8 Site Plan Rev/Add/Highland
-
l'
:(
;)
j
,
..
....
t
t
. -
~
J
-
..
)
PC DATE: March 1,2000
-!,
-
CITY OF
CHANHASSEH
CC DATE: March 27, 2000
REVIEW DEADLINE:
CASE#: 95-11 SPR File 2-2000
STAFF REPORT
By: RG, DH
PROPOSAL:
Site Plan Review for a B,117 sq. ft. expansion to a 9,161 sq. ft. building
LOCATION:
Lot 2, Block I, Chanhassen Business Center 2nd Addition; 8360 Commerce Drive
APPLICANT:
Martin Woody Architects Inc.
1000 Superior Blvd. Suite 200
Wayzata, MN. 55391
(612) 745-0494
David Obee
8360 Commerce Dr.
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING:
Office/Industrial
2020 LAND USE PLAN: Officellndustrial
ACREAGE: 1.57 Acres (68,250 sq. ft.)
DENSITY: FAR. .326
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The applicant is proposing a B,1l7 square foot warehouse addition to an existing 9,161 square foot
office warehouse building.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
The City's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not 1;he proposed
project complies with Zoning Ordinance requirements. If it meets those standards, the City must then
approve the site plan. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Highland Development SPR
March 1,2000
Page 2
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
As part of the original development, an expansion to the building was anticipated. The applicant is
proposing a 13,117 square foot warehouse addition to an existing 9,161 square foot office warehouse
building on Lot 2, Block I, Chanhassen Business Center 2nd Addition. The warehouse addition is
approximately 20Y:z feet in height, matching the existing warehouse height.
The applicant is proposing the use of coated tilt-up random ribbed concrete panels for the expansion.
There will be a two-foot wide horizontal band of smooth concrete painted blue around the top of the
building to match the existing warehouse. The building material matches the existing building.
Adjacent zoning and land use are tothe north-lOP, Railroad, to the south--Oll, National Weather
Service, other office/industrial uses, to the east --011, vacant lot, Jehovah Witness, Power System, and
to the west --011, open space and pond area
The existing building is currently connected to sewer and water. This expansion is being developed on
a lot that is part of the Chanhassen Business Center 2nd Addition. The lot currently contains a 9,161 sq.
ft. building with a number of trees and shrubs throughout the property, mostly along the perimeter. The
lot abuts a public right-of-way on Commerce Drive.
BACKGROUND
On January 13, 1992, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for the Chanhassen Business
Center. The PUD was amended on February 8, 1993 to allow for a church as a pennitted use and the
final plat for phase I of the project was approved. On April 24, 1995, the Chanhassen Business
Center 2nd Addition, subdividing Outlot C into 7 lots, was approved by the City.
The Chanhassen Business Center is and industrial/office park on 93.7 acres. The original plat
consisted of 12 lots and 2 outlots. The ultimate development for this proposal was to have a total of
700,000 square feet of building area with a mix of20% office, 25% industrial, and 55% warehouse.
The first phase of final plat approval includes two lots. The National Weather Service (NWS) was
built on Lot I, Block 2 and the Jehovah Witness Church was built on Lot I, Block I of the 15t
addition. Power Systems was built on Lot 4, Block I and Paulstarr Enterprises was built on Lot 7,
Block I of the 2nd Addition.
The plan for the 9,161 square foot Highland Development building was approved on August 28,
1995.
GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE
The applicant is proposing the use of unpainted tilt-up random ribbed concrete panels matching the
existing building for the expansion. There will be a two-foot wide horizontal band of smooth concrete
painted blue to match the existing warehouse.
Highland Development SPR
March 1, 2000
Page 3
ACCESS
The current lot has access from the east off of Commerce Drive. This would remain the only access
point to the property.
LANDSCAPING
It appears that no existing trees will be removed for the proposed addition. Existing trees include
boulevard trees along Commerce Drive planted by the developer as well as trees along the parking lot
and in the western comer. These trees are to remain on site and have been incorporated into the
applicant's proposed landscape plan,
By ordinance, the applicant is required to provide the following: 372 sq. ft. of landscape area and 2
trees within the parking area. According to the submitted landscape plan and count of existing trees,
the applicant meets the landscape area and parking requirements.
The rear of the building faces the Bluff Creek corridor and the Creekside development. To provide a
more buffered view from the Creekside neighborhood, staff recommends the applicant plant
evergreens at the western comer of the proposed addition.
GRADING
The site was previously rough graded with development of the first phase. The proposed phase will
require minor grading for the parking lot and building pad. The City has a 20-foot wide drainage and
utility easement over the existing stonn sewer line north of the building. The grading plan proposes
to place approximately four additional feet of material upon the easement. The stonn sewer is already
approximately 13 feet deep. The structural integrity of the pipe may be jeopardized by placement of
additional fill material within the easement area. Therefore, staff recommends no additional fill be
placed within the City's 20-foot drainage and utility easement.
DRAINAGE
The existing drainage infrastructure on site has been sized to accommodate this future expansion. No
additional stonn sewer improvements will be necessary.
UTILITIES
The existing building is connected to city sewer and water from Commerce Drive. No additional
utility improvements are proposed with this expansion.
EROSION CONTROL
Erosion control fencing is proposed around the perimeter of the grading limits. No additional erosion
control measures will be necessary.
Highland Development SPR
March 1,2000
Page 4
STREETS
The existing site has a paved parking lot with concrete curb and gutter. The plan proposes expanding
the site northerly with approximately 10 additional parking stalls. It appears the parking lot layout is
in confonnance with city ordinance on drive aisle width and parking stall length.
LlGHTING/SIGNAGE
The plan does not c.all for any new signage to be placed on the addition. The plan does call for wall
mounted light fixtures to be placed above doors on the east and south sides of the building. Wall
mounted lights shall be shielded from direct off site view.
SITE PLAN FINDINGS
In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance with
the following:
(I) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides,
including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be
adopted;
(2) Consistency with this division;
(3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree
and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general
appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas;
(4) Creation ofa harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site
features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the
development;
(5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with
special attention to the following:
a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of
a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community;
b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the
design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and
neighboring structures and uses; and
d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and
parking in tenns of location and number of access points to the public streets,
width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation,
Highland Development SPR
March I, 2000
Page 5
separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of
parking.
(6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for
surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air
and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may
have substantial effects on neighboring land uses.
Finding: The proposed building is consistent with all ordinances and regulations. The
expansion fits in with the existing development on the site and within the Chanhassen
Business Center.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
On March I, 2000, the Plànning Commission held a public hearing to review the proposed site plan.
The Plànning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the site plan subject to the
conditions of the staff report.
At the Plànning Commission meeting, the Commissioners instructed staff to go back and work with
the applicant to review the status of the stonn sewer placement through the applicant's parcel. Upon
field verification, it appears the city's stonn sewer has been installed outside of the dedicated
drainage and utility easement on the plat of Chanhassen Business Park 2nd Addition. Staff has written
a letter to the engineer requesting that a new legal description and easement agreement be prepared
for the stonn sewer. Staff still recommends that the applicant not put fill over the stonn sewer line to
jeopardize the structural integrity of the pipe. The applicant has had concerns with regards to future
expansion of the property. The intent was to possibly place a parking lot area within this drainage
and utility easement. Staff will be reviewing the building potential of the lot with regards to
impervious surface and setbacks to detennine what buildable area is actually left of the parcel.
The proposed impervious surface of the existing development and proposed expansion is 63.4 %,
maximum impervious surface coverage may be 65 percent. After the proposed expansion, the developer
may install an additional I ,092 square feet of impervious area to achieve the maximum site coverage.
Staffhas inspected the site as it pertains to the landscaping plan. The existing trees in the comer of the
site are located close to the comer of the proposed building expansion. There is a gap in the spacing of
the trees on the west side. To maintain the established spacing, one tree needs to be added. The north
side of the development is relatively devoid of landscaping. Staff is therefore recommending that four
conifers be planted to eventually screen this side of the building.
The applicant also wanted the city to review a potential hard surface drive to the north of the building.
The Fire Marshal has stated that such a drive is not necessary from his standpoint. The drive aisle could
be installed provided no additional fill is placed over the stonn water pipe and the total additional
impervious surface does not exceed 1,092 square feet.
Highland Development SPR
March 1,2000
Page 6
The Plànning Commission did add a condition that "The present storage bins or trailers that are there be
removed upon completion of the addition and they may not be used again on the premises without prior
city approval." Outdoor storage requires approval of a conditional use permit.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motion:
"The City Council approves Site Plan #95-11 (File 2), as shown on the plans prepared by Martin
Woody Architects, dated January 26,2000, and subject to the following conditions:
J. The applicant shall plant 4 evergreens at the ',veatem eamer north of the proposed addition and
one deciduous tree west of the proposed addition. Existing trees shall be protected by tree
fencing during construction. No existing trees shall be removed. If so, they will be replaced at a
rate of2:1 diameter inches.
2. No additional fill material may be placed over the city's storm water pipe or within the City's
20-foot wide drainage and utility easement north of the building.
3. Wall mounted lights shall be shielded from direct off site view.
4. The addition is required to be protected with an automatic fire extinguishing system. .
5. Two accessible parking spaces are required and the access aisle must be 8' feet wide.
6. 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.
7. The present storage bins or trailers that are there shall be removed upon completion of the addition,
and they may not be used again on the premises without prior city approval."
ATTACHMENTS
I. Development Review Application
2. Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated February 9, 2000
3. Memo from Steven Torell to Robert Generous dated February 17, 2000
4. Memo from David Hempel to Robert Generous dated February 23, 2000
5. Public hearing and property owners list.
6. Planning Commission Minutes 00/1100.
Highland Development SPR
March I, 2000
Page 7
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
INRE:
Application of Highland Development Site Plan Review 95-11
On March 1,2000, the Chanhassen Plànning Commission met at its regularly schedule
meeting to consider the application of Martin Woody Architects and Highland Development for a site
plan review for the property located at 8360 Commerce Dr. Chanhassen, Minnesota. The Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed site plan was preceded by published and
mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to
speak and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. The property is currently zoned PUD (Planned Unit Development Light Industrial Office
Park).
2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Office/Industrial.
3. The legal description of the property is Lot 2, Block I, Chanhassen Business Center
2nd Addition.
4. Section 20-11 0:
(I) Is consistent with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides,
including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that
may be adopted;
(2) Is consistent with this division;
(3) Preserves the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree
and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general
appearance ofthe neighboring developed or developing or developing areas;
(4) Creates a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site
features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to
the development;
(5) Creates a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features,
with special attention to the following:
a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and
provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general
community;
b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping;
Highland Development SPR
March 1,2000
Page 8
c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression
of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and
neighboring structures and uses; and
d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior
drives and parking in tenns of location and number of access points to the
public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior
circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and
amount of parking.
(6) Protects adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for
surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light
and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations
which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses.
5. The planning report #95-11 dated March 1,2000, prepared by Robert Generous is
incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDATION
The Plànning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the site plan
review.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 15t day of March, 2000.
CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION
BY:
Its Chainnan
ATTEST:
Secretary
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
e90 COULTER ORIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937-1900
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPUCA"ON
AP?UCANT: MAf;Q ¡J lNaV4. ~NER:..±hf;HLA)Û ~V\Jt-6-JT
ADDRESS~~O~. 1...!PADDRESS: ~00~1::t'\1ME:Q.L\S- p~.
J M. ?f1.1 ~~&JI ~q0~r
jElEPHONE (Day time) ~rÞ..J L4G- ot-Cl4 TELEPHONE: 11..... r¡ t; -. V~
_ Comprehensive Plan Amendment _ Temporary Sales Permit
_ Conditional Use Permn _ Vacation of ROWlEasements
- Interim Use Permit _ Variance
_ Non-conforming Use Perm~ ..:.- Wetland Alteration Permit
_ Planned Unit Deve:opmgnl" _ Zoning Appeal ,
I
_ Rezoning _ Zoning Ordinance Amendment
_ SiQn Permits .
_ Sign Pian Review :::;..- Notification Sign
..A. Site Pian Review" ...x. Escrow for Filing Fee&'Attomey Cost" I
($50 CUP/SPRNACNARWAPfMeles ,
and Bounds. $400 Minor SUB)
SubCivisicn" TOTAL FEE $ VJ Ç?D -
-
A nsl of all propeny owners within 500 feel 01 the boundaries of the propeny must be included with the
application_ 1K .J l0\L-l ' \0 'P~Ae.& U.S T.
BuildIng material samples must be submitted with sile plan reviews,
"Twenty-six full size I2!sW!.coples 01 the plans must be submitted, Including an By," X 11" reduced copy of
transparency for each plan sheet.
-" Escrow will be requIred for other applications through the development contract
NOTE" When mu~lple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be cha'Qed lor each application.
,
. NOTE· When mu~iple applications are proc.ssed, Ih. appropriate fee shall be charged lor each appncalion,
PROJECTNAME-Ht0t-k...ANù D~MÐJT, ~¿.,.
1.0CATION ~g(oO flDMM~ ~. ¡1~<..BJI vVvJ·
1.EGAI. DESCRIPTION L-Oí 2.,. b~l¿" \
~+-b\ss~ bJs/~8SS (~\
~Õ AVDilliliJ.
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
REASON FOR '¡HIS REQUEST
U
This application must be completed ir\ full and b.typewritte or Clearty printed and must be aocompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before IlIIng this appllca1lon, you sho~ld confer whh the
Planning Department to determine Ihe specHic ordinence and procedurel requirements applicable to )'Our appßcalion.
This is tc ce:1Hy that I am making application for the described action by the City and thaI I am responsible lor COf1l)lying
wHh all City requirements whh regard to this request. This application should be processed In my name and I am Ihe pany
whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this çplication, I have attached a copy 01 proof 01
oWr\ership (e"her copy 01 Owner's Duplicate Cennicate 01 Thle. Abs1ract 01 Title or purchase agreement), or I am the
authorized person to make this application and the lee owner has also signad this applICation.
I will keep mysell informed 01 the deadiines for submission of material and the progress of this applica!lOn. I I1.:nher
understand tha1 additional lees may be charged lor consulting 'ees, f,aslbilHy Sludies, etc. w~h an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed wHh the study. The documents and Information I have submitted aretNe and correct to the besl
01 my knowledge.
1 also undemand that after the approva: or granting of the permit. SUCh perm"s shall be Invalid unless lI1ey are recorded
against the tHle to the property for whiçh the approvaVpermh Is granted whhin 120 days w"h the Carver County Recorder's
OffiCe and the original docu nt re1u ed to City Hali Record$.
¡-1Þ-e;o
Date
þ~~
Signature 01 Fee Owner
Appiì;ation Received on i 1'3-7/ DO
(- 27- 00
Date
<fj-eel CD
Fee Paid·· Jt~· - Receipt No.
(¡/ê. í fc
. The applicant should contect staff for a copy ollha Itaff rlpo" which wtll ba available on Friday prior to Iha
meellng, H not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the eppllcant'e address.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 City Ctnttr Drivt. PO &x 147
CJxuzhassm. Mi..""ta55317 MEMORANDUM
Phunt 612.937.1900
Gmmd Fax 612.937.5739 TO: Robert Generous, Senior Planner
Enginming Fax 612.937.9152 FROM: Mark Litttin, Fire Marshal
Public S4fay Fax 612.934.2524
Webwww.tÎ.ciNmhasstn.m..us DATE: February 9,2000
RE:
The site plan review for a 13,117 square foot expansion to a 9,161 square foot
building located on Lot 2, Block I, Chanhassen Business Center 2nd Addition,
8360 Commerce Drive, property zoned PUD, Highland Development.
Planning Case: 95-11. Site Plan (File 2-2000)
I have reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order fo comply with the Chanhassen
Fire DepartmentIFire Prevention Division I have the folloWing fire code or city
ordinance/policy requirements. The site plan is based on the available infonnation submitted at
this time. If additional plans ór changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items
will be addressed.
I. In reviewing plans for the warehouse area of the building, it appears storage could be
over] 2 feet il1 height. ff so, plans and specifitations for warehouse storage meeting
the fire code must be reviewed, Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshal regarding storage
and use of thê warehouse so t):¡at an a.ppro~riate codê plan review may 1;>e completed.
g:\safety\mllplrev95-ll
The City ofChanhassen. A frtIwinr communitv with tkan lakes. aualitv ,choo/'. a charmin, downtown. thrioin, businesses. and heautilùlMrkf. A mat ola" to Ii,,,. "'",.. and ok
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
'0 City Center Drive, POBox 147
Chanha;sen, Minnesota 55317
Phone 612.9311900
General Fax 612.9315739
'ngineering Fax 612.9319152
'"bli, Safety Fax 612.934.2524
U7eb www.cí.chanhassen.mn.u5
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Bob Generous, Senior planner
s-7
FROM:
Steven Torell, Building Official
DATE:
February 17,2000
SUBJ:
Site Plan Review for:
Highland Development Addition
8360 Commerce Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Planning Case: 95-11 Site Plan (File 2-2000)
I have reviewed the plans for the above addition, received by the Planning
Department on, January 26, 2000. Following are my comments, which should be
included in the conditions of approval:
The addition is required to protected with an automatic fire extinguishing system.
Two accessible parking spaces are required and the access aisle must be 8' wide.
The building and or their representative should meet with the Inspections Division
as soon as possible to discuss plan review and pennit procedures.
G/safety/stimemos/plan!highlandaddition
~f Citv ofClJ( } bflSseJl. A fYOwin![ community with clean lakes. Qualit'l'schools, a chamzinfT dow11town, thrivim1 bUJÍneJSt's. and beautifùl bnrk.i. A U/'Mt (¡laff to lit'f. work. and nuv.
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690City CtnterDrive, POBox 147
ChanhflSStn, Minnesota 55317
Phone 6]2.937.1900
Gelltral Fax 6]2.937.5739
Engineering Fax 612.937.9]52
Pubhc Safety Fax 612.934.2524
1I'íb www.ci.chanhasstn.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Bob Generous, Senior Planner
FROM:
David Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
DATE:
February 23, 2000
SUBJ:
Review of Site Plan Expansion to the Highland Development
Lot 2, Block I, Chanhassen Business Center 2"' Addition
LUR 95-21
Upon review of the plans prepared by Martin Woody Architects dated January 25,2000,1 offer the
following conunents and reconunendations:
GRADING
The site was previously rough graded with development of the first phase. The proposed phase will
require minor grading for the parking lot and building pad. The City has a 20-foot wide drainage and
utility easement over the existing stonn sewer line north ofthe building. The grading plan proposes to
place approximately four additional feet of material upon the easement. The stonn sewer is already
approximately 13 feet deep. The structural integrity of the pipe may be jeopardized by placement of
additional fill material within the easement area. Therefore, staffreconunends no additional fill be
placed within the City's 20-foot drainage and utility easement.
DRAINAGE
The existing drainage infrastructure on site has been sized to acconunodate this future expansion. No
additional stonn sewer improvements will be necessary.
UTILITIES
The existing building is connected to city sewer and water from Conunerce Drive. No additional
utility improvements are proposed with this expansion.
EROSION CONTROL
Erosion control fencing is proposed around the perimeter of the grading limits. No additional erosion
control measures will be necessary.
STREETS
The existing site has a paved parking lot with concrete curb and gutter. Plan proposes on expanding
the site northerly with approximately 10 additional parking stalls. It appears the parking lot layout is in
conformance with city ordinance on drive aisle width and parking stall length.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
I. No additional fill material may be placed within the City's 20-foot wide drainage and utility
easement north of the building.
jrns
c: Anita L. Benson, City Engineer
The City of Challhasstn. A tTowin~ community with cltan lakes, quality schook, a channinr downtown, thrivinr businesses, and beaurifùl parks. A "rat vlact to live. work. andvk
\\cfsllvoI2\eng\dave\pclhighlandexpansion.doc
~\~~
, ".'
,-_-",",,
I
, I
\j
APPLICANT: Highland Development
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1,2000 AT 7:00 P.M.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
690 CITY CENTER DRIVE
PROPOSAL: Site Plan Review for
Building Expansion
LOCATION: 8360 Commeree Dñve
NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant,
Highland Development request for site plan review for a 13,117 sq. ft. expansion to a 9,161 sq. ft.
building on property zoned PUD Office/Industrial, Planned Unit Development Office Industrial.located
on Lot 2, Block 1, Chanhassen Business Center 2nd Addition; 8360 Commerce Drive.
What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's
request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead
the public hearing through the following steps:
1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
2. The Developer will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project.
Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during
office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project,
please contact Bob at 937-1900 ex!. 141. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one
copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on February 17, 2000.
-~ 0
(1)-- c:::
~,
,- '.--
, I
~ ,-1
\Lr!
\ I I I p ,
~ . oci!D '.'
__L~'U-":'~,,<,
- ~~~----'-=-'" ~-
~J--~~'&
"'" - kc' ~~
=, '"
~ ;.'~~~
~ ~ ",', ~
_~ ~~~<1 I
'1 "~- I,'
L'" " ~.~.~ L---J
'cY',r-- ~ :. . -c-j
.'..~
=c-----------------..-
\\
\'\\,
'\ I
r----'-,\
\~
~~~~ I
-~~ \--'
~ '" /!\.
~ake D~0~0-~~~~~:.{."~~\.~~~ "
'-- ---¡-' -S~_. " '?', o"':!
I I ....,----------,..\\~"""'"
I 'i', \~\~
;:''--~~-.5: ~ \-
, <:(" "- ~~, ~,;;c L.....__. ._
I I / .:::¡~h~~ =
~~ !\ 1i~.Rid e riai! NoM - / ;;¡: ~o- ~ =
Vi~w '-. '- ~~ I.· ~ ---- '- '---=\".
~
.'-----1' :
\
I
I
, 0
Lake ~
.'l')09t!i
Jasel
s aqel ssaJpp"
®AlJ3J\"1i
OSMONICS INC
5951 CLEARWATER DR
HOPKINS, MN 55343
HARLEY E & ELIZABETH L .
BERGREN
3330 EDINBOROUGH WAY APT 1611
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55435
K & S INVESTMENTS LLC
8330 COMMERCE DR
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
DAVID L OBEE
2060 MAJESTIC WAY
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CERAMI HAIDLE & CERAMI LLC
1660 WEST LAKE DR
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
QUANTUM CONTROLS INC
1691 WEST LAKE DR
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
RAYMOND A COLLINGS
1670 LAKE DRIVE W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHANHASSEN BUSINESS
CENTER LLP
1711 WEST LAKE DR
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
BUILDING MANAGEMENT GROU
LLC
C/O CONTROL PRODUCTS
1724 LAKE DR W
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
AUDOBON 92
15241 CREEKSIDE CT
EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346
.....__ ._. _._...10____ _ __
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1,2000
Kind: 8, thank you. That the applicant and staff review the depth of the pond.
Conrad: I'd certainly accept that as a friendly amendment.
Peterson: It's been moved and seconded with an amendment.
Conrad moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Wetland Alteration Permit #00-1 because staff believes it will be an improvement to the
habitat and to the water quality of the lake, subject to the following conditions:
l. The area shall be mitigated to make up for the 250 square feet of wetlands above and
beyond the diminimus requirement.
2. The wetland be constructed in such a fashion that it will allow native plants to grow and
follow the DNR guidelines for wetland conversion (see attached).
3. The applicant shall not be pennitted to put in a fountain or any chemicals to control the
environment in this area.
4. The applicant shall use a native wetland seed mix to complete the restoration or
conversation of this area to a more natural setting.
5. The excavation process and the access to the site be reviewed or at least
communicated to staff and approved.
6. A tree preservation plan be reviewed by staff.
7. StaffwiJI report back to the Planning Commission within one year from project
completion as to the impact of this project.
8. Staff and the applicant will meet to review the depth of the pond.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 13.117 SQ. FT, EXPANSION TO A 9,161
SQ. FT. BUILDING ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD OFFICEIINDUSTRIAL, PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT OFFICE INDUSTRIAL LOCATED ON LOT 2, BLOCK 1,
CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER 2ND ADDITION: 8360 COMMERCE DRIVE,
HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT.
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
14
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1,2000
Peterson: And I would be happy to open up the floor to anybody that has a question for Bob.
Questions of staff'?
Kind: I have a question Mr. Chainnan. I went and took a look at the site today and noticed that
there's some outside storage of, I can't even describe it. They're like semi trucks that are empty
without the wheels on them. Stored outside on the northwest side of the structure right now. Is
the reason for the expansion to get more storage and get that stuff inside? Or should I be asking
the applicant this?
Generous: The applicant, the primary expansion is for warehouse space.
Kind: As I'm asking this I'm thinking this is not the right person to ask. Never mind.
Generous: My assumption would be yes.
Peterson: Okay, other questions of Bob?
Kind: I do have one more for Bob. Did you get an answer, I called you today about that 2 to I
diameter condition.
Generous: No, I didn't get an answer but I read it through and I understand it. You replace that 2
caliper inches for every caliper inch that's removed so.
Kind: And that's what that condition says?
Generous: That's what the condition says.
Kind: Okay, thank you.
Peterson: Would the applicant or their designee wish to address the commission?
David Obee: I can address the question about the containers. What's stored in there is hose and
it's hose that contains propane and stinky stuff. We close the loop on the hose by connecting the
two ends together and we store in that facility rather than inside because it is a little bit of a
smell, if you've ever smelled propane. It's not harmful as a by product or any kind of a
flammable waste. It just stinks. That's why it's stored in those outside containers. But I got that
idea from Prince's Paisley Palace who, he had a lot of those containers there. Well if he's doing
it, it must be all right because he had about 13 or 14 of them and I think I ran it by the city when I
was thinking about it. Those will be gone with the addition of the new building. So with, I don't
know whether you noticed but there's some lubers, exhaust lubers...in there and that will be
probably more addressed on the mechanical drawings than what you saw initially. It's under the
mezzanine. The back, north side of the building so it's, there's a mezzanine that runs along the
north side of that additional wall and that's where that hose will be going. So I hope that answer
the question.
15
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1,2000
Kind: Yes.
Martin Woody: My name's Martin Woody. I'm President of Martin Woody Architects. I'm the
architect on the project. I had just a couple issues here with the 6 recommendations. The City is
asking us to plant some additional evergreens at the western corner of the proposed addition.
The landscape plan that we submitted shows there's 3 conifers and 2 deciduous trees at the
northwest corner of the property. That are existing and they're actually not as far back as they're
shown there. It's that L-I drawing. They're actually right at the comer of the addition.
David Obee: Those were part of the future concept that I had discussed with Bob 4 or 5 years
ago.
Martin Woody: They're shown more towards the northern property line but they're actually right
on the comer.
David Obee: .... we talked about it 4 or 5 years ago. They actually cover this corner here. To
add...my name's Dave Obee. I'm the owner of the building. Proposing the addition.
Peterson: We need to have you talk into the microphone one at a time so that people at home can
hear.
David Obee: Along that east perimeter property line, at the time that we did the landscaping
along that. .. and the inspections department that we would extend the maples and the coriifers
that continued all the way to the back of the lot. So I knew this expansion was probably going to
be happening here so if you see where the new bituminous parking lot is, and then there's A, B,
A, 8, A, B, A. Those trees are already in there. And we did that with the future in mind as long
as I had the guy that was putting the trees in, I just decided to continue that all out so. There's a
lot that's already in place for this building with the initial building going on. The sprinkler
system has been sized for it. The electrical has been sized for it. Natural gas. Everything's been
sized for it. It's just a matter of waiting for it to get to this point so, and I think Bob's aware of
that.
Peterson: What are you asking here?
Martin Woody: Not to add any more trees. In the landscape report that Bob put together, the
findings per the ordinance we have enough trees on the site. I think the concern was because
obscure or soften the view on the northwest comer of the building where those trees are already
in place.
Peterson: Bob, does that statement change your opinion of the staff report at all?
Generous: I'd like to review that...
Peterson: So noted.
16
Planning Commission Meeting - March I, 2000
Burton: I guess I have a question. I was a little bit confused because I've seen there's trees along
the west side of the existing building but with the addition there aren't any trees. I thought that's
what you were talking about.
Aanenson: That was the point to soften the building.
Burton: Yeah.
David Obee: These are up here now. These will be here, here and here.
Kind: If you could keep it flat, then we can see it.
David Obee: These 5 trees slide up to this corner right here. So to proportionate anything in here
or here, I don't think...these are all maples. To put in a couple more maples to add to that line,
these are actually ashes. B, B and B are three ashes. And then these two A's are coniferous.
Peterson: I think we can just work with staff between now and council and we can address that
specific one.
Martin Woody: I guess let's see on number 2, as far as the recommendations go. There's
actually a reinforced concrete pipe, if you can look at the C-I drawing. The civil drawing. That
was installed outside the 20 foot utility easement. What we're trying to create on the north side
of the building is, at the northeast corner we have a small curb and then we're thinking about
putting some Class V along the north edge of the building for a fire access. So we're grading it
out there a little ways, 30 feet or what not and adding some fill on top of that existing site. And
the recommendation states, actually the reinforced concrete pipe is actually right here. It's about
5 feet to the south of the 20 foot utility easement. So I don't know when the city installed that
pipe they missed...so we're not going to, we're planning on not putting some extra load on that
pipe but 4 feet of fill or whatever, but maybe I or 2 feet. Just enough so we can provide fire
access along that northern side...
Peterson: Dave, can you comment to that?
Hempel: Certainly Mr. Chainnan, Commissioners. I guess I'm not aware of the stonn sewer
being outside the easement. I will certainly check on that because if it is then we're, we'll come
back to the developer or applicant here and rectify the situation. The pipe that's in there is a
concrete pipe but it is a lower grade concrete pipe that has a certain capacity to it. If you exceed
that, you jeopardize the entirety of the pipe so. Another issue is maintenance. Should the pipe
ever break, very seldom would that ever happen with a concrete pipe. There's always a chance
but by placing more fill and also creating a fill slope condition over there and make it difficult for
maintenance crews to access that area. Also heard the applicant mention just now about using
the area as a gravel area. Is that, I thought that was going to be grass.
David Obee: Somebody recommended that. Before you guys recommended it, consultants have
used this as a fire lane...he's probably going to go ahead with the building the building. Most
17
Plànning Commission Meeting - March 1,2000
cities are asking for access to the back of the building so he just wants you to have it graded out
rather than having change the print on the plan.. .just make it so that it's accessible for fire...
Sounds like one step cut off. It's more of a fIre lane than anything else.
Hempel: Mr. Chainnan, commissioners. I guess I would like to comment, or like the Fire
Marshal to address that a little bit because if you have a gravel surface there, that's going to be
more impervious surface and more erosion potential with a gravel surface, maintenance upkeep.
If you want to do a driveway back there, I recommend that you have, require it be paved instead
of gravel type surface.
David Obee: We'd, Dave, like to comment on that. I think Martin had mentioned that putting
Class V down and then over that putting a couple inches of finish black dirt and then seeding
over that. Might solve that situation. I don't know. That's up to Mark or.
Hempel: That's a possible solution to it, sure.
David Obee: Whatever works. Asphalt, it doesn't matter to me.
Hempel: I'm just concerned the pipe situation on the site. The trunk stonn sewer.
David Obee: With the asphalt Dave, if we did asphalt all the way back there, would that throw
the stonn sewer situation into a different twist?
Hempel: No, I believe it would not. I'd still recommend no additional fill be placed over that
pIpe.
Martin Woody: I think that we can achieve what we'd like to see there without adding any
additional fill over that pipe. I guess my concern would be how did the pipe get outside the
easement.
Peterson: We can look at that with staff after the meeting. Other comments? Okay, thank you.
Any questions of the applicant?
Kind: Just to clarify what I heard. Those storage bin trailer things are out of there?
David Obee: They're gone.
Aanenson: That would be the staff's recommendation.
Kind: Because that's really important to me that those go away. They're on the side where
residents can see them.
David Obee: I had them painted the same color as the building.
Kind: I noticed that.
18
Planning Commission Meeting - March 1,2000
David Obee: So that was a consideration...
Aanenson: They are illegal. I don't know who gave you pennission but that's not a permitted
use. They are illegal. I don't know who gave you pennission but they're not pennitted by city
code. It wasn't anybody from...
Peterson: We heard that they're going so it's not an issue. Thank you. Public hearing I guess.
Blackowiak moved, Kind seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was
opened.
Burton moved, Sidney seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Peterson: Thoughts commissioners.
Blackowiak: Mr. Chair, Ijust have a quick question to clarifY this. We're okay on the
impervious surface right now, correct? Nor correct? Where are we with that?
Generous: They're yes, under the impervious surface.
Blackowiak: What is the requirement?
Generous: I believe it's 35%. And they're at 32.6%.
BIackowiak: Right. Ifwe do any type of Class V or whatever, wouldn't that add to the
impervious surface coverage? I mean Class V is basically asphalt. I mean it's crushed up but I
mean it is impervious more or less.
Peterson: But now if you put it with dirt and seeding on top.
Blackowiak: You put dirt on? I've never heard of that in my life.
Aanenson: This is one of those things I guess it would have been helpful ifwé had known ahead
of time. We could have addressed all these issues. Generally we like the applicants to call or
something. We maybe could have addressed some of the questions.
Burton: We can tailor our conditions to have this looked at before it goes to Council.
Blackowiak: Yeah, okay. But I'm just worrying that if you start doing, adding more impervious
surface you might be over your limits so, okay. That was my question.
Peterson: Anyothers? I'll entertain a motion.
19
Planning Commission Meeting - March I, 2000
Burton: Mr. Chainnan I'll give it a whack here. I'll move the Planning Commission
recommends approval of Site Plan #95-11 (File 2) as shown on the plans prepared by Martin
Woody Architects dated January 26,2000 and subject to conditions that are shown on the report,
1 through 6. And I'll change I to be that the applicant and staff shall review landscaping plans
prior to this matter being presented to the City Council. And replacing number 2.with the
applicant and staff shall review the issues of the location of the utility easement and the actual
location of the pipe prior to this matter going to City Council. I'd add number 7, that if there's
going to be a hard surface drive to the back, that the Fire Marshall comments be obtained before
presentation to City Council. And that in any event that that lane to the back be reviewed with
staff prior to presentation to Council. Next condition would be that the present storage bins or
trailers that are there be removed upon completion of the addition and they may not be used again
on the premises without prior city approval.
Peterson: Is there a second?
Kind: Second.
Peterson: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion?
Burton moved, Kind seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site
Plan #95-11 (File 2) as shown on the plans prepared by Martin Woody Architects dated
January 26, 2000, subject to the following conditions:
I. The applicant and staff shall review landscaping plans prior to this matter being
presented to the City Council.
2 The applicant and staff shall review the issues of the location of the utility easement
and the actual location ofthe pipe prior to this matter going to City Council.
3. Wall mounted lights shall be shielded from direct off site view.
4. The addition is required to be protected with an automatic fire extinguishing system.
5. Two accessible parking spaces are required and the access aisle must be 8 feet wide.
6, 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.
7. If there's going to be a hard surface drive to the back, that the Fire Marshal
comments be obtained before presentation to City Council. And that in any event
that that lane to the back be reviewed with staff prior to presentation to Council.
8. The present storage bins or trailers that are there be removed upon completion of
the addition and they may not be used again on the premises without prior city
approval.
20
Plànning Commission Meeting - March 1,2000
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING:
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR TWO RETAIL BUILDINGS. BUILDING A
HAVING 23.607 SQ. FT. AND BUILDING B. 7,800 W. FT. TO BE LOCATED ON LOTS
1 AND 2. BLOCK 1. WEST VILLAGE QEIGHTS 3 ADDITION ON PROPERTY
ZONED BG. GENERAL BUSINESS AND LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF WEST 78TH STREET AND POWERS BOULEVARD INTERSECTION. T.F. JAMES
COMPANY.
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Peterson: Questions of Bob.
Sidney: Yes Mr. Chair. I'm wondering if we could comment about discussions with the
applicant about moving the, well relocating Building B more towards the south. Where do we
stand tonight?
Generous: Their position is that they don't want to move the building further to the south.
Sidney: Okay.
Kind: And I'm interested in discussions on that south elevation. It looks light years better than it
does in the blueprint plan. This color plan looks a lot better having that additional articulation
and that spandrow of windows. I'm assuming spandrow means big windows?
Generous: Yes.
Kind: Okay. And were there any discussions about having those be functional windows or
maybe even perhaps display windows so you could see some light?
Generous: That was specifically in our original response to the applicant. That we believe that
display windows could add some light to that area would be an improvement on the elevation
and they went back and talked with their client and this is what they came back with.
Kind: Okay. That's all for now.
Peterson: Other questions of Bob?
Burton: Yes Mr. Chairman. This might be kind of an ignorant question but the first condition
talks, that the applicant shall enter into a site plan agreement, and I don't remember seeing that
condition before. Is that because there usually is one already or does that always come after this
process?
21