Loading...
3. City Code Amendment-Photocomposite Images for Subdivisions and Site PlansL � 1 CITY OF 3• CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 0 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director Bob Generous, Planner II DATE: April 19, 1994 SUBJ: Code Amendment for Photocomposite Images for Subdivisions and Site Plans Background The City Council and Planning Commission requested that staff prepare a code amendment for the requirement of photo imaging. This will be a requirement for subdivisions as well as site plans. The amendment will be placed in two sections of the City Code. The photo imaging should provide the level of detail that was provided with the photos of the ISTEA pedestrian bridge. These photos enhanced the city's ability to analyze not only the size and scale of the bridge, but also the visual presence of the bridge and its impact on surrounding development. The City Council held a first reading on April 11, 1994. The ordinance was tabled in order to permit staff to provide additional information to Council. Specifically, Council requested that staff address the following issues: timing, cost, list of service providers, and criteria to be used to determine when this would be required as part of a submittal. Additionally, staff has revised the ordinance to eliminate the requirement for a computer generated image to permit other forms of photocomposite imaging. Purpose Photocomposite imaging or computer aided graphics are a means for the city to evaluate the impacts of a proposed development on the environment, the surrounding properties, and the district in which the development is proposed. The intent of this ordinance is to permit the city to have an accurate visual representation of a proposal incorporating scaled elevations, realistic landscaping, and final grades. Such images will permit the city to more accurately evaluate a proposal's compatibility and impact to its surroundings. MEMORANDUM 1 Don Ashworth, City Manager April 19, 1994 Page 2 Not every subdivision or site plan would be required to submit a photocomposite image, e.g. an addition to an industrial building that is large enough to require site plan approval (10% or greater expansion), but where the addition may be very straight forward or a single - family subdivision that is proposed on an existing corn field with minimal grading. For this reason, the amendment is proposed in the supplementary information section of the subdivision requirements. Further, the code states that the city may waive any of the data requirements due to the limited size and nature of a project. Another option that might be considered is site elevation. The intent of the graphic is to provide information as to how the development will impact the surrounding uses. Issues Criteria: When will it be used? Project scale - commercial, industrial, or office site plans; multi- family or commercial /industrial subdivisions where a final product (i.e. buildings) are being proposed; where a project potentially will have a significant visual impact on surrounding developments or the district in which it is located; where there will be significant grade changes within a development or to adjacent properties. Location: when a project abuts less intensive land uses, is located adjacent to a critical environmental corridor, requires extensive grade changes, or is located in an area considered a focal point or highly visible location within the city. Timing: Who will request this information? Staff anticipates that these photocomposite images would be required as part of a submittal package after the developer has discussed the project with staff and the developer reasonably believes that their product is sufficiently complete to come in for final approval, i.e. at preliminary plat and as part of a site plan package. The Planning Commission or the City Council could also request photocomposite images as a part of their review process. Staff estimates that this requirement will cost from $150 to tens of thousands of dollars depending on the complexity, size, level of resolution, and number of perspectives required. When have requested some quotes for hypothetical developments to get an example of the costs. (See attachment - -An additional bid will hopefully be available Monday evening). Don Ashworth, City Manager April 19, 1994 Page 3 Service Providers: ' Staff is performing a telephone survey to get an idea of companies that can provide this service. (See attachment) Planning Commission Update The Planning Commission held a public hearing on Wednesday, March 16, 1994 regarding ' the proposed ordinance. The Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the code amendment to City Council. The Commission believes that staff will use their best judgement in determining whether or not photocomposite images will be required as part of a ' development proposal. Should the Commission require additional information, they would also be able to request a photocomposite image of development. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the first reading of the code amendment to require photocomposite images for subdivisions and site plans as shown in the attached amendment and that a second reading of the code amendment be scheduled for May 9, 1954. , Attachments 1. Code amendment ' 2. Information from Macromedia Technologies 3. Minutes of the Planning Commission dated 3/16/94 4. Minutes of the City Council dated 4/11/94 ' 5. Letter of Transmittal from Terry M. Forbord dated 4/2/94 6. Note from Charlie James 7. Letter from James E. Jasper dated 4/8/94 ' 8. Subdivision and Site Plan Ordinance 9. Phone survey of costs and service providers , CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 18 AND 20 OF THE ' CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, CONCERNING SUBDIVISION DATA REQUIREMENTS AND SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS SITE AND BUILDING PLANS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: r Section 1 . Section 18 -40 (4) of Chapter 18 Subdivision, Division 2. Platting Procedures of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to add subsection m.. (4) Supplementary information: M. 6-o'lUputer Nn\P-?aj6d photocomposite images, artistic renderings, or site elevations which depict the visual impact of the propos evelopment's - - - -- Zi sign, landscaping, street layout, signage, pedestrian ways, lighting, buildings, or other details that affect land use within the city shall be submitted. Such images and renderings shall be from key vantage points and provide an undistorted perspective of the proposed development from abutting properties, less intensive land uses, and /or from entryway locations. Appropriate levels of resolution for the visualization shall be used from flat shading for massing studies and preliminary design to photorealistic imaging for final design. Section 2. Section 20 -109 of Chapter 20 Zoning, Division 6. Site Plan Review of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to add subsection, o: Sec. 20 -109. Applications. Subsection (5) Site and Building Plan: C&ppAler gi; �(f W photocomposite images,_ renderings, or site elevatio which depict the visual impact of the proposed development's design, landscaping, street layout, signage, pedestrian ways, lighting, buildings, or other details that affect land use within the city shall be submitted. Such images and renderings shall be from key vantage points and provide an undistorted perspective of the proposed development from abutting properties, less intensive land uses, and /or from entryway locations. Photorealistic imaging or renderings are the appropriate level of resolution. Section 3 . This ordinance shall be effective immediately following its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1994, by the City Council of the City of Chanhassen. ATTEST: Don Ashworth, Clerk/Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor C�3:'��1i94 C19:3)2 GALTIER PLAZA H0. r�01 OC17. MACRQMEDIA ' Technologies Incorporated t ' A Computer Graphics Primer p p ' Introduction Most people cannot Imagine what the Interior and exterior of structures will look like before they are built. Some of these people are the same people that are making critical structural and financial decisions from plans they do not understand. Macromedla Technologies Incorporated has developed a unique line of visualization products that can save people and organizations significant amounts of time and money by allowing them to see and tour through unbuilt structures. This paper is a brief description of some of what is possible with computer visualization In relation to the built environment. It Is intended to describe some of the ' terms and techniques commonly used In the computer graphic business. 3 Dimensional Computer Generated Models A 3- dimensional computer generated model is a digital model which can be created from a variety of input data. This data Can Include, but is not limited to: a sketch on ' paper, site plans, topographic maps, GIS files, blueprints, elevation drawings, or CAD files. The computer model Is responsive to any proposed design changes. Presentation Formats A 3- dimensional computer model Is Interactive with a wide array of presentation mediums, or formats. Because the computer model has been created digitally it can be stored or presented on any available medium. These can include: Photographic prints (sized from 3x5 inches up to mural size) VHS video cassette (for both still transfers and animations) Overhead transparencies 35mm presentation slides Interactive C -D disk 4590 S(T)11 Trail 0 Fagan. MN 5512.2 ■ (Al2) 6,R1_( r,7C 0_ x_11 '94 Fiq : GALT I ER PLAZA H0. 001 Computer Renderings F-1 C1 A computer rendering Is an image created from any position or perspective within or around the computer model. Rendering a computer model into a image is the process the computer uses to take digital information and create an image which we understand as a visual representation of the proposed structure or development. Photocomposits Images A photocomposite is an image that takes a computer model and places It within a photograph of a proposed site. We normally refer to these as "Photorealistic Images" since it is practically impossible to tell that the structure or development in the photograph is a computer image and not the real thing. It Is Imperative that professional photographs be taken from precise locations using certain techniques. This assures perfect perspective meshing of both the photograph and the computer rendering of the structure or development. Animations An animation is normally produced on a VHS video cassette. Animations are a series of still Images taken of the computer model and shown at 30 frames per second. The net effect Is the illusion of motion or movement through or around the computer model. This technique is very effective when showing Intricate parts of the computer model at certain perspectives that can only be achieved using this technique. Other possible applications of this technology are; tours through unbuilt structures, massing studies, and evaluation of performance standards for interchanges, bridges, or other traffic pattern areas. Levels of Resolution A 3- dimensional computer model can be rendered and output at various levels of resolution. These options can be applied to fill the needs of the persons who are analyzing a proposed development. Different levels of resolution are available for each of the presentation formats discribed earlier. Flat Shading A level of resolution that utilizes basic colors to form the shape of a proposed structure. There is no texture on the computer model. Flat shading is a cost effective level of resolution used for; massing studies, preliminary designs, or any time a detailed rendering is not required. Textured A level of resolution that applies textures, and colors to the model. It has light sources and casts shadows. It is approaching photorealism. L_1 L J' L✓' 1 C1 : '94 G9:3� GALTIER PLAZA HO. C101 0051 Photorealism A level of resolution that when output onto photographic print material is practically Impossible to distinguish from a real photograph. Conclusion Macromedia Technologies Inc. visualizations' are applied at many of the various stages of project management. They can help clients review design alternatives and make final presentations. In municipal applications they can be critical to a unified understanding by all decision makers of complex development plans. In public forums Macromedia graphics convey complex ideas to large and diverse audiences quickly and distinctly. For residential development they can make the difference between a sale and no sale. Call us if you need more Information or this extremely effective communication approach. This material has been prepared by: Macromedia Technologies Inc. 4590 Soott Trail Eagan, MN 55122 Ph. (612) 683 -0579 -N E UV - -i [v I S 1 O N 1 � I A NEW SOLUTION, i i ACHIEVE A UNIFIED VISION Achieving a unified vision among everyone involved in a building project is param unt to its success. Because those who approve projects are ften times not accustomed to blueprints and may intekpret 1 traditional conceptual renderings differently, their vision is rarely unified. I This age old need has a new solution: Digital Imaging (fom �— l4acromedia Technologies Incorporated. PHOT A phott> will digit I A h `� proje t ` retou Nppb Q ES IT BETTER A turn -key visual commimieatiabi firrn, specializes in visualizing unbuilt plans, Macronterlia TtefuWogies Incorporated combines the aecurocy of CAD models, skilled eyes of graphic artists n�l _a lahgttp nphe s,-and the experience-of architects and m i engeeM4 oc� I C vis aal-to is that turn concepts into reality. — ��� DIGITAt - IMAGING __The process of creating digital images begins by first understanding' your project and its communications needs. A simple sketch, blueprints, CAP `files, or GIS data will allow us to create a 3 -1) computer model that is accurate to your vision of the proposed structure In every dimension and detail -The computer model can then be seen in several different ways, each one.tailored to your specific communications needs. ANIM& before i' byTM a clients, unders f r i� the existing Wabasha ftreet_grj�§19 in St. Paul, Minnesota 1� A i -R phc ` s�!L2 1 ' \ f APHS For true photographic results, our Hi -Rez NIM TIO S erings offer a view of what your completed project ERH a ly look like in its environment. Our exclusyve > o ess looks so real, most people can't tell that ,the PHOT h n is not yet built. Hi -Rez images are not ordit{ary otographs, they are the culmination of procise 1i g and Irtful computer rendering. } v� of moving through a stricture � is bu t cari �i \Valk- thruTM and Fly - u t I r a i ations`;t*se c�osi efli_ toots help n c un '�s, planning corm' on �otlrec� t nil c mp px design issues that jus tot=�e�_�� —,� _ -ahy, ther V�ay. O VH VI OC D T AN AR C GRA HIC RIN LIVE VI EO SLIDE .^ebb , • �� , -;q. `.. ' �, �'- YOU CAN'T AFFORD NOT TO USE DIGITAL IMAGING The Digital Imaging process is flexible and affordable. The 3 -D computer model is the basis for Hi -Rez images and Walk -Thru animations so it grows with your communication needs as your project progresses. Because the same computer model is used for an infinite number of viewing positions, digital images cost far less than traditional visualization methods like cardboard models and conceptual artist renderings. VERY SIMPLE STEP BY STEP Hi -Rez images begin with an original photograph of the site. The computer model is colored and textured in accordance with your specifications, then precisely oriented and imported into the scene. Props and other elements are added to create the final image. The resulting image leaves little to the imagination - or misinterpretation. Computer animation can be created at different levels of sophistication, depending on its intent. Simple flat shading is helpful during the design stage while fully textured and shadowed treatment might be used for final approvals and understanding. THE NEW VISION Your new vision of your project created with digital Imaging from Macromedia Technologies Incorporated will save you time and money. Let us help you and your clients achieve a unified vision by calling for an office near you today! 0 N 0 a a) � N � C,ZX O N U G p �i OD 4i1 W cc b0 F n Q p v F � Z O F— Q O Z . Z w O'� 0 O rY O LJ- A 3 -D computer model is imported into a real photo of the proposed site, then artfully rendered to match your vision of the finished project. Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 1 staff report. I would like to see the staff evaluate the drainage patterns within the Timberwood Estates neighborhood to make sure that the patterns of drainage are maintained and specifically in the vicinity of Lots 4 thru 12. And I'd also like to add that the ' consideration for the sanitary sewer stub for Timberwood Estates, the siting of that stub minimize topography disruption and tree loss to the extent possible. Scott: Do you guys want to take a 5 minute break before we do the next? , (The Planning Commission took a short break at this point in the meeting.) ' PUBLIC HEARING: AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE REGARDING A REQUIREMENT TO SUBMIT COMPUTER AIDED GRAPHICS OR MODELS FOR SITE PLAN REVIEWS AND SUBDIVISIONS. Public Present: Name Address ' Vemelle Clayton 425 Santa Fe Circle ' Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. Scott: Any questions or comments. ' Mancino: Is this a public hearing? I Scott: It will be. I don't know, I just have one comment. In the section 1(4) where you talked, item number (m) where you talk about computer generated photocomposite images or ' artistic renderings. I personally would like to see computer generated photocomposite images only and the reason, I was quite struck by the pedestrian bridge. I mean that, I think as a Planning Commission we were able to make some decisions based upon some fairly minute differences I think in the pylon size and different materials and then also they were able to do a time progression and say well here's what it's going to look like now and here's what it's going to look like in x number of years. From an artistic rendering standpoint, I don't see ' that as being as valuable. So I would rather not have both. The question does come in though, do you have an idea of what this costs somebody to do a photocomposite versus an artistic rendering? Generous: I don't know the artistic rendering. Now they gave me some examples of the 31 r 1 u I Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 ' costs for the photocompositioning ... $3,000.00 for the standard site. The example he used was the high bridge in St. Paul which was a $35 million to $55 million project depending on their final design. And they said that the final cost was, I believe it was $35,000.00 or $40,000.00. Scott: Yeah, because that's my concern is if somebody's got a quarter of a million dollars in a lot and then they're going to be building a $20.00 a square foot building, I'm just trying to figure out if there's a way to give us the scale without having. Aanenson: As you recall when we looked at the hotel project, what they did, I'm sorry. What they did is take actual photographs and tried to superimpose it. I think that helped you to give a bit of perspective from Highway 5 and West 78th. Scott: That worked really well. Aanenson: Right, and I think that's what we're talking about in this artistic rendering. Scott: So it's a photographic process but not just somebody drawing something? Aanenson: Right. Ledvina: Question. When you say artistic rendering, do you mean a computer artistic rendering or is that what you're requiring though? I mean can somebody sketch it out? Is that adequate? Scott: That, at least in my mind, that doesn't really give an appropriate view or doesn't give me a good idea. Mancino: Well they can change scale all the time. When it's a hand drawn artistic rendering, a lot of times they'll get the building and the trees out of scale you know with each other or they'll give a funny perspective that isn't real realistic and I think that that's the problem with the. Yeah, they do whatever they want to do. 1 1 Scott: I like the idea of if there's some existing, I mean I don't expect someone to spend $3,000.00 on something but I think it is important, if they can take an existing photograph and use that as the scale point and then do something with it. So I don't know what the language is. Maybe photocomposite image. I mean that to me says it's a couple of photographs stuck together. It doesn't have to be anything extremely expensive, unless someone that has a very large scale development feels they can invest the money but anyway. Farmakes: You're going to drive the cost up of demanding a building that's not built as a 32 I Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 1 photocomposite where it becomes an illustration... versus if they scan in an elevation drawing and then drop in some color and then show the signage. They can do that like a photo shop or something relatively inexpensively. If they have to render the building in 3 dimensional form, it gets to be fairly expensive. Scott: What's the middle ground that gives us what we want but doesn't cost? I Generous: Well it depends on the resolution you ask for too. John was telling me that if you go with a flat shaving, it's less expensive than going to the photo realistic images. Farmakes: The memory capabilities get very high and then you get into work station type breaks where you have a much more sophisticated computer to hold a lot of memory from an illustration. Some of them might be 100 megabytes just for an illustration. So it's a lot of more expensive equipment. Scott: What language do we want? ' Farmakes: Well aren't we interpreting, Kate can you go over what the benefit again is ' supposed to be here? If we're looking at photocomposites, we're looking at the relationship of the building to existing buildings? We're looking at possible signage or landscaping. That , sort of thing. When we're looking at signage or whatever, I think that certainly working from a working elevation and seeing the maximum development is sufficient. I don't know if it needs to be a photo rendering or that cost when you're dealing with PUD's where there's ' substantial amount of money and it's a large scale development. This is fairly small percentage. Mancino: Yeah, I was going to say. It might have to do with cost of the project and having ' staff make that decision because we couldn't have visualized the bridge. I mean if somebody explained it in verbiage, here's the difference between the you know, the bridge. We couldn't ' visualize that and the picture obviously. Aanenson: I think that kind of language, what Bob has put in there, the appropriate levels of ' resolution for the visualization. I mean that's something we're going to have to develop you know as we go through this process. Say that this project demands this level of detail and this project—but we want to have something in there where if we do need it to make a good decision, that we can ask for it. Farmakes: So the criteria then would be that if you thought it was necessary, then you could ask the developer for that expense? 33 I I Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 Aanenson: Right. Because we don't have it in there right now. Right now we can't ask for it. ' Mancino: That makes sense. That makes sense. Ledvina: So the terminology, appropriate levels of resolution, that's really your discretion. Aanenson: Well if it comes to you, you could say we can't tell the details and we're going ' to have... Generous: Also you should know that once they have the first one done, the next levels are I less expensive. He was giving me like $800.00 for a different angle or picture... Ledvina: A question. Now does this apply to all subdivisions that will come through? Aanenson: No, that's what I'm saying. We'll have them to do in subdivisions and sign plans. ' Ledvina: But what do we have in front of us? Is this. Aanenson: You're amending two sections of the code. ' Generous: 18 -40 is the subdivision section and 20 -109 is the site plan review. Ledvina: So you said subdivisions so this is for subdivisions, just like what we, like a residential subdivision. ' Aanenson: Or maybe along Highway 5 ... some instances where you may want to... Ledvina: I see that it's a very powerful tool for analysis and I really like what we did with the pedestrian bridge. I couldn't agree with you more on that but for a residential subdivision, I'm having a hard time seeing the application. Mancino: What about an apartment building? Aanenson: You don't have to have it. This is something if you feel like it's necessary, ' you've got the language in there. Again, we're going to have to on a case by case basis, and it may be something that...a multi- family project. Generous: He also said they could do like a video so if you have a subdivision it would be like coming into the entrance on the street. Going up the street seeing the various housing types placed in there. 34 1 Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 1 Farmakes: A walk thru program. ' Generous: Yeah, exactly. ' Mancino: So it gives us the option. Aanenson: What it does is ives you the option. ' g Y P Scott: The option to ask for it. Okay. , Ledvina: I guess I would like to see that clarified. I don't think that ..appropriate level of , resolution. Another question though. Section 20 -109. That's the site plan review? Aanenson: Yes. I Ledvina: Okay. I think it's certainly appropriate there. I don't know, I think it has a lot of application there but I'm not so sure, certain as it relates to subdivisions, how important it I might be. Nutting: But they're also not making it mandatory. I Ledvina: Yeah. How can we change that language to make that clearer? Appropriate levels of resolution. Scott: Appropriate levels of resolution as determined by City planning staff. Ledvina: Can you throw that in there? Scott: So it's clear as to who makes that? ' Aanenson: Well this is part of a laundry list that you look at. When you come in for an application to build a subdivision, we give you a checklist, these are the things you need to ' provide. And so these fall into that checklist. Okay so if someone was coming in and we'd say well this obviously, you probably wouldn't need this on this subdivision or take a site plan, this may or may not. It's one of those things you could check... Nutting: You want to say it's a requirement but you have the flexibility to say you don't need it. Generous: Yeah, you're too small and we don't really... ' 35 Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 Aanenson: Or when it comes to you and ... and you feel like you need it, then we've got a ' method to say, we're not going to approve it until we get a visualization. Scott: Yeah but I wouldn't see us getting to that point until the development is going ahead but then we're getting down to maybe some of the finer details. Okay. Good. Are we done with the discussion with the staff? This is a public hearing. Is there anyone here who would like to speak on behalf of the public hearing? Yes. Please identify yourself. Vemelle Clayton: I'm Vernelle Clayton and I live at 422 Santa Fe Circle ... just have some questions. We haven't had much of a chance to look at the report and we had some of the same questions that you did. Particularly did it really mean that you could have a rendering such as we used on the motel, and apparently it does. And I think that's important. The process is not incredibly well developed yet for computer visualization. It's sort of going through the process, as I understand. The computers and calculators and everything... probably in a couple years everybody will have it but right now not too many people do. And I have, ever since I worked in State government, always felt that it was somewhat an uncomfortable position for any unit of government to find themselves in to be requiring something that is only provided by a few. And so one of the questions that we had was, would like to have answered too I guess before we know whether we're even concerned about this is, how many ' people really can provide this service? And that is kind of ... and that then, let me go back. How many people can provide it at the level that you want? There are a lot of people that can provide a certain amount of...go in and assume that you're requiring a whole lot. So I guess that would be something that should be clarified so there aren't any misunderstandings. The other thing is that sometimes I think what we did with the motel, when we took a picture ' and then Tim Howell, as you may recall, painted in what we proposed to build, could be done by somebody like Tim Howell but the others couldn't. I like to be able to see folks like Tim Howell be able to ... business of being an architect, one of the few remaining businesses where ' you don't have to be a...if you don't want to. So I mean—but basically we had a couple questions like that. When would it be applied? There are some small projects that really couldn't afford it. And whatever you ask these folks to do, they pass it on to the price of the home or the price of the product that's sold in the commercial buildings so I think you need to think about that. I believe that's all I had. But maybe if you have the answers to those questions and you know that ...that's fine but we didn't have the answers and we were wondering, since we find ourselves appearing before you from time to time with various projects but. ' Scott: Maybe the intent, especially on the, like an addition to an existing structure. In my mind that's just fine. We just want to see how is it going to look. How's it going to play out and so forth. From a signage standpoint, an elevation drawing, you know 2 dimensional 36 Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 1 is fine but I think when we start getting into something like, and I don't know if you had a chance to see the computer generated piece that they did for the pedestrian bridge but we were asked to make some decisions that I don't think we really could have made. Vemelle Clayton: I think that's perfectly reasonable and that's a very ambitious project—so it's a very small percentage of the total cost. ' Scott: So that's why we want to make sure that it's optional and it's only used in case of a tie or if you will, but just something where we feel we need it or city staff needs it. But we're not going to be requiring this willy nilly and I think that was one of our concerns. It's like what does this stuff cost? But no, your points are well taken. 1 suggest you might want to it's , Vernelle Clayton: I would Bugg y g Y of to be not the g planning staff but the City Planner. I've never read anything from the staff on their own... reports signed off by the planners. I think it would be the city planner that would be making i the decisions. I would think she'd be more comfortable with some sort of a guideline—and I would think you would be in the future, should you hire some ... if she decides to go to South ' America or something. It's easy to be comfortable with the people you know and their judgment. You're comfortable and so am I with Kate's judgment but this is a law on the books that doesn't always, I've been around here a whole lot longer than probably any of you and some of the things that we all thought we just a given you know 5 or 10 years ago, people don't even remember now. And some of the things that happened 20 years ago, it's so easy to have a good idea while you're doing it and then another group of people interprets ' it differently. Scott: I think someone at the planner level would be appropriate. I don't know if we need to have the Planning Director but you know city, when you talk about planning staff, I'm not thinking of an administrative individual. I'm thinking of someone who's business it is to plan and to make decisions of that thing so we need to specify planner level I and H on up or whatever but we're talking about somebody who's in the business of planning can make that decision. Are there any more comments from the public for the public hearing? May I have, seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing? ' Mancino moved, Farmakes seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Scott: Matt. Ledvina: Well, I have a few questions. I guess one other thing that I wanted to know was, it says and provide a perspective. This is in the middle of the paragraph. And provide a 37 r F I Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 t perspective of the proposed development from abutting properties. Outlying properties? All sides? At the property line? Aanenson: We do that right now when we ask for perspectives. We make the judgment call on what we feel is the most important... maybe on a small project, it's ... maybe on one project ' it's so sensitive that you need a perspective from all. So really. Ledvina: Sure. Okay, so it's your discretion on that. That's fine but it's just, it begs to ' question I guess. Aanenson: Maybe there's a... Ledvina: Sure, I'm okay with that. Aanenson: There's just so many variables with each project. I guess I don't want to tie it down and then leave something out. Ledvina: Okay. Well I think things do change with time and I can see 5 years from now people looking at this ordinance saying geez, that was in the Stone Age. The Jurassic type of things... But we have to make a stab at it and I guess, as I said before, it is a powerful tool and I would support the passage of this ordinance. Scott: Okay. Ron. Nutting: I guess I also would support it. I guess the issue is coming down to discretion to apply on a case by case basis to the level that's appropriate and I guess the only question I have is, the language as it sits, appropriate levels of resolution for the visualization shall be used from flat shading etc. Does that leave appropriate open to interpretation from the applicant side as opposed to planning side? And do you want to say as determined by so my comment is, if we want to refine that. Otherwise I'm in favor of approving this. Scott: Okay, Nancy. Mancino: I'm in support of approving this as is. The only words I would change is artistic renderings and I don't know what we came up with. And I don't know what the right jargon is. Jeff, what was the right, you came up with something. 1 Farmakes: I don't remember what it is. Mancino: Did someone write it down? 38 I Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 1 Generous: I wrote photocomposite but I don't know. 1 Mancino: Well I think that Joe you said just leave out artistic renderings and say ' photocomposite images. Farmakes: Because the photocomposite that's where you took two photos together into a single image. A rendering, a 3 dimensional rendering is just that. It's a rendering. A drawing in CAD where you do. Mancino: Oh a computer generated rendering. ' P Farmakes: Correct. Which is far more elaborate and far more costly. You can use photo, canned photo or library photo textures like for instance... have a lot of different kinds of brick. And you can design a dimensional drawing and the computer will apply it dimensionally. So again it's the amount of, that's far more elaborate and time consuming and expensive than scanning an elevation drawing and dropping in some color in the background. Scott: Or taking a photograph of the existing area and then superimposing either a line ' drawing or a photograph. Farmakes: That's easy. Scott: Yeah, and that may be appropriate in those instances. Farmakes: That's an easy issue. Two scans and you put them right together. That's easy. Mancino: Well then let's leave it up to the discretion of ' Ledvina: I'm comfortable with artistic rendering... , Mancino: Then we'll leave artistic rendering. Ledvina: ...but again, I'm sensitive to. ' Mancino: Cost. I Ledvina: Well cost, yeah. And narrowing the realm of possibility and also the vendors that can provide the service. I think that's important. I 39 1 I Planning Commiss -n Meeting - March 16, 1994 Mancino: Then let's leave both in and so either are an option. Whatever is appropriate for the particular site. Scott: As determined by. ' Farmakes: And I would add the verbiage of provide an undistorted perspective of the proposed development. ' Mancino: Where would you put that? Farmakes: Well you were talking about distortion of perspective which can be used to create ' a distortion of scale so the purpose of comparison, you would want like a normal lens. A view of the surrounding area. Ledvina: Depict the undistorted visual impact. Whatever. Farmakes: My comments on this are that the city staff should have discretion because the negotiation and development takes place prior to us seeing the staff report and that's therein where the preparation of presentation takes place. Before we see it. For us to set up a criteria, again you get into the problem of trying to come up with a criteria that is applicable to every type of development. And as we've seen with the sign ordinance type situation, it's a very complicated process and I would go with the judgment of city staff on this and not hinder the, as to individuals changing on city staff, I don't think that that makes any difference. An ordinance is an ordinance and whoever is in the city staff at the time I believe will, it's their job to project whatever the city ordinances are through their interpretation so time marches on and I'm sure we may get other people here but I wouldn't expect that they would go outside the realm of what the current ordinance is and if it needs to be changed, it will be changed. We do it all the time as our needs arise. Aanenson: Or as technology changes. Mancino: Jeff, you're limiting it just to staff. I mean if it got to City Council and somebody on City Council said you know, you guys I really think we should see a photo image composite, I mean. Aanenson: It's not limited to staff. All we're saying is this is a requirement. If we don't require it, what we're saying is it could be a requirement. Okay what we've done by not, 1 everybody... when a developer comes in they'll say, can you hand us a checklist to see what we need to do. We can say, we probably don't think that this project requires ... so all it is is it's on the checklist. Is it appropriate? You may be required to put them on notice... 40 Planning Commission Meeting - March 16, 1994 1 Aanenson: It goes to Council. I LANDSCAPING APPROVAL FOR MINNEWASHTA LANDINGS AND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 7 AND I MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. I Scott: Any questions for staff or comments? Mancino: A couple questions. Kate, where are you, and I'm sorry if I missed it when you gave the report and you talked about the conservation easement. You're going to take that directly to the City Council? ' Aanenson: That would be part of the conditions. You had asked that's one of the things we 41 Scott: Okay. Well I support that code amendment and can I have a motion please? Mancino: I move that, oh I'm going to need your help on this. I move that we approve the code amendment to require computer generated images for subdivisions and site plans as shown in the attached amendment, attachment. Is that what I want to say? With the addition of provide, you're wanting to provide an undistorted perspective. ' Farmakes: Provides an undistorted perspective of the proposed development. ' Mancino: Thank Y ou. Scott: Is there a second? ' Nutting: Second. ' seconded that we accept Scott: It's been moved and sec t the code amendment as amended. Is p there any discussion? Mancino moved, Nutting seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Code Amendment for Computer Generated Images for Subdivisions and Site Plans amended to include a statement that it provides an undistorted perspective of the proposed development. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Scott: Does this have a life after us now? i Aanenson: It goes to Council. I LANDSCAPING APPROVAL FOR MINNEWASHTA LANDINGS AND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 7 AND I MINNEWASHTA PARKWAY. Kate Aanenson presented the staff report on this item. I Scott: Any questions for staff or comments? Mancino: A couple questions. Kate, where are you, and I'm sorry if I missed it when you gave the report and you talked about the conservation easement. You're going to take that directly to the City Council? ' Aanenson: That would be part of the conditions. You had asked that's one of the things we 41 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 APP Cl-' '94 10:42AM LUNDGPEN BOS. CONST. C R0S LVnDGREn � . ANC. LE=R OF TRANSMITTAL TO: P. 1/1 ]DATE: /g y PROJECT; JOB NUMBER FROM; WI✓ ARE SENDING BY: ❑ DELIVERY SVC El MAIL El OVERNIGHT COURIER ❑ kAX # 9 .5 ? S 7 3 r7 DESCRIPTION ❑ CONTRACTS ❑ PRINTS ❑ REPORTS ❑ COPIES D ITEMS QTY DATE DESCRIPTION THESE ARE TRANSMITTED ❑ AS REQUESTED ❑ FOR YOUR USE ❑ FOR APPROVAL ❑ FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ❑ REMAP, S c7r r / r7 ��;ry G fTr.� dc./_�47 L=Cr, C�/<?ric! �'/� ��' 1 /E•f� � � f Lundgrw Bros. Construction, Inc • 935 E. Wayzata Blvd, • Wayzata, MN 55391 - 612/473 -1131 • FAX 612/473 -7401 CI Y CF I 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. B04 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (6 12) 937.1900 • FAX (612) 937.5739 DATE: COMPANY: ATTENTxON: FAX NUMBS✓ : FROM: k FROM CITY OF CHANHASSEN 3)/9 CITY OF CNANt1ABOXO 7" COVZR LZTTB,R Fax Pumbera 937 -5739 ' 7 t` sending s total of ._ pages, including this cover page. If you do not receive all pages, :or are exbe4encing other problems in transmission, please call 9371900 and &OX for operator assistance. Thank you. cO ; L / 1 � A T A SIGN I N / wr�urEC $80e Yp p SUDE � I soppuft I 1 Pn�ro Tow te s►�ouur� 1 S TniNK Ttils ow%N�+*� AW-M u�''t To W' . w K Su6MI��A. RCSO µ 1�vE b ►T0A7 R[A A*W*Cn RMVf ri ja spel -- " 'Develo me t p � 235 W. 1st St. • WACONIA, MN 55387 443 -2181 Metro • 442 -5611 Local • 442 -4934 Fax April 8, 1994 Mr. Don Chmiel, Mayor City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 e � � - ,1 Re: Proposed ordinance - Photo imaging for subdivisions and I site plans Mr. Mayor: We have been advised that the council intends to consider adopting an ordinance that would require photo imaging for all proposed subdivisions and site plans at its scheduled meeting, Monday, April 11. 1 We wish to register our opposition to this proposal. While it may provide a tool by which the city can more easily review a proposed project, we question whether the substantial additional cost that would be incurred, and thus passed on to the customer, is justified. Countless projects have been successfully reviewed without the benefit of this technology. Chanhassen has qualified staff who are trained to review projects for the benefit of the planning commission and council. We think this is adequate. We urge the council not to adopt this ordinance. Respectfully, JASPER DEVELOPMENT CORP. OF WACONIA JiIttj �> Ja s E. Jasper President JEJ /kkr § 18.39 J CHANHASSEN CITY CODE (2) Refer the preliminary plat to the planning commission or appropriate city staff, officers or departments for further investigation; or (3) Disapprove the preliminary plat. If the plat is not approved, the city council shall state the reasons for denial on the record. (f) The findings necessary for city council approval of the preliminary plat and the final plat shall be as follows: (1) The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; (2) The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; (3) The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; (4) The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drain- age, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; (5) The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; (6) The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record. (7) The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. b. Lack of adequate roads. c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off site public improvements or support systems. (g) The city shall notify the applicant of the city council's action, stating the conditions of approval or reasons for disapproval. (h) An applicant may at his own risk, apply to process the preliminary and final plats simultaneously. (Ord. No. 33•D, § 4.1, 2- 25 -85) , 5AJIV(Sion Sec. 1840. Same —Data required. Unless waived by the city because of the limited size and nature of the proposal, the l following shall be furnished with a preliminary plat: (1) Identification and description; a. Proposed name of subdivision, which shall not duplicate or be similar in pronun. ciation or spelling to the name of any other plat in the county. b. Legal description. c. Names and addresses of the record owner, subdivider, land surveyor, engineer, designer of the plat, and any agent having control of the land. 1002 F 1 SUBDIVISIONS § 1840 d. Graphic scale not less than one (1) inch to one hundred (100) feet. e. North arrow. f. Key map including area within one (1) mile radius of plat. g. Date of preparation. (2) Existing conditions: a. Boundary lines of proposed subdivision. b. Existing zoning classifications for land within and abutting the subdivision. c. Acreage and lot dimensions. d. Location, right -of -way width, and names of existing or platted streets; locations of parks, buildings and structures, railroad right -of -way, easements, section lines and corporate boundaries within the proposed subdivision and to a distance one hundred fifty (150) feet beyond. e. Boundary lines of adjoining platted or subdivided land, within one hundred fifty (150) feet, identified by name and ownership including all contiguous land owned or controlled by the subdivider. f. Topographic data within the property to be subdivided and one hundred (100) feet beyond the property boundary, showing contours as follows: two -foot inter- vals where slope is seven (7) percent or less; five -foot intervals where slope is from seven (7) to fifteen (15) percent; ten -foot intervals where slope is greater than fifteen (15) percent. All areas of the subdivision to be platted with a slope greater than twenty -five (25) percent must be clearly indicated. However, on undevelopable sections or larger acre lots topographic data may be reduced to significant physical characteristics, such as top and toe of slope, if in the opinion of the city the area is viewed as unsuitable for future subdivision. Location and elevations of on -site and abutting water courses, lakes, wetlands, rivers, streams, and marshes at date of survey and their ordinary high water mark plus approx- imate high and low water elevations shall also be shown. Where the subdivision borders a lake, river or stream, a meander line shall be established at an elevation two (2) feet above the recorded high water elevation of the lake, river or stream. Flood plain areas, location of wooded areas, rocky outcrops, power trans- mission poles and lines and other significant physical features shall also be shown. g. Location, size and approximate grade of proposed public sewer and water mains. If public sewer and water are not available the developer shall provide site evaluation data required by "Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 Individual Sewage Treatment Systems Standards" to determine the suitability of the site for indi- vidual sewage systems. The following data is required for review: 1. Location of two (2) drainfield sites. 2. Two (2) soil borings on each drainfield site for a total of four (4) soil borings per lot. 3. No percolation tests are required for slopes between zero and twelve (12) ( percent. One (1) percolation test per drainfield site where the land slope is between 13 and 25 percent. 1003 § 18 -40 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE Areas where the land slope exceeds twenty -five (25) percent shall not be consid- ered as a potential soil treatment unit site. The depth of the percolation test should be determined in the field by the site evaluator. h. An accurate soil report indicating soil conditions, permeability and slope. i. Utilities on or adjacent to the property, including location, size and invert eleva- tion of public sanitary and storm sewers, catch basins and manholes; location and size of water mains and hydrants; location of gas mains, high pressure lines, fire hydrants, electric and telephone lines, and street lights. The direction, distance to, and size of such facilities shall be indicated. j. Location of any wetlands. (3) Proposed design features: a. Layout of proposed streets showing the proposed names, the right -of -way widths, centerline gradients and typical cross sections. Street names shall be assigned or approved by the city. b. Location and width of proposed pedestrian ways and utility easements. c. Lot sizes, layout, numbers and preliminary dimensions of lots and blocks. d. Minimum building setback lines as required by the zoning ordinance. e. Areas other than streets, alleys, pedestrians ways and utility easements, in- tended to be dedicated or reserved for public use, including the size of such areas. f. Location, size and approximate grade of proposed public sewer and water mains. If public sewer and water area not available the developer shall provide site evaluation data required by Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Individual Sewage Treatment Standards (WPC 409) to determine the suitability of the site for individual sewage systems. References shall be made to "Soil Survey: Carver (or Hennepin) County, Minnesota," U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Con - servation Service, and any other available sources. The data required shall be determined by the city. g. If the preliminary plat is a rearrangement of a recorded plat, the lot and block arrangement of the original plat, its original name, and all revised or vacated right -of -ways and easements shall be shown by dotted or dashed line. (4) Supplementary information: a. Statement of the proposed use of lots stating type of buildings with number of proposed dwelling units or type of business or industry to reveal the effect of the proposed development on traffic, fire hazards, and density of population. b. Any proposed protective covenants. c. A drainage plan for the area indicating the. direction and rate of natural storm water runoff and those unaltered areas where storm water collects and perco. lates into the ground. A proposed drainage plan for the developed site indicating the direction and rate of runoff and those areas where storm water win collect and percolate into the ground shall also be included. d. A proposed finished grading plan shown at contour intervals appropriate to the topography or spot elevations indicating the relationship of proposed changes to existing topography and remaining features. Kim SUBDIVISIONS 11841 Sec. 1841. Final plat — Generally. (a) Unless otherwise provided in the development contract for phased developments, within one (1) year after the date of the city council approval of the preliminary plat, the subdivider shall file an application for approval of the final plat. In addition to the application the subdivider shall submit: 1 (1 ) Copies of the plat in such quantities as is required by the city; (2) Two (2) mylar copies of the plat; (3) One (1) two hundred (200) scale copy of the plat. If the final plat application is not filed within this period, the preliminary plat will be considered void unless for good cause shown an extension is requested in writing by the subdivider and granted by the city council. The application for final plat approval shall be filed at least fourteen (14) days prior to the meeting of the city council at which action is desired. f (b) The final plat shall conform to the requirements of this chapter and to all conditions set forth in the approval of the preliminary plat as modified during final plat approval. (c) The city council shall review the final plat and shall approve or disapprove it within sixty (60) days of receipt of the completed application. (d) No final plat shall be approved by the city council until the plat is in a form acceptable for recording with the county, the proper filing fees have been paid to the city, a development contract has been signed, appropriate security has been furnished, and no other payments to the city related to the development are outstanding. Supp. No. 3 1005 e. If any zoning changes are contemplated, the proposed zoning plan for the areas. f. Where the subdivider owns property adjacent to that proposed for the subdivi. sion, a general development plan of the remaining property depicting the possi- ble relationships between the proposed subdivision and the future subdivision. The plan shall address the overall land use, traffic circulation, utility easement configurations, and general lot layouts. g. A soil erosion and sediment control plan. The plan shall include a timing sched. ule and sequence of operation indicating the anticipated starting and completion dates of the particular development segment and the estimated time of exposure of each area prior to completion of effective erosion and sediment control mea- sures. Gradients of waterways, design of velocity and erosion control measures, and landscaping of the erosion and sediment control system shall also be shown. h. A vegetation preservation and protection plan to provide stabilization of erosion or sediment - producing areas. ' i. Required variances. j. Water distribution system. k. Proposals for street lighting, curb and gutters, sidewalks and boulevard improvements. 1. Such other information as may be requested by the city. (Ord. No 33 -D, § 59.2(7), 2.25.85; Ord. No. 33E, § 1, 12.15 -86) Sec. 1841. Final plat — Generally. (a) Unless otherwise provided in the development contract for phased developments, within one (1) year after the date of the city council approval of the preliminary plat, the subdivider shall file an application for approval of the final plat. In addition to the application the subdivider shall submit: 1 (1 ) Copies of the plat in such quantities as is required by the city; (2) Two (2) mylar copies of the plat; (3) One (1) two hundred (200) scale copy of the plat. If the final plat application is not filed within this period, the preliminary plat will be considered void unless for good cause shown an extension is requested in writing by the subdivider and granted by the city council. The application for final plat approval shall be filed at least fourteen (14) days prior to the meeting of the city council at which action is desired. f (b) The final plat shall conform to the requirements of this chapter and to all conditions set forth in the approval of the preliminary plat as modified during final plat approval. (c) The city council shall review the final plat and shall approve or disapprove it within sixty (60) days of receipt of the completed application. (d) No final plat shall be approved by the city council until the plat is in a form acceptable for recording with the county, the proper filing fees have been paid to the city, a development contract has been signed, appropriate security has been furnished, and no other payments to the city related to the development are outstanding. Supp. No. 3 1005 ZONING Sec. 20.108. Exceptions. 4 20 - 109 Notwithstanding the provisions of section 20 -107, the following shall not require site or building plan approval: (1) Construction or alteration of a single- or two - family residential building or accessory building on a lot zoned for residential use; (2) Enlargement of a building by less than ten (10) percent of its gross floor area, provided that there is no variance involved and also provided that the director of planning has conducted an administrative review pursuant to section 20.113 of this section; (3) Changes in the leasable space of a multitenant building where the change does not intensify the use or require additional parking; (4 ) Construction of buildings for agricultural uses on land zoned and utilized for agricul- tural purposes. (5 ) Moving a residence or accessory building to any lot zoned A -1, A -2, RR, or RSF provided that the lot and structure siting comply with all applicable zoning ordinance standards. (Ord. No. 119, 2- 12.90) Sec. 20 -109. Applications. Application for a site plan review shall be made to the city planner on forms provided by the city and shall be filed four (4) weeks in advance of the planning commission meeting at -� which it is to be considered. Incomplete or deficient applications shall not be scheduled for a f/ meeting unless the director of planning has determined that official action is warranted. The application shall also include: r s t (1) Evidence of ownership or an interest in the property; (2) The application fee; and (3) Complete site plans, signed by a registered architect, civil engineer, landscape archi- tect or other design professional, to include the following: (4) General: a. Name of project. b. Name, address, and telephone number of applicant, engineer, and owner of record. c. Legal description (certificate of survey will be required). d. Date proposed, north arrow, engineering scale, number of sheets, name of drawer. e. Vicinity map showing relationship of the proposed development to surrounding streets, rights-of-way, easements and natural features. f. Description of intended use of the site, buildings, and structures including type of occupancy and estimated occupancy load. g. Existing zoning and land use. h. Tabulation box indicating: 1. Size of parcel in acres or square feet. Supp. No. 2 1167 [ i L I § 20 -109 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE 2. Gross floor area of each building. 3. Percent of site covered by building. 4. Percent of site covered by impervious surface. 5. Percent of site covered by parking area. 6. Projected number of employees. 7. Number of seats if intended use is a restaurant or place of assembly. S. Number of parking spaces required. 9. Number of parking spaces provided including handicapped. 10. Height of all buildings and structures and number of stories. (5) Site and building plan: a. Property line dimensions, location of all existing and proposed structures with distance from boundaries, distance between structures, building dimensions, and floor elevations. b. Grading and drainage plans showing existing natural features (topography, wet- lands, vegetation, etc.), as well as proposed grade elevations and sedimentation and storm water retention ponds. Plans shall include runoff and storage calcu- lations for 10 year and 100 year events. c. All existing and proposed points of egresslingress showing widths at property lines, turning radii abutting rights - of-way with indicated centerline, width, paving width, existing and proposed median cuts, and intersections of streets and drive- ways. d. Vehicular circulation system showing location and dimension for all driveways, parking spaces, parking lot aisles, service roads, loading areas, fire lanes, emer- gency access (if necessary), public and private streets, alleys, sidewalks, bike - paths, direction of traffic flow, and traffic - control devices. e. Landscaping plan in accordance with the provisions of Article XXV. f. Location, access and screening detail of trash enclosures. g. Location and screening detail of rooftop equipment. h. Location and detail of signage. i. Lighting location, style and mounting. j. Building elevations from all directions indicating materials and colors. Interior floor plans may be required. k. Utility plan identifying size and direction of existing water and sewer lines, fire hydrants, distance of hydrant to proposed building. 1. List of proposed hazardous materials, use and storage. m. Proposed fire protection system. n. Such other information as may be required by the city. (Ord. No. 119, 2- 12 -90) Sec. 20 -110. Standards. In evaluating a site and building plan, the planning commission and city council shall consider its compliance with the following: Supp. No. 2 1168 ZONING Z § 20 -111 (1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development ides, in. J Y P Bu eluding the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Consistency with this division; (3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of neighboring developed or developing areas; (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; (5 1 Creation of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and uses on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neigh- boring structures and uses; and d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and , parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6 Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. (Ord. No. 119, 2- 12.90) Sec. 20.111. Public hearing. Upon receipt of a completed application, a date shall be set for review of the site plan before the planning commission. The review will be held no less than ten (10) days after mailed notice is sent to the owners of properties located wholly or partially within five hundred (500) feet of the site, as reflected in the records of the county auditor. The director of planning may require an expanded mailing list for sites fronting on lakephore where-the development would be visible over a larger area. Following the hearing or any continuance thereof which is not appealed by the applicant, the planning commission shall make a recommendation. The site plan shall be forwarded to the city council with the planning commission's recommendation for review on the next available agenda. Final approval of the site plan requires a simple majority vote of the city council. (Ord. No. 119, 2.12 -90) i Supp. No. 2 1169 1 1 1 1 LIST OF COMPANIES PERFORMING COMPUTERNVIDEO GRAPHICS (Preliminary) APRIL 21, 1994 Alpha Video & Audio, Inc. 7836 2nd Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55435 Contact: Sam Fischer Phone: 896 -9898 Software: Lightwave 3D Rendering Macromedia Technologies, Inc. 4590 Scott Trail Eagan, MN 55122 Contact: John Gregor Phone: 683 -0579 Software: Multiple Techno - Marketing, Inc. 5170 West 76th Street Edina, MN 55435 Contact: Don Little Phone: 830 -1984 Software: Multiple 04/11/94 10:31 GALT I ER PLAZA N0. 001 002 MACIOMEDIA Technologies Incorporated w Andrew Mack City Planner City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Ph. (612) 937 -1900 fax 937 -5739 Dear Andrew, As per our conversation yesterday I am sending you the cost quotes for the two development scenarios you have outlined. These costs are based upon creating the computer modeling from supplied blueprints and elevation drawings. If we were supplied with 3- dimensional wire -frame computer files of the proposed structural developments we can reduce our Computer Modeling costs by 10.20 %. Residential Development Oak Ponds: The following costs are to create a computer generated photo - realistic visualization of the proposed development. This visualization will depict all proposed structures, topographic changes, road alignments, landscaping and signage. Photography: The base photographs may be supplied by the developer or contracted through us. If the developer supplies the photography we need to consult with the photographer before the photo- shoot. This Is necessary to obtain the best possible image quality and avoid additional costs later in the process. Cost for aerial and ground level photography f-, 459(1 Srntt Trail ■ Faaan W .ri.5199 ■ r417N 4Q'i !1670 I 04/21/94 10:32 GALTIER PLAZA I I Computer Modeling and Rendering: 1 N0. 001 003 These are the costs to create the necessary computer models at photorealism of the proposed development and render the computer models into the site photographs. The final output will be on VHS video tape. Total cost for the first view: $2200.00 Additional views, Cost per view: $ 800.00 Total costs: Total cost for this project will depend upon the number of views and who supplies the site photography. The total cost for two views and site photography will be $3800.00. Byerly's Development: The following are the costs to computer visualize the proposed Byerly's development. These visualizations will include all structures and architectural detailing as Indicated on the supplied blueprints, parking lots, landscaping, and signage. These visualizations will be depicted at photo - realism. Site Photography: Again the base photography can be supplied by Macromedia Technologies or the client. Aerial and ground level photography: $800.00 Ground level or aerial photography only: $400.00 Computer Modeling and Rendering. These are the costs to create the necessary computer models at photorealism and render the computer models into the proposed site photography. These models will depict the proposed development as described above. The final output will transferred onto VHS video tape. Total cost for first view: Additional views, cost per view: $1800.00 C14 %21%94 10:32 GALTIER PLAZA NO. 001 004 Total costs: Total costs for this project will depend upon the type of photography or who supplies the site photography and the number of views. The total cost for aerial and ground level site photography, and two computer modeled views will be $3400.00. Additional output services are available, the costs are listed on the enclosed appendix. Andrew, if you have any questions about these quotes, or our services, do not hesitate to call me at 683 -0578. 1 look forward to talking with you again soon. Sipcgrely, Gregor � / tar of Ma ting t t C14/21/94 10:-7-7 GALT I ER PLAZA N0. 001 005 Appendix A Macromedia Technologies Incorporated Price List for Video & Photographic Support Services High Quality color Dye Sublimation Prints, (Printed Direct From Digital File) 8 1/2 by 11 Inches 11 by 14 inches 11 by 17 inches First Image From File: $105.00 $125.00 $150.00 Additional Copies 2-6: $ 25.00 $ 35.00 $ 50.00 (price per copy) Additional Copies 7 -11: $ 20.00 $ 28.00 $ 44.00 4x6 Color Negative Produced direct from computer file Cost per negative: $95.00 EktaColor "C" Prints Custom Quality A negative must be created for each file before C- prints can be produced. Size Quanity First 2 -6 7 -11 5x7 $ 29.00 $ 19.50 $ 17.00 8X10 32.75 22.20 19.60 81!2x11 38.60 26.30 22.80 11 x 14 52.00 35.30 30.90 Call 16x20 77.10 52.30 46.30 For 2044 96.40 65.50 58.00 Quote 24x30 130.40 88.50 78.40 30x40 165.00 112.10 88.90 40x48 231.20 157.50 138.60 40x60 267.75 182.10 160.65 04/21/94 10:33 GALTIER PLAZA N0. 001 Appendix A continued: 35mm Color Copy Slides Number of Orginals 1st orginal Additionals $ 15.00 1 7.50 2 -10 6.00 11 -20 5.00 21 -over VHS Duplications: Qty 1 2.11 12 -24 25+ $ 15.00 $ 2.50 7.50 2.50 6.00 2.50 5.00 2.50 Price per copy $34.00 $23.90 $22.70 call for quote FjFj s APR -21 -94 THU 15:37 ALPHA VIDEO FAX N0, 6128969899 P.01 Andrew Mack, City of Chanhassen, ' Here is an idea of the costs and time involved in generating rendered images like those you described. Please keep in mind, these are only estimates. The actual cost of each project would vary according to the amount and type of ' collateral material available. That being said, here are some estimates: For either project, figuring a best case scenario, the total package would be approximately $1200 - $1500. This is based on approximately two days of graphics ' time at $75 /hr. This supposes that the architectural firms were supplying us with CAD models for the elements of the rendering. In either project, several hours would be required to convert the plan view, or ' elevation maps into a 3D landscape. It is doubtful that this information could be provided to us in a useable format; this would necessitate creating the landscape from scratch. This estimate also supposes that we can get accurate colors for the elements, as well as models for the signage, and other miscellaneous elements involved. Any elements which would have to be created, add cost to the finished project. This leads to the middle estimate, which would be in the $4000 -$5000 range. This estimate suppose only some collateral materials. These would include color ' plan views, and layouts for the various elements. Added time would be spent modeling the different elements, such as lamp posts, signage, parking lots, streets, etc. This modeling time would be held to a minimum if collateral materials were available, such as sketches of the various signs, complete shopping center, or apartment community layouts. Finally, the worst case scenario, would be creating a highly detailed model based upon simple information only, The material which you faxed to us provides a good example. If this was all that was available, we would have to spend large amounts of time creating all of the elements. Details would have to be created from scratch, and several trial renderings would be necessary to check the accuracy of the models with the architectural plans. This would lead to a finished cost of approximately $8000 - $9000, This amount ' could be lowered back into the middle range, by reducing the amount of detail required. If the buildings could simply be shells without great amounts of details, then creation times fall dramatically. Finally, it is worth noting that with the amount of work that would be put into any of the three levels listed, the most significant portion is accrued during the ' creation of objects and elements. The actual rendering would be insignificant. Hope this clears things up for you. If you have any questions about this, feel free to give me a call. Sam Fischer Alpha Video ESTIMATES BY COMPUTER/ VIDEO GRAPHICS COMPANIES APRIL 25, 1994 The following estimates were obtained by the Planning Department from the computer /video graphics companies who were contacted and indicated an ability to perform the type of services contemplated by the City of Chanhassen's proposed City Code amendments. The estimates listed below are for two approved projects in the city. These projects were used as realistic scenarios of the type of services that would typically be required by the city. Prior to tonight's meeting, the third company contacted stated that they could perform the services indicated but they are not specifically set up to produce the type of product needed and chose to withdraw from consideration and submission of an estimate of services. B yerly's Alpha Video & Audio, Inc. 7836 2nd Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55435 Contact: Sam Fischer Phone: 896 -9898 Software: Lightwave 3D Rendering Macromedia Technologies 4590 Scott Trail Eagan, MN 55122 Contact: John Gregor Phone: 683 -0579 Software: Multiple Oak Hill /Ponds High: $8,000 -9,000 High: Medium: $4,000 -5,000 Medium: Low: $1,200 -1,500 Low: High: n/a High: Medium: $3,400 $8,000 -9,000 $4,000 -5,000 $1,200 -1,500 n/a Medium: $3,800 Low: $2,720 -3,060 Low: $3,040 -3,420 LIST OF COMPANIES PERFORMING COMPUTER/VIDEO GRAPHICS (Preliminary) APRIL 25, 1994 Alpha Video & Audio, Inc. 7836 2nd Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55435 Contact: Sam Fischer Phone: 896 -9898 Software: Lightwave 3D Rendering Macromedia Technologies, Inc. 4590 Scott Trail Eagan, MN 55122 Contact: John Gregor Phone: 683 -0579 Software: Multiple APR 25 '94 04 :25PM LUNDGREN BOS. CONST. P.4/5 1 LurlDGREI BRUS. 1 , CONSTRUCTION INC. April25, 1994 1 Honorable Mayor Don Chmiel Members of Chanhassen City Council 1 City of Chanhassen 935 E'�r'ayzata 81vd, 690 Coulter Drive P. O. Box 147 W ayzata Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Minnesola 55391 Dear Mayor Chm and City Council Members: (612)47 -1231 Lundgren Bros. Construction, Lnc, is strongly opposed to the adoption of the proposed amendment to the City Code Sections 18 -40 and 20 -109 regarding a requirement to submit computer -aided graphics or models for subdivisions and site -plan reviews. The purpose of this letter is to briefly 1 summarize our reasons for opposing this amendment First, the amendment as written is overbroad and vague. The amendment does not provide sufficient guidelines to determine who is affected by this requirement, when it Nvill be applied, what type of developments will need to provide this information, why this additional information ' is required, and how this information will be presented. As a developer, upon a facial reading of this amendment, it provides no indication of which of our developments will be required to submit computer -aided drawings, Computer -aided drawings are a substantial imposition on a 1 developer and may impede proceeding with the development. As such', some guidelines need to be stated so it can be determined when these graphics will be required. 1 Second, computer -aided graphics impose a significant cost to the developer which are in turn passed on to the consumer. These graphics can range in cost from $150 to tens of thousands of dollars. In essence, this requirement would make many of the Lundgren Bros. residential projects financially impossible. These graphics may provide a nice visual perspective of the development but this benefit is substantially outweighed by the costs imposed, Third, the.information given by these additional computer graphics is a duplication of information 1 and development controls already available. The City controls proposed developments by the provisions set forth in the City Code_ T'lie Code sets standards for numerous items including setbacks, signage„ platting approvals, grading, and wetland requirements. These code items 1 protect the city and allow them to control the development. Numerous drawings of the site are provided by grading plans, utility plans, signage plans, preliminary and final plats. These renderings provide a visual perspective of the development'. The computer aided drawings merely 1 duplicate the information already provided but show it through a different perspective. Fourth, requiring these graphics will greatly increase the time involved in the approval process. The last three preliminary plats that Lundgren Bros: submitted had to be redone. When the plats 1 ,are redone the computer -aided graphics will also need to be redone. The time required to provide these changes greatly increases the 'costs and length of the approval time. 11 Fifth, the language of the amendment states that the graphics are required when the, development abuts a "less intensive land uses, is located adjacent to a critical environmental corridor, requires extensive grade changes, or is located in an area considered a focal point or highly visible location within the city." In relation to the first point set forth, this language broadly states that almost any development could be subject to this requirement Almost every site will need grading, but when would this grading become excessive? When does a location change from being visible to highly visible? More importantly, what purpose would be served by showing a computer graphic of a residential development abutting'a less intensive land use? Essentially, this requirement means a perspective view from a wetland or a park since these are uses less intensive than residential. Lundgren Bros, understands.thai all things considered it would be wonderful to have computer aided graphics of all of the developments. However in practicality, this amendment would severely limit the amount of development or greatly increase the cost to the buyer. At the last meeting, and as stated in the staff report, it was interpreted that residential development would be exempt from these requirements. Upon review of the amendment, the requirement for computer aided graphics appears to apply to residential uses. We wrote a letter before the last meeting opposing this issue and strongly reiterate our opposition at this time. The amendment is overbroad, vague, and imposes an immense cost on developers and eventually buyers.- Mayor, members of the City Council, we ask that you hear our opposition to this Code Amendment_ We ask that this item be turned down. Very truly yours, Terry M. Forbord Vice President OPUS C Fj April 25, 1 TO Opus CorporAtien 800 OIT•is Center 9900 Bran Rnad Last Minnetonka, Minnesota 5511141E100 {;17.9964444 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 bear Mayor and Council Members: 612 937 5735 1994,04 -26 03:09Pr1 #R11 P.0202 Mailing Arldress h0, Box 150 Minneripulis, Mlnnanla 5544U - 01W rax 611':138.4529 ' opus Corporation and Gateway Partners Limited Partnership wishes to express its continued opposition to the ]proposed Code Amendment to rewire photo comipositc ItTlaging for commercial, industrial, or office site plans or cotppmcrcial /industrial subdivisions. We do not feel that a compelling case has been made for establishing; this new requirement when other Twin Cities ' Communities are able to review and approve development projects without. this requirement in Place. ' Currently, site elevations are prepared as part of a project's normal site and building plan review process. Renderings are also prepared if this seems appropriate, If c;oncc1 are raised about the visual impact of a proposed development, a developer responds as needed and appropriate. ' Establishing an additional time-consuming and potentially expensive requirement for all commercial and industrial pr(kiects does not seem warranted, ' We would request that this ordinance change be denied. Sincerely, -/�04 ' Michele Foster Director Real Estate Dcvclopment ' MF:bb CC: Paul Steiner ' Kate Adnenson Don Ashworth Opus Corporation is an of(iliato of tl)R Dpus group of companiHS AtOlAects, Contramrs, DevelapyrH AUSIITI, ClIjcogo, Dollas, Deom, Houston, Milwauke8, Minnoapoli5, Peg.ar.,nla, Phoenix, Seiatk, Tampa