The URL can be used to link to this page

8. Site Plan Reivew at 251 Lake Drive East, Family of Christ Church 1 C ITY OF P.C. DATE: 2/17/88 � ; :; :: 88: 14h/88 1 SAN ' ' Prepared by: Olsen/k I . I STAFF REPORT 1 PROPOSAL: Site plan review of a 7 ,277 square foot church 1 F- Ii 0 LOCATION: Lot 1, Block 7 , Hidden Valley (251 Lake Drive East) 1 ^i I W APPLICANT: Family of Christ Lutheran Church P.O. Box 388 Chanhassen, MN 55317 I _ II PRESENT ZONING: PUD-R ^• r IACREAGE: 3 .25 acres DENSITY: I ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - Highway 5 _-____�?//7/d'k /T ilik S — PUD-R; Hidden Valley _._ E - RSF; Chan Estates II E . W - BN; vacant I W WATER AND SEWER: Available to property (n I PHYSICAL CHARAC. : The site has a gradual slope towards the south II2000 LAND USE PLAN: Residential High Density I ? Ea* rap_ . Aro s ..f ■AIL. ,_PIP841114; 111t1111111, l• `� 10Thal11 .iitrrie_ET r) . ,.. I ■�.-1•,■tF:fa8Fi8/ - .. aN‘ -Elm mu .mmilw e,MPIt'l 1 . ...m= ;P g .._ 1IIrul !! 1. 1.::111 } 1 _ ; !. NI 1, .. ■ Iilll Milli W. TH Si a-r ./ :: II"' tCanc7-i c �- I p1_ ' ��,, • I inrair L. - 4 '� rI- k �' T „ -:L ,�- 1 OP --44,- GI �J� \ ©) ��i .�.� _L ►' 4• en 800 I okra;A . _____Lt...„,4%,.. _ .io. Ott?i��..� - ES! z Ih � �'''' III\� A � w�J 2 , <.,- , .V!��i gmsu �I ' 'R•F RSF T" 8200 ar+ '4�� , L I s PrIff)AKO e --�—. MARSH = �� 8300 y.� max lF SUSAN �i` ` f J . a F :r :Iv a —�=. __...:/l.' r - 8• c ti �,///� �y,, R/CE Al SH LAKE ) 1 11?'. ST. MigliiiIV P, ,(� 7 8600:.i o 3 m 8700 I RSF, F • Z . .- = R12 8800 r z f POND s —' 8900 W ` r Ow. SV ff cr o �8 Ii! i 2 ( -R '� _ 9000;I I-I I I I I I I I I I I I I '.� _, RD , c4 �, 9100 = i �2 1 DI 1n_ 1 Family of Christ Lutheran Church February 17, 1988 Page 2 ' APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 5-9-7 of the Zoning Ordinance requires the following con- ditions for a church in the residential district (Attachment #1) : ' A. The site shall be located on a collector arterial roadway as identified in the comprehensive plan or located so that ' access can be provided without conducting traffic through residential concentration. B . The structure must be set back 50 feet from all property ' lines. C. Parking area shall be set back 25 feet from the streets and ' non-residential property and 30 feet from residential property. ' D. No more than 70% of the site is to be covered with impervious surface and the remainder is to be suitably landscaped in conformance with Article VIII. ' Section 7-1-10-5 requires one parking space for each three seats based on the design capacity of the main seating area plus one parking space per classroom for churches . The maximum height of ' a structure in a residential district is 40 feet. REFERRAL AGENCIES Building Inspector Attachment #2 Fire Inspector Attachment #3 City Engineer Attachment #4 BACKGROUND On May 20 , 1985 , the City Council approved the Hidden Valley Estates PUD with outlot B designated as a future church site ' (Attachment #5 ) . As part of the PUD approval , the property was rezoned from R-1A to P-1 which was the residential PUD district. To permit the church to be located on outlot B within the P-1 ' district, the zoning ordinance was amended to permit a church in the P-1 district as a conditional use. The City Council approved the zoning ordinance amendment on September 9 , 1985 (Attachment #6 ) . The Zoning Ordinance permitted churches as a conditional use in the P-1 District subject to the following conditions : 1 . The church site must be served by a collector or major arterial street. 2 . The church site must be within the metropolitan urban service ' area. I Family of Christ Lutheran Church February 17 , 1988 Page 3 ' In February of 1987 , the City adopted a new zoning ordinance and zoning map and the P-1 district was changed to PUD-R. The PUD-R district does not regulate churches as permitted or con- ditional uses . Since Outlot B was approved as a future church site, staff is reviewing the proposal as a site plan for a per- mitted use. The current zoning ordinance permits churches in the residential district as a conditional use permit and has specific requirements . Staff is using the conditional use permit require- ments as guidelines for site plan approval since the site is in a predominantly residential area. ANALYSIS ' The applicant is proposing to develop a church on property zoned PUD-R with approximately 3 .25 acres . The property is located just west of the Chanhassen Estates subdivision and within the Hidden Valley PUD, just south of Highway 5 . The property is ser- viced by Lake Drive East (collector) and Hidden Court. The zoning ordinance requires the structure to be set back 50 feet from all property lines and the parking area is to be 25 feet from streets and 30 feet from residential property. The zoning ordinance also requires that no more than 70% of the site shall be covered with impervious surface and the maximum height of a building in a residential area is 40 feet. The applicant is proposing a 7 ,277 square foot church for the first phase and two additional phases which would include a classroom addition and a sanctuary addition for a total square footage of approximately 20 ,000 square feet. The percent of impervious surface including all the phases and parking area is 54% which is below the required 70% maximum impervious surface. The seating for the first phase of the church will be 250 , there- fore, 84 parking spaces would be required in the first phase. The second and third phase will require an additional 66 parking spaces. The applicant is providing 96 parking places in the first phase and 60 in the future for a total of 156 parking spaces . The Building Inspector has required a total of 4 handicapped parking spaces for all phases. There are 2 handicapped parking spaces provided for the first phase which meets the state building requirements . The additional 2 handicapped parking spaces will be provided with future phases . ' The building and parking areas meet the required setbacks . The proposed landscaping screens the first phase of the parking and building and the remainder of the site will be left in its natural state. The proposed landscaping meets the Zoning Ordinance requirements except that 1 foot of shrubs must be included with the 2 foot berm with the strip of spruce trees along Lake Drive East. The remainder of the open area developed as part of Phase 1 shall be covered with sod or seeded. r 1 . Family of Christ Lutheran Church ' February 17 , 1988 Page 4 Streets Currently, there is a major intersection at the corner of Hwy. 5 and Dakota Avenue where the McDonald' s and Sinclair Station is located. The City of Chanhassen is reviewing the possibility of shifting this intersection to the west to provide a north-south intersection for TH 101. The most current proposal for the inter- section is shown on Attachment #7. The proposal is in the prelimi- nary stage and the improvements to the intersection and TH 101 will not take place for some time in the future. The proposed intersec- tion and realignment of TH 101 will impact the proposed site by ' requiring some additional right-of-way for Hidden Court to inter- sect with Lake Drive East. The location of the intersection of Lake Drive East with the realigned Hwy 101 requires the proposed entrance to the church to be located approximately 60 feet to the south as is proposed. It is also proposed by the Public Safety Department that a secondary access be provided from Hidden Court for use as an emergency access should the primary access be blocked. Attachment #8 shows the relocation of the primary access south 60 feet, the additional right-of-way that will be required as part of the Hwy. 101 improvement and a possible location for the ' additional access from Hidden Court. Building Height The height of the main building is 33 feet which is acceptable under the maximum height requirement of 40 feet. The church is proposing a steeple approximately 73 feet in height which is 33 ' feet over the maximum height requirement. The Zoning Ordinance does permit church steeples to be omitted from the maximum height requirement of the area if the required rear and side setbacks are ' increased 3 feet for each additional foot over the maximum height ( Attachment #9) . As previously stated, staff is using the con- ditional use permit requirements for a church in residential ' districts as guidelines for the site plan review. Those guidelines require a 50 foot setback for the structure. In a residential district the setbacks for structures is 30 feet. Therefore, staff is recognizing that an additional 20 foot setback has already been provided. If the proposed church was at the 30 foot setback the church would have to be located back an additional 11 feet or 41 feet from the rear and side lot lines to permit the 73 foot ' steeple. Since the site for the applicant is currently providing a 50 foot setback, staff feels that the intent of the ordinance is being met and that the height of the steeple is acceptable. ' Miscellaneous The applicant is proposing a 20 square foot sign to be located just south of the primary entrance to the site. The applicant will have to receive a sign permit and the maximum size of the sign permitted is 24 square feet. Also, the Building Department ' has required that the steeple must be of non-combustible construc- tion or that it be a maximum of 20 feet in height. The Building r Family of Christ Lutheran Church February 17, 1988 Page 5 ' Department also requires a set of plans for preliminary review prior to the formal building permit application. The Fire Inspector has recommended that the hydrant located in front of the proposed future sanctuary be relocated to the north corner of the primary access as shown on Attachment #10 . The Fire Inspector also recommended, as stated previously, that a second access be provided to ensure two accesses to the property. The remaining items of the site plan such as trash enclosure and lighting, meet the require- ments of the Zoning Ordinance and the City Engineer' s memorandum reviews drainage and utilities . RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan #88-1 as shown on the site plan dated January 28 , 1988, with the following conditions: ' 1 . The applicant shall provide details on type of shrubs proposed along the east lot line and provide 1 foot of hedge along the west property line between vehicular access and Lake Drive East. 2 . All open areas in the first phase shall be covered with sod or seeded. 3 . Two additional handicapped parking spaces will be provided with the second and third phases or as required by the state building codes . 4 . The future phases shall preserve the additional right-of-way ' required for the TH 101 improvement. 5 . The proposed access to Lake Drive East shall be relocated 60 feet to the south. 6 . A second access to Hidden Court shall be provided and approved by the City Engineer. 7 . The applicant shall receive a sign permit for the proposed sign which shall not exceed 24 square feet. ' 8 . The steeple shall be constructed of non-combustible material or shall not exceed 20 feet in height. ' 9 . The hydrant located in front of the proposed sanctuary shall be relocated to the south corner of the entrance from Lake Drive East. 10 . The City Engineer ' s sixteen conditions. il Family of Christ Lutheran Church I February 17, 1988 Page 6 IPLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission uanimously approved Site Plan #88-1 as I shown on the site plan stamped "Received January 28, 1988" with staff' s conditions and adding #11 and #12 as follows: 1 . The applicant shall provide details on type of shrubs proposed I along the east lot line and provide 1 foot of hedge along the west property line between vehicular access and Lake Drive East. I2 . All open areas disturbed in the first phase shall be covered with sod or seeded. I3 . Two additional handicapped parking spaces will be provided with the second and third phases or as required by the state building codes . I4 . The future phases shall preserve the additional right-of-way required for the TH 101 improvement. I5 . The proposed access to Lake Drive East shall be relocated 60 feet to the south. I 6 . A second access to Hidden Court shall be provided and approved by the City Engineer. I 7 . The applicant shall receive a sign permit for the proposed sign which shall not exceed 24 square feet. I 8 . The steeple shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Uniform Building Codes . 9 . The hydrant located in front of the proposed sanctuary shall be I relocated to the south corner of the entrance from Lake Drive East. I 10 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and shall provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of the utilities. 11. The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District Permit. I 12 . A 6-inch sanitary sewer cleanout shall be provided on the sanitary sewer service and shall be located 12 feet west of the easterly property boundary. I13 . Plans and specifications for the installation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer prior to final site plan Iapproval. II Family of Christ Lutheran Church February 17, 1988 II Page 7 14. The plans shall be revised to show a 24-foot wide bituminous I driveway between the west access onto Lake Drive East and Hidden Court. This access shall be constructed in accordance to the typical parking lot section (with out curb) as shown I on the plans . The location of the access onto Hidden Court shall be located a minimum distance of 100 feet east of Lake Drive East to allow for proper traffic movements. I 15. A drainage swale shall be located east of the building pad to ensure proper drainage away from the building and to the II south. 16. The proposed "courtyard" area as shown on attachment 4 shall be revised to maintain proper drainage away from the building II and shall provide an adequate buffer from flooding during a 100-year storm event. 17. The southwest corner of the site shall be revised to insure I positive drainage away from the primary access and to the stormsewer system. II 18. All fire hydrants shall be located a minimum distance of 30 feet away from all proposed structures . All hydrants shall have a 6-inch gate valve between the hydrant and watermain. I 19. An acceptable erosion control plan indicating the location, type of erosion control, and the City' s standard detail for I installation of the erosion control shall be submitted prior to final site plan approval. 20. All erosion control measures shall be in place prior to the II commencement of any grading and once in place shall remain in place throughout the duration of construction. The developer is required to review erosion control and make the necessary II repairs prior to the onset of spring runoff. All of the ero- sion control measures shall remain intact until an established vegetative cover has been produced, at which time Iremoval shall be the responsibility of the developer. 21. Hay bales shall be placed around all storm sewer inlets . 22 . Wood fiber blankets shall be utilized to stabilize all II disturbed slopes greater than 3 :1. 23 . Erosion control check dams shall be placed at 100-foot inter- II vals in all constructed drainage swales. 24 . Working hours shall be between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and II 6 : 00 p.m. with no work allowed on Sundays and Holidays. II II Family of Christ Lutheran Church February 17, 1988 Page 8 25 . The developer shall promptly clean streets, on and off site, of all dirt and debris that has resulted from construction work by the developer, its agents or assigns. 26 . The lights proposed on the site plan shall be shielded so as ' to not impact the neighbors . 27. The applicant may phase the looping of the watermain and the installation of the third hydrant if approved by the City ' Engineer. The applicant preferred installing a gravel drive to serve as a ' secondary access to the site from Hidden Court rather than a paved private drive as proposed by staff. The applicant also requested whether the looping of the watermain and installation of all hydrants must be a part of the first phase. Attachment ' #13 is a memo from the City Engineer with his recommendations on the proposed phasing of improvements and the recommended design of the secondary access from Hidden Court. ' Staff recommended that the driveway entrance from Lake Drive East be located 60 feet to the south to accomodate the realignment of ' Highway 101. Minnesota Department of Transportation has reviewed the realignment and has suggested two other road alignments . Fred Hoisington, as a consultant to the City, has reviewed the MnDOT proposals and has confirmed that the driveway, shifted 60 ' feet to the south, will accomodate all three scenarios ( 2 MnDOT, 1 BRW) (Attachment #14) . ' CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following ' motion: "The City Council recommends approval of the site plan for the Family of Christ Lutheran Church as shown on the site plan dated ' January 28, 1988 with the following conditions : 1 . The applicant shall provide details on type of shrubs proposed ' along the east lot line and provide 1 foot of hedge along the west property line between vehicular access and Lake Drive East. ' 2 . All open areas disturbed in the first phase shall be covered with sod or seeded. ' 3 . Two additional handicapped parking spaces will be provided with the second and third phases or as required by the state building codes . ' 4 . The future phases shall preserve the additional right-of-way required for the TH 101 improvement. Family of Christ Lutheran Church February 17, 1988 Page 9 5 . The proposed access to Lake Drive East shall be relocated 60 ' feet to the south. 6 . A second access to Hidden Court shall be provided and approved , by the City Engineer. 7 . The applicant shall receive a sign permit for the proposed sign which shall not exceed 24 square feet. 8 . The steeple shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Uniform Building Codes. 9 . The hydrant located in front of the proposed sanctuary shall be relocated to the south corner of the entrance from Lake Drive East. 10 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with the City and shall provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of the utilities. 11. The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District Permit. 12 . A 6-inch sanitary sewer cleanout shall be provided on the sanitary sewer service and shall be located 12 feet west of the easterly property boundary. 13 . Plans and specifications for the installation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer prior to commencement of any grading. 14. The plans shall be revised to show a 16-foot wide Class V driveway between the west access onto Lake Drive East and Hidden Court. This access shall be constructed of a 6 inch Class V section. The location of the access onto Hidden Court shall be located a minimum distance of 100 feet east of Lake Drive East to allow for proper traffic movements. 15. A drainage swale shall be located east of the building pad to ensure proper drainage away from the building and to the ' south. 16 . The proposed "courtyard" area as shown on attachment 4 shall be revised to maintain proper drainage away from the building and shall provide an adequate buffer from flooding during a 100-year storm event. 17. The southwest corner of the site shall be revised to insure positive drainage away from the primary access and to the stormsewer system. I Family of Christ Lutheran Church February 17, 1988 Page 10 ' 18 . All fire hydrants shall be located a minimum distance of 30 feet away from all proposed structures . All hydrants shall have a 6-inch gate valve between the hydrant and watermain. ' 19 . An acceptable erosion control plan indicating the location, type of erosion control, and the City' s standard detail for installation of the erosion control shall be submitted prior to final site plan approval . 20 . All erosion control measures shall be in place prior to the commencement of any grading and once in place shall remain in place throughout the duration of construction. The developer is required to review erosion control and make the necessary repairs prior to the onset of spring runoff. All of the ero- sion control measures shall remain intact until an established vegetative cover has been produced, at which time removal shall be the responsibility of the developer. ' 21. Hay bales shall be placed around all storm sewer inlets. 22 . Wood fiber blankets shall be utilized to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 :1. 23 . Erosion control check dams shall be placed at 100-foot inter- vals in all constructed drainage swales. 24. Working hours shall be between the hours of 7 :00 a.m. and 6 : 00 p.m. with no work allowed on Sundays and Holidays . 25. The developer shall promptly clean streets, on and off site, of all dirt and debris that has resulted from construction work by the developer, its agents or assigns. 26 . The lights proposed on the site plan shall be shielded so as to not impact the neighbors . 27. The proposed watermain should be extended from the existing ' water service on the east property boundary to the existing 8 inch diameter watermain located south of the site on Hidden Court. The diameter of the proposed watermain which traver- ses the parcel should be a minimum of 6 inches while the extension of the watermain along Hidden Court should be 8 inches in diameter. ' NOTE: Conditions in bold type are City Engineer' s amended con- ditions . ATTACHMENTS 1 1 . Section 5-9-7 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2 . Memo from Building Department dated February 2 , 1988. 3 . Memo from Fire Inspector dated February 1, 1988. I 11 Family of Christ Lutheran Church February 17, 1988 Page 11 Attachments ( continued) ' 4 . Memo from City Engineer dated February 11, 1988 . 5 . City Council minutes dated May 20, 1985. 6 . City Council minutes dated September 9 , 1985. 7 . Current intersection proposed for TH 101. 8 . Location of primary and secondary access and right-of-way required. 9 . Section 6-10-2 of the Zoning Ordinance. 10 . Hydrant location. 11. Letter from Family of Christ Lutheran Church dated February 5, 1988 . 12 . Application. 13 . Memo from the City Engineer dated March 10, 1988 . 14 . Letter from Fred Hoisington dated March 3 , 1988 15. Planning Commission minutes dated February 17 , 1988 . 16. Site plan dated January 28 , 1988. 1 I I I I I I I 1:: G. Light sources shall be shielded; and 1:: H. No outside speaker systems. 5. Commercial Communication Transmissio Tower ' " A. Transmission towers not desi n progressively shall be set bacromoalllproperty • lines a minimum distance equal to the height of the tower. 6. Wholesale Nursery II A. The site must be on a collector street or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan; B. Five acre minimum lot size; C. All storage and yard areas as well as buildings iri must be set back 100 feet from public or private road right-of-ways and 500 feet from an adjacent single family residence; ill D. The site must be located along a collector or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan; ill E. All outdoor storage areas must be completely screened by 100% opaque fencing or berming; F. Hours of operation shall be from 7 o'clock a.m. to 6 o'clock p.m. , Monday through Saturday only (work on Sundays and holidays not permitted) ; G. Light sources shall be shielded; and H. No outside speaker systems. 7. Churches A. The site shall be located on a collector or arterial roadway as identified in the comprehensive plan or located so that access can be provided without conducting traffic through residential concentration; B. The structure must be set back 50 feet from all property lines; C. Parking areas shall be set back 25 feet from streets and nonresidential property and 30 feet from residential property; D. No more than 70 percent of the site is to be covered with impervious surface and the remainder -46- 4t) I is to be suitably landscaped in conformance with Article VIII. E. Churches outside the MUSA line must provide the following for review: 1) Location of two (2) drainfield sites. 2) Two (2) soil borings on each drainfield site for a total of four (4) soil borings. 3) No percolation tests for drainfield sites es where the land slope is between zero and 12%. 4) One (1) percolation test per drainfield site where the land slope is between 13% and 25%. 5) Areas where the land slope exceeds 25% shall not be considered as a potential soil treatment site. 6) The sewage treatment system must be in conformance with Ordinance 10-B. 7) School and daycare uses accessory to the church lif use are not permitted unless approved by the City Council. 8 . Private Stables A. Compliance with Horse Ordinance No. 56; and B. Stables must be located a minimum of 200 feet from wetland area. 9 . State Licensed Day Care Centers A. Site shall have loading and drop off points designed to avoid interfering with traffic and pedestrian movements; B. Outdoor play areas shall be located and designed in a manner which mitigates visual and noise impacts on adjoining residential areas; and C. Shall obtain all applicable state, county, and city 1111 licenses. 10. Hospitals - Health Care Facilities A. Site shall have direct access to collector or arterial street, as defined in the Comprehensive Plan; 111! -47- CITY OF CHANHASSEN .i„,; 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 ' (612) 937-1900 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Department 1 FROM: Building Department c1-)( , DATE: February 2 , 1988 SUBJ: Planning Case 88-1 Site Plan Review 1 . Four handicap parking spaces required. SBC 1340 .0300 subp. 5 . 1 2 . Spire must be non-combustible construction or a maximum of 20 feet high if combustible. UBC 507. 3 . Building Department requires a set of plans for preliminary review. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 k 1 CITY OF ,, 1, _. . N ,,,s,, , CHANHASSEN 1 `\ I i' `t 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 I MEMORANDUM I TO: Jo Ann Olson, Asst. City Planner FROM: Steve Madden, Fire Inspector 1 DATE: February 1, 1988 SUBJ: 251 Lake Drive, Church 1 Upon review of the site plan of the church, I recommend that a 1 second driveway be installed to insure two accesses to the pro- perty. I Also, I recommend the hydrant placement as marked on the plan. If you have any questions, please see me . I I I I I 1 1 I I i3 I 4 .......„......., 1 „., CITY OF ill CHANHASSEN ,, 1 �_ �`,' ` : . 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 I !1 (612) 937-1900 IMEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission IFROM: Larry Brown, Staff Engineer ,;,', DATE: February 11, 1988 ISUBJ: Site Plan Review of Family of Christ Lutheran Church Planning File No. 88-1 1 This site is part of the Hidden Valley subdivision and is located I in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Lake Drive East and Hidden Court (refer to attachment 1) . The 3 . 25 acre site is composed of an open field with a berm on the east side of the parcel which provides screening to the "Chanhassen Estates ISubdivision" (Additions 1 and 2 ) to the east. Sanitary Sewer IMunicipal sanitary sewer service is available to the site by an existing 8-inch diameter sewer service located on the east pro- perty boundary (refer to attachment 2 ) . A 6-inch sanitary sewer I cleanout should be provided between the proposed building and the property boundary since the total length of the sanitary sewer service exceeds 100 feet. IWatermain I Municipal water service is available to the site by an existing 8-inch line which was extended from Erie Avenue to the easterly property boundary. I The proposed watermain should be extended from the existing water service on the east property boundary to the existing 8-inch diameter watermain located south of the site on Hidden Court. I The diameter of the proposed watermain which traverses the parcel should be a minimum of 6 inches while the extension of the water- main along Hidden Court should be 8 inches in diameter. I The proposed hydrants should remain a minimum distance of 30 feet away from the building such that safe access to the hydrants may be maintained in the event of a structure fire. Each hydrant should have a 6-inch gate valve between the hydrant and watermain. 11 Planning Commission February 11, 1988 ' Page 2 Plans and specifications for the installation of the sanitary ' sewer and watermain should be submitted for approval by the City Engineer prior to final site plan approval. Access/Parking It is recommended that only one primary access be allowed from , the site onto Lake Drive East to keep traffic patterns and move- ments on Lake Drive East to a minimum. The proposed access meets the minimum required site distances in accordance to the stan- dards of Minnesota Department of Transportation. To insure access of fire and emergency vehicles , an additional 16-foot wide driveway will be required to access onto Hidden Court. This driveway should be constructed in accordance to the typical driveway section such that the future parking lot may be matched into the driveway. Since this access is to serve as a secondary access , no curb will be required along the driveway. A concept plan for the realignment of State Highway 101 , which if constructed may affect the intersection of Lake Drive East and Hidden Court (refer to attachment 3 ) , has been submitted to this office. The access onto Hidden Court should be located a minimum distance of 100 feet east of Lake Drive East such that proper traffic movements may be accommodated. Grading 1 The plans propose that the central portion of the parcel be graded to approximately 3 .0% and sloped to the south. Two to four foot berms have been proposed along Lake Drive East. The grading plan should be revised to include a drainage swale to the east of the proposed buildings to maintain positive drainage ' away from the building and to the south. The proposed grading of the site will not require the removal of any trees . Drainage Off-site runoff for the proposed church was accounted for during the storm sewer and ponding design of the Hidden Valley sub- division. Therefore, no further retention of storm water runoff will be required unless otherwise required by other regulatory agencies . A 21-inch diameter sotrm sewer stub was provided at the southerly property boundary. The existing storm sewer invert elevation is 944. 95 . Submittal of plans and specifications iden- tifying proposed entrance conditions to the storm sewer system will be required for approval by the City Engineer prior to final site plan approval. ' 11 Planning Commission ' February 11, 1988 Page 3 A drainage swale should be constructed east of the proposed building to maintain positive drainage away from the building and ' to the south. Similarly, the southwest corner of the site should be revised to insure positive drainage away from the primary access and to the storm sewer system. ' The proposed courtyard between the proposed church and future classroom addition (refer to attachment 4) should be revised to maintain drainage away from the building and provide an adequate ' buffer for flooding during a 100-year storm event. Erosion Control ' The plans do not address erosion control. Submittal of an accep- table erosion control plan indicating the location, type of ero- sion control, and the City' s standard details for proper installation will be required prior to final site plan approval . Approval of the preliminary site plan for Family of Christ ' Lutheran Church dated January 25, 1988, is recommended upon the following conditions: 1 . The developer shall enter into a development contract with ' the City and shall provide the necessary financial sureties to guarantee the proper installation of the utilities. 2 . The developer shall obtain and comply with all conditions of the Watershed District Permit. ' 3 . A 6-inch sanitary sewer cleanout shall be provided on the sanitary sewer service and shall be located 12 feet west of the easterly property boundary. ' 4 . Plans and specifications for the installation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer shall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer prior to final site plan 1 approval . 5 . The plans shall be revised to show a 24-foot wide bituminous driveway between the west access onto Lake Drive East and ' Hidden Court. This access shall be constructed in accordance to the typical parking lot section (with out curb) as shown on the plans . The location of the access onto Hidden Court shall be located a minimum distance of 100 feet east of Lake Drive East to allow for proper traffic movements . 6 . A drainage swale shall be located east of the building pad to ensure proper drainage away from the building and to the south. Planning Commission February 11, 1988 I Page 4 7 . The proposed "courtyard" area as shown on attachment 4 shall be revised to maintain proper drainage away from the building and shall provide an adequate buffer from flooding during a 100-year storm event. 8 . The southwest corner of the site shall be revised to insure positive drainage away from the primary access and to the stormsewer system. , 9 . All fire hydrants shall be located a minimum distance of 30 feet away from all proposed structures . All hydrants shall have a 6-inch gate valve between the hydrant and watermain. 10 . An acceptable erosion control plan indicating the location, type of erosion control, and the City' s standard detail for installation of the erosion control shall be submitted prior to final site plan approval. 11 . All erosion control measures shall be in place prior to the ' commencement of any grading and once in place shall remain in place throughout the duration of construction. The developer is required to review erosion control and make the necessary repairs prior to the onset of spring runoff. All of the ero- sion control measures shall remain intact until an established vegetative cover has been produced, at which time removal shall be the responsibility of the developer. 12 . Hay bales shall be placed around all storm sewer inlets . 13 . Wood fiber blankets shall be utilized to stabilize all disturbed slopes greater than 3 :1 . 14 . Erosion control check dams shall be placed at 100-foot inter- vals in all constructed drainage swales. 15 . Working hours shall be between the hours of 7 : 00 a.m. and 6 : 00 p.m. with no work allowed on Sundays and Holidays . 16 . The developer shall promptly clean streets , on and off site, ' of all dirt and debris that has resulted from construction work by the developer, its agents or assigns . Attachments : 1 . Location Map 2 . Sewer and Water Service Location 3 . State Highway 101 Realignment 4 . Courtyard Location and Drainage 1011 Calailki*_ZACT. • 1 1111111 111111111111 1isp.■�CPK 10ppexa • CC�t9 ��[�"11 � � ■ 11111 iiIiiii H ST. ii muiijv ' W. 7: I MP . OPP I i1 i ��Fj ($L# '1 q h• 0 PROJECT LOCATION I LI 117: ippliq ' glir 11.77- 12 ditz 411 e to. ■ 112! ir..;-! Ikeittivamiles I& d r LAK :Ws??M di Pie- ripr VI A n3 itsv % Inz IIINE ikr., 1 v. ge, I- EINE ma k. II .Ati $:, los MIK Illr I j► Vr � ,►e a-t, -„i ,�� , 810 fi ■■ : 1 . ..-.. . . ill "PIM ly4■111111v ..* (n' • : ••• r tat ■IIIP IN ilatei 1 > • ( .- . '.. Mau sr tin la 4 i .... . ......, •• ..,40rAr tow. . Iivviii444, Ignidir SINNEN ��— � CIRCLE I //----- - Cm%, I RICE MARSH I d A7Ye.e Htit e,vr p ....,......„,.- ..,..,..------ . , s•- ,. _ lR { ;0 r , i i, , / 4 , , , -.1 „,. 41, , , „., ,: __. , ,1---1, 41.1. ,;. I'll -.- , • , ..", ; . iniii, a _. .,_,„, , .Q , _ •••.. • 1 4-- aillill 7 - 4". i - ' ‘.1:flfiriSPL:<-‘1 filriONP.Wit It 11 lt '': kit f _ . . ' 1 4$! , :r;- i. li\i 1 -. s , -- :.-,,--•,-.„„ ,,, • 2,----e V---•i... 7,..4) :.. . -i:',t.-.41 - 1 , ..,_ T. . - / t4c. ialli IV .- ‘ PP .:: 1 by .'• WI( /kw - - li 1. . a:. 911._ ., 111: , i --- , 1. v • ?it t.i...„ . . . .saltr - • :-1 ( . - 1 lir" - . - ::::-: '. ' -441 IA 11 \ I. '-' ':i S-11 -it, ;-.. , _ ,.. . 1.. '-;-, 0-'- - - iti _n- i : ._ CI''.,i.. --.. ,-- . , qPf_T ‘----- ' - -: .; .........i'_ . - -._s (},,l- `::..� T 1_, lain t; ---=.a -- ' _,_: •1 q P1111 :4! r . . ii .1 \ \ ' - _ P = ■;tir , 7 i . 1 :-. '11 \ ,_I\ tl - ta .s ,, tw aD 4 E{ .1/kr( 1 •., otityl I'Al t--, r_ „ 1.1 -\} 10,) 0 k : II h'i%° 11 \/ 1 -S); irI " A // I \ I CA I '} tom / l i \ _ : t 111 I ta --- . ' , -1 iii ; 4 { 1 . i '""f w C o i I � I _ o ,� 2 c f. Am / g 'V 71/`— 0 I -A' / i 11 1——41:- i—t(11 , -t• I Ali • �/ -I-- � I • .v f i c ', LA / N � i� • . 1 - 11 1 j 1 1 i -- -i , L • 1 , / 1: . `� —L � 1 r -,c- 7` ...-.• . ! __.. C " . ■ e ._ .x-- o_ C.' 1 - ._ - - !---- -.-_ : I0 c ...,1 c -, • r , J•_, c G `-',..- • i / 77 - I . 0 ,„,../0'A I .. _ ... 0. -,----, .■ 10 AV- .5 . .„/ 1. - ■ - T 1-:/_=.2-:C:—.'-'-:.:_-- .1. -1-'E___--11_- 't...._____. 1__; ‘,.___...... ... ..-■-....""";.Z --- , . I ..r. ..-...1 _ . - -- _..— —. ..---0../ -.- ---_ ,.._ ._,, .._?zr— — ---.._.T.- _77.,..._ Z. _ ..."--'-'-_/•-•23e-•' • • 0 •-• C-- •--;_-7) - 0 0 c ct _ A ,_,/ ) •-..- 2 ---- ' ---:. .•- ,,A-r- C.° 0 :\ A.:- .50° .- ...• - •15:C I :, f ',y ( -...c_ ^ . ._ (..:. :-. c c c c 0 0 G 0 0 ' ..Dr /2 ', . ... .- .,.,.....,.., ,...---. .7.`..- .9. . '......%. ' CC C.-. , 1, • ....:..-''- ......' ..- ...K.::: ...• ( .... /4.: ; , 4-rt;'' X\ ...**.? '' I ..v. a. • ..., _._____.- _,_ ; ---i---- .,-..---4--- - .. ' " ,----,<X_V) _.,.....,----- - --•->..- ' I .. ..-- „..., '''.4 c - -1 . __" -- ,...,c .-------- ---...,----' -\\.- ii- • 1 ... ...- .--•1/4. • I --' _ ----------------- C o (,- ...--- __.. \‘, : t 1 . r -•• , --1 b ---- ...,-- -- -- I (.,,,,--------- , ' ) --. „--->-/ -- ! - I _ / -- - „, - , 0 I -, .- 0 ■ , - .'•• - ( ',... ' • .-- -,/‘ ''-----sA il I 1, I 1 C ... ..... - - --- I I 1 i 1 -.■ - I I 1 n't"4 ...," 4.‘... .--- - , I ,..•-' . 1 1 1 1 1 „,..../17x/- ! .., ,,-,-,..-.Ns AREA oF PARCEL I . ---- .„.„71: i •47.,-- 1 .., . , - .-"•• .- ,,,, _ I I I I AREA OF TAKihr, t 0,08A AREA oFREAAINDER • a 1 , i 1 II 1 : 3.51 A- : , I 1 .-,-.' 14 L \..... oi ' 'PR 6tkir t y I •t 1 . 1 --f--: . --..„ I ...- ■-• _.--,, s A et e s it t' ---4 •, • , 4..---60° SeCON.49/0,4 y I I • 1:11/ I • / ACCe.SS • . \ , 1 I ,, • - , .. ...... I . 1d . ,-. / . 1 S., / / • .--• s. I ...--- ..."11/// 2- I 44 rrAe 't I ',' . () , i -.-7,,,,,/ _, .1) 1 ■ 5 • ! i. : ,11/ ! — ! -•o, 4 !o , I ,.IN' 1. _ /ate .4∎� It _r T --.: ' i __-.4. 44, ' ._ri,.. il ,,, , , rt. :: - i ' ,140f. sq1 ' ,� . , r (�— _ ' ` -' .-. -'-: I try _ A i ibitil' - — - ' 'IA* - -1 ( eil • I J_-_ Vk„.. - —0. il - 1 g i l'• - -•-1 _§. -._1) !If. . 411.1 \I■ k 1 ,T —,_1 , .. \-400'1 ' i t 1 - i 161i .."..ra..-....- .1-41 0 laf.tkr ---- , __,: : I I - 11 -11-3— 4—, - I 0 - ..-A.,1- . .,:- ,.,.. _-4,:. 0_1- - 1 , 1 : 4iat .1-_-:6.- it; , .,„ i s . . _ .._ � : 1 I • . •' ' '- • 11 011' HY il 1 i MI :II \ \ \ ' :s -t1P. 0 ' 1 IN , li.i4',#:;..71. . 7 -I ,r b el < ..,-, ori:77,-4,-t-Ii..P4Pi I I — r \ ( --13'\ 7, --€) L ' :Eirs'i \\ sl-s0_.-.-- iu - '11 j Pilikr-4-.-----T---'. 1 -‘111. Lp,a -1 IN\ - � ; : 1‘. 47, 1 '' I ' 177 0 g It MrtIr o 1 • - , ifie, a Ilt1.461, 1* '1 l< / .4N - 0 :P1 i i <44 li:_s) ( 111---\ _ t ■,. "c; ..111§L,, /./ it\i\ 1 . illik .\ , i it, . 1 ; =. ri 1> c 2c 11 / O . t - --_ ' 274 _,'_ g i( r, )3 ,r_ __ 1:b(li Ail , 4 , / _i_ 1 -.-q 1 1 IC .>ti. < ,_' , „ ofpr c N e/ — - 1 . , 1, i1 .. I ..: •' -- \ •,/ , --•1 .. A ••• -4 , i I .::-..1.-,' j a -.- .- 1 `i1 Meeting, May 2 1985 -21- II 4- councilwoman Swenson : I understand that Roger Knutson is going to come up with ' something on this . I wasn 't agreeing with those 18 boat slips and the four docks . If we are not being specific, this in fine . Councilman Geving: The sketch plan does not show the four docks , so I think that we are o .k . I Mayor Hamilton: My motion was to approve the sketch plan review for 18 townhomes, P.R.D. with a beachlot . The docks were discussed some and there is more discussion to be had, but we generally agree with your concept in your sketch plan . That does not make it final . ICouncilwoman Swenson : I want it on record that I have no means of approving that without giving more discussion . p g IFred Plocher: At what next stage does that happen? Our problem is that we have to spend a lot of money to get the final plans and final review . It will be hard to do that if we don 't know what the dock situation is. 1 Barb Dacy: As soon as we get the results from the City Attorney 's y office , we will make an appointment and set up the whole process. I .-- HIDDEN VALLEY SUBDIVISION, SE CORNER OF HIGHWAY 5 AND 101 , NEW AMERICAN HOMES : A . Preliminary Plan Approval Including Rezoning to P-1, Planned Residential :1- Development . B . Wetland Alteration Permit . C. Land Use Plan Amendment from High and Low Density Residential to Commercial . D. Rezoning from R-la , Agricultural Residence to C-2, Commercial District . Barb Dacy : The property is now zoned R-la single family . To the east is Chanhassen Estates, which is zoned R-1. To the west is R-la zoning as well and is now vacant . ITo the south is R-1, which is the Rice Marsh Lake Subdivision . The present land use designation on the property ; the southern area of the 81 acre site is designated as part of an open space , the mid portion is designated as low density residential and II the upper portion , adjacent to Highway 5, is designated as high density residental . The American Legion site is commerical and in the immediate vicinity of the intersec- tion , Chanhassen Estates is designated as low density residential and is designated as commercial to the north of Chanhassen Estates along Highway 5 . The subject pro- ' perty was zoned P-2. There have been three or four proposals ranging from over 600 apartment units to the most recent one in the late 70 's to around 200 in combination with single family uses . It was rezoned to R-la in 1981 given that there was little II activity on site . This proposal was originally before the Council during the sketch plan review approximately 1} months ago . It has since gone to the Planning Commission twice and it is now back with four items to review . You have the preliminary deve- lopment plan approval with rezoning, wetland alteration permit request , land use plan Iamendment , and rezoning in conjunction with that land use plan amendment . I will briefly summarize some of the changes that have occured since sketch plan review . The southern 23 acres of the property are unbuildable as it is designated as a class A wetland . The middle area is proposed as 109 single family detached lots . Original- ly , the developer proposed 132 single family detached lots . The average lot size has increased from 12 ,000 to 14,793 square feet . The DNR has a 1 ,000 foot area of shore- line management area . Because of the subdivision , the DNR has a formula for tiering the size of the lots as you move away from the wetland and the Rice Marsh Lake ordi- nary high water mark . The concept that you see here tonight has been approved by the IIDNR in that they state that the tiering that is being proposed is consistent with II AN7 -1.3-frttn5-11-i-. meeting, May 20 , 19;4 << -22- . rpolicies . The northern part of the sites, the applicant is creating three .fiats. In the original sketch plan , Lake Drive East was further to the north adja- ;:' nt to the American Legion property . That road has been moved south and thus the creation of the two acre outlot. The applicant has also applied for redesignation of :4,z putlot A from high density residential to commercial . Outlot B is being proposed as a church site. The rezoning action that is before you tonight is everything south of I:: f Lake Drive East including the chu_rrh_ site being rezoned to P-1. Pending your deci- sion on the land use applications for these two outlots to commerical , the applicant is requesting rezoning to C-2. I mentioned that the average lot size has increased to 14,700. The exact middle of the 109 outlots averages 11,700 square feet . Thirty- II one lots are below 10,000 square feet; 49 lots are between 10 ,000 and 15 ,000 square feet and 20 lots are above 15 ,000 square feet. The cul-de-sac widths of the lots are at minimum of 40 feet , however, the majority are 50 feet wide on the cul-de-sacs. II The non-cul-de-sac lots are a majority of 70 feet wide . The lots adjacent to Chanhassen Estates ha-v-e been widened to 90 feet. The applicant has proposed a five to six foot berm along the south side of Lake Drive East to screen the commercial and the function of the collector street from the single family area . Berms are also II proposed adjacent to Chanhassen Estates. The developer is proposing one tree per lot with a caliper size of at least 31 to 4 inches . This would dictate a size tree of at least 15 feet tall . Staff also recommended that the size of the berms on Chanhassen II Estates that at least two trees per lot would also be planted . The applicant is asking for a variation in setbacks than normally required. On non-cul-de-sac lots the applicant is requesting a 25 foot front setback . On cul-de-sac lots, a 30 foot front setback and a minimum building separation of 15 feet between each structure . II With the variation of setbacks, what can be acheived is the elimination of that house to house -effec-t and a creation of more open space between the livable areas of the house. Normally , the garage side would be located in front of the driveway and, II therefore, in the non-living areas of the house. Fifteen feet should still provide adequate building separation . The intent of this altering setback scheme would be to create the appearance of more open space between any two homes . It would also advan- ' tage in that it would cluster the driveways into one certain area . The applicant is also proposing deed restrictions . The lots that abut Chanhassen Estates , the deed restrictions are the same for those lots as they are in this subdivision . The deed restrictions also establish an architectural control committee , which will review II each housing package for each lot as is developed . The deed restrictions require that no two of the same color package and house design can be located directly adja- cent to each other or across the street . The Planning Commission , at the April 24, II 1985 meeting, recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions in the staff report in addition to four additional conditions . 1) basements are required on each home . 2) There be two car garages on each home , 3) that the average lot size be II maintained throughout the phasing of the development, and 4) that proper con- sideration be taken for park land dedication . I would like to review some issues concerning those recommendations . First of all , as far as the two-car garages and the basements; in between the time that the Planning Commission has considered this II to the Council tonight , the applicant has indicated to staff that he will comply with the requirement for a two-car garage on each building site . He has indicated that at least 37 percent of the proposed homes will , because of the sloping conditions on II site, will contain a basement. He has also indicated that the lots adjacent to Chanhassen Estates will have low-grade living areas and a split foyer design . This would mean that up to approximately 50 percent of the homes would have basements. It IIhas been the staff' s understanding that these types of requirements have not been made as conditions of approval on previous subdivisions , however, should you feel that two- car garages and basements are required for every lot and if that is to be recommended as the commission of approval , specific findings should be made for this particular ki development . The other condition that the Commission had was the proposed phasing I auncil Meeting, May 2( 1985 `,�1 _ ' -23 plans. They were concerned that a lot of the small lots would be built first and the applicant would come back and request additional small lots . We reviewed and calcu- lated the average lot size of this area and that is approximately 12,122 square feet . There is a difference of approximately 2,000 square feet from the overall average . The other issue that was recommended to be strongly considered was the Park and Recreation issue . The Commission , on May 7, 1985, recommended that the City Council request the developer to dedicate one acre of land, which would support a tennis court and a tot lot. The Commission felt that 1) Rice Marsh Lake Park is not ade- quate in size and the amount of improvements that can be made are limited due to wet- "' 2) The existing tot lot in Rice Marsh Lake Park is too far from the Hidden Valley development . 3) The accessibility of Rice Marsh Lake Park is not adequate for the population in the area and will require more facilities to be available . The street design and patterns are following the lay of the land. It is a very con- voluted site, in that there are a lot slope conditions. The staff' s recommendation to the Park and Recreation Commission was that the fees be accepted in lieu of park land ' so that the tennis court lot could try and be improved on the site south of Lake Drive East on the north site of Chanhassen Estates. We also recommended that 25 feet of the utility easement be reserved for a trail easement and a possibility for a tot lot in the western part of the site. In summarizing this,' 9 you have a preliminary development plan request for rezoning to P-1 south of Lake Drive East; you have a wetland alteration permit request because the sedimentation basins in the southeast part of the site are within 200 feet of a class A wetland; you have a land use plan ' amendment application from high denisty and low density residential to commercial and rezoning request for these two outlots from R-la to C-2. The American Legion site is now zoned as C-2 as well . Our recommendations based on the applicant ' s application is to approve the development plan with the P-1 zoning south of Lake Drive East; approval of the reduced setbacks for reservation of the trail easement, a reservation IlL of no easement in the south part of a 150 foot setback area; all the recommendations made by the City Engineer; the proposed planting plans as submitted; filing of the proposed deed restrictions; compliance and satisfactory outcome of the environmental assessment worksheet , which has been done; and acceptance of park dedication fees in lieu of park land . ' Councilwoman Watson : On the residential property , what are the minimum lot frontages on the cul-de-sacs? 1 Barb Dacy : The majority of the cul-de-sac lots measure 50 feet in width and most of the non-cul-de-sac lots were at least 70 feet in width , and those abutting Chanhassen Estates are 90 feet . ' Councilman Geving: The last time you were here we sent you back home to do your replanning and you did a very good job at taking another shot at this . I think that 1 some of the objections that I had were the small lot sizes . I still see 31 lots that are less than 10,000 square feet . I am very pleased to see the cul-de-sac sizes are larger and you are doing a fair job of separating the residential areas from the existing Chanhassen Estates , even though those are quite larger lots in size in the ' Chanhassen Estates area . My next point is the request from the Park and Recreation Commission for a one acre tot lot size area . Do you have any comments on that? Jerry Martin : I must have misunderstood, I thought that they would rather have us give a donation . Councilman Geving: They wanted both . They wanted a tot lot area, I understand . Barb Dacy : The Park and Recreation Commission recommended that a one acre site be reserved for a tot lot and a tennis court . It was staff' s recommendation to accept the park dedication fees and the reservation of a trail easement Meeting, May 20 , 15 k(� -24_ oilman Geving: If we get the park dedication fees of roughly $400 per unit II P unit , re are we going to invest that money to build a tot lot? g=b Dacy : An idea has been suggested that a tennis court could be placed at the site of the old sewage treatment plant on the north side of Chanhassen Estates . IIII Councilman Gevinq: Do we own that property? Barb Dacy: Yes. Councilman Geving: How big is it? Is the existing sewer area greater than one acre? II Is it big enough for a tot lot and possibly a tennis court? Bill Monk : Yes . II Councilman Geving: Would this be a public facility available to all of the residents of the community , or would it be for just the residents from just this area? II Bill Monk : We would have to take a look at it . The parking and access would be a question that we would have to resolve because it is on Lake Drive East and it is II large enough to fit , but it would take a significant amount of altering the site . Whether a tennis court should even go there is questionable . Councilman Geving: I am not so concerned about the tennis court as I am with the II need for some place for these children to play . The area down in the southern part of the development was virtually the small park . We carved out a park and put a ball diamond down there and I suspect that if you build 109 units in here, there is going II to be a lot of children looking for a place to play . They can 't go across the highway . I think that should be addressed, at least at the staff level , to see where we are going with that . Also , do you have a church in mind? II Jerry Martin : Yes , we do . The Lutheran Church here in town . There is some of the constituents here this evening. Councilman Geving: Over what period of time do I P you feel that you can accomplish phase I and phase II? P Jerry Martin : We would hope to be in and out within two years . So, we would hope II that phase I would take us a year from the start and starting with phase II in the spring of next year . II Councilman Horn : Barb, you said the average lot size was around 12,000 square feet . Did you do that based on taking all of the lots and dividing the number of lots into that? I Barb Dacy : The 12,000 figure was the average lot size in the first phase . The whole 109 lots is 14,700 square feet . II Councilman Horn : That is taking all of the lots and dividing by the number of lots, not including the green area , it ' s not a gross type of thing. Barb Dacy : Right . As a matter of fact the II gross of just the middle acreage is 2.3, the net , minus the streets, is 2.9 units per acre. Councilman Horn : There are some fairly small lots in here , and they are smaller than ~' I would like see , but I can 't -argue with the average lot size . II II ouncil Meeting , May 1985 -25- II II ' u7 Councilwoman Swenson : On Drive A on the east side of the property , block 1 , are those double frontage lots? Barb Dacy : Yes they are . Councilwoman Swenson : I believe we have some sort of a restriction on double fron- tage lots in that some berming is required . I, Barb Dacy : Right , and that is what the buffer easement is on the north side of those Ilots . That is intended for the five to six foot berm . Councilwoman Swenson : Is there some way we can be assured that the people purchasing II property along that block are going to know the future planned use for outlots A and D, or are we, at some future date, going to have people come in and saying, "hey , we don 't want that here, this is a residential area ." IBarb Dacy: Part of your action tonight , if you decide to designate outlots A and D as commercial and rezone that to C-2, normally a property owner would come into the City Hall and ask what the area is like across the street . We would say that it is I commerical , C-2. If there are any uses in that district that require a conditional use permit , a public hearing would be conducted . You are going to be acting on everything on that piece tonight , except maybe for the proposed church . 1 Councilwoman Swenson : We will make certain that people purchasing property along that line are going to know that is a potential commerical area . I am assuming that the lots are going to exit onto the interior street . JIBarb Dacy : Yes Councilwoman Swenson : My mai il n n concern is the sedimentation into Rice Marsh Lake . I find this disturbing. We have a contour line of 877, which according to my figures, puts that into Rice Marsh Lake . I don ' t think we need any more drainage into Rice Marsh Lake and into the creek . It' s missed in the environmental assessment I worksheet to the effect that this is going to require some attention . I don ' t like to see that down that far . Is there an alternative to this? II Bill Monk : In looking at the site and trying to come up with a drainage system , I first looked at the piping and then backed up to that into some type of a inter- mediate ponding area . The lower sedimentation pond, I think its configuration will be changed somewhat from shown on the actual plan and will be expanded in an II east/west direction before the plan is actually finalized. Sedimentation basins will be totally above the ordinary high water mark . It will not actually go into what will be considered the wetland area or the lake area . I IICouncilwoman Swenson : An 877 elevation? II Bill Monk : It will be all above that elevation . That is a part of the requirement , �1 that it be above that . Councilwoman Swenson : It is definitely an alteration . I with Bill Monk : It is , there is no question about it , but the o p th the terrain are I very minimal . The plan, as you see it , is about the best of the options that were Iviewed. Councilwoman Swenson : I just don ' t approve of this at all because we have sedimen- t tation going to Rice Marsh Lake and we know that we have problems with this chain of lakes . I can ' t sanction contributing to those problems . i II i Meeting, May 20 , 198' ' -26- ,goonnk : One of the things that we have looked at is that we have extreme sedimen- n occurring there now . When l0 9 you walk down that ditch , some places it will be 8 et deep . I think we have looked for a system that would control that sedimentation kith the ponding arrangement and the step down that ' s being proposed and capture as much of it as you can before you actually get down there, so I believe there is some question in my mind that it will make the situation better . It will alter erosion, but it will also allow the subdivision to maximize and enhance the aesthetics of the site with a step down approach . Councilwoman Swenson : I am less concerned with the aesthetics of the site as I am with the quality of the water. Bill Monk : The erosion that exists there is going to have to be handled somehow and someday . This represents, I believe, a reasonable approach . I just don 't see many options because there is not enought flat land there to make a sedimentation pond at any intermediate stage . Mayor Hamilton: Do you think that there will be any significant increase in the amount of flow into Rice Marsh Lake? Bill Monk : With the hard surfacing of the streets and the houses , there is no question that there will be an increase . Any subdivision will always increase it . What you try and do is control the rate. That is what we are doing here . We are controlling the rate as a trade off to the volume . There is no way that the volume will not increase . What we are doing here is trying to control that volume and release it at least the same level as it is being released now, just over a longer period of time , and to halt the erosion and come up with some maintainable system . This is about the best plan that we can come up with . Councilwoman Swenson: If we are going to increase the quantity of the flow that is I I going to go into Rice Marsh Lake , this is obviously going to influence the level of the lake and it is going to influence the level of the creek , it ' s going to influence the level of Lake Riley and right on down . The water is already so high now that in some cases it is getting a little perilous . I am very worried about this . Mayor Hamilton: I think I heard Bill Monk say that there maybe more volume , but it is going to be spread out over a longer period of time . It is all going to drain and it is going to keep going through the systems , so you are not going to see an increase of the level of the lake . Councilwoman Swenson : I disagree with that . Mayor Hamilton : I don ' t have the information that tells me that it is true or not ' true. Councilwoman Swenson: We know this from other instances . Councilman Horn : Are there outlets on these other bodies of water down stream from Rice Marsh Lake that would have them seek a lot more . Will this be a volumetric increase . Obviously , the last one on the chain will see that . Councilwoman Swenson : What is the Watershed 's opinion on this? Have we received any report back from them on this? , Barb Dacy : Yes. They sent an EAW. They will have to go through the normal per- .-- mitting process, just like any other subdivision. 11 d,cil Meeting, May 110 1985 ( -27- r ,- councilwoman Swenson: This is something that I would like to know more of. of I Mayor Hamilton: Is there a possibility of putting in a sedimentation basin/baffle weir type of arrangement so that the flow could be controlled even more? Bill Monk : I guess the type of outlet structure that would be put in there is questionable . I think it would be better just to berm it up and actually let it overflow in order to outlet it to the point source . You can argue back and forth between the two . We will be recommending that the basin be enlarged east or west to I make it store just as much as possible before it does overflow and handle a larger storm . The actual type of outflow, at this point , hasn ' t been determined . I am not sure whether one would be any different really than the other, except that one might 1 allow for more central erosion . Councilwoman Swenson : Would it be of any advantage for that to be up without disturbing the wetland area? IBill Monk : Again , the moving of it as far north as the terrain allows, there will be no disturbance below the ordinary high water mark of Rice Marsh Lake . We are staying Iback from that as the DNR and the City always require . Mayor Hamilton: Will we see this when it comes back for final approval? IIBill Monk : The Council would see plans that would be made for any drainage plan and would have like approval on those plans. There is a lot of work that needs to be done with the Watershed District , the DNR , myself and the developer to come up with a final plan , but it will be based on this proposal and I really don ' t see any option . Ilt Mayor Hamilton: We see that as a concern and that you would address that in your final plan . It would help me and I am sure it would help Councilwoman Swenson if we had somebody to estimate the volume of water that may be running off now , what volume can be stored and how fast that flows so we have some idea as to what increase IIthere is going to be down stream all the way along. Barb Dacy : There was a detailed review and volume requirements, etc . that will be regulated by the City Engineer and the permitting process of Riley Creek . They are IIgoing to have meet another set of approval . Councilman Geving: I think there are too many lots . I would like to have the I Council look at block 2, lots 36, 39 on cul-de-sac D . I find those two lots at 7 ,700 . If we eliminated one lot on that street we could bring the average up to around 8,000 . What is happening here is you are taking a corner lot, which is 100 II by 120, immediately next to it you have a lot that is 70 by 110 , so you have a large lot and a little lot and then right next to it again you have a 10,000 square foot lot and two lots over you have another 7, 700 square feet . My recommendation would be to eliminate one lot along that street , cul-de-sac B . I would like to address I that . Gene Ernst: You are correct . The width of the lots are the same . The only addi- tional thing is that there will be additional back yards on the larger lots . That is 11 the reason we left those at that size . Councilman Geving: Those are my objections on that street . The street to the west of that on the same block , lots 33 and 31 on the cul-de-sac , are also very small lots . I don ' t intend that you eliminate a lot , just square off the sizes of some of those . Your corner lot is 8,500 square feet surrounded by these two 7,900 and 7,700 II 11 Meeting, May 20 , 19 r -28- e foot lots . You then have a huge lot , lot 30 , in the middle of the cul-de-sac could be pushed out a little bit . You could square those lots up and have some ry decent looking lots . Ha or Hamilton: Is your intent to have every lot the same? Councilman Gevinq; I would like to have most of the lots over 8 ,000 square feet . II ill IIThat is my intent . Mayor Hamilton: A 7 ,700 square foot lot is very close to that . I think they have II done what we have asked them to do . Councilman Gevinq: I think that in order to maintain the style of the homes that we II put in there, I think that 8,000 square feet is pretty much of a minimum. Jerry Martin : Gene and I looked at that in that particular area . We were trying to do just what you are trying to do and we saw what you saw . II Councilman Gevinq: I am not trying to eliminate a lot here and there . I am trying to make them look a little bit larger to the average homeowner . r Jerry Martin : We looked at exactly the same thing and our comment was that also . Gene sat down and tried to pull those lots around . Gene: We did that and that is why these lots got larger . Before, these II e were the same size . We added the square footage to lots 38 & 39 to make those larger because they were the same size as the adjacent lots. Your comment in reference to lot 30; II you are correct . That line could change to increase lot 33. The reason that was done is because the survey is simpler to lay it out . Councilman Gevinq: If we were to extend the lot line on lot 30, then you would have four decent home sites on 32, 31 , 33 and 30 . Those four could be very nice home sites , all over 8,000 square feet . IIGene Ernst : That is no problem to change that line . It is simply a matter of adjustment . Councilman Horn : I had expressed some concern earlier over the 7,700 square foot lot r and if we can negotiate to eliminate to get our average up to 15,000 , I think that ' s great . But , what I am concerned about doing is making every lot look the same . I II think it is better to mix a small one in with a big one than it is to cut the big one off and make two identical lots . Pretty soon it gets very monotonous . I like the concept of mixing them in with the larger lots . I would hate to have an area where we have all the small lots bunched together and all of the large lots bunched r together. Councilwoman Watson : We do have all of the small lots bunched together . I think II that is Councilman Geving' s and my point . If you mark down these lots in that corner you will find, as the Mayor says, we have a nice mix . We have a nice mix of lots all under 10 ,000 square feet . II— Mayor Hamilton : I think our average lot size has increased significantly and I think LI that is what we were looking for . We are bound to have a few small lots . Councilman Horn : I tend to agree with the Mayor . I am concerned about average lot sizes . That to me is what a PUD is all about . It says you look for the average lot size , and that allows you some variety . r 11 uncil Meeting, May 1985 �4"Y -29- I tom McGuire : I live at 8026 Erie . My property , if I am interpretting this )( correctly , will abut up to the church property . I understand that they are going to put up a six foot berm up against all the northern lots . My question is, will that Y:- include the church as well? Barb Dacy: If there is to be a church located at that site and going through site plan review , staff would certainly make recommendations making that site plan with additional grading. • i Tom McGuire: Will they also have two trees per lot. !! Gene Ernst: The descision was the trees would be located on the lots that there is II no berming. There is an area here, because of the topography , that the berming would be very difficult to place . I Mayor Hamilton :. While we are discussing that church lot, is there a real possibility that the church people are going to be able to purchase that lot from you? IIX Jerry Martin: Yes, we are about 99.9 percent sure . Area Resident: One of the things that has been an issue for the people in Chanhassen Estates throughout this whole process, has been the question of the garages and the I basements . We have been to the Planning Commission and talked with them and I think they made a recommendation that both double garages and basements should be part of this proposal . I was a little confused as to what Barb Dacy said in regards to the II basement issue . Would you address what you think about that and what you might be ' recommending here . Jeremy Neighbor: I am a partner with the architectural coalition and we have been Icommissioned by New American Homes to provide the designs for Hidden Valley . I can state, unequivocably , that all the houses will have two car garages and they will all II have basements , either partial or full . There is a situation with respect to the way the topography of the land , that given the way the land lays and putting a house on that site, the back side of the lot sloping off would require, by necessity , a walk- out basement if you wanted one or not . The others would be provided , because that is simply what the market wants . IMayor Hamilton : There are many homes in Chanhassen today that,o ay ha , you could say , do not have basements . Simply because the lay of the land you couldn ' t put a basement in I some of these homes that were built near lakes . If they put a basement in , they would be under water . That is, consequently , the same situation that exists here . ' II Some of those homes, you couldn ' t put a full basement in . IJeremy Neighbor: In some instances it will be split entrances , some instances full basements, and some instances partial basements . But in all cases there will be an area for storage and a two car garage . • II Councilman Geving: Perhaps you could show us Y our sketches . ii II Jeremy Neighbor: I have a number of sketches to show . We presently have 6 which we are proposing for the 109 units to be developed . We are also constantly developing new plans and that is to say that we will not only have six plans. It also doesn ' t II rule out the possibility of a homeowner coming in and purchasing a piece of land and using a plan of their own and would meet the criteria in terms of quality , could also be included . We have tried to set up a range of houses to make a wide variety II of houses available to more than just a single notch make . Smaller houses available i is ranging from 1 , 100 square feet up to 1,400 square feet . All have two car garages II ting, May 20 , 198�S.g -30- II i have basesments and all have a lot of other amenities that we are finding .. le in the market . I will show you plans that we will definitely be providing, more to be developed . 1) Split level entry - This. is a smaller house, to master bedroom, den , and another bedroom, a large living room, a deck on the i ; - 1evel entry , and in the half level there is a family room and basement . This is _ of split level entry that we will provide and the storage that you are talking t . This is a smaller house which has 1,200 square feet . It has a vaulted ceiling. The prices for the houses in general will range somewhere in the neigh- borhood of $65,000 to $75,000, depending on the basements, to about $85 ,000 to II$95,000 . There is a lot of variety here . It has to do with the size of the lot , and it has to do with the kind of options that a person might add . 2) Cottage type house - this has 1,200 square feet . The lower level has a vaulted ceiling. The second level has a large attic storage area, as well as the two car garage, off-side deck, two II bedrooms up, large master bedroom below, large open kitchen-dining area . 3) Model C- This has 1,280 square feet . It has a two car garage and vaulted ceilings . 4) Model D - This is a 1,000 square foot, two story home with a vaulted ceiling in the II living room and a large open area . A lot of windows to take care of which is a beautiful site, tremendous amenities with respect to the revene . 5) Model E - This is a large one-story plan with access down to the basement. This has 1,280 on one story . This is the widest home of the group and it is only 40 feet across and would II fit easily fit on a 70 foot lot with 15 foot sideyard setback on either side. 6) Model F - This is a cottage type style home , 1,300 square feet with two bedrooms above with a loft, large living room , vaulted ceiling in the living room. This is I just a start and we see this as just a minimum. We are developing house plans at the rate of one or two a day . Councilwoman Swenson : There was a comment made that the Planning Commission was con- cerned about the parking for the church and whether or not 3.2 acres was sufficient i II to accommodate the parking for the church . Was there some agreement to make that larger? I Barb Dacy : Lot 59 under plat has been added to outlot B , so the total area now is 35 .59 acres . We have not seen a specific site plan . II Dennis Loechler: I live in Chanhassen Estates . It is my understanding that the whole plan is really contingent on the church being developed on that outlot . Is II`/ that correct? 1 Councilman Geving : No, where did you get that impression? Dennis Loechler: It was discussed at the Planning Meeting. If the church plan fell II through , this whole plan would have to go back to the Planning Commission . Barb Dacy : If the church does not locate on outlot B , a new use would trigger II another plan review process , but the entire site would not be reviewed, just the use for outlot B . Dennis Loechler: Will the developer be allowed to break ground without that outlot being decided? II Mayor Hamilton: Yes he will be . il Jeff Papke: I live at 8010 Erie . The line of homes right along Erie from Dakota, the cul-de-sac has really become violent with the busy roads on both sides of it . These are suppose to become the two primary entrances and accesses to Hidden Valley . + Is there some way to include some type of berming on that property? II II uncil Meeting, May 2: ' 1985 -31_ Bill Monk : We have never really talked about the traffic that much , and we should a ' little bit . I' am proposing as a requirement` of' the' City that this access drive be continued off the site and hook up with Dakota . So the Council is aware that is a part of City ' s municipal state aid system trying to get a frontage road that will come all the way through from 184th Street over to Audobon Road and hook up with the southern portion of the site . The duplexes , in this particular area , do end up with double frontages . The City will only be seeking to acquire 50 feet because of the existing Sinclair station . There is going to be very limited things that can be done ' in here . There , perhaps, can be some landscaping, but the question of a berm is going to be difficult . I haven 't looked at the street grade to see what kind of separation there will be, but in essence , I think the City has always planned that someday this road would continue on through here and that is what is being proposed . As to the heavy uses on both sides, one of the reasons that we are not recommending that this 80th Street be pushed through is because of fear a certain area will be used as a short cut. The proposal is to plat across this and not run that road through . There will be some duplexes that will end up with a double load and the City will be looking at what it can do with grade differential and plantings through there . ' Bruce Frykman: I live at 8020 Erie . The issue of the park dedication, as far as dedicating money or dedicating land , I really think with the number of children this will bring in, that dedicating money to a fund that is going to put a tennis court up one-half mile away from those housing areas is a mistake . I think that there should be a dedicated tot lot land in that development and also I am concerned about the existing drainage problem, the berming and the parking lot . Rick Sathre: I am the engineer for the project . This same issue came up at the Planning Commission and I discussed it at that point . We show on the preliminary grading plan a lowering of the land mass in' the church site a little bit and there would be a berm that would start one lot north of you. The intent is that the water from the church property would flow southerly and southwesterly and be picked up by the storm sewer . So now , and in the future the high point should be along the pro- perty line . Bruce Frykman : There was the other issue , too , about the tot lot . One other concern ' I had was about the sedimentation basins, that they are not going to be stagnant mosquito breeding ponds . How are they going to be contained? Mayor Hamilton : As you heard , we are going to have to get more information back on ' the engineering from the developers about the sedimentation basins . As far as the tot lot , I think you heard that we are not interested in just building a tennis court, as you mentioned , we want someplace where children can play actively and we are going to have to find out some more information about that . Councilwoman Swenson moved to approve the Preliminary Plan including rezoning to P-1, ' planned residential development subject to the following conditions : 1 . Rezoning of the property will be P-1 south the Drive A and the remaining Outlots A and D be rezoned to a commercial designation subject to city I 4C approval of the Land Use Plan Amendment . A zoning ordinance amendment should be processed to allow churches in the P-1 District . 2 . A 25 foot front yard setback on non-cul-de-sac lots, a 30 foot front yard setback on cul-de-sac lots and a minimum separation between buildings of j t„• 1 ., .- . -, ,o ".!,.,r;,. . " TOTAL a " '� ; o o TOTAL LOZS, osti Q CBD SINGLE ^M o SINGLE F �\ r I s \ / �✓,. . L '� ,♦ \ ' = AMERICAN LEGION 1 �,3 19 r ` .2 � ‘ MAXIMUMD LOT \ GROSS ENSII \ 20 3 \ UNITS/ACRE N , \ ` \ r ANUS (ROW 1AP F : 1 o .-- \ --- -- 4 � . HOUSING TYPE 1 \ \ 5 �j N Ou21" 53' E AVERAGE LOl �, 22 \ ��6 f \ \\\ 5ss.t4 �. STREET RIGHT S C I r \ \ ' %7 \ r, sue_ STREET W IDT 1 23 ": a ;</'.\\ / 25 ly , 24 `\ ✓,tom \ ` B : OaK \\., '01, �':.l <, ,� , G� \ 8 x- ,OUTLOT A 4.93 acres CUL-DE-SAC /i'M\v-- ; • /,-PCB/ \ �\ -C--- ''\ \ SETBACKS: F HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, _ F 26 /� 7\. \ ■ 9 , 2 ,;,--a G ti , \ 32 , :�. OR COMMERCIAL o E 1 ,> t31 \\, '> < 10 ). / '` \ Ta °�. o 27 M ) s i '\ \ A,/\ \\ .0 A. ESENTZOt ``,'�\b / r '' <�33 \ --- 11 \ / LI \e'''' TT d's }��y -.T--F -- \ f;- 1 I i i f- r, \ <a 13 N j ��.�—SRI E/�_---� \ °': 1p.,.. --,,,,,---NN 57 9 I 38 r: 37 / I 'r i 7C I loc• J ---- -_ / OUTLOT B �'�� -= �'./� CHURCH SITE . \ , :;jI k HI �; I i'i r.iI I=i1 ,,\ . 1 , t.1‘ \ ° 1 9, , i i i., 9.-, II P,O 90 - • O 2120.x9 _ \ ° 2 N 0 N 0°38' 17" E ' DD T I • N �-, . EM � �'E�HSON�I SON s � � � � � � � Ilan. w!_ _tr! �` �. �p , �FHCR NGpA LOOS OECH BENS HERB k I auncil Meeting, Septem4110 9, 1985 -2- b. Red Cedar Cove: 1) Approval Final Plat . c . Approve Development Contract for Hidden Valley , United Mortgage Corporation . d . Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Allow Churches as a Conditional Use in the P-1, Planned Residential District , First and Second ' Reading, Judy Siegle, applicant . e . RESOLUTION #85-50: Approve Plans and Specifications for Creekwood Drive Street Improvements . f. Approve 1986 Police Contract . g . RESOLUTION #85-51: Approve Resolution Authorizing Submittal of Final LCMR Grant Application, Lake Ann Park Ballfield Lighting. ' Motion was seconded by Councilman Horn . The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Watson and Swenson , Councilmen Horn and Geving . No negative votes . Motion carried . ' RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE UNITED WAY: Ann Bryant: I am here from the United Way and I am here to request your support for an event that we have going on next week , September 18th . It is a new event . It is an occasion where we are going out trying to solicite funds from new businesses in the community . One of the southerly suburbs which we have pinpointed is Chanhassen, so we are looking for your support . We have a goal of $150,000 . We have pinpointed ' small businesses because they are where we have to go if we are going to grow increasingly in the future . New allocations have been recommended to Carver County and your area . They have allocated new funds last year and encouraged other agencies ' within your area to petition for funding . I believe the resolution is just requesting your support for the day . Councilman Geving: How are you going to come into our community and do that? What is the plan? Ann Bryant: We have pinpointed new growing agencies . In Chanhassen they have pin- pointed 50 new small businesses and we have recruited between 400 and 500 volunteers for that day and each one is assigned approximately 10 different companies to go out and meet with the CEO or the owner . So within Chanhassen there are approximately 50 . ' This is a new thing. It has never been done any place in the United States by an y United Way . So not only is the United Way of Minneapolis very exicited about it , but also Nation wide they are looking at it as a target that may be an example for all over. ' Councilman Horn : The only reservation I have is what does this mean if w e endorse this to our local businesses . Does it mean that we are expecting them to participate? Ann Bryant: I believe it just means that you are supportive of it and encouraging them to support the United Way and the whole cause . You are endorsing it thinking it is a worth while thing that they should consider supporting. We are not going to go out and tell the businesses that they have to support it because that is impossible [72 and we realize that . We are just encouraging them to support the United Way . I 1 I• ,.-... 5/ " (•0" I ,t. - ___ - -- - I ...-- jr_ c■ ,---1 e---• ,--.71- ----. E---- _c , ,-----, ... .1_ 41 , C 1—.-r-''' '—‘:,....__J 1._--.11 I, J , .A _ _ 0 c 7•57;'fr'' k....:k, C r__i Li.....1:,e: ' ..„...•.....:,-': ../ .-......- • 1/14•11L-f.,,,,, 'Or- -— r E, ,- El c LI c I ,... -----. , / •, • ,....W. ,,,',..,-,,--..;-.!",<,.. .--' — —- --C•r-----— '... „”•.‘-'-:52,--i,. ,-.....- - 0 0 ''',‘ 1.' 1—' CI . --",4 - (.•....-- „,------.---.."--- -- ,_. • - -_, c_._ i,„ ,r. ,, c---„-•-: :.--- 'a :---- ,of°- -1`-r-H--. L ' ',I •,. -- , a 1 1 _ - ,/,------. - .:- - -. .7 ‘ -- ..... ...;;;,- ..... . . --,... • - --,..--,-;.::_= .fr-1. a CV- '`,--- A.'‘..-_ C _—,--'. „.,... , ,,---. C---•,5:4,-/-/---it,r—Tv 77- --•••••I's „,,,:7 r_ ,---7 .„.„:„.. . — ._--,-----=---_,Ni . -7- ,r - '';------. f . 1 -_ c t.-_--,,,i. Jr. % c ' - e-• - 'NA _ i _ ,..(.,4-. co ii750e _. jy1/,f7 ,....;%';-- .-.> , . - - - / .:......._`;-::- P. C 0 C -• .:--- ' / --';.----' fr --,/ „...- ,....... ____:-- I , • 2 :1.. - -. 4--- ■ \ ;* ' ,..'" • sr----- - -;-"----- I .--- -' ---- ,„--.- , -.. •. ' --•-''-----r --=---* I-- -_----=-='''-----' ' ... „..c ______:----____-..z-_- __.„,- -s- ,,,,i -,,, p_v,,,,,,,.yvi;\•, ,--.:--, _. . ,..., ,... I ---- --•-• --,------- - , --- -- ---,,,--'' - - -- • i , ..--e,---,- ,---.- ' i bi,....-•-%-::-.,- ---- . _ I , ,,t ,-- • - 1 4 x....,.. .-.....- - 4 --- -,e- ---- . , .. ,---,/ •,., . 95443 t .... • ..--.. , . _ . • „-'' ,--- -i- \ t( to.- z •.' • - j c 4/— .. .. • , •.„ ..... 1 - (Y. . • ,,,---'--' . . i ..,. . 1 l 1 I I 1 I .r 5 c.,01 EL-1 , --- - 1 I '1 ( .,,i- , . _T-14-101 it • ! I i.1 1 0-k2s4---k• 1 , 1 . , , , ./ 1 1 ; i i F,-J[A' • • ,. , 1 , . , AREA OF PAKEL e 3.59A '-...,. AREA OF TAHIW, t 0.06A . 1 ill 'i ! . . AREA OR REPAIRDtk I r • I If id ! I I I 1 _ 4--— •"5_=:_l__4, - ,- -, , ; 4.,60° / , 1 I D• 12° I / if ' LeCArna./ qv I 1 / / \ br.-Nr.I•ii)) i 1 1 ii / / .- / 111'' 1 II /A/ // / \ l'I'lpfe,W i .-1 / 1 t..1 / \\ ' / ,/, ,,,,,,i- i - , ........),/ \ \ „„.....„..y i.k(1709-1 ! I 25 1 __' t"il -5 , i I ... - , " i A,e• .,- C) . . 1. --] I 11111111.1r. e ?, , .._.m. 1 7 --1 1 .' , ''<1 • "..i • • / : . 0 (-. .- -----, J _ 11 • 3 7 I. 1 8 I\ 1 1 ',") 4 ■) , l'. I,/ ,..p. /,' ;1•', 1 ' -,A.i.; 1 0 A iiki 4 I iii 1 v 6'(1 -Vr.7 C _1 I ....,,,. .d '!' tr,-L1 1 I - ;i:'.---;C :' --- T I 1 air t e '• _ .. I I --.1- -i1-111 I -1 ; . • L;- 1 V 1\ •, 1p 1 --..■ . 1 1L3 I ,k i i ;,,,----ps 1 I ;‘' \\\IT '''i'i'-• -V P ■ -- i . cs , (\ > 1 -I ,Ps - • . < ! ,11-.-4-1 - N i i j. r \ ' • I...4 1- r :._. ; rit ; - ;fr. 1 „\„. \ IA i 1\ p 4,1811 -y _.... II 1.,11 'I . - 1 ■\ rtl! 1 -1- - .-- --f ( . VW • 4 I- ''t F : ;-‘ , 4 / I - ilj:), - ' t -, q.' 1 1 \-'"-. • F I rilli, ,\\I ,,, / kl 1 tt: • , r ' I. V - ! \ T\ \./ 4' : l/ t,‘ \ '' -; 1 ---..-----t; D ‘\-IA ,\,- --\.- '' - ril , - • I1J .4 i. i . • ,,_ , ,.. v „\ , , a' )111,all -.-- t'',-\, k, `..glia .1 OT (k I'i I \ IT--, /1 1,, ., -, H ,-(-; , 7 ! \ • t' 1, 0 ,.. ,-,. ,, plirirLiiis . \._, vi 1 , , / 4 -‘7, 74 ■ ' . ."-- _../ I . 1 I - - - -- i A .,,, • ill ,i; _, , - ---- ; 1 ----- -L, I -0-- I .1' I is 4 , . ,.. t Li- , I ti)-----( , illk , /,/ ...., —...., '■,, — ks, ' ; 1 ' i 1 , • I '411Nk ''"---- \s\' ...,,,,N,71 t' ■ \ , ! j i e , . ! \ '.: • , I I , i s •ti _----\---f—, . , \ i I , 7 • A\ \ •11"-t 4- i t) (---- -- I \ y _ // / ,i. &., c- 1 ,,„-., Nia, -,,,I iti , .-- \ I ..) \V' II. kv 1--------,__ A \\ ' \ , t , , \- ......‹, Mk\ • ..----r___ __,....-\ r ,p Iv-a I _s, (1) ('''9. - ' / ,. 4 . -- . \ I 6 Ge - 'A --3S • l i TI P ( ‘‘ '‘ '- -1% --U \ VI - .._. , , \ V(-..--, AC t)10 cl I 11111111111111.1 -a 1 . P. I:'‘- 1 (N \ \ %I i \ \ - ccl 3r f a li B. Maintained in good repair. II il C. Controlled as to temperature, ventilated and lighted compatible with the health and comfort of the II animal (s) . D. Of sufficient size to allow adequate freedom of II movement. Inadequate space may be indicated by evidence of malnutrition, poor condition of debility, stress or, abnormal behavior patterns. E. Cleaned as often as necessary to prevent I contamination of the animal (s) contained therein and to minimize disease hazards and reduce odors. II 3 . Animals shall be provided wholesome, palatable food and 31 water free from contamination and of sufficient II quantity and nutritive value to maintain all animals in good health. il 4 . Animals kept in pet shops or kennels shall be kept in II accordance with regulations for pet shops and kennels in addition to the regulations provided by this ordinance. Pet shop or kennel owners shall receive a license as required by the City.- ii 11 SECTION 10. HEIGHT REGULATIONS II6-10-1 Where the average slope of a lot is greater than one (1) foot rise or fall in seven (7) feet of horizontal distance from the established street elevation at the property line, II one story in addition to the number permitted in the district in which the lot is situated shall be permitted on 11 the downhill side of any building. 6-10-2 The height limitations stipulated elsewhere in the zoning II code shall not apply to the following: 1. Farm Buildings, Certain Architectural Features. Barns, , 1 silos, or other farm buildings or structures on farms; church spires, belfries, cupolas and domes, monuments, water towers, fire and hose towers, observation towers, II chimneys, smoke stacks, flag poles, masts and aerials; communication transmission towers; parapet walls extending not more than four (4) feet above the II limiting height of the building. 2 . Places of Public Assembly. Places of public assembly II in churches, schools and other public and semi-public buildings, provided that these are located on the first 31 floor of such building and provided that for each three (3) feet by which the heights of such building exceeds II the maximum height otherwise permitted in the district, ilits side and rear yards shall be increased in width or -94- II i depth by an additional foot over the side yards required for the highest building otherwser permitted in the district. g ise ' SECTION 11. YARD REGULATIONS The following requirements qualify or supplement district regulations. Yard measurements shall be taken from the nearest point of the wall of a building to the lot line in question, subject to the following qualifications: ' 6-11-1 Every part of a required yard or court shall be open and unobstructed. 6-11-2 A yard, court, or other open space of one building used to comply with the provisions of this Ordinance shall not again be used as a yard, court, or other open space for ' another building. 6-11-3 Except as provided in the Business, Industrial and Office ' Districts, the front yard setback requirements shall be observed on each street side of a corner lot; provided, however, that the remaining two yards will meet the side yard setbacks. ' 6-11-4 On double frontage lots, the required front yard on both streets. Whenever possible, structures be ' should face the existing street. 6-11-5 Permitted Obstructions in Required yards. The following shall not be considered to be obstructions: ' 1. Front and Side Street Yards. Into yard, or required side yard adjoining yar side rstreet nlot line, cornices, canopies, eaves, or other architectural features may project a distance not exceeding two (2) feet, six (6) inches; fire escapes may project a ' distance not exceeding four (4) feet, six (6) inches; an uncovered stair and necessary landings may project a distance not to exceed six (6) feet, provided such stair and landing shall not extend above the entrance floor of the building; bay windows, balconies, open porches and chimneys may project a distance not exceeding three (3) feet; unenclosed decks and patios may project a distance not exceeding five (5) feet and shall not be located in a drainage and utilit y easement. Other canopies may be permitted by conditional use permit. e' 2 . Interior Side Yards. The above-named features may project into any required yard adjoining an interior ' lot line, subject to the limitations cited above. a -95- j ___ ------" -50 -0 L.J 1....7:i -■. --_,............... ; ...Cr' 76" '. _ 94147 70"offr...... ..... ....... 411111.......4............ 31.L9G1 _____... ........... '... ..).1...L j11 .11- Tlz-.4•SH .----. iti ".. Sr. . 2.lAi ..--- ma eat Y C,PAP I ... r-.,1 F --, ,",r r....."'..••••••••■•■•••••■••••••■ ■•■••■•■•••1 r___. . •\i/ I I I o9; . / I I I it 1 r t3-.0..lo,---Cf) - I——le 41/ I „ _. I PUr upze... I -' Tagehr-rS.Nt- to' -- a . I I____.g. i 44..fw--42.zert — I \ f A r:›ci I rip 12... 1..0 n --r- 1 33a, tpith 4, ,s --1- I I ' 1 gt,o --40 . NO/ -,..., _.1 __I -='-.LJT-Ufz.E. i I--- ..----- _ _,:"---_ 1 - -s — vi , -- ----r-i-2, =42V. 't!po - __ _____-__ ____ , " - . I 1 r-- 11 1.1.1.111M1.1.111 /.4,tic, ;./4, ' O. - — —!=--.7r" , — _7:-....• 4 - it -1 H.e,.. R.4..1":.4‘, J),,z:,(2_4,.F,_c,r . , Fit.„1 IN i , i i ' ■._\ I i ! i __.• , i 4 -----------■filic a c„ , . i i , = ra .---- , ---!-- , , _ . ,PC-4-t 1.-irzt,H - real r...1 II .----/ / I Li 6.1 r ,p,p -_, .. .;-:".7.■,*- 5- /40:1,4.$ ,4 t ia,(-4 ,.. ---. / --i N--, -4-' — 616431 I ' ItIgt ..---. ■„ - ,-'ft'-'"11111111Zal -'7'1°'7.416111 *%177..-140. Coi P/Ir / , Alk.:fafiggiimap.„ ?.:1_. -,4,.. 1111160.11......411....--"Poss;”;,-- iii ■._ . -30I-C7";2,44:7_ ■ N. i,4 ,_• ir -2-rvi-011 • --■11111 LA V....E., r )1:2-1\/1 ..., ,.. ---.,,,t e• • -- `16st cl La e7 I 4--':;:—"',-e4i ."--":"----------.— N To L.-JP- c15:=t --- ,----r----1,A.iry .-`)----=--, 1 TI 1 o r•,:l. ...4.1._-T- _-_,z,LF_-_. ED ( 1: -Ti„,jr---1. NI.A.P.K...3) , - -, 1/4.) --:or- (111) 1.?1,4fr,V•r I. ...:1-441.1... .- — .r6 Imo,' I d ILY OF CHRIST rye • LUTHERAN CHURCH ;-/�/�� I YOUR GOOD CHRISTIAN NEIGHBOR Post Office Box 388 Church Phone Nate Castens, Pastor I Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 (612)934-5659 At Home 934-7870 J IFebruary 5, 1988 1 Dear City of Chanhassen: I We greet you as neighbors ! God willing, our congregation will soon be building a church on the site we purchased near you on Lake Drive East in the Hidden Valley development. IWe look forward to being good neighbors with you in our community and we pledge ourselves to making and keeping our neighborhood a I pleasant place to live and worship. When plans for the Hidden Valley development were first presented several years ago, homeowners and residents of Chanhassen Estates I were pleased to learn that a church was planned for a portion of the development. This site is zoned for commerical use, but our church use will make this 3 . 5 acres a quiet, low-use area. We do I not plan a preschool or a day-school operation in our facilities, and we are committed to designing our building and site according - to Chanhassen' s detailed and attractive landscape requirements. Trees, shrubs, exterior building and parking lot design all will I provide a graceful appearance to our completed property from all directions , front and back. We 've enclosed our proposed design and site plan for your review. IIn addition, if and when a re-alignment of Highway 101 and 5 is completed and a major intersection joins the two, our property and building will provide an excellent buffer for sound and sight for Iour neighbors in Chanhassen Estates. We hope that if you have questions or concerns, you will address I them to either of us so that we might dispel any doubts or fears you may have. Cordially, a* L (11'("-c ' zy/ 51----1. / ('(I (0-6( , I Dean Brown 470-0376 4-7J-0q/a- Nate Castens ( 934-5659 ) FEB 8 1988 LI I Y OF CHANT-91/8 I J tit 1 LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CITY OF CHANHASSEN (r: 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 APPLICANT: ram, ► 017 Chr,s}' L(,*eran (`.hUtt1QWNER: Fnm;i O� Cjtir,s t L.,, 11z►".. ('hur A- Y f ADDRESS -P.O. Z0x 388 ADDRESS 33x 3�8 ' Vianhet. s er, MjJ 55317 Ctwinha*5e», AN 55 317 Zip Code Zip Code 1 TELEPHONE (Daytime) 534:P.59 TELEPHONE 934 -5651 REQUEST: Zoning District Change Planned Unit Development Zoning Appeal Sketch Plan Preliminary Plan Zoning Variance Final Plan Zoning Text Amendment Subdivision ' Land Use Plan Amendment Platting �— Metes and Bounds Conditional Use Permit Street/Easement Vacation 4: ,><' Site Plan Review Wetlands Permit PROJECT NAME CJlOrch c1.: i Tor- Fcu, ly oN. Ghr,St L Atit .n C,hUrr.h PRESENT LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION REQUESTED LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION — PRESENT ZONING 17(X;c) g--' REQUESTED ZONING USES PROPOSED Q,1,L,,Gh rtictfemQ C1C+1V,iib3 SIZE OF PROPERTY :kilprox 3,1 aGre5 ' LOCATION o t I. . Bloc, �ctden lie, Carver Cpl,'n'f Mlnne50+a REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST neu) COn�tr`UG�IO►`7 LEGAL DESCRIPTION (Attach legal if necessary) Lc?1 1. , BIx,L 7, Hidden VtlUe j Cower Coon+y, City of Chanhassen Land Development Application Page 2 FILING INSTRUCTIONS : ' This application must be complete clearl d in full and be typewritten or y printed and must be accompanied by all information and ' plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions . Before filing this application , you should confer with the City Planner to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application . FILING CERTIFICATION: The undersigned representative of the applicant that he is familiar with the PP t hereby callifies Procedural applicable City Ordinances , requirements of all i Sgned B ' Y 41,,,'(,Gu dy,t(t)--,-171 Date 9-R j L� Applicant _ 9 7 C Jr n t-) 1�ea,� Zvi Id(n� Coin ,-}-te 330- 434-4 The undersigned hereby certifies that the applicant has been C ' authorized to make this application for the property herein described. By /- Signed j� ` ', w( lt/2 Date Fee Owner I Date Application Received /1/42M7 Application Fee Paid 51) , cro City Receipt No. This Application will be considered by the Planning Commission/ • Board of Adjustments and Appeals at their meeting. • I 1 .._. CITYOF _, 1 \ CHANHASSEN f \ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager L, 1, /b FROM: Larry Brown, Staff Engineer I DATE: March 10, 1988 SUBJ: Site Plan Review of Family of Christ Lutheran Church I Planning File No. 88-1, Update to February 11, 1988 Staff Report I On February 17 , 1988 , the Planning Commission approved the site plan dated January 28, 1988 for Family of Christ Lutheran Church II subject to 28 conditions from staff. Two of these conditions were approved contingent upon the applicant reaching agreement with the City Engineer. These items were resolved and are pre- sented as follows. ' The plans had originally proposed a "dead end" watermain from Hidden Court to the fire hydrant located north of the proposed II building ( refer to Attachment #3) . The applicant' s engineer has been informed that the proposed 1 500-foot dead end watermain may promote a stagnant water con- dition. In addition, looping of the proposed watermain to the existing 8-inch diameter service, as shown in Attachment #2 of the February 11, 1988 memo, would be required to maintain ade- ' quate water pressure and flow conditions to support the proposed Phase I building sprinkler system and fire fighting equipment. The second condition which was resolved stems from condition I number 5 of my previous memorandum which stated, "The plans shall be revised to show a 24-foot wide bituminous driveway between the west access onto Lake Drive East and Hidden Court. This access I shall be constructed in accordance to the typical parking lot section (without curb) as shown on the plans . The location of the access onto Hidden Court shall be located a minimum distance 1 of 100 feet east of Lake Drive East to allow for proper traffic movements. " Discussions regarding the secondary driveway access onto Hidden I Court resulted in an agreement that the driveway may be constructed of a 6-inch, Class V base being 16 feet in width upon the condition that it is maintained year-round. I I Don Ashworth March 10, 1988 page 2 It should be noted that the Minnesota Department of Transportation has various concept plans for the realignment of ' State Highway 101. Mr. Fred Hoisington, the City' s consultant for this matter, has made recommendations regarding the impact of the realignment of 101 on the church site in his memorandum dated March 3 , 1988 which has been included in the staff report. Approval of the preliminary site plan for Family of Christ Lutheran Church dated February 25, 1988 is recommended upon the ' conditions of the previous staff report with the following amendments : 1 . Condition 5 shall be revised to state "The plans shall be ' revised to show a 16-foot wide Class V driveway between the west access onto Lake Drive East and Hidden Court. This access shall be constructed of a 6-inch Class V section and shall be maintained year-round. 2 . The proposed watermain should be extended from the existing ' water service on the east property boundary to the existing 8-inch diameter watermain located south of the site on Hidden Court. The diameter of the proposed watermain which traver- ses the parcel should be a minimum of 6 inches while the ' extension of the watermain along Hidden Court should be 8 inches in diameter. ' 3 . Plans and specifications for the installation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer shjall be submitted for approval by the City Engineer prior to the commencement of any grading. Attachments: 1. February 11, 1988 Planning Commission Report 2 . February 17, 1988 Planning Commission Minutes 1 I 1 I Hoisington Group Inc. 1 1 ' Land Use Consultants March 3 , 1988 1 ' 1 t ' Ms . Barbara Dacy Planning Director .6, City of Chanhassen ,1,,i, i0 690 Coulter Drive ' i;';i.1Chanhassen , MN 55317 I ''111 e: Access to Family of Christ Lutheran Church �1 1' Barbara: Not knowing what the outcome will be of our various il discussions with neighbors and landowners , it would appear li that the best location for the entrance to the Family of , Christ Lutheran Church would be as we recently recommended (not as originally proposed) . Enclosed are three roadway configurations , all of which accommodate the recommended 11 driveway entrance location . Two of them are based on the most recent MnDOT proposal , which we reviewed with them on IIII Thursday, February 25 , 1988 , and the third is based on BRW' s proposal which has a truer northsouth alignment (Alternative II 3) . My conclusion is that the recommended driveway location II accommodates all three scenarios as well as can be expected . I would prefer to give preference to the Lake Drive East traffic in every instance , which means there would likely be stop signs at Hidden Court and the church entrance. 1 If you have questions , call . T. Sincerely, 1 — fe II Fred Hoisington Consultant Enclosure II , ' 1 MAR 7 1988 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7300 Metro Blvd. Suite 525 Edina,MN 55435 • (612)835-9960 � . .A .., •ii,i.!: n;vJ'I:.ii _ r •i4: r M.-.;di,:g,.4:4110oi..'f iaiia 1 G/?°64:.ij ® I Iv 0 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 17 , 1988 - Page 22 Emmings moved , Batzli seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Subdivision Request #86-11 for West Village Heights to replat five commercial lots into six commercial lots as shown on the plat stamped "Received January 28, 1988" with the following conditions : ' 1. There shall be a maximum of four driveways on the north side of West 78th Street and the driveways shall be directly opposite of existing driveways to the south or placed in a location such that future driveways on the south side can be constructed opposite of those on the north (i .e. lot lines) . 2. Lot 5, Block 1 shall share access to West 78th Street with Lot 4, ' Block 1 at a minimum of 300 feet from Kerber Boulevard and Powers Boulevard to intersect with the Burdick property to the south . 3. A maximum of two driveways shall be allowed along Kerber Boulevard and a driveway servicing Lot 5, Block 1 shall be directly opposite .Coulter Drive. i 4. There shall be no permanent driveway access to Powers Blvd . (CR 17) . 5. Final site plans shall conform to city and watershed district I criteria for 100 year freeboard elevation. 6. The drainage easement for the ponding area on the Eckankar site must be acquired prior to development of Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 and the 25 foot utility and drainage easement on the west border shall be increased to 30 feet . All voted in favor and motion carried . 11 SITE PLAN REVIEW OF A 7, 277 SQUARE FOOT CHURCH TO BE LOCATED ON PROPERTY ZONED PUD-R, PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - RESIDENTIAL AND LOCATED AT 251 LAKE DRIVE EAST (LOT 1, BLOCK 7, HIDDEN VALLEY) , FAMILY OF CHRIST LUTHERAN CHURCH. Jo Ann Olsen presented the staff report on this item. Conrad: Would a representative of the church like to talk to us? Maybe respond to anything you' ve read in the staff report or what you 've heard tonight. I think that ' s important if you agree with the staff ' s recommendations or have problems with them. We' re interested in that . ' Dean Brown: I 'm chairman of the new building committee and representatives of the building committee , as well as the church, are here. Terry Lyons is also here. He is an employee of Banden Construction Company and they are our designers and they have prepared the drawings and at this point, will be the ones that are going to be carrying through the whole construction. I think Barb knows us pretty well . Let' s see, we' ve been working together for quite a long time V2?. Planning Commission Meeting ' February 17, 1988 - Page 23 ' here. I think that we' ve come a long way. We agree with the majority of the recommendations here but we would like a couple clarifications on a couple of them. First of all , on number , we might as well just go ahead and start with number 5. I think that that, from our perspective, is fine. To realign with that intersection is okay from our perspective. One thing that we were wanting to know though is, if when we realign and move that 60 feet down, there seems to be an area there that we could possibly get some more parking. I think it' s important to realize that the church that we' re building is on an area where we can not park on any streets and we don't want to park on any streets so we want to be able to maximize the amount of parking space that we can get . I realize that you have minimum requirements but at the same time, we want to be able to provide as much parking so we don ' t have any problems ' in the future. I think what we' re talking is just north of that intersection, you can see there' s a little bit of area in there, if we could possibly get some more parking in there. Second is item number 6. A second access to Lake Drive East shall be provided and approved by the City Engineer. We' re a very new congregation. We' ve been in existence for about 7 years . We have experienced a growth rate in the last 3 years of approximately 20% a year and that's why we' re at the point ' right now of proposing to you, we need to move on. We've been very fortunate that we were able to rent the old St. Hubert ' s church but at this point we ' ve outgrown our needs. We are a member of the new Evangelical Lutheran Church of America who has a very tight building ' program that' s been in existence for a number of years . We've been working through them as far as estimates for a building and that ' s really our lending institution is our main church. What we ' re up ' against is that because of the size of our congregation, they go through and recommend and approve an amount of money that they will lend us for building our church. We have- to pay it back at a specific interest rate. We have to live within a budget of $450,000. 00. We kind of have a top end here where we just have a certain amount of money to spend . The reason I 'm bring this up is that a number of the items that have been proposed by the City we' re very much in agreement with. We feel ' that they' re very important but I think it' s important that you also understand that a number of the items are kind of outside of the original budget that we were going with. Now I can ' t say it' s your ' fault that our budget was a certain amount but we were relying very heavily upon a very well established building program within the Lutheran church. Currently, up to the point where we don ' t have to do this extension drive, we' re spending approximately between $50, 000. 00 to ' $60, 000. 00 of our money to comply with the curbing , landscaping , sprinkler system, additional fire hydrants and this is money that was never appropriated for those types of things . What we ' re thinking on item 6 is that at this particular time in our building phase , we' re looking at approximately $6, 000. 00 to $10, 000. 00 of additional money to add that road . We would very much love to have that second access when ' we add our additional parking but at this particular time, it' s a cost that we just really can ' t bear . We don' t quite understand the full reason behind it. As stated earlier by the gentleman just preceeding us , we found kind of three tier effect here from the Fire people. A sprinkled building. That ' s fine. We agree that that ' s a very important aspect . That will help our insurance but it' s a cost to us upfront . Planning Commission Meeting 1 February 17, 1988 - Page 24 Second is the number of fire hydrants that we' re providing on our lot . Currently we' re providing two fire hydrants and we' re going to be adding a third one when we add our final sanctuary. We feel at this point we kind of have two tiers of fire protection. Now, all of a sudden we' re getting an additional access for emergency vehicle type of equipment and it doesn' t settle well with us . Conrad: What' s the rationale Jo Ann? I Olsen: It came back, again from the Fire Department and also from engineering . Staff , we always look at a second access . They wanted that for emergency purposes in case, for some reason this was blocked and trucks could not get in to the fire hydrants around here. We can negotiate. It' s pretty level here and I think a truck might be able to get in there if it is a gravel road and maybe just keep it plowed in the winter to keep a path open. That ' s something we can negotiate or work with them. I know that we want some form of secondary access onto that site. If it' s just a driveway that is maintained or kept clear than I think that would be acceptable and possibly they wouldn ' t have to do a bituminous drive at this time. We can work with the Fire Department and the Engineering Department . Conrad : We' ve always wanted to get two roads to a parcel , a building site, a residential site, but also we' re asking for two accesses to the site? I guess I 'm not aware that we have applied this standard before. Maybe we have and I just haven' t recognized it. Olsen : When we have the two separate roads it helps provide us with an area for a second access. We have been lately though providing a secondary access . Headla : I can remember having battled through when Tim and I , when we couldn' t get them. Olsen : The mini-storage for Gary Brown, he had to provide a different easement. The neighbor is letting us drive over their land but it ' s still some form of secondary access . Conrad : Where' s the guideline that we use to require a second access? Where is that? Dacy: I think you have to remember , how many people can assemble in the sanctuary? Conrad : Barbara , I think I heard Jo Ann say that we can work out some kind of access. I 'm just going back to some basics. It really has nothing to do with this . I 'm just trying to understand . Dacy: That' s part of the rationale. You' re asking, what is a guideline ' and a guideline is the type of use . What I was going to say is that the sanctuary can hold up to 400 people. If you have a parking lot that ' s full of people and there' s an emergency that occurs , you have a 2 foot berm plus landscaping, let' s say it' s during the wintertime and for some I/ Planning Commission Meeting g February 17 , 1988 - Page 25 ' reason that access into the front of the church is blocked , the emergency vehicles have no other means to get to that. To scale berm and maybe a snowpile , a secondary access is going to help that out. The ' July superstorm, if there' s flooding or something occurs in that area that that access is blocked , again that leaves a second means in and out. The amount of people going in and out of there, especially if it ' s full , at a Christmas mass for example, that ' s what we felt was the ' criteria. Conrad : Is it a planning staff guideline? Is it a Fire Department ' guideline? Dacy: All three . As Jo Ann said earlier . Engineering , planning and Fire Department. Conrad : So in terms of the motion that the staff has recommended , that a second access be provided and approved by the City Engineer, do we ' need to change that in light of Jo Ann , you feeling that we can work with the church somehow to insure that we have a second access, because that probably makes sense? Do we need to modify that to give the church ' folks a warm feeling that. . . Olsen : Yes , you might want to modify it just because the conditions , Larry's conditions are pretty specific that it must be a bituminous driveway. Emmings : Why don ' t we just leave it general one in here that there will ' be a second access and take out the specific one and let them negotiate. Ellson : Take out the words "Hidden Court" and just say, a second access ' shall be provided and approved. Olsen : Maybe just take out Larry' s specific . ' Batzli : If you remove the engineer ' s condition 5? Is that the recommendation? Olsen : That deals with both of them. Dean Brown: Just for clarification from our standpoint then, if we provide the second access , what about the curbing along the street? Do we have to provide the curbing into that access and assuming there is some sort of berming and landscaping along there , how do we? We want to comply with you guys but we just want clarification. Olsen : That ' s something we would work out with the engineers . I know what we want to do and I can work it out . Terry Lyon : For example if we were to provide a curb cut . . .and insure it 's clear in the winter . ' Dean Brown: I guess I kind of want to bring up a point too about the use of the building. We are a congregation that meets on Sundays , 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 17, 1988 - Page 26 Wednesday activities , Monday activities but we do not plan any type of a day school or any type of a child care either so the use of the building is not going to be continuous all the way through. It is going to be on specific days and specific times. Again, I guess I 'd really like to say that we agree that we would like a second access but a fully, true second access would be provided . . . I think we needed clarification again on point 8 . The steeple shall be constructed of non-combustible material or shall not exceed 20 feet in height of? Olsen : I talked to the Building Inspector this evening to confirm that and what he' s saying is that you will measure that 20, not from the actual highest point of the building , the sanctuary but there it' s pretty much the height of that building, you can go 20 feet higher than that . Dean Brown: And that height is 44 feet? Olsen: Say that height is your 33 feet of the sanctuary. You would be able to go 20 feet higher than that . It ' s from the State Building Code. Dean Brown: And if the height of our building was 44 feet and then it would be 20 feet above that? Olsen : I believe that ' s how it works . I don ' t know if that 44 feet adds something to that 20 feet. It ' s a Building Code that he' s using 1 that from. Terry Lyon: I feel obligated to talk with the Building Inspector in that regard too because as I read the specific section that was cited in the UBC, Article VII , it says that you can go 20 feet above the highest allowable height which in this particular building, it' s a Type V, is 50 feet . 50 plus the 20 and I realize we' re still 3 feet above that but I 'd like to discuss that issue to clarify it. Conrad : So just for my own clarification, and I don ' t even care but if they built it entirely out of non-combustible material then these 20 ' s , we don' t care about. But if they do , then the building code applies . Olsen: And that will be caught in the building inspection action. 1 Dean Brown: On the water , I think we needed clarification. We've been told or talked about a total water loop for the fire hydrants connecting Chanhassen Estates into a fire hydrant on the lot just to the south of us. What' s the ruling? Terry Lyon: By that they mean they would like an adequate water supply 1 line connected to the east on Chanhassen Estates and also to the south so there is a continuous loop. There again , as we were indicating before, we have a sprinklered building. They required hydrants. Now they want a complete loop. A watermain is not real cheap and then the access. We' re just asking how many different requirements. Olsen : That ' s a typical requirement for the loop in the water . . 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 17 , 1988 - Page 27 Dean Brown: Again, I ' ll reemphasize the first phase of the building . . .a limited budget in the sense that we agree, we very much intend to do the ' sprinkling and do the two fire hydrants but I would like to amend it to say let us do the total water loop at the time we add the third fire hydrant and add the final sanctuary so that we could possibly delay some of the costs because at this point, we don ' t really see that to be ' anything other than a convenience for the City. Again, we want to comply to that but we' re talking some money here and again, we ' re already, to meet the landscaping, the parking and I 'm going to reiterate ' these things because from our perspective we' re not a business . We don ' t sell a product. We don' t get any income from something. What we survive on completely is donations and we want to make sure that we are ' completely responsible to the citizens of the city of Chanhassen. What we' re looking at here, is really experiencing a cost that ' s just a lot for us in the first phase. We would like to see that amended to say, bring the watermain in for the two fire hydrants and then at the time we go to the third phase for the sanctuary, be required to do the total water connection into the third fire hydrant . ' Conrad: Is there any supportable logic to phasing in those types of things? Olsen : I would need to discuss those with the engineer . I think that I it might be more logical to do it now. I don ' t know whether I could say that it could be amended . I guess I don ' t know the facts . ' Dacy: To be honest, we didn' t anticipate the detailed questions that the applicant has so we didn ' t ask Mr . Brown to attend tonight. Jo Ann' s right, we can' t recommend to the commission one way or the other ' on their request but we understand your concern . This is a detailed item that, as far as the Planning Commission is concerned, unless you do have a real big problem with it, this is something that staff should be able to work out. ' Conrad : The only impact is the motion that we make. Dacy: If you want to phrase a motion so there is some leeway in there, we'd sure appreciate that . Conrad : The trouble is , we don ' t have the insight either . I 'm not sure ' why we require two fire hydrants or three. I 'm not sure why we require the looped water . What ' s it a function of other than it ' s probably a standard that makes sense to me but I 'm not sure when can you slip that ' requirement and when not? Dacy: Exactly because the engineer , the basic purpose of it is to ' maintain a constant pressure and if you ' re using one fire hydrant and that draws all the water off of one main and there ' s not enough pressure to serve the second hydrant, you want to keep a looped system, as Mr. Lyon ' s said . They go through the flow and pressure analysis and I 'm ' sure Larry has done preliminary evaluations of that to determine this recommendation . They have submitted another proposal that he may or may i Planning Commission Meeting February 17 , 1988 - Page 28 not have looked at. Unfortunately Larry isn' t here and he could have probably answered that. Batzli : A continuous loop may have been based on an evaluation of the third fire hydrant already being installed. May or may not have been. We don ' t know. Dacy: Right . , Terry Lyons : Actually, I believe the continuous loop is a request whether it' s 1, 2 or 20 hydrants. The concern, as Barbara mentioned, is ' they want to maintain pressure. If for example there was a fire at the church and Chanhassen Estates, if all the hydrants were open at the same time the pressure would drop. Our feeling is , possibly but there again it's belts and suspenders and should we be made to bear that cost all at this time. Dean Brown: I would assume that the majority of you have built a home and had a budget. Again, being the chairman of this building committee, I have to be very conscience of that budget because the money that we sink into the ground for these things are very important to us but they also deduct from the aesthetics that we can build into our building. Right now we can' t even afford brick and that' s not anything from your perspective so we' re giving up a lot of things . We' re reducing the quality of the windows that we' re putting in the building and the quality of the carpet. Things so we can afford stuff that will make the building what you guys want . Conrad : We 've heard that . I think we all work with a budget . On the other hand, one of the charges for the City and for this commission is to make sure things that are built are safe. There may be liability problems if we allowed you to do something that 's not considered safe and I think that' s a responsibility that we have to make sure is satisfied that whatever building goes into Chanhassen, has the safety of the citizens as a cornerstone. I think the City will work with you and if a phased in approach can be worked, I think we' ll try to do that. If it can ' t, you' re going to be stuck with it . You should continue , when you go to City Council , between now and City Council you can be working with City staff on these. I know the road access can be taken care of. The other issues, I think they have to talk to the engineer and get some specifics and you should sit down with him. Dean Brown: But that ' s something we hadn't heard before was the phased in approach. That' s why I 'm asking these things several times . We' ve just been told water loop, fire access, pavement. To us those are there but let ' s give and take a little and thank you very much for saying that. That' s what we' re looking for . Conrad : And I don ' t want to lead you astray. Maybe we can ' t do that ' but I think we should look at it and see if that' s possible. Dacy: It was my understanding that Mr. Brown did talk to you about ' these recommendations . Planning Commission Meeting February 17, 1988 - Page 29 ' Dean Brown: Yes . Dacy: Okay, so you were aware of them? Dean Brown: Yes . Dacy: Okay, so now you 've come up with alternatives that you may not have posed to Mr. Brown? Dean Brown: That' s right . Dacy: Okay, so that makes me feel better . They were aware of these conditions and we can go from there. ' Dean Brown: The point 4, the future phases shall preserve the additional right-of-way required by the TH 101 improvement. What does that mean? ' Olsen : That ' s more of a condition just so when those future phases come in, we will know to review those sites and not let you put the parking ' lot within the right-of-way. If this goes through, they will be acquiring this property. Dean Brown: At what point would they acquire that? ' Olsen: When it would be improved . ' Dean Brown: That again is cutting into an area of our parking that we' re concerned about. Can we get some sort of approval at that time that would say, that setback would change so we can still get some parking for there? Olsen : Right . The way we ' re considering this is that it' s a hardship imposed by the City so you could possibly get a variance to the setbacks. It is something we are taking away. Land that you did have for the setback so the setbacks may be reduced . You still would not be able to build into it but we may be able to look at reducing the ' setbacks and provide some screening or additional berms or something . Dean Brown: Again, our concern was that to us it ' s taking away from some of our parking and so long as we can work on a variance . Is that the only spot we' re talking about? Olsen : So far . Dean Brown: And we wouldn ' t know that until it was all approved right? Terry Lyon: That's pushing that one right to the limit but as you all know, that parking is just meeting the requirements for the future expansion so if indeed you say we may get the setback, that 's not going to allow us to meet your requirement in the future. 1 Planning Commission Meeting II February 17 , 1988 - Page 30 Olsen : You still have to go through process . I can' t say that you' ll II get it. Terry Lyon: In your opinion , it would be approved? I feel it' s II justified to ask. The church is setting aside that property for something that may not happen and receiving no compensation for setting that aside and also it may be limiting their ability to expand in the future because they won' t be able to meet the parking requirements so we I need some sort of commitment that it would be acceptable also. Dacy: That would be staff' s recommendation. We can' t guarantee what a II City Council is going to do. Dean Brown: So by us agreeing to this recommendation , we' re just saying that the future phases shall preserve that particular piece of II right-of-way or any right-of-way? Olsen: We' re saying that particular . If things change. . . I Batzli : I don ' t know that staff can even make that statement because how they develop TH 101 will have a major impact on that and we have no control over that really. Very little. I Olsen: When they determine what property need, that' s when they will start the acquisition process . As of today, that is the corner that II they are looking at that would need the additional highway right-of-way. Dean Brown: But we can go on the assumption that if it was condemned II for state use or whatever use, then we could apply for a, what type of a permit was it? Ellson: Variance . I Dean Brown: A hardship variance . A hardship imposed variance saying that we still need the parking. Because potentially what could happen II there is if you condemn that and then didn ' t give us the right-of-way, we wouldn' t be able to meet your minimum requirements for parking . That' s the extreme to the one end . I guess that ' s what we want to make II sure everyone is aware of is that we' re building now with the thorough assumption that we can add a second and third phase . We would hate to be able to develop this and the second phase and then all of a sudden find out we can ' t do the third phase because we' re 5 parking spots II short. Headla : This summer when we had that heavy rainstorm, what happened to II that area down there? Did they get flooded? What I 'm really referring to is if we take that spot of land now and we blacktop it all , we' re going to have faster runoff. Are we going to create a problem for that church or for the immediate neighborhood? II Olsen: The Hidden Valley plan always had, their storm water system always had this lot also included in those calculations and perhaps you II could clarify it a little bit better but it was always planned for the II Planning Commission 9 Meeting February 17, 1988 - Page 31 development of this lot so it will be able to. Headla: It will be able to handle that more rapid runoff than if it was just plain ground there . Terry Lyons : That' s also addressed in the engineer ' s report . ' Headla: Yes, I see they talk about it there but where they put it all blacktop, I just was wondering about that . On the lights you have in the parking lot, how tall are those lights going to be? Terry Lyons : 20 feet . ' Headla: And will they be on all the time? Dean Brown: They' ll be on a timer switch where they' ll come on. ' Headla: So during the night they usually stay on until middle evening, something like that? ' Dean Brown: We do use our church into 10: 00 to 11: 00 at night . Like on Wednesday evenings and sometimes on Mondays so for our safety purposes , we' ll more than likely have them on. ' Headla: But they would be on 7 days a week? Dean Brown: Yes . Headla : I was wondering there , 20 feet , is that going to affect neighbors a ways away if it ' s on every night? Olsen : We usually have the lights shielded so they' re directed . They might still be able to tell that there ' s a light over there but it ' s reflected so it doesn ' t shine into a neighbor ' s property. Does that ' answer your question? Headla : I 'm thinking about when I look out my back window, 2, 000 feet away I see the lights from my church parking lot and to say they point down, it leaves a fair amount of light there . What kind of lights are these? ' Terry Lyons : They will be high pressure sodium. Shielded high pressure sodium. Dean Brown: I think it' s important to note that all of the houses to the east of us, that you would be referring to, are lower than our lot to begin with and we' re still going to have a 6 foot berm as well as 10 ' foot trees across there. So, it ' s like if our lot is here and the houses are down here plus there will be that 6 to 10 foot shield across there. Then the lights are going to only be from one end to the other . Terry Lyons : One of the parking lights that would be visible to the residential neighborhood. Planning Commission Meeting February 17 , 1988 - Page 32 Headla : The one up on the north end? Terry Lyons: Yes . , Headla : That ' s all that I have. Batzli : I guess I 'm curious , are we recommending this as a conditional , use but you evaluate it as if it was a conditional use? Olsen : We use the requirements of a church within a residential district as the guidelines. We had no specific guidelines for a church in a PUD district so we really haggled this over . We were going , well is it a conditional use? No, because it' s not submitted as a conditional use in the PUD ordinance but yet there are no specific regulations for the church in the PUD so we felt, since it is a residential district , that regulations for churches as conditional uses in the RSF district, whatever would be appropriate to use for the site plan review. This lot was always approved as a church site. We felt that it was still an approved use. Batzli : So the future expansions would have to come back in as another 1 site plan? Olsen: Yes . All phases have to come back in. We have to make sure that they're conforming to the parking and the setbacks . Ellson: I think it looks awful nice . I don ' t know how we can make a recommendation with the motion so open to this type of thing. Maybe you' ve done this in the past but it seems like it will be awfully vague to try and do something when there' s so many things that' s left to be done . Do you do this a lot? They have to do this and that . Okay, - we' re going to go with that. It seems like anything can be written in there. I 'm just a little apprehensive about that part of it but if you guys have done it before, I ' ll trust you. ' Emmings: He mentioned they' re not doing a daycare or not doing day school. We one time talked about a church who was going to do a school or we talked about the possibility of them doing a school . If they would add that as a use, would that have to come back? It seems to me we talked about the fact that there had to be different requirements for bathroom facilities and all kinds of other kinds of things. Is that being taken into account now? Olsen : No . If they came in for a new use , a lot of times we' ll hear about it from the building department and within the PUD district, we would have to address that as a permitted use . It would have to get some sort of city approval . , Emmings : So if they decided to add those uses , they would have to come back? - 1 Planning Commission sxon Meetzng February 17, 1988 - Page 33 ' Dean Brown: And we already fully understand that that is very well , I talked to Barb and staff, that construction of the walls are different. The fire code is different and that ' s why we' re stating now that we ' re ' not doing that so that what we' re proposing is what we' re using. Emmings : The only time I talked against a church related issue, my furnace stopped working at home. I 'm not willing to risk that anymore. Erhart : Why are there no trees shown on the landscapin g in some of the areas such as the very north end and the south end? Olsen: The reason is because they' re not developing this side. Erhart: What about the other? Olsen : They are landscaping it all around . Erhart: I see they' re landscaping directly around the parking lot but not around by the street . Okay, so that future parking essentially will be seeded at this point? Olsen : I think we ' re just going to leave it in it' s natural state at this time. ' Dean Brown: We plan to seed or sod it . As you point out in one of your recommendations is that all land that we' re not using needs to be seed and sodded . ' Erhart : That ' s a good point . If the land is natural grass now and you' re not disturbing it, that may be imposing an additional requirement ' that may not be necessary. Olsen : It was my understand that you were going to leave that southern portion all in it ' s natural state. Dean Brown: Point 2, all open areas in the first phase shall be covered. Erhart : I have a question , does the City have written requirements for fire hydrants and loops or is this something that the building inspector ' sort of comes up with from time to time? Dacy: The Fire Code does . ' Erhart : But I don ' t see a condition requiring three fire hydrants on my list. Am I missing something? ' Dean Brown: It ' s on the plan . Erhart : Oh, you ' ve already got that on the plan . And I think you' ll see that a loop is a standard requirement of the City for a fire hydrant ' so I don' t have a problem with that. I do think we ought to change the condition for the steeple so there ' s not, again, I don' t think we ought 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 17, 1988 - Page 34 to be imposing fire restrictions that go above the Uniform Building Code so I 'd like to see us change condition 8 to say that the steeple shall be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code period. I sometimes think we do get a little carried away with this fire thing . You' re requesting that one entrance be moved 60 feet further to the south as compared to as shown on the plan? Olsen : Yes . Erhart: And the Fire Inspector is asking that the second access be added at Hidden Court. I agree, if nothing else, that we should just leave it open but I really question whether you want to have that many parking spaces and one access. It just seems to me, from a practical standpoint, given that Lake Drive East is basically a private street . In other words, it' s not a collector . It' s not an arterial. Why you wouldn' t have an access up on the north end . It just seems there' s going to be a tremendous congestion bringing all those cars in. You know how people all come in 5 minutes after the service starts . It just seemed practical to me to have a second access up there. I think that' s much more logical than the south end . Particularly considering , in the future you ' re considering a classroom. If you' re going to have a second access , it' s more reasonable to put it on that side where you have a density of children and so forth. Again, I don' t know if it has to be done now. Terry Lyon: The staff would not allow us a second access onto Lake Drive East. Olsen : Lake Drive East is a collector . It ' s a major east/west . ' Erhart: But according to your TH 101 plan here, that' s going to become . . . Olsen : That ' s still going to be a major road . And we did look at providing that secondary access onto Lake Drive East and they had a large berm to cut through. The sight distance of before . Erhart: A berm that doesn ' t exist today. ' Olsen : Right but it' s just that the sight distance was not good . There are good points to having it on Lake Drive East but we reviewed it and we determined that . . . Erhart : What ' s the distance , if you move that driveway let' s say closer to Hidden Court, can you maintain a 300 foot distance between the two driveways? Olsen : I think the City Engineer was recommending 100 foot distance from Lake Drive East to Hidden Court. Erhart : And it looks like you' ve got , about what? 200 feet there now? About 160 feet now so if you move it 60 feet down, that would get you to your 100 feet . If you put another driveway up on the north end , that . 1 Planning Commission on Meeting February 17 , 1988 - Page 35 ' would easily be 300 feet from that driveway. Aren ' t we requiring collectors , that driveways be 400 feet apart? ' Dacy: In the rural . Erhart : So it doesn ' t apply here. Whatever , I think just looking at this whole thing, you ought to have provisions, at least for the future ' on the driveway on the north end . Not the south end . Dacy: That curve and the grade is the biggest factor there. The sight ' distance is poor there. Even the existing elevation now. Batzli : Is Hidden Court a through street? ' Olsen : It curves down in a round about way. Batzli : It does link up with something else somewhere? ' Olsen : Yes . ' Dean Brown: Lake Drive East curves around and connects with Dakota . Batzli : We' re talking about Hidden Court . Olsen : Yes , Hidden Court does dead end . There is another access . Here' s Lake Drive East and then there ' s another Hidden Lane back there. Erhart : It must be the new design for the TH 101/TH 5 crossing . I 've not seen this before. This is much preferable over the one Mark ' s got in his book. ' Conrad : I don ' t have anything to add . I think Tim, your comment on point 8 was using the Uniform Building Code instead of the specifics that were in there? Thinking they would cover what staff detailed? The only other thing I would say is that whoever makes the motion, is that we recommend that the applicants work with staff to review access . Maybe some phased in approaches if it works for fire hydrants , looped water , whatever but basically working with staff and the City Engineer to see if any of those things can be deferred. If not, the City Council should be aware of that when it gets to them. ' Dean Brown: That's what we ' re looking for . If it ' s a rule, we' ll have to live by it but if we can work, we'd love to . ' Erhart moved, Headla seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan #88-1 as shown on the site plan dated January 28 , ' 1988 with the following conditions : Headla : That second access , we' re really talking about quality. On that second access aren' t we? 11 Planning Commission Meeting 1 February 17 , 1988 - Page 36 Ellson : Right . Not necessarily the road as constructed in the Engineering report but we still want some sort of. . . Headla : Yes , I think we want an access of some kind but . . . it ' s the quality of the access . Erhart : I think what we ' re trying to say is on Phase 1, maybe we could live without it but if you' re going to build all these parking spaces and the additions shown here , we feel that a second access will be needed at that time. Conrad : Emergency vehicles need a second access period . It just 1 simply, right now the mechanics of how quickly we want that access upgraded and I think they can work that out . Headla : Did you say anything about , like the fire hydrants and the loop? If that could be negotiated with phases? Conrad : Tim didn' t. Batzli : Could that be a friendly amendment? 1 Erhart: There has to be a second first. Headla : I ' ll move that the requirements for the fire hydrants and the looping of the watermai_n be considered for negotiation to be incorporated in with the third building phase . Emmings: Shouldn' t we just say it like this maybe. If they can satisfy the City Engineer that it ' s not necessary to do it all at this time, then that would be alright with the Planning Commission. Whatever the City Engineer thinks is necessary or appropriate at this time . Is that the idea. Batzli : Are you suggesting in your point 8 that the steeple need only be designed in accordance with UBC and not constructed in accordance with that? Erhart : I 'm assuming that ' s the same. 1 Batzli : Okay. Are there other applicable building codes that you would like to include? Is the problem that we have a building code that ' s tougher than the Uniform Building Code. Was that merely a requirement of the Engineer or the Fire Department and the City? Olsen: That was the interpretation , 20 feet was how the Building Inspector interpretted the height that they would permit under the UBC. Erhart: If his interpretation differs from somebody elses and we 1 approve the requirement including this wordage , then the interpretation doesn' t mean anything anymore. Then it' s what we approve and I want to go back to the Uniform Building Code and let them work out this interpretation. . 1 Planning Commission 9 Meeting February 17, 1988 - Page 37 ' Terry Lyons : The only other applicable Code would have been the Minnesota Building Code and it doesn ' t address that specific issue so ' the Uniform Building Code is the only one. Batzli : I guess I would rather have said, the steeple shall be designed and constructed in accordance with all applicable Building Codes . Erhart: That's fine. Emmings : Aren ' t you just talking about the UBC there? Batzli : I don' t know. ' Emmings : I think the State has adopted the UBC and all these communities have adopted the State so we will have the same. t Erhart : I 'm not trying to get us , put words to try and back up somebody' s misinterpretation if in fact that' s the case. I don' t know. Headla : One other thing , looking at my notes , we were going to put in a note that whenever they do further expansion, they were to come back. Conrad : I think that ' s implied though. Not implied . Olsen: We would require it, yes . t Headla : You would require it anyway? Okay, then there ' s no need for it. ' Terry Lyons : It ' s required by your Zoning Ordinance and it ' s required by the Uniform Building Code and it ' s required by the Minnesota Building Code . Anytime you add , alter , modify. ' Headla moved, Emmings seconded an amendment to the motion stating that the Planning Commission approve phasing of the fire hydrants and looping ' of the watermain if the City Engineer determines that these requirements are not necessary at this time. All voted in favor of the amendment and motion carried. Erhart moved , Headla seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Site Plan #88-1 as shown on the site plan dated January 28 , 1988 with the following conditions : 1. The applicant shall provide details on type of shrubs proposed along the east lot line and provide 1 foot of hedge along the west ' property line between vehicular access and Lake Drive East . 2. All open areas disturbed during construction in the first phase shall be covered with sod or seeded . 1 Planning Commission Meeting February 17, 1988 - Page 38 3. Two additional handicapped parking spaces will be provided with the second and third phases or as required by the State building code. 4. The future phases shall preserve the additional right-of-way required for the TH 101 improvement. 5. The proposed access to Lake Drive East shall be relocated 60 feet to the south. 6. A second access to Hidden Court shall be negotiated with the city staff with the possibility of phasing. 7. The applicant shall receive a sign permit for the proposed sign which shall not exceed 24 square feet. ' 8. The steeple shall be designed and constructed in accordance with all applicable building codes. 9. The hydrant located in front of the proposed sanctuary shall be relocated to the south corner of the entrance from Lake Drive East. 10. Lights must be shielded and not be intrusive on adjacent ' neighborhoods . 11. The 16 points outlined in the City Engineer ' s report shall be ' included. 12. The Planning Commission approves phasing of the fire hydrants and looping of the watermain if the City Engineer determines that these requirements are not necessary at this time . All voted in favor of the amendment and motion carried. ' APPROVAL OF MINUTES : Emmings moved , Conrad seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated January 20, 1988 as amended on page 11 by Steven Emmings. All voted in favor and motion carried . Erhart moved, Ellson seconded to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated February 3 , 1988 as amended by David Headla on page 23. All voted in favor except Conrad who abstained and motion carried . COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER. Mark Koegler : You made a statement before that I was going to be 111 talking . What I 'm really going to mostly do tonight is turn it back to you and let you do the talking and just take notes and agree and disagree and those kinds of things. Let me tell you, the material that' s in front of you tonight is the entire Transportation Section