Loading...
3 Chanhassen West Business Park CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market Boulevard PO Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Administration Phone 952.2271100 Fax 952,2271110 Building Inspections Phone 952.2271180 Fax 952,2271190 Engineering Phone 952,2271160 Fax 952.2271170 Finance Phone 952.2271140 Fax 952,2271110 Park & Recreation Phone 952.227.1120 Fax 952.2271110 Recreation Center 2310 Coulter Boulevard Phone 952.2271400 Fax 952.2271404 Planning & Natural Resources Phone 952.227.1130 Fax 952.2271110 Public Works 1591 Park Road Phone 952.2271300 Fax 952.2271310 Senior Center Phone 952.2271125 Fax 952,2271110 Web Site WNW, ci ,chanhassen,mn, us ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Gerhardt, City Manager FROM: Bob Generous, Senior Planner ri1P- DATE: August 8, 2005 SUBJ: Chanhassen West Business Park - PC #05-23 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant is proposing an office-industrial Planned Unit Development (PUD). Specifically, they are requesting that the property be rezoned from Agricultural Estate to Planned Unit Development, incorporating the design standards contained in the Planning Commission staff report on pages 4 through 10. Additionally, they are requesting preliminary plat approval to create eight lots, three outlots and right- of-way for a public street, and a wetland alteration permit to grade and fill wetlands on site. Each lot will appear before that Planning Commission and City Council for site plan review. Staff recommended that the developer proceed through the PUD in order to preserve more of the existing site vegetation than would have been possible under a straight Industrial Office Park (lOP) development. The developer is preserving a 3.8 acre site, Outlot C, as permanent open space within the center of the project. They are also proposing the use of a private street to access Lots 4 and 5 which will permit additional tree preservation. Along the eastern perimeter of the site, they are preserving existing vegetation within 50 feet of the property line. The applicant has saved a large portion of the existing mature oaks on site. This preservation will add a unique feel to the site and provide the residential neighborhood to the north an added buffer for the development. The applicant did an excellent job fitting the design to the site. Staff has prepared the design standards and setbacks recommendations based on the adequacy of the proposed buffering, as per city code. The neighbors were concerned about the height and bulk of the buildings within the development and how the transition will be handled, specifically on Lot 6. This shall be handled through setbacks, elevation changes, and landscaping. It should be noted that the proposed finished floor elevation for Lot 6 is 17 feet lower than Galpin Boulevard and that all the existing trees within 50 feet of the right-of-way will be preserved. In the middle of Lot 8, the proposed finished floor elevation of the building is nine feet lower than Galpin Boulevard. The proposed finished floor elevation of Lot 1 is six feet higher than Galpin Boulevard. The City 01 Chanhassen . A growing community with clean lakes, quality schools, a charming downtown, thriving businesses, winding trails, and beautiful parks, A great place to live, work, and play, Executive Summary Chanhassen West Business Park August 8, 2005 Page 2 Staff is working with the developer to see if the proposed final grade for Lot 1 can be lowered. This may eliminate the retaining wall between Lots 1 and 2. Additionally, the applicant has agreed to revise their landscape plan to incorporate additional landscaping on the north and east property lines. While staff has prepared design standards that would permit building heights of three stories and 40 feet, which is less than the four stories and 50 feet permitted in the lOP district, City Council could revise the design standards for building heights for Lots 1, 6 and 8 to two stories and 30 feet to address neighbors' concerns and yet provide the developer with reasonable building parameters for those lots. ACTION REQUIRED City Council approval requires a majority vote of City Council present. PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 18,2005, to review the proposed development. The Planning Commission voted 3 to 2 to approve the proposed project with modifications to the conditions of approval as follows: 54. Follow the city code and have a 150 foot setback on the northeast corner abutting Lot 6. 55. No motels/hotels be allowed. 56. The combination of the berm height, landscaping and the height of the building on Lot 6 be such that you cannot see the roof line while standing on the ground on Lot 2 of Trotters Ridge. 57. The applicant work with city staff to resolve any drainage issues with Lot 2 in Trotters Ridge. 58. City staff be directed to revisit the issue of access from the site onto Lyman Boulevard with Carver County. (The Planning Commission minutes for July 19, 2005 are item la of the City Council packet for August 8, 2005.) Staff believes that the recommended l00-foot setbacklbuffer for the north development perimeter complies with city code and satisfies the buffering requirement, which states: "In instances where existing topography and/or vegetation provide buffering satisfactory to the city, or where quality site G:\PLAN\2005 Planning Cases\05-23 Chanhassen West Business Park\Executive Summary Chan W Business Pk.doc Executive Summary Chanhassen West Business Park August 8, 2005 Page 3 planning is achieved, the city may reduce buffer yard requirements by up to 50 percent. The applicant shall have the full burden of demonstrating compliance with the standards herein." The applicant has agreed to provide additional landscaping and berming within the 100-foot setback; therefore, condition 54 is not being recommended by staff for inclusion as a condition of approval. Additionally, the applicant is proposing the creation of Outlot C, which will preserve a significant stand of mature trees. If additional perimeter setbacks are required, then the applicant may have to encroach into this area to "make up" for the lost developable area. Staff has modified the design standards to delete hotels/motels as uses within the PUD, which will be incorporated into the rezoning ordinance. Therefore, condition 55 is not necessary. Condition 56 is addressed by the design standards. Staff has analyzed the resulting height configuration and determined that assuming a person six feet tall and a berm six feet tall with a slope of 3: 1 planted with a six-foot conifer, the permitted building height at the 100 foot setback would be 39.33 feet. The design standards permit a maximum building height of 40 feet. Condition 57 has been added, as condition 54, to permit the applicant and staff to work out the drainage as it relates to the ultimate berming in this area. Condition 58 is a directive to staff and not a condition of approval for the developer. Staff has re-contacted Carver County regarding access to Lyman Boulevard. Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard are classified as arterial roadways in the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plans and are under the jurisdiction of Carver County. SRF Consulting Group, Inc., the City's traffic consultant, completed a city-wide traffic analysis with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Traffic volumes on arterial and collector roads within the city were estimated based on the zoning and land use. The proposed land use for Chanhassen Business Park West is consistent with that shown in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan traffic analysis; therefore a site-specific traffic analysis was not required for this development. Carver County has stated that the site access must be at Galpin Boulevard. Staff supports the proposed site access for the following reasons: 1. The access would align at an existing intersection to Galpin Boulevard (at Stone Creek Drive). G:\PLAN\2005 Planning Cases\05-23 Chanhassen West Business Park\Executive Summary Chan W Business Pk.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. ----- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY THE CITY COUNCn.. OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code, the City's zoning ordinance, is hereby amended by rezoning all property within the Chanhassen West Business Park from A2, Agricultural Estate District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development (OfficelIndustrial) District. Section 2. The rezoning of this property incorporates the design standards contained in the Planning Commission staff report dated July 19,2005, as amended. Section 3. The zoning map of the City of Chanhassen shall not be republished to show the aforesaid zoning, but the Clerk shall appropriately mark the zoning map on file in the Clerk's Office for the purpose of indicating the rezoning hereinabove provided for in this ordinance, and all of the notations, references, and other information shown thereon are hereby incorporated by reference and made a part of this ordinance. Section 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this _ day of ,2005. ATTEST: Todd Gerhardt, ClerklManager Thomas A. Furlong, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on ,2005.) '+-1 ~ ! ~~~ ..J I . . . i ! ~ ~ i ~ mo , , , I t ~i!' ! i f ;, i utili ! I I II if!l- i :PI !I i I ~ii;! h hl!1 Ih!~1 ! 1!I!jI! i !HI ~!I gll nl :; ~ :; :; :; :i ~~~a~'~ ~~ii;~ . . ; ~ ~ :i !$ i ~ ~ i~~~~ cr: 1- - -\- - -'\ \ \ I:!....~ eN :>.. 00" QUz ..~Z ~~i5 .d.. ..c.. i5:i 1;1;;3 , 0/ I ~& / /~ ! 0/ <;j ---J__/ cr '-,",-, ~ - - -- ,,-", z ..0 f= -is- ",0 <( , , , , , , , , , , , , I"~ ; I :M_-J , i I : I / d ~fI Ii lllll! ~f! III ~I' j !II ~ J UI . [ll] 11, II ii, · I .!1 'II Iti It' hI.!1 r--- / / -- --,---\ .. I I . I - - ,IIt:Igt -::- --- -: .- -- --5;:-,-... ',' ---..w '(:9 " 0 " " "Ii F " " il I f 9 ) ,i J '__._._1 I ! I ._ J: -.-'- \. \ 1 Jl _ _ _ - - _I L': L _L lI!lIiIIJI:oIB1IQ ~ __ -- '" U) - -a:: w o f- - f- --Q cr: f- ::: N01IOOV OtJlHl , r';:Er' >itJv d tJ08tJV M~ Generous, Bob From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Morris, Alyson Wednesday, August 03,200510:30 AM 'jmurray@labrechemurray.com' Oehme, Paul; Generous, Bob; Aanenson, Kate; Gerhardt, Todd Chanhassen West Business Park Mr. Murray, My name is Alyson Morris and I'm the Assistant City Engineer in Chanhassen. Thank you for your question regarding access to this project. Below is a response to the residents' traffic concerns: . Both Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard are County roads, therefore the County has jurisdiction regarding access locations. Both roads are intended to be used by all vehicle types. . The County has identified Lyman Boulevard as an east-west arterial corridor with higher traffic volumes than Galpin Boulevard. Access to arterial corridor roadways must be limited to maintain traffic movement within the corridor. Due to the existing full intersections nearest to the site- Galpin Boulevard and Norex Drive (to the west at Chaska's industrial park), full access to Chanhassen Business Park West would compromise the effectiveness of Lyman Boulevard as an east-west corridor, therefore the County has stated that access to this site shall be from Galpin. . Galpin and Lyman are classified as A-Minor Expander Arterials. City Code Section 18-57 (I) states that "To the extent feasible access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less than one-fourth mile [1320 ft] and through existing and established crossroads.". The existing accesses to Lyman in this area- Galpin and Norex Avenue- are approximately 1900 ft (0.36 miles) apart, therefore any additional access to Lyman Boulevard between these streets would not meet City Code. Due to wetland conditions, any access from the site to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. . Access from Galpin at the Stone Creek Drive intersection satisfies the "through existing and established crossroads" condition of the City Code. . Staff looked at extending a public road to the west, connecting to Norex Avenue in Chaska, as suggested at the Planning Commission meeting. This is not feasible due to the significant grade difference between the existing buildings. . A city-wide traffic analysis was completed with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the land use used to generate the projected traffic volumes shown in the 2020 Plan. . The 2003 traffic volume on the south end of Galpin was 3,100 vehicles per day (vpd) and 7,800 vpd on Lyman. The County's projected 2010 traffic volume on Galpin is 5,500 vpd and 9,000 vpd on Lyman. The site access on Galpin is preferred since the existing and projected traffic volumes are lower than that of Lyman. . Carver County recognizes the potential need for a signalized intersection at Galpin and Lyman and is identified in the County's 5-year Capital Improvement Plan. A signal will not be installed until the warrants, or "justifying conditions" as defined by the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices are met. If you have any other questions please call me at 952-227-1164. Cordially, Alyson Morris Assistant City Engineer City of Chanhassen 1 IBus Stop Locations District 112 2004-2005 School Year Generous. Bob From: Sent: To: Subject: Gerhardt, Todd Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:42 AM Aanenson, Kate; Generous, Bob FW: Re: Development at Galpin & Lyman Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged -----Original Message----- From: Tom Furlong [mailto:tfurlong@apexfsi.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:49 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Re: Development at Galpin & Lyman -----Original Message----- From: STEVE.DALE@usbank.com [mailto:STEVE.DALE@usbank.com] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:35 PM To: tfurlong@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Mayor Tom Furlong, I hope you have cooled off from Webelo Camp a couple of weeks ago. I think all the boys in our Pack had a great time and actually learned a few things. Now for the big issue at hand for the Trotters Ridge subdivision -- the proposed development at the corner of Lyman and Galpin Blvd. (which I mentioned briefly when we were at camp, but thought it inappropriate to discuss). As you can imagine it is an issue that has quite a few people talking in our neighborhood and in Stone Creek, as well. To give you a better grasp of the situation and why we are upset about the whole issue I am inviting you to come and see for yourself. My wife and I, along with our two children, reside at 2487 Bridle Creek Trail and welcome you to come to our home at your convenience to see how this development will change our lives, our neighborhood and possibly the value of our property. Please contact me either via email or phone to setup this meeting. My email addressesareoffice-steve.dale@usbank.com (612) 303-0784 or home - ss.dale@worldnet.att.net (952) 448-5574. Recognizing how rough scheduling can be for all of us, please note that while I work in downtown Minneapolis, my wife works out of our home and could show you how we think the development will negatively impact our property during the day. Hopefully, you can drop by one evening prior to the Aug. 8th Council meeting to see what our neighbors and our family are worried about. We will be sending you an official letter addressing our concerns with the development and what we feel are more than reasonable compromises to some of the neighborhoods concern. But coming to see the actual property I feel would be very helpful in your decision. Please feel free to bring another member of Council, if possible. Tom, when we moved to Minnesota more than four years ago from the Milwaukee area we could have relocated anywhere in the Twin Cities, but we picked Chanhassen. We selected our "new hometown" on the basis of the quality of life, schools and because everyone spoke highly of the great mix of town and country that made it a unique place. However, I fear that the changes now being proposed for our section of the community could damage that image of Chanhassen. The once unique lifestyle that makes Chanhassen special is being 1 sacrificed out of greed, not need. Please call and let me know when you can drop by to see the issue from our point of view...our backyards. Thanks for listening. Steve Dale 2487 Bridle Creek Trail (952) 448-5574 (Home) (612) 303-0784 (Office) Electronic Privacy Notice. This e-mail, and any attachments, contains information that is, or may be, covered by electronic communications privacy laws, and is also confidential and proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you are legally prohibited from retaining, using, copying, distributing, or otherwise disclosing this information in any manner. Instead, please reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error, and then immediately delete it. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2 2292 Boulder Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 August 1, 2005 To City Council Members: My name is Sonya Benkstein. I live in the Stone Creek neighborhood and I have been a resident of that neighborhood and Chanhassen for 7 and Y2 years. I am writing this letter in regard to the proposed development on the comer of Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard. I want to make clear that I am not opposed to a development on this parcel, but I do have a concern on the impact it may have on the Stone Creek neighborhood. The concern I have relates to the positioning of the entrance of this new development. It is my understanding that City Staff is proposing that the entrance be directly across from the entrance to the Stone Creek neighborhood (on Stone Creek Drive). I am opposed to the location of this proposed entrance because it would pose a large safety risk to the children and families of my neighborhood and it would cause an influx of commercial traffic in an otherwise residential area. More Specifically, the things that concern me are as follows: 1. Increase in commercial traffic in a residential area. As it stands today, we have little to no delivery/semi-truck traffic on Galpin Boulevard. Instead, this traffic occurs predominantly on Lyman Boulevard. It makes more sense to route commercial traffic to a more commercial area, i.e. the existing entrance to the development area off of Lyman. Location of the entrance off Lyman fits with the more commercial-type surrounding businesses on this road and the existing commercial deliveries (i.e. Holasek Nursery, small industrial facility to the west ofthe nursery, etc.). In contrast, routing the proposed new development's traffic off Galpin just doesn't fit. Galpin is a residential street and it makes little sense to route semi trucks and other delivery trucks onto our neighborhood streets. 2. Safety issues relating to our children. The increased commercial traffic on Galpin translates directly into safety issues for the children in the Stone Creek neighborhood as well as other surrounding neighborhoods. School busses travel up and down Galpin with great frequency as a result of Bluff Creek Elementary. School busses stop regularly, and increase semi and delivery traffic creates the risk for more accidents and injuries. Route the traffic, via an entrance to this development onto Lyman, where I know of no school bus stops. 3. Potential for a 4 way stop or traffic light intersection. The increased traffic as a result of this development would most likely result in some form of controlled intersection. This would introduce the potential for traffic to back up on Stone Creek Drive into our neighborhood (most frequently during rush hour times). This concerns me as there are bus stops along that stretch of road and Stone Creek Drive is the road that we (along with other neighbors) have to cross to get to the Stone Creek City Park. 4. Risk of injury to foot and bike traffic on Galpin. While we are fortunate to have a nice bike path which runs along Galpin, it is not always used (i.e. by kids who ride their bikes directly on Galpin). Routing semi and other commercial traffic, which will be traveling at speeds up to 50 mph or more (speed limit is 45 mph - but most traffic exceeds this limit), poses a safety risk to our kids. 5. Distance requirement issue. We have been told that Galpin is being proposed as the entrance because of City and/or County "distance requirements." Even if this is the case, I have to believe that these can be modified in the interest of traffic and pedestrian safety. Further, for the reasons above, the most logical location for an entrance is off of Lyman, not Galpin. It seems to me that if you are forced to "pick" which road will serve as the entrance to this development, choosing an entrance off of a more commercial road (i.e. Lyman) as opposed to a residential road (i.e. Galpin), is the right choice. In the process, the City will reduce noise levels on Galpin (and in our surrounding neighborhoods), preserve the residential- type setting which presently exists on Galpin, and reduce the risk of injury to kids, other traffic, and pedestrians. To conclude, I read a couple of weeks ago that Chanhassen was ranked very high on the list of best places to live in the country. My family and I have been very happy in this community and I know that this is owed to the good decisions you have made on our behalf. I am asking you to please consider this development and the proposed entrance carefully - and do the right thing. I know that good businesses playa critical role in the community, but so do the families that live in your neighborhoods. Please keep us in mind during your decision making process. Sincerely Sonya A. Benkstein Message Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob From: Gerhardt, Todd Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:41 AM To: Aanenson, Kate; Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Planned Development off of Lyman & Galpin Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged -----Original Message----- From: Tom Furlong [mailto:tfurlong@apexfsLcom] Sent: Tuesday, August 02,20058:51 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Planned Development off of Lyman & Galpin -----Original Message----- From: Peggy Emerson [mailto:peggy@mchsi.com] Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:59 PM To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Planned Development off of Lyman & Galpin Coucil Members, I live in Stone Creek (8409 Stone Creek Court). I attended the recent planning meeting regarding the development across the street from our neighborhood. I was quite surprised that Chanhassen was considering a plan that is so inconsistent with what surrounds the property. I was amazed at how inconsistent the plan is with other development priorities in Chanhassen. I sat through several other items on the agenda in which beautifully landscaped buildings were being criticized for lack of curb appeal etc. At least those plans were consistent with the properties surrounding them and that care was taken to ensure that surrounding properties would find the new development appealing to look at. In contrast, what we are talking about on Galpin/Lyman is an industrial development with capacity for many semi truck deliveries a day and very large unsightly buildings next two rather upscale neighborhoods. I believe you are setting a bad precedent as well - why would someone want to build/live in Chanhassen if upscale neighborhoods can be allowed to be next to a large industrial development? I find this historically quite inconsistent with all the strict requirements the city has stuck to in the past. Someone on the planning commission stated that what will be developed is an improvement to what is there today. I find this rationale hard to understand. Sure after you drive up the residential driveway, past the tree, wind down a ravine, there is some junk about... but none of us can see any of that from where we live or even from the road. It sounds like the developer plans to fill in the level, especially on the North and East sides, which would automatically make all visible to our neighborhoods. This obviously concerns us. 81212005 Message 81212005 Page 2 of 2 If this plan wasn't already unbelievable in it's inconsistency with its environment, I was almost laughing when they said the one and only entrance would be an intersection with the entrance to our neighborhood. All the commissioners seemed to just throw up their hands and say they could do nothing about an entrance off of Lyman, as the road is a Carver County road. The entrance off of Galpin was referred to as "already being a street intersection". Could you please drive down Galpin and see for yourself how silly that statement is? It's basically a driveway to a house that happens to be across the street from the entrance to our neighborhood. Although, I see that recently someone quick threw up a stop sign on the "driveway" side, no doubt to reinforce the idea that it already was an intersection of streets. Further, why does it make sense to have all the traffic routed down Galpin (especially keeping in mind the fact that a school will be build right around the corner off Lyman)? You are just asking for fatalities of children due to large trucks delivering to the planned development. I can imagine the pedestrian traffic flow of Galpin changing quite a bit when the school is complete. Perhaps kids will be walking and riding their bikes to Lifetime (having to cross Galpin). I did not like the tone of the meeting. All the neighbors seemed to be conceding the fact that the multi-building manufacturing development was going forward. I would like to go a step further and ask you to reconsider the development in general. Just as you were patient (and probably took some heat) for turning away other fitness clubs off of 41 and Hwy 5... it all paid off with something way better than anyone could even have imagined. Why don't we hold off on this development too? Something much better and more appropriate could be done with that land! We can imagine that the city is quite over budget on residential developments (especially after hearing about all of them at the planning meeting), but it would not be best for Chanhassen to gain some quick industrial tax base while jeopardizing the consistency of our city plan. Thanks for your consideration, Peggy Emerson Message Page 1 of 2 .." Generous, Bob -z.S30 a.,'~' ~(i~ &.u-l - I~ From: Gerhardt, Todd Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 20058:42 AM To: Aanenson, Kate; Generous, Bob Subject: FW: Proposed Business Development @ Galpin and Lyman Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged -----Original Message----- From: Tom Furlong [mailto:tfurlong@apexfsLcom] Sent: Tuesday, August 02,20058:50 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Proposed Business Development @ Galpin and Lyman -----Original Message----- From: Curtis Zoerhof [mailto:zoerhofs@msn.com] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 7:36 PM To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us ~ t.A- L '1 Cc: M.. ,n liii1W' r ..nty "24"2- 1 brt t.,- r Subject: Proposed Business Development @ Galpin and Lyman Dear Counsel Representatives, As members of the Trotter's Ridge neighborhood, we request your careful consideration of the negative impact such a development will have on our neighborhood. . Decreased property values for those homeowners on the South side of the neighborhood. . Unsightly views of dumpsters and parking lots. . Increased traffic on an already busy Galpin Blvd. Members of our neighborhood refer to Galpin as "Interstate Galpin" due to the level and. speed of the current traffic. We understand that your decisions must be made to represent the interests of the entire community and that the counsel has made it a priority to increase the number of businesses in Chanhassen, relative to residences. With the right planning, the business development could be completed with minimal impact on the neighborhoods. Therefore, before making your final vote, please: . Request and review a current, site specific traffic study. . Request that County engineers review moving the proposed entrance from Galpin Blvd. to Lyman. The traffic issue is a serious safety concern. Not just for drivers entering and exiting our neighborhood but more importantly for the school buses and elementary school children that use Galpin on a daily basis. Peggie personally witnessed more than one "near miss" of a school bus and motorist on Galpin. Please also consider that Bluff Creek Elementary School is only at the other end of the block and the volume of school buses, parents taking children to and from school, and children walking or on bikes is tremendous. We do not need more cars on Galpin. 8/2/2005 Message Page 2 of 2 We could be more comfortable with the proposed business development if the entrance were relocated to Lyman and the buffer zone between Trotter's Ridge were increased. We recently read that a major, national publication ranked Chanhassen as the 16th best place to live in the United States. Please give this and our requests your most careful, heartfelt consideration before voting on August 8. Careful planning that reflects the concerns of the residents most directly impacted by the project will allow Chanhassen to remain one of the best places to live. Peggie and Curt Zoerhof 952-937-5801 8/2/2005 Message Page 1 of 1 Generous, Bob , From: Tom Furlong [tfurlong@apexfsLcom] Sent: Tuesday, August 02,20058:49 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Proposed Development on Galpin Blvd. Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged FYI -----Original Message----- From: Helen Hollands [mailto:helen@xsrus.com] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 10:36 AM To: council@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Subject: Proposed Development on Galpin Blvd. Dear Council Members, I live in the Stone Creek Neighbourhood so am interested in the proposed development on Galpin Blvd, just opposite Stone Creek Drive. I understand that there are a number of options under consideration for the development, some of which may increase significantly the traffic along Galpin Blvd (especially heavy freight vehicles). In order to properly evaluate the impact of this development on traffic and determine how best to handle it I request that a site specific traffic study be carried out for the roads that it will affect so that decisions can be taken based on current (Le. 2005) data. Yours faithfully, Helen Hollands 2051 Boulder Road. 8/2/2005 FW: Quick comment about proposed PUD at Galpin & Lyman Page 1 of 2 Ill! ll?:. Generous, Bob ;;1357 ~ ~{L. w. From: Tom Furlong [tfurlong@apexfsLcom] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:52 AM To: Gerhardt, Todd Subject: FW: Quick comment about proposed PUD at Galpin & Lyman -----Original Message--n- From: Tom Furlong Sent: Monday, August 01,20058:11 AM To: 'Bill Rodriquez' Subject: RE: Quick comment about proposed PUD at Galpin & Lyman Bill, Thank you for your email. While I can't respond to all of your concerns right now, please know that I will provide an opportunity for public comment during the meeting on this development. I will try to call you to discuss the other items in your email. Thanks again for your thoughts. Tom Furlong, Mayor City of Chanhassen (952) 474-8891 home (612) 209-1152 cell tfurlong@cLchanhassen.mn.us This e-mail message and all attachments are intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential, privileged information or attorney work product. Any review or distribution by any other person is prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please immediately contact the sender and delete all copies. -----Original Message-m- From: Bill ROdriquez [mailto:bill.rodriguez@mchsLcoml Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 9:36 PM To: tfurlong@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; blundquist@ci.chanhassen.mn.us; cpeterson@ci.chanhassen.mn.us Cc: rgustafson@co.carver.mn.us; bweckman@co.carver.mn.us Subject: Quick comment about proposed PUD at Galpin & Lyman Hello, all: I just wanted to drop a few words of concern about the warehouse-style PUD that is proposed for the corner of Lyman & Galpin Blvds. I live in the community across the street, Stone Creek. This PUD is up for a vote at your Aug. 8 City Council meeting. 8/2/2005 FW: Quick comment about proposed PUD at Galpin & Lyman Page 2 of 2 Here are my four concerns: . I understand there's a chance the hearing may NOT be open to public comment. I hope that you will listen to what nearby residents have to say. Only then should you determine whether to approve the proposal as is or ask for modifications. . The proposed exit/entry into the PUD is on Galpin, directly across from the Stone Creek access onto Galphin. This is going to cause quite a 4-way traffic back-up during busy hours. The preference within our neighborhood is for the PUD's exit/entry to be on Lyman. I realize there might be some county regulations that may restrict this, but my understanding is that this has not been fully explored. (Messers Gustafson and Weckman, I believe a couple residents are in the process of contacting to you for clarification on this issue.) You may want to stop by sometime this week during the commuter rush hour to observe firsthand the traffic up and down Galpin. It can get hectic, especially at the Stone Creek/Galpin intersection. Putting yet another artery there is going to make things a lot worse. In addition, there's a lot of school traffic along this road during Sept-June. . No one wants to spend good money on a home, only to have a warehouse go up across the street. Can we at least get the developer to build office-style townhomes along the Galpin corridor, somewhat similar to what's being built on Highway 5 near the Family of Christ Church? . Finally, residents would like to see a 150-foot setback from Galpin for the PUD to further buffer the noise and enhance the esthetics. I'm not against the development per se. But I'm hoping the developer (he sits on the Planning Commission, ironically!) will be more sensitive to the concerns of neighbors whose properties will be affected by his work. Thanks for listening. And don't hesitate to contact me if you'd like to talk about this. My office number is 952-883-5274, home is 401-0546. Thanks again. Bill. Rodriguez@mchsi.com 81212005 Message Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob ~,. lII"~", From: Tom Furlong [tfurlong@apexfsLcom] Tuesday, August 02, 2005 8:51 AM Gerhardt, Todd FW: Concerned Citizens -- Lyman/Galpin Proposed Rezoning and Development -- August 8th City Council Meeting Vote Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- From: Chrysauna Buan [mailto:cbuan@mchsi.com] Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 6:57 PM To: tfurlong@cLchanhassen.mn.us Subject: Concerned Citizens -- Lyman/Galpin Proposed Rezoning and Development -- August 8th City Council Meeting Vote Tom, We are writing to share our concern over the proposed rezoning of the land on the comer of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard from agricultural to industrial. We became very concerned when the Planning Commission approved this proposal with a 3-2 vote on July 19th. Of the five commissioners who voted, · Two were strongly opposed due to the increased traffic it would create on Galpin Boulevard, a street lined with residential neighborhoods. Rightfully so, the estimated increase in daily traffic in and out of this proposed development is 2.600 vehicles. mostly trucks. · Another commissioner had strong concerns about the traffic and the negative impact that the tall buildings would have on the Stone Creek development. The proposed buildings are large and would be very close to the Stone Creek development with few trees in between. · The remaining two commissions both stated that the proposed development did not blend well with the surrounding residential neighborhoods. One even compared the residential neighborhoods and the proposed development as two plates colliding together. Given all these concerns, why was this proposal approved? We ask that when you review this proposal on August 8th please consider the negative impact that this type of development would have on the surrounding residential communities. Given that the land is next to two beautiful neighborhoods and that Carver County is requesting the entrance/exit be placed on Galpin Boulevard we feel that a residential neighborhood would be a more appropriate use of this land. Please vote no to the rezoning proposal and recommend that the land be rezoned from agricultural to residential instead. After you read this email we invite you to drive down Galpin Boulevard beginning at Hwy 5 and Bluff Creek Elementary School. You will travel down a turning road lined with mature trees. On both sides you will see homes that people have made their own with personal touches such as perennial gardens, children's play sets, basketball hoops, putting greens and swimming pools. On the sidewalks on each side, you will encounter people walking their dogs and children on their bikes. As you reach the end of Galpin Boulevard, you will see the Stone Creek development on your left side. According to local 8/212005 Message Page 2 of 2 realtors, this neighborhood is a very popular, high demand development for people who would like to make Chanhassen their home. Directly across from Stone Creek you will see the proposed development site. Future home to concrete buildings, the minimum number of trees required along Galpin Boulevard, and an estimated 2,600 cars and trucks entering and exiting. Is this really what the city of Chanhassen would like? The city that was just rated 16th in the nation for quality of life. I know it is not what the residents along Galpin Boulevard would like. Sincerely, Rick & Chrysauna Buan 2369 Stone Creek LN W Chanhassen MN 55317 PH: 952.474.6427 8/2/2005 Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob From: Kelly & Sara Morlock [ksm_143@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 26,200512:12 PM To: City Council Cc: Generous, Bob Subject: Galpin/Lyman Proposed Development Dear City Council Members: My name is Sara Morlock. My husband, Kelly and our two children, live at 2325 Boulder Road, Chanhassen. The back of our property faces Galpin and is directly impacted by the proposed development on the property at Galpin and Lyman Blvds. I am writing to you to get on record with some thoughts and considerations for you prior to the August 8th City Council meeting. First, the traffic study being used by the County is based on data from 1996 and are general traffic studies, not site specific. We would like to see a current, site specific traffic study to determine realistic traffic impacts to our neighborhoods and Galpin Boulevard. Without current information, we do not see how you can make an informed decision regarding this proposed development! Secondly, as you may be aware, the County "prefers" the development to have one access road directly across the street from the main entrance to our neighborhood. The County states that an entrance off Lyman would be out of County Code due to the fact that Norex Drive (the entrance road to the Chaska Industrial park) would be within 1,000 - 1,300 feet of the proposed development entrance. The fact of the matter is the existing proposed entrance off Galpin is not within County Code. Not to mention the obvious concerns we have with safety for our children and the significant increase in traffic in and out of the proposed development, on Galpin and in our neighborhood. As the proposed entrance (across from the Stone Creek entrance) does not meet County code, we would like to see the entrance to this development off Lyman or perhaps through the adjacent Chaska Industrial Park. Thirdly, as you review the plans, you will see that the majority of mature trees along Galpin Blvd will be destroyed in the process of this proposed development. This leaves the residents along Boulder Road with an unsightly view of two to three story office/light industrial buildings. While we realize they will replace trees and provide landscaping, we would like to see more mature trees preserved along Galpin to provide our neighborhood with a reasonable buffer against the proposed development. Finally, we would like to see the buildings no taller than one story. This will help to buffer our neighborhood and will limit the types of industry that can go into these buildings. In speaking with our neighbors, we are realistic to understand that at some point this property will be developed. Our goal is to work with the developer to make this office park as minimally invasive to our lives/property as possible. I urge to to drive out to see the site. The property has many, many mature oaks and other trees that will be destroyed should this development be approved. Stand on Galpin and imagine this property is YOUR backyard! What would be acceptable to you as a property owner?! I thank you for your time in reading this and am hopeful you will take into consideration the concerns and requests we have made. 7/26/2005 Page 2 of 2 Regards, Sara & Kelly Morlock 2325 Boulder Road 952/474-4572 Home 612/209-1691 Cell 7/26/2005 Page 1 of 1 Generous, Bob From: Thor Smith [tsmith@thebpfg.com] Sent: Thursday, July 21,20051 :24 PM To: Generous, Bob Subject: Proposed Galpin Development Dear Mr. Generous, I wanted give you a few quick comments about the proposed development along Galpin Blvd. I am supportive of the actual development itself (as long as they are willing to change the height of a building or two and preserve more trees than proposed.) However, I feel that the added amount of traffic not only along Galpin, but through the Stone Creek neighborhood poses a rather large safety issue for the multitudes of young children living in Stone Creek and Creekside neighborhoods. I would suggest that the city of Chanhassen propose to the city of Chaska that the developer be allowed to access his development via the Chaska business park. By doing this, it would alleviate both the request to put the access on Lyman (which simply isn't going to happen per Carver County) and gets rid of the need for an unsightly four way intersection attaching an industrial development with an upscale residential neighborhood. I am fully aware of the potential logistical problems with this and I feel that by making efforts to keep the traffic levels on residential streets lower, we are helping to create a safer place for our kids. Unfortunately I was unable to attend the meeting this week so I wasn't able to bring this up. I did watch the majority of the meeting on tv. Thor E. Smith President BluePoint Financial Group, inc. 952-476-1084 ph. 952-476-0855 fax tsmith @thebpfg.com P.s. I need your help spreading the word about my business. If anyone you know is going to buy or refinance their home, please let us know. Anyone you refer to us will always recieve the highest level professional service. Thank you. Visit us 0 the web at: www J:)luepQto1fin~ngjgJgIQ_Y.Q,-Qom 7/2112005 July 19,2005 City of Chanhassen Planning Commission Chanhassen MN Dear Commissioners, My name is Joel Lehrke and I reside at 2329 Boulder Road. I wish to bring to your attention some concerns I have in regards to the Chanhassen West Business Park. I am located on the east side of the PUD and my back yard would face it. I apologize for not being at the meeting in person, but I am away on a business trip. First, I do not believe the PUD, as is proposed, fits a proper transition from single family residential to industrial. The buildings that are proposed for this site are very massive. From the pictures I have seen, these buildings would have a very dominant look to them and would clash with the appearance of the residential homes in the area. Further I do not have a good feeling as to how high these buildings could be. I have heard remarks from Eden Trace at the open house of up to 40 feet. Also, the number of buildings that would be located at this site is quite large. I feel the density is too great. Second, I am worried about the changes to topography. The wetland located in the NE comer of this lot, would be filled and an elevation change of about nine feet would occur. While I have been told this wet land is of low quality and the replacement would be better, I must say that this would be a very massive change to the look of the area. Moreover, I am concerned about the flow of water in this area. While I have been informed by staff that there is a southern flow of water in the NE comer, I have heard comments from Trotters Ridge residents of a northern flow. The residents have commented about water problems and Eden Trace made a comment at the open house that they were also aware of this northern water flow. Third, I am concern about the large mature trees that will be destroyed or damaged in this PUD. While there is a great effort to save a number of trees, the actual benefit to the surrounding residents would be low. By this I mean the area saved would be an isolated island and many of the surrounding residents would not enjoy the views or pleasure of these trees as they do now. I personally am concerned with the grove of mature trees located in the SE comer near the home. While it is true that these trees will be replaced, they will be replaced with much smaller trees. These large trees have provided a natural site block and would change the view drastically for myself and fellow neighbors. These trees are marked for removal when building site 1 is built. I will state that I have no time for residents that do not do their research before they move into an area. I wish to explain to you how I did do my research. I talked with city planners before I moved into the area as to the plans. At that time the area was agricultural and much of the area was going residential and that they had many builders looking at the area. Zoning was being change to reflect this. A potential for a large industrial park was not mentioned by city planners. Builders were looking at that site and doing research as to its development. As a matter of fact I was informed at the time of my build by the Hans Hagen salesmen and site supervisor that they were looking at developing the area. I also spoke with individuals involved with grading of Trotters Ridge and they had heard that they were looking at putting the roads into the area. From this I could only come to a conclusion that the area would eventually be residential and not agricultural or industrial. I do have a proposal for the site. I see town home type office buildings being built on the north and east portion of this lot. They would be similar in style to the ones being built along Hwy 5 next to Family of Christ Church. I would move back or eliminate building 1 to protect the mature trees in the SE comer. Even more, with town home style office buildings, they could be placed in a way to save these trees and create an enjoyable office area. Larger warehouse type buildings would then be placed towards the Wand SW portion of the lot, keeping these types of businesses away from the adjacent residential areas. The town home style would have to be high enough to block site lines of the warehouses. I further believe there should be restriction as to hours of use. That manufacturing that involves chemicals, smells, loud noises and heavy truck traffic, should be banned from this office park. The main access for this industrial area should be from Lyman Boulevard. In closing, the most important thing I can emphasize is the PUD is too drastic of a transition in its present form. An example of a good transition is the industrial area in Eden Prairie, south of Anderson Lake Pkwy and west of hwy 212. this industrial park is surrounded by strip malls and apartment buildings on the north, small business buildings and town home style office buildings on the east side, a school on the south end, and high density town homes on the west. Also please preserve the appearance of the lot in regards to mature trees and topography, especially in the SE comer I ask you NOT to approve the PUD in its present form. Sincerely, Joel Lehrke 2329 Boulder Road Chanhassen MN 55317 Home 952470 5953 Cell 6123867184 Email Joel@Lehrke.name .. July 15, 2005 Dear Planning Commissioner Sacchet : Last Thursday evening, the neighbors of Trotters Ridge and surrounding area met to discuss our concerns and requests to be brought before the Planning Commission about the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. We reviewed the Staff Report and discussed each of the Conditions of Approval at length. As a result, we have a number of revised and new conditions we ask you to seriously consider including in your recommendations about this proposed development on July 19. These suggestions are attached in condition format which we hope you will find helpful. We also had several questions for Staff about the conditions. Because of the unique location of Trotters Ridge within a large expanse of industrial development, we are seeking increased buffering and restrictions to maintain the quality of life in our neighborhood. We look forward to the upcoming Planning Commission meeting. I will be speaking on behalf of the neighbors who met on Thursday. If you have any questions or suggestions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ Lu Ann Sidney 2431 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 474-3835 LASidnev@msn.com Revised July 19, 2005 Chanhassen West Business Park Trotters Ridge suggested revised and new conditions to Staff Report (Planning Case 05-23) Under Recommendations. pe. 19. revise the conditions listed in B to include: Condition # 1. Increase Blue Spruce, Ash, Maples, and Lindens on east and north side (including Outlot B) of the development to exceed buffer yard requirements by 100%. Plantings along Outlot B to be outside the wetland buffer zone. 3. Increase buffer zone around trees where tree protection fencing will be placed to a minimum of 1 0 feet beyond the drip line. 5. Trees should be planted beyond the wetland buffer zones of 16.5 to 20 feet. 23. Retaining wall must be moved outside the 100 foot buffer zone on the Northeast side of Building 6. 26. A secondary safety access road must be provided. Safety access seems insufficient. 35.d Move the primary access to Lyman Blvd. (The neighborhood is concerned that the increased traffic flow on Galpin Blvd will endanger children.) 36.h Construction rock entrance must be off Lyman Blvd. All construction traffic shall stay off of Galpin Blvd. 51. See 35.d issues. The followine were Questions we had durine the meetine: 24. What does "Provide a water service for Lot 6" mean? 35.h Why realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway? What is the impact on trees? 43. What does "any offsite grading" mean and who would this impact? Per Staff. the Report was revised 7/14/05 to include Condition 53: 53. The developer shall either dedicate Outlot C to the City for open space purposes or dedicate a conservation easement over Outlot C. Other Conditions for the Plannine: Commission to recommend: 54. Provide 100% screening from North boundary properties. The buffer zone shall be increased to at least 200 feet. 55. The applicant shall reduce the square footage of Building 6 to a maximum of 50,000 sq. ft. and provide appropriate articulation, especially on the North property boundary. The heights of Buildings 5 and 6 will not exceed 1 story plus parapet for screening of rooftop equipment. 56. The applicant shall add a minimum 15 foot berm with landscaping to provide 100% screening along Outlot B and lots 1-4 Trotters Ridge residences. Landscaping shall include a mixture of deciduous and coniferous trees. The berm along lots 1-4 will have grass and be mowed and maintained. 57. The silt fence on the north boundary will be located a minimum of 10 feet beyond the drip line of the large oak on Trotters Ridge lot 5. Tree protection fencing will also be added. End berm at lot 4. 58. Outlot C must be designated as a Permanent Conservation Easement. (Substitute for Condition 53) 59. Keep retaining walls 10 feet outside the drip line of existing trees in the Northeast Comer. 60. In order to save mature trees continue 100 foot buffer on the east side along Galpin Blvd. Please consider amendinl! the Development Desil!n Standards on Pl!. 4 in the Staff Report as follows: Applicant shall limit the Hours of Operation for any business to 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. (b. Permitted Uses) Business types shall not include conference/convention centers or hotels/motels or research labs. (b. Permitted Uses) The applicant shall not permit outdoor storage of any kind. (b. Prohibited Ancillary Uses) Businesses shall not have outdoor paging systems. (b. Prohibited Ancillary Uses) The applicant shall provide for additional soundproofing materials in Buildings 5 and 6. (e. Building Materials and Design) The light level for site lighting shall be zero foot-candles at the North property line. (h.4. Lighting) No lighted signs, either externally or internally lighted, will be permitted. (g. Signage) <,-~~1 July 15, 2005 Dear City of Chanhassen Planning Commissioner: You've been invited by our neighbors, Barry LaBounty and LuAnn Sidney, to visit properties on Bridle Creek Trail that abut the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. This item is scheduled to be before the Planning Commission on July 19,2005. While we do not oppose the development of the land behind our homes, my husband and I have some specific concerns about the plans that we would like to put before the commission for your consideration. As you make your recommendations on this proposed development, we ask that you support our request for the following to ensure that the transition from commercial to residential be managed in such a manner that our neighborhood is not adversely impacted. . The stretch of road between Hwy 5 and Lyman Blvd. is primarily residential. In developing the property on the comer of Galpin and Lyman, we would like to see maximum effort made to ensure that the character of this area remains residential and family oriented in nature. The types of businesses and the hours that will be allowed to operate will definitely impact this, as will the over all "look" ofthe business park (building designs). Businesses should not be allowed to operate on a 24 hour basis, outside security lights should not be allowed on the north side along the residential property line and all fans, AC units or other mechanical units must be screened and soundproofed to ensure zero impact on us and our neighbors. . Our home will directly abut the property line of the largest lot on the proposed development; potentially allowing the largest building of this development to be built in our back yard. We foresee that this may very likely have a negative impact our property value. To minimize this impact, the height of the buildings that directly abut the residential property lines must not exceed 1 story (18-20 feet), a berm of 15-20 feet high should be created and planted with dense coniferous and deciduous forestry that provides a year-round barrier, and the set-back be increased to 200 feet. . Current plans show access to the development coming from Cty Rd. 19 (Galpin Blvd). The certain increase in traffic on Galpin is a concern for two reasons: 1. the increased noise level and 2. if school district budget cuts ever require the elementary aged children in our neighborhood (and there are many!) to walk to school, the increased car and delivery truck traffic would pose a threat to their safety as they crossed Galpin to get to Bluff Creek Elementary. It is imperative that the access to this business park be from Lyman Blvd. vs. Galpin. Upon inspection, I believe you would agree that this would also seem a logical condition as well. . Appropriate drainage of water from the wetland area located directly behind our home will also be critical. Steps must be taken to ensure that runoff from the proposed berm not pool in our backyard. We look forward to your support in protecting our residential property values and livability through a well-balanced, yet considerate, relationship of land use, roadways and natural features as plans for this proposed development are considered. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Respectfully, Christine and Mark Fischer 2407 Bridle Creek Trail Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 470-0838 cmmafischer@juno.com City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob From: Morris, Alyson Sent: Friday, July 15, 20058:14 AM To: Generous, Bob Subject: FW: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 FYI -----Original Message----- From: Bill Weckman [mailto:bweckman@co.carver.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 20054:24 PM To: Morris, Alyson Subject: RE: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Alyson, CSAH 19 (Galpin Blvd) was reconstructed in 1996 as a 52 foot face to face curb and gutter urban section. That particular section was chosen because it could immediately accommodate a two-lane roadway with 12 foot right turn lanes or by-pass lanes at the intersections and could be re-striped in the future as a four lane roadway or a "super three" lane roadway with a dedicated left turn lane and thru-rights on each side. At that time traffic studies indicated that future traffic on Galpin Blvd was very dependent on if new TH 212 were built or not built. If monitoring of the traffic indicates the present two-lane facility is "breaking down" due to increased traffic, consideration will be given to moving forward to one of the two alternative lane configuration alignments. It would be the County's preference to have a consistent striping ''theme'' through the entire corridor, not a mixture of striping configurations at various intersections. As some additional information: The 1996 ADT on CSAH 19 was 3250 vpd on the north end. The 2003 ADT was 4,450 on the north end and 3,100 on the south end of CSAH 19. The 1996 ADT on CSAH 18 was 7,800 vpd in the Galpin Blvd area of CSAH 18. The 2003 ADT was 8,300 vpd. The transportation plan incorporated into the current County comprehensive plan includes the following traffic projections: 2010 - Galpin 5,500 with new TH 212 in place by 2010. 2010 - Galpin 9,200 with new TH 212 in place after 2010. 2010 - Lyman (CSAH 18) 10,500 with new TH 212 in place by 2010. 2010 - Lyman (CSAH 18) 9,000 with new TH 212 in place after 2010. 2020 - Galpin 6,000 with new TH 212 in place by 2010. 2020 - Galpin 10,000 with new TH 212 in place after 2010. 2020 - Lyman (CSAH 18) 11,500 with new TH 212 in place by 2010. 2020 - Lyman (CSAH 18) 14,000 with new TH 212 in place after 2010. I know it will not be much consolation to the people along Galpin, but this study indicates that as a result of new TH 212 being constructed now and completed by 2010 (project should be totally finished by the end of 2008) traffic on Galpin will not increase as fast or as much as it would have if TH 212 was not being built. This information also gives you a better understanding on why access onto Lyman (CSAH 18) for this development is not preferred by the County. Please be aware that these traffic numbers are from an overall area traffic study and are not site specific. Hope this information will help you. Bill Weckman, P.E. Carver County Public Works 952.466.5207 7/15/2005 City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Page 2 of 2 952.466.5223 (fax) Email -bweckman@co.carver.mn.us "The unauthorized disclosure or interception of e-mail is a federal crime. See 18 U.S.C. SEC. 2517(4). This e-mail is intended only for the use of those whom it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under the law. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not distribute or copy it. Return it immediately to the sender with attachments, if any, and notify the sender by telephone." -----Original Message----- From: Morris, Alyson [mailto:amorris@ci.chanhassen.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 3:04 PM To: Bill Weckman Subject: RE: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Bill, We anticipate that some residents will show up for the public hearing with questions regarding the traffic that will be generated from this project. Using the ITE 1997 manual, Bob figures that the site will result in the following traffic: Average weekday 2,436 trip ends AM peak 311 trip ends PM peak 322 trip ends Ave. Saturday 872 trip ends Ave. Sunday 256 trip ends Based on these numbers, would the County require a left tum lane into the site from northbound Galpin? Looking at the striping plan for SAP 10-619-04, would it be possible to rest ripe northbound Galpin to accommodate an exclusive left turn lane and a through-right turn lane? Thanks for your help, Alyson 7/15/2005 Page 1 of 1 Generous, Bob From: Kelly & Sara Morlock [ksm_143@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 2:45 PM To: mundestad@centercompanies.com; bmerriman@centercompanies.com; Generous, Bob Subject: Galpin/Lyman Proposed Development Gentlemen: I am writing on behalf of concerned neighbors in the Stone Creek neighborhood. Attached you will find a document outlining concerns and expectations regarding your proposed development. While we would prefer the land to remain as it, we are also realistic that eventually something will be developed on this property. If you are able to address these concerns and meet the outlined expectations, it is our belief that we can come to mutual agreement on moving forward with the proposal. My reason for providing this information to you prior to the meeting this afternoon is to make you aware of the issues that will be raised and provide you some time to be prepared to address them. It is very important to our neighborhoods off Galpin Boulevard that we maintain and reflect the peaceful nature of our residential community. For these reasons, it is imperative that any development on this property is reflective of our current neighborhoods. Sara Morlock and Stone Creek neighbors 7/14/2005 Issues regarding Proposed Development: Must promote Good Design (Good Design will provide quality solutions for issues of Land Use, Aesthetics, Safety and Function that will benefit both the affected neighborhoods and the new development) . Land Use - Preservation of Existing Amenities (Mature Trees, Woodlands, Wetlands, existing terrain and open space) . Revisit location of drives, buildings, parking areas and service to Preserve wooded areas, and mature trees - most importantly along entire Eastern edge and Northern edges to provide and maintain existing buffer (both visually and physically) to the residential neighborhoods that will face it. This will in turn create a greater amenity for the new development. . Minimize service zones, drive lanes, parking and other paved areas to maximize open space, and preserve tree and wetland areas. . Keep buildings and paved areas out and away from wetland setback areas, for preservation of these amenities (specifically Buildings 4 and 5). . Reduce the number of proposed buildings. . Eliminate light industrial usage. Aesthetics - . Quality Materials - such as brick, stucco, architectural precast, and metal. (Lesser materials such as rockface block, painted concrete block, low-grade siding is inadequate and inappropriate where visible to patrons and general public). . Quality Landscaping - above minimum requirements to create acceptable buffer zones and enhance existing landscaping/terrain, through use of vegetation, plantings, berms, rock features and natural looking retaining walls.) . Quality Signage . Parking - break up with landscaped areas to avoid "sea of parking." . Environmental concerns of light industrial businesses. Safety - . Concern over location and number of drives into development site, depending on specific type of use. Currently only one ingress/egress from site. Service vehicles entering to and from Galpin pose greater safety concerns for children's safety along Galpin (especially if light industriaVwarehouse use. Relocate by placing the entrance/exit off Lyman to minimize impact. . Similar concern over noise of service vehicles with the single entrance point. . Traffic Study Analysis - to see what the impact might be for Galpin, this proposed intersection and access to main entrance of Stone Creek neighborhood. Function - . Concealing of Service areas from public view . Efficient use and layout of land to minimize impact on existing features and minimize grading requirements. Issues regarding City Planning and zoning: Lack of connectivity between neighborhoods through hodge-podge development. Review planning and zoning foresight of community with actual built environment to justify appropriate type of development. Determine if Galpin is designed for impact of proposed road use. City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Page 1 of 2 Generous, Bob From: Morris, Alyson Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:23 AM To: 'Bill Weckman' Cc: Oehme, Paul; Generous, Bob; Sweidan, Mahmoud; Aanenson, Kate Subject: RE: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Bill, Your quick response is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Alyson -----Original Message----- From: Bill Weckman [mailto:bweckman@co.carver.mn.us] Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:23 AM To: Morris, Alyson Cc: Roger Gustafson Subject: City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Allison- This email is a follow-up to my June 28, 2005 memo to Robert Generous and in response to our July 12, 2005 telephone conversation regarding the request for rezoning for the Chanhassen West Business Park located in the northwest quadrant of the CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd) and CSAH 19 (Galpin Blvd) intersection. The plan received indicated access for this development was to be onto Galpin Blvd across from the Stone Creek Drive access onto Galpin Blvd creating a cross intersection. This would be the County's preference for access to this parcel. CSAH 18 and CSAH 19 are both minor arterial roadways on the Carver County roadway system. CSAH 18 has the larger projected traffic of the two roadways because it is an east-west arterial corridor that stretches from CSAH 11 (Victoria Drive) in Victoria to the west to TH 101 in Chanhassen in the east. The portion of CSAH 18 from CSAH 13 (Bavaria Road) in Victoria to west of TH 41 is presently 82nd Street and will be reconstructed as part of a future roadway project when development creates the need for the improvement of that corridor. Carver County's objectives include limiting the number of accesses to CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd.) and require that accesses that are permitted onto CSAH 18 be public street accesses in order to maintain traffic mobility on the corridor. Traffic projections for these corridors indicate that there may be an eventual need for the installation of a traffic signal at the CSAH 18/CSAH 19 intersection. That need will be evaluated as development and resulting traffic increases continue to occur in this area. For these reasons, Carver County would prefer that access from the Chanhassen West Park Business development to CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd.) would not be a consideration as part of this proposal. If you have questions regarding this response, feel free to give me a call. 7/15/2005 City of Chanhassen Planning Case 05-23 Page 2 of 2 Could you confirm receipt of this email? Thanks. Bill Weckman, P.E. Carver County Public Works 952.466.5207 952.466.5223 (fax) Email -bweckman@co.carver.mn.us "The unauthorized disclosure or interception of e-mail is a federal crime. See 18U.S.C. SEC. 2517(4). This e.mail is intended only for the use of those whom it is addressed and may contain information which is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under the law. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not distribute or copy it. Retum it immediately to the sender with attachments, if any, and notify the sender by telephone." 7/1512005 Carver County Water Management - Deparbnent of Planning &. Zoning G:Nemment CentEr - Mninislrcllion BLildng 600 East 4111 Street Olaska, Minnesota 55318 Phone: (952)361-1820 Fax: (952)361-1828 www.co.carver.mn.uslwater Memo To: Robert Generous, City of Chanhassen From: Paul Moline, Carver County Water Management Date: 7/8/2005 Re: Chanhassen West Business park (County Water Project 20050038) cc. Lori Haak, City of Chanhassen Ben Merriman, Center Companies Aaron Mlynek, Carver SWCD Enclosures: none Carver County Water Management is offering comments on the Chanhassen West Business Park in the City of Chanhassen. The County is the Watershed authority for this portion of Chanhassen and will need to receive an application for Water Management Rule approval prior to construction. These Rules cover stormwater and erosion & sediment control issues on the site. The County met with the City and the applicant on June 16. Issues: . Prior to approval, the County will need to receive an application, fee and submittal of the following information (detailed requirements can be found at www.co.carver.mn.us/DMsions/LandWaterServices/PZlApplications.html): o Site Plan o Water Features. o Erosion and Sediment Control Plan o Stormwater management plan including hydrologic calculations, existing and proposed drainage, off-site flows, and method for meeting the County's infiltration requirement. . Major issues discussed the June 16 meeting were o Infiltration requirement - applicant discussed ways of incorporating the requirement into swales, parking medians, etc. These details do not show up on plans sent for comment by the City. o Off site flows - ensuring that impact from offsite flows does not create nuisance downstream conditions, particularly to the south and east. Again, the County will need to receive this information and approve the stormwater and erosion & sediment control plans before development begins on the site. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Paul Moline 952.361.1825 pmoline@co.carver.mn.us ~ z -< u ~ ~ ~ ~ -< -< ~ -< ~ ~ ~ ~ 00. PC DATE: July 19,2005 w CC DATE: Aug. 8, 2005 CITY OF CHANHASSEN REVIEW DEADLINE: August 16, 2005 CASE #: 05-23 BY: RG, LH, ML, AM, JS, ST STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request for Rezoning of property from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat Approval, and Wetland Alteration Permit- Chanhassen West Business Park. LOCATION: The northwest corner of the intersection of Lyman Boulevard and Galpin Boulevard APPLICANT: Eden Trace Corporation 8156 Mallory Court Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 361-0722 V olk Minger Partnership P. O. Box 236 Chanhassen, MN 55317 (952) 470-1753 PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural Estate District, A2 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Office/Industrial ACREAGE: 40.15 acres DENSITY: EA.R 0.18 - 0.33 SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant in proposing an Office-Industrial Planned Unit development consisting of eight lots and three outlots with a wetland alteration permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving rezonings, PUD's, and amendments to PUD's because the City is acting in its legislative or policy making capacity. A rezoning or PUD, and amendment thereto, must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City's discretion in approving or denying a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. This is a quasi judicial decision. Location Map Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 8470 Galpin Boulevard City of Chanhassen c ClS CI) ~ 0 o 0 ClS ClS .c: .c: o i - .c: o 0 >- - B ~ - (3 3 Subject Site Lyman Blvd (C.R. 18) SCANNED Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 2 of2 PROPOSAL/S~RY The applicant is proposing an office-industrial Planned Unit Development. The development consists of eight lots, three outlots and public right-of-way. The developer proposes creation of a common open space to preserve wooded areas within the development. Access is proposed at the existing driveway entrance off Galpin Boulevard. Ponding for the development is proposed in the southwest comer of the project. Water and sewer service are available to the site. The purpose of this development is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible development while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. The standards are partially based on the uses within the Industrial Office Park District (lOP), but provide additional requirements not included in the lOP district. The PUD design standards will be incorporated in an ordinance which will regulate the development of the site. The property to the north is a residential single-family subdivision, Trotters Ridge, which is zoned Planned Unit Development-Residential. The property to the east, across Galpin Boulevard, is a residential single-family subdivision, Stone Creek, which is zoned Single-Family Residential. The property to the south, across Lyman Boulevard, contains the Holasek nursery, which is currently zoned Agricultural Estate District and is guided for Office/Industrial use. Both Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard are classified as minor arterial roadways in the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan. Minor arterial roadways are intended and designed to carry higher traffic volumes. As the city continues to grow, Galpin Boulevard will provide mobility for north-south traffic flow to destinations within the city as well as the regional transportation system. The property has abandoned farming uses on the northern and eastern portions of the site; abandoned mining and excavating operation on the western and southwest portions of the property; and landscaping and contracting operations are located on the central portion of the property. A house is located in the southeast comer of the property. Three large wetland areas are located in the east central, northwest, and southwest of the property. The site is significantly wooded in the north central area. The property has a high point of approximately 980 feet in the north central area and a low point of 940 feet in the southwest comer of the property. The property is bounded by Galpin and Lyman Boulevards. Staff is recommending that the preliminary Planned Unit Development, preliminary plat and wetland alteration permit be approved. BACKGROUND On August 12,1996, City Council denied a Land Use Map Amendment #96-1b from Office/Industrial to Residential Medium Density for the northerly 22.6 acres, conceptual and preliminary approval of PUD #96-2, preliminary plat approval for 23 lots and associated right- of-way, Site Plan Review #96-5 approval for 140 townhouse units, and Wetland Alteration Permit #95-2b. In the summer of 1995, Scherber Partnership Properties requested a land use map amendment from Office/Industrial to Residential - Low Density, a rezoning to Single Family Residential, Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 3 of3 RSF, and preliminary plat approval to permit 59 single-family lots. City staff recommended denial of the land use map amendment and consequently the rezoning and subdivision. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the development, and the City Council tabled the item, with the consent of the applicant, to permit staff and the applicant to work out a compromise for the development of the parcel. However, in February, 1996, the applicant formally withdrew the development application. On February 13, 1987, City Council approved CUP #87-1 for a landscape contractor's yard and a wholesale nursery and a variance to permit a contractor's yard within one mile of an existing contractor's yard (on the same property). On November 19, 1984, the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), #84-13, to permit a contractor's yard for R & W Sanitation on the southeasterly 32 acres of the site. Such approval included the storage and repair of garbage trucks. The property was zoned R-IA, Agricultural Residence District. On November 19, 1984, the City Council also approved CUP #84-14 for a contractor's yard to include the storage and repair of construction equipment. In April, 1982, the property owner, Yolk, applied for a building permit to reconstruct a pole barn which had collapsed due to heavy snow. The building permit was denied because the storage and repair of excavating equipment in the pole barn was not a permitted use in the R-IA district at that time. Mr. V olk petitioned the Council on May 17, 1982 to issue the building permit. The City Council approved the issuance of the building permit subject to Mr. Yolk applying for a rezoning request from R-IA to 1-1. Mr. Yolk made an application for the rezoning and a comprehensive land use plan amendment. On June 25, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. The City Council considered the request on October 4, 1982. The Council tabled the item until staff completed a survey of all contractors' yards as well as other non-conforming uses in the city. The City Council amended the Zoning Ordinance to allow contractor's yards as CUPs in the R-IA zone on August 20, 1984. On November 12, 1980, a rezoning request from R-IA to I-Ion the parcel was considered by the Planning Commission. At that meeting, the request was revised to an ordinance amendment to permit contractors' businesses and storage yards as conditional uses in the R-IA district. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the request. The City Council subsequently denied the request on January 5, 1981. REZONING Justification for Rezoning to PUD The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 45 acres from A2, Agricultural Estate District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development for an Office/Industrial Park. The project consists of eight lots. This property was one of four areas designated for Office/Industrial use as part of the 1991 comprehensive plan update. The review criteria are taken from the intent section ofthe PUD Ordinance. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 4 of 4 Section 20-501. Intent Planned unit developments offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through the relaxation of most normal zoning district standards. The use of the PUD in this instance is to permit impervious surface clustering within the development in order to preserve a significant area of trees. The use of the PUD zoning also allows for an internal transfer of site coverage. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City has the expectation that the development plan will result in a significantly higher quality and more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the other more standard zoning districts. The proposed development provides a compatible development with the surrounding development subject to the recommended modifications to the plan. The proposed and rezoning assist in the furtherance of the following land use goals of the City of Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan: Recognizing that some uses pay their own way in terms of the property taxes generated and some uses do not, Chanhassen will strive for a mixture of development which will assure it financial future. Development will be encouraged within the MUSA line. Planned industrial development will be encouraged as a means of encouraging tax base growth and creating new employment opportunities. Development should be phased in accordance with the ability of the city to provide services. Development shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. DEVELOPMENT DESIGN STANDARDS Staff is proposing the following development standards govern the development of the property. Development Standards a. Intent The purpose of this zone is to create a PUD light industrial/office park. The use of the PUD zone is to allow for more flexible design standards while creating a higher quality and more sensitive proposal. All utilities are required to be placed underground. Each lot proposed for development shall proceed through site plan review based on the development standards outlined below as well as the Design Standards for Commercial, Industrial and Office-Institutional Developments contained in Chapter 20, Article xxm, Division 7, of the Chanhassen City Code. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. Ancillary uses may be permitted as listed below once a primary use has occupied the site. Shared parking may be used within the development. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 5 of5 b. Permitted Uses The permitted uses in this zone shall be limited to light industrial, warehousing, and office as defined below. The uses shall be limited to those as defined herein. If there is a question as to whether or not a use meets the definition, the Community Development Director shall make that interpretation. Light Industrial - The manufacturing, compounding, processing, assembling, packaging, or testing of goods or equipment or research activities entirely within an enclosed structure. There shall be negligible impact upon the surrounding environment by noise, vibration, smoke, dust or pollutants. Conferences/Convention Center - establishments designed to accommodate people in assembly, providing conference and meeting services to individuals, groups, and organizations. Contractor yard - means any area or use of land where vehicles, equipment, and/or construction materials and supplies commonly used by building, excavation, roadway construction, landscaping and similar contractors are stored or serviced. A contractor's yard includes both areas of outdoor storage and areas confined within a completely enclosed buildings used in conjunction with a contractor's business. Must comply with the following standards: (1) Equipment and supply storage must be screened or enclosed. Screening shall comply with Buffer Yard D and F4 Fencing as specified in Chapter 20 of the Chanhassen City Code. (2) Vehicles/Equipment shall be stored within an enclosed or screened area. (3) No unlicensed or inoperable vehicle/equipment shall be stored on premises. (4) All chemicals shall be stored in proper storage facilities, specified by OSHA regulations. (5) The contractor shall be licensed, bonded and insured. Day Care - establishments providing for the care and supervision of infants and children on a daily basis. The following applies to Day care centers: (1) The site shall have loading and drop off points designed to avoid interfering with traffic and pedestrian movements. (2) Outdoor play areas shall be located and designed in a manner which mitigates visual and noise impacts on adjoining residential areas. (3) Each center shall obtain all applicable state, county, and city licenses. Health Services- establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical and other health services to persons. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 6016 ~TI,gt81.~U.8tel 8staelisHm@Hts 8Hgag@8 iR fl:imisHiRg IssgiRg, €If l€lsgiHg aH8 m8als, t€l tH8 g8R8ral fll:i8li@. Ml:ist @€Imfll:,' 1::itH tHe felhn':iHg staR8af8s: (1) TH8 sit8 sHall Han~ a 8€1':8f88 @Htf8R@@ aR8 a s@pafM@8 8fsfl €Iff af8a, 1::Hi8H may H8t 81881( tH8 8R':8 isl8. (2) PafhiRg: shall 88 188at88 iH the iHt8Rsr.'88hiH8 8l:iilsiHg. Office - Professional and business office. RecreationlHealth Club - establishments engaged in operating reducing and other health clubs, spas, and similar facilities featuring exercise and other physical fitness conditioning. Research Laboratory - establishments engaged in scientific research or study. Must comply with the following standards: (1) All chemicals and pollutants and waste must be stored, used and disposed of according to OSHA and Hazmat regulations and standards. (2) The building must be secure from persons other than laboratory personnel. (3) No outdoor experiments that cause hazards or excessive noise or odors shall be permitted on site. Utility services Warehousing - Means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property. Ancillary Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a primary use) Antennas Screened outdoor storage - Outside storage is permitted, if approved by the City Council as part of the site plan review, subject to being completely screened with 100 percent opaque fence and/or landscape screening. Showroom - showroom type display area for products stored or manufactured on-site provided that no more than 20 percent of the floor space is used for such display and sales. Telecommunication Towers by conditional use permit only. Prohibited uses . Auto related including sales and repair . Churches . Garden Center Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 7017 . Home furnishings and equipment stores . Home Improvement/Building Supply . Lumber Yard . Retail c. Setbacks The development is regulated by the PUD Standards. There are no minimum requirements for setbacks on interior lot lines in the PUD zone, except as specified below. The following setbacks shall apply: In the PUD standards, there is the requirement for landscape buffering in addition to building and parking setbacks. The following building and parking setbacks shall apply: Buffer yard, Setback building/parking (ft.) Galpin Blvd. C, 50, 50 Lyman Blvd. C, 50, 50 Street A NA, 30, 10 Interior Lot Lines B,O,O West Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to C, 30, 20 industrial) North Perimeter Lot Line (adjacent to D, 100, 100 residential): Buffer yard & setback No fences shall be permitted between the required landscape buffer and arterial and collector roads. The PUD standard for hard surface coverage is 70 percent for office and industrial uses. Any one sitellot can exceed the 70 percent requirement, but in no case may the entire finished development exceed 70 percent hard surface coverage. d. Development Standards Tabulation Box 1. Minimum Lot Dimensions a. Lot Area = one acre b. Frontage = 150 feet; Minimum frontage on cul-de-sac = 60 feet c. Depth = 200 feet 2. Building Area Building Square Footage Breakdown: Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 8 0/8 I Use I Percent Total I Square Feet I Office 30% 105,000 Light Industrial !Warehouse 70% 245,000 Total (Maximum) 350,000 The actual use percentages and square footage totals may vary provided that the total building square footages are not exceeded. 3. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot. 4. Building height shall be limited to 3 stories or 40 feet. e. Building Materials and Design 1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural standards and site design. 2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry or higher quality material shall be used. Color shall be introduced through colored block or panels and not painted cinder block. 3. Brick may be used and must be approved to assure uniformity. 4. Block shall have a weathered face or be polished, fluted, or broken face. 5. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt-up or pre-cast, and shall be finished in stone, textured, coated, or painted. 6. Metal siding will not be approved except as support material to one of the above materials or curtain wall on office components or, as trim or as HV AC screen. 7. All accessory structures shall be designed to be compatible with the primary structure. 8. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from adjacent public right-of-ways and the project perimeter by walls of compatible appearing material or camouflaged to blend into the building or background. Wood screen fences are prohibited. All exterior process machinery, tanks, etc., are to be fully screened by compatible materials or landscaping. 9. The use of large unadorned, concrete panels and concrete block, or a solid wall unrelieved by architectural detailing, such as change in materials, change in color, fenestrations, or other significant visual relief provided in a manner or at intervals in keeping with the size, mass, and scale of the wall and its views from public ways shall be prohibited. Acceptable materials will incorporate textured surfaces, exposed aggregate and/or other patterning. All walls shall be given added architectural interest through building design or appropriate landscaping. The buildings shall have varied and interesting detailing. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 9 0/9 10. Space for trash and recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures or within an enclosure for each lot developed in the Business Park. 11 Each building shall contain one or more pitched roof elements depending on scale and type of building, or other architectural treatments such as towers, arches, vaults, entryway projections, canopies and detailing to add additional interest and articulation to structures. 12. There shall be no underdeveloped sides of buildings visible from public right-of-ways. All elevations visible from the street shall receive nearly equal treatment and visual qualities. f. Site Landscaping and Screening 1. Landscaping along Lyman and Galpin Boulevards shall comply with buffer yard standard C. Landscaping along the northern project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard D. Landscaping along the westerly project perimeter shall comply with buffer yard B. All buffer yard plantings shall be installed as part of the subdivision. Each lot must present a landscape plan for approval with the site plan review process. 2. Storage of material outdoors is prohibited unless it has been approved under site plan review. All approved outdoor storage must be screened with fences, walls and/or landscaping. 3. When parking lots are less than three feet above the adjacent roadway, an undulating or angular berm or elevation change of three feet or more in height shall be installed. All required boulevard landscaping shall be sodded. 4. Loading areas shall be screened 100 percent year round from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required where deemed appropriate. g. Signage 1. The Chanhassen West Business Park POO shall be permitted one project identification sign at the entrance on Galpin Boulevard. The sign shall not exceed eight feet in height. A maximum of 80 square feet of sign area shall be permitted. The project identification sign shall not be counted against the permitted signage on an individual parcel. 2. All freestanding parcel signs shall be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. 3. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign per street frontage. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development. A common theme will be introduced at the development's entrance monument and will be used throughout. The sign treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect the quality of the development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the development. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 10 of 10 5. Wall sign shall be permitted per city ordinance for industrial office park site. 6. All signs shall require a separate sign permit. h. Lighting 1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the development. 2. A decorative, shoe box fixture (high pressure sodium vapor lamps) with a square ornamental pole shall be used throughout the development area for area lighting. 3 Lighting equipment similar to what is mounted in the public street right-of-ways shall be used in the private areas. 4. All light fixtures shall be shielded. Light level for site lighting shall be no more than 1/2 candle at the property line. This does not apply to street lighting. i. Alternative Access 1. Each site shall accommodate transit service within the individual development, whenever possible. 2. Pedestrian access shall be provided from each site to the public sidewalk and trail system. 3. The developer and site users shall promote and encourage Traffic Demand Management Strategies. 4. Each site shall provide areas for bicycle parking and storage. 5. Preferential parking shall be provided for car and van pool vehicles within each site. SUBDIVISION REVIEW The applicant is proposing an eight-lot office-industrial development. LANDSCAPINGffREE PRESERVATION Minimum requirements for landscaping include 9,082 sq. ft. of landscaped area around the parking lot, 36 trees for the parking lot, and bufferyard plantings along all property lines. The applicant's proposed as compared to the requirements for landscape area and parking lot trees is shown in the following table. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 11 of 11 bufferyard D - 25' width x 72 understory trees 120 understory 1200' length 108 shrubs 180 shrubs 75% oftotals shown South property line 30 canopy trees 21 canopy trees bufferyard C - 20' x 1000' 60 understory trees 40 understory trees 90 shrubs 60 shrubs East property line 37 canopy trees 22 canopy trees + 16 existing bufferyard C - 20' x 1240' trees 74 understory trees 57 understory trees 111 shrubs 42 shrubs West property line 11 canopy trees 17 canopy trees bufferyard B - 15' x 720' 17 understory trees 35 understory trees 75% of totals shown 27 shrubs 53 shrubs The applicant does not meet minimum requirements for the buffer yards along the south and east property lines. Staff recommends that bufferyard plantings be increased in these areas to meet minimum requirements. The applicant has saved a large portion of the existing, mature oaks on site. This preservation will add a unique feel to the site and proved the residential neighborhood to the north an added buffer for the development. The applicant did an excellent job fitting the design to the site. GRADING. DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL The existing site is about 40.15 acres in size with scattered wetlands. In addition, there are three existing buildings on the property which will have to be razed prior to any grading operations. The current plans show buildings with proposed floor elevations from 961-966. The applicant is now proposing to grade about 83% of the site for the new building pads, storm pond and a proposed street ending with a cul-de-sac. The current plans propose eight lots located along the proposed street and cul-de-sac. There are a few areas of concern with the grading plan. Staff would like to see the applicant do a better job of matching in with the existing topography of the site and maintain a side slope of 3: 1 maximum. The existing site drains toward the existing three wetlands on the northwesterly and southwesterly comers and east side of the parcel. At these elevations, stormwater from the buildings and parking lots will drain toward the proposed catch basins and be conveyed via storm sewer system to the proposed storm pond on the southwesterly comer of the parcel. The pond will treat the water before discharging it to the adjacent wetland. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3:1 slopes and a 10:1 bench at the NWL. The applicant is required to meet the existing site runoff rates for the lO-year and 100-year, 24-hour storm events. Storm sewer sizing calculations must be submitted at the time of final plat application. The storm sewer must be sized for a lO-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat over the public storm drainage system including ponds, drainage swales, and wetlands up to the 100-year flood level. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 12 of 12 The applicant must be aware that a retaining wall structure is not allowed within the public street right-of-way. Also, any retaining wall exceeding four feet in height must be designed by a registered structural engineer, with approved safety fence and a building permit must be obtained. Erosion control measures and site restoration must be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). Staff recommends that the City's Type II erosion control fence, which is a heavy duty silt fence, be used for the area adjacent to the existing wetlands on the north and south grading limits of the site. Type I silt fence shall be used in all other areas. A minimum 75-foot long rock construction entrance must be shown at the entrance drive that will be utilized during construction. In addition, tree preservation fencing must be installed at the limits of tree removal. Erosion control blankets are recommended for all of the steep 3: 1 slopes with an elevation change of eight feet or more. All disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. The applicant should be aware that any off-site grading will require an easement from the appropriate property owner. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes. A minimum 75-foot rock construction entrance must be added to the plans at the proposed access off of Galpin Boulevard. Storm Water Mana2ement The proposed development is required to maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations should be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. Easements Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width should be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. Erosion Control Stable emergency overflows are needed for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows should be'clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows can be stabilized with a turf re-enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. Notes on the plan are needed describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed. Timing of stabilization will vary depending upon slope and if it is a concentrated flow area. The rate of mulch application is needed as well (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). All riprap/fabric at the flared end section must be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 13 of 13 Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3:1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Steeper than 3:1 10:1 to 3:1 Flatter than 10:1 Time 7 days 14 days 21 days (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area is not actively being worked.) These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. Erosion control blanket should be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified should adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale should be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan should be shown as a shaded area. Sediment Control Temporary sediment basins are needed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins should be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) is needed for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins are needed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast comer of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water run on from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. The Wimco inlet control detail proposed will work for all curbside inlets. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas will need alternate controls/Wimco details. The engineer should check on alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. Additional inlet controls may be needed for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. Silt fence will be needed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations need to be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence should be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast comer of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence should be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as needed. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 14 of 14 Surface Water Manaeement Fees Water Quality Fees Because of the impervious surface associated with this development, the water quality fees for this proposed development are based on industrial development rates of $6,330/acre. Based on the proposed developed area of approximately 33.87 acres, the water quality fees associated with this project are $214,397. Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average citywide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels, and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. Industrial developments have a connection charge of $5,957 per developable acre. This results in a water quantity fee of approximately $201,764 for the proposed development. SWMP Credits This project proposes the construction of one NURP pond. The applicant will be credited for water quality where NURP basins are provided to treat runoff. This will be determined upon review of the ponding and storm sewer calculations. Credits may also be applied to the applicant's SWMP fees for the provision of outlet structures. The applicant will not be assessed for areas that are dedicated outlots. No credit will be given for temporary pond areas. At this time, the estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. Other Aeencies The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. UTILITIES Municipal sewer and water stubs are available to the site from Galpin Boulevard on the east side of the parcel. The applicant is proposing to connect to the existing utility stubs and extend them to the proposed lots to service the site. The sanitary and watermain lines that run within the public street right-of-way and within the shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5 until the last sanitary manhole will be considered a public utility line and the remaining will be considered private utility. Additional gate valves are needed for the shared private watermain between any two lots. Minimum 20-foot wide easements will be required over the public portion of the storm sewer lines between Lots 2 and 3. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 15 of 15 The underlying property has been previously assessed for sewer, water and street improvements and there is no remaining assessment due payable to the City. Since the developer will be responsible for extending lateral sewer and water service to the lots, the sanitary sewer and water connection charges will be waived. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. All of the utility improvements are required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Upon completion of the utility improvements, the utilities will be turned over to the City for maintenance and ownership. The applicant is also required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies will have to be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. STREETS There is one public street proposed with the project. The street is proposed as a cul-de-sac running west of Galpin Boulevard and a private shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The applicant is proposing the paved streets to be 32-feet wide with a 60-foot wide right-of-way and a 46-foot cul-de-sac paved radius. The applicant must be aware that the City's standard commercial street pavement width is 36-foot wide from back-of-curb to back-of-curb and the cul-de-sac must be 48-foot in radius. Staff is fine with the 24-foot wide shared driveway between Lots 4 and 5. The developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. The proposed development lies west of Galpin Boulevard (CSAH 19) and north of Lyman Boulevard (CSAH 18), A-Minor Expander Arterials as identified on SRF Consulting Group Incorporated's Functional Classification Map. Proposed access to the site will be from Galpin Boulevard, which aligns with Stone Creek Drive, an existing local street extending east of Galpin Boulevard. Staff has researched the feasibility to move the proposed site access from Galpin Boulevard to Lyman Boulevard in response to citizens' requests. Due to wetland conditions, access to Lyman Boulevard would be 1,000 feet west of Galpin Boulevard. Carver County has identified Lyman Boulevard as a regional east-west collector with limited access; therefore, Staff recommends that the access to Chanhassen West Business Park remain at the Galpin Boulevard/Stone Creek Drive intersection. This recommendation is also consistent with Section 18-57 of the City Code, which states that "access to arterial streets shall be at intervals of not less than one-fourth mile [1,320 feet] and through existing and established crossroads" . SRF Consulting Group, Inc. analyzed the 2020 transportation system in conjunction with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan. SRF's forecasted 2020 traffic volume for Galpin Boulevard was based on the 2020 Land Use Map and the construction of the new Trunk Highway 212. The Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 16 of 16 proposed land use of the Chanhassen West Business Park is consistent with the 2020 land use used in SRF's traffic analysis. SRF's report does not identify a need to upgrade Galpin Boulevard by the year 2020. Right turn lanes for north and southbound traffic exist at the Galpin Boulevard intersection with Stone Creek Road and the proposed site access. The developer must submit an access permit to Carver County Public Works for the proposed connection to Galpin Boulevard. As stipulated by the Assistant County Engineer, the developer must submit information on proposed turn lanes with the permit application. Staff has concerns of movements of truck traffic accessing off Galpin Boulevard to Lots 1 and 8 being too close. Staff recommends increasing the access width to 44 feet to create a three-lane access off Galpin Boulevard and increase the turning curb radius. Also, relocate Lots 1 and 8 easterly accesses further to the west and re-align them opposite of each other. The applicant should be aware that, in commercial districts, six-foot wide sidewalks are required and the parking driveway aisle must be 26-feet wide. Cross-access easements will be obtained for the shared driveways and recorded against the lots. PARKS AND RECREATION PARKS The proposed Chanhassen West Business Park is situated within the park service areas of Stone Creek Park and the Chanhassen Nature Preserve. Stone Creek Park is a seven-acre neighborhood park located across Galpin Boulevard. Amenities at the park include a sliding hill, basketball court, playground, benches and trails. The Chanhassen Nature Preserve is a 100-acre natural area featuring both wetland and upland areas and a comprehensive pedestrian trial system. TRAILS An existing section of the city's Comprehensi ve Trail Plan parallels the eastern border of the subject property. Future plans call for a pedestrian trail on the north side of Lyman Boulevard. Care should be taken to protect sufficient right-of-way for this future improvement. MISCELLANEOUS As part of the future development of the site, the applicant should be aware of the following: Each site will require a separate site plan review. Drive aisle widths are 26 feet wide, not 24. The buildings are required to have an automatic fire extinguishing system. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 17 of 17 The plans must be prepared and signed by design professionals licensed in the State of Minnesota. The location of property lines will have an impact on the code requirements for the proposed buildings, including but not limited to; allowable size and fire-resistive construction. The plans as submitted do not have the information necessary to determine compliance at this time. The owner and or their representative shall meet with the Inspections Division as soon as possible to discuss property line issues as well as plan review and permit procedures. WETLANDS Existing Wetlands Eight AglUrban wetlands exist on-site and were delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. in October 2004. The wetlands on-site are generally highly disturbed and/or incidental as a result of the site being used historically as agricultural land and a contractor's yard. Basin F 1-30 (Wetland B) is a Type 2/3 wetland located in a farm field in the eastern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, smartweed and cattail. The hydrology of the wetland is affected by drain tile. The applicant is proposing to fill the wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 1-30 is 19,166 square feet (0.44 acres). Basin F 31-34 was included in the delineation, but has been found to be non-wetland. A no loss determination should be completed for Basin F 31-34. Basin F 35-50 is a Type 2 wetland located in the northwest comer of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, stinging nettle and black willow. No impact is proposed to Basin F 35-50. Basin F 51-80 N is a Type 2 wetland located in the southwestern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass, stinging nettle and black and sandbar willow. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland; however, it is an incidental wetland and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. 5C. An exemption request should be completed for Basin F 51-80 N. Basin F 51-80 S is a Type 4 wetland located in the southwestern portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by cattail. No impact is proposed to Basin F 51-80 S. Basin F 81-86 (Wetland D) is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 81-86 is 3,920 square feet (0.09 acres). Basin F 87-90 (Wetland C) is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland. The total proposed impact to Basin F 87-90 is 2,178 square feet (0.05 acres). Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 18 of 18 Basin F 91-97 is a Type 2 wetland located in the south central portion of the property. The wetland is dominated by reed canary grass. The applicant is proposing to fill this wetland; however, it is an incidental wetland and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. Sc. An exemption request should be completed for Basin F 91-97. On December 30, 2004, City staff conducted an on-site review of the wetland delineation. The wetland boundaries shown on the plans are consistent with staff recommendation. Another wetland basin (Wetland A) is shown on the plans. This area was not identified in conjunction with the Earth Science Associates delineation. Upon review of the soil survey, National Wetland Inventory, aerial photography of the area and an on-site investigation of the basin on July 8, 200S, it has been determined that the wetland is incidental and is therefore exempt under MR 8420.0122 Subp. SC. An exemption request should be completed for Wetland A. Wetland Replacement Wetland replacement must occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota LocallStatelFederal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects (Parts I and II) should be submitted for the proposed project. The application should include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan should be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan should include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans should show fixed photo monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant should provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): 1. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; 2. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is O.OS acres in area; and 3. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. A wetland buffer 16.S to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.S feet) must be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas should be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant must install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) should maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 19 of 19 The applicant must submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit should be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant should submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. COMPLIANCE TABLE Area (sq. ft.) Fronta2e (ft.) Depth (ft.) Notes Code 43,560 150 200 Lot 1 166,233 328 354 Lot 2 144,036 238 354 Lot 3 124,349 329 350 Wetland setback Lot 4 219,215 35 # 380 Wetland setback Lot 5 156,190 75 @ 404 Wetland setback Lot 6 257,813 80 @ 460 North buffer yard Lot 7 82,385 205 366 Lot 8 97,843 328 368 Outlot A 180,643 Ponding and wetland mitigation OutlotB 92,577 Wetland Outlot C 165,365 Preserved woodlands ROW 62,069 1.42 acres Total 1,748,718 40.15 acres # Lot must be revised to meet the minimum 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. @ Exceeds the 60 feet frontage on cul-de-sac. RECOMMENDA TION Staff recommends that tlu~ PlaRning CammiBBi8R City Council adopt the following three motions and adoption of the attached findings of fact and recommendation: A. "The Chanhassen PlanRiRg C8mmiB8i8R f888IDm.8R88 City Council approves the ordinance rezoning ~ the property located within the Chanhassen West Business Park from Agricultural Estate District (A-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) incorporating the development design standards contained within this staff report based on the findings of fact attached to the report." B. "The Chanhassen City Council approves PlanRiRg CammiB8i8n f88amm@R88 aJlflr8':al €If the Preliminary Plat for Chanhassen West Business Park, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, based on the findings of fact attached to the report and subject to the following conditions: Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 20 of 20 1. Applicant shall increase landscape plantings in the south and east property line bufferyards to meet minimum requirements. A revised landscape plan shall be submitted before final approval. 2. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any construction activities. Fencing shall remain in place until construction is completed. 3. All trees shown as preserved on plans dated 6/17/05 shall be protected. Any trees damaged or removed shall be replaced at a rate of 2: 1 diameter inches. 4. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for WaterIWetland Projects (Parts I and II) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 5. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 4O-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 6. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 7. The proposed development shall maintain existing runoff rates and meet NURP standards. Storm water calculations shall be submitted to ensure the proposed storm water pond is sized adequately for the proposed development. 8. Stable emergency overflows shall be provided for the proposed pond on site. The emergency overflows shall be clearly labeled on the plan and a detail is needed. The emergency overflows may be stabilized with a turf re-enforcement mat or fabric and riprap. 9. Notes on the plan describing timing of temporary stabilization with Type 1 mulch and seed or erosion control blanket and seed shall be included. The notes shall include timing of stabilization as well as the rate of mulch application (2 tons per acre, disc anchored). 10. All riprap/fabric at the flared end section shall be installed within 24 hours of flared end section installation. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 210/21 11. Erosion control blanket shall be installed on all slopes greater than or equal to 3: 1. All exposed soil areas shall have temporary erosion protection or permanent cover year round, according to the following table of slopes and time frames: Type of Slope Steeper than 3:1 10:1 to 3:1 Flatter than 10: 1 Time 7 days 14 days 21 days (Maximum time an area can remain open when the area is not actively being worked.) These areas include constructed storm water management pond side slopes, and any exposed soil areas with a positive slope to a storm water conveyance system, such as a curb and gutter system, storm sewer inlet, temporary or permanent drainage ditch or other natural or man made systems that discharge to a surface water. 12. Erosion control blanket shall be specified in the swale from the flared end section to the wetland along the west boundary of the site. The blanket specified shall adequately protect the area from designed velocity and depth of flow. The blanket and seed in the swale shall be installed within 5 days of culvert installation. Erosion control blanket is recommended for the pond slopes from around 952 to 942 contours. All blanket on the plan shall be shown as a shaded area. 13. Temporary sediment basins shall be installed prior to disturbing upslope areas. The areas of temporary sediment basins shall be labeled on the plan. A temporary outlet (e.g., a perforated riser and rock cone) shall be provided for the pond; details should be provided. Temporary basins shall be constructed in the area of the proposed permanent storm water pond, the southeast comer of the site prior to discharging to the culvert under Galpin Boulevard, and possibly in the northwest area of the site to handle water run on from the north prior to discharge to the wetland. 14. Any and all area inlets or drop inlets in paved areas shall be protected with alternate controlslWimco details. The engineer shall research and provide alternate designs for Wimco-type inlet controls to fit the various types of inlets. 15. Additional inlet controls shall be provided for adjacent inlets on Galpin Boulevard and Street A. 16. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 17. Type 1 and Type 2 silt fence locations shall be specified on the plan. Type 2 silt fence shall be installed around all wetland areas and in the southeast comer of the site to protect the culvert under Galpin Boulevard. The silt fence shall be extended along the south side to close the gap in the silt fence. 18. Street cleaning of soil tracked onto public streets shall include daily street scraping and street sweeping as-needed. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 22 of 22 19. The estimated total SWMP fee, due payable to the City at the time of final plat recording, is $413,661. 20. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval. 21. In lieu of parkland dedication and trail construction, full park fees shall be collected at the rate in force at the time of final plat for the proposed Chanhassen West Business Park. At current rates, the park fee would total $359,500 (35.95 x $10,000 per acre). 22. A demolition permit must be obtained before beginning demolition of any existing structures. 23. Retaining walls over four high must be designed by a professional engineer and a permit must be obtained prior to construction. 24. Provide a water service for Lot 6. 25. A lO-foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants i.e., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes, Xcel Energy, Qwest, cable TV and transformer boxes. This is to ensure that fire hydrants can be quickly located and safely operated by firefighters. Pursuant to Chanhassen City Ordinance #9-1. 26. Fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is required to be installed. Such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternate methods of protection are provided. 27. The new proposed street will be required to have a street name. Submit proposed street name to Chanhassen Building Official and Chanhassen Fire Marshal for review and approval. 28. No burning permits will be issued for trees to be removed. Trees and shrubs must either be removed from site or chipped. 29. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed load of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. Pursuant to Minnesota Fire code Section 503.2.3. 30. Temporary street signs shall be installed on street intersections when construction of a new roadway allows passage be vehicles. Pursuant to 2002 Minnesota fire code Section 501.4. 31. Prior to final platting, storm sewer design data will need to be submitted for staff review. Depending on the size of the drainage area, additional catch basins may be required at that time. The storm sewer will have to be designed for a lO-year, 24-hour storm event. Drainage and utility easements will need to be dedicated on the final plat over the public Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 23 of 23 storm drainage system including storm water ponds, drainage swales, emergency overflows, access routes for maintenance, over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, and buffer areas used as PVC. The minimum easement width shall be 20 feet wide. 32. The interior lot storm sewer will require private easements to be dedicated where the sewer crosses from one lot to another. 33. Private utility easements are required for the sanitary sewer and water lines that serve Lot 4 but go through Lot 5. 34. The sanitary sewer and water hookup charges will be applicable for each of the new lots. The 2005 trunk hookup charge is $1,458 for sanitary sewer and $2,955 for watermain. Sanitary sewer and watermain hookup fees may be specially assessed against the parcel at the time of building permit issuance. 35. On the site plan: a. Revise the cul-de-sac pavement radius to 48 feet. b. Revise the parking driveway aisle from 24 feet to 26 feet wide. c. Revise the public street width from 32 feet to 36 feet wide. d. Increase the full access width off Galpin Boulevard to 44 feet and create three lane access. e. Shift Lots 1 and 8 easterly access further toward the west and realign the across each other. f. Show at least one, 6-foot wide, side walk along the public street. g. Show the access off Galpin Boulevard turning curb radius. h. Realign lot 5 access perpendicular to the shared driveway. 1. Show street lights. J. Show handicap parks and ramps. 36. On the grading plan: a. Extend silt fence type between the storm pond and Outlot A. Silt fence Type II must be used adjacent to wetlands and storm pond. b. Revise contour lines to match 3: 1 maximum slope and tie the proposed contour lines with the existing contours for Lots 4, 5, south of Lot 2 and northeast of Lot 1. c. Show the proposed contour lines for Lot 6. d. Show all retaining walls top and bottom elevations. e. Show all emergency overflows (EOF). The EOF must be 1.5' lower than the adjacent lowest floor. f. Revise Lot 6 parking slope to 0.7% minimum. g. Add a note to remove any existing structure and access off Galpin Boulevard and all disturbed areas, as a result of construction, must be seeded and mulched or sodded immediately after grading to minimize erosion. h. Show 75-foot minimum construction rock entrance. 1. No retaining walls structure is allowed within public street and/or public utility easements, revise accordingly. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 24 of 24 j. Show 20-foot utility easement for the storm sewer between Lots 2 and 3 37. On the utility plans: a. Show all existing and proposed drainage and utility easements. b. Show the proposed sanitary and storm sewer stubs inverts. c. Add storm sewer schedule. d. Public storm sewer pipe type must be RCP and 15-inch minimum diameter. e. The last street accessible storm manhole (STMH#2) must be built with a sump. f. Revise sanitary sewer pipe from DIP to PVC-C900. g. OIl the utility profile show all sewer and pipe crossings. h. Minimum vertical separation must be 18 inches between watermain and sewer. 1. Call out watermain fittings 38. Any retaining wall over four feet in height must be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the state of Minnesota with an approved safety fence on top of it. Also, it will require a building permit from the Building Department. 39. Add the following City of Chanhassen Detail Plate Nos. 1002,2109,2110 2204, 3104, 3109, 5201,5205,5214 and 5215. 40. Prior to final plat approval, a professional civil engineer registered in the state of Minnesota must sign all plans. 41. All of the ponds are required to be designed to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards with maximum 3: 1 slopes and a 10: 1 bench at the NWL. 42. Cross-access easements for the shared driveway accesses must be obtained and recorded against the lots for each of the entrance drives. 43. Any off-site grading will require easements from the appropriate property owner. 44. Public utility improvements will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required at the time of final platting. The applicant will also be required to enter into a development contract with the City and supply the necessary financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to guarantee installation of the improvements and the conditions of final plat approval. The applicant must be aware that all public utility improvements will require a preconstruction meeting before building permit issuance. Permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies must be obtained, including but not limited to the MPCA, Department of Health, Watershed District, Carver County, MnDOT, etc. 45. If importing or exporting material for development of the site is necessary, the applicant will be required to supply the City with detailed haul routes and traffic control plans. The applicant should be aware that any off-site grading will require an easement from the Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 25 of 25 appropriate property owner. 46. All private streets are required to have 24-foot wide paved streets from back-of-curb to back- of-curb, be built to a 7-ton design and contained within a 40-foot wide private easement. At the completion of the project, the developer will be required to submit inspection/soil reports certifying that the private streets were built to a 7-ton design. 47. Six-foot wide sidewalks are required. 48. All plans must be signed by a registered engineer in the state of Minnesota. 49. All of the proposed building pads must have a rear yard elevation at least three feet above the HWL of the adjacent ponds. 50. Installation of the private utilities for the site will require permits and inspections through the City's Building Department. 51. Comply with Carver County memo dated June 28,2005 and revise the plans accordingly. 52. Revise plan sheet size to 24 x 36 using scale 50. 53. The developer shall either dedicate Outlot C to the City for open space purposes or dedicate a conservation easement over Outlot C. 54. The applicant shall work with staff to resolve any drainage issues with Lot 2 in Trotters Ridge." C. "The Chanhassen City Council approves PllmRiRg Csm.m.issi8R f@@Sm.m.8R8S a~~f8!:tll 8f the Wetland Alteration Permit to fill and alter wetlands within the development, plans prepared by Schoell & Madson, Inc., dated June 17, 2005, subject to the following conditions: 1. A no loss determination shall be completed for Basin F 31-34. 2. Exemption requests shall be completed for Basins F 51-80 N, Basin F 91-97 and Wetland A. 3. Wetland replacement shall occur in a manner consistent with the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (MR 8420). A Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for WaterIWetland Projects (Parts I and II) shall be submitted for the proposed project. The application shall include sequencing discussions and sequencing flexibility requests, if applicable. The applicant must receive approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to or concurrent with final plat approval and prior to wetland impacts occurring. 4. A five-year wetland replacement monitoring plan shall be submitted. The replacement monitoring plan shall include a detailed management plan for invasive non-native species, particularly purple loosestrife and reed canary grass. The plans shall show fixed photo Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 26 of 26 monitoring points for the replacement wetland. The applicant shall provide proof of recording of a Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland. 5. Several corrections must be made to the Wetland Mitigation Plan (sheet 10 of 13): a. Wetland A is shown as an impact area. Upon finalization of exemption paperwork, mitigation will not be required for this wetland; b. Wetland C (Basin F 87-90) is 0.05 acres in area; and c. Wetland D (Basin F 81-86) is 0.09 acres in area. 6. A wetland buffer 16.5 to 20 feet in width (with a minimum average of 16.5 feet) shall be maintained around all wetlands and proposed wetland mitigation areas. Wetland buffer areas shall be preserved, surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The applicant shall install wetland buffer edge signs, under the direction of City staff, before construction begins and must pay the City $20 per sign. All structures (including parking lots) shall maintain a 40-foot setback from the edge of the wetland buffer. 7. The applicant shall submit a letter of credit equal to 110% of the cost of the wetland creation (including grading and seeding) to ensure the design standards for the replacement wetland are met. The letter of credit shall be effective for no less than five years from the date of final plat approval. The applicant shall submit a cost estimate for wetland creation (including grading and seeding) so the City can calculate the amount of the wetland creation letter of credit. 8. Drainage and utility easements a minimum of 20 feet in width shall be provided over all existing wetlands, wetland mitigation areas, buffer areas used as PVC and storm water ponds. 9. Silt fence shall be installed around Outlot A along the east side between the pond the wetland. 10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies (e.g., Carver County, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES Phase II construction permit), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (for dewatering), Army Corps of Engineers) and comply with their conditions of approval." ATTACHMENTS 1. Findings of Fact. 2. Development Review Application. 3. Reduced Copy Existing Conditions. 4. Reduced Copy Preliminary Plat. 5. Reduced Copy Preliminary Site Plan. 6. Reduced Copy Wetland Mitigation Plan. 7. Reduced Copy Concept Landscape Plan. 8. Memo from Bill Weckman (Carver County) to Robert Generous dated 6/28/05. 9. Letter from Pete May (Sprint) to Robert Generous dated 6/23/05. Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case 05-23 July 19, 2005 Page 27 of27 10. Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Mailing. g:\plan\2005 planning cases\05-23 chanhassen west business park\staff report preliminary pud.doc CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION INRE: Application of Eden Trace Corp. for a Rezoning of property from A2, Agricultural Estate District, to PUD, Planned Unit Development for an Office-Industrial Park, Subdivision approval for eight lots, three outlots and associated right-of-way, and a Wetland Alteration permit to fill and grade wetlands on site - Chanhassen West Business Park. On July 19,2005, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application of Eden Trace Corp. for rezoning, preliminary plat approval and wetland alteration permit for the referenced property. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed development preceded by published and mailed notice. The Planning Commission heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The property is currently zoned A2, Agricultural Estate District. 2. The property is guided in the Land Use Plan for Office/Industrial use. 3. The legal description of the property is: (see Exhibit A) 4. The Subdivision Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider seven possible adverse affects of the proposed subdivision. The seven (7) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; b. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; c. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; d. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this chapter; e. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; 1 f. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record; and g. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: 1. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. 2. Lack of adequate roads. 3. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. 4. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. 5. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider six (6) possible adverse affects of the proposed amendment. The six (6) affects and our findings regarding them are: a. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. b. The proposed use is compatible with the present and future land uses of the area. c. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. d. The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. e. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity. f. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. 6. The planning report #05-23 dated July 19, 2005, prepared by Robert Generous, et aI, is incorporated herein. RECOMMENDA TION The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the preliminary Planned Unit Development, Preliminary Plat and Wetland Alteration permit. ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 19th day of July, 2005. CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION BY: Its Chairman g:\plan\2005 planning cases\05-23 chanhassen west business park\findings of fact chan w business park.doc 2 EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION: That pQrt of the East Holf (E 1/2) of the Southeost Quarter (SE 1/4).. ~n 16. Township 116 North. Range 23 West. whicft lies South of tho Ncarth 1065.41 feet, westerly 01 the centerline of Coufrty State Aid Highway No. 19. ond North of the South 100.00 feet;. ALSo .. Thot port of the Southwest Quartet' of the Southwest Quarter of Section 15, Township 116 North, R~e 23 West, lying west.lr1y M the centerline of COunty state ~ HIghway No.. 19 ond no~ ..of the centerfine of. Count;y stote Aid Highway No. 18. SOid property being'subject to eooetneht for ~ plltposes for COu~ State Aid Hig~woy 19 and County State Aid H"tghway 18. ,.. Planning Case No. OS c:;2.3 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 Market,Boulevard - P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 - (952) 227-1100 CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION JUN 1 7 2005 PLEASE PRINT , Applicant Name al)d Address: .e:..d~ \~ ~-rF R l S' & Ma. U f) '^t G. IA. ,..,.. Ctu...~k&~r~, ItAN SS"3'...., Contact: Mda/jL ()A.d.~.1 J-o.-( Phone: fr:Z.-r'I-07'rL Fax: 3(,/-07"L':! Email: (JAtk, e ~ (~ t..o-M. CHANHASSEN P~NN/NG DEPT Owner Name and.Address: ' ()ofl..lYliwe/L t 4n-~~<p f. () - '&::,)1: d-.st; cAo.Ylhasf:-&t rnN S-S-317 Contact: /JA--t-#1t"hfM .... Phone: f~ -Cf/b~I7's3 Fax: 7~ - <r2C)~ ?53? Email: Pm(Yt'r~4 ~ /'heAr; .CO'wt Comprehensive Plan Amendment Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of Right-of-Way/Easements Interim Use Permit Variance Non-conforming Use Permit K Wetland Alteration Permit I 275.06 "x Planned Unit Development* ~ I =:5() Zoning Appeal __ Rezoning. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Sign Permits / \ 75 Notification Sign** - $75 + $100 Damage Deposit Sign Plan Review X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attdrney Cost*** -. ~ . C~UP/SPRN ACN AR/W AP/Metes & Bounds Wlinor SUB TOTAL FEE $1 .0) z;.1)~ri> Site Plan Review* / * Subdivision* 72-0 (~OO4-- IS~~ l~s) An additional fee of $3.00 per address within the public hearing notification area will be invoiced to the applicant prior to the public hearing. . * Twenty-six (26) full-size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8W X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet along with a diqital COpy in TIFF-Group 4 (*.tif) format. ** Applicant to obtain notification sign from City of Chanhassen Public Works at 1591 Park Road and install upon submittal of completed application. $100 damage deposit to be refunded to applicant when sign is retumed following City Council approval. *** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract. CJLJ-;ci:;,.':;J Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. NOTE: When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. --- PROJECT NAME: CJNll\ ~a s S~I\ LOCATION: GQlp\'""" Blvd ~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: We'~ B,^~\".e -'S' Ly hQ,,,\ 6l vd . Bu-~ R~,() ~CA \PI'A Rlvd TOTAL ACREAGE: SE VLj o~ tL SF Y\f Lfo. (5 ,t 4/). S'~ro. '" tb . , -r. II b I... t "3 I a. V'vt.v ~ , ~kc.,~ WETLANDS PRESENT: YES NO PRESENT ZONING: P Ii IJ ,..,,,: REQUESTED ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION: REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION: REASON FOR REQUEST: This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly 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 Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within 15 business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within 15 business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed. of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. ~~ S~ ~~;,; ~~~tC -- (Pf7!o~ Date m~J/YA Signature of Fee Owner &!t1(05 l Date SCANNED CD_~an\fonns\DeVelopment Review Application.DOC Rev. 4/05 I ~~i~ 5301 H~~li 'I~i~. ~ i~J~ h j",d!1 "j. ~~" . ~ ~ h~i~~ ~g~n~ ~d~ '" ; '5 i i f j j f I I ' if!, n is il~ 'jli J'! Ii 1- ~!I . I III ~l" I' It i : J! jl! ~!I !I ~!i "+. :~ ; ~ ~ n t' ~ ~~5Adll" ~ s.pl ~ !!pH~n ~nln~n o ~ 1!: :! ~/ (;--0 / ~ /01 /er ---.I r---~ ~ I ",,0 & r - 0- -&~ - \ 1---\----< \ \ \ , , , , ~ " mOl iii~~i 4 l- I ; )~1j~~~: CL. , i i w I.t') OJ ~.i! ~ en 0 Q ! i f J'~I S ~ ~ ~ ~ i l~ en CJ <(Q 0 Z I I ' ~w i i Xw C'..J Z I I file . r ! ,I : "+.i ~ z> ~ z . ~. ' )1 i <(- :5 if Ii jli !H J ..8 xW 1~lf: ~ uo Q CL. 't It .:t il I u..W ;z II II Iii j. ~I~ . . ~ -J OJ II: f ~ ocr en , J"! It I;".l~ ~ ~ ~ en 51! I! ll~ I " ,I .. ~~~ I- ~ ~ i!l !l ~!l ~li~B I- U z uJ 9 ~ j u I I; ~ ~ ~ . ! ~ . ~~~i~ ~I ",0 I *- o I ~ Ie ----1_-.1 - ~ 1- - ---\- - -'\ \ r- &0-\ \ \ \..\ I I-::. ~ - ~l ,_~r _0- G!:' . __------ '\ i --- , .........- \ ~.. - -- - ----- .-"' \ . _ ",,'10. G~"'" .......~~18....... .. .:tg 0:,... 00" ~~I ~~z a:::::I= - ...." mile o;! OI... o ~ r · , d ~ = ~ .,A ~fl llllll ~f!hli il'i"'1 J: I ell . ffi] Ul i I 'II. d Ii! '11 II! III I IIi . HI i J .., Z ,,0 i= -is- U1 0 <( - <0 _w -<:9 u " 0 I- cr: 0 .,A -- I- <Xl ::l 0 '" If) - -fl:: w S' f- f- --Q cr: III f- I- ;:: 0 .,A I- ::l "- 0 "- ..-.-11 , CD I ; , :Ii 'll . d -----~B-~~-~ "' -~ N01IOOV OdlHl >ldVd d08dV "+. ~l ~m~ m~~ i ; ~.; ~~Ij~i ~Ij~i i~ i~ i; ~~ 'rn~~ , ... j Ai llll i t a , i i ! i f I I . I I r ! il U 'i '1)5 1'1, " "I. ',I "I!I I I II ; t It i I~ l~ ll~ ~!I!i~!1 ~.h i~iU. ~ ,Id~! ~ " I! ~h'!~ !I ~ i ~~~Il~ . i ~'hl~ U i ig~.:i ~~ I ~ ~.I~A ji I ~d~ gG )1 I z ~ ::t a: ~ ill: I- 1rl ~ ~ D..; i ~ ! j I . " .; ~~~=i~ ~~~~; ~~~~~ l~ ;~~~~ ;~';t ~~~!~ : ~ ~;ji~i ~jiji ~Ijji I! . ! I I _ ~ I! <,t ~ fi fi ~ I.. Iii !II ~ i I ! -i~ ~ I l~ II' , ; "i i . ! n ~ l~ ~ ii i; ~~ ~i ~ ;1 ~~ g~ 2. ~ ~~ ~; f: f; _ , ,: .! .......;....:~ ~~ ::;~~~::; ~........ -""III... I' ii~~~ i~j~~ ~~~!~ ;~ ',".g "",'1:1 ~ 11.1:1 ~..~ ~mi ~mi ~ml ~SB .J ~t; i~i d~ ~I~ "~ u: ~I I-....() 1 *- o 1 () 1<3 ---~-J ~ ___w B " 0 cr:: "' 0> (f) - -fl:: W o f- - f- - -Q cr:: f- ::: ""-- ""-- N '" z ,,0 i= -is- ",0 <( --- I jI-i " I .\ \ ' u ,':i ' ! l; ,:'; , I g . '\ \ j 0 . >'\". j\ .. :,', . \ .:/ <0 1- - -t - ~\ \ \ .. .::a:~ ..",.. 00" uUz ....:0 ~~z ..:1= "c" z:oc !II"'" iii!! u , '" ~ "-..., lD a > if z c J! ... II) .. 88 o. n II :Ii c iii U vi ~ .-----\ if f>'" .' 'J i i~,'>..,...:,.-.--:-\ I r tS>.',/ i : i<g>' ,',>:/ ,>> ! f, ,0> (. , > , . I I,' ,'. G'.' '. . ~., I \' ~~, ,> , I \1: ' , ~f I , >' ~.,~.,' ___,_._______J ' (. _ NOilOOV , , \ \ , ., , , o tJ I Hi ~tJVd tJ08tJV " jj .--t.:~ ~ / o~ ,,0 / o / / -------'---.1 0- ~ (j <:,"-., ":::,., ~ )vQ~ / I-z -rs- <- <Xl "..~". 'C,~ l{~/ >'- /1-- ;.../ ;7 "- " , 1 < ~ ,,' d (J I Hl .gggglg Ii en ~ ~ 8 ;:: : 0 0 0 0 0 j ;i ;@@)@@2 I:l III ~ U C A. ! 'rn~~ , .... j t l~; 1 ~ -~ r- cf 0- I ~-;Q:-~ r - (j \ 1- - --\- - --' \ \ \ .. ; ~ .. .:~~ "':0.. 00" ~~I ~~:i ",:l::; ,"c.. i5:i &1;8 Ii ~fJ .1 lj1111i! ~ ! III ~ii 'I: 8'J ~ -~ [[[] II l j j . 11 \\ ' )i(JVd tJO~(Jv '. '- "" '" Ii g C <0 Z V o ..: ~ II ~N i X I:l U I:! ~ - "- ::I . CJ 0 III III U , U o 0 N "' ~ <Xl o z :5 f-- W 3: a ~ c ci I:l Z g C@_ @ g 11 5 v;f-- a OJ:: W 0 III ~~~~ ~ I-!:: >........ .. ~~~~ 2 ~~ ~8 .. Z8a..5 <r u o z :5 f-- W 3: , i i f , i , I I I I ' I f !I f - 'I II If iJ II 1j ~!t h I! I:! II! I! lt~ m !f ~!f o W f-- U .. a. :;.: o w (/) o a. o '" "- ~.1:1 I ...... :H~ I e ~ " .' ~ ~! , jW I '9 ~ . ~:; ~ ~ i I i.~ ~ 8 i ~ ~~! "'. -~-.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ii ~OOO.P 10 . . ~,~, .. , , ~. M. ~ "'1111 I.. ~Q ~ . ~~ -' Ill.... ~ ~ !i ~I ;.i~ .d~i~ ~Ii~; ~i I:: .II!, i~ g II ~ · I!~ ~.d51 !J,. "".1 I~ti! . ~i ~_ ~ t ~~h b.,~ ~9.; t<~ ~l .~; A I ~~ ~ ~ i :@II m~i~ ~a. iiS s~ oid I: I ;; ; ~~tg ~~d.1 ~~.i ~~~ i. Itqi~ !; ii i . ..h .il.~. ita .' ~I "il.. l"' ~~ " ~ ~ ~!:~i ~m~~ "~i~. ~i!;s M!! !:I ;~ . ~ i ~~"h is'!~ ~.;.' ~l!'~ ~liu m I" "'~~~; ~Ih,r .g!~1 "A. ~~ ~~u ~~~ It I 0.. 5 II.. · .. .x~.~ ~.a v. ~ ".. I.t. t3 ~ i". :~I.. .$.~~ I'i ~~. h3~1 .~:~ 5 ~ · i~ . j ..s .~. ,f .d~~ .- ~ i !5~ J~i!1 !!~i !I! ~Ii liml"l! !II !l ! --1 ~ t I I -_ w B o Q::' (f) -8': - w f-- f-- -Q Q::' f-- "'- I I I ~ I NOt~I(-r-IV' ! E" 0..1\,1'11' I.." U"- ~!:::. \..011--1-.1- d08dV -+.i ~ J I i . . a l ~, n Ii x. l~ <l l~ .. 1= .~ i~ ~~ I 2 :i:~! ~ " ~~I! f . ~..::: ~ :il~ , - 8 ~ ~ ;, i Uis~ . ~~d~. ~ .!j'~ ~I~.I~ ~ ~i~lii I i.j51! s" .~l~ mi~! CIl .. z '" :s '" '" s " 01 ~ ~ .-,,, : ~~ ~ f:'~ ~ ~i. ~ ili . i ~ s , ~ " - " L~ Ii ~~ i~~ 8 ....rfl~ i,,!:: to. ! ."il ; 5." flU .; ~ ~~i Iii! !e! ~ lif"l lfii~ nil - .! g ~ ,;~r! - ;,' rn~~ , ~ i ~~ H:lj J ~ ,; ; I. ~ :1 I ~. j .1 ~i Ii I II f " a:rrg 0:".. 00" uUz ....,. ~0:9~ .... ..e.. I:; Iil'le .z u ~fJ I iil111il ~jJ Jli ~iil!ll 8ft I ..c: J ell -. ffiJ II i I II LL "1:""" 111('-.\:' '". .~ "'- ~~ ::. (.;;..> ....~ CARVER COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS 11360 Highway 2]2 West P.O. Box 300 Cologne, MN 55322-0300 Phone (952) 466-5200 Fax (952) 466-5223 Administration Parks Enginccring Highway Maintcnancc Equipmcnt Maintcnancc Survcying & Mapping ClllWfCDaty 18JJ - 200J To: From: Subject: Robert Generous, Senior Planner, City of Chanhassen Bill Weckman, Assistant County Engineer fl nl 11 Request for Rezoning \?if' Chanhassen West Business Park (05-23) RECEIVED JUt - 5 2005 CITY OF CffANHASSEN June 28, 2005 We have reviewed the information regarding the Chanhassen West Business Park preliminary plat transmitted to Carver County by your memorandum dated June 20, 2005. These comments are based on that review. Further comments may be necessary as the plans progress. 1. Right-of-way widths listed in the Eastern Carver County Transportation Study for roadways functionally classified as "A" Minor Arterials: Urban Undivided 2-lane Roadway Minimum Recommended 1 00' 11 0' Rural Undivided 2-lane Roadway Minimum Recommended 120' 150' Urban Undivided 4-lane Roadway Minimum Recommended 100' 120' Rural Undivided 4-lane Roadway Minimum Recommended 140' 170' CSAH 18 (Lyman Blvd.) and CSAH 19 (Galpin Blvd.) are functionally classified as "A" Minor Arterial roadways in the Carver County Transportation Study. The preliminary plat needs to be reviewed to determine if the corridor shown on the plat will meet the needs for a future urban roadway. Presently Lyman Boulevard is a rural roadway in this location. 2. An access permit will be required from Carver County for the proposed access onto CSAH 19 (Galpin Blvd.) The information received did not include any information on proposed turn lanes, channelization, etc. to accommodate this access. That detail will be needed for the access application. 3. Any public utility lines that are to be installed within the County Road 18 or 19 right-of- way are subject to the utility permit requirements of Carver County. 4. Any proposed grading and installation of drainage structures within the right-of-way of County Road 18 or 19 is subject to review and approval of Carver County. Carver County has concern about the closeness of the proposed pond to the CSAH 18 right of way. This area has many deep peat soil deposits. Has is been verified that this pond excavation will not jeopardize the existing road structure? Reconstruction of CSAH 18 is planned for the near future. Will this pond accommodate runoff and ponding needs from CSAH 18? 5. Development activities (including the installation of both public and private utilities needed to serve the development site) that result in any disturbance of the highway right-of-way (including tree removal, trench settlements, erosion, and sediment deposits) need to be completed in a manner that leaves the right-of-way in "as good or better condition" than what existed prior to construction. It is requested that the city include a provision in the developer's agreement that requires the developer to be ultimately responsible for the final condition of the county highway right-of-way. A clear understanding of this responsibility will result in fewer project oversight problems for both the county and the city. 6. Any trees or landscaping completed within the right-of-way must be approved by Carver County. When locating shrubs and trees, consideration should be given to maintaining an acceptable sight distance at the CR 19 intersection. Any trees or shrubs overhanging into the right-of-way could be subject to trimming for safety or overhead utility consideration. 7. As this area develops, traffic volumes will increase. Carver County considers any potential noise abatement improvements to be the responsibility of the developer. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed plat. ~Sprint 545 E. R2nd Street Ch:L,ka, 1\IN 55.-\IR-2354 June 23, 2005 Robert Generous City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN. 55317 Re: Planning Case # 05-23 "Chanhassen West Business Park" The purposed business park is served by two telephone companies. The western half is served by Sprint with the eastern half served by Qwest. Sprint is working with Qwest to establish a boundary to determine who will provide service to which lots. According by the existing plan lots 1,2,6,7 and 8 would be served by Qwest with lots 4 and 5 served by Sprint with lot 3 to be determined. If you have any question regarding this application, please feel free to contact me at 952-448-8354. Sincerely U //0/ Pete May :;;-- Network Engineer I Sprint of Minnesota, Inc. gct\~tl) 4: lIJIJ'3 j\)~ ~ r\~SSE.N Cr\~~ C\"\'l Of CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDA VIT OF MAILING NOTICE STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on Thursday, July 7, 2005, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing for Chanhassen West Business Park Rezoning, Planned Unit Development, Preliminary Plat Approval and Wetland Alteration Permit - Planning Case No. 05-23 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records. Subscribed and sworn to before me this'~ day of.::r.- 1 ILl ,2005. , ,~~ TIVku~ ~J - Not~~ J ~ KIM T. MEUWISSEN , ~,;(,._.... Notary Public-MInnesota "-- My CommIssion Expires Jan 31, 2010 1f;MNED m I: +:l a,) a,) == m5 .S 'w ... en as._ a,) e ::E:e .~ 0 :cO ::Sm 0.1: -'- o 2 a,) as ()- +:lo. o I: Za,) en en as .c I: as .c o m I: +:l a,) a,) == I: mo 1:'- ._ en i.! a,) e ::E:e .~ 0 :cO ::sm 0.1: -I: o I: a,) as ()- ._ 0. - o I: zm en as .c I: as .c o ~ O)-g~ CIl a. ~~O~ ';i .....- "0 ..r::: 0 - 0) 0 .c ~ fa ::::-E~ ~ ii5 t'll~;.9 0) ~ ~ _0) oE- ::J 0 ,,, ::J 0) ~ 0) ..- CIl >.:Q _ .eCP e CO= "'C O..c::!:!...; c.> U). c:~ 0 0.>.-....- -0) m .c..r:::_ ~ CIl t'llEONOOoen,....~ CIl L. > t'll Ol~ :.a ~ ci. O)E N of,; 0 0..:E ~ CPE wo..O) ::J'Q5 > oe- t5 c::: a. ' ..... 0) - - e (ij -::. "S 0 c::: 0: a..~ 0 ~ g 0 ~ ::J c::: = .. = .,..; L. Cl 0 >. 0) t'll "0 P 000 Ol .. CIl CD g, 0 := 0 .a e .....>==::J~ al E..r:::..r::: ~,- CIl C:::~O ~,--cpO ~ . -0 ~a..~- - __w_~>_ ffi~o.._~ c::: 8L.oE .....E ~.9~t'll-~So>~ ..... E t'll - 0)..00)= 0) .=CIlCll'..r:::"'CJ)-~.: 'l;:: 0;:: _ E '0 1: o..r::: CIl a...r::: .c E t'll .. ~ ~ Ol c::: l;; >. c'- L. - a. 0 - ::J 0 E E _ g ::J 0 CP cD E -.~O)w ...J 0- -O)L.c:::a. . . ...,....E m E Eo.. :E - '5 g>ii5 a. 0 0) 0 0) t'll .9 (j) c::::: Ol= . 00::: a. c::: '0 - CIl 0..- Ol 0) CIl..r::: Q) = O..r::: c::: E.2.!: ca 0 00 E 0:::: 0 0 0 - 0- c::: ~ ..r::: c::: - ..r::: 0) 0 CIl 0) . a. - _ .... ci g .::: ~ ~ 5 ~ g> o~ O)'~::: ~ E ;; 0 eX) o~ C) ~ a5 ~ en g ~ o~~Q)Q5 ~ ~~-EoOa.oc::: ~~::J.c~..r:::E~~~ o 1- 0) Cl == 0) iii t'll S 0) = := - .::: t'll .c ~ 0 ~ t'll .~ Q) I- ::::: e a...... '" Gl O).c ..r::: 0 0) c::: "?"< ~ >........r::: ..r::: .. e ~~o~- ~ w..r:::o_--O)="O CIlO__c:::~_ .~_ _l;;L.C:::"O .$ ~ooc>O)~~>~ c:::..r:::-Ot'll -_c::::tL~ t'll .0 a.:J c::: c::: o!: > = - c:::..r::: 0) ~.- 0 ~ 0) .!9..r::: 19 0 0 .e 0.. ~oE'O~1 00) ~.c"O~->a.~~ a.O>'C:::OC:::O)~_cP Ww ~..r::: Gl::JC:::::J..r:::o_O) O)~t'llO~O)OCllca.e o t'll Ol c::: ~ t'll - .l: a. t'll Cl g> c::: ~ L. .~ ..r::: 'O:Q 0 0 E @ 'E CP _ ~ B .~ fa"?"< ~ '0 -;; ~ ii5 . 0 t'll _ ~ C> - Ol U: 0) @ E > E.5 0 CD 0-..... ~L."Oo~O)_L.O)c:::t'llc::: ~c::: ~CIlO"OO-- ..-~NO"S 0L.~~_w_0::J~=2t'llCll~~CIl~~O)gOt'lloeo~ . ~ c::: 0) 0 '~ - '"~ o-o~ C> c> 0 - t'll 0 ::J::J - L. c::: c::: .- i~::J~-~ Oo>g O)ec:::-=c:::O)O)o"Ooa.O)O)-O)cp~ ....,::JOL.~~ O)o~~~L.a.~=RO)..r:::~::::=L.JC:::=-..r:::-w o 0 '0 0 _ ::J E 0 _CIl CIl t'll := t'll E ,Q ~ c::: t'll = 0 ~ .;:: ~ - i ~ ~-=CIl~a ~~S~~E~~iO)E~~~I>.f~:=E.9~~ ,~t'll _g ~:= ~::Jt'll- _..r:::O::Jw>>'t'llL.-~tCllWen iI~~~~c:::..r:::~Ba.g'5gCJ)~oo..=::JB"Oa.~Et'll~~" O)~o-~~":lO)t-oQ)a.o.c g, 5C1lE.ca.a. .E ::J 0- 0) o~ ~ ~ "0 0 t'll - ..r::: a..c::J . , .. >. 00::: 0;:: , ::J 0) 0 Cp ~O~Clo..OWZC)<~t'llt'lla...-N~~ ~.cO::::~O)CIl"OO.a1- CD E .. i=s ~~ .sB ~.3 .! U:::.;.; glii 'c .!:! .i2 0..<( enOl e e cp.- c.- c.1 !::E _Cp ca.e .e- :=10 ~.. en.!! e e OCP ~E ~ E ::J 0 00 'ii en o c. o .. 0.. >.e ~.2 CP_ c.ca OU .. 0 11....1 L. O)-g~ a. '5 0) ~ ~ "0 ..r:::0- CIl 0 o~o= - t'll 0) .c~_ E c::: fa ::::-E"O CIl ii5 t'll"-Q).9O)cpcp _0) OE- ::J 0 t'll CIl 0) _ 0)"- CIl >.:Q _ e t'll= 12 o.c~ ~ ::J CIl' c::: ' oa.>'-S'- -0) t'll .c..r:::_ 0 0 t'llEo~oooen ~ CIl L. > ~ o~ ~ 0) o~ ~ ci. O)E N of,; 0 0..:E ~ CPE Wo.. 0) ~w> 'o~"O a. '.....O)--e (ij-::. "S OC:::~ L.O c::: _go~::Jc:::="= 'L.Cl 0 >'O)t'll 0.0) 0 Ol"CIlCDg,O:=O.ae j~:J al E..r:::..r:::"O~ ~ C:::~O O)--cpO ffi::Jo.._ c::: ~O-Eo ~o..ti~ io-~~>~i:=~ _ .g :;:- OE t'll.2 _ 0) in 0 0) 0- EO)+: :!!: CIl en ~ Ci5 c. Us .!!! 0) Ol c::: L. ['0 .!: e = a. a...r::: ~ E E E S g ::J 0 Cp cD E ~~Q)O) ...J co- -O)o-::Jo . . ........E '- Eo.. w_- Ol- 0..C::: 0.0 0) t'll.9 (j) c::::: Ol '~ .~Ea.c::: '0 ~CIl::Jc:::CIl 00) =O..r:::c:::E.2~~OOO Eo:::: 0 0 0 - .- g. ~ c> 0) CIl ..r::: 0) 0) 0 CIl 0) . a. - _ '": O L. - 0- c::: -0 Olo- !p- .c:::_ ..r:::_ - - ..r:::_ L.' . 0- '" c::: - 0) en CD . -0)- 0 c:::c:::w> mE oro:=~O)O)O) 0 og~~~ ~ Gl~-E>'O- "0 ~~::J.c~..r:::E~N~ o ,- 0) Cl == 0) ~ m ~ Q) ~ := 2',g fa .c 50S t'll ,~ 0) I- =::: e ~ ~ g. ~ ~ l!? 31 ..r::: 0 = - .~ ~"O"O CIl 0 >. _ -E :!: =. Iii _(j)L.C:::"O .$ ~OOC>O)~CIlO)>O) c:::..r:::~ot'll -_c::::t:- t'll .c a.:J c::: c::: .!: = - c:::..r::: 0) CIl ~ 0) ,S..r::: 19 0 0 .e 11. ~E-"Ot'll ~.c"O--O)L.~O a.O>'C:::OC:::O)~_cp o oO)i g~ ~::Jc:::s..r:::~a.o~ O)~t'llO~O)OCllca.e o t'll Ol c::: ::> t'll - ~ a. t'll Cl g> c::: := ~ CIl ..r::: 'O:Q 0 g E @ oE Cp _ NO..r:::~c:::::> '--0 _CIl_ 0-:= - -Olu.L.O)~E Eeo ~ C:::~"O 0 C~CIl~L.'~ O)Ol O)c::: CIlCllO~ =_ ~~2o..s L.(j)12o-~o..r:::O)Emc::: ~~..r:::Olm::JOOt'llOoe"o 0)0'" oc:::t'll~'Oo-~~2t'llCll~~ ::J::J-L.C:::C::: 0_ -~~-~ oo~~O)~ec:::~gEO)o.9"Ooa.O)Q)-O)CP" ~OL.~> O)o"SECIlClla.~=RO)..r:::~E~~~~EE=~ _OS~e ~ii5Oc&~~O):=t'llE~L.t'llI-O) ~O)o~ca t'll~ii5:;:- ~O)alosfa=..r:::=O)E~ :=>.~~.c_E-~~ "OI~~~~c:::~~~a.~'5~S..r:::o::J~::J:!:"Oo..~~i~>~ ~ o-~-":lO)tguO)lio~oo~oo..-ouC:::CIlE.ca.aca::J ::J~o)~~~"OOt'll~..r:::a..c::J >.>.o_,::JO)oCP.e ~O~Clo..oWZ(!)<~t'llt'lla.~NM~ ~.c~=O)CIl"OO.a1- CD E i= e ..... .2 ....- .s B ca 0 C.J .! u::: en .. eOl cp.5 c.- c.1 !::E _Cp ca.e .e- :=10 ~ ., en.!! e e o Cp ~E ~ E ::J 0 00 >.e ~o Cp~ c.ca o U .. 0 11....1 ca en o C. o .. 0.. ui -0 C) ~ c! o~ ~~ ~! g ... c~~ 2= ... ~ ~ ~o ctS 0 .2 Q) a. cu- c: >,0- Q.OJ ca_ ~Q)Q)"C Oi'~tU;;-O tUc:g>.2= c:.c:c -~Q) ~Q)0 ~Q) ~<.- Q)~ Q).~o ~-.- c>cu OJ- - ~ >~ ~~.- '""~::s CDo_:eg 8:ai<<; C1>.!e s n; ~oo E-ctScu>.> ctS~a ~~ Q)~'~ tUG; c: Ee "'8.Q)'E"" . Q)Q.e ai ~ ~~:;: ~.c.cQ) RQ) ~tUom.c:E- ~o tU=o OJ ~ O<<la.'-'c-8c 0'" 0 c: ;:g>.E ~~a.E~~u;lZ ~ ~ ~,:.2! u)'~Q) tUQ)Q)'OOcu-5.!!'st: >..g Eg- ~!~ ~.~S~ia~5~& ~~ ~~g ~OO tUaSE.c:EtU",-Q) Q)> U"C e=Q) C~OQ)~~~~go sea ~>Q) oc:.g:g ,g:-&l'~~tU lii"C E g> o~ c:a ~ ~~'" tUtU~.c:~Q)EO-- -tU '" c: Cm E-ctS-o~Em~C: U0 OJQ) - OJ ~0Q)0EctS c:Q)C <<10- o~c: '0 ~= 0 -a.cn ... 8,- >.!!! _= -0- 0 ~'5~ ~~cn~~~o~m~ g~ ~s~ -i-c:il'Eli.Eo!!!s::Q)::::~Q).2! OCll 515 is tU~Q)S::Q)Q)o"C~EtU"C~_ tU - 8~= .~S~i~E~~~~~~~5~! ~s .", aiS2 Q) i c: 5,tU -Q) Q) ~ 1:;'jE oS; 0 ~Q)CIl -g E l1) E ~.~ Q) g> 5l ~ ~ 0 E ~ e g. u = g 8~~!~~='c~Q)~~~~ a.~ Q)~'2 ~Q)E"";,,,EEo~~"8EQ)~fi .E~ ="C~ J: := c: ~ - ~ ... (,) 0 .0 .!a' '0 "C ! ci~ a: 0>< >.4):::::1 0"0 CJ >''0'::: 00."3 <1>... c: =' ~Q)t=Uo~~tUEc:"'-Eo ~a ~u.2! Q)'OQ)C'tSCOQ,):::::I caccno~ ...C: <<Se:_ a: 0 8' s :=.5: a. 0.13 Q) Q) 5 ~ en 5 ~ ! .- u cO... ctSC:OQ)c:cnE~-cn Om ~ctS <<s'Oa.i~C:Q)~:::::I:::::I'OctSQ)~ 'co ~ ... a:~~~~~~;o~i~:5ug:~ ~~g Q) en Q) c.2 == (f)U cu E 8:.8 21)'-" a.:t (J ~E'~'--!~~~~~~~~~~o ~C~ ~~~~~=E~5~~=~!E~~ si~ ~~!~~<~j!'2~:~~~~~ ~g~ ~~~[~~!c~o~,~,Q~~~~ ,~~~ [Eg"u~~i~~~~~e8!~~~~~ ~<~!la~~g~,,!gS~ic~g!~ ~~~~~~~~~~~m~EB~!~'~~~ ~~~~~~~oOia~~j~0~~'~~5 ~~~"-S~cO~~.5~~c5~~:E~~ S::-C~c:.cQ)Q)uc:C:~otU~~~Q)otU"C ..~l!! ~~,g!~f5.Q)~2~CIl~Q~Qiu;U5l'~ !i!~ .o~o SE!2 .~~~~!~=~ ::>c:e.gg>~tU&lujoo-.l!!EQ=8. ~'20U ic:~lZ~eQ)~~-otClllo~"'.Esc:c:S UlE~jtU~tUgge~~S::~Q)"C"C~,I1l o oE 00"~~0~mmC~0~c~c Q. u)"o 0.5 ! ~ c: ~~ Ac::-= en 1i) 1: ~ ~ g m ~ 8.S ~ .~ go 5 [8.~,~ ~.~ g S ~,~ -g 0 5:€ 5 ~. g .! .!!! c g>~ e e 8. ~ E .!!! g lil - ~ tU :e 8 ~ 5l t: :c ~2~~~~51e!EEO~~~~I~i~8Qi ~~~~~~!~m8~~.5~~~C:!'~~~~ ~CIlOC~~CIl~==eUU~~~0<tU~mtU'" <3.. ... Q) ~ ~_Q) cO ,~Q) ~ i; 00 c:ta c~ ~ Q) ~~ ~ ._ Q) ~ c: - E ~'- a. Q) ~ 0 ~~~ n;'~m ~o mC:g'~:; c:~~ -~Q) "Q)0 Q) 0<,_ Q):t Q)00 ~;~ ~~~ ~~ i~~ ~~ j'i~ -goo Em~~>->- ~1)e> ~~ Q)5,Q m'Q) C En ~ Q)~=E . Q)o.! ~... ~ >-:5 ~.c~ o~~~tUom.c:E- ~o tU_o Q)e> ~>e~a.wE;8~ 0- ~~c ~C:S ~ma.E~E00 E ~ -:-=Q) uf'~ !! ca Q) Q) ~ 0 Q) -6 ~ g ~ io.g ~ g-= ~!'~ -g~S~~aS~0[ 'G~ ~5g ~o" tUaSE.c:E~",=Q) Q)> U"C e:.::i) c:==oQ)~"~'C3~60 =~ 15>-Q) ._nF ~;c:n~>-m~~Ee> ~o c~E ~~~ n;~:!~Q)~o_.5 sl 0U~ ~m! ~U~;~~E~~~ ~.~ ~!c: -g~= ~di~...;8~lf E~ ~~~ m~O '-~oOOC:0'-0 0_ U Q) -g--oE1)-'!!!EQ)-~Q)! ucn C:~ m~Q)C:Q)Q)u~...Em'O~- ca, 50= 60~~C:E~'O='OE~S~ Q)m u~ca ~~8*ig~ffi~~~0~j ~~ ~~oo gE~E~~Q)g>~~~@E~ e~ C=c: o~~~m~E-~i~~~~~! ~a. !~~ ~Q)E~_0EoQ)Q)~EQ)xo -.~ -'Offi ;c: ;c:.....Q) -~... onQ) 'OQ) AQ)_ Q) < ~ ffi -g 0'0 0 >-~.::: 0 a~ Q) 5 g-g a.. ~Q)t=-UQ)=tUEc"'-Eo ~a ~-Q) Q)'OQ)mge>~g mE00~ ...c ~g= a:,Q.. g..9 := ,5 a. a.~ Q) Q) g ~ 0 is ~ !.- 13 c~'" mCOQ)c0E~._0 Om Q)m ~~~j=j!=5~~.~~~o~~ ~~E ~ : :'~ 50..== ~ 0 ~ Q) as e ~ .!!! ~ ~;: g ~E,~'~~!;C:~~~~iQ)a.~Q)o Q)6~ cnm~.-u-EuB0Q)=~mE.~~ ~~m ~Eg~a<Q)~Q)g>",tU"C=-~~ -tUQ) ~u"'ia.,~i~~~0~~~cB ~~- Q)~~a.cau!c~o~~~~~~~ .~~~ [Eg~~~~i~~~~~e8!'~~~cao ~ccaUFa,.!!!ga:'OQ)gs>-a.c~oQ)m Q)c,5Q)~mgE~ ,C"'a. ~!Q)O'~S'" >~u~0~-Eoccama.Eo~~00e>Q) ~~~~Q)n~oO~~~ca~Q)O~~'~.5S _Q)>-.-5Q)co~cac~~c~~~a.E~,5 '2 '~(1 ~ c:C Q) Q) 5 -g "2 lO 0 ~:: 8. 3: ~ 0 ca "0 ..~l!! <2,g!EEf5.Q)Q)E2~CIl~Q~Qi0U&l'~ !'OQ)~ ...~ ~ Q)~ oe>~Q)Q)e>"'::s i~ii~ii;~~~~i~~~~8.~I~~~ CD ~ 0.0_'" Q)... Q) 0 Q) "C 0'00-._ C Q)"- U~E~jtU~tU8ge~~C:~Q)"C"C~-o..tU"C1l o oE 00'O"'~0Q)mcaC~0Q)c c: Q. ufO 0,5 ! ~ C a.~ AC:-= 00 U 1: ~ ~ g m Q) 8..s ~ ,~ go 6 ~ 8.~"~ ~.~ g S ~.!!! -g 0 :;? :; ~ C ~~c~~~~0~E~~g-;C:m~8i~~1: ~2~~~~Q)tQ)EE8Q)~g",gaii~8Qi ~~Nc~=~"'~oE~~.~~~Q) ~O>-E ~~~~~~f5.~~~8u~~8.~~~~~~lil u . c . ! -= . ~ s:: () '0 s:: () l: '0 ;:; l: ;:; Disclaimer This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational. tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found p1easa contact 952.227.1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ~466.03, Sub<!. 21 (2000), and the usar of this map acknowledges that tha City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indermify, and hold harmess the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the use(s access or use of data provided. <<NAME)) <<NAME1)) <<ADD1 )) <<ADD2)) <<CITY)) <<STATE)) <<ZIP))-<<ZIP4)) c 5 ~ (; u .. '0 ;:; .. ;:; . ... . . s:: () Disclaimer This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to prepare this map are error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational. tracking or any other purpose requiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepancies are found please contact 952-227-1107. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ~466.03, Sub<!. 21 (2000), and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties which arise out of the use(s access or use of data provided. <<Next Record))<<NAME)) <<NAME1 )) <<ADD1)) <<ADD2)) <<CITY)) <<STATE)) <<ZIP))-<<ZIP4)) Public Hearing Notification Area (500 feet) Chanhassen West Business Park Planning Case No. 05-23 8470 Galpin Boulevard City of Chanhassen ~ en tel J: o - o >- - (3 SCANNED Carver County GIS Mapping Application Legend ...IIT. v' .......... "....... ":.... LIIIIII .... .......... c Map Created on: 6-20-2005 Carver County This map was created using Carver County's Geographic Information Systems (GIS), it is a compilation of information and data from various City, County, State, and Federal offices. This map is not a surveyed or legally recorded map and is intended to be used as a reference, Carver County is not responsible for any inaccuracies contained herein. 4275 NOREX LLC 5354 PARK DALE DR MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55416 -1603 ROGER A & GAYLEEN M SCHMIDT 8301 GALPIN BLVD CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -8413 JEFFREY A & CYNTHIA L OLSON 2520 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9372 GINO R TENACE & ROBIN S MARSH-TENACE 2557 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9372 JEFFREY J & ANDREA R SEBENALER 2499 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 SCOTT T MURPHY & LORI A BOETTCHER-MURPHY 2550 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9372 CURTIS J & MARGARET A ZOERHOF 2530 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9372 REILLY M DILLON & STEPHANIE GIMBLE-DILLON 2542 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9372 STEPHEN D & PATRICIA V PETERS 2536 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9372 DAVID E & MONICA L KILBER 2470 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 JEANNE M LINDBERG 2480 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 ALAN W JR & CATHERINE D HECHT 2490 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 TIMOTHY R CAHLANDER & KARLA B PLADSEN-CAHLANDER 2495 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 ALEXANDER D DONALDSON & ALETA M DONALDSON 2460 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 STEVEN G & DEBORAH A WATTS 2563 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9372 MICHAEL C & KRISTIN M MATTSON 2560 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9372 CRAIG W & DANA A JOHNSON 2450 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 THOMAS M & MARCIA A KLADEK 2491 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 FRANK J & REBECCA A LAENGLE 2440 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9369 LEGEND HOLDINGS LLC C/O LEWIS 11750 OLD GEORGETOWN RD APT 2202 ROCKVILLE , MD 20852 -2652 WILLIAM G & KAREN N LOOMIS 2567 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9372 JAY & FAITH M CUTLER 2430 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 CHARLES L & BARBARA C NICKOLAY 2420 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 KARIL YNN KIRMEIER 2410 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9369 STEVEN W & SARAH S DALE 2487 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 SCOTT & AMY C KAEHLER 2380 BRIDLE CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9338 GENE M & BEVERLY G HERMES 2571 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9372 DANIEL R & SHELLEY R LUNA 2483 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 SCOTT P & LESLIE M LOEHRER 2370 BRIDLE CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -9338 JEFFREY L & HANNAH R CROMETT 2471 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 SCANNED CLARENCE E & L1EVA L SCHMIDT 2461 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 CRAIG V & NINA F WALLESTAD 2475 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 ANGILBERTO HERNANDEZ & LAURIE HERNANDEZ 2451 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 THOMAS J RADERMACHER & JOELLEN ANTONSON RADERMACHER 2479 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 PAUL M & CONSTANCE M PALMER 2360 BRIDLE CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9338 STEVEN J & NANCY J CAVANAUGH 2441 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 PETER & LUANN SIDNEY 2431 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 BARRY & MARY L LABOUNTY 2421 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 RODNEY H & JANICE C MELTON 2413 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 MARK & CHRISTINE FISCHER 2407 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 ANDREW M DINGMAN & STEPHANIE J DINGMAN 2403 BRIDLE CREEK TRL CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9369 CALVIN DISCHER 5476 WOODLAND RD MINNETONKA. MN 55345 -5658 RICHARD B BURY 4175 TRILLIUM LN E MOUND, MN 55364 -7730 SAMUEL 0 & KIMBERLY A STlELE 2375 BRIDLE CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9388 MERLE D & JANE VOLK 16925 CO RD 40 CARVER. MN 55315 -9635 JEFFREY D & REBECCA R BRICK 2365 BRIDLE CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -9338 CHARLES E & DIANA L KIRCHOFF 2355 BRIDLE CREEK CIR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9338 KEVIN M & CATHLEEN A DILORENZO 2382 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7413 WILLIAM G JR & PAMELA FRANZEN 2370 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7413 JAMES A & LAURIE L1SIGNOLl 2356 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7413 CHARLES 0 & ERIN M BUSALACCHI 2342 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7413 LBI ACQUISITION CORP C/O CHEF SOLUTIONS: L PETRICH 20 N MARTINGALE SUITE 600 SCHAUMBURG. IL 60173 -2417 TOM & SOMMANA MONTHISANE 2381 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7413 RICHARD B & CHRYSAUNA A BUAN 2369 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7413 WILLIAM A & LORRAINE RODRIGUEZ 2357 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7413 DAVID G & YAEL M RUBIN 2345 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7413 BRIAN C & SALLY L SNABB 2333 STONE CREEK LN W CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 -7413 THOMAS E & MARY K WITEK 2318 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7403 JEFFREY J & ABIGAIL M WILSON 2332 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7403 MARK SUNDQUIST 2374 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN , MN 55317 -7403 JAMES D & TRACI L LEONARD 2360 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7403 JOHN F & LAURIE SULLIVAN 2346 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7403 THE NORDICK GROUP INC 675 12TH AVE NE WEST FARGO. ND 58078 -3502 RODDY Y & LAURIE L W ZIVKOVICH 2337 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 THOMAS V & BEVERLY L ANTILLEY 2361 STONE CREEK DR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7403 JOSHUA T KRIENKE & CHRISTINA A KRIENKE 2375 STONECREEK DR CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7403 DANIEL J & PAMELA J CULHANE 2333 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 ALOTA PROPERTIES LLC 4035 NOREX DR CHASKA. MN 55318 .3043 JOEL E & HEIDI M LEHRKE 2329 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 JEFFREY J & KARLA M ALTHOFF 2326 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 KELLY K MORLOCK & SARA B ROMANSKI-MORLOCK 2325 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 DOUGLAS VERNON JOHNSON 2322 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 CHARLENE A STENDER 2321 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7401 JAMES M & JENNIFER D LARRANAGA 2318 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN. MN 55317 -7401 DOUGLAS G & SARAH P HIPSKIND 2317 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 .7401 DONALD W & CATHY BORGMANN 2308 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 RORY D & AMY J LEA 2313 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 GERHARD & HELENE A SCHOCK 2309 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 DELORIS B HOLASEK LIVING TRUST C/O DELORIS HOLASEK 8610 GALPIN BLVD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -9413 SCOTT T & NICOLE M BRUSH 2301 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 MICHAEL & JACQUELINE R MROSKO 2305 BOULDER RD CHANHASSEN . MN 55317 -7401 RICHARD F RIEGERT C/O RIEKER ENTERPRISES 7875 187TH ST BELLE PLAINE . MN 56011 -8932 CHASKA WATERTOWER MINI 149 JONATHAN BLVD N CHASKA . MN 55318 -2342