Loading...
CAS-40_VILLAGE ON THE PONDS 9TH ADDITION BUILDING C-1 (2)0 SWMP FEE -WORKSHEET DATE December 112004 FH.E NO. PROJECT CO-OP (Villages 9th) Total Site Area 1.35 Net Site Area (acres) 1.35 LAND USE CLASSIRIC kTION Commercial TYPE Water Quality Water Quantity control structure SVIW FEE SWMP CREDITS Acre. Each .- Q PER ACRE ACRES TOTAL $ 7,596.00 $ 5,604.00 1.35 1.35 $ 10,254.60 $ 7,565.40 I�TT"P Q UNIT TOTAL QUANTITY PRICE PRICE - $ 7,596.00 $ - $ 2,500.00 $ $ 17,820 TOTAL SWMP FEE S 17,820 CITY OF 7700 Market Boulevard PO Boz 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax 952 227.1110 Building Inspections Phone: 952.227.1180 Fax: 952.227.1190 Engineering hone: 952.227.1160 Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance Phone: 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 0 Int DIMigJ:L•V I11gh,1 TO: Robert Generous, Senior Planner FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: November 10, 2004 0 SUBJ: Villages on the Ponds Building C-1 (Food Co-op) request for a site plan approval for a 17,400 square foot commercial building with variance to the commercial design standards on 1.35 acres zoned Planned Unit Development located at the southeast comer of Lake Drive and Great Plains Boulevard. Applicant VOPI, LLC. Planning Case: 04-40. Parka 52.227.1120 Phone: 952227.1120 I have reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order to comply with the P P J P Y Fax: 952.227.1110 Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code or Recreation center city ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan is based on the available information 2310 Coulter Boulevard submitted at this time. If additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate Phone: 952.227.1400 code or policy items will be addressed. Fax 952.227.1404 Planning d 1. A 10 -foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, Natural Resources trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, Cable TV and transformer boxes. P:2211 Fax:952.227.1110 This is to ensure fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. Public Works 591 Park Road Phone952.227.1300 : e 2. yellow curbing ang lane" "No Parkin fire l" signswill brequired. Contact the Fax: 952.227.1310 Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and location of signs to be installed. Senior Center Phone: 952.227 1125 Fax: 952.227.1110 3. Submit utility plans to Fire Marshal for review and approval. Web Site gAsafetyVnNlmv04-40 www.achanhaasen.mo.us The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. 0 City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard Chanhassen, MN 55317 tip Lll l of (952)227-1100 Date: October 18, 2004 To: Development Plan Referral Agencies From: Planning Department By: Bob Generous, Senior Planner Subject: Village on the Ponds Building C-1 (Food Coop) — Request for Site Plan Approval for a 17,400 square foot commercial building with Variance to the commercial design standards on 1.35 acres zoned Planned Unit Development located at the southeast comer of Lake Drive and Great Plains Boulevard. Applicant: VOP L LLC. Planning Case: 04-40 The above described application for approval of a land development proposal was filed with the Chanhassen Planning Department on October 15, 2004. The 60 -day review period ends December 14, 2004. In order for us to provide a complete analysis of issues for Planning Commission and City Council review, we would appreciate your comments and recommendations concerning the impact of this proposal on traffic circulation, existing and proposed future utility services, storm water drainage, and the need for acquiring public lands or easements for park sites, street extensions or improvements, and utilities. Where specific needs or problems exist, we would like to have a written report to this effect from the agency concerned so that we can make a recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. This application is scheduled for consideration by the Chanhassen Planning Commission on November 16, 2004 at 7:00 p.m in the Council Chambers at Chanhassen City Hall. We would appreciate receiving your comments by no later than November 3, 2004. You may also appear at the Planning Commission meeting if you so desire. Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated. 1. City Departments a. City Engineer b. City Attorney c. City Park Director d. Fire Marshal e. Building Official f. Water Resources Coordinator g. Forester 2. Watershed District Engineer 3. Carver Soil & Water Conservation District 4. MN Dept. of Transportation 5. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 6. CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco 7. MN Dept, of Natural Resources 8. Telephone Company (Qwest or United) 9. Electric Company (Xcel Energy or MN Valley) 10. Mediacom 11. U. S. Fish and Wildlife 12. Carver County a. Engineer b. Environmental Services 13. Other - 14. &CANN% Park a Recreation owl -�F o • � . 1k-1 Recreation Center outlots, one of which is the outiot being platted now. 2310 Coulter Boulevard MEMORANDUM Phone: 952227.1400 TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager CITY OF PUD 95-2, Village on the Ponds 7'h Addition, creating one lot; the vacation of the CIMSEN FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner 7700 Markel Boulevard DATE: December 13, 2004] PO Boz 147 for a street level commercial and upper level apartment building with a variance Chanhassen, MN 55317 SUBJ: Final Plat Approval for Village on the Ponds 9"' Addition Administration Planning Case No. 04-40 Phone: 952.227.1100 square foot, two-story bank and office building with drive through facilities with a Fax: 952.227.1110 variance for the use of 16 percent EIFS and a signage in excess of 20 feet high. Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 PROPOSAL SUMMARY Building Inspections the Village on the Ponds Design Standards, Development Site Coverage and Phone 2.21 Fax 952 227.1190 The applicant, VOP 1, LLC, is requesting final plat approval replatting Outlot B, www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us Village on the Ponds 8`s Addition, creating one lot for Village on the Ponds 9th Engineering Addition. Concurrently, the city is reviewing a site plan for a one-story with PFax:9522.27.1170 Fax: 952.227.1170 mezzanine, 18,200 square -foot building. Site lana approval is contingent on the � �1 g• P PP g final platting of this property into a Block and Lot designation. Finance the lot on the corner of Promenade Pond and Great Plains Boulevard shall Phone 952.227.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 BACKGROUND Park a Recreation On October 28, 2002, the Chanhassen City Council approved PUD #95-2 granting Phone: 952.227.1120 Fax: 952.227.1110 Final Plat approval for Village on the Ponds 8`" Addition, creating two lots and two Recreation Center outlots, one of which is the outiot being platted now. 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone: 952227.1400 On October 14, 2002, the Chanhassen City Council approved the final plat for Fax: 952.227.1404 PUD 95-2, Village on the Ponds 7'h Addition, creating one lot; the vacation of the Planning d existing drainage and utility easement on Outlot F, Village on the Ponds; Site Plan Natural Resources #2002-7, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated August 2, 2002, Phone: 952.227.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 for a street level commercial and upper level apartment building with a variance for 1.35 underground parking spaces per unit; and Site Plan #2002-7, plans Public works prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated August 2, 2002, for a 11,000 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227 1300 square foot, two-story bank and office building with drive through facilities with a Fax: 952.227.1310 variance for the use of 16 percent EIFS and a signage in excess of 20 feet high. Senior Center Phone: 952.227.1125 On November 26, 2001, the Chanhassen City Council approved an amendment to Fax: 952.227.1110 the Village on the Ponds Design Standards, Development Site Coverage and Web site Building Height, www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us 5. The maximum building height shall be Sector I - four stories (residential with street level commercial or office)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to three stories/40 ft.) except for the lot on the corner of Promenade Pond and Great Plains Boulevard shall be limited to two stories and 30 feet, Sector II - three stories/40 ft., Sector III - three stories/40 ft., and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet. Building height limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers, and other architectural and roof accents. oCAW Eo The City of Chanhassen e A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. ' Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9`h Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 04-40 December 13, 2004 Page 2 And 5. The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 -unit motel. Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors and between uses subject to approval by the Planning Director, with the intent not to increase the total traffic load. The following factors shall be used in calculating the reallocation of building square footages between uses: 1 Residential apartment unit = 3 congregate care (assisted living or dementia) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 2 elderly (independent) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 360 square feet of office/service. 1 Residential apartment unit = 90 square feet of retail. 1 Residential apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional. 950 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of institutional. 300 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of office/service. 290 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of addition institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. 6. Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority of the street frontage. On September 23, 1997, the city granted Final Plat approval for Outlot C into Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Outlot A, Village on the Ponds 2°d Addition. On September 23, 1996, the City Council approved PUD 95-2, Village on the Ponds, including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use -Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Commercial/ Office/Service Institutional Dwelling_ TOTAL Retail (sq. ft.) (N. ft. (sq. ft. Units M ft. Sector I 114,500 83,500 0 160 198,000 Sector lI 60,000 * 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector III 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 Sector IV 0 0 0 162 0 TOTAL 174,500 97,500 100,000 322 372,000 * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 -unit motel. Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors and between uses subject to approval by the Planning Director, with the intent not to increase the total traffic load. The following factors shall be used in calculating the reallocation of building square footages between uses: 1 Residential apartment unit = 3 congregate care (assisted living or dementia) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 2 elderly (independent) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 360 square feet of office/service. 1 Residential apartment unit = 90 square feet of retail. 1 Residential apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional. 950 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of institutional. 300 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of office/service. 290 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of institutional. In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of addition institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. 6. Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority of the street frontage. On September 23, 1997, the city granted Final Plat approval for Outlot C into Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Outlot A, Village on the Ponds 2°d Addition. On September 23, 1996, the City Council approved PUD 95-2, Village on the Ponds, including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use -Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; j Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9`n Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 04-40 December 13, 2004 Page 3 Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (final reading); and final plat dated "Received September 19,1996" for two lots and ten outlots and public right-of-way. On August 12, 1996, the City Council granted preliminary approval of PUD #92-1 including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Officelindustrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use -Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (first reading); Preliminary plat for 13 lots and 3 outlots and public right-of-way; Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and excavate wetlands on site; Vacation of right-of-way and easements; Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) findings of Negative Declaration of the need for additional environmental investigation; and Indirect Source Permit Review for the Village on the Ponds project. FINAL PLAT The developer is proposing the creation of one lot for building C-1, Lakewinds Food Coop. Compliance Table Area (square feet) I Area (acres) Use Code (based on CBD) 10,000 10.23 Lot 1, Block 1 58,806 11.35 Building C-1 Total 58,806 11.35 LANDSCAPING AND TREE PRESERVATION The development shall comply with the landscape plan submitted and approved as part of the site plan for the Building C-1, Planning Case #04-40. Should the development not be constructed, the landscaping would need to comply with the Village on the Ponds Development Design Standards as well as city ordinance requirements for site landscaping. PARKS & RECREATION The development shall pay full park fees pursuant to city ordinance. Based on the 2004 standard of $7,000.00 per acre for commercial property, the developer shall pay $9,450.00 in park fees at the time of final plat recording. GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The site was rough graded as part of the original platting of the property. Final grading will be performed with the development of the individual site. At that time, appropriate erosion control measures will be installed. Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9`h Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 04-40 December 13, 2004 Page 4 Storm Water Ouality Fees The SWMP has established a water quality connection charge for each new subdivision based on land use. Dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. The SWMP water quality charge for commercial developments is $7,596.00 /acre. Therefore, the fee associated with this proposed 1.35 acre development will be $10,254.60. Storm Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average city-wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Commercial developments have a connection charge of $5,604.00 per developable acre. The water quantity fee for the proposed 1.35 acres development will be $7,565.40. The total storm water management fee payable at the time of final plat recording is $17,820.00 UTILITIES Currently, the site has access to public sanitary sewer and water from Lake Drive East. The plans propose on connecting to the existing utility. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. STREETS The plans propose access off of Lake Drive East and Pond Promenade. No public streets are proposed. REVIEW CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Applicant will be required to provide 208 trees as reforestation plantings. Trees are to be from the city's Approved Tree List. *This condition no longer applies. Landscaping for the lot is being provided as part of the site plan review. 2. All future site plans for the Village on the Pond development will use the conceptual landscaping plan as a guide for numbers and placement of landscape plants including trees and shrubs. No individual uses will be allowed to provide less landscaping for the site than what has been included on the master landscaping plan. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The development shall comply with the Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 91" Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 04-40 December 13, 2004 Page 5 landscape plan submitted and approved as part of the site plan for Planning Case #04-40 for Building C-1. Should that development not be constructed, the landscaping shall comply with the Village on the Ponds Development Design Standards as well as city ordinance requirements for site landscaping. 3. Applicant shall provide a landscaped walkway between individual sites along Highway 5 to allow for greater pedestrian accessibility and continuity of landscaping if the building are not moved to the foreground of their parking lots. *This condition does not apply. 4. Minimum tree removal will be allowed for the tennis courts to the west of Highway 101. No clearings will be allowed for parking spaces. *This condition no longer applies. 5. The development shall comply with the development design standards included in the staff report and incorporated herein by reference. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The development shall comply with the Development Design Standards for Village on the Ponds. 6. Grading shall be prohibited in the area between the bluff areas adjacent to Lake Susan. *This condition does not apply. 7. Fire hydrants shall be spaced at 300 foot intervals and fire hydrants shall be located at major intersections. Final hydrant approval will be given when exact street locations are known and how buildings are positioned on property. *This condition has been met. 8. Turning radiuses of fire apparatus access roads shall be submitted to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval. *This condition has been met. 9. Fire lanes will be marked with the appropriate street signage and yellow curbing. Fire Marshal will determine fire lanes upon review of plans and final access routes and at that point determine exact placement of signs and yellow curbing. *This condition still applies. 0 • Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds Oh Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 0440 December 13, 2004 Page 6 10. The road or driveway access directly east of the existing Lake Drive must have a street name. The street name must be submitted to the Fire Marshal for review and approval. *This condition has been met (Pond Promenade). 11. Premises identification will be reviewed as specific buildings are being proposed. Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy # 29-1992 will be used as basic criteria for numbering the buildings. Due to the complexity of this project, numbering on more than one side will be necessary as well as additional monument or directional signage. *This condition still applies. 12. Final grading plan shall incorporate the following changes: Provide compatible site grades for the future upgrade of Grandview Road through Lots 8 and 10, Block 1. *This condition has been met. - Delete tennis courts. *This condition has been met. - Relocate NURP Basin No. 4 westerly outside of existing Trunk Highway 101 right-of-way. Consider consolidation of NURP Basin No. 3 with NURP Basin No. 4 and oversize NURP Basin No. 4 to accommodate future stormwater runoff south of the development. *This condition has been met. - Adjust grading limits on Lot 2, Block 2 to avoid tree loss. *This condition has been met. - Phases of grading the development shall be shown. *This condition has been met. - Incorporate fencing with the construction of the 12 -foot high retaining wall on Lot 10, Block 1. *This condition has been met. - Rerouting of Riley Creek shall be developed and approved by the DNR. 0 0 Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9`n Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 0440 December 13, 2004 Page 7 *This condition does not apply to this phase. - Revise grades along Trunk Highway 101 for a future trail underneath Trunk Highway 101. *This condition has been met. - All NURP basins shall be constructed with either 3:1 side slopes with a 10:1 bench at the normal water level for the first 1 -foot of depth or 4:1 side slopes overall. *This condition has been met. - Add high water levels to all NURP basins and wetlands. *This condition has been met. - No berming allowed in any public right-of-way. *This condition has been met. - Maintain 71h feet of cover over City's watermain along Trunk Highway 101. *This condition has been met. - Include lot lines, lot numbers, block numbers, and storm sewers with structure numbers. *This condition has been met. 13. Final plat approval shall be contingent upon clarification of the issues relating to the vacation of Great Plains Boulevard and portions of Trunk Highway 101 lying westerly of the future Trunk Highway 101 corridor. *This condition has been met. 14. The lowest floor elevation of buildings adjacent to ponds and wetland shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100 -year high water level. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The lowest floor elevation of buildings adjacent to ponds and wetland shall be a minimum of three (3) feet above the 100 -year high water level. 15. The City shall assume maintenance and ownership of the stormwater ponding facilities and wetlands two years after completion of the site improvements. The appropriate drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated on the final plat over ponding areas and wetlands. The easements shall encompass the storm ponds and wetlands up to the 100 -year flood level. Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9`h Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 0440 December 13, 2004 Page 8 Storm sewer facilities which lie outside of public right-of-way shall be privately owned and maintained by the applicant or its successors. *This condition does not apply to this phase since there are no storm water ponds associated with this phase. 16. The proposed 8 -inch water line through Lot 10, Block 1 along the northerly side of proposed St. Hubert's Church shall be extended along the secondary access road to the east property line. In addition, sanitary and storm sewer and water service shall be extended to the east property line of the plat through the northerly access road to Grandview Road via Lake Drive and sanitary sewer shall be extended south of the school to the east property line. *This condition has been met. 17. All sanitary sewer and water lines with the exception of the individual building services shall be owned and maintained by the City upon completion. As -built construction plans will be required before the City accepts the utilities. *This condition does not apply. 18. The existing house on Lot 1, Block 2 shall be razed within 30 days after the final plat is recorded and the appropriate demolition permits will be required through the City's Building Department. Existing wells and/septic systems on the site shall be abandoned per State health codes and City ordinance. *This condition has been met. 19. The final plat shall dedicate right-of-way for future Grandview Road over the easterly 17 feet of Lots 8 and 10, Block 1 paralleling existing Grandview Road. *This condition has been met. 20. All access points on to Trunk Highway 101 are subject to MnDOT and city approval. *This condition does not apply to this phase. 21. Detailed storm sewer calculations for a 10 -year and 100 -year storm events along with ponding calculations based on Walker's PONDNEf methodology along with pre and post -runoff conditions shall be submitted to City staff for review and approval prior to final plat consideration. *This condition is being met as part of the site plan review. 0 r Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9`n Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 04-40 December 13, 2004 Page 9 22. The applicant will be responsible for the appropriate water quantity connection fees based on the City's Surface Water Management Plan. Staff has estimated the proposed development would be responsible for a water quantity fee of $159,206.00 and a water quality fee of $267,323.00. Credits may be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees for oversizing of the ponding facilities and oversizing of trunk storm sewer after review of the final construction plans and drainage/ponding calculations. The SWMP fees are payable at time of final plat. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The applicant shall pay water quality fees of $10,254.60 and water quantity fees of $7,565.40. The SWMP fees totaling $17,820.00 are payable at time of final plat recording. 23. The applicant shall be responsible for the installation of street lights along the private and public streets. The applicant and City staff shall work together to prepare a street lighting plan to be incorporated into the street construction plans. *This condition has been met. 24. The applicant will be required to enter into a PUD/development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security and administration fees to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval. *Since there are no public improvements, this condition shall be modified as follows: The developer shall pay required administrative fees prior to the recording of the plat. 25. The applicant shall design and construct the street and utility improvements in accordance to the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications for the public improvements shall be submitted to City staff for review and formal approval by City Council in conjunction with final plat approval. *This condition does not apply since there are no public improvements. 26. The applicant shall provide a copy of the covenants for review and approval by the City and shall be filed at the County with the final plat documents. *This condition still applies. 27. The applicant shall apply for and obtain all necessary permits from the regulatory agencies such as the MPCA, Health Department, Watershed District, DNR, Army Corps of Engineers, MnDOT, Metropolitan Council Wastewater Services, and Carver County Highway Department. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the regulatory agencies such as Carver County, the Minnesota Department of Health, MCES, Watershed District, Minnesota DNR, MPCA and MnDOT. • Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9`h Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 0440 December 13, 2004 Page 10 28. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction. The applicant will comply with the City Engineers direction as far as abandonment or relocation of the drain tile. *This condition is still applicable. 29. The applicant shall develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management practice Handbook (BMPH). Type III erosion control fencing will be required around the wetlands. The site may also require additional erosion control fence on the slopes and/or temporary sediment basins. Wood fiber blankets shall be utilized on all slopes in excess of 3:1. *This condition does not apply to this phase. 30. Drainage and conservation easements shall be dedicated over all wetland areas within the subdivision including outlots. Wetland mitigation measures shall be developed and subject to approval by the City. The mitigation measures shall be completed in conjunction with the site grading and restoration. *This condition does not apply to this phase. 31. The applicant reduce the impacts to Wetland 2000, create a larger on site mitigation area and present a sequencing plan showing reduced impact to affected wetlands. *This condition has been met. 32. City staff and the applicant shall investigate the origin of Wetland 6000 to determine if this area can be exempt from the Wetland Conservation Act. *This condition has been met. 33. Buffer strips shall be provided around Wetland 5000. The buffer strips shall be 10 to 30 feet in width with an average width of 20 feet. *This condition has been met. 34. The street section for the public portion of Lake Drive shall be constructed to 36 -feet wide face- to-face with concrete curb and gutter. The street section which accesses Grandview Road within the plat shall be constructed to 31 -feet wide back-to-back with concrete curb and gutter. A temporary cul-de-sac with a 25 -foot radius shall be constructed at the end of the public street for Grandview Road. All private streets shall be constructed in accordance with the City's private street ordinance which requires a minimum 26 -foot wide drive aisles and built to 7 -ton design. Mr. Todd Gerhardt • Village on the Ponds 9`h Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 04-40 December 13, 2004 Page 11 *This condition has been met. 35. Depending on the phasing of the project, Trunk Highway 101 may need to be upgraded to four lanes, as well as, turn lanes and traffic signals. This will be further evaluated contingent upon the outcome of the traffic study being reviewed by SRF. The applicant shall incorporate the necessary traffic improvements as recommended by SRF accordingly. Should the traffic signals not be required with the initial phase of development, the applicant will be required to escrow with the City their fair share of the cost for future installation. Security shall be a means of a letter of credit or a certificate of deposit. All Trunk Highway 101 improvements shall meet State Aid standards. The applicants responsibility for the traffic signals along Trunk Highway 101 shall be 37% of the total cost. A cost sharing agreement between the applicant and City shall be drafted for the installation of any traffic signals. *This condition has been met. 36. The applicant shall provide cross -access easements and maintenance agreements for use of the private streets. Cross -access easements should also qualify the secondary access road for public use to Grandview Road. *This condition has been met. 37. The applicant shall also convey to the City a trail easement over Lot 9, Block 1 and Outlots B and C once the trail alignment has been approved and constructed. *This condition does not apply to this phase. 38. The applicant shall dedicate the future Trunk Highway 101 right-of-way with the initial phase of development in conjunction with an agreement by the city for the vacation of TH 101. *This condition has been met. 39. The application be approved as presented with certain conditions regarding parks and recreation: a. The south Rice Marsh Lake Trail connection be identified on the plan. b. If the trail along TH 101 south of Rosemount is disturbed during construction, an agreement for replacement be coordinated with the applicant. c. There be a joint agreement for future use of the soccer field between the community and St. Hubert's Church. d. Full park and trail fees be collected per city ordinance. *This condition shall be modified as follows: The developer shall pay $9,450.00 in park fees at the time of final plat recording. Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9'h Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 04-40 December 13, 2004 Page 12 40. Unless setbacks can be maintained for existing TH 101, development of Block 2 is contingent upon the upgrade of State Hwy. 101. *This condition has been met. 41. The developer shall create a schematic booklet depicting development design standards and definitions. *This condition has been met. 42. The developer shall create and maintain an Architectural and Landscape Review Committee to review and approve development and building plans for buildings within the Village on the Ponds. *This condition has been met. 43. The developer shall work with the city to accomplish City goals for housing including the provision of "affordable" housing. *This condition still applies. 44. The developer and future site users shall be required to incorporate street/plaza furniture, planting boxes, public art, bicycle racks, drinking fountains, etc. within the development and on individual site plans. *This condition still applies. 45. The applicant shall prepare a detail plan for the design of the wetland alterations. *This condition has been met. 46. The applicant shall provide specific landscaping plan for wetland 2000 and along TH 5. *This condition has been met. 47. For two years following final approval of the development, no changes in official controls of the city shall affect the development. *This condition has been met. 48. A Phase H historical analysis shall be performed on potential archaeological sites as delineated in the EAW. *This condition has been met. 0 0 Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9`h Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 0440 December 13, 2004 Page 13 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves the Final Plat for Village on the Ponds 91h Addition, creating one lot subject to the following conditions: 1. The development shall comply with the landscape plan submitted and approved as part of the site plan for Planning Case #04-40 for Building C-1. Should that development not be constructed, the landscaping shall comply with the Village on the Ponds Development Design Standards as well as city ordinance requirements for site landscaping. 2. The development shall comply with the Development Design Standards for Village on the Ponds. 3. Fire lanes will be marked with the appropriate street signage and yellow curbing. Fire Marshal will determine fire lanes upon review of plans and final access routes and at that point detemune exact placement of signs and yellow curbing. 4. Premises identification will be reviewed as specific buildings are being proposed. Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy # 29-1992 will be used as basic criteria for numbering the buildings. Due to the complexity of this project, numbering on more than one side will be necessary as well as additional monument or directional signage. 5. The lowest floor elevation of buildings adjacent to ponds and wetland shall be a minimum of three (3) feet above the 100 -year high water level. 6. The applicant shall pay water quality fees of $10,254.60 and water quantity fees of $7,565.40. The SWMP fees totaling $17,820.00 are payable at time of final plat recording. 7. The developer shall pay required administrative fees prior to the recording of the plat. 8. The applicant shall provide a copy of the covenants for review and approval by the City and shall be filed at the County with the final plat documents. 9. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the regulatory agencies such as Carver County, the Minnesota Department of Health, MCES, Watershed District, Minnesota DNR, MPCA and MnDOT. 10. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction. The applicant will comply with the City Engineers direction as far as abandonment or relocation of the drain tile. 0 0 Mr. Todd Gerhardt Village on the Ponds 9'h Addition Final Plat Approval Planning Case No. 04-40 December 13, 2004 Page 14 11. The developer shall pay $9,450.00 in park fees at the time of final plat recording. 12. The developer and future site users shall be required to incorporate street/plaza furniture, planting boxes, public art, bicycle racks, drinking fountains, etc. within the development and on individual site plans." ATTACHMENTS 1. Final Plat. 2. Resolution Approving Village on the Ponds 90, Addition. 3. Village on the Ponds Development Design Standards. 4. Breakdown of Administrative Fees. g:\plan\2004 planning cases\04-40 - village on the ponds building c-1 food coop\cc staff report 12-13-04 final plat approval.doc DATE: MOTION BY: CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO: SECONDED BY: A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL PLAT CREATING VILLAGES ON THE PONDS NINTH ADDITION, VOP I, LLC WHEREAS, VOP I, LLC has requested a subdivision of the property located at the SOUTHWEST corner of Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive into one lot of 1.35 acres; and WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision complies with all requirements of the Chanhassen City Code; and WHEREAS, the Chanhassen Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 17, 1996, and found the plan consistent with the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan and Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance and recommended approval of the subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chanhassen City Council hereby approves PUD #95-2 granting Final Plat approval for Village on the Ponds 9`" Addition, creating one lot subject to the following conditions: 1. The development shall comply with the landscape plan submitted and approved as part of the site plan for Planning Case #04-40 for Building C-1. Should that development not be constructed, the landscaping shall comply with the Village on the Ponds Development Design Standards as well as city ordinance requirements for site landscaping. 2. The development shall comply with the Development Design Standards for Village on the Ponds. 3. Fire lanes will be marked with the appropriate street signage and yellow curbing. Fire Marshal will determine fire lanes upon review of plans and final access routes and at that point determine exact placement of signs and yellow curbing. 4. Premises identification will be reviewed as specific buildings are being proposed. Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy # 29-1992 will be used as basic criteria for numbering the buildings. Due to the complexity of this project, numbering on more than one side will be necessary as well as additional monument or directional signage. 0 � I 5. The lowest floor elevation of buildings adjacent to ponds and wetland shall be a minimum of three (3) feet above the 100 -year high water level. 6. The applicant shall pay water quality fees of $10,254.60 and water quantity fees of $7,565.40. The SWMP fees totaling $17,820.00 are payable at time of final plat recording. 7. The developer shall pay required administrative fees prior to the recording of the plat. 8. The applicant shall provide a copy of the covenants for review and approval by the City and shall be filed at the County with the final plat documents. 9. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the regulatory agencies such as Carver County, the Minnesota Department of Health, MCES, Watershed District, Minnesota DNR, MPCA and MnDOT. 10. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction. The applicant will comply with the City Engineers direction as far as abandonment or relocation of the drain tile. 11. The developer shall pay $9,450.00 in park fees at the time of final plat recording. 12. The developer and future site users shall be required to incorporate street/plaza furniture, planting boxes, public art, bicycle racks, drinking fountains, etc. within the development and on individual site plans. Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 13th day December of 2004. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, City Clerk/Manager YES NO gAplan\bg\Villages\Resolution Villages 9th Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor ABSENT 0 0 Adopted September 23, 1996 Amended August 13, 2001 Amended November 26, 2001 VILLAGES ON THE PONDS CHANHASSEN,IVIINNESOTA DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a mixed use PUD consisting of commercial, institutional, office, and residential uses. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below. b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone should be limited to uses as defined below or similar uses to those as listed in the Standard Industrial Classification. If there is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director shall make that interpretation. No single retail user shall exceed 20,000 square feet on a single level of a building. A maximum of thirty- three (33) percent of the square footage of the retail users within the development may be of a "big box" category. The intent of this requirement is to provide a variety of users, including small retail shops, service providers, coffee shops, cabarets, etc., for residents of the Villages as well as the community as a whole, rather than typical suburban type large, individual users dominating the development and detracting from the "village" character. Retail users should be those that support and compliment the residential development located within the development, providing goods and services which enhance residents of the village and the community. Office. Professional and business office, non -retail activity except for showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on-site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. bank/credit union finance, insurance and real estate health services - except nursing homes and hospitals engineering, accounting, research management and related services legal services Personal Services. Establishments primarily engaged in providing services involving the care of a person or his or her personal goods or apparel. dry cleaning beauty or barbershop shoe repair photographic studio tax return preparation laundromat health club optical goods computer services day care center copying mail stores Institutional. Establishments that are public/semi-public in nature. church library education services day care art gallery dance studio cultural facility Commercial/Retail. Establishments engaged in commercial operations including retail sales and services and hospitality industries. Apparel and Accessory Stores shoe stores electronic and music store and musical instruments restaurant — no drive through, except on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2°d Addition through a conditional use permit and compliance with the following standards - the drive through shall provide sufficient stacking to assure that traffic is not backed into the parking lot drive aisles; loud speakers used for ordering shall be shielded so that noise is not heard off-site, and the drive through shall be screened from off-site views. (amended 8/13/01) restaurant - fast food only if integrated into a building no freestanding fast food and no drive through drug storelpharmacy book/stationary jewelry store hobby/toy game gift novelty and souvenir sewing, needlework and piece good florist camera and photographic supply art and art supplies, gallery sporting goods video rental food stores including bakery and confectionery hardware store computer store hotel/motel entertainment liquor store pets and pet supplies home furnishings Residential. Residential units shall be provided as upper level units above the commereialloffice uses within the village core and as stand alone units. A minimum of 50 percent of the residential units shall be rental units. Of the rental units, the city has adopted a goal of 35 percent of the units meeting the Metropolitan Council's affordable criteria. For the ownership housing, the city has adopted the goal of 50 percent of the units meeting the Metropolitan Council's affordable criteria. Prohibited Uses: auto related including auto sales, auto repair, gas stations c. Setbacks In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply: Buildine Parking Great Plains Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback C, 0' 0' Market Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback C, 50' 20' Hwy. 5: Buffer yard & Setback B, 50' 20' Interior Side Lot Line: Buffer yard & setback NA, 0' 0' East Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to residential): Buffer yard & setback D, 50' 50' West Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to industrial): Buffer yard & setback B, 50 20 0 0 Buffer yards are as specified in the City of Chanhassen Landscaping and Tree Removal Ordinance, Article XXV. No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height 1. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70% for the overall development. Individual lots may exceed this threshold, but in no case shall the average exceed 70 percent. 2. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. The maximum building height shall be Sector I - four stories (residential with street level commercial or office)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to three stories/40 ft.) except for the lot on the corner of Promenade Pond and Great Plains Boulevard shall be limited to two stories and 30 feet, Sector II - three stories/40 ft., Sector III - three stories/40 ft., and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet. Building height limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers, and other architectural and roof accents. (Amended 11/26/01) 4. The maximum building footprint for any one building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet without a street level break in the continuity of the building, e.g., pedestrian passageways, except for the church and residential only buildings. 5. The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: (amended 11/26/01) * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 unit motel. 4 Commercial/ Office/Service Institutional Dwelline TOTAL sq. ft. Retail (sq. ft.) (sa. ft.) (N. ft.) Units Sector I 114,500 83,500 0 160 198,000 Sector II 60,000 * 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector III 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 Sector IV 0 0 0 162 0 TOTAL 174,500 97,500 100,000 322 372,000 (amended 11/26/01) * Includes 47,200 square foot, 106 unit motel. 4 0 0 Building square footages may be reallocated between sectors and between uses subject to approval by the Planning Director. The following factors shall be used in calculating the reallocation of building square footages between uses: 1 Residential apartment unit = 3 congregate care (assisted living or dementia) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 2 elderly (independent) unit. 1 Residential apartment unit = 360 square feet of office/service. 1 Residential apartment unit = 90 square feet of retail. 1 Residential apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional. 950 square feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of institutional. 300 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of officelservice. 290 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of institutional. (amended 11/26/01) In no instance shall more than 27,000 square feet of addition institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. 6. Buildings adjacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on the majority of the street frontage. (amended 11/26/01) e. Building Materials and Design The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. The intent is to create a pedestrian friendly, "traditional' village character consistent with the European heritage of the upper midwest and the atmosphere within this development, yet with the amenities and technological tools of modern times. The village elevations shown on the PUD drawings are to be used only as a general guideline and the reflection of the overall village image including the north - midwestern architectural vocabulary, village like human scale and flavor, and variety in design and facade treatment. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Major exterior surfaces of all walls shall be face brick, stone, glass, stucco, architecturally treated concrete, cast in place panels, decorative block, cedar siding, vinyl siding in residential with support materials, or approved equivalent as determined by the city. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted block or brick. Bright, long, continuous bands are prohibited. Bright or brilliant colors and sharply contrasting colors may be used only for accent purposes and shall not exceed 10 percent of a wall area. 3. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. Exposed cement ("cinder") blocks shall be prohibited. 4. Metal siding, gray concrete, curtain walls and similar materials will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials, or as trim or as HVAC screen, and may not exceed more than 25 percent of a wall area. 0 L -j 5. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 6. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by walls of compatible appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material compatible to the building. 7. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. 8. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal or accessory structures. 9. There shall not be underdeveloped backsides of buildings. All elevations shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. 10. The materials and colors used for each building shall be selected in context with the adjacent building and provide for a harmonious integration with them. Extreme variations between buildings on the same street in terms of overall appearance, bulk and height, setbacks and colors shall be prohibited. 11. Slope roof elements shall be incorporated in all structures: Sector I - minimum 70 percent of roof area shall be sloped, Sector 11- minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, Sector III - minimum of 30 percent of the roof area shall be sloped, and Sector IV - minimum of 70 percent of the roof area shall be sloped. An exception to this requirement are roof areas designed for human use such as decks, garden areas, patios, etc., which will not be counted towards flat roof area. 12. The following design elements should be incorporated into individual structures: Building Accents Towers, silos, arches, columns, bosses, tiling, cloisters, colonnades, buttresses, loggias, marquees, minarets, portals, reveals, quoins, clerestories, pilasters. Roof Tvces Barrow, dome, gable, hip, flat. Roof Accents 0 Cupolas, cornices, belfries, turrets, pinnacles, look -outs, gargoyles, parapets, lanterns. Accent elements such as towers, turrets, spires, etc., shall be excluded from the sector building height limitation. Window Types Bay, single paned, multi -paned, angular, square, rectangular, half -round, round, italianate. Window Accents Plant boxes, shutters, balconies, decks, grates, canopies, awnings, recesses, embrasures, arches, lunettes. 13. Street level windows shall be provided for a minimum of 50 percent of the ground level wall area. E Site Landscaping and Screening All buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I shall be installed when the grading of the phase is completed. This may well result in landscaping being required ahead of individual site plan approvals, but we believe the buffer yard and boulevard plantings, in particular, need to be established immediately. In addition, to adhere to the higher quality of development as spelled out in the PUD zone, all loading areas shall be screened. Each lot for development shall submit a separate landscaping plan as a part of the site plan review process. 2. All open spaces and non -parking lot surfaces, except for plaza areas, shall be landscaped, rockscaped, or covered with plantings and/or lawn material. Tree wells shall be included in pedestrian areas and plazas. 3. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited. 4. Undulating or angular berms 3' to 5' in height, south of Highway 5 and along Market Boulevard shall be sodded or seeded at the conclusion of grading and utility construction. The required buffer landscaping may be installed where it is deemed necessary to screen any proposed development. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 5. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. 6. Native species shall be incorporated into site landscaping, whenever possible. g. Signage 0 0 One project identification sign shall be permitted for the development at each end of Lake Drive and at the south end of Main Street. Project identification sign(s) may also be located at the entrances to the development(s) in Sector IV. Project identification signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display area nor be greater than five feet in height. One project identification sign, with a maximum height of 20 feet, which may be increased in height subject to city approval based on the design and scale of the sign, designed as a gateway to the project shall be located at the north end of Main Street. Individual lots are not permitted low profile ground business sign. Within Sector III, one sign for the church and one sign for the school may be placed on streetscape walls. The top of the signs shall not extend more than eight feet above the ground and the total sign area for the signs shall not exceed 64 square feet. Pylon signs are prohibited. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. 2. All signs require a separate sign permit. 3. Wall business signs shall comply with the city's sign ordinance for the central business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on the "street" front and primary parking lot front of each building. 4. Projecting signs are permitted along Main Street and Lake Drive and along pedestrian passageways subject to the conditions below. Signage Plan and Restrictions Wall Signs 1. The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the tops of which shall not extend greater than 20 feet above the ground. In Sector II, sign height may be increase based on the criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building architecture and design. The letters and logos shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall be constructed of wood, metal, or translucent facing. 2. If illuminated, individual dimensional letters and logos comprising each sign may be any of the following: a. Exposed neon/fiber optic, b. Open channel with exposed neon, c. Channel Letters with acrylic facing, d. Reverse channel letters (halo lighted), or e. Externally illuminated by separate lighting source. 0 0 3. Tenant signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band and do not occupy more than 15% of the sign area unless the logo is the sign. 4. Within Sector 11, architecturally, building -integrated panel tenant/logo sign may be permitted based on criteria that the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building design and architecture. 5. Back lit awnings are prohibited. Projecting Signs 1. The letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign area. 2. All wooden signs shall be sandblasted and letters shall be an integral part of the building's architecture. 3. Signage shall consist of store identification only. Copy is restricted to the tenant's proper name and major product or service offered and such minimal messages such as date of establishment of business. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are permitted provided they are confined within the signage band or within the projecting sign and do not occupy more than fifteen (15) percent of the sign display area. 4. Projecting signs shall be stationary, may not be self -illuminated but may be lighted by surface mounted fixtures located on the sign or the adjacent facade. 5. Projecting signs shall be limited to one per tenant on street frontage and pedestrian passageway and my not exceed six square feet. Letters shall have a maximum height of 12 inches. 6. Projecting signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk and shall not project more than six feet from the building facade. Plastic, plexi -glass, clear plex, or similar material projecting signs are prohibited unless used in conjunction with other decorative materials. 8. Projecting signs may be painted, prefrnished, or utilize exposed metal. Any exposed metal shall be anodized aluminum, stainless steel, titanium, bronze, or other similar non- corrosive or ono -oxidizing materials. Window Signs 1. Window signs shall not cover more than 25 percent of the window area in which they are located. 0 0 2. Window signs shall not use bright, garish, or neon paint, tape, chalk, or paper. Menu Signs Shall be located at eye level adjacent to tenant entries and shall not exceed 4 feet in height. 2. Shall be used only to convey daily specials, menus and offerings and shall be wood framed chalkboard and/or electronic board with temporary handwritten lettering. No paper construction or messages will be permitted. 3. Menu signs shall be limited to one per tenant and may not exceed 8 square feet. Festive Flags/Banners 1. Flags and banners shall be permitted on approved standards attached to the building facade and on standards attached to pedestrian area lighting. 2. Plastic flags and banners are prohibited. 3. Flags and banners shall be constructed of fabric. 4. Banners shall not contain advertising for individual users, businesses, services, or products. Flags and banners shall project from buildings a maximum of two feet. 6. Flags and banners shall have a maximum area of 10 square feet. 7. Flags and banners which are torn or excessively wom shall be removed at the request of the city. Building Directory In multi -tenant buildings, one building directory sign may be permitted. The directory sign shall not exceed eight square feet. Pole Directory Sign Pole directory signs consisting of single poles with individual nameplate type directional arrows may be located within the development. 2. Pole directory sign shall not exceed 15 feet in height. 10 E E 3. Directory signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk. 4. A maximum of eight directory signs may be provided per pole. 5. The maximum size of an individual sign shall be 18 inches long by four inches wide. 6. Poles shall be a minimum of 10 feet behind the curb. h. Lighting 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. The plans do not provide for street lighting. As with previous developments, the City has required the developer to install street lights throughout the street system. 2. A shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with decorative natural colored pole shall be used throughout the development parking lot area for lighting. Decorative, pedestrian scale lighting shall be used in plaza and sidewalk areas and may be used in parking lot areas. Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 4. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the project perimeter property line. This does not apply to street lighting. 5. Light poles shall be limited to a height of 20 feet. 6. Lighting for parking areas shall minimize the use of lights on pole standards in the parking area. Rather, emphasis should be placed on building lights and poles located in close proximity to buildings. i. Parking 1. Parking shall be provided based on the shared use of surface parking areas whenever possible. Cross access easements and the joint use of parking facilities shall be protected by a recorded instrument acceptable to the city. 2. A minimum of 75 percent of a building's parking shall be located to the "rear" of the structure and in underground garages. 3. The development shall be treated as a integrated shopping center and provide a minimum of one space per 200 square feet of commercial/retail area. The office/personal service component shall be treated as an integrated office building and provide 4.5 space per 1,000 square feet for the first 49,999 square feet, four per thousand square feet for the 11 0 0 second 50,000 square feet, and 3.5 per thousand square feet thereafter. Residential uses shall provide 1.5 spaces per unit as underground parking with visitor spaces provided as part of the commercial/office uses. Within sector IV, visitor parking shall be provided at a rate of 0.5 stalls per unit. Hotel/motels shall comply with city ordinance. Churches/schools shall comply with city ordinance, however, a minimum of 50 percent of the parking shall be shared. 12 �—� -v -v 6£SS NW Tl3S5tllRMp �� ® �� ��,� awa a^•A�+� xa � NW N3SStl4iNV4i� ' a�r 713d013A30 40li®iF4H ; i YI m aa_ = a e e e aSSS? x a? a x HI m'8 qp a z W a 0 0 CITY OF CHANHASSEN VILLAGES ON THE PONDS 9TH ADD. LUR NO. 04-15 BREAKDOWN OF ADMINISTRATION FEES - 12/2/04 Based on $0 of Estimated Public Improvements 3% of Public Improvement Costs (up to $500,000) $ Final Plat Process (Attorney Fee for Review and Recording of $ 450.00 Plat and Development Contract) Recording Fees a. Plat Filing $ 30.00 Park Fees 1.35 Acres @ $7,000/ac Surface Water Management Fee GIS Fee ($25/plat and $10/parcel) TOTAL ADMINISTRATION FEES Villages 9th FEE xls $ 17,820.00 $ 35.00 $ 27,785 8 a MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Cl l l OF FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner CgANI11lJSEN DATE: December 13, 2004 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 SUBJ: Site Plan Approval for a 18,200 square -foot commercial building Chanhassen, MN 55317 (coop grocery) with Variance to the commercial design standards; Administration Planning Case #04-40 Phone: 952.227.1100 Fax: 952.227. 1110 Building Inspections EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Phone, 952.227 1180 Fax: 952 227 1190 The developer, VOP I, is requesting Site Plan Approval for an 18,188 square -foot Engineering commercial building with Variance to the commercial design standards to permit Phone: 952,227.1160 the use of faux window treatments. Fax: 952.227.1170 Finance ACTION REQUIRED Phone: 952127.1140 Fax: 952.227.1110 City Council approval requires a majority of City Council present. Pad & Recreation Phone: 952127.1120 PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY Fax: 952.227.1110 Recreation center The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 16, 2004, to review 2310 Coulter Boulevard the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 to approve the Phone: 2 Fax: 952.227.1404 proposed project. The summary and verbatim minutes are item la of the City Council packet for December 13, 2004. Planning & Natural Resources RECOMMENDATION Phone: 952127.1130 Fax: 952.227.1110 Staff recommends adoption of the motion as specified on page 11 of the staff Punic woos report dated November 16, 2004, as modified. 1591 Park Road Phone: 952.227.1300 Fax: 952.227 1310 ATTACHMENTS Senior Center Phone: 952,227 1125 Planning Commission Staff Report Dated November 11, 2004. Fax: 952.227 1110 Web Site gAplanx2004 planning cases\04-00 - village on the ponds building c-1 food cooptexecutive sunvnary.doc www.d.chanhassennn.us - 4� The City of Chanhassen • A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks. A great place to live, work, and play. F z 0-0 v a a a Q I CITY OF CHANHASSEN STAFF REPORT PC DV 11/16/04 [4] CC DATE: 12/13/04 REVIEW DEADLINE: December 14, 2004 CASE #: 04110 BY: RG, LH, ML, MA, JS, ST PROPOSAL: Request for Site Plan Approval for a 18,200 square -foot commercial building (coop grocery) with Variance to the commercial design standards. LOCATION: Southeast comer of Lake Drive and Great Plains Boulevard Outlot B, Village on the Ponds 80' Addition APPLICANT: VOP I, LLC c/o Lotus Realty Services P. O. Box 235 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)934-4538 PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development, PUD, mixed use 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Mixed Use ACREAGE: 1.35 acres DENSITY: F.A.R. 0.31 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Request for Site Plan Approval for an 18,188 square -foot commercial building with Variance to the commercial design standards to permit the use of faux window treatments LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets those standards, the con City must then approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi judicial decision. Location Map • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 (Food Coop) Outlot B, Village on the Ponds 8th Addition City of Chanhassen Planning Case No. 04-40 go J\eJara Subject Site state HWy 5 Arboretum Planning Commission a 0 Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The developer is proposing a one story with a mezzanine level, 18,188 square -foot commercial building for a coop grocery. The building materials consist of stucco, wood siding, brick and face block. The applicant is requesting a variance from the commercial design standards to permit less than fifty (50) percent of the first floor fagade that is viewed by the public to include transparent windows and/or doors. Instead of transparent windows, the developer is proposing the use of faux windows with awnings to provide additional architectural details. To the north of the site are Culvers Restaurant and the Silo Building (Village on the Ponds Building 4). To the west of the site are Pond Promenade, Community Bank Chanhassen and the proposed Village on the Ponds Building C (residential units over commercial). South of the site is Lake Drive and the Foss Swim School. East of the site is Lake Drive and a residential subdivision, Hidden Valley. The site is serviced with sewer and water which was installed as part of the Village on the Ponds initial development. Storm water shall be treated within the Village on the Ponds storm water system. The site was preliminary graded with the initial Village on the Ponds development and then rough graded to approximately its final grade as part of Village on the Ponds 8°i Addition and the construction of the Community Bank Chanhassen Building. Access to the site will be via two entrances off Lake Drive as well as access via Pond Promenade. As part of the original Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Villages on the Ponds development, a traffic study was completed. A traffic study was also completed for the nearby Park Nicollet Clinic. Each of these previous studies stated that, at some time in the future, a 4 -way stop would be required at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East. As part of the development review for the project, we took another look at this intersection with the proposed food coop development. The new traffic study looked at traffic volume, operational analysis, and the need for additional traffic control measure at the existing intersection of Great Plains/Lake Drive. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan with a variance to the fenestration standards subject to the conditions of the staff report. BACKGROUND On October 28, 2002, the Chanhassen City Council approved the final plat for PUD 95-2, Villages on the Ponds 8th Addition, creating two lots and two outlots from Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2°d Addition. The two lots are the site for the two-story bank office building and the four-story commercial and apartment building. One of the outlots contains Pond Promenade. The other outlot is the site for the proposed Coop. On November 26, 2001, the Chanhassen City Council approved an amendment to the Villages on the Ponds Design Standards, Development Site Coverage and Building Height, Planning Commission 0 0 Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 3 3. The maximum building height shall be Sector I - four stories (residential with street level commercial or office)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to three stories/40 ft.) except for the lot on the corner of Promenade Pond and Great Plains Boulevard shall be limited to two stories and 30 feet, Sector II - three stories/40 ft., Sector III - three stories/40 ft., and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet. Building height limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers, and other architectural and roof accents. On September 23, 1997, the city granted Final Plat approval for Outlot C into Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2°a Addition. On September 23, 1996, the City Council approved PUD 95-2, Villages on the Ponds, including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use -Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (final reading); and final plat dated "Received September 19,1996" for two lots and ten outlots and public right-of-way. On August 12, 1996, the City Council granted preliminary approval of PUD #92-1 including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use -Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercial/office buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (fust reading); Preliminary plat for 13 lots and 3 outlots and public right-of-way; Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and excavate wetlands on site; Vacation of right-of-way and easements; Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) findings of Negative Declaration of the need for additional environmental investigation; and Indirect Source Permit Review for the Village on the Ponds project. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 6, Site Plan Review Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 7, Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office - Institutional Developments Village on the Ponds Development Design Standards Planning Commission 0 • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 4 GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE Size portion Placement The proposed entry to the building is on the southwestern elevation of the building toward Pond Promenade. The entry is covered by a circular teal green metal roof and a buttercup yellow awning. Above the entry is a raised parapet three feet higher than the adjacent parapet walls. The building has significant articulation including angled walls, projected and recessed wall areas, transparent windows and doors, canopies, faux windows, planter boxes and variations in materials and colors. Material, detail and color Building materials are of high quality. The primary building material consists of stucco painted in four different colors: Coconut Grove (off-white), Ligonier Tan, Western Reserve Beige and Sombrero (pinkish clay). As accent, the developer is proposing the use of face block as a base material in a random mix of oyster, toffee and saddle colors. Additionally, the building incorporates the use of classic oak brick as a base and a column material. One wall is proposed using wood siding with blue spruce paint. Roof material consists of teal green standing seam metal and charcoal gray asphalt shingles. Awnings are proposed in Sea Spray green, Buttercup yellow and Salmon. Staff s one concern with the building material is the use of the wood siding with a spruce blue paint finish on the eastern elevation of the building. We believe that this surface and finish is not compatible or harmonious with the balance of the building architecture. Staff would recommend that this wall be constructed of the brick material which will repeat, on a larger scale, the use of brick for vertical elements on three of the other building elevations as well as more closely match the color scheme of the building. Height and Roof Design The building height is 20 to 24 feet. Parapet walls of two to six feet with one area of nine foot parapet walls above the entrance shall provide screening for all the rooftop equipment and help to provide additional vertical articulation to the building. The proposed building height is within the height limitation contained in the Village on the Ponds design standards. There are pitched roof elements in the asphalt mansard roof treatment as well in the metal canopy and other fabric canopies. Facade transparency The applicant is requesting a variance from the requirement that 50 percent of the first floor elevation that is viewed by the public include transparent windows and or doors. All other areas Planning Commission & • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 5 include landscaping material and architectural detailing and articulation. The installation of windows on some elevations is not possible due to the internal use of the building for storage and refrigerators. In these instances, the developer is proposing the use of faux windows with canopies and planter boxes to add architectural detailing. Following is a breakdown of the openings within each elevation of the building including the faux windows: ELEVATION CALCULATIONS FOR LAKEWINDS RETAIL SURFACE AREA BELOW 12 FEET PER ELEVATIONS OPAQUE OPENINGS FAKE WINDOWS/ARTICULATIONS SOFT % SQFT % SOFT % WEST 415 35% 774 65% 0 0% EAST 1,388 66% 515 24% 216 10% NORTH 951 44% 805 37% 419 19% SOUTHWEST 744 38% 967 50% 228 12% TOTALS 3,498 3,061 863 PERCENTTOTALS 47% 41% 12% As can be seen by the table, the percentage of openings and full windows exceeds 50% of the total building wall area. Site Furnishing The development will provide planter boxes on each side of the building. In addition, a small patio type seating area will be included in the northwest corner of the building. The developer shall install bicycle racks on site. Loading areas, refuse area, etc. The loading dock/service area is located in the southeast corner of the building. The building has been extended in this corner to provide a recessed area to help screening of service yards, refuse and waster removal, other unsightly areas and truck parking/loading areas. This area will be Planning Commission 0 0 Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 0440 November 16, 2004 Page 6 approximately four feet lower than parking lot. A short wing wall screens the loading area from the west. Landscaping The applicant has submitted a landscape plan. The proposed plantings as compared to the requirements are shown in the following table. Proposed landscaping does not meet minimum ordinance requirements. Staff has the following recommendations: All parking lot planting islands and peninsulas must have at least 10 foot inside width, overstory trees are required in the parking lot island and peninsula planting areas, one additional bicolor oak is required along Great Plains Boulevard. The applicant must submit a revised landscape plan to the city for approval. Lot Frontage and Parking location The building has been pushed as far to the northeast corner of the site as permitted by the design standards. This helps to create an urban feel along Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive. Parking has be located to the west and south of the building. The following setbacks shall apply: Required Proposed Trees/ parking lot 2 overstory 0 overstory Interior Side Lot Line 2 islands/peninsulas 2 islands/peninsulas Boulevard trees — Great Plains 7 Bicolor oak 6 overstory trees Blvd. Proposed landscaping does not meet minimum ordinance requirements. Staff has the following recommendations: All parking lot planting islands and peninsulas must have at least 10 foot inside width, overstory trees are required in the parking lot island and peninsula planting areas, one additional bicolor oak is required along Great Plains Boulevard. The applicant must submit a revised landscape plan to the city for approval. Lot Frontage and Parking location The building has been pushed as far to the northeast corner of the site as permitted by the design standards. This helps to create an urban feel along Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive. Parking has be located to the west and south of the building. The following setbacks shall apply: • 85 parking spaces will be provided within the development lot. The six additional spaces required as part of the development are being provided through cross parking arrangements with other properties within Village on the Ponds. Based on information provided by the applicant, the peak day and time of operation of the business is Saturday from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. On other days, the peak hours of operation are 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The peak hour for Culvers is Friday from 11:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. to 7:45 p.m. While there is some overlap in peak hours, other users in the area should not have these same peak times, e.g. Starbucks, which would normally have an earlier peak. Villages Proposed Lake Drive 0' 7.8' Interior Side Lot Line 0' N 43.1', S 75', W 71' Parking standards: 1 space per 200 square feet of building area. 91 85 • 85 parking spaces will be provided within the development lot. The six additional spaces required as part of the development are being provided through cross parking arrangements with other properties within Village on the Ponds. Based on information provided by the applicant, the peak day and time of operation of the business is Saturday from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. On other days, the peak hours of operation are 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The peak hour for Culvers is Friday from 11:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. to 7:45 p.m. While there is some overlap in peak hours, other users in the area should not have these same peak times, e.g. Starbucks, which would normally have an earlier peak. Planning Commission 0 • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 7 The following summary table tracks the building area and type of uses envisioned, developed and proposed within Villages on the Ponds. Project Commercial Office/Service Residential Institutional Date Bldg Sq Ft (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (units) (sq. ft.) Approved C/O/Ins. Permitted 164,640 97,500 322 134,000 396,140 Lake Susan Apartments Bokoo Bikes Foss Swim School Houlihan's Culvers Building 4 (Silo Building) Building 17 (not built) Americlnn Americlnn (expansion) St. Hubert's Presbyterian Homes Northcott Inn & Suites (not built) Community Bank Chanhassen 162 6/28/1999 5,018 6,077 6/28/1999 11,095 10/14/02 19,000 9,800 6/14/1999 9,800 7,362 81 5/11/1998 7,443 4,768 40 9/24/2001 4,768 7,425 7,425 9/22/1997 14,850 TOTALS 30,000 8/11/1997 30,000 44,013 1,492 2/24/1997 45,505 6,870 - Balance Equivalents 6,870 92,478 12/9/1996 92,478 4,500 4,500 69 11/26/2001 9,000 24,980 50,914 12/09/02 75,894 NA 11,000 10/14/02 11,000 Retail C (not built) 9,500 9,500 54 10/14/02 19,000 Retail C-1 (this project) 18,200 18,200 Retail G (future) 8,000 8,000 40 16,000 St. Hubert Expansion 41,522 4/8/2002 41,522 TOTALS 140,636 138,789 325 134,000 413,425 Balance 24,004 (41,289) (3) - Balance Equivalents Conversion to Office 80,013 NA (1,080) Conversion to Institutional 82,772 (43,462) (1,320) NA Conversion to Commercial NA (12,387) (270) Balances after conversion for deficits 11,347 Negative balances represent building square footage in excess of those originally contemplated. However, the development permits the conversion of excess square footage from one use to another provided the total permitted square footage is not exceeded. GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL There is an existing dirt stockpile within the proposed building pad which will need to be cut down to prepare the site for a pad elevation of 950.25. While staff believes that the proposed site plan layout will work on the property, the current grading plan does not work. Specifically, the Planning Commission 0 • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 8 parking lot contours are incorrect and the location/elevation of an emergency overflow point for the catch basins must be shown that is 1.5 -feet lower than the proposed building elevation. As such, the grading plan for the site must be revised. The building and parking lot drainage will be collected by proposed catch basins within the parking lot. The site drainage for the property will be routed to an existing regional pond that was recently constructed with the senior housing project south of the property. This pond has been sized for development of this property. As such, no additional ponding improvements are required with this development. Storm sewer sizing calculations will be required, however, at the time of building permit application. The proposed storm sewer must be sized for a 10 -year storm event. It should be noted that the proposed storm sewer pipe is shown as 15 -inch diameter. The existing storm sewer pipe that the new system drains to is only 12 -inch diameter pipe. This will require the proposed pipe to be a maximum of 12 -inch diameter storm sewer. Additionally, an NPDES permit will be required from the MPCA. Proposed erosion control includes silt fence around the site perimeter. Staff would also recommend that a minimum 75 -foot rock construction entrance be installed at the location that will be utilized during construction. Erosion Control Silt fence should be installed as detailed in the preliminary grading and utility plan. The City's standard detail plate for silt fence should be included in the construction plans. Construction site access points should be minimized to controlled access points with rock entrance and exit pads installed and maintained throughout construction. All exposed soil areas should have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (maximum time an area can remain =vegetated when area is not active) he' worked Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Days Flatter than 10:1 21 Days These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other man made systems that discharge to a surface water. Daily scraping and sweeping of public streets should be completed anytime construction site soil, mud, silt or rock is tracked or washed onto paved surface or street that would allow tracked materials or residuals of that material to enter the storm water conveyance system. Planning Commission 0 • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 9 UTILITIES The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing water and sanitary sewer stubs on the west side of the site. From there, the services will be extended to the building. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for the new building. The 2004 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 per unit for sanitary sewer and $2,814 per unit for watermain. The 2004 SAC charge is $1,425 per unit. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units calculated by the Met Council. These charges will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel. STREETS Proposed full accesses to the site will come from existing private streets on the north and south sides of the site. No public street improvements have been proposed with this project. The proposed drive aisle width for the site must be a minimum of 26 -feet. As part of the original Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Villages on the Ponds development, a traffic study was completed. A traffic study was also completed for the nearby Park Nicollet Clinic. Each of these previous studies stated that, at some time in the future, a 4 -way stop would be required at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East. Staff felt it was a good idea to now take another look at this intersection with the proposed food coop development. The new traffic study looked at traffic volume, operational analysis, and the need for additional traffic control measure at the existing intersection of Great Plains/Lake Drive. The study rated the level of service (LOS) for the existing intersection. LOS is a method used to grade the overall traffic flow and vehicle operation on roadways. LOS grades range from a high grade of (A) to a low grade of (F). (Unlike education grade scales, an (E) grade LOS does exist.) The new and original traffic studies are attached. In summary, the traffic study found that the existing 2 -way stop controlled intersection of Great Plains/fake Drive will operate at an acceptable LOS of D or higher with the development of the food coop site. By 2010 and full buildout of the Villages development, however, the intersection will drop to an unacceptable LOS under the 2 -way stop condition. The intersection will have to be monitored as additional development occurs to determine when the 4 -way stop control is warranted. In addition, the study recommends that the northbound lanes of Great Plains Boulevard be striped and signed to better define the existing lane geometry. That is, a left - through lane and a right -tum only lane will have to be striped along with appropriate signage. Planning Commission 0 0 Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 0440 November 16, 2004 Page 10 WETLANDS Existing Wetlands No wetlands exist on site. LIGHTING/SIGNAGE The developer is proposing 25 foot light poles with one single head and two quad head shoe box style luminaries 400 watt high pressure sodium lamps as well as wall mounted fixtures at the loading dock. All lighting shall be shielded from off site views. Wall signage is proposed on the west, north and east sides of the building within a three foot wide sign band. Signage must comply with the Village on the Ponds sign standards. Separate sign permits will be required for the installation of all wall signage. RECOMMENDATION Staff FesswAaeods that and the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the following motion: `"The Chanhassen City Council approves Planning Case #04-40 for an 18,188 square foot commercial building with a variance from the commercial design standards to permit less than fifty (50) percent of the first floor fagade that is viewed by the public to include transparent windows and/or doors, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated October 15, 2004, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. Outlot A, Village on the Ponds 8`s Addition must be replatted in to a Lot and Block configuration prior to issuance of a building permit. I The sidewalk in the northeast corner of the site shall be connected to the sidewalk on Lake Drive. 4. The developer shall install bicycle racks on site. 6. All landscape islands and peninsulas in the parking lot requiring trees must have a minimum inside width of ten feet. 7. Two overstory trees are required in the parking lot. Planning Commission 0 0 Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 0440 November 16, 2004 Page 11 8. A total of seven bicolor oaks are required along Great Plains Boulevard. 9. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted to the city prior to building permit approval. 10. The building must be protected with an automatic fire sprinkler system. 11. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 12. An eight foot wide access aisle must be provided for one of the accessible parking locations. 13. The building owner and or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 14. The City's standard detail plate for silt fence installation shall be included in the construction plans. 15. Construction site access points shall be minimized to controlled access points with rock entrance and exit pads installed and maintained throughout construction. 16. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (maximum time an area can remain unvegetated when area is not aclivel be' worked) Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Days Flatter than 10:1 21 Days Daily scraping and sweeping of streets shall be completed anytime construction site soil, mud, silt or rock is tracked or washed onto paved surface or street that would allow tracked materials or residuals of that material to enter the storm water conveyance system. 17. All plans must be signed by a registered Civil Engineer in the State of Minnesota. 18. Show the dimensions of the new parking stalls on the site plan. The new parking stalls are required to be 9 -feet wide by 18 -feet long. 19. Add the latest City standard detail plate nos. 5203, 5214, 5215, 5300, 5301. Planning Commission a 0 Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 12 21. On the gradinglutility plan: a. City as-builts show the size of the existing sanitary service as 6 -inch diameter; revise the proposed pipe size shown on the plans to comply. b. Show the proposed sanitary sewer service invert. c. Show all proposed contours. d. Show a minimum 75 -foot rock construction entrance. e. Revise the size of the proposed storm sewer to be a maximum of 12 -inch diameter. f. Revise the plan to show the correct elevation contours and spot elevations. 22. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 23. The applicant must show the location/elevation of an emergency overflow point for the parking lot that is 1.5 -feet lower than the proposed building elevation. 24. Storm sewer sizing calculations are required to be submitted at the time of building permit application. The proposed storm sewer must be sized for a 10 -year storm event. 25. Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for the new building. The 2004 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 per unit for sanitary sewer and $2,814 per unit for watermain. The 2004 SAC charge is $1,425 per unit. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units calculated by the Met Council. These charges will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel. 26. The minimum drive aisle width required for the parking lot is 26 -feet. Revise the plans to comply. 27. An NPDES permit from the MPCA must be obtained for the site grading. 28. The northbound lanes of Great Plains Boulevard, south of Lake Drive, must be striped for a left -through lane and a right -turn only lane along with appropriate signage. 29. Extend the pick up area to include the area of the two handicap stalls directly adjacent to the pick up area and relocate the handicap stalls to the south portion of the building. 30. Install a 4 way stop sign at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive. 31. Fire Marshal conditions: a. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. Planning Commission 0 8 Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 13 This is to ensure fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. b. Yellow curbing and "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of yellow curbing and location of signs to be installed. c. Submit utility plans to Fire Marshal for review and approval." ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Memo from Mika Milo to Robert Generous dated 10/22/04. 4. Reduced Copy Site Plan. 5. Reduced Copy Coop Retail, Detail Site Plan. 6. Reduced Copy Coop Retail, Plan. 7. Reduced Copy Roof Plan. 8. Reduced Copy Landscape Plan. 9. Reduced Copy Building Elevations, West and North. 10. Reduced Copy Building Elevations, East and Southwest. 11. Food Coop traffic study dated November 2004. 12. Original Villages EAW traffic study dated 6/28/96. 13. Park Nicollet traffic study dated 11/13/03. 14. Affidavit of Mailing Notice, Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List. gAplan\2004 planning cases\0440 - village on the ponds building c-1 food coop\staff report bldg cl.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION Application of VOP I, LLC for Site Plan Review with a variance from the commercial design standards to permit less than fifty (50) percent of the first floor fagade that is viewed by the public to include transparent windows and/or doors. On November 16, 2004, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly schedule meeting to consider the application of VOP I, LLC for a site plan review with a variance from the commercial design standards for the property located at the southeast comer of Lake Drive and Great Plains Boulevard. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed site plan was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned Planned Unit Development, PUD, Mixed Use. 2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Mixed Use. 3. The legal description of the property is: Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 8`h Addition to be platted as Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 9`a Addition. 4. Site Plan Findings: 1 (1) The proposed development is consistent with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) The proposed development is consistent with the site plan review requirements; (3) The proposed development is designed to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing areas; (4) The proposed development creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; (5) The proposed development creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) The proposed development protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. 5. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance to the design standards unless they find the following facts: a. The literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. The use of the building requires that some areas not have windows, e.g., storage and coolers. The 2 developer is proposing a reasonable alternative, which provides additional building articulation and architectural detailing. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. The city design standards require that buildings have 50 percent windows. However, the function of a commercial -retail building requires that some areas not have openings. c. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but to facilitate the use of the site for a fiery - d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. The use of the building for a coop grocery is permitted in the zoning district, but the standards interfere with the operation of the store. e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Development of the site will enhance the neighborhood and community. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 6. The planning report #04-40 dated November 16, 2004, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. RECOMIIIENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the site plan review with a variance from the commercial design standards to permit less than fifty (50) percent transparent windows and/or doors on the first floor fagade that is viewed by the public. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this day of .2004. COMMISSION LIM CHANHASSEN PLANNING Its Chairman CITY OF CHANHASSE N CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED M1 OF 7700 MARKET 55317 OCT 1 5 2004 (TD119t1LovEN (952) 2274100 CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT �1181f��klSdi DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT. VO/" ADDRESS: C1 L,dTUS RSAC.i'� Eye tics. /A/C )00. 23-Q C-4164410, , NN TELEPHONE {Day time) 9Sa - 93'% 'IS 3.9 OWNER: VO L L ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment _Temporary Sales Permit Condlional Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit ✓Variarmce e0 i _ Non -conforming Use Permit _ Wetland Alteration Permit _ Planned Unit DeveloprnenC _ Zoning Appeal Rezoning Zoning Ordinz n Amendment Sign Perm _ Siam Plan Review Notification Sign 115 k/ Site Plan Review' / l P� X Escrow for Feng Fees/Attorney Cosy' S� ($50 CUP/SI R VACNAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) V Subdivision' Q\( 2 SD TOTAL FEE $ / S 9 Y 13 Lr A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. `Twenty -sic full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8%" X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shah be charged for each application. SCANNED 0 0 PROJECTNAME e-/ D-� U11 -1-¢66S Ot" IW PONDS - LOCATION 5(t) 1 A/r&25�C 71010 CJS TD v D QLG,4�,16 a r PSA / N S LEGAL DESCRIPTION I/, zLA6f Q/V Leg 7'004oS 2M bb's 6 e pAaLa>7 D ,4< X07 /. �yace/ l�i�LG�s oia rhi� 161,6� 9Y/i �dd'�r• TOTAL ACREAGE 41a ND 3'/l0 (o a - -- WETLANDS PRESENT YES i'l NO PRESENT ZONING i; REQUESTED PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION 44 REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION rJ�� REASON FOR THIS REQUEST / O ZI- P e,221AI G 7YE_ R4psCe/ . This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or dearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and pians required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordnance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application sharld be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have atradned a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or 1 am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensfons are approved by the applicant VOP /' LL C 01 Signature of Applicant -% Date �Qt]1L Sigriallure of Fee Owner Date Application Received on1 I Irl /o Fee Paid �� Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report wflI be mailed to the applicant's address. SCANINIM 1►v�1�,1���1�URBAN PLANNING E :11: 3 1' 7r. 1 rye ARCIIITECTURE r e MILO CONSULTING October 22, 2004 To: Robert Generous, Planning City of Chanhassen 690 City Center Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 From: Mika Milo, AIA Project: Village on the Ponds . Retail Building C-1, Lot "B" Re: Project Description Narrative 1) General Disposition and Use: The proposed development consists of a 16,518sf, single story, commercial, retail building, with a small 1,669sf mezzanine level next to the main entry. Even though the proposed building footprint is somewhat different than originally envisioned in P.U.D., overall it is within the area assigned for the type of use, and of similar size, mass, bulk, and character, thus fully conforming to P.U.D. Master Plan. With its proposed initial use for a quality health -food store, it is an excellent, highly welcome addition to the Village, complementing adjacent developments, and contributing to retail "critical mass" and services offered for the Chanhassen community at large. 2) Circulation: The proposed building is located on Lake Drive East, facing Highway 5 and the Promenade, and is surrounded with surface parking on the North, West and South. An arrangement of driveways and parking allows for circulation flexibilities and good access or exiting. There are comfortable, wide sidewalks on all building sides that are well connected with street sidewalks as well as the Promenade and adjacent existing buildings. Main entry to the buildings is clearly emphasized and oriented towards the Promenade in a sweeping, circular motion. This is facing a small Entry Plaza that will be used for outdoor exhibits, display of products, and promotional activities of a festival nature. A small outdoor seating and eating area at the North-West comer will further enhance the "active" street image and a lively village atmosphere. Next to the main entry, there is a customer loading/pick-up area. Accessible parking stalls are located right in front of the Main Entry. Also, there is a diagonally positioned pathway connecting the Main Entry to the Promenade sidewalks, leading to the main street. The needed service/loading area is placed in the least visible comer and is further screened by a 6' high masonry wall as well as street trees and landscaping along Lake Drive. Additionally, this area is recessed within the building, thus further reducing its visibility and view exposure. 3) Mass Bulk and Design Features: Even though the building will contain a single user, it has been intentionally designed to project the character of a "multi building" composition, with ever changing faces, views, materials, colors, and varied roof forms. As a result, the building wall and bulk is "reduced" to a human scale, and a harmonious integration with the rest of the Village has been achieved. A number of various articulations, colorful awnings, planters, sloped mansard roofs and parapets, signs and banners, windows, contrasting forms and materials, all together contribute to a lively and active fagade treatment and add interest and identity to this village place. (All rooftop HVAC equipment is well screened behind 5-7 foot high parapets/sloped roofs.) The building materials are of high quality and include brick, block, clapboard siding, and stucco in a variety of colors and textures. All building colors are a complementary and harmonious "earth -tones" palette with accents in paint, awnings, cornices, site finishing's, etc. In conclusion, the proposed building will provide a welcome and complementary addition to the Village, both in terms of its intended use as well as its architectural character and overall flavor. 3914 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite A144 San Diego, Califomia 92123 Phone: (858) 565-8485 Fax: (858) 565-8203 Email: mag@magarch.wm • • I Q J a w co J Q w 0 J_ Q w w LL O O 0 O m N I ' � i �� a �► � .■■..■■.■.. rrrrrrrrr II II i v s 0 R .i � x h s I ' � i �� a �► � .■■..■■.■.. rrrrrrrrr II II i v s 0 R .i all Aft 4 I� 9 i e 5} aF Fi k '4 i a S Lg 4 is •. i•'• �',•F �. PeT F - F '$' • pay a .8 S.2S ' • Fno 6 F4 b frg $ = oL .' 7'9 a's•S a g: ;fie _• -_ - - 9 3;1 oh fra 4 I� 9 1fi t t s i e 1fi I I'' 111111 nmi IN W 0 Villages on the Ponds Food Coop Chanhassen, Minnesota Traffic Impact Analysis CITY OF CHANHASSEN NOV 0 9 2004 Prepared for: ENGINEERING DEPT_ City of Chanhassen November 2004 CC"Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. •; • Traffic Impact Analysis for Villages on the Ponds Food Coop Chanhassen, Minnesota Prepared for: City of Chanhassen Prepared by: Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc 2550 University Avenue West Suite 345N St. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Phone: 651.645.4197 Fax: 651.645.5116 160511002 November 2004 1 Vdhges on the Ponds Foul Coop• • 11/05/3704 Table of Contents 1.o Introduction 1 2.0 Project Background 3 2.1 Related Traffic Studies 3 2.2 Study Area 3 2.3 Existing Conditions and Traffic. 3 3.o Traffic Generation 5 4.o Traffic Distribution . 7 5.o Projected Traffic Volumes. 9 5.1 Historic Traffic Growth 9 5.2 Total Traffic 9 6.o Traffic Analysis. 12 7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations. 15 Appendix } Villages on the Ponds Food COO 1.o Introduction • 11/05/2004 Kimley-Horn and Associates was retained by the City of Chanhassen to perform a traffic analysis at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East/Pond Promenade in the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. The purpose of this study is to investigate traffic impacts at this intersection caused by the final phase of the Villages on the Ponds development. Figure 1 illustrates the site location. Villages on the Ponds is a mixed-use development that is primarily commercial with some residential. The additional development studied as part of the report includes the following land uses: food coop, bank, retail, apartments, residential, hotel, and office. The construction and occupancy timeline of additional development is approximately 5 years or by 2010. As shown in Figure 1, Lake Drive East/Pond Promenade runs in an approximate east/west direction and Great Plains Boulevard in an approximate north/south direction. This report has been prepared to evaluate existing conditions as well as future traffic conditions that include the proposed development. Two future scenarios were considered in this study: 2007 build -out and 2010 build -out. The 2007 build -out scenario evaluates traffic conditions when only the Food Coop is completed. The 2010 build -out scenario evaluates traffic conditions when the entire project is anticipated to be completed. Assumptions regarding the study area, traffic generation, access, and traffic control were discussed with City staff prior to the completion of this analysis. Page 1 T L 0 O Z +*" \ VFW Site Kif— Medical Clinic - a B\ Under Construction 47- rS yo..q-- a � Lake Dr. East Pond Promenade .'0 _ >. PO I F an f Retail/Apartments �- Food Coop Bank/Office •5:.�,'' L':r7G - 1�ke0 Office/Residential y Office Legend ® -proposed Development 0 -S"Intemection Imn� Villages on the Ponds Food Coop FIGURE Kimley-Horn Chanhassen, MN Study Area and Associates, Inc. VdIagn on the Ponds Fool Coop 11/05/2004 2.0 Project Background 2.1 Related Traffic Studies Several traffic studies have been completed recently -that have included the study area or developments located near the site. The original Village on the Ponds development plan was studied by BRW, Inc. in 1996. Benshoof & Associates, Inc. completed a traffic study dated November 13, 2003 for the Park Nicollet Clinic, currently under construction to the northeast of the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East/Pond Promenade. The primary purpose of this study is to determine if changes in land use within the Village on the Ponds development will impact the previous recommendation of an all -way stop control at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/ Lake Drive East. 2.2 Study Area The study area for this analysis includes the following roadways and intersections: Roadways • Great Plains Boulevard • Lake Drive East/Pond Promenade Intersections Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East/Pond Promenade 2.3 Existing Conditions and Traffic The intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East is currently two-way stop controlled, with free-flow conditions on the Great Plains Boulevard approaches to the intersection. AM and PM peak hour weekday turning movement counts were performed by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East/Pond Promenade on October 27 and October 26, 2004 respectively. Figure 2 depicts existing lane geometry and traffic volumes at the intersection. In addition to turning movement counts, daily traffic volume counts were collected by the City of Chanhassen on all entering approaches to the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive on October 25 and 26, 2004. The daily traffic volume data was aggregated in 15 -minute intervals. Page 3 = =^ F1Existing Lane Geometry Villages on the Ponds Food Coop and Weekday AM and FIGURE Kimley-Horn Chanhassen, MN PM Peak Hour Turning and Associates, Inc. Movement Volumes 2 o� O z a v Icy Pond Promenade a f� —�► + Lake Drive East Legend 4 Existing Lane Geometry O UnsignaFzed Intersection v m C � a L 'O v 0 0 z —o 29 (89) f — 20 (24) Pond Promenade IC— 56 (177) 47 (37) Lake Drive East 20(10) 4 l71 N �o N Legend 4 Traffic Volumes- Weekday AM (Weekday PM) = =^ F1Existing Lane Geometry Villages on the Ponds Food Coop and Weekday AM and FIGURE Kimley-Horn Chanhassen, MN PM Peak Hour Turning and Associates, Inc. Movement Volumes 2 V'&ga m the PorA Foal Coop • 3.0 Traffic Generation . 11/05/2004 Traffic generation potential for the proposed development was determined using traffic generation rates published in Trip Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE], 7" Edition, 2003). Table 1 summarizes the estimated traffic generation potential for the proposed development. Table 1—Proposed Development Trip Generation Specific information regarding the retail development is not available at this time. Trip generation for the retail portion of the development was completed assuming a combination of specialty retail and pharmacy w/o drive thru land uses. These land uses were selected because the ITE Trip Generation rates for these development types are based on similar sized retail facilities and are relatively common in developments similar to the Villages on the Ponds. Table 1 indicates the proposed development having the potential to generate a total of 7178 new daily trips, 624 of those occurring in the AM peak hour and 1071 occurring in the PM peak hour. Page 5 Weekday AMPeakHour PM Peak Hour ITECocle Description Size Daily Commercial Component 850 Supennarket 17,000 sf 1,738 34 21 55 117 113 230 912 Drive -In Bank 5,500 sf 1,356 38 30 68 126 126 252 310 Hotel 75 units 298 26 16 42 23 _ 21 44 710 General Office Building 30,000 sf 528 63 9 72 19 93 112 710 1 General Office Building 20,000 sf 1 386 46 6 52 17 84 101 710 General Office Building 5,500 sf 143 16 2 18 14 71 85 814 Specialty Retail 19,000 sf 842 100 109 209 29 38 67 880 Pharmacy w/o Drive Thru 13,000 sf 1,171 34 1 23 1 57 55 55 110 Residential Component 220 Apartment 45 units 421 5 21 26 27 1542 230 Residential Condominium 40 units 295 4 21 25 19 9 28 Total New Trips 7178 366 258 624 446 625 1071 Specific information regarding the retail development is not available at this time. Trip generation for the retail portion of the development was completed assuming a combination of specialty retail and pharmacy w/o drive thru land uses. These land uses were selected because the ITE Trip Generation rates for these development types are based on similar sized retail facilities and are relatively common in developments similar to the Villages on the Ponds. Table 1 indicates the proposed development having the potential to generate a total of 7178 new daily trips, 624 of those occurring in the AM peak hour and 1071 occurring in the PM peak hour. Page 5 1 V"Jlagm on the Ponds Food CO � 11/05/2004 Reductions in hip generation caused by internal, multi-purpose trips or pass -by trips were not taken into consideration for this analysis because their impact is negligible. Page 6 ViDages on the Ponds Food Coop �l 4.o Traffic Distribution 11/05/OM1 The directional distribution and assignment of trips generated by the Villages on the Ponds planned development is based on a review of existing and historic roadway volumes from Mn/DOT, information from recent traffic studies, and from assumptions of travel patterns within the study area. Below is a list of the site traffic distribution percentage: • 20% to/from north TH 101 20% to/from south TH 101 • 20% to/from east TH 5 20% to/from west TH 5 10% to/from Great Plains Drive north of TH 5 5% to/from east Lake Drive 5% to/from Market Boulevard north of TH 5 Site traffic distribution is shown in Figure 3. Page 7 �4 O�O ry0 a s 'or 2000 �5 m c _C Q N O a � SO Ev O 20% Pond Promenade 5% Lake Drive East Lake Drive East fake Ot East r �r f N O \o 0 T L Tf0 0 Z `_ Villages on the Ponds Food Coop Site Traffic Distribution FIGURE Kimley-Horn Chanhassen, MN 3 and Associates, Inc. ViUagcs on the Ponds Food Coop • 5.o Projected Traffic Volumes 5.v_ Historic Traffic Growth I1/05{2U04 Historic traffic growth is the increase in the volume of traffic due to usage increases and non- specific growth throughout an area. The growth rate used in the original study by BRW, Inc. in 1996 was 0.5% on Lake Drive East and 0% growth on the north and south approaches to the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East. Based on a review of the existing roadway network, historic traffic volumes, and conversations with City staff an average annual growth rate of three percent was determined for through traffic on Great Plains Boulevard. There have been two significant land use changes adjacent to Lake Drive East. These include the addition of the new VFW and the upcoming opening of the new Park Nicollet Clinic. The traffic counts completed for this analysis include the new VFW traffic. The trips generated for the year 2010 Park Nicollet Clinic development completed by Benshoof & Associates, Inc. have been added to the existing traffic volumes to obtain the portion of the background traffic that will be generated by the clinic. 5.2 Total Traffic To obtain total 2007 no build traffic volumes, existing (2004) traffic volumes were increased to account for the traffic generated by the 2010 Park Nicollet Clinic development and background growth to the through traffic on Great Plains Boulevard. Once existing volumes were increased to account for background traffic growth, all traffic generated by the Food Coop was added to develop total traffic volumes for 2007. Figure 4 illustrates weekday AM and PM peak hour 2007 turning movement volumes. To obtain total 2010 no build traffic volumes, existing (2004) traffic volumes were increased to account for the traffic generated by the 2010 Park Nicollet Clinic development and background growth to the through traffic on Great Plains Boulevard. Once existing volumes were increased to account for background traffic growth, all traffic generated by the entire proposed Village on the Ponds development was added to develop total traffic volumes for 2010. Figure 5 illustrates weekday AM and PM peak hour 2010 turning movement volumes. Page 9 p�� 2007 Weekday AM ��-- Villages on the Ponds Food Coop FIGURE Kintley-Hornand PM Peak Hour and Associates, Inc. Chanhassen, MN Traffic Volumes 4 m .2 r a o r o o 29 (0) [291 f-- 20 (0) ROl Pond Promenade (— 64(2)[66] 47 (4) [511—/4 Lake Dove East 20 (0))[41 I o _o � � N Site traffic includes only super market trips from Lend Table 1 that are distributed through the intersection Great Plains Boulevard and take Drive East 0 AM Traffic Volumes - Background (Site) [Total] a m u, C .2 _ a O N O N O N b r �- 100 (0)[100] f-- 24 (0) [24] Pond Promenade 220 (6) [226] crNe East 37 (19) [56] Lake 10 (o) [10]—► �Rr 1 j� 7 (0) m m; Legend Site traffic includes only super market nips from Table 1 that am distnbuted through the intersection 4 PM Traffic Volumes - Background (Site) [Total] Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Dnve East p�� 2007 Weekday AM ��-- Villages on the Ponds Food Coop FIGURE Kintley-Hornand PM Peak Hour and Associates, Inc. Chanhassen, MN Traffic Volumes 4 2010 Weekday AM Villages on the Ponds Food Coop and PM Peak Hour FIGURE Kirnsen, ley -Horn Chanhassen, MN and Associates, Inc. Traffic Volumes) v T m I C L T d p 0 o e � N z y O 29 (0) f29l 4 20 (7) [271 Pond Promenade i— 64 (11) [75[ 47 (n) (1241—� Lake Drive East 4 (o) [alb �m `o E opo y O N Site traffic indudes all site generated trips from Legend Table 1 that are distributed through the intersection Great Plans Boulevard and Lake Drive East. AM Traffic Volumes - Background (Sb) [ToIaIJ v m v. C 2 a h O •- N� M . 100 (0)[100] ♦-- 24 (9) [331 Pond Promenade Ae 220 (14) [2341 37(130)[1671-1� Lake Drive East 10 (10))Vj—)4 RR 1 7(o)m—)4 I G mm� Legend Site traffic includes all site generated lops from 4 PM Tralfie Volumes- Background (Site) [Totaq Table 1 that are distributed through the intersection Great Plains Boulevard and take Drive East 2010 Weekday AM Villages on the Ponds Food Coop and PM Peak Hour FIGURE Kirnsen, ley -Horn Chanhassen, MN and Associates, Inc. Traffic Volumes) vasges on the Ponds Foal Coo0 6.0 Traffic Analysis 0 - 11/05/4 Capacity analyses for the unsignalized intersection in the AM and PM peak hours (Appendix) were performed for the following scenarios: • Existing 2007 no build 2007 with Food Coop 2010 no build • 2010 with the proposed development Analyses were completed to determine the operating characteristics of the study area intersection and roadways using HCS 4.1e, which uses methodologies contained in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) [TRB Special Report 209, 2000]. Intersection turning movement counts were used with information about the number of lanes and traffic control to determine existing and future levels of service. Level of service (LOS) describes traffic conditions—the amount of traffic congestion—at an intersection or on a roadway. LOS ranges from A to F—A indicating a condition of little or no congestion and F a condition with severe congestion, unstable traffic flow, and stop -and -go conditions. For intersections, LOS is based on the average delay experienced by all traffic using the intersection during the busiest (peak) 15 -minute period. LOS A through D are generally considered acceptable. Each of the aforementioned scenarios was analyzed during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The results are presented in the following summaries and supporting calculations are presented in the Appendix. This unsignalized intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East currently provides the following lane geometry: Great Plains Boulevard (southbound) --one exclusive left -tum lane, one exclusive through lane, and one exclusive right -tum lane Great Plains Boulevard (northbound)-- this approach is not striped but traffic operations observed in the field show that this approach operates as if it has one shared through and left -tum lane and one exclusive right -tum lane Lake Drive East (westbound) one shared through and left -tum lane and one exclusive right -tum lane • Pond Promenade (eastbound) --one shared through, right -turn, and left -tum lane Page 12 Vdlages on the Ponds Food Coop. �. 11/05/2009 Table 2 shows levels of service and delay for the stopped approaches under existing (2004), 2007 no build, 2007 build out, 2010 no build, and 2010 build out conditions under two-way stopped control. Table 2 --Great Plains Blvd./Lake Drive East-Two—Way Stopped Control Approach LOS Year Weekday.. .•. y PM Peak ,. Hour LOS Eastbound Westbound Eastbound Westbound 2004 B BIF B 14 secJveh 11 sedvehclveh 2007 No C BBuild 19 ser/veh 14 serlvehrJveh2007 Build C COut wl Food (20 sectveh) (15 seclveh)ctveh)Coop 2010 No C B C - -. Build 19 sectveh 15 secIveh 16 sec/veh 20 sedveh 2010 Build F D F F Out 79 seciveh 29 serJveh Source: Kimley-Hom and 4ssociates, Inc. *-denotes greater than 100 sec/veh delay The level of service on the stopped approaches are satisfactory for 2004, 2007 no build, 2007 build, and 2010 no build conditions but unacceptable LOS values will occur under the 2010 build out scenario. Analysis on an all -way stop scenario was then completed to determine if the change in intersection control was a viable mitigation measure. The HCM methodology does not provide a procedure that can be used to evaluate the existing lane geometry because there are more than two traffic lanes on the north approach. The geometry of the northbound approach was changed to a shared -through left lane and a shared -through right lane due to changes in the future traffic volumes and the modification to all -way stopped control. SimTraffic was used to analyze traffic conditions with the modification to northbound lane geometry under all -way stopped control. This microsimulation software is based on methodologies contained in the HCM, adapted for simulation purposes. Table 3 summarizes the results of this all -way stop controlled unsignalized analysis. Page 13 Vi&ges on the Ponds Food Coo0 • 1 11/05/2W4 Table 3—Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East — All -Way Stop Approach LOS Year Eastbound VVestbound Northbound Southbound 2010A A A A A Build Out 6 seGveh 7 seGveh 6 seGveh 7 seGveh 2010 PM A B A A Build Out 8 seGveh 11 seclveh 9 seGveh 9 secIveh Source: Kmtey-Horn and Associates, Inc. The results of the SimTraffic analysis indicate that under all -way stop control the intersection operates at acceptable LOS values during both 2010 build out weekday peak periods. A review of the SimTraffic output shows that the 95h percentile queue experienced is anticipated to be around 100 feet for the southbound through traffic. This distance is considerably less than the actual distance between the intersections of TH 5 and Lake Drive East (approximately 400 feet). Therefore no significant impact on the signalized intersection at TH 5/Great Plains Boulevard is anticipated. Page 14 V'Aages on the Ponds Foci Coop 4W _ 11/05/ZUM 7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The proposed development will increase traffic volumes at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard and Pond Promenade. The recommendations listed below will create better traffic operations as the development is being built: • All -way stopped control is not required under the 2007 Build Out Food Coop Scenario. Under the two-way stopped control the northbound approach should be signed and striped so that the lane geometry is modified to a shared through -left and an exclusive right -turn lane. • All -way stopped control is required under the 2010 Build Out Scenario. When the all - way stopped control is installed the northbound approach should be signed and striped so that the lane geometry is modified to a shared through -left and a shared through -right to allow more through traffic to reach the stop -bar, particularly during the PM peak period. Page 15 V&Scs on the Ponds Foal CO Appendix Page 16 •I . 11/05/3004 HCS2000: Un-'-gnalized Intersections Rele-"e 4.1d TWPWAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: Existing AM Peak Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2004 Project ID: East/West Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr, East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? 5 65 244 0.90 0.90 0.90 5 72 271 2 -- -- Undivided No 0 1 1 LT R No 55 28 59 0.90 0.90 0.90 61 31 65 2 -- Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 56 20 29 47 20 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 62 22 32 52 22 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, queue Length, and Level of Service NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1 4 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 LT L LT R LTR 5 61 No 1 1 1 L T R 501 No 0.05 Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 56 20 29 47 20 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 62 22 32 52 22 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, queue Length, and Level of Service NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1 4 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 LT L LT R LTR 5 61 84 32 78 1498 1216 607 990 501 0.00 0.05 0.14 0.03 0.16 0.01 0.16 0.48 0.10 0.55 7.4 8.1 11.9 8.8 13.5 A A B A B 11.0 13.5 B B HCS2000: U )gnalized Interssations RelW 4.1d TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: Existing PM Peak Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2004 Project ID: East/West Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr. East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments or Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 11 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? 8 66 76 73 60 55 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 8 73 84 81 66 61 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Undivided 98 / 11 7 No 2 No 0 1 1 1 1 1 LT R L T R No C Flared Approach: No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 177 24 89 37 10 7 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 196 26 98 41 11 7 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Gude (%) 9.0 0 LOS A 0 C Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Approach Delay / No / Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT L LT R LTR v (vPh) 8 81 222 98 59 C(m) (vph) 1459 1423 551 989 490 v/c 0.01 0.06 0.40 0.10 0.12 95% queue length 0.02 0.18 1.93 0.33 0.41 Control Delay 7.5 7.7 15.9 9.0 13.4 LOS A A C A B Approach Delay 13.8 13.4 Approach LOS B B HCS2000: Un- .ralized Intersections Rele=,e 4.1d TWT -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY • Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: 2007 No Build AM Peak Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary -- Analysis Year: 2007 Project ID: 32 East/West Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr. East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? 5 84 260 140 30 59 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 5 93 288 155 33 65 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Undivided 32 / 22 4 No 2 No 0 1 1 2 1 1 1 LT R 0 L T R No C Flared Approach: No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R I L T R volume 64 20 29 47 20 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 71 22 32 52 22 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 8.9 0 LOS A 0 C Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Approach Delay / No / Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 17 8 9 I 10 11 12 Lane Config LT L LT R LTR v lvpn) 5 155 93 32 78 C(m) (vph) 1495 1177 410 964 335 v/c 0.00 0.13 0.23 0.03 0.23 95% queue length 0.01 0.45 0.86 0.10 0.89 Control Delay 7.4 8.5 16.3 8.9 19.0 LOS A A C A C Approach Delay 14.4 19.0 Approach LOS B C HCS2000: Ufinalized Intersections Rel a 4.1d * �t TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: 2007 No Build PM Peak Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2007 Project ID: East/West Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr. East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 8 78 84 112 64 55 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 86 93 124 71 61 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 19.2 Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 1 Configuration LT R L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R I L T R volume 220 24 100 37 10 7 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 244 26 111 41 11 7 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percant Grade (s) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Ldnes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 17 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT L LT R LTR V (vpn) C (m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS 8 124 270 111 1453 1397 460 973 0.01 0.09 0.59 0.11 0.02 0.29 3.69 0.38 7.5 7.8 23.4 9.2 A A C A 19.2 C 59 398 0.15 0.52 15.6 C 15.6 C HCS2000: ;ignalizd$ ftitattictions Re*(Se 4.1d TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: 2007 Build AM Peak (Food Coop) Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2007 Project ID- East/West Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr. East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? 5 94 261 0.90 0.90 0.90 5 104 290 2 -- -- Undivided No 0 1 1 LT R No 140 47 64 0.90 0.90 0.90 155 52 71 2 -- No 1 1 1 L T R No Minor Street: Approach Movement Westbound 7 8 L T 9 R 10 L Eastbound 11 T 12 R Volume 66 20 29 51 20 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 73 22 32 56 22 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Delay, Queue Length,, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT L I LT R LTR v tvpn) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS 5 155 95 32 1464 1165 389 951 0.00 0.13 0.24 0.03 0.01 0.46 0.95 0.10 7.5 8.6 17.2 8.9 A A C A 15.1 C 82 319 0.26 1.00 20.1 C 20.1 C HCS2000: U�'gnalized intetseCtions Rel a 4.1d TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: 2007 Build PM Peak (Food Coop) Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2007 Project ID: East/West Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr. East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R v o.Lume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? 8 135 90 112 123 75 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 8 150 100 124 136 83 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Undivided 111 / 11 7 No 2 No 0 1 1 1 1 1 LT R L T R No 0.75 Flared Approach: No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 226 24 100 56 10 7 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 251 26 111 62 11 7 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 896 0 v/c 0.01- 0 0.75 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage 95% queue length 0.02 / 5.98 No / Lanes 0 1 1 8.0 0 1 0 Configuration LT R E A LTR Approach Delay Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config IT L LT R LTR v (vph) 8 124 277 111 80 C(m) (vph) 1350 1316 368 896 311 v/c 0.01- 0.09 0.75 0.12 0.26 95% queue length 0.02 0.31 5.98 0.42 1.00 Control Delay 7.7 8.0 39.2 9.6 20.5 LOS A A E A C Approach Delay 30.7 20.5 Approach LOS D C HCS2000: Uspnaliztd fntets4ttions Rel 9W 4.1d TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: 2010 No Build AM Peak Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2010 Project ID: 22 E t/W 52 as est Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr, East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? Street: Approach Movement 5 90 260 140 32 59 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 5 100 288 155 35 65 Undivided / No 0 1 1 LT R No Westbound 7 8 9 L T R No 1 1 1 L T R No Eastbound 10 11 12 L T R volume 64 20 29 47 20 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 71 22 32 52 22 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) A 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage S / C No / Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service NB SB Westbound Eastbound 1 4 I 7 8 9 10 11 12 LT L LT R LTR 5 155 93 32 78 1493 1170 404 956 331 0.00 0.13 0.23 0.03 0.24 0.01 0.46 0.88 0.10 0.90 7.4 8.5 16.6 8.9 19.2 A A C A C 14.6 19.2 S C HCS2000: 0" gna 1 izea fhtdtSddtions RelW a 4.1d WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: 2010 No Build PM Peak Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2010 Project ID: Undivided East/West Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr. East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Major Street: Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? 8 85 84 112 70 55 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 8 94 93 124 77 61 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Undivided 111 / 11 7 No 2 No 0 1 1 1 1 1 LT R 0 L T R No 450 Flared Approach: No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 220 24 100 37 10 7 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 244 26 111 41 11 7 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (°s) 111 0 C(m) (vph) 1446 0 450 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage v/c 0.01 / 0.60 No / Lanes 0 1 1 0.29 0 1 0 Configuration LT R 24.3 9.2 LTR LOS Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config IT L J LT R LTR v (vph) 8 124 270 111 59 C(m) (vph) 1446 1387 450 963 390 v/c 0.01 0.09 0.60 0.12 0.15 95% queue length 0.02 0.29 3.84 0.39 0.53 Control Delay 7.5 7.9 24.3 9.2 15.9 LOS A A C A C Approach Delay 19.9 15.9 Approach LOS C C HCS2000: Ur`gnalized fht#k§6dtions Rel* 4.1d -TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: 2010 Build AM Peak Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2010 Project ID: East/West Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr. East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 5 192 267 140 183 143 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 5 213 296 155 203 158 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- __ 2 _- Percent Grade (%) Median Type/Storage Undivided D / Flared Approach: RT Channelized? No No Lanes Lanes 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 Configuration Configuration R LT R L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R I L T R volume 75 27 29 124 26 4 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 83 30 32 137 28 4 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 D 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Approach Movement Lane Config v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Delay NB 1 LT / Queue Length, and Level of Service SB Westbound Eastbound 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L I LT. R I LTR 5 155 113 32 1198 1056 230 827 0.00 0.15 , 0.49 0.04 0.01 0.51 2.48 0.12 8.0 9.0 34.9 9.5 A A D A 29.3 D 169 199 0.85 6.30 79.0 F 79.0 F HCS2000:46 ignaliZdd fh�4isk tiols Re* 3e 4.ld TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: Kim Benson Agency/Co.: Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Inc. Date Performed: 10/27/2004 Analysis Time Period: 2010 Build PM Peak Intersection: Great Plains/Lake Drive E Jurisdiction: Chanhassen Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2010 Project ID: East/West Street: Pond Promenade/Lake Dr. East North/South Street: Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 8 354 105 112 259 174 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 393 116 124 287 193 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- __ 2 Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? No No Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 1 Configuration LT R L T R Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 234 33 100 167 20 7 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 260 36 111 185 22 7 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No / Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 Configuration LT R LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT L LT R LTR v (vph) 8 124 296 111 214 C(m) (vph) 1082 1056 168 656 134 v/C 0.01 0.12 1.76 0.17 1.60 95% queue length 0.02 0.40 21.23 0.61 15.26 Control Delay 8.4 8.9 413.2 11.6 359.5 LOS A A F B F Approach Delay 303.7 359.5 Approach LOS F F AM AWSC 2010 Build • • RNS: 78 Baseline 11/8/2004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Performance by movement Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 Delay�Neh 97N�'F�& � 27'��37fft0'e ' 45'"�� Vehicles Entered 109 31 4 67 29 36 4 198 283 128 190 164 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance i otai uelay (hr) 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.9 2.2 DelasVte€as Vehicles Entered 144 132 485 482 1243 Total Network Performance SimTraffic Report Page 1 kimleylvl7-ff51 AM AWSC 2010 Build • 1 Baseline RNS: 78 1118/2004 Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd_ Directions Served LTR Maximm Oiieue (fEk_82 Average Queue (ft) �tr 38 ueue (ftp, �"; 68 Link Distance (ft) 404 Blk Intersection: 5: Bend WB :.VVB NB LT R LT TR T L T R 8851 112FZd7 32'"73 95 69 39 20 45 65 1 42 44 41 79`' ' X92`' 10 62 75 6 463 48 48 291 356 �... 0.05 0.13 0 0— 75 N:- 2•-.c'v 0.00 0 Nework Summary SimTraffic Report kimleylv17-ff51 Page 2 AM AWSC 2010 Build •' • RNS: 91 Baseline 11/8/2004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Performance bV movement Total Delay (hr) 02 0.0 0 0 0 1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.1 Vehicles Entered 127 26 3 57 31 30 5 205 272 136 185 129 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.2 0.8_ 0.9 2.1 5.1T `5$'Y� 69' 62a :. Vehicles Entered 156 118 482 450 1206 Total Network Performance SimTraffie Report Page 1 kimleylv17-1151 AM AWSC 2010 Build • RNS: 91 Baseline 11/8/2004 Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Directions Served LTR LT R LT TR T L T R t4{axiriiuniQUeUea 112 50 ?0` 9054, Average Queue (ft) 38 41 19 46 61 2 K 43 49 36 95ih u --=!ill 11111 B jilt - €94 17 .:.rI35 73 5l's.tee Link Distance (IM ft) 404 463 48 48 291 356 pstia[rEBII imp-` ;U.05 0.11 e, _ Queuing Penalty (veh) p p -' StOg�.BD: 175 125 "t Storage Blk Time (%) 0.01 WEta. LPOW,04 J�- Intersection: 5: Bend Nework Summary Netwowtd§Queurng Penally_,NNEMEM,Y SimTraffic Report kimleylv17-ff51 Page 2 AM AWSC 2010 Build • • RNS: 4 Baseline 11/8/2004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains_ Blvd. Performance by movement Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 DKetay'(eFe[s _�*36:6Za!SQs,Ny:` 8.Y46 Vehicles Entered 124 27 2 78 26 21 3 185 279 139 184 177 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.9 2.1 Deta}e'ttCes.;> ' S D r�fi_Sa . 5.8. ?6',7`C _2 Vehicles Entered 153 125 467 500 1245 Total Network Performance SimTraffic Report Page 1 kimleyM7-Ml AM AWSC 2010 Build Baseline Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. • RNS: 4 11/8/2004 Directions Served LTR LT R LT TR T L T R INabmu tx.POi ,FBF©i Q32 7U 7� Average Queue (ft) 34 38 20 42 62 1 43 43 40 9 th.(2Ueu —Kfi fr 5 :. MW 6283'FWM Intersection: 5: Bend Directions Nework Summary fK4tworqAwi t ewn eda[ _. a SimTrafflc Report kimleylvl7-ff51 Page 2 AM AWSC 2010 Build RNS: 53 Baseline 11/8/2004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Performance by movement Iotaloelay(hr) 02 00 00 01 0.0 00 00 04 0.3 03 0.4 ©e a l Ve:4 Z-67-- 7, Vehicles Entered 118 29 2 72 21 40 3 202 257 124 186 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance Total Network Performance SimTraffic Report 1dmleyM7-ff51 Page 1 AM AWSC 2010 Build • RNS: 53 Baseline 11/8/2004 Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd - LTR LT R LT TR 1 T . R Nework Summary SimTraffic Report kimleylv17-ff51 Page 2 AM AWSC 2010 Build • RNS: 13 Baseline 11/8/2004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Performance by movement Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.0 0.0 o.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2 Vehicles Entered 133 21 5 72 32 28 6 203 276 130 179 137 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance Total Delay (hr) 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.8 2.0 DefaylVeh(sj"_,5 62'5.6.4- 5:9' .r .. Vehicles Entered 159 132 485 446 1222 Total Network Performance Total Delay (hr) 2.7 Vehicles Entered 1222 SimTraffic Report Page 1 kimleylvl7-ff51 AM AWSC 2010 Build • RNS: 13 Baseline 11/8/2004 Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Directions Served LTR LT R LT TR T L T R MaxirturmIIdeuft 68� 44 70 55_-. „- Average Queue (ft) 36 38 21 43 62 2 40 43 41 95th.( ieu fEk„ .6 18 58 68--'62y.. Link Distance (ft) 404 463 48 48 291 356 VPsk�. 4 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Storage©isa X75 y 175 Storage Blk Time (%) 4?44 r ? altjF eh� . f- Intersection: 5: Bend TT2Tenq= Directions Served Nework Summary SimTraffic Report Page 2 kimleylvl7-ff51 PM AWCC 7n1n Riiilrl • Baseline 11/8/2004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Performance by movement Total Delay (hr) 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.8 OA 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.2 0.3 0.9 0.3 Delay'I1feh(s) ���8.�>R g ZA !: 2 K 7 01 7 8„ ' 97 6.7r 3LL6 , 11 7 9 Vehicles Entered 183 21 11 225 29 107 4 365 100 112 271 204 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance Total 0.5 1.1 1.2 1.5 215 361 469 587 Total Network Performance Total Delay (hr) 5.3 1632 4.3 9.4,.-- 1632 .4, ate' 1632 SimTraffic Report Page 1 kimleylvl7-ff51 PM AWSC 2010 Build RNS: 78 Baseline 11/8/2004 Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. gluveu -NB -.- -85 SEE Directions Served LTR LT --R LT TR T L T R Maximum Quecie ft 120 205 tilt ill ?a - 187 : 131 147 Average Queue (ft) 56 71 45 65 67 7 ,55 41 61 50 95thxQueue"ft g�p01'" 64 '°587' 98 86 Link Distance (ft) 404 463 48 48 291 356 Upstr-e6m81[cTime(%) 1,XTA4':'0.14 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 — StoraeBatJis(Et) 3 7575 125 Storage Blk Time (%) 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 ,Q— :e g PeR tt\ a eh ` 1- 1 0 Intersection: 5: Bend Directions Link • A z x#�+� ,y -_ ,`+'`� ..,1 �.�i -�'.T3 �_r:A„urc a„a.; max. Storage Blk Time Nework Summary Networkwide Queuing Penalty: 9 kimleylvl7-ff51 SimTraffic Report Page 2 PM AWSC 2010 Build • RNS: 91 Baseline 11/8/2004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Performance by movement I otal Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.2 0,2 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.3 0.8 0.3 14 2,, ,z E3 4 -a 7�k f- - Vehicles Entered 163 17 7 238-- 41 100 7 364 162 109 258 174 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance 0.4 1.3 1.2 1.4 4.2 187 379 473 541 1580 Total Network Performance SirnTraffic Report kimleyM7-ff51 Page 1 PM AWSC 2010 Build • • RNS: 91 Baseline 1118!2004 Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Directions Served LTR LT R LT TR T L T R IN ,%t#I Queue (ft) 85 2t0 kt t` 90 Average Queue (ft) 50 79 49 66 61 1 41 60 41 Link Distance (ft) 404 463 48 48 291 356 Time (%) 0.11 0.00 ' 0.00 intersection: 5: Bend Nework Summary Network wide Queuid"` �ttatY l 12grLAI ._ SimTratfc Report Page 2 kimleylvF-ff51 PM AWSC 2010 Build • • RNS: 4 Baseline 11/812004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Performance by movement I otal Delay (hr) 0.4 0.0 0 0 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.3 0.8 0.3 Dela- FVeF� s ' ° `�"'�7`Ta Wig; 6 1•':;��148' -. "ti "�9'°` 9.Q ' � � - 't1: Vehicles Entered 179 16 6 231 30 101 4 379 101 112 270 189 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance I otai Delay (hr) 0.4 1.0 1.1 1.4 4.0 t7efay F Veik,Cs``: - Vehicles Entered 201 362 484 571 1618 Total Network Performance SirnTraffic Report kirnleyM7451 Page 1 PM AWSC 2010 Build • RNS: 4 Baseline 11/8/2004 Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. INUE15 WIM 01 w KB S6 Directions Served LTR LT R LT TR T L T R MaximyQdeue{ft 0 Fa992t0�45_�7; 131 45 Average Queue (ft) 50 66 44 56 59 2 41 07 47 95ttxQi u t 8„_ 5 qg, 104 7'68”: Link Distance (ft) 404 463 48 48 291 356 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 I'J Storage Blk Tune (%) 0.04 0.00 O,nO _�ME Intersection: 5: Bend Directions Nework Summary NetworCCwI a Quewng Penaltj 5" r; SimTrafflc Report kimleylvl7-ff51 Page 2 PM AWSC 2010 Build • • RNS: 53 Baseline 11/8/2004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Performance by movement Total Delay (hr) 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.0 1.0 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.3 Delay.FVeh (sy.:' _ 7 0 S:Srtsz3 €fB Tlg,t10,tt 4 Vehicles Entered 150 22 5 237 32 102 6 350 109 140 245 166 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance 1101, 111 Total Delay (hr) 0.4 1.1 1.2 1.5 4.1 72 10 tl 9.2g 94 _.� .. Vehicles Entered 177 371 465 551 1564 Total Network Performance SimTraffic Report ktmk3yW4M Page 1 PM AWSC 2010 Build • • RNS: 53 Baseline 1118/2004 Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Directions Served LTR LT R LT TR T L T R MaAmuar Queue (fty gr,,, , 172 101 Average Queue (ft) 41 69 48 61 69 3 45 61 42 9$t[KPueue((t)Y'NX73;1'.121 89L, Link Distance (ft) 404 463 48 48 291 356 Time (%) _ 0.06 0.00 0.01 Intersection: 5: Bend Directions Served Queue Blk SimTraffic Report Page 2 kimleylvl7-ff51 Nework Summary IVetworTcwn a Qii'euingTar alty 11 SimTraffic Report Page 2 kimleylvl7-ff51 DAA AIAIon n^4^ n..:u • • Baseline 1118/2004 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Performance by movement B - Total Delay (hr) 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.3 bela�.&Veh low . 4 9.5mt 9 4 % 2 Vehicles Entered 167 17 6 223 28 102 5 365 123 110 233 181 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Intersection Performance Total Delay (hr) 0.4 0.9 1.0 1.1 3.4 493 524 Total Network Performance SimTraffic Report Page 1 kimleylvl7-ff51 • • PM AWSC 2010 Build RNS: 13 Baseline 11/8/2004 Intersection: 3: Pond Promenade & Great Plains Blvd. Directions Served LTR LT R LT TR T L T R MaxiniiimQueue�ftr 12TH4..93v11k,. 167 74 966 pQ Average Queue (ft) 46 60 37 60 62 11 39 51 47 95tK'W- eua(ft� ' ` g ` �8 63 "84 62 ! Unk Distance (ft) 404 463 48 48 291 _. 356 Upstream Bf,7ime9oj _ -: Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 Stora"eBa Dist ft _ 175 x...;125 Storage Blk Time (%) 0.03 0.00 r Queuin enal veh 3 Intersection: 5: Bend QueuiFlc�Fe��c �ve)t Nework Summary Netwoncrcih:QueumgPenalty 3 a = Axa .: SimTraffic Report kimleylvl7-Ml Page 2 • 0 2 Traffic Parking spaces added 22.192. Existing spaces (if project involves expansion) 0. Estimated total Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated 14.800. Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and its timing: approximately 1.500 for both the AM peak (7-9:00 AM) and the PM peak (4-6.00 PM). For each affected road indicate the ADT and the directional distribution of traffic with and without the project. Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on the affected roads and describe am" traffic improvements which will be necessary. Response: A traffic operations analvsis of the proposed development was completed in order to document the following issues: • Identification of principal roads, highways, and intersections that will be used by motor vehicles moving to or from the proposed project. • Estimates of average daily traffic volumes and peak hour traffic volumes anticipated to occur one year after the proposed project will be substantially complete and operational. • Identification of traffic impacts that would result given the capacity limitations of the roads, highways, and intersections and the forecast post -development traffic volumes. • Identification of mitigation measures that can be implemented to address traffic impacts. ACCESS ROADWAYS AND INTERSECTIONS Access— Ro— adwaays Local access to the proposed site is to be provided directly by Great Plains Boulevard and Trunk Highway (TH) 101/Market Boulevard and indirectly by TH 5/Arboretum Boulevard. The project location and adjacent roadway system is shown in Figure 1. Great Plains Boulevard will act as one access to the development. In addition, five accesses are proposed off of TH 101, three accesses to the east and two accesses to the west. North of TH 5, Great Plains Boulevard is a north -south, two-lane roadway with no parking and a posted speed limit of 30 miles per hour (mph). South of TH 5, Great Plains Boulevard is proposed to be designed as a two-lane roadway with parking bays on both sides of the street and a maximum posted speed limit of 30 mph. The purpose of this section of Great Plains Boulevard will be to provide a direct route for the heaviest movements into and out of the development. North of TH 5, Market Boulevard is a north -south, two-lane roadway with no parking and a posted speed limit of 30 mph. For approximately 1,000 feet south of TH 5, TH 101 is a north -south, four -lane divided highway with left- and right -turn lanes before tapering into a two-lane roadway. TH 101, from TH 5 south to County State Aide Highway (CSAH) 18/Lyman Boulevard, is planned to be upgraded to a four -lane divided roadway with left- and right -turn lanes. This section of TH 101 does not allow parking and the posted speed limit is 40 mph. TH 5 is an east -west, four -lane divided highway with left- and right -tum lanes at major intersections. Access onto TH 5 near the proposed development is excluded to major cross -streets with no driveway access. c TH 5 does not allow parking and the posted speed limit is 55 mph. The site plan is shown on Figure 3. " Regional access to the proposed site is provided east and west by TH 5 and north and south by TH 101. TH 5 provides direct access from the southwest suburbs to I-194 and the rest of the regional road system. TH 101 provides access to TH 212 and TH 169 approximately 3 miles south of the proposed development. Access Intersections Six critical intersections were identified for analysis: • TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard • TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard • Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive East • TH 101 and Lake Drive West • TH 101 and Lake Drive (through development) • TH 101 and Main Street The two intersections on TH 5 are controlled by traffic signals. The remaining access intersections are proposed to be unsignalized with no control on TH 101 and Great Plains Boulevard and stop control on the minor roadways (Lake Drive and Main Street). The existing road geometrics and traffic control are shown in Figure 10 and Table 3. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Existing traffic data is collected because the information is a key component used in the analysis of existing conditions and in producing forecast volumes. The existing data gathered includes: The existing two-way Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes on TH 5, TH 101/ Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard were recorded by BRW, Inc. on March 22-24, 1996. The existing peak hour turning movement volumes and geometrics were collected by BRW, Inc, on March 23, 1996 from 6:00 to 9:00 AM and 4:00 to 6:00 PM at the following locations: (1) The intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard (2) The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard • The existing traffic signal timing was obtained from Mn/DOT for the AM and PM peak hours of operation at the following locations: (1) The intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard (2) The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard rte; 21 •' The resulting existing ADT volumes are documented in Figure 9 and the AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes are illustrated in Figure 11 and documented in Table 3. SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC Trip Generation The trip generation of the proposed land uses are based on national average trip generation rates from the Trio Generation ItenortFifth Edition published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in 1991. The number of daily, AM and PM peak hour trips expected to be generated by each of the proposed land uses are shown on Table 4. The proposed site includes nine areas of development and eight different land uses. The proposed plan contains 391,000 gross square feet (sf) of mixed use commercial development and 266 dwelling units. The proposed development includes: • 16,800 sf for three restaurants • 47,000 sf church • 53,000 sf elementary school • 104,500 sf of office space in six buildings • 122,500 sf of retail space in four locations • 106 -room motel • 154 apartment units in four buildings • 112 condominium units in two buildings. The proposed development also includes an alternative land use plan. This alternative plan involves adding 13,000 sf of office space in Area 6 and replacing the 32,000 sf of office space in Area 7 with 56 condominium units. For purposes of the trip generation analysis both the proposed land use and the alternative land use were analyzed and compared. The proposed land use generated greater AM and PM peak hour volumes; therefore, the volumes generated by the proposed land use were used for further analysis in this report. Because of the mixture of land use types proposed for this development, some of the trips generated are expected to be internal, multi-purpose trips. The Trip Generation Manual suggests developments with a mixture of residential and commercial land uses produce the highest multi-purpose trips. Based on this information, 10 percent of the trips generated were assumed to be internal, multi-purpose trips. In addition, number of the trips generated by the site are expected to be vehicles traveling on the adjacent roadways which utilize the convenience of the direct access to the development and make an intermediate stop even though the proposed site was not their primary destination. The TIrE4DLGemntrmatti2onmMmAannijai refers to these intermediate stops as "pass -by trips". The pass -by trips were not taken into consideration when developing the trip generation for the proposed development. Therefore, the site generated traffic.will probably be lower than the trip generation indicates, and the analysis based on the higher trip generation will produce conservative results. r 22 TABLE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS PEAK HOUR VOLUMES AND GEOMETRICS (1) _.EAST TRAFFIC SOUTH APPROACH NORTH APPROAC_ H _ NO. INTERSECTION CONTROL„ PARAMETER-- Ri LT RT TH 5 _ LT_ AM Peak Hour 26 61 151 1 & Signalized PM Peak Hour 75 87 136 __ TH 101 — — _ Geometrics 1 2 1 TH 5 119 AM Peak Hour 27-- 21 — 158 2 & Signalized PM Peak Hour 53 74 171 Great Plains Blvd._-- — Geometrics 1 -- 1 1— 39 Lake Dr. East 24 AM Peak Hour 0 36 40 3 & Thru/Slop PM Peak Hour 0 114 40 Great Plains Blvd. -- Geometrics 0 1 1 2 Lake Dr. East 2 AM Peak Hour 60 243 0 4 & Thru/Slop PM Peak Hour 40 301 0 TH 101 0 Geometrics 1 2_ 0 0 0 (3) Lake Dr. (Site) —�--- AM Peak Hour 0 303 0 5 & Thru/Slop PM Peak Hour 0 341 0 — TH 101 0 Geometrics_ 1 2 1 40 0 Main Street 0 AM Peak Hour 0 303 0 6 & Thru/Stop PM Peak Hour 0 341 0 TH 101 1 1 Geometrics 0 1 < n _.EAST APPROACH SOUTH APPROACH WESTAPPROACH . RT TH LT RT _ TH__ _ LT_ _ RT ......... __. LT 104 1,073 165 162 51 12 77 1,550 54 267 1,786 204 271 122 119 50 1,080 96 1 2 2 1 166 2 1 63 1,283 31 84 39 20 24 1,777 49 174 1,915 45 87 57 35 1,544 81 .1_.2-- 1 1 2 1 2 1 65 0 40 65 78 0 0 0—,--,"o 65 0 40 65 145 0 0 0 0 —�--- 0---.�_ 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 185 40 60 0 40 0 0 0 0 452 60 40 0 60 0 —_ 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0185 0 0 0.........— 0 .. 0 0 0 0 452 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 185 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 452 0 0 0 0 1 0 1_ 1 1 n n n Notes: (1) The carrot symbols > or < Identify where a right or left movement shares the same lane with [he through movement. (2) All four unsignalized Intersections are controlled with a stop condition on the east/west streets and through conditions on the north/south streets. (3) The movements to and from the west approach of [his Intersection do not include the volumes for the trips generated by the Rosemount, Inc. building which will share this access. Source: BRW, Inc. peak hour turning movement counts recorded on March 23, 1996. wnM U:UNTVOL.WK4 0 S. S S R i Ije{ f � i e e I e e e e e e e e i e s S R R 9 e If 8 888 18888888 18 l aha 8 i 8 8888 x x x x 8 I i 18 8888 I S 1 18 8 8 « I RSR.?R YS I R R I A I R I SYS R I R R A 2 R x x 512-tRx !s ARA i ___«=fix x I x i R R R R «««A. ._e2 3 I I I S. Ije{ f � i e e I e e e e e e e e e e s S R R 9 e e Ie! Xg l aha I g$ gxxx Rg88 x 18 8 x x I xxxx x x x x I 8 8 I 8888 I S 2 mo !s ARA i ___«=fix l e S i« I l xxxx R «««A. !I3 f I� •. I .... I� g l 8'8 e I 888888 18 1 8 8 I 8� 888 18 8 S 8 �I✓C %� x I Y x X% x% x � x x I FF pp H IsLU � ui LU I I I I 8 a J maa i is g f $ • 0 The development is expected to generate 14,810 vehicle trips per day, 1,520 AM peak hour trips and 1,490 PM peak hour trips. Fifh, percent of the total daily trips are expected to be inbound to the development and 50 percent are expected to be outbound from the development for a total of 7,405 vehicles per day (vpd) both entering and exiting the development. The distribution of vehicles in the AM peak hour is expected to be 56 percent inbound and 44 percent outbound or 855 vehicle trips entering and 665 vehicle trips exiting. The distribution of vehicles in the PM peak hour is expected to be 48 percent inbound and 52 percent outbound or 715 vehicles entering and 775 vehicles exiting. Directional Trip Distribution The directional orientation used to distribute the site -generated trips to/from the proposed development is based on two sets of information: the existing traffic demands and the regional traffic model for the twin cities metro area. The directional trip distribution assumed for the site is shown on Figure 15. TRAFFIC FORECASTS In order to analyze the potential traffic impacts that the expected future development will have on the adjacent roadway system, traffic volumes were prepared for the forecast Year 2002 background (no -build) and post -development (build) conditions. The forecast no -build volumes consist of the existing volumes plus a background traffic growth. The forecast build volumes consist of the background volumes plus the site -generated trips for theproposed development distributed over the roadway network. Background Traffic Growth The background traffic growth was determined from two sets of information: by analysis of historical traffic counts for the roadways in the area and from historic land development patterns in the Chanhassen Central Business District (CBD) provided by the City staff. The ADT volumes reported on the Mn/DOT Traffic Flow Maps from 1978 to 1994 were used in combination with the 1996 ADT count conducted by BRW, Inc., to develop average annual growth rates along TH 5, TH 101/Market Boulevard, Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive. These growth rates were then adjusted based on the City of Chanhassen's assessment of growth in the area. An average annual growth rate of three percent was determined for TH 5, TH 101 south of TH 5, and Lake Drive west of TH 101. A growth rate of one-half percent was used for Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard, both north of TH 5, due to lack of area remaining for new development in the downtown area. A one-half percent growth rate was also used for Lake Drive east of Great Plains Boulevard. Finally, a zero percent growth rate was used for Great Plains Boulevard south of TH 5. The residential neighborhoods in the area east of Great Plains Boulevard are mostly built -out and Great Plains Boulevard will be designed to provide direct access into the proposed development. Any growth in traffic along Great Plains Boulevard will be accounted for by the site -generated traffic. r 25 These growth rates were applied to the existing daily volumes along TH 51 TH 101 / Market Boulevard, Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive to develop background growth traffic volumes. These results are shown in Figure 11 and Table 5 for the intersection turning movement volumes as Year 2002 no -build volumes. Forecast Traffic Volumes In order to analyze the potential traffic impacts that the proposed development will have on the adjacent roadway system, post -development traffic volume forecasts were prepared for the Year 2002 conditions. The forecast volumes consist of the existing volumes plus background traffic growth plus the site -generated trips for the proposed land uses. The resulting forecast Year 2002 build AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes for the two intersections along TH 5 are illustrated in Figure 12. The existing peak hour turning movement counts were not available for the four unsignalized access intersection; therefore, the following assumptions were made in developing the AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes. • The AM and PM peak hour volumes were assumed to be 10 percent of the ADT on Lake Drive. • The directional distribution along Lake Drive was assumed to be a 50/50 split for both the AM and PM peak hours. The directional distribution along TH 101 and Great Plains Boulevard was based on the peak hour turn movements at the two TH 5 signalized intersections. The directional distribution along TH 101 was assumed to be a 40/60, northbound/ southbound split in the AM peak hour and a 60/40, northbound/southbound split in the PM peak hour. The directional distribution along Great Plains Boulevard was assumed to be a 60/40, northbound/southbound split for both the AM and PM peak hours. The geometry assumed at each access entrance included a left- and right -turn lane Off of the major street (TH 101 or Great Plains Boulevard) and two lanes outbound from the development (either a left -turn lane and a right -tum lane or, where appropriate, a left -tum lane and a shared through/right-turn lane). For the forecast build conditions at the intersection of TH 101 and Lake Drive West, the east approach from the development was assumed to provide right -in and right -out movements only. • No site generation volumes were available for the Rosemount, Inc. building which will share the west approach to the intersection of TH 101 and Lake Drive through the site as one of its accesses. Therefore, only the trip generation from the proposed development was used for this west approach only. The Year 2002 forecast build AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes for all six intersections are documented in Table 6. VIM 26 TABLE 5 FORECAST YEAR 2002 NO -BUILD CONDITIONS PEAK HOUR VOLUMES AND GEOMETRICS (1) NO. �.--_--- INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTROL PARAMETER RT NORTH_APPROA__C_H TH - EASTAPPR_OACH _ SOUTH APPROACH WEST APPROACH TH 5 AM Peak Hour 30 ._ 60 �T 160 RT_ 120 T_H — -- - _---- __= . = LT —.. RT . _--'----.....—. 1 8 Signalized PM Peak Hour 80 90 140 1,280 200 190 60 10 90 1,850 TH 101 Geometrics 1 2 320 2,130 240 320 150 140 80 1,280 1 110 5 -- - AM Peak Hour 30 20 1 160 1 80 2 1,530 2TH 40 80 2 a Signalized PM Peak Hour 50 80 180 210 40 20 30 2,120 60 Great Plains Blvd. Geometrics 1 1 2,290 50 70 90 80 40 1,840 0 100 Lake Dr. East AM Peak Hour 0 45 I1 45 65 — - — --- 1 -- 3 a Thru/Slop PM Peak Hour 0 125 45 0 45 65 75 0 0 0 0 Great Plains Blvd. Geometrics 0 1 65 0 45 65 155 0 0 0 0 — Lake Dr. East AM Peak Hour 0 _ 0 0 75 275 0 4 a Thru/Slop PM Peak Hour 50 340 0 0 0 0 0 210 50 75 0 50 —.—TH 101 Geometrics 1 2 0 0 0 0 535 75 50 0 75 (3) Lake Dr. (Site) AM Peak Hour -- 0 350 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 _ 0, _ _ 1 _ 5 a Thru/Stop PM Peak Hour 0 390 0 0 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 0 TH 101 1 2 0 0 0 0 535 0 0 p p _ Main Street _Geometrics AM Peak Hour 0 350 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 6 a Thru/Stop PM Peak Hour 0 390 0 0 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 0 TH 101 Geometrics 0 1 < n 1 0 .. 0 0 535 0 p 0 0 Notes: (1) The carrot symbols > or < identify where a right or lett movement shares the same lane with the through movement. (2) All four unsignalized intersections are controlled with a stop condition on the east/west streets and through conditions on the north/soulh streets. (3) The movements to and from the west approach of this intersection do not Include the volumes for the trips generated by the Rosemount, Inc. building which will share this access. Source. BRW, Inc. peak hour turning movement counts recorded on March 23, 1998. anuw U:UNTVOLWK4 TABLE 6 FORECAST YEAR 2002 BUILD CONDITIONS PEAK HOUR VOLUMES AND GEOMETRICS 0) Notes: (1) The carrot symbols > or < identify where a right or left movement shares the same lane with the through movement. (2) All four unsignalized intersections are controlled with a stop condition on the east/west streets and through conditions on the north/south streets. (3) The movements to and from the west approach of this Intersection do not Include the volumes for the trips generated by the Rosemount, Inc. building which will share this access. source BRW, Inc. using ITE Trip Generation Manual, Fifth Edition (1991). .11. U:UNTVOL.WK4 W, (2) NO. INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTROL PARAMETER -- .RT NORTH APPROACH ---------.,. _ TH LT_ —._ EASTAPPROACH RT SOUTHAPPROACH TH LT WESTAPPROACH RT TH 210 1,850 160 1,290 1 2 30 2,209 40 1,930 1 2 -- - - 0 0 0 0 0 > 1 75 0 50 0 1 _0 5 0 20 0 0 15 0 5 0 0 > 1 LT 60 110 1 80 120 1 600 65 1 50 75 5 40 35 15 1 RT TH LT TH 5 1 & TH 101 TH 5 2 & Great Plains Blvd. eke Dr. East 3 & --Great Plains Blvd. Lake Dr. East 4 & TH 101 (3) Lake Dr. (Site) 5 & TH 101 AM Peak Hour 30 60 160 Signalized PM Peak Hour 80 90 140 Geometrics 1 2 1 AM Peak Hour 40 90 160 Signalized PM Peak Hour 60 140 180 _Geometrics 1 1 1 AM Peak Hour 75 300 45 Thru/Stop PM Peak Hour 65 350 45 Geometrics 1 1 1 AM Peak Hour 75 495 0 Thru/Slop PM Peak Hour 50 530 0 Geometrics 1 2 -- — --- ---- ... -- —0 AM Peak Hour 40 400 130 Thru/Slop PM Peak Hour 5 445 130 Geometrics 1 2 1 AM Peak Hour 5 490 35 Thru/Stop PM Peak Hour 35 535 15 I Geometrics I 1 1 1 1 120 1,280 300 320 2,130 330 1 2 2 80 1,620 300 210 2,370 280 1 2 1 280 60 100 430 150 250 1 1 280 90 20 300 140 60 1 1 2 65 285 0 65 370 0 1 1 1 25 290 50 25 660 75 1 2 1 65 0 45 65 0 45 0 > 1— 1— 100 0 0 95 0 0 0 0 25 0 125 40 0 120 0 > 1 1 115 335 20 100 680 5 1 2 1 Main Street 0 & TH 101 I 15 0 40 20 0 65 0 > 1 1 1 65 420 5 50 750 15 1 1 1 Notes: (1) The carrot symbols > or < identify where a right or left movement shares the same lane with the through movement. (2) All four unsignalized intersections are controlled with a stop condition on the east/west streets and through conditions on the north/south streets. (3) The movements to and from the west approach of this Intersection do not Include the volumes for the trips generated by the Rosemount, Inc. building which will share this access. source BRW, Inc. using ITE Trip Generation Manual, Fifth Edition (1991). .11. U:UNTVOL.WK4 W, Site -generated trips were assigned to the roadwav system for the forecast Year 2002 build condition based on two assumptions. Vehicles using TH 5 will use the road closest to their land use, either TH 101 or Great Plains Boulevard, to gain access to TH 5. When the east approach left -tum movement off of TH 5 at the Great Plains Boulevard intersection exceeds 300 vehicles in the peak hour, vehicles are expected to by-pass this intersection and turn left at the TH 101 intersection to access the development. FORECAST TRAFFIC ANALYSES Capacity Analysis A capacity analysis is a qualitative measure of traffic flow through an intersection or along a roadway segment. The basic output from a capacity analysis is a level of service (LOS) letter grade (A through F) with LOS A representing minimal delays and no congestion, and LOS F representing substantial delays and congestion. LOS E is considered to be the actual capacity of an intersection or movement. Level of service D is generally considered to be an acceptable level of traffic operations in urbanized areas during the peak traffic hours. Level of service E and F are common during peak hour conditions in urbanized areas for left -tum movements at unsignalized intersections. Capacitv analyses were conducted using the traffic volumes and geometrics illustrated previously in Figures 10, 11 and 12 and documented in Tables 3, 4 and 5, at the following six locations: (1) The intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard (2) The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard (3) Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive East (4) TH 101 and Lake Drive West (5) TH 101 and Lake Drive (through development) (6) TH 101 and Main Street The capacity analysis of the signalized intersections used the SIGNAL94 software and the procedures documented in "Chapter 9: Signalized Intersections" of the 1994 Update to the Hi¢hwav Capacity Manual (HCM).The unsignalized intersections were analyzed using the procedures of "Chapter 10: Unsignalized Intersections" of the HCM. The existing traffic signal timings were used for the existing conditions and forecast no -build analysis and optimized timings were used in analyzing the forecast build conditions. The existing cycle length during the peak hours is 145 seconds. This cycle length was maintained for the future conditions analysis. The existing timing is set to provide as much green time as possible to the heavy east and west through movements on TH 5. By providing extra time for the major movements, the cross -street movements and the major street left -tum movements will experience more delay. A similar timing plan was used for the build conditions where extra green time was provided for the TH 5 through volumes. 29 The results of the capacity analysis for the existing, Year 2002 no -build', and Year 2002 build conditions are shown in Tables 7 and 8 for the two signalized intersections and for the four unsignalized intersections, respectively. The signalized intersections level of service table provides the intersection level of service and intersection delay results for the AM and PM peak hours. The unsignalized intersection level of service table provides the major and minor street level of service and delay by movements and the intersection delay results for the AM and PM peak hours. All four of the right -tum movements at the intersection of TH 5 and TH 101/h4arket Boulevard have their own lane and a channelization island. There are also right -tum lanes and channelization islands for the east and west approach right -turn movements on TH 5 at the Great Plains Boulevard intersection. Therefore, these right -tum movements were analyzed as free right conditions which means they do not effect the signal timing operations at the intersections. The remaining two right -tum movements for the north and south approaches on Great Plains Boulevard have their own lane but do not have a channelization island. The analysis assumed that for every two vehicles turning left during the protected left -tum phase on TH 5, one vehicle would turn right -on -red from the north and south approaches on Great Plains Boulevard. The capacity analysis is an indication of how conditions are likely to be during weekday peak hours only and not at other times of the day or on weekends. The results of the signalized intersection analysis are as follows: For the existing conditions, both intersections along TH 5 are reported to operate at LOS C in the AM and PM peak hours. For the forecast no -build conditions, both intersections along TH 5 are expected to operate at LOS C and D in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. For the forecast build conditions, the intersection of TH 5 and TH 101 is expected to operate at LOS D for both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard is expected to operate at LOS F for both the AM and PM peak hours. When the volume approaches or exceeds the capacity for a movement the delay grows at an increased rate. Rather than report an approximation of this increased delay, the analysis reports the movement(s) which are above capacity and does not report delay for the intersection. In order to compare the no -build and build conditions where the intersection level of service is F and no intersection delay is reported, the planning analysis from the 1985 HCM was used to supplement the results of the 1994 Update to the HCM analysis. The planning analysis is a method which provides a basic assessment relative to whether the capacity of an intersection is expected to be exceeded. The analysis sums the volume for the critical movements at an intersection. If the sum of the critical volumes is below 1,200 vehicles in the peak hour, the intersection is expected to be under capacity. If the sum of the critical volumes is from 1,200 to 1,400 vehicles in the peak hour the intersection is expected to be near capacity. If the sum of the critical volumes is greater than 1,400 vehicles in the peak hour, then the volume is expected to exceed the capacity of the intersection. 23W 30 TABLE 7 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE INTER. I I TRAFFIC TIME OF CYCLE LENGTHS LEVEL ERSECTION ANALYgS sum OF INTERSECTION CONTROL CONDITION OF SERVICE DELAY tj�ECI IPLANNING LEVEL OF CRITICAL _ _CAPACITY_- VOLUMES____ 1 TH 5/Arboretum Blvd. Signalized Existing AM Peak Hour 145 and PM Peak Hour 145 C 17.6 Under 1,0 - --- TH 101/Market Blvd. Year 2002 - ' AM Peak Hour C 20.0 - -Under 1134 -. . _.._ . 88 — No -Build PM Peak Hour 145 145 21.1 Near 1,215 Year 2002 ------' —... AM Peak Hour 145 D __ 27 7 Near _-_11,39 0 Build PM Peak Hour 145 D 30.1 Near 1,265 D 34.9 Over 1,470 2 TH 5/Arboretum Blvd. Signalized Existing AM Peak Hour 145 and ----- PM Peak Hour 145 C 18.3 Under 1,147 Great Plains Blvd. Year , 2 -- --- AM Peak Hour --- ------ 145 19.4 -- - Near - _ 1,297 - �Nc-Build PM Peak Hour_ 145 C 22.6 Near e 1,300 Year 2002 AM Peak Hour 145 _D --_ _ 31 2 — - - Over 1515 --'sis Build ----- PM Peak Hour 145 F F NA Over 1,650 Year 2002 ---------- -----. AM Peak Hour145 D NA — - ' _ _Over 1,825 -- -- - Mitigated Build PM Peak Hour 145 27.6 Over 1,500 (3) F NA Over 1,625 NOTES: (1) The same cycle length was used (145 seconds) for all conditions. HCS ANALYSIS PLANNING ANALYSIS (2) No Intersection delay Is reported when a movement volume to capacity ratio exceeds one LOS —: =:—, CRITICAL over the peak hour factor. A -5 VOLUME RELATIONSHIP' (3) The mitigated build C.Ond1110n included an additional left -turn lane /or the east approach and pp B >5 and <=15 FOR INT. TO PROBABLE a free right turn for the south approach. 1AP C > 15 and c=25 (VPH)__ CAPACITY D >25 and <=40 0 to 1,200 Under Capacity E >40 and <=60 1,201 10 1,400 Near Capacity F >60 >= 1,401 Over Ce adl SOURCE: BRW, Inc. using SIGNAL94, HCS Signalized Intersection Analysis and the Highway Capacity Manual. 06128196 U:ILOSNEW.WK4. TABLE 8 ON LEVEL OF SERVICE UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTI III wi tour rnteraecbPns are controlled wilco swP conditions on Ne eastlwest sheets am tree Dowing through Pondieons on the norM,south RI The dgettiOn and movemem is reported. For example, VVB LT identifies Me Westbound left tum movement movement (3) The intersepron delay represents me oven4 delay m seconds per vehicle entenng the intef t-Wrh n . (a) The movements M har from Me west approach of tMa mtersecbo Cp not mCude Me vdumes tw the MPs generated by me Rosemount, Inc. Duitlmg which wit, snare Mils axes. (S) The results wiM -W idemky Me movements which are trot Present in Me embng and nP-build conditions. Sou BRW. Inc. using NCS Unalgraft" eenaac Anah ala -" Ma Highway Gpscay W.L DVINa{ U.MIHSIGLOS-M4 A Oi Table 7 shows the AM and PM peak hour results of the planning analvsis for the signalized intersections along TH 5. The results indicate: • For the existing conditions, the intersections of TH 5 and TH 101 is reported to operate under capacity in both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of in TH 5 and Great Plas Boulevard is reported to operate under capacity in the .4jM peak hour and near capacity in the PM peak hour. • For the no -build conditions, the intersection of TH 5 and TH 101 is expected to operate near capacity in both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard is expected to operate near capacity in the AM peak hour and over capacity in the PM peak hour. • For the build conditions, the intersection of TH 5 and TH 101 is expected to operate near capacity in the AM peak hour and over capacity in the PM peak hour. The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard is expected to operate over capacity in both the AM and PM peak hours. • The analysis indicates that in comparing the sum of the critical volumes for the AM and PM peak hours from the existing conditions to the forecast Year 2002 no - build conditions there is an increase of 13 to 17 percent. • The analysis indicates that in comparing the critical volumes for the AM and PM peak hours from the no -build to the forecast Year 2002 build conditions there is an increase of 4 to 27 percent. The planning analysis helps demonstrate that the change in operations at the intersections along TH 5 from the existing conditions are not solely due to the additional traffic generated by the development. The background traffic growth in the area accounts for 45 to 65 percent of the traffic forecast at the two intersections along TH 5, varying by intersection during the peak hours. Even without the additional site -generated traffic in the forecast year, the volumes are expected to be near or over capacity due to the background traffic growth. Table 8 shows the results of the unsignalized intersection analysis. The analysis indicates that all of the unsignalized intersection movements currently operate at LOS C or better in both the AM and PM peak hours. For the forecast Year 2002 no -build condition, the analysis indicates that all of the intersection movements are expected to operate at LOS D or better in both the AM and PM peak hours. For the forecast Year 2002 build conditions, the analysis indicates all of the intersection movements are expected to operate at LOS D or better, with the following exceptions: • The TH 101/Lake Drive West intersection eastbound left -turn movement is expected to operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour. • The TH 101/Lake Drive (Site) intersection westbound left -turn movement is expected to operate at LOS E and F in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. • The TH 101/Lake Drive (Site) intersection eastbound left -turn movement is expected to operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour. 33 e3s" j i1 • The TH 101/Main Street intersection westbound left -tum movement is expected to operate at LOSE in the PM peak hour. The traffic for the minor street left -turn movements at the unsignalized intersections are expected to experience some delav during the peak hour conditions. However, the intersection operations for the majority of the volume entering the unsignalized intersections are expected to operate at LOS A. This volume includes the through movement and right -turn movement volumes along the major street which are not required to stop. RECOMMENDED MITIGATION The following traffic mitigation measures are recommended based on the results of the preceding traffic capacity analysis and planning analysis. Mitigation is recommended for intersections where the volume approaches or exceeds the capacity for the current geometrics. The signalized intersections of TH 5 and TH 101/Market Boulevard is expected to operate at LOS D or better which is a satisfactory condition for the peak hours of operation. The intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard is expected to have movements which approach or exceed the capacity; therefore, different forms of mitigation including adding double left -turn lanes, channelizing free right -turn lanes or a combination of both were considered. Table 7 shows the results of the most effective and reasonable mitigation at this intersection. When the volume for a left -turn lane exceeds 300 vehicles, an additional left -turn lane should be considered. The volume for the east approach left -tum movement into the development is expected to be near or over 300 vehicles in the peak hour. The addition of a second left -tum lane for the east approach on TH 5 is recommended at the intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard. Adding a second left -tum lane is expected to improve the conditions at the Great Plains Boulevard intersection. Another form of mitigation which should be considered at the TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard intersection is either providing a free right for the south approach or extending the right -tum lane. This right -tum movement is expected to be heavily used by vehicles traveling east on TH 5 or north on TH 101. Although the through and left -turn movements for this south approach are low compared to the right -tum movement, extending the right -turn lane could help prevent the right -tum queue from blocking access to the through and left -turn lanes. Although these mitigations are expected to improve the intersection operations, they do not improve the overall intersection level of service. The intersection is expected to operate near capacity due to the heavy through movement on TH 5. No mitigation was identified to deal with the high volumes of traffic traveling in the through movements on TH 5. The through movements on TH 5 already receive the majority of the green time at the signalized intersections and are expected to continue to do so in the future. Therefore, the mitigation discussed above is aimed at improving the conditions for the other movements at the intersections. A common form of mitigation for unsignalized intersections is to install a traffic signal. Volumes at the unsignalized intersections were compared to the Peak Hour Volume Warrant as discussed in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic ontrol 34 35,600 0 x F+ Lake Drive West 1,950 mnnmial Assessment Worksheet City of Chunho n 8 0 \, 45,800 44,400 2,100 Filum 9 7}oftk Volumes 7 1 1 1 I I I I 1 z T.H.5 --------—----------—-------- - -------—----------—-- ----- -� -► I I It] + + x® I I I I � I I Legend: I I Traffic Signal I I Suurce: BRW, Inc. I I I I I I lia{n on the Ponds ,vironmentol Assessment Workshect ,e Lily of Chanhassen is Figure 10 Iic Control and Geometric Condillona Naart 11 rXISo and Year 2002 No -Build AM and Ph1 RPk Flour 7hralne Movement Valumc. Ilges on the Ponds rvironmenial Assessment Worksheet a City of Chanhassen �� a CD rl'y u N to N `1 Lis. � T.H. S 54/96 60/110 104/267 49/81 t 63/174 120/320 60/100 80/210 1,55011,0801,073/1,786 1,850/1,290 1,073/1,786 1,777/1,544 1,280/2,130 2,120/1,840 t— 13/1,915 1,,,2628 /2,290 77/50 90/60 165/204 24/35 200/240 30/40 31/45 40/50 f X01 ~\ p .�+ N\ Legend: Traffic Signal p 0% bN Go yp NN Hf yim XXX/XXX Cxisting Conditions AM/PM Peak I lour x Turning Movement Volumes I -H XXX/XXX Year 20112 No -Build AM/PM Peak Boor Turning Movement Volumes Source: okW, Inc. Counted mr M.,ch 19, 1996. Naart 11 rXISo and Year 2002 No -Build AM and Ph1 RPk Flour 7hralne Movement Valumc. Ilges on the Ponds rvironmenial Assessment Worksheet a City of Chanhassen �� PU 3 t$ 60 (0) 110 (0) 1,850 (0) 1,290(0) 210 (115) 160(100) �} "rag" on [he Ponds nvironmemal Assessmem Workshcet he City of Chanhosscn 00 00 00 r9i� $rn RR 2,130(0) 1,930 (85) 300 (95) `` 330 30 (0) (85) 4 MOR 120 (0) 80 (15) 320 (0) 120 (20) F 1,280 (0) 2,200 (75) 2,130(0) 1,930 (85) 300 (95) `` 330 30 (0) (85) 40 (0) Legend: rn- 00 Traffic Signal XXX (XXX) Year 2(X)2 Build AM peak Hour Nv0 Turning Movement Volumes (Site Generated Volumes) XXX (XXX) Year 2002 Build PM Peak Flour Turning Movement Volumes (Site Generated Volumes) Source: Oft W, Inc. Using ITE Trip Cencratcd Manual, Fifth Edition, 1991. 0o rn- 00 0p0 00 Nv0 I o�ppg 141 t (* 0p0 00 Nv0 I o�ppg i 80 (0) 210 (0) F 1,620 (85) 2,370 (75) 300 (255) F 280 (225) Year 2002 Build and Site Firyn 12 terated AM and PM . (Movement Volumes =.' Miu w as w b MZZLP-. 952 238 1671 P.02/14 1WBENSH80F & ASSOCIAT18, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 10417 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, SUME TWO / HOPIQNS, MN 553431(sM 238-18871 FAX pM 23&.1671 November 13, 2003 MEMORANDUM TO: Dean Williamson, Frauenshuh Companies Duane Spiegle, Park Nicollet Health Services FROM: Edward F. Terhaar E FT' Refer to File: 02-77 RE: Revision #2 - Traffic and Parking Studies for the Proposed Park Nicollet Clinic in Chanhassen, MN PURPOSE The purpose of this memorandum is to present our traffic and parking studies for the Proposed Park Nicollet Clinic in the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota. This report represents an update to our reports dated December 20, 2001, March 11, 2002, and May 9, 2003. Revisions were made to fully account for traffic generated by the Villages on the Ponds development. Based on our discussions with the City, we have focussed our attention on the Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive intersection. The proposed site is located to the south of T.H. S, north of Lake Drive, east of Great Plains Boulevard and west of Dakota Avenue. Figure 1 shows the project location. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Proposed Development Characteristics The Proposed clinic will be developed as described below: • Current Proposal — 56,000 square feet of building space • Longterm expansion —the addition of 24,000 square feet of building area for a total of 80,000 square feet -- - - - - acn..w- a mmon. 952 238 1671 P.03/14 FRAUENSHUH COMPANIES TRAFFIC STUDY FOR CHANHASSEN CONIC FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION Mr. Dean Williamso, Mr. Duane Spiegle .-._......... o ren.. -3- 952 236 1671 • November 13, 2003 The current site plan shows 217 on-site parking stalls, with 75 located under the building and 142 surface stalls, It is anticipated that a shared parking agreement will be in place with the American Legion site which would allow the clinic to use 50 American Legion stalls during the day. Therefore, a total of 267 parking spaces would be available for clinic use. Phase 1 of the development is expected to be complete in 2005, with the remaining phase occurring later in the future. For purpose of our study, we have assumed that the long term phase would occur in 2010. A full access intersection for both the lake Drive east of Marsh Drive. Ari clinic and the American Legion is provided on ght in/out access will be provided on Great Plains Boulevard north of Lake Drive. The existing access for the property south of the clinic site will remain at its present location. Existing Conditions The site has recently been vacated. The previous American Legion building was replaced by a new building located east of the proposed clinic site. Access to the new Legion building is on Lake Drive east of Great Plains Boulevard. The existing intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive is unsignaliZed with stop signs on east and west approaches. The geometrics at the Great PI op ains nalize Boulevard/Lake Drive intersection are as follows; • East approach — Shared lane for left and through movements and a right -tum lane. • West approach — One lane shared by left tum through, and right turn movements. • North approach — One left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane • South approach — One lane shared by left turn, through, and right turn movements. Traffi—mol—umes As part of this current study, new turn movement data�yay collected at the Great Plains Boulevard/I eke Street intersection. Data was collected dunee weekda am. and report, peals periods on Tue�siav Deem Q2 phis d is presented later in thuz P. 04/14 ^ 722 238 1671 P. 05/14 Mr. Dean Williamso* 4- • November 13, 2003 Mr. Duane Spiegle TRAFFIC FORECASTS Trio Generation The a -m• Peak hour, p.m. peak hour and daily development trips have been estimated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation 6°i Edition. Table 1 shows the results of the trip generation estimates, Land Use I Size Trin Distribution Table 1 Was for the Clinic .M. Peak _Hour P.M. Peak Hour In I Out Itt I Out 82 20—T-42 112 Based on the existing volumes and locations of major attractions, we obtained the following trip distribution percentages for trips generated by the proposed development: - 15 percent to/from the west on T.H. 5 - 25 percent to/from the east on T.H. 5 - 10 Percent to/from the north on Great Plains Boulevard - 20 percent to/from the south on Great Plains Boulevard - 25 Percent to/from the north on T.H. 101 - 5 Percent to/from the south on Marsh Drive and Hidden Lane (combined) The distribution percentages listed above were used to determine the development volumes at the Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive intersection. T_ c volumes Weekday am. and p.m, peak hour traffic volumes have been developed for the Great Plains Boulevarda ake Street intersection for each year corresponding to a phase of the development (2005 and 2010). All of the future volume scenarios include the traffic generated by the proposed clinic, the new American Legion building, and other development in the area. Information provided by the City was used to determine the amount of ttaf fic added by the nearby Villages on the ponds development. Table 2 Shows the traffic volumes for existing, 2005, and 2010. 952 23B 1671 Nk' Dean Williams* -5- November 13, 2003 Mr. Duane Spiegle Table 2 WctkdaY A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour Volumes at the Great Plains Boutevnr.irt..4. n.:... P.06i14 SCENARIO -- ••w aYKx awYiVN A.M, P&AK HOUR VOLUMES EBL IDT EBR WBL WET WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SHT SBR 2005 without Clinic 51 53 24 25 10 10 71 78 1 18 19 36 1 8 1 77 206 44 39 57 2004 with Clinic 53 25 10 83 19 43 8 227 217 59 169 59 2010 without Clinic 55 26 11 82 19 43 45 8 238 228 114 169 59 2010 with Clinic 55 26 11 90 19 9 277 227 62 214 62 45 9 292 243 147 214 62 SCENARIO P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES Bxistin EBL EBT EBR W13L WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 2005 without Clinic 46 47 12 12 8 148 27 57 7 35 77 86 58 49 2004 with Clinic 47 12 8 S 157 187 28 70 7 208 86 105 238 50 2010 without Clinic 50 13 9 28 70 7 213 92 133 238 50 2010 with Clinic 50 13 9 165 29 73 8 260 90 109 298 53 208 29 84 8 268 98 148 298 53 r.0 w.n waw 6 P9-1—RR.. Mr. Dean William&A Mr. Duane Spiegle TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Level of Service 952 238 1671 P.07/14 • November 13, 2003 Capacity analyses were performed using the methodologies presented in the Highway Capacity Manual for each of the three scenarios described earlier. Table 3 shows the results of the traffic analysis. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which range from A to F. Level of service A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. Level of service F represents the worst intersection operation, with excessive delay. In most instances, level of service D or better is considered acceptable in urban areas. For analysis purposes, the existing geometries and traffic control were assumed for all three scenarios. Table 3 presents the capacity analysis results. Table 3 Weekday Peak Hour Levels of Service at Great Plains Boulevard/Like Drive Intersection with Existing Geometries and Two -Way Stop Control avo©oraotsoo� ' t �000©rv00000 �0000©or:�oo.. As shown in Table 3, all movements at the Great plains Boulevard/Lal<e Drive intersection operate at level of service D or better during all 2005 scenarios. Under the 2010 scenarios, the eastbound and westbound movements experience unacceptable levels of service both without and with the proposed clinic. This indicates that while the Proposed clinic does add traffic to the intersection, it is not the sole reason for the changes in level of service. In this case, the considerable through traffic added on Great Plans Boulevard by the Villages on the Pond development also plays a major role in the level of service changes. The next form of traffic control considered for this intersection is all-wa control. All -way stop control works well at intersections with moderate overall traffic volumes. This form of control was analyzed assuming no changes to the existing roadway eometries for the 2010 scenarios. The results are shown in Table 4. A A A A A 7=lC e3d 1671 P.OB/ 14 Mr. Dean Willian=40 -7_ 40 November 13, 2003 Mr. Duane Spiegle Table 4 Weekday Peak Hour Levels of Service at Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive Intersection with Existing Geometries and All-Wav Conn r,,..«....i Wnmg ■wmo""ooFm .,� As shown in Table 4, all movements wULQperateat_aceeptable-levels ofsetvice-with all_ waY stogy control. Therefore, we recommend that intersection operations be monitored as Elie area develops to determine when all•way stop control should be installed. Access Location on Great Plains Boulevard As described earlier, a right in/out access will be provided on Great Plains Boulevard between Lake Drive and T H. 5. Based on observations at the site, we recommend that the right in/out access be located no farther north than the former American Legion access due to vehicle queues on Great Plains Boulevard at T.H. 5. Mn/DOT staff reviewed and approved the access as proposed in March, 2002. Recent discussions with Mn/DOT staff indicate that the former American Legion access location would be acceptable for the proposed right in/out access. Operations at the Right IngUjZ tl t Out Access Points Using the volumes shown in Figure 1 and existing geometrics and intersection control, capacity analyses were performed using the methodologies presented in the Highway Capacity Manual. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which range from A to F. Level of service A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. Level of F represents the worst intersection operation, with excessive delay. service Under all scenarios, all movements at both right in/right out access points operate at level of service B or better during both the a.m. and p.m peak periods Therefore, both access Pow will operate at acceptable levels of service. Another factor that was considered in the analysis of these access points was the impact m northbound vehicles queued on Great P� Boulevard at T.H. 5. Observations were made at the site during the a.m. and P.M. peak periods on several weekdays, During these observations, the vehicle queues never extended far enough south to impact either access point �4 c..w lnri F-EW14 Mr' Dean ViWilliamsoo -8- • November 13, 2003 Mr. Duane Spiegle The spacing between the two access points was also reviewed. Measurements at the site indicate the two access points are approximately 75 feet apart. This spacing exceeds the .r.' minimum spacing recommended by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. ' Based on the points described above, we expect that both right in/right out access points will be able to adequately accommodate the forecasted traffic volumes. Need for Traffic Signal Control at the Crreat Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive Intersection We compared the forecasted volumes to the peak hour traffic signal warrant requirement as presented in the Minnesota Manual on Traffic Control Devices (MM-UTCD). The peak hour warrant if one of eight warrants used to determine if an intersection should be considered for signal control. In this case we were able to check the peak hour warrant against the existing, 2005, and 2010 volumes as presented in this report. The comparison showed that none of the forecasted volumes meet the required volume level. Based on the acceptable level of service with intersection control described above and volume levels below the peak hour warrant requirement, it is our opinion that a traffic signal will not be necessary at this intersection. Ivlr. Dean VrWiamsot • Mr. Duane Spiegie PARKING ANALYSIS E)dstina conditions -9- E �c cw iptl r.1P 14 November 13, 2003 In order to completely understand the parking characteristics of each proposed use, we collected parking usage information at comparable sites. Data was collected at the new American Legion building in Chanhassen and at two Park Nicollet clinics in the metro area. Data at the American Legion was collected on Friday, February 7, 2003, from 11 a.m to 2 p.m. This time period was chosen for the American Legion site because it includes the busy lunch time rush and it represents a busy time for the proposed clinic. A Friday was chosen because it represents a busier than usual day for the American Legion and a typical day for the clinic. The data for the American Legion is shown in Table 4. Table 4 Ezisting Parkin Demand at the New American Legion American Legion Time Number of vehicles parked 11:00 am 23 11:15 am 25 11:30 am 28 11:45 am 29 12:00 m 35 12:15 m 44 12:30 m 50 12:45 47 1:00 m 45 1:15 m 36 1:30 31 1:45 25 2:00 m 28 The new American Legion site has approximately 115 on-site parking spaces. Our survey showed that during the lunch time period, a maximum of 50 spaces were used, which allows opportunity for some of the available spaces to be used by clinic patrons. Parking survey data was also collected at two Park Nicollet clinic sites. Data was collected at the clinics in Burnsville and Minnetonka in December, 2002. The Minnetonka clinic surveyed is known as the Carlson clinic. Data Burnsville clonic was collected on Tuesday, December 3, 2002, and the data for the Carlson clinic collected on Thursday, December 5, 2002. These clinics were chosen becauwas se they represent a good comparison the expected uses and size of the proposed clinic. Data was collected on typical weekdays to capture normal clinic use c collected is summarized in the following two tables. characteristics. The data Table 5 Parking Survey Information for Sumsville Park Nicollet Clinic Burnsville Tuesday 1213102 Total spaces available 398 Building size 93,629 sq. ft. Number of vehicles % spaces Time of day packed used 800 183 46.0% 820 245 61.0% 840 280 70.4% 900 300 75.4% 920 321 80.7% 940 326 01.9% 1000 341 85.7% 1020 335 84.2% 1040 330 82.9% 1100 335 84.2% 1120 308 77A% 1140 262 70.9% 1200 270 67.8% 1220 219 55.0% 1240 209 52.5% 100 249 62.6% 120 268 67.3% 140 294 73.9% 200 300 75.4% 220 297 74.6% 240 292 73.4% 300 293 73.6% 320 288 72A% 340 282 70.9% 400 273 68.6% 420 244 61.3% 440 184 46.2% 50o 153 38.4% 520 91 22.9% 540 63 15.8% 800 50 12.6% 400 350 300 m >Y 250 of CL a 200 m t 150 m ' 100 50 0 °,�<p Time of day 0 0 v K m v Carlson Thursday Number of vehicles Time of day parked Table 6 Parking Survey Information for Carlson (Minnetonka) Park Nicollet Clinic 1215102 Total spaces available 213 % spaces used 800 65 39.9% 820 102 47.9% 840 138 64.8% 900 147 69.0% 920 164 77.0% 940 161 75.6% 1000 160 75.1% 1020 158 74.2% 1040 183 76.5% 1100 181 75.6% 1120 158 74.2% 1140 149 70.0% 1200 131 61.5% 1220 117 54.9% 1240 113 53.1% 100 118 55.4% 120 149 70.0% 140 150 70.4% 200 lea 78.0% 220 165 77.5% 240 164 77.0% 300 159 74.8% 320 146 68.5% 940 155 72.8% 400 145 68.1% 420 127 59.6% 440 101 47.4% 600 76 35.7% 520 58 27.2% 540 51 23.9% 600 43 20.2% Ann 35C 300 250 A CL to 200 i 150 m 100 50 0 °ti° Time of day 10 r m IL-11 e.xO 1b71 P. 13/14 W. Dean Wilhamm* -12- November 13, 2003 W. Duane Spiegle As shown in the tables, the Burnsville clinic parking demand peaked in the morning, decreased during the noon hour, and then increased during the afternoon. A similar Pattern was seen at the Carlson clinic, with the actual peak occurring in the afiemoon. Future Parking__ _Demand Parking demand calculations were performed for the 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. time period on a typical weekday. This period was chosen because it will represent a busy time for both the American Legion and the clinic. During the morning hours before 11 am., the American Legion site isnot busy while the clinic site is quite active. The opposite is true for the evening hours, when the American Legion is busy and the clinic is quiet. The Burnsville clinic is 93,629 square feet in size. The peak parking demand of 341 spaces, which occurred at 10 am., equates to a parking demand of 3.64 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. The Carlson clinic is 45,294 square feet in size. The peak parking demand of 168 spaces, which occurred at 2 p.m., equates to a parking demand of 3.71 spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. The surveyed parking demand ratios are very similar for the two clinics. To be on the conservative side, we used the higher rano to estimate the future parking demand for the proposed clinic. The estimated peak parking demand for each please of the clinic development is shown in Table 7. Table 7 Wee Peak Parkin Demand for the Proposed Clinic Phase Size (sq. rt) Peak Parking Demand Clinic -current nrnmocnl 56,000 208 spaces Unuc-long term expansion 80,000 297 spaces 'soxx i Future Parking Demand Verses Future Parking Supply Based on the current site plan, the clinic site will have 217 on-site parking spaces. We have also assumed that 50 spaces on the American Legion site will be available for clinic patrons during the day. Therefore, a total of 267 parking spaces would be available for clinic use. For parking calculations, the total available supply _is reduced by 5 Herten resulting in the total effective supply. The effective supply takes into account parking inefficiencies due to space turnover, two spaces occupied by one vehicle, spaces occupied by things other than vehicles (e.g. snow), handicap spaces not used, etc. Therefore, the effective supply available for the clinic is 254 spaces. Comparing this to the peak parking demand numbers shown in Table 7, the current proposal (56,000 square feet) scenario can be accommodated on site. The parking demand for the long term expansion (80,000 square feet) scenario will exceed both the on-site supply and the 50 shared parking spaces. When this expansion occurs, approximately 50 Off-site parking will be needed to demand accommodate the additional On an overall basis, the clinic and American Legion uses compliment each other with respect to parking demand because they tend to peak at different times during the day. '_IDC e,x, Ib (1 Y. 14/14 W. Dean W ftliamsone7 -13- • November 13, 2003 Mr. Duane Spiegle The clinic will have higher parking usage during morning and afternoon times, while the American Legion will be busiest in the evenings and on weekends. CONCLUSIONS Based on the information presented in this report, we have made the following conclusions: • On an average weekday, the 56,000 square foot clinic is estimated to generate 136 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 205 trips during the p.m peak hour. The 80,000 square foot clinic is estimated to generate 194 trips during the am. peak hour and 293 trips during the p.m. peak hour. • The Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive intersection is expected to operate at acceptable levels of service with existing two-way stop control under all 2005 scenarios. • Under the 2010 scenario with two-way stop control, the eastbound and westbound movements experience unacceptable levels of service both without and with the proposed clinic. • Under the 2010 scenario with all -way stop control, all movements operate at acceptable levels of service. Therefore, we recommend that intersection operations be monitored as the area develops to determine when all -way stop control should be installed. • The existing right in/right out access for the gas station and the proposed right in/right out for the clinic will be able to adequately accommodate the forecasted traffic volumes. • The parking demand for the current proposal (56,000 square feet) scenario can be accommodated on site. • The parking demand for the long term expansion (80,000 square feet) scenario will exceed both the on-site supply and the 50 shared parking spaces. When this expansion occurs, approximately 50 off-site parking will be needed to accommodate the additional demand. • We recommend that the proposed right in/out on Great Plains Boulevard be located no farther north than the former American Legion access due to vehicle queues on Great Plains Boulevard at T.H. 5. Recent discussions with Mn/DOT staff indicate that the former American Legion location would be acceptable for the proposed right in/out access. TOTAL P.14 CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on November 5, 2004, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing — CORRECTION for Village on the Ponds Building C-1— Planning Case No. 04- 40 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of�pyf�� , 2004. I • cct1J�lc Notary P lic KareKJ. Engelh d , Deput Clerk KIM T MEUWISSEN wWxv PUNIG- MIM(Wta Notice of Public Hearing - CORRECTION Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Tlme:TUESDAY November 16, 2004 at 7:00 .m. Location: Ci Hall Council Chambers 7700 Market Blvd. Request for Site Plan Approval for a 17,400 square -foot Proposal: commercial building with Variance to the commercial design standards on 1.35 acres zoned Planned Unit Development - Villa a on the Ponds Building C-1. Planning File: 04-40 Applicant: VOP I LLC Property Located at the southeast corner of Lake Drive and Great Location: Plains Boulevard. A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing Is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: What Happens at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about Questions & this project, please contact Bob Generous at 952-227-1131 or Comments: e-mail bgenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Welland Alterations, Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application In writing. Any Interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that includes all pertinent Information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The Item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the Item and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercialrndustrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an Item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding its status and scheduling for the Clty, Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative Is encouraged to provide a contact for the city, Offen developers are encouraged to meet with the neighborhood regarding their proposal. Staff Is also available to review the project with any Interested persoms). • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be Included In the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be Included In the report, lease contact the Planning Stan person named on the notification. Notice of Public Hearing - CORRECTION Chanhassen Planning Commission Meeting Date & Time: TUESDAY Monday, November 16 2004 at 7:00 p.m. Location: City Hall Council Chambers, 7700 Market Blvd. Request for Site Plan Approval for a 17,400 square -foot Proposal: commercial building with Variance to the commercial design standards on 1.35 acres zoned Planned Unit Development - Villa a on the Ponds Building C-1. Planning File: 04-40 Applicant: VOP I LLC Property Located at the southeast corner of Lake Drive and Great Location: Plains Boulevard. A location map Is on the reverse side of this notice. The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborh about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead* public hearing through the following steps: - What Happens at the Meeting: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. If you want to see the pians before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about Questions & this project, please contact Bob Generous at 952-227-1131 or Comments: e-mail boenerous@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. City Review Procedure: • Subdivisions, Planned Unit Developments, Site Plan Reviews, Conditional and Interim Uses, Welland Altert� Rezonings, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Code Amendments require a public hearing before the Planning Commission, City ordinances require all property within 500 feet of the subject site to be notified of the application In writing. Any Interested party is invited to attend the meeting. • Staff prepares a report on the subject application that Includes all pertinent Information and a recommendation. These reports are available by request. At the Planning Commission meeting, staff will give a verbal overview of the report and a recommendation. The Item will be opened for the public to speak about the proposal as a part of the hearing process. The Commission will close the public hearing and discuss the item and make a recommendation to the City Council, The City Council may reverse, affirm or modify wholly or partly the Planning Commission's recommendation. Rezonings, land use and code amendments take a simple majority vote of the City Council except rezonings and land use amendments from residential to commercial/Industrial. • Minnesota State Statute 519.99 requires all applications to be processed within 60 days unless the applicant waives this standard. Some applications due to their complexity may take several months to complete. Any person wishing to follow an item through the process should check with the Planning Department regarding Its status and scheduling for the City Council meeting. • A neighborhood spokesperson/representative is encouraged to provide a contact for the city. Often developers are encouraged to meet with the nelghborhood regarding their proposal. Staff Is also available to review the project with any Interested person(s), • Because the Planning Commission holds the public hearing, the City Council does not. Minutes are taken and any correspondence regarding the application will be Included In the report to the City Council. If you wish to have something to be Included in the report, lease contact the Planning Staff person named on the notification. his map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. his nap is a congilafim of records, infometion and data located in various city, county, state and Hera offices and other sources regarding the area shovm, and is to M used for rammce urposes Only. The qty does not wanant that the Geographic hfomtation System (GIS) Data used t prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent Mat the GIS Data can be used ic navigattma, haclung or any other purpose reputing exacting measurement of distance or irection or pKYl9m In to depiC4m of geegraph,, faawne. 11 , m dism pe cm ani found lease contact 952-227-1107.The precedng dsdaner is provided pursuant to Minnesota tattles §466.03, Subd. 21 ROOD). and the user of this map aclaroxledges that the City shell not a fiehie for my damages, and npressiy waves a0 dams, arta agrees to defend, incermify, and cid hamiess the City from any and as darns bmUM by User, its errployees or agents, or third arties which was out d the users access muse of data prowled. ,a Stale Hwy 5 Asa�meouta� 3Ub .i he map Is n"w a bgagY recoiled map nor a survey and is nm intended In be used ea ane. his map Is a conoletion of records, imamrwion ab data locamd, "not, city, county. stere and, uderal offices and ober saames regadng 0e ams It p anti b b be lead tar ratererice urWaes Only. TM City does not warted tient IM GeopaplYe kdametiOn System (GIS) Data used h prepare this map em error Tree, and the City does mat repment died the GIS Das can be used x navigodo el, bad -V or any oih r perp,,, reWrng emcft rressmermra m distance m traction or precision in am depiction d gergrWw rearm,,, a errors m dscreparues are found lease umtact 952-227-1107. The precadp disdarter b provided pursuant to tiauesma tables §466.03. Subd 21 12000). and the user of this rrop admowiedgm that the Cit shag nm cid able f�6s� - and! erpressly me es a1 clam and agrees to drama indmrsity, and Cly front any and all dams broogM by Ther. a anployeas or agerds, m Burd ones Which abs out It the users amass IN use of data pmMded. G.,, •' 0 BISRAT & DENISE ALEMAYEHU AMOCO AMERICAN OIL CO AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC 380 HIDDEN LN C/O BP AMERICA INC -TAX DEPT C/O LOTUS REALTY CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PO BOX 1548 PO BOX 235 WARRENVILLE IL 60555 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BLUE CIRCLE INVESTMENT CO MICHAEL M & PRUDENCE L BUSCH CHANHASSEN INN 1304 MEDICINE LAKE DR 8113 MARSH DR 531 79TH ST W STY 301 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PO BOX 473 PLYMOUTH MN 55441 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN NH PARTNERSHIP CHCR LLC C/O NEW HORIZON CHILD CARE C/O CULVERS CHURCH OF ST HUBERT 16355 36TH AVE N 450 POND PROMENADE 8201 MAIN ST SUITE 700 PO BOX 307 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PLYMOUTH MN 55446 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 COMMUNITY BANK CORP DRF CHANHASSEN MEDICAL BLDG THOMAS CLOUTIER ATTN: PRESIDENT C/O FRAUENSHUH COMPANIES 421 LAKE DR 706 WALNUT ST 7101 78TH ST W CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHASKA MN 55318 SUITE #100 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55439 MARTIN J & TIMAREE FAJDETICH CHADWICK L GATZ & BRA J GREEN DY G & KIM 8100 MARSH DR PEI-SHAN S YEN RANDY MARSH IM DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8140 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 HOLIDAY STATION STORES INC PAUL F & RITA A KLAUDA GREGORY D & MARY A LARSEN PO BOX 1224 TAX DEPT #199 8130 MARSH DR 8151 GRANDVIEW RD MI BOX MN 55440 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 M JASON K & LAURA J LEHMAN CHRISTOPH J LESER & NORTHCOTT COMPANY 8090 MARSH DR COLLEEN A CANNON 250 EAST LAKE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8110 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PHM/CHANHASSEN INC WILLIAM R & DEBRA E PRIGGE MICHAEL E RAMSEY 2845 HAMLIN AVE N 390 HIDDEN LN 6362 OXBOW BND ROSEVILLE MN 55113 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ROBERT J & LOIS A SAVARD MICHAEL R SCHNABEL & BRIAN E SEMKE & 8080 MARSH DR SANDRA J STAI DEBORAH C SENKE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 370 HIDDEN LN 331 HIDDEN LN CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SILO I LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY SERVICES INC ALBERT RT &JEAN SINNEN RT & JE SINN DEAN V SKALLMAN & PO BOX 235 8150 GRANDVIEW JOYCE L BISH CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8155 GRANDVIEW RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 L73 VOP 1 LLC DAVID E & KARLI D WANDLING WHEATSTONE RESTAURANT 250 LAKE ST E 8120 MARSH DR GROUP CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 250 EAST LAKE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RICH SLAGLE 7411 FAWN HILL ROAD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 i CITY OF CHANHASSEN STAFF REPORT PC DATE: 11/16/04 CC DA E: 12/13/04 REVIEW DEADLINE: December 14, 2004 CASE #: 04-40 BY: RG, LH, ML, MA, JS, ST PROPOSAL: Request for Site Plan Approval for a 18,200 square -foot commercial building (coop grocery) with Variance to the commercial design standards. LOCATION: Southeast comer of Lake Drive and Great Plains Boulevard Outlot B, Village on the Ponds 8`s Addition APPLICANT: VOP I, LLC c/o Lotus Realty Services P. O. Box 235 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952)934-4538 PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development, PUD, mixed use 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Mixed Use ACREAGE: 1.35 acres DENSITY: F.A.R. 0.31 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Request for Site Plan Approval for an 18,188 square -foot commercial building with Variance to the commercial design standards to permit the use of faux window treatments LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposed project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets those standards, the City must then approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision. The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi judicial decision. 4" Planning Commission • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUNMRY The developer is proposing a one story with a mezzanine level, 18,188 square -foot commercial building for a coop grocery. The building materials consist of stucco, wood siding, brick and face block. The applicant is requesting a variance from the commercial design standards to permit less than fifty (50) percent of the first floor fagade that is viewed by the public to include transparent windows and/or doors. Instead of transparent windows, the developer is proposing the use of faux windows with awnings to provide additional architectural details. To the north of the site are Culvers Restaurant and the Silo Building (Village on the Ponds Building 4). To the west of the site are Pond Promenade, Community Bank Chanhassen and the proposed Village on the Ponds Building C (residential units over commercial). South of the site is Lake Drive and the Foss Swim School. East of the site is Lake Drive and a residential subdivision, Hidden Valley. The site is serviced with sewer and water which was installed as part of the Village on the Ponds initial development. Storm water shall be treated within the Village on the Ponds storm water system. The site was preliminary graded with the initial Village on the Ponds development and then rough graded to approximately its final grade as part of Village on the Ponds 8's Addition and the construction of the Community Bank Chanhassen Building. Access to the site will be via two entrances off Lake Drive as well as access via Pond Promenade. As part of the original Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Villages on the Ponds development, a traffic study was completed. A traffic study was also completed for the nearby Park Nicollet Clinic. Each of these previous studies stated that, at some time in the future, a 4 -way stop would be required at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East. As part of the development review for the project, we took another look at this intersection with the proposed food coop development. The new traffic study looked at traffic volume, operational analysis, and the need for additional traffic control measure at the existing intersection of Great Plains/Lake Drive. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan with a variance to the fenestration standards subject to the conditions of the staff report. BACKGROUND On October 28, 2002, the Chanhassen City Council approved the final plat for PUD 95-2, Villages on the Ponds 8th Addition, creating two lots and two outlots from Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2°d Addition. The two lots are the site for the two-story bank office building and the four-story commercial and apartment building. One of the outlots contains Pond Promenade. The other outlot is the site for the proposed Coop. On November 26, 2001, the Chanhassen City Council approved an amendment to the Villages on the Ponds Design Standards, Development Site Coverage and Building Height, Planning Commission i Is Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 3 The maximum building height shall be Sector I - four stories (residential with street level commercial or office)/50 ft. (retail and office buildings without residences above shall be limited to three stories/40 ft.) except for the lot on the comer of Promenade Pond and Great Plains Boulevard shall be limited to two stories and 30 feet, Sector II - three stories/40 ft., Sector III - three stories/40 ft., and Sector IV - four stories/50 feet. Building height limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers, and other architectural and roof accents. On September 23, 1997, the city granted Final Plat approval for Outlot C into Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, and Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2°d Addition. On September 23, 1996, the City Council approved PUD 95-2, Villages on the Ponds, including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use -Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercialloffice buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (final reading); and final plat dated "Received September 19, 1996" for two lots and ten outlots and public right-of-way. On August 12, 1996, the City Council granted preliminary approval of PUD #92-1 including a Comprehensive Land Use Plan amendment from Office/industrial, Institutional, Residential Medium Density, Residential Low Density to Mixed Use -Commercial, High Density Residential, Institutional and Office; Preliminary planned unit development for up to 291,000 sq. ft. of commercialloffice buildings, 100,000 sq. ft. of institutional buildings, and 322 dwelling units; Rezoning from IOP and RSF to PUD, Planned Unit Development (first reading); Preliminary plat for 13 lots and 3 outlots and public right-of-way; Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and excavate wetlands on site; Vacation of right-of-way and easements; Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) findings of Negative Declaration of the need for additional environmental investigation; and Indirect Source Permit Review for the Village on the Ponds project. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3, Variances Chapter 20, Article II, Division 6, Site Plan Review Chapter 20, Article XXIII, Division 7, Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office - Institutional Developments Village on the Ponds Development Design Standards GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE Planning Commission • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 4 ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE Size portion Placement The proposed entry to the building is on the southwestern elevation of the building toward Pond Promenade. The entry is covered by a circular teal green metal roof and a buttercup yellow awning. Above the entry is a raised parapet three feet higher than the adjacent parapet walls. The building has significant articulation including angled walls, projected and recessed wall areas, transparent windows and doors, canopies, faux windows, planter boxes and variations in materials and colors. Planning Commission Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 5 Material, detail and color Building materials are of high quality. The primary building material consists of stucco painted in four different colors: Coconut Grove (off-white), Ligonier Tan, Western Reserve Beige and Sombrero (pinkish clay). As accent, the developer is proposing the use of face block as a base material in a random mix of oyster, toffee and saddle colors. Additionally, the building incorporates the use of classic oak brick as a base and a column material. One wall is proposed using wood siding with blue spruce paint. Roof material consists of teal green standing seam metal and charcoal gray asphalt shingles. Awnings are proposed in Sea Spray green, Buttercup yellow and Salmon. Staff's one concern with the building material is the use of the wood siding with a spruce blue paint finish on the eastern elevation of the building. We believe that this surface and finish is not compatible or harmonious with the balance of the building architecture. Staff would recommend that this wall be constructed of the brick material which will repeat, on a larger scale, the use of brick for vertical elements on three of the other building elevations as well as more closely match the color scheme of the building. Height and Roof Design The building height is 20 to 24 feet. Parapet walls of two to six feet with one area of nine foot parapet walls above the entrance shall provide screening for all the rooftop equipment and help to provide additional vertical articulation to the building. The proposed building height is within the height limitation contained in the Village on the Ponds design standards. There are pitched roof elements in the asphalt mansard roof treatment as well in the metal canopy and other fabric canopies. Facade transparency The applicant is requesting a variance from the requirement that 50 percent of the first floor elevation that is viewed by the public include transparent windows and or doors. All other areas include landscaping material and architectural detailing and articulation. The installation of windows on some elevations is not possible due to the internal use of the building for storage and refrigerators. In these instances, the developer is proposing the use of faux windows with canopies and planter boxes to add architectural detailing. Following is a breakdown of the openings within each elevation of the building including the faux windows: Planning Commission • • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 6 ELEVATION CALCULATIONS FOR LAKEWINDS RETAIL SURFACE AREA BELOW 12 FEET PER ELEVATIONS OPAQUE OPENINGS FAKE WINDOW S/ARTICULATIONS SOFT % SOFT % SQFT % WEST 415 35% 774 65% 0 0% EAST 1,388 66% 515 24% 216 10% NORTH 951 44% 805 37% 419 19% SOUTHWEST 744 38% 967 50% 228 12% TOTALS 3,498 3,061 863 PERCENT TOTALS 47% 41% 12% As can be seen by the table, the percentage of openings and full windows exceeds 50% of the total building wall area. Site Furnishing The development will provide planter boxes on each side of the building. In addition, a small patio type seating area will be included in the northwest corner of the building. The developer shall install bicycle racks on site. Loading areas, refuse area, etc. The loading dock/service area is located in the southeast corner of the building. The building has been extended in this comer to provide a recessed area to help screening of service yards, refuse and waster removal, other unsightly areas and truck parking/loading areas. This area will be approximately four feet lower than parking lot. A short wing wall screens the loading area from the west. Planning Commission • • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 7 Landscaping The applicant has submitted a landscape plan. The proposed plantings as compared to the requirements are shown in the following table. Proposed landscaping does not meet minimum ordinance requirements. Staff has the following recommendations: All parking lot planting islands and peninsulas must have at least 10 foot inside width, overstory trees are required in the parking lot island and peninsula planting areas, one additional bicolor oak is required along Great Plains Boulevard. The applicant must submit a revised landscape plan to the city for approval. Lot Frontage and Parking location The building has been pushed as far to the northeast corner of the site as permitted by the design standards. This helps to create an urban feel along Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive. Parking has be located to the west and south of the building. The following setbacks shall apply: Required Proposed Trees/ parking lot 2 overstory 0 overstory Interior Side Lot Line 2 islands/peninsulas 2 islands/peninsulas Boulevard trees — Great Plains 7 Bicolor oak 6 overstory trees Blvd. Proposed landscaping does not meet minimum ordinance requirements. Staff has the following recommendations: All parking lot planting islands and peninsulas must have at least 10 foot inside width, overstory trees are required in the parking lot island and peninsula planting areas, one additional bicolor oak is required along Great Plains Boulevard. The applicant must submit a revised landscape plan to the city for approval. Lot Frontage and Parking location The building has been pushed as far to the northeast corner of the site as permitted by the design standards. This helps to create an urban feel along Great Plains Boulevard and Lake Drive. Parking has be located to the west and south of the building. The following setbacks shall apply: • 85 parking spaces will be provided within the development lot. The six additional spaces required as part of the development are being provided through cross parking arrangements with other properties within Village on the Ponds. Based on information provided by the applicant, the peak day and time of operation of the business is Saturday from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. On other days, the peak hours of operation are 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The peak hour for Culvers is Friday from 11:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. to 7:45 p.m. While there is some overlap in peak hours, other users in the area should not have these same peak times, e.g. Starbucks, which would normally have an earlier peak. The following summary table tracks the building area and type of uses envisioned, developed and proposed within Villages on the Ponds. Villages Proposed Lake Drive 0' 7.8' Interior Side Lot Line 0' N 43.1', S 75', W 71' Parking standards: 1 space per 200 square feet of building area. 91 85 • 85 parking spaces will be provided within the development lot. The six additional spaces required as part of the development are being provided through cross parking arrangements with other properties within Village on the Ponds. Based on information provided by the applicant, the peak day and time of operation of the business is Saturday from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. On other days, the peak hours of operation are 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The peak hour for Culvers is Friday from 11:30 a.m. to 1:15 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. to 7:45 p.m. While there is some overlap in peak hours, other users in the area should not have these same peak times, e.g. Starbucks, which would normally have an earlier peak. The following summary table tracks the building area and type of uses envisioned, developed and proposed within Villages on the Ponds. Planning Commission • • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 8 Project Commercial Office/Service Residential Institutional Date Bldg Sq Ft (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (units) (sq. ft.) Approved C/O/Ins. Permitted 164,640 97,500 322 134,000 396,140 Lake Susan Apartments Bokoo Bikes Foss Swim School Houlihan's Culvers Building 4 (Silo Building) Building 17 (not built) Americlnn Americlnn (expansion) St. Hubert's Presbyterian Homes Northcott Inn & Suites (not built) Community Bank Chanhassen 162 6/28/1999 5,018 6,077 6/28/1999 11,095 10/14/02 19,000 9,800 6/14/1999 9,800 7,362 81 5/11/1998 7,443 4,768 40 9/24/2001 4,768 7,425 7,425 9/22/1997 14,850 TOTALS 30,000 8/11/1997 30,000 44,013 1,492 2/24/1997 45,505 6,870 - 6,870 92,478 12/9/1996 92,478 4,500 4,500 69 11/26/2001 9,000 24,980 50,914 12/09/02 75,894 11,000 10/14/02 11,000 Retail C (not built) 9,500 9,500 54 10/14/02 19,000 Retail C-1 (this project) 18,200 18,200 Retail G (future) 8,000 8,000 40 16,000 St. Hubert Expansion 41,522 4/8/2002 41,522 TOTALS 140,636 138,789 325 134,000 413,425 Balance 24,004 (41,289) (3) - Balance Equivalents Conversion to Office 80,013 NA (1,080) Conversion to Institutional 82,772 (43,462) (1,320) NA Conversion to Commercial NA (12,387) (270) Balances after conversion for deficits 11,347 Negative balances represent building square footage in excess of those originally contemplated. However, the development permits the conversion of excess square footage from one use to another provided the total permitted square footage is not exceeded. GRADING. DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL There is an existing dirt stockpile within the proposed building pad which will need to he cut down to prepare the site for a pad elevation of 950.25. While staff believes that the proposed site plan layout will work on the property, the current grading plan does not work. Specifically, the parking lot contours are incorrect and the location/elevation of an emergency overflow point for the catch basins must be shown that is 1.5 -feet lower than the proposed building elevation. As such, the grading plan for the site must be revised. Planning Commission • • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 9 The building and parking lot drainage will be collected by proposed catch basins within the parking lot. The site drainage for the property will be routed to an existing regional pond that was recently constructed with the senior housing project south of the property. This pond has been sized for development of this property. As such, no additional ponding improvements are required with this development. Storm sewer sizing calculations will be required, however, at the time of building permit application. The proposed storm sewer must be sized for a 10 -year storm event. It should be noted that the proposed storm sewer pipe is shown as 15 -inch diameter. The existing storm sewer pipe that the new system drains to is only 12 -inch diameter pipe. This will require the proposed pipe to be a maximum of 12 -inch diameter storm sewer. Additionally, an NPDES permit will be required from the MPCA. Proposed erosion control includes silt fence around the site perimeter. Staff would also recommend that a minimum 75 -foot rock construction entrance be installed at the location that will be utilized during construction. Erosion Control Silt fence should be installed as detailed in the preliminary grading and utility plan. The City's standard detail plate for silt fence should be included in the construction plans. Construction site access points should be minimized to controlled access points with rock entrance and exit pads installed and maintained throughout construction. All exposed soil areas should have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type Of Slope Time (m 3dm m time an area can remain =vegetated when area is not active be' worked) Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Days Flatter than 10:1 21 Days These areas include any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other man made systems that discharge to a surface water. Daily scraping and sweeping of public streets should be completed anytime construction site soil, mud, silt or rock is tracked or washed onto paved surface or street that would allow tracked materials or residuals of that material to enter the storm water conveyance system. UTILITIES The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing water and sanitary sewer stubs on the west side of the site. From there, the services will be extended to the building. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. Planning Commission • • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 10 Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for the new building. The 2004 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 per unit for sanitary sewer and $2,814 per unit for watermain. The 2004 SAC charge is $1,425 per unit. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units calculated by the Met Council. These charges will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel. STREETS Proposed full accesses to the site will come from existing private streets on the north and south sides of the site. No public street improvements have been proposed with this project. The proposed drive aisle width for the site must be a minimum of 26 -feet. As part of the original Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Villages on the Ponds development, a traffic study was completed. A traffic study was also completed for the nearby Park Nicollet Clinic. Each of these previous studies stated that, at some time in the future, a 4 -way stop would be required at the intersection of Great Plains Boulevard/Lake Drive East. Staff felt it was a good idea to now take another look at this intersection with the proposed food coop development. The new traffic study looked at traffic volume, operational analysis, and the need for additional traffic control measure at the existing intersection of Great Plains/Lake Drive. The study rated the level of service (LOS) for the existing intersection. LOS is a method used to grade the overall traffic flow and vehicle operation on roadways. LOS grades range from a high grade of (A) to a low grade of (F). (Unlike education grade scales, an (E) grade LOS does exist.) The new and original traffic studies are attached. In summary, the traffic study found that the existing 2 -way stop controlled intersection of Great Plains/Lake Drive will operate at an acceptable LOS of D or higher with the development of the food coop site. By 2010 and full buildout of the Villages development, however, the intersection will drop to an unacceptable LOS under the 2 -way stop condition. The intersection will have to be monitored as additional development occurs to determine when the 4 -way stop control is warranted. In addition, the study recommends that the northbound lanes of Great Plains Boulevard be striped and signed to better define the existing lane geometry. That is, a left - through lane and a right -tum only lane will have to be striped along with appropriate signage. WETLANDS Existing Wetlands No wetlands exist on site. LIGHTING/SIGNAGE The developer is proposing 25 foot light poles with one single head and two quad head shoe box style luminaries 400 watt high pressure sodium lamps as well as wall mounted fixtures at the loading dock. All lighting shall be shielded from off site views. Planning Commission • • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 11 Wall signage is proposed on the west, north and east sides of the building within a three foot wide sign band. Signage must comply with the Village on the Ponds sign standards. Separate sign permits will be required for the installation of all wall signage. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Planning Case #04-40 for an 18,188 square foot commercial building with a variance from the commercial design standards to permit less than fifty (50) percent of the first floor facade that is viewed by the public to include transparent windows and/or doors, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated October 15, 2004, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. Outlot A, Village on the Ponds 8th Addition must be replatted in to a Lot and Block configuration prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. The sidewalk in the northeast comer of the site shall be connected to the sidewalk on Lake Drive. 4. The developer shall install bicycle racks on site. 5. The easterly wall that is proposed for wood siding shall be constructed of the brick material. 6. All landscape islands and peninsulas in the parking lot requiring trees must have a minimum inside width of ten feet. 7. Two overstory trees are required in the parking lot. 8. A total of seven bicolor oaks are required along Great Plains Boulevard. 9. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted to the city prior to building permit approval. 10. The building must be protected with an automatic fire sprinkler system. 11. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 12. An eight foot wide access aisle must be provided for one of the accessible parking locations. Planning Commission 0 0 Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 12 13. The building owner and or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 14. The City's standard detail plate for silt fence installation shall be included in the construction plans. 15. Construction site access points shall be minimized to controlled access points with rock entrance and exit pads installed and maintained throughout construction. 16. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Time (maximum time an area can remain unvegetated when area is not active( be' worked) Steeper than 3:1 7 Days 10:1 to 3:1 14 Days Flatter than 10:1 21 Days Daily scraping and sweeping of streets shall be completed anytime construction site soil, mud, silt or rock is tracked or washed onto paved surface or street that would allow tracked materials or residuals of that material to enter the storm water conveyance system. 17. All plans must be signed by a registered Civil Engineer in the State of Minnesota. 18. Show the dimensions of the new parking stalls on the site plan. The new parking stalls are required to be 9 -feet wide by 18 -feet long. 19. Add the latest City standard detail plate nos. 5203, 5214, 5215, 5300, 5301. 20. Provide a connection between the two sidewalk systems in the northeast comer of the site. 21. On the grading/utility plan: a. City as-builts show the size of the existing sanitary service as 6 -inch diameter; revise the proposed pipe size shown on the plans to comply. b. Show the proposed sanitary sewer service invert. c. Show all proposed contours. d. Show a minimum 75 -foot rock construction entrance. e. Revise the size of the proposed storm sewer to be a maximum of 12 -inch diameter. f. Revise the plan to show the correct elevation contours and spot elevations. 22. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. Planning Commission 0 • Village on the Ponds Building C-1 Planning Case No. 04-40 November 16, 2004 Page 13 23. The applicant must show the location/elevation of an emergency overflow point for the parking lot that is 1.5 -feet lower than the proposed building elevation. 24. Storm sewer sizing calculations are required to be submitted at the time of building permit application. The proposed storm sewer must be sized for a 10 -year storm event. 25. Sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for the new building. The 2004 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 per unit for sanitary sewer and $2,814 per unit for watermain. The 2004 SAC charge is $1,425 per unit. All of these charges are based on the number of SAC units calculated by the Met Council. These charges will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel. 26. The minimum drive aisle width required for the parking lot is 26 -feet. Revise the plans to comply. 27. An NPDES permit from the MPCA must be obtained for the site grading. 28. The northbound lanes of Great Plains Boulevard, south of Lake Drive, must be striped for a left -through lane and a right -turn only lane along with appropriate signage. ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Memo from Mika Milo to Robert Generous dated 10/22/04. 4. Reduced Copy Site Plan. 5. Reduced Copy Coop Retail, Detail Site Plan. 6. Reduced Copy Coop Retail, Plan. 7. Reduced Copy Roof Plan. 8. Reduced Copy Landscape Plan. 9. Reduced Copy Building Elevations, West and North. 10. Reduced Copy Building Elevations, East and Southwest. 11. Food Coop traffic study dated November 2004. 12. Original Villages EAW traffic study dated 6/28/96. 13. Park Nicollet traffic study dated 11/13/03. 14. Affidavit of Mailing Notice, Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List. g1plan\2004 planning cases\0440 - village on the ponds building c-1 food coop\staff report bldg cl.doc