Gateway Concept PlanAGENDA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
THURSDAY, APRIL 10 1997 AT 3:30 P.M.
CHANHASSEN CITY HALL, 690 COULTER DRIVE
1. Conceptual approval to rezone 102 acres of property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD,
Planned Unit Development (Residential, Industrial and Commercial) located at the SE
quadrant of Hwys. 5 and 41, Gateway, Steiner Development.
CITY OF
CHANFIASSEN
STAFF REPORT
PC DATE 3/19/97
CC DATE: 4/14/97
CASE #: 92 -6 PUD
By: Aanenson/vc
PROPOSAL: Conceptual Development Plan for Rezoning 146.5 Acres of Property from
A -2, Agricultural Estate to PUD, Planned Unit Development for Gateway
West Business Park
Z
V
J
a
LOCATION
APPLICANT
SE quadrant of Hwys. 5 and 41.
Steiner Development
3610 South Highway 101
Wayzata, MN 55391
Minnetonka, MN 55343
Gateway Partners
c/o Steiner Development, lnc.
3610 South Highway 101
Minnetonka, MN 55343
PRESENT ZONING: A -2, Agricultural Estate
ACREAGE: 146.5 acres
DENSITY: Not Applicable
LJ
ADJACENT ZONING AND
LAND USE: N - A -2; vacant
S - A -2; vacant
E - A -2; vacant
W - A -2; Minnesota Landscape Arboretum
WATER AND SEWER: Water and sewer will be available with Phase IV of Upper Bluff
Creek Trunk Improvement Project.
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: This site has varied topography, including 15 acres of wetland and
10 acres of upland wooded vegetation. There are 3 existing homes
on the subject site. One will be removed and the other 2 homes are
shown on a lot that is exempted from the current proposal.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: OI, Office/Industrial
0
N . � A O !� O h !� A R .d O 0• m0 O O p O O O 0 O
N N N h
asranhra
N'.63�dk .fyhks Arlo
City of Shorevwod
6200
Lake 7 irglni¢
6300 1 _ e _
a
ar
c +�
i
6!0 � - `Ha1A Park es
A /
6500 / 1
c
6700 % n lakes
��RJ6D V
Lake D ✓ ✓ ✓ ///
Yinnaraanta
Al171newashta
6900 Park tart - Lake
7000
Y
CL7'9'2SO76
7100 U Lakc
`e St Jm
U U
7200
c pI
7300 — ��I
7400 g F . �(1. .. •� i',
� l
7600 j
3 a:a d.uP• OCATI
77oc� £
� 3 lrboratm
_.... .. . - ... �LC
7800 .,._<....
In 0
L. O - ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 1
} ■� ■ ■� ■ ■ ■� q Park
7900 - now 0 ■,■ 0 a :� ■■ s ■■
■ ■� ■
M . N . ■ fir
■
■ ■ CoNisrONd
8000 ILM ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
YK
■f>meaeta LaaQaeapa ltboratlm - - ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
8100 ■ i ■ ■ ■ � ■■ ■� ■ ■ ■ ■ M ■ ■ ✓
In I
1N 82 St m ■ r 11 i s �■ ■ ■ III ■
• ■.■ a ■
8200
Q z a
8300 �•�� �J�,r — �C1..LJ
8900
C.
cc
9500 G'.
8600 Lyman B /vy
N N Jai
8700 i �
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8800 -
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 2
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
As part of the discussion of the proposal, the following policy issues will need to be discussed:
• Creation of a TIF district and the uses of the funds.
• Extension of the utilities from the east.
• Extension of Coulter Boulevard from the east.
• The amount and location of park land.
• Whether a residential component should be permitted in the project and the type of units
these should be.
• Access to Highway 5.
The Gateway development proposal was given conceptual approval from the City Council in 1993.
The approval never progressed because the developer had issues with the conditions imposed.
Since that time, numerous things have happened that have affected the current development
proposal. These changes include:
• sale of the westerly 31.5 acres of the site to the Arboretum
• adoption of the Highway 5 corridor study
• completion of the Bluff Creek Natural Resources Plan
• donation of the O'Shaugnessey property leading to the plan for a natural / passive park in this
area
• request by the city and MnDOT for an additional intersection along Hwy. 5
• request by the developer to guide this property to residential
• extension of the Upper Bluff Creek Utilities to the Autumn Ridge Development
Last year a request was made to guide this property residential. Staff, Planning Commission, and
the City Council rejected that request. There were some conflicting desires for this property. While
the city wanted this property to be developed as an industrial park, the developer felt that the design
constraints were prohibitive. It is staff's belief that the current concept plan meets the objectives of
the developer. As staff works through refinement of the proposal, staff believes the city and the
developer will have their goals met.
The current proposal includes 102.1 acres that will be developed including 1,334,200 square feet of
building on 12 lots. The development will take place in three phases with the first phase taking
place this year in the southwest corner (82 Street). This phase includes 3.8 acres of commercial,
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 3
10 acres of industrial, and 23.5 acres of residential.
The site plan shows approximately 333,500 of square footage used for support commercial and a
residential development. In the PUD Ordinance, it states that the "PUD shall be used for the use or
uses for which the site is designated in the comprehensive plan, except that the city may permit up
to twenty -five (25 %) percent of the gross floor area of all buildings in a PUD to be used for land
uses for which the site is not designated in the comprehensive plan, if the City Council finds that
such uses are in the best interest of the city and is consistent with the requirements of this section."
Staff feels that support commercial may be appropriate, but on a limited scale. A restaurant or
convenience store /gas station may be a permitted support commercial use. The residential (multi-
family) area would be located on Lot 12. Staff believes that if residential uses are permitted,
low or mid -rise buildings that limit the building pads and incorporate underground parking
would be most appropriate. These units could be ownership or rental. Staff believes that the
mixed use is a good use of the property but wants to ensure that the site is developed in a cohesive
manner. We believe this can be accomplished under the PUD zoning as it is further developed.
There are 15 acres of wetland and 10 acres of upland vegetation. A wetland alteration permit will
be required. The majority of the wetland and wooded areas are found on the eastern portion of the
site.
Because this project exceeds 750,000 gross square feet of new office /industrial development, an
Environmental Impact Statement is mandatory. The city will be the Responsible Governmental
Unit. Instead of completing an EIS, staff is recommending an Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR) be completed. The same issues will be studied under an EIS and the AUAR but the time
frame is shorter. The AUAR will provide an opportunity to develop detailed information about the
project and potential impacts. Staff will then direct the applicant on how to mitigate these impacts.
The proposal shows a water tower located on the easterly portion of the Wrase's property. Staff has
proposed that the city buy the Wrase's property allowing them to live on the site and thus allowing
the water tower to be placed on the rear portion of the property. The Wrase's are uncertain if this
proposal is acceptable to them at this time. The other option would be to move the water tower to
another site and leave the Wrase's property undisturbed with the city owning the entire 3 plus acre
lot and they could remain living in their home. The applicants will have to work with the
Engineering Department to ensure the appropriate location for this water tower as well as
acceptance and purchase of the Wrase's property (if they are agreeable to this location).
Staff is recommending that this property be developed as a PUD. While this site warrants a PUD
zoning for reasons such as traffic management, comprehensive storm water management, wetland
protection, architectural control, etc., this plan as proposed needs to be further developed before
staff can make a recommendation on the proposed design. The site size, prominence and potential
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 4
for coordinated development are major opportunities to create a high quality, sensitively designed
corporate environment. This proposal and the review process will allow for the incorporation of
numerous refinements. Staff is recommending that the PUD concept be approved with the
conditions of approval.
Site Characteristics
The property is approximately 146.5 acres in size located south of Highway 5 and east of Hwy. 41.
The property is currently cultivated with one farm homestead along Highway 5 and two homes that
are currently exempted along Hwy. 41. The homestead, owned by Wrase's, is 3.15 acres in size.
This site has varied topography with rolling hills, wetlands and wooded areas. There are 15 acres of
wetlands. They are mostly found in the eastern edge of the property with ten acres of upland woods
consisting of maple, basswood and oak located in the southeast corner of the 150 -acre parcel. The
plan proposes to include the largest wetland and wooded area of 36 acres to be included as a city
park. This property would be combined with the recently acquired O'Shaugnessey property to
create a large passive park.
This property is currently zoned A -2 (Agricultural Estate). The Comprehensive Plan guides this
area for future land use of office /industrial. The proposed land uses, office /industrial, includes
those properties exempted from this proposal. The University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum
is the adjacent use to the west of this proposal and it is zoned A -2. Property to the north and east of
this site it is zoned A -2 and are currently cultivated/cultivated field. The property to the south is
bordered by 82nd Street and the Chaska city limits. The property in Chaska has been developed as
an industrial park.
Overview
The proposal will be guided by the recommendations of the Highway 5 Corridor Study and the
Bluff Creek Corridor Study. Both studies recommend preservation of natural features. The plan as
proposed places the road adjacent to the open space. This will create a significant open area and a
visual edge from Highway 5.
One of the major issues of the Highway 5 Corridor Plan is to develop the frontage /parkway roads
that will run on either side of the highway. The location of the southern frontage road directly
impacts the design of this project. The proposal shows a full access onto Highway 5 approximately
1600 feet east of the intersection of Highway 5 and Highway 41. The city has worked with
MnDOT to allow for a full signalized intersection at this location. There will be another full
intersection at Highway 41 and 82 Street.
This project will require a mandatory Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The City Council
had previously recommended that the AUAR process be used and staff is proposing that this
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 5
process be used again. The mandatory requirement applies when there is new construction of
750,000 square feet of gross floor area. This project proposes a total of 1,334,200 square feet. of
buildings including 335,000 square feet to be allocated for residential and commercial uses. The
city will be the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU). As a part of the AUAR, staff is
recommending a study of the traffic issues for this area be completed. Staff also recommends that
the applicant reimburse the city for the cost of this study.
The sewer for this area will be serviced by Phase IV of the Upper Bluff Creek trunk sanitary sewer
and water improvements. The southwest portion of this site may be serviced via gravity sewer line
from Chaska. This past year, the city took a proactive role in a joint Chanhassen/Chaska Water and
Sanitary Sewer Agreement. This agreement provides for an area in Chanhassen to have water and
sewer service provided through the Chaska utility system. This service area, on the southern
portion of the site, will be the area the applicants are proposing to develop first. However, there is a
limit of 20,000 gallons per day that the Gateway site may discharge into Chaska's system.
REZONING
The purpose of the conceptual review is to provide an opportunity for the applicant to submit a plan
to the city showing the basic intent and the general nature of the entire development without
incurring substantial costs. Staff recommended the conceptual review so that the planning
commission and the council could comment on the changes. The ordinance requires the following
items be reviewed:
Overall gross and net density.
1. Identification of each lot size and width.
2. General location of major street and pedestrian ways.
3. General location and extent of public and common open spaces.
4. General location and type of land uses and intensities of development.
5. Staging and time schedule of development.
The site plan and attached narrative meets the requirements for conceptual review. Staff is
requesting that input be given to further develop this plan.
Justification for Rezoning to PUD
The applicant is requesting to rezone 146.5 acres from A2, Agriculture to PUD, Planned Unit
Development. The following review constitutes our evaluation of the PUD request. The review
criteria is taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance.
Section 20 -501. Intent
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 6
Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of
most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for a greater variety
of uses, internal transfer of density, construction phasing and a potential for lower development
costs. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the city has the expectation that the development
plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been
the case with the other, more standard zoning districts. It will be the applicant's responsibility to
demonstrate that the City's expectations are realized as evaluated against the following criteria:
Planned unit developments are to encourage the following:
Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive
environmental features, including steep slopes, mature trees, creeks, wetlands, lakes and
scenic views.
Finding. There are 10 acres of upland wooded vegetation including box elder, willows and
green ash on the eastern portion of this site. This wooded area is adjacent to a wetland that
will be preserved through dedication of 15 acres to the city. In addition, there will be a 36
plus acre site with the vast majority of the site left in it natural state.
2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing of
land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels.
Findin . This is a large area of property, and when it is approved for subdivision, it will
have a master transportation plan, and a sewer, water and storm water management plan. If
each of these parcels were to develop separately, they would not have the comprehensive
utility and traffic plans. It will also provide a cohesive and unified design theme at one of
the major entrances to the city.
3. High quality design and design compatibility with surrounding land uses, including both
existing and planned. Site planning, landscaping and building architecture should reflect
higher quality design than is found elsewhere in the community.
Finding. The applicants are proposing to submit individual building plans for each
development lot. The city will utilize its normal site plan review procedure for each. The
approved PUD documents will establish firm guidelines to ensure that the site is developed
in a consistent and well - planned manner so that a higher quality of development will result.
4. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along
significant corridors within the city will be encouraged.
Finding. The Comprehensive Plan shows a required landscaping buffer with the
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 7
residential property to the east. The majority of this property is a wetland. Therefore, staff
feels that the existing topography meets the buffering requirement. Because the
Comprehensive Plan guides this property for office /industrial, staff would recommend that
buffering be considered at the time this lot is developed.
S. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Findin The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for office and light industrial use. The
applicants are proposing a business park. They are requesting a mixed use area that may be
commercial, educational, office or industrial and residential. Staff is recommending that
support commercial and residential may be approved if recommended by the Planning
Commission and City Council as defined in the PUD Ordinance.
6 Parks and Open Space. The creation ofpublic open space may be required by the city.
Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and
overall trail plan.
Finding. The Park and Recreation Commission recommended that a community park be
developed on the site. This park would require dedication in excess of the 36 acres, which
includes the eastern portion of the site. The Park Commission will be meeting on March 18,
1997 to review this new plan.
7. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD.
Findin The proposed residential development has not been developed at this point but
staff would encourage the developer to consider an affordability component as a part of the
development.
8. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sightings and
the clustering of buildings and land uses.
Finding The conservation element will evolve as the wetlands, roads and building
orientation are established as part of the standards for this PUD zone that staff will be
developing. Provisions for ultimate service of the site by Southwest Metro Transit should
be incorporated into the plan.
9. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic
conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate.
Finding. Staff is recommending a traffic study be completed for this site. The applicants
shall reimburse the city the cost for this study.
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 8
SummM of Rezoning to PUD
Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility, but allows the city to request
additional improvements, and the site's unique features can be better protected. The flexible
standards allow the disturbed areas to be further removed from the unique features of the site. In
return for modifying the standards, the city will receive the following (after outlined plan
modifications have been incorporated):
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan;
Screening of undesirable views of loading and parking areas;
Corridor sensitivity on Highways 5 and 41, including building orientation;
Preservation of desirable site characteristics (wetlands and trees);
Improved architectural standards including, uniform signs and architecture;
Traffic management and design techniques to reduce potential for traffic conflicts;
Improved pretreatment of storm water;
Gateway treatments.
CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL
General Site Plan/Architecture
The applicant has stated that the standards for this development are critical to the quality of the
business park. The Highway 5 Design Standards will dictate the design standards for the site.
Because this is a mixed use PUD it will be important that the design has some unifying features.
These issues will have to be developed as a part to the Preliminary Review.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
a. Intent
Staff envisions this area as a well- conceived, cohesive light industrial office park with support
commercial and multi - family residential. The site has varied topography, wetlands and upland
woods. It is bordered by two major collectors, Highways 5 and 41. This site is the gateway to the
western edge of the city. All of these features should be designed to make this site an asset to the
community.
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 9
Some of the site design issues include building materials on visible sites, screening of parking lots
and loading areas, orientation of buildings along Highways 5 and 41, and the natural terrain and
vegetation should be preserved.
Staff feels that a PUD zone is the appropriate zoning for this area to ensure a higher quality of
design and a more sensitive development. The plan as proposed needs to be further developed to
reflect these concerns.
b. Permitted Uses
The proposal calls for office, warehouse, manufacturing and some support commercial. The
comprehensive plan guides this area for light industrial and office use. Staff is recommending that
some support commercial be approved as part of the permitted uses for the zone. The City Council
also stated in a work session with the developer that they may consider a residential use a part of the
PUD. The PUD ordinance states that the city may permit up to twenty -five (25 %) percent of the
gross floor area of all building in a PUD to be used for land uses which the site is not designated in
the comprehensive plan. The location of the residential component may make a good transition but
the proposed site is sensitive. The development must be sensitive to the land.
C. Setbacks
The plan, as proposed at this time, is too conceptual to review the setbacks. The Highway Corridor
Study does establish setbacks, although the PUD zoning does provide for flexibility from these
standards. Specific standards will be established as a part of the Preliminary review phase.
d. Development Standards Tabulation Box
Not able to review at the time of conceptual approval.
e. Building Materials and Design
Because this will be a large business park with some support commercial and residential, there may
be many types of building materials being used. One of the major concerns that staff will be
addressing is building orientation along the highways.
All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry material shall be used. The block shall
have a weathered face or be polished, fluted or broken face. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt -
up or pre -cast, and shall be finished in stone textured or coated. Metal standing seam siding may be
used as support materials, curtain wall on office components, or as a roofing material. All roof top
equipment shall be screened, however, wood screen fences are prohibited.
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 10
f. Site landscaping Screening
Again, because this is a large business park, the landscaping will be a significant unifying element.
An overall landscaping plan needs to be developed. This plan shall take into consideration the
adjacency of the Arboretum, views from Highways 5 and 41, and gateway treatments. All lots with
in the PUD will be required to submit a landscaping plan consistent with an overall landscaping
theme. Because this is a mixed use project, landscaping needs to incorporate the buffering between
the uses.
All outdoor storage shall be prohibited. Loading areas shall be screened from public right -of -ways.
Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate.
g. Signs
The PUD shall develop a cohesive sign theme consistent with the building architecture. The signs
shall be limited to one monument or ground sign only on each lot. In addition, wall signs shall be
permitted to no more than two per street frontage. There shall be no freestanding/pylon signs
permitted, especially along Highways 5 and 41.
h. Lighting
Lighting again should be consistent throughout the business park. This would include street
lighting and building lighting.
Compliance Table
Lot
Acres
Uses
1
1.02
Support Commercial
2
2.3
Support Commercial
3
10
Industrial
4
5.6
Support Commercial/Industrial
5
4.5
Support Commercial/Industrial
6
4.3
Industrial
7
5.5
Industrial
g
10.2
Industrial
9
22.6
Industrial
10
4
Industrial
11
1 6.5
Support Commercial
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 11
12
23.5
Residential
Outlot A
18.1
Op en Space
Outlot B
18
Op en Space
Total
146.5
Grading and Drainage
The concept plan does not provide any preliminary site grades. It is assumed, due to the nature
of the topography, that extensive site grading will be necessary to prepare the site for streets,
utilities and building pads. The appropriate erosion control measures will need to be employed
in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Detailed grading,
drainage and erosion control plans will be required upon preliminary and final plat review. The
concept plan also does not provide data with regards to storm water runoff in the development.
The developer should be aware that the City's water quality and quantity standards must be met.
A detailed storm water management plan will need to be developed in accordance with the City's
Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) at time of preliminary and final plat submittal.
Utilities
In the future, Trunk Highway 41 will be lowered to improve street grades south of Trunk
Highway 5. This may result in lowering the water reservoir site which, in turn, may require
moving the water reservoir slightly. The applicant should work with the City in determining the
final location for the future water reservoir tank prior to preliminary plat. Access to this water
tower site also needs to be addressed. The developer should, if feasible, include an internal
driveway access to the water reservoir site instead of accessing the site from Trunk Highway 41.
Sanitary sewer service to the development requires the extension of the Upper Bluff Creek
Interceptor which is approximately 650 feet east of the development. Extension of the sewer
may commence in 1997. The cities of Chaska and Chanhassen have a cooperative agreement
whereby some of the development adjacent to 82 Street can be served through Chaska's sewer.
However, there is a capacity limit of 20,000 gpd that can be discharged into Chaska's system.
The utility improvements for the site shall be constructed in accordance with the City's standard
specifications and detail plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required
upon final platting for each phase for staff to review and City Council approval.
Streets
The proposed streets are fairly well designed from a traffic circulation standpoint. However,
without street grades it is possible that the streets may be realigned to be compatible with the site
topography. The City's Comprehensive Plan proposes Coulter Boulevard to be extended west
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 12
from Galpin Boulevard to Trunk Highway 41 through this site. Currently, Coulter Boulevard has
been constructed up to 650 feet east of this development with the subdivision of Autumn Ridge.
The City has plans on extending Coulter Boulevard in the future depending on development
pressure. The access points onto Trunk Highway 41 and Trunk Highway 5 have been reviewed
by MnDOT (see attached letter dated 3/19/96). Staff has reviewed MnDOT's comments and
concerns and concurs with their findings.
The applicant should prepare a traffic study to determine traffic warrants for intersection
signalization, street widths and auxiliary turning lanes. The concept plan does not indicate the
road right -of -way width; however, the plans scale 80 feet wide which is consistent with
subdivision requirements. Streets shall be constructed in accordance with the City's design for
industrial /commercial -type use. According to City subdivision codes for this land use, street
right -of -way should be a minimum of 80 feet wide with a 36 to 52 -foot wide pavement section.
This type of roadway system (Coulter Boulevard) should also include a sidewalk or trail system
adjacent to the street within the road right -of -way.
MnDOT has programmed the upgrade of Trunk Highway 5 adjacent to this site sometime in
1999/2000. The developer should work with MnDOT in preparing their construction plans with
regards to site grading, drainage and street improvements adjacent to Trunk Highways 5 and 41
for compatibility.
The streets will need to be designed and constructed in accordance with City standard
specification and detail plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required in
conjunction with final platting for staff review and City Council approval. The developer will
also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide a financial
security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee site improvements.
Landscaping and Tree Preservation
The eastern portion of property is covered with vegetation consisting of mainly box elder, willow
and green ash. This area should not be altered as it falls into lots with wetlands which are being
proposed for park dedication.
Landscaping, especially the treatment along Highways 5 and 41, should be given special
consideration. The applicant will need to provide the following information for the proposed site
development:
Tree Survey: All trees 12 inches and larger must be located and inventoried/numbered on a
survey map. Wooded areas, that include smaller trees, shall also be shown using an edge
outline.
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 13
Tree Survey List: Inventory list of significant trees with number, species, diameter, and if
desired, condition.
Canopy coverage calculations: Tree canopy coverage for the entire site must be calculated.
Each use will have different canopy coverage requirements, therefore individual calculations
for existing coverage, coverage required by ordinance, coverage to be removed, and coverage
to be replaced must be done.
Landscape plans: Proposed landscape plan for site including plant schedule is required.
Applicant must meet ordinance standards for each use, including parking lot and buffer yard
standards.
Wetlands
There are eight wetland basin areas identified on this site covering an area of approximately 15.5
acres. These wetlands are located on the east side of the property with small fingers reaching
west. These wetlands have been previously delineated by the applicant but have not been
presented to the City for official review. The applicant will need to provide the City with an
accurate wetland delineation for staff review. In addition, if the applicant proposes to fill or
excavate any of the wetland basins, they will also be required to apply for a Wetland Alteration
Permit (WAP).
Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP)
The City of Chanhassen has developed a surface water management plan (SWMP) to protect
water quality and manage water quantity within the City's watershed. The plan identifies, from a
regional perspective, the stormwater quantity and quality improvements necessary to allow future
development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general, the
water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100 -year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-
year design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses
William Walker, Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water
bodies.
This proposed development will be required to construct water quality and water quantity ponds
in accordance with the City's SWMP, or pay the City SWMP fees to have these ponds
constructed.
Park and Recreation
The Park and Recreation Commission will be meeting on March 18, 1997 to review this proposal.
When this project was reviewed previously, the Park Commission envisioned this area as an active
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 14
play area. Since that time, the Park Commission has modified their recommendation. The property
to the west, the O'Shaughnessey property, was dedicated to the city. This area, as well as a portion
of the Gateway property, will create a large passive park. This park is a component of the Bluff
Creek Plan. This area would then be one to the largest passive parks in the city. The Park and
Recreation Commission will be reviewing what areas should be included. Their recommendation
will be forward to the City Council for conceptual review.
The Park Commission met on March 25,1997 to review the proposed development. The
Commission moved that upon submittal of the preliminary development plan the following
features be incorporated:
• Designation of Outlots A and B as identified on the commission's concept plan as open
space.
• The identification of an internal trail/sidewalk system including the trails within Outlots
A and B, sidewalks and/or trails adjacent to thoroughfares, and a north /south trail
adjacent to Highway 41.
• A sidewalk be planned for the north side of 82 " d Street to facilitate east/west pedestrian
movement.
The commission also expressed their preference that Coulter Boulevard not be extended
through the park preserve that is being created.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 19, 1997 to review the proposed
development. The Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the conceptual PUD
with modification of condition 4 to include tree preservation and specification for designing a
unique housing type and the addition of condition 14 requiring the submission of a gateway
treatment for Highways 5 and 41 and the developer's concept for a high grade business use at the
intersection.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council grant conceptual approval for Gateway West Business Park
PUD #92 -6 as shown on site plans dated February 26, 1997 subject to the following conditions:
1. Existing structures on the property which may be demolished require a demolition permit.
Proof of septic and well systems that are abandoned are required.
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 15
2. The design standards shall be consistent the Highway 5 Standards.
3. A tree inventory shall be completed.
4. The multi - family development be developed sensitive to the land form with focus on
preservation of the trees and natural area. Affordability be considered for some of the units
along with direction for designing a unique product type for Chanhassen.
5. Completion of an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR).
6. The applicant shall secure a Wetland Alteration Permit.
7. Dedication of park land as requested by the Park and Recreation Commission.
Upon submittal of the preliminary development plan the following features be
incorporated:
Designation of Outlots A and B as identified on the concept plan as open space.
The identification of an internal trail/sidewalk system including the trails within Outlots
A and B, sidewalks and /or trails adjacent to thoroughfares, and a north/south trail
adjacent to Highway 41.
A sidewalk be planned for the north side of 82 " d Street to facilitate east/west pedestrian
movement.
8. The applicant should work with the City in coordinating a final location providing internal
street access for the water reservoir site in conjunction with preliminary plat submittal.
9. Sanitary sewer and water service from Chaska to the southwesterly portion of the site will be
limited to a discharge of 20,000 gpd. The remaining portion of the site will require sanitary
sewer and water service from Chanhassen via the Upper Bluff Creek Interceptor. The
applicant should petition the City for the extension of utilities and street (Coulter Boulevard)
to service the site.
10. The street and utility improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the
City's standard specifications and detail plates. Detailed construction plans and
specifications will be required upon final platting for staff to review and City Council
approval. Erosion control measures will need to be developed on the grading, drainage and
erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
Gateway West Business Park
March 12, 1997
Page 16
11. The developer shall incorporate the City's Surface Water Management Plan when developing
a overall comprehensive master drainage plan through the site. The developer's construction
plans shall also be designed to be compatible with future upgrading of Trunk Highways 5 and
41.
12. The developer shall work with MnDOT in preparing their construction plans for
compatibility with future upgrading of Trunk Highways 5 and 41 improvements.
13. A traffic study shall be prepared by the applicant to determine traffic warrants for intersection
signalization, auxiliary turn lanes and street widths. The traffic study shall also address
pedestrian circulation.
14. When the applicant comes back with the preliminary plat design that they present their
idea for a gateway treatment and also their concept for a high grade business use of the
intersection of Highways 5 and 41.
15. That the Wrase property be incorporated into the presentation when this application
comes back."
ATTACH
1. Developer's Narrative and application.
2. Memo from Dave Hempel dated March 13, 1997.
3. Letter from MnDOT dated March 19, 1996.
4. Memo from Steve Kirchman dated March 10, 1997.
5. Memo from Greg Hayes dated March 11, 1997.
6. Public hearing notice and property owners list.
7. Highway 5 /Galpin Blvd. Park concept plan from Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc.
8. Parks Commission Minutes of March 25, 1997.
9. Parks & Recreation Staff Report.
10. Planning Commission Minutes of March 19, 1997.
eg:\plan\ka \gatewaycon.pc.doc
02/26/97 17:02 FAX 612 473 7058 STEINER 16002/003
5&41 (Gateway) Development Conceptual Plan Narrative
The 146.5 acre Highway 5 & 41 Property is proposed to be developed into an industrial business park by
Steiner Development under a Planned Unit Development process (PM). The following summary
represents a conceptual outline that is the result of numerous meetings with Chanhassen City staff
resulting in a plan that responds to environmental and market concerns. This summary is based on the
Conceptual Plan dated February 26,1997 and the numbers are approximate.
The proposed plan indicates approximately 102.1 acres to be developed excluding roads, wetlands and
high park land that the City of Chanhassen will own. Based on a floor area ratio of 30 %, a planned
1,334,200 square feet of industrial buildings is possible. Under the Chanhassen City Code Planned Unit
Development District, 25% of the total building square feet can become ancillary uses to industrial and,
consequently, 333,500 square feet will be allocated to residential and commercial uses.
The eastern part of the site which is primarily wetlands is to become City of Chanhassen park land. This
land will be added to the existing City park land to the east. The high ground running through the middle
of the wetlands and the sloped wooded hillside immediately to the west of the wetlands is also proposed to
become developed park land and park trails. The wetland totals approximately 23.6 acres and the upland
area approximately 12.8 acres, for a total of 36.4 acres that will become park land. The final amount of
dedicated park land will be 10% of developable acreage or 10 acres.
Allowing 8 acres for road right of way plus 1.7 acres for natural environmental reserve ponding (NERP),
approximately 62.7 acres are to be developed into industrial buildings primarily accessed from a new
north south road from Highway 5 to 82 r ` Street. This land is presently treeless and will be graded into 4
to 10 acre parcels. The remaining 37.7 acres will become residential and commercial. The 14.3 acres of
commercial includes the 3.8 acres at the intersection of 82 Street and Highway 41, the 6.5 acres at the
east side of the proposed north south road and Highway 5, and 4 acres to the west of the north south road_
The commercial area's include sites for restaurants, banks, professional office, convenient store and other
support commercial uses. The 23.4 acre site in the south east corner of the property is proposed to be a
residential town house development_
Phase One: 1997 -1998
Phase One is to include the land accessible from 92 Strut which includes 3.8 acres of commercial, 10
acres of industrial and 23.5 acres of residential. Utilities will have to be extended from the east to the
north south road and south to 827 Street The Industrial Tax Increment Finance District will be
established in phase One.
Phase Two: 1999 - 2000
Phase Two will open with the construction of the north south road and will provide between 20 and 30
industrial acres and the 6.5 acres of commercial at the interscction of Highway 5-
Phase Three: 2001- 2002
Phase Three will be the final development phase opened up in conjunction with access to Highway 41 at
the center of the property. Approximately 20 to 30 acres will be developed as industrial as well as the
remaining 4 acres of commercial in Phase Three. In the event that the Wrase property is developed in
conjunction with the proposed development a roadway extension of Peavey Road would be considered
running north of SI NP Street to the proposed Highway 41 connection. This alternative would provide
various water tower locations, a east west road realignment and smaller platted lots.
02/26/67 17:02 FAX 612 473 7058 STEINER
2003 %003
Architectural and landscape standards for the industrial area will be determined in conjunction with the
City of Chanhassen planning staff. It is anticipated that exterior walls will be painted andtOr integral
color precast concrete or masonry. Overall hard surface coverage is anticipated to be limited to 70% with
the remaining 30' /o to allow for topographical transitions between sites along with minimum setback and
landscape requirements.
We anticipate having an industrial project in the range of 100,000 square feet with Heartland America
Corporation as the anchor tenant to start Phase One. Heartland needs to occupy the building by October
1, 1997 to coincide with their existing lea$e termination_ Con setluently, we anticipate a City approval
process to run concurrently with the PUD process for preliminary and final plat application.
2
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937 -1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
APPLICANT: Steiner Development, Inc.
OWNER: Gateway Partners
ADDRESS: 3610 South Highway 101
Wayzata, MN 55391
TELEPHONE (Day time) (612) 473 -5650
ADDRESS: c/o Steiner Development, Inc.
3610 South Highway 101, W ay z at a 5539
TELEPHONE: (612) 473 -5650
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Temporary Sales Permit
Conditional Use Permit
_ Vacation of ROW /Easements
Interim Use Permit
_ Variance
Non - conforming Use Permit
_ Wetland Alteration Permit
_X Planned Unit Development*
_ Zoning Appeal
Rezoning
_ Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Sign Permits
Sign Plan Review
Notification Sign
Site Plan Review*
X Escrow for Filing Fees /Attomey Cost'"
($50 CUP /SPRNACNAR/WAP /Metes
and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB)
Subdivision*
TOTAL FEE $ 7
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 8'/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.
PROJECT NAME Chanhassen Gateway Development
LOCATION South East Intersection of Highway 5 & 41
LEGAL DESCRIPTION See attached legal description
TOTAL ACREAGE 150.5
WETLANDS PRESENT X YES NO
PRESENT ZONING Quided industrial
REQUESTED ZONING Industrial PUD
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Agriculturial
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
Industrial, commercial and residen
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Start Industrial Development
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 I 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.
111,11110, 111,111
• Y Y 140f )
Si ure of Applicant Date
Y -5P
Signature of Fee Owner Date
Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No.
The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting.
If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
FROM: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer ,
DATE: March 13, 1997
SUBJ: Review of Concept Plan for Gateway - File No. 92 -15 LUR
Upon review of the conceptual plat for Gateway stamped "February 26, 1997 ", I offer the
following comments and recommendations:
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
The concept plan does not provide any preliminary site grades. It is assumed due to the nature of
the topography that extensive site grading will be necessary to prepare the site for streets, utilities
and building pads. The appropriate erosion control measures will need to be employed in
accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Detailed grading,
drainage and erosion control plans will be required upon preliminary and final plat review. The
concept plan also does not provide data with regards to storm water runoff in the development.
The developer should be aware that the City's water quality and quantity standards must be met.
A detailed storm water management plan will need to be developed in accordance with the City's
Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) at time of preliminary and final plat submittal.
UTILITIES
In the future Trunk Highway 41 will be lowered to improve street grades south of Trunk
Highway 5. This may result in lowering the water reservoir site which, in turn, may require
moving the water reservoir slightly. The applicant should work with the City in determining the
final location for the future water reservoir tank prior to preliminary plat. Access to this water
tower site also needs to be addressed. The developer should, if feasible, include an internal
driveway access to the water reservoir site instead of accessing the site from Trunk Highway 41.
Kate Aanenson
Gateway Concept Plan Review
March 13, 1997
Page 2
Sanitary sewer service to the development requires the extension of the Upper Bluff Creek
Interceptor which is approximately 650 feet east of the development. Extension of the sewer may
commence in 1997. The cities of Chaska and Chanhassen have a cooperative agreement whereby
some of the development adjacent to 82 Street can be served through Chaska's sewer.
However, there is a capacity limit of 20,000 gpd that can be discharged into Chaska's system.
The utility improvements for the site shall be constructed in accordance with the City's standard
specifications and detail plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required
upon final platting for each phase for staff to review and City Council approval.
STREETS
The proposed streets are fairly well designed from a traffic circulation standpoint. However,
without street grades it is possible that the streets may be realigned to be compatible with the site
topography. The City's Comprehensive Plan proposes Coulter Boulevard to be extended west
from Galpin Boulevard to Trunk Highway 41 through this site. Currently, Coulter Boulevard has
been constructed up to 650 feet east of this development with the subdivision of Autumn Ridge.
The City has plans on extending Coulter Boulevard in the future depending on development
pressure. The access points onto Trunk Highway 41 and Trunk Highway 5 have been reviewed
by MnDOT (see attached letter dated 3/19/96). Staff has reviewed MnDOT's comments and
concerns and concurs with their findings.
The applicant should prepare a traffic study to determine traffic warrants for intersection
signalization, street widths and auxiliary turning lanes. The concept plan does not indicate the
road right -of -way width; however, the plans scale 80 feet wide which is consistent with
subdivision requirements. Streets shall be constructed in accordance with the City's design for
industrial/commercial -type use. According to City subdivision codes for this land use, street
right -of -way should be a minimum of 80 feet wide with a 36 to 52 -foot wide pavement section.
This type of roadway system (Coulter Boulevard) should also include a sidewalk or trail system
adjacent to the street within the road right -of -way.
MnDOT has programmed the upgrade of Trunk Highway 5 adjacent to this site sometime in
1999/2000. The developer should work with MnDOT in preparing their construction plans with
regards to site grading, drainage and street improvements adjacent to Trunk Highways 5 and 41
for compatibility.
The streets will need to be designed and constructed in accordance with City standard
specification and detail plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required in
conjunction with final platting for staff review and City Council approval. The developer will also
Kate Aanenson
Gateway Concept Plan Review
March 13, 1997
Page 3
be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide a financial security in
the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee site improvements.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The applicant should work with the City in coordinating a final location providing internal
street access for the water reservoir site in conjunction with preliminary plat submittal.
2. Sanitary sewer and water service from Chaska to the southwesterly portion of the site will
be limited to a discharge of 20,000 gpd. The remaining portion of the site will require
sanitary sewer and water service from Chanhassen via the Upper Bluff Creek Interceptor.
The applicant should petition the City for the extension of utilities and street (Coulter
Boulevard) to service the site.
3. The street and utility improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with
the City's standard specifications and detail plates. Detailed construction plans and
specifications will be required upon final platting for staff to review and City Council
approval. Erosion control measures will need to be developed on the grading, drainage
and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice
Handbook.
4. The developer shall incorporate the City's Surface Water Management Plan when
developing a overall comprehensive master drainage plan through the site. The
developer's construction plans shall also be designed to be compatible with future
upgrading of Trunk Highways 5 and 41.
5. The developer shall work with MnDOT in preparing their construction plans for
compatibility with future upgrading of Trunk Highways 5 and 41 improvements.
6. A traffic study shall be prepared by the applicant to determine traffic warrants for
intersection signalization, auxiliary turn lanes and street widths. The traffic study shall
also address pedestrian circulation.
Attachment: MnDOT letter to Kate Aanenson date 3/19/96
c: Charles Folch, Director of Public Works
\'cfsl \vol2leng\projects\gateway \concept plan review.doc
ON- �o �
a
� OF
March 19, 1996
Mir• ^esota Department of Transportatinn
Metropolitan Division
Waters Edge Building
1500 West County Road B2
Roseville, Minnesota 55113
Kate Aanenson
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Kate Aanenson:
SUBJECT: Gateway West Business Park
Site Plan Review S96 -015
Southeast Quadrant of TH 5 and TH 41
Chanhassen, Carver County
CS 1008
�ve- 92 -J S�
E
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the Gateway West
Business Park conceptual site plan submitted to us by Steiner Development, Inc. We find the
concept plan acceptable for further development with consideration of the following comments.
• We request that right of way be dedicated to accommodate the proposed reconstruction of
Trunk Highway (TIT) 5 and possible future expansion of TH 41. Along TH 5, right of
way needs have been identified by the project design engineer for the reconstruction
project; Jim Knutson of Barton - Aschman may be contacted at 332 -0421 for further
information. Along TH 41, we request a dedication of property on both sides of the
highway to establish a right of way width of 75 feet from highway centerline (150 feet
total width). The existing TH 41 right of way width varies, falling in the range of 33 to 40
feet from highway centerline. Any questions regarding TH 41 right of way needs may be
directed to Evan Green of our Preliminary Design Section at 582 -1303.
We futher request that access control be dedicated to the public along TH 5 and TH 41
right of way, except at the locations of the street entrances shown on the submitted plan
and any areas where access control has already been established. Any questions regarding
Mn/DOT's records of existing right of way and access control may be directed to John
Hippchen of our Right of Way Section at 582 -1261.
At the time of platting, the preliminary plat submitted for Mn/DOT review may be
forwarded directly to Ruth Ann Sobnosky of our Transportation Planning Section at the
above address. RECEIVED
MAR 21 RECD
An Equal Opportunity Employer CITY OF (;Hw'ivHASZ�,ui
Kate Aanenson
March 19, 1996
page two
• A Mn/DOT highway access permit is required for the proposed street connection to TH 5
east of TH 41 (referred to as West City Street in Chanhassen's Highway 5 Corridor
Study). The proposed reconstruction of TH 5 will accommodate a fill access intersection
at West City Street. However, if West City Street is constructed prior to the
reconstruction of TH 5, some improvements will be needed in the interim.
Specifically, a right turn and left turn lane on TH 5 will be needed at the TH 5 /West
City Street intersection. Transportation improvements necessitated by development, such
as the required turn lanes, are the financial responsibility of the project proposer, the city,
or both. Evan Green, as noted above, may be contacted regarding the design of these
lanes.
Plan and cross - sectional views of the proposed street connection, showing the required
turn lanes as appropriate, must be submitted with the access permit application. Bill
Warden of our permits section may be contacted at 582 -1443 for further information
regarding the permit process. The application must be submitted by the city if the new
connection is to be a city street.
• A highway access permit is also required for the proposed street connection to TH 41
approximately halfway between 82nd Street and TH 5. This connection must be limited to
right - in/right -out movements only. If there is no median on TH 41 at this location, the
connection must be constructed with a triangular center island to block left turning
movements. In addition, a right turn lane on northbound TH 41 is required.
Again, plan and cross - sectional views of the proposed access, showing the required center
island and right turn lane, must be submitted with the access permit application. Bill
Warden, as noted above, may be contacted for further information. Again, the application
must be submitted by the city if the new connection is to be a city street.
• No direct access to TH 5 or TH 41 will be allowed from any individual lot adjoining a
trunk highway. Lot access must be accommodated by way of internal and local streets.
• Where lots are located on the corner of a trunk highway and a local street — such as Lots
22, 8, 1, and 16 — we recommend that the entrance to the lot be set back from the
street/highway intersection a minimum of 300 feet from the intersection stopline. We
strongly recommend against construction of the proposed westerly entrance to Lot 8,
which is shown within 100 feet of the TH 41/82nd Street intersection.
Kate Aanenson
March 19, 1996
page three
• A Mn/DOT stormwater drainage permit imay be required for the proposed development.
Grading and drainage plans showing both existing conditions and proposed post -
development conditions must be submitted to Mn/DOT for review prior to construction.
Existing drainage patterns, systems, and rates of runoff affecting Mn/DOT right of way
should be perpetuated. Questions and correspondence may be directed to Mary Hondl
(797 -3053) of our Hydraulics Section at 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley 55422.
• Any use of or work within Mn/DOT right of way will require an approved Mn/DOT
permit. The permit required depends upon the nature of the proposed work. Bill Warden
may be contacted for further information.
If you have any questions regarding this review, please contact me at 582 -1383.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Malaby
t
Transportation Planner
c: Frederick Richter, Steiner Development Inc.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
FROM: Steve A. Kirchman, Building Official
DATE: March 10, 1997
SUBJECT: 92 -6 PUD file 2 (Gateway, Steiner Development)
I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, FEB 2 6
19 9 7 , CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project.
Analysis:
Demolition Permits. Existing structures on the property which will be demolished will require demolition
permits. Proof of well abandonment, if applicable, must be furnished to the City and a permit for septic
system abandonment, if applicable, must be obtained and the septic system abandoned prior to issuance of a
demolition permit.
Recommendation:
The following condition should be added to the conditions of approval.
1. Obtain demolition permits. This should be done prior to any grading on the property.
I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early
as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements.
g:\safety\sak\memos\plan\gatwayI
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
FROM: Greg Hayes, Fire Inspector
DATE: March 11, 1997
SUBJECT: Planning Case 92 -6 PUD File 2
I have reviewed the site plan review for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire
Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code or city ordinance /policy
requirements. The site plan is based on the available information submitted at this time. If additional
plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed. I have no
comments or concerns at this time.
g Asafety \gh \sitereview
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday, March 19, 1997
at 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
690 Coulter Drive
SUBJECT: Conceptual Industrial
Planned Unit Development
APPLICANT: Steiner Development
LOCATION: Southeast Corner of Hwy. 5
and Hwy. 41
NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The
applicant, Steiner Development, is requesting conceptual Industrial Planned Unit Development
to rezone 150.5 acres of property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate for 12 lots and 2 outlots
located at the southeast intersection of Hwy. 5 and Hwy. 41.
What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the
meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps:
1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
2. The Developer will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then
make a recommendation to the City Council.
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 Kate at 937 -1900 ext. 118. 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 March 6, 1997.
Owner
Ownadr
Owncty, Location
, No Address
MILLS PROPERTIES INC ATTN: TOM GREEN MAURICE 0 JR & JOAN R MOE
PO BOX 971 2515 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
BRAINERD, MN 56401 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JAY C DOLEJSI MICHAEL J MEADOWS
6961 CHAPARRAL LN 2519 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9227 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MID AMERICAN BAPTIST SOCIAL SERVICES MARK A WAGNER
CORPORATION 2511 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
2600 ARBORETUM BLVD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 8003
CHASKA GATEWAY PARTNERS
3610 HWY 101 S
WAYZATA, MN 55391
ROBERT W & JOANN C SCHWARTZ
2507 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
REGENTS OF UNIV OF MINN C/O REAL
ESTATE OFFICE
424 DON HOWE BLDG
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55455
WIN LANDSCAPE ARBORETUM
3675 ARBORETUM DR
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHASKA GATEWAY PARTNERS
3610 HWY 101 S
WAYZATA, MN 55391
HENRY & EDNA WRASE
8175 HAZELTINE BLVD
CHASKA, MN 55318 9619
MARK A & PEGGY A ARRINGTON
2503 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
BOYD D & DEBRA L AARESTAD
2510 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
LON D & JULIE M LOHMILLER
2499 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
TROTTERS RIDGE OF CHANHASSEN
2765 CASCO POINT RD
WAYZATA, MN 55391
0 Iep xee yep
I 1 x
j I
Highway
LEGEND
PARCEL
Wetland: 13.1 acres
Upland: 7.3 acres i i ! 1 �` ` l f rf J� ✓ D/
Total Area: 20 4 acres it e
PARCEL B
Wetland:
Upland:
Total Area:
12.7 acres
14.7 acres
27.4 acres
PARCEL C
Wetland:
12.8 acres
Interior Upland:
2.2 acres
Other Upland:
4.3 acres
Total Area:
19.3 acres
PARCEL D
Wetland:
Interior Upland:
Other Upland:
Total Area:
26.8 acres
7.2 acres
3.5 acres
37.4 acres
MORTM
1.V
a
m a
Z a
a
4 �
J tu a
Q w
�y� Z
V 0 w
, V U
Y/
c
v
3�t -
e
c
i
I,•�., w. eyee I
Ikayn: SLC
m,w. —
D-10 /x7/04
IM
Park & Recreation Commission Minutes
March 25,1997
A regular meeting of the Chanhassen Park & Recreation Commission was called to order at
7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, March 25 in the city council chambers. The following members were
present: Commissioners Lash, Howe, Berg, Manders, Roeser, Scott, and Meger. Staff present:
Todd Hoffman, Park & Recreation Director; Patty Dexter, Recreation Supervisor; Jerry
Ruegemer, Recreation Supervisor; and Mike Hammond, Facility Supervisor.
Minutes: The minutes of the February 25, 1997 meeting were approved as presented.
Determine Park, Trail and Recreation Conditions of Approval for Conceptual Planned Unit
Development—Industrial. Request to Rezone 150.5 Acres of Property Zoned AL,
Agricultural Estate for 12 Lots and 2 Outlots Located at the Southeast Intersection of
Highways 5 and 41; Steiner Development: Howard Dahlgren and Fred Richter were present
representing the applicant. A staff report was given followed by a presentation from the applicant.
Residents from the Trotters Ridge neighborhood were also present. All residents who spoke did so
in favor of setting aside the area identified by the commission as open space. Upon conclusion of
discussion, Commissioner Berg moved that upon submittal of a preliminary plat, that the following
features be incorporated:
• Designation of Outlots A and B as identified on the commission's concept plan as open
space.
• The identification of an internal trail /sidewalk system including the trails within Outlots A
and B, sidewalks and/or trails adjacent to thoroughfares, and a north/south trail adjacent to
Highway 41.
• A sidewalk should also be planned for the north side of 82n Street to facilitate east/west
pedestrian movement.
The means by which these requests can be accomplished include a combination of application of
PUD standards, park dedication, cash purchase, right -of -way dedication, etc.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Meger and all voted in favor.
The commission also expressed their preference that Coulter Boulevard not be extended through
the park preserve that is being created.
Mission Statement; Chanhassen Recreation Center: The commission recommended the
following mission statement be forwarded to the city council:
"The Chanhassen Recreation Center is a place dedicated to serving the growing needs of a
dynamic city. A place for playing, exercising, meeting, learning, and relaxing. A place where
people young and old gather to reenergize. A place for lifelong leisure."
CITY OF
CHAN ASSEN
PRC DATE: March 25, 1997
PC DATE: March 19, 1997
CC DATE: April 14, 1997
HOFFMAN:k
STAFF REPORT
PROPOSAL: Request for conceptual planned unit development -- industrial to rezone 150.5
acres of property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate for 12 lots and 2 outlots.
Z
J_
J
L
L
LOCATION: Southwest intersection of Highways 5 and 41.
APPLICANT: Steiner Development, Inc.
3610 South Highway 101
Wayzata, MN 55391
Conceptual and Narrative Attached
PRESENT ZONING:
ZZ
Li
ADJACENT ZONING
A2, Agricultural Estate
AND LAND USE: N - State Highway 5
S - City of Chaska — Industrial
E - City of Chanhassen — Parkland (O'Shaughnessy Donation)
W - State Highway 41
COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN
The Comprehensive Park Plan encourages the preservation of lands as a means of mitigating or
complimenting the loss of open space to industrial development. Portions of this site have been
identified by the commission for preservation since first being introduced to it in 1992. The concept
plan submitted by the applicant dated February 26, 1997 depicts two outlots at the eastern edge of the
proposed plat. These outlots encompass approximately 75% of the land identified by the commission as
desirable open space or parkland.
The commission's recommendation for acquisition is depicted on an attached concept plan dated
October 27, 1994 with revisions dated May 13, 1996 and March 4, 1997. The commission's concept
identifies 47.8 acres of desirable open space versus the applicant's 36.1. Continue to be aware that over
half of the open space identified in your concept is wetland and approximately 3 /4 of the open space
0
In viewing the concept plan prepared by Hoisington - Koegler, the parcels currently being studied are A
and B. The majority of parcels C and D were acquired through the O'Shaughnessy donation with a
small portion of parcel D being acquired as park dedication from Trotter's Ridge. The vision behind
assembling these properties into a 100+ acre open space preserve has evolved over the past 4 -5 years.
The applicant has expressed their willingness to cooperate with the city in fulfilling this vision.
COMPREHENSIVE TRAIL PLAN
The Comprehensive Trail Plan identifies major corridors at the western and northern boundaries of this
property. The Highway 5 trail to the north is scheduled to be accomplished with the extension of the
north access boulevard. The construction of the western trail adjacent to State Highway 41 will be
accomplished at the time the highway is updated. The internal trail system depicted on the
commission's concept plan should be completed contemporaneously with the development of this site.
To ensure that all trail and sidewalk connections are planned appropriately, both the design and
development of these systems should be a shared responsibility between the city and developer.
PRESERVATION OF THE WOODED WETLAND AND ADJOINING UPLANDS
The preservation of the large wooded wetland partially located on the Gateway site is an essential
ingredient to the success of the commission's vision. Equally important is the acquisition of a
continuous border of upland adjoining the wetland.
The wetland is classified as ag /urban, and is isolated from other water based resources in the city. There
is a limited amount of open water present, representing just 5% of the total area encompassed.. The
dominant plant species include: reed canary grass, cattail, jewel weed, sedge, and duck weed. Box elder
trees are abundant, and some American elms are present. Sources of water feeding the wetland include:
natural, storm water, and surface drainage. Some sedimentation and siltation has occurred. Numerous
dead and dying trees are present, a result of a recent change in water levels. Wildlife is abundant, and
includes deer, muskrat, water fowl, pheasant, mink, fox, frogs and other amphibians, and a multitude of
insect varieties. Hawks and owls also inhabit the area, finding refuge in the dense, wooded wetland and
adjoining forested areas. Under the current proposal to incorporate nearly 100 acres into a park reserve,
much of this wildlife will adapt to the impending surrounding development.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission make the following requests of the
applicant:
1. Upon submittal of a preliminary plat, incorporate the following features:
- Designation of outlots A and B as identified on the commission's concept plan as open space.
- The identification of an internal trail /sidewalk system including the trails within outlots A and B,
sidewalks and/or trails adjacent to thoroughfares, and a north/south trail adjacent to Highway 41.
-A sidewalk should also be planned for the north side of 82 Street to facilitate east /west pedestrian
movement.
The means by which these requests can be accomplished include a combination of application of PUD
standards, park dedication, cash purchase, right -of -way dedication, etc.
(':• \nn�4 \th \ciain >� tint
02.26%97 17:02 RX 612 473 7058 STEINER 0002/003
6&41 (Gateway) Development Conceptual Plan Narrative
The 146.5 acre Highway 5 & 41 Property is proposed to be developed into an industrial business park by
Steiner Development under a Planned Unit Development process (PM). The following summary
represents a conceptual outline that is the result of numerous meetings with Chanhassen City staff
resulting in a plan that responds to environmental and market concerns. This summary is based on the
Conceptual Plan dated February 26,1997 and the numbers are approximate.
The proposed plan indicates approximately 102.1 acres to be developed excluding roads, wetlands and
high park land that the City of Chanhassen will own. Based on a floor area ratio of 30 %, a planned
1,334,200 square feet of industrial buildings is possible. Under the Chanhassen City Code Planned Unit
Development District, 25% of the total building square feet can become ancillary uses to industrial and,
consequently, 333,500 square feet will be allocated to residential and commercial uses.
The eastern part of the site which is primarily wetlands is to become City of Chanhassen park land. This
land will be added to the existing City park land to the east. The high ground running through the middle
of the wetlands and the sloped wooded hillside immediately to the west of the wetlands is also proposed to
become developed park land and park trails. The wetland totals approximately 23.6 acres and the upland
area approximately 12.8 acres, for a total of 36.4 acres that will become park land. The final amount of
dedicated park land will be 10% of developable aercage or 10 acres.
Allowing 8 acres for road right of way plus 1.7 acres for natural environmental reserve ponding (NERP),
approximately 62.7 acres are to be developed into industrial buildings primarily accessed from a new
north south road from Highway 5 to 82 Street. This land is presently treeless and will be graded into 4
to 10 acre parcels. The r em ainin g 37.7 acres will become residential and commercial. The 14.3 acres of
commercial includes the 3.8 acres at the intersection of 81" Street and highway 41, the 6.5 acres at the
east side of the proposed north south road and Highway 5, and 4 acres to the west of the north south road.
The commercial arm's include sites for restaurants, banks, professional office, convenient store and other
support commercial uses. The 23.4 acre site in the south east comer of the property is proposed to be a
residential town house development.
Phase One: 1997 -1998
Phase One is to include the land accessible from 82 Street which includes 3.8 acres of commercial, 10
acres of industrial and 23.5 acres of residential. Utilities will have to be extended from the east to the
north south road and south to 82 Street The Industrial Tax Increment Finance District will be
established in Phase One.
Phase Two: 1999 - 2000
Phase Two will open with the construction of the north south road and will provide between 20 and 30
industrial acres and the 6.5 acres of commercial at the intersection of Highway 5.
Phase Three: 2001- 2002
Phase Three will be the final development phase opened up in conjunction with a=ss to Highway 41 at
the center of the property. Approximately 20 to 30 acres will be developed as industrial as well as the
remaining 4 acres of commercial in Phase Three. In the event that the Wrase propery is developed in
conjunction with the�roposed development a roadway extension of Peavey Road would be considered
running north of 82 Street to the proposed Highway 41 connection. This alternative would provide
various water tower locations, a east west road realignment and smaller platted lots.
lk
02:26 %97 17:02 FAX 612 473 7058 STEINER
0003/003
Architectural and landscape standards for the industrial area will be determined in conjunction with the
City of Chanhassen planning staff. It is anticipated that exterior walls will be painted and/or integral
color precast Concrete or masonry. Overall hard Surf= coverage is anticipated to be limited to 70% with
the remaining 30% to allow for topographical transitions between sites along with minimum setback and
landscape requirements.
We anticipate having an industrial project in the range of 100,000 square feet with Heartland America
Corporation as the anchor tenant to start Phase One. Heartland needs to occupy the building by October
1, 1997 to coincide with their existing lease termination. Consequently, we anticipate a City approval
process to run concurrently with the PUD process for preliminary and final plat application.
• . ti
Rd
Utica
Grei
8 •�•.`• t0O Ne�yB : ��• Sh
�/ T yrmo � • . \J a ��9
Or • A
• ° "av __ �, ! Lake
p, a - -e � c� ��. �; •
d Ann
r ' If / FawnHin
icw Mest
_•�
• / `c Coun • n. _
• • 3 U
J • ; ker8
1 e /
•. ` 1 ` °� Minnesota
•�.• .•� Arboretum . �_•_• -_•• •` .
_..` - --
Boulevard
Sate Hwy 5 Arboretum r- C
•` •• ••�•- �- . --• -- _�
+° State Hwy 5 -
..
Afoot • I • .
• I • Park
' %• _ - - -�"'- �. 1 Court O
• 1 �•. '"' •�.'�.'. Coukerehrd
Coulter • . ' t..
Minnesota Landscape Arboretum � � /
f
� ' I Timberwood pr • • , i
L 1 n' ° s .t • •� ��.•�Poad
W 82nd SL • �r IAaQ \t ° e4y o
1 -ukew , Oak,
tby Or °oar
�'� .. � ; o Hi dBe • r. • 'O
• •'•
•
J �Re�nan�' ew �l /
1 rk Coun Q ;
I �� �eneaeek / � c�� .. •`
�1 lane w 4a p • • - e
I � �v q' � ,,/ � � •� rGAC�
0 r
1 X401 Cr V. V. Lake D A' c9
Lyman B/ �' t = _ s•
t t•
Valley � \ et eTracworth a ` m ~� twnaCP
I tx
/ \ •• Je L Pie • i ell e jyeyRd •
/ • 7ir S /
in
• • Q c 9
`• • • to O l • r Q.
_ _ _ 4
\ 1
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
March 5, 1997
Mr. Fred Richter
Steiner Development
3610 South Highway 101
Wayzata, MN 55391
Dear Mr. Richter:
This letter is in response to our recent meeting at which the proposed Gateway West
Business Park was discussed. At that meeting, it was agreed that I would forward to you
three documents to assist in your planning. Please find the following documents enclosed:
1. Copies of a plan depicting the portion of the "Gateway" property which the city
desires for parkland/open space.
2. A plat depicting the O'Shaughnessy open space donation.
3. A plat depicting the Trotters Ridge Parkland dedication.
I trust this information will prove to be helpful. Please contact me if you require additional
assistance.
Sincerely
Todd Hoffinan
Park and Recreation Director
c: Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager
Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
Charles Folch, City Engineer
g: \park\th\ricltter.Itr
V
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 19,1997
Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Allyson Brooks, Bob Skubic, Alison Blackowiak, Craig Peterson,
LuAnn Sidney, Kevin Joyce, and Ladd Conrad
STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and
Dave Hempel, Asst. City Engineer
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO REZSONE 102 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED A2,
AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(RESIDENTIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL) LOCATED AT THE S3
QUADRANT OF HIGHWAYS 5 AND 41, GATEWAY, STEINER DEVELOPMENT.
Public Present:
Name Address
Al Klingelhutz 8600 Great Plains Boulevard
Rick Wrase 8175 Hazeltine Boulevard
Fred Rickter Applicant
John Uban
Tom Kordonowy Steiner Development
Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item.
Peterson: Any questions for staff?
Brooks: I have some questions. Is there any Federal ... for this project or any State funding that's
being used for this project or State permit?
Aanenson: Well the access possibly...
Brooks: What about wetland?
Aanenson: There's no DNR wetlands or...
Brooks: I guess, they're not going to fill any wetlands?
Aanenson: Yes there will be some wetland mitigations that they will have to be permitting. The
City would be improving...
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Brooks: But they are, how old are these structures that are being demolished?
Aanenson: The farmstead, I'll have to let the applicant talk to that. Whether or not they're
historic. There is a historic piece, the Wrase one and we've spoken to the Wrase's. That's
certainly something, if they would decide to sell, that we would want to move that home and put
it, as part of the large park that we're talking, as a possible interpretative center for that park.
Brooks: Okay, but if that house is eligible for that and you move it, it will lose it's eligibility.
Okay, so this is something to keep in mind. Also, it says that instead of an EIS you're
recommending an AUAR. What exactly is that?
Aanenson: What it does it scopes the same issues. It's on a little bit shorten review process. We
believe that because of the level of detail that we do our ordinances already, our tree ordinance,
our wetland ordinance, we already require so much in our city, that we're not requiring anything
above and beyond that.
Brooks: So are they going to be required to do a ... resource survey?
Aanenson: Yes...
Brooks: Okay. You have to...three sites on the Villages so, and this with wetlands would be
another good area.
Aanenson: They've already done...
Brooks: Thanks.
Peterson: Other questions of staff?
Joyce: Kate, the only thing I can think of, a quick question. What happens if you put Coulter
Boulevard through, what kind of impact is that going to have on what we're talking about here?
I didn't quite understand that.
Aanenson: The Coulter Boulevard project, when we did the Autumn Ridge, we looked at the
soils and that ... touch down point has already been established because there is poor soils in that
area and there was a lot of discussion of whether or not we could abandon that ... but we believe
with the volumes on Highway 5 that it is a good alternative, east /west connector that's always
been identified in the City's comprehensive plan to have a connector...
Joyce: But will it impact the conceptual plan that you have here?
Aanenson: ...actually what it does, Coulter... significant change in grade between this
development and State Highway 41.
2
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Joyce: So Coulter will stop right, or you will have to turn right?
Aanenson: Yeah, we have this movement coming in to the north/south.
Joyce: Okay, yeah. I guess that's my point. There's going to be a T right there is what their plan
is, right?
Aanenson: Well they could build... temporary cul -de -sac before it gets to TH 41.
Joyce: Okay.
Aanenson: They're going to need an east/west connection... Eventually this will come through.
It's when Highway 41 is widened...
Joyce: Okay, thanks.
Skubic: Kate, which businesses qualify as service commercial?
Aanenson: When we put ... what we talked about is maybe some restaurants, a gas station, bank,
day care ... but it's certainly not going to be a big box user or anything like that...
Sidney: I had a question about the mix of commercial residential and as I understand a PUD can
have up to 25% non whatever it is zoned for buildings and things in it. And they're proposing
24.99% right now. I'm wondering about the ratio of commercial to residential in that 24.99 %. If
there's a rationale for more commercial than residential or what is that ratio?
Aanenson: That's a good question. We really haven't done that many true mixes like this. I
guess when they went back to the City Council, the area that we're talking about for residential is
probably the most wooded piece. Concerned about the sensitivity of the development of that and
some of that can build with the topography in mind. Certainly the intent of that commercial is to
support the industrial, not necessarily the residential. The residential certainly can benefit from it
but...
Peterson: Other questions?
Blackowiak: I have a couple quick ones. Talked about discharge into Chaska's system. 20,000
gallons per day. Is that something that's feasible? That the applicant feels is going to be a
workable amount for them.
Hempel: Again this is an interim situation until we're able to extend sewer and water services
out to the site, which those utilities could be extended this summer out to that area.
Blackowiak: But 20,000 would be sufficient until something is extended to them? I mean I have
no.
k]
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Hempel: That would be a question for the applicant.
Aanenson: That's something, as this evolves ... that they can meet that.
Blackowiak: Okay. And secondly, the Park Commission, they met last night regarding this?
Aanenson: I apologize, it's actually next week.
Blackowiak: Oh, it's next week so the 18 all right. That's it for me.
Peterson: Before we call the applicant up I just want to remind you all that, the total
Commission, this is a concept approval so the developers and staff are really just looking for a
more general feedback and direction so they can move ahead and get more detail so we will see
this again. So with that in mind does the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning
Commission? If so, please come forward and state your name and address.
Fred Richter: Good evening. I'm Fred Richter with Steiner Development. We're in Wayzata.
Let me just start off by introducing the gentlemen here with me tonight as part of our team. Tom
Kordonowy, Steiner Development. Then our planning consultants from Dahlgren, Shardlow &
Uban, Howard Dahlgren and John Uban. ...we have over the years worked a lot with the city
staff. Gone through a lot of gyrations and various directions... and kind of enter into a
dialogue... what we think is workable on this site ... not only to Steiner Development but also to
the City in it's vision. ...have industrial with the residential, trying to work the wetlands and
kind of relate to the ... Park Commission's desires and so on. So I think in a nutshell, we're pretty
in tune with city staff and have some ideas that we want to share with you and I think my purpose
is introductory. Is to introduce Steiner Development... proposal and then John Uban will go kind
of a detailed... We've got a few, just images. This is a office industrial PUD. I guess the first
question you ask yourself, what is an office industrial park. What does Steiner Development
bring to the table to guide it that way. These images are a project that we accomplished in the
southwest quadrant of the metro area. ...Steiner and Koppleman, residential branch to
commercial has done a lot of development in the southwest. We're very sensitive to some of the
topographical as well as project features. It's our role as a developer to be the component of
buying the marketplace... and livable project in detail. This project here, I put together the
Edenwood. It's down by Valley View in Eden Prairie and I think one of the overall features in
this development... This is an office showroom type of project that was built in the late 80's.
Another project we did a little further out this way, is one completed just in the last couple years.
It was more of a smaller site so the overall site issues weren't the same but again it was trying to
take the industrial building, which by nature is long and horizontal and not ... talking about office
industrial often 20% office. The rest of it is storage, distribution and in some cases light
assembly... It's all driven by the southwest metro market, which is... We've built and manage
over 2 million square feet of industrial area and we're constantly seeing things grow and change
and in some cases we're talking... This project, it sits on a wetland—the landscaping. I think
some trails around the pond... Other Steiner Development projects have ranged over the years,
our home building on TH 101. This could be an example of the commercial, which is a small
quasi professional type building. We've done a medical building out in Waconia attached to the
4
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
hospital... The large building here is the... building in Chaska. You can see that
probably... working in Chaska we came over the years knowing that their interest in Highway 41
and keeping it, more of a rural feel... When you look at materials in an industrial area like this,
our building here, this is actually right across 82 °d . It's the United Postal building. You have a
mixture of brick and masonry and the architecture is again an office industrial multi- tenant, but
by and large we'll be ... is masonry, either brick or architectural block or architectural precast so
we can photograph to show those combinations. I say architectural precast. That needs to be
added... there's elements, windows and other... One other thing that... I think in summary,
Steiner sees after being involved with this for over... the land is owned by members of Steiner
Development and other individuals. We've had several inquiries in the last three years. Specific
ones and we feel now is the time to move forward. The timing issue is crucial in the sense that
we're partners with the City. The utilities are brought in, area wide assessments in place, we
have... marketplace on several proposals... We have a first phase proposal for an industrial
user... This is important because it establishes the overall framework of the development. ...pay
back the utility and street improvements, and we have that understanding with an end user. A
local corporation. The other thing in the PUD I think to focus on, the main issue tonight is
conceptual and that is ... the overall concurrence that this should be guided under this framework.
The framework being the 150 acres by the time we take out the TH 41 and TH 5 easements, 146
acres. Then we take out the parkland, wetland... developable and we think because of the nature
of this land, certain parts of it do lend itself better to residential and then some for commercial,
we're into a ratio of approximately 67 acres that are industrial. Approximately 14 are commercial
and then the residential, 23. And John Uban will go into that in detail so I don't want to get too
far... But I think the thing I do want to stress ... to answer questions and try to, that you
understand a lot of the background, not only from our own work but the city staff has come into
this...
John Uban: Good evening, I'm John Uban. I'm here really to give you an overview of the
property and some of the design considerations that we're looking at, including the industrial
business part of a varying piece of property. It's varied in that there's a quality wetland with
extensive trees and so forth. On this initial sketch we've indicated a road system that goes
through the property. Here's Highway 41. Highway 5. We've indicated some of the pioneering
natural features of the site. In green, there's a wooded corner of the site. It's hard to tell on the
screen but these two larger wetlands have been there for quite a while, and some of the sort of the
extensions you found were agricultural drainage systems which we're working... under the new
criteria which portions are wetlands and which are not. However, about half of this wetland has
always been under cultivation over the last 50 years. And so it has returned, on the wet years,
been turned into a more natural state and then is cultivated historically during the dry periods.
We saw all of this with the natural systems as being a very important part of the site. And when
we first came to the City we proposed a park over all of these natural features of the site, and that
would be donated to the city. And that really, at first we really did not have that notion in
the ... but over the years with the wisdom of creating this natural park has grown with the citizens
and city staff and we're really pleased at this point that 36 acres of this natural area is part of our
plan as dedication to the city. These wetlands are quite frankly some of the most beautiful ones
I've ever seen because of the growth that is around them and they offer very nice amenities to be
enjoyed by everyone. And so we are anticipating in the center area, that the 36 acre park. The
61
Planning Commission Meeting -March 19, 1997
wooded areas at this time are contemplated for a residential type development. They have the
higher amenities. They have the nice views into the parkland. This open space. They have
trees ... and they're very nice. Also, in building ... the park department, they may be interested in
part of that southeast corner. We do not know and we have to meet with them next week and so
we will be finding out more as we go through this process what input from the neighbors... If
that happens, a residential development in this corner will be... We have about 1.2 million
square feet that we...25% of that is proposed for other uses of support commercial and
residential. About twice as much residential as there is commercial. So there's an actual...
There's nothing really magic about that... The other thing I'd like you to notice on this diagram
are where the lines are close together is where we find the steeper terrain in the property. In
order to develop this we have to do a fair amount of grading. Several things are happening
around the property that we have to adjust to. First of all, Highway 41 is scheduled to be lowered
so we'll need to be grading portions of this site to accomplish that. And that is sometime in the
future, and we don't know exactly when that will be scheduled. Sometime shortly after Highway
5 is completed we believe. Additionally we are leaving some of the natural growth in place. For
instance this area where the slopes provides a wonderful view back towards the property. We
anticipate this would be a great place for a restaurant, theme restaurant... or a hotel... The rest of
the site will be reterraced to match into the property lines that separate the different uses. And so
what takes place is a terracing. Not a leveling of the site but a terracing. Where we have one
building set higher or lower than the one next to it with slopes in- between. Then we're
proposing also ... natural state so you'll once again see those edges of slopes between the
buildings screening from each other the back side. Overall this gives you a polarized version of
the land uses. We have park on the eastern side. Residential, associated with that park, and this
is the area with the highest amenities. At the entrance to Highway 5, restaurant, hotel type of
services up on top. And at 82 " more convenience type commercial, whether it's a gas station,
bank, those sorts of facilities. The rest of it, then moving over, will be industrial business type of
uses. The road system supports that. This leg of the road will probably be the last one built.
...have to be done with Highway 41. All of the roads anticipate this terracing of these lots so
their grading has to adjust proportionately. So the whole site really has to be designed as one
element ... out of 150 acres, 62 acres is industrial, 14 is commercial, 23 is residential, park is 36
and right -of -way 13. That's how it breaks down. The additional things that you will see as we
bring, in front of you again will be the amenities referred as the design elements that we're
putting together to tie this as a single business park. This is very guide ... does not equal a tree
but it's to show the general intent and ideas that we're trying to accomplish. The plan here
shows the sort of pairing of trees around the perimeter. This is to replicate orchard type
plantings. This is... The area used to be an orchard. Next to an orchard. It's the closest to the
Arboretum. This technique has been used I believe around the elementary school and so this is
our theme for the perimeter. To use flowering trees in a setting of replication of orchard
plantings. We also anticipate monumentation and signage at the entrances. At three points. We
also anticipate the gateway type feature at the very corner of TH 5 and TH 41. Within the
development a streetscape that will include clustered trees. Not just trees lined up evenly along
the street but placed in clusters. Lighting, individual signage. The whole package put
together... coordinated. In addition we propose several ponds and so the trail system that will
integrate the site with the park. These are basic elements that we'll be bringing forward in
addition to our... Overall the concept is reflecting this idea of returning... some historical point
C
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
that of an orchard and at the same time create an interior matching in with the natural setting of
the park. Just to summarize, we have to do a phasing of this development. Utilities come from
the south, from Chaska to begin with. The utilities from Chanhassen are brought in from the east
at a later date so there's a sequence of events. Each phase is sort of... on the development and it
allows us to grade portions of the site at one time. We do not anticipate mass grading. Right
now it's a little bit different scale from the sketch that we've completed. Phase I will include
both development on 82 Street, a portion of the road system and working with the Park
Department on the timing of the east/west road. Phase II then is completing the north/south road
with the lots that abut this area. This north/south road we anticipate being installed
approximately when the completion of Highway 5 is done. And that allows that north/south road
to act as a by -pass to Highway 41 when that is complete so we're trying to tie the interior
development to help offset against the... The last phase is along Highway 41. That is the last
improvement. It also, we're saving this corner parcel, or group of parcels, for the very last.
We're anticipating holding that to really see how, you know some premium development. We
don't know what it is. Just something that the City will really go for. We don't know exactly at
this point how long that will take but we're certainly willing to wait to find out. I think that's
about it. If you have any questions, we're here to answer them. This is where we're at and when
we come back again...
Peterson: Any questions from commissioners?
Conrad: Sure. Why do you need the residential on this? Why, it's the first thing you're going to
develop. What's your logic in terms of persuading us that we should take our industrial and turn
it residential, which may be a loss for us and we're probably not going to be able to find more
industrial land in this city. So I guess I'd just like you to tell us, is there a demand right now for
residential and that's what you're responding to?
John Uban: Well there certainly is a demand and we did bring this through one time to be
reviewed as all residential and we found the market was interested in this parcel for residential
development. I think the important part is why residential in that particular spot and that really is
a beautiful spot. ...looking at that area, it is much more of a residential site than it is an
industrial site. It has the amenities of view. The association with the future park and trails.
Close facilities to the elementary school. It has many of the features that you would really like to
have in a residential development. Now it happens to be in a development here that will have
other businesses around it. So it has to be done carefully and we're fortunate that most likely it
will be buffered by park on almost all sides except the west side and that side we are in control
of. We already are looking at the development of the lot. This one right here that looks directly
across the street from them. That will be a very handsome building. Properly landscaped up
front. Car parking perhaps in the front with all the loading hidden around back. And on the
residential side there could be berming and ... to make that work. We also like to have a variety
of uses in industrial parks. Opus is an example where that took place. Much has been learned
from that. We're finding that, we've been planning... relationship of business, housing and
commercial coming closer together. Rather than placing one thing way over here and... and then
get in your car and drive over here... Now that will happen no matter what we do, but we think
that designing and building things to a high standard where residential and businesses and other
7
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
things really do have to take place in close proximity and perform well. So we're designing
something that performs well enough to accommodate.
Conrad: What kind of residential are you envisioning right now?
John Uban: Primarily townhouses would be our idea of what would happen today. Small lot
single family maybe or townhouses. Not apartments... On the other side of TH 41, before the
Arboretum purchased that.
Conrad: What do you envision on the corner? The biggest lot you have, right on the intersection
of TH 41 and TH 5?
Fred Richter: ...at this point in time we don't have a specific vision. Your question, your first
question about residential and timing. Right now... marketable down here and as you move this
way the time frame is further out. In the last year and a half.
Conrad: Because there's not the demand?
Fred Richter: There's not the demand for, to really justify... Right now there's a demand for a
certain amount of office industrial, but we see this corner as being office, more corporate
identity. In the last year and a half we have talked to people who have maybe entertained that
area but they've found sites further in Eden Prairie ... 494. It's our belief, as John said, as we
move this way and start the quality development here, it's really in our best interest and the city's
best interest to wait and see if we can't get something... take advantage of the exposure... One of
the things that we...we can't get too out of line with our development costs ... metro competition.
As nice as we all think this area is, we're competing with Shakopee. We're competing with
people moving out to areas... We know the quality of the site, a better site ... but we still want to
keep competitive so we see that Phase I being very sensitive... So we're like to see stay with this
plan to give us as much flexibility. We're not sure if it's a cul -de -sac or it could even be a loop
road. It's somewhat conceptual over in this corner. I think going back to your question, you
asked earlier about why residential. The other thing that you can see in this diagram here,
industrial office, what's marketable today, really would just destroy. We have problems with this
wetland... Residential is being tucked in. We could save a lot of the trees...
Conrad: When you come back it would be very persuasive to show how residential fits there and
is more sensitive to the environment than industrial. Very definitely. I want to see that so that's
important.
Fred Richter: ...townhouses. A 2,000 square foot or ... footprint versus office industrial building
which in today's marketplace is literally 50,000 square feet ... 2,000 you can move with the
topography versus 50 has to be just flat.
Conrad: Kate, are we looking for more land for homes right now?
1.11
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Aanenson: No. I guess that's the point that we raised. Frankly we have a lot of that. I think
what we're saying, our recommendation is to come in with ... product or a different price point.
...issue that we have. It's got to be something different.
Conrad: And it could be, you're saying different affordable.
Aanenson: That's one option. Or just different architecturally. Price point or something that
we've got a lot of townhouses being approved. Autumn Ridge right to the east. I think you want
to see, to give them that, we want to see something different.
Conrad: What property's to the south? Is that Chaska?
John Uban: That is Chaska and there are a variety of industrial uses but some of them have a lot
of open space...
Fred Richter: ...but there's Chaska Business Center here and another smaller corporate use.
Conrad: When I look at one lot here, can I envision one building? Is that what we are assuming?
Maybe not on that corner lot but when you divide this up, how should we right now respond to
how you've divided them into the 9 or whatever number lots here. One major building per lot or
is it just, this is how you think you're going to be able to see it off or?
John Uban: Primarily yes. One building per lot. Some of them may combine together, if
there's... Up here this may become two restaurants versus one restaurant, depending on the size.
If it's small, a 5,000 square foot restaurant you could probably get two buildings there, versus the
larger theme...
Aanenson: ...that's one of the reasons why we want to do a PUD on this property. They've
talked to some users, as they've indicated. We've talked to them too. We're happy with the
people that are out looking at this, and it may just happen that someone wants to ... on that corner.
A big corporate user or something else. That would be fine with us. What we're trying to deal
with in the environmental assessment... and then if they snap it into different lots, that's okay.
There will be some...
Conrad: What's the biggest concern you have with the City right now and how we're fitting in?
John Uban: Well getting it nailed down I guess.
Fred Richter: ...to move the project forward. Our intent is to try to take an opportunity with...
Not only take your leadership and guidance but we've got... study and we're well aware of the
nature of the you know... One other thing, kind of follow -up. ...This is TH 5. This is TH 41
going to Chaska. This is the property under consideration. This is Peavey Road. This is all
Chaska. What's interesting, as we look at this, developing this we have done studies... Until that
happens, the type of land we're offering ... for this to become marketable. So to a large degree we
see kind of the projects kind of moving up out of Chaska and at the same time we're constantly
9
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
capturing the amenities coming down TH 5 from 494. Right now 494 and TH 5... would be more
than happy to... The 5 corridor is probably where... Going back to the major site building...
Peterson: Other questions?
Joyce: What portion of this is going to be a TIF District? First phase of it and everything
involved here. I noticed you said in the first phase could be where you have the.
Fred Richter: I don't see Todd. The TIF district, I know it's driven by the blue.
Joyce: The industrial portion of it.
Fred Richter: The industrial. Kate, some of the red can be in the TIF district, is that true?
Aanenson: Yes. In order for the city...
Peterson: Other questions of the applicant?
Brooks: I'd like you to readdress the landscaping issues. I sort of liked what you showed until
you said a tree doesn't necessarily equal a tree and that started concerning me a little. As you go
west from Paisley Park studios, right now you get a real nice feel of Carver County as being
agricultural. And when I see this, I just would like a better feel, you know I'm a little nervous if
you put your restaurant and everything right up to Highway 5, then all we're going to have is a
strip that's continuing all the way down to, well eventually unfortunately Waconia so I just, I
would like a little bit better sense of if you plant to set some of these things back a ways so that
the visual is less intrusive. The other question I have is when you border Chaska, I once heard
the Mayor of Chaska say, and rightly so, that he wanted to green belt his city so that when you
move from Chanhassen to Chaska, you know you've left one town and entered another town,
which is a fair thought. Otherwise it just becomes endless suburbia. I would also be interested in
hearing how you plan to landscape the division between Chan and Chaska.
John Uban: I'll take both of those, and when I commented that a tree does not equal a tree here it
means this is diagrammatic and we'll have more trees than what you see here.
Brooks: Well that's good.
John Uban: This is here for conceptual to try and get a feel for it because we haven't gotten into
the detail of it yet. We do recognize the importance of having an attractive ... on Highway 5.
Then with the issue of the restaurant, we have a lot of steep slopes in here and this will have to be
sort of uniquely defined you know back and forth. How much should be landscaped. How much
is for parking and things like that. The real opportunity comes from the larger site as you form
the corner and that corner is where everyone stops and is part of sort of the gateway feeling
through the Arboretum as you head that way. You know north, Minnewashta Park and... Chaska
so we recognize that there are a lot of important ingredients that have to happen. And perhaps
the City and the Arboretum have some ... feeling that surrounding that intersection you know with
10
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
trees or something to form a very unified pattern that could take place around the intersection.
We only have one corner. But those things we'll explore with the city and we've also talked to
the City of Chaska and they have actually given us some suggestions on how to incorporate
Highway 41 into their theme as you go through town. And now when it comes to separating
Chanhassen from Chaska at the border, you have to recognize that Chaska didn't do their share.
And we hopefully contributed to our share by working with the Arboretum and... Chanhassen
portion, at least on the west side. On our side we just, we'll have an attractive development... as
well as what Chaska did. Now what happens, what makes these marked difference... how the
water tower is treated on the Wrase parcel. Something there might happen that might give some
identity to that separation. But we'll have landscaping throughout but because 82 Street is
really on the line, there's no open space that can separate Chaska from Chanhassen. And so the
other separation is then as you move to the east, and you know we're keeping all these wetlands
and so forth, and if the park wants to expand, that also will help create a very definite separation.
Whole different flavor ... so I think we'll try to do our best but we have to practical and we have
recognized many things that we can do and we'll be bringing those details to you.
Brooks: Yeah, I think you're just in a visually sensitive area, especially with the Arboretum so
it's just important to keep in mind.
Fred Richter: I think we ... Chaska really invested a lot of money into protecting their
"downtown ". Being that the road leads away from them, the more natural terrain and less rural
town center... At the same time we're in a very sophisticated suburban environment that needs
industrial... so I think what John is really describing is the landscaping that is... At the same time
the residents are going to need some commercial support...
Peterson: Other questions?
Sidney: I was wondering if you could give me a better sense of what you meant by terracing. I
was wondering about, I hope you have pictures or something.
John Uban: I do have just a quick sketch. It's diagrammatic in the sense that there's not—on the
site but this would indicate an upper and lower terrace. It will define... Where this land has
some slope to it, portions of it get flatten out to accommodate the buildings and parking ... rear
portions of the site. And then we have the change in slope and what we're proposing is the
natural... slope. Nothing that we would mow. Put natural materials back on to ... natural feeding
and then following up with naturalized planting of trees and shrubs. When you do that on the
slope you use lots of small material that ... very readily and yet on the upper portions obviously
you have sort of shade trees... What's also nice is that we control the drainage so that we won't
have erosion in there. There will be control of the water that... controlled drain system that will
minimize the amount of water that would want to run down the slope. And all of this together
then starts to re- establish the natural edge. And we want to do this so that each building has it's
own setting. Has sort of a frame or wrapping around it and although this you know, seed it and
small things to begin with, with patience these things do grow very quickly, especially after the
fifth year...
11
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Sidney: Are you making use of natural the topography?
John Uban: Readjusting. ...I mean the grade on the top and the bottom, we just have to adjust
that and make plateaus at different levels...
Peterson: What kind of elevation drops are we talking about? When you go back to the top map.
Can you give us some sense of what areas and how large of drops you're talking about?
John Uban: From the very highest point to the very lowest across the site, there's about 100 feet
of drop. The upper portion will be lower, I think around 15 feet, depending upon the elevation of
TH 41. And then as you terrace in three sections, so we have probably 20 to 30 feet in a terrace.
So that's—maybe around the height of the building itself. We don't have... These will be
different elevations and I think that will in of itself create an interesting arrangement, more so
than you would find in sort of a flat corn field type of industrial park.
Blackowiak: I have a quick question about the residential. Based on the plan, it seems like
they're going to be somewhat landlocked in the middle of an industrial park to the west and an
industrial park to the south. And no other residential around it. Can you speak to that issue?
And also, do you have a potential number of residents that would be in that area, based on what
you envision at this point in time.
John Uban: Right now our program we anticipate, between 100 to 120 units in that area. You
probably, 2 to 2 %2 people per unit. But the number of people, we don't know how many people.
Whether it's isolated, there really is a neighborhood just 100 feet away from it. The Trotter's
Ridge neighborhood really is right here. Directly to the southeast ... so the two together I think
form a very nice edge from one residential development into the next.
Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Thank you. Hearing none I'd like to have a motion
please to open it up to a public hearing.
Conrad moved, Skubic seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was
opened.
Rich Wrase: Can I say a couple words? My name is Rich Wrase. I'm representing my father
and mother, Henry Wrase and Edna Wrase and this is ... right here. And in the first place ... We're
interested, we're not against this development. We'd like to see this in the future be part of the
development. We don't want to be a residential area in the middle of commercial property and
that's all I have to say for now. We want a reasonable offer ... access 82 Street. Thank you.
Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the commission? Can you state your name
and address please.
Al Klingelhutz: I'm Al Klingelhutz of 8600 Great Plains Boulevard. Henry Wrase and Edna,
who own this property, called me this afternoon and asked me to come in front of the
commission... I guess Henry's afraid at the present time, if you look at this plat here and you see
12
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
a little... from Highway 41 into the industrial property, but you don't see any into Henry Wrase's
property. The Highway Department, when they improve Highway 41 is going to allow an
entrance to Henry Wrase's property where it is at the present time. It looks to me like the two
accesses are going to conflict on a major highway right there because normally there's a 500 foot
distance spread and that ... so Henry's biggest concern at the present time is to see to it that
either... development, there's access to that property. For the time being I think he can keep the
access he's got now and I think it's very important, and... something about a water tower for his
property. If the Highway Department says no, there can't be an access to the property, what is
the value of that property? Or what is the value of his property to the City for a water tower?
They're going to have to have access to the property, for a water tower on the property too.
Henry would sell the property ... very reasonable price. There's two homes on the property.
One's fairly new and the other one is one of the older homes in Chanhassen. Henry Wrase's
been a resident of Chanhassen for 82 years. He's a long time resident. His wife lived in
Chanhassen. Was born and raised in Chanhassen township and happens to need her own place in
Chaska. Now if ..so that's a real concern for Henry. Henry just recently came out of the
hospital. He has cancer. Still recuperating so that's why... somebody else could come up here
and speak for him. I'd like to thank you.
Peterson: Thank you. Dave, can you speak to the issue of access off of TH 41 a little bit?
Aanenson: Maybe I can do that. The City Manager and myself met with Mr. Wrase and his son.
The developer is aware of the situation and there's a number of different scenarios that can
happen to this site. Certainly we need a water reservoir on this site, and that's one option. If we
take it for public purposes, the City could acquire that property which is certainly an interest. Or
maybe... developer... Certainly we would want to improve Mr. Wrase's driveway situation. The
developers are aware of that. Even if no one buys the property and they continue to live there,
we would certainly recommend taking the driveway access ... but we're aware of that as this
project evolves...
Peterson: Okay, thanks. Anyone else wish to come up to Planning Commission? Seeing none,
may I have a motion to close the public hearing?
Skubic moved, Sidney seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Peterson: Commissioners. Ladd, do you have any thoughts that you'd like to start off with?
Conrad: No, I'm fine with it. Yeah, I'm not fine with giving up, we give them the same deal
again that we talked with. That the applicants are very aware of I'm not real thrilled about
giving up industrial. But I think if they come back, but overall the PUD looks reasonable to me.
I think if they come back and give us, to tell us a little bit about how they plan to put residential
on there and if they give us a product that we may feel is appropriate for it, and a couple other
things, for me we, you know I've got to be convinced that you're treating that property with the
residential, that's the best use of the property. Very definitely. I've got to see that. It's certainly
not going to make Chanhassen any money so I've got to make sure that it's doing something for
the property. Number two, I want to make sure that that corner is really a high grade corner.
13
Planning Commission Meeting -March 19, 1997
There's just no doubt. Again, the only, as we give up residential, I just want to make sure a
couple things are happening and I think they'll take care of the landscaping but that corner just
absolutely has to be high grade. This has to be our entry, our gateway to Chan so I trust that
you'll make it that and it's to your advantage and obviously something that we want here. Other
than that, I really don't have any major other issues with the project as defined in this sketch
plan.
Peterson: Do you have any thoughts as it relates to the type of housing? Whether it be
affordable? Whether it be, is that going to be ... any more compelling. The aspect of how it fits
in the environment or is it going to be the type or is it going to be a combination of both?
Conrad: That's a good question Craig. We don't really need, we don't need townhomes. It's a
sellable product right now and therefore they can sell the land, and that's okay. That's, but we
should motivate them somehow and make sure that they can get this project rolling. You know
for me, right now I think Kate worded it well. We need something a little bit different. I don't
think we want the same old, same old. I wouldn't say it's got to be affordable but it would be
nice if it were. It would be nice if we had a new product that complimented what else we had in
town. I don't know what that is. I'm not smart enough to figure that out so. But it's got to be
enough to motivate us to take 23 acres out of industrial. Along with whatever else we say here.
That's sort of, you know we've got to say what we'd like to see on the other part. The part that
stays IO...hear what that is. I'm trying with the support commercial. I think that's important.
It's a PUD. I think that a hotel there is fine. I think that services are fine for the residential. I
think that just makes sense. That's what a PUD is about. That's what we'd like to do. That's
what we discovered in the Villages is to make sure that we give, we're not really, that we're
supporting the uses there with other things so.
Peterson: Good. Thanks. Kevin.
Joyce: I actually like the plan. I don't have that much problem with the residential. I think it's a
good opportunity for the city. That would be the place to look at securing some affordable
housing. Some of the issues we have, I think that's just a good spot. I do agree with Ladd that
townhomes, we don't need any more townhomes or anything. Come up with something a little
more creative in that regard. But I do like the concept. Just a couple of odds and ends. Number
one, as far as the Wrase's are concerned, I think that we should be a little more concrete when we
come up with. I look at the recommendations, I don't see anything mentioned about the
residential portion of that. And I think they do have some legitimate concerns and if we can put
in something there to ally their concerns. If they do continue to live there, they'll know that they
won't have these problems they're talking about with the upgrading of TH 41 and that, and I
think that's important. I'm kind of hearing that on that compliance table, those are just
guidelines of what possibly might be going into those lots. I understand that. I would definitely
look at Lots 10 and 11 which are on Highway 5. Those are going to be sensitive lots and I think
we're going to be very limited on what we can put there. I can't imagine putting... stores and
things like that obviously on the Highway 5 corridor. They wouldn't allow that but if those will
become commercial type of lots we're going to have to look at those very seriously. The only
14
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
other thing I have a thought on the orchard tree clusters. Personally, my own personal taste, I
don't like the orchard tree clusters.
John Uban: We need to know that.
Joyce: And that's why I'm saying it because it just, I'll look to the other commissioners but I
didn't like that idea. So other than that, that's all I have to say.
Peterson: LuAnn.
Sidney: Well like the other two commissioners I don't have any problem with the plan. In fact I
do like the proposal the way it's presented. I do have some concerns about the treatment of the
residential area and how that fits into the parkland. I'd like the applicant to consider strongly the
possibility of adding some of that land into the park system if possible. I think it would make a
very good transition between the residential area and the other, that residential area and Trotters
Ridge residential area. As well as help to act as a buffer to the south to the Chaska area. And as
I drove by that area this afternoon there are some very nice industrial properties to the south.
However, I believe as you go along, is it 82 "d ? There is one property where you have truck
loading docks right up to the road and I would think that the trees and that pond area would help
to shelter the proposed residential area from that part of the Chaska development. I think overall
I think it's a good plan.
Peterson: Thanks. Alison.
Blackowiak: Well I agree that the concept is good. My general comments in terms of guidance
would be, sensitivity to the existing topography. I think that mass grading, that term just scares
me and I think that the terracing is a good way to look at it. I like the idea of some type of a
cover on the terraced slopes to try to keep more of a naturalized, natural look. But I would say to
limit grading whenever possible. I just, I don't want it just a big flat piece. I mean if we're going
to do this piece as PUD we need something interesting. We need something unique and this is
going to be a very important piece in Chanhassen because it is the western gateway to the city.
So I mean we need to really seriously consider that. I would stress creative use of natural
landscape features. I would like to see, I like the idea of the ponds. The wetlands area. The
things that, from what I've heard, that is pretty much in place to take the eastern couple of outlots
and ... I don't know what the specifics are but I'd like to take a look at something architecturally
interesting to avoid the large rectangular industrial building. We've got a nice area so come back
with something that will really wow us. I agree with staff on the building orientation, especially
with respect to the potential residential component and loading docks. Loading docks are kind of
a touchy subject right now so we need to be careful of loading docks and residential areas. And
finally I'd say we need to give some serious consideration to the Wrase property. Their access
issues and what they would like to do and what they would like out of this development because I
don't want them to be just in there in a sea of office buildings. I think they should, I think they
should really talk to, that Steiner should talk to them and work something out before maybe the
next meeting or just so we can kind of be kept abreast of what's going on with that. And that's
it.
15
Planning Commission Meeting -March 19, 1997
Skubic: This is the first extension of commercial business I've become familiar with since I've
been here, outside of downtown so we want to be careful with what kind of commercial business
we have here. And it sounds like we are. Do we need to review what support commercial is?
Do we indeed have a support commercial?
Aanenson: Right, what we're looking for is input from you tonight and we'll be developing a
specific list. Whether it's square footage or specific list ... make sure that we've got that control
and then also feel like we're getting, those views that are close to TH 5, the architectural
standards...
Skubic: And I think what you have outlined here is pretty consistent with what I, with eat in
restaurants and ... storage and so forth. And in a residential area here, one suggestion would be to
do a cluster development similar to our North Bay, north of Lake Riley. You could preserve the
natural features of the land and still get something that might be a little more unique. And
regarding the perimeter landscaping, it's winter most of the year around here so I don't think
those trees will be flowering very much. I would like to see some coniferous trees in there for
screening. That's all.
Peterson: Allyson.
Brooks: Well I think I basically stated most of my concerns. I mean I don't mind the plan. I
guess I'm just very concerned that we don't make Highway 5 look like a strip. I agree with
Allison and I would like to see this stay away from sort of the massive, blocky structures. Some
of the first buildings that were shown were actually quite nice. They looked like they were set
back a ways and there were some others that were sort of bigger and grander that were more
visually intrusive. But it sounds like you're thinking about that and you're working towards
making it very sensitive to the landscape anyway. I think the Wrase situation is an issue. Which
one, Kate, which property did you say was the historic?
Aanenson: There's two homes on the site.
Brooks: Right, one is new and one is.
Aanenson: Right, the original one sits to the rear of the property.
Brooks: And how old is it? You have no idea? ...yeah, that's pretty original.
Rick Wrase: ...1885.
Brooks: That's pretty old for Chanhassen. Are there out buildings with that? The out buildings
are not...
Aanenson: They're falling down. They're actually probably... right now.
16
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
Brooks: Well I think that that's, you know even if we do end up removing the home, I would
like to see some consideration. We do have a, there is supposed to be historic preservation
component to our comprehensive plan and it would be nice to see some, whether it's a booklet on
you know the history of Chan. Something to kind of contradict the fact that we may have to
remove an 1885 home. There really aren't a lot of those left.
Aanenson: It's been documented in the City of Chanhassen...
Brooks: All right. But that's basically some landscaping is my only concern. Other than that the
proposal looks okay.
Al Klingelhutz: The home is probably in better condition than a lot of them that were built 10 -15
years ago.
Brooks: Well that's true. Yeah, I'd just like to see some kind of mitigation you know. If we are
forced to remove a home that's that old, there is a loss to the city. It would be nice of the
developer to propose some kind of mitigation to account for that. Whether it's doing
presentations to school children or just something to account to the fact that we are losing
something.
Nancy Mancino: Or move it.
Brooks: Yeah, move it. I like the idea that Kate, you talked about moving it as part of an
interpretative center in the passive park. That sounds neat.
Aanenson: What this area was like.
Brooks: Exactly. Yeah, that's... just so as long as we lose something, we gain something. Okay.
Thank you.
Peterson: My comments are not that dissimilar. I think we've got a definite theme that hopefully
we're painting a picture for the developers that is one that we, at least my sense is that most of us
are in agreement that we would approve the conceptual plan. I would recommend that you spend
a little bit more time working on the residential side prior to going to Council. In looking at the
presentation tonight, I was searching to get, and thinking in my mind about, I had a difficult time
picturing both the residential and some of the industrial. I think that the Council members would
probably like a little bit more also. So if you can present a better picture, visually somehow, I
think it'd be beneficial for you. The PUD I think is the best concept for this property because of
the Highway 5 proximity and because of the wetlands and the general area. You commented on
the terracing side of it and I looked at it and I thought to myself, I like the idea of terracing. At
the same time I struggle with picturing, you have an office building overlooking another office
building and you're looking at the roof of another office building so I think it's an obstacle that I
think can be overcome but in my mind I've got that picture and I can't get that out of my head.
I'm overlooking another office building roof. You know I think you also mentioned that the size
and the pictures you presented are generally smaller to middle sized office products and you also
17
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
mentioned that you may combine some of the lots, if the right purchaser would come in and want
a larger unit. I'd be motivated to set some kind of limitations on size. I think Kate you
mentioned briefly that, to try to keep the atmosphere a little bit smaller. Maybe go potentially
larger in the corner and essentially give a smaller feel. Kind of a winding, terracing kind of
uniqueness that's not dissimilar to the property that I think you mentioned in Eden Prairie that
has that kind of a feel. The winding roads and different elevations. As far as the residential side.
I struggle with this, just as everybody else does. In order for me to vote on rezoning, I really
have to see something unique and even though that that site may be conducive from a visual
standpoint for residential, there are a lot of industrial office types of companies that also want
that kind of a feel for a corporate office so that wouldn't be a compelling enough reason for me
to say let's rezone that and take it out of industrial office. So I guess I would leave you with the
fact that I wouldn't be comfortable, unless there really is a defined uniqueness, and that could
potentially be affordable, as much as I don't like to say that, but that's something that the city
doesn't have that would be unique to the city. But I would like to definitely be wowed as one of
the other commissioners said earlier so with that, that ends my comments. Any other comments
or questions from anybody? With that, can I hear a motion and a second?
Conrad: Sure. I'll make the motion that the Planning Commission recommends conceptual
approval for the Gateway Business Park PUD #92 -6 as shown on the site plans dated February
26, 1997, subject to the conditions on the staff report dated March 12` 1 through 13 with the
following additions. Point number 4. I'd add some verbiage to the multi - family development be
developed sensitive to the landform with focus on preservation of the trees and the natural area
and also with a direction for designing a unique product type for Chanhassen. Something like
that. I'd also add a condition number 14. That the applicant, when they come back with
preliminary design, that they present their idea for a gateway treatment and also that they present
to us their concept for what's going to, a high grade use of the intersection. High grade business
use of that intersection. Add a point number 15. That the Wrase property be incorporated into
the presentation when the applicant comes back, and I'd be open for any other amendments to
this.
Peterson: Any friendly amendments? Is there a second?
Joyce: I'll second that.
that the Planning Commission recommends conceptual approval for Gateway West Business
Park PUD #92 -6 as shown on site plans dated February 26, 1997 subject to the following
conditions:
Existing structures on the property which may be demolished require a demolition permit.
Proof of septic and well systems that are abandoned are required.
2. The design standards be consistent the Highway 5 Standards.
3. A tree inventory be completed.
18
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
4. The multi - family development be developed sensitive to the land form with focus on
preservation of the trees and the natural area. Affordability be considered for some of
the units along with direction for designing a unique product type for Chanhassen...
5. Completion of an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR).
6. The applicant shall secure a Wetland Alteration Permit.
7. Dedication of park land as requested by the Park and Recreation Commission.
8. The applicant should work with the City in coordinating a final location providing
internal street access for the water reservoir site in conjunction with preliminary plat
submittal.
9. Sanitary sewer and water service from Chaska to the southwesterly portion of the site will
be limited to a discharge of 20,000 gpd. The remaining portion of the site will require
sanitary sewer and water service from Chanhassen via the Upper Bluff Creek Interceptor.
The applicant should petition the City for the extension of utilities and street (Coulter
Boulevard) to service the site.
10. The street and utility improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with
the City's standard specifications and detail plates. Detailed construction plans and
specifications will be required upon final platting for staff to review and City Council
approval. Erosion control measures will need to be developed on the grading, drainage
and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice
Handbook.
11. The developer shall incorporate the City's Surface Water Management Plan when
developing a overall comprehensive master drainage plan through the site. The
developer's construction plans shall also be designed to be compatible with future
upgrading of Trunk Highways 5 and 41.
12. The developer shall work with MnDOT in preparing their construction plans for
compatibility with future upgrading of Trunk Highways 5 and 41 improvements.
13. A traffic study shall be prepared by the applicant to determine traffic warrants for
intersection signalization, auxiliary turn lanes and street widths. The traffic study shall
also address pedestrian circulation.
14 When the applicant comes back with the preliminary plat design, that they present
their idea for a gateway treatment and also their concept for a high grade business use
of the intersection of Highways 5 and 41.
15. That the Wrase property be incorporated into the presentation when this application
comes back.
19
Planning Commission Meeting - March 19, 1997
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS:
Aanenson: ... City Council recommended that... find another location. They have found another
location. It does require a public hearing so we will have a special meeting, in order to keep
them on track and to be proactive. That special meeting is set for March 24 We're hoping
that... meeting at 6:00. I believe Bob handed out the agenda item.
Joyce: What are you doing? You're having a Planning Commission meeting and then a City
Council meeting right after it?
Aanenson: It's scheduled for 6:00 because there is a Board of Adjustment meeting so you won't
be in here that whole time until 7:30. I don't believe it should take that long.
Joyce: Well you guarantee it only lasts an hour...
Aanenson: Well they do having them co- locate on one site so, it is a public hearing and... That's
all I had for new business.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Joyce moved to note the Minutes of the Planning Commission
meeting dated March 5, 1997 as presented.
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE:
Aanenson: I'll be happy to. Actually there were several planning items on the last City Council
meeting. The Planning Commission approved the three additional buildings on West Village
Heights a number of months ago, but that was tabled while some negotiations were taking place,
but the Council did approve that. Next to the Byerly's site so there will be ... with a drive thru and
one larger user then a multi- tenant building. So we're looking at construction this spring. Joe
Scott's building on Great Plains was approved ... the Highlands was given conceptual approval.
...but that will be exciting. Woodridge Heights was approved. There was a preliminary and a
final plat. So that's been a way. That's the Centex property off of Galpin. Lake Lucy. And
then... wetland, and that was the one that said it was expired...
Peterson: Going back to the Byerly's, specifically with the Kinko's building. I know when that
was presented to us months ago we talked about trying to get them to put some more landscaping
in the Kinko's building. Were you able to do anything there or not?
20