5. PUD Kerber Blvd. Chaska Machine & Tool T
1 ' C ITY OF
PC DATE: 6/16/93
, '1 ' -S--
\ I. CC DATE: 6/28/93
1 ,..„ - CHAITHAStill CASE #: 93 -1 PUD
By: Al -Jaff
1
1 STAFF REPORT
1
PROPOSAL: 1. Preliminary Plat and Preliminary/Final PUD Development Plan
Approval for Rezoning of Property from BG, General Business to
I PUD, Planned Unit Development
I- 2. Comprehensive Plan amendment to allow light industrial use on
I Q property guided for commercial use
3. Site Plan Review for a 16,335 Square Foot Addition
V LOCATION: 7900 Kerber Boulevard - Chaska Machine and Tool, Inc., Lots 3, 4 and 5,
I .71.
Block 2, Burdick Park
1 Q APPLICANT: Doug Hanson
17001 Stodola Roa d
Minnetonka, MN 55345
111
PRESENT ZONING: BG, General Business
I ACREAGE: 97,163 square feet 2.2 acres kix
1 DENSITY: n/a Ds* s�,•- An if C,3mmissfort
ADJACENT ZONING 7,;t7177: C0'"'
AND LAND USE: N - BG, vacant 6' --
I 4 S - Highway 5/Twin City Western Railroad
r E - PUD, Market Square /City owned outlot
1 W - PUD, Target
WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site.
I Ijj
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site has an existing light manufacturing building with
�' a parking lot, landscaping and utilities. Mature trees
1 occupy the southerly portion of the site.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
I
1
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 2
' PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
' There have been numerous changes in this proposal since it was first submitted to the city.
Therefore, staff has elected to write a new report, rather than provide the City Council with
an update.
' The applicant, Doug Hanson, was involved in the initial development of this site and has
PP g P
' requested approval to expand the existing building onto Lot 3, Block 2, Burdick Park. The site
is located north of Highway 5 and the Twin City Western Railroad, west of Market Square, and
east of Target. It is an "L" shaped parcel with an area of 2.2 acres. The proposal consists of a
' preliminary and final development plan for rezoning from BG to PUD, site plan approval and a
comprehensive plan amendment. Preliminary and final plat approval is also being requested.
Conceptual approval was given by the Planning Commission on March 17, 1993, and by the City
' Council on April 12, 1993. On June 16, 1993, the Planning Commission reviewed the actual
application and recommended approval with a vote of three to two. Staff will detail the reasons
for the split vote further in the report.
1 Chaska Machine and Tool, Inc., which is a light manufacturing facility with an employment base
of 40 (30 during the day shift and 10 during the evening shift), occupies the building. The shifts
are from 6:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 3:30 a.m. The business is a metal stamping
facility and the loading dock/truck activity is minimal and is only used during the day. The
zoning of the property has been changed, since the original approval, from I -1, Industrial to BG,
General Business. This was done under an effort to remove non - conforming uses from the CBD
in support of redevelopment efforts. The BG, General Business District does not permit
industrial uses such as manufacturing. Therefore, the existing use is now non - conforming and
cannot be expanded.
There is one lot left vacant adjacent and to the south of the existing building (Lot 3, Block 2,
1 Burdick Park). This parcel is owned by the Chanhassen HRA. The existing building and Lot
3 are located at the end of Kerber Boulevard, between Market Square and Target/City owned
outlot. The site is bordered to the south by Highway 5 right -of -way. Staff visited the site to
determine how the existing use fit in with the newly developed properties adjacent to it and to
determine if the site was suitable for commercial uses. The remaining lot (Lot 3) is less than an
' acre in size, is not easily seen from West 78th Street (where it would receive access) or Highway
5 and abuts the rear parking lot and outdoor storage area of Market Square and Target. With
these circumstances, staff did not feel that a new user would find this site to be appropriate for
a commercial use. Also, staff felt that the existing facility was low level industrial and has
proven to be compatible with the surrounding property and uses. Both the existing building and
vacant parcel have poor visibility from W. 78th Street and virtually no visibility from Hwy. 5.
We concluded that retail commercial uses were not likely to be a realistic option in this area and
support the request to rezone both parcels to allow for an expansion of the existing use.
1
Chaska Machine 1
June 16, 1993
Page 3
The only option the applicant has to expand the site is to rezone the roe to IOP, Industrial
Y P PP P property rtY
Office Park or PUD, Planned Unit Development. Staff did not feel rezoning the site to IOP,
Industrial Office Park was appropriate. We did not wish to open the site up to any industrial use.
Instead we recommended the applicant apply for rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development.
The intent of a PUD is to develop flexible zoning while creating a higher standard of
development. Part of the PUD process is to establish development standards by which the site
plan will be required to adhere to. This PUD will be governed by the final development plan.
The overall preliminary site plan appears to be in order and well designed. Staff has been
working with the applicant for a few months and the plans have gone through some changes
since it first appeared before the Planning Commission and City Council for the concept
approval. Additional changes were made after the June 16, 1993, Planning Commission meeting.
The intended use of this building is office, light manufacturing, and warehousing. Standards are
proposed to be incorporated with the PUD agreement that would limit all future use of the site
to low impact ones consistent with its surroundings. The applicant is proposing significant new
plantings of over -story and evergreen trees be provided between the site and Hwy. 5 to expand
the "Target" forest to the east. This was a condition of approval that the Planning Commission
required. The applicant has revised the plans to meet this condition. Some trees will be lost
after placing the new addition. Also there is limited space where trees can be placed on site.
Therefore, staff is recommending that should adequate space become problematic for the trees
to grow, 10 of those proposed trees be placed on Outlot A, Crossroads Plaza (fountain site).
Originally, the applicant was proposing to develop the site in two phases. However, on June. 2,
1993, staff was informed of a change of plans and that the applicant was proposing to complete
both phases with this proposal. The proposed 16,309 square foot addition will take place as soon
as the City approves the proposal. Staff found that the expansion will actually bring the site into
compliance with the hard surface coverage maximum of 70 %, decreasing it from the current
80.27 %.
The comprehensive plan designates this property as commercial. The comprehensive plan will
P P g P Pe rtY P P
have to be amended as part of the application process to designate the subject site as industrial.
i
The project is expected to receive Tax Increment Financing assistance through the City's Housing
and Redevelopment Authority.
Staff believes the proposal, combined with conditions proposed by staff, will be effective in
providing satisfactory development. Through the PUD ordinances, the proposed expansion to the
facility will be allowed and the city will be able to maintain control on the improvements and
uses. Staff finds the proposed PUD, plat and site plan to be acceptable and is recommending
approval of the preliminary and final stage of the PUD plan, preliminary and final plat,
comprehensive plan amendment, and site plan subject to proposed conditions.
1
.1
1 Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 4
BACKGROUND
1 On April 16, 1973, the subject site was zoned I -1, Industrial. On June 12, 1978, the City Council
approved a site plan for an office /warehouse /manufacturing facility on Lots 4 and 5, Burdick
' Park. The site plan was approved with conditions and a variance to setback requirements (see
Attachment #1). The site was developed meeting the original conditions of approval.
' On March 17, 1993, the Planning Commission reviewed a concept plan for the expansion of the
existing building and unanimously recommended approval of it, with an added condition of an
improved architectural appearance to the building and the incorporation of transit planning to the
' site design. On April 12, 1993, the plan was reviewed by the City Council and approved as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
' On June 16, 1993, the Planning Commission reviewed preliminary and final stage of the PUD
plan, preliminary plat, comprehensive plan amendment, and the site plan. The application was
approved with a vote of three to two.
' REZONING
' Justification for Rezoning to PUD
The applicant is requesting to rezone 2.2 acres from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit
Development. The following review constitutes an evaluation of the PUD request. The review
criteria is taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance.
1 Section 20 -501. Intent
' 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 to be realized as
evaluated against the following criteria:
' Planned unit developments are to encourage the following:
1. 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.
1
1
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 5
Finding. There is a stand of trees located on the southwest corner of the site. These trees
are an extension of a significant wooded area, owned by the HRA, separating the Target
site from the subject site. These trees include oak, elm, ash, basswood and box elder.
Staff is recommending a preservation easement over the southwest corner of the site be
dedicated, so that the trees are preserved. These trees are highly visible from the Hwy.
5 corridor and their preservation will be an asset to the city. They will offer some
screening of a portion of the building and all loading areas. The applicant is also adding
15 new over -story trees and 5 evergreen plantings in this area to expand upon the
preserved forest. Should there be limited open space on site, staff is recommending 10
trees be placed on Outlot A, Crossroads Plaza.
2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing 1
of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels.
Finding. There is one lot left vacant adjacent and to the south of the existing building
(Lot 3, Block 2, Burdick Park). This parcel is owned by the Chanhassen HRA. The
existing building and Lot 3 are located at the end of Kerber Boulevard, between Market
Square and Target/City owned outlot. The site is bordered on the south by Highway 5
right -of -way. Staff visited the site to determine how the existing use fit in with the newly
developed properties adjacent to it and to determine if the site was suitable for
commercial and therefore, commercial zoning should be maintained. The remaining lot
(Lot 3) is less than an acre in size, is not easily seen from West 78th Street (where it
would receive access) or Highway 5 and abuts the rear parking lot and outdoor storage
1
area of Market Square and the Target Store. With these circumstances, staff did not feel
that a new user would find this site to be appropriate for a commercial use. Also, staff
felt that the existing facility was low level industrial and has proven to be compatible
with the surrounding property and uses.
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 applicant is proposing to use materials compatible with the existing
building. Typically with a PUD, the city would require higher quality architectural design
than what exists and is being proposed. Staff worked closely with the applicant to
improve the image of the entire building. The Planning Commission and City Council
approved the concept plan with the condition that "The expansion of the building shall
match and enhance the architectural design of the existing building." In order to meet
this condition, the applicant will paint the rock face concrete block, which is the main
material used on the building. The building architectural facade will also be revised by
removing the existing cedar hand split roof shingles over the entrance canopies and
replaced with colored ribbed steel panels to accent the building. There will be a total of
1
1 Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
1 Page 6
four entrances /canopies that will be alike in appearance and they will be illuminated by
recessed lights above the doors. These panels will be similar in style to the Target and
Market Square buildings. The applicant is proposing to use that same accent color to
paint three stripes, 8 inches wide, around the building. The first stripe is proposed to be
' painted above the windows, the second below the split faced block, and the third band
will be around the edge of the top of the building. Staff would prefer to see the proposed
painted stripes be replaced by glazed tile to fit in with the architectural theme set by
' Target and the Market Square Shopping Center to accent the building. The applicant is
also proposing to remove the existing roof top wood screen and replace it with steel
siding panels, to be painted a color that will not stand out.
' Architectural appearance was one of the issues that members of the Planning Commission
disagreed upon. Commissioners Halberts, Scott, and Ledvina felt that the applicant had
1 improved the building facade considerably and the use of paint on the building should be
adequate. They also felt the use of tile should not be required. Commissioner Batzli and
Mancino wanted to see the use of tile as an accent on the building. They also were
1 opposed to the use of two different types of windows. The proposed addition will be two
feet higher than the existing building. Commissioner Mancino wanted the addition to be
at the same height as the existing building. She also wanted to see the accent strips to
align on both the existing and the new addition. To eliminate this problem, the applicant
is proposing to use pilasters to separate the old from the new addition. This will also
reduce the impact of elevation difference.
4. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along
g
significant corridors within the city will be encouraged.
Finding. Additional landscaping is proposed to be provided along the south. The back
' of the building will be against the trees and all loading will be screened from view. It
will also expand upon a protected forest area considered important as part of the Highway
5 corridor.
1 5. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
' Finding. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for commercial development. A guide
plan amendment is being requested and proposed for approval by staff for reasons
outlined previously.
' 6. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city.
Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and
1 overall trail plan.
1
I
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 7
Finding. The Park and Recreation Commission has recommended that park and trail fees 1
be received in lieu of park and trail dedication.
7. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD. I
Finding. Not applicable to this proposal.
1
8. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sightings and
the clustering of buildings and land uses.
1
Finding. Chanhassen is actively involved with public transportation. The applicant has
requested from Southwest Metro Transit to provide public transit to the site probably as
I
dial -a -ride or van pool service. A list of all employees, the time their shift begins, and
place of residency was submitted with the application. Information will be made
I available to the employees regarding bus schedules and park and ride lot locations. Also,
the city is one of the few suburban communities that is able to have a pedestrian oriented
CBD. This is made possible by the creation of a centralized "downtown." There is a I
park and ride facility in the area and the downtown is connected by sidewalks.
9. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic I
conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate.
Finding. Access to this site will be from Kerber Boulevard, via West 78th. The City I
Council has recently approved the location of 4 traffic signals on West 78th Street. This
will help regulate traffic, which will allow easier access into the site.
The PUD ordinance establishes a same minimum district size but allows the city to waive
this standard under several conditions. We find that the proposed request is consistent
with condition #1 & #2 as follows and are recommending that the area requirement be
I
waived.
Section 20 -503. District size and location.
1
(a) Each PUD shall have a minimum area of five (5) acres, unless the applicant can
demonstrate the existence of one of the following:
1
(1) Unusual physical features of the property itself or of the surrounding
neighborhood such that development as a PUD will conserve a physical or
I
topographic feature of importance to the neighborhood or community.
(2) The property is directly adjacent to or across a right -of -way from property which 1
has been developed previously as a PUD or planned unit residential development
1
t
1
1 Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
' Page 8
and will be perceived as and will function as an extension of that previously
' approved development.
Summary of Rezoning to PUD
' Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility but allows the city to
request additional improvements and some of the site's features can be better protected. The
' reduced standards allow the expansion of a light manufacturing nonconforming business in the
CBD. In return for reducing the standards, the city is receiving:
' • • Screening of undesirable view of loading areas
Preservation existing and requiring additional trees
• Improved architectural standards and appearance including; entry ways, roof top
screening, uniform architecture
• Encouraging Public Transit
1 PRELIMINARY AND FINAL STAGE PUD PLAN APPROVAL
Development Standards /Site Plan Review
Staff is ro osin the following development standards be used for this PUD plan and
P P g g P P
' incorporated into the PUD agreement.
a. Intent
The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD that would allow the expansion of an existing
office/light manufacturing use. It is intended that this use be operated and maintained to
' preserve its low intensity character to ensure its compatibility with surrounding uses and
the greater Chanhassen Central Business District.
b. Permitted Uses
The permitted uses in this zone are limited to the light industrial/office or less intensive
' uses than the existing use. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there
is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director
shall make that interpretation.
' 1. Light Manufacturing*
2. Retail **
3. Newspaper and small printing offices
' 4. Veterinary Clinic
5. Animal Hospital
6. Offices
f
I
Chaska Machine 1
June 16, 1993
Page 9
1
*Light manufacturing is subject to the following limitations:
- no visible emissions of smoke I
- no noise emissions exceeding the MnPCA standards measured at
the property line.
- No outdoor, unscreened storage of materials, trash storage, shipping I
pallets except for recycling materials. (This was a discussion item
among the Planning Commissioners. The metal that is collected
for recycling purposes can not be screened because it is produced I
in large pieces. It will be located behind the building and will be
screened with landscaping.)
- No overnight parking of Semi trucks or inoperable vehicles
I
- all parking must be accommodated on -site in a concealed location
behind the building
* *Retail uses are subject to the following limitations: I
- signage consistent with approved sign package
- retail uses must be consistent with the site's restricted parking
1
c. Setbacks
The setback of the majority of the building has been set by the existing portion. The I
addition will maintain a minimum of 50 feet from Kerber Boulevard, and 55 feet from
Highway 5. In the PUD standards, the building setback is 30 feet from any local
I
street/public right - of - way, and 50 feet from arterial and railroad lines. The proposed
addition was Iocated 46 feet from the Railroad Right -of -Way on the most southerly
I corner. To meet staff's request, the applicant revised the plans to meet the PUD setback
requirements. The parking setback on the west received a variance on June 12, 1978, to
allow a zero setback from the lot line.
I
d. Development Standards Tabulation Box
USE Lot Area Bldg. Sq. ft. Parking Impervious Bldg. Parking I
Surface Setback Setback
Ordinance 5 acres 43 70% North -30' North -20' I
required South- 50' South -20'
West -30' West -20'
East -30' East -20'
1
Existing 49,138 19,980 67 80.27% W -45/N -25 W -0/N -25
E- 55/S -80 E- 20 /S -na
Proposed 48,025 16,309 59 60.33% W -45/N -na * * ** I
Addition E -50/ W -0/N -na
S -50 E- 20/S -20 I 1
-
Total 97,163 ** 36,209 59 70%
s.f. /2.2 acres
i
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
' Page 10
** The City Code requires a minimum area of five (5) acres for a PUD unless the applicant
' can demonstrate unique physical features of the site. There is no way for the site to contain five
acres as it is abutted by Highway 5, Pica Drive, city property and Market Square. The site is
also located adjacent to the Target PUD. For these reasons, we believe it is reasonable to waive
' the 5 acre standard as allowed by the ordinance. Waiver of PUD minimum area requirements
is recommended.
* * ** Existing variance.
e. Building Materials and Design
1 Applicant's Proposal. The developer is proposing that the addition use the same concrete
block material as the existing building. The entire building will be painted. The ceder
' wood shingles will be removed and replaced by ribbed steel panels. The roof top
equipment's existing screening is proposed to be removed and replaced by steel panels.
Existing 3 foot wide rusty doors will be removed and replaced by new ones, and the
1 introduction of three painted stripes on the building for accent.
Finding. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of
1 architectural standards and site design.
1. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Concrete block, same as the
1 type used on the existing building, shall be used. Color shall be introduced
through colored block. Glazed tile should be used to create the accent 8" wide
stripes on the building rather than paint.
' 2. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary
g P P arY
structure. All ground mounted equipment, trash storage, etc. to be fully screened
by compatible masonry walls.
' 3. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by materials compatible with the
building. Wood screen fences are prohibited.
' f. Site Landscaping and Screening
Applicant's Proposal. The applicant has prepared a landscaping plan that shows the
' addition of 20 trees. The existing trees along the southwest corner of the site will be
preserved. Tree preservation is a positive, if minor, element.
' Finding. In addition, to adhere to the higher quality of development as spelled out in the
PUD zone, all loading areas shall be screened. If open space was not available on the
subject site to place all the proposed trees, five trees shall be located along the south
1
I
Chaska Machine III
June 16, 1993
Page 11 1
portion of the site, and 10 trees on Outlot A, Crossroads Plaza. They are required to
extend the protected forested area eastward. Ultimately, we anticipate there being
I
additional plantings on city -owned land further to the south. This reforestation is
consistent with the goals of draft Hwy. 5 planning efforts and to screen less desirable
views of the south edge of the CBD. Trees should be over -story and evergreen. They
shall be selected from the approved tree list. All plant materials must meet minimum size
specifications. Tree plantings may be installed partially on city owned land located
adjacent to the site.
1
1. All open spaces and non - parking lot surfaces shall be landscaped, covered with
plantings and/or lawn material.
1
2. Unscreened outdoor storage is prohibited.
3. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. '
g P
4. Tree preservation areas shall be clearly staked and marked by snow fence prior
1
to the start of grading. Staff will use its discretion to require minor revisions to
grading including the potential use of retaining walls, if it appears that tree I
preservation will benefit. Protected trees lost due to development activity shall
be replaced on a caliper inch basis.
5. A satisfactory letter of credit to ensure compliance with approved plans shall be 1
provided prior to the start of grading.
g. Signage 1
No signage is proposed at this time, however, the site contain an existing wall mounted
I
sign.
1. Each business shall be allowed one wall mounted sign. The total of all wall
I
mounted sign display areas shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the total area
of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted.
2. All signs require a separate permit. I
3. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and will use
I
materials compatible with the building. Signs shall be an architectural feature, and
shall not be solely mounted on a pole of a foundation.
4. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights.
I
1 Y g
1
1
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 12
5. Temporary signs will be allowed in a manner consistent with the city sign code.
h. Lighting
Recessed light will be introduced. These lights will be located above the entrance doors,
1 and tucked under the new canopies.
Finding.
1. All light fixtures shall be shielded high pressure sodium fixtures. Light level for
g g P g
' site lighting shall be no more than 1 /z candle at the property line. This does not
apply to street lighting.
' 2. Glare, whether direct or reflected as differentiated from general illumination, shall
not be visible beyond the limits of the site from which it originates.
' 3. Lights shall be on a photoelectric cell to turn them on and off automatically as
activated by yearly conditions.
' 4. Light poles shall use shoe box light standards.
Streets /Access/Parking
1 Access to the site is obtained via Picha Drive and Kerber Drive. There are two access points
onto Picha Drive which eventually leads into Target. Staff is recommending a stop sign be
installed at each exit point on Picha Drive. There will be a total of 59 parking stalls. The City
Code would only require 43 parking spaces (including one for a company vehicle). Therefore,
59 parking spaces are not necessary and the applicant can remove some of the parking area and
' replace it with landscaped open space. Some of the proposed parking is an extension of existing
parking at the rear of the building. The applicant is proposing to continue to have this parking
adjacent to the westerly lot line with no setback. This area abuts open space that has existing
vegetation and which will never be developed. Staff would prefer to keep the parking in this
area rather than add parking to the front of the building. Therefore, staff does not object to
keeping the zero setback for the rear parking.
Utilities
' The existing building is connected to municipal sewer and water. The plans propose to extend
another sewer and water line to serve the building expansion. The appropriate connection and
hookup fees will be required at the time of building permit issuance.
1
1
1
Chaska Machine 1
June 16, 1993
Page 13
Grading and Drainage 1
The grading plan does not indicate the existing underlying ground contours. It is difficult to
I
determine the amount of earthwork involved with this expansion although it appears the end use
contours are acceptable. A storm sewer line is proposed to be extended from the existing storm
sewer in Picha Drive near the Target entrance to the southwest corner of the parking lot. The
111
catch basin will catch runoff from the new parking lot, driveway and building rooftop areas. The
storm sewer will convey runoff to the newly created retention pond on the Target site. Since the
I storm sewer connection is within the City's boulevard, the applicant should escrow $500.00 to
guarantee boulevard restoration. Connection to the City's storm sewer will need to be inspected
by City staff. The site plan proposes concrete curb and gutter around the perimeter of the new
I
driveway and parking lot. The existing westerly parking lot behind the building currently sheet
drains westerly into the woods. Staff is comfortable with this drainage pattern and recommends
no further drainage improvements at this time. Staff is requesting site drainage calculations I
prepared by a professional engineer be submitted to the City for review.
Erosion Control
1
Erosion control measures are not illustrated on the plans. Staff recommends that erosion control
fence (Type I) be installed along the easterly, southerly and a portion of the westerly property
I
line at the grading limits. Based on the landscape plan, it appears all disturbed areas will be
restored with sod.
Park and Recreation 1
The property will be subject to park and trail fees. These fees are to be collected at the time of
I
building permit application at the rate then in force. Current industrial/commercial fee rates are
$3,000 /acre for park, and $1,000 /acre for trail.
In determinin g g the acreage to be assessed, the Park and Recreation Director was unable to locate 111
a building permit showing that park and trail fees had been paid on the existing building.
Assuming that the platting incorporates both lots and that the original permit did not include park
I
and trail fees, the entire plat (95,394 sq. ft.) can be subjected to fees. If fees were paid on the
original permit, only the addition (34,236 sq. ft.) will be subject to park and trail fees.
I
The applicant is objecting to pay park and trail fees for the existing building. Staff is leaving
this matter up to the discretion of the City Council.
1
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: 1
1
1
s
1 '
I Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 14
1 "The City Council approves the rezoning of 2.2 acres (97,163 square feet) of BG, General
Business to PUD, approve preliminary and final development plans, preliminary and final plat
I approval and comprehensive plan amendment from commercial to office /industrial as shown in
plans dated April 19, 1993, revised June 18, 1993, and with a waiver of the 5 acre minimum
PUD zone requirement subject to the following conditions:
1 1. Preliminary and final plat approval combining Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 2, Burdick Park into
one lot with appropriate easements. All typical utility and drainage easements shall be
I dedicated to the city on the final plat. Plat documents need to be prepared by the
applicant.
I 2. Rezoning approval from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit Development.
3. The expansion of the building shall match and enhance the architectural design of the
1 existing building. Rock face concrete block shall remain as the main material used on
the building and shall be painted. All ceder wood shingles shall be replaced with ribbed
steel panels. However, the accent stripes shall be created by using paint.
I 4. There shall be no unscreened outdoor storage permitted. Existing outdoor storage to be
placed in approved, screened enclosures where applicable.
I 5. Prior to rezoning and development, the applicant shall purchase the roe in question
g P � PP P property rtY q
' from the HRA.
6. Transit planning shall be incorporated into this development.
I 7. The applicant shall submit detailed storm sewer calculations prepared by a professional
engineer for the City to review.
1 8. The applicant shall provide a $500 security for connection to the City's storm sewer line
and boulevard restoration on Picha Drive. This fee will be refunded upon satisfactorily
1 completing connection and restoration of the City's boulevard.
9. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed around the perimeter along the grading
1 limits.
10. Park and trail fees shall be paid at the time of application of building permit (on the new
1 structure).
11. Approval of the minor comprehensive plan amendment by the Metropolitan Council.
I 12. Stop signs shall be installed at the exit points to Picha Drive.
1
' 1
Chaska Machine 1
June 16, 1993
Page 15 1
13. Meet the conditions of the Fire Marshal.
14. Should open space for planting the proposed trees be problematic and limited on the 1
subject site, 10 trees shall be located on Outlot A, Crossroads Plaza.
16. The PUD Agreement shall include the following conditions: 1
a. Intent
The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD that would allow the expansion of an existing
office/light manufacturing use. It is intended that this use be operated and maintained to
preserve its low intensity character to ensure its compatibility with surrounding uses and
the greater Chanhassen Central Business District.
b. Permitted Uses
The permitted uses in this zone are limited to the light industrial/office or less intensive 1
uses than the existing use. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there
is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director
shall make that interpretation. 1
1. Light Manufacturing*
2. Retail **
1 3. Newspaper and small printing offices
4. Veterinary Clinic
5. Animal Hospital
6. Offices
*Light manufacturing is subject to the following limitations:
no visible emissions of smoke
no noise emissions exceeding the MnPCA standards measured at
the property line
no outdoor, unscreened storage of materials, trash storage, shipping
pallets except for recycling materials
no overnight parking of semi trailers or inoperable vehicles
all parking must be accommodated on -site in a concealed location
behind the building
* *Retail uses are subject to the following limitations: 1
signage consistent with approved sign package
retail uses must be consistent with the site's restricted parking
1
1
1 Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 16
1
ATTACHMENTS
I 1. Staff report and minutes dated April 12, 1993.
P P
2. Letter from the applicant dated June 4, 1993.
1 3. Addresses and work shifts of Chaska Machine and Tool employees to start the transit
planning process.
4. Staff report and Planning Commission minutes dated June 16, 1993.
1 5. Plans dated April 19, 1993, revised June 18, 1993.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
PC DATE: 6/16/93 3.
CITY OF ,. 1
= , CC DATE: 6/28/93
CHANHASStiN
CASE #: 93 -1 PUD 1
By: Al -Jaff
1
STAFF REPORT 1
1
PROPOSAL: 1. Preliminary Plat and Preliminary/Final PUD Development Plan
Approval for Rezoning of Property from BG, General Business to 1
PUD, Planned Unit Development
Z 2. Comprehensive Plan amendment to allow light industrial use on
property guided for commercial use 1
4 3. Site Plan Review for a 16,335 Square Foot Addition
V
J LOCATION: 7900 Kerber Boulevard - Chaska Machine and Tool, Inc., Lots 3, 4 and 5,
Block 2, Burdick Park 1
a.
Q APPLICANT: Doug Hanson 1
17001 Stodola Road
Minnetonka, MN 55345
1
PRESENT ZONING: BG, General Business 1
Action by Cky Alministr tc
ACREAGE: 97,163 square feet 2.2 acres ���,,jors,d
DENSITY: n/a eo; :_'
ADJACENT ZONING — ; to c�:n n ss en 1
AND LAND USE: N - BG, vacant --•- --
S - Highway 5/Twin City Western Railroad ;,,. t .. to Council
Q E - PUD, Market Square /City owned outlot - ' - 1
d W - P UD, Target
0 WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. 1
W PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site has an existing light manufacturing building with 1
a parking lot, landscaping and utilities. Mature trees
occupy the southerly portion of the site.
2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
1
I Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 2
1 PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
I The applicant, Doug Hanson, was involved in the initial development of this site and has
requested approval to expand the existing building onto Lot 3, Block 2, Burdick Park. The site
is located north of Highway 5 and the Twin City Western Railroad, west of Market Square, and
I east of Target. It is an "L" shaped parcel with an area of 2.2 acres. The proposal consists of a
preliminary and final development plan for rezoning from BG to PUD, site plan approval and a
comprehensive plan amendment. Preliminary plat approval is also being requested. Conceptual
I approval was given by the Planning Commission on March 17, 1993, and by the City Council
on April 12, 1993.
I Chaska Machine and Tool, Inc., which is a light manufacturing facility with an employment base
of 40 (30 during the day shift and 10 during the evening shift), occupies the building. The shifts
are from 6:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 3:30 a.m. The business is a metal stamping
1 facility and the loading dock/truck activity is minimal and is only used during the day. The
zoning of the property has been changed, since the original approval, from I -1, Industrial to BG,
General Business. This was done under an effort to remove non - conforming uses from the CBD
1 in support of redevelopment efforts. The BG, General Business District does not permit
industrial uses such as manufacturing. Therefore, the existing use is now non - conforming and
cannot be expanded.
I There is one lot left vacant adjacent and to the south of the existing building (Lot 3, Block 2,
Burdick Park). This parcel is owned by the Chanhassen HRA. The existing building and Lot
I 3 are located at the end of Kerber Boulevard, between Market Square and Target/City owned
outlot. The site is bordered to the south by Highway 5 right -of -way. Staff visited the site to
I determine how the existing use fit in with the newly developed properties adjacent to it and to
determine if the site was suitable for commercial uses. The remaining lot (Lot 3) is less than an
acre in size, is not easily seen from West 78th Street (where it would receive access) or Highway
I 5 and abuts the rear parking lot and outdoor storage area of Market Square and Target. With
these circumstances, staff did not feel that a new user would find this site to be appropriate for
a commercial use. Also, staff felt that the existing facility was low level industrial and has
I proven to be compatible with the surrounding property and uses. Both the existing building and
vacant parcel have poor visibility from W. 78th Street and virtually no visibility from Hwy. 5.
We concluded that retail commercial uses were not likely to be a realistic option in this area and
1 support the request to rezone both parcels to allow for an expansion of the existing use.
The only option the applicant has to expand the site is to rezone the property to IOP, Industrial
I Office Park or PUD, Planned Unit Development. Staff did not feel rezoning the site to IOP,
Industrial Office Park was appropriate. We did not wish to open the site up to any industrial use.
Instead we recommended the applicant apply for rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development.
1 The intent of a PUD is to develop flexible zoning while creating a higher standard of
1
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 3
development. Part of the PUD process is to establish development standards by which the site
plan will be required to adhere to. This PUD will be governed by the final development plan.
The overall preliminary site plan appears to be in order and well designed. Staff has been
working with the applicant for a few months and the plans have gone through some changes
since it first appeared before the Planning Commission and City Council. The intended use of
this building is office, light manufacturing, and warehousing. Standards are proposed to be
incorporated with the PUD agreement that would limit all future use of the site to low impact
ones consistent with its surroundings. We are proposing that significant new plantings of over -
story trees be provided between the site and Hwy. 5 to expand the "Target" forest to the east.
Some trees will be lost after placing the new addition. Also there is limited space where trees
can be placed on site. Therefor, staff is recommending 10 trees be placed on Outlot A,
Crossroads Plaza (fountain site).
Originally, the applicant was proposing to develop the site in two phases. However, on June 2, 1
1993, staff was informed of a change of plans and that the applicant was proposing to complete
both phases with this proposal. The proposed 16,335 square foot addition will take place as soon
as the City approves the proposal. Staff found that the expansion will actually bring the site
closer into compliance with the hard surface coverage maximum of 70 %, decreasing it from the
current 80.27% to 70.3 %. Staff is recommending that the hard surface coverage be decreased
to comply with PUD standards.
The comprehensive plan designates this property as commercial. The comprehensive plan will
have to be amended as part of the application process to designate the subject site as industrial.
The project is expected to receive Tax Increment Financing assistance through the City's Housing 1
and Redevelopment Authority.
Staff believes the proposal, combined with conditions proposed by staff, will be effective in 1
providing satisfactory development. Through the PUD ordinances, the proposed expansion to the
facility will be allowed and the city will be able to maintain control on the improvements and
uses. Staff finds the proposed PUD, plat and site plan to be acceptable and is recommending
approval of the preliminary and final stage of the PUD plan, preliminary plat, comprehensive
plan amendment, and site plan subject to proposed conditions. '
BACKGROUND
On April 16, 1973, the subject site was zoned I -1, Industrial. On June 12, 1978, the City Council 1
approved a site plan for an office /warehouse /manufacturing facility on Lots 4 and 5, Burdick
Park. The site plan was approved with conditions and a variance to setback requirements (see
Attachment #1). The site was developed meeting the original conditions of approval.
1
1
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 4
On March 17, 1993, the Planning Commission reviewed a concept plan for the expansion of the
existing building and unanimously recommended approval of it, with an added condition of an
1 improved architectural appearance to the building and the incorporation of transit planning to the
site design. On April 12, 1993, the plan was reviewed by the City Council and approved as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
' REZONING
Justification for Rezoning to PUD
The applicant is requesting to rezone 2.2 acres from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit
1 Development. The following review constitutes an evaluation of the PUD request. The review
criteria is taken from the intent section of the PUD Ordinance.
1 Section 20 -501. Intent
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 to be realized as
evaluated against the following criteria:
1 Planned unit developments are to encourage the following:
1. 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.
1 Finding. There is a stand of trees located on the southwest comer of the site. These trees
are an extension of a significant wooded area, owned by the HRA, separating the Target
site from the subject site. These trees include oak, elm, ash, basswood and box elder.
1 Staff is recommending a preservation easement over the southwest comer of the site be
dedicated, so that the trees are preserved. These trees are highly visible from the Hwy.
5 corridor and their preservation will be an asset to the city. They will offer some
screening of a portion of the building and all loading areas. We are also requiring the
addition of 5 new over -story tree plantings in this area to expand upon the preserved
forest. Also, due to limited on site open space, staff is recommending 10 trees be place
on Outlot A, Cross Road Plaza.
1
1
Chaska Machine ,
June 16, 1993
Page 5
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.
Finding. There is one lot left vacant adjacent and to the south of the existing building
(Lot 3, Block 2 Burdick Park). This parcel is owned by the Chanhassen HRA. The
existing building and Lot 3 are located at the end of Kerber Boulevard, between Market
Square and Target/City owned outlot. The site is bordered on the south by Highway 5
right -of -way. Staff visited the site to determine how the existing use fit in with the newly
developed properties adjacent to it and to determine if the site was suitable for
commercial and therefore, commercial zoning should be maintained. The remaining lot
(Lot 3) is less than an acre in size, is not easily seen from West 78th Street (where it
would receive access) or Highway 5 and abuts the rear parking lot and outdoor storage
area of Market Square and the Target Store. With these circumstances, staff did not feel
that a new user would find this site to be appropriate for a commercial use. Also, staff
felt that the existing facility was low level industrial and has proven to be compatible
with the surrounding property and uses.
3. High quality design and design compatibility with surrounding land uses, including both 1
existing and planned. Site planning, landscaping and building architecture should reflect
higher quality design than is found elsewhere in the community. 1
Finding. The applicant is proposing to use materials compatible with the existing
building. Typically with a PUD, the city would require higher quality architectural design
than what exists and is being proposed. Staff worked closely with the applicant to
improve the image of the entire building. The Planning Commission and City Council
approved the Concept plan with the condition that "The expansion of the building shall
match and enhance the architectural design of the existing building." In order to meet
this condition, the applicant will paint the rock face concrete block which is the main
material used on the building. The building architectural facade will also be revised by
removing the existing cedar hand split roof shingles over the entrance canopies and
replaced with colored ribbed steel panels to accent the building. There will be a total of
four entrances /canopies that will be alike in appearance and they will be illuminated by
recessed lights above the doors. These panels will be similar in style to the Target and
Market Square buildings. The applicant is proposing to use that same accent color to
paint three stripes, 8 inches wide, around the building. The first stripe is proposed to be
painted above the windows, the second below the split faced block, and the third band
will be around the edge of the top of the building. Staff would prefer to see the proposed
painted stripes be replaced by glazed tile to fit in with the architectural theme set by
Target and the Market Square Shopping Center to accent the building. The applicant is
also proposing to remove the existing roof top wood screen to replace it with steel siding
panels, to be painted a color that will not stand out.
1
1
1
' Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 6
' 4. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along
g
significant corridors within the city will be encouraged.
Finding. Staff is recommending additional landscaping be provided along the south.
g P g P g
' The back of the building will be against the trees and all loading will be screened from
view. It will also expand upon a protected forest area considered important as part of the
Highway 5 corridor.
1 5. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
' Finding. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for commercial development. A guide
plan amendment is being requested and proposed for approval by staff for reasons
outlined previously.
' 6. Parks and open space. The creation of public 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 has recommended that park and trail fees
1 be received in lieu of park and trail dedication.
7. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD.
' Finding. Not applicable to this proposal.
8. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sightings and
the clustering of buildings and land uses.
1 Finding. Chanhassen is actively involved with public transportation. The applicant has
requested from Southwest Metro Transit to provide public transit to the site probably as
dial -a -ride or van pool service. A list of all employees, the time their shift begins, and
' place of residency was submitted with the application. Information will be made
available to the employees regarding bus schedules and park and ride lots locations.
' Also, the city is one of the few suburban communities that is able to have a pedestrian
oriented CBD. This is made possible by the creation of a centralized "downtown." There
is a park and ride facility in the area and the downtown is connected by sidewalks.
' 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.
" 1
Chaska Machine 1
June 16, 1993
Page 7
Finding. Access to this site will be from Kerber Boulevard, via West 78th. The City
Council has recently approved the location of 4 traffic signals on West 78th Street. This
will help regulate traffic, which will allow easier access into the site.
1
The PUD ordinance establishes a same minimum district size but allows the city to waive
this standard under several conditions. We find that the proposed request is consistent
with condition #1 & #2 as follows and are recommending that the area requirement be
waived.
Section 20 -503. District size and location.
(a) Each PUD shall have a minimum area of five (5) acres, unless the applicant can ,
demonstrate the existence of one of the following:
(1) Unusual physical features of the property itself or of the surrounding '
neighborhood such that development as a PUD will conserve a physical or
topographic feature of importance to the neighborhood or community. 1
(2) The property is directly adjacent to or across a right -of -way from property which
has been developed previously as a PUD or planned unit residential development
and will be perceived as and will function as an extension of that previously
approved development.
Summary of Rezoning to PUD
Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility but allows the city to
request additional improvements and some of the site's features can be better protected. The
reduced standards allow the expansion of a light manufacturing nonconforming business in the
CBD. In return for reducing the standards, the city is receiving:
1
• Screening of undesirable view of loading areas
• Preservation existing and requiring additional trees
1
• Improved architectural standards and appearance including; entry ways, roof top
screening, uniform architecture
• Encouraging Public Transit
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL STAGE PUD PLAN APPROVAL
Development Standards /Site Plan Review
Staff is proposing the following development standards be used for this PUD plan and 1
incorporated into the PUD agreement.
1
1 Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
' Page 8
a. Intent
1 The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD that would allow the expansion of an existing
office/light manufacturing use. It is intended that this use be operated and maintained to
preserve its low intensity character to ensure its compatibility with surrounding uses and
the greater Chanhassen Central Business District.
b. Permitted Uses
The permitted uses in this zone are limited to the light industrial/office or less intensive
' uses than the existing use. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there
is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director
shall make that interpretation.
1 1.
2. Light Manufacturing*
Retail **
3. Newspaper and small printing offices
4. Veterinary Clinic
5. Animal Hospital
6. Offices
*Light manufacturing is subject to the following limitations:
no visible emissions of smoke
1 - no noise emissions exceeding the MnPCA standards measured at
the property line.
No outdoor, unscreened storage of materials, trash storage, shipping
' pallets or other materials
overnight parking of a maximum of four trucks
all parking must be accommodated on -site
**Retail uses are subject to the following limitations:
- signage consistent with approved sign package
retail uses must be consistent with the site's restricted parking
1 c. Setbacks
The setback of the majority of the building has been set by the existing portion. The
' addition will maintain a minimum of 50 feet from Kerber Boulevard, and 55 feet from
Highway 5. In the PUD standards, the building setback is 30 feet from any local
street/public right -of -way, and 50 feet from arterial and railroad lines. The proposed
addition is located 46 feet from the Railroad Right -of -Way on the most southerly corner.
Staff is recommending the design be revised to maintain the required setback. The
1
1
Chaska Machine I
June 16, 1993
Page 9
parking setback on the west received a variance on June 12, 1978, to allow a zero setback 1
from the lot line.
d. Development Standards Tabulation Box 1
USE Lot Area Bldg. Sq. Parking Impervious Bldg. Parking 1
ft. Surface Setback Setback
Ordinance 5 acres 43 70% North -30' North -20' I
required South- 50' South -20'
West -30' West -20'
East -30' East -20' 1
Existing 49,138 19,980 67 80.27% W- 45/N -25 W- 0/N -25
E- 55/S -80 E- 20 /S -na
1
Proposed 48,025 16,335 59 60.33% W- 45/N -na * * **
Addition E -50/ W- 0/N -na I
S -46 * ** E- 20/S -20
Total 97,163 ** 36,315 59 70.3 %*
s.f. /2.2 1
acres
* The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70 %. The existing impervious surface 1
exceeds the requirements, however, with the proposed addition, the impervious surface will be
brought very close into compliance. Staff is recommending that a revised plan be submitted I
showing less hard surface coverage to bring the plan into compliance with the 70% maximum.
** The City Code requires a minimum area of five (5) acres for a PUD unless the applicant
I
can demonstrate unique physical features of the site. There is no way for the site to contain five
acres as it is abutted by Highway 5, Pica Drive, city property and Market Square. The site is
also located adjacent to the Target PUD. For these reasons, we believe it is reasonable to waive
I
the 5 acre standard as allowed by the ordinance. Waiver of PUD minimum area requirements
is recommended.
* ** The PUD standard for structure setbacks from Railroad Right -of -Way is 50 feet. The I
proposal is illustrating the building at 46 feet. Reducing the size of the building will ultimately
reduce the hard surface coverage. Revised plans shall be submitted showing the required setback.
1
* * ** Existing variance.
1
1 Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
i Page 10
e. Building Materials and Design
Applicant's Proposal. The developer is proposing that the addition use the same concrete
block material as the existing building. The entire building will be painted. The ceder
' wood shingles will be removed and replaced by ribbed steel panels. The roof top
equipment's existing screening is proposed to be removed and replaced by steel panels.
' Existing 3 foot wide rusty doors will be removed and replaced by new ones, and the
introduction of three painted stripes on the building for accent.
' Finding. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of
architectural standards and site design.
1. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Concrete block, same as the
type used on the existing building, shall be used. Color shall be introduced
through colored block. Glazed tile should be used to create the accent 8" wide
1 stripes on the building rather than paint.
2. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary
' — structure. All ground mounted equipment, trash storage, etc. to be fully screened
by compatible masonry walls.
1 3. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened by materials compatible with the
building. Wood screen fences are prohibited.
' f. Site Landscaping and Screening
Applicant's Proposal. The applicant has prepared a landscaping plan that shows the
' addition of 12 trees. The existing trees along the southwest corner of the site will be
preserved. The landscaping plan could do a better job of buffering parking lots and
breaking up the expanse of the building. Tree preservation is a positive, if minor,
element.
Finding. In addition, to adhere to the higher quality of development as spelled out in the
PUD zone, all loading areas shall be screened. Fifteen additional trees shall be provided.
Five trees shall be located along the south portion of the site, and 10 trees on outlot A,
Crossroads Plaza. They are required to extend the protected forested area eastward.
Ultimately, we anticipate there being additional plantings on city -owned land further to
the south. This reforestation is consistent with the goals of draft Hwy. 5 planning efforts
and to screen less desirable views of the south edge of the CBD. Trees should be over -
story and selected from the approved tree list. All plant materials must meet minimum
1
1
.1
Chaska Machine
1
June 16, 1993
Page 11
size specifications. Tree plantings may be installed partially on city owned land located 1
adjacent to the site.
1. All open spaces and non - parking lot surfaces shall be landscaped, covered with '
plantings and /or lawn material.
2. Unscreened outdoor P
storage is prohibited. I
3. Loading areas shall be screened from public right -of -ways.
1
4. Tree preservation areas shall be clearly staked and marked by snow fence prior
I to the start of grading. Staff will use its discretion to require minor revisions to
grading including the potential use of retaining walls, if it appears that tree
preservation will benefit. Protected trees lost due to development activity shall I
be replaced on a caliper inch basis.
5. A satisfactory letter of credit to ensure compliance with approved plans shall be I
provided prior to the start of grading.
g. Signage
1
No signage is proposed at this time, however, the site contain an existing wall mounted
sign.
1. Each business shall be allowed one wall mounted sign. The total of all wall
mounted sign display areas shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the total area
I
of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted.
2. All signs require a separate permit.
I
3. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and will use
materials compatible with the building. Signs shall be an architectural feature, and
I
shall not be solely mounted on a pole of a foundation.
4. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights.
1
5. Temporary signs will be allowed in a manner consistent with the city sign code.
I
h. Lighting
Recessed light will be introduced. These lights will be located above the entrance doors, 1
and tucked under the new canopies.
1
1
I .
1 Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 12
Finding.
1. All light fixtures shall be shielded high pressure sodium fixtures. Light level for
site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the property line. This does not
1 apply to street lighting.
2. Glare, whether direct or reflected as differentiated from general illumination, shall
1 not be visible beyond the limits of the site from which it originates.
3. Lights shall be on a photoelectric cell to turn them on and off automatically as
activated by yearly conditions.
4. Light poles shall use shoe box light standards.
Streets /Access/Parking
1 Access to the site is obtained via Picha Drive and Kerber Drive. There are two access points
onto Picha Drive which eventually leads into Target. Staff is recommending a stop sign be
' installed at each exit point on Picha Drive. There will be a total of 59 parking stalls. The City
Code would only require 43 parking spaces (including one for a company vehicle). Therefore,
59 parking spaces are not necessary and the applicant can remove some of the parking area and
replace it with landscaped open space. Some of the proposed parking is an extension of existing
parking at the rear of the building. The applicant is proposing to continue to have this parking
adjacent to the westerly lot line with no setback. This area abuts open space that has existing
1 vegetation and which will never be developed. Staff would prefer to keep the parking in this
area rather than add parking to the front of the building. Therefore, staff does not object to
keeping the zero setback for the rear parking.
' Utilities
1 The existing building is connected to municipal sewer and water. The plans propose to extend
another sewer and water line to serve the building expansion. The appropriate connection and
hookup fees will be required at the time of building permit issuance.
Grading and Drainage
1 The grading plan does not indicate the existing underlying ground contours. It is difficult to
determine the amount of earthwork involved with this expansion although it appears the end use
contours are acceptable. A storm sewer line is proposed to be extended from the existing storm
sewer in Picha Drive near the Target entrance to the southwest comer of the parking lot. The
catch basin will catch runoff from the new parking lot, driveway and building rooftop areas. The
1
1
1
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 13
storm sewer will convey runoff to the newly created retention pond on the Target site. Since the I
storm sewer connection is within the City's boulevard, the applicant should escrow $500.00 to
guarantee boulevard restoration. Connection to the City's storm sewer will need to be inspected
I
by City staff. The site plan proposes concrete curb and gutter around the perimeter of the new
driveway and parking lot. The existing westerly parking lot behind the building currently sheet
drains westerly into the woods. Staff is comfortable with this drainage pattern and recommends
1
no further drainage improvements at this time. Staff is requesting site drainage calculations
prepared by a professional engineer be submitted to the City for review.
Erosion Control I
Erosion control measures are not illustrated on the plans. Staff recommends that erosion control
1
fence (Type I) be installed along the easterly, southerly and a portion of the westerly property
line at the grading limits. Based on the landscape plan, it appears all disturbed areas will be
restored with sod.
Park and Recreation i
The property will be subject to park and trail fees. These fees are to be collected at the time of
building permit application at the rate then in force. Current industrial/commercial fee rates are I
$3,000 /acre for park, and $1,000 /acre for trail.
In determining the acreage to be assessed, the Park and Recreation Director was unable to locate I
the building permit file for the existing building. Assuming that the platting incorporates both
lots and that the original permit did not include park and trail fees, the entire plat (95,394 sq. ft.)
will be subject to fees. If fees were paid on the original permit, only the addition (34,236 sq.
I
ft.) will be subject to park and trail fees. ,
el E
RECOMMENDATION Y 1
Staff recommends the Planning Commiss' n adopt the following motio :
"The Planning Commission recomme ds approval to rezone 97,163 sq e feet of BG, General I
Business to PUD, approve prelimin y and final development plans, p liminary plat approval
and comprehensive plan amendmen from commercial to office/industrial as shown in plans dated
I
April 19, 1993, revised June 4, 1993, and with a waiver of the 5 acre minimum PUD zone
requirement subject to the following conditions:
I
1. Preliminary and final plat approval combining Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 2, Burdick Park into
one lot with appropriate easements. All typical utility and drainage easements shall be
dedicated to the city on the final plat.
1
1
1
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 14
' 2. Rezoning approval from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit Development.
1 3. The expansion of the building shall match and enhance the architectural design of the
existing building. Rock face concrete block shall remain as the main material used on
the building. All ceder wood shingles shall be replaced with ribbed steel panels.
1 However, the accent stripes shall be created by using glazed tile and not paint. The use
of glazed tile will fit in with the architectural theme set by Target and the Market Square
Shopping Center to accent the building.
U 4. There shall be no unscreened outdoor permitted. a ermitted. Existing outdoor storage to be
' placed in approved, screened enclosures.
5. The hard cover surface of the site (the three lots) shall not exceed 70 %. The setback of
1 the building shall maintain a minimum setback of 50 feet from the railroad right -of -way.
Revised plans reflecting those two elements shall be submitted for staff review.
' 6. Prior to rezoning and development, the applicant shall purchase the property in question
from the HRA.
1 7. Transit planning shall be incorporated into this development.
8. The applicant shall submit detailed storm sewer calculations prepared by a professional
1 engineer for the City to review.
9. The applicant shall provide a $500 security for connection to the City's storm sewer line
' and boulevard restoration on Picha Drive. This fee will be refunded upon satisfactorily
completing connection and restoration of the City's boulevard.
10. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed around the perimeter along the grading
limits.
11. Park and trail fees shall be paid at the time of application of building permit.
12. Approval of the minor comprehensive plan amendment by the Metropolitan Council.
' 13. Stop signs shall be installed at the exit points to Picha Drive.
P g P
14. Meet the conditions of the Fire Marshal.
' 15. Fifteen over story trees shall be added. Five along the south portion of the site, and 10
trees on outlot A, Crossroads Plaza,
1
Chaska Machine
June 16, 1993
Page 15
1
16. The PUD Agreement shall include the following conditions:
a. Intent '
The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD that would allow the expansion of an existing
office/light manufacturing use. It is intended that this use be operated and maintained to
preserve its low intensity character to ensure its compatibility with surrounding uses and
the greater Chanhassen Central Business District.
b. Permitted Uses
The permitted uses in this zone are limited to the light industrial/office or less intensive
uses than the existing use. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there
is a question as to the whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director
shall make that interpretation.
1. Light Manufacturing*
2. Retail **
3. Newspaper and small printing offices
4. Veterinary Clinic
5. Animal Hospital
111
6. Offices
*Light manufacturing is subject to the following limitations:
1
no visible emissions of smoke
no noise emissions exceeding the MnPCA standards measured at
the property line.
No outdoor, unscreened storage of materials, trash storage, shipping
pallets or other materials
overnight parking of a maximum of four trucks
all parking must be accommodated on -site
* *Retail uses are subject to the following limitations: 1
signage consistent with approved sign package
retail uses must be consistent with the site's restricted parking ,
ATTACHMENTS
1. Staff report and minutes dated April 12, 1993.
2. Letter from the applicant dated June 4, 1993.
3. Addresses and work shifts of Chaska Machine and Tool employees to start the transit '
planning process.
4. Plans dated April 19, 1993, revised June 4, 1994.
1 T Y Pr DATE: 3/17/93 _ ,
OF
�. � `
C 11 A H A E 1 CC DATE: 4/12/93
�;
-...,..\,... CC
#: 93 -1 PUD
By: Olsen/v
1
1 STAFF REPORT
1
1 PROPOSAL: Concept plan approval to allow property zoned BG, General Business to be
rezoned to PUD, Planned Unit Development
1 Action by City Adm!nis'rator
1 Z Endoried___ L D WA-
Q LOCATION: 7900 Monterey Drive - Chaska Machine and Tool, Inc. 14io�i`
V Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick Park e '�_ 9 3
I D ote SuSrn:tted to Commission
/ .
1 a. Dee Subm^tsd to Council
4 APPLICANT: Doug Hanson -1 z — 5
17001 Stodola Road
1 Minnetonka, MN 55345
T ,
1 PRESENT ZONING: BG, General Business
1 ACREAGE: 95,394 square feet
1 DENSITY: n/a
ADJACENT ZONING
1 AND LAND USE: N - BG, vacant
Q S - Highway 5
E - BG, Market Square /City owned outlot
1 Q - W - PUD, Target
I w WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site.
F. PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site has an existing light manufacturing building with parking
1 (f) lot improvements, landscaping and utilities.
1 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial
1
1i ' 'k � V - — __ z '' ' % � • 1111:(7.1 , i 1 . I ., c_______ - X. I S & \1_, -c 1' - s> ,, • i
ID .1. \• Po i ti) 1P # " 4 't \ \`*" .
1"tf) 0 a i '' - ,..".-1 : ,, . -- ...-„J„
" .,. -... •. -) -
/ ?it, , , ,;--._1 - ,K,/ v
, _ . ., , , , .... ....„ . , ,
, 1 , .__, .,.. \, • - , .
‘ f . r , ,,,,_„,,
.„ L K • � •fvE v F u A / ;) - � I`'"1'L� , - 1r 'if • -( �•1„�.g ' 1 •
' % t 1 1. t iff,'
PARK to _ / \ t J f 1 .� 1 } .; ,- , •.,L 1 y ,•
1 emu "I�a t Y >, 6'w ,o e. V t 0 ., mow■- 1 •/ , `'� ` ■ ' " •�•� '�
.„- 0 I • it 1 EL EM , (\ „, 0 J . � •_ ,-A -lc. i
/ e 1 • _S'CHOOL - - . . - It. a ' , "t! , \ , \
n i 1":,.k
B OA - = r / r ... ® P I : y ti 4 10:, _ 1''.. : . . -,,, Mlle
%- -..„1:0 114 ..., .1 \ ./. t ■ .4 ; - A■ "-- ' A - <
,, . . • ..., ,. - . ., , --_,4 , _1, • - ,1,-..
Y
:-n ..s 1
11 - ,
L% ' r / � ' � 1 IAA.
n ` � }
-IN 1 ' ..: 4 ,„ pm ., ; z ■ , Ind S 1)nl _ g I ,_ , \ l ‘ 1111% --1
C � io 4A ‘ w o •
1 rm 111., 011 .1..11
mz it IP \ ' . / ; --_, - . ,
r
f---- )C1,
IL V I44ulIlI,n,* � o - a , , 1 .' t ,l I {l S _my sof / Trend
e.'c i , \ ) -)). 4 . .7 \ ° ,
CI i No r...4,,, j , .4ific ..': d E* e ' • N- 7' , - 4 I 4 1- i ,
r rti 11 Ibit -j li , .'',, 7 ', .: .
, i.. , - s t..,,c,! . „ .
43, ) ,..,,,c1 A 1 -----N •
•
' - rri c.0) - - I an 4 e/ i Ata.. n CD ,
I J 6H wa ~ \ , i 7
Illik ‘\ ,t) i ? I
1 1 �G
I N co ∎�� J -pJ --,1
-4
0 0 o Z r �'� Ig000 M c; v
fT �/ O v
n . 18800 � r I � \ o m I .
. 1 �►' �V IR7 Tf{ AV F_ 1 8800 O z U U O c0
3 G (/'
•. t` �� p lef ", \- OM Mil NM lial OM Elli 1111111 1
1
West One Expansion
Chaska Machine
March 17, 1993
1 Page 2
BACKGROUND
' On April 16, 1973 the subject site was zoned I -1, Industrial. On June 12, 1978, the City Council
approved a site plan for a Office/Warehouse /Manufacturing facility on Lots 4 and 5, Burdick
1 Park. The site plan was approved with conditions and a variance to setback requirements (see
attachment #1). The site was developed meeting the original conditions of approval.
1 PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
The applicant, Doug Hanson, was involved in the initial development of the subject site and has
1 requested approval to expand the building onto Lot 3, Burdick Park. Chaska Machine and Tool,
Inc., which is a light manufacturing facility with an employment base of 40 (30 during the day
' shift and 10 during the evening shift) occupies the building. The shifts are from 6:30 a.m. - 4:30
p.m. and 4:30 p.m. to 3:30 a.m. The business is a metal stamping facility and the loading
dock/truck activity is minimal and only used during the day. The zoning of the property has
' been changed, since the previous approval, from I -1, Industrial to BG, General Business. The
BG, General Business District does not permit industrial uses such as manufacturing. Therefore,
the existing use is now non - conforming and cannot be expanded.
1 There is one more lot left vacant adjacent and to the south of the existing building (Lot 3,
Burdick Park). This parcel is owned by the Chanhassen HRA. The existing building and Lot
' 3 are located at the end of Monterey, between Market Square and Target/City owned outlot .
The site is bordered to the south by Highway 5 right -of -way. Staff visited the site to determine
how the existing use fit in with the newly developed properties adjacent to it and to determine
if the site was suitable for commercial and therefore, should be maintained as commercial. The
remaining lot (Lot 3) is less than an acre in size, is not easily seen from West 78th Street (where
it would receive access) or Highway 5 and abuts the rear parking lot and outdoor storage area
' of Market Square. With these circumstances, staff did not feel that a new user would find this
site to be appropriate for a commercial use. Also, staff felt that the existing facility was low
level industrial and has proven to be compatible with the surrounding property and uses.
The only options the applicant has to expand the site is to rezone the property to IOP, Industrial
Office Park or PUD, Planned Unit Development. Staff did not feel rezoning the site to IOP,
1 Industrial Office Park was appropriate. We did not wish to open the site up to any industrial use.
Instead we recommended the applicant apply for rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development.
This will allow the proposed expansion to the facility and also allow the city to maintain control
on the improvements and uses. The comprehensive plan designates this property as commercial.
The comprehensive plan will have to be amended as part of the application process to designate
' the subject site as industrial. The first step in this process is the concept plan approval. The
concept plan allows the applicant to receive direction from the Planning Commission and City
Council as to whether they will approve the proposed rezoning.
1
1
West One Expansion
Chaska Machine
March 17, 1993
Page 3
1
PUD
The City Code requires the PUD to only be used for the use for which the site is designated in
the Comprehensive Plan. As stated above, the property is designated as commercial, and if the
PUD is to be approved, the Comprehensive Plan will have to be amended to designate the site
as industrial. The City Code requires a minimum area of five (5) acres for a PUD unless the
applicant can demonstrate unique physical features of the site. There is no way for the site to
contain five acres as it is abutted by Highway 5, Pica Drive, city property and Market Square.
The site is also located adjacent to the Target PUD. For these reasons, we believe it is
reasonable to waive the 5 acre standard as allowed by the ordinance.
The current building is 19,980 square feet and is located on two lots (Lots 4 and 5, Burdick
Park). The total area of the two lots is 61,158 square feet. The building is one story and is
made of square block with canopies over the entrances. There is parking located at the front and
rear of the building. There is no setback for the parking to the rear of the building. This was
permitted with a variance in 1978. The applicant is proposing to expand the existing building
by 12,735 square feet with a future expansion of 5,400 square feet. The use of the building and
expansion will remain the same, which is Chaska Machine and Tool - light manufacturing. The
expansion of the building will be of the same material, color and architectural design as the
existing building. There are a total of 65 parking stalls which could be provided.
Typically with a PUD, the city would require higher quality architectural design than what exists
and is being proposed. Since the desire with this situation is to have the expansion match the
existing building, staff would agree to the proposed architectural design. The applicant is
providing for 65 parking spaces. The City Code would only require 43 parking spaces (including
one for a company vehicle). Therefore, 65 parking spaces are not necessary and the applicant
can remove some of the parking area and replace it with landscaped open space. Some of the
proposed parking is an extension of existing parking at the rear of the building. The applicant
is proposing to continue to have this parking adjacent to the westerly lot line with no setback.
This area abuts open space that has existing vegetation and which will never be developed. Staff
would prefer to keep the parking in this area rather than add parking to the front of the building.
1
Therefore, staff does not object to keeping the zero setback for the rear parking. The hard surface
coverage has not yet been calculated, but it cannot exceed 70 %. The landscaping plan will
have to show existing and proposed vegetation and shall meet the new landscaping regulations.
Outdoor storage will not be permitted.
RECOMMENDATION
1
Rezoning the property to PUD will allow the expansion of the existing use which has proven to
be compatible to the site and surrounding uses. The rezoning will also allow the business to
remain in the city and the development of a lot which might otherwise remain vacant if it
1
1
1 West One Expansion
Chaska Machine
March 17, 1993
1 Page 4
remains zoned commercial. A PUD allows the city more control over the development of the
1 site, such as improved landscaping and site specific conditions (i.e. no outdoor storage). If the
site remains as is, it is non - conforming and the city has less control over the site. Since this is
only concept plan approval, staff will be recommending general conditions. More detailed review
I of specific plans (i.e. utilities, grading, landscaping, etc.) will take place at the next phase of
approval.
1 Planning Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the concept plan
request to rezone Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick Park from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned
I Unit Development with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall receive and meet the conditions of the following approvals:
1 a. Preliminary and Final Plat approval combining Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick Park into
one lot with appropriate easements.
1 b. Comprehensive Plan amendment changing the land use designation from
Commercial to Industrial.
I c. Site Plan approval for the building expansion.
I d. Rezoning approval from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit
Development.
I 2. The site plan shall have to maintain the proposed concept plan, with the proposal being
an expansion of the existing building for use by the existing use, light manufacturing.
A higher intensity industrial use will not be permitted at this site.
I 3. The expansion of the building shall match the architectural design of the existing building.
1 4. There shall be no outdoor storage permitted.
5. All rooftop equipment shall be screened.
I
6. The hard cover surface of the site (the three lots) shall not exceed 70 %.
1 MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
I Which came first- -the chicken or the egg? In this case, staff decided that the Planning
Commission's thoughts and concerns should be obtained before asking the HRA if they want to
sell their land. Given the battles which occurred in attempting to move Hanus, Hendrickson Dry
1
1
1
West One Expansion
Chaska Machine
March 17, 1993
Page 5 1
Wall, Instant Web, FMS, etc., out of downtown; I must admit that an expansion of an industrial
user is of concern. Paul advises me that those concerns can be alleviated through the PUD 1
contract.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 1
The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the concept plan request to
rezone Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick Park from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit
I
Development with staff's recommended conditions and adding the following:
7. Prior to rezoning and development, the applicant shall purchase the property in question 1
from the HRA.
8. Transit planning shall be incorporated into this development. 1
CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
I
Staff recommends the City Council approve the concept plan request to rezone Lots 3, 4 and 5,
Burdick Park from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit Development with the following
conditions:
1. The applicant shall receive and meet the conditions of the following approvals: 1
a. Preliminary and Final Plat approval combining Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick Park into
one lot with appropriate easements.
1
b. Comprehensive Plan amendment changing the land use designation from
Commercial to Industrial.
1
c. Site Plan approval for the building expansion.
d. Rezoning approval from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit I
Development.
2. The site plan shall have to maintain the proposed concept plan, with the ro osal being 1
P P g
an expansion of the existing building for use by the existing use, light manufacturing.
A higher intensity industrial use will not be permitted at this site.
1
3. The expansion of the building shall match the architectural design of the existing building.
4. There shall be no outdoor storage permitted.
I
1
1
West One Expansion
Chaska Machine
March 17, 1993
' Page 6
5. All rooftop equipment shall be screened.
1 6. The hard cover surface of the site (the three lots) shall not exceed 70 %.
' 7. Prior to rezoning and development, the applicant shall purchase the property in question
from the HRA.
8. Transit planning shall be incorporated into this development.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Variance Contract for building.
2. Staff report dated May 7, 1979.
' 3. Planning Commission minutes dated March 17, 1993.
4. Concept plan.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
HANSEN & KLINGELHUTZ CONSTRUCTION, INC.
VARIANCE CONTRACT
FOR BUILDING AT
1 BUILDING AT PICHA DRIVE AND MANDAN DRIVE
WHEREAS, application has been made by Hansen & Klingelhutz
Construction, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, as the developer of a
tract of land lying within the City of Chanhassen, and more particularly
described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof; and I
by West I Properties, a partnership consisting of Jeffery E. Swedlund,
Roxanne Swedlund, Douglas M. Hansen, Beverly J. Hansen, Thomas A.
Klingelhutz, Catherine M. Klingelhutz, and Robert 0. Nyen, as the
proposed owner and operating entity of a 19,000 square foot combina-
tion office /warehouse /light manufacturing building, hereinafter
referred to as "The Building ", to be constructed upon the above
described tract of land. (Said corporation and said partnership are
hereinafter referred to collectively as "The Applicants "); and
WHEREAS, the subject property is presently zoned I -1,
1 Industrial District; and
WHEREAS, the Applicants have requested certain variances
from the literal provisions of applicable Chanhassen Ordinances; and
WHEREAS, §462.357, Subd. 6 of Minnesota Statutes, and §22.02
of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance authorize the Chanhassen City,
Council to impose conditions upon the granting of such variances to
insure corpliance and to protect adjacent properties; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Chanhassen Board of I
Adjustments and Appeals on July 6, 1978 to consider public comment on
said variance requests; and
WHEREAS, the Chanhassen City Council has, by its resolution 1
dated June 12, 1978, approved the development plans and certain
variance requests of the applicants, as hereinafter described in
Paragraph 2, subject only to the issuance by the Chanhassen Board of
Adjustments and Appeals of a recommendation that certain variances be
approved; and
WHEREAS, the Chanhassen Board of Adjustments and Appeals, by 1
its resolution dated July 6, 1978, approved proposal of the Appli-
cants as hereinafter set forth; and
WHEREAS, the above described resolutions were adopted subject
to and on condition that the applicants enter into this variance
1 contract; and
WHEREAS, the Chanhassen City Council has determined that the
proposed development as described herein substantially complies with
the standards set forth in the second full paragraph of S22.02 of the
Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance;
-1-
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises
and acceptance by the City of Chanhassen (hereinafter referred to as
"The City ") of the Applicants' development plans and the approval
of the above described variance requests, the City and the Applicants
1 agree as follows:
1. Improvements by Applicants. Applicants agree at their expense
' to construct, install and perform all work and furnish all materials
and equipment in connection with the installation of the following
improvements in accordance with the site plan and landscape plan
described in paragraph 2 below:
' a. Parking lot and access driveway grading, stabilizing, and
bituminous surfacing,
' b. concrete curbs and gutters abutting all parking lot areas
and access driveways, except the western edge whereon a
rolled bituminous curb shall be installed,
' c. storm and surface water drainage,
d. boulevard sodding or seeding of uniformly good quality, and
e. grounds lighting.
' 2. Scope of Development Governed by Exhibits. The exterior
dimensions, architectural design, decorating scheme, grading plan,
loading dock configuration, and placement of structures shall be in
' conformance with that certain Site Plan dated April, 1978, Site Plan
dated May, 1978, Landscape Plan dated April, 1978, undated Ground
Floor Plan, undated Exterior Elevation Drawing, Street Construction
Plan dated April 13, 1978 as revised by the City Engineer on April 21,
' 1978, and Storm Drainage Plan dated April 13, 1978 as revised by the
City Engineer on April 21, 1978, all of which are on file in the
office of the Chanhassen Zoning Administrator in File P -481.
' The building shall be constructed of stacked square block except for a
decorative band of vertical fracture block creating a relief effect
' shadow line. Said block shall be painted in tones of gray or white.
The canopies depicted on said elevation drawings shall project outward
six (6) feet and night lights shall be provided to illuminate all
entrances to the Building.
3. Effect of Conflicting Ordinance Provisions. The parties hereto
acknowledge that the development as described in paragraph 2 above
' conflicts with the literal provisions for setbacks, load dock con-
figuration, front yards, side yards, and rear yards contained in
SS12.05, 12.08 and 9.07 of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance. The parties
hereto furtheracknowledge that, in accordance with the above described
resolutions of the Chanhassen Board of Adjustments and Appeals and the
City Council, the proposed development may be constructed in conformity
with the various plans which are described in paragraph 2, above.
1 4. Outside Storage Prohibited. With the exception of trash
facilities as hereinafter provided, and with the exception of licensed
' vehicle parking as hereinafter provided, no equipment or other personal
property shall be stored or displayed outside of the building.
' -
5. Overnight Parking Requirements. No motor vehicle of larger
than 9000 lbs. licensed gross weight shall be parked overnight except
in parking spaces #39 -58 as shown on parking layout dated 5/78. This
area shall permit overnight parking for larger licensed vehicles not
to exceed 8' x 24'. Applicant agrees to review parking within the
designated area (parking spaces 39 -58) on or about November 1, 1979;
and further agrees that in no case shall boats be parked (stored)
on the property, and that parking within the designated area shall
be tenant oriented parking only.
6. Parking Lot Configuration. Off - street parking facilities
shall be constructed in accordance with the Site Plan described in
1
Paragraph 2 above with the following modification:
a. All parking spaces shall be clearly delineated or marked
as such and shall have a minimum width of nine (9) feet
and a minimum length of twenty (20) feet exclusive of
aisles and maneuvering space.
b. A clear aisle width of at least eighteen (18) feet shall
be provided for all parking spaces located easterly of
the building.
1
7. Schedule of Work. The Applicants further agree that they
shall commence work hereunder immediately, and shall have all work done'
and improvements fully completed to the satisfaction and approval
of the City on or before August 1, 1979. The Applicants shall
submit a written schedule indicating the proposed progress schedule
and order of completion of work covered by this contract, which
schedule shall be a part of this contract. Upon receipt of written
notice from the Applicants of the existence of causes over which the
Applicants have no control which will delay the completion of the
work, the City, in its discretion, may extend the date hereinbefore
specified for completion.
8. Grading Plan and Lighting Plan. No Certificate of
1
Occupancy shall be issued and the Applicants shall not occupy the
building until the Applicants' final grading plan has been reviewed
by City staff for purposes of verifying that said grading plan is in I
complete conformity with all of the provisions of the within
permit and contract. Said final grading plan shall include existing
contours, proposed grading elevations, drainage configurations,
storm water drainage configurations, spot elevations, proposed
access driveway road profiles, location and candlepower of all
illuminaries, and locations of exterior trash storage areas.
9. Sign Plan. The Applicants agree to prepare and submit to
the City a sign plan, which shall include location, type and
dimensions of all proposed exterior signs. No exterior signs shall
be erected and no sign permit shall be issued until after said
sign plan has been reviewed by the City for purposes of verifying
that said sign plan is in conformity with applicable city ordinances.
-3-
1
II
II 10. Landscape Plan. The Applicants agree to prepare and submit
to City staff a final landscape plan which shall include location,
I type and diameters of proposed plantings, description of and locations
of all screening devices, and location and elevation of proposed berms.
No landscaping permit shall be issued and the Applicants shall perform
I no landscaping until after said landscape plan has been reviewed by
City staff for purposes of verifying that said landscape plan is in
conformity with all of the provisions of the within contract.
1 11. Reimbursement of Costs. The Applicants shall reimburse the
City for all costs, including reasonable engineering, legal, planning
and administrative expenses, incurred by the City in connection with
I all matters relating to the administration and enforcement of the with-
in contract, and the performances thereof by the Applicants.
12. Performance Bond. For the purpose of assuring to the City
I
that the improvements to be by the Applicants constructed, installed
and furnished as set forth in Paragraph 1 hereof shall be constructed,
installed and furnished according to the terms of this agreement, and
I that the Applicants shall pay all claims for work done and materials
and supplies furnished for the performance of this agreement, Applicants
agree to furnish to the City a cash deposit in the amount of $15,000.00
I or in lieu thereof, a corporate surety bond in said amount approved
by the City and naming the City as obligee thereunder, being conditioned
upon the performance by the Applicants of their obligations hereunder,
said sum being equal to 110% of the total cost of such improvements as
1 estimated by Schoell & Madson, Inc., the City Engineers.
13. Public Welfare. The establishment, maintenance and operation
I of the use shall not be detrimental to, nor endanger the public health,
safety, comfort or general welfare.
I 14. Screening. All trash areas, mechanical equipment, compressors
and air conditioning equipment, including roof top equipment, shall be
screened from view from West 78th Street, Mandan Drive, and Picha Drive.
I 15. Nuisance. The activities conducted on the premises shall not
cause the emission of noxious odors, nor cause objectionable noise. The
proposed use shall not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
I property, nor diminish nor impair property values in the immediate
vicinity.
16. Public Address System. No public address system or other
I audio paging system shall be utilized on the subject property which
emits noise in excess of the standards set forth in the Chanhassen
Zoning Ordinance and all regulations amendatory and supplementary
1 thereto, which standards shall be binding upon the Applicants.
17. Other Regulations. The Applicants shall comply with all City
I Ordinances, state laws, and regulations of state agencies and depart-
ments.
1
-4-
18. Proof of Title. Upon request, the Applicants shall furnish
the City with evidence satisfactory to the City that they have acquired
fee title to the subject property.
19. Erosion Control. The Applicants, at their expense, shall
provide temporary dams, earthworks, or such other devices and practices,
including the seeding or sodding of graded areas, as shall be needed, I
in the judgment of the City Engineer, to prevent the washing, flooding,
sedimentation or erosion of lands and roads within and outside the sub-
ject property during all phases of construction. Applicants shall keep
all streets free of all dirt and debris resulting from construction by
the Applicants or their agents upon the lands described in Exhibit A
hereto.
20. Disclaimer by City. It is understood and agreed that the
City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City shall
not be personally liable or responsible in any manner to the Applicants,
the Applicants' contractors or subcontractors, materialmen, laborers,
or to any other person, firm or corporation whomsoever, for any debt,
claim, demand, damages, actions or causes of action of any kind or
character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this agree-
ment or the performance and completion of any work and improvements
hereunder; and that the Applicants will save the City, the City Council,
and the agents and employees of the City harmless from any and all II claims, damages, demands, actions or causes of action arising therefrom
and the costs, disbursements and expenses of defending the same.
21. Written Work Orders. The Applicants shall do no work nor
furnish materials for which reimbursement is expected from the City
unless a written order for such work or materials is received from
the City Manager. Any such work or materials which may be done or fur- I
nished by the Applicants without such written order first being given
shall be at its own risk, cost and expense, and Applicants hereby agree
that without such written order, Applicants will make no claim for com- I
pensation for work or materials so done or furnished.
22. Liability Insurance. The Applicants shall take out and main- I
tain, until the time of completion of the Building and the improvements
described in $1 above, public liability and property damage insurance
covering personal injury, including death, and claims for property
damage which may arise out of the Applicants' work or the work of their
subcontractors, or by one directly or indirectly employed by any of them.
Limits for bodily injury or death shall be not less than $100,000 for
one person and $300,000 for each accident; limits for property damage
shall be not less than $100,000 for each accident. The City shall be
named as co- insured on said policy and the Applicants shall file a copy
of the insurance coverage with the City.
23. Remedies Upon Default.
a. In the event the Applicants shall default in the performance
of any of the covenants and agreements herein contained, and
such default shall not have cured within ten (10) days after
receipt by the Applicants of written notice thereof, the City, ,
if it so elects, may cause any of the improvements described
in 11 above to be constructed and installed, and may cause
the entire cost thereof, including all reasonable engineering,
-5-
1
II legal, and administrative expense incurred by the City, to
be recovered as a special assessment under Minnesota Statutes
I Chapter 429, in which case the Applicants agree to pay the
entire amount of the assessment roll pertaining to any such
improvement within thirty (30) days after its adoption. App-
' licants further agree that in the event of their failure to
pay in full any such special assessment within the time
prescribed herein, the City shall have a specific lien on all
of Applicants' real property described on Exhibit A for any
I amount so unpaid, and the City shall have the right to fore-
close said lien in the manner prescribed for the foreclosure
of mechanic's liens under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
II b. In addition to the foregoing, the City may also institute
legal action against the Applicants and the corporate surety
on their performance bond, or utilize any cash deposit made
I hereunder, to collect, pay or reimburse the City for the cost
of making any of said improvements. In the event of an
emergency, as determined by the City engineers, the notice
II requirements to the Applicants shall be and hereby are waived
in their entirety, and the Applicants shall reimburse the City
for any expense incurred by the City in remedying the condi-
' tions creating the emergency.
c. In addition to the foregoing, the City may institute any
proper action or proceeding at law or at equity to prevent
I violations of the within variance contract, to restrain or
abate violations of the within variance contract, or to prevent
use or occupancy of the proposed Building.
24. Address of Developers. The address of the Applicants for
purposes of this development contract and for purposes of notice under
this contract shall be: Box 207, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317.
I 25. Successors and Assigns. It is agreed by and between the parties
hereto that the agreement herein contained shall be binding upon and inure
II to the benefit of their respective successors and assigns.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these
I presents to be executed on this day of , 1978.
CITY : CHANHASSEN HANSEN & KLINGELHUTZ CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Mayor Its f-:... ,
II ATTEST: 7
_ — And 44. ,,i ��.: . /�?
City (Hager is !' '1
1 -6-
II
1
WEST I PROPERTIES ''
Je f r/ E . Swddlund, a' Partner 1
� < 1 z.
Roxanne Swedlund; a Partner
/ t `a /i/ 42,,.
Do / M. Hansen, a Partner
1
t _ i... '.t. / / /` • ..t
Beverly J.ar)sen, a Partner
1
Thomas A. Klinge'lhutz, a/Partner
1
Catherine M. Klingelhutz, a Partner
--- ,, T �,_ /r 1
Robert 0. Nyen,j a Partner
i
1
STATE Or MINNESOTA )
SS I COUNTY OF C;c✓ ✓ )
On this /L• " day of 7h,-1,, , 1971, before me, a notary
public within and for said county, personally appeared Walter Hobbs and '
Donald V. Ashworth, to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn,
did say that they are respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the
municipal corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that said
instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authori
of its City Council, and said Walter Hobbs and Donald W. Ashworth
acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corpora"
Notary Pu is
; ..: -...1,. KAREN J. ENGELHARDT
- 7 - '" � NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA
7J�i C CARVER COUNTY
My CO•nr.uss• ^^ Oct. :.".ret 11. 111115
i d J D#4 0~P. -,M. •
1
II
II STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
1 COUNTY OF )
On this day of , 1978, before me, a
notary public within and for said county, personally appeared
and , to me
personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn, did say that they
are respectively the and the
I of the corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that the
seal affixed to said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of
said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors, and said
and acknowledged said
II instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation.
1 Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
II
ss.
COUNTY OF '..` )
On this '` day of ?Tito , 1979, before me, a
I notary public within and for said c personally appeared JEFFERY
E. SWEDLUND, to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn did
say that he is a partner of the partnership named in the foregoing
I instrument, and he acknowledged to me that such partnership executed
the same,
- /; i 7 /;.(,. • ,-,,,/ . Av ' e ,ate- ,
1 Notary Public r `
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
I )
COUNTY OF ss. )
I On this ! `" day of `7rlaqc.., , 1979, before me, a
notary public within and for said courity, personally appeared ROXANNE
SWEDLUND, to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn did say that
she is a partner of the partnership named in the foregoing instrument,
and she acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the same.
"ms's 6Z/ L icic ;z a . iv , tt k.l~
II Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF 1,;L Lik i )
On this day of 7) %Q
.c,i- 1979, before me, a
II notary public within and for said county, personally appeared DOUGLAS M.
HANSEN, to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn did say that
he is a partner of the partnership named in the foregoing instrument,
II and he acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the same.
Notary Public
1 -8-
II
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
II
COUNTY OF " ti L )
On this day of `]77 C 197, before me, a notary II
public within and for said county, personally appeared BEVERLY J.
HANSEN, to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say
that she is a partner of the partnership named in the foregoing instru- '
ment and she acknowledged to me thatsuch partnership executed the same.
Notary Pub is
II
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss. II COUNTY OF u``�' )
On this C day of 72)4 , 197f, before me, a
notary public within and for said coun €y, personally appeared THOMAS
II
A. KLINGELHUTZ, to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn,
did say that he is a partner of the partnership named in the foregoing
instrument andhe acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the II
same.
-- r(ct-.�zLL:Liz, a ✓6 zt- 'e .7 -
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) Notary Public 1
ss.
COUNTY OF )
On this "�` day of 7) - '._ ky , 197f, before me, a II notary public within and for said county, personally appeared CATHERINE
M. KLINGELHUTZ, to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did
say that she is a partner of the partnership named in the foregoing instill-
ment and she acknowledged to me that such partnership a the same.
"_W ��TJLL.42.,4ItJ Cc - !- (.4:7. If./---
Notary Public II
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
I
ss.
COUNTY OF )
On this /(s day of 777.„4,- , 197y, before me, a II
notary public within and for said county, personally appeared ROBERT
0. NYEN, to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did
say that he is a partner of the partnership named in the foregoing instru '
ment and he acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the same.
,� 4 ' c�."- —
N P hb1ic j II
K J F'����HARD7
:�� NpTA RY J L . E m NNESOTA
CARS ��; COUNTY
my CeTmisrr a).;,,res Oct. tf. 1 .5*
-9- ,..
1
' HANSEN & KLINGELHUTZ CONSTRUCTION, INC.
VARIANCE CONTRACT FOR BUILDING AT
PICHA DRIVE AND 2'1ANDAN DRIVE
' EXHIBIT A
Lots 4 and 5, Block 2, Burdick Park Addition,
according to the map or plat thereof on file
' and of record in the office of the County Recorder
in and for Carver County, Minnesota.
1
-10-
CITY TF
/0,
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE •P.0 BOX 147•CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 474 -8885
fiction by City Adb inignobt
PLANNING REPORT Endo ■ 11
DATE: May 7, 1979
sioa
TO: City Manager, Don Ashworth Oete schmittad to pumma
FROM: Assistant Manager /Planner, Bob Waibel pat` `u"� `� t� Ccu'citi
SUBJ: Development Contract Amendment Request, H & K Warehouse,
Burdick Park
APPLICANT: Hasen and Klingelhutz
PLANNING CASE: P -481 1
Petition
The applicants are requesting to amend Sections 4 and 5 of their
proposed development contract with regards to overnight motor vehicle
parking. As shown in the attached planning commission minutes of
April 4, 1979, the planning commission moved to recommend that
"the council amend the development contract, item 4 be amended to
read licensed vehicle parking, item 5 increased the weight
restrictions from 7,000 to 9,000 lbs for overnight parking on the
east and south, that outside storage be confined to the west side
of the building with no storage of vehicles larger than 8 x 20 feet."
This office recalls that during the site plan review of the subject •
proposal, the plans were presented in a manner indicating that the
bay doors on the building were designed so that they could accomodate II
various types of construction equipment mounted on trailers.
Based upon the concerns of the planning commission during site plan
review regarding the issues of storage and parking on the
subject property, and the fact that many service vans and pick up
type vehicles are licensed at 9,000 lbs., I recommend that Section
5 of the development contract be amended to read that no motor
vehicle larger than 9,000 lbs. licensed gross weight shall be parked:
or stored outside of the building on the subject property between
the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. on any day. Furthermore, I
recommend that all vehicles to be stored overnight shall be self
propelled light duty over the road vehicles, and that permission be
restricted to the west property line only.
CITYOF
CHANHASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE•P.O. BOX 147•CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
1 (612) 474 -8885
1 PLANNING REPORT
DATE: April 2, 1979
1 TO: Planning Commission and Staff
' FROM: Assistant Manager /Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Development Contract Review for H & K Warehouse
1 APPLICANT: Hansen and Klingelhutz Construction, Inc.
PLANNING CASE: P -581
1 •
This item was before the planning commission at it's regular February
' 28, 1979, meeting, at which time the planning commission wanted staff
to look at alternative amendments concerning the overnight parking
at the H & E warehouse site in Burdick Park. From an administrative
standpoint, I believe that staff is not authorized to enter into
1 amendment negotiations until the city council so directs that the
development contract might. be amended.
•
1 What is needed at this time, is a polling of the planning commission,
and a motion resulting from that polling stating how and if the
development contract should be amended. This motion will be submitted
concurrently with the staff recommendation to the city council for
their consideration.
Based upon the recollection that the initial plan proposal, was pre-
1 sented so as to indicate -that the door bay heights- were adequate to
clear equipment on trailers, I recommend that section 5 weight
restrictions be increased. to vehicles no larger than 9,000 lbs.,
1 that this provision apply only to the western side of the property,
and that the vehicles eligible for overnight parking shall be self -
propelled light duty over the road vehicles.
1
1
1
1
CITY OF
CHANI1ASSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE•P O. BOX 147.CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 I
(612) 474 -8885
i
PLANNING REPORT
DATE: February 28, 1979
TO: Planning Commission and Staff '
FROM: Assistant City Manager /Planner, Bob Waibel
SUBJ: Development Contract Amendment Request
APPLICANT: Hansen and Klingelhutz Construction, Inc. '
PLANING CASE: P -481
Attached hereto you will find the letter of amendment request of
behalf of Hansen and Klingelhutz and involved section of the development
contract. '
As stated in section 5, no motor vehicle larger than 7,000 lbs.
be permitted to be parked at the site between the hours of 2:00 a.m. t
and 6:00 a.m. on any day.
The second page of the Hansen and Klingelhutz letter of January 18,
1979, appears to imply that a business leasing must have the right
to park a truck,trailer and equipment if need be. The attached planni
commission minutes of May 10, 1978, state that materials will be
stored outside but vehicles may be parked outside and that an I
adequate development contract controlling the visual quality of the
grounds should be implemented. From my recollection, I believe that
it was also stated at site plan review that bay doors of the structure'
were desiged as such to allow equipment of tenants to be stored
indoors overnight. It is for these reasons, that I recommended that
section 5 of the development contract be amended to read that no
motor vehicle larger than 9,000 lbs. licensed gross weight shall II be parked or stored outside of the building on the subject property
between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. on any day. Furthermore
the motor vehicles to be stored outside shall be self - propelled
light duty, over the road vehicles.
t
t
i
J � y " /
. , r J s ". f Uf!1; City Atltrinisfrafcr
/ ' 7 Aeferrad To;
... 'r "'�� Maybr
Council
pi3 fie'
b - .
ulid01 = .. ��/
p � t j ii y t--/
1 HANSEN & l'ic
KLINGELHUTZ F `' : ` 3 _ ___
Par;!: 6 Ig c ..
construction, inc. UtiiiSea ialsotarameg
"
press �
- — .�
...
II Ot tr
DATE: January 18, 1979 Data
TO: City Manager, Don Ashworth AND the City Council
I FROM: Hansen & Klingelhutz Construction, Inc.
II SUB : City Development Contract for Industrial Building on Manadan Drive
I
Upon reviewing the City contract for our industrial building on Mandan
Drive in Chanhassen and having some experience in the leasing process of
the building, we find that we cannot live with the restriction as stated
in item 5 (overnight parking prohibited).
II We would like you to reconsider this portion with the following changes:
II 1. Charge 7000# to 9000# gross weight so it may include all vans
and pick up trucks co:rmonly licensed at 9000;,'.
2. Chan e this overall restriction to apply to vehicles in the
II front area of building only -not to include parking restrictions'
on the side or rear of our private property.
II 1 recommend this for the following reasons:
1. ::a:.y ordinary vans and pick ups are licensed for 9000#.
I 2. By changing the restriction to apply to the front of the
building only,you will still accomplish what I think you
are intending to do, which is keep the appearance of the
II site in front neat and clean looking with no large vehicles
parked in front. The rear and south of the building will
be screened by the building itself which is approximately
18' high.
1 3. We are completely screened in the rear by the woods which
I assume will likely remain. The tree line is an asset of
great value especially along the lot line to whomever owns
II the property.
II
cont.
11
II 71:48 FRONTIER TRAIL • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 474 - 4146
a
1
1
HANSEN & 1
KLINGELHUTZ
construction, inc. 1
Industrial Bldg. Contract cont. Page 2 '
We reouest this change not because we expect a mess but because a
business leasing here must have the right to park a truck, trailer,
e if need be. This should be a lessors right in Eden Prairie,
Edina, Chanhassen or wherever.
I assure you, backed by our reputation in dealing with you in the past, '
that our building and site will be kept neat and clean in front and
back with no trace of junked cars or trucks etc. as seen in other parts
of Chanhassen.
Please consider this seriously since it is very important for us to
succeed in leasing the building. I hope you will approve this change
and we will do our part in policing our parking so the overall appear-
an:e is pleasing.
1
Sincerely,
cJ )41-44-4'-=
L I 44:9 t L,A<
Douglas N. Hansen
Thom 0. IrlingeMutz '
1
1
7198 FRONTIER TRAIL • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 • (612) 474 -4146
.
Planing C IT issior meeting May 10, 1978 -7-
' SITE PLAN REVIEW - nANSEN & KLINGELHUTZ: Ton,.,lingelhutz, Doug
Hansen, Jim Hawks, and Jeff Swedlund were present. H. & K. are
proposing to construct a 19,800 square foot office /warehouse facility
on Lots 4 and 5 Burdick Park. The property is currently zoned I -1
and is shown on the HRA plan as General Business. Sewer and water
are available to the property. The proposed building has seven 30' x
' 90' bays and approximately 600 square feet of that will be office.
Seventy -six parking spaces are shown but some may have to be eliminated
near the loading dock. No materials will be stored outside but vehicle:
may be parked outside. The building will be eight inch concrete block
1 with a fractured block band along the top for decoration.
Walter Thompson moved to recommend the Council look with favor on the
' Hansen and Klingelhutz office /warehouse facility subject to:
1. That an adequate development contract controlling the visual qualit:
of the grounds be implemented.
' 2. That the proposed rear yard setback be allowed as submitted.
3. That parking up to the westerly property line be permitted.
4. That the clear aisle widths by the loading docks be increased
to meet ordinance standards.
' 5. That the loading dock width be increased to 12 feet.
6. That the berm at the north access on Mandan Drive should not
exceed 22 feet in height.
' 7. That more detailed information be supplied concerning the outside
storage facilities.
8. That information regarding the architectural treatment of the
building be furnished.
9. That plans for signage be submitted for Sign Committee review.
10. The developer submit a lighting plan for review by the Planning
Commission.
1 11. The front yard setback is 23 feet. The ordinance calls for a 30
foot front yard setback.
12. The developer consider 45° angle parking along the west property
' line. The Guide Plan and CBD Plan show the area to the west to be
something other than R -1A, therefore, the Planning Commission recommend:
a side yard variance be granted.
' Motion seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved.
Dick Matthews moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Les Bridger and
unanimously approved. Meeting adjourned at 12:30 a.m.
' Don Ashworth
City Manager
1
1
t
1
1
1
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises
and acceptance by the City of Chanhassen (hereinafter referred to as
"The City ") of the Applicants' development plans and the approval
of the above described variance requests, the City and the Applicants
agree as follows:
1. Improvements by Applicants. Applicants agree at their expense
to construct, install and perform all work and furnish all materials
and equipment in connection with the installation of the following
improvements in accordance with the site plan and landscape plan
described in paragraph 2 below:
a. Parking lot and access driveway grading, stabilizing, and '
bituminous surfacing,
b. concrete curbs and gutters abutting all parking lot 'areas
and access driveways, except the western edge whereon a
rolled bituminous curb shall be installed,
c. storm and surface water drainage,
d. boulevard sodding or seeding of uniformly good quality, and
e. grounds lighting. •
2. Scope of Development Governed by Exhibits. The exterior
dimensions, architectural design, decorating scheme, grading plan,
loading dock configuration, and placement of structures shall be in
conformance with that certain Site Plan dated April, 1978, Site Plan
dated May, 1978, Landscape Plan dated April, 1978, undated Ground 1
Floor Plan, undated Exterior Elevation Drawing, Street Construction
Plan dated April 13, 1978 as revised by the City Engineer on April 21,
1978, and Storm Drainage Plan dated April 13, 1978 as revised by the I
City Engineer on April 21, 1978, all of which are on file in the
office of the Chanhassen Zoning Administrator in File P -481.
The building shall be constructed of stacked square block except for al
decorative band of vertical fracture block creating a relief effect
shadow line. Said block shall be painted in tones of gray or white.
The canopies depicted on said elevation drawings shall project outward'
six (6) feet and night lights shall be provided to illuminate all
entrances to the Building.
3. Effect of Conflicting Ordinance Provisions. The parties hereto 1
acknowledge that the development as described in paragraph 2 above
conflicts with the literal provisions for setbacks, load dock con-
figuration, front yards, side yards, and rear yards contained in
SS12.05, 12.08 and 9.07 of the Chanhassen Zoning Ordinance. The partie
hereto furtheracknowledge that, in accordance with the above described
resolutions of the Chanhassen Board of Adjustments and Appeals and the
City Council, the proposed development may be constructed in conformit
with the various plans which are described in paragraph 2, above.
4. Outside Storage Prohibited. With the exception of trash 1
facilities as hereinafter provided, and with the exception of motor
vehicle parking as hereinafter provided, no equipment or other persona
property shall be stored or displayed outside of the building.
-2- 1
. / / ,
1 S. Overnight Parking Prohibited. No motor vehicle of larger
than 7,000 pounds licensed gross weight shall be parked or stored
outside of the Building on the subject property between the hours
111 of 2:00 o'clock A.M. and 6:00 o'clock A.M. on any day. The Applicants
acknowledge that their acceptance of the foregoing restriction was
the keystone to the City's action approving the variances requested
I by the Applicants, and further acknowledge said restriction must be
strictly complied with and may be enforced by the City in proceedings
at law or in equity.
Al 6. Parking Lot Configuration. Off - street parking facilities
I shall be constructed in accordance with the Site Plan described in 112
above with the following modification:
I a. All parking spaces shall be clearly delineated or marked as
such and shall have a minimum width of nine (9) feet and a
' minimum length of twenty (20) feet exclusive of aisles and
maneuvering space.
ill b. A clear aisle width of at least eighteen (18) feet shall be
provided for all parking spaces located easterly of the
Building.
1 7. Schedule of Work. The Applicants further agree that they
shall commence work hereunder immediately, and shall have all work done
and improvements fully completed to the satisfaction and approval of
I the City on or before , � If ( / `-" , 197 . The Applicants
shall submit a written schedule indicating the proposed progress schedule
` and order of completion of work covered by this contract, which schedule
ill shall be a part of this contract. Upon receipt of written notice from
the Applicants of the existence of causes over which the Applicants
I have no control which will delay the completion of the work, the City,
in its discretion, may extend the date hereinbefore specified for
I II completion.
1 8. Grading Plan and Lighting Plan. No Certificate of Occupancy
1' shall be issued and the Applicants shall not occupy the Building
until the Applicants' final grading plan has been reviewed by City
i i
staff for purposes of verifying that said grading plan is in complete
conformity with all of the provisions of the within permit and contract.
I Said final grading plan shall include existing contours, proposed
s grading elevations, drainage configurations, storm water drainage
v configurations, spot elevations, proposed access driveway road profiles,
i' location and candlepower of all illuminaries, and locations of exterior
trash storage areas.
f
f 9. Sign Plan. The Applicants agree to prepare and submit to the
}' City a sign plan, which shall include location, type, and dimensions of
all proposed exterior signs. No exterior signs shall be erected and no
sign permit shall be issued until after said sign plan has been reviewed
'' by the City for purposes of verifying that said sign plan is in confor-
mity with applicable City ordinances.
s
i' -3-
f
S
il
i
Planning Commissic 3eting April 4, 1979 - 3 -
from Chapparal would be reduced from about 113 cfs prior to development'
to 54 cfs after development. The Engineer is engaged in a study
to determine whether this reduction in flow is enough to eliminate
the existing erosion problem in the creek. Additional controls
within the Chapparal development are not recommended. The storm
sewer system has adequate capacity except that a second catch basin
should be added in the most southeasterly cul -de -sac. The watermain
in Kerber Blvd. should be 18 inch instead of 16 inch. The slopes on
the pond should be 3:1 or possibly 4:1 for maintenance and safety
reasons. _ '
Pat Swenson moved to recommend the Council grant final approval of
the plat as proposed with the shifting of the boundary of the second
addition to encompass the southern boundary of the road (Exhibit A,
Road A)and subject to the conditions of staff. Motion seconded by
Mal MacAlpine and unanimously approved.
DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AMENDMENT - HANSEN AND KLINGELHUTZ, BURDICK PARK: I
Tom Klingelhutz and Doug Hansen were present requesting amendments to
items 4 and 5 in their development contract.
Mal MacAlpine moved to recommend the council amend the development
contract, item #4 be amended to read licensed vehicle parking, item #5
increase the weight restriction from 7,000 to 9,000 lbs. for overnight I
parking on the east and south, that outside storage be confined to the
west side of the building with no storage of vehicles larger than 8 x 20
feet. Motion seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved. ,
! MC GINN LOT SPLIT, LOT 4, BLOCK 1, HARVIR HILL: Mr. McGinn is seeking
l approval to subdivide Lot 4, Block 1, Harvir Hill into two lots.
Pat Swenson moved to hold a public hearing on April 25, 1979, to
consider the lot split conditioned upon receipt of an abstractor's
certificate by April 9. Motion seconded by Mal MacAlpine and
unanimously approved.
THE BALTIC COMPANY - SITE PLAN: The Baltic Company is requesting
rezoning of Lots 1 and 2, Minnewashta Park from R -1 to C -1. The
property currently is the site of_Cermak Sales and Service. Reynold
Roberts, representing the owners, gave a presentation. They are
proposing to remodel the existing building into an office building.
The remaining structures and equipment would be removed from the
property. Eleven parking spaces would be provided on the east side
of the building. The Baltic Company would be the owner /user of
the building. The Assistant City Attorney asked for vertification
of ownership of the property.
Mal MacAlpine moved to hold a public hearing on April 25, 1979, to
consider rezoning from R -1 to C -1 subject to proof of ownership.
Motion seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved.
1
1
I' CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
I (612) 937 -1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
1 mod) .i: DINE. Y�:� "r��
APPLICANT: �%�U M OSt'� OWNER: iou6Ls M 1 +Nsck)
I ADDRESS: 1 "10 ( ST51:0LA RD ADDRESS: 1'1001 STO. OIJ! D AD
Tv \ - 54A rv1ti £5.34.c- ADDRESS:
MO Ss 345
1 TELEPHONE (Day time) 9.? ,4 O S . • TELEPHONE: Q? 4 9 263
1 ,
1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Subdivision
I 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Vacation of ROW /Easements
1 3. Grading /Excavation Permit 13. Variance
I 4. Interim Use Permit 14. Wetland Alteration Permit
5 1 ...- - ' Notification Signs :.r = 15. Zoning Appeal
6. Planned Unit Development 16. Zoning Ordinance Amendment
1 7. Rezoning 17. Filing Fees /Attorney Cost - (Collected after
approval of item)
I 8. Sign Permits 18. Consultant Fees
I 9. Sign Plan Review
10. Site Plan Review TOTAL FEE $
1 ,
1 A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must
included with the application.
1 t Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted.
1 8' X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet.
1 * NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
PROJECT NAME WET Of )C pc1;'(` IBS I DL 1
LOCATION 79 o0 MvfJT Ey 1Q\
LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT'S 3 ¢S e(el icK 1 %!k 1
1
1
PRESENT ZONING 15 G
REQUESTED ZONING P 1
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION ( V4eAdr) for
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION L IG 4-‘1 M A NU"A CV el f 1G — DFF I CE
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST IC P'1, oS 1 00 FU2 MRCS , 4 7x,t_ roc_ -
Sc���, T' S,cT 1:=u - �+ -P C�� 1 3 aDr✓i C. f•r_l 'p-k, El NS
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or dearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with th
Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complyinJ
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 o
ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am th
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. 1 furthe
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to an
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best
of my knowledge 1
I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded
against the title to the property for which the approval /permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder'
Office and the original document retumed to City Hall Records.
Signature of,,ppiicant Date
1
Signature Fee Owner Date
Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. 1
This application will be considered by the Planning Commission /Board.of Adjustments and Appeals on
1
PIN"
I 1 \ . -_-:5 el i
-2Y7_S i • . )rtn,%, I Y
h I V __ fir
1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING f ,,,,,_ al vei
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ®'
1 Wednesday, March 17, 1993, 7:30 P.M. l k B UM B
City Hall Council Chambers ... P • I t Alp 1
690 Coulter Drive ' > m WM /
s �
Project: Concept Plan for as _ E'er _ . ' , ,\
West One Expansion
\ 11-1N1414.1"111■—• W py
Developer: Doug Hanson P - 1 -- - --- , _ 1 , , ,
I West One Properties
r . /
1 Location: 7900 Monterey Drive
1
/' � s `r
•
1 Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in
your area. Doug Hanson proposes to rezone property zoned BG, General Business to PUD,
I Planned Unit Development for a manufacturing and office expansion located at 7900
Monterey Drive.
I 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 Planning Commission Chair will lead the public hearing
1 through the following steps:
1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project.
1 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
I Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council.
I Questions or 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 Jo Ann at 937 -1900. If you choose
I to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the Planning Department in
advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission.
I Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on March 4,
1993.
1 ;
L
1 , IL A '
1 L1
T
Frontier Development Corp. 1
c/o Bloomberg Companies, Inc. B. C. Burdick Bloomberg Companies, Inc.
P. 0. Box 730 426 Lake Street 545 West 78th Street
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Excelsior, MN 55331 P. 0. Box 730 II
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Roberts Automatic Products, Inc. Lutheran Church of the Living E. Jerome Carlson ,
880 Lake Drive Christ Instant Web, Inc.
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Box 340 6950 Galpin Lake Road
I
Chanhassen, MN 55317 Excelsior, MN 55331
Twin Cities & Western Railroad Dayton Hudson Corp.
1
723 11th Street East c/o Target Stores
Glencoe, MN 55336 33 South 6th Street 1
Minneapolis, MN 55402
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
March 17, 1993 - Page 60
becoming real intense and irritating the people around them and over
crowding the lake. Okay?
' Gary Carlson: I think we should accept your recommendation...
Batzli: Okay.
Gary Carlson: Because two things will happen. First of all, when you say
launch, a boat and trailer...If someone sees that it's a, the only people
' who will launch will be my neighbor...but if you say launch and I tell
everyone there's going to be a launch.
Batzli: Well we're going to say no launch in a minute so don't worry
' about that.
Gary Carlson: If you say no launch, fine.
' Batzli: Okay. Do we have a motion?
Ledvina: I would move that the Planning Commission recommend the approval
I of the Non - Conforming Recreational Beachlot permit application by Schmid's
Acre according to or consistent with the request and specifically with
these exceptions. The number of boats docked to 1. Number of boats on
' land being 1 and an exception to the request for a boat launch. No boat
launch.
' Batzli: Is there a second?
Mancino: Second.
Batzli: Is there any discussion?
Ledvina moved, Mancino seconded that the Planning Commission recommend
' approval of Non - Conforming Use Permit for a Recreational Beachlot for
Schmid's Acres with the continued use of one dock, 1 boat parked at the
dock, 1 boat parked on land, off street parking for 10, 1 canoe rack, and
' no boat launch permitted. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously.
Batzli: When does this go to the Council?
Aanenson: It should be on April 12th.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONCEPT PLAN TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM BG, GENERAL BUSINESS TO PUD, PLANNED
' UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR EXPANSION OF AN OFFICE AND MANUFACTURING FACILITY
LOCATED AT 7900 MONTEREY DRIVE, WEST ONE EXPANSION, DOUG HANSON, WEST ONE
PROPERTIES.
' Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Batzli
called the public hearing to order.
111 Doug Hanson: I'm Doug Hanson. I live in Minnetonka.
Planning Commission Meeting
March 17, 1993 - Page 61
Batzli: I'm sorry. Before you start in, I have one more question of Jo
Ann. Are you done with the rest of your staff report?
Olsen: I was just going to finish to say that there used to be 5 users in
this building. As Chaska has expanded, they've pushed them out. He, Dou
Hanson who will be explaining that he is proposing with this expansion
that he will locate his own construction business there also and I believ
a plumber. So I think we need to have it clear exactly who would be using
that site. '
Farmakes: Can I ask for some additional site plan, I guess this isn't
site plan review but some concept on how this is in relationship to the
Burdick property that still remains behind Target and that road going in.
I believe we might have a few drawings in the back of there of Target, bu
we don't see that on any of this. The relationship of this building to
the area behind Target and the drive in, the service road that goes back I
behind there.
Olsen: Right here is...Market Square... This is Pica Drive and this is
where you get into Target...
Farmakes: But there still are some lots I believe behind Target. There'
2 lots.
Olsen: ...where the trees are?
Farmakes: Okay, down there by your stomach. '
Batzli: But is this contingent upon, I mean looking at Don's comments
here. Is this all contingent upon, rezoning this PUD can be made
contingent upon the HRA selling this hunk of land?
Olsen: Well they have, they own it and they have total control now.
Batzli: Yeah but I don't want to rezone this PUD.
Olsen: If the HRA. '
Batzli: Well it says here, isn't this hunk, is this a proposed expansion;
Is that going on land that's owned by the HRA right now?
Olsen: Correct. Right.
Batzli: So can we make this contingent, because I don't see in any of thl
conditions that this is contingent upon them getting all the property
under common ownership.
Olsen: Sure you can.
Batzli: If they don't do that, then there's no point in us rezoning thes'
individual little parcels PUD.
•
Olsen: Exactly. ,
Planning Commission Meeting
March 17, 1993 - Page 62
Batzli: Okay. Please, go ahead.
y s
Doug Hanson: I'm Doug Hanson. I was one of the builders, the partner of
Tom Klingelhutz back in '78. We had about 5 previous people as tenants in
there. It was office /warehouse. DayCo Concrete was in there. Vernco
Maintenance. Frontier Meats. There was an auto body shop in there and
there's another one but I can't think of what it was. But eventually
Chaska Machine has taken over the whole operation and they're in a
position to expand. They would like to stay there if they could. We
would, I have a company, Hanson Hometech. We do residential remodeling. I
work with my two sons. Steinkraus Plumbing would be another tenant and we
would share a small area in the very end of this building. About 2,000
square feet. We would share the office and the secretary /receptionist.
That type of thing. Otherwise it's mainly for Chaska Machine. And the
future expansion area would be for them also as they grow. There's 5,400
square feet in the proposed expansion... The highway is here and the
railroad tracks is here...
Batzli: Okay. Does anybody have any questions?
Harberts: I have a comment. Chaska Business Machines as well as the
Target area, if you recall when Target came before the Commission there
was a transit element involved and it's simply because of the amount of
traffic and trips that would probably be generated in the Target area.
Chaska Business Machines is one of the businesses that are being targeted
for reverse commute opportunities. Basically bringing people from the
inner city out to a possible location such as Chaska Business for
employment. And because of the location, and what could potentially
happen with these other areas, my comment is that I would like to have
Southwest Metro involved in the, if this thing goes forward, to add that
transit element in here because I see a potential high demand for public
bus service to bring potential workers out to this area. Especially with
Target...and what I'm seeing right now is basically maybe just adding like
a bus shelter or a bus stop or something in that turn around area. That
circle, that cul -de -sac little thing. So I'd like to encourage that
Southwest Metro become involved with this conceptual site plan design to
insure that it's transit friendly and that it continues to fill that
reverse commute strategy.
Olsen: By transit friendly you mean that a bus can get in there or a van?
Harberts: More a van but just basically putting maybe a bench or a bus
shelter or something. Simply, you know with Chaska Business Machines is
expanding. They're going to expand their work force. They've already
been identified as a company out in Chanhassen to promote reverse commute.
So I just think that they're a top candidate to really focus in on making
sure that this facility is transit friendly. That would be basically the
same concept that you see presented to you when you looked at the Target
site plan.
Batzli: Any other comments right now? Okay. Did you have anything else?
Doug Hanson: I'm here to answer any questions.
Planning Commission Meeting
March 17, 1993 - Page 65
Farmakes: Correct.
Batzli: Okay.
Doug Hanson: Could I say something?
Batzli: Sure.
Doug Hanson: I plan to follow the building that's there. It's a 20,000
square feet building there and I just, all you're seeing is another 30
foot and a turn and another 60 foot. And so there's really not much
different on the front so I would follow the same site, the same
architecture that's there right now. 1
Farmakes: In long term use for downtown and if you're looking at where in
the long term in the market developed for business /office type market,
which is not, I don't believe here yet or we haven't seen that •
demonstrated by our developers. We do have a fairly limited amount of
space downtown where that would go so that's another thing for
consideration in reviewing this. I'm just saying that it's how far down`
the line you wish to look for this type of useage. This is a possible
solution for the existing building and I don't think that I've got enough
information to go one way or the other.
Scott: If from a manufacturing standpoint, could r
you tell us, and
especially me, what happens in that building? What do you do in there?
When you manufacture. Manufacturing...
Doug Hanson: Okay, it's Chaska Machine and Tool and punch presses and
they make parts for machines. They're shipped all over.
Scott: Custom fabrication.
Doug Hanson: Yeah. Just small, mainly small parts.
Scott: So you guys basically take, your raw materials are metal?
Doug Hanson: Yep.
Scott: Metal castings?
Doug Hanson: No metal, sheet metal.
Scott: Pretty much sheet metal?
Doug Hanson: Stamped parts and machine parts and things like that.
Scott: Okay. So as far as any sort of, and then the scrap, basically a
scrap hauler takes it away and recycles it or something?
Doug Hanson: Yeah, it's recycled. Right.
Scott: Okay. And then as far as, is there any sort of hazardous material
that we could probably get some fumes?
Planning Commission Meeting
March 17, 1993 - Page 66
Doug Hanson: No.
Scott: You know when I was down there, it was hard for me to tell but my
opinion is conceptually I don't have a problem with this at all. Granted
there's some architectural features on some adjacent buildings that need
to be considered but I figure, it seems like this property is probably not
' that useful for something else and if these guys happen to grow out of it
or, I mean office warehouse is pretty useful space. But then you've got
an industrial, a couple of things in the TIF district that have some of
that empty space anyway. So I mean you're right, the market isn't there.
But conceptually I don't have a problem with it and from a standpoint,
they've got a business running here. They're looking at expanding. It
looks like a logical alternative, so that's my opinion on it.
' Batzli: Okay, Matt.
' Ledvina: I share the same sentiments as Joe here. I think this seems to
be a reasonable extension of the existing use. I guess in looking at some
of the conditions in the staff report here, we have on number 3 the
expansion of the building shall match the architectural design of the
existing building. And we looked at, recently we looked at, was it...and
we changed that building to, or we suggested the developer change the
building to include some pitched roof elements and I think you could
' easily do the same thing for the expansion and make it work. Because much
of the building is, you know has a flat roof and then you can have an
entrance or something like that that has a pitched element to improve the
' architecture or increase the standard or whatever. So I think we could
change that to say matching and enhance the architectural design. But I
guess other than that, I agree. It's kind of a weird little corner and if
' it can be expanded to an increased use by...use, I think it should be
done.
Batzli: Okay. Ladd.
Conrad: I saw an interesting figure tonight. An acre of commercial land
sells for $130,000.00 in Chanhassen. An acre of industrial land is a
' little bit over $40,000.00. And so what's the implication of value. As
you talk industrial, there's a gap between that and what commercial
property is valued at. How does this impact our decision?
1 Olsen: Well in the value of it, and all of that kind of gets back to the
HRA. It's their final decision whether or not to sell it, and that's
where we got involved in this because of the HRA wanting to know, is this
an option. What were the options and so the Manager's comment is right.
Which one goes first. If they choose to not sell it and feel that they
could sell it commercial and receive more money, that's their decision I
' think. As far as us, I don't know that we're involved in that.
Conrad: Okay. From a planning perspective, I have no problems with that
at all.
Batzli: That's it?
Conrad: That's all there is.
1
4
Planning Commission Meeting 1
March 17, 1993 - Page 67
Batzli: Okay. Diane. II
Harberts: I have no problem with it. Again, I just want to recommend II
there be some transit planning, and that's for the future.
Batzli: Okay, is that it? ...Ladd's remark that from a planning
perspective I have no problem with this at all. I'm more on Jeff's
wavelength. It probably could be done if it's done right and I guess I'd
give it a shot at a conceptual stage and let the HRA determine whether
it's a smart move to sell it for a third of the price that they could
maybe get doing something else. Given it's location. Maybe they can't. II
I would add one condition that any approvals that we're doing tonight is
contingent on the applicant's purchase of the land, which it's shown on. ,
The plans we're looking at. The additional lands.
Olsen: So you would not like to see this proceed until he's actually
finished that deal? The conceptual plans. 1
Batzli: Well, I find it difficult to move too far down the road if the
HRA isn't willing to do it.
II
Olsen: Right, I agree.
Doug Hanson: I've given them a purchase agreement and they're just
II
holding it until it goes through here.
Batzli: Right. But I'm just saying that if the HRA at their next
I
meeting, after we approve this says they're not going to sell you the
land, then one of our conditions was that they sell you the land.
Doug Hanson: Yeah, I agree. I can't do anything otherwise. 1
Batzli: Okay. Is there any other discussion? II Ledvina: I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of
Concept Plan Request to Rezone Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick Park from BG,
General Business to PUD with the following conditions as outlined in the II
staff report subject to the following modifications and additions.
Condition number 3 should read, the expansion of the building shall match
and enhance the architectural design of the existing building. The II addition of condition 7 which would read, prior to rezoning and
development, the applicant shall purchase the property in question. And
condition 8, that transit planning be incorporated into the development.
Batzli: Is there a second?
Harberts: Second. 1
Batzli: Is there any discussion?
Ledvina moved, Harberts seconded that the Planning Commission recommend 1
approval of the concept plan request to rezone Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick
Park from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit Development with the
following conditions: 1
II
il Planning Commission Meeting
March 17, 1993 - Page 68
II 1. The applicant shall receive and meet the conditions of the following
approvals:
1 a. Preliminary and Final Plat approval combining Lots 3, 4 and 5,
Burdick park into one lot with appropriate easements.
1 b. Comprehensive Plan amendment changing the land use designation
from commercial to industrial.
I c. Site Plan approval for the building expansion.
d. Rezoning approval from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit
I Development.
2. The site plan shall have to maintain the proposed concept plan, with
the proposal being an expansion of the existing building for use by
I the existing use, light manufacturing. A higher intensity industrial
use will not be permitted at this site.
3. The expansion of the building shall match and enhance the
I architectural design of the existing building.
4. There shall be no outdoor storage permitted.
I 5. All rooftop equipment shall be screened.
I 6. The hard cover surface of the site (the three lots) shall not exceed
70%.
I 7. Prior to rezoning and development, the applicant shall purchase the
property in question from the HRA.
8. Transit planning shall be incorporated into this development.
I All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
I PUBLIC HEARING:
ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE TO DEFINE DOCK SETBACK ZONES.
I Public Present:
Name Address
I Jeff Kvichang 6681 Horseshoe Curve
I (The following people signed the public hearing sheet but had left by this
point in the meeting.)
I Randy & Rayma Smith 429 Pleasant View
Greg & Barb Hedlund 748 Lake Point
Donald & Beverly Hanson 8516 Great Plains Blvd.
1
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the
PP purchase
agreement for the school /recreation property acquisition at the corner of Galpin
Boulevard and Highway 5 as presented. All voted in favor, except Councilman
Senn who opposed and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
Mayor Chmiel: As concerns were mentioned previously. Thank you. 4 to 1. ,
CONCEPT PLAN TO REZONE PROPERTY FROM BG, GENERAL BUSINESS TO PUD. PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT FOR EXPANSION OF AN OFFICE AND MANUFACTURING FACILITY LOCATED AT
7900 MONTEREY DRIVE. WEST ONE EXPANSION. DOUG HANSEN. WEST ONE PROPERTIES.
Paul Krauss: What you're being asked to review tonight is a concept plan
approval to rezone a property that's zoned SG and contains Chaska Machine Tool
Company and an adjacent parcel to PUD. I'll just summarize the kind of points
that we were hitting on. We were originally approached by the owner who wished
to expand his property. It's a non - conforming a use. It is an industrial use
in the heart of the city's central business district. However, when we looked
at it in detail and with what has occurred around it, we realized that while
it's in the heart of the CBD, you can't get to it or see it from anyplace else
in the CBD and we looked at what kind of reasonable use can this be put to.
There's an adjoining lot that's owned by our city HRA. Basically the existing
facility sits right over here. The lot that's owned by the HRA is down there in
the alley below Highway 5. We went through and tried to figure out if any
commercial, retail /commercial or office uses could legitimately go there.
Retail /commercial, it's almost as bad a spot for retail /commercial as the back
part of the Dinner Theatre is. I mean you just can't, and that even has better
vici''lity. You just can't see it. It doesn't have the kind of traffic that
would induce people to come to their business. You've got the whole back of
Market Sq„are. I know the loading dock's facing you. You have the entrance to
the leading docks for Target. Possibly office might go there if there was a
market, fcr office but even then what we're finding these days is most office
use wart visibility and you know that they want signs and just about
ever that a retail use wants. What we have is an existing business that
is doing well and a desire, as we usually have, to keep them in the community
arc' to try to work with them. What that led us to is the conclusion that maybe
we oueht do something a little different here, i.e. look to getting some
pre = - ty back on the tax rolls by legitimizing what's now a non conforming use.
It didn't seer to detract any from the central business district. In fact it's
I to pee -le who work and presumably do their business downtown. The HRA
o. property is not being used for anything at the present time and it's,
we're not sure what we would ever use it for constructively down there. We were
concerned that all the trees that we worked very hard at saving for Target not
be damaged by this and we concluded that none of the trees would be damaged. SO
we came up with the idea of coming up and rezoning this thing to PUD and
actually doing a guide plan amendment that basically legitimizes the fact that
Chaska Took is there. Would allow them to expand but through the use of the PUD
place some pretty significant guidelines on what kinds of uses can be allowed
and how development should look and operate down there. We clearly didn't want
to zone it IOP where then anything goes and you can have a turkey processing
plant or whatever else down there. It's just not appropriate but as a light
office industrial use compatible with what it is now, hopefully incorporating
sor aesthetic and landscaping improvements, we really couldn't see what the
ham was. And because of that we proposed that this rezoning and guide plan
29
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
1
amendment be considered. We took it before the Planning Commission and they
11 agreed that it had some merit. So tonight we're bringing forward that request
to you. It is a concept. It's non - binding. Basically we're asking you to look
favorably upon that and if you do, they'd come back in with their formal
presentation and design package. There is a list of proposed conditions that
has been attached and the Planning Commission added a couple. That basically
placed some limits on what the property can be used for and some guidance as to
what we'd be looking for when they brought back in a site plan. With that we
' are proposing that it be approved.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you Paul. Is there someone here from the Chaska Machine
' Tool Incorporated that would like to address us?
Doug Hansen: My name is Doug Hansen. I was a partner with Tom Klingelhutz when
we built this building and just to give you a little background. Chaska Machine
' is a solid company and they had about 1/3 of the building when we built it and
as they grew they took over the space of DayCo Concrete, Frontier Meats, an auto
body shop, Lakeside Equipment and last was VernCo Maintenance that moved to
' Chaska. Chaska Machine is a solid company and they've had steady growth and
they really want to stay here. He approached me about it after talking to the
city that there was a possibility that this could be, they could stay right here
' and expand right here. I've got a building and remodeling company with my two
sons called Hansen Home Tech. We, together with Steinkraus Plumbing, would
share about 2,000 feet in the southeast end of the building. A small bay. And
like I say, this building's been there about 15 years and we've had a good
' record with the city and they'd like to stay here and they'd like to expand
here. If you have any questions.
' Mayor Chmiel: Do you have any concerns regarding the recommendation from the
Planning Commission? As well as the conditions that were established on that?
Doug Hansen: From a cost standpoint I would like to maintain the exact
appearance of the addition. What's exposed, the new part is just from here. The
parking lot is right in here now. So the new part is just this end here and I
would like to...a couple hundred feet long... I would like to maintain that
' single appearance. Decorative block, two rows of decorative block tied in with
the windows...
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Council. Richard.
Councilman Wing: I don't have anything.
Mayor Chmiel: With all the respective conditions that are contained within.
Councilman Wing: This is just conceptual so I've got a couple comments on
' preliminary and final. I just want to make sure that trees are there. But it's
not the time so, I'd like to see it properly landscaped and it will be. That's
all. I think PUD's the way to go. I'm ready to approve this.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Colleen.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: On condition number 8, where transit planning shall be
incorporated into this development. I have a feeling Diane put that in. Does
' 30
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
•
that mean there will be a bus turn around?
Paul Krauss: Well, I'm really not certain.
Mayor Chmiel: In the front door and out the back.
Paul Krauss: I mean clearly this isn't going to be large enough to have any
kind of facility. However, what we've been asking business people to do, in
fact Jerome Carlson who was here earlier tonight has been very cooperative.
We've asked them to allow us to work with their employees to survey them and
develop packages so that Southwest Metro can offer to tailor transit service.
The Dial -a -Ride service or van pooling, or just make them aware of the over the
road long distance services they offer. That's probably going to be sufficient.
I'm not really sure where Diane was leading that one but that's my guess.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Okay. Other than that, you know I drive past that ,
area 2 or 3 times a day and I never noticed it until I got this packet. And
went oh, there's a building there? So I don't have any problem with the use. I
think it's a good use for that space. '
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Michael.
Councilman Mason: Briefly, I shared the Manager's comments about expansion of
indiJstrial use I think is a concern but on the other hand, our fine City Planner
also says that this will be alleviated through the PUD and I agree. It looks
good tb me and Chaska Machine I think has done a fine job... '
Ccurci_^ Wing: But who does the hiring and firing? Since you said the
Manager's comments, my ears perk up a little.
Counc_2q_ Mason: I certainly go along with the concept plan.
Mayc- Chmiel: Chicken or the egg?
Co:r)�'man Master: Yeah, that too.
Mayo- Ch e_' Than you. Mark.
Cotrcilma Sera: The existing operation, and I guess over the years even a
nur,be- of the building tenants down there but Paul, when you talk about PUD's,
how do you exactly plan on controlling the use under the PUD?
Paul Krauss: What we would propose to do Mark is the PUD contract, agreement
that would be filed with the property would set very explicit guidelines as to
what types of uses could be there and how they'd have to limit their operations.
For example, limits on outdoor storage and truck boxes and heavy equipment that
you can hear outside the building and those kinds of things. We can place those
limits on it. The goal is to limit any adverse impacts that might accrue and
really not limit them as to who's going to be occupying the building, because
that can change over time.
Councilman Senn: What's the underlying zoning that remains in place?
31 1
- - -- - 1
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
1
Paul Krauss: It doesn't under our ordinance. Once you zone it to PUD, that is
the zoning. There's nothing underlying it. You basically void out what's under
II it.
Councilman Wing: This would be a great place Paul for automotive uses. Right
II behind Target's loading dock and the hardware store's loading dock.
Mayor Chmiel: For future thought. Any other questions Mark? Okay. I guess I
I don't have any real concerns. I think that as Paul has indicated in here that
the concerns can be alleviated through the PUD contract and in that particular
case I would request a motion for the approval of the concept plan with the
conditions of the Planning Commission. Making sure that, or I should say City
II Council recommendations with items 1 thru a, b, c, d, items 2 thru 8.
Councilman Wing: So moved.
II Councilman Mason: Second.
I Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve concept plan request
to rezone Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick Park from BG, General Business to PUD,
Planned Unit Development with the following conditions:
I 1. The applicant shall receive and meet the conditions of the following
approvals:
a. Preliminary and Final Plat approval combining Lots 3, 4 and 5, Burdick
Park into one lot with appropriate easements.
' b. Comprehensive Plan amendment changing the land use designation from
commercial to industrial.
c. Site plan approval for the building expansion.
' d. Rezoning approval from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit
Development.
II 2. The site plan shall have to maintain the proposed concept plan, with the
proposal being an expansion of the existing building for use by the existing
use, light manufacturing. A higher intensity industrial use will not be
permitted at this site.
3. The expansion of the building shall match the architectural design of the
' existing building.
4. There shall be no outdoor storage permitted.
II 5. All rooftop equipment shall be screened.
6. The hard cover surface of the site (the three lots) shall not exceed 70%.
1 7. Prior to rezoning and development, the applicant shall purchase the property
in question from the HRA.
' 32
City Council Meeting - April 12, 1993
8. Transit planning shall be incorporated into this development.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSS TESTING FOR AEDES TRISERIATUS (LASCROSSE ENCEPHALITIS) MOSQUITO ON CITY
PROPERTY. '
Todd Hoffman: It seems as though we just put to rest this issue. However, it
is mosquito treating season once again. They are out spreading the briquettes
across our city. I've received calls from residents wondering what is going on
so if you've heard anything to date, they are out. In preparing for the
operations, the upcoming operations of the MMCD, Mr. Ross Green, the District's
Public Information Representative called to ask for a clarification in regard to
the testing for the Aedes Triseriatus or the LaCrosse Encephalitis mosquito in
our city parks. Specifically Mr. Green asked if the district would be allowed
to test for that type of mosquito which can carry LaCrosse Encephalitis in city
parks and if sufficient levels of mosquitoes were found, to apply chemical
treatment. It is important to understand that that has not been the case in the
past. They have never found sufficient levels so it's not as though it's a big
concern but I think they are on their toes so to speak in this regard and they
just want to make sure everything is clear. The staff's recommendation is that
the MMCD be allowed to test for the Aedes Triseriatus mosquito in the city parks
and if populations warrant control, that the application of approved treatment
substances only be allowed upon the city being notified and the area for
treatment having been conspicuously posted 24 hours prior to the treatment. That
was one area that they had agreed to undertake. The posting of public open
space when they're treating. However what they did is posted one 4 x 8 post at
the entrance to the park so we're asking that they make it a little bit more
noticeable. In addition it is requested that staff be contacted prior to their
first testing so we can observe exactly what this testing procedure includes.
From what I understand they go around in areas likely to hold, harbor this type
cf mosc_:to with a vaccum cleaner and if in 5 minutes they suck of 2 of this
type of rosquito, which I'm not sure I could identify them from any other
n q ito. b _lt if they do that, then they'll tell you they want to treat for
LaCrosse Encephalitis carrying mosquito. There is no one here from Mosquito
Cor.trol District. I take it with the recommendation in their affirmative, that
they we~e-'t concerned.
Mayor Chrriel: Good. Thank you. Any concerns of Council?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Have we done this in past years? Applied this
treatment?
Todd Hoffman: Not to my knowledge in city parks, no. But in other areas of the
city they have.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: No adverse affects?
Todd Hoffman: Again, not to my knowledge. They've done this on private
property. '
Mayor Chmiel: Anyone else? Can I have a motion?
1
33
1 CITY OF
1 ., 4
'k.7. * °
-% ;-ek .# 4,4r
'
kti CliANHASSEN
•.,•.•_ . ....
„_,.,..... L pi ,--
- - A 1...,- 4 - e - 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT
II POLICY REGARDING PRE -PLAN
1 Prior to issuing the C.O., a pre -plan, site plan shall be submitted
to the Fire Department for approval. The following items shall be
shown on the plan.
1 1) Size 11" x 17" (maximum)
2) Building footprint and building dimensions
3) Fire lanes and width of fire lanes
I 4) Water mains and their sizes, indicate looped or deadend
5) Fire hydrant locations
6) P.I.V. - Fire Department connection
1 7) Gas meter (shut -off), NSP (shut off)
8) Lock box location
9) Fire walls, if applicable
10) Roof vents, if applicable
I 11) Interior walls
12) Exterior doors
13) Location of fire alarm panel
I 14) Sprinkler riser location
15) Exterior L.P. storage, if applicable
16) Haz. Mat. storage, if applicable
I 17) Underground storage tanks locations, if applicable
18) Type of construction walls /roof
19) Standpipes
1
1
1
I Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention
Policy #07 -1991
I Date: 01/16/91
??‘(----- Revised:
Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1
1
Ft i PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
•
•
,, CITYOF
1
.......„
,,,
-,, ,
0.,v, CHANHASSEN
N :11, - ,„
,„.,,,..,„, f, •
,% „ ..,
<� 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
REODIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE
1
1. Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18 ".
NO 2. Red on white is preferred. 1
PARKING
FIRE 3. 3M or equal engineer's grade
LANE reflective sheeting on aluminum
I
is preferred.
4. Wording shall be: NO PARKING
I
FIRE LANE
5. Signs shall be posted at each end II
of the fire lane and at least at
7'0" 75 foot intervals along the
-fire lane.
II
6. All signs shall be double sided
facing the direction of travel.
1
7. Post shall be set back a
minimum of 12" but not more than
I 36" from the curb.
- - 8. A fire lane shall be required in
(NOT TO GRADE front of fire dept. connections
I
SCALE) extending 5 feet on each side and
along all areas designated by the
Fire Chief.
1
ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN
WRITING, WITH A SITE PLAN, FOR APPROVAL BY THE FIRE CHIEF. IT IS
I
THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONTINUITY
THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDING THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF
FIRE LANES.
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention
Policy #06 -1991 II Date: 1/15/91
Gt.? - Revised:
Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1
II
If
t
II* • PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
I
1
I Sharmin Al -Jaff
April 29, 1993
Page 2
1
EROSION CONTROL
1 Erosion control measures are not implemented on the plans. Staff recommends that erosion
control fence (Type I) be installed along the easterly, southerly and a portion of the westerly
I property line at the grading limits. Based on the landscape plan, it appears all disturbed
areas will be restored with sod.
1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The applicant shall submit detailed storm sewer calculations prepared by a
1 professional engineer for the City to review.
2. The applicant shall provide a $500 security for connection to the City's storm sewer
1 line and boulevard restoration on Picha Drive. This fee will be refunded upon
satisfactorily completing connection and restoration of the City's boulevard.
1 3. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed around the perimeter along the
grading limits.
1 ktm
1 c: Charles Folch, City Engineer
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
A Jtie-= 4,
MI. Thaarii,an anf members of the Planning Commission. I am
HanE,:n. one of the oracfanal builders, and present owner,
watn 1 Nyen Chaska, of West One Building.
:Peen a change an our plans, although the original
is the same. Chaska Machine decided
th- want-d fri.:.re space, so the project as to be done in one
sl:nu=,.: and fini phast instead of two as originally proposed
sr,et,li plan re
the saze of the bualdanq expansion to be
- tt. to 16.3 sq ft. 2.700 sq ft
• _ 1-1.mtt Inf. anli
lemaandeI of the space wili be used
1
- t --u-
• ;_ :IL.,
_ _ tie nacht
• , -.! !
- : E:'_ =
1
L-n
3 ' 1
•_ - . _ _ e
_ whm Hanser, 6 E.17.riQtillU1 .21
terh-nated: C nave 5 er'_yees.
Chanhassen, has 6 emplyees and has
sha otfaceiwarehouse space with UE.
this clan. hope we are meetang your concerns They
as well!
tL: architectural appearance of the
hu-1 the cedar handsplats root shangies over
be ried and the roof area would
1 'steel pi- lE of an a, as Lea'
. Thes€ panels wall he .talhalar an st.:
RECEIVED
t a nd -.. • q1_1111 - ,- - Tao :CI (- WC- C. be t - ied 31.
- _ 1J,Thd thti wandow:.- an 5"
_ J.. band ,a,,roun _
CT' OF CHAM-i
.
II
II
- - 1= - West Dne Prcperties Addition)
II „ _ Th- :,:_tal f.: cn the tcp edge wc be painted
- '7: t: fi•rm the tcp band. The pcs's would be ccvered
w:th s'ee f,:r du and apcearance The whole building
• , :. - - - -,,..0. will be painted in a light color grey or one to be
.- - ThEre will be a total of 4 entrances canopies that
apl.earance and they wall be illuminated by
I 1-,-... light-, abc the door
Th r air rDngationers ale small to cool the small
cffa ale-a. and only stand 21" high. Therefore we are
II rt1:171 the wood screening and erect canelF of
1 steel E:d of a color that wall tint stand out as
the, --: hf.ral: he npticeable.
II
1 F-tee] do are Fusted and will be recla
being bua:t.
. _
II
,
_ . - ';-,...: 1 4 _ a:Id,I is th( availabil.lt:, :f
-. - -- - - .- -, , ,-. - -1- .
_,.1, . y r•- r= -1 t'il "'V" Cl'"
I.
_ - _
. .. - _f t.tar. -_-:L t_ the sjtE We
' . .
- - f -_: i .. ' -._ - „::-, - v i+ 1 . - 1^-?. P t . 1'1 ,- -,.' .. a:
•
• ,,
, ,:: - c ,.f.cr, 1 =
1 - , - . -
. - -- - t-7. i . 2 ni . ' 4- _ II - 11; - -
4- .1,1■71" 'elr1-
' -.:-.' _if the 1: here. but at
- II
_ _ , _-, ,--
_ ... _, , f n
,
., .= p:-1.:11 c:u11 1 lmIt•,-1 t Cci L
- " 1 :- -- )-.•,-,i MCh-
- -. -
• ,- .,n-ty: f h prolu and
,
:-- - „a ;..-_:::. ma: ha.,.'e 7. , ..A. 4 tru (pl_ading Van-
_
_ 1,11.. u,a, h ah enclosed vah -type an the future
: -,,: I:
- : 't - , .. , 7er thi:E' one....I think thE worst scenera,
• -..:. t- ,h1 up w:th n:t enDugh parking I know what Hopkins
W-=.1 '__L --',-.] *h- st... of ther businesses around here
th c the lack of parking. Brad even has
II .--.:‘.- ---, t M:1..ct Square. We are on the western border
__,... ...._ M.: , , the e,lipioyees from Chaska Machine
'
. , '---- - y - -_--t ti-: t n
'2':_ hey must usE cars and eel
__.
II : - .. ‘ = •: - ' •,, ' 7 '-- -"" 1:', r '' IP_IITC.: • ':.' 1 ::-:' 7. ri thk-- 1.. :
.
: _ ' _ . H -,--. -, -I - -t _: nee - -i - _ - _‘t
1
1
11
P1 :ling -5 spac ti.T. this may , but I do kno
icc to have at least what I have now fi
bua:dang. aF it chanqes tc a 36,335 ft .
the hardcover limitataons. there is a net loss of
le from the ,- - - y.astanc, parking at thas time. We have
r1-:l the saze of the building and the parking. I feel
very that 50 spa: are absolutely necessary with
- :mac - and c; an the course of business activitieF
what the future holds, or if Chaska Machine will be
- f_r:v-r: I wan' to avoid a situation where people will
in tb , ! street or at Market Square. and
Lave t: cc back to the city to request more
1 p7a
• n n-w ad": . on the-
h ' 15 yearz This nit 17e
- - TH7 .1
f. UE t e
t eir: - I 3 3
- 1,
• _ _ _ • _
' : t-
. .
•
_ 7113
-
17T .;. hty nea th,
th prD:ect.
1
1
1
1 0 o 00
0
CHASKA MACHINE & TOOL, INC.
A SHORT & LONG RUN METAL STAMPING COMPANY
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
ATT: SHARMIN
HERE ARE THE ADDRESSES & WORK SHIFTS FOR OUR EMPLOYEES.
' DOUG HANSON REQUESTED THAT I GIVE THESE TO YOU.
LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
1
DAN L8
1
1 - .
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Box 446 • 7900 Monterey Drive • Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
(612) 934 -5473 • FAX (612) 934 -7676
ORG l-(11
•
CO CODE COMPANY NAME
YEW CHA$KA MACHINE ---
.
PERSONNEL DATA
roll WAWA SOCIAL SECUmty NO SEx
10052 -2 471190 M
Dr.I Nw 1 O/ 10/ 8— 0/1 ARTHE . (SA(SATE � DAN
513 CASPER CIRCLE
NORWOOD MN
55368- NIMSEE SOCIAL SECMITY 110 S[ %
10045 -0 468 8353 M /� /
DAT P OAEE 12/ 1 2/ 8 / \ �1 1
3ASTYR PAUL f�J / / J �1 1 /
8500 CHURCH STREET -
✓ICTORIA MN
55387
0,1E N01000 'SOCIAL SECMIT0 NC SE
10055 -3 1 470663275 I M
oE.T WILE o.TC 06/27/ 8
06 WEST 65TH ST ,_ f ( / ) /
iiiiiiir
-
2 ^ A (f
2061 1 WEST
E XCELSIOR M
55331 1
EILE NUMSE0 SOCM.t SECURITY NO S
10051-.51471,80 IM
DE,T wme DATE 1 or /26 / 999 2
4 09G.D AR I D�
409 CIMARRO N CIRCLE '
:HANHASSEN MN
55317
EIIE IJMUIS SO =MIA Ep
C1Al LSE%
10053--9 46$04,9912 IM
DAT IINURE DATE 5/16/ 8888
4IGWESTT7N, TODD
D i Y /y '
41 WEST 2ND STREET I
NACONIA MN
55387
5 EASY STEPS TO PH
SIMPLY GIVE US VOL
1 NEW HIRES
2 CHANGES TO EMPI
SOCIAL SECURITY
3 SPECIAL PAYS IHA
4 CURRENT PAY INF(
PERMANENT CHAN. .
5 COMPANY TOTALS
- MO Will E - - - - NM N E i ME NM ME MI r MN MI
IIIIII IM .1111 ME NM I MN ME NM ME
ORG
CO COCK COMPANY NAME
YEW CHASKA MACHINE
PFRSONNtL DATA
11LE RUNNER SOCIAL SECL ITV 140 SEX
10054 -6 4761767743 M
DEPT IINURE DATE 03/22/ 3 C
39 ,i
0KCE
59110 CASSEY Y PR KWY � w
'RIOR LAKE MN
55372
TILE MOWN SOCIAL SECUMTV NO SEX
10058 -4 474,84 IM
DEPT MIRE DATE 1 / 23 / 7
5 37ER , �MADSL _ J} (�f
637 SO MADISON �{ /
SHAKOPEE MN
55379
1 4.1 NUMBER SOCIAL SECURITY N0 SEX
10063 -2 4648247671M
DEPT IIMITE DA T( 0 /04/9993
EFTA , O
JOHN
2502 W
2502 OOOCREST DR
ZHASKA MN
55318
N302
T ILE NUMMI SOCIAL SECURITY NO SEX
10553-4 I
47601/04/ Q4761 IM
RE
DEPT M DATE 9999992
-IELDS,l1O8ERT R ./
520 GORMAN ST
1%/g71( ) 7
SHAKOPEE MN /
55379
fIU NUMBER SOCIAL SECURITY NO SEX
10076 -6 474926254 M
DEPT IMIIE DATF 09/08/02
3RAUO 30 2 D ^
NO BOX X 15 302 15 2ND AV - �l /
YOUNG AMERICA MN
55397
iRF NUMBER SOCIAL SECURITY NO SEX
10074-2 1 468888,22 180 M
-IA JJNME RAT( 10/14/ 1 ,
2NNAR S S
51 (\ 4 /1 li
9124 4 NARCI SSUS US D
ST
✓ICTORIA MN
55386
5 EASY STEPS TO PH
SIMPLY GIVE US YOL
1 NEW HIRES
2 CHANGES TO EMPL
SOCIAL SECURITY
3 SPECIAL PAYS IHA
4 CURRENT PAY INF(
PERMANENT CHAN(
5 COMPANY TOTALS
ORG
CO COOS COMPANY NAME
YEW CHASKA MACHINE
PERSONNEL RATA
Etr NUMBER SOCIAL SEWN NO SEX
10078 -0 474768600 M
DEPT JJ DATE 06/ 12/ 8 , A
I62Z,OYA
3662 MARSHALL -
3662 SO M RD
SHAKOPEE MN
35379
• — ■
C
1
FILE NUMER SOCIAL SICLMITV NO SEX
10875 -1 47002/29/ 4180531E
DEPT
',mown B �� •
T
�iODGES, LORA W
3800 LAKE RILEY BLVD
^HANHASSEN MN
55317
06217
Fnf NUMER SOAL SUNNI NO ISEx
10082-1 ( CI 476,84190 16 IM
NM
OEPT I DATE 04/15/ 9991
-OD BOX 4 0/9 ICHAEL
'0 BOX 418
MAPLELAKE MN
35358
5 EASY STEPS TO PF
SIMPLY GIVE US YOl
1 NEW HIRES
2 CHANGES TO EMP
SOCIAL SECURITY
3 SPECIAL PAYS (Hi
4 CURRENT PAY INF
PERMANENT CHAN
5 COMPANY TOTAL;
11111 MON 1.1.1 Mil MI IIIIII MO EMI ME IIIIIII 11.11 Nim
-
ORG -
CO CODE COMPANY NAME •
YEW CHA$KA MACHINE
PERSONNEL DATA
PPS NUMNEN SOCIAL SFCUIT• NO SIN
10080 -7 _47784 IM
DEPT INNS DATE 09/05/ 9
- IODGES,ROBERT
3800 LAKE RILEY BLVD" /\ / (J'
:HANHASSEN MN ��/
55317
*'6217
PILE WAWA SOCIAL SECUIITP NO SEx
10084 -5 4706B8955 IM
NIILEGATE 8 / 13/ 5
-I0 pAt �J
�OWELL,DALE "/
112526 RAMSEY COURT
:HASKA MN
35318
PILE *TUMOR SOCIAL SECUITP NO SEX
10100 -2 4687Z8368 IM
DEPT MIME R R / 17 / 5 ^ t w
JEURIS EN, , LARRY / l�
16280 DUTOIT ROAD
CARVER MN
55315
•
PILE money SOCIAL SECT NO SEX
10300 -0 1 UI
504,345879 I M
DEPT I NME DATE
�CALIHEA ROONALD
0 /1 Lir
1911 MELODY HILL CIR
XCELSIOR MN
55331
LILE MIMUEP SOCIAL SECIT• MO SE
10308 -6 1 U 46490,3787 IM
DEP ■ME E R 1 ff /15/ 9 D �
CLEIN, ROBERT
2145 TRUMBLE COURT
:HASKA MN
55318
PILE MAMA " SOCIAL SECUITT NO SEx
10482 -7 4774 M
OEPP !MILE DATE 02/ 0 1 / �3
-ARSON , 1 CHRISTOPHER ^� If /,/
1220 E 14TH ST - ` f / )
3LENCOE MN
55336
5 EASY STEPS TO PHI
•
SIMPLY GIVE US YOU
1 NEW HIRES
2 CHANGES TO EMPL
SOCIAL SECURITY
3 SPECIAL PAYS (HAI
4 CURRENT PAY INFO
PERMANENT CHANC
5 COMPANY TOTALS
ORG
CD COO€ COMPANY NAME
YEW .CHASKA MACHINE
PERSONNEL DATA
FRF NUANIEA SOCIAL SECUITV NO SE%
10494 -4 46%9_68246 M
O '
NOE DATE 06/01/ 7 /�
LI
UND. DAN N /� //�
323 MONROE AVE SO (�/
EDINA MN 1
55343
FILE NUMSFII SOCIAL SECUITV NO SEX
10496 -8 47638 I AAA I A
L ti DATE 10 /10/ 6
LU ND. JA�QUE M /`
5070 MAPLELEAF CIR
SHOREWOOD MN
55331
FRF EIUMUE% ,SOCIAL SECUIty NO SEX
10500-81472 9987 I M
ff+.%nEE DA
LU E /1 y
LUND. JAMES N / JV '
3070 MAPLELEAF CIR
SHOREWOOD MN
55331
int
FRI NIIMMI SOCIAL SECUITV ND !!f
10530 -7 477
OAT NME wn( 110 / 16 / 4
NAPES NE R
5 [�
545 DARDADANELL LLE LANE
0/1 `/ 4
SHAKOPEE MN
55379
5 EASY STEPS TO PH
SIMPLY GIVE US YOl
1 NEW HIRES
2 CHANGES TO EMPI
SOCIAL SECURITY
3 SPECIAL PAYS IH<
4 CURRENT PAY INF
PERMANENT CHAN
5 COMPANY TOTAL:
111.1 NM MN .11. 11.111 MI ME 11.1 1111111 Mil I= MN NM MN MI I= MIMI
111111 1111111 11.11 11111111 MN OM NM M 111111 11111 IIIIII M -
ORG
CO COOS COMPANY NAME
YEW CHASKA MACHINE
AE RSQNNEL 9ATA
r1lE NUMSER SoCIAt SECURITY NO SEX
10528 -0 4640614534 F
D NME G TE O3/ 29/93
72TE R , GAVI T
72 EHLERS ERS AV
Z:HASKA MN
35318
tIU HUMMER SOCIAL SECURITY No RS
10531-4 46406 M
3 DEPT kW GATE 12/01/92 /I,�,,- /
28 U/ V '
SHAKOPEE MN
55379
ERE NUMIEII SOCIAL SECURITY IEO SEX
10551 -0 477,60 IM
OAT MRE GATE 1 /16/ 1 , A
MOORE, 111 V/
200 EAST LAKE ST
NACONIA MN
55387
ERE NUMRR SOCIAL SECURE', NO x
10644 -7 1 46 757 M
DEPT 1NISE DATE 1 / 21/ 2
30 W,HW /")�
31101 1 W HWY 1 1001 1 NB r (/
SAVAGE MN
•
ERE NIMIIER SOCIAL SECURITY NO iigx
10645- 4
DEPT MIRE DATE 4 /19/ 99993
?ARISE DI D 06
211 11 E 3RD N1
SHAKOPEE MN ti
55379
ERE MIM1411 •. •• SOCIAL SECURITY NO gx
10646 -1 470840548 IF
DAT ((N111E GATE D5/24/ 999993
PAULSOq DAWN >w _
SHAKOPEE 7 �
HA1 P 1ST AY ^ / to
E MN ! \/ 1 u/ o
55379
5 EASY STEPS TO PHI
SIMPLY GIVE US YOUI
1 NEW HIRES
2 CHANGES TO EMPL
SOCIAL SECURITY
3 SPECIAL PAYS THAI
4 CURRENT PAY INFO
PERMANENT CHANG
5 COMPANY TOTALS
ORG
CO COOS COMPANV NAME
YEW CHASKA MACHINE
PERSONNEL DATA
FIIF NUMSEA SOCIAL SECURITY NO SEY
1 0673 -9 DPF11 921 F �(
o¢n II Mc oArE 1 1 %� /
SETERS6N,LAURA O 418 1ST STREET EAST
NAPLE LAKE MN
55358
FILE WAWA SOCIAL SECLFIITY NO SEY
10677 -7 471 F
OEPT IIMIIIE OATS 01/031E9
/L
, ETERSON,SUSAN [[ff ,
418 1ST STREET EAST
NAPLE LAKE MN
55358
FILE
1II040E11 SOCIAL SECURITY NO SEX
10730-5 46B:07327 ///
1 4 ��
pF W IISE OAT[ 4 _I
500MI PAUL
/t /)
600 KIPP bRIVE / w
JORDAN MN
55352
PILE *meta SOCIAL SECURITY NO SEX
107343 471 M
OEYT N ME YE S/ �0 STITZ GER I
,DEN S 7
702 W FOREST ST
3ELLE PLAINE MN
56011
LOT #57
FILE MAMA SOCIAL SECURITY MO T 3/ 1 2/ 4
SEX
10820-1 471174�8596�F
MITE
oER OATS V
2R I EST NITEIE
21 ^ ,Q
212 WESTMINSTER AVE J/'
NATERTOWN MN
55388
4W
s1E WAWA SOCIAL SECURITY MO EX
10708 -2 474
OE" 11NIIIE DATE 11/05/9988 , A
�HO BUTTEA 011 .
1011 BUTTE COURT
,HANHASSEN MN
55317
5 EASY STEPS TO P1-
SIMPLY GIVE US YOt
1 NEW HIRES
2 CHANGES TO EMP
SOCIAL SECURITY
3 SPECIAL PAYS (Hi
4 CURRENT PAY INF.
PERMANENT CHAN
5 COMPANY TOTAL!
111111 NM ME MI MN OM MI NM 111111 111111 ION IIIIII 1111111 1111111
IIIIII MI NM NM NM ME OM MN 1111111 MN 1111111 M NM 111111 1111111 IIIIII -
ORG -
CO CODE COMPANY NAME
YEW CHASKA MACHINE
PFRSNNNEL OATH
FNF MAMA SOCIAL SECURITY NO SEs
10840 -7 471,744356 M
DEPT NIM GATE 38/141_1
NEBER, AVID D ,Q
12790 PRIMROSE LANE ,
EDEN PRAIRIE MN
55344
APT 1319
FILE NUMBER SOCIAL SECURITY NO SE>
10881 -6 47 94 M
DEPT NME DATE 03/25/91
Vi
NENTWORTH,WILLIAM M /�
3800 LAKE RILEY BLVD r tj/
�HANHASSEN MN /
55317
ND216
nu MUMOES 'SOCIAL SECURITY No Ws 10883-0 147704,4590 IM
oEPT INMC DATE 033/25/$$$$$$3 /T �/j
WET2 LYN A 0 - /)
22126 6 REDWING REDWING AV
JORDON MN
55352
FNr NUMMI SO SECURITY No SE>
11005 - 5 IM
OEEl MITE DATE 5 / 25 /888 1 ) A
336F3R DAVEE n V /
336 3RD AVE APT 102
EXCELSIOR MN
55331
.. FLLE NUMUEE 1SOCIAL SECURITY NO ISE>
I I
O•T 'MITE DATE
1
5 EASY STEPS TO P1
I SIMPLY GIVE US YO
1 NEW HIRES
2 CHANGES TO EMF
SOCIAL SECURITI
3 SPECIAL PAYS IH
4 CURRENT PAY INF
PERMANENT CHAP
5 COMPANY TOTAL
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 1 1
PUBLIC HEARING:
DOUG HANSEN, WEST ONE PROPERTIES FOR A PUD TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM BG,
GENERAL BUSINESS TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT
LOTS 3, 4, AND 5, BLOCK 2, BURDICK PARK INTO ONE LOT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW II FOR A 16.335 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION OF AN OFFICE AND MANUFACTURING FACILITY
LOCATED AT 7900 KERBER BOULEVARD, WEST ONE EXPANSION.
Public Present: '
Name Address
Doug Hansen 17001 Stodola Road, Minnetonka '
Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Chairman Batzli
calle_i the public hearing to order.
Doug Hansen: Mr. Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. As you
know I'm Doug Hansen. I don't have too many in the audience. As you know
the project is to be done in one single and final phase instead of two as
originally proposed in the sketch plan review. And Sharmin has brought to
you the reduced size of the building to 16,309 square foot, the addition
that is. And let's see, it was also brought out that the project was
scheduled to be presented 2 weeks ago but working with her we decided to
wait and I'm I tonight. I think we've accomplished the improved
appearance b/ painting the original building with the new addition and
installlr the teal colored metal roofs on the entrances. That's tied in
with the accent_ stripes. The posts will be covered with pre - finished steel
of the sa6,e color as the main portion of the building. Existing 3 foot
dogs U,ill Le replaced. The rooftop air conditioners will be enclosed with
steel ai in,, of that color. The almond color. She talked about public
transit. We met that railroad setback requirement by cutting off a corner
of the building to maintain that 50 foot setback requirement. We brought
the held cover down to 70% by reducing the size of the building and
narrowing the blacktop along the rear of the building to 26'6 ". The
concerns I ha.ie, one of them was with the staff recommending that the
glazed tile should be used for accent stripes. The cost is great because
it includes the old building as well as the addition. This isn't Target or '
Target's resources. Or Target's income. It's a manufacturing company and
has a much lower return of income. There'd be about 900 lineal feet or if
you added that strip on the top, I was proposing to paint the roof flashing •
but if you add a strip on the top, there's 1,366 lineal feet of this band
and it would be very expensive. I believe it's not practical from a
maintenance aspect because on the existing building it would have to be
glued on the face of the block that's there. So all the edges are exposed
to the weather and eventually probably would fall off. One of the most
obvious reasons is that the front of our building looks at the trucks and
the loading at the back of Market Square. In the back of Market Square are
accent stripes that are painted. On the front of Market Square there's
accent stripes that are painted. Why should this requirement be made of us?
I don't know. The building's been there for 15 years and I looked at the
stripes on Market Square in front of Festival Foods. There's a red stripe
that's painted. It looks great. I don't know why these wouldn't look
II
Planning Commission Meeting
II June 16, 1993 - Page 2
great. You really have to study it close to see that it's not tile. It's
1 a painted stripe.
Harberts: My understanding is that these are all painted stripes?
II Doug Hansen: Painted stripes, right. Another issue is the truck parking
requirement. I think you've got, the staff report calls for eliminating
II truck parking to 4 and right now we have permission to park trucks
overnight. Trucks are a necessary part of the business. There's no semi's.
There's no semi - trailers. This parking could be limited to the rear to be
completely hidden from view. Chaska Machine, we have 2 trucks. A stake
I truck and a van type for hauling product and Steinkraus Plumbing would have
3 or 4. Our firm may have an enclosed van type and in the future. We don't
right now but the truck parking is necessary provision for the businesses
II here. We now look at the U -Haul trucks and trailers right in our front.
So I don't think we're asking for anything that's unreasonable. The trees.
You require 15 more trees. I'd like to see them on this lot, if that's
possible. Another concern is a park and rec fee. Although I understand
I you're not to answer for that anyway. I'd gladly pay the fee for the new
addition but I don't think it's fair to charge it on an existing building
that's been there for 15 years and you know we paid, we were probably the
I first, one of the first industrial buildings in Chanhassen and since 1984,
what we paid before that but that's the only records I have. We paid
$218,359.00 towards the tax increment financing that stayed in Chanhassen.
I The parking, 59 is absolutely necessary. We had to struggle to get down to
this hard cover because of a pre- existing condition of 82% hard cover. So
through compromise we're down there. I hope in the future if I ever need
more parkin°, if Chaska Machine leaves or whatever, I hope that you'll keep
I that in mind that we met this hard cover requirement as if it was a new
building, and we've fought that so we've reduced, there's a net loss of 8
spaces right now. Just a few things, advantages I guess. The addition
I cleans up and makes immediate good use of the remaining lot and allows
Chaska Machine to remain in Chanhassen. They're a solid company and
they've been an asset for the city providing jobs and income to the
I surrounding businesses as well as the real estate tax income to Chanhassen.
Improvements made to the existing building as well as the addition will be
refreshing, fit well with the surrounding Market Square complex. Tree area
will be extended to the east to accomplish what the city desires. The hard
cover area is reduced from over 80% to 70% by the addition of Lot 3 to the
layout. I just want to let you know that the timing is important for
Chaska Machine because they're eager to, they need space as soon as they
I can get it. I'll be glad to change the windows to the size that's there.
The reason for the larger windows is that people would like to see out when
they're sitting at their desk so it was a practical thing. But they're
I living with what's there now and I guess they can live with higher windows.
Is there any other questions?
Batzli: We'll probably have some as we go around. Appreciate your
I comments. Is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission?
If not, is there a motion to close the public hearing?
I Scott moved, Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 3
Mancino: Sharmin, I have a couple questions. On page 6 at the top of your
report, the first finding says that the back of the building will be
against the trees and all loading will be screened from view. Is that the
new addition that we're talking about?
Al -Jaff: Correct. '
Mancino: Because the back of the new addition, I'm very concerned with
what you see from Highway 5 because it is on the Highway 5 corridor and
there are going to be some very specific and stringent architectural
specifications on the whole corridor. When it's going to be screened from
view of the loading, does that mean year round or are we talking about, I
mean how is it going to be screened? How's the loading going to be
screened?
Al -Jaff: Over the past 2 weeks I drove, I made sure that I take that
section on Highway 5 that overlooks Chaska Machine and the only part that I
could see, even being in a passenger seat, the only part of the building I
could really see has been the front of the building and a small portion of
the side.
Mancino: Yeah, but the trees are out so you can't see it like you can in
the winter.
Al -Jaff: Anything that will be stored will be behind the building.
Mancino: On the west side?
Al -Jiff: On the west side. Correct. We are adding more trees to this
site.
Mancino: Will some of those be conifers so that we can keep the screening
year round
Al -Jaff: cou1J make that a condition of approval.
Mancino: I wc l d like to have a mix because I know that in the winter
time, because I make at least 2 trips a day on Highway 5 going back and
forth, you can, that is much more exposed than it is now. I mean you can
see all of Market Square. The back. The U- Hauls. Everything. And also
you can see, if you really look, you have to strain to look, you can see
the back of the existing, but as it comes out and faces more towards
Highwa; 5 is my concern. Under permitted uses on page 8 of the report. It
says overnight parking of a maximum of 4 trucks and Mr. Hansen is asking
for more than 4, correct?
Al -Jaff: Correct. ,
Mancino: Okay. Would that mean if someone else came in and they wanted to
put semi- trailers, they could also park semi - trailers or we could put 4
semi-trailers. Let's say that Chaska Machine and Tool left and somebody
else rented it and it's zoned PUD with light industrial, are we going to,
would we allow the use? ,
1
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 4
Al -Jaff: I pulled up their original report. They were permitted, I'll
' read it here. It says motor vehicles larger than 9,000 pounds, licensed
gross weight, shall not be parked or stored outside. No, shall be parked
and stored outside of the building on the subject property between the
hours of 2:00 and 6:00 a.m. on any day. So basically the limit on the size
of the truck is 9,000 pounds.
Mancino: 9,000 tons or 9,000 pounds?
Al -Jaff: I have pounds here. That would be a medium size, small sized
truck.
Scott: It's like a big U -Haul street truck. Yeah, it's not a.
Al -Jaff: I asked Dave.
Hempel: Larger than a pick -up truck.
Mancino: So it would be limited to that size when we change the zoning
from BO to PUD?
' Al - Jaff: Correct. That's what they have right now. However, they don't
have a limit a7, to how many they may park there. Overnight.
' Mancino: And you have 8 right now?
Doug Harr I think we can live with 8 unless...
Mancino: But we're going to limit you to 4.
Doug Hansel,. I can't .. .
Harberts' What's the reason for limiting it to 4? Is there some kind of
ordina r - or what's your guide?
Al - Jaf - i.i just didn't want to see too many trucks parked out there. We
figured w can live with 4.
' Harbert=: How many is too many?
Scott: Well that's an indication to me and I would, I'm going to be a
business, as the President of the Chamber of Commerce. That's the way I'rn
looking at this almost exclusively. I would love to see the tenants of
that area have as many, I mean if they have to, they're not going to spend
$30,000.00 or $40,000.00 on a truck just to park there to tick us off. I
' mean they've got business happening. They need a delivery truck. The
constraint is purely financial and I think you can effectively limit the
size of the truck that's there but I don't think you should put on a top on
' any number of them because they don't buy them for fun. You know they need
them, they'll buy them. Or if they're not too sure, they'll lease them and
then when they don't need them, they'll give them back so I don't think we
should mess the guy's business. With the trucks. We can limit the size.
I think that's an effective way of doing it. We just don't want huge
semi's all over the place.
II
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 5
II
Batzli: I'm confused. Are we talking about semi's or delivery trucks?
II
Scott: There's a limit of 9,000 gross weight.
Batzli: Pardon me.
II
Al -Jaff: Delivery trucks.
Doug Hansen: No semi's. I
Batzli: No semi's.
I
Scott: Yeah, they don't need semi's.
Al -Jaff: Medium sized trucks.
I
Batzli: Okay. So we could say no semi's parked but however many delivery
trucks.
II
Scott: They're going to take deliveries. They may get deliveries in
semi's c.r something but they're not going to be parked overnight. II Batzli- Yeah. Well, that's what we're concerned about is that this
become-- a collection point for rusting trucks or has a bunch of semi's
idling overnight.
II
Scott: Yeah, and 9,000 gross weight will control. Will eliminate that
problem
II
Al -Jaff : But ; r)u don't want to put a limit on the number of trucks that
may be pared overnight is what you're saying?
Scott: Nopc. II
Batzli: Oh I would but these guys wouldn't.
1
Mancino: Yeah, I would too.
Batzli: We haven't gotten to me yet, but keep going. Who was, Diane were II
you? Where was I? Was it Nancy? I knew somebody was still talking. I'm
sorry. I forget which end I started on.
Mancino: Visually I have a problem with the two buildings not lining up. II
When I look at the front face and I see that everything is kind of askewed
a little, and I look at it and I say, oh my gosh. They must have added on II
right there and why didn't they at least add on and make it, and continue
the elements. Whether it's the window element. Whether it's the top parapet
element. I would like to see that continued in the same line. Now I don't
know about the draining and what needs to be done to get proper drainage
for the building or the addition and maybe Dave can add anything. I mean I
don't understand the draining problem.
Batzli: Before we get to the draining problem, aesthetically don't you II
want the face of the building to be broken up somehow?
II
II
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 6
II
Mancino: Well it is. It's going to have 3 more roof canopies. It's going
I to have 3 more entrances than what we see now. It will hopefully have good
landscaping to break it up. But I don't think breaking it up by having
just one point in time where everything doesn't meet anymore is a good way
I of breaking up a building. Maybe the architect or who's ever designing it
can come back and say, you know there's a reason why it goes up and looks
right there and maybe there's another one that echo's it. But I think it
draws your attention to it and I don't think it's aesthetically pleasing.
1 So I would like to see it taken care of architecturally. Whether you come
back with something that makes it look right. It just looks wrong. Anyway,
but draining and grading, I don't know what the problem is.
II Doug Hansen: Can I speak to that?
II Mancino: Sure.
Doug Hansen: I have to raise it up 2 feet. I'd rather leave it all level
but I have to raise it to get the water out of that front yard...to get the
I water around the building and over to...big storm and the whole building
gets flooded because it's flat. It's not good... It's got to go up 2 feet.
I'd rather have it flat too but it has to be a break up. Market Square you
I know jogs up all the way up. As the grade goes up, the building goes up.
Mancino: Yeah, but I think that's been thought through very well
ar._hitecturall because it has different levels meeting each other and it
I keeps going and it just doesn't have one split.
Doug Hansen: Well, I don't know any other way out of it. You know it is a
I step up but I don't think we should try to hide it.
Batzli. hir-il we'll hear from the rest of the commissioners. Let's see if
everyone would like to see that problem addressed.
II Mancin , _: M, other question Sharmin, last one has to do with outdoor
storag._. I saw in the City Council Minutes from the April 12th meeting
I that condition number 4 was that there will be no outdoor storage permitted
and that was one of their conditions of approving the concept plan. And so
it's coming back to us to revise that? Am I correct, in allowing. This is
I on page, the bottom of page number 32.
Batzli: So you feel there's been a change from the Council and then to our
condition 4 that there's no unscreened outdoor storage permitted?
II Mancino: Yes. And do we have a problem there in, I know that the Highway
5 Task Force Subcommittee who's working on architectural specifications is
I not allowing any outdoor storage on the Highway 5 corridor. With the
exception if it's outside of, let's see, let me think. The following may
not be used in any visible exterior application except when specifically
II permitted by the city in areas with limited public view. And so they're
going to be prohibiting outdoor storage. Now I think the west, the back
side of the building on the west side that faces Target is really in
limited public view so that I feel it would be fine to allow screened
II outdoor storage on that one side of the building. On that west side but
II
II
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 7 1
again not on the side, the south side that faces Highway 5. So I would II like that to be a condition. Exactly where the outdoor storage can go.
Batzli: Does the applicant, do you have a need for outdoor storage? II Scott: Well that recycling. Isn't there a metal recycling?
Doug Hansen: ...but that's not outdoor storage.
Mancino: Well there are pallets all over.
Doug Hansen: The pallets will go inside when we have the new addition...
1
Al -Jaff: It still is a condition of approval under number 16 that no
outdoor unscreened storage of materials be permitted. And it specifies
II
trash storage, shipping pallets or other materials. It's on page 15.
Condition number 16. When it says, defining retail.
Batzli: Rioht. What I think the issue was that the original condition 1
when we looked at the concept plan was that there shall be no outdoor
storage and now we're saying there shall be no outdoor storage unless it's
screened, which is different. I think we understand that there's probably
going to be a certain number of stuff that's outside that need to be
screened but we're not trying to allow storage of articles of stuff so much
as if the got to put a trash container or something outside, yeah
screen it. But everything else comes inside. That's why they're doing the
addition t the building. My understanding.
Scott.: The way the site plan is set up, it looks like on the south side of II
the bei ldinJ thei e's a 28 foot area that is exclusively for cars. 26 foot,
excuse me. When I measured it I screwed up. But it looks like it's
specifically for the purpose of cars passing so there really isn't any room
to put stuff there and then there's a trash enclosure so that looks to be
way the site is set up is there won't be any room because of the narrowness
of the site and having to pull cars in and out. They're not going to be I
putting stuff back there anyway. Not on the south.
Batzli: If condition is just modified that existing trash enclosure, you
I know shall be screened or whatever we need to say there.
Mancino: Trash and recycling.
Batzli: Yeah. And then we can leave in condition 16 as it is. Or we can
just say no outdoor storage of materials.
Doug Hansen: Could I say something? II
Batzli: Sure.
9
Doug Hansen: The recycling binds, you know they can't be screened. II
Y
Scott Because they've got to pick them up.
II
II
I
Planning Commission Meeting
II June 16, 1993 - Page 8
II Doug Hansen: Yeah. You know they're...filled with metal so the truck has
to come and maneuver around. But they are all basically...
Batzli: Where do they currently sit on the plan? Is that this one?
I Scott: The recycling, it's right there.
I Batzli: Oh, recycle area?
Scott: Yeah. And this is gated right here. So they have a metal
I recycling container.
Mancino: What did they do at Market Square where they have those
recycling?
II Al -Jaff: They dc, have trash enclosure on each side but then you would be
able to access them from the front. They are not visible from Highway 5.
I You could see the side of them, which is basically an extension of the
wall. Of the building.
Batzli. You're not going to be able to screen this recycle area without
II takino out parking stalls and he's already short parking stalls. Like to
punch an, other holes in our nice plan here?
Mancino: I think that's it.
Batzli E', done enough damage.
II Mancino: At least those were all of my questions on it. That's it.
Batzli: Whst dc you think of, this park and trail issue. He only wants to
I pa> on h_,1f of his building. What do we normally do?
A1- -Jaff: I checked our building files and all I could find is a signed
I permit appli= st.ion on Chaska Machine. There is no record. Nothing on it
so.
I Batzli: That he paid the first time?
Al -Jaff: Yeah.
I Batzli: 5o you want to get him now.
Al -Jaff• And I talked to Park and Rec's Director and he still wants the
I fee paid for both phases. The first one that was done in '79 and.
Batzli: Did you think you paid one originally or just that you've been
here lone enough.
II
Doug Hansen: I don't know. Probably they didn't have them at that time.
I Scott: Yeah, when did we start collecting that? Did we start collecting
them in '79 or is this a thing that came after '79?
II
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 9
Doug Hansen: We didn't do it illegal. We got a permit and went through
the process. That building is...
Batzli: We understand that. I think it's an issue you have to take up
with the Council though. We can't change that one. Joe.
Scott: I think that a painted strip is fine. I think that if to get
drainage the building has to be up 2 feet, I think that's fine. I think
limiting the trucks to 9,000 pounds gross weight is great. Let them have
10. I mean if they're making that kind of dough, they should be able to
buy trucks and park them out there. I think this is definitely a limited
public view area because I was cruising on Highway 5 and you almost have to
cause an accident to look down there when you're driving by there but I can
see definitely your point. So I think that Mr. Hansen has worked very
closely with the city staff and this is, you know this is an industrial
building you know and I was down there. I think when you compare it to the
back of Market Square, it looks pretty good right now so I think this is
going to be an upgrade. I think it's a great use. I just don't think we
should hassle this guy anymore. You know, that's where I'm coming from. I
won't say an
Batzli: Dc you want to see him change the size of the windows?
Scott: No. No
Batzli: COka >. You like it as is? '
Scott: 'rCaf' .
Batzli: O ka> . Matt . 1
Ledvin& Loc at the architectural pespective if you will of the grade
chance, cr the change in the roof line. I can understand that, I looked at
the graci3n,D plan and I don't see any easy solutions for lowering the
building t match eAisting. There's really not even a possibility of
puttinj a catch basin in someplace and running it. You know running it in
a storm because there is just no easy drainage out of here. 5o I can
understand that issue. What I was thinking possibly is, there's a...one
that makes kind of the elbow. Maybe there's a possibility of raising that
another 2 feet as well to, I mean you have the grade change at the addition
and maybe to give it a more uniform look or a unitized look that you'd make
another change at that point. So I'll just throw that out there. I think
it can be done architecturally with just the one 2 foot drainage. But I
don't know. I'm not an architect. But as it relates to the screening. I
was back there when this first came in front of us and I do remember that
very limited in terms of the sight views there from off site but as I was
back the I noticed that it wasn't as nice as maybe it could be and I hope
that maybe with the addition that things will really be spruced up hack
there and all that. I don't know, I don't have an easy answer or an answer
even on the screening. I think if staff will work with Mr. Hansen on
that, I'm sure they can come up with acceptable screening for those trash
and recycling areas. I don't know what those are going to be even. Other
than that I don't feel the need to restrict the number of trucks. Small
trucks back there. I think that's reasonable to, well I take that back. I II
1
I
Planning Commission Meeting
I June 16, 1993 - Page 10
I think if we looked at 10 trucks, I would think that would be ample and I
think we really should provide some guidance on that. I think that would
be appropriate. So let's see. I don't feel the just for the record, I
don't feel that the applicant should pay additional fees for park and trail
I for the existing structure. I think certainly for the value of the
addition that's appropriate but, wherever that goes. Other than that,
that's my only comments.
Batzli: Okay. Diane.
I Harberts: I'm going to concur a lot with the comments of Commissioner
Scott. I don't think that they need to be required to put some glazing on.
According to the directions from the Council and the Planning Commission to
match and enhance the design of the existing building. I think that's been
I met. I think discussion on previous projects, we have to be sensitive to
the co=t factor. Market Square, those pictures or whatever I've seen was
painted and they looked fine. I think that would look a lot better than
I tiles that may he falling off in a few years simply because they're, in a
sense just added on later. I too don't feel that he should be paying park
fees or the old building but only on the new building. The new addition.
No limit on the truck. I think your business pretty well controls that.
I Work out this, I'm still a little confused but work out the deal with the
storage, the screening, that type of thing. I think Commissioner Scott
summed it up well. He worked hard for it. Let's work with him too on this
I and I think he's come quite a distance and I'll just support the public
transit element of this plan. That's my comments.
I Batzli: (4ay. Did everybody, nobody really commented on the evergreens in
condition 1S, rather than some of the overstory trees on the south portion
of the site 7 think is where we were talking about putting them. Did
everybcd- concur that we should do some of that?
I Scott: Eoe) c.eens? I'd agree with that.
I Mancino . Add conifers instead of deciduous. Or a mix.
Batzli: Well, is an evergreen tree like that considered an overstory
tree? No, it isn't is it? Okay. I ask the dumb questions. I would, I
I
don't know. The issue about the jog in the building. It didn't look bad
to me. 1 guess I don't have a complete picture based on the elevations
that were given to us exactly, it didn't look bad but maybe it would if I
I really knew what it was going to look like. But it didn't look bad based
on the drawing to me. So I have a tough time requiring that he put in
different sized windows or match up the roofline or put in a third jog when
I it was things that, I didn't get a sense from the staff that these were
important to them as design elements of the building.
Al -Jaff: Well they were pointed out to us yesterday by Commissioner Mancino
I and we ' l e gc,i rig to end up with two different sizes of windows.
Batzli: Is that going to look bad? Do we have that on another building?
I Scott: You know that might be the architectural element that we need, you
know when you're looking at the new addition kind of jogging up. Maybe by
II
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 11 1
increasing window size, maybe that can fool the eye into making it look I
more compatible. I don't know. I can't figure that out in my head either
but you know.
Mancino: Well there's so many horizontal elements on the building. That's
where I think the problem is.
Batzli: There's too many horizontal elements?
I
Mancino: Well yeah.
Batzli: Differing.
1
Mancino: They're differing horizontal and they're_
Batzli: But see, I would think it would make it worst by making the I
window_ uniform because then it would be even more noticeable I would
think. I don't know. I don't know either, That would seem to me to
exaccerbate the problem. If the windows were identical size but offset, if
you're trying to make it look like there's not this jog. Well I don't
know.
Mancino: Well actually I would like them all to line up. Not just the I
windows but everything else...perfect world is what I'm saying.
Al -Jaff: Staff would recommend that the same windows that are being used I
on tl building today be used with the addition. You would have some
continuance with the addition.
I
Batzli: Okay. As far as the park and trail fees, I think we need to do
whate.'e we require everybody else to do. If we require other people to
pay u:, if they didn't pay the first time, I guess we need to have him pay
up to _ I don't know what we do. Condition 16, I'd like that somehow this
unscreened storage. What I'd like it to say I guess is, there shall be no
outdoor unscreened storage except for the existing trash enclosure and I
recycle area. If we can live with that because it looks like that's what
we're going to end up with here.
Scott: How about under number 4, there shall be unscreened outdoor storage I
permitted. Existing outdoor storage to be placed in approved screened
enclosure where applicable because.
Batzli: Yeah, that could be. I'd like to limit, the overnight parking, I'd
like to .ee a maximum of 10 operable delivery trucks and that there shall
be no overnight parking of semi - trailers or inoperable vehicles. So we I
don't see rusting hulks there. Not that you're going to do it. I didn't
want to say that.
Scott: Now you lease that building out to not only your own company but to I
all the tenants?
Doug Hansen: Well there's just Chaska Machine. There will be Steinkraus I
Plumbing...
.
II
Planning Commission Meeting
I June 16, 1993 - Page 12
I Scott: So you could put, I know in my lease there's all sorts of
conventions about the stuff that you can't do so I mean, that can be
something as a landlord you can do for people that are moving into the new
space or that sort of thing. That's something that you can control as a
1 landlord too so.
Harberts: What's your feeling on 10 trucks?
Doug Hansen: Well, as far as I know that would be fine at this point but
if Chaska Machine leaves and somebody else, after I get another tenant or
tenants...
I Scott: Well you can always come back too.
I Doug Hansen: ...The one thing Matthew brought up...step down. Chaska
Machine, you know they don't like to step up with the forklift truck so any
brakes, we should just have one brake...and you lose the flexibility of
I placing the punch presses around.
Scott: Do they have to mount those things to the concrete floor?
Doug Hansen: Ec> they what?
Scott: The punch presses, do they have to mount those to the floor?
I Yeah, I could seq. where that would waste some space.
Doug Hansen' I know there's one step up where you have...one area to the
I other .. .
Ledvine: I recognize there's some utility concerns with grade changes
certainly. But I was speaking strictly from a possible architectural
basis. Tjrt a thought.
Doug Henrn: You know on this grade change, what if there's a 6 inch jog
I or something...
Mancinc: Yeah, that's kind of interesting. Do a little stepping back of
the building or forward a little bit. Yeah. That would make, that might
I do something.
Batzli: Yeah, that might help. Talk to us one last time about the strip.
I Painted versus this other dealy bob. Do we really need this thing or can
we paint?
1 Al -Jiff: Because it's a PUD and because we wanted higher standards, staff
recommended that we go with the tile versus the painted strip.
Scott: MI. Hansen, what's the increased cost to put the tile on there? You
II said it was a substantial amount of money. Just roughly. Plus or minus
$10,000.00.
I Doug Hansen: I don't know but I tried to get that bid for you today but he
didn't call back. I don't honestly know. I know that it's thousands. I
just can't see it when I'm looking at it.
II
t
II
Planning Commission Meeting 111 June 16, 1993 - Page 13
Scott: I think your point was well taken.
II
Doug Hansen: Looking across the street to try...
Scott: I think too with having those tiles exposed on the four corners, if I
they're going to be glued on, exposed to the elements, it'd probably look
kind of.
Doug Hansen: That's what the tile setter told me. I
Scott: Versus Target, isn't that, Target's set right into the. Right, so I
it's a different application altogether. Yeah, okay.
Batzli: Well, I guess I would like to see better materials if he car., I
because it's a PUD, if he can demonstrate with some real cost figures and
something from the people that say it's going to fall off and be an
eyesore, I'd certainly go along with that. But right now I guess I remain
I
uncomzinced. Is there anything else that people would like to discuss or
is there a motion here?
Mancinc: I now the electrical box in the front, you have to paint that
I
the sane color as the building?
Doug Hansen: I don't know...to do that.
I
Harberts: I don't know if they'll let you do that.
Mancino: Well it's kind of the same color anyway.
1
Harbert =: Nc I think there's codes. Some kind of codes.
Doug Hansen: I don't know... 1
Al - Jaff: what we can do is maybe screen it with some bushes. Like 3 foot
I high hushes, on the site onl/. We do have to have a clearance. That's one
solutic.n.
Scott: Well I can make a motion, if you'll allow me to.
I
Batzli: You have the floor.
Scott: The Planning Commission recommends approval to rezone 97,163 square I
feet of BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Urban Development. Approve
preliminary and final development plans, preliminary plat approval and
comprehensive plan amendment from commercial to office /industrial as shown
in plans dated April 19, 1993, revised June 5, 1993 and with a waiver of a
5 acre minimum PUD zone requirement subject to the following conditions.
I'd like to change condition number 3 to read, the accent stripe shall be
II
created by using paint, period. Number 4 to read, there shall be no
unscreened outdoor storage permitted. Existing outdoor storage to be
placed in approved screened enclosures where applicable. Number 11, Park II and trail fees shall be paid at the time of application of the building
permit on the new structure. 15. Fifteen overstory trees shall be added.
Five conifers along the south portion of the site, and 10 trees on Outlot
II
I
Planning Commission Meeting
II June 16, 1993 - Page 14
II A, Crossroads Plaza. And number 16, and Commissioner Batzli can maybe help
me with this one. On number 6, Offices. Light manufacturing is subject to
the following limitations. Overnight parking of a maximum of 10 operable
delivery trucks.
Batzli: I had suggested no overnight parking of semi trailers or
inoperative vehicles.
I Scott: Okay. No overnight parking of semi trailers or inoperable
vehicles.
I Harberts: Second.
Mancino: I'd like to add a friendly amendment to that and that is on 3.
II That the rock face concrete block shall remain as the main material used on
the building and it shall be painted. Because we're painting the whole
building, correct?
I Scott: Oh, anyway? I don't know. Are we? Is that what that ivory color
is?
I Harbe7 tr: 'r'eah.
Scott ::h, c,k . That's friendly. I'll accept that one.
II Batzli S. wh t dces conditions 3 read now?
Scott: Pck face concrete block shall remain as the main material used on
II the bu dingy• and it shall be painted?
Manc_in_: A,d a1=_o, you added to it that it's not glazed tile. It's just
I paint. Hi the accent stripes shall be created by using paint.
Bats1_ : ;7ou'vF_ eliminated the rest of the verbage there?
I Ma nc it . 'i.yl .
Batzli: So you don't have expansion of the building matches and enhances
the architectural design of the existing building?
Scott. That's striken from condition 3.
I Batzli: Do you want to ask the applicant to look into setting back the
building?
I Scott: No.
Batzli: At the park. You don't want to do that?
I Scott: No.
I Batzli: Okay. Is there any other discussion?
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 15
Scott moved, Harberts seconded that the Planning Commission recommends '
approval to rezone 97,163 square feet of BG, General Business to PUD,
Planned Urban Development. Approve preliminary and final development
plans, preliminary plat approval and comprehensive plan amendment from
commercial to office /industrial as shown in plans dated April 19, 1993,
revised June 5, 1993 and with a waiver of a 5 acre minimum PUD zone
requirement subject to the following conditions:
1. Preliminary and Final plat approval combinging Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block
2, Burdick park into one lot with appropriate easements. All typical
utility and drainage easements shall be dedicated to the city on the
final plat.
2. Rezoning approval from BG, General Business to PUD, Planned Unit
Development.
3. The expansion of the building shall match and enhance the architectural
design of the existing building. Rock face concrete block shall remain
as the main material used on the building, and it shall be painted.
All cedar wood shingles shall be replaced with ribbed steel panels.
However, the accent stripes shall be created by using paint. '
4. There shall be no unscreened outdoor storage permitted. Existing
o td storage to be placed in approved, screened enclosures where
applicable.
5. The h_,d cover surface of the site (the three lots) shall not exceed
- '0% The setback of the building shall maintain a minimum setback of
feet from the railroad right -of -way. Revised plans reflecting those
tw elements shall be submitted for staff review.
6. Print t: rezoning and development, the applicant shall purchase the 1
p) =pe, t, in question from the HRA.
7. Trans rlanning shall be incorporated into this development.
1
8. The applicant shall submit detailed storm sewer calculations prepared
by a professional engineer for the City to review.
1
9. The applicant shall provide a $500.00 security for connection to the
City'_ storm sewer line and boulevard restoration on Picha Drive. This
fee will be refunded upon satisfactorily completing connection and
restoration of the City's boulevard.
10. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed around the perimeter 1
along the grading limits.
11. Par and trail fees shall be paid at the time of application of
building) permit on the new structure.
12. Approval of the minor comprehensive plan amendment by the Metropolitan
Council.
13. Stop signs shall be installed at the exit points to Picha Drive.
Planning Commission Meeting
II June 16, 1993 - Page 16
II 14. Meet the conditions of the Fire Marshal.
15. Fifteen over story trees shall be added. Five conifer trees along the
south portion of the site, and 10 trees on Outlot A, Crossroads Plaza.
16. The PUD Agreement shall include the following conditions:
a. Intent.
The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD that would allow the
' expansion of an existing office /light manufacturing use. It is
intended that this use be operated and maintained to preserve its low
intensity character to ensure its compatibility with surrounding uses
and the greater Chanhassen Central Business District.
b. Permitted Uses.
' The permitted uses in this zone are limited to the light industrial/
office or less intensive uses than the existing use. The uses shall be
limited to those as defined herein. If there is a question as to
' whether or not a use meets the definition, the Planning Director shall
mae that. interpretation.
1. Light Manufacturing*
' 2. Retail *4
3. Newspaper and small printing offices
4. Vetei inai y Clinic
5. animal Hospital
Offices
? manufcturing is subject to the following limitations:
- \•isible emissions of smoke
-- no emissions exceeding the MnPCA standards measured at the
' property line
- No outdoor, unscreened storage of materials, trash storage, shipping
pallets, or other materials
'
- overnight parking of a maximum of ten delivery trucks
- no overnight parking of semi trailers or inoperable vehicles
- all parking must be accommodated on -site
* *Retail uses are subject to the following limitations:
- signage consistent with approved sign package
- retail uses must be consistent with the site's restricted parking
Scott, Harberts and Ledvina voted in favor. Batzli and Mancino voted in
I opposition. The motion carried with a vote of 3 to 2.
Batzli: Your reason for?
I Mancino: Well I certainly hope that the...looks better than I think it
might. I just have some concerned about that obviously.
1
r
11
Planning Commission Meeting
June 16, 1993 - Page 17
Scott: Mr. Hansen, when the building is finished you can invite
Commissioner Mancino to come over.
Mancino: And I'll say I was all wrong, I'm sorry and I hope that that
happens. There's no question about it. But no, I do have some concern
about it and I would just like to have it, I'd like to see a rendering of
the whole front face and see what else could be done architecturally to it.
So we just don't have that one split. That's what concerns me. We're •
going to have two different looking buildings. And that's why.
Batzli: Okay. Out of curiosity, were we going to strike condition 5 and
was that part of your motion?
Scott: It wasn't part of my motion but.
Al -Jaff: We were going to strike condition 5 but it wasn't part of the
motion.
Led.iira : But he's met it.
Scott: Sc that's why I just left it. '
Batzli: M,' other concern was that I share some of Nancy's concerns
about that and I'd like to see a little bit more guidance, especially in
condition 3 regarding matching the...Thank you. This goes to City Council
when?
Al - -Jafr Can the 2Bth.
Batzl i
Al - Jaff: Of June. That's net Council meeting.
1
I '. e got to go to that one too.
1
1