Loading...
1i Approval of MinutesCHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION JUNE 1, 1999 Mayor Mancino called the work session to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Mancino, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Engel, and Councilwoman Jansen MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Senn STAFF PRESENT: Scott Botcher, City Manager; Todd Gerhardt, Assistant City Manager; Anita Benson, City Engineer; and Charles Folch, Public Works Director. PUBLIC WORKS EXPANSION The presentation began at 7:00 p.m. with Public Works Director, Charles Folch, providing the City Council with a brief history of the Public Works Building Expansion issue including the facility needs study completed last fall. Folch then discussed the pre-design schematic plans which had been prepared by the consultant Amcon CM. Folch discussed the primary reconstruction and expansion elements to the Administrative/Support, Repair, and Vehicle/Equipment/Materials Storage Areas of the facility. Folch then discussed other general design considerations, including a new roof for the entire building, a new front mansard over the administrative area, and new phone and computer system upgrades. Todd Christopherson of Amcon Corporation then provided a presentation of a proposed project schedule and estimated costs from the pre-design schematics. Following some discussions, City Manager, Scott Botcher then inquired from the Council as the direction or next steps that should be taken. It was concluded that the phone and computer system upgrades are issues which will need to be integrated with forthcoming system improvements proposed for City Hall. Therefore, the phone system and computer system issues will be discussed in more detail with the Council in the near future. The Council concluded by directing the City Manager to meet with the Public Works Director and the Finance Director to put a financing package together for the project and bring back to City Council for review and consideration. TH 101. PROJECT COMMUNICATION Roger Gustafson, Carver County Public Works Director, gave an update on the status of the trunk highway turnback agreement between MnDOT and Carver County. Both MnDOT and Carver County are currently drafting a turnback agreement for Trunk Highway 101 north of Highway 5. Further, Carver County will continue to work with MnDOT on the turnback of Trunk Highway 101 south of Trunk Highway 5. It is expected the turnback agreement between MnDOT and Carver County for TH 101 north of TH 5 may take up to six months to process. Rather than wait until the turnback agreement is fully executed between MnDOT and Carver County, Council provided staff with direction to proceed with the public involvement process as previously approved providing the jurisdictional status of TH I01 be conveyed to all residents. City Council Work Session June 1,1999 Page 2 SET BUDGET GOALS FOR 2000 City Manager Botcher presented his request to the council seeking guidance so staff may begin preparing budget requests for the Fiscal Year 2000 Municipal Budget. Following discussion, it was the consensus of the group that while the city may certainly utilize the strategy of publishing the maximum allowable levy as a part of the Truth in Taxation notice, that at the same time staff was directed to prepare budgets with a certified levy increase above Fiscal Year 1999 of 3.5% to 4%. It was mentioned that with the growth in the community (which has yet to be certified by the county), it is very possible that a 3.5% to 4% growth in levy may in fact result in a tax rate decrease for our taxpayers. It was also mentioned that the HACA credits will probably be reduced from last year and that this would be taken into account while generating budget figures. Additionally, a discussion was held regarding the availability and utilization of alternative revenue sources. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS There were no miscellaneous items discussed. Mayor Mancino adjourned the work session meeting at 8:30 p.m. Submitted by Staff Prepared by Gina Burmeister 2 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION JUNE 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Councilman Senn and Councilman Labatt. Councilman Engel arrived at the end of the work session. COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Mancino and Councilwoman Jansen STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Anita Benson, Charles Folch, Cindy Kirchoff, Kate Aanenson, Roger Knutson, Phil Gravel, Bonestroo and Brad White, First Systems Technology CONSENT AGENDA: A. AWARD OF BID FOR INFILTRATION/INFLOW DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 98-2. No questions were asked on this item. B. ACCEPT UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS FOR LOT 5~ BLOCK 1~ SUN RIDGE~ PROJECT 97-19. Councilman Labatt asked if the punch list had been completed on this project. Anita Benson stated that it had. C. FAMILY OF CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH ADDITION: FINAL PLAT AND APPROVE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AND PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS, PROJECT 99-10. Councilman Labatt asked if this was the new church site. Staff stated that it was the new site. Kate Aanenson corrected the Development Contract to clarify the zoning for the piece should be IOP, not commercial industrial. D. UPDATE ON Y2K ASSESSMENT FOR PUBLIC WORKS~ AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF SPECIFICATIONS FOR NEEDED REPAIRS. Acting Mayor Senn asked if this request was part of the Y2K budget. Charles Folch said no, that he thought additional requests would be coming out of the contingency fund. Acting Mayor Senn stated that he thought any additional requests for Y2K items that were not in the budget would be discussed by the Y2K Task Force and look for their recommendations. Todd Gerhardt asked Charles Folch to clarify what his request for public works included. Brad White from First Systems Technology was available for questions. He stated that the panels would take 4 to 8 weeks to build once plans had been prepared and approval granted. Acting Mayor Senn asked about the balance in the contingency fund. Todd Gerhardt stated that he would get the list from Richard Rice and compare it to the funds available in the contingency fund and prioritize the list. It was decided this item should be tabled. City Council Work Session -June 14, 1999 F. APPROVE PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS; AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR LAKE DRIVE WEST STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT 98-16. No questions were asked on this item. G. CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 7TM ADDITION~ EDEN TRACE CORPORATION: FINAL PLAT AND APPROVE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AND CONSTRUCTION PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS, PROJECT 98-12. Anita Benson passed out a handout with the actual bid prices that had been received from the developer after the packets had gone out. Acting Mayor Senn questioned why the administration fees were so high compared to the total amount. Anita Benson clarified the fees. Kate Aanenson stated that the fee was based on per acre. H. APPROVE SIGNAL JUSTIFICATION REPORT~ AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS FOR TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT TH 41 & 82rqD STREET WEST~ PROJECT 97-1B-3. No questions were asked on this item. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 3~ CENTURY BOULEVARD STREET/UTILITIES (82ND STREET NORTH TO COULTER BOULEVARD)~ PROJECT 97-1A {98-1). Councilman Labatt asked where this segment of road was exactly located. Acting Mayor Senn asked where this project was coming in budget wise, over or under budget. Anita Benson stated it was probably going to come in slightly over budget. Acting Mayor Senn asked where the money for the overage was going to come from. Anita Benson stated that it was over what was budgeted but not over what was available for the project. VILLAGES ON THE PONDS 4TM ADDITION~ AUSMAR~ LLC: FINAL PLAT AND ADDENDUM C TO DEVELOPMENT/PUD AGREEMENT. NO questions were asked on this item. K. VILLAGES ON THE PONDS 5TM ADDITION, AUSMAR~ LLC: FINAL PLAT AND ADDENDUM D TO DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT/PUD AGREEMENT. Councilman Labatt asked for clarification that this item was pertaining just to the land and not the site plan. Kate Aanenson said that is was not the site plan. L. APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE~ CHANHASSEN ROTARY CLUB~ FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION. No questions were asked on this item. M. APPROVE RESOLUTION EXERCISING LOCAL LEVY OPTION, 2000 TRANSIT SERVICES. City Council Work Session - June 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn asked how this request compared to last year. Todd Gerhardt stated that it was approximately $55,000 more than last year. Acting Mayor Senn questioned why expenses were increasing dramatically and asked if this item could be tabled to get additional information. Todd Gerhardt stated that the item needed to be acted on by the 30th of June, so it could go onto the next City Council agenda on June 28th. N. APPROVAL OF BILLS. No questions were asked on this item. O. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Acting Mayor Senn stated that he would make correction to the Minutes from the May 17, 1999 City Council work session at the regular meeting. He asked why the Memo was attached to the Minutes and if it could be removed. Todd Gerhardt stated that it could. REVOCATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, TEMPORARY SALES TRAILER, KERR COMPANIES. No questions were asked on this item. Q. ESTABLISH PUBLIC HEARING FOR ASSIGNMENT OF CABLE TV FRANCHISE FROM TRIAX MIDWEST ASSOCIATES, L.P. TO MEDIACOM LLC. Acting Mayor Senn asked when the City Council would get the answers to the questions they had asked. Todd Gerhardt stated the one answer had been received. Acting Mayor Senn asked that the City Council have all the answers to their questions before holding the public hearing. 2. PROPOSAL TO REALLOCATE 1997-98 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG FUNDS FROM HOUSING/HOME OWNERSHIP TO LAND ACQUISITION. Kate Aanenson explained this proposal to the Council. There were no questions asked. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAGE AND STRIPING REQUEST EVALUATION ON LAKE LUCY ROAD, PROJECT 97-5. No questions were asked on this item. REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 19,490 sO. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 3~ BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER 3RD ADDITION; ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE WEST, DOVER BUILDING D. GREIG SHEPHARD. No questions were asked on this item. REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR TWO 19,632 SQ. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS TO BE LOCATED ON LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN LAKES City Council Work Session - June 14, 1999 BUSINESS PARK 7TM ADDITION; LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE WEST~ MONK PROPERTIES, EDEN TRACE CORPORATION. No questions were asked on this item. e REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 48~565 SQ. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 3, BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 7TM ADDITION~ LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE WEST, CHAN LAKES LLP~ EDEN TRACE CORPORATION. No questions were asked on this item. ge REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR AN 18,388 SQ. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 4, BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 7TM ADDITION; LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE. WEST, CHAN LAKES PARTNERSHIP LLP, EDEN TRACE CORPORATION. NO questions were asked on this item. e REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 9,800 SQ. FT. SWIM SCHOOL; LOCATED ON OUTLOT G, VILLAGES ON THE POND 6TM ADDITION~ ,CORNER OF GRANDVIEW ROAD AND LAKE DRIVE, JON FOSS SWIM SCHOOL. Kate Aanenson explained the process that this site plan has been through with the design of the building and discussions with the Planning Commission and applicant. Acting Mayor Senn questioned whether the design fit with the Villages concept. Councilman Engel expressed concern about the building fitting in with the Villages concept also. Councilman Labatt asked about the air exchange system and if chlorine odor would be emitted into the adjoining neighborhood. The work session meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt Assistant City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 4 ' CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING JUNE 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Mayor Senn, Councilman Engel, and Councilman Labatt COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Mancino and Councilwoman Jansen STAFF PRESENT: Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Anita Benson, Kate Aanenson, Cindy Kirchoff, and Phil Gravel, Consultant APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the agenda as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: b. Resolution #99-46: Accept Utility Improvements for Lot 5, Block 1, Sun Ridge, Project 97-19. d. Family of Christ Lutheran Church Addition: 1) Final Plat Approval 2) Approve Development Contract as amended by staff, and Plans and Specifications, Project 99- I0. do Table to June 28, 1999 City Council meeting the Update on Y2K Assessment for Public Works; Authorize Preparation of Specifications for Needed Repairs. Resolution #99-47: Approve Plans & Specifications; Authorize Advertising for Bids for Lake Drive West Street & Utility Improvements, Project 98-16. g. Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition, Eden Trace Corporation: 1) Final Plat Approval 2) Approve Development Contract and Construction Plans & Specifications, Project 98-12. Approve Signal Justification Report; Authorize Preparation of Plans & Specifications for Temporary Traffic Signal at TH 41 & 82na Street West, Project 97-1B-3. Resolution #99-48: Approve Change Order No. 3, Century Boulevard Street/Utilities (82nd Street North to Coulter Boulevard), Project 97-1A (98-1). City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 j. Villages on the Ponds 4"' Addition, AUSMAR, LLC: 1) Final Plat Approval 2) Approve Addendum C to Development Contract/PUD Agreement k. Villages on the Ponds 5th Addition, AUSMAR, LLC: 1) Final Plat Approval 2) Approve Addendum D to Development Contract/PUD Agreement Approval of Temporary On-Sale Liquor License, Chanhassen Rotary Club, Fourth of July Celebration. Table to the June 28, 1999 City Council meeting the Resolution Exercising Local Levy Option, 2000 Transit Services. n. Approval of Bills. Approval of Minutes: City Council Work Session Minutes dated April 19, 1999 City Council Work Session Minutes dated May 24, 1999 City Council Minutes dated May 24, 1999 Receive Commission Minutes: Planning Commission Minutes dated May 19, 1999 po Resolution #99-49: Revocation of Conditional Use Permit, Temporary Sales Trailer, Kerr Companies. qo Establish Public Hearing for Assignment of Cable TV Franchise from Triax Midwest Associates, L.P. to Mediacom LLC Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. VISITOR PRESENTATION: None. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSAL TO REALLOCATE 1997-98 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG FUNDS FROM HOUSING/HOME OWNERSHIP TO LAND ACQUISITION. Kate Aanenson: In 1997-98 we were allocated $50,000, a total of $50,000 for... We did not receive money for 1998-99. We had programmed that money for home acquisition...and the local bank the last couple years to try to make this deal happen. We've had some difficulty in doing that. Last year we programmed out 99-2000 dollars for land acquisition for relocation of homes that we own and also working with Habitat for Humanity. That $50,000 will not go too far in a lot acquisition so working with Hennepin County and the fact that we haven't been able to use that previous year's dollars, that we would recommend and they would support, reallocating 97-98 dollars to land acquisition. There is a resolution attached that we're recommending you approve for reallocation. Acting Mayor Senn: Any discussion? If not, could I have a motion. 2 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Councilman Labatt: Motion to approve. Councilman Engel: Second. Resolution #99-50: Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve that the 1997-98 CDBG funding of $50,729 be reallocated for land acquisition for affordable housing. All voted in favor and the motion carried. TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAGE FOR STRIPING REQUEST EVALUATION ON LAKE LUCY ROAD~ PROJECT 97-5. Anita Benson: As this traffic analysis was done for a four way stop on Lake Lucy Road in response to a petition received from resident in the Woodridge Heights subdivision. And per Council direction. Acting Mayor Senn: Is there anybody here from Lake Lucy Road tonight? Let's see here. We've already had the hearing and stuff on this I believe, correct? Audience: I'm sorry? Acting Mayor Senn: No, I'm just asking Anita a question. Anita Benson: Mark ifI could, I will elaborate a little further on the findings of the traffic study. Acting Mayor Senn: Do you want to go into that first'then? Okay. Anita Benson: We did collect traffic volumes for the intersection April 29th through April 30th and did perform a traffic analysis to determine whether a stop sign was warranted at the intersection or not. The results of the traffic analysis indicated that no warrants were met and that indeed a stop sign is not needed at the intersection. The function of a stop sign, just so everyone is aware, is to assign right-of- way at an intersection. It has been shown in many traffic studies to be ineffective to control speed which I believe was one of the concerns of the residents. And since the concerns of the neighborhood are primarily with the speed, the traffic travels on Lake Lucy Road and the safety of the crossing at Manchester Drive taxes the trail on the north side of Lake Lucy Road, I recommended that a double yellow, no passing zone striping be reinstalled along Lake Lucy Road to provide for the 8 foot parking lane which was previously acted on on the south side. Also that a crosswalk be installed on the east side of the intersection of Manchester. Just an update for Council. The striping has been installed for that crosswalk and the signing is in the process of being installed. Also recommend that public safety provide additional enforcement of the 30 mph speed limit on Lake Lucy Road and I guess as a closing comment, it's important to remember that this is a collector roadway. It's function is to carry higher volumes of traffic and as such the installation of a stop sign would be counter productive to it's function in the city's transportation system. Thank you. Acting Mayor Senn: Any questions for staff?. Councilman Engel: None. Acting Mayor Senn: Questions? Would you, you have some comments you'd like to make? City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Larry Marty: I'm Larry Marty. I'm a resident on Lake Lucy Road, 2117 Lake Lucy Road. In reviewing the data that was collected, first of all I guess the, when I reviewed the information it said Tuesday, April 29t~' through Thursday, April 30th, which first of all raised a couple of concerns because first of all 29t~ and 30th is two days and this is indicating that it was Tuesday through Thursday, which I'm confused as to how long the study was actually done. From my college days and taking statistics I understood that you need to get a very serious amount of data before you can even determine a baseline. And two days of data on traffic that varies throughout the day over a week, is not sufficient enough data to make this determination. Also wanted to point out that the 29th and 30th were not Tuesday and Thursday, so the dates are incorrect. I think the data itself, even when we understood about talking about this intersection, was that we might not meet the criteria, whatever that criteria was and now when we saw this we see the criteria. That we might not necessarily meet the criteria. But we think because of several of the other issues, this one deems exception. Our concern is certainly with speed but it's more for the protection of the children in the neighborhood. This neighborhood is new. It's a little over a year old. We have over 55 kids in the neighborhood to date and the neighborhood is not complete. This particular intersection is where the school pick-up is for the school buses. For students, 5 to 15 years of age. The path that exists throughout the neighborhood to go up to the Minnetonka Middle School West is on the north side. Everyone who primarily the majority of the neighborhood is on the southern side of Lake Lucy and therefore would need to cross the road to that path. And I see that there's been a crosswalk put in which we appreciate, but that's really a very small band aid approach to it. It will only indicate where our kids will be hit when the cars come through the intersection in my opinion. The traffic there as posted at 30 mph. The traffic exceeds that quite exceptionally. The fact that it does have double lines...that it will also encourage traffic to go at a faster pace. The fact that the double lines there are to, really for the intent of to discourage passing scares me a little bit. That anybody would even consider passing in that section of road, especially with or without those lines. I understand that it is a collector road and that the volume of that road will be higher. We understood that when we purchased our home. But this is one stop sign where it is an intersection. This is the highest point of that road coming from either direction, from the east or the west. The visibility is limited because of the height of the road and coming from the east to the west, you're approaching from a curve. And from the east, the elevation so it's a very poor visibility for children that might be in the crosswalk or crossing it there. A lot of the information that was in here talks about the inconvenience ora stop sign. What I guess I'm trying to look at is not the inconvenience of stopping of traffic once between Galpin and Highway 41. It's not like there will be a series of stop signs through there. It will be a way to protect the children and keep them much safer. The chance of people, as it states in here about being inconvenienced and people not respecting the stop sign, I disagree with. People may roll through stop signs. People do that all the time but I would rather have a chance of a child potentially being hit by a car rolling through a stop sign than a car speeding at 35 or 40 mph as we commonly see through our neighborhood. All of this together talks about the data and I guess I want to get outside the data. This is a collector road. We know traffic over the years, and as this development grows, will continue to get higher. So that's the reason you want to put the stop sign in now so that you don't deal with the issue down the road or we don't have to come back or we don't have to potentially even deal with the death or an injury, a serious injury of an individual or child. We've seen, with all the data here, we've seen the data put down but we haven't seen enough data collected. If you want to go by data, we haven't seen data collected. It's in the morning. It's 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. It's 3:00 to 6:00 p.m. is when the heavy times are. And on Saturdays. Saturdays are an extreme amount of traffic. There are a lot of parents that rush their kids up to the Middle School because they're late for soccer practice. They're late for cross country. They're late for golf so they're rushing up there. They know that. They understand that. They wouldn't certainly be inconvenienced to the point of dealing with a stop sign. I guess my last point is the fact that we also look at the speed and to my knowledge that there's been no speed tests or measurements done. We do occasionally see a patrol car through the neighborhood which we're appreciative for. We'd like to see more of it. We had requested that the City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 county put out that trailer that measures speed in the neighborhood. And I understand there's only one of those trailers for Carver County so getting it was difficult, and it may not have been able to be obtained in the time frame but we were told that if that wasn't possible, that a squad car would be there to measure speeds, which to our knowledge has never happened. And we think that that would also give us a little bit more data to be able to better determine whether this is happening. But again, like I say today, double lines, crosswalks, even reducing the speed to 25 mph on that stretch of road which I don't think will make a difference because people will still continue to exceed it, the best thing that we can do is to put in one set of stop signs there. It will be a very minor inconvenience to the traffic itself and could be much more substantial to the City and to the safety of the individuals that would be impacted by it. Thank you. Acting Mayor Senn: Thank you. Anybody else? Bring it back to council then. Any questions or comments? Councilman Engel: I personally wouldn't mind seeing...study that showed the actual speed and volumes of the cars on the east/west route on this road. I mean I see they've talked about, having gone through it and said it didn't meet the minimum criteria. And I don't really see the results of the study. I see they're well in excess of the 500 cars per hour on the east/west leg but not on the north/south. But the speed itself, I had questions on what it actually is. Going east/west. Anita Benson: Mark ifI could. The 500 cars, the counts that you see there are per day counts. So that's a 24 hour count so you divide that number by 24 and you'll get your hourly. But really there are peak traffic volumes in the morning and the evening. Councilman Engel: Per day versus per hour. I'm missing that per hour, okay. Councilman Labatt: Did the study or survey, did it show the hourly, like 6:00 and 7:00 in the morning, how many vehicles? Did they break it down? Councilman Engel: Yeah, so you know right at rush hour, 7:00 to 8:00 and then 5:00 to 6:00. Anita Benson: We can do that. Councilman Engel: That'd be nice to know because I know it's going to be nil during the day, I mean pretty obviously. What is it at rush hour? How many people are zipping from the east side to the west? Using that thing. Like a thoroughfare. I'm sure it's a few. I just don't know if it reaches this level. I know it's not going to reach it at 1:00. Acting Mayor Senn: What's the designation of Lake Lucy Road? Is that a? Anita Benson: It is a Class I collector and it is a municipal state aid route. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, so being municipal state aid, for us to do any stop signs or anything like that requires what? Anita Benson: I have left a message for our state aid people. However, I did not get a return call on it yet. But this is the Minnesota Manual on Traffic, Uniform Traffic Control Devices is put out by MnDOT. It's a federal highway document that's modified specifically for Minnesota and that's the criteria and standards that we utilize when we're constructing a new project. City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Councilman Engel: That's right, if it's a state aid road we're limited in what we can do on that, aren't we? Acting Mayor Senn: ...want to put a stop there, can we without their approval? Councilman Engel: That's what I was wondering. I don't think so. Anita Benson: What's what my question was to them. If we were installing, if this is a new construction project, they would not allow it. Acting Mayor Senn: Right, but as an existing one. Anita Benson: That I do not have an answer for. Acting Mayor Senn: As far as the crosswalk you're suggesting. How was that intended to be signed? Just crosswalk or? Anita Benson: No, our standard crosswalk sign which also we do have a supplemental sign that informs people of a relatively new law that requires all vehicles to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk. There's a supplementary sign plaque that we include on those now. Acting Mayor Senn: So we finally beefed that one up huh? Anita Benson: Correct. I believe there's a $4,000 fine for violating that, that has not been as well publicized. I think if there was a public information campaign out of the public safety department, could probably help. Councilman Engel: How about a sign that says it? Acting Mayor Senn: I mean could that be part of the signage? I mean you know, vehicles must yield to pedestrian traffic, you know $4,000 fine or something or is that not part of it? Councilman Engel: Is that too wordy? Anita Benson: It is a regulatory sign and you're limited on what you can put on that. Maybe on a temporary basis they could be. Councilman Engel: It should say, if you can't read this sign, you're liable for a $4,000 fine, right? Acting Mayor Senn: Well what does council then, do you want to table this until we can get some speed studies back from public safety and also get additional information on the breakdowns as I was hearing for. Councilman Engel: That would be important if we could even do anything. First thing I think we've got to find out is the first point is I'd like to hear back from the State because we may be. Acting Mayor Senn: Bound anyway. Councilman Engel: We may be really bound here. Which would not surprise me, City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, could I have a motion? Councilman Engel: I think he raised his hand. He wants to make another. Larry Marty: I just have one question. Why wasn't that the first thing addressed? Councilman Engel: Can you go back up there so you get in the minutes? They don't collect that if you don't go into the microphone. Larry Marty: I guess to me that's the first question that should have been done. Acting Mayor Senn: Well it sounds like she was trying to do it but she didn't get a return call so, understand. Larry Marry: ...first question should be asked, is this even a possibility. We did a study. We wasted time, dollars and your time tonight. My point is, let's get the answer to that question right away and get back to us so that we can you know really address this or say nothing we can do. That would have helped us even understand it from the get go. Acting Mayor Senn: Don't get me wrong okay, but I mean the study and the data is, doesn't go unnecessarily even if we are told that we can't put a stop sign there. It gives us data we need to go back and negotiate with them in terms of possibly other improvements.. If they have effectively the control over a stop sign, they also have control over every one of the other features that Anita has suggested that we go ahead and implement here, okay which means they could say no on those too. But so the more data you have and the more information you know allows us basically to go back and talk with them and negotiate with them and see what we can get out of them so I wouldn't look at it as being a waste of our time. Larry Marty: Okay. Acting Mayor Senn: And one other thing, some of us, and I've been a long standing critic of this. I don't agree with the Manual, okay. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we have effectively control over it. Larry Marty: Understood. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, so sometimes whether we like it or not we're stuck with going with it but it doesn't mean we have to agree with it. Larry Marty: So noted. Acting Mayor Senn: Can I have a motion to table then? Councilman Engel: Motion to table. Acting Mayor Senn: Is there a second? Councilman Labatt: Second. 7 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Councilman Engel moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to table action on the traffic control signage and striping request for Lake Lucy Road. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Acting Mayor Senn: Alrighty, tabled to the 28th, right? And we should have no problem getting the info back by then? Anita Benson: I would hope not. Acting Mayor Senn: Alright. There's no time frame we're on there on that anyway is there? There's no time frame we have to act on or anything? Anita Benson: No. REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 19~490 SQ. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 3~ BLOCK 1~ CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER 3aD ADDITION; ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE WEST~ DOVER BUILDING D. GREIG SHEPHARD. Cindy Kirchoff: Thank you. This item was reviewed on the May 19th Planning Commission meeting and it was approved at that meeting by unanimous vote. Overall the site plan did receive complimentary remarks. However, there was a concern raised over the location and the screening of the trash enclosure. Staff does believe that the trash enclosure is located appropriately on the site, In response to the concern about the screening of the trash enclosure, the applicant has revised the buffering. Added a tree and clustered the proposed spruce trees on the site and also slightly elevated the earth berm around the area as to screen it from the adjacent residential. The building exterior has been changed slightly. The original proposal did call for dormers on the roof of the building. The proposal that's in front of you tonight has three chimneys so the dormers have been removed from the building and replaced with the three chimneys. Staff does not have an issue with this. It is still an attractive addition to the industrial park. It does comply with the zoning ordinance requirements and the PUD for the Chanhassen Business Park and therefore staff does recommend approval with the conditions that are outlined in the staff report. Thank you. Acting Mayor Senn: Thank you. Any questions from council? Any questions from anyone in the audience? Kris Dahl: My name is Kris Dahl. I live on 1774 Valley Ridge Trail. My house is probably about six houses west of the proposed project. I will be able to see this building in the winter time when the trees lose their leaves. There's no doubt about it. These plans that you see here show what the building is going to look like and they showed what it's going to probably look like in the winter time, but when you look out our back window you're going to see this building sitting there. I met with the Mayor, she did not, unfortunately she's not here to comment on some of my issues but I have some pictures and I don't know if this shows the true reality. Acting Mayor Senn: Yeah, it'd probably be best if you'd hand them. Kris Dahl: I have some descriptions behind it that kind of say here you're walking down...the City of Chanhassen planners have done in the past. They've got residential housing, trees along one side of the 8 ~ City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 bunker to hide the commercial buildings. And on the other side you've got residential buildings that are also hid by trees. Also along that trail, just down the road just a little bit further you see. Acting Mayor Senn: I tell you what, do you guys want to see them? If not, why don't you just bring them up here and there's only three of us here so we can kind of look at them collectively as you. Kris Dahl: Can you get my voice up there? Acting Mayor Senn: No, what I'm saying is could you, I assume you know what's on the back by heart? Kris Dahl: Yes. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, why don't you just give me all the pictures. Kris Dahl: Well I don't know them by heart. Acting Mayor Senn: Oh, okay. Alright. Kris Dahl: I'm just a CPA. I know numbers. That is down the trail a little further that says wildlife sanctuary and when I moved into this house a little over a year ago, that was probably one of the key points that I thought that this land was land that could not be developed. When I talked to other residents, they were appalled at them potentially building a house on this area. I've got another picture here that's a little further down the trail. Show where the building is going to be placed. And if you can see in that picture, that's where the building's going to be placed and if you see, there's a little red sign. Well that's the park. That's the city park. So as you come down the berm, around the comer, there's a bunker they put there on the right, and it's put there intentionally by the prior Planning Commission to tell the people that are going to be potentionally developing this area, that that bunker's got to remain. In normal city works where you have residential, then you've got apartments, duplexes, and then you've got commercial. In this area you don't have that buffer, that's why you need that extra area. You need the extra area because you don't have the rental apartments in between the residential and commercial area. From that picture I just gave you, here's a picture from above the hill as you're looking down towards the residential area. And a picture's worth a thousand words. Who's ever house that is, and there's Bob over here who I don't have a picture of his house. If I'm down a little further, he can see where the building's going to be. He's going to be staring right at a dumpster that's proposed to be there. They say that it's going to be hidden and all that, but I'd like to see what.., the pictures here just kind of show on top of the hill looking down at the wildlife scenery trail. See off to the right here, that is the park. The park sign. It shows how close that that building's going to be to the park. And I'd like to say, I sent a letter to the Mayor. I haven't got any real response. Talked to her. The bunker and wooded fence on the north side of the city trail which hides the commercial buildings and natural tree line on the south side, and the trees on the north side, or the south side, which hides the residential houses, keep the wildlife sanctuary and the parkland trail intact. That's the way I'd like to keep it. I moved into Chanhassen and that was one of the key factors. That trail there was a selling point. That attracts people to this area. I challenge that the City Council, if they make a move on this project, to go take a walk down the trail and see what it's actually going to do. I challenged the prior Planning Commission and nobody took me up on that. I sent them all letters and no response. The prior Planning Commission, they had the foresight to build that bunker there for a reason. And the reason is, we've got to keep the commercial away from the residential area and you need that natural buffer. Natural trails are an integral part of our city. They are extremely important attracting people to move into Chanhassen. Please take a walk down the trail, but the one thing I want to make sure if you're up there, be careful because there is 15 foot holes up there City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 that were dug that are probably about a foot width and I took a picture here that had been up there for a month. And my little dog is you know a fairly nice sized dog and I've got a picture of her right next to it. And if you look at the hole you'll see that this is is a potential problem that somebody just never covered up these holes. And my question is for the City Council. Has anybody walked down that trail? Have you ever walked down the trail? Acting Mayor Senn: Been on the trail before. Councilman Engel: I live there, I bike it. Kris Dahl: You do? Do you enjoy the scenery when you're going down? Councilman Engel: Enjoy them all. Kris Dahl: Yeah. Do you see the red tail hawks in the woods and all that just a little bit further? Councilman Engel: Saw a cardinal. Kris Dahl: Yeah, okay. And there are throned owls too. And last picture here shows the, once you get into the park, just down just a little bit further you see a big oak forest that it's extremely well populated with wild animals and this is kind of a wildlife sanctuary. Kind of what I'd like to keep it that way. I guess Pillsbury planted some trees on the west of this trail and it shows Pillsbury's commitment to keep wildlife areas and parklands parkland and keep commercial buildings away from parkland areas. I'm all for the development in Chanhassen. But lastly I'd like to say that if you're going to build it, hide it. It's not something that I don't think residents like to be walking down a park trail and be staring at by the two story glass commercial building and thank you very much for your time. Acting Mayor Senn: Thank you. Any questions? Councilman Engel: Not right now. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay. Kate, any comments based on? Kate Aanenson: ...Mr. Dahl at the Planning Commission there was an EAW. I'm delighted to hear that there's all that wildlife there once we put the industrial in. That shows us that we're working well. Pillsbury cooperated with us on Arbor Day and did a wonderful job planting. There was an article in the paper. That was a city project, the Arbor Day, which Pillsbury cooperated with. Again, showing the public/private partnership there. We do have the wildlife. That's moving up and down as part of the Bluff Creek watershed. So that kind of ties into where Pillsbury is as far as Bluff Creek. Some of the projects that we're doing there. The Planning Commission felt that, ifI can quote in their minutes, this is as good as it gets. It's never our intention to completely screen these buildings. Our protection ordinance allows for residents to also buffer. We've got numerous situations in this city where industrial is abutting residential. You're going to see three more in just a few minutes up against Lake Susan Hills where the neighbors will see part of the buildings. It's not an uncommon situation in Chanhassen. We've found it works really well. The trails are very well received and again the Planning Commission thought it was a nice looking building. We did pull all the documents again for Mr. Dahl to come look at. Unfortunately he didn't, we did pass out the letter that he did send to the Mayor and gave you comments. And provide an opportunity for him to comment. Understand how we put that trail in and it was also to be used by the residents of that industrial park, but we felt that this was an office use. It 10 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 works well. The Post Office, the City put that up there based on a lot of issues. landscaping at the City's cost but it was never our intent to do 100% screening. happen. Again, the situation occurs throughout the city so. A fence and the It's just not going to Acting Mayor Senn: How long has that land been guided or zoned commercial? Kate Aanenson: The property was approved in 1992. The Chan Business Center. It's been guided commercial under the 1991 Comprehensive Plan I believe. Acting Mayor Senn: And as far as the, from looking at this and evaluating it, I mean this seems to be pretty much kind of the lesser of all. Kate Aanenson: That's how we felt. It's an office. Acting Mayor Senn: I mean the office is probably the least. Kate Aanenson: As far as delivery trucks and that sort of thing, right. That's what we felt. That's what the Planning Commission felt too. It's a good use at the end there. Acting Mayor Senn: Is there anybody else to be heard on this? Bob Beduhn: Hello, my name is Bob Beduhn. I live at 1798 Valley Ridge Trail North. I'm one of the residents that will be looking at the facility. And I was at the last Planning Commission meeting and I guess I wanted to correct the record or ask that the record be corrected on the statement made by the planning staff regarding concern about screening the trash buffer. I clearly stated, and I believe if you still have the tape you'll hear that I asked about the trash and that the comer also be soften. The comer of the building that I'll be looking at. And right as they were closing the resolution I even stopped the Chairman of the Planning Commission and clarified that point. Just so that there were two points to my concern to be addressed with both the screening of the trash receptacle and the softening of that comer. I was faxed a landscape plan by the architect for the project and I've modified that with what I believe is a reasonable redesign of that screening to kind of soften that comer. I'm also a registered professional engineer in the State of Minnesota so I'm confident to work on a grading plan like this, just so you have that background. If I could put that on the table. My house sits essentially, well kind of off in this part of the house and then looks straight into where the comer of this building would be. There's a red flag there right now where the comer of this building is going to be. In the current plan they show, basically they leave a little berm at...post 'office berm. The first plan shows just leaving the top part and then grading it down to the comer of the building and it tapers off...this row of pine trees right here. In this comer of the building... I think that's the objection that my neighbor has regarding the project is that essentially this building will be hanging right off the edge of the hill and wrap all the way around. And so that's the concern about, when you come down the trail, and I think with some minor earth work you could extend the, wrap this berm around to avoid all the existing trees and there's an, I believe there is an excess of dirt on the site. And that it would be easy to just grade the berm and kind of soften this comer and transition from kind of the post office where you've got the fence and the berm and it steepens up...with some cottonwood trees and then works it...pocket of trees and then you can work the trees down the side of the slope there. And I talked to the architect today about that and they had some just general concerns about maybe some drainage around their building but that would be pretty minor work. I faxed this to Kate's attention this afternoon as well. And so that's my main point is to ask that they consider and put that extra grading in. It usually costs about $4.00 a yard to grade dirt and it costs $10.00 a yard usually to haul it off site and dispose of it and if there is an excess of dirt on this site, 11 City Council Meeting- June 14, 1999 which I believe there is since they're taking out the entire existing dirt on the site, that this would be a cost to benefit for the developer and would I think address some of the concerns about screening the building. Just one comment about Kate's response. All the landscaping at the post office site is not in. I haven't seen a schedule yet as far as when all the other trees and shrubbery we were promised was going to be in so I appreciate the fence but all the landscaping is not in on that site yet. So that's probably my neighbor's nervousness about taking the city at face value on that, so just wanted to make that noted. Thank you. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, thank you. Is there anybody else here? Kris Dahl: One more last statement. I wonder does, I never got to see the Environmental Impact Statement. Has it been revised for the removal of the bunker and hills? Kate Aanenson: That's a stockpile. It was never intended. Kris Dahl: But the drainage goes into a natural wetland which is the DNR. Kate Aanenson: That was all approved. The ultimate grading plan matches the Environment Assessment. Kris Dahl: But the problem is is that the residential people in the area don't know really what's going on with this project. They're kept out in the cold. They've got other things to do. We're the ones that keep them advised of what's kind of going on. I recommend that this be tabled until the conditions are fully explained to the residents or, I'm still left out on kind of what's going to be done with the bunker or the trash compactor or the hill. City of Chanhassen promised to put some trees in the hills on the bunker and that's never been done so I just want to see something in writing and I vote for that this be tabled until another day. Acting Mayor Senn: Thank you. Councilman Labatt: ... Kate Aanenson: It's consistent. The only comments we've received are from the two gentlemen that spoke tonight. Mr. Beduhn's property isn't abutting. Again our landscape ordinance requires that the homeowner's also responsible for some of the buffering. 75% is on this. This plan is consistent with the EAW and meets all the standards of the zoning ordinance, the PUD and site plan. Acting Mayor Senn: Meet all the ordinances. Kate Aanenson: Right. We can certainly work with the applicant if they want to massage some of that grading but we are concerned about the drainage in that area too. We have ordered the landscaping for the site. There was a funding issue but Todd Gerhardt, the Assistant City Manager does have that available. We have worked with Wilson's to get that ordered. It should be happening any day now. Acting Mayor Senn: Yes sir. Rich Keeman: Hi, my name is Rich Keeman with KM Building Company and I'm here representing Greig Shephard with Dover Group. He's the developer. Along with me with Beth Stosser. She's here with Charles Radloff Architects. I just want to make a couple comments in regard to the landscape items 12 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 in regard to the trash area. The items that we just did take a look at these things that Bob had sent over and what he's proposing here in regard to some modifications, we see, the first time I've had a chance to take a look at it. I see no problem making the modifications and massaging this area through here. We would obviously consult with our engineer, Rader and Associates and sit down with them and make, I don't see any problem making those...modifications. In regard to the general comments about the building. Mr. Shephard has taken I think really good steps in regard to try...very attractive, transitional type of building into this area with the trussed roof and so forth and the shingled roof and actually trying to keep it a low profile building. We appreciate the work that staff has done with the project and we're just here to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. Acting Mayor Senn: Well, okay one more. Couple minutes, okay? Something new. Bob Beduhn: ...Kate's comment about screening is I have planted pine trees. I own a very small little sliver of a top of a hill that I can plant one pine tree on and I planted a pine tree there. That's the extent to which I can buffer. The area that I overlook that looks in the building is my neighbor's garden and they are not going to be planting a bunch of trees to buffer. I don't have control of that property and so I've done what I can but I only own about maybe a 10 x 10 area on top of the hill to do any screening on. Because my house, my yard's kind of a valley so that's my only point and I just ask, I'll work with these people and if you make your order contingent upon softening that comer, I'd be happy.. Thank you. Acting Mayor Senn: Just as a point of clarification. Kate's point really was though that these people have met our requirements under the codes and ordinances for screening and landscaping which means we can't force them to go beyond that basically, okay. Her point wasn't that you could or couldn't and stuffso I mean that makes a difference. That's why we have the ordinances. Any more comments or motion or? Councilman Labatt: Go ahead. Well I think office has a slight impact on... First impression of the building when I saw it was I thought it was a golf course country club...add a fifteenth amendment to the building thing that the applicant and staff... Acting Mayor Senn: And the applicant and staff... Councilman Engel: Basically we added where I would have gone which was soften that comer which is what they're asking for and the applicant has indicated they're willing to do. My concern with this in this area, we went through a long process with the post office. This is not as severe a use as has been pointed out that you have with a high traffic volume user, which is a manufacturing facility or delivery distribution facility. In that regard it is... It's awful hard to just want everything, to control all the developments around us and we don't any more than the applicant does or than abutting property owners do. It's hard to find I think a perfect match for everybody. So I want to go along with this but I'd like to see them work with you to get a little more buffering on that comer, recognizing that they're already meeting all of the ordinance requirements and we are going to improve, and already agreed upon plantings on the postal site. We talked about this a lot when we were doing the postal building and that was, there was fear we were opening sort of a Pandora's Box by trying to get all we could at that postal site and we just can't do it at every turn. There's too much undeveloped land in Chanhassen that's going to be abutting every neighborhood, and mine is one of them. And I recognize that. There's a limit of city resources that we can put into this and there's a limit of control that we can exert on development. And the ordinances primarily spell that out. So I think we've done a good job on ordinances and when we've had some impasses, people have worked with the developer. I'd like to see that continue. 13 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn: Could I have a motion then please. Councilman Engel: He had the condition, go ahead and give it. Councilman Labatt: I make a motion that we approve the site plan #99-7 for the Dover Building as shown on the plans dated received June 7, 1999, subject to the following conditions and those are spelled out I through 14 in the staff report. And with the addition of number 15 that the applicant and staff work together to better buffer the southeast comer, especially in the area of the trash collection. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, is there a second? Councilman Engel: I'll second that. Councilman Labatt moved, Councilman Engel seconded to approve Site Plan #99-7 for the Dover Building as shown on the plans dated received June 7, 1999, and subject to the following conditions: 3. 4. 5. The applicant shall demonstrate that the eight foot decorative light fixtures meet the 90 degree cut- off as required by ordinance. The lighting plan shall show all existing light fixtures that may impact the site. The sign plan must be revised to delete the external illumination for the monument sign. All roof and ground mounted equipment shall be screened from view. Staff and the applicant shall work together in resolving the following storm sewer modifications: a. Extend a catch basin southerly along the west curb line to the northeasterly corner of the parking lot. b. Redesign the storm sewer system from the underground garage drive aisle to the west. Include a 3 foot sump catch basin with catch basin No. 4. c. Erosion control fencing (Type I) will be required after the storm sewer has been installed west of the building. The applicant shall provide landscaping screening in lieu of the 6 to 8 foot high earth berm along the southerly portion of the building to provide screening/buffering from the neighbors in Bluff Creek Estates. The applicant will need to supply the city with detailed storm sewer calculations for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant will need to apply for and obtain a grading permit through the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of grading activities in accordance with the City Best Management Practice Handbook. 14 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 All slopes steeper than 3:1 shall be restored with erosion control blanket. The city's boulevard area along Lake Drive West shall be sodded. The applicant shall escrow with the city $2,500 to guarantee boulevard restoration and installation of the driveway apron. I0. Plumbing permits will be required by the City's Building Department for extension of the utilities through the site. 11. The Building Official requires that with 74 parking spaces provided, 3 must be handicapped accessible. One must be located in the parking garage. 12. Fire Marshal conditions: a. The owner must comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department Policy premise identification. Fire Prevention Policy//29-1992. Copy enclosed. bo A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, bushes, shrubs, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9- 1. c. Submit radius turn dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval. Pursuant to 902.2.2.3, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. Fire lane signage and yellow curbing will be determined by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal. Contact the Fire Marshal for the exact location of fire lane signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to Section 904-1 Uniform Fire Code. e. Submit size of address numbers to be included on monument sign to Fire Marshal for review and approval. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding fire department notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy 04- 1991. Copy enclosed. g. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-1992. Copy enclosed. 13. All signage shall require a separate permit. A monument sign shall be limited to eighty (80) square feet in sign display area and eight (8) feet in height. 14. The applicant shall pay two-thirds of the park fees at the time of building permit. 15. The applicant and the staff work together to buffer the southeast comer of the building, especially in the area of the trash enclosure. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 15 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 .REQUEST FOR SITE P.LAN REVIEW FOR TWO 19,632 SQ. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS TO BE LOCATED ON LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1, CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 7TM ADDITION; LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE WEST; MONK PROPERTIES~ EDEN TRACE CORPORATION. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. Make this a short staff report. This is part of the Chan Lakes Business Park 7th Addition, which you recently approved final plat tonight and you've also ordered the road improvement project. One of the issues that the staffdid have on approving these site plans is contingent upon access to the property. I believe we've worked out a way for some of the site plans to go forward because we do have to have hard surface coverage in order to make sure that we can get emergency vehicles to the site. This first project is at the end of Lake Susan Hills, Bittern Court, and it consists of two buildings. I've shown the materials here. It's well conceived buildings. Screening the loading docks and we believe the plan is well designed. It's consistent with city ordinances. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report and I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. Acting Mayor Senn: Any questions at this point? From Council? Councilman Engel: No. Acting Mayor Senn: Is there anybody here who would like to be heard or comment on this matter? If not, I'll bring it back to Council for a motion for discussion. Councilman Engel: Move approval. Acting Mayor Senn: Move approval by Councilman Engel. Is there a second? Councilman Labatt: I'll second it. Councilman Engel moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve Site Plan #99-4 for two office warehouse buildings with an area of 19,632 square feet each, to be located on Lot 1 and 2, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition as shown on the plans dated April 16, 1999, revised June 4, 1999, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall increase plantings for buffer yard areas in order to meet ordinance requirements. The parking setback along Lake Drive West shall be 30 feet. Within the 30 foot setback, the applicant will be required to provide a 3 to 4 foot meandering berm. The berm shall be extended along Audubon Road to maximize screening of the parking lot. o Full park and trail dedication fees shall be paid for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition in accordance with ordinance requirements. One ground low profile business sign is permitted per lot. The area of the sign may not exceed 80 square feet and a height of 8 feet. Also, one wall mounted sign per business shall be permitted per street frontage. The total display area shall not exceed 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. No sign may exceed 90 square feet. All signage must meet the following criteria: 16 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 o o ao All businesses shall share one monument sign per lot. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance. b. Wall signs are permitted on no more than 2 street frontages. All signs require a separate permit. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural accent to the building. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials and heights. No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed from the residential section south of the site. Co eo go Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be permitted on the sign. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. A detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. The applicant shall meet with the Building Department to discuss commercial building permit requirements. The applicant shall provide 5 accessible parking spaces. The location of these spaces must be dispersed among all the accessible building entrances. Fire Marshal conditions: a) b) c) d) e) Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact number and location. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, bushes, shrubs, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. Submit radius turn dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval. Pursuant to 902.2.2.3, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of fire lane signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to Section 904. I, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. Install and indicate on plans the location of the PIV (Post Indicator Valve). Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. 17 City Council Meeting- June 14, 1999 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 15. 16. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding fire department notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy 04-1991. Copy enclosed. g) Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-1992. Copy enclosed. The applicant shall provide details on the decorative elements along the upper portion of both buildings. Details shall include materials and application. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the city. Only shielded fixtures are allowed as required by ordinance. A detailed lighting plan should be submitted prior to city council review. Street lights consistent with Lake Drive East and West will be at 200 feet intervals, staggered from one side to the other. The site plan fails to show the trash enclosure location. The dumpsters must be screened by a wing-wall and doors with siding and trim to match the building. Current state statutes require that recycling space be provided for all new buildings. The area of the recycling space must be dedicated at the rate specified in Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC) 1300.4700 Subp. 5. The applicant should demonstrate the required area will be provided in addition to the space required for other solid waste collection space. Recycling space and other solid waste collection space should be contained within the same enclosure. Rooftop equipment and ground mounted mechanical equipment are not shown on the plans. All equipment must be screened from views. The 30 future parking spaces shown along the northern portion of the site shall be eliminated. The applicant shall enter into a site plan contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required for landscaping. Final grading shall incorporate berming along Lake Drive West and Audubon Road outside of the city's right-of-way. The applicant shall work with staff in revising curb radii on the plans to accommodate fire apparatus vehicles. A cross-access agreement for parking and utilities purposes which also addresses maintenance responsibilities and scheduling shall be prepared by the applicant and recorded against the benefited lots (1, 2 and 3, Block 1). In addition, a cross-access agreement for driveway purposes shall be granted to the parcel north of the site (Stockdale) over Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 to gain access to Lake Drive West. Detailed storm drainage calculations for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event shall be submitted to the city for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 18 City Council Meeting- June 14, 1999 17. Installation of the public utilities throughout the site will require building permits through the City's Building Department. 18. The proposed driveway access onto Lake Drive West shall incorporate an industrial driveway apron and pedestrian ramps in accordance with the city details and pedestrian ramps. 19. The applicant will need to provide financial security in the amount of $2,500 to guarantee installation of the driveway aprons, boulevard restoration, and erosion control measures. Security may be in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow which will be returned upon satisfactorily completing the project. 20. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc mulch or wood fiber blanket or sod in accordance with the approved plans within two weeks the completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 21. All utility street improvements shall be construction in accordance with the city's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The plans shall be revised to provide individual sewer services to each lot from the property line and lower driveway grade at entrance off Lake Drive West to 4.0% or less. 22. All private streets/driveways shall be constructed to support a minimum of 7-ton per axle design weight in accordance with City Code 20-1118. 23. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agency, i.e. Watershed District. 24. No berming is permitted within the city's right-of-way. Landscaping improvements may be permitted subject to staff review and approval. 25. Site plan approval shall be contingent upon final platting of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition. 26. The lowest floor or opening elevation of the building shall be a minimum of two feet above the flood elevation, the adjacent wetland or stormwater ponding area." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 48~565 SQ. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 4~ BLOCK 1~ CHANItASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 7TM ADDITION~ LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE WEST~ CHAN LAKES PARTNERSHIP LLP~ EDEN TRACE CORPORATION. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This one, the site plan is at the end of Swan Court. One larger building, screening of the loading dock. This site plan, similarly with the other one, we had some modifications that required additional setbacks. Those changes have been made. This site plan is consistent with the zoning ordinance and meets all the requirements. Staff is recommending approval with the conditions in the staff report. Planning Commission also did recommend approval...on their May 19~ Planning Commission meeting. 19 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn: Any questions for staff?. Okay, is there anybody here to be heard on this matter? No comments? Return to council for a motion then. Councilman Engel: Move approval. Councilman Labatt: Second. Councilman Engel moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to Site Plan #99-5 for a 48,565 square foot office warehouse building to be located on Lot 3, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition, as shown on the plans dated April 6, 1999 and revised June 4, 1999, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall increase plantings for buffer yard areas in order to meet ordinance requirements. The parking setback along Lake Drive West shall be increased to 30 feet. Within the 30 foot setback, the applicant will be required to provide a 3 to 4 foot meandering berm. Full park and trail dedication fees shall be paid for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7t~' Addition in accordance with ordinance requirements. One ground low profile business sign is permitted per lot. The area of the sign may not exceed 80 square feet and a height of 8 feet. Also, one wall mounted sign per business shall be permitted per street frontage. The total display area shall not exceed 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. No sign may exceed 90 square feet. All signage must meet the following criteria: All businesses shall share one monument sign per lot. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance. b. Wall signs are permitted on no more that 2 street frontages.- c. All signs require a separate permit. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural accent to the building. e. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights. No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed from the residential section south of the site. g. Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted. h. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be permitted on the sign. 2O City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 o o 10. i. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. A detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. The applicant shall meet with the Building Department to discuss commercial building permit requirements. The applicant shall provide 5 handicapped accessible parking spaces. The location of these spaces must be dispersed among all the accessible building entrances. Fire Marshal conditions: a) Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact number and location. b) A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, bushes, shrubs, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. c) Submit radius turn dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval. Pursuant to 902.2.2.3, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. d) Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of fire lane signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to Section 904.1, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. e) Install and indicate on plans the location of the PIV (Post Indicator Valve). Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding fire department notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy 04-1991. Copy enclosed. g) Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-1992. Copy enclosed. The walls along the east and west side of the loading area shall be built of the same materials as the rest of the building and incorporate the decorative bands. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the city. Only shielded fixtures are allowed as required by ordinance. A detailed lighting plan should be submitted. Street lights consistent with Lake Drive East and West will be at 200 feet intervals, staggered from one side to the other. The site plan fails to show the trash enclosure location. The dumpsters must be screened by a wing-wall and doors with siding and trim to match the building. Current state statutes require that recycling space be provided for all new buildings. The area of the recycling space must be dedicated at the rate specified in Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC) 1300.4700 Subp. 5. The applicant should demonstrate the required area will be provided in addition to the space 21 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. required for other solid waste collection space. Recycling space and other solid waste collection space should be contained within the same enclosure. Rooftop equipment and mechanical equipment are not shown on the plans. All equipment must be screened from views. The 34 future parking spaces shown along the northern portion of the site shall be eliminated. The applicant shall enter into a site plan contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required for landscaping. Final grading shall incorporate berming along Lake Drive West outside of the City's right-of- way. No berming is permitted within the City's right-of-way. Landscaping improvements may be permitted subject to staff review and approval. The applicant shall work with staff in revising curb radii on the plans to accommodate fire apparatus vehicles. A cross-access agreement for parking and utilities purposes which also addresses maintenance responsibilities and scheduling shah be prepared by the applicant and recorded against the benefited lots (1, 2 and 3, Block 1). In addition, a cross-access agreement for driveway purposes shall be granted to the parcel north of the site (Stockdale) over Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 to gain access to Lake Drive West. Detailed storm drainage calculations for a 10-year, 24-hour storm event shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Installation of the public utilities throughout the site will require building permits through the City's Building Department. All driveway access points along Lake Drive West shall incorporate an industrial driveway apron and pedestrian ramps in accordance with the City details and pedestrian ramps. The applicant will need to provide financial security in the amount of $2,500 to guarantee installation of the driveway aprons, boulevard restoration, and erosion control measures. Security may be in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow which will be returned upon satisfactorily completing the project. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc mulch or wood fiber blanket or sod in accordance with the approved plans within two weeks the completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. All utility street improvements shall be construction in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. The plans shall be revised to provide individual sewer services to each lot from the property line and lower driveway grade at entrance off Lake Drive West to 4.0% or less. 22 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 23. All private streets/driveways shall be constructed to support a minimum of 7-ton per axle design weight in accordance with City Code 20-i 1 t8. 24. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agency, i.e. Watershed District. 25. The final grading plan shall incorporate erosion control measures around the downstream side of the grading limits and adjacent the pond. 26. Site plan approval shall be contingent upon final platting of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition. 27. The lowest floor or opening elevation of the building shall be a minimum of two feet above the flood elevation, the adjacent wetland or stormwater ponding area." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR AN 18,388 SQ. FT. OFFICE/WAREHOUSE BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON LOT 4, BLOCK L CHANHASSEN LAKES BUSINESS PARK 7TM ADDITION; LOCATED ON LAKE DRIVE WEST~ CHAN LAKES PARTNERSHIP LLP~ EDEN TRACE CORPORATION. Kate Aanenson: This one is in the interior of the project itself. Again it's one large building. 18,000 square feet. Approximately 2.9 acres. It does abut a wetland in the back. It does meet all city ordinances and we are recommending approval as did the Planning Commission with the conditions of the staff report. Acting Mayor Senn: Questions from council? Councilman Labatt: This has the fenced area for outdoor play area. Is that right? Kate Aanenson: It's not going in. Councilman Labatt: Okay. Good. No questions. Acting Mayor Senn: Alright, is there anybody here to be heard on this matter? If not, I'll bring it back to council for a motion. Councilman Engel: Move approval. Councilman Labatt: Second. Councilman Engel moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve Site Plan #99-6 for an 18,388 square foot office warehouse building to be located on Lot 4, Block 1, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition, as shown on the plans dated April 16, 1999, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall Increase plantings for buffer yard areas in order to meet ordinance requirements. 23 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 o The parking setback along Lake Drive West shall be increased to 30 feet. Within the 30 foot setback, the applicant will be required to provide a 3 to 4 foot meandering berm. Full park and trail dedication fees shall be paid for Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition in accordance with ordinance requirements. One ground Iow profile business sign is permitted per lot. The area of the sign may not exceed 80 square feet and a height of 8 feet. Also, one wall mounted sign per business shall be permitted per street frontage. The total display area shall not exceed 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. No sign may exceed 90 square feet. All signage must meet the following criteria: All businesses shall share one monument sign per lot. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance. b. Wall signs are permitted on no more that 2 street frontages.- c. All signs require a separate permit. do The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural accent to the building. e. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights. No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed from the residential section south of the site. g. Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted. h. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be permitted on the sign. i. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. A detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. The applicant shall meet with the Building Department to discuss commercial building permit requirements. The applicant shall revise the southern exterior elevation by adding windows or landscaping to breakup the blank portions. Fire Marshal conditions: a) Additional fire hydrants will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact number and location. b) A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, bushes, shrubs, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes to ensure that fire 24 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 10. 11. 12. 13. hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. c) Submit radius turn dimensions to City Engineer and Fire Marshal for review and approval. Pursuant to 902.2.2.3, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. d) Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of fire lane signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to Section 904.1, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. e) Install and indicate on plans the location of the PIV (Post Indicator Valve). Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding fire department notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy 04-1991. Copy enclosed. g) Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy//29-1992. Copy enclosed. h) If any trees are to be removed, they must be either chipped or hauled off site. Due to close proximity of neighboring homes, no burning permits will be issued. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the City. Only shielded fixtures are allowed as required by ordinance. A detailed lighting plan should be submitted. Street lights consistent with Lake Drive East and West will be at 200 feet intervals, staggered from one side to the other. The site plan fails to show the trash enclosure location. The dumpsters must be screened by a wing-wall and doors with siding and trim to match the building. Current state statutes require that recycling space be provided for all new buildings. The area of the recycling space must be dedicated at the rate specified in Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC) 1300.4700 Subp. 5. The applicant should demonstrate the required area will be provided in addition to the space required for other solid waste collection space. Recycling space and other solid waste collection space should be contained within the same enclosure. Rooftop equipment and mechanical equipment are not shown on the plans. Ail equipment must be screened from views. The applicant shall enter into a site plan contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required for landscaping. Final grading shall incorporate a three to four-foot high berm along Lake Drive West outside of the City's right-of-way. Construction activities adjacent to wetlands shall be protected with Type III erosion control fence. 25 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 14. The applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City to construct a parking lot and landscaping improvements within the City's drainage and utility easement. 15. Detailed storm drainage calculations for a 1 O-year, 24-hour storm event shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 16. Installation of the public utilities throughout the site will require building permits through the City's Building Department. 17. The proposed driveway access onto Lake Drive West shall incorporate an industrial driveway apron and pedestrian ramps in accordance with the City details and pedestrian ramps. The other access point at Marshland Circle shall also incorporate an industrial driveway apron. 18. The applicant will need to provide financial security in the amount f $5,000 to guarantee installation of the driveway aprons, boulevard restoration, and erosion control measures. Security may be in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow which will be returned upon satisfactorily completing the project. 19. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc mulch or wood fiber blanket or sod in accordance with the approved plans within two weeks the completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 20. All utility street improvements shall be construction in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. 21. Ali private streets/driveways shall be constructed to support a minimum of 7-ton per axle design weight in accordance with City Code 20-1118. 22. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agency, i.e. Watershed District. 23. No berming is permitted within the City's right-of-way. Landscaping improvements may be permitted subject to staff review and approval. 24. Site plan approval shall be contingent upon final platting of Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 7th Addition. 25. The lowest floor or opening elevation of the building shall be a minimum of two feet above the flood elevation, the adjacent wetland or stormwater ponding area." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 9~800 SQ. FT. SWIM SCHOOLI LOCATED ON OUTLOT G~ VILLAGES ON THE PONDS 6TM ADDITION~ CORNER OF GRANDVIEW ROAD AND LAKE DR!VE~ JON FOSS SWIM SCHOOL. Kate Aanenson: ...where this is. This is St. Hubert's. Highway 5... 26 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn: If I had it figured out right, it's basically as far east as you can go and still staying effectively to the south of Lake Drive. Kate Aanenson: Exactly. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, good. Kate Aanenson: Exactly. Councilman Engel: Just directly north of St. Hubert's. Acting Mayor Senn: Of the gym. Kate Aanenson: The parking lot and the gym, correct. They would share a parking lot there. Just to give you some background on this. When we first met with the applicant we were excited about the use. We saw the opportunity to have recreation as a part of this. As a matter of fact in the EA we looked at institutional or recreational uses as one of the components of the center. So we were excited to work with the applicant. The issue that we had was the design. When it first came in, we had a design that was rather whimsy and we were concerned that that may not meet the intent of the PUD agreement that we had put in place. This was the original site plan and it had a shed roof, and again if you look at the design of itself from the front, it had a taller roof and although St. Hubert's is behind with the taller gymnasium building, we again felt that the shed roof didn't match what we were trying to create. We do have a pitched roof requirement in there. Although based on some of the buildings, we've allowed for pitched roof elements and we've tried to work on that. Then the other concern we had with the original design was the colors. It had the bright yellow, aqua marine and another blue. And so we were concerned about how that related because we're kind of going for more of the Midwestern vernacular was what the design standards called for. So in meeting with the architects we couldn't seem to come to some consensus so we went to the Planning Commission just under open discussion and met with them once and tried to get some ideas. The Planning Commission concurred with some of the concerns that the staff had and the applicant and their architects did agree to go ahead and put the pitched roof on, the gabled roof as opposed to the shed roof, and then also try to do the subdued colors. So that's what they went forward with. The PUD requirement says that they have to work through the architectural committee of the Villages, which is Mika Milo and his comments are on there. He also had some concerns about the subdued colors. They still have the white on the roof and they've taken the yellow and toned it down but it still has some elements around the window. The Planning Commission did approve this design but there was two descending votes and they thought that maybe the blue, which we've included in your packet with the approval of the applicant, that maybe the blue roof and the blue around the windows. This is adjacent to the residential area. While it is a smaller building, it does have some good elements of what we're trying to create with the Village concept and that is that you can on the sidewalk, there are the windows. You can look in. See the activity. Be a part of that. There is a nice plaza on the front that you can be waiting for your ride or be dropped off outside in the plaza area, but certainly there was some concern on the planning commission whether or not this fit in with the design of the Villages of the Pond but ultimately voted 5 to 2 to recommend approval to you. And maybe if we can get the applicant... Again, this is the building that has a certain form and function that drives the design and maybe if they could speak to that a little bit it might help you understand exactly what they're trying to do. But there are recommended conditions of approval and if you had additional questions, I'd be happy to answer those. Acting Mayor Senn: Questions from council? 27 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Councilman Engel: Not yet. Acting Mayor Senn: Is there anybody here to be heard on this matter? The applicant. Kate Aanenson: He's the applicant. Acting Mayor Senn: Oh, okay. I'm just trying to find out first if there's anybody else here. One sec okay. Is there anybody else here on this? No, okay. Tim McIlwain: My name's Tim Mcllwain. I'm with Hagen, Christensen, and McIlwain Architects. We've been commissioned to design this facility. And as you can see these are the new sketches with once again the gabled form. Very simple, crisp shape and the side units that have been pushed into it which would be the locker facilities and some of the mechanical on the back have been, we're going to be using an EFIS or a synthetic stucco that will be, we've toned it down to like a limestone color. The balance of the building is white. Mika in his review has approved everything except he said it was a Sunshine Yellow. What we've determined to do is on all the window frames and along an arcade that will be along the streetscape, where we had some span or like the lower windows, we'd like a little bit more height there because people are going to be sitting there in chairs and watching their kids in a pool. That will all be the aqua color. There was some suggestion to make the roof a green shape, a green tone and we would not prefer to do that. Number one because we thought it first of all had a lot more color than the original scheme. I think the coloring that was submitted is vastly more than I think the Villages covenants would allow, as a 10% being a very strong, bold color. And plus we just feel that it's a simple, crisp shape. Let's keep it one color with textured, integrally colored block and a bone colored standing seam. Simple shapes. Simple function. And then try to get a little bit of animation out of some of the window placement and once again going from the yellow to a aqua, but we'd still like to keep the simple entry fascia...band that comes out of the building and covers the entrance piece. We'd like to make that yellow because it's a pretty important part on the interior of the architecture. It sort of binds all the spaces together and we did that on the first interior project and it's been pretty successful. And we discussed that with Mika early on and he seemed to approve that. So you know we haven't gotten official word from him but that's where we're at at this point. Are there any other questions? Kate Aanenson: We did talk about changing from all EFIS to. Tim McIlwain: I'm sorry. Kate Aanenson: We want to show that. Tim Mcllwain: There's gable shapes along the integrally colored rock face blocks so there will be some real texture to the gable form and the EFIS will just be the subordinate shapes that push into the overall large form. Kate Aanenson: That's the locker room portion with the EFIS. Tim Mcllwain: Yeah, there's a locker room and then on one side is a therapy center. I believe there are floor plans in the packages, yeah? Acting Mayor Senn: Any other questions for the applicant at this point? 28 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Councilman Engel: I really want to see this project work. We're having some impasse here between staff and the architect and Mika and I guess internally on council so, I mean my kid goes so I think it's a fantastic business. I really want to see it in Chanhassen. When it comes to decorating, my opinion, my skill is next to zero. I want the business but I want the integrity of this community and Villages to be saved as well. I'm having a hard time trying to find the middle road here but I desperately want to find one. So I'm asking you, is there anything that we could do that we haven't tried yet? Kate Aanenson: Well let me just so we're all on the same page talk about where we've been and where we're at, just to make sure. When it originally came in it was all EFIS and had the two blues and the bright yellow on it. To date where we're at is, correct me if I'm wrong, added the cut face block on the main portion of the building. The two boxes which would be the locker room and retail part would still be EFIS. Those are the boxes on the outside. The yellow has been subdued and the yellow will not be around the bottom windows but on the upper. Tim Mcllwain: There won't be any yellow on the windows at all. The windows, all the frames will be the aqua. Kate Aanenson: The blue, which is what we included in your packet. Councilman Labatt: The second rendering? Kate Aanenson: Right, the roof may not be blue. The roof would still be white which was their desire, so that's the movement. Tim Mcllwain: Yeah I mean we've got, we've trying to make it as clean and simple a building as possible. Councilman Labatt: It will look something like this then? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Right, the only thing that that second sheet showed. Councilman Labatt: Was the blue roof. Kate Aanenson: Was the blue roof, which it will not have. That would still be white but the windows would be the blue. That's his recommendation. Councilman Labatt: I had a question for him. Tim, in the Minutes here I was reading from the Planning Commission that you talked about the air exchange system. Inside the building and how it's going to exchange air one to two times an hour in the winter time. Tim McIlwain: Actually quite a bit more from what we're finding out. Councilman Labatt: My question to you is, what odors will be? Tim Mcllwain: That's a good question. What we're learning, actually Jon Foss, who is the owner of the company, has become very much an expert on mechanical systems. When you smell chlorine and coming from a pool, that means that it's dirty water, quote unquote. Chlorine is odorless. Only when it combines with body oils and such does it formulate an odor so, and he's got the most, the quickest turn around in terms of water as well. He's turning around water I believe about every six hours. The water's 29 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 completely filtered and circulated through. So he's very much on top. He checks his equipment several times a day so there should be absolutely no odor coming out of the building. If it's a problem, it'd be a problem noticed internally first and then it would be corrected. So it's not like an exterior pool that you're accustomed to. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, this is the design here now? Kate Aanenson: That's correct. With the cut face block, the blue. The only thing that would be different from what we submitted would be the roof would not be blue. It would be. Acting Mayor Senn: It'd still be white. Okay. Councilman Engel: What were planning commission or others looking for from a color scheme? Kate Aanenson: Well they still had concerns that that yellow around the windows still seemed a bit whimsy. Playful which. Acting Mayor Senn: That's gone now. Kate Aanenson: That's gone, correct. Councilman Labatt: New aqua color. Kate Aanenson: Correct. And sounds like that's what they've agreed to. Councilman Labatt: The other hang-up was the. Kate Aanenson: They still had some issues whether or not the white, you know we do have two neutral color of roofs in the city. They're both on banks. The Chan Bank and the Richfield Bank have got the really almost a steel color on both their. Not all roofs are colored. You know it's not going to be reflective material. Councilman Engel: Can you talk about that a little bit? The rood Tim McIlwain: It will be a standing seam metal, prefinished metal roof and it's in a bone white matte finish. Councilman Labatt: Do you have samples of it at all? Tim McIlwain: The owner, who was supposed to be here, has the samples. Kate Aanenson: He had them all at the Planning Commission. Tim Mcllwain: To be honest with you, there was the submittal by the one planning commissioner with the sketch, the colored sketch was submitted as a friendly amendment and I didn't get the feeling there was a resounding approval of it. It just was submitted and it wasn't as if it was embraced so once again I think if we put a blue roof on it, my gut feel is it's going to look too retailish, or even like it should be sitting on the banks of the St. Croix River housing boats to be honest with you. I think a clean, simple 3O City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 shape is the most appropriate way. The blue roof by far would call a lot more attention to this building than anything we've done to date. Acting Mayor Senn: Your EFIS is going to be what, a lime color you said? Tim Mcllwain: Limestone. Like a cream color. Acting Mayor Senn: And your, how about your rock face block? Tim McIlwain: This is a sample of the texture of the EFIS and the proposed color. Councilman Engel: What's the concrete block representing again? Tim McIlwain: That is the entire large pool building. That's the large, gable shape... Basically the entire gable shape, both ends have gable... Acting Mayor Senn: I think it's fair to say one of the big problems everybody's having with this, we spent a lot of time upfront conceptualizing and kind of predetermining what we wanted design wise on Villages on the Pond. Major decision for us to expand the commercial area and... And so if you take that concept and all the hours and discussion and review and stuff that we spent on it, there's very little with this that really conforms to what we were. Now that's not to say that this is negative. That's just, you know that's part of where we're on this learning curve is we all sat here expecting as the projects came in they meet this look and they meet this standard and this one's hardly doing that but then it's hardly a typical business either as it would relate to what was perceived .coming in to us though. Tim Mcllwain: I understand your concems. I just turned to the only official document that we've ever received, which would have been Mika's comments that he approved the design wholeheartedly. The forms. The functions and had a problem with the sunshine yellow which we have revised so in my opinion we've met the intent of all the requests that have been placed forward. Acting Mayor Senn: Well, let's hear from council. Councihnan Labatt: It made me feel more comfortable seeing the colors rather than the color renderings here. Because this one was pretty bright. But as far as the business, you know I think it's a fabulous business to have here in Chanhassen. It's unique. It's nice looking. And I'm glad that the colors around the windows and doors have been. Councilman Engel: I'm pretty much feeling the same way. I mean the colors, the design are not exactly I'm sure what the designers of Villagers had in mind for every single building in that development. There's a lot of buildings in there. I think this is not the first of which we're going to have a few friendly amendments and it's going to take a little windage on so to say to change them so that everybody can agree but it is just a fantastic business in my opinion and I'd like to see it in Chanhassen and that outweighs any small reservations I might have left on the coloring. And I do feel a lot more comfortable with the coloring and the tinting having seen those materials as opposed to these drawings. They did look a little bright on paper as opposed to seeing that. So I favor it just on the basis of the business strength over the small concerns I have left that haven't been addressed on the colorings. Acting Mayor Senn: Have you looked at materials other than the EFIS? 31 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Tim McIlwain: At one point we had talked about doing a, it's a creamed color integral block. Our only concern there is because of the new energy code. We have to elevate those subordinate boxes above an R20 in the wall to make up for some shortages in the bigger box... So what I'm saying is, is the most economical system is to put EFIS on that. And as well we like the two textural changes between the plaster look and the fairly textured block. Roughly textured block. We like that change of texture. So for those two reasons, that's why we're proposing EFIS versus if we went with a block, we'd have to go to a cavity wall situation where you have the internal block and external block. Acting Mayor Senn: And the durability of EFIS, especially in high traffic areas doesn't bother you? It doesn't have a wonderful reputation. Tim McIlwain: Well, where we're putting it, it's really going to be held away from the public for the most part. Where we've had some, a friendly amendment to make the building more approachable from Lake Drive, so that people could come up and look in those large bay windows, or those large windows into the pool. That is block. But around the balance of the building we've got a maintenance concrete base. The EFIS comes down and sits on that so that there shouldn't be a maintenance issue with lawn keeping equipment. And beyond that, the good thing about EFIS, if it is vandalized, it can be patched quite easily. EFIS we've used over the years has held up fairly well. Councilman Engel: Move approval. Councilman Labatt: Second. Councilman Engel moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve Site Plan #99-8 for Foss Swim School, as shown on the architectural plans prepared by Hagen, Christensen & McIlwain dated 5/25/99, and site plans prepared by John Oliver & Associates, Inc. dated 4/15/99, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. Site plan approval is contingent upon the site receiving final plat approval and recording of the subdivision. 3. The development must comply with the Development Design Standards for Villages on the Ponds. Two accessible parking spaces will be required for the twenty-six spaces that are provided. Access to the building from these spaces must also be provided. Parking lot improvements, including parking lot landscaping shall be installed prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 5. Submit utility plans to Fire Marshal for review and approval. Indicate the location of fire hydrants and PIV (Post Indicator Valve). A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, bushes, shrubs, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 7. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-1992. Copy enclosed. 32 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding fire department notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy 04-1991. Copy enclosed. 9. The pedestrian access from Lake Drive to the Plaza area shall be relocated to the western end of the site and the access be widened to approximately 10 feet (two squares). 10. The applicant shall pay park and trail fees at the time of building permit application pursuant to city ordinance. 11. The applicant shall be responsible for the warranty of the trees if they are planted before the site is developed. If the 'other' trees are installed after the site is developed, the warranty will be covered by the Villages developer. 12. Additional landscaping, such as planter boxes, shall be added near the entrance of the building. 13. The overall Villages on the Ponds hardscape plan designates two benches to be located along the sidewalk adjacent to Lake Drive. These benches and landscaping improvements must be installed prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 14. The pedestrian access from Lake Drive to the Plaza area shall be relocated to the western end of the site. 15. Wall business signs shall comply with the city's sign ordinance for the central business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on the "street" front and primary parking lot front of each building. All signs require a separate sign permit. The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the tops of which shall not extend greater than 20 feet above the ground. The letters and logos shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall be constructed of wood, metal, or translucent facing. 16. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 17. The applicant shall revise the grading plan along the easterly side of the property to maintain the existing vegetation along Grandview Road. 18. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed and maintained along Lake Drive until all disturbed areas are restored. 19. The applicant shall consider providing additional pedestrian access from Lake Drive to the building in the area of the swimming pool. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: LAKE ANN PARKING ENTRANCE ROAD AND PARKING LOT RECONSTRUCTION. 33 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn: There's just a memorandum in here. I assume there's nothing else for us to do with this, correct? Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Just to advise Council that Todd would like to table any work done out at Lake Ann to the year 2000. Acting Mayor Senn: Alrighty. Is his intention then essentially to set aside or allocate the funds then that we set aside for that and carry them forward to next year so designated? Todd Gerhardt: Correct. Acting Mayor Senn: Alrighty. That's okay with everybody? Okay. TABLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: A. AWARD BID FOR INFILTRATION/INFLOW DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 98-2. Acting Mayor Senn: I pulled l(a). As this has come and gone through our process I guess I've made no secret of my feelings on it. I'm not happy with the city getting into this new business, which benefits a few at the expense of all the taxpayers. This, in my opinion, is going to basically start a long list of these requests...throughout the city. Especially a city which is predominantly built on clay, as we are, and this is going to continue to be an ongoing problem and with this action will become an ongoing fairly major expense to the city over the long term. So that is why I have opposed this all along and continue to oppose it so...question for I guess, does this require three? Roger Knutson: Yes. Acting Mayor Senn: So we have two options. We can table it so it doesn't go down in flames or we can vote on it tonight but.., it's up to you guys. Councilman Engel: I'd move to table until full council can weigh in. Councilman Labatt: Second. Councilman Engei moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to table the award of bid for infiltration/inflow drainage improvement project 98-2. All voted in favor and the motion carried. O. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Acting Mayor Senn: I'd like to amend the May 17th minutes under Housekeeping/Miscellaneous items. The paragraph, it says Councilman Senn mentioned that the Mayor has the unilateral authority to place an item on the agenda. I'd like it to go on to basically say the rest of what was said which was pointed out that all delineations between Mayor, Council and City Manager are well defined in State Statute, which do and will govern basically. Other than that I wanted to remove the memo from the minutes because it really is not part of the totality of what was discussed or agreed at the meeting so with those two I would move approval. Councilman Labatt: Second. 34 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the Minutes of the May 17, 1999 City Council work session as amended. All voted in favor and the motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION: No comments. Acting Mayor Senn: I see some people still sitting in the audience. That always makes me leery because it's like somebody missed something or we missed something or whatever but is there something you're here on that. Well we just want to make sure we didn't miss anyone, that's all. Okay? Everybody okay? Bev Ricker: I did have a concern. Acting Mayor Senn: On which item? Bev Ricker: It's not on any item on the agenda... Acting Mayor Senn: Oh, the visitor presentation? Sure, come on up. We have a couple minutes here to do that. Bev Ricker: I was here last winter and I have continuous concems about the business being run down on the comer of Chan View and Great Plains, which is Country...Dry Cleaners. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, all right. Bev Ricker: I called and spoke to Nancy Mancino. Actually our voice mails have spoken to each other back and forth. Acting Mayor Senn: You know I was reading an article about that the other day. Talking about how it takes us now 11 times to communicate with a live person. Bev Ricker: Oh I would believe that. And that's probably the average which means half... Acting Mayor Senn: Terrible, yeah. It's terrible. Bev Ricker: At any rate, it took six months and a court case to get the 30 washers and dryers that were stored outside down there last winter, cleaned up. And as of about 10 days ago there are 2 more sitting outside. They apparently got in his way inside. I was promised, again on my voicemail, by Scott Botcher that they would be gone by Friday afternoon. When I drove down here they are outside still sitting there. This man is flaunting the law. He's doing illegal outdoor storage. He's repeating his performance. We are trusting this man to be part of the voluntary clean-up for his toxic waste which is an additional issue. He's been doing this for 25 years. It's the most unsightly place in town and has been on and off for 25 years. My understanding from Scott Botcher again via voicemail is that the MPCA is going to finally look and see if pollution has gone beyond the confines of his business. In the past they've simply said it hasn't but they've never done the testing. They're doing it somehow like this. No, it has not gone beyond the confines of this property. I don't find that a very scientific approach. Now apparently finally they're going to do something but how are we going to get this mess cleaned up when no matter what's done, there's no follow through. It's like pushing a jelly bean up a hill. The minute you let go, right back down. And he's got the most unsightly fence that he's put up around a rusted, falling apart utility shed. I have to drive by this every morning and every afternoon and look at it. It's in the middle of a 35 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 moderate residential neighborhood. It's a junk yard. I understand Todd Gerhardt went out there on Wednesday and gave him 48 hours. It's now well over 100 hours since then. Acting Mayor Senn: Yeah, because we instructed staffto really crack down on it. Where do we sit? Todd Gerhardt: He was cited again this last Friday. Bob Zydowsky and I both visited the site and it was Bob Zydowsky, I don't know if he gave him 48 hours. I think it took Bob 48 hours to go through Roger's office voicemail and talk to somebody and, but and then them going through Bob's voicemail. But he was cited this last Friday and the Judge will not have any leniency on him as the fine. He's going to have to show up at court and pay the full misdemeanor charge which could be up to $700.00 and he does have two washing machines sitting out there. We took immediate action. Talked to Roger's office and he has a citation in the mail to him today. Acting Mayor Senn: Under our ordinances basically is that the extent of what we can do or can we remove it and charge it back against him? ...I mean that is sometimes a remedy. Roger Knutson: We don't have the right to go on people's private property and remove stuff like that without a court order. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay, so we have to get the court order to do it. Essentially we're, and we're asking for maximum penalty I assume? Roger Knutson: Certainly. Bev Ricker: His penalty for littering my neighborhood for over six months with over 30 washers and dryers I believe was $80.00. Acting Mayor Senn: Was that the first? Bev Ricker: He's been at it for 25 years. Acting Mayor Senn: No, no I understand that but I mean it is, I mean like I say when this came back before us we kind of asked staff to really crack down on it and stuff and I'm assuming that's the first. Bev Ricker: ...it's nowhere near the first and that he's had several court cases against him in Carver County. Roger Knutson: It's only the second one I've, we've started the second one that I'm aware of. If there's something else, I'm not aware of it. Bev Ricker: Well Chaska's also in Carver County and they've gone after him. Acting Mayor Senn: Oh okay, but on this facility. Roger Knutson: From us, I don't know about anyone else. And I'll just point out. Bev Ricker: I would think the County knows him well by now. Roger Knutson: The 30 washers and dryers were removed. Unfortunately he's reoffending. 36 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn: I'm a little beleaguered by the issue on the pollution. I mean we all know there's pollution on that site. In fact I thought that was the way the purchase agreement got called off before to purchase that property. I mean once that site's been turned in, I mean isn't it required under State law and the MPCA to define the scope of the pollution? Todd Gerhardt: He's done that. He has completed an environmental assessment on the property which has a remedial action plan in correcting the measures. However, there are another segment of that analysis to be completed. We talked with MPCA last Thursday-Friday. The bits of the conversation that I received is that the, he's in the volunteer clean-up program. He is receiving money through a dry cleaners superfund account to clean up that site and that's what's paying for the environmental assessment study. And from what MPCA is telling us that it could start later this summer with the clean- up on the site was his comment. Acting Mayor Senn: Did they not define off site? Usually you have to define all lateral and vertical. Todd Gerhardt: I haven't read the report at length. Bev Ricker: I have read the entire report. It does nothing to define anything beyond his property, including not even the effluent from his storm sewer. Acting Mayor Senn: Could you talk to the MPCA please about that because my understanding always was, or that you had to define lateral and the extent of the pollution before you can effectively submit a clean-up approval by the agency. Todd Gerhardt: Right, and I can't imagine MPCA accepting any report not knowing how big the plume is and where the plume is going. How deep it is. Is it affecting ground water? How close is it to fresh ground water and the water table? How close it is to our wells and. Acting Mayor Senn: Well you double check just to give her that...so we can get some... Bev Ricker: My property itself is awash in ground water and I'm less than a block from there and Anita and I have gone over and over plans on how on earth we could remediate my ground water problem and there apparently is no solution to that. At least nothing within reason. And I don't know if it's polluted or not, because no one has looked. But I do know that the visual pollution is there and he's reoffending continually and has for the 25 years I've lived in Chanhassen. It's always been a pit. So I this time have decided it's not going to keep on going or I'm going. Acting Mayor Senn: If we can keep on it, okay? Bev Ricker: Okay. The promise was that it would be gone by Friday aftemoon by Scott Botcher. That... Councilman Engel: I don't think we have the legal right to do that is the problem. Acting Mayor Senn: I don't think Scott can promise that unfortunately but it sounds like we have gone ahead and taken the action to the citation and will go to court and we will recommend. Bev Ricker: What is the court date? 37 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Roger Knutson: I don't have a court date. You can call me and get it. Bev Ricker: How long are we talking about because I don't have the patience for another six months of this man doing this to all of us. Roger Knutson: It depends on the court's calendar. We get assigned a court date by the court. I don't want to guess but if you want to call Todd or myself, we'll give you the date when we have it. Bev Ricker: Ballpark, are we talking another 3045 days? Roger Knutson: That's for a first appearance. Acting Mayor Senn: Can we ask for acceleration given the safety or anything like that? Roger Knutson: Can ask. Councilman Labatt: What about tell him to remove them again. If he doesn't, go back and repeat with the citation process. Roger Knutson: Oh yes. Councilman Labatt: I mean there's nothing wrong with going back next Friday and citing him again. Roger Knutson: In theory. Councilman Labatt: I mean if it's just going to sit there and... Bev Ricker: I would really like it if you could go out there on a daily basis until he goes broke and goes out of Chanhassen. Chaska managed to get him out. I don't think they should have more power than you. Councilman Engel: I have no problem with a guy that's been a repeated offender. Acting Mayor Senn: In practicality probably what would happen is the citations would probably irritate the Judge more towards him. At the same time he's probably not going to... Roger Knutson: In all likelihood they would all be combined. Bev Ricker: Yeah, well the maintaining of a junk yard was worth $80.00 for six months... Acting Mayor Senn: I mean I don't see a problem with going out and citing him every day if that helps. Roger Knutson: I'1t talk to our prosecutor about that. Acting Mayor Senn: Alright, we'll see what we can do. Thank you. Bev Ricker: ,..on the toxic waste, the entire total net worth of that dry cleaners relief plan is...so that is a really bogus plan. That that's going to be cleaned up. 38 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Acting Mayor Senn: Well I assume... Alrighty, anything else? Mary Kaufman: Can I ask a question? Acting Mayor Senn: Well certainly. I thought you were leaving. Mary Kaufman: ...you got my curiosity when you were talking about Villages because, I'm Mary Kaufman and I live in the community adjacent to that and I'm. Councilman Engel: Just east of Grandview? Mary Kaufman: We're on Hidden Lane. Acting Mayor Senn: Okay. Mary Kaufman: You know right in there. And I'm remiss at not keeping up with my council minutes, I will admit it. But I did look in recently when you had the Chanhassen plan for the year coming out. I'm like okay, where does it say what's happening with Villages on the Pond and them was nothing in there that I could find. Talked to the neighbors and nobody seems to know really what the plan is for that. I'm glad to hear there's a business, the swimming business that's coming in .... kind of all sitting there and funding had run out so I'm just kind of curious. I don't think I have accurate and complete information. Where could I find that? What might be the. Acting Mayor Senn: That's easy enough to do. You've got, I'll write it down here for you. Call Kate Aanenson tomorrow. Give you her name and phone number and give her a call and she can get you a copy of the plan. I mean there's actually a physical plan but now you have to understand that Village on the Ponds is kind of like this, in our terms, this massive PUD which allows a lot of it to free flow except what it does is it designates basically kind of cluster of uses. Like commercial, or combined commercial residential. Or pure residential. There is one thing floating through for approvals now that's on the far west end, more or less across Market Boulevard on the far west end of Villages on the Ponds. It's a multi family residential apartments. I think safe to say relatively high end. Mary Kaufman: ...in the works. Acting Mayor Senn: Well they're in the works, yeah. I mean that's going through the process right now. I can't tell you where it's going one way or another. Other than that I'm just trying to think. Councilman Engel: Bicycle shop. Acting Mayor Senn: Bicycle shop was on the agenda tonight. And the bicycle shop is an absolutely beautiful building. Probably the best of anything you've seen, even in Village on the Pond so far. And then essentially you have...and did we have one more restaurant? Todd Gerhardt: Well Ruby Tuesdays has made application but I don't know exactly where they are right now. There's a question regarding that use. Acting Mayor Senn: There was a project that was approved that included Famous Dave's and a small office building but neither of those has proceeded. In fact my understanding was that Famous Dave's 39 City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 withdrew from it and they weren't proceeding with the small office building until they also got the restaurant or the retail component part of that going so that's kind of up in the air but what you're asking for just kind of a general plan of what's going to be where and stuff on the project. Kate should be able to give that to you. Mary Kaufman: ...know that it's still happening because it's been sitting sort of with nothing going on for quite a while and so there's been some concern. I think no one really has accurate information. Acting Mayor Senn: Well it could get longer. I hate to tell you that. What's happening though is more and more land, as they tone in, see they're governed by very specific restrictions there in terms of those types of uses. A lot of the property in there has to be used in the combined commercial residential context which is something they're having a great deal of difficulty marketing, is my understanding. And stuff so I mean that's going to probably continue to go very slow and they're pretty quickly reaching the outside confines or what they can allot to pure commercial or retail and stuff so I mean like I say, that's probably going to probably even start extending out more and more unless some hot buttons or whatever get pushed on those combined uses. A lot of Villages was originally concept or whatever to be like you know, you know retail on the bottom and apartments on the top and you know that type of thing and that's what's not happening. Mary Kaufman: I think the misinformation that's out there, that I'm aware of, is I would equate it to like a HUD home situation where whatever the plan was, the funding fell out and so now this has to sit here forever and ever and ever until you know HUD homes, until they reach that time where then they can go on the market. And so you're seeing it sitting there idol and bricks laying here and stuff there and it just looks kind of like an abandoned project so I was really glad to hear that there is something getting ready to go in there. At this point I don't care what it looks like, just get something in there you know so the streets will get plowed and what not. Acting Mayor Senn: Well to help cure the HUD homes part. The multi family project that's on the west end over there, is a HUD financed project but I think the rents in there are something like $1,100 per month. Mary Kaufman: ...equating with the, if you've had a HUD house on your home on your block, you see it deteriorate because...empty and could have, you know be in shambles by the time someone buys it. It's that, equating it that way. Not with. Acting Mayor Senn: That's slated for there. I mean basically what's slated there is multi family but I don't think you'll... Mary Kaufman: No, it's mostly just to know that something is going to happen and it's just not going to become tumble weed. Todd Gerhardt: And I think what you're associating with is that they received some Met Council funding. Put the bricks in in the bus stop areas and it's kind of unusual to see those type of improvements when you don't see buildings going up next to them. So what you will see over there will be the public improvements, the streets, the lights, the sidewalk and the bus shelters go up first without the uses. They got a concept approval. Then they go out and try to find people to buy into it and so they didn't have all the uses signed up right away when they got their approval. 4O City Council Meeting - June 14, 1999 Mary Kaufman: That's okay. I think it's just important to know that progress is coming. It's not an abandoned project and that was kind of the misinformation that was out there so. Councilman Engel: Whatever happened to that office building on the southwest comer? Mika Milo was in here what a year, a year and a half. Acting Mayor Senn: That was the one with Famous Dave's. Councilman Engel: They came in tandem? Acting Mayor Senn: Yeah, it was a tandem deal basically. Councilman Engel: One goes, the other goes or both go? Acting Mayor Senn: Yeah, that was my understanding at the time. Okay, well thank you. Anything else7 Acting Mayor Senn adjourned the meeting at 8:17 p.m. Submitted by Scott Botcher City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 41 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 2, 1999 Chairman Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ladd Conrad, Alison Blackowiak, Matt Burton, Deb Kind, Craig Peterson, Kevin Joyce, and LuAnn Sidney STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Cynthia Kirchoff, Planner I; Bob Generous, Senior Planner; and Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A 12 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 30 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK~ A 3 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE 10 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK~ AND A BLUFF SETBACK VARIANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION~ ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 6728 LOTUS TRAIL~ TODD FROSTAD. Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff?. Seeing none, would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission. If so, please come forward and state your name and address please. Todd Frostad: Hello. My name is Todd Frostad. It sounds so impersonal when she... Basically I'm requesting the addition to my property. Anyone who's been dOwn Lotus Trail...up 40 stairs... The stairs that are pointed out here are not the way they're set right now. It actually kind of stair steps down this way and there's actually 40 stairs between the driveway and the front door of the house as it sits right now. The objective with putting the addition is two fold. My wife is now 6 months pregnant with our first child which I guess is a self inflicted hardship, but a hardship nonetheless. And secondly, I have an 84 year old grandfather. The house right now is a two bedroom log home and so with one on the way and my grandfather using a second bedroom, I'm already one bedroom short. So the objective here was to build an addition out which would do two things. Create a lower entryway to the house and allow for the construction of a lower level bedroom and bathroom for my grandfather. The objective being that we could, under the rear addition build a bedroom about here for my grandfather and a bathroom here adjacent to what is now a laundry room right in here. And have this area, this external area, as I could go through the other plans if you want and I don't know what the process is here. To have an internal staircase instead of the external staircase. So 20 stairs inside and 20 stairs outside, And the front door would actually be right about here. And so if you look, if you can compare it where it sits on here. This is the proposed addition right here. And this would basically, as we had requested it, we assumed that, and we didn't know at the time when we wrote the letter up, that this was actually not, we thought it was 20 feet and in fact it sounds like it's 12 feet and something from the edge of where the gazebo is. And we'd actually take the gazebo out and give back some space to the city. You know and so in my mind improving the existing conformity and not eliminating it and just follow alignment with the deck. And then the back yard, just kind Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 of do whatever we need to. And in her letter back to me it said that you know the staff would consider approving a 4 foot rear yard setback with easement, or with how you'd phrase it? It had something to do with the awning. Or the overhang. Kirchoff: Oh, we have to measure the setback to the overhang. You aren't allowed any encroachment into a setback that has received a variance. Todd Frostad: All right so, but in your letter you said that the staff would consider approving it if it was a foot shorter instead of, this back here is 14 feet. If it was 13 feet it would pass. Is that kind of, so that's, we could obviously knock a foot off the plans. That would be fairly easy. And what I'm just trying to find out is what can we do with that front 12 when in reality I'm giving some footage back because I just want to get that lower entryway. And that's kind of the nuts and bolts. I'm trying to be flexible and not just have to go back and forth between the city every month with new letters or new adjustments. I spent $2,000 with an architect and I can give you the receipts and this is the best plan that we've come up with mutually between myself and the architects. And I'd hate to keep spending money with him and you know and delays and delays because you know in September I'll have a baby and she'll be lugging him or her up and down the stairs, plus my grandfather who spends most of the time in the summers at the lake, which isn't a big deal but winter will set in and he's back in the house pretty much full time. So I'm just trying to understand how we go about getting something approved within this commission's findings or objectives. So and if they say we can approve it based on 13 feet and 12 feet, then great. Then I'll draw plans for that. Or whatever the plans. Because all I know right now is that what, you know would I have to request a variance for which would be just about anything on this property. The limitation in the survey as you see it shows just the one lot, and if you guys remember last year. I don't know if you were on the planning commission, or actually three years ago now. The Tommy Byrnes project where he was going to move a property on. I actually own the whole adjacent lot and have with the county merged both properties. And so with where the garage is right now, to get the same square footage, I'd actually have to try to build over the garage and the vertical height would actually make it a four story building so my construction cost would be pretty outrageous so this is the most economical with the, to achieve the space that I could come up with. And so help. Peterson: Questions of the applicant. Based upon what the staff submitted back to you, it sounds like maybe you didn't have enough time to review that or with the architect so specifically ask the question. Have you had the appropriate amount of time to respond to staff's recommendations that are presented here? Todd Frostad: I was out of town late last week so I basically didn't get a chance to review this until the end of last week and then with the holiday weekend, no. I haven't even had a chance to call the architect. Not to mention he charges me $150.00 an hour every time I call so. I know we can compress it. I mean if it's a foot off the back, piece of cake. All I'm trying to do is get the front door here and this is, it's a log house. That's one of my other problems is because the way they construct the comers. I can't put windows and doors right up against the comer. I have to put it you know a foot and a half or two feet in. Just the way it, just construction limitations. The way he described it to me. 2 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Peterson: Cindy, can you summarize succinctly what he'd have to do on his current plans presented before us tonight to change that to code? Kirchoff.' The first thing he'd have to do, like I said in the staff report is reduce the size of the structure to, from 46 to 33 feet in depth. They do have the 12 foot in the front and then the 1 foot in the back. So they have to reduce it that size. There's no issue with the width at 20 feet. Todd Frostad: What you're basically, take it back to the edge of the house, not to the edge of the deck? Kirchoff.' Correct. Todd Frostad: And like I said, there's already structure there and I'm already giving some back so I'm just hoping because with the internal stairs I use up basically all this interior space, as this shows. Kind of in getting those stairs in there. And then the front door would be right here. So that's my limitation is I don't have a place to put a front door and stairs and a bedroom, all on the lower level, and bathroom. That's what I'm hoping to do here. And I'll tear down the gazebo. I'm just trying to. Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Okay. Thank you. Todd Frostad: How does the process go from here? Peterson: We'll do a public hearing now and then we'll discuss it among ourselves and make a recommendation to Council. Todd Frostad: Okay. Thank you. Peterson: May I have a motion and a second to open up to a public hearing please? Sidney moved, Kind seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Seeing none, may I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Conrad moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. Any thoughts on this one? Kind: I'm wondering if staff could speak to the deck versus house structure issue on the difference. Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Kirchoff: A living space is different from a deck in that a deck can encroach 5 feet into a setback whereas the living space, the addition would have to meet the 30 foot setback. Kind: The deck appears to be wider than 5 feet so it wouldn't have to be totally even with the house, is that right? Kirchoff: I'm not. Kind: Here's the deck. This appears to be more than 30 feet from the house. The current house. From the curb. This is more than 5 feet. So the addition would not have to go all the way back. Blackowiak: I like visuals. Kind: But the structure would have to come back to about that point, is that right? Kirchoff: According to that survey, the existing house is about 32 feet from the property line that abuts Lotus Trail. Kind: Okay. So they've got 2 more feet. Kirchoff: Yes correct. Joyce: Is the real issue the expansion of the non-conformity? That's what we're really talking about here. And that's from 1986. The initial variance. Kirchoff: Well the variance application indicated that that deck is on the plan. The 12 foot deck would meet the 25 foot setback and the gazebo would not so they essentially got a variance for the gazebo and the landing portion of that deck. That gazebo could encroach 10 feet into the recorded setback, when in fact it's at 12 feet from the property line. Peterson: Other comments? Blackowiak: Mr. Chair, I would like to sort of follow up I guess on what you said. I don't think I personally don't want to say no. We cannot do any kind of an addition. I think we like to be flexible. However it sounds as if, that he hasn't had a lot of time to talk to his architect and maybe, I mean I might suggest we table it until he has time to review it with his architect and maybe come in with an alternate plan or something. Otherwise I don't know if we can support, or ifI can support furthering a non-conformity. So it's kind of where I'm at right now, and I would not object to tabling this. Peterson: ...that Kate? Aanenson: Well, what you're telling him is that you're willing to look at something. Blackowiak: If it conforms. 4 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Aanenson: That's the direction you're going. Well he can make it conform. He's just not going to get his choice. He's agreed he can cut one foot offand make the back end. It's the front end that's the issue so what you're saying is can he live with 6? Can he live with 8? Because what he wants is 12 feet additional encroachment into the front yard setback. So that's what I want to make clear that he's going to be spending some time doing that and you still may not agree to that. I think if you told him you would give me, say make 6 work. I just want to make sure you're clear and that's the direction you may be sending. He may be. Blackowiak: But if it conforms, if he makes a Conforming addition, we don't see it again is what you're saying? Aanenson: Well to make it conform he can't put the addition on. Blackowiak: He could put an addition on. Just not this addition. Aanenson: Correct. Blackowiak: But if the addition that he proposes and brings to the city conforms, then we do not see it again, is that correct? Kirchoff: Correct. Aanenson: Correct. Burton: There'd be no variance, right? Aanenson: Right. Blackowiak: So we would never see it. Okay. Todd Frostad: Can ! make one additional comment? Peterson: Sure. Todd Frostad: The distance from where the house is and 2 feet... My problem is, the edge of the house is where the stairs would be coming in unless we can plan to keep 20 stairs inside a basically a...by 20 structure. Get 20 vertical stairs so I would need more than 2 feet to get a door way...is my only issue. Peterson: Good, thank you. Other comments? I'll entertain a motion. We have some discussion going on so. Blackowiak: Sorry. 5 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Peterson: That's all right. Blackowiak: I was trying to clarify where the door is. Peterson: Again, I ask for a motion. Joyce: Do you want to make a motion? Blackowiak: No, go ahead. Joyce: All right, I'll make the motion Planning Commission denies the request for a 12 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback and a 3 foot variance from the 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of the addition based upon the findings. And is this the same motion, we just combine the two? Kirchoff: There's two motions there. Joyce: Okay. That's my first motion. Conrad: I'd second that. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Joyce moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission denies the request for a 12 foot variance from the 30 foot front yard setback and a 3 foot variance from the 10 foot side yard setback for the construction of an addition based upon the findings presented in the staff report. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Peterson: Second motion please. Joyce: Planning Commission approves the request for a variance #99-3 from the bluff protection setback for the construction of an addition within the required setbacks subject to conditions 1 through 4. Conrad: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Joyce moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission approve the request for Variance #99-3 from the bluff protection setback for the construction of an addition within the required setbacks, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall submit a survey prepared by a licensed land surveyor at the time of building permit. 6 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 2. A detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plans shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. Type III erosion control must be maintained until all vegetation has been restored. 4. The foundation shall be designed by a structural engineer. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Peterson: The appeal from the decisions of this board, a council member, the applicant or any aggrieved person may appeal such decision to the City Council by filing an appeal with the zoning administrator within four days after the date of the Board's decision. This appeal will be placed on the next available City Council meeting which is June 28th. Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A 578 SQ. FT. VARIANCE FROM THE 1~000 SQ. FT. MAXIMUM ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SIZE ON PROPERTY ZONED RSF AND LOCATED AT 6570 CHANHASSEN ROAD~ CHARLES KLINGELHUTZ. Public Present: Name Address Loren & Deb Sposito Tom & Judy Newhouse Kate Wirth Richard Herr 40 Fox Hollow Drive 6521 Gray Fox Curve 6503 Gray Fox Curve 120 Fox Hollow Drive Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff?. Seeing none, would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission? If so, please come forward and state your name and address please. Charles Klingelhutz: ...probably was originally farm property. I have more than sufficient land to build a garage and I had it surveyed. The surveyor said you can build a 35 by 37 garage. I have more than enough...more than enough space from Highway 101... Peterson: Any questions of the applicant? Conrad: Yes Mr. Chairman. Why can't you build it and attach it to your home? Charles Klingelhutz: I do not wish to attach it to my home. Conrad: But why not? It would be legal then and then you could get done what you'd like it. 7 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Charles Klingelhutz: For one reason, I don't want the fumes from the cars coming in the house. Conrad: Because you're working on the cars or because? Charles Klingelhutz: Not only that but gas fumes from cars. Conrad: That's pretty standard though to have an attached garage, and that you way you could get what you'd like. Burton: Mr. Chairman I have a question for the applicant. Is it possible you could remove some of the other structures to get it down to the footage that the staff talked about? Charles Klingelhutz: It's possible to remove the milk house. Which is right by the house now. Burton: Which one's the milk house? Peterson: Removing that wouldn't still bring him into compliance, would it? Kirchoff: No it would not. Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Kind: Could the applicant build a smaller garage? A typical 3 car garage is about 700 square feet, is that right? And then combine that with destroying one of the existing buildings to get. Charles Klingelhutz: Again, even if I built a 30 by 32, I'm still over not under 1,000 square feet, which I was told by one...it would be illegal to do it here. Peterson: Other questions? Thank you. This item is open for a public hearing. May I have a motion and a second please. Conrad moved, Joyce seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Seeing none, a motion to close. Conrad moved, Joyce seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners, any thoughts? Comments? Conrad: Mr. Chairman, there are some real options here to get the applicant what he wants. I think he just has to come in with a difference proposal. He can get what he likes. It won't be perfect for him but through destroying one building and whatever. If we were close, I could 8 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 even, if we were close because he has a lot of property, I think we could consider something. But we're not close so, and there are several options here. So it's going to be hard to vote favorably for this Mr. Chairman. Peterson: Other comments? May I have a motion please. Sidney: I'll make the motion. Recommend that Planning Commission deny Variance Request #99-2 for a 577 square foot variance from the 1,000 square foot maximum accessory structure size based on the findings listed above. Burton: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Sidney moved, Burton seconded that the Planning Commission deny Variance Request #99-2 for a 577 square foot variance from the 1,000 square foot maximum structure size based upon the findings listed in the staff report. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Peterson: This also may be appealed by a City Council member, the applicant or any aggrieved person. They may make such appeal to the City Council by filing an appeal with the Zoning Administrator within four days after the date of the Board's decision. This appeal will be placed on the next available City Council meeting on June 28th. Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE A 19+ ACRE PARCEL INTO TWO LOTS ON PROPERTY ZONED A2~ AGRICULTURAL ESTATE AND LOCATED AT 10151 GREAT PLAINS BLVD. AND NORTH OF LAKOTA LANE~ DAVID TEICH. Public Present: Name Address Norm & Karaline Monroe Martha & Wally Moroz David Teich Claudia Campbell Jane A. Paul Yvonne & Russ Barto 565 Lakota 495 Lakota 1217 So. Monroe, Shakopee, MN 55379 415 Lakota Lane 410 Lakota Lane 400 Lakota Lane Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions ofstaff. 9 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Burton: Mr. Chairman I have one question. I'm looking through the conditions. On number 2 it talks about the building eligibility. It says that no building eligibility remains for the 12 acre parcel. Should it be clarified do you think to the 20157 Aanenson: That's fine. I think until services are available or we can clarify that. That's a good point. Peterson: Cindy could we, or Dave, should we be formally setting in here that...sewer and water is there that...certain period of time or is that automatically into the agreement? Hempel: City ordinance requires homes within 150 feet of a sewer line be connected within a 12 month period. Aanenson: If I can just add to that comment. The applicant did ghost plat this property. It is his intent to further subdivide the property when urban services are available and he's located his home as such so I think that that issue will probably go away at such time. Peterson: ...because it is A2 now. Aanenson: Correct. And like Dave indicated, until such time that the sewer and water was close, so even though we bring it in the year 2015, first urban services would have to be within close proximity so even though we would bring it in, it may be a while before we bring it up. Lakota Lane. Until it's petitioned to be brought up there. He may decide that he wants to stay in that status until, another five years. This is the property owner that's buying it from Mr. Teich. Mr. Teich may petition. Some of the people on Lakota may petition so we'd have to, like I say it kind of goes back to that policy until urban services are, or as Dave indicated, until it's in so many feet. Peterson: Yeah, I think it's so important to let people know that. Be absolutely sure they are aware that they have to connect when available. Has to be in here or not probably isn't the issue. Just a matter of letting them be aware of it. Aanenson: Right, and this is, I understand what you're saying because this isn't an area that we intend to leave as large lot. We do intend to see this area develop. Now those on Lakota may not be able to further subdivide because of the slope and they're on a bluff. So there's probably not a lot of potential for additional subdivisions so their desires may not be the same. Although over time they may have failing systems and may want municipal services. But that is a good point. We can make sure that we put some language in here. Peterson: Other questions of staff?. Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. I think it may be for Dave. We talked about deferring the SWMP fees. The water quality and water quantity fees. And I have three questions regarding that. Number one, do we defer them at the current price? Number two, is something 10 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 attached to the property in terms of these fees being due? And then three, should it be a condition of approval that these fees are noted and will be paid at the time of subdivision. Hempel: ...the amount due at that time. Attach it to the development? With subdivision of the property and we noted that the property should have development contract where it will list out the conditions of approval and in that document it could be noted that these Surface Water Management fees will be due and payable upon further subdivision because the development contract will get recorded at the County against the property. Third question. Blackowiak: Condition of approval. Should it be a condition of approval? Or will it be addressed in the development contract and would you be comfortable with that? Hempel: We can certainly add it in the development contract when it goes to the City Council. Blackowiak: Thank you. Peterson: Does that answer your question? Blackowiak: Yes. Peterson: Other questions? Sidney: Yes Mr. Chairman. Question for staff. Under landscaping you're saying that the reforestation required for the development is 77 trees but you feel comfortable with 20. Why was 20 selected? It's less than half the required trees. Kirchoff: Staff decided that 25% of that total would be appropriate since it is only one lot and one home. Sidney: Okay, is it simply because of lot size or what's the reason for that? Kirchoff: Basically because there's only one single family home that will be located on that 19 acre parcel. Aanenson: The rest of it's going to be pasture. He will have horses up there. It's all okay. We thought that was proportional to what he's going to use it for. Peterson: Okay, other questions of staf~ Kind: Kate mentioned that there was a ghosting for this plan. Does that mean that the 30 foot setback would happen in the future? That the 50 would change to 30 later on? Aanenson: Yes. 11 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Peterson: Would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission? If so, please come forward please. David Teich: Hello, I'm David Teich and I live in Shakopee at 1217 South Monroe. I've owned the property now for 15 years. My family's owned it since 1867, and that's part of it. My intent here tonight or with the application I made is to sell the property. The home to build and I'm working with anybody I have to comply with any ordinances that Chanhassen has, and that's fine. I don't have a problem with any of this. My only intent is to sell the property and having had this property for sale for some time, not being able to sell all the property at once, subdivision was the only way I could sell some of it. And the interested parties, we're agreed on a price and everything's a go ahead. And I'm sure we can work together with anything you need. Other than that, thank you. Peterson: May I have a motion and a second for public hearing please. Joyce moved, Blackowiak seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This item is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward. Seeing none, motion to close public hearing. Conrad moved, Kind seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. Your thoughts? You have no thoughts, may we have a motion? Blackowiak: All right, I'll move that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approve the preliminary plat request #99-4 SUB to subdivide a 19.68 acre parcel into a 7.68 acre parcel and a 12 acre outlot as shown on the plans dated received May 4, 1999, subject to conditions 1 and 3 through 8. With condition 2 being modified to read the applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City establishing that no building eligibility remains for the 12 acre parcel until such time urban services are available. Peterson: Is there a second? Burton: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Kind: Should the motion read 1 through 8 with 2 being amended? Blackowiak: Six to one I think. Kind: But you skipped 2. Blackowiak: I said 1 through 8 and then 2. I reread the whole thing. 12 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Kind: Okay. That's all right. Biackowiak moved, Burton seconded that the Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the preliminary plat request (99-4 SUB) to subdivide a 19.68 acre parcel into a 7.68 acre parcel and a 12 acre outlot as shown on the plans dated received May 4, 1999, subject to the following conditions: The proposed 7.68 acre parcel shall be shown in the form of a lot and block legal description and the 12 acre parcel shall be shown as Outlot A on the preliminary plat with a subdivision name acceptable to the City and Carver County. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City establishing that no building eligibility remains for the 12 acre parcel until such time urban services are available. 4 Detailed grading, drainage and erosion control plan showing two approved septic site and well locations shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat a 30 foot wide right-of-way for Lakota Lane along the southerly 30 feet of the property. 5. The applicant shall pay the City GIS fees according to city ordinance. o Two individual sewage treatment site (ISTS) must be located and shown on the site plan. The sites must be evaluated by a licensed ISTS designer and must be submitted for approval by the City. o Twenty trees will be required for reforestation. Five of the 20 must meet minimum ordinance requirements (deciduous 2 ½" diameter). The remaining 15 will be required to meet a 4' or 3A" diameter minimum and can be deciduous or evergreen. The deadline for satisfying the reforestation requirement will be by the time the Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the proposed home. 8. Park and trail fees shall be paid at time of building permit application. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Peterson: Motion carries. This goes on to the council on the 28th of June. Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO AMEND THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW SCREENED AND/OR ENCLOSED DECKS OR PATIOS, CHAPARRAL 2N°~ 3Ro, AND 4TM ADDITIONS~ CIMARRON HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. 13 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Public Present: Name Address Michael Quinn Linda Kloman Esther Eichelberger Mary Ashley 7105 Pontiac Circle 1015 Pontiac Circle 1035 Pontiac Lane 7024 Pima Lane Cindy Kirchoff presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff. Kind: Chairman I have one. Does the City have on record that the footings are strong enough to support the heavier structure? Kirchoff: That would be addressed at the time of building permit if they wanted to add on a screened porch. Aanenson: When we received requests for this there was two approaches taken. Let each one come individually or obviously amend the PUD so when we could see it wasn't fitting we decided it'd probably be more prudent to go ahead and amend the PUD. But each, we did receive some questions from some of the homeowners in reviewing this. The homeowners association is the applicant. They would be done a case by case basis. If someone wants to come in, they'd still have to come in. Get a building permit. We would check the setbacks. The same process. What we're doing is giving them relief from the ordinance requirements so they would still have to come in and get a permit and all that so we would check that issue at the time of application. Kind: It's not as simple as just putting a porch, or a roof and. Peterson: Do we need to address the consistency of materials... I just got back from Florida... townhouse down there, every other one has a different kind of screened in porch and/or windows. Kirchoff.' The homeowners association will be reviewing all the plans for the screened in porches or patios before they apply for the building permit. To make sure that they're consistent with the existing building materials and roof pitch, etc. Peterson: Other questions of staff?. Would the applicant like to make a presentation? If so, come forward please. Conrad Schmidt: Conrad Schmidt, 7251 Pontiac Circle. I'm the Treasurer of the Cimarron Homeowners Association. Our meeting in February, there were a number of people that came because of number one, they wanted to, there was about nine homes or nine quads that were 14 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 going to be painted and of course they want to look at color schemes and things such as that. But in addition to that we had a number of requests from people that would like to screen in or enclose their porches and we said that'd be fine. Of course architecturally have to conform. We're also going to lay down some guidelines too as well which of course would conform to your own guidelines as according to your building code. And so subsequently we looked into this and there was a number that came forward and requested this. We took it under advisement here at the last meeting and then we also approached the, I think Cynthia. You're the other, with our plan and they brought it to fruition and we want to thank them very much for helping us. Helping us out with this. As to when this will begin of course, this will only begin of course on consent from you from, as well as the city which of course after it had gone through the planning commission it will go to the city I take it, is that the correct procedure? If there's any questions, I'd be willing to answer them but that's pretty much sums up I think what, we very much welcome this and then Herald for a number years and we finally felt it was time to make some movement on this... Peterson: Motion and a second for a public hearing please. Burton moved, Blackowiak seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward. State your name and address please. Seeing none. Conrad moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Comments from commissioners. Conrad: Chairman, it's a good request. Joyce: Yeah, I think it's a good request too. I think what you said though about the conformity of, because I've been Florida this year too and saw the same thing so, just throw that into the record but I think it's a good point. But otherwise it's a good request. Peterson: Motion please. Burton: Mr. Chairman, I'll move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of an amendment to the development contract entitled "Planned Residential Development Contract Plat for Chaparral and Chaparral 2nd, 3rd and 4th Additions" to allow screened patios and porches on the four plexes with the conditions 1 through 3 as in the staff report. Conrad: Second. Peterson: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? 15 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Burton moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of an amendment to the development contract entitled "Planned Residential Development Contract Plat of Chaparral and Chaparral 2nd, 3rd and 4th Additions" to allow screened patios and porches on the four plexes with the following conditions: 1. The screened patios and porches cannot extend from the building further than 10 feet. 2. The screened patios and porches much maimain a 20 foot from and rear yard setback. 3. The screened patios and porches may not exceed a 10' x 20' dimension. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR AN 11~095 SQ. FT. 1 ~ STORY RETAIL SHOWROOM AND OFFICE BUILDING ON 0.627 ACRE OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 550 LAKE DRIVE IN THE VILLAGES ON THE PONDS PUD~ THE PEDDLER CYCLERY~ VIGIL COMPANIES INC. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Can you point out exactly where in the Villages... Generous: Here's Highway 5 to the north. This is 101. Market Boulevard and Lake Drive. It's right south of the AmericInn site. If you go out there you'll see a pond area and a wetland area adjacem to 101. Down in this corner here. Peterson: It picks up this whole section. Generous: Right, but most of this is storm water pond or wetland so it's very, the buildable area is really on the end. And then this serves as a through rOad. Peterson: Okay. Questions of staff?. Joyce: Condition number 4 was curious. I didn't think we'd have to do, ask for that but. Generous: ...street furniture. Peterson: It's funny but it's also, we were very specific as to what other types of things we're allowing on the street but yet we just say bicycle racks. Yellow and blue polka dot .... feature in front of the facility, should we not be more specific? Aanenson: To match the architectural theme, is that what you're thinking? Sure. 16 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Peterson: Other questions of staff. Kind: Mr. Chairman. I'm wondering if staff could address the fire hydrant being turned off issue. How would that affect the hotel and Houlihan's? Hempel: Certainly Mr. Chairman. The watermain system through that area is what we call looped so if you shut it off in one location, we still have a water supply coming in from the east or from the west. What turning off the water does though, and turning it back on, it disrupts the rust and particles in the mains and we get rusty water calls and we have to go out and flush the watermains in the area and deal with those type of complaints so. If all possible we'd really like for them to try and incorporate their patio features around and I know it's probably not the most desirable to have in our patio but if there's a way they could affect that, then that would be helpful. Peterson: Other questions? Seeing none, would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission? If so, please come forward and state your name and address please. Ed Vigil: I'm Ed Vigil. I live at 11191 Burr Ridge Lane, Eden Prairie. With regards to the hydrant. We're looking at the situation. It is kind ora, it affects our design mainly because of the patio. All I can say is that we'll look into the possibility of not having to deal with it. It is an extra expense too because it's not just free to move a hydrant. But I can't tell you at this time if it's going to be possible. However, if we decide to change it, is that a problem to flush the water or whatever is necessary? Hempel: It's just an added inconvenience and then relocating the hydrant. Additional grading out in the wetlands and so forth. It's not the first time, put it that way. Ed Vigil: Well it's for us is just an issue that we want to make sure that it looks right. That it's appropriate because we do have to have the setbacks for the people within the hydrant, in terms of the bikes that come in and the people that are going to be around it so it's something that we'll have to weigh what's less inconvenient and what's best for the look, the City and the people that are going to be around us. Peterson: Questions of the applicant? Joyce: Can we take a closer look at the elevations there? Maybe some of the. Aanenson: Do you want to pass this around? Joyce: Yeah. And the materials. Peterson: Any other questions of the applicant so we don't make him stand up for? All right, thank you. Ed Vigil: Thank you. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Peterson: May I have a motion and a second for a public hearing please. Joyce moved, Kind seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Seeing none. Motion to close. Kind moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. Comments. Conrad: Great plan. Burton: I think it's one of the nicest plans that I've seen since I've been on. Blackowiak: Yeah I certainly agree. The only advice I'd have is when, condition 5 talks about signs on two elevations. I wrote a note to myself, choose wisely because we've had some other issues where people choose signs on one side of a building or another and then come back and say, Wait. We want it on this side so, just make sure you figure out where you want them but it looks great. I think it's very well done and it will be a much needed addition to that area. Peterson: One thing that just triggered when I saw the color rendering going around. It triggered in my mind that the garage door, if anything looks atypical to the design, the garage door doesn't seem to. I don't know what the design of that or the texture of that's going to be but it just seems to be that we've got an extremely architecturally creative design and then you've got a traditional garage door sticking in one side of it. Prominently. Ed Vigil: IfI can add, we are working with, the garage itself will be, it appears to be here a simple garage and they will not. It will be something, custom garage door... Peterson: Thank you. Other comments? I'll entertain a motion. Blackowiak: 'Well I'll move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #99-10, plans prepared by the Lampert Architects dated 4/30/99, for an 11,095 square foot 1 ½ story retail, showroom and office building, Peddler Cyclery, subject to conditions 1 through 18 outlined in the staffreport. Conrad: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing no discussion I'd just like to close by saying I too like the design a lot. I think it's creative and will add a lot to that, not only the whole Villages on the Pond but certainly that comer. Nice design. 18 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Blackowiak moved, Conrad seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #99-10, plans prepared by Lampert Architects dated 4/30/99 for an 11,095 square foot 1 ½ story retail, showroom and office building, The Peddler Cyclery, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the City and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. Site plan approval is contingent upon the site receiving final plat approval and recording of the subdivision. 3. The development must comply with the Development Design Standards for Villages on the Ponds. 4. The developer shall provide bicycle racks. 5. Provided that signage is only proposed on two building elevations, the applicant may choose which two elevations will have signage. All signs shall require a separate sign permit. Three decorative, pedestrian scale lights must be installed along the sidewalk from Lake Drive to Pond Promenade. The lighting fixtures shall be designed to provide a 90 degree lighting cut-off. Fencing adjacent to the storm water pond and wetlands shall be decorative and compatible with fencing provided elsewhere in the Villages on the Ponds. The applicant shall work with staff to provide options for decorative fencing around the retaining walls. 8. Two accessible parking spaces will be required for the thirty-four spaces that are provided. The spaces must be located near the main entrance. 9. Install and indicate on plans the location of the PIV (post indicator valve). Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. 10. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, NSP, US West Cable TV and transformer boxes to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 11. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding fire department notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department Policy #04-1991. Copy enclosed. - 12. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-1992. Copy enclosed. 19 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 13. The applicant shall pay park and trail fees at the time of building permit application pursuant to city ordinance. 14. All landscaping in planting holes near the building shall be irrigated. 15. All trees in planting holes near the building shall be protected by tree grates. 16. The grading plan shall be revised as follows: Denote a 6-foot wide concrete sidewalk on the plans along the north/south street and eliminate the retaining wall fence and re-grade the pond slopes. Provide sufficient cover around relocated hydrant with a minimum of 7.5 foot bury depth. Revise elevation of storm sewer outlet to 940.0 (normal water elevation). Provide erosion control measures to encompass the north, west and south sides of the site and protect existing storm sewer inlets. Construction access shall be from the east side of the property and not Lake Drive. Show existing catch basin in the northeast comer of Lake Drive and north/south street. Provide valley gutter through proposed drive aisle access onto north/south street. Leave openings in curb for drainage through proposed median to maintain drainage along the north/south street. Clarify responsibility for removal of existing bituminous sidewalk/trail along Lake Drive and installation of 6-foot wide concrete walk in accordance with Villages on the Ponds hardscape plan. Show location of relocated street light and street sign. 17. All disturbed areas as a result of construction activity shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks completion in accordance with the City Best Management Practice Handbook. 18. The applicant will be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits for relocation of the hydrant and installation of storm sewer from the City's Building Department. The applicant shall give a minimum 48-hour notice to the City to request mm-off or mm-on of City water for relocation of the hydrant." All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: 2O Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 3 STORY 54 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDINGS (162 TOTAL UNITS) ON 9.94 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED PUD- MIXED USE AND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HWY 101 AT MAIN STREET IN VILLAGES ON THE PONDS~ CHANHASSEN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT~ THE SHELARD GROUP~ INC. Public Present: Name Address Brad Willmsen 8510 Great Plains Blvd. Kyle Tidstrom 8679 Chanhassen Hills Drive Gene Klein 8412 Great Plains Blvd. Tammy Harris 8408 Great Plains Blvd. Jim Jacoby 8410 Great Plains Blvd. Jim Amundson 8500 Great Plains Blvd. Kathy Holtmeier 8524 Great Plains Blvd. Barbara & John S. Jacoby 8516 Great Plains Blvd. A1 & Mary Jane Klingelhutz 8600 Great Plains Blvd. Milton Bathke 8404 Great Plains Blvd. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Questions of staff. Conrad: What are the heights of the buildings Bob? Generous: To the top of the parapet? Conrad: If our standard is 50 in that zone. What..~? Generous: Yeah, they would be close to the 50 to the middle of the roof. You look at the garage elevation and add a 4 story to it. We were permitted, as part of the design standards we permitted that. So it's around 45. Peterson: Other questions of staff? Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman, this is to Bob. Can you talk a little bit about Highway 101. And the upgrade plan and how it fits in and what's going to happen with traffic. Generous: I think I'd defer to Dave ifI could. Hempel: Thank you Mr. Chairman, Planning Commissioners. The latest and greatest we've heard. Highway 101 is still under jurisdiction of Minnesota Department of Transportation or MnDOT as we call them. It is eventually going to be turned back over to Carver County 21 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Highway Department and they, in a joint effort with the City of Chanhassen, will be upgrading 101 to a four lane segment down to proposed 212 at some future time between Highway 5 and down to 212. The time line that I guess we're hearing now is a 4 to 5 year period before that happens. Before the tumback and turnback funds are available to do that. The traffic. A traffic study was prepared for the Villages on the Ponds which did not indicate full upgrading of 101 all the way down to that level. All the way down to the 212 but they did recommend mitigation measures to help offset and alleviate some of the traffic congestion at the intersections of Highway 5, Market Boulevard and Great Plains and Highway 5. Some of the improvements at Great Plains and Highway 5 have been completed with the initial phase of Villages on the Ponds. With this proposal before us there was really no mention of mitigation measures along Highway 101 with this development. Staff has indicated in the staff report that we'd like for the applicant to revisit that area now that all three apartment buildings will be accessing one singular access point across the main street at Highway 101. The preliminary plat for Villages on the Pond indicated two building, two apartment building units to be accessing here with the third or the northerly building being accessed through the Rosemount driveway across from Lake Drive at Highway 101. That location there, the traffic study indicated that a future traffic light may be warranted with full development of Villages on the Pond. We are, or we have required the developer escrow a share of the cost for future traffic signals at that location. With this submittal here the only requirement that we see at this point is a right mm lane into the site on southbound Highway 101. We are cognizant of sight line problems along Highway 101. Speeding vehicles and so forth. A speed study was done here approximately a year ago by MnDOT and speeds did range, it was a wide variety of speeds along there. The conclusion was though the 40 mph posting was adequate or was appropriate given the 85% percentile of cars that drive that road. One of the things that will occur to help improve sight lines with this project is construction of the regional storm water pond south of the buildings along and adjacent to the creek there out to existing Highway 101. All those trees that are in there would be removed and it would improve sight lines for the first home to the south of this site. But again we did have a condition in the staff report that the applicant revisit the traffic issues with this development to see what mitigation measures may be required with this site development. Thank you. Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman I have a couple more questions related to traffic so maybe I'll address them to you Dave. Second thing. Doesn't the fire department normally want two entrances to a neighborhood per se. We've got a lot of units here with a single entrance and I don't see any mention of that at all. Hempel: Typically yes. We would like to have emergency secondary access whenever feasible but given the terrain of the site, the elevation difference, and the building layout, that wasn't really feasible. There's a pretty good access into the site with a loop parking lot area. Aanenson: Plus the buildings will be sprinklered and there's close proximity to 101 so that was all taken into consideration. Blackowiak: Okay. And my final question has to do with the trail. I've heard rumors that with the upgrade of Highway 101 that there's going to be an underpass there for the trail connection. Is that true? 22 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Aanenson: With the upgrade of 10 I. Blackowiak: So again we're talking then the upgrade of 101, turnback in 4 to 5 years and then when would construction be? Would it at 4 to 5 years or are you talking after that? Hempel: The construction that we're hearing would be a 4 to 5 year time table from now. The turnback should occur within the next year maybe. Blackowiak: Okay, and you're comfortable with the crosswalk? I mean I cross that area fairly often and I will not let my kids go near there without me. It's treacherous at best. And I'm wondering about adding a lot of people and again, we have a real bad area and the crosswalk, is there anything we can do to upgrade the crosswalk now or can we do the underpass now or what's? What are our options? Hempel: Mr. Chairman, maybe we can further research that with MnDOT to see if there's other measures that can be done. As far as the underpass, at this time I would say no. Because it requires the elevation of 101 to be elevated I think another couple of feet is the final design or the preliminary design for new 101. To be elevated up another couple of feet to provide enough elevation difference to have the underpass for the trail. Blackowiak: Okay, thank you. Peterson: We can do another pedestrian bridge. Let's not go there. Other questions of staff?. Burton: Mr. Chairman I have a question or two. On the landscaping, I was wondering if staff could discuss the replanting requirements or the planting requirements to get to the ordinance requirements. I was looking at the conditions and it talks about, overstory trees and then they have to submit a revised landscape plan. I'm wondering if you can just talk about how you got to those conditions and where we're at with all that. Generous: Mr. Chairman. They're meeting with the City Forester tomorrow to review that. To have their landscape person and our landscape person to come together. The way we get it is by ordinance. It tells us based on their tree removal plans. How much they have to put in and... So yeah, that's something we'll work out at the staff level with them. We know the numbers. It's just the location of things and that's what they'll work with Jill on. In addition with the sewer alignment we're going to get additional trees down on the Lake Susan side. That's something that we probably, as part of the tree preservation ordinance, what we tried to do is extend preserved treed areas so that we create a habitat area with these newer trees. Burton: When I look at that chart that you put in the report, just for example, it says, it looks to me like it's required to have say 45 shrubs and they have no shrubs. I mean are those things that are considered or. 23 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Generous: Right, And that's in the buffer yard requirement. However there are shrubs in there. That's a mistake, They showed lots of shrubs and we'll review that again. Burton: All right. Another question I had was on establishing the new wetlands and it says how either the developer of Villages or that this site developer has to take care of that and I'm wondering if we just leave it like that, who determines if they don't, if one of them doesn't go forward. How do you ever determine who's going to have to do it and by when? Generous: We should be able to work that by the time of final platting, which is really where the condition will stick. It was part of the overall PUD determined that we needed this and so that's where it really belongs. The developer, I assume that the developer of the apartment buildings will do it and be reimbursed by the owners. Peterson: Other questions? Kind: Mr. Chairman. I have a question about parking. Required is 324 and what's proposed is 302. I wonder if staff could speak to that. Generous: We reviewed their calculations. I think this is one that the applicant would be more appropriate addressing because it's the market project for them so they need to provide something that will work. Based on my analysis we reduced the number of parking spaces for one bedrooms. It's 1.7 parking stalls per one bedroom unit and 2 parking stalls for two bedroom units so we think that the numbers probably will work. In addition this is, we have the transit facility, or it will be available for this project over in Villages and that was part of the whole intent to provide this transit oriented development. But the specific question should be addressed by the developer. Otherwise we can go in and tear out more trees and provide it. Peterson: Other questions? Kind: Chairman I have one more question. Regarding the affordability units. The 20% that staff's recommending. Is that something that needs to be checked out with City Council or it's just sufficient being in the staff report that way or how does that work? Aanenson: This was a goal that was put into the PUD that is a part of this project. We wanted to try to make some of the goals of the Livable Communities Act. Obviously it's our objective to get as high as we can and we had looked at 35%. There needs to be some participation by the city and the EDA is looking at that but right now I think we've agreed that 35% is not achievable for this project to go forward. But at this point we're recommending at least 20%. We went for a grant based on getting affordable housing. It has to have some affordable housing to make it go forward. We're anticipating that we will still have additional affordable housing on the other side of 101 as a part of that project. Kind: Is that that new law that was just passed? 24 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Aanenson: Well the Livable Communities Act is what we signed on for and we're trying to do our due diligence and this is an area because we're in close proximity to downtown and we've got the other services there, that this would be the opportunity to put it in this location. Conrad: Mr. Chairman I'I1 take off on that question and that answer. So how do we encourage affordable housing in that project? How does that work Kate? Aanenson: Well, Bob and I spent the last two months and so has the EDA trying to work through those issues. So has the applicant. It's really tough based on land costs, construction costs, and trying to get market rate rents and how you make that work. Try to get it to market rent and then go beyond that to subsidize it. It's a very complex issue. 20% is the highest we can go unless there's some other funding sources available..where we're at. Trying to do a housing district and that's what we're going forward with. That's the best we can get based on again, construction costs, land costs. Getting a rate of return. Joyce: Is there a contract set up? I mean I think that's what everyone's asking. How are we assured that these rates. Aanenson: Yes. Yes. They're working with the EDA. Yes, putting together the housing district, yes. Joyce: Do they come once a year and, I'm assuming you have a 25 year. So I think it's set so that there's, you have the Livable Communities Act has some sort of, every year it goes up I assume with inflation and that. The rents or whatever and it's pegged against that and you've checked that once a year or something. Aanenson: Correct. Looking at the life of the district and yes. There's a check and balance. Joyce: Was that your question? Kind: Yes. Joyce: I thought so. Generous: They would actually have two contracts. One would be the site plan agreement and the second one would be any redevelopment agreement with the EDA. Conrad: One more question Mr. Chairman, or at least one. The existing vegetation on the lake side. Talk to me about the screening on the lake side for the residents before they do. Generous: This is Lake Susan. I think these two areas are bluffs as defined by ordinance so no vegetation... And then as part of their...so all these trees... Behind that we'll get additional landscaping. Our intention is to fill in any...that are created as part of the grading of the site with the new plants... They do have the storm water pond here...traditional over story trees, we look at putting in this area also. They will see the building from here. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Conrad: How high will the existing vegetation? How much will it cover? How much will it screen in terms of elevation against the 50 foot setback or 50 foot building elevation. Generous: At least half, maybe two-thirds. Conrad: The storm water pond, today that's all vegetation? Generous: Correct. Conrad: It's pretty much scrub vegetation there? Aanenson: Yes. Conrad: But it's not very high quality. Aanenson: No. Generous: Neither on the, the site doesn't have. You don't have oaks savannahs...you have the softer woods. Conrad: So that pond, we're removing all the vegetation in order to build that pond. That's a smart way to build a pond? Generous: That's the only way to build it. It's the low point for the entire development. Aanenson: Upside of the creek. Generous: And it has to be big enough to handle everything. And this. Conrad: Have to take down all the trees for buffering as much as I can. Generous: There should be some left along the lakeshore because they don't grade all the way to the lake. Their separation. That's also an area that we can look at additional landscaping if it turns out to be a big issue. We've made them relocate the discharge pipe from the storm water pond. Initially they had planned that into Lake Susan and so they're revising that to go into Riley Creek. So you won't have that area being revegetated. Conrad: So really are we exposing the homeowners to Highway 101 as we take down that vegetation? Aanenson: There's two approaches to that. Number one, you're improving the sight line for one I think which is, and we can go back and relandscape it. So you're looking at noise continuation, is that kind of what you're saying? Yeah, yeah. I think that's something we can certainly look at. The pond needs to go there. We always said as far as the environmental assessment, but 26 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 what I hear you saying is you're concerned about what's that going to do for what they're seeing. We can look at that. Conrad: Right, seeing and hearing. I don't think we're protecting any trees that are, you know I'm not too worried about cutting down the trees. They're there. I've looked at them. I've Rollerbladed by them. Alison's right in terms of that intersection. On Rollerblades that's just awful trying to get across so I don't do that anymore. But I don't know that we have a real good solution to that but I think we can have some solutions in terms of some screening there. Something. I think ifI were a lake homeowner there I'd... Peterson: Other questions? Blackowiak: Mr. Chair I've got just one more question. Can you talk to us a little bit about the changes on condition 39. Why they were made. Specifically is it going to be more tree loss? And if so, why are we doing it? Convince me that it's the best thing that we should be doing there. Generous: Well there might be a little bit more tree loss. I don't think it's...a lot of it. They haven't expanded their grading limits very much with that change. They just cut through a comer of the, actually it's the bluff impact zone. Not the...that they're going through this. It's, I think what they're looking at a 30 foot wide swath area and only half of that was not devegetated. Aanenson: Do you understand where it is? Blackowiak: Well I'm assuming it's kind of on the south end of Building C. Maybe show us on the. Generous: On the original plans. This third line runs down here. That's where they're proposing part of their... Their grading plans originally.., don't have the specific location of the trees in relationship to that. You could have canopy that over reaches that some. Blackowiak: Okay, and now wasn't it going to be on the other side before? Generous: No. The condition that we had in them would make them put it all...highway. At one time they looked at having it connect over on the west side. That's not feasible with the topography and the site layout because the buildings are in the way. They would have to come into this bluff area. They'd lose more trees then... We felt this was an acceptable area... It's open down at the bottom already along the sewer alignment. There is the metropolitan...It's just a little triangle piece... Blackowiak: So what happens to the bluff then in that spot? Just grade it away and we don't care? Generous: ...this is going to drop down significantly... 27 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Hempel: The grades would be restored back to original elevations through there. Blackowiak: Okay, and you feel that that's the better alternative then going back between the building? It's an acceptable alternative? Hempel: The other way is much more expensive having to tunnel underneath Highway 101. That was originally how it was proposed to be served with the preliminary utility plan for Villages on the Pond. Blackowiak: Okay, why there? I mean just. Hempel: They're already creating the disturbance with the watermain being extended underneath 101. Eventually the storm sewer will be extended underneath 101 in that location as well so it was just economically it was more feasible to extend all three utilities at the same time than one and then come back and do another later. This option here will be much more economical for the applicant and much more feasible given the proximity of the buildings than having to run it up the drive aisle and then branch off to the building site. Blackowiak: But they're going to be going under the highway anyway for the water, is that correct? Hempel: That's correct. Blackowiak: So why are we going off in another direction totally? Hempel: Well as Bob mentioned, the grading. The grading for the building and the site already will reduce the amount of canopy coverage from that comer and they could realign the sewer outside of the, or realign the sewer so it's within the grading that they're already doing and then not have to take down any more trees as well. That's an option too. Blackowiak: Okay. Peterson: Other questions? Conrad: I have one more Mr. Chairman. The lighting that would be visible to the surrounding neighbors in the area to the south. Would you describe what they might be. Generous: Well they have to do the 90 degree cutoff lighting for their parking lot area. Conrad: It could be screened. The parking lot area would be screened. Generous: Right, so the only openings they have is really on the driveway. They can get some through the trees in the winter. They'll see the lights from the windows and the general glow of the parking area. It's not heavily lighted. 28 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Kind: Mr. Chairman I have one more crosswalk question. Alison and Ladd spoke to the treacherousness of the trail crossing. I am wondering with the vision that this apartment complex is a part of Villages on the Pond. Folks wanting to get over to Villages on the Pond. They're not going to go down the trail connection to get back up to Villages. Should there be a crosswalk at Main Street? And if so, would that be just as treacherous as the trail connection? Hempel: Mr. Chairman, commissioners. I would strongly, would not recommend additional crosswalks at that location of Main Street given the close proximity of another crosswalk. Eventually there may be a crosswalk with the traffic signals at Lake Drive and 101 in the future. There is a trail along the west side of 101 from this site that takes you up to Rosemount. In that area. That would be more of an appropriate location for a crosswalk. Kind: Okay, thank you. Peterson: Other questions? Kate, my theme in the last few meetings I think I would prior to going to council again recommend that they do some color renderings and exterior renderings of the building be actually finished. It's difficult for me to really get a good clear sense of what the building feel was like. I know it was bullet pointed. How'd you get that? Kind: It just came this way. Blackowiak: I thought it was mine. I hogged it. Peterson: But I think give that in the same packet to council would be very helpful. I assume it would be helpful. With that, would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission. If so, please come forward and state your name and address please. Greg Hollingkamp: Hi, my name's Greg Hollingkamp. I'm with KKE Architects and we can give you a little bit of a presentation on the development and then answer some of your questions about the exterior and some of the other questions you had earlier here. First off on the site plan, if you can put this on the screen I'll point out a couple things. The site plan, well it's pretty straight forward but a couple things that you had questioned on the required parking. We show 302 cars and if you use that ratio that Bob talked about of the 1.7 cars per one bedroom unit and 2 cars per two bedroom unit, that would calculate out to 300 cars and what we're showing is 302 cars. The Fire Marshal had looked at the plan and had recommended through in this area that we increase the turning radius and that would eliminate 2 or I think it was 3 cars so we're basically in the same range as what we had talked about. On the wetland there was a question on the wetland. We need to increase the wetland by 3.7 acres or mitigate the wetland..37 acres. And currently there's a wetland on the north portion of the site, over in this area and there's also a wetland that occurs down in this area where the pond will be in the future. And when we look at that, just one thing we need to work with you on at the city. If we add .37 acres of wetland up in here it would basically take away all the woods on that part of the site and it might be a little odd to destroy the woods to put in wetlands so I think when we look at that, we may want to look at the ponding area that's going to be developed and look at mitigating wetland around that pond. I think that might be a more natural environment for that but we can work with staff on that. Also 29 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 on the entry to the development. We'd like to have you consider allowing us to put in a median in this location. We'd like to have a little nicer entry where the turn lane coming in and the turn lanes going out would be split by a landscape entry. When we looked at that early on with staff they had suggested maybe we eliminate that and I think it maybe had to do more with turning movements for emergency vehicles but we feel there's enough room there to accommodate both so we'd like you to consider that. On the lighting, as far as lighting from the neighbors to the south. Again, all of that should be pretty well screened because we will have the buffer of the bluffs here that Bob was talking about. We will have some wallpak lighting on the building but it will be limited to the garage entries which are on the ends of the building here. And those have to be shielded and that's again away from the residential area. The remainder of the lighting through the development and the parking lot would be a decorative type light that would fit in with the Village on the Ponds theme. And then also when you were asking about the view to the development and what the neighbors would see. One of the things we did when we laid out the development, again if you consider the trees in this area, that's going to screen out a fair amount of this development to begin with because it can't touch the bluffs. And then this building will be seen but the building's been turned sideways so really all you're looking at is the narrow view of that building as opposed to a long view of a building so we tried to minimize any impact there. I also think that when we look at the landscaping closer with staff, when we add more overstory trees, we may want to look at this area in here. Add additional trees to create that buffer, especially at the pond to reduce the amount of trees in this area. On the exterior of the building, we brought along some renderings and then also a sample board. And let's see here. You won't be able to see the colors. I can hand this to you here, but essentially what we've got is at each entry of the building, this would be a typical entry. We picked up on more of the traditional, old world flavor and then we've introduced a stone which you see here that will be an accent and nice warm colors to accentuate the entry area. The base material around the entire building is a textured rock face block that you see here. Again, I'll hand these to you so you can see them a little closer. Then you can see the roof. It's a heavier shingle style roof. Has a little bit of shadow to it with, you know staying with the brown tones. And then we have a mix of composite siding and shakes. The shakes are used in the bay areas again to give a little older world flavor to it. We also have mixed in balconies in some units. Bay windows in some units. Optional fireplaces in some units so that you'll have the chimneys breaking up the roof line as well. And the roof line has a fairly steep pitch to it because we want that old world flavor to kind of carry through there as well. This, maybe you can see it a little bit better here. These are the colors of the material. I think a nice blend with color. And I think with that we'll just answer any questions you have. Peterson: Questions of the applicant? Kind: I noticed you spoke of composite. On the plan it talks of vinyl or composite material for the boarding and the shake. Can you speak to what you're preferring and why? Greg Hollingkamp: Well, what we're doing right now, frankly we're pricing out the entire project and we can do a lot with vinyl siding. There are some good products out there now and it's a nice product. Low maintenance. That would be a preference to go with a vinyl siding. 3O Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 When you get into the shakes, typically those are cedar shakes and so we'd have a blend of the two materials. Kind: My concern is the composite. My experience is that that is not a great long term material and I'm hearing you agree with that. Greg Hollingkamp: That's correct. Peterson: Other questions? Blackowiak: Mr. Chair I have a question. Talked about the affordable units and we're looking at 20%. Do you plan to spread that 20% out among the buildings or are you going to concentrate it all in one building? What's your thought on that? Greg Hollingkamp: Well I think the idea has been to spread that out and Shel Wert can speak to that. Sheldon Wert: Hi. My name is Sheldon Wert. I'm the developer of the property. And the units are going to be spread throughout the buildings. It won't be in one particular area. The affordable income units are all being built in the same fashion that all of the other units. There's no physical difference in them. And we have them in our proformas spread out through the entire rental scheme. Kind: I have another question. Could the applicant speak to the Parking issue? Do you think that 1.7 is adequate for the one bedroom units? What if they have company over? How does that all work? Sheldon Wert: Yes, it should be adequate. Number of communities that we do apartments in actually go down to 1.5 per unit which would be 162 units. It would be 240 some cars. In that range so we're in excess of that already. One of the big driving factors for us is to make sure we have one car parking underground for each unit and that's driven primarily by the market and this achieves that and then we supplement it with the on grade parking. Peterson: Other questions? Sidney: One more question for the applicant. You mentioned optional chimneys. What are the materials that the chimneys would be made of?. Is it galvanized? Greg Hollingkamp: Actually it'd be optional fireplaces. And then the chimneys would go with that. We haven't picked out a material for the chimneys. Sidney: Blend in color I presume and everything like that. Okay. Peterson: Other questions? Okay, thank you. Can I have a motion and a second for a public hearing please. 31 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Joyce moved, Blackowiak seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Jim Amundson: My name's Jim Amundson, 8500 Great Plains Boulevard. I'm concerned about, from what I see tonight, the holding pond on the south end. Is that going to be completely, is 101 going to be right to the lake then? There's going to be the road, the pond, the lake. Hempel: Mr. Chairman, maybe I can address that. Jim Amundson: The way it looks, we're clearing all those trees out to the creek. Hempel: The location of the ponding. Existing Highway 101. Future Highway 101. The corridor through here will be expanded for additional... There's also going to be a holding pond south of the creek... Jim Amundson: My concern on that is, I mean that's all trees in there. It's the best, I shouldn't tell anybody, best fishing spot. And it's all trees and...and now we're going to tear that down and build a holding pond which will show 101. Increase our noise levels with cars going through there and I think as you know 101 is crazy. And when we're looking at this concept, we look at 101 and Market. I live south. That traffic horrendous right now. We always think of that intersection but we put a crosswalk there for the new trail system and you see people Rollerblading and running. Literally running with their kids across that street. So from what I see tonight I think there's a lot of questions to this thing and I don't see how anything can be passed and sent on to anywhere so I hope you take that in consideration. The property owners there and what we go through. I mean that's a beautiful lake and to start clear cutting some of that and putting in holding ponds, increasing noise, it just destroys the lake. Peterson: Thank you. Kathy Holtmeier: I'm Kathy Holtmeier. I live at 8524 Great Plains Boulevard. When I was listening to this I wrote down four concerns that I had. Number one's with the height of the apartment buildings. When this was developed before and the city owned the lake property around, most of the lake, we had talked about keeping the height of the properties so that the residents around the lake could not see it. So like right across the lake everything is tree lined. This sounds as if it's going to be higher than that and I'm concerned that that will, the apartment buildings will be kind of in our face if you want to say that. The second concern I have was the sewer that you had mentioned. If they have access to the sewer the way they talked about, they are going to really be ripping up that part of the lake rather than, and it seems like it would be to save the applicant money, even though that may not be the best solution for the lake itself. The third one I had was just the same thing. The amount of traffic that this would generate when we already know that it's a problem and there doesn't seem to be any kind of solution for that. And 32 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 the third I was wondering, we hadn't discussed what kind of lake access this apartment complex would have. I noticed on page 12, number 7 they talked about development of a beach lot. And my understanding was we already have a public access on the lake with the public, now we have a public beach. And that that should be sufficient. Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else? Jim Jacoby: My name's Jim Jacoby.~8410 Gre,a_t Plains Boulevard. I had a couple things and some I would like to reiterate evers~hing else Ive heard from the public. I think those are all good issues. Another thing I think with the holding pond today, when it rains really hard, that water's flowing over 101 today even so I don't know how when you get more collection of water with more asphalt and more runoff, it's just going to get worse. I mean we've had a lot of trouble with the development across the street and the amount of runoff that's now going into the lake and coming across and how much I have on occasion seen the water going over 101 when it rains hard so I haven't seen that addressed at all in any of these plans because that culvert they put in when they redid that 101 there is not sufficient upon a heavy rain day to compensate for the water. And you know, and I think just everything else. What's the other thing? And also you know like you talked about parking. If the city has requirements on parking, you told the other people that came today that they can amend their plans. Well, I heard a kind of flip comment saying well we can get rid of more trees. Well you can get rid of more units. There's more than one way to solve a problem so I'll throw that out there that those are my comments, thank you. Peterson: Thank you. Kyle Tidstrom: Hi, Kyle Tidstrom, 8679 Chanhassen Hills and I'd reiterate all that's already been said. But in addition, when they talk about well we'll take a few trees down there but then we'll plant some more trees in. Some of those trees may be those big cottonwoods that have all the canopy down there. And if you cut down a 50 or 60 foot tree, I haven't seen anybody planting trees that size yet. You've got a 50 foot building and you're going to landscape. At best you're putting in 15 to 18 foot trees and you put those in and they aren't going to grow for a while. We're not going to see any canopy or shade or sight line improvement from landscaping while I'm alive. Maybe while my grand kids are. If you cut that sewer line down there, my calculations are if the peak of that lot is listed here as 969 feet and the lake is 881, and the sewer runs below the level of the lake, you're talking about maybe a 100 foot down to get that. You've got to have a column cut 200 feet wide to get down 100 feet without collapsing and killing those people putting that sewer down. So it might be a small comer that it runs through when all is said and done for the pipe but in order to get that pipe down to that length, you're going to have a real wide aisle cut through there or you're going to risk burying these guys that are putting that pipe in. And in addition I heard this issue on the beach lot to the dock and I can't talk to the history of this thing but I think somewhere in the minutes of when Rosemount was developed, when the trail was developed, when Lake Susan Hills was developed, there must be somewhere in the minutes there that there's some belief that that existing public access, which is extremely active if you spend any time around that lake, was providing adequate access and that to me is a big issue as far as safety on the lake. When you get on there on a weekend, we don't even let our kids on there because it's already active to the point with that public access that you get more 33 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 than two boats on a lake that size, it becomes unsafe. So I think that hits all the issues that I had written on. Other than you said that the zoning for that area was already talked about but is there an overall density zoning ordinance in town for high density housing? Aanenson: The entire city has a future land use. There is guiding for different zonings throughout the community. This was given a PUD zoning as Bob indicated in the item before. An Environmental Assessment document was done for the entire Villages on the Pond, including how we're going to handle storm water, tree removal and zoning and specific land use. This area was guided for higher density and given a total number of units on the site. Which it is consistent with. Peterson: While you're talking you want to address the beach lot issue also. Aanenson: Beach lot is a separate permit. They'd have to come back in and get a beach lot application. It would have to meet the criteria. But they'd have to go through another public hearing and a process to get that. Generous: Mr. Chairman, I did a quick review of that based on the ordinance. They have 770 feet of lake frontage. By ordinance they would be permitted up to 3 docks. 9 mooring sites. Aanenson: They have to have so many dedicated acreage though. I'm not sure they've got that. They've got to have so many acreage on the lake also. Dedicated for the beach lot. I'm not sure they meet that criteria. I haven't looked at that, but it is a separate process. Peterson: Anyone else wishing to address the commission? Barbara Jacoby: I'm Barbara Jacoby, 8516 Great Plains. You mentioned that you're going to put 322 units across 101. Did you not say that tonight? Generous: As part of the entire development, up to 322 dwelling units were approved. Barbara Jacoby: For both sides? Generous: Total, yes. Barbara Jacoby: Oh okay. I misunderstood, I'm sorry. Gene Klein: My name is Gene Klein, 8412 Great Plains Boulevard. I just had a question on the trail that's existing there now. Is that not a city trail? City parkland? Aanenson: No. Gene Klein: How can you put a beach lot in front of, on city parkland? 34 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Hempel: Mr. Chairman, it's actually a trail easement 20 foot wide over the property. We do not own the property. We have the right for a trail across the property only. Gene Klein: That was my question. Peterson: Thank you. Tammy Harris: Hi. Tammy Harris, 8408 Great Plains Boulevard. I support all of the opinions shared by the others of my neighbors here in this room. Some of my concerns, actually my primary one deals with the traffic on 101. 101 is an extremely unsafe road. And I also have a question for you Dave. The MnDOT study that you had mentioned earlier. Were the conclusions of that that 85% of the drivers on 101 are driving the speed limit? Because you threw out a 85 percent figure and I invite all of you to my home someday and we'll sit on the lawn and gauge that. I just have a really hard time believing that. And I would urge the commission not to even consider this project until the results of an updated traffic impact study are completed. Also I'm concerned about tree preservation in the area. I find it kind of ironic that the plans are showing the removal of all these trees and they're talking about well let's tear them down but when we're done we'll relandscape and put trees back in. Why don't we just leave the existing trees there? Peterson: Thank you. A1 Klingelhutz: Al Klingelhutz, 8600 Great Plains Boulevard. I guess a big concern to a lot of people on the lake is the use of the lake. When the public access was put in, Rosemount Engineering came in the subdivision west of the lake. It was agreed that there would be no more dockage on the lake. How many boats do they expect to put on these docks? On this dock off the lake. A big question. Has there ever been a study done to show how many boats at one time can be used on the lake? We heard before on weekends, and I live on the lake, and I won't even go out fishing on the lake. All I've got is a pontoon. But the one end is up as high as your desk there and the other end is down here. With all the waves on the lake at the present time and if we get any more boats on there, we won't even have a shoreline left because it's going to wash it all out. It's only a 90 acre lake and to expect to put much more on it, and I think it was agreed at the time and I'm sure it was. When Lake Susan Hills came in, they all had to stay back from the lake. They were above the bluff. Went into the open fields. No trees were removed. We had all the big oak trees and all the trees that were there previously. That is the buffer. Even from my place and I'm not far from Lake Susan Hills, I can barely see any houses in the whole subdivision because of all the original trees. I think Rosemount Engineering, that came in when I was Mayor of Chanhassen. We made them stay above the tree line with their building and that's 300 feet away from the lake. In the summertime when the trees are leafed out you can hardly see it. In the wintertime through the trees without any leaves, you can see Rosemount Engineering. 50 foot building. Somewhere in the ordinance, unless it was changed, we've got a 40 foot height limit in the city of Chanhassen. And I can remember that distinctly when, I don't know if I was on the council or Mayor at the time, but some people wanted to even make it lower. I said well you can't do it because the farmer's silos are all over 40 feet. So they put in this limit of 40 feet. I can't quite understand how things can change when the policy has been established on a lake. 35 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 If there wouldn't have been any homes on Lake Susan, no one would have had access to the lake. It'd be just like Lake Ann. Lake Ann has no access on the lake. Now you want to get more people and 152 units, possibly 350 people with the kids or more, to be able to use that lake with a dock and they have every right to have a boat and go onto public access. So I definitely would be against any dockage for this many units on the lake. If you put homes on a, single family homes along the lake, how many homes would you get? You've got 387 feet and you take 90 to 100 feet for each home. You'd have about 38 homes. Here you're looking at 162 homes. That's quite a difference. Just where is the open space on this? Can you show me in the map? The open space on this property. So it's along the side of the lake. You get down to the south end of the lake where the creek runs. Are you going to put a ponding area on the south side of the creek? Aanenson: When 101 gets realigned, correct. A1 Klingelhutz: I don't know, after all the rains we've had, you have a ponding area there already because it was all water almost up to Armstrong's house. Was there any consideration on the traffic problem on 101 after new 212 starts dumping traffic onto it? Plus the fact that there's a lot of area south of Highway 212. Hundreds of acres yet that have got potential housing developments on it. Has that been figured into the study on traffic on Highway 1017 Hempel: Mr. Chairman, I believe it has been addressed. Pre-212 and Post-212 development conditions. Peterson: Chances it will go four lane.., so the road will be upgraded substantially prior to 212. Al Klingelhutz: I know the road will be upgraded. There's already a 200 foot alignment with two lanes on each side with a center island. How much will 101 be raised where the crosswalk goes underneath? (There was a tape change during Dave Hempel's answer to A1 Klingelhutz' question.) A1 Klingelhutz: ...That underground trail, you say the trail only has to be raised 4 to 6 feet or 2 feet? Are the people going to crawl through it? Imean most people are between 5 and 6 feet tall and you want them to be able to walk through it. The road isn't raised anyplace there at the present time that I know of. Hempel: No it's not Mr. Chairman. It's very similar to the Powers Boulevard trail south of Highway 5. Similar street design I believe and that trail crossing. Aanenson: Or the one at Coulter. Hempel: Or the one at Coulter. Aanenson: ... structure that's under grade. Have them other places in the city. 36 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Peterson: Gradual descent with a path going down. Winding around. A1 Klingelhutz: The new trail doesn't show on this map. Aanenson: Not yet. Al Klingelhutz: ... Aanenson: 101's on this side. A1 Klingelhutz: ...How about the lighting? Is there going to be as much lighting as they made St. Hubert's put up? Sometimes I look at that as light pollution, not as something that's really pretty to look at. Peterson: Bob, do you want to address the lighting issue? A1 Klingelhutz: What? Peterson: I'm asking Bob to address the lighting question. Generous: Where do you start? It was in St. Hubert's proposal for security purposes. They recommended that lighting. We don't believe that this site will have as much lighting. Their parking area is very limited. The buildings will frame the lighting if you will, or will corral it all so it's concentrated in the center of their project. As development in the Villages on the Pond comes forward, a lot of this spillover lighting will be eliminated. Unfortunately it's vacant now and so you can see it for miles. Aanenson: Also we've changed our ordinance to require the cutoff lighting since that has been approved so... A1 Klingelhutz: ...every time I look out of the picture window over the lake and I see all the lights up at Lake Susan...the waste of electricity. I've talked to Father Steve here a while ago and he says you know what our electric bill is? $3,500.00 a month. That's a lot of money. And a lot of it is wasted on way too many lights there. On the south end or the southwest end there is no bluff there. When we're set back...where the bluff is. Peterson: Ask that question again. Aanenson: Where they're showing it is where they're going to be. I mean there's a topo map that shows that. We'd be happy to sit down with anybody that wants to go through the topo maps or look through any of this. We'd be happy to sit down and explain it to them. But we've got the bluff outline on the topography, the topo map showing where that is and how the buildings relate to it. They cannot be in the bluff impact zone. They are not in the bluff impact zone. They're required to stay out of it by ordinance. 37 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Peterson: So Al, if you want to sit down with staff maybe afterwards and go through that, they'd be... A1 Klingelhutz: Okay. I guess that's all. Aanenson: If I can make one more clarification about the beach lot. They are not applying for a beach lot at this time. That was brought up during the environmental assessment document. We know it's a sensitive issue. There's certain criteria they have to meet in order to get a beach lot. It has to be a separate lot. They'd have to split offa separate lot. Dedicated for the beach lot. It has to be a minimum of 30,000 square feet with 200 feet of frontage. That gives them one dock with three boats and then they would need additional square footage and additional frontage to get that. We're not sure that they've got the property to accomplish it at this time. It's not being proposed at this time. Does that mean they may not come back and ask it in the future? They may. But it's not being considered at this time. Make sure everybody's clear on that. Peterson: Thank you. Other comments? Brad Willmsen: My name is Brad Willmsen, 8510 Great Plains Boulevard. You just commented on that the beach lot is not being proposed right now. But I'd like to address it anyway just to, I'd like to give my feelings on it. 90 acres is a small lake. It's got to be one of the smallest lakes in Chanhassen. Right now it's in, being that small, heavy rains the level of that lake goes up and down very fast so since we had so much rain this spring, with all the activity we have now on that lake, the shorelines really take a beating a lot because the water levels can be really high quite often. And if you put that many more people with direct access to the lake and just to me it seems like that's just too much for that small of a lake. So I just wanted to express that. Thanks. Peterson: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, motion and a second to close the public hearing. Blackowiak moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. Anybody want to offer their, any comments on this one? Joyce: Could I ask a quick question Mr. Chairman of the. Kate, just so I understand this. Can you give us right now, I know this isn't an issue but I think there is an issue for everybody here. Do you feel comfortable telling us right now what would be the maximum amount of docks or boats that, if they were requested. Aanenson: First of all they'd have to create a separate lot. A beach lot. I'm not sure how they could carve out a 30,000 square foot lot. When this originally, the original PUD came forward, the developer had looked at putting a recreational area down there. A tennis courts and some other facilities. The staff at that point was adamant against that. We wanted to leave this open. Certainly with the property being sold, they have a right to come back and request but they do 38 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 have to create a separate lot that has to have a minimum square footage just to get one dock of 30,000 square feet. 200 feet of shoreline. To get one dock which would allow 3 boats. I'm not sure that you'd want to approve that subdivision to create that lot. That's the first issue. Joyce: So I mean what we're saying is they, even if we were to approve that, you're only talking about three slips? Aanenson: Right. You may not choose to approve that subdivision. And then it would be a conditional use. You can attach any conditions you want to mitigate the impact. Our original recommendation from the staff was not to. Now if they came back and said we'd like to put a dock out there for people to go out and sit on, put a bench on the end. You may agree at some time in the future. Again they're not asking for that tonight but you may in the future decide that might be something, an amenity that you may want to put there as long as there's no boat launching or something like that. You could put those kind of conditions in there but we did look at that at the original proposal. Joyce: The other question I had, after listening to this and after listening to some of the commissioners comments is, I'm a little sketchy on what kind of buffers we were talking about. When we were talking about taking down those trees. I know Ladd you questioned how much of those were going to come down and, again just maybe some feedback from you. Do you have a good feel for what? Aanenson: Right, and I think the architect brought up a good point too as far as locating some of the trees. We want to put those in the area where they're doing the best to buffer. Obviously the residents enjoy looking at that treed area. It is a significant stand of trees and making sense to put them down in that lower end if we're taking down for the ponding. Working and siting them in the best location to block the buildings and to mitigate the impact of losing those trees where the pond is. So that's something that we would work at between now and when this goes to City Council. Try to develop a better landscaping plan. Joyce: I'm just, I guess I'm on the fence whether we wait to see that. Maybe everyone would be more comfortable. I think there were three issues here. There's the recreational lot. Aanenson: Well the recreational lot's not before you. Joyce: It's not an issue so, as far as I'm concerned it's not an issue for me but I'm just saying it was an issue with the other people and I think maybe we've addressed that. Secondly is these trees that are coming down and their view sheds of what's happening with this project. And then thirdly is the traffic and I don't think that's ever going to be resolved so, where I'm at is just, I'm concerned about landscape I guess. I'm just throwing those, I don't have an answer. I'm just saying. I'm a little uncomfortable about it. Peterson: Kate can you, we can make that a condition prior to going to council that the landscaping issue be addressed more thoroughly, is the easy way out .... comfortable doing that as a commission. 39 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Aanenson: Again we go back, our comfort level is there because we worked on the original environmental. We saw what was going to come out in the replacement. We looked at where the storm water was going to go and the traffic analysis so while some of you are newer, you're looking at it in a narrow time warp. We're looking at this over the life of and there are certain things that we recognize we would be giving up to be getting on the other side. Preservation of the bluff was important. We knew we would lose some of the interior trees but we want to preserve the bluff and the significant trees. And what they're agreed to in working with Jill is to go back and do a reforestation or replanting. Certainly we understand the concern of what they're going to look at, the neighbors across the lake and reducing that sight line and making it pleasant and trying to get it back. Are they going to be tall, some of the tall cottonwoods that are there now? No. I think we are going to preserve the significant stands. The no touch zones on the bluff and the north end at Rosemount. But there will be trees coming down. Peterson: Other comments? Kind: One more tree question that came up with one of the neighbors asked about the holding pond area. Will any of the trees right along the shoreline be preserved or do they all go away to create that pond? Aanenson: They should be preserved. Generous: Should be preserved. We have a strip that they're not grading into. Aanenson: I mean there's a buffer between the pond doesn't go right to the lake. Hempel: As well as along Riley Creek. Kind: So you won't be able to see Lake Susan from 101 when you're driving by? Hempel: I'd say there's probably going to be openings in the trees because I mean you've got a swath of trees out there, 150-200 feet wide now. That may be narrowed up to 20 feet from the shore with trees left so. Peterson: Other comments? Burton: I have a question for staff again. On the, with respect to traffic and the study that they're being required to do. If the study shows that say they need a light at 101 and Main Street, does that mean that they can just go ahead and build a light there? Since they have to implement whatever it shows. Can they go ahead and put a light in if that's what their study shows? Hempel: If the study recommends that that be installed, then another step has to occur and that's with MnDOT to go through a traffic signal justification report it's called so it does take some time. And MnDOT would look to the city and/or developer probably to have that installed. 4O Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Blackowiak: But Dave would that be then, before the development's started? Hempel: Concurrence with the development, yes. It's going to take them many months to build this out. 120 days. Something like that to build this out. Aanenson: 18 months complete. Blackowiak: 18 months? Aanenson: To get all the units, yes. Burton: How long does it take to do a traffic study? Hempel: I'm sorry, I didn't hear that. Burton: How long does it take to do a traffic study? Hempel: I would imagine that the original traffic study can be updated within 30 days. Peterson: Other questions? Conrad: Just some comments and maybe they're more comments than questions for the people that are here. I think their concerns were, are addressed in the staff report right now and you're probably not look at it but the lighting issue is addressed in the staff report. Landscaping issue is addressed in the staff report. And a third, the traffic study is addressed. It's there so whatever the motion is, if it's pro or con, it's those things are being looked at. Their concern of the staff and of us. In my mind it's probably good to send the signal to the developer that there's a concern with the beach lot so although it's not up tonight, there's a concern. The lake can handle five boats properly. Based on 20 acres per boat is what the DNR sets as a standard. So it's a tough one Al. I live with that all the time when I see boats out on lakes but there are standards out there but the beach lot is, when it comes back, it should be, I would sure like to see it. If it's there, more of a passive beach lot. I think it's a good project. I like the looks of it personally. I like, I think there's some really nice things. Underground parking is nice. I think the real issue, and you've heard it and I'm just going to repeat it because if I make the motion it's going to be there. I think we do have to look very directly at the ponding and the landscaping around the ponding and the buffering from 101. I think that's a real imposition on the lake owners right now and we've got to look at it and I'm going to be recommending, or whoever makes the motion, that we take a certain look at that and that we get the developer to do some perspectives for us so we can see it. And I'm not too terribly. I like the building elevations that they've presented there. Good looking elevations. To me they are so I think you're getting some quality stuff in there. We've known about this project, or about things happening for a long time so it's sort of probably shocking when you see it coming in but it's not a surprise to me. And no matter what, you're going to end up with ponding. No matter what... It's going to happen. But that's, those are the key things. Again, I just think everybody should know in the staff report are some 41 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 reviews. Critical reviews of the things that you brought up. I don't think anything was left out to my knowledge. Peterson: Thank you. Other comments? Questions? Hearing none, is there a motion and a second? Conrad: I would make that Mr. Chairman. I would move that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #99~9 for a three building apartment development within Villages on the Pond development. Each building will be three stories with 54 units for a total of 162, plans prepared by KKE dated 4/16/99, subject to the conditions of the staff report 1 through 47 with the following changes. On condition 26. That the developer and staff review the landscaping that would be between or around the new holding pond and Highway 101. And to present this, a perspective of that to the City Council. With the intent, this doesn't have to be in the motion. But with the intent that we're trying to buffer noise and sight from the current homeowners. Condition 48. I would like to have the applicant show a perspective from the lake of the building with the tree coverage as, showing the amount of building that is seen from maybe across the lake. I think that's important to see. Condition number 49. That the staff review the, with the applicant, the median dividing the entry to the site to see if it adds to character but not at the expense of congestion or hazard. I'd be open to any other friendly amendments .... thanks Bob. Would you like me to note condition 39 as to the revision? Is that all I need to do? And then we would revise condition 39 in the staff report per the handout that we received tonight from staff on June 2nd. Joyce: Is there a traffic study in one of these conditions? Conrad: Yeah. Yeah, there sure is. The traffic study would be done before this got approved. Joyce: Okay. Burton: That's 36. Conrad: Would you like to make any kind of amendment to that? I don't know what I'd do. Burton: I'm not sure what I would say either. Peterson: There's a motion on the table. Conrad: I think you'd better second my motion and then there could be a friendly amendment. Joyce: I'll second the motion. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Kind: I have an offer for a friendly amendment. 46(b). Parking spaces must meet city ordinance of 2 per unit. What do you think? Okay, doesn't work. 42 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Peterson: Is that accepted? Conrad: No. Peterson: Other discussion points? One thing I'd like to note, the applicant really hasn't locked in their materials yet and I think prior to Council I really would like to at least have staff work with them to be sure that the chimney has been picked out and materials and the exact materials are picked out. It's a sizable enough project that let's be sure we do it right. It's been moved and seconded, any further discussion? Conrad moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #99-9 for a three building apartment development within the Villages on the Ponds development on Lot 1, Block 1, Villages on the Ponds 6th Addition, each building will be three stories with 54 units for a total of 162 units, plans prepared by KKE, dated 4/16/99, subject to the following conditions: The developer shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 4 Site plan approval is contingent on the city granting final plat approval for Outlot J, Villages on the Ponds, creating a block and lot designation for the site upon which the apartment complex is to be built. o A minimum of 20 percent of the units shall be affordable for a period of not less than 25 years from the date of certification of occupancy for the three buildings. Project identification signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in sign display area nor be greater than five feet in height. A separate sign permit shall be required prior to the installation of signage. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from public right-of-ways by walls of compatible appearing material or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. o A lighting plan shall be submitted to the city for review and approval prior to site construction. Wall pack units must be screened so that they do are not directly visible from off site. Development of a beach lot shall require separate Conditional Use Permit approval by the city. The applicant shall pay park and trail fees at the time of building permit application pursuant to city ordinance. 43 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 An additional two fire hydrants will be required. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. 10. A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees, bushes, shrubs, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 11. Submit radius turn dimensions in parking lots to determine fire department vehicle access. Submit turn dimensions to Chanhassen City Engineer and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. Pursuant to 902.2.2.3, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. 12. Required access. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided in accordance with Sections 901 and 902.2 for every facility, building or portion of a building, hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction of any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building that is located more than 150 feet from fire apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exceptions - #2. When access roads cannot be installed due to location on property, topography, waterways, negotiable grades or other similar conditions, the Chief is authorized to require additional fire protection as specified in Section 1001.9. Because apparatus access roads are not accessible to within 150 feet of all portions of the building we are requiring the following additional fire protection features. a. Fire sprinkler the attic space with an approved NFPA 13 system. b. Provide fire sprinkler protection in the underground parking garage with an approved NFPA 13 system. c. Provide class III standpipes in all stairwells at each floor. d. Note: The building itself will be required to be fire sprinklered per the building code. All fire sprinkler plans must be submitted to the Fire Marshal/Inspector for review and approval. 13. Fire lane signage and yellow curbing will be determined by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location of fire lane signs and curbing to be painted yellow. Pursuant to Section 904-1, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. 14. The buildings shall.comply with Chanhassen Fire Department policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29- 1992. Copy enclosed. 15. If any trees are to be removed, they must either be chipped or hauled off site. Dueto close proximity of neighboring homes no burning permits will be issued. 16. Regarding the existing buildings on site to be removed, contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal for determination if any buildings can be burned if they prove training value. 44 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 17. Install and indicate on utility plans locations for PIV (Post Indicator Valve). Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal for exact location. 18. Timing of installation. When fire protection, including fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed, such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. Pursuant to Section 901.3, 1997 Uniform Fire Code. 19. Comply with the Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding fire department notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy 04-1991. Copy enclosed. 20. Demolition permits must be obtained to demolish the existing structures and utilities, wells and sewage treatment systems must be abandoned. 21. The site utility plan was not reviewed at this time. 22. Access for people with disabilities must be provided to all facilities. 23. The building owner and or designer should meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss plan review and permit procedures. 24. Tree protection fencing shall be installed around all areas designated for preservation. 25. The number of overstory trees shall be increased to meet minimum reforestation requirements. 26. Developer and staff shall review landscaping between and around the pond and Highway 101 to assure adequate buffering. 27. Grading within the bluff and bluff setback areas shall be prohibited. The applicant shall redesign the site facilities and/or incorporate the use of retaining walls to eliminate grading into the bluff setback zone. 28. Utility improvements which lie outside of the public right-of-way for drainage and utility easements shall be privately owned and maintained by the applicant or successors. 29. The existing house and outbuildings on the property shall be razed within 30 days after final plat is recorded. In addition, the well and septic system shall be abandoned in accordance with local and state health/building codes. 30. The access point onto Trunk Highway 101 is subject to MnDOT approval. The applicant will be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits for construction of the right-mm lanes and 45 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 all work within Highway 101 right-of-way. 31. The applicant shall design and construct the public utility improvements in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications for the public improvements shall be submitted to city staff for review and formal approval by the City Council in conjunction with final plat approval. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the final plat and provide financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the public improvements. 32. The applicant shall report to the city engineer the location of any draintile found during construction. The applicant will comply with the city engineer's direction as far as abandonment or relocation of the draintile. 33. The applicant shall develop a temporary sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH) to control erosion during construction. Additional Type I erosion control fencing will be required around the grading limits along Highway 101. Wood fiber blanket and/or sod shall be utilized at all slopes in excess of 3:1 and in the ditches along Highway 101. 34. The driveway access from Highway 101 to the site shall be a minimum of 36 feet wide, back- to-back with concrete curb and gutter with a left mm lane, shared through right mm drive aisle. The main driveway aisle width from the garage entrances to the parking lot shall be 28-feet wide, face-to-face. A 6-foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed along the north side of the driveway aisle from Highway 101 to the sidewalk proposed for Building A. 35. All private streets/parking lots shall be constructed in accordance with the City's Ordinance No. 20-1118 which requires a minimum 26-foot wide driveway aisle built to 7-ton design. 36. The applicant shall update the traffic study prepared by SRF for Villages on the Ponds to take into consideration the additional apartment building gaining access at the intersection of Main Street and Highway 101 and install any necessary traffic mitigation measures recommended in the updated traffic study. 37. The applicant shall be responsible for providing an interim trail connection around Lake Susan to the pedestrian crossing at Highway 101 during construction. This interim trail section may consist of a class V gravel surface. 38. The applicant shall petition the City to vacate trail easements which will be no longer utilized. In addition, the applicant shall rededicate to the City a new 20-foot wide trail easement centered upon the new trail aligmnent. 39. Sanitary sewer service to the site shall be extended to the connection at the manhole adjacent to the trail as shown on the plans. A reforestation plan in addition to the landscaping already required for the project shall be prepared and submitted to the city for approval to replace the 46 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 trees removed due to the sewer line extension. The water line shall be jacked underneath Highway 101. Open cutting on Highway 101 will not be permitted. 40. The applicant shall be responsible for the extension of the trunk storm sewer from the proposed regional stormwater pond to the driveway entrance to the site. The applicant will be entitled to credits against the SWMP fees for installation of the trunk storm sewer line in accordance the City's Surface Water Management Plan. 41. Plans shall be revised to incorporate an outlet control structure in the regional pond. The outlet control structure shall be located on the southwesterly comer of the pond to discharge into the creek versus Lake Susan. 42. The applicant shall re-evaluate the water needs due to the fact that a looped water system is not available. 43. If material is imported or exported from the site, the applicant will need to provide the City with a detailed haul route for review and approval. If the material is to be imported or exported to/from another site in Chanhassen, it should be noted that those other parcels will be required to obtain an earthwork permit from the City. 44. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the regulatory agencies such as the Minnesota Department of Health, MCES, Watershed District, Minnesota DNR, MPCA and MnDOT. 45. The applicant shall submit detailed storm sewer and pond calculations for post- and pre- development conditions. The calculations shall be for a 1 O-year and 100-year, 24-hour storm event. The pond shall be designed in accordance with the Villages on the Ponds storm drainage plan (NURP standards). 46. The applicant shall redesign the parking lot per staff's alternate parking lot plan dated May 12, 1999. 47. Either the site developer or the Villages on the Ponds developer must establish 0.37 acres of new wetlands to fulfill the obligation of the Wetland Alteration Permit. 48. The applicant shall provide to City Council a perspective from the lake of the development with the preserved tree coverage. 49. Staff shall review with the applicant the installation of a median at the entrance with respect to congestion and traffic hazards." All voted in favor, except Blackowiak and Kind who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 2. Peterson: The two people who said nay, would you like to make comments for the same please. 47 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Blackowiak: I have three major comments. First I think the development is premature. We should not go ahead with this until 101 is upgraded. You're effectively land locking the residents with no safe crosswalks which I think is contrary to the pedestrian oriented nature of the Villages. So you're going to set them over them and say, they're in a pedestrian friendly environment but you take your life in your hands if you cross 101 so hop in your car and drive across the road. Secondly I think the sewer on the southeast comer is a mistake. I don't think it's in the city's best interest and we're not getting bluff preservation with that. And finally, I think that the beach lot will be coming. I don't care that it's not here tonight. I think that the issue needs to be addressed with the preliminary plat and show some possibilities for a beach lot because it will be coming. Kind: I echo what Alison said and I also have concern .about parking. I've lived in apartment buildings. They have shortage of parking spots and it's no fun. Peterson: Okay. This goes on to Council on the 14th of this month. Thank you. Generous: No, the 28th. Peterson: The 28th of this month. So noted. Thank you all for coming and your comments. REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 9~800 SQ. FT. SWIM SCHOOL TO BE LOCATED ON OUTLOT Gl VILLAGES ON THE PONDS 6TM ON PROPERTY ZONED PUDI PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-MIXED USE AND LOCATED AT CORNER OF GRANDVIEW ROAD AND LAKE DRIVEl JON FOSS SWIM SCHOOL. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Peterson: Any questions of staff?. Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman I've got a couple questions. Both have to do with building size. Building size and lot size. First I see that the lot size is listed at 2.4 acres. I'm wondering where you're finding those. And then my second question has to do with the sheet that I have, this old sheet from Villages and it lists all the different lot numbers. And I've kind of kept it. And according to this, this is Lot 15 or Building 15. It's listed as a one story, 8,825 square foot building. And I'm wondering if that is the high end. Is the building too large for that piece. Generous: The 2.4 is actually a mistake. They were showing all ofOutlot G. So it's gotten smaller. They're revising that plat and that will be going to Council June 14th. Exceeding that number. Within the Villages we're trading off all over. We have a cap that we cannot exceed and so we're still under that. Blackowiak: Okay, so then what is the impervious coverage with the new acreage? So if it's not 2.4, how big is it? What percentage are we at with? 48 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Generous: I don't have that number but this site was all, almost completely impervious as a part of the Villages concept. Blackowiak: So you don't care is what you're telling me? Aanenson: What we're doing is keeping a running balance. We're keeping a running balance. Generous: Actually they could pave the entire upper part of the development and still meet the 30%. Aanenson: We've got it in the lower half. Blackowiak: Okay. Generous: But we are getting within each site we do get a lot of green areas and we keep building on that. We get the landscape elements throughout the project. We get the pedestrian connection. The public realm spaces that are so important to us and...Livable Communities Act. I don't have the exact square footage of the site. That's something I requested of the developer. Aanenson: Just for clarification. Final plat, this thing is all under a preliminary plat. You've approved a preliminary plat. Final plat at this point just goes to City Council. So what they would do is plat what they needed for this project to go forward so you understand that. At this point the final plat will just go for a reading at the... So it's been preliminary platted, which you've approved. The underlying lot... Blackowiak: I look at the size and I just went no way. Aanenson: Sure, that's... Peterson: Other questions of staff?. Kind: Question Mr. Chairman. Could staff address where on this plan the pedestrian access points are from the sidewalk. It wasn't really clear to me. I'll point it out here ifI can. What are these things? Generous: Benches. Kind: They're benches. So they're not access points. Generous: No, the access points... Kind: Okay. 49 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Peterson: Other questions or comments? Would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission? If so, please come forward and state your name and address please. Tim Mcllwain: Tim Mcllwain, I'm an architect with Hagen, Christensen & Mcllwain Architects. We prepared the structural design. We've reviewed the comments made by staff and I don't believe we need any more comments. I've just actually just seen the review from...the first time...there was a question about the yellow color and I think that's something we can work with them on. Although I think we'd still like to keep a fairly strong color on them. The existing facility has a very strong yellow along the side that we'd like to bring out and I think in the overall volume and exterior of the building it's small... We were within the design criteria of an accent color on the building, but we are willing to discuss it... Sidney: How about the white roof?. Would you be. Tim Mcllwain: Well the white roofI think we feel pretty strong about. The texture of the colored white concrete. You can see there's the bone white. You know...attitude. It's clean. It's refreshing. It's just crisp. To be frank with you, the owner doesn't have a lot of money to put into...materials. It's a simple building that supports basically one activity. We want to represent that in the architecture of the classic, crisp geometry. And by doing the overall volume in one color, it has a certain clarity to it. If you start to break, even with the big...start to break down the colors, I think you'd start believing it's something else. A simple geometric...best way to play it. And we're trying to open the pool to the street because it is a, the existing facility is fun to watch the kids. It's a place for kids. That's what it's about. It's teaching the kids and we've opened it up as much as we can to the street and we've played with some of the window forms to create the animated fun that you'll see at night with the glowing out through. And...and we think the white is just a simple, clean... We're also going to put a mechanical mezzanine inside the building so to minimize any protrusions to this clean shape which really... Peterson: A couple questions for you as it relates to the windows on the upper roof line. Obviously they're designed to be fun. Creative. Good questions. I guess in my mind... statement. My first sense is they just don't seem to fit the character of what we're trying to do in Villages. That's a statement. The question I've got is, are those windows, am they overlooking the pool? What I'm trying to think of is in the wintertime and the temperatures, do you normally have windows at that height because the heat's going to go up there and they're going to be sweating like wild with the high humidity of the pool. I don't know whether that's been thought through or not. Tim Mcllwain: To answer your question. Number one, yes. The west end, on the one end yes, it does overlook the pool. On the other end it overlooks the retail lobby. There's a lobby there. So there we don't, because that is separated internally from the pool. The other side that has been a very strong concern. Very first facility is air quality. It all gets down to quality of water in the pool and the quality of the. . . and the air, complete air is turned over in the pool space, I think is it once or twice per hour. It's an unbelievable amount. It's actually exceeds several times the industry standards so that is the process by which the humidity is extracted out of the air and the odors are extracted out and it's dumping a lot of fresh air.., so there shouldn't be a problem with 5O Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 condensation. And in the overall scheme of things it is a fairly small surface area that they're showing. The biggest problem with pools is putting clear glass skylights into the vaulting and... Peterson: Other questions of the applicant? Kind: I'm wondering if the applicant would consider opening up some pedestrian access to those windows along Lake Drive that overlook the pool. It'd be cool to look in there and see what's going on. Right now there's no easy way to get through. Tim Mcllwain: Be able to communicate through physically? Kind: Not communicate but just to see. Tim Mcllwain: Yes. This elevation from here... Kind: I'm not sure I asked the question very well or not. I'm wondering if you can improve the access from the sidewalk to there because right now the landscaping doesn't allow for anybody from the sidewalk to enter into that area. Tim Mcllwain: Frankly we haven't considered it but it's a good point. So people can actually walk in and view. I mean I think it's what a pool is about. I mean I'll have to ask the owner if they'll have an issue with that, but I think it's all part of having the community... I think it could be a nice idea. Kind: Yeah. Tim Mcllwain: Frankly we never considered it and now we can. Kind: I have one other question regarding the roof color .... the white seems pretty bright and I've done a little coloring that I'd like to submit. I don't know how you go about doing it, showing an aqua, bluish color of the roof and I'm just wondering if you would consider it. I don't know how I go about doing that. Peterson: Other questions and comments while it's going around? Thank you. May I have a motion and a second for a public hearing please. Kind moved, Sidney seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. Peterson: This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, please come forward and state your name and address please. Motion to close? Conrad moved, Blackowiak seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Peterson: Commissioners. Comments. Thoughts. Feelings. 51 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Burton: I guess I have a comment. While I can understand the concerns about the colors and maybe even the...Milo's comments about the coloring. You know he also points out that, I'll just read what he wrote. The creative environment with it's human scale and playful form will also be very suitable for kids. It will be a fun place to come and spend time on healthy activities and I think if you take that into consideration, I think that the colors make sense. It's a kid attractive place and I think it's something unique and I think that while it is a little bright, it is something that, being unique, it's something that will be fun to have in Villages and I think it's a neat addition. Joyce: I think as we get into this, as we've gotten into it, you know we don't want to be too conservative either. I don't see anything distasteful about this at all. I mean it's just colorful. And I guess I don't have a problem with it. I didn't see the first, I wasn't here for the first one so I'm just taking this from what I see here and it's definitely functional and I think it will add a little pizzazz to it so I'm kind of in favor of it. I really am. I don't see a problem with it. Blackowiak: I guess I'll have to add, I do kind of like your blue here. Looking at the original color drawings, I was happy to get color drawings but not as happy with the colors. The yellow's pretty yellow. I do like the blue a lot better. The blue seems just a little bit more palatable. Talking about PUD's and higher standards and we have to make sure that we get what we want in here. We just have to you know, take our time. I certainly like the idea. I like the swim school. ! would really like the school to consider the color and see i£you can't tone it down a little bit. That's a phrase that we use. Tone it down and I think that that is good advice. Peterson: Comments? I feel the same way. The last meeting we saw a design that just didn't work. I think this architecturally works. As I stated earlier, I think the windows are a little, I can live with the windows if it wasn't for the abrupt whiteness of the roof and the side and the abruptness of the yellow. Pull out those windows being more distinctive. Alison stated that in the PUD we have higher standards. I think we can have higher standards but I think part of what we're trying to get is similar standards. Although allowing this sort of creativity but within some operating parameters I don't think we've met here. So I'm still not comfortable that the colors are right and wouldn't approve it based upon the colors that are presented this evening. Architecturally I'd move ahead. Colors I wouldn't. I'd entertain a motion. Joyce: Well I'll make a motion. I make the motion the Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposed site plan #99-8 for Foss Swim School, architectural plans prepared by Hagen, Christensen & Mcllwain dated 5/25/99, and site plan prepared by John Oliver & Associates, Inc. dated 4/15/99 subject to conditions 1 through 18. Burton: Second. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussions? 52 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Kind: I have a couple of friendly amendment ideas. 19. Applicant shall consider improving pedestrian access from sidewalk to plaza area along Lake Drive. And/or 20. Applicant shall explore option of a teal colored roof or other color. Peterson:... Kind: You can add that to that too. To lower, having the window trim match the roof color or tone it down a bit. Is that an amendment? Joyce: Well I'd agree with 19 and I would agree with exploring. I guess I wouldn't, then you'll have to make another motion then. I'll make 19. I think it's a very good point and that should be on there but definitely...20, going back to whether we want to approve it or not so that's not my motion. So my motion stands with 19 and not 20. Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Kind: IfI vote for this motion with the white roof, it will go on to council with... Joyce moved, Burton seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed site plan #99-8 for Foss Swim School, Architectural plans prepared by Hagen, Christensen & McIlwain dated 5/25/99, and site plans prepared by John Oliver & Associates, Inc. dated 4/15/99, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement with the city and provide the necessary security to guarantee erosion control, site restoration and landscaping. 2. Site plan approval is contingent upon the site receiving final plat approval and recording of the subdivision. 3. The development must comply with the Development Design Standards for Villages on the Ponds. Two accessible parking spaces will be required for the twenty-six spaces that are provided. Access to the building from these spaces must also be provided. Parking lot improvements, including parking lot landscaping shall be installed prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 5. Submit utility plans to Fire Marshal for review and approval. Indicate the location of fire hydrants and PIV (Post Indicator Valve). A 10 foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e. street lamps, trees, bushes, shrubs, NSP, US West, Cable TV and transformer boxes to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance 9-1. 53 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 7. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding premise identification. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division Policy #29-1992. Copy enclosed. o Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department Policy regarding fire department notes to be included on all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy 04-1991. Copy enclosed. 9. The pedestrian access from Lake Drive to the Plaza area shall be relocated to the western end of the site and the access be widened to approximately 10 feet (two squares). 10. The applicant shall pay park and trail fees at the time of building permit application pursuant to city ordinance. 11. The applicant shall be responsible for the warranty of the trees if they are planted before the site is developed. If the 'other' trees are installed after the site is developed, the warranty will be covered by the Villages developer. 12. Additional landscaping, such as planter boxes, shall be added near the entrance of the building. 13. The overall Villages on the Ponds hardscape plan designates two benches to be located along the sidewalk adjacent to Lake Drive. These benches and landscaping improvements must be installed prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. 14. The pedestrian access from Lake Drive to the Plaza area shall be relocated to the western end of the site. 15. Wall business signs shall comply with the city's sign ordinance for the central business district for determination of maximum sign area. Wall signs may be permitted on the "street" front and primary parking lot front of each building. All signs require a separate sign permit. The location of letters and logos shall be restricted to the approved building sign bands, the tops of which shall not extend greater than 20 feet above the ground. The letters and logos shall be restricted to a maximum of 30 inches in height. All individual letters and logos comprising each sign shall be constructed of wood, metal, or translucent facing. 16. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 17. The applicant shall revise the grading plan along the easterly side of the property to maintain the existing vegetation along Grandview Road. 18. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed and maintained along Lake Drive until all disturbed areas are restored. 54 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 19. Applicant shall consider improving pedestrian access from sidewalk to plaza area along Lake Drive. All voted in favor, except Conrad and Peterson who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 2. Peterson: Ladd, reasons for nay. Conrad: Well I think the design's getting better. The colors are not right for Village. Mika had some real good points. I think we should have turned it back, given the applicant some time to review Mika's points and respond. It's not right. Peterson: I'll echo those thoughts. It goes on to council on the 14th? On the 14th. Thank you. Blackowiak: Mr. Chairman...new business or not. There was not a sign on this site either. Aanenson: Yes. We're out of signs. We do, have ask to put the signs out. We honestly do. We have had so many projects going on all the signs are out. We're trying to relocate signs. Blackowiak: Well I think you'd better spring for a few more because obviously there were no residents here and I wonder if that's... Aanenson: Everyone within 500 feet was notified. Blackowiak: Yeah, but there's no sign so I mean it would be nice to have a sign up there saying the proposed development. Call City Hall. Aanenson: We'll work on that. That's something we try to do above and beyond the notice. Blackowiak: Yeah, that would be nice. Kind: IfI could just add on to what Alison's saying. I'm wondering if we should expand that 500 radius to include the neighboring residential areas. Aanenson: That's something I would defer you talk to the Council about. No matter who you notice, it's never enough. I'll tell you that. I can promise you that. Kind: It's just, I mean it's just fellow businesses for anything in Villages and the neighboring residents I'm sure are interested in what's going on there. Burton: Kate, don't they pay for a sign when they apply? Aanenson: Yes. They have to pay for one sign, yes. But if we don't have one to give them, and the onus is on us. We've got, well we've got a horrendous amount of development happening out there. 55 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Blackowiak: Okay. Aanenson: Yes, I apologize for that. Peterson: So noted. OLD BUSINESS: Aanenson: To remind you of the City Council meeting on Monday, on 7/14. 7:15 on next Monday night. You're meeting with the City Council. Joint work session. I put that in your packet before. What I put in there was I put the major work task that we had outlined for you as part of the budget process. Peterson: It starts at 7:15? Aanenson: Yeah, this is just to remind you of what we were working on. We were putting together the meetings with Jill and Phil. I put that memo in there last time. That's what I included in their packet to talk about and I didn't put all of the water resources, forestry because I kind of kept it to planning. Updating of the PUD ordinance. All that. Kind: My notice said 7:30. Did that change? Aanenson: Is it 7:30? Blackowiak: I thought it was 7:00. Aanenson: 7:15. Peterson: I thought it was 7:00 too. Aanenson: You know what, I'll e-mail you all. And then just a reminder, on the 16th we also have a large agenda on that in two weeks. Joyce: Kate I have a question. Are we going to have a normal summer, are we going through every other Wednesday in the summer? Aanenson: Yes we have. Joyce: We're booked then? Aanenson: Yeah. Even July 7th. We've got quite a few items in already. Generally we skip the 4th of July week but because it's, the 5th is the holiday actually which is Monday and we were planning to have a meeting on the 7th just because we have so many items. We had that lag time 56 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 in January, February and now it's all come together. Especially when we have variances. We process those. For people to wait a month it's, and summer time is variance time. Joyce: They're so much fun. Burton: I don't think I'll be here on the 7th. Aanenson: If anybody else knows about, then let me know so ifI know we don't have a quorum. Peterson: Did the church rezoning go to council yet or not? Aanenson: It was tabled. That's on for the 14th. Still working on issues. Peterson: That's a busy meeting on the 14th too. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Blackowiak noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated May 19, 1999 as presented. ONGOING ITEMS: Peterson: Anything ongoing? Aanenson: Yes, the comprehensive plan. We did get a date on that for June 9th at the Met Council. Right now it appears that we are getting a hearing to get that approved and then the next step is to take it back to the City Council for final reading. Mr. Mondale had waited...two months before he held any hearings so we're kind of in that backlog. So we'd like to get that out. Get it reprinted and get it out. We've been told we're getting approval. We've got the letter. Their memo. So that came over...this afternoon. Peterson: Anything else? Aanenson: Just busy. We've got a lot of projects going on around town and hopefully we can take a field trip here. We generally plan that fall one where we go out and look. If we get an opportunity to do that sooner, that'd be great. Go out and look at what's going on. Now Phil has got an intern and she's putting together a brochure for each neighborhood. Each lake is getting a separate one and then we're putting together...for these neighborhood meetings. It's coming together really nice so we'll be sharing that with you here pretty soon too. Peterson: Nice to get the new park maps out. Anything else from anybody? Is that a motion to close? Chairman Peterson adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 10:00 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director 57 Planning Commission Meeting - June 2, 1999 Prepared by Nann Opheim 58