4 a,b & c.Beisner Ltd. Chan Holding Company. Emission Control Testing Station I
1
21' III. b : e.,
C ITYOF ...-..-4-----
1
u >. A .. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
-
1 " 5.'
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
-
ej S =y P n k .a;or
1 MEMORANDUM r, - ''.... ,_t
Ate- __
I TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager r .; --- -
Mt F.J` :.t to Commission
FROM: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I
I pate 5u - °tto d t Councit
DA'Z'E: February 2, 1993 .�-. -_-9- _ _
I SUBJ: Beisnex Ltd. /Chanhassen Holding Company; Property Located South of Hwy. 5,
North of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and East of Emission Control
Testing Station:
I 1) Site Plan Review for GI < , _ , , 5,397 square foot building;
I 2) Preliminary Plat to Su!" ivid ,3.1634 Acres into 3 lots with an area of
0.939 Acres, 0.778 As *J's, and 445 Acres; .
I 3) Conditional Use P , g' it to All •; an Auto Service Facility in the BH
District
3
1 Background: -
On November 18, 1992, the ' : ing Commission review.' the site plan and conditional use
1 permit requests for the de of an Abra Auto Body ' ; , air and a Goodyear Auto Service
facility. The Planningommission tabled action on the proposal as there were a number of
issues related - to architectural l Nid`' esii a i F :' g Commission and residents of
I Chanhassen Estat s'''Subdivis oni eed6d lved ote_ d::be taken. The
applicant was directd 4o meet with staff and Planning Commissioner Jeff F,., i'nakes to resolve
1 those issues of concern.
=
On December 2, 1992, the Planning Com>I ssi. reviewed the changes. The request was
I approved for the Goodyear site, however, th ;,Atha building design was not satisfactory. The
Planning Commission directed the applicant td fine the design before it appears before the City
Council. The applicant is in the process of redesigning the Abra building. The new design was
I proposed to appear before the City Council on January 25, 1993, however, the plans were
submitted too late for staff to review and analyze prior to the meeting. The revised Abra plans
will appear before the City Council on February 22, 1993.
1
%a
1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1 Don Ashworth
February 2, 1993
1 Page 2
On January 11, 1993, the City Council reviewed the site plan and conditional use permit requests
1 for the development of a Goodyear Auto Service facility. The City Council tabled action on the
proposal as architectural and site design issues resurfaced. The city does not have specific
architectural standards in the ordinance and the City Council noticed a pattern of struggling with
1 site plan applications and trying to revise them to meet the city's expectations. Staff was
directed to investigate the possibility of a moratorium along the Highway 5 Corridor while the
city develops the Highway 5 plan and new approaches to regulating development in this area.
' Several members of the City Council also directed the applicant to revise the plans by providing
additional landscaping along the south property line of Lot 1 and change the exterior finish from
block concrete to brick. The applicant has not submitted the requested changes.
' Staff Comment
The question of whether a moratorium will be imposed on the Highway 5 corridor will be
resol\ ::d by the City Council prior to reviewing this item on the agenda. Thus, this report does
1 not deal with this issue.
Staff finds that we must continue to recommend approval of this request should the moratorium
' not be imposed. The site plan meets or exceeds all ordinance requirements. No variances are
being requested and it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The only variance is a minor
one for a sign height which we view as an advantage for the city since it limits the number of
pylon signs. It is reasonable to question the ordinances and seek improvements under the
Highway 5 program and related projects. However, it is difficult to continue modifying the
proposal based upon as- yet - unwritten requirements.
At the same time, we agree that many of the concerns that have been raised are valid. We also
believe that they can for the most part, be resolved satisfactory under existing codes. Individual
members of the Council voted that the site plan seemed to be well developed at the January 11,
1993, meeting. However, there was a desire to see the building imply brick as an exterior
material and for more trees to be incorporated. We believe these requests are reasonable and
1 supportable in light of current ordinances. The conditions have been revised to reflect these
changes (conditions 11 and 12 of the site plan approval).
1 In addition, a concern was raised to staff regarding our ability to enforce conditions of approval
on tenants in the building should Goodyear not own the store out right. The City Attorney has
drafted a conditional use permit that clearly states that both the owner and any occupant of the
' property are responsible for compliance. We will be making this the standard format on all
future conditional use permits.
1
1
1
Don Ashworth
February 2, 1993
Page 3 1
Staff recommends that the requests be approved as follows: 1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES 1
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1. Permit. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Chanhassen
hereby grants a conditional use permit for the following use:
Auto Service Facility
2. Property. The permit is for the following described property ( "subject property ") in the 1
City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota:
Lot 1, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition
3. Conditions. The permit is issued subject to the following conditions:
1. No public address systems are permitted. 1
2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site. 1
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 site.
5. No outdoor storage shall be permitted at the Goodyear site.
6. Noise level shall not exceed OSHA requirements or Minnesota Pollution Control 1
agency guidelines at the property line. Doors will be kept closed or no more than
a 12" opening.
7. Pollution level shall meet standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency.
8. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review #92 -3 and
Subdivision #90 -17."
1
1
I
I Don Ashworth
February 2, 1993
1 Page 4
1 SITE PLAN REVIEW
"Approval of Site Plan Review #92 -3 as shown on the site plan dated November 30, 1992,
1 subject to the following conditions:
1. A 4 foot variance to achieve a 12 foot high monument sign. This sign which will
I face 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.
I 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
I use by the remaining undeveloped lot.
2. The applicant shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to
I be used 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.
1 5. Provide a complete, final set of civil engineering documentation to staff for review
and approval.
1 6. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal's memorandum dated October 8,
1992.
1 7. 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
I painted yellow.
8. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall
i be submitted.
9. The applicant shall pay $7,580 into the Surface Water Management Program fund
I for water quality treatment downstream of the site. This fee will cover Lots 1 and
2 only.
1
1
1
Don Ashworth 1
February 2, 1993
Page 5 1
10. No signage will be allowed until sign plan approval is obtained from the Planning
Commission and City Council. 1
11. The applicant shall provide eight additional evergreens along the south side of Lot
1, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza 3rd Addition. 1
12. Brick shall be used on the exterior of the Goodyear building. Plans shall be
developed to staff approval. The brick shall be designed to incorporate
highlighting treatments similar to the or better than the current proposal.
13. Compliance with conditions of Subdivision #90 -17 and Conditional Use Permit 1
#92 -2."
SUBDIVISION 1
"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. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits are requested. 1
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.
c. A drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 1. 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
Y g P Po
dedicated in favor of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement agreement shall be drafted 1
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.
1
1
I
1 Don Ashworth
February 2, 1993
Page b
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
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.
12. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review #92 -3 and Conditional Use
Permit #92 -2."
4 4. Termination of Permit. The City may revoke the permit following a public hearing for
violation of the terms of this permit.
5. Lapse. If within one year of the issuance of this permit the allowed use has not been
completed or the use commenced, this permit shall lapse.
' 6. Criminal Penalty. Both the owner and any occupant of the subject property are
responsible for compliance with this conditional use permit. Violation of the terms of this
' conditional use permit is a criminal misdemeanor.
Dated
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
ATTACHMENTS
' 1. Minutes dated January 11, 1993.
2. Staff report dated January 11, 1993.
1
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
1 I. SET SALE DATE FOR 1993 TAX INCREMENT BONDS.
Councilman Senn: If I understand (i) correctly, what we're doing under (i) is
we're approving the sale of the bonds? {�
Don Ashworth: That's correct. Well, you're setting a sale date, but that's
' making assumption a ►hen we get o e actual ae ate t
, h at if the
bring back the s
a reasonable tht bid, that we'll t awar it. It sl
does d give an approximate
30 day period. I can't remember what we recommended in here for a date. The
first meeting in February. Sale date for February 8th. So you would have an
I opportunity between now and February 8th to let's say, ask additional questions
in regards to what it is that's proposed to be bonded for in here. I would
prefer tabling the item to respond to those rather than to get into to actually
' preparing a perspectus and telling people what it is we're bidding and then
change our mind. It would be more preferable to take 2 weeks and figure out,
no. I don't like some of these items or yeah, all of those are fine versus
1 • again, putting out an official statement and then saying, you know we're not
really going to make this sale.
Councilman Senn: Rather than take the time or waste the time to discuss
1 specific items maybe tonight then I'd like to move to table.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is there a second?
II Councilman Wing: Is that what you're requesting?
Don Ashworth: Yes. If there are concerns by Council. We're not going to go
I broke if we wait an additional 2 week period of time to make sure that everyone
is up to speed as to what it is that's proposed to be bonded.
I Mayor Chmiel: I would second that because I had some things here too that, my
concerns were what the rates of interest. What are we looking at? Where are we
going with this? And a few other things too.
II Councilman Senn moved, Mayor Chmiel seconded to table setting the date for the
1993 Tax Increment Bonds until the next City Council meeting. All voted in
favor and the motion carried.
II GOODYEAR TIRE FACILITY LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 5. NORTH OF LAKE DRIVE EAST. AND
EAST OF THE CHANHASSEN EMISSION CONTROL STATION:
II A. REPLAT OF LOT 2. BLOCK 1. CHAN HAVEN PLAZA 3R0 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 SO. FT. GOODYEAR TIRE BUILDING.
Public Present:
Name Address
' Al Beisner Maple Grove
Chuck Beisner n i
Vernelle Wayton Chanhassen
12
r •
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993 11.
Thomas N. Thompson Chanhassen
• Tom Kotsonas Chanhassen Estates
Sharmin Al -Jaff: There are three applications before you. A site plan, a
conditional use permit and a subdivision. Approximately 3 acres are proposed to
be divided into three lots. Lot 1 will contain the Goodyear facility. Lot 2 is
proposed to contain the Abra facility and Lot 3 will be reserved for future
development. The proposal came before the Planning Commission on several
occasions. Planning Commission's primary concern revolved around the design of
the site relative to ongoing issues of urban design and the Highway 5 corridor.
The Abra design still wasn't satisfactory. That's why we didn't bring it in
front of you today, but we kept the Goodyear on for you to vote on. The site
plan is reasonably well developed. Staff has been working with the applicant
for approximately 6 months now and the design has improved considerably. 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. All services will be conducted inside the building. Parking
for vehicles is located on the north and west side of the structure. This
location is ideal since it places these areas further away from residences south
of Lake Drive. The site landscaping is of high quality due to attention that
was paid to this issue by staff and the applicant. We regard the project as
reasonable, well developed and staff is recommending that the City Council
approve the site plan, the conditional use permit and the subdivision request
with conditions outlined in the report. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you. Is Goodyear here to make any formal presentation or
do you have something for us to view this evening?
Al Beisner: I'm Al Beisner. I'm not Goodyear. I am the developer of the site. ,
A little history. We came to Chanhassen in May I think of last year. I have a
relationship with Goodyear. They wished to locate in your community. We looked
at several sites. We originally had put money down on an option site further
west. That was a neighborhood zone and would require rezoning. When we came to
staff we were informed that rezoning in this particular area would be very
difficult because neighborhood business is neighborhood business. This
particular piece of property is highway business. I think number 20 under the
proposed uses under highway business fits the Goodyear site and the Goodyear use
very well. Later on in the development of the project, because of some sort of
a glitch I guess, we fell into a conditional use permit requirement which we are
complying by. We have been through, as you probably heard, many, many meetings
and design changes with Goodyear, with Abra and the Goodyear store was never the
problem. It was the Abra store that seemed to be the problem and we are not
asking for approval of that building tonight. We're b ;ck doing probably, as we
refer to, our seventh redraw of the architectural in that. Even though
architect and the taste appeared to be a matter of the individual taste of the
Planning Commission, of myself and it's very difficult for us all to agree on
what works. I have some boards, color boards I could put here and show you what
we've done to the site and how it's going to look. In sitting through several
of these meetings with the neighborhood group and hearing feedback from
residents, in reviewing this entire procedure, I'm very, I'm confident that what
we are proposing is a very, very good use for the site. Number one, we are
spending about 2 1/2 times as much on landscaping as the city does require
today. We're putting in some landscape features that are not in your
13 '
11
11 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
requirements at all. Number two, we have set back the buildings from the
II
freeway a good distance so that we don't have a building out on a freeway.
Basically we've also lowered each, or we've lowered the elevation of our site
' about 5 feet from the next door neighbor, which is the emission control
building. You'll see from one of the drawings that I have that we're not very
visible, much to the chagrin of Goodyear and of Abra, from the freeway. We've
put in berming. 3 -4 feet of berming in front so that cars that are parked in
II the parking lot will hardly bk visible from Highway 5 and /or from the Lake Drive
side. And in reviewing some of the neighbors concerns and what is permitted in
a highway zone. I think fast food restaurants, which are 24 hours. And motels
I which can operate 24 hours, that have their lights on and have cars going in and
out all the times of the day. We don't expect any traffic problems. We're
hoping to have 32 cars a day as customers for the Goodyear store. If Taco Bell,
' which is a permitted use in that zone, has 32 cars a day, they wouldn't be in
business there. So I think that we've lost sight of some of the things that
this really is a better use because it's open during business hours. We aren't
open after 9:00 on any one night. We aren't open Sunday and I think that with
I the extra attention that we've paid to the landscape details, that we've done,
we think it will be a very good, compatible use. There will be no outside
storage. There won't be cars parked outside. Those are all in ordinances that
' the City of Chanhassen has currently and we expect that they would enforce
those. I'll try to show you a couple of things. This is basically the color
site plan, landscaping plan of the two sites. We're only considering the
Goodyear site. We're not developing this other site. Right now...pond in here,
II existing stand of poplars that is there. We are set back from Highway S further
than what your normal setback requirements are. The berm that we have along in
the northern border here, we're virtually...shield cars. If you can see it
' closely, this h..ca he and a h. h berm is 3 1/ to fee.
A normal car height is te . r is about 4 re 1/2 or 5 car feet You Te won't be seeing 2 that 4 fr
om the
freeway where currently you...emission control building and the Mc0onald's site,
I there really isn't a berming there to screen their parking lot from the highway.
This is the building that we are proposing to have a pitched roof. We have some
gables on the ends. With accent colors and stripes of the Goodyear colors.
This design...we had two gables here. On your handout, that shows... The same
I building with a couple of gables here to break up the long roofline that we did
have at one time. Architecturally speaking, we are not in a historical zone.
We don't have sidewalks in front of us. There won't be pedestrian traffic
walking through there that we can tell. There aren't sidewalks going in and we
think that we've come a long way and we have worked with the city and the staff
in trying to develop the plan, the landscape plan and those kinds of things so
that it would be a nice use here. Unlike many of you perport developers to be,
II
some of us are very conscience of the community that we are in. We will be a
major taxpayer here. We do not want to develop a slum. ;t would only hurt our
values as it would hurt everybody elses values. And I know the problems that
I people have with developers and designs along the freeway. I, at one time was
the original Commissioner of the Maple Grove Economic Development Commission and
we adapted a highway zone. And we have bricks, glass or better and we aren't so
' sure that's the right answer. Developing your highway corridor is extremely
difficult and architecture is extremely subjective. But we think what we've
done and what we've put into this far exceeds what any of the standards were and
we'll be pleased with this once it's completed. If you have any questions, I'm
II here.
' 14
1
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993 11'
Mayor Chmiel: Any questions?
Councilman Mason: Do you have anything for the view from the back end? The
Lake Drive side? '
Al Beisner: This will be the back. This is the south elevation.
Sharmin Al -Jaff: The residential area.
Councilman Mason: Yeah.
Al Beisner: This way?
Councilman Mason: No. I'm thinking of the south side. In terms of '
landscaping. I know there's that outlot between the two but will their view be?
Al Beisner: Right now they won't be able to see through. I don't know what's
going on here. That will be addressed when this lot is developed. ,
Paul Krauss: Ultimately there's going to be an intervening building with
additional landscaping but nobody knows what that is at this point. '
Councilman Mason: On the southern lot?
Paul Krauss: Right. '
Councilman Senn: So that is viewed as a temporary buffer rather than?
Paul Krauss: Yes.
Al Beisner: Originally we had inquiries by other auto related areas for this
particular southerly site. We've had an inquiry, and I only take them as
inquiries believe me, but from a doctor who wants to, or a dentist that would
like to build his clinic there. I don't know why he'd want to be in this area
as opposed to downtown but that's one inquiry that we do have. But otherwise
there's nothing we have on the board. We do not have that property under
option. We are optioning this property from, I think it's the Mason family, who
coincidentally were the owners and developers I think of the. 1
Councilman Mason: No relation.
Al Beisner: No, but I think that they were the original developers of the '
property. The residential area south of the site. And at that time they wanted
to develop all residential but there was some movement by the powers that be at
that time to create a business buffer zone between residential and a highway.
So that's how it came about.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Where do you expect the traffic flow to come from
primarily?
Al Beisner: Primarily from the McDonald's end of it. Whatever that stop light
is there. The stop sign at TH 101. We, Goodyear, would like to do 32 cars a
day. Abra probably, and we aren't talking Abra now but Abra's probably 10 to 15
15 '
1
II City, Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
I cars a day. It's not like it's a high traffic volume that's going to be created
as opposed to if we were to have a fast food or something like that. Then there
could be concern about traffic but we don't see that here.
Mayor Chmiel: What about noise ?
Al Beisner: They will, there is a condition in I believe the Minutes about we
' will not exceed, Goodyear will not exceed the acceptable or the permitted noise
level. Goodyear is not noisey. They do everything indoors. Closed. Garage
doors down. It's not a noisey kind of business. It's not fixing auto wrecks at
Goodyear. It's you know, greasing, oiling the car, alignments, tires, that kind
of thing.
Councilman Senn: Two questions if I could. One's a clarification. In our
' staff report, there's a section on the hours which leads me to believe that an
agreement was reached with the neighborhood that you'd be open 7:00 a.m. to 7:00
p.m. Now I just heard you say a minute ago that they were going to be open
' until 9:00 p.m.
Al Beisner. . I'm sorry. We do not have set hours yet. We have not reached
agreement with anybody. The hours that you have in your Minutes are the typical
hours a Goodyear store is open. And they vary from operator to operator. But
there isn't a Goodyear store in the Twin City area that's open past 9:00 so
that's why I threw out the 9:00. That was a mistake. Right now the proposed
' hours are as stated in that staff report.
Councilman Senn: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.?
Al Beisner: Yes. Yes.
Councilman Senn: But there's no tie to that basically one way or the other?
Al Beisner: No.
' Councilman Senn: Second question is.
Mayor Chmiel: Paul had a.
' Paul Krauss: He said as to the noise. I think there's an omission here. When
this was before the Planning Commission, in fact we were talking about it to the
Abra people and they indicated that they have a company requirement that the
doors be kept virtually shut. No more open than a foot or two off the ground.
And one of the things it does is cut down the noise. That was to be a condition
on both sites that we were going to add. So that would help to keep the impact
wrench noise down if it's basically taking place within the building.
Councilman Senn: Yeah, because most of them leave the doors open in the •
summertime.
II Paul Krauss: Right.
' Councilman Senn: Second one is, where will you, and it may just be the plans
that I have so I'd like to know, where is your storage area in effect for your
1
16
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
trash and your discarded tires and that sort of thing? Especially your
discarded tires, which get to be quite a pile.
Al Beisner: Right here. We're proposing to attach this, this is a 5,200 square
foot building. Square foot site...is enclosed part of the building. There is
outside, the door is that direction.
Councilman Senn: .So it's roofed? It's basically like a trash enclosure? 1
Al Beisner: No, it is roofed too. Not like a trash enclosure. Trash enclosure
is not roofed. Here is that, it does have a roof...with a door that shuts and
it does lock.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions?
Councilman Wing: Paul, it says they're going to use a split block. It sounds
like a cement block building. Is that right? It might have a fancy texture to
it but it's a cement block building?
Paul Krauss: That's true. The City prohibits unadorned block.
Councilman Wing: But it's a cement block building. Is the one in Eden Prairie, ,
near the Eden Prairie Center, is that not brick? Isn't the Goodyear store in
Eden Prairie brick? It sure looked like brick to me.
Al Beisner: I don't think so. Block comes in so many different styles and 1
shapes. It may be the burnished block look that we are trying to achieve here
too. '
Councilman Wing: But it matches all their other brick buildings.
Al Beisner: Yes. Goodyear doesn't have as many brick buildings as you might 1
think.
Councilman Wing: I don't care if they've got any. But in regards to this city,
you're putting a building right in our gateway.
Paul Krauss: Councilman Wing, we do have a photograph of that one. It does
appear to be a brick.
Councilman Senn: It is brick.
Councilman Wing: It is brick.
Councilman Senn: It is brick. The one on Highway 7 is a combination . burnished
block and block face block.
Councilman Wing: Just I guess my comment just on that one specific issue is
that, if we're going to place, if we're going to allow automotive use to expand
beyond the central business district, and start stripping down the highway into
our, the very essence of our gateway which has been a primary discussion for a
year now, the cart's ahead of the horse and I don't think we can do much about
it in this case. They're meeting the land use and like it says, it's
17 ,
11
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
11 reasonable. It's not necessarily unacceptable but I don't think we should be
looking at any concrete block if other cities are getting brick and it's
certainly a much higher quality building than the one we're looking at. And I
went around and I looked at the different types of burnished block and split
I face concrete block and it's still a cement block building and I'm not going to
buy it on this one. Cement block building, I don't care what you call it. It's
a cement block building. The one in Eden Prairie startled mebecause first of
' 'all it's nicely landscaped,:»which I think this is the case here. With berms but
it was also a real quality building which I was surprised to see. If I go into
the, let me just take a quote here out of the Planning Commission meeting from
' one of it's senior members. Typically with car care type structures you wind up
with a very minimum it takes to do the job. That's the type of light industrial
use that you often see with these types of buildings. This is the designer
saying this. It is not something that I think we would be in the interest of
good planning to be putting next to both the entrance to our city and single
family residents and I agree with his statement. I don't think any type of
cement block is acceptable for this building. Not...I'd just like to, that's
the only comment I have on that issue. I'd like to stop right there for now.
Councilman Senn: Mr. Mayor, is this time to ask Paul questions too or?
I Mayor Chmiel: Sure, yes.
Councilman Senn: Paul, in relationship to that hour issue then. That is not
II something that, it was kind of a point of resolution with the neighbors?
Paul Krauss: I don't recall it as being one Mr. Senn but under the conditional
' use permit standards, you n attach dion that regulate hours of
operation. So it can certainly be resol ti by s you there.
Councilman Senn: Is there, reading through your findings, I just wanted to
I clarify a couple of them on page 12. If I'm reading this correctly, there will
be a condition in the conditional use permit which says there will be no
unlicense or inoperable vehicles stored on the premises.
Paul Krauss: Yes, there should be. In fact it's one of the standard ones in
the ordinance. It should be repeated. Well, it is. No damaged or inoperable
II vehicles shall be stored overnight on the Goodyear site. It's condition number
4.
Councilman Senn: And there will be no outside repairs whatsoever?
II Paul Krauss: Yes. Condition 2. No outdoor repairs to be preformed or gas sold
at the site. We should probably clarify the language seit more directly
' parallels with what's in the text but the conditions are in there.
Councilman Senn: I didn't see a condition at all relating to outside sales.
Flags, banners, all that sort of thing, which Goodyear is famous for. Is it
II I'm just not seeing it or is that something?
Al -3aff: It's not in the report.
18
1
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
Al Beisner: I believe that that was an issue that was brought up at one of the
Planning Commission meetings and we understood then that the City of Chanhassen
has a sign ordinance and what you can do and how you can do it. I'm assuming
that's what we are abiding by.
Paul Krauss: The sign ordinance would probably allow some of the situations to 1
exist that you're referring to so it may be wise to, if you wanted to place
limitations on it, put it in the conditions of the permit. '
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Any other questions?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Do you see the development of the Goodyear store ,
preconditioned on Abra going in?
Al Beisner: No. No. It came about because I was doing the Goodyear store and
there was another developer that had an option on this site and was going to put
in an auto mall and he had Abra and they wanted to be there and I said, I just
want to build a free standing Goodyear store. And he said, well I'd like to put
an Abra store in there so we're making two separate legal descriptions. Two
separate loans. Two separate ownerships. The whole thing. So it's not one on
the other at all.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else like to address the
Council at this particular time? Yes sir. State your name and your address
please. '
Tom Kotsonas: My name is Tom Kotsonas and I live in Chanhassen Estates. I back
up to Lake Drive East. The gentleman has made some comments and maybe he met
•
with some other neighbors and not myself but I don't remember being informed or
asked to attend any meetings. I've gotten the implication that he's met with the
neighbors. I don't know. No? Okay, so I misread the statement on that. I
would just like to reinforce some of our concerns from the Chanhassen Estates
neighborhood and those of us who back up to that proposed development. Much of
it's been brought up. There seems to be, and rightly so, a great deal of
concern with the north side facing the highway. The berming and the trees and
so forth. They mentioned the parking on the west side. The west side affects
us more than parking on the east side of the building. That's the east side is
further away from the houses than the west side is. We have, obviously would
like to see as much berming on the south side and the west side as possible and
as much vegetation, trees that are of some size to start with. 3 and 4 and 5
foot trees, especially pine trees take many years and I'm a young man but if
they stage it, some of those trees grow in Minnesota, they'll be 20 or 30 years
from now before they get to a size that will be of any benefit to us and I would
like to stay in the neighborhood that I'm in. I've betn there a long time and I
would like to continue residing there. And I mentioned to other people at times
that we have seen a number of, I have seen a number of my neighbors move out
because of development that's taken place along behind us. As long as I've got
the stage here a little bit, we have McDonald's sitting there with spot lights
shining through at nighttime. We have the emissions control, or testing center
which we can watch cars coming in and out of there, checking stations, or they
can watch us you know from the same thing. We would like this not to become
similar to that. We would like, if it's going to be developed, whatever is
there we would like to be insured that we have plenty of privacy. We've been
19
1 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
there a long time paying taxes and we have a right as residents and as taxpayers
to protect our property, our neighborhood and our values as much as someone
coming in and making a profit. Thank you very much for the time.
Councilman Mason: Why wouldn't the parking lot be on the other side there? If
it would help that neighborhood out. Was that addressed at all, do you know?
Paul Krauss: Not specifically. Mr. Besiner might have some considerations
about the parking. This parking is fairly remote from the neighborhood. I mean
ultimately there's going to be quite a bit, and I'm not sure what, but there's
going to be something between there and the neighborhood.
Al Beisner: This is the west side. This is the east side and this is
residential down here so... Also, a problem that came about with the
development of the emissions control site. This site will be it is right now 4
1/2 feet higher than this... Coming from the...natural drop. We have a 4 1/2
to 5 foot drop from this elevation to this elevation. There will be no cars
' visible from the west. It became more, originally we had the Goodyear building
over here but we couldn't put in the... I don't know what happened to that when
the emission control building...if the site was raised...
Paul Krauss: Now, in the duration, you do have that clump of willows over here
which are not great but in the summertime do offer...a line of trees along what
will become the north property line there and at least that would give them some
time to grow. But again, we're still uncertain as to what's going to happen
there. I assume it will probably take access off the driveway here someplace,
kind of right across from that and in that case those trees won't be in the way
' and could be allowed to stay.
Al Beisner: On our final plan, and...we do not have any illuminated lighting
for Goodyear on this end of the building...
Councilman Mason: I did note that there are going to be some trees that are 16
feet in diameter on the report. That's great. I want to see them.
' Mayor Chmiel: Is there anyone else wishing to address this at this time?
Tom Thompson: My name is Tom Thompson, a Goodyear employee and perspective
owner of this facility. First, some concerns about hours. Most of the stores
that are open until 9:00 are near malls. So this store more than likely will,
7:00 will be sufficient. Secondly, the flags and signs. Goodyear doesn't lean
towards the carnival effect. They work towards professionalism and looks of the
building, which it handles well. So as far as the flag, and the carnival
effects, would be on an annual, possibly a permit type thing. Sales, such as
1 anniversay sale. Minimal weekend things. So I don't think that would be,
shouldn't be a concern. As far as noise. 25 to 30 cars a day is the normal,
and less than 10% of these vehicles are being operated during repair time.- So
exhaust, revving engines or whatever you want to call it, they're sitting idol.
They're not running. The only equipment that would be making noise are air
tools which probably more than 50 to 60 feet away you wouldn't hear them anyway.
They'd all be within the building. So the noise level's minimal. The looks of
the building, someone had recommended or had mentioned Eden Prairie. I managed
•
' 20
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993 1
• Eden Prairie for 7 years and this building far exceeds the looks and outlay of
the Eden Prairie building. It was set up very well. Thank you for your time.
Councilman Wing: I just have, one thing in Chanhassen we're certainly
interested in good corporate citizens and liquor stores who don't sell liquor to
minors and cigarettes to minors at the grocery stores, and MT. Beisner I don't
want to put you on the spot here necessarily, but didn't Goodyear get a lot of
really negative media cov &rage recently on quota systems and, didn't they
recently get caught in a sting operation?
Tom Thompson: Yes, that was the corporate stores which was, it was one sided.
It was sensationalism in journalism. It was a one sided store. I work for a
corporate store right now and I can honestly say the independents could be as
much a spot as a corporate but sensationalism in journalism. No one's going to
deal with one man. They want to go for the corporation. And my store, which I
work in Wayzata, we had been visited several times. Nothing was said. What
little highlighted segments you saw on the television were sensationalized. They
panned out to be nothing and it fizzled out real quick. 1
Councilman Wing: So that problem, both between Sears and Goodyear, that's been
resolved? I can feel comfortable.
Tom Thompson: Sears was a much more complicated issue. The government was
involved with that and government also did come to Goodyear and ask for their
advice and their help and Goodyear declined because they didn't want to get into
mud slinging.
Councilman Wing: So there's no question I could come to your store in full
trust?
Tom Thompson: 100% guaranteed. That's been Goodyear's warranty all along.
100% customer satisfaction. 1
Councilman Wing: Okay.
Councilman Senn: Are you individually going to be owning and operating this 1
business?
Tom Thompson: Well, I don't know. It's a franchised store which means Goodyear 1
will hire on the owner, just like applying for a job. So whoever's best suited
for the position of owning this facility will be taken on. And each individual
who applies for ownership has to meet certain requirements, so it's fairly
strict.
Mayor Chmiel: Do you still live in town Tom? 1
Tom Thompson: Yes, I'm a resident of Chanhassen.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other questions of Tom? Thank you. 1
Tom Thompson: Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: You had some specific questions that you wanted to bring up. 1
21 1
•
1
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
Councilman Wing: Whenever it's convenient. Are you looking for...
11 Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Councilman Wing: Mr. Biesner, my comments tonight I want to make sure are not
directed at you, and this is the first time as a Councilmember I get a chance to
react to this. It goes through Planning Commission and we have preliminaries
but all of a sudden here it is, and last time I showed some concerns I got a
II letter from a corporation that kind of came after me. So I'd like to put my
comments out but necessarily be attacking you or your company whatsoever. And I
want to back up and just comment that these are really permanent installations.
' Kind of one shot deals and we either do it right or we're stuck forever. The
real concern I've got is this is our gateway. I'm going to suggest that this is
our front door and we're kind of developing it using 15 year old standards and
I ordinances that are just in the process of being updated and these lots on this
east end are sneaking by the program here and I'm going to suggest that in 6
months, or if this was to be held for a while, that this development might not
be occuring in my opinion. I was hoping we could zone and limit fast food and
I auto centers and kind of centralize their automotive centers and not spring them
up on a strip basis running out to our east end right down our gateway. So I
guess I'm recognizing that this is meeting our standards and maybe there's very
' little to be said or done and my voting no would not even be a legal vote no if
they're meeting our ordinance guidelines. But on the north side of the street
we've just taken out a taco stand and a cement plant. Now we've turned around
and added an auto body shop and a Goodyear tire store, and I don't see those as
II necessarily complimenting each other. It seems we're trying to clean up this
side but then we're letting kind of what I see as an inappropriate land use come
in for the south side now, and I have nothing against Goodyear. My last set of
I tires came from them, but again we're talking land use and what's best for the
city. And I think if the Highway 5 corridor study were in line and if our
landscaping and our land use ordinance were up to par where I'd like it to be
I tonight, that we probably wouldn't be addressing this. My concern is that
there's probably a few more lots out there in this area that are going to slip
through unless we do something really rapidly and that's what I want to discuss
under Council Presentations. I think we need to move to prevent additional
1 automotive or fast food uses at the entryway to our city. Reasonably well
developed. Reasonably well developed for our gateway. ...come to terms with
this in the staff report has been like trying to hit a moving target because we
don't have any rules in place. Cement blocks I don't approve of. Reasonable if
on exceptional land use. You know none of this is making me feel real good
about this. Eden Prairie is brick. I'm going to suggest that we have brick
here. The building architecture meets the standards of the site plan ordinance
II
requirements. That's back from 1978. Not the new corridor study that's coming
through. Just quickly going back to where we're winding up here and why I'm
really afraid of approving this tonight without a lot more information. The
1 Planning Commission who has looked at this night after night and week after
week, said they're really worried about it. Senior Commissioners are, there's
one comment off of page 11. I think Ladd you hit it on the nose. We pass this
up to Council tonight and let them take a hack at it. Probably the best thing
to do. Five more opinions. Well I think we're less informed than the Planning
Commission and we're not designers either. So I really, I guess I don't know if
we've got any justification to say no to this but they slip through the crack
II and what we're trying to do on Highway 5 and I'm really concerned about the
1 22
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
neighbors comments about the negative impact these businesses will have. I
don't think they're positive quality business. Again, nothing to do with
Goodyear. I'm talking strictly land use and do we want our corridor, the
gateway to be auto body shops and tire shops and so on and so forth. I think
the neighbors comments about the degregation of their neighborhood and the type
of land use that's going in here is very pertinent and I really am concerned for
the neighbors and I wish we .had been a head of this by another 6 to 8 weeks. 6
months. This probably wouldn't have happened. I think the neighbors have very
valid points and I think that once again, staff and City Council are sitting
here with all our hoofs dug into the ground, pulling backwards but the carts got
all the developers going westbound and they've got more people than we've got.
They've done everything right. They're given and yielded. I think staff has
done an excellent job on this. I'm real disappointed that Planning is saying,
we don't like it and I'm saying I don't like it and I don't like the land use
and I wish we were ahead of this and I hope that no more of these are going to
slip through the cracks. I can't be any more negative than that. I'll turn it
over to somebody else. Thank you.
Mayor Chmiel: Thank you for your positiveness. Colleen, do you have any? '
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes. I think a reocurring theme that we're going to
see tonight is the Highway 5 corridor task force and where they are and being a
freshman on the Council I'm not completely certain where they are in the
development of the plan but I'm concerned that we are letting things come
through without an overall plan for what we want to do for Highway 5 and how
businesses will relate to that development. So I'm concerned about allowing '
businesses to build or do anything until we have that long range plan in focus
for Highway 5. Particularly, as Dick said, with it being the gateway to our
city. I appreciate all the work that's been done by the Planning Commission and
by Goodyear but it sounds like nobody's completely thrilled with it and I have a
lot of faith in staff and in the Planning Commission. They're not thrilled. I'm
not particularly thrilled. As Dick said, it does meet our standards as they sit
today but as City Council we have the authority to put the brakes on this one
until we have more current standards to have it live up to so I guess right now
I'm uncomfortable with it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Michael. 1
Councilman Mason: Being uncomfortable with it and which way we're going to vote
I think are two different things. I find myself being in kind of an unusual
position here. I'm not sure at this point that we have much choice. I agree
with your comments about I wish this was coming 6 months later because I suspect
we'd be done with our Highway 5 overlay. Just out of curiousity Paul, how much
longer do you think we'll be going with that?
Paul Krauss: Councilman Wing asked me that this afternoon and I always hesitate
to give a date where you have citizens involved because you're never sure which
way it's going to go. We have an intent to try to wrap it up in about 5 -6
months, or at least get the ordinance out. In fact, there's a separate
subcommittee, well you're aware of that. A separate subcommittee has been
established to work on the ordinance aspect under an accelerated way and their
first meeting is Wednesday. So I'd give the 6 months as a reasonable timeframe.
23 1
11 City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
1 Councilman Mason: I guess my question would be, and maybe this is to the legal
end of this. Is there anyway, and also I want to share what Councilman Wing
said too. I think clearly there's been a lot of work done on this and I
' appreciate that. That to me is not the issue at all, but we are talking about
what Chanhassen is going to look like for the next, as long as I'm going to be
•
here, and I'm curious if there's anything we can do to hold this off until that
I gets done. I mean what happens if we vote this down?
Elliott Knetsch: Well, part of this is a preliminary plat and you're obligated
to act on the preliminary plat but then I believe it's 120 days after it's
submitted to you from the Planning Commission so I don't think you could wait
until it's done to act on this. You're legally required to act in a certain
amount of time.
' Councilman Wing: Mike, the other comment along that line, and I don't, you have
the floor but the central business district which this falls into is not
I necessarily anything that the task force is dealing with. They're primarily
dealing with the western two - thirds and so this is the eastern part which may or
may not have any reflection on that task force at all and their findings.
Excuse me.
Mayor Chmiel: Anything else Mike?
Councilman Mason: No. I guess we could drag our feet and see if we could prod
the committee along but I don't see that. I guess we're asking Goodyear and
people to act in good faith and I think we need to act in good faith too. So at
this point I don't have anything more to say.
Mayor Chmiel: Mark.
II Councilman Senn: I guess two different levels of comments. One is if we do
proceed with this I would, I'm in real agreement with Dick that I'd like to see
some upgrading of the building materials. I'd also like to see some
stipulations that relate to hours and banners, flags and outside sales. And I
guess those are the kind of, if it goes comments. I have I guess a real overall
concern just in relationship to the land use. You know I know this is highway
business but a lot of things under it require conditional use permit. You know
if you go out and drive, let's call it the eastern section of Highway 5. It's
kind of amazing. I mean you see an emission center, 4 gas stations, 1 oil
change place, 2 auto service places, 2 carwashes, 1 auto parts place, and then
II go on and on and on. I've seen this happen before in other cities. I'll call a
wonderful example, Hopkins which 20 years ago became gasoline alley. 20 years
from then which is now, they're still working to get ridfof that reputation and
I that image. You know I'm not sure I have as many problems with the Goodyear
building itself if it's done properly but again I have a real problem with
intensification of this type of uses on our main corridor because it seems to se
the handwriting's on the wall. We're becoming another gasoline alley acid I '
I think that's not in the overall benefit of the City of Chanhassen. I don't know
I guess totally either what the solutions are and again, I haven't been involved
in the year's discussion on this, if that's what it's been. But I'd really
rather than see us proceed with approvals on this, I'd really rather see us take
an action to do something like put a moratorium on it for 6 months so we can sit j
back and get where we want to get in relationship to land uses on that corridor.
' 24
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
Now I'm not sure that's expanding the study that's going on out west because I'm
not sure I want to take the efforts away from that that are going on but maybe
• this becomes an east end study of the same thing. But I get real concerned
• • because any time an area first opens for development, these are the pressures
that are put on it. The question is whether you're going to allow the pressures
to take over or whether you're going to sit back and take your time and get a
good balance. And I guess I underline that word balance of development.
Balanced uses in the area. ,
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, Richard.
Councilman Wing: Don, I'd just like the City Manager to address this. Don, in
laymen's terms, I agree with Councilman Senn. I think the land use has gotten
ahead of the, has gotten ahead of us here and we're stung. To put it bluntly,
isn't that a tough bounce. Have they not met our standards in our current
ordinances and is there in fact, we have no choice? There is nothing to deny
here? They've gone the extra mile with staff and with our ordinance. There's
nothing to deny. There is no moratorium that he's put on here. Hasn't this
simply slipped through the cracks and it's a done deal?
Don Ashworth: I would request that the City Attorney respond to that. 1
Elliott Knetsch: Thank you Don. I would agree with what you're saying to a
certain degree. I think the bottom line is, however, that the use that they're'
considering here is a conditional use. If it was a permitted use and they met
all ordinance requirements, then you are, there really is no discretion. But
with the conditional use, you have discretion and the staff report contains the
factors to consider in looking at a conditional use. The staff has made
recommendations on findings but the Council is not bound by those findings. If
you go through those and determine, in your opinion, that they don't meet those
standards, then you could deny the permit. Or you know, if you come up with
other standards that relate to the wording of these standards that you don't
think they meet, you could deny the permit. In other words, you're not totally
restricted to the specific language of the ordinance. If you have other traffic
concerns, other land use concerns that say impact adjoining properties or the
city in general, that could form the basis for denial of the conditional use
permit.
Councilman Senn: That addresses this specific action but I think Dick's '
question was coming back to more what mine is. Can we put a moratorium on
consideration even of projects in this area until we have a chance to catch up
and get a new land use plan in effect in place?
Elliott Knetsch: The answer is yes. You're allowed to have what's called an
interim ordinance while you study the area in question. '
Councilman Wing: So you're saying we could deny the conditional use permit and
put an overlay, temporary overlay to get, we could get an ordinance on line real
fast that might make it undesireable to put this type of business in or make it
so attractive that we wouldn't care what they put in. But we could deny the
conditional use permit? 1
25
1
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
Elliott Knetsch: I think that if you consider an interim ordinance, you would
have to consider how the interim ordinance is going to effect pending
applications. Do you want the pending applications to go through or do you want
them put on hold until you, until you lift the ordinance and allow development
' applications again?
•
Councilman Wing: Okay, we talked about moratoriums before and Woodbury got shot
down so we chose not to go that route.
Elliott Knetsch: Yeah, but Woodbury was upheld in Court within the last month.
II Councilman Wing: Was upheld?
Councilman Senn: It was upheld a week ago as a matter of fact.
1 Don Ashworth: If you would consider denying it, what you previously have done
is to act to have the City Attorney's office draft the, I guess you call them
' Findings of Fact. Basically it provides the basis under which this is being
denied. If you are going to go with the moratorium, I would ask that you
similarly table the item to allow the City Attorney to draft those findings as
well.
I Councilman Senn: Excuse me Don, if we table it though, doesn't it pass by, I
mean doesn't it just pass because of that time period you referenced earlier? If
' we don't act by that date, it goes forward?
Elliott Knetsch: Right, but I don't believe that we're at the end of our time
limit on that date. I don't know when the application was filed or when the
Planning Commission acted on it.
Sharmin Al -Jaff: The Planning Commission acted 2 weeks ago.
II Paul Krauss: But the item was filed.
II Sharmin Al -Jaff: In May.
Mayor Chmiel: I think everybody's concerns are establishing the Hihgway 5
corridor with the regulations that we're looking for and I think some of the
II
things that I had too is something that were not addressed fully but we're
looking at now with that adoption for the Highway 5 corridor. The standards for
architecture as to the exterior of those buildings. What they're really going
II to look like. I think that's one of it. We could also go for that moratorium
on a 6 months basis and I think within that period of time we might have enough
gathered to put that through. I see a puzzled look on your face Paul. I'm
asking that question.
Paul Krauss: If it was just a matter of staff working with our consultalnts and
going off and writing this thing, we could have it to you in 2 weeks. But the
fact of the matter is, we're working with a citizens task force and we need to
bring them along and then we need to go public with it and get feedback and then
we need to bring it through the Planning Commission and then ultimately to you.
Now at the end of that process, what you have is new development ordinance.
An overlay ordinance in all probability for the corridor. You haven't gotten to
' 26
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993 I/
uses at all. I mean that involves the City initiating rezonings and they're
probably going to be contested rezonings. A property owner isn't going to want
to concede it in a number of cases up and down the corridor. Changing land uses
also involves getting often rubber stamped but approval by the Metro Council,
which adds more time. That whole, you're going the whole 9 yards on that thing
probably takes the best part of a year. •
Councilman Senn: But can't we undertake that process, separating the east end 1
from the west end and shorten that process back to what you were talking about
in the first place?
Mayor Chmiel: They're not addressing the east end. 1
Paul Krauss: That's not true. No. The corridor starts at Dell Road and ends
technically past the Arboretum. The work schedule in fact, when we've targeted
sites that needed special study, we started out with the area in front of Data
Sery and then we've got the next site we've targeted is the Ward property so
we've picked up parcels in and around, completely through the CBD. Also,
Richard you mentioned something that the CBD and the corridor are not
necessarily the same thing and that's true except to the extent the CBD has
exposure on Highway 5. There was never an intent to look at anything
specifically. You know, is the CBD a different area? Yeah. I mean preferrably
we'll deal with that, with the Highway 5 study but you're not going to get
answers to land use questions on 78th Street from a Highway 5 corridor study.
That probably just adds confusion to the whole thing but I think you have to be,
one of the things about moratoriums is you need to know that you have a date
certain at which time the thing collapses or you're striving to attain that.
Again, I think 6 months may be reasonable to establish an ordinance but it's not
going to change the uses in that timeframe.
Councilman Senn: So you'd need a year is what you're saying? '
Paul Krauss: I would think so.
Councilman Wing: But perhaps if we did have this delay, we would at least, if
Target was suggested to be our minimum standard, we did fairly well with Target.
If that was our new minimum standard, I'd like to get that minimum standard in
the ordinance so that then applies to these lots that are sneaking in the east
side, which is going to increase the landscaping a little bit and maybe setbacks
and building types, architecture standards and so on and so forth.
Architectural standards, that's so nebulous we can hardly touch that in the next
10 years maybe but the types of businesses, I guess we can't change but at least
what we did with Target, it ought to be in an ordinance form and on line before
we let anymore development on Highway 5 into our gateway. This Mr. Senn, he
sounds like this troublemaker Wing from 2 years ago. My first meeting I came
and I said, here's what Highway 5 looks like to me with umpteen filling stations
and this and that. It was a cement plant, a taco shop and a McDonald's and then
we've got this little building that's the American Legion and I made it clear
that I didn't want that to continue to the west end so this corridor study got
started. Now you come in saying, you know it isn't a very pretty picture but
yet we're allowing more of it and we're expanding it. It just doesn't sound
right. I mean he's hitting it right on the head. I'm stunned that suddenly
we're expanding this automotive center out to the east end of our city. We're
27 ,
1
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
trying to encourage Eden Prairie to do a good job at their west end and not cut
11 all those trees down so we can come barging in from the west and you know really
do kind of the opposite of what we're even talking about so. I don't want to
be, I hope I'm leaving Goodyear out of this because Mr. Besiner I have no axes
with. The issue is strictly to me is land use. Our gateway and permitted uses.
Councilman Senn: But the ordinance takes that now. I mean the ordinance allows
II us to take the Target standard and make it the standard for this project or any
other use like this in the corridor, correct Paul? I mean by simply attaching
those conditions to the conditional use permit.
I Paul Krauss: You do have a fair amount of latitude under the conditional use
permit to get better than normal development. So you could probably come up
with something similar to the Target. In fairness to Mr. Besiner and Goodyear
II though, one of the problems here is nobody has ever been able to, well thus far,
I mean we haven't been able to articulate consistently what will make everybody
happy. You know when the Planning Commission talked about architecture, we had
5 different opinions and you've got Mr. Besiner sitting there saying, I will do
what you want but tell me what it is.
Mayor Chmiel: That's right. Yeah, I agree.
II Councilman Senn: Mr. Mayor, I don't consider the issue here to be architecture.
I mean that is a sub - issue.
II Mayor Chmiel: That is a portion of it.
Councilman Senn: That's a portion of it but I consider the major issue here in
' front of us is land use in relationship to that area.
Mayor Chmiel: Well, on the other hand you could put another taco shop or a Taco
Johns in there and they would have 150 cars in a day or 200. Is that going to
better it? I don't think so from the neighborhood's standpoint, or from the
city's standpoint.
II Councilman Senn: But delaying, doing a study, the moratorium would address
both. I mean I guess I'm not going to turn around and say that that's better
than a Goodyear because I think the Goodyear's better than the Taco and I'm not
I saying I wouldn't come back and say the Goodyear's fine. But my fear is, we
approve a Goodyear tonight, then Abra's going to be in right next to it. And
the third lot back there is going to be something else. Before you know it,
there's going to be 3 more automotive things in here in front us. It seems to
me we ought to bite the bullet and get at the job we really want to get at,
which is get it straighten away. fi
II Councilman Wing: Quick question for Paul. Direct question. I'll apologize
later. The way things are happening, with our existing ordinances Paul and
you've been struggling to get these things on line and the things that are
II happening and your available staff, could you use some breathing space right now
to get revamped and look at some of these issues and not have the pressure of
people coming in the door all the time? If we gave you a moratorium of x weeks
I or months, would that give you some needed breathing room right now to really
look at these issues and attack some of these issues we're concerned about?
1
28
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993 1
Paul Krauss: Yeah, it certainly wouldn't hurt. I mean having more time to sit
back and complete. If our only job was to push paper and bring permits to you,
I mean it would be pretty straight forward. I mean the more interesting and
more complex part of our job is to work with you on a vision for what the city
should be and on planning. Fundamental planning. There's no question that
we've known all along on Highway 5 that we're under the gun. We told the task
force that when they were set up. That we're going to try and bring you along
as quickly as possible but there are going to be things that you may be able to
influence but not totally change. I think they were pleased when we explained
the Target process to them and a little bit concerned when we showed them the
Abra plan. But that was a limitation they were willing to accept. I don't want
to dissuade you. You know if moratorium is the way you're going to go, I've
worked in a community where we did that. I think it was done effectively.
There were some outs built into the moratorium for some sites. For example, one
important site I think to the city may well be the corner of Target which is
part of that PUD and which had the standards that you spoke of already embodied
in it. That's also in the corridor. 5o you may want to be able to exempt some
sites if they meet some kind of criteria. There's a lot of things to think of
so how you exactly define the corridor, how you handle that, what's the duration
of this thing, it's not as black and white an issue as it might seem. I mean it
is one solution. It is effective but there's a lot that goes with a moratorium.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Any other discussion? Go ahead.
Councilman Wing: I'm only going to move tabling until the first meeting in '
February to allow some time to look at these issues and clarify where we're
going. Especially with staff. I wouldn't want to act on a moratorium. I think
it's too severe and I'm not sure that this isn't the choice we want and they
haven't done the best job possible.
Mayor Chmiel: Paul, do you have a question?
Paul Krauss: If a moratorium ordinance is to be brought back, it would be
reviewed I think directly by the City Council. It wouldn't necessarily, well
I'm not sure. Would it have to go to the Planning Commission? 1
Elliott Knetsch: No, it would come back to the Council.
Paul Krauss: And for us to officially bring you an ordinance we have to publish 1
it 14 days. 10 days? 14 days in advance.
Elliott Knetsch: That's by your own rules of procedure. You can waive your own
rules of procedure.
Mayor Chmiel: I would just as soon not waive rules when it comes to doing
things as such. I'd like everybody to know exactly what's happening
Elliott Knetsch: You would still provide, you know publish it and put it on the
agenda and so forth so the public would be aware of what's going on. I'm just
saying if it's a matter of missing by a day in applying to the rules, you could
waive the day.
1
29 1
•
1
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
Paul Krauss: You would also have an obligation to define the corridor and then
notify all the property owners who would be effected by the moratorium. So
we'll sure try to bring it back to you by February. That's February 8th?
II Mayor Chmiel: Maybe that's what we're looking at is tabling it for a 30 days
period with to do what?
' Councilwoman Dockendorf: To achieve what, yeah.
Mayor Chmiel: To gather just what Paul had indicated.
Paul Krauss: We could bring you a moratorium ordinance and some guidelines for
•
how it might be effected. One of the questions I have though is, should Mr.
Beisner be working to resolve. I mean is the direction that you're to give Mr.
II Beisner are the things that he could do that would resolve your concerns in the
short term?
I Councilman Mason: I think Councilman Wing has stated his distaste for concrete
block. That might be one thing to look at. But on the other hand, why should
they spend any more time on it if we're examining this? Again, I'm finding
myself in kind of an unusual position here tonight. Are we, by looking at a
I moratorium, is this kind of de post facto? I mean why, and I'm not saying we
shouldn't do it. I'm just saying this has all been done in good faith with
everyone concerned and we accuse developers and the like of not acting in good
' faith. Are we doing that now? I think that's something, I'm not making a
judgment. I think that's something we need to look at.
II Councilman Senn: B #his is the first time we've een it and we're the only
body to consider this ut type of an action, isn't that s true?
Mayor Chmiel: True.
Councilman Wing: Well the Planning Commission has by their comments, every one
of them, said we don't like it. They said, we're uncomfortable. Let's get rid
of it and give it to the Council. So here it is.
Mayor Chmiel: Get 5 more votes.
' Councilman Wing: But I agree with Mike. I'm not supporting a moratorium. I
don't a moratorium is necessarily the way to go but I think we have to decide
what we expect out of this. On the other hand, Mike also pointed out that they
' have complied with the existing ordinances and exceeded those limits. Sharmin
has wrung blood out of turnips if you want. I mean both sides have worked hard
to do everything possible to make this go. We can add bfick to it. I mean I
I don't think we ought to have block in our gateway to the city but that's a
standard that's simply got to be met head on.
Councilman Mason: I hope it's vote time here pretty soon on this to tell you
II the truth. I'm okay with tabling this but I'd really, I'm not going to take a
moratorium lightly because there's just too much going on in this city right
now. Paul's mentioned Target. Paul's mentioned that area. That's something ,
II that would really, I'm not saying I'm against it but I certainly think that that
would really need to be looked at very carefully.
30
1
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993 1
Councilwoman Dockendorf: And I'm not sure what we could accomplish. Say we put
It
a moratorium for the next 6 months, what's our plan for that 6 months? The task
force certainly already has a full slate.
Paul Krauss: There are some of these sites that are going to be problematic. I 1
mean there's the second and third site here. There is what is in front of Data
Serv. There's the site adjacent to the Press. Once you move out of that,
everything that's going to be done either requires a rezoning that gives you a
lot of latitude, or is in a TIF district which gives you a lot of latitude.
That's one of the, I mean really the zoning is only one of the tools the city
has in the arsenol. Unfortunately it's the only one we have here really. I
don't want to tell you that without a moratorium everything will turn out just
hunky dory. You do have those 5 or 6 sites where you're going to be posed with
similar problems if somebody brings in a proposal. But for the balance of the
area, you can bring pretty such all the tools to bear that you did with Target.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, and I think I'll entertain one more and I think we'll call
the question after that because I think we're just grinding here and coming to
no conclusion.
Councilman Senn: Yeah. I think we're grinding too and I think part of it is
because we don't have a good feel for what the moratorium and stuff would mean.
So I guess what I would like to move is that we direct, that we table this for
30 days and that we direct staff to come back in 30 days with a proposed
ordinance on moratorium. That's the only way we're going to get our hands on
it. Touch it. Feel it. Know what it means. Staff can provide the
professional expertise to doing that and at that point we can decide which way
we move from that point. It may not be to go ahead with the moratorium but at
least at that point we know what we're, I guess talking about.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. At the same time should we also, in that aspect have our
attorney go through and look at that moratorium with some draft findings?
Councilman Senn: That would make sense, yes.
Councilman Wing: Now was that a motion? Did you make a motion?
Councilman Senn: Yes, I did make a motion. '
Councilman Wing: I would second it just for discussion. Because the moratorium
I still don't feel comfortable with and I don't support. ,
Councilman Senn: Dick, don't get me wrong. I's not suggesting a moratorium.
Councilman Wing: Well I know. First of all we're tabling this for 30 days. I ,
still don't think it effects Goodyear. They have a proposal on the table that
seems reasonable. It's gone beyond the norm. I think we almost have to on
that. But then this moratorium is going to effect the lot next to it and the
lot next to that one and subsequent things coming in so I don't think we're
going to see them slipping through the crack here quite as easily and we'll get
an ordinance on line fast with landscaping that meets the Target standards. Why 11 are we going to delay it 30 days? We can't change the land use and what they've
done with Goodyear. I think this, your motion I can go along with but I still
31 1
1
.I City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993
II think we have to address Goodyear tonight and make a decision on denying it or
not denying it.
I Councilman Senn: Well Dick my motion was to delay it 30 days for the reason
that, okay here's the reason now. The reason that, at that point we can decide
whether this property should or 'should not be included in a moratorium. But
until we define the moratorium, I don't think that's fair to make that judgment.
II Nor is it fair to treat this property I think any differently at this point than
we're going to look at surrounding ones.
1 Councilman Wing: Except this land use is established and it is meeting
ordinance.
' Mayor Chmiel: Yes. And it's of those standards but nonetheless you can still
table it for those 30 days.
Councilman Wing: Well, I can go with the 30 days tabling.
II Mayor Chmiel: And to come along. My understanding of your motion, restate that
motion as such.
II Councilman Senn: The motoin is that we table this item.for 30 days and in that
time period staff and City Attorney come back with a draft or proposed
' moratorium ordinance for consideration and with all the definitions.
Mayor Chmiel: With the findings?
II Councilman Senn: With the findings and definitions that we need.
Mayor Chmiel: Good. And you seconded it.
II Paul Krauss: If I could clarify that. Should this be an ordinance that we get
together, publish it and do everything else so that if you wanted to, you could
take action on it that evening? Or did you just want to review it.
II Councilman Senn: If that's possible, that'd be nice to have as an option.
II Mayor Chmiel: If it's possible. I don't know how you could do it but.
Councilman Senn: That's something you have to answer maybe more than us.
II Paul Krauss: Well part of what you would have to do in creating the ordinance
is establish the corridor. Establish what it covers and 't guess it's difficult
to notify people if we don't know exactly what it is.
I Councilman Senn: Do we have time to wait? I mean do we have time if we wait 30
days, come back, get our hands on an ordinance and then do we have time then to
II turn around and do that publication?
Paul Krauss: Then you're looking at probably another 15 -20 -25 days beyond that.
' So I guess we'd like to shoot for it. If we take a shot at defining a corridor
and notifying people, you can make it smaller at'that point but you can't expand
it without going through a re- notification.
32
City Council Meeting - January 11, 1993 1
Councilman Wing: Can you make sure that an update is on the next agenda. 1
Mayor Chmiel: I'm going to call a question.
Councilman Senn coved, Councilman Wing seconded to table action on the Goodyear 1
Tire Facility for 30 days and direct staff to come back with a proposed draft
ordinance on a moratorium and findings. All voted in favor, except Councilman
Mason who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 4 to 1.
CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL. GATEWAY BUSINESS CENTER. SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TH 5 AND TH
41, OPUS CORPORATION. 1
Public Present:
Name Address ,
Michele Foster Opus Corporation
John Uban Dahlgren, Shardlow S Uban
Paul & Carol Paulson 3160 West 82nd Street
Henry Wrase Chaska
Rick Wrase Chanhassen
Peter Olin Minnesota Landscape Arboretum
Jim Andrews Park and Recreation Commission
Larry Schroers Park and Recreation Commission
Jan Lash Park and Recreation Commission 1
Harry Adams 115 West 82nd Street
Kate Aanenson: Opus Corporation is requesting PUD conceptual approval of 170
acres of property. This proposal includes 22 lots with approximately 950,000
square feet of building. The buildings would be an office /industrial mix. This
proposal also calls for some support or ancillary commercial included in the
project. Lot 1, which is this lot right here, is being shown as being held out
for future development. This property is zoned A -2 but the Comp Plan guides it
for office /industrial type uses. This item appeared before the Planning
Commission twice. First in October and then in November and the Planning
Commission discussed it at length. They had numerous concerns with the project.
I think what we're trying again is the Highway 5 in a conceptual envision of
this development and where we're going with that. We have shook out a few
issues I believe. Paul Paulson's property here and the Wrase's property there
were both shown as exceptions. We're hoping now that they can be included and
it appears that they may, are working towards being included into the
development project itself. One of the other issues is the park dedication.
This project does not reflect what the Park and Recreation Commission, their
recommendation. They are showing two lots. Lot 17 and 18, which would be these
two lots right here, as open space. These lots also include the more
significantly wooded area and the wetlands, both of which would be required to
be preserved under the PUD anyway. So what the Park and Recreation Commission
is looking for is more of a community park and that acreage does not meet their
needs. They're looking at something separate from that. At the time of the
Planning Commission, there were 4 proposals. It got tabled the first time. The
Planning Commission asked that they come back and show some alternatives for
that Lot 1. There was a great discomfort in what the possibility of that would '
be. So they came back with 4 proposals. Those being office institutional,
33 r
1
P.C. DATE: 11 -
1 C i T Y O F C.C. DATE: 1 -11 -93 18 -92 1
' � CASE: 92 -3 Site Plan
\' :it CflANllAIT 92 -2 CUP
- 90 -17 Subdivision
�-7 BY: Al -Jaff
1
1 STAFF REPORT
I PROPOSAL: 1) Site Plan Review for Goodyear, 5,397
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
r- 3) Conditional Use Permit to Allow an Auto Service Facility in the BH
Z District
i Q LOCATION: South of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and
1 V
_ east of Emission Control Testing Station
J
0 APPLICANT : Beisner Ltd. Chanhassen Holding Company
1 6100 Summit Drive 14201 Excelsior Boulevard
Q Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Minnetonka, MN 55436
1 PRESENT ZONING: Highway Business
ACREAGE: 3.1634 acres
I ADJACENT ZONING
AND LAND USE: N - Hwy. 5
' S - RSF; Chan Estates and Lake Drive East
E - IOP; DataSery
W - BH; Emission Control Station
SEWER AND WATER: Services are available to the site.
I 't ,
SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is undeveloped and vegetated primarily with
I W mature poplar and elm trees.
a 2000 LAND USE: Commercial
1
1
1
Goodyear 1
November 18, 1992
Page 2
1
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing to construct a Goodyear Auto Service facility. The site is located
PP P P g Y tY
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.
In an accompanying subdivision request, the site is being divided into three lots, one of which
1
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 1
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
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 1
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 Good Y eai
November 18, 1992
1
Page 3
concrete block accented by a sandable decorative texture fmish structure that will have a series
' of service bays and a pitched roof. All services for the facility will take place inside the
building.
1 Parking for vehicles is located on the north and west side of the structure 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 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
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
1 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
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
1 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
Goodyear. 1
November 18, 1992
Page 4
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.
1
BACKGROUND
On January 28, 1991, the City Council approved fmal 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 1
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
On November 18, 1992, the Planning Commission reviewed the site plan and conditional use
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.
1
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
proposed to appear before the City Council on January 25, 1993.
1
GENERAL SITE PLAN /ARCHITECTURE
1
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 1
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
nearest home is located 350 feet away from the south edge of the actively used portion of the
1
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
I
Goodyear
November 18, 1992
1 Page 5
length with dormers along the roof line to break it up and reflect what has become typical
1 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
1 enclosure will be constructed of chain link 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. Berming
and landscaping is proposed along the north side, adjacent to Highway 5. This will provide
screening of cars parked in the lot.
1 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
agreement, acceptable to the city, filed against each parcel. We do not wish to see the city
1 petitioned to accept the street at some point in the future.
The existing private street was built in accordance to the City's typical commercial pavement
1 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 dine 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).
1
Goodyear. 1
November 18, 1992
Page 6
1
•
LANDSCAPING
The landscaping plan is very well conceived. Staff worked closely with the applicant to design
P g P rY
the landscaping plan. Berming 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
1
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
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
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.
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.
LIGHTING 1
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 foot candles of light at the property
line as required by ordinance. An acceptable lighting plan should be submitted when building
permits are requested. 1
SIGNAGE
The Plannin g requested Commission review of the sign package before it appears before the City
Council. The applicant has submitted a preliminary signage plan. One monument identification
sign is proposed at the north edge of the site facing Highway 5. Staff proposed that if the
1
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
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 construct 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. The building has two wall mounted signs along the north and west elevations. The
1
1 Goodyear
November 18, 1992
1 Page 7
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
1 sites. A sign plan acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit.
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
1 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
1 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
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 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
1 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.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Both municipal sanitary sewer and watermain are available to the site. The plans propose on
P rY 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
Goodyear
November 18, 1992
Page 8 i
•
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 fmancial 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 1
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
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
1
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' 1
S -25' W -10' S -35' W -26'
Hard surface 65% 64.6%
Coverage
Lot Area 20,000 s.f. 42,410 s.f. 1
Variances Required - none 1
1 •
Goodyear
November 18, 1992
Page 9
PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES
The City is requiring that park and trails fees be submitted in lieu of park land. Fees are paid
Y q g P P P
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.
' 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. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeters of all lots.
2. Drainage and conservation easement located over the pond on Lot 3.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1 Auto Service Facilities are permitted in the BH District as a conditional use. The following
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
1 control testing stations.
GENERAL ISSUANCE STANDARDS
' 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort,
P � Y� t,
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 than would have
occurred or could have occurred if more intensive uses allowed by the
1 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.
1
Goodyear. 1
November 18, 1992
Page 10 1
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
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 1
proposal exceeds current design standards.
4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. 1
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, 1
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. 1
6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not
be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 1
FINDING - There are no projected needs for public facilities and services beyond those
which are already provided in this area. 1
1
1
IF
Goodyear,
November 18, 1992
1 Page 11
7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of
I 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,
1 or trash.
FINDING - This site will not create adverse impacts to persons, property or the general
I welfare of the area. Hours of operation, orientation of the bays away from
residence, and lighting standards will comply with city ordinances.
I 8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic
congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares.
I 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
1 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
quality, however, the large quantity gives it its significance. In order to
1 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.
There are a large number of mature evergreens located along the south
1 side of Lake Drive East that still provide the required buffering.
I 10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
FINDING - The site plan is well designed to provide adequate landscaping and
I 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.
1 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values.
I FINDING - The site is being used for a commercial type of operation which is
consistent with its designation.
I 12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article.
1
1
Goodyear 1
November 18, 1992
Page 12 1
FINDING - The following is our review of conditions of 'approval and appropriate
findings: 1
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 is further restricting
outdoor parking of damaged or inoperable vehicles.
c. No public address system shall be audible from any residential parcel. 1
FINDING - No public address systems will be permitted.
d. Stacking areas deemed to be appropriate by the City shall meet parking
setback requirements.
FINDING - There are no drive through facilitates being proposed.
e. No sales, storage or display of used automobiles or other vehicles such as 1
motorcycles, snowmobiles, or all- terrain vehicles.
FINDING - Both operations specialize in repair of vehicles, not sales. i
f. Disposal of waste oil shall comply with PCA regulations. Facilities for the
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.
h. A minimum separation two hundred fifty feet is required between the nearest 1
gas pumps of individual parcels for which a conditional use permit is begin
requested. '
1
1
1 Goodyear
November 18, 1992
L Page 13
FINDING - Not applicable.
I Based upon the foregoing findings, staff is recommending that the conditional use permit be
approved with appropriate conditions.
I RECOMMENDATION
1 The Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt the following motions:
I. SITE PLAN REVIEW
I
"The City Council approves of Site Plan Review #92 -3 as shown on the site plan dated
I 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
1 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
detailed sign plan for staff review prior to the City Council meeting. The monument sign
I 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.
I 2. The applicant shall provide staff with a detailed cost estimate of landscaping to be used
in calculating the required financial guarantees. These guarantees must be posted prior
I to building permit issuance.
3. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the
1 necessary financial securities as required.
4. The applicant shall provide a flammable waste separator as required by Building Code.
I 5. Provide a complete, final set of civil engineering documentation to staff for review and
approval.
I
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
1 and 2, Block 1. Signs shall be placed at 100 -foot intervals and the curb painted yellow.
I 8. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be
submitted.
1
1
Goodyear _
1
November 18, 1992
Page 14
•
9. The applicant shall pay $7,580 into the Surface Water Management Program fund for
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.
12. Compliance with conditions of Subdivision #90 -17 and Conditional Use Permit #92 -2."
II. SUBDIVISION
"The City Council approves 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. Park and trail dedication fees to be assessed at the time building permits are requested. 1
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.
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. 1
1
Goodyear,
November 18, 1992
Page 15
8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition. The
1 outlot shall be repla with Lot 3, Block 1.
9. The developer shall revise the detention pond to accommodate 0.95 acre /feet of runoff
1 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
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
Permit #92 -2."
' III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
"The City Council approves 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.
2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site.
1 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 site.
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.
' 7. Pollution level shall meet standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency."
Y
1 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
Goodyear 1
November 18, 1992
Page 16 1
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
......,,.....____ , .. .. _
.. ..
Post brand fax transmittal memo 7671 rtlirrann
-Ir
1 laingrgilliElkaariMg-MMIII
t ilW
1 iii.11.111=
iliginggall
1 •
''■:47-A• ....---,
II ,=01 — d v. 1=1114 - MEI
mmmmmm ..m.i. 7. id -
g ME I J > 8 111111111111111
I ,.
',.:•. 1. , 7 D na -vo-
C■ 'a
„i h4
'.1 iii pi '
f— ig
,1 ta
1111111
1 4 — _ l•
1' —, MI simumetamm 1 ft `3 l i l
■14' 2
5 LI 1 sulaa
a 4
1 ,
,, It ..
i
i ii .. . _._.1 I .
• --..- ,
. 11111 •si . A it 1 %
z Ill L i I N
4 v.. ■I .
I 1 1 111111111111° 1:;
\11 \ no: Wein
I
111111111
.,I
II \ :1 II 11 1
1 \ .
IIIM \
1111111 /
1 !I -
III \
I MTH_ 0111 Iji
Il
1 11
Ill” 111111111 ! ' ,: . '1 '.)t',7 h
ill II 1 il
i • 1 II II
- _AM*
I ,
.. 11 - 1
tjb ' 0 I
]1 ;i III1 IMO
14 ;1:1L11111,111 i=
I I
,4
>
II - I
_
i :'. 7,41111111MM!
_ otsit !ffp_i IA ;
0) V
r--=ati
, .........•. ,....,,Huni. tiJ 11 '
1
1
1
November 25, 1992 1
Chanhassen City Council
Chanhassen Municipal Building
1
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317 •
Dear Council Members, 1
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 111
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 III
business associates.
During the November 18 City Planning Commission Meeting, the commission spent a 1
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
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
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. 1
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. 1
The impact of the proposed development on Chanhasserf Estates is perhaps more
critical than you realize. In the past 18 months, five of the nine homes across from this I
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.
I
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, 1 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
1 to a peaceful, disturbance -free neighborhood.
Thank you for your consideration.
1 r
Si e e l y,
111 aci i ff(6440 ,
1 Lindsay Amadeo
8007 Cheyenne Avenue
Chanhassen, MN 55317
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
�� v� � . / ^� •
7 �- :/� 4 �/.� e... � x�/ ,,�,r .
_ -_ /, � ^ I ` ^ `/ / -4") " ^
'�- , ~/ �'r ////c...) / g /` c~ :r r' e~r~/ t°(-- ' r ` ' -� /''' °/
- � / //~ / 11/16/92
/ ^� � � r � /^// ` ~ � // �����7~ I /��/_�/ �/<~ � i (~-[ � �
� `�../ ' ~� ` �/ �, ~ ��-' ' Tom Kotsonas
u� ,,� / 7'~��� //,./,'/4-s - -~ �- -�� ^' 8O01 Cheyenne Av
/ ` I /° �?� ' � � / � ' '*'r , ~' � ~ ^ � /^,/ Chanhassen
/7 / yy / 934-6061
G7 ' v 77,<-1
Member
II
City Planning Commission
I would like to take several minutes of your time to express my
concern with the proposed development of a Goodyear Tire and NI
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 NI
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
Station for our viewing. Every evening and early morning we 1
constantly have vehicle headlights and a McDonald's spotlight
shining through our windows. Obviously, as pointed out by
those who consider us to be whiners, we can always keep our NI
drapes and curtains closed: thus, avoiding the problem. Of
course this does not help much if we choose to be outside
during the spring/summer/fall months. Added to this during
II
the summer months, unless we keep our windows shut, we have the
noise and pollution of the vehicle traffic generated by these
businesses.
II
Since these business are now a fact of life, debate concerning
their benefits is no longer of any consequence. Yet, as a
member of the Planning Commission, you have the opportunity to 11
recommend to the City Council that the construction of a very
detrimental development not be allowed to take place. Even
though the majority of the residents of Chanhassen Estates are
II
not moneyed nor politically influential, we ask that you
seriously consider the negative impact this particular
commercial development will have on our neighborhood.
II
This development, which no other residenti' neighborhood would
welcome, will do nothing to improve or even preserve the
present condition of our neighborhood. Beyond that which NI
currently exists, this construction will bring:
1. increased traffic to all connecting intersections,
(one of which directly enters into our neighborhood);
I
2. increased - noise, air/auto, trash pollution;
3. additional loss of privacy;
4. loss of a natural (trees, etc.J buffer between Hwy. #5
and the local residents; 11
' 5. a general destruction of the local, natural environment;
II
II
II
N� 6. a vet—, negative impact on the use of the residents`
mini-park;
7. a definite turn away from the idea of trying to enhance
N� the looks of the east entrance into Chanhassen;
��
~~ 8. (by allowing an unsightly and undesirable business
development to occur) the possible initiative
to the deterio of the neighborhood.
- both of these businesses require twenty-four hour
outdoor space for a number of unsightly automobiles,
tires, signs, junk, etc.
In your decision making, there are several appropriate
questions that must be answered.
1. In what ways is this business compatible and a benefit
N� 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?
3. And would you want the construction of such
N� businesses in your neighborhood?
It is important, as you make your decision, to consider th�
N� 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
N� 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.
Than' you for your time and consideration in this matter.
N� Sincerely,
��
°
Tom Kotsonas
�� •
��
�� •
1
1
•
•
Letters ._ . �: f �tf - - 1
" Y ` was the proposed development nega- will rapidly becoming an unsightly 1
Repair business lively imps the area yet little is string of auto - related companies. If
not compatible • • . a . being done to change the nature of the the proposed site is developed as
The Chanhassen Planning Com- development. ° • - planned, travelers entering the city on
mission is currently reviewing the If you want to protect the rights Highway 5 will be visually assaulted
;: proposed development of an Abra nearby homeowners have to a peace- with 11 automotive - related businesses .
Auto Body and Goodyear The store fal, disturbance-free neigghhborhood, within the first mile of the city. The
on East Lake Drive, east of the emis- write to the city council, Chanhassen purpose of both businesses is to repair
' dons plant. Future plans include Municipal Building, 690 Coulter Dr., damaged cars. These wrecked auto-
• adding an auto parts store to the site. Chanhassen, MN 55317 and let them mobiles and the extremely loud re-
This type of development is not know what you think. pair equipment needed to fix them
compatible with the mature neigh- . Gasrd Amadeo will certainly create an audio and
borhood on the south side of the pro- • . Chanhassen visual disturbance to Ia
posed area. The purpose of both bud= -. \ this is the type of impression we want
Man 33 to repair damaged caia. Theses Not a pretty to give . visitors, potential residents
unsightly automobiles and the ex- and business
tremelyloud equipment needed city welcome - - If you want to give people travel- 1
to fix them certainly create an Imagine yon are entering Chan- ing to Chanhassen from this entrance
audio and visual disturbance to sir- hassen on Highway 5 from the east. point a better impression, write to the
rounding neighbors. The impact of Immediately when you cross the line sty �. Chanhassen Municipal
the proposed development on Chan- from Eden Prairie you see a tire shop Buildin8. 690 Coulter Dr., des
hassen Estates is critical In the past and repair facility, an auto body re- sera, MN 55317 and let them know
18 months, five of the nine homes pair shop and a auto parts store. Con- what you think. •
across from this area have been or are tinning down Highway S you have Lindsay Amadeo
for sale. The rapid turnover rate is gone less than a mile and you see nine a
highly unusual for a mature develop- more automotive related business.
went The instability of the neighbor - Eleven auto industry shops — not a
hood does not bode well for the city a pretty welcome into our community
the residents of the area. is it? : •
As part of a new generation of The Shulman Planning Com-
inoome -prod Chanhassen resi- mission icourrently reviewing the
dents, I had hoped to make Chanhas- proposed development of an Abra
sea a long -term home. If the area is Autobody/Goodyear facility ity to be built
. developed u currently proposed, I on East Lake Drive, south of High-
, will definitely make plans to move way S and east of the emissions pleat.
out of the city long before I intended, An auto parts store is targeted to join.
thus adding to the instability of the this development in the fu
° If the proposed businesses are built
The consensus cif the Planning on that site the development of the
Commission at the Nov.18 meeting eastern entrance to our community
1
1
1
1
1
II City Council Meeting - November 23, 1992
Councilwoman Dimler: What's our action here tonight? Anything?
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
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.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion? Seeing none, can I have a motion? For Don
to send that letter to MnDot.
Councilman Mason: So moved.
Mayor Chmiel: Is there a second?
Councilman Workman: Second.
Councilman Mason moved, Councilman Workman seconded authorizing the City Manager
to prepare a letter to MnDot asking them to make a commitment to the Highway S
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:
1 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
1 Quick comment under Council Presentations? •
I Mayor Chmiel: No.
II Councilman Wing: Okay, I'll do it next time.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure, go ahead.
1 1 Councilman Wing: Paul, I think this Council and the Planning Commission at the
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
I 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 anc. it doesn't. We really
have no say whatsoever unless it's a PUD or HRA's project. So my concern is
II ' two. Number one, landscape ordinance seems to be solely, grossly inadequate.
Is that an assumption I can make? Or needs to be adjusted?
I Paul Krauss: I think our landscape ordinance was state, was 1980 state of the
II art but it doesn't deal with Highway S issues very well.
Councilman Wing: Okay. And also architectural standards. We say well we want
I ' this and we want that and we think it ought to have pitched roofs and we don't
think, and we think it ought to have this. So there's no rules and these poor
30
1
City Council Meeting - November 23, 1992 1
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 I think I get frustrated here because you don't know, we just don't have
anything to tell the people coming 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 1
architectural standards?
Councilman Wing: Oh, I have no definitions other than we don't have any 1
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 flat 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. 1
Mayor Chmiel: In other words you say you want this one blue, you want this one
pink, you want this one yellow. ,
Councilman Wing: We're sort of doing that.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. 1
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 there 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.
31 11
II '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
II 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 f
a better quality product. So in that case you don't specifically need an
II ordinance. You're getting at it through another.
Councilman Wing: Oh, but if Charlie James puts in a Wal -Mart across the street
II that doesn't use HRA money, we do want that one landscaped the same way we want
the Target across the street landscaped? Or better? Then we won't have an
ordinance for it right?
II Paul Krauss: You don't have one that would produce that, right.
Councilman Wing: That's what I'm asking for.
II Councilman Workman: But Eden Prairie has an ordinance that dictates design,
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.
I 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
1 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 F
I they're 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
I and I'm concerned about it. That's all.
Paul Krauss: I certainly will feedback this thing to the Highway 5 corridor
I task force. Same think like when we did the SWMP and we were told to accelerate
the wetland.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. And I think Dick has a good point there.
I 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
II the 1st of the year...
Mayor Chmiel: Alright, we'll get it on the next agendt for discussion. We'll
II move along to 7.
ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS:
II 1993 BUDGET. CITY MANAGER.
Don Ashworth: Each of our sessions moves us a little closer to adoption of a
I budget. Our hearing is set for December 9th. At that point in time you do have
to complete what would be the general and debt levies as they would go to the
i
II 32
II
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
DECEMBER 2, 1992
Chairman Batzli called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. 1
•
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ladd Conrad, Jeff Farmakes, Brian Batzli, Matt Ledvina
Steve Emmings, Joan Ahrens and Tim Erhart 1
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 II
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
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. 1
Batzli: Did that correspondence, was that written after the current?
1 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 II
plan review talks about the applicant preparing revised architectural
plans.
Al -Jaff: Correct. We hadn't seen the plans at the time when we wrote II
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
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't
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 was
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
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 drawn
from a view from Highway 5. That we'll show with our berming and you'll
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.
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
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, we
have met the requirements of the city of Chanhassen. We've also in this
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
Highway 5 and this is what your view will be with the berming that we
have proposed and that's in place. If you ],.00k 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. We
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 that
' we put a lot of time in and discussed last time and it doesn't look even
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
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 3
still if this is all that we had in mind but we think it's one a long II
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 thil
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
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
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 II 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 wall
explaining about the cars, berms for me have an elevation shown here on
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 inche
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 thll
Goodyear building?
Johnas Blumental: My understanding was, we talked about the dormers in
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 1
accomplished by the one large dormer?
Johnas Blumental: Right, yes. r
Batzli: Anyone else have any questions?
Ledvina: Was there any attempt to coordinate or propose the coordination
of building materials between the two Goodyear and Abra buildings?
11
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 4
Johnas Blumental: Actually they are very similar in a way. I mean they
11 are concrete block and moving some, I mean one is ivory color. One is
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 veryc comfortable that they are two individual buildings
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 talking
about architectural issues of bringing light industrial to what we would
consider I guess more of a retail type building where we had more
' 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.
Farmakes: The blue that you have issued on the Goodyear building. Is
that indicative of the blue that you're proposing there?
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
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 next
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 to
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 have
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.
Al Beissner: No. Okay.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 5 1
Farmakes: The color, the proposals that you're doing here for the
exterior is far different than the samples that you brought in II
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 J 1
us their samples and say these are the, this is.the color tfiat are in th
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 1
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 uil
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. 1
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 an
a grayer and the blue tone. Now we're going into a beige and a lighter
and we can do that. 1
s`
F
Johnas Blumental: The idea is that the roof would be a little darker
than the building. 1
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 1
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 1
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 loo
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
functional. 1
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, ar
false dormers. They don't provide any light inside the building.
They're just there for the aesthetics from the outside. Other than that 1
I don't have.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 6
Farmakes: I have one question on the Abra structure. You know have I
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
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
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.
' 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
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
1 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
11 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 in
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
II
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 7 '
t considered so that what we're looking at. Also the trees and the
evergreens that are going to be planted, that they're strategically
II
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 II
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, pleas
keep in mind that the site should be developed so that not only the owne
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 opportunit
to speak to you tonight.
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. I 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 II
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. II
t 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. 1
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?
II
Mike Koenig: Right.
Batzli: So you prefer to see something green all year?
1
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.
Batzli: Thank you. Would anyone else like to address the commission? 1
Is there a motion to close the public hearing?
Emmings moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. All voted ill
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
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 o�
the commissioners for their comments on the plan. From time to time
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 8
people do have questions right in the middle and we'll try to entertain
11 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?
1 Ahrens: The only issue we're discussing is the architectural issues?
Batzli: You can bring other issues up.
11 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,
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 like
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 will
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...
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 discussion
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 elements
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 care
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
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 over
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 and
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 materials
that are being used on the buildings I think would also go a long way in
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 9 1
f, 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 se
a sample. It would be helpful I think to assess the quality of the type
of the building if we could see some samples. I think the Goodyear is J1
perhaps more cohesive as a design than the Abra. I think the work on th
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 positio
not the Bawdiness 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? i
Al -Jaff: No. We don't have a specific design.
Emmings: In your condition number 4 on the site plan review you're 1
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. 1
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 II
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 II
just, the building itself is not something that I particularly like but
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 aril
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 II
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
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
I think that will improve the view of the buildings and I'm not too sure
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 10
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 signs
on that south side of the building?
Al -Jaff: They're entitlted to one but it's a conditional use permit. If
you want to have non - illuminated signage to the south, illuminated to the
north, I think you have the option to do so. You can make it a condition
of approval.
Emmings: Can you also limit, if there are lighted signs, can you limit
the time that the lighted signs are on?
' Al -Jaff: It's a conditional use permit, so yeah.
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. I
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
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,
1 there are literally thousands of pollution levels and I don't think it's
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 the
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 I
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 a
330 foot expanse and we put one dormer. We put one big block in the
I/
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 11 1
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 meal
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
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, II
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 aboull
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 I
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 I
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.
1
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 I
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 wall
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. S
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 roof"
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 a
1
Planning Commission Meeting
g
December 2, 1992 - Page 12
C 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 it
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?
Erhart: When all these trees, essentially this area here is going to
' remain in until it's developed?
Batzli: Right.
Erhart: Yeah. Well in the first place, I don't think so. They've gone
beyond the requirements already on this. Extensively beyond the
requirements. I guess without studying it anymore, my reaction would be,
' I think they've done a pretty good job.
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?
Al -Jaff: When it develops. When site 3 develops. Then we could require
' that additional landscaping. Because right now they are providing some
landscaping around the drainage pond.
' Batzli: Right. But those are hackberries and things like that. They're
kind of low.
Al -Jaff: Yes they are.
Batzli: Okay. My comments are more of the same. I don't mind the Abra
building north and south elevation. In fact, I think there's almost a
' repetition of the shed dormer almost effect from the background to
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, last time we
talked about how it looked like a set from an old western when you went
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
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
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 well
could move a couple of them to the south side. With that I'll entertain
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, 19911
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 II
sign permit, you're not, your motion doesn't in any way approve the sign
as they appear on the plans that we have in front of us?
Conrad: No it doesn't. 1
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
include these new plans in the motion. '
Emmings: Okay, I assumed that we were talking about the new plans.
Batzli: Have these been received? Date stamped received by the city? I
No.
Ledvina: These are dated November 25th. 1
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 folks"
like the plans we're looking at tonight, I'm sure that by the time it
I
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,
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.
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 that
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 the
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
this motion was to, made them do.- It's already on the plans so that, 4
does not exist except to shift some of what they've put on the current
plans to the south side.
Ahrens: Including the part about the detailed...
' Aanenson: That's city ordinance. That's a requirement anyway so they're
going to have to do it.
' Ahrens: Okay. So why was this included in there?
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,
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 II
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. '
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 I
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. 1
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
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 16
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 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.
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
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.
7. Provide a complete, final set of civil engineering documentation to
staff for review and approval.
8. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal memorandum dated
October 8, 1992.
' 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 sighting 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.
fi
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 Addition
as shown on the plan dated September 21, 1992 with the conditions in the
staff report.
Batzli: Is there a second?
Ahrens: Second.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
December 2, 1992 - Page 17
Batzli: Discussion. No discussion.
Emmings moved, Ahrens seconded that the Planning Commission recommend 1
approval of the preliminary plat for Subdivision #90 -17 for Chan Haven
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. 1
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.
c. A drainage and utility easement along the easterly 20 feet of Loll
3, Block 1.
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, Bloc
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 froll
the Watershed District, Health Department, etc.
6. If construction of public improvements proceed beyond freeze -up,
special modifications to construction practices shall be incorporate"
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 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 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.
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
1 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.
1 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
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 of
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.
Emmings: Well that and the sign ordinance.
' Al -Jaff: Correct.
' 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
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.
Farmakes: As a condition? I thought we weren't approving the signage as
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 tie
it in architecturally.
' Farmakes: Yeah, I think that's what. we do with Market Square. We ask
them to do the same thing. I don't see why that's any different.
I Batzli: We can't I don't think. Move to amend? Would you like to move
to amend the motion?
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.
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 I
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: Were getting real tangled up here aren't we? ,
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. 1
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 II
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
9 CHANHASSEN
I 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1
I MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
1 FROM: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I
1 DATE: November 23, 1992
SUBJ: Beisner Ltd. /Chanhassen Holding Company; Property Located South of Hwy. 5,
I North of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and East of Emission Control
Testing Station:
I 1) Site Plan Review 92 -3 for Goodyear, 5,397 Square Feet and Abra Auto
Service Center, 6,494 Square 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.
18, the Planning Commission reviewed the site
On November 8, 1992, th g plan and conditional use p
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 Plannint Commission and residents of
I 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.
1 Issue:
I 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
neighborhood.
1
1 4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
Abra/Goodyear Proposal 1
December 2, 1992
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
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
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 ro osed Abra design should include a roof system that would incorporate pitched
P P � Y IP P
roof sections and screen all the roof top equipment.
Issue:
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
December 2, 1992
' Page 3
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.
' Solution:
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:
Pollution level from both sites.
Solution:
The following condition has been incorporated into the Conditional Use Permit conditions
of approval, "Pollution level shall meet standards set by the Minnesota Pollution Control
1 Agency."
' STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the forgoing, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following
motion:
A
I. 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 shall prepare revised architectural plans incorporating the concerns raised
PP P P P rP g
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
found in the area.
1
1
Abra/Goodyear Proposal 1
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
PP P tY P
necessary financial securities as required.
6. The applicant shall provide a flammable waste separator as required by Building Code.
7. Provide a complete, fmal set of civil engineering documentation to staff for review and 1
approval.
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.
fi
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
December 2, 1992
Page 5
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. 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.
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
P
District, Health Department, etc.
6. If construction of ublic improvements proceed beyond freeze -u special modifications
P P P freeze-up, P
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
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
Abra/Goodyear Proposal
December 2, 1992
Page 6
11. The applicant shall reimburse the city for all engineering consultant fees associated with
the storm water study.
12. Compliance with conditions of approval for Site Plan Review #92 -3 and Conditional Use
Permit #92 -2."
III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
"The Planning Commission recommends approval 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-
17. 1
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.
4. No damaged or inoperable vehicles shall be stored overnight on the Goodyear and Abra
sites.
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." 1
ATTACHMENTS 1
1. Planning Commission Minutes dated November 18, 1992.
2. Staff report dated November 18, 1992.
3. Elevations prepared by Commissioner Jeff Farmakes.
1
1
1
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 3
1 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
1 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
Randy MacPherson 6100 Summit Dr, Brooklyn Center 55430
Abra
Tom Kotsonas 8001 Cheyenne Avenue
Gerard & Lindsay Amedeo 8007 Cheyenne Avenue
Sharmin Al -Jaff 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
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 4 1
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 b
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 oll
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 workill
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 II
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 1
we hope that we can continue on. There will be, we will be putting in
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 II
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. 1
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 1
conditions. 5o you've answered that;
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
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
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
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
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
MacPherson address you.
Batzli: Okay, thank you.
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
' 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
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
another picture which actually shows a different, we extended-a rolled
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
' 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 allover 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.
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
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. As '
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 trill
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 environmen'
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.'
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
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.
1
1
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. 5o the noise
' 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. So 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?
1
1
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 yoll
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
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. 1
Emmings: How about anything that, anything that you use in your
operations? Do you need to store anything outside? '
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. 1
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'_t' -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 t
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 of
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 wh
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
r
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 produce 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 �r 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.
' 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
' 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?
' Emmings moved, Ledvina seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in
favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Batzli: Jeff, we'll start with you here.
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 10
Farmakes: Paul, can you talk a little bit more about three of the generil
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 ,
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 thesi
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 agai
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 the]
buildings look. We'd much prefer that they take on an appearance pore
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 was
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 t
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 thil
Highway 5 program yet up and running, I'm not sure exactly where the grail
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 oil
and off as he indicated, for many months you know, trying to get a handl
on where Highway 5 is going. Trying to do the best job we can within the
existing ordinances. Again, we wish that we had a little bit different
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 should 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
1 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
' 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
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
1
Planning Commission Meeting
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 a
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 fairli
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 car
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.
1
Krauss: Commissioner Farmakes. It would be useful you know if the
Planning Commission had some specific recommendations on this and I don'
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 II recall. You gave quite an astute dressing down of the architecture of
that building. I think it resulted in some modifications. I believe that
you clearly have some latitude. Some degree of latitude and again I don
know where to tell you to stop but in terms of this being a conditional
use. It's clear that Chanhassen is developing a set of standards and
expectations that are somewhat beyond Bismark or Mandan. You know simpl
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 he
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 I
it, when we sit up here and we say, no we want four gables up there or
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
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. i
1
1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 13
1 Emmings: In general I agree with what Jeff has said. It's frustrating to
sit 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
1 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 •
1 could be.
Emmings: I think it should probably be under the conditional use permit
portion.
1 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
1 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
this kind. Is that regulated under our sign ordinance?
Al -Jaff: Yes it is.
1 Emmings: Okay, what can they do?
1 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.
1 Emmings: And do they have to come in and tell you when they're doing it?
Al -Jaff: Yes.
1 Farmakes: That's being modified somewhat.
Emmings: What will the new one say?
1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 14
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... 1
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 -Jaff: 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. 1
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 I
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
won't provide a tremendous intensification of the traffic and so I don'
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,,p.aul yoil
were suggesting that that might be appropriate?
Krauss: Well in fact we had a meeting last week and we talked about the
proposed Opus project and we did briefly talk about this one. The conce
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
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'll
be happy to bring it up. And Jeff.
'#
11 Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 15
' Batzli: 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.
1 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 ii
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 entrancetand 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.
I 1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 16
Batzli: Not identical but at least so one architect is looking at the
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
general a franchise directive usually follows that you have to be seen al
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 i
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 y
can dillute that.
Conrad: If I were the applicant, I wouldn't want to. I'd want to keep I
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 of ,
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 back
to you're part of the entrance to Chanhassen, and that's real significang
Being part of that good image means you're going to increase your businell
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
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 think
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 want
to pollute visually in terms of the cars that are going to be there and II
have to plan for the worst possible scenario and I have to plan for the II
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 with
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? I
Conrad: A plan. I
Batzli: You need big plans?
Conrad: No, I guess I'm kind of interested in, when we talk about trees
Yeah, I need something bigger than this and I guess I need something tha
incorporates what staff's vision is in it and I need to know how
I
'II '
11 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
1 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.
1 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
tcpether. 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.
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.
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 18 I/
Erhart: We're talking about this pond. Is there going to be a pond her"
•
Krauss: Yes. '
Erhart: Is that big enough? II
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 II
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 II
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...
II
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
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
IP
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 thlt
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 t1
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 lb
technical violation of the conditional use permit.
Krauss: If they cannot, I would ask them to consider another site. You 1,
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 fulls
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
11 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 Gong time.
I don't know if you can get rid of them now. I would like this cofidition,
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 odtr 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
I :
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 20
stipulation that there will be no outside storage of vehicles and have
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
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 ,
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.
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 o
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 II
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
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? '
Randy MacPherson: They call them air ratche,.s 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 onll
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 gone
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.
And that is, since this is going to be a showcase, if you will, for peop
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.
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.
1 .
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?
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
11
I/
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 22
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 I
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 also
so that you see just the short ends of the buildings and the garage door
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 likell
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 fee
higher in elevation than our site and part of what we're doing is cuttin
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 wh
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 II
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
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.II
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? Isblue.suit a�
blue tie or is it brown suit and brown tie? We don't know and we
through an exercise where we designed the Abra building with the same
mansard roof that the emission control building has. That didn't fly veil
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 floorplan 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
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 y
it looked really bad. When Randy saw it he said, you know it doesn't lo
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
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
1 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
11 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 something 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. So 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
11
Planning Commission Meeting
I/
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 pr 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 11
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 il
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.
II
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. II Batzli: Okay, thank you.
Emmings: Do you have any idea what's going to happen on the other lot II
there?
Al Beissner: No I don't.
II
Emmings: Okay. •
Al Beissner: We tried to do them all three at once and we didn't find all
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
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.
11
#'
Planning Commission Meeting
11 November 18, 1992 - Page 25
I 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?
II 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
II around the pond that we have to put in.
Emmings: On the.
II Al Beissner: Both sides.
Emmings: Okay, what's going to be on the south side of the pond?
11 Krauss: Nothing. Just a line of trees.
I 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
I 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
II 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?
II 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
II 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
II 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 btit again, I'd guess I'd just
like to see a final, and I know what Mr. Beissner's talking about. What
I 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
I 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
1 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
11 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
II
I'
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 26
would be obviously...and I'm naivee on what noise goes on in a place lik,
that. Second thing. I guess I'm looking for a roofiine 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 fr�n
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 haul
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 II
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 wh
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.
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 ti
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's11
like a fake.
Batzli: A set. It's a set.
Conrad: You're going to create a fake roof no matter what but still, ye
you're right. It is a set. So anyway, it doesn't.
11
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? So 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.
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?
1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 28 1
Krauss: It's almost directly across the street. '
Batzli: To the south?
Krauss: To the south. 1
Batzli: Okay. Is there uncomfort on staff's part at all with these types
of, there's a lot of traffic on that road from DataSery and whatever elst
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
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
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? '
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. ,
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. -
Batzli: Okay. You're comfortable with that right now? Okay. Is there a
motion? ,
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.
Erhart: I move that the Planning Commission table the approval of the
site plan review.
Batzli: Is there a second? ,
Farmakes: Second.
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 hav6 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.
1 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.
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
' next time when it comes back? -
Krauss: Clear as it usually is.
1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 18, 1992 - Page 30 1
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, II
your name?
Gerard Amedeo: Gerard Amedeo. It's not really a question. It's just a
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'
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 Mc0onald'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 tri
per day. There's just no doubt but when we did traffic studies before, we
knew that that was going to happen. So again, if you know some more
things, I think it's valid to come back at the next meeting and share thIL
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 flavo1
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 I
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. It
a massive undertaking and we really weren't , i n a position to do that unto.
the Highway was upgraded and we had our comprehensive plan done which wa
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 unfortunatel
on a couple of these early applications that come in, as they just finish
this stretch of highway, we are being reactive and we're trying to be as li
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
hopefully be able to get it on the next meeting. We will send out anoth
notice to the residents just so they're sure which meeting it's on.
Batzli: Thank you very much everyone for coming in.
1
P.C. DATE: 11 -18 -92
1 C 1 TY O F C.C. DATE: 12 -14 -92 92-3 Site \ L . I
I V
CASE: 92 2 CUP Plan . . C IIANIIAtill 90 -17 Subdivision
BY: Al -Jaff
1
1 STAFF REPORT
1 .
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
r- 0.939 Acres, 0.778 Acres, and 1.445 Acres
i 3) Conditional Use Permit to Allow an Auto Service Facility in the BH
I District
V LOCATION: South of Hwy. 5, north of Lake Drive East and Chanhassen Estates and
1 J east of Emission Control Testing Station
APPLICANT : Beisner Ltd. Chanhassen Holding Company
i < 6100 Summit Drive 14201 Excelsior Boulevard
Q 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
a SEWER AND WATER: Services are available to the site.
I 8 '
SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is undeveloped and vegetated primarily with
1 W
mature poplar and elm trees.
2000 LAND USE: Commercial
•
1
1
Goodyear /Abra Facility 1
November 18, 1992
Page 2
1
PROPOSAL /SUMMARY
The applicant is proposing to construct an Abra Auto Body Repair and a Goodyear Auto Service 1
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
1
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.
1
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 1
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
ve 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.
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 111 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
1
2 are proposed to be removed to prepare the site for development. These trees are not of
1
1
I •
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
' 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.
1 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
1
Goodyear /Abra Facility 1
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
111
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 Chanhassen 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. '
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
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
1 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
1 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 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 design
to desi
P g P rY Y PP g
' the landscaping plan. Berming 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
1 Highway 5. The trees shown on the landscaping plan are 16 feet in diameter. It is likely that
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
1 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.
1 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 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
The applicant has submitted a signage lan. One monument identification sign is proposed
PP plan. g P P 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
pennitted 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
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 1
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
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
meeting.
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
1 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 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 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
1 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
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
I
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' 1
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 I
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 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 I
be charged $3,245 in park and trail fees, and the Abra site will be charged $2,614.
SUBDIVISION 1
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
I
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.
I
1
Goodyear /Abra Facility
November 18, 1992
Page 9
2. Drainage and conservation easement located over the pond on lot 3.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
' Auto Service Facilities are permitted in the BH District as a conditional use. The following
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 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.
FINDING - The ro osed use would be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan.
P P t3' P
' 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.
1 FINDING - The site is located adjacent to a major highway and a collector road. It is
in the Chanhassen commercial district aid 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.
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
neighboring uses.
1
1
Goodyear /Abra Facility
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
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.
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
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 Goodyear /Abra Facility
November 18, 1992
1 Page 11
There are a large number of mature evergreens located along the south
1 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
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.
1 11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values.
FINDING - The site is being used for a commercial type of operation which is
consistent with its designation.
12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article.
' FINDING - The following is our review of conditions of approval and appropriate
g PP
' 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.
1 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 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.
FINDING - There are no drive through facilitates being proposed.
1
1
Goodyear /Abra Facility '.
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. '
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: '
I. 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. '
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
1 Page 13
use and limit of one common sign and allowances for its use by the remaining
1 undeveloped lot.
3. 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.
4. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the city and provide the
necessary financial securities as required.
1 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
1 approval.
7. Meet all conditions outlined in the Fire Marshal Memo.
' . 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
Good
PP g Y
1 building to break it up. The pre - finished galvanized steel canopy shall be extended along
the north elevation of the Abra building.
' 10. Concurrent with the building permit, a lighting plan meeting city standards shall be
submitted.
' 11. The applicant shall pay $7,580 the Surface Water Management Program fund for water
quality treatment downstream of the site."
A
IL 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. 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.
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.
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
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."
M. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
"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.
Goodyear /Abra Facility
November 18, 1992
' Page 15
2. No outdoor repairs to be performed or gas sold at the site.
1 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 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.
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
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
Post-it brat id fax transmtttal memo '7671 «of P*Ps
•
illariMeggiall.11
. •
• arg „ , ,
- soli?
'WM 4
4 SUAI LC
•. . •
F AWN,' le
1••••■••
..= •
• *ow.
— .
•
0 1 1
• ■1
••••••••• ••■•••••••■••■V•VIV•■•.=,....-
GA blocs z 1/0`
1
1 itA3 et.%
AUIIUI Poc4k" brand tax Irencmittel memo 7871 � iC.�C..
11111111.11111111111111 . 111111•1111111
111111111111•11111111 • -5. ■••11111Mla
MIMI UM= MIME IlloulimillIMMENNUMIMIIIII1 aim 111111111111111
111111111ESNIII NEW _ 0 0 D '44:412 • NIIP rim=
iumwmpon now UR wpm =wpm
imminlit IMMO 1 irE/ AUT° Pon= • I Mr atf
1111111111111MEll MIME rimmip
imulimmai Mill 111111111moill111111111111111111m111111 Ulm WPM/4W
� ■rte ��� � ■�■ i ■ , r7 ■ ■ ■ i
•114111111110111 MOM"
11111113••11111111111111 millimummomimm11111E WORM aumull11
iminiumni Rim minmuliumilmmoNINNIII MIN
MMOUMMEMOMMONAMOlummummommunallOMM
111•111•1111111111• 111111111 11 ollr:41111EAVAIIWAII111•11111 111 MEM 1111111111111
5N525111111111 MI5 1 IMAI311111•LIFORMIti' MIN IRMO 11111111111111
•111111111111111•11 11111111 Illogiffignoll1111111111111mamli11111 MINIM 11111111F1
111101111111111111 MOM 11•11111mml•11111111111111011111111 Nun 11111•111111111
wommummuingsmraggingintaunrompinimmiginin
miummIllimmmummuffinmemsmimmIllImilms
2111111=1••1111MIREMINIMINIIIIIIIIIRIMIMMINIFINNIMEMINI
R1111111111111 1111111111111 111111111111111 ENE • • I
- .
• ) ' 111,
, l •
'•••
• r
GOODAEASI
• ___ _ _ -- • mom.
-,-
--,
.•-•...... _
All., ...iir.„-w...--,, • •
1 11 4111
--
..r.: -....-..,,, ........-...--.> ...,_ A .•-...,..- _
- .- 1 i
1 lc
- — 4.,,
....x
- --
- i
-- ,. 0 - ........
.T.- . .4 1 .,:j f 7' • , ..
I ir k,
i' ' -....-- ..._. A ' • •",.. • Immilmio" 4 1,..7 , •.-.- 4. 7 3:•••Zr ...• 1
1:•"••'._______ NVilr 0.
t ,',,■‘ la. -.-., - --- 7. - ..-:„.= ,••••••••, --"! r y : • t. ....•,----;-; -- - • .' - .,..
I ' - --- ,. - i - r . •
, 1 .- 1 ' --I : ..--" • - • - -r ... 1 ---
•-:-.. : ggslr ...--- *
' - . . i ..•-„„-;•:•-,'-:,t---7,. 111` 0
it-, --.'",'...-:-. - ...., .: MI - 7 ,17 ". • '::,^ . 'Th -- • - 7, 'F a
k."• <AIL
47)00040.
Z'At -- A ' w. ,,,,, r r'''' i . „E2'.::;":?•-• • SAffmadigil-- I
■ .
N.,■, -- ,--, ,1 - ___,, r - r - - ii iiiir - _ ,: o rl e e . 4
h#4fr _ 6/47s,,e: • ,--... ,
lei .
1 .• — ''.
.,...0
_
,,....
-7
••
A.. ‘ 4 • _
. _
- ••• -.1;•"....i :%&-..,---,.,;•-• .. . ,
- .. ' -...."'. 4 :• - ••• 1 4-c - k1.1 . - -. • - --::-•: - " -
- '..!..: - .4' ''''s --, .'' - •
- •• '
- ..
- .
-......
;J
------------
• -
- GOOD/W .
..e-- - • 1-: _
is ' • 1 _ _ _ _
000 "Filial, -gag AMMER ' NANOwe
ji ...ie ...,...„11, .L.. ne......r._ja„,,„ii--- -__• --______ - - - -
•. -, ..... - - ______-_-
• • . - --;
- -
- g ....4...--°•-• -
...„..,,,,_ •
...:-------,":---- . , .
•••■••....
''...'"......" ....."--... 11 .7.7-7-.77:-...-f-.---:"7;,. ' .... .--_- . - 1-
, , ... ........r............. p-_-, „....._._.___„..--___...___,„:;: ••••• •.,.L.. 1 ••
- .
.........:17-• .. :M. • ''''---.' NTI•:,...-,: Zak Ali , '
- -Fir- - I
I
la refig," •- ■-•-lr-- - - A
---- -Npow s - •-••■•,„,„„.•:t ____...
•••• II ........._ CV" `,„,,,•••••_-,
• V ti . . DT 52-114-8R -, .0.
-. .
1
• i-,1% ,, ....
, .....__ ,
4 ,- - -,, .
....'"-•r' alr'••••.,_,
-.. ...,
•
• .
....._
( lia
--".."----"-- • ----„•••-•••• .._, _
,. ,- -'''"-- - „,.........---.P ' ,- -
-._-.-
! -.....,_ . -....r..... ...„,.. , _ - ,...---••••
-••• ' '• _.. , ...... --•*- -..-'-- -*
.........„
• .-.........„...,...._ .
• •
f ...- .
1
< .... ",
• -. _ - • l
. .
t0000liw w
Wm==mrs
. • -• t. "t - - - :
----.........-----....:
- .....: ,:•.i.'-',:tr'."1 •-• •
• _
...... IGOOD;•••ITEAR • GOODI L-
r _ .- 44
.------ ,. - • E - _ ____ _____
-_. . fr
I
.-. —
. 421-1-" ----- ' 11 ' ''''. ...■1‘ ;Ifni 15. ----1,..—„,..
..__.:
,N.6-.. --- -e---"App- ......mr
CI 91-91-8 •••
••• - . _ -
' '. --s•- - _ ,- ,=,_ '., , , - ,
— - -
........
6* ••■•• - .0551 •
- •14 •,
... . „ .
4.1 : _ ' 1. a • .
•.. ., . - .. .
.---•-•^:7z... _ -=--- : 2 :•;-- _: ..
I i • ki.-
.•
• . . ...t,*1 , . "••••- $6•74f;
0 ... .
_
- . .
. .. -. v e'. - • • ';' '- -- ; ' .
- * - ' s
•
.
.
,
• 4 .-,,,,,;.,,,--•■•:;-... ....,
7 4 -- .,;_..,... -
....... ..
- • - -17 ' ' ":. ' -, - ; - ,s , .:Ze.. - -.:
' .
•• IV 16 4 - •
, , ; :-.s.,1,";--:-.4.tlit-'-'-,- - -;::4-7.-Tg;-;.;A'41•'-7;::4;11- '-'-
•
, . . • -- ..e - .. - • .- ' . 7-'1 . •-•- .
•
, .. , .,...••••.7,,77.•;.:#0 '•".'•4•=4;;;t;*--,..4,-•7i.:41;•'- --''''.-
1 1' .. ... ,,
- • •-..-- -,;•,.. •"---. - .. , '-`. -,--- ' -40::,..!1,44=:2---'-‘
' '--:-... .'--:--'-,' '''• '''-'--. ,.. .: -' ..;,„{. 7 ' . •
.
.....„. _•. f - ki 3 ... j . • • • • ' ..-.--
•
- s--.•-•,, - -..-•,:- - •-sii.„..„.•:•..,..-, ,r,••
,,
• - • :• .--.:•,.: -.4.--... 47 . ' . .‚ . • ---
".••:-.,..;ch...a: .....7 .,e.Z. 4• ,•; S :': 7 •0_;,i_< , ,.
• • • - • ' " ' • • - • • •
sr•%."--`4,-1'''''7, 4,41i-V21%-..;')...,:,.-..•
, 3 - - 4... . - xv. • .-
:
•
. . .
4 3 • -•••••• ..c,t k .. . 7. .. .• .1. .4. ''
i • - ; , - %. '` a -ts-' .4=rt--5,;1.44.ee4., -
- - • •• 4 . - '5: ,! ..
• .
• '` . 4•;- •:- . -,-' •.;•/.*„.0.,..........:"----,:
. , ■.,..
.. 41*-.4....
. .
".
, : .• '." - i.7% i .."•• i' i. :,: .
4 -. ..-; , .:-.T.4:•tk.i'. A ‘7=-!•....„,- , -_ ,, t ,-- -... - 7- - '-:',:
• . - - . ` 1 , , , .. ,, . • ' •
1 a . 1, ... - ': •i,',.:"....441 Jr. '..4.,4):4.4.,Ar-•••...,
.- .
• 1 '-• .' .`.':-.'' -..: W. 0:" .... iZ t* 471% '';"
. i7 ••!' 1 • 411....., h, • • . 4 - i:
.. •:.. -- ...% . 1 ;-`7"'ril‘: '.‘. -.* - ....i'' .
. 1 # si - .* IP
.. .' . ,.....,-,f.,4•kcIte,„,..• -,:r....-..„-,-.
, .k . •.:J. 3 'et
. ......, .:•,. ■-....,:. - 4 . ,..,:-% ‘-.5 1 ,...,...,--.-
- 7 ,
- - -1' •:.•y,,..b.s17„„1-- - 1;•... - : _;.:: "- ------ : - . • [ 1 - i ''.. -:'*. • 41 11. ." • '---", . - i.., :f., , :r. - ';'.ttr,, -
• J .• 4 • . fir - ,; ..„.; ;,-4. 'N.... ..-.... •-...., ; - - - ,. - • ...\ , I • '' . . . -'- 7:
,- - . ,-....•••••0-----
•-:1-• •-,........•••'.6-7 4 -.4... - - -••,^ .
- . ... . • • • -
, _ -...- • . •• .;:.3,c i _ : --- 4 . - -;'.-%,;7,4•A'-',..
i- . 7 bs.. .. • ••-i.-.••••:). ' ,1- . -':i - -; S . 5 • :' - ' - i \. I •
....7.... ....,,, • - ........„
, :•., - 4 - E ;. ,_..'.7-:,... -';7,...-15q...'t
• - .- '.. i ..... ,.,L.,....-•.:-......t.. •(•...,.. !..i i'. .. - .1'. _ •,... .... ' ii 1
--:
.,...,,•.) ,-;:.-f ,-...--..„••••,..-...-- ;:c
--
• - •,.-". -• -,-•,.. 2 y -,,, ::•_.^,;,-,-, - ....t...., . 4. ,
-, ;' . •••:',;•..:" .•?
•
. ' A ' "-- ' ''. s .:' :.7 7 . ,...s. ;II .. . . . ,
- - -.7 ..- -....-.:A4: -- ';' - 4._•- - r- -
• .• . - - - Te: '- : ?c- 2;,,,...'1.• - 1:.....;.",..7.:;.7...' , . • .1 -- i', ' . ' 1 ; .
1
- 7.,,--4......,.
, 4,!4..,.. ;,..,-,,.... -.... t .. _
it
#
• - - i -,....4,..,.., ....._-...,;.. „..._-,‘(.., ..,.....,..7:„.„
, . • . 4 - .4 ,, .. ."?.•• .4"seta.... ,,,..-■. ; : r . . 14: 4 - ;', , ,,....:c..,...% • - ." ‘. f. - \
"--". -...- ,'---':,-Z
.7.
_7' ...:-.. f tb, 'Li .... ' - • ' ' . • . '• ••
.. ..rt i :F • ■■2, .; e,
; • ..... -,-. , .,,,i ...i - • Wiz,- - , --,- - ::..ir 4, _..... - , it
L.,4
_-:. v... .•)-'., •:',Ir.. •-: ,,- 0 1.:. ii ik: A ,
- - .
- . ....
l'",, ;:. 1!...,.:,:.:-;.7 •'-*- .,,,r? .., -.: '.. . . .- -; - -
1
. :. , . lt.•,, ,,; , : ,..... •A..; -.1. .f...s.:7...7-. •- -' 7., .. ;.
- ..''' 1.,."••• .4•-■•
.■::•,: , .
,,. ...--.:,..t..:..A...1„vt-2,T,If.-_,. • .,,_:'e ...k .. - --`, 4 f 1 . .--
A
. 4...C..) -;;L:i::'N'ri- 7 ti j . ' f , p , -,.,.,4' 74 .....4._ ''•f.''''''itr--':'''• ' • '
: ...■ ..C. -:.:. ; .•• ...,j. il..•fia1.- .'",c ,. ' ...5 - '1, " --: f. .
- ;:ig
' - -,.- . ki..1 '' -.; ,,, p • ':ft, '),:r.:1 .- -I:- -r., - -, , .. . -. , - - r .
1 4 1
' ... ic . • - ... - r . -. .:,, N.- - .1.4 4:: .- - •Y•....•.;14- - •I': • 4.
I 9
4.-
. ...•,,:t ••.'.....;•••••: .,•.':7, _•1'...t•-,, •-• Va., .s - .,_
4 A
..-- - :.::.:1-,,. -.. - ,,-,...„- 4 ....1,! -L, ,„, _I-.. ,. :, •,.. .... ., ..: , • .
. ._.,,,
..,,...:.:,i t
i.,....Q-s ".?.4.-e,...1- tl 1 1 u -- ,-: ' ,, ;
.:‘,..w..-.
.
.....,..,_:,.....,,,..,:vi-„,..,v4„....,,,-.,,;;.:4-t...tifl,;.,---- .,.- : : , • i 1- g
,. ...
,- 4 . 7---- : 4 '---vkat -Tvii -,.., ..' t . .. . I ..
- 1.4
.,,,, ''''' - • . - .-
,...A. .' - • - • .. - i
- 4.
--no• s • z- r ,-.. ...- - ,,
-,.,..
• It. --,..' 1' :- ,; 4 . -- ;' , ...-t,-- , 47 ....-s- -:-.... f.,, - - fr- - 4 --1., .. -
- • 4 --- 1-.;•;;••Y4'-'• •,- , V ift . " • : : : •••; ,- 4' t i ,.% . .0_,t.i-- -t r _... . _ ,-4,
•,,.-
0-- -.1.5... 4 .1,-. , ....-=1-.,•.,.......1-,.„..„-- -. • . - z re .31",,: . ! , i 1 .
'''...
% --i...,---•--
•
- 4
• .„,1!-7:.*:••• • A.• . IA . . 4 ;4%, . - ^•• . 1 1,V 4 . al
.- 4
c . ,Ig x,,,, :, . 4 -.,A-•(....,!..,■• 2pc ...,-; . :... ''.
..„..f;.':c:rX,,„.;:--f,.,•5-t1411.:;:•:•".k.` 0` -.:- ..V -: ' :-. 1 _;'-
4
- •-• !•-.21" V.„.V'iptik. ..r..1"1 - ,• •7 4 1, • 1,,,e,-- .1.14.•••• . - . .• . •- i"'
!; -..dre ,,,-,-..../•-•--, . i' 4 .... ,..'• ..r-,1 lc;
olt
94,‘ 1. -kz-(4,..., - i -.. ... _
. .. ,_
... .-•.-.- .. •
- =•.:•...:.i..per. - .-.,---it f r.•:...-.
- ! -- is.......; - -4 , 17;;-;,•- , ..0:,,..t;. 1 • -.. : i . .._.• . ...
,.....„...„,„:,,,......:„.„..,..•
...........,„. ,....„- .L.„-_, ... -. --f.. 0....1 A '•' ot" • tie ,. , - I I ' •
• .r.e.V . --
1: ' It, • -.. - ! "... • :.. t
. 4 •.... ,.. ..,..- .;•,... •-,; .W*,■M It " •,•: . •,,,,:•‘• 1„ , . ' • - '.... . , 1 - t, i ; .
; -1 • • - ' . -)...• .` , .. ..
:- -..e I ."t'....7..e • -,.-;.-
,...- '-' :'• "T• ix - 4 1 , 1;;. . f.A . -. 'e•;•f7ge. ''' - - 1 .. -
- ...
-- il.firi..:'•#;',. - ./.!•:.'tif ?.....••■- 1*--, e.mi . .•*.e .-- -, .. -. •' • - ..
- - • • .-. a • . , 7 :'.• ..:..." --: e v., ...2..t
'
,:!. t ... - • .....•_,. . r . _ -- 1%.74i1-'• 4 - ' . ••-- ' ' `' .---P- 0 --
-- .t 1.• -xi.- - -...„. -.,--4. ;. :.,-,. : , . „.,.. .,;....,
6; _ . . • ..... _,
w
. , -- , A--„iil....::--4- .• . 4.,-;-';': --yt!,•-!..:44-?.1-+''''It ■•• ' - •••- . •--- - ...'. .- j ,
-••-
•-.- it
i
.. g i _ ,
. ..
i 4,--.---?..e.,-.--,0,7-.-..,-:-..-..e.-.....-:;■apf.. -..--..;:i-k--P- .1•17-4:,'''..7;" i , i
. .- ,
.. 4'l - 1. 4 .2t.. q '''-i• L ..": ( 4 "It.. i ... - -
. • .. - , ... _ . .
• . A. - . ; i. . . , 4.1.74
-'
7, . • .... ..,f,My'r-,4."!,41e7,-;4117,g4i. .. - .i . .: ' i r !.. .41. -. -_ ,-.,
... - -:,...- _ .- . . , • -
f- pal . .t.s. e .!4 -- --.11 - : ,.. i r.,-;.-•-•-_-i i. ,-. e• - . -*. ,. , ,. : . ,.+ 1 a
7.. ,- 1 ,4 r••. -- 4..`4" ,- .. - _ - ..i. - ,A. - ..-
• - - ...:. - -,..- - r., •
`- ". 7 % 4,;:.: 1r,....411. ''.. f" - 1••■,',4 1 V ',- • , r : • •-•it- 0 .
...Stu
lir .., .. • •
. - ' " • -, -F-• ..•.;::.
"
._-■ ..• --7 k.. - :- _.. .'•' •' -
. Aif,"- • : ii , . 1 - -.. - : ,. , .„,ff , .
- -... •••
'1 . ,'."3-•t•-z-tk.-X.,.i.. • ,-• , .... ;1., t .....:- • . '. ••• ,
'
• -
, .et...,..) > ; Ir., -..„.,, - . tz":;..._..,t-,-...4-"•:,--1-5-7, IL :.", t{,{ i ;44-
..--,_ ...- ,-,....-...,-
-
•eir•-4 • . ..,•--.•-• 4.■••'..-44 .i ‘-'' --.1-0 -• - . ' ,_,..- . oat=-• V d
.., ‘1:;-....., .• 7. r
1,;,.r-'4--Ali,""r.'Sli•••••?t;',V1,.t.::_tett`..4.1.i.4311.,-,. r . • ..
..- ,.;_ ''..-- • , I
,..---
4 .." - - 2•C:: 4. ".•'''. 4 , -1 - f -:- .4 , ,- "' ati 4...:•.4V .. ,- ,
- • .-.,,,, • . a •ata.4. , - "C. r7. • ... . 7 • • ■••• 7 ' . -: ..7: -•'" -
.,e, .......47.....4_ Th...... ,Y .7 r.... .. -4 P.{117.., ...;.;(••••••••• ) - - .i...:- rt
*., ---...."---- -.4- ..___'- , -,. --,- . - .:_•4_ , - - ` 1 Z-...,- -- :-. -- -
-, . 4 'f., .',' ...--.se-1---.- ..--••••,--2-..'.. PI -
,;.•••Is'iz-i. ta;•';....5,- 4,-1 NI•ti.: , ...1, -- ;."; YO:. --'7;,- --fc.,- ,. --•,--._ i -
---;',..:"4.--..4:1'',70.1!:::.-:•-.1,",;' i.t..1 - .. 7 r -•.-•-• t
-, •:: - it - 4-4,-, ,--- -----f.-Af.„;"-
- ---4...--_-/--_,---T,•t:4 '.:*-• ...`"' •1;71" i.e-;).1,-.'''S.' • • - - 1" : ! . .i - ' ' . A7.:
• S.T,Z, ....-, ii.i,„7t.V '-'t"-..': , ''''' , . --- -L - ...,•,f - • ?..;;..iVi." ;,- % . '7- 2.4: '_:-.- 2 ' XIII 1 lit Mt ‘. '.. • -•-'3
cs...= 2:11 _, , - - 1,,,,; ..; ",,,, -.....''',-". '•
',el.."... '.......-",.=..../....ri • * •,1 fo•-. t • . - 7 A C.• • 5 ••• , , _ _
7 •••••_. - ." • ......7 7, '''''? 7 ,. - .4' ".7...i -7 1Z 7,,,,
".. 7 0' . .44, . ' • - ...3 - - •• . •••••f• .... - - • • -
• •
T ._.
r- -..v.,-.:-...„-#. _ -_-• '-# 1 - - • - - ,-- -
- .":_•'..• 4i ;'.47 ,.. . 0 . ,,, ".) 7.. ...k.•,..*.r._ 7t
1 .0 .*:: ii ir tr.: ... .-4-n. 7 ,:..?- - - ..-.., :1:-...... . , . .
7;10
, •.- - -‹ _.-- •,,,,v,f_i: . •
_
.-, ..,.....4i;:.'=-1; - - . .:::: . ;:i• - ..;:i 1 ;.t-T.-..,-,..--,,.. • _ ',-- 1,--:••.‘ r- -..;%. - : 111 '.! '.; -
-- : , .2.:. ,- ;.. - .: .11: Z'
. - ,-.3tr ti• - ; • -. , _;; A . r .-It:,. - .4,-..,* -- ;-.•-t- i ; t•-!:`.-t 41 -. : -- -!‘_r•-•• 1;i._ ,
.•
,-,,-. - - • ....- , .
.• - ..:-,...:: i'.k - ,,, , , , ,...-ti -. ••,,,,,•.:--,- II- , es -- :.•,0 , ....• t ___-- - --,;-. 7'..-r.' ----; 4
i . - •
-----.
- ' , 1` - ,--"-," - .-- f' .•.-3 ,_:..'.:.---,.:-‘:?, :N - ..-:-.. .-.- .-..*..,--: - $ - - ., 1
! - -
. ' ''''''
- .; '1;" ;ic ::- i. - : - - tt -.1? --.- r. -L-4 ;-' 1 5: - .5 :5: z"... - - •_.; - t ,.-- ;
.
4„.-.",...- .. - . -,..../ (.- • :AT 1 .;.: - ; '
c "' '''-',7-;;--,..4•V;;.--..=
.-fLvi.11;:••••'-#-.:1'''''' - 4- ...-i-'••••=.: -"!r•-.','•-b•-e.-----,,' "' ''''ar • .
t -.•. •- -.-le'•••-•-•••-•-•-••'-.•-',
..:•et..: ;.- ..-„1.i '",-. ---•.;;;,.. f :: I.. . •e ,: ..t.. .,., . i.. .• .
' -. ,..-, • ,1-0 A - 'a_si,' , :xk•- ,- 4•-'e-r-•!=- . .".' - -._ . '
..-4, 1 21"*..1 ..,;,....7-:,4,2 ir .. - ..._;;;,...:- ,.-.::- - :.- ..• - .. ' I s
,,....-,...;!,,,p.„,-..,,.....k...--... Z.I.cr..L.,;:.
......1.•1• 1........, ` .-•• . . - ;•• -1,.. . ..,..... • -
, sP ••• .
- • -.'t 7 ' - :••••" '''',',`.- 11-?•---- .71
. . ,41.,, -Vs . ..4, .
.....• ...,:.,;‘,...,.r•r 1....1,:.•• -•`• ir . .- -• -., - A. - - '7', ..`,. 7. 7.7 7'..".-... - ,r, :. -ar' i
• • .1. -• ,--., ,,, `.. \ '• ... .-- - ' . .. '' ' ' - '` - -'- : - - -
,-.7,13 .'..., _-!..,.,." t:.. .,,,." $;: ,.:, ..,-' . _ .-i' ;. -.7 ) -4 : 71-7 .. 2L . 77- 2 .t.T , - ■- - "---.--..... . . ' 1,
'•:''' (. ' 1...A. •-•• - ''.i .' ''Z' ' ',. '-. :::-• '...: --- .''..rt.-- •
z.,,. . ._.•-. ,
... : ,....., • .....4 _p.. .-„An..,-...........,
. _ . -,,,, - .43 , .- -. ....-7_ , ,,,3 - --ct .
. ., . ' t•
;;;-. '.-='. '--4-..;.---: '-.. - : l'= --, ' '' ' . • 1 ' . -,..-:. zi.,•,!- ---_--.0...-,I 4- 4,,.. ,- .... : , I . - ,---
‘ ,--- - -- " - V= 1, - 7 ‘..v.*•:. •-• • •; . -.,„.. , -..-:,-;-.1:- . ..
. -:..
..
, !!-. - •• . - : - ,., ..__•_-q,-.4.-1' ,, - ..: *-- - .•*. i.. .. 4 ..r!'•:.'t . --
' it.; • - ,
.
,-.... s. •'': ` ; 1,, . ' - -- .: .- . •' • - : ,., , ' : ` : - , -.,-.::.;;;;;...: -' 7- ..!:::: ;;;;•-• . :-...,'-;-:
l 'A' ; 4? 7. 1,, • - :1•": i,.. .- . 7 -. ,-.. -:. ....,,.A
r: .-.---.-: -.:.-.: --; . ':- '17 .;:------.. :1 ,-- .--: - -4- :'' - --: --;': ' --. . ' - il . 4 ... • t< . '... . -1- ' '-' '':.--:.;. . .. ..4:-'....;
- ., ..,..,•-..? ''''''' ..fit . 7- • -. , ,,i_'•;• 4 '
:7 . ... . .
.• ••• ;.• - .1•" • ;•4.. - .•-•• ...t:A.•‘7.- z, •
.r j
- -----.-:,-, --v-- ,if.:-.;- - - - 77 , 3•-•-:...-.7,•:-..- F-,
- # ilia - o- - - ..-.. :,,- -i..._ • ,- 1-0 - .., ,,. -..---_ , _--i--- - - • •t •:'•■
'. : t :-...' '' -- 1 .• " ••• • • . 77- .•:•.. • • • 7 7 :..••• ■ '. Its . - 4 -
... , • ..... ,.,.... 1;0,11 7 4i 4. ;:t7 t .i.'t...:7.. . ;It • 7,.';•1 - - ; ' 7 .
- .
7- ...■ - - 7 el" .` .-. . .. •-• •• ...., .',•:...7j.7 ' :.•:L. - .--• • ...k •
. %:.. : . •••.' "4 *,.. "4 ;t 7. - 41 .• 7. - 7; , ...i-
. ■
a : : i i •- lb '
----; -. - .3..!_.,--..-'::-.7,''''.-:".:-.
- :.4- ' ' - . . .
.--.- -:-.- -;:- - -......"-•‘;': -- * -.' - - . --,-;,-- .-- - - ;4 - k.
•
CITYOF
I
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 ,
MEMORANDUM 1
TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I
111
FROM: Dave Hempel, Sr. Engineering Technician tof
IOPP
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
Auto Service Center
Project No. 92 -16 and LUR 92 -17
1
Upon review of the preliminary plat for Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition, I offer the
following comments and recommendations:
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
1
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. 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 *ill 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
es 1
%I, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Sharmin Al -Jaff
October 14, 1992
' Page 2
UTILI HES
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
' 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.
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
1 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 Und 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.
1 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 1
MISCELLANEOUS 1
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
Upon review of the plans prepared by Blumentals
1
p p p p y umentals Architecture, Inc. dated September 21,
1992, I offer the following comments and recommendations:
1
SITE ACCESS
CC SS
The plans propose on extending the private street from the Minnesota Vehicle Inspection 1
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).
UTILITIES
1
All three lots will be served with municipal utilities. The appropriate hookup fees will be
charged at the time of building permit issuance.
1
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1
Preliminary Plat Approval
1. The final plat shall dedicate a drainage and utility along easterly easement alon the easterl 20
feet of Lot 3, Block 1.
2. A driveway or cross- access easement for use of the existing and proposed
Y g p oposed 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
Sharmin Al -Jaff
October 14, 1992
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.
' 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.
' 6. The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide 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 Seal plans and specifications for formal City approval.
8. Outlot A shall be included with the replatting of Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition.
1 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.
' jms /ktm
c: Charles Folch, City Engineer
1
•
CITYOF
� r
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner I
1
FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal
•
Fire Prevention Bureau
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:
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). r
3. Fire Department Policy #06 -1991 (included). Placement to
be determined prior to issuance of CO.
4. Fire Department Policy #07 -1991 (included).
5. Fire Department Policy #29 -1992 (included). r
r
1
r
r
t«f PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER r
I •
1 . 4. C ITYOF
v ClIANHASSEN
1 ...,.. r "-- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
= (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
II CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE
1. Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18 ".
I 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 A 4. Wording shall be: NO PARKING
• f' FIRE LANE
1 5. Signs shall be posted at each end
pt he fire lane and at least at
I 7'O" 05 of intervals along the
- yf ire =:lane .
I 6` All signs shall be double sided
facingAthe direction of travel.
. 7. Post s be set back a
I minimumf 12" but not more than
W . 36" f rom`'he curb.
- - 8. A fire 1 be shall be required in
II - (NOT TO ,, front of M 're dept. connections
SCALE) , extending feet on each side and
1% , ` lbrig `1 <1a seas designated by the
ANY DEVIATION FROM-THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL .�E> S UBMITTED IN
I WRITING, WITH A SITE `°'PLANJ ; FOR APPROVAL BY ,SHE F CHIEF. IT IS
THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE°" EP,Al2TMEit = TO ° ENSURE CONTINUITY
THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDIG ESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF
I FIRE LANES. "..
Chanhassen Fire Department
1 Fire Prevention
Policy 106 - 1991
Date: 1/15/91
Revised:
1 Approved - Public Safety Director Page 1 of 1
II t 4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
o a C ITY F
., C T I
, r ,
i ,•..,
'('
Al 4
A CHANHASSEN 1
�:.� rte' ., 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 SITE PLANS
II A .
ll the following required inspections shall be scheduled 24 hours
in advance with the Fire Marshal:
1. Witnessing the flushing of underground sprinkler service I
line, per NFPA 13- 8 -2.1.
2. Hydrostatic test of sprinkler system and 24 hour air test
II
for dry systems.
3. Testing of all smoke detection, manual pull stations, and
fire suppression system�ss
4. Installation of fire extinguishers 2A -40BC rated minimum.
Install one by each e d door and as designated by Fire
Inspector.
5. Extinguishers shall be pr vided before final approval.
I
6. A final inspection . by Fire Inspector before a
Certificate of Occupancy issued.
Fire Department access roadssha11 be,5provided on site during all II
phases of construction. The construction of these temporary roads
will conform with the Chanhassen Fire b.epartment requirements for
temporary access roads" at construction sites. Details are
II
available.
,r
Onsite fire hydrantsishall be provided a in operating condition
during all phases` construction.
The use 2,f liquefied - pe rol iim aas s a =° b e i n conformance with
NFPA Standard 58 - end ter1(imnesota: n fo _ re d . „ . A list of I
these requ is available.
a
All fire detection ar►d ;suppression systems- �s`hall be monitored
II
by an approved UL central station W th - UL — 71 Certificate issued
on these systems before final occ pancy is issued.
1
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention II Policy #04 -1991
Date: 11/22/91
Revised:
Page 1 of 2 1
to PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1
•
I i
An 81" x 11" mvlar As Built shall be provided to the Fire
Department. The As Built shall be reproducible and acceptable to
the Fire Marshal.
An approved lock box shall be provided on the building for fire
department uses The lock box should be located by the Fire
1 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 /41 the total pipe size at the
line.
High -piled combustible storage shall comply with the requirements
1 of Article #81 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 signage shall be provided as required by the Fire
Marshal. (see policy #06- 1991).
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).
•
11
1
1
1
fi
1
1
Chanhassen Fire Department
1 Fire Prevention
Policy #04 -1991
Date: 11/22/91
Revised:
1 Approved - Public Safety Director _ Page 2 of 2
1
CITYOF
. - ot) 1
. „ .., .
-., ,-,-,.. , . -.:,-,,r, CHANHASSEN I
,...,..„, .....
,- Ke' 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
,- (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
1
PREMISES IDENTIFICATION
General
II
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 t
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. ='
I
Other Requirements - General f.L_ -` .
1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color from the background I
2. Numbers shall not be In script
3. If a structure is not visible from the street, additional numbers are required at the driveway entrance. Size
and location must be approved. I
4. Numbers on mall box at driveway entrance may be a minimum of 4 ". However, requirement *3 must still
be met
I 5. Administrative authority may require additional numbers 11 deemed necessary.
Residential Requirements (2 or less dwelling unit)
I 1. Minimum height shall be 5 1/4".
2. Building permits will not be finaled unless numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department
I
Commercial Requirements
` f
1. Minimum height shall be 12 ".
2. Strip Malls - - - '
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.
I 3. If address numbers are located on a directory entry sign, additional numbers will be required on the
buildings main entrance.
Chanhassen Fire Department
I
Fire Prevention
Policy #29 -1992
Date: 06/15/92
Revised:
Approved - Public Safgty Director Page 1 of 1
t4 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
CITYOF 47,„-- CIIANUASSEN
1 _ -f
_ - r 690 COULTER DRIVE •
I
Z P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
CASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT
POLICY REGARDING PRE -pLAN
II Prior to issuing the
to the Fire Department •for a pre -plan, site
to the
I pla of the approval. p shall items submitted abe
n. The following items shall be
1 ) Size 11" x 17" (maximum)
I 2 ) Building footprint and building
3 ) Fire lanes and width of fire lanes
mensions
4 ) Water mains and their sizes, indicate looped
5 ) Fire hydrant locations p or deadend
I 6) P.I.V. - Fire Department co P ;
7 ) Gas meter (shut -off ? nection
)�
8 ) Lock box location NSP shut off)
I 9) Fire walls, if a
10) Roof vents pplicable -:- f
applicable;
11) Interior walls
II 1
, ,
2) Exterior doors
13) Location of fire alarm
14 Sprinkler riser locatonanel `
1 5) Exterior L.P. storage, if a
1 16) Haz. Mat. storage, f applicable le
17) Underground storage' tanks pplicable �r
18) Type of construc jonwlls /rooflon$' if applicable
•
II
19 ) Standpipes "
- r
I Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire. Prevention
ur)✓ Polic # -1991
�" Date: 01/16/91
Revised:
•
I Approved - Public Safety Director
Page 1 of 1
i
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
OITYOF
. CHANIIIISSEN
1
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sharmin Al -Jaff, Planner One 1
FROM: Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Coordinator
DATE: October 12, 1992
SUBJ: Goodyear and Abra Service Center
The above mentioned site plan review will be formally addressed by the Park and Recreation 1
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
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.
If you have questions in this regard, please see me.
1
pc: Park and Recreation Commission, October 27, 1992, . Packet
eir
1
1
1
�� PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
DEEVHAVEx
sxon xxE.ox..
.DDi Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District
I • 0 0 4' Engineering Advisor: Barr Engineering Co.
Dx.xn.55Ex
.NEY PEDEx ERAMIE -
8300 Norman Center Drive
�+
Suite 300
I e, c9f *ji f a Minneapolis, MN 55437
832 -2600
aLDDxIx -x
Legal Advisor: Popham, Haik, Schnobrich & Kaufman
I 3300 Piper Jaffray Tower
222 South Ninth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
333 -4800
1 October 9, 1992
1 Mrs. Joanne Olson
Senior City Planner
1 City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
1 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
submitted to the District for the Chan Haven Plaza 4th Addition in Chanhassen.
II The following policies and criteria of the District are applicable for this
project:
1. In accordance with Section E (2) of the District's revised Rules and
II 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.
II 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.
f
1 cerelyi
FX
Ro•ert,C. Obermeyer
II
B -rr Engineering Company
Engineers for the District
RCO /kmh
c: Mr. Ray Haik
Mr. Fritz Rahr
23 \27 \053 \JO1.LTR
1
1
1
tr nn �� S nn TATE Of
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES I
PHONE NO. METRO WATERS - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 551��
772 -7910 ! E No II
October 2, 1992
OCT - 5 1992
II
Ms. Sharmin Al -Jaff
Planning Department CITY Ur t�nn �cind!`
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
II
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: GOODYEAR AND ABRA AUTO SERVICE CENTER, CHAN HAVEN 3RD
II
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,
I
T.116N, R.22W) and have the following comments to offer:
1. The project site does not contain or appear to involve any
II
public waters or public waters wetlands; therefore, no DNR
protected waters permit is required.
2. No floodplain or shoreland concerns were noted.
II
3. Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken during
the construction period. The Minnesota Construction Site
II
Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook (Board of
Water & Soil Resources and Association of Metropolitan Soil
and Water Conservation Districts) guidelines, or their
equivalent, should be followed. II
4. If construction involves dewatering in excess of 10,000 II 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.
II
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.' Please contact me at
772 -7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. 1
Sincerely,
C ,4 -•?)/-47 1
Ceil Strauss
Area Hydrologist
II
cc: Bob Obermeyer, Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek WSD
Wayne Barstad, Ecological Services
II
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER II
CITY F CHANHASSEN
C O C
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937 -1900 •
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPUCATION
APPLICANT: Beisner Ltd. OWNER: Chanhassen Holding Company
I ADDRESS: 6100 Summit Drive ADDRESS: 14201 Excelsior Boulevard
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Minnetonka, MN. 55436
TELEPHONE (Day time) 560 -0246 TELEPHONE: 935 -3486
' 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. X Subdivision
2. X Conditional Use Permit - 12. Vacation of ROW /Easements
3. Grading /Excavation Permit 13. Variance
4. Interim Use Permit 14. Wetland Alteration Permit
5. Notification Signs 15. Zoning Appeal
1 6. Planned Unit Development 16. Zoning Ordinance Amendment
7. Rezoning 17. Filing Fees /Attomey Cost - (Collected after
' approval of item)
8. Sign Permits 18. Consultant Fees
9. X Sign Plan Review
10. X Site Plan Review TOTAL FEE $ 930.00
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must .
1 included with the application.
Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted.
' 81/2" 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
LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 2, Block 1, Chan Haven Plaza, 3rd Addition 1
1
PRESENT ZONING Business Highway
REQUESTED ZONING same '
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Busniess Highway
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION same '
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST
•
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly 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 I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying'
with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party
whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of
ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the,
authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further'
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best
of my knowledge.
I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded'
against the title to the property for which the approval /permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's
Office and the on do;). ent retumed to City Hall Records. '
fi
/ Sept ember 191992
ignatur of Applicant Date
•
Y . Q / s
Signature of Fee Owner Date
0
Application Received on y ,cJa� Fee Paid :� "0 Receipt No. 4 /C3?3
This application '
s app ication will be considered by the Planning Commission/Board of Adjustments and Appeals on
1
1
' a - .1.%•... I*. s' / 1II i c;rrr `. 1 . i 11 ., A II7 , . , � , , ` �
• _y�� 1. • � 71 I .r I�IU11 w ruw ■ _ �� I 2 s
• - ;aai..�rai�a r:1119:11110 /� g
1 [
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 7 � ��
/!° ��r�
Wi
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING .~ N riill%*` 1111 I 1 Wednesday October 21, 1992 aK c
T MIGMM v► �� ti �� ��ti '
7.30 P M / - ,. _■ 4. .„„ r s
" - \
1
City Hall Council Chambers s ''
690 Coulter Drive 1. :�T ' • „...0
.�_ �( 4 ,. tRK.E W
s. rr .■ • . wal L1,7 : o
_ lihi �� h LAKE W Project: Goodyear Tires /Abra SUSAN \� .;. _ - �= . _
...' � R /C At RSN LAKE
Developer: Beisner, Ltd. � t��� r� _ — ���
,I ' E TM O O
Location: Lake Drive East - South of w - _r„,,.2,-
I 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
I project. During the meeting, the Planning Commission Chair will lead the public hearing
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.
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
wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Sharmin at 937 -1900. If you
I 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 October 8,
1992.
R
t
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 1
Sinclair Marketing, Inc. Terry & Margaret Lewis Chanhassen Center Partners 1
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 1
Lotus Lawn and Garden Center Thomas & Patricia Redmond
78 West 78th Street c/o Redmond Products, Inc. 1
Chanhassen, MN 55317 18930 West 78th Street
Chanhassen, MN 55317
1
1
1
1
f
i
1
1
1
1
1
.:r
1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING / �-
® al PM net ° ' S. ��'Wk t-- ...
— " ' ' " -
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING gin l , "
S
1�
1 Wednesday, November 18, 1992 �; M` A . . mim Awe
� "` �, • ; eye e x
7:30 P. M. ,,: . :; . y 4.,` I
1 City Hall Council Chambers °'- � o '1/4 I -"°°
690 Coulter Drive
:m t - -''
I _ I n ` -4, - LA
Project: Goodyear Tires/Abra `—.. - s "la ' --- _
_ . . PA R ,_,,,( - --, Ili°°
/SAN ) 11116 ,� _ '�.
1 Developer: Beisner, Ltd. ��4 7...A ,.►� .R /CE 1 RS" LAKE •
S. 4 TM
I Location: Lake Drive East - South of
Hwy. 5 and East of the ); — • . •r/00 Emission Control Station _ '
I , .. . _ 1 ----.•00
Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in
I 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
I project. During the meeting, the Planning Commission Chair 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.
1 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.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on November 12,
1992. Q
I 3,t II
I 0
•
RAYMOND & K KNIGHT LEE & PATRICIA JENSEN WALTER & K SCHOLLMAN m
8007 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8009 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8011 DAKOTA CIRCLE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317
1
RAYMOND & M JEZIERSKI GAR
ARY & M FANDEL DENNIS & S UNZE
8013 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8015 DAKOTA CIRCLE 8017 DAKOTA CIRCLE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317
MICHAEL WILLIAM FARRELL
8024 CHEYENNE AVE •
'
CHANHASSEN
1
1
1
1
1
4 1
1
1
1
I££SS NW NO'S
OP XOS
?IMAM
6Z£0£ VD V.INV'ZLV LI£SS NNI N3SSVHFWHD
S 2IQ ?I 1Vd 3AILf1DHX3 6S LIES; NI IsIaSSVHNVHD 069 XOS
OZI 3.LIf1S ISMS H.LBL M 08LSI 3AI?IG O2I.LLVfl) 09
d21OD 3INUINf1S DMI SS32Id 3I-I.L DNI )IaLA VM
1
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
8V Cheyenne Trail ; 8003 Cheyenne Avenue 8005 Cheyenne Avenue
I C . nhassen, 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
1 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
I
ALITA LOWNSBURY JEROME & RENEE GRIEP GERALD & M WASSINK
I 8000 DAKOTA AVE 8002 DAKOTA AVE 8004 DAKOTA AVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317
111 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 1 1 - __ '
8003 DAKOTA AVE 8005 Dakota Ave t ° - 4
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 Chanhassen MN 55317 r . •N • "f
• •
. • • • J
I. • Y.' • . . ; • • s4 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 DANIES & L ROBINSON MITCHELL LOBENS & 1
8016 CHEYENNE AVE 8014 CHEYENNE AVE MICHELLE RIEHM
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8012 CHEYENNE AVE I
1 • CHANHASSEN MN 55317
(s •
•
RICHARD & B FRASCH WILLIAM & E KRAUS CURRENT RESIDENT
I
8010 CHEYENNE AVE 008 CHEYENNE f1VE 8003 CHEYENNE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 C HANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317
-t 1
Mike and Cindy Koenig CURRENT RESIDENT STEPHEN & J MACDONALD
8005 Cheyenne Ave 8007 CHEYENNE AVE 8017 CHEYENNE SPUR '
Chanhassen MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317
1
JON, SR & D WILSON GLENN & B HAGEMAN THOMAS & JOY EASTMAN
8019 CHEYENNE SPUR 8021 CHEYENNE SPUR 8023 CHEYENNE SPUR ,
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317
CURRENT RESIDENT ALOIS & M STUMPFL GEORGE & T THOMAS I
8025 CHEYENNE 8027 CHEYENNE TRAIL 8029 CHEYENNE AVE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 I
PHIL & CONNIE CHAN ROBB LUND RALPH LYTLE I
8031 CHEYENNE AVE 8023 ERIE AVE MARY ANN ROSSUM
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 8021 ERIE AVE ll
CHANHASSEN MN 55317
THOMAS & S KOEPPEN CLAYTON & M SODETANI TERRANCE & S THOMPSON 1
8009 ERIE AVE 8005 ERIE AVE • t 8000 -8002 ERIE
CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317
1
VENCIL & C PREWITT JEFFREY PAPKE • VERNON & B HUSEMOEN
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
" 1 1.4ES° 4 ' "'nneaota Department of Transport' 71n CV
Metropolitan District
Transportation Building
St Paul, Minnesota 55155
Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128
' Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422
Reply to 593 - 8753
Telephone No.
October 29, 1992
1
Mr. Paul Krauss
•
' Planning Director
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147
1 Chanhassen, MN 55317
In Reply refer to: TH 5
1 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:
1 • 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
' Planning Supervisor
cc: Mary Anderson, Metropolitan Council
' Roger Gustafson, Carver Co. Engineer
John Freemyer, Carver Co. Surveyor
RECEIVED
OCT 3 0 1992
1 CITY Ur Gru , vor, ,3,��i�
y �T MINNESOTA
An Equal Opportunity Employer
SITE DATA lei -o 127-C VICINITY MAP
-
u 5
l A, All c GOODYEAR SITE STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5
0
• ....K e•MIYwAT AM/ Mttttt13 tfblCr OCOMICS l �,, ,. •,yf ,e � •
•
LA
0 Ysl AYTO frrt, .Em• 1 ,•w a '''''''''''.e.'' r...N_- �_ _._ _ --- -__ �_ _�_aro , ,n a.• • .qas � i�.+ i
• 1•A[IM 1.II. o 410..1 .•a'_�:."i� -- f- =_� __. n .l ... -4 .. •, n. 1,1ry . I
• Slit t S0^ Pr. _)_�� -�- �...
•
• M•*01.6 AMA Al • r ip»A.s _�..__.�,.•a _ _ - _.^uen wane ..._ ,:..,..d...
/ 197, �_
� sOmaD ulf e. m1w....� 1 en•..n a a ' _ - �- _ _ .- _ -- _ . `, I
nutty 1 .o.. fo. R. . �. ] a : �.. _ �.•+ __. _ m _tt' I �t . ..; \ ��ez� V
• ry0.1.0 0 5O. IT. /1
• .S. 00 SO. . no 11 CA. • Y li, - " �� -t .. :� ;, ... - - z6 n,E 1 �n.. l]�� i .�_. /.• - AID / _
m lot - aL )e CANS .,• , • ., a :_ _ - - - � , � ,1,
0 • (∎1111 Y
N ITS � t I 64...P.-- _�!_l lCi�•C , <._ __•� AO-,_* _ 9L C _ Y,a I 1'� ?
-TO � I * �
- acc . .y n ]
• Mt 11Oa I3O rloro 11e.Tf rye. 0*5*05OWL.. q \ I \ � 9 x � � �
�- w \' O ' •• � _Ee rc.' .12 Y.ta, 1. 1,0 .. 5 ' C ' i 1P •rKj. t• "•<• i s 0'..r • ]
' ABRA SITE L t ee -� P. i :..,n,%7 ._ / ' . +.,... • I p
• 2.110. a•.lo...• ANC ros1Nm sMnUT oun la -� : l I I ^ .(� �� � ` I '° I I
LAND � � j � i SI LAND • AUTO a .u• ml I i
• inr i.jsxltll I
)1.10] so^ n. J'b-C, c /� y
• u• ma, -- - � I T' • y
O. TS G113 , :k-- -] ._ �, ' 11� ''' y�" . I L 1 4 ; I . ...tr. r
• ADM.. AREA ca . 10. IT.
T. O _ .. ■ T.. •......* 1 ' .-� • .{ -'f 1 I I 1 I h _ i � PAR, _
•
w •n• y_ 1 X 1 765.''''0'...'iT9 1. � � VEH I CL E I _ -- • SUp11[0 M 5 S of r 11..5 30. IT. - cpCp /• ' O DTlelt• 1)..10 30. . • f _ • �- - ��" �': � -�_ .i t ' 1 . : STATION 'wC • itooiR�e u� •ICAL .e 10. ../1110 10. rr.1 a �Mf 1 . o - y�� 1 10 . 1 l ' 1 I „ r ' I 1 ; I 1 .; 7 L . : -V
MMOO[e T t1 M3 ,. ACClif 1(L[ _J_CtL I I - .1. „ n7 1. < • Slit LI(.n0 IL 00* 1.1.. IRON ItOltol 1 c IB j I - • i : . • . l � T L d1 W 1•.meA
T" T" o 52K -O � _O i'C'C I C-[ i I 'r, .... 'V 4:, .: - •
L u -
SITE PLAN NOTES ;. t 2 -- - -Ly ti _ o .. . �' ...A
MINNESOTA VEHICLE s 1 - "GOODYEAR . A A BRA I
• CY - •
0017[ AM. ) •• *0.00175 .i,. .. Jol.n a INSPECTION STATION _ •' I - - T • . c. .u. A.D A
te1 - o• Y I PROJECT DATA
,,,,.•..3 ITC. C.001. 00C.001. 410101 - / 2 - 1 I �� L i
ya CI AL l. A tt T. s.ALL Otte - r .rH u - (, _� I ) I
......2. 1......2. ......2. . I r ^i.e ` 5 e
• 5(050001 MSS a.cltn Mef a C11 0 ,wO00 00 •.__. 1 - 11 / - e • • MarCT 0.01, * AND AB. A 1u l ..A ,• �.JJ 1� 4 �� ] 1
earls. l IiI M
AD IC 'MICE CI.. 4
CO.[3 0u1 a iS t . J ' i t L,� J-7,-(.! . 1 1 I 1 -, 1�'. T 1 c .....t 0 0 41.0$070 o41.0$070 L CYq t .. 1 -0• ..n As - 1 \ ►-y �i„� V y I '�' ` ^ CM.. co u•ii� :ISwifo •
05[0.5 .. a .1 •Sw•.0rr••• +/T. I �ncJ_I • MOO MOO 0.10011%. MOOING **(OVSOr
• NATI. (01/01 ouS .1.5. .11 All A (0 0
__ _ _ - - --
S1 __ '
,y 1.1[lo .. 51 >0
G ‘. r = - r"_ �� -I- - -- Zs 1 C 16111 .S1 -.let
• tl.. C.0.11 0000 AND 10010 Or '� •, TS.
ACM, ROAD Onn.S ACCESS ± let Ae INC s S.. . ^ Al - _ -__ �'�.[l.t • A ••IICMT (I n... TD.
M •IOY .0 i. I • .• - . -- -1--- „"^'t •9•^`t•'=-:•<P..- -• J " tle0 S.07 pit[
pan. tnuct nl)TFw •\ _ -..3-,.....06. - eteott. MIKA. w
. 1 0 N s TO "UT A. Mn.O a I \/ 0/•• - T ' -'1'• 1 L1xl »o -ea
. T i n .s lftlw .utwet0 `{� •
-T�
•A,1 O. i . _ _ - • YC.11t17 OlOf l ML3 MMIt�S•A /. f•In Ile
• MO Cpl( CMS w ZINC.. C.( r0 ♦4 • y •• ••• -.4. ,' �� O c • • .0.1... Stow• 0 W.
I1.. CO.,wt JOINT [•IACI •n• I a1 �• •.p • 10111 Sal_ST)r
NE. C0.1100 CURD A CONCRETE CMe ,(A �✓- ! 1
C. Y .0.. 11• CD. l CD. ✓ • � ' t Y a ' - - 51 -1
10001 .[17 1 0.1CI•00 .or1111 301. • 1 • • f.IR[. so.O0L :Air.*Aaiau
C MC.
ON.11. SOW'S/ SOW'S/ M.O. • ,,✓ - • -e"
! ` •.I..17ON[A. .. .310 HMI P R n• -e• o M• � - . • x ,,,,,. L t ` ' • n um S48-7601 •
• MCI. PAM/ 11 • 111 Me 0..0. ACCUS I .4 - � - • 0 • , L a � C'2' f K.
Anit Al OM ADA 1Y5Orll.tf. la - • j ' - = DRAWING INDEX
a
110113 ).Alt et •.. .017010[. ' . P .. _*' • y J !) ..1%.; r 4 dt 10 • 1
Fl ACMttttt1 PARCH. AttSes4R0 .MCI. P0Ct PYL r 1 + 1 Al 111E 01 1.
• PAR.. 51(01/ CH . 5101 AS R* .(,.' .. CI M[t 111.MT Om.. t YAYYI RA.
ACC YIe[ 01 LINIS .9 00070 ^:11 • 0.0 %l / �• \I l Ct ME11.1 ft. AM O L 0. • • . , .,1 • .e ° 11 LAYDICwt[ RA.
CODS. ue.. 1 • o .• • '` ' I� 1 v ;eoun0000.. An LD1w
1 0.1.0000 e
.
SURVEY AUTHORITY I I q , ` ' ^tJ 1 BI rn ntals/ 0205 E.IN brown brw.
\ I I Li O Bal. Cw1b NFn
• MM. DV 1100001.1. t •Aroo.. INC. YUIiIS 55130
u oo T[A t 1 •eu YO a . . • 1
11a1Y w »)M an3 1•x1.1 : 4 •1• .
• NNW, *0221010 110711N111*.. 1002.
I 5 r -ice •
• '4 1 ,../
111121$111.41737 •• ^j V 1 11l / 1 .Ore. a. CD.... .•.. 11‘1•''' 1 c . e i e / . r . j *..r.''' ......
• • - -wife na - - - -- _ -' //" •.z ( i n.e -. .o • t 05 • 0a.
I ; f �w.a 0R - • ��- • •••' - ..' 94
!_b i, I
:,. a 6c1e- l. 92 Z ti w �- ..• tow. 1 - AUTO SERVICE CENTER
-- - _ -- __ :r
.._,n .
- - - c..:� -' ,r.. n b.,n../IwP 1 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
0 , r '' 900'- LAKE DRIVE EAST n. - ,:: �N • N SITE PLAN
5 SITE PLAN _
AL ■ .1..,.,...lJ1
IMIN 111. /1111 I/III NM - - - - NM NM - ■1111 NM - NM MN r
IIIMI MN MN I = MI • I MN NM = MN IIIII MI MI 1111111 MI MN ME
LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE
STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5 SAW MADE
[M.• e: B.r° .fY.
-tee re 5 +e ._ Vneenos n ANIRICAN
�. = - ". =_ . e ,• ---.=-_"`_''.. . SOGAT
__. - -21. --- ,...........: -!--4 . ,. . -.r..----..-=.
- _
`` � 4i - . . +. t n,S.Lm0. terry
Mt ,' "' f.. ;0•••"'...-..e.
0• .-.ri ....... -__.° �••H.•• _ �'� — •.a ,.. - SMUG[. Ol•P xlllf
• �_ —__ - T n. TS r •L Y 26.62 OL r'ID UeVt axen.,
L - —�•� ..,--,.....77._._.„ i / L IT i + ,« aeED
_ ____- - w ` _, _.,. ./ : : iie: i To.
v &WT.% r r , ,.�•�'�."'°.�.. • . .1..,•.^ ,.s Yf c>e /• g .r.l: 0 « iro:::c:.x. a.xeae.
, ��� F ( 11. I!t Q I Y«If[x.
N. `' r .
e0. .. 63
L r;-.14.7_z_ -.0 I, I 11 ,1 I LANDSCAPE NOTES
! . „� '_I1_ ' • 0tCIDU 0V5 ,ee 1$.4 «v « : -r /: 4 «c i. »u wtr.r..
L� - M4.. S rer. « »•m. +Le Leoux
•
i - �4D ' / - I fJ 3 - ' • t
A . , -'_ N I • .S S[r atrftx xU
' rtxae L» EIS. •IR -r /+ r.er[S
j f p Q -- - — . -- I • DECIDUOUS n. 1$, r. ttttttT xua
O } y I I . ��� I • A410. i AWNS. D A «Y SKASE CO . 1 r .. 0! «f o AN ,.
N � - • ' Litt 1 'EARS. nu YM
-� J - 1 • [tua.u« •»Mws. v P `.7,,;,;;.!""”` ,, xnaxn
1 6�_ GOODYEAR a uc••, As A.o y ru I« .o,,,.
S " l — I �' ABRA , ' I mu,tt t0. no`. Asi:o er[ ennr «i TM! r. 1$L[
« , — , I C'•Sf0•l .A .EAL Ted[ Or • MOTES OR MORE
�Ht - 'R E r ICT. Sol. rxe
n ED .MO °,.
SER•.t,'u.'S." Of
I e......7; ..e......7; „ ffi I t 5' 1 • ; I PROTECT. v dues AT op
.S L_ .r. _ J _ - . .f.o «o ttttt 1st ' eo:S;:uc 40. ,.� c T a Coo.,
� nu . q.ut w 1$, s »ASS
RO
C� l � 'C'''- Y' e r ' L i I ocu +ii » ^p » : ;io M T' t o o
! •f' F_ 1 : :` ? r! µ :, : ° 1 T »i AM, or a 4.4 K14•riio INSPECTED
a •MAO,
' €14.9 �- =G r”' < A • . OTED FOR term, 2,>.E yx.sl Lr SODDED uer•, .1141 t SKIM y
S . y {� i 9i I mlor«cs� OD.. O arovan, ETC. MOH. • ... ... . ^ +'C +]•• ~•• � L"' / ��� • . + i ...gum - - I' 'T M I 14.1$»
• [0 .c TMp•MT• LINE AS «03[0.
•�� -.1$M..
. • J in. ���������� 1 • MO• TA MRCP. PL DEEP OVER r•011 TOP t et G
EDGING
�•• . �.. Nb005 50 500 00 •ll IIA MEAS.
EK1 e41x •0ll . •4xtl fOL rMi
"� ' . ���� ��� ��y� - 1150005• OL[• L MAC* M
EM 1S : . �_ -- 2
t - Rr y4 I
` L a \ \ \3 '. 4 ' , - -- tree tveoewia ANN.. ' E E
s e
L'
' � ' I P �' ^r
`
• ! I 6205 Eyre 055«5
Q( f B SYx:
I /4 I / I I:.YI IhUdtx ULLI'V W FU MO4M�1 GM 1w. W1$
° 55230
( 1• -I— ^•c • S � • �( , I / / f ,• (112 - 6181 Fax1 /1}1 }01 -}IS. •
• 1 4 t 1 jep� � 1 - - 1 .a °• o. fe..raer4• :i' }• • .K - /! ,i �,;t 'r' 'i
'i� _y he y �J/ '" i,.�' »ee «i lo-... sr 10a,•
92
' e .,,, ''••••-- - - -.- - - - ---____-. ,.--,.. I ,,,,,:::;' Pk ttttt n• It • r it = I"�.0 .. .,. .S.a ,e✓- ` ; : ^�' ?e/ X91 of 1 Op. , >. }1.
- .„c ybelre -
- ° '"''^ °"' °'e _ >.� '" "+� f AUTO SERVICE CENTER
-- — — • IY - - - -- — a.s, ,,� — ; T-- - R 1$ b°arx•, I CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
• LAKE DRIVE EAST , }r
N LANDSCAPE PLAN
c p LANDSCAPE PLAN _ . y
.....V . "..1$.0
r ,.,414 .-,11
9 I ., 9 ------ 04011.ifArla
- ' ..1 ____._ ealins
11
m
.;;AkilS I R■ - - --- ----- .03Makiv_ .1:11Allekldv ...., •••••••• tIV3 A0000 1
ry,
IP' a
0 11!
4 4 I
eP
, mr:
p. s
0- P
i Ia. n
e IX Er
ttl ' Z Z
. U s
1 1
' p til ' • 1 !I :_.,,
0 . . 1 ,.
' K 1 jVi)
--lifili(11Wr; W
Ilj . \ Mill" I
Mt
iiiiiiptillin
mi
..1
Hl fie: I
g34 i-
( 1 i
I .
lis 6 11 i 11 i •
Illiir Pei
;At t..1 i 1 1 1 it i i v
11111 1
CA €3
E.,
iv
i VI
t t -
i R
1 1,.! I
i e
e 11M11101H1
1 111 f 4' i G
i Ei t==i al
I i f 1 i i _:_i '.
k
i ,t i . ..
1 1111 1 8 1
1 4 1
1 1 Ull
1 '99
e l 1 1
tl
I
__ \ In ,
. •i\I -I,
. 1 \1
: 1.1 0 A
it. ...„,
1. .1 i • 1(1 1
- 32
- , ..., j Li 10 ' 1
- - I
i - ea aft. to. ei t
1
1
AI i
Ve
1
./.
1
1
1
1
1
MN MI • NM MN OM NM MN IIIIII IOW MI NM NM MN • MI I= • IIIM
• : I -..• ....., t- --
-1 • .x.` - n. •-•,.. • 70, C.1, •1
wd , • L a z c :A - vE .. - a Lo .
^ “,-,- tu. - , -..•
_ - -
../. ...I
L
.....''' ..1 . • pker :TM-
r l --.... 0e...,./.."65. : - 7 ..1 . —..- -
... Ouake.•■,. r .
= AUTO - BODY & GLASV . ...., -- , d . v., •
. IN
____
. ..__ . _ . . • -
. • _____
; L--
• , _.
2 1 -
1 ' __________
._ ..
WEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION
.: - . : 1, ., , :
• ••,•-...--C. ar4. 1 ----.
•-........, • ,,,,,...-
• Me. --- A..., 5,,
. 'TIM se,...r0c,' 6.---......
1 ..• — —1. • 6.4-56. E ■. ,....x.t.
. ce■-et 5-0
. „
--1 - •-, ' AGRA.. ,,.1
..___.
- - --..__.
T.._ 7 • • • • . .._._ - -
—.---,
•1
1 , --1 ,1. • .,.•
.. _ ._.. ..
li
'. --- 77 .-- , - - - --...--='
EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION
,,:- .. ,•.•.:- -
V! • , - Z..
-0-•
I SDMF-72202 i
Ef CERIPITI3 Mlle tiNVICl2
Blumentals1 6205 Ea. Brown
5une
blirdfilbgalEgg OrA@ Breoklyn COOMI, Knnesola
1612,561-5767 52430
Fax1612/561-2914
k;.''': fo o r r. 6,
t7...‘ 1 % " ; 52
‘-.......,, __-...
I P•v,•lon5
i . 4 •O••!• .12. ; , ,
, .
, I?}
AUTO SERVICE CENTER
- CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
ABRA BUILDING ELEVATIONS
— ..... -
PYLON SIGN / . - - — -
1
- L., '----
-..
STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5
•-• _____.___ _,..-_-,-._2___ ____ ___ _ — ___,.....„-, • - ,.._ , .
:" _--- - • -.... : -f- --- - - ___ ,.. „, _ . .. ....-_ . ____,,,_•. • --
--- -- -.:--.-: -Z--,--:.,.; • 30 ST 11
- . , I
b..
-....'". •-• ----- ■ .----"." ---- - ,.. .„-
..'"..-::. . -- •,-.7 7;. - ....
SCALE FEET
7- -sZL....-..-----------■=1 I '';`, :;;
C,.
1
I I
. f• --------- -. I I • , PRELIMINARY PLAT OF
___ ._•.• — -... : r.......:--- •••:-
•:,. , rzn. e-nft .
' I 1
5 I
CHAN HAVEN PLAZA
1 , 1
\ '
4TH ADDITION
1 : _ ,• ....
. ,
•.„, .
_
- 2 z ,
, 1
— t ,, I, (KM IIMIK NM A MS SWM,
I .1(41.1(410,,. . m t7 M
emo I. ronl•r
I .
;1 ;; • •-• I
- '
.. I
7 I
/ 1 '
'?! • i I
i
-- - i
• I t
.,,„ ."'. , '' s... s.. r...••... 7 -1
I
'-'••• , .
1 ' — II --
— ISS` r - ' ' . " ' - " .
I ., issams.
_---,— —.)... -- -- -- = :as —. — — —,.— -- .7 1 .-- 1 . :::. . I:: . t ittrisi717s:ti,;;;7. "" 0*
/ )% i / 282 j 4
r ,
•
/ ,„,.% ‘:N I ., ,..".L. cT •P'..d w ' / 1 ),
■
. l F,
• . ) :' 7 D '''''"5. 0 ••••••"...d t -
( , .. ''•• • ) ''1,. •' ' 1'' ••• / '7#;.,Z" Waif, c....,,.1
4 e
,
"" P. I i ,
iz
i 'I ., 4 .1 f . • 4 . 1.. i
, ‘, .. , ... / a I, V - .. \ I t, ■ i
4 ,./." 0 •. ., ' t; .
1 . . '1 , 1 maraartuu
,••
,°11 , • i ,., 9 3.,/ ,. ..1 , 4,, ,, , , , ..'oe: ,
t • ' il
1 0. o011.3 - Omotes ...... h shot ...
•• ••••••• •••••••••■ •••••
o...l m,
//
I -.me- • 0.. mist. emtmr.
s. Arbil• 11,$.5 Saw. .1 A ENO h.,
... ' ( .* s .4. \ 1 ( 1 c ,s... •-' 3 -,,,, I
1 •
: r. . y 1 / s. ...... , ..... ,.......,.....,..... 01 a. Pr.I. by tho
S C/ty 0
l ' c • \L ) t '-'-? thabhmsea me W. t.m. IM IN'S No".7
‘7 . I • , jr
G. lo. oast In. of tot i no en as.. woe.. of onno o totor. 0
4
,
' ' 1 1// •mafin 77 sKbAds y
: i.s: .. i F.
I 7. 17.......• rentsefteft INN to M. Mb
• \ \ \ r
--- - 1/ , MMIMK, OM el CNN
..- S. P.m. Ims • 1 Ims
• Ed' I. /0 Arm:
j \ \ I 10.1011 son. loot or O.ONI otne
."----, -4 -,‘ \—, V-..— — — —7 — )--... ----- '! , r
,
2 17.91. more WI b. 0.77117 bob
,
l ' .7- '1' . i : i ,
: ,P 1 cr ' tiln :::: Lt :1.11: LT
" 4■
. r. i
1 ....
; . '. - .no -.-. /13 ' Wily - eets...1■7 ro • , ,.., i ,,,:c.,[ ,..,: 1 .,
• 1 ' ,v. CP . ,
° ------... —_,..-...... nob. „Attun.•
. ' , t , „.•••
2 ,;..
L . • 1.--:- ' -.. -...)- ''....."'"- .C--"- - ' - -- - I ^'.tit■
• ..* .."--,. r - . -----•;;'•... „ ...■"'"' i
------ ------ .
• 1 , I
....._
...x., Nno wenn 7.1.7 , -...-:. ..... .4--
---1 --
Cone Cn. DVS-. . I. • 922 SS , G.'• 1.... _ -
--I-- '' _ 1 MN Mar. MI 0409 c.c./ me PM st.
mimed this ...Lo__ My of
' --- .---- '---- '-'''--- ------ v.7,7 - - -- - 71E s :Am, !slc.ns IC' !. ballE. I*
\... LAKE DRIVE EAST ,r, • It '1! .."'--..'
by ........-... ...:-.....
ni
REVISIONS CERTIFICATION , ='
SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. CLIENT
92.14_471„_ELEy■SioN " : Z ....-- -..-
. • .,_........--..-..___ COO I me • 1.1c1W O. Sarno.* tea ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS
BY 1.1711... ...I ......... :-=
PLANNERS • SOIL OES11■ BEISNER LTD. ) ( LOCATION
CHANHASSEN, MN.
) ..
''',..:$:...' - IOSSO WAVyAT• SI sr.
IMIIIMINI■■•1 MINNETONKA. MN OS3s
■=1.111111111MIIIIIIONNIIIIII on••0...ttneta on.. INN on....
IMMIIMIIIIIIIIIIMINIIII■i fait, ste t..o
S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 61903-002
•
--- --------- -- • — --- •
1111111 MO NM MN MN MI IN all IIIIII MO MN Mill 11111111 MN MI MINI MI IIIIII MI
• MI MI MI = • • OM • 1 MI • • NM • IIIM • IIIN
i 'Il .E.,. , n. STATE HIGHWAY NO. 5 - -`- — ;- n *•
.�n� 9554 Sw .�� r -rar - � ��� -- _. Y� .s'a -_
-� ��.,. - ' .:i) F._ _—,. • - ^ _ ' ,` ■
Tor - i.. t
SCALE to FEET • ti .0. �^' •• I, •• d`i • tn. A' ` —..'. I •
�% _.. _,.. I
t. III 0 1 -'4'7; I
} jr iii GOO !« • 11-1
' 2 ,O EAR I h -- i � ABRA D - I
z ' y' — ,li, .., «. ., -- r° I •
• . r j.■•■ 6 •-•c• t't
` .a..ra Nom___. a e .�. - a !, T . i
f E
4 ��� A 1 '� - /I €:
e. .r r -4' a, i " x / I:
y ,.. o-M1 1 ry t 1
i ." N llj ' •O ' �- j Q 1 /.. • SCHOELL 6 MANSON. INC.
SOW ranel• ..n
�..a Q ® N mtrrOW ^•, • d, Q•' 6205 Earls Brown
- - w M i• __ 6%16 MTEC9 I 1 `. �' � /� � , . 1 .+lame t 6v0.
.Itomm 1.0r =WM. I ..o /, / ■
� ` . D6NVt N ~"a ) t I !�^a15 I 1 erenwhn ONta. Wn35.1 •
ii man N 1010152 - , i t A
Milo. 1510667106 .,
-� ..o-- -- QI6SIK 6 vu 6.60 ; r i I { I
o—.� 6.0606[0 MOM SD. I; �1 ' _���r i./ i I 1612/5111-STST F.111121351-211.•
0000000 MATO.CAMPO moms I .�� L�����.aa��.� _ � �� 11 1 -
^� ,�,� Ir ,� PRELIMINARY GRADING 6 DRAINAGE PLAN
■ I 7 : - ., it � � 141. - _ -. bd. ' _ . . , i/ i s i ., o, o,.ir we o-.., e. o.:. OK
� _r / mac. _ - .. .i --- .. 3>r =__ � .I 1; 4. 1
''� x15. >�- - - 2 1 n ;n It
a.b sate- ■∎v. 2rr '""•;30.10 �. . ` ..— - AUTO SERVICE CENTER
i2' " ^Cann° ' ^ CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
— — — — — -- ...._ �_ Or. — — t i Ri ii3O 6,„,,,.52.„
3
LAKE DRIVE EAST
CHAN HAVEN PLAZA 4TH ADDITION
tM. 6.N N ,M N• 9• n..AN •N . . r.
SMI PROJECT NO.61903.002 SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEETS
----- -
---
_ 1'
0 i i z
o w
x 1
, I g i .
iii
• •i I! 5 f.'
A- n
I t-
W 0 tai
. ; g !i i M.• C.) 1.2 ;;‘,1 II/
- x .
I
, .
xf.4," . ,NI •
- - - - CC Z l e, Pig • 0
a -
N m I 1 A 1
'f9 ,.- la is)
. /1111 0 . , IA :,, , 2 0
M i t i 5 Doi 01
= 1::-11 2
I
g3 :1 _g m i i •- - 4 ° _al: 1- i
.•,,,,,,c 1.) ,
i i 14
si I
i41 & I
? 1 3 1
1
li
-1 - s i
z i
.. li ,‘ I J
a ,.. ., \
a. E
ii
e• tt. \ b 1
.1 . . „,,,.. .. ,..z...?...; -.? '
\
••• ■-•■■--•= n. 0 .„.0 ,,, , .—....:T — -
. ' 1 . ' ^ - • I • 0
. • I ......tai ..„,,,...'''' t X
- •------4— \ --4
..,
.. i l ._________________________
' ' .....„ , "' . 1 1, T . . ...,.. rss ..... "... ''.\\
I
1 I ii i
'.....
...-.. -- :.1....P.1:.1. .1-'1 '
1 ■ ' • I t \ ■ \ SA 3 0
1 N • • -1.,..'.'.:'"' \ '2, • ‘' = •
-4 1 !
I' i■ i - 1 01 I I !
1 ._ _ .- , .............m....m.■., ..,, a ..„. d
' f. " - • N ..., ,_‘ ....- 7 C J.' !.
1 . -r 1 • - ct
, i.,„,..,
.1 !.- 1 6
, 1 . i :I' 1 k • —2 1
1
z ;,, , i L 411, if I .
- 1 ;
1.1! 1,, , 1 1 4,- - i I - -.
;iv I .4 .
a :•• 1 , I ti • , ,,,,..,,e....,...-
.....-., t• - • Oa i" I Q '3
1
1 aril -1 ,`$. 1 1, 11
• . ; 4 i 1 •
'4 it 1 IPM - ' . a:,•kil - -... • 1 i
1 .. t: - - . i 1 . • ■I d
g-'. ;•,d 1iiiq ._ • .‘ i I i r• 0 . ...
I i i j '1! l' ,. . / . .../..,--n-N. •)...,_•-t I i t
. t .> -
3 -. % . .,, I 1 ,: .. :/. ISE
1
- t u 1 't • - ' '7 , fi - ...-,-, w it .
ta „, E ,.„ . A. -..„ I 4:-,
,... r - - •■■■4 • < 0
N. 6-
/
• . . rmt -- I ° )
iii i;, ••• '„'; '; \ • 1 r 8 1.9 . i ''‘ •,. bg
_
ill • o ' '. . l i
. . .„. . 1.1 - - ,.1 ...,
, -...-: 1 , f ;1 / 1 I I, . a • ; ' 4
. n - 13 -I
.; l' 'l I 'pl :
\ ,, ,1 -ii
.‘ ■ ,. 1 '6 - - LA) -, ;Ds )ai k I t
/ - ' -l_ ' i / .-- 1 1"4::: : 11 % i i l f:
S l' 411-1dg J IJJ_I Ii" - 1 ... -=--7-::- -
2 I 01, , '••I 1, 1 --:
- ' I -I_ I ... _ . .. _ _ _ . 5 , , 1
1 'i ; 1 ■ - It I ti I I ... ■'.
t : '' ' ' . .`• ,.., , --- ,. ' dl , /., , S. rs, - ... •
i
...._ ._ , _ _-_ , L
. b •:,\ Iv '.i ,i, ":. .. •, '5 ,,.., I / 1 I "
C
/' 1
I -,-
',\ ',, ,
i: • \ - --i..N. , .. ...
‘
::•,\,,, \ ,\I'k x
. , .1,," 0> 1
..- .. ''', .C.,' ' 1
• S„ ',I, I •„ Ill " .
Vz:• , c r ... 0 ___. 1 ..._...._ _.
4-4 , \_.___(...„....,,,.....„__ ----1
1 i
•
i 1 . 1
\ I
,- •.,:„%
,.....4. I 1
7 1
...1 J
I ,•,..ov ill h
it!
1 I
i 1
i t \
I
. _
I
1
: I
11 g „, ,....,,.
1 I
I — r
V131/3R8
4 11
_....,® . { 4
- 1
I :.., i. __ _ ,..1 ;
•
‘....' 8
0 ia :1`.1.4):,.,1
2 till:
i
It
1 1
i;
•
. I • . 1 . 1 .1 1 11 .1 1 1::•_ cc. C...., e. 1
I -' l- ltr: 7•1 1'1 4. "I imam r: I
it . ..
LI - ;'i 7 - ' • • 1 I 1 , ..i 4.
• r. /.. i i_ •• ii _
I i
, ,1 ."
I
ft ! A.1 I
_.-1 Eif fil
4 p
f'd -ot k . - .,.., .. . • /
' 1 . 4- 9 -t, _ 1
III .I T
,, I 1,--L3-1 1 IL l-
,-t , 4 1,
I 11.1 Li . I .' ci .
1 1 _
I i . '' ' • ' '' j 4 I
... [C I Ltitii 7 1 --- 1 -
4 - 3
I .1 \Ell-
-' 1 ri,•:. •.: iri
- 1--
, . . .
,_. h . ,,l -
i 1
-1-' - \ „ R-
- =,. ,
1iiL • i
- _
- _ - :_i_d , I
_ I I
L- ,...z.
• • i 1
I .
-
. • ...,..::7-
; , I t
r7 r IIIIIIII;e1 1 '
: -
Iii■1111111111115! •
....„1
' I I ! 1 11 -1 "- • • , ' '1 f‘
!-...
, ; • rt . - •
(.....-
I .• !jet
• I 1 • --t--:
' I : 4 - i .1 i ..: L-1
t.11-
- I 113
-.
,1! li-7--itr" wfl
1 r
1 ' , --
r - --.
i In
r >
-, ..
• ' • ' 1 i
I
! 7 1. D.0 •
li c '
. t
, i- .; _•, .4
I - :1 • I '-. I r'
''' i.■ i -
-1 ' t 1
I -lit
• ii El . at
:,;-•
t.....:, ,
•
• - i
- I
It .• .
•
r , ,-i,- : , •
1
1
••4 ri_g_ ' 1 : „..._., , I
i , ' t I 1.
I - I 1
... .4.2..L.E. - ±1: - • - i Ti - "'
• LI 1 ; ! 4 i.:- ,
1 _
iiiiill t .1
1,1_11. 1
PM 1 .
1
I ' 44 - 1...;L: -.1
1 I .d_.:":1 .. i--.1 r 1
'" . -I
-- i i i , i .
. . Ii:i
•
1
I , -
1 1 Ili.
, \.,........L....,. il
. •
,._:
, -1 i
L lill ..-1
1 I ---, 1-; 6 i
,.. .,,,
mins
• .. .
,!-- I-. i 1,
. ---4 1:1 !i — -
. -• i lilt._ ,..t
.. , ,.,..9.1.,
1
:--1--
f - • t 1 _. . : -.. -_: . -. ri . -.‘..• . - .-. . 5 .• . :,..- - - . . . • 1 .
1
. . .. .
1
1-
,
1
I.( ; --: ---...;.•
1
:‘,... -r.....-1„...%.....1
(
, •-s, . ...-.. , , i
1-1
•. , 4.1—,..:•'.'
. .
2 h . •A- !;.....11■........."
. ..• .... • •=-•-• •••1 • • •
. ■
/ i . 4 A IN• i ' 44 1 u • 1
i ■ — ,...:4', ' • '. •
-Z,..' .4.1...i .,..a ' ,'. •
. 7 (li ,
, ,-
_ is , ,_
_
1
t-
. . ‹g , 1 _ _,
-, ,.
s ,
_I., .
,, .. . p..11 '1. -;-•
1
\ : • i',1/4: .
-4
_ ra,
. . . _
- , ■
:,.......•11111r _ -._ .
:..- i , i •
t .
; .
4
' !
. i.
1
. .:. g
. / '.- .-- .• -
• i . _.. -,.. : , ' - . - .: A
1 . • -. * -, , . .
. , - -: • ! - :,. :
1
4 1
• ,, . - 1. •• .-! . , . .
-- . • • „ • ; .
.
•
Ina; . -
y r: -,, it
__. , .: ...,. .!
:77 I , -• . • - I -
t_ . ■ 4
••
,
41 . il
- --
- .7.• ,...... ...,:, . S )5 ,_ . 2 . :.
I
r
..,.. ( • 4 . 7,'' IP . i •
- •••• % 1. I * 1 ■ • ' f ! .• ...__
1 i 1
.4.. .....,.. • 4 t'
..f.b. 4`. - ■I''' 1
_
• .'. 1 . - --' — — - ii
1
. ' • I # •'. / t , ; • _".. ..:-, _
it : I t
, • 41)10\ 6.-
1
I - t-:
4
.. ,7: ., I . • ,. it J ° i ...
- - - ! .
.4 -t Z. . lilt
— .
1 • . --
• . •
- gt- •••.: ' r . 1 -4 % • . ' ■ -) : • 1
51 •- :
1 •
• i ; . / .
. ..
.., • ‘ gilt 4
: : \ s, 1 •
4
. -;.- 7 •
1 7 V N
S . 7 t •
' . ...........7
I ti
; 4 , ,,.. ,,..... ' .Y.5
R I
- :
1
. .
• : .
1 ...
. - .
• '
1 . .
. .
• 14
4 1 r l i t is i fi r p or i f..- . II I . . .
IrA * tr' it '-••■■••••--
' - il
1 i 1 - II 1
:-:. •. I , ei
1 1 ,...: 0 01
ti 4 r ,, II
.1 .
1 , .,
I , 1
"li a t I . •
L vtli 44
4 * 4 j. ._.-:,--. . .
41.
• ,..... . . _
Ill F:
I
2 -$1. ! 1
_
:-.. I— 1. .1
;I-- :)? -Pi 1 Z
.i,'l
I .',. II ' .-.. 7 • . 1 ,. ;
1
A('
11,, li 1: 1 i
1 , - .-ii .11,
, -k,.= 1 :, top,
, ,-,,1 . i-r. :
_
y. i 11 , rk , 1 L
I I
L----, 7---..,-7--. . .
.. / i • Vial t -^ . Mu Nib
_. ....
- .; itilt , I1 i - II .1 lift 7-
1 - ; ,..' .,•:. - - ,,--,
I
. I • • Pttg, I II itiot s V- ,
i thr-441t41 4--
M.
•: • 1
.,t,(-1,11 ..., ,.
1 ; li 1 f - It 1_111 '1.
- 1/4 Ili
. -- • 1 v. ;:
1 .?.
...... ....
1 4 i
i 1 14 - i t f ' .. - ' • 4
I t14114.. V Agighl 401 ..
)(?: -: i ,w 1. II .-- ' • - i-
"IY.%1, • .•:
r 1
11 • • , ._ ,. ..- .. .--.
•--; IC 111 i I . mg 1
.. , (1 1 4
" I R 1 1 - • I
.. —
1 t s 'jil i A
I
I FIV ; •." ' • g
1.4.t. li r a ;4 ' Ti• f . - i
I i i I ih 0 .- ii ...._.1 . 1111
I - !
...„_;:
,• •1 !i fd., 3 , iiitil. 1
':,■ y , CC .. I - " '
I 1 ' a
.-,? :•• Ai .
1 ':i4 p lir ■ ,
fop : .• -;.'
„... ' - ,-....
:41 . " iiiiiii
.:Igli rrvi
I ki p- PP ;- --- • Age,r,
1 :
i
1 1 •
___
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1