to two years. She stated that the
applicant has met with staff and Fred Hoisington to coordinate
the bank site with the downtown plan. She stated that the pro-
posed access on West 78th Street has been agreed upon by all
parties to be temporary and when the new road is constructed,
this temporary access will be closed and a new access will con-
nect with the new street to the west. She noted that Mr.
Hoisington has stated that a 50 foot right-of-way must be main-
tained for the new drive; however the site plan is proposing a 30
foot easement on the new bank property. She stated that to
account for the remainging 20 feet of right-of-way needed, Mr.
Hoisington has recommended that 7 feet of this come from the old
bank site. She stated that this would require a variance to the
required setback when the street is constructed. She stated the
westerly parking aisle should be reduced from 32 feet to 24 feet,
which would still maintain enough width for smooth traffic flow
but would reduce parking by one space. She stated that the
remaining 5 feet would come from the westerly setback area
reducing it from 25 feet to 20 feet. She stated that the 25 foot
setback would remain until the road is constructed and
landscaping will reduce its impact. She stated that the appli-
cant is also proposing one informational sign, two directional
signs and a message board. She stated that the directional and
information signs will be reviewed during the sign permit pro-
cess; however, the ordinance does not address message boards.
She stated that the Sign Ordinance does allow for public service
and informational signs which can be either one wall or
freestanding sign showing weather, time, termperature and similar
public service announcements. She stated that message boards are
not unusual as part of a bank and will not distract traffic. She
stated that the applicant can receive a sign variance as part of
the site plan procedure and staff is recommending approval of
this. She indicated that the plan shows a heavily landscaped
site for both the exterior and interior or garden area of the
building. She noted that the applicant stated they would like to
implement the landscaping in stages. She stated that the
exterior landscaping as planned must be planted in its entirety,
and the interior landscaping could be reduced at the intial
stage. She stated that the landscaping overall is adequate to
screen the drive thru and along the borders of the site.
Ryan asked for clarification on the ring road or downtown plan
and felt that there would be a lot of traffic being dumped out on
Laredo.
e
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 10
Olsen stated that the initial plan is to connect Coulter Drive to
West 78th just to the west of the bank site. She stated it is to
be proposed to be constructed in 1986 and the feasibility for
that study for the intersection will be conducted this winter.
Emmings stated that he did not see the 50 foot right-of-way ease-
ment in the recommendation.
Monk stated that as part of a site plan review the city can make
an applicant provide for things that may happen in the future
such as the road going though; however, as part of the site plan
review process there is nothing that allows us to require that
the applicant dedicate right-of-way as part of that site. He
stated that if the City or liRA moves to approve the plan and
build that street in the future, the city will have to acquire
the right-of-way at that point.
M. Thompson asked what the bank would be doing with the old
building?
Mr. Higgens stated that they would like to rent or sell it and
they will improve it as required.
e Noziska asked when they plan to start construction.
Mr. Higgens stated that they would hopefully start construction
in January and finish in July or August.
M. Thompson asked if there was any consideration taken as far as
future expansion of the bank facility?
Mr. Higgens stated that they have considered this and they will
initially only be using about 7,500 square feet.
Ryan asked Bill Monk if he was comfortable with the proposed
traffic plan.
Monk stated that he does have a concern with the traffic on
Laredo Drive. He stated that the city might have to improve
Laredo to three lanes as part of the HRA downtown improvements
slated for 1986 to improve overall traffic in the area.
Ryan stated that there is only 126 feet of stacking distance on
Laredo. He was concerned because the traffic has become really
busy from the bowling center traffic.
--
M. Thompson moved, seconded by Noziska to the Planning Commission
recommends approval of the State Bank of Chanhassen Site plan
#85-3 stamped "Received October 31, 1985" with the following con-
ditions:
1. That the southerly access be temporary and relocated to con-
nect with the new road to the west.
--
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 11
2. That the westerly parking aisle be reduced from 32 feet to 24
feet in width.
3. That a revised site plan showing the reduced westerly
parking aisle be submitted.
4. That a revised landscaping plan be submitted for approval.
5. A culvert be installed under the West 78th street driveway in
conjunction with ditch regrading to allow continued drainage
to the existing outlet culvert.
6. silt fence be installed around the existing culvert outlet
and along Laredo Drive to control erosion during construc-
tion.
7. A positive outlet be established for drainage from the
garden/court area.
8. All bituminous areas be lined with concrete curb and should
not be extended beyond the property lines.
e All voted in favor and the motion carried.
--
e
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 12
site Plan Review #85-10 for a 2,257 square foot auto garage on
property zoned P-4, Planned Industrial Development District and
located on Block 2, Park One Addition, Daryl Fortier, applicant
Olsen stated that the applicant is proposing a 2,527 square foot
building for the warehousing of the property owner's cars. She
stated that the structure will be located just north of the Press
building on Outlot A. She stated that the structure will be 14
feet in height and will contain stalls for the storage of cars,
work bays, wash bay and bathroom facilities. She stated that
there will also be a car port on the northern side of the struc-
ture which will contain a gas pump with a 5,000 gallon tank for
race test fuel. She stated that the details of the gas tank will
have to be approved by the Fire Marshal. She explained that the
structure will be served by a gravel drive off the existing West
77th Street. She stated that there will be no outside storage
and the site will remain in its natural state. She state that
t.he structure wi 11 be setback 74 feet from t.he south lot line and
50 feet from the west lot line which is more than adequate and it
allows the preservation of the existing tree line. She stated
that a second phase would include mini-storage garages and a
paved parking lot which will need to go through another site plan
review at the time of that proposal.
e
Olsen stated that the site has access to water but has no sani-
tary sewer at this time. She stated that the site will use a
septic system until sewer service is available. She stated that
the applicant has submited percolation tests and two of the three
tests results were somewhat high and the third test was
unacceptable. She stated that staff is recommending detailed
plans showing the exact location and acceptable perc tests for
the septic system be submitted prior to approval of the building
permit.
Mr. Daryl Fortier stated that this warehouse was for the personal
storage of Mr. Beddor and his sons cars. He stated that there
should be floor drains installed in each of the bays connecting
them to a flammable waste trap to collect any oils. He stated
that by having a trap, the oils would not run out into the
street. He stated that right now they just wanted to hook up the
wash bay area and wait until sanitary sewer was put in to connect
the bathroom facilities, which he understands will happen next
spring.
Ryan asked how large the fuel storage tank was and where it will
be located?
e
Fortier stated that it was 5,000 gallons and located on the far
north side of the building under the carport. He stated that
after reviewing this with the building inspector they will pro-
bably be moving it to the opposite side of the building.
.e
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 13
Ryan asked what type of fuel it was?
Fortier stated that it would be gasoline. He stated that Mr.
Beddor and his sons like to run their cars at Brainerd
International Raceway and they found that when they are racing
sometimes the pumps up there are shut down for a higher octane
fuel. He stated that the pumps are open when there is a public
event only and they would take up their own fuel up when it was a
private event. He stated that he has visited a number of garages
with the club and he reviewed some of the items that they had.
He stated that one of the items is a solvent parts washer which
keeps all solvents and contaminates into a closed system. He
stated that the solvents are kept in a separate container and
then taken back to a dealer for recycling. He stated that there
will be a hoist in the garage which will be used mainly for
changing tires. He stated that there would a number of tires
stored in the building. He also stated that there would be a
washer and separate metal container for all towels used for clean
up.
Noziska asked what the basic construction of the building was?
e
Fortier stated that it would be Type 5 construction with a wood
frame.
Noziska stated that it was surprising to him that it is not made
of fire resistent materials.
Fortier stated that
keep this facility.
another location or
frame and they also
Mr. Beddor was not sure how long he would
He stated that they might want to move it to
convert it and it would be easier with a wood
looked at the cost of construction.
Noziska was concerned about the effluent from the wash bays and
felt that they needed to be caught before it is dumped in the
environment. He felt that this was almost like a service station
and the requirements that they have should be utilitized on this
site.
Siegel asked for a recommendation from the City Engineer on where
to go with the drainage situation.
Bill Monk stated he would probably recommend modifying condition
number 4. to state that the bathroom and washbay floor drains be
trapped in a system meeting uniform building code requirements
and that the system also include a set-up for disposing of oils
and other automotive fluids separately. He stated that a beyond
the trap some type of a catch up system should be installed until
e the sewer is in place.
e
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 14
Ryan felt that a trap would catch most of the hazardous
materials, solids and flammables but would not necessarily catch
toxics and contaminates that could get into the ground water. He
asked if the applicant would build the building and put floor
drains in but cap them and just operate as a dry building and
wash the cars someplace else until sewer was in?
Fortier stated that if that was his only choice, but stated that
the wash bay would be a very light use. He asked about the
requirements that Brown's car wash had?
Monk stated that it has silt traps but he did not know if they
recycled the water or not.
Ryan asked the City Engineer if he would contact the Pollution
Control Agency to find out the specific regulations fpr a car wash.
Monk asked if the Commission wanted to treat this as a service
station for regulations?
Ryan stated that was correct.
e
Siegel stated that by doing that it would be treating this
request more of a commercial application rather than a private
request. He felt that this would be more of an extended use;
like on a duplex with four or five people washing there cars once
a week.
Monk stated that there will be other activities going on which
probably would be consistent with what might happen in a commer-
cial garage. He felt that it would not be totally unreasonable
to consider it as a commercial use.
Siegel felt that may be they were putting more constraints on the
request than actually exists.
Dacy stated that they will research the Environmental Protection
Codes and contact the Pollution Control Agency and if they do not
have any regulations, then the problem is solved. She stated
that the Commission's intent is good, to make sure that the sen-
sitive area is protected.
Fortier felt that with washing cars anywhere you are going to
have a little oil and salt wash in the street. He felt that the
amount could not be any more damaging than a car going through a
mud puddle and washing off on the side of the road. He stated
that the sides of the roads must be loaded with toxics.
e
Ryan stated that this request looks like it ought to be a per-
sonal use but it is so close to commercial because you are
talking about storing 5,000 gallons of fuel and you may be buying
Planning Commission Minutes
November 20, 1985
Page 15
e
other things by the drum full. He stated that if one of those
drums leak, it goes down the floor drain. He stated that it does
not happen in your garage because it drains down into the storm
sewer.
Fortier stated that they would just as soon delete the drains to
proceed with construction until the issue is resolved so that
they can get the footings in the ground. He stated that the
Commission could put the condition that there will be no floor
drains until approved by staff. He stated they would hope to get
an answer wi thin the next month and a half before the construc-
tion reaches that point.
Emmings felt that this request was more of a service station. He
stated that even if the drains were capped, there would still be
stuff spilled on the floor and he thinks there should be a plan
for that. He suggested the item be tabled until we know what
that plan will be.
e
Noziska stated that he had reservations about allowing wood
type construction of the building. He felt that it was not
appropriate and it was just like putting up a tin shed or wood
shed. He stated that there will be a lot of flammables in the
building. He stated that he did not want to set a precedent in
the city with that type of construction. He stated that it also
may be a temporary building and some times temporary buildings
become permenant.
Emmings moved to table the request until the applicant comes up
with a plan to handle all of the waste and toxic materials on the
premises to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and any other
regulatory body such as the Pollution Control Agency.
M. Thompson asked if they put in a holding tank system would that
resolve most of the issues?
Ryan stated that it would resolve all of the issues except it is
going to cost them some money and they may not want to bother
with the concept of a wash bay at all.
e
M. Thompson stated that even if the applicant went to a dry
building, there will still be other things stored in there such
as oil and anti-freeze and it is going to get on the floor and
have to go somewhere and if there is no drains it will probably
go out the door.
Ryan felt that the applicant would be reluctant to say no to his
friends/club if they want to work on or wash their cars. He felt
that because of the hoist and the wash bay, it expands the use to
a more commercial type than personal.
Noziska seconded the motion. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
e
e
e
Planning Commission MInutes
November 20, 1985
Page 16
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Siegel moved, seconded by Emmings, to approve the November 6,
1985 minutes as written. Emmings, Siegel, and Ryan voted in
favor. Noziska and M. Thompson abstained. Motion carried.
Noziska moved, seconded by Emmings, to adjourn the meeting at
10:30 p.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Barbara Dacy
City Planner
Prepared by Vicki Churchill
November 26, 1985