Loading...
1982 07 22 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 22, 1982 AT 7:30 P.M. CHANHASSEN COUNCIL CHAMBERS APPROVED ON <6 - I d ~ AMENDED ON 8- Jg-B& e Members Present: Chairman Art Partridge, Ladd Conrad, Carol Watson Jim Thompson Howard Noziska and Bill Swearengin Members Absent: Mike Thompson Staff Present: Bob Waibel, Craig Mertz and Becky Foreman Building Permit Moritorium for Fast-Food Restaurants, Public Hearing: Present: Keith Boudrie, 8042 Cheyenne Avenue Mary Arndt, 8022 Dakota Avenue Barb Husemoen, 8015 Cheyenne Avenue Louis J. O'Dell, 8012 Dakota Avenue George D. Largay, 8006 Dakota Avenue Thomas Nogen, 8009 Erie Avenue Dave Sellegren, Larkin, Hoffman, Daly and Lindgren Thomas Hamilton, 224 Chan View Chairman Partridge called the public hearing to order at 7:40 p.m. e Waibel presented the staff report to the Planning Commission. He indicated that the Planning Commission had recommended to the City Council development of a fast food moritorium in the C-2 and C-3 zoning districts located south of Highway 5. He explained that the City Council reviewed the Planning Commission recommendation and feel that P-3 zoning districts also lying south of Highway 5 should be included in the moritorium. Waibel explained to the Planning Commission that they may reduce the area that will be affected by the moritorium, but may not enlarge the area without holding another public hearing. Swearengin explained that the intent of the Planning Commission to establish a moritorium was to prevent other fast food restaurant requests in areas such as C-2 and C-3 Districts before the Planning Commission could review and revise the Zoning Ordinance for the best uses in those districts. Partridge indicated that when the moritorium recommendation went before the City Council for their review, the staff also recommended P-3 districts to be included in the moritorium, which would be the parcel of land along Highway 5 in front of the CPT building. waibel read into the record a letter from Dave Sellegren, the repre- sentative for both the Chanhassen Holding Company and McDonalds, dated IIreceived Chanhassen Community Development Department July 22, 1982" stating his opposition to the moritorium. e Partridge stated that the Planning Commission would like to redo the zoning Ordinance to prevent a fast food row along Highway 5. Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 1982 Page 2 e Dave Sellegren, attorney for Chanhassen Holding Company and McDonalds, indicated that Minnesota state Statutes Section 462.358, Subd. 3B states that a parcel of land that has been subdivided may not be affected by any zoning amendments that take place after the preli- minary approval has been given for 1 year. He further explained that the 8 acre parcel that McDonalds subdivided approximately 1 acre off from, is immune from the proposed moritorium. Craig Mertz, Assistant City Attorney, explained to the Planning Commission that if they adopt a resolution establishing a moritorium, they will need to state their reasons for the certain districts. Watson indicated that the Planning Commission did not intend to affect the McDonalds property, but felt that the remaining 7 acres should be affected by the moritorium until the Planning Commission could review the zoning ordinance. Watson indicated that McDonalds has their own moritorium on the rest of the eight acres preventing any other fast food restaurants to locate on the remaining eight acres. It was noted that McDonalds definition of "other fast food restaurants" is those restaurants who sell mainly hamburgers, which means other fast food restuarants could be located there such as Taco Bell or Kentucky Fried Chicken. Partridge read a letter from Jerome Carlson dated "received Chanhassen Community Development Department July 9, 1982" stating his opposition to a moritorium in the Park Two area. e J. Thompson asked Mertz if the remaining 7 acres would be further sub- divided would that make the parcel a new subdivision and then be sub- ject to the moritorium. Mertz, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the 8 acres that McDonald subdivided their property off from cannot be affected by the proposed moritorium. He stated that Minnesota State Statutes state that for 2 years following a subdivision approval, no amend- ment to an official control can affect the use of that land. He further noted that the remaining 7 acres was a result of the sub- division requested by McDonalds. Partridge asked if the City could deny any further subdivision of the property. Waibel stated that the owner could apply for a subdivision of the property without disclosing the proposed use. Partridge indicated that there should be no fast food restaurants located at Highway 17 and Highway 5 until traffic signals are installed. Boudrie indicated that he realizes that a moritorium is too late for the McDonalds property, but he stated that he is in favor of the mori- torium to give the Planning Commission time to review the ordinances to help to prevent other problems. e Noziska made a motion to close the public hearing. Second was made by J. Thompson. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 1982 P ag e 3 e Conrad asked the Planning Commission if the property north of Highway 5 should be considered in the moritorium. The Planning Commission concurred that north of Highway 5 there are not the residential areas that need to be protected as south of Highway 5. Conrad made a motion, seconded by Watson, to recommend that the City Council establish a 6 month limited fast food restaurant moritorium in the C-2, C-3 and P-3 districts located south of Highway 5, including the 7 acre parcel located on Outlot 2 of Chanhassen Estates, in order to assess the impact of fast food restaurants on public safety, traffic, noise and litter. Conrad further stated that the reason for the fast food restaurant moritorium is because they are high traffic generators mostly at times during the day that children are generally present, and also because of the overuse of Highway 5. He also indicated that the reason the moritorium is for only for those districts south of Highway 5 is for the reason that the lands are located close to residential districts. The Planning Commission expressed concern regarding fast food restaurants amount of traffic and late hours which would not be established by other uses listed in the C-2, C-3 and P-3 districts. All voted in favor and the motion carried. *J. Thompson had to leave early; his feelings on the next two items are as follows: e J. Thompson indicated that regarding the Peterson liquor store request, he is not in favor of that type of use at the location pro- posed. He also indicated he sees no problems with the final plan as submitted by Lotus Lake Manor Homes. Conditional Use Permit Request, 195 West 78th Street, Guy Peterson, Public Hearing: Present: Guy Peterson, applicant Keith Boudrie, 8042 Cheyenne Avenue Mary Arndt, 8022 Dakota Avenue Barb Husemoen, 8015 Cheyenne Paul and Louise O'Dell, 8012 Dakota Avenue Alex Krengel, 8009 Cheyenne Avenue The public hearing was called to order at 8:50 p.m. by Chairman Partridge. Waibel presented the staff report to the Planning Commission. He stated that the applicant is requesting to locate a off sale liquor store at the southwest corner of the intersection of West 78th Street and Highway 5. He stated that the property was formerly known as Guy's Drive-In and is zoned CBD, Central Business District. e e e Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 1982 Page 4 Waibel stated that the property is planned for park or open space in the Land Use Plan because it is one of the main entryways into the City. Waibel explained that the property is approximately .76 acres and has City sewer and water available. He said that there are single family homes and apartments located on the north and east sides, Waibel further explained that the applicant is proposing to construct a 15 by 30 foot addition onto the existing building. He stated that staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the "City's Proposed Plot Plan" when considering this request. Waibel indicated that the staff is recommending that the applicant install curb or fencing to define his property lines from the access to the Apple Vally Red-e-mix plant. He also stated that because of the angle of West 78th street along the applicants property, the request for curbing may be dropped along that street. He also indi- cated that staff is recommending that overhead utilities be placed underground. Waibel explained the staff recommendations to the Planning Commission. He indicated that staff is recommended that the concrete curb along West 78th street be dropped; that if the applicant can prove that placing overhead utilities underground would be a undue hardship, this requirement could be dropped, that the existing fence along the westerly property line be repaired; and that the applicant plant several deciduous and coniferous trees in the landscaped area of the property. Boudrie, 8042 Cheyenne Avenue, indicated that the property is in a bad location for this use. He stated that when the Highway 5 and 101 inter- section is redone, it will take quite a bit away from the pro- perty. Peterson indicated that there is enough parking on the property for approximately 50 cars. Boudrie indicated that a liquor store along Highway 5 will generate more through traffic than the other liquor stores in Chanhassen. He also indicated that Chanhassen has limited police protection which might also be considered in this review. Paul O'Dell, 8012 Dakota Avenue, indicated that getting back onto Highway 5 from that property will be very dangerous, he stated Highway 5 is already overused. Watson expressed concern that Chanhassen has too many liquor stores already. Noziska indicated that the City Council has indicated that section of 101 and Highway 5 is one of the gateways to the they would like to see an attractive use on the property. questioned if this would be an improvement to the existing the inter- City and Noziska use. Planning Comission Minutes July 22, 1982 Page 5 e Partridge indicated that the site plan shows a large balance of land to building. Conrad made a motion, seconded by Noziska, to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Waibel explained that staff recommends all utilities be placed underground. He stated that the applicant felt this request would cause financial difficulties because the cost would be totally born by him. Waibel indicated that he would like to receive verification from the utility company on the costs in order to determine hardship. Swearengin indicated he feels there is plenty of greenspace and that the requested use in not a high traffic generator. He indi- cated this may be a good use for the property and may be an impro- vement. Conrad indicated that he feels the amount of greenspace is fine, but there is too much parking. Swearengin suggested that a con- venience store be attached to one side to make better use of the property. It was stated that the new addition will be 60 feet from the property line. e Noziska indicated that he sees no problem with the requested use or the owners plot plan. Conrad indicated that he concurs with the City's plot plan. Swearengin stated that he sees no problems with the use or either of the proposed plot plans. Conrad asked if some of the bituminous could be removed and sod be put in. Partridge indicated that he is concerned with the use and the appearance, he feels that both are inappropriate in that area and that the existing building is in bad condition. Conrad made a motion, seconded by Swearengin, to recommend approval to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit as requested and approval of the site plan labeled "City Plot Plan" with the following conditions: 1. That the concrete curb along West 78th Street be dropped from the approval requirements. 2. Should the applicant demonstrate to the City that the placement of overhead utilities underground would substantiate an undue hardship that the requirement for underground utilities be deleted from approval requirements. 3. That the existing fence along the Westerly property line be repaired in a workmanlike manner. 4. That the applicant plant a minimum of 5 deciduous and 5 coni- e ferous trees in the landscaped area of the property. 5. That staff review site plan with applicant for considerably more greenspace on the easterly side of the proeprty. Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 1982 P ag e 6 4It The following voted in favor: Swearengin, Conrad, and Watson. Partridge and Noziska voted against. Motion carried. Partridge and Noziska concurred that the request was a tacky solu- tion to a tacky problem. They stated that a more appropriate use could be located on the property and that they felt the property was being underutilized. Final Plan Review, Lotus Manor Homes, B-T Land Company: Present: Rick Sathre, B-T Land Company Waibel presented the staff report to the Planning Commission. He indicated that the applicant is submitting a final plan with the con- ditions requested by the Planning Commission at their last review of this request. Waibel explained that the applicant is planning to locate several mailbox clusters with 16-20 units in each cluster as opposed to the two locations previously proposed. 4It Waibel indicated that on May 27, 1982 the Planning Commission recom- mended that a year round trail be dedicated but not developed until the Environmental Protection Committee has developed the wetland ordinance. Waibel further stated that staff recommends that the development contract contain a provision that will provide dedication of an 8 foot wide blanket trail easement on Outlot A, and Lots 10 and 11, Block 2 as shown on the final plan. Waibel stated that the applicant has indicated that he plans to deve- lope a landscaping plan after the City Council has established the den- sity of the development. Waibel indicated from the Engineer's report that the development shows a single roadway to connect with Sioux Trail and in the future connecting to the Lotus Lake Park access onto Pleasant View Road. He indicated that the City Engineer recommends that a temporary cul-de-sac be constructed at the terminus of Sioux Trail. He stated that all streets will be 28 feet in width in compliance to City standards. He also explained that a 75 foot square piece of right-of-way will be dedicated in the northwest corner of the property and right-of-way is also being dedicated to give the Kartak and Flom properties access. Sathre indicated that he would like the trail easement to be better defined when the development contract is written. Partridge indicated that B-T Land has complied with most of the Planning Commission requests. e Watson indicated that the park fees should be credited for the land that is being dedicated for the trail. Waibel indicated that the Park and Recreation Committee felt that the developer should dedicate the trail with no mention of park dedication fee credit. Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 1982 Page 7 e Noziska made a motion, seconded by Watson, to recommend approval to the City Council for Lotus Lake Manor Homes as requested by B-T Land Company with the condition that to the final Landscaping Plan be submitted prior to the signing of the plat, along with the City Engineer'S recommendations as follows: 1. All site generated drainage must be directed to one of the pro- posed ponds. 2. The volume of storage and method of outlet must be such as to allow time for large particle sedimentation. 3. The ponding area will be located entirely upland of the existing wetland. 4. Design of the pond outlet will allow for discharge over as large an area as possible to avoid point discharge. 5. The drainage plan must be reviewed and approved by all appli- cable regulatory agencies. Conditions as set by these agencies as well as conditions suggested by advisory agencies and approved by the City must be incorporated into the final design. 6. Platting of appropriate drainage easements for ponding areas e and where storm sewers are not within dedicated right-of-ways. The following voted in favor: Noziska, Watson, Swearengin, Partridge. Conrad voted against. Motion carried. Conrad stated that he feels the plan is good, but the density is too high. Minutes Conrad made a motion to approve the Planning Commission minutes of July 8, 1982 as presented. Partridge seconded the motion. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Watson made a motion, seconded by Noziska, to note the Environmental Protection Committee mintues of June 8 and June 22, 1982 as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Partridge indicated that he agrees with the Environmental Protection Committee's stand in sticking with their work schedule. He stated that the EPC.. is for the sole purpose of writing an ordi- nance, not to make recommendations on planning requests. Partridge further stated that the EPC is doing a fine job and that he does not agree with the City Council censuring their actions when they are doing their job. e e e - Planing Commission Minutes July 22, 1982 Page 8 Watson made a motion, seconded by Noziska to note the mintues of the City Council meeting of May 17, June 7, and June 21, 1982. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Watson left the meeting at this time. Work Program Partridge indicated that he would like to discuss Ordinance 45 when all seven members are present, but those who were present could make comments for discussion. Swearengin indicated he feels that development should be allowed in unsewered areas with an alternate sewage system. Partridge stated that Ordinance 45 was origianally intended to force development into the sewered areas of the City. Noziska felt that the City should not restrict those with property in the unsewered areas. Noziska indicated that the Metropolitan Council requires 5 acre lot size for self contained sewage systems. Waibel indicated that there is a large demand for larger lots in unsewered areas. Waibel also stated that the Planning Commission did a study 5 years ago on Ordinance 45 and that he would like the Planning Commission to review their findings. He said he would present it at their next meeting. Swearengin made a motion, seconded by Noziska, to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion was carried. Meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m.