8a-e Gateway Partners, Steiner Dvlpmt-Hwys 5 & 41
CITY 0 F
CHANHASSEN
PC DATE: 5/7/97
~ Q.-~,
CC DATE: 5/27/97
CASE #: 92-6 PUD
By: Generous/Hempel:v
-
z
::{
:.>
.-
...J
1.
1.
::{
c:(
~
Q
W
f-
-
C/)
STAFF
REPORT
PROPOSAL: Request preliminary PUD approval for a mixed use development consistmg of
office/industrial uses, support. commercial uses, and park and open space; rezoning from
Agricultural Estate, A2, to Planned Unit Development, PUD; preliminary plat approval for 12 lots,
2 outlots and associated right-of-way; wetland alteration permit to fill and mitigate wetlands; and
interim use permit to permit site grading; Alternate Urban Area Review (AllAR) review and
approval, Gateway Addition, Gateway Partners,
LOCATION:
Southeast comer ofHwys. 5 and 41
APPLICANT:
Steiner Development
3610 South Highway 101
Wayzata, MN 55391
Gateway Partners
clo Steiner Development, Ine
1>
a_'J ,\.. . P.::tMp
1'ININ' .
ACREAGE:
154 acres (including 2.64 acre Wrase parcel)
INTENSITY:
F.A.R. 0.1 - 0.4
ADJACENT ZONING AND
LAND USE: N - A-2; vacant
S - A-2; vacant
E - A-2; vacant
W - A-2; Minnesota Landscape Arboretum
WATER AND SEWER:
Water and sewer will be available with Phase IV of Upper Bluff
Creek Trunk Improvement Project. Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, will be served via
Chaska's sanitary sewer.
PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: This site has varied topography, including 15 acres of wetland and 10 acres
of upland wooded vegetation. There are 3 existing homes on the subject site. One will be removed and the
other 2 homes are shown on a lot that is exempted from the current proposal.
2000 LAND USE PLAN:
Office/Industrial
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 2
PROPOSAL/SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting preliminary PUD approval for a mixed use development consisting of
office/industrial uses, support commercial uses, and park and open space; rezoning from
Agricultural Estate, A2, to Planned Unit Development, PUD; preliminary plat approval for 12 lots,
2 outlots and associated right-of-way; wetland alteration permit to fill and mitigate wetlands; and an
interim use permit to permit site grading to commence prior to final plat approval.
The proposal includes approximately 90 acres that will be developed into approximately 1.2 million
square feet of building on 12 lots. The development will take place in three phases with the first
phase taking place this year in the southwest comer (82nd Street). This phase includes
approximately 4.12 acres of commercial and 20 acres of industrial. A site plan for a proposed
101,600 square foot office/industrial building is being reviewed for Lot 3, Block 1.
Because this project exceeds 500,000 gross square feet of new office/industrial development, an
Environmental Impact Statement is mandatory. The city wiH be the Responsible Governmental
Unit. Instead of completing an EIS, the city is pursuing an Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR). The same issues will be studied under an EIS and the AUAR, but the time frame is
shorter. The AUAR will provide an opportunity to develop detailed information about the project
and potential impacts. Staff will then direct the applicant on how to mitigate these impacts. The
city may not issue any notices to proceed on the project until the mitigation plan is approved by the
city.
The proposal will be guided by the recommendations of the Highway 5 Corridor Study and the
Bluff Creek Corridor Study. Both studies recommend preservation of natural features. The plan as
proposed places the road adjacent to the open space. This will create a significant open area and a
visual edge from Highway 5.
One of the major issues of the Highway 5 Corridor Plan is to develop the frontage/parkway roads
that will run on either side of the highway. The location of the southern frontage road directly
impacts the design of this project. The proposal shows a full access onto Highway 5 approximately
1600 feet east of the intersection of Highway 5 and Highway 41. The city has worked with
MnDOT to allow for a full signalized intersection at this location. There will be another full
intersection at Highway 41 and 82nd Street.
As part of the review, staffis preparing preliminary development standards for the PUD. Any
future development would need to comply with the standards that are established as part of this
district. Additionally, individual site plans will need to be reviewed and approved as
development proceeds.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 3
Staff is recommending that the preliminary plan be approved subject to the conditions of this
report.
Site Characteristics
The property is approximately 146.5 acres in size located south of Highway 5 and east of Hwy. 41.
The property is currently cultivated with one farm homestead along Highway 5 and two homes that
are currently exempted along Hwy. 41. The homestead, owned by Wrase's, is 3.15 acres in size.
This site has varied topography with rolling hills, wetlands and wooded areas. There are] 5 acres of
wetlands. They are mostly found in the eastern edge of the property with ten acres of upland woods
consisting of maple, basswood and oak located in the southeast comer of the ISO-acre parcel. The
plan proposes to include the largest wetlands and wooded area of36 acres to be included as a city
park. This property would be combined with the recently acquired O'Shaughnessy property to
create a large passive park.
The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for future land use of office/industrial. The proposed
land uses are office/industrial, commercial and parks and open space. The University of Minnesota
Landscape Arboretum is the adjacent use to the west ofthis proposal and it is zoned A-2. Property
to the north of this site is zoned A-2 and is currently cultivated field. The property to the south is
bordered by 82nd Street and the Chaska city limits. The property in Chaska has been developed as
an industrial park.
This site has varied topography from a high point of 1038 feet in the west to a low point of934 in
the east. There are approximately 15 acres of wetland and 10 acres of upland wooded vegetation.
There are 3 existing homes on the subject site. One will be re~oved and the other 2 homes are
shown on a lot that is exempted from the current proposal. An ol~ barn is located in the south
central portion of the site.
REZONING
Justification for Rezoning to PUD
The applicant is requesting to rezone approximately 154 acres from Agricultural Estate to PUD,
Planned Unit Development. There are three components to the PUD: industrial/office, support
commercial, and parks and open space. The following review constitutes our evaluation of the
PUD request. The review criteria is taken from the intent sl?ctio'n of the PUD Ordinance.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 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 zoning also allows for a greater
variety of uses, internal transfer of density, construction phasing, and a potential for lower
development costs. 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.
FINDINGS
It will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that the City's expectations are to be
realized as evaluated against the following criteria:
1. Preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of sensitive
environmental features, including steep slopes, mature trees, creeks, wetlands, lakes and
scemc VIews.
Findine:. There are 10 acres of upland wooded vegetation including box elder, willows and
green ash on the eastern portion of this site. This wooded area is adjacent to a wetland that
will be preserved through dedication of 15 acres to the city. In addition, there will be a 40
plus acre site with the vast majority of the site left in its natural state.
2. More efficient and effective use of land, open space and public facilities through mixing
of land uses and assembly and development of land in larger parcels.
Findine:. This is a large area of property, and when it is approved for subdivision, it will
have a master transportation plan, and a sewer, water and storm water management plan. If
each of these parcels were to develop separately, they would not have the comprehensive
utility and traffic plans. It will also provide a cohesive and Unified design theme at one of
the major entrances to the city.
3. High quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both
existing and planned. Site planning, landscaping and building architecture should reflect
higher quality design than is found elsewhere in the community.
Findine:. The applicants are proposing to submit individual building plans for each
development lot. The city will utilize its normal site plan review procedure for each. The
approved PUD documents will establish development standards to ensure that the site is
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 5
developed in a consistent and well-planned manner so that a higher quality of development
will result.
4. Sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses and along
significant corridors within the city will be encouraged.
Findine. The Comprehensive Plan shows a required landscaping buffer with the residential
property to the east. The majority of this property is a wetland. The city is in negotiations
with the developer which will be preserving approximately 40 acres in its natural state as a
transition to less intensive development to the east.
5. Development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Findine. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area for office and light industrial use. The
applicants are proposing a business park. They are requesting a mixed use area that may be
commercial, educational, office or industrial uses. The support commercial shall be as
defined in the design standards for this development. Staff is basing most of its use
recommendations on the uses permitted in the lOP district regulations.
6. Parks and open space. The creation of public open space may be required by the city.
Such park and open space shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Park Plan and
overall trail plan.
Findine. The Park and Recreation Commission recommended that a community park be
developed on the site. This park would require dedication in excess of the 36 acres, which
includes the eastern portion of the site. The applicant is proposing the dedication of
approximately 40 acres. The city is also investigating the purchase of additional park land
in excess of the dedication requirements.
7. Provision of housing affordable to all income groups if appropriate with the PUD.
Findine. Not applicable for this development.
8. Energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and sitings and
the clustering of buildings and land uses.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 6
Findin2. The conservation element will evolve as the wetlands, roads and building
orientation are established as part of the standards for this PUD. Provisions for ultimate
service of the site by Southwest Metro Transit shall be incorporated into the plan.
9. Use of traffic management and design techniques to reduce the potential for traffic
conflicts. Improvements to area roads and intersections may be required as appropriate.
Findin2. The use of traffic demand management techniques for the developer and site
users will be a condition of approval.
Summary of Rezoning to PUD
Rezoning the property to PUD provides the applicant with flexibility, but allows the city to
request additional improvements and the site's unique features can be better protected. The
flexibility in standards allows the disturbed areas to be further removed from the unique features
of the site. In return for the flexibility, the city is receiving:
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan;
Screening of undesirable views of loading and parking areas;
Corridor sensitivity on Highways 5 and 41, including building orientation;
Preservation of desirable site characteristics (wetlands and trees);
Improved architectural standards including, uniform signs and architecture;
Traffic management and design techniques to reduce potential for traffic conflicts;
Improved pretreatment of storm water;
Gateway treatments;
Sensitive development in transitional areas;
More efficient use of land
GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE
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. Other
Gateway Preliminary pun
May 7, 1997
Page 7
uses may be permitted as listed below if they are ancillary to a principal use in the development.
Commercial/retail uses are prohibited expect those uses specifically noted below.
b. Permitted Uses
The permitted uses in this zone should 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 City Council shall make that interpretation.
Permitted uses may be allowed upon any lot within the development.
Light Industrial - The manufacturing, compounding, processing, assembling, packaging, or testing
of goods or equipment or research activities entirely within an enclosed structure, with no outside
storage. There shall be negligible impact upon the surrounding environment by noise, vibration,
smoke, dust or pollutants.
Warehousing - Means the commercial storage of merchandise and personal property.
Office - Professional and business office.
Health Services- establishments primarily engaged in furnishing medical, surgical and other
health services to persons.
Conferences/Convention Center -
Indoor RecreationlHealth Club-
Day Care -
Hotel/M"otel-establishments engaged in furnishing lodging.
Institutional- (minimum square footage 70,000 square feet)-educational, or public/semi-public
uses including academic and technical courses.
Utility Services - Water towers and reservoir.
Commercial uses (permitted on lots specified as commercial in development standards
tabulation box)
1. Restaurant, permitted on Lot 1, Block 3 and Lot 4, Block 4 with a total maximum of
20,000 square feet for stand alone restaurants.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 8
2. Convenience store with or without gas pumps not to exceed 12,000 square feet on Lot 1 and
2, Block 1 only.
3. Banks, with or without drive up windows
Ancillary Uses (in conjunction with and integral to a primary use)
1. Fast Food (no drive-through and only in conjunction with and integral to a convenience
store ).
2. Restaurant (only in conjunction with hotel/motel or convention/conference center).
3. 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.
4. Telecommunication Towers and Antennas
5. Car wash, in conjunction with convenience store.
Prohibited uses
. Contractors Yard
. Lumber Yard
. Home Improvement/Building Supply
. Garden Center
. Auto related including sales and repair
. Home furnishings and equipment stores
. General Merchandise Store
c. Setbacks
The development is regulated by the Highway 5 and the PUD Standards. the There are no
minimum requirements for setbacks on interior lot lines in the PUD zone. The following setbacks
shall apply:
Street Frontage Minimum Setback Maximum Setback
Buildin arkin Buildin arkin
Hwys. 5 & 41 70/50 150 *
Coulter & North South Road 50/20 100
82n & West Local 30/20 NA
*Lot 5, Block 4, must only meet the maximum setback on one Highway frontage.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 9
The average hard surface coverage does not include Outlots A and B. The PUD standard for
hard surface coverage is 70% for office and industrial uses. Anyone site/lot can exceed the 70
percent requirement but in no case can the entire finished development exceed 70 percent.
d. Development Standards Tabulation Box
1. Building Area
LOT/USE
Building Size/F AR
(s uare feet)
Lot 3, Block 1 10.02 131,006 262
Lot 4, Block 1 5.45 71 ,218 142
Lot 5, Block 1 4.41 57,688 115
Lot 1, Block 4 4.38 57,199 114
Lot 2, Block 4 5.40 70,597 141
Lot 3, Block 4 8.98 117,371 235
Lot 1, Block 2 12.23 159,822 320
Lot 5, Block 4 23.20 (.4 FAR) 404,279 (3/1 000) 1,213
Lot 1, Block 1
Lot 2, Block 1
Lot 4, Block 4 Office/Hotel
Loti, Block 3
Restaurant/Office
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 10
Commercial sites may develop as office-industrial uses. Square footage for individual lots
may be reallocated within the development, by type, provided the maximum square footage
is not exceeded.
Building Square Footage Breakdown
Office 31% 368,000/(432,000)
Light Industrial 31% 368,000/(432,000)
Warehouse 31% 368,000/(432,000)
Commercial 7% 81,000/(0)
Total 100% 1,186,000/(1,295,000)
*includes the Wrase property. () represents conversion of commercial uses to office-
industrial uses
2. More than one (1) principal structure may be placed on one (1) platted lot.
3. Building height shall be limit 3 stories or 40 feet.
4. Lot 5, Block 4, is anticipated to accommodate a corporate headquarters or office, research,
manufacturing type user. While the majority of the development is based on 30 percent
office space, Lot 5 must have a minimum of 40 percent office use and include multi-story
building(s).
e. Building Materials and Design
1. The PUD requires that the development demonstrate a higher quality of architectural
standards and site design. All mechanical equipment shall be screened with material
compatible to the building.
2. All materials shall be of high quality and durable. Masonry 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.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 11
5. Concrete may be poured in place, tilt-up or pre-cast, and shall be finished in stone, textured
or coated.
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 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.
9. The use oflarge unadorned, pre-stressed concrete panels and concrete block 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. 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.
10. Space for recycling shall be provided in the interior of all principal structures or within an
enclosure for all developments in the Business Center.
11 Each buildings 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 Highways 41 and 5 shall comply with Buffer yard standard C (as per
city code). Coulter Boulevard, the north south street, and West 820d Street shall comply
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 12
with Buffer yard standard B. The master landscape plan for the Gateway PUD shall be the
design guide for all of the specific site landscape developments. 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 masonry fences and/or
landscaping.
3. Undulating or angular berms or elevation changes of 3' te-4! in height shall be placed
along Coulter Boulevard, and the North! South Street. The berms shall be sodded or
seeded at the conclusion of each project Phase grading and utility construction. The required
buffer landscaping may be installed incrementally, but it shall be required where it is
deemed necessary to screen any proposed development. All required boulevard landscaping
shall be sodded.
4. Loading areas shall be screened from public right-of-ways. Wing walls may be required
where deemed appropriate.
g. Signage
1. All freestanding signs be limited to monument signs. The sign shall not exceed eighty (64)
square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. The sign
treatment is an element of the architecture and thus should reflect with the quality of the
development. The signs should be consistent in color, size, and material throughout the
development. The applicant should submit a sign package for staff review.
2. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign per street frontage.
3. 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.
4. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights.
5. The Gateway PUD shall be permitted tffi:ee two Gateway business identification signs.
One sign per project entrance, at West 820d and the north/south road and at Highway 41
and the westerly roadway, shall be permitted. Said sign shall not exceed 80 square feet in
sign area nor be greater than eight feet in height.
6. Wall sign shall be permitted per city ordinance for industrial office park site.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 13
7. All signs shall require a separate sign permit.
8. Sign age for the main entrance on Highway 5 and the north/south road shall be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council.
h. Lighting
1. Lighting for the interior of the business center should be consistent throughout the
development. The applicant's proposal is consistent with the lighting standards for the PUD
ordinance. The plans do not provide for street lighting. As with previous industrial
parks/roadways, the City has required the developer to install street lights throughout the
street system. The street lights should be designed consistent with the existing lighting
along the existing Coulter Boulevard.
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.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 14
SUBDIVISION REVIEW
WETLANDS
There are six wetland basin areas identified on this site covering an area of approximately 15.5
acres. These wetlands are located on the east side of the property with small fingers reaching to
the west. This project proposes to fill 2.93 acres of Type 2 seasonally flooded wetlands. The
mitigation for these impacts would be a combination of new wetlands on site buffer zones and
wetland credits for an off site mitigation project. This wetland report is based on a delineation
performed by Peterson Environmental in 1994. At that time, requirements for defining a wetland
boundary were ground water present at a depth of 18 inches. This requirement has since been
amended to "groundwater present at 12 inches". The applicant feels that this revision will
decrease the size of previously delineated wetlands, and is therefore conducting a study of the
hydrology in the area. This new delineation may decrease the size of the identified wetlands.
Wetland A
Wetland A is located at the northwest corner of the site. It has been identified by the City as an
ag/urban wetland that is currently connected to the storm water culvert system along Trunk
Highway 41 and Trunk Highway 5 because of it's location and the runoff impacts, this wetland
has poor quality plant and wildlife potential. While these plans do not propose impacts to the
size or function of this wetland, future site plans will have to demonstrate that runoff is not
increased to this site and that it maintains it's function in the culvert system.
Wetland B
Wetland B is a large area on the north eastern edge property and extends to the east where it
drains into a section of the Bluff Creek. It is approximately 14 acres of type 2, ag/urban, wet
meadow wetland. This wetland receives runoff from two smaller wetlands to the west and
northwest by two fingers of wetland area. Because of past agricultural activities and the
dominance of reed canary grass, this wetland is considered to be poor in quality but highly
important because of it's connection to the Bluff Creek. Proposed impacts to this wetland are
fill in the above mentioned fingers of wetlands and to mitigate along the west edge (see
attachment).
Wetland C
Wetland C is located at the southeast edge of the property and extends further to the south east of
this site where, like wetland B, drains to the Bluff Creek . It also has a long finger of wetland
that extends to the west and drains through this finger into Wetland D. This wetland is
approximately 12 acres of type 2 ag/urban wetlands which has been impacted from both
development from the south and previous agricultural activities. The value and quality of this
wetland are low because of historical agricultural disturbances, but like wetland B, maintain a
high significance because of it's connection to the Bluff Creek.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 15
Wetlands D
Wetland D extends beyond the south property border and has been identified as 2.17 acres of
seasonally flooded, Type 3 AglUrban, shallow marsh wetland. The wetland receives drainage
overland from wetlands F and E, and from a ditch from wetland B. Two storm sewer culvert
routes are located on the west and south edges with overflow drainage going to the northeast into
the lower portion of Wetland B.
Wetland E
Wetland E is a 0.24 acre seasonally flooded Type 2 ag/urban wetland located in the southeast
portion of the site. This wetland is considered to be of high quality because of the forested
surroundings. Wetland E receives overland flow and overflow drains into wetland F.
Wetland F
Wetland F is also located in the south east comer of the site. This wetland is very similar to
wetland E, a 0.29 acre Type 2, ag/urban wetland located in a forested surrounding. It receives
overflow runoff form wetland E and drains west to wetland C. This wetland unlike others on this
site still is dominated by native plants species.
Wetland Mitigation
This site plan proposal has 2.93 acres of wetland impacts requiring 5.83 acres of mitigation. Of
the 5.86 acres of wetland mitigation required, 2.27 acres of new wetlands are proposed to be
created on site. At this time the remaining mitigation will come from new wetland credits
created by the arboretum and in kind mitigation including upland buffers.
This site originally included a 30 acre parcel on the west side of Highway 41. This area was sold
to the University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum as part of a extensive 10.5 acre wetland
restoration project, to be undertaken by the arboretum.. In selling this property to the University,
Steiner Development, Inc. included a condition of sale that would require the University to bank
enough wetland credits to meet the mitigation needs of the remaining developable area. At that
time the wetland impacts were calculated to be 1.8 acres. City Staffhas met with the Arboretum
and the developer and acting as the LGU, will credit the applicant 1.8 acres of new wetland
credits for this project. The Arboretum will either transfer bank credits to this project or they
will make a cash contribution to the City's wetland fund for the restoration or creation of 1.8
acres of new wetlands.
Wetland Buffers
The City Wetland Ordinance requires buffer strips for the ag/urban wetland located on the
property if the wetland is not impacted. The buffer strip width required for an ag/urban wetland
is 0 to 20 feet with a minimum average width of 10 feet. The principal structure setback for
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 16
these wetlands is 40 feet measured from the outside edge of the buffer strip. Wetland buffer
areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland ordinance. The City
will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and will charge the applicant
$20 per sign.
SURF ACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP)
The City of Chanhassen has developed a surface water management plan (SWMP) to protect water
quality and manage water quantity within the City's watershed. The plan identifies, from a regional
perspective, the stormwater quantity and quality improvements necessary to allow future
development to take place and minimize its impact to downstream water bodies. In general, the
water quantity portion of the plan uses a 100-year design storm interval for ponding and a 10-year
design storm interval for storm sewer piping. The water quality portion of the plan uses William
Walker, Jr.'s Pondnet model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies.
SWMP FEES
This proposed development will be required to construct water quality and water quantity ponds in
accordance with the City's SWMP, or pay the City SWMP fees to have these ponds constructed.
The entire Site will be evaluated based on total area minus any wetlands or outlots. As of this
report, this site would be responsible for a SWMP fee based on 114.02 acres of developable land.
OfficelIndustrial developments have water quality fees of $4,633 per acre and water quantity rates
are $4,360 per acre. Based on these figures the water quality fee for the entire site would be
$528,255 and water quantity fees would be $ 497,127. Water quality credits are given for on site
treatment ponds meeting NURP standards. Water quantity credits are also given for assessments
and/or construction of trunk storm sewer lines if applicable. These fees are determined when the
final grading and utility plans are submitted with each phase of the project. The remaining fees are
due at the time of final platting.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
This project is proposed to be developed and graded in multiple phases. Phase I consists of the
southwesterly and central portions of the site which includes Lots 1 through 4, Block 1, part of the
north/south street and Coulter Boulevard, as well as storm drainage ponds. This approach of
grading is feasible in an effort to minimize erosion on the site. However, staff is concerned that the
earthwork will balance upon arriving at the final phase of construction so that additional material is
not needed to be imported to or exported from the site. The applicant should provide to the City an
overall grading plan which stages construction. The plan should include the amount of earthwork
involved in each phase to insure that the earthwork on site balances. Overall, the grading appears
acceptable except for the following areas:
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 17
1. The parcellying north of Lot 1, Block 1 will be approximately 6 to 8 feet higher than Lot 1
after grading. The City has directed the applicant provide access from 82nd Street West to
this parcel for future access needs. Based on the grading plan, this will be fairly difficult to
achieve without modifying the grading plan on Lot 1, Block 1. Staffhas requested a 40-foot
wide easement assuming a 20-foot wide private driveway to access the site from 82nd Street
West. The grading plan will need to be revised to address this.
2. A storm water quality pond is proposed at the northeast comer of 82nd Street West and the
north/south street. This ponding basin will essentially be developed in an existing ravine
area. Staffhas reviewed the pond configuration and recommends the pond be reconfigured
to a more north/south configuration to minimize tree loss and preserve the natural slopes
adjacent to Wetland C.
3. Site grading will involve filling portions of wetlands throughout the site. There are fingers
of wetlands that extend out from the main wetland basin. Staff believes that by realigning a
portion of the north/south street between Coulter Boulevard and the cul-de-sac westerly
approximately 50 to 75 feet would reduce wetland impacts. In addition, this would give
some slope relief along the east side of the north/south street adjacent to the wetland and
parklands. Currently there is a 2: I slope and a retaining wall proposed.
4. Two storm water basins are proposed adjacent to Coulter Boulevard lying east of the
north/south street. These two storm water basins will take approximately 70% of the site
runoff. Based on their size, it appears they may need to be increased to accommodate storm
water runoff and provide the necessary water quality treatment prior to discharging into
wetlands. The applicant should provide the City with the necessary storm water
calculations to document the pond sizing will meet the City's Surface Water Management
water quality/quantity requirements prior to final plat consideration.
5. Based on the applicant's narrative, it appears that Trunk Highways 5 and 41 future upgrades
have been taken into account in the proposed site grading. As of today, staff has not
received back comments from MnDOT with regards to this proposal. Therefore, staff is
recommending that any additional changes in site grades as a result of MnDOT's review
shall be incorporated into the conditions of approval for preliminary and final plat.
6. Upon preliminary review it appears that storm water currently draining to Wetland "C" may
be reduced with the proposed site grading. The developer's engineer shall provide the City
with documentation that Wetland C will receive the same amount of runoff as with
predevelopment conditions to insure recharging ofthe wetland. Storm water discharge
points in the ponds should be consolidated wherever feasible to reduce maintenance and
improve water quality by keeping the outlet pipe as far away from the inlet pipe as possible.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 18
The plans propose a series of storm sewers to convey surface water runoff from the individual lots
to regional storm water ponds for treatment prior to discharging into the wetlands. A storm sewer
system will also need to be extended along the north/south street to address storm water runoff from
Lot 1, Block 3. The development's storm sewer system shall be designed for a 1O-year,24-hour
storm event. Ponding calculations including pre and post-development conditions for a 10-year and
100-year storm event will also be required for City staff review prior to final plat consideration.
The applicant should also consider oversizing the storm sewer system and ponding facilities to
accommodate runoff from Trunk Highway 5. This should be worked out between MnDOT, the
applicant and the City prior to final plat consideration.
UTILITIES
Municipal sewer and water service is not readily available to the site without the extension of
sanitary sewer and water from the adjacent parcel approximately 650 feet east. The applicant has
petitioned the City to extend sewer and water service from this point along future Coulter
Boulevard to service the development. The City Council on April 28, 1997 authorized preparation
of the feasibility study to start the process of extension of utility services. In the meantime, Lots 1
and 2, Block 1 may be serviced from 82nd Street West. The applicant should also extend a sanitary
sewer service to the Wrase parcel which lies directly north of Lot I, Block 1 as a part of the overall
site improvements. It is not uncommon for a developer to be required to extend municipal services
to the adjacent property lines for future extension. Municipal utility service to the remaining
portion of the development requires the extension of the Upper Bluff Creek Interceptor which is
approximately 650 feet east of the development. Construction of the sewer and water service is
proposed to commence in 1997. Given the timing constraints of preparing the construction plans
and actual construction, an interim connection into Chaska's sewer system may be appropriate for
Lot 3, Block 1. The cities ofChaska and Chanhassen have a cooperative agreement whereby some
of this development adjacent to 82nd Street West maybe served through Chaska's system.
However, there is a capacity limit of20,000 gallons per day that can be discharged into Chaska's
system. Depending on the amount of discharge from Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1 may not be able to
be developed until permanent sewer facilities have been extended to service Lot 3. A condition will
be placed in the final plat approval process to address this issue.
Public street and utility construction outside the scope of the City's work will require detailed utility
and street construction plans and specifications in accordance with the City's latest edition of
Standard Specifications and Detail Plates in conjunction with final platting for staff review and City
Council approval. The developer will also be required to enter into a PUD
AgreementlDevelopment Contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to
guarantee conditions of approval.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 19
STREETS
As a part of the feasibility study for utility extension, the report will also analyze construction of the
north/south street from 82nd Street West to Trunk Highway 5 and Coulter Boulevard. Although the
north/south street will be constructed in two phases with Phase I concentrating on the portion of
street adjacent to Lot 3, Block 1, a subsequent phase would complete the northern portion of the
north/south road and associated utilities to Trunk Highway 5. The timing of this phase will be
driven by two factors: development pressure and/or the upgrade of Trunk Highway 5 by the year
2000. The extension of Coulter Boulevard west to the north/south street may be delayed until
development levels warrant construction. The determination of this need is currently being
analyzed in an overall traffic study for the development. The above-referenced improvements
could be constructed as a City project and assessed back to the development. The east/west street
and cul-de-sac would be construction by the developer in subsequent phases as development
warrants.
The proposed street system is fairly well-designed from a traffic circulation standpoint. Street
grades appear to range from 1 % to 6% which are in compliance with design standards for this land
use. The streets are proposed to be constructed to the City's standard for commercial/industrial
roadways (36 feet wide face to face of curb within an 80-foot wide right-of-way). Additional right-
of-way may be needed on the north/south street adjacent to Lot 4, Block 2 and Lot I, Block 3 to
accommodate turn lanes. Based on MnDOT's preliminary plans for Trunk Highway 5, this area
will require a 100-foot wide right-of-way. The City's Comprehensive Plan proposes Coulter
Boulevard to be extended west from Galpin Boulevard to Trunk Highway 41 through this site.
This road corridor has been previously designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) street.
Currently, Coulter Boulevard has been constructed up to 650 feet east of this development with
the subdivision of Autumn Ridge. The City has plans on extending Coulter Boulevard in the
future depending on development pressure and overall transportation system needs. The access
points onto Trunk Highway 41 and Trunk Highway 5 have been reviewed and approved by
MnDOT. The east/west street will be restricted to a right-in/right-out only at Trunk Highway 41.
Staff has reviewed MnDOT's comments and concerns and concurs with their findings. MnDOT
has programmed the upgrade of Trunk Highway 5 adjacent to this site sometime in 1999/2000.
The developer should work with MnDOT in preparing their construction plans with regards to
site grading, drainage and street improvements adjacent to Trunk Highways 5 and 41 for
compatibility.
The streets shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City standard specification and
detail plates. Detailed construction plans and specifications for those streets and utilities
constructed by the developer will be required in conjunction with final platting for staff review
and City Council approval. The developer will also be required to enter into a development
contract with the City and provide a financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash
escrow to guarantee site improvements. Preliminary and final plat approval should be contingent
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 20
upon the City Council ordering public improvement project 97-1 for the extension of utilities and
street to service this development. Without the extension of municipal utilities, this development
would be considered premature.
The development of this property will further support the need for traffic signals at the intersection
of 82nd Street West and Trunk Highway 41 and at Trunk Highway 5 and the north/south street.
Recommendations from the traffic study (SRF dated 4/25/97) reveal a traffic signal is warranted at
82nd Street West and Trunk Highway 41 with the first phase. Based on the status of Trunk
Highway 41, a temporary traffic signal would likely be installed until a permanent light is
constructed with the upgrade. It should be noted that the Trunk Highway 41 upgrade is not in
MnDOT's 20-year plan. Auxiliary turn lanes may also be warranted on 82nd Street West at Trunk
Highway 41 as a result of this development of which the developer would be responsible for
constructing and/or financing. It is recommended that the developer escrow with the City a
financial guarantee for the share of the local cost participation for the auxiliary turn lanes and traffic
signals at 82nd Street West and also the future traffic signal at Trunk Highway 5 and the north/south
street. The cost required local participation of these intersection improvements is not known at this
time. However, preliminary estimates from MnDOT will be used for the escrow provision. A
condition to address this will be placed in the PUD AgreementlDevelopment Contract.
A traffic study was prepared by SRF to address traffic-related issues as a result of this development.
The traffic report contains a number of optimistic assumptions such as Trunk Highway 5 being
built to six lanes and Trunk Highway 41 being built to four lanes during the next 20 years, neither
of which have been programmed nor are likely. Staffwill be working with SRF to modify the
traffic report to address these issues. Overall, the entire site is expected to generate a total of 3] ,000
daily trips into the region's road transportation system.
The remnant parcel (Wrase) lying north of Lot ], Block] has direct access onto Trunk Highway 4].
In an effort to improve access to the parcel, a driveway easement should be dedicated over the
easterly 40 feet of Lot ], Block 1.
Boulevard street lights will also be required. The City's standard along industrial/collector-type
streets is a 25-foot corten steel street light. Location of the street lights will be determined at the
construction plan review stage.
EROSION CONTROL
Erosion control measures are proposed throughout the site. Due to the terrain, additional erosion
control fence may be necessary at the toe of steep slopes and adjacent to storm water ponds after
grading is completed. Type ill erosion control fence will be required adjacent to the wetlands. The
storm water ponds or temporary detention ponds should be constructed in the initial grading phase
to minimize erosion to the wetlands. Erosion control blankets will also be required on slopes
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 21
greater than 3: 1. Revegetation of the exposed slopes should occur immediately after grading is
completed.
LANDSCAPINGITREE PRESERVATION
Existing canopy coverage for the site is approximately 8-9 acres in the southeastern comer and 2
acres in windrows. Grading for most of the site will remove approximately 4 acres of trees. The
office/industrial/commercial area has less than 19% coverage and is therefore required to
preserve 10% of the existing trees. According to grading plans, no trees will be saved in the
office/industrial/commercial area so the replacement requirements will be 1.2 times the minimum
10%. This equates to a landscaping plan that includes at least 400 trees. This does not include
landscaping that will be done as part of each site plan nor does it include the buffer yard
plantings along the collector road or highways.
PARKS AND RECREATION
The Park Commission met on March 25, 1997 to review the proposed development. The
Commission moved that upon submittal of the preliminary development plan the following features
be incorporated:
. Designation ofOutlots A and B as identified on the commission's concept plan as open space.
. The identification of an internal trail/sidewalk system including the trails within Outlots A and
B, sidewalks and/or trails adjacent to thoroughfares, and a north/south trail adjacent to Highway
41.
. A sidewalk be planned for the north side of 82nd Street to facilitate east/west pedestrian
movement.
The commission also expressed their preference that Coulter Boulevard not be extended through
the park preserve that is being created.
Staff has be working with the developer to determine the appropriate area to be preserved
for park land. This area is a compromise between the land that the Park Commission would
like dedicated as Outlot B and what the developer has proposed for Outlot B. The
compromise creates a 12.23 acre Lot 1, Block 2. Along the eastern edge of this lot, trees
would be preserved through the use of tree conservation easements. The city would take as
dedication and through purchase all of Outlots A and B.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 22
MISCELLANEOUS
In order to promote traffic demand management strategies and mitigate some of the
developments impacts on the transportation system, the developer should work with Southwest
Metro Transit to provide land and/or funding assistance for transit stop(s) within the
development. Prior to approval of the final plat, the developer shall document there discussions
with Southwest Metro Transit.
Existing structures on the property which may be demolished require a demolition permit. Proof of
septic and well systems that are abandoned are required.
The city is in the process of amending the subdivision ordinance to require all developers pay a
fee of $25 per lot to incorporate updating the GISlbase map. The fee will be payable at the time
of final plat recording.
INTERIM USE PERMIT
COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXCA VA TING, MINING, FILLING AND GRADING
ORDINANCE
Section 7 of the City Code provides a series of standards which an interim use permit must be in
compliance with.
Section 7-40 - Fees
The ordinance allows the City to determine the fee schedule for each permit and that each
permit must be annually reviewed by the City Engineer. Section 7-41 provides for an
irrevocable letter of credit that will be required to ensure compliance with conditions of
approval.
Finding
Staff is proposing that a letter of credit be required to ensure compliance with conditions
outlined below. The letter of credit will cover any road damage, maintenance of erosion
control measures and site restoration. In addition, a permit fee from the Uniform
Building Code will be applied based on earthwork quantities and that all city staff and
city attorney time used to monitor and inspect the operation shall be paid by the applicant.
Staff time shall be paid at a rate of $30.00 per hour. Staff will document the time on a
monthly basis and bill the applicant accordingly.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 23
Section 7-42 - Setbacks
The ordinance requires that a setback of 100 feet from existing street rights-of-way and 300
feet from adjoining property lines be required for mining activities.
Finding
This condition does not apply. It was intended for mining operations only.
Section 7-43 - Fencing
The ordinance requires fencing for areas which will be converted to steep grades or where
on site ponding exists if the Council determines that a safety hazard exists.
Finding
This condition is not applicable since slopes are 2: 1 or flatter.
Section 7-44 - Appearance and Screening
The ordinance requires that the visual impact of grading and mining operations be
minimized and that where necessary, screening be provided.
Finding
This is a temporary excavation process which will be creating building areas for a future
office/industrial building and will immediately be restored with topsoil and seed.
Therefore, the visual impact of the grading will be minimal and screening will not be
necessary .
Section 7-45 - Operations, Noise, Hours, Explosives, Dust, Water, Pollution, Top Soil
Preservation
A. Maximum Noise Levels as measured at the perimeter of the site shall be within
limits set by the MPCA and by the Federal EP A.
Finding
Staff believes that the excavation on the site will not be excessive.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 24
B. Earth work is permitted only during the hours of7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday and prohibited on national holidays.
Finding
The hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturdays
and no work on national holidays or Sundays as stated in the ordinance.
C. Operators are required to use all practical means to eliminate vibration on adjacent
property from equipment operation.
Finding
The earthwork may impact the dwelling adjacent to the site. The developer will be
responsible for monitoring the effects from the construction activities and mitigating any
such effects.
D. Operators shall comply with all applicable regulations for the protection of water
quality.
Finding
The applicant is providing erosion control surrounding the site to retain any runoff from
the site. There are wetlands on the site. Grading shall be in accordance with the
approved development plan for Gateway West.
E. Operators shall comply with all regulations for the protection of wetlands.
Finding
A wetland alteration permit is necessary for this earthwork. The developer will be
required to comply with the conditions of this permit.
F. Operators shall comply with all requirements of the Watershed District where the
property is located.
Finding
The site is proposing erosion control measures to meet requirements of the Watershed
District. Watershed District approval is required.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 25
G. All top soil shall be retained at the site until complete restoration of the site has
taken place according to the restoration plan.
Finding
A stockpile must be provided for the topsoil which will be respread on the site as soon as
the excavation is completed. The temporary topsoil stockpile area shall be designed on
the grading plan.
H. Operators shall use all practical means to reduce the amount of dust, smoke and
fumes caused by the operations. When atmospheric or other conditions make it
impossible to prevent dust from migrating off site, mining operations shall cease.
Finding
Staff does not anticipate a problem with these impacts with the site's location and
precautions that the applicant is providing for the excavation. The applicant should be
providing water trucks for dust control and street sweepers.
I. To control dust and minimize tracking of sand, gravel and dirt onto public streets,
internal private roads to any public roadway shall be paved with asphalt or concrete
for a distance of 300 feet to the intersection of the public roadway. Alternate means
of controlling this problem may be accepted by the city.
Finding
All materials will remain on site. The applicant is required to construct and maintain
gravel construction entrances during the grading operation. The applicant is also required
to provide street clean-up on a daily basis or as needed.
J. All haul routes to and from the site shall be approved by the City and shall only use
streets that can safely accommodate the traffic.
Finding
The materials moved will remain on site.
Section 7-46 - Restoration Standards
The ordinance provides a series of standards outlining site restoration. These are reviewed
below.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 26
A. The plan must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Ordinance.
Finding
The Comprehensive Plan illustrates this area as office/industrial. The applicant's
proposal to grade the site is in conformance with the intended use of it being a
office/industrial business park site. Therefore, staff believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
B. Restoration shall be a continuing operation occurring as quickly as possible after
extraction operation has moved.
Finding
Restoration will be completed immediately after the excavated material has been
removed. Staff will be maintaining a letter of credit to cover the restoration costs in the
case that the applicant does not or is unable to restore the site in a timely manner.
C. All banks and slopes shall be left in accordance with the restoration plans submitted
with the permit application.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 27
Finding
Staff is recommending that the project engineer supply the City with a letter certifying
compliance with the approved grading, drainage and erosion control plan.
D. Slopes, graded areas and backfill areas shall be surfaced with adequate top soil to
secure and hold ground cover. Such ground cover shall be tended as necessary until
it is self sustaining.
Finding
The topsoil is being preserved on the site and will be respread after excavation of the clay
material. The topsoil will then be seeded to ensure ground cover for stabilization of the
area. Erosion control blanket will be required on all slopes 3: 1 or steeper.
E. All water areas resulting from excavation shall be eliminated upon restoration of the
site.
Finding
Other than sediment ponds shown on the plans, there will be no water areas resulting
from the excavation of the site, therefore, this condition is not applicable.
F. No part of the restoration area which is planned for uses other than open space or
agricultural shall be at an elevation lower than the minimum required for
connection sanitary or storm sewer.
Finding
The finished grade of the site is at an elevation that will allow for the connection of
municipal water, sanitary and storm sewer.
G. Provide a landscaping plan illustrating reforestation, ground cover, wetland
restoration or other features.
Finding
The Planned Unit Development application reflect the excavated areas will be spread
with the topsoil and seeded immediately after excavation. The site will also be
landscaped with trees and hedges.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 28
INTERIM USE PERMIT STANDARDS
Mining operations will be allowed as an interim use permit. The ordinance provides that interim
use permits are reviewed under the general issuance standards established for conditional use
permits, Section 20-232, of the ordinance. The following constitutes a compilation of the general
issuance standards and staffs findings for each.
1. Will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, safety, comfort, convenience
or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city.
*
The proposed earthwork is a temporary operation. The grading will provide
topography on the site which will be compatible with proposed office/industrial
uses and therefore it will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, comfort,
or general welfare of the city.
2. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's Comprehensive Plan and this
chapter.
*
The excavation will be maintaining the site in a form suitable for office/industrial
use which is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and this chapter.
3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in
appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will
not change the essential character of that area.
*
The proposed excavation will be reshaping the site for building pads, streets and
storm ponds. The slope will be leveled but will not be changing the essential
character of the area. The land will be restored to a natural state once excavation
is completed and will remain as such until development of the site.
4. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses.
*
With the conditions of approval, the activity will not be hazardous or disturbing to
existing or planned neighboring uses.
5. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including
streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and
sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and
services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the
proposed use.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 29
*
The use is temporary which does not need to be served by public facilities and
services. The finished elevation will allow the site to be served by sanitary sewer
and water once it is developed in the future.
6. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not
be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
*
The activity will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and will
not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
7. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of
operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare
because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents,
or trash.
*
The proposed excavation could result in additional traffic, noise and fumes. The
conditions of the approval will provide standards by which the activities should be
minimized/controlled.
8. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic
congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares.
*
The applicant must provide for traffic control for vehicle entering and leaving the
site.
9. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or
historic features of major significance.
*
The proposal will not result in any significant impact to natural or historic
features.
10. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
*
The area proposed for excavation, once completed, will still be aesthetically
compatible with the surrounding residential/neighborhood commercial sites.
11. Will not depreciate surrounding property values.
* The proposed use will ultimately increase surrounding property values.
12. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 30
*
The proposed excavation application is meeting the standards prescribed for the
District.
Staff feels that the application is complete and will minimize potential impacts. With the
conditions proposed, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission and City Council
approve the project with appropriate conditions.
PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 7, 1997 to review the proposed PUD.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Rezoning of the
property to PUD, Preliminary approval ofPUD #96-2 for an office/industrial business park and
Preliminary Plat approval for the Gateway subdivision, Wetland Alteration Permit for Gateway
Business Park, and Interim Use Permit to permit site grading subject to the conditions of the staff
report.
The Planning Commission tabled the review ofa proposed site plan for Lot 3, Block 1, to permit
the applicant to provide additional material for city review.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the following motions:
"The City Council approves rezoning the property from Agricultural Estate, A2, to
Planned Unit Development, PUD."
"The City Council grants preliminary approval of PUD #92-6 for an office/industrial
business park and preliminary plat approval for 12 lots, two outlots and associated right-
of-way subject to the following conditions:
1. The developer will be responsible for surface water management fees pursuant to ordinance.
Staffhas estimated the water quality fees at $528,255 and water quantity fees of $497, 127.
Water quality credits will be given for the creation of on-site water quality ponds meeting
NURP standards in accordance with the SWMP. Water quantity credits will also be given
for payment of assessments and/or construction of trunk storm sewer lines. Final SWMP
fees will be determined upon review of the final grading, drainage and construction plans
with each phase of the project. Surface water management fees are only applicable to the
lots being platted and not outlots.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 31
2. The developer shall supply the City with an overall phasing plan of the grading including
the amount of earthwork involved in each phase.
3. The grading plan shall be revised to incorporate the following items:
a) Lot 1, Block 1 shall be revised to accommodate for a drive access over the easterly 40 feet
of Lot 1, Block 1 to service the Wrase property.
b) The proposed storm water pond at the northeast comer of 82nd Street West and the
north/south street shall be reconfigured into a more north/south configuration to minimize
tree loss and preserve natural slopes adjacent to the wetlands.
c) The north/south street between Coulter Boulevard and the cul-de-sac street shall be
realigned 50 to 75 feet westerly to reduce wetland impacts and give slope relief along the
east side of the north/south street adjacent to the wetland/park property.
d) MnDOT's review comments shall be incorporated into the final grading and development
plan.
e) The grading plan may need to be revised to ensure predeveloped runoff rates are being
maintained to Wetland C.
4. Preliminary and final plat approval shall be conditioned upon the City Council ordering
public improvement project No. 97-1. Without the project, preliminary plat and/or final
plat shall be void.
5. The developer should be responsible for extending sanitary sewer service to the Wrase
parcel which lies directly north of Lot 1, Block 1 as a part of the overall site improvements
with Phase I.
6. Depending on the amount of sanitary sewer discharge from Lot 3, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2,
Block 1 may not be able to develop until Lot 3 is connected to permanent sewer facilities.
7. The installation of a temporary traffic signal and/or auxiliary turn lanes at the intersection of
82nd Street West and Trunk Highway 41 is required with Phase I development. The
developer shall be responsible for a share of the local cost participation of this traffic signal
on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in
relation to the total traffic volume on 82nd Street West. The developer shall also be
responsible for future costs associated with the local share of the traffic signal to be installed
at the north/south road at Trunk Highway 5. Financial security to guarantee the installation
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 32
of these traffic improvements will be required from the developer in the form of a letter of
credit or cash escrow.
8. The street right-of-way width adjacent to Lot 4, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 shall be
expanded to 100 feet wide to accommodate future turn lanes.
9. The east/west street will be restricted to a right-inlright-out only at Trunk Highway 41. All
lots shall access onto interior streets and not Trunk Highways 41 or 5.
10. All public streets and utilities constructed by the developer shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
Detailed construction plans and specifications for the developer-installed public streets and
utilities constructed by the developer will be required in conjunction with final platting for
staff review and City Council approval.
11. The developer shall be required to enter into a PUD Agreement/Development Contract with
the City and provide a financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to
guarantee site improvements.
12. The developer shall be responsible for the installation or costs associated with the
installation of street lights. The City's standard street light along industrial/collector-type
streets are 25-foot high corten steel street lights. Location of the street lights will be
determined upon review of the final construction drawings.
13. Type ill erosion control fencing will be required adjacent to wetland areas. Additional
erosion control fence may be necessary at the toe of steep slope areas and adjacent to storm
water ponds after the grading has been completed.
14. The storm water ponds and/or temporary detention ponds shall be constructed in the initial
grading phase to minimize erosion off-site. Erosion control blankets will be required on all
slopes greater than 3: 1. Revegetation of the exposed slopes shall occur immediately after
grading is completed.
15. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with
seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod after completion of each activity in
accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
16. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland
ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and
will charge the applicant $20 per sign.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 33
17. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for lO-year and 100-year
storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater quality/quantity ponds in
accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to
review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post-
developed stormwater calculations for 10-year and 100-year storm events and normal
water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basin, and/or
creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also
be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water
quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model.
18. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies,
i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health
Department, Minnesota Pollution control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and
comply with their conditions of approval.
19. Fire hydrants shall be incorporated per the Fire Marshal's recommendations.
20. The appropriate drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated on the final plat for all
utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a
minimum of 20 feet wide. Consideration should also be given for access for maintenance
of the ponding areas.
21. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way except landscaping
along the frontage road in accordance with the Trunk Highway 5 Corridor Study.
22. The lowest floor or opening elevation of all buildings shall be a minimum of 2 feet above
the 100-year high water level.
23. Stormwater ponds must have side slopes of 10: 1 for the first ten feet at the normal water
level and no more than 3:1 thereafter or 4:1 throughout for safety purposes.
24. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during
construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain-tile as directed by the City Engineer.
25. Final grades adjacent to Trunk Highways 41 and 5 will be subject to review and approval
of MnDOT for compatibility with the future widening of Trunk Highway 5.
26. Increase landscape plantings to include 400 trees in addition to buffer yard plantings and
individual site plan landscaping.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 34
27. A 10' clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, NSP, US West, 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.
28. Submit street names to Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Building Official for
review and approval.
29. Existing structures on the property which may be demolished require a demolition permit.
Proof of septic and well systems that are abandoned are required.
"The City Council approves Wetland Alteration Permit for Gateway Business Park subject
to the conditions of preliminary PUD #92-6 approval."
"The City Council approves Interim Use Permit #97-1 for Gateway West Planned Unit
Development site subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall provide the city with a letter of credit in the amount to be determined
by the City Engineer based on earthwork quantities, maintenance of erosion control
measures and site restoration.
2. The applicant shall pay the city a grading permit fee as required by the Uniform Building
Code and pay for all city staff and attorney time used to monitor and inspect the grading
operation. The inspection fees shall be computed at a rate of$30 per hour per person.
3. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit requirements of the watershed
district.
4. The applicant shall work with City staff in revising the proposed grading plan to an
acceptable stormwater management plan in accordance with the City's Surface Water
Management Plan. Since the stormwater management plan for the subdivision has not
been fully approved, the applicant's engineer shall provide an interim storm drainage and
erosion control plan including but not limited to construction of temporary sediment
basins in accordance with the City Best Management Practice Handbook in an effort to
minimize erosion off the site.
5. Upon completion of the site grading, the applicant's engineer shall supply the City with a
letter certifying that the grading has been completed in compliance with the proposed
plan.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 35
6. All site restoration and erosion control measures shall be in accordance with the City's
Best Management Practice Handbook. The applicant's engineer is encouraged to pursue
acquisition ofthis handbook and to employ these said practices. A stockpile must be
provided for the topsoil which will be respread on the site as soon as the excavation and
site grading is completed. Topsoil and disc-mulched seeding shall be implemented
immediately following the completion of the graded areas unless the City's Best
Management Practice Handbook dictates otherwise.
7. Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed Minnesota PCA or EPA
regulations. If the City determined that there is a problem warranting testing, such tests
shall be paid for by the applicant.
8. Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and no
work on national holidays or Sundays. Hours of operation on Saturdays are limited to
9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. If complaints from residents are logged with city staff regarding
Saturday operation, the hours shall be reviewed by the City Council.
9. The applicant shall construct and maintain gravel construction entrances during the
grading operation.
10. All erosion control measures shall be installed prior to commencement of grading
operations and be maintained until all disturbed areas have been fully restored. The
applicant shall also be responsible for removal of all erosion control measures upon
completion of site grading. The city engineer will determine the appropriate time and
authorize the applicant to remove the erosion control measures.
11. The applicant shall notify the city engineer of all drainage tiles encountered during site
grading. The city engineer shall determine the appropriate abandonment or rerouting of
all existing draintile systems.
12. Additional Type I erosion control fence shall be used along the north perimeter of the site.
Erosion control fence surrounding the wetlands shall be the City's Type III version.
13. This grading permit approval is conditioned upon the City authorizing public
improvement project No. 97-1 to extend trunk utility service to the site.
14. The grading permit shall be conditioned on approval of the preliminary plat for the
Gateway West Business Park PUD by the City Council.
Gateway Preliminary PUD
May 7, 1997
Page 36
15. The developer will be responsible for monitoring the effects from the construction
activities and mitigating any such effects."
ATTACHMENTS
1. Letter from Peter 1. Coyle to Mayor Nancy Mancino dated 4/14/97
2. Memo from Ferrol O. Robinson and Jack A. Lord to Kate Aanenson dated 4/25/97, Traffic
Study
3. Memo from Mark Littfin to Bob Generous dated 4/24/97
4. Memo from Robert Huffman to Robert Generous dated 4/21/97
5. Highway 5/Galpin Blvd. Park Concept Plan
6. Notice of Public Hearing and Mailing List
7. Letter from Scott Peters to Robert Generous dated 5/13/97
8. Letter from Kermit Crouch to Bob Generous dated 5/20/97
9. Planning Commission Minutes of 5/7/97
10. Sketch Plan: Lot 1, Block 2 and Outlot A
PETER J. COYLj:
DIR. DIAL (612) .911.32'4
FL
LA~IN, HotFMAN. DALY & L~GREN) LTD.
; ATTORNEYS AT LAW
I ;
1 NOR~8T FINANCIAL CeN~R
reoo XERXES AVENUE SOUTH
BlO INOTON, MINNESOTA &543,."e4
TELEPHONE (812) 8311-3800
I FAX ~12) ........
04.14.1997 15:36
P. 2
FROM LRRKIN HOFFMRN 17TH
;
April 14. 1 ~97
I i
Mayor Nadey ~ancijo
City of Cb~assen Ii
P.O. Box *7 I
Chanhasse*, Minneso~ 55317
Re: peti~iOn to Retne ProPt
Dear Mayor Mahcino. ! ~
. I I i
Our finn re~resents . and Mrs. Henry rase in connection th :certain property situated along CSAH
41 in the City of Ch assen, Mi esota the City). This letter 04firms that the Wrases consent to have
theIr property include in the req est for ning relating the Ch I ssen Oateway Project, as proposed
by Steiner Developme 1. We un erstand at Steiner has sough t~ rezone the property included with
Chanhasse~ Gat~way rom Ag E ate to Panned Unit Developnjent (PUD), in order to allow residential,
commercial, and indus ial develo ment w thin the Gateway Project. The Wrases' consent to rezone
their property does not extend to aving it~incorporated into the plat for the Gateway Project. at this
time. I
I I
With regardl to thc'con~ptual pi s for C ssen Gateway. th~ \yrases object to such plans insofar as
they (1) do *ot provide! adequate ccess to eir property from 8~nd Street; (2) may result in stormwater
drainage from Chanha sen Oatew y 110wi g across their propertf Without appropriate easements or
compensatir therefor; and (3) p opose t e location ofa water tower for the benefit of the Cit)' on the
Wrase's prorerty. t '
The Wraseslsupport co cept rem ing for' hanhassen Gateway. I will be at the City Council meeting to
WlSwer any ~uestions ouncilllle bers tni ht have regarding thi, l~tter.
~lY'! I
LARKIN, H~FFMAN DAt Y & INDO N. Ltd.
cc: Mr. ~d Mrs. HFnry Wras~
Mr. Rich Wrase !
; I
02919'1.01' ! I
~CONSULTING
GROUP,
I N c.
Transportation · Civil · Structural · Environmental · Planning · Traffic · Landscape Architecture. Parking
SRF No. 0972656
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
City of Chanhassen
'f'~ l"'f.a:3~~ ].r"'" (';)
,~ .,"1 l' '!.' r,. ; .
FROM: Ferrol O. Robinson, Principal
Jack A. Lord, Senior Transportation Planner
:\ !~~ P 2 8 1~;~J7
DATE: April 25, 1997
SUBJECT: TRAFFIC STUDY FOR PROPOSED GA TEW A Y WEST DEVELOPMENT
Introduction
The Gateway West Development is a 1,217,203 square foot (building area) mixed use development
proposed for the southeast quadrant of Trunk Highway (TH) 5 and Trunk Highway 41 in
Chanhassen, Minnesota (see Figure 1, Project Location). The site, presently zoned A-2,
Agricultural Estate, is cultivated and has two homes adjacent to TH 41 that are exempted from
acquisition for the proposed development, and one home along TH 5 that may be acquired.
The development, which includes 12 lots incorporating industrial, commercial, and residential uses,
will require rezoning to PUD, Planned Unit Development. Industrial lots are estimated to be 30
percent office, 35 percent warehousing, and 35 percent light manufacturing uses covering
approximately 917,800 square feet of building area. About 75,400 square feet of commercial uses
will include a bank, convenience store, medical office building, and restaurants. The residential
building area is expected to contain approximately 80 units of multi-family dwellings. The
development will also include over 3,100 surface parking spaces. (The estimated number of trips
for the site is based on the maximum allowable floor-area ratio. The actual number of trips could be
less if floor area ratios constructed are less than those used for this analysis.)
Trip generation for the development was calculated by applying trip generation rates from the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 1991 Trip Generation Report, 5th Edition (including the
1995 update to the 5th edition), to the building square footage for the appropriate land uses. Traffic
generated by the site was then added to the background traffic and assigned to the site access
locations and adjacent roadways. Traffic estimates were completed for the year 2003 (one
One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443
Telephone (612) 475-0010 . Fax (612) 475-2429
An Equal Opportunity Employer
I,
Ii
//
if
~!{ -
foo!1 \
~d
;ii
---=-~ \ '<fa
/~ Ij'lIQ 'j."ii"
~\\ i;~tjl II-
(~I ( !::: \\\\ ,1,1 ~~)
\ 1\ E \1111 iJ./
\ \' ~ \ 1\ .--Ai
~\>\ ~ \\\\ ) I
\:~~~~~j j)11 ~ ii
\\\ //~JI ~
\\ ...---'/.--;,-) \,'
\~-----=---::::-~/ f I
'....:==.-:..--... ~...../
r;f)
<
~
Z
<
ti ~
'lIO ~
'1111'/ ~NIM U
u ~~""; ct
m :;: D i tl sn:xJlI~
-,~ c,-,1!:
:;; : L) 'e::: dI1n.l
~ ,/ CQ
N1<f7V::>
\~
j
/1
/'
I B,I,',
I or)
/ !
(~ '
;
---'
/
/
/
!:::
OQi
'i:~
........J
..:9......-;,
..... rr.,)!,\
\W'
ii~ - _'"
~~~~t""- "",
!>f '
o '-
!
'l;
'-..
'-
'-
[iJ'-
'"
Cl
, !
Q-1~~"""",_,,_, j
-lNlj,13ZVH 1.
~
~
~
is
BI!
13
..c
rn
<tI
Qi ~
~Qi
c:l s::
....J!:::
~
~
~
.~
o
p....
~
~I!
....J:'j
=/i
~ ~.
II
l'3
z
"
.1
:!
'"
Cl
\~
1:1: ~
\:Vt.~s ,/ ~
,,~.~/ ;J
C-'
-
~
NNAl9>r;
@
~ ~ i
g",'!!....J
,lI30ln09
'.
'"
"'
"'
"
U
NldlY~
@
TR.
i:f
""
fJ/
,",
...)
Cl
02
"'
<:i
~
"'
3iaill-B "'-"-
'''-'
'_~ .~:c,. __
<:
~"iiO""
'O^lB
z
<
5
'all
@
w
!::
en
/,-- 'llilB
t;;.......' [iJ
~,>'"
\
\
I
:E
~
~
0::
o
::?1 ~
0.. -<
o ~
;:j ~
U
<.Il
Cl
Z
-<
....J
i.
\i>':
"'..
A
00,
/.~-
,/
/
r
I
;:-
/
J'
/-
~
'\ '."-...:.. ~
~
"'z
,...
,.
'"
...)
...)
~
Z I-
Z 0 :2
W i= u
en "'"
en <C "'"
0.
<( 0 C
J:
Z 0 u
....
<( ...I .....
J: u
() t- c
u. 0 >
<l
0 W S
~ .., U
0 f-
a: <l
() c:
Q.
~
...)
"'
Z
<y
~
z
Q.
~
r;f)
<
~
U
u
z
..
,
It.
;:l
o
III
~
~
z
~
!o
'"'
;:l
III
Z
o
U
~
Kate Aanenson
- 3 -
April 25, 1997
year after opening) and 2012 (ten years after opening). Finally, capacity analysis for key
intersections was completed using the traffic forecasts.
This study analyzes the transportation system in the area without TH 212 included in the regional
network. It is anticipated that construction of TH 212, which would be an east-west roadway,
would reduce the number of trips on TH 5, which also runs east-west. At the same time, traffic on
TH 41 and CSAH 19 south of TH 5 is expected to increase as a result of TH 212.
Existing Conditions
Morning and afternoon peak hour turning movement volumes were counted at the TH 51TH 41
intersection in December 1996. Similar counts were obtained for the TH 41/82nd Street intersection
in February 1995. Turning movements for the TH 5/Galpin Boulevard intersection were counted in
April 1997. These counts provided the basis for background traffic projections for the years 2003
and 2012. (The counts at TH 5 and Galpin Boulevard were taken while TH 101 was closed due to
flooding. As a result, traffic volumes on TH 5, especially through-movements, were unusually high
and had to be adjusted. The adjustment was made by balancing the counts with counts taken at the
TH 51TH 41 intersection before TH 101 was closed.)
Trip Generation
An estimate of the number of site-generated vehicle trips was calculated by applying trip generation
rates from the ITE Trip Generation Report to the land uses for the proposed development (see
Tables 1 and 2). Trips generated by industrial lots were estimated using the building area for each
lot applied to trip generation rates for a Business Park. Building square footage for specific
commercial land uses were used to determine trips generated for lots 1, 2, 10, and 11. Trips for the
residential land use were based on the number of dwelling units estimated for lot 12. An estimated
multi-use capture rate of five percent ofthe total trips was used to account for internal trips, and was
subtracted from the total trips. The TH 41182nd Street and TH 5/North Access intersections were
adjusted for pass-by trips amounting to 35 percent of the convenience store, bank, and restaurant
peak hour traffic. The site is expected to generate a total of about 31,000 daily trips, with
approximately 2,900 and 2,700 trips expected during the a.m. and p.m. peaks, respectively.
Trip Distribution
The directional distribution of trips for the subject site (Figure 2) was determined based on the
regional distribution of population and employment. This distribution is observed for the
transportation system in the area without TH 212. Construction of TH 212 would result in a traffic
distribution that is different that that used for this study.
~/!
~f{
6 ill
~ I:
~~ 111Ia,.
/~/~\\ ~ tJ
r~((' t:: \\\~ II '-
1\(, ~ \\\\ ~
~\\ ~ \0~~\ r :;
;'\\\ j J'III ~ ; _,
\~~\ /:2 ~ i c
\\\~..--/ ;//- I ~/-. I
\~/ l; rJ) i
------- <<I
~
Z i ,-/ /"'--
~ \ I 8
u "~~~~:IM U ~\ Q J/\..,> t'#
~ ;;: 1:) ',!:2 SO:JOH:> eJ:.-- +
- 3: .. 'Z / 0 8 'b ~
-< D;~ JI1m /' I ~, ~.<
::;: r ,@;/G) N ~ ..%
I ~ -Cl
I ,.. ...<r:
tfl.)~ ' @ ~~~ G~
01
I
r
/
/
\
~~____ I-
.. ~-'\,f~rf7J~~\~)
, \\\<;j I)
/ ':')) \....:1 I
f J, Q) ,
1,0 Jj/)~ /)11
~// ~/I(
(( r;:::/ ....:I / l
\'{~?/
'-\;~/
N/<l7I-[J
<<
u
tz
-<
~
'"
:t
'-
~
t::
OQ)
.C~
........:1
~ -~
::r: rr--:::=;-;"
~y
~~- .~'-~~.,..-. .......
lIY"'-SlH:> t..... "",
;>! ,
(J ,
l
"
"-
"
,
(i)"
tfl.
", Ln :
Q~q-"-'~3Ni:Ll3zvH~
<<
Cl
~
!
~
~
i
GI
.tfl.
,,0
Eli' M
ceil
,
~
.....
..c
<fJ
~
Q) :.:
~Q)
<'3 c:
....:It::
~
~
~
.,...;
o
P-4
~
ro
'aH Ava N05WIH:>
"
II
//
"
l!
NNA1:J>'"
\~
..
, ~
\:"%s ,/ ~
'-j ;:>
l:)
-
~
N
,.
'"
,.J
,.J
~
Z
0
t=
z ~ I-
m 2
W u.
(j) - :2
(j) ~ a.
~ '" <( l- e
z :c CJ)
(2, 'all
'" tfi \~3a;;i~ z - u.
'" C >
'" <(
'" u.
u :c
TR, i NIJ1V9 @ () ..J c
<C >
~) itlJ LL Z <I:
/@ ::i 0 $
~! :; 0
'" '" ~ U.
:o..\" ..... t= I-
'--.-- ,----- ~'0. <I:
() () <.!:
:<: W
g ~
Z '" -
< z C
~ ::'y
~
Q.
,w
.... ~
::;2
~
""
~
o
::E ~
~ <(
o ""
;::i ~
U
(fl
Cl
Z
<(
...J
!
/:.
j
:,/
:/
, ""1'"
'/i
/.
:/
'" '"" ~ -"'- __",,, .20....
<<Z
'QIf
@
~^'i~
~
o
o
~
'-
"'-
" "','
'"
\.
'\
\
, \,
\1>'"
~\\'
~,
<<
~
rJ)
<<
~
U
u
z
L:':":"
/1
/
r--
,
..
;:l
o
III
~
j
c
z
~
1-0
-'
;:l
'"
Z
o
U
~
t'--
0\
0\
V)
C"l
.......
'C
0..
~
>-
C
:J
~
tn
0
u:
V) LL
~
~
~
tn
W
~tn
>-w
~~
wo::
~z
<(0
C>-
z~
I:: w~
0 tnw
en
I:: tnz
Q) "'l'"" <(w
I::
CI:S w~c>
~ -!Za.
Q) m<(_
~ <(~o::
~ ~O~
I. - 0\ 0\ 0\ 0 ~ ~ 0 00 V) \0 00 -
= = C"! \0 C"! ~ ~ ~ ~ C"! - 00 \0 C"!
~ 0
= - C"l - - - - - - - C"l V) 0
M C"l
..::I::
=
~
~ ~
~ = 0\ ~ \0 0\ - - 0\ \0 M C"l ~ ~
C"! 0\ l"'! l"'! ~ ~ M M M C"! C"l ~
Eo-; ~ ..... 0 r--:
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0
~ M C"l
Z
0
..... I.
Eo-; - C"l - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t'-- \0 ~
;;Z = = \0 0\ C"! C"! C"l C"l C"l C"l C"l \0 C"l ~
~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 r--:
= C"l 0 0 0
~ C"l
..::I::
Z =
~ ~
Co:l ~
~ ~ = C"l V) 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 V) V) 0\
; < ..... \0 C"! l"'! l"'! M M M M M C"l V) ~
C"l \0 - - - - - - - C"l t'-- 0
Eo-; C"l '"
0\
~
~
~ 0 t'-- V) \0 t'-- t'-- t'-- t'-- t'-- 00 ~
- - -
= \0 C"! l"'! ~ t'-- 00 \0 M M - 00 C"! ::s
~ V) V) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t'-- \0 -.:
>. ~ \0 - - - - - - - M t'-- c
- 00 C"l - '"
.... <l::
= ::
~ .~
'"
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ~
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
~ Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) .....
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .....
0 I:: '-
~ ~ ~ Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) :::>
~Eo-; a a a a a I-< I-< a I-<
CI:S CI:S ro 0/) .",
~~ ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 I::
0'" 0'" 0'" 0'" 0'" 0'" 0'" 0'" 0'" 0'" 0'" ..... -
rZJ rZJ rZJ rZJ rZJ rZJ rZJ rZJ rZJ rZJ rZJ .......
.......
~~ Q)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~
~; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
q q o~ o~ o~ q o~ q o~ o~ o~ 0
~Eo-; - - - - - - - - - - - I-<
~ I-< I-< I-< I-< I-< I-< I-< 'I-< I-< I-< I-< Q)
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) A- Is
A- A- A- A- A- A- A- A- A- A- A-
,......,
I-<
Q)
,......, ;>
en 0
0.. a
~ ;::1
.....
A- ..s:::
en 0/)
~ ro .0 ::E
t:l ;::1
rZJ .......
~ ~ u ~~
~ '-' ;S
z Q) ....... 0
I-< ro "'0
< 0 Q) I
..... t3 .....
.....
~ rZJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rZJ
Q) a a (,) '-'
(,) ro ro ..... en en
I:: a:l A- A- A- A- A- A- A- I:: ..... .....
..... ~ I::
Q) U
..... I:: en en en en en en en 8
I:: en en en en en en en
....... Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) ........
Q) I Q)
;> Q) I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: ro ~
;> 'r;; ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... (,) .....
I:: en en en en en en !+:: en
0 'C ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ;::1 ti-< Q) 0..
U 0 a:l a:l a:l a:l a:l a:l a:l 0 ~ ~
Eo-; 0 C"l
0 - C"l M ~ V) \0 t'-- 00 0\ -
- - -
~
""
.5..o.i
.", la
B~
<.) '"
o '"
- 0
~ .5
~ :g
~lIl
.", ..
~~
'" 0
:; ~
<.) <.)
co 0
~-s
.. '"
o .-
S ~
g ~
o :l
~.",
0]
-S 0
1) ij
.. '"
o 0
fo-s
:E c;
0'"
..c 0
f-< 1<1
2~
.o..c
'" -
:= ..c
'" 0/)
> :l
'" 0
~.s
~ 5
'" >
.", 0
-B E
o c
E 2:!
-s~
,g:a
~.:c
~~
~ '"
'" ~
c 0
o..c
''';:: V'J
~ ~
arE
.9 ~
"'.0
~ '"
En:B
.. '"
.",-
ra.s
11 .5
E! c
.9- g
~~
~B
.. '"
o ..
1:; .9-
.",~
~~
:l-S
-6- .~
.s~
'" :l
.~ ~
..c ..
- 0
~~
'" .
5 .S!
'';:: 1<1
~ ~
~ ~
'" 0
~ ~
,S! .....
~ ~
g ~
o 0
~-s
.;:: ~
- 0
o..c
..c '"
f-<B
.. ..
~-E
Z 0
""
<:3
'"
\:l
""
~
~
0\
0\
t!'
9
~
t...l
.,.,
-.:'
c
~
<l::
~
~
'"
::
c3
9-
~
~
o
o
c
bD
c
u.l
c
o
i
t::
o
Q.
~
~
.....
o
B
~
'"
.5
o
<.)
..
:l
o
CI)
~
-
'-'
r-
0\
0\
........
lrl
C"l
........
.....
I-;
0..
~
\0
>-
c
::)
t-
CI)
2
u.
u.
<c
a:
t-
t-CI)
Cl)w
wt-
3:<c
>-::E
~t;
wW
t-z
<Co
C>-
zt-
w~
Cl)w
N~ffi
w::I:c>
..JzQ.
m<C_
<c::I:a:
t-Ot-
s::
o
rn
s:::
<l)
a
~
<l)
~
~
.....
= =
=0
.:c
=
~
=--
00 ........ 00 C"l lrl ........ 0 ........ lrl lrl 00 r- ........ I.C
\0 '<:t \0 0 00 00 0 r- lrl r- C"l........ 0\ 00
C"'lC"'l................ ................'<:t........ 0 ~
C"l~ ~
........
.E:> lrl \0 00 C"l 00 C"l '<:t lrl 0\ C"'l r- C"l ........ ~
.... '<:t 00 r- r- \0 C"'l lrl ........ lrl 0\ 0\ 0 0 r-
= 0\ 0\ 00 0 00 00 o~ O\~ \O~ 00 0;, lrl \O~ ~
~ 0\ C"'l~ ,...; ........~ ........ ........ lrl C"'l C"l =
C"'l f'f'l
~
N-.
t;jc::l
~
~
~
=
Co
fIl
--
........OOOO\OC"l'<:tC"'lC"l\O........~C"'l
\0 C"l 00 00 0 0\ r- 0\ 00 C"'l r-'2 0
r-~ o~ \O~ ........~ oo~ ........~ oo~ C"l~ r-~ ........~ '<:t~ :;j C"l~
........lrlOC"'lOO\O........C"'lC"'l\OC"lo r-
........ ........ ~ r- lrl lrl r- ~ ~ C"l C"l 00 N~
........
'i:'
<l)
;>
o
s:::
~
-
,-..
rn
0..
~
p.. ...s:::
~ rn bD
~ c3 .g ffi
~ ! ~ ~~
Z <l) ':::0
< I-; ro"'Cl
, 0 <l) I
~ ........ ~.......
r/1~~~~~~~~e:::::oo
8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~ ';; rn
fl c:o p.. p.. p.. p.. p.. p.. p.. . S d -g
"" rnrnrnrnrnrnrn........Uro""
'2 .E rn rn rn rn rn rn rn........ ~ 8 ta
<l) I ~~~~~~~<l)~t (5
~ .~ '00 '00 '00 '00 '00 '00 '00 ~ ~ ~ -
o I-; :;j :;j :;j :;j :;j :;j :;j tj...; <l) - .g
U 0 c:o c:o c:o c:o c:o c:o c:o 0 ~ ~ r/1
~
o ........ C"l C"'l '<:t lrl \0 r- 00 0\ ~ ::: Sj
~
=
~
t--
--'
;:
<>
~
<>
c:>.
~
'"
c:>.
.5
<>
'"
~
:;
E
~. ~
~c
~ .52
.......'is
~.g
O~
~~
<>
~'\ij
z.!!l
~c
~]
=-- '"
0..
'0
~!-o
~c
;>8
~g.
~~
<>
Q
<>
.c
!-o
~
....
--
Kate Aanenson
- 7 -
April 25, 1997
Traffic Operations Analysis
A capacity analysis of the intersections and roadways adjacent to the proposed site was undertaken
using historical traffic counts for background traffic, the Gateway West Development Summary for
site-generated traffic, and a micro-computer application of the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual to
determine the estimated intersection Level of Service (LOS) for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
Figures 3 through 9 show the intersection peak hour volumes used in the operations analysis.
Table 3 shows the results of the level of service analysis for key intersections adjacent to the
development. (The north leg of the TH 5/North Access intersection and a frontage road parallel to
TH 5 will be built as part of improvements to TH 5 programmed for 1999. Traffic volumes for this
intersection were estimated from the Traffic Section of the 1995 Arboretum Boulevard
Environmental Assessment completed by the City of Chanhassen.) The analysis was completed for
morning and evening peak hours for the existing condition and for the years 2003 and 2012. Three
scenarios were considered for the forecast years:
· Scenario #1 - Existing and Programmed Configuration - Uses existing and programmed
external roadway and intersection configurations with only the forecast background traffic.
Background traffic is estimated to grow at 2.2 percent per year. Programmed improvements
include widening TH 5 to four lanes from east of the TH 51TH 41 intersection to CSAH 17 in
1999.
· Scenario #2 - Without Coulter Boulevard - Analyzes the intersections using recommended
external roadway and intersection improvements with the forecast background plus site-
generated traffic. The analysis does not include Coulter Boulevard (the east-west roadway
connecting the development to Galpin Boulevard).
· Scenario #3 - With Coulter Boulevard - Uses the recommended external roadway and
intersection improvements with forecast background plus site-generated traffic. The analysis
includes the Coulter Boulevard connection to Galpin Boulevard.
Existing Condition
The intersection of TH 5 and TH 41 is signalized and currently operates at LOS E during the a.m.
peak and LOS D during the p.m. peak. The TH 41/82nd Street intersection is presently unsignalized
and operates at LOS A during both peak periods. The TH 5/Galpin Boulevard intersection operates
at LOS F during the a.m. peak and LOS D during the p.m. peak.
Year 2003
Scenario #1 - The analysis shows that the TH 51TH 41 intersection will operate at LOS F during
both peak periods. The TH 41 182nd Street intersection will also operate at LOS F during both peak
periods as an unsignalized intersection. The TH 5/North Access intersection operates at LOS F in
the morning and LOS D in the afternoon. The intersection of TH 5 and Galpin Boulevard will
operate at LOS C during the a.m. peak and LOS B during the p.m. peak.
Kate Aanenson
- 8 -
April 25, 1997
TABLE 3
CHANHASSEN GATEWAY WEST TRAFFIC STUDY
PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
Intersection
TH 5 and TH 41 and TH 5 and TH 5 and
TH41 820d St. North Access Galpin Blvd.
Existing EID AlA N.A. FID
Year 2003 Scenarios -
I. Existing/Programmed Configuration
Background Traffic Only F/F F/F FID C/B
2. Gateway Development: With Recommended
Improvements and Without Coulter Blvd. DID C/C C/D C/C
3. Gateway Development: With Recommended
Improvements and With Coulter Blvd. DID C/C DID D/C
Year 2012 Scenarios -
1. Existing/Programmed Configuration
Background Traffic Only F/F F/F FID FIB
2. Gateway Development: With Recommended
Improvements and Without Coulter Blvd. DID BIB C/D C/C
3. Gateway Development: With Recommended
Improvements and With Coulter Blvd. DID BIB C/D D/C
X / X A.M. PEAK PERIOD / P.M. PEAK PERIOD
(The level of service of the TH 5/Galpin Boulevard intersection changes between the existing and
2003 forecast conditions as a result of widening TH 5 from two to four lanes. Operations at the
TH 51TH 41 and TH 51N0rth Access intersections do not change because the roadway is currently
four lanes at those locations.)
Scenario #2 - Analysis indicates that the TH 51TH 41 intersection will operate at LOS D during the
a.m. and p.m. peaks if dual left turns are added at all approaches. The TH 41182nd Street
intersection will operate at LOS C during both peak periods as a signalized intersection. The
TH 51N0rth Access intersection will operate at LOS C during the a.m. and LOS D during the p.m.
peak with a signal and dual left turns in the westbound direction. The intersection at TH 5 and
Galpin Boulevard will operate at LOS C during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods.
Scenario #3 - Operations at the TH 51TH 41 and TH 41182nd Street intersections will be the same as
described in Scenario #2 above. The TH 51N0rth Access intersection will operate at LOS D during
both peaks but the westbound dual left turn lanes which would have been necessary without Coulter
Kate Aanenson
- 9 -
April 25, 1997
Boulevard are not required for this scenario. The intersection of TH 5 and Galpin Boulevard will
operate at LOS D during the a.m. peak and LOS C during the p.m. peak with no additional
improvements.
Year 2012
Scenario #1 - Under existing and programmed conditions, all of the key intersections will exhibit
LOS F conditions during both peak periods with the exception of the TH 5/Galpin Boulevard
intersection which will operate at LOS B during the afternoon peak.
Scenario #2 - The TH 51TH 41 intersection will operate at LOS D during both peak periods if TH 5
is widened to six lanes. The intersection of TH 41 and 82nd Street will operate at LOS B during the
morning and afternoon peak periods if TH 41 is widened to four lanes and a dual left turn is added
in the southbound direction. The TH 51N0rth Access intersection will operate at LOS C for the
morning peak and LOS D during the afternoon peak with if the six lane improvement is made to
TH 5. The intersection of TH 5 and Galpin Boulevard will operate at LOS C during both peak
periods, assuming that TH 5 is upgraded to a six-lane roadway.
Scenario #3 - All of the intersections will operate as described in Scenario #2 above, with the
exception of the TH 5/Galpin Boulevard intersection which will operate at LOS D during the a.m.
peak period.
Recommendations
In order for the key intersections to operate at acceptable levels of service in 2003, one year after
opening of the Gateway West Development, the following additional improvements are necessary:
· Construct dual left turn lanes at all approaches to the TH 51TH 41 intersection.
· Signalize the TH 41/82nd Street intersection.
· Signalize the TH 51N0rth Access intersection.
· Upgrade TH 41 to a four-lane roadway.
· Construct dual left-turn lanes at the westbound approach of the TH 51N0rth Access intersection
(if Coulter Boulevard is not built).
Acceptable levels of service at the key intersections in 2012, ten years after opening, will be
dependent upon:
· Upgrade ofTH 5 to a six-lane facility east ofthe intersection with TH 41.
· Upgrade ofTH 41 to a four-lane facility south ofthe TH 5 intersection.
· Construct dual-left turn lanes at the southbound approach ofTH 41 and 82nd Street.
The construction of the TH 51N0lih Access intersection is critical to the operations of TH 5 and
TH 41, considering the amount of traffic that will be generated by the Gateway Development.
Construction of this intersection is especially important if Coulter Boulevard is not built.
It)
C) ~
C)
~ ~
::E ;:J M
. . 0
:E:E (0 a: Co-'
cia: C)U- -
C)w ~
'""a:
II II ::E<(
- 000
><>< a: I-
u-z
><>< w::>
- a:0
<(u
ooz
I- 0
Z -
::>1-
Ou
u~
za:
--- OW
C')'l:t'C') ~!z
CONr-- u-
-'l:t',.. WI-
CD"'- OOW
N-N a:w
Nr-- L247 (201) wa:
Lt),.. 1-1-
Lt) zoo
J~L ;: Cl en
... 38 (66) '<t Z
:r:C\l W
t4 (31) I:::~ :!
GALPIN BLVD. It) '<t
:r: :r: ~
I- I- ..J
43(40)~ ltr ww
:r::r: Z 0 I-
1-1- Z
. W > L.U
34 (20) ~ (j) a:: ~
13(24), (j) 0..
--- <( ~ 0
Lt)NCD J:
.........,.. 0 ....J
-....- Z L.U
,.. - r-- <( :I: >
,..o::t,.. J: L.U
0 ~ Cl
Lt) ()
,.. LL <t >-
<(
0 W ~
~ a.. L.U
--- ~ I-
,..CDO --- <(
'l:t''l:t'CO No::t,.. () Z CJ
,..C>>N CD-.....
--- ,.. - i=
Lt)Q)('I) -
('I)OLt) L 178 (260) Lt)ON L26 en
NN N -
J~L J~L (5) ><
... 288 (428) ... 564 (786) W
t 50(310) TH 41 t 6 (6)
169 (60)~ ltr 169 (16) ~ ltr
601 (404) ~ 816 (637) ~
53 (153), --- 36 (9), ---
o,..o::t o::tC')....
oeor-- C') --
,..('1)- -
-- Lt).....o::t
....N....
,......'l:t'
N,..CD
.....
u
Lt) ~ z
...
~ (J) ,
l- e ..
::l
Z 0
N "
co tJ
\.l
Z
-
I-<
"'"
::l ...
<J) -<i
oJ)
~ Z >D
0 N
>D
U a-
0
~ ci
z
....
~
rJl
~
r::==
:S:S ::> llll:t
l:)
<c.: -
~
II II
-
XX
XX
-
>
..J
Z
0
--- 0
11)11)11)
o)No) u::
-co,.... U.
0""'-
('I) -II) <
(0) L280 (230) e::
('I),.... (/)1-
co
J~L ... 45 (75) we
,5 (35) :EZ
::)::)
GALPIN BLVD. ..J~
50 (45) ---.1 ltr zO" I-
w>~ Z
llJ
40 (25) ~ (/)a:O ~
15(25), (/)::)< Q.
--- <( m 0
11)00 IO-
,....CON ...J
-co- z~> llJ
- ~~< >
(11)0 llJ
CO,.... CO 0<(3= Cl
'" >-
,.... u..we <(
Oa.~ ~
--- ~('I)e:: llJ
11)011) ~
COON --- oOe
,....,....('1) II) It) It) <!l
-,....- 0)-,.... Ow
- ,.... - N:E
o II) It) -
~~O) L205 (305) 001t) L30 a::E
NN ('I) <(<
J~L J~L (5) we::
... 335 (500) ... 670 (935) >"
, 60 (360) TH 41 , 10 (10) 0
e::
c.
200 (70)---.1 ltr 200 (20)---.1 ltr -
"
Z
700 (470) ~ 970 (760) ~ ~
60(180), 45 (10), CJ)
--- --- ><
II) II) It) (11)0
,....~co ~-,.... W
,....~- - -
-- 11),....11)
11)11)11)
II) co II)
N('I)......
,....
u
II) ...: z
...
:I: CJ)
l- e r::
::>
Z 0
N ..:
co I.-'
~
z
-
1-0
....
::> ....
III -0
'"
~ Z Ie
0 N
Ie
U '"
Q
[;] d
z
~
~
Vl
~
~
. . ;::l II)
:E:E e"
cia.: joooI
~
II II
-
><><
><><
-
~
z
0
--- 0
IDIDID
,......('1) u:
,..(7)N LL
-,.. -
- c:a:
IDIDID L340 (280) ee
('I)U)('I)
....N cnl-
J~L ... 55 (90) WC
,5 (40) :=Z
;:):J
GALPIN BLVD. ..J~
60 (55) ~ ltr ZOCJ I-
w>~ z
50 (30) cna:O w
~ :::E
30 (20), cn;:)c:a: a..
--- <( m 0
OOID IO-
N.....N ...J
-0- ZJ:> w
,.. ~~c:a: >
Ln- W
(7)Lno Cl
00..... 0<(3: >-
0 LLWC
N <C
Oa..~ 3:
--- ~Nee w
000 I-
00::1'0 --- O~C <C
N('I)o::I' LnLnID CJ
-,.. - M -,.. Ow
- N - N:E
OIDO -
1D(7)U) L 250 (370) LnOLn L40 a::E
N('I) ('I) <(c:a:
J~L J~L (5) wee
~ 410 (605) ~ 815 (1140) >CJ
, 70 (440) TH 41 ,10 (10) 0
ee
c..
240 (85) ~ ltr 245 (25) ~ ltr -
CJ
Z
850 (570) ~ 1180 (920) ~ i=
75(215), 50 (15), en
--- --- ><
OOLn OLnO
0::1'0::1'0 ID -,... W
,..ID,.. - -
--- ID,..ID
IDO
OU)Ln
('I)U),..
,..(7)
u
Lt) ..= z
...
::I: en
I- C ,;;
;:l
Z 0
C\I ~
co ~
u
z
-
....
...
;:l ...
Ul ..c
III
~ Z '"
0 N
'"
U '"
c
~ C
:z
~
~
<I'.
~
E3 co
:E:E 0
cia: -
~
" "
.............. ....... -
anoan XX
en co en -
-co... xx ci
... - -
- L 280 (230) >
oanan ..J
C')coen m
en...
j~L ... 45 (75) 0:
W
,- 95 (95) ..J
I-
GALPIN BLVD. =:)
0
50 (45) -.-t ltr 0
l-
=:)
40 (25) ~ 0
205 (135) , ::J:
.............. ....... en!::
oano
...I'-N W3:
NN...
-...- :=;
an-an
an an en ::)1-
...co
co ..Jffi
...
.............. ....... .............. ZO== f-
000 oan
coo... 1'-"" W>~ Z
C~~ -..,. w
-0 L 260 (695) an - CJ)a:O ::!:
oan
oanN ... C') CJ)::)o: c..
I'-enco
.....,. ... <( Q, 0
j~L .. 30 (30) J! :cO== ..J
Z~- W
,- 220 (595) <( C >
:c~w w
O<~ Cl
ltr >-
170 (180)-.-t 45 (120) --.1 It LL.WW <(
00.== s:
~M~ w
30 (30) ~ 80 (220) , f-
-00 <(
85 (90) , .............. ....... .............. OOW (!J
ooan oan
enC')an C')"" NO:
-I'-C') ... ...
an -- -- a:i:
coano an an
COC') en en <-
coan .....,. W3:
...
>!Z
W
..................... ==
an an an Q,
coenN ..................... 0
N..,...,. an an an
-... - S ONC') ..J
an -0 an -... W
0 - -
l'-anC') ... oano >
enC') - co an W
C') L 205 (305) an ... L 135 (75) C
C')
J!L J L- J!L >
.. 410 (700) 105 (70) .. 635 (965) <I:
, 135 (560) , 10 (10) 3:
... 715 (1450) W
I-
375(190)--.1 ltr 2050 (1160) ~ TH 41 535 (185) .-+ ltr <I:
CJ
790 (530) ~ 1435 (930) ~
60(180), ..................... 80 (45), ..................... u
anoan oano z
...coo an...... ...
...CON ---
--- anoan .
anoo NN ...
anNC') 0
NI'-en
... 0
IlC
t.?
fJ
I.t) ...= z
J: ~
en f-o
~ C ""
0 ...
Z III -0
Z Il'l
N ~ Ie
0 N
co Ie
U er-
0
~ 0
Z
~
ell:
Ul
~
~
:5:5 ;:J I'
~
cia.: -
~
II II
.-. .-. .-. -
01l)1l)
(f)cnto- XX -
........N XX ci
-N-
0-0 - >
~Il)to- L 340 (280)
ON .J
.... lD
JlL AlII 55 (90) 0::
LLI
T 95 (110) .J
I-
GALPIN BLVD. ::)
0
70 (65) ---1 ltr 0
I-
::)
55 (30) ~ 0
210 (135) , J:
.-. .-. .-. CJ)!::
1l)01l)
....~N W3:
N~""
-....- ~;
Il) - Il)
Il)ll)cn :)1-
....~
N ...Jffi
N
.-. .-. .-. -- ZO::a: ~
000 Oil)
ooll).... !"-OO W>~ Z
C~~ -~ w
-0 L 260 (695) Il)- Cl)a:O :E
OON 00 CI):)O:: ll.
to-NCD ....~
.... CD .... <( a.. 0
J~L .... 30 (30) J~ IO::a: ...J
~J:C w
T 220 (595) >
I~LL1 W
O<C~ 0
ltr >-
170 (180) ---1 45 (120) .-.1 It LLWLLl <(
Oc.::a: ~
~N~ w
30 (30) ~ 80(220), !;i:
O~O
85 (90) , .-. .-. .-. -- OLLl (!)
01l)1l) 00
cnOIl) !"-Il) NO::
-cn(f) -....
Il)-- Il)- a:i=
001l)0 cnll)
CD(f) ....CD <C-
Oil) Il) W3:
N
>!z
LLI
::a:
--- a..
01l)0 ---
0(f)0 Il)II)II) 0
C")!"-II) - o::rNC") .J
-....- 0 II) -.... LLI
- 0 - -
11)11)11) .... 11)11)0 >
coo::rcn - CD II) LLI
o::rC") L- 250 (370) II) .... L 145 (75) C
J~L C") J~L >-
<II 485 (805) J L- 105 (70) III 760 (1180) <C
,145 (640) , 10(10) 3:
III 845 (1715) LLI
415(205).-.1 ltr 2425 (1355) ~ TH 41 595 (190) .-.1 ltr ~
CJ
940 (630) . 1735 (1115) .
75(215), --- 95 (50), --- l.I
011)11) 011)0 Z
o::rJ:::N CD........ ...
.... N ---
--- 11)011) .
11)11)0 NN ...
o....cn ;:l
C")oo 0
N.... IIli
I.-'
t.l
It) ...= z
:I: en ~
...
.... 0 ...
;:l ..
Z Ul 'l
N Z u
~ 'l
co 0 "
'l
U 0
c:
~ C
;.!
~
~
tj
~
~
;::l co
:E:E L'
<CO: -
~
II II
--- -
It) It) It)
en.".... XX
-"'C') XX
... -
-It) - -
00,.. L 355 (430) C
C')...C') >
Q) ..J
J~L ... 45 (75) . 330 (340) m
,-- 5 (35) ,-- 175(120) a:
w
GALPIN BLVD. ..J
I-
ltr · lr :J
50 (45) ---1 0
(SS~) S17~ 0
40 (25) .. (OU) SH . :I:
-- I-
205 (135) , --- 00 CJ)~
o It) 0 00
","'N NN Wen
NO - --
-"'0 It) It) ::=1-
It)-N r--r--
It) 0 :::)ffi
...C') 0
Q) ..J:E
... >
--- ..J -- ZO~ l-
001t) It) It)
Q)OC') In N.". W>O Z
C~~ -0::1' UJ
- It) L 150 (395) a: - CJ)0:a: ~
o It) It) W It) It) CJ):::)~ a..
,..enC') .... MM 0
JJL ,.. <(0-
.... 30 (30) ..J J~ J: C ...J
::J Z~W UJ
,-- 220 (595) 0 <( c >
J:~Z UJ
0 O<cW 0
>-
170 (180) ---1 ltr 15 (40)---.l It LLW:E <(
Oo.:E ~
> 0 UJ
30 (30) .. 80 (220) , I-NO ~
_ W
85 (90) , --- -- O"-a: CJ
00 It) o It) O:I:
enC')1t) Mo::I' NI-
-"'C') ,.. ,..
It)-- -- 0:-
Q)1t)0 It) It) <C~
Q)C') en en
COlt) ,..0::1'
... WZ
>~
D..
--- 0
It) It) It) --- ..J
CDenN It) It) It) W
No::I'o::I' - ONM >
-,.. - 0 It) -,..
It) -0 0 - - W
r--It)M ,.. 01t)0 C
enM L 205 (305) - CD It) L 135(75)
M It) ,.. >
J~L M J~L <C
... 410 (700) J L . 635 (965) ==
105 (70) w
,135 (560) . 715 (1450) , 10 (10) ~
"
375 (190) ---.l ltr 2050 (1160) ~ TH 41 535 (185) ---.l ltr
790 (530) .. 1435 (930) ..
60(180), --- 80 (45), --- u
It) 0 It) 01t)0 Z
,..CX)0 It),..,.. ....
,..CDN ---
--- It) 0 It) ,
1t)00 NN ...
It)NM :J
Nr--en 0
,.. Illi
\.:l
0
II) ...: z
::E: CJ) -
...
l- e ..
:J ...
Z '" ..c
N z on
~ '"
co 0 N
'"
U '"
0
~ 0
Z
I<<
~
tIl
~
~
. . ::> en
:E:E Co-'
<ia: -
~
.......... ..... II II
000 -
C')CIO<D XX
_OC') XX
-N-
O-It) - -
-=1'0_ L 415 (480) ci
C')-=I'
en >
..J
J~L ... 55 (90) ... 400 (420) m
T 5 (50) T 175(120) a:
W
GALPIN BLVD. ..J
I-
70 (65) -1 ltr · lr ::)
0
(sse) s~e U
55 (30) ~ (O~~) SH t J:
-- I-
210(135), .......... ..... 00 wi
It) 0 It) 00
_-=I'N NN w-
NN- -- :E~
-_It) It) It)
It)-N ..........
It) It) ci :)ffi
_0
N ..J:::E
N >
.......... ..... ..J -- zO~ I-
001t)
CIOIt)C') co It) It) Z
_CION NClO w>O
--- a:: -0::1' C/)a:a: w
- It) L 150 (395) - ::::iE
00 It) W It) 0 C/):)!i ll.
""'NC') C')0::I'
-co ~ - <( - 0
J~L ... 30 (30) J~ :::cOO ..J
::J Z::J:W w
T 220 (595) 0 <( 0 >
:::c~z w
0 0
u<w >-
170(180) -1 ltr 15 (40)---1 It L.1.w:::E <(
Oc..~ s:
!::NU w
30 (30) .. 80(220), _ W ~
85(90), .......... ..... -- u""a: ~
o It) It) 00 OJ:
en 0 It) C')1t) NI-
- en C') --
It)-- -- a:i
CIOIt)O It) It)
<DC') en co <I-
Olt) _It)
N wz
>~
a.
--- 0
o It) 0 --- ..J
OMO It) It) II) W
M.....II) - ONM >
--- 0 II) -_
II) -II) 0 - - W
ClOII)(J) - 011)0 0
o::rM - co II)
o::r L- 250 (370) II) - L 145 (75) >-
J~L M J~L <
III 485 (805) J L- .... 760 (1180) ~
105 (70) W
T 145 (640) .... 845 (1715) T 10 (10) ~
"
415 (205)---1 ltr 2425 (1355) ~ TH41 595 (190) ---1 ltr
940 (630) . 1735 (1115) .-
75(215), --- 95 (50), --- u
011)11) 011)0 :z:
o::r.....N co__ ...
_.....N ---
--- 11)011) ~
11)11)0 NN
O_(J) :I
MOO 0
N_ '"
C
t.:l
I.t) ...= :z:
:J: en ~
!-
l- e ..
:I ..
Z II) "
N It
~ :z: "
co 0 "
"
U a
c:
~ C
;;!
I>
~
tj
CITY OF
CHAHHASSEH
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Bob Generous, AICP Senior Planner
FROM:
Mark Littfin, Chanhassen Fire Marshal
DATE:
April 24, 1997
SUBJECT:
Request preliminary PUD approval for a mixed use development consisting of an
office/industrial uses, support commercial uses, multi family uses, and park and open
spaces; rezoning from agricultural estate, A2 to planned unit development, PUD;
preliminary plat approval for 12 lots, 2 outlots and associated right of way; wetland
alteration permit to fill and mitigate wetlands; and site plan review for a 101,600 square
foot and industrial building on proposed lot I, block 3; interim use permit to permit site
grading; alternate urban area review (AUAR) review and approval for gateway addition.
This project is located at the southeast comer of Highway 5 and Highway 41, Gateway
Partners, Steiner Development, Inc.
Planning Case 92-6 PUD File 2
I have reviewed the site plan for the above project. In order to comply with the Chanhassen Fire
Department/Fire Prevention Division, I have the following fire code or city ordinance/policy
requirements. The site plan is based on the available information submitted at this time. If additional
plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy items will be addressed.
1. A 10' clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants, Le., street lamps, trees, shrubs, bushes,
NSP, US West, 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.
2. Submit street names to Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Building Official for review and
approval.
Site plan review for Heartland America, Lot 3, Block I:
1. Watermain shall be looped and extended to the west side of the building. Hydrant spacing shall not
exceed 300'. Contact Chanhassen Fire Marshall for exact locations of additional fire hydrants.
2. No Parking Fire Lane signs and yellow curbing shall be provided. Contatct Chanhassen Fire Marshal
for exact locations of signage and painted curbing. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Deparment/Fire
Prevention Policy 06 1991.
Bob Generous
April 24, 1997
Page 2
3. Install a post indicator valve on the water service coming into the building. Contact Chanhassen Fire
Marshal for exact location.
4. When fire protection including fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for fire protection is
required, such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of
construction. Pursuant to 1991 Uniform Fire Code Section 10.502.
5. The building must comply with Chanhassen Fire Department policy regarding premise identification.
(Copy enclosed). Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy #29-1992.
6. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department policy regarding maximum allowed size of domestic water
service on a combination domestic/fire sprinkler supply line. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire
Department/Fire Prevention Policy #36-1994.
7. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention policy regarding notes to be included on
all site plans. Pursuant to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy #04-1991.
8. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention policy regarding pre-fire plans. Pursuant
to Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Policy #07-1991. (Copy enclosed).
9. Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department/Inspection Division policy regarding water service
installation for commercial and industrial buildings. Pursuant to Inspection Division Water Service
Installation Policy #34-1993. (Copy enclosed).
I O.Comply with Chanhassen Fire Department policy regarding fire sprinkler systems. Pursuant to
Chanhassen Fire Department/Fire Prevention Division #40-1995. (Copy enclosed).
ML/be
g:safety\ml\generous.!
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES TO BE INCLUDED ON ALL SITE PLANS
1. Fire Marshal must witness the flushing of underground sprinkler service line, per
NFPA 13-8-2.1.
2. A final inspection by the Fire Marshal before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
3. Fire Department access roads shall be provided on site during all phases of
construction. The construction of these temporary roads will conform with the
Chanhassen Fire Department requirements for temporary access roads at
construction sites. Details are available.
4. Onsite fire hydrants shall be provided and in operating condition during all phases
of construction.
5. The use of liquefied petroleum !!as shall be in conformance with NFP A Standard
58 and the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. A list of these requirements is
available. (See policy #33-1993)
6. All fire detection and fire suppression systems shall be monitored by an approved
UL central station with a UL 71 Certificate issued on these systems before final
occupancy is issued.
7. An 11" x 14" As Built shall be provided to the Fire Department. The As Built
shall be reproducible and acceptable to the Fire Marshal. (See policy #07-1991).
8. An approved lock box shall be provided on the building for fire department use.
The lock box should be located by the Fire Department connection or as located
by the Fire Marshal.
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention
Policy #04-1991
Date: 11/22/91
Revised: 12/23/94
Page 1 of 2
9. High-piled combustible storage shall comply with the requirements of Article #81
of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. High-piled combustible storage is
combustible materials on closely packed piles more than 15' in height or
combustible materials on pallets or in racks more than 12' in height For certain
special-hazard commodities such as rubber tires, plastics, some flammable liquids,
idle pallets, etc. the critical pile height may be as low as 6 feet.
10. Fire lane signage shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshal. (See policy
#06-1991).
11. Smoke detectors installed in lieu of 1 hour rated corridors under UBC section
33050, Exception #5 shall comply with Chanhassen Fire Department requirements
for installation and system type. (See policy #05-1991).
12. Maximum allowed size of domestic water service on a combination domestic/fire
sprinkler supply line policy must be followed. (See policy #36-1994).
Approved - Public Safety Director
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention
Policy #04-1991
Date: 11/22/91
Revised: 12/23/94
Page 2 of 2
~.!1~
-
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 . FAX (612) 937-5739
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE LANE SIGNAGE
1. Signs to be a minimum of 12" x 18".
NO
PARKING
FIRE
LANE
2. Red on white is preferred.
3. 3M or equal engineer's grade
reflective sheeting on aluminum
is preferred.
4. Wording shall be:
NO PARKING
FIRE LANE
5. Signs shall be posted at each end
of the fire lane and at least at
7'0" 75 foot intervals along the
fire lane.
6. All signs shall be double sided
facing the direction of travel.
7. Post shall be set back a
minimum of 12" but not more than
36" from the curb.
(NOT TO
SCALE)
GRADE
8. A fire lane shall be required in
front of fire dept. connections
extending 5 feet on each side and
along all areas designated by the
Fire Chief.
ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE PROCEDURES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN
WRITING, WITH A SITE PLAN, FOR APPROVAL BY THE FIRE CHIEF. IT IS
THE INTENTION OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO ENSURE CONTINUITY
THROUGHOUT THE CITY BY PROVIDING THESE PROCEDURES FOR MARKING OF
FIRE LANES.
,~n 7/
Approved - Public Safety Director
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention
Policy #06-1991
Date: 1/15/91
Revised:
Page 1 of 1
#.
trJ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT
POLICY REGARDING PRE-PLAN
Prior to issuing the C.O., a pre-plan, site plan shall be submitted
to the Fire Department for approval. The following items shall be
shown on the plan.
1) Size 11" x 17" (maximum)
2) Building footprint and building dimensions
3) Fire lanes and width of fire lanes
4) Water mains and their sizes, indicate looped or dead end
5) Fire hydrant locations
6) P.I.V. - Fire Department connection
7) Gas meter (shut-off), NSP (shut off)
8) Lock box location
9) Fire walls, if applicable
10) Roof vents, if applicable
11) Interior walls
12) Exterior doors
13)' Location of fire alarm panel
14) Sprinkler riser location
15) Exterior L.P. storage, if applicable
16) Haz. Mat. storage, if applicable
17) Underground storage tanks locations, if applicable
18) Type of construction walls/roof
19) Standpipes
PLEASE NOTE: Plans with topographical information, contour lines,
easement lines, property lines, setbacks, right-of-way lines,
headings, and other related lines or markings, are not acceptable,
and will be rejected.
Director
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention
Policy #07-1991
Da t e : 01 / 16 / 91
Revised: 02/18/94
Page 1 of 1
(
C ITV OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
General
PREMISES IDENTIFICATION
Numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing
buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible
from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall
contrast with their background. Size and location of numbers shall
be approved by one of the following - Public Safety Director,
Building Official, Building Inspector, Fire Marshal.
Requirements are for new construction and existing buildings where
no address numbers are posted. _
^" :.. ~)'~
Other Re~."rements - General
1. Numbers shall be a contrasting color from~the ba~kground.
2. Numbers shall not be In script
r~, ~,'
3. If a structure Is not visIble from the street, addltlona(numbers are required at the driveway entrance. Size
and location must be approved. ,/,# ..
4. Numbers on mall box at driveway entrance may be a mInimum of 4". However, requirement #3 must stili
be met
5. Administrative authority may require addItional numbers If deemed necessary.
ResIdenUaI Requirements C2 or less dwelling unit)
1. MinImum height shall be 51/4",
2. Building permits will not be f1naledunless numbers are posted and approved by the Building Department
CommerdaJ Requirements
1, Minimum height shall'be 12".
2. Strfp Malls .
a. Multi tenant building will have minimum heIght requirements of 6",
b. Address numbers shall be on the maIn entrance and on all back doors,
~.::..~"
.i.......}~~"
3. If address numbers are located on a directory entry sIgn, additional numbers will be required on the
buildings maIn entrance.
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention
Policy #29-1992
Date: 06/15/92
Revised:
Approved - Public Sa~ty Director Page 1 of 1
t J PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
WATER SERVICE INST ALLA TION POLICY
FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS
1) The Inspections Division shall be responsible for issuance of permits. No permit
shall be issued until approval of plans have been obtained from the following:
a) Engineering Department
b) Fire Marshal
c) Minnesota Department of Health
d) Plumbing Inspector
2) Plumbing inspectors will do all installation inspections and witness the hydrostatic
and conductivity tests.
Inspection and Test Requirements
a) All pipe shall be inspected before being covered. Phone 937-1900,
ext. 31, to schedule inspections. A 24 hour notice is required.
b) Conductivity test is required. The pipe shall be subjected to a minimum
350 amp test for a period of not less than 5 minutes.
c) Hydrostatic test required. All pipe shall be subjected to a hydrostatic
pressure of 150 psi for 2 hours. Allowable pressure drop shall not exceed
1 PSI.
d) Pipe shall not be run under buildings - NFP A 24,8-3.1.
3) Upon approval of the hydro test, the plumbing inspector shall submit a copy of
the inspection report to the utility superintendent. The inspection report shall note
whether the system is ready for main flush and drawing of water sample for the
bug test.
Inspections Division
Water Service Installation
Policy #34-1993
Date: 04/15/93
Revised: 4/17/96
Page 1 of 2
4) Water main flushing shall be witnessed by the utility superintendent.
a) Watermain flushing may be scheduled by contacting the utility
superintendent at 474-2086. A 48 hour notice is required.
b) The utility superintendent shall obtain a water sample for a bacteria test
after the main flush and deliver to a testing company. The contractor shall
be responsible for testing costs. Allow two weeks for testing results to be
returned to the City.
c) Upon receiving approval of the water sample test, the utility
superintendent shall submit a copy to each plumbing inspector and turn
water on to the tested and approved sections of the piping.
5) An additional supervised flush and flow test will be required and witnessed by
the Fire Marshal for services supplying fire suppression systems. The flush and
flow test shall be performed in accordance with 1991 edition of NFPA 13, Sec. 8-
2.1. Contact the Chanhassen Fire Marshal at 937-1900, ext. 132.
6) Watermain installations shall comply with:
a) Minnesota Plumbing Code, Chapter 4715
b) Chanhassen Engineering Department, Watermain Specifications
c) National Fire Protection Association, Chapter 24
7) Only authorized city employees are permitted to operate city water control valves.
For water turn on or off contact the utility superintendent by phone 474-2086. A
24 hour notice is required.
~~
Inspections Division
Water Service Installation
Policy #34-1993
Date: 04/15/93
Revised: 04/17/96
Page 2 of 2
Approved - Public Safety Director
CITY OF
CHAHHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
MAXIMUM ALLOWED SIZE OF DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE ON A
COMBINATION DOMESTIC/FIRE SPRINKLER SUPPLY LINE
1. Domestic water line shall not be greater than 1/4 pipe size of the
combination service water supply line.
2. 1 1/2" domestic off 6" line.
3. 2" domestic off 8" line.
4. 2 1/2 domestic off 10" line.
Option 1:
Domestic sizes may be increased if it can be calculated hydraulically that the
demand by all domestic fixtures will not drop the fire sprinkler water below its
minimum gallonage required.
Option 2:
Combination domestic and five line service shall have an electric solenoid valve
installed on the domestic side of the service. This valve shall be normally
powered open and close on loss of electric power or signal from the system
water flow indicator.
Must be approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen
Mechanical Inspector.
~~ 7J~
Chanhassen Fire Department
Water Line Sizing
Policy #36-1994
Date: 06/10/94
Revised:
Page 1 of 1
Approved - Public Safety Director
CITY OF
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE. P.O. BOX 147. CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900. FAX (612) 937-5739
CHANHASSEN FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICY
FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS
1. Permits are required for all sprinkler work.
2. A minimum of four sets of plans are required. Send, or drop off plans and specifications and
calculations to:
Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
3. Yard post indicators are required and must have tamper protection.
4. All control values must be provided with tamper protection.
5. All systems tests must be witnessed by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal. Appointments can be
made by calling the Fire Marshal at 937-1900, ext. 132, between 8:00 AM and 4:00 PM,
Monday through Friday. Please try to arrange tests at least 24 hours in advance. All revisions
of25 heads or more will require a test.
6. Main drains & inspector test connections must be piped to the outside atmosphere.
7. Water may not be introduced into sprinkler piping from the City main until the Fire Marshal
witnesses a flush test per NFP A 13-8-2.1.
8. The City of Chanhassen has adopted Appendix E (see 1305.6905 appendix chapter 38 of the
rvlBC).
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention Division
Policy #40-1995
Date: 01/12/95
Revised: 03/12/97
Page 1 of2
I .
9. All systems must be designed to NFP A-13, 1991 edition and Chapter 6 Standards. All attic
systems are to be spaced at a maximum 130 square foot coverage. 3/4" plastic piping will not
be allowed at any time in attic space.
10. All equipment installed in a fire protection system shall be UL listed or factory mutual
approved for fire protection service.
11. Fire protection systems that are hydraulically calculated shall have a 5 psi safety factor at
maximum system flow.
12. Acceptable water supplies for fire sprinkler systems are listed in NFP A-13, 1991 ed., Chapter
7. Swimming pools and ponds are not acceptable primary water supplies.
13. Pressure and gravity tanks shall be sized per the requirements contained in NFP A-13 and 22.
Duration of the water supply shall match the hazard classification of the occupancy.
14. Include spec sheets for fire sprinkler heads - dry pipe/pre-action valving.
15. The definition of inspection is contained in MN Rule 7512.0100 Subpart 10, and states that
inspection means:
1. Conducting a final acceptance test.
2. Trip test of dry pipe, deluge or preaction valves.
3. A test that an authority having jurisdiction requires to be conducted under the
supervision of a contractor. Only licensed fire protection contractors are
permitted to conduct these tests.
4. All other inspections including the inspectors test, main drain and other valves
are permitted under MN Rule 7512.0400 Subpart-2G, as maintenance activities
and do not require a license as a fire protection contractor.
16. Per Section 904.3.2. and the 1994 Uniform Building Code, an approved audible sprinkler flow
alarm to alert the occupants shall be provided in the interior of the building in a normally
occupied location. (Location must be approved by the Chanhassen Fire Marshal).
17. In existing systems, the follo\ving shall apply:
1. If any changes in the hydraulically most demanding area, or an addition of 20 or
more heads, hydraulic calculations will need to be provided.
2. If an addition or change of 20 or more heads to a system, a test will need to be
completed.
Chanhassen Fire Department
Fire Prevention Di\'ision
Policy #40-1995
Date: 01/12/95
Revised: 03/12/97
Page: 2 of 2
APR-?1-1997 nR:4~
~1 T Nt'jfI]A:=1m-N('\~:=1
C1'J ""'"'1 C::C::...,...,
,,( .1. 01011.1 p.n1/n1
MIIIIIIJflII$CO-
"Ill" ,_"~""",-",,,,,,,,,,"_,,,,"_"IlIU; . ." ........- .._".11111 no '" ",m" ,- . .nlll."..._........-....mn-..lIIl11"..
A ,ENER6VCOMPANY
Date:
4/21/97
To:
Chanhassen
Robert Generous
Phone #: 612...937-1900
Fax #:
From:
Minnegasco
Robert Huffman
fhnnCi 912-321-5527
Fax: 612...321-5573
Pages:
Including Cover _2__
-
Subjef;t: planning Case Information R@gponse
1. O~~ i~ Cl'vnHnhlQ on Q:Alpin :\Tlrl Hl~hwa.Y 5 for thti Wahlut
Gl'Uve Dcv~lupnlent
2. Gas i::; available on HighvJay 41 r\",r Gateway Business
Center
Thank you for keeping me informed to the activity in your
community.
&~g~:: otfg~:: --lC::~"II --lC::~"II
0... !l > ~"''' >
-II ~.fQ Eo ~. f ~ 10- " _fc"
-!l[n r~l.~
ic::"'" iC::""'[lIl if!- [lIl
'5!-C::OOf'" ... C::" f'" OOf'"
"1'5!- = ..['5!- n III . >
.. !I ..l.
f!-
... ... :O"'WN ...-- ~:-'~
......"""......0\ :-':1'-'"
.. ud"" 00 WWNOo .......... .......-
IIII DBID D a I a I D
"
~
Hnisinb'tnn KtK.'glcr Gmup loc.
.;r.)Mtcru~NIt'Un.1 ~1It ~~,
MiMl...puld.M~JU .,.,W, 161!)H,~.l)I}h(1
HIGHWAY 5/ GALPIN BLVD. PARK
CONCEPT PLAN
Ch.""....n, _soli
; f
i' !' ~ !' :r
i ( t ~
I ~t I. ~
i Ii i
~~
I~
mra
110
I ,oo" I ..."."..,,011"".....1 . 1.ll....."I..."~~
Wednesday, May 7, 1997
at 7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
690 Coulter Drive
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBJECT: Preliminary Planned Unit
Development for Mixed Uses
~PLlCANT: Steiner Development
LOCATION: Southeast Corner of Hwy. 5
and Hwy. 41
\JOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The
:lpplicant, Steiner Development, is requesting preliminary Planned Unit Development for mixed
Jse development consisting of office/industrial, commercial uses, multi-family uses and park
md open space; rezone 154 acres of property zoned A2, Agricultural Estate to PUD; preliminary
Jlat of 12 lots and 2 outlots; wetland alteration permit to fill and mitigate wetlands; site plan
'eview for a 101,600 sq. ft. office and industrial building on proposed Lot 1, Block 3; interim use
Jermit to allow site grading; and an Alternate Urban Area Review (AUAR) for Gateway Addition.
rhe project is located at the southeast intersection of Hwy. 5 and Hwy. 41.
Nhat Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the
jeveloper's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the
neeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps:
I. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project.
) The Developer will present plans on the project.
t Comments are received from the public.
L Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then
make a recommendation to the City Council.
Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City
Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to
someone about this project, please contact Bob at 937-1900 ext. 141. If you choose to
submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting.
Staff will provide copies to the Commission.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on April.24. 19f' ~/)-4q 1
~&Y
Owner
Ownaclr
Owncty, Location
, No Address
MILLS PROPERTIES INC ATTN: TOM GREEN MAURICE 0 JR & JOAN R MOE
PO BOX 971 2515 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
BRAINERD, MN 56401 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
JAY C DOLEJSI
6961 CHAPARRAL LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 9227
MICHAEL J MEADOWS
2519 BRIDLE CREEKTRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MID AMERICAN BAPTIST SOCIAL SERVICES MARK A WAGNER
CORPORATION
2600 ARBORETUM BLVD 2511 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 8003 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHASKA GATEWAY PARTNERS
3610 HWY 101 S
WAVZATA, MN 55391
ROBERT W & JOANN C SCHWARTZ
2507 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
REGENTS OF UNIV OF MINN C/O REAL
ESTATE OFFICE
424 DON HOWE BLDG
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55455
MARK A & PEGGY A ARRINGTON
2503 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
MN LANDSCAPE ARBORETUM
3675 ARBORETUM DR
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
BOYD 0 & DEBRA L AARESTAD
2510 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
CHASKA GATEWAY PARTNERS
3610 HWY 101 S
WAVZATA, MN 55391
LON 0 & JULIE M LOHMILLER
2499 BRIDLE CREEK TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
HENRY & EDNA WRASE
8175 HAZELTINE BLVD
CHASKA, MN 55318 9619
TROTTERS RIDGE OF CHANHASSEN
2765 CASCO POINT RD
WAVZATA, MN 55391
~,"'\""EISOJ:., ...
.. q
~ ...
:II t!
~+ l
~O"~~"
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Metropolitan Division
Waters Edge
1500 West County Road 82
Roseville, MN 55113
May 13, 1997
Robert Generous
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Dear Robert Generous:
SUBJECT: Gateway West Business Park
Preliminary Plat Review P97-046 I
Southeast Quadrant of Trunk Highway (TH) 5 & TH 41
Chanhassen, Carver County
C.S. 1008
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has reviewed the Gateway West Business
Park preliminary plat in compliance with Minnesota Statute 505.03, subd. 2, Plats. We find the plat
acceptable for further development with consideration of the following comments.
· We are currently reviewing the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for this
proposal. We will provide our comments concerning the AUAR when completed.
· The final plat must identify the edge of Mn/DOT right of way and any Mn/DOT monuments
found.
We request right of way dedication of75 feet from TH 41 highway centerline as stated in
our March 19, 1996 letter.
· The site should maintain existing drainage patterns and rates of runoff. The Riley Purgatory
Bluff Creek Watershed District, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Army
Corps of Engineers should also review this plan. Questions regarding Mn/DOT drainage
concerns may be directed to Brian Kelly of our Water Resources Section at 797-3151.
· The North-South Street access to TH 5 is in an area of controlled access. We need an
exchange of access on TH 5 to allow for the proposed access. We will not issue an access
permit until the access exchange has been competed. Please contact John Hippchen of our
Right of Way Section at 582-1261 regarding the exchange of access.
~r;~ /~ { 2 r 1~>:;"
An equal opportunity employer
, ',.,
Robert Generous
May 13, 1997
page two
We require Mn/DOT highway access permits for the proposed street connections to TH 5
and to TH 41. As previously noted, we will not allow access to TH 5 until an exchange
in access control occurs. Bill Warden of our Permits Section may be contacted at 582-
1443 for further information regarding the permit process. The city must submit the
applications if the new connections are to be city streets.
North-South Street access for Block 3, Lot 1 should be provided near the southern lot line
to alleviate potential congestion problems and to allow for right turn lane expansion.
Access allowed closer to TH 5 may result in congestion on TH 5 caused by left turning
movements into Block 3, Lot 1.
The lot labeled "Exception", east ofTH 41, should be provided with a future access to
82nd Street. We will not allow future access to TH 41 if the land use of this lot changes.
We will allow no direct access to TH 5 or TH 41 from any individual lot adjoining a
trunk highway. Lot access must be accommodated by way of internal and local streets.
. The Preliminary Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan shows proposed contours
within the TH 41 right of way. We are concerned that the proposed grading will affect
the ditch and drainage patterns. Please contact Glen Ellis of our Final Design Section at
797-3029 for further information.
Any use of or work within Mn/DOT right of way, including grading, will require an
approved Mn/DOT permit. The permit required depends upon the nature of the proposed
work. As previously noted, Bill Warden of our Permits Section may be contacted for
further information regarding the permit process.
. Our Consultant Design Section is identifying the final construction limits for TH 5. It is
possible that we may need additional right of way for TH 5 construction. The project
proposer should contact Mike Spielmann of our Consultant Design Section at 582-1211
for further information regarding TH 5 construction and to coordinate all development
activities.
Robert Generous
May 13, 1997
page three
Please contact me at 582-1654 with any questions regarding this review.
?~
Scott Peters
Senior Transportation Planner/Local Government Liaison
c: John Freemyer, Carver County Surveyor
Chaska
May 20, 1997
:. ~ ;
r: ~..' ~
Bob Generous
Senior Planner
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
P.O. Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
t.' '.'
Re: Gateway Business Center Review
Dear Bob:
Chaska Planning and Engineering staff have reviewed the Gateway Business Center proposal
and offer the following summary comments:
1. Appropriate staff members from our two cities need to meet and negotiate or
renegotiate agreements on 82nd Street relative to improvements and maintenance
and to obtaining sewer service from Chaska for certain lots along 82nd Street.
2. The cities also need to discuss installation of traffic signals at 82nd Street and
Highway 41 which currently has congestion problems.
3. We also need to discuss ways in which sense of community can be strengthened for
both cities as it relates to entering and leaving our two cities on Highway 41.
Chaska staff has suggested a significant landscape treatment along Highway 41
which appears to be indicated on the overall site plan.
4. We understand the objective is to cut down Highway 41 some 15 feet which is
generally supported by the City of Chaska. Will that be accomplished as part of the
project as was done at Pioneer Trail and Highway 41 in Chaska a few years ago?
5. We understand that MnDOT has given initial approval to a full access on Highway 5.
Chaska staff generally supports such full access in order to better distribute traffic
between Highway 41 and Highway 5.
6. We were surprised to see that Coulter Drive was not continuous through the
development to Highway 41. Such continuity was a major feature in the previous
1992 plan. Has Chanhassen's objective for Coulter changed?
;
':J: -. ~ .
r1:, n Pl?za 55:18~ 19G~) Pl;()ne 612~ 1.~ :-. . ( ;', I
On a related matter, we have received the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) and
are reviewing same. Our comments will be forwarded to you by June 7th. We were
pleased to see that a traffic study has been undertaken.
If you have any questions, please call.
Sincerely,
)c~~
Kermit Crouch
Director of Planning & Development
KC:jms
c: Dave Pokorney
Bill Monk
Shirley Broers
Pat Smith
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
PRELIMINARY PUD APPROVAL FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
CONSISTING OF OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL USES. SUPPORT COMMERCIAL USES.
AND PARK AND OPEN SPACE: REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL ESTATE. A2
TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. PUD. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR
12 LOTS. 2 OUTLOTS AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT-OF-WAY: WETLAND
AL TERA TION PERMIT TO FILL AND MITIGATE WETLANDS: AND SITE PLAN
REVIEW FOR A 101.600 SQ. FT. OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL BUILDING ON
PROPOSED LOT 1. BLOCK 3: INTERIM USE PERMIT TO PERMIT SITE GRADING:
ALTERNATE URBAN AREA REVIEW (AUAR) REVIEW AND APPROVAL FOR
GATEWAY ADDITION. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF HIGHWAYS 5 AND 41. GATEWAY PARTNERS. STEINER
DEVELOPMENT.
Public Present:
Name
Address
Bruce Buxton
Rich Wrase
Mark Wentzell
Brainerd, Minnesota
405 Cimarron Circle
A.K. Architects
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Peterson: Any questions for staff?
Skubic: What do we have in here that would prohibit say a Cub Foods or a Best Buy retail store?
Generous: Under the intent section. Commercial use, retail uses are prohibited except for those
uses specifically. . .
Skubic: So they're not permitted uses you're saying.
Generous: Yes. They're strictly prohibited.
Skubic: Okay, thank you.
Peterson: Other questions?
Conrad: Yes Mr. Chairman. Bob, the institutional square footage minimum. You were advised,
or the applicants said 250,000 is too great. Why did you set it at the 250? Was there a rationale
for 250 versus 100 versus anything?
Generous: No, because basically that was.. .Lot 9, Block 4. That threshold. And if you get
something that large you'd probably get a university, college type. . . potentially research institute.
And we did, this is one of the concerns we want to have a high quality development on that
comer...this, the design criteria...
35
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
Peterson: Other questions?
Joyce: Bob, have we thrown out any idea of housing in here then? Is that what we're saying?
Generous: That's correct.
Joyce: So when we talk about support, commercial support here, we're really limited now
because you're only dealing with the people that are there going for their office work and that
kind of stuff.
Generous: Unless a convention center with...
Joyce: Okay. I'm just curious, and I'm not quite understanding this. You said in the report it
says that there's going to be, I'm looking at traffic signals on the north and south road and
Highway 5.
Generous: Yes.
Joyce: So there will be signals there for the traffic going east and west on Highway 5?
Generous: Right. It will be north and south. ..
Joyce: Wow. That's pretty close to Highway 41, isn't it?
Hempel: A quarter mile away.
Joyce: It is a quarter, I guess all right. Okay. I just, it would seem like a lot of backing up to me
but if we have a big traffic report so evidently they know what they're talking about. I was just
curious about that though. Okay. Thank you.
Peterson: Bob, why don't you kind of just give us a general update on the Wrase property and
where we're at with those discussions and the access, etc., etc., that was the issue last time.
Generous: The access would be required under.. .the developer would provide a.. . driveway
access into their property. My understanding from the City Attorney was...
Peterson: I assume we're not close within, before going to Council etc., etc. We're weeks or
months away.
Generous: I don't know exactly...
Peterson: Okay. Other questions of staff.
Blackowiak: I may have missed this but Bob, what happened? What is the progress of the park
negotiations? I know that the Park Commission had talked about acquiring some more of the
36
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
land and since Lot 1 of Block 2 is no longer multi-family, what's happening for that southeast
quadrant?
Generous: They're still negotiating that. It won't be resolved probably until the... There's a
compromise position that we're... Staffs preference is to preserve.. . developer has to have a
developable piece of property. . . We're getting closer I believe.
Peterson: Would the applicant like to make a presentation? And if so, please come forward and
state your name and address please.
Fred Richter: Good evening. I'm Fred Richter with Steiner Development. With me tonight is
Howard Dahlgren, part of our planning group and John Uban. John Uban will be making the
majority of the presentation regarding the overall PUD issues. And Mark Wentzell, an architect
with Ankeny Kell Architects will talk about the Phase I building and kind of run through the
exterior concept of that and the site plan on that. Just I guess one thing just to lead off and
reiterate what Bob has stated. We've had several work sessions with Council and I think it's fair
to say we've got a line pretty well figured out as to the boundaries in that southeast quadrant.
Approximately someplace in this area which will be an industrial site and. .. park issue with the
Council with the final resolution of the dedication or purchasing the land. That was a big
issue...pretty well focused now. I think with that, John can kind of run you through our
development and then we'll turn it over to Mark Wentzell who will talk about the architecture.
John Uban: Well the last time we were before you we did have a residential component that we
talked about quite a bit and as pointed out, in looking at an enlarged park, now about one-third of
the site is being considered for park, which includes basically the whole easterly one-third of the
property. This in a way changes the character of what we're proposing. It means we are
condensed into a smaller parcel. So what we have left is a set oflots. This is really a plat. It's a
set of lots that we have configured on this property with the north/south street primarily serving
lots, and in exchange an east/west at some future phase, out to Highway 41. So we'll have, when
we end up maybe 90 acres of developable land. 100. In that neighborhood that can be
developed. In addition, the Wrase property has already been discussed.. .going to be included in
with the development by virtue of an easement or driveway access that would get into.. . site so
they don't have to have direct access to Highway 41. And that will be integrated in with the site
plan through Lot 1. So that that is all tied together. A condition we anticipate a water tower site
there. On the perimeter, we're talking about enhanced setbacks that are part of the Highway 5
corridor treatment. We talked about a lot of landscaping. Almost a wall of landscaping, and I
will show you that plan. And the interior is then different. The interior is treated differently to
accommodate these buildings and each one of the sites is graded to it's own separate plateau and
between the sites we have these terraces that create a backdrop for each of the buildings, and
that's what I'll focus on before we get into the architecture. This drawing, once again, here's
Highway 5. Here's Highway 41. 82nd Street comes across to about here and then turns to the
south. Everything colored in here is the proposed park area. North/south road up to Highway 5
where there will be a full intersection. The traffic study has indicated that this is absolutely
necessary. In order to have an industrial park here, we have to have this intersection signalized
so that it works. Otherwise it's not an industrial site. Coulter Boulevard is still being considered
by the City, whether or not it should go in or shouldn't go in. The traffic study said that this will
37
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
operate equally well with or without this road in place so that is still a future decision. Obviously
it allows for more parkland to be usable if that road isn't built. The road over to Highway 41 is
one of our last phases of development and in that we would anticipate that Highway 41 will be
improved. Lowered to minimize the grading.. .tie into that. The grading on the site anticipates
these changes that will take place when Highway 41 and Highway 5 are developed. And we will,
after our first phase, create a second phase grading plan that precisely shows the cu~s and fills and
quantities which are hard to do at this point. We have talked about some of the things with staff
that Bob brought up and we will continue to work with staff to kind of fine tune some of these
elements, like the land use where we would like to have a bank or financial institution. That's an
important part of a good service base for business and the same with servicing automobiles,
restaurants, these sorts of things. There is a significant industrial base to the south in Chaska that
they, themselves do not have good services. So we find this to be an appropriate place to
accommodate services that are. . . We are not anticipating a large institutional use, at least
initially. It would probably be unusual, a 1 in 10 sort of chance that something of a huge
magnitude would come along but we think a smaller number would work and would work well
within the park without really over burdening the tax base scenario for the development. I think
the important thing really to consider then is our landscape plan and our signage and what we're
proposing to do. We have illustrated here, and you can see it in different colors, a naturalized, re-
establishment of the terraced slopes throughout the development. These basic areas create the
grade changes between each individual lot and are fully naturalized. That means an extensive
planting of trees, native turf, flowers, everything so we kind of return some of the natural terrain
that is now under cultivation back to it's original form. And then all along the perimeter with a
gateway landscape feature at the comer of Highway 41 and 5, this is all planted in as well with
both evergreen and overstory trees. With the landscaping we're trying to blend into the road
system the landscape. Not just put up sort of a wall of trees, but let's spread it out a little bit and
make it look more natural, which two things have to be done and we need the flexibility to do it.
One is to be able to plant in right-of-ways so that the trees or shrubs can blend closer to the street
surface. And the other is to have a variety of sizes of plant material. Instead of everything being
6 foot or 8 foot tall, or something, that we have a variety so it really looks like a naturalized
planting. So these are the details we'll present as we bring each individual development to you.
So by planting in the right-of-way it tends to give a visual narrowing of the streets, which calms
traffic and really I believe makes a much more attractive development. We have over 400 trees,
just trees alone. Lots of shrubs, just in this perimeter planting and the terracing. Each site will
have it's own landscape in addition so there's quite a bit to be planted for the site. We have
coordinated lighting. The signage, we're asking for signage larger than what has been talked
about with city staff. But primarily at the entrances of the three main entrances in which we
really need a gateway monument that expresses that this is an important site. And understanding
that the perimeter is going to be heavily landscaped, there won't be these immediate views into
the site itself. So what we have is a presence that needs to be expressed at the entrances.
Tastefully done. And we have right here as an example of the type of sign age that we're
proposing. Some nice stone, boulder, masonry work with a logo and the name of the park placed
on there. That's important. That's an important part of developing a high quality park that has
that type of signage. And we're just asking for subtle increases. A few feet in height. The
ability to have finials or caps come off the monuments that might be higher yet. An exact design
will be before you when we're ready to build it. These types offlexibilities where we hope you
understand and present to you this evening. In addition, tying into the overall site will be a pond.
38
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
All the water quality issues are being addressed in the engineering. Traffic has been studied. An
indirect source permit is being processed. We have over 2,000 potential parking stalls here. We
don't know for sure but since the potential is there, we're processing an indirect source permit
and because we have over 500,000 square feet of potential building on the site, we are also doing
an alternative urban area review, which is an alternate way of doing the environmental review
when you have an excellent comprehensive plan and when you have excellent ordinances that
control many of the things that are ofa concern in an environmental review. You already have
much of that in place so that process merely meets the criteria and the law and expresses all of
those concerns in that document. That is presently being published and being distributed to all
the agencies for review. .. . show you the type of building. This is an interior building. Not a
building seen from the perimeter, so it's inside the park building. Industrial building and will
show the architecture and treatment of that structure.
Fred Richter: Mark is going to be showing you...you'll see more green space which is indicative
ofthe 70% maximum coverage. From our. ..standpoint, we're open up the development, Phase I
in '97 and '98 of 82nd Street. So this would be Phase I and possibly the comer of Lot 2. And
then we go over here. '99 to 2000 is the potential for this lot here and possibly these. Then when
a full intersection opens up, and we've talked with staff, the comer lot, the larger lot. The one
that actually is anticipated to be a little different than what Mark will be showing in that we're
guiding this one to a kind of corporate user. A high tech manufacturing. One that's going to be a
multi-story building and more green space. Another just clarification. In the commercial, guided
commercial and this is also so what Mark will be showing you probably will be indicative of this
area here, which is the primarily industrial, multi-tenant or end user building with these being
guided a little bit differently. Mark.
Mark Wentzell: Thank you Fred. This is the site plan for that first building that Fred just
mentioned. 82nd Street and then the proposed north/south road. It's approximately a 10 acre
parcel with one building placed in the center of which. .. the first tenant coming into this section
and future tenants later so it becomes a modular kind of building layout. We have two entries to
the site. One off of 82nd, which is a truck traffic entry and then more parking for an entrance off
of the north/south road. Parking is related along the edge ofthe site. Along the front and
forward boundary of the site where the monument sign... The building is approximately 645 feet
by 160...service yard in the back with some additional employee parking... Also there's a
proposed future expansion of the building shown right here. .. parking and surface area here for
the loading dock. This is a computer generated perspective of the building. It shows the massing
and scale ofthe building. This is a view, this is the southeast comer of the building right here. It
shows a typical entry. ..that comer. They're repeated then along the building at regular intervals
50 they can be subdivided for tenants. The idea behind each entry, which is a significant feature
of the building, is there a recessed entry rather than a projected entry. It keeps the, I think the
massing of the building more consistent and here's an opportunity to create a shelter entryway
around here. We have some grillwork and some changing colors. . . that you'll see in the
coloration I'll show you in a just a moment. So this is generally this large kind of feature right
here and the building matches the scale of the structure. The multi-tenant building... the street
faces the building. Parking is right out here and then the back yard across here is where the
service area is. This area through here would be...is the embankment up to the next site, the sort
of terraced area. That will be covered again with the native grasses and heavily landscaped. . .
39
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
This will explain a little more about the materials and coloration of the building. Since this is a
pre-cast concrete building with insulated wall panels and metal structure within. It's an efficient,
long lasting building system. To give the building character we wanted to look at both scales. At
the small human scale and also to scale the entrance canopies and the entry features to the scale
of the building. So we have a series of entries along here. Some will be actual entries for a
particular tenant. Some will be just recesses to modulate the facade if a tenant doesn't need this
additional entry space. So we're showing here five entries and three kind of just regulated
appearing like entrances. Again we've painted these in sort of a shades of earth tone. We started
out with the lower portion of the building with a light beige color and then above that a warm
gray band. And then a little lighter, an off white kind of color and then a gray cap give
dimension to the height of the building and. .. And then most of the features. . . sort of a warm
ochre brown color to identify those entries and to give them the prominence. We then recess that
entry and side. The sense of shadow will help identify the entries and also protect them and then
an ornamental grillwork is in there to add some detail. I have here a photograph of a similar
building, if you can see that very well. But again it's somewhat.. .concept with the recessed entry
here and this dark area here looks somewhat brighter color and then the ornamental grillwork
gives that some enthusiasm right at the entryway. This is again a painted, pre-cast building.
Similar to the materials that would be used on this building.
Peterson: Would you pass that around, if you would.
Mark Wentzell: The back side of the building, the loading dock side is painted in the same
coloration with a single.. .cap across the top and then the lower.. .loading docks will be painted to
match and then the back is painted with the off white color. A little bit simpler than the front,
and again this is the north side that is the future expansion and this is the south elevation with
this entry actually being from the southeast. And this is the major one across three sides facing
the proposed north/south road. And I think that completes my explanation of it. Yes.
Peterson: If you would, just a few questions. We talked about the colored material and the
banding. Do you have any of that with or have you met with staff to let them review the types of
materials that you're going to be using? When you say paint it scares me.
Mark Wentzell: Well it's a cementitious paint product made for painting concrete. It's not
house paint but it is in any color imaginable because it is a paint product. It's not an aggregate or
an actual concrete product. I think there's several reasons for that. One, you get more consistent
color than you do if you're trying to use a natural concrete product. We have a greater variety of
color and we have the ability to put color on the building where we want it rather than as a pre-
cast panel which are made in 8 foot wide segments by the height of the building and you have to
pretty much stick with the color of that panel. So it's a little more flexibility. I think if you see
these photographs, the ability to get nice, warm colors. Kind of natural colors is quite. . . We can
provide the actual paint samples of the colors.
Fred Richter: One addition, in the pre-cast technology, this is a lot of reveals are put into the pre-
cast panels so as you talk about a color change, there is an architectural real crisp reveal that
starts to highlight, as you can see in that picture so this gives legitimacy to the color change. It's
really a way to take and develop a larger building and get it. . .like a day like today when you get a
40
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
lot of moisture, the exposed aggregate starts to modulate in color lots... Something that actually
allows in 10 years, whatever to update the color. To freshen up... We think this is a state of the
art, something we're seeing from the pre-cast companies that have it in other industrial
markets.. .
Peterson: So as far as longevity of the paint itself.
Mark Wentzell: It's significantly different than the old days of putting let's say like a latex paint
on a concrete wall. This is not that kind of system. This is, it's not going to flake or peel or
blister off.
Peterson: It's just going to fade.
Mark Wentzell: It will fade like any paint, particularly bright colors will fade, and it will have to
be repainted sometime in the future but you're getting very long lead times. At least a 10 year
cycle now on these paints. I think maybe even 15. As a matter of fact a lot of these have never
been repainted. And it's consistent with the buildings that you see to the south. The what,
Flouroware building and.
Fred Richter: All the.. .I'd say the majority of those are painted with... This technique, with the
architectural reviews.. . actually a little more sophisticated...
Peterson: The ones with the dark blue is what you're talking of?
Fred Richter: ... the older buildings, some of them are just standard concrete panels. Some of
them are exposed aggregate. Some of them have painted stripes. Some of them have a masonry
band.
Mark Wentzell: You can see in those pictures how the reveal system works where it's not just a
paint line but an actual reveal where the paint colors change. That will be done here.
Joyce: I have another question here. In your development standards, item II of the building
materials and design. It says each building should contain one or more pitched roof elements.
How is that incorporated?
Fred Richter: We talked with staff, maybe Bob you want to answer how you define a pitched
element.
Generous: Well it varies. In this specific site plan.. .entryway with the grill system and
coloring... pitched roof element. The Byerly's went with the vault system. You know it varies.
.. .on Dell Road and Highway 5, they did those... Something that ties it in with the rest of the
community but gives it it's own...
Joyce: I'm obviously thinking more of.
41
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
Fred Richter: Yeah, the roof. I think when we talked to staff today, the.. . might be generalized.
It isn't literally a pitch but to achieve the objective of giving the building entry identity, scale,
spatial modulation of the long walls. That type of thing.
Joyce: Okay. I don't know if this is the right time to ask this question but we have all the, you
said there was going to be some parking back behind this building?
Mark Wentzell: Yes. ... parallel parking.
Joyce: Okay. What kind of tenants, is this a warehouse type of situation or what? Is this office
and warehouse or?
Fred Richter: The anchor tenant... they're a 70,000 square feet facility. 12,000 offices. They're
a direct mail marketing firm. So they would have not only their purchasing, front offices,
catalog, publishing, that would be in the 12,000 square feet. Then the rest of it would be
basically distribution. ..
Joyce: So 10% of the building is for office and 90% is for warehouse.
Fred Richter: Yeah. That is the anchor tenant.. .12 over 70.
Joyce: Or 12 over 70, I'm sorry. Okay, that's 15-20%.
Fred Richter: The remainder of the building, roughly 30,000, we would probably estimate
probably 20% for office. It varies. We've had buildings right now very similar dimensions and
all that, our first tenant is 50% build-up. In other words, 50% office. And in this... The overall,
a facility like this probably 20%.
Joyce: The thing I'm leading up to then I guess is, I believe we have to address something in the
parking with the islands, the landscape islands and things like that and I'm just, with that it seems
like a lot of parking to me and I just, I hate a building surrounded by parking. So how are you
going to address those situations?
Fred Richter: I think the islands, Mark did you want to address that.
Mark Wentzell: We had. . . that comment and I forget exactly. .. Our thought is that because
there's...repeated row of parking. You know aisle after aisle, that you get the parking lot heavily
surrounded by greenery, just one aisle deep so that putting an island here really doesn't add a
lot. .. If it was a double row or you know three rows deep, then the islands do a lot more for the
parking lot to break up the asphalt.
Fred Richter: Ifwe can work it out with staff...other communities it's pretty common. What
happens here is if you get more greenery in the parking, you obviously reduce your parking.. .so
I think there has to be a balance.. . pretty close to landscape.
Joyce: Thank you.
42
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
Peterson: This is a public hearing. I'd like to hear a motion to open up the meeting to a public
hearing and a second please.
Joyce moved, Sidney seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened.
Peterson: Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, please come forward and state
your name and address please. Seeing none, may I hear a motion to close the public hearing, and
a second.
Joyce moved, Skubic seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed.
Peterson: Commissioners. Bob, would you share your comments please.
Skubic: Well I don't have a great deal to say about this. I do have a question of Dave. We
typically don't allow landscaping trees in the right-of-way. What are the implications of doing
so?
Hempel: Typically we don't. Or we have in some residential communities where the
homeowners association that maintains them. They enter into what's called an encroachment
agreement which spells out maintenance responsibilities and if they fail to do it... we're not
responsible for damage or maintenance in the right-of-way. This particular subdivision does
have a very wide right-of-way. 80 foot wide right-of-way.. . areas will be 36 feet
wide.. . additional turn lanes so there may be some opportunity here to utilize some of that right-
of-way area for landscaping. Typically on a collector type street, Coulter Boulevard for instance,
we would have a streetscape plan where we will plant boulevard trees... with the city project.
.. . open for ideas for landscaping.
Skubic: Okay, thank you. Regarding the institutional square footage. I don't have a strong
feeling on that. I guess 250,000 square feet is prohibitive, I would consider a reduction. I don't
know what to what. I think I need more convincing on that and more background. Just a couple
details. The building is a little bit plain, especially on the south side and it fronts 82nd Street.
There's no windows on the south side. I think it needs to have some architectural features on that
side. We typically get some materials in here to look at. I certainly don't expect you to bring in
an 8 foot by 20 foot pre-cast slab but we like to look at materials to see what they're like. I don't
have anything else to add.
Peterson: Kevin.
Joyce: I have a couple questions and Bob, maybe you can help me out on this. What do we
have, six motions here? Is that what we're looking at?
Generous: Five.
Joyce: Five, okay. The second motion is for the actual PUD, and I'm sorting through here. Is
there, in the conditions something about signage?
43
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
Generous: That would be the design standards. Once this is final.
Joyce: Then we go into those conditions? Okay, that explains that for me, thank you. All right,
because we just went through that signage business with the 8 inches. I didn't want to do that
tonight for sure. I suppose that will also incorporate the multi-story possibility on Lot 5 and that
kind of thing. Is that?
Generous: Yes.
Joyce: Okay. All right. As far as the Heartland America, I guess I didn't ask the question about
condition 7. There was a request for increased evergreen plantings. Has that been taken care of?
Is that in the presentation? Did they increase those?
Generous: No they haven't.
Joyce: They have not?
Fred Richter: We have to, once we figure out. ..
Joyce: All right. Okay. It's a huge development and in some ways it's nice to have one
developer. I think that's a plus but then it can be a minus too. I hope it's not a cookie cutter type
of situation either, but since we'll be looking at each site plan it doesn't sound like it's going to
be. As far as the banking facilities, or I think there was a question to whether that would be an
allowable usage. I think that's a good usage. That's my feeling on that. Thank you very much
for this. This is very nice and helpful. I like being able to, when it's reduced and you can look at
these things. I will have to agree with Bob though, once you go to City Council, it'd probably be
good to have some samples of materials and stuff like that so, I mean I think you are aware of
that. Otherwise, I'm pretty satisfied with it.
Peterson: Good, thanks. LuAnn.
Sidney: I'm pretty satisfied as well and I guess I have one comment about architectural details on
the building. Personally I'm not a great fan of the metal grid or that kind of design element
above the door and I guess I would like to see some other options for the design of the building if
possible. That's all I had.
Peterson: Ladd.
Conrad: This is an interesting review meeting. I think City Council did a real nice job. I
attended their meeting when they talked about this project. We don't have their notes. Their
Minutes. I think that would have been real helpful to have seen their Minutes because I thought
they gave some direction to the developer and we don't have privy to that. So you don't know if
we're meeting what their requirements are or not. Just one comment. I think Bob, we've just got
to, when the Council gives real clear direction to the developer, we've got to see it. We do.
They had some insightful things and I think they were very positive. I thought it was a really
44
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
good interchange between the developer and Council. I guess it's such a big project, I guess we
lose sight of the fact that we're looking at a PUD fIrst and then there's some other stuff that's
going to happen but we now merged the two and I think it's really overall, I think it's easy to
water this down and... I don't have many comments on the PUD. I think it's moved in the right
direction. I think the developer's doing a good job. I think the staff report, from what I can tell,
is on the money but that's just a guess because I didn't take the notes from the City Council
meeting but, and I'm going to make, I want to make, I think we should approve the PUD tonight.
Secondary, the other item before us, I'm the last person on this commission that gets involved in
architecture but I didn't, and maybe it's our new way of presenting things. But I can't relate at all
to what I saw tonight. We always have building materials here and I don't, I'm not even the one
that wants it, you know. I'm pretty much the one that would let developers do their thing and
staff reviews it and makes it fit. But I couldn't relate to what was presented tonight. And it may
be the presentation. It may be the materials. I know I need a better front elevation so I can relate
to what it is. I couldn't let that go through. It doesn't mean I'm against it. It just wasn't what we
typically see. Back to the big picture, the PUD for Gateway. The only thing that I see, and I
think the staff report is good. I made one note and the only note dealt with sidewalks. Are there
any? We probably connect to a trail but in an industrial like this, do we have sidewalks?
Generous: We will on the north/south boulevard.
Conrad: Do I know that? It's in the subdivision.
Generous: And under the design standards we have...
Conrad: And how do I know that?
Generous: On page 13. We typically say sidewalk or pedestrian access or some type of. . .
Conrad: So we have a master thinking. What I don't want to do is piecemeal it. There's, that's
okay. Well, is there a master plan for connectivity for sidewalks in an industrial park like this?
John Uban: The problem is it's hard to see on your television I think but we have indicated all
along here, the north/south, east/west if that takes place. It also shows a trail in here. It also
shows Highway 5, Highway 41 and the same for 820d Street. So we have a big loop this way.
We're connecting into the park north/south and then the trail along the State Highway... We're
also proposing that, we'd like...between the curb and trail.
Conrad: Thanks. And Bob you started the presentation with a whole series of questions and I
don't know that we've really provided any direction yet. One, I can't remember what you said.
And I think at the bare minimum we should get out with at least giving you some direction on
that so as it goes to City Council they have, you know they have some direction. Well, as we end
talking about it, I think we have to address the issues that you brought up. If they were the
developer's issues or your issues. Bottom line, the site plan's fine with me. Looks good. It's
where...it looks good to me. I like it. ...the building that's presented. I don't know. I'll listen to
others. I haven't heard any critical comments so if somebody else makes the motion, that may fly
through. I just, again it may be the new format of presentation here but I think we should have
45
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
materials. We should have a pretty good front elevation rendering. And I didn't see that tonight.
And I guess the bottom line is, the architectural detail, I think as LuAnn said, makes me a little
bit nervous. I'm not, pre-cast is fine. We haven't ruled it out. It just wasn't up to what we had
been seeing from almost every other developer that's been in here in the last year.
Peterson: Allyson.
Brooks: I'm going to start with the traffic. I think I was really surprised to see that SRF could
ever put any kind of an assumption in their report that Trunk Highway 5 would ever be six lanes.
I think that is appalling. I can't believe that they could think that TH 41 would be four lanes.
The transportation system plan has been out in draft form with the Metro Division for almost a
year. They've had every access to it. There is no excuse for SRF to come in and do a traffic
report saying that Highway 5 could ever be six lanes. You know we were talking before about a
traffic report was done for another development you know and everything's fine. Well when I
see this, I question the traffic reports. This is not fine. This is completely out of the realm of
reality. And I think that you know again this development, and there's nothing that I suppose can
really be done. It's really going to put a lot of pressure on Trunk Highway 5. It's not going to
make it six lanes. It's just going to make a lot of traffic. I agree with the Parks and Recreation
Commission of their preference that the boulevard not be extended through the park preserve. I
think it would be nice to just leave it as it is. As for the Wrase property, I think I discussed
before, I believe that building is 19th Century building. Didn't we discuss that the last time it
came forward? 1880? Right. I would like to see something that if that property ever goes away
as part of the development, there is some mitigation done for the historical record. You know
whether we move the building or we don't move the building, take into consideration that we are
removing a piece ofChanhassen's history and we do something to mitigate that damage. Finally,
as for the building that Ladd was talking about. I found the building to be quite ugly. I don't like
the pre-cast building. I think they have no class. They have no style and they have no
individuality. They look like anywhere. There was nothing attractive or special about either of
those buildings that passed in front of me, and maybe as Ladd said you know, if we saw the
materials it might be different but just from the photographs, I thought they were particularly
ugly and I thought even the loading dock area, I realize nobody sees it but it's still pretty poor to
look at. Aesthetically, it was not a very nice building. And other than that, the development as a
whole I have nothing against but those are some of the issues that I came up with but that traffic
study is really alarming. I'm sorry Dave. To have SRF come in with six lanes is amazing.
Hempel: Mr. Chairman, maybe I can address that a little bit. We, staff does have concerns with
a lot of the assumptions in the traffic report. We reviewed it in about a couple of hours but we
have a lot of questions to go back with to SRF.
Peterson: Okay, thanks.
Brooks: Thank you.
Peterson: Alison.
46
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
Blackowiak: I too agree that overall I like the PUD. I'm personally glad the residential
component is out of it because I didn't really feel that that ever fit into it so I'm glad to see that's
not a part of that anymore. Regarding Coulter Boulevard, I too would prefer that that not be
extended through the parkland. Not only do you have a nice, you know Outlots A and B.
You've got the wetlands and the park area. You also have the 0 'Shaughnessy property
immediately to the east which is I think just a wonderful opportunity to leave an area untouched.
We do have residential to the southeast of this and that would just be a nice chance because if we
put the street in, we're just going to have lots of traffic going through this park very quickly and
that's a fact. And regardless of what happens on TH 5 or TH 41, it would be nice if we didn't
have to put the Coulter Boulevard extension through this parkland as well as through the
O'Shaughnessy property. The Heartland building, I wouldn't go quite so far as Allyson but I was
rather uninspired. Like she said, it's everything else. I mean we see this building everywhere.
We've talked about PUD's and how they need to show us something a little bit more. A little bit
extra. We've got, we want to see a little bit more in design standards as I understand the PUD
ordinance and I didn't see it there. I would like to see that again. I would like Heartland to come
back and show us the materials like Ladd said. Show us something a little bit more inspiring. A
little more interesting maybe than your run of the mill industrial building that you can see on any
area in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area so that's basically it.
Peterson: Okay. I think we have a diverse opinions tonight. I think there's a consistent theme
however on the PUD, as my thoughts parallel that. I think the idea presented tonight and the
uniqueness of a terracing is going to be a tremendous asset to the community and give a generally
unique feel. I agree with the other comments. I think one of the things missing, as I was talking
to staff today that I had a difficult time with regarding the Heartland building itself was, is that
we didn't have renderings of the building really before that were of the scale that you can get a
sense. I don't remember what scale it was. It was relatively small where we really didn't get a
sense of really what the building was going to look like. We had the top views and the parking
lot views but as far as the side and front and rear rendering to the building, they're really small
and hard to get a feel for what we're really experiencing. I think it is necessary for us to make an
informed recommendation to Council that we see that again. See the building and see the styling
of it more than what was presented tonight. I was squinting at the monitor tonight on the pencil
drawing to kind of get a sense of really what I was looking at. I really couldn't get that from the
pencil drawing. Bob made a comment earlier that I think the south side of the building clearly
needs some more architectural lines. I think that to me is at a minimum and I'd like to refrain
from making further comments on the front until I really get a feel for it and right now I don't.
We had done some very nice things with those building materials around town and I'm not
saying that this isn't there yet but again I don't know, and I can't make a recommendation up to
Council until we see a little bit more of it so. That's the extent of my comments. Do I hear a
motion? We have five so.
1,1
Blackowiak: Well I'll start with an easy one. I move that the Planning Commission
recommends approval of the rezoning of the property from Agricultural Estate, A2 to Planned
Unit Development, PUD.
Joyce: I'll second that.
47
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
Blackowiak moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval
of the rezoning of the property from Agricultural Estate, A2 to Planned Unit Development,
PUD. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Joyce: I'll take my turn. The Planning Commission recommends preliminary approval ofPUD
#92-6 for an office industrial business park and preliminary plat approval for 12 lots, two outlots
and associated right-of-way subject to conditions 1 through 29.
Peterson: Second?
Blackowiak: I'll second that.
Joyce moved, Blackowiak seconded that the Planning Commission recommends
preliminary approval of PUD #92-6 for an office/industrial business park and preliminary
plat approval for 12 lots, two outlots and associated right-of-way subject to the following
conditions:
1. The developer will be responsible for surface water management fees pursuant to ordinance.
Staffhas estimated the water quality fees at $528,255 and water quantity fees of $497, 127.
Water quality credits will be given for the creation of on-site water quality ponds meeting
NURP standards in accordance with the SWMP. Water quantity credits will also be given
for payment of assessments and/or construction of trunk storm sewer lines. Final SWMP
fees will be determined upon review of the final grading, drainage and construction plans
with each phase of the project. Surface water management fees are only applicable to the
lots being platted and not outlots.
2. The developer shall supply the City with an overall phasing plan of the grading including
the amount of earthwork involved in each phase.
3. The grading plan shall be revised to incorporate the following items:
a) Lot 1, Block 1 shall be revised to accommodate for a drive access over the easterly 40 feet
of Lot 1, Block 1 to service the Wrase property.
b) The proposed storm water pond at the northeast comer of 82nd Street West and the
north/south street shall be reconfigured into a more north/south configuration to minimize
tree loss and preserve natural slopes adjacent to the wetlands.
c) The north/south street between Coulter Boulevard and the cul-de-sac street shall be
realigned 50 to 75 feet westerly to reduce wetland impacts and give slope relief along the
east side of the north/south street adjacent to the wetland/park property.
d) MnDDT's review comments shall be incorporated into the final grading and development
plan.
48
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
e) The grading plan may need to be revised to insure predeveloped runoff rates are being
maintained to Wetland C.
4. Preliminary and final plat approval shall be conditioned upon the City Council ordering
public improvement project No. 97-1. Without the project, preliminary plat and/or final
plat shall be void.
5. The developer should be responsible for extending sanitary sewer service to the Wrase
parcel which lies directly north of Lot 1, Block 1 as a part of the overall site improvements
with Phase I.
6. Depending on the amount of sanitary sewer discharge from Lot 3, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2,
Block 1 may not be able to develop until Lot 3 is connected to permanent sewer facilities.
7. The installation of a temporary traffic signal and/or auxiliary turn lanes at the intersection of
82nd Street West and Trunk Highway 41 is required with Phase I development. The
developer shall be responsible for a share of the local cost participation of this traffic signal
on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in
relation to the total traffic volume on 82nd Street West. The developer shall also be
responsible for future costs associated with the local share of the traffic signal to be installed
at the north/south road at Trunk Highway 5. Financial security to guarantee the installation
of these traffic improvements will be required from the developer in the form of a letter of
credit or cash escrow.
8. The street right-of-way width adjacent to Lot 4, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 3 shall be
expanded to 100 feet wide to accommodate future turn lanes.
9. The east/west street will be restricted to a right-inlright-out only at Trunk Highway 41. All
lots shall access onto interior streets and not Trunk Highways 41 or 5.
10. All public streets and utilities constructed by the developer shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates.
Detailed construction plans and specifications for the developer-installed public streets and
utilities constructed by the developer will be required in conjunction with final platting for
staff review and City Council approval.
11. The developer shall be required to enter into a PUD AgreementlDevelopment Contract with
the City and provide a financial security in the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow to
guarantee site improvements.
12. The developer shall be responsible for the installation or costs associated with the
installation of street lights. The City's standard street light along industrial/collector-type
streets are 25-foot high corten steel street lights. Location of the street lights will be
determined upon review of the final construction drawings.
49
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
13. Type III erosion control fencing will be required adjacent to wetland areas. Additional
erosion control fence may be necessary at the toe of steep slope areas and adjacent to storm
water ponds after the grading has been completed.
14. The storm water ponds and/or temporary detention ponds shall be constructed in the initial
grading phase to minimize erosion off-site. Erosion control blankets will be required on all
slopes greater than 3: 1. Revegetation of the exposed slopes shall occur immediately after
grading is completed.
15. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with
seed and disc-mulched or wood fiber blanket or sod after completion of each activity in
accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook.
16. Wetland buffer areas shall be surveyed and staked in accordance with the City's wetland
ordinance. The City will install wetland buffer edge signs before construction begins and
will charge the applicant $20 per sign.
17. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year
storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater quality/quantity ponds in
accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to
review and approve. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post-
developed stormwater calculations for 10-year and 1 DO-year storm events and normal
water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basin, and/or
creeks. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also
be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. In addition, water
quality ponding design calculations shall be based on Walker's Pondnet model.
18. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies,
i.e. Carver County, Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health
Department, Minnesota Pollution control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, Army Corps of Engineers and Minnesota Department of Transportation and
comply with their conditions of approval.
19. Fire hydrants shall be incorporated per the Fire Marshal's recommendations.
20. The appropriate drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated on the final plat for all
utilities and ponding areas lying outside the right-of-way. The easement width shall be a
minimum of 20 feet wide. Consideration should also be given for access for maintenance
of the ponding areas..
21. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way except landscaping
along the frontage road in accordance with the Trunk Highway 5 Corridor Study.
22. The lowest floor or opening elevation of all buildings shall be a minimum of 2 feet above
the 1 DO-year high water level.
50
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
23. Stormwater ponds must have side slopes of 10: 1 for the fIrst ten feet at the normal water
level and no more than 3: 1 thereafter or 4: 1 throughout for safety purposes.
24. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during
construction and shall relocate or abandon the drain-tile as directed by the City Engineer.
25. Final grades adjacent to Trunk Highways 41 and 5 will be subject to review and approval
ofMnDOT for compatibility with the future widening of Trunk Highway 5.
26. Increase landscape plantings to include 400 trees in addition to buffer yard plantings and
individual site plan landscaping.
27. A 10' clear space must be maintained around fIre hydrants, i.e., street lamps, trees,
shrubs, bushes, NSP, US West, 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.
28. Submit street names to Chanhassen Fire Marshal and Chanhassen Building Omcial for
review and approval.
29. Existing structures on the property which may be demolished require a demolition permit.
Proof of septic and well systems that are abandoned are required.
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Peterson: Next motion please.
Sidney: I'll make the motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Wetland
Alteration Permit for Gateway Business Park subject to the conditions of preliminary PUD #92-6
approval.
Peterson: Second?
Skubic: Second.
Sidney moved, Skubic seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Wetland Alteration Permit for Gateway Business Park subject to the conditions of
preliminary PUD #92-6 approval. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
Peterson: Next motion.
Skubic: I'll recommend that the Planning Commission recommend tabling of Site Plan #97-6 to
allow the applicant to improve the presentation and the architecture of the building. To take
another look at that.
Brooks: I second.
51
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
Fred Richter: Just a question of staff. One, we're nervous about our schedule. Would it be
possible if we had. ..overall, the notion of pre-cast, the coating. Ifwe come back with larger
renderings, and even have some options on some of the colors. . . basic industrial concept. . .
address the details of this. Again the Planning Commission and come back... I think the
comments I heard were one of not really understanding this. We apologize for that. We should
have had larger elevations. Materials is kind of tough since it is a piece of pre-cast. .. that we
showed you in that photograph. The idea of the reveal over on the openings is just kind of the
basic concept that has various elements...several different options on that. The basic concept...
600 feet long. And Bob, I guess I'm asking you also, schedule wise. If it gets tabled, we can
come back when. . . ?
Peterson: We can take it in two weeks so it would be the following Council meeting. We're not
talking major delay.
Fred Richter: I have no problem with the comments, if I understand you right. I'm reading that
it's a matter of detailing more and maybe looking at some options and carrying our concept out a
little more...
Peterson: Yeah, I think the sense, the general sense is this is the first building of what you're
presenting and what we consider to be a fine development so we're taking maybe even extra care
with the first building sets the tone quite often to the rest of the development so, and what we're
saying is we haven't got a feel for what that tone is yet. Further discussion to the motion at hand.
Conrad: Could I make a comment, just so. Yeah, I think part of it was presentation because we
can't even tell. I don't have a problem with the 600 feet but it looked pretty boring. So when we
say we couldn't tell, that's the truth. We couldn't tell because we couldn't see. But there's a
feeling inside that you haven't broken up 600 feet very well and we've done that in Chanhassen
almost every building. We're breaking, not, we don't want two 300's. The 600 is okay but
we're looking for those design elements that can help break up that monotony of that long span
of space and I didn't see it in what I saw so, there's some surface stuff and then maybe there's
some depth behind it that I just want to be sure right now.
Peterson: Any further discussion to Bob's motion to table?
Skubic moved, Brooks seconded that the Planning Commission table Site Plan #97-6 for
Heartland America. All voted in favor and the motion carried.
Dahlgren: Mr. Chairman, a point of timing. Are we talking about tabling from two weeks from
now?
Peterson: Work with staff on that but I think that was the plan. Is that the final motion? There's
one more.
Brooks: I move the Planning Commission recommends approval of Interim Use Permit #97-1
for Gateway West Planned Unit Development site subject to conditions 1 through 15.
52
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
Peterson: Second?
Skubic: I'll second it.
Brooks moved, Skubic seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
Interim Use Permit #97-1 for Gateway West Planned Unit Development site, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The applicant shall provide the city with a letter of credit in the amount to be determined
by the City Engineer based on earthwork quantities, maintenance of erosion control
measures and site restoration.
2. The applicant shall pay the city a grading permit fee as required by the Uniform Building
Code and pay for all city staff and attorney time used to monitor and inspect the grading
operation. The inspection fees shall be computed at a rate of $30 per hour per person.
3. The applicant shall obtain and comply with all permit requirements of the watershed
district.
4. The applicant shall work with City staff in revising the proposed grading plan to an
acceptable stormwater management plan in accordance with the City's Surface Water
Management Plan. Since the stormwater management plan for the subdivision has not
been fully approved, the applicant's engineer shall provide an interim storm drainage and
erosion control plan including but not limited to construction of temporary sediment
basins in accordance with the City Best Management Practice Handbook in an effort to
minimize erosion off the site.
5. Upon completion of the site grading, the applicant's engineer shall supply the City with a
letter certifying that the grading has been completed in compliance with the proposed
plan.
6. All site restoration and erosion control measures shall be in accordance with the City's
Best Management Practice Handbook. The applicant's engineer is encouraged to pursue
acquisition of this handbook and to employ these said practices. A stockpile must be
provided for the topsoil which will be respread on the site as soon as the excavation and
site grading is completed. Topsoil and disc-mulched seeding shall be implemented
immediately following the completion of the graded areas unless the City's Best
Management Practice Handbook dictates otherwise.
7. Noise levels stemming from the operation are not to exceed Minnesota PCA or EPA
regulations. If the City determined that there is a problem warranting testing, such tests
shall be paid for by the applicant.
53
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997
8. Hours of operation are limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and no
work on national holidays or Sundays. Hours of operation on Saturdays are limited to
9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. If complaints from residents are logged with city staff regarding
Saturday operation, the hours shall be reviewed by the City Council.
9. The applicant shall construct and maintain gravel construction entrances during the
grading operation.
10. All erosion control measures shall be installed prior to commencement of grading
operations and be maintained until all disturbed areas have been fully restored. The
applicant shall also be responsible for removal of all erosion control measures upon
completion of site grading. The city engineer will determine the appropriate time and
authorize the applicant to remove the erosion control measures.
11. The applicant shall notify the city engineer of all drainage tiles encountered during site
grading. The city engineer shall determine the appropriate abandonment or rerouting of
all existing draintile systems.
12. Additional Type I erosion control fence shall be used along the north perimeter of the site.
Erosion control fence surrounding the wetlands shall be the City's Type III version.
13. This grading permit approval is conditioned upon the City authorizing public
improvement project No. 97-1 to extend trunk utility service to the site.
14. The grading permit shall be conditioned on approval of the preliminary plat for the
Gateway West Business Park PUD by the City Council.
15. The developer will be responsible for monitoring the effects from the construction activities
and mitigating any such effects."
All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS:
Generous: The car dealership's off for the 21 st.
Joyce: What was that? I'm sorry.
Generous: The car dealership was supposed to come to you on the 21st and they requested to be
withdrawn again. Oh, another new business. I'm supposed to remind you on May 19th we're
having the citizen kick off meeting for the Comp Plan amendment schedule. It's open to the
Planning Commission and City Council. Basically staffwill run it but if you want to listen to
what people have to say.
Peterson: You'll be sending out a notification?
54
Planning Commission Meeting - May 7, 1997