The URL can be used to link to this page

6a & b Villages on Ponds Bldg Cle~ti_ons ~ Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 2 Staff has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, EAW, regarding traffic issues in Villages on the Ponds. As part of the EAW, build out of the project was anticipated for 2002. The only traffic control devices proposed within the development, and specifically at Lake Drive East and Great Plains Boulevard, are stop signs on the east and west approaches to the intersection with major north south streets. With these controls in place, the level of service will remain at a level of service C or better. (Level of service C was anticipated for east bound and west bound left tums at the peak hour. See attached Table 8.) Section 2B.5 of the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control states that "stop signs should not be used for speed control" and that "a stop sign should not be placed on a major street unless justified by a traffic engineering study". No signage may be placed on a state route without consent of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. Great Plains Boulevard is State Trunk Highway 101. Staff is recommending approval of the site plans for both buildings with an approval of the variance for the underground parking, but denial of the variances for the use of more than 15 percent EIFS and signage height above 20 feet. The Planning Commission is recommending approval of both site plans and approval of the underground parking variance and the use of EIFS. The Planning Commission could not come to a consensus about denial of the signage above 20 feet. The following recommendations incorporate the Planning Commission recommendations with the parking and use of EIFS variances incorporated within the site plan approval motions. Since there was no consensus regarding the signage, staff has presented the motion denying the variance for the signage height. RECOMMENDATION City Council action includes approval of three motions: "The Chanhassen City Council approves Site Plan #2002-7, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated August 2, 2002, for a street level commercial and upper level apartment building with a variance for 1.35 underground parking spaces per unit based on the findings of fact and recommendation and subject to the following conditions: 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. . Site plan approval is contingent on final platting of Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, to a block and lot designation. , The developer shall work with the city to provide 20 percent of the units at affordable rents. 4. Lighting shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. . Signage shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. A separate sign permit is required for each sign. Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 3 . The applicant shall eliminate Parkway maple from the plant schedule. A suitable replacement shall be substituted. . Submit storm sewer design calculations for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event with drainage flow map. . Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos.: 3101, 5201, 5207 and 5300. 9. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regularity agency permits. 10. Retaining walls over 4-feet in height must be designed by a registered engineer and requires an approved fence at the top of the wall. 11. All plan sheets must be signed by a registered engineer. 12. Add rock construction entrance a minimum of 75 feet in length and revise the note from 50 feet to 75 feet. 13. Add a storm sewer schedule to the plans. 14. Type 2 silt fence shall be used around the grading area. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected from construction-related sediment through the use of filter barriers (see City Detail Plate No. 5302). 15. Add a legend to the plans. 16. On the site plan, show the dimensions of the parking stalls, access aisles and driveway widths. 17. Revise the grade to 3:1 maximum on the south side of the underground garage entrance. 18. On the grading plan: · Show stmTn sewer size, type, class and slope. · Show CB and CBMH numbers, rim and invert elevations. · On the utility plan, show all existing and proposed utility sewer type, class, size and slope. 19. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Qwest, Xcel Energy, Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 20. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required as well as curbing to be painted yellow. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Codes Section 904.1. Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 4 21. The radius tums shall be designed to accommodate the turning of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus. Submit radius tm-ns and dimensions to the Chanhassen City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 22. The proposed parking deck over the underground parking must be built to support the load of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus or shall have vehicle height limiters installed. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for additional requirements. 23. If Chanhassen Fire Department's aerial ladder truck is unable to negotiate access via the east parking lots, Fire Department standpipes along with fully spfinklered buildings will be required. 24. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for locations. 25. The buildings must be protected with automatic fire sprinkler systems. 26. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 27. The buildings must be constructed in accordance with the Minnesota State Building Code and the International Building Code (IBC) as amended by the State of Minnesota. The IBC is scheduled to become effective this fall. The architect must provide a detailed code analysis, during the preliminary plan stage, for review for compliance with the new code. Special attention must be paid to the fire-resistance and opening protection of the exterior walls between the two buildings, and the parking garage below, in relation to the placement of a property line. 28. An accessible route must be provided to both buildings, parking facilities, public transportation stops. 29. All parking areas, including parking garages, must be provided with accessible parking spaces dispersed among the various building entrances. 30. Accessible dwelling units must be provided in accordance xvith Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. 31. The utility plan does not contain enough information for review at this time; plans will be reviewed when submitted for permit. 32. The building owner and or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan review and pmrnit procedures. In particular, type of construction and allowable area issues need to be addressed as soon as the Minnesota Amendments to the IBC are available. Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 5 "The Chanhassen City Council approves Site Plan #2002-7, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated August 2, 2002, for a 11,000 square foot two-story bank and office building with drive through facilities with a variance for the use of 16 percent EIFS based on the findings of fact and recommendation and subject to the following conditions: 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. . Site. plan approval is contingent on final platting of Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, to a block and lot designation. 3. Lighting shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. . Signage shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. A separate sign permit is required for each sign. . The applicant shall eliminate Parkway maple from the plant schedule. A suitable replacement shall be substituted. . Submit storm sewer design calculations for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event with drainage flow map. . Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos.: 3101, 5201, 5207 and 5300. 8. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regularity agency permits. . Retaining walls over 4-feet in height must be designed by a registered engineer and requires an approved fence at the top of the wall. 10. All plan sheets must be signed by a registered engineer. 11. Add rock construction entrance a minimum of 75 feet in length and revise the note from 50 feet to 75 feet. 12. Add a stoITn sewer schedule to the plans. 13. Type 2 silt fence shall be used around the grading area. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected from construction-related sediment through the use of filter barriers (see City Detail Plate No. 5302). 14. Add a legend to the plans. 15. On the site plan, show the dimensions of the parking stalls, access aisles and driveway widths. Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 6 16. Revise the grade to 3:1 maximum on the south side of the underground garage entrance. 17. On the grading plan: Show storm sewer size, type, class and slope. Show CB and CBMH numbers, rim and invert elevations. On the utility plan, show all existing and proposed utility sewer type, class, size and slope. 18. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Qwest, Xcel Energy, Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 19. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required as well as curbing to be painted yellow. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Codes Section 904.1. 20. The radius tums shall be designed to accommodate the turning of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus. Submit radius tums and dimensions to the Chanhassen City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 21. The proposed parking deck over the underground parking must be built to support the load of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus or shall have vehicle height limiters installed. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for additional requirements. 22. If Chanhassen Fire Department's aerial ladder truck is unable to negotiate access via the east parking lots, Fire Department standpipes along with fully sprinklered buildings will be required. 23. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for locations. 24. The buildings must be protected with automatic fire sprinkler systems. 25. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 26. The buildings must be constructed in accordance with the Minnesota State Building Code and the International Building Code (IBC) as amended by the State of Minnesota. The IBC is scheduled to become effective this fall. The architect must provide a detailed code analysis, during the preliminary plan stage, for review for compliance with the new code. Special attention must be paid to the fire~resistance and opening protection of the exterior walls between the two buildings, and the parking garage below, in relation to the placement of a property line. 27. An accessible route must be provided to both buildings, parking facilities, public transportation stops. Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 7 28. All parking areas, including parking garages, must be provided with accessible parking spaces dispersed among the various building entrances. 29. The utility plan does not contain enough information for review at this time; plans will be reviewed when submitted for permit. 30. The building owner and or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan review and permit procedures. In particular, type of construction and allowable area issues need to be addressed as soon as the Minnesota Amendments to the IBC are available." "The Chanhassen City Council denies the variance for the installation of signage above 20 feet based on the findings and recommendation." PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 17, 2002, to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted five for and none against on two separate motions to recommend approval of the proposed site plans with the variances for underground parking and the use of EIFS subject to the conditions of the staff report and the addition of the following conditions: The applicant will work with staff to address mitigating the sight line concerns of the neighbors. The applicant will work with staff to provide traffic calming measures throughout Villages on the Ponds, specifically at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Great Plains Boulevard. The Planning Commission could not come to a consensus on the signage variance, however. A motion to recommend approval of the variance for signage in excess of 20 feet in height on the southeast elevation of the building and the bank sign on the tower, but not the logo, failed two for and throe against. A motion to deny the signage variance for signage in excess of 20 feet in height failed two for and three against. A motion to deny the signage variance in excess of 20 feet in height, except on the south elevation, failed two for and three against. Finally, a motion to deny the variance for signage in excess of 20 feet in height failed on a vote of two for and three against. The commissioners' opinions on the signage variance seemed to be as follows: · Two commissioners opposed the variance. · One commissioner was for the variance for all signage. Two commissioners were for signage in excess of 20 feet in height on the south elevation and on the tower, but without a second sign on the tower for the logo, which they directed should be replaced with a decorative feature similar to the tower on the apartment building. Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 8 The Planning Commission was concerned regarding the sight lines from the apartments to the houses on Marsh Drive. The nearest house is approximately 600 feet from the east end of the apartment building. We have requested that the applicant provide sight line drawings from the apartment to the houses to dete~Tnine if mitigation measures are necessary and appropriate. The Planning Commission was also concerned regarding traffic in the development and specifically at Lake Drive and Great Plains Boulevard. Staff has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Document, EAW, for Villages on the Ponds. The traffic study showed that only stops signs on the east and west approaches are required to maintain an acceptable level of service. Finally, the applicant has provided staff with the calculations for all the building materials using the computer to measure the surfaces. As staff stated, our original calculations were based on a simple width times length, which did not accommodate the changing building surfaces. Staff accepts the applicant's calculation of 16.1 percent EIFS. MISCELLANEOUS Following is a summary of site coverages that have been approved within the development. This table represents the amount of impervious surface that will be present in the development. Description Site Area (acres) hnpervious Area Percent Impervious (acres) Americlnn 3.5 2.1 60 St. Hubert's 8.0 5 62 Outlot A (private 3.4 3.2 95 streets) Outlot B (Village 3.7 0 0 Pond) Outlot H 7.5 0 0 (wetlands/Rice Marsh Lake) Outlot L (wooded 2.3 0 0 knoll) Bell Mortgage 1.2 0.86 72 Building Bokoo Bikes 0.63 0.5 80 Foss Swim School 0.56 0.49 88 Building 17 (not 1.3 0.85 65 constructed) Culvers 0.94 0.49 52 Lake Susan 9.9 3.5 36 Apartment Homes Presbyterian Homes 5.11 2.5 49 Building C/Bank- 3.19 2.66 83 Office Total 50.63 22.98 45.4 Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 9 ATTACHMENTS o Planning Commission Minutes of September 17, 2002 Planning Commission Staff Report Villages on the Ponds Environmental Assessment, Traffic Analysis Tables 6 and 8 and pages 33-35 g:\plan\bg\development review\executive summary Villages Building C.doc Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 10 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of VOP I, LLC and Peregrine Corporation for Site Plan Review for a four-story building with street level commercial and 54 apartment units with a variance for reduction in the required covered parking and for a two-story 11,000 square foot bank - office building with variances for building matehals and signage height, respectively. On September 17, 2002, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly schedule meeting to consider the application of VOP I, LLC and Pereghne Corporation for a site plan review for the property located at the northeast corner of Lake Drive and Main Street. The Planning Commission conducted a public heating on the proposed site plan was preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Cormnission heard testimony fi'om all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Tile property is cun'ently zoned Planned Unit Development, PUD. 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 2nd Addition to be replatted to Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 8th Addition. 4. Section 20-110: Is consistent with tile elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 11 (2) Is consistent with this division; (3) Preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring 'developed or developing or developing areas; (4) 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) Creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: ao 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; Co 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 do 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) 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 unless they find the following facts: no The literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship for the underground parking due to the required configuration of the building along Lake Drive, Main Street and Pond Promenade. The bends in the building reduce the ability to efficiently layout parking stalls. The two 90 degree comers eliminate, potentially, eight parking stalls, the number of stalls the project is deficient. The literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship for the use of EIFS on the bank building. The development of the bank and the retail - apartment building adjacent to it will be harmonious since of majority of the Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 12 apartment building is EIFS. It is reasonable to permit the use of Eff~S in this application. The literal enforcement of this chapter would not cause an undue hardship for the signage height however. In this instances, it is a matter of preference rather than design constraints that lead to the variance request. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a vm-iance is based are applicable to other property within the same zoning classification. As staff has discussed, there are design constraints in the project requiring the layout of the buildings to provide interior parking spaces as well as underground parking. The harmonious nature of the development and the need for higher quality desing provide unique circumstances for the exception of parking and EIFS. There are no unique circumstances related to the signage height, which would lead to the need for variances for signage. c. The purpose of the vahation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but rather to conform to the design constraints within Villages on the Ponds. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship for the parking and building materials owing to the design constraints of the project. However, the variance for signage height is self created since they are due to aesthetic preferences and convenience rather than inability to comply with ordinance. e. The granting of the variance ,,viii not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. However, the intent of the signage was to provide for pedestrian scale, rather than the typical suburban commercial center designed for the automobile. 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. . The planning report #2002-7 Site Plan Review dated September 17, 2002, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. Villages Building C October 15, 2002 Page 13 RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the site plan review with the variance for underground parking and use of more than 15 percent EIFS for building material on the bank/office building and denial of the variance for signage height. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of September, 2002. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMIS SION BY: Its Chairman ATTEST: Secretary CITY OF PC DATE: september 17, 2002 CC DATE: October 14, 2002 REVIEW DEADLINE: 9/30/02 Extended to November 29, 2002 CASE#: SPR 2002-7 STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for site plan approval for a four-story building consisting of underground parking, 19,000 square feet of street level commercial area and 2-3 stories with 54 apartment units and a two-story, 11,000 sq. ft. office and bank building with drive-through windows and underground parking. Additionally, a variance is necessary to pe~rnit wall signage above 20 feet on the bank building, to reduce the underground parking below 1.5 spaces per unit, and to pe~Tnit the use of Exterior Insulting Finishing System (EIFS) for more than 15 percent of the building exterior on the bank building. LOCATION: APPLICANT: Northeast corner of Lake Drive and Main Street VOP I, LLC c/o Lotus Realty Services, Inc. P. O. Box 235 MN 55317 (952) 934-4538 Peregrine Corporation 706 Walnut Street Chaska, MN 55318 (952) 556-1300 PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development, PUD 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Mixed Use ACREAGE: 3.18 acres DENSITY: 17 units per acres SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicants are requesting a vertically and horizontally integrated mixed used development consisting of a three to four-story building containing street level retail and commercial uses with studio, one bedroom and loft style apartments (total of 54 units) and a two-story bank office building. Ltl Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. 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. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The development is located within the Villages on the Ponds a mixed-use development. The site was rough graded as part of the overall development. The property is located within Sector I of the Villages on the Ponds development. The proposed development consists of a two-story, 11,000 square foot bank - office building and a four-story building with 19,000 square feet of street level commercial uses with two to three stories of apartments above. The commercial component will be multi-tenant lease space. The primary parking for the project is located underground and in the interior of the lot. Some on-street parking is also available along Lake Drive, Main Street and Pond Promenade, which are all private streets. It should be noted that due to building code requirements, the separation between the two buildings may be increased. This would increase the amount of open area in this area, which could be covered by landscaping or additional site furnishings. The residential component consists of three studio (efficiency) units, 29 loft units and 22 one- bedroom units. The building steps up from the north to the south with two stories of apartments on the north and three stories of apartments on the south and west. The fourth story will consist entirely of apartment lofts. The garage level, below grade, contains 73 parking stalls, which equals 1.35 spaces per unit, as well as storage areas, stairwells and elevator areas. The con~mercial component consists of multi-tenant space, multiple building fagades simulating development of the building over time and varying building heights and entrance treatments. Building materials consist of brick, natural stone, river rock, EIFS, clapboard siding, and shake shingles. The roof is asphalt shingles with towers with standing seam metal roofs. The literal enforcement of parking standards would cause an undue hardship for the development of the commercial - apartment building due to the required configuration of the building along Lake Drive, Main Street and Pond Promenade as required by the development design standards and street configuration in Villages on the Ponds. The bends in the building reduce the ability to efficiently layout parking stalls. The two 90 degree comers eliminate, potentially, eight parking stalls, the number of stalls the project is deficient. Additionally, staff has contacted apartment management companies to determine if there is a need for more parking spaces based on the size of the units. Based on anecdotal information, they have confi~rned that the small units, efficiencies and one bedrooms, require fewer parking spaces than two or more bedroom units. Generally, the demand for parking is limited two spaces per unit regardless of the larger unit size. As a secondary issue, the developer, separately, will be working with the city to provide 20 percent of the units affordable. In 2002, an affordable unit is defined as monthly rent of $621.00 for an efficiency unit and $741.00 for a one-bedroom unit. The bank-office building is two stories. The primary building material consists of red brick and white and sand colored EIFS with a base and entrance area of natural stone. The use of EIFS exceeds the 15 percent maximum coverage permitted by the Design Standards for Commercial, Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 3 Industrial and Office-Institutional Development. The roof is green standing seam metal. A tower element is introduced above the main entrance. The applicant is proposing signage integrated into the tower as well as on the top of the second story. Signage above 20 feet in height is not in keeping with the pedestrian character for this sector of Villages. Staff is recommending approval of the site plan subject to the conditions of the staff report. Staff is recommending denial of the variance for the use of more than 15 percent EIFS on the bank-office building, denial of the variance for the signage height on the bank-office building, and approval of the variance for the reduction of covered parking below 1.5 spaces for unit for the apartment based on the findings in the staff report. BACKGROUND On April 8, 2002, the Chanhassen City Council approved Site Plan #96-11 File 2, plans prepared by Opus Architects & Engineers, Inc., dated 1/30/02, for a 41,522 sq. ft. expansion to the existing building, St. Hubert Catholic Community, and the following amendment to the Villages on the Ponds Design Standards: d. Development Site Coverage and Building Height 5. The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: Commercial/ Office/Service Institutional Dwelling TOTAL Retail (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) Units sq. ft. Sector I 104,640 83,500 0 160 188,140 Sector 1I 60,000 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector llI 0 0 134,000 0 134,000 Sector IV 0 0 0 162 0 TOTAL 164,640 97,500 134,000 322 396,140 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) units. 1 Residential apartment unit = 2 elderly (independent) units. 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. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 4 300 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 additional institutional building square footage be reallocated without an amendment to the PUD. 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, 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 H - three stories/40 ft., Sector llI - 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. And The following table shall govern the amount of building area for the different uses: Commercial/ Office/Service Institutional Dwelling TOTAL Retail (sq. ft.),(sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) Units sq. ft. Sector I 114,500 83,500 0 160 198,000 Sector H 60,000 * 14,000 0 0 74,000 Sector [[I 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. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 5 290 square feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of institutional. In no instance shall additional 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 August 13,2001, the City Council approved an amendment to the Villages on the Ponds Development Design Standards permitting a drive through window as a conditional use on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition. On September 13, 1999, the City Council approved PUD #95-2 granting Final Plat approval for Villages on the Ponds Sixth Addition, creating one lot. This is the site for the Lake Susan Apartment Homes development (Site Plan #99-9). On June 28, 1999, the City Council approved PUD #95-2 granting Final Plat approval for Villages on the Ponds Fifth Addition, creating one lot and one outlot. This site is for the Foss Swim School. On June 28, 1999, the City Council approved PUD #95-2 granting Final Plat approval for Villages on the Ponds Fourth Addition, creating one lot and two outlots. This site is for the Peddler Cyclery, a.k.a., Bokoo Bikes. On May 11, 1999, the' City Council approved the final plat for Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 3rd Addition subdividing Outlot D and part of Outlot E, Villages on the Ponds. 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 2nd Addition. September 12, 1997, enter into sub-recipient agreement with AUSMAR to construct the improvement spelled out by the Metropolitan Council's grants. May 19, 1997, enter into Livable Communities Act Grant agreement with the Metropolitan Council for the provision of public realm improvements and affordable housing in Villages on the Ponds ($500,500.00). February 24, 1997, enter into Transit Capital Financial Assistance Grant with the Metropolitan Council for the provision of a transit facility within Villages on the Ponds ($190,000.00). 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; Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 6 Rezoning from lOP 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 (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 Pe~wLit Review for the Villages 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 Development Villages on the Ponds Development Design Standards GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The proposed development consists of two buildings on a 3.18 acre site. The commercial - residential building is the westerly building on the site, fronting on Main Street, Lake Drive and Pond Promenade, and is proposed as a 54-unit apartment building with street level retail. The commercial-residential building is four stories tall with an underground parking level. The building height is 50 feet (note: building height includes V2 the gable height and excludes the garage elevation). Decorative towers are excluded from the height calculations. Total building square footage is 73,000 square feet. The bank-office is two-stories tall with an underground parking level. Building height is 35 feet. The total building area is 11,000 square feet. The building elevations are highly articulated. The commercial-residential building materials consist of white, sand, reddish-brown, and beige/gray EIFS, red and honey colored brick, gray clapboard siding, natural stone (Ledge stone), river rock, and green and grayish-blue shake. EIFS represents 50 percent of the building materials. However, the design standards limiting EIFS to 15 percent of building material only apply to the commercial portion of the building which is only seven percent EIFS. Roof material consists of gray asphalt shingles and green standing seam metal on towers and entrance canopies. The building is visually broken into small segments to simulate several distinct buildings. Street frontages are presented with 78 percent storefront windows and entrances. The building is highly articulated projecting in and out at entrances and where faux building fagades meet. Window Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 7 treatments include the use of shutters, peaked and arched fabric canopies, planter boxes, metal grates, and balconies. The signage band is twelve feet wide from above the storefront windows to 20 feet high. Rooftop equipment is hidden in fiat roofed areas located in the comers of the building, behind the comer towers. The bank-office building materials consist of reddish-brown, and beige/gray EIFS, red brick, and natural stone (Ledge stone). EI:FS represents approximately 30 percent of the building material and thus requires a variance from the Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office Institutional Developments. Roof material is green standing seam metal. A drive through canopy is located on the south of the side of the building and is well located to facilitate traffic circulation as well as minimize visual impacts. ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE Size portion Placement The building entries are greatly defined, including having the main entrances oriented on a different plane from the building elevations and having canopies, recesses and projections. The building elevations are highly articulated with numerous openings, change in materials, projections and recesses in the building fagade, and incorporation of various window treatments and styles. The ground level of the multi-story building is visually distinct from the upper stories through the use of different building materials as well as incorporation of signage bands, window treatments and ledges. Material and detail The building materials are high quality materials including brick, natural stone, fiver rock and EIFS. However, EFIS, an accent material, may occupy up to 15 percent of the buildings facade on commercial buildings. The building exteriors are extremely detailed with various visual elements of interest. Color Building colors are harmonious and earth toned with reds, tans, greens and blue elements. Highlights are incorporated with awning materials and decorative artwork. Height and Roof Design Building height is limited to 3 stories or 40 feet for non-residential buildings and 4 stories and 50 feet for residential buildings. Pitched roofs shall have a minimum roof pitch of 1 foot of rise to every 4 feet of run. Each building has multiple pitched elements. Mechanical equipment is screened within areas sun'ounded by roof elements. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 8 Facade transparency Street frontages are presented with 78 percent storefront windows and entrances. The design standards require that 50 percent of the first floor elevation that is viewed by the public shall include transparent windows and or doors. All other areas shall include landscaping material and architectural detailing and articulation Site Furnishing The development includes many community features such as planting boxes, tables and chairs, landscaping, lighting, and benches incorporated in the overall street hardscape. Loading areas, refuse area, etc. Screening of service yards, refuse and waste removal, other unsightly areas and truck par~nJloading areas are accomplished by locating them to in the interior of the U-shaped building. Landscaping Landscaping complies with the city's design standards and conforms to the overall landscaping plan for villages on the ponds. Lot Frontage and Parking location The buildings are pushed toward the street frontages within the project as required by the Villages on the Ponds design standards. Public spaces are created to the front of tall the building and between the two buildings. Villages Proposed Interior Side Lot Line 0' N- 80, E - 183, S - 11, W - 12 .. 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 (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) Permitted 164,640 97,500 Residential Institutional Date Bldg Sq Ft (units) (sq. ft.) Approved C/O/Ins. 322 134,000 Lake Susan Apartments Bokoo Bikes 5,018 6,077 Foss Swim School 9,800 Houlihan's 7,362 81 162 6/28/1999 6/28/1999 11,095 6/14/1999 9,800 5/11/1998 7,443 Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 9 Culvers Building 4 (Bell Mortgage) Building 17 (not built) Americlnn Americlnn (expansion) St. Hubert's Presbyterian Homes (not built) Retail E Bank (this project) Retail C (this project) Retail C-1 Retail G St. Hubert Expansion TOTALS Balance Balance Equivalents Conversion to Office sq.ft. Conversion to Institutional Conversion to Commercial 4,768 7,425 7,425 30,000 44,013 1,492 6,870 4,500 4,500 69 24,980 50,914 11,000 9,500 9,500 54 24,000 520 8,000 8,000 40 146,436 139,309 325 18,204 (41,809) (3) 60,680 NA (1,080) 62,772 (44,009) (1,320) NA (12,543) (270) Balances after conversion for deficits 5,661 92,478 41,522 9/24/2001 9/22/1997 8/11/1997 2/24/1997 12/9/1996 11/26/2001 4/8/2OO2 134,000 NA (3) 0 4,768 14,850 30,000 45,505 6,870 92,478 9,000 75,894 11,000 19,000 24,520 16,000 41,522 419,745 GRADING/DRAINAGE/EROSION CONTROL The cun'ent plan is proposing a 4-story building with underground parking. The project will involve grading the site to prepare the building pads and parking lots. The parking lot and building drainage will be collected by a system of catch basins within the parking lot and route the drainage to an existing storrn sewer along Lake Drive East. Storm sewer sizing calculations for a 1 O-year, 24-hour storm event will be required prior to building permit approval. Proposed erosion control consists of silt fence around the perimeter grading limits of the site. Staff is recommending that Type 2 silt fence be used. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected from construction-related sediment through the use of filter barriers (see City Detail Plate No. 5302). The rock construction entrance is required to be a minimum of 75 feet in length. The applicant will be required to obtain all necessary permits from the appropriate regulatory agency including but not limited to MnDOT, Watershed District, MCPA, etc. UTILITIES The plans propose on connecting to the existing utility stubs and extending additional sewer and water services from the parcel to the north. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 10 STREETS The plans propose on utilizing the two existing accesses off of Lake Dhve East and from the existing parking area to the north and also a new access off of Lake Drive East. LANDSCAPING Proposed landscaping meets and exceeds minimum requirements as outlined in the overall landscape plan for the Villages on the Pond PUD development. Total landscape area and tree quantities for the vehicular use area is satisfactory Staff recommends that the Parkway maple be eliminated from the plant schedule. It is a variety of No~ay maple, a species that is notorious for it's susceptibility to disfiguring and ultimately fatal canker diseases. The applicant may substitute another species of maple if they so choose. LI GHTING/S I GNA GE Building 1 consists of a sign band that runs from 12 to 20 feet above grade. This sign band is designed to accommodate man different styles and types of signage as outlined in the development design standards. This sign band is in keeping with the location and intent of the design standards, which are to provide pedestrian scale. 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. 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. Building 2 proposes the use of signage in the tower and along the upper elevation of the building. This signage is above the 20 feet height limitation for signage. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider tine development's compliance with the following: Consistency 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) Consistency with this division; (3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 11 general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; (4) Creation of 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) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: 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; 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) Protection of 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. Finding: Subject to the revisions contained in the staff report, the proposed site plan is consistent with all plans and specifications and development design standards for the Villages on the Ponds Planned Unit Development and meets site plan findings 1 through 6 enumerated above. FINDINGS The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: ao That 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. Reasonable use includes a use made by a Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 12 majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre-existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. Finding: The literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship for the underground parking due to the required configuration of the building along Lake Drive, Main Street and Pond Promenade. The bends in the building reduce the ability to efficiently layout parking stalls. The two 90 degree comers eliminate, potentially, eight parking stalls, the number of stalls the project is deficient. The literal enforcement of this chapter would not cause an undue hardship for the signage height or the use of EIFS on the bank building however, h~ these instances, it is a matter of aesthetic preferences and convenience rather than design constraints that lead to the variance requests. bo The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Finding: The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are applicable to other property within the same zoning classification. As staff has discussed, there are design constraints in the project requiring the layout of the buildings to provide interior parking spaces as well as underground parking. With the exception of parking, there are no unique circumstances, which would lead to the need for variances for signage or building materials. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Finding: The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but rather to conform to the design constraints within Villages on the Ponds. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship for the parking owing to the design constraints of the project. However, the variances for signage height and building materials are self created since they are due to preferences rather than inability to comply with ordinance. 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. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 13 Finding: 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. However, the intent of the signage was to provide for pedestrian scale, rather than the typical suburban commercial center designed for the automobile. 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. Finding: 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. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motions: A. "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan 4/2002-7, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated August 2, 2002, for a street level commercial and upper level apartment building with a variance for the number of underground parking spaces subject to the following conditions: , 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. Site plan approval is contingent on final platting of Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, to a block and lot designation. o The developer shall work with the city to provide 20 percent of the units at affordable rents. . o o Lighting shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. Signage shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. A separate sign permit is required for each sign. The applicant shall eliminate Parkway maple from the plant schedule. A suitable replacement shall be substituted. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 14 . Submit StOITrl sewer design calculations for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event with drainage flow map. . Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos.: 3101, 5201, 5207 and 5300. 9. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regularity agency permits. 10. Retaining walls over 4-feet in height must be designed by a registered engineer and requires an approved fence at the top of the wall. 11. All plan sheets must be signed by a registered engineer. '12. Add rock construction entrance a minimum of 75 feet in length and revise the note from 50 feet to 75 feet. 13. Add a storm sewer schedule to the plans. 14. Type 2 silt fence shall be used around the grading area. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected from construction-related sediment through the use of filter bm~'iers (see City Detail Plate No. 5302). 15. Add a legend to the plans. 16. On the site plan, show the dimensions of the parking stalls, access aisles and driveway widths. 17. Revise the grade to 3:1 maximum on the south side of the underground garage entrance. 18. On the grading plan' Show sto~Tn sewer size, type, class and slope. Show CB and CBIvlH numbers, tim and invert elevations. · On the utility plan, show all existing and proposed utility sewer type, class, size and slope. 19. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Qwest, Xcel Energy, Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 20. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required as well as curbing to be painted yellow. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Codes Section 904.1. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 15 21. The radius turns shall be designed to accommodate the turning of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus. Submit radius turns and dimensions to the Chanhassen City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 22. The proposed parking deck over the underground parking must be built to support the load of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus or shall have vehicle height limiters installed. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for additional requirements. 23. If Chanhassen Fire Department's aerial ladder truck is unable to negotiate access via the east parking lots, Fire Department standpipes along with fully sprinklered buildings will be required. 24. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for locations. 25. The buildings must be protected with automatic fire sprinkler systems. 26. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. 27. The buildings must be constructed in accordance with the Minnesota State Building Code and the International Building Code (IBC) as amended by the State of Minnesota. The IBC is scheduled to become effective this fall. The architect must provide a detailed code analysis, during the preliminary plan stage, for review for compliance with the new code. Special attention must be paid to the fire-resistance and opening protection of the exterior walls between the two buildings, and the parking garage below, in relation to the placement of a property line. 28. An accessible route must be provided to both buildings, parking facilities, public transportation stops. 29. All parking areas, including parking garages, must be provided with accessible parking spaces dispersed among the various building entrances. 30. Accessible dwelling units must be provided in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1341. 31. The utility plan does not contain enough information for review at this time; plans will be reviewed when submitted for permit. 32. The building owner and or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan review and permit procedures. In particular, type of construction and allowable area issues need to be addressed as soon as the Minnesota Amendments to the IBC are available. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 16 B. "The Planning Commission recommends denial of the variance for the use of more than 15 percent EIFS and signage in excess of 20 feet in height on the bank building based on the findings in the staff report. C. "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #2002-7, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated August 2, 2002, for a 11,000 square foot two-story bank and office building with drive through facilities subject to the following conditions: . . 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. Site plan approval is contingent on final platting of Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition, to a block and lot designation. 3. Lighting shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. . Signage shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. A separate sign permit is required for each sign. The applicant shall eliminate Parkway maple from the plant schedule. A suitable replacement shall be substituted. 6. The use of EIFS shall be limited to a maximum of 15 percent of the building elevation. . Submit storm sewer design calculations fora 10-year, 24-hour storm event with drainage flow map. . Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos.' 3101, 5201, 5207 and 5300. 9. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regularity agency permits. 10. Retaining walls over 4-feet in height must be designed by a registered engineer and requires an approved fence at the top of the wall. 11. All plan sheets must be signed by a registered engineer. 12. Add rock construction entrance a minimum of 75 feet in length and revise the note from 50 feet to 75 feet. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 17 13. Add a storm sewer schedule to the plans. 14. Type 2 silt fence shall be used around the grading area. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected from construction-related sediment through the use of filter barriers (see City Detail Plate No. 5302). 15. Add a legend to the plans. 16. On the site plan, show the dimensions of the parking stalls, access aisles and driveway widths. 17. Revise the grade to 3:1 maximum on the south side of the underground garage entrance. 18. On the grading plan: Show storm sewer size, type, class and slope. · Show CB and CBMH numbers, rim and invert elevations. · On the utility plan, show all existing and proposed utility sewer type, class, size and slope. 19. A 10-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Qwest, Xcel Energy, Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 20. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required as well as curbing to be painted yellow. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Codes Section 904.1. 21. The radius turns shall be designed to accommodate the turning of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus. Submit radius turns and dimensions to the Chanhassen City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 22. The proposed parking deck over the underground parking must be built to support the load of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus or shall have vehicle height limiters installed. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for additional requirements. 23. If Chanhassen Fire Department's aerial ladder truck is unable to negotiate access via the east parking lots, Fire Department standpipes along with fully sprinklered buildings will be required. 24. Additional fire hydrants will be required'. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for locations. 25. The buildings must be protected with automatic fire sprinkler systems. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 18 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. The buildings must be constructed in accordance with the Minnesota State Building Code and the International Building Code (IBC) as amended by the State of Minnesota. The IBC is scheduled to become effective this fall. The architect must provide a detailed code analysis, during the preliminary plan stage, for review for compliance with the new code. Special attention must be paid to the fire-resistance and opening protection of the exterior walls between the two buildings, and the parking garage below, in relation to the placement of a property line. An accessible route must be provided to both buildings, parking facilities, public transportation stops. All parking areas, including parking garages, must be provided with accessible parking spaces dispersed among the various building entrances. The utility plan does not contain enough information for review at this time; plans will be reviewed when submitted for permit. The building owner and or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan review and pmTnit procedures. In particular, type of construction and allowable area issues need to be addressed as soon as the Minnesota Amendments to the IBC are available." ATTACHMENTS . , 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. i1. Findings of Fact and Recommendation Development Review Applications MAG Project Description: Building "C" and the Bank, Villages on the Ponds, Chanhassen, Reduced Copy of Site Plan Reduced Copy of South Elevation Reduced Copy of West Elevation Reduced Copy of North Elevation Reduced Copy of East Elevation Educed Copy of South Courtyard Elevation Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List Villages on the Ponds Development Design Standards Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 19 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIF~S, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION IN RE: Application of VOP I, LLC and Peregrine Corporation for Site Plan Review for a four-story building with street level commercial and 54 apartment units with a variance for reduction in the required covered parking and for a two-stow 11,000 square foot bank - office building with variances for building materials and signage height, respectively.' On September 17, 2002, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly schedule meeting to consider the application of VOP I, LLC and Peregrine Corporation for a site plan review for the property located at the northeast comer of Lake Drive and Main Street. 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. 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 2nd Addition to be replatted to Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 8th Addition. 4. Section 20-110: Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 20 (~) 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) Is consistent with this division; (3) Preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; (4) 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) Creates a functional and hamnonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: 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; Co 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 te~ms 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) 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 neighbohng land uses. . The Board of Adjustments and Appeals shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. The literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship for the underground parking due to the required configuration of the building along Lake Drive, Main Street and Pond Promenade. The bends in the building Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 21 reduce the ability to efficiently layout parking stalls. The two 90 degree comers eliminate, potentially, eight parking stalls, the number of stalls the project is deficient. The literal enforcement of this chapter would not cause an undue hardship for the signage height or the use of EIFS on the bank building however. In these instances, it is a matter of preference rather than design constraints that lead to the variance requests. b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are applicable to other property within the same zoning classification. As staff has discussed, there are design constraints in the project requiring the layout of the buildings to provide interior parking spaces as well as underground parking. With the exception of parking, there are no unique circumstances, which would lead to the need for variances for signage or building materials. 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 rather to conform to the design constraints within Villages on the Ponds. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship for the parking owing to the design constraints of the project. However, the variances for signage height and building materials are self created.since they are due to aesthetic preferences and convenience rather than inability to comply with ordinance. 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. However, the intent of the signage was to provide for pedestrian scale, rather than the typical suburban commercial center designed for the automobile. 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. o The planning report #2002-7 Site Plan Review dated September 17, 2002, prepared by Robert Generous, et al, is incorporated herein. Villages - Building C September 9, 2002 Page 22 RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the site plan review with the variance for underground parking and denial of the variance for building materials and signage height. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 17th day of September, 2002. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY: Its Chairman ATTEST: Secretary CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD __CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE (Daytime) ¢(_.~',~ -~,..R,~/--- ~--/'~'~f-~ OWNER: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit Non-conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development* Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review* Subdivision* Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Wetland Alteration Permit Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CUPISPR/VAC/VAR/VV APIMetes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) TOTAL FEE $ ~",/"~/ ~J J 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-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2'. X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. ** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME LOCATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION TOTAL ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT PRESENT ZONING /L./! Z" ,~, D REQUESTED ZONING ~O q~~ PRESENT ~ND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED ~ND USE DESiGNATiON R~SON FOR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance 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 should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or t 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 extensions are approved by the applicant. Sig6at~'re of Applicant Dat¥ - ' Signature of Fee Owner Application Received on Date a" Fee Paid 7/~ 0 O 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 will be mailed to the applicant's address. vlotmd Overall Site Plans, including landscape, grading and utilities are being submitted for the portion of Outlot A, Villages on the Ponds 2nd Addition on which approval is being sought for a retail/housing building and a bank. Separate elevations drawings are being presented for each building and separate parcels will be created upon approval of a final plat to be submitted for approval within the next 30 days. There will be separate ownership entities and separate development agreements with the City. Thus, two separate applications are being submitted, one for the bank and one for the retail/housing building. Lotus Rm~ltw Services, Ino {852~83~-5~72 p.5 OoI ~! 02 CiTY OF CHANHASSEN 77OO MAF{KET EmULEVARD ._CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: ~ .. .' i~;m--- ADDRESS: 706 Walnut St. Chask_a, M.N. TELEPHONE (Day time) . ( 9 5 2 ) 5 5 3__j_1 8 556-1 3OO :_ OWNER: Peregrine Cor_~ation .. ADDRESS: 706 Walnut St. Chaska, M.N. 55318 TELEPHONE: J~ Comprehensive Plan Amendment Conditional Use Permit Interim Use Permit Temporary Sales Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Non-conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development* Rezoning ~ Sign Permits _-- Sign Plan Review Site Plan Review* ',- ~.; ._/?? Subdivision" Wetland A~e~on Pe~it " ~ Zoning ~p~ ~ Zoning Ordinance ~dmbnt .... Notification Sign i~) ~,' ~ Escrow for ~ling F~A~omey Cost ($~ CU P/S P~ACNA~AP~etes and Bounds, ~0 Minor SUB) TOTAL FEE $ 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-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/2'' 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 shall be charged for each application. 3! 02 02:02p Lotus )JEC/NAME Villages On The Ponds ',ATION NE quadrante of Lake & Main/SE quadrant Pond Promenade & Main ~LDESCRIPTION Par_t of. Out Lot A: V_oP. 2~d Add'ns to be final 'ALAOREAG5 Outlot A is AUprox 4ft. I'LANDS PRESENT ., .YES X NO ;SENT ZONING Mixed use .p_[ID tUESTEDZONING No change requested SEN/LAND USE DESIGNATION Mixed use PUD tUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION_ No change requested SON FOR THIS REQUEST ' See Attached application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information )lans required by applicable City'Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you shou!d confer wfth the Planning ~rtmbnt to determine the specific ordinance and procedural-requirements applicable to your application. :ermination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written ~ of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. is to certify that I am making application for the descn'becl a~ion by th~ City and that I am responsible for complying with ty requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom ',ity should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either of Owner's Duplicate Certif'~te of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or ! am the authorized person to make )plication and the fee owner has also signed this application. keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this applbation, i further ~tand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate pdor to any ~rb_ation to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to-the best of ]owledge. :ity hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing · ements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day sion for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review sions by the applicant are approved D~te of Fee Owner Date Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. pplicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available or~ Friday prior to the meeting. contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. MILO ARCHITECTURE GROUP, INC. URBAN PLANNING ARCHITECTURE INTERIOR DESIGN CONSULTING PROJECT DESCRIPTION FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION Submitted on 8/1/02 PROJECT: Building "C" and The Bank, Village on the Ponds, Chanhassen, MN , Introduction: The proposed development at the core of the Village is meant to meet or exceed all design goals outlined in P.U.D. in regards to use mix, building design, streetscape character, materials used and pedestrian oriented environment envisioned both by the City and the development team. The project, once completed should be V.O.P.'s "flagship" project and a focal point facing Highway 5. It will set the tone for the remaining developments to follow along the Main Street, the Village Square and the Promenade along the Village Pond on the north. Project Components: The entire project encompasses two closely interconnected, 5'et separate segments: Building "C", a retail building along the Main Street, Lake Village and the Promenade, with 2 to 3 levels of apartments on top of it, plus an underground garage. The Bank Building, a two-story structure with an underground garage, oriented towards the Promenade as well as the Lake Drive East. The Use Mix: All uses proposed are highly welcome within the Village and will further strengthen its pedestrian oriented environment. Actually, the proposed mix is an ideal one: retail, office/bank, hospitality, institutional uses at the active street level, complimented with the living units/apartments at the upper floors, allowing for "live-work" arrangements, thus reducing further vehicular traffic in the community. Building~ Massing~ Heighh and Bulk: Starting with the existing "Silo" retail and "Culver's" single story buildings, next to the Highway 5, the proposed developments project a distinctly terraced image: A two-story Bank building, followed with a three-story Building "C" with another floor added further back at the Village Square, thus terminating the development as a 4-story structure. Right there a landmark Village Tower structure dominates as the highest focal point of the entire V.O.P. community. With its massing, height and bulk, and the buildings with zero setback along adjacent streets, the proposed development fully meets the requirements set forth in P.U.D. Building and Roof Desigm Materials and Colors: The building mass aligned tightly against and along the adjacent streets, is visually broken down into smaller segments, suggesting a gradual, separate development over longer period of time, comprised of several distinct "buildings". Accordingly, the materials and colors are varied and so are the roof forms at the top, as well as the storefronts at the street level. The facades display a harmonious variety of materials and colors (apartments) with the finishes at the street level mainly comprised of face brick, natural stone, river rocks, ceramic tiles, decorative blocks and similar high quality materials. The roofs, which are over 75% sloped roofs, feature some cupolas/towers, varied forms and heights, and often terminate with large gables with distinct shapes and materials. Over residential areas the roofing material is mostly asphalt shingles, while standing seam sheet-metal roof is dominant at the Bank Building. C:kDOCU.ME-i~BGENER-I\LOCALSM\Ten~pkPerm. it App Buildin~ C.doc 250 Prairie Center Drive, #220, Eden Prairie, Minnesota Phone: 952 944 6242 Fax: 952 944 0106 E:mail: mag@magarch.com 1 Streetscape~ Signage~ Storefronts: In conjunction with the proposed retail-uses along all three street frontages, there will be enhanced pavers, decorative street-lights, directional signs, landscape, benches and caf~ terraces provided to promote a dynamic pedestrian environment for shopping, entertainment and relaxation. Retail storefronts are highly individualized in design, materials used and accompanied with creative, distinct wall signages/logos, banners, projecting signs and colorful awnings. The signage is organized within the signage band not exceeding 20' above the street level. The exemption is the Bank sign and logo, which is proposed to be architecturally, building-integrated within the Bank Tower, complimentary to the building architecture. Parking: In harmony with the P.U.D. intent, the bulk of commercial parking is located in the "interior" of the block, hidden from the view. The residential units have their cars parked within the underground garage along the entire building footprint. Some parking is provided along the adjacent streets, as short-term parking for the retail patrons. There are pedestrian passageways provided between the parking in the "rear" and the store entrances facing the adjacent streets. In conclusion, we believe that the proposed development to the highest possible extent meets the intent of the P.U.D. vision for a "pedestrian fi'iendly, traditional, Village character consistent with the European heritage of the upper Midwest, a Village of human scale and north-midwestern architectural vocabulary, and flavor rich in design variety and facade treatme~ts." Please refer to provided Material and Color Board architectural, landscape and civil engineering plans for further details on the proposed development, or call our office at any time. .< VILLAGES ON THE PONDS ~ ~~ ;~_~ ~~ Bldg..4 - <:~ .' __~: ..... ,__..__ 15,000 sq.ft, retail Americlnn Peddler Cyclery Foss Swim School; Catholic Community i Lake Susan APartment Homes o~~ , \~-~___.____.. .... ;~__:~ I~1 - ,"'~~ ........ /il/'" ~// ,~ i../ "%...,~ .'- 7~-,~'1 ! ..,- :',,,,~/ Bldg. 17 - 2 story ~ 30,000 sq. ft. office · . · q!:,-. ~L · 0 O O 0 0 . 9933 5-25-99 Foss Swim School mOUTH ELEVATION °°:~ Foss Swim School 5-25-9~ TH ELEVATION _. 9933 5-25-99 Foss Swim School ~FEST ELEVATION 9933 FOSS Swim School ~ "' ~ ! il! .i ill ir .. -- x...' - ~ ~--_--":.,~.--- __--:- . -_ . ./ ~ .-.4._4.~'~..-.~' ~;~,~..- ...... .- --._ _ ~ :.--._ .... --_'? 0 _-0-' . ,.,- -'.. _ - ' _-'-~--_ ._-~:,~?,- _ .... ',~ __ ~ .... ~. ~ ;'~-' ~ .<' :..' > · ' ~ --..--< .:t::---' - ,-, :. ... /~:" · ,--;:;..>.5.~. - '. I ~ rS--" , ,.. .. r . '.(:.'.,'.''/ . ' ' .' ' ..... . .- '-.. ' ' [ . ': _ ~ ~ .. :"*'; .-': >'7'-- - " ">'..'~" ' ;-' . '" - " ~ ~ ' · .../'/'.:.:. - .. ,~ _ . · ~ ....~. : </.: ~. .... ..-, .... ~ ~. - ~ / ,, . ~. -..,~ ". ,,.. .?::: - . ..... :'-',--:.. ' : ~.,.,..,_~:',..t:_~ -'~ "'., : '. _~. ,,:,'U . L~ '.. . : :.- : ' I :..~.':~. · '-":' -? ' ~- ~ - '"1 ~ ..... _ .._ . :.: .,_ . :'--~-: __._,. ..,.: "' '-_ :<';, ':':":_~ .: ~ ~ 'i,,.¢: .... :.'7 ._. r-. . . .~ : - . ... '"". :: : ' -v ,' ... , _ _ . _ . ., / ,, >:-, ,_ ~-- _.__-~ ....... ~.: ,," '"'-.. ,--. '-:"':-'- ~., ........ , ................ -.~ .-..- ?:: .?:':_____-----'--::: ..: / ~.n,'< 0 ~ Z (~ ~oo°°~ ~ ~°°oo ~ ~ o~o {)NIN/V,V Ol~J~iV-I ..... ONIQIS O'~¥OSclV-'lO .... SJI3 / O'DOnlS 3N01S qv~nLVN ..4OO~1 3"IONIHS I'-IVHdS¥ ':FI~DNIHS '::t'NVH S Y, DOM M3AIM ....... ONI(]IS S~IS / O00N_LS 0 NIN/¢~¥ 01E!8¥_-I JO0;~ ~]ONIHS IIVHdSV · -t00~ '"IVJ_B W h'V~S E)l',,!l a NV_LS aTC)NIFI$ f~.. -:::-' --i~+ ~H ~' .':~].::.7: -- ! "' :!! : i:il If 9NINMV C)I~8V.-I :IlgNIFIS ::::INVFI S =100~1 'IV/3 Y~ INVEIS E)NIQNVJ. S --- 300~ 3-1ONIHS /-1VhdSV )4DO~ ~3Al~t NOI~HB S313 / O00FLLS · 3N015 qV~ZVN ------ LuZ ~oo~t IAIV:::t ~ DNIC]NV_L~' ~]NO±S 'IV~N.LVN ~I3OM ;d 3/'db' ONIE]IS C}WVOedV'-13 3]E)NIHS 3)4VHS' S..-113 / OOON.I.$ --IOO~I ~]~DNIHS -I.]VHdSV ONIN/¢~V OI~SV_-I ~NOJ. S "IV~FLI.¥N- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ;HANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2002 AT 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7700 MARKET BLVD. The Planning Commission meeting for September 3rd has been cancelled and rescheduled for September 17, 2002. PROPOSAL: Site Plan Review for APPLICANT: VOP I, LLC & Peregrine Corp. Retail, Bank and Apartments LOCATION: Villages on the Ponds NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicants, VOP I, LLC and Peregrine Corporation, are requesting site plan approval for a four-stow building consisting of underground parking, 19,000 square feet of street level commercial area and 2-3 stories with 54 apartment units and a two-stow, 11,000 sq. ft. office and bank building with drive-through windows and underground parking and variances for building materials, parking and signage on 3.18 acres zoned Planned Unit Development and located at the northeast corner of Lake Drive and Main Street. What Happens at the Meeting: 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: 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. Questions and Comments: 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 this project, please contact Bob at 227-1131. 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. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on September 5, 2002. ®09~S IERICAN LEGION-CHAN POST 580 GREAT PLAINS BLVD ANHASSEN MN 55317 ROBERT J & LOIS A SAVARD 8080 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY PO BOX 235 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BERT & JEAN SINNEN i0 GRANDVIEW RD i,*NHAS SEN MN 55317 JASON K & LAURA J LEHMAN 8090 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY ~ ~ PO BOX 235 CHANHAS~'E'-N MN 55317 ,~ V SKALLMAN & YCE L BISH 55 GRANDVIEW RD iANHASSEN MN 55317 MARTIN J & TIMAREE FAJDETICH 8100 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 NORTHCOTT COMPANY 250 EAST LAKE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 EGORY D & MARY A LARSEN 1 GRANDVIEW RD ANHASSEN MN 55317 CHRISTOPH J LESER & COLLEEN A CANNON 8110 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHCR LLC 450 POND PROMENADE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 7t-IAEL R SCHNABEL & J STAI HIDDEN LN ;SEN MN 55317 DAVID E & KARLI D WANDLING S 120 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SILO I LLC 200 I%VY 13 W BURNSVILLE MN 55337 ;RAT & DENISE ALEMAYEHU HIDDEN LN ,~NHASSEN MN 55317 PAUL F & RITA A KLAUDA 8130 MARSH DR CttANHASSEN MN 55317 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY ~ ~._~.~-~-~ BOX 235 CH~NHASSEN MN 55317 R & DEBRA E PRIGGE HIDDEN LN ;EN MN 55317 LANCE T & MARGARET MAZUR CHAIN' 8140 MARSH DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 WHEATSTONE RESTAURAINT GROUP 250 EAST LAKE DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 AN E SEMKE & )RAIl C DEUTSCH HIDDEN LN MN 55317 BLUE CIRCLE INVESTMENT CO 1304 MEDICINE LAKE DRSTE 301 PLYMOUTH MN 55441 NORTHCOTT COMPAI~Y 250 EAST LA~UR-/ CH,~,~HASSEN M~ ~'~N 55317 G & KIMBRA J GREEN MARSH DR MN 55317 CHANHASSEN NH PARTNERSHIP 900 2ND AVE S 1100 INTERNA5 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55402 CHURCH OF ST HUBERT 8201 MAIN ST CHANHASSEN MN 55317 7H.~dEL M & PRUDENCE L BUSCIt MARSH DR EN MN 55317 WARM WATER POOLS LLC 6121 BAKER RD 0104 MINNETONKA MN 55345 AUSMAR DEVELOPMENT CO LLC C/O LOTUS REALTY ~ /~-~' PO BOX 235 CHAN..HASS~N MN 55317 .,_ ©091;S ~aSel AUSMAR DEVELOPME~..~T~O LLC C/O LOTUS ~ PO BOX 235 CHANFIASSEN MN 55317 RONALD A & SALLY T KING & MARK & DEBRA EKLO-SENIOR HSG 5100 EDEN RD SUITE 106 EDINA MN 55436 MICHAEL E RAMSEY 6362 OXBOW BND CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CI I,.'\NttASSEN INN 531 79THSTW CH,qNI-IASSEN MN 55317 Sl~,qel ssa~pp¥ EXHIBIT C Adopted September 23, 1996 Amended August 13,2001 Amended November 26, 2001 VILLAGES ON THE PONDS CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 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 :ts listed in the Standard Industrial Classification. If there is a question as to the whether or not a use meets tile 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 thMy- 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., roi' residents of the Villages as well as the community as a whole, rather than typical suburban type large, individual users dominating the development acd detracting fi'om the "village" character. Retail users should be those that support and compliment tile 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 fol' showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on-site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used roi' 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 iegal 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 plnotographic studio tax return preparation laundromat healtln club optical goods computer services da5' care center copying mail stores Institutional. Establislnments that are t0ublic/senni-i0ublic in nature. lib daf cai'o a~-t gal elanco stt~dio ct~!tul'al t'acilit5- Commercial/Retail. Establishments enga,?d in commercial operations including retail sales and services and tnospitality industries. Aplxn'el and Accessory Stores shoe stores electronic and music store and musical instruments restaurant - no drive througln, except on Lot 1. Block 1. Villages on fine Ponds 2nd .addition ttnrough a conditional usc permit and compliance with tile following standards - fine drive tlnroug, tn stnall 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 tneard off-site, and tlne drive through shall be screened from off-site views. (amended $/~3/0~) 'rcstak~rant - fast food only if integrated into a building no freestanding fast food and no drive ttnrough drug store/ptnarmacy book/stationary jewelry store t~obb>'/to>' 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/inotel entertainment liquor store pets and pet supplies home furnishings Residential. Residential units shall be provided as upper level units above the commercial/office uses within the village core and as stand alone units..4, 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 ll~c ownership housing, the city has adopted the goal of 50 percent of the units meeting the Metropolitan Council' s affordable criteria. Prohil)ited Uses: auto related including auto sales, auto repair, gas stations c. Setl)acks In thc PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parkino= setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply: Building ParNng Great Plains Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback Market Blvd.: Buffer yard & Setback Hwy. 5: Buffer yard & Setback Interior Side Lot Line: Buffer yard & setback East Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to residential): Buffer yard & setback West Perimeter Side Lot Line (adjacent to industrial): Buffer yard & setback C, 0' C, 50' B, 50' NA, O' D, 50' B, 50 ! 20' 20' 0~ 50' 20 Buffer yards are as specified in tine City of Chanhassen Landscaping and Tree Removal O~'dinance, Article XXV. No fences shall be permitted between tile required ]andscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. d. I)evelopment Site Coverage and Building Height The PUD sta~qdarct for hm'd surface coverage is 70c,,'~ for thc ox'el'all ctevelopment. I~ctivictual lots may exceed this threshold, but in no case shall the average exceed 70 :h'io~-e ttaan o~qe (1)p~'incipal st~'ucture may be placed on one (1) platted lot. TI~o m~tximum building hei?qt shall be Sector' iI - fou~' sto~'ics (~'csiclcntial with st~'eet level com~e~'cial o~' office)/50 ft. (~'ctail and office buildi~qgs without ~'oside~qces above shall be limited to three StOl'ies/40 ft.) except fo~' thc lot on thc comqe~' of P~'omenade Po~qd a~qd O~'cat Plains Bouteva~'d shall be limited to two sto~'ies al~d 30 feet. Sector' II - th~'ee sto~'ics/40 ft.. Sector' III - th~'ce stories/40 ft., and Sector' I¥ - fou~' sto~'ies/50 feet. Building hoioht= limitations a~'e exclusive of steeples, toxve~'s, and other architectural and roof acce~qts. Amended 11/26/01) , Tlqe max mum building footprint fo1' ail)' oi'~e building shall be limited to 20,000 square feet without a street level b~'eak in the continuity of tile building, e.g., pedestrian t>assagexvays, except fo~' the church and residential only buildings. 5. Tile l'olloxving table shall gox'eml the amount of building a~'ca for tile different uses: Comme~'cial/ Office/Service Institutional Dxvellin~o Retail (sq. ft.) (scl. ft,) (sq. ft.) Units Sector I 114,500 83.500 0 160 Sector' II 60,000 ''~: 14,000 0 0 Sector iii 0 0 100,000 0 Sector IV 0 0 0 162 TOTAL 174.500 97,500 100,000 322 TOTAL sq. ft. 198,000 74,000 100,000 0 372.000 (anlc~qded 11/26/01) '~: Ilqclttdes 47.200 sqt_~a~'e l'oot. 106 unit ~Slotel. 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 Residenti 1 Residenti 1 Residenti 1 Residenti 1 Residenti 950 square 300 square 290 square al apartment al apartment al apartment al apartment unit = 3 congregate care (assisted living or dementia) unit. unit = 2 elderly (independent) unit. unit = 360 square feet of office/service. unit: 90 square feet of retail. al apartment unit = 440 square feet of institutional. feet of office/service = 1,000 square feet of institutional. feet of retail = 1,000 square feet of office/service. 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. o Buildings a4jacent to pedestrian sidewalks must have commercial/office on tine majority of the street frontage. (amended 11/26/01) e. Building Materials and Design . Tile. 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, 5,et with the amenities and technological tools of modern times. The village elevations shov,,n on the PUD drawings are to be used only as a general guideline and the reflection of the overall village image including the north- midwestem architectural vocabulary, village like human scale and flavor, and variety in design and facade treatment. . All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Major exterior smTaces of all walls st-mil 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 pm-poses and shall not exceed 10 percent of a ',,,'all area. . Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. Exposed cement ("cinder") blocks shall be prohibited. , Metal siding, gray concrete, curtain walls and similar materials will not be approved except as supl)ort material to one of the above materials, or as trim or as HVAC screen, and may not exce,ed more than 25 percent of a ,,,,,all area. 5. All accesso~'y structu~'es shall be designed to be compatible with the p~-imary structure. All roof mounted eqt~ipment shall be screened by' ,,,,,ails of compatible appearing material. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior' process machinery, tanks, etc., a~'e to be fully screened by compatible mate~-ials. All mechanical eqt~ipment shall be screened with material compatible to the bt~ilding. o Tile bt~ildings shall have x.'a~*ied and intei'esting detailing. Tile use of large unadox'ned, conc~'ete panels and concrete block, o~'a solid wall t~m'elieved by ax'chitecttiral detailing, suctn as change in mate~-ials, change in colox', femest~'ations, o~' othe~' significant vist~at relief provided in a manne~' or at intei'vals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public xvays stnall be p~'ohibited. Acceptable matex'ials will inco~>orate textured st~rfaccs, exposed aggregate a~ld/ol' ottner patte~'ning. All walls shall be given added a~'chitectural interest th~'ot~gh building design o~' appropriate landscaping. Space fo~' ~'ec>,cling slnall be p~-ovicted in tine interiox' of all px-incipal ox' accesso~'y stt't~cttt~'es. . Ttne~'e slnatll not be t~mctei'developed backsides of btnildings. All elevations stnall x'eceive :,qezt~'l)' eqttttl t~'eatmemt amd vist~al qt~alities. 10. Tine ~late~'ials and color's used fo~' erich bc~ilcling shall be selected im comtext witln tine ttctjacent bttilding and p~'ovide fei' a ha~'moniot~s integ~'ation xvitln tt~em. Ext~'eme va~'ia~tioms betweem bttildimgs o~ tho same st~'eet in tel'mS of ox'e~'all appea~'ance, bt~lk and hcigl~t, setbacks a~qd color's shall be p~'ohibitect. 11. Slc)t0c ~*oof elemc~nts stnall be inco~-po~'ated im all st~'ctctu~'es: Sector' I - minimtma 70 pc~'cemt of ~'oof area stnall be sloped, Sector' II - minimum of 70 pe~'cent of the roof a~'ea shall be sloped, Sector' III - minimum of 30 pel'cent of the ~'oof al'ea shall be sloped, and Sector' IV .- minimttm of 70 pe~'cent of the ~'oof area shall be sloped. An exception to this ~'eq[til'emel~t ai'e ~'oof al'eas designed fo~' htlman t~se stlch as decks, ga~'den a~'eas, patios, etc., which will mot be cotmted toxva~'ds flat ~'oof a~'ea. 1'2. Tine folloxving desigm elements shoc~ld be inco~po~'atcd i~nto inctividt~al strt~CtUl'es' Bt~ildino~ .Accents Towc~'s. silos, a~'ct~es, colt~mns, bosses, tiling, cloisters, colomnades, bt~ttresses, loggias, ma~'qttees, minarets, po~-tals, ~'eveals, quoins, cle~'estories, pilasters. Roof Types Ba~Toxv. dome. gable, hip, Flat. Roof ,A~ccents Cupolas, cornices, belfries, tmTets, 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. \Vindow Accents Plant boxes, shutters, balconies, decks, grates, canopies, awnings, recesses, embrasures, arches, lunettes. 13. Street level windov,'s slnall be provided for a minimum of 50 percent of the ground level wall area. f. Site I.andscaping and Screening All buffer landscaping, including boulevard landscaping, included in Phase I shall be installed when tile grading of the phase is completed. This may ,,,,'ell 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. 9 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 ,,,`,ells shall be included in pedestrian areas and plazas. 3. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited. . Undulating or angular berms 3' to 5' iT1 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. . Loading areas shall be screened fi'om public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. 6. Native species shall be incorporated into site landscaping, whenever possible. o Signage One project identification sign shall be permitted for the development at each end of Lake D~ive 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 heigtnt of 20 feet, which may be increased in height subject to city approval based on tlne design and scale of the sign, designed as a gateway to tine project shall be located at the north end of Main Street. Individual lots are not permitted lox,,, profile ground business sign. Within Sector EII, one sign for ttne 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 tile ground and the total sign area for the signs shall not exceed 64 square fee~. Pylon signs are prohibited. The sign treatmen[ is an element of tine architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material and height ttwougtnout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used througlnout. All signs require a separate sign pe~qnit. Wall business signs stnall comply xvittn tile city's sign ordinance roi' the central business clist~'ict for determination of ln'laximul-n sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on the '~st~'cet" front and prima~'y parking lot fi'o~t of each builcling. P~'ojecting signs are pem-~itted along Main Street and Lake Drive and along pedestrian passageways subject to the conditions below. Si~agc Pta~n and Rostriciions \Vail Simons The location of letters and logos shall bo restricted to the approved building sign bands, tt~e tops of xvtnictn stnall not extend greater ttnan 20 feet above tile ground. In Sector II, sign tneight may be increase based on tile criteria ttnat the signage is compatible with and complementary to the building architecture and design. Tine letters and logos shall be ~'estricted to a maximum of 30 inches in tneight. All individual letters and logos compi'ising eacln sign shall be constructed of wood, metal, or translucent facing. If illuminated, individual dimensional lc. tte~-s and logos comprising each sign mav be an), of the following: ~ a. Exposed neon/fiber optic, b. Open ctnannel wittn exposed neon, c. Channel Letters witln acrylic facing, d. Reverse channel letters (tnalo lighted), or c. Externally illuminated by separate ligtnting source. . 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. . Within Sector II, 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. Projectino~ Simas 1. The letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign area. 9 All wooden signs shall be sandblasted and letters shall be an integral part of the building's architecture. . 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 cstablishment of business. Corporate logos, emblems and similar identifying devices are pemnittcd 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. . Projecting signs st~all be stationary, may not be self-illuminated but may be lighted by surface mounted fixtures located on the sign or the adjacent facade. . Prqiecting signs shall be limited to one per tenant on street fl'ontage and pedestrian passageway and my not exceed six square feet. Letters shall have a maximum height of 12 inches. . Projecting signs shall be a minimum of eight feet above the sidewalk and shall not project more than six feet fi'om the building facade. . Plastic, plexi-glass, clear plex, or similar material projecting signs are prohibited unless used in conjunction with other decorative materials. . Projecting signs may be painted, prefinished, or utilize exposed metal. Any exposed metal shall be anodized aluminum, stainless steel, titanium, bronze, or other similar non- con'osive or OhO-oxidizing materials. Window Si mas Window signs shall not cover more than 25 percent of the window area in which they are located. 2. Window signs shall not use bright, garish, or neon paint, tape, chalk, or paper. Menu Si~ons . . . Shall be located at eye level adjacent to tenant entries and shall not exceed 4 feet in height. 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. Menu signs shall be limited to one per tenant and may not exceed 8 square feet. Festi ye Fla~s/B anners Flings and banners shall be permitted on approved standards attached to the building facade and on standards attached to pedestrian area lighting. Platstic Flags and banners are prohibited. 3. t~lags and banners shall be. constructed of fabric. . shall ~not co~ltain actx'ertisino for individual users, bt~sinesses, sevvices, or , t>~'oducts. 5. Pl:tgs and banners shall pro.loci from buiictings ix maximum of two feet. 6. Flags and banners shall have at maximum area of i0 square feet. . Flags and banners xvhicla are torn or excessively \x.'Ol'n shall be removed at the request of tile city. Buildin~o IDirectorv In nnulti-tenant buildings, one building directory sign may be permitted. The directory sign shall not exceed eight square feet. Pole Directory Si_on Pole directory signs consisting of single poles with individual nameplate type directional a~q'oxvs may be located within the development. Pc)lc directory si? shall not exceed 15 feet ill height. 10 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 . Lighting for the intehor 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. 9 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 tiao private areas. . 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. . 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 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. , A minimum of 75 percent of a building's parking shall be located to the "rear" of the structure and in underground garages. . 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 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. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 2002 Chairwoman Blackowiak called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Alison Blackowiak, LuAnn Sidney, Rich Slagle, Uli Sacchet, and Steven Lillehaug MEMBERS ABSENT: Bruce Feik and Craig Claybaugh CITY COUNCIL LIAISON: Mayor Jansen STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Colmnunity Development Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and Mak Sweidan, Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A FOUR-STORY BUILDING CONSISTING OF UNDERGROUND PARKING~ 19~000 SQUARE FEET OF STREET LEVEL COMMERCIAL AREA AND 2-3 STORIES WITH 54 APARTMENT UNITS AND A TWO-STORY~ 11,000 SQ. FT. OFFICE AND BANK BUILDING WITH DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW AND UNDERGROUND PARKING, VARIANCES FOR BUILDING MATERIALS, PARKING AND SIGNAGE ON 3.18 ACRES ZONED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ANI) LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LAKE DRIVE AND MAIN STREET, VOP I. LLC AND PEREGRINE CORPORATION. Public Present: Name Address Bob Savard Vemelle Clayton Mika Milo. AiA Colleen Cannon Margaret Mazur Rita Klauda Jeff Burzinski 8080 Marsh Drive 422 Santa Fe Circle 250 Prairie Center Drive. Eden Prairie 8110 Marsh Drive 8140 Marsh Drive 8130 Marsh Drive Chaska Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Blackowiak: Commissioners, questions of staff. Sidney: I'll start off Madam Chair. Blackowiak: Go ahead. Sidney: Bob. we talked a little bit about this, about why, well I guess I was wondering why decorative towers weren't included in the height calculations? Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Generous' Madam Chair, Commissioner. As specifically as part of this we wanted to have additional architectural detailing and we wanted them to provide these opportunities, bell towers, regular towers, minuets, you know and so we didn't feel that penalizing them for that we should, so right in the standards we put that those were excluded. Sidney: Okay. And then for heights, how is this going to compare to other building heights in the development? Will this become the focal point do y'ou believe? Generous: Well being ii1 tile center it will. It's at the high point of tile project and tile toxver's actually the tallest tower within the development. It has an elevation of 78 feet. St. Hubert's, tile top of their-steeple is at 63 feet. They have another additional 19 feet but that's just the cross element. There are other buildings in there at like 36 feet in the Bell Mortgage building. 26 V2 feet in the Culver's Restaurant so everything else is lower here and it sort of builds up to this center point of the project. Sidney: Very good. Other questions. Probably a big question here. On pages 8 arid 9 we have a table and I'm wondering if you could walk us through that because I know we did some horse trading i~ tem~s of square footages of various uses and how did we come to our balance as shown here? Generous' Beginning on page 8, we started out with what tile PUD standards said that the distribution of uses wot~ld be, and what we've t~'ied to do is walk through the different uses that have bee~ approved within the project. So the Lake Susan Apartment ~ad, let's start over. The comme~'ci'~l component is 165.640 square feet of space within tho entire N'qject. Tho office sec'vices was 9V.500. Residential units a~'e 322. and the institutional is 13~.000 square feet. And then fi'Olql that we begin to subtract things out so For the Lake Susan Apartments, it's 162 units that camo out. Bookoo Bikes was split into two uses. Tine commercial is approximately 5.000 squa~'e IX'et and th~ service was 6,000 square feet. Foss Swim School was a service. Moulihan's was comme~'cial with a very minimal sec'vice because of the office space in that. Culver's was all comme~'cial. Building 4. which is the Bell Mortgage building, that was split 50/50 between services and comme~'cial. Building 17, which has approval but is not constructed south of Hubert's. They have, that's a 2 story office building. So we have to take that out so 30,000 squa~'e feet. AmericInn has 44,000 square feet of commercial and because of their offices we allocate about 1.500 square feet for the services. In the futu~'e they have approval for expansion and so we had to allocate that square footages. P~'esbyterian Homes on the Lake Street side,, they have 9,000 square feet of commercial office space that will be built into the project. Plus for senior' housing we don't count them the same as regular apartments. For an independent living u~it it was counted as half an apam~nent per unit and for the assisted living I believe it was a third of apartment pe~' unit so while we have, it shows 69 in here. There were a total of about, I believe it's 160, 31, 61. 161 units that were. And then when you get down to the bottom we have the bank building which is this project and the retail building C which is this project. Took up the 19,000 square feet of commercial and then the bank was 11,000 square feet of office. Retail Building E is a potential future building in there so we allocated those spaces. I think I double counted that one though. C-1 is a future building. Oh, Retail Building E would be the building to the west of this site. It's north of the Presbyterian Homes between this site and Bookoo Bikes. And then xve have Retail Building G which would be on the southeast comer of Main Street and Lake D~'ix'e which would be a future one. And then St. Hubert's expansion and so doing all the calculations they actually have, well they're over on residential if they do the 40 additional units in another building but they have more than 5.600 square feet of commercial space so that could be reallocated. And so this project is still within the parameters of the overall development. Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Sidney: Okay. And it's driven by what, I seem to understand pretty much traffic isn't it? Generous: Correct. That's how we keep things balanced. Aanenson: Trips. Generous: Trip generation rates for the different uses. Sidney: So so far we're okay. Generous: Right. Sidney: Good. Blackowiak: Okay. Ail); other questions for you? Sidney: No. Blackowiak: Rich. Slagle: Just a couple. Bob on page 2. first para~aph at the end you say it should be noted that due to building code requirements separation fi'om the two buildings may be increased. This will increase the amount of open area in this area on the north. Would there be Inerit to considering that additional open area if that does happen to be additional parking? Generous: Chair. Commissioners. Tile separation we're talking about is just between these two buildings. And it's just where the property line is. I don't know that we're going to gain enough space to create another. 'because we'd take out this and this is protection for tile drive through and the last parking stall. Aanenson: Excuse me. I think tile other thing we're trying to accomplish there is to interject some of those public spaces, and we thought this was a great opportunity to provide that public space where you've got that conm'~el'cial in the first floor. If you're waiting for someone. Slagle: Okay. Same page. You talk about affordable living. Developer's going to work with staff. I'm just curious. What is the rent as affordable unit for a loft? You listed two of them. I know ifs inbetween. I'ln just curious. Any idea? Generous: That's S621 for all efficiency. S741 for a one bedroom per inonth. Slagle: And if you don't know it. Aanenson: That's it. Generous: Then it goes up fOl' two bedrooms but I don't know that... Slagle: Okay. And then we had talked earlier today about the par'king. Obviously it's as you mentioned, it's so~x of a joint effort among all of the tenants for parking. My only question is, once Culver's went up I did hear from some business owners in the unit that has Starbuck's and what not. concerned about parking. And I'll ask this of the applicant as well but I mean what Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 happens as time goes on if parking becomes more of a concern? Is that something that we'll address with the developer? Aanenson: Yep. Slagle: Okay. Oel,lerous: But in this instance, as this develops we'll get more parking on that promenade so that they can expand that area, and we have, hopefully there's enough complimentary uses so peak hour shift, like tile coffee shop is earlier and then you have tile lunch crowd and then with the bank building going in, if we had some evening users, they would have that potential space. Slagle: And then if you can go to that schelnatic you had. Yeah, right there. As you look at that going sort of to the northeast Bob. that would be tile lanes of drive through, where it says ATM right in thlere. What would you project to be tho normal traffic pattern for someone coming it.l? Generous' I believe they'd come off of Lake Drive East ill here and back out. And then either back out to Lake Drive or into tile prQject. Slagle:. Okay. ©onerous: Depending on you know if they're going. Okay. that's all. Sictnev: Then a £ollow-up question to Rich's question about parking, h,l this development, is it possible to put a ramp ill. parking l'alllp iI,l at 5el-ne other time? Aanenso~q: If tile>, felt riley needed it. sure. Sidney' There's ample room or a spot that would be amenable to that? I _ouess I'm just thinkino ahead. ~ ' ~- ~;.lllOI1SOl,l' ll,l a concol,ltrate¢l ©enerous: Well there's room that they can cio tlmt. it's just a design issue. Right now this is a ramp. Startin,-,= of a ramp. Sidney- Starting of a ramp. Aanenson' Right, underground parking. Blackowiak: Okay, thanks. Lillehmug' I have a follow-up question with tile traffic going to tile drive through oil tile bank there. Il' you look at the schematic there. \Vhlere the ATM potentially would be, I would assume the :\TM would be on tile outer southerly island there. Gall'ICl'eLis: That's CO1TeCt. Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Lillehaug: Measuring that it would probably only provide for stacking of two cars. Typically at an ATM there's sometimes more than a couple of cars stacked in there, so I would see a potential for cars to be stacking maybe 3 or 4 and then they'd be through the intersection there. And I see that kind of as problematic and I'm wondering, you indicated that the route would be typically off of Lake Drive East going over the parking deck and then to the drive throUgh. Would that be considered to be limited to one way or is it intended to be a through in both directions? Generous: The intent is for two way operation on that driveway. Yeah, it'd be tough to make the turn back to come out. Liilehaug: i think the rest of my questions I'I1 address to the applicant. Blackowiak: Okay. Uli? Sacchet: Yeah, I have some questions. My first question is the inside of the U shaped building. Is that all tile same color and surface? Generous: On tile interior? Sacchet: On the drawing it's on tile east elevation you've got a little bit of... The whole thing is kind of that beigest and it's all tile same? Generous: It looked to me like there was brick and then the center part was tile EFIS but I'll have tile architect. Sacchet: I can address it with the applicant. While you're there with this picture, I'm wondering whether you are aware. There are two blank squares on top of the roof. Do you know what they arc? Or is this an applicant question probably too. Generous: That's tile area behind tile roof. You're seeing a back view. Sacchet: That's not going to be white though. Well we'll address, we'll get some input there. In terms of. just to be really clear since we went through quite a merry-go-round about tile drive through with Culver's, a drive through bank is SOlnething totally different. Generous: Tile design standards specifically address for a restaurant. Sacchet: And so a drive through here is alright then, okay. Generous: Yes. Sacchet: Do we know what's going to happen on Site 2? Tile site between the bank, northeast fi'om there? Generous: This area? There's a potential for about 24,000 square feet of building. We've had some preliminary discussions with the daycare. I've also talked to retail users so I'm not sure what's going to come out of that yet. Sacchet: So we don't know ),et, okay. And then with the EFIS I'd like to clarify also. I was also a little confused by the staff report. Tile staff report says that the commercial residential building represents it's 50 percent of EFIS and I wonder whether that was a typo. Is it 50 percent? Planning Comlnission Meeting -September 1'7, 2002 Generous' Oil tile total residential building. Sacchet: So it is 30 percent on tile bank and 50 percent on tile commercial residential? Getlerous: Yes. Sacchet: Okay. Then my question is, why is there only a condition on I think the bank building and not tiao commercial? Generous' Because residential's not covered by tile design standards fei' tile EFIS. Solely commercial. Sacchet: \Ve can limit it on tile bank but we can't limit it on tile other one? GeneI'ous: Correct. Sacchet: Okay. Generous' And so if you look at tile analysis ftn'ther. I looked at just the first level of that commet'cial space in that building and tile other one came to 6 percent of that elevation that's comme~-cial. Sacchet' Okay. So in other' wo~'cls v,'e can l'est~'ict it on tho bank building but x,,~e can't restrict it the other one. Gcl'~cI'OUS' Teah. without at-nendin~ the o~'dinance COlTeCt. Sacchet: IBecause I didn't see exactly how that fit together. Tou only touched on tile undergl-ound parking and you made that tile ha~'dship ISnding fei' tile variance. That the hardship is because there are two 90 degree angles. Nlost buildings have 90 degt'ee angles. How's that a ha~'dship'? (}ene~'ous: For providing tile two. because they can't efficiently lav out the parking. If they kept this a st~'aight building, they could make it. Sacchet: Oh because it's a U shape. ©enel'ous: Yeah, tile>, lose it on the corners where they could put those extra spaces in. Sacchet' Okay. I see your thinking. Thank you. I believe that's my questions. Yes. Thank you. Blackowiak: Thank you. I just have a couple questions. To follow-up on Uli's on tile EFIS. I was looking in my design standards book and I don't see mention of EFIS at all really. ©onerous' Because that's the COmlnercial-il~dustrial-institutional portion of tile city code. that was adopted last July. \Vhich is an overlay on everything in tile community. t31ackowiak: Okay. I'm looking at this Villages. Generous: Yes. Not part of that. It's in addition to that they have to meet these standards. Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Blackowiak: Okay. Generous: Yes, I reviewed it against both the Villages standards and those standards for the commercial portion. Blackowiak: Okay. Secondly we talked about this is in Sector I and in building height it does not say that Sector I is exclusive of steeples and bell towers. It only makes that distinction in Sector III. So has there been any change to the design standards as of, mine are dated August 21st. August 13, 2001. Generous: The intent was that we don't, the steeples and belfries and those architectural detailing that they're putting up on top aren't supposed to be, they're not supposed to be penalized for that. Blackowiak: Okay. Well I was just curious because it was called out specifically in Sector III. It says maximum building height shall be for example Sector III, three stories, 40 feet exclusive of steeples and bell towers. Genei'ous: But there's a period inbetween there. Building. Height limitations are exclusive of steeples, towers and other architectural roof accents. Blackowiak: Okay where are you? What? Generous: At the bottom of, the Design Standards D-3. Blackowiak: D-3. Okay, that's not what mine says. That's why I'm asking if I have the latest iteration because mine says August 13. o.2001. Then it talks about maximum building height shall be Sectol' I. It says three stories. Generous: No, it's amended November 26. ,,\anenson: 26~'. 2001. Blackowiak: Okay, so 1 don't have the most cun-ent one. Generous: It should be attached to the report. Blackowiak: Okay. Well I was just looking in my book. That's why I was. Okay, so it was re- re-amended. Okay. Aanenson: One. two, three. Three amendments. Blackowiak: Yes, ah'ight. So I want to go back. Aanenson: Actually page 4. Blackowiak: Yeah, because it was page 4 in the other one. Gene~'ous: Right. So it's the same page but it was under D-3. Blackowiak: Okay. So that's what was amended. Building and height limitations are exclusive. Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 2002 Generous: And that's also where we came up with tile street level elevations had to be primarily office retail. Blackowiak: Okay. Yeah, I don't have that. Actually Exhibit C. So that would be just tile total, is Exhibit C the total amendments? G~gneroLis: Yes. Blackowiak: Okay. I can just add that so I don't need another one. Okay. That answers that question. Access. Can you show ine tile accesses off Lake Drive East'? I think I'm missing something here. Two existing accesses. We're talking about the one across from Foss Swim School. Oh. you're talking that one too. And then your new one is there? Aanenson: Yeah. Blackowiak: Okay, is tile southwestern most I guess of that. Okay. Have we looked into any xestrictions on right-in/right-out or anything, or is that full access on that one as well? They're full access to the best of my knowledge. I31ackowiak: So all three are gt~ll access'? Okay. Alrighty, then I'1t just save l-l~y other ctuestions for tho applicant. Another question Uli? Sacchct: ¥cspleaseNladamChaii-. Iflmay. 'I'hei'e's a condition to revise the grade going into tile unde~'guound parking to 3 to 1. In the plan it just says 10 percent. Iqow do tile two compare? the side. Sacchet: Oll that' s the slope. Gcrlel'OLlS: ¥CS. Sacchet: Okay. So tile ramp is still l() percent. It's the side cannot be more than3to 1. Right. Sacchct: Alright, thank you. That's very clear. Blackowiak: Okay. Would tile applicant or their designee like to make a presentation? If so, please come to tile podium. State your name and address for tile record. Vernclle Clayton: Thank you Madam Chairman. My name is Vernelle Clayton. I live at 422 Santa Fe Circle, and I'm here just for a bit of ail overview for both of tile projects and then others will speak to more specific questions. Just going through, what I like to do is let you know up front where we might disagree with tile condition and for tile most part we're comfortable with tile conditions. We think we understand them and we're going to work to comply with them. We do suppo~'t staff's reconlmendation that we have the variance for tile parking. I've talked a bit with Bob about that and I've done some calls to apartment managers and for tile n'lost part I think I don't need to go through it again because I heard tile same thing as Bob did, and it really will be the enforcement and any of the issues that could occur will be a management issue perhaps more Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 than a city issue here because the, both the streets and the parking lots are private. So whereas there might be a reason for the ordinance in that you don't want, we want to keep people off the city streets. Here it's private streets and any issues with snowplowing and all that sort of thing will be a management issue. I just thought I would add that perspective. We do want to go on record as Village on the Ponds folks in supporting a variance for the bank, both on their signs and their use of EFIS. Though this afternoon we did have an analysis done on the exact percentage of EFIS done by the designer and it turns out, and Mika will talk to this a bit more, that they are at 16 percent and so with it being at 16 percent, I guess we'd like to have a variance for 16 percent as opposed to 15. Or you ~know, maybe it could be a bit higher than that in case there's a miscalculation. But I was all prepared and so was Mika to talk to you a lot about the benefits of EFIS and I guess, both Mika and, or neither nor I, nor Jeff who's bank it is, really understand what the rationale was for limiting EFIS in the first place and we don't know how it came about that 15 percent was the number that was used. And I was going to show you, and I will because we'll have inore discussion. This is a building that is ahnost all EFIS. It has some brick around the bottom and it's a building that folks in Chanhassen believe, at least tell me, that they believe it's one of the nicer buildings in town. You mentioned earlier that, or you discussed briefly that the design standards for Village on the Ponds do not limit the use of EFIS. We specifically didn't limit the use by percentage or by elimination of most building materials because it was our goal to have a variety of materials there to create a more interesting project. And this ordinance did come along after our standards were established. We do recognize that we're bound by anything that does come along later, but just historically it was our hope to have a variety of materials. With that I think that I will let Mika talk about it a bit more and he can explain the calculations and so forth. As to the signs, we really would like to have a variance for these two sign locations that are problematic based on the requirement of the PUD. From one perspective it's a bit arbitrary in that we have the sectors established. In Sector II, which is the sector that runs kind of along the highway, not necessarily in a straight line but that's approximately along highxvay. Higher signs than 20 feet are permitted and there's the additional language that says provided it fits with. it's kind of an integral part of the architecture, and so we have permitted signs in towers at Village on the Ponds. It is of great value to folks along the line of visibility from 5 to have a sign that can be seen, and that's what the bank's hope is. That they'd have a sign that could be seen and read fi'om Highway 5. That goes to our hope to have a sign at the fi'ont. Personally I feel that towers look better if they have a sign in it, if they're designed such that it looks like that was what was intended rather than a contrived kind of design feature that looks exactly like a contrived design feature. With respect to the sign that was proposed at the rear of the building. This one is intended to be somewhat of a directional sign in that it's fairly important as people are driving along Lake Drive, that they know where they should be going if they're going to the drive up. It's been done as a part of the design of the building and at the end you'll probably hear this explained much better by Mika. Or Jeff. Also, it helps take away from noticing that this is a drive up. An alternative would be that there is a need for some signage on this side, a directional to make this band bigger...but then we're drawing attention to... So those are a couple of our reasons for wanting to see if you could give us a variance. Which I think we have worked out the space issue between the two bnildings. We're adding only 3 more feet and that will provide the 5 feet necessary for the construction, but not enough for parking but really nice space for outdoor eating if we can manage to get the right tenant adjacent to that same space. What other questions did you have that you'd like to ask me? Blackowiak: Are you ready for questions now? Vernelle Clayton: I'm ready roi' questions but if you'd like to hear from Mika first and see if he answers then-t. I'll come back. Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 2002 Blackowiak: Okay, tvell why don't we hear the entire presentation and then we'll take questions at tile end. Vernelle Clayton: Okay, very good. I will just say that this is Mika Milo. We almost missed hiln. If we hadn't been delayed for 2 weeks, he was in Europe pieing up his 95 year old mother who takes an annual trip back home every year so Mika, if that says anything about you, we don't see you often but we'll probably see you fora long time. Mika Milo: My name is Mika Milo. I'm an architect and principle with Milo Architecture Group with offices both in San Diego and also here in Midwest area. My address is at 1412 Cowling Drive, 207 at St Paul, Minnesota, 55108. It's pleasure for me to be here for you, for tile Planning Commissioner to answer any question and present this project. Whatever questions you have on that. I really feel that this is most significant probably project fi'om tile Villages that we have conceptualize and worked with you, with the City of Chanhassen and the planning staff for years so to speak and conceptual...to have this character. We feel this building should be reflected more, reflecting most...and this project is I believe will get...and that was meant to accomplish all these goals that we have set at that time 5 or 6 years ago wt~,en Chanhassen approved that project and we look forward to a really...completion of that project as long as...once we have that village in a year or two hopefully...establish the core for the village...I think the project will really start, to shape up and be really a very good addition and arnenity for the city as well. Re~oardina that particular project, I understand that two issues have been mostly getting the attention as well as have been the aspect of the variance denial which is tile signage above 40 feet. as well as the EFIS 15 percent of commercial industrial portion of the building, which... smaller portion than we're .... As far as the EFIS, I would like to just join Vernelle and say that we don't really understand. We have not been part of that whole process here in Chanhassen and therefore we were, Bob said that last Jul5, has been on book... I can only tell with my 30 plus ycal's o~' experience as architect, working in various regions in the world, not just in the United States. Both in Europe and here in Minnesota and California, that EFIS has been a very good material for us architects and developers to use and builders, and has greatly improved. It has some difficult...material about 10 years ago in it's infancy, 10-15 years ago, had some difficulties and therefore I could imagine that maybe 10 years ago somebody raised some concerns about that's really not very good quality...especially in the climate that we have here. Harsh climate. But it has greatly improved. Greatly and that project is as safe as stucco or any other material I would sa5' if that is done properly in the context of...good job according to specifications and we do as architects...and make sure that everything is covered and that it's not going to fade and I can say that we have increasingly worked with EFIS very successfully and there was no...no problem. 'As far as the appearance, we prefer it more than stucco. It looks like stucco but it is actually a hard, it's a better looking product than stucco. It has some advantages. First of all from outside it is only a positive advantage of EFIS versus stucco. As far as the building material and the technology of it, there is certainly different process. But from outside is faced with the same thing...Much more precise for reveals and profiles. Everything is really done meticulously nice, especially... And also EFIS does not crack like stucco does, especially in this climate... over the years cracks and chips and so on. EFIS has also a problem because it has some portion of that is behind, the under layment is having some kind of styrofoam type of very dense styrofoam that is a little bit portion of the building just next to tile ground or so, it can be by strong impact. If you punch...down below on the sidewalk. But up above...there is, no one is pushing it. Plus EFIS has also improved that as well. We are now much stronger. It forces... I don't want to give too much, take too much time on that because I'm just saying that EFIS has been shown as really I think it's a great material to work with and good technique to do it and we would like that we have the freedom to use them on these buildings as one of the materials and like Bob said, we have a lot of naaterials. A lot of materials. A lot of varieties...actually 10 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 expensive materials that we are using on this buildings and EFIS is also more expensive than stucco. We are talking here if stucco was let's say $14.00 per square foot and EFIS is like $17.00. It's like $3.00-$4.00 more so it's a higher quality finish really and professional...finishes that are pre-made and pre-mixed rather than stucco is a very subject to variation. So all together I'm saying that we would really appreciate that we have the opportunity to use EFIS here...making that 50 percent of residential and 50 percent of the bank building, but if that has to really be, we would not be happy about that and I don't know that's up to the owner of how they... I don't see really any reason. I would like...discuss with anybody another forum or something here to see if you have an expert at the table and discuss why we have... Regarding the bank percentage, the city percentage, we calculated it is, we are 16 percent right now with EFIS where you see it here on the plan. That is basically...the upper portion of the bank building, down to the entire first floor is... So what you see here is the upper part of the building is going to be EFIS and over here, the upper part of that building will be EFIS as well. Now, we are practically at tile level of what is approval anyway, 15 percent. It's only 1 percent we are talking about. I can achieve that 1 percent by just simply changing something...the tower portion here. ...instead of EFIS we use another material... If I just go that, it will be fine... The variance doesn't do a lot of really harm here. I mean denial...we can easily achieve the 1 percent, this is not an issue really and but I would like that we have...a little more freedom in that we don't have to change it because I think it's exactly nice the way we have that tower with all the different colors... EFIS and I will be glad to... Regarding signage, the signage that we are talking about is the signage for the bank and one is facing the Lake Drive, southeast. South and southeast portion. I would like to show also on the... You see the signage is here facing the Lake Drive here. So that signage, this signage here is right here on that space. And it's about 2 V2, it's about 150 feet away from tile Lake Drive East. So, and they're building...along here and if they put the signage down below here, let's say here at 20 feet, then I don't think really, honestly I think that people will not see and will not recognize that here is a bank and like Vernelle said, it also gives a good, it drives tile attention up to the building rather than to the canopy here. The drive through canopy and secondly it is also a good way...for the people to know first time coming where they're going and where the building is a bank...rather than going around to the parking lot and trying to find a way and read the signage is the lower level and so on so I think it's very functional. In this particular case...is really not pedestrian friendly. It's a plain parking...so that's what people are fi~ced, we are... So therefore I think there's also a problem to have the signage and it's more making...rather than pedestrian level type...just look at these facades right here. If you take the signage off, I think that would aesthetically would be less desirable because somehoxv the...face has been made and it receives some attention for signage. If I take the signage out, I don't know what, maybe I don't even need to do that. I can probably not do that and just do that...roof all across. Have sloped roof or I think that the building would lose the variety of interest if I do that. See the whole thing by going straight up with the...but to have variety and expression of the building and building...so I think this would be aesthetically I think it will be our mistake that... Regarding the other sign...northwest and north...just that comer. We are tal 'king about this corner, that's where the tower is. You see the tower is facing actually...here and the pond and so the tower's significance is more like the main entrance to the room. Here is the main entrance. Here's the focus of that building and we always all along had here the tower in the approval of the previous concept of the Villages...and so that tower is very fulfilling that function perfectly according to how the Villages is going to be. The only thing is that that tower is I think very, very...and interesting to including when we...name of the bank...and down below it is...a wall goes here and you see also on the other tower right here, is also the same...background so we have that each of on every tower it is a nice...green sheet metal roof so the whole thing is very plain at the...and I think really beneficial to keep that, just the logo in that segment, and also that logo is not much higher than the 20 feet. We're talking here maybe 23, 24 feet for the logo. The upper portion here of the tower...same thing. I think that way from the freeway there will be also 11 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 some understanding that here is the bank building rather than down below from the...I think you wilt not be able to read this...signage band, especially... And I think it's very modestly implanted here. That it's not much of that. I would like also to say that the project that your planning staff and Kate pointed to us is an excellent project here... Vernelle Clayton: Golden Valley and Winnetka. Mika Milo: In Golden Valley. We have also taken that into consideration. Not copying or anything but we felt that this is really a project that really shows a lot of variety in the signs and the signs are not so stiff, just one in one band... They go up and down and give a lot of character to that and giving some of the tower with that and so in our case we are not doing that much of signage and like oil this project, we are much more restrictive but we just projected one kind to have something very significant to symbolize... I think there is more variety, interest to the project and I would really, I think it would...advantage to have that approval for that so that's my EFIS and signage... Blackowiak: Thank you. Mika Milo: Thank you and go back to space unless thel'e are any question or. t3lackowiak' Sure, that would be great. Vc~-~elIo Clayton: Madam Chair, if you would I'd like to int~'oduce Jeff t3tu'zinski. He's tile chief pe~'son with thc bank. Al'e you P~'esident or CEO o~' both? JeffBu~'zinski: Sure. I wash windows and vacuum. I'mJeffBui-zinski. I live in 3350 Julian D~'ive in C'haska. Minnesota. Tile most northerly border of Chaska. just outside Chanhassen and it's my pleasu~'e to finally be a part hopefully of Chanhassen. I've been tt'ying to get he~'e with the ba~k since 1992 in one way or another. As a head of another financial institution and actually was tmsuccessful bidder for the property at tile Americana Bank, where it now sits and as my wife and I have driven by there many times and said, please buy that building for me and she said she can't. She teaches 6th. 7t~ and 8th grade religion at St. Hubert's. Not quite in her budget so. I have been involved in the Chanhassen con-m~unity since 1992. In addition to being a member of St. Hubert's, I'm also a trustee of St. Hubert s. Also oil the Board of Directors of Chan Catholic Housing which is a joint venture between St. Hubert's Catholic Elder Care and Presbyterian Homes. I'm also on the Knights of Columbus with Chanhasscn so we've been veD, involved in Chan. It just seems so logical that we might have a community bank here, and I tell you that just to try to separate us fi'om maybe other financial institutions which have located branches here and maybe rhetorically tell you how much they're looking forward to being involved in Chanhassen, but we have been involved in Chanhassen and looking forward to getting across Highway 5 and being more involved with businesses in the city and community. Peregrine Corporation, just very briefly. I don't 1,mow anything about EFIS or signage or things like that so I won't bore you with that but we started Peregrine Corporation in 1999 and it was designed principally to owned community banks. We formed Community Bank Chaska in February of 2000, and actually opened up out of a trailer and after 2 V2 years we're about 42 V2 million dollars in assets which makes us the second largest bank in Chaska. And we're basically we're owned by the community. Peregrine Coqooration is owned bv members of the Chaska community as well as members of Chanhassen community, and I haw to tell you with 33 shareholders currently we have ove~' 70 interested, or Chanhassen residents that are interested in investing in Peregrine Corpo~'ation and being a part of tis which further commits us to investing in Chanhassen. The names like Al Klingelhutz and Steve Burke and Gary Brown and Pat Minger may be names i,-) Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 familiar to you. They're also part of Peregrine so it's my pleasure to be here. I understand the difficulty relative to the variances. I also understand your role as leaders and if there's a way to administer, continue to administer consistently and fairly to the rest of your community by granting us this variance it'd be very much appreciated so thank you. Blackowiak: Conunissioners. Vernelle, xvhy don't you come on up to the microphone and you can sort of field the questions and call up people as y9u feel necessary. I'll start with you Rich. Any questions of the applicant? Slagle: No questions. Blackowiak: Uli, I know you had a couple I think. Sacchet: Yes, I have a few questions. First of all the question of the inside of the U. The color and materials, is it all the same? Vernelle Clayton: I only know what I see also, but it does appear that this list, back part is all the same color. Is that your intent Mika? Mika Milo: Yes. That is tile part of tile building that will be the least seen. It is way back and almost like... We did not feel that because we have been placing the money where people can see the buildings. We really have taken...details and expensive appearances really but we feel at least here where we are very .back, almost nobody sees, still within decent. You go about... middle portion but we felt like we can at least... Blackowiak: Okay, could I get you to come up to tile microphone. Yeah, then we can get 3'our answers on tape. Thank you. Sacchet: So the material on that interior, is it a stucco or EFIS? Mika Milo: That's meant to be EFIS. Sacchet: That's EFIS In there? Okay. Okay. And then those two white squares. Can'you explain those two white squares on the roof for me please? Mika Milo: Okay. Yeah, that is, as we peaked roofs, tile corners where the building turns. You see this corner and this corner. The roofs are coming in such a fashion that we are leaving that area fiat roof to hide the conflict. So this is behind that would come up here. But it happened that fi'om these end the roof is not going all the way up so you can see that wall, but this is only on tile elevation. I don't think anybody will see that high or on the fourth floor above the parapets some difference in the height. Sacchet: So it's basically a wall? Mika Milo: Behind... Sacchet: And it's basically a wall? Mika Milo: Yeah, it's a wall and it's in the n-fiddle of tile building. The building is 65-70 feet wide and this is in tile middle and...nobody will see that. We can put some color to it. I don't 13 Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 2002 think it's meant to really be white. I think we should put the same colors that we are putting on this building. Sacchet: Right. That's what. Mika Milo: ...and you are right, there are... Sacchet: Because I couldn't figure out why it seemed like blank white so I figured what is it. Mika Milo: I think that by ndstake in our printer and computer did not.., in the color and I appreciate that coinme~lt. I will make some color there. Sacchet: It's definitely visible. Mika Milo: I appreciate that. I will make a note. Sacchet' Okay. And then I wanted to ask Vernelle. we don't know yet what happens on the Lot 2. I mean the part of that piece. VernelleClayton. Tou mean the not a part? I¢lackowiak: Yeah. the not part. Sacchet: The notpa~x. The othe~- blank spot. X'emelleClavton: AsBobsaid. and several people have come in . . , not the~.e yet Sacclqet- ,&nd then one mo~'e question. Tou have 54 apamnents. Tou have 73 unde~'t~'ound pa~'kin~ spots. Are these parking spots goin~ to be like ~llost[>' ~oinff with apzn'tments or do have any vision how that's going to work there? ~ ¢ Veme]]e Clayton: They're strictly for the apa~'tments. gacchet: Primarily for the apartments. Vemelle Clayton' Exclusively. Sacchet: Exclusively for apartments. VernelIe Clayton: Right. Sacchet: So some apartments may have more than one. Okay, that answers my questions. Thank you. gIackowiak: Okay. thank you. Steve. any questions of the applicant? Lillehaug: I have a couple questions with the sign. On the no~h and east sides, you indicate you'd like to put a bank s~naze s~gn way up on the tower. A i%o halfway up and then a bank si~n about 15 for that dso. What actually would that logo be? Not specific words but would it be a bank 1o~o there? 14 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Vernelle Clayton: Have you established a logo? JeffBurzinski: We do have a logo. It's a CB which means Community Bank. Lillehaug: Okay. And then what I'm looking at is on the tower on the residential portion, there wouldn't be a logo there but it would be accented with a red color? Jeff Burzinski: That is no logo... Vernelle Clayton: Just a design feature. Mika Milo: We did not determine exactly what that would be. Either it would be maybe a metal or metal piece or maybe stucco or something, but in any case you see it's nice to have something here as a focal point so here is the logo is CB. It's a very simple... Lillehaug: So to follow up on that though. If that logo were absent, it would still match what was ou the residential portion. Mika Milo: We would still do something in that, yes. Lillehaug: Okay. And could you also comment on, I questioned earlier the traffic flow to the drive through. Do you see any specific concerns with that or would you consider possibly looking at limiting that to a one way rather than two direction flow? Vernelle Clayton: Typically what we like to do in situations like this, in an3' development is live with it a little and see if we actually have an issue. We did that a lot in the Market Square project and then the city and we would, I'm son'y. Would re-evaluate it. It would be somewhat problematic to have. are' you talking about this being a one way? Lillehaug: Yes. Vernelle Clayton: I think it would be a detriment to. or a disadvantage to the retailers to have one way traffic there. Kate, were you going to. Aanenson: \Vell I was just going to sa3'. We looked at that too because that was, when we first inet, that was our first, you know how is the bank going to fall looking at that. Anybody going through the bank drive through has to make a one way movement so, because to go through the drive through you can't come back out so the people that it's inhibitingis the people that want to go into the back of the retail, or the workers at the retail or somebody visiting the apartments. That's what's back there, so we didn't want to impede on that space. I think our preference would be to keep it two way. I think people are going to find out the times that it's resistant to go through. Your lunch hour on Friday, probably not the best time to try to sneak to the bank, so we looked at SOlne of that. And hopefully some of that can also be accomplished through parking and going in. Or people in that area using the services too. Vernelle Clayton: We did make, the staff suggested we make a couple changes here on this part to make things flow a little better. Keep my hands off that thing. So we've done that. Aanenson: We did ask for some changes. We spent a lot of time working on that circulation. 15 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Lillehaug: Okay. I have a couple other specific questions. One would be north of the Promenade, what is called Promenade. It's a drive aisle I guess in the parking lot. One of your plans show a sidewalk being constructed there. It's inbetween the pond and the par-king lot. In that area. Tile plan that we're looking at there shows a parking lot being constructed. Some other site plans in our packet don't show a sidewalk being constructed. Is that part of the overall plan or part of this plan? Because a portion of it is on, I'm not too clear where the property lines are but it appears that it's on this property that we're specifically talking about. Vemelle Clayton: You will get a plat that shows where tile property lines will be and the intent is to make Pond Promenade in that area an outlet, just as the other streets are. So it xvon't be on this property. It will be it's own. We haven't been showing sidewalks on that on our master plan, have we on the north side? We have? Okay. Well, we're bound b,/tile overall plan as it was originally approved and we're really dealing with, from here over tonight for this site plan. But, and I don't know how you want to deal with that. We already have approval that says that we have to i0ut that in. Aanenson: Right. But I guess our position would be the nexus might be with this project. ©enerous' \Voll with the platting of this addition we would require that connection be made. Clayton: Yes. I think that makes sense. :\anensol~: Okay. Lillohatlg: Okay .,As long as I'm kind of on shaky ffi'ound here. how about that. it's called Shore Point ~cluare. Clearly that seems to be on an outlet, not part of tlni.q property. Clayton' Right. That's pa~'t of Outlet A. I think. It's at the end of Ocltlot ~\. which is a Lillchau,g: Okay. So you wouldn't intend on repairing any real u~Iv settlement in that area that really draws fi'om the whole area? Clayton' You do~'t like the natural'? Lillehau(3: \,e re talking about trying to make this as best as we can and 10 feet away there' s some real... \:ernelle Clayton: You're absolutely right. \\;e are, and we've been working oil tile north end of Main Street. it's now, it used to be Pier Point and we are not having a pier there so now, what did you call it now? Pond Point or, anyhow. We're working on that and the irrigation. I rnet with the irrigation guy just today. We put in all the pavers and are putting in the i~Tigation so that next spring we can do plantings ill there. We will probably just seed the edge this fall, but then dig up some of the seed and put in the plantings on sort of steps and along the concrete. I guess we don't have anything that really shows it here. And then I am, as a part of that. I kind of wanted to make a little progress out there and then come into staff and say look, here's what we're planning to do. Here's what we've done and what would you permit us to do about that reed grass, because it's excessive. I mean it's just, it blocks the view of the rest of tile water and so We have to within tile constraints and what can be done and still be fair to tile environment, we have to do somethin~ with that. ' 16 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Lillehaug: Okay. That's probably about enough from me. Blackowiak: Okay. Alright, thank you. Sidney: One more question? Blackowiak: Sure, go ahead. Sidney: Question of the applicant and staff. I'm still confused about EFIS calculations. Are we in concmTence with the calculations? Generous: I did a quick calculation. I took the 10 foot band and multiplied it by the length. He probably was able to do more detailed, taking out the windows where it jumps up and down so it could be less. Mika Milo: ...probably have more than...oil this building? Generous: My calculation was based on a 10 foot band around the entire thing. Mika Milo: Yeah, ilo. No, we have a precise calculation done by computer. Generous: \Vhich is better than me. Blackowiak: Oil come on now. Mika Milo: It's 16 percent including that where tile signage will be and these...I guess when we put the signage on... We are talking about here is tile exact number. Here is the computer saying that we have on this building, on the bank building we have total of 12.200 square feet total of tile surface of the sign. Out of that, 2,000 is EFIS. So there... Sidney: Does staff agree with that? You wouldn't have the information? Vernelle Clayton: We can get staff together with...of the calculations. Blackowiak: That's a applicant will work with staff. Alrighty. Seeing no more questions fl'onl commissioners, this item is open for a public hearing and I will open this item so anybody wishing to speak, please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. Rita Klauda: Good evening. My name is Rita Klauda, K-l-a-u-d-a. I live at 8130 Marsh Drive and I would be a neighbor to this proposed development. My issues are two fold this evening. The first one is traffic. I am very concerned about tile development and what that will do to the increased traffic from our neighborhood and around our area. I understand retail needs to go in there and, but with tile increase of apartments, people coming and going. Right now traffic is, there's all kinds of people speed. Numerous times tt-u-ough that area I've seen people slow down at tile 4 way stop, but they absolutely do not stop. They just keep right on going. They pick up speed. They come around the comer by Foss, and there's been many a times where I' ve had to literally pull over in my van with my children because people are in tile middle of the road because they're coming around the curve too fast. Our neighbors who live up on Grandview, several times, their children get off the bus stop right there. Several times my neighbor has had to literally stand in the middle of tile road waving her hands even though the bus, the lights are flashing, the stop arm is out. so people don't run her children down when they're getting off the 17 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 9002 bus. And so right now the traffic is fast and there's a lot of it. Wlnen we come off of Lake Drive by the Citgo, by the Starbucks, we wait and we wait and we wait and we wait to make a turn onto that road some days because the traffic, even now without this development, there's just a lot of people who cut through there. I just, I don't know what this is going to do and I don't ~low what the answer is but I just want to state ttnat I am very concerned about the increased level of traffic it's going to put at the corner and around my neighborhood. The second part of my issue with this development is, is if the apartments and fine height of the apartments. We live down a few houses. Tlnis spring my husband and I, we wanted to build a three season porch and a deck on the back of our home. Right now we see trees and blue sky. I don't want to see a pitched roof and towers and apartment buildings. That's something I don't want to see. And also our neighbors, all the way down to the corner. We have bedrooms and bathrooms and our family rooms that run across the back of our houses and if we have ail apartment building with apartments that are 4 stories up? they look down into our homes. Why stnould we be forced to live in fish bowls when complete strangers can peak into our homes anytime tlney wish. I don't think strangers should have that kind of access to my lnome, or to my neighbors homes. I just don't think it's fair' ttnat we have to live with our blinds shut because we don't know, and who's going to have that kind of access to our houses besides, if we look out our window and we see an apartment building. I just think 4 stories is just way too high. A pitctned roof and towers. It's just, it's way too high and I understand we need retail back there. That's fine. Maybe one story on top of that, but the current proposal the way it stands. I think it's way too much height on tile building. Thank you. t¢lackowiak' Okay. thank you. Bob, I want to ask just a couple questions right now. Traffic stuclyI know has been done for this area. That's what we're basina~ a lot of things on. Has there been ally discussion on traffic lights, signalizing when and where? Or not necessarily even when. Where have the5, talked about traffic lights? (-}onerous' I don't remember for Lake Drive East. I do know on the west side tllex'~ anticipated that it would take a traffic light. I believe it's too close to Idighway 5 there and they were looking 'at traffic contt'ol, stop signs rather than ligtnts. Blackoxviak: Okay, so but some type of control to. because l live in tlre area and lcan certainly ., agree with what she's saying because a left turn fi'om Lake Drive onto Great Plains or wherever it is right now. Lake Drive East, is rather tough. Generous' 'Yeah. I'll check roi' certain fol' council to find out what that called roi'. I know ttney were looking at widening there and limiting the access into tile east. Blackowiak: Right, okay. Speed and bus issues. That would be a Carver County Sheriff. so call the sheriff and have them out because tile>, can do. tile>, can do speed. They can monitor, put out different type. Generous- We also have the Operation Hotfoot. Blackowiak: Or Leadfoot. Generous: Leadfoot. Blackoxviak: That's what tilex, are. Generous' So that might be something that tile neighbortnood would like. and actually as this place develops it will help to slow down traffic. 18 Planning Commission Meeting - September 1'7, 2002 Blackowiak: Okay. Privacy and sight lines. Generous: That's a long way. Aanenson: We're trying to scale it off exactly. A couple hundred feet. Sidney: Can we have that for council? Blackowiak: Yeah, is that something that we could get for council? Aanenson: We can get a perspective of the elevation of that house and the top of that and what the perspective is. We'd be happy to get that and share it with the neighbors. Blackowiak: Okay that would be, I think that would be very helpful for the neighbors, just to give them some more information. Yes. Thank you. Anybody else like to get up and speak. I didn't mean to take up anybody's turn but. Colleen Cannon: Hi, my name is Colleen Cannon. I'm at 8110 Marsh Drive. I'm on the same street that Rita Klauda is. I just, I wanted to bring up one point. I don't know how valid it is but we know of one neighbor in our street who wasn't notified of this meeting. It was changed once, and I'm really surprised at the low attendance. I know that when there was a commercial venture. being proposed for Lake Drive, or Lake Street. there was quite a number of people who showed up so I'm really a little bit concerned that so few people are here and I'm going to talk to my neighbors when I get home and make sure that everyone was notified. I'd be sm-prised if they were. The other thing that I wanted to bring up is, a lot of the discussion this evening is about what the fac, ade is going to be made out of, and that's not really a concern for me as a neighbor. I really don't care an awful lot what the facade is made of. This is really an enormous project. I moved in 5 years ago and spoke with someone at City Hall who told me that nothing on that site would be taller than 2 or3 stories. And I'm not sure why no one is questioning or if there was some agreement that was breached without consultation with people who are going to be living in the residential neighborhoods next door, but that is a real issue of concern for me. Four stories with a peaked roof and towers is enormous. And with signage, and I think if you're going to be looking at sight lines or a perspective lines, you have to remember that a lot of those trees are deciduous trees and there's not going to be any leaves on those in the winter. The sight lines are going to be very low and I think I'm going to be able to see any building that goes up, but that's tall fi'om almost every room in my house and that makes me very angry to think about that. When I purchased this house I knew that this was going to be developed. I ~knew that it was going to be a mixed area with commercial, residential but I didn't expect anything of this size so I feel deceived. Thank you. Blackowiak: Okay, notification. I know Rich in the past has said that he'd be happy to receive mailings so. Aanenson: He does. Blackowiak: Did you get this inailing? Okay. Good. Twice? Generous: Did you get it both times? Slagle: Yes. 19 Planning Colnmission Meeting- September 1'7, 2002 Blackowiak: Okay. And what we're talking about is that we have often said that we want to make sure that people are being notified, which is why Rich Slagle, Mr. Slagle here one of our co~runissioners, has volunteered to receive a mailing. So anytime a mailing goes out, he is supposed to get a mailing. He is supposed to be on the mailing list. So at least he said he got this one, which is good to knoxv but it's just sort of a check for us to make sure that indeed it is going out. Yeah, and there is a mailing list on tile packet that shows who the mailing was supposed to be sent to. So okay. Slagle: I was going to sa5' if she wants tile list. Blackowiak: Yeah, there is a list on there that will show you who received the mailing, but it's nice to know that you did get the mailing because that has been a concern of our's in the past. Kate or Bob, would you like to talk about the size and tile original plan and heights and different sectors. I don't know what else to add. Generous: It hasn't been revised. For residential we wanted it to load up higher because that's the only way we could get the density. We do restrict it if it was commercial only. They wouldn't be able to go that high. [ know immediately across or the next building, that not part of site, is limited to 2 stories. Aanenson: That's one that's closer to them. ©enerous: Yeah. the one that's closer to Lake Drive and Great Plains, but it,s alwavs been in tile design sta~dal-ds to go up and because they're putting,, in residential, to go up to the ~4 story rather than 3 stories fei' commercial. l?,lackox;'iak: Okay, so this is something that has been constant 0I' 111.l$ remained the same since the original agreement. Aanenson: Can we show them the sector map which is the height, so we can just to be clear. Blackowiak: Sure. That would probably be helpful, thanks. Generous: So within the interior o£ the project we allowed it to go to 4 stories. However as part of that. I think it was the November amendment, they speciiqcally called out for this building being limited to a 2 story because one of the concerns was for tile neighborhood. We wanted to bring it down on the edge. so it's always been 3 stories if you have commercial. Four stories if ,'ou do residential. Blackowiak: Okay, so that hasn't changed since the initial agreement? ,A~allCllSOll: Correct. Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. \Vould anyone else like to make any comments this evening? Bob Savard: Good evening. My name is Bob Savard. I live at 8080 Marsh Drive. It's nice to see you all again. F3lackowiak: ~\nd you can move that microphone if it's more convenient. 20 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Bob Savard: It's fine where it is. I share some of my neighbors concerns regarding the traffic situation. And whether or not the enforcement will improve the situation there, I'm not sure but it is unsafe. It's certainly unsafe for pedestrians at this point. The children in our neighborhood cannot cross Lake Drive safely. There' s not a marked crosswalk at our end of the neighborhood. The marked crosswalk between the Citgo station and the Starbucks, no one pays attention to. So if you're caught in the crosswalk, you could very well get run over. And I'm sure Rita has experienced that, and I have personally as well. I've also experienced some of the traffic situations, especially on the curve right behind my property line. People travel at a high rate of speed. I realize it's private property. That is not public street at that point as far as I understand it, but something needs to be done. Secondly, I have some concern about the amount of paved surface and where the storm water runoff will go. I didn't hear that discussed. I don't get to see the documents that you're privy to, but I am concerned because of storm runoff, at least part of it, goes right through my back yard. And there's a lot of sediment in that pond as it is right now, and the pond is getter larger because it has, it's not deep enough. So it's spreading out. And if we increase tile water flow and the sediments that goes into that pond, I have already had to re- landscape my back yard because of that. Shared parking appears to be a real problem. I hope that everybody's wishes come true because I've seen the struggle over there, especially immediately after Culver's opened, and now there are signs saying hey, this is my parking spot, which runs contrary to the shared parking philosophy I think. I have no concern about tile drive through. It tums out that the Culver's drive through, since iny house is closest to Culver's, doesn't present any problems for us. And we have no concerns about the building materials. You know if it tums out as nice as the Bookoo Bike Shop is, and I can still see that building from my holne, that's perfectly okay with ine. Signage above 20 feet concerns me but I guess the sign wouldn't be facing my house directly. And finally I share the same concern with Rita and all of my other neighbors regarding a 4 story apax-tment building ii,, my back yard. If anyone can see these buildings from the back of their holne, I certainly can. I can see all the way to the Amel'ichm as it is right now. The grade of Great Plains Boulevard is just a little bit higher than Marsh Drive where my home is, and I don't knoxv what tile elevation is for the building above the grade of tile street, but that would clearly put it at least 15 to 20 feet higher than my home. And anything higher than one story is certainly looking down upon my house. So I share the same concerns. I see tile plan saying 2 to 3 stories, but tile drawings are drawn with a 4 story apartment. Is that 3,our evaluation of xvhat it's doing? Blackowiak: Yes. but it's ollly part of it. 2 to 3 stories above the first story of commercial retail. So you have story one is COlnmercial retail and then 2 to 3 above that. So you have to add those 2. Bob Savard: Those are my concerns. I hope you'll take them into consideration. Thank you. Blackowiak: Thank you. Okay. again we're hearing about traffic. Impervious Kate. I know we've got a number for tile entire project and then, but any one site can go over that 70 percent number, and I' m assulrting we're. Aanenson: The PUD balances it out. Blackowiak: P,,ight. I'm assuming we're on track to. Generous: Right. They could actually do 100 percent impervious and still meet tile standards. But on this one they're at 17 percent landscaping. Blackowiak: Okay. Storm water. 21 Planning Commission Meeting -September 1'7, 2002 Aanenson: I want to see specifically where his concern was. Where the drainage is coining fi'om, if he could show us on a map. Is it on his property coming from this property? Blackowiak: Mr. Savard, if you could come up and show us again where you are? Bob Savard: I'm not sure it ',',,ill be on this map. Blackowiak: There we go. Bob Savard: Oh, okay. This is my property. Can I use your pen Bob? Thank you. This is my property right here. There's a storm water runoff that runs through tile back of my property, my neighbors and then it cuts through and runs underneath Marsh Drive and into the ravine. There's a pond here right now and it's getting larger as we speak because of sediments filling up that pond. Blackowiak: Okay, and that would just be a city. Aanenson: We'll check on that. Blackowiak: Yeah, that they need to check on. So Mak. where would tile storm water be going from that property or tile new development? Carl yOU. Sxveidan: \\'hat they arc proposing by storm scxvc~' connectin,g towards sout!~ and southv,'est... stub sewer. Blackowiak: So not connecting. Sxxcidan' It shouldn't be affecting actually.' his pi'opel'tx'. Blackowiak: Okay. so it would connect to a different storln sewer completely and not to. Swcidan: Away fl'Om it. Blackowiak: Away fi'om him, okay. Sxveidan' ,So we will check this area to see what is concerning or what is happening there. glackowiak' Okay, thank you. Generous: Madam Chair, tile pond for this is actually south of the apartnaent building on tile west side of 101. Blackowiak: Oil it's that one over by tile other apartments? Okay. Okay, thank you. Anyone else like to speak this evening? Okay seeing ilo one I will close the public hearing. AMght, we have 3 motions we're going to have to make so I think what we should do is go ahead and just make our comments in general and then make them all at tile beginning and then go ahead and make tile three motions at tile end. So some brief comments, Rich would you like to start out? Slagle: Sure. I think that tile proposal is fine. I arll tending to lean towards the applicant oll some off their points of variances, but I do want to make one editorial comment if I may, and 22 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 that's relating to the traffic and what not and I've said this before but I frequently visit that area and it's a lovely area, but that parking and traffic is going to get worst. And because they are private streets, I'm going to throw out at least something to consider to the applicant and that is, trying to come up with creative ways to slow down traffic, there are lots of ways to do it. I don't need to list the different ways but I'm going to ask you to consider that. And then also for viewing, for the citizens here, I had a situation in Woodbury where we purchased a piece of property. Were told that we're going to have a 2 story State Farm building across the street from us. It turned into a zoning change and became a Lifetime Fitness, 24 hours, 3 stories, towers, what have you. And what they did for us is they actually came and said we will purchase a number of evergreens for a number of homes and put those up. ThinNng that it would be cheaper and easier for them to do it on our property than to do something on a mass area for their's so I just throw that out as having been in that situation and that might be some type of a compromise. But anyway, that is my biggest concern. I think this project is wonderful but going forward in the development I think it's going to be a concern. Blackowiak: LuAnn. Sidney: Well I really like the project. Beautifully designed. Would I expect anything less? Probably not from Milo. Just a gorgeous building. I do appreciate the comments froln the neighbors, and I think Rich makes a good point about neighbors working with the developer to see if there's some solution to any problems with sight lines. The development appears consistent with the comprehensive plan and design standards for commercial industrial office institutional dex'elopments as well as a PUD so I think we're in really good shape. The only concern I have is about EFIS and how we deal with that. We have a different opinion on tile calculations so wondering how tile commissioners would like to handle that as a possible variance or not. Blackowiak: I don't know. We'll have to hear what other people weigh in Oil. All)' other comments? Sidney: No. not at this point. Blackowiak: Uli. go ahead. Sacchet: I think it's a very attractive project. I understand the concern of tile neighbors, but I also have to acknowledge the quality of the project that's in front of us. Now this is Village on the Ponds. It's all extension of downtown and I appreciate the effort that went into designing this with all the character and detailing and everything. It is within the PUD framework that they can go up to 4 stories if they do residential. Now I'd like to point out for the neighbors benefit that the 4 stories is really the furthest away from where that neighborhood is, and actually the way you. this part of the Village on the Ponds is designed the way I see it, it's actually staggered. It starts like there's 2 stories and then it's 3 stories and it only has 4 stories at the very far side towards the center part of the Village. It appears to me that only very small part of what is really 4 stories will be visible from the neighborhood. What you will see is mostly the 2 story and 3 story portion, and even those will be at a pretty good distance, and yes it's mostly the city street but there's a fair amount of trees inbetween there. I would go one step further with Commissioner Slagle's suggestion. I would make it a condition that the developer would put some evergreens in there, into that buffer zone to balance out the neighborhood because it's a valid concern. Ill terms of the traffic, it's definitely an issue and I remember Vernelle's statement of tile past that more traffic will slow it down. I'm still looking forward to that. I do think that traffic control is a real issue through. People cannot safely cross a crosswalk. That's really not acceptable to the point of view. In terms of the runoff, it seems like the Savard property is not 23 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 impacted. I think that's something that needs to be said...verified. In terms of the EFIS, it's kind of funny that we have 50 percent on the bulk of the building and then we're squabbling over 1 percent on the small building, so I would think a 1 percent variance is a very small variance and if it's within the context, I don't see a problem with giving them a 1 percent variance on EFIS on the bank building. With the sign, tile architect or designer pretty much sold me on the sign on the back side of the building where the drive through is. I do believe it's going to add an aesthetic value...to what is designed right now. It has a very functional purpose that people driving by there see and go the right place because we certainly don't want people driving around more than they have to be, because it's supposed to be pedestrian. Now aside from the tower, and for me personally the balance would be to consider having the sign on top of the high one'on the tower. I mean it's kind of contradictory with the ordinance because if we would... I'm of tile opinion that I would be inclined to allow tile higher one with the framework, and I can't verify that, that along the Highway 5 there's a strip where higher signs seem to be allowed by the PUD. And I can see the wisdom of having a sign tip there but then to balance, I don't see why he needs two. · .,, And then the sign in tile middle might as well be an accent as it is on the other tower as well. That would be sort of the balance. How we can anchor it in so it's in line with the ordinance and everything, that's a little more of a challenge. I mean there's obviously, it's hard to say what's the hardship in not being able to put a sign up there. So I' m a little bit struaaling with that one, think that's my comments. Blackowiak: Steve. Lillehaug: \Veil I also agree and I think this is a x'e~'>, high quality p~'oject. I do have concerns with thc shared parking. You can only share so much and when i look at that. tile, parcel there or p~-ope~'t>' that says not a part, alld I saw an imprint of a building on one of those sketches, it really didn't show that area cont~'ibuting any more parking spaces so when it's full from what's out the~'e now. and that's developed, I don't see that area contributing to any more parking spaces because it looked all building to me on that plan that I saw there. So I do see that as a concern. I don't know how to address it right now because the pa~'king that is proposed for this project is on this prope~'ty and for these offices and residents. :So we'll have to address that at a later time. EFIS. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think stucco would be allowed as this accent. Aesthetically I think they're pretty much equal so I think it's a reasonable request. Signing, I agree with Uli that the one on tlao south, that that is also reasonable and I'm also on the other views of the building. I'm not too sure it's, it looks like we're tripling up on tile signs so I don't know if we should be allowing triple oil the signs. :So I'm not too sure which way to go ell that either, but I guess that would end my comments. Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. Ijust have a couple new comments to add. Again overall I think this is a nice looking project. Traffic. I live in tile area. I don't live right tip on Marsh. I live down a little farther, but I've seen tile problems with tile traffic. I have kids that like to walk up to Citgo or like to walk over to Starbucks and it's treacherous. I mean I'm always, before they leave every time I say you watch when you cross. You be careful, and they know but still they've come back telling me, oh this car didn't even slow down for us and you know. so I would really encourage, and I know this is not even a part of this but encourage Vernelle to' look into a 4 way stop right there at Starbucks or something right now, and that's my little bit of narrative. I'll get back on track here. I like tile building. EFIS versus stucco. Again, if it's I percent I would be okay with the variance for i percent. I don't have a problem with 1 percent. If we're talking more than 1 percent, then ~ start getting a little more concerned. But 1 percent, that's negligible to me. Sign on the back of the bank. I'm worried about the fact that we are going up too high and we're bringing eyes tip and drawing attention to advertising, which is what it is. I mean we've got all this, we've got these beautiful buildings and we're just putting lots of signs and lots 24 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 of advertising up and I understand the value of that, but by the same token it's supposed to be pedestrian oriented. It's supposed to be European look and feel, and you'd never see signs slapped up on every little awning in Europe. It's just not done, so for me to hear you know, we need that, I don't really necessarily agree. That being signage, I'd almost rather see it more at the awning level. I do realize it would draw attention to the awning but I think that's what you're trying to tell me that people are going to be wanting to find anyway is the drive through. So then let' s put the sign close to where it is and it makes, I think it would kind of make sense for me. I do not like the idea of the signage in the front tower, or the logo. I think we've got lots of opportunity for signage and we could just do some -kind of a fill in, like is on the taller tower. We don't need to keep, I think it could be done very tastefully without the signs, I guess that's what I' m trying to say and I would like that, so I would not support a variance for the signage there. Site plan, totally agree with it and I would also just add a condition about, before going to council show placement of the sidewalk and then also before going to council, have the applicant work with neighbors to demonstrate sight lines and give the neighbors some kind of idea of what they're going to be seeing potentially from their homes. So those would be conditions I'd like to see on that so. LuAnn you have another comment? Sidney: Yeah. are you finished? Blackowiak: Yeah I'nl finished, yep. Sidney: Question for Kate. This second motion with the variances. Can we split those into, split into two? .-~aI1CI1SOII: YeS. Sidney: Okay. I think that's where we're heading with. oh I guess personally' I'd recommend approval for tile variance roi' the EFIS. however deny the sign. Blackowiak: So that would be fotlr motions then. Wily don't you go ahead and we'll see what happens here. Sidney: Do you want to start with. Blackowiak: Let's start with tile first one. Sidney: Okay. \Vallt nle tO make the motion? I can make it. Blackowiak: Go right again. Sidney: Okay. I guess we have some friendly amendinents here. I'll go ahead. Tile Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #2002-7, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Incorporated, dated August 2, 2002 for a street level commercial and upper level apartlnent building with a variance for the number of underground parking spaces subject to the following conditions. I through 32. Blackowiak: Okay. there's been a motion. Is there a second? Sacchet: Second. Blackowiak: Moved and seconded. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - September t7, 2002 Sacchet: Friendly amendments? Sidney' Yes. Sacchet: First, let's take them one at a time. First of all. I really think it's necessary to specify what tile variance is with underground parking that we're giving. Discussing space, so I'd like to be specific and state that we give a variance, and if I read the reoort~ correctly, we give a variance to have 1.35 stalls per unit...1.5 stalls. I'd like to spell that out. Is that okay? Sidney' Yes. Blackoxviak: Or even a comment. I guess a question Kate. or Bob. Do we have any reason to be, lieve that the number of' units would chanc, e0 ~ · Generous: I don't believe to because tile building would shift. t31ackowiak: i'm just curious because maybe we want to specify a specific number of parking stalls. ~ Sacchet' Jt~st nlontion tl~o nunaber of stalls, so xve say there afc. 73 stalls in there. Is that tile 1]UlllbCi'? I°,tackoxviak: x~'oah. So tiaat ii' l'ot' sco~ne reason tl~,e tlnit is lost. '~vo don't lose a parking stall ars xx'oll. Sacchet: Okay. So we say x,,'e want. xx'e would keep the variance at 73 stalls for this building is ,<ul't~ciont. ()kay. then I'nl hapi)5, with thut. When I'd like. t31ackoxviak: Wait. do you accept that Sidney: Yeah. Sacchet: Then I'd like to propose 2 additional conditions. And I think it COulld,_°~o actually with both buildings. The, first one would be. condition 33. That applicant will work with staff to determine the planting of eve~'greens as a si~,~lat buffer towards tile neighbors. Do you want to add sonaething to that? Slagle: Can i add something? I don't know ifI would do it that way. I think I would. I would be comfortable if xve just ask staff to work together with tile applicant and homeowners on Marsh, probably the ones that are most impacted, and just ask that they work to something that's agreeable-. But I would actually like to see, get something in wr/ting a's to what the actual actions were. Because evergreens in some yards might not fit. It might be better to have some fencing, you know I don't know. Sacchet' Okay. So we would say, applicant will work with staff and neighbors to mitigate sight, lloxv xvot~ld >'ot~ say that? Slagle: \'iews of developn~ent. Sacchet: Can you he-lp me out? 26 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Aanenson: Sure. I guess what, the first step we'd like to see is just show the sight lines. So understand the impacts and then after we understand what the sight line is and what the impacts and the view shed is, ask the neighbors some options, just as you're saying. And then we would present those options, what the neighbors would like to see based on that information to the City Council with our recommendation and the applicant's recommendation. Sacchet: So there are really several steps. First step would be the applicant will make a study of sight lines? Aanenson: Correct. Sacchet: ...to the applicant. Aanenson: So they have the information and see what they want to screen, is what you're saying. Sacchet: And then the second step would be, based on that applicant and staff and the neighbors will work together to find. Aanenson: Appropriate buffering, whatever it is. And I think that's what Rich is saying. It may not be an evergreen. It may be something else, depending on what their needs are. Sacchet: Appropriate buffering, yeah. Sounds good to me. Aanenson: Present those options. Slagle: And I would just. and maybe it's in the minutes and I'll be able to read it. I just want to be able to know what happens. Aanenson: Yep, and then we'll present those options to the council and forward them back to you too. I31ackowiak: Okay, thank you. Okay, accepted? Sidney: Alright. Sacchet: Alright, and one more. I'm getting out on a limb a little bit. This would be number 34. Traffic control. Applicant will work with staff to consider a 4 way stop on Lake Drive East and Great Plains Boulevard. Blackowiak: Private street, we can't really do that can we? Sacchet: Well, we could be doing a trade here. Blackowiak: It is public ii1 that area? Okay. Aanenson: Well it has to meet warrants but I think we can make that a condition but I'd like to make it even more broader. I think what you were saying. Sacchet: Traffic control. Let's just say. 27 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Aanenson' \Veil I would even say, work on traffic cahning, and that's what I heard you say, in the entire project. And I think that's kind of what we said. When we have more on street parking, that's going to slow it down because people are getting in and out of the cars but I think traffic cahning in the overall project we want to work towards. Including this intersection, but the entire project. Sacchet' Could we say, applicant will work with staff to calm traffic in the project and specifically at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Great Plains? Aanenson: Yeah. Ijust don't want to commit for the traffic stop siena, if it doesn't meet warrants. Sacchet: It might be a different solution, absolutely. Right. Slagle: Can I just ask a question, or point of' clarification. I know it sounds crazy coming from but is it really needed on this one? I mean. Sacchot' \Veil it seems to be a real concern. Slaglc' I l~q. ean I think it's moro ovel'all and not just for this apptical~t and I tlqink just as long ;,;ts voice tine COllCOrllS of tt~e applicant. I lqqoa~q I think. .c4acchet: \Vhere I'm comino fi'om is, we'fo cix'in~ some variances< and in ti-mt context there's a give and take and this is ail area wl~ere I think xvo have a real concern. Documented. ~cknoxvledged. so why not make it not a firm condition like Kate saxs. with some open endedness bt~t make it a condition. That's where I'm at with it. That's what I'm proposing. I~lackov,'iak: Okay. LuAnn, accept that? Si¢lnev: Sounds good. t31ackowiak: Alrighty. Got a motion and a second and sonae amonclmonts. Sidney moved, Sacchet seconded that the I)lalming Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #2002-7, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated August 2, 2002, for a street level colnmercial and upper level apartment building with a variance for 73 underground parking spaces, subject to the following conditions: Tho applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. Site plan approval is contingent on final platting of Outlet A. Villages on tiao Ponds 2nd :\ddition. to a block and lot designation. 'File developer shall work with tile city to provide 20 percent el~ tho units at affordable l'ClltS. 28 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 . . . . . . 10. 11. 12. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Lighting shall comply with tile Villages on the Ponds design standards. Signage shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. A separate sign permit is required for each sign. The applicant shall eliminate parkway maple from the plant schedule. A suitable replacement shall be substituted. Sublnit storm sewer design calculations for a 10 year, 24 hour storm event with drainage flow map. Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos.: 3101, 5201, 5207 and 5300. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regulatory agency permits. Retaining walls over 4 feet in height must be designed by a registered engineer and requires an approved fence at tile top of the wall. All plan sheets must be signed by a registered engineer. Add rock construction entrance a minimum of 75 feet in length and revise the note from 50 feet to 75 feet. Add at stornl sewer schedule to tile plans. Type II silt fence shall be used around tile grading area. Also, existing catch basins around the site perimeter nmst be protected from construction-related sediment through the use of filter barriers (see City Detail Plate No. 5302). Acid a legend to tile plans. On the site plan. show tile dimensions of the parking stalls, access aisles and driveway widths. Revise tile grade to 3:1 maximum on the south side of the underground garage entrance. On the grading plan' · Show storm sewer size, type, class and slope. · Show CB and CBMH numbers, rim and invert elevations. · On the utility plan, shoxv all existing and proposed utility sewer type, class, size and slope. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Qwest. Xcel Energy, Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 09-1. 29 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 2T. 28. 29. 30. 32. 33. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required as well as curbing to be painted yellow. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Codes Section 904.1. The radius turns shall be designed to accommodate tile tun~ing of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus. Submit radius turns and dimensions to the Chanhassen City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. The proposed parking deck over the underground' parking must be built to support the load of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus or shall have vehicle height limiters installed. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for additional requirements. Il-' Chanhassen Fire Department's aerial ladder truck is unable to negotiate access via the east parking lots, Fire Department standpipes along with fully sprinklered buildings will be required. Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact tile Chanhassen Fire Marshal for locations. Tile buildings must be protected with automatic fire sprinkler systems. The building plans must be prepared and sitned by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. Thc buildings must be constructed in accordance with the Minnesota State Building Code and the International Building Code (IBC) as amended by the State of Minnesota. The IBC is scheduled to become effective this Fall. The architect must provide a detailed code analysis, during the preliminary plan stage, for review for compliance with the new code. Special attention must bo paid to the fire-resistance and opening protection of the exterior walls between the two buildings, and tho parking garage below, in relation to the placement of a propetxy line. accessible route must be provided to both buildings, parking facilities, public t~'ansportation stops. All parkino~, areas, includin~ parking ,_~araues.= must be p~'ovided with accessible parking spaces dispersed among tile various building entrances. Accessible dwelling units must be provided in accordance with Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 134 i. The utility plan does not contain enough information for review at this time; plans will be reviewed when submitted for permit. Tile building owner and/or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan rex'iew and permit procedures. In particular, type of construction and allowable area issues need to be addressed as soon as the Minnesota Amendments to the IBC are available. The applicant will work with staff to address mitigating the sight line concerns of tile neighbors. 30 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 34. The applicant will work with staff to provide traffic claming measures throughout Villages on the Ponds, specifically at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Great Plains. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of $ to 0. · Blackowiak: Next motion please, and if you're going to split it. Sidney: I will split it. Blackoxviak: Okay. Sidney: Can I do tile first one? Sacchct' Sure. Sidney: I recommend the Planning Commission, well make tile motion that the Planning Commission recommends approvals of a variance for the use of 16 percent EFIS oil tile bank building with one condition. The applicant shall work with staff to verify the percentage EFIS. Slaglc: So you're flip flopping then. You're flip flopping from the recommendation in (b), which recommends denial. Sidney: Yes. Slagle: So you tm-ned it around to an approval? Sidney: Yep. Slagle: Okay. I just wanted to make sure. Blackowiak: Okay. M. otion. Is there a second? Slaglc: Second. Sidney moved, Slagle seconded that the Plamfing Con, mission recommends approval of the variance for the use of 16 percent EFIS on the bank building with the following condition: 1. Tile applicant will work with staff to verify tile percentage of EFIS. All voted in fnvor and tile motion cnrried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Blackowiak: B(2) we'll call it. Second part of that. Sacchet' Yeah. you don't want to do tile second one. Blackowiak: Okay. LuAnn, you want to go ahead then? Sidney: You sure? 31 Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 2002 Slagle: I can do it. Blackowiak: Go ahead Rich. Slagle: If you want mine. Either way we'll vote which way we do. I'm going to call B(2) as the Planning Commission recommends approval of a variance for signage in excess of 20 feet in height on the bank building based on the findings in the staff report. Blackowiak: There's been a motion. Is there a second? Sacchet: You do it in general? Slagle' Yeah, l'm happy with it. I am. Sacchet: Okay. Doesn't look like you're getting a second. Stagle: Try agail]. Blackowiak: No second. Okay, withdraw your motion? Slag!o' Sea,icone else. Yeah, I withdraw my motion. S;~cchct: So wc go down. . .I' m probably thc next one then. Blackoxviak: Alright. go ahead. Sacchet: Alright. B(2). The Planning Commission recommends to grant a variance for specific signage in excess of 20 feet in height on tho bank building, namely on the south elevation as shoxvn on tho plan and on tho bank tower for tho bank. And then signage, lot's call bank si?age but not the looo ~ · Blackoxviak: Okay, there's been a motion. Is there a second? Slagle: Wait, we're going to have like how many? I mean we're going to have like 3 or4 sign motions. Blackowiak: This is the sign motion. Yeah on the bank signage on the back side. Yes on the tower, but no logo below the tower. In a nutshell... Lillehaug' I'll second that. Sacchet: We got a second. Blackowiak' Okay, moved and seconded. Did you understand that, I'm son'y. Slagle: You're making a motion to approve the signage in all areas except for the logo. Sacchet' The Ieee ~ · Blackowiak: The tower. Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Slagle: ...on the west elevation. Oh okay, so in the tower. Sacchet: Just the logo on tile tower. That's going to be the same accent as on the other tower. Slagle: Okay. Blackowiak: Tile logo itl the tower? Sacchet: The logo band. The thing that's... Blackowiak: So it's not ill tile, you're saying. Sacchet: It's the base of the tower, not oil top of the tower. Blackowiak: Okay, let's clarify that. Sacchet: We need to be specific here. Blackowiak: That's right. $1agle: Bob, can you show me which signs? Lillehaug: I've got to make sure I seconded what I thought I seconded. Generous: \Vhat I got is you approved it in tile tower, but not. I31ackowiak: Below. Sacchet' Correct, that's my motion Bob. Blackowiak: And on the back of the bank. Generous: Yes, on tile back side. Blackowiak: Okay. is that what you meant to? Lillehaug: Second, 3,es. Blackowiak: Okay, a motion and second. Sacchet moved, Lillehaug seconded that the Planning Commission recommends to grant a variance for specific signage in excess of 20 feet in height on the bank building, namely on the south elevation as shown on the plan and bank signage but not the logo on the tower. Sacchet and Lillehaug voted in favor. The rest voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3. Blackowiak: Motion is not. Sacchet: So where does that leave us? 33 Planning Commission Meeting- September 17, 2002 Blackowiak: That leaves us, so we can try one more time or we can try as many times as we need to, but who hasn't made the motion? Have you made one? Sidney: I'll make one again. I guess my thought here, and I'll just express it is that, I'd like to make a motion to deny and it will prompt more discussion between the applicant and staff. Blackowiak: At City Council? Sidney' Before City Council. I'd like to make a motion that tile Planning Commission recommends denial of the variance for tile signage in excess of 20 feet in height on the bank building based on the findings in the staff report. Blackowiak: Okay. Motion. Is there a second? Can I second? Technically ]:can't, can I? ,,\anenson: Yes you can. Blackowiak: I can? Oh, I'm seconding that. Been a motion and a second. Sidney moved, Blackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of the variance for the signage in excess of 20 feet in height on the bank building based on the findings in the staff report. Sidney and Blackowiak voted in favor. The rest voted in opposition and the motion failed with n vote of 2 to 3. I:llackov,-i:~k: Okay, we're at an impasse, flow many iterations'? Slagie: I-/ow about this'? How about a motion to approve the variance fei' the signage on all aspects with a condition that one of tlne. that condition one is that staff and. staff present to council the concern of whatever the logo underneath the tower, which it seems is what people are concerned about. I'm okay with all the requests of the applicant for signage. Blackowiak: SecI'm~otso. Slagle: Hello us Kate. Blackowiak: Yeah. I mean should v,.e,just deny it all and send it to council? Sacchet: I n'leal~l council certainly gets the idea on this. Blackowiak: Yeah. make a note of that. Confused commissior~er. Do we have to vote on it, or can it just go forward to council withottt a vote? Aal]el~SOi~: YOt. l should make a motion. Blackowiak: We should have some resolution, is that what you're saying Kate? Aanenson: On a straight variance, if you don't have a simple majority it would still go forward because you need the super majority as approving it but without the majority. Blackowiak: Okay. Sacchet: So either way it goes to council, in this particular, evenif... 34 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Aanenson: Correct. Generous: Yeah, in this instance it wouldn't have a recon~mendation from the Planning Commission. Blackowiak: Well let's do that then. Let's just send it without a recommendation. Sidney: And a lot of confusion. Blackowiak: Yeah, exactly. Is that fair enough? Sacchet: A mixed recommendation. Aanenson' Right. Well you'd need the 75 percent to make it pass, Co~Tect. Blackowiak: Right, and we don't have that. Aanenson: Right. And it's happened in the past when we've done a variance, you don't have the 75 percent so it goes forward to them, even though it may have been approved, it's not a majority. Blackowiak: It doesn't pass. yeah. So then why don't we just let it be and let them sort it out. Sidney: Any guidance for staff at this point? Aanenson: I think you still need a motion. l¢lackowiak: We still need a motion. $1agle: We need to vote on that and it needs to be approved, not by the super majority. Aanenson: Correct. Blackowiak: By your smile I think I know what it's going to be. Go ahead. Sacchet: I'd like to move that tile Planning Con-unission recommends denial of the variance for signage itl excess of 20 feet, with tile exception of tile south elevation. Blackowiak: Motion. Is there a second? Lillehaug: Second. Sacchet moved, Lillehaug seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of the variance for signage in excess of 20 feet, with the exception of the south elevation. Sacchet and Lillehaug voted in favor. The rest voted in opposition and the motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3. Blackowiak: You know I was thinking you were going to move to send it onto council without a recommendation. That's what I was. so would you like to do that? Sidney' Yes. 35 Planning Comn-fission Meeting- September l?, 0.2002 Slagle' Wait, I don't know if we can do that. Aanenson' I'm not sure we can do that. Blackowiak: We can't do that? fi,.alldi1SOll: No. Blackowiak: We're stuck. I mean I don't want to be stuck here. This is such a, I think. Aanenson: Why don't you move to motion C while we're getting an opinion on this. Blackowiak' Thank you. Okay, let's do that. I think we're rather split on this and it's an issue that we shouldn't take a lot of. I mean cot.~llcil's ultimately going to decide. We'll let theln decide and th%"ll understand that we were divided. Aanenson: If you want to go to motionC, we'll... Blackowial,:: Okay. motion C please. ,Sacchet: Nlotion C. Do you want to do it.'? Lillelaaug: ,Sure. I make a motion that the Planning Coml'nission recommends approval of Site Plan #2002-7. plans prepared by Milo Al'chitecttlre ©~'oup. Incoq0orated dated August:, ~ 2002 for a t 1,000 square foot two story ballk and office buildilag with drive througl-~ facilities, subject to the fotlowil~g conditions. 1 through ~ The~'e,. was a tape chanoe~_ at this poi~t in the discussion. ) Blackowiak' Okay And also I had talt,:ed about placement of sidewalk and sight lines as well. Lillehaug: Sure. ]31ackowiak: For this building. Okay, accepted? Lillehaug: Yes. Blackowiak: Okay. We need a vote. Lillehaug moved, Sacchet seconded that the Planning Comnfission recolnmends approval of Site Plan #2002-7, plans prepared by Milo Architecture Group, Inc., dated August 2, 2002 for a 11,000 square foot two story bank and office building with drive through facilities, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with tile Git5, and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. Site plan approval is contingent on final platting of Outlet A, Villages on tile Ponds 2nd .Addition to a block and lot designation. 36 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 . . . . . . 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Lighting shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. Signage shall comply with the Villages on the Ponds design standards. A separate sign permit is required for each sign. The applicant shall eliminate Parkway maple front the plant schedule. A suitable replacement shall be substituted. The use of EFIS shall be limited to a maximum of 15 percent of the building elevation. Submit storm sewer design calculations for a 10 >,ear, 24 hour storm event with drainage flow inap. Add the following City of Chanhassen latest Detail Plate Nos.' 3101, 5201, 5207, and 5300. The applicant is responsible to obtain and comply with all regulator>' agency permits. Retaining walls over 4 feet in height must be designed by a registered engineer and requires an approved fence at tile top of the wall. All plan sheets must be signed by a registered engineer. ..\dd rock construction entrance to a minimum of 75 feet in length and revise tile note from 50 feet to 75 feet. Add a storm sewer schedule to the plans. Type II silt fence shall be used around the grading area. Also. existing catch basins around the site perimeter must be protected fi'om construction-related sediment through the use of filter barriers (see City Detail Plate No. 5302). Add a legend to tile plans. On the site plan. show the dimensions of the parking stalls, access aisles and driveway widths. Revise the grade to 3:1 maximum on the south side of the underground garage entrance. On the grading plan' · Show storm sewer size, type, class and slope. Show CB and CBMH numbers, rim and invert elevations. · On the utility plan, show all existing and proposed utility sewer type, class, size and slope. A 10 foot cleat' space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, shrubs? bushes. Qwest. Xcel Energy, Cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassel~ City Ordinance #9-1. 37 Planning Commission Meeting -Septernber 17, 2002 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 3'7 2S. 29. 30. 33. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required as well as curbing to be painted yellow. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to 1997 Minnesota Uniform Fire Codes Section 904.1. Tile radius turns shall be designed to accommodate tile turning of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus. Submit radius turns and dimensions to the Chanhassen City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. Tile proposed parking deck over tile underground parking must be built to support the load of Chanhassen Fire Department's largest apparatus or shall have vehicle height limiters installed. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for additional requirements. It~ Chanhassen Fire Department's aerial ladder truck is unable to negotiate access via tile east parking lots, Fire Department standpipes along with fully sprinklered buildings will be required. Additional fire hydra ~ts will be required. Contact tile Chanhassen Fire Marshal for locations. Tho buildings must be protected with automatic fire sprinkler systems. The building plans must be prepared and signed by design p~'ofessionals licensed in tiao State of Minnesota. Thc buildings must be constructed in accordance with tiao Minnesota State Building Code and the International Building Code (IBC) as amended by the State of Minnesota. The iBC is scheduled to become effective this fall. The architect must provide a detailed code analysis, during the preliminary plan stage, for review for compliance with the new code. Special attention I22USt be paid to the fire-resistance and opening protection of the exterior walls between the two buildings, and the parking garage below, in relation to the placement of a property line. accessible route must be provided to both bttildings, parking facilities, public t~'ansportntion stops. All parking areas, includin~ parking garages, must be provided with accessible parking spaces dispersed among the various building entrances. The utility plan does not contain enough information for review at tiffs time; plans will be reviewed when submitted for a permit. The building owner and/or their representatives shall meet with the Inspections Division to discuss plan review and permit procedures. In particular, type of construction and allowable area issues need to be addressed as soon as the Minnesota Amendments to the iBC are available. The applicant will work with staff to address mitigating the sight line concerns of the neighbors. 38 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 34. The applicant will work with staff to provide traffic claming measures throughout Villages on the Ponds, specifically at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Great Plains. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to 0. Blackowiak: Now back to the stick)' one. Okay, what's the word'? Aanenson: When we do a straight variance, I just want to be clear on this. When we do a variance, typically if someone's doing a porch or something like that, that's a separate variance. The way this process is being handled, we're doing a variance with a site plan so the code addresses that specifically. So I'm going to read it and tell you how I'm interpreting it to make sure we're all clear. What it says is that, a vote of less than 3¼ of the members present on any vote ill a variance, in conjunction with platting, site plan review or conditional use permit, or interim use permit, serve only as a recommendation to the City Council so that super majority rule doesn't CalTy forward and that's what I was concerned about. So in this circumstance it's a little bit different weighting than a typical just straight variance because it's in conjunction with other issues. The site plan. So back to what you said before, and I think this is what the Chair was saying is that you just recolmnend what you feel, and then ultimately council's going to make that decision. So we don't need tile super majority. Blackowiak: But we still need. ,~kancnson: A nlotion. Blackowiak: A motion that can'ies. Aanenson: Correct. No. No. You just need a motion that you want to forward through. So even il' it doesn't carry, if you want to go back to your first motion. Blackowiak: Let's just go back to whatever tile first one was. Or somebody just give me a motion. Let's just. Slagle: I'll do it. Planning Commission recommends approval of signage in excess of 20 feet in height on the bank building based oil findings ill tile staff report. I will need a second in order to have a vote. Blackowiak: Okay, there's been a motion. Is there a second? Oil come on. Solnebodyjust second it and then we can. Slagle: Yeah. then you can vote. x, Vin or lose. Sacchet: Can you second alld then deny? AallellSOll: S Lire. Sacchet: That's kind of hokey. Alright, I'll second. Sidney: Friendly comment? They recommended denial not approval so you can't. Slagle: I understand. 39 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17. 2002 Sidney: But you said based on tile staff report. Slagle: Oh I'm SOtTy. Good point, good point. Oh okay. Then how about I do this. The Planning Con-nnission recommends denial of signage in excess of 20 feet in height on tile bank building based on findings in tile staff report. Go with me on this. Blackowiak: Okay, motion. Sacchet: Second. Slagle moved, Sacchet seconded that the Plan~fing Commission recommends denial for tile request for signage in excess of 20 feet in height on the bank building based on the findings in the staff report. Sacchet and Blackowiak voted in favor, Slagle, Lillehaug and Sidney voted in opposition. The motion failed with a vote of 2 to 3. Blackowiak' So as long as we didn't have the super majority tiling, that's good. Alright, we got out of that one. Dodged a bullet there. Alright. this item goes to tile City Council on October 14~''. Com'ect? October 14~'. :\anens°n: Yeah. Ve~'nclle Clayton: And I have a question. I \vou]d like to ]lave it on tine record that we need help with tl~e t~'a['tSc. Specifically, this is a very good example of a wide street inviting high speeds. .&nd the~'e are a couple things. We'd be happy to have angled parking. That might help, but we've got parallel parking whicla makes the street wider. That's something we could think about, but that was something that was denied us when the prQject was approved. So this is, if we're going to solve the traffic problem, we're all going to have to work on it. The other ttiino that I would like the engineerin~ department to work on is because we asked for stop signs that restricted the traffic to a lower speed, and we were told that we could not do that because as you appt'oacla tho Highway 5, it has to gradually reduce instead of suddenly becoming at a slow r~te in our area. So I'd like to see if the standards might be bent, if they still exist, and. Blackoxx'iak: Well it sounds like you need to sit down with staff and engineering and work out these issues and bring them up \\'ith them because I think you understood tonight that we're all fairly concem~ed about traffic. \:ernelle Clayton: And we all xVailt to make it slower and I'm oil record as saying when it gets really busy out there it will be slower, but \ye have this period of time noxv that we should be dealin~ with too. Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. Slagle: If I call add. I mean it is truly a shortcut fo/- a lot of people, 101 to get to 5 to avoid the intersection at 5 on 101 and then. Vernelle Clayton' Yep. so \ye want to make it so inconvenient that they won't do that. Slagle: Exactly. Blackowiak: Okay. ,&lright. New or old business Kate. it wasn't on tile agenda but. No? 40 Planning Commission Meeting - September 17, 2002 Aanenson: I've asked her just to put new business on only if there is new business, to kind of help us so we don't get stuck on that. Blackowiak: Right. Tomorrow night, joint meeting. 7:00 with the council. Is it courtyard conference room? Aanenson: Courtyard conference room. Blackowiak: Okay. 7:00 then tomorrow night, and that's 2005 MUSA stuff and Roger will be there and all council? Aanenson: Yep. Blackowiak: Good. Slagle: If I could ask. In the Bluff Creek. we are talking Figure 11 the low ones, is that CO~TeCt? Just so I have my pictures right. Aanenson: Yeah. I was going to bring those too. The bigger ones. I have those upstairs. $1agle' But it is the low ones? ,-\anenson: Yep. AI~PROVAI, OF MINUTES: LuAnn Sidney noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated August 20. 2002 as presented. Chnir~voman Blackowiak adjourned the Planning Com~nission meeting at 9:05 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson COmlVmnity Development Director Pl'epaved by Nann Opheim 4-1 ~0~ Zo ~ !.1.1 {DO TABLE 8 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE INTERSECTION (1) I NORTH/SOUTH STREET MINOR STREET MAJOR STREET INTERSECTION & TRAFFIC TIME OF (3) i LEVEL OF i DELAY (3)i LEVEL OF ! DELAY DELAY NO. EAST/WEST STREET CONTROL CONDITION DAY MOVEMENT: SERVICE i (SECJVEH) MOVEMENTi SERV1CE i (SECfVEH ($EC/VEH) 3 Great Plains Blvd. Thru/Stop Existing AM Peak Hour WB LT A ! 4.6 SB LT i A ; 2.6 1.5 & WB RTi A ! 3.0 Lake Ddve East PM Peak Hour VVB LT i B i 5.8 SB LT i A i 2.8 I.E~"' WI~ RT ! A i 3.3 · Year 2002 AM Peak Hour VVB LT i A i 4.7 SB LT - A ! 2.6 1.5 No-Build WB RT i A ! 3.0 PM Peak Hour VVB LT i B i 6.6 SB LT A ' 3.0 1.8 WI~ RT, A ! -3.4 Year 2002 AM Peak Hour EB LT I C i 12.2 NB LT ; A i 3.2 1.7 Build EB TH/ET ~ A ! 3.8 SB LT ! A ! 3.2 VVB LT B J 9.4 VVB TH/ET. A ! 3.9[ , PM Peak Hour EB ET i C ~ 16.7 NB ET i A i 3.4 2.0 i EB TH/ET A i 4.0 SB LT A i 3.7 VVB LT C ! 12.2 WI~ TH/ET ! = 4 TH 101 Thru/Stop Existing AM Peak Hour EB LT B 8.5 NB LT A I 3.2 1.1 & EBET , ^ !. 3.2 Lake Drive West PM Peak HourEBEB RTLT , AC Ii 17.63.3 NB LT i A ,i 3.5 1.5 Year2002 AMPeakHour EBLT [ C J 10.1 NBLTI A 3.5 1.3 No-Build EB RT A , 3.3 , PM Peak Hour EB LT F I 123.3 NB LT B I 5.0 6.6 EB ET , AI 3.8 VVB RTI ^ 4.4 , (4) ~ j (5)' I : (5) 5 TH 101 Thru/Stop Existing AM Peak Hour EB LT j NA i NA NB LT NA ! NA 0.0 EB RT ! NA ! NA SB LT NA I NA & PMPeakHour EBLT j NA ] NA NBLT I NA i NA 0.0 EBRT ! NAJ NA SBLTI. NA I NA , Lake Drive (Site) Year 2002 AM Peak Hour EB LT -i NA ! NA NB LT NA NA 0.0 No-Build EB RT ! NA I NA SB LT , NA i NA PM Peak Hour EB LT i NA i NA NB LT i NA i NA 0.0 EB RTi NA ! NA SB LT ! NA , NA Year 2002 AM Peak Hour EB LT i C i 16.9 NB LT i A 3.8 5.0 Build EB TH/RT [ A i 3.3 SB LTI A 4.5 VVB LTi E ! 41.4 WB TH/RTl A J 3.3I I PM Peak Hour EBLT F i 51.8 NBLT J A 3.8 38.1 EB TH/RT A 3.5 SB LTJ B 7.7 WB LTi F 475.6 WB TH/RT I A I 4.2 6 TH 101 Thru/Stop Existing AM Peak Hour VVB LT NA N^ SB LT NA NA 0.0 WB RTi NA i NA . & PM Peak Hour VVB LT i NA NA SB LT NA I NA 0.0 VVB RT J NA , NA Main Street Year 2002 AM Peak Hour VVB LT i NA i NA SB LT NA NA 0.0 No-Build VVB RT . NAI NA , PM Peak Hour VVB LT NA i NA SB LT NA NA 0.0 VVB RT i NAi, NA Year 2002 AM Peak Hour EB LT i C I 16.5 NB LT A 3.7 1.4 Build EB TH/RTI A I 4.9 SB LT A 3.8 VVB LTI Ci 16.8 WB TH/ET ! A 4.4 PM Peak Hour EB LT i D 27.5 NB LT A 4.1 2.3 EB TH/ETI B - 5.1 SB LT B 5.4 VVB LT E I 42.4 VVB TH/ET B J 6.8 I . , NOTES: (1) All four intersections are controlled with stop conditions on the east/west streets and free flowing through conditions on the north/south street. (2) The direction and movement is reported. For example, VVB LT identifies the Westbound left-turn movement. (3) The intersection delay represents the overall delay in seconds per vehicle entenng the intersection. (4) 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. (5) The results with "NA" identify the movements which are not present in the existing and no-build conditions. SOURCE: BRW, Inc. using HCS Unsignalized Intersection Analysis and the Highway Capacity Manual. U:IUNSIGLOS.WK4 ~13555 Table 7 shows the AM and PM peak hour results of the planning analysis for the signalized intersection, s along TI-I 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 TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard is reported to operate under capaciH' in the AM peak hour and near capaciH' 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 ho4rs 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 tTvo 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 · The TH 101/Main Street intersection westbound left-turn movement is expected to operate at LOS E in the PM pea_k hour. The traffic for the minor street left-turn movements at the unsignalized intersections are expected to experience some delay 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-turn movement into the development is expected to be near or over 300 vehicles in the peak hour. The addition of a sec_.ond left-turn lane for the east approach on TH 5 is recommended at the intersection of TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard. Adding a second left-turn 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-turn lane. This right-turn 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-turn movement, extending the right-turn lane could help prevent the right-turn 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 Control Devices (MMUTCD). Neither the AM nor the PM peak hour combination of major and minor street volumes were found to meet the Peak Hour Volume Warrant conditions for signali~.ation at any of'the fora', intersections. As stated earlier, level of sen, ice E or even F for left-mm movements from minor streets at unsignalized intersections during peak hour operations is common in urbanized areas. Gaps in traffic created by the traffic signals at the tTvo TH 5 intersections will also improve the conditions for the left-turn movements from the development accesses. Therefore, no mitigation is recommended at any of the unsignalized intersections. 23. Vehicle-related Air Emissions. Provide an estimat'e 'of the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air qualit3, impacts. (If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EAW Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.) Response: The proposed project ``.rill have 2,192 associated parking spaces. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) rules require an Indirect Source Permit (ISP) for new development with over 2,000 parking spaces. The ISP regulates vehicular emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) from vehicles generated by proposed developments. - The air qualib, impacts of the proposed project were addressed by modeling future traffic flow to predict carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations in the project area. The microscale air quality analysis was based on the traffic forecasts and operational analyses documented in Question #22 - Traffic. Total expected CO concentrations are the sum of local CO (determined through modeling) and background CO (determined by monitoring in the project area). Impacts ,,*,,ere determined by comparing the forecast CO concentrations to the state ambient air quality standards for CO, shown in Table 9. These standards were established at levels to protect the most sensitive segments of the population and are not to be exceeded more than once per year. TABLE 9 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CO (PPM) State 1-HOUR AVERAGE 8-HOUR AVERAGE 3O The air quality impacts of the project were addressed by estimating future CO concentrations at the m'o busiest intersections in the project area: · TH 5 and TH 101 (Market Boulevard) · TH 5 and Great Plains Boulevard r235S5 35