The URL can be used to link to this page

7. Heritage Sq. Apts, Review Site Plan 7, IC I T Y O F P.C. DATE: Jan. 4, 1989 t C U AN11A�S S C.C. DATE: Jan. 23 , 1989 � • CASE NO: 87-1 PUD IIPrepared by: Hanson/v il STAFF REPORT I PROPOSAL: Review of Detailed Facia, Sound Proofing, Lighting and II Signage Plans for Heritage Park Apartments Pursuant to the Conditions of Approval for the PUD Plan LOCATION: South of and adjacent to Chan View, Opposite the Huron I Q Avenue Intersection, North of West 78th Street APPLICANT: Mr . Thomas Zumwalde Heritage Square Investors I �— Butler No. Bldg. , Suite 200 Limited Partnership 510 First Avenue 7101 York Avenue So. Minneapolis, MN 55403 Edina, MN 55435 ' - CHADDA P.O. Box 100 Chanhassen, MN 55317 II PRESENT ZONING: R-12 , High Density Residential , 7>K1 ICBD, Central Business District ; " ACREAGE: 2 . 6 acres . /-a--S9 v II DENSITY: 23 units per acre II ADJACENT ZONING _ f- 0\3-S1 AND LAND USE: N- RSF & R-12; single and multiple family QS- CBD; commercial uses IIE- R-12 & OI; dry cleaners/St. Hubert W- RSF; single family IW WATER AND SEWER: Available to site IPHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site is level with poor soils along Chan View I2000 LAND USE PLAN: High Density Residential & Commercial II Heritage Park Apartments II January 4 , 1989 Page 2 1 BACKGROUND ' This application was initially reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in May and June, 1987 . Final plan amendments were approved with conditions by the Planning Commission on June 1, 1988 , and by City Council on June 13, 1988. The approval included eleven (11) conditions. Of these conditions , the following were subject to Planning Commission and City Council review prior to building permit issuance: 1 . Detailed facia and signage plans . , 2 . Detailed lighting plans. 3 . Detailed sound proofing standards . ANALYSIS The facia details call for exterior materials to be a rock face block base with cedar lapsiding on the first two floors and cedar shake siding on the third story. Balcony areas will be cedar lapsiding with steel latice railings . The materials are similar ' to the clock tower on 78th Street. Colors have not been spe- cified at this time. Signage plans call for entry sign at the westerly drive. This ground sign structure is 13 feet in length, 6 feet in height and 4 feet wide. The sign display area is 12 square feet. The sign is located 5 feet back from the property line and 15 feet from the curbline of Chan View, which should provide adequate site distance assuming Chan View is not widened. An additional 5 foot setback would be preferrable. The sign is located only one foot from the access drive. It would be preferrable to increase this setback, to improve visibility of the parking spaces behind the sign and allow space for snow stacking for plowing the access drive. The sign is to be illuminated by ground spot lights . These lights should be installed to only light the sign and must be permanently fixed in place. The lighting plans call for 20 foot poles with high pressure ' sodium directional box lights . A lower height of 12 ' -15 ' would be more consistent with the downtown area and lessen the impact to the adjacent residential area. The walkway along the rear of the building will be lit with 4 foot high bollard lights. The walk is intended to provide access to the downtown. This walk aligns with the main vehicular access from 78th Street to the proposed Chanhassen Professional Building. In reviewing both plans , it would be logical to provide a walk on the east side of the apartment complex to align with the exsting clock tower on 78th Street. ( Refer to Chanhassen Professional Building staff report) . I 11 Heritage Park Apartments P January 4 , 1989 Page 3 Sound proofing was discussed at City Council with regard to mini- mizing sound transmission between apartments. The interest was to minimize sound more than in typical apartment construction. The ' building code requirements are for a 50 STC rating. The proposed details specify ratings of 52 , 51 and 55 for corridor walls, party walls and floors . Building Department has suggested means for reducing sound other than additional wall thickness are minimizing back to back plumbing areas , eliminate penetration of party walls , put closets on party walls and other construction techniques . ' RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the ' following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of the detailed submit- tal of facia, signage, lighting and sound proofing standards for ' Heritage Park Apartments #87-1 PUD based on plans stamped "Received December 26, 1988" , and subject to the following conditions: ' 1 . Increase sign setback to be 10 feet from property line and 5 feet from driveway. 2 . Lighting for sign shall be permanently directed only on the sign. 3 . A lighted walkway added to align with the clock tower. 4 . Applicant shall work with staff to minimize sound transmission between apartments . ' PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Comission unanimously recommended approval of the detailed submittal as shown on the plans with staff' s conditions and added the following conditions: 5 . Street lights limited to 13 feet. 6 . Continue the sidewalk design, sidewalk lighting, and signage theme used in the downtown throughout the site. ' CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION The applicant has submitted revised plans to address the Planning ' Commission conditions and based on these revised plans, staff recommends the following motion: "The City Council approves of the detailed submittal plans stamped "Received January 18, 1989" subject to the following conditions: 1 . Lighting for sign shall be permanently directed only on the ' sign. Heritage Park Apartments January 4 , 1989 Page 4 I 2 . Applicant shall work with staff to minimize sound transmission between apartments . 3 . Continue the sidewalk design, sidewalk lighting, and signage theme used in the downtown throughout the site. " ATTACHMENTS 1 . City Council minutes dated June 13 , 1988. 2 . Planning Commission minutes dated June 1, 1988 . 3 . Planning Commission minutes dated January 4, 1989. 4 . Site Plan dated January 18, 1989 . 1 1 IICity Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 IIMayor Hamilton: There's some confusion on trying to clarify I think. That's the reason afor sthe tabliinggtIsbeaeve. �re 1 Councilman Horn: That's part of it. The other part is finding out what sign sizes we have in this city because if we're way out of line than we should IIchange our ordinance. Councilman Johnson: Roman, the 80 square foot sign you currently have, is there a possibility that same other station, is the same sign used nationwide? I mean ' you're not going to eat that sign and just let it sit in the warehouse. I'm sure you'll find use for it. II Raman Mueller: I'm down to three stores in the State of Minnesota right now. That's it. This is one of them. The other one is in Mankato and the other one is downtown St. Paul. ICouncilman Johnson: Could they use an 80 square foot sign in either of those? II Roman Mueller: St Paul I have three faces on two sides for a total 6 faces and each one of them is well over 80 square feet. The other one is in Mankato and that's getting a 10 by 13 sign. Right now we're just going to adjust the placement of it with the City. Could I use it? Potentially yes. At what time II I don't know. le-- PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT FOR A 60 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH AND ADJACENT TO CHAN VIEW, HERITAGE PARK APARTMENT PARTNERS. Mayor Hamilton: We also tabled item 3 to go along with this item. IBarbara Dacy: The Planning Commission recommended approval of this item. One of the major issues of discussion at the Planning Commission meeting was the II traffic issue and those concerns were voiced from people that live in the neighborhood to the north of the proposed site. The concerns were about regarding the removal of the stop signs at West 78th Street and Great Plains Blvd. and as we noted in the staff update, we know that the Council is well I aware of MnDot's position on traffic control along this stretch. We put a note that this only confirms that the City's intent to try and realign TH 101 as soon as possible and get the north/south traffic out of downtown and on it's own lrealigned roadway. In a nutshell, this overhead reflects the original building P location and building configuration on the site. What is now proposed of an "L" shape building which is located on the site approximately pyste is more further south of the lot line to the existing 2 1/2 story apartment bu n i diingbut I it is 10 feet closer to the west lot line. The applicant has submitted a good landscaping plan to maximize so that the yard areas around the building is providing for good yard space. The Planning Commission also adopted the I previous conditions of approval that were imposed during the 1987 review as well. I know that the Council is concerned about the design and exterior quality of the building. I now see that the architect is here for the applicant Ithat could probably better address those questions. [17 Brad Johnson: i thought maybe first of all we could review the process that IIwe're going through to get everything in order since we did change them around a 46 City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 7 little bit. You have before you two decisions to make. One is the inducement I resolution for the bonds that we plan on using to finance that and that's the part that you tabled. Inducement resolution will allow us to use housing revenue bonds to finance the project and those of course have no on-going direct obligation other than to the project for payment. In addition to that, as you also have before you a housing plan, the city has no updated plans. Is that right Barb? We had to redo the housing plan as a part of our condition for the bond so that's also in there. I think both of those are somewhat formalities in bonding processes. The second thing is that we've been asked, we formed a new partnership to own the project and we were asked by that partnership to redesign the building to fit with what they perceive is a better plan and design. That's what we're submitting to you. It's been approved by the Planning Commission with their recommendation. We've had basically no neighborhood, we had a meeting on our own with the neighbors and the Planning Commission meeting and in both cases their only concern was 78th Street intersection so you guys can take care of that on item 19. I'd like to introduce Tom Zumwalde who is the architect for the project and then back in the corner is Jay Weiss. He represents Weiss Construction who will be a general partner in the project. 1 Tom Zumwalde: I understand there were some questions or comments concerning the elevations. Let me first tell you why we're going through this process. Brad mentioned...and what we found is we did some marketing ...Maxwell of Minneapolis and also got some input from the contractor in terms of cost and both of those were important factors in taking another look at the design and configuration. The original building was kind of a question mark shape with a lot of angles in it and what happened as a result of that is you end up with a lot of pie shaped units with minimal exterior wall and a very wide space in the inside of the building. Marketing felt that was not very desirable. It also a lot of pie , shaped rooms. Another thing was wherever you hit one of those angles you have some real severe structural problems. It's very costly so we looked at those and we looked at the costs that it would take to accomplish that and could that money be better spent elsewhere in the building? Looked at a new design and a new design that is virtually the same square footage as the original. I think it's perhaps 200 square feet bigger. Something like that but almost identical. _ The same height. The same unit count. Everything. The big difference is that the average unit size increases 24 square feet. The units are much more marketable. The building is fully sprinkled now. The units have washers and dryers in them. A lot of amenities that we weren't or would not have been able to originally offer in the program. Those are basically the reasons why we've taken another look at it. In terms of the exterior, we're looking at pretty much the same pallet of materials that we were looking at originally. Certainly the same type of character. The original building was a combination of brick and horizontal lap siding. What we're looking at on the proposed building and unfortunatley I don't have it colored for you but I think you can see pretty much the configuration. Again, we've got brick and we've got a series of two different types of lap siding breaking at the third level. You can see the darker divider. We also have balconies in all of the units now versus the original proposal which had either balconies or bay windows. The balconies will project from the facades of the building so they break up what is perceived now as a longer plan and I think will be successful in bringing down the sale of the building. We had the tower initially. We've maintained that element. That's still the focal point of the building. That's pretty much it I guess. Mayor Hamilton: I think Bill had some concerns about the construction of 47 i 8City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 materials. [- . Councilman Boyt: Let me deal with probably one of my bigger concerns. Soundproofing that's going into it. I would assume that this is probably built as a typical apartment is built and that's not soundproof enough. ' Tom Zumwalde: The guidelines for an apartment building are party walls...which are standard. You find that pretty much in...housing. Apartments. It doesn't matter. It's kind of an industry standard. There are ways of increasing it slightly but again the cost of it is considerable to do that. We're certainly going to meet all the standards. There's no question about that. Councilman Boyt: Tell me what this rating of 50 blocks in terms of sound intensity. Does it block my neighbor's bass from their stereo? Tom Zumwalde: Probably not. Councilman Boyt: One of the things, when we take 60 put them we people and P together and if this was your apartment building without city assistance, this ' would be an interest of mine but it wouldn't be as concern but the City is becoming involved in this and as such, I think one of the things that we could do is we can say to people, there are 60 people living in here but once you get inside your doors, you're a unit. You're not bombarded by people from the outside. That makes your place very attractive and I think that it's worth the possibility of say for instance double sheet rocking which is fairly inexpensive really since you're only putting a finishing coat on the outside surface. Tom Zumwalde: Let me explain it a little further. Party walls that you have to use in an apartment project have to have tests run on them... Double layer of drywall is certainly one of them... What we can do if you have something specific in mind in terms of an STC. .. Councilman Boyt: It's been a while since I've seen those ratings so the general idea is let's block stereos for instance. I know that a total block is completely unrealistic but we can probably block 90% of it and so I'd like to see your work on that and with the prospect that we're going to go above the industry norm for an apartment building. The other concern I had was really more a maintenance of the exterior. I recognize this is certainly a cost factor but what is going to something like an all brick do to your cost? You currently have about a third brick now and the rest of it is lap siding. Tom Zumwalde: It increases it. Perhaps Jay could address that. Councilman Boyt: Give it to me over like 30 years. When we consider maintenance of the lap siding versus the brick. 1 Jay Weiss: There are maintenance costs incurred. However, as a reserve it is set up manually that we pay for those expenses of exterior maintenance so that'a requirement of the lender to have a reserve set up so without it the dollars sit there and just accumulate. This program better uses the dollars for the intended use. I never looked at 30 years to be honest. We can only give square foot costs in terms of installation. 48 11 j City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 Councilman Boyt: I look at the apartment buildings that are there by the I F railroad tracks off of TH 101. Don't those have brick exterior and we don't have any city money in that building do we? So I think there is an advantage in having an exterior that's going to last at least 30 years or longer and it would II be nice to know how much that's really going to cost us in terms of rent. Eventually all these things get reflected back into rent and I think we have a lever from the public money standpoint that we wouldn't normally have. , Mayor Hamilton: I think you also need to consider who's going to, what market are they attempting to reach for people to be in there and the more you continue to add in such as brick which is very expensive, if you're going to require I that, than you to continue to cut out the bottom level of people who can afford to be in there. If the City is going to be, as you say involved in the funding of this through tax increment financing, it would seem to me that we may want to II have as broad a base as possible. People who can afford to rent in this building. Councilman Boyt: Yes, I agree with you and it's my understanding that there are II 10 units that we're providing for senior citizens or how many units Brad for senior citizens? Brad Johnson: This building is designed for 24. It's an adult building and the II target market is over 55 years old. We also set it up so that 24 of the units have been set aside for low to moderate income at the expense of the developer. That's the kind of building. We can not do an FHA building that's specifically II for seniors so if we can target the rent to seniors initially. Their concern is we don't build it for seniors than what do you do? We don't have a true senior building where you've got a ruling senior, they just don't do that right now. II They used to do it. Mayor Hamilton: So are your rents flexible enough so as the cost of this building continues to go up, the people who are going to be able to rent in here will remain the same? Brad Johnson: The problem that we have is we can put an all brick exterior on II this and we're already capped on our rent. That does not increase the rent. In other words, the lenders say you can rent this for so much in Chanhassen but the amenity package and the exterior package does not increase the rents. They take 11 out the dishwashers too...so washers and dryers and things that we're putting inside the building but things on the outside do not. We added another $60,000.00 worth of exterior, there's no way that we could be reimbursed for that building cost. The money that the City is assisting this project, I might II also say the building was previously approved as the same type of siding it has. Wood and brick. The money that the City is assisting this project on is going to directly to the tenants. Not the developer. In other words, we're going to II develop, how we're doing it is that the other issue is the tax exempt nature of our clients and by providing 24 units for low and moderate income qualifies us to offer this at about 2% lower interest rate. We have an agreement with the City that the money that they give us in assistance, that we've requested will be repaid to the City in addition to all of this so that's how it works. The L additional funds that have to go back in the district, the agreements that are II involved. The first agreement had to do with additional land. The second one the City is advancing us approximately an additional $40,000.00 a year of tax revenue that will pay for this and that will be used then to basically subsidize 49 11 y Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 IIthose 24 tenants. However, the developer is required also to pay back those funds over a 12 year period. [- II Don Ashworth: I was just going to basically say the same thing. Maybe just a slight twist on it. The performer that the HRA looked at in establish a subsidy level considered two portions. One to the developer and one to the units II themselves. Set up to try to turn this and reduce the number of years. The subsidy level right now turns positive in the 6th year or from the 6th to the 7th year. The total agreement though is written over a 12 year package. We have been pushing for the performer to maintain that 6th to 7th year position. II Additional costs that we may put into the project, what that will do is keep the project from turning positive to the 7th, 8th, 9th year. In other words, reduce the monies that Brad was talking about that would be repaid to the City so there I is some benefit to us in not pushing through additional costs. I'm not saying that we shouldn't look for the best materials and the best project. I'm just saying, you can not look at those as though they're dollars that they're just Isimply going to absorb. We probably will absorb them. Councilman Boyt: I think that if we're looking at 12 years here and then basically, as I understand it, the building is privately owned. It's operated Ilike any other apartment building. Is that correct? And I'd like to think that we have a building that's going to be standing and as pretty as it looks like it's going to be today, 20 to 30 years from now. There's certainly plenty of I examples of buildings that are of this nature so that's why I'm a little concerned about a wood construction exterior. Tom Zumwalde: I know what you're saying about brick...it's a major, major cost. II If you look around at a lot of what I consider newer luxury developments around town, they are for the most part wood sided. It's not a cheap, chinsey material and this is... I think to put the brick on it would push it way into the Icadillac realm and that's really out of the realm of. .. Councilman Boyt: I've got just a couple of questions and then I'll stop. There II are 24 units that are low to moderate income. There are, I saw the figure 5 units that are handicap accessible? Tom Zumwalde: Three units. IICouncilman Boyt: Isn't that set by the size of the building? Oka would think that it's well worth the City's money to improve the sound ebarrier. IIThat just makes it a better place and it's not all that much more expensive and I will give up on the brick. Councilman Horn: No comments. II Councilman Geving: I think this is certainly something we've been wanting in Chanhassen for a long time to increase our housing base with a major complex IIsuch as this. I'm certainly all for it. I'd like to know a little bit more about where this lies in relationship to Chan View. How much further back from Chan View is this location now than it was previously? I'm quite surprised that 11 we didn't get a lot of homeowner input on this but apparently it's also the fact [7 that we have a buffer there now. We already have apartments on those corners and people are used to them and I don't think that they feel this is a threat. It's actually a major improvement. How many feet would you say that would be? II 50 i City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 Tom Zumwalde: The original ro sal was a proposal approximately, almost the same distance from than View. Barbara Dacy: It met the setback in the front which is 25 feet off of than View. Councilman Geving: Then the street will be lined up with Huron. The street I live on so I could come right into the apartment complex when I get to be 55 and ready to occupy it. I'd like to know are these units, are these units that are going to be sold? Strictly a rental arrangement. Strictly rental and you are marketing for an age group in the 55 seniors, let's say rather than young married with children? Brad Johnson: Yes. The building has been basically designed as an adult building. One bedroom, den. One bedroom and then two bedroom Swingle units which means they've got a living room in the middle and a bedroom and a bath off , of two, each bedroom and a bath are off on either side. Generally speaking those types of units are designed more for adults. One or two adults living in it. I won't say that we won't get a lot of children but we've got quite a few and there's nothing wrong with that. It's just the building isn't limited to that. The other thing is that we've got quite a bit of new units that are coming abroad that are more designed for families. Two bedrooms. Three bedrooms in different configurations. Young families don't tend to like to have their children not next door to them. Councilman Geving: Brad have you thought of any security measures in the parking areas? Is there going to be a parking garage for each of the units? Will there be a security type of arrangement that you'll have there? Brad Johnson: There will be a push button operator for each person to get into ' the garage. It's a fully secured building. You just can't get in. Councilman Geving: Okay, so you thought about all those angles. I Brad Johnson: What we're trying to do is fulfill, we've listened with the neighborhood over in that area and they would like to see this, at least one of these types of buildings go in put in there. Councilman Geving: Let me ask you a question about your landscaping. I don't see too much about the landscaping plan or what I would see as I drive down , Huron and look at this facility. What kind of shrubery? How's it going to look to the viewer? Tom Zumwalde: Through your ordinance you require so many trees planted around 1 the perimeter of the site and that was volunteered. A fair amount of buffer type of... As you get out here along Chan View, there is berming along this side and again the trees every so far with a shrub lining. Then again a perimeter landing along this side. We'll have to develop that patio area in here and ultimate connect it to trails... Councilman Geving: What about the recreational facilities? Is there anything in the building itself designed for the residents? 51 II 12 City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 Tom Zumwalde: Yes, in this corner of the building there's 3,000 square feet on the first floor that is a party room, community kitchen, bathroom. [- IICouncilman Geving: Where they could put on an open house type thing? And there s a kitchen in there? Tom Zumwalde: Yes. Councilman Geving: Just another quick question. What are one of these units going to cost to be when I get to be 55 and want to move into it a single unit. Brad Johnson: Let clarify that. Through the City participation we're setting aside 24 units that will go to low to moderate income which means that the people living in that unit will have to or 60% of the median income for a single or family. That's in the range of $12,000.00 to $16,000.00 a year and they can spend a certain percentage of that money for their income. That's just for the 11 24 units. We've also set that aside primarily for the senior citizens. That's the 55 and older group. If we can't find that group in town, than we have to rent it to everybody else. The other 36 units are open to all adults at our market rate and our rate of rental runs something like $350.00 at the low end and up to $675.00. Now the units themselves we can not, this is another rule, we can not take a two bedroom unit and not rent it as a subsidized unit. There's no special units. It's just the individual. Each unit will have it's ' own thing and we'll have a base rent period. If a person qualifies for a unit, there's no, it's not like a Section 8 housing or something like that where we've got a certain kind unit. We'll basically have the same kind of units available to everybody. Councilman Geving: That's the kind of questions I'm getting from the residents ' in the community now. How much does it cost? What are they going to look like? What are the amenities? I'm hoping that you'll be providing the newspapers, we've got all the papers represented here tonight, with that kind of information. ' Brad Johnson: We've got to go through this process first. ' Councilman Geving: You'll get it. One other question since you did indicate that you're going to have balconies, are those going to be cement balconies or are they going to .be wood? We had a big problem over in Eagan I believe with a fire on the balconies and that kind of thing. What are the balconies going to look like? Tom Zumwalde: In fact I was reading the Minutes from last year. They are wood. 11 The construction of the building above the garage is wood frame and the balconies will also be wood. As I recall in the Minutes last year, I believe the City has an ordinance... Councilman Johnson: I don't have a lot of questions on this. I see where Bill's coming from. I can't support you right now Bill on this because I can't get a grasp. I don't know what that cost differential is. From where they're ' coming from the standard building thing going up to the next step and how much noise reduction you get with that next step. If you said the base noise there's not much that stops it. My neighbor who lives 200 feet, more than 200 feet away from me, his base goes blasting through my walls and I've got extra sized walls i 52 City Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 ' and everything. I see where you're coming from but in this case we don't have enough information to go with. I can't put something on here that's going to a I kill project. project's thi s p Sect. I think this pro3ect s hmportant to the City and potential cost increased to this project, like you say a double layer drywall, when you start talking 60 rooms, you're talking a lot of money. I'm not sure if you're going to have a significant increase. I think apartment management can control sound in an apartment. Just like the apartments I used to live in in Texas, it took the management to do it. There was nothing I could do about it. We had a rock and roll group four apartments down. There was nothing I could do about them as far as construction wise. Otherwise, I see this as a benefit to the City. Mayor Hamilton: When you build your walls, I guess just to follow up on what Bill's saying, are they 2 x 6, 2 x 8 construction? Do you do a single wall for two sides or do you actually build 2 x 6 walls? Tom Zumwalde: Typical would be a 2 x 4 stud with some. ..on one side and 5/8ths on the other side for sound insulation. There are 6 plate 2 x 4 studs staggered on that plate... There are a whole variety of them. Some of them increase the fire rating more than they increase the sound deadening so I would have to go back to the book and look at... The increase in sound deadening isn't that great even in a really significant wall. It only goes up to perhaps 55... It costs more to do it than you realize. Mayor Hamilton: I know some of them do a double wall which I would think would improve it a lot or go through a 2 x 6 wall so you get additional insulation in there would help I would think. I Brad Johnson: I guess the best thing is there has been a tremendous increase, since many of you live in apartments, in apartment sound proofing and if anybody is really interested we have one that was built to this spec that is currently being rented if you want to go visit one, we'd be more than happy to buy you lunch and drag you over there. It's in St. Louis Park and it's basically the same standards as this building. It's designed for seniors. Councilman Boyt: I think this is an issue that if there's a way that we can put a condition on this that leaves the issue open so we can look at the cost trade- off, quiet is one of the most expensive things we can buy anywhere. This is an opportunity to build some more into the building if it's at all economically justifiable. I just think to make that decision without the chance to examine is to II miss an opportunity and I'd like to see us create a window so we can look closer. Mayor Hamilton: I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you. Is quiet the most expensive thing we can buy or the most precious? I Councilman Geving made a motion to approve the PUD amendment as presented by staff and Mayor Hamilton seconded the motion. I Councilman Boyt: What about adding something on the sound? I don't know exactly how to word that but do we need... Barbara Dacy: What they were discussing is that condition 4 requires that the facia plan come back. If you wanted to add something in that condition to address the sound proof issue. I 53 14ty Council Meeting - June 13, 1988 Mayor Hamilton: You'll get another shot at that review of their building plans specifically. Councilman Geving: We'll see that again so we won't have to include it tonight. You understand what we're trying to do so come back to us with that. Councilman Geving moved, Mayor Hamilton seconded to approve PUD Amendment I Request #87-1 subject to the plans stamped "Received May 12, 1988" and the following conditions: 1. A detailed utility plan showing water, sewer and stormwater connections as well as fire hydrant locations shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to building permit issuance. 2. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted indicating the additional plantings to be located between Chan View and the parking area. 3. A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in conjunction with the development plans for the retail projects to be developed to the south and east of the parcel. 4. Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submitted for Planning Commission and City Council final review prior to building permit issuance. 5. Removal of the existing single family residence shall be accomplished prior to building permit issuance. 6. Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. 7. All parking areas shall be lined with concrete curbing. 8. Compliance with the comments as noted in the Building Department memorandum dated May 25, 1988. ' 9. Compliance with the comments in the letter from BRW dated May 25, 1988, specifically #6-#11 on pages 1 and 2 and #1 on page 3. 10. Compliance with comments as noted in the Fire Department memo dated May 27, 1988. 11. Items referred to in BRW's letter be specifically spelled out regarding storm sewer. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PROPOSED HOUSING PLAN AND PROGRAM. 11 Resolution #88-58: Mayor Hamilton moved, Councilman Geving seconded to approve the Housing Revenue Bond Program and Housing Plan for construction of the Chanhassen Heritage Square Apartment Complex. All voted in favor and the motion carried. 54 II CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION II li REGULAR MEETING JUNE 1, 1988 II Chairman Conrad called the meeting to order at 7: 35 P.m. . MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Erhart, Steven Emmings, Annette Ellson, Ladd Conrad, II Brian Batzli , James Wildermuth and David Headla STAFF PRESENT: Barbara Dacy, City Planner I PUBLIC HEARING: .* PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT FOR A 60 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO CHAN VIEW, HERITAGE PARK II APARTMENT PARTNERS. Public Present: II Name Address I Tom Zumwalde Applicant George Beniek 412 - 76th Street West Sue Welliver 7611 Huron Avenue ar Barbara Dacy presented the staff report . II _� t Conrad: I got a call from Brad Johnson saying he was on his way from St . II Paul . He' d be delayed but he would be here. He' s not trying to dodge it but we' ll open it up for public comments, if there are any from the applicant. Any comments at all on the revision to this particular apartment building. I George Beniek: I live on 412 West 76th Street. I guess my only question is, was there, I imagine there was a public hearing on the initial which I don' t recall ever receiving a copy of . What' s the purpose of the change now? To who's benefit is the change? Is it more units going to be in there? Dacy: No . There is no change in the amount of units that were previously 1/ approved by the Council in 1987. The only thing that' s changed is how the building is sitting on the lot . Basically it' s shifted more to the south II and has become an "L" fashion as you see there. The north/south and the east/west access as opposed to a "U" formation. As to who' s benefit , I don' t know. II George Beniek: Why are they requesting the change? Is it our purpose to know that? Dacy: The architect is here. II 7 Tom Zumwalde : I can try and answer that. I am Tom Zumwalde, the II architect on the project. I designed the original project and also the revision to it. The original project, we did not have a contractor II 1 Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 2 C ! involved. We did not have a lot of marketing input. In the last year we got a contractor involved and we've dome some marketing input and those are the prime reasons for the changes in the configuration. With the original building that was "U" shaped, we had a lot of units that were pie shaped with minimal exterior walls looking up to an inside court. From a marketing standpoint, the people we talked to felt they were less useable or less rentable. Less desirable units. From the construction end, all of those wedges in the building were very, very costly and what was happening was we were spending so much money on those that the rest of the building would have suffered for it. So what we feel , in the super configuration is that we' re getting a much better, more efficient building. The units have increased an average of 24 square feet per unit. They' re much more liveable than the other ones were. Basically those are the reasons . George Beniek: The heights of it is going to be approximately how many stories? Tom Zumwalde : The same, it ' s 3 stories . The identical number of units . The same number of parking spaces. Basically just the configuration change. George Beniek: It will conform to allow the senior citizen access? Handicap? Tom Zumwalde : There are three handicap units in the building . Totally accessible. As far as rent levels and all of that, I wish the developer were here to answer that . I really don ' t have all that information . Sue Welliver : I live on Huron Avenue. I own a double bungalow there and I 'm concerned also about my tenants and myself, since I live there, is access. There' s going to be 60 units and you ' re going to have a lot of parking and that type of thing and a lot of cars . How are you going to get out onto 78th Street without any stop signs onto 78th Street? It ' s very difficult right now. If you ' re going to put that up and have the only access onto that road, how are you going to get back out? That ' s what I 'd like to know. Dacy: The access to the apartments will be from Chan View and there will be two access points. One opposite the Huron Avenue intersection. Here' s Huron Avenue here. The entrance to the parking lot will be directly 1 opposite of that and there will be another access further to the east on Chan View. So cars entering and leaving the site will come from Chan View, iff they' re going to be headed to Great Plains Blvd . , they' ll go over to here and then go south to the Great Plains Blvd . and West 78th Street intersection which there' s a stop sign at that point and West 78th Street is now a flow through on that. There ' s no four way stop. That was eliminated with the reconstruction of the south lane of Great Plains Blvd. . Additionally, there could be traffic that goes west on Chan View that would eventually hit Laredo. The City is just finishing up, we' re I reconstructing Laredo Drive as it intersects West 78th Street. There' s a right turn lane now that will be on Laredo Drive going onto West 78th Street. 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 3 1 Sue Welliver: Yes , but I mean when you try to get onto West 78th Street , that is the most difficult now that they eliminated the four way stop sign there. Also , on Laredo , eliminating that. You want to go east , anyway from there, it's very difficult. We have to wait 5 to 10 minutes and that' s just normal time. You get into rush hour and it' s terrible. I Dacy: I agree. There' s a considerable amount of traffic on West 78th Street in both locations. In this location in front of Kenny' s, because II that leg is part of TH 101, MnDot's requirement was that we remove the stop signs along West 78th Street to promote the flow through on West 78th Street and to control the traffic coming from Great Plains Blvd. onto West 78th Street. There' s no question that during peak hours that main street is a busy street. I can't dispute that. Sue Welliver : Are they going to do anything? Are they going to suggest to do anything for that for the residents in this apartment unit also? Like are they going to put a four way stop on Laredo and West 78th or do you know? Dacy: No, there are no plans to put a four way stop at either location. Again, MnDot is requiring us that we can' t have stop signs on that leg of what is known as TH 101. What ' s there now can control the traffic but yes, it' s going to be busy during peak hours. I don't know how else to explain it. C ' Sue Welliver: I have rental property right now and that ' s one issue that 1/ we have right now is because you can' t get out. Now you build a 60 unit apartment building , those owners are also going to have the same problem there. I think they should look at that and I think the City should decide on putting in stop signs . There ' s a church there with children going across. I think there should be stop signs and I think this is just going to add to the congestion. I Conrad : It sure will add to the congestion by putting in 60 more units there. There' s no doubt about that. I guess the question becomes , Barbara , you' re telling us that the intersection at TH 101 or West 78th . Is that 78th? Dacy: Yes . I Conrad : That MnDot really does control that and what is our influence in terms of the traffic problems? Dacy: As you recall also, the City has a long term plan, it ' s really not long term because we' re trying to accomplish it along with the four lanes of TH 5, creating a new leg of TH 101 that would go through the Apple Valley-Redimix property, cross TH 5 and hook up into Lake Drive East. That would take a significant volume of the north/south traffic from TH 101 and take that out of going through the downtown area but there is going to be this interim period in here where the north/south traffic on ( TH 101 is going to be going through the downtown area. George Beniek: How many parking places are there shown on their plan? 1 I Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 4 Dacy: 108. Tom Zumwalde: The building has a 60 car ara e below it. There' s g g ere s one garage space for each unit and then 48 open stalls out in the parking lot. 11 The same as it was before. George Beniek: So there will be a basement in the building? Is that right? Tom Zumwalde: That would be the garage, correct. Conrad: The parking lot did look small didn' t it? George Beniek: Yes . Emmings moved, Wildermuth seconded to close the public hearing . All voted in favor and the motion carried. The public hearing was closed. Conrad : Tim, we' ll start down at your end . What are your comments? Erhart: I really don' t have any. I think the building space is unusual space. It' s built well and I think it' s adequate. 11(1 Emmings: I don' t really have anything. I liked the other building better but so what. Conrad : Yes , the other building was prettier . Emmings: This one 's efficient . 11 Ellson : I don' t have any comments either . I think it ' s just fine. Conrad: Nobody's talking about traffic. Brian? Batzli : I was going to talk about landscaping but I ' ll talk about traffic a litjle bit. Kenny's is going to stay where it is isn ' t it? Throughout this whole development so we' re not going to lose any traffic. . . I guess I would recommend that, I 've seen the paster of that church has asked that stop signs be put in there, at least so people can get across the street to go to church. We' re adding potentially 108 more cars a day or more. When you talk about back and forth trips , a lot more congestion at that intersection. I guess I would like to see whether we can convince MnDot of some other way before we get people getting inpatient and trying to pull out and creating havoc at that intersection because I think it ' s a problem. I personally waited there trying to get out of Kenny' s market for , it is several minutes. That' s not really an exaggeration. I guess I 'd like to see something . I don ' t know what we can do in this particular instance but it sounds like MnDot is kind of calling the shots on it but I do think that' s a concern. Not having been involved in the original building, I don 't know if I like the original building or not. Your one condition that asks for the additional plantings, what are you going to, I didn ' t understand where that ' s going to be. Chan View and the parking area? You' re just going to have more plantings in that one strip? I Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 5 I C Dacy: Yes, in this area. I Batzli : Do we require a certain plantings to be put in? Are we going to get like little pine trees that are going to take 15 years to grow to shield this thing? Dacy: No . The ordinance requires for evergreens that they be a minimum of 6 feet at planting and I believe the landscaping plan, in some cases there were taller trees . Batzli : Because this is going to be a 3 story building and when you have II a 6 foot pine tree, it's going to take 20 years to mature and you have a single family homes in the area, I don ' t know. Obviously the people are going to have to look at the building for a couple of years no matter what II you do. That ' s all . Wildermuth: I guess I have a question about the storm water runoff. Jim Lasher, in his letter , spent quite a bit of time talking about an on-site retention. . . Dacy: Part of the problem in determing that, the ultimate storm sewer I plan is that the City needs to finalize it' s plans for the drainage of the abutting properties. This site here is where a daycare center is proposed C to be located and all of these properties here interrelate so what we ' re trying to do is have BRW and the applicant on this project work together so there is on-site retention on this property and make sure that it ' s properly directed to whatever is finally determined on the daycare site also. It ' s hard at this point to give you a definitive answer of the I/ catch basin over here or here. Wildermuth: There doesn' t look like there ' s going to be room for a hatch basin on this property. Dacy: If you' re talking about a retention pond . Is that what you mean? The City' s intent was to create a storm sewer system and piping and so on so an, actual pond wouldn' t probably be used . There might be a very small depression in there but it was my understanding from BRW that we' re looking at a storm sewer system. , Wildermuth : With an underground garage, I can see a lot of problems there. Like with the storm that we had last year . That' s going to be flooded because that whole area is low and it all drains . I think what we II should do is strengthen the language for the storm water runoff. Put in provisions that that be made. . . I guess we' re looking at the BRW letter . That's all I had. Headla : . . . Even if there ' s City' s storm sewer that will catch the runoff, then this apartment complex will pay for that? , Dacy: Yes, the applicant is responsible for all necessary storm sewer improvements from the runoff from their property. I I Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 6 II /, Headla : Does that appear to be adequate to allow that storm sewer to take care of it? To me that seems that ' s the logical way to go but is there anything else we should be looking at? Dacy: The intent of condition 1 from staff was taken from BRW's letter that we want final utility and storm sewer plans from them. That will be reviewed both by in-house engineering staff and BRW. Before they get a building permit, they' ll have to satisfy those issues . Headla: Did you get any input from the Fire Department today? Dacy: People from the Fire Department talked to me today but. . . Headla: I talked to Steve yesterday and I said I want to know if we ' recommend approval of this , is the Fire Department going to require any additional fire fighting equipment? His first comment was , well we' re ordering the aerial ladder . We' re ordering that so we ' re covered there. I said, is there anything else? He said I don ' t know, I ' ll have to talk to them. I said, well get back to Barb on Wednesday. Dacy: No, Steve did not talk to me. The primary fire protection equipment is the requirement for sprinkling so that ' s the number one best defense as far as. . . 11 C Headla : I 'm not talking about defense. I 'm talking about we got hooked into being required to have an aerial ladder in this City. Have we overlooked something else that we can' t charge the apartment complex for or are the general taxpayers going to have to pay for it? Dacy: Not to my knowledge will there be any other need for any other type of equipment. The aerial ladder is a significant addition to Chanhassen' s fire fighting capabilities . Between that and the requirement that the building be sprinklered is the best that we can do. Headla : Last time we beat around quite a bit on the soil borings. Have they done any of that work? Dacy: I know soil borings have been conducted on site. The area where the parking lot is is where most of the poor soils are located. Headla : They will have to take special precautions there so that doesn ' t break up in a short period of time? How do we cover that? Dacy: The applicant will be responsible for maintaining the parking lot in an acceptable condition and I believe they will be soil corrections . 11 Tom Zumwalde : As required . There are a lot of borings that were done on the site and I 'm not certain exactly how bad it is down at that end but we ' re putting in concrete curb around the entire lot . Putting in a ' bituminous parking lot. That ' s a rental property. We' ll be forced to keep it up just to keep it marketable. Headla: Where do you have all your trash containers? I Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 7 I CTom Zumwalde : The trash collection area will be in the basement of the building or the garage. Headla: Will they be coming in from Huron to go in there? Tom Zumwalde: That's correct. _ r Headla : That tends to be off of where the real soft soil is? Dacy: The poor soils, from my understanding, were over in this direction. Tom Zumwalde: It gets worse as you get into this direction. . . 1 Headla : What do you do, you take soil borings and based on what you find that determines the type of base you put down? , Tom Zumwalde: That ' s correct. Headla: And the City Engineer has to approve that? , Tom Zumwalde : The City Engineer will be approving all that . . . Headla: That' s all I have. C Conrad : I don ' t have any additional comments . I think those that I 've heard are real valid comments and maybe whoever makes the motion might want to say something in there that the City Council decides what the traffic impact on West 78th Street might be. Maybe review whether we should pursue some kind of a stop sign on West 78th. 1 Headla: I 'd like to talk about that again. When does it look like TH 101 will go through by that Redimix and that? I Dacy: Hopefully during the 1992-93 timeframe . Headla : Once it does that , then we would be able to put up a stop I sign. . .? Dacy: Right . What would happen is that that portion of West 78th Street II would revert to local control . That would no longer be TH 101. Headla : What if it takes them two years to get that thing totally built, II then that would be two years when. . . Conrad : It' s a problem right now. I know that and this will add a little bit to that and it may be an opportunity to look at the whole situation. I don' t know what the flexibility of the State is but we may, somebody may want to ask the City Council to look into the matter. Is there a motion? Wildermuth : I move the Planning Commission recommend approval of the , Final Plat Amendment for the Heritage Park Apartments PUD #87-1 based on the plans stamped "Received May 12, 1988" subject to the following conditions: 1 through 10 and I think the items in the BRW letter referred II to in condition 9 should be specifically spelled out regarding storm water I II Planning Commission Meeting June 1, 1988 - Page 8 11, handling . I would assume that it would have to make adequate provisions Ito handle. . . Does anybody have any suggestions on the traffic situation? I think the traffic situation in terms of what the City will be allowed to do after. . .and TH 101 gets rebuilt, in terms of the natural course of I events I think if that situation becomes really bad. . .specifically read it into the motion. ilWildermuth moved , Emmings seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Final Plat Amendment for the Heritage Park Apartments PUD #87-1 based on the plans stamped "Received May 12, 1988" subject to IIthe following conditions : 1. A detailed utility plan showing water , sewer and stormwater I connections as well as fire hydrant locations shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to building permit issuance . II 2. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted indicating the additional plantings to be located between Chan View and the parking area. II 3. A pedestrian walkway shall be provided on the site in conjunction with the development plans for the retail projects to be developed to the south and east of the parcel . IC4. Detailed facia and signage plans shall be submitted for Planning Commission and City Council final review prior to building permit issuance. I5. Removal of the existing single family residence shall be accomplished prior to building permit issuance. 6 . Detailed lighting plans shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance. I7. All parking areas shall be lined with concrete curbing . 8. Compliance with the comments as noted in the Building Department IImemorandum dated May 25, 1988 . 9. Compliance with the comments in the letter from BRW dated May 25 , I1988 , specifically #6-11 on pages 2 and 3 and #1 on page 3 . 10. Compliance with comments as noted in the Fire Department memo dated May 27, 1988 . II11. Compliance with the comments in the letter from BRW dated May 25, 1988, specifically spelled out regarding the storm sewer . il , 12. Direct City staff to research the traffic situation prior to City Council review. 1 All voted in favor and the motion carried . 1 Planning Commission Meeting January 4 , 1989 - Page 46 I Emmings moved , Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Wetland Alteration Permit #88-17 based on the plan stamped December 16, 1988 and the grading plan stamped December 29, 1988 and subject to the following conditions : 1. One is approval of the disposal plan by the Fish and Wildlife Service. I 2. Identification of the access road. 3. A letter from the owner of the property on which the spoils would be dumped. 4. Compliance with all of the provisions of the City Engineer ' s report. I 5. Subject to a check by staff of the City ordinances to be sure that all of this is in compliance with those ordinances. All voted in favor and the motion carried . HERITAGE SQUARE APARTMENTS , REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN II APPROVAL TO BE MET PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT. Steve Hanson presented the staff report. I Tom Zumwalde: I have one brief comment. My name is Tom Zumwalde, the architect. We' re in the process right now of putting construction drawings together on this project and should be completed by the end of the month. At that point we' ll be submitting them for final approval . The owners asked us to prepare and have alternate for this project for face brick, if the budget allows it. What I would like to do, if possible, if we get approval on this . . . if he' s able to add the brick to the building , that we don ' t have to come back through this process . It ' s unknown at this point whether or not there' s going to be room in the budget for it but if there is, he would like to do it. Conrad: I would see no reason to come back to us to add brick. Brick is better . I would encourage that . Tom Zumwalde: That' s all I had . Erhart: Sidewalks . Post lighting material . Are we continuing the theme of the downtown? Approving the sidewalk material in the design. We ' re designing the curbs . All the wooden posts stained gray I think it is . Is that theme being carried through this? We' re asking how it will be tied into the clock tower? The sidewalk. Are we carrying the downtown theme into the landscaping and the sidewalks and so forth? Tom Zumwalde : I 'm assuming the sidewalks will be just a standard concrete block. 1 . Planning Commission Meeting January 4 , 1989 - Page 47 ' Erhart : Do we have any special standards on our downtown sidewalks Brad? Brad Johnson: On this particular case, the actual site plan for this whole area except for . . .will be done by the City as a public improvement which we' ll cover better I think maybe in the next discussion. Erhart: I was referring to this plan. We seem to have a theme in the City regarding the sidewalks and the little posts and all the signs and everything and I 'm just wondering if we can carry that theme into this site. That ' s all . ' Brad Johnson: At somebody' s expense . ' Erhart : Well , we always have the ability to ask up here. To my surprise , most times they go along. Brad Johnson: That hasn' t come up at a meeting of any. Erhart: I 'm just suggesting, my reaction is that I 'd like to see us carry the theme of the city into this site plan . Whatever standards we apply to the sidewalks and lighting and posts and so forth. That' s the only comment I have. Brad Johnson: What you ' re saying is you'd like to see lighting along that block? Erhart : If that ' s what we' re doing downtown , yes . Emmings: It says the walkway along the rear of the building will be lit with a 4 foot high, some kind of lights I ' ve never seen the word before in ' my life. Erhart : Okay, if that ' s the case , than I 'd like to see us use the same ones, the same designs that we' re using downtown. Tom Zumwalde: Brad , I 'm not sure if any of those 4 foot bollards have been used in the downtown area . IErhart : In the park? Brad Johnson : In Heritage Park there ' s some. Emmings: I don' t have any other comments on it . Elison : The only thing I had is the materials are similar but colors have not been specified. I doubt the would give us a shocking pink or something but do you want to mention color? It would be nice to do a color . That' s probably minor but I can' t let it go by without saying something . 1 Batzli : I don' t know how I can top any of these comments so I don' t have anymore. I II Planning Commission Meeting January 4, 1989 - Page 48 I Wildermuth: As I look under the recommendations , I don' t see anything I about the height of the street lamps or the lamps in the parking lot so I 've added a fifth item there . They should be 13 feet conforming with the other light standards . I Headla : They hit them all . Conrad : I have nothing unless we trade our sidewalk for brick in the II front of the building. No comments . Emmings : Can we explore what Jim asked about a little bit? When we' re II talking about the light standards outside, reducing them from 20, did that include the parking lot? Tom Zumwalde : That ' s what I was specifically referring to was the parking I lot. Right now on the plan there' s 3 of them within the parking area and then there' s another one up towards the entrance where you drive in. Emmings: And those are the ones that you' re talking about? Tom Zumwalde: Yes . II Emmings: Okay. Erhart : I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the II detailed submittal facis, signage, lighting and so on with the four conditions listed plus the fifth condition that the lighting height be altered to 13 feet. That' s the parking lighting height I believe. And II item 6, that we continue the sidewalk design, sidewalk lighting signage theme used in Heritage Park throughout the site. Ellson: I ' ll second it. I Erhart moved, Ellson seconded that the Planning Commission recommend I approval of the detailed submittal of facia , signage, lighting and sound proofing standards for Heritage Park Apartments #87-1 PUD based on the plans stamped "Received December 26, 1988" and subject to the following II conditions : 1. Increase sign setback to be 10 feet from property line and 5 feet from II the driveway. 2. Lighting for sign shall be permanently directed only on the sign. 3. A lighted walkway added to align with the clock tower . II 4. Applicant shall work with staff to minimize sound transmission between apartments . 5. The outdoor lighting height shall be altered to 13 feet . II 6. Continue the sidewalk design, sidewalk lighting signage theme used in II 11 , . i Planning Commission Meeting January 4 , 1989 - Page 49 ' downtown throughout this site . All voted in favor and the motion carried . ' SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 21, 600 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING, ON PROPERTY ZONED CBD, CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED JUST EAST OF 480 WEST 78TH STREET, CHANHASSEN PROFESSIONAL BUILDING-PHASE I, ARVID ELNESS ARCHITECTS, INC. Steve Hanson presented the staff report . Brown: Point of clarification. There was a clerical error on the tail end of my memorandum. What appears to be page 2 is an arbitrary page. ' I 'm not sure where it came from. My memorandum ends at page 1. Conrad : Brad , do you have any reaction that you want to talk about here? Brad Johnson: I think Tom' s prepared to answer anything on this site. I 'd like to point out that we ' ve been having meetings with the City and we' ve collected some comments that in general are pretty much being ' addressed and I think that has to be clarified . I want you to remember too that this is a four phase project. One phase is very important to get going and that ' s the first phase . The next three would deal with an ' extension and that overhang and the possible expansion east. . . We have a concept here that we 'd like you to have you accept for all four phases . Tom will be go through and bring you up to speed on what we' re asking for . Tom Zumwalde : This is an original drawing that you would always see. It is . . .specific information. Part of the reason for that is because it covers about 20 parcels of property here and we have very limited information in terms of who owned them. How big they were and a number of other things . Also, part of the problem was that the City and the City' s consultant was going to be doing a municipal parking lot so our biggest ' concern initially was to try and find what the extent of our work would be in order to put this building together and how much would be done by the City and by BRW. We had a meeting , I believe in December with Steve and Jim Lasher of BRW. Before that meeting I prepared a site drawing on a little larger scale so we could see what we' re talking about . I started to focus in on the two buildings . This is 78th Street down here. Phase 1, the two story building . Phase II , a one story building . . .and then the ' proposed Phase IV over here. This being the clock tower and this is Heritage Park Apartments . On this drawing I had arbitrarily laid out parking. Again taking it a step further than perhaps I should have but I wanted to feel reasonably comfortable myself that the building and parking . . . and so forth. In our discussion that day, the way it ended up was that basically what we are looking at is the building and the building pad and that BRW would prepare all the documents for the parking lot, for the sidewalks surrounding the building , the landscape plan , the grading plan and the utilities. They would also be getting the surveys and so forth. Everything else that was required . Out of that meeting that day, one of the things we talked about is , as Steve had mentioned, is pushing the building back farther from 78th Street and also shifting it over to the east a little bit so that if the Lawn and Garden Center stays longer I