The URL can be used to link to this page

7. Planning Commission Request with Study of Hwy 5, Corridor, Planning Director 7 r 1 CITYOF 1 011%1 CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 1 • (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 I MEMORANDUM F -- • -__ '✓ DtA t, _ TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director I DATE: February 13, 1992 SUBJ: Highway 5 Corridor Study - Planning Commission Update I I The Planning Commission was very receptive to undertaking a formalized corridor study. They have asked me to forward their recommendation that the City Council proceed with this work as soon as possible. Minutes of the discussion at the Planning Commission meeting are attached and as I recall a number of the City Council members were present I at that meeting. I I will not rehash the discussion contained in the January 31, 1992, Planning Commission memo, except to note that: I 1. The city is in a much better position to control its destiny than we were two years ago, but; I 2. The undertaking of a formalized corridor study would certainly be an added and desirable tool. I Whether or not the city proceeds with the formalized corridor study, there is an important point that we need to come to some agreement on. The city should consider retaining someone to work with us and MnDOT to refine the Hwy. 5 design and related public space I improvements to make sure the optimal roadway is built. This work effort would be very similar to what the HRA has undertaken utilizing Barton Aschman at the major intersections in the central business district. A similar effort is warranted west of downtown 1 on the new road segment and a comparable work effort is also warranted on the recently completed section from the downtown to the east boundary line of the city. If the corridor study proceeds as outlined in this report, this will be one element of the work program. If 1 a decision is made not to proceed with the corridor study, I would strongly encourage the Council to consider moving ahead with this one particular element as soon as possible. The City Engineer and I have already conducted a preliminary meeting with MnDOT and time 1 t 0 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 • 1 Mr. Don Ashworth February 13, 1992 1 Page 2 study proceeds as outlined in this report, this will be one element of the work program. If a decision is made not to proceed with the corridor study, I would strongly encourage the Council to consider moving ahead with this one particular element as soon as possible. The City Engineer and I have already conducted a preliminary meeting with MnDOT and time is of the essence if we are to be able to provide input and make changes without disrupting the construction schedule. 1 Should the Council support the Planning Commission's recommendations to conduct a formal corridor study, I would recommend that staff be directed to prepare a request for ' proposal outlining the work program and desired goals and send this out to qualified firms. We would then invite them to come in and interview with you in a manner similar to that which was done with the surface water program. At this point in time, I am honestly not sure what the cost of this undertaking would be, but I think compared with other efforts, it is probably going to be fairly reasonable. Based upon some preliminary estimates, a $40,000 - $60,000 effort is a reasonable range. 1 Last September when we discussed this at a Council work session, I indicated that staff would be able to undertake a significant portion of this work, although some consultant assistance was going to be required. Since that time, the work that was undertaken further clarified some of the goals and products of the study and a number of these are, frankly, beyond staff's capabilities. Since that time as well, we have also become extraordinarily busy with time commitments ranging from a considerable influx of new and major development proposals, to work on the surface water program, senior center, and other projects. Additionally, we will have . to operate short staffed throughout much of the spring and ' summer due to Jo Ann's impending maternity leave. Thus, I would strongly recommend that adequate funding be made available so that this work effort can proceed in a timely manner. Time is of the essence if we are to go forward since the Council is aware of the great 1 magnitude of development pressure are beginning to see in this area. As noted above, time is also of extreme importance relative to the city's input and involvement into the Hwy. 5 design program. RECOMMENDATION 1 Based upon the Planning Commission's review and input, as well as the input gained by the preliminary Hwy. 5 Task Force, staff is recommending that the City Council authorize staff 1 to prepare a request for proposals to undertake work associated with completing the Hwy. 5 Corridor Study and plan. 1 ATTACHMENTS 1 1. 2. Memo dated January 31, 1992. Planning Commission minutes dated February 5, 1992. 3. Meeting Report by Barton Aschman Associates. 1 . . 1 4, CITYOF i lir 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 II (612)937-1900* FAX(612)937-5739 MEMORANDUM I TO: Planning Commission FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director 1 DATE: January 31, 1992 II SUBJ: Highway 5 Corridor Study Background /Overview 1 At the February 5, 1992, meeting, Bill Morrish and Lance Neckar, from the University of Minnesota's Urban Design Center, will be II presenting work undertaken by their group on the Hwy. 5 corridor. This work was undertaken in conjunction with a temporary corridor study work group established by the --City Council. Members of the I HRA, City Council, as well as Steve Emmings and Jeff Farmakes from the Planning Commission, were represented in this group. To put their work into context, it may be useful to first step back and understand why this work was undertaken and what lead up to it. II In the spring of 1991, the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan was finally adopted after years of effort. As a condition of approval, at the request of the Planning Commission and City Council, work II was to proceed to define uses for the two 1995 Study Areas which were identified on the Comprehensive Plan. These study areas were located outside the expanded MUSA but represented the next likely II expansions of the community. The Comprehensive Plan left these areas blank, and this program was essentially going to be designed to fill in the blanks. ° ° °- ' II _ -, .: , . _ - 'tea , -:•j;: — ^r''..7,- , .- At the same time, it was evident that there would -fie growing pressure for development along Hwy. 5 and there was increasing II concern among members of the City Council and other groups lead by Councilman Richard Wing, to make sure - that what happens on the corridor is of the highest possible °quality. Councilman Wing had contacted the University's Urban Design Center for advice. At the II same time, Planning staff organized a bus tour of the corridor. Growing out of this mix of issues, the HRA retained the University's Urban Design Center to do a conceptual corridor report to better define peoples interests and establish goals. This work was completed late last year and was presented to the task force and is now being presented to the Planning Commission. The purpose II ip PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER I 1 1 Highway 5 Corridor Study 1 January 31, 1992 Page 2 1 of tonight's meeting is to review this information and, hopefully, make some decisions on where the city should go from here. I The University will have handouts as well as visuals that will be presented at the meeting. I 'ves •: 0 LA •4 �. �,.,. , Regulatory Environment 1 The City Comprehensive Plan contains quite specific recommendations for the Hwy. 5 corridor. Among these are the following: • The Hwy. 5 corridor, vest of downtown Chanhassen in I particular, should not become an industrial or commercial strip road as has been the case in Eden Prairie and on highways in other communities. Thus, the Land Use Plan I was developed in such a way that residential land uses occupied much of the north side of the highway and break up the corridor on the south side in the vicinity of Timberwood. The Comprehensive Plan designated a middle school site at the intersection of Hwy. 5 and Galpin Boulevard. This 1 was done not only because we think it is a good school site, but also because we think it has a tremendous amount of merit in providing permanent and substantial I amounts of green space in this area. • The plan envisions some expansions to Lake Ann Park, as well as preservations of environmental and recreational 1 corridors along both branches of Bluff Creek. • The plan envisions a system of collector streets that I will allow the movement of traffic without reliance on Hwy. 5. • The plan established a 1995 Study Area at the northeast corner of the intersection of Hwy. 5 and Hwy. 41. In large part, from some perspectives, this may prove to be an optimal commercial site; however, it was determined I that it is in the city's best interest to make sure that the downtown is fully developed before other commercial developments proceed. 1 The city has also been involved in a number of initiatives that have a direct bearing on Hwy. 5. These include the following: 1 • We have taken a proactive role in working with MnDOT to make sure that as Hjiy. 5 is extended, there are unique and interesting design elements added to the project. I I 1 • Highway 5 Corridor Study January 31, 1992 Page 5 6. Completion of the analysis and designation of land uses in the 1995 Study Area. Phasing plan for inclusion in MUSA. 7. An extension of the Hwy. 5 design improvement program undertaken in conjunction with the city and MnDOT. 8. Development of a capital improvement program so that proposed developments may be realized. 9. Development of an image and visual analysis /development 'plan. 10. Last, but certainly not least, is a need to coordinate this program with an extensive public information program to solicit their comments, make changes as necessary, and gain their support, as was done with the Comprehensive Plan. To date, the work done by the university has only scratched the surface of these taks. At most, their work has only convered portions of the tasks under numbers 1., 5., and 8. We have come to a point in this discussion where it is necessary to make some decisions as to whether or not we will proceed forward and if we do, how this should occur. As to the question of whether or not we should proceed with a formal corridor study, my opinion is that it has merit and would enhance our chances of getting a • unique and high quality community environment in the corridor. If we choose not to undertake this analysis, we will proceed along the lines established and as we outlined above, I believe we are in a greatly enhanced position of realizing many, if not all, of the goals that might be set by a corridor study. If we decide to proceed with a corridor study, it must be understood that substantial resources in terms of time and dollars would need to be allocated for the study. Initially, when I spoke to the Council and working group about this last fall, I had hoped that we could structure a study utilizing a combination of my staff, the university staff, and a judicious use of consultant time as necessary. Since that time, we have seen a tremendous increase in our work load, not only from ongoing programs, but mostly from a major increase in development activity, and I do not see this abating at any time in the new future, barring some unforeseen major economic decline. Thus, it is highly likely we will have to go out for bid to obtain the necessary expertise to complete this in a timely manner. I also should note that I believe the university staff have demonstrated expertise in this area and that they surely have a role to play in this in the future. At the same 1 Highway 5 Corridor Study • January 31, 1992 Page 6 • time, I do not believe that this is something they cari competently . fulfill all the required tasks in- house. As to the time question, it depends on the exact work plan that is selected and the motivation that is put to this. Time periods anywhere from six months to eighteen months would be reasonable in 1 this regard. At the same time, we should recognize that demands, not only on our staff time but on yourselves, have also grown considerably in recent months. Many of you are serving along with members of the City Council, on the Surface Water Management Task Force, or on the Sign Ordinance Work Group, or the Wetland Ordinance Work Group established by the Surface Water Management 1 Task Force. Before selecting a time frame to complete this task, should you decide to pursue it, you should take your ability to take on extra meetings into account. In any event, we are looking for your guidance and input on this matter. I expect several members of the City Council to be present and certainly would expect to take your recommendation to them for formal action. r 1 1 1 • • • 1 1 1 : 1 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting 11 • February 5, 1992 - Page 21 1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairman Emmings noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated January 15, 1992 as presented. , CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Emmings: We've got the report from the Director and let's hold onto that. II Paul, is there anything in there that you want to talk to us about? Otherwise we'll just assume everybody's read it. Unless anybody has any questions. ' Krauss: No. I think it's all self explanatory. Ahrens: Is there a judgment yet on Moon Valley? 1 Krauss: No. Emmings: What are you waiting for? ' Krauss: We spoke to Roger today and we understand the Judge ceases to get a salary if he goes longer than 3 months on giving us a ruling. Emmings: There was a Judge down...who used to turn himself in because he frequently took more than 3 months to get it. He turned himself in and have his salary cut off until he got it right. Quite a guy. HIGHWAY 5 CORRIDOR STUDY UPDATE - DISCUSSION AND NEW DIRECTION. , Krauss: Mr. Chairman, just to give a little bit of background and then I'll turn the meeting over to Bill Morrish. I think it's useful to go over how we got into this very briefly. This thing grew out of the ' Comprehensive Plan study and issues along TH 5 and TH 5 study area, specifically led to an agreement between yourselves and City Council that you'd do some sort of a study on that study area to define those land uses., We have representatives here tonight from the Mills Fleet Farm that's in that study area and I think most of you are familiar with that. As the summer progressed, largely at the instigation of a concerned Councilmember, we began to look at some of the bigger issues with TH 5 itself beyond that•, immediate study area. And wound up establishing a relationship with the University of Minnesota, Bill Morrish, Lance Neckar and their staff to bring a little bit of creativity to looking at what could be done. The scope of their work changed pretty dramatically from when we first brought them on but the Council established a, I don't know what you'd call it. Sort of working group. It's an unofficial working group that included a couple members of the Planning Commission, City Council and HRA to work and r take a look at this thing. Now all this work is a conceptual study. There's never been any public hearings and there never was an intent to be at this point. This was sort of get our act together. Get our minds working. See the possibility of the thing and it's basically been brought to fruition to the point where you now need to decide if your desire to proceed with something more formalized or if you've got enough out of it oil whatever you want to do. In my memo I point a lot of things that we've done over the last few years. I think you've got a track record to be proud of. All of the things that have changed. All the programs that have!' been initiated. All the ordinances that have been changed...and the HRA's 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 22 been active too working on TH 5 improvements. So there's a lot that's been happening. I think that there's a lot of merit to doing a formal corridor study. There's a lot to be gained out of it. One of the most important things is that you get a common vision of what you'd like to see out there. We've got a tremendous amount of development pressure out there. Last meeting I stuck a map in your packet indicating the properties that have either petitioned for utilities, have come in for development applications or have talked to us and I haven't added it up but it's about 600 or 700 acres, mostly on the corridor. At this point I can tell people, developers that our expectations for what happens in the corridor are higher than they were 6 months or a year ago but I can't really tell them exactly what they are. I have some idea but it's kind of tough to know exactly. So hopefully when you listen to Bill tonight you'll get some feel for what's been done to date and through Bill's comments and from some of the stuff in my memo, you'll get some feel for what could be accomplished. You know, it's really going to be a judgment call on your part, on the City Council's part as to whether or not there's a desire to devote the time and the resources to do it. And it's a considerable effort. Most of you have just come off doing a comprehensive plan. It's that sort of an effort. I mean it involves properties. It involves public hearings. It involves all the rest. We stand ready to do that if there's guidance to do that. But again, I'd like you to review what Bill has and make your own judgments. And with that I'd like to pass the meeting over to Biil Morrish. Bill Morrish: Mr. Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. It's an honor to be here this evening in Chanhassen to present to you what we've been playing around with for the last couple months with members of the Commission, members of the Council and Paul's staff. As Paul said, this has been a collaborative effort between the City of Chanhassen and the Urban Design Center at the University of Minnesota. In our interest to try to really get at the heart of principles for making a community and the discussions we've had about planning and development in reference also to this. What are the features that you hold important in your community that you want to carry through from one generation to the next and by that continuity as things have changed, as cycled up and down... What are those things, the continuity that somehow people can count on. Our interest in the Urban Design Center is of course the physical environment. How can the physical environment work with the economic development issues and the social agenda in a collaborative and equal way to make a framework for development. What we did, and it's very quickly up here in this overlay, is we didn't produce a project or master plan to be voted on but we held a class. A classroom course but it was hard to know who was the teacher and who was the student. The whole idea was to do a demonstration drive of the corridor before you figure out whether you'd like to even buy the car and it's much cheaper to do it on paper than do it in concrete. So we started out with certain suppositions to investigate this corridor area with some known facts. One, the comprehensive plan which we feel is fine. It's good structure to begin with. It organizes the basic land use but• we need to begin to start looking at the physical structure itself and that is what you're now doing in your GIS. Your Graphic Information System where you're beginning to identify those areas of wetlands and topography and we're very interested in that because a lot of what's to be defined in there to help you define what you think will make good spaces. Not only define where wetlands are but those sensitive things or the scientific part of the Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 25 drainage problem. And they began to work with that and say well gee, maybe we can get the water out of here. Get the mosquitoes out and also maybe make a backbone for development and you can see how successful that has been. And cities at that time, Boston, Kansas City, those kinds of cities made that decision at that point. And you are at that point with pieces like Bluff Creek. You're also at that point with TH 5. And though a lot of it, although not all of it, has been engineered and for one time we begin to even look and question at that and should we be looking at other alignments and so forth and we evaluated pretty much that this right -of- way's in place and this right -of -way really isn't too far off where it should be actually. Experimenting sort of wildly with bending and so forth, it actually is in the right place... But as the result of that first workshop which we had where we talked a lot about this and talked about these . photographs which the members of the committee took with box cameras. You can see everybody's view of the world here. But beginning to look at this environment that hasn't in some respects been in the main viewI of the community. Main view of the community has been sort of in this area and now the focus of the community is starting to move westward. What is it going to see? What is it going to be? It's somewhat like this area but! it is a little bit different. Different kinds of growth. Meeting t different markets as we go into the future. So out of that came the notion that out of the discussion that there seemed to be in Chanhassen and the environment issue moved westward. These rooms left o(ier from the agricultural working of the landscape and those remnents of the vegetational zones, that there's some idea of oh, you drive through a room. There's the room of Lake Ann. There's a room at the intersection of TH 5 I and TH 41. You can almost feel that you've arrived somewhere coming from the west. And that there's also this connectivity question that we see in Bluff Creek as a drainageway kind of comes through up. Touches the road and then just goes off. You can pass through it and you can kind of see why Bluff Creek and now I'm going to go past Lake Anna So the connection is made to the vegetation and occasionally you'll see a hardy citizen trying to make it across TH 5. So there's community on one side and community on the other and in your land use plan you're also proposing to put schools on one side and new neighborhoods on one side. So as 'you begin to look_further into your land uses by the comprehensive plan -, you're starting to realize that there's a community that should be integrated around TH 5 and through TH 5 and not separating. You also have the issue of the highland and the lowland. The fact that there's hills up here and ability to see across the highway on the north side and on the south side, you have the land falling away and vistas looking out towards the Minnesota River. But very simply we've called it the Fridley effect but I've been working with Fridley to overcome the Fridley effect and that is a pretty typical drawing of what happens when you put a right -of -way in. An expanded road and everything follows suit. You get a frontage road. You get front parking. The position of the building and then you mitigate, 1 mitigate, mitigate until you get to the neighborhood. Usually a fence. And you may perceptually, the appearance of that road right -of -way much wider than it actually is. So if you go through Fridley and say boy, that road is really, really wide. We took everybody out with these box cameras I and said take pictures of the right -of -way. They took it out of the front of their cars and I said, now measure the width, the actual road right -of- way and it's only this big. But the perceptual width of the right -of -way, I the annoyance which comes with the confusion, the sense of what happens • Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 26 when it's urbanized over a long period of time becomes ever, ever wider. More communities now are coming back and responding to this, especially as they move out of the lower price and first step development. Beginning to push back into this. Now one of the things that's unique about the western area is the fact of these rooms and I sort of hinted at the fact that there's already in the structure, you don't have to go out and row it. A community of open parcels and wetlands and trees which are part of your land use plan so it's not like I have to go out and make these things up. They exist. The possibility of keeping that, you can't change the road and you're not really changing the development as much but one important thing that you're doing, which we'll talk to you in this first drawing, is you don't make frontage roads. You make city streets. And that these road which carry traffic and service this area can be defined not as a frontage road which is usually a very sort of non- descript kind of road. You actually plant it like you've been doing in your main street for several reasons. One to move water along off that road sideways into your water system. Move it away and begin to organize your detention ponding along the TH 5 which you're going to have some because you have all this upland water that has to get through the road somewhere. But also begin to work ' on your development. We just looked at a development parcel the other day. What was the property? Krauss: It's the Ryan property. •• Bill Morrish: And the whole organization of development so that a person who builds a corporate headquarters has a premiere opening facade and you go by and you go ah ha, IBM. Ah ha, General Mills. It's framed by the landscape. Positioned. Parking to the rear but actually to the front because this is a major street in the middle of the city and you begin to create an aesthetic and a presence of the building and the developers within the landscape rather than just to confuse you no signs and parking lots and frontage roads that look like this. Well that's a very utopian dream. That is kind of to achieve and the question is how close 11 can you get to entering paradise. So what we did was to play the game and see if we could do that and what we did was to take the frontage road on the north side first and to take actually a very severe and tight alignment ' to TH 5 and begin to start figuring out how to construct a road which is really extending main street which became known in the group as Chanhassen Boulevard. So as you came down from a new neighborhood in here, you got on this road, you would know that you're really part of downtown. Which is an important thing for downtown as the city begins to urbanize. A lot of cities as they urbanize sort of forget to connect the roads back to downtown and they keep wanting to know why people never go to downtown. We're working with the city of Rosemount, Minnesota. We found out all the subdivisions roads don't lead to downtown. They all led to Apple Valley. So no one was keeping track of the subdivision roads because they were l going to the county roads. Well, they were heading to that K -Mart. And it's difficult to keep track of all of these so one of the ways to do it is to actually sort of make this drawing to sort of remind you and we were 1 talking about again the Ryan property again the other day and just the principle of looking at this site and it's simpleness was able to come up with a discussion about how to look at that property. I think actually as we began to work it, it became a better developable property because the 11 building's have more of a presence to the street themselves and not being Planning Commission Meeting 1 February 5, 1992 - Page 27 1 cut off by TH 5 by a frontage road. Actually the frontage road serves the property better back in here then around in front. So we moved ourselves along this way and looked at one alternative for the 1995 study area. We even played with the Fleet Farm, which we'll come back to-in a minute but with the notion of the road being something. Here it is. It loops into the wetland. Here it comes along and connects into Lake Ann. We also looked at the other frontage road and began to look at how it becomes in II talking with Peter Olin and the Arboretum, the possibility of even moving the entrance from here down to here and this frontage road now becomes Arboretum Blvd., which is actually the old name of State Highway 5. 5o what you have here is a great round for people in the community to circulate in the community and not to be caught up into the State Highway. You actually, on Arboretum Blvd. you go somewhere_ On Chanhassen Blvd. you' go somewhere and if someone has a project here, you know 1555 Arboretum Blvd. and you know 1227 Chanhassen Blvd. puts you in the context of the community. You can sell it. You can market it. It gives you a presence. It also gives you a great race track if you want to have a bicycle race out here. And it can also form a backbone for pedestrian network where people can begin to move laterally across your community this way picking up wetlands. We also looked at a couple other roads which might be developed II as kind of parkways as a development along your wetlands and your drainage areas in here. There's a couple of other kinds of roads we begin to look at but that forms the backbone. It also can form the backbone for a park ' ride system that you have, proposed park ride system here but also the possibility down in this area next to the school. The other park ride system which is sort of picking up this market area here and bringing it, it might be even a loop for people working here and living there. They can" just take it down and come to the Rosemount Company. And it's very interesting the way you have organized your industry down here and the way people could actually not have to drive to work. Live here because they can work here, and I understand you do have a high population that do do that and here is a structure of a system that actually sets that system up. We then talked about the notion of making roads which by using placement ofl buildings, site plan concepts, the preservation of stands of vegetation which most of them exist in wetland right -of -ways and actual planting and landscape architecture of those detention ponds, the shaping and sculpting is what their pond see, sort of shaping them to make it give an aesthetic.. Taking those pieces and instruments, you can begin to start making spaces so as you're traveling along TH 5, development is sitting in sort of a room. Space that you feel or district that you're passing through. Then II you go through a narrowing where Bluff Creek goes through or underneath. And then you come into another place and you don't feel like you're just going through sort of one relentless flow of development.- And actually you've done a lot of them downtown. This just sort of shows you extending II downtown and extending it out here. These buildings are already positioned and the whole idea of keeping this building back you're going to need a detention pond there anyway. And giving this as kind of a premiere corner," you can make a kind of gateway intersection here where coming out underneath the underpass here of the railroad, one could see the stand of trees. This big detention pond which is also to be shared by housing. Once, it begins to kind of make a giant environmental intersection. You already have the components down herewith the Rosemount Industry. This pond. Their pond over here and I think with experimentation with horticulturists II and other landscape architects and even artists now have become very Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 28 11 interested in the artistic merits of plant materials you can create in this detention pond structure. A very significant landmark that might come up every spring and fall that people would like to pass through. And we went all the way through to extending Lake Ann and then all the way up down to the intersection there of Highway 5 and 41. So that gives you a notion that once you're passing through this space, just using in our sort of first pass over, the structure that you have already. What becomes very interesting is what the developer can add to that structure in the way they landscape. The way they do development. The way they position the building to actually build upon that and make them much a stronger presence in the landscape than actually having a large sign. And in looking at the evolution of development in California, which I have over some 20 years, the sophistication of thinking about using the borrowing of the landscaping as they say because that you can't buy it all. It's so expensive. How can you sort of leverage all this landscape that's behind you to be yours. Positioning of the building in contrast to a background landscape is something to become very, very interesting and the building and the landscaping becomes the signature and it's less reliant upon the signs. Also people like to pay more sitting in the landscape having coffee than 1 sitting under signs. You've got to figure out someway to sell expensive coffee. The other backbone which we've been talking about is this wetlands culture which again is one of the major, is probably the major building block of your community and how do you manage that. Now do you develop that becomes a very major issue and not only in the existing structure but even how it's done by development. How this water moved across the development. How can it be seen in the structure of the development as it feeds into the fingers of Bluff Creek and actually one could sort of feel the structure of water moving across the landscape in all development as a way that unifies a city. And that one important connection in crossing of course is Bluff Creek. It's one of the deepest ravines. It is one of the most mature ones. It is also perfectly located against the school. Next - the school with the residential area and the whole development of probably if you're going to make one underpass here that people might go under, this might be it because there's enough depth and height to not see all the way through and have the vegetation go through. We're not talking about height here. We're talking about something that is more like this bridge down here which is on River Parkway. We are looking at a series of bridges. These are also some pedestrian bridges because one of the issues is, and I know you've talked about it here, is this pedestrian bridge possibility up here so this neighborhood can get up to this open space and schools and so forth. But these kinds of things and earmarking those now and identifying those now and developing these things tend, in the right place, you may only have to do one but done in the right place such as Bluff Creek can make that community connection and the whole community can get underneath. Probably the best example in Minneapolis that I can think of right now is Minnehaha, the way it goes underneath 35W. It's really the 11 only major pedestrian break in the whole length of 35W and you slip underneath it without really worrying about crossing 35W. I'.m not pushing public art. That's just a very successful pedestrian bridge. But the 11 water system, the vegetation system, working with the roads and the rooms begins to sort of create this structure of this hypothetical land that is here before you in various different compounds. I've just gone very quickly over this and I thought what we could do is through questions begin to come back to more details because of the lateness of the evening. That's 1 Planning Commission Meeting 11 February 5, 1992 - Page 29 ti what we've done. We will be packaging this up into a little small report in about 2 weeks and we will get you some copies of it so you can see a lo of the more thought that we have in it. Several of the recommendations we made and begin to already talk to Don and Dave Hartley is this question of what kind of information and how you're going to deliver the information i your GIS to help you make decisions about site plans. That's one thing that I think would be very, very interesting. On what kind of data you collect on that. The other one is the discussion of the bridges at Bluff Creek. Who pays for it. I've just received actually this weekend the new Highway Surface Transportation Bill and I've had someone do some research ll back in Washington in Moyahan's office and I have some work on that but actually compounded of it is that 1O% off the top now in the new Federal Highway Bill is for highway enhancement. No longer a mitigation question anymore and right at the top is pedestrianization. Right next to it is wetlands, environment and it's not just one of, you know we'll kind of stay away from environment. They're actually talking about something more like It this and what's very interesting is that I think that communities, a very important piece of the legislation is that it's up to the language of the MPO, the Metropolitan Planning Organization to set the criteria for how this money is to be spent and I think what's important is that the communities in the metropolitan area I think can play a very active role in establishing how that money's to be spent and there are many, many other components in the Bill but one of them is how to define enhancement. It II could be a pedestrian bridge here. That could be a requirement. The pedestrian bridge underneath. How wetlands are taken care of and detention ponds are taken care of. The whole nature of the right -of -way has been radically changed by this Bill and the intention of Moyahan in writing this, as this person told me, was to expand the nature and the notion that - roads are part of the community. They're not something just sort of to pass through so I can give you all some excerpts from that Bill that might" help you also to see that there are some ways to fund some of these - projects. That's a new bit of information. Emmings: Thank you very much. Your input into this process has been I think just outstanding. In every way. I've heard you deliver this 2 or 3 times and I get different things out of it every time. I don't think, in my work, I don't think like you think and this helps, is very stimulating. II I really like it. But I don't know, there are other people here who haven't heard it before and I don't know if there are any questions from anybody. Let's just throw it open to anybody that wants to talk about anything should just feel free to do so. Conrad: It's hard to response. There are so many things. I guess what II I'd like you to do is just work from one end to the other. Not in any detail but other than the frontage roads, tell me what other major, and I see on the east end we start with where there was a bridge. A pedestrian bridge but tell me other major things that occurred as you went west. Bill Morrish: I'll take you on another bus ride. I think the development of this park ride and of course I know there's been a major argument and II somehow would help reminding Eden Prairie the importance of this stand of trees here. Is an important landmark and gateway to your community. Not only from a visual sense but also'a nice environment that was one to get out here on many days in Minnesota and leave here and the important statio 11 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 30 11 to your community for many commuters. How that's designed and one notion had about this was that some of the possible upgrading and further enhancement of the some part of the Arboretum with more formal plantings, flowering fruit trees and so forth might repeat. So whatever's at that end would be at this end and it also might repeat iln other places along the way. That there's this kind of civilized orchard theme that repeats through and oh that's a gateway. The formal tree represents gateway come seasons. Welcome to Chanhassen it's spring. The cherry blossoms. And then this whole intersection here which is interesting and that the fact, I love seeing up this because you can see the church steeple and that wonderful thing you see in the midwest, that..sort of street that goes up there and you expect to find the County Seat. But at the top of the hill there's a church. That counts too. And keeping that and the possibility of developing another formal monument at the bottom and to sort of remind you that that's a point of orientation point of beginning of downtown. We even played in here the possibility if light rail ever began the future and this happens to be corridor, because of the grade change and the separation and the high bluff and low, it's a great transit point. A person could come right in on a light rail and then the pedestrian bridge can take you straight out in the upper areas. Give them the high points of the land. You don't have to deal with the problems of a ramping of pedestrians which is always problematic and even Armegente and the Walker had a difficult time figuring out to get people gracefully up. Handicapped and so forth so --that was a kind of transit...and a linear room with the possibility of shaping that earth so. What's nice is the way the land squeezes in. You kind of leave Eden Prairie. You go through this bend in the road. It squeezes and then it comes to Chanhassen and really come into your major service area and entrance into Chanhassen Dinner Theatre. The next move is this sort of composite wetland. The outlet is in progress out there at the base of your new development which sits up here on the hill. Market Street and the possibility of developing the first kind of wetland you see more of out here as you head out into that more crowded landscape. The other notion is to then continue downtown keeping buildings moved forward so you can keep a pedestrian zone in here. Very important component I believe to marketing and retailing in the future suburban area and I've seen it in many, many communities. The people on Saturday and what do you have to do on Saturday which is everything and enjoy yourself, is to have these areas where you can do a lot of those things and pick up a little bit of enjoyment. Downtown Wayzata. 5Oth in Edina. 50th and France. Those kinds of things. You've got most of it. You can really finish it... possible City Hall Park and making this a very wonderful structure and then coming out into this area and beginning to work with this wetland coming 11 down and the drainage. The next big room is Lake Ann and again this type of vegetation might then pick up what's here and there. A formal entrance. A new entrance to Lake Ann. Maybe picking up what we talked about in the Arboretum. Moving westward is actually playing with the catching of water off the roads and tree plantings. Instead of planting trees in the middle of the road and we're trying to come up with the vocabulary of principles for laying out a road. You can put trees in the middle. You can put trees to the side. You can also put double rows to. one side and pick up that old kind of farm wind row which exists in my home city in California and here. It's a kind of universally known agricultural symbol but also creates what I always remember as there's this county road and then the old county road and it's always between the, this old hedge row. They've actually, you Planning Commission Meeting 1 February 5, 1992 - Page 31 11 might plant across this space. This hedge row which is the entrance to the residential development and then the residential development could have it's own thematic landscape. But this long space would be held together. II Development of a parkway which services these communities with a slight drainage swale in there but•as this becomes more developed, the possibility of moving water from this development and this development across here parallel to the road might save a lot of people some time, money and energy and also into the future create a new parkway out of something which is just a drainage swale now. Then there's Bluff creek. With actually organizing the development in such a way that it could become a small pedestrian node in the park and ride. Here's the park and ride parking area that you walk past the pond, pick up the bus and move out. Pick up a cup of coffee. Some kind of small cleaners restaurant kind of thing. This piece down here and then the school. The school I think is a really good access at that point. Moving forward up into the intersection. Staying away from the lowlands so you can put your playfields out there. Keeping 11 the road down roughly, I understand it's better here in this area and so looking at the site in more detail. But creating a zone where somebody could actually walk across the intersection because it's concentrating the pedestrian activity in that area. People are more aware of drivers when there's people around them and the expectation is I'm driving through a people area. So if you want people to be in the area and don't design the road that way, then drivers are going to sort of drive quickly the way the II road goes. So by moving this development forward is more of a sense of it's concentrated around that pedestrian. You see people walking around the building. So there's a kind of important commercial note serving this II area and as it kind of satellites to this. Then this office park here, the possibility of a corporate park focusing itself around this wetland. One of the really truly dynamic pieces of property here is this hill and the focus towards it and maybe sharing the entrance to the Arboretum. Looking at residential, the organization of roads in and around here and we had this discussion of wetlands. How much private access. How much public access and here's one way of having private ownership along it and then also public access and houses and things organized around here so that people living around here would have access to this wetland so this is sort of like a leg of the IOP but yet it doesn't have to go around. And-then down here, we thought we'd even take the hard problem of trying to figure out how Fleet Farm would go in there rather than avoid it and say oh what we need to put there is houses. We thought we'd just sort of take it on and see the interesting opportunities. One mature stand of trees gives you a landmark. It is a wetland area. Important wetland area. It's also a gateway symbol. We have another stand on the other side as a possibility • of making a kind of hedge row to go through. The development of TH 41, very important issue. Right now it's a very beautiful road as it goes through the landscape but we know once it's re- engineered it's going to be wider and a lot of that vegetation is going to disappear. So if some of it is going to disappear and be upgraded, what do we replace back into it. So, is it possible to develop a vegetational corridor working with the parking lot of the Fleet Farm. Placing buildings in such a way that the back side of it with it's storage areas and it's truck loading behind the hedge row. II The head of the building is to the front. Using the wetlands as formal planting and the parking lot to give it a thematic connection to this area and begin to start talking about the possibility of integrating this use in such a way that maybe apartments over here and here and smaller houses over, 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 32 here. So we just took a quick look at that. And then down to this intersection and the rebuilding of the Arboretum's entrance through some very powerful landscaping. Rather than small signs you kind of have to hit real quick with your brakes to slide in there right. That's your favorite corner. And then actually here is this wonderful display of flora and fauna which could be done and presented to the community and again the major gateway from the west into Chanhassen and the middle point between the lake and the river. And I think those memorable pieces are the things that people are going to use to oriente themselves around in this sprawled suburban area. Erhart: Where in the metropolitan area has this been applied so you can see the final outcome of something? Bill Morrish: I guess I would have to make you a composite. It hasn't bee done completely as a corridor here. I know other places around the country it's been done. And what they've done has, they've done everything. I'll give you the sort of types of legislation that they've done. One could take Camino Real, well I know actually, Palm Springs. They took a major boulevard and they zoned the thing from top to bottom with very stringent design guidelines. Setbacks. Placement of buildings. Materials. That whole thing. In fact the city of Santa Barbara did it extensively fighting off California Transportation Department on a State Highway and it's even thematically Spanish which is, it's Spanish highway bridges which is rather odd but they held to it. At the other end, a lot of communities have described a basic physical features and then established performance standards to meet those so they can have some flexibility to adapt to new markets that come along and they're not interested in being totally Spanish the whole length of it. And those have been somewhat more succesful in one end in the ability to adapt to market but they've had to be very stringent about those landmark elements like the wetlands or how you build right at those edges and site plan becomes very important and site plan review becomes very important.. How the parking lot is built right next to the buffer filter strip to the wetland. Tim Keane: Tim Keane, Larkin Hoffman. I think the closest two examples I 11 can think of readily are 80th Street in Bloomington which runs parallel to 494 and how to a growing extent 76 extension through Edina into Richfield paralleling 494. Those are sort of parallel collector corridors which take I on different personalities. Themes through different land use patterns. Bill Morrish: 80 as it goes past Normandale and the Trammel Crow site and a lot of the things they're now talking about in redoing the land use along that area. I'd say, my memory's coming back now. Some of what they're trying to do in France Avenue, since Southdale's not complete yet. It's a very heavily traveled road but they're trying to do it there. The most closer example is what you do in resort areas along scenic highways through communities. Like what Stillwater's trying to do with it's entrance to the north. Coming in through downtown along with it's parks and down through downtown and out the other end. So there's segments here and there. Emmings: Anything else? Anybody? 1 11 Planning Commission Meeting 11 9bruary 5, 1992 - Page 33 • 1 Councilman Wing: Bill, while you're speaking, that Highway 41 and 5 intersection is obviously going to be commercial. We can make that assumption and living out in that area. I guess I'm willing to accept traffic and accept people and accept the commercial development but there's two factors. Number one. You've got this commercial development. How is it going to affect downtown development and is it going to in fact anniliate downtown commercial business? That'd be the first part of my question. Secondly, is real heavy retail commercial appropriate land use butting up against the Arboretum and Lake Minnewashta and parks. All our II natural environmental amenities are sitting right there and suddenly we bring in a very intense commercial /retail area. And then as I sit over on Lake Minnewashta, basically we still have our night sky. If you build a strong retail commercial on that intersection with all it's inherent lighting, is that the end of our night sky in that area? Are we now in an I/ urban area and will we lose that particular amenity for the campers in the park and the Arboretum? 1 Bill Morrish: If all those factors are important and the city feels that light quality is important, that the predominant value to the community is the dominant presence of the Arboretum. All those factors, then one those need to be stated very clearly and described and then within that context one begins to first make a decision. I think the business one is one that requires a market study and a clear sense about what,it is that you want t do with downtown. I mean I have seen something like this kill downtown an I've seen it work. It depends on what it is and how it's done. And the relationship between those merchants. Is there a solid relationship or are they out to sort of cut each other's throats. A lot of this stuff fails because the merchants fail to come to some common agreement. Within the problem of how you do it, I've seen some very interesting answers. Squaw Pink Parkway which is a very large project in Phoenix going to Scottsdale had a problem with lighting. It was the neighborhood and a problem with the astronomers on the mountains worried about all that light coming off the road, they wouldn't be able to see the planets anymore. So believe or II not the Arizona Department of Transportation and the Federal government came up with a different lighting scheme that throws the light down and it's fabulous lighting and they're so excited they're going to do it all over the state. By taking those parameters they came up with actaully better lighting for the highway. It's a hooded cobra head that drapes the light right across it and you don't have this sort of big burst of light as you go down it. And so it solved both the problems but it took a while. 11 And I think within that context one looks creatively at each one of those questions and begins to work back. But I think for you and probably why there haven't been many of these roads in this area is you're just approaching the question that has to look at this problem. You've been pretty much an area that hasn't had these large things come in and now you are looking at them. I think what you need to do is describe those factors which means you need to have general principles for the community but then you need to start looking at districts. Geographic districts and say, as I call this district out here, the Arboretum district. It has certain performance criteria that we feel is important to the investment the community has made in here and continues to rely upon in their investment II that they have made in committing to build here and live here and pay taxes here. And then you go across to the various different kinds of districts. 11 And so that adds an overlays upon the zoning and they work together and Planning Commission'Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 34 those become your performance criteria to then look at specific design problems. Does that answer? Okay. Ahrens: I have a similar question for the intersection of CR 117 and TH 5 where you envision the coffee shop...area. Is that the northwest corner? Bill Morrish: Well this whole area here? Ahrens: The whole area. Right. That's where the driving range is? 11 Bill Morrish: Yeah. That great little stone wall and everything. Ahrens: Right. Is that considered a commercial area? Is that considered a better land use or is that just kind of a clever way of using the corner or what's wrong, is there something wrong with leaving it the way it is? Bill Morrish: All these things have different time lines. One of the problems that you'll have is when the road is engineered up to it's new standards, the position in which the frontage roads will take will be anywhere from 150 to 200 feet back I believe from the intersection so some of the geometry is going to push itself in. If and when the road, Chanhassen Blvd. or aka the frontage road comes through, you'll be going through that piece of property. Someway up or down. •So what we decided to do is at some, you know we all love this. All the students love this place because anyplace that's strange architects love. Landscape architects love and we'd probably all fight for that stone wall. It's just a great stone wall. A lot of stone. Very busy person. I think if you put him to work on your roads he might just them all for you. Maybe it's just a lot of energy in the wrong place. There are a lot of towns built by mad stone masons who just sort of started making things. All of Europe in fact. They became known as free masons. They organized into political .organizations. Well it's where the pyramid comes in on your dollar bill. Jefferson was a free mason and the theme carries on. So I'm not going to make this person Jefferson and the dollar bill but I think what we began to in looking at many scenarios at that intersection. One we found it's a very difficult intersection. It's a big decision to decide where to put that road coming from the east going to the west as it impacts the bluff. Bluff Creek piece because it's a very mature stand of trees. It's a dynamic piece and there's a lot of debate. Gee, do we put it low, do we put it high? In this case we pulled it high in that we found that by taking that piece up high, that Bluff Creek defined a kind of space and a room appeared. Gee if we take Bluff Creek and kind of say, the vegetation of this site and bring up the vegetation on the other side and work it, it became this very interesting site. Now there are all kinds of things that can go into it. We began to look at that area in thinking about basic convenience level service to that area as your town almost doubles in size probably by the time you get out to here. Where would those things normally occur? So we decided to take the hardest problem and put it in this space here. Also the school drove it a little bit. This whole problem of how schools are not only educating but there's latch key programs. There's all these other social services that schools are going to provide so what happens to the structure into the evening? Somebody's coming home from work on the shuttle or the tram or transit. Their kid can be picked up. Can they do that .convenient pick -up the cleaners and then go 1 Planning Comm'isio - Meeting • February 5, 1992 - Page 35 11 back. So is there a possibility. So we lumped all of that in there to see what we could do even with the park ride and went say who knows, it's probably 15 years away but one of the interesting things right now that you have to decide and think about is where does that road go. That frontage road go because where it goes will affect what you can do with that parcel.l If it goes low through Bluff Creek and comes into the intersection, that site's a gas station. Very easily a gas station. Ahrens: Another question. It seems like a lot of this planning is aimed II at hiding a lot of the development along TH 5. Bill Morrish: Some of it. Not all of it. Most of the stuff that's hidden' is residential which is buffered on the up side. The lower side tends to • look into, a variety of things actually. Some hide. Years ago the room notion. Here actually it's open. The notion of this commercial industrial area actually being part of the park open space. These here. This is open' here though this is more of a screened kind of vegetation. The residential is screened through that. That's one way to look at it. The development of that road. What you really have is a full vocabulary of the different II kinds of rooms and you can change the pieces to create different effects. I think if you went back and had 'more information about the kind of development'a developer would do here, then you could begin to start orchestrating how to create screening where you need -It to create some sense of connection across these large open parcels where the highway goes by and some opening. And actually I just thought of a very interesting case study. I've been working with the Mayor of Rochester and we got into," - he made a presentation about his city and how great downtown was and he said, we don't have any problems in our city. And everybody raises their hands, but Mayor we can't find downtown from the freeway. So he organized" a public /private sector organization of landowners and they've actually organized to get together to make a corridor plan and it's all the businesses along the way. They realized that everybody that goes through Rochester thinks they're trash because it's so disorganized and there's this big beautiful sort of Oz of the Mayo Clinic down there all organized so everybody things they're trash and don't stop. So actually the business community and it would be very interesting to actually work the land owners" on this to start talking about the multiplicity of types of developments they may be thinking about in organizing the best place for that frontage road. Ahrens: Should that be going on now? Bill Morrish: I think so. I think discussions could begin. I mean there's many examples of public /private partnerships where you're not sitting down to hammer out a plan but you're talking about what's possible because there's certain things that you as a city have to do as part of your infrastructure that if you lay in now will be cheaper to them and cheaper to you. And if you put it in the right sort of way, I mean developments come in certain parcels and if you do housing, there are certain kinds of parcels that you'll be looking for. If you do gas stations, you're looking for something surrounded by frontage roads and lots of access. Those kinds of things. Any other questions? 1 1 Planning Commission Me€`ing February 5, 1992 - Page 36 Peter Olin: In speaking for the Arboretum, we're g f boretum, we re very excited about the planning Bill's been doing and I'd like to know what sort of things you are 11 envisioning. Not let this just drop into the waste basket after the great presentation but to carry forward with the plan. We're very interested in being part of that. Emmings: Thank you. I don't have an answer to your question. I think that's the issue here tonight. Are there other questions for Bill? Okay. Address yourself to that Paul. Where are we and what are we going to do next? Krauss: Well I think you've got to realize that what Bill's done to date is a series of concepts that are thought provoking and involve some techniques but this is not a document which he or I would ask you to adopt as a part of the cofiprehensive plan. I think if you want to move forward with this, the clear answer is, undertake a formal corridor study. Set a relatively short time ideally because things are happening quickly but it means devoting the time and the resources to do it. Emmings: And to do a corridor study would mean doing what? What are the steps? II Krauss: Well I tried to lay out in my memo about 10. things, about 10 items that I think need to be touched on in a corridor study. Some of the stuff Bill has scratched the surface on with a formalized inventory of natural features but coordination with land use plans, development patterns; zoning patterns, that sort of thing. We've never officially defined the corridor. You need to do that. Traffic is a real major element that would have to be looked at. Regulatory controls. I mean you get this, how do you bring it about? I mean it's something to have a plan. It's another to make sure it's enacted. You need to develop a land use component for the study area because we've never gotten one. Whether or not you bring it into the MUSA in 1995, year 2000 or tomorrow, we were committed to filling in that blank and that's one of our tasks. The process of working with TH 5 design with MnDot is a very potent element here. I think you're going to see some really nifty stuff happening this summer with the construction of TH 5 through downtown and that's because there's been a partnership between the city and MnDot to do something different. Tomorrow afternoon Charles Folch, Don and myself are going to meet with MnDot to kick off some discussions about doing something comparable on the rest of TH 5. But the HRA spent quite a bit of time and effort and dollars for getting Barton - Aschmann to develop plans of how to work those intersections in downtown so 11 I mean there's a clear city role in that. The image analysis is real important. One of the most important implementation tools is the capital improvement plan. The city is very heavily involved in what's happening on TH 5 through downtown. It's also tremendously expensive. You need to know that there's an element that the city can participate in beyond that we're able to. Beyond that you really want to develop public /private partnerships. Ways of working with developers so hopefully they get what they need out of the project and we get what we need. The long and the short of it is, if there's a desire to proceed with this, I think a recommendation has to go up to City Council accordingly. As for what this will cost and exactly how much time is involved, I honestly don't know. You know other communities have done corridor studies. Minnetonka did one • 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 37 completed after I left the city. Burnsville has done them. There's a number of them out here so there's a number of expertise to draw on. But 11 again I'm not sure what it costs. But it clearly would involve some cost on the part of the city because we frankly don't have the time, availability or the expertise to do it all in house. There are elements that we need to get expertise on and we'd like to keep Bill's folks involved in some of the design elements as well. So I guess if you're interested in proceeding, the best way of doing that at this point is asking the City Council to evaluate undertaking the program. 1 Emmings: Alright, so what do we need? I don't know how other people feel about this thing but it's such an opportunity. I think what Bill said about the fact that we're, I think we're kind of fortunate here in being II able to plan this whole strip before there's much in place that we have to work around. And I keep thinking too about Dick Wing's comments. We don' want to wind up with the west side of the city looking like the east side in some ways. But I think I can't imagine that we wouldn't want to go forward with this but is there anybody, is there any opposition to this thing going forward? 1 Conrad: Well we haven't really, it's my understanding that there's going to be some detail plans that we can look at. Are we going to receive that" or are we just sort of saying it kind of looks nice ?• Krauss: Well no. This is not a document you're being asked to say yea or nay on. It just wasn't developed with that-goal in mind. I think when thl City Council first established this, it was designated as a pre -task task force kind of a thing. To get a handle on what's the possibilities. What are the major issues. Get some guidance as to where you go from there. 1 Emmings: The way I look at this Ladd, and I don't know if I'm off on this but this shows us what we can do. It gives us just a rough, well it's not even that rough- to me. I'd vote for this tonight but it feels like you're making such a big step in the right direction where we haven't done a damn thing before. And so it feels real good to me but still, it's just a starting point and obviously we have a lot of work to do and I think whatr people are doing is asking the City Council if they want to, if the City ■■ wants to get behind taking this kind of an approach to the whole corridor or not. Whether we're willing to devote the time and resources to it that" it's going to take to do it, whatever that might be. Conrad: Makes sense to me. Farmakes: The working packet basically covers what he did today. 11 Emmings: What? , Farmakes: The working packet that we worked with on.the subcommittee basically covers what he talked about tonight and details each individual room and also some of the subject matter that he touched on. The wetlands and transportation corridors. Things of that nature. Emmings: I remember the first time he mentioned driving through the rooms" I remember thinking what the hell is he talking about you know and it's 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 38 taken me some time to get the idea. But when you start thinking about it that way and then you drive up and down that road and when you drive through Bluff Creek, you feel the vegetation come in on you and then you go out into other spaces, they're real powerful images once you catch onto them. Or once you start thinking about them I should say. Farmakes: And it's a good way to assimulate the information. When you look at it in it's entirety, it becomes very vague and this way it becomes very assimable. Somebody without really being good at looking at those plans can understand what they're trying to do with the overall plan. Batzli: I think it would be an opportunity lost if we don't pursue it. I think this is an excellent start in order to control development of that area in a way that we like. So I think we should continue on this route. Erhart: Who determines to what depth you're going to do this study? ...all the various things that we could do. I mean formalize inventory of natural features. You can get, I mean you can get real detailed or you could get by as much as almost essentially generalize this is what we're 11 looking for and this is the kinds of things we're going to require. Frontage roads removed from TH 5 and then just a general guideline. Or you can get very specific obviously and the question is going to be how much money you want to spend on this? Who's going to determine how detailed you want to get? Do you have a range of dollars ranging 'from just broad guide lines to detailed? Every quarter mile by quarter mile plan. Krauss: I'd really be shooting from the hip to give you numbers. I mean what we've done recently on contracts is to lay out what the goals are. Get those to qualified firms and say okay, here's the palate of what we're looking for. Give us your best shot of how you're going to respond to it and then in a competitive bid let us know what it's going to cost. Erhart: But it depends-on so much what your goals are. What are you, do you envision actually going through here and actually laying out all the details that you've listed here in the study? Or what do you think is the best investment for this study to actually get some kind of a corridor 11 plan. Krauss: That's a hard one for me to answer Tim. I would prefer to have the knowledge of pretty much exactly what you folks and the City Council believe is an optimal development package out there. That you've been able to go through a process that you can intellectually and intelligently make some decisions in greater detail than we did with the Comp Plan which was the city in it's entirety. That when we show a road on the map, that the road is reasonably placed and does the job and that traffic is being routed the right way. I mean some of this stuff we're developing. When Bill talks about the water features, you know from your work with the swamp committee that we're going to have very detailed information on most of that stuff there. Now you can take it a little bit further and do. some 11 design work on it. As far as TH 5 itself goes, I see a need if you really want to work it, we need to do what we've already been doing on TH 5 which is have a professional design staff working with us. Working with MnDot to make that highway look like something different. 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting 11 February 5, 1992 - Page 39 1 Erhart: Okay, in the first place, I think we're all saying yeah we'd really like to do a unified plan all the way out. The question is, how far do you have to go with that to get what appears to be a real sensible idea and the question is if you start detailing out roads on the north side of Bluff Creek over there at the intersection of CR 117 and TM 5 and then the developer comes in and says, well no this is my plan and it's all different. Are you going to say you have to follow that plan or are we getting too far ahead if we detail it? Krauss: I don't know. 'I can only give you my own reaction to that sort oft a thing and a road is a major city system and we have every opportunity and ability to decide exactly where it's going to go and the developer has to take it. Now if they can come up with a better idea, I think we've always II been willing to listen to a better idea. Erhart: Yeah I think we would but what's the likely outcome? We're going to follow our own design or is it likely when we get all done 20 years fromll now it will actually turn out different than what we invested all the planning money. Emmngs: But right here is where, at least the major features like the frontage roads, especially if you've got an opportunity to connect one of them into the Arboretum or something like that. It seems to me you've got II to grab that stuff and say that's what we're going to do because that's part of the big vision. I think you can tinker with the details later on but if you don't nail down that big vision now, the analogy is the lakes in Minneapolis. If they haven't done that, it never would have. You know if they hadn't done that in the 1880's, it never would have happened and this is, I don't know if this is really analogous. That's so dramatic and I don't know if this is that dramatic but still there are features there that I'm sure we'd all agree on would be, ought to be saved and protected and used in certain ways and those major features you know have got to be nailed down now. Not later on. 1 Peter Olin: I know it's not my place to make a suggestion but to tell you what you might do. On the other hand, Bill's giving you a whole set of concepts and some idea of what it might look like if you sort of develop ill a certain way but the important things are the concepts of the rooms and creating the city streets and so on. Perhaps the Planning Commission may want to take a strong stand and say we support those concepts and send it II right back to...right onto City Council to move ahead with this. Now again I think Paul's right. It's going to be awfully hard to say how far you can go on some of these things until you essentially get some of those concepts and say we want to try and work with those concepts. That's the ideal and how far can you go with you need to do some work on it so I think it may be limited in terms of you're setting a budget of x dollars. But you could conceptually move the whole thing forward by taking a strong stand on that in the conceptual term... Emmings: Thanks. t Krauss: Maybe if I could touch on one thing. Jo Ann raised a point and I think it's a valid one. We had, I mean this task force serves a good purpose in terms of bringing the HRA, the Council and the Planning 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 40 11 Commissioners together to get to this point. But this was not a P rocess that was designed for public consumption that was going to result in a document that is going to have a significant bearing on people that own property and want to buy in .the future. If this is proceeded with, it would be my recommendation that it be handled in a manner that the Comp Plan was which is that the Planning Commission become the active body in this and you've got the expertise and the ability to interact with the public to accept input and make recommendations. You did that very well with the Comp Plan and ultimately make a recommendation to the City Council. So I think it would be my recommendation that that be how that's formatted. Emmings: So I think what we've got to do or what we should do here is, there are a lot of members of the City Council on the task force and there are some here now. I guess endorsing the concepts and then, or not, and setting up some kind of program to get it moving or keep it moving. Yeah, I agree with you. I think it should be held by the Planning Commission... Erhart: If you're proposing that we endorse the concept and suggest we get moving, I don't think anybody's against it. Let's just proceed. Emmings: No, it's hard to imagine. Do you want a motion? Brad Johnson: Can I say one thing? 11 Emmings: Yeah Brad. Brad Johnson: To piggy back on what, oh Brad Johnson. I think there are a II number of design concepts or elements in this particular plan that all of us wrap into and then if some of us want to see it detailed all the way out, it would appear to me that you could take another meeting and go through these and kind of say, hey these things are and you could explain it right Bill. I like the north /south pedestrian. To me that's a big deal because I know that's what could divide this town and the bridge...ride my bike down or my kid could walk and the entrance to the Arboretum. Whatever they are. There are even some elements that I'm a little concerned about and...how you'd handle the CR 17 and TH 5 corner, that's all green. That's a major decision. You'd have to say that's not only a concept. We would like to support and we'd better get to work on so we have to get control of that...another gas station in there. I'm just' saying there are some elements that are going to be developed very quickly okay and there are some that are just concepts. And so there are things on this end of town, I think all of us developers, that's a nice piece of land. The whole idea is just great. It's going to affect everybody on the corner. Who owns the corner. I don't happen to own it...and I think you can take an element like pedestrian crossing is here. Those things, we endorse that. We endorse this road system out here and you can pass that onto the Council and then you've got to figure out how you that under control in your Comp Plan. Because someplace you get control of that, someplace down the line. My concern because I'm in the downtown, I think we have a primary retail opportunity here. I think all those roads do lead downtown. They don't actually lead to TH 41 and TH 7...that our primary road concerns in addition to what...101, Powers Blvd., 101 South and how they all fit into 1 Planning Commission Meeting 11 February 5, 1992 - Page 41 our community because our population's on the east side and our community runs another 2 or 3 miles that direction as far as the viability. If you see we're going to have sort of a downtown. We're not going to have 50th and France because 50th and France today would never be built. It'd be one big Target. I'm not kidding. People aren't building small buildings anymore because there aren't any small retailers to build them but there 11 are Targets and there are Gateways and people are coming with big buildings. We have to figure out how that all fits In because I hear on one side the image is small buildings. The chances over the next 5 years of building a lot of small buildings in Chanhassen is not very good... But I'm just saying there are some things that are going to happen to the downtown area that will protect that you should probably act on and say these are important... I'm okay with it because I don't have to own it and I think that might be a nice idea. All the gas stations will be over here. But those are elements you should probably get at. Emmings: I think your comments point up the fact that we need to get input from people like you and that's part of the whole process that we went through in the Comp Plan and everything else. 1 Brad Johnson: What you see there is good. And then you've got Fleet Farm worrying about certain things and me worrying about certain things. But as a community person, I live there, that's great. What. you're trying to do II but I think there are elements you guys are grabbing onto that you can say, hey. Of these things we believe the following and you could leave a statement. Do these things. Pass them onto the Council and Paul can figure out how to get them into a real thing. Emmings: But I think the first step here is getting it up to the Council to see if this is where they want us to spend time. Do they want us to be the primary body that's going to do it? Do they want to devote city resources and time to this in other ways? You know that isn't a decision for us to make. I guess the staff is asking us to tell the council that II that's what we think should be done. That's our recommendation but we've got to get them to tell us. Brad Johnson: I was trying to... 1 Emmings: Well, of course. We sure can't do that tonight until everybody' had more time to digest this and I think getting your report is going to be big step in that direction. Bill Morrish: Yeah in about 2 weeks. It's somewhere in the computer right" now... Emmings: Okay. Do we need a formal motion on this or anything? Krauss: I don't know. If you've got, there seems to be a consensus of the Planning Commission. That's probably sufficient. Emmings: Does anybody have anything to say that sounds different than what, we've already said several times? Okay. Uh, I have to go. If you want to continue I'll turn it over to either the next Chairman or the present Vice 11 Chairman. Okay, is there anything else? - 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 42 I Krauss: No. i Batzli: Do we want to approve the By -laws and that stuff? Conrad: Let's do that next session. 1 Emmings: We've got to do (b), (c), and (d) on this. Informational things. Is there a motion to adjourn the meeting? i Conrad moved, Ledvina seconded to adjourn the. meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10 :15 p.m.. Submitted by Paul Krauss Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 1 Project TH 5 from TH 41 to CSAH 17 - S.P. 1002 Page Three Meeting Report contti Jeff Hoffstrom updated the group on the status of survey work on the project. MnDOT Central Office is compiling a set of basemapping files based on 1990 aerial photos. Field work will be necessary to verify the aerial photos and to locate underground utilities. Jeff suspected that the mapping would be complete by the middle of 1992 at the earliest. Since the first phase of the design (construction limits, cross - sections, profiles, typical sections, and mainline construction plans) needs to be done by late June 1992, Barton - Aschman will utilize the information available at-present to begin the mainline design. This information includes basemapping from 1985 aerials and surveyed cross - sections; a list of the required items was submitted by Barton - Aschman to Mike Spielmann. Design of the TH 5 cross roads will not commence until the geometric layout is approved by Chanhassen. Chanhassen staff were asked to evaluate their growth potential and capacity needs with respect to the crossroads, detached frontage roads, and overall roadway network within approximately three months. This will allow Barton - Aschman to complete construction limits for the project by June 1992 so the right -of -way • acquisition process can begin within the corridor. The current letting date for the project is February 1996. The group agreed that project meetings will be held on an as- needed basis. Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc. 111 Third Ave South • Minneapolis, MN 55401 • (612) 332-0421 BA will proceed in reliance on this report. Any discrepancies should be brought to our attention in writing within (7) days. Planning Commission Meeting February 5, 1992 - Page 42 Krauss: No. 1 Batzli: Do we want to approve the By -laws and that stuff? Conrad: Let's do that next session. Emmi ngs : We've got to do (b) , (c) , and (d) on this. Informational things. Is there a motion to adjourn the meeting? Conrad moved, Ledvina seconded to adjourn the. meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m.. 1 Submitted by Paul Krauss Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 1 II ' • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Project TH 5 from TH 41 to CSAH 17 - S.P. 1002 II Project No. 2685 - - Date February 14, 1992 By James Unruh II Meeting Report MnDOT Golden Valley e Meeting Date 2/6/92 ' Meeting Location M y 9 Conference Room 3 IIIIMMMMIMMMMIIIMMINIMMOMP II Participants Copies to: Mike Spielmann, MnDOT Final Design SW Transportation Coalition Board 1 Evan Green, MnDOT Preliminary Design Roger Gustafson, Carver County Jeff Hoffstrom,.MnDOT Surveys Barry Warner, Barton - Aschman Paul Krause, Chanhassen John Mullan, Barton - Aschman II Chuck Folch, Chanhassen Dave Warzala, Barton - Aschman James Unruh, Barton - Aschman II Summary 1 The meeting was held to initiate the final design phase of the TH 5 reconstruction project from TH 41 to CSAH 17. The items of discussion were as follows: Evan Green noted that the geometric layout for the project was approved by MnDOT in March 1989, but city staff did not take the layout to the Chanhassen City Council for approval. The city did approve an earlier concept however. Evan pointed out that several of the intersections shown on TH 5 within the project limits will be new intersections. Their locations were based on an II even spacing between the intersections and on the future Chanhassen street system in the area. Paul Krause noted that development interest along the project has been very 1 high, especially since the acceleration of the TH 5 reconstruction projects in Eden Prairie and near downtown Chanhassen. Paul also noted that the 1990 census data for population and employment for Chanhassen and Chaska has been significantly higher than had been projected by the Metropolitan Council. The traffic volume projections for TH 5 used by II MnDOT were based in part on the Metropolitan Council projections. A recent traffic study projected significantly higher traffic volumes along TH 5 than were used by MnDOT. An additional change from the MnDOT layout is that the current Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan shows detached frontage roads along both sides of TH 5. . RECEIVED 1 FEB 1 81992 c(t t ur .Jt'1HlvriASSEN Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc. 111 Third Ave South • Minneapolis, MN 55401 • (612) 332 -0421 BA will proceed in reliance on this report. Any discrepancies should be brought to our attention in writing within (7) days. I/ .I . II Project TH 5 from TH 41 to CSAH 17 - S.P. 1002 Page Two I Meeting Report Paul's comments led to a lengthy discussion on how to resolve the differences between the 1989 MnDOT plan and Chanhassen's plans along the corridor. Evan j agreed that one or more of the new intersections shown on MnDOT's plan could be eliminated if the capacity of the other intersections is increased and the detached frontage road system incorporated. Evan will review the current II traffic projections along TH 5 before any changes are made to the MnDOT plan. The revised traffic volumes will also be needed for the pavement type selection process. 1 Chanhassen is planning to utilize the area in the southeast quadrant of the TH 5 /CSAH 19 intersection for a junior high school. Evan cautioned that Chanhassen should not transfer the ownership of the land to the school II district until the TH 5 right -of -way takings are completed. This could potentially constitute a 4(f) modification to the EA if ownership were transferred to the school district without first dedicating the required II right -of -way. It was noted that right -of -way will be required from the parcel under consideration. II With the proposed junior high school and an extensive proposed pedestrian trail system to the south of TH 5, Chanhassen would like to the proposed pedestrian trail cross under TH 5 via a bridge structure rather than a box culvert. The likely location of the trail crossing is in the vicinity of II Bluff Creek. Paul will investigate the possibility of using funds designated for pedestrian improvements in the recent Federal Surface Transportation Bill. II Regarding the pedestrian trail along the north side of TH 5, Chuck Folch has asked Dennis Wildermuth (MnDOT construction inspector) and Schafer Contracting to extend an 8 -foot trail from CSAH 17 to the Lake Ann Park entrance as an amendment to the S.P. 1002 -51 (TH 5 from CSAH 17 to Dakota Avenue) II construction contract. The preliminary and final design plans showed a short connection to the existing 4 -foot trail in the northwest quadrant of the TH 5/ CSAH 17 intersection. II Evan noted that the trail along the north side of TH 5 within Lake Ann Park will have to be constructed by Chanhassen. Evan also noted that the new TH 5 II lanes are proposed to be on the south side of the existing lanes to eliminate any impacts to Lake Ann Park. A special design (urban) may be required along the south side of TH 5 to minimize impacts to the mini - storage and Prince's Paisley Park Studio properties. II Paul suggested that Chanhassen may want to incorporate some special median treatments into the section of TH 5 from TH 41 to CSAH 17 as was done in the 11 TH 5 median at Market Boulevard and Great Plains Boulevard. However, it was noted that a depressed median section is currently shown in the preliminary TH 5 design plan. Incorporation of dual left -turn lanes on TH 5 may require a II raised median, but the increased construction cost of the project, mainly for an enclosed storm drainage system, would be significant. 1 Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc. 111 Third Ave South • Minneapolis, MN 55401 • (612) 332 -0421 BA will proceed in reliance on this report. Any discrepancies should be brought to our attention in writing 1 within (7) days. 1 Project TH 5 from TH 41 to CSAH 17 - S.P. 1002 Page Three Meeting Report cone 1 Jeff Hoffstrom updated the group on the status of survey work on the project. MnDOT Central Office is compiling a set of basemapping files based on 1990 ' aerial photos. Field work will be necessary to verify the aerial photos and to locate underground utilities. Jeff suspected that the mapping would be complete by the middle of 1992 at the earliest. Since the first phase of the design (construction limits, cross - sections, profiles, typical sections, and mainline construction plans) needs to be done by late June 1992, Barton - Aschman will utilize the information available at. present to begin the mainline design. This information includes basemapping from 1985 aerials and surveyed cross - sections; a list of the required items was submitted by Barton - Aschman to Mike Spielmann. Design of the TH 5 cross roads will not commence until the geometric layout is approved by Chanhassen. Chanhassen staff were asked to evaluate their growth potential and capacity needs with respect to the crossroads, detached frontage roads, and overall roadway network within approximately three months. This will allow Barton - Aschman to complete construction limits for the project by June 1992 so the right -of -way acquisition process can begin within the corridor. The current letting date for the project is February 1996. 1 The group agreed that project meetings will be held on an as- needed basis. 1 r 1 1 i 1 11 • 1 Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc. 111 Third Ave South • Minneapolis, MN 55401 • (612) 332 -0421 BA will proceed in reliance on this report. Any discrepancies should be brought to our attention in writing within (7) days.