1985 01 23
MINUTES
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
e JANUARY 23, 1985
Chairman Ryan called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m.
Members Present
James Thompson, Thomas Merz, Ladd Conrad, Bill Ryan, and Mike
Thompson.
Members Absent
Susan Albee and Howard Noziska
PUBLIC HEARING
Conditional Use Permit Request #85-1 for a wholesale nursery on
property zoned R-la, Agricultural Residence District and located
at 9150 Great Plains Blvd., Mark VanHoff, applicant.
Public Present
Mark VanHoff
10550 Nicollet Ave. S., Mpls.
e
Dacy explained that the applicant is intending to operate a
wholesale nursery at 9150 Great Plains Boulevard. She stated
that the applicant intends on using the existing driveway and
structures as indicated on the site plan. She noted that the
proposed location of the facilities will be screened by vegeta-
tion on the south and screened to the north by the slope of the
land. She also stated that the applicant intends to locate vege-
tation along Great Plains Boulevard and along the southern por-
tion of the parcel. She stated that the proposed use would not
have an adverse impact on surrounding properties and the existing
access from Great Plains Boulevard appears to be adequate for
vehicles that will be entering and leaving the site. She also
indicated that the applicant's activity will be limited to
licensed nurserymen and not the general public.
Mark VanHoff noted that when the Zoning Ordinance Amendment for
wholesale nurseries as conditional uses, the Planning Commission
was concerned about retail sales from the premises. He stated
that the only clientele would be licensed nurserymen such as
retailers and local landscapers. He also noted that the
Commission was concerned about the traffic flow into the nursery.
He stated that the operation would have a possible total of 75 to
100 accounts and would generate approximately 7 to 10 customers
daily. He also wanted the Commission to know that they only har-
vest in the spring and fall and the storage would be for these
crops (burlapped) until sold. He also noted that the greenhouse
would be used for a propagation facility to take clippings, root
them and then plant outside.
e
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 1985
page 2
e
M. Thompson moved, seconded by J. Thompson to close the public
hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
After the explanation from the applicant, the Commissioners did
not feel that this activity would be detrimental to the
surrounding properties.
J. Thompson moved, seconded by M. Thompson, that the Planning
Commission recommends the City Council approve Conditional Use
Permit Request #85-1 to locate a wholesale nursery at 9150 Great
Plains Boulevard as depicted on the site plan labeled as
Attachment #3. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING
Final plan Amendment Request #79-2 for Near Mountain planned Unit
Development on property zoned p-1, planned Residential
Development and located along Chanhassen Road, Near Mountain
Partnership, applicant.
Public Present
Peter Pflaum
Rick Sathre
e Mike Pf laum
Olsen stated that the applicant is proposing to increase the Type
B area by 19 lots in exchange for 13 Type A lots and 6 condomium
units. She also noted that, in addition, the street alignment
and shape of the ponding areas have changed slightly but will not
impact the design and would allow for a better lot layout. She
explained that development is taking place in the Type C area
where the front and side yard setbacks are 25' and 5'/10'. The
developers intend to continue these setbacks into the Type B
area. She stated that staff believes the reduced setbacks can be
continued into the Type B area without adversely impacting the
surrounding property. She also noted that staff is recommending
that a berm be continued along the Type B area and also would
like the developers to further discuss with staff their phasing
plan for Near Mountain.
Lundgren Brothers Construction
Peter pflaum explained that as they develop the project, they are
getting more of an idea of how they want the different type of
homes to be phased together smoothly. He stated that they have
decided to change the line between the Type B and Type A phases
because of a natural tree line or wooded area and by doing that
are dropping 13 larger lots (Type A) and 6 condominium units and
adding 19 Type Blots.
e
Conrad moved, seconded by Merz to close the public hearing. All
voted in favor and the motion carried.
e
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 1985
Page 3
Merz moved, seconded by J. Thompson, that the Planning Commission
recommend the City Council approve the Final Development plan
Amendment as depicted on the sathre-Bergquist, Inc. proposed
Amended plan dated January 14, 1985 with the following con-
ditions:
1. That the major north-south and east-west roadways have a 50
foot wide right-of-way and a 32 foot wide street section.
2. That the existing berm located on the property south of the
Type C area be continued along the south boundary of the Type
B.
3. The applicant work with staff on the phasing plan as the
final pats are processed.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
Sign Variance Request #85-1 for two temporary advertising signs
located at the prairie House Family Restaurant, 501 West 79th
Street, Ted Korzenowski, applicant.
e Public Present
Ted Korzenowski
applicant
Dacy explained that the applicant is seeking two variances; a
free standing sign to be located on his property in front or near
the existing city sign and an advertising sign to be located
along Highway 5 on the site where the Chanhassen Center is
located. She stated that the applicant intends that signs be
erected for one year. She indicated that the applicant in his
letter to the Planning Commission stated that additional signage
is necessary to attract and direct traffic off the highway. She
noted that the applicant now has a free standing sign as per-
mitted by the ordinance. She explained that the intent of the
sign regulations is to insure a proper balance between the number
of signs and the number of buildings located on a particular
property. She also added that off-site advertising signs are
specifically prohibited to prevent the proliferation of signs
advertising businesses in other locations of the city. She also
stated that temporary signage for advertising purposes could
result in other requests by other businesses in the community.
She stated that staff recommends the variance be denied and that
the applicant should consider working with the Chamber of
Commerce in the redesign of the existing City sign.
e
Ted Korzenowski asked if any of the Commissioners were at the
Downtown Forum. He stated that most of the recommendations were
that the sign ordinance should be revised for Chanhassen which
e
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 1985
Page 4
brought a round of applauds. He stated that this should tell the
Commission that the sign ordinance should be looked at. He also
stated that the concensus was that the business area is suffering
because of the sign ordinance. He stated that the ordinance is
causing him a hardship because he is not getting the traffic into
his restaurant. He stated that the traffic coming from the east
cannot see his sign until they go by it because of the city sign.
He stated that the city sign is in violation of the ordinance
because it is too big and also the sign is on his property. He
stated that the restaurant business is tough and he needs a cer-
tain volume to exist and has to rely on a certain amount of traf-
fic. He added that he only wants the sign temporarily until he
gets his business built up.
Conrad stated that he doesn't know if a sign would be the answer
or if it is because of access.
J. Thompson felt that access was the biggest problem for busi-
nesses. He stated that if they allowed one person to have a tem-
porary sign, then 15 more signs will be coming and pretty soon it
will look like the Las Vegas strip and we don't want that.
e
Ted Korzenowski asked why the ordinance allows for a variance if
the city won't issue one? He stated that obviously someone
thought under some circumstances, a variance would be granted and
he felt that the Commissioners should look at the circumstances
instead of just saying no. He stated that he likes to analyze
the situation before a decision is made.
M. Thompson stated that staff has analyzed the situation.
The Commissioners felt that no real hardship exists in this case
and stated that if they approved this variance, all of the other
businesses in Chanhasssen would be in for a sign variance also.
At this point Mr. Korzenowski left the meeting.
M. Thompson moved, seconded by J. Thompson to deny Sign Permit
Variance Request #85-1 because the sign ordinance is not imposing
a hardship on the applicant. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Conrad moved, seconded by J. Thompson to approve the January 9,
1985 minutes as written. All voted in favor and the motion
carried.
e
Conrad moved, seconded by M. Thompson to adjourn the meeting at
9:00 p.m. All voted in favor and the motion carried.