Loading...
1982 05 27 e e e APPROVED ON {,- IO-~?- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 27, 1982, AT 7:30 P.M. CHANHASSEN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AMENDED ON b-(o-8';;J. Members Present: Chairman Art Partridge, Ladd Conrad, Carol Watson, Bill Swearengin, Jim Thompson and M. Thompson. Members Absent: Howard Noziska Staff Present: Bob Waibel, Becky Foreman The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. !~~!~!~ ~i~~! ~~~~!~E~~nt ~~~ Amend~~~! ~~i ~i!~ f!~~ !~~i~~ ~~S~~~!~ 1~ l~ ~~~~ 1 ani Q~!!~! ~ f~~~ Qne~ !he fE~~~ !~~~~ f~~!i.~ .!!~~~i~.s...:.. Present: Frank Beddor Daryl Fortier Bob Waibel, City Planner, explained to the Planning Commission that the required submittals for this item have not been given to the staff as yet, or have been received too late for the staff to make a review. Waibel recommended that the Planning Commission listen to the developers comments and continue this item to the June 10, 1982 meeting in order for the staff to make a review and recommendations for the Planning Commission. Frank Beddor, the applicant, explained the different types of printing done by his business. He explained that the Press uses rolled paper and needs an oven to dry the printing; whereas, sheet fed type of printing is paper sheets fed into a printer one at a time and does not need an oven to dry. Beddor explained that the new expansion on the Press is to start a sheet fed division. Beddor stated that he wants to expand the Press in 3 phases. Phase one will be to the east side of the Press, and will be used for the sheet fed division. Phase 2 will be to the back of the existing press building and will be used for more presses and additional sheet fed equipment, and phase 3 will be for more presses in the future. Beddor further explained that there will be a mezzan~ne on the second floor to be built later to be used for a gym with a locker room for the employees. Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1982 Page 2 e Beddor further explained that when the second floor is built, there will be offices to the front of the second floor. He explained that the architects have designed the windows to angle in front to soften the second story high line. Beddor pointed out that the taxes from the new expansion will help to offset the cost of public improvements. J. Thompson asked what the smoke from the Press smoke stack is from. Beddor answered that the paper that comes out of the presses need to be dried by an oven. The smoke is humidity from the ovens. Beddor further explained that he has a permit from the state to have those types of ovens. Fortier discussed the problems with the proposed access in the northwest corner of the site. He noted that staff had concerns on the proximity of these accesses to the 900 curve in West 77th Street He stated that in order to delete the westerly proposed access, a variance would need to be given by the City Council to the requirements of Ordinance 47 that prohibits the driving and manuvering of trucks through automobile parking areas. e Partridge stated that the Planning Commission's concensus is agreeable with the plan as proposed. A motion was made by Watson and seconded by J. Thompson to con- tinue this item unitl June 10, 1982. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Environmental Protection Committee The Planning Commission requested that the Environmental Protection Committee add to their work schedule to look into an off-road vehicle ordinance. Ii~~! Q~~~!~~~~~! ~l~~ ~~~~~~~~!~ 1~tu~ Lake ~~~~~ ~~~~~~ Present: Rick Murray, B-T Land Company Rick Sathre, Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. Sharry Neumann, 5420 Clayton Dr., Maple Plain (Burnett Realty) Thomas & Anita Murphy, 6450 Pleasant View Circle James Nicholls, 6451 Pleasant View Circle Henry Sosin, 7400 Chanhassen Road James Parson, 6800 Brule Circle Aaron Babcock, 125 Choctaw Circle e e Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1982 Page 3 Waibel presented the staff report to the Planning Commission. He stated that this is a request for a final development plan amendment for 140 units of single-family attached housing. The property is located west of Highway 101 approixmately 500 feet south of the intersection fo Pleasant View Road and Highway 101. Waibel explained that the applicant has 45.96 acres that is currently vacant land consisting of wetland and agricultural lands to be used for the 140 unit development. He further explained that the applicant is planning on preserving the wetlands from any development. Waibel stated that the closest unit will be approximately 150 feet away from the wetland area. Waibel pointed out that this distance is consistent with the preliminary draft of the wetland ordinance. Waibel stated that a matter of concern is the road access. He pointed out that the Department of Transportation recommended only one access onto Highway 101 to be developed north of the presently developed Lotus Lake Estates Phase 1, and that the access be located in the vicinity of the one presently proposed. e Waibel stated that the Planning Commission at its last review of this request suggested a secondary access through the northerly 5 acres of the Pleasant View Park property. Waibel indicated that the Park and Recreation Commission has reviewed this application and recommend that the developer pro- vide an eight foot wide year round trail from Lotus Lake Estates to Lotus Lake Park. Waibel also stated that the Park and recreation Commission also indicated that the road align- ment in the northwest corner of the property will not pose any problems for the development of Lotus Lake Park and that the park dedication fee be applied in lieu of land dedication. Waibel explained that the applicant at the last review of this request brought up the subject of storage, Waibel stated that the applicant has since indicated that he does not intend to allow outside storage areas in this development. Waibel stated that the adjoining property to the proposed deve- lopment appear to have a potential for further development. Waibel stated that should this development occur staff feels that the Klingelhutz, Kartak and Flom properties should access onto Chippewa Curve and Arapahoe Circle rather than accessing directly onto Highway 101. e Waibel indicated that staff would like to encourage the use of centralized mailboxes. Waibel pointed out that staff believes that this method of mail delivery enhances the overall appearance of neighborhoods, as well as minimize vehicular traffic conflicts. Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1982 ~ Page 4 Waibel explained the staff recommendations to the Planning Commission. He indicated that staff feels that this plan is consistant with the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan and the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance. Waibel stated that the recommen- dations from the staff included the applicant to dedicate a potential future access for the Murphy, Kartak,and Flom pro- perties in accordance with the specifications of the City Engineer, that the applicant provide preliminary location of an 8 foot year round trail over a 15 foot wide trail easement as recommended by the Park and Recreation Commission, that the applicant give a location for the centralized mailboxes, and that the final plan be accompanied by a prototype landscaping proposal for the 4-plex and 8-plex units. Waibel stated that other recommendations should be considered such as, park dedication requirements, that the architecture be the same as proposed in the exhibit photographs submitted by the applicant, that the covenants and development contract to the proposed development prohibit outside storage, that the proposed covenants and restrictions be approved by the City Attorney, and that the applicant receive all applicable federal, state, and local agency approvals and permits prior to the construction commencement and issuance of a building permit. e Rick Murray, representative from B-T Land Company, stated that at the last review of this request the Planning Commission requested that they look into locating two accesses onto Highway 101. Murray stated that he has met with the Dept. of Transportation and they pointed out that a second access onto Highway 101 would not be a requirement from their department since the estimated traffic counts this project would generate did not warrant two accesses. He further explained that MnDot is estimating that the 140 townhouse units will create less traffic than would the 98 single family units planned for prior to this request. Murray explained that 1n discussing the matter of density with other developers who have worked with the 8-plex units, they indicated that eight-plex units it is typical to develop them at a density of 10 to 16 units per acre. Murray listed other areas who have used this type of development such as Edina who has 14 units per acre, Shakopee Road and Normandale has 10 units per acre, and Edenvale has 12 units per acre. Murray stated that B-T Land is requesting to have 3 units per acre. He indicated that their company wants to keep the development with an openness and not a look of being packed in. e e Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1982 Page 5 Murray stated that detached storage garages as mentioned at the prior review of this request, has been discussed and decided not to be allowed. Murray stated that there will be a 150 foot buffer from the wetlands area as suggested by the commission and as proposed by the draft wetlands ordinance. It was brought up by the Planning Commission that since these units have no basements, will the developer provide a storm shelter for the occupants. Murray stated that he could look into this request. Murray stated that the units will be located 50 and 60 feet. apart. Murray stated that they will have the "large home" appearance of the homes in Lotus Lake Estates 1st Addition. e James Parson, president of the Lotus Lake Homeowners Association, stated that the Association is very pleased with this request because the applicant has taken much time in trying to preserve the wetlands and to make the proposed deve- lopment very pleasing to the eye. Parsons presented a resolu- tion and a petition to the Planning Commission from the Lotus Lake Homeowners Association members indicating their approval of this request. Henry Sosin, 7400 Chanhassen Road, stated that he is in favor of this request and is pleased that the applicant did not develop the wetlands. He asked the Planning Commission if the proposed density was in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. Rick Sathre, from B-T Land Company, stated that currently the property is in farmland and that this development will make the property more pleasing to the eye than vacant land with no grass. Murray stated that there is a 4 foot trail along the lake now. He indicated that in the Planning Report it was mentioned that the trail should be 8 feet wide. Partridge stated that the trail easement should be put on hold until the Environmental Protection Committee develops an ordinance on Wetlands. M. Thompson made a motion seconded by Watson to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. e M. Thompson stated that 140 units is too many units for this area and feels it is not in conformance with the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan. He further stated that he objects to the road being joined onto Pleasant View Road because of the pro- tential traffic problems this will create. Murray explained that parking will be 2 off-street outside spa- ces and one garage per unit. e e e Planning Commission Meeting May 27, 1982 Page 6 Swearengin stated that he feels this request is an excellent use of the property and is encouraged because the neighbors are in favor of the proposal. Watson stated that she feels that there is a lot of units, but since the developer is preserving the wetlands she is in favor of a density transfer bonus. She further questioned why the City is asking for a dedication of property plus a park fee. Watson stated that the road access to the north is a potential problem. She feels that the road should have a temporary cul- de-sac and have a single access into this development. Conrad stated that the proposed access onto Pleasant View Road would be the safest way for a secondary access. He indicated that people wanting to go into Excelsior will have to go out onto 101 and then take Pleasant View Road, one way or another, they will use Pleasant View Road. Murray indicated that he is not concerned about having the road access onto Pleasant View Road. Murray stated that the road is dedicated to the public and some may not like others using "their" road, but it is still a public road. Swearengin made a motion, seconded by J. Thompson to recommend to the City Council approval of the final development Plan for B-T Land Company as proposed with the conditions as listed in the May 19, 1982 Planning Report with an amendment to the recommendation #2 to have the 8 foot trail be required to be dedicated but not developed at this time until the Environmental Protection Committee has developed a wetlands ordinance. Those voting in favor of the motion were as follows: Partridge, J. Thompson, Swearengin. Those voting against the motion were as follows: Watson, M. Thompson and Conrad. Motion failed. Conrad stated that he is uncomfortable with the number of units. He stated that he likes the plan, but 140 units is too much of an impact. Conrad made a motion stated the same as the previous motion with the condition that there only be 120 units maximum permitted. The following voted in favor: Conrad and M. Thompson. Those voting against the motion were as follows: Watson, J. Thompson, Swearengin, and Partridge. Motion failed. e Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1982 Page 7 Swearengin stated that the applicant could have come in with 170 units and cut it back to 140 units to fulfill the desire to cut something out. He stated that the developer has done a great job fitting this on the property, the neighbors approve, the staff sees no problem with the request, and there is less surface coverage than if the applicant would have put ~n single-family residences on the property. Conrad stated that he figured the applicant has 35 acres of buildable land times 3.4 units as proposed by the Comprehensive Plan and that would allow for 120 units total. Murray stated that if the Planning Commission cuts down the number of units, it gives the developer no incentive to do anything to maintain sensitive areas such as wetlands. He further stated that B-T Land Company does not have 35 acres, they have paid for, been assessed and taxed on 45.96 acres. He indicated that that amount of land would have a maximum amount of permitted units of 160-170 based on the formula from the Chanhassen City Comprehensive Plan. Watson stated that she did not vote nay on the original motion because of density, it was because of the road system. e J. Thompson stated that he does not like the density amount for this development, but since the developer has gone to such lengths to maintain the wetlands, and to keep the 8-plexes far enough away from the wetlands, he is willing to accept the higher density. Watson made a motion, seconded by Swearengin to approve the final development plan as stated in Swearengin's previous motion with the additional condition that Sioux Trail end in a cul-de-sac and to be used as a secondary access at a later date. The following voted in favor: Watson, Swearengin, and Partridge. Those voting nay are as follows: Conrad, J. Thompson and M. Thompson. Motion failed. Watson made a motion, seconded by Partridge to recommend to the City Council approval of the final development plan for B-T Land Company as proposed with the conditions as listed in the May 19, 1982 Planning Commission Report as follows: e e e e Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1982 Page 8 The staff recommends that the developer submit an exhibit entitled final plan depicting the following items: 1. Location of right of way to be dedicated for potential future accesses for the Murphy, Kartak, and Flom proper- ties in accordance with the specifications of the City Engineer. (#2 has been changed at the request of the Planning Commission) 2. Location of an 8 foot year round trail to be dedicated but not developed at this time until the Environmental Protection Committee has developed an ordinance regarding the wetland areas. This trail should be in compliance with the proposed ordinance. 3. Location of central mailboxes. 4. The above final plan should be accompanied by a prototype landscaping proposal for the 4-plex and 8-plex units. Other conditions for final approval are: 5 . That park dedication requirements for the proposed deve- lopment be satisfied through the Park Dedication Fee in lieu of dedication of land. 6. That the architecture of the proposed 4-plex and 8-plex structure be consistant with the architectural exhibit photographs submitted by the applicant designated as file copies Architectural Exhitits A and B. 7. That the covenants and development contract to the pro- posed development contain provision for the prohibition of outside storage. 8. That the proposed covenants and restrictions rece~ve the approval of the City Attorney. 9. That the applicant receive all applicable federal, state, and local agency approvals and permits prior to the construction commencement activities and issuance of building permit. The following voted in favor: Partridge, Swearengin, Watson, and J. Thompson. Those voting nay: M. Thompson and Conrad. Motion carried. e Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1982 Page 9 ~~~!~~ fl~~ ~~~i~~~ 1 ~i~&l~ I~~il~ ~~!~~~~~ Lot ~~~~i~i~i~~ 365 Pleasant View Road: No one was present representing the applicant. Waibel presented the staff report to the Planning Commission. He stated that this is a request to subdivide a 3.5 acre lot into a 1 acre and a 2.5 acre lot. Waibel explained that this property is planned for low density residential use. Waibel stated that the property is located approximately 50 feet north of the intersection of Pleasant View Road and Horseshoe Curve on the east side of Pleasant View Road. Waibel explained that the proposed subdivision of the property is to create an approximate 1 acre building lot along the southerly 97 feet of frontage along Pleasant View Road. Waibel stated that the remainder of the property, upon which the owners residence is located, will have a panhandle con- figuration and will have approximately the northerly 92 feet of frontage on Pleasant View Road. 4It Waibel explained that Subdivison Ordinance 33 states that pro- posed lots shall have 90 feet of frontage on a public street and shall have a lot area of 15,000 square feet. Also, he stated, that the Shoreland Management Ordinance 65 states - that proposed lake shore lots shall have 75 feet of frontage on the lake and a minimum area of 15,000 square feet. He indicated that these regulations should be taken into consideration when con- sidering this request. Waibel stated that the staff recommends that the applicant work with staff in preparing a preliminary plat that is signifi- cantly consistent with the sketch submitted by staff listed as attachment #5 in the May 19, 1982 staff report. He further stated that upon preparation of all preliminary plat infor- mation, a public hearing shall be held to gather neighborhood sentiment to the proposal. M. Thompson suggested that Lot 1 have an access to the lake for Lot 2. Waibel stated that this subdivision complies with all ordinances. . Conrad made a motion, second by J. Thompson to request the applicant to work with staff in preparing a preliminary plat and to order a public hearing for this request. All voted in favor and the motion carried. e e e Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1982 P ag e 10 Swearengin made a motion, second by Watson to request that every proposed subdivision be listed with a sign 3' x 4' stating that the property is up for subdivision (similar to Minnetonka City's signs). All voted in favor and the motion carried. f~~~~~~i~! ~~~ l~~~~!~i~! ~~~i~~ QE~i~~~~~ ~~~isi~~~~ The Planning Commission indicated that they would like to review the Proposed ordinances before it goes to a public hearing. Watson made a motion, seconded by Conrad to order a public hearing on the Commercial and Industrial Zoning Ordinance Revisions for June 24, 1982. The Planning Commission requested that the Chamber of Commerce be notified of this public hearing. Minutes Watson made tes of the presented. a motion, second by Swearengin to April 22, 1982 Planning Commission All voted in favor and the motion m1nu- accept the meeting as carried. Conrad requested that a representative from the Environmental Protection Committee come to the next Planning Commission meeting and give an update of their progress. Watson made a motion, seconded by Partridge to note the minutes of the Environmental Protection Committee as presented for the April 27 and May 11, 1982 meetings. All voted in favor and the motion carried. J. Thompson made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:30 p.m. Second was made by Swearengin. All voted in favor and the motion carried.