Loading...
1979 10 10 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - October 10, 1979 - Roman Roos called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M., with the following members present: Clark Horn, Pat Swenson, Tom Droegemueller Members absent were: Walter Thompson, Jack Bell. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Clark Horn moved to accept the minutes of the August 29, 1979, Planning Commission Meeting. Motion seconded by Pat Swenson and approved. Clark Horn moved to accept the minutes of the September 19, 1979, Planning Commission Meeting. Motion seconded by Tom Droegemueller and approved. Pat Swenson moved to note the September 4, 1979, City Council minutes. Motion seconded by Clark Horn and approved. Tom Droegemueller moved to note the September 11, 1979, City Council ~inutes. Motion seconded by Clark Horn and approved. Pat Swenson moved to note the September 17, 1979, City Council minutes. Motion seconded by Clark Horn and approved. Clark Horn moved to accept the minutes of the September 12, 1979, Planning _ Commission Meeting. Motion seconded by Pat Swenson and approved. SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, MC MULLEN SUBDIVISION REQUEST The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 25 acre parcel into five residential building sites and one outlot. It is presently zoned R-la. Doug Hanson gave a presentation stating the location is at the northeast terminous of W. 86th Street. Roman Roos stated that the questions of the streets, frontage on the streets, cul-de-sac, are common issues brought forth by the ordinance,and these should be addressed before it comes back to the Planning Commission. Bob Waibel presented the Planning Report dated October 8, 1979. He stated his office feels that there is insufficient grounds for considering any variances to the issues presented, however, before the preliminary plat stage, he would recommend that the Planning Commission direct staff to investigate as to any possible measures that can be taken by the applicant to bring the proposal in compliance with the spirit and intent of the Subdivision Ordinance. The cul-de-sac and public streets were discussed. Mr. Hanson stated there are no immediate plans for the outlot. - Roman Roos asked what the topography of the land on Outlot C is. Mr. Hanson said it is going up hill. Mr. Roos said a point required the land paper point of view. the Marsh land area. to consider is that in all proposals in the past they have to run all the way across the development, strictly from a We have done this with every proposal that has comein with The length of the cul-de-sac, in this case if the street REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - October 10, 1979 Page 2 - going along 86th is extended and dedicated, that cul-de-sac length would not be totally out of proportion. in terms of what the ordinance stipulates. SITE PLAN REVIEVJ - OFFICE WAREHOUSE, LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 2, BURDICK PARK ADDITION The applicant is proposing to construct two 15,000 square foot industrial facilities containing office and warehouse uses on lots 1 and 2, block 2, Burdick Park. The property is located in the southeast quadrant of Picha Drive and Mandan Drive. The property is zoned I-I, industrial district. Bob Waibel gave the staff report on this. He stated at the staff discussions, it was decided due to the HRA tax increment district and redevelopment plan and the IRB proposal, that this be presented for informational purposes at this time, and Planning Commission defer comment, or decisions until receipt of BRA comments regarding the proposal in light of the overall redevelopment district, and the city council comments regarding the industrial revenue bond financing request for the proposal at hand. Roman Roos recapped various items which the Planning Commission will be discussing, curbing, landscaping, parking, screenage of rooftop units and/or ground units, curb cuts, concrete curbs and gutters, and the variance on the setback. - SITE PLAN REVIEVJ, PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING, LOT 1, BLOCK 1, BURDICK PARK ADDITION The applicant is proposing to construct an approximate 8,300 sq. ft. office building in Lot 1, Block 1 of the Burdick Park Addition. The property is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Mandan Drive and W. 78th st. The property is zoned C-2, Commercial District. Bob Waibel gave the staff report on this. He stated at the staff discussions it was decided that the Planning Commission receive this item for informational purposes only at this time and defer comment until the HRA has made their review and has made comments with reference to their redevelopment concept plan. He recommended that the Planning Commission advise the applicant to present this proposal at the next regular HRA meeting. PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW, CANNONBALL RESTAURANT MTH 5 AND CSAH 17 e Mr. James Burdick stated in regard to the green area, there is quite a bit of green area to the West. There is also quite a bit to the south. He also stated it was discovered that Highway 16 bituminous is actually on his property on the corner. He said they are going to try to work a trade off with the County. He stated there is adequate parking. The plans show that it is rather a rustic building, with a western motif to it. Bob Waibel said the main issue with the HRA, he feels, would be the land usage for this particular property. He stated this site plan has been looked at, and there probably will be more review of the site plan itself. To complete a site plan review he needs the capacities of the facility, and architectural rendering. REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - October 10, 1979 Page 3 e PROPOSED PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIE\~, LAKE SUSAN HILLS AND CHANHASSEN LAKES NORTH The applicants are requesting preliminary development plan review for an approx- imate 760 acres of land for the development of approximately 2,038 residential units. Mr. Bob Waibel gave the staff report. He stated in a development of this size and magnitude, there are some questions that should be looked at by the Planning Commission, and a review by the City Council. They essentially come back to the issues pointed out in his report which were long term and community wide in nature. There was concern about the immediate adequacy of Lake Ann Park, the facilities there, if there was going to be any capital expansion of the area, or land expansion of the area, or facilities expansion. There was also mentioned a potential competition with other areas under development within the city that could result in developments left unfinished for extended periods of time with full public improvements. This would put an undue strain as far as operating and maintenance costs of these services with a less than desirous absorption level. He stated that the Planning Commission and City Council should assure themselves that this is managed possibly through phasing, overall utility plan, etc. He also stated with regard to the ,Comprehensive Plan current+y being updated, there needs to be an investigation by staff as far as the allowed sewer flow capacity. e He stated with the magnitude of this proposal, he believes that the city should make certain that the mentioned concerns are not aborragated through an outright or premature approval of any or all elements of the plans in question. He recommended that the Planning Commission enter into the record their comments regarding the issues mentioned, i.e. phasing, utility capacity, land use and local market competition. He recommended that the subject proposal along with the Planning Commission comments be referred to the City Council along with a request for direction and/or conditions upon which any further review of Chanhassen Lakes North and Lake Susan Hills may proceed. Mr. Ed Dunn said he wanted to establish the functional validity of their plans, and then answer some of the market questions. He showed a blow up of Lake Ann Park that Bob had concern about, stating they show green space, and in general it is their intention to respect the shore line of Lake Susan also. He said they sold some land to a farmer, and they don't have that much commercial any more, they backed off of that. In connection with park land, they have scheduled a tour with the park committee to see if they agreed that a certain portion of land constituted a fantastic park system for the city. They are in touch with the park committee, and will continue to be. He stated, in regard to industrial parks, they will be taking up other matters relevant to the new proposal in both areas. They do show some proposed park areas. e Mr. Dunn stated there are 770 acres, the total number of dwelling units is just about 2200, a gross overall density of about 3 units per acre. It will involve single family residential, medium density residential, and higher density (such as apartment buildings). They show some estate type lots, they are generally situated because of the terrain and because of the logical place to stop with the sewer extension. REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - October 10, 1979 Page 4 - ffihe sewer capacity availability question was discussed. The sanitary sewer system in the general area of Lake Susan and Lake Ann was discussed. It was stated in order to develop the Dunn & Curry property, the extensions that would have to be made were shown on a drawing. They showed the city's capacities, and calculated capacities using the densities that were shown on the land use plan, and they are virtually identical. In some cases, they are putting less into the proposed trunk than it was set up for. At this time in regard to the estate lots, they are thinking of these lots as unserviced by a sanitary sewer. As far as water main trunks in conformance with the general plans of the city, the extensions could be made through the property very easily. Going back to the sanitary sewer~, on the north end in the Lake Ann property they propose a lift station. What they were aiming for on drainage, is the same restriction that the city imposes and the Water 3hed District imposes, not to allow any rate of runoff that is greater than the existing natural rate of runoff off the existing land in its present state. The only way you can do that is by holding ponds, and he stated they have more than sufficient capacity in all of the major areas to meet that requirement. e Mr. Dunn stated that these are planned developments that they are seeking, they will be phased. As far as why the densities were selected for the area they were put, part of it involves topography. In general you will find the single family has less slopes to cope with. Another consideration is where the heavy traffic flows, generally speaking they put higher densities near arterials to minimize the amount of local street travel. These plans have not yet been presented to Park & Rec, but they are aware of it. Clark Horn stated he would like to see, the next time this comes around, is lot sizes indicated. Mr. Dunn said in the plan development and review they don't do that, they will be. This will go to council, and they will get the input, if the densities are acceptable, the generalized land uses are acceptable, you feel it is a creditable plan and it can be made to function, mechanically, then they will go on from there and they will come back with that approval, and they will then start coming in with phases. It is contemplated they would then enter into a plan development contract with the city. Bob Waibel stated it has been a request of staff over the last few months, that all developers indicate the individual lot size, plus the overall density layout of the entire development, at the plan development stage, for ~heplanning commission information, and to be able to be presented at the public hearing. At that point in time we go to a public hearing for what is called a preliminary development plan review. The public hearing is held by the planning commission and then it is brought to the City Council for their review. They would then say approved, disapproved, or modify the plan, or approved with conditions. and then the more extensive engineering work would be done, the grading, drainage and utility plan. At that time the legal department would be drafting the development contract. e Mr. Dunn stated in working with an amount of ground this size, that they do some phasing. For their own purposes, they have divided this into South Lake Susan Hills, West Lake Susan, and the third phase is 220 acres. These plans have been planning and engineering checked by their prospective buyers. REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - October 10, 1979 Page 5 e Mr. Dunn said that Park & Rec. have a general concept on our idea, but he hasn't shown them. He said they are aware that they own the 770 acres, they know that we own the Highpath Farm, and they have asked me about the Lake Ann shoreline. Roman Roos said he is confortable with the concept. He said that he is not saying he is comfortable with the lot sizes, with the cul-de-sac, or accesses in and out, sewer, etc. That is all down stream. Mr. Dunn stated what they are looking for at this point is concept plan approval. Bob Waibel said he felt the bigger issues should be discussed, some direction to the city council should be given as to how far we should proceed with this, should we go into approval of the whole thing in anticipation of a plat? Roman Roos said if this is approved in concept that does not mean that the issues can't be brought to a head, if nothing else, everything is stopped until they are resolved. There are an awful lot of issues that have to be addressed, but right now we are looking at a concept. e Pat Swenson said if we are only working on a general concept theory, we can say, as far as we are concerned, with what we have reviewed so far, it is okay as far as we think the land use program is going to go, the eventual charting. It is not in conflict with what we are working on. I would think we would go to Park & Rec. and have them give recommendations, that would then go along with our opinion. If Council reads what we mve to say, and what Park & Rec has to say, and no';; just what staff has to say, we ought to be able to come back and Council could say it is okay in this direction and that direction, now what do we recommend that these people do next. Then Dunn & Curry know where to go. Mark Koegler said in his opinion the biggest reason for the discussion about kicking this thing up to the Council quicker was the underlying "policy issue- of the extension of additional sewer vs. the amount of sewered area that we presently have that is undeveloped, but it is developable, the concerns about the assessments. All of the things seen tonight are not in conflict from a land use perspective with our comprehensive plan, however staff has not discussed in detail yet what phasing will be tied to the utilities. The areas will be serviced, but when. He said maybe you could just consider recommending that the Council be informed given the magnitude of the project. You can still authorize the developer to continue tonight, but recommend that the Council be informed that these are the issues that are coming down the line. Pat Swenson said the Planning and Park & Rec. Commissions can make a recommendation as to what they want to see, and give the Council something to consider. e Pat Swenson moved that the Planning Commission recommend to Dunn & Curry that they secure the opinions of the Park & Rec. Commission, and that those opinions along with the Planning Commission general approval of the concept or sketch plans that we have seen then be presented to Council with staff making notations of the points which have been brought up in the presentation tonight. No Second - Motion denied. e e e REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - October 10, 1979 Page 6 Clark Horn asked if this issue couldn't be tabled pending the results of the staff presentation to the City Council and gets their general guideline as to how to proceed because of the magnitude of the project, the question of the sewer extensions and how far they want to go with sewer extentions etc. at this point. He felt that is more of a Council issue than other things such as Lake Ann Park. Those kinds of issues can be handled under a normal cycle. The only valid portion of that that he could see would be the overall sewer concept. Once we get an inclination from City Council as to what their feelings are, we should proceed in a normal manner. Mr. Dunn said he perceived that the concept is generally acceptable. They would like a statement to the effect that you find it generally acceptable. If you were to table it would simply go to Council, and come back to be untabled. Nothing is resolved. He understands the concerns about the Park Committee, and he said there will be a lneeting with them before they go to the Council, hopefully with their recommendation, but we will have their input covering these lands. As far as any problems involving sewering this area, they have guaranteed the payment of one million dollars sewer trunk after which the City of Chanhassen planned to put in beginning in the year 1971, it is within the City's plan, it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. At no time have they been told that there is any suggestion that they have any problem with the sewer board. Accordingly we would say there is not a problem, the trunk is in place, the trunk is workable. Then the argument, implications, suggestion or statement or concern expressed that they should be in some remote way accountable for a problem area ihto which utilities were placed several years ago having nothing to do with them, and even the implication that if they don't approve this, some magical thing will happen up there, and that will develop and solve that problem, they say there is no indi- cation that there is that trend. This land has waited for 10 years for development and he can't tell you when the north sewer service area was put in. He doesn't think that the New Horizon homes activity in any way represents a detrimental effect on that area, growth promotes growth. Bob Waibel stated he looks upon this as being similar to the Near Mountain situation where there was a major issue of a study. It seemed to be in order as far as a collector street, a major community wide type of situation. The situation there was to bring that to the City Council through the Planning Commission level, staff level, and being it was a community wide issue, bring it to the City Council and then go back to the plan review. Tom Droegemueller moved that the concept plan be approved as presented this evening subject to the conditions as follows: (1) Park & Rec. Committee's review of the overall concept plan related to the park system; (2) concerns of the staff that they be referred to the Council; (3) the sewer expansion related to the market competition phasing; (4) the magnitude of the project; and with the next step of the review process, that these concerns as well as Council's will be re-reviewed. Motion seconded by Clark Horn and unanimously carried. The reason the last paragraph was stated was to let Council know that we are concenned about these items, however, it will not stop the overall project getting its initial concept plan approval. REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - October 10, 1979 Page 7 e DISCUSSION, CBD REZONING Bob Waibel stated what he wanted was to draw some comments regarding the areas around the major roads through the downtown area, Powers Boulevard, 78th Street, Highway 5, THIOl, and properties with unique or highly visible qualities. He stated he was also trying to work in the restaurant study at this time. Roman Roos stated all of them had to be concerned with the balance of Section 5, Frontier Development Park, with area No.6, that area which is on the north side of 78th Street going towards the drive-in restaurant, with the alignment of the north section of the ring road itself. Roman Roos stated No.6 is "General Commercial", and the classifications are lumber, materials, variety stores, food stores, furniture, misc. retail, banking offices, credit agencies, insurance offices, real estate. He stated No. 10 "General Business" is wholesale trade, durable goocls, garden supplies, automotive dealers, boat dealers, motorcycle dealers, snowmobile dealers, automobile repair facilities. If we want warehousing in, then we are going to have it covered under permitted uses in Section 10,or modify Section 10 to accommodate exactly what we do want. e Pat Swenson said in reviewing these she was very much impressed that everything had been covered so well. If those were approved, will that cause anything that is now existing to be non-conforming? Roman Roos said looking at those 10 groupings, if No. 8 were pulled out, the housing area, and No. 7 which is the green space area, and No. 3 the open space area, and leave the rest of it in CBD, he felt they have accomplished everything they are trying to do in terms of the CBD. Then we can start working on permitted uses in those sections and modifying each section as we feel is necessary. Bob Waibel said he is not comfortable with No.9, he felt that Holiday and Happy Chef would be almost the capacity of what the cul-de-sac could handle. It is also a high visibility area too. Another area of concern is No.8. Hanson & Klingelhutz would then be non-conforming, but it would be grandfathered in. This is something that should be looked at, whether it should be planned around, or just leave it. It is actually far enough away from 78th. These warehouses of Burdick's, Roman Roos said, aren~ hugh industrial warehouses, they are small contracting and/or business. He said he had no objections to a single story building of that nature. As long as it is not heavy industrial, and as long as we can control the emissions and wastes, etc. so that it doesn't create problems, and as long as they are consistent. Roman Roos stated he also did not have any objections to Burdick's office building. It is next to the ring road, it is across from the bank, it is an ideal place for a small professional office. e Mr. Roos asked Bob Waibel to get the map of the CBD for the next meeting, and also the council definition of what the CBD area is. , , REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - October 10, 1979 Page 8 e Mr. Jim Sulerud made a presentation to the Planning Commission regarding property near Bluff Creek Highland Section Addition, stating this piece of property is being sold with"the buyer anticipating to build a home there. He stated he indicated to one of the buyers he felt a building permit wouldn't be granted. He said his concern is that the realtor is selling it now conditioned on the receipt of a variance to build, their only claim for such a variance is a hardship. He felt this didn't really exist for a purchaser. He said in 1972 he felt the Planning Commission at that time was not anticipating any more access onto 101 in that area, nor were they considering any other single residential lot just because of the way they laid it out. On the plan it indicates a portion of that property being R-l. It seems to have mislead at least one of the buyers, and he recommended on the comprehensive plan, to indicate that as open space or whatever. He said he was encouraging the Commission not to respond to this particular situation as a hardship. He said if you call that a hardship, you have a precedent problem. He also had some concerns about access. He said his recommendations are that you not respond to a situation that will probably be proposed as a hardship. Clark Horn stated that the Planning Commission position has been regarding hard- ship cases, that we have not recognized hardship on economic type cases, such as exchange of property for profit type of basis. That is not one of the requirements. e Mr. Sulerud stated he is concerned about any access onto 101. The highway department indicated to him that they are open and willing for the city to play a greater role on an access to 101, or any highway access. They welcome that participation, because they feel a lack of control in areas where they don't have designated controlled access. They make the people respond to your requirements. Clark Horn moved that the Planning Commission recommend to Council that they appoint Thomas Hamilton to serve on the Planning Commission. Motion seconded by Pat Swenson and unanimously carried. Clark Horn moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the Conditional Use Permit for the Minnewashta Creek Addition be accepted as presented by Craig Mertz, Assistant City Attorney. Motion seconded by Tom Droegemueller and unanimously approved. Bob Waibel reminded the Planning Commission about the Moratorium Public Hearing, the City Council ordered a Public Hearing to be held October 15, 1979, and it is. a joint Planning Commission and City Council meeting. The public hearing has to involve the Planning Commission. A quorum will be needed in order to adopt any building moratorium. e Don Ashworth City Manager