The URL can be used to link to this page

11-1-95 Agenda and Packet AGENDA FILE CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSI WEDNESDAY,NOVEMBER 1, 1995,7:00 CHANHASSEN CITY HALL,690 COULTER CALL TO ORDER OLD BUSINESS _ 1. A preliminary plat to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition into 4 lots and site plan review for a 7,742 square foot Tires Plus facility located on property zoned BH, Highway Business District and located north of Hwy. 5, east of Market Blvd. on West 79th Street. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Sign height variance request to allow a 6'/:foot high entry monument sign to be located at the intersection of Landings Drive and Minnewashta Parkway, Kenneth Durr. 3. Sign variance request to allow two monument signs on property located at 761 West 78th Street, Richfield Bank. 4. An amendment to the City Code for landscape nurseries and garden centers in the A2, Agricultural Estate District. 5. Preliminary plat of approximately 36.6 acres of property into 3 lots and 2 outlots; site plan review of two 64,000 sq. ft. buildings;wetland alteration permit; and vacation of an existing right-of-way and utility easement on property zoned IOP and located in the southwest corner of Dell Road and Hwy. 5,CSM Corporation. NEW BUSINESS APPROVAL OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL UPDATE ONGOING ITEMS OPEN DISCUSSION 6. Industrial Land Use Study. 7. Livable Communities Act. 8. DataSery Remodeling. ADJOURNMENT NOTE: Planning Commission meetings are scheduled to end by 10:30 p.m.as outlined in official by-laws. We will make every attempt to complete the hearing for each item on the agenda. If,however,this does not appear to be possible,the Chair person will notify those present and offer rescheduling options. Items thus pulled from consideration will be listed first on the agenda at the next Commission meeting. PC DATE: 10/4/95 CITY of 11/01/95 CC DATE: 11/13/95 � • CHAIHASEI CASE #: 95-13 SUB, k95-10 SP By: Generous STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition into 4 lots and site plan review for a 7,742 square foot Tires Plus facility zLOCATION: 550 West 79th Street, north of Hwy. 5, east of Market Blvd. on West 79th Street Z — a APPLICANT: Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd. Chanhassen Housing & Redevelopment Authority •�—� 701 Ladybird Lane City of Chanhassen Burnsville, MN 55337 690 Coulter Drive Q (612) 894-2700 Chanhassen. MN 55317 PRESENT ZONING: BH, Highway Business District ACREAGE: 3.78 acres (164,760.64 sq. ft.) DENSITY: not applicable ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N-railroad tracks, CBD, Frontier Center S -BH, Highway 5 Q E -BH, West 79th Street Center(Cheers) W-BH, Americana Bank QWATER AND SEWER: Available to site PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site is relatively flat with a six foot elevation change across the entire parcel. A lowland/ponding area is located in the southeast corner of the property. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial ±±C°" t" Vel • 4 ° 11,411110' /i es iteit CM 414-. - - -fm'amff 1 i I c(01"11"r11 I - mlir ii! ��1. «� e�1'`1 ■J 1� ,, ��:1$6,12:1.; ` A \ LAKE , � ''•n TWINMAPLE • LANE s MU A all S1 all �`: a,�� ` iwww�l\��,; A `j 'l �� BASSW�_�Si�•.� . 'l ,)`�, VI CIRCLE '� �� o; — /IIul 11-x' .I I1��► � % �� /11 L'�1�l, 7400 ��1 r A ,> " fallP1 .•111110--14 : �\ q, II *oma i �rke 1111 011' wi .,�f � u •'''•111 0 , A • esp. 1.1. .._.:.., is, on at.,. 1 ialowro ofq um 14---:-- ) 0 en W OA.;' PA0040.irptcp, 1��I A 111 IL $0,46EN: , 7 d a PI ,,, W o .` Il$0�Ts.TN:( : 1I= • Fa a '� =�'10,1 0 .� 1051( AI ,..j II 15 , ,j Ztz ,,,Jj ... _,, c, :�- • x •0111111 Tilliertialli lHAN ■V■� 4 lin wo v■ CHI V,E�Id 2. ■ 1 11 ..1520 v,„ ,,ri :21 ollp,••••0046._11 w 7 -1-1Q___-__Is _ )7 el API m _ •...!_,, ATIO �I NitffliLA "Ea2: "ZIP-1W75 1011111‘ '4 6 atin* biPi Al a ter Nr HANHASA rI RFt. '�`�.• L} Lr- w r`�.• • YENNEESUrk � :r v� Ilk . R MINI PAA IIMI DRIVE TATE HIGN� MIIIM-� *�` da .ii; ►1.4l lik ,.. vs,, v. .• .0/7 **. 4 / ii':%TN e ' S ` 8100 40ti � VW*;t , —. Q SU PARK ' Z. tiAta��.■• Eli., A. —8200 _ � �� .,�� FR/CE .Il. w �' ; - --____,- _ —__;,.--u----, � �.. Y �� MARSH ~ w _ J-�� • SINNEN firmIlle FLIA CIRCLEI f---- i ., ix 1 mic PARK �� ' -) L A KE SUSAN Jrl _._ _ _ , , �— �� 2... {� ./ �-tirc7Ity R/C C . M RSH L d`� :{,4=1 V , --;-------- ---___-z/- 4 40zo, si ‘______________.) it 14i`ma . �' - ti.. . OO :6TH V A . k., _fes';,-2 _ Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY The City of Chanhassen Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) is proposing the subdivision of a 3.78 acre parcel zoned Highway Business District, BH, into four lots ranging in size from 0.6 acres to 1.24 acres. The rear two lots, Lots 1 and 2, will be accessed via a private street that will serve as the access for the entire site. The proposed subdivision does not require any public improvements and is served by adequate urban infrastructure. A master site development plan, grading,drainage and erosion control plan will be required prior to approving the final plat. Staff has worked extensively with the applicant to revise their site plan for the Tires Plus building to comply with city design requirements. We are recommending that the applicant provide a pitched roof, either gabled or hip, to comply with the Highway 5 standards and to be consistent with the majority of development within the central business district. Staff is recommending approval of the subdivision and site plan subject to the conditions of the staff report. BACKGROUND On March 9, 1992, the Chanhassen City Council approved Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition which replatted Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza Addition, into two lots. Council also granted site plan approval for an 11,468 square foot bank and office building for Americana Community Bank. On October 23, 1989,the Chanhassen City Council approved a site plan for a 14,000 square foot -- bank and office building. However,the development was never undertaken and the applicant withdrew the site plan. On February 12, 1989, the Chanhassen City Council approved preliminary and final plat for Crossroads Plaza Addition. The plat consisted of two lots and four outlots. Two of the outlots were utilized for Highway 5 right-of-way. The other two outlots were used for drainage and stormwater retention ponds. SUBDIVISION WETLANDS There is one large wetland on-site. The wetland is an ag/urban wetland located on the east third of the property. The wetland is approximately 1.5 acres and is characterized as a type 1 seasonally flooded basin. Since the wetland can not be avoided with development, the City will be seeking a wetland alteration permit to fill the wetland and replace it south of West 79th Street (the property is Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 — Page 3 being purchased by the City). The wetland mitigation plan is still being formulated, but plans are to -' create wetland where there is no longer wetland south of West 79th Street and restore the existing wetland south of West 79th Street that has been degraded. The City may also have to use wetland credits from the wetland bank. — The City delineated the wetland south of West 79th Street since this information is needed for the wetland alteration permit process and the wetland mitigation design. The plans should include the parcel south of West 79th Street and show wetland delineation, wetland mitigation plan, and stormwater ponding before filling any wetlands. Peterson Environmental will be completing the _ wetland delineation report, the mitigation plans, and the wetland permit application. Wetland buffer areas will be incorporated into the mitigation plan. Prior to filling the wetlands on Lot 2 and 3 the City must receive all the necessary permits to complete the project in accordance with the — WCA. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) — The site has been assessed for storm drainage improvements along West 79th Street and the regional downtown pond. Therefore, SWMP fees are being waived. — GRADING & DRAINAGE The site drains to the south. The stormwater runoff will be collected in the storm sewer system and connected to the existing storm sewer on West 79th Street and discharged into the existing stormwater pond on the south side of West 79th Street. Staff will require the hydrologic calculations to verify water quality treatment and stormwater holding capacity. EROSION CONTROL The plans have provided, for the most part, erosion measures and site restoration in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). The final grading plan shall incorporate erosion control fence(Type I)around the perimeter of the grading limits. UTILITIES The applicant's engineer has been working with City staff in preparing final utility and street construction plans for the overall site. Staff has reviewed these plans and fords them in accordance with the City's standards. The utilities from West 79th Street are proposed to be extended to the common lot corner of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4. This segment of utilities will be owned and maintained by the City upon completion. The remaining site utilities will be considered private and not maintained by the City. The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for obtaining the Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 Page 4 necessary permits from the City's Building Department for the private utilities. Since there will be public improvements installed, the applicant will be required to enter into a development contract and provide the City with a financial escrow to guarantee the installation of the public improvements and conditions of final plat approval. The necessary drainage and utility easements are being provided on the final plat for the public improvements. STREETS Access to the site is proposed from West 79th Street. The access driveway is proposed to be constructed with the initial phase of construction. However, only the Tires Plus parking lot improvements will be constructed initially. The entire site may be graded depending on receiving the necessary wetland alteration permits. Otherwise, only the access drive and Tires Plus site will be graded. The site has an existing curb cut located in the southwesterly corner of the site. This curb cut will be removed and the boulevard restored. The City has had a traffic study prepared to determine impacts to the existing roadway system. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. had prepared a traffic study on June 28, 1995. The results of this study indicated that the West 79th Street and Market _ Boulevard intersection and the existing roadway geometrics will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service. The overall master site plan/grading plan has also provided pedestrian access through the use of sidewalks. LANDSCAPING/TREE PRESERVATION Existing boulevard trees,planted by the city, are located along West 79th Street. Additional trees are located on the east and west sides of the site on adjacent properties. Individual site plan landscaping will be done on each lot. AREA FRONTAGE DEPTH BH District 20,000 150 100 Lot 1 30,589 230 133 Lot 2 26,274 208 133 Lot 3 53,900 280 209 Lot 4 53,996 262 228 Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 Page 5 District Regulations (BH): Setbacks: front- 25, side - 10, rear- 20; Building height- 2 stories FINDINGS 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning ordinance; Finding: The subdivision meets all the requirements of the BH, Highway Business District. 2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable city, county and regional plans including but not limited to the city's comprehensive plan; Finding: The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable plans. 3. The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and storm water drainage are suitable for the proposed development; Finding: The proposed site is suitable for development subject to the conditions specified in this report. _ 4. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage disposal, streets, erosion control and all other improvements required by this _ chapter; Finding: The proposed subdivision is served by adequate urban infrastructure. While the parcel will be developed by the individual site users, a master development plan for grading, drainage, and utilities will need to be developed prior to final plat approval. 5. The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage; Finding: The proposed subdivision will not cause environmental damage subject to conditions if approved. 6. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record. Finding: The proposed subdivision will not conflict with existing easements, but rather will expand and provide all necessary easements. Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 Page 6 7. The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate storm water drainage. b. Lack of dedicated and improved public streets. c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. Finding: The proposed subdivision is provided with adequate urban infrastructure. SITE PLAN GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The proposed development is within the Highway 5 corridor and must comply with the design standards established therein. The standards of the overlay district include: 1. Parking and building orientation: • The site meets this standard. The parking setback in the HC-1 district are those established by the underlying zoning. The site parking meets this requirement. The building is oriented to West 79th Street. This orientation maintains the visual concept which the city would like for the entire site. The development of the entire Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition will locate structures to the periphery of the site with the majority of parking located in the center. 2. The architectural design standards. • The materials and details of the buildings are consistent with the Hwy. 5 standards. The project incorporates brick exterior with a well designed landscaping plan. Building materials are of a high quality. Wile he project into*he str ctureThe applicant has provided the pitched roof element through the extension of the peaked signage facade across the front of the building. Staff is recommending that this pitched roof treatment be extended across the entire length of the building. Staff believes this solution meets the criteria of the Highway 5 standards. Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 — Page 7 • The overall design and architectural theme for the development consists of brick exterior walls, recessed areas, and varied building facades. • Building height is limited to three stories or 40 feet. The proposed structure is one story of approximately 22 feet. The district regulations limit building height to 2 stories. • The proposed development incorporates the use of high quality materials in both building and landscaping elements. • The site design is such as to avoid the accumulation of trash, leaves and dirt. — • The building components are proportional and relate well to one another. • Building colors are harmonious and create a pleasant aesthetic experience. 3. Landscape Design and Site Furnishings • The applicant's landscaping plan is well designed and incorporates the use of _ native tree species as well as extensive buffering materials. The plan reforests a site devoid of vegetation. Minnegasco will not permit the placement of trees within their 20 foot easement on the north side of the structure so the revised _ building design will permit placement of trees on the north side of the parking lot as well as to the north and east of the building. ACCESS Access to the site will be provided via a private street from West 79th Street into the site which -- must comply to city standards. GRADING/DRAINAGE — Grading of the site must be consistent with the master development plan that will be required of the plat. — LANDSCAPING The landscaping plan exceeds the minimum requirements of code. However, Minnegasco will not permit the planting of trees within their easement along the northern property line. Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 Page 8 LIGHTING/SIGNAGE The applicant is proposing 22 foot high parking lot light poles with wall mounted light fixtures on the south, east and west elevations. The applicant is proposing signage on the south,east, and west elevations. City code permits signage on street frontage only. Signage will only be permitted on the south elevation and must comply with city code requirements. No panel signs will be permitted. A separate sign permit will be required for signage. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance with the following: (1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Consistency with this division; (3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing or developing areas; (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; (5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 Page 9 c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and neighboring structures and uses; and d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. — (6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light — and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed development, as designed revised, does net comply with the Zoning Ordinance nor and the Highway 5 overlay standards. The applicant is proposing site coverage of 66.5 percent. City code permits a maximum site coverage of 65 percent. An additional 428 square feet of landscaped area would be required on the site to meet this requirement. Originally,the applicant was proposing site coverage of 77 percent and was short of landscape area by approximately 1,400 square feet. Staff has worked with — the applicant to revise the plans to reduce this deficiency. Staff believes that the revised plans are acceptable and that the 428 square feet is not an issue. In order to meet this requirement, the applicant could remove two more parking spaces if the Planning Commission so desires. Alternately,the city could require the development as a whole to comply with the 65 percent site coverage requirement which would require — a minimum landscape area for the entire plat of 57,666 square feet. The Highway 5 design standard requires a pitched roof element. The proposed peaked sign area parapet wall on the southern elevation of the building does not meet the intent of the ordinance. — The applicant shall incorporate a sloped roof on the structure across the entire expanse of the building rather than only the front of the structure. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motions: — Subdivision "The Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve subdivision 95-13, Crossroads 3rd Addition,plans prepared by Peters,Price & Samson, dated July 12, 1995, _ Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 Page 10 replatting Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition into 4 lots subject to the following conditions: 1. Submit master plan showing entire site plan with utilities. Fire hydrant locations will be reviewed at that time. 2. This development proposal is similar to the Market Square proposal where there was a master utility, grading, and drainage plan used to develop the overall site. The plan document submitted with a Tires Plus submittal does not provide enough information. The applicant needs to develop an overall master grading, drainage, and utility plan to service the entire development. In order to proceed for City Council review on October 23, 1995, the applicant must submit a master plan for the site by October 9, 1995. All utilities shall be installed in accordance with the City's latest edition of Standard Specifications. Completion of the utilities, most likely the mainline utilities, will be owned and maintained by the City. Therefore, detailed construction plans as well as as- built plans will be required. _ 3. The preliminary plat itself appears to be acceptable. The appropriate drainage and utility easements will be dedicated with the plat. 4. Existing landscaping along West 79th Street will be in conflict with the proposed driveway. These trees will need to be relocated. 5. There is an existing concrete driveway apron on West 79th Street located in the southwest corner of the site that will need to be removed. 6. The applicant needs to hire or retain a qualified wetlands delineator to verify any wetlands on the site. 7. This subdivision proposal will be subject to water quality and quantity surface water management fees (SWMP) in accordance to city ordinance. 8. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new developments. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be used adjacent the grading limits. 9. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 — Page 11 10. All utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. 11. 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 accepting the utilities and will charge the applicant$20 per sign. 12. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 2-year, 10-year and 100- year storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and -_ approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins and created basins. Individual storm — sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. 13. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 14. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, _ i.e. Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Health Department, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Board of Water and Soil Resources, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their _ conditions of approval. 15. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way. — 16. A landscape plan providing upland and wetland plants to naturally blend the wetland mitigation areas into the surroundings is recommended. -- 17. Prior to filling the wetlands, the City shall receive all the necessary permits to complete the project in accordance with the WCA and Army Corps of Engineers. — 18. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during — construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. _ Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 Page 12 19. Erosion control fencing (Type I) shall be denoted on the final grading and drainage plans prior to final plat approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be installed around the perimeter of the site prior to any work commencing. Site Plan "The Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve site plan 95-10, plans dated October 20, 1995,prepared by Yaggy Colby Associates, for Tires Plus, on Lot 1, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 3rd Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. Building is required to be fire sprinklered per NFPA 13. 2. Ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants. 3. Submit radius turn dimensions for approval. 4. Signage will only be permitted on the south elevation and must comply with city code requirements. No panel signs will be permitted. A separate sign permit will be required for signage. 5. Grading of the site must be consistent with the master development plan that will be required of the plat. 6. The applicant shall incorporate a pitched roof across the entire building width. 7. Revise the landscaping plan to locate all proposed trees outside the Minnegasco easement. 8. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new developments. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. Type I erosion control fence shall be used adjacent the grading limits. 9. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 10. The applicant shall apply for and obtain permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies, i.e. Watershed District, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission,Health Department, Crossroads Plaza 3rd/Tires Plus October 4, 1995 Updated November 1, 1995 — Page 13 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency,Board of Water and Soil Resources, Minnesota — Department of Natural Resources and Army Corps of Engineers and comply with their conditions of approval. 11. The private utilities shall be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or builder shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the City. 12. The applicant shall enter into a site development agreement with the city and provide the necessary security to meet the conditions of approval." — ATTACHMENTS 1. Development Review Application, City of Chanhassen 2. Development Review Application, Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd. 3. Letter from Ronald L. Fiscus to Todd Gerhardt dated May 16, 1995 — 4. Letter from Richard J. Pilon to Robert Generous dated September 7, 1995 5. Memo from Mark Littfin to Robert Generous dated September 21, 1995 6. Memo from Steve A. Kirchman to Bob Generous dated September 25, 1995 7. Public Hearing Notice and Mailing List 8. Planning Commission Minutes of 10/4/95 9. Revised Plans 10/20/95 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: 4Of CL[ A l\ OWNER: _ CCADDRESS: ( Ll�' lA I Y--( TD ADDRESS: c 5S-31S ti.c_�Ls�� 4' � TELEPHONE (Day time) 3� /etc TELEPHONE: 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. ! - Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review Notification Signs 9. Site Plan Review X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** $100 CUP/SPR/VAC/VAR/WAP $400 Minor SUB/Metes & Bounds 10. y Subdivision TOTAL FEE $ A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 8W' X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. — * NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. " Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME C(-CSS C-Clt157[.C{ZC-t_ 3c 4j) — LOCATION 5'D p U0- 7crrin ' LEGAL DESCRIPTION )- Z t31z(L__L 1 C+Ce:SSP4 .0,a•-G< 2.-`art 4iicit �. PRESENT ZONING Pp 14 4--k7 it (c-i-i j }ES< �; ��i z�� 1 REQUESTED ZONING 7)1-- / U PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION t.-C v�,-,-�,C�t REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION L:?'I'h vlW&_i Lc l--+' ' /a�1-t av ' /7 REASON FOR THIS REQUEST �r;�•t�S-[ti�. `�' E_(tc�2 z��-� � 7 (. `{-� �_ c.„"1." ie; /124--k ,.4 /A-- L 4 t L / j 3 c A �, •f re,,,— I t This application must be completed in full and b1ypewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the _ authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. 1 will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 1 also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded ag 'nst the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's Off ce and the s iginal document returned to City Hall Records. (-4 ; (9 )s 1 jt‘5 Si at re of Applicant Date Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd. OWNER: Chanhassen Housing & Rehabilitation Authority ADDRESS: 701 Ladybird Lane ADDRESS: City of Chanhassen Burnsville, MN 55337 TELEPHONE (Day time) (612) 894-2700 TELEPHONE: (612) 937-1900 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance - 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review Notification Signs }` icy - > t- 9. X Site Plan Review X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost' $100 CUP/SPRNACNARNVAP $400 Minor SUB/Metes & Bounds _ 10. Subdivision TOTAL FEE $ Sb- • A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must Included with the application. Twenty-slx full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 81/2" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME Tires Plus - Chanhassen LOCATION Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition LEGAL DESCRIPTION See Attached PRESENT ZONING Highway Commercial REQUESTED ZONING No change requested PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION Highway Commercial REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION No change requested REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Site plan review This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consutting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records. 417 Signature of Applica Date Purchase Agreement Pending Signature of Fee Owner Date Z Application Received on qi 7 f 1iS Fee Paid Receipt No. 5 q9 / The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. LAND DESCRIPTION That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza Second Addition according to the plat thereof on file in the County Recorder's office, Carver County, Minnesota, described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of said Lot 2; thence easterly on an assumed azimuth from north of 79 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds along the north line of said Lot 2 distance of 230.00 feet; thence southerly 169 degrees 04 minutes 54 seconds azimuth 133.00 feet; thence westerly 259 degrees 31 minutes 20 seconds azimuth 230.00 feet to the westerly line of Lot 2; thence northelry 169 degrees 04 minutes 54 seconds azimuth along said westerly line 133.00 feet to the point of beginning. Said tract contains 0.70 acres. 717 THIRD AVENUE SOUTHEAST (507)288-6464 kit - ROCHESTER,MINNESOTA 55904 FAX(507)288-5058 YAGGY May 16, 1995 C O L B Y — ASSOCIATES Mr. Todd Gerhardt ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS SURVEYORS • PLANNERS Assistant City Manager LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS City Hall 690 Coulter Drive _ P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 RE: Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd., Proposal Project Narrative Dear Todd: Tires Plus Groupe, Ltd., proposes construction of a facility in the city's commercial — redevelopment project. The site, located in the northwest corner of the property, is 133' x 230' in size. This allows ample room for the construction of a 7-bay facility with internal circulation to limit the number of overhead access doors. Ample parking was provided for the facility on site, as well as attractive landscaping. The landscaping is an important part of the proposal. The plant materials are arranged in such a fashion as to provide a "development edge" to this multi-user commercial development. The arrangement of the plant materials will provide both an element of screening from the railroad and commercial properties to the north, as well as providing a focal end-point as the property is viewed from the highway. A landscaped area forms the eastern boundary of the property providing an attractive landscaped terminus to the entrance drive. The building architecture makes use of brick and stucco materials and is a further variation and improvement upon the award winning facility constructed in Apple Valley. This enhanced facility — has greater aesthetic appeal than the standard prototype building used by Tires Plus and is commensurate with the"up scale" environment Chanhassen has sought to achieve. Several elements regarding overall sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer service to the project have yet to be determined. Therefore, Tires Plus has made several assumptions regarding municipal utility services. It is anticipated that such services will be extended through the main — access drive into the property for centralized access. A 4" sanitary sewer and 6" water service is proposed to connect with the main at the southeast corner of the property. This will provide ample sanitary sewer service and water service for both domestic and fire control functions. 215 NORTH ADAMS 515.424-6344 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY - MASON CITY,IOWA 50401 FAX 1515 424-0351 EMPLOYER _ Mr. Todd Gerhardt May 16, 1995 Page 2 — It is anticipated that the storm water will be surface drained from this property to properties adjoining to the south at which point it will be collected and piped to the storm sewer existing in the street right-of-way south of the project. The general orientation of the site is to naturally — drain southward from the north portion of the property that is of higher elevation. An erosion control plan is included for approval that will provide ample control during the construction process. It is not anticipated that any particular impact will be placed on the existing utility systems requiring any unusual accommodation by the city. Tires Plus, although very successful, by their nature are low traffic generators as compared to — other commercial businesses. For that reason, this is a very attractive addition to the rear portion of this project. Tires Plus has developed an uncommon philosophy and strategy toward its sales and service operation. They have, in effect, reinvented the process of tires sales and service. Their strategies include attractive but serviceable buildings, a prohibition against exterior display of tires and a — prohibition of overnight storage of vehicles in the parking lot. This, coupled with lighting control, excellent landscaping and reasonable operating hours, have combined to make them attractive additions to other commercial neighborhoods. Since its founding in the Twin Cities in 1976, this operating philosophy has allowed Tires Plus to expand to some 60 stores throughout the midwest and achievement of its status as the premiere tires sales and service facility in the region. Tires Plus looks forward to being an attractive addition to Chanhassen's redevelopment program. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please do not hesitate to call. Yours truly, — YAGG COLBY ASSOCIATES IA/14 j ! � L _ Ronald L. Fiscus Director of Planning and Landscape Architecture RLF/sm #4246 Minnegasco® A NORMA ENERGY COMPANY September 7, 1995 Mr. Robert Generous Planner II City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 — Re: 95-13 SUB and 95-10 Site Plan Lot 2 , Block 1, — Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition Chanhassen, Minnesota Dear Mr. Generous: Enclosed are your prints for this project. Also enclosed is a copy of our section map for the area showing the location of — Minnegasco' s natural gas mains in the area. Some individual services are not shown. Natural gas service is available to this property from the main shown. — Minnegasco owns and operates a 6" natural gas pipeline in a 20 easement. This easement was granted to Minnegasco or a predecessor for this pipeline. We have serious concerns about the grading and — landscaping for this project and therefore object to these portions of the project until our concerns are resolved. Enclosed is a copy of our guidelines for encroachments into pipeline easements. If the developer follows these guidelines most of our concerns will be resolved. The developer/builder should contact Bryan Petrica, Minnegasco Commercial Energy Services at 321-4323 , to make application for natural gas service. — S ' cerel , — i Richard J. •i on, P.E. Senior Adm nistration Engineer Engineering Services 612-321-5426 — cc: Oscar Juria Dean Senne Brian Petrica Easement file 60-93 700 Kest Linden Avenue PO. Box 116:1 \finnrannlic \1\:i:;-1-U1-1 IG:; MINNEGASCO, A DIVISION OF NorAm Energy Corp. GUIDELINES FOR CONSTRUCTION AND/OR ENCROACHMENT WITHIN GAS PIPELINE EASEMENTS The following guidelines are general requirements only. Minnegasco may inspect the area and review construction plans. Final construction plans must be approved by Minneqasco before any construction is begun within Minneqasco's easement. 1. Soil shall not be removed or placed in a manner that will result in earth or pavement cover over the pipeline of less than three feet or more than five feet. A level area of not less than six feet on each side of the pipeline shall be maintained at all times. Slope beyond 6' from the pipeline shall not be steeper than 4 to 1, unless otherwise agreed. Any amount of cut or fill, within the 4 to 1 slope area, shall increase the width of the level area on each side of the pipeline by that same amount of cut or fill. The pipeline must be fully accessible at all times during and after the construction. 2. Landscaping over and within ten feet on each side of the pipeline is restricted to normal ground cover vegetation. Beyond ten feet on each side of the pipeline, upright plantings are restricted to (and shall not exceed) six feet in height. No trees shall be planted or remain within the easement. Any trees, removed within the easement while performing maintenance activities shall not be replaced by Minnegasco or owner. 3. Any buried utility line installed across the inplace pipeline shall be placed with no less than one foot of vertical separation (Federal Regulation), padded with well compacted soil (preferably granular material) and cross at an angle less than 45°, from normal to the pipeline. 4. With prior Minnegasco approval, parking lots, perpendicular driveways or roadways of portland cement concrete or asphaltic concrete (or similar materials) may be placed within the easement, but shall be reasonably limited in width when crossing the easement to minimize the interference with or access to the pipeline for inspection and maintenance. Permanent structures, including, but not limited to, buildings, signs, screen walls, decks, tennis courts, and swimming pools are not allowed under any circumstances within the easement. Installations such as retaining walls and fences that may restrict longitudinal access require approval by Minnegasco before construction. All fences must have a 10 foot wide gate centered over the pipeline. 5. Once Minnegasco and the Owner, Developer or Contractor have reached an agreement, Minnegasco shall be given at least two working days advance notice of planned construction activity so arrangements can be made for Minnegasco Personnel to monitor the construction. Minnegasco will locate and stake the pipeline, but will not assume responsibility to expose or backfill the pipeline or to determine the actual elevation of the inplace pipeline. Excavation to expose the pipeline shall be parallel to the pipeline. Minnegasco Personnel must be present during this excavation. 6. Any subsequent damage or destruction caused by Minnegasco in the exercise of its easements rights, of any and all of those certain foreign constructions (landscaping, driveway, roadway, utility lines, etc.) which may be permitted within the easement area, will be permanently repaired or replaced at the owner's or contractor's (not Minnegasco's) expense. 7. In accordance with Federal Department of Transportation Codes, Minnegasco must place markers over the transmission line. These markers will always be placed behind both sides of the curb or behind the driven roadway. All markers placed by Minnegasco will not be removed. If you have any questions call: Richard J. Pilon, Engineering Services - 321-5426. Dated: January 6, 1995 CITY OF CHANHASSEN\ = 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Generous, AICP Planner II FROM: Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal DATE: September 21, 1995 — SUBJ: Tires Plus, Planning Case#95-I SUB &#95-10 Site Plan 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 review is based on the available information submitted at this time. As additional plans or changes are submitted, the appropriate code or policy item will be addressed. — 1. Building is required to be fire sprinklered per NFPA 13. 2. Submit master plan showing entire site plan with utilities. Fire hydrant locations will be reviewed at that time. 3. Ten foot clear space must be maintained around fire hydrants. 4. Submit radius turn dimensions for approval. ML:eb esafesysrnNvcspls CITY QF CHANHASSEN - �\ s 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Generous,Planner II FROM: Steve A. Kirchman,Building Official • q1<- DATE: DATE: September 25, 1995 SUBJECT: 95-10 SPR and 95-13 SUB (Tires Plus Groupe, Inc. and City Of Chanhassen) I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, MAR 16 1995, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. I also reviewed the proposed subdivision plans stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, JUL 12 1995, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " I have no comments or recommendations concerning this application at this time. I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. g:\safety\sak\memos\plan\nrsplus.doc r'c Jy - ,,i t . 1 �: -`'�17 6010 .� ; — �0 o ill a, �c,S fes_ , - _v1_r. .. ,4h I _,____-__42__4___-- • _ __ O___°_._S\ \-. \-, _ _ - sov\ p 1, - .4.u.) x ..................\ \ \ , .-1 Ail - i \ 1:7: _ M L1 K C Ili'l, 1 A a u -- r ' A 33i.....,:e to V _.........1 ; , \, gri r' 0 `.. t P 17 4 ' r wr T. s 0, 5V '1 IA' ' Z N Vic k.),) �4 t � N l 4,1\c 11 a '',, 7( ,„0,...\ � r ��v�a1t�.5L 1 �l _. -0 71 - A • u V1 �dm'a' °— � 1 1 l — - ",� _ ,gym 1 r_ ree.d.a r t 1 \ \ �+�LIQ ymr0 Sit LA n, hi �� S31lIX,SSd J,61Oo ,,55UA lddEO:IO S6, z2 d3S 'd .... !s `U Cm t it \1 — IPo�i��lrrair:►.c'■�/ 1^1}5 3finaerun _ NOTICE OF PUBLIC j I is im© w •"i �C 4,0 /C m 7 �1� �Fl HEARING NM ;a 14'1 k) WO =ulin IIEW.3 .�INN .m , TM Agile .0 as .rte a© • 21, ii • •` .� ill1Ii 11111 1111111 PLANNING COMMISSION .,. me d 5_ 1007.11 �+"� w �' 111111111111 MEETING rim WE F le H sr. r u;:111111 ' Wednesday, October 4, 1995 — at 7:00 p.m. rif7 � CityHall Council Chambers - y ATO — 690 Coulter Drive ``'' �� i--14-11111 tifri.---ji -di i' d ' s-.4,4 iiiiii -f�t Project: Site Plan for Tires Plus— %. . Facility & PreliminaryPlat TATE �,r �e►� *' E HIGNva > IMS.'- �V' a u" for Crossroads 2nd Addition - +�. e • VY) -..' ,,, ria- tt t ., �= f-, Developer: Tires Plus Groupe & '' f11 1,= i -' �0,04:479',. — City of Chanhassen ► s I,`--r'!lit1� A �� I-, w .ti t ri i f.or „Ii� l: 'o d t' :ail � 2 _ Location: No. of Hwy. 5, east of Market 1 Blvd. on West 79th Street Notice: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in your area. The applicant, Tire Plus Groupe, Inc. , is requesting site plan review for a 7,742 square foot Tires Plus facility and the City of Chanhassen is requesting a preliminary plat to replat Lot 2, Block 1, Crossroads Plaza 2nd Addition into 4 lots and ocated on property zoned BH, Highway Business District and located north of Hwy. 5,east of Market Blvd. on West 79th Street. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the — meeting,the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project. — 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The Commission — will then make a recommendation to the City Council. — Questions or 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 September 21, 1995. . „ ll iL,� C Robert Dittrich John H. Dorek et al Bloomberg Companies — 1827 Crestview Drive 581 West 78th Street P. 0. Box 730 New Ulm, MN 56073 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Chanhassen, MN 55317 _ Estate of Martin Ward Waterfront Associates Ralph Molnau c/o Jerome Raidt Pers Rep — 440 Union Place Ronald Dubbe 930 Baker Bldg. Excelsior, MN 55331 356 3 Street West 730 2nd Ave. S. Waconia, MN 55387 Minneapolis, MN 55402-2475 _ • Thaddeus Korzenowski Chanhassen Inn B. C. Burdick 20645 Radison Road 531 79th Street W. 684 Excelsior Blvd. — Excelsior, MN 55331-9181 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Excelsior, MN 55331 Donald McCarville 3349 Warner Lane — Mound, MN 55364 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 PUBLIC HEARING: A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOT 2, BLOCK 1, CROSSROADS PLAZA 2ND ADDITION INTO 4 LOTS AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 7,742 SQUARE FOOT TIRES PLUS FACILITY LOCATED ON PROPERTY ZONED BH, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT AND LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHWAY 5, EAST OF MARKET BLVD. ON WEST 79TH STREET. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions for staff at this time? Mehl: Yeah, I've got a question. If, you know the rest of the two restaurants there and the Tires Plus are going to generate a lot of traffic. My concern I guess would be is that roadway going back there, is that adequate to deal with it? I guess the other thing too is that, Tires Plus places I've been to have been very busy. A lot of things going on. And they deal with a lot of used and new tires. How are they going to get those in and out of the facility? Back a truck in off of West 79th into the area or is there enough room to maneuver once you get down in their facility. Generous: Well they would be able to drive on site. They're actually, I believe their storage area for the used tires is up here where the ramp is so they would be able to pull off and back into that driveway to access that area. As to the specific operation, maybe the applicant can. Mehl: And then all the new tires, if I recall, were on the back wall. If they have problems of trying to get them back there. They need a way to get a truck back into there. I don't see any big doors for access. One thing I noticed on the prints there, there was a gravel surface near the front, left front corner, or right front corner that looked like about 20 x 50. What is that? Generous: This area? Mehl: No. It was actually a little farther, a little lower to the, yeah. In that area. Generous: I believe that's additional landscaping. It used to be part of the sidewalk when they had the handicap ramp on the eastern edge of the building. But to the revisions and the need to shifting the building, they eliminated that space and moved it over right next to the entrance. Mehl: Just one other question too I guess. Again...there's going to be a lot of activity and a lot of things going on and I believe the drawing that I saw showed, it must have been 7 or 8 17 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 stalls for working on vehicles. I also assume that there's going to be a big air compressor in there with a lot of impact wrenches and a lot of noise producing things and in the summer time you're likely to have the doors open for ventilation and so on. I wonder, has that been looked at for noise standards and that sort of thing? — Generous: Well that's one of the reasons they only have two overhead doors on this building. They really wanted to put all 8 bays with direct drive in and back out on the south elevation and we said that we didn't believe that was appropriate for this area. I haven't gotten into any detail about looking at it as far as other standards for what it would be at the property line. Could we request the applicant, if he has that information, to provide it. — Mehl: Okay. Mancino: Thank you. Any other questions? Does the applicant wish to address the Planning Commission? Thank you. Ron Fiscus: I would be happy to. I'm Ron Fiscus with Yaggy Colby Associates representing Tires Plus. ...for us to give you just a little more background on how far we have come with - this project since we first started talking with Todd Gerhardt and Kate about it about a year and a half ago in fact. ...at that point was that Tires Plus had control of a piece of property across 79th Street to the south that had a little bit of developable area and a lot of wetland. The city had a piece of property that had a little bit of wetlands and a lot of developable area so it seemed like a match made in heaven at that point. So we started working with staff to find a way that Tires Plus might be included as a part of this city's redevelopment project. One of the first concerns was the appearance of the building and as we started talking about — that there was a Tires Plus project that went into Apple Valley in the area of County 42 and Cedar which last year won the Minnesota Shopping Center Association award for a building _ in the under 10,000 square feet. As staff had a chance to take a look at that and we supplied them with some photos of that and they said well, that seems to address a lot of the concerns we have. Some of those concerns being, getting the building mass to perform an end point. _ An end to this piece of property to start screening some of the railroad right-of-way and the area beyond from that Highway 5 and 79th Street corridor. So the building that's proposed on the site, that's shown here, is that Apple Valley building with a couple logistic changes. One — is that it has been lengthen by one stall_ There are 7 stalls in there to provide more building mass. There's a parapet wall up here that's elevated a little bit above that Apple Valley facility. Once again to get the building up and to get more building mass in there. So we — picked up that same clock tower, if you will, feature from the Apple Valley facility and it coincides very nicely with the number of the other building features that you see in the community like the Abra Auto Body. Market Square has that same sort of feature. They — pick up again and again with the Chanhassen downtown area. The issues, other issues that 18 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 we wanted to resolve at that point were the building locations and we recognized that we had to deal with the easement across the back of the property and yet we wanted to bring the showroom around in front so that's the front door to the face to 79th Street. Allowing to minimize the number of overhead doors in compliance with the request of the staff. Goodyear for example has direct access into the parking, into their service stalls. It was thought that on this location that it wasn't the desired goal and both as an appearance concern and a means to control noise, there are two overhead doors instead of seven overhead doors were the direction that we went with. As we've gone through the developing of this process with the HRA and Todd Gerhardt's office and have started working from a zoning approval standpoint, site plan approval standpoint, three other primary issues have come up. One is _ open space. The 35% open space requirement. That we worked very diligently with the assistance of staff to balance the appearance concern and the operation of the building concern with the need to get as close as we can to that 35% open space. Also recognizing that the limits of that property have essentially been set by the subdivision plat that the HRA has put together. And with Bob's help we have gotten very close to that and appreciate his efforts in that regard. And it is a balancing act between the open space and providing adequate parking. We would like to hold to the 18 stalls that are shown with this revised site plan. 16 is what's required by city code. We had a concern that that may not be enough based on...experience in other communities with similar facilities. That 18 really fits that facility much better. As I have acted as staff to planning commissions, as I've advised planning commissions on preparation of zoning ordinances in evaluating the proposals from the other side of the fence than I'm speaking to you this evening, one of the things I continually encourage planning commissions to do is look at the reasons for the regulations. Regulations are fine but you also need to look at the reasons behind those and the parking requirements are frequently set as a minimum standard. You want to make sure that there is adequate parking first and foremost. Beyond that, the number of stalls required in your zoning ordinance are a guideline. Well our concern with Tires Plus, adjacent to Applebee's that also, that has a much higher parking demand than the Tires Plus facility. Much higher traffic demand...is there going to be adequate parking for both of those so that we minimize the need for parking across those property lines, even though there are cross easements in place that will provide for the legality of cross parking. For the most part I think the Tires Plus peak uses will happen at different times than Applebee's, but there is going to be some overlap at peak use times and so we would like to go to the 18 stalls and ask for your concurrence with the staffs evaluation. That that 33 1/2% open space, as it's represented with a lot of landscaping, would satisfy that goal of what you're trying to accomplish from an appearance of open space standpoint. The other item I want to address is that of the roof structure. It was our hope as we worked with staff, with the city administrator's staff early on — in the project, that this building facade would be acceptable. Would meet all the requirements of the city. So what I'd like to do is maybe have some dialogue as we get farther into the discussion tonight about that roof situation. I would encourage that this 19 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 parapet with the clock tower sort of replicates that roof sort of feel. And as I talked with Todd about, where that roof requirement came from. Once again we get back to the reason — why. Todd's reaction to that was, one of the primary reasons for starting to look at roofs and requiring those as a design element was that you were tired of looking at the HVAC systems. _ The air handling units that are frequently roof mounted and dot the landscape on the tops of roofs. There are no rooftop systems with the Tires Plus building...so that's that screening is not a concern because the roof wouldn't be solving that particular purpose there. But we _ would like to have some dialogue with you about that. We do hope that Tires Plus will be a busy facility but frankly the traffic generated from the Tires Plus is on the very low end of the spectrum as far as the number of trips generated per square foot, even with a very busy _ store. Our perception is that 79th Street is very adequate to handle the Tires Plus facility. I think the HRA's direction to locate those high traffic generators at the front of the property rather than driving all that heavy traffic through to the side is a very good choice and I'm sure _ 79th Street is adequate to handle that. One other point had to do with the staffs recommendation that there be a grading plan as an overall site utility plan submitted for the project. We have previously...the street and utility plans have been submitted for getting the utilities and the service street into the site. We've been authorized to prepare the overall site grading plan... (There was a short break in the taping of the discussion at this point.) Mehl: ...I guess my question was how you were going to physically do that. I assume drive — a truck up the driveway and maneuver it or turn it or something and back in. Ron Fiscus: Sorry, I forgot to answer that. There are two places tires are stored. The new tires are at the back of the building. The used tires are in the...in this location of the building. So a truck coming in to deliver new tires or pick up used tires has two options. One is to come into this parking lot that is basically vacant and they would do, they would back — directly into this area. The other is, and we've looked at the truck turning movements to assure that that is doable. They can come into this location and then back into that space. The door to stock the new tires into the racks is back here and there's a walk. I think it's back into it. One of the earlier concepts showed this, showed a more ample, a larger paved area to provide better opportunity for that. A thought we've had is that in order to reduce the _ impervious surface, and yet to provide for that truck access back into there, might be to widen this out slightly or to use some landscaping. The paver panels that you can plug grass into that provides a useable surface but no more often than truck traffic comes in there to pick up _ and deliver. The grass would be allowed to grow in that kind of a surface...opportunity to solve the problem. 20 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 Mehl: Would you expect truck traffic in there daily or weekly or what would be the frequency? Ron Fiscus: Mike Diamond with Cardinal Development knows a little bit more about the frequency of operations. Mike. Mike Diamond: We are the developers for Tires Plus. I'll have to ask you to forgive my voice tonight... Operationally, typically they bring in a truck once a week. In very busy stores in the Twin Cities it's twice a week deliveries. For incoming. ...recycling is a similar cycle. The used tires that you're speaking of, there is a typical trash that any retail establishment has but the used tires are picked up and Tires Plus is very proud of their environmental programs. They're used as fuel for a paper mill in...Wisconsin and so they're picked up on a regular basis and taken to that... Mehl: Okay, thank you. Mancino: Any other questions at this point for the applicant? Skubic: I guess I have one. The discussion about the air compressors. Where will the air compressors likely be located and air conditioning equipment also? Will it might just be roof mounted? Mike Diamond: The air compressors are internally located and are actually back in the same areas of the tire storage at the rear of the store. With it, they have mufflers for the air compressors and this sort of thing and they're designed and used with the air conditioning equipment, I'll let Ron address. Ron Fiscus: The facility, customarily the standard Tires Plus facility has overhead doors for each of the stalls and in the service area, the usual means of handling air is to open the door and let the cool air blow into and circulate within the building. In this case, because we have done the internal circulation and we have limited doors, the building is designed frankly to operate more with the doors closed than the doors open and there is beefed up air handling within the service area. The air conditioning unit for the showroom area is located within the building also. So there are no compressors or air handling equipment that would create noise... Skubic: Thank you. Mancino: Thank you very much for your presentation. May I have a motion to open this for a public hearing please. 21 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 Conrad moved, Meyer seconded to open the public hearing. The public hearing was opened. _ Mancino: This is open for a public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission on this issue, please do so. Seeing none, may I have a motion to close the public hearing? Meyer moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. The public hearing was closed. Mancino: Commissioners. Don. Don, your thoughts. Mehl: Yeah, I'm just putting them together here. Is there a, I wonder is there a physical divider between the two parking lots? They could, can they easily come over and use the restaurants? Mancino: Bob, is there a divider between Applebee's or what's ever will be there? Generous: The line will be approximately on the north side of Applebee's parking lot. There's no berm or median or anything separating the properties. - Mancino: So someone could come in and just, if there wasn't anybody in the parking lots, just make a beeline diagonally over to Tires Plus if they wanted to? Generous: Well, sure. Once you made the turn into the aisle. Mancino: Thank you. Mehl: And the other thing I had a question about I guess or a concern about is the entrance — into their 18 stall parking lot. Is that wide enough for two cars to pass or is it a single car width? Mancino: Dave, could you address that? When you are in the parking lot on the west side of Tires Plus, can you be coming in and coming out at the same time? Hempel: This would be the drive aisle between the parking stalls and the island should be 24 feet wide which would be adequate for two cars to pass. Mancino: We hope so because that's what we just approved for the last subdivision. 24 feet. Okay. Mehl: That's all I have. 22 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 Mancino: Let me remind commissioners that I think that the applicant would also like to hear some of our positions and comments on the roof. Whether it follows staffs recommendation. Or the applicant would like to keep it as it is. A flat roof. Staff is recommending something else and also on whether they are to comply with the zoning ordinance which would mean that they would have to decrease the parking spaces by 2 to meet the maximum site coverage of 65%, which is our existing zoning. And they're only off by 428 feet so I just, but if you could also speak to, I think those two. The Highway 5 ordinance. It is an ordinance now. The architectural designs has in it that within this district that there be a pitched roof element on each building and that that is one of the conditions that staff has recommended. So we can come back to you Don as you think about that. Mike? Meyer: Why don't you come back to me too. Mancino: Come back to you too. Fine. Bob? Skubic: Sure. First off on the false front there, I agree with the applicant.- That frontal geometry is the same as we see on Market Square but the front on Market Square is also much deeper than that and I think that gives you a much different appearance from the side elevation. I don't know, I personally don't know if a pitched roof along the periphery is something that I would desire but I certainly think something needs to be done with that front portion there in some manner. Make it deeper or make it a little more robust. I appreciate what staff has done to make some provisions for some trees or shrubs in the back side of the building and I certainly hope something can fit in that 4 foot section area to block that off a little bit. The Frontier development immediately to the north I believe is being redeveloped and I think for appearances sake it would be nice to have some trees along the back side of the building there. And the 428 square foot condition here. Man, that's about 1/4 of this room. 20 feet by 20 feet. That isn't a large area. However it does preclude putting shrubs in that area. So there's that trade-off there. But I think that by moving the building forward that 4 feet, that there certainly could be enough landscaping in that area. I don't think that 420 square feet is significant. Those are my opinions. Mancino: Ladd. Conrad: Two issues. Site plan. Or it's a subdivision and a site plan. Overall it looks nice. I like it. I'm uncomfortable that we weren't given enough for the subdivision. It's like how can I approve something that really wasn't given to me? It's bad. Site plan looks good. I can slip the standards for impervious surface. I need a reason from staff because as you know in this business, if we grant a variance or slip a standard, then the next developer says well you did it there so I need a reason. And we probably can find one because probably 23 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 overall I'm guessing we can do that. Staff could say landscaping exceed the requirements. — I'm comfortable. But a couple things that the applicant didn't do. ...this is not a ranting and raving deal. Really, we do have standards in our Highway 5 deal so that's sort of an absolute. We're doing it. That's, we're doing it. Everybody that comes into Chanhassen does it so. We received these, I see these were dated May 30th. That's a couple months ago so obviously staff has told the applicant about them and they have chose not to give us anything because they probably wanted to do this which is sort of in their corporate direction, which I — understand but like Bob, I think those are our rules and I'd like to see what we can do within those rules. We've had some successes and failures. I'd sure like to see that. So again I have a hard time passing this on. I haven't seen a good subdivision plan and the documents that we normally require from anybody building in Chanhassen. And I haven't seen elevations that sort of meet what we're looking for. Signage on this elevation, we don't really allow advertising on the outside of the buildings so, and we've got some things that are — wrong, which are easy, real easy to correct so it's not a big deal but it's really not what I'm looking for. But I'll end it. Overall this looks real good. I like the subdivision. It makes, I just like how it works but you haven't given me anything. You haven't given me anything — like other people give us when we review this. And I think you're looking for feedback from us in terms of changing your corporate direction and I guess my signal is, yeah. We can probably slip our impervious surface but that sort of bothers me because we've got a huge site here and usually you can, in a bigger site you can usually manage that so, and we'll figure that out so that's not an issue. Signage is an issue so that's got to be worked and roof line's got to be worked but I think Tires Plus is a reputable, real good company. I'd welcome them to Chanhassen even though my comments don't seem like they're very welcoming but I just want some stuff that we really, I just need some other paperwork before I. Mancino: So you'd like to see this back? Conrad: I think so. Again, it's really tough to, it's tough to pass it on when you know I'm sort of looking at the overall subdivision and it's real flimsy here so. I'm not comfortable that we can do it. — Mancino: Thank you. Craig. Peterson: I think not having been here for the first portion, I'll abstain for my comments. Mancino: Okay. Don, did you want to add? — Mehl: I agree with Ladd. I think we have to maintain consistency and follow and work with some of the things that have been established along the Highway 5 corridor. So I agree with — Ladd's comments. 24 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 Mancino: Okay, Mike. Meyer: Pm in agreement with Ladd also. There's really nothing additional. Mancino: Thank you. Would the applicant like to respond please? Ron Fiscus: The two issues that are before you tonight are the subdivision plat and the site plan. The subdivision plat has essentially been out of our control. It's something that the HRA has been working through and we've been asked to provide some more information after receiving the staff report and those things that are within our control, we certainly are rushing to get into place...staff has encouraged. And Todd may want to speak a little bit more to that subdivision issue as he represents the HRA. And the same point with the roof. Although the plans that were submitted are dated back in May, we have been really waiting on getting the staff review until the HRA took action in approving the development agreement. It seemed inappropriate for the staff to spend a lot of time with all the other things that are going on, reviewing the plans until we knew we had an agreement with HRA. So that reaction to those plans has come fairly shortly and so we've been trying to wrestle with the initial reaction to the building that we got from the administrative part of the staff said gee, this looks great. And then wrestling with the different direction we're getting from planning staff saying, gee it needs some roof. One solution that we'd like to suggest to you that would be in keeping with some of the other roofs that have been acceptable, would be to pick up this line behind the parapet and bring the roof straight back. There would be a standing seam steel roof that would be like Market Square. It could come back to the end of this parapet so it would have a little more, a bit more mass. Or frankly if you'd like, some of the other facilities in the community that have used that have pulled that line clear back through to the back of the building so we would offer either of those two suggestions today that would be very acceptable to Tires Plus as a solution to that roof issue. The signage, we understand the brand signs that are usually placed on the Tires Plus facility in the front would be deleted from this project in order to comply with the city's requirements. We have been scrambling to get through the development agreement with the HRA and to get to the point of being able to get before you in anticipation that we might be able to get under construction yet this fall. The land transfer is scheduled to occur, the first piece of it, sometime after October 23rd. Tires Plus is in the position to move as quickly as you will allow them to, to get under construction this fall so what we would like to do, if at all possible was to address the issues that are outstanding issues tonight in hopes that we might be able to get a recommendation from you so we can be in front of the City Council on the 23rd. As with the roof issue, with the signage issue, with the landscaping issue, we hope that maybe we've addressed those adequately at this point so that you can feel comfortable making a recommendation to the Council. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 • Mancino: Thank you very much for responding to that. Now response of how we feel comfortable, what we want to do with this. Do I have a motion? Conrad: A motion for what? — Mancino: For what we would like to do. Would we like to table it and see it back again with a new roof line? What do we feel comfortable with at this point as far as the applicant's — response? Conrad: Madam Chairman, could I ask. Todd, representing HRA, could I ask you a quick — question? Normally when we have a subdivision of a major plat we have traffic. We kind of lay it out. We've got aisles. We've got different elements. We tie them all together. We see where the traffic's going. How they feed the different things. You know if it's a one site — plan, then the applicant has total control. I'm getting the feeling the applicant doesn't have total control here. Where do I see the site? The overall site development where we have islands in the roads and where, who's doing that? Is that HRA? Are we asking Tires Plus to — do that? I guess I'm a little bit confused Todd. Mancino: When we'll actually see one and who's going to bring it to us. Gerhardt: Bob, can you put up the overall development? To get this development, if you look at it closely, it can be done in two phases. Where you have Applebee's and Tires Plus here and here, you physically can do that phase first without building the parking lots and landscaping on the second half. We come in with a common driveway along the property line on both sides and when the HRA comes to fruition with two other users, then the overall development would be continued. Staffs taken a look at this and feels comfortable that it can be done in two phases. Am I answering your question? — Conrad: No. Well I kind of get it. I know where we're going. I'm just missing, who put this together that we're looking at right there? Is that what you drew? City did that? — Gerhardt: City staff is working. Conrad: The city owns all the land Todd, right? Gerhardt: Right. The parking and we sat down and knew that we had a restaurant and that we had Tires Plus and potentially a second restaurant that was interested in coming into Chanhassen. And with that we sat down with planning staff and Barton-Aschman to come up with some concept plans and with those concept plans the planning staff came back with that — concept to Planning Commission I think this past summer and showed me this concept and 26 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 asked for your feedback. Is this something that you can support as a development in Chanhassen? Not looking at details of roofs. Not looking at details of green area but as an overall development. What do you think of this as a vision for this area? And from what I was told, this had a positive feedback from Planning Commission. We accomplished the Highway 5 standards of getting the green area and buildings between the parking lots and Highway 5. Using the buildings to screen the mass parking that would go along with those. Taking the restaurant element with the front lawn theme around the buildings, along West 79th Street and giving you that residential feel. As it goes to the pitched roof elements and the green area and the plat, you know we'll work with the planning staff and Planning Commission on their recommendations if you want to alter property lines to accomplish that. Conrad: Let me interrupt you Todd. My question, and I'm still confused. We got an applicant in here that really has a site but we have an overall subdivision. Under the recommendation by the planning staff it said, the applicant should submit a master plan showing entire site plan. Now maybe I've just got some works mixed up here. Aanenson: Can I answer that question very simply? There's two co-applicants here. If you look on the top. City HRA and Tires Plus. So it should have been made more clear that the HRA is obligated to do that portion. We have contracted with them, as long as they're going first, they're carrying the ball, that they are going to accomplish some of that. The city's doing the wetland portion of that. But yes, they are doing a portion of the plat. It was the city's obligation to provide you a subdivision. What happened is Tires Plus came in in May. they've been waiting for the negotiations. Todd has spent months trying to get the HRA purchase agreements on this property so they've been waiting all this time so they're ready to go. We're behind them. They're ahead of us as far as their time frame. They want to get going. We feel, as Dave indicated, that we feel that, and Bob, that it's a flat piece of property. We can accomplish that. It's just about there. You're right, it's not. We don't have a subdivision in front of you but as Todd indicated too, we did bring that forward to show you the direction. Conrad: Well that's real general, yeah. And we're saying, hey generally we like this. So that's a whole different deal. We're not getting specific and... Aanenson: Right, but the city is the co-applicant so when we say applicant, that's onerous on the city to be providing that information. Yes, we are amiss on not having all that information in front of you. Gerhardt: You do have the plat in front of you. The subdivision is. Conrad: Well yeah, there's some lines here. 27 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 Generous: That's how the cities do it. — Conrad: Seriously Todd, it's just not up to any standard. Mancino: There's nothing to do with pedestrian friendliness. There's nothing. Gerhardt: You're talking the grading plan and... — Conrad: Sure. Maybe a sidewalk in the front. We don't know anything. Mancino: I mean if you wanted to walk back there and couldn't get there. Gerhardt: There's sidewalks shown on this site plan and it has. Mancino: Where? Conrad: Well Todd it's not. Gerhardt: Can I point it out? Conrad: No, no. I take back some of the things that were said directed at Tires Plus. You're — running faster than we are so I understand the problem. I don't know how to solve it. Gerhardt: Well I would suggest if you feel uncomfortable looking at this, I would table it — until you have a full submission of grading plans and you know, it's not a substantial document but as Ron has mentioned, he could have it completed by next week. I would say table this for 2 weeks if you feel uncomfortable looking at this. — Aanenson: Just for their edification. This is scheduled for the City Council on the 23rd. We hate to do this. We're doing this tonight with Pillsbury. We're fast tracking these but if — there's just a few issues that we're looking at next time, if we could turn this around, we can maybe keep them still on track for the 23rd Council meeting, and that's an opportunity too if we table it. Conrad: You can do that? Aanenson: We'll try. You know we can't make a promise but we can sure try to do that. It just depends on the level of dialogue that needs to take place at the next meeting. That will keep them on track at least for the 23rd meeting. 28 Planning Commission Meeting - October 4, 1995 Mancino: If we can do that. If you can do that. Aanenson: Well it's onerous on them and onerous on the city to accomplish that, sure. Mancino: Okay. I mean we like to see drawings on the new roof line and then a complete subdivision. Pedestrian, traffic circulation. Conrad: Yeah, we've got to. It's just a standard you know, and I appreciate the workings of the HRA and government but we just have to apply the same rules to a government body as we do to private businesses and that sometimes can come back and affect a private business but dog gone it, we just have to apply those standards to us. Mancino: Thank you. May I have a motion? Conrad: I make a motion to table planning case #95-13 Subdivision and #95-10 Site Plan. Mancino: Second? Mehl: I second. Mancino: Any discussion? Conrad moved, Mehl seconded that the Planning Commission table action on Subdivision #95-13 and Site Plan #95-10 for Tires Plus and HRA. All voted in favor and the motion caned. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: Any questions for staff at this time? Seeing none, does the applicant wish to address the Planning Commission? Ric Moore: Good evening. My name is Ric Moore. I'm with Pillsbury Bakeries and Food Service and we've been out at this Chanhassen site since 1992. Over that 3 year period we've been very successful. The business volume has grown about 35% and with that growth is causing problems in our ability for loading and unloading products and so that's why we're here tonight. We've worked with staff previously...take your recommendation to Council. Again, this will help us solve our problem and also help get our trucks off Audubon Road too. ...got our engineering firm here with us. We've got a lot of drawings and can answer any questions you have. Thank you. 29 C I TY 0 F PC DATE: 11/1/95 • CHAIflAE7S \I SEN CC DATE: 11/27/95 CASE #: 95-8 Sign �-' By: Rask:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Variance request for a sign height variance to allow a seven and one-half(7.5) foot _ high entry monument sign at the intersections of Landings Drive and Minnewashta Parkway _ LOCATION: Minnewashta Landings Subdivision located at the intersection of Highway 7 and < Minnewashta Parkway on the northwest shore of Lake Minnewashta APPLICANT: Kenneth Durr 4830 Westgate Road Minnetonka,MN 55345 — Q (612) 935-7789 - - PRESENT ZONING: RSF-Residential Single Family ACREAGE: 19.7 acres(gross) 17.2 acres(net) DENSITY: 1.4 u/a(gross) 1.5 u/a(net) ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N- Highway 7 and RSF, Residential Single Family S- RD-Recreational Development,Lake Minnewashta E- RSF - Residential Single Family _ Q W- RSF, Minnewashta Parkway and Fire Station WATER AND SEWER: Available to the Site. PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The entry monument is located at the entrance of the subdivision on the recreational beachlot. The recreational beachlot and the area surrounding the entry monument have been heavily landscaped. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Low Density Residential • A CATHCART M/NNEWASHTA PARK B HEIGHTS PARK o o 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r•7 N - N 0 0 ch m M O M M M in Y O Q M r7 40 I -�� ..Ar I 6200 a / + r �`, ST 1r1170 ig I ��Voilla `• �r f'tIIIINI , ,` • .4_ 41.1 sal 0 107 91 ri,,• ak ' Virt4 ,4 LAKE111 ' / 1�� 1� �A rm_--�rt mi r� �_ �� 6300--, - 4.„7.73 E' F�.r qtr '�— :" l//RGN/A - e _ : �`•n Ur;hi A lei 7 W' -.4c- .O/'!../isC Ir IrsA° 6400 '� D �•'..1 .WI `I' • ' ASTER // �P.A�A.. -� lin ii- _ J% (�//'/'J� ir - CIRCL A .� i, `� 4(1,6600 iAup" 4.4„..te. � �� ) ;�_ � _ ,. /ire �1. ic[A/P Vioe:wie/ \\ a proXI G` ♦rscrI;�rat"gm•,i r` r X 01`-linewton—ic---B,, r LAKE • 6700 mar.u�oisilila ;� GAUNTRY ST- Evrj - �v 1 i OAKS ,�� 1 ROAD ,;.,�,_,►an M / N N E W A S H T A \ 1,-- 1.11 ST&-•-' 6900 i' REG/ONAL — ..)- ----'- 7000 K, q.A. �� ,_,!rigm , imv-p: i — 1 rw, . • . ...- ,,, ... „. 71C0 —O .,. u U row I "IP iff r „„„„,UII-,V� • l• 3 X.4% r ��/ / 7200 I C.a�. �i`I►,i I 7,i �� `OONA 7 300 ��, �� MINREWASMTA if�`. • ` 7O DRIVE 400 �: �'R`\ , I = I — EILV/r 1 TM Se• \ I' WRI WM 7600 .• _' ' #1111111 1 4111111111 vONO 770 / lr _ _ STA E IH 7800 VIP,7 7900 — r.a OW' I — 8000 I Minnewashta Landings Sign Variance November 1, 1995 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Section 20-1301(2), Signs Allowed in Agricultural and Residential Districts, "Area identification/entrance signs." Only one (1) monument sign may be erected on a lot, which shall not exceed twenty-four(24) square feet of sign display area, nor be more than five (5)feet high. Any such sign or monument shall be designed so that it is maintenance free. The adjacent property owner or a homeowners association shall be responsible for maintenance of the identification/entrance sign. Such sign shall be located so as not to conflict with traffic visibility or street maintenance operations, and shall be securely anchored to the ground. BACKGROUND On June 13, 1994, the City Council approved the final plat for Minnewashta Landings. Entry monument(s) were shown on the preliminary plat at the intersection of Landings Drive and Minnewashta Parkway, however, no sign details were provided at the time of plat approval. In August of this year, the applicant erected the monument sign without first obtaining a permit. Staff notified the applicant that the sign did not meet ordinance requirements and the sign would have to either be removed or a variance granted by the City Council. The applicant is therefore requesting a variance to allow the sign to remain as constructed. The preliminary plat, dated March 21, 1994, showed three entry monuments located at the intersection of Landings Drive and Minnewashta Parkway. A revised landscaping plan submitted after the preliminary plat, dated April 29, 1994, contained one entry monument located on the center island. However, no details were submitted showing the height or size of the proposed monuments or signs. The applicant indicated in his appeal that the entrance sign is the same as submitted in the original proposal for the development of the land and was installed accordingly, assuming the original proposal was recognized. In his appeal,the applicant also ascertains that the sign is in proper scale to the area and does not endanger public safety or impair property values in the neighborhood(see letter from Kenneth Durr dated September 29, 1995). ANALYSIS Based on the criteria provided in the ordinance, staff is recommending denial of the variances. Neither the size,physical surrounding, shape, or topography prevents the placement of a sign which meets ordinance requirements. The applicant proceeded to construct the entry monument under the assumption that the sign was approved along with the preliminary and final plat. As mentioned above, staff could find no records of sign details or any other evidence showing that • ,;/ /% / / ,N_ . - ,.. -4/1,12 5/2-6 ..... m fl6e r (,rY .oaE ,' /A1 j /" • , -- '1,67 / / . ... • ! . 1* dhc iC' GIA-/G�oXtS 1---i)/1- � \~ f .- le7F�.-zue,Jr A, e i -, i pF ov/F.0z. i 6s/e•-/t/ / , - ,% \- \ '= = / ,i /i ,, , 1 , mit, / / / ./ ` ' - ( ', o/ • \ / -/ a4c)1 t . -,._,=.--:"r-:-.:-,:: -----„,....-~, gzi:.4-:-..,',. .ii;,:,.... / /' / 1 ` ' 4 /�..N / -____/ L - -1.,1 o. I 4/. ., ''''• , .,>..*"-j . .., —(9-7-: e". f ,r•-') • 14441,./A/7- , • ,�/ , \... 1 r ice( _ - - ••<------' � .. " NcE� &t'>LO.v 1/ `/'f 1 )/•3`1� ,N "0 !!.%r.t.:-"" , /Oc tir,,/(417 W i .r- - _ - ....-- •--: i / . .. ,..„;.,;-;„_:_:..."74,ry&z_. . _ _ ,--f------- -!- k 9 _... _\\\•„,,,...--... ,,,,, - C) f4i..14:ft.'-‘1%.A3.:. i f • .j i � J . j r� „ - 4�H • �1. :GS I ' ' `: � , � . - 1 •OUTLOT Ai"-ri: -z.-\ N _ POND , • _ i eivr/1- Y TftfA-1E oG (---- j �' 'I-AIIr,Nc9: A--A/12 \ • • t F6-NC/N _ IV / 1t '��..___.-J �„ -., •le - / flo,v T. -/- %` r �7 \\\...........1."." xir7 ( Nlo /4141.7 I/6 \ 'r' 1 VEvgrA-7-,o v. 4 ` i 44 CITY O F PC DATE: 11/1/95 \ CHAIIIASEI CASE CC DATE:#: 475 AR By: Rask:v STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Variance request to allow a second monument sign at the Kerber Blvd. entrance to Richfield Bank LOCATION: 7800 Kerber Boulevard, southwest corner of West 78th Street and Kerber Z a Boulevard V APPLICANT: Richfield State Agency HTG Architects 6625 Lyndale Avenue South 7401 Metro Blvd. #495 Richfield,MN 55423 Minneapolis, MN 55439 Q (612) 798-3342 (612) 831-8880 PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development, PUD ACREAGE: 1.43 Acres DENSITY: ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N-BG, West Village Center S - PUD,Vacant lot E - PUD, Market Square; Kerber Blvd. W- PUD,Target _ Q WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. LLI PHYSICAL CHARACTER: The Richfield Bank is currently under construction. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Commercial „-i --N.,Niedip, is ■ � �l ■ - (, * Luc>, a Eton i t-� t ice” .0-,D. ,' � va �' , L O T U �+ 44), E Ot" 111 , 0 I 1-."14 4 4L-RAteliellk 1- 4E1! ! IIIIIstt ci111��l �,�►•a : ♦I:. A)A 10111*41111114ikt; 11I1174' 11011111.• = ©,�, Iii� ' �' ,I) s,11 ilitiN4M1 � :ism(�ANN GR ENw iiiii" ,40: ♦ I ••. 4 \ L . PARK .. IL 4 Q/ al, `� IK.'' �� , p e 1 csyritippw 411:::: ,_______,v,i 0%1,1:1_ :411:11 inAlriNet:41,‘.:'‘ .t. ., - -1: 1 7) INII otgargb fulliv. fie,,, lk •�4iii� atria rum :•-o aAn irign , No IN atria rum!pal 0 11�` i �� in n,� ��o 4a.17:71.1 .. '_rc1413'.idEANN tintrx 19110 L ® r�®®®: wi �� ■■, al Pli WM -I IIII: u law lailli __, .Itil Y ��1aiii. •. . I ii i 1 11111 IIM „„,„,,, LEVARDZ �H�r �' wo 6� CH< 1.6D I � � L86I111 W ®��! N, j:111 Ian i W le/rim illow mg 141404,111 R IR• 11! -Iigillne W Or .....7. s r s- AWIlir i ? • ,wo is * *V : DRIVE qT f HIGKyrpY FIARPRI R. 11,--k---- • �', �► Chi o> Y / e= t11 (4 ....: •-• • E - ...--" , ',%.. 4 •l ' 1�PARK � 2 - . 4ali •, (PVT10111,- �•._r------- . � :?..i. ..stk. '.�1 ■ ESSE � -� paw 5,* Y4'::?% % PVTI A'u ©� �� CIRCLE 4m" ; a �ft 1t LAKE SUSAN ":_i Richfield Bank Sign Variance November 1, 1995 Page 2 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The following sign criteria was adopted as part of the Target PUD: 1. Each property shall be allowed one monument sign. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance. 2. Wall signs are permitted on no more than 2 street frontages. The total of all wall mounted sign display areas shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. 3. All signs require a separate permit. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and shall tie the building materials to the signs. This includes the freestanding, wall, and monument signs. Signs shall be an architecture feature. 5. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size,materials, and height. Section 20-1303 of the sign ordinance states that one (1) ground low profile business sign shall be permitted per each building. Such sign shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height or 64 square feet in sign area. Section 20-1255(2)of the sign ordinance states that on-premises directional signs shall not be larger than four (4) square feet. The maximum height of the sign shall not exceed five (5) feet from the ground.No more than four(4) signs shall be allowed per lot. Section 20-1253 states that, "The City Council, upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission, may grant a variance from the requirements of this article where it is shown that by reason of topography or other conditions, strict compliance with the requirements of this article would cause a hardship; provided that a variance may be granted only if the variance does not adversely affect the spirit or intent of this article. . ." BACKGROUND On April 24, 1995, the City Council approved Site Plan #95-4 for Richfield Bank and Trust for a 12,166 square foot two story office building. Wall signs and a fountain monument sign were proposed at the time of site plan approval. Staff recently issued sign permits for two 97.5 square foot wall signs on the northwest and southeast elevations of the building. A sign permit was also Richfield Bank Sign Variance November 1, 1995 Page 3 — issued for a 46 square foot sign located on the fountain structure. The fountain structure is made of concrete with brick cap, sides and back to match the building brick. Individual letters are patina red — bronze of copper. The applicant provided sign details on proposed directional signs as part of the sign package — submitted for permit approval. All directional signs meet minimum ordinance requirements except the sign located at the Kerber Blvd. entrance. This sign is approximately four (4) feet high and — twenty(20) square feet in size. Section 20-1255(2)of the sign ordinance states that directional sign may not exceed four (4) square feet. The sign contains the name of the bank and directional information(see attached drawings). _ The applicant provided the following description of the proposed sign, "The sign design will compliment the bank building design by nature of the level of quality and material(s). The sign design uses clean crisp silver accent bands and a burgundy base color that relate with the building materials and colors. The proposed sign will have white back-lit letters. The sign will face east, and give direction to customers entering the site from Kerber Drive. The proposed sign can only -- enhance the site and city landscaping." ANALYSIS Staff is recommending denial of the variance because the applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a variance. Neither the size, shape, or topography prevent the placement of a directional sign which meets applicable code requirements. The two proposed wall signs and fountain sign provide more than a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise their name and service. Directional information could be placed on a sign which is four (4) square feet or less. In addition, no other business located along West 78th Street has more than one monument sign. Several shopping or retail centers located on West 78th Street were permitted additional _ monument signs. However, no single business has more than one monument sign. If approved,the variance would deviate from pre-existing standards in the central business district. Permitting a larger directional sign or monument sign will not improve traffic circulation or safety. It appears that the sign is being requested to provide additional advertising along Kerber Blvd. The purpose of the sign ordinance is to establish standards which permit businesses a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise their name and service. Richfield Bank has this opportunity with the proposed wall signs and fountain sign. The sign contains the name of the bank, Richfield Bank & Trust Co., along with directional information. Because the sign contains more than directional information, staff is considering the sign to be a monument sign. The twenty (20) square foot display area far exceeds the permitted — four(4) square feet. Therefore, staff is considering the proposed sign a second monument sign. The applicants are requesting a variance to allow a twenty (20) square foot directional sign. — Richfield Bank Sign Variance November 1, 1995 Page 4 FINDINGS The Planning Commission shall not recommend and the City Council shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: a. That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre-existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre-existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criteria. Finding: The applicant has a reasonable use of the property with the existing wall and monument signs. Other businesses located along West 78th Street do not have more than one monument sign per business. If approved,the variance would deviate from pre-existing standards in the Central Business Districts b. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally,to other property within the same zoning classification. Finding: The conditions upon which the petition for the variance is based are applicable to other properties within the same zoning classification. c. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Finding: The purpose of the variation appears to be based upon a desire to have additional advertising on Kerber Blvd. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The alleged hardship is self-created as the applicant could make use of a directional sign only. e. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Richfield Bank Sign Variance November 1, 1995 Page 5 _ Finding: The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to public safety or neighboring parcels. As mentioned in the staff report, the sign will not improve traffic — circulation or safety. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent — property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Finding: The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to _ adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increases the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. _ RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the request for Sign Permit — Variance#95-9 based on the findings presented in the staff report and the following: 1. The applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that would warrant the granting of a — variance. 2. Richfield Bank has a reasonable opportunity to advertise their name and service with two — wall signs and fountain sign. 4. Provisions exist in the City Code for the use of directional signs. 5. The variance is inconsistent with the purpose and findings of the sign ordinance." _ ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from Jeffrey Pflipsen,HTG Architects, dated October 9, 1995 2. Application dated October 9, 1995 3. Site Plan showing proposed sign — 4. Directional sign detail 5. Proposed monument/directional sign aa� in ARCHITECTS 09 October 1995 Mr. Robert Generous Planner II City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive P.O. 147 Chanhassen,Minnesota 55317 Re: RICHFIELD BANK&TRUST,CHANHASSEN OFFICE Min SIGN VARIANCE Dear Bob: Below is a brief summary of the proposed sign variance that we are requesting. The information is based on the variance outline form provided to HTG Architects by the City of Chanhassen. IMAGE: The sign design will compliment the bank building design by nature of the level of quality and material(s). The sign design uses clean crisp silver accent bands and a burgundy base color that relate with the building materials and colors. The proposed sign will have white back-lit letters. The sign will face east, and give direction to customers entering the site from Kerber Drive. The proposed sign can only enhance the site and city landscaping. REQUESTED VARIANCE: Richfield Bank & Trust Co. complies with the city ordinance that states the site can have four directional (2'x2') signs, one monumental sign, two building signs and an unlimited number of traffic flow signs. The requested variance is to change one of the directional signs from 2'x2' to 4'x5' in size. Also, the proposed sign would have the name of the Bank across the top for additional identification. This is the first sign that the customers will notice when entering the site(which should standout). Please see the enclosed site plan,approved sign drawing and the proposed sign drawing for additional information. If you have any questions or need any other information,please let me know. Sincerely, Jeffrey J Pflipsen Vice President/Project Architect cc: Mr. Steve Kirchner, Richfield Bank&Trust Mr. John Rask,Planner I, City of Chanhassen Enclosure HICKEY, THORSTENSON, GROVER, LTD 7401 Metro Boulevard, Suite 495 Mpls MN 55439 (612)831 8880 CITY OF CHANHASSEN • 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: HTG ARCHITECTS OWNER: RICHFIELD STATE AGENCY ADDRESS: 7401 METRO BLVD. #495 ADDRESS: 6625 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH MPLS, MN 55439 RICHFIELD, MN 55423 TELEPHONE (Day time) 612-831-8880 TELEPHONE: 612-798-3342 — JEFF PFLIPSEN STEVE KIRCHNER 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. XX Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. XX Sign Plan Review Notification Signs 9. Site Plan Review X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" ($50 CUP/SPRNAC/VAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) 10. Subdivision TOTAL FEE $ 75 .00 A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must Included with the application. J� r2nty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 81/2" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. • NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract PROJECT NAME RICHFIELD BANK AND TRUST CO. LOCATION SOUTHWEST CORNER OF WEST 78TH STREET AND KERBER BOULEVARD - LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT 1 , BLOCK 3, BURDICK PARK ADDITION, TOGETHER WITH THE VACATED PORTION OF WEST 78TH STREET ACCRUING HERETO TO BE VACATED. - ALSO TOGETHER WITH DOCUMENT NO. T75496 PRESENT ZONING PUD REQUESTED ZONING NO CHANGE PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION COMMERCIAL — REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION NO CHANGE REASON FOR THIS REQUEST DIRECTIONAL SIGN VARIANCE. SIGN LOCATED AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SITE. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. — This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. — HTG ARCHITECTS (at re pts i9 rtff A scant Date JEFFREY J. PFLIPSEN, VICE PRESIDENT — Signature of Fee Owner Date Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be malted to the applicant's address. g I :,t--/ ��i c4„ ��'3 �• 44 �• — I SI I• Z — VlU d .Q I NQ I i g c'-ccs 1 ' ��ve1 a ICI _ . , % 4 14 774-7----- 0 I I I 4; ii ii, . —NI7 94.-A:E ' i W if v. 1 / I 1 0 k .iI CVI g - 0 -- " E-. - 1 101 - 1 dI ' Z — 1 �_ _____________7. PP9/ r1Q I 1 _ r - wo �-1 , i 0 o a ` $ - o o 0 owYi w Is c4 F "IIIII ,,.41n«w.%VOW*«wr+ ki3B fIN- _-- Q1 31Yp D ...,•....,r4/N MhN h Y.1V1 /a,....NIP. � •'''.0-, '•' 3� .v Mr•aalo/Mhv lr•p.m •q •1.031 w 4»4•41 m•ew•Wdri 51� u is-` f \ � s _ } \ ... ..,, ....... . /1•••••• . ''..4.-...."...-3i.:y,+i?.,I�r'' ti�u'"`sna �= a��-. r'+sr V 1 ly +°ty� JNi� F� {CRiv S f I�: —y . I frt 1 `M • j 1 1 _I 0 1 —...\_______.-t?3 17 t VV rV i Y�a—rs m 1 –lir TCI ____ , .C3) 2 i -2 _x ` . ._ .. )-� ,- _�..Y'a.1.3.... ..r... --„.-,--.4.-...a.40r,..--, -. w +n •t'• is s.. .z., - 'CL, .6.1,1 - ... .- - -:.?.:.- - _,_,...._ -....,...._,. ....4.%.. .- . ... '-- . ....,_,. . -_, . -_,U)..-...*:-.....-.,..(11:- 1-4 z F r ) 1 _ 141• A 0 - U (f) m D CO W U) Q) - U = (1) = Q U Ucc - T T 4 L W - 0 - IP k) -4 ..► 4 - a -4 a.- -4 sem . ► r. CITY OF t CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: John Rask, Planner I DATE: October 25, 1995 SUBJECT: Proposed Text Amendment to the A-2, Agricultural Estate District SUMMARY Mr. Don Halla, Halla Nursery Inc., is requesting a zoning ordinance text amendment to allow landscape nurseries as a permitted use in the A-2, Agricultural Estate Zoning District. Mr. Halla indicates in his application that nurseries are currently prohibited and that landscape nurseries are an agricultural use and should be permitted. Further, Mr. Halla indicates that he has occupied this property since 1962 and his business is no longer a permitted use. BACKGROUND The intent of the A-2 District is, "preservation of rural character while respecting development patterns by allowing single-family residential development." The following uses are permitted in an"A-2"District" 1. Agriculture 2. Public and private parks and open space 3. Single family dwellings 4. State-licensed day care center for twelve or fewer children 5. Utility services 6. State-licensed day care center for six or fewer persons 7. Temporary real estate office and model home 8. Arboretums Planning Commission October 25, 1995 Page 2 — The following are permitted accessory uses in an A-2 District: 1. Accessory agricultural buildings 2. Garage 3. Private stables 4. Swimming pool 5. Tennis court 6. Signs 7. Home occupations 8. One Dock — 9. Roadside stand 10. Private kennel The following are conditional uses in an A-2 District: 1. Commercial communication transmission tower — 2. Electrical substation 3. Churches 4. Recreational beachlots — 5. Group homes for seven to sixteen persons The following are interim uses in the A-2 District: 1. Churches 2. Mineral extraction 3. Mobile homes 4. Bed and breakfast establishments — 5. Commercial kennels, stables and riding academies 6. Wholesale nurseries 7. Golf driving ranges with or without miniature golf courses Currently, wholesale nurseries are allowed as an interim use in the A-2 District. Wholesale nursery is defined in Section 20-1 of the City Code as follows, "Wholesale nursery means an — enterprise which conducts the wholesale of plants grown on site as well as accessory items directly related to their care and maintenance (but not including power equipment such as gas or electric lawnmowers and farm implements)". The ordinance provisions of the A-2 District do not meet Mr. Halla's current needs because retail sales are not permitted. The retail sales portion of Mr. Halla's Nursery has been expanded illegally and is in violation of City Ordinances. Discussions have occurred between Mr. Halla and city staff over the years concerning the retail segment of Halla Nursery. Mr. Halla has shown a desire to expand his business to provide for — Planning Commission October 25, 1995 Page 3 additional retail space. In his request for a code amendment, Mr. Halla indicated that he would like to continue to operate his business as a"legal use"or permitted use. This would allow him to expand or intensify his operation at the current location. It is staff's opinion, that Halla Nursery would best be classified, for zoning purposes, as a retail nursery or garden center. A garden center is defined as follows, "Garden center means a place of business where retail and wholesale products and produce are sold to the retail consumer. These centers, which may include a nursery and/or greenhouses, import most of its items sold. These items may include paints, handicrafts, nursery products and stock, fertilizers,potting soil, hardware, lawn and garden power equipment and machinery, hoes, rakes, shovels and other garden and farm tools and utensils." This definition appears to better describe the current operation of Halla Nursery. Section 20-1 of the ordinance defines nursery as follows, "Nursery means an enterprise which conducts the retail and wholesale sale of plants grown on the site, as well as accessory items directly related to their care and maintenance (but not including power equipment such as gas or electric lawnmowers and farm implements). Halla Nursery currently has retail sales which do not meet this definition. By way of example, pet food is offered for sale on the premises. ANALYSIS When considering zoning ordinance text amendments, one must consider the comprehensive impacts on all properties affected by the amendment. Any amendments to the A-2 District will not only affect Mr. Halla's property, but all property zoned A-2, and those properties located near an A-2 District. The current permitted uses in the A-2 district are either residential in nature or are uses which require a large land area, such as: agriculture, arboretums, parks, etc. These uses do not generate a significant amount of traffic or require a large investment in buildings or other improvements. The A-2 District may be better described as a"holding zone" or"open zone"because the majority of property in this district is guided for further development. The City of Chanhassen 2000 Land Use Plan shows this property guided for Large Lot Residential. Permitting garden centers or retail nurseries may ultimately lead to a"spot"zone of this property. The property surrounding the existing Halla Nursery buildings, which is part of the current nursery, has received final plat approval for a residential subdivision. Other A-2 zoned districts are adjacent to existing and future residential or industrial developments. A"retail" oriented nursery or garden center may not be compatible with the existing permitted uses in the A-2 zoning district. However, there may be certain A-2 zoned areas which are suitable for garden centers or nurseries. Planning Commission October 25, 1995 Page 4 Property currently used for nurseries or similar uses may be suitable for use as a garden center or retail nursery. If allowed in the A-2 district, retail nurseries or garden centers would be more — compatible with the current interim uses in the A-2 District. Structures such as greenhouses, outdoor displays, and nursery areas are for the most part temporary structures or uses. Allowing additional permanent structures would only increase the likely hood that the property would remain in retail use. By permitting retail nurseries as an interim use, conditions can be placed on the permit to ensure that the property will someday comply with the comprehensive plan. — Constructing permanent retail buildings makes it difficult to redevelop the property into other appropriate uses. Staff is also concerned that if permanent buildings are constructed for retail nursery purposes, these buildings may be converted to another retail use if the property is vacated by the nursery. Interim uses include those uses which are allowed within a zoning district for a limited amount of time. The temporary use is permitted until a particular date,until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. Interim uses are reviewed and conditions added to soften any negative impacts on adjacent properties, such as: increased traffic, — noise, drainage, and requirements for public facilities and services. As mentioned above, A-2 Districts are often located near existing or future residential or industrial properties. These properties serve as a"holding"or"open"zone until such time as the property is further developed. If garden centers or retail nurseries are to be permitted in the A-2 District, it would make sense to permit them as an interim use. Staff is recommending that the ordinance be amended to allow for retail and wholesale nurseries as an interim use in the A-2 District. Amending the ordinance to allow retail and wholesale — nurseries as a permitted use would be inconsistent with the A-2 District. Staff is concerned with the impacts that a retail nursery or garden center would have on surrounding properties and the spirit and intent of the A-2 District. Garden centers would permit the retail sales of a wide range of products, including: hardware, lawn and garden equipment, paints, tools, etc. The current permitted, conditional, and interim uses in the A-2 district are either residential in nature or are uses which require a large land area. A garden center is inconstant with other uses in the A-2 — District. However, staff is of the opinion that adding retail nursery sales may be appropriate in certain locations, if the necessary conditions are attached. Staff has provided seven conditions which would apply to retail or wholesale nurseries. The conditions are as follows: — 1. The site must be on a collector street or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan. 2. The minimum lot size is five (5) acres. Planning Commission October 25, 1995 Page 5 3. All storage and yard areas as well as building must be setback one hundred (100) feet from public or private road right-of-ways and five hundred (500) feet from an adjacent single family residence. 4. All outdoor store areas must be completely screened by one hundred (100) percent opaque fencing or berming. 5. Hours of operations shall be set by the City Council. 6. Light sources shall be shielded. 7. No outside speaker systems are allowed. 8. A termination date shall be established for the interim use permit. The use shall be permitted — until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending denial of the zoning ordinance amendment as submitted by the applicant. The applicant's proposal requested that landscape nurseries be a permitted use or"legal use" in the A-2 District. Staff has provided a proposal which would allow the applicant to operate a retail nursery. Currently, retail nurseries are prohibited in the A-2 District. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council amend Sections 20-576(7), 20-1, and 20-257 to permit both wholesale and retail nurseries in the A-2 District as an Interim Use, as outlined in the staff report dated October 25, 1995." More Specifically,the amendments shall read as follows: Amend Section 20-1 to read: — "Nursery means an enterprise which conducts the retail and wholesale sale of plants grown on the site or imported to the site, as well as accessory items directly related to their care and maintenance. The retail sale of hardware, paint, pet supplies, power equipment, and farm implements shall be prohibited. Nursery may include greenhouses." Amend Section 20-257 to read: Planning Commission October 25, 1995 Page 6 — "The following conditions will apply to all wholesale and retail nurseries: 1. The site must be on a collector street or minor arterial as identified in the comprehensive plan. 2. The minimum lot size is five (5) acres 3. All storage and yard areas as well as building must be setback one hundred (100) feet from -' public or private road right-of-ways and five hundred (500) feet from an adjacent single family residence. (Note: The 500 foot setback would not allow Mr. Halla to add additional buildings after homes are constructed in his subdivision. Staff is of the opinion that 500 feet is an _ appropriate setback for nursery buildings from single family residences. Again, consideration must be given to all properties within the A-2 Zoning District.) 4. All outdoor store areas must be completely screened by one hundred(100) percent opaque fencing or berming. 5. Hours of operations shall be set by the City Council 6. Light sources shall be shielded — 7. No outside speaker systems are allowed." Amend Section 20-576(7)to read: "Wholesale and retail nurseries." ATTACHMENTS — 1. Application for zoning ordinance amendment submitted by Don Halla dated October 4, 1995. — 2. Letter to Don Halla dated October 6, 1995 CITY OFFCHANHASSEN CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE OCT 0 6 1995 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION OCT 1995 �j APPLICANT: j—f/A Lei /I/lJf�S�� Y //I//t/t, OWNER: ,Jo�/ �� `_'f __,��ARTMiNT \ p2..VD I _ r . ADDRESS: /O 000 6,$?EAT PSA /N5 ADDRESS: 6 o / / QHArv�( C//45 4 , A411/ . -55 '/49 --•o7fr44 A/ .55 39 /a27 TELEPHONE (Day time) *y5-6 s.K< TELEPHONE: 94`7' 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Vacation of ROW/Easements 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance 3. Interim Use Permit 13. Wetland Alteration Permit 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal - 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning 7. Sign Permits 8. Sign Plan Review Notification Signs 9. Site Plan Review X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost" ($50 CUP/SPRNAC/VAR/WAP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) 10. Subdivision TOTAL FEE $ A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. _ 81" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. • NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. " Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract ' 9t:61 g66T 't SH IS3a UW.IJNa Pawn: NO. LOCATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION A -� REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION A -2- %I ��'�� 41,640 REASON FOR THIS REQUEST A -� �� _ /96 v �'-now-o(/te, This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed an must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying - with alt City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the - authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further _ understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my nowledge. ir/1,:_c" Sign re of Applicant ate Signature of Fee Owner p e Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. • ,, :, 7 . - SN9IS31 „NAtH13 A'lNMS WO:JJ CITY of \ CHANHASSEN \ a • 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 October 6, 1995 Mr. Don Halla Halla Nursery 10000 Great Plains Blvd. Chaska, MN 55318 Dear Mr. Halla: I have received your application from Steve Kirchman today. It is my understanding that you are requesting an amendment to the City Code permitting landscape nursery's in the A-2 district. The procedure for a code amendment is a public hearing before the Planning Commission and then review and either approval or denial by the City Council. I have scheduled this hearing for the November 1, 1995 Planning Commission meeting. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, �IwtA0,1\94Vgni Kate Aanenson Planning Director P.C. DATE: 11-1-95 5 CITY OF C.C. DATE: 11-27-95 CASE: 95-18 Site 9r-1118 \�ICHANHAss95-4VAC, SUB _ / • BY: Al-Jaffe STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: 1) Site Plan Review for the construction of two 64,000 square foot Office Warehouse buildings }.., 2) Preliminary Plat to Subdivide 36.6 acres into 3 Lots and 2 Outlots, Z Chanhassen East Business Center — Q 3) Vacation of an abandoned Public Right-of-Way VLOCATION: South of Highway 5, West of Dell Road,and North of Eden Prairie. a. APPLICANT : CSM Investors, Inc. DataServ, Inc. a. 2575 University Ave. W. Suite 150 12125 Technology Dr. < St. Paul, MN 55114-1024 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 646-1717 829-6553 Jim Paulet i PRESENT ZONING: IOP,Industrial Office Park ACREAGE: 36.6 acres ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - Highway 5 S-Eden Prairie, Residential E-Dell Road, Eden Prairie,Residential W-Abra/Highway Business QSEWER AND WATER: Services are available to the site. — Q SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is an old farmstead. Lake Drive East bisects the site W in the middle. There is an existing office industrial building — on the southwest corner of the site. 2000 LAND USE: Office/Industrial . . .. • .. F.- • - 8--- -.;-- F § § 08 '93 ..„---1 2 0 I ♦ I PIEDMONT UJCIDE cant I cascADE CHR/S_TNAS % I I HENNEPINI COUNTY COURT `:__ LAKE .—. •% r.• - •• - 1.1140 +1��it11�� 11111,�r $$AIT*c u 6200 - f �� Iitoymigprinavfirs.soviect-pli•��,Ilr Iillld l resr �`�Cirri ► Wilai. ix4 ea�� t k'; i . .... 6300 1111°110.11'N•717.10.0.50".9' : fit.l,A6,6 0� I` I I —L. Moa -- �1 �sA �tj0•o,spIttNF.l IIIMIt=;aIAIII 64004viiiii., p.. N. . i � o.47,\,, I � di• •..•,k' mow min 6soo.■�ct` 4 o . . g ;1■�.Erlia� itf`� ARVE/P'� ? �i ♦ Q -. itTEFill °IMO pussCTA� , �' VIOLET i. i ,,�t o ■ra ►� v Roan \ r LSTI S J l _fr„..___ . tr7-.170 .: ,-3' -6Too - 6800 . 4174 • �� *�`�v �\1-,- ,./ PARK ,ti 4141a= ' 4114 ikelliFi fr. !�" pa l�� .H= `_ .\::. :411111 v � Irl `�'`;ar " ,•�410.,LIN(�`�, \\ Aat f4„, 7 ' 17i7.1 t41•o• ..........., 1'.� '�.� LOTUS \i 6900 • • `rPt rrAn, • �11� .. - \`� �'�vid : -7000 m Uiuej'0 0 ail �. - 111111N yw� ��''. �1 !�Nr yr g°`''.4 .-d4k� ct 11 i� �1111tt- `lb ,it d " .AviiiiikI 700 - 11 1 filmy p i iro m filmy _ Il' y '.:-.11..&\.‘ .15..'� 7200 .ili...• 110111 rTi � Asie,• .4 L A ( N T....0u v M `, ��ik ' LANE „��li Ill 44 �� '� ,cmaI 7300 °:6'4;110%.14e �� Chile iv MLR 114 . \ iitil 8AssVcLE a / Re Or �I. w -�4• ''�' 74002 _ A•`A._ At,oti.sk., v►oath- ' ' '\i. ©i ima 41141�j 19�►4A� 441' s,. 401•;;A\ • 0 0 � �-` Al 11 co e �n',''1014 got gWe' 1��,�� % z. m 7500 �- „1 -■.l'ii aaaill mat,.row• .�A�0 ,•e I - 7600 k> 4 :C.m©ions��. IASL- ,ti piis 4t r Niro mn.r= L■oAr ftp . 0�®®®®m� vmil - ua44,1 H •it giai�N©cr.., rne7ASs1�.�4.a% a ii ir'■`�d 1 Hill llu1 OHMMail I 2 f/ F 77th ST EET 7700 6ra ?lie 11111IIIIIIP ME r 7B HST. IA „ 1:111 IIP` w 1,T143 �� W / � ______ 7800 • 111.1111A#1.4144.40r _ — - w 10- AV I/1I•*_ I l'��—� 7900 ft R. ---,4 ,4 aille Splaptiv riii.IGteaia. . A=te��f �•� • �I •' ��, u ' !� �w‘ sin��a IFZ' `o 8000 - id .• r.41/40,'; e�t 4 2% W-8100 ' 410 .7 rS s f- �'�� .�/....-%...,A,'" Q 1 ARK ' S ' ow viten:�f 11� 1 �, g — �I .��>+3 FR/CE .r-8200 L -‘-i.---,,---"------------.....7 r irop7.Nw MARS/ .4.- �—.._ LAKE W t nn PARK , 8300 ,,. LAKE SUSAN i,oil - *a, s �� LoCa� .Ort 4W1moT\� Fp-04 RICE M RSH LAKE __) _ ,.....i;_,.....___„ I- -,--- -it 3"ri,.. t"- - 4 ,r .--4 ---j- i CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 2 PROPOSAL/SUMMARY There are three actions being requested with this application, a subdivision, a site plan review for — two office warehouse buildings and a vacation of an abandoned public right-of-way. The site is zoned IOP, Industrial Office Park and bordered by Highway 5 to the north,Dell Road to the east, and a Lundgren Brothers residential development to the south. The lot area of the — office/warehouse sites are 5.43 acres for Lot 1 and 4.8 acres for Lot 2. The site is visible directly from Highway 5 and has full access from Lake Drive East. — The subdivision request consists of subdividing 36.6 acres into three lots and two outlots. Lots 1 and 2 will contain the proposed office warehouse buildings. Outlot A will be reserved for future development. Staff is not aware of any pending developments for the outlot. Outlot B will serve — as a site for a pond. The third lot will be labeled as Lot 1, Block 2. This parcel is located south of Lake Drive East and contains the existing DataSery building. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. The site plan is for the two office warehouse buildings. The buildings are well designed, "L" shaped, and a mirror image of one another. They are proposed to utilize face brick on all four — corners of both buildings, as well as areas surrounding entrances into the buildings. Decorative pre-colored rockface block will be integrated into the walls, accented by pre-colored masonry bands. Two pitched roof elements adorn each building. — The building can be divided depending the needs of the tenant. Loading docks are proposed for — those tenants that would need them. These buildings will serve office/industrial tenants. The applicant has proposed to have the parking in front of the building. Staff was not receptive to this idea. After working with the applicant and understanding the needs of the tenants. We have — arrived at a workable solution. The office space will generate customer parking space. Requiring all parking to the rear causes a conflict between the loading dock and customer space. This area is in the highway corridor which uses the underlying district for setbacks. The parking — as proposed including the screening does meet the Hwy. 5 zoning district requirement. Parking for vehicles is located around the buildings. This issue was discussed in detail with the — applicant. Staff explained that this corner is the gateway into the city and special attention must be paid to all details of the site. These buildings will require 246 parking spaces. Rather than concentrating all spaces in one area, the spaces were designed surrounding the buildings. They are broken by landscape islands and screened from views from Highway 5, Dell Road, and Lake Drive East by berms and vegetation. There is a maximum of two rows of parking at any given — location. The site landscaping is generally of high quality,however, there are certain areas such as the south portion of the site, where the loading docks are located, that could use a variety of CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 3 — trees and bushes for additional screening. A meandering berm of 4 to 6 feet in height runs along the entire edge of the site that does provide screening. — Staff regards the project as a reasonable use of the land. The overall design is sensitive to the Highway 5 corridor's image. Based upon the foregoing, staff is recommending approval of the — site plan, without variances, the subdivision request, and the right-of-way vacation with conditions outlined in the staff report. GENERAL SITE PLAN/ARCHITECTURE The proposed office/warehouse buildings, with an area of 64,000 square feet each, will be situated parallel to and south of Highway 5. The site is bordered by Highway 5 to the north, and Dell Road to the east. Access to the buildings is proposed from Lake Drive East. Parking will be scattered around the buildings. A meandering berm with landscaping, 4 to 6 feet in height, is proposed to be installed along the perimeter of the site to provide screening. The buildings are located 120 feet from the north, 125 feet from the east, 85 feet from the south, and 75 feet from the west property line. Materials used on the "L" shaped buildings which are a mirror image of one another, are face brick on all four corners of both buildings, as well as areas surrounding entrances into the buildings. Decorative pre-colored rockface block will be integrated into the walls, accented by — pre-colored masonry bands. Two pre-colored pitched roof elements adorn each building. The building's architecture is tastefully designed and meets the standards of the site plan ordinance requirements. The different colors and materials give the building the desired visual appeal. This development falls within the Highway Corridor Overlay and must comply with the district's design standards in addition to the Industrial Office Park Standards. The purpose of the overlay district is to promote high-quality architectural and site design through improved development standards with the corridor. The design standards should create a unified,harmonious and high — quality visual environment. The plan and design of the proposed development meets the intent of the overlay district with the following features: • The building will be one story and the architectural style is unique to the building but will fit in. The building will provide a variation in style through the use of brick, block, glass, and pitched roof elements. The building is utilizing exterior materials that are durable and of high quality. Samples of the materials as well as computer generated colored images have been submitted to the city and will be available at the meeting. • The site slopes easterly, and grading of the site is required. The existing site grade ranges from 904 in the southeast corner to 936+on the northwest corner. The landscaping plan CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 4 provides a variety of plant materials that are massed where possible, particularly along Highway 5 and the corner of Dell Road and Highway 5. The berms and landscaping materials will be continuous along the perimeter of the site. The plant materials are repetitious in some locations and variable in others. Proposed plant materials are indigenous to Minnesota. A curb is required along the perimeter of the green space area. All planting areas are adequate in size to allow trees to grow. Additional plantings along the south portion of the site to further screen the loading dock will be required. • A parking lot light plan is required. The plan should incorporate the light style and height. A detailed sign plan which include lighting method has been submitted. Individual channeled letters with the option of back lighting are proposed. • The site plan fails to show the trash enclosure location. The dumpsters must be screened by a wing-wall and doors with siding and trim to match the building. Current state statutes require that recycling space be provided for all new buildings. The area of the recycling space must be dedicated at the rate specified in Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC) 1300.4700 Subp. 5. The applicant should demonstrate the required area will be provided in addition to the space required for other solid waste collection space. Recycling space and other solid waste collection space should be contained within the same enclosure. SITE PLAN FINDINGS In evaluating a site plan and building plan, the city shall consider the development's compliance with the following: (1) Consistency with the elements and objectives of the city's development guides, including the comprehensive plan, official road mapping, and other plans that may be adopted; (2) Consistency with this division; (3) Preservation of the site in its natural state to the extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the general appearance of the neighboring developed or developing areas; (4) Creation of a harmonious relationship of building and open space with natural site features and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development; CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 5 — (5) Creation of functional and harmonious design for structures and site features, with special attention to the following: — a. An internal sense of order for the buildings and use on the site and provision of a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and general — community; b. The amount and location of open space and landscaping; — c. Materials, textures, colors and details of construction as an expression of the design concept and the compatibility of the same with adjacent and — neighboring structures and uses; and d. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including walkways, interior drives and parking in terms of location and number of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking. (6) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately covered by other regulations — which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses. Finding: The proposed development is consistent with the City's Highway 5 corridor — design requirements,the comprehensive plan,the zoning ordinance, and the site plan review requirements. The site design is compatible with the surrounding development. It is functional and harmonious with the approved development for this area. — WETLANDS A wetland delineation report was prepared by John Anderson with Wetlands Data. He found two possible wetlands on site. Wetland A is located in the northeast corner and Wetland B is shown — on Outlot A in the plans. After two meetings with the Wetland Conservation Act's designated technical evaluation panel (TEP), it was determined that Wetland B (noted on the plans) was not jurisdictional. The owner has provided documentation that the wetland has not existed for more than 20 years because of activities associated with public or private drainage systems. The TEP also determined that Wetland A does not have the hydrology to define it as a wetland. Therefore, the wetlands on site are exempt from the wetland regulation process and the applicant may fill or — drain them without replacement. _ CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 6 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN(SWMP) The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) that serves as a tool to protect, preserve and enhance water resources. 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. An ultimate conditions model has been developed at each drainage area based on the projected future land use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to determine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. The development will be required to be constructed in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan. A regional stormwater pond has been designed for both water quality and quantity on this property and the remaining undeveloped land of the DataSery property. The pond's best location is in the southeast corner of the DataSery property adjacent to Dell Road. The stormwater runoff would run through this pond and be discharged under Dell Road into a natural wetland. Stormwater would then travel through the wetland and be discharge into Mitchell Lake. The City of Eden Prairie and Chanhassen agree that the water quality pond should be designed for a natural wetland, retaining 60%to 75% phosphorus according to the Pondnet Water Quality Model. Staff supports the water quantity analysis that was done on this site in the late 1980s. however, hydrologic calculations are necessary to confirm the design. It appears that the applicant and the property owner are reviewing an option to combine the existing pond just southeast of the DataSery building with the proposed pond in the southeast corner of the property. Staff will be meeting with the project engineer to discuss these alternatives. In either case, the applicant will have to dedicate a drainage easement over this property to construct the pond. Storm Water Quality Fees The SWMP has established a water quality connection charge for each new subdivision based on land use. Dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of$2.50 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond. The proposed SWMP water quality charge of $5,909/acre for commercial developments will be waived if the applicant provides water quality treatment according to the City's SWMP standards. The stormwater quality pond shall be designed to retain 60% to 75% phosphorus according to the Walker Pondnet model in order to provide for better water quality to Eden Prairie wetland. CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 7 — Storm Water Quantity Fees The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average city-wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. — Commercial developments will have a connection charge of$4,360 per developable acre. The total gross area of the property is 21.3 acres. Therefore, the proposed development would then be responsible for a water quantity connection charge of$92,868. The oversizing of the regional pond and infrastructure will be credited to the applicant at the time of final plat. This fee will be due payable to the City at time of final plat recording. — GRADING & DRAINAGE The site is designed to drain to the south southeast where the stormwater would discharge into the existing stormwater system in Lake Drive East. The applicant will have to construct a stormwater pipe from Lake Drive East to the regional pond, dedicate an easement over the property to both install the stormwater pipe and construct the pond, and come to an agreement with DataSery on the location of the pipe and the regional pond so that it meets the needs of all parties. The oversizing of the storm sewer pipe and pond will be credited against the applicant's SWMP fees. The applicant will need to submit to the City detailed storm drainage calculations for the storm — sewers as well as ponding calculations for a 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm event, 24-hour duration for staff review and approval. Based on these calculations, additional catch basins may be required. The site contains remnants from a farm house that will need to be properly abandoned. A demolition permit from the City's Building Department may be required. A drain tile also exists — through proposed Lot 1, Block 1 to Lake Drive East that may need to be incorporated into the storm drainage system. — The grading plan proposes berming along three sides of the site. The grade difference on the west side of the parcel prohibits berming. The site to the west will be approximately ten feet higher than the proposed west parking lot. EROSION CONTROL — Erosion measures and site restoration shall be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook(BMPH). The final grading plan shall incorporate erosion control — fence (Type I) around the perimeter of the grading limits. Rock construction entrance shall be employed and maintained at all access points until the driveways and parking lots have been paved — CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 8 with a bituminous surface. Hay bales and/or silt fence shall be installed around all catch basins until the parking lots have been paved. UTILITIES Individual sewer and water services have been extended to the lots from Lake Drive East. All utilities installed outside the City's drainage and utility easements or right-of-way shall be considered private and not maintained by the City. These utilities will be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for obtaining the appropriate permits from the City's Building Department. In conjunction with this development, the City will be requiring the upgrading of Dell Road south of Lake Drive East to the south city limits. Construction plans and specifications were previously _ prepared by the City of Eden Prairie. The actual street, however, was only constructed on the Eden Prairie side. The applicant should contact the City of Eden Prairie to obtain the rights to these construction plans and complete the remaining street and utility improvements along Dell Road within the City of Chanhassen. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide financial security to guarantee construction of the public improvements and conditions of final plat approval. The applicant may be reimbursed through tax increment financing for these public improvements along Dell Road. This will be further discussed at the City Council level. Fire hydrant locations throughout the site will be subject to City Fire Marshal approval. Apparently, there are existing drainage and utility easements over the old alignment of Lake Drive East which the applicant is requesting a vacation. The applicant should formally petition the City to vacate these existing easements prior to fmal plat approval. STREETS/PARKING/INTERIOR CIRCULATION The site is proposed to be serviced from two driveway access points off of Lake Drive East. The westerly access drive is proposed to be shared with the site to the west in the future. Staff recommends against sharing this driveway access due to the grade difference between the two sites. In addition, most of the time these access points will not be used because they do not line up with the future site improvements. The applicant's engineer has submitted to the City a preliminary traffic study for Lake Drive East and Dell Road. The preliminary conclusions indicate acceptable levels of service through Phase I of the development with eventually a level of service `B' for the forecast year 2005 assuming a signalized intersection. Level of service is defined as those operational conditions within a traffic stream as perceived by users of the traffic facility. The concept of level of service was originally defined as being a quantitative measure of operational conditions. Such a measure would ideally CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 9 cover factors such as speed and travel time, delay, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, safety. In practice, levels of service have been and continue to be defined by one or two measures of effectiveness for each facility type. These measures relate more to speed, delay, and density than they do to quantitative factors or to safety. For each facility type, i.e. intersections, freeways, multi-lane highways, six levels of service, A through F, are defined. — Level of service A represents a free flow with individual vehicles being unaffected by the presence of other vehicles. Level of service E represents operating conditions at capacity which may involve delays or back ups and accidents. — Staff will be forwarding a copy of this preliminary traffic study along with the final study to an independent consultant, SRF Consulting Group, Inc., for their evaluation of the traffic impacts at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Dell Road as well as Dakota Avenue and Lake Drive East, and forecast traffic impacts as well as any necessary geometric reconfigurations of intersections or traffic control devices. Prior to receiving the final plat approval, a final traffic study should be — prepared and reviewed by the City's traffic consultant, SRF. Based on the traffic study it appears a traffic signal may be required in the future at Lake Drive East and Dell Road. 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 of Dell Road. Security to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development(Phase I and II)will be required. As mentioned in the Utilities section of this report, staff is recommending that the upgrade of Dell — Road be required south of Lake Drive East in conjunction with this development. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required for submittal for review and approval by the City. The City has already acquired the necessary easements from the upgrading of Dell Road from DataServ. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat these easements as right-of-way. The City's parking ordinance for Office warehouse buildings require a total of 123 spaces per — building with a total of 246 spaces. The applicant is providing 246 spaces. The Minnesota State Building Code (MSBC)requires that handicapped parking spaces be provided at the rate of one handicapped space per every 50 spaces in the lot(s). This calculates — out to 5 spaces. The submitted site plan includes eight handicapped parking spaces. The Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) has specific requirements for van spaces which currently are not part of the MSBC. These requirements are not enforced by the Inspections Division,but — should be incorporated into the site plan. Site approaches are regulated by the MSBC, and are not detailed on the site plan. Curb cuts, width,texture and slope are details that must be included on the site plans. _ CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 10 LANDSCAPING The landscaping plan for the CSM Corporation development has been reviewed. The applicant is providing a total of 157 overstory, ornamental, and evergreen trees. Species selection is diverse and well-represented by trees that are under utilized in most landscape plantings. Applicant may want to consider specifying male plants on the plant schedule for two species, Kentucky coffeetree and Amur corktree. In locations where these trees are planted near a parking area, a non-seed bearing variety would be appropriate. In the east parking lot, applicant must provide two landscaped peninsulas as required by city ordinance. In the central parking lot, one landscaped peninsula is also required. On the south side of the development, additional screening is needed around the truck loading area. Screening elements may include berms and planting of ornamental and/or evergreen trees as well as extending the landscaped area along East lake Drive into peninsulas that mirror the peninsulas that extend south of the central parking lot. Landscaping is proposed along the north east and west side of Lots 1 and 2, to screen the parking areas. A meandering landscaped berm, 4 to 6 feet in height, is proposed to be installed along the perimeter of the site. Staff is recommending additional landscaping materials be added to screen the loading area along the south portion of the site. LIGHTING Lighting locations for the parking lot have not been illustrated on the plans. Only shielded fixtures are allowed and the applicant shall demonstrate that there is no more than 1/2 foot candles of light at the property line as required by ordinance. A detailed lighting plan should be submitted when building permits are requested. accent lights are located above entry ways into the buildings. Street lights consistent with Lake Drive East will be at 200 feet intervals, staggered from one side to the other. SIGNAGE The applicant has submitted a signage plan. One ground low profile business sign is permitted per lot. The area of the sign may not exceed 80 square feet and a height of 8 feet. Also, one wall mounted sign per business shall be permitted per street frontage. The total display area shall not exceed 15% of the total area of the building wall upon which the signs are mounted. No sign may exceed 90 square feet. Staff is recommending the following criteria be adopted: CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 11 — 1. All businesses shall share one monument sign. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance. — 2. Wall signs are permitted on no more that 2 street frontages. The total of each wall mounted sign display areas shall not exceed(24 square feet). — 3. All signs require a separate permit. 4. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural accent to the building. _ 5. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights. 6. No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed from the residential section south and west of the site. 7. Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted. 8. Individual letters may not exceed 2 feet in height. — 9. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be permitted on the sign. — The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. One stop sign must be posted on the driveway at the exit point of both sites. A detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a building permit. COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT Ordinance Building 1 Building 2 Building Height 2 stories 1 story 1 story _ Building Setback N-30' E-30' N-120' E-125 N-120' E-30' S-30' W-30' S-85' W-30' S-85.33' W-75' — Parking stalls 123 stalls 123 stalls 123 stalls Parking Setback N-25' E-25' N-30' E-47' N-30' E-NA S-25' W-10' S-30 W-NA S-30' W-5'* CSM Corporation _ November 1, 1995 Page 12 Hard surface 70% 58% 69.3% Coverage — Lot Area 1 acre 5.43 acres 4.8 acres * The zoning ordinance requires a 10 foot side yard setback for parking areas, and no setback when parking lots are adjacent to one another. Since it is unknown at this point — what the layout for the buildings on Outlot A will be, staff is recommending a 10 side yard setback for the parking area on Lot 2, Block 1 be maintained. — PARK AND TRAIL DEDICATION FEES The City is requiring that park and trails fees be submitted in lieu of park land. Fees are to be — paid in accordance to city ordinance. One third of the fees will be required at the time of final plat recording. — SUBDIVISION The subdivision proposal will subdivide 36.6 acres into three lots and two outlots. Lots 1 and 2, — Block 1, will contain office/warehouse buildings. Outlot A will be reserved for future development. The parcel located south of Lake Drive East must be shown as Lot 1, Block 2. — This parcel contain the DataSery building. Outlot B will contain a pond. The subdivision request is a relatively straightforward action. The following easements are either illustrated on the plat or should be acquired: 1. Standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of all lots. — 2. Dedication of public right-of-way. 3. Dedication of drainage and utility easements over ponds and drainage ways. — VACATION There is an existing right-of-way easement for an abandoned road, located on Outlot A. This easement serves no function or purpose. Staff is recommending the easement be vacated. CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 13 — STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt the following motion: — I. SITE PLAN REVIEW "The City Council approves Site Plan Review#95-18 as shown on the site plan received October 2, 1995, subject to the following conditions: 1. The materials used to screen the trash enclosure shall be the same type of brick used on the building. 2. Signage criteria: a. All businesses shall share one monument sign. Monument signage shall be subject to the monument standards in the sign ordinance. b. Wall signs are permitted on no more that 2 street frontages. The total of each wall mounted sign display areas shall not exceed(24 square feet). c. All signs require a separate permit. d. The signage will have consistency throughout the development and add an architectural accent to the building. e. Consistency in signage shall relate to color, size, materials, and heights. f. No illuminated signs within the development may be viewed from the residential — section south and west of the site. g. Back-lit individual letter signs are permitted. _ h. Individual letters may not exceed 2 feet in height. i. Only the name and logo of the business occupying the unit will be permitted on the sign. j. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to erecting the signs on site. One stop sign must be posted on the driveway at the exit point of both sites. A CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 14 detailed sign plan incorporating the method of lighting, acceptable to staff should be provided prior to requesting a sign permit. 3. Applicant must provide two landscaped peninsulas in the east parking lot and one in the central parking lot. Screening of truck loading area along East Lake Drive must be increased. Screening may include berms, ornamental, and evergreen trees. An extended peninsula parallel to the entryway may also be considered on the condition that it does not impede truck access to the loading areas. 4. The applicant shall enter into a site plan contract with the city and provide the necessary financial securities as required for landscaping. 5. Fire Marshal conditions: a. Additional fire hydrants will be required. One fire hydrant must be relocated. Contact Fire Marshal for exact changes and modification. b. "No Parking Fire Lane" signage and yellow curbing must be provided. Contact Fire Marshal for exact"Fire Lane"areas. c. P.I.V. (Post Indicator Valves)must be installed. Show on utility plans. d. A ten foot clear space must be provided around fine hydrants. 6. Concurrent with the building permit, a detailed lighting plan meeting city standards shall be submitted. 7. Meet with the Building Official as requested in his attached memo to discuss. 8. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new developments. The building setback line and erosion control fencing shall be denoted on the final grading and drainage plans prior to final plat approval. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. 9. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 10. The applicant shall upgrade/extend Dell Road south of Lake Drive East to the south City limits as well as install a storm drainage system from Lake Drive East to the regional pond CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 15 — site. All public utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and — utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. The private utilities will be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or builder shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the City. 11. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year — storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to — final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basins, 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. 12. 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. — 13. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way. 14. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings adjacent to wetlands and storm ponds shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100-year high water level. — 15. A regional water quality and water quantity pond shall be provided on site to pretreat stormwater runoff prior to discharging under Dell Road into the Eden Prairie wetland. The — proposed stormwater pond 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. The stormwater pond shall be designed to 60% to 75% phosphorus removal efficiently. A — landscape plan providing upland and wetland plants to naturally blend into the landscape is recommended. 16. Existing wells and/or septic systems on site will have to be properly abandoned in accordance to City and Minnesota Department of Health codes/regulations. 17. The proposed commercial development of 21.3 developable acres is responsible for a water quality connection charge of$92,868. These fees are payable to the City prior to the City CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 16 filing the final plat. The water quality fees will be waived if the applicant provides for on- site stormwater treatment. 18. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 19. The installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Dell Road is expected in the future. The developer shall be responsible or share the local cost participation of this signal on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in relation to the total traffic volume of Dell Road. Security to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development (Phases I and II)will be required. 20. All roof top equipment must be screened in accordance with city ordinances. 21. The parking area for lot 2 shall maintain a 10 foot side yard setback along the west edge of the property." II. SUBDIVISION "The Planning Commission recommends the City Council approve the preliminary plat for Subdivision#95-18 for Chanhassen East Business Center as shown on the plat received October 2, 1995, with the following conditions: 1. Park and trail dedication fees to be collected per city ordinance. 2. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development contract. 3. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. All catch basins shall be protected with silt fence or hay bales until the parking lot is paved. 4. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post-developed stormwater calculations for a 10-year and 100-year storm event, 24-hour duration. Individual storm sewer calculations between each catch basin segment will also be required to determine if sufficient catch basins are being utilized. CSM Corporation November 1, 1995 Page 17 — 5. 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. — 6. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should 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 shall also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. 7. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat the necessary right-of-way for the upgrade of Dell Road. — 8. The site with the DataSery building shall be shown on the plat as Lot 2, Block 1." III. VACATION "The City Council approves Vacation 95-4 of the old alignment of Lake Drive East through Outlot — A subject to the following condition: 1. The applicant shall provide the city with a legal description of the old alignment proposed — to be vacated." ATTACHMENTS 1. Memo from Diane Desotelle, Water Resource Engineer, and Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer, dated October 24, 1995. 2. Memo from Eden Prairies Engineering Department dated October 23, 1995. — 3. Memo from Steve Kirchman dated October 23, 1995. 4. Memo from Jill Sinclair, dated October 17, 1995. 5. Application. — 6. Narrative dated October 2, 1995. 7. Signage Criteria. 8. Narrative describing CSM. — 9. Memo from Mark Littfin, Fire Marshal, dated October 18, 1995. 10. Plans received October 2, 1995. CITYOF\ CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II FROM: Diane Desotelle,Water Resources Coordinator David Hempel, Assistant City Engineer DATE: October 24, 1995 — SUBJ: Review of Preliminary Plan for Chanhassen East Business Center and Site Plan for CSM Corporation - File No. 95-36 LUR Upon review of the preliminary plat drawings prepared by RLK Associates dated October 2, 1995, we offer the following comments and recommendations: WETLANDS A wetland delineation report was prepared by John Anderson with Wetlands Data. He found two possible wetlands on site. Wetland A is located in the northeast corner and Wetland B is shown on Outlot A in the plans. After two meetings with the Wetland Conservation Act's designated technical evaluation panel (TEP) it was determined that Wetland B (noted on the plans) was not jurisdictional. The owner has provided documentation that the wetland has not existed for more than 20 years because of activities associated with public or private drainage systems. The TEP also determined that Wetland A does not have the hydrology to define it as a wetland. Therefore, the wetlands on site are exempt from the wetland regulation process and the applicant may fill or drain them without replacement SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) The City has adopted a Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) that serves as a tool to protect, preserve and enhance water resources. 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 Sharmin Al-Jaff October 24, 1995 Page 2 — model for predicting phosphorus concentrations in shallow water bodies. An ultimate conditions — model has been developed at each drainage area based on the projected future land use, and therefore, different sets of improvements under full development were analyzed to determine the optimum phosphorus reduction in priority water bodies. The development will be required to be — constructed in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan. A regional stormwater pond has been designed for both water quality and quantity on this property and the remaining undeveloped land of the Datasery property. The pond's best location is in the southeast corner of the Datasery property adjacent to Dell Road. The stormwater runoff — would run through this pond and be discharged under Dell Road into a natural wetland. Stormwater would then travel through the wetland and be discharge into Mitchell Lake. The City of Eden Prairie and Chanhassen agree that the water quality pond should be designed for a _ natural wetland, retaining 60% to 75% phosphorus according to the Pondnet Water Quality Model. Staff supports the water quantity analysis that was done on this site in the late 1980s, however, hydrologic calculations are necessary to confirm the design. It appears that the applicant and the property owner are reviewing an option to combine the existing pond just southeast of the — Datasery building with the proposed pond in the southeast corner of the property. Staff will be meeting with the project engineer to discuss these alternatives. In either case, the applicant will have to dedicate a drainage easement over this property to construct the pond. — Storm Water Quality Fees The SWMP has established a water quality connection charge for each new subdivision based on — land use. Dedication shall be equal to the cost of land and pond volume needed for treatment of the phosphorus load leaving the site. The requirement for cash in lieu of land and pond construction _ shall be based upon a schedule in accordance with the prescribed land use zoning. Values are calculated using market values of land in the City of Chanhassen plus a value of $2.50 per cubic yard for excavation of the pond. The proposed SWMP water quality charge of $5,909/acre for _ commercial developments will be waived if the applicant provides water quality treatment according to the City's SWMP standards. The stormwater quality pond shall be designed to retain 60% to 75% phosphorus according to the Walker Pondnet model in order to provide for better _ water quality to Eden Prairie wetland. Storm Water Quantity Fees — The SWMP has established a connection charge for the different land uses based on an average city-wide rate for the installation of water quantity systems. This cost includes land acquisition, proposed SWMP culverts, open channels and storm water ponding areas for runoff storage. — Commercial developments will have a connection charge of$4,360 per developable acre. The total gross area of the property is 21.3 acres. Therefore, the proposed development would then be _ Sharmin Al-Jaff October 24, 1995 Page 3 responsible for a water quantity connection charge of$92,868. The oversizing of the regional pond and infrastructure will be credited to the applicant at the time of final plat. This fee will be due payable to the City at time of final plat recording. GRADING & DRAINAGE The site is designed to drain to the south southeast where the stormwater would discharge into the existing stormwater system in Lake Drive East. The applicant will have to construct a stormwater pipe from Lake Drive East to the regional pond, dedicate an easement over the property to both install the stormwater pipe and construct the pond, and come to an agreement with Datasery on the location of the pipe and the regional pond so that it meets the needs of all parties. The oversizing of the storm sewer pipe and pond will be credited against the applicant's SWMP fees. The applicant will need to submit to the City detailed storm drainage calculations for the storm _ sewers as well as ponding calculations for a 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm event, 24-hour duration for staff review and approval. Based on these calculations, additional catch basins may be required. The site contains remnants from a farm house that will need to be properly abandoned. A demolition permit from the City's Building Department may be required. A drain tile also exists through proposed Lot 1, Block 1 to Lake Drive East that may need to be incorporated into the storm drainage system. The grading plan proposes berming along three sides of the site. The grade difference on the west side of the parcel prohibits berming. The site to the west will be approximately ten feet higher than the proposed west parking lot. EROSION CONTROL Erosion measures and site restoration shall be developed in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook (BMPH). The final grading plan shall incorporate erosion control fence (Type I) around the perimeter of the grading limits. Rock construction entrance shall be employed and maintained at all access points until the driveways and parking lots have been paved with a bituminous surface. Hay bales and/or silt fence shall be installed around all catch basins until the parking lots have been paved. Sharmin Al-Jaff October 24, 1995 Page 4 — UTILITIES — Individual sewer and water services have been extended to the lots from Lake Drive East. All utilities installed outside the City's drainage and utility easements or right-of-way shall be considered private and not maintained by the City. These utilities will be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or contractor shall be responsible for obtaining the appropriate permits from the City's Building Department. In conjunction with this development, the City will be requiring the upgrading of Dell Road south of Lake Drive East to the south city limits. Construction plans and specifications were previously prepared by the City of Eden Prairie. The actual street, however, was only constructed on the Eden Prairie side. The applicant should contact the City of Eden Prairie to obtain the rights to these construction plans and complete the remaining street and utility improvements along Dell Road within the City of Chanhassen. The applicant will be required to enter into a development contract with the City and provide financial security to guarantee construction of the public improvements — and conditions of final plat approval. The applicant may be reimbursed through tax increment financing for these public improvements along Dell Road. This will be further discussed at the City Council level. Fire hydrant locations throughout the site will be subject to City Fire Marshal approval. Apparently, there are existing drainage and utility easements over the old alignment of Lake Drive — East which the applicant is requesting a vacation. The applicant should formally petition the City to vacate these existing easements prior to final plat approval. STREETS The site is proposed to be serviced from two driveway access points off of Lake Drive East. The westerly access drive is proposed to be shared with the site to the west in the future. Staff recommends against sharing this driveway access due to the grade difference between the two sites. _ In addition, most of the time these access points will not be used because they do not line up with the future site improvements. The applicant's engineer has submitted to the City a preliminary traffic study for Lake Drive East and Dell Road. The preliminary conclusions indicate acceptable levels of service through Phase I of the development with eventually a level of service 'B' for the forecast year 2005 assuming a — signalized intersection. Level of service is defined as those operational conditions within a traffic stream as perceived by users of the traffic facility. The concept of level of service was originally defined as being a quantitative measure of operational conditions. Such a measure would ideally — cover factors such as speed and travel time, delay, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, safety. In practice, levels of service have been and continue to be defined _ Sharmin Al-Jaff October 24, 1995 Page 5 by one or two measures of effectiveness for each facility type. These measures relate more to speed, delay, and density than they do to quantitative factors or to safety. For each facility type, i.e. intersections, freeways, multi-lane highways, six levels of service, A through F, are defined. Level of service A represents a free flow with individual vehicles being unaffected by the presence of other vehicles. Level of service E represents operating conditions at capacity which may involve delays or back ups and accidents. Staff will be forwarding a copy of this preliminary traffic study along with the final study to an independent consultant, SRF Consulting Group, Inc., for their evaluation of the traffic impacts at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Dell Road as well as Dakota Avenue and Lake Drive East, and forecast traffic impacts as well as any necessary geometric reconfigurations of intersections or traffic control devices. Prior to receiving the final plat approval, a final traffic study should be prepared and reviewed by the City's traffic consultant, SRF. Based on the traffic study it appears a traffic signal may be required in the future at Lake Drive East and Dell Road. 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 of Dell Road. Security to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development (Phase I and II) will be required. As mentioned in the Utilities section of this report, staff is recommending that the upgrade of Dell Road be required south of Lake Drive East in conjunction with this development. Detailed construction plans and specifications will be required for submittal for review and approval by the City. The City has already acquired the necessary easements from the upgrading of Dell Road from Dataserv. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat these easements as right-of-way. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT 1. The applicant will need to develop a sediment and erosion control plan in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook and the Surface Water Management Plan requirements for new developments. The building setback line and erosion control fencing shall be denoted on the final grading and drainage plans prior to final plat approval. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and formal approval. 2. All areas disturbed as a result of construction activities shall be immediately restored with seed and disc-mulched or wood-fiber blanket or sod within two weeks of completion of each activity in accordance with the City's Best Management Practice Handbook. 3. The applicant shall upgrade/extend Dell Road south of Lake Drive East to the south City limits as well as install a storm drainage system from Lake Drive East to the regional pond site. All public utility and street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the Sharmin Al-Jaff October 24, 1995 Page 6 — latest edition of the City's Standard Specifications and Detail Plates. Detailed street and — utility plans and specifications shall be submitted for staff review and City Council approval. The private utilities will be inspected by the City's Building Department. The applicant and/or builder shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from the — City. 4. The applicant shall provide detailed storm sewer calculations for 10-year and 100-year — storm events and provide ponding calculations for stormwater ponds in accordance with the City's Surface Water Management Plan for the City Engineer to review and approve prior to final plat approval. The applicant shall provide detailed pre-developed and post developed stormwater calculations for 100-year storm events and normal water level and high water level calculations in existing basins, created basins, 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. 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City and provide the necessary financial security to guarantee compliance with the terms of the development — contract. 6. 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. 7. The appropriate drainage and utility easements should 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 shall also be given for access for maintenance of the ponding areas. 8. No berming or landscaping will be allowed within the right-of-way. 9. The lowest floor elevation of all buildings adjacent to wetlands and storm ponds shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the 100-year high water level. — 10. A regional water quality and water quantity pond shall be provided on site to pretreat stormwater runoff prior to discharging under Dell Road into the Eden Prairie wetland. The — proposed stormwater pond 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. The Sharmin Al-Jaff — October 24, 1995 Page 7 stormwater pond shall be designed to 60% to 75% phosphorus removal efficiently. A — landscape plan providing upland and wetland plants to naturally blend into the landscape is recommended. 11. Existing wells and/or septic systems on site will have to be properly abandoned in accordance to City and Minnesota Department of Health codes/regulations. — 12. The proposed commercial development of 21.3 developable acres is responsible for a water quality connection charge of$92,868. These fees are payable to the City prior to the City filing the final plat. The water quality fees will be waived if the applicant provides for on- - site stormwater treatment. 13. The applicant shall report to the City Engineer the location of any drain tiles found during — construction and shall re-locate or abandon the drain tile as directed by the City Engineer. 14. The applicant shall dedicate on the final plat the necessary right-of-way for the upgrade of — Dell Road. 15. The installation of traffic signals at the intersection of Lake Drive East and Dell Road is — expected in the future. The developer shall be responsible or share the local cost participation of this signal on a percentage basis based upon traffic generation from full development of this site in relation to the total traffic volume of Dell Road. Security to guarantee payment for the developer's share of this traffic signal for the entire development (Phases I and II) will be required. 16. The applicant shall formally petition the City requesting the vacation of the old alignment of Lake Drive East through Outlot A. jms/ktm — c: Charles D. Folch, Director of Public Works/City Engineer g:\eng\dianelplanning\csm.ppr — • I City of Eden Prairie City Offices VPEden 8080 Mitchell Road • Eden Prairie, MN 55344-4485 prairie Phone (612) 949-8300 • TDD (612) 949-8399 • Fax (612) 949-8390 October 23, 1995 Sharmin Al-Jae ff RECEIVE!City of Chanhassen OCT ` g 1995 - 690 Colter Drive P.O. Box 147 c �+1' rar c,rvkitint� Chanhassen, MN 55317 _ RE: Development Proposal by CSM Corporation at the Southwest Corner of Dell Road and Highway 5 Dear Ms. Al-Jaff: Thank you for providing us an opportunity to review and comment on the above referenced development — proposal. I feel there are two issues of critical importance to the City of Eden Prairie with regards to this project, namely; the completion of Dell Road, and the construction of the proposed storm water pond. A summary of Eden Prairie's concerns are as follows: — • The intersection of East Lake Drive and Dell Road will not function adequately with development of this project until the westerly lanes of Dell Road are completed and south bound traffic is no longer diverted to the north bound lanes of Dell Road. • Based on the preliminary plat it appears that no right-of-way dedication for Dell Road is proposed at this –. time. We would recommend that any City approvals for development of this property be conditioned upon right-of-way dedication for Dell Road. City staff would like to meet with the staff of Chanhassen to discuss alternatives that would allow the completion of Dell Road during the 1996 construction season. — • It is Eden Prairie's understanding that the proposed storm water quality pond will be constructed concurrent with the construction of the proposed CSM buildings and infrastructure. Additionally, it is _ Eden Prairie's understanding that the proposed pond will be designed and built in accordance with NURP standards and with the conclusions of a study entitled Multi-site Drainage Study Southwestern Eden Prairie, prepared by Sathre Bergquist, Inc. and dated March of 1990. Said study limits run-off from this — site to a maximum of 38.4 cfs and allows for a storage capacity of 12.5 acre feet. Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on this plan and please call Alan Gray or myself so that we may meet with Chanhassen staff to discuss the Dell Road construction schedule. Sincere!/, my,' 46 e John.` Y - for Engineering Technician JJ:ssa -- cc: Charles Folch, Chanhassen City Engineer Dsk.JJ.CSM-Corp.ltr Pec vcieo Pape, CITY QF CHANHASSEN t/i 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff,Planner II FROM: Steve A.Kirchman,Building Official -Cr('- /_ DATE: October 23, 1995 SUBJECT: 95-18 SUB, 95-18 SPR,95-4 VAC and 95-5 WAP(CSM Corporation) I was asked to review the site plan proposal stamped "CITY OF CHANHASSEN, RECEIVED, OCT 02 1995, CHANHASSEN PLANNING DEPT. " for the above referenced project. Although I won't add conditions to the proposed subdivision, I wish to point out the soil conditions as detailed in the Carver County Soil Survey. The Soil Survey indicates that this property consists mostly of Glencoe soil and Cordova silty clay loam. Both soils are in the worst groups for building construction, and may require extensive soil correction or special foundation designs. I would like to request that you relay to the developers and designers my desire to meet with them as early as possible to discuss commercial building permit requirements. swem.t,morrpm.6e,Cap CITY QF _ 0:olfri. CHANHASSEN' _ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 _ (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM _ TO: Sharmin Al-Jaff, Planner II FROM: Jill Sinclair, Forestry Intern DATE: October 17, 1995 — SUBJ: CSM Corporation Landscape Plan The landscaping plan for the CSM Corporation development has been reviewed. The applicant is providing a total of 157 overstory, ornamental, and evergreen trees. Species selection is diverse and well-represented by trees that are under utilized in most landscape — plantings. Applicant may want to consider specifying male plants on the plant schedule for two species, Kentucky coffeetree and Amur corktree. In locations where these trees _ are planted near a parking area, a non-seed bearing variety would be appropriate. In the east parking lot, applicant must provide two landscaped peninsulas as required by _ city ordinance. In the central parking lot, one landscaped peninsula is also required. On the south side of the development,additional screening is needed around the truck loading area. Screening elements may include berms and planting of ornamental and/or _ evergreen trees as well as extending the landscaped area along East lake Drive into peninsulas that mirror the peninsulas that extend south of the central parking lot. Recommendations: 1. Applicant must provide two landscaped peninsulas in the east parking lot. 2. Applicant must provide one landscaped peninsula inj ie central parking lot. — 3. Applicant must increase screening of truck loading area along East Lake Drive. — Screening may include berms, ornamental, and evergreen trees. An extended peninsula parallel to the entryway may also be considered on the condition that it does not impede truck access to the loading areas. _ • CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937-1900 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: CSM TNVF.STnRS TNr. OWNER:DATASERV TNS ADDRESS: 2575 UNIVERSITY AVE.W. . STE.150 ADDRESS: 12125 TECHNOLOGY DR. ST. PAUL, MN 55114-1024 EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 TELEPHONE (Day time) 646-1717 TELEPHONE: 829-6553 (JIM PAULET) 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. x Vacation of ROW/Easements 2 @ $100/EA = $200.00 — 2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Variance 3. Interim Use Permit • 13. x Wetland Alteration Permit $275.00 4. Non-conforming Use Permit 14. Zoning Appeal 5. Planned Unit Development 15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 6. Rezoning — 7. Sign Permits — 8. Sign Plan Review x Notification Signs $50 - FEE $100 - DEPOSIT ✓9. X Site Plan Review $1,530 X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attomey Cost' $50 ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/WAP/Metes$400 and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) 10. x Subdivision $475 TOTAL FEE $ 3,080.00 A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must Included with the application. Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 8W' X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. '� C.•......... ...:a v... �.......�.,.+ i... ..,p,,,. �....i:....:..... +,.......H 16, eia.rnlnnmanf Mntrar PROJECT NAME CHANHASSEN BUSINESS PARK LCCATTTTCN STATE HIGHWAY 5 & DELL RD. LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEE ATTACHED PRESENT ZCNING HC 1 OVERLAY OF IOP REQUESTED ZCNING NO CHANGE PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION IOP REQUESTED !.AND USE DESIGNATION NO CHANGE REASON FCR THIS REQUEST This application must be completed in full and be typewritten orciearty printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that i am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should cortact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized perscn to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any — authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and 1rformation I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. • INS i > op - -ignature of A olio!" / Date,41, .L`-• _ -' Y Signature of Fee Diner Date Application Received on /f61- 2-,5 Fee Paid $5c c 6)0 Receipt No.575O' The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. /1/ EXHIBIT A TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN DATASERV, INC. ("Seller") AND CSM INVESTORS, INC. ("Buyer") Legal Description of the Property: Parcel 1: That part of the following described property which lies north of East Lake Drive: The North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 19, Township 116 North, Range 22 west, of the 5th Principal Meridian, except that part lying and being within the right of way of ▪ State Highway #5 and except the following described tracts: 1. Beginning at a point in the North line of said Section 18, Township 116, Range 22, 1249.24 feet east from the Northwest corner of said Section 18, thence East along said ▪ North line of said Section 13, 180 feet thence South and parallel to the West line of said Section 18, 317 feet; thence West 180 feet; thence North 317 feet to the point of beginning. 2. The East 180 feet of the West 1249.34 feet of the North 317 feet of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 18, Township 116, Range 22. 3. A strip of land 60.00 feet in width over and across that part of the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The centerline of said strip of land is described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Section 18; thence South 00 degrees 02 minutes 58 seconds East, assumed bearing, along the West line of said North Half of - Northwest Quarter 614.34 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence Northeasterly 113.62 feet along a non-tangential curve, concave to the Northwest, having a radius of 300.00 feet, a central angle of 21 degrees 41 minutes 58 seconds, and the chord of said curve bears North 51 degrees 32 minutes 47 seconds East; thence Northeasterly and Easterly 264.37 feet along a reverse curve, concave to the Southeast, having a radius of 300.00 feet and a central angle of 50 degrees 29 minutes 25 secrndn; thence South 88 degrees 48 minutes 43 seconds East 360.00 feet; thence Easterly and Southeasterly 419.22 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the Southwest, having a radius of 750.00 feet and a central angle of 32 degrees 01 minutes 33 second:i; thence Southeasterly and Easterly 415.65 feet along a reverse curve concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 750.00 feet and a central angle of 31 degrees 45 minutes 12 seconds; thence South 98 degrees 32 minutes 27 seconds East 984.42 feet to a point on the East line of said North Half of the Northwest Quarter distant 671.45 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof and said centerline there terminating. Parcel 2: That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. The north 317 feet of the east 360 feet of the west 1429.34 feet of the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section I8, Township 116 North, Range 22 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota; — which lies southerly of Line I described below: — Line 1. Beginning at Right of Way Boundary Corner B21 as shown on Minnesota Depar rnent of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 27-48 as the same is on f..c and of record in the office of the County Recorder in _ and for said county; thence run westerly, along the boundary of said on an azimuth of 271 degrees 27 minutes 33 seconds for 183.96 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B22; thence on an azimuth of 271 — degrees 27 minutes 33 seconds for 360.13 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B25 and there terminating; CSM CORPORATION CHANHASSEN EAST BUSINESS CENTER DELL ROAD AND TRUNK HIGHWAY 5 CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA Project Narrative Submitted Monday, October 2, 1995 Introduction This project narrative is submitted on behalf of CSM Corporation for a proposed development located in the southwest corner of Dell Road and Trunk Highway(T.H.) 5 in the City of Chanhassen. The first phase of this development consists of two (2) —' office/warehouse buildings. Each building is approximately 64,000 square feet, or a total of 128,000 square feet. Future development plans will be based on market conditions. CSM Investors, a Minnesota Corporation, is celebrating it's 20th anniversary this year. CSM is actively engaged in the acquisition, development, leasing, financing, property management, and sale of real estate in fourteen Western and Midwestern states. CSM's current portfolio includes the ownership and management of approximately 3,000,000 square feet of industrial space, 2,500,000 square feet of retail space, and 6,000 apartment units. CSM's philosophy has been to acquire and develop real estate for long term ownership. RLK Associates, Ltd. is serving as site planner and engineering consultant for this project. RLK Associates is a planning, design and engineering firm located in Minnetonka. The firm has extensive previous experience in working with the City of Chanhassen. Steven Schwanke and John Dietrich are the principal contacts for this project. The Submittal This submittal is for a preliminary plat of approximately 21.3 acres of property located at the southwest corner of Dell Road and T.H. 5. The subject property is guided for "Office/Industrial" land uses and is zoned Industrial Office Park. As a result, we believe a rezoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment are not required for the proposed development. The material submitted with this narrative includes a completed application form for a preliminary plat/site plan approval, list of pro rties with names and addresses within 500 feet of the property, and a check for $1 .00. Additionally the plan sheets being submitted include: .t October 1995 NARRATIVE RLK Associates,Ltd. - 1 - for CSM Corporation Sheet 1 of 9: Cover Sheet Sheet 2 of 9: Existing conditions plan Sheet 3 of 9: Preliminary plat (Chanhassen East Business Center) Sheet 4 of 9: Preliminary site plan Sheet 5 of 9: Preliminary grading, drainage, & erosion control plan Sheet 6 of 9: Preliminary utility plan Sheet 7 of 9: Preliminary landscape plan Sheet 8 of 9: Architectural building elevations Sheet 9 of 9: Landscape detail sheet Existing Conditions Plan The subject property under CSM's option is approximately 21.3 acres in size. The property is bounded by T.H. 5 to the north, Dell Road to the east,East Lake Drive to the _ south, and several commercial properties including the Emission Testing facility to the west. The subject parcel is being subdivided from DataSery Corporation which at this time is intending to retain the property south of East Lake Drive. The site has a flat to — rolling topography which ranges 10 + feet in elevation, and contains no known unique wildlife or plant species. Currently one wetland in the central area of the site has been identified and a second area at the northeast corner of the site within the Mn/DOT — drainage and utility easement has not been classified as a wetland. Preliminary Plat — Three lots are being proposed on the property controlled by CSM as part of the preliminary plat identified as Chanhassen East Business Center. The fourth parcel Outlot — B is located on the DataSery property: * Block 1, Lot 1 consists of 5.43 acres and accommodates a 64,000 square foot building;. * Block 1, Lot 2 consists of 4.8 acres and accommodates a 64,000 square _ foot building; * Outlot A consists of 11.1 acres and is for future development; * Outlot B consists of 3.7 acres and is for the construction of a regional stormwater pond pursuant to the City's recently adopted Stormwater Management Plan. Outlot B is not part of the applicants property, but is shown as part of this plat because of the necessity to create the regional — stormwater pond. Selected existing easements within Outlot A are proposed to be vacated which were 4 formerly in place for roadway and utility services. e — October 1995 NARRATIVE RLK Associates,Ltd. -2- for CSM Corporation Preliminary Site Plan The site plan for Phase I consists of two (2) office/warehouse buildings. Each building is 64,000 square feet for a total of 128,000 square feet. Sufficient parking has also been provided as part of this development. The code requires 123 parking stalls for each building, and this is the amount provided. Truck parking is provided along the south side of the building, and is completely screened from Highway 5 by the building. The truck parking is sufficiently screened from East Lake Drive by using plant materials and berming. The site plan has located parking between the building and Highway 5. The parking areas on the north side of the buildings are necessary for the successful marketing of this project. The parking lots are screened from Highway 5 through the combination of 3-4'berms and plant material. All code requirements have been met, and no variances or conditional use permits are required as part of this development Preliminary grading, drainage, and erosion control plan The City of Chanhassen stormwater management plan has established the need for a regional stormwater pond to be constructed in conjunction with any development on the CSM or DataSery property. The CSM proposal is to utilize the existing storm sewer infrastructure connections into East Lake Drive for the parking lots and building storm sewer. The grading/storm sewer plan will also utilize the existing drainage ditch within an existing drainage and utility easement on the DataSery property to channel the water to the new stormwater pond in Outlot B. CSM is prepared to construct the stormwater pond in conjunction with the Phase I development. Final agreement on the stormwater pond size, location, and ownership will have to be resolved between the City, DataServ, and CSM. The entire north and east perimeter of the site facing Highway 5 and Dell Road will have undulating berms for screening of the parking areas proposed. A result of the berming is the necessary grading of the area within the drainage and utility easement at the Northeast corner of the site. A sufficient collection area will remain to collect the storm water run- off from Highway 5 and maintain its current flow toward Dell Road. Coordination between the berming, landscaping, and image for the gateway, will have to be resolved as these plans are being reviewed. Construction elements, such as, silt fencing and rock entrances will be prepared according to the City of Chanhassen requirements. Preliminary utility plan _ The utility plan provides the subject property with sanitary sewer, water and stormwater facilities of sufficient size and depth to support the anticipated uses in the two (2) buildings. These utilities will be connected to existing public utilities located in East Lake Drive. October 1995 NARRATIVE RLK Associates,Ltd. -3 - for CSM Corporation East Lake Drive has sufficient infrastructure for watermain and sanitary sewer to service this site. Existing stubs for the sanitary sewer are proposed to be utilized. It is anticipated new 8" taps will be completed on the existing 12" watermain, for the proper water — distribution of the two sites. The watermain will loop both buildings and all fire hydrants will be installed acceptable to the Fire Marshals recommendation. Preliminary landscape plan Both the Highway 5 corridor study and landscape code requirements were reviewed prior to developing the landscape plan. The plan as designed will complement the berming and architectural facades along Dell Road and Highway 5. The plan as proposed is proactive — in suggesting a palette which will be followed in future phases as well as suggesting a heavily landscape gateway at Dell Road and Highway 5. The plan utilizes a linear row of overstory trees along the perimeter and incorporate clusters of plant grouping for year — round color and interest. A viewshed has been established between buildings 1 and 2 and the primary viewshed to the DataSery property will be developed between Lot 2 and Outlot A. The plant material selected utilizes ornamental, coniferous, and overstory trees with a strong emphasis on sugar maples and species from the City's recommended list. Architectural building elevations — The building facades are proposed to have recesses and projections on the corners to prevent a undulating multiple plane surface. The main entries will be setback in the facade with wing walls and foundation plantings. Exterior materials for all buildings have been chosen with low maintenance and long term attractiveness in mind, corner accents, pergola's and striping are face brick. The background walls are integrally colored decorative masonry with a clear sealer applied. All glazing is gray tinted aluminum frames. Metal roofs and flashing are to be factory finished galvanized steel with a 20 year painted finish. — Related Issues • Stormwater Ponding. The City's Stormwater Management Plan shows the subject property directing stormwater to a regional pond located in the southwest corner of East Lake Drive and Dell Road. The preliminary grading and erosion control, and — utility plans submitted as part of this proposal directs stormwater runoff to the City's proposed regional stormwater pond. This pond, however, has not been constructed and is proposed to be located on land owned by Dataserv. CSM Corporation and — Datasery continue to discuss the most expedient means for constructing the regional stormwater pond consistent with the City's Stormwater Management Plan. October 1995 NARRATIVE RLK Associates,Ltd. -4- for CSM Corporation — • Environmental Assessment Worksheet. We have been advised by City staff that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW)will not be required for the proposed project. City staff has indicated that the mandatory threshold for a project like the one — being proposed is 300,000 square feet of building space. The proposed project is for only 124,000 square feet of building. Future phases of development will be based on market demand. October 1995 NARRATIVE RLK Associates,Ltd. -5- for CSM Corporation Chanhassen Business Center Signage Criteria All siHnarse to he inr1ividn 1 ehonnal t....e 10+4..:.... ..,a 1--- -- - CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 18, 1995 Chairwoman Mancino called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Nancy Mancino, Bob Skubic, Jeff Farmakes, Don Mehl, and Craig Peterson MEMBERS ABSENT: Ladd Conrad and Mike Meyer STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director; Bob Generous, Planner II; Dave — Hempel, Asst. City Engineer; and Fred Hoisington, Planning Consultant. PUBLIC HEARING: CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR A MIXED LAND USE DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL, OFFICE, SINGLE AND MULTI-FAMILY ON _ APPROXIMATELY 66 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF HWY 5 BETWEEN GREAT PLAINS BLVD. AND MARKET BOULEVARD, VILLAGES ON THE PONDS, LOTUS REALTY SERVICES. Public Present: Name Address Bruce Marengo 8150 Marsh Drive Walt Chapman 8140 Marsh Drive Steve Lundeen 8160 Marsh Drive Mary Berniee 8155 Grandview Road Steve Kokesh 8201 Grandview Road Al Sinnen 8150 Grandview Road Rick Hladky 8173 Marsh Drive Gloria and David Isackson 8183 Marsh Drive Rita Klauda 8130 Marsh Drive Dave Nickolay 8500 Tigua Circle — Jack Lynch 1314 Marquette Gordy Nagel 514 Del Rio Drive Dick and Pat Hamblin 340 Sinnen Circle — Jill and Randy Meyer 330 Sinnen Circle Mike R. 321 Sinnen Circle Cornelia & Mark Teel 8223 Marsh Drive Thomas & Jeanee Stronczer 8132 Dakota Lane Yagui Wei 8110 Marsh Drive Brian H. Burdick 684 Excelsior Blvd. 1 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Name Address Monte & Jan Eastvold 8180 Hidden Court John Ward 5916 Hansen Road W.J. Ward 4510 Bruce Dave Cummin 8152 Marsh Drive Brian Johnson 8143 Marsh Drive John Lund 8140 Dakota Lane — Alison Wokoviak 8116 Erie Circle Mary Hoffman 8129 Dakota Lane Mark Meyers 8131 Dakota Lane Jerry & Debra Disch 8170 Marsh Drive Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Mancino: So you're saying if we say yes to concept plan and then they come in with a preliminary plat. Generous: And you don't like it you can always deny it. Mancino: And we don't like it, we can deny it and start over. Okay. Thank you. Does the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission? Please. — Jack Lynch: Yes. My name is Jack Lynch...BRW representing the Ward family. I think actually the staff has gone through the basic concept pretty well. As just an overview, we're — embarking on a long and involved process. We're going to go through three different phases of approvals and in each phase we go through you're going to tie us down to more specifics. Your staff is already working very hard at doing that through this first phase. The site is a — rather sensitive site. We have a number of fairly large stands of mature trees by the old farmstead, down along the slopes on the southern part of the property and along the east property line. We have a number of wetlands. There's a major wetland on the south. There's a couple of wetlands up on the northern part of the property and run along proposed TH 101. There are also some slope conditions, especially along and sloping and facing Lake Susan and the major wetlands area on the south. The idea was on the northern part of the property was — to develop an extension of downtown Chanhassen with small, one and two story buildings all interconnected with a similar architectural theme. No flat roofs. Pitched roofs. The buildings basically brought right up to the right-of-way with a desire to do on street parking, — both on the frontage road and the loop street to the south. So that we create a downtown pedestrian oriented retail complex. The parking would all be internal or on the sides. So this retail corridor basically would be a pedestrian oriented downtown. The areas that are — 2 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 • designated as office and residential for the most part of the most sensitive pieces of the property. The office components are on fairly steep slope terrain with fairly major stands of vegetation and the idea there is to create a small building pad. An office building maybe 2 or 3 stories tall which is going to force us to go to underground parking to save the terrain and the vegetation. So basically those orange pods would be developed... Actually on this pod we'd develop on the existing old TH 101 right there but the idea of those three parcels is to limit the development to a small pad. Doing mainly underground parking and two to three stories. The residential component is the same thing. It's fairly heavily terrained and heavily treed. The only real way of saving the terrain and the vegetation is to do small building pads. The most destructive development anybody could do would be either industrial or single family residential. The decision here is not to go to single family residential by multi-family attached product. Again it would be those two residential pods would be treated the same as the office components with one building pad. Small building pad and underground parking. The last southerly component of the open space, whether it's open space or residential is certainly a discussion item. Most likely it will probably all go with open space. That is basically an overview of the concept. The concept right now simply is a downtown extension of, the extension of downtown Chanhassen with a retail core. We are especially interested in developing some on street parking opportunities, an office component and a residential component so it is a mixed, multiple use project bringing in both retailing, office employment opportunities and a residential component and a major open space component. Access to all parcels would be mainly off of TH 101 but at already primarily designated intersections. Staff has asked us to do some traffic analysis to assure that. And I think with that we'd be glad, I guess I would be glad, well now I have a few compatriots. There's a few us now who would be glad to answer any questions. _ Mancino: Okay, thank you. Mr. Lynch, if we have questions a little later after the rest of the public hearing, we may ask then. Thank you. Is there anyone else who that would like to present as part of this? Brad Johnson: Madam Chairman, members of the Planning Commission, my name is Brad Johnson. I live at 7425 Frontier Trail. We're pleased to present this since we've only been involved with the downtown real estate development now for about 10 years and have looked at the Ward property off and on as an opportunity to develop something. We felt over the years that it should be delayed until about this time when the rest of the town is completed as we all had a lot of interest on the north side of the street. What you see here is a project that we, and I missed Jack's comments because we thought there was somebody before us this evening so, feel meets a lot of the criteria that a lot of people have said which would be pedestrian friendly, traffic, going...more of a 50th and France. I have some photographs I can show later when I get them organized but basically we modeled our ideas out of...Main, 50th and France, Excelsior, Wayzata. We've gone into those communities, along with Como 3 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Avenue and different places and tried to figure out what makes things pedestrian friendly. What makes retail work within that atmosphere and some of the key elements is parking on the streets. It's kind of interesting. Those types of things seem to be the key elements and we've gone ahead with that. Also met with the neighbors and there's a lot more here than we've met with but in general we've been concerned about their interests over here on the east — side of the property. One of the key concerns as Jack may have said is the road. To provide the public with access. We're concerned about the buffering in this area and I think in general we're open to any good ideas relative to this neighborhood. It's just, we tried to design it with what they seemed to have said. One of our concerns is that this site has dropped off quickly and if we were to use it as R-1 or residential single family, commonly done, we would end up with pretty much destroying the site geographically, we believe topographically because the road system for either townhouses or single family system to make it economically viable, would destroy the site we think. Now we're open to any other good ideas but, so we went to more single pad orientation there. Again I'm at a loss. I don't know what Jack said so we probably want to listen. We're pretty much in agreement with the report that staff has. We've worked with them for quite a while on this. There's a couple of _ issues. This is a long process. You know we've got to come 6 public hearings before we complete this and I guess what we'd like to do is get a consensus that we should move along and then continue to meet with staff to try to come up with the final plan. It's going to take a _ long time. I believe part of the concept process is to listen and then try to meld this to your needs and the city needs and the neighborhood needs so we'll listen to that. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. And Mr. Lynch did a good presentation. May I have a motion to open this for a public hearing? Peterson moved, Farmakes seconded to open the public healing. The public hearing was opened. Dave Cummin: My name is Dave Cummin. I live at 8152 Marsh Drive. First I'd like to say we understand that Lotus wasn't required to contact all the residents in the area. We contacted approximately 65 households that border the eastern and southeastern edge of the — proposed development and of these households we called, less than 15 were contacted by Lotus or American Development in the rezoning...that this brings. This represents less than 25% of the neighbors in the immediate area. We have over 80 signatures of concerned — citizens representing 100% of the households that border the proposed development. We asked the people three questions. First one was, were you aware of the proposed development? The second was, do you have concerns regarding this development? And — third, would you like more information before the project moves forward? The answers to the first question, over 50% of the people were not aware that development was proposed. All but one person had concerns on the development and 100% of the people would like more 4 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 information before the project goes forward. I guess in general we have a few questions that we'd like to propose for... With the existing Great Plains Boulevard as it stands right now, one of our questions is why couldn't that serve as a natural buffer to the area? We don't really feel that apartments are an appropriate buffer to our neighborhood. We're also concerned about the increased traffic flow in the Brookhill area. We were wondering about the numbers regarding the amount of traffic coming through. Also concerns along that are about the flow of truck traffic coming in with deliveries. Also waste removal. If this involves either late night traffic and was any consideration given to the neighborhood in this. I would also like to just point out one more question. If the area was actually planned as some extension of the downtown neighborhood, one of the questions that has come up is, why wasn't the existing pedestrian bridge moved over into that area to make it more pedestrian friendly is what we've been talking here. And I can submit to you a list of all these names if you'd like. Mancino: Thank you. Please give them to staff. Thank you. Mike Regnier: My name is Mike Regnier. I'm at 321 Sinnen Circle in Chanhassen. This is my son Chris. I wanted to just propose a couple of ideas for you guys to think about tonight if you would, and that is just the concepts of fairness and good faith. I think most of the neighbors here tonight are thinking along those lines in terms of there's a good many of us that called the planning department before we moved in to the neighborhood abutting this open land to find out what the city's plans were for it and we have been told now that it is zoned along the bordering property where we all are. We're all on the southeastern edge or the eastern edge, that it is zoned single family residential. That the master guide plan is single family residential and indeed that that master guide plan was re-examined this summer. The City Council went ahead again and said no, we'd like to keep that single family residential and I think with us, the people from the neighborhood, I think there's probably a lot of people that think some retail along Highway 5 makes some sense on that site. I don't think you'll find many people in the residential area around this that want to see a three story apartment building of any type going in along there. If nothing else, for the simple fact that it doesn't flow well with a residential neighborhood, which I think was the City Council's intent in keeping that single family. And we heard from the development side of this equation tonight that it's not economically feasible to make that single family. My suggestion, and I think the neighborhood would be then, leave that as part of the open space — or what have you but I don't believe it's the city's or the citizens responsibility to make it economically feasible to develop any portion of that site. So I just wanted to go on record. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. 5 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Brian Johnson: My name is Brian Johnson and I live at 8143 Marsh Drive. I'm currently employed as the Assistant Treasurer and Director of Real Estate at the University of Minnesota and previously to that I did 10 years of real estate development. I worked for... corporation. First of all let me say that I understand that this property will be developed at some point and I'm not opposed to development. However I have some serious concerns with the development as it's proposed right now. First off, tax increment financing. This is a prime piece of commercial real estate and one of the fastest growing markets in the Twin Cities. I don't see any reason why we need to provide tax increment financing for this particular location. Tax increment financing, in my opinion, should be reserved for locations where there's either extreme soil problems. There's environmental problems and it's needed to _ make the property economically viable. In this case I think it's a very economic, it's a very viable piece of property as it is and I think the citizens of this city deserve to have new tax dollars generated from this development go into the tax plan. Just as a note. The taxes on my — existing residence are $3,600.00 a year. I called the cities of Eden Prairie and Bloomington today. Based on my assessed value and came up with my taxes in the city of Eden Prairie would be about $2,900.00 a year and in Bloomington they would be about $2,800.00 a year — and so again, on the tax increment financing piece, I don't see that there's anything that unusual about this particular piece of property that warrants tax increment financing for development of this piece. _ Mancino: Excuse me. Let me make a suggestion that you attend the HRA meetings. That's the Housing and Redevelopment Authority meetings and they are the people, they are the — commission that decides about TIF dollars and who it goes to and who it doesn't so I'm sure they'd like to hear your point of view. Brian Johnson: Yes. Thank you for that. I understand that. I think it's an integral part of this particular proposal so I wanted to be on record with that at this point. My second point is I think this particular proposal provides inadequate buffering with the existing — neighborhood. Again, the plan talked about single family residential. I think everybody expected single family residential or possibly even medium density of 4 to 8 units per acre. Not 16, 25, not 30. I think there's plenty of room either over in this area or further away — from the residential area if there's a desire to do high density residential housing but I don't believe it needs to be back up to the existing residential housing. Second of all, the retail areas up in the northeast corner here, I'm very concerned that they back up right to existing — residential housing. Just across a small pond. I don't want to be looking out my house and seeing the back end of a shopping center. In other communities such as Bloomington and Eden Prairie, the back ends of shopping centers are required to be all brick. They're required to have them at both loading docks. There are restrictions on the hours in which trucks can deliver. Again we're concerned that we don't have trucks delivering late at night. We don't have lots of trucks driving through our neighborhood. These are concerns of our's and we'd 6 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 like to see a better job of buffering between the existing neighborhood and the proposed retail. The third concern that I have is Lotus Development is a rather small, under capitalized developer. There were some problems and some significant time delays in the Market Square project while Lotus was trying to put their financing together. And also there's a piece on Main Street now they've been trying to develop another office building and I think we all drove by the signs that said opening the Spring of '95 and there's still nothing there. Last point, I think a full blown EIS should be done on this site... A think a full traffic study needs to be done as part of a normal EIS. To look at the affect on the wetland and look at the affect on neighborhoods. In summary, I think the neighborhood has some very strong concerns about this proposal. I would request that you not approve this proposal as presented. I think the developer should go back and address some of the realty concerns and the environmental concerns before this body sends it on forward and I would strongly urge that no city funds be employed for this particular development. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else? John Lund: My name is John Lund. I live at 8140 Dakota Lane. I have a couple of issues of concern tonight. One, first and foremost is that we were not contacted by Lotus Realty at any point in their discussions with the neighbors at showing the proposed development. We own roughly 2 1/3 acres on the eastern edge of their proposed development. We were not contacted and we have direct concerns that the developer was trying to ram this through without adequate neighborhood input. The second concern that I have is the wetlands surrounding the proposed development. As some of my neighbors have indicated before me, I'm very concerned about the impact that this will have on the wetlands and for our residential neighborhood. I have copied I believe the appropriate individuals on a letter dated October 16th. I have copies for the commission. Also have copies for the City Council and I've provided Mr. Johnson a copy of my letter by fax. I would also move that the commission does not approve the plans as stated. That the developer address neighborhood — issues and fully contact the residents that will be affected by this development. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address the commission? Please. Now is the time to give your opinions and enlighten us with some other viewpoints that you have. Steve Lundeen: I'm Steve Lundeen. I live at 8160 Marsh Drive. My concern is these developers come in and they make assumptions about what needs to be saved, what doesn't need to be saved. This tree needs to be saved. That tree doesn't need to be saved. That they — can make a lot of money by plowing down all those trees. They would give you a study that said these trees are totally unnecessary and it will benefit everybody if we plowed them all down and put up what we're going to put up. Secondly, as far as the tree thing goes, like I 7 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 said. If...it made more money for them so what benefit are they getting by not having the single family residential and what are the true reasons they don't want the single family — residential. Is it because there's some big oak trees up on top of the hill or is it because they can make more money by stacking a bunch of people together...information that one of our neighbors passed out that said was, at the last meeting that was presented and one of the — things was more tax dollars for the school funding and also in that packet it said that the TIF financing, so the taxes wouldn't go back to the year 2000. Well we're going to be voting soon on a new referendum for raising the taxes to pay for the schools. Our kids need the money now to pay for these schools and not 5 years down the road or 10 years or 20 years or whatever that ends up being. Mancino: Thank you. Randy Meyer: I'm Randy Meyer. I live at 330 Sinnen Circle. I have several issues. I'd like to echo some of the concerns of the people that have already spoke. Some issues such as environmental. I don't know that any study has been done to see what's going to happen with — that area. I realize that Lotus would like to keep as many trees and wetlands as possible but I also know from experience in construction, that these sites usually get to be a sterile pond areas. They talk about pond areas. They are not like the regular natural ponds and wetlands that are currently there. I have problems with the fact that we weren't notified. That the neighborhood does not know what this is going to, how this is going to affect our taxes. How it's going to affect our property values. How it's going to affect a lot of the traffic — areas. There's a lot of things that the neighborhood has not been informed on that's going to affect us in a very dramatic way that no one is coming and addressing that issue. Those two areas are our major issues in my mind and appreciate your time. Mancino: Thank you. Lois Savard: Hi. I'm Lois Savard and I live at 8080 Marsh Drive. Right here on the corner. I just want to confirm that, as it was explained retail will be directly in our back yard and we were not consulted so I just wanted to verify that the developers did not consult with property — owners and we did not have any input into this plan. And I echo all the concerns of my neighbors and am very concerned about this. Thank you. Rita Klauda: Good evening. My name is Rita Klauda. I live at 8130 Marsh Drive. Down the street from Lois. I echo the concerns of my neighbors regarding the environment. The _ side to the neighborhood, the buffer between the residential and the apartment building. I think the traffic concern along Lake Drive right now, there's already quite a few cars that go quite fast along Lake Drive, There's already considerably traffic on Lake Drive. I really don't care to see that more traffic be on Lake Drive. Lois and I walk our children to the day 8 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 • care that's across the street. Our children ride their bikes. They cross the street to get to the Total Mart. If we're to get out of our neighborhood and go for a walk, we need to cross Lake Drive. The sidewalks are on the other side of the street. How are we to escape from our neighborhood if the traffic goes up? We can't get out of our neighborhood. We can't get to the walk bridge that isn't even finished yet. The walk bridge to nowhere because we can't get to it if the traffic increases. So I see the traffic increase, I'd like to know what the increased traffic will be on Lake Drive. I'd like to see a traffic study. I'm concerned for my children. My children go to the daycare right there on Lake Drive. I don't want people in our neighborhood driving around and making it unsafe for our children. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. Alison Wokoviak: Hello. I'm Alison Wokoviak and I live at 8116 Erie Circle, and I stepped in a little late tonight so I hope I don't duplicate any of your earlier comments but I do have a couple things. First I believe that the main point is the current zoning. It was kept by the City Council for a reason. I feel that single family is the area that should be kept adjacent to the Brookhill development. Secondly I'd like to know how do you define high density? How do you Mr. Johnson. Again, I don't know if anybody's talked about it a little bit earlier. How do you define high density in terms of what is proposed for that area. I believe that the single family is more consistent with the existing houses. I don't believe that the high density can act as an adequate buffer with the current setting. I really feel that we need to have single family there and so we're consistent with what is currently there and again with what people were told was going to be there. Secondly I do question the need for retail. Do we need additional retail across from downtown? We have areas in the downtown again, that people have pointed out, that are not fully developed. Would those be available for development or do we need just right across Highway 5 in a higher use commercial area. I do realize Chanhassen is growing and we are going to keep growing whether we like it or not. But my question is, do we need the retail right there? Will the growth that is projected, maybe drive the need for retail there or will it be an additional center that would be more conducive to the new development that's going to be happening. I'd like to know if we need to have that retail right there, or if we should just hold off a little bit to find out how development is going to happen and maybe do a new retail center a little further away from downtown. Thank you. Mary Hoffman: Hi. My name's Mary Hoffman. I live at 8129 Dakota Lane and my concern, I agree with everything that's been said here tonight and last spring a very nice... homes presented to the City Council I believe and it talked about Chanhassen. The 100 year anniversary being celebrated next year and how we didn't want to lose the identity of our beautiful downtown and I do believe that doing further retail on the other side of Highway 5 ...that identity. The old St. Hubert's at this end. The City Council here...presented in this 9 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 booklet and I thought it was beautifully done. I think this is an about face from what was presented to us, each individual home last spring so I just want you to consider that. But I do — think it's an about face from what we were told. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. — Mark Meyers: My name is Mark Meyers. I live at 8131 Dakota Lane. I also was not contacted about this development. I live right adjacent to the path that goes through this — development. We're concerned of the environmental impact that this will have on this area. There's much, water drains through our neighborhood. Many of the houses up on the hill _ have problems with sump pumps. They have to run a lot. Especially with this development proposing underground parking. There's a good chance that there are underground streams in this area going into Rice Marsh Lake. And to Lake Susan. I'm also concerned about the _ effect that government assisted rental units built 3 stories would have right next to residential areas. Another item you should look at is the path. The existing path that is crossing TH 101. Every time I go down there I feel I'm taking my life in my hands with that traffic. I — like using the trail system but it is very dangerous crossing TH 101 and this is going to make it worse. I just hope there's not an accident in that area. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you very much. Anyone else? Tom Stronczer: Hi. My name is Tom Stronczer. I live at 8132 Dakota Lane. I do agree with most of the other concerns that my fellow neighbors do have. My wife and I we moved here 3 years ago and one of the things that we moved to Chanhassen is because it does have a very open, a very country feeling to it and the concern I have is building this up is going to — increase the density of the population of traffic which will have an adverse affect on the wetland and the natural resources. I do think that the increased traffic will cause more - problems. Accidents. Kids. There's a lot of young kids there. I think having a retail area will increase their potential of being harmed. Thank you. Mancino: Thank you. — Steve Kokesh: Hi. My name's Steve Kokesh. I live at 8201 Grandview Road which is right next door to where he wants to put the apartments and the thing of my concern is, the same with everybody else's but they say they only want to put one unit, 45 units in on that piece of parcel. Well anybody who buys a parcel like this and wants to put one apartment on it, over time it gets sold again. We will be back here for more city board meetings because they will want to put at least two more apartment buildings on it over time and I don't think that that kind of buffer is what people need in the area. I mean where most of the issues have been _ for what's going to happen right now but within 10 years they'll put at least 2 more apartment 10 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 — buildings on that piece of property. We'll be right back here discussing our issues with it at the city board meetings to a different owner. Whoever buys that piece of property from them and that's the issue I wanted to address about it. Mancino: Thank you. Jerry Disch: My name is Jerry Disch, 8170 Marsh Drive. I'm kind of wondering why we're destroying a road that we've already got paid for and bringing in more roads that are going to take TIF financing. The TH 101 or the Great Plains Boulevard is already a natural buffer and the residential that is already zoned for it would be a buffer. I don't know why we're destroying all that and putting new roadways up and having to pay for them again. I'm real concerned about my taxes. I just looked at the school referendum that's coming. You another $330.00 coming next year if this goes through. I'm real concerned about that TIF financing. I realize you've got to go to another hearing for that. I just wanted to voice my concern. Mancino: Thank you. Pat Hamblin: Hi. I'm Pat Hamblin at 340 Sinnen Circle. I just wanted to say one thing. This is the impractical part of it. When we moved in 6 years ago the first thing I fell in love with was the drive down Great Plains Boulevard. The natural beauty, especially in the fall it's you know, speaking as an artist, it's awesome... I realize that this is valuable property and that it's going to get developed. I expected that. I expected it more on Highway 5 than down further. I guess I would like to see a little bit more of the natural drive. You know you talked about the...coming into Chanhassen you know it's not too much more beautiful than that. I'm also concerned about this apartment building. I haven't heard anything about it tonight and this is just a rumor that I've been hearing that it's possible that it is low income housing. Government assisted. If that is so, we definitely have very big concerns about that because that will definitely affect our property value. Right now we look out our back yard and we see a couple of the houses on Grandview and...trees. Lots of deer. Lots of other woodland animals. Our concern is, you're right in line where this senior citizen complex is slated to be. That's what we're going, we're wondering, is that what we're going to see when we look out our window from now on? I think this is just, it's way too big of a scope for this property. I think it's too close to this residential area and I would really like to see a little bit more consideration for the neighbors, thank you. Mancino: Thank you. Is there anyone else? Brad Johnson: I just had three things I'd like to say. First of all, I apologize because we did not contact all the neighbors. We're only required to contact people within 500 feet, which we did. Well, we go through the process of, we go to an abstract company. They're asked to 11 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 give us a list. The city asks us to give a list and we give out the list. Now that's how that happens and somebody has measured 500 feet. — Audience: From what? Highway 5? Brad Johnson: From the nearest property line of our property. Audience: How do you explain the one on the corner? — Brad Johnson: We didn't. We had. People from the audience were talking at the same time. Mancino: Brad, let's continue. Brad Johnson: I just apologize for that, that's all. — Audience: We were never contacted. Brad Johnson: That's number one. Number two is that it appears that. Audience: Let's address this issue before you go on to number two. Mancino: Please. Brad Johnson: The proposal that I would have is, Madam Chairman is that I've written a lot of items here that take more interaction than we would have here in order to do it so if we could organize a more of an informal meeting with the neighbors and try to address the issues of taxes, income. How this affects their school. Mancino: I think that would be a good idea. — Brad Johnson: Yeah, something like that because that's a very technical kind of business and I think we can do it better by answering more direct questions than we can here. We are — concerned about the buffering of the neighborhood and so I think some of the concerns that they've addressed, we're open to discussion. This is a large parcel of property and it's not going to live or die on exactly what we do on this side of the property so we're more than — happy to address those kind of issues. Mancino: Thank you. 12 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Brad Johnson: Maybe that's the way we have to progress so that's what it will be, thanks. Mancino: Thank you. Anyone else? May I have a motion. Debra Disch: I am Debra Disch. I live at 8170 Marsh Drive and one of my concerns was some of the rumors. I wanted to know, is it true that they are considering a low income family apartment anywhere or another church in this area, that we do not need. You know we pay enough taxes. A church don't pay taxes. You know my concern is the low income. We don't need that either. I'm concerned of my property value and my taxes, you know. But I'd just like to address that. I don't know, are those rumors true? Low income family. MINN Mancino: This is just conceptual at this time. It has been part of the conceptual. Not the church hasn't, was presented earlier and which we will discuss as a commission and answer many of the questions that have been brought up tonight. Debra Disch: You know another thing, when I moved out to Chanhassen, out in this area, we came out this way to get away from I guess the business of, I don't know. Just the crowded. Audience: The Edina. Debra Disch: Yeah, you know. And you know like they were saying before, now this is going to look like 50th and France or Carmel or Monterey. I can't see that. I've been to those places, Monterey and Carmel. I don't understand how those would look like this in the specific acres there. You know? So that was just one of my concerns. Mancino: Thank you. Dave Cummin: Dave Cummin, 8152 Marsh. I would like to readdress the distribution that Lotus...very, very sporadic contact with people that remain out there. There were people on a cul-de-sac right outside of this area where one or two houses got it. Somebody across the street got it. People on closer than 500 feet if that was our tape measurer, did not receive it. So there wasn't neighborhood input on this and when I talked to Bob earlier on this, I told him that was our concern. Nobody really knew about this. Again, the figures that we gave you. 50% of the people, and actually if you add it up it's 55% of the people did not know. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Can I have a motion to close the public hearing? Farmakes moved, Peterson seconded to close the public hearing. The public healing was closed. 13 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Mancino: We do not attempt to try to answer all of your questions as you came up and asked them and now it's the commissioner's time to ask questions from or to the staff and to the — applicant and then for us to have a discussion and we will be very much aware of what you said tonight and be asking, I'm sure, many of those same questions that you had about traffic. About environment. About buffering, etc. So please be patient and listen and please do not — show any disrespect or rudeness by yelling out. We would appreciate that very much. Thank you. I think what we'll do since this is such a complex unit to look at, this mixed use, is to kind of start at the beginning talking about land use and what is in this concept plan for land use and how it differs from the comprehensive plan. Bob, from your staff report I am to take that we should use as our benchmark, as our guide mark, for what we are to look at as the comprehensive plan. The 1991 comprehensive plan. Not the amendment from the Highway 5 study? Generous: Not until the Met Council approves the revisions that were adopted. Aanenson: Well, that's not a true statement. What we're saying is that the Council has — responded on the new one but technically, legally it doesn't have standing until the Metropolitan Council approves it so we're still saying that there's several different thoughts going around as the Highway 5 and then the Vision 2002 and the Comprehensive Plan. The — legal standing to date is what's on the official comprehensive plan 1991. Until the Met Council approves it, it's just for your edification the direction that the Council is moving but until it's adopted legally it doesn't have standing. — Mancino: So what if it gets adopted between the conceptual and the preliminary? Aanenson: Even if, but this doesn't match either one so they would still require a comp plan amendment. Okay? So I guess in either scenario we're giving you, showing the different options. It doesn't match the proposed or approved changes or. -- Mancino: But it matches the comprehensive plan a little bit more than it does the Highway 5, especially in that northern area. — Aanenson: Yes. The retail, correct. But again we did say up to 25% retail. I think people envisioned retail and the Council envisioned retail in this area. They just didn't want to see — large, big box was the issue. Mancino: Okay. Did you have a question? Farmakes: I was just wondering if they had an idea what month or what year the Met Council in their wisdom may vote on that? 14 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Mancino: Do you have an idea about that? Aanenson: It's been up there for a couple of weeks so. Mancino: It usually takes what, a month? Aanenson: Hopefully 60 days so unless they tell us it takes a major which could take longer. Mancino: What I'm seeing the differences, and I've got my kind of map out here, visual map, is that parcel 2, which is in the upper left hand corner, in the northern part, which is the pink area, which is 9.5 acres, is very much in keeping with the existing comprehensive plan. Aanenson: Correct. Mancino: As in land use. Aanenson: Correct. Mancino: Okay. And then I move over to parcel number 3, which is the 3.4 acre retail, which again is in keeping with the 1991 comp plan. Aanenson: Correct. Mancino: Okay. Then I move down past Lake Drive to the south, to that small retail which is 3.2 acres, which the comp plan has as medium density residential. So there we have a change on 3. Aanenson: Yes. Mancino: Okay. Then let me go down to Parcel 8 and Parcel 9, which is residential and this they're denoting as high density R-12. And that in the comprehensive plan is residential low density. Generous: For the southern part. Aanenson: Yeah, a portion of it. Mancino: For the southern part. Generous: ...this cul-de-sac. 15 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Mancino: Say that again please Bob. Generous: The split...at the cul-de-sac. The current comprehensive plan has a multi-family... up here and then low density to the south. Mancino: Okay. So parcel number 8, the northern part would still be medium density? Aanenson: Yes. — Mancino: Okay, thank you. The 7.4 acres which is south of the cul-de-sac street is low density residential. Aanenson: Yes. Mancino: Okay. And then going over to the west of that. Parcel number 5, which I see is _ 4.4 acres, which is office, according to the comprehensive plan is residential low density. — Generous: Yes. Mancino: Okay. And the piece that is the number 1, in the middle of it, which is currently conceptualized as retail in the comprehensive plan is office. -- Generous: Correct. Mancino: And then over west of TH 101, both of those offices were medium density — residential. Generous: Correct — Mancino: Okay. And south of that medium density residential was, instead of residential was open space? And it was also the same on the east side of TH 101. Residential, or open — space? Generous: Open space. — Mancino: Okay. Well on these land use changes, can I hear some comments or some questions from different commissioners on how you feel about the changes that are in concept form at this time and I think that one of the major core issue is the retail. What percentage of retail and being on the south side of Highway 5, and then going into the property owners' 16 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 concern about having high density adjacent to low density. Craig. Would you like to ask any questions? Give comments. Peterson: I think that a couple of the areas obviously when we talk about high density is the buffering. I'd like to get more information as to what types of buffering and really what kind of space is going to be between the two and better definition of the type of buffering and the row of that distances between the two. As we go through the retail aspects of it, on the surface the 9.5 and the 7.4 and 3.4 seem to more logically fit than the 3.2 in they're very close to residential area. I guess I'd like to hear from staff a little bit too, even though we talked about, I'd like to get a little bit more specific as to how many acres we are talking about changing from one zone to the other. Specifically. I think it's talked about in general, transferring from commercial to residential and vice versa. I'd like to get more specific as to what the exact acreages are moving from one to the other. So like the office space on the west side of TH 101. It seems like a nice transition from the current space that's already •. there. As is the office space of 4.08 acres. So on the surface I guess my thoughts are that there are some pieces that fit and I'm comfortable with. There are some pieces that I clearly need to explore a little bit more in depth as to how they actually are going to fit and what's going to go within them. It may be beneficial to those residents that are here too to hear from staff as to how, what is the exact definition for them as far as medium density and low density and high density. Just for their own edification. You may want to take a shot at that Bob. Generous: First of all how much would change. Currently there's 16 1/2 acres designated for commercial and so they're adding that, of approximately that 7.4 acre parcel. That would be the middle of this, which is currently designated for office use. Peterson: So 7.5 additional from commercial to office? Generous: Correct. I guess they're adding about 6 acres, maybe 7 acres of office space. I don't know, we've never done an exact calculation on the area but the residential component is actually about the size of what's designated. Maybe a little longer but it's shifted south and it's gone to the higher density. Mancino: I was going to say, we don't have any low density, 1 to 4 houses per acre in here, in the new revised concept plan. Do we have any? Generous: Yeah, down on the south. Peterson: On the lower side. 17 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Generous: That's the area we're suggesting that they leave as open space and transfer the density of it elsewhere on the site. Mancino: But prior to this we didn't have any high density at all? Generous: No. Mancino: Designated. Generous: The discussion of density, when we discussed low density residential, generally _ we're looking at 1 to 4 units per acre and that would be a standard single family detached housing, or it could be a planned unit development with smaller lot sizes, or possibly a twin home development with 10,000 square foot per unit. Our medium densities are generally our townhouse developments. They'll go from 4 to 8 units per acre. We've done some other studies. We're currently averaging about 6 units an acre on our multi-family development. And then high density is a top range in our comp plan. It goes from 8 to 16 units per acre. — Mancino: Which is mostly apartment buildings? Generous: Yes. Generally you have to go up in stories to meet those types of densities. Aanenson: It doesn't have to be though. It could be owner occupied. Stacked. It doesn't have to be. Nobody said what. Generous: It could be townhomes. — Mancino: Or it could be condominiums. Aanenson: Sure. Mancino: And to meet the R-12 or the R-16 in the yellow area which is high density over to the east, which is by the residents. How high up would those need to be to? Generous: I don't know if we looked at the exact parameters. You could probably do it in 3 — stories. Mancino: Okay. I mean there's a big difference between 3 and 4 stories. Do we have an ordinance limitation at this point to just 3 stories in this area? 18 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Generous: Current residential zoning, yes. Within a PUD you'd establish what the standards for the district because it becomes it's own zoning in essence. Mancino: So a PUD opens it up to the height of the building? Generous: Yes. Mancino: We could establish it to be 2 stories? We could establish it to be 4 stories? Generous: Right. Make it a 20 story tower, if that's what the city decided it wanted there. Peterson: Dave, do you have your scale out? If you could give me a sense for where, on the 3.2 acres of retail, in the upper right side, where a logical building pad would be in there. How far would the closest home building pad that's currently there be in feet approximately? do you have your scale with you tonight? Hempel: My scale unfortunately probably can't be used. Aanenson: Really that's a question as part of the PUD and that's kind of where we can, as part of the PUD process, this is a concept level. What we're trying to do now is say, what sort of uses. You can't even go and measure yet. We've requested that they do an EAW but until you do, you have to know what you're measuring first. So part of this whole process is to try to decide what we should measure. What sort of things are we looking at and then develop the framework to say this should be the heights. This should be the setbacks. That's part of this process. Right now we're just trying to establishing what is the vision. What should those uses be and then try to establish the framework on how to make them acceptable or to make it work. So to say to meet the setback, we can make it greater or lesser, whatever we feel is appropriate. Maybe we say it's, that's not the appropriate land use. Right now _ we're just trying to say, what is the appropriate uses so then we can go forward and then evaluate. Do the environmental. Do the traffic. Do the buffering. Do those sort of analysis but first we have to decide what it should be and that's kind of what this process is about. Generous: To answer your question though, I did scale it off. It's about 200 feet from the property line over to the first house over on Lake Drive. Mancino: Jeff, any comments on land use? Farmakes: Yeah. I want to make, or ask staff to define once again because I'm not sure, based on the comments that I heard, that everybody understands exactly where the concept 19 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 plan stands in order of review. And maybe you can go over that one more time as to where, basically this is a beginning of the process. If you can define that again. Aanenson: Sure. What the applicants are requesting is a PUD. They're asking for two things. One, to change the comprehensive plan. And even if the Council approves it, because it's inconsistent with both alternatives, the current comp plan and the one we've got in, it will have to go to the Met Council to get approved. So that's one process. And the second _ process is to come up with the PUD standards, as I explained, to decide what the appropriate land use is. And this is the concept level. As Brad indicated, there's a series of public hearings. This is the first hearing. That's where we notify everybody. Bring them into the — process to try to decide what it should be. Nobody's made any of those decisions yet so we're trying to decide what it should be and that's just the first public hearing. Then it goes up to the City Council and they will also review this. After they've given some recommendations, _ that's all it is is a recommendation. That gives them some idea of what to go forward and measure. To do their environmental. We give them the marching orders that are on our conditions of approval to do the tree surveys. To do the wetland. Do the environmental. To _ do the traffic. Whatever other direction that you and the other Council give them to go forward. Then they come back through another public hearing. At that time if you are unhappy with any of the findings, you can say we recommend denial and the process stops — there. If you want to add additional conditions or ask for more research, that is the appropriate step to go. Then it has to go back to the City Council for another hearing and then for final plat approval it goes to City Council so actually there's five hearing processes. — So this is going to take a long time to go through those process. Mancino: So those that are here tonight are here at the beginning of the process. — Farmakes: So if you think of this as an egg and chicken, this is the egg. What this is used for in the process is to define what the objections are. Define where it falls in the scope of — the comprehensive plan and something has to start from somewhere and this is where it starts from. As plans often are, the objections usually occur to the surrounding properties and how they're affected by that development and this is a part of that process. If we approve — something tonight, or if we table something tonight, it's extremely preliminary. I urge you to find out how that process works and to follow it through as an organized neighborhood _ situation and gets your points across because that's how the process works. I'll leave that at that. If, as I said, if something's approved tonight, remember that what's approved is a preliminary idea. Not a scope of plans and the plans that do come back eventually are very — detailed and building materials and far more comprehensive and at any step and point of that process they can be tabled or denied. So there's a lot of room in there in the process for you to get your points across. _ 20 _ Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 • Mancino: And different ways to communicate. I heard that Mr. Johnson from Lotus Realty will have another neighborhood meeting and you will read it in the paper when it's going to - come up to City Council for the conceptual review after tonight and it will be published in the paper. Also, staff if you could also let people know, will they be getting notification? Everyone here, if they ask to be notified for the first, the preliminary plat. Aanenson: They certainly would notify all public hearings before the Planning Commission. Legally that's the requirement is the public hearing before the Planning Commission. We certainly ask them to track it through this process. We normally let them know the next time it will be on for City Council, but these things take so much time. To do the environmental and all that work is going to take months so you have to just, we hope that there's a '- spokesman or somebody, maybe a couple of neighborhood people that are tracking it because it's going to be a long time between meetings because, depending on what your action is, there's a lot of work done between meetings. Mancino: And please know that staff is busy so if you could have 1 or 2 people designated to kind of keep calling City Hall, Bob or Kate, and find out what's happening. Keep up on it. Farmakes: I have a couple other issues that I want to touch on briefly. Mancino: Are you going to talk about land use? Farmakes: Yes I am. Mancino: Thank you. Farmakes: But I did want to start out with that because I think it kind of permeates the beginning also for our discussion here. That they understand what it is we're discussing here tonight. Mancino: Thank you. Farmakes: In the issue of land use, what I would like to try, in my own mind figure, when we determine how much property is going to be used in a comprehensive plan for our community for commercial and I hear the comments that we need more retail. Then we ask, well why do we need more retail? What does it provide the community? And we hear kind of ambiguous comments about well, we get more taxes or it cuts taxes and people want the convenience of going down and getting this and those are far more intangible issues than dollars and cents. We have always used the ratio that, as long as I've been here that half a million square feet defines between 30,000 and 35,000 people. Now that was the previous 21 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 planning director's comments to us because we do rely on professional staff for these comments. And I believe that roughly is about 2% of the property in Chanhassen. And we — have in the staff report here a new report that tells us that well roughly it's 10% now. And the reason that it is increased from earlier thinking is because we need more parking and I'm wondering how that fits into this demand. Do we need more parking? How does that relate to the increased retail issues? I'm still confused on that regard as to why that demand for changing the land use would be. Also looking at these figures and looking at Chanhassen, our land use ratios, a population is showing at 13.3 using '90 census data. That's got to be at least 30% out of whack than current data. Maybe we can get an update on that. Aanenson: We have that now. Farmakes: I'm looking at the totals that we have here north of Highway 5 in there. I think — we're at 450... Mancino: 450,000? Farmakes: That's pushing it pretty close and I'm not against additional retail in land use. I just want somebody to define why we need that and if it's parking, that's what I'm getting out _ of this report. If I'm wrong on that, that's fine but I would like to know why we get one direction as little as 5 years ago and now we're getting another direction that we need more of this. — Aanenson: Can I comment on that? We're not, this was put in for your edification. Just as far as other trends are because the developer has, or the applicant has requested additional — commercial. We've always taken the position if we want additional, if somebody wants additional commercial, they need to convince us why. Because we're not hitting a market nitch or something like that. We're not advocating one way or the other. We've asked Fred — Hoisington to be a part of this team because he worked on the Vision 2002 plan and is very familiar with the downtown development. This is really for your edification. We've said to the developer all along that we want him to demonstrate to us why we should have additional retail space and what the implications are so we were just showing you some other trends. Yes, we're undersized but we don't see ourselves, I'm talking about national trends for cities our size. As came out of the Vision 2000, people like the concentrated downtown. But on — the other hand there was concern that we are running out of commercial space, I'm telling you in general. Is it all filled up? No. Is this premature? That's a question you're going to have to ask. We struggle with that ourselves. We know the Legion property's going to be developed and there's other commercial property in the vicinity that will be developing shortly. So the residents ask a good question about the timing. Those are same issues that _ staff struggled with but, in the long term will we need more commercial and where should it 22 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 be? This City's always taken the position that we want to have a concentrated downtown. We wanted commercial to be in a core area. That's, it's an appropriate question. Is this the right spot? Farmakes: Well it's not only the right spot but what I'm asking, and I'm not pro or con this. That's a question that needs to be answered thoroughly and for us to be consistent on how we treat that because every four corner spot in Chanhassen at some point in time is going to get somebody with the idea that it needs a strip mall. Aanenson: All the way up and down Highway 5, absolutely. — Farmakes: It just goes without saying. I mean if you go east of here and you see other more mature communities, that's what happens. And I am somewhat worried that if we treat this inconsistently some larger developments, often different parts of town, may have other ideas for farm fields that are larger in scope and I am, I want to make sure that we come up with the rationale that's consistent here if we do that. Aanenson: Certainly, and that's one of the things we would recommend in your findings that you do have some reasons in there that it makes sense. That this location is more appropriate than another location to expand the commercial. Farmakes: But even that as a given, the term that we're going to run out of retail space, even if we develop it as proposed. When that's finished, the same comment could be made. We're MEV running out of retail space. Mancino: Well we can say we're running out of residential space too. I mean people. Farmakes: Absolutely but what I want to look at is how much do we need to service Chanhassen? And if we want to be a regional service area, how much more do we need to service that? What is our purpose here? And if we're going to be a shopping area for other surrounding communities, we need to define that and not just say well we need more. The question is why do we need more I think and we need to have that answered and I'm gladly agreeing with that. The other issue on land use that I wanted to just touch on real briefly here, because I'm using up more time than I wanted to. The issue in regards to housing or multi type housing. You need to look on this on different tier levels. Besides the land use that is being proposed here. The city is a part of a county and the county is a part of a metro area. The metro area is sort of directed by the legislature and the legislature happens to be — directed by the federal government. And all of these are players in this issue and I'm sure you've been following in the newspapers and so on the issue of dispersed housing and these issues that directly affect unpopulated suburbs or tier suburbs like Chanhassen. You need, if 23 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 you're concerned about this issue you need to go beyond the city and municipal government because that's not where the directives come from. The directives come down from Mount — High as to how this is going to be and currently this is an active topic in the legislature. So Mr. Workman and Mr. Oliver are your representatives here and State Senator. If you want to be up to speed on this and voice your opinion on these issues, please do so but remember — where municipal government falls in this area. We're not always the decision makers of these processes as to defining who goes where and who pays for it. I'll leave it at that. Mancino: Thank you. Bob. Skubic: Craig and Jeff covered a lot of ground there. Land use. The comprehensive plan and the Highway 5 plan both direct some retail use of this land along Highway 5. I take that to mean that that's the direction, retail extension in that direction is where we want it to go. Probably I think the question here, how much, how far does it go here. If it's directed along Highway 5. If it goes per the current plan we of course need an amendment. Regarding the residential area, the applicant is aware of the transition area. He made a point that the units would be attempted to be located towards the street side, away from the current development. And this is certainly an issue, a big issue that needs the attention of staff and the applicant and the neighbors. Whether this is developed as a high density or the current zoning of — medium density in that area with the potential of single family. Mancino: Don. — Mehl: Yeah, I agree with Jeff here. We have to take a look at how much retail we have to have and why we need it. Who's going to use it. You know is it going to be Chanhassen -- people or are we going to draw from Fridley, Plymouth, Bloomington, wherever. In order to do that you have to have something that's really unique and is going to make them want to come here. It's going to be impossible to develop a huge shopping mall or shopping center in — there that's going to be all inclusive. You can't have a Mall of America out there. A couple things I wanted to bring up here too. We were discussing area 4 which is that lower right pink section up on top. That 3.2 acres. One thing that was discussed here in the proposal — and we really haven't talked about it is the architecture of the buildings. Mancino: We'll get to that. Mehl: Okay, and what I was going to say is that with the proper architecture I'd have no problem with retail in that section 4. It could look like houses you know in effect. And Pm wondering if there's been any consideration to say interchanging the two yellow areas with the two orange areas on the left. Again with architecture in mind, the office could look a lot different than an apartment complex. 24 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Mancino: Okay, thank you. Let me give a few of my comments. I'll first start with the core issue of retail and how much should there be. I certainly don't know what the magic number is either. I feel that the parcel 1, which is kind of the focal point, the village center, and I do understand that every village needs a center, is the one that I'm struggling with. I feel that those that were on the Highway 5 task force and the comprehensive plan that was passed, did a good job of looking at that northern half and wanting that to be extended retail. Going south of that, I'm not sure that I agree with the concept of taking it to the south down further. Staff or Mr. Hoisington, can you talk about critical mass at all? I mean what happens when -- we start taking away some retail? Should there be a critical mass to make the project successful? Feelings on that? �- Hoisington: That's a real good question Nancy, and not an easy one to answer. I don't happen to agree with the critical mass discussion here, but then Brad and I have disagreed on a number of things in the past so that's understandable. Mancino: So let me hear another viewpoint. — Hoisington: I guess as we've indicated in the past, you will run out of retail space here, without question. You're drawing people to shop here from Eden Prairie because Eden Prairie has some of it's own deficiencies. So you I think need to ask the question, do you want to serve others beyond this community as you currently are. And maybe that's more critical than critical mass and I think Brad is using it more in the sense that he can augment what's already there and that's why I kind of disagree. I think we have some disadvantage on West 79th Street. Always have and probably always will, just because of the way the thing works. What we can do is we can look at some things for you but I can't give you an answer tonight regarding critical mass. And what it would take to create this viable center here. You have a very viable downtown, and we're not talking huge numbers. We're talking about something that I think would represent a very good interchange and a very good overall strengthening of this core that you've established that's pretty strong today. Remember what it used to be like. We had no critical mass. We're building toward that but you have limits and you can't go beyond those limits. This may be the only site you have where you can provide the support for the rest of downtown. There just isn't any, other than separated sites. TH 101 and 212 and further to the west on TH 41. There aren't any others. Mancino: Okay. Then I would have to say at this point, I don't have a real rationale, good reason to go beyond what the comprehensive plan has already designated as retail. Dealing with the neighbors concern about high density adjacent to single family. Gosh, I think that I'm speaking for everybody in this room, whether it be a developer who lives here, whether it be every other commissioner or staff, that that's the hardest one to deal with. I would like to see staff and the developer work on either moving that, flip flopping it. Possibly look at on 25 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 the west side of TH 101. Also another option would be to look at, and I haven't actually gone there and walked that particular property line so I'd have to go over and look at the topography to look at a good sized buffering. And see if we can, what can happen there in the buffering area. Not only topography in that I think Bob you said that it's fairly high on the east side of that property line. There's some slopes there? Generous: In that northern section. Mancino: In the northern. Does it come down to the southern area too? Generous: It slopes down but so does the land to the east. Unfortunately they both tier down towards the wetlands. Mancino: Then I would like to see staff and the developer come back with some alternate plans. I don't feel comfortable with the high density next to the low density. I think those were my two concerns with the land use issue that I saw of the others, I don't have any — concern with. I do agree with staff that those two small southern residential land use areas would, that whole area would be benefitted by adding more open space. Moving on past the land use issues, what about traffic and transportation and circulation. Any comments from _ commissioners on that. Now there's no question that there will be and it's one of our conditions, that the applicant is preparing a traffic study talking about access points and determining roadway improvements. May I have other comments and questions from the — commissioners. Don. Mehl: Yeah, I think it's absolutely necessary to have a traffic study done. Is there any -- possibility that vans or buses or whatever could conceivably bring people from this area over to say the Country Suites hotel area or over to the Byerly's area. In other words we're going to have to provide some places where buses can let people off and you know, turn around. — Maybe it's not a concern. I didn't see it anywhere in here but it's something I wanted to bring up. Mancino: There was, there is going to be some sort of a transit hub in the area for Southwest Metro. Mehl: Okay. That's all. Mancino: Okay, Jeff. Farmakes: I would think, it's more egg and chicken again. That you need to know the alignment of the land use before you make a real determination or criticize any type of traffic 26 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 • flow. I'm somewhat concerned about the issue of street parking and pedestrian, you said they'd cross the street and so on. Are they going to be going through between cars? That Nam type of thing. And how that relates. If you have, it seems to me that somewhat has some built in dangers into it in regards to the pedestrian and traffic flow not only for the cars but also for the people. So I have nothing really to go on here to make any concrete criticisms but I would expect those kind of answers from staff and how those interplay between what types of use we actually come up with. Also issues of any type of movement between either office or residential and these open spaces. That if for passive uses they still I would expect have some sort of gathering use for people who either are in higher density and so on and how that would... - Mancino: Well I know that staff is recommending that there be no parking on any of the streets. On either side. Correct? No parking on TH 101, on the loop street or Lake Drive? Hempel: That was our concern in the staff report, that's correct. Farmakes: Yeah, but I believe part of the proposal said street parking and they came before us tonight so I'm responding to that. If in fact the definition of percentage increase to retail from, I think our staff report there went back to 55 comparing it with a study that went up to recent times, or a decade or recent times but the reason for this increase in commercial property relationship to population is because of the parking that will be a consideration in evaluating this particular piece. And looking at parking trends throughout north of TH 5, how that relates to our population and a cap of population where, again what type of market are they going to? Are they going to 30,000-35,000 or are they going beyond that and what type of length of stay, trip. How you want cars in the area for parking. Commercial area versus residential versus office. So again those types of things. It's all more into engineering and traffic issues. So I'm going to leave it at that. Mancino: Bob. Skubic: The Hoisington report brought up the issue of phasing timing of the Highway improvements with regards to the development and that strikes me as an issue we have the extension of Lake Drive East. We have Highway 101 and Great Plains Boulevard realignment and these are probably something that's tied up between the county and the state and the city. It seems like it could be a pretty messy, lengthy process to get these aligned. Does staff have, or Dave, do you have any insights on how this all might hook together? Hempel: Lake Drive East is in the comprehensive plan as a collector street. The city has listed it on the city's municipal state aid street system. The alignment shown in the concept here is fairly close to what's in the comprehensive plan. The intersection of Lake Drive and 27 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 TH 101, median improvements are already there. It's all there with the upgrade of what I'll call Market Boulevard and TH 101 by Rosemount. The touch down points are established meandering through the parcel. It's somewhat open but we want to keep it more of a thoroughfare or a boulevard. Frontage road scenario... The upgrade of TH 101 and the traffic studies that would shed some light exactly what improvements are going to be needed and also determine the access point on the south loop street and the appropriate traffic control devices within the development itself will also be looked at. All those are things that come... Skubic: Thank you. Mancino: Craig. Peterson: As it relates to traffic, I think most of the major issues have been brought up. The only ancillary concern that I guess I would see, if the plan remains, let's assume a plan remains as it is. If you look at the trails that are marked with the dotted line. It looks as though the trails are clearly biased towards the residential without a clear trail into the major — retail centers. They are on the outskirts of both. I guess on a conceptual basis would seem more logical to integrate the trails more within the retail areas also. Not just within the residential and office areas. That's it. Mancino: I just had a couple remarks. The residents brought up a little bit of Lake Drive and what's going to be happening with Lake Drive. Well Lake Drive is going to continue to — have more traffic on it. No question. It's a collector. It has been in the comprehensive plan. It always was going to be there and it will be there and there will be traffic going west on Lake Drive. Will continue through this development and keep going west. It definitely will be there. As far as getting to the new pedestrian bridge and being able to cross Lake Drive as it becomes more congested, what are the options? Has the city looked into that and I'm just asking for options? Not what are we going to do or, but I think that's a real good — concern and safety concern for adults and children. Hempel: Again I guess I'm going to fall back on what the traffic studies are going to reveal based on the land use. Location for crosswalks. Four way signalized intersections and how that will be explored as part of the traffic study. Mancino: Okay. So you will be looking at that issue, good. Not on the collector but on the loop street, and Dave I'm directing this towards you and on some of the small cul-de-sacs. Why wouldn't it work to have parking on one side? — Hempel: I guess it would kind of depend on the actual use. We've had some discussions this _ afternoon, the applicant and the city engineer, regarding the parking on the south loop street 28 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 and the residential street. There is room for parking on one side of the street to permit two directional flows of traffic as well. We're concerned about pedestrian traffic both crossing the street at appropriate locations. Mancino: Sure, because they have to go through the two park streets and look both ways. Hempel: That's correct. So again it kind of falls back on what's being proposed on that site. If it's a lower use, maybe on street parking would be permissible. Mancino: Yes Fred. Hoisington: I think in this case I can certainly appreciate where everybody is coming from. I think there may be an issue related to safety and so forth but I think this concept is one that rather demands parking on the street and I think I would not want to see you throw that possibility out too soon without at least giving it at a chance to work because the whole village concept, in our downtowns, with the exception of Chan's downtown where we're not able to accommodate that, and many resort centers and so forth have that and that's what gives them their quaint, unique character. In addition to pulling the buildings up to the street and so forth. All these things go together to make it a much more acceptable place for people to walk in rather than simply drive to and then go someplace else. And on street parking canbe veryhelpful in that respect. All I'm saying is, hopefully we don't throw that away yet until we at least explore it very, very carefully because I think that's a very important part of what may occur here. Mancino: Okay. And maybe it's the concept of having pedestrian areas where cars can't park so you can cross the street there and work both ways. You know that. What else about traffic? My only other concern about the retail and a fair amount of, and it may even, yeah mostly retail, and being pedestrian friendly, is when we have retail and we have these big parking lots and we have small children getting out of the car, I think there needs to be in that particular parking lot some designated pedestrian walkway to the retail area. And I don't know if that's, if it's just painted on asphalt or if it's a little built up area. If there's an actual walkway that takes pedestrians from out in the middle of that big parking lot and invites you into the retail. So I would like to see that concept investigated. Anyone else have any other? Mehl: One other parking related item. I did talk a little, or I did see here where there was going to be some underground parking proposed. I guess I was curious as to how much and where that's going to take place and with the lake and the wetlands nearby, you know will the ground water table allow for underground parking without having a big problem? 29 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Mancino: I think that that's something you'll just have to deal with later on in the process. At the conceptual level, I think the underground parking is a good idea and will help keep the existing topography but I'm sure that you'll have to do tests. Soils tests to make sure that we can actually put the underground parking in. Moving on to environmental issues. Any concerns from commissioners on the wetland vegetation. Some of the old mature trees in that area. Slopes. Where do you want to conceptually what is important and how would you like to see those dealt with as far as the, I think the applicant said that they would very much like to keep the east/west slope that's in the upper part of the site. Is that important to us? And in other areas, what's of value? Jeff. Farmakes: Well, as proposed here obviously some of this development is beyond the wetlands. It's down to Lake Susan. We saw some photographs from some other developments that there was a river of mud going into Lake Susan. I think obviously the development that we have adjacent to large bodies of water in particular, we should be concerned about. But the city does have current ordinances in place. We have discussed briefly about strengthening those ordinances in regard to development that takes place — adjacent to bodies of water. Sensitive bodies of water also Lake Susan is in no great help either. So that's an issue. As far as the ETA, that sort of thing, I have no objections to an ETA study. That's not an issue condition for this thing as far as killing it or approving it. So I have no other objections to that other than following existing ordinances, other than in regards to the runoff and grading issue next to a sensitive body of water. I would support us dealing with that I guess ASAP. — Mancino: Bob. Skubic: The property received an environmental rating of .96. 1.0 requires an environmental impact statement. It seems like we're awfully close. I'd like to have some safety factor in there and being that we're early in the development here, is there a chance that, how far does that rating and is there a possibility that as we proceed, that may be re-assessed and an environmental impact statement will be required. I have a perception that environmental impact statements are a quite lengthy processes and how might that affect the proceedings? Aanenson: I guess the staffs position on that is that we would be the jurisdiction that would review it. The EIS and we believe that what we would flush out as part of the EAW is pretty — thorough. I'm not sure we'd accomplish anything more based on, you know we're one of the few communities that take the storm water management plan to the level that we do as far as our review and the tree ordinances. The ordinances that we have in place. I'm not sure we'd — really address any more issues. Certainly you have the opportunity, if there is something else that you want to address specifically beyond the scope of the EA document that you feel _ wasn't addressed, you certainly have the opportunity to make that a condition. 30 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Mancino: What's the difference between the two Kate? Aanenson: It's really the level of scoping that you do. Additional data that you would provide, and I'm not sure that based on our ordinance, that you'd really be getting any additional information that you wouldn't in the environmental assessment. Mancino: Then why do they have a certain criteria for after a 1.0 you have to go to the next document? Hoisington: Well generally the purpose of the EAW is to determine whether you need an EIS. Mancino: Oh, okay. Hoisington: And what would likely happen in this case, Kate's exactly right. The likelihood is you will not need an EIS on this site because virtually all of the significant issues will have been addressed with the EAW and you won't be able to really find much more when you get - right down to it so to order or to request an EIS at this point...you're going to get a lot of material. More than you want from an EAW and you'll know just about everything there is to know about this site. Aanenson: If there's something missing, then we certainly would ask them to do it. Additional information. Mancino: Okay, thank you. Skubic: Thank you. Mancino: Craig. Peterson: Part of my thought process is, and whenever you consider rezoning any area, is what is the compelling reason to do so. Clearly in this area that is sensitive, that has an ambience to it as defined with the trees and the sloping and the ridge lines, that part of the impedance behind I guess myself recommending a change in zoning would be that the ability to improve or at a minimum maintain some of those issues I just mentioned. Whether we, obviously this is premature but it's a matter of how much can we save of the topography and if we come in in the retail areas and flatten them out, which I don't think is the goal maybe mentioned here but it's a matter of how much we can save. The more we can save, the more the compelling reason to rezone I guess is one perspective I would have. That's about it. 31 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Mancino: One of the statements that the applicant made in the report that we got said it is the overall intent that the ponds development will retain the major hardwoods and steep — slopes and ponds which give this site it's intrinsic value. And I take that to heart so I will be looking for, in detail, major hardwoods staying. Steep slopes. And ponds so that we do keep the, I think it was again in the applicant's report that 20% of this site is in wetlands or some — sort of water and at the end of the development, I'd like to keep that figure at 20%. Brad Johnson: It will be higher probably. Mancino: Or higher, thank you. The topography change, the rolliness to it is what makes it and I applaud the applicant for putting that in. Thank you. I think the next issue is architectural design and asking or talking a little bit about the vernacular. Of course we all had to go to our dictionaries to say what does vernacular mean. So I think there will be some talk about that. And a country village look. Again to us, what does that mean? Comparing Chanhassen here to Carmel and Monterey. Little stretch. So what does that really mean and I think that those are the things that we'll kind of talk about and want to know more about at — this point. Craig, would you like to lead off on architectural and what you would like to see. Peterson: You pretty well paraphrased my whole comments right in your intro. It's a matter of the points that were listed by the developer early on, the areas, I close my eyes and try to picture 50th and France and Como area and other areas within the Minneapolis, St. Paul metro area and I'm having a hard time conceptualizing that. I can only offer a vision of — almost a townhouse style of retail where it's multi level connected, that I've seen in other areas that would be somewhat small in nature and inter connected with the street system, walking system, excuse me that you had mentioned earlier Nancy that would seem to fit — within the trees and certainly not the larger block development as far as retail. So I guess as I perceive it without listening to a great deal of feedback from the developer yet, I guess I perceive a much smaller retail area that, or in the few thousand square feet range each, — interconnected with a walkway and with the underground parking. I think they're probably comparing the underground parking to 50th and France as maybe the parking in back of the retail as you walk down that, if you're familiar with that area, with no parking in the front and the parking in the back so. I guess I'm still searching to get a good idea what it is. I'm sitting here just guessing as, if retail...what I would like to see. Something similar to what I mentioned I guess. Mancino: And conceptually in size? — Peterson: Conceptually in size is smaller units versus the larger area. The more intimate. I look at Carmel and Monterey and I see those areas. If you try to compare those. Those are the smaller, boutique style retail shops that, again the viability of having those in Chanhassen 32 — — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 is beyond my level of knowledge but that's how I close my eyes and think of that. The developer will have to obviously present, and maybe staff has had discussions with them as to the different types of retail that has been presented as possibilities to go in here. I'd be interested to hear that, if any has been discussed. — Mancino: Bob. Skubic: Okay...imagine what this would be like but we certainly have a desire to have this — compliment, supplement existing downtown area and the comp plan and the Highway 5 plan that directs smaller retail stores in this area. Time and time again the statement have been made that we are not seeking the big box stores here. I do wonder how this will supplement — and compliment the existing downtown area, being that this is different. I like the village concept, even though I'm not really sure what it is but they're talking about on street parking and small specialty shops. That's different than what we have. Does that really compliment — or not? That's beyond me. Mancino: How does that work? Having the village look and the concept right across from a central business district which doesn't have that, or at this point. Hoisington: But it has some of the same characteristics that they're intending here and if — there's a concept that's really strong and important here, I think we need to give them the benefit of the doubt on it as to what they're proposing to do because they're trying to create something that's very much in keeping with what we were trying to do in the Vision 2002. — But we had the existing buildings and so forth to live with here too and so we weren't able to, we aren't and we never will be able to accomplish everything that we'd like to see there. A walk around kind of downtown. Well, it's going to be difficult for people to walk across the highway into the present downtown or vice versa. But on the other hand, I think the integrity of this whole concept depends on them being able to do it. I'd say if you don't want them to — do something of this nature, then I'm not sure what value there is in extending retail on the other side of the street. I'd like to press it even further. I'd like to encourage, and Kate and I talked about this and Bob, the possibility of even considering anyway some second level — occupancies that might involve multi-family. Apartments and to do so with some really neat stuff so you've really got a nice village concept here. I would only like to stretch them as far as we can stretch them to get a truly urban space here. That's an interesting place to shop — and interesting place to live and the people are more than interested to come to and that really truly becomes part of what we envisioned downtown to become. — Mancino: How does the, if you did that concept of putting the multi-family over the retail in that northern, the most northern, how does that. 33 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Hoisington: It may not be the most northern because it's possible that some of it might occur there but that's where the hotel and restaurant might go and so there might still be some — opportunities for some mixed use within that corner but the 7.4 acre retail area especially, I think there's the true core of this village where we could expect to have on street parking. We could have truly mixed use. Minimizing the parking areas by requiring tiered parking and that sort of thing. I think it could potentially work out. Mancino: And then go east for me. How do we resolve the high density next to single family. Hoisington: That's the harder part for me to deal with is the area that goes to the east and I guess we need to think about that a little bit more. I'm not ready to snap anything off over there so. — Mancino: Okay. Jeff. Farmakes: I don't have any enlightenment on traditional architecture or vernacular character. That holds plenty of fog for me. I'll wait until the next phase when they actually bring something forward that I can look at. But I mean that's pretty typical when you try to — describe something that isn't there, or if you can use, it's kind of like 50th and France. Well 50th and France is 1930's downtown facade that kind of survived. It got lost for a while and then there's little independent buildings connecting to one another and it gives it a certain — kind of character. I'm a little dubious about whether or not we actually would wind up with that or if we would wind up with some sort of fake facade on that and in turn lose it's charm and kind of look like a facade on a fast food place or something. We're going to have a hard time finding a sardine factory to rehab here so I still, in reading all that, I'm not exactly sure what we're going to wind up with and I'll wait to see a drawing. Mancino: So there's no particular direction that you want to give? Farmakes: I would go back to the same thing. Anything that comes before here in — development of this city, I would love to see the best quality materials used and with materials of permanence. Not something that chips, peels or falls apart. Mancino: Brick, glass? Farmakes: Brick, glass and other details. Mancino: Stone. 34 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Farmakes: And I like small. I have no problem with small. I'm not exactly sure how that fits into the scope or the reality of retail and I still, since we're conceptual, I can gab about that for a few seconds but I'm not sure if we need an eighth video tape store or, I'd have to be convinced somehow that again the community is mix of ratio and it's not our job to be market directors but for instance there's a restaurant across the street that went out of business. Now that may be because of bad management decisions. The question is is that Chanhassen has an awful lot of sit down capability for restaurants. We can sit down pretty much half the population here for lunch. Pm not sure if what will come in as a service for our community is going to be an addition, rather than a duplication and that's at some point I think something that we need to address when we look at this scope of retail. That's the end of that. Mancino: Don. Mehl: Like some of you I also went to the dictionary to look up vernacular and it kind of told me that it's the common building style of a period or place. And I thought, or kind of what I thought it was but when you look at it it can involve dozens or maybe hundreds of possibilities. Somewhere along the line here we're all going to have to agree on what that is and is it going to be consistent throughout the entire development or is it going to change throughout the development. The other thing I think we have to look at architecturally too is the conceptually look at how the buildings on the north portion are going to be shaped and how they're going to be designed because Highway 5 is going to be a major viewing point into that whole development. And in effect that whole northern portion is going to be a big window looking into the development and I think whatever we do architecturally with those buildings, I think they have to look interesting and charming and whatever, all the way around the building. You know not only from the front, the street side, but also from the back and the side because along that northern portion they're going to be seen from all directions and they have to look friendly and it has to look inviting. I think some thought has to go into that. Mancino: Thank you. I don't have too much more to add. I will wait and see when this 20,000 square foot building looks like a country village setting. I don't understand that. Is that doable? Hoisington: They say it is. Mancino: Okay. So that is my question. I agree very much with Commissioner Peterson on the, I see smaller type buildings. Smaller footprints. 5,000 square foot. 2,000 to 5,000 square foot. I don't know if that makes it. And so the reality has to set in on us too. I know that the Highway 5 task force, the Vision 2002 talked about again, which is in the applicant's 35 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 report not wanting to see big boxes in this area. And yet that's what I think of when I think of high volume retailers. — Hoisington: One of the things, when you look at 50th and France, I think the impression is that there are lots of small buildings up there and it has a very nice scale to it. -" Mancino: Yes. Hoisington: And yet there are some very large buildings. Lunds and some of these buildings actually the ones on the northwest corner of 50th and France are all kind of one building, but they give the impression of being small buildings so I think your direction that it should appear small is absolutely right on. I mean that's what this whole village concept is about. But I think again, we need to give them the benefit of the doubt that they can make a 20,000 square foot building look small. I guess I'm not really willing to set a limit on how big they can be but certainly I want the appearance to be that this is a small village. Not a large, bunch of large buildings. — Farmakes: What comes to mind when you're thinking of 50th and France, it's not the Americana building and not the Lund's building but the little individual stores that go up and — down and those are individual buildings. Hold overs from the depression years, many of them. Buildings built in the 20's and 30's with the little different facades and really almost unusable retail space. Those are the mind images that come into place but you're right, there are some larger buildings that I'm thinking of the retail strong that is now I think Chico's or whatever it is and the...and many of those buildings don't function terribly well as retail buildings. The typical retail is as big as you can get it. As convertible as you can get it — because things change over the years and buildings don't necessarily, they're not built to last necessarily because the concept of retail changes so much. So unfortunately the community's not going anywhere so the question comes up, what makes sense for the foreseeable future. — Mancino: And working downtown I can tell you, boy what a change. Whether it's Gavidae. Whether it's the whole downtown, there is so much that is vacant now in retail and — everything's just closed up and there's nothing down there. It's all gone to Mall of America so I have some concerns about what will work here in longevity of time so. Any other issues or comments to make on any part of this concept? Staff is there anything that we haven't addressed that you would like to hear from us? Now we need to make a motion. And thank goodness the Chairwoman can't. Do I have a motion for this conceptual plan? Staff has made recommendations. I just have one question to ask people are looking to make a motion. Staff, you didn't put in your conditions anything about, are you just implying that the comprehensive plan changes? Does it say that in one of these conditions? — 36 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Generous: No. That would be at the next stage. Mancino: That would be at the next stage. When we see it a preliminary plat? Generous: Yes. And they would actually request the amendment. Mancino: So it's not at this stage, thank you. And is there a way at the next stage, when I read the Hoisington report, to phase in the comprehensive plan changes? Hoisington: Well I think there is and I think we just need a bit of attention to how that takes place. What we want to do, we want guarantees essentially that what they say they're going to do, they're going to do and so we just have to figure out a way to make sure that happens. Aanenson: Let me back up. You're saying, talk about phasing in the changes? Mancino: Well I think there's. Aanenson: There's phasing but I think they want to know what... Mancino: Phasing in the comprehensive plan changes. Hoisington: How to address, how to amend the comprehensive plan and how it effects the zoning change. Mancino: And you had suggested in your report of phasing that in. Hoisington: Yes. Farmakes: I'll make a motion that we table this. Planning Commission table conceptual approval of PUD #92-1 dated October 23, 1995 for the following reasons. I think some of the land issues. The land use issue is a fundamental issue of which all the rest is built upon. And I don't think I have in front of me a compelling demonstrated need for this and I'd like to see it. I think we should have that. We go with whichever one of the adoptions we have here because the real determination is the same issue that we've always argued with this piece of property from the beginning. How much of it should be retail? And I'm not sure that I've heard anything further on it other than this one report and addressing the issue of parking being the main culprit for the increase in percentage as to where we are with that. Mancino: So can you be more specific with your direction to staff if we do table it. What you want them to provide us with. 37 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 Farmakes: Well I think Kate mentioned it. That they have additional information that they can provide us with in regards to calculating that. And I don't want to keep on going around and around in a circle but the issue, the fundamental issue is, seems to me is that whether it's appropriate amount of square footage for a defined central business district with that population between 30,000 and 35,000. Chanhassen filled up and if it extends beyond that, — what is the purpose of being a regional draw. Is that what we want? Mancino: Okay. Is there a second to the motion? — Peterson: I second that. Mancino: Any discussion? Peterson: To further Jeff s comments, part of my concerns are, I'm not yet comfortable with the transition from residential and the rezoning of those residential areas. I think as we mentioned earlier, I'd like to explore the possibility of relocating some of those residential — areas or switching the office to residential, etc, etc. Clearly no one wants to have next to their home, single family home, necessarily a high density building. But yet somebody has to. It can't be in the middle of an island at Lake Susan. And unfortunately we're going to have to address that and we're going to be compelled to do so eventually as this project proceeds. And I think the residents to a certain degree have to understand that. Hopefully they will when the time comes. But what's presented I think this evening is not enough for — me again to be comfortable that as it's presented conceptually even, that the relationship between the residential and the retail and the rezoning of the residential has adequately been addressed. Nor does it seem to have been adequately addressed with the residents to at least — my satisfaction. Farmakes: The key point in the relationship also to the critical mass issue that you discussed. To what point is the commercial area not viable because it's been restricted and obviously that will define what the transitional issue is by simple matter of space and of course land use. This is a option in front of us. I believe we had four options over a period of time that we — looked at, including this one, and correct me if I'm wrong but you've been here and you've heard this. Are you comfortable that that has been defined for you the need for retail? And we very well may need it but it sure hasn't in my mind been quantified by anybody. Other than the fact it talks about we'll run out of it and this will give us enough for 5 more years. What does that mean? I don't know. And if I say, I vote yes for this, I would want to know that. I would want to feel comfortable that I know that because we have in the past denied other types of developments outside of the central business district and that would tell me that we knew what that meant. That we knew where we were going with this. And I've always _ 38 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 used that rationale simply because that's what our professional staff city recommended to us. Now if we're going to change that, I'd like to know why we're going to change that. Mancino: Any other discussion? Farmakes moved, Peterson seconded that the Planning Commission table the conceptual planned unit development review for Villages on the Ponds, PUD #95-2. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mancino: When will this come back, just so. Aanenson: It's really dependent upon the applicant. I'm assuming that he'd probably want to meet with the neighbors again so we'll go ahead and notify everybody again. Mancino: Okay, you will be notified when this will come back in front of the Planning Commission and again it will still be at the conceptual stage when you come back. Thank you for coming. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Skubic noted the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated October 4, 1995 as presented. CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Aanenson: On October 9th the City Council gave final plat approval to the Forest Meadows subdivision subject to resolution of compensation for the park. They also gave final plat approval for Lake Susan Hills townhouses. Jasper Homes and they approved the site plan for the expansion of the Pillsbury facility. They also requested that they complete it by November 15th. They had requested December 1st. Since November 15th is the time that generally the asphalt plants close. They also requested that they give the next two City Council meetings, to give an update. So in other words, they're kind of progressing and keeping their feet to the fire so to speak to get this worked out. So hopefully the issue will be solved and we won't have trucks on Audubon Road anymore. Also I included in your packet the Livable Communities Act. Certainly a timely topic tonight. I have prepared for the City Council meeting Monday night some goals. Recommended goals. The last page of this report shows you where Chanhassen, the city index and I prepared those goals for the Council and given them some information. As I indicated earlier, we do now, based on the GAS we were able to combine or compile our different land uses into a little bit of a number crunching so we do have better information as far as actual acreage of different land uses so some of that information we can prepare for you as far as where we are in the development. This ties into the industrial study that we're working on and then ties to this commercial retail 39 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 and there's some other broader issues that we'll have to look at so that ties into the Livable Communities Act. We were able to show exactly what our development trends are and it was — very informative. So after the input from the City Council we'll certainly bring it back to you and show you what the direction is because a lot of this is contingent upon implementation. And that's going to be the work of the Planning Commission and the Council to decide what — strategies they're going to take and a lot of it involves recommended land use changes or tools to provide opportunities for different types of densities and some of those things we've talked about here too. The PUD ordinance. Increasing density bonuses under the PUD and — those sorts of things. So we will be coming back to you with those strategies. Mancino: Is this going to happen to land that has already been guided in the comprehensive plan and we're going to go in and change some of that land use? Aanenson: Well I think there's an opportunity and we've talked about lot sizes. We've talked about the PUD. We've talked about twin homes. You know that helps under our low density. Maybe there's appropriate places to do twin homes. Everybody gets nervous about it — but there's places where we've done, the Chaparral neighborhood we've done twin homes, four plexes and those work well so there's opportunities I think to where we can push the densities. We've talked about this before. Ladd's kind of championed this cause and when people come in here and we try to push them down, instead of building to the limit and that's going to cause us some problems down the road because as Ladd's pointed out, where do we take that density that we've lost. There's not an opportunity to replace it somewhere else. So one of the strategies would be certainly to at least keep people to build to the density, the top end of that density because we're supposed to be at 10 to 11 and we've averaging 6 units an acre so we're way below what we should be. And it goes back to what the Met Council's... — increasing our urban service area, we need to be intensifying within. And that doesn't mean that there's not an opportunity for larger lots. There certainly is. But what we're looking at is other opportunities to provide some more infill development, and that's what Fred was talking — about and we certainly felt strongly with this previous development, that we think there's an opportunity to provide something as long as you've got the retail, there's some intensity and even building on top of those. Try to get a little bit more creative. And so I think hopefully — this thing will evolve into an exciting opportunity to do some different land uses. Mancino: And that would be an increase because we hadn't planned on high density in that area? Aanenson: Right. And again it ties into the mass traffic component and proximity to the rest of the downtown, and services and work and that whole concept. Mancino: Okay. Any ongoing items? 40 — Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 ONGOING ITEMS. Aanenson: Yeah, the industrial land use study, we were hoping to put that on at this time but actually I spent a lot of time working on this Livable Communities Act which I didn't have programmed in my work schedule so it's certainly an issue that Rottlund is concerned about. Our investigation of that but like I indicated earlier, we do now have an opportunity to look at where we are with our industrial property and we'll put that on the next agenda. There is quite a few items on the next agenda so it will be a lengthy one next time. Tires Plus is back on. Mancino: Whatever happened to them? I mean they really wanted to come back right away. Aanenson: The City's developing that so yeah, some wetland issues. Yeah. Mancino: On what property? Aanenson: The wetland was a little bit bigger so we're working through that issue. And then the other one I told you was the DataServ. The front of that was sold off to CFM. They'll becoming in with that. With two parcels. There will be four parcels. They're coming in with two. The northern portion there. There's a wetland issue there. A larger wetland than they thought so we're trying to resolve that. We don't want to do a site plan review and then find out that actually that wetland completely changes the design so that's where we're at right now. Tentatively it's on the agenda. We published it but it may come off if we can't resolve that. We don't want to go through the review process and then have to take it back again. Mancino: What kind of us and who's coming in? Aanenson: CFM. What it is is an industrial kind of spec space is what they're looking at. It can be carved up in a number of different ways. Office, warehouse components. They do have docking facilities. What it is and what you're seeing what we don't have a lot of in this community, they're filling a nitch that there's a lot of demand for and that's for people that kind of want the office/showroom type which is kind of quasi-retail. You have an office and you may have some retail component with it. What this means, it's not going to be one big user. You're going to have signs and, but the architecture looks very nice. I think it's something. Farmakes: Is it like...as a showroom for manufacturing? Aanenson: No. It could be a lot of different things. It could be a carpet warehouse. It could be somebody that just needs a small space of their own to do, that they need shipping 41 Planning Commission Meeting - October 18, 1995 and receiving. Maybe they don't have any retail there but they need a shipping and receiving spot. It could be a wholesale dealer. It could be a lot of different things. It could be a — lighting studio. It could be... Generous: NordicTrack. — Aanenson: NordicTrack. It could be a lot of different things. So what we don't have is a lot of that opportunity in this city. In Chanhassen for a small proprietor. Somebody like that. Start up business to find that kind of space so it could be snapped into different size users. But they've got enough interest now to build two buildings. But again I think you'll be happy _ with the architecture on that one. And DataSery will be coming in shortly for the rest of their building on their property too. Mancino: Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn? Peterson moved, Faimakes seconded to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at — 9:40 p.m. _ Submitted by Kate Aanenson Planning Director Prepared by Nann Opheim — 42 — C QTY of \ CHANHASSEN �\ J 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: October 26, 1995 SUBJ: Director's Report On October 23, 1995,the City Council took the following action: 1. Final plat, plans and specifications and development contract approval was given for the Halla's at Great Plains Estates. 2. Conceptual and preliminary PUD approval for Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition. 6, 4 CITYOF -4. CHANHASSEN �-- 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: October 26, 1995 SUBJ: Gateway West Property Discussion of Comprehensive Plan Change At the Planning Commission meeting of September 6 and October 4, 1995, there was an open discussion of changing the comprehensive plan on the Gateway West property located on the southeast corner of Hwy. 5 and Hwy. 41. The staff's recommendation was to examine the city's goals and policies regarding the mix of land uses. If it is the recommendation that the land should remain industrial, then the commission will have to exam the development implications. Based on the fact that this area is located on two major collectors, and Highway 5 access, staff supports this area to remain industrial. Attached are the elements of the city's Comprehensive plan that related to this request. A PAS memo from 1992 compares land use for the 90's industrial land uses for suburbs averages about 7.5 percent. The 1991 comprehensive plan recommended about 8 percent industrial land. In comparing other communities, the industrial land use in Savage is 7.7 percent industrial city wide and 25.0 percent industrial in the urban area. In Burnsville,the industrial land use is 8%. If the land use designation on the Gateway property were to changed to residential. There is not another location to provide for the industrial land use loss. It is staff's opinion that instead of changing the land use designation on industrial land, that consideration should be given to upzoning existing residential land. As I have stated before, I believe that this should remain industrial consistent with the city's comprehensive plan of providing a diversified tax base. There are other opportunities to provide multifamily in the city on property all ready guided for residential development. There is not an area to provide additional industrial zoning. eo ioeo a) C? O O O - a) a) r cc! /O �On o O - L O c/11 T W CO In T U Q D CI r r15 _ a) �p a) L �� CO0 (OV N - aS CO iiiE nc•) r M Z d • "' W W 0 / - W 1.� 0 Q cc ^ W �_Y - L0 CO0 0 0 0 Cr) 0 0 0 0 C .01- co 1Cr) (O 0 — 00 W , a IOn v CO v aa)). cOo CO CO a) I(n — NOM (V (Od) ,:if� CNtrV C7 U I� T r 0 I) N CO O r CO M QNr elalWIhlnN r• f� C7 T N .- r y T Cr T ` - J 1 co r � o � o1- O _ C.-) � a) o a 0 CI 0 73cO -0 c4 O L co QJ J I J 'CII M172 -c) a) is o s to a) IU Q �.rl a) C (n C C C f m �I a) \l E .0 ,U � LE cn (7) (7) co W D A o 4- as 7 Q) a) a) a) . C 0100 -,a. cc cc cc CCM (AD Rg�EC.E ith c - ( c7C. RLL ETV i-iJ SEP p �$ i SEP 0 o 1A ST 199 • 24 Fi A ' YL) l;t-t�-+Ivnr��jEN • AMERICAN / Al PLANNING ASSOCIATION S Residential 42% Residential 52% Residential 4090 i-•: Residential 48% Commercial 3r` Commercial Iii - Commercial 3cl Industrial 6% Commer 0% 40 Industrial 8%;� Public Use 37 "z Industrial 7% c# Industrl 10% Public Use 51,c :` kmia, Public Use 31% Public Use 32% hitmidi 1955 Large Cities 1992 Bringing Land-Use land-use map will have the most insight into what forces brought the city to its current form and where it may be Ratios Into the '90s heading in the future. Land-use ratios are most useful to planners and developers — By Christopher Harris involved in comprehensive planning and long-range development, because these data are necessary in Every municipality is responsible for guiding future growth. determining what mix of land uses should be encouraged in The challenge is creating an appropriate mix of residential, future decades.Also,developers building neotraditional — commercial,industrial,and public uses in the community. towns,planned communities,and large-scale mixed-use 10 One pivotal factor in this process is a solid understanding of developments on vacant land find ratios from other the current pattern of land uses within municipal boundaries. communities to be a good basis for land-use allocation. ._ Knowing what uses exist and what services are needed to It is interesting to note that the ratios from the planned provide for those uses can determine the type and location of community of Columbia, Maryland,which was built in the development that a municipality should plan for. early 1960s,nearly match all of the ratio averages from the This PAS Memo is a summary of a 1992 survey of 1992 survey. land-use ratios in 66 municipalities.The American Planning Association undertook this study in response to a Current Data are Important large number of requests that the Planning Advisory Service Development patterns change over time—even within a receives for an update a 1983 study. Part of this demand is decade—and land-use ratios need to be updated to reflect driven by the growing number of states that are mandating those changes accurately.This study will serve as an update cities and counties to do comprehensive planning.These to several surveys of land-use ratios done in preceding mandated plans must include an inventory of existing decades. land uses. The first major study was done by Harland Bartholomew Even in cities where planning is not required,there has and Jack Wood in 1955.They surveyed ratios over a 20-year been a significant number of comprehensive plan updates span and published their results in Land Uses In American in the last few years. Some of these communities may be Cities.Those ratios were used in a large number of the redoing their plan for the first time since the 701 era of federally funded 701 comprehensive plans. planning in the 1950s and 1960s.Land-use trends and A second study,by Eisner and Associates,examined ratios settlement patterns have changed significantly since that compiled between 1939 to 1985.The usefulness of this data time,causing noticeable changes in the land-use mix for comprehensive planning purposes is compromised by the and a need for updated ratios. fact that the researchers analyzed ratios over a 46-year span. Too many development trends altered land-use ratios over Who Uses Land-Use Ratios that period.Eisner's ranges include both pre-and post-World — Land-use ratios refer to the breakdown of various categories War II residential settlement patterns,which are vastly of land as a percentage of the total amount of land in a different. community. After a land-use survey,the results are mapped Yet another survey of 22 large American cities was done or entered into a computer and total land acreage for each in 1973.The results of that study were printed in Urban Land category is tallied. Policies and Land-use Control Measures(Vol. VI,Northern • Because the ratios are derived from acreage totals, America). they do not represent the spatial patterns of cities. Spatial Finally,the most recent comprehensive look at these ratios arrangements of land uses typically are portrayed on a land- was a 1983 survey by Gregory Longhini and Mike Sutton. — use map. Planners who understand both their land-use ratios Published by the APA,it quantified land-use ratios from 46 large and 22 small cities(See PAS Memo May 1983).Most course;a privately owned area might be an amusement park. of the land-use ratios in that survey were compiled between Transportation and utilities is the last public use 1978 and 1982. distinction.This includes rights-of-way,streets,alleys, airports,rail,transportation terminals,communication,pump Methodology stations,power stations,water facilities,and other similar _ Approximately a third of the information presented here uses. was discovered by reviewing many recent comprehensive Although the categories in this study were selected to plans in the APA library.Most of the data for small cities reduce discrepancies,the task of fitting each city's land-use were collected this way.The other two-thirds of the data, ratios into these two tables was still extremely difficult. — particularly for large cities,were collected through telephone To repeat: these are only generalizations. interviews. Unfortunately,the manipulation needed to reorganize Selection of cities for the study was based on two some of the cities' ratios has weakened the results slightly. variables: date of their land-use survey and their geographic For example,a small percentage of the communities did not location.Although some of the ratios used date back seven calculate the acreage of streets and right-of-ways.Sometimes years,the majority of the data were collected since 1989. transportation is completely ignored and other times only Almost every region in the country is represented. utilities,bus terminals,airports and the like are calculated as Land-use ratios are calculated as a percentage of the all of the transportation uses.In these cases,this category's developed land within communities.Therefore,agricultural ratio is typically under five percent. and vacant lands were not figured in.This results in a more Other inconsistencies arise because specific uses are t accurate representation of the breakdown of land uses in handled very differently among communities,according to the urbanized portion of each city. different rationales.For example,a recreational facility such One problem with the data is that nearly every city as a miniature golf course or a driving range is certainly a responded with different land-use categories.Tucson, recreational use. But,by some definitions,it is also a Arizona,breaks its developed land into 21 categories. business use;after all,it is earning a profit. Although Baltimore responded with only five categories.For this the definition of recreational uses in this study includes study,the data have been reorganized into the following four for-profit uses,some cities include these uses in the land-use categories:residential,commercial,industrial, commercial category. Some cities consider railroads to and public uses.Public uses are further broken into three be a transportation use,as does this study,while others subcategories: parks and recreation,institutional,and consider them an industrial use. transportation and utilities.Limiting the categories was Mixed-use developments create yet another problem. necessary to reduce the discrepancies between uses as For the purposes of this study,these percentages are figured defined by each city and,for comparative purposes,to use into whichever use dominates the development,particularly 0-1 categories that resemble those found in APA's 1983 study. commercial,residential,or industrial.For example, small structures,such as an apartment over a retail shop,will most Details of Each Category likely be categorized according to the use occupying the The residential category includes single-family detached ground level—that is,commercial. units,two-or more family attached units,apartments, Although mixed-use developments are not included as a condominiums,and mobile homes.Noted in the table is the category in this study,more cities are beginning to include percentage of single-family detached housing as a percentage them in their ratios.Tampa,Florida;Bellevue,Washington; of the entire developed city. and Frisco,Colorado,responded to this survey with mixed- The commercial category includes all types of trade and use ratios.In two of the three cases,the percentages were services.The retail portion includes uses such as strip malls, minuscule.Tampa,Florida,has multiple mixed-use small and large scale shopping centers,and wholesaling categories such as suburban mixed-use,which covers outlets. Also included are office buildings and business parks 13 percent of the total developed land. that have financial or administrative functions.Other general The process of recalculating data to serve the purpose commercial uses are restaurants,grocery stores,and repair of this study is the last major methodological problem. businesses. A majority of the ratios for each city had to be recalculated The industrial category includes both heavy and light in order to eliminate the percentages of land that is either industry.These uses are characterized as construction, vacant,agricultural,or non-improved open space such as manufacturing,warehousing and distribution,resource forest land.This,combined with rounding the ratios, is the extraction,and,in some instances,high technology research. reason some of the percentages do not equal 100 percent. The public use category is the cumulative percentage of _1 institutional uses,parks and recreation,and transportation and Residential Uses utility facilities.Institutional uses are those owned by the Since the first study of land-use ratios in 1955,residential local,state,or federal government,such as schools,hospitals, uses have occupied the most land in small and large cities. and police and fire stations.Churches,synagogues,and In 1955,40 percent and 42 percent of the land in central ..J fraternal organizations,which are quasi-public facilities, and satellite cities,respectively,was used for residential also are included in the institutional category. purposes. In the 1973 study of large cities,40 percent of land The second public use category is parks and recreation, was residential.The boom in suburban growth in the 1950s 110_1comprising private or publicly owned areas used by citizens and 1960s increased these percentages significantly.The in the community.A public area could be a municipal golf effects were evident in the 1983 study,where residential land increased to 48 percent of a city's developed land for both Christopher Harris is an APA research associate. large and small cities.The residential densities in large _1 2 I Eisner & Associates Studies, 1939-1985 breakdown within the residential category.Cities that offer breakdowns within the residential category tended to do it in Use Range of Percentages two different ways:number of families per unit(e.g.single- family and multifamily)or the number of units per acre. Residential 35-39% As expected,single-family housing is by far the largest Commercial 4.8-5 portion of any city's housing stock.This type consumes an Industrial 10-11 average of 73 percent of the total housing stock in the 12 cities for which this information was available.The averages — Streets 20-26 for multifamily and mobile homes are 14 percent and 3 Open Space,Schools,Parks 10-18 percent,respectively.The data range for multifamily housing was from 8 percent to 41 percent of land used for housing. The range for mobile homes was much smaller: one-half western cities are typically lower than large eastern cities. of 1 percent to 7 percent. For example the residential ratio in Long Beach,California, is 79 percent.In Pittsburgh,it is only 28 percent,according Commercial Uses — to the 1983 survey. Since the 1950s and 1960s,commercial uses,which include Suburban sprawl also explains the residential ratio office and retail,have occupied an increasing amount of increase in small towns from 42 percent in 1955 to 52 percent acreage in both large and small cities.The land-use ratios in in 1992.An increased level of automobile ownership led to 1955 were 3.32 percent for the central cities and 2.54 percent — the creation of the bedroom community.Employment, for the satellite cities.By 1992,these averages increased culture,and goods and services were not necessarily needed significantly,to 10 percent. in these communities as long as the nearby major city offered The biggest factor in this large percentage increase is — them.Therefore,residential uses predominate the developed parking. Parking has become a major regulatory concern land. over the last few decades,as both large and small cities have These high ratios of residential land should begin become dominated by cars. An entire parking lot is to decline due to a combination of many economic, considered a commercial use.Many uses require parking that — demographic,and regulatory trends that are decreasing effectively doubles the acreage of commercial land. demand for single-family detached homes.The 20-percent- Unlike in large cities,where suburban office migration has down conventional mortgage is no longer affordable for the caused commercial land-use ratios to plateau at 10 percent, average U.S.household.According to U.S.Housing Markets this ratio continues to climb in smaller cities.The Land Use — (January 29, 1990),a household needs an average down Institute estimated in 1986 that 57.3 percent of the country's payment of 28 percent.The cost of the average home from total office market was located outside major downtowns. 1988 to 1990 increased 8.4 percent,or$11,000,while the This was an increase of nearly 10 percent from 1981.Height — average income of a household has increased only 4.8 restrictions and a strong bias toward low density development percent. exist in these areas,so buildings cover more acres. Quickly rising land cost is another major factor Also contributing to the higher commercial ratio is the contributing to the inconsistency between housing cost and rise of average square footage allowed per office worker, — income, according to an article in Building Sciences according to a 1991 Price Waterhouse Study.Between 1942 (November 1987). Land costs are now one-quarter of the cost and 1979,the average work space increased from 110 square of a single-family home.Thirty years ago,that figure was feet to 199 square feet.In 1988,only nine years later,that only 10 percent. average had crept up to 342 square feet. — Demographic changes are reducing demand for single- Currently,trends between office and retail development family homes as well.Couples are purchasing houses at differ greatly.The construction of office buildings has an older age and having fewer children.Builder magazine decreased considerably in most cities since the late 1980s — reported in January 1992 that the percentage of home buyers due to high vacancy rates. But according to Real Estate who are first-time buyers has dropped significantly from 47.7 Perspectives magazine,retail overbuilding continued at a rate percent to 34.6 percent in 1990.Furthermore,the 1990 nearly double its absorption rate well into the recession in Census indicates that household size declined from 3.33 1990.The common types of retail development—strip centers — persons in 1960 to 2.62 persons in 1989.Ultimately,this and regional malls—consume large amounts of land.Given means less space will be required for each family.In fact, that these development styles are being used in small and surveys conducted recently by the National Apartment large cities alike,the commercial ratios in both sizes of cities Association have noted an increase in apartment living. can be expected to increase. — Zoning trends have become an issue as well.Recent environmental protection regulations encourage development Industrial Districts patterns such as cluster and planned unit developments.Also, In large cities,the amount of land used by industrial firms — courts are ruling against five-acre estate lot sizes and other peaked in the late 1970s or early 1980s,and has recently been large minimum lot size zoning when the effect is to exclude declining.In 1955,the average industrial land-use ratio was certain income groups. 6.4 percent.The 1983 survey indicated an industrial land-use ratio of 12 percent,while this current study shows a ratio Breakdown by Housing Type of only 10.5 percent. In small cities and suburban areas, Although this study provides general land-use ratio the industrial land-use ratio has remained within a third percentages for residential land as a whole,some of a percentage point since 1955, at around 7.5 percent. communities may be interested in the housing stock The trend most affecting industrial land allocation is the 3 t country's economic shift from manufacturing and other An example is Hoffman Estates,Illinois,a Chicago _ heavy industry to a service industry.This may be causing suburb,where institutional uses cover only 3.4 percent of ; what Coldwell Banker identified in 1990 as the highest ever developed land.In El Paso,Texas,the percentage is 17 national vacancy rate(6.9 percent)of industrial buildings percent.El Paso is a county seat and therefore must offer larger than 100,000 square feet. the entire spectrum of institutional uses to the region. This shift has led to the conversion of many industrial buildings into residential loft or commercial office space, Transportation and Utility Uses thus decreasing the industrial ratio. Transportation and utility uses have consistently covered the Differentiating between industrial and commercial uses second highest amount of acreage in a city since these data — has also become more difficult.For example,many light were recorded.As evident from the data set,many cities do manufacturers also have service centers,showrooms,and not include streets and right-of-way in their acreage.These warehouses on the premises.Therefore,when ratios are cities therefore have disproportionately low transportation _ calculated,they are categorized as heavy commercial uses, land-use ratios.Because of this discrepancy,averages for not industrial uses. this category are not listed. As the ratios from the three studies show,economic The amount of land devoted to right-of-way increases restructuring has not affected the land-use ratios in suburban as a city's single-family housing stock increases.But — areas nearly as much as large cities,because heavy because many cities calculate streets into institutional and manufacturing never was a dominant force there. recreational uses, it is extremely difficult to pinpoint transportation land-use ratio trends.For the purpose of this Parks and Recreational Uses analysis,it is understood that streets and right-of-way — The following analysis is based primarily on improved parks constitute most of the transportation uses and utilities and open spaces that are maintained by public park districts category.The utilities and communication uses are usually a or municipalities. very tiny portion. For example,only one-half of a percent of _ Historically,the rule of thumb for calculating the number developed land in Austin,Texas,is occupied by utility uses. of acres of park land needed in a community is one acre of There are two major current planning issues that may land per 100 residents. However,for the past 40 years many affect future street and right-of-way ratios:the recently communities have fallen well short.In the 1955 study,the adopted Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency — percentage of park and recreation land for central and satellite Act(ISTEA)and neotraditional town planning.ISTEA maiks cities was 7 percent and 4.4 percent of developed land, the first time that the federal government plans to tackle respectively.Eleven small communities from the 1983 congestion problems head-on by improving the management survey list an average percentage of only 4 percent.These of existing transportation systems and coordinating data are difficult to compare,in part because,in many transportation planning with land-use planning.Until now, il communities,parks,playgrounds,and athletic fields on the solution has been to increase road capacity.Successful school property,as well as vacant lots,are calculated into the implementation of high-occupancy vehicle lanes,bus lanes, — institutional ratios rather than the parks and recreation ratio. ridesharing,encouraging the use of alternate modes of travel, This makes the ratios appear as though less land is available and coordinated land-use and transportation policies,could for parks and recreation than really exists. mean that right-of-way and transportation use ratios will hold The explosive growth in single-family homes also had an steady even if population increases. — interesting effect on the use of public parks. Most suburban homeowners have their own private front and back yards. Words of Caution This explains,in part,why suburbs will typically have a It is not recommended that these ratios be used as urban lower percentage of land in the parks category.Manassas, land-use models.Any city predicting its future land-use — Virginia,an outlying suburb of Washington,D.C.,has only requirements solely on the ratios of other cites could be 1 percent of its land as parks while in St. Paul,Minnesota, seriously misguided.Every city has different factors this use covers 12 percent of the developed land. affecting its land-use distribution. Instead of considering — these numbers rules of thumb,consider them examples of Institutional Uses land-use ratios that exist in cities today. Look closely at The percentage of land occupied by institutional uses has what factors affect your own city's land use before increased slightly in the last 50 years.The Bartholomew comparing your ratios to these data. — study indicated that central and satellite cities had about 10 percent of their land devoted to institutional uses.The 1983 The PAS Memo is a monthly publication for subscribers to the Planning Advisory survey showed that the ratio of institutional uses in small Service,a subscription research service of the American Planning Association: — Israel Stollman,Executive Director;Frank S.So,Deputy Executive Director. towns was 13 percent.No averages were calculated for this study.However,the data do not differ drastically from the ThePAS Memo is produced bye APA staff inChicago.Research rch and y writing by Research Department staff:Marys Morris,Editor.Production earlier studies. by Publications Department staff:Cynthia Cheski,Assistant Editor. Large cities typically will have higher institutional land- Dennis McClendon.Design Director. use ratios.Uses such as hospitals,churches,schools,and Copyright©1992 by American Planning Association,1313 E.60th St.,Chicago,IL 60637.The American Planning Association has headquarters offices at 1776 government buildings are all directly related to the Massachusetts Ave.,N.W..Washington.DC 20036. population;as the number of people grow,so will the acreage All rights reserved.No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any iik of these institutional lands.Other institutional uses are not so form or by any means,electronic or mechanical,including photocopying,recording. clear cut: state capitolgrounds,museums,civic centers,and or by any information storage and retrieval system,without permission in writing P from the American Planning Association. colleges and universities are all uses that serve a regional Printed on recycled paper,including 50-70%recycled fiber market and are therefore more common in large cities. and 10%postconsumer waste. 4 Land-Use Ratios (in percent) for Communities Under 100,000 Residential Right City or town Population (single-family) Comm'l Ind'l Public Inst'l Parks of way , Aiken,S.C. 20,000 - 65%(60%) 9% 1% 25% 9% 16% NA Ambler,Pa. 6,600 63 11 10 16 3 4 9 - Asheville,N.C. 62,000 69(62) 12 5 14 9 5 NA Bellevue,Wash. 88,000 65(57) 10 4 18 7 11 NA Carlsbad,Calif. 51,000 57(40) 5 9 29 3 17 9 - Carrollton,Tex. 33,000 39(34) 30 17 15 5 10 NA Columbia,Md. 78,000 43 (32) 20(combined) 37 NA NA NA Costa Mesa,Calif. 88,000 51 (30) 12 15 22 13 9 NA Elgin,Ill. 72,000 37 5 4 54 10 12 32 El Monte,Calif. 79,000 57 15 15 13 5 1 7 - Evanston,Ill. 72,000 45 (30) 7 4 44 10 8 26 Fishkill,N.Y. 15,000 24(20) 4 1 70 25 33 12 Frisco,Colo. 1,600 38 13 3 45 NA NA NA Galveston,Tex. 62,000 25 (21) 5 25 44 19 25 NA Highland Park,Ill. 31,000 53 6 0 41 4 18 19 - Hoffman Estates,Ill. 45,000 46(37) 10 2 41 3 15 23 La Verne,Calif. 27,000 67 (58) 11 3 19 19 NA NA Lynnwood,Wash. 29,000 56(46) 22 3 19 _ 13 6 NA - Manassas, Va. 22,000 52(41) 8 12 28 26 2 NA Midway,Ky. 1,400 54 7 1 38 24 NA 14 Montpelier,Vt. 8,400 51 (45) 6 6 37 7 15 15 Mount Prospect,Ill. 58,000 65 (57) 6 16 13 4 9 NA Northbrook,Ill. 32,000 46 7 8 39 7 13 19 _ Oak Creek,Wis. 20,000 37 (27) 8 12 43 6 23 14 Olathe, Kan. 49,000 52(43) 7 6 35 14 9 12 Prescott,Ariz. 26,000 74(50) 8 4 14 NA NA NA - Pompano Beach,Fla. 67,000 44(25) 10 17 39 4 17 8 Redding,Calif. 53,000 64 11 12 13 8 5 NA St.Peters,Mo. 38,000 72 12 4 12 NA NA NA Sedona,Ariz. 7,300 74(71) 15 0 12 11 1 NA Skokie,Ill. 60,000 34 6 13 47 12 3 32 - Versailles, Ky. 7,200 50 9 19 23 9 NA 14 Wakefield,Mass. 24,000 54(52) 5 3 38 8 6 24 West Hollywood,Calif. 36,000 42(8) 22 3 33 3 1 29 - Ratio Averages 52% (41%) 10% 7% 31% NA NA NA How Land-Use Ratios Have Changed in Small Cities Over the Years Residential Year of survey (single-family) Comm'l Ind'I Public Inst'l Parks. 1992 52%(41%) 10% 7% 31% NA NA 1983 48 7 8 37 13 5 - 1955 42(36) 2 8 48 11 4 Land Use (2/91) LAND USE Introduction The land use element of a comprehensive plan graphically depicts the desired spatial arrangement and future appearance of a city. Coupled with stated goals and objectives , it plays a key role in guiding the physical development of a community. The comprehensive plan is an important tool in reviewing and acting on rezoning requests where consistency with the plan is required . The basic development concept under which this plan has been formulated is best stated by the overall goals and policies it contains . These goals and policies are explored in detail elsewhere in this Plan . In general terms , the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan has evolved under a number of premises : * That the City provide a residential environment which accommodates diverse income levels and housing style - preferences . Single family detached housing and related neighborhoods will , however, continue to be the dominant land use and housing type. * That the community contain a well -rounded mix of developments which provides employment opportunities as well as consumer goods and services . * That there is a belief that the mix of uses experienced in Chanhassen in 1990 provides a quality lifestyle and is representative of the preferred land use mix into the future. * That development be consistent with the preservation and enhancement of significant natural features and aesthetic amenities . * That this comprehensive plan coupled with the support of the people of Chanhassen , its elected officials , and staff be utilized as a basis for future decisions on growth within the community. In addition to these premises, the plan is responsive to current development trends and to the factors that influence these trends . 1 (2/91) Specifically, the plan recognizes the opportunities and limitations of area transportation facilities . Additionally, the plan recognizes and is responsive to development pressures exerted from within the community and from the southwestern suburban metropolitan area. EXISTING LAND USE An examination of the existing land use pattern is a prerequisite to analyzing the future growth potential of a community. Existing land use should be considered along with growth projections and other factors in planning for orderly, economical , and environmentally sound community growth . Land use analysis can point out physical problems and land use conflicts as well as special opportunities , and can help preserve the amenities which make the community attractive. Chanhassen comprises a total of 23 . 13 square miles . Within this area, a variety of uses can be found : businesses , industries , homes , lakes , parks , etc. The development pattern portrayed by each of these has evolved over a number of years and reflects the prevailing market and development philosophies of their respective time periods . These philosophies may, in some cases , be no longer consistent with the planning philosophies and policies of the city today. This section will examine Chanhassen ' s existing land use pattern . First, in general terms , the city can be looked upon as having two primary sections : the northern part which contains urban-type development and the southern half which is more rural in character. These zones are divided by the Metropolitan Urban Service Area line or MUSA line as it is commonly referred to. This line was originally established under the Development Framework Chapter of the Metropolitan Development Guide prepared by the Metropolitan Council in the late 1970 ' s . The land area and communities within the MUSA line are those which have been designated as either fully developed or as developing areas and are expected to contain the vast majority of metropolitan growth between now and 2000 . Chanhassen ' s 1980 Comprehensive Plan contained a MUSA line alignment that was prescribed by the Metropolitan Council in 1976 . The line was intended to define the limits of growth up to the year 2 (2/91) 1990. In 1986, the City of Chanhassen signed an agreement with the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission as a condition to the construction of the Lake Ann Interceptor sewer line. A condition of that agreement was a change in the target date of Chanhassen ' s MUSA line from 1990 to 2000. The agreement did, however, contain a provision that allows the City to amend it ' s comprehensive plan and/or comprehensive sewer plan including provisions related to urban and rural service areas and sewer flow allocations . Due in large part to rapid growth that was not anticipated by the Metropolitan Council , the supply of available land within the MUSA line has diminished to the point where land availability has become a major impediment to further growth . By 1989, the City had far exceeded the year 2000 population and employment projections contained in the Metropolitan Council ' s 1988 Systems Statement. It became apparent that a large scale expansion of the MUSA line is required to allow for planned and orderly growth for the balance of the 1990 ' s . This lack of available land has become one of the primary reasons the City has undertaken the Comprehensive Plan updating program. The following table contains information on existing land uses . Unfortunately, a direct comparison between this information and 1980 information contained in the previous plan can not be made due to different collection techniques and definitions of categories . An assessment of residential , commercial and industrial growth is possible, however, utilizing building permit information . Existing 1990 Land Use Category Acres Percent of Total Residential - Single Family 4, 136 31% Residential - Multi Family 81 1% Commercial 151 1% Industrial 461 4% Park/Open Space 1 , 790 13% Public/Semi -Public 1 , 033 8% Vacant 4, 380 33% Undevelopable 1 . 295 9% TOTAL 13, 327* 3 (2/91) * This figure excludes lakes, ponds , railroad right-of-way and major highway right-of-way areas . A detailed breakdown of existing land use information is presented in the appendix following this section . Community-wide land use information is important in understanding development patterns and in predicting future trends . In Chanhassen , it is important to specifically focus on the land uses and available supply of vacant land within the confines of the current MUSA line. Without any modification of the 1980 Comprehensive Plan , the land supply within {_ •is area is that which will be available to accommodate the community ' s growth through 2000. The following is a breakdown of land uses within the current MUSA line: Existing Land Use - MUSA Area Developed Vacant Category Land (Acres) Land (Acres) Residential - Single Family 2, 617 281* Residential - Multi Family 43 175* Commercial 117 118 Industrial 432 95 * The vacant single and multi -family residential totals above contains approximately 113 acres that is presently owned by the Eckankar Church . The owner has not expressed any desire to develop the property in the near future so the effective net vacant residential land should be reduced by 113 acres . 4 — ./. P 1141,_-_=".„4 hht4 cid, ,��Il��yp` �1 'nfM' IiYJ.1,:►�'•- :•�a:�::- .".r: ....1 0.--,c . Am ---;--- - -----, ritari .wi _ t am .:...--,. •,.../7:4 fr.:.-,,•4 � r- ..,. JI55cv. �` el, .-53,,,-....7.-1,, ;�� ;;`: _'_ •r �2"L V_� ��` {III/ V Ar ilLi • . . ......._7 _ W. .4.7...-L . s rA- . •••E- =7M ' s :my i,:r.-'4 .........::.A.. "IN • ' 44, AMIE • - :--.:V.7— p:?_,...-‘ efg it. 1,4Wgi fiEtt_Er-45.. .10 • ii im MI .1.....• L--3 r-"sig. - -i I ..-- (,-•>..., „gar - - vi i .,-,_ „lots . 1 A .e -- 116A - -....: fan . City of BM- Chanhassen ,4 . • -) '. WE . .-. are Minnesota ,.. _ai - EXISTING "- ■■■ 2000 MUSA •Line ��'�j."�� .�.� i 1 N .'s '.. ! ' 7'.---",&111.i.eltdijdflp f Afr IL ,..s.,44 .. wc„,rAaPI.FIP . i ir/pAii..„,„,_ . aim . ' .‘ 1:411V:131116ir r . .........,e,,-',7 - _ '---..- . N • _ .. ` . . I - i 5 (2/91) supply of vacant land within the Metropolitan Council ' s current - MUSA line will be exhausted at or prior to the end of 1993 . Depletion of Residential Land Supply greggibillmj �ill■TH 212 EIS LJcJJ Eli IU�t,liu�t U im ■tt■,1 City (4.75-5.5) IIUIIII�JII "an MI City (6.0) lit Meg I t — 190 199jq �°��1991 1991 199 1c 1905 199 1991 1998 1999 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT Chanhassen has the tradition of being an agriculturally oriented community. Until the mid 1970 ' s , a feed mill was located within the downtown area. As the community grew and the feed mill was displaced by other uses , the city shed much of its agricultural image assuming more of the role of a metropolitan suburb yet retaining much of its original rural flavor. Prior to 1980, Chanhassen did not have a significant industrial base and employment opportunities were located primarily outside of the community. In 1980, nine locations existed within the city which were classified as industrial : the BMT Company, M. A. Gedney Company, Apple Valley Red-E-Mix, Statewide Auto Salvage, the Moon Valley Gravel Company, Instant Web, Animal Fair, the Press , Inc . , and businesses in the first phase of the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park. From 1980 to 1985, industrial expansion occurred in the Park One area and within the Chanhassen Lakes Business Park . Within these areas , over 1 . 2 million square feet of additional industrial floor area was added . Industrial construction between 1980 and 1985 accounted for over 1800 jobs . From 1986 through 1989, the rate of industrial growth in Chanhassen — continued to rise. The community became the home of corporate 8 COI C' o rivd2herd i vt pion (2/91) offices for Rosemount, Inc. and McGlynn Bakeries . Approximately 1 ,000 people are employed at Rosemount facility alone. Both of these businesses, as well as several others , established campus environments containing large areas of open space. In addition to major new construction, many existing businesses expanded their plant and/or added new shifts . A survey undertaken by the City in late 1990 indicated the presence of nearly 6, 000 (approximately 800 of which are part time) jobs in the community. This number is in excess of the 4,800 jobs that the Metropolitan Council has projected for the year 2000 and it was achieved 11 years ahead of schedule. In 1987 and 1988 alone, approximately 150 acres of industrial land was developed. The amount of industrial development during the 1980 ' s virtually depleted the supply of vacant industrial land . Not including planned expansion areas for existing businesses , Chanhassen had a total of 95 acres of land available for industrial development at the end of 1990. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Existing commercial uses in Chanhassen occupy 163 acres or approximately one percent of the total land within the community. Chanhassen ' s commercial development occurs almost exclusively within the downtown area along West 78th Street. Within this area, commercial establishments generally fall within one of three categories : retail services and entertainment-oriented, household — services , or auto-oriented . In addition to the downtown area, the city contains two smaller neighborhood commercial centers , one at the intersection of TH 7 and TH 41 and the second along TH 101 immediately south of TH 5 . Within the downtown area, commercial uses can be found which fall under each of the three previously identified categories . The most prominent of these is the entertainment-oriented Chanhassen Dinner Theatre which serves as a commercial focal point for the community. Surrounding this facility are household service oriented businesses such as restaurants , hardware, drug and grocery stores , dry cleaners , and similar uses . The downtown area along West 78th Street has seen significant commercial expansion in recent years . This area has been the focus 9 (2/91) OFFICE Various types of office uses are accommodated in the commercial and industrial future land use categories . The plan designates a location along TH 101 as "pure" office. This site which totals approximately 11 acres was designated in a TH 101 corridor study in response to specific site characteristics including transportation access, topography and proximity to existing and planned residential areas . MIXED USE The plan designates areas around the proposed TH 101/TH 212 interchange as mixed use. This category has been established to accommodate either commercial or high density residential developments . --:77 INDUSTRIAL Chanhassen has a remaining supply of 95 acres of vacant industrial land . For the continued well being of the community and in the interest of promoting a balance of land uses , Chanhassen established a plan that will accommodate a reasonable amount of industrial office development in the future. With this goal in mind, the City assessed where it would be reasonable to allow this development to occur. In undertaking this analysis , the location of existing industrial office development in Chaska was reviewed , existing and proposed roads and highways necessary to providing high levels of access were assessed and the need to provide the buffering of existing residential neighborhoods were examined in — detail . The Land Use Plan provides 638 acres of industrial property, 520 of which is undeveloped at the present time . Additional industrial office use is being proposed in four areas . The first is the logical extension of industrial uses west of the current terminus of the MUSA line, a short distance to the east branch of Bluff Creek. This area is essentially a valley that is already overlooked by existing and potential industrial office uses and would be serviced primarily by Audubon Road to the east and Highway 5 to the north . The Bluff Creek corridor provides an acceptable buffer when combined with associated flood plains and _ wetlands , the City ' s recreational trail development, large physical 36 ( qq1 Chahgsen Crvyit NMIvw PIc (\ (2/91) separation to existing single family homes and the existing tree line that screens those homes . The second area is located on the south side of the intersection of Highways 5 and 41 . This area has excellent accessibility which would be improved by the construction of collector streets through the area. It is immediately adjacent to industrial growth extending north from Chaska along Highway 41 . It can also easily be buffered from any potential single family development since none currently exist in the area. There is a concern for mitigating impact of adjacent industrial uses on the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum, which is located further to the west . However, it is believed that for the most part, development will not occur adjacent to public areas of the Arboretum and that by a combination of existing trees and new screening, future impacts can be mitigated . The third area is located south of the railroad tracks between Audubon Road and Lyman Boulevard . This area is bisected by the Bluff Creek Corridor. The Planning Commission ' s initial goals of placing industrial in this area were based on - the apparent suitability of this area for this use and its proximity to the new TH 212 corridor. It is the intent that much of the future traffic generated by these uses can be directed to the south rather than onto Highway 5 . The issue of impacts upon existing residential uses along Audubon Road was considered at length . The result of the redesignating of a substantial area located adjacent to these homes for low density residential uses with industrial uses along Audubon Road located to the north along the railroad tracks . In this manner, it is hoped that any new residential development located in proximity to this area will be screened by an existing vegetated fence line and that future buyers will have a full awareness of adjacent land use patterns . In addition , the buffer yard concept is being employed extensively in this area. The west side of Bluff Creek adjacent to Lyman Boulevard is being designated for industrial uses . This area is adjacent to a major area highway and to railroads and is crossed by a high tension power line and is partly occupied by existing NSP Substation . Virtually the entire site is currently tilled making it suitable for industrial use . Buffering is proposed along the west side of Bluff Creek which will tend to diminish views from properties to the east. 37 (2/91) The fourth and final area for industrial expansion is a collection of relatively small sites located at the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and Lyman Boulevard . These areas are currently being used for non-residential and non-agricultural purposes and are adjacent to industrial expansion coming from the south in Chaska. RECREATION The 2000 Land Use Plan identifies major park expansions and primary trail corridors . The recreation section should be consulted for additional material on the expansion of parks and the provision of new park facilities . INSTITUTIONAL There is only one major institutional expansion that is being programmed in the Comprehensive Plan . From information provided by the Chaska School District, a new middle school is likely to be required to meet the district ' s growing population by the mid- 1990 ' s . It was determined that it would be advantageous for this facility to be located within the City of Chanhassen to serve residents , to provide recreation amenities and to help promote a sense of community. Other sites were explored within the school district . Their parameters include a 40 acre site size with reasonable grades and excellent access to new population centers . The middle school as envisioned, will have substantial recreational space but will not have lighted ball fields . Taking these factors into account, the plan envisions locating the school at the intersection of Galpin Boulevard and Highway 5 . It is hoped that this site will not only meet the specifications of the school — district and the community, but would also help to further the goals of the Comprehensive Plan by facilitating the bridging of Highway 5 with uses of non-commercial /industrial nature. 1995 STUDY AREAS The future land use plan contains two areas listed as " 1995 Study Area" . These areas have been designated to allow further, more detailed review of appropriate land uses and the phasing of transportation facilities and utilities to service these areas . However, at the same time, the City does not believe that it can justify bringing these areas into the MUSA line at this time based 38 Land \A Se AppenoiX 1 ...,, A I I I I I I ! I I I I I c LI I ! ! I is I t E1 t l l l 1 l Ft : ! 1... __ --- w..7-, 1-11P"ratirwe Aigfr4,11firfag RI .,PWrIlly On.ivizittak.,,i -_, itlift,,.,ir.,0-7 _i..:........ ''i rel4p0 - - b tit*•I-_'... d`.1.1.,T. • e:- 4. - . ..4145 ih,,,,,....-5414.a! ..,. — L � >—...- .• -)74/•,:47.qi • • le .k, 410-9. 11.r. 1 1.-: 'i er L A I r7.Wink .17..4 0 ---: I ,..,:k, .1t../:*.tx E. 539-1 • 539-2__ {540-�0 - ►• }, �► , 74,1i. • X11,..,, ar 0161 'i"Y' .i `' R' - 40_13 1 0: • .......„74..... „..7..,,...;_,,>.."P.- -... ....---...i Arlt ^ fg.:JZ ilk 4 A f t , IffirT i -( , , • •0_1.,- . i -p . _,,,:,...,,,, -. .. _ .. , . , ...„:„_:c.,...,,..,-„ - -„ , ---- ,-„„4 ,...; 4., .. , , 2,..--` L . • ♦_ . . , _41_, , , OK lir i iFes;_, •, '€ - -- - ---s--- I.' 1� u I , Ili `' ■ CIE go,. Aid24$-y1 ,. -___ c 1 , . .6.• _ --mgr. •• a . ...-_..., •- -.Lii-m .......=..... L Q • % I , ir- re.4.- W • ' '14- -Si X6=1. 54g• , 8;2-1 L' folFri,'7 -•• 3 L ..- .- -=).J- : • (/y s ,,_. 4a-25 - �^��gip. t------i - • i 2:. I a, : 111-7- 1_ 1 „ -, . . 1 .- 540-18 , It ilL l / • }' - _ ».- 1 0 /� 540-24 i 1 i B ,• -- I _ k� ■ :a ,■ N L -t - 4 Cm'of _ I , __ p-IA•M ASSEN - - 1 i ��' _ASE MAP L ,• TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ZONES •- ! I I 04* i l l l i ' ---,,j7: ---•- L Iwiiii, II iI:;1 - Sub-Area Boundries •-- �,1 \ , -- 5 seagull Existing MUSA Line 1111 I i , "' -- • • • Proposed MUSA Line 1-3��, L HQ.l1m SY: - _ ..!.,,,I - I. CHAM&SAN ENIIIEERNG DEPT. - - ' 1 _ T ////`4//'',//�� - AMMO JAIL.Mit :4 1-- y�• E .. :. ems- I, L , '��• 6 ...- ... .." I L -_ __ .. _ . f. -1 � - -'-- - - .- I 0 = [ J _, P41 547-1 = L ___ • , L 1 1 t 1 t t l i 1 t 1 'I I •; I I1 I VV.. 1 CH C 0 AA p o tvens:1vt Plan (2/91) In Chanhassen ' s 1980 Comprehensive Plan , calculated acreage requirements were multiplied by 1 . 5 to account for market flexibility and the possibility that large property owners may not have a current or near term interest in developing parcels for urban uses . This method of providing an adequate supply of vacant land which is used again in this plan is consistent with the Metropolitan Council ' s use of a five year excess of land over a ten year planning period . 8 W J CO Q CU O .r0 .4 .44- C) 0 CO CO N NN CO CV 11 CO LC) CD .-rl's. UD OD M J .-1 M .--1 .-1 N M . 1 N N N .--1 O p0 > W CI 2 M CO - N .-r .y Q .-r ,..1 W ;71 OC z c0 O Q )) J C O F- M Z 1 Q ]L Ln C_) CC Q Q W > d O COO CO N M N In Q CO O Z .--' CO CO .--1 Ln CO .-4 ,-y CO M M O O CD N. CO U N N O .N-1 .4-1 C) . 1 .--1 LL - = .-"1 Ln I� M Lf) U) N M N .-1 N. t\ 1 CCQ LL 0) Cf) CO .4 .--1 .--1 U) 0) '7 .-1 - Q Cn )) •--1 •--1 N N .. co co N N M C.0 2 1- •-• CO W O W Z CO _ O < =D101 MN N. OM co CO CO .--. __I ea_ .-I .--1 N .--1 2 O 1-r W Cl- Y I O MI LO 0 0) CO O) LI) M f. .--1 0 0) CO CO - O N M Lf) W W d .--4 M Q) 4-4 N CD N. 2 - CO > M O 4J N J CI O_' O OI CO C, O O O N N Q QZ Z N co N CD Ln N. M C.. ..i .--4 CO M I CO O LO CO .--1 N I... M N U) .--1 .--1 .-1 0 .--1 LU U CJ Z 6-4 Cd LLIcr ul CD M U) M 0- N CO CO M n CO 00 N 00 CD Ln L) O 'cf U) M 0) Cf) r` LLI D) O '4' a0 a0 0 .--1 .--1 co .--1 O O N M n M N U) .-r CY N co •--1 •'-1 ....1 N CO •--1 N .--1 .--1 .4 4--1 .-1 CD N Z Q w U CC w d O CD O ^ CO M t\ CD CO O V' O ..J' O) CO Is.- O CO N CO u) r. N. CO CD O M - N CD CO V' 11D f\ Cf) Ln •7 N I I N I .--1 CO I 01 I M I..... t\ O In CD C N. C!) 1 I I C. CO N -J CO .-1 •--1 .-1 CO M •--1 M - .--1 .--1 CO N .--1N .-r N M O .--1 Q Lo I- .� O I-, CO W - I- O .-+ N M Cr Ln CO 1,.. CO 0) O .--1 N CO 'cf Lf) CD O .--1 N .-1 N M Q Ln CD N. CO CJ) . . . . . . . . . . N N N N N N N .-1 N CO .--1 .-r ... .. J N 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I Q 1- < 0) CT O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .--1 r-1 .--1 N. CO N I- O )-- Cr) 0) •cct •czt Q '- Q 'C st Q 'at •cf - .4- - wr - - , - - - v - v v - v v v LI) O O Ln Ln in in Ln Ln Ln LI) in L) U) CO Ln N Cf) in in Ln Lf) u) Ln in Ln N in Cn Ln U) in u) in Ln C)0 a0 U- 4 W -J OD Q d O '--1 on LA U) U) co on •7 CO 4D O 03 W .-4 N C) N er M .-4 0) .7., C) W C\I C) Z .-1 C) N <II W '1 v CV01 Z m U) C)sr 01 .N.� OctalCC CD C) I I- O Z 01 et CD __ U) QQl a7 ... 04 1.61 ..-4"'4 'r COM (0 Cl) "� "-1 CC CD 00 Zl N er 00 COLO co M N N N M X. C D: O U ce it El U) O 00 M U7 QN .-1 .r _ O W DE N 0) N. C) co O .r N co U) N "-1 N. N. ^ Q ^ O OD 00 M W .-, .--1 .-4 ,-..14 —1 C CD Z Q CL J •W 0 0.-. co Cl) Z 4nl 1... J O- 1 C W W CL Y GO CC = O Q l M C ? a. 4.4 CO M Z Z UJ O CC 5C .= p J Q U Fl01 f O U w U lICC if d 04 col Co N V N. NN. CO 'Cr N. C7 N .-r CO U) N M LA O M Q2� .--4 1 V a z W ]GG U CC s7 40 sr 0) 00 U) .--1 L17 C) N C) 00 .--1 .-1C....1 ct O J M I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 CD N CD N O .--4 .-r I 1 1 1 �' N 1 I 1 1 I 0) Q V M .--1 .-r N. .--1 1- CD N v /- N 4--4 W -7 N •--1 N M -r U) CO N. W C) iO .-r .-y "y ..y 71"71 -7"7 '1 CAD _ - N N N N N N N .-r N M .--1 .--1 .--1 J Z NI 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 d F-. Q 0000000000000000000000000000 .--4 .-r .-1N. COLtiy F_ F- M M Q tt <T v. Q V V' •7 v. v. Q Nr st a7 'Kr •cr s7 sT at Q t1 V V U) O CD C — LC) LI) U) U) L4) U) U) U) U) U) LI) U) Ln LA L) Lf) U) U) U) L) LA U) Ln LL) U) U) LC) U) U) U) U) U) OO CO I- LL LU J m 0 W W M 1 P 0•sst CO 03ti '0 N O IA QI Lu ce SMO �O s.7M CV O03 IN CV Z 03Q I J a O M 1 z QLU s.t]G V) > a s m 0 X z 0 U LL Q LL! U- CL V) Q ti ti N J Q Q W C a Z m V) Q N .1 P H JC1J0 .- 0 W 1 d Y O CC O' Os 0 N LLJ -1> > d M N '0 rel•-• N 0 0 J Q ZI N z N U J — x XO .i O• s U Ni LLIU U LI O O d X Ni M N LL 0` a P O N N d' V) 1 r- M M M O Y � Z Q Y W U OC — < .43 N- _ w J O ~ O N O• . CVN- .- N Ni .O '- ti LA LA v O H N H tri tIi '0 N a) P O .- N N1 LA'O 0 N s- N M1A N- CO P N N N N N NN .- N Ni S s- J Z I- M M v 1 0 0 O v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 . 0 0 sr- J � 0 O in LA V1 V1 Vl LA {A LA V1 Vl LA Vl V1 V1 LA LA {A {A {A Ln {A LA V1 IA LA LA IA LA IA LA LA L/1 O co I- LL — • .) --I Co O (n LA c71 CA CA C77 LA (n CA CJI CJI (71 CA (n (J1 U7 N (J1 (n (Jl (J1 CA to CJI (n Vl CT (!1 (.71 (71 c7) (n O O Co A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A W W -•.I O -I N 00 �7 .-- .-- � O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C (0 (0 D --I D I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I 1 1 N Z Or I-•• F•• I- W N r N) N N N) N N) N CO CO V Cr) L71 A W N r- N h-. O Co A W N I-. O CD CO V O CJI A W N ►- O •--I 1,1 CO --I I.-• O CA) -4 I-• 1•.. 3--• D y W V I-• co A A N .-+ N W N W (Jl A (n 4- (J1 N ANN W 1- Co Co r N O V CD A N CO I--• A O 01 O V I-- Co •-• h-• O h•' 43 A O I--• N O A CA Cn V OD A CO CO Co0N D rn J O O O I- O O CX) -.4 41 A N W (DV N V (XI O (D CO (D Cn O Co O O O V W W VO W W C) rn z D 7C A 1- W WW .-- 3-. _ _ _ O N O V Cn Co Co A Co CO W A I- N 4.31 CO r IO r r 0 O O A I-+ A -o 03 e•••••• V A O I . V V CO I . N CO CO N CO O V W + V ► N v Co 1--• - 1-.• Cll W O CJ1 CO00 I n Z C) 711 CO .--. I-.. CrI NI 6--. CO I--• A N) 1--• CO Cn CO W I3 (W. 3 C7 %J O V co NI- O N) CO N IO 70 )3. N3 CO (0 000 V 0) - (C- + 0 i1 `�. rn z C) V 4-. G O O N Z CO CO V O N A N) a-• O W 1-0 rn O O CO CD W IV C A O W CA O 1--. V W A W VI CO CO (D O A C) O N F. 7C -v rn - m O I"". C) I • W I-. I--• l./1 W I--• A O CO O O V A W A CJ1IC D O CO Z -I C3 D r G -I D N D PD M D ( 7 ~' ~' I--. I""• I-•ICI) N 4=.• (77 O I-' N N V A V V V A N) Co 1•-' I--. I-' C) T CO N) (D CT CO I"•' N N I-. O O CO V O r Cr) N CO N) V V I--' N W CO CA W V CA A 0 IN-• 13 T r N W I-• 1--• I-+ C) — O N3 N.1 VCn NC 1-- 00 I O 3 _ O CO 1--. N I-- N O ,- CON O A W I- c. . , OD (71 N) CO A 2 W 1 . O CO 0 CD N)CAI CO 43. h-• '0 D O CO OA A 173 < N 7c ?:..3) m D v1 - --I w 1-o O I... r I CO N N V t,,, O Z p N r OO N A N) A A O WD ,..-41". (n C GJ A $-. � O N 70 a T- I- N N C CO Z I••• - OTT NO I-. 1-.. V O V CO I-• I-. N I-• N N 43. 03 CD O I-+ 1-- W N I- I-- r G A CCn CO Co V N N O A 4- OCIIO (71NCONCDOCn (D V 43. 4..n1- 043. 0 (D43. I- c0Cnr O 'O D 03 r rn OS t P6iicics (2/91) A Comprehensive Plan is designed to serve as a guide for the local decision making process . The cornerstone of such a compre- hensive planning process is the development and adoption of goals which identify the desired qualities of the community. Before developing goals and policies for the City of Chanhassen, the question "What are the problems and needs of the City" was asked . Once these problems and needs are coupled with the unique characteristics and values of the community, then various goals and policies can be established. For this report, the following definitions have been used : GOALS Values which have been reduced to a number of broad statements concerning what is desired . POLICIES Goals which have been reduced to a number of specific components stated in a manner per- mitting appraisal of progress achieved toward given goals . The goals and objectives established as part of this study will be important in as much as they will serve to pattern specific recommendations which will be offered . The Comprehensive Plan is designed to be a flexible tool which can be adapted to new objectives to attain stated goals . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GOAL Chanhassen is a high amenity residential com- munity that contains large amounts of open space, natural tree cover, wetland, variable topography and a thriving downtown . The City is experiencing rapid growth and development pressure as urbanization has extended out to include communities in the southwestern area of the metropolitan region . Highway develop- ment and the filling of communities to the east are expected to accelerate growth pressure. It is the City' s overall goal that its amenities and qualities be maximized and preserved while allowing growth to occur in a comprehensively planned and reasonable manner. 1 l qq ( 000V(-e Pia() (2/91) POLICIES Develop and maintain the City' s Comprehensive Plan so that it may serve as the planning vehicle to achieve the goal . Supported with continuing efforts on behalf of the City Council , Commissions, residents and staff it should be utilized to establish goals , promote discussion and community support and facilitate the coordination of varied interests that will be required. LAND USE GOAL Achieve a mixture of development of mixture which will assure a high quality of life and a reliable tax base. DISCUSSION Chanhassen ' s land use to date has been — primarily agricultural and single family residential . In recent years , the City has been successful in attracting an increasing base of industrial uses and has seen the redevelopment and expansion of its commercial central business district . POLICIES Develop and maintain the City ' s land use plan so that it is utilized as a fundamental tool for directing the community' s growth . Recognizing that some uses pay their way in terms of the property taxes they generate and some uses do not. Chanhassen will strive for a mixture of development which will assure its financial well being. Development will be encouraged within the MUSA line and at the same time Chanhassen will plan the reasonable and orderly expansion of the _ MUSA line to meet its need for additional developable land. 2 (2/91) Encourage low density residential development in appropriate areas of the community in a manner that reinforces the character and integrity of existing single family neighborhoods while promoting the establishment of new neighborhoods of similar quality. The plan should seek to establish sufficient land to provide for a full range of housing opportunities . These opportunities require that adequate land be designated for medium and high density land uses . The City will seek to discourage the conversion of these areas to lower density uses to insure that the goal of housing diversity can be met regardless of temporary market fluctuations . Chanhassen will continue to encourage the location of commercial uses in the central business district. Commercial development outside the central business district and its fringe will be minimized until development of the central business district and fringe are largely completed . The City will encourage the development of neighborhood service centers where appropriate . These will generally be located at major intersections . In areas where they will not adversely impact adjoining residential development. Development of unplanned and strip commercial centers shall be discouraged. The City will reassess the need for the BF, Fringe Business District to determine if it is inconsistent with this policy. The BF District should also be re-examined to ensure that whatever development is allowed to occur, that it is done in a manner that is protective of the sensitive environmental areas found along the Minnesota River Valley and river bluffline. 3 (2/91) Planned industrial development will be encouraged as a means of encouraging tax base growth and creating new employment opportunities . It is believed that planned growth can and should be designed to minimize environmental/ neighborhood and traffic impact. The City will seek opportunities to provide transitions between uses of different types; the more in compatible the neighboring uses , the more important the transition zone. For example, natural features may provide good transitions between incompatible uses or uses of moderate intensity can provide transitions between high intensity and low intensity uses . The Land Use Plan also seeks the establishment of buffer yards where appropriate. These buffer yards represent areas of increased setbacks where a developer will be required to install landscaping and berming to offer improved separation of incompatible uses . Development should be phased in accordance with the ability of the City to provide services; development should occur in areas where services are available before extending services to new areas . - Development should be planned to provide adequate internal street linkages . The land use should also seek to direct growth in a manner that makes the most efficient use of the area ' s highway system. Development should be planned to avoid running high traffic volumes and/or nonresidential traffic through residential neighborhoods . The land use plan will be utilized to facilitate the City' s efforts to anticipate future needs for open space, roads , parks , schools , utilities , etc . , and make adequate 4 (2/91) provisions for them prior to the time they are needed. The Rural Service Area shall be preserved as an agricultural zone or used to support very low density development. It is the city' s policy to ensure that this area is not prematurely developed. The City will discourage the expansion or construction of commercial and industrial facilities in this area. Chanhassen will encourage the preservation and adaptive reuse of structures of historic and architectural significance. The City will maintain a comprehensive and up to date set of ordinances to ensure that development is consistent with the plan while resulting in high quality, sensitively designed projects . Ordinances should be reviewed and modified as necessary to improve performance standards for new development to ensure that they incorporate high quality design , landscape, etc. The PUD Ordinance should also be reviewed for similar reasons . NATURAL RESOURCES GOAL To promote rational planning which correlates growth and the preservation of a high quality environment. — POLICIES All site plans and other development proposals should be reviewed to determine impacts upon natural systems . These shall include but not be limited to blufflines, soils , vegetation, wetlands, drainageways and topography. All development plans should be reviewed by the Watershed District or other agencies to ensure compatibility with area wide standards . 5 (2/91) Local drainage plans should be coordinated with those of the watershed districts , with the city ' s storm water management plan and with the city' s wetland protection program. City storm water plans should be designed to maintain and enhance water quality. These plans should be comprehensively coordinated with wetland protective measures . GOAL The City will undertake the study and potential implementation of a storm water management fund or other mechanism that will facilitate comprehensive planning , funding and implementation of storm water management, water quality and wetland protection measures . • The City should investigate and implement programs designed to preserve and improve water quality, both in area lakes and in the Minnesota River. These efforts should be coordinated with storm water management, wetland protection, flood control and related activities , in addition to making this a factor in the review of new development proposals . Encourage compatible land uses in areas which are components of the city ' s overall drainage system. For example, floodplains which pro- vide seasonal water storage can be used for recreation and wildlife habitat. Water and storm drains should be routed and constructed so as to minimize permanent damage to natural resources . Re-vegetation , reforestation and similar measures should be employed to mitigate any resulting impacts . Future developments should be designed so that they are sensitive to natural features . Such features which are determined to have signifi - cant environmental , cultural , historical , 6 (2/91) and/or archaeological values should be pre- served and maintained through the use of ease- ments or dedication . Support state and federal programs for the reduction of pollutants and upgrading of the natural environment. For all development which increases the sur- face water runoff where natural storm water runoff storage sites are not available, controls should be provided so that downstream peak flow is no greater than can be handled by downstream drainage features . The City of Chanhassen should continually strive to improve water and air quality within the community. This would include cooperation with federal and state programs designed to achieve this purpose. Improve environmental quality by preserving the scenic and recreational aspects of lakes , rivers and streams and provide opportunities for public use where appropriate. Urban development and agricultural practices that minimize pollution and siltation should be encouraged . Such practices may include but not be limited to: - Promoting use of biodegradable, non-polluting chemical fertilizers , pesticides and ice melting chemicals . - Requiring use of soil erosion practices that minimize erosion . - Management of liquid and solid waste dispo- sal systems so as to preclude contamination of nearby surface water resources and underlying ground water supplies . 7 (2/91) - Approval of grading, filling and excavation plans to ensure that erosion and siltation are minimized. Utilizing state, federal and programs where appropriate, the city should operate diseased tree removal programs to assist in curtailing tree diseases and noxious weeds that impact wetland and lake areas . Construction plans and specifications should contain provisions for adequate on and off site protection of existing vegetation . The city will utilize its site plan review, land use plan and subdivision procedures to maximize the preservation of mature trees by the sensitive design of proposed developments . The City of Chanhassen will discourage the alteration of steep slope areas and bluffs to minimize soil loss from erosion, minimize tree loss where appropriate and to protect visual - amenities such as those found along river blufflines . HOUSING GOAL To provide housing opportunities for all - residents , consistent with the identified community development goal . POLICIES Existing housing within the city should be maintained and improved and revitalization of older developed areas should be encouraged . The City of Chanhassen will attempt to provide adequate land for projected housing growth and to provide housing opportunities for persons of a range of incomes . 8 (2/91) As state and federal funding permits , efforts should be made to provide low and moderate housing where needed, to provide balance to the generally high cost of new housing. New construction programs may provide a source of such housing. Plans and ordinances for the City of Chanhassen should ensure that adequate amounts of land are designated to accommodate projected residential growth . The city should promote the use of state and federal programs designed to reduce land costs for developers of low and moderate income housing. The City of Chanhassen will cooperate with other governmental units and public _ agencies to streamline, simplify, and coordinate the reviews required for residential development to avoid inflating the cost of housing due to unnecessary delays in the review process . Subsidized housing should be given equal site and planning considerations to non-subsidized housing units and should not be placed in inferior locations or in areas that are not provided with necessary urban services . If demand becomes apparent, the city will promote the construction of senior citizen housing in locations convenient to shopping and medical services . The development of alternative types of housing such as patio homes , townhouses , and quadplexes should be permitted to supplement conventional single-family homes and apartments providing that they are compatible with appropriate land use practices and are representative of high quality development. 9 (2/91) New residential development should be discouraged from encroaching upon vital natural resources or physical features that perform essential protection functions in their natural state. Housing development methods such as PUD' s , cluster development, and innovative site plans and building types should be encouraged to help conserve energy and resources used for housing. Property and code enforcement policies which encouraged the maintenance and rehabilitation of both owner occupied and rental housing should be encouraged . The City should continue to ensure non- discrimination in the sale and rental of housing units . Citizen participation in developing plans and implementing housing programs is encouraged in redevelopment, rehabilitation , and in the planning for future housing. RECREATION GOAL The City of Chanhassen will provide recreational open space areas which will reasonably meet the outdoor recreation needs of the community ' s residents . POLICIES Provide park and open space facilities that emphasize accessibility and use by Chanhassen residents . Coordinate the expenditure of local funds for recreational open space with the schedules for 10 (2/91) the provision and development of other municipal services . The city should update and adopt the recreation open space element of the comprehensive plan at least every five years . An annual assessment of programs , identified needs , and the capital - improvements program should be conducted . Negotiations for the acquisition of recreational open space areas should be based upon appraisals by qualified appraisers . Reasonable efforts shall be made to acquire land by negotiated purchase before utilization of the power of eminent domain . The location, design , use and impact of recreation facilities should be compatible with and enhance the environment of both the site and surrounding area . Abandoned right-of-ways should be reserved and preserved for public use if they can be utilized for recreational purposes . Encourage the cooperative effort between the school system and the city in the acquisition, development and usage of recreational lands and facilities . Provide open space ares which assist in the conservation and protection of ecologically sensitive areas . Provide a recreation system that integrates manmade facilities into the natural environment of the area. Develop a park and open space plan which is consistent with and compliments the overall land use plan for Chanhassen . 11 (2/91) Provide a system of neighborhood parks which are centrally or conveniently located within the area they serve and where possible, are integrated with school facilities . Encourage citizen participation in the planning for and development of park and open space facilities . Continue to seek assistance from community groups in the planning and development of recreation areas . Provide a balanced park system which includes neighborhood parks , community parks , special use facilities , schools, and private developments ; all interconnected by a linear trail network. Where possible, neighborhood park lands should be planned for, prior to development to insure that future facility demands can be met. The location of neighborhood parks should be identified in areas that do no require the crossing of major thoroughfares by small children . The planning for recreation and open space within Chanhassen should concentrate on total environment programming rather than emphasizing facility programs . Recreation activities will be designed to appeal to all age groups . UTILITIES GOAL Provide public sanitary sewer, water, storm water, electrical , natural gas and communication service to all urban density residential developments and all non- residential , commercial and industrial uses in 12 (2/91) a manner which is responsive to natural resource protection concerns within the City. POLICIES It shall be the responsibility of the City Engineer and Planner to give technical advice and aid to the Planning Commission in preparation of necessary utility plans . Formulation of utility plans shall be coordinated with city plans for land use, transportation, open space and community facilities as described in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan . Wherever practical , utility plans should be coordinated with the Park and Recreation Commission ' s plans for linear open space and passive play areas . Formulation of local plans for utilities shall be consistent with the plans and procedures of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) which accommodate the future growth and continued vitality of the City of Chanhassen . POLICIES To plan and provide an efficient local sewage collection system to transport sewage to appropriate metropolitan facilities . Ensure that local sewer investments are coordinated with metropolitan sewer system plans . Utility systems with the City of Chanhassen should be based upon : 1 . Maximum protection of health and safety; 2. Adequate and efficient service; 3 . Fair and equitable distribution of benefits and costs . All utility systems should be installed in newly developing areas before or at the time of development . This allows for more economical 13 (2/91) utility installation, reduction of damage to streets, less erosion and a reduction of public improvement installation costs . All public and private utilities within the city should be installed in a coordinated manner and in accordance with the sequencing and level of - service indicated in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan . Maintain , operate and reconstruct where necessary, the existing utility systems so that _ they can continue to support existing development and redevelopment in the urban service area. Establish an ongoing system of inspection and monitoring of local sewer, storm and water systems . The direct discharge of untreated domestic or industrial waste into any water body, water course, or drainageway shall be prohibited . Roof water and paved surface drainage shall be channeled into a storm water system as approved by the Chanhassen City Engineer and appropriate - regulatory agencies . Storm water run-off shall be held on the land for the greatest extent possible . All urban density development shall be served by comprehensively designed storm water drainage systems . Natural drainageways , streams , and ponding and other holding areas for surface water run-off should be publicly preserved . Gutters, catch basins, and storm sewers should _ conduct surface water run-off to the natural drainageways and building areas . 14 (2/91) Utilities such as electricity, telephone and natural gas must be available at the time any development is open for occupancy. Whenever possible, those services shall be underground . All underground utilities should be installed at the same time to reduce installation and maintenance costs . Where overhead utility lines are necessary, their design and alignment should be compatible with existing, proposed or probable development of the area. Any structure to be inhabited should provide the following: - A continuous supply of potable water. - Sanitary facilities and an approved sewage disposal system. - Heating adequate for healthful and comfortable living conditions . - Hot water for domestic use. - Electricity for lighting and equipment use in the dwelling . - Within the urban service area, water service and hydrant outlets shall be provided for fire protection . The spacing and design criteria of these systems shall conform to city ordinance and shall serve to improve or maintain the existing fire insurance rating . GOAL To provide for reasonable and environmentally safe development at low densities experienced in areas located outside the MUSA line consistent with the City ' s land use goals and policies . 15 (2/91) POLICIES The city will establish an ongoing inspection system and permit issuance program for septic systems consistent with the guidelines and regulations stated in the local sewer plan . The Chanhassen sewer plan will indicate acceptable locations , ordinances and design standards for septic tank systems . The city shall provide informational assistance to septic tank users on how to maintain and operate on-site disposal systems . The pumping of sludge from septic tank systems will be discharged into the metropolitan _ disposal system only in such locations as may be designed by the city and the MWCC. The city shall forbid sewered urban-type development in designated rural service areas which lie adjacent to existing or proposed sewer interceptors . Non-urban land uses should be served by properly constructed and operated septic tank and well water systems . GOAL To recognize the often unique circumstances of unserviced lots located both inside and outside of the MUSA line located in subdivisions that were platted prior to 1987 under ordinances that allowed down to 212 acre lots . POLICIES These lots were, for the most part, developed relatively recently and have new on-site sanitary and water service built to high standards . The City will , therefore, seek to ensure that these subdivisions are not unduly burdened by new local utility lines and related assessments . The City Council should seek to adopt sensitive policies for trunk line improvements as well . 16 (2/91) The City will utilize policies listed above to ensure the proper maintenance and functioning of these systems . Property owners must understand that proper maintenance and upkeep of on-site systems is their responsibility. At such time as on-site systems begin to fail the City will work with residents to install utilities to these subdivisions in a coordinated, comprehensive manner. Since on- site systems tend to fail at different times at different lots in a subdivision , residents should be aware that utilities may need to be provided beore consensus is achieved from all impacted property owners . Homes developed since 1987 in the Rural Area are equipped with alternate drainfield sites . If problems occur with the primary site, the City would look favorably on allowing use of the secondary site if it is still functional . TRANSPORTATION GOAL Create a multi-modal transportation system which permits the safe, efficient and effective movement of people and goods . POLICIES Provide a local transportation system which is consistent with the plans and programs of the County, Metropolitan and State systems as well as with the overall growth policies of the City of Chanhassen . Transportation facilities should be planned and designed to be compatible with the surrounding environment. Encourage multiple use of right-of-way areas accommodating various modes of transportation . Thoroughfares and major routes should be planned so as to reduce conflicts between external 17 (2/91) i traffic and local traffic while minimizing the disruption or division of the logical pattern of development in the community. Combine streets, highways, mass transit, terminals, and parking facilities into a coordinated transportation system. - Provide flexibility for additions or modifications to the transportation system by basing right-of-way requirements on an evaluation of future transportation needs . The city will utilize the land use plan and transportation plan maps to illustrate planned road alignments and to facilitate their acquisition and construction as new developments are proposed . The plan maps will illustrate all collector and arterial street alignments . It will also be amended from time to time by the City during the subdivision - review process . As a part of platting, each development should provide dedication and improvement of public streets consistent with the standards found in city ordinances . The city will promote the - provision of street connections to maximize safety and ease of access . Neighborhoods should be planned and designed to limit or discourage external trips traversing the neighborhood . - Sufficient setbacks and/or berming should be designed into all development projects adjacent to major public roadways . Coordinate existing and planned transportation facilities and their capacities with land use types and densities with particular emphasis on 18 - (2/91) land development in the vicinity of interchanges and intersections . Promote increased development of bikeways and trail facilities in order to conserve energy resources, enhance recreational opportunities and assist in the abatement of pollution and congestion . Promote safe and convenient access connections between the highway system and major commercial areas; industrial uses, and residential neighborhoods . The City should cooperate with the Regional Transit Board and Southwest Metro Transit Commission in order to provide future transit service to and within the community. The City will support the development of park and ride facilities that encourage transit use. In major areas of employment and commercial activity, sufficient parking and transfer areas should be provided to meet the needs of mass transit . The City will continue an ongoing maintenance program in order to maximize the community ' s investment in transportation facilities . For proposed developments , the City will require detailed circulation and access plans which depict the impact of the proposed development on both the existing and future transportation systems . Through the development review process , the City will strive to discourage development from occurring within the designated roadway corridors as well as limiting access to collector streets , minor arterials , intermediate arterials and principal 19 (2/91) arterials . The City will implement roadway design standards and inspection practices which insure proper construction . Chanhassen should require sidewalks and/or trails in commercial , industrial and medium and high density residential areas; adjacent to schools and other public buildings; and along one side of collectors and other high volume roads . The City will support Federal , State, Metropolitan and local efforts directed toward the timely construction of Trunk Highway 169/212, upgrading of Hwy. 5, relocation of Hwy. 101 and other facilities serving the area. Chanhassen will coordinate efforts with Eden Prairie and other appropriate jurisdictions to insure that Highways 5 and 101 continue to function effectively. Chanhassen will coordinate the construction and maintenance of hard surfaced local streets , collectors , and arterials . Within the Rural Service Area, the City will provide and maintain a transportation system consistent with the needs of agricultural land uses . — COMMUNITY FACILITIES GOAL The City should contain community facilities and public services necessary to protect and enhance the health , safety and welfare of all _ Chanhassen residents . POLICIES Chanhassen should continue to cooperate with the Carver County Library System in the provision 20 (2/91) of library services to the community. The City will work with the County to provide a new library location in Chanhassen when space needs exceed the availablity of room in the City Hall location . Continue to make meeting space available to City boards and commissions , civic groups, homeowner associations and other community organizations . Provide facilities , equipment and man power to insure adequate fire protection . Provide appropriate levels of police protection and emergency medical service consistent with the needs of Chanhassen residents . Promote an ongoing maintenance program for all city buildings and facilities to insure their extended use. Cooperate with both the Chaska and Minnetonka School Districts in providing educational facilities and programs which satisfy state and local requirements . Work with the Chaska School District to locate a future Middle School facility in Chanhassen at a location identified by the Land Use Plan . City will promote energy conscious design for all public buildings . RECYCLING GOAL To provide recycling opportunity to residents , institutional /office, commercial and industrial facilities in Chanhassen . POLICIES Provide curbside collection of targeted recyclables in Chanhassen . 21 (2/91) Expand curbside collection of recyclables to - multi -family developments and collection of targeted recyclables to office, institutional , commercial and industrial facilities . Expand the types of targeted recyclables . Provide recycling containers . Provide public information through the following: - presentations to loc, service clubs/homeowner associations - mailings - newspaper articles - displays - contests - earn merit badges for boy scouts and girl scouts - fire station and bank sign Work to achieve an increase in participation of curbside recycling to 50% by 1993 . — Provide containers to make it more convenient to recycle and act as a reminder to recycle. Educate the public so they are informed of the recycling programs available and participate in the programs . Work to expand the scope of recycling efforts to include special pick-ups, collection of additional materials as technology and markets allow and to assist in coordination and enhancement of recycling in the City ' s business community. 22 N Qt t • 4.1 Mok, .`._•. •--- -% 1.-;..1.-.�, .• :. a ate .., ., o to ! 'I n ,� y ,,, '�V-'- ..Qty` ''1\i. I-• s ? - Y R CJ , F;,71 ' y " \a S ti r t� PLt? ,tom Y }-i i1y_ i :ill .� - aR _-• :,7L`�i ^;'S:.'£•it. • may: a ti- El will.' `. '7,4--,T.;-, ,,,.::`,',.T--, A w Nth - - -_- • INIL_ .,� j 1) -§ "',A :.4.....)i t �Iy�, 71v}' O = .II = 1te! 1 -„ r • I�� c 4.0 0 r.'.. • / of m air..-n x' I Q' Lea a # oft 'moi Mn ' '''Qa f\0.3 v 4• Ul - 7�0�. ': I * Q V /1��:g ;_Al �E a A O ��•«► '� CI- CD N V +r ' - aN i " . w0cx Oa •''' . - v m • 'of"'" ) Oa. = MrnM > `-4, ' . ca° 7, CITY OF CHANIIASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: October 25, 1995 — SUBJ: Livable Communities Act Attached is a memo to the City Council that was presented on Monday, October 23, 1995. The City Council has agreed to participate in the Livable Communities Act. The council will be _ holding a work session in the first part of December to adopt the goals. This report is for your information and to show you the direction of development and policy recommendations. Ultimately, the Planning Commission may have to make recommendations on the implementation strategies to achieve the housing goals. CITY 4 F . CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 — (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM — TO: City Council FROM: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director DATE: October 16, 1995 SUBJ: Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Housing Goals — - BACKGROUND - About one month ago, I presented to the Council the Legislature's Livable Communities Act. I recommended that the city agree to participate because it could mean the loss of funding — through any state or Metropolitan Council disbursements, or it could mean the rejection of future expansion of the MUSA line. In order to participate,the City Council must adopt a _ resolution by November 15, 1995 (see model resolution attached) and adopt Housing Goals by December 15, 1995. It is my recommendation that the council adopt both at the same time if there is concurrence on the goals since they are the major components of the act. -- I am proposing that the council review the housing goals and give staff input as to whether or not they are acceptable. The city has until June 30, 1996 to summit an action plan as to how we will -- implement our goals. As part of that implementation,the council will then have to budget $50,795 towards affordable housing in 1997. In attendance at the Council meeting will be the two assigned Metropolitan Council staff, Don Bluhm and Bob Paddock. They will be available to answer any questions that you may have about the Livable Communities Act. -- ANALYSIS In order for the council to decide if the goals are acceptable or even achievable, we must examine the housing trends of the city. The City of Chanhassen is being compared with 20 other _ Livable Communities October 16, 1995 Page 2 communities in Sector 8 of the Metropolitan area(see attachment 2). If you average all of the affordable, diversity, and density numbers for the 20 communities in the sector, you would arrive at the benchmark numbers for Sector 8 (see Attachment#2). After arriving at a bench mark for the areas of affordability and density,the city was measured against these areas to determine the city index. The goals the city is trying to achieve is for the period 1996 to the year 2010. The city has 15 years to work toward these goals. _ Development is cyclical. Recently the city has seen more multi-family development. As explained by the Met Council staff, the objective for the city is to turn the course of the ship for housing development. It may be impossible for the city to accomplish the change of course _ — (achieve all of the goals) within this time frame. The process is then threefold. The first step is to pass a resolution to participate in the process and set goals. The second step is to develop implementation strategies to achieve these goals. The third step is to allocate Affordable and _ — Life-cycle Housing Opportunities Amount (ALOHA) dollars for affordable housing in the city's 1997 budget. This makes the city eligible for the three funding accounts: Tax Base Revitalization, Livable Communities Demonstration, and Local Housing Incentives. The Met Council has estimated that the number of new households for this period will be 5,784 _ (see attachment 2). Staff estimates that the current number of households is 5,907. The Met Council is assuming that based on available land, the city will double the number of households in the next 15 years. This is assuming a 6 percent growth rate. The Met Council projections can be compared to the projections made in the city's 1991 comprehensive plan. Table 1 Household and Population Projection Composite Source: 1991 Comprehensive Plan TH. 212 Household 3,800 5,600 6,500 7,400 TH. 212 Population 10,800 15,300 17,500 19,250 4.75 - 5.5% Household 4,113 6,586 8,609 11,250 4.75 - 5.5% Population 11,105 17,782 22,814 29,813 6% Household 4,235 7,583 10,149 13,582 6% Population 11,435 20,474 26,895 35,992 Livable Communities October 16, 1995 Page 3 — Some of the assumptions made in the earlier projections include the household size at 2.7 — persons per unit (2.65 after the year 2000) The current household size is estimated at 2.92, which is reflected in the number of young families in the city. Another assumption in the projections is that all property would be developed. Staff finds the projected household numbers possible only — if all available land in the MUSA develops, which is unlikely. There are all large tracts of property in the current MUSA that may not be developed by the year 2010. These properties include Prince, who has 156 acres guided for low density development, and Eckankar, which has — 60 acres of property, guided for high and medium density. The three areas the city has to address in affordable housing are Life-cycle, Density and Affordable. • Life-cycle housing is made up of two components. The number of non-traditional housing or — - percentage of housing that is not single family detached. The other component is the ratio of owner occupied units to renter units. • Density compares the number of units to the acres of development. This ratio is applied to low density and multifamily. • Affordable is that percentage of new housing units that will be affordable. The Met Council considers those owner occupied units under$115,000 affordable. Rental affordability is the _ percentage of rental units with rents under$625. In order for the Council to assess a goal carefully, staff has reviewed developments in the city -- since 1991 to evaluate development trends. _ Livable Communities October 16, 1995 Page 4 Table 2 Residential Development Statistics Source: Chanhassen Planning Department GROSS ROW - WETLAND PARK NET TOTAL GROSS NET NOTES - PROJECT. /CASE NAME ACRES ACRES ACMES_TARO ACRES UNITS DENSITY DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED 33-1 SUB Highlands of Lake St.Joe 36 0.4 11.54 0 24.06 33 0.92 1.37 Shoreland district ___ 33-4 SUB Windmill Run 17.92 3.37 0 0 14.55 35 1.95- 2.41 farm field SUB RalOaks Estates 13 2.2 0' 0 10.8 23 1.77 2.13 farm field 93-10 SUB Lotus Lake Woods 4.47 0.32 0.3 0 3.85 7 1.57 1.82 woodedwetland 33-11 SUB Oaks at Minnewashta 35.83 9 3 8 15.83 45 126 2.84 33-12 SUB tTower Heights 7.1 0.6_ 0 0 6.5 13 1.83 2.00 14 SUB Shenandoah Ridge 11.5 3.5 0 0 8 20 1.74 2.50 193-15 SUB Church Road 3.3 0 0 0 3.3 4 1.21 121 93-16SUB TJO 1.06 0 0 0 1A6 3 2.83 2.83_ 33-25 SUB Minger Addition 9.95 2.08 __ 0--- 0.15 7.72 17 1.71 220 - -_ - �T�'1 SUB Minnewashta t.andngs 19.7 1.7 0 0 18 27 1.37 1.50 beachlot/shoreland district 194-3 SUB Olivewood 25.95 4.6 14.8 0 6.55 9 0.35 1.37 shorelanddistrict 94-4 SUB Shadow Ridge 15.99 2.15 1.9 0 11.94 17 1.06 1.42 3.9 acre outlot yet to be platted 34-5 PUD Mission HillslSingle-family 7.1 0 0 0 7.11 16 225 2.25- - 17 SUB Shamrock Ridge 37.9 3.67 6.7 0 27.53 45 1.19 _1.63 ---- 94-8 SUB Creekside 39.5 42 5.7 5 24.6 44 1.11 1.79 --- - 194-10 SUB Brenden Pond 23.3 3.6 7.2 0_ 12.5 21 ----- 0.90 1.68 14-13 SUB Point Lake Lucy 18.15 1.63 5.62 0 10.9 19 1.05 1.74 _ 34-14 SUB Lake Ann Highlands 35.1 9.2 0_ 0 25.9 92 2.62 3.55 14.8 acres of MF to south 15 SUB Hobens Wild Woods Farm 1.87 0, 00 1.87_ 3 1.60 1.60 95-10 SUB Forest Meadows 202 2.2 0 5 13 19 0.94 1.46 12-4 PUD Meadows at Longacres 95 10 24 0 61 112 1.18 1.84 13-2 PUD Trotters Ridge 32.5 7.44 5.6 0 19A6 49 1.51 2.52 11-3 PUD Willow Ridge 30.3 4 8.39 0 17.91_ 37 122 2.07 921 SUB Stone Creek 81 10.04 0.96 _8 62 141 1.74 2.27 12-4 SUB Ithilien Addition 9 1.8 0.9- _0 6.3 17 1.89 2.70 12-5 SUB Bluff Creek Estates 61.45 7.9 19.7 0 33.85 78 127 2.30 - - _ 3 PUD Woods at Longacres 96.77 13.1__ 10.87 0 72.8 115 1.19 1.58--- _ 93-6 PUD Rogers/Dolejsi 80.8 202 0.5` 5.3 54.8' 134 1.66 2.45 SUBTOTAL 871.71 128.9 127.68 31.45 583.68 _ 1195 --- PERCENT 15% 15T- 4% 67% AVG 1.37 2.05 -- MULTI-FAMILY 1994-5 PUD Mission Hills/Multi-family 47.18 11.6 -- 5.87 -_- 0 29.71 208 4.41 7.00 -- ^4-18 PUD Autumn Ridge 11.5 _ 0 0 0 11.5 46_ 4.00 4.00 -- -- -- 2-3 PUD Oak Pond/Oak Hills 24.19 2.09 1.8-- 0' 20.3_ 147 6.08 724' 24 522 5.22 48 4.95 4.95 -- 7 SP Prairie Creek Townhomes 4.6 0 0 0 4.6 87-3 PUD Powers Place 9.7 0 0 0 9.7_ a5 7 SP Lake Susan Hills Townhomes 729 0 0 0 7.29 34 4.66 4.66 5-8 SP Centenial Hills 22 0 0--- 0 22 65 29.55 29.55 _5-1 PUD North B y 52.1 2.92 8.66 26.38 14.14_ 76 1_46 5.37 --- 1 - SUBTOTAL 158.76 16.61 - 16.33 26.38 99.44 648 PERCENT 10% 10% 17% 63% AVG 4.08 6.52 - - TOTALS 1030.47 145.51 144.01 57.83 683.12 1843 `T PERCENT 14%_ _14% 6% 66% AVG 1.79 2.70 - --- l`- L- Livable Communities October 16, 1995 Page 5 — Table 3 — 1991 Comprehensive Plan Land Uses Source: 1991 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Acres Percent Households Units/Acre Percentage of Residential Commercial 272.50 2% Office/Industrial 1,110.43 8% Office 13.48 0% Parks/Open Space 2,302.42 17% _ Public/Semi Public 1,056.79 8% Residential Large Lot 1,523.95 10% 295 0.19 2% Residential Low Density 4,344.86 33% 7,083 1.80 59% Residential Med. Density 507.88 4% 3,047 6.00 23% Residential High Destiny 210.39 2% 1,683 8.00 13% Mixed Use 82.63 1% 413 5.00 3% _ Study Area 1,145.98 9% Undeveloped 772.53 6% Total 13,333.84 100% 13,241 1.99 avg. 100% DENSITY GOALS -- As Table 2 indicates, the city has been averaging 2.05 net units an acre on the single-family (low density) and 6.52 units and acres on the multi-family (medium and high density). In -- Chanhassen, low density includes twin homes. The North Bay project which is developed as a single family detached project does not increase the density in the single family detached land _ use because the land use is guided high density. This highlights an issue the Planning Commission has been raising for a long time—if the city allows development to occur below the designated density, then where does this lost density occur. The benchmark the city should be trying to achieve in the single family detached is the 1.8-1.9 units/acre. In Chanhassen, because of the number of wetlands, staff has asked to have the net ..._ density used in calculations. Currently, the city index is 1.5/acre. I believe a goal that is obtainable is 1.8 units an acre net density. In the multifamily district, the bench mark is 10-14 units/acre. The city index is 11 units/acre. Staff is recommending a goal of 9-10 units per acre. —_ This number is based on 1990 data. As indicated earlier, this number has moved farther from the benchmark because of the number of projects approved at the medium density range. The only _ Livable Communities October 16, 1995 Page 6 way to achieve the density benchmark in the multifamily land use would be to build developments at the maximum density permitted. In cases where the development is appropriate, give density bonuses as permitted in the PUD ordinance. The city currently has limited high density development. The majority of projects are being developed at 6 units an acres, therefore, a significant number of developments will have to be built in excess of 14 units an acre to increase the multi-family units per acre density to achieve the benchmark. Table 4 Housing Goals Agreement Single -Family Detached 1.5/acre 1.8-1.9/acre 1.8/acre net - — Multifamily 11/acre 10-14/acre 9-10 LIFE CYCLE GOALS The method for determining life-cycle housing is to look at the future number of households the Met Council has predicated for the city in the next 15 years and establish what percentage of owner to renter the city will try to achieve. The type of non-single family includes apartments, townhouses, 3 and 4 plexes, etc. Assuming the Met Council prediction of 5,784 new households, staffs recommended goal of an 80%owner to 20%rental mix would mean that 4,627 units should be owner occupied and 1,157 should be rental units. In the 1990 comprehensive plan, the approved housing goal was for 34% of the housing units to be non-single family detached. I believe this still is a reasonable goal. With the types of owner occupied and rental there is a large variety of housing options. I believe it would be impossible to achieve a higher level of rental to owner occupied units because there has only been two rental projects built in the city in the last 10 years. The proposed Met Council benchmark is 67/ 75 and 25 /33 ratio of owner to renter. The city index according to the Met Council is 85 / 15. The Heritage Park Apartments, with 60 units, was built in 1989-90 and in 1995-96, Centennial Hill (Senior Project), with 65 units is being built. Even at 1,157 units over the next 15 years it would mean 70 units a year. The important number to keep in mind is for every eight units of owner occupied, the city should be developing two units of rental. Livable Communities October 16, 1995 Page 7 — Table 5 Housing Goals Agreement — Type (Non-Single Family 19% 35-37% 34%* 1991 Comp — Detached) Plan Owner/renter Mix 85/15% (67-75)/(25-33)% 80/20 AFFORDABLE The definition of affordable owner occupied units are those units under$115, 000 in homestead valuation. Affordable rental units are those units with rents under $625 a month. To determine the number of affordable ownership, the first step is to determine the number of owner occupied _ units. As stated previously with an 80/20 ratio of owner occupied units to rental units, the number of owner occupied households over the next 15 years could be 4,627. The number of rental could be 1,157. The bench mark the Met Council is recommending is 60-69% ownership affordable and 35-37%rental affordable. The city is currently at 37%affordable rental, according to the Met Council and the County Assessor(see Table 6). According to 1995 data, 32% of Chanhassen homesteaded homes are affordable. I believe a 50% goal is more realistic. That means that 50%of all new homes constructed in the next 15 years should be under the $115,000 in valuation. Table 6 Chanhassen Homestead Valuation January 2, 1995 Source: Carver County Assessor 3 r rs $0-$72,000 225 5% $72,001-$115,000 1,111 27% _ $115,000-$150,000 1,436 35% $150,001-$200,000 741 18% $200,000-$250,000 304 7% —_ $250,001+ 320 8% Total 4,140 Livable Communities October 16, 1995 Page 8 Table 7 Housing Goals Agreement Ownership 37% 60-69% 50% Rental 44% 35-37% 35% RECOMMENDATION _ — Staff is requesting input from the City Council as to the proposed goals. The resolution and goals should be approved at the November 13, 1995 meeting. The next step in the process is to provide the Met Council with implementation strategies that will be used to achieve these goals - — (due June 30,1996). Strategies staff is considering are reviewing the PUD ordinance to allow zero lot line homes and density bonuses, working with the City's HRA and Carver County HRA for another housing development, examine the use of CDBG dollars for affordable housing, down payment assistance, requiring all developments to meet the comprehensive plan densities, providing additional mixed use opportunities, and investigating commercial/industrial/office contributions to affording housing fund. Attached is the Housing Goals Draft Agreement and Resolution for your input and consideration for the next Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Model Resolution 2. Sector 8 Housing Data 3. Draft Housing Goals -3h o - 4V RESOLUTION NO. - dor RESOLUTION ELECTING TO PARTICIPATE THE LOCAL HOUSING INCENTIVES ACCOUNT PROGRAM - UNDER THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT CALENDAR YEAR 1996 - - WHEREAS,the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act(1995 Minnesota Laws Chapter 255)establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which is intended to address housing and other development issues facing the metropolitan area — - defined by Minnesota Statutes section 473.121;and WHEREAS,the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund,comprising the Tax Base Revitalization Account,the Livable 'Communities Demonstration Account and the Local Housing Incentives Account,is intended to provide certain funding and other assistance to metropolitan area municipalities;and WHEREAS,a metropolitan area municipality is not eligible to receive grants or loans under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund or eligible to receive certain polluted sites cleanup fording from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development unless the municipality is participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under _ Minnesota Statutes section 473.254;and WHEREAS,the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act requires the Metropolitan Council to negotiate with each munici- —_ pality to establish affordable and life-cycle housing goals for that municipality that are consistent with and promote the policies of the Metropolitan Council as provided in the adopted Metropolitan Development Guide;and WHEREAS,by June 30, 1996,each municipality must identify to the Metropolitan Council the actions the municipality plans to take to meet the established housing goals;and WHEREAS,the Metropolitan Council must adopt,by resolution after a public hearing,the negotiated affordable and life- cycle housing goals for each municipality by January 15, 1996;and WHEREAS,a metropolitan area municipality which elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Pro- gram must do so by November 15 of each year;and WHEREAS,for calendar year 1996,a metropolitan area municipality can participate under Minnesota Statutes section 473.254 only if:(a)the municipality elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program by November 15, 1995;(b)the Metropolitan Council and the municipality successfully negotiate affordable and life-cycle housing goals _ for the municipality;and(c)by January 15, 1996 the Metropolitan Council adopts by resolution the negotiated affordable and life-cycle housing goals for each municipality; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED THAT the [specific municipality] hereby elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Program under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act during calendar year 1996. By: By: Mayor Clerk — � p V y h �h o a — L !MMINEMEMINE y C O ] iiiiIiiii1IiiI1iii o� O V N�� 4 67 � llIIiIiiIHhIiiiiiIi� E — C v u > - c 11111111111110v —v E i_ —:IiIIiHiii1IiHiiiii TO✓. CV �I C1iIIIiiiIIliiilIIIii O ea 3 T 11•111•11111111 111111111111110 V fl! III2 O Noc N O a� i ii,, , iniffiHinhit DRAFT HOUSING GOALS AGREEMENT METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT PRINCIPLES The city of Chanhassen supports: 1. A balanced housing supply, with housing available for people at all income levels. 2. The accommodation of all racial and ethnic groups in the purchase, sale, rental and location of housing within the community. — 3. A variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life-cycle. 4. A community of well-maintained housing and neighborhoods, including ownership and rental housing. 5. Housing development that respects the natural environment of the community while — striving to accommodate the need for a variety of housing types and costs. 6. The availability of a full range of services and facilities for its residents, and the _ improvement of access to and linkage between housing and employment. GOALS To carry out the above housing principles, the City of Chanhassen agrees to use benchmark indicators for communities of similar location and stage of development as affordable and life-cycle housing goals for the period 1996 to 2010, and to make its best efforts, given market conditions and resource availability, to remain within or make —— progress toward these benchmarks. CITY INDEX BENCHMARK GOAL -- Affordability 1 Ownership 37% 60-69% 50 7? Rental 44% 35-37% 315 70 Life-Cycle — Type(Non-single family 19% 35-37% 3L 7° detached) 1 q 9, el."- D14P1 -_ Owner/renter Mix 85/15% (67-75) / 00/W (25-33)% Density Single-Family Detached 1.5/acre 1.8-1.9/acre !•8 Multifamily 11/acre 10-14/acre To achieve the above goals, the City of Chanhassen elects to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Local Housing Incentives Program, and will prepare and submit a plan to the Metropolitan Council by June 30, 1996, indicating the actions it will take to carry out the above goals. CERTIFICATION Mayor Date CITYOF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kate Aanenson, AICP, Planning Director DATE: October 25, 1995 SUBJ: DataSery Remodeling DataSery is remodeling their existing facility on Hwy. 5 and Dell Road. I have given administrative approval to this project. I wanted to the Planning Commission to be informed of the scope of this project as well as future plans for this property. I will have large colored renderings available for the meeting. Again,this is an"FYI" item. Hammel Green and Abrahamson, Inc. Architecture•Engineering•Interior Design 1201 Harmon Place Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403-1985 — Telephone 612•337•4100 Telefax 612•332•9013 11101 A _■ _M11 1 'WI I *RIM'S DIRECT DL4L NUMBER 24 October 1995 612/337-4103 Ms. Kate Aamenson Chanhassen Planning Department 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, Minnesota 55319 Re: Datasery HGA Commission Number 983.009.02 Dear Ms. Aamenson: As we have discussed in recent months,Datasery Corporation is in the process of remodeling their Chanhassen facility into their new corporate headquarters. This work is essentially an interior remodeling, but will have an impact on the external envelope of the building, as well as a minimum impact on the site plan. The existing main entrance will be moved to the west and centered on the north facade. This entrance motif — _ will extend up and across the roof through a skylight,introducing natural light into the center of the 400'x 400'facility. Other small skylights, 20'x 20',will be centered in the working quadrants east and west of the north-south skylight. The exterior precast panel facades will remain,but we will be providing small vestibules at the east and west entrances, thematically consistent with the remodeled main entrance. On the east and west facades near the _ south end of the building a new window will be cut in,mirroring their respective entrance vestibules. On the south facade,two of the overhead doors are being discontinued,but will remain. The interior is being developed as a high bay office space with exposed structure and acoustical panels above. The floor concept will have large open work spaces with a simple tic-tac-toe corridor system surrounding the center cafeteria and conferencing area. Site work will remain unchanged for the time being. Datasery is planning a new warehouse to be constructed on their land to the east of this existing facility. At that time,additional parking and other landscaping treatments will be added to the work. For this phase of the project, the parking lot, which is capable of holding 610 cars,will be restriped to accommodate 550 carts for the 500 employees currently planned for the facility. Landscaping adjustments will be made on the north side of the building at the new entrance to reconfigure the sidewalk and the canopy drop-off. Existing signs will be relocated consistent with the new — entrances and reconfigured land ownership. The only new exterior sign to be added to this site is the Datasery sign currently on their Eden Prairie headquarters,which will be relocated onto the north facade wall. That sign will be under the allowable 3%of the wall arca required by Chanhassen city code. — a Ir, w IIVI � Ms. Kate Aamenson 24 October 1995 Page 2 The site is currently bermed and landscaped at its perimeters adjacent to the Eden Prairie residential lands to the south or the Chanhassen residential lands on the west edge. Accompanying this letter,you will find the following boards,illustrating our client's design intent. 1. A collage of color photographs showing the existing facades. 2. Plan of the new corporate headquarters workstations representing an open plan,high bay officing concept. 3. Proposed modified facades showing new entrances on the northeast and west,as well as a reduced number of truck bays on the south. 4. Roof plan with the preliminary equipment layout. The owner is still considering the screening options versus their construction budget. Currently they are either going to screen each piece of equipment individually or do a perimeter screen surrounding all of the equipment. 5. Site plan-basically,this remains unchanged,except for resurfacing and striping the parking area and developing new sidewalk and landscaping concept at the main entrance. 6. An isometric concept sketch of the interior open office space(the roof has been omitted for illustration purposes). 7. A reduced set of drawings for your use and distribution. The boards and the above statements represent our client's plans and intent as of this date. Should those change,we will advise you and make the appropriate adjustments. We have been meeting with the Building Inspections Department and are proceeding with demolition and review of construction plans. Should it be of any value, I will plan to attend your Planning Commission meeting if you would advise me as to date and time. Sincerely, HAMMEL GREEN AND ABRAHAMSON,INC. C M 1/11;41 C.M.Niemeyer,ALA Vice President CMN13S.WP6;mm Enclosure cc: Jim Paulet,DS