WEBVTT METADATA Video-Count: 1 Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=VnJFzI1GK8Y Part: 1 1 00:01:58.159 --> 00:02:13.840 Wait till the light comes on in here. Oh, here we go. All right. Good evening. We'll call the uh Wednesday, July 8th, um Chaza Planning Commission meeting to order. And uh I'll 2 00:02:13.840 --> 00:02:41.200 look for a roll call. here. >> Here >> all right. Um, everybody's got a copy of the agenda. I'll look for a motion to approve the agenda. >> So moved. >> Seconded. 3 00:02:41.200 --> 00:02:58.239 >> Um, first by Commissioner Aen, second by Commissioner Michaelitz. Uh all in favor say I. >> I. >> Motion carries. Next we're into our visitor presentation. So it' be the opportunity for anybody that had wants to speak about something that may not be 4 00:02:58.239 --> 00:03:16.080 on the agenda tonight. Is there anybody out there? Pretty good full house tonight. Anything online? No. Okay. We'll move on to approving the previous meeting minutes from the June 10th, 2026 5 00:03:16.080 --> 00:03:31.920 meeting. Look for a motion to approve those. >> I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. >> Second. >> Motion by Campbell. Um seconded by Commissioner Ason. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> I. 6 00:03:31.920 --> 00:03:47.360 Carries. Brings us to our action items. Um we've got a public hearing tonight. 7A to recommend approval of the conditional use permit CUP for outdoor storage at 3700 Chaza Boulevard, 7 00:03:47.360 --> 00:04:08.080 Precision Yard Services, PC number 2026-14. That's the old Shramm Brewery site there. That I'll turn it over to staff. >> Thank you. We have a >> Thank you. 8 00:04:08.080 --> 00:04:22.720 We have a conditional use permit request this evening for the address 3700 Chaza Boulevard uh specifically for open storage. Um this is being proposed by the applicant Precision Yard Services. 9 00:04:22.720 --> 00:04:39.040 Uh the site in question um again is 3700 Chaza Boulevard. It's kind of on uh the southern southwestern sides of the city. Um it is uh directly west of Chaza Boulevard. gains access off of there 10 00:04:39.040 --> 00:04:57.040 today. Um there is um an existing building kind of uh mid uh in the middle portion of the site here uh abuing um other industrial users to the north also in the same zoning district. Um and then 11 00:04:57.040 --> 00:05:14.560 you have um open um wooded land uh directly west which will also come into question with another item we have on the agenda this evening um in some residential kind of to the northwest of the property. 12 00:05:14.560 --> 00:05:30.960 Um just to give you a background of this site in particular um the building that exists on the property today was built in 1972. Um at that time it was um a part of Chesca Township's jurisdiction um which was ultimately annexed in into the city 13 00:05:30.960 --> 00:05:47.360 in the early thousands. Um and at that time Cover County Public Works um occupied the building and owned the building and site. Um they used it as one of their um maintenance grounds uh particularly for their road maintenance. 14 00:05:47.360 --> 00:06:02.560 So they had um outdoor storage as well on the site uh for road maintenance um uh operations. Um then in 2017 um a new user uh occupied the building 15 00:06:02.560 --> 00:06:20.560 which was a shramm house. Um so in 2017 a conditional use permit was approved to operate a brewery and tap room um at this site. Um they did eventually close their doors uh at the end of uh 2025. 16 00:06:20.560 --> 00:06:37.280 So now uh we're looking at a new user to occupy the building in site. Um I also want to mention that when Shramm House uh went in uh they also extended city utilities to the building. Um the pictures that are shown on this 17 00:06:37.280 --> 00:06:55.199 slide here show um how the site looked um during uh the operations of Carver County Public Works. So uh the 2005 to 2011 images reflect uh those operations and then the bottom right uh image 18 00:06:55.199 --> 00:07:11.120 reflects when um the brewery was um in operation of that building. Uh so the site in question is a little over 4 acres in size. Uh the building is a little over 7,000 square feet in size 19 00:07:11.120 --> 00:07:26.639 as well. Um there's an existing access onto the county road um just to the south of the site um that gains access to the property. Um it is a standalone property so it does not connect um to the properties to the north. They have 20 00:07:26.639 --> 00:07:44.639 their own independent access on a different road. uh the property is in um the restricted industrial zoning district or I2 to be exact. So the same zoning district that um is present on the sites just to the north of them. 21 00:07:44.639 --> 00:08:00.720 In terms of what the long range plan um guides this property, it is guided for highdensity residential which is kind of in conflict with what the existing zoning is out there. Um uh and really what happens with that is 22 00:08:00.720 --> 00:08:16.720 is if the property does redevelop and have major improvements done to it, um it would be done so in um uh connection or compliance with the long range comprehensive plan. Uh the existing property owner is well aware of the long 23 00:08:16.720 --> 00:08:32.000 range plans for this site and the sites uh directly north for highdensity residential. Um it is kind of understood at this point that collaboration between all of the properties within that I2 zoning district would have to uh 24 00:08:32.000 --> 00:08:46.640 coordinate uh redevelopment uh at the same time or that would be the ideal setup um as there are limitations in terms of access into both of those sites um uh from the county roads um to meet 25 00:08:46.640 --> 00:09:04.080 their spacing requirements. So, um, because of that collaboration effort that, uh, needs to occur, um, it's kind of at the the mercy of the other property owners and in in that same zoning district to, um, redevelop at the 26 00:09:04.080 --> 00:09:22.399 same time. So, in the interim, we have a user that fits the zoning out there that doesn't plan to do any major improvements to trigger compliance with the comprehensive plan. Um, and the proposed use again uh will allow 27 00:09:22.399 --> 00:09:39.760 for the existing building to be uh utilized. Um, and again, they're not proposing major improvements to the site. Uh, so the current request um is for a conditional use permit. Um but getting 28 00:09:39.760 --> 00:09:55.600 to the zoning that's set up out here for I2. Um there this is one of kind of the um unique zoning districts that does allow for outdoor storage as a permitted use out there. Um and then when it um goes over a certain threshold, that's 29 00:09:55.600 --> 00:10:12.320 when uh property owners are required to get a conditional use permit um if it exceeds a 2:1 land to building ratio. So, this property in particular can have up to 14,400 square ft of outdoor 30 00:10:12.320 --> 00:10:28.399 storage uh as a permitted use out there just based on the size of the building that exists. So, if um a user proposes anything over that, they do have to apply for a conditional use permit. And that is why uh this request is in front of us this evening. 31 00:10:28.399 --> 00:10:48.040 Um specifically the user um is proposing roughly 75,000 square feet of outdoor storage. Uh so it exceeds that 2:1 land to building ratio and this is for a landscape contracting company uh Precision Yard Services. 32 00:10:48.399 --> 00:11:05.040 um the details of the operation. Uh so the landscape uh company is a family-owned lawn and landscaping company that's currently in Jordan, Minnesota. So the image you see on this slide here is their um setup in Jordan. 33 00:11:05.040 --> 00:11:22.320 Um they specialize in providing maintenance service for residential and commercial properties mainly in the southwest metro area. Um they did uh recently sign a 7-year lease for the property at 3700 Chesca 34 00:11:22.320 --> 00:11:37.600 Boulevard to move their operations there. Um they would be kind of a normal um Monday through Friday operations 7:00 a.m. to 700 p.m. operating hours and then have limited hours on Saturday from 35 00:11:37.600 --> 00:11:54.880 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. They'll have a total of 20 employees um at the site. uh and they don't plan to have any customer or retail sales associated with uh the use. Um so the open storage uh proposed would 36 00:11:54.880 --> 00:12:10.800 be mainly on the north side of the site. So north of the building um and they've kind of highlighted in red on this upper left exhibit um kind of the different uh outdoor storage components that they're proposing. So, kind of the total area uh 37 00:12:10.800 --> 00:12:27.279 that's really being encompassed again is 75,000 square feet. Um it won't be fenced in. Um they propose uh approximately 15 trucks and trailers. Examples of these um at their current site are shown in the bottom right 38 00:12:27.279 --> 00:12:43.600 images. Um they also propose storing small equipment and attachments uh roughly 10 shipping and rolloff containers. um inventory, storage, loaders and skids, uh four hoop structures, 39 00:12:43.600 --> 00:13:02.399 um so these structures here seen in these images. Um as well as salt storage, um the property uh can accommodate uh approximately 40 stalls of vehicle parking um outside of the outdoor 40 00:13:02.399 --> 00:13:18.000 storage component. So based on the size of the building um from a code perspective um it would require 21 parking spaces. So the 40 parking stalls um as well as the understanding of 20 employees uh 41 00:13:18.000 --> 00:13:35.839 occupying uh this site uh 40 parking spaces uh appears to be uh well over uh what they need for their operations. Um, with any outdoor storage, uh, the biggest component is screening and what 42 00:13:35.839 --> 00:13:52.000 can be seen from public view and public right ofway. Um, so the applicant did put together a few sight line sighteline analyses uh to give you an understanding of what you're seeing from Chaza Boulevard. Um, kind of the main public 43 00:13:52.000 --> 00:14:09.279 uh thoroughfare adjacent to the site. Um so we have a few um images uh on the right hand side uh showing views from Chesca Boulevard looking um north and southwest um off of that roadway. Uh one 44 00:14:09.279 --> 00:14:24.959 of the benefits of this site and um kind of the site to the north is that um there's a pretty significant grade change from the roadway um and the properties. there's about 30 ft of uh grade difference between those 45 00:14:24.959 --> 00:14:43.120 properties. Um so it does um help minimize what's being seen from the public uh roadside. Um I think kind of the the main uh visuals you see are kind of that eastern edge of the property. Um, a few more kind of looking north 46 00:14:43.120 --> 00:14:58.079 again, farther down, uh, Chaza Boulevard and, uh, what can be seen from on top of the site here too, just to show some of those openings that exist between the trees. Um, I think the the only area 47 00:14:58.079 --> 00:15:16.720 that staff uh really recognized as um a a an area for screening purposes and based on where storage, outdoor storage is going to be um placed is basically on that northeast side of the site. Um there's an opening 48 00:15:16.720 --> 00:15:34.639 there. Um there was a former accessory building um that was with the Carver County operations. It has been torn down, but just to give a reference of uh what can be seen from Chaza Boulevard um is you can see um 49 00:15:34.639 --> 00:15:50.959 uh some visuals into the site just based on that reference point of where that former accessory building was and where outdoor storage uh will be placed up to, which would be a little bit closer than where that accessory building was. So, um, with that in mind, um, they did 50 00:15:50.959 --> 00:16:07.040 provide a screening plan, um, to kind of fill in that, uh, one gap area that was shown. Um, but, uh, staff would advise, um, an addition of, um, uh, 8 to 10 Black Hill spruce to fill in 51 00:16:07.040 --> 00:16:24.720 kind of that eastern edge where uh, that outdoor storage would be going up to. Um and that would be a uh or that's um a condition of approval as a part of the CUP. Um to grant a CUP or how we analyze 52 00:16:24.720 --> 00:16:39.120 them, there are six standards that need to be met. Um I'm not going to go through all of them. They are fully um analyzed in the staff report. So I'm just going to highlight a few uh for presentation purposes uh which would be 53 00:16:39.120 --> 00:16:57.600 um standards B and D. Uh B relates to um the special use will not be injurous to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted uh nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. 54 00:16:57.600 --> 00:17:15.280 Uh so the proposal for open storage uh exceeding the 2:1 building to land rate ratio um will be no different than the uses that are immediately north um and the ones that are kind of the most exposed um to the site. Um so it will be 55 00:17:15.280 --> 00:17:31.360 consistent with those uses and what's seen there. Um sight lines into the site are minimal uh from adjacent public view. Um and screening will be provided along the east edge of the property. Um as well as uh what would need to be 56 00:17:31.360 --> 00:17:48.160 included or enhanced on that east side uh per staff's uh conditions of approval. Um and then D, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. Um as we mentioned before, 57 00:17:48.160 --> 00:18:05.120 utilities do currently service the property, so there's no issue there. Um no new access, drainage patterns, grading or impervious surfaces um are proposed as a part of this use and operation taking over here. Um 58 00:18:05.120 --> 00:18:21.440 so it will be used as is out there. Uh so with that um we are asking for you to make a motion this evening to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for open storage exceeding a 59 00:18:21.440 --> 00:18:37.679 2:1 building to land ratio and totaling uh 75,000 square ft at 3700 Chesca Boulevard and then subject to the conditions that are listed in the staff report. Um, if this moves on this evening, it would go to the next city 60 00:18:37.679 --> 00:18:52.880 council meeting, which would be Monday, July 20th. >> Happy to answer any questions. Otherwise, we do have the representatives here uh on behalf of the application if you have >> awesome >> questions for them. Thank you. 61 00:18:52.880 --> 00:19:10.320 >> Thank you, Liz. Um, before we open up the public hearing, any questions for Liz or staff? >> We have questions. In my opinion, it looks like a great use of the property for >> I just have have there been any 62 00:19:10.320 --> 00:19:26.960 discussions on security if it's not going to be fenced in or anything like that, but highintensity lighting for the lots and things like that. >> Yeah. And the applicant can probably expand on kind of what their methods would be, but we did ask the question um 63 00:19:26.960 --> 00:19:42.640 since that's always a concern with open storage areas. Um, I do think the site does lend itself to be um a little bit more secure because of its uh topography uh difference uh between Chasa Boulevard 64 00:19:42.640 --> 00:20:00.320 um and the site itself. Uh but they do also intend to put up security cameras um so that they have visual on the site and kind of those outdoor storage areas. >> Perfect. >> Awesome. Thanks. Say anything. Um this the the Black Hill 65 00:20:00.320 --> 00:20:17.679 spruce trees height uh size to those. >> Um those at a minimum would need to be 6 ft. Yeah. >> Um if nothing else, we'll uh open the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. And if the 66 00:20:17.679 --> 00:20:34.799 applicants are would like to approach the uh the commission here, happy to listen to what you have to say. Evening, Mr. Chair, members of the commission. My name is Alex Young commercial applicant. 67 00:20:34.799 --> 00:20:50.880 We uh have no issues with staff recommendations for approval. Um we've been working with staff on this for a while. We're fully on board with the long range long range plan of high density residential. Um this is kind of 68 00:20:50.880 --> 00:21:07.679 an interim step in in getting there. Sure. So, I'm happy to answer any questions that you have and uh certainly don't want to preclude anyone else from speaking at the public hearing. So, I'll sit down, but if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. >> Any questions? 69 00:21:07.679 --> 00:21:22.799 >> No, I think Liz answered biggest one as I had is >> the you know, highintensity lighting, you know, we >> Yeah, >> that that's all if there's not going to be a security fence around to hold in all that. >> It's a very good question. We were worried. We were concerned about that 70 00:21:22.799 --> 00:21:38.960 with ShraMM when we bought the building and leased it to ShraMM. ShraMM did have cameras. The new tenant will have cameras. There were no issues when ShraMM was there as a tenant. The only time that we've actually had issues is when the building's been vacant. So, the last few months we have had a few 71 00:21:38.960 --> 00:21:53.760 issues. >> So, we're excited tenants moving in here in July and we'll kind of get back to business as usual. I think the one access point in and out helps that. I don't think people like getting trapped up there. Um, and it was very public use before, so a lot of people in and out. 72 00:21:53.760 --> 00:22:09.760 There'll be fewer people now. So, tenants's aware of it. Um, they're aware that we had that concern with ShraMM, but that there there was also no issues. So, >> perfect. >> Um, maintenance. Um, there's not going to be like a 73 00:22:09.760 --> 00:22:26.720 maintenance garage for the trucks, things like uh like extended maintenance, you know, transmission change outs, stuff like that. No, the they're they're focused on I'll call it light landscaping. So, they're focused on maintenance of landscaping at areas 74 00:22:26.720 --> 00:22:43.679 like in Chaz at apartment complexes and that. So, they do a lot of mowing, a lot of snow plowing. It's not a heavy maintenance business. Much lighter maintenance than was there when the county was using the building. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Bourbon. >> Any other questions? 75 00:22:43.679 --> 00:22:58.960 >> I'd agree with you. I think it's it's you know when you look at that site up there in that building and the options for different businesses to take it. It was it was going to be something like that or a general contractor or somebody that you know needs the outside storage and a a good 76 00:22:58.960 --> 00:23:15.679 building but not a whole lot of space. >> Yep. >> So kind >> it's always fun to take a tenant from Jordan. So >> sure. >> You said that. >> I can say that. Yeah. Yes. >> All right. >> Well, thank you. >> Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to approach for uh during the 77 00:23:15.679 --> 00:23:33.200 public hearing? No. Anybody online, Liz? No. All right. We will uh close the public hearing at 7:23 at this point. And I'll look for a motion for approval. 78 00:23:33.200 --> 00:23:48.240 I'll make the motion to recommend to the city council approval of the conditional use permit for open storage exceeding the 2:1 building to land ratio totaling 75,000 square ft at 3700 Chesca 79 00:23:48.240 --> 00:24:05.600 Boulevard subject to the following eight conditions. >> All right, >> second. >> Motion made by Commissioner Campbell and seconded by Commissioner Sailor. All in favor say I. >> Awesome. >> I'm sorry. Awesome. 80 00:24:05.600 --> 00:24:20.960 >> My notes are messed up here. >> Um, all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> Motion carries. Thank you. >> Cool. >> Brings us. >> Next one 81 00:24:20.960 --> 00:24:37.919 >> to our second item of business 7B. recommend approval of the concept plan for Vista Ridge, Johnson, Ryland Homes, PC number 2026-12. >> Thank you, chair. I have got this one this evening. 82 00:24:37.919 --> 00:24:54.400 Uh, tonight we have a concept plan by Johnson Ryland for 27 single family dwelling units on roughly 30 acres. Uh, the applicant is Johnson and Ryland Homes. Uh, this evening we are in the concept plan phase. uh which the 83 00:24:54.400 --> 00:25:09.360 planning commission uh may have heard our speech many times but I'm going to give it uh just once more for anyone who may be tuning in. Uh concept plan is the first of Chesca's three-step review process. Uh so it generally includes 84 00:25:09.360 --> 00:25:26.880 pretty highlevel plans uh that don't include all of the details. And so as a result of that uh our review of that it gets to more identifying issues that we would like to see resolution as the pro the project moves forward rather than a 85 00:25:26.880 --> 00:25:42.320 concept plan resolving uh those identified issues. Uh so tonight that's the phase we're or that's uh the step that we're in. We're identifying those issues and then we will continue to see those issues being resolved uh as the 86 00:25:42.320 --> 00:25:58.640 plan moves forward should it move forward. Uh the site uh is outlined here in black. Again, it's roughly 30 acres. Uh it's surrounded by an area that has developed kind of roughly over the last 87 00:25:58.640 --> 00:26:15.120 decade. Uh there's just under 350 approved residential lots spanning within five uh approved developments. And then recently earlier this year uh the planning commission reviewed a concept plan uh for the Hassic property 88 00:26:15.120 --> 00:26:30.960 that included or that would add uh another 207 units. Uh their plan included a mix of single family detached dwellings uh as well as twin homes. Uh Chaza's downtown uh is just offscreen 89 00:26:30.960 --> 00:26:48.400 here to the right. And then uh the planning process is currently underway uh for the 50 plus acre uh Southwest Chesa Park uh to the west of the site. Uh other notable areas, uh there is some property that's also owned for a future 90 00:26:48.400 --> 00:27:05.600 elementary school uh just further west of the southwest Chesco Park. And then hopefully later this year we will begin to see construction of Savannah Way that collector road uh west of the park as well. Uh so again the site 30 acres is 91 00:27:05.600 --> 00:27:21.679 comprised uh of four properties uh two of which were outs that were retained by Linda Carlson for future development as part of ensconced woods to the north and Carlson Bluffs to the west. Uh the largest parcel is unadressed and also 92 00:27:21.679 --> 00:27:38.799 owned by Linda. And then the eastern part of the site uh is the ShraMM Brewery site uh that Miss Hansen just presented on just a moment ago. I think it's important to note here at this point uh that the project the development this evening is not 93 00:27:38.799 --> 00:27:55.679 proposing any major redevelopment to that site. Uh so if the conditional use permit and the concept plan were both approved uh within you know at the next council meeting uh there would just be some more review for how uh if there's additional screening that would be 94 00:27:55.679 --> 00:28:13.200 needed as part of preliminary. Uh but uh until that both of those items are approved uh we're just making note of that that that might come forward in the future. Uh the site itself uh is very heavily 95 00:28:13.200 --> 00:28:30.399 wooded. Uh it's known to contain a southern messic maple basswood forest. Uh you can see here from these site photos. Uh you kind of looking from the south and to the north. Uh you can start to see again what you'll see as a theme 96 00:28:30.399 --> 00:28:46.000 throughout my presentation this evening. You may have picked up on it in the staff report for this evening. Uh but the site's greatest challenge is going to be topography. Uh the site itself uh drops about 100 feet in elevation uh from the highest 97 00:28:46.000 --> 00:29:02.480 point on the west uh side and kind of on that western property line in the northwest corner uh to uh the lowest point in the southeastern corner of the site uh along uh Chaza Boulevard. 98 00:29:02.480 --> 00:29:20.080 Uh generally uh this site kind of slopes downward from that high point uh to an area that kind of flattens out here in the middle and then it's sloping down in all the directions from there. So as a result uh the site like much of the surrounding area does include a number 99 00:29:20.080 --> 00:29:37.919 of steep slopes. It's a little bit hard to see on this image on the screen, um, but you can see it in your staff report. Uh, and you'll see it later in my presentation. Kind of all of these areas that have this green overlay, uh, are wooded steep slopes under our ordinance. 100 00:29:37.919 --> 00:29:54.159 Uh, generally uh, these area these steep slope areas are located on the north side of the property and the eastern side of the property. Uh but there are some existing wooded steep slopes that exist just offsite uh on the south and 101 00:29:54.159 --> 00:30:11.120 the west. So before I get too far ahead of myself and into our review, I just want to quickly ground the planning commission and those in the audience of what the concept plan is. Uh so there's 27 single family dwelling lots. Uh those lots 102 00:30:11.120 --> 00:30:28.559 would be accessed uh via new colle or connector road. It would be a local street, but it would run east and west. So, it would generally connect uh at the point where the existing ShraMM brewery driveway is today. Uh and then come up 103 00:30:28.559 --> 00:30:44.080 uh and through the site. It's shown to terminate on the western side of the property. Uh but the plan does also contemplate a future roadway connection that would happen through the Lano property to the south at some point in the future. 104 00:30:44.080 --> 00:30:58.960 Uh the remaining 13 lots then uh would be accessed uh via newly constructed culde-sac uh which they are calling Soaring Eagle Court. And the plans then also you know include all of the supporting infrastructure uh 105 00:30:58.960 --> 00:31:14.399 to construct those new homes uh so utilities, sidewalk, storm water, etc. And then you can see uh what some of those home designs would look like here as well. So moving forward, you know, moving 106 00:31:14.399 --> 00:31:29.600 through uh the plans and our staff review of those plans. Uh the site is guided by the comp plan primarily for lowdensity residential uh which does have a uh required dwelling unit of 2 to 107 00:31:29.600 --> 00:31:46.159 five units per net acre. Uh but there is also property that's guided for highdensity residential. So that's Shramm site. uh thinking ahead for for future redevelopment and then uh as well as land that's guided for open space 108 00:31:46.159 --> 00:32:01.840 preservation. Uh so rough calculation under the current plan does show that it's likely under that two units per uh two dwelling units per acre. Uh however, as you noted in your report, there is uh some 109 00:32:01.840 --> 00:32:18.880 clarification that's needed on that northern site boundary uh that's within that outlot. And so clarification of that would allow staff to further evaluate and just make sure that we're meeting that minimum threshold. Uh roughly twothirds of the site uh is 110 00:32:18.880 --> 00:32:34.480 currently zoned open. Uh so o open that's as you know a holding zone uh for property until it's redeveloped at which time it's anticipated or expected rather uh that it would be reszoned. 111 00:32:34.480 --> 00:32:49.600 Uh the remaining kind of third of the property then is is planned residential development as part of the ensconced woods development and Carlson Bluffs over to the west. And then there is as uh Miss Hansen mentioned earlier uh the 112 00:32:49.600 --> 00:33:06.399 Shanbury property is zoned I2. Uh it's likely that you know a bulk of the site would be reszoned uh to PRD in that next step. So, in step two of our review process, uh, to allow for a consistent planned residential district 113 00:33:06.399 --> 00:33:21.840 across all of those residential lots, um, but it's not anticipated that, uh, the Shanbury site would be reszoned as part of that, uh, request. Uh, the lots themselves range in size 114 00:33:21.840 --> 00:33:39.440 uh, from just over 13,000 square ft upwards to 116,000 square ft. Uh the lot widths range from 70 feet wide to 405 feet wide. Uh which is pretty consistent with um uh lots within the surrounding 115 00:33:39.440 --> 00:33:54.559 area. Uh however uh the current lots are shown to extend uh within those wooded steep slope areas. So the wooded steeps the uh or with excuse me uh the properties are 116 00:33:54.559 --> 00:34:10.399 shown to extend into the wooded steep slopes kind of beyond that 30foot no mra setback. Uh and so it's always been staff's recommendation to align our property lines to stop at that that setback. And 117 00:34:10.399 --> 00:34:25.440 really the intent of that is because it allows for the highest level of preservation of those separate those you know very sensitive areas by taking it out of uh private property ownership. And uh some of the commission may recall 118 00:34:25.440 --> 00:34:42.159 uh that we had a similar situation in conversation uh with Carlson Bluffs to the west at their concept plan review. Uh they were showing similar situation where all of their lots extended into that wooded steep slope. um as a condition of approval uh they came back 119 00:34:42.159 --> 00:34:58.640 at preliminary and they did adjust most of those rear lot lines to that setback. There was just two small areas uh of encroachment that still went beyond that setback. Uh those areas were placed in conservation easement uh and there are 120 00:34:58.640 --> 00:35:16.000 conservation signs out along that line uh to essentially establish where that boundary exists. Uh so staff is recommending a similar condition uh this evening to adjust those property lines uh to be consistent 121 00:35:16.000 --> 00:35:31.599 with uh staff's practice or with the city's practice. Uh the plan this evening uh does include a new main road. Uh soaring Eagle Parkway is kind of that east west connector road. Uh it would intersect 122 00:35:31.599 --> 00:35:48.400 with Chesca Boulevard uh with an upgrade to a full intersection on the east side and then again it would terminate there on the west side uh with a turnaround access uh that says it will accommodate you know fire trucks being 123 00:35:48.400 --> 00:36:08.240 able to to back in and navigate uh that the uh and then again those remaining lots access via uh Soaring Eagle report. Uh the alignment of this connection to Percheron Boulevard has been heavily 124 00:36:08.240 --> 00:36:24.480 studied uh and kind of predicted or anticipated by a number of our plans within the city. Uh and so it first was contemplated, you know, three alternatives for that alignment uh was 125 00:36:24.480 --> 00:36:40.880 contemplated in the Southwest Chesa plan. And you can see those here in relation to the development site. Uh ultimately uh the preferred growth and development plan as part of that southwest CHASCA plan did place that connection just to 126 00:36:40.880 --> 00:37:00.079 the south of the development site uh on the Lano property. And so they're showing that that connection uh would happen roughly where the existing Edge Hill Road and Chaza Boulevard intersection is. Excuse me. And then subsequently, 127 00:37:00.079 --> 00:37:17.040 the 24E comp plan uh did emulate uh that alignment when it was adopted. Uh in 2018, uh the county studied these access points. Um and this is a little bit 128 00:37:17.040 --> 00:37:33.520 confusing. Uh north is to the right of the screen and south is uh to the left. And so here's the ShraMM Brewery site. Um here's their access. Here's Edge Hill Road access. And the county's access 129 00:37:33.520 --> 00:37:50.240 plan for 61 and 41 corridor study did say that both of these access points would be upgraded to full intersections. Uh so the Edge Hill access uh would be upgraded to essentially allow for this connector roadway that we're speaking 130 00:37:50.240 --> 00:38:09.760 about this evening. Um and then the ShraMM brewery site uh would allow for redevelopment of those two northern properties. Uh but most recently uh so that kind of building on that uh last year city staff 131 00:38:09.760 --> 00:38:26.640 in conjunction with Stantech uh the city's engineering consultant took a look at um you know of they're identifying three potential alignments for this connector road and looking at them in a little bit more detail and trying to understand you know what are 132 00:38:26.640 --> 00:38:41.839 the challenges that each of these alignments would present. kind of an overarching theme was that any um any construction of a new road was going to have to overcome, you know, the site's topography um and impacts to the steep 133 00:38:41.839 --> 00:38:58.880 slope. But it also looked at um soil concerns and feasibility of constructing a roadway through what is today a gravel mine, a gravel pit. Uh so alignment three, 134 00:38:58.880 --> 00:39:15.359 this it's cut off on my screen. So alignment three essentially cuts through uh what is the Lano pit today. So kind of punching through straight through. Um this one was quickly eliminated um because of soil feasibility concerns in 135 00:39:15.359 --> 00:39:33.599 the gravel pit, you know, going down um a significant amount. soil borings were not getting to a point where where that was structurally feasible and it also presented concerns with its proximity to the county road 40 intersection. 136 00:39:33.599 --> 00:39:49.040 Uh the alternative one alignment again is looking at connecting into Edge Hill Road uh and Chesca Boulevard. uh that option wasn't necessarily eliminated. Uh so it's still up for consideration. 137 00:39:49.040 --> 00:40:05.839 However, the the study did show that this would likely have the greatest amount of steep slope impact of of the three alternatives. So alternative two, um this alignment generally is is aligning with what's being shown this evening as part of the 138 00:40:05.839 --> 00:40:21.359 concept plan. There are some subtle changes, but ultimately landing at that ShraMM house brewery location and this location was generally shown that would have the least amount of soil stability concerns uh as well as steep 139 00:40:21.359 --> 00:40:36.800 slope impacts and that it would you know again continue to support the redevelopment for high density on those properties to the north. So kind of in summary and conclusion of that there was a lot of pages in the 140 00:40:36.800 --> 00:40:52.640 staff report related to this. Um but in short uh while we acknowledge that there's additional engineering and some design information that is needed to fully evaluate you know whether alternative two or alternative one is the correct location kind of for where 141 00:40:52.640 --> 00:41:07.760 that alignment happens. Um we are generally supportive of continued exploration of uh alternative 2 and and and what's currently being proposed and 142 00:41:07.760 --> 00:41:24.319 to this is a very minor detail in in the grand scheme of things. Um but still worthy enough to note. Uh there is a historical marker uh within the ride ofway of of Chaza Boulevard. Uh that uh 143 00:41:24.319 --> 00:41:41.280 historical marker was built in 1938. Uh and it was reconstructed in 2010 or 2009 rather. Um but it was put on the National uh Registry of Historic Places in 2010 following that that reconstruction. 144 00:41:41.280 --> 00:41:58.720 And so, uh, the developers indicated that there's no plans and that there would be no impact to that site. Uh, some of their plans do show some line work. It it seems like it's probably just an error in the line work. Um, but we would ultimately want to make sure uh 145 00:41:58.720 --> 00:42:18.480 that there are no impacts because any impacts would require some uh lengthy and additional review by outside jurisdictions just due to that uh historic designation. uh to construct that east west roadway. Um there is a sizable retaining wall uh 146 00:42:18.480 --> 00:42:35.520 that's proposed uh kind of on the north side of Soaring Eagle Parkway. Uh there are kind of two areas of grading within the steep slope area and then there's a third area that is shown to have grading onto the Lano property to the south. And 147 00:42:35.520 --> 00:42:51.119 so we would want some additional information uh just to understand those impacts. And this is this profile uh is often in plans um that come before you. Uh but 148 00:42:51.119 --> 00:43:07.599 not often do we as planners get to talk about street profiles in uh a planning presentation. So I I am going to walk you through this a little bit to help you kind of orientate yourself and and feel free to stop me and interject with any questions should you have them. I 149 00:43:07.599 --> 00:43:25.280 also acknowledge that I am not an engineer. So um uh there is uh about 80 feet of grade change uh that occurs along the 18,800 ft of uh that new proposed roadway. And so in this profile 150 00:43:25.280 --> 00:43:41.839 um kind of on the left hand side so this section is showing the cut and fill that's needed for that future corridor uh that future connection on the Lano property. Uh this line is really designating where uh the roadway on the 151 00:43:41.839 --> 00:43:57.760 property is starting. So this black line then is at that intersection of the culdeac and the new road. And then we're continuing all the way uh to this point uh which is really that intersection uh of Chesca Boulevard 152 00:43:57.760 --> 00:44:14.160 and Soaring Eagle Parkway. And so the the red is obviously areas of cut uh green areas of fill. Uh so kind of over the course of that 1,800 feet of new roadway, uh the average 153 00:44:14.160 --> 00:44:30.960 grade change is well within our city limit or our city requirements or city maximum allowable percentage of grade change. However, it's on this eastern side uh where we're getting to a grade change of 14% uh that's far exceeding uh 154 00:44:30.960 --> 00:44:49.599 what our city maximum would be. And so that starts to present uh a number of concerns uh especially when it comes to you know maintenance uh snow clearing and and most importantly fire access. Uh so again you know in short we generally 155 00:44:49.599 --> 00:45:06.400 at a high level support the alignment um but we do need more information uh especially when it comes to the engineering part of it uh to fully evaluate that proposed alignment. So, we expect to bring you more details and maybe some more profiles uh at the 156 00:45:06.400 --> 00:45:22.880 preliminary review. So, moving beyond um the roadway construction, uh the plan does include a 5-ft sidewalk on the north side of Soaring Eagle Parkway, again terminating on that western side, uh with the plans 157 00:45:22.880 --> 00:45:40.000 being that it could be extended beyond uh and then a new 5-ft walkway down the east side of Soaring Eagle Court. Uh generally that's appropriate for single family neighborhoods. Uh however, there have been a number of plans and 158 00:45:40.000 --> 00:45:56.160 kind of trail connections and junctions that have been contemplated for this site by previous plans. So the first uh is the 2040 comprehensive plan which is showing kind of this trail junction uh again showing the a shared use path 159 00:45:56.160 --> 00:46:13.680 along this new connection uh as well as a shared use path that's connecting Savannah Way on the west uh up to Bigwoods Boulevard on the northeast. And again, we see that kind of general alignment showing up uh in the recently adopted 2040 pedestrian and bicycle 160 00:46:13.680 --> 00:46:29.760 master plan. And so there are a few conditions included in your report this evening um that do get to ensuring consistency with uh the surrounding neighborhood, ensuring that we're getting those connections uh that need to happen uh as 161 00:46:29.760 --> 00:46:45.200 well as meeting our ordinance standards and and looking and exploring opportunities uh for these paths and trails to connect through the site uh as they were kind of previously uh thought through. 162 00:46:45.200 --> 00:47:01.359 Uh the site itself as I noted is very heavily wooded. Um you can see here this this depiction does a better job. Those green areas are the wooded steep slope areas kind of both on the site as well as offsite. Um a tree inventory and a 163 00:47:01.359 --> 00:47:17.280 comprehensive grading plan for the entire site has not yet been submitted as part of this concept plan. Um so this evening I can't share a lot of details about the extent of of those um those plans. However um we will see them as 164 00:47:17.280 --> 00:47:33.520 part of our next package and then I can uh provide more of those details um as part of part of preliminary. Uh the plan also is showing um connecting utilities to the site um on 165 00:47:33.520 --> 00:47:49.440 the eastern side connecting into existing infrastructure um by directionally boring under Chaza Boulevard bringing up through the site and then looping through looping that water man through uh to existing 166 00:47:49.440 --> 00:48:05.599 utilities that are in Peron uh to the west. Uh this does require coordination uh with the property owner to the south, the Lano property, because the city would advocate for that looped water main connection to happen at the 167 00:48:05.599 --> 00:48:22.480 time of development to ensure that the development has adequate water pressure just uh because of the the topography grade or the site the site's topography. Uh so again that does you know kind of have impacts to these adjacent properties and so we would you know need 168 00:48:22.480 --> 00:48:38.160 to see some coordination ahead of preliminary uh for that. Uh the new homes are generally shown to be similar to other Johnson Ryland projects in Chaza. Uh submitted floor plans suggest footprints of just over 169 00:48:38.160 --> 00:48:53.920 2,000 square feet uh and are shown to be a mix kind of two and single and twotory homes. Uh generally the homes appear to be consistent but again we just need some more architectural details to confirm that and then all of the homes 170 00:48:53.920 --> 00:49:08.800 within the development like any new home would be subject to the city's anti-imotony requirements uh at the time of building permit. Uh the proposed setbacks generally consistent with what we see. They are identical to what was approved for 171 00:49:08.800 --> 00:49:25.440 Carlson Bluffs just to the west. Um, you will see that there is a condition of approval to add an interior or excuse me, a side corner lot setback just because there wasn't one included. It was not an issue with Carlson Bluffs because there were no corner lots, but there are a few within this development. 172 00:49:25.440 --> 00:49:41.359 Uh, so we did include a condition and recommended um a 15- foot setback here just to be consistent with those surrounding developments. So staff is recommending approval of the concept plan. Uh we find that's an 173 00:49:41.359 --> 00:49:57.520 appropriate land use logical expansion of development uh that's been you know thought through this area. The conditions of approval that were included will help get the resolution on the identified issues that we've talked about this evening. Uh an approval tonight does not necessarily approve 174 00:49:57.520 --> 00:50:13.599 construction. You'll see it uh again with more details moving through that process. And then the right hand side is is just identifying kind of in summary that running tally that was happening on the lefth hand side of my presentation. Uh just carrying that over. Uh and again 175 00:50:13.599 --> 00:50:28.720 uh the project would come before you only after we can check all of those boxes. So with that uh looking for a recommendation to approve and I will turn it back to you chair for any questions. 176 00:50:28.720 --> 00:50:44.960 >> Thank you Ashley. Um, questions for staff from the committee. >> Uh, Craig, is there a requirement at all for new neighborhood developments to incorporate a like a neighborhood play 177 00:50:44.960 --> 00:51:00.240 area >> of unknown size? I'm just generalizing. >> Uh, chair and commissioner. So, there is a um park dedication requirement. Um, oftentimes we see when 178 00:51:00.240 --> 00:51:20.880 there is proximity to Oh, I'm not going to make you car sick. Uh, let me just do this. Oh, that did not work. Uh, the city may take, you know, a fee in lie of parkland designation uh if it's within a certain distance of a park. Um, in this case, 179 00:51:20.880 --> 00:51:36.400 it's something that we would, you know, look at as part of preliminary. it has to be figured out as part of the development agreement which happens kind of out after your guys's review of this project. Um, but given this the the property's proximity to the Southwest 180 00:51:36.400 --> 00:51:51.359 Chaza Park, um, I don't see that staff would advocate for, you know, a park specifically in this neighborhood. >> All right, cool. >> Any other thoughts or comments? 181 00:51:51.359 --> 00:52:07.839 I'd like the staff's review of the 2040 bicycle and pedestrian uh plans and to incorporate, you know, the 8 foot wide path through there instead of a 5-ft walkway. I mean just it's 182 00:52:07.839 --> 00:52:23.920 you know I think that's just perfect spot you know for it because you got Chaska Boulevard. You don't want anybody on that but you're going to have a lot of bike traffic going through so you need the bigger bigger pathway. >> Sure. >> Looks like it could be a really nice 183 00:52:23.920 --> 00:52:40.480 development. Uh I appreciate the work Ashley and city have put into it especially all the different studies on the road options. It seems like you've gotten to a logical place there after a lot of study. I guess the one thing I'll share you, it's sad to me to see the 184 00:52:40.480 --> 00:52:56.960 extent of tree removal that's being proposed and I know this is concept didn't go deep here that'll come back at preliminary but I just want to share from my perspective it's disappointing to see that extent of 185 00:52:56.960 --> 00:53:16.400 forest removal. Anyone else? >> It's a tough site. >> It is. >> Yeah. When I look at that, I look at it's a very challenging site. Um, you got a lot of grade change there. You got steep slopes. You've got, you know, the 186 00:53:16.400 --> 00:53:32.559 last remnants of our big woods around here. Um, and it all kind of comes together. And then it's next to gravel pit as well. So, um I the one thing that concerns me with 187 00:53:32.559 --> 00:53:48.880 this project is because of the steepness of the road coming down the Chaza Boulevard there. Um and and not having a second entrance into that development. If there ever is an issue on that slope there and we can't get 188 00:53:48.880 --> 00:54:07.280 emergency vehicles on the other side of it, then that can be a that can be a big problem. Um, and then I'd say also just from having driven down Bigwoods Boulevard many times at the bottom there, especially in winter time, it gets a little slick. So trying to 189 00:54:07.280 --> 00:54:27.720 flatten that out at the bottom as much as possible. So you've got a little bit of a cushion down there, which is hard with, you know, a historical site on one side. What you said that the max grade there would be 14%. 190 00:54:28.160 --> 00:54:47.040 >> Chair, that's what they're proposing. So, our maximum city standards for local streets is 8%. >> 8%. >> I think you said the county evaluated that intersection. Are they putting a signalized access in there or just proposing? 191 00:54:47.040 --> 00:55:08.240 Uh, chair and commissioner, the study ultimately showed that they would be full intersections. Um, I don't believe that it got to the level of detail of whether they would be signaled or not. Uh, so I would say just with the amount 192 00:55:08.240 --> 00:55:24.559 of trees that they have to take out, this the road, making sure that we have some sort of possibility of a a road connection going into the gravel pit at some point in the future. um 193 00:55:24.559 --> 00:55:46.480 the trail plan. Um steepness of the road. We've talked about the historical site. I like the plan. It's just square box, round hole type thing, right? Yeah. Um but that's that's my 194 00:55:46.480 --> 00:56:02.799 thoughts on it. So, anyone have any other thoughts on it? I fit it fits well within the uh the housing concept all the way down. You walk through that founders ridge all the way down through it's >> beautiful and this would be a beautiful 195 00:56:02.799 --> 00:56:26.480 addition. So >> else >> um I know it's not a public hearing but do the applicants want to say anything? Matt Ryland, Johnson Builders. I just wanted to say we're really excited to, you know, this is basically kind of the third phase of what we've already done 196 00:56:26.480 --> 00:56:42.559 and we see that it, you know, it's a continuation of what we've done. It's real consistent with it'll look real similar to the other neighborhoods we've done and just let me know if you have any other questions. >> Perfect. You guys do a nice job. So, >> thank you. >> You bet. You bet. 197 00:56:42.559 --> 00:56:58.559 >> All right. With that, I'd look for a motion to approve the >> One second. Chair, uh, there was a presentation prepared, so I just want to make sure that >> Did Did you want to pull it up? >> Yep. Point out. >> Sure. Thanks. >> I won't lie. Her presentation was way 198 00:56:58.559 --> 00:57:12.960 better than mine, so >> I don't want to bore you all with the redundant details over and over again. But, um, >> we don't we don't grade presentations, unless they're really bad. >> Good. >> Good. I'm glad to hear that. Um well I 199 00:57:12.960 --> 00:57:28.799 just kind of maybe look at it less granularly and go back to the thousand foot view. Um quite literally I think we can skip to the fourth or fifth slide there. Um this was not in the presentation. I 200 00:57:28.799 --> 00:57:44.160 don't believe that the concept drawing was that in there actually the previous slide. Um this one, this is more of a cartoon drawing of the neighborhood and what it would look like um in context of the neighborhood. And um if we can go to 201 00:57:44.160 --> 00:58:02.160 that next uh drone shot. This I kind of just wanted to point this out. This is um a drone shot from literally a thousand feet and it shows great context of Carlson Bluffs and inconce. And I think what I'm kind of wanted to 202 00:58:02.160 --> 00:58:17.920 show is that this neighborhood isn't um an isolated thing. This is really connected with the other neighborhoods as you talked about the walking paths. It's a really beautiful area. Um and you know, it's marked with our Johnson Ryland quality and whatnot. And we've 203 00:58:17.920 --> 00:58:34.640 worked with you guys in the past. Um and I'm sure you know that. So yeah, I just kind of wanted to bring these photos here. I'm a visual person, so it kind of helps me to share that as well. Um, I hope you see that it's not a we're not trying to take another piece of land. 204 00:58:34.640 --> 00:58:49.680 This is connected with other things. As Matt said, this is phase three essentially within Sconce Woods being phase one, Carlson Bless Bluffs, uh, being phase two, and this would be our third phase. And it's a connected project. It's been thought through from our engineers all the way to the 205 00:58:49.680 --> 00:59:06.559 marketing side. And um yeah, I think you guys know us well. So if you have any questions, you're more than welcome to ask them. So thank you. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> I I think everybody kind of understands our challenges are the same as our 206 00:59:06.559 --> 00:59:26.960 challenges, right? So um looking for a motion to approve the concept plan. I'll make the motion to approve recommend approval of the concept plan for the 27 single dwelling units on site 207 00:59:26.960 --> 00:59:43.920 east of Carlson Bluffs and encompassing outlot A Carlson Bluffs, outlot 8 in Sconced Woods, 3700 Chesca Boulevard and the adjacent unadressed parcel east of Carlson Bluffs to the city council 208 00:59:43.920 --> 01:00:01.520 to subject to the following 12 conditions. >> Okay. >> Second. >> Motion made uh by Commissioner Austin, seconded by Commissioner Campbell. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. 209 01:00:01.520 --> 01:00:17.599 Congratulations. Um, >> good luck. >> That's beautiful spot. That's beautiful. >> We'll move on to number eight. Other business. Anything to share? No. staff. Anything for other business? 210 01:00:17.599 --> 01:00:35.160 No. >> All right, then I would look for a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjourn. >> Second. >> Motion made by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Sailor. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Motion carries. 211 01:00:48.640 --> 01:00:52.280 Recording stopped.