The URL can be used to link to this page

4. Site Plan Review for Goodyear Tire . : 11 -- 1 CITY O F P C DATE DATE 1 -11 -93 92 ._.- -- '1 CASE: 92 -3 Site Plan 1 \ \ i CHAN -2 CUP i - 90 -17 Subdivision "-y BY: Al -Jaff 1 • 1 STAFF REPORT 1 , PROPOSAL: 1) Site Plan Review for Goodyear, 5,397 I 2) Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 3.1634 Acres into 3 lots with an area of 0.939 Acres, 0.778 Acres, and 1.445 Acres 3) Conditional Use Permit to Allow an Auto Service Facility in the BH 1 Z District V LOCATION: South of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and I east of Emission Control Testing Station -J a APPLICANT : Beisner Ltd. Chanhassen Holding Company I 0 6100 Summit Drive 14201 Excelsior Boulevard Q Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Minnetonka, MN 55436 1 1 PRESENT ZONING: Highway Business ACREAGE: 3.1634 acres I ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - Hwy. 5 1 S - RSF; Chan Estates and Lake Drive East - • . E - IOP; DataSery W - BH; Emission Control Station I 4 SEWER AND WATER: Services are available to the site. I #5 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is undeveloped and vegetated primarily with I W mature poplar and elm trees. �"� 2000 LAND S E: Commercial 1 N , • 1 1 Goodyear November 18, 1992 1 Page 2 PROPOSAL /SUMMARY The applicant is proposing to construct a Goodyear Auto Service facility. The site is located between Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5 adjacent to the Emission Control Testing Station. The area of the Goodyear site is 40,908 square feet and located in a Highway Business District. The site is visible directly from Highway 5 and has access from Lake Drive East via a private drive. 1 In an accompanying subdivision request, the site is being divided into three lots, one of which will contain the Goodyear building, the second is proposed to ultimately contain an Abra auto body building, and the third will be reserved for future development. The third parcel is zoned ' BH so that high intensity commercial uses are likely to be proposed but staff is not aware of any pending developments. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. Conditions ' proposed for review would result in dedication of all required easements. This proposal has come before the Planning Commission on several occasions. It has generated ' extensive concern and comments by the Commission as well as from area residents. The Planning Commission's primary concerns revolved around the design of the site relative to ongoing issues of urban design in the Highway 5 corridor. Working on this project is particularly difficult due to the fact that while expectations have been raised about the quality of the development in the Highway 5 corridor, the corridor planning process has not produced any complete set of development guidelines by which projects are to be judged. Thus, staff, the developer, and the Planning Commission have, to a very real extent, been trying to hit a moving target. At the most recent Planning Commission meeting, there was general agreement by the Commission that the underlying site plan and landscaping for the proposal was reasonable. The Planning Commission also appeared to agree that the Goodyear building, with some additional architectural refinements, was generally acceptable. The primary concerns seemed to focus on the suitability of the proposed design for the Abra Auto Body facility. Staff has since met with the developer on several occasions and as of yet have been unable to come to an agreement on refinements to the Abra building that would resolve the Planning Commission's concerns. At the most recent meeting, the developers indicated that rather than continue to tinker with what 1 is becoming a more and more complicated design that meets no one's goals, that they would in essence take a "fresh run" at the Abra building architecture. However, since they wish to move forward with this request, they have taken the opportunity to delete the Abra building and site ' plan from the current proposal while final designs are being prepared. Thus, the current request is for the Goodyear facility, its accompanying conditional use permit, and subdivision of the property. We expect to be able to bring back the architectural plans for the Abra facility to the ' City Council in the near future. As a result of this change in the request, this report has been redrafted to deal only with the Goodyear facility. The site plan is reasonably well developed. Staff has been working with the applicant for the past six months on the site plan and building architecture. The design has improved considerably and the applicant has been quite cooperative with staff. The Goodyear building is a split face 1 1 Goodyear November 18, 1992 Page 3 concrete block accented by a sandable decorative texture finish structure that will have a series of service bays and a pitched roof. All services for the facility will take place inside the building. Parking for vehicles is located on the north and west side of the structure away from Lake Drive. 1 This location is ideal since it places these areas further away from residences south of Lake Drive. The Goodyear site will be operated from 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. on Saturdays. The site will be closed on Sundays. There will be no outdoor storage or outdoor servicing of vehicles. Staff is further requiring that there be no outside storage of damaged or inoperable vehicles. The site landscaping is generally of high quality due to the attention that was paid to this issue by staff and the applicant. Additional landscaping was added by the applicant on the north side of the site along Highway 5, and along the parameters of the retention pond located to the south of Lot 3. There is a large number of poplar and elm trees on the site. All of the trees on both Lots 1 and 2 are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not of high quality, however, the large quantity gives them visual significance. Their loss is unfortunate but is unavoidable if the land is to be developed. When the Emission Control Site was reviewed, site access was a major concern of staff's throughout the design of the proposal. Our original thinking was that a public cul-de -sac should be required running north from Lake Drive since there may ultimately be 4 sites accessing Lake 1 Drive via that connection. However, staff was concerned that the need to create a cul-de -sac at the end of the street would result in a hazardous traffic situation, whereby traffic entering and leaving the sites would be cutting across the cul-de -sac in an uncontrolled manner. Therefore, 1 we recommended that the plans be revised to utilize a commonly owned and maintained private driveway system that will avoid the traffic conflicts outlined above. The private driveway was built to city standards which required the full 32' pavement width and a 9 ton design and curb and gutter. The current access provisions are acceptable, however, plans to provide the driveway's long term maintenance by the land owners should be clarified. A maintenance agreement acceptable to the city should be recorded over all of the lots. Staff regards the project as a reasonable if unexceptional use of the land. It is unfortunate that the Hwy. 5 Study could not have been completed earlier since it will likely result in development standards that are more sensitive to the corridor's image. The Planning Commission considered referring the request to the Hwy. 5 Task Force to gain their input. However, the city's ability to leverage substantial changes to what is otherwise a reasonable request, based upon current ordinances, may be limited. We also note that the site is not located in any Tax Increment District so we have no ability to offer financial incentives that have been useful elsewhere in obtaining design improvements in the Central Business District. 1 1 1 Goodyear November 18, 1992 1 Page 4 Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the site 1 plan, without variances, conditional use permit and subdivision requests for this proposal. BACKGROUND 1 On January 28, 1991, the City Council approved final plat #90 -17 for Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition. The subdivision resulted in dividing 5.59 acres into 2 lots with an area of 1.9 acres for Lot 1 and 3.0 acres for Lot 2. Lot 1 became the site for the Emission Control Testing Station which was approved as a conditional use permit concurrently with the subdivision. Lot 2 was reserved for future development and is being proposed for subdivision into three lots with this 1 application. On November 18, 1992, the Planning Commission reviewed the site plan and conditional use 1 permit requests for the development of an Abra Auto Body Repair and a Goodyear Auto Service facility. The Planning Commission tabled action on the proposal as there were a number of issues related to architectural design raised by the Planning Commission and residents of Chanhassen Estates Subdivision that needed to be resolved before a vote could be taken. The applicant was directed to meet with staff and Planning Commissioner Jeff Farmakes to resolve those issues of concern. On December 2, 1992, the Planning Commission reviewed the changes. The request was approved for the Goodyear site, however, the Abra building design was not satisfactory. The Planning Commission directed the applicant to refine the design before it appears before the City Council. The applicant is in the process of redesigning the Abra building. The new design is 1 proposed to appear before the City Council on January 25, 1993. 1 GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE The building is situated parallel to Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5. Access is gained off of a private driveway which connects to Lake Drive East. Parking is located to the north and west of the proposed building. We note that the parking area is setback 75 feet from Highway 5, which exceed the Zoning Ordinance requirements, and offers larger green space in this area. The 1 nearest home is located 350 feet away from the south edge of the actively used portion of the site. Direct views of the service bays will be screened by berming and landscaping from both Hwy. 5 and Lake Drive. The Goodyear site is located 75 feet from the north, 30 feet from the 1 east, 75 from the south, and 75 from the west property line. Materials used on the Goodyear building will be split face concrete block accented by a sandable decorative texture finish. Pre- finished metal overhead doors will be used on the east and west elevations of the structure. The building architecture meets the standards of the site plan ordinance requirements. The Goodyear building will have a pitched roof that is a 100 feet in 1 1 Goodyear 1 November 18, 1992 Page 5 1 length with dormers along the roof line to break it up and reflect what has become typical Chanhassen CBD design. The dormers were added as a condition of approval from the Planning Commission. Auto services will take place inside the building. The roof system is being used to screen roof mounted equipment. The applicant is showing the trash enclosures screened by a split face concrete block to match the Goodyear building materials. The gate to the trash enclosure is shown facing east on the elevations plan, and facing north on the site plan. Staff recommends the gate face to the west to minimize views from Hwy. 5. The gates to the trash enclosure will be constructed of chain link fencing. 1 PARKING/INTERIOR CIRCULATION The City's parking ordinance for vehicle service stations requires 4 parking stalls per service Y P g � P g Pe stall. The Goodyear site will require 16 stalls. The applicant is providing 32 stalls. Berming and landscaping is proposed along the north side, adjacent to Highway 5. This will provide screening of cars parked in the lot. ACCESS 1 Access to the development is provided by an existing private street off Lake Drive East which services the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station (MVIS). Similarly, this development does not propose any public right -of -way for extension of the proposed street and therefore access to the lots will be private. A driveway or cross - access easement should be recorded in conjunction with the final plat recording to guarantee access to the lots. There should also be a joint maintenance agreement, acceptable to the city, filed against each parcel. We do not wish to see the city petitioned to accept the street at some point in the future. 1 The existing private street was built in accordance to the City's typical commercial pavement design with the thought that someday it would be dedicated back to the City for ownership. Engineering staff feels with the concept proposed the City will not be taking ownership of the street and therefore the street pavement/parking lot designs may be designed accordingly. The preliminary plat provides the necessary drainage and utility easement for the public improvements with the exception of a storm sewer line along the easterly line of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff recommends that the easement be increased to 20 feet wide to provide adequate room for maintenance. We also recommend that a standard 5 -foot wide drainage and utility easement be dedicated on both sides of the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. The plans propose extending the private street from the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station 1 located adjacent to the development. Since this roadway will not be a public street, staff is comfortable with the proposal. The layout is similar to a mini -mall type parking lot design with one access from a public street (Lake Drive East). 1 1 1 1 1 Goodyear, November 18, 1992 I Page 6 LANDSCAPING III The landscaping plan is very well conceived. Staff worked closely with the applicant to design the landscaping plan. Berming is proposed along the north and south side of the site. The I vehicles that will park along the north edge of the site must be totally screened by the berms and landscaping. Additional landscaping was added on the north side of the site along Highway 5 - as a result of a condition of approval from the Planning Commission. The trees shown on the I landscaping plan are 16 feet in diameter. It is likely that they will reach this size in 10 or 15 years. That was the reason 8 additional spruce or Black Hills evergreens were added. Also, along the south lot line of Lot 3, the applicant is proposing a retention pond. This pond will I have a depth exceeding 8 feet with an average of one foot standing water. The applicant is landscaping the pond parameter with trees and hedges. This was also a result of a Planning Commission recommendation. I There is a large number of poplar and elm trees on the site. All the trees on Lot 1 are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not of high quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. The applicant is attempting to replace some of these trees with a better quality. 1 LIGHTING Lighting locations have not been illustrated on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and I the applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than'/ foot candles of light at the property line as required by ordinance. An acceptable lighting plan should be submitted when building permits are requested. I SIGNAGE I The Planning Commission requested review of the sign package before it appears before the City Council. The applicant has submitted a preliminary signage plan. One monument identification I sign is proposed at the north edge of the site facing Highway 5. Staff proposed that if the Goodyear and the Abra signs were combined into one free standing sign, the third parcel located to the south would be permitted to have signage facing Highway 5 too. This third site would be I part of the Abra and Goodyear free standing sign. The applicant has been working on a design for the free standing sign; however, we believe additional refinement is required. The area of the sign is proposed to be 60 square feet. The ordinance allows 64 square feet in area and a I maximum height of 8 feet for monument signs. The sign is designed as a monument and not a pylon due to the height of the sign board above the ground. The applicant is requesting a height of 12 feet. Considering the fact that the applicant could construct a pylon sign with an area of I 80 square feet and a height of 20 feet, staff is in favor of granting a 4 foot variance for the height of the monument sign. It is a clear benefit to have one coordinated sign instead of two individual pylon signs. The building has two wall mounted signs along the north and west elevations. The I 1 1 Goodyear 1 November 18, 1992 Page 7 1 ordinance requires that no wall mounted sign exceed 80 square feet of display area or 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the sign is mounted. The signage plan must be approved by the Planning Commission and City Council before the applicant can obtain a permit for the signs on site. One stop sign must be posted on the driveway at the exit point of both sites. A sign plan acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. 1 GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site is approximately six feet lower than the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The plan 1 proposes to regrade a portion of the access drive to provide a smooth transition between developments. Storm drainage from the proposed development will sheet flow across the driveways and parking lot areas and then conveyed via storm sewer system to a proposed detention pond located over the southerly portion of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff has reviewed the size of the detention pond and found it is under capacity and needs to be enlarged to accommodate runoff from this development and the adjacent MVIS site. The pond should be modified to accommodate 0.95 acre /feet of runoff below the 927' contour line. This will also provide a 2- foot freeboard around the pond basin. 1 The pond is not designed to meet NURP standards as is the city's current policy. To do so would require additional wet area which would severely compromise the utility of the remaining 1 lots. Staff believes that this problem can be addressed downstream at a city owned pond. The developer should be required to pay an equivalent fee into the Surface Water Management Program fund to accomplish these improvements downstream. The fee was calculated by the city's consultant at $7,580. This fee was calculated for Lots 1 and 2 only. Lot 3 will be charged a separate fee at the time it develops. The applicant is proposing a series of catch basins and storm sewer to convey runoff to the ponding basin. From the city's standpoint, the catch basins and storm sewers located within the drainage basin and main street access should be owned by the city to maintain drainage. The individual storm sewer line extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 from the street should be maintained and owned by the individual property owners. Erosion control measures shall be incorporated onto the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly sides of the development. 1 PUBLIC UTILTI7ES Both municipal sanitary sewer and watermain are available to the site. The plans propose on extending the existing 6 -inch watermain and looping to the existing 10 -inch watermain located just east of the development. Sanitary sewer was extended previously in conjunction with development of the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The applicant is proposing to extend sanitary sewer and water service to each lot. All utility construction should be in conformance 1 1 1 Goodyear F. November 18, 1992 Page 8 ' with the latest edition of the city's standard specification and detailed plates. Formal plan and specification approval will be required at time of final platting. ' Since the development will include construction of public improvements, it will be necessary for the applicant to enter into a development contract and provide the financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements. Upon completion of these public improvements, the city will formally accept for perpetual maintenance and ownership most of the utilities within the utility and drainage easements. The city will not be responsible for ownership and maintenance of the storm sewer extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. This is considered a private storm ' sewer line. All three lots will be served with municipal utilities. The appropriate hookup fees will be ' charged at the time of building permit issuance. MISCELLANEOUS ' As a part of Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition, an outlot (A) was created. This outlot covers the existing private street. The intent was for the developer to dedicate back to the city, at some 1 future date when the street was extended, the street and Outlot A as public street and right -of- way. However, as proposed the city would have no reason to accept the street. We do not want to see the outlot go tax forfeit nor do we want to see the driveway's maintenance be avoided by the property owners. Therefore, staff suggests Outlot A be incorporated into the replat as part of Lot 3 or resolved in some other acceptable matter to the city. ' COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT Ordinance Goodyear Building Height 2 stories 1 story Building Setback N -20' E -10' N- 75'E -30' S -25' W -10' S- 45'W -55' Parking stalls 24/16 stalls 32 stalls Parking Setback N -25' E -10' N- 27'E -15' S -25' W -10' S -35' W -26' Hard surface 65% 64.6% Coverage Lot Area 20,000 s.f. 42,410 s.f. Variances Required - none 1 1 Goodyear 1 November 18, 1992 1 Page 9 PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES I The City is requiring that park and trails fees be submitted in lieu of park land. Fees are paid at the time building permits are requested. These fees are currently assessed at a rate of $2,500 I per acre and $833 per acre for park and trail fees, respectively. As such, the Goodyear site will be charged $3,245 in park and trail fees. SUBDIVISION 1 The subdivision proposal is a relatively simple request that will serve to divide the site (3.136 I acres) into three lots, one of which will contain the Goodyear building (40.904 square feet), the second will contain the Abra building (33,918 square feet), and the third (62,969 square feet) will be reserved for future development. The parcel is zoned BH so that higher intensity commercial I uses are likely to be proposed but staff is not aware of any pending developments. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. Conditions proposed for review would result in dedication of all required easements. The following easements are either illustrated on ' the plat or should be acquired: 1. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeters of all lots. I 2. Drainage and conservation easement located over the pond on Lot 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I Auto Service Facilities are permitted in the BH District as a conditional use. The following 1 constitutes our review of this proposal against conditional use permit standards and with conditional use permit standards provided in the draft ordinance revision pertaining to emission control testing stations. 1 GENERAL ISSUANCE STANDARDS I 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or city. I FINDING - The site is zoned BH. The proposed uses will not create any significant or unexpected impacts from this use and, in fact, in many respects impacts I generated by this use are less by a significant factor than would have occurred or could have occurred if more intensive uses allowed by the Zoning Ordinance were to be developed on the site. 1 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. 1 1 1 1 Goodyear November 18, 1992 1 Page 10 FINDING - The proposed use would be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. 1 The Hwy. 5 Corridor Plan is not yet completed or incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. ' 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. ' FINDING - The site is located adjacent to a major highway and a collector road. It is in the Chanhassen commercial district and as such a commercial building is fully consistent with this site. Staff has worked with the applicant in an attempt to achieve design compatibility with the Chanhassen CBD and Hwy. 5 design efforts. While the Highway 5 Plan may ultimately provide additional guidance for design standards, these are not yet in place. The proposal exceeds current design standards. r 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. FINDING - There will be no unexpected measurable impacts to the existing or planned neighboring uses. Traffic on Lake Drive will of course increase but the street was designed for this purpose. Potential noise impacts from the use will be dealt with by conditions attached to the approval. The use may even have the effect of blocking some of the highway noise that currently reaches area homes. 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. FINDING - Full city services are available to this site. Roads serving the site have recently been upgraded and are fully capable of handling the access needs ' of this proposal. 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not ' be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. FINDING - There are no projected needs for public facilities and services beyond those ' which are already provided in this area. r 1 Goodyear, 1 November 18, 1992 Page 11 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare I because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. FINDING - This site will not create adverse impacts to persons, property or the general 1 welfare of the area. Hours of operation, orientation of the bays away from residence, and lighting standards will comply with city ordinances. 1 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. 1 FINDING - The site is visible from a major highway and is accessible from that highway by 2 signalized intersections and a collector street designed to I commercial standards. There will be no direct traffic impacts to any area residential neighborhood. 9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or 1 historic features of major significance. FINDING - The development of this site will result in the loss of a large number of I poplar and elm trees. These trees currently act as a buffer between the highway and area residential properties. These trees are not of high I quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. In order to develop the site, the majority of the trees will have to be removed. I Extensive landscaping is being required in part to make up for this loss. There are a large number of mature evergreens located along the south side of Lake Drive East that still provide the required buffering. 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. FINDING - The site plan is well designed to provide adequate landscaping and 1 buffering from adjoining properties. The buildings are to be built of brick and decorative concrete block. Site operations are designed to maximize I off -site screening as much as possible. 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. 1 FINDING - The site is being used for a commercial type of operation which is consistent with its designation. 1 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. 1 1 1 1 Goodyear November 18, 1992 1 Page 12 FINDING - The following is our review of conditions of approval and appropriate 1 findings: a. No unlicensed or inoperable vehicles shall be stored on premises except in I appropriately designed and screened storage areas. ' FINDING - All operations will be conducted inside the buildings. _ I b. All repair, assembly, disassembly and maintenance of vehicles shall occur P � Y� Y within closed building except minor maintenance including, but not limited 1 to, tire inflation, adding oil and wiper replacement. FINDING - There will be no repairs performed outdoors. Staff is further restricting 1 outdoor parking of damaged or inoperable vehicles. c. No public address system shall be audible from any residential parcel. I FINDING - No ublic address systems will be permitted. P Y Pe 1 d. Stacking areas deemed to be appropriate by the City shall meet parking setback requirements. 1 FINDING - There are no drive through facilitates being proposed. I e. No sales, storage or display of used automobiles or other vehicles such as motorcycles, snowmobiles, or all - terrain vehicles. 1 FINDING - Both operations specialize in repair of vehicles, not sales. f. Disposal of waste oil shall comply with PCA regulations. Facilities for the 1 collection of waste oil must be provided. FINDING - A condition is being added requiring proper disposal of waste oil. I g. Gas pumps and /or storage tank vent pipes shall not be located within one hundred feet of any parcel zoned or guided for residential use. I FINDING - Not applicable. 1 h. A minimum separation two hundred fifty feet is required between the nearest gas pumps of individual parcels for which a conditional use permit is begin requested. 1 1 Goodyear 1 November 18, 1992 Page 13 I FINDING - Not applicable. i Based upon the foregoing findings, staff is recommending that the conditional use permit be approved with appropriate conditions. RECOMMENDATION 1 The Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt the following motions: 1 I. SITE PLAN REVIEW "The City Council approves of Site Plan Review #92 -3 as shown on the site plan dated November 30, 1992, subject to the following conditions: 1. A 4 foot variance to achieve a 12 foot high monument sign. This sign which will face I Highway 5 shall contain only the names of the occupants of Lots 1, 2 and 3. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Provide a I detailed sign plan for staff review prior to the City Council meeting. The monument sign may not exceed 12 feet in height. Sign covenants are to be submitted outlining the use and limit of one common sign and allowances for its use by the remaining undeveloped 1 lot. 2. The applicant shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used 1 in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. I 3. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. I 4. The applicant shall provide a flammable waste separator as required by Building Code. 5. Provide a complete, final set of civil engineering documentation to staff for review and approval. 6. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal memorandum dated October 8, 1992. 1 7. The applicant shall post "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots I 1 and 2, Block 1. Signs shall be placed at 100 -foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. 8. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be I submitted. 1 1 1 Goodyear . - . November 18, 1992 I Page 14 9. The applicant shall pay $7,580 into the Surface Water Management Program fund for I water quality treatment downstream of the site. This fee will cover Lots 1 and 2 only. 10. No public address systems are permitted. 11. No signage will be allowed until sign plan approval is obtained from the Planning Commission and City Council. 1 12. Compliance with conditions of Subdivision #90 -17 and Conditional Use Permit #92 -2." I II. SUBDIVISION "The City Council approves of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #90 -17 for Chan Haven Plaza I 4th Addition as shown on plat dated September 21, 1992, with the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits are requested. I 2. Provide the following easements: 1 a. A standard 5 -foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. 1 b. Drainage easement located over the drainage pond. c. A drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. I 3. Enter into a development agreement acceptable to the city. cit P g P Y 1 4. A driveway or cross - access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted I and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. 5. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the Watershed I District, Health Department, etc. 6. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze -up, special modifications I to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. I 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 1 1 1 Goodyear, 1 November 18, 1992 Page 15 1 8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The outlot shall be replatted/combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 1 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927.0' contour line. 1 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. 1 11. The applicant shall reimburse the city for all engineering consultant fees associated with 1 the storm water study which added up to $608.40. 12. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review #92 -3 and Conditional Use I Permit #92 -2." III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I "The City Council approves of Conditional Use Permit #92 -2 subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review #92 -3 and Subdivision #90- 1 17. 2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site. I 3. No parking or stacking is allowed in fire lanes, drive aisles, access drives or public rights - of -way. 4. No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored overnight on the Goodyear site. 1 5. No outdoor storage shall be permitted on the site. 6. Noise level shall not exceed OSHA requirements or Minnesota Pollution Control agency guidelines at the property line. standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency." 7. Pollution level shall meet stan y ." g y ATTACHMENTS 1 1. Revised Goodyear design and elevations. 2. Letter from Lindsay Amadeo dated November 25, 1992. 3. Letter from Tom Kotsonas dated November 16, 1992. 4. Letter to the Editor, Chanhassen Villager, November 25, 1992. 1 1 1 Goodyear November 18, 1992 I Page 16 5. City Council Minutes dated November 23, 1992. 6. Planning Commission Minutes dated December 2, 1992. 7. Staff report dated December 2, 1992. 8. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 18, 1992. 9. Staff report dated November 18, 1992. 10. Elevations prepared by Commissioner Jeff Farmakes. 11. Plans dated September 21, 1992. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -■-■... •-• ........t.. •-•■••••" . .. . - . ■..--- -._ --...---- - -- - - 7_ ..:::- 7: - : "-- . - - - - - Post-)r brand fax transmittal memo 7671 reeMilla iiiriMMIIIIIIIiiiffigr 1 i• ..0. lifiRM3211=.2 iiall11111. x # 0 3 _ s - 3,7 iiiiiMIIMIIIIII 1 . . • ___, NUM' - I I wily 7 . 14 ' iN MIIIMIIIIIMI 8 5 S ti 1 ii ti 1 11■11 - r , s J > 1) 2 tii -W- i ' IMI $ 1 .,...,• ow ! '-.1 I- . hi . 11111 t- - ° F i l i 1 1 i - 11 1 1 .11 J a :J ilir ..111111 ',". II' 1 1 Fil .... h- vt. I 1 7.(N Ill. ...i (..i• I...) 4 1 1 •--.. 4 IP MOM ! 11 11 :A. ...) ..I 4 4. 1 II l e '; ' i l ll I 11111111 / 1 R „ I 1111 II 1 1111 I / p . ha • 1 111161 1 • ,i...{ ...,..f: • ii.p 111 ..,..,. . I I i i li I po ll • I tid . • t 1 'It C.. I Z • E / 1101:1 r ZS .■ ....F" ow la 1 ow 1 ...1 ki ii.1 II _ ll.he, 1 • - • . % , . . . . i • i u , ' 9■ \ R N iiiiiiiiiiiii t 0 - uri W. l" t c,0 v mii $$$$$$ MIMI .i: " ' malw ••• VOIPINI111111 ' ILI 1 ' -- 1 1 1 1 November 25, 1992 Chanhassen City Council Chanhassen Municipal Building 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Dear Council Members, This letter is a response to the proposed installation of an Abra Autobody /Goodyear facility and future site of an auto parts store to be built on East Lake Drive, south of Highway 5 and east of the Emissions Plant. I am very concerned the development of the eastern entrance to our community is rapidly becoming an unsightly string of auto - related companies. If the proposed site is developed as planned, travelers entering the city on Highway 5 will be visually assaulted with 11 automotive - related businesses within the first mile of the city. I don't think this is the type of impression we want to give visitors, potential residents and business associates. During the November 18 City Planning Commission Meeting, the commission spent a great deal of time discussing roof lines and general building appearances as proposed by the developer. I plead that we must back up and look at the situation from a much 1 broader perspective and act now to better control the development of this entrance to our community. Most disturbing was the admission of several commission members that the 1 development of this area, "Is a throw back to how it was handled," "A zoning mistake," "We don't want a car care area extending down the highway," "The neighbors have never been happy with this area," and "It (development of the area) doesn't seem to be going well but I don't know how to change it." The consensus of the meeting was the proposed development negatively impacts the area. While I appreciate the commissions' honesty, I do count on them to initiate sound development practices that represent our community in a positive manner. This type of development is particularly distressing as automotive industries are not hospitable companies to back a residential neighborhood. The purpose of both ' businesses to repair damaged cars. These unsightly automobiles and the extremely loud repair equipment needed to fix them will certainly create an audio and visual disturbance to surrounding neighbors. Unfortunately the natural barrier of evergreen trees lining the south side of East Lake Drive is dying out, compounding the problem. The impact of the proposed development on Chanhassen Estates is perhaps more critical than you realize. In the past 18 months, five of the nine homes across from this area have been or are for sale. This rapid turnover rate is highly unusual for a mature development. While new residents will most likely remain for some time, the instability of the neighborhood does not bode well for the city or the residents of the area. 1 1 1 1 1 As part of a new generation of income - producing Chanhassen residents, I had hoped to make Chanhassen a long -term home. If the area is developed as currently proposed, I will definitely make plans to move out of the city long before I intended, thus adding to the instability of the area. I encourage you to look carefully and conservatively at the type of development that welcomes our travelers from the east and protect the rights nearby homeowners have to a peaceful, disturban6e -free neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. Si erely, 111 41/44 Lindsay Amadeo 8007 Cheyenne Avenue 1 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 /C . • 1 /,(. .7 - F` , r /�. - . ' ` G el 4 � � . r ?le/ "',1i, ' t' E4 11/1 9C <- _/ y f. - , y .. to Tom Votsonas U ° �-• = <'� ,` f ` � ": f 8001 Cheyenne Av 1,4 (' r: ; ` f - , ' % .4 e ` - 't C 0 / r ' : /..4' 1 , Chanhassen f Member 1 City Flanning Commission I would l i k e to take several minutes of your time to express_ my I concern with the proposed development of a Goodyear Tire and Abra facilities south of Hwy. #5, north of Lake Drive East, and east of the Chanhassen Emission Control Station. After spending the time to view most of their current facilities in the western suburbs, I have formed a very strong opinion against the construction of these facilities on the edge of the Chanhassen Estates neighborhood. I At the present time those of us living on Cheyenne Av. and the general neighborhood have a McDonald's and an Emissions Testing I Station for our viewing. Every evening and early morning we constantly have vehicle headlights and a McDonald's spotlight s_hi ni nc1 through our windows. Obviously, as pointed out by 1 those who consider us to be whiners, we can always keep our drapes and curtains closed: thus, avoiding the problem. Of course this does not help much if we choose to be outside I during the spring /summer /fall months. Added to this during the summer months, unless we keep our windows shut, we have the noise and pollution of the vehicle traffic generated by these businesses. 1 Since these business are now a fact of life, debate concerning their benefits is no longer of any consequence. Yet, as a I member of the Planning Commission, you have the opportunity to recommend to the City Council that the construction of a very detrimental development not be allowed to take place. Even II though the majority of the residents of Chanhassen Estates are not moneyed nor politically influential, we ask that you seriously consider the negative impact this particular commercial development will have on our neighborhood. I This development, which no other residential neighborhood would welcome, will do nothing to improve or even preserve the I present condition of our neighborhood. Beyond that which currently exists, this construction will bring: 1. increased traffic to all connecting intersections, (one of which directly enters into our neighborhood); II C. increased - noise, air /auto, trash pollution; 3. additional loss of privacy; 4. loss of a natural (trees, etc.) buffer between Hwy. #5 and the local residents; 5. a general destruction of the local, natural environment; 1 1 1 6. a very negative impact on the use of the residents' mini - park; - 7. a definite turn away from the idea of trying to enhance the loot _. of the east entrance into Chanhassen; 8. (b/ allowing an unsightly and undesirable business development tc occur) the possible initiative to the deterioration of the neighborhood. both of these businesses require twenty -four hour outdoor space for a. number of unsightly automobiles, tires, signs, junk:., etc. 1 In your decision making, there are several appropriate 'que=stions that must be answered. 1. In what ways is this business compatible and a benefit to the bordering residential neighborhood? 2. Is it not likely that there are more suitable nonresidential areas of Chanhassen where businesses of this type would have no destructive impact on their neighboring residents? . and, would you want the construction of such businesses in your neighborhood? It is important, as you make your decision, to consider the destructiveness of these businesses on our neighborhood. Not one of the establishments I viewed came remotely close to being a sightly addition to its surroundings. Everyone of the present business either bordered a "run- down" neighborhood or were located far from residential housing. None of the viewed businesses were near a residential neighborhood such as Chanhassen Estates. Granted, we are not a neighborhood of large, expensive houses. But, we are a neighborhood of clean, well -kept houses. We are a mixture of new and long time residents; who as much as anyone, have the right, and are entitled to continue living in and around clean, safe and environmentally pleasant surroundings. 1 Than t. you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sin_erely, 1 Tom Kotsona 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 . Letters :',txJ f Repair business , '- was the proposed development nega- will rapidly becoming an nasighdy lively impacts the area yet little is string of auto - related companies. If not compatible • • . .' - being done to change the nature of the the proposed site is developed as The Chanhassen Plaanin4 Cbm- development. - p travelers entering the city on mission is currently reviewing the If you want to protect the rights N g way 5 will be visually assaulted i proposed development of an Abra nearby homeowners have to a peace- with 11 automotive - related businesses . .. Auto Body and Good rue slots fill, disturbance-free neighborhood, within the first mile of the city. The on East Lake Drive, east of the emir- write to the city oa Gb mcil, anhassea purpose of both busin rep businesses Ls to air I . lions plant. Future plans include Municipal Building, 690 Coulter Dr., damaged cars. These wrecked auto- - adding an auto pares store to the site. Chanhassen, MN 55317 and Id them mobiles and the extremely loud re- „ - This type of development is not know what you think pair equipment needed to fix them I compatible with the mature neigh- "• .. - Gerard Amadeo will certainly create an audio and boyhood on the south side of the pro; neigh- ,..,, `. +• -"= -- • Chanhassen visual disduban to passers -by• Is ' posed area. The purpose of both bust= • .- this is the tyke of impression we want noses is to repair damaged cam Thong Not a pretty a Sm visitors, potential residents I nasighdlpp automobiles and the u- tremelyloud equipmeataeeded city welcome If you want to give people travd- b fix them certainly create an Imagine you are' and business associates? entering Chan- ing to Chanhassen from this entrance audio and visual disturbance lo sur- hassen on Highway 5 from the east. point a better impression, write to the : I ramding neighbors. The impact of Immately when you cross the line city counai, Chanhassen Mnaidpal the proposed development on Chan- from cross a you see a lire shop B u i dmg, 690 Coul Dr, Chanhas- hassen E is critical. In the past and repair facility, an auto body re- un, MN 55317 and let them know 18 months, five of the nine homes pair shop and a auto parts store. Con- what you oss from this area have bee° or are tmutng down Highway 5 you have - I sa for sale. The rapid turnover rate is gone leas than a mile and you see nine Chanhassen highly unusual for a mature develop- more automotive related business. meat The instability of the neighbor - Eleven auto industry shops — not a I hood does not bode well for the city or mua welcome into ow comity • the residents of the area. is As part of a new generation of The Chanhassen Flamini CC income -rod Chanhassen rear- mission, is..atrrently reviewing the I dents, I had hoped to make Chahar proposed development of an Abra sea a long -term home. If the area is Autobody//Goodyear fiality to be built developed u currently proposed, I on East Lake Drive, south of High- , will definitely make pbms to move way 5 and Cast of the emissions plant. out of the dty long before I intended, An auto parts store is �to join. I thus adding to the instability of the this development in the area. ' If the proposed businesses are built The consensus of the Planning on that site, the development of the eastern Commission at the Nov. 18 meeting entrance to our community 1 • .. • _ - 1 • 1 1 i 1 1 am City Council Meeting - November 23, 1992 It Councilwoman Dimler: What's our action here tonight? Anything? 1,. Mayor Chmiel: No, I think our action basically, this is to. Don Ashworth: You're authorizing me to prepare a letter similar to the one II that's enclosed to MnDot basically asking them that yes, they're willing to make a commitment to this project and include the north frontage road project as a part of the Highway 5 construction. II Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Seeing none, can I have a motion? For Don II to send that letter to MnDot. Councilman Mason: So moved. Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second? II Councilman Workman: Second. II Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded authorizing the City Manager to prepare a letter to MnDot asking them to sake a commitment to the Highway S II project and include the north frontage road project as a part of the construction plans. All voted in favor and the motion carried. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: II Councilman Wing: I was doing City business and I missed the Pledge of Allegiance and I just was wondering, would you just allow me out of order one II Quick comment under Council Presentations? i Mayor Chmiel: No. i t ,<' Councilman Wing: Okay, I'll do it next time. 1 i Mayor Chmiel: Sure, go ahead. 1 Councilman Wing: Paul, I think this Council and the Planning Commission at the f last meeting are constantly stymied, Abra's coming in and we got something good from Target. I'm surprised at the feedback I've gotten from Target. Comments II that maybe that ought to be our minimum standard. Abra we're stuck with and these other ones coming in along Highway 5 and it would appear that our landscape ordinance needs to aggressively be attacked right now. I mean if II Target is what we like and what we want, then the landscape ordinance has to reflect that on the Abra and the new ones coming in and it doesn't. We really have no say whatsoever unless it's a PUD or HRA's project. So my concern is two. Number one, landscape ordinance seems to be solely, grossly inadequate. II Is that an assumption I can sake? Or needs to be adjusted? Paul Krauss: I think our landscape ordinance was state, was 1980 state of the 1 art but it doesn't deal with Highway 5 issues very well. 1; Councilman Wing: Okay. And also architectural standards. We say well we want ` this and we want that and we think it ought to have pitched roofs and we don't II think, and we think it ought to have this. So there's no rules and these poor 30 1 1 MS City Council Meeting - November 23, 1992 guys are coming in scratching their heads saying, gripes people. What do you want? Just tell us what you want. We'll build it. We'll do it but what do you want and we don't have the rules. So the in a sense the architectural standards we don't seem to have adequate rules and the Planning Commission is frustrated and 1 think I get frustrated here because you don't know, we just don't have anything to tell the people eoming in except the quick oil change place could build what they want because that's, we don't have any rules to say they can't. So I guess I'm suggesting here that the Council recommend to staff that the ' landscape ordinance and the issue of architectural standards be taken up at the Planning Commission and be given priority. ' Mayor Chmiel: I don't disagree with you but how far are we going to go with architectural standards? Councilman Wing: Oh, I have no definitions other than we don't have any definitions. So what's good for you I don't like. What I like you don't like. And I don't know Don. I don't have that answer. Or maybe just a committee to review but do we want pitched roofs or don't we? Are fiat roofs okay or aren't they? Mayor Chmiel: I think we should have a specific direction with design. But as ' far as colors, I don't think we should even really approach that. Councilman Wing: You know you're becoming specific and I don't know, I have no suggestion here other than what can or can't a company do coming in. Mayor Chmiel: In other words you say you want this one blue, you want this one pink, you want this one yellow. ' t = Councilman Wing: We're sort of doing that. ' Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. Councilman Wing: And they're really frustrated. I don't blame them. Mayor Chmiel: Paul. Paul Krauss: Well you know, in fact I had a meeting with Jeff Farmakes today. Jeff had volunteered to provide some sketches for Abra and Goodyear so that we could relate to them the kinds of concerns that staff and Planning Commission had. And Jeff and I had an opportunity to discuss, how do you get a design and ' we both agree and that is... We don't want to dictate colors. We don't want to dictate era...you know, everybody has a Wild West theme or ultra modern or anything else but you do want to get to things like there should be no unadorned walls. That there's got to be...detailing that we do want this, on and on and on. As far as the Highway 5 area goes, that's on the agenda for the Highway 5 corridor task force. Maybe we can give some direction to them to accelerate work on an overlay district might be appropriate. But that would, once that's ' in place that will deal with the Highway 5 corridor which incorporates portions of downtown but all of downtown. Then you have sites like the Charlie James property that aren't technically on the Highway 5 corridor. If you want to deal with those somewhat separately or just expand the corridor so that, there's lots of ways you can look at that. 11 31 1 City Council Meeting - November 23, 1992 II Mayor Chmiel: I think we can put slash slash TIF districts to various blah, blah, blah. Paul Krauss: Well you see I think the HRA and the Council have been very good 1� recently, the last two years, I think it started with Councilwoman Dimler's suggestion with the industrial building, to use the HRA input as leverage to get a better quality product. 'So in that case you don't specifically need an ordinance. You're getting'at it through another. 1 Councilman Wing: Oh, but if Charlie James puts in a Wal -Mart across the street that doesn't use HRA money, we do want that one landscaped the same way we want II the Target across the street landscaped? Or better? Then we won't have an ordinance for it right? Paul Krauss: You don't have one that would produce that, right. 1 Councilman Wing: That's what I'm asking for. Councilman Workman: But Eden Prairie has an ordinance that dictates design, II right? I mean I get a little nervous relying on things that can blow over that a termite can eat to block the view of something that's still going to be there. II Paul Krauss: Eden Prairie has I think, I could be wrong, but I think they have a brick or better ordinance so it's been my experience that Eden Prairie that II gets a lot of buildings that are just as ugly, they're just clad in brick. Councilman Wing: But on the other hand the Abra plan at the Planning Commission talked about this classic, updated. It went on and on describing how wonderful II' going to be and then it states cement block and I almost want to start applauding. Well that's painted cement block. Wonderful. what a classic that's going to be. Something's wrong. I'm just saying we don't have the rules 1' and I'm concerned about it. That's all. Paul Krauss: I certainly will feedback this thing to the Highway 5 corridor task force. Same think like when we did the SWMP and we were told to accelerate II the wetland. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. And I think Dick has a good point there. 1 Councilman Wing: To move along tonight I'd just like to ask this be on a future agenda. Don if you would approve that for Council discussion. Preferably after the 1st of the year... II Mayor Chmiel: Alright, we'll get it on the next agenda for discussion. We'll move along to 7. 1 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: 1993 BUDGET. CITY MANAGER. 1 Don Ashworth: Each of our sessions moves us a little closer to adoption of a budget. Our hearing is set for December 9th. At that oint in would go to the e you do have 11. to complete what would be the general an d debt 32 III 1 1 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 2, 1992 Chairman Batzli called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ladd Conrad, Jeff Farmakes, Brian Batzli, Matt Ledvina, Steve Emmings, Joan Ahrens and Tim Erhart STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planner II; Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I; Dave Hempel, St. Engineering Technician; and Todd Gerhardt, Asst. City ' Manager PUBLIC HEARING: BEISNER, LTD. PROPOSES THE CONSTRUCTION OF GOODYEAR TIRE AND ABRA FACILITIES ON PROPERTY ZONED BH, BUSINESS HIGHWAY AND LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5. NORTH OF LAKE DRIVE EAST AND EAST OF THE CHANHASSEN EMISSION CONTROL STATION: A. REPLAT OF LOT 2. BLOCK 1, CHAN HAVEN PLAZA 3RD ADDITION INTO 3 LOTS. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO LOCATE AN AUTO SERVICE RELATED USE IN THE BH. BUSINESS HIGHWAY DISTRICT. C. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 5,397 SQUARE FOOT GOODYEAR TIRE BUILDING AND A 1 6.494 SQUARE FOOT ABRA FACILITY. Public Present: Name Address Thomas N. Thompson 1011 Butte Court Michael Koenig 8005 Cheyenne Avenue Tom Kotsonas 8001 Cheyenne Avenue Sharmin Al -Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Batzli: Did that correspondence, was that written after the current? Al -Jaff: Yes. Batzli: So they had seen these? Al -Jaff: No, they haven't seen these. Batzli: Okay. And another question. Your first condition of the site plan review talks about the applicant preparing revised architectural plans. 1 Al -Jaff: Correct. We hadn't seen the plans at the time when we wrote this report. We don't usually do this. Batzli: In view of the plans that we now have, that were hand delivered to us, would this condition change? Are you asking for something in addition to what was hand delivered to us? Al -Jaff: We are still asking for dormers on the Goodyear building. 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 2 Batzli: Otherwise staff is, finds that the current revised plans that were hand delivered are acceptable? That's staff's position, other than the dormers? Okay. If the applicant would like to make a presentation regarding any of the conditions or revised architectural plans, why don'' we do that right now. Al Beissner: Mr. Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. We have taken the time and effort we think to revise to reflect what came out of our meeting a couple of weeks ago and we .did meet and if there wa -a timing problem or a gap it's because we were under some pressure to try and get it done in time and I hope what we put together reflects what II meeting we had with Jeff was helpful in bringing forward. I have my architect here and I have some colored renderings of what you see there that will better reflect. We even have an elevation taken from or draw from a view from Highway 5. That we'll show with our berming and you'lll virtually not see any cars at all that are parked there. Where as you drive right now by the McDonald's and the Emission Control building, you can see the pavement and you can see cars that are parked there. My architect is here and I'd like to at least show you our color landscape plan, building plan and elevation plan if we could. Batzli: That'd be fine. 1 Al Beissner: We were also under the impression, and mistakenly so obviously that we could put signs on all four sides of the building. We` • didn't in our original drawing and we can modify that to what city requires. Batzli: In order for the camera to see these, they're going to have to be slid over more toward the podium. Al Beissner: I'll start out briefly explaining what Johnas did in here II with his detail. First one is just basically a colored site plan showing the existing lot that's not being developed and the two lots with our coverages. Green area to asphalt and to building area and as before, w have met the requirements of the city of Chanhassen. We've also in thi elevation, in this landscape plan, put in the additional trees that were requested last time that we were here. This is an elevation taken from 1 Highway 5 and this is what your view will be with the berming that we have proposed and that's in place. If you look closely you can see a couple of cars drawn in here. With the normal standard size American car, that's probably about how it will look from the freeway. If we get some bigger campers or things, you'll see at least the tops of them but you won't be seeing grills. You won't be seeing headlights. You won't be seeing anything like that with the proposed berming that we have. This was the same berming we had last time but wasn't illustrated as it is here. This is the proposed Goodyear elevation, and we do have in the drawing 2 weeks ago, we did have gables on the end of the roofs here. now have introduced the gables on the sides and have broken up a lot of it and I think put some of the detail into the Goodyear store that we didn't even discuss last time. And this is the Abra store. The one tha put a lot of time in and discussed last time and it doesn't look eve n close to what it was last time. And I'm again trying to interrupt what everybody wants architecturally is difficult sometimes and I don't know 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 3 still if this is all that we had in mind but we think it's gone a long way in accomplishing what we had to do as far as screening our rooftop unit. Creating something different than what you will see in any of the drawings that we've had. This is the elevation from the freeway and as you saw in the berm, the berm would come across here and you'd only probably see the top. This is the elevation that you would see from Lake Drive, if the trees were down. The trees aren't down so it's there. This is the elevation as you look from the Goodyear store and this is the back elevation that faces east. And like any good architect, when he thought we could have signs on all four sides, we put them on. We didn't proposed it the first time and we can take some off. So the architect is ' here, Johnas Blumental, if you want to ask him any questions about it, feel free. ' Johnas Blumental: I guess I can answer questions or explain what we are talking about. These are mansard roofs and they enclose equipment. These docks...spots, they are mansonary recesses to give a little more 1 interest to it. The idea is created to break up the roofline but obviously these are not downtown buildings. There is no pedestrian traffic walking by... As what you can see from Highway 5, and people that are out in the parking lot, so like I mean when I read the report about dormers for a Goodyear, instead of putting several small dormers, we are using one larger dormer and breaking up the roof line. That was the idea. And we are also breaking up this roofline on the end of the buildings so there is not that, pardon me for the expression, a barn look. And we are creating the peaks and we have a...because we have in this case, there is really attic effect on...we need some louvres for roof ventilation anyway so we are oversizing them I mean for the architectural effect. In a way this probably is probably very telling elevation of the entire site because this is what the public will be seeing. They will see the different roof lines and so on. And as Al was ' explaining about the cars, berms for me have an elevation shown here on a side. Usually the berms are 4 feet higher than a parking lot. And normal car is 4 -4 1/2 feet high so it might be that the car top, 6 inches ' or so might show. That is... Batzli: Is there something architecturally or some architectural reason why you don't want to put the dormers that the staff is requesting on the Goodyear building? Johnas Blumental: My understanding was, we talked about the dormers in a ' meeting...the report. And we made one big dormer instead of several smaller ones because the reason why I mean that that will be more noticeable from the highway than I mean several small things. Batzli: So you feel that breaking up the mass of the building has been accomplished by the one large dormer? Johnas Blumental: Right, yes. Batzli: Anyone else have any questions? 11 Ledvina: Was there any attempt to coordinate or propose the coordination of building materials between the two Goodyear and Abra buildings? 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 4 Johnas Blumental: Actually they are very similar in a way. I mean they are concrete block and moving some, I mean one is ivory color. One is II beige color and so everything is coordinated. They both have stripes. I mean obviously the Goodyear has different color stripe and things like that so we felt very' comfortable that they are two individual buildings II but they are coordinated obviously. It's not the same design. Ledvina: One of the comments that we had at our last session related to the possibility of having the same type and color of building materials." Maybe the same types of roofing materials and things like that. I don't know, was that discussed with Jeff at all? Farmakes: We were not defining materials at that point. We were talkin' about architectural issues of bringing light industrial to what we would consider I guess more of a retail type building where we had more 11 detailing. And we were not, there's only so much you can do in one meeting. I think that the next step maybe would be to consider to look closer at the materials that they're talking about. Johnas Blumental: My comment would be that the materials would be, should be complimentary but not necessarily the same and that's what we are trying to do. 1 Farmakes: The blue that you have issued on the Goodyear building. Is that indicative of the blue that you're proposing there? II Johnas Blumental: Not exactly I mean. This is our print. It's rather regular blue color that Goodyear uses but it's not exactly the final selection. I was just trying to illustrate that it is going to be blue.' Al Beissner: We will get color chips from Goodyear on what they proposed and what they use and what is their standard and this is about as close. When Johnas asked me, this is about as close as we could come we thought' to duplicating it. Farmakes: That's a colored stone? , Al Beissner: Yes...And the other thing that I think, to answer your question, we talked last time if we wanted the buildings all to be the II same or be in a shopping center kind of look and they're small enough here so they can be individual, almost like homes. You don't want the same home repeated but yet you don't want a very inexpensive rambler nex to a very expensive two story. So we did take that into consideration trying to do it but we didn't, it would be virtually impossible to try t get Abra and Goodyear to be identical because each company seeks for their own identity so we thought we did that. If you would like, I havell the prints that I had here 2 weeks ago that we didn't like. If you want to rehash that and refresh that? Batzli: No. 1 Al Beissner: No. Okay. 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 5 Farmakes: The color, the proposals that you're doing here for the exterior is far different than the samples that you brought in previously. Do you have samples here? Al Beissner: No, I don't have samples here. This, the Goodyear, in their specifications have what their talking about and they have different shades of what they have. We went to a lighter shade here to ' try to coordinate with the lighter shade that Abra has. They will give us their samples and say these are the, this is .the color that are in the ,specs that we can choose from but they're shades of that. ' Farmakes: The shingling that you're putting on the roof, is that a raised type shingling? The sample that you had was sort of a black, shingle. - Al Beissner: That was from their colored rendering that they supplied us that basically was their standard throughout the country. We don't have ' samples of the colors of the shingles that we'd like to use yet. Farmakes: But you anticipate that it's going to be close to what you have here in the color renderings? Al Beissner: Yes. We used the black one before. They had a blacker and a grayer and the blue tone. Now we're going into a beige and a lighter and we can do that. Johnas Blumental: The idea is that the roof would be a little darker than the building. Batzli: Okay, thank you. Have you had a chance to look at the staff report? Are there any conditions that you don't agree with at this point? Al Beissner: Well the only one I think we had a misinterpretation about the dormer thing and when Johnas came up with this big dormer as opposed to the small ones, I think when we talked about dormers last time we put the smaller ones in and that's. Farmakes: I think the issue of dormers that's not functional. It may let a little more light on the inside. It may create a little bit more problems for the construction. The issue of dormers again is if you look ' at the mass of the roof there, there's nothing much breaking it up. These large expanses of nothing being broke up are typical of more industrial type structures. It is more of an aesthetic thing than 1 functional. Al Beissner: I think when we put that up before we had one solid roof and then we were throwing in, you know small dormers here and there. Here Johnas thought it was better to go with bigger ones on each side than say 6 smaller ones. And again, I don't know. The dormers were, are false dormers. They don't provide any light inside the building. 11 They're just there for the aesthetics from the outside. Other than that I don't have. 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 6 Farmakes: I have one question on the Abra structure. You know have I 11 believe a garage door on both ends of the building, is that correct? Al Beissner: We've( always had a garage door on both ends of the building. Farmakes: You have? Al Beissner: Yes. Farmakes: Okay. That was my error then. , Al Beissner: This is, that's for the paint line that begins at one end and comes out the other end at the back of the building. If you have a site plan, that's always been there. Farmakes: And then that's the air conditioning vent? Al Beissner: That was the problem we had. It's right over here. It's II right over here. Farmakes: The north elevation then would be the side that's facing the ' highway? Al Beissner: Correct. And if you get back to, that will face the II highway. We still have the grove of trees that's between us and Lake Drive that someday will probably come down but they aren't coming down when we're developing this. i Batzli: Thank you. I'd like to give any member of the public here tonight an opportunity to speak. I would ask that if you can keep your comments fairly brief, that would be appreciated and also please step up t to the podium and give us your name and address prior to speaking for the record. Would anyone from the public like to address the Commission? Tom Kotsonas: Tom Kotsonas. I live at 8001 Cheyenne Avenue, Chanhassen' Estates. I'm not too sure how brief I'm going to be but I've got a statement to make. I spoke to you last time also when we talked 2 weeks ago and I wish to again street some of my concerns and point out that as, far as our neighborhood is concerned, that both of these businesses are an extremely negative and will have a negative impact on our residential neighborhood. And would like, if they are going to go through, to keep several things in consideration. The buildings, as been talked already, should be as pleasing and the roof line should be imaginative. Something noticing as they're driving through Chanhassen, looking at the new bank II building. I thought that was an imaginative design. The Country Suites the new Market Square mall. Also the roof line again, for such a large building, large site is rather well developed I thought. Another thing to keep track of is what's going to happen to trash and cars left overnight as we talked about before and the layout of the buildings, I don't understand and maybe they could point out where these things are What are we as a neighborhood going to be facing? Is all the traffic ill and out of the garage doors going to be facing our neighborhood or is it going to be facing the highway? That's something that should be 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 7 considered so that what we're looking at. Also the trees and the evergreens that are going to be planted, that they're strategically placed so that they do give us privacy and and our neighborhood privacy so that they're not all on the highway side. 0r'facing the emission test center which does nothing for us. So that when that third lot does get developed someday, which probably will be in the near future, that whatever goes there, we also are well protected from whatever goes there and whatever is developed. And keeping these things in mind then, please keep in mind that the site should be developed so that not only the owner but the neighborhood and the city of Chanhassen'can be proud of whatever goes in there and whoever enters into Chanhassen coming through the east ' end can look at that and say, well that is a well developed, well designed, commercial site. Okay, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak to you tonight. 1 Batzli: Thank you. I was actually pleased that you noticed some of the new roof lines. We put a lot of effort into trying to, thank you. Thank you for your comments. Would anyone else like to address the Commission? Mike Koenig: Hi, my name is Mike Koenig. . live at 8005 Cheyenne Avenue and I .guess a couple of my concerns is there seems to be a lot of talk about how we're going to put a berm up to block it from Highway 5 but what about on the other side where taxpayers are going to look out their back windows and see this all the time. This grove of trees that you're talking about, right now I can look out and see all the way through it. That's not going to help us at all. Another question, a sign on all 4 sides of the building. Is this the lighted sign that I'm going to look out my window at night and see lighted signs? That's not real appealing. My taxes, or real estate property values were raised last year and this going in is definitely going to not increase them. It's going to lower them and at least if it's going to be there, let's put some trees or something. Evergreens or something to block it from us. Thank you. Batzli: Let me ask you a question. From your window you say you can see through the trees. Is that because the leaves are down? Mike Koenig: Right. 1 Batzli: So you prefer to see something green all year? Mike Koenig: From the time that they're, in the fall when they drop their leaves until they're full in the summer again, you can see all the way through there. Obviously something's going to be going in there before long and they won't be there is another concern too. 1 Batzli: Thank you. Would anyone else like to address the commission? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? Emmings moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. 11 Batzli: Just by way of introduction, to_those of you who may not have attended a Planning Commission before, we're now going to ask each one of the commissioners for their comments on the plan. From time to time 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 8 r people do have questions right in the middle and we'll try to entertain those questions if we have time at the end of each commissioner's comments. Joan. Ahrens: The only issues we're discussing are the architectural issues? Batzli: Pardon me? Ahrens: The only issue we're discussing is the architectural issues? 1 "" Batzli: You can bring other issues up. Ahrens: Well I didn't attend the last...but I'm glad to see some progress here in the architectural plans. However, I don't think that they are creative or attractive...along Highway 5. I think that they, II I like the...I think you did a good job on those. Farmakes: They'll be copyrighted next week. Ahrens: I like the dormers along the roof. I think that's nice. I lik the brick on the front of the Goodyear building. We need buildings like this. Too many cities have buildings like this towards the entrance of their city and...and I think that we need to provide that...our city wil be proud of...As far as the trees, I think if these people think that there's not enough trees in there, there should be some more trees... r Batzli: Jeff. Farmakes: I share the concerns about the car care development center developing on it's own on that end of town. We've had a long discussio on this. I'm not going to repeat myself, about our ability to control the development there. I think that the applicant, in the meeting that we had, had made a start with this. They have taken some of the element" that we discussed. It's not the intention that the sketches that we worked on were to be done verbatim. It was simply to be used as a tool" to communicate what the city is looking for and the quality of architecture. Not necessarily that we have a comtemporary building or that we have a theme building throughout the city. Or that sort of thing. We weren't discussing style as much as issues of detail and quality of materials and things of that nature. Typically with car careil type structures you wind up with the very minimum it takes to do the job. That's the type of light industrial use that you often see with these II type of buildings. It is not something that I think would be in the interest of good planning to be putting next to both the entrnace to the city and single family residences. Very close by. I too would like to see landscaping, evergreen type to be a year round barrier continued ov on that east side of that property on the lot that's yet to be developed We need to also be thinking about how to incorporate the pylon signage with this new type of architecture that we're looking at. I'd like to see the detailing that they're working on, whatever it winds up being all the building to also work it's way into the pylon itself. The signage is an issue that has yet to be resolved. I think it's a major issue considering the single family residents close by. Actually in material that are being used on the buildings I think would also go a long way in 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 9 helping the discussion here. Perhaps at the next round here we could discuss those more in detail rather than a colored magic marker. I know obviously when a client•is looking at what they're going to buy, they see a sample. It would helpful I think to assess the quality of the type 1 of the building if we could see some samples. I think the Goodyear is perhaps more cohesive as a design than the Abra. I think the work on the roof needs to further modify. I like the different approach the client, the applicant has taken to the color. Again that they're attempting to be less obtrusive and relying on their signage to identify their position and not the gawdiness of the structure. I think it needs work, to sum it up but I do believe that we're no longer on step one, where we were at the last meeting. Emmings: I've got a couple of questions. When staff says they'd like to see more dormers on the Goodyear building, what have you got in mind there? All the dormers, do you want a bunch of them or one more? Al -Jaff: We want the roof broken up more. You still have a long roof line on the building. If we can break that up someway and the thought that comes to our mind is, dormers. I don't know if that helps. ' Emmings: Well you don't have a specific? Al -Jaff: No. We don't have a specific design. Emmings: In your condition number 4 on the site plan review you're talking about an additional 16 evergreens on the south side of Highway 5. Is that in addition to the landscape plan that we've seen? Al -Jaff: Those have been shown on this plan. The plans that were submitted to you on Friday reflect that, yes. So we no longer need condition number 4. Emmings: Okay. For my two cents worth on the way the buildings are ' looking. I agree that, I think the landscape plan looks pretty good. Perhaps there should be some more evergreens to the south but otherwise I think it's a pretty nice landscape plan that we've seen. I don't really have any reservations about the Goodyear building. I personally don't like the Abra building. I think the roof line is just too choppy. It just, the building itself is not something that I particularly like but I have mixed feelings about how far we go with what we like and don't like. I don't think it's an inappropriate use here in this location. Those are my comments. Ledvina: I generally share Jeff's sentiments as it relates to the architecture. I guess softening that a little bit. I think the applicant has gone quite a long way in this process and I'm sensitive to that too. He's spent a lot of time and money in developing many different concepts. I would have hoped that we could have zeroed more into what we really want at this point because there has been a lot of effort on both sides and I know that. But still I feel we do need some 11 more work with the building and if it's adding dormers, well that's fine. I generally agree with the landscaping plan. It seems to, from Highway 5 I think that will improve the view of the buildings and I'm not too sure 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 10 i about the south side of the site. There are quite a few plantings there but I don't know if there would need to be some more evergreens in there" I don't know how staff would feel about that. I really don't see evergreens. Mostly honeysuckles and things like that. About the lighting issue, is there a possibility that they could have lighted sign on that south side of the building? Al -Jaff: They're entitlted to one but it's a conditional use permit. I you want to have non - illuminated signage to the south, illuminated to th north, I think you have the option to do so. You can make it a conditio of approval. Emmings: Can you also limit, if there are lighted signs, can you limit 1 the time that the lighted signs are on? Al -Jaff: It's a conditional use permit, so yeah. 1 Ledvina: That might be more appropriate. Their working hours. And I don't know about that. I think that was it in terms of the site plan. II did have one thing on the conditional use permit. I guess in the staff report we talked a little bit about the pollution and that ought to be associated with this development. And I think that the discussion that we had at the last session related to cars coming in and out of the facility. The pollution as it relates to more traffic. I guess I feel that that is really pretty much out of the control of the proposers here II in that they can't obviously keep cars from coming in and out. That's what they want. I guess your condition number 7, pollution levels shall meet standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. I just, there are literally thousands of pollution levels and I don't think it's ll applicable. I think they'll do what they have to in terms of their sanitary discharge and I guess I would just propose that we would delete that condition. I don't think it's useful. That's it. Batzli: Thank you Matt. Ladd. Conrad: I think that the applicant has made some strides and I'm comfortable with some of it. Most of the issues that were brought up thil last time. I hear the neighborhood concerns and I think if I were them I'd still be concerned as to how this looks and their impact. Overall III think it's a good site plan. And overall I think it's, based on the zoning, it's appropriate. I don't have a problem with the Goodyear. Whether it's the current design or whether it's one with more dormers. The current design is fine. I really don't like Abra. Batzli The roof line? Conrad: Yeah. The roof. Abra's welcome here but the roof line is just" not, it's not there yet. I'm real uncomfortable with that. I think the north /south elevations are okay. The east /west is just choppy and the mansard enclosures of the mechanicals are not good. So real briefly that's where, I think some good strides have been made and again, as we're playing around with architecture, we're doing a lousy job folks. We don't have standards to apply. Remember, we took Target. They had all 330 foot expanse and we put one dormer. We put one big block in the i 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 11 { middle of it, okay. So let's be kind of realistic what we're doing. We've got a building that's a whole lot smaller here so. It doesn't mean we shouldn't have our standards. It is a gateway. It is the way people come into Chanhassen but we don't have those architectural standards that 11 are real solid that we can apply in every situation here and I get uncomfortable. I don't want 7 of us designing this building. However, I don't like Abra. I just don't like how that looks. It's got to change and I don't think I'm asking for a great deal. I think I'm talking about that roof line. There's just something wrong with it. - Batzli: So Ladd, before we move on to Tim, what would you propose we do with Abra? I mean do you want to see one more shot at it here? Conrad: I really don't. To tell you the truth, I feel real uncomfortable talking architecture. Real uncomfortable. The Planning Commission shouldn't be doing that. We should have some standards out there that guide. That guide the developers and the architects and then we just make sure they follow the standards. We don't. We do have some power here simply because we do have some conditional use. This is an area that we perceive to be an entrance to Chanhassen so I think we have some power that can make the developer do some things that we like. But you know, again I just don't want, I want staff to do that and I prefer to have it go to City Council because they're going to see 5 new perspectives once it gets there. But it's not going to go up there with, the Abra building's not going up there with my approval. Batzli: Thank you. Tim. Erhart: Well looking at the landscape plan, I think there's a lot of trees on the north side of this site with all the evergreens. It's just a matter of years and you're not going to be able to see these buildings from Highway 5 at all. In 10 years so I'm not asking anybody to take them out but I'd say the landscaping site is pretty good in that area. The south side we don't know what's going to go in there ultimately. I'm surprised. I guess I thought at the last meeting I thought we had an understanding with the developer that they were going to make the roof lines like we wanted them and Jeff raised his hand to go tell them what we wanted. And I think, this is what you did Jeff? Is this your work? ' Farmakes: Yes. Erhart: Yeah. I think Jeff did a great job and then they came back with something different so I'm confused because we spent quite a bit of time listening to the developer tell us that they've gone back and forth at the request of staff and that it was staff leading them around the loop and all this and then we bought that. So then we gave them a chance to show them what we wanted and they come back with something different. So now I don't understand anymore. But I agree with everything that's been said pretty much here. Abra is just awful. We've got partial flat roofs and partial pitched roofs and it looks like there wasn't any planning into it at all so. The Goodyear building, I'd say it's marginal. At least it has a pitched roof over the whole thing. Certainly it could be done with a little more pleasing to the eye. I think Ladd you hit it on the nose. We pass this up to Council tonight and let them take a hack at 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 12 it. Probably the best thing to do. I think the site plan's pretty good. The conditions seem to make sense. I hope it makes the motion to pass on with our comments. Batzli: Does it make sense to you Tim to require that they put evergreens in there which will really be interim screening until the southern piece develops? You've indicated that the northern side looked good and would you require them to put a couple more evergreens in on the south side? 1 Erhart: When all these trees, essentially this area here is going to remain in until it's developed? 1 Batzli: Right. Erhart: Yeah. Well in the first place, I don't think so. They've gone 1 beyond the requirements already on this. Extensively beyond the requirements. 1 guess without studying it anymore, my reaction would be, I think they've done a pretty good job. 1 Al -Jaff: The...landscaping could be required when site 3 develops. Because right now you do have existing trees that will provide some screening. If that would help. Batzli: You think we should make that a condition? Currently or just when it develops? 1 Al -Jaff: When it develops. When site 3 develops. Then we could require that additional landscaping. Because right now they are providing some II landscaping around the drainage pond. Batzli: Right. But those are hackberries and things like that. They'd kind of low. Al -Jaff: Yes they are. Batzli: Okay. My comments are more of the same. I don't mind the Abra 1 building north and south elevation. In fact, I think there's almost a repetition of the shed dormer almost effect from the background to II bringing it in the foreground in the Goodyear building but then I start designing their architecture for them and I didn't want to do that either. The side elevations do, we've added depth to the, cast time we talked about how it looked like a set from an old western when you went II to the side and it's just a piece there. We've added depth. We've broken up the middle. We've added some interesting elements but I think, from what you've heard from the commission, there's still a problem that'll looking at it it either looks contrived or choppy or something doesn't jell. I think, obviously I'm not going to tell you how to build buildings but if there's a certain number of people up here and all of them kind of look at it and kind of go, I don't know. I think you want to be pleasing to your customers and be visible and want to construct a good building. So with those assumptions, I'm hoping that they'll try to take one more shot at it as it goes before City Council because I think II they may have somewhat the same reaction. I would have liked to have 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 13 seen a couple of evergreens shifted to the south. But just to break up that southern side because we don't know when that particular parcel will be developed so I would prefer not to wait with that. I would ask that whoever makes the motion at least consider shifting some of the trees to the back. I think we've done a real good job on the north and in fact I agree with Tim. I think you've got a lot of evergreens and I think we could move a couple of them to the south side. With that I'll entertain 11 any motion on the site plan review. Or should we do subdivision first? It doesn't matter. Conrad: Okay, I move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #92 -3 as shown on the site plan dated September 21, 1992 subject to the following conditions. With the conditions as per the staff report except the following changes. Condition 1, that the applicant present a revised building elevation for the Abra building concentrating on fixing the choppy roof line. The second part of condition 1 is to consider adding more dormers to the Goodyear building and be prepared justify it's current design to the City Council. Changing condition 4. To eliminate condition 4 as it stands in the staff report but to recommend the shifting of an appropriate number of evergreens to the south side of the project to do, per staff recommendation, to help screen from the neighborhood. That's all. Emmings: I'll second the motion. Batzli: Discussion. Emmings: I'd like to have, with regard to the sign. Condition number 3 Ladd. I assume that your motion, because they still have to obtain a sign permit, you're not, your motion doesn't in any way approve the signs as they appear on the plans that we have in front of us? Conrad: No it doesn't. Emmings: Just so that understanding is clear. Batzli: Well actually the plans that Ladd included in his motion don't have all the signs on it. I mean if we'd really would probably like to 11 include these new plans in the motion. Emmings: Okay, I assumed that we were talking about the new plans. 11 Batzli: Have these been received? Date stamped received by the city? No. 1 Ledvina: These are dated November 25th. Emmings: So are the plans that we're approving the ones that we all got at home that are dated September 20. Ledvina: Two of them are September 29th... Batzli: Well, Ladd if you'll reflect your motion to say something folksy like the plans we're looking at tonight, I'm sure that by the time it 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 14 gets to City Council. Conrad: Yeah, that kind of sounds like me too doesn't it Brian? Yeah, 11 the plans I see in front of me. Boy that's just so, I don't even want to do that. ' Al -Jaff: We received those plans on the 30th. The revised plans. Can we change the date on the site plan to November 30, 1992? Emmings: Instead of September 21? Al -Jaff: Please. 1 Conrad: Yeah. I would change my motion to reflect the site plan dated November 30, 1992. - Emmings: And then? Conrad: I don't need to change 3 Steve. , Emmings: No. I don't think so as long as the record's clear that you're not, and by my second, I'm not approving in any way any of the signs thall appear on these plans. They're going to have to come back and get those approved. Al -Jaff: Do you want to make a recommendation on the illumination of thl signage facing? Conrad: Do we do that here or do we do that in the conditional use permit? I thought that's where we'd put the condition on. Batzli: Any more discussion? ' Ahrens: Ladd, on number 4, did you just change the first sentence? Was that what you were changing? ' Conrad: Number 4 I took entirely out Joan except to move certain of the trees, and I don't know how many, to the south side. So that condition no longer applies based on the plans that we have. They have done what II this motion was to, made them do.- It's already on the plans so that, 4 II does riot exist except to shift some of what they've put on the current plans to the south side. 1 Ahrens: Including the part about the detailed... Aanenson: That's city ordinance. That's a requirement anyway so they'd going to have to do it. Ahrens: Okay. So why was this included in there? 1 Emmings: That would be before they saw these new plans. The new plans reflect some of those things I think. I'm not entirely, even though I seconded the motion and I'm going to vote for it, I have to say that I'm � not entirely comfortable taking away trees from the Highway 5 side and Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 15 moving them back there. I'd rather see them add trees. If we think they've done a good job on Highway 5, why wreck that to give them a little bit on the south.side. • Ahrens: I agree. Emmings: So I would leave the north side alone and I'd rather see the, I would be willing to just leave the south side alone for now until it's developed and make sure we do a good job of landscaping once we know what's going in there. But if the feeling is that there should be some additional trees back there, then those should be in addition to the Highway side. Ahrens: I agree. I mean I can't think of one plan or one development in the city that we've ever over landscaped. It may have looked great on the plan. Emmings: Well a good example is the. Conrad: We took of the median down main street I think. 11 Emmings: Yeah but a good example is the Valvoline, the quick oil change you know. We saw those plans. You know, you couldn't see that building unless you got in a helicopter because it was hidden in a forest of trees. You look at it now and it's up there and you wonder where all that landscaping went you know, and maybe it will be there in 10 years but somehow I don't think so. Conrad: Okay. Batzli: Amend your motion Ladd. Conrad: Yeah, I'm going to withdraw my change to condition number 4. See if you can decide whether you, but my motion or my change would now reflec the following. That the, 4 is worded is entirely deleted but that I'd request that staff review the need for additional screening on the south side with the applicant. Emmings: Yeah... Batzli: Is there any other discussion? Conrad moved, Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan Review #92 -3 as shown on the plans received November 30, 1992 and subject to the following conditions: ' 1. That the applicant present a revised building elevation for the Abra building concentrating on fixing the choppy roof line. Request that the applicant consider adding more dormers to the Goodyear building and be prepared justify it's current design to the City Council. 2. The applicant must revise plans to include trash screening for the Abra site with a gate facing east and a second for Goodyear with a 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 16 11 gate facing west. Plans must be submitted for staff review prior to City Council meeting. 1 3. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on the site. Provide a detailed sign for staff review prior to the City Council meeting. The monument sign may not exceed 12 feet in height. Sign covenants are to be submitted outlining the use and limit of one common sign and allowances for its use by the remaining undeveloped lot. 1 4. Staff review the need for additional screening on the south side with the applicant. The applicant shall also provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the II required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city II and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 6. The applicant shall provide a flammable waste separator as required II by Building Code. 7. Provide a complete, final set of civil engineering documentation to II staff for review and approval. 8. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal memorandum dated 11 October 8, 1992. 9. The applicant shall post No Parking -Fire Lane" signs along the sou line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Signs shall be placed at 100 foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. 10. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city II standards shall be submitted. 11. The applicant shall pay $7,580. into the Surface Water Management II Program fund for water quality treatment downstream of the site. 12. Compliance with conditions of Subdivision #90 -17 and Conditional Use Permit #92 -2. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Batzli: Is there a motion on the subdivision? Emmings: I'll move the Planning Commission recommend approval of preliminary plat for Subdivision #90 -17 for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Additio' as shown on the plan dated September 21, 1992 with the conditions in the staff report. Batzli: Is there a second? Ahrens: Second. 1 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 17 Batzli: Discussion. No discussion. Emmings moved, Ahrens seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #90 -17 for Chan Haven 1 Plaza 4th Addition as shown on the plans dated September 21, 1992, with the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits are requested. -2. Provide the following easements: a. A standard 5 foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 1. b. Drainage easement located over the drainage pond. c. A drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. 3. Enter into a development agreement acceptable to the city. 4. A driveway or cross - access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. 5. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the Watershed District, Health Department, etc. 6. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze -up, special modifications to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 11 8. Outlot A shall be included with the repiatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The outlot shall be replatted /combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre /feet of runoff below the 927.0' contour line. 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type 1) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type 1 silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. 11 11. The applicant shall reimburse the city for all engineering consultant fees associated with the storm water study. 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 18 12. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review #92 -3 and Conditional Use Permit #92 -2. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Batzli: Finally the conditional use permit. ' Ledvina: I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit *92-2 subject to the staff conditions with the II deletion of item 7 and the creation of a new item number 7 which would read, if illumination is used in signage on the south side of the two buildings, that illumination would be limited to the operational hours oll the businesses. Batzli: Is there a second? Conrad: I second. Emmings: When it says they have to come in for a sign permit. Who does" that in the city? Al -Jaff: I do. Emmings: Okay. And is a sign permit a conditional use permit? Is it a type of permit where you can impose restrictions on things like ( illumination? Al -Jaff: Whatever you approve now is going to be my guideline to approve that sign permit. 1 Emmings: Well that and the sign ordinance. Al -Jaff: Correct. 1 Batzli: We need to add something. Jeff requested that we tie it in somehow with the architecture of the building, at least the pylon. We II kind of skipped over that thought in the first two motions. Is that something that's appropriate here? AI -Jaff: Or in the site plan. 11 Farmakes: As a condition? I thought we weren't approving the signage a shown. Batzli: We aren't but if you don't impose a condition now, they would merely have to comply with the sign ordinance. They wouldn't have to till it in architecturally. Farmakes: Yeah, I think that's what we do with Market Square. We ask 1 them to do the same thing. I don't see why that's any different. Batzli: We can't I don't think. Move to amend? Would you like to move to amend the motion? 1 • 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 2, 1992 - Page 19 Farmakes: I thought the motion was made already. Batzli: Yeah, but you can move to amend it. We'll vote on your amendment then. j Farmakes: I'll move to amend it. Batzli: To include architectural equivalent standards on the pylon? Farmakes: That would be with the signage design. When they do it. Batzli: Is there a second? Ledvina: Second. Batzli: Okay, any discussion on the amendment? Emmings: I want to be clear on what it is. Because I'm not. What you want to do is see some kind of architectural compatability between the sign and the buildings. ' Farmakes: To the monument sign. Emmings: Now how do you define that? Al -Jaff: You can make a condition to see the signage before it goes up. Farmakes: Yeah, I thought that's what we were doing. Al -Jaff: So you can review the signage separately. I mean you pass this but we'll bring the signage in front of you. Batzli: Okay. Does our motion accomplish that? No. Emmings: We're getting real tangled up here aren't we? 11 Aanenson: You can either spell out the standards or ask to see it again. That's really your two options. Ledvina: Well, why don't I just, I'll amend my motion to add an 8th condition which would say that the Planning Commission shall review the actual signage for this project. Batzli: Okay, is there a second to that? ' Farmakes: Second. Batzli: Okay, let's vote on Jeff's original amendment. Farmakes moved, Ledvina seconded an amendment to the motion to include a condition that would require architectural standard equivalents to the signage designs. Farmakes, Ledvina and Ahrens voted in favor. Conrad, Erhart, Emmings and Batzli voted in opposition. The amendment failed by a vote of 4 to 3. 1 CITYOF 1411 i ii ‘,.14,...... : : ..,..... 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1 - 1 , MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission 1 FROM: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I DATE: November 23, 1992 SUBJ: Beisner Ltd. /Chanhassen Holding Company; Property Located South of Hwy. 5, 1 North of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and East of Emission Control Testing Station: 'fii 1 1) Site Plan Review 92-3 for Goodyear, 5,397 Square Feet and Abra Auto Service Center, 6,494 Feet 1 2) Preliminary Plat 90-71 to Subdivide 3.1634 Acres into 3 lots with an area of 0.939 Acres, 0.778 Acres, and 1.445 Acres 1 3) Conditional Use Permit 92 -2 to Allow an Auto Service Facility in the BH District. Adf w 1 On November 18, 1992, the Planning Commission review4 the site plan and conditional use 1 permit requests for the development of an Abra Auto Body Repair and a Goodyear Auto Service facility. The Planning Commission tabled action on the proposal as there were a number of issues related to architectural design raised by the Planning Commission and residents of Chanhassen Estates Subdivision that needed to be resolved before a vote could be taken. The applicant was directed to meet with staff and Planning Commissioner Jeff Farmakes to resolve I those issues of concern. Issue: 1 Architectural standards had to be revised because it is located on Highway 5 and is the entrance into Chanhassen. Also the design had to be sensitive to the Chanhassen Estates 1 neighborhood. 1 wir t4 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 1 Abra/Goodyear Proposal December 2, 1992 111 Page 2 Solution: On November 23, 1992, staff and Commissioner Jeff Farmakes met with the applicants, the developer, and their architect. Commissioner Farmakes prepared three sketches, one of Abra and two of Goodyear (Attachment #1). The intent of these sketches were to give the applicants some guidance and show them how the roof elements could be revised to achieve higher architectural standards. Staff wanted to review the revised plans prior to writing the staff report update and sending it to the Planning Commission, however, this would have meant waiting until the January 6, 1993, meeting. The applicants are facing deadlines on the purchase of the property and the development of the facilities. They 1 requested that staff provide the report update for Planning Commission review prior to seeing the revised plans and they will hand deliver them on Friday, November 27, 1992, to all the Planning Commissioners. Staff agreed to this arrangement with the condition 1 that if the revised plans were not satisfactory, the item will be pulled off the December 2, 1992, agenda. On November 24, 1992, staff met with the applicant's architect to review some revisions made to the buildings elevations. Staff informed the architect that there was a significant improvement in the design. Work will continue on the design over the next few days. The proposed Goodyear design should incorporate dormers in its roof line. Other features were discussed such as shifting the roof line as shown in the rendering submitted by Commissioner Farmakes. The proposed Abra design should include a roof system that would incorporate pitched 1 roof sections and screen all the roof top equipment. Issue: 1 Noise level from the facilities and how they would affect the residential neighborhood to the south of the proposed facilities. Solution: The following condition has been incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit conditions of approval "Noise level shall not exceed OSHA requirements." State noise guidelines shall be met at property line. Doors will be kept closed or no more than a 12" opening as outlined by Abra representative. Issue: Additional landscaping as requested in the staff report. Solution: 1 1 Abra/Goodyear Proposal 1 December 2, 1992 Page 3 1 The following condition has been incorporated into the Site Plan Review conditions of approval, "The applicant shall provide an additional 16 evergreens along the south side of Highway 5 to provide better screening of the parking area. The retention pond parameters shall be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site shall be provided with four additional evergreens." Issue: Outdoor storage of tires and cars on both sites. 1 Solution: 1 The following conditions has been incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit conditions of approval, "No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored overnight on ' • the Goodyear and Abra sites" and "No outdoor storage shall be permitted at either site." Issue: 1 Pollution level from both sites. Solution: I The following condition has been incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit conditions 1 of approval, "Pollution level shall meet standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency." i STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based upon the forgoing, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: i I. SITE PLAN REVIEW "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #92 -3 as shown on the 1 site plan dated September 21, 1992, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall prepare revised architectural plans incorporating the concerns raised by the Planning Commission and staff and be more reflective of high quality design of the site location on Highway 5 and adjacent Central Business District and residential uses I found in the area. 1 1 1 1 Abra/Goodyear Proposal December 2, 1992 Page 4 2. The applicant must revise plans to include trash screening for the Abra site with a gate facing east and a second for Goodyear with a gate facing west. Plans must be submitted for staff review prior to City Council meeting. 3. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Provide a detailed sign plan for staff review prior to the City Council meeting. The monument sign may not exceed 12 feet in height. Sign covenants are to be submitted outlining the use and limit of one common sign and allowances for its use by the remaining undeveloped lot. 4. The applicant shall provide an additional 16 evergreens along the south side of Highway 5 to provide better screening of the parking area. The retention pond parameters shall be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site shall be provided with four additional evergreens. The applicant shall also provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. 6. The applicant shall provide a flammable waste separator as required by Building Code. 1 7. Provide a complete, fmal set of civil engineering documentation to staff for review and approval. 1 8. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal memorandum dated October 8, 1992. 1 9. The applicant shall post "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Signs shall be placed at 100 -foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. 10. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 11. The applicant shall pay $7,580 into the Surface Water Management Program fund for water quality treatment downstream of the site. 12. Compliance with conditions of Subdivision #90-17 and Conditional Use Permit #92 -2." 1 1 1 1 Abra/Goodyear Proposal 1 December 2, 1992 Page 5 1 II. SUBDIVISION "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #90 -17 for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition as shown on plat dated September 21, 1992, with the following conditions: 1 , 1. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits are requested. 2. Provide the following easements: a. A standard 5 -foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. b. Drainage easement located over the drainage pond. 1 c. A drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. 3. Enter into a development agreement acceptable to the city. 4. - A driveway or cross- access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary 5. Th P Y Pe rmits from the Watershed District, Health Department, etc. 6. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze -up, special modifications to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The 1 outlot shall be replatted/combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre /feet -of runoff below the 927.0' contour line. 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. 1� 1 1 Abra/Goodyear Proposal December 2, 1992 I Page 6 11. The applicant shall reimburse the city for all engineering consultant fees associated with I the storm water study. 12. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review #92 -3 and Conditional Use P I Permit #92 -2." III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1 "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit #92 -2 subject to the following conditions: 1 1. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review #92 -3 and Subdivision #90- 17. 1 2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site. I 3. No parking or stacking is allowed in fire lanes, drive aisles, access drives or public rights - of -way. 1 4. No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored overnight on the Goodyear and Abra sites. 1 5. No outdoor storage shall be permitted at either site. 6. Noise level shall not exceed OSHA requirements or Minnesota Pollution Control agency 1 guidelines at the property line. 7. Pollution level shall meet standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency." I ATTACHMENTS I 1. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 18, 1992. I 2. Staff report dated November 18, 1992. 3. Elevations prepared by Commissioner Jeff Fannakes. 1 1 1 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 3 ' Erhart moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Preliminary Plat #91 -1 as shown on the plans dated October 19, 1992 with the following conditions: 1. Lot 4, Block 1 shall be platted as Outlot A. 2. Right -of -way shall be dedicated along the northerly 60' and over the ' westerly 10' of the northerly 65.89' of Lot 3, Block 1. 3. Cash in lieu of parkland dedication shall be required at the time of building permit issuance. 4. The plat name of Gateway First Additional shall be changed. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ' PUBLIC HEARING: BEISSNER, LTD. PROPOSES THE CONSTRUCTION OF GOODYEAR TIRE AND ABRA FACILITIES ON PROPERTY ZONED BH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS AND LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5, NORTH OF LAKE DRIVE EAST AND EAST OF THE CHANHASSEN EMISSION CONTROL STATION: Public Present: ' Name Address Al Beissner 6100 Summit Dr, Brooklyn Center 55430 Randy MacPherson Abra Tom Kotsonas 8001 Cheyenne Avenue Gerard & Lindsay Amedeo 8007 Cheyenne Avenue Sharmin Al -7aff presented the staff report on this time. Chairman Batzli called the public hearing to order. Al Beissner: I'm Al Beissner and I'm the applicant and real estate developer. We have entered into a purchase agreement to buy the 2 acres of land and develop the Abra and Goodyear site as outlined. We've worked probably 4 or 5 months with the city through maybe several site plans to develop what we thought was compatible. This presented a little more of a challenge than we initially thought because we're actually facing 2 front doors. Highway 5 is a front door and Lake Drive is a front door. And it was difficult to determine which should be the front so in essence what ' you see on the plans that we've submitted, are basically we have metal facia on Highway 5 and we have metal facia on Lake Drive. And we've tried to treat one as the other one because we didn't know which would be the front door. If it's a neighborhood, they think Lake Drive is a front door. If it's the City of Chanhassen, they think Highway 5 is a front door so we were very conscience of our development of that. A couple of things that I'd like to point out about the efforts that we put forth here is that, the two buildings as they are proposed, really is a lot less building coverage for the land than what it is zoned for. That is Goodyear wanted double the parking requirements and that required more 11 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 4 IF land obviously. More green area so we have about 11,000 square foot of building on 86,000 square feet of land. If we were to develop it to it' max, it would have had much more coverage. We've also been sensitive. Your ordinance requires some guidelines for landscaping. Minimum dollar amounts. We have, our bids have come in and our landscaping cost will bil more than double what your standards are for the property so we've taken that effort. We haven't completed the complete development of the pond yet but we will be landscaping that. We don't have a plan for that. Generally speaking we are in agreement with the staff report and can comply without objection to most everything in it with a couple exceptions. The dormers that were requested by staff. Goodyear hasn't approved dormers yet on their gabled roof and they don't have it in thei plans. In dealing with Goodyear, they have like 8 sets of standard plan that they think meet all the standards and we have sent to Akron for a request for the dormers to sort of offset the gabled roof that we have oil it and we have not heard back yet from them. Akron, Ohio and corporate • Goodyear is apparently substantial so it may be a while before we hear on that. When we developed the rooflines, and this seemed to be a very sensitive issue, we had the Abra standard roof plan, and Randy MacPherson, president of Abra is here and would like to address you also. Abra had their standard building that they've developed kind of like Goodyear had to develop their standard building. Fortunately for us I II guess, Goodyear has a gabled roof on this particular building and not a flat roof. The standard Abra roofline and standard Abra building did not meet with the staff's acceptance when we walked in the door. We've work through I think 4 or 5 different plans and elevations for it. And in fa we've probably added a good 4% or 5% more to the cost with the two front doors if you will. By putting awnings on both Lake Drive and on Highway 5. There was a strong sentiment about having a pitched roof or a gabled roof or something other than a flat roof on the Abra store and we though we came to a reasonable compromise. The President of Abra would like to address it. They're trying to develop their own standard roof line and I this design that we came up with doesn't meet quite their standards yet and we're still talking to them about it. Otherwise I think everything in the staff report is acceptable and fine with us. We've spent,a .lot of effort and time trying to meet all of the requirements and we think we'v done a good job of it and we were sensitive to the landscaping. We were sensitive to the coverage. We were sensitive to the two front doors and we hope that we can continue on. There will be, we will be putting in II substantially more trees than what we ever anticipated and that's satisfactory with us. So I don't, different Planning Commissions function differently. I don't know what you want for a report or want me to say I but that's kind of what we went through. And I think the staff report adequately reflects the number of meetings we have had and the changes that we have gone through on trying to meet your requirements. Batzli: We may have questions for you later. What I think we needed a sense of was whether you had seen the staff report and agreed with those conditions. 5o you've answered that. 1 Al Beissner: Right. The only other thing in the staff report, we were originally scheduled I think for October 14th and then we didn't have a quorum. Then we were scheduled for 2 weeks later and that didn't work a so the condition number 11 is a condition that wasn't in the October 14th 11 Planning Commission Meeting 11 November 18, 1992 - Page 5 ' one. And what that is, it's an $8,700.00 charge for water retention downstream. When Schoell- Madsen, our engineers designed this, they though that the water retention downstream was free and so they designed it that way. The sellers of the land aren't so sure that they wouldn't rather 1 store it all on the site as opposed to downstream and we would like to meet again with staff to determine whether or not we can deepen the pond and berm it more so we don't have to pay for downstream retention or if 1 they would rather pay for it and keep the pond as it is. So that's the only condition that we are up in the air on. At the October 14th meeting we didn't have a number. Didn't know what it was coming out. Would this be the appropriate time for? Batzli: Yes. Al Beissner: Okay. I have brought, not good plans but plans. The first plan we had for the Abra store. The second one. The third one and the one we wanted and then the one we ended up with so I'll let Randy 1 MacPherson address you. Batzli: Okay, thank you. 1 Randy MacPherson: Thank you Mr. Chairman, Commission members. My name is Randy MacPherson. I'm the President of Abra Auto Body and Glass. First of all I want to assure you that we share your same concerns about the ' appearance and the quality of our operation. This facility will be one of our national prototypes. It will be our national role model. We have people flying in from as far away as Europe to view our facilities so the 1 apperance of this facility we share your same concerns. And one of the things we want to do is make sure that we present ourselves in a very professional manner and that we become a very good neighbor in the community. I think you have one picture which is actually a facility that 1 we did several years ago but we have done another facility similar to that and I wanted to show you the difference. I think you have this picture here and it shows a...on the roof and we have since, I'd like to give you 1 another picture which actually shows a different, we extended -a r - oiled masard up on the roof as well. And one of my concerns with this pinnacle and I'll pass this out to you, is that actually having this false roof we think actually attracts more attention to it. And it's maybe a matter of taste but we have worked very hard and diligently to try to create something that's not obtrusive or not going to stick out or not going to draw attention to it. And so what we would like to propose, we are happy with the city and with the conditions. We're just asking that you would allow us to build a building that's more consistent with the appearance and with the quality of image that we're trying to accomplish. So if you 1 can pass that picture around and I didn't bring more. I probably should have but anyway, we share the same concern and we're just asking. This is national role model for us. A national prototype. Minneapolis is our headquarters and we're expanding all over the country now and it's very important that we have a uniformity consistency. It's something that every city will be happy with so we share you concerns and want to be willing partners with you in creating a facility that everyone will be happy with. IF Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 6 Batzli: Very good, thank you. This is a public hearing. I'd like to open it up to the public. If anyone would like to address the Commissio I ask that they step up the microphone and give their name and address for the record prior to addressing the Commission. ' Tom Kotsonas: My name is Tom Kotsonas and I live at 8001 Cheyenne in Chanhassen Estates. I also have some pictures to pass around. The I pictures that I'm presenting are of current establishments around the western suburbs and all of these, after looking at these, I have some -grave concerns, at least what exists at the present time with Goodyear and Abra facilities. Questions such as what happens to the automobiles. Al you can see in the pictures, when they circulate the storage of automobiles on the outside, a rather unsightly view in all those cases. Most of those pictures were taken this weekend early in the morning so those cars are there and they're not stored away at night. They're ther There are a number of concerns besides that that I have on this development. To go through them in a sort of a manner here. One, is th increased traffic that this site is going to bring to our neighborhood. Or line our neighborhood. Noise. These types of businesses bring a gre deal of noise with them. Air and the auto pollution was already talked about. The trash and all of these businesses except one had outdoor trait sitting front and back. Storage overnight. And these would be somethin that we're worried about. Obviously loss of privacy in addition to what we already have. The general destruction of the trees in that neighborhood that are there. Which is something in a natural environmenil which we'd much prefer to stay. That negative impact on the mini -park. To have those businesses right there. The amount of traffic going by. I can't imagine many couples or many people wanting their kids to go down.II Young children to be playing there when that traffic, that increased traffic is there. There are some pictures of the entryway into Chanhassen and I don't see how this is going to enhance the entryway into Chanhasse on the east side. That I read in the paper and it seems like the City Council and the Chamber and this group and others are very concerned wit . Nothing seems to be being done about it. There's a lot of talk but everytime something goes in, it doesn't seem to be something to help out in that nature. And the other things we're worried about of course are outdoor signs. Flags. All of these places have banners flying. Sale signs. All these types of things that again, make it very difficult and make it very unsightly for our neighborhood. And the other things that II would like you to consider is, how is this business compatible to the neighborhood. I think we as residents and long term residents. Myself I've been there over 10 years, and some of the other people in that neighborhood have been there as many as 20. We feel that we deserve als to be considered in this. It seems that every time a business comes alo they have the top spot or top billing or however you want to say it and then we get sympathy and then after the sympathy, the vote is taken and couple trees are put up and away we go. And also the feeling in the neighborhood is that there's a big push to develop this and whatever comes, let's get it in there. Let's get this plot of land developed and then we'll be done with it and we'll be onto something else. We feel that we're entitled to be recognized and entitled to be considered in what go in and what kind of businesses. Automobile repair facilities do make noise. They are unsightly, and with the other things that go with them. Thank you very much. ., Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 7 ' Batzli: Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to address the Commission? ' Lindsay Amedeo: I'm Lindsay Amedeo, 8007 Cheyenne. Chanhassen Estates also. Of course, anything in the automotive industry is not the business of choice to back up a residential neighborhood but I also understand that ' the zoning for that area allows for this type of business and we understand that the city needs the funds. And so the remaining question for me is, like Tom said, what will be done to reduce the visual and the -audio disturbance that is brought by this type of a business? They are unsightly. This type of a business is extremely noisey and that's my primary concern. Although to also repeat what Tom said, the natural visual barrier of the evergreens that are behind, inbetween my property ' and the proposed site, is dying out and there is no visual obstruction there right now. So I'm real curious to know what the plans are to decrease the visual and sound problems that this type of business will bring. Batzli: Thank you. Would anyone else like to address the Commission? I apologize, we took some of your pictures apart and there was glue on them. Tom Kotsonas: That's okay... Randy MacPherson: Mr. Chairman, Commission members, I don't know what pictures are being circulated but we share the same concerns as the residents do. In fact many of our good customers live very close to us. ' We have 16 locations in the metropolitan area. Many of these are by, some of them right next to restaurants. In Coon Rapids we have residential homes in less than 200 feet. We're in West Bloomington, we have residential housing with less than 200 feet. We have 16 locations and have never had, we've never had one complaint to any city about our activities. We operate our businesses and we've had OSHA out to test noise levels and everything and I can assure you that we will not be a ' disturbance and you can check our facilities. And you can check also other cities that we have been in and find that to my knowledge we've never had one complaint. And we just opened up a new facility in West Bloomington and it's always an issue and I can understand. Especially in ' auto body. You mention the word auto body and it sends shivers through many residents and also Planning and City Commissions because of the concern. Because the industry. The image of the industry. Frankly the ' reason why we have prospered and done so well in this industry is because of what we've done. We've raised it to a new level. We have brought the body shop business from back street to main street, USA. So the noise I level, the sounds, the odors, we have to abide by very strict government regulations. We've just had OSHA through again checking to make sure that we're doing everything appropriately. And we have not, this concern has been raised before and after we come into the community, it's never become an issue. 5o we share the concern and again, we want to be a good neighbor in the community and we certainly don't want to offend some of the people close by who could be potential customers of ours and so we share that. Batzli: Have you had any meetings with the local residents? IF Planning Commission Meeting - November 18, 1992 - Page 8 Randy MacPherson: In going before the City of Eagan, we went back and II resurveyed people in the West Bloomington market and none of them had a complaint. I didn't do this. It was hired by the people representing us in Eagan. Batzli: But in this particular development, you haven't had a neighborhood meeting to explain the development? Randy MacPherson: We have not personally had one, no. ' Emmings: Do you have any need to store anything outside? Other than yoli trash perhaps. Randy MacPherson: Well I'm as sensitive to that as anyone. We have a general philosophy of not having outside storage and once in a while II someone will drop off a customer, a customer will drop off a car after hours and leave the key in the key drop but we do not want wrecked cars stored outside. ' Emmings: How about anything that, anything that you use in your operations? Do you need to store anything outside? II Randy MacPherson: Nothing. We don't want anything outside. Emmings: So if there were a condition that nothing could be stored outside, that would not be a problem to you? Randy MacPherson: That would not be a problem. Krauss: Commissioner Emmings, we do have a condition that says no damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored overnight. Emmings: I'm talking about anything. We've got trash and we'll get the trash enclosed. There will probably be some vehicles outside but I just wondered if there would be, I don't see any reason. He doesn'_tA have any need to have anything else stored outside so we can put a condition on that nothing else will be stored outside. Randy MacPherson: I don't want anything stored outside. I'm just as II concerned about that as anyone. Farmakes: Where is a damaged car stored? When I bring it in. Randy MacPherson: We keep it inside. Farmakes: So when a wrecking car, you don't have like a central area somewhere else where you store these? They bring in a wrecked car off o a wrecking truck and it brings inside and it spends it's entire time inside? Randy MacPherson: There may be a short period of time during the day when it's dropped off and then it's, they'll tow a vehicle. Sometimes an inoperable vehicle will be towed to us and it may be outside for a short period but it's brought in by night. And we work very hard to schedule Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 9 ' appropriately. The other thing that I want to point out about Abra, I can't speak for Goodyear but we, most of our facilities do not, their average traffic, I mean the amount of cars we pr.oduce a week is not much more than about 20 cars. We are not doing a lot of small, you know we're ' not doing tune -ups or anything like that. We do a lot less volume of repair and so, and we do not, especially in a location like this, we do not specialize in heavy collision. We're not doing the heavy, really ' severely damaged. Most of it is, if we have a vehicle that's damaged like that, we'll bring it to one of our larger facilities where we have more storage, including Eden Prairie. We have a larger facility with storage and it's tucked down behind where we can store some vehicles down there. ' Farmakes: How do you deal with the damaged automobiles as far as leakage of oil or battery acid or any of these other types of things that are stored on site? Randy MacPherson: We have an EPA license. We have storage containers which are removed and we have to keep track of all potential, we are considered a small quantity generator. We're not a large quantity generator, but even so, we are very regulated by the government on anything. So we have the appropriate, if the oil spills, we have the ' appropriate product to clean up that and the proper way of disposing of it. ' Batzli: When you're doing minor repair work, maybe pounding out dents and things like that, during the summer months do you typically have the doors open to your facility? The bays open. 1 Randy MacPherson: We tell our people that they cannot have the door open more than 12 inches. And there are some facilities where we have, I think our Eden Prairie facility, I don't know if you've been by it. 1 Batzli: I'm looking at pictures of it. ' Randy MacPherson: Okay. See that's tucked, you can't even see that from the road. That is tucked behind. I don't know if you're familiar with the Modern Tire building. Batzli: Yeah. Randy MacPherson: But it's back behind that. And that's a different 1 location. That's more of an industrial facility. And that's where I said we will do more of our heavy collision and repair. Batzli: Thank you. We may have more questions. This is a public hearing. Does anyone else wish to address the Commission? Is there a motion to close the public hearing? 1 Emmings moved, Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. 1 Batzli: 3eff, we'll start with you here. 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 10 Farmakes: Paul, can you talk a little bit more about three of the generi issues. Standards. To•be designed to construct...so it will be compatible in the appearance with the existing and intended character of the general vicinity. We've had a lot of problems with that area in thell past, being that it's so close to a single family residential area. Som of the intents of the things that we're working on with the Highway 5 development. What concerns me a,bit I guess is now that the highway is completed, there sort of will be a general development I think is kind o� indicative to some of the stuff that we're seeing and these types of buildings appearance generally take on a light industrial look. With the block and the comments that have been made in the past by some of the I other applicants for these types of buildings. Valvoline for instance. Putting the money into the building is not probably consistent with good business practice with these types of operations. The problem with thesil types of buildings is that they're positioned of course into a very sensitive area and I'm sure you're familiar with the fact that that's the entrance to our city and so on. How does this relate to the intent of what we're doing with Highway 5? I read your paragraph there but it really doesn't address sort of the work that's been working on for a yea and a half. Krauss: Well, Commissioner Farmakes, I'm sure as you're aware, we've hall a lot of intent in the last year to do a better job of development along Highway 5. It has yet to pay dividends in terms of having a new ordinan with some specific guidelines. Now we went through an exercise with Target that you're all familiar with where I think we did employ a lot o the concepts that will become a part of the Highway 5 project. But again Target it was in the HRA district. There were financial considerations. It was done as a PUD. It was a modern day project. In a lot of respect I think I indicated this at our last Highway 5 meeting, this site is something of a throwback in terms of the way it was handled. I mean thill has been a platted, commercial site since McDonald's went in. The site' been appropriately zoned for this type of use. Lake Drive is a frontage road through there, is completed. We do have concerns with the way thes buildings look. We'd much prefer that they take on an appearance ore consistent with the development standards that we've had in downtown Chanhassen. We think the PUD standard provided some latitude to do that. Probably not as much as we would have at it if the Highway 5 project wasli completed. I'd note that, I recall when the emission control station ca before you, you were told that they had a prototype that they built 11 of and their contract with the State said this is all they built. And in that case we would have preferred a pitched roof again but we settled fo a mansard condition on there and we settled for considerably more landscaping than they put in elsewhere and I think if you look at other emission control stations around the Twin Cities, it's probably one of til better looking ones. What it all boils down to is, I think the fact tha this is a CUP and that there are conditions like this in a CUP, gives you some latitude to demand better than average. But since we don't have thll Highway 5 program yet up and running, I'm not sure exactly where the gra area is of how far we should push that. We've worked, given the fact that this is somewhat traditional site planning, we've worked with Beissner o and off as he indicated, for many months you know, trying to get a handy on where Highway 5 is going. Trying to do the best job we can within th existing ordinances. Again, we wish that we had a little bit different ` 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 11 architectural style but beyond that, we'd like to hear your comments on where you think we shoi.lid take it. I'm relunctant to, ah. I guess I've said enough on that. Farmakes: I wanted to know what you could do in regards to the architectural standards. And I guess I'm going to have to rely on your expertise with that because it is interpretative at that point. I think it's unfortunate that one, you have to ask an applicant to do something that's far more costly and the type of building that maybe in general terms in servicing is, from their standpoint, a waste of money. From our standpoint I think it's one of aesthetics in the community that we live in. We keep on bumping up against this problem and particularly in the car care industry. I really don't mean to single that out but I'm sure that this isn't the first time that you've heard that. The type of architecture that we're getting is corporate led franchise type architecture. It is basically bare bones type of architecture that is meant to put up a workable facility for the least amount of money possible. And unfortunately, when such facilities are taken out of the light industrial area and they're put into a commercial area that, for instance car care where they want to be next to the highway. They want to ' have a visibility that a light industrial area is not going to provide them. We get into a situation where we're getting the bright plastic and the graphics and the cinder block type buildings. I think that that's ' unfortunate in this particular area. This is an incredibly sensitive area I think because of the zoning mistake that was made...past that we're all familiar with that in this room. I don't really know again getting back to that gray area, what we can do there but I would really like to see more done with the style of the architecture in trying to take it away from the light industrial look. I realize that you've done work on that and the applicant has been working with you on that to try and stick with ' that. I don't know if there could be any additional work done to clarify detail, perhaps what that could be. We've had problems in the past with architectural standards. If you have any ideas with that, I'd like to ' hear them. I think for sure at least that there's further work that could be done in softening the roof line. I am concerned about the on site. People driving into our community. I certainly hope that they're not going to see a line of smashed cars as they drive into Chanhassen. ' But I guess I'd also like to say to us in general, as a warning, that we need to get this overlayment district done. And do it well but do it as a priority because these types of developments are going to follow this 1 highway completion very, very fast and I kind of see us in a position where we may be putting up things that we don't want to live with long term. If we can get any additional type of negotiation position for the types of properties that are going to be developed here, we're going to need more than what we have. • Batzli: Jeff, help me out a minute here. On the roof, you're suggesting 1 that we should do what with it? Farmakes: Well I'm not an architect but basically it looks like an airplane hangar. The comment Goodyear made I believe about corporate directive, there are thousands of different Goodyear operations and architectural styles throughout the country and I know in Ipswitch, a small town in New England. Massachussetts, it's in a historical zone. It 11 • Planning Commission Meeting IF November 18, 1992 - Page 12 looks like a historic building. They basically had to conform an auto body section care area to like a salt box type operation. These types o things can be done if there's a community that wants to have them done and have the type of ordinances that support that type of development. And again, I'm going to have to defer to you because we get into a gray area/ in negotiation and I'm not sitting there at the table. But I think that in the area of the Abra facility, actually the stone work there is fairlli nice. I think the problem there is the roof line and sort of the contemporary, you have a box industrial look with a flat roof and again, 'these types of structures, even though we put a lot of trees around them still wind up looking like light industrial type buildings. And without changing that and putting them close to a single family zone, and in the primary entrance into our community, we're going to wind up with car care area that extends down the highway which is what we did not want working' on our general corridor. Batzli: Okay, thank you. Steve. Oh, sorry. Krauss: Commissioner Farmakes. It would be useful you know if the Planning Commission had some specific recommendations on this and I don't say this because we couldn't come up with them but we had a series of ' meetings with them over a period of months getting small incremental changes here and there and you sometimes lose the forest through the trees. We went through a similar process on the Americana Bank as I recall. You gave quite an astute dressing down of the architecture of that building. I think it resulted in some modifications. I believe th you clearly have some latitude. Some degree of latitude and again I don't know where to tell you to stop but in terms of this being a conditional I use. It's clear that Chanhassen is developing a set of standards and expectations that are somewhat beyond Bismark or Mandan. You know simply because there's franchise architecture doesn't mean you have to take it.' For years we've been telling people like Hardee's that orange buildings don't fly in Chanhassen and you do have a right to do that. So don't shoot too low either. , Farmakes: Well i, of couse when we deal with some of these things', when we sit up here and we start saying, well why don't you move that over here and why don't you bring that up here. We're up here for an hour. Arbitrarily when we look at these things, we of course go over them but they're small schmatic type illustrations. Some of the things that we are suggesting or have to be responsible about, they're obviously costing someone thousand, tens of thousands or many thousands of dollars. I wan to make sure that perhaps maybe we can sit down later and talk in more specific terms of architecture. In terms of general ideas, I find that it, when we sit up here and we say, no we want four gables up there or I something like that. It doesn't serve a lot of purpose and sometimes confuses the issue. Perhaps maybe we can discuss this later in regards to changing the architecture but I wanted to be on record as thinking or making the statement that we could improve this type of structure so it does not have a light industrial appearance as we drive into Chanhassen. Batzli: Okay. Steve. ' Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 13 ' Emmings: In general I agree with what Jeff has said. It's frustrating to it and look at these buildings on the one hand and think now we're going to have McDonald's and the test station and this building and this ' building and it is the entrance to Chanhassen from the east and it doesn't seem to be going very well. But I don't know how to change it. I don't know now, you know these kinds of businesses are businesses we all use and it's not the kind of situation where you want to say, well they can be in somebody else's community or something. And there ought to be a solution in it but I don't know what it is. The way the land is zoned now, it's an appropriate use I think for the area. So in general I just think it's kind of frustrating to look at this. But a couple of things that were brought up. The pictures raise a point. The one Goodyear facility had a huge stack of tires outside of it and is that addressed here somewhere? ' There just will not be any outside storage. Krauss: It's addressed but it's not addressed as well detailed as it • could be. Emmings: I think it should probably be under the conditional use permit ' portion. Krauss: Yes, exactly. Emmings: And we may...broader condition that just says, there will be no outdoor storage. Now they've got trash, that will be enclosed right? ' Krauss: Yes. Emmings: Trash containers, that will be enclosed. There shouldn't be any outdoor storage of anything on these sites. We can leave the condition that there's no damage or inoperable vehicles stored, even though that's kind of mushy. I'm not sure exactly what that means. But I can see that they would sometimes have to park cars outside if it's not a lot and they're not in terrible condition, if they're not all smashed up, I guess that can be all I've got. The other, somebody raised, one of the people who spoke, raised the question about having banners and sale signs. That does seem to be kind.of something that you associate with a business of 11 this kind. Is that regulated under our sign ordinance? Al -Jaff: Yes it is. Emmings: Okay, what can they do? Al -Jaff: They can have streamers. They can have banners as a temporary sign 3 times a year, 10 days at a time for a total of 30 days per year. Per site. Emmings: And do they have to come in and tell you when they're doing it? Ai -Jaff: Yes. Farmakes: That's being modified somewhat. Emmings: What will the new one say? IF Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 14 Ir Farmakes: Well, we haven't met in quite a while but essentially it limit some of that to a new opening. And modifies it somewhat. Emmings: But it's limited anyway so it's not... ' Farmakes: It deals pretty much with the banner and the amount of what goes in the window. It would say temporary, the Valvoline would change., Would temper that down somewhat. That type of useage. Al -Jaffa Does that cover the streamers as well? Farmakes: Ah, I would be, I don't feel comfortable quoting that because, it's been a while since I've worked on that particular thing. Maybe 4 or 5 months. I don't want to quote that off the top of my head. Emmings: I don't really have any other specific comments on this. Batzli: Thank you Steve. Matt. , Ledvina: Well generally I would say that I believe the site does fit into the land use that's in the vicinity of the project. I would also agree with Jeff's sentiments as it relates to the Highway 5 overlay and I thin we should also try to expedite our development of an overlay to more adequately deal with these types of buildings that are going in. I'd ' support the efforts, continued efforts to improve the roof lines of certainly the Goodyear with the use of the dormers where we can and also staff's recommendations regarding Abra. One of the residents mentioned the situation with the traffic and I think that these types of uses real" won't provide a tremendous intensification of the traffic and so I don't know that there will be that much more substantial traffic or pollution resulting from this. Being that you have the emission control center jut next door and hundreds of cars go through that line so. I wanted to ask about one of the elements in the staff report and find out whether maybe we wanted to add a condition as it relates to the Highway 5 task force providing some input on the site plan review. And I don't know, -.Paul yoll were suggesting that that might be appropriate? Krauss: Well in fact we had a meeting last week and we talked about thell proposed Opus project and we did briefly talk about this one. The concelh that I have is, some of the Highway 5 issues may be out of the legal context of the current ordinance. I mean I think you should push the envelope within the current ordinance because you have a standing to do S that but the Highway 5 Task Force is looking down the road towards a new set of guiding principles that don't quite exist yet. We'd be happy to take it to them. I think we have a meeting in early December. We could' do that but they're likely, it's likely to be an exercise in frustration because they may come up with desires that can't be met. Ledvina: So maybe they really can't provide additional input beyond what we're doing right here. Krauss: I don't know, Commissioner Emmings serves on that. I mean we'd' be happy to bring it up. And Jeff. .t ' Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 15 ' Eatzli: Paul, by way of example, give me a desire that can't be met. • ' Krauss: If there's a statement that, you know we initially would have had a preference for both these buildings to be identically designed. I've seen both uses done very attractively in auto malls that have consistent architecture where the door's already entered into a central courtyard and ' they share a common parking where they do have pitched roofs. Metal standing seam roofs. Where all the signage is coordinated. That would be my preference. If that's the recommendation of the Highway 5 Task Force, ' my guess is if, I don't want to speak for the City Attorney but if it was rejected on the principle that that's what you wanted to do, you may have pushed the envelope a little too far. In terms of what you can demand based upon the current ordinances. ' Batzli: I don't think we would be pushing it too far necessarily to have design themes that would tend to have you look at one building and another and say, they resemble one another. Or at least there are design elements that are consistent. Do you think right now that we have that? ' Krauss: I don't know. I mean that was our initial preference that we discussed with the applicant. I think clearly that's the most appropriate way of doing it. If we get, and again, we're dealing with an ordinance that doesn't exist and we're not sure what you're reaction or City ' Council's reaction's going to be on any of these things so it's kind of, we've got a series of unknowns. If we get a strong indication from you as to what your desire is, we'll pursue it. ' Batzli: Ladd. Conrad: Three issues which everybody's talked about. Noise. The architecture. The roof design and landscaping. Noise, the applicant has talked about a little bit. I guess I'm not comfortable there yet because I don't know what kind of noise is generated from Abra. That bothers me. I need somebody to comfort me somehow on the noise level for the neighborhood. The pitched roofs and the architecture, I think is - just real important. It's the entrance to Chanhassen and I'm not overly protective of that visual but I am somewhat. I don't want this to be the typical and I'd like to stay away from architectural standards as much as I can but in this case, this is the entrance and there's just no doubt we have to make it work. I'm not sure that I need to have the two buildings looking alike. But I do need to make it look like what we've been trying to make that area look like and that's a little bit of fitting into the neighborhood. Even though it's on a highway. I want to feel comfortable that there's some architectural soundness and that's typically with the roofline. I think the building materials look fine. Batzli: Let me ask this, if I can interrupt you, and I already have so I will. Rather than look like a hodge podge of fast food /franchise type buildings, doesn't it make more sense to at least make several of them look like they belong together? Conrad: That'd be nice. I don't know if it counts. Really we already have two that, we've got McDonald's so we should make them all look like McDonald's. 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 16 IF Batzli: Not identical but at least so one architect is looking at the I other plan. Architects• know how to do that. I don't. Farmakes: The intent though is, I can't speak for the applicant but in IL general a franchise directive usually follows that you have to be seen a they're very concerned about that and of course they seek this type of confirmation with structure and signage to try and reinforce that this it a Goodyear or this is an Abra. And they do put a lot of money into it. It's part of that marketing direction and Ladd, I'm sure you know that you can dillute that. Conrad: If I were the applicant, I wouldn't want to. I'd want to keep the image constant. Yet on the other hand, what we're seeing is that that image is a variety of images out there right now. If you're a franchise , we have an opportunity to make a new standard for architecture that othe try to match. The ones that I've seen in the pictures, and those are old, they're today but they're still, there's certainly nothing, there's not standard there that I want to follow. I think the applicant has present some visuals that are okay but I think we have to improve upon them and think it really, a lot goes back to that roofline. And it also goes bac to you're part of the entrance to Chanhassen, and that's real significan . Being part of that good image means you're going to increase your busine and so I think there's a compromise here to keep the Goodyear and Abra and give them their identity if they want but I think also Chanhassen has to' demand what fits in that area. And the neighbors have never been happy with that section and I think I want to, it's not an intensive use. It fits this area I think. My concern is just to make sure it fits visuall And again, part of that is noise. Part of my concern is noise. The oth�r Part is landscaping, and I don't have any idea what we're talking about. None. It's just like, I want to see how it fits and that's real important. And again we're talking, I've looked at the plans and I don' have a clue and I think staff has asked for more landscaping and I thin that's real appropriate. I do want to, in looking at many little plans here and I don't know what that is, but that's a big deal to me. I want' to feel comfortable that both facilities have good highway exposure because that's what they're buying. They're buying exposure to the Highway 5, and I want that to happen. Yet on the other hand, I don't wa to pollute visually in terms of the cars that are going to be there and have to plan for the worst possible scenario and I have to plan for the fact that there are going to be some vehicles out there that don't look so good and...for a while so I just guess I'm not real comfortable yet wit h what we're doing to that site and I need more information. And I think it's something simple. I think it's something that, I just need to see what's going on and right now I don't. Batzli: So how do you see? What do you need to see? Conrad: A plan. 1 Batzli: You need big plans? Conrad: No. I guess I'm kind of interested in, when we talk about trees Veen, I need something bigger than this and I guess I need something that incorporates what staff's vision is in it and I need to know how Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 17 ' automobiles are blocked both ways and maybe we're talking about elevation so I can see berming and how the berming hides the cars. Cars from the neighborhood and maybe, I need to feel comfortable that Highway 5, our vision on Highway 5'or our view on Highway 5 is acceptable. So you know, ' it may be an elevation that shows me berming and how cars are. I'm just kind of nervous that cars are going to be stored there and then again, I want to plan for the worst scenario and see how we take care of it. So ' noise, roof line, and landscaping and there are probably solutions that are on the table right now. I just can't visualize them with what I've been getting. Batzli: Okay, Tim. Erhart: I'll shock everybody and make it short. I can't figure out anything from these drawings. About once a year we see a set of drawings like this to represent a plan. I think we all should have the same response. Krauss: We did distribute full sized drawings for this but it was done the meeting that was cancelled because we didn't have a quorum. Erhart: And we were supposed to bring them? Krauss: Yes. Erhart: Then I apologize but I can't figure out what the landscaping or the parking, or actually the traffic is So I guess I'd like to see an ' opportunity to see a full set of plans. I agree with pretty much everything on the architecture. I'm not sure what the architecture is. What it is on this. I don't think it even comes close to the auto emission which I think came out okay. After we worked on those guys for a ' little bit. So I think we've got to work on these guys a little bit and see if something can be done, better appearance than this. I'd like to see them look a little bit like there was some thought to put them ' together. It doesn't have to be the same. Some consistency: .I one thing that I'll speak up on on behalf of the developer. Item number 11 under the site plan review where we're asking them to pay a $7,580.00 Surface Water Management Program fund for water quality treatment downstream. If I read that right, that is asking for something that the first time any citizen group even reviewed tonight for the first time, unless I misunderstand this. 1 Krauss: No. This is. Erhart: Or is this the off site? Krauss: This is the off site and it's similar to what we did with Hans Hagen Homes. ' Erhart: This is not the storm water hook -up charge? Krauss: No, no, no, no. No. This is because the pond that's sized on that third site is not large enough I think to accommodate the volume and it's not large enough to accommodate the water quality standards. 1 Planning Commission Meeting IF November 18, 1992 - Page 18 Erhart: We're talking about this pond. Is there going to be a pond her" Krauss: Yes. Erhart: Is that big enough? 1 Krauss: No. And Mr. Beissner indicated tonight that they may look to increasing the size of the pond and that's fine and that would decrease the dollar but at some point there's a law of diminishing returns becaus the lot loses it's utility. Erhart: Yeah, that would be a surprise if that couldn't be made big enough. Krauss: Well keep in mind, this pond also has to serve the emission 1 control site. That's all supposed to drain through this one. Erhart: Okay. Well if that's what that is that's okay. Then again, I I guess we can point out for you Paul is that item 11 on the subdivision, now which, if we go forward here and add this engineer to handle this storm water work, we should be incorporating the cost of this into our II development fee structure as opposed. That's my opinion. Krauss: Okay. To raise the fees to cover it... Erhart: Whatever. Yeah, I don't think it's right in the long run that we go to developers and ask them to agree to an open ended thing like this. At some point we have to make it part of the fee structure so they know I what it's going to be. That's a comment internally here. And also the conditional use permit. Make sure that we don't have outdoor storage and I agree. I think it's an appropriate use for the area. I think we just, have to work, we've got to work this architecture out better. Again, I' not going to waste your time. No double parking. I thought some of those photos they were double parking. We want to make sure we don't have tha I don't think it's on here although in one spot it looked like it-could but it's hard to tell. So my feeling is, other than the subdivision motion, I think it should come back. Batzli: Thank you. It's difficult for me to look at this and I know thI. we have a condition in here that there's not going to be any damaged or inoperable cars and again I don't know what that means but clearly there going to be cars parked outside these buildings. And I don't think that's a problem but I don't know that that's what, that there's a meeting of the minds on this condition as to what this means and what they're going to do from the standpoint of, I can't believe that Abra is going til be able to get all the cars inside every night and do that. And some of them will be "damaged ". It's beyond my comprehension that they're going to actually do that. I don't know that they're envisioning not parking one or more vehicles at some point in time out of doors and be at least lh technical violation of the conditional use permit. Krauss: If they cannot, I would ask them to consider another site. You' know I worked with a Goodyear dealer who was moving from Hopkins many years ago who had an operation where they had a wrecker and a field full •1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 19 of junked cars. It really was in the entrance to downtown Hopkins. It was a hideous thing to look at. I don't think Abra has in mind doing anything like that. They've said tonight that they're willing to comply with it. I'd be real leery of opening the door to having crunched cars sitting out on Highway 5. Batzli: Well that's not what I'm suggesting. I'm just suggesting that for example Goodyear I think had 32 parking spots and if we assume for a minute that there's maybe, I don't know how many people will be working there but let's assume about 12. 15. There's about 17 more parking ' spots. Probably 2/3 of those will be people who are leaving their cars there that are going to be worked on that day. Some I'm sure will be left overnight from time to time. Some of them may be "damaged ". That's probably why they're there and I don't think they're going to pull them ' into their bays either. And I don't know what, you know I don't want to try and kid ourselves that there won't be "damaged" cars sitting outside and there will be storage of, I can't envision that places that deal with damaged cars at some point won't leave one outside. And if this is an intent to minimize those things, or you know put in place some vehicle. Vehicle, no pun intended. Method of trying to get them to put them inside every night, that's fine but I can't see it happening. And by looking at these pictures, every one of them has cars outside. Now granted most of them are probably employees in the back. You know I take these photos with a grain of salt because I don't know. I wasn't there to look at the ' cars and see what they were. Whether they were employees' cars that are being driven back and forth or whether these are the cars that are being worked on. But I have a tough time because once again, from our room concept that we were initially shown in our grand Highway 5 corridor plan, clearly this is one of the first things when people are coming into Chanhassen and while I don't mind a couple of cars being left out, I don't want it to get out of control. And what I really don't want to have happen is to 4 years later finally get tired of it and go back to this conditional use permit and have them say well yeah but, you know you let us go for 4 years and you knew that we had to park some things outside and ' our attorney says, well yeah. Boy, you kind of sat on it for a .long time. I don't know if you can get rid of them now. I would like this condition, whatever it is to reflect reality because this is such, I believe a crucial site coming into Chanhassen. I'd love to believe everybody but I can't believe that if I was the applicant standing up there, you know I'd probably say well yeah we're going to try our best. But I don't know that I would have made the statement we will never do that. They will do it. I can't imagine they can't do it. I mean, do you want to respond? Randy MacPherson: I'd love to. I think I said that there will be times that people will drop off cars but we do not store cars outside, and I think there's a difference. I think that's what it's called, is storing cars outside. And we share the same concerns. I mean I've got people coming from all over the country and even Europe looking at our concept. And we do not allow our managers to store outside. Now I can't ever tell you that I never have a manager who does not not follow our procedures but we have people on staff that go around to all of our facilities and visibly inspect them and do a grading and a report. And one of the things we evaluate is to make sure that there's nothing unsightly outside. So that's very important and we have several cities that we have this 1 I Planning Commission Meeting I. November 18, 1992 - Page 20 stipulation that there will be no outside storage of vehicles and have II lived by it and abided by it. Another thing is we do have Goodyear next door. Well typically the Goodyear customers come and go the same day an many times there are empty stalls in their facilities at night and we ha worked out reciprocal arrangements where if we have too many, which is infrequent, to get inside, we simply work out an arrangement with them to pull the car inside over there over night. And since we a lot of times IF some reciprocal business back and forth, we try to get along real well s it's worked very well on those occasions when someone did over schedule. So I'm not here to try to mislead or trying to lie to anybody. We're ve concerned about that and are prepared to look to that agreement. And if � we have any of our, if anyone from the staff would call me from any city and say hey, your storing cars, I can guarantee you we'd address it immediately. So I can never say that an employee would never do it but II can tell you we're living under this agreement and our cities have been happy with us. And they share your concern so. The other thing I want to point out is that our buildings are not cheap. They're very expensive. I The buildings look more like an office complex than, they do have some garage doors on the sides of them but they are very expensive buildings to build and the question with architecture is not really to us a cost fact because to put that particular peak up, whatever is not any more money than what we're proposing. That's not any additional money. Our proble is that we consider it actually more intrusive and it actually attracts more attention to our roofline and we don't want it to be, we don't want, to attract attention to that roofline. That's our opinion. That's our view. The other thing is, you'll never have McDonald's wanting to look like Hardee's. I mean it just, I think you said it very well. We want ir have identity in the community. And of course we want that identify to very positive so anyway, we are prepared to live by this ordinance. And while I'm up here, if I may address the noise issue. Our buildings are insulated and our garage doors are kept closed except for a foot. Now II once in a while we do run into a store where somebody has left the door open. When our people see that, we make sure that they close that door. Most of our repairs are simply replacement of damaged sheet metal. It's' just take a fender off and you put a fender on. Batzli: Do you use air? II Randy MacPherson: They call them air ratchets which, you know you would not, I've never had one noise problem ever. And I drove by the site tonight and I saw the distance to the residential area and it'd be virtually I think impossible for someone to hear our activities going on!' And so I'm very comfortable personally with the noise issue and we've purposely driven ourselves by the locations. Most of the air ratchets don't make that much noise. There's a lot newer ones that are a lot mor� quiet and we're not beating out fenders and those kinds of things because frankly you can't repair fenders nowadays. You have to replace them. T sheet metal is so thin, if you lean on them you put a dent in them. So anyway that, the noise issue has come up many times but after we've gon into the community, has never come up as an issue. And we have our, it's enclosed and it's in insulated buildings and has never been an issue. II Batzli: You've been very helpful, thank you. I have one more question. ir And that is, since this is going to be a showcase, if you will, for peo Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 21 ' coming in and looking at your concept and franchise, I imagine that you don't want to tie it too closely into the Goodyear store. Is that a true statement? Randy MacPherson: I don't, you know we want to work with you people. We're not saying it has to be any particular way. We're just saying that we'd like to have you recognize that our desire to have our own individual ' look, for it to be a professional look, that will represent the community well. In this picture here, which is the one you got earlier, that blue roof there is a Panekoeken restaurant. And that's on University Avenue. ' And so we're right next to restaurants on main retail thoroughfares and I think that's an attractive looking facility. I mean and I could be wrong. You know my wife sometimes has to tell me if this shirt goes with this tie and those kind of things so maybe I'm the best judge of that but so anyway, we would like to have. We are in auto malls that have, everyone has the same architecture. But this is a free standing building and it's not incorporated within a building and so we're just asking for you to allow us to, if we can, to represent ourselves and we are trying to get. consistent. And I'll admit, that we do not have all 16 of our metro areas nor our outside metro areas all the same but we're trying to get more consistent with our appearance and our professionalism. ' Batzli: Well as a trademark attorney, you don't have to convince me that you want to maintain a somewhat consistent image, so thank you. 1 Randy MacPherson: The other issue that I want to make sure too on, you talked about landscaping. And I appreciate your comments. I don't want people to see cars either and I don't mind berming. I just want to make sure that we have people know when they drive by Highway 5 that there is an Abra facility there. Conrad: That's real important. Batzli: Thank you. Emmings: I have a question for Paul. ' Batzli: Okay, go ahead Steve. Emmings: Paul, the condition that says no damaged or inoperable vehicles will be stored overnight on the Abra site. Why? 11 Krauss: It should apply to both. Emmings: Okay. Batzli: Go ahead. You've been waiting very patiently. Al Beissner: I'd like to go through a couple of the issues that I now hear that are brought out that can maybe you can appreciate what we've been through and what we're trying to do. Would you put that site plan back up. What we tried to do and that's-our site plan blown up and you should have had. We delivered 27 full sets of plans to the City in September. Whenever we had to so I'm sorry that you didn't get yours 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 22 1- then. But this is the site plan and a couple things that we tried to doll that, to make it different and better. First of all our setback from th freeway or Highway 5, a good distance. As far as we could go. With one major exposure out there, everybody wants to build on Highway 5 so when you're coming from the east, then you can see the building right there. We set the building back as far as we could. We turned the buildings al so that you see just the short ends of the buildings and the garage doors are facing each other so that if you don't like the looks of garage door" you don't like Abra's garage door and Goodyear doesn't like Abra's garag door and Abra doesn't like Goodyear's garage door but we did that so there's no visibility from the freeway or from the residential area for the garage doors. We offset the buildings so not to make them look like kind of a row house. I mean that's the reason they were pushed back and forth and we pushed the Abra one closer here because they had a small do on that end of the building that we didn't want exposed. We also, this site plan doesn't show it but the emission control site is probably 5 fe higher in elevation than our site and part of what we're doing is cutting off the road here and going down. Why that site got built up and is kin of a beacon up there, we don't know but our's is lower by 5 feet than whit their site is. So we won't be sticking up and looking that direction. The third thing is, we do have 3 foot berms along the freeway and so when thil cars are parked, you won't see any hood and grills or whatever from any normal car. And if there's any foreign cars or smaller cars there, you won't see them as they're parked anywhere along in here. You will not s e the cars parked from the west elevation because again, this site pad is or 5 feet lower than the emission control site plan. So basically, and there's very little parking of this view from the eastern elevation. So we were, you know it is your front door. We did work hard, a long time. I think we originally entered into the purchase agreement in May and we' � been back and forth and when you were talking, I think our frustrating part and your frustrating part, rooflines. I didn't even put on this board the first roofline that we had because it was when we walked in, w� walked out quickly because they said that will never work and we got the hint right away. So we struggled with the roofline thing and we don't know, when you say what is right. I mean what is right? Is blug alp blue tie or is it brown suit and brown tie? We don't know and we'went through an exercise where we designed the Abra building with the same mansard roof that the emission control building has. That didn't fly vet well because it still looks like a flat roof. One of the problems that ran into early on in so you know why we struggled with it and why they can't have a roof like a Goodyear. The rooftop whatever it is that's ov your paint booth, has to be on top of the roof. Goodyear doesn't have t rooftop units that they need for ventilation. And the problem lies with if you have our building plan and floorpian out there, is that on this line right here, this is where one of the, that's where that big rooftop unit is. The other rooftop units are on this side of the building. And r what really throws the thing out of whack is that you want to screen the elevation that you have. We have a 4 foot screen from the east and the west so you can't see it from the east or the west but then to make it have any kind of balance in a peak, we had to go up so high and that's w it looked really bad. When Randy saw it he said, you know it doesn't look right. That's not our first choice. We did do these and we have one. Also signage. When we first came to town and I know when developers com to town and they're always, we are the bad guys wearing the black hats and 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 23 ' we looked at the ordinance and we thought we were under the Highway Business zone and the Highway Business zone allows you to do so many different things. I think about 45 days into our development work the City of Chanhassen found out that we, there was a technical loophole or something that we found that we now are under a conditional use and not Highway Business. In Highway Business there's a whole lot more that one can do and the City and the staff you know has to I guess abide by the ordinances in what we can do. Because it's a conditional use permit, we changed a whole lot of thought process. The sign that you will see on the freeway is from this site that has 60 square feet of signage which is ' less, or is it 80 feet? 60 square feet or 80 square feet which is less than what we are allowed. If we would have had Highway Business, we could have each of the sites had their own pylon sign. We have one sign here ' out on the freeway there and it will be done with the Goodyear logo, the Abra and then the third user which will be this guy down here. And the sign will be coordinated, color coordinated probably with the Goodyear building or the Abra building. So we're very sensitive to that. And ' those are the kinds of things that we have negotiated back and forth and come up with and we are happy with and arrived at. This is the same Abra building with a mansard roof just like the emission control one. You put ' a mansard all the way around it and that's how that looks. This is a modification of their building where we don't have a mansard all the way around but we have screened on the roof the rooftop units. And we struggled with that. We came up with what we thought was a better plan and that was closer to what Abra does or what Abra wanted and this is, this is all the rooftop. These rooftop units are screened. I think if you were to superimpose the elevations that we've drawn on say the end of, the roofline comes up something like that. We have much more roof or facade than we really need to screen it but to put it in balance and make it have some interest, you had to. That's what happened here. One of the ' rooftop units is here and the other one is over there and that's why we had to start so far out and to give it any kind of balance. We struggled with this probably 5 different times to come out with the right balance in it and so when you're talking, where do we go with the architecture, we'd ' like to know where to go with the architecture. It's not somethi.rg that,• not that cost isn't a factor again but we all estimate how much our typical architect fees are going to be. Engineering fees are going to be, ' etc, etc, etc. If you send it back to us and say okay, let's do it again and let's try something architecturally different. Who is going to determine what's right architecturally? That's our biggest concern because I think, I mean we struggled with this a lot and I'm not sure that there's a right solution and that's what the problem is. So we did do a lot more with the site and I wanted to point these things out to you so that we did take all this into consideration by moving the buildings back. ' Setting then differently. We're lower so it's not going to be something big and intrusive sticking out there. And we thought we did a good job with it. It's taken a little longer than we wanted to take but we understand that. 5o if you have suggestions as to which style of architecture to use, that's great. But what I'm afraid of is that we'll go to a committee over here and the committee will try to guess again as to what is the right look. That's our biggest problem is that we don't know and there aren't any guidelines saying they all have to be gabled. They all have to be mansard. They all have to be flat. It's kind of the individual choice. I just wanted to point that out but that's kind of 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 — Page 24 what we have gone through and this one we thought was attractive. That II was choice, that was go number 4 I think or 5 but that still has some flat roof look and I really don't know what to do. This one isn't balance. We put an accent stripe around the entire building too so it's l not like one solid wall so it won't be straight brick. It will have accept stripes in it. And the architecture here, we tend to carry the same accent through the front and sides. We have struggled with it. I I will say this, it's not gone without um. Batzli: What happened to the roof units when you put the pitched roof on? Where did they disappear under the pitch? What happened to them? T last one they showed us. Al Beissner: This one? 1 Batzli: Yeah. Where are the rooftop units in there? Al Beissner: One is over here and one is here. From the side this is..' Batzli: That part is pitched? Straight up and down. I Al Beissner: This panel is pitched up. You can see how it's... If we didn't have...side elevation looking from east and west. The metal that is complimentary to the exactly what is the other metal facade is and it slanted the roof, tipped slightly rather than...and the unit sits facing here and over here and that's why it had to be spread out so far. That's why it kept getting so high. If it didn't, then we'd go with this. It would have to be lower... I wish there were some way that we could do i' architecturally with, that's where our problem comes in because we just couldn't put the same roof on it that Goodyear has. Batzli: Okay, thank you. Emmings: Do you have any idea what's going to happen on the other lot there? Al Beissner: No I don't. Emmings: Okay. Al Beissner: We tried to do them all three at once and we didn't find a, third user. Emmings: Do you expect it to be some auto related something or, not necessarily? Al Beissner: Yes. I would think so. The people that we've talked to have been like Champion Auto Store, Rossi Big Wheel or something like IL that. We understand that you kind of want all the automotive stuff in o area as opposed to sprinkled throughout the community and it seemed like, as long as the emission control was there, and if we can do Goodyear and Abra there, you should make that the auto center if you will and have th use there. But we have talked to Rossi Big Wheel and Champion Auto. Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 25 ' Emmings: Would you go back to your site plan? You've kind of detailed the landscaping on the north, east and west sides and what about from the view from the south where the neighbors? r Al Beissner: We aren't doing anything down here. The trees that are there will still be there and until this site gets developed, those ' poplars and dogwoods and elms will stay there. We are doing landscaping around the pond that we have to put in. Emmings: On the. Al Beissner: Both sides. ' Emmings: Okay, what's going to be on the south side of the pond? Krauss: Nothing. Just a line of trees. Al Beissner: Yeah. ...as you can kind of tell, we've gone through maybe 4 or 5 different sign designs too that would make it right and compatible and kind of make it so it's as well as you can make an auto ' architecturally compatible with an area. Batzli: Okay, thank you. Let me ask you a hypothetical question Ladd. ' Now that we just saw what we saw, if we were to say table this for tonight so that we could see final landscaping. Maybe there's still an issue about noise or something that you haven't been satisfied with. What would you want to see in relation to the roofline /architecture of the building now that we've kind of at least gotten a flavor of the history of what's been done on the Abra. What do you think the applicant could do or staff could do with the applicant to, I mean what guidance can we give them? ' Conrad: Well I think staff's always done a pretty good job of working with applicants. We're not designers up here. I get real nervous when we talk about architecture. And when we see something and we're all speaking, there's some consensus I think amongst those of us who are here that the roofline is still not comfortable. I think the history is good to see where Mr. Beissner has taken it but I'm still not comfortable with ' the roofline period. The Abra roofline is kind of artificial looking to me. It just doesn't feel right. And I think staff has asked for some things with Goodyear that might make sense but again, I'd guess I'd just ' like to see a final, and I know what Mr. Beissner's talking about. What bogey are we shooting for. What is it? What's the standard? Typically staff has given pretty good direction. I guess when I take a look at, other than maybe there's a couple cases where I might wonder but I think generally they've come back with something. We can't get a consensus here on architecture. There's just no way 6 of us are going to do that and I think staff has at feast is one voice. So I guess as long as staff is going to tell me that the noise is not a problem, I guess I'm not waiting for the applicant to tell me. I think the staff is saying noise is not a problem and that's one of the, the reason this is a conditional use is because you're obviously backed up to a neighborhood and a neighborhood that's been there for a long time and a real important neighborhood and we want things to fit in. I need the security of somebody saying, hey. We don't have jack hammers operating in an Abra thing all day long. That 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 26 would be obviously...and I'm naivee on what noise goes on in a place likil that Second thing. I guess I'm looking for a roofline that, I'm not trying to bundle costs. I guess I just see some'rooflines in the Abra thing that I don't like. And it seems that there's got to be a solution to that. And third, I'm looking for some elevations that can show me frill the highway. You know a 3 foot berm is, they typically sink and I guess I need some security that we have done our job out on Highway 5 to make th look good. And I guess, if 3 foot are standard, is that the maximum berming height that we can, our ordinance allows? Krauss: 3 foot's fairly typical. To go higher than that you almost havil to drop a wall behind it otherwise the grade gets. Conrad: And I'm not trying to hide your identity. I guarantee you that' I think it's critical that companies who buy the property have that highway identity. On the other hand, it's critical that we kind of bury some of the stuff that is a little bit offensive to the eyes as flashing by at 45 mph and that's some cars that might be there. I guess I need some really crude sketches to show me that we've done our job out there. think when you take a look at these, it's a little bit better than what I was looking at before. ' Batzli: But the staff has asked them for things in addition to what. Conrad: That's my impression. That this, you've asked for more beyond this. I'd like to see that and then just get a sense that we've done wha we're trying to do and that is to visually take care of cars that are there and I'm not looking for standards that we haven't applied to the II emission control folks. But you know it's funny, my impression of that emission control is pretty good. I think we did a good job of designing that thing so whether that tells you our taste is terrible or whatever. II I feel that fits some of what we're looking for. Batzli: Does your wife have to tell you what tie to wear with which sui Conrad: Absolutely. No, she waits until I make a mistake and then she gets me. Batzli: Does anyone else, before Paul asks his really important questiol have any other guidance for what they're looking for in the roof? Erhart: Yeah, I like the mansard roof and what I don't like about the til roofs that we're looking at is the square ends. Conrad: Yeah. I'd reinforce that. Mansard is acceptable to me. The II square. The wall that. See the wall is a face on a TH 5 and from the angle that most people, you don't follow and look directly 90 degrees at it. So typically what you're seeing is a view that it's not real. It's ' like a fake. Batzli: A set. It's a set. Conrad: You're g oing to create a fake roof no matter what but still, ye you're right. It is a set. So anyway, it doesn't. 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 27 ' Randy MacPherson: We don't like that wall either. I liked the rolled mansard. That's what I'm trying to get is the rolled mansard look. My problem is with that fake wall. It just looks like a saloon. Batzli: Right, exactly. I think that's our problem with it too and what we're struggling with is, by committee we're having a tough time saying to you well this is what we want. I actually, I think some of your previous designs were better efforts, at least closer. Something like that bothers me less than what the one, second one down, bothers me a lot less than the fake saloony kind of walls that no one's going to look at from 90 degrees. ' Farmakes: ...but if I can volunteer this. If the staff wants to meet later on this, I think we could come up with a couple of quick sketches ' that maybe would give a directional point for the client and maybe the city. But I feel real uncomfortable when we start playing with the architectural drawings in the space of 20 minutes here for something ' that's going to be here for 20 years. Batzli: I agree. ' Al Beissner: Could I leave these drawings with you then? 5o that you can have them to mill around with. ' Batzli: What I would suggest is, I'm getting the sense that we'd like to table this and get some additional information. I know Jeff for one would be more than happy to meet with staff and yourself and the architects to ' maybe noddle around and kick around some ideas. I'm volunteering you but I think that. Farmakes: ...just trying to help. 1 Batzli: Okay. I guess I'd appreciate a motion at this point from my fellow, one or more of my fellow commissioners. Oh yeah, your really important question. I'm sorry. Krauss: Well yeah, the noise question. Noise is a tough animal to regulate. There are state noise guidelines. I think the residential ' standard is 65 dba daytime and 55 nighttime. We can put a condition on there that this site not exceed those levels of noise at the property line. I like the Abra idea of keeping the doors largely shut. That could ' be applied to Goodyear. I'll bet you though that whatever noise guidelines we establish, the highway's going to drown it out anyway. ' Conrad: Well that's an interesting parallel or contrast, yeah. Krauss: But we can still make them operate to an acceptable level on site. Batzli: Two things that, before our motion, I would like to see those things that you just suggested but two other things. And they were comments by the public here that maybe weren't brought up again. One I think, I'm sorry I have just your first name written down. Tom, was it? You spoke about a mini -park. I'm unfamiliar with the location of that. Where is that in relation to this? II Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 28 II Krauss: It's almost directly across the street. II Batzli: To the south? i Krauss: To the south. Batzli: Okay. Is there uncomfort on staff's part at all with these typ s of, there's a lot of traffic on that road from OataSery and whatever els�. Krauss: Well and to be honest, I think we pointed this out when emission control came up, because the same question came up. There's going to bell lot more traffic on it. It's a collector street that passes through an office /industrial area. Most of that area's undeveloped right now. Now since the emission control station came through, we have Dell Road is no constructed and the signal is operating and I'm not sure if that's inducing a lot more traffic to come in from that side but that's the goa . Batzli: Yeah I'd like, I'm going to take another visit to that site because I didn't really see where that mini -park was in relation to that'll The other thing was, our second person from the public. Lindsay, was that the name? She mentioned something about the screening and we've heard II from the applicant. There basically isn't going to be any. Right now we're going to rely on natural screening until the site to the south develops. Is there any reason to require, obviously you don't want to have them put up screening temporarily which is all going to all be grad" down or cut down. But assume for a moment that this other site doesn't develop for a number of years, which it very well could. Is there adequate screening for the neighbors to the south right now? 1 Al -Jaff: There is a large number of elm and poplars on the site. Batzli: But elevation wise, are they going to be able to. II Al -Jaff: You won't be able to see them from the neighborhood. You won't be able to see the two buildings from the neighborhood. II Batzli: Okay. You're comfortable with that right now? Okay. Is there a motion? I Conrad: I would move that we, well I want to make sure. Let's see we've got the conditional use permit. You've got the site plan. I Erhart: I move that the Planning Commission table the approval of the site plan review. Batzli: Is there a second? II Farmakes: Second. II Batzli: Discussion. Conrad: Well yeah, what's your intent? 1 Erhart: To come back. 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 29 Conrad: Well what are you, thinking about for the other aspects? Erhart: Well I'll get to that when I get there. Conrad: So you have a strategy. What's your strategy? Erhart: I'm going to ask these guys if they want to do the subdivision ' tonight of if you want to table all of it? For sure with the site plan review we want it. ' Conrad: Right. Emmings: Well and the conditional use. ' Batzli: We're asking the applicant to sum in here, do you understand the question? ' Al Beissner: Yes, I understand and I don't think there's any reason to go through the other two...do all three at the same time. ' Erhart: Okay, well then I'll move that we table all site plan review, subdivision and conditional use until we get to review the architectural and cover some of the other issues that are still in question. Batzli: Okay, who seconded that motion? Conrad: It was me. Oh, it was Jeff? ' Farmakes: I seconded it. ' Batzli: Okay. Al Beissner: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. Are there any things in the other two that could pose a problem...? Emmings: The only other one that we talked about at some length was outside storage. Al Beissner: If we're going to table the site plan review but the subdivision agreement and the other two that you're going to act on tonight, are there any problems with those two that we should address the Council at the next meeting? Batzli: We were really talking about all three of them tonight. And I think you heard all of the problem areas. Do you accept this friendly amendment to his motion? I think you seconded it. 1 Farmakes: All three. I was assuming it was all three. Batzli: Okay. Is there any other discussion? One moment while we vote on this. Paul, is it clear to you from our Minutes what we want to see 11 next time when it comes back? Krauss: Clear as it usually is. r 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1992 - Page 30 Batzli: Well then we're golden. Is there any other discussion? , Erhart moved, Farmakes seconded that the Planning Commission table action on the Goodyear Tire and Abra site plan, subdivision and conditional use permit application for further review. All voted in favor and the motio' carried. Batzli: We did have one more question from the public. I'm sorry sir, I your name? Gerard Amedeo: Gerard Amedeo. It's not really a question. It's just all comment after listening to the discussion. It has to do with... One ha to do with the traffic that...and the gentleman brought up that he didn't think the traffic was going to be much of a problem. I'm sure that thes two gentlemen hope that he is wrong. That traffic is going to hopefully' be substantial. I think it will be. Conrad: Just responding. When we take a look at the site, and the uses' compared to a McDonald's or compared to the emission control, it's not even close. So the validity of challenging that is can that area sustain additional traffic. That's where you could challenge it. I looked at that in terms of what we had planned for and nothing seemed to me on the surface to say we're stressing the site out. Obviously there's more trips per day. There's just no doubt but when we did traffic studies before, knew that that was going to happen. 5o again, if you know some more things, I think it's valid to come back at the next meeting and share th with us but at this point, it didn't look that way. Gerard Amedeo: My second comment is that, it seems to me that the flavol of what I'm hearing all of these gentlemen say is that you're not quite sure what the image should be. You want it to be something that's positive for the city but you're not really quite sure what that is. It' seems to me we're a little late in the baligame to be deciding what that image should be when you've got applicants coming to the city with plans and drawings. This is what we want it to be and you're still not quite sure. Batzli: We have a citizens group looking at that issue. Yeah, I mean we're talking about Highway 5 from one end of the city to the other. Itlb a massive undertaking and we really weren't in a position to do that until the Highway was upgraded and we had our comprehensive plan done which wail done about a year and a half ago. So we're working on it as fast as we can and I agree, we'd rather be proactive than reactive and unfortunately on a couple of these early applications that come in, as they just finis this stretch of highway, we are being reactive and we're trying to be as cautious as we can on it. But we appreciate that. So this will be back hopefully next time. Krauss: Well we're trying to work around the holidays but we should 1 hopefully be able to get it on the next meeting. We will send out another notice to the residents just so they're sure which meeting it's on. Batzli: Thank you very much everyone for coming in. P.C. -18 -92 • C ITY 0 F C DATE: DATE: 11 12 -1492 � CIIAHASEII CASE: 92 -2 3 Plan 1 • - 90 -17 Subdivision BY: Al -Jaff 1 1 STAFF REPORT I PROPOSAL: 1) Site Plan Review for Goodyear, 5,397 Square Feet and Abra Auto Service Center, 6,494 Square Feet 1 2) Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 3.1634 Acres into 3 lots with an area of 1„ 0.939 Acres, 0.778 Acres, and 1.445 Acres 1 Z 3) Conditional Use Permit to Allow an Auto Service Facility in the BH 4 District 1 V LOCATION: South of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and east of Emission Control Testing Station CL A PPLICANT 1 � Beisner Ltd. Chanhassen Holding Company 4 6100 Summit Drive 14201 Excelsior Boulevard Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Minnetonka, MN 55436 1 1 PRESENT ZONING: Highway Business 1 ACREAGE: 3.1634 acres ADJACENT ZONING 1 AND LAND USE: N - Hwy. 5 S - RSF; Chan Estates and Lake Drive East E - IOP; DataSery 1 W - BH; Emission Control Station 1 SEWER AND WATER: Services are available to the site. 0 5 • SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is undeveloped and vegetated primarily with 1 W mature poplar and elm trees. 1 2000 LAND USE: Commercial I 1 1 od ear Abra Facility 1 Go y / November 18, 1992 Page 2 • PROPOSAL /SUMMARY • The applicant is proposing to construct an Abra Auto Body Repair and a Goodyear Auto Service facility. The site is located between Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5 adjacent to the Emission Control Testing Station. The area of the Abra site is 33,918 square feet and the Goodyear site is 40,908 square feet. Both sites are located in a Highway Business District. The site is visible directly from Highway 5 and has access from Lake Drive East via a private drive. In an accompanying subdivision request, the site is being divided into three lots, one of which will contain the Goodyear building, the second will contain the Abra building, and the third will be reserved for future development. The parcel is zoned BH so that high intensity commercial uses are likely to be proposed but staff is not aware of any pending developments. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. Conditions proposed for review would result in dedication of all required easements. The site plan is reasonably well developed. Staff has been working with the applicant for the past three months on the site plan and building architecture. The design has improved considerably and the applicant has been quite cooperative with staff. The Goodyear building is a split face concrete block accented by a sandable decorative texture finish structure that will have a series of service bays and a pitched roof. The Abra building has decorative integral color concrete block. The north and south elevations have a pitched element to them. All services for both facilities will take place inside the buildings. Staff would have preferred to have the buildings utilize a coordinated architectural theme. However, the underlying zoning and lack of HRA involvement does not provide a great deal of leverage. Minor architectural revisions are being proposed to further improve both building designs. 1 Parking for vehicles is located on the north and west side of both structures away from Lake Drive. This location is ideal since it places these areas further away from residences south of Lake Drive. The Goodyear site will be operated from 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. on Saturdays. The Abra site will be operated from 7:30 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. on Saturdays to provide estimates on work required on a vehicle. Body work will take place from 8:00 a.m. until 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Both sites will be closed on Sundays. There will be no outdoor storage or outdoor servicing of vehicles. Staff is further requiring that there be no outside storage of damaged or inoperable vehicles. The site landscaping is generally of high quality due to the attention that was paid to this issue by staff and the applicant. Additional landscaping is being requested on the north side of the site along Highway 5, and along the parameters of the retention pond located to the south of Lot 3. There is a large number of poplar and elm trees on the site. All of the trees on both Lots 1 and 2 are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not of 1 1 } 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility November 18, 1992 1 Page 3 valuable quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. Their loss is unfortunate 1 but is unavoidable if the land it to be developed. When the Emission Control Site was reviewed, site access was a major concern of staff's ' throughout the design of the proposal. Our original thinking was that a public cul-de -sac should be required running north from Lake Drive since there may ultimately be 4 sites accessing Lake Drive via that connection. However, staff was concerned that the need to create a cul -de -sac at ' the end of the street would result in a hazardous traffic situation, whereby traffic entering and leaving the sites would be cutting across the cul -de -sac in an uncontrolled manner. Therefore, we recommended that the plans be revised to utilize a commonly owned and maintained private 1 driveway system that will avoid the traffic conflicts outlined above. The private driveway was built to city standards which required the full 32' pavement width and a 9 ton design and curb and gutter. The current access provisions are acceptable, however, plans to provide the 1 driveway's long term maintenance by the land owners should be clarified. Staff regards the project as a reasonable if unexceptional use of the land. It is unfortunate that 1 the Hwy. 5 Study could not have been completed earlier since it will likely result in development standards that are more sensitive to the corridor's image. The Planning Commission may want ' to consider referring the request to the Hwy. 5 Task Force to gain their input. However, the city's ability to leverage substantial changes to what is otherwise a reasonable request, based upon current ordinances, may be limited. 1 Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the site plan, without variances, conditional use permit and subdivision requests for this proposal. BACKGROUND ' On January 28, 1991, the City Council approved final plat #90 -17 for Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition. The subdivision resulted in dividing 5.59 acres into 2 lots with an area of 1.9 acres for Lot 1 and 3.0 acres for Lot 2. Lot 1 became the site for the Emission Control Testing Station ' which was approved as a conditional use permit concurrently with the subdivision. Lot 2 was reserved for future development and is being proposed for subdivision into three lots with this application. 1 GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE The building is situated parallel to Lake Drive East and Hwy. 5. Access is gained off of a private driveway which connects to Lake Drive East. Parking is located to the north and west of the proposed buildings. The nearest home is located 350 feet away from the south edge of the actively used portion of the site. Direct views of the service bays will be screened by berming and landscaping from both Hwy. 5 and Lake Drive. 1 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 4 The Goodyear site is located 75 feet from the north, 30 feet from the east, 75 from the south, and 75 from the west property' line. The Abra site is located 105 feet from the north, 10 feet from the east, 45 feet from the south, and 55 feet from the west property line. Materials used on the Goodyear building will be split face concrete block accented by a sandable decorative texture finish. The Abra building will be constructed of integral color concrete block with a pre- finished galvanized steel canopy accent. Pre- finished metal overhead doors will be used on the east and west elevations of the Goodyear structure and on the north, south and west elevations of the Abra building. The buildings' architecture meets the standards of the site plan ordinance requirements. The Goodyear building will have a pitched roof that is a 100 feet in length. Staff is recommending the introduction of dormers along the roof line to break it up and reflect what has become typical fhanhassen CBD design. The north and south elevations of the Abra building have a pitched element to them, however, the north elevation looks bare. Staff is recommending the pre - finished galvanized steel canopy be extended along the north elevation. 1 Auto services at both facilities will take place inside the buildings. The roof system is being used to screen roof mounted equipment. The applicant is showing the trash enclosures screened by a split face concrete block to match the Goodyear building materials. The gate to the trash enclosure is shown facing east on the elevations plan, and facing north on the site plan. Staff recommends the gate face to the west to minimize views from Hwy. 5. The Abra site plan shows a trash enclosure located at the northwest edge of the building; however, the applicant has failed to show the trash enclosure on the elevation plan. It is recommended that the trash enclosure gate face east. The gates to the trash enclosure will be constructed of chain link 1 fencing. PARKING/INTERIOR CIRCULATION The City's parking ordinance for vehicle service stations requires 4 parking stalls per service stall. The Goodyear site will require 16 stalls. The applicant is providing 32 stalls. The Abra site will require 24 stalls. The applicant is providing 25 stalls. Berming and landscaping is proposed along the north side, adjacent to Highway 5. This will provide screening of cars parked in the lot. ACCESS Access to the development is provided by an existing private street off Lake Drive East which services the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station (MVIS). Similarly, this development does not propose any public right -of -way for extension of the proposed street and therefore access to the lots will be private. A driveway or cross - access easement should be recorded in conjunction with the final plat recording to guarantee access to the lots. There should also be a joint maintenance 1 agreement, acceptable to the city, filed against each parcel. We do not wish to see the city petitioned to accept the street at some point in the future. • 1 .! } Goodyear /Abra Facility November 18, 1992 ' Page 5 The existing private street was built in accordance to the City's typical commercial pavement design with the thought that someday it would be dedicated back to the City for ownership. Engineering staff feels with the concept proposed the City will not be taking ownership of the street and therefore the street pavement/parking lot designs may be designed accordingly. The preliminary plat provides the necessary drainage and utility easement for the public improvements with the exception of a storm sewer line along the easterly line of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff recommends that the easement be increased to 20 feet wide to provide adequate room for maintenance. We also recommend that a standard 5 -foot wide drainage and utility easement be dedicated on both sides of the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. The plans propose extending the private street from the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station located adjacent to the development. Since this roadway will not be a public street, staff is comfortable with the proposal. The layout is similar to a mini -mall type parking lot design with one access from a public street (Lake Drive East). LANDSCAPING The landscaping plan is very well conceived. Staff worked closely with the applicant to design the landscaping plan. Berating is proposed along the north and south side of the site. The ' vehicles that will park along the north edge of the site must be totally screened by the berms and landscaping. Additional landscaping is being requested on the north side of the site along Highway 5. The trees shown on the landscaping plan are 16 feet in diameter. It is likely that 1 they will reach this size in 10 or 15 years, but until then additional landscaping will be required. Staff is recommending that 8 spruce or Black Hills evergreens be added to each site. Also, along the south lot line of Lot 3, the applicant is proposing a retention pond. This pond will have a ' depth exceeding 8 feet with an average of one foot standing water. Staff is recommending that the pond parameter be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site is also lacking in trees. Four additional evergreens are required. • There is a large number of poplar and elm trees on the site. All the trees on both lots 1 and 2 are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not of high quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. The applicant is attempting to replace some of these trees with a better quality. LIGHTING Lighting locations have not been illustrated on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than 1/2 foot candles of light at the property line as required by ordinance. An acceptable lighting plan should be submitted when building 1 permits are requested. 1 • 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility 1 November 18, 1992 Page 6 SIGNAGE 1 The applicant has submitted a signage plan. One monument identification sign is proposed at the north edge of the site facing Highway 5. Staff proposed that if the Goodyear and the Abra signs were combined into one free standing sign, the third parcel located to the south would be - permitted to have signage facing Highway 5 too. This third sign would be part of the Abra and Goodyear free standing sign. The applicant has been working on a design for the free standing sign; however, we believe additional refinement is required. The area of the sign is proposed to be 60 square feet. The ordinance allows 64 square feet in area and a maximum height of 8 feet for monument signs. The sign is designed as a monument and not a pylon due to the height of the sign board above the ground. The applicant is requesting a height of 12 feet. Considering the fact that the applicant could place a pylon sign with an area of 80 square feet and a height of 20 feet, staff is in favor of granting a 4 foot variance for the height of the monument sign. It is a clear benefit to have one coordinated sign instead of two individual pylon signs. Both buildings have two wall mounted signs along the north and west elevations. The ordinance requires that no wall mounted sign exceed 80 square feet of display area or 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the sign is mounted. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the sign on site. One stop sign must be posted on the driveway at the exit point - of both sites. A sign plan acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. GRADING AND DRAINAGE 1 The site is approximately six feet lower than the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The plan proposes to regrade a portion of the access drive to provide a smooth transition between developments. Storm drainage from the proposed development will sheet flow across the driveways and parking lot areas and then conveyed via storm sewer system to a proposed detention pond located over the southerly portion of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff has reviewed the size of the detention pond and found it is under capacity and needs to be enlarged to accommodate runoff from this development and the adjacent MVIS site. The pond should be modified to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927' contour line. This will also provide a 2- foot freeboard around the pond basin. The pond is not designed to meet NURP standards as is the city's current policy. To do so 1 would require additional wet area which would severely compromise the utility of the remaining lots. Staff believes that this problem can be addressed downstream at a city owned pond. The developer should be required to pay an equivalent fee into the Surface Water Management Program fund to accomplish these improvements downstream The charge is currently being computed by the city's consultant and will be made available at the Planning Commission 1 meeting. 1 1 1 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility November 18, 1992 1 Page 7 The applicant is proposing a series of catch basins and storm sewer to convey runoff to the ponding basin. From the city's standpoint, the catch basins and storm sewers located within the drainage basin and main street access should be owned by the city to maintain drainage. The individual storm sewer line extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 from the street should be maintained and owned by the individual property owners. Erosion control measures shall be incorporated onto the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be 1 installed along the north, east and southeasterly sides of the development. PUBLIC UTILITIES Both municipal sanitary sewer and watermain are available to the site. The plans propose �T'Y ose on P P P extending the existing 6 -inch watermain and looping to the existing 10 -inch watermain located ' just east of the development. Sanitary sewer was extended previously in conjunction with development of the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The applicant is proposing to extend sanitary sewer and water service to each lot. All utility construction should be in conformance with the latest edition of the city's standard specification and detailed plates. Formal plan and specification approval will be required at time of final platting. 1 Since the development will include construction of public improvements, it will be necessary for the applicant to enter into a development contract and provide the financial security to guarantee installation of the public improvements. Upon completion of these public improvements, the city will formally accept for perpetual maintenance and ownership most of the utilities within the utility and drainage easements. The city will not be responsible for ownership and maintenance of the storm sewer extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. This is considered a private storm sewer line. ' All three lots will be served with municipal utilities. The appropriate hookup fees will be charged at the time of building permit issuance. 1 MISCELLANEOUS As a part of Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition, an outlot (A) was created. This outlot covers the existing private street. The intent was for the developer to dedicate back to the city, at some future date when the street was extended, the street and Outlot A as public street and right -of- way. However, as proposed the city would have no reason to accept the street. We do not want 1 to see the outlot go tax forfeit nor do we want to see the driveway's maintenance be avoided by the property owners. Therefore, staff suggests Outlot A be incorporated into the replat as part of Lot 3 or resolved in some other acceptable matter to the city. 1 1 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility 1 November 18, 1992 Page 8 1 • COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT Ordinance Abra Goodyear Building Height 2 stories 1 story 1 story 1 Building Setback N -20' E -10' N- 105'E -10' N- 75'E -30' S -25' W -10' S- 45'W -55' S- 75'W -75' Parking stalls 24/16 stalls 25 stalls 32 stalls 1 Parking Setback N -25' E -10' N- 60'E -10' N- 27'E -15' S -25' W -10' S-45' W -15' S -35' W -26' Hard surface 65% 62% 64.6% Coverage 1 Lot Area 20,000 s.f. 34,163 s.f. 42,410 s.f. Variances Required - none 1 PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES The City is requiring that park and trails fees be submitted in lieu of park land. Fees are paid 1 at the time building permits are requested. These fees are currently assessed at a rate of $2,500 per acre and $833 per acre for park and trail fees, respectively. As such, the Goodyear site will be charged $3,245 in park and trail fees, and the Abra site will be charged $2,614. SUBDIVISION .� The subdivision proposal is a relatively simple request that will serve to divide the site (3.136 acres) into three lots, one of which will contain the Goodyear building (40.904 square feet), the second will contain the Abra building (33,918 square feet), and the third (62,969 square feet) will be reserved for future development. The parcel is zoned BH so that higher intensity commercial uses are likely to be proposed but staff is not aware of any pending developments. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. Conditions proposed for review would result in dedication of all required easements. The following easements are either illustrated on the plat or should be acquired: 1 1. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeters of all lots. 1 1 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 9 2. Drainage and conservation easement located over the pond on lot 3. 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Auto Service Facilities are permitted in the BH District as a conditional use. The following 1 constitutes our review of this proposal against conditional use .permit standards and with conditional use permit standards provided in the draft ordinance revision pertaining to emission control testing stations. ' GENERAL ISSUANCE STANDARDS 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or city. FINDING - The site is zoned BH. The proposed uses will not create any significant or unexpected impacts from this use and, in fact, in many respects impacts . generated by this use are less by a significant factor then would have occurred or could have occurred if more intensive uses allowed by the Zoning Ordinance were to be developed on the site. ' 2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. r FINDING - The proposed use would be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. The Hwy. 5 Corridor Plan is not yet completed or incorporated into the 1 Comprehensive Plan. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in ' appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. FINDING - The site is located adjacent to a major highway and a collector road. It is in the Chanhassen commercial district and as such a commercial building is fully consistent with this site. Staff has worked with the applicant in an 1 attempt to achieve design compatibility with the Chanhassen CBD and Hwy. 5 design efforts. 4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. FINDING - There will be no measurable impacts to the existing or planned 1 neighboring uses. 1 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility 1 November 18, 1992 Page 10 1 5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. 1 FINDING - Full city services are available to this site. Roads serving the site have recently been upgraded and are fully capable of handling the access needs of this proposal. 6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. FINDING - There are no projected needs for public facilities and services beyond those which are already provided in this area. 7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of 1 operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash. 1 FINDING - This site will not create adverse impacts to persons, property or the general welfare of the area. Hours of operation, orientation of the bays away from 111 residence, and lighting standards will comply with city ordinances. 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic 1 congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares. FINDING - The site is visible from a major highway and is accessible from that highway by 2 signalized intersections and a collector street designed to commercial standards. There will be no direct traffic impacts to any area residential neighborhood. 9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance. FINDING - The development of this site will result in the loss of a large number of poplar and elm trees. These trees currently act as a buffer between the highway and area residential properties. These trees are not of high quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. In order to develop the site, the majority of the trees will have to be removed. Extensive landscaping is being required in part to make up for this loss. • 1 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility November 18, 1992 ' Page 11 There are a large number of mature evergreens located along the south ' side Lake Drive East that still provide the required buffering. 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. 1 FINDING - The site plan is well designed to provide adequate landscaping and buffering from adjoining properties. The buildings are to be built of brick ' and decorative concrete block. Site operations are designed to maximize off -site screening as much as possible. ' 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values. FINDING - The site is being used for a commercial type of operation which is 1 consistent with its designation. 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. 1 FINDING - The following is our review of conditions of approval and appropriate findings: a. No unlicensed or inoperable vehicles shall be stored on premises except in appropriately designed and screened storage areas. ' FINDING - All operations will be conducted inside the buildings. ' b. All repair, assembly, disassembly and maintenance of vehicles shall occur within closed building except minor maintenance including, but not limited to, tire inflation, adding oil and wiper replacement. ' FINDING - There will be no repairs performed outdoors. Staff p perf is further restricting outdoor parking of damaged or inoperable vehicles. c. No public address system shall be audible from any residential parcel. FINDING - The buildings will be at a distance that exceeds 300 feet from any residence and will be screened by landscaping. d. Stacking areas deemed to be appropriate by the City shall meet parking setback requirements. t FINDING - There are no drive through facilitates being proposed. 1 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility 1 November 18, 1992 Page 12 e. No sales, storage or display of used automobiles or other vehicles such as motorcycles, snowmobiles, or all- terrain vehicles. FINDING - Both operations specialize in repair of vehicles, not sales. f. Disposal of waste oil shall comply with PCA regulations. Facilities for the 1 collection of waste oil must be provided. FINDING - A condition is being added requiring proper disposal of waste oil. g. Gas pumps and/or storage tank vent pipes shall not be located within one hundred feet of any parcel zoned or guided for residential use. FINDING - Not applicable. 1 h. A minimum separation two hundred fifty feet is required between the nearest gas pumps of individual parcels for which a conditional use permit is begin requested. FINDING - Not applicable. 1 Based upon the foregoing findings, staff is recommending that the conditional use permit be approved with appropriate conditions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1 Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: ' L SITE PLAN REVIEW "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review #92 -3 as shown on the site plan dated September 21, 1992, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant must revise plans to include trash screening for the Abra site with a gate 1 facing east and a second for Goodyear with a gate facing west. Plans must be submitted for staff review prior to City Council meeting. 1 2. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting any signage on site. Provide a detailed sign plan for staff review prior to the City Council meeting. The monument sign may not exceed 12 feet in height. Sign covenants are to be submitted outlining the 1 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility November 18, 1992 ' Page 13 use and limit of one common sign and allowances for its use by the remaining undeveloped lot. 3. The applicant shall provide p e an additional 16 evergreens along the south side of Highway 5 to provide better screening of the parking area. The retention pond parameters shall be landscaped with trees and hedges. The easterly portion of the site shall be provided with four additional evergreens. The applicant shall also provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used in calculating the required financial guarantees. These ' guarantees must be posted prior to building permit issuance. 4. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required. ' 5. The applicant shall provide flammable waste separator as required by building code. 6. Provide a complete, final set of civil engineering documentation to staff for review and approval. 7. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal Memo. 1 . 8. The applicant shall post "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. Signs shall be placed at 100 -foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. ' 9. The applicant shall introduce dormers along the east and west roof line of the Goodyear building to break it up. The pre - finished galvanized steel canopy shall be extended along 1 the north elevation of the Abra building. 10. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be 1 submitted. 11. The applicant shall pay $7,580 the Surface Water Management Program fund for water 1 quality treatment downstream of the site." IL SUBDIVISION "The Planning Commission recommends r - g s app oval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #90 17 1 for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition as shown on plat dated September 21, 1992, with the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits are requested. 2. Provide the following easements: 1 • 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 14 1 a. A standard 5 -foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. 1 b. Drainage easement located over the drainage pond. c. A drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. g ty 8 Y • 3. Enter into a development agreement acceptable to the city. 1 4. A driveway or cross - access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. 5. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the Watershed 1 District, Health Department, etc. 6. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze -up, special modifications 1 to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. 1 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The outlot shall be replatted/combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre/feet of runoff below the 927.0' contour line. 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type 1 I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. 11. The applicant shall reimburse the city for all engineering consultant fees associated with the storm water study." III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1 "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit #92 -2 subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with conditions of site plan and plat approval. 1 \- 1 Goodyear /Abra Facility November 18, 1992 Page 15 2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site. • 3. No parking or stacking is allowed in fire lanes, drive aisles, access drives or public rights - of -way. 1 4. No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored over night on the Abra site." ATTACHMENTS 1. Revised monument sign plans. 2. Example photocopies of the proposed buildings. 3. Memo from Dave Hempel dated October 14, 1992. 1 4. Memo from Mark Littfin dated October 8, 1992. 5. Memo from Todd Hoffman dated October 12, 1992. 6. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District. 7. Memo from the DNR dated October 2, 1992. 8. Letter from MnDOT dated October 29, 1992. 9. Site plan dated September 21, 1992. 1 1 1 . . .. . .. . .. - ... ..-...... ...... .... . ______.. ............ ....... lemomp■•••■•• St-It bra' id tax transmittal memo 7671 *co Peps k / ) 1 llOgill11111111111111 iiiiMMIBIEll s % ' • WM IIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII / • MU / i • fo 5 0 0 XX X •• • SC9 • • . . • ■ I • IMMOMO i est.“ rz .4...• ........._■••■■••••00.. 1 ..... - • • • •• •••,.. • . a. ..... , • .• ■ . _ J . - _j...., [4 ________....................._. ‘ 1 ......., I. , 1 i - j _. ..... • .... .•• Pr • . • •••■ 1 • •_. ••■ • - - ■• . 1 NM ME r ________ _•• 1 • . • ME I irl•ign.1........~•■•■•••••■•/...11••........0........".......• .........,.... . =•••••■•••■•=.1.. ,g.......■•■..........w. tit 6 1 g erS a° Se' se V " tato us Lb toms, 1 • 1 1 • • 1 .: • t•.. ,.+: S' -•► . _. . . . _ - • _._ _1111. 1111. 1111 _. i �.�. —• -- __ . __._ �_.._. 11_11 � • 1111_ Ii■ ■11■� post -It" brand fax transmittal •e1 • / t; II.IC u!e ■ ®. .. 1 ■.11111 al memo 7 . K� � ■■!i■i.i ■ ■■..11 1111■ ■.! ■G .t. , �■ 11 • • 11 ...■. mumu ..!_ Fax Y1A1 - FIX# .508 _ 1111 ■1111■ • w.i.iliii Ii ■.11Ii1l.! . ..■. ..... ice.! ■■ ■.l �i 1 �� RM � IN..MI..i1111 ■■ ■!1101! ■ ■i.l�i •■■. 1 ■ ■ ■..111■w11■. ■w1r411• ■w! ■.4NIM�P11■ ■11111 ■ ■11■ ■11■11i.■liM!■■LN ■i.11 ■r i.11N2111.. ■.1111 1•11111liii111111iii11MiitENttiiIIIIIIINEMMINIIIIIiINII fi r■ ■.!■!■ ■■■ ■■■■■ ■.■..�...■ ime .■111 i■ i ummou �r ■!l�■■ ■■r .! ■l01 iummu 01■■i� ■. ■■ • ■ 11!!1111 num rsrlr ■1111■ . 11111111111111111111111111 r .11 ■a■ 1 11111■ IM EE - oot:OrtAit iirniiiiii II1D4111111 _ ■■ w 11. IWO llama Am non ■■U■ . ■■■■ ■I�r rrl•iu ■■ ■ � ■■lli ■1.■ ■01. 11 ■ 11 IP 111111111111 f 1 ' iliiiiiii ,11111`Hl 11` �_�.... 11 C [ 3 Li X k ■!If 111 M lrirrmmammuiRE ME 111: 1111111 r 1n...■ .1■ ■11.�■mrw!!w!l, lMl1■ ■11■ _ UR■■■■ 0111 ■a.1a■rr�rrmmir ■r■ a ■■is M ■E ■11 ■11■ �t #1 :51::c:R V irAI ( ! • ••55.115511 miUR�R *iii imii *5558 i milli 11 5 *.. •1•111111111111111 ■■!■ Ir ■■iiRlilar■ri■ IIInis ■ 1_ t�11551511I 1 1111. �� ■... Na01! Nom ■ ■■ ■.0 1■■ ■ 11■ ■.r■ ��II:IIIC 10 ■IICICI : :IIC1 : :1� :: : :1■■ 1111 ■1111■ '"'• ■ ■.1 �.ANIMM1 .I. . • 1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■■■IICC ■■!•�laa L1 alaki �immos•I. .o:::IC111" lla 1 WUN'?�, 1 1 ' I :CC:: - ■Il : : : : : :alia .�"I II''l. :III1 t ■ ■■■■ . . ■•■ ••.... MINI1111111111§1111M111 11 11 _ 1 11111fli ..• • . i CITYOF 1 - 6 90 COULTER DRIVE • • P.O. BOX 147 • • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 i MEMORANDUM - TO: Sharmin Al Jaf Planner I FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician ri f d'i' DATE: October 14, 1992 SUBJ: Review of Replat - Lot 2, Block 1 Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition into Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition; Site Plan Review for Goodyear and ABRA I Auto Service Center Project No. 92 -16 and LUR 92-17 . i I. v. Upon review of the preliminary plat for Chan ,Haven Plaza 4th Addition, I offer the 0 following comments and recommendations: ACCESS ,t. N , ,, Access to the development is provided by an existing private street off Lake Drive East which services the Minnesota "Vehicle Inspection 'Station (MVIS). Similarly, this a d development does not propose any public right -of -way for extension of the proposed street and therefore access to the lots will be private. A driveway or cross -access easement should be recorded in conjunction with the final plat recording to guarantee access to the lots. The existing private street was built in accordance to the City's typical commercial pavement design with the thought that someday it would be dedicated back to the City for ownership. f Engineering staff feels with the concept proposed the City will not be taking ownership of the street and therefore the street pavement /parking lot designs may be designed accordingly. The preliminary plat provides the necessary drainage and utility easement for the public improvements with the exception of a storm sewer line along the easterly line of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff recommends that the easement be increased to 20 -foot wide to provide adequate room for maintenance. We also recommend that a standard 5 -foot wide drainage and utility easement be dedicated on both sides of the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. 1 1 m to or PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 1 Sharmin Al -Jaff October 14, 1992 1 Page 2 ' UTILITIES Both municipal sanitary sewer and watermain is available to the site. The plans propose ' on extending the existing 6 -inch watermain and looping to the existing 10 -inch watermain located just east of the development. Sanitary sewer was extended previously in conjunction with development of the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The applicant is proposing to extend a sanitary sewer and water service to each lot. All utility construction should be in conformance with the latest edition of the City's standard specification and detailed plates. Formal plan and specification approval will be required at time of final platting. 1 Since the development will include construction of public improvements, it will be necessary for the applicant to enter into a development contract and provide the financial security to I guarantee installation of the public improvements. Upon completion of these public improvements, the City will formally accept for perpetual maintenance and ownership most of the utilities within the utility and drainage easements. The City will not be responsible for ownership and maintenance of the storm sewer extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. This is considered a private storm sewer line. 1 GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site is approximately six feet lower than the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection Station. The plan proposes to regrade a portion of the access drive to provide a smooth transition between developments. Storm drainage from the proposed development will sheet flow across the driveways and parking lot areas and then conveyed via storm sewer system to a proposed detention pond located over the southerly portion of Lot 3, Block 1. Staff has reviewed the size of the detention pond and found it is under capacity and needs to be enlarged to accommodate runoff from this development and the adjacent MVIS site. The pond should be modified to accommodate 0.95 acre /feet of runoff below the 927 contour line. This will also provide a 2 -foot freeboard around the pond basin. 1 The applicant is proposing a series of catch basins and storm sewer to convey runoff to the ponding basin. From the City's standpoint, the catch basins and storm sewers located within the drainage basin and main street access should be owned by the City to maintain drainage. The individual storm sewer line extended between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 from the street should be maintained and owned by the individual property owners. i Erosion control measures shall be incorporated onto the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly sides of the development. 1 1 1 1 Sharmin Al -Jaff October 14, 1992 Page 3 MISCELLANEOUS As a part of Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition, an outlot (A) was created. This outlot covers the existing private street. The intent was for the developer to dedicate back to the City, at some future date when the street was extended, the street and Outlot A as public street and right -of -way. However, as proposed the City would have no reason to accept the street. Therefore, staff suggests Outlot A be incorporated into the replat as part of Lot 3 or resolved in some other acceptable matter to the City. Our concerns are that the outlot could be left to go tax forfeit. SITE PLAN REVIEW - GOODYEAR /ABRA 1 Upon review of the plans prepared by Blumentals Architecture, Inc. dated September 21, 1992, I offer the following comments and recommendations: 1 SITE ACCESS The lans propose on extending the private street from the Minnesota Vehicle P P Po g P Inspection Station located adjacent to the development. Since this roadway will not be a public street, staff is comfortable with the proposal. The layout is similar to a mini -mall type parking lot design with one access from a public street (Lake Drive East). 1„JT1LITIES 1 All three lots will be served with municipal utilities. The appropriate hookup fees will be charged at the time of building permit issuance. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1 Preliminary Plat Approval 1 1. The final plat shall dedicate a drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. 1 2. A driveway or cross -access easement for use of the existing and proposed street shall be dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance agreement acceptable to the City. 1 1 . • Sharmin Al -Jaff October 14, 1992 1 Page 4 • ' 3. A standard 5 -foot wide drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated along the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1. 1 4. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the Watershed District, Health Department, etc. 5. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze -up, special modifications to construction practices shall be incorporated as directed by the City Engineer, i.e. full depth select granular material for trench backfill, etc. 1 6. The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide p p ty an p ovide the necessary financial securities as required. 7. The developer shall construct the sanitary sewer and watermain improvements in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specification and Detail Plates and submit final plans and specifications for formal City approval. 1 8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The outlot shall be replatted /combined with Lot 3, Block 1. 9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre /feet of runoff below the 927.0 contour line. ' 10. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Type I silt fence shall be installed along the north, east and southeasterly perimeters of the plat. Site Plan Approval ' 1. The applicant shall post "No Parking - Fire Lane" signs along the south curb line on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Signs shall be placed at 100 -foot intervals and the curb painted yellow. 1 jms / ktm c: Charles Folch, City Engineer 1 • 1 1 • • 1 CITYOF Wt.114' CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I 1 FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal • Fire Prevention Bureau 111 DATE: October 8, 1992 SUBJ: Site Plan Review for Goodyear & Abra Auto Service Center Planning Case 90 -17 SUB, 92 -2 CUP & 92 -3 SPR The Chanhassen Fire Marshal reviewed the proposed site plan and has the following requirements: `y 1. Ten (10) foot clear space around fire hydrants, i.e. NSP, telephone, trees, shrubs, etc. City Ordinance. 2. Fire Department Policy #04=1991 (included). 3. Fire Department Policy #06 -1991 (included). Placement to be determined prior to issuance of CO. Wy k k _. 4. Fire Department Policy #07 -1991 (included). 5. Fire Department Policy /29-1992 (included). 1 -... _ _ -_. _< <...... .` �. s - ._£'3d. `r"'A- <1'�a:. =-12 KGs +.� - Y 3 - :- ^:•.YY... :.,., �=2. - :.e �� ` +-• ..,s,t� - -` - ads+_. t" . 1 1 1 t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 I ,, ., 0 I TY OF ,i,. a , -,,,,,,,I., CHANHASSEN 1 , „,.... $, y17 ,_ - s 1� �"4-- 690 COULTER DRIVE • .P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 , -4 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY 1 tEOUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE BIGNAGE • 1. Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18 ". 1 . NO 2. Red on white is preferred. PARKING I FIRE LANE 3. 3M or equal engineer's grade reflective sheeting on aluminum is preferred. 1 " 4. Wording shall be: NO PARKING • FIRE LANE 1 5.s shall be posted at each end the fire lane and at least at 7'0" 5 ' pot intervals along the 1 ire A11 s shall be double sided 1 ' facingthe direction of travel. / Post sh 11 be set back a I ,s minimum '..f 12" but not more than r 36" from' = he curb. 8 . A fire 1- e shall be required in I - (NOT TO G RADE front of �`wre dept. connections SCALE) extending u feet on each side and 'kMJC ` �` lonq=.as designated by the ANY DEVIATION FRON THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL E UBMITTED IN I WRITING, WITH A SITE`"PIJUI, ; = BAR. APPROVAL BY g C HIEF. IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE CEP r:P� "TO ENSURE CONTINUITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDI G ESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF FIRE LANES. I y,_ Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention I Policy #06 -1991 filf V Date: 1/15/91 Revised: II Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 1 sr PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER • CITYOF ) 1 I 4 „,.._,.„,... 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 . (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE. DEPARTMENT POLICY 1 • CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES TO BE INCLUDED ON ALL BITE PLANS All the following required P ired ins ections shall be scheduled 24 hours II in advance with the Fire Marshal: 1. Witnessing the flushing of underground sprinkler service 1 line, per NFPA 13- 8 -2.1. 2. Hydrostatic test of sprinkler system and 24 hour air test I for dry systems. 3. Testing of all smoke detection, manual pull stations, and fire suppression syste . II 4. Installation of fire a i nguishers 2A -40BC rated minimum. Install one by each e door and as designated by Fire Inspector. 5. Extinguishers shall Oe - p vided before final approval. II 6. A final inspection,: by Fire Inspector before a Certificate of Occu ancy issued. Fire Department access oad shall be -i rovided on site during all 1 phases of construction. TIe construct ,on of these temporary roads will conform with the Chanhassen Fire , epartment requirements for temporary access roads -at construction sites. Details are II available. Onsite fire hydrant hall be provided a in operating condition II during all phases4tf construction. The use ofef i pe" <a" eum_ ' as i = — � `' • - in conformance with NFPA Standard 8 and:.Ethe:'4iituiesota ni; lra<s ' -, ode A list of 1 • these requirements is available. All fire detection an ` -fire suppression systems -s all be monitored II by an approved UL central scat cn 3thl YL "71 Certificate issued on these systems before final ficcipancy is issued. If 1 Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention II Policy #04 -1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: -Page 1 of 2 1 Pt No or PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1. - ( An 04" x 11" mylar As Built shall be provided to the Fire . Department. The As Built shall be reproducible and acceptable to the Fire Marshal. 1 An approved lock box shall be provided on the building for fire department use.- The lock box should be located by the Fire Department connection or as located by the Fire Marshal. The domestic supply from a combination domestic and fire protection line shall not exceed one fourth (1 /4) the total pipe size at the 1 line. High -piled combustible storage shall comply with the requirements ' of Article 181 of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code High -piled combustible storage is combustible materials on closely packed piles more than 15' in height or combustible materials on pallets or in racks more than 12' in height. For certain special- hazard commodities such as rubber tires, plastics, some flammable liquids, idle pallets, etc. the critical pile height may be as low as 6 feet. Fire lane sianage shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshal. (see policy #06- 1991). 1 ,Smoke detectors installed in lieu of 1 hour rated corridors under UBC section 3305G, Exception #5 shall comply with Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for installation and system type. (see policy #05- 1991). 1 1 1 1 Chanhassen Fire Department Fire Prevention Policy #04 -1991 Date: 11/22/91 Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director _ Page 2 of 2 • • . . . } .., CITYOF 1 �� E , . CHANHASSEN is „. j 1 �; ;,� _ i 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 _,., (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY 1 ZREMISES IDENTIFICATION General 1 Numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall I contrast with their background. Size and location of numbers shall be approved by one of the following - Public Safety Director, Building Official, Building Inspector, Fire Marshal. 1 Requirements are for new construction and existing buildings where no address numbers are posted. �x. Other Requirements - General = II 1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color fro the background. I 2. Numbers shalt not be M .t script '' 3. If a structure is not visible from the street, additional numbers are required at the driveway entrance. Size d I I and location must be approve 4. Numbers on mail box at driveway entrance may be a minimum of 4 ". However, requirement #3 must still be mat - I 5. Administrative authority may require additional numbers if deemed necessary. Residential Requirements (2 or less doodling well I 1. Minimum height shall be 5 1 /4 ". 2. Building permits will not be flnaled unless numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department Comm rd t ai Requirements _ I 1. Minimum height shaMbe 12 2. Strip Malls - I a. Multi tenant building will have minimum height requirements of 6". b. Address numbers shall be on the main entrance and on all back doors. 3. if address numbers are located on a directory entry sign, additional numbers will be required on the buildings main entrance. _ Chanhassen Fire Department II Fire Prevention li)":2--fl----"------ Policy #29 -1992 Date: 06/15/92 II Revised: Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 . I L 4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 • 1 I , ) , A IF • CITYOF t � fy ifr . s,. • ``: . �` ` 1, .4 „,* = DRIVE 690 COULTER • i P.O. B OX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937 -1900 •FAX (612) 937 -5739 II CHANHASSEN FIRE EPARTMENT OLICY REGSU.JING li PA II Prior to issuing the C.O. to the Fire Department for approval. Plan, site plan shall be submitted shown on the PProval. The following II g items shall be 1 ) Size 11" x 17" (maximum) 2 ) Building footprint and building dimensions II 3 ) Fire lanes and width of fire lanes 4 ) Water mains and their sizes, 5 ) Fire hydrant locations indicate looped or deadend I 6) P. I.V. P •I•V. - Fire Department co 7) Gas meter (shut-off) action 8 ) Lock box location , NSP hut off) II 9 ) Fire walls, if applicable . , - 10) Roof vents, if a ppllcablg 11) Interior walls e-.a 12) Exterior doors II 13) Location of fire alarm 14) Sprinkler riser locat• anel H 15) Exterior L.P. storage if a 16) Haz. Mat. storage, applicable cable b9 e 18) Underground stora Type of construe o tanks locations if applicable 19 ) Standpipes on walls /roof 1 t., - 1 „^yr'K Chanhassen Fire Department Fire. Prevention Policy #07 -19 Date: 01/16/91 Revised: Approved - public Safety Director Page 1 of 1 II i .fr 1 is 4pi PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER , , , 1 _ . CITY F 1 i 1 ,.,. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 3 MEMORANDUM 1 TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner One 1 FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator DATE: October 12, 1992 SUBJ: Goodyear and Abra Service Center 1 The above mentioned site plan review will be formally addressed by the Park and Recreation Commission on October 27, 1992. To meet the _ plan review schedule of October 12, I am forwarding this preliminary report. _ 1 Situated in the Highway and Business Service District of the city, this development is subject to commercial/industrial park and trail fees. 'These fees are currently assessed at a rate of $2,500 I per acre and $833 per acre for park and, trail fees, respectively. As such, the Goodyear site will be charged $3,245 in park and trail fees, and the Abra site will be charged $2,614. gip- If you have questions in this regard, please see me. \'''---- I 4 k' 1 pc: Park and Recreation Commission, October 37, -992,' acket x� "„ r " -r-a , - f , I t 1 1 IV t sit PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 I OW...'fk - . , ` , • Y«I«E EO «k♦ E«O.E _ I Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District I ck.«.. . ° c� Engineering Advisor: Barr Engineering Co. ft ” P P ...A. 1«.in if 8300 Norman Center Drive O �� Suite 300 419 Ilk Q • Minneapolis, MN 55437 ° •., 832 -2600 4r nooY«c�i c« Legal Advisor: Popham, Haik, Schnobrich & Kaufman II 1 3300 Piper Jaffrey Tower 222 South Ninth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 333 -4800 October 9, 1992 II Mrs. Joanne Olson Senior City Planner I City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 II Dear Mrs. Olson: The engineering advisors to the Board of Managers of the Riley - Purgatory - Bluff Creek Watershed District has reviewed the preliminary information as I submitted to the District for the Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition in Chanhassen. The following policies and criteria of the District are applicable for this project: II 1. In accordance with Section E (2) of the District's revised Rules and Regulations, a grading and land alteration permit will be required from the District for this project. Accompanying the permit application, a grading plan showing both existing and proposed contours must be submitted to the District for review. II 2. A detailed erosion control plan must be submitted to the District for review and approval. 1 3. A stormwater management plan must be submitted to the District for review and approval. Thank you for the opportunity of reviewing this project at an early date. II If you have any questions regarding the District's comments, please call us at 832 -2857. ' cerely II / e .■i .1 Ro•ert C. Obermeyer II B =rr Engineering Comp ny Engineers for the District RCO /kmh c: Mr. Ray Haik Mr. Fritz Rahr 23 \27 \053 \JO1.LTR II II • troms o:TA �� S nn TATE OF DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE NO. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 5516 0 I ENO 1 772 -7910 RECE�� October 2, 1992 OCT - 5 1992 Ms. Sharmin Al -Jaff Planning Department CITY Ur �.nn:vt,ttS City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: GOODYEAR AND ABRA AUTO SERVICE CENTER, CHAN HAVEN 3RD 11 ADDITION, CASE 90 -17 SUB /92 -2 CUP /92 -3 SPR, CITY OF CHANHASSEN, CARVER COUNTY Dear Ms. Al -Jaff: 1 We have reviewed the site plans dated 9/21/92 (received September 24, 1992) for the above - referenced project (NE 1/4, NE 1/4, S.13, T.116N, R.22W) and have the following comments to offer: 1. The project site does not contain or appear to involve any public waters or public waters wetlands; therefore, no DNR protected waters permit is required. 2. No floodplain or shoreland concerns were noted. I 3. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their 1 equivalent, should be followed. 4. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or 1 million gallons per year, a DNR appropriations permit is required. You are advised that it typically takes approximately 60 days to process the permit application. Thank ou for the opportunity to comment. Plea y pp y Please contact me at 772 -7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, 1 Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist cc: Bob Obermeyer, Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek WSD Wayne Barstad, Ecological Services 11 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER I 111 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937 -1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT; Beisner Ltd. OWNER; Chanhassen Holding Company 1 ADDRESS: 6100 Summit Drive ADDRESS: 14201 Excelsior Boulevard Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Minnetonka, MN. 55436 TELEPHONE (Day time) 560 -0246 TELEPHONE: 935 -3486 1 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. X Subdivision 2. X Conditional Use Permit - 12. Vacation of ROW/Easements 3. Grading /Excavation Permit 13. Variance 1 . ___ Interim Use Permit 14. Wetland Alteration Permit 1 5. Notification Signs 15. Zoning Appeal 6. Planned Unit Development 16. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 7. Rezoning 17. Filing Fees /Attomey Cost - (Collected after I approval of item) 8. Sign Permits 18. Consultant Fees 9. X Sign Plan Review 10. X Site Plan Review TOTAL FEE $ 930.00 I A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must . included with the application. Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. • 51/2" X 11' Reduced copy of transparency for each plan shiet. • NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. 1 1 PROJECT NAME Good Year & ABRA Sales and service stores LOCATION Lake Drive & State Highway 5 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza, 3rd Addition 1 1 PRESENT ZONING Business Highway I REQUESTED ZONING same 1 PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION • Busniess Highway REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION same 1 REASON FOR THIS REQUEST 1 This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or dearly printed and must be accompanied by all informatioll 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 1 am making application for the described action by the Clty and that I am responsible for complyin with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the pa whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. i have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or 1 am 11 authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. 1 will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. 1 furthee 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 1 have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. . I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recordeci against the title to the property for which the approval /permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's Office and the on docu ent retumed to City Hall Records. c September 19,1992 natur of Applicant Date 1 Signature of Fee Owner Date DO Application Received on 9-.... 7 Fee Paid Receipt No. 4 1 This application will be considered by the Planning Commission/Board of Adjustments and Appeals on , 1 1 M • Ld :. j I r r ��7� o � � � I J IYII um r ,.w � . ^ • ..'. • & ` �� I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING f � � e Ii ir:. in PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING -- � ' yn _ .` — _ . -� : TES II Wednesday, October 21, 1992 T KKK ;x, •� r . • • 7.30PM 1 ,.\�. -%t ti 1 City Hall Council Chambers ':= - ='\ • . 4-• d 690 Coulter Drive las a : — s 0 ° i 1 Project: Goodyear Tires /Abra 4111116:-.- "� s _ _ 4; tt. ". 7,'2411 1 ASH LAKE .. , 1 Developer: Beisner, Ltd. �tf4, �' .iviivo - , A _... Location: Lake Drive East - South of II Hwy. 5 and East of the ), �, '' Emission Control Station 1 Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. Beisner, Ltd. proposes to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd 1 Addition into 3 lots. A conditional use permit and site plan review are also required for the construction of Goodyear Tire and Abra facilities on property zoned BH, Highway Business and located south of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East, and east of the Chanhassen Emission • 1 Control Station. 1 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: I 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. I 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. I Questions or Comments: ff 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 Sharmin at 937 -1900. If you 1 choose 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 October 8, 1992. itisi ),q 1 - -' 1 Chanhassen Holding Co. McDonalds Corp. (22 -146) Systems Control, Inc. 14201 Excelsior Blvd. AMF O'Hare 755 Mary Avenue No. Minnetonka, MN 55343 P. O. Box 66207 Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Chicago, IL 60666 Thomas & K. Kotsonas James & Janice Gildner Michael & Cynthia Koenig 1 8001 Cheyenne Trail 8003 Cheyenne Avenue 8005 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Gerard & Lindsay Amadeo Alex & Marilyn Krengel Alice L. Sieren 1 8007 Cheyenne Avenue 8009 Cheyenne Avenue 8011 Cheyenne Avenue Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Sinclair Marketing, Inc. Terry & Margaret Lewis Chanhassen Center Partners - 550 East South Temple 8013 Cheyenne Circle c/o Builders Development P. O. Box 30825 Chanhassen, MN 55317 P. O. Box 637 Salt Lake City, UT 84130 Wayzata, MN 55391 Lotus Lawn and Garden Center Thomas & Patricia Redmond 78 West 78th Street c/o Redmond Products, Inc. Chanhassen, MN 55317 18930 West 78th Street Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 1 1 1 .' 1 1 1 1 L ._ "1"...f...o., ir.,...e.t.. .07 .00(.,-- _ imp i' U w -. 11 I IE g, 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING '� A " ? PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING '- " % ,r '"4 ��n��t G Wednesday, November 18, 1992 _ M. �.. ! „ te _ ""��► ^ 7:30 P. M. ' 1 City Hall Counc Chambers % -z s + - t 690 Coulter Drive :: ; ; ` _1 41 ' � Ae z Project: Goodyear Tires /Abra arcs -. ` :1; :_ _ 1 L. \ \ �' R/cE * RSN LAKE Developer: Beisner, Ltd. � ; I Location: Lake Drive East - South of vc Hwy. 5 and East of the ), �� la 1 �.� Emission Control Station i ' I —7-48r4 Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in 1 your area. Beisner, Ltd. proposes to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition into 3 lots. A conditional use permit and site plan review are also required for the construction of Goodyear Tire and Abra facilities on property zoned BH, Highway Business I and located south of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East, and east of the Chanhassen Emission Control Station. 1 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 1 project. During the meeting, the Planning Commission Cher will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. I 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. 1 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 I wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Sharmin at 937 -1900. If you choose 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. 1 Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on November 12, 2t i 1992. 0 I _ ji "S: t i i) I) j iL I 41, I 9) 1 RAYMOND & K KNIGHT LEE & PATRICIA JENSEN WALTER & K SCHOLLMAN 8007 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8009 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8011 DAKOTA CIRCLE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1 RAYMOND & M JF7TERSKI GARY & M FANDEL 'DENNIS & S UNZE 8013 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8015 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8017 DAKOTA CIRCLE I CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL WILLIAM FARRELL 8024 CHEYENNE AVE 1 CHANHASSEN 1 • 1 1 1 1 • 4 • 1 • • 1 IEM NW NOIS'I3D Oti XOS 2I3avJ fl NYYZA 6Z£0£ VD V.LNV'ZLV LIES; 1.IN NHSSVHN V} D S 2IQ Vd 3ALLt1D3X3 6S LIES; M} NNSSVHNVHD 069 XOS Oa OZI Huns 1332I1S H.L8L M 08L81 HARM O2I.LLVI1t• 09 d2IOD DNI SS3IId 3H.L ONI 313.LAVR 1 I Chanhassen Holding Co. McDonalds Corp. (22 -146) Systems Control, Inc. 1 14201 Excelsior Blvd. AMF O'Hare 755 Mary Avenue No. Minnetonka, MN 55343 P. O. Box 66207 Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Chicago, IL 60666 I Thomas & K. Kotsonas James & Janice Gildner • Michael & Cynthia Koenig 8001 Cheyenne Trail ; 8003 Cheyenne Avenue 8005 Cheyenne Avenue I Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 Gerard & Lindsay Amadeo Alex & Marilyn Krengel Alice L. Sieren 8007 Cheyenne Avenue 8009 Cheyenne Avenue 8011 Cheyenne Avenue 1 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 i Sinclair Marketing, Inc. Terry & Margaret Lewis Chanhassen Center Partners 550 East South Temple 8013 Cheyenne Circle c!o Builders Development P. O. Box .30825 Chanhassen, MN 55317 P. O. Box 637 1 Salt Lake City, UT 84130 Wayzata, MN 55391 Lotus Lawn and Garden Center Thomas & Patricia Redmond DONREED PROPERTIES 78 West 78th Street c/o Redmond Products, Inc. 337 WATER STREET Chanhassen, MN 55317 18930 West 78th Street EXCELSIOR MN 55331 Chanhassen, MN 55317 ALIT A LOWN SBURY JEROME & RENEE GRIEP GERALD & M WASSINK 8000 DAKOTA AVE 8002 DAKOTA AVE 8004 DAKOTA AVE 1 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1 BARRY & M GREGERSON ROBERT & P PETERSON PAULINE M CALDWELL 8006 DAKOTA AVE 8008 DAKOTA AVE S 8010 DAKOTA AVE 1 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 I RONALD & AMY DVORAK P. Hegstrom I 8003 DAKOTA AVE 8005 Dakota Ave , _ _ , . _ T . - - • , • CHANHAS SEN MN 55317 Chanhassen MN 55317 ► r • t • .�.- : : -. •• • . • •, '1 z - • .. r. .. s. •. . • • - Y �• . - . = j + r 7 * _ - - • ( fir 1 x t is . t '� I " " . 't L i ... 7 : • .1.4 ' ' i • 1 ' r 1 ROBERT & B ARMBRUST DOUGLAS & K BAGLEY GEORGE & A JENNINGS 8022 CHEYENNE AVE 8105 81ST STREET 8018 CHEYENNE AVE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 VICTORIA MN 55386 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 N EINAR & V SWEDBORG DANIE1I & L ROBINSON MITCHELL LOBENS & 8016 CHEYENNE AVE ( 13014 CHEYENNE AVE MICHELLE RIEHM CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8012 CHEYENNE AVE I • # • ° .' • CHANHASSEN MN 55317 If : RICHARD & B FRASCH WILLIAM & E KRAUS . CURRENT RESIDENT 1 8010 CHEYENNE AVE 008 CHEYENNE i4VE 8003 CHEYENNE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 HANHASSEN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 r Mike and Cindy Koenig CURRENT RESIDENT STEPHEN & J MACDONALD 8005 Cheyenne Ave 8007 CHEYENNE AVE 8017 CHEYENNE SPUR r Chanhassen MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 • 1 JON, SR & D WILSON GLENN & B HAGEMAN THOMAS & JOY EASTMAN 8019 CHEYENNE SPUR $021 CHEYENNE SPUR 8023 CHEYENNE SPUR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CURRENT RESIDENT ALOIS & M STUMPFL GEORGE & T THOMAS 8025 CHEYENNE 8027 CHEYENNE TRAIL 8029 CHEYENNE AVE 1 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PHIL & CONNIE CHAN ROBB LUND • RALPH LYTLE 1 8031 CHEYENNE AVE 8023 ERIE AVE MARY ANN ROSSUM CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8021 ERIE AVE ' CHANHASSEN MN 55317 THOMAS & S KOEPPEN CLAYTON & M SODETANI TERRANCE & S THOMPSON I 8009 ERIE AVE 8005 ERIE AVE . 8000 -8002 ERIE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 r VENCIL & C PREWITT JEFFREY PAPKE • VERNON & B HUSEMOEN 1 8004 ERIE AVE 6180 CARDINAL DRIVE 8015 CHEYENNE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 1 SOO LINE RAILROAD PER MAG CORP FRANK JR & M BEDDOR SOO LINE BUILDING C/O MAG CORP - R FELLOWS 649 5TH AVE S PO BOX 530 14956 MARTIN DRIVE NAPLES FL 33940 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55440 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 1 0" ` ' "`nneaota Department of Tranaportr °ltn i io Metropolitan District it(4,). Transportation Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 OF Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 Reply to 593 - 8753 1 Telephone No. October 29, 1992 1 Mr. Paul Krauss Planning Director City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 1 In Reply refer to: TH 5 - C.S. 1002 Chan Haven Plaza, 4th Addition TH 5 Near Lake Drive East Chanhassen Dear Mr. Krauss: We are in receipt of the above referenced plat for our review in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03 Plats and Surveys. We find this plat acceptable for development with consideration of the following comment: • A permit will be required from the Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District. ■ If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 593 -8753. ■ Sincerely, Tim Henkel i Planning Supervisor cc: Mary Anderson, Metropolitan Council r Roger Gustafson, Carver Co. Engineer John Freemyer, Carver Co. Surveyor 1 RECEIVED 0 CT301992 P -1? CITY Ut t,n,,,,,- ,,,,, MINNESOTA An Equal Opportunity Employer • ` 1 1 1 1, it 1 1 • • �� \Ns w fi >a f t 6i Y 2 h � F ; 1111:,,,s- . \,1 -J ;" `• ii: li lie. .i : or me. o Q • - : bs ✓ 1 °r`�L'' " _ )- It! s :El: � Ie : z .: • s :1 i p I _- 1 V.ce}� U a 1 1 " 1-1 '" ! F..�. ly ►IY: O S<6 L� b= si -- _ b Z i� sSS = � • z + �i a � ;, :. r w s f >. \ `• )) 11❑ � ` \ l . t' U - 0' = Ny 1 ��1 _d;/ { � '� �\. �F �.s L W L z r_:G 1 �. i IL tid. 1 • > - , ii'ati 11 ,- .,, \ 7* ' `.-.' 1 a i s ! ' p .cu.aa i • i� � },, <u ai f I . r - 1 i aal L' 4M.. ' ll +Yat T hf•�l / M^ y I 4. , 11 !1� j: I -- ' 11 w `\,1 .' I 1 I _ x� i - i1 11 „ _s ; ; . a s • Z ¢ . I I 1 t ai , _ ,_ p , :∎,• F• ; j, ovi } � 7' E 't 1', s , I _i j� 1 • •\ , 3 ill 1(1 Y 3 I,, 4..+1,-,..`, -- - e I I r y " ^" ` O" 1 i r • 4 5 a •I I i j x 1 I 4 d /. — I� 1 ,1 a ' W W I ' l I�1; � I y:,!, lx..,,.. ti.. 1I ■ 1 i , . 4 E la s . \\I:\ t : II ��a -.4 —� . —_ • .� / pp' J l , j I 1 i I X t .. K.owm •• 'N •f1J ! ' i \\1 \ \ d 1 _ I . .- . L !' A - ' ' ' i 8 %' II? 11 . - S� 1 1 . ! I1 -...,-,4.-1 4 ca , P_I J .4 `'r .�. py 's z-. 1 � 4 �Y � c w s I j . 1 �� 1 ti ,...... 1 • S t : 1 a= 1 is I 1 E 1 ° w i I i• I r I III L - -- • -- - - - - - -- — -- — - - - -- — J i C ! - !S ! Cy r :S :S I 1 : . :- '4. - - Y = ' " $ f : Le i '4. .1 .. i v - i f = ii : - _ ' '• -E v i5 s Il �: C . _ L _i N :.L ��`'`� C i<_i: Ili-:. _ 4; C i t i T- i .... r . . >` >f = y1 �E - 0.-- I. _ 04.: !✓ -i "s3 Yi iii: - r 1- Sri•i ` 1 25` - p -- f� , ' i 't 1Z1 g -'1 1 1 i s - ` : Z .a.L ::$ -: ee :t 17:: hill s . .. _ ' III F. a j ; € - a ' a ii s s c- - f: :- z . E p : ` II! G . € a ii rr t . 1 1 If i- 1 } s W 6 e e-I tic:g ' a- - 4 r rsi fi : i;. i .. - t - f_ 1 I i 11 t le = s.r s e.. J s: H iii i ' 1 1 12 iii: 114 ; r i :E 1 If II II ! i - • . MI NMI 111111 MK NIB 111111 MN 111111 111111 alll MI MI MI MI Sill MI 1111, Mill 11111 .• . __. • • LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5 8. SM. ... ,,.. .; ..---. „...„ ......... •,,... ........1. Ilf.r.11110041U1 ,.... • .. . ''.".---- --., -.., It.. N. .....‘ 17...... ...OM ....• OS ZTX ■;e1rA: slant. nom . ::-- .... ............................................................................................................................................ ______ **111111.1** ,..,.. O. • - 22- --- __,........ ---- ;:ofir.... ...rr=---- POKY. O.. Mil. If ■........ 7w...a :. ! • .... • , • sl• 7 "--='..-=-. ------ =-- "7=- ■••• --. ' --- c . c50:: .: 1_4 • . 1.A. S1 Ore SW C,..... .1_- ---.— .., ...- . " . g ............ ASA .... .0.... .. fo• 41.• . I de ANSI. Set 0. .....—....---......-- -- -.-..... ,.,....‹ 1 .......... ft. . e doC•o• ..., I Sr ....... 1 .-.. S. ag:4-orsolirgillnilleiti* ,, , .. 1 . .. 4,t, • I • rr 44.4, mac. 11.. 0111111..• I UMINUILIIIILILI 1 ::.... ............. .■ . 7e 01.•0. NOM{ "'%:-.:"■<:. iTh 11 . 1 4....ij . 1 1 • r 7----,, J• \ "\ AV " \ ' . . A I 1 LANDSCAPE NOTES I •-...... .• 1 t ;...niv 1 - 111=1111 . Ike_ 11 . ..- - • r......_ .i e- . ,. .. 5 1 • ore.e.of Ulm .... 7.1..elotS CA ..... AND It. O. . ..... .., .... ••• • h . . 7 i 4:• . POYORWO 1 ..N. • rtir7 te N... • V. - -.. . .. ._ Nil ii i MIME s i 1 1 1 i I • ele.n.s N.. ....• 7' •11 . ....... wi. . • ...As. • •••••••• IMAM 01.••• > SSD 1.• 11.1... NNW. - ; 1 4'.:-. GOODYEAR --1 i MI I i 1 1 • 01:11•1 i • MS 1......0.1. MIS 00 TM .1--E-.4... ..--- I 1 i . • . ••••• „! e. . . .. M.,. .. . e med. et 00. , A ; l On.. A. AT A frt. CO •041 . off 1.1f. .. 1 • '..--e.. ' 3 e• • • • ions Otto ..... n vo. na,St.m..... 'nit" Of ..10.0 f. s•o• /cm ow 011.• ... AT OA ,f. el. , L--- ' • I : " 1 5 -• ••••-• ,..• •••••• ...... 8. OP toof Telt•S ..... No offs ....... • O• e.i.tlef .... ........... et 4 IO . •00...s. ..ICI.Cok cf .... ...--..,4....„ • !. 'ea ,- II 0 . , .... i 't. 4 •INSVAIS S.L. Of . P.C. .0 ..... Cf. ..• it 1 It.--- M it r b3C • i . ... . , .?., ; • W SITS ..... Of 100010 Me. FM. 1... A •••••, • 'ft ' -,.... f.r.rrfff.str.,.,,,p; .' 4 ,„ , , ...0 A 4440 4 4.44 . to AS •oTIO. •:‘• ..." • .. !. . . • 01.01.0f Olden, fe 1.1.111.• ...e i ...VW- v imeteorween I. KA... •••• Noll ff. 0000 feet. .- —-4- l' ..1......-.—....... , . endst*.•••••••••■••,.....••••• !!: 16 't v d . . I ",,,,, •0 t. .... A., I h : it -, '7f. , "i - i 1) 1 . A, • ,/, fl I. !I ) 1 f lk / ./.: •4: ,,,,...• . ...•., 02,;" ii r ' • > ! I) • ..ft, •,. s, _ • I ... . • . •••• roe , • 1.11 1 i . b 1. 1 . • ''.. 0 . ' 1 I • ... .. ..e * , • • ' - • .,.. , .1 •0 1 . . tv e' ... ■ BIUMentalS/ •••• to. *Odd . • / 11000....... ; . ; :. ‘• ' ' , ‘ I X 1/ 1 attotitaggam fin 1~1. .o.. C Monmrrou : 7, 111430 t ■ . • ..• I :,... k • , , .., • .0“.....,,,,, 0.1111211111•11.0 I i .i. f 1 ,, 1 1 / 1 1 ,,, . t.... —. l __.• .6'.. 1 .7,1—.. - _,„„, , ), .0...we CAN10.11.• , 0 •,, --- i••• __L W * _.... . z f ,...- ' 2:„.1 "".- . . _ec .*A '''' Ono.el 10 I Drown io t I 'NJ e) 't.11.12 r f i ' ..,... .. _ ...,._ -._ - — .: _., .,-../- -,,- I ...,_•:1' An 11 . ‘......... ...........%: ---„--- , . r ..-.• It "•••••••• . ..'-'.. ' M ,,,,... .,.... ,.. . ....... ...... t ... e..,.---SCO'''. . . . • .. ..,,, ! I ..... ma:173:1011111111111PraWINORIMINIIN11•111 . ". ............... , . on. • Ofit lb „ ..........y.-.1 -- • !Ze......• ---- AUTO SERVICE CENTER — dt.... — ......... I CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA -.--- -- -.-.. — ---- --- --- -..= — .......-,..„-,..;; 8..n. iip "... • 410•8 LAKE DRIVE EAST LANDSCAPE PLAN Al W LANDSCAPE PLAN ...............* ....... ...................... ............. • .......... I Itli ,..7.,r ............. Claratiall•-- 211.34- .• =Ad_ _no,..11,72.1111. LI _ .... .. - , . 410 .. .11•0 • • al 1 MaLlaill la a ...111IA I:I - - ----- .11kly_ • 0 , ..... --; '-- - - ---- --- -." A 9 , - 9 ..., s"SZAIT, ,N '1 1S U3A0, , I 11Y3A0000 t' Z 0 , en. ou 2 I 01 _....1 161 q .ii _ 0 0 0 - kit 1 — 1 t - `V j I! - , ' Nfil;:vian i l id , . I owe: il All 1 1;1 '-a • 'II i i ) VIII • 11111'14 I mill 1 fig 1 st ..i ' '' 11111 \ 0 • 1 I ti' !lir i . s __ , \ - - — k , 1.. 11111 1 § I s k 1 4 g 111111111MR) II ' i i! IlLi t li g 1 IN 1 mull= El N .&. d 5 111 6:9 \ i _I ' I 1 a.. 1 I 1 y ,I "II I _ . -,1 ' : 0 • . • • 1 -- 0. 1 , i _ — i 1 1 1 1 1 1 I tit I f 7 : • I . r I 1., r fn f 1 I il z._ WO ..,, 0 w 11.1 i Wi 0 ; 11 t, g I I _ : izz _1 i Men 0; i I 1 ... d■ F. ; . IZ i I I • . 1 1 . 4 , , _.. '', - V I I, il". t': .— S - •.F . 1 •:-. -i' I • I "i -•1• N gb-, ro. I 1 . • t9 '61 . . I. . . . .. , • --- , 1 . /J. , i X . i:ILI . z • I_ Es ,;: i d; 0 '1 • • il:1 i P , I 0.1i! ,:! i 1 r 11 . i P > ..1 IU W. i • il ':•.! 1 . • ,I il --'-....- . ,, •:, : ilill I I i : I LI d . r 1 ; 1 ,•• '' 2 .4 L II I II • , „. 1 • 0 ' ; ., , _ I 1 ti 1 IILIII . • , 11,1' tt • • St iir r g -' z • 1P ti vl f 1 •,, i .2.,, .01,1) 7. 1 ? : • • . •: ?: it 2; ) • • • • , . Iv 11 i 1 1 I . 1 - 0 1 • • 1 \ I .I 1 '-‘: . III:, • I , 1 1:•-;,---4,•-.:,.. • • •"7 • \ . y •:,, . , . , .,,..,.. I • 1 11, . .,.... , . ..•-• i ,, . ... Of i_ O. i i .. . . . . • i . ! : :. ..., . 1 II 1 I, IL:IL ,.......,. 1 124 1 4 i Z 0 1 Z 0 1 . CC —.I- LO 1 . Ilic P a M Hi F. Lic lit I) 11 1 — - ' , 1 I .11 j—r--- 1! 11 IIJ ■ Sq-1-7' .., - WI 10 . • , • • • 1 1 • .e bl„w, ^ °'" STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5 - `.•. .--• '.� _,t - - -- - _— _... - - _ e 1� t ��•_ -. —_ - . :a -- - SN — If• � �r 1 _ _— -- - -'�' — ' 1 I PRELIMINARY PLAT OF —1:§)— • "�' CHAN HAVEN PLAZA • . f 4TH ADDITION I 2 ! _ 1 f„ S '•' • •• - • — ■ ! ii • I . I w • • a l «I 1. E.11 »YI.,1 W n0 001/10, w.r..q 1. too ..a.rw N.: '1; 1 ii I'. 41 1 ICi.:ylw 47,AP.14W _ - ----- �tICT.— .•��i��. ..1. las i— 1 -+ r Iw Nll!w •M. ,INN 1.rp n1.1.w.r alo n w et • • L/ —r.� ' 1 1::::1.1.::::::.:1 . IN NI • Isw NMI. Wilif ' r JJ E I. t• \• • 1. •- Mom Ins 00.00 MM. '•1 seen seen .lMt1M. ' i i % ( ; S • ,• " � • ; i f I ' • Mn � i:iiiln l.nw.. • ' / .1 S. Mi l wlwli0it w Mw MI .• •• Nl MrM. III N W t.la M ( • 8 . �• i • ` 1 !' D • � I / t.:N.n we S no ton I...w •ti I i 7 ) • 1 F • J t. IM .. • 10 1 on w numl Mo•M of Wen \ *VIM M • T • \ \ , R : 1 1 omits 11 .n . n WS, ,,'vow. r _ Ms Moon ••• l .I1M MI. Mb M 0 10.00. 1110 r w 1 I ., "1 I 1. 0M1M.•p .III M OM MN HAM .N IMMO, l am• _• \ ' I� ti i... • I — — • t I M. Mon. Ms • 1 1N ant �\ t"'._ ...so, ■ _: •,„, , I • + ,., ` 1� O. 01 Ones: 1 NAM : o N of. LIM111 men L 1 n' � `1Mr 'MM n Mt• � • . t. �t. -,0*.. I • • nriw+.r ; ' .�.•. �.J +- mo I 1 e... C.r► ...t..... M•••••.2.10 tow. 1: . • — �� 1 NM 11 . Ms W 1 MOM MI �:Mn-Vn + lx.n. •:••• /Mo. IMI. .. ' , . M NmM LAKE DRIVE EAST b +L .__ .,-••• ol • °T. " : .I SSN ......•••••• `"^ . 1 0N ^°N . _ SCHOELL 8 MADSON, INC. CLIENT LouncN C111) n•s '�•"' ENGINEER* • {UNVE•ON1 • • -._ •.. /a : f . ... � ~ �� w ----- ENS • N011. 1E5/1`::I —, - -` 1 ..r..k - - l w11V N11• el .0 BEISNER LTD. CHANHASSEN, MN. MM� .+•NM• mow N. INN NINMETOl1M1. NN. !11! - ) .. .•�1 �� 1111. 111 r//• __ __ - - -_ -_ - ._ .- -_ • S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 61903 -002 IIIII - - Ma - NMI - - - - - -' - - - - . . I1l!! 11 I I 1 1 111 1 1111 1 -© - - , 3 I I Ell • 11111"i' ;I iii 11 : E i 1 I 1 1 it I 1 it I .: 1 1 I 1 "•'• 1. I .. I \ ' 1 . 1 , , , • -,:‘ -. 1 / / 1 ..- 77 .7;37 - 7'7 - •*., ;I ■•(`‘‘.., 1 1 i, •;---... -:.••••, '..... <- _, / . . / . ././ i . 1 \ \ ---,.. • 1 • 11,7•,‘ - -:■'',. • • 4 -1- .. • , '' • -----`' 11 / ••p=• -..,,, ••••■•,4,\ 'a. -=.6' .0 .- " •- ---: - - :///-7-- --- - ••-• = . - -' -.„ -.1 \I ;t 1 ., ''.: i / i ■ ••;\ ......,__, - " \ Iti • II -:„.... ''' i y. ? t' - ---- • ., , :" ---N s • 1 f \It *- i . .!. .- I t • IW i .... „, , --,-- -........__ -- ' '-' 'l LE tji7D'? • 7 7 ' 1 \ \ i i "Z: 1 I • I I It ;.. !I il k , a ;:-...' t 1 . •••..‹V . It •,'• ."-- '----), (., i 1 1 !s■ til1V.11111. :;:' .."\ 4., ;-;','"•"<te I : e ..- ...... In p t .. • ' 1 1 1'1141141 ‘1 •il I M — It - sr I rn I g 1 Mu il iti poi • II 1 I .-• ; r H 6 I; '.; 1 ii 1:1 I. . - ' A L I V1W i rn 1 il :it `6• 1 r gri I.I \ iiiii f A1/2._, I I " i"- - ' — - •- - I 1 Ill i M .-/."% I JI ... - „nit _ •‘•• . • I 1 n i ; x m 1 11 111 Ili!' N.% - I • 4 .... ,., rft- 1 I 111 1411110.1:11 '''' 1 riraL_ • . ii --- 7 ,1 :-, i /.. ; - • IL 1 I 1 1 ', t* 1 1 . - A, %,- th . ,...._L ...-•-,, 1.. - ...,, 1 I ‘, 17' • 1 . ... ••••.—IJIIMI■Ne■Cu.S..111•• , 1 N \\ I I 1,- 1 _ >,..__.„ , ......... 4. -•; 1 . ,. 1 .41, ft * V 1 htl % ,,, • • lii-I - \ f 1 art t ' • , ----. .. ; ! .. I • * 1 F , •• \ - I\A‘‘`• 1 L..; • -......2.,„/ ... 1 • •, ." J. 0 1,1 . 40 • ,. I 4\ s II‘A .., • V,, .4%. 1 . 1. I I f g I / •,-_-_- '. ,1 . rt I s i I, • 'a \ \v. -4 \\ ... I. ,• 1 , , . i ,_ -'---.."---".. \ o • aiTrITITUTrr..5kanireema 4 ,t . , I I I , ... ; : 4 : i i \ V ..:. . 1. • \ .‘. I ' 4.,...l..... t -4:,....-...;- .,-. t . • t i 1 ....L. ‘ s' ,..1...... ■ . 1 ‘ .... . _ . . .Z.,.....:.; ± L.... --. .... --. -:-.... -...... -- .... ----- ■ .... .... .. .... —. ...I. Il -------m----w-nror,:- - -- fr• • . • i 1 I \ ,,,, ....• i t . = 3". ...' ".. ' i . ‘'; Vb 1: 1 I 4.. 1", i 1 F 1 .' . A - I I , i a 11 I irt I t g ii.,:l 2,..x• i i ,1 § — / ./. i r . ■ii 3 4 I 0 O i t:aii A A -- - . - 411' 1 1111111r- 111 3 1 11 g cl it z a 5 m 0 . 4 !.1 • 1 . 1 " Ili ••4 a -4 Z a w i• I t !! I 1 I I ill! I' c• E SI - ‘4,-_,4-? , : l• ' t -ft fgi lig q 8 I E 1 . • • . . .)•• 2 . E 1 ■ f : 2 t . 1 • "C a . - f gilli i : 1 > h 1 t ri ••• I Itii I a J Ill . a• • • i i i 5 w 0 ., • 1 / 11 z 2 - — gc i t !I r .1 2 • ,!!;'1 .W — co "" 2 Fiq t -i, , NI 4' . i , ...___.../ :. - f l E 2I t 5. i rit 2 1 _ -i • . 8 _til t i i - : l i I j I i• ,..■ I 1 . ......... 4.-•:2:', A., 1 1 ----------- -- x..--..—".• ,. 1% _ i.. I • . 1 ...i . V 1, ., f ' ■ -....• ,...- ----,— ---- i PIA N .....................■.----'`r I ‘ • `• \ i 1 I t•-•6 I : .......11••,•• -•'- ii ‘; ... It .. - .011.111”1".• P. P.+ ..... \,... _ N. ,I \ , c . 1 ‘ • I . i • I 1 . A ,,, IC I f:r • r=14.124 t - 1 ri 1 1' , -- • .,— 1 I , - - 1 110 • in r i 1 I tl . 1 - - ,-- "■ 11 t. _,., i-- '-` 4 • ., . 1 , ,... .. .... ...1 1 ...... i /... ....-Nt 1 ‘ 1 —••- 'Y 0 - - I 1 6 i i i - '' el 4ili al 1 1 1 i: i 17 1 1 - • N ‘, . i • . 4i :.._ -f. -.t. II: .".' % ,..-nrici ,71 .. . 8 ... 1 ‘.... I I . i 1 I 11 ' I ■fill : - 4 : 14 I 4 III ill f t i a - .., •---. 1 Iry *4.4: i if 2 ."- 1 .11 ;III .•' -. ;,- , • . . r il it • - 4. . . I .- .g. • ' ; I i 1 04 ' I s % ' / • -- . . . fl 1.1' . '''.• ' f 12.1 • i : . • III 1 1 ,.; , ., .. , aef . . ---- "'I% • 1 CC a! I - II 1 • 1 / i t I S ' ' .1 I I 0 I f ' . ' I \ 1 1 - a : - - 8 1.9 i• 1 . ,_ 1 ). , ri 4 I. • , - .... 1 i - . ...... l\i: Ill t \ .: 1: • l'..1 1 ' i s, ... ,; .1 . . ..• . , , • I '‘ ) ',. 1 /I.. i 1 4 ‘,1,?s/..:-.,-f)`--..----,?---.' v i .. 4 :I i_t A 1 -.1' f 1,s? , - •i I , -• - - - ? i• ...- 06 /.,... , s• ..... ,, / I . 1 --- -1 _ __ 1 - .- - _ ..... _ . . . it 1: 4 ..ii . .7 ''. ft , ' f 1 ..i '''":. .,:■ .. ": 1 1 A 11. Ili i "-/,) ) i , --- '.2.!..::22:=.....n:..... n!...,..... ......L..' / / 4 ...N . . • 1 i t '111,/ . ..... . o'N: S, .?g . •'... ' `, ' F! - - - . i; 1 \ .. I i / 7 '4,":,:,„: ^ t' .. \,,,, . • •• .. • . .-....- 1 1 I , `Ott% N" \ - i .% • i I 1 r 1 1 1- 1 -- , .. --- . .2 1 AL 1 / 111 .......] -- --- -------- — .. i 1 . ! 1 f IL- 1 112/11 g :7, -■,-.: 11 \ ;1 ii I. ti V I 1E1 ! I I :Cil I ic:.. ' 3 311iii I I, 1 ri x : ,....4._ ,....• 1 t . i I I 1 .1 •,t . 4 I t I g 111 I 115 2- I I . . . II . 1 1 11 1 1 . «� - �i y.I� .., -.; - -f Wi 1 - �: i 1 — is — � 1J '' 4- 1 Ar1,•.,, . i ! / H , _-tr-,--:_i_. , I JI_I . i,.,It'l . 1 . r . / • -4f. cm ..... ili , 1 __ _1 a al :- II 1 � r 1 ,.i. ... \:h.z 1 i ! : t t . 1 " 14 I' ' _Lr � t 1 r l 1 ,.....,1:::- .,. : i ` ! .L 1 _ ' Iirurr • IF, , i... j 0 ? . �r 1 !.1tl' • • : ! ! 1" X01 -`. r --- i 1.._ H i -. •,... II • (ti,, t'! .. , • T ' ''9TH _ i- _ . - (r II I j- • I i t'Ii r • 1 i " t + T 'L - F11m- ;- 1111 ! i ii [ l'.1111-1.1.1.'• 8 r. I . S. - X11..1 ' - -�' -r airen m • tI !_`,r� Z us.7 - 1 . 1 1 - • • -.i 1. :•i • _ -4 .� • 1 a Cy! ' te. �. 1 4. - r t i i .1-' . 1 C9 . ' " .. 1 r ' O ti;, F 1 • F�.,L 1 r .,_, i. T,, 1 • . ., 0 r 1 �; - , 1 0 II - • r: 1 • • 1 eh 1 .�..: i 1 1 • 6 . . .. ....,.,,.„, ,, ...,.,. .._.„.___ .....,... t 1 1 1 1 _ i....,,,,,4 III a �� a --.------1-44 n�ui_ oil .:.t.-,, , –,_- ..-: —t-rr , i -... — , i:RI 11 , :-.ri• i--7- -- . hi- - 1—i- 1 - . [Jolt .,. t f;. F. .7 f- I. ,. L ;li i I �� 6.f rFi ti 1 1 �- ^ {. ` 1 :'t • . t - Ei-A.ti .{ • ~ } " k � � � f- - RI F ' 1 I --,/ � !ft / .:-., r__---tit i 1 r1. + ..I _ � 1 �� ,1111; , 1 I- � . , c r!1 � , l';-411111-1 3I , tea � 1 � I � I � � t a Ill I 1 1 - . i 1 t .; 1 1 �. ( ! LI,L. t� 1 ! �.,II i I ; — 1 _# ' r , , rte _ '' , — l y t 4 1 ' 1 1 1 . 1